Transcriber’s Note
Special Characters
Metrical notation is used in the original book to mark the length or
weight of syllables in scansion. In the e-text, the metrical notation
is placed on a separate line above the text and uses the following
Unicode symbols:
metrical short: ᴗ (U+1D17)
metrical long: – (U+2013)
metrical short over long: ⏓ (U+23D3)
metrical long over short: ⏒ (U+23D2)
When Greek letters are cited as examples in the original book they have
an overline printed above them (e.g., λ̅, ν̄), much as in English
cited letters are underlined or italicized. A combining macron (U+0304)
is used in this e-text above single letters to represent the overline.
In cases where the overline extends above more than one letter,
combining overline U+0305 is used because it gives a better result
(e.g., κ̅δ̅).
Since there is no precomposed Unicode character for omicron with acute
and diaeresis (e.g., το̈́ῦτοτε), this e-text uses U+0308 combining
diaeresis and U+0301 combining acute accent above the omicron.
The following additional character modifications used in the original
book are represented in the e-text as follows:
o with breve above: ο̆ (U+0306)
o with macron above: ο̄ (U+0304)
θ with inverted breve above: θ̑ (U+0311)
Unicode symbols for some of the above cases are currently not well
supported by standard fonts, and they may be displayed imperfectly or
not at all.
Parallel Display of Greek and English Pages
The Greek text of Dionysius and the English translation, which
appear on opposing pages in the original, are displayed in side-by-side
columns in the HTML and e-book versions. All common browsers and some
hand-held e-readers manage this parallel presentation well, even on
a fairly small display. At the time that this e-book was produced,
however, many e-readers do not, and the English page may be shown
following the Greek instead of parallel to it.
Page images of a different copy, but the same edition, of the original book can
be viewed at The Internet Archive:
http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924026465165
The cover image that appears in e-book versions was created by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain.
Errata:
Page 40: ὠδῇ -> ᾠδῇ
Page 108, note 16: οὐδεμίας -> οὐδεμιᾶς
Page 109, line 21: μηδεμίας -> μηδεμιᾶς
Page 112, note 14: διάνοιας -> διανοίας
Page 182, note 9: Διά -> Δία
Page 188, critical apparatus to line 5: συγκαμφθείς -> συγκαμφθεὶς
Page 204, line 11: ἀλλ -> ἀλλ’
Page 232, line 1: οὐχι -> οὐχὶ
Page 334, s.v. ᾠδή: ὠδικός -> ᾠδικός
[iii]
Dionysius of Halicarnassus
On Literary Composition
BEING THE GREEK TEXT OF THE
DE COMPOSITIONE VERBORVM
EDITED WITH INTRODUCTION, TRANSLATION, NOTES
GLOSSARY, AND APPENDICES
BY
W. RHYS ROBERTS
Litt.D. (Cambridge), Hon. Ll.D. (St. Andrews)
PROFESSOR OF CLASSICS IN THE UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS
FORMERLY FELLOW OF KING’S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE
EDITOR OF ‘DIONYSIUS OF HALICARNASSUS: THE THREE LITERARY LETTERS,’ ETC.
MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED
ST. MARTIN’S STREET, LONDON
1910
[v]
EQVITI INSIGNI
NATHAN BODINGTON
VNIVERSITATIS LOIDENSIS VICE-CANCELLARIO PRIMO
HVNC LIBRVM DAT DICAT DEDICAT
EDITOR COLLEGA AMICVS
[vi]
Tantum series iuncturaque pollet,
Tantum de medio sumptis accedit honoris.
Horace Ars Poetica 242, 243.
See Dionysius Homer’s thoughts refine,
And call new beauties forth from every line.
Pope Essay on Criticism 665, 666.
[vii]
PREFACE
It is a happy instinct that leads Pope to find in Dionysius a
gifted interpreter of Homer’s poetry, who can ‘call new beauties
forth from every line.’ In his entire attitude, not only towards
Homer but towards Sappho and Simonides, Herodotus and Demosthenes,
Dionysius has proved that he can rise above the debased
standards of the ages immediately preceding his own, and can
discern and proclaim a classic excellence. He has thus contributed
not a little to confirm our belief in the essential continuity of
critical principles—in the existence of a firm and permanent basis
for the judgments of taste.[1]
The breadth of interest and the discriminating enthusiasm
with which in the present treatise Dionysius of Halicarnassus (or
‘Denis of Halicarnasse’, as we might prefer to call him) approaches
his special subject of literary composition, or word-order, may be
inferred from the table of contents, the detailed summary, and the
brief statement on page 10 of the Introduction.[2] It is an interest
which impels him to touch, incidentally but most suggestively, on
such topics as Greek Pronunciation, Accent, Music. It is an
enthusiasm which prompts him to speak of ‘words soft as a maiden’s
cheek’ (ὀνόματα μαλακὰ καὶ παρθενωπά), to describe Homer as
‘of all poets the most many-voiced’ (πολυφωνότατος ἁπάντων τῶν
ποιητῶν), and to attribute to Thucydides ‘an old-world and
[viii]
masterful nobility of style’ (ἀρχαϊκόν τι καὶ αὔθαδες κάλλος).
Expressions so apt and vivid as these, together with the easy flow
and natural arrangement of the whole treatise, tend to prove that
Dionysius is not laboriously compiling his matter as he goes along,
but is writing out of a full mind, is dealing with a subject which
has long occupied his thoughts, and is imparting one section only of
a large and well-ordered body of critical doctrine in the command of
which he feels secure.
That to the Greeks literature was an art—that with them, the
sound was echo to the sense—that they were keenly alive to all
the magic and music of beautiful speech: where shall we find these
truths more vividly brought out than in the present treatise? And
if we are still to teach the great Greek authors in the original
language and not in translations, surely it is of supreme importance
to lay stress on points of artistic form, most especially in a literature
where form and substance are so indissolubly allied as in that
of Greece and when we are fortunate enough to have the aid of a
writer who knows so well as does Dionysius (see page 41) that noble
style is but the reflection of those noble thoughts and feelings which
should inspire a nation’s life. Nevertheless, the de Compositione
lies almost dead and forgotten, seldom mentioned and still more
seldom read; and one is sometimes tempted to think of the eager
curiosity with which it would most certainly be welcomed had it
lately been discovered in the sands of Egypt or in some buried house
at Herculaneum. A new ode of Sappho, and a ‘precious tender-hearted
scroll of pure Simonides,’ would rejoice the man of letters,
while the philologist would revel in the stray hints upon Greek
pronunciation. So striking an addition to the Greek criticism of
Greek literature would be hailed with acclamation, and it would
be gladly acknowledged that its skilful author had known how to
enliven a difficult subject by means of eloquence, enthusiasm, humour,
variety in vocabulary and in method of presentation generally, and
had made his readers realize that the beauty of a verse or of a
prose period largely depends upon the harmonious collocation of
those sounds of which human speech primarily consists.
[ix]
A word may be said upon some of the modern bearings of the
treatise. Dionysius is undoubtedly right in holding that consummate
poets are consummate craftsmen—that even so early a
poet as Homer φιλοτεχνεῖ. Our British habit of thought leads us
to dwell on the spontaneity of literary achievement rather than on
its artistic finish. We are apt to sneer, as some degenerate Greeks
did in Dionysius’ time (pages 262-270), at the contention that
even genius cannot dispense with literary pains, and to insist
in a one-sided way on the axiom that where genius begins rules
end. But a reference to the greatest names in our own literature
will confirm the view that the highest excellence must be preceded
by study and practice, however eminent the natural gifts of an
author may be. Would any one hesitate to say whether Paradise
Lost or Lycidas is the more mature example of Miltonic poetry?
Shakespeare, with his creative genius and all-embracing humanity,
may seem to soar far above these so-called artificial trammels.
But, here again, could any one doubt, on grounds of style alone,
whether Hamlet or The Two Gentlemen of Verona was the earlier
play? To be able fully to appreciate such differences is no
small result of a literary education; and though the rhetoric of
each language is in a large degree special to that language, it is
notwithstanding true that our western literatures are closely
interrelated—that they should continually be compared and contrasted—and
that modern literary theory can gain much in stimulus and
suggestion from that ancient literary theory which had its origin
in Greece, and which by way of Rome (where Dionysius taught
Greek literature in the age of Horace) was transmitted to the
modern world.
In the present edition an endeavour has been made to suggest
some of the many points at which Dionysius’ principles and precepts
are applicable to the modern languages and literatures. Efforts,
too, have been made to smooth away, by means of the Glossary and
the English Translation, those technical difficulties which might
easily deter even the advanced Greek student (not to mention the
wider of cultivated readers generally) from seeking in the
[x]
de Compositione that literary help which it is so well able to give.
The edition has been many years in preparation; and special
pains have been taken with the English Translation, as it is the
first to be published and as its execution presents great and obvious
difficulties. The Glossary will show how rich and varied is
Dionysius’ rhetorical terminology, and it may also serve as a
contribution towards that new Lexicon of Greek and Roman
Rhetoric which is a pressing need. It seems not unnatural to treat
thus fully a work of which no annotated edition in any language
has appeared for a hundred years. For the constitution of the
Greek text, on the other hand, the recent critical edition of
Dionysius’ literary essays by Usener and Radermacher is of the
highest importance. The present editor desires here to acknowledge
the debt he owes to their admirable apparatus criticus, the exhaustiveness
of which he has not attempted to equal, though he has thought
it desirable to report (with their aid) a good many seemingly
insignificant errors or variants which may serve to throw some
light on the comparative value of the chief documentary authorities.
He may add that he has himself collated, for the purposes of the
present recension, the best Paris manuscript (P 1741, which contains
Aristotle’s Rhetoric and Poetics, Demetrius de Elocutione,
Dionysius de Compositione Verborum and Ep. ii. ad Amm., etc.),
and that he has explained on pages 56-60 his views with regard
to some of the textual problems presented by the treatise.
It is a pleasure further to acknowledge the ever ready aid he
has received from his personal friends—-from Dr. A. S. Way, who
has not only contributed the verse-translations throughout the treatise
but has given help of unusual range and worth in other directions
also, and from Mr. L. H. G. Greenwood, Mr. G. B. Mathews, Mr.
P. N. Ure, and Professor T. Hudson Williams, who have read the
proofs and made most valuable suggestions. Nor should the great
care shown in the printing of the book by Messrs. R. & R. Clark’s
able staff of compositors and readers be passed over without a word
of grateful mention.
It may perhaps not be out of place to state in conclusion that
[xi]
the editor hopes next to publish, in continuation of this series of
contributions to the study of the Greek literary critics, a number
of essays and dissertations grouped round the Rhetoric of
Aristotle. The Rhetoric is a remarkable product of its great
author’s maturity, in reading which constant reference should be
made to Aristotle’s other works, to the writings of his predecessors,
and to those later Greek and Roman critics who illustrate it in so
many ways. Studies of the kind indicated ought to contain much
of modern and permanent interest. Not long ago a distinguished
man of science wrote, ‘one literary art, the art of rhetoric, may be
weakened and lost when the scientific spirit becomes predominant—that
sort of rhetoric, I mean, which may be fitly described as
insincere eloquence. Rhetoric seeks above all to persuade, and in
a completely scientific age men will only allow themselves to be
persuaded by force of reason.’ The writer seems to recognize that
there may be a good as well as a bad rhetoric, but perhaps it hardly
falls within his scope to make it clear that the Greeks, from whom
the art and the term come, were themselves well aware of this fact,
even though the age in which they lived might not be completely
scientific. The vicious type of rhetoric which he justly censures is
exemplified in the Rhetorica ad Alexandrum. In this book—for
whose date the antiquity of a recently-discovered manuscript (published
in the Hibeh Papyri i. 114 ff.) suggests the age of Aristotle,
though Aristotle himself is certainly not the author—the aim of
rhetoric is assumed to be persuasion at any price. But how
different is the spirit of Plato in the Phaedrus and the Gorgias,
and of Aristotle in the Rhetoric. To take Aristotle only. He
looks at rhetoric with the sincerity of a lover of truth and with
the breadth of a lover of wisdom. He recognizes that the art may
be abused; but ‘so may all good things except virtue itself, and
particularly the most useful things, such as strength, health, wealth,
generalship.’ Its function is ‘not to persuade, but to ascertain in
any given case the available means of persuasion.’ Mental self-defence
is a duty no less than physical self-defence; but though it
is necessary to know bad arguments in order to be ready to parry
[xii]
them, we must not use them ourselves (for ‘one must not be the
advocate of evil’), nor must we try to warp the feelings of the
judge (for this would be like ‘making crooked a carpenter’s rule
which you are about to use’). Season must be our weapon, and
we must have confidence that the truth will prevail (for ‘truth
and justice are by nature stronger than their opposites’ and ‘what
is true and better is by nature the easier to prove and the more
convincing’). The whole work is conceived in the same spirit—that
of attention to truth rather than to mere persuasion, to matter
rather than to manner, to the solid facts of human nature rather
than to the shallow blandishments of style. The author of the most
scientific treatise that has yet been written on rhetoric manifestly
held a lofty view of his subject; and so far from commending an
insincere eloquence, he says less than we could wish about literary
beauties and the arts of style. Here Dionysius, in his various
critical works, happily serves to supplement him. Though he has
the art of speaking specially in view, Dionysius draws his literary
illustrations from so wide a field that the art of literature may be
regarded as his theme. The method he inculcates is that which
every literary aspirant follows, consciously or unconsciously, in
regard to his own language—the reading and imitation of the
great writers by whom its capacities have been enlarged. To us,
no less than to his Roman pupil Rufus, the practice and the
precepts of those Greeks who attained an unsurpassed excellence in
the art of literature have an enduring interest. For they help the
fruitful study of our own literature; and that literature, we all
rejoice to think, has not only a great past behind it but a great
future in store for it.
The University, Leeds,
December 6, 1909.
CONTENTS | [xiii] |
| PAGE | |
| INTRODUCTION— | |
| I. Summary of the ‘de Compositione’ | 1 |
| II. The Order of Words in Greek— | |
| A. Freedom and Elasticity | 11 |
| B. Normal Order | 14 |
| C. Lucidity | 15 |
| D. Emphasis | 17 |
| E. Euphony | 27 |
| F. Greek and Latin and Modern Languages | 29 |
| G. Prose and Poetry: Rhythm and Metre | 33 |
| III. Other Matters arising in the ‘de Compositione’— | |
| A. Greek Music: in relation to the Greek Language | 39 |
| B. Accent in Ancient Greek | 41 |
| C. Pronunciation of Ancient Greek | 43 |
| D. Greek Grammar | 46 |
| E. Sources of the Treatise | 47 |
| F. Quotations and Literary References in it | 49 |
| G. Manuscripts and Text of it | 56 |
| H. Recent Writings connected with it | 59 |
| TEXT, Translation, and Notes (Critical and Explanatory) | 64 |
| Glossary | 285 |
| Appendices— | |
| A. Obscurity in Greek | 335 |
| B. Illustrations of Word-Order in Greek and Modern Languages | 342 |
| C. Greek Pronunciation: Scheme of the Classical Association | 348 |
| Indices— |
| A. Passages quoted in the ‘de Compositione’ | 353 |
| B. Names and Matters | 354 |
[1]
INTRODUCTION
I
Summary of the de Compositione
A general account of the life and literary activities of Dionysius
will be found in the volume entitled Dionysius of Halicarnassus:
the Three Literary Letters, where the de Compositione Verborum is
briefly described in connexion with the other critical essays of its
author. Here a fuller summary of the treatise seems necessary
before an attempt is made to estimate its value and to follow up
some of the highly interesting questions which it raises.
The date of the de Compositione is not known, but may be
conjectured to lie between the years 20 and 10 B.C. The book
is a birthday offering from Dionysius, as a teacher of rhetoric
in Rome, to his pupil Rufus Metilius.
c. 1. This book is a birthday present which deals with the art
of speech, and so will be found particularly useful to youths who
look forward to a public career. Oratorical excellence depends on
skill exercised in two directions—in the sphere of subject matter
and in the sphere of expression (πραγματικὸς τόπος and λεκτικὸς
τόπος). In the former sphere, maturity of judgment and experience
is required: in the latter the young are more at home, but they
need careful guidance at the start. The λεκτικὸς τόπος has two
subdivisions, ἐκλογὴ ὀνομάτων and σύνθεσις ὀνομάτων. The composition
of words is to be treated now: the choice of words is to
be treated next year, if Heaven keeps the author “safe and sound.”
The chief headings in the present treatise are to be the following:—
(1) The nature of composition, and its effect;
(2) Its aims, and how it attains them;
(3) Its varieties, with their characteristic features and the
author’s preferences among them;
(4) The poetical element in prose and the prose element in
verse, and the means of cultivating both—of imparting the flavour
of poetry to prose and the ease of prose to poetry.
[2]
c. 2. “Composition is, as the very name indicates, a certain mutual
arrangement of the parts of speech, or elements of diction, as some
prefer to call them.” The parts of speech recognized by Theodectes
and Aristotle and their contemporaries were three in number, viz.
nouns, verbs, and connectives. The number was raised, by the Stoics
and others, to four through the separation of the article from the connectives.
Later were added the adjective, the pronoun, the adverb,
the preposition, the participle, and certain other subdivisions. These
principal parts of speech form, when joined and set side by side,
the cola (‘members,’ ‘clauses’). The union of cola completes the
“periods,” and these make up the entire discourse. The functions
of composition are to arrange the words fittingly, to assign the
proper structure to the cola, and to divide the discourse carefully
into periods.
In its effects, though not in order of time, the composition of
words comes before the choice of words.
c. 3. Our thoughts are uttered either in verse or in prose. In
both alike, composition can invest the lowliest words with charm
and distinction. By way of foretaste, two passages (one of poetry,
the other of prose) may be quoted in illustration. The first is from
the opening of the 16th Odyssey, where the lines allure not by
elaborate language or lofty theme, but by the sheer beauty with
which the words are grouped. The prose example is furnished by
that passage of Herodotus (i. 8-10) which describes the unworthy
behaviour of Candaules towards his wife. Here, too, the charm
resides not in the incident nor in the words which describe it, but
in the deft arrangement of the language.
c. 4. The powerful effect of composition will be still further
realized if some choice passages of verse and prose be taken and the
order of the words disturbed. Homer and Herodotus once more provide
examples. Certain lines in the twelfth and thirteenth books of
the Iliad are chosen, and transformed, with disastrous effects, from
hexameters into two varieties of tetrameters. A short passage of
Herodotus is turned about in a similar way, one of the two versions
being in the style of Thucydides, the other in the odious manner of
Hegesias. Composition may in fact be likened to the Homeric
Athena, who with a touch of her magic wand could make the same
Odysseus resemble either a beggar or a gallant prince. The neglect
of composition has lamentable results in writers like Duris, Polybius,
Chrysippus, and others. Failing to find the subject satisfactorily
treated by previous authors, Dionysius has himself endeavoured to
discover some natural principle to form a starting-point (φυσικὴ
ἀφορμή). He has not succeeded, but he will describe his attempt.
c. 5. It had occurred to him that, in a natural order, verbs would
[3]
follow nouns and precede adverbs, while things which happened first
in time would come first in narration. But these (and other) rules
were seen to be untrustworthy, when tested by the actual practice of
the great authors.
c. 6. As far as words (or elements of discourse) are concerned,
the art of composition operates in three ways—through (1) the choice
of elements likely to combine effectively; (2) the discernment of the
particular shapes or constructions (i.e. singular or plural number,
nominative or oblique case, active or passive voice, etc.) to be given
to each element in order that the structure may be improved;
(3) the perception of the modification which these shapes need in
view of the materials. Each of the processes can be illustrated
from the arts of house-building and ship-building—of civil and
marine architecture. This analogy is developed at some length.
c. 7. In the case of the cola, the processes are two. (1) The
cola must be rightly arranged. For instance, in a passage of
Thucydides (iii. 57) the order in which they come makes all the
difference. So, too, in Demosthenes de Corona § 119.
c. 8. (2) The right “turn,” or “shaping,” must be given to the
cola, so that they may faithfully reflect the various aims and moods
of the speaker or writer. A good example will be found in
Demosthenes de Corona § 179.
c. 9. Under (2) it is to be noted that the cola may be lengthened
or shortened for the sake of literary effect. Examples are given
from Demosthenes, Plato, Sophocles, and again Demosthenes.—The
same remarks will apply to periods as to cola. Further, the art of
composition must determine when it is fitting to employ periods and
when not.
c. 10. Next come the aims and methods of good composition.
The two chief aims are charm and beauty or nobility: the ear
craves these in composition, just as the eye in a work of pictorial
art. The two qualities are, however, not identical. Thucydides,
for example, and Antiphon possess beauty but lack charm. Ctesias,
on the other hand, and Xenophon are charming (pleasing, agreeable),
but deficient in beauty. Herodotus combines the two excellences.
c. 11. The chief sources of charm and beauty (or nobility) are
four: music, rhythm, variety, and propriety. Charm and beauty, themselves,
have many subdivisions. The instinctive appreciation of music
and rhythm on the part of a popular audience may be noticed during
a performance in some house of entertainment. Variety, too, and
propriety are indispensable. As to the music of speech, it is to be
observed that there is a sort of oratorical cadence which differs from
music proper in quantity only, not in quality. The speaking voice
does not rise in pitch above three tones and a half: it confines
itself to the interval of the Fifth. The singing voice, on the other
hand, uses a greater number of intervals, not only the Fifth but
[4]
(beginning with the Octave) the Fifth, the Fourth, the Tone, and the
Semitone, and, as some think, still slighter intervals. Other points
of difference are that, in singing, the words are subordinate to the
air, and the length of the syllables is regulated by the musical time.
So the speaking voice can show good melody without being
“melodic,” and show good rhythms without being “rhythmic.” There
is, in fact, music in speech, but not the whole of music.
c. 12. Various sounds affect the ear in various ways. The cause
lies in the nature of the letters; and as their nature cannot be
changed, there should be a judicious intermixture of pleasant with
unpleasant sounds. Short words, too, must be mingled with long,
and long with short. The same variety, too, must be practised in
the use of figures, and in other ways. But even variety must not be
carried to excess: uniformity is sometimes equally pleasant. Tact
is needed, and to impart tact is no easy task. It is to be remembered
that not even the commonest words need be shunned by good
writers: they can all be dignified by means of composition, as is seen
in Homer’s poems.
c. 13. Beauty of composition will be attained by the same means
as charm of composition,—by melody, rhythm, variety, propriety.
And the nature of the letters themselves will play an equal part in
determining the character of the composition.
c. 14. The twenty-four letters of the Greek alphabet are now
examined from the phonetic point of view. The object is to trace
to some of its ultimate elements the secret of the variety and music
found in beautiful language. The nature and the qualities of the
letters must be understood by the writer who would know how to
vary his style in an ever-changing and musical way. The letters
(γράμματα), or elements (στοιχεῖα), may be divided into vowels
(φωνήεντα, φωναί) and consonants (ψόφοι), and the consonants into
semivowels (ἡμίφωνα) and mutes (ἄφωνα). The vowels can be pronounced
by themselves; the semivowels sound best when combined
with vowels; the mutes cannot be uttered at all except in combination.
There are seven vowels: two short, ε and ο; two long, η and
ω; and three common,—α, ι, and υ. The semivowels are eight in
number: five single, viz. λ, μ, ν, ρ, ς, and three double, viz. ζ, ξ, ψ.
The nine mutes may be classified as: ψιλά (tenues) κ, π, τ; δασέα
(aspiratae) χ, φ, θ; and μέσα (mediae) γ, β, δ. Or they may be
arranged according to the part chiefly concerned in their production:
whether it is the lip,—π, φ, β; the teeth,—τ, θ, δ; or the throat,—κ,
χ, γ. That is to say, Dionysius recognizes (though he does not use
the technical adjectives) a division into labials, dentals, and gutturals.
Among these various letters a regular hierarchy is established by
him. Long vowels are held to be more euphonious than short vowels.
The order of euphony for the vowels is, from the top downwards, as
follows: ᾱ, η, ω, υ, ι, ο, ε; and (for the semivowels) first the double
[5]
consonants, then λ, μ, ν, ρ, and lastly ς, which is condemned in strong
terms. Among the mutes, the rough (the aspirates) are regarded as
superior to the middle, and the middle to the smooth. The physiological
processes by which the several letters are produced are described
with some particularity in the light of the phonetics of the day.
c. 15. Syllables, as well as letters considered singly, contribute to
variety of style. Of the syllables (or small groups of letters) there
are many different kinds. The principal difference is that some are
short and others long. But the difference does not end there, since
some are shorter than the short and others longer than the long.
The fact is that, from the metrical point of view, the vowels and
final consonants alone count in determining the length of a syllable,
whereas in actual delivery the initial consonants also have to be
considered. For instance, a speaker will find that the initial syllable
of στρόφος takes more time to utter than that of τρόπος; and so
with τρόπος by the side of Ῥόδος, and with Ῥόδος by the side of
ὁδός. In the same way, σπλήν is really longer than the vowel η
standing by itself. And further: syllables differ not only in
quantity but in sound, some being pleasant and others unpleasant,
according to the nature of the letters which compose them. Great
poets and prose-writers have an instinctive perception of these facts,
and skilfully adapt their very syllables and letters to the emotions
which they wish to portray; e.g. Homer in Odyss. ix. 415, 416,
and in Il. xvii. 265, xxii. 220, 221, 476, xviii. 225.
c. 16. Poets and prose-writers frame, or borrow from their predecessors
in earlier generations, such imitative forms (words whose
sound suggests their sense) as ῥοχθεῖ, κλάγξας, βρέμεται, σμαραγεῖ,
ῥοῖζος: all of which are found in Homer. Nature is here the great
teacher; she prompts us to use, in their right connexion, words so expressive
as μύκημα, χρεμετισμός, φριμαγμός, βρόμος, πάταγος, συριγμός,
and the like. The first writer to broach the subject of etymology was
Plato, particularly in his Cratylus.
With regard to the music of sounds, the general conclusion is
that variety and beauty of style depend upon variety and beauty
of words, syllables, and letters. To clinch the matter, Dionysius
quotes (with appropriate comments) further illustrations from Homer—Odyssey
xvii. 36, 37, vi. 162, 163, etc. Theophrastus, in his work
on Style, has distinguished two classes of words—those which are
beautiful (or noble) and those which are mean and paltry. Our aim
should be to intermingle the latter kind, when we are forced to employ
them (as sometimes we are), with the better sort, as has been done
by Homer (Il. ii. 494-501) in his enumeration of the Boeotian towns.
c. 17. Rhythm, also, is an important element in good composition.
For our present purpose, a rhythm and a foot may be regarded as
synonymous. Of disyllabic and trisyllabic feet the following descriptive
list is given:—
[6]
|
| A. Disyllabic Feet. |
| Name. | Quantities. | Qualities. |
| 1. ἡγεμών, πυρρίχιος. | ᴗ ᴗ | Wanting in seriousness and dignity. |
| 2. σπονδεῖος. | – – | Full of dignity. |
| 3. ἴαμβος. | ᴗ – | Not lacking in nobility. |
| 4. τροχαῖος. | – ᴗ | Less manly and noble than the iambus. |
|
B. Trisyllabic Feet |
| Name. | Quantities. | Qualities. |
| 1. χορεῖος, τρίβραχυς. | ᴗ ᴗ ᴗ | Mean and unimpressive. |
| 2. μολοττός. | – – – | Dignified and far-striding. |
| 3. ἀμφίβραχυς. | ᴗ – ᴗ | Effeminate and unattractive. |
| 4. ἀνάπαιστος. | ᴗ ᴗ – | Stately. |
| 5. δάκτυλος. | – ᴗ ᴗ | Contributes greatly to beauty of style. |
| 6. κρητικός. | – ᴗ – | Not lacking in nobility. |
| 7. βακχεῖος. | – – ᴗ | Virile and grave. |
| 8. ὑποβακχεῖος. | ᴗ – – | Virile and grave. |
|
Various lines are quoted from the poets in order to illustrate the
effect of these several feet.
c. 18. As each word has a rhythmical value (great or small) which
cannot be changed, all depends on the skill with which we arrange
the words at our disposal so as to blend artistically the inferior with
the better. To illustrate his meaning, Dionysius quotes, and gives
a rhythmical analysis of, passages from Thucydides, Plato, and
Demosthenes. The excerpt from Thucydides is a part of the
Funeral Oration attributed to Pericles (ii. 35). The rhythms here
used are shown to be dignified ones, such as spondees, anapaests,
dactyls, etc. Thucydides, we are told, deservedly has a name for
elevation and for choice language, since he habitually introduces
noble rhythms. From Plato is taken a short passage of the
Menexenus (236 D); and this too is shown to owe its dignity and
beauty to the beautiful and striking rhythms that compose it. If
Plato had only been as clever in the choice of words as he is unrivalled
in the art of combining them, he “had even outstript”
Demosthenes, as far as beauty of style is concerned, or “had left the
issue in doubt.” Demosthenes is the foremost of orators, and may be
regarded as a model alike in his choice of words and in the beauty
with which he arranges them. The opening of the Crown, with its
careful avoidance of all ignoble rhythms, will prove his pre-eminence.
Deficiency in this respect can be illustrated just as conspicuously
[7]
by the writings of Hegesias, who would seem to have shunned good
rhythms out of sheer wilfulness. A passage is quoted from Hegesias’
History—a passage which, if well written, would have moved to
sympathetic tears rather than to derisive laughter. With it are
contrasted some famous lines of the Iliad (xxii. 395-411) which, we
are told, owe their nobility largely to the beauty of their rhythms.
c. 19. The third element in good composition is variety (ἡ
μεταβολή). In the use of rhythms to impart variety, prose enjoys
much greater freedom than poetry. Epic poets must needs employ
the hexameter line: the writers of lyric verse must make antistrophe
correspond to strophe, however greatly they may strive for liberty
in other respects. That prose style is best which exhibits the
greatest variety in the way of periods, clauses, rhythms, figures, and
the like; and its charm is all the greater if the art that fashions it
lies hidden. In point of variety, Herodotus, Plato and Demosthenes
hold the foremost place: Isocrates and his followers are distinguished
rather by monotony of style.
c. 20. The fourth element is fitness or propriety (τὸ πρέπον).
Propriety is described as the harmony which an author establishes
between his style, and the actions and persons of which he treats.
Common experience proves that ordinary people, in describing an
event, will vary the order of their words (and the point here is
the arrangement, not the choice of words) in accordance with the
emotions which it excites in them. Similarly, artistic writers should
follow their own aesthetic instincts in the matter. Homer has done
so with surpassing effect. A fine instance is furnished by the lines
(Odyssey xi. 593-598) which depict the torment of Sisyphus—the
slow upheaval of his rock, and its rapid rolling down the hill once
it has reached the top.
c. 21. After these theoretical and technical discussions there arises
the question: what are the different kinds of composition or arrangement,—what
are the different harmonies? The answer given is that
there are three: (1) the austere (αὐστηρά), (2) the smooth (γλαφυρά),
(3) the harmoniously blended (εὔκρατος) or intermediate (κοινή).
c. 22. The characteristic features of austere composition are set
forth in considerable detail: both generally and in reference to
words, clauses, periods. Among its principal representatives are
mentioned: Antimachus of Colophon and Empedocles in epic poetry,
Pindar in lyric, Aeschylus in tragic; in history, Thucydides; in
oratory, Antiphon. The beginning of a Pindaric dithyramb and the
opening sentences of the introduction to Thucydides’ History are
minutely examined from this point of view. [Any attempt to
summarize fully this chapter and those which follow is hardly
possible owing to the nature of the subject matter. The chapters
are important, and will repay a careful study.]
c. 23. Smooth composition is next characterized in a similar
[8]
way. Its chief representatives may be taken to be: Hesiod, Sappho,
Anacreon, Simonides, Euripides, Ephorus, Theopompus, Isocrates.
In illustration are quoted (with sundry comments) Sappho’s Hymn to
Aphrodite and the introductory passage from Isocrates’ Areopagiticus.
c. 24. “The third, the mean of the two kinds already mentioned,
which I call harmoniously blended (or intermediate) for lack of a proper
and better name, has no form peculiar to itself, but is a judicious
blend of the other two and a selection from the most effective features
of each.” This third is the best variety of composition because it is
a kind of golden mean; and its highest representative is Homer, in
whom we find a union of the severe and the polished forms of
arrangement. On a lower plane are other votaries of the golden
mean: among lyric poets Stesichorus and Alcaeus, among tragedians
Sophocles, among historians Herodotus, among orators Demosthenes,
and among philosophers Democritus, Plato and Aristotle. Illustrative
examples are, in this case, unnecessary.
c. 25. These discussions lead up to a final question,—that of the
relations between prose and poetry. And first: in what way can
prose be made to resemble a beautiful poem or lyric? It is in
metre, even more than in the choice of words, that poetry differs
from prose. Consequently prose cannot become like metrical and
lyrical writing, unless it contains, though not obtrusively, metres
and rhythms within it. It must not be manifestly in metre or in
rhythm (for in that case it will be a poem or a lyric and will desert
its own specific character), but it is enough that it should simply
appear rhythmical and metrical. It will thus be poetical, although
not a poem; lyrical, although not a lyric. Passages are then taken
from the opening of the Aristocrates and the Crown of Demosthenes and
are subjected to a minute metrical analysis. The result of the scrutiny
is (it is claimed) to show that many metrical lines are latent in good
prose, the author having taken care to disguise slightly their metrical
character. In an eloquent passage Dionysius then submits that the
great end in view warranted all these anxious pains on the part of
Demosthenes. Demosthenes was no mere peddler, but a consummate
artist who had the judgment of posterity always before his mind.
Isocrates, also, and Plato spent no less trouble on their writings, as
witness the story about the opening passage of the Republic. It is,
further, to be noticed that such careful processes, though deliberate at
first, become in the end unconscious and almost instinctive, just as
accomplished musicians do not think of every note they strike on
their instrument, nor skilled readers of every single letter which
meets their eyes in the book that lies open before them.
c. 26. Secondly (and lastly) comes a question which is the
counterpart of that asked in c. 25: namely, in what way can a poem
or lyric be made to resemble beautiful prose? The two principal
means are: (1) so to arrange the clauses that they do not invariably
[9]
begin and end together with the lines; (2) to vary the clauses and
periods in length and form. These things are more difficult to do
where the metre is uniform, as in heroic and iambic verse. In lyric
poems the task is easier, since the variety of their metres brings
them a point nearer to prose. At the same time, while avoiding
monotony and while generally causing his verse to resemble
beautiful prose, the poet must remember that the so-called “prosaic
character” is a defect. We are, however, here thinking not of
vulgar prose but of the highest civil oratory. In order to show
that, in poetry, clauses can be of different sorts and sizes, and can
also be so far independent of the metre as almost to give the effect
of an unbroken prose-narrative, Dionysius draws some concluding
illustrations from the 14th Odyssey, the Telephus of Euripides, and
the Danaë of Simonides.
The following Tabular Analysis may help to make the general
structure of the treatise still clearer:—
I. Chapters 1-5. Introductory. The nature of composition,
and its effect.—Instances of the fatal neglect of composition.—The
secret of composition not to be found in grammatical rules.
II. Chapters 6-20. General Theory and Technique of
Composition:—
(α) Three processes in the art of composition, c. 6.
(β) Grouping of clauses, c. 7.
(γ) Shaping of clauses, c. 8.
(δ) Lengthening and shortening of clauses and periods, c. 9.
2. cc. 10-20: Charm and beauty of composition, and the four
means of attaining these qualities:—
(α) Preliminary remarks, cc. 10-13.
(β) Four means:
(1) μέλος, cc. 14-16.
(2) ῥυθμός, cc. 17, 18.
(3) μεταβολή, c. 19.
(4) τὸ πρέπον, c. 20.
III. Chapters 21-24. Three Modes of Composition:—
(1) σύνθεσις αὐστηρά, c. 22.
(2) σύνθεσις γλαφυρά, c. 23.
(3) σύνθεσις εὔκρατος (or κοινή), c. 24.
IV. Chapters 25, 26. Relation of Prose to Poetry, and
of Poetry to Prose.
Note.—The existing division into chapters is not always a
happy one. As a help to the reader, a few words of summary have
been prefixed to each chapter of the English Translation.
[10]
The Greek Epitome is about one-third the length of the original.
It is of early but uncertain date (cp. Usener de Dionysii Halicarnassensis
Libris Manuscriptis p. viii, n. 7), and is preserved in the following
codices: Darmstadiensis, Monacensis, Rehdigeranus, Vaticanus
Urbinas. It has survived along with the original; and instead of
superseding and extinguishing the unabridged work, as ancient
epitomes seem often to have done, it contributes not a little to its
elucidation. Had it been preserved at the expense of the original,
we should have still possessed the Sappho, but should have lost the
Simonides. Towards the end, the Epitome is executed with less
care than at the beginning.
II
The Order of Words in Greek
The strong and the weak points of the de Compositione
Verborum will appear from the foregoing summary, and still
more from the treatise itself and the notes appended to it.
Dionysius’ book is unique: no other of its kind has come down
to us from classical antiquity. Its immediate subject is the
Order of Words in Greek. But its author is happily led to
raise fundamental questions such as the relations between Prose
and Poetry, together with incidental points of Greek Pronunciation
and Accentuation; and generally to take so wide a range
that no English title less comprehensive than On Literary
Composition seems to fit the contents of the work.[3]
The discursive enthusiasm of the writer is obvious. Not less striking,
however, is the sound literary taste which converts his quotations
into a true anthology and preserves some priceless remains of
Sappho and Simonides. It will be necessary to point out certain
weaknesses of Dionysius from time to time. But his weaknesses
are far more than counterbalanced by his great excellences.
Some of his shortcomings are those of his age,—an age which
was a stranger to the modern method of comparison as applied
to literary investigation. Others, again, are more apparent than
real. When, for example, certain omissions are observable in
some directions along with ample expatiations in others, it is to
be remembered (1) that Dionysius is dealing with the department
[11]
of expression and not with that of subject matter, (2) that, in
the department of expression, he is concerned with the composition
(or arrangement) of words and not with their selection, and
(3) that, in regard to composition, he is here interested primarily
not in lucidity nor in emphasis, but in euphony. Hence we
must not expect him to dwell on that great governing principle
of literary composition,—logical connexion. To its importance,
however, he is fully alive, as is clear from a passage in his essay
on Isocrates: “The thought” [in Isocrates, who pays excessive
heed to smoothness of style and a pleasant cadence] “is often the
slave of rhythmical expression, and truth is sacrificed to elegance....
But the natural course is for the expression to follow the
ideas, not the ideas the expression.”[4]
And though, in the de
Compositione, it is his business to discourse rather upon sound
than upon sense, yet the orderly way in which the subject matter
of the treatise is presented shows in itself that Dionysius was
well aware that the chief essential for a book is a basis of clear
thinking and broad logical arrangement, and that, as a consequence,
its excellence is to be sought even more in its chapters and its
paragraphs than in its flowing periods.[5] It may be well to touch,
with a similar regard to sequence and with occasional references
to modern parallels or contrasts, upon one or two aspects of his
main theme which his own treatment of it suggests as suitable
for further discussion and elucidation.
A. Freedom and Elasticity
In his fifth chapter Dionysius shows, with no difficulty and
with much vivacity, that it is impossible to lay down universal
rules governing the order of words in Greek. He admits that he
had been inclined to entertain a priori views on the question of
the natural precedence of certain parts of speech and to hold
that nouns should precede verbs, verbs adverbs, and so forth.[6]
[12]
But he had proceeded, with that sound practical judgment which
distinguishes him, to test his theories in the light of Homer’s
usage. He had then found them wanting. “Trial invariably
wrecked my views and revealed their utter worthlessness.” The
examples of variety in word-order which he quotes from the Iliad
and the Odyssey are most interesting and instructive. But a
modern reader, familiar with languages whose paucity of inflexions
often offers freedom only at the price of ambiguity, has more
cause than any ancient writer to wonder at the liberty which
Greek enjoys in this respect. No doubt the long gap between
πολὺν and χρόνον in the Frogs has, and is intended to have, a
comic effect. But there is no sort of ambiguity in the sentence,
since the poet takes care to use no noun with which the adjective
could agree until the right noun at length comes and relieves the
listener of his suspense and growing curiosity,—
εἰ δ’ ἐγὼ ὀρθὸς ἰδεῖν βίον ἀνέρος ἢ τρόπον ὅστις ἔτ’ οἰμώξεται,
οὐ πολὺν οὐδ’ ὁ πίθηκος οὗτος ὁ νῦν ἐνοχλῶν,
Κλειγένης ὁ μικρός,
ὁ πονηρότατος βαλανεὺς ὁπόσοι κρατοῦσι κυκησιτέφρου
ψευδολίτρου κονίας
καὶ Κιμωλίας γῆς,
χρόνον ἐνδιατρίψει.
Aristophanes Ranae 706-13.
Here as many as twenty-one words divide an adjective from
its noun, though noun and adjective are usually placed close
together.[7] But, even in serious poetry, the same thing is to be
noticed, though on a less surprising scale. For example:
ἦν δ’ οὐδὲν αὐτοῖς οὔτε χείματος τέκμαρ
οὔτ’ ἀνθεμώδους ἦρος οὔτε καρπίμου
θέρους βέβαιον.
Aeschylus Prometheus Vinctus 454-6.
Here the adjective follows the noun, but (as before) there is
no ambiguity, though there is much added emphasis due to the
apparent afterthought. Similarly:
[13]
ἐν δὲ νομὸν ποίησε περικλυτὸς ἀμφιγυήεις
ἐν καλῇ βήσσῃ μέγαν οἰῶν ἀργεννάων.[8]
Homer Iliad xviii. 587, 588.
And in prose the dependence of a genitive may be quite
clear, though the distance between it and the words on which it
depends be great: e.g.
τῶν μὲν οὖν λόγων, οὓς οὗτος ἄνω καὶ κάτω διακυκῶν ἔλεγε
περὶ τῶν παραγεγραμμένων νόμων, οὔτε μὰ τοὺς θεοὺς
οἶμαι ὑμᾶς μανθάνειν οὔτ’ αὐτὸς ἐδυνάμην συνεῖναι
τοὺς πολλούς.
Demosthenes de Corona § 111 (cp. § 57).
In prose, again, the extremely antithetic and artificial arrangement
of words possible (without complete loss of clearness) in a
highly inflected language may be illustrated from Thucydides:—
καὶ οὐ περὶ τῆς ἐλευθερίας ἄρα οὔτε οὗτοι τῶν Ἑλλήνων
οὔθ’ οἱ Ἕλληνες τῆς ἑαυτῶν τῷ Μήδῳ ἀντέστησαν, περὶ
δὲ οἱ μὲν σφίσιν ἀλλὰ μὴ ἐκείνῳ καταδουλώσεως, οἱ
δ’ ἐπὶ δεσπότου μεταβολῇ οὐκ ἀξυνετωτέρου, κακοξυνετωτέρου
δέ.
Thucydides vi. 76.[9]
The following sentence of Demosthenes, with its carefully
chosen position for the main subject Φίλιππος and the main
verb ἐπηγγείλατο, shows how well suspense and the period can be
worked in such a language:—
ὡς δὲ ταλαιπωρούμενοι τῷ μήκει τοῦ πολέμου οἱ τότε μὲν
βαρεῖς νῦν δ’ ἀτυχεῖς Θηβαῖοι φανεροὶ πᾶσιν ἦσαν
ἀναγκασθησόμενοι καταφεύγειν ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς, Φίλιππος, ἵνα μὴ
τοῦτο γένοιτο μηδὲ συνέλθοιεν αἱ πόλεις, ὑμῖν μὲν εἰρήνην
ἐκείνοις δὲ βοήθειαν ἐπηγγείλατο.
Demosthenes de Corona § 19.[10]
In an analytical language such as English a separate introductory
[14]
sentence[11] would be almost necessary in order to bring out
the point of a familiar passage in the Cyropaedia:—
παῖς μέγας μικρὸν ἔχων χιτῶνα ἕτερον παῖδα μικρὸν
μέγαν ἔχοντα χιτῶνα, ἐκδύσας αὐτόν, τὸν μὲν ἑαυτοῦ
ἐκεῖνον ἠμφίεσε, τὸν δὲ ἐκείνου αὐτὸς ἐνέδυ.
Xenophon Cyropaedia i. 3. 17.
And the force and variety gained by juxtaposition, or by
chiastic arrangement, is obvious in such examples as:—
(1) τίπτε με, Πηλέος υἱέ, ποσὶν ταχέεσσι διώκεις,
αὐτὸς θνητὸς ἐὼν θεὸν ἄμβροτον;
Homer Iliad xxii. 8, 9.
(2) τί δῆτα, ὦ Μέλητε; τοσοῦτον σὺ ἐμοῦ σοφώτερος εἶ
τηλικούτου ὄντος τηλικόσδε ὤν;
Plato Apology 25 D.
(3) οὐ γὰρ ἐπὶ κρίσει μέν τις δικασθεὶς οὐκ ἂν ἐπὶ τῶν
δικαίων καὶ καλῶν ἐλεύθερος καὶ ὑγιὴς ἂν κριτὴς
γένοιτο· ἀνάγκη γὰρ τῷ δωροδόκῳ τὰ οἰκεῖα μὲν
φαίνεσθαι καλὰ καὶ δίκαια.
Longinus de Sublimitate c. xliv.
(4) καὶ τῶν κώλων ... ἀνίσων τε ὄντων καὶ ἀνομοίων ἀλλήλοις
ἀνομοίους τε καὶ ἀνίσους ποιούμενοι τὰς διαιρέσεις.
Dionys. Halic. de Comp. Verb. c. xxvi.
The two last examples of elegant variation might, no doubt,
be closely reproduced in modern languages. To the more
important matter of emphasis, which arises in some of the other
instances, a separate section must be devoted later.[12]
B. Normal Order
Though Dionysius does right to deny the existence of a
[15]
natural or inevitable order in Greek and to emphasize the essential
freedom of the language, he might well have recognized more
explicitly that there is what may be termed a normal or usual
order, and that it is precisely the departure from this normal
usage which does much to give a definite character (good or bad,
as the case may be) to the style of individual Greek authors.
For instance, it is usual in Greek for an adjective to follow its
noun, and for a negative to precede the word or words which it
qualifies. There are, further, certain customary positions for the
article (according as it is attributive or predicative); for the
demonstrative pronouns in conjunction with the article; for
αὐτός, according to the meaning which it bears; for the particles;
for prepositions, conjunctions, and relative pronouns; and so
forth. There is, in short, a grammatical order sanctioned by
prevailing usage, an order which might be shown to hold good,
commonly though not universally, in some of the grammatical
constructions indicated by Dionysius in his fifth chapter. Now
between this normal order, and lucidity of expression, there exists
a close connexion.
C. Lucidity
It might easily be concluded, by a reader who knew the de
Compositione alone among Dionysius’ critical essays, that he set
little store by that clear writing which, as it presupposes clear
thinking, is a rare and cardinal excellence of style. As the noun
σαφήνεια occurs but once in the treatise and the adjective
σαφής not much oftener, it might be supposed that he underrated
a quality to which Aristotle and other writers of antiquity
assign so high a place. Aristotle, indeed, regards it as a first
essential of good style, which must be “clear without being
mean” (λέξεως δὲ ἀρετὴ σαφῆ καὶ μὴ ταπεινὴν εἶναι, Aristot.
Poet. xxii. 1: cp. Rhet. iii. 2. 1). Similarly Cicero puts clearness
(sermo dilucidus) before ornament, asking how it is possible, “qui
non dicat quod intellegamus, hunc posse quod admiremur dicere”
(Cic. de Orat. iii. 9. 38). Horace’s approving reference to lucidus
ordo has become proverbial.[13] And Quintilian allots the primacy
[16]
to the same great quality: “nobis prima sit virtus perspicuitas,
propria verba, rectus ordo, non in longum dilata conclusio; nihil
neque desit neque superfluat” (Inst. Or. viii. 2. 22), and puts a
high and not always attainable ideal before the orator in
relation to his judicial auditor: “quare non, ut intellegere
possit, sed, ne omnino possit non intellegere, curandum” (ibid.
viii. 2. 24).
If Dionysius in the present treatise says little about lucidity,
the sole reason is that he assumes it as a necessary and indispensable
quality of style. In the de Thucydide c. 23 it is classed
(together with purity and brevity) as one of the ἀρεταὶ ἀναγκαῖαι
(in contradistinction to the ἀρεταὶ ἐπίθετοι, such as ἐνάργεια,
ἡ τῶν ἠθῶν τε καὶ παθῶν μίμησις, etc.). The Greek critics
recognized, however, that the plainer styles were more likely
than the more elaborate ones to excel in lucidity,—that, in this
respect, a Herodotus and a Lysias might be expected to surpass
a Thucydides and a Demosthenes.[14] Among these authors let
us choose Lysias and Thucydides, and see what praise or blame
Dionysius awards to them upon this score. In the fourth
chapter of the de Lysia, the lucidity of Lysias is contrasted with
the obscurity often found in Thucydides and Demosthenes; and
it is pointed out that this excellence is, in him, all the more
admirable in that it is combined with a studious brevity, an
opulent vocabulary, and a mind of great native force. And no
finer example of pellucid clearness of narration could well be
imagined than that quoted from Lysias in the sixth chapter of
the de Isaeo: ἀναγκαῖόν μοι δοκεῖ εἶναι, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί,
περὶ τῆς φιλίας τῆς ἐμῆς καὶ τῆς Φερενίκου πρῶτον εἰπεῖν
πρὸς ὑμᾶς, κτλ. To the obscurities of Thucydides, on the other
hand, as seen in his History and particularly in his Speeches,
constant and mournful reference is made in the essay which has
the historian for its subject. “You can almost count on your
fingers,” says Dionysius, “the people who are capable of comprehending
the whole of Thucydides; and not even they can
[17]
do so without occasional recourse to a grammatical commentary.”[15]
Dionysius, further, gives it as his opinion that the language of
Thucydides was unique even in his own day; and he combats
the view that a historian (as distinguished, say, from an advocate)
may plead in excuse for an artificial style that he does not write
for “people in the market-place, in workshops or in factories,
nor for others who have not shared in a liberal education, but
for men who have reached rhetoric and philosophy after passing
through a full curriculum of approved studies, to whom therefore
none of these expressions will appear unfamiliar.”[16] Obscurity
and eccentricity, he says in effect, are not virtues except in the
eyes of literary coteries; presumably a speaker speaks, and a
writer writes, in order to be understood.[17]
D. Emphasis
Dionysius’ inadequate recognition of a normal order is naturally
attended by some uncertainty in his attitude towards that kind
of emphasis which a departure from the normal order produces.
It may, indeed, be thought that the effect of emphasis, and the
best means of attaining it, are considered at the opening of the
sixth chapter of the treatise, and that it comes under the heading
both of σχηματισμός and of ἁρμονία. In the fifth chapter,
however, we should have welcomed a clearer recognition of the
emphasis which, as it seems to modern readers, falls upon ἄνδρα,
μῆνιν, and ἠέλιος, when they come at the beginning of the line
and so are the first words to accost the ear. Certainly in his
own writing Dionysius shows that he appreciates the emphasis
gained by thrusting a word to the front of the sentence: e.g.
καιροῦ δὲ οὔτε ῥήτωρ οὐδεὶς οὔτε φιλόσοφος εἰς τόδε χρόνου
τέχνην ὥρισεν (132 21). Towards the end of chapter 7 he
quotes from Demosthenes the words τὸ λαβεῖν οὖν τὰ διδόμενα
ὁμολογῶν ἔννομον εἶναι, τὸ χάριν τούτων ἀποδοῦναι παρανόμων
γράφῃ. He changes the order to ὁμολογῶν οὖν ἔννομον
[18]
εἶναι τὸ λαβεῖν τὰ διδόμενα, παρανόμων γράφῃ τὸ τούτων
χάριν ἀποδοῦναι, and then asks whether the passage will be
ὁμοίως δικανικὴ καὶ στρογγύλη. To us it would seem that the
chief loss is the loss of emphasis which is entailed (in Greek) by
removing from the beginning of the clauses the important and
contrasted phrases τὸ λαβεῖν τὰ διδόμενα and τὸ χάριν τούτων
ἀποδοῦναι. Possibly this loss of emphasis is implied (among
other things) in the words “δικανικὴ καὶ στρογγύλη.”[18]
Where it occurs in Dionysius, the word ἔμφασις bears the
sense of ‘hint,’ ‘suggestion,’ ‘soupçon’ (de Thucyd. c. 16
ῥᾳθύμως ἐπιτετροχασμένα καὶ οὐδὲ τὴν ἐλαχίστην ἔμφασιν
ἔχοντα τῆς δεινότητος ἐκείνης): a sense which is akin to its
technical use of ‘hidden meaning’ (“significatio maior quam
oratio,” Cic. Orat. 40. 139; cp. Quintil. viii. 3. 83, ix. 2. 3,
64).[19] In our sense of emphasis due to position, the word
ἔμφασις is perhaps hardly used even in the scholiasts; and it is
possible that Greek has no single term to express the idea,
though it may doubtless be one of the elements in view when a
writer uses such expressions as ἁρμονία, σχηματισμός, and
ὑπερβατόν.
A modern student of Greek, having to feel his way with
practically no help from ancient authorities, will probably reach
the conclusion that the rhetorical emphasis he has in mind is
attained by placing a word in one of the less usual positions open
to it. The word thus emphasized may come at the beginning, in
the middle, or at the end of a sentence, the real point being that
the position should be (for that particular word) a little out of
the ordinary. In Greek, however, as contrasted with English,
the emphasis tends to fall on the earlier rather than the later
words.[20] In delivery, it would seem that the Greeks found it
more natural to stress the beginning than the conclusion of a
[19]
sentence. But an emphatic word may be found at the end as
well as at the beginning, and may sometimes be placed neither
at the end nor at the beginning.[21]
Allusion has already been made to the rhetorical emphasis
which falls upon the opening words of the Iliad and the Odyssey.
As with “arma virumque cano” in the Aeneid, the words μῆνιν
and ἄνδρα seem to strike the keynote of the following Epics.
And, in a less degree, a certain emphasis due to initial position
(and contributing either to emotional effect or to logical clearness)
is to be discerned throughout the poems: e.g. in the sixth
book of the Iliad:—
δυστήνων δέ τε παῖδες ἐμῷ μένει ἀντιόωσιν.
Homer Iliad vi. 127.
and
πέπλον δ’, ὅς τίς τοι χαριέστατος ἠδὲ μέγιστος
ἔστιν ἐνὶ μεγάρῳ καί τοι πολὺ φίλτατος αὐτῇ,
τὸν θὲς Ἀθηναίης ἐπὶ γούνασιν ἠϋκόμοιο, κτλ.
Homer Iliad vi. 271.
Similarly with the following ten miscellaneous examples of
various emphasis, taken chiefly from Dionysius’ favourite speech:—
(1) ἐκεῖνος γὰρ πολλοὺς ἐπιθυμητὰς καὶ ἀστοὺς καὶ ξένους
λαβών, οὐδένα πώποτε μισθὸν τῆς συνουσίας ἐπράξατο,
ἀλλὰ πᾶσιν ἀφθόνως ἐπήρκει τῶν ἑαυτοῦ.
Xenophon Memorabilia i. 2. 60.
(2) καὶ ταραχώδης ἦν ἡ ναυμαχία, ἐν ᾗ αἱ Ἀττικαὶ νῆες
παραγιγνόμεναι τοῖς Κερκυραίοις, εἴ πῃ πιέζοιντο,
φόβον μὲν παρεῖχον τοῖς ἐναντίοις, μάχης δὲ οὐκ
ἦρχον δεδιότες οἱ στρατηγοὶ τὴν πρόρρησιν τῶν
Ἀθηναίων.[22]
Thucydides i. 49.
(3) Ἀναξαγόρου οἴει κατηγορεῖν, ὦ φίλε Μέλητε, κτλ.
Plato Apology 26 D.
[20]
(4) οὐ γὰρ τὰ ῥήματα τὰς οἰκειότητας ἔφη βεβαιοῦν, μάλα
σεμνῶς ὀνομάζων, ἀλλὰ τὸ ταὐτὰ συμφέρειν.
Demosthenes de Corona § 35.
(5) οἱ μὲν κατάπτυστοι Θετταλοὶ καὶ ἀναίσθητοι Θηβαῖοι
φίλον, εὐεργέτην, σωτῆρα τὸν Φίλιππον ἡγοῦντο·
πάντ’ ἐκεῖνος ἦν αὐτοῖς· οὐδὲ φωνὴν ἤκουον εἴ τις
ἄλλο τι βούλοιτο λέγειν.
id. ib. § 43.
(6) οὓς σὺ ζῶντας μέν, ὦ κίναδος, κολακεύων παρηκολούθεις,
τεθνεώτων δ’ οὐκ αἰσθάνει κατηγορῶν.
id. ib. § 162.
(7) καὶ τότ’ εὐθὺς ἐμοῦ διαμαρτυρομένου καὶ βοῶντος ἐν
τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ “πόλεμον εἰς τὴν Ἀττικὴν εἰσάγεις,
Αἰσχίνη, πόλεμον Ἀμφικτυονικόν, κτλ.”
id. ib. § 143.
(8) ὃς γὰρ ἐμοῦ φιλιππισμόν, ὦ γῆ καὶ θεοί, κατηγορεῖ,
τί οὗτος οὐκ ἂν εἴποι;
id. ib. § 294.
(9) ἀλλ’ οἶμαι οὐ δυνάμεθα· ἐλεεῖσθαι οὖν ἡμᾶς πολὺ
μᾶλλον εἰκός ἐστίν που ὑπὸ ὑμῶν τῶν δεινῶν ἢ
χαλεπαίνεσθαι.
Plato Republic i. 336 E.
(10) μηδ’ εἵμασι στρώσασ’ ἐπίφθονον πόρον
τίθει· θεούς τοι τοῖσδε τιμαλφεῖν χρεών.
Aeschylus Agamemnon 921.
It will be seen from some of the above examples that words
may have emphasis if, though not actually placed at the very
beginning of a sentence or a clause, they come as early as they
well can. The three following passages will further illustrate this
point:—
(1) καὶ ἐς Νικίαν τὸν Νικηράτου στρατηγὸν ὄντα ἀπεσήμαινεν,
ἐχθρὸς ὢν καὶ ἐπιτιμῶν, ῥᾴδιον εἶναι
παρασκευῇ, εἰ ἄνδρες εἶεν οἱ στρατηγοί, πλεύσαντας
λαβεῖν τοὺς ἐν τῇ νήσῳ, καὶ αὐτός γ’ ἄν, εἰ ἦρχε,
ποιῆσαι τοῦτο.
Thucydides iv. 27.
[21]
(2) ὅ τι μὲν ὑμεῖς, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, πεπόνθατε ὑπὸ
τῶν ἐμῶν κατηγόρων, οὐκ οἶδα· ἐγὼ δ’ οὖν καὶ
αὐτὸς ὑπ’ αὐτῶν ὀλίγου ἐμαυτοῦ ἐπελαθόμην· οὕτω
πιθανῶς ἔλεγον. καίτοι ἀληθές γε, ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν,
οὐδὲν εἰρήκασιν.
Plato Apology init.
(3) ἀλλὰ μὴν τὸν τότε συμβάντα ἐν τῇ πόλει θόρυβον
ἴστε μὲν ἅπαντες, μικρὰ δ’ ἀκούσατε ὅμως, αὐτὰ
τἀναγκαιότατα ... οἱ δὲ τοὺς στρατηγοὺς μετεπέμποντο
καὶ τὸν σαλπιγκτὴν ἐκάλουν, καὶ θορύβου
πλήρης ἦν ἡ πόλις.
Demosthenes de Corona §§ 168, 169.
Sometimes, however, emphatic words will be thrust right
to the front through such devices as the postponement of an
interrogative particle: e.g.
ἑστάναι, εἶπον, καὶ κινεῖσθαι τὸ αὐτὸ ἅμα κατὰ τὸ αὐτὸ ἆρα
δυνατόν;
Plato Republic iv. 436 C.
and
οἷον δίψα ἐστὶ δίψα ἆρά γε θερμοῦ ποτοῦ ἢ ψυχροῦ, ἢ
πολλοῦ ἢ ὀλίγου, ἢ καὶ ἑνὶ λόγῳ ποιοῦ τινος πώματος;
id. ib. iv. 437 D.[23]
An uninflected language may well envy the grammatical
resources which enable Greek or Latin poets to secure at once
clearness and the utmost height of emotion in such lines as:
Ζεῦ πάτερ, ἀλλὰ σὺ ῥῦσαι ὑπ’ ἠέρος υἷας Ἀχαιῶν,
ποίησον δ’ αἴθρην, δὸς δ’ ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ἰδέσθαι·
ἐν δὲ φάει καὶ ὄλεσσον, ἐπεί νύ τοι εὔαδεν οὕτως.
Homer Iliad xvii. 645.
Me, me, adsum qui feci, in me convertite ferrum,
O Rutuli.
Virgil Aeneid ix. 427.[24]
[22]
The end as well as the beginning of a clause or sentence
may bring emphasis when it is an unusual position for the
particular word or phrase which stands there. Illustrations may
perhaps be drawn from expressions conveying the idea of “death,”
which (according to Dionysus in the Frogs) is the “heaviest of
ills,” and which (be that as it may) is as little likely as any to be
entertained lightheartedly, or to be mentioned without some
degree of feeling and emphasis. At the beginning of a sentence,
τεθνᾶσι clearly has emphasis in
τεθνᾶσ’ ἀδελφοὶ καὶ πατὴρ οὑμὸς γέρων.
Euripides Hercules Furens 539.
And in the following passage of Plato, it will be seen that the
τὸν θάνατον which comes near the beginning of a clause is more
emphatic than the τὸν θάνατον which comes at the end of a
clause:—
οἶσθα δ’, ἦ δ’ ὅς, ὅτι τὸν θάνατον ἡγοῦνται πάντες οἱ ἄλλοι
τῶν μεγάλων κακῶν;—καὶ μάλ’, ἔφη.—οὐκοῦν φόβῳ
μειζόνων κακῶν ὑπομένουσιν αὐτῶν οἱ ἀνδρεῖοι τὸν
θάνατον, ὅταν ὑπομένωσιν;—ἔστι ταῦτα.
Plato Phaedo 68 D.
The τὸν θάνατον before ἡγοῦνται is here emphatic on the same
principle as the θάνατον before εἰσέθηκε in the passage (already
alluded to) of the Frogs:—
θάνατον γὰρ εἰσέθηκε βαρύτατον κακόν.
Aristophanes Ranae 1394.
But a word like θάνατος may also come with emphasis at the
end of a sentence, if that order is rendered unusual by the interposition
of additional words or by any other means which create
a feeling of suspense and even of afterthought. For example:
[23]
τί δέ; τὰν Αἵδου ἡγούμενον εἶναί τε καὶ δεινὰ εἶναι οἴει
τινὰ θάνατου ἀδεῆ ἔσεσθαι καὶ ἐν ταῖς μάχαις αἱρήσεσθαι
πρὸ ἥττης τε καὶ δουλείας θάνατον;
Plato Republic iii. 386 B.
Here the θάνατον seems intended to repeat with emphasis
the preceding θανάτου to which, itself, a considerable degree of
prominence is assigned. So, perhaps,
ἀλλὰ νόμον δημοσίᾳ τὸν ταῦτα κωλύσοντα τέθεινται τουτονὶ
καὶ πολλοὺς ἤδη παραβάντας τὸν νόμον τοῦτον ἐζημιώκασιν
θανάτῳ.
Demosthenes Midias § 49.
and
... καὶ φοβερωτέρας ἡγήσεται τὰς ὕβρεις καὶ τὰς ἀτιμίας,
ἃς ἐν δουλευούσῃ τῇ πόλει φέρειν ἀνάγκη, τοῦ θανάτου.
Demosthenes de Corona § 205.
Some miscellaneous examples of words coming emphatically
at the end of a clause or sentence are:—
(1) αἰτοῦμαι δ’ ὑμᾶς δοῦναι καὶ νῦν παισὶ μὲν καὶ γυναικὶ
καὶ φίλοις καὶ πατρίδι εὐδαιμονίαν, ἐμοὶ δὲ οἷόν περ
αἰῶνα δεδώκατε τοιαύτην καὶ τελευτὴν δοῦναι.
Xenophon Cyropaedia viii. 7.
(2) ἀλλὰ καὶ τούτους κολυμβηταὶ δυόμενοι ἐξέπριον
μισθοῦ.[25]
Thucydides vii. 25.
(3) ὑψοῦ δὲ θάσσων ὑψόθεν χαμαιπετὴς
πίπτει πρὸς οὖδας μυρίοις οἰμώγμασι
Πενθεύς.[26]
Euripides Bacchae 1111.
(4) ἴστε γὰρ δήπου τοῦθ’ ὅτι πάντες οἱ ξεναγοῦντες οὗτοι
πόλεις καταλαμβάνοντες Ἑλληνίδας ἄρχειν ζητοῦσιν,
καὶ πάντων, ὅσοι περ νόμοις οἰκεῖν βούλονται τὴν
αὑτῶν ὄντες ἐλεύθεροι, κοινοὶ περιέρχονται κατὰ
πᾶσαν χώραν, εἰ δεῖ τἀληθὲς εἰπεῖν, ἐχθροί.
Demosthenes Aristocrates § 139.
[24]
(5) δεῖ δὲ τοὺς ἀγαθοὺς ἄνδρας ἐγχειρεῖν μὲν ἅπασιν
ἀεὶ τοῖς καλοῖς, τὴν ἀγαθὴν προβαλλομένους ἐλπίδα,
φέρειν δ’ ἃν ὁ θεὸς διδῷ γενναίως.[27]
Demosthenes de Corona § 97.
(6) εἶθ’ οὗτοι τὰ ὅπλα εἶχον ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν ἀεί.
id. ib. § 235.
(7) εἰ γὰρ ταῦτα προεῖτ’ ἀκονιτεί, περὶ ὧν οὐδένα κίνδυνον
ὅντιν’ οὐχ ὑπέμειναν οἱ πρόγονοι, τίς οὐχὶ κατέπτυσεν
ἂν σοῦ; μὴ γὰρ τῆς πόλεώς γε, μηδ’ ἐμοῦ.
id. ib. § 200.
(8) ... ἡμῖν δὲ τοῖς λοιποῖς τὴν ταχίστην ἀπαλλαγὴν
τῶν ἐπηρτημένων φόβων δότε καὶ σωτηρίαν ἀσφαλῆ.[28]
id. ib. § 324.
It may be added that, occasionally, both the earlier and the
later positions are emphatic in the same clause or sentence: e.g.
(1) τέκνα γὰρ κατακτενῶ
τἄμ’.[29]
Euripides Medea 792.
(2) ὦτα γὰρ τυγχάνει ἀνθρώποισι ἐόντα ἀπιστότερα ὀφθαλμῶν.[30]
Herodotus i. 8.
(3) νῦν δὲ τὸ μὲν παρὸν ἀεὶ προϊέμενοι, τὰ δὲ μέλλοντ’
αὐτόματ’ οἰόμενοι σχήσειν καλῶς, ηὐξήσαμεν, ὦ ἄνδρες
Ἀθηναῖοι, Φίλιππον ἡμεῖς, καὶ κατεστήσαμεν τηλικοῦτον
ἡλίκος οὐδείς πω βασιλεὺς γέγονεν Μακεδονίας.
[31]
[25]
Demosthenes Olynthiacs i. § 9.
(4) πολλάκις δὲ τοῦ κήρυκος ἐρωτῶντος οὐδὲν μᾶλλον
ἀνίστατ’ οὐδείς, ἁπάντων μὲν τῶν στρατηγῶν
παρόντων, κτλ.
Demosthenes de Corona § 117.
(5) καὶ μὴν καὶ Φερὰς πρώην ὡς φίλος καὶ σύμμαχος εἰς
Θετταλίαν ἐλθὼν ἔχει καταλαβών, καὶ τὰ τελευταῖα
τοῖς ταλαιπώροις Ὠρείταις τουτοισὶ ἐπισκεψομένους
ἔφη τοὺς στρατιώτας πεπομφέναι κατ’ εὔνοιαν·
πυνθάνεσθαι γὰρ αὐτοὺς ὡς νοσοῦσι καὶ στασιάζουσιν,
συμμάχων δ’ εἶναι καὶ φίλων ἀληθινῶν ἐν
τοῖς τοιούτοις καιροῖς παρεῖναι.
Demosthenes Philippics iii. § 12.
(6) οὐ λίθοις ἐτείχισα τὴν πόλιν οὐδὲ πλίνθοις ἐγώ,
οὐδ’ ἐπὶ τούτοις μέγιστον τῶν ἐμαυτοῦ φρονῶ.
Demosthenes de Corona § 299.
(7) ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐχθρῶν πεπολίτευσαι πάντα, ἐγὼ δ’ ὑπὲρ τῆς
πατρίδος.
id. ib. § 265.
In connexion with the imperfect appreciation which the
de Compositione Verborum shows of a normal order and of an
[26]
emphasis produced by departure from it, attention may be drawn
to the fact that the treatise contains no reference to the ‘figure’
hyperbaton; and this although the figure had been recognized
long before Dionysius’ time, and continued to be recognized long
afterwards. It is first mentioned by Plato, who probably took
over the notion from the Sophists: ἀλλ’ ὑπερβατὸν δεῖ θεῖναι
ἐν τῷ ᾄσματι τὸ “ἀλαθέως” (Plato Protag. 343 E, where the
reference is to a poem of Simonides). The author of the
Rhetorica ad Alexandrum (c. 30) indicates it in the following
terms: ἐὰν μὴ ὑπερβατῶς αὐτὰ [sc. τὰ ὀνόματα] τιθῶμεν,
ἀλλ’ ἀεὶ τὰ ἐχόμενα ἑξῆς τάττωμεν. Quintilian treats of it
in the passage beginning “Hyperbaton quoque, id est verbi
transgressionem, quoniam frequenter ratio comparationis et decor
poscit, non immerito inter virtutes habemus” (Inst. Or. viii.
6. 62).[32] The author of the Treatise on the Sublime describes
and defines it thus: ἔστι δὲ λέξεων ἢ νοήσεων ἐκ τοῦ κατ’
ἀκολουθίαν κεκινημένη τάξις καὶ οἱονεὶ χαρακτὴρ ἐναγωνίου
πάθους ἀληθέστατος (Longinus de Sublim. c. 22).[33] And, later
still, Hermogenes and other writers on rhetoric are well acquainted
with the figure. Dionysius, however, mentions it but seldom in
any of his writings, and even then (e.g. τὰς ὑπερβατοὺς καὶ
πολυπλόκους καὶ ἐξ ἀποκοπῆς πολλὰ σημαίνειν πράγματα
βουλομένας καὶ διὰ μακροῦ τὰς ἀποδόσεις λαμβανούσας
νοήσεις, de Thucyd. c. 52; cp. c. 31 ibid.) is clearly thinking not
of desirable but of highly undesirable “inversions.” He may have
thought that its proper place was in poetry rather than in prose.
[27]
E. Euphony
A modern writer on style would probably lay more stress on
clearness and emphasis than on euphony. The ancient critics,
on the other hand, seem to have taken the two former elements
more or less for granted. Because they were easily attainable
in languages so fully inflected as Greek and Latin, their attainment
was regarded as an important matter indeed, but one which
called for no special recognition of any kind. As Quintilian says,
in reference to clearness, “nam emendate quidem ac lucide
dicentium tenue praemium est, magisque ut vitiis carere quam
ut aliquam magnam virtutem adeptus esse videaris” (Inst. Or.
viii. 3. 1).[34] Dionysius, too, in the de Compositione Verborum, passes
more readily over the two qualities of clearness and emphasis
because he is not concerned with the πραγματικὸς τόπος.[35] He
keeps rigorously to his real subject; and that is not the relation
of words to the ideas of which they are the symbols. It is,
rather, their relation to their own constituent elements (letters
and syllables of diverse qualities and quantities) and to the
pleasant impression which the apt collocation of many various
words can make upon the ear. His task is to investigate the
emotional power of the sound-elements of language when alone
and when in combination—their euphonic and their symphonic
effects. Hence the constant recurrence, throughout the treatise,
of words like εὐφωνία, εὐρυθμία, εὐστομία, λειότης, ἁρμονία,
σύνθεσις. The illustrative excerpts which he gives are so
numerous and so happily chosen that no others need be added
here.[36]
A careful study of his examples, in the context in which
they occur, will suggest many reflexions upon the freedom and
adaptability of Greek order. But no absolute test of euphony
[28]
can be based upon them. Dionysius himself formulates no
invariable rules upon the subject. In the last resort, the court
of appeal must, as he sees, be the instinctive judgment of the
ear (τὸ ἄλογον τῆς ἀκοῆς πάθος).[37] The part played by the
ear has been well described by Quintilian: “ergo quem in
poëmate locum habet versificatio, eum in oratione compositio.
optime autem de illa iudicant aures, quae plena sentiunt et
parum expleta desiderant et fragosis offenduntur et levibus
mulcentur et contortis excitantur et stabilia probant, clauda
deprehendunt, redundantia ac nimia fastidiunt” (Inst. Or. ix.
4. 116). Naturally the ear in question must be the individual
ear (“aurem tuam interroga, quo quid loco conveniat dicere,”
Aulus Gellius Noctes Att. xiii. 21); the criterion is subjective,
not absolute.[38] But it is assumed that the ear in question has
been trained and attuned by constant converse with the great
masters, and that (like Flaubert in modern times) an author
never writes without repeating the words aloud to himself.
Thus trained, the ear will work in harmony with the mind:
“aures enim vel animus aurium nuntio naturalem quandam in
se continet vocum omnium mensionem” (Cic. Orat. 53. 177).
Both Cicero and Dionysius are well aware that style is personal
and individual,—that it is no uniform and mechanical thing.
Dionysius’ own position has been misunderstood by those who
have judged the de Compositione as if it were a complete treatise
on the entire subject of style. In the eyes of Dionysius, words
are not what dead stone and timber are in the eyes of the
ordinary workman. They are, rather, the living elements which,
in the secret places of his mind, the master-builder views as
potential parts of some great temple.[39] They are what an
individual makes them. Hence, just as Cicero writes “qua re
sine, quaeso, sibi quemque scribere,
Suam quoíque sponsam, míhi meam; suum quoíque
amorem, míhi meum”:
so Dionysius long ago anticipated the saying that the style is
the man.[40]
[29]
Among the minor debts we owe to him is the fact that his
minute analysis of rhythms, or feet, in passages of Thucydides,
Pindar and others, helps to disclose the inner workings of the
beautiful Greek language and to impress us with the importance
attached by the ancients to what we moderns find it so hard
fully to appreciate,—the effect on a Greek ear of syllabic quantity
in prose as well as verse. And he insists no less upon the
charm of variety,—the paramount necessity of avoiding monotony.
He saw, for example, that the Greek inflexions (notwithstanding
the many advantages which they brought with them) had at
least one drawback: they are apt to lead to a certain sameness
in case-endings. Accordingly he would, for instance, have
approved (though he does not mention this particular passage)
of the separation of the words σωτηρίαν ἀσφαλῆ from the other
accusatives at the end of the de Corona: ἡμῖν δὲ τοῖς λοιποῖς
τὴν ταχίστην ἀπαλλαγὴν τῶν ἐπηρτημένων φόβων δότε καὶ
σωτηρίαν ἀσφαλῆ.[41] Further reference to these minutiae of
style may fitly be made later, when the topics of “rhythm” and
“music” are considered.[42]
F. Greek and Latin compared with Modern Languages,
in regard to Word-Order
Something has already been said, incidentally, about certain
differences in word-order between the ancient and the modern
European languages. In such a comparison Greek and Latin
may be placed upon the same footing, as their points of contact
are vastly more numerous than their points of divergence, considerable
though these are.[43]
[30]
The points of contact become manifest when an attempt is
made to translate into Latin, and into English, the sentence
from Herodotus which Dionysius quotes, and twice recasts, in
his fourth chapter:—
(1) Κροῖσος ἦν Λυδὸς μὲν γένος, παῖς δ’ Ἀλυάττου, τύραννος
δ’ ἐθνῶν τῶν ἐντὸς Ἅλυος ποταμοῦ· ὃς ῥέων ἀπὸ
μεσημβρίας μεταξὺ Σύρων τε καὶ Παφλαγόνων
ἐξίησι πρὸς βορέαν ἄνεμον εἰς τὸν Εὔξεινον καλούμενον
πόντον.
Herodotus i. 6.
Croesus genere quidem fuit Lydus, patre autem Alyatte; earum
vero nationum tyrannus, quae intra Halym amnem sunt:
qui, a meridie Syros ac Paphlagones interfluens, contra
ventum Aquilonem in mare, quid vocant Euxinum, evolvitur.
(2) Κροῖσος ἦν υἱὸς μὲν Ἀλυάττου, γένος δὲ Λυδός,
τύραννος δὲ τῶν ἐντὸς Ἅλυος ποταμοῦ ἐθνῶν· ὃς
ἀπὸ μεσημβρίας ῥέων μεταξὺ Σύρων καὶ Παφλαγόνων
εἰς τὸν Εὔξεινον καλούμενον πόντον ἐκδίδωσι
πρὸς βορέαν ἄνεμον.
Croesus erat filius quidem Alyattis, genere autem Lydus, tyrannusque
earum, quae intra sunt Halym amnem nationes; qui,
a meridie interfluens Syros ac Paphlagones, in mare, quod
vocant Euxinum, evolvitur contra ventum Aquilonem.
(3) Ἀλυάττου μὲν υἱὸς ἦν Κροῖσος, γένος δὲ Λυδός, τῶν
δ’ ἐντὸς Ἅλυος ποταμοῦ τύραννος ἐθνῶν· ὃς ἀπὸ
μεσημβρίας ῥέων Σύρων τε καὶ Παφλαγόνων μεταξὺ
πρὸς βορέαν ἐξίησιν ἄνεμον ἐς τὸν καλούμενον
πόντον Εὔξεινον.
Alyattis quidem filius erat Croesus, genere autem Lydus, earum,
quae intra sunt Halym amnem, tyrannus nationum; qui,
a meridie fluens Syros inter ac Paphlagones, contra Boream
erumpit ventum in mare, quod vocant Euxinum.
[31]
In these sentences the Latin follows the Greek order closely,
and might be made to follow it still more faithfully were it not
that it seems better to diverge occasionally for special reasons: e.g.
it is desirable, in rendering the original passage of Herodotus, to
secure (as far as possible) a good rhythm. In English, on the
other hand, the choice lies between a wide deviation and a
rendering which is ambiguous and possibly grotesque. In fact
(to recur once more to the main point) the freedom with which
the order of words can be varied in a Greek or Latin sentence
is without parallel in any modern analytical language, and the
attendant gain in variety, rhythm, and nicety of emphasis is
incalculable.[44]
Still, the modern languages have great powers, in this as in
other ways: powers which will be incidentally illustrated later.
M. Jules Lemaître has written, with reference to Ernest Renan:
“Je trahis peut-être sa pensée en la traduisant; tant pis!
Pourquoi a-t-il des finesses qui ne tiennent qu’à l’arrangement
des mots?”[45] These finesses are perhaps, as is here implied,
hardly communicable, even though an earlier French writer has
commended Malherbe as an author who
D’un mot mis en sa place enseigna le pouvoir.[46]
It may well be that these matters, if not altogether the
[32]
“mysteries” which Dionysius terms them, are eternally elusive
because they depend upon the infinite variety of the human
mind. Yet some studies in English literary theory, such as
might be suggested by Dionysius’ treatise, could not fail to be
of interest, and might be instructive also. Something of the
kind has been already done, without reference to Dionysius or
other Greek critics, by Robert Louis Stevenson in his essay on
Some Technical Elements of Style in Literature.[47] Each language
has, in truth, a rhetoric of its own. But the various languages,
ancient and modern, can help one another in the way of comparison
and contrast.
These methods of comparison and contrast have—as regards
word-order—been excellently applied to the ancient and the
modern languages by Henri Weil and T. D. Goodell. Weil’s
chief service is to have pointed out so clearly the principle that
the order of syntax must be separated in thought from the order
of ideas, and was by both Greeks and Romans freely so separated
in practice, whereas in the modern languages (owing to the lack
of inflexions) this practical separation is less frequent. Goodell,
starting from the postulate that the order of words in a language
represents the order in which the speaker or writer chooses, for
various reasons, to bring his ideas before the mind of another,
discusses (with constant reference to modern languages) the
order of words in Greek, from the standpoint of syntax, rhetoric,
and euphony. In the course of a carefully reasoned exposition,
he corrects and supplements many of Weil’s observations.
The full title of Weil’s book is De l’ordre des mots dans les langues
anciennes comparées aux langues modernes: question de grammaire générale
(3rd edition, Paris, 1879). There is an English translation by C. W.
[33]
Super (Boston, 1887), with notes and additions. Goodell’s paper
on “The Order of Words in Greek” is printed in the Transactions of
the American Philological Association vol. xxi. Other writings on
the subject are: Charles Short’s “Essay on the Order of Words
in Attic Greek Prose,”—prefixed to Drisler’s edition of C. D.
Yonge’s English-Greek Lexicon,—which is an extensive collection
of examples, but is weak in scientific classification and in clear
enunciation of principles; H. L. Ebeling’s “Some Statistics on the
Order of Words in Greek,” contributed to Studies in Honour of Basil
Lanneau Gildersleeve, and including some valuable investigations
into the order in which subject, object, and verb usually come in
Greek; inquiries into the practice of individual authors, e.g. Spratt
on the “Order of Words in Thucydides” (Spratt’s edition of Thucydides,
Book VI.), and Riddell on the “Arrangement of Words and Clauses in
Plato” (Riddell’s edition of Plato’s Apology), or various dissertations
such as Th. Harmsen de verborum collocatione apud Aeschylum, Sophoclem,
Euripidem capita selecta, Ph. Both de Antiphontis et Thucydidis genere
dicendi, J. J. Braun de collocatione verborum apud Thucydidem observationes,
F. Darpe de verborum apud Thucydidem collocatione; and in Latin
such elaborate studies as Hilberg’s Die Gesetze der Wortstellung im
Pentameter des Ovid. An interesting book which compares Cicero’s
Latin translations (prose and verse) with their Greek originals is
V. Clavel’s de M. T. Cicerone Graecorum Interprete. In Harvard Studies
in Classical Philology vol. vii. pp. 223-233, J. W. H. Walden discusses
Weil’s statement that “an emphatic word, if followed by a word
which, though syntactically necessary to the sentence, is in itself unemphatic,
receives an access of emphasis from the lingering of the
attention which results from the juxtaposition of the two.” Reference
may also be made to A. Bergaigne’s “Essai sur la construction
grammaticale considérée dans son développement historique, en
Sanskrit, en Grec, en Latin, dans les langues romanes et dans les
langues germaniques,” in the Mémoires de la Société de Linguistique de
Paris vol. vii. The subject is, further, glanced at in the Greek
Grammars of Kühner and others. But in modern times, as in those
of Dionysius, it has on the whole failed to receive the attention which
its importance would seem to demand.
G. Prose and Poetry: Rhythm and Metre
Readers of the de Compositione cannot fail to notice that,
catholic as he is in his literary tastes, Dionysius reserves his
highest admiration for two authors,—Homer in poetry and
Demosthenes in prose; and that he seems to regard them as
equally valid authorities for the immediate purpose which he has
in view. Homer is quoted throughout the treatise, on the first
[34]
page and on the last; and Demosthenes inspires (in c. 25)
its most eloquent passage. That outburst is a triumphant
vindication of Demosthenes’ methods as a sedulous artist.
Dionysius sees that he is one of those men who spare no
pains over the art they love—that Demosthenes, like Homer,
φιλοτεχνεῖ (200 18; cp. 154 20).
In seeming thus to draw no very clear line between verse
and prose, Dionysius is at one with most of the Greek and Roman
critics; and this attitude is readily intelligible in the light of
the historical development of Greek literature, in which Homer
(who was a master of oratory[48] as well as of poetry) heralds the
intellectual life of all Greece, while Demosthenes is the last great
voice of free Athens. But the approximations of prose to poetry,
and of poetry to prose, which Dionysius describes in his twenty-fifth
and twenty-sixth chapters should not create the impression
that, in his opinion, the prose-writer was free to borrow any and
every weapon from the armoury of the poet. Of one poetical
artifice he says, in c. 6, “this principle can be applied freely in
poetry, but sparingly in prose”; and elsewhere he calls attention
to qualities which he regards as over-poetical in the styles of
Thucydides and Plato.[49] Yet he did clearly wish that good prose
should borrow as much as possible from poetry, while still remaining
good prose. And although he agrees, in general, with Aristotle’s
exposition of the formal differences between prose and poetry, he
does not adhere quite firmly to the Aristotelian principles.[50]
[35]
In the Rhetoric, Aristotle insists that the styles of poetry and
prose are distinct. The difference is this: “prose should have
rhythm but not metre, or it will be poetry. The rhythm,
however, should not be of too marked a character: it should not
pass beyond a certain point.”[51] In the same way, Dionysius
(C.V. c. 25) declares that prose must not be manifestly metrical
or rhythmical, lest it should desert its own specific character.
It should simply appear to be the one and the other, so that it
may be poetical although not a poem, and lyrical although not a
lyric. But, in practice, Dionysius is found to cast longing eyes
upon the formal advantages which poetry possesses, and to wish
to infuse into public speeches a definite metrical element, which
seems alien to the genius of prose, and which would have failed to
gain the sanction of Aristotle, though this appears to be claimed
for it.[52] It is not here a question of the ordinary methods of
imparting force and variety to word-arrangement. In regard to
these, Dionysius’ precepts are, in general, sound and helpful
enough; and if, now and then, the process is extolled in what
may seem extravagant terms, we have only to think of the vast
difference which slight variations of word-order will make even
in our modern analytical languages. For example:
Cut is the branch that might have grown full straight.
Marlowe Doctor Faustus.
[36]
Killed with report that old man eloquent.
Milton Sonnets.
Schön war ich auch, und das war mein Verderben.
Goethe Faust.
The effect of these lines would be sadly marred if we were
to read “the branch is cut,” “that eloquent old man,” and “ich war
auch schön.”[53] In Greek prose, no less than in Greek poetry,
inversions like those just quoted would be quite legitimate. This
at least we can affirm, though it would be rash to attempt to lay
down any general rules with regard to the differences between
Greek order in verse and in prose. It is better to follow Dionysius’
example and to cull illustrations from both alike impartially,
with only two qualifications. First, the Greek word-arrangement
is even freer in verse than in prose, though the clause-arrangement
and the sentence-arrangement of Greek poetry show (as
Dionysius implies in c. 26) a general tendency to coincide with
the metrical arrangement. Second, an absolutely metrical arrangement
is foreign to the best traditions of Greek prose. It is the
second point that is of importance here; and notwithstanding
the almost furtive character which he attributes to the metrical
lines detected by him in the Aristocrates, it is obvious that
Dionysius has in mind a very close and deliberate approximation
to the canons of verse and is prepared to strain his material in
order to attain it.[54] Here, again, some modern illustrations may
be of interest. The writers of the Tudor period seem to have
had a special fondness for, and an ear attuned to, what may be
roughly regarded as hexameter measures. This predilection
[37]
appears both in their rendering of the Bible and in the Book
of Common Prayer:—
How art thou | fallen from | Heaven, O | Lucifer, | son of the | morning.
How art | thou cut | down to the | ground, which didst | weaken the | nations.[55]
Why do the | heathen | rage, and the | people im | agine a | vain thing?
(He) poureth con | tempt upon | princes and | weakeneth the | strength of the | mighty.
God is gone | up with a | shout, the | Lord with the | sound of a | trumpet.
(The) kings of the | earth stood | up, and the | rulers took | counsel to | gether.
Dearly be | loved | brethren, the | Scripture | moveth us |.
The rhythms into which modern prose-writers drop are usually
iambic or trochaic. This is so with Ruskin and Carlyle, and it
would be easy to quote examples from their writings.[56] But, as
in ancient so in modern times, the best criticism looks with
favour on rhythmical, with disfavour on metrical prose. Prose,
it is held, loses its true character—as the minister primarily of
reason rather than of emotion—if it is made to conform to the
rigid laws of metre.
If Dionysius fails to prove that metrical lines, thinly
disguised, are a marked feature of the style of Demosthenes, no
greater fortune has attended some attempts made in our own day
to establish such exact rhythmical laws as that of the systematic
avoidance, in Greek oratory, of a number of short syllables in
close succession. It is clear that Demosthenes’ ear, with that
kind of instinct which comes from musical aptitude and long training
(cp. C.V. 266 13 ff., 268 12), shunned undignified accumulations
of short syllables, but not with so pedantic a persistency
that he could not on occasion use forms like πεφενάκικεν or
διατετέλεκεν or προσαγαγόμενον. If he formulated to himself
a principle, instead of trusting to inspiration controlled by long
experience, this principle would be that which Cicero attributes
to a critic who was almost contemporary with Demosthenes:
“namque ego illud adsentior Theophrasto, qui putat orationem,
quae quidem sit polita atque facta quodam modo, non astricte, sed
[38]
remissius numerosam esse oportere” (Cic. de Orat. iii. 48. 184).[57]
The necessary limits to be observed in these curious inquiries
are well indicated by Quintilian, who utters some sensible warnings
against any attempts continually to scent metre in prose or
to ban some feet while admitting others: “neque enim loqui
possumus nisi syllabis brevibus ac longis, ex quibus pedes
fiunt ... miror autem in hac opinione doctissimos homines
fuisse, ut alios pedes ita eligerent aliosque damnarent, quasi
ullus esset, quem non sit necesse in oratione deprehendi” (Quintil.
Inst. Or. ix. 4. 61 and 87).[58]
On the subject of prose and poetry, Coleridge’s Biographia
Literaria (ed. Shawcross, Clarendon Press, 1907) is likely long to
hold its unique position. Theodore Watts-Dunton’s article on
“Poetry” in the Encyclopaedia Britannica contains an appreciative
estimate of the good service done to criticism by Dionysius in the de
Compositione. The article by Louis Havet on La Prose métrique (in
La Grande Encyclopédie, xxvii. 804-806) deals with what we should call
“rhythmical prose,” the French terminology differing here from our
own. Some account of enjambement (with ancient and modern illustrations)
will be found in the Notes, pp. 270 ff. The recent writings on
Greek rhythm and metre are almost endless. Some of them will be
suggested by the names of: Rossbach, Westphal, Weil, Schmidt, Christ,
Gleditsch, Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Goodell, Masqueray, Blass.
With regard to the relation between metre and rhythm, there is
not a little suggestiveness in the saying of the historical Longinus:
μέτρου δὲ πατὴρ ῥυθμὸς καὶ θεός (Proleg. in Heph. Ench.; Westphal
Script. Metr. Graeci i. 82). There is also, in our day, an increasing
recognition of the intimate alliance between Greek poetry and Greek
music; it is more and more seen that lyric stanzas are formed out
of figures and phrases, rather than from mere mechanical feet. Nor
is it to be forgotten that poetic rhythm may probably be traced
[39]
back to the regular movements of the limbs in dancing. The views
of Blass on ancient prose rhythm are given in his Die attische Beredsamkeit,
Die Rhythmen der attischen Kunstprosa (Isokrates, Demosthenes,
Platon), and Die Rhythmen der asianischen und römischen Kunstprosa
(Paulus, Hebräerbrief, Pausanias, Cicero, Seneca, Curtius, Apuleius);
and some of them are summarized in an article which he contributed,
shortly before his death, to Hermathena (“On Attic Prose Rhythm”
Hermathena No. xxxii., 1906). Probably his tendency was to seek
after too much uniformity in such matters as the avoidance of hiatus
and of successive short syllables, or as the symmetrical correspondences
between clauses within the period. The best Attic orators were
here guided, more or less consciously, by two principles to which
Dionysius constantly refers: (1) μεταβολή, or the love of variety;
(2) τὸ πρέπον, or the sense of propriety. This sense of propriety
rejected all such obvious and systematic art as should cause a
speech to seem, in Aristotle’s words, πεπλασμένος and ἀπίθανος
(Rhet. iii. 2. 4; 8. 1). Still, Demosthenes’ greatest speeches were
no doubt carefully revised before they were given to the world;
and so the blade may have been cold-polished, after leaving the
forge of the imagination. It is to be noticed that, in the matter of
hiatus, for example, some of the best manuscripts of Demosthenes do
seem to observe a strict parsimony; and this careful avoidance of
open vowels may be due ultimately rather to Demosthenes himself
than to an early scholar-editor. Whatever the final judgment on
Blass’s work may be, he will have done good service by directing
attention anew to a point so hard for the modern ear to appreciate
as the great part played in artistic Greek prose by the subtle use of
time,—of long and short syllables arranged in a kind of general
equipoise rather than in any regular and definite succession. How
singularly important that part was reckoned to be, such passages of
Dionysius as the following help to indicate: οὐ γὰρ δὴ φαῦλόν τι
πρᾶγμα ῥυθμὸς ἐν λόγοις οὐδὲ προσθήκης τινὸς μοῖραν ἔχον οὐκ ἀναγκαίας,
ἀλλ’ εἰ δεῖ τἀληθές, ὡς ἐμὴ δόξα, εἰπεῖν, ἁπάντων κυριώτατον τῶν γοητεύειν
δυναμένων καὶ κηλεῖν τὰς ἀκοάς (de Demosth. c. 39).
III
Other Matters arising in the de Compositione
A. Greek Music: in Relation to the Greek Language
For the modern student there is perhaps no more valuable
chapter of the de Compositione than that (c. 11) which treats of
the musical element in Greek speech. It helps to bring home
[40]
the fact that, among the ancient Greeks, “the science of public
oratory was a musical science, differing from vocal and instrumental
music in degree, not in kind” (μουσικὴ γάρ τις ἦν καὶ
ἡ τῶν πολιτικῶν λόγων ἐπιστήμη τῷ ποσῷ διαλλάττουσα τῆς
ἐν ᾠδῇ καὶ ὀργάνοις, οὐχὶ τῷ ποιῷ, 124 20). The extraordinary
sensitiveness of Greek audiences to the music of sounds is
described by Dionysius, who also indicates the musical intervals
observed in singing and in speaking, and touches on the relation
borne by the words to the music in a song. His statements,
further, give countenance to the view that “the chief elements of
utterance—pitch, time, and stress—were independent in ancient
Greek speech, just as they are in music. And the fact that they
were independent goes a long way to prove our main contention,
viz. that ancient Greek speech had a peculiar quasi-musical
character, and consequently that the difficulty which modern
scholars feel in understanding the ancient statements on such
matters as accent and quantity is simply the difficulty of conceiving
a form of utterance of which no examples can now be
observed.”[59] Even Aristotle, Greek though he was, seems to
have felt imperfectly those harmonies of balanced cadence which
come from the poet, or artistic prose-writer, to whom words are
as notes to the musician. And if Aristotle, a Greek though not
an Athenian, shows himself not fully alive to the music of the
most musical of languages, it is hardly matter for wonder that
writers of our own rough island prose should be far from feeling
that they are musicians playing on an instrument of many
strings, and should be ready, as Dionysius might have said in
his most serious vein, εἰς γέλωτα λαμβάνειν τὰ σπουδαιότατα
δι’ ἀπειρίαν (252 16). It is true that, on the other side, we
have R. L. Stevenson, who writes: “Each phrase of each sentence,
like an air or recitative in music, should be so artfully compounded
out of longs and shorts, out of accented and unaccented syllables,
as to gratify the sensual ear. And of this the ear is the sole
judge.”[60] Dionysius and Stevenson are, admittedly, slight names
to set against that of Aristotle. But this is no reason why they
should not be allowed to supplement his statements when
he is too deeply concerned with matter and substance to
say much about manner and the niceties and enchantments
[41]
of form. And Dionysius is—it must in justice be conceded—no
mere word-taster but a man genuinely alive to the
great issues that dignify and ennoble style. He can, for
example, thus describe the effect, subsequent and immediate,
of Demosthenes’ speeches: “When I take up one of his speeches,
I am entranced and am carried hither and thither, stirred now
by one emotion, now by another. I feel distrust, anxiety, fear,
disdain, hatred, pity, good-will, anger, jealousy. I am agitated
by every passion in turn that can sway the human heart, and am
like those who are being initiated into wild mystic rites....
When we who are centuries removed from that time, and are
in no way affected by the matters at issue, are thus swept off
our feet and mastered and borne wherever the discourse leads us,
what must have been the feelings excited by the speaker in the
minds of the Athenians and the Greeks generally, when living
interests of their own were at stake, and when the great orator,
whose reputation stood so high, spoke from the heart and revealed
the promptings of his inmost soul?”[61]
In addition to D. B. Monro’s book on Greek music, reference
may be made to such works as Rossbach and Westphal’s Theorie der
musischen Künste der Hellenen, H. S. Macran’s edition of Aristoxenus’
Harmonics (from the Introduction to which a quotation of some
length will be found in the note on 194 7), and the edition of
Plutarch’s de Musica by H. Weil and Th. Reinach. The articles, by
W. H. Frere and H. S. Macran, on Greek Music in the new edition
of Grove’s Dictionary of Music and Musicians should also be consulted,
as well as the essay, by H. R. Fairclough, on “The Connexion
between Music and Poetry in Early Greek Literature” in Studies in
Honour of Basil Lanneau Gildersleeve. The close connexion between
music and verbal harmony is brought out in Longinus de Sublim.
cc. 39-41. In Grenfell and Hunt’s Hibeh Papyri, Part i. (1906), p. 45,
there is a short “Discourse on Music” which the editors are inclined
to attribute to Hippias of Elis, the contemporary of Socrates.
B. Accent in Ancient Greek
If there were any doubt that the Greek accent was an affair
of pitch rather than of stress, the eleventh chapter of this
treatise would go far to remove it. It is clear that Dionysius
describes the difference between the acute and the grave accent
as a variation of pitch, and that he considers this variation to
[42]
be approximately the same as the musical interval of a fifth, or
(as he himself explains) three tones and a semitone. Similarly
Aristoxenus (Harm. i. 18) writes λέγεται γὰρ δὴ καὶ λογῶδές
τι μέλος, τὸ συγκείμενον ἐκ τῶν προσῳδιῶν τῶν ἐν τοῖς
ὀνόμασιν· φυσικὸν γὰρ τὸ ἐπιτείνειν καὶ ἀνιέναι ἐν τῷ διαλέγεσθαι
(‘for there is a kind of melody in speech which depends
upon the accent of words, as the voice in speaking rises and
sinks by a natural law,’ Macran). The expression προσῳδία
itself (cp. τάσεις φωνῆς αἱ καλούμεναι προσῳδίαι, 196 16) implies
a melodic character, and the adjectives (ὀξύς and βαρύς) which
denote ‘acute’ and ‘grave’ are used regularly in Greek music
for what we call ‘high’ and ‘low’ pitch.[62] It would be hard to
believe that βαρύς could ever have indicated an absence of stress.
That such a musical pitch—such a rising or falling of tone—can
be quite independent of quantity seems to be proved by the
analogy of Vedic Sanskrit, inasmuch as, when reciting verses in
that language, the native priests are said to succeed in keeping
quantity and musical accent altogether distinct. “We cannot
now say exactly how Homer’s verse sounded in the ears of the
Greeks themselves; and yet we can tell even this more nearly than
Matthew Arnold imagined. Sanskrit verse, like Greek, had both
quantity and musical accent; and the recitation of the Vedic poems,
as handed down by immemorial tradition, and as it may be heard
to-day, keeps both these elements clear. It is a sort of intoned
recitative, most impressive and agreeable to the sensitive ear.”[63]
A useful handbook on the general subject of Greek Accentuation
(including its musical character) is Vendryes’ Traité d’accentuation
grecque, which is prefaced by a bibliographical list. The volume is
noticed, in the Classical Review xix. 363-367, by J. P. Postgate, who
supplements it in some important directions. There is also a
discussion of the nature and theory of the Greek accent in Hadley’s
Essays pp. 110-127. As Monro (Modes p. 113) remarks, it is our
habit of using Latin translations of the terms of Greek grammar that
has tended to obscure the fact that those terms belong in almost
every case to the ordinary vocabulary of music. The point of the
illustration drawn from the Orestes, in the C.V. c. 11, is that the
musical setting in question neglected entirely the natural tune, or
accent, of the words. It is not to be assumed that Dionysius
approved (except within narrow limits) of this practice or of the
[43]
corresponding neglect of syllabic quantity (128 19). He probably
regarded such excesses as innovations due to inferior schools of music
and rhythm. In the hymns found at Delphi (and also in an inscription
discovered by W. M. Ramsay) there is a remarkable
correspondence between the musical notes and the accentuation of
the words, as was pointed out by Monro (Modes pp. 90, 91, 116, 141;
and Classical Review ix. 467-470). It is the hymns to Apollo
(belonging probably to the early part of the third century B.C.), in
which the acute accents usually coincide with a rise of pitch, that
Dionysius would doubtless have regarded as embodying the classical
practice. In early times, it must be remembered, words and music
were written by the same man; cp. G. S. Farnell Greek Lyric Poetry
pp. 41, 42. The chief surviving fragments of Greek music (including
the recent discoveries at Delphi) will be found in C. Jan’s Musici
Scriptores Graeci (with Supplement), as published by Teubner.
C. Pronunciation of Ancient Greek
The de Compositione is not a treatise on Greek Pronunciation,
or even on Greek Phonetics. The sections which touch upon
these subjects are strictly subsidiary to the main theme; they
are literary rather than philological in aim. There was, in
fact, no independent study of phonetics in Greek antiquity;
the subject was simply a handmaid in the service of music
and rhetoric. Hence the reference early in c. 14 to the
authority of Aristoxenus “the musician,” and the constant
endeavour to rank the letters according to standards of beautiful
sound. Still, though Dionysius’ object in describing the way in
which the different letters are produced is not scientific but
aesthetic and euphonic, much praise is due to the rigorous
thoroughness which led him to undertake such an investigation
at all. And it has had important incidental results.
One modern authority claims that, notwithstanding difficulties
in the interpretation of the de Compositione due either to vague
statements in the text or to defective knowledge on our own
part, it is possible to reconstruct, with essential accuracy, the
“Dionysian Pronunciation of Greek,” or (in other words) the pronunciation
current among cultivated Greeks during the fifty years
preceding the birth of Christ; while another authority has given
a transliteration of the Lord’s Prayer, according to the original text,
in the Hellenistic pronunciation of the first century A.D.[64] It is,
further, maintained that, thanks to the general progress of philological
[44]
research, we can in the main reproduce with certainty the
sounds (including even the aspirates) actually heard at Athens in
the fourth century B.C.—with such certainty, at all events, as will
suffice for the practical purposes of the modern teacher.[65]
Two circumstances render it unsafe to lean unduly on
Dionysius’ evidence in determining the pronunciation of the
earlier Greek period. Although he studied with enthusiasm the
literature produced by Greece in her prime, and would certainly
desire to read it to his pupils in the same tones as might have
been used by its original authors, it is hardly likely that the
pronunciation of the language had changed less in three or four
hundred years than that (say) of English has changed since the
days of Shakespeare.[66] The other circumstance is the uncertainty
which attends some of his statements, quite apart from any
question of the period which they may be supposed to cover.
This uncertainty is due to the fact that there was no science of
phonetics in his day, and that consequently his explanations are
sometimes obscure, either in themselves or at all events to their
modern interpreters. But in many other cases he is, fortunately,
explicit and easily understood. One example only shall be given,
but that an important one: the pronunciation of ζ. In 144 9-12,
it is clearly indicated that ζ is a double letter, and that it is
composed of σ and δ (in that order): διπλᾶ δὲ τρία τό τε ζ̄
καὶ τὸ ξ̄ καὶ τὸ ψ̄. διπλᾶ δὲ λέγουσιν αὐτὰ ἤτοι διὰ τὸ
σύνθετα εἶναι τὸ μὲν ζ̄ διὰ τοῦ σ̄ καὶ δ̄, τὸ δὲ ξ̄ διὰ τοῦ κ̄
καὶ σ̄, τὸ δὲ ψ̄ διὰ τοῦ π̄ καὶ σ̄, κτλ. The manuscript
testimony is here in favour of σ̄ καὶ δ̄ (rather than the reverse
order), and it may be noticed that the similar reading,
ὐπασ̅δ̅εύξαισα, is well supported in Sappho’s Hymn to Aphrodite
(238 9). The statement is not in any way contradicted by the
further statements in 146 5 and 148 6; and taken together with
other evidence (e.g. such forms as συρίσδειν = συρίζειν, κωμάσδειν
= κωμάζειν, Ἀθήναζε = Ἀθήνασδε), it seems to establish this as
[45]
at least one pronunciation of ζ. The actual pronunciation may
well have varied at different times and in different places. Some
authorities think that in fifth-century Greece the sound was like
that of English zd in the word ‘glazed,’ while in the fourth
century it roughly resembled dz in the word ‘adze’ (Arnold and
Conway, op. cit. pp. 6, 7).
The book which deals most directly with the de Compositione
in relation to Greek pronunciation is A. J. Ellis’ English, Dionysian,
and Hellenic Pronunciation of Greek, considered in reference to School and
College Use. In applying great phonetic skill to the interpretation
of Dionysius’ statements, the author of this pamphlet has done much
service; but he abandons too lightly any attempt to recover a still
earlier pronunciation, and shows an uncritical spirit in so readily
believing (p. 4) that Erasmus could be hoaxed in the matter of Greek
pronunciation. A more trustworthy work is F. Blass’ Pronunciation
of Ancient Greek (translated by W. J. Purton), in which the scientific
aids towards a reconstruction of the old pronunciation are marshalled
with much force. Arnold and Conway’s Restored Pronunciation of
Greek and Latin, and Giles’ Manual of Comparative Philology (pp. 114-118:
especially p. 115 for ζ), contain a succinct statement of probable
results. There is also a good article, by W. G. Clark, on Greek Pronunciation
and Accentuation in the Journal of Philology i. pp. 98-108;
with which should be compared the papers by Wratislaw and Geldart
in vol. ii. of the same journal. The entire conflict on the subject of
Greek pronunciation, as waged by the early combatants in England
and Holland, is reflected in Havercamp’s two volumes entitled
Sylloge Scriptorum qui de linguae Graecae vera et recta pronuntiatione
commentarios reliquerunt, videlicet Adolphi Mekerchi, Theodori Bezae,
Jacobi Ceratini et Henrici Stephani (Leyden, 1736), and his Sylloge
Altera Scriptorum qui ... reliquerunt, videlicet Desiderii Erasmi,
Stephani Vintoniensis Episcopi, Cantabrigiensis Academiae Cancellarii,
Joannis Checi, Thomae Smith, Gregorii Martini, et Erasmi Schmidt
(Leyden, 1740). Erasmus’ dialogue de recta Latini Graecique sermonis
pronunciatione (Basle, 1528) was, in its way, a true work of science
in that it laid stress on the fact that variety of symbols implied
variety of sounds, and that diphthongal writing implied a diphthongal
pronunciation. Attention has lately been directed to the fact that
Erasmus claims no originality for his views on this subject, and that
he had been anticipated, in varying degrees, by Jerome Aleander in
France, by Aldus Manutius in Italy, and (earlier still) by the Spanish
humanist, Antonio of Lebrixa (Bywater The Erasmian Pronunciation
of Greek and its Precursors Oxford, 1908). It may be noted, in passing,
that when enumerating the errors of his Byzantine contemporaries,
Antonio mentions that they pronounced Ζ “as a single letter, whereas
[46]
it was really composite, and stood for SD” (Bywater, p. 20). Among
the immediate successors of Erasmus in this field the most interesting,
perhaps, is Sir Thomas Smith (1513-1577), who, like Cheke, was one
of the “etists” and so incurred the wrath of Stephen Gardiner and
drew out that edict which threatened various penalties (including
corporal punishment for boys) against the practice of unlawful
innovations in the province of Greek pronunciation. It was Smith
who, in his treatise de recta et emendata linguae Graecae pronuntiatione
(Havercamp, ii. 542), detected a lacuna in the text of C.V. 140 16
as current in his time, and secured the right sense by the insertion
of δύο δὲ βραχέα τό τε ε̄ καὶ τὸ ο̄ after τὸ ω̄ (in l. 17). Echoes,
more or less distinct, of the long dispute as to the pronunciation of
the ancient classical languages may be heard in such various quarters
as: (1) [Beaumont and] Fletcher’s Elder Brother ii. 1, “Though I
can speak no Greek, I love the sound on’t; it goes so thundering as
it conjur’d devils”; (2) King James I. (in an address to the
University of Edinburgh, delivered at Stirling), “I follow his [George
Buchanan’s] pronunciation, both of his Latin and Greek, and am
sorry that my people of England do not the like; for certainly their
pronunciation utterly fails the grace of these two learned languages”;
and (3) Gibbon’s reference to “our most corrupt and barbarous mode
of uttering Latin.” In modern times a constant effort is being made
to get nearer to the true pronunciation of the two classical languages;
and (to speak of Greek alone) some interesting side-lights have been
shed on the subject by the discovery of Anglo-Saxon or Oriental
transliterations (cp. Hadley Essays pp. 128-140, and Bendall in
Journal of Philology xxix. 199-201). The application of well-ascertained
results to the teaching of Greek pronunciation could be
injurious only if it were allowed to impede the principal object of
Greek study—contact with the great minds of the past. But an
attempt to recapture some part of the music of the Greek language
is hardly likely to have this disastrous effect.
D. Greek Grammar
Grammar, like phonetics, was by the ancients often regarded
as a part of “music.”[67] It would not, therefore, seem unnatural
to his readers that, in a treatise on euphony, Dionysius should
continually be referring to the parts of speech (τὰ μόρια τοῦ λόγου).
He also uses freely such technical terms of grammar as: πτῶσις,
ἔγκλισις, ἀπαρέμφατος, πληθυντικῶς, ὕπτιος, ἀρρενικός, θηλυκός,
οὐδέτερος, ἄρθρον, ὄνομα, πρόθεσις, σύνδεσμος, etc. Though
himself concerned more immediately with the euphonic relations
[47]
of words, he is fully alive to the phenomena of their syntactical
relations. His remarks on grammatical points show, as might
have been expected, many points of contact with the brief treatise
of another Dionysius—Dionysius Thrax, who was born a full
century earlier than himself. Dionysius Thrax was a pupil of
Aristarchus, and produced the earliest formal Greek Grammar.
Some interesting hints as to the successive steps in grammatical
analysis which had made such a Grammar possible may be found
in the second chapter of the de Compositione, where special
mention is made of Theodectes, Aristotle, and “the leaders of
the Stoic School.” In c. 5, a useful protest is raised against the
tyranny of grammar, which so often seeks to control by iron
“rules” the infinite variety and living flexibility of language.
The standard edition of Dionysii Thracis Ars Grammatica is that
by Uhlig (Leipzig, 1883). The whole question of ancient views on
grammar can be studied in Steinthal’s Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft
bei den Griechen und Römern, mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die Logik
(2nd ed., Berlin, 1890-91).
E. Sources of the de Compositione
It must strike every reader of the treatise, that Dionysius
combines some assertion of originality with many acknowledgments
of indebtedness to predecessors. In this there is, of course,
no necessary inconsistency. The work covers a wide field, and
implies an acquaintance with many special studies. While referring
with gratitude and respect to the admitted authorities
in these various branches of learning or science, Dionysius claims
for himself a certain originality of idea and of treatment. He
is among the first to have written a separate treatise on this
particular subject, and he is the first to have attempted an
adequate treatment of it.[68]
In making these acknowledgments, Dionysius does not specify
any Latin writers, nor indeed any recent writers whatsoever.
When Quintilian, in the fourth chapter of his Ninth Book, is
himself writing a short de Compositione, he mentions “Halicarnasseus
Dionysius” and (with special respect) “M. Tullius.”[69]
[48]
But Dionysius says not a word about Cicero or Horace, although
the former was partly and the latter fully contemporary with
himself, and although they, like himself, were students of literary
composition. As his work on early Roman history shows,
Dionysius was not ignorant of Latin; and it is unfortunate
that he did not think of comparing Greek writers with Latin.
But the comparative method of literary criticism hardly existed
in Greek antiquity, notwithstanding the reference to Cicero and
Demosthenes in the de Sublimitate, whose author (it may be
added here) not only treats of σύνθεσις in two of his chapters,
but also tells us that he had already dealt with the subject in
two separate treatises.[70]
To his Greek predecessors Dionysius often refers in general
terms. For example, they are called οἱ πρὸ ἡμῶν in 140 7, οἱ
πρότερον in 96 7, and οἱ ἀρχαῖοι in 68 9. The last term best
suggests Dionysius’ habitual attitude, which was that of looking
to the past for the finest work in criticism as well as in literature.[71]
And so it will be found that, though the de Compositione Verborum
contains incidental references to the Stoics and to other leaders of
thought, its highest respect seems to be reserved for Aristotle
and his disciples Theophrastus and Aristoxenus.[72] But the
question of Dionysius’ obligations to his predecessors (and to
the Peripatetics particularly) is so large and far-reaching that it
must be treated separately elsewhere. Meanwhile, let it be
noted how considerably his various writings illustrate, and are
illustrated by, the Rhetoric of Aristotle.[73]
As to its originality, the book may well be left to answer
for itself. It does not read like a dull compilation. The
learning is there, but it is lightly borne, and none can doubt
that the writer has long thought over his subject and can
give to others the fruits of his reflexions with verve and
a contagious enthusiasm. The work has an easy flow of
its own, as though it had been rapidly (but not carelessly)
written, out of a well-stored mind, while its author was busy
[49]
with his teaching and with the many literary enterprises to
which he so often refers. It must be conceded that a literary
critic who deals with so difficult, many-sided, and elusive a
subject as that of composition can hardly avoid some errors of
detail, since he cannot hope to be a master in all the accessory
sciences upon which he has to lean. But we may well be
content if he preserves for later ages much invaluable literature
and teaching which would otherwise have been lost,—if he
himself maintains (amid corrupting influences) high standards
in his literary preferences and in his own writing,—and if he
sheds a ray of light upon many a hidden beauty of Greek style
which would but for him be shrouded in darkness.
Reference may be made to G. Ammon de Dionysii Halicarnassensis
Librorum Rhetoricorum Fontibus and to G. Mestwerdt de Dionysii Halicarnassensis
in libro de Compositione Verborum Studiis. One section of
the subject is also treated in G. L. Hendrickson’s valuable papers on
the ‘Peripatetic Mean of Style and the Three Stylistic Characters’
and on the ‘Origin and Meaning of the Ancient Characters of
Style’ in the American Journal of Philology vols. xxv. and xxvi.; and in
H. P. Breitenbach’s dissertation on The ‘De Compositione’ of Dionysius
of Halicarnassus considered with reference to the ‘Rhetoric’ of Aristotle.
F. Quotations and Literary References in the de Compositione
The greatest of all the lyrical passages quoted in the treatise
is Sappho’s Hymn to Aphrodite. But great as this is, it does not
stand alone. It has companions, if not equals, in the Danaë
of Simonides and in the opening of a Pindaric dithyramb. The
very preservation of these splendid relics, as of some slighter
ones, we owe to Dionysius alone.[74] The total extent of the
quotations made in the course of the treatise may be judged
from the references given at the foot of the translation: these
illustrative extracts form a substantial part of the work they
illustrate. The width of Dionysius’ literary outlook may also
be inferred from the following roughly-drawn Chronological Table,
which (for the sake of completeness) includes some authors who
are mentioned but not actually quoted:—
Chronological Table of Authors quoted or mentioned in the De Compositione[50]
| B.C. | Epic
Poetry. | Elegiac
and
Iambic. | Lyric. | Tragedy. | Comedy and
Satire. |
|---|
| Before 700 | Homer
Hesiod | ... | ... | ... | ... |
| 700-600 | ... | Archi-
lochus | Alcaeus
Sappho
Stesichorus | ... | ... |
| 600-500 | ... | ... | Anacreon | ... | ... |
| 500-400 | ... | ... | Simonides
Pindar
Bacchylides | Aeschylus
Sophocles
Euripides | Aristophanes |
| 400-300 | Antimachus
of
Colophon | ... | Philoxenus
Timotheus
Telestes | ... | ... |
| 300-200 | ... | [Calli-
machus] | ... | ... | Euphorio
Chersonesita |
| | | | | Sotades |
| 200-100 | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
| B.C. | History. | Oratory and
Rhetoric. | Philosophy. | Grammar;
Musical and
Metrical
Science, etc. |
|---|
| Before 700 | ... | ... | ... | ... |
| 700-600 | ... | ... | ... | ... |
| 600-500 | ... | ... | ... | ... |
| 500-400 | Herodotus
Thucydides | Gorgias
Antiphon | Empedocles
(verse)
Democritus | ... |
| 400-300 | Ctesias
Xenophon
Theopompus
Ephorus | Isocrates
Aeschines
Demosthenes
Theodectes
| Plato
Aristotle
Theophrastus | Aristoxenus |
| 300-200 | ... | Hegesias | Epicurus
and the
Epicureans | Aristophanes
of
Byzantium |
| | | Chrysippus
and the
Stoics | |
| 200-100 | Polybius | ... | ... | ... |
[51]
To this list might be added the minor historians, of the third
and second centuries B.C., who are mentioned together with
Polybius in c. 4, and of whom some account will be found in
the notes on that chapter: Phylarchus, Duris, Psaon, Demetrius
of Callatis, Hieronymus, Antigonus, Heracleides, and Hegesianax.
And it will be noticed, further, that the treatise contains a large
number of unassigned verse-fragments, which can only be referred,
vaguely, to some lyric poet or to the lyric portions of
some tragic poet. By such anonymous fragments, as well as by
the poems quoted under the names of Sappho and Simonides,
we are reminded of the many lost works of Greek literature and
of the happy surprises which Egypt or Herculaneum or the
Sultan’s Library may still have in store for us. If the quotations
as a whole—identified and unidentified, previously known
and previously unknown—are passed in review, it will be found
that Dionysius has given us a small Anthology of Greek prose
and verse. While strictly relevant to the main theme, his
illustrations are chosen with so much taste, and from so wide a
field of study, that (to adapt his own words) οὐκ ἀηδὴς ὁ λόγος
ἐγένετο πολλοῖς ὥσπερ ἄνθεσι διαποικιλλόμενος τοῖς ἐαρινοῖς.[75]
Two prose-writers mentioned by Dionysius seem to invite
special comment: Polybius and Hegesias. It is not without a
kind of shock that we find the great historian Polybius classed,
along with Phylarchus and the rest, among writers whose
works no man can bring himself to read from cover to cover.[76]
But we have to remember that the judgment is passed solely
from the standpoint of style; and from this restricted standpoint,
it can hardly be said that subsequent critics have
ventured to reverse it and to maintain that Polybius is (to use
the modern expression) an eminently “readable” author. Let
one modern estimate be quoted, and that from a writer who
appreciates fully the greatness of Polybius’ theory of history, and
[52]
who, on the other hand, is not concerned to vindicate the soundness
of Dionysius’ judgment: “Unfortunately, his [Polybius’]
style is a serious deterrent to the reader. We long for the ease,
the finished grace, the flowing simplicity of Herodotus; or again,
for the terse and rapid phrase of Thucydides, the energy, the
precision of each single word, the sentence packed with thought.
Polybius has lost the Greek artistic feeling for writing, the
delicate sense of proportion, the faculty of reserve. The freshness
and distinction of the Attic idiom are gone. He writes with an
insipid and colourless monotony. In arranging his materials he
is equally inartistic. He is always anticipating objections and
digressing; he wearies you with dilating on the excellence of
his own method; he even assures you that the size and price of
his book ought not to keep people from buying it. Admirable
as is the substance of his writing, he pays the penalty attaching
to neglect of form—he is read by the few.”[77]
Hegesias is not only mentioned, but quoted, in the treatise.
A few detached sentences are given from his writings, and one
longer passage. In c. 4 Dionysius rewrites a brief extract
from Herodotus in utter defiance of the customary rules (or
practices) of Greek word-order, and then exclaims, “This form of
composition resembles that of Hegesias: it is affected, degenerate,
enervated.” He proceeds: “In such trumpery arts the man is
a hierophant. He writes, for instance, ‘After a goodly festival
another goodly one keep we.’ ‘Of Magnesia am I, the mighty
land, a man of Sipylus I.’ ‘No little drop into the Theban
waters spewed Dionysus: O yea, sweet is the stream, but
madness it engendereth.’”
In c. 18 Dionysius illustrates the beauty of prose-rhythm
from Thucydides, Plato, and Demosthenes. He then assigns to
Hegesias a bad pre-eminence among writers who have neglected
this essential of their art. Quoting a passage of some length
from his History, he asks how it compares with Homer’s description
[53]
of a similar scene; and he holds the vast superiority of the
latter to be due ‘chiefly, if not entirely, to the difference in the
rhythms.’ In the words just cited there is obviously much
exaggeration. But we must allow for Dionysius’ preoccupation
in this treatise (cp. τοῦτ’ ἦν σχεδὸν ᾧ μάλιστα διαλλάττει
ποιητής τε ποιητοῦ καὶ ῥήτωρ ῥήτορος, τὸ συντιθέναι δεξιῶς
τὰ ὀνόματα, 92 18-20), and must, at any rate, try to discover
wherein the main defect of Hegesias’ rhythms is supposed to lie.
It is probable that no single thing in the passage offends the ear
of Dionysius so much as the double trochees (or their metrical
equivalent) which are found at the end of so many of the clauses.
This double trochee, or dichoree, is found in its normal form
(– ᴗ – ⏒) at the end of such cola as those which terminate in:
τοῖς ἀρίστοις, καὶ τὸ πλῆθος, εἰς τὸ τολμᾶν, τῇ μαχαίρᾳ, καὶ
Φιλωτᾶς, καὶ τὸ χρῶμα, σκαιὸν ἐχθρόν. The metrical equivalent
ᴗ ᴗ ᴗ – ⏒ occurs in such instances as: πρότερον οὕτως, ἕνεκα
πρᾶξαι, κατακοπῆναι, καθικετεύων. It is interesting to observe
that this final dichoree is regarded both by Cicero and by
Quintilian as characteristic of the Asiatic orators.[78] Let it be
added that, in the extract from Hegesias, the dichorees are not
confined to the close of clauses but occur freely in other positions,
[54]
while many of the sentences are short and the reverse of periodic;
and it will be granted that Cicero has good ground for calling attention
to the jerky, or staccato, character of the style in question.
In the Orator (67. 226) the effect of Hegesias’ writing is thus
described: “quam (sc. numerosam comprehensionem) perverse
fugiens Hegesias, dum ille quoque imitari Lysiam volt, alterum
paene Demosthenem, saltat incidens particulas.” And his
manner is amusingly parodied in one of the letters to Atticus
(ad Att. xii. 6): “de Caelio vide, quaeso, ne quae lacuna sit in
auro: | ego ista non novi; | sed certe in collubo est detrimenti
satis. | huc aurum si accedit |—sed quid loquor? | tu videbis. |
habes Hegesiae genus! quod Varro laudat.”[79] Two further
specimens (not given by Dionysius) of Hegesias’ style will add
point to Cicero’s parody. The first is preserved by Strabo
(Geogr. 396): ὁρῶ τὴν ἀκρόπολιν | καὶ τὸ περιττῆς τριαίνης |
ἐκεῖθι σημεῖον· | ὁρῶ τὴν Ἐλευσῖνα, | καὶ τῶν ἱερῶν γέγονα
μύστης· | ἐκεῖνο Λεωκόριον· | τοῦτο Θησεῖον· | οὐ δύναμαι
δηλῶσαι | καθ’ ἓν ἕκαστον. The other specimen is quoted by
Photius (Bibl. cod. 250) from Agatharchides, the geographer of
Cnidus: ὅμοιον πεποίηκας, Ἀλέξανδρε, Θήβας κατασκάψας, ὡς
ἂν εἰ ὁ Ζεὺς ἐκ τῆς κατ’ οὐρανὸν μερίδος ἐκβάλλοι τὴν σελήνην.
ὑπολείπομαι γὰρ τὸν ἥλιον ταῖς Ἀθήναις. δύο γὰρ αὗται
πόλεις τῆς Ἑλλάδος ἦσαν ὄψεις. διὸ καὶ περὶ τῆς ἑτέρας
ἀγωνιῶ νῦν. ὁ μὲν γὰρ εἷς αὐτῶν ὀφθαλμὸς ἡ Θηβαίων
ἐκκέκοπται πόλις.[80]
It is quite clear, from his express statements, that Dionysius,
in his criticisms, has in view, mainly if not entirely, the bad
rhythms of Hegesias. But the passages which he quotes seem
open to criticism on other grounds as well. The long extract in
c. 18 contains metaphors which might well seem violent to the
Greeks, who allowed themselves less licence than the moderns
do in this direction (e.g. ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐλπὶς αὕτη συνέδραμεν εἰς
τὸ τολμᾶν, and τοὺς δ’ ἄλλους ὀργὴ πρόσφατος ἐπίμπρα); and
it is high-flown expressions of this kind which the author of the
de Sublimitate has in view when he writes: τά γε μὴν Ἀμφικράτους
[55]
τοιαῦτα καὶ Ἡγησίου καὶ Ματρίδος· πολλαχοῦ γὰρ
ἐνθουσιᾶν ἑαυτοῖς δοκοῦντες οὐ βακχεύουσιν ἀλλὰ παίζουσιν
(iii. 2). False emphasis, too, and a general desire to purchase
notoriety by the cheap method of eccentric word-order, would
appear to be implied in Dionysius’ own parody in c. 4 (90 15-19).
For example, Ἀλυάττου and ἐθνῶν, though not in themselves
important, are assigned prominent positions at the beginning
and the end of the sentence. But the greatest of all the defects
of Hegesias—especially when compared with Homer—is a certain
vulgarity of tone.
The contrast drawn between Hegesias and Homer may seem
overstrained, but it is eminently characteristic of Dionysius.
Homer was to him the great pure fount of Greek, and his own
constant desire was “antiquos accedere fontes.” Hegesias, on
the other hand, typifies to him the decline in Greek literature
which followed the death of Alexander, whose exploits he records
with so feeble a magniloquence. And yet the curious thing is
that Hegesias, who lived probably in the earlier part of the
third century, aspires (as Cicero tells us) to copy Lysias. But
while endeavouring thus to imitate one of the most Attic of the
Attic writers, he came, by the irony of fate, to be regarded as the
founder of the degenerate Asiatic school: Ἡγησίας ὁ ῥήτωρ, ὃς
ἦρξε μάλιστα τοῦ Ἀσιανοῦ λεγομένου ζήλου, παραφθείρας τὸ
καθεστηκὸς ἔθος τὸ Ἀττικόν (Strabo Geogr. xiv. 1. 41).[81] In
the terms “Attic” and “Asiatic” there often lurks some confusion
of thought, as well as no little prejudice and rhetorical animosity.
But of Dionysius, as compared with Hegesias, it is clearly within
the mark to say that, though he lived two centuries later, he has
vastly more of the true Attic feeling for purity of style; and
that, though he may himself have cherished wild dreams of
turning back the tide of language, yet in league with some
leading Romans of his day he did good service by showing how
the best Attic models may hold out to future ages shining
examples of the skill and beauty which all men should strive
after in handling the language of their birth.
[56]
For Dionysius in relation to contemporary Romans, and to the
struggle between Asianism and Atticism, reference may be made to
Dionysius of Halicarnassus: the Three Literary Letters pp. 34-49.
G. Manuscripts and Text
The chief authorities for the text of the de Compositione are
indicated in the following list of abbreviations employed in the
apparatus criticus of the present edition:—
Siglorum in notulis criticis adhibitorum Index
F = cod. Florentinus Laurentianus lix. 15. saec. xii.
P = cod. Parisinus bibl. nat. 1741. saec. xi. (x.).
M = cod. Venetus Marcianus 508. saec. xv.
V = cod. Vergetii Parisiensis bibl. nat. 1798. saec. xvi.
E = Διονυσίου Ἁλικαρνασέως τοῦ περὶ Συνθέσεως Ὀνομάτων Ἐπιτομή. saec. inc.
R = Rhetor Graecus (Scholiasta Hermogenis περὶ ἰδεῶν, i. 6). saec. inc.
a = editio princeps Aldi Manutii (Aldi Manutii Rhetores Graeci, tom. i.), Venetiis. 1508.
s = editio Roberti Stephani, Lutetiae. 1547.
r = exemplum Reiskianum, Lipsiae. 1775.
Us = exemplum ab Usenero et Radermachero Lipsiae nuper editum.
The Florentine manuscript (F) contains, besides certain
writings of other authors, the following works of Dionysius:
(1) the essays on Lysias, Isocrates, Isaeus, and Dinarchus:
and (2) the de Compositione Verborum (as far as the words
πειρατέον δὴ καὶ περὶ τούτων λέγειν ἃ φρονῶ in c. 25). The
Paris manuscript 1741 (P) is the famous codex which contains
not only the de Comp. Verb., but also Aristotle’s Rhetoric and
Poetics, Demetrius de Elocutione, Dionysius Halic. Ep. ad Amm. II.,
De Vet. Scr., etc. Some notes upon the manuscript are given in
Demetrius on Style pp. 209-11; and the editor has examined it
once more at Paris for the purposes of the present recension.
The remaining manuscripts are considerably later than F and P.
[57]
M belongs to the fifteenth century, and V was copied by the
Cretan calligrapher Ange Vergèce (as he was called in France)
in the sixteenth century. The edition of Robert Stephens is
based upon V. In the Journal of Philology xxvii. pp. 83 ff.,
there is a careful collation, by A. B. Poynton, of “Some Readings
of MS. Canonici 45” (C: sixteenth century) in the Bodleian
Library, with regard to which the collator says: “Despite the
care with which the work is done, the manuscript is not of much
value as a presentation of the Florentine tradition, since F exists
and the writer of C is rather a διασκευαστής than a copyist. The
interest of the manuscript is antiquarian and bibliographical....
It is a copy made at some time in the sixteenth century, probably
after 1560. It is based on the Florentine MS. with variae
lectiones and marginal notes. It has not the appearance of being
a mechanical copy: rather it seems to be the work of a scholar
who was conversant with the MSS. of the treatise and, while he
was aware of the importance of the Florentine MS., saw that in
many cases it needed to be corrected.”
The dates of the Epitome and of the Rhetor Graecus are
uncertain. But both are early and highly important authorities.
The latter quotes c. 14 only of the treatise, but the quotation
enabled Usener to show that the text of F agreed in the
main with that of the Rhetor and of the Epitome. The result
was to enhance greatly the authority of F, with which earlier
editors had merely an indirect and imperfect acquaintance. But
by a not unnatural reaction against the excessive attention paid
to what may be called the P group (PMV: though M and V
sometimes coincide with F against P), Usener is inclined too
readily to follow F, or even E, when standing alone. Still, while
the readings supported only by F, or E, or P should be carefully
scrutinized and independently judged, the concurrent testimony
of FE and any other MS. is very strong indeed.
Two passages taken almost at a venture (say, the first twenty
lines of c. 12 and the last twenty of c. 19) would be enough to
show that neither F nor P can be exclusively followed, and that
Usener himself is often (more often than is indicated in this
edition) driven to desert F, which in fact contains, in these or
other places, a large number of impossible or even absurd readings.[82]
[58]
Where, however, there are genuine instances of various readings
(as εὐκαιροτέραις: εὐροωτέραις in the last of the passages just
specified), it seems best to follow F (especially when supported
by other authorities), even though the hand of an ingenious early
scholar may sometimes with reason be suspected.[83]
One reason for accepting with reserve the unsupported testimony
of F is that its evidence is sometimes far from sound in
regard to quotations from authors whose text is well established
from other sources. In the principal quotations from Pindar
and Thucydides this defect is not so manifest; and it may even
be claimed that its text of the Pindaric dithyramb, and of the
Herodotus extract on p. 82, is distinguished by many excellent
features, though not so many as Usener was at first inclined to
claim in the case of the Pindar. But in the extract from the
Areopagiticus of Isocrates which is given in c. 23, the text
presented by F (as compared with that presented by P) seems
to suggest that, in dealing with Dionysius’ own words as well as
with his quotations, the transcriber may have felt entitled to
make rather free alterations on his own account. In order to
provide readers with the means of judging for themselves, the
critical apparatus has been made specially full at this point.[84]
Usener’s text of the de Compositione deserves the highest
respect: it is the last undertaking of one of the greatest philologists
of the nineteenth century, and every succeeding editor
must find himself deep in its debt. Its record of readings is full
to exhaustiveness. In the present edition less wealth of detail is
attempted (especially in regard to F and R), though all really
[59]
important and typical variations have, it is hoped, been duly
registered, and particular attention has been paid to the minute
collation of P. But apart from the correction of misprints (as on
pp. 124 13, 132 23, 250 7), it is hoped that the following among
other readings will commend themselves (on an examination of
the sections of the Notes or Glossary in which they are defended)
as superior to those adopted by Usener (and indicated here in
brackets) from conjecture or on manuscript authority: 64 11 (σοὶ
omitted), 70 5 (εὖ τί), 78 17 (παλαιαί), 80 13 (παιδικόν), 94 13
(προβαῖεν), 94 16 (σπουδάζεσθαι), 98 20 (οἷά τινα), 106 13
(εὖ ἢ), 132 20 (θηρᾶν), 142 9 (σπανίζει), etc.
H. Recent Writings connected with the de Compositione
A full bibliography, covering not only the de Compositione of
Dionysius but his rhetorical and critical works generally, is given
in the present editor’s Dionysius of Halicarnassus: the Three
Literary Letters (published in January 1901), pp. 209-219.
The following are (in chronological order) the early editors who
have done most to further the study of the de Compositione:
Aldus Manutius (editio princeps), Robertus Stephanus, F. Sylburg,
J. Upton, J. J. Reiske, G. H. Schaefer, and F. Goeller. Much
interest still attaches to C. Batteux’ publication (1788): Traité de
l’arrangement des mots: traduit du grec de Denys d’Halicarnasse;
avec des réflexions sur la langue française, comparée avec la langue
grecque. The translation is too free and based on too poor a
text to meet the needs of exact scholarship. But the Réflexions
(which accompany the translation, in vol. vi. of the author’s
Principes de littérature) are full of suggestive remarks. Another
excellent literary study of Dionysius is that of Max. Egger:
Denys d’Halicarnasse: essai sur la critique littéraire et la
rhétorique chez les Grecs au siècle d’Auguste (Paris, 1902). As
its title indicates, this volume takes a wide range; and it reveals
that full competence in these matters which it is natural to
expect from the son of Émile Egger. A short general account,
by Radermacher, of Dionysius’ critical essays will be found in
Pauly-Wissowa’s Realencyclopädie vol. v.
The first volume of Usener and Radermacher’s text was
included in the bibliographical list mentioned above. In 1904
appeared the second volume, containing the de Compositione and
[60]
some other critical writings of Dionysius (Dionysii Halicarnasei
opuscula ediderunt Hermannus Usener et Ludovicus Radermacher.
Voluminis sec. fasc. prior. Lipsiae, 1904). The second volume
is on a par with the first, which was welcomed, as a notable
achievement, in the Classical Review xiv. pp. 452-455, where
also attention was drawn (p. 454 a) to a questionable emendation
previously introduced by Usener into the text of the de Imitatione.
This emendation is withdrawn in Usener’s second volume—a
fact which may be mentioned as one proof among many that
his tendency was to grow more conservative and, in particular,
more attentive to the testimony of P 1741. The titles of
A. B. Poynton’s articles on Dionysius are: “Oxford MSS. of
Dionysius Halicarnasseus, De Compositione Verborum” (Journal
of Philology xxvii. pp. 70-99), and “Oxford MSS. of the Opuscula
of Dionysius of Halicarnassus” (Journal of Philology xxviii.
pp. 162-185). Among other useful subsidia lately published
may be mentioned: W. Kroll’s “Randbemerkungen” in Rhein.
Mus. lxii. pp. 86-101, and Larue van Hook’s Metaphorical
Terminology of Greek Rhetoric and Literary Criticism (Chicago,
1905). R. H. Tukey (Classical Review, September 1909, p. 188)
makes the interesting suggestion that “the De Compositione belongs
chronologically between the two parts of the De Demosthene.”
The use of the present tense δηλοῦται, in C.V. 182 8 may be held
to countenance this view.
In some recent books of larger scope it is pleasant to notice
an increased appreciation of the high value of the work done by
Dionysius in the field of literary criticism. Certain of these
estimates may be quoted in conclusion. R. C. Jebb, in the
Companion to Greek Studies p. 137: “The maturity of the
‘Attic revival’ is represented at Rome, in the Augustan age,
by the best literary critic of antiquity, Dionysius of Halicarnassus.”
A. and M. Croiset Histoire de la littérature grecque
v. p. 371: “Les uns et les autres [les contemporains et les
rhéteurs des âges suivants] appréciaient avec raison l’érudition
de Denys, la justesse de son esprit, sa finesse dans le discernement
des ressemblances et des différences, la solidité de sa
doctrine, son goût dans le choix des exemples. De plus, ils se
sentaient touchés, comme nous et plus que nous, par la vivacité
de ses admirations, par cette sorte de foi communicative, qui
faisait de lui le défenseur des traditions classiques.” Wilamowitz-Moellendorff
[61]
Die griechische Literatur des Altertums pp. 102 and
148: “Von unbestreitbar hohem und dauerndem Werte ist die
andere Seite der rhetorischen Theorie und Praxis, die sich auf
den Ausdruck erstreckt, die Stilistik.... Es ist ein hohes Lob,
dass er (Dionysios von Halikarnass) im Grunde dieselbe stilistische
Überzeugung vertritt wie Cicero, und wir sind ihm für die
Erhaltung von ungemein viel Wichtigem zu Dank verpflichtet;
seine Schriften über die attischen Redner und über die Wortfügung
sind auch eine nicht nur belehrende, sondern gefällige
Lekture.” J. E. Sandys History of Classical Scholarship i.
p. 279: “In the minute and technical criticism of the art and
craft of Greek literature, the works of Dionysius stand alone in
all the centuries that elapsed between the Rhetoric of Aristotle
and the treatise On the Sublime.” G. Saintsbury History of
Criticism i. pp. 136, 137, 132: “Dionysius is a very considerable
critic, and one to whom justice has not usually, if at all, yet
been done.... A critic who saw far, and for the most part truly,
into the proper province of literary criticism.... This treatise
[sc. the de Compositione], if studied carefully, must raise some
astonishment that Dionysius should have been spoken of disrespectfully
by anyone who himself possesses competence in
criticism. From more points of view than one, the piece gives
Dionysius no mean rank as a critic.” S. H. Butcher Harvard
Lectures on Greek Subjects pp. 236, 239: “Of his fine perception
of the harmonies of Greek speech we can entertain no reasonable
doubt.... We cannot dismiss his general criticism as unsound
or fanciful. The whole history of the evolution of Greek prose,
and the practice of the great masters of the art, support his main
contention.” With these extracts may be coupled one from the
Spectator of March 23, 1901: “In this treatise Dionysius reviews
and attempts to explain the art of literature. It is a brilliant
effort to analyse the sensuous emotions produced by the harmonious
arrangement of beautiful words. Its eternal truth might
make it a textbook for to-day.”
[62]
In the Notes and Glossary, as in the Introduction, references are usually given
to the lines, as well as the pages, of the Greek text here printed: e.g. 80 7 = page
80 line 7 of the De Compositione.—The following abbreviations are used in referring
to volumes already issued by the editor:—
D.H. = ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus: the Three Literary Letters.’
Long. = ‘Longinus on the Sublime.’
Demetr. = ‘Demetrius on Style.’
[63]
ΔΙΟΝΥΣΙΟΥ ΑΛΙΚΑΡΝΑΣΕΩΣ
ΠΕΡΙ ΣΥΝΘΕΣΕΩΣ ΟΝΟΜΑΤΩΝ
[64-5]
ΔΙΟΝΥΣΙΟΥ ΑΛΙΚΑΡΝΑΣΕΩΣ
ΠΕΡΙ ΣΥΝΘΕΣΕΩΣ ΟΝΟΜΑΤΩΝ
I
“Δῶρόν τοι καὶ ἐγώ, τέκνον φίλε, τοῦτο δίδωμι,”
καθάπερ ἡ παρ’ Ὁμήρῳ φησὶν Ἑλένη ξενίζουσα τὸν Τηλέμαχον, 5
πρώτην ἡμέραν ἄγοντι ταύτην γενέθλιον, ἀφ’ οὗ παραγέγονας
εἰς ἀνδρὸς ἡλικίαν, ἡδίστην καὶ τιμιωτάτην ἑορτῶν ἐμοί· πλὴν
οὔτε χειρῶν δημιούργημα πέμπω σοι τῶν ἐμῶν, ὡς ἐκείνη
φησὶ διδοῦσα τῷ μειρακίῳ τὸν πέπλον, οὔτ’ ἐς γάμου μόνον
ὥραν καὶ γαμετῆς χάριν εὔθετον, ἀλλὰ ποίημα μὲν καὶ γέννημα 10
παιδείας καὶ ψυχῆς τῆς ἐμῆς, κτῆμα δὲ σοὶ τὸ αὐτὸ
καὶ χρῆμα πρὸς ἁπάσας τὰς ἐν τῷ βίῳ χρείας ὁπόσαι γίνονται
διὰ λόγων ὠφέλιμον, ἀναγκαιότατον ἁπάντων χρημάτων,
εἴ τι κἀγὼ τυγχάνω τῶν δεόντων φρονῶν, ἅπασι μὲν ὁμοίως
τοῖς ἀσκοῦσι τοὺς πολιτικοὺς λόγους, ἐν ᾗ ποτ’ ἂν ἡλικίᾳ 15
DIONYSIUS OF HALICARNASSUS[65]
ON
LITERARY COMPOSITION
CHAPTER I
OCCASION AND PURPOSE OF THE TREATISE
To you, Rufus Metilius, whose worthy father is my most
honoured friend, “I also offer this gift, dear child,”[85] as Helen,
in Homer, says while entertaining Telemachus. To-day you are
keeping your first birthday after your arrival at man’s estate;
and of all feasts this is to me the most welcome and most
precious. I am not, however, sending you the work of my own
hands (to quote Helen’s words when she offers the robe to her
young guest), nor what is fitted only for the season of
marriage and “meet to pleasure a bride withal.”[86] No, it is the
product and the child of my studies and my brain, and also
something for you to keep and use in all the business of life
which is effected through speech: an aid most necessary, if my
estimate is of any account, to all alike who practise civil oratory,
1 ἁλικαρνασσέως PV2 4 καὶ om. V 6 ταυτηνὶ PMV 7 ἡδίστην om.
P 8 χεῖρον PV1 9 ἔφη PV || οὔτε εἰς PMV 11 σοὶ om. E 12
πάσας EF 13 ὠφέλιμον V: ὠφελίμων EFM: ὠφέλιμοι P 14 τι] τι δὴ MV
2. For the meaning and rendering of
σύνθεσις see Glossary, p. 326 infra.
5. In ll. 5, 8, 9, 10, the reference is to
Odyssey xv. 123-127:—
Ἑλένη δὲ παρίστατο καλλιπάρῃος
πέπλον ἔχουσ’ ἐν χερσίν, ἔπος τ’ ἔφατ’ ἐκ τ’ ὀνόμαζε·
Δῶρον τοι καὶ ἐγώ, τέκνον φίλε, τοῦτο δίδωμι,
μνῆμ’ Ἑλένης χειρῶν, πολυηράτου ἐς γάμου ὥρην,
σῇ ἀλόχῳ φορέειν.
10. The word γαμετή is used by
Dionysius in the interesting and highly
characteristic passage which opens the
de Antiq. Oratoribus (c. 2).—Here
Sauppe conjectures γαμετῇ for γαμετῆς.—For
εὔθετος cf. de Thucyd. c. 55 τὸ
διηγηματικὸν μέρος αὐτῆς πλὴν ὀλίγων
πάνυ θαυμαστῶς ἔχειν καὶ εἰς πάσας εἶναι
τὰς χρείας εὔθετον, τὸ δὲ δημηγορικὸν οὐχ
ἅπαν εἰς μίμησιν ἐπιτήδειον εἶναι.
11. κτῆμα ... χρῆμα, ‘a treasure and
a tool,’ ‘a compliment and an implement’:
similarly 264 14 φθόνῳ καὶ χρόνῳ
(the reading of PMV), and 268 9 χρόνῳ
τε πολλῷ καὶ πόνῳ, 184 25 ἀγνοίας ...
προνοίας. Cp. the jingles found in the
fragments of Gorgias, or in Aristophanes
(ῥώμῃ ... γνώμῃ, Av. 637, 638; σχῆμα
... λῆμα, Ran. 463). Such rhyming
tendencies (frequent in the orations of
Cicero) are condemned in prose-writing
by modern taste, though they have, in
the course of centuries, found much
acceptance in poetry.—For the antithesis
in κτῆμα ... χρῆμα cp. Isocr. ad Demonicum
28, Cic. ad Fam. vii. 29, 30, Lucr.
de Rer. Nat. iii. 971.
The Epitome (except Er) omits
σοι, thus securing brevity at the price
of rhythm, antithesis, and point. Cp.
66 13, where E omits οἰκειοτέρα.
14. κἀγώ: the καί gives a modest
tone, as in Soph. Philoct. 192 εἴπερ κἀγώ
τι φρονῶ (Jebb).
15. πολιτικούς: see Glossary, s.v.
[66-7]
τε καὶ ἕξει τυγχάνωσιν ὄντες· μάλιστα δὲ τοῖς μειρακίοις τε
καὶ νεωστὶ τοῦ μαθήματος ἁπτομένοις ὑμῖν, ὦ Ῥοῦφε Μετίλιε
πατρὸς ἀγαθοῦ, κἀμοὶ τιμιωτάτου φίλων.
διττῆς γὰρ οὔσης ἀσκήσεως περὶ πάντας ὡς εἰπεῖν τοὺς
λόγους, τῆς περὶ τὰ νοήματα καὶ τῆς περὶ τὰ ὀνόματα, ὧν ἡ 5
μὲν τοῦ πραγματικοῦ τόπου μᾶλλον ἐφάπτεσθαι δόξειεν ἄν,
ἡ δὲ τοῦ λεκτικοῦ, καὶ πάντων ὅσοι τοῦ λέγειν εὖ στοχάζονται
περὶ ἀμφοτέρας τὰς θεωρίας τοῦ λόγου ταύτας σπουδαζόντων
ἐξ ἴσου, ἡ μὲν ἐπὶ τὰ πράγματα καὶ τὴν ἐν τούτοις
φρόνησιν ἄγουσα ἡμᾶς ἐπιστήμη βραδεῖά ἐστι καὶ χαλεπὴ 10
νέοις, μᾶλλον δὲ ἀδύνατος εἰς ἀγενείων καὶ μειρακίων πεσεῖν
ἡλικίαν· ἀκμαζούσης γὰρ ἤδη συνέσεώς ἐστι καὶ πολιαῖς
κατηρτυμένης ἡλικίας ἡ τούτων κατάληψις οἰκειοτέρα, πολλῇ
μὲν ἱστορίᾳ λόγων τε καὶ ἔργων, πολλῇ δὲ πείρᾳ καὶ συμφορᾷ
παθῶν οἰκείων τε καὶ ἀλλοτρίων συναυξομένη· τὸ δὲ περὶ 15
τὰς λέξεις φιλόκαλον καὶ ταῖς νεαραῖς πέφυκε συνανθεῖν
οὐχ ἧττον ἡλικίαις. ἐπτόηται γὰρ ἅπασα νέου ψυχὴ περὶ
τὸν τῆς ἑρμηνείας ὡραϊσμόν, ἀλόγους τινὰς καὶ ὥσπερ ἐνθουσιώδεις
ἐπὶ τοῦτο λαμβάνουσα τὰς ὁρμάς· οἷς πολλῆς πάνυ
[67]
whatever their age and temperament, but especially to youths
like you who are just beginning to take up the study.
We may say that in practically all speaking two things
must have unremitting attention: the ideas and the words. In
the former case, the sphere of subject matter is chiefly concerned;
in the latter, that of expression; and all who aim at becoming
good speakers give equally earnest attention to both these aspects
of discourse. But the science which guides us to selection of
matter, and to judgment in handling it, is hampered with
difficulties for the young; indeed, for beardless striplings, its
difficulties are insurmountable. The perfect grasp of things in
all their bearings belongs rather to a matured understanding, and
to an age that is disciplined by grey hairs,—an age whose powers are
developed by prolonged investigation of discourse and action, and
by many experiences of its own and much sharing in the
fortunes of others. But the love of literary beauty flourishes
naturally in the days of youth as much as in later life. For
elegance of expression has a fascination for all young minds,
making them feel impulses that are instinctive and akin to
1 τε καὶ PV: ἢ FM || τε om. F 2 νεωστὶ PMV: ἄρτι F || μετίλιε FP:
μελίτιε EMV 3 καμοὶ P,MV: καὶ ἐμοὶ F 4 ἀσκήσεως EPMV: ὑποθέσεως
F 5 νοήματα καὶ τὴν λέξιν ὧν EF 6 μᾶλλον ἐφάπτεσθαι om. M
9 τούτοις EPMV: αὐτοῖς F 10 ἐπιστημηι F1 11 καὶ EFMV: ἢ P
12 ἀγμαζούσης F1 || πολιαῖς κατηρτυμένης FMVs: κεκοσμημένης P 13
ἡλικίαις M2 (cf. v. 17 infra) || ἡ τούτων κατάληψις F γρ M: ἐστὶν
ἡ τούτων κατάληψις E: ἡ τούτων γνῶσις ἐστὶν PMV || οἰκει[ο]τέρα cum
litura F,PMV: om. E 15 συναυξανομένη PMV 16 φιλόκαλον EFP:
φιλότιμον καὶ φιλόκαλον MV || πέφυκε συνανθεῖν Reiskius: πεφυκὸς
συνανθεῖν P: συνανθεῖν εἴωθεν οὐχ ἧττον EF: πεφυκὸς συνανθεῖν (εἴωθεν
addit M) οὐχ ἧττον MV 19 ἐπὶ τοῦτο EF2: ἐπὶ τοῦτον F1MV: om. P ||
τὰς EFM: om. PV
2. For the plural ὑμῖν cp. Long.
xii. 5 ἀλλὰ ταῦτα μὲν ὑμεῖς [‘you
Romans’] ἂν ἄμεινον ἐπικρίνοιτε.
Ῥοῦφε Μετίλιε: reference may
be made to the editor’s article on ‘The
Literary Circle of Dionysius of Halicarnassus’
in the Classical Review xiv.
(year 1900), pp. 439-442. Dionysius
clearly numbered many Romans among
his friends and pupils. Dedicatory
books, or poems, were not uncommon
gifts on birthdays: compare
Ἀντίπατρος Πείσωνι γενέθλιον ὤπασε βίβλον
μικρήν, ἐν δὲ μιῇ νυκτὶ πονησάμενος.
ἵλαος ἀλλὰ δέχοιτο, καὶ αἰνήσειεν ἀοιδόν,
Ζεὺς μέγας ὡς ὀλίγῳ πειθόμενος λιβάνῳ.
Antipater Thessalonic.
Epigr. Anthol. Pal. ix. 93.
θύει σοὶ τόδε γράμμα γενεθλιακαῖσιν ἐν ὥραις,
Καῖσαρ, Νειλαίη Μοῦσα Λεωνιδέω.
Καλλιόπης γὰρ ἄκαπνον ἀεὶ θύος· εἰς δὲ νέωτα,
ἢν ἐθέλῃς, θύσει τοῦδε περισσότερα.
Leonidas Alexandr. ib. vi. 321.
3. Reiske’s conjecture ‹παῖ› is plausible
rather than necessary: cp. Il. xxi.
109 πατρὸς δ’ εἴμ’ ἀγαθοῖο and Odyss.
iv. 611 αἵματος εἶς ἀγαθοῖο.—In the
words κἀμοὶ τιμιωτάτου φίλων Dionysius
illustrates his own contention (in c. 25)
that fragments of metrical lines are
occasionally found in prose writings.
[F, however, has καὶ ἐμοί.]
6. πραγματικοῦ ... λεκτικοῦ: see
Gloss., s.v.
13. κατηρτυμένης: cp. the sense of
‘break in,’ as in Soph. Antig. 477 σμικρῷ
χαλινῷ δ’ οἶδα τοὺς θυμουμένους | ἵππους
καταρτυθέντας and Plut. Vit. Themist. c.
2 καὶ τοὺς τραχυτάτους πώλους ἀρίστους
ἵππους γίνεσθαι φάσκων, ὅταν ἧς προσήκει
τύχωσι παιδείας καὶ καταρτύσεως. So
Plato Legg. 808 D (of a child regarded as
‘the most intractable of animals’) ὅσῳ
μάλιστα ἔχει πηγὴν τοῦ φρονεῖν μήπω
κατηρτυμένην.—On πολιαῖς (although
supported by FMV) Usener candidly
remarks “fort. πολιαῖς interpolatum.”—Against
κατάληψις (notwithstanding its
strong manuscript support) must be
weighed: (1) Dionysius’ anti-Stoicism,
(2) the likely intrusion of a comparatively
late word.
14. συμφορᾷ: perhaps the meaning
is ‘comparison of,’ as (according to a
possible interpretation) τὰς ξυμφορὰς ...
τῶν βουλευμάτων in Soph. Oed. Tyr. 44,
45.
15. συναυξομένη: the form αὐξάνω
(and its compounds) does not seem to be
used by Dionysius.
17. οὐχ ἧττον (EFMV) should be
retained: cp. n. on line 13. The words
can hardly be regarded as a gloss on καὶ
ταῖς νεαραῖς, though εἴωθεν (see critical
notes) is probably a gloss on πέφυκε,
which would subsequently be changed
to πεφυκός.
ἐπτόηται: not infrequent in earlier
and in later Greek. Aesch. Prom. V.
856 ἐπτοημένοι φρένας (‘with their hearts
wildly beating’), Plato Phaedo 68 C περὶ
τὰς ἐπιθυμίας μὴ ἐπτοῆσθαι (so Rep. 439 D),
Plut. Mor. 40 F βλὰξ ἄνθρωπος ἐπὶ παντὶ
λόγῳ φιλεῖ ἐπτοῆσθαι (quoted from
Heracleitus), id. ib. 1128 B ἐπτοημένους
περὶ τὰ ὄψα, Chrysostom de Sacerdotio c.
1 περὶ τὰς ἐν τῇ σκηνῇ (i.e. the theatre)
τέρψεις ἐπτοημένον.—For youth in relation
to the arts of style cp. Plut. Vit.
Demosth. c. 2 (last sentence).
18. ἑρμηνείας: see Gloss., s.v.
[68-9]
καὶ ἔμφρονος δεῖ τῆς πρώτης ἐπιστάσεώς τε καὶ ἀγωγῆς, εἰ
μέλλουσι μὴ πᾶν “ὅ τι κεν ἐπ’ ἀκαιρίμαν γλῶσσαν ἔπος ἔλθῃ”
λέγειν μηδ’ εἰκῇ συνθήσειν τὰ προστυχόντα ἀλλήλοις, ἀλλ’
ἐκλογῇ τε χρήσεσθαι καθαρῶν ἅμα καὶ γενναίων ὀνομάτων καὶ
συνθέσει ταῦτα κοσμήσειν μεμιγμένον ἐχούσῃ τῷ σεμνῷ τὸ 5
ἡδύ. εἰς δὴ τοῦτο τὸ μέρος, ὃ δεῖ πρῶτον νέοις ἀσκεῖσθαι,
“συμβάλλομαί σοι μέλος εἰς ἔρωτα” τὴν περὶ τῆς συνθέσεως
τῶν ὀνομάτων πραγματείαν ὀλίγοις μὲν ἐπὶ νοῦν ἐλθοῦσαν,
ὅσοι τῶν ἀρχαίων ῥητορικὰς ἢ διαλεκτικὰς συνέγραψαν τέχνας,
οὐδενὶ δ’ ἀκριβῶς οὐδ’ ἀποχρώντως μέχρι τοῦ παρόντος ἐξειργασμένην, 10
ὡς ἐγὼ πείθομαι. ἐὰν δ’ ἐγγένηταί μοι σχολή, καὶ
περὶ τῆς ἐκλογῆς τῶν ὀνομάτων ἑτέραν ἐξοίσω σοι γραφήν,
ἵνα τὸν λεκτικὸν τόπον τελείως ἐξειργασμένον ἔχῃς. ἐκείνην
μὲν οὖν τὴν πραγματείαν εἰς νέωτα πάλιν ὥραις ταῖς αὐταῖς
προσδέχου θεῶν ἡμᾶς φυλαττόντων ἀσινεῖς τε καὶ ἀνόσους, εἰ 15
δήποτε ἡμῖν ἄρα τούτου πέπρωται βεβαίως τυχεῖν· νυνὶ δὲ
ἣν τὸ δαιμόνιον ἐπὶ νοῦν ἤγαγέ μοι πραγματείαν δέχου.
κεφάλαια δ’ αὐτῆς ἐστιν ἃ πρόκειταί μοι δεῖξαι ταῦτα,
τίς τε ἐστὶν ἡ τῆς συνθέσεως φύσις καὶ τίνα ἰσχὺν ἔχει, καὶ
τίνων στοχάζεται καὶ πῶς αὐτῶν τυγχάνει, καὶ τίνες αἱ γενικώταται 20
αὐτῆς εἰσι διαφοραὶ καὶ τίς ἑκάστης χαρακτὴρ καὶ ποίαν
inspiration. Young people need, at the beginning, much prudent[69]
oversight and guidance, if they are not to utter
What word soe’er may have sprung
To the tip of an ill-timed tongue,[87]
nor to form at random any chance combinations, but to
select pure and noble words, and to place them in the
beautiful setting of a composition that unites charm to dignity.
So in this department, the first in which the young should
exercise themselves, “for love’s service I lend you a strain,”[88] in
the shape of this treatise on literary composition. The subject
has occurred to but few of all the ancients who have composed
manuals of rhetoric or dialectic, and by none has it been, to the
best of my belief, accurately or adequately treated up to the
present time. If I find leisure, I will produce another book for
you—one on the choice of words, in order that you may have
the subject of expression exhaustively treated. You may expect
that treatise next year at the same festive season, the gods
guarding us from accident and disease, if it so be that our
destiny has reserved for us the secure attainment of this blessing.
But now accept the treatise which my good genius has suggested
to me.
The chief heads under which I propose to treat the subject
are the following: what is the nature of composition, and
where its strength lies; what are its aims and how it attains
them; what are its principal varieties, what is the distinctive
1 ἐπιστάσεως EF: ἐπιστασίας PMV 3 μηδὲ PF1V || εἰκῆ sine iota PF2:
εἰκεῖ F1 || ἀλλὰ PMV 4 τε χρήσεσθαι s: τε χρήσασθαι PMV: κεχρῆσθαι
sine τε EF 5 τῶ σεμνῶ sine iota P: σεμνῶ[ι] cum litura F 6 ἐσ F
7 συμβάλλομέν F || μέλος M. Schmidt: μέρος libri || εἰς F: εἰς τὸν
PMV || τὴν (ex τῆς) F,M: τὸν P,V in marg.: τὸ r || τῆς F: om. PMV 8
ὀλίγοις] οὐκ ὀλίγοις V in marg. || ἐλθοῦσαν ἐπινοῦν F 9 ἀρχομένων M
|| διαλεκτικὰς F: καὶ λεκτικὰς P: καὶ διαλεκτικὰς MV 10 et 11 δὲ PMV
10 ἀποχρώντως οὐδ’ ἀκριβῶς F || οὐδὲ PMV 12 σοι om. F 13 ἔχης
P sine iota 15 ἀνούσους P 16 ἄρα om. F 17 δέχου F: προσδέχου
PMV 18 δὲ PMV || ταῦτα δεῖξαι F 19 τε om. M 21 τίνες ἑκάστης
χαρακτῆρες F
2. The reference is to the indiscretions
of an impertinent tongue,—‘Whatever,
without rhyme and reason, | Occurs to
the tongue out of season’: Lat. quicquid
in buccam. Cp. Lucian de conscrib. hist.
c. 32 ἀναπλάττοντες ὅ τι κεν ἐπ’ ἀκαιρίμαν
γλῶσσαν, φασίν, ἔλθῃ.
4. The κεχρῆσθαι of EF perhaps
points to τε χρῆσθαι as the right reading.
We should then have λέγειν ... συνθήσειν,
χρῆσθαι ... κοσμήσειν: a
combination of present and future infinitives
which would be in keeping with
Dionysius’ love of variety (μεταβολή).
6. “Write νέους. The dative with
the passive present, though of course
possible, is unlikely in Dionysius. ἀσκῶ
can take two accusatives,” H. Richards
in Classical Review xix. 252.
7. M. Schmidt’s conjecture μέλος (M.
Schmidt Diatribe in Dithyrambum,
Berol. 1845) seems to be established by
Athenaeus xv. 692 D ἐπεὶ δ’ ἐνταῦθα τοῦ
λόγου ἐσμέν, συμβαλοῦμαί τι μέλος ὑμῖν εἰς
ἔρωτα, κατὰ τὸν Κυθήριον ποιητήν: cp.
ib. vi. 271 B συμβαλοῦμαί τι καὶ αὐτὸς
μέλος εἰς ἔρωτα τῷ σοφῷ καὶ φιλτάτῳ
Δημοκρίτῳ.—In itself, however, συμβάλλομαι
μέρος gives good sense (cp. Plato Legg. 836 D τί μέρος ἡμῖν ξυμβάλλοιτ’ ἂν
πρὸς ἀρετήν;); and the repetition of μέρος
might be deliberate,—‘to this part of
the subject ... I contribute as my part.’—ἔρανον
[corrupted into ἔρον, ἔρων, ἔρωτα]
might be conjectured in place of ἔρωτα,
if any considerable change were needed.
8. In estimating Dionysius’ obligations
to his predecessors, it should be
noticed that the correct reading here
is not οὐκ ὀλίγοις (as in the editions of
Reiske and Schaefer) but ὀλίγοις.—For
συνθέσεως see Gloss., s.v.
11. Either (1) ἐὰν δ’ ἐγγένηταί μοι
(without σχολή), or (2) ἐὰν δὲ γένηταί μοι
σχολή, would be more natural. Cp. H.
Richards in Classical Review, l.c.
12. Either Dionysius did not fulfil
his design, or this treatise on the ‘choice
of words’ has been lost. For other lost
works of Dionysius see D.H. p. 7.
14. εἰς νέωτα: Hesychius, εἰς τὸ ἐπιὸν
ἢ νέον ἔτος. Cp. Theophr. de c. Pl. iii.
16. 2 τὸν εἰς νέωτα καρπόν.
17. τὸ δαιμόνιον: cp. de Demosth. c.
58 ad f. ἐὰν δὲ σῴζῃ τὸ δαιμόνιον ἡμᾶς
κτλ.
18. ταῦτα: compare 86 4, 90 15, 100
12, 27, 106 5, and contrast 98 20, 21,
100 16, 17, 18.
[70-1]
κρατίστην αὐτῶν εἶναι πείθομαι, καὶ ἔτι πρὸς τούτοις, τί ποτ’
ἐστὶ τὸ ποιητικὸν ἐκεῖνο καὶ εὔγλωσσον καὶ μελιχρὸν ἐν ταῖς
ἀκοαῖς, ὃ πέφυκε τῇ συνθέσει τῆς πεζῆς λέξεως παρακολουθεῖν,
ποιητικῆς τε κατασκευῆς τὸν ἀποίητον ἐκμιμουμένης λόγον καὶ
σφόδρα ἐν τῇ μιμήσει κατορθούσης ποῦ τὸ κράτος, καὶ διὰ 5
ποίας ἂν ἐπιτηδεύσεως ἐγγένοιτο ἑκάτερον αὐτῶν. τοιαυτὶ
μὲν δή τινά ἐστιν ὡς τύπῳ περιλαβεῖν ὑπὲρ ὧν μέλλω λέγειν,
ἄρχεται δὲ ἐνθένδ’ ἡ πραγματεία.
II
ἡ σύνθεσις ἔστι μέν, ὥσπερ καὶ αὐτὸ δηλοῖ τοὔνομα,
ποιά τις θέσις παρ’ ἄλληλα τῶν τοῦ λόγου μορίων, ἃ δὴ καὶ 10
στοιχεῖά τινες τῆς λέξεως καλοῦσιν. ταῦτα δὲ Θεοδέκτης μὲν
καὶ Ἀριστοτέλης καὶ οἱ κατ’ ἐκείνους φιλοσοφήσαντες τοὺς
χρόνους ἄχρι τριῶν προήγαγον, ὀνόματα καὶ ῥήματα καὶ
συνδέσμους πρῶτα μέρη τῆς λέξεως ποιοῦντες. οἱ δὲ μετὰ
τούτους γενόμενοι, καὶ μάλιστα οἱ τῆς Στωικῆς αἱρέσεως 15
ἡγεμόνες, ἕως τεττάρων προὐβίβασαν, χωρίσαντες ἀπὸ τῶν
συνδέσμων τὰ ἄρθρα. εἶθ’ οἱ μεταγενέστεροι τὰ προσηγορικὰ
διελόντες ἀπὸ τῶν ὀνοματικῶν πέντε ἀπεφήναντο τὰ πρῶτα
μέρη. ἕτεροι δὲ καὶ τὰς ἀντονομασίας ἀποζεύξαντες ἀπὸ τῶν
ὀνομάτων ἕκτον στοιχεῖον τοῦτ’ ἐποίησαν. οἱ δὲ καὶ τὰ 20
ἐπιρρήματα διεῖλον ἀπὸ τῶν ῥημάτων καὶ τὰς προθέσεις ἀπὸ
[71]
feature of each, and which of them I believe to be the most
effective; and still further, what is that poetical element, so
pleasant on the tongue and so sweet to the ear, which naturally
accompanies composition in prose, and wherein lies the effectiveness
of that poetical art which imitates plain prose and succeeds
excellently in doing so, and by what method each of those two
results may be attained. Such, in broad outline, are the topics
with which I intend to deal, and on this programme my treatise
is based.
CHAPTER II
COMPOSITION DEFINED
Composition is, as the very name indicates, a certain
arrangement of the parts of speech, or elements of diction,
as some call them. These were reckoned as three only by
Theodectes and Aristotle and the philosophers of those times,
who regarded nouns, verbs and connectives as the primary
parts of speech. Their successors, particularly the leaders of
the Stoic school, raised the number to four, separating the
articles from the connectives. Then the later inquirers divided
the appellatives from the substantives, and represented the
primary parts of speech as five. Others detached the pronouns
from the nouns, and so introduced a sixth element. Others,
again, divided the adverbs from the verbs, the prepositions
1 εἶναι F: om PMV 4 ποιητικῆς τε om. P || ἐκμημουμένης P1 5 ποῦ]
αὐτοῦ PV: τοῦτο FM: αὐτῷ s 6 ἐγγένοιτο F: γένοιτο PMV 8 ἄρχεται
δὲ ἐνθένδ’ ἡ πραγματεία om. s || δὲ om. V || ἔνθεν PF2: ἐντεῦθεν F1MV
9 ἔστι μὲν EFM: ἐστιν PV 13 προῆγον F 14 μετὰ τούτους F: μετ’
αὐτοὺς PMV 16 τεσσάρων F 19 ἀντωνυμίας V 20 τοῦτο PMV 21
ἐπ[ι]ρρήματα cum litura P || διεῖλον PMV: διελόντες F
4. κατασκευῆς: see Gloss., s.v.
5. Usener’s conjecture εὖ τί may
derive some colour from the manuscript
readings in 72 10. But 270 11 shows
that εὖ is not necessary here, and ποῦ is
nearer the manuscript tradition. Cp.
also 250 3 (κατορθουμένοις), 198 11 (κατόρθωμα),
de Thucyd. c. 1 (τῆς δυνάμεως οὐκ
ἐν ἅπασι τοῖς ἔργοις κατορθούσης). Other
examples are quoted in Long. p. 202.
7. ὑπέρ: cp. 72 3, 17: περί, 68 12.
10. de Demosth. c. 48 τοῖς πρώτοις
μορίοις τῆς λέξεως, ἃ δὴ στοιχεῖα ὑπό τινων
καλεῖται, εἴτε τρία ταῦτ’ ἐστίν, ὡς Θεοδέκτῃ
τε καὶ Ἀριστοτέλει δοκεῖ, ὀνόματα καὶ
ῥήματα καὶ σύνδεσμοι, εἴτε τέτταρα, ὡς
τοῖς περὶ Ζήνωνα τὸν Στωικόν, εἴτε πλείω,
δύο ταῦτα ἀκολουθεῖ μέλος καὶ χρόνος ἴσα.
Quintil. i. 4. 18, 19 “tum videbit, ad
quem hoc pertinet, quot et quae partes
orationis; quamquam de numero parum
convenit. veteres enim, quorum fuerunt
Aristoteles quoque atque Theodectes,
verba modo et nomina et convinctiones
tradiderunt; videlicet quod in verbis
vim sermonis, in nominibus materiam
(quia alterum est quod loquimur, alterum
de quo loquimur), in convinctionibus
autem complexus eorum esse iudicaverunt;
quas coniunctiones a plerisque
dici scio, sed haec videtur ex συνδέσμῳ
magis propria translatio. paulatim a
philosophis ac maxime Stoicis auctus est
numerus, ac primum convinctionibus
articuli adiecti, post praepositiones:
nominibus appellatio, deinde pronomen,
deinde mixtum verbo participium, ipsis
verbis adverbia. noster sermo articulos
non desiderat, ideoque in alias partes
orationis sparguntur.” Quintilian elsewhere
(ii. 15. 10) writes: “a quo
non dissentit Theodectes, sive ipsius
id opus est, quod de rhetorice nomine
eius inscribitur, sive ut creditum est
Aristotelis.” It is hardly likely that in
i. 4. 18 Quintilian is translating from
the de C.V. c. 2; the coincidences are,
rather, due to the use of common sources.—Dionysius
does not mention Dionysius
Thrax, the author of the first Greek
Grammar, nor does he seem to take
account of Aristot. Poet. c. 20.
13. The Arabic grammarians in the
same way reckon ‘verbs,’ ‘nouns,’ and
‘particles.’
15. Cp. 96 8, 12 infra.
17. τὰ προσηγορικὰ διελόντες: cp.
Dionysius Thrax Ars Gramm. p. 23
(Uhlig) τοῦ δὲ λόγου μέρη ἐστὶν ὀκτώ·
ὄνομα, ῥῆμα, μετοχή, ἄρθρον, ἀντωνυμία,
πρόθεσις, ἐπίρρημα, σύνδεσμος· ἡ γὰρ
προσηγορία ὡς εἶδος τῷ ὀνόματι ὑποβέβληται.
21. This seems to imply that adverbs
were originally included in verbs—that,
for example, εὖ ποιεῖν (like bene facere
in Plautus) was regarded as a quasi-compound.
It is to be remembered that the
division of words in writing is a later
invention.
[72-3]
τῶν συνδέσμων καὶ τὰς μετοχὰς ἀπὸ τῶν προσηγορικῶν, οἱ δὲ
καὶ ἄλλας τινὰς προσαγαγόντες τομὰς πολλὰ τὰ πρῶτα μόρια
τῆς λέξεως ἐποίησαν· ὑπὲρ ὧν οὐ μικρὸς ἂν εἴη λόγος. πλὴν
ἥ γε τῶν πρῶτων εἴτε τριῶν ἢ τεττάρων εἴθ’ ὅσων δήποτε
ὄντων μερῶν πλοκὴ καὶ παράθεσις τὰ λεγόμενα ποιεῖ 5
κῶλα, ἔπειθ’ ἡ τούτων ἁρμονία τὰς καλουμένας συμπληροῖ
περιόδους, αὗται δὲ τὸν σύμπαντα τελειοῦσι λόγον. ἔστι δὴ
τῆς συνθέσεως ἔργα τά τε ὀνόματα οἰκείως θεῖναι παρ’ ἄλληλα
καὶ τοῖς κώλοις ἀποδοῦναι τὴν προσήκουσαν ἁρμονίαν καὶ ταῖς
περιόδοις διαλαβεῖν εὖ τὸν λόγον. 10
δευτέρα δ’ οὖσα μοῖρα τῶν περὶ τὸν λεκτικὸν τόπον
θεωρημάτων κατὰ γοῦν τὴν τάξιν (ἡγεῖται γὰρ ἡ τῶν
ὀνομάτων ἐκλογὴ καὶ προϋφίσταται ταύτης κατὰ φύσιν)
ἡδονὴν καὶ πειθὼ καὶ κράτος ἐν τοῖς λόγοις οὐκ ὀλίγῳ
κρεῖττον ἐκείνης ἔχει. καὶ μηδεὶς ἡγήσηται παράδοξον, εἰ 15
πολλῶν καὶ μεγάλων ὄντων θεωρημάτων περὶ τὴν ἐκλογήν,
ὑπὲρ ὧν πολὺς ἐγένετο φιλοσόφοις τε καὶ πολιτικοῖς ἀνδράσι
λόγος, ἡ σύνθεσις δευτέραν ἔχουσα χώραν τῇ τάξει καὶ λόγων
οὐδέ, πολλοῦ δεῖ, τῶν ἴσων ἐκείνῃ τυχοῦσα τοσαύτην ἰσχὺν
ἔχει καὶ δύναμιν ὥστε περιεῖναι πάντων τῶν ἐκείνης ἔργων 20
καὶ κρατεῖν, ἐνθυμούμενος ὅτι καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων τεχνῶν,
ὅσαι διαφόρους ὕλας λαμβάνουσαι συμφορητὸν ἐκ τούτων
ποιοῦσι τὸ τέλος, ὡς οἰκοδομική τε καὶ τεκτονικὴ καὶ ποικιλτικὴ
καὶ ὅσαι ταῖς τοιαύταις εἰσὶν ὁμοιογενεῖς, αἱ συνθετικαὶ
δυνάμεις τῇ μὲν τάξει δεύτεραι τῶν ἐκλεκτικῶν εἰσι, τῇ δὲ 25
δυνάμει πρότεραι· ὥστ’ εἰ καὶ τῷ λόγῳ τὸ αὐτὸ συμβέβηκεν,
οὐκ ἄτοπον ἡγητέον. οὐδὲν δὲ κωλύει καὶ πίστεις παρασχεῖν
[73]
from the connectives and the participles from the appellatives;
while others introduced still further subdivisions, and so
multiplied the primary parts of speech. The subject would
afford scope for quite a long discussion. Enough to say that
the combination or juxtaposition of these primary parts, be
they three, or four, or whatever may be their number, forms
the so-called “members” (or clauses) of a sentence. Further,
the fitting together of these clauses constitutes what are termed
the “periods,” and these make up the complete discourse. The
function of composition is to put words together in an appropriate
order, to assign a suitable connexion to clauses, and to distribute
the whole discourse properly into periods.
Although in logical order arrangement of words occupies the
second place when the department of expression is under investigation,
since the selection of them naturally takes precedence and
is assumed to be already made; yet it is upon arrangement, far
more than upon selection, that persuasion, charm, and literary
power depend. And let no one deem it strange that, whereas
many serious investigations have been made regarding the choice
of words,—investigations which have given rise to much debate
among philosophers and political orators,—composition, though
it holds the second place in order, and has been the subject of
far fewer discussions than the other, yet possesses so much solid
strength, so much active energy, that it triumphantly outstrips
all the other’s achievements. It must be remembered that, in
the case of all the other arts which employ various materials
and produce from them a composite result,—arts such as building,
carpentry, embroidery, and the like,—the faculties of composition
are second in order of time to those of selection, but are nevertheless
of greater importance. Hence it must not be thought
abnormal that the same principle obtains with respect to discourse.
But we may as well submit proofs of this statement,
2 προσαγαγόντες F: εἰσάγοντες PVa: προεισαγαγόντες M 3 οὐ μικρὸς
PMV: πολλὺς sic F 4 τῶν τριῶν PMV: * * * τριῶν * * * * F 5
καὶ om. P1 8 οἰκείως θεῖναι τά τε ὀνόματα (verbis in hunc modum
dispositis) PMV || παράλληλα PM, corr. F1 9 ἀποδιδόναι F ||
ἀρμονίαν FP: sic passim 10 λαβεῖν F1 || εὖ τὸν EF: αὐτὸν ὅλον τὸν
PMV 11 δὲ PMV 12 κατὰ γοὖν F: κατανοοῦντι EPMV 14 τοῖς EF:
om. PMV || ὀλίγον M 15 κρεῖττον EFM: κρείττω PV || ἡγήσεται F
17 καὶ ῥητορικοῖς PMV || ἀνδρᾶσι F: ἀνδράσιν P 18 χώραν ἔχουσα F
|| συντάξει F1 19 ἐκείνη (sine iota) FP 21 ἐπὶ EF: αἱ περὶ PMV
22 δ(ια)αφόρους P1 || λαμβάνουσιν F: λαμβάνουσι M 23 τε om. EF
|| πολιτικὴ E 24 ταῖς τοιαύταις PMV: ταύτης F || ὁμοιογενεῖς P:
ὁμογενεῖς FMV 25 τῶν λεκτικῶν E
6. ἁρμονία: see Gloss., s.v.
8. Cic. de Orat. iii. 43. 171 “sequitur
continuatio verborum, quae duas res
maxime, collocationem primum, deinde
modum quendam formamque desiderat.
collocationis est componere et struere
verba sic, ut neve asper eorum concursus
neve hiulcus sit, sed quodam modo coagmentatus
et levis; in quo lepide soceri
mei persona lusit is, qui elegantissime id
facere potuit, Lucilius:
quam lepide λέξεις compostae! ut tesserulae omnes
arte pavimento atque emblemate vermiculato.”
9. In the actual contents of his
treatise Dionysius pays more attention
to the ὀνόματα than to the κῶλα and
περίοδοι. The importance of employing
periods judiciously is indicated in 118 15.
12. κατανοοῦντι (the more difficult
and better supported reading) may be
right, cp. 90 12 εἰσπλέοντι (from Thucydides).
13. Cic. Brut. 72. 253 “primoque in
libro dixerit (Caesar) verborum dilectum
originem esse eloquentiae.”
25. For the antithesis cp. Demosth.
Olynth. iii. 15 τὸ γὰρ πράττειν τοῦ λέγειν
καὶ χειροτονεῖν ὕστερον ὂν τῇ τάξει, πρότερον
τῇ δυνάμει καὶ κρεῖττόν ἐστιν.
[74-5]
τοῦ προκειμένου, μή τι δόξωμεν ἐξ ἑτοίμου λαμβάνειν τῶν
ἀμφισβήτησιν ἐχόντων λόγων.
III
ἔστι τοίνυν πᾶσα λέξις ᾗ σημαίνομεν τὰς νοήσεις ἡ μὲν
ἔμμετρος, ἡ δὲ ἄμετρος· ὧν ἑκατέρα καλῆς μὲν ἁρμονίας
τυχοῦσα καλὸν οἵα τ’ ἐστὶ ποιεῖν καὶ τὸ μέτρον καὶ τὸν 5
λόγον, ἀνεπιστάτως δὲ καὶ ὡς ἔτυχεν ῥιπτομένη προσαπόλλυσι
καὶ τὸ ἐν τῇ διανοίᾳ χρήσιμον. πολλοὶ γοῦν καὶ
ποιηταὶ καὶ συγγραφεῖς φιλόσοφοί τε καὶ ῥήτορες λέξεις
πάνυ καλὰς καὶ πρεπούσας τοῖς ὑποκειμένοις ἐκλέξαντες
ἐπιμελῶς, ἁρμονίαν δὲ αὐταῖς ἀποδόντες εἰκαίαν τινὰ καὶ 10
ἄμουσον οὐδὲν χρηστὸν ἀπέλαυσαν ἐκείνου τοῦ πόνου. ἕτεροι
δ’ εὐκαταφρόνητα καὶ ταπεινὰ λαβόντες ὀνόματα, συνθέντες
δ’ αὐτὰ ἡδέως καὶ περιττῶς πολλὴν τὴν ἀφροδίτην τῷ λόγῳ
περιέθηκαν. καὶ σχεδὸν ἀνάλογόν τι πεπονθέναι δόξειεν ἂν
ἡ σύνθεσις πρὸς τὴν ἐκλογήν, ὃ πάσχει τὰ ὀνόματα πρὸς 15
τὰ νοήματα. ὥσπερ γὰρ οὐδὲν ὄφελος διανοίας ἐστὶ χρηστῆς,
εἰ μή τις αὐτῇ κόσμον ἀποδώσει καλῆς ὀνομασίας, οὕτω
κἀνταῦθα οὐδέν ἐστι προὔργου λέξιν εὑρεῖν καθαρὰν καὶ καλλιρήμονα,
εἰ μὴ καὶ κόσμον αὐτῇ τις ἁρμονίας τὸν προσήκοντα
περιθήσει. 20
ἵνα δὲ μὴ δόξω φάσιν ἀναπόδεικτον λέγειν, ἐξ ὧν
ἐπείσθην κρεῖττον εἶναι καὶ τελειότερον ἄσκημα τῆς ἐκλογῆς
[75]
that we may not be thought to assume off-hand the truth of a
doubtful proposition.
CHAPTER III
THE MAGICAL EFFECT OF COMPOSITION, OR WORD-ORDER
Every utterance, then, by which we express our thoughts is
either in metre or not in metre. Whichever it be, it can, when
aided by beautiful arrangement, attain beauty whether of verse
or prose. But speech, if flung out carelessly at random, at the
same time spoils the value of the thought. Many poets, and
prose-writers (philosophers and orators), have carefully chosen
expressions that are distinctly beautiful and appropriate to the
subject matter, but have reaped no benefit from their trouble
because they have given them a rude and haphazard sort of
arrangement: whereas others have invested their discourse with
great beauty by taking humble, unpretending words, and arranging
them with charm and distinction. It may well be thought that
composition is to selection what words are to ideas. For just
as a fine thought is of no avail unless it be clothed in beautiful
language, so here too pure and elegant expression, is useless unless
it be attired in the right vesture of arrangement.
But to guard myself against the appearance of making an
unsupported assertion, I will try to show by an appeal to facts
4 ἄμετρος ἣ δ’ (ex ἥδ’ corr.) ἔμμετρος F,E || καλ(ῶς) P || μὲν om.
M 5 οἵα τ’ M: οἷά τ’ PV: οἷά τε F,E || καὶ τὸ FE: τὸ PMV 6
ἔτυχεν] ἔοικε M || ῥιπτομένη PMVE: ῥιπτουμένη F 7 τὸ om. F1 ||
γοὖν καὶ F,E: γοῦν PMV 10 ἀποδόντες E γρ M: [ἀποδόν]τες cum litura
F: περιθέντες PV: παραθέντες M 12 δὲ PMV 13 δε PV || ἀντὰ P1 ||
ἰδίως EFM1: ἡδέως ex ἱδίως P1: ἰδέως M2 || τ(ῶ) λόγ(ω) P: τῶν λόγων
M 14 ἂν om. M 16 ἐστὶ ante διανοίας ponunt EF 17 κόσμον * *
* * * P || ἀποδώσῃ F 18 καὶ ἐνταῦθα EF || πούργου P1 (ρ suprascr.
P2): προὔργον V || καλλιῥήμονα FM,P: καλλιῤῥήμονα V 19 τίς F: τ(ῆς)
P,MV 21 φασὶν libri: corr. Krueger || ἀναπόδεικτον P: ἀναπόδεικτα
F2MV: ἀπόδεικτα F1 22 κρεῖττον] καὶ κρεῖττον F || τελεώτερον M
1. ἐξ ἑτοίμου λαμβάνειν: cp. 78 13
ἐξ ἑτοίμου λαβὼν ἐχρήσατο.
9. There is much similarity, both in
thought and in expression, between this
passage and the de Sublimitate xl. 2:
ἀλλὰ μὴν ὅτι γε πολλοὶ καὶ συγγραφέων
καὶ ποιητῶν οὐκ ὄντες ὑψηλοὶ φύσει, μήποτε
δὲ καὶ ἀμεγέθεις, ὅμως κοινοῖς καὶ δημώδεσι
τοῖς ὀνόμασι καὶ οὐδὲν ἐπαγομένοις περιττὸν
ὡς τὰ πολλὰ συγχρώμενοι, διὰ μόνου τοῦ
συνθεῖναι καὶ ἁρμόσαι ταῦτα δ’ ὅμως ὄγκον
καὶ διάστημα καὶ τὸ μὴ ταπεινοὶ δοκεῖν
εἶναι περιεβάλοντο, καθάπερ ἄλλοι τε πολλοὶ
καὶ Φίλιστος, Ἀριστοφάνης ἔν τισιν,
ἐν τοῖς πλείστοις Εὐριπίδης, ἱκανῶς ἡμῖν
δεδήλωται. The author of the de Subl.
had, as he himself tells us, dealt with
the subject of composition ἐν δυσὶν συντάγμασιν
(xxxix. 1 ibid.).
13. ἰδίως may be right, meaning with
περιττῶς ‘in a special and distinctive
manner.’
14. The Aristotelian ἀναλογία is before
the author’s mind here, just as is the
Aristotelian doctrine of τὸ μέσον later
in the treatise (246 16).
17. de Demosth. c. 18 οὐχ ἅπαντα δέ
γε τὰ πράγματα τὴν αὐτὴν ἀπαιτεῖ διάλεκτον,
ἀλλ’ ἔστιν ὥσπερ σώμασι πρέπουσά
τις ἐσθής, οὕτως καὶ νοήμασιν ἁρμόττουσά
τις ὀνομασία.
18. προὔργου: cp. Plato Alcib. II.
149 E ὥστε οὐδὲν αὐτοῖς ἦν προὔργου
θύειν τε καὶ δῶρα τελεῖν μάτην.
21. MS. Canon. 45 has φάσιν, ἀναπόδεικτον,
as reported (Journal of Philology
xxvii. 84) by A. B. Poynton, who compares
Aristot. Eth. Nic. 1143 b 12 ὥστε
δεῖ προσέχειν τῶν ἐμπείρων καὶ πρεσβυτέρων
ἢ φρονίμων ταῖς ἀναποδείκτοις φάσεσι καὶ
δόξαις οὐχ ἧττον τῶν ἀποδείξεων. διὰ γὰρ
τὸ ἔχειν ἐκ τῆς ἐμπειρίας ὄμμα ὁρῶσιν
ὀρθῶς. Probably Dionysius has this
passage of Aristotle in his mind, and
wishes it to be understood that he does
not mean to dogmatize simply on the
score of being an old and experienced
teacher. In the Rhet. ad Alex. 1432 a
33, an oath is defined as: μετὰ θείας
παραλήψεως φάσις ἀναπόδεικτος.
[76-7]
τὴν σύνθεσιν, ἔργῳ πειράσομαι δεικνύναι, ἐμμέτρων τε καὶ
πεζῶν λόγων ἀπαρχὰς ὀλίγας προχειρισάμενος. λαμβανέσθω
δὲ ποιητῶν μὲν Ὅμηρος, συγγραφέων δὲ Ἡρόδοτος· ἀπόχρη
γὰρ ἐκ τούτων καὶ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων εἰκάσαι. ἔστι δὴ παρ’
Ὁμήρῳ μὲν ὁ παρὰ τῷ συβώτῃ καταγόμενος Ὀδυσσεὺς περὶ 5
τὴν ἑωθινὴν ὥραν ἀκρατίζεσθαι μέλλων, ὡς τοῖς παλαιοῖς
ἔθος ἦν· ἔπειτα ὁ Τηλέμαχος αὐτοῖς ἐπιφαινόμενος ἐκ τῆς εἰς
Πελοπόννησον ἀποδημίας· πραγμάτια λιτὰ καὶ βιωτικὰ
ἡρμηνευμένα ὑπέρευ. ποῦ δ’ ἐστὶν ἡ τῆς ἑρμηνείας ἀρετή;
τὰ ποιήματα δηλώσει παρατεθέντα αὐτά· 10
τὼ δ’ αὖτ’ ἐν κλισίῃς Ὀδυσεὺς καὶ δῖος ὑφορβὸς
ἐντύνοντ’ ἄριστον ἅμ’ ἠοῖ κειαμένω πῦρ
ἔκπεμψάν τε νομῆας ἅμ’ ἀγρομένοισι σύεσσι.
Τηλέμαχον δὲ περίσσαινον κύνες ὑλακόμωροι
οὐδ’ ὕλαον προσιόντα. νόησε δὲ δῖος Ὀδυσσεὺς 15
σαίνοντάς τε κύνας, ὑπὸ δὲ κτύπος ἦλθε ποδοῖιν·
αἶψα δ’ ἄρ’ Εὔμαιον προσεφώνεεν ἐγγὺς ἐόντα·
Εὔμαι’, ἦ μάλα τίς τοι ἐλεύσεται ἐνθάδ’ ἑταῖρος
ἢ καὶ γνώριμος ἄλλος, ἐπεὶ κύνες οὐχ ὑλάουσιν,
ἀλλὰ περισσαίνουσι· ποδῶν δ’ ὑπὸ δοῦπον ἀκούω. 20
οὔπω πᾶν εἴρητο ἔπος, ὅτε οἱ φίλος υἱὸς
ἔστη ἐνὶ προθύροισι. ταφὼν δ’ ἀνόρουσε συβώτης·
[77]
the reasons which have convinced me that composition is a more
important and effective art than mere selection of words. I will
first examine a few specimen passages in prose and verse. Among
poets let Homer be taken, among prose-writers Herodotus: from
these may be formed an adequate notion of the rest.
Well, in Homer we find Odysseus tarrying in the swineherd’s
hut and about to break his fast at dawn, as they used to do in
ancient days. Telemachus then appears in sight, returning
from his sojourn in the Peloponnese. Trifling incidents of
everyday life as these are, they are inimitably portrayed. But
wherein lies the excellence of expression? I shall quote the
lines, and they will speak for themselves:—
As anigh came Telemachus’ feet, the king and the swineherd wight
Made ready the morning meat, and by this was the fire alight;—
They had sent the herdmen away with the pasturing swine at the dawning;—
Lo, the dogs have forgotten to bay, and around the prince are they fawning!
And Odysseus the godlike marked the leap and the whine of the hounds
That ever at strangers barked; and his ear caught footfall-sounds.
Straightway he spake, for beside him was sitting the master of swine:
“Of a surety, Eumaeus, hitherward cometh a comrade of thine,
Or some one the bandogs know, and not with barking greet,
But they fawn upon him; moreover I hear the treading of feet.”
Not yet were the words well done, when the porchway darkened: a face
Was there in the door,—his son! and Eumaeus sprang up in amaze.
1 ἔργω F || δεικνῦναι F || ἐνμέτρων F 4 εἰκᾶσαι F 5 ὁμήρ(ω) P ||
τῳ om. P || σϊβώτηι P: corr. in margine P2 || ὀδυσεὺς P 8 πραγμάτια
λιτὰ καὶ PV: πραγμάτια ἅττα F: πραγματιάττα λιτὰ καὶ M 9 δ’ ἔστιν
F: δέ (ἐστιν) P 11 κλισίησ’ EFV: κλισίῃ Hom. || ὀδυσσεὺς FP2M1V
12 ἐντύνοντ(ες) P,V 13 ἐκπέμψαντε EFPM || ἀγρομένοισ(ιν) P
14 περίσαινον FEV 15 ὀδυσεὺς P 16 περί τε κτύπος Hom. 17 ἂρ
sic FP || ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα Hom. 18 ἐῦμαι’ P: εὔμαιε V 20
περισαίνουσι FV 22 ἐπὶ F || προθύροισ(ιν) P
5. The extract from the Odyssey well
illustrates that Homeric nobleness which
pervades even the homeliest scenes; and
Dionysius is right in pointing out that
this nobleness does not depend on any
striking choice of phrase, since Homer’s
language is usually quite plain and
straightforward.
6. On Odyss. xvi. 2 (ἄριστον) there is
the following scholium, ὅτι καὶ ἐν τῇ
Ἰλιάδι ἅμα τῇ ἀνατολῇ ἐσθίουσιν: and
similarly on Theocr. i. 50, πρωΐας ἔτι
οὔσης ὀλίγον τινὰ ἐσθίομεν ἄρτον καὶ
ἄκρατον οἶνον πίνομεν.
9. The charm of a simple scene, simply
but beautifully described, is seen in
Virg. Ecl. vii. 1-15; Georg. ii. 385-9;
Aen. v. 328-30, 357-60. (The Latin
illustrations, here and elsewhere, are
for the most part the exempla Latina
suggested by Simon Bircov (Bircovius),
a Polish scholar who lived early in the
seventeenth century.)
11. By “Hom.” in the critical notes
is meant the best attested reading in
the text of Homer. κλισίῃς, however,
has some support among the manuscripts
of Homer; and so has the form ἂρ in
76 17, and πέσεν in 78 1.
14. Monro (Odyss. xiv. 29) regards
ὑλακόμωρος as a kind of parody of the
heroic epithets ἐγχεσίμωρος and ἰόμωρος,
and thinks that we cannot tell what
precise meaning (if any) was conveyed
by the latter part of the compound.
See, further, his note on Iliad ii. 692.
20. The construction must be ὑπὸ
ποδῶν: cp. Il. ii. 465 ὑπὸ χθὼν σμερδαλέον
κονάβιζε ποδῶν. The force of ὑπό
is half-way between the literal sense of
‘under’ and the derived sense of ‘caused
by’ (Monro).
[78-9]
ἐκ δ’ ἄρα οἱ χειρῶν πέσεν ἄγγεα, τοῖς ἐπονεῖτο
κιρνὰς αἴθοπα οἶνον. ὁ δ’ ἀντίος ἔδραμ’ ἄνακτος·
κύσσε δέ μιν κεφαλήν τε καὶ ἄμφω φάεα καλὰ
χεῖράς τ’ ἀμφοτέρας· θαλερὸν δέ οἱ ἔκπεσε δάκρυ.
ταῦθ’ ὅτι μὲν ἐπάγεται καὶ κηλεῖ τὰς ἀκοὰς ποιημάτων 5
τε τῶν πάνυ ἡδίστων οὐδενὸς ἥττω μοῖραν ἔχει, πάντες ἂν
οἶδ’ ὅτι μαρτυρήσειαν. ποῦ δὴ αὐτῶν ἐστιν ἡ πειθὼ καὶ
διὰ τί τοιαῦτά ἐστι, πότερον διὰ τὴν ἐκλογὴν τῶν ὀνομάτων
ἢ διὰ τὴν σύνθεσιν; οὐδεὶς ἂν εἴποι διὰ τὴν ἐκλογήν, ὡς
ἐγὼ πείθομαι· διὰ γὰρ τῶν εὐτελεστάτων καὶ ταπεινοτάτων 10
ὀνομάτων πέπλεκται πᾶσα ἡ λέξις, οἷς ἂν καὶ γεωργὸς καὶ
θαλαττουργὸς καὶ χειροτέχνης καὶ πᾶς ὁ μηδεμίαν ὤραν τοῦ
λέγειν εὖ ποιούμενος ἐξ ἑτοίμου λαβὼν ἐχρήσατο. λυθέντος
γοῦν τοῦ μέτρου φαῦλα φανήσεται τὰ αὐτὰ ταῦτα καὶ ἄζηλα·
οὔτε γὰρ μεταφοραί τινες ἐν αὐτοῖς εὐγενεῖς ἔνεισιν οὔτε 15
ὑπαλλαγαὶ οὔτε καταχρήσεις οὔτ’ ἄλλη τροπικὴ διάλεκτος
οὐδεμία, οὐδὲ δὴ γλῶτται πολλαί τινες οὐδὲ ξένα ἢ πεποιημένα
ὀνόματα. τί οὖν λείπεται μὴ οὐχὶ τὴν σύνθεσιν τοῦ
κάλλους τῆς ἑρμηνείας αἰτιᾶσθαι; τοιαῦτα δ’ ἐστὶ παρὰ τῷ
[79]
Dropped from his hands to the floor the bowls, wherein erst he began
The flame-flushed wine to pour, and to meet his lord he ran;
And he kissed that dear-loved head, and both his beautiful eyes;
And he kissed his hands, and he shed warm tears in his glad surprise.[89]
Everybody would, I am sure, testify that these lines cast a
spell of enchantment on the ear, and rank second to no poetry
whatsoever, however exquisite it may be. But what is the
secret of their fascination, and what causes them to be what
they are? Is it the selection of words, or the composition?
No one will say “the selection”: of that I am convinced. For
the diction consists, warp and woof, of the most ordinary, the
humblest words, such as might have been used off-hand by a
farmer, a seaman, an artisan, or anybody else who takes no
account of elegant speech. You have only to break up the
metre, and these very same lines will seem commonplace and
unworthy of admiration. For they contain neither noble
metaphors nor hypallages nor catachreses nor any other figurative
language; nor yet many unusual terms, nor foreign or new-coined
words. What alternative, then, is left but to attribute
the beauty of the style to the composition? There are countless
1 πέσον Hom. 2 αἴθωπα PM || ἔδραμ(εν) F: ἔδραμ’ E: ἦλθεν PMV Hom.
3 καὶ φαλήν P 5 ἐπάγεταί τε καὶ F 6 τῶν F: καὶ τῶν PMV ||
οὐδ’ ἑνὸς F1 || ἥττων F 7 εὖ ante οἶδ’ habet F 8 τοιαύτη F1 ||
πότερα F 9 ἐκλογ[ὴ]ν cum litura P || ὡς ἐγὼ πείθομαι om. F 10 καὶ
FE: τε καὶ PMV 12 ὤραν Sylburgius: ὥραν PMV: ὧραν F γρ φροντίδα in
marg. M 13 λαβῶν P 14 γοὖν F: γ’ οὖν P 15 ἐν αὐτοῖς (αὐταῖς P)
εὐγενεῖς ἔνεισιν PMV: εἰσὶν εὐγενεῖς ἐν αὐτοῖς EF 16 οὔτε ἄλλη PV ||
οὐδεμία διάλεκτος F 17 οὐδεδὴ P: οὔτε δὴ FMV || γλῶσσαι F || οὐδὲ
Sauppius: οὔτε PMV: ἢ in rasura F2 19 τοιαῦτ(α) (εστι) P,MV
7. Perhaps ποῦ δὲ δή: cp. 116 9.
9. Cp. Hor. Ars P. 47 “dixeris egregie
notum si callida verbum | reddiderit
iunctura novum.”
On the other hand, the importance
of ἐκλογή is illustrated by Aristotle’s
comparison (Poetics xxii. 7) of νῦν δέ μ’
ἐὼν ὀλίγος τε καὶ οὐτιδανὸς καὶ ἀεικής with
νῦν δέ μ’ ἐὼν μικρός τε καὶ ἀσθενικὸς καὶ
ἀειδής.
10. Cp. J. W. Mackail in Class. Rev.
xxii. 70, “A quality of the finest Greek
poetry, from Homer to the late anthologists,
is its power of taking common
language and transforming it into poetry
by an all but imperceptible touch.”
The quality is exemplified in Euripides,
though it did not originate with him
(κλέπτεται δ’ εὖ, ἐάν τις ἐκ τῆς εἰωθυίας
διαλέκτου ἐκλέγων συντιθῇ· ὅπερ Εὐριπίδης
ποιεῖ καὶ ὑπέδειξε πρῶτος, Aristot. Rhet.
iii. 2, 4: cp. Long. p. 146). So “tantum
series iuncturaque pollet, | tantum de
medio sumptis accedit honoris” (Hor.
Ars P. 242-3).
13. λυθέντος γοῦν, κτλ. Cp. Isocr.
Evag. 10 οἱ μὲν (sc. ποιηταὶ) μετὰ μέτρων
καὶ ῥυθμῶν ἅπαντα ποιοῦσιν ... ἃ τοσαύτην
ἔχει χάριν, ὥστ’ ἂν καὶ τῇ λέξει καὶ τοῖς
ἐνθυμήμασιν ἔχῃ κακῶς, ὅμως αὐταῖς ταῖς
εὐρυθμίαις καὶ ταῖς συμμετρίαις ψυχαγωγοῦσι
τοὺς ἀκούοντας. γνοίη δ’ ἄν τις
ἐκεῖθεν τὴν δύναμιν αὐτῶν· ἢν γάρ τις
τῶν ποιημάτων τῶν εὐδοκιμούντων τὰ μὲν
ὀνόματα καὶ τὰς διανοίας καταλίπῃ, τὸ δὲ
μέτρον διαλύσῃ, φανήσεται πολὺ καταδεέστερα
τῆς δόξης ἧς νῦν ἔχομεν περὶ
αὐτῶν.
14. ἄζηλα: this adjective occurs also
in the de Demosth. c. 28, and more than
once in the Antiqq. Rom.
16. ὑπαλλαγαί, καταχρήσεις: see
Glossary, s. vv.
17. Usener reads γλῶτται παλαιαί τινες.
But (1) γλῶτται are usually παλαιαί (cp.
Galen Gloss. Hipp. xix. 63 ὅσα τοίνυν
τῶν ὀνομάτων ἐν μὲν τοῖς πάλαι χρόνοις
ἦν συνήθη, νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι ἐστί, τὰ μὲν
τοιαῦτα γλώττας καλοῦσι, κτλ.): (2) the
phrase πολλοί τινες is elsewhere used by
Dionysius, e.g. de Lysia c. 1 οὔτε πολλοῖς
τισι κατέλιπεν ὑπερβολήν, κτλ.
18, 19. An interesting modern parallel
is that passage in Coleridge’s Biographia
Literaria (c. 18) which touches on the
stanza (in Wordsworth’s Lyrical Ballads)
beginning “In distant countries I have
been.” Coleridge remarks, “The words
here are doubtless such as are current in
all ranks of life; and of course not less
so in the hamlet and cottage than in
the shop, manufactory, college, or
palace. But is this the order in which
the rustic would have placed the words?
I am grievously deceived, if the following
less compact mode of commencing
the same tale be not a far more faithful
copy, ‘I have been in many parts, far
and near, and I don’t know that I ever
saw before a man crying by himself in
the public road; a grown man I mean
that was neither sick nor hurt,’” etc.—In
this connexion see also F. W. H.
Myers’ Wordsworth, pp. 106 ff., for the
music in Wordsworth’s Affliction of
Margaret.
[80-1]
ποιητῇ μυρία, ὡς εὖ οἶδ’ ὅτι πάντες ἴσασιν· ἐμοὶ δ’ ὑπομνήσεως
ἕνεκα λέγοντι ἀρκεῖ ταῦτα μόνα εἰρῆσθαι.
φέρε δὴ μεταβῶμεν καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν πεζὴν διάλεκτον καὶ
σκοπῶμεν, εἰ κἀκείνῃ τοῦτο συμβέβηκε τὸ πάθος, ὥστε περὶ
μικρὰ καὶ φαῦλα πράγματά τε καὶ ὀνόματα συνταχθέντα 5
καλῶς μεγάλας γίνεσθαι τὰς χάριτας. ἔστι δὴ παρὰ τῷ
Ἡροδότῳ βασιλεύς τις Λυδῶν, ὃν ἐκεῖνος Κανδαύλην ‹καλεῖ,
Μυρσίλον δὲ› καλεῖσθαί φησιν ὑφ’ Ἑλλήνων, τῆς ἑαυτοῦ
γυναικὸς ἐρῶν, ἔπειτα ἀξιῶν τινα τῶν ἑταίρων αὐτοῦ γυμνὴν
τὴν ἄνθρωπον ἰδεῖν, ὁ δὲ ἀπομαχόμενος μὴ ἀναγκασθῆναι, ὡς 10
δὲ οὐκ ἔπειθεν, ὑπομένων τε καὶ θεώμενος αὐτήν—πρᾶγμα
οὐχ ὅτι σεμνὸν ἢ καλλιλογεῖσθαι ἐπιτήδειον, ἀλλὰ καὶ
ταπεινὸν καὶ ἐπικίνδυνον καὶ τοῦ αἰσχροῦ μᾶλλον ἢ τοῦ καλοῦ
ἐγγυτέρω· ἀλλ’ εἴρηται σφόδρα δεξιῶς, καὶ κρεῖττον γέγονεν
ἀκουσθῆναι λεγόμενον ἢ ὀφθῆναι γινόμενον. ἵνα δὲ μή τις 15
ὑπολάβῃ τὴν διάλεκτον εἶναι τῆς ἡδονῆς αἰτίαν τῇ λέξει,
μεταθεὶς αὐτῆς τὸν χαρακτῆρα εἰς τὴν Ἀτθίδα γλῶτταν καὶ
οὐδὲν ἄλλο περιεργασάμενος οὕτως ἐξοίσω τὸν διάλογον.
“Γύνη, οὐ γάρ σε δοκῶ πείθεσθαί μοι λέγοντι περὶ τοῦ
εἴδους τῆς γυναικός· ὦτα γὰρ τυγχάνει ἀνθρώποις ὄντα 20
ἀπιστότερα ὀφθαλμῶν· ποίει ὅπως ἐκείνην θεάσῃ γυμνήν. ὁ
[81]
passages of this kind in Homer, as everybody of course is well
aware. It is enough to quote this single instance by way of
reminder.
Let us now pass on to the language of prose and see if the
same principle holds good of it too—that great graces invest
trifling and commonplace acts and words, when they are cast
into the mould of beautiful composition. For instance, there is
in Herodotus a certain Lydian king whom he calls Candaules,
adding that he was called Myrsilus by the Greeks. Candaules
is represented as infatuated with admiration of his wife, and
then as insisting on one of his friends seeing the poor woman
naked. The friend struggled hard against the constraint put
upon him; but failing to shake the king’s resolve, he submitted,
and viewed her. The incident, as an incident, is not only lacking
in dignity and, for the purpose of embellishment, intractable, but
is also vulgar and hazardous and more akin to the repulsive than
to the beautiful. But it has been related with great dexterity:
it has been made something far better to hear told than it was to
see done. And, that no one may imagine that it is to the dialect
that the charm of the story is due, I will change its distinctive
forms into Attic, and without any further meddling with the
language will give the conversation as it stands:—
“‘Of a truth, Gyges, I think that thou dost not believe what
I say concerning the beauty of my wife; indeed, men trust their
ears less fully than their eyes. Contrive, therefore, to see her
1 δε P,MV 2 εἰρεῖσθαι P 3 μ[ε]ταβῶμεν cum litura P || ἤδη ante
καὶ ἐπὶ add. F || διάλεξιν F 4 καὶ ἐκείνη F || τοῦτο F: τὸ αὐτὸ PV:
τοῦτο αὐτὸ M || τὸ F: om. PMV 6 ἡδονὰς post μεγάλας add. F || τὰς
PMV: καὶ F 7 καλεῖ Μυρσίλον δὲ om. FM: καλεῖ Μυρσίλον δὲ καλεῖσθαι
om. PV: supplevit Sylburgius coll. Herod. i. 7 9 τινα post αὐτοῦ
ponit F 10 ὁ δὲ PMV: ὃσ F 11 δὲ om. F || αὐτὴν· πρᾶγμα F: αὐτὴν
τὸ πρᾶγμα P: αὐτὴν ἦν· τὸ δὲ πρᾶγμα MV 12 ἐπιτήδειον] δυνάμενον E
13 ταπεινὸν EPMV: παιδικὸν F 14 ἀλλὰ PM 16 τηῖ P 17 γλῶσσαν F
18 περιειργασμένος P || τὸν λόγον F 19 περὶ] τ(ους) περι P: τὰ
περὶ Va 20 τυγχάνει] ὑπάρχει F
4. Usener’s conjecture παρὰ (for περὶ)
may be held to find some support from
92 21 and 256 10, but on the other hand
Dionysius’ love of μεταβολή has always
to be remembered.
6. F’s reading ἡδονὰς γίνεσθαι καὶ adds
still another καί to the four already
used in this sentence. The two nouns
ἡδονὰς ... χάριτας are superficially
attractive, but the plural ἡδοναί is not
common in this sense.
9. γυμνήν: some light is thrown
on various phases of Greek and non-Greek
feeling with regard to any exposure
of the person by such passages
as Thucyd. i. 6, Plato Menex. 236 D,
Herod. i. 10 (ad f.). As to the women
of Sparta cp. Gardner and Jevons Greek
Antiquities pp. 352, 353.
10. For the participles cp. p. 76 ll. 5-7.
12. οὐχ ὅτι (in a context which gives
it the meaning of non solum non) occurs
elsewhere in Dionysius: e.g. Antiqq.
Rom. ii. c. 18 καὶ οὐχ ὅτι θεῶν ἀλλ’ οὐδ’
ἀνθρώπων ἀγαθῶν ἀξίους.
13. ταπεινόν (which is weightily supported)
seems to correspond better than
παιδικόν to σεμνόν.—F’s reading παιδικὸν
might perhaps be translated ‘sportive’
or ‘freakish’ (with a reference to boyish
pranks); cp. D.H. p. 196 (s.v. μειρακιώδης)
and p. 199 (s.v. παιδιώδης), and
Aristot. Rhet. iii. 11 fin. εἰσὶ δὲ ὑπερβολαὶ
μειρακιώδεις ... διὸ πρεσβυτέρῳ
λέγειν ἀπρεπές.
17. So, in de Demosth. c. 41, μετακεκόμισται
δ’ εἰς τὴν Ἀτθίδα διάλεκτον ἡ λέξις
(the passage in question being Herod.
vii. 8). For the charm of the Ionic
dialect cp. Quintil. ix. 4. 18 “in
Herodoto vero cum omnia (ut ego quidem
sentio) lenitur fluunt, tum ipsa διάλεκτος
habet eam iucunditatem, ut latentes
etiam numeros complexa videatur.”
18. οὐδὲν ἄλλο περιεργασάμενος: notwithstanding
this undertaking, the
variations from the traditional text of
Herodotus are (as will be seen on
reference to the critical footnotes) considerable.
It is no doubt possible that F’s reading
τὸν λόγον (‘the story’) is original,
and was changed to τὸν διάλογον (‘the
conversation’) because the whole story is
not quoted. But such readings of F as
ὑπάρχει (for τυγχάνει l. 20: against the
MSS. of Herodotus) show that its unsupported
testimony must be received
with much reserve.
20. This passage of Herodotus may
have been before Horace’s mind (Ars P.
180): “segnius irritant animos demissa
per aurem | quam quae sunt oculis
subiecta fidelibus et quae | ipse sibi
tradit spectator.” Cp. also Shakespeare
Coriolanus iii. 2 “the eyes of the ignorant
| (are) more learned than the ears.”
In the Greek the emphatic position of
both ὦτα and ὀφθαλμῶν is to be noticed;
cp. Introduction, pp. 19-25, for emphasis
at the end and at the beginning of
clauses.
[82-3]
δ’ ἀναβοήσας εἶπε· Δέσποτα, τίνα λόγον λέγεις οὐχ ὑγιᾶ,
κελεύων με δέσποιναν τὴν ἐμὴν θεάσασθαι γυμνήν; ἅμα δὲ
χιτῶνι ἐκδυομένῳ συνεκδύεται καὶ τὴν αἰδῶ γυνή. πάλαι
δὲ τὰ καλὰ ἀνθρώποις ἐξεύρηται, ἐξ ὧν μανθάνειν δεῖ· ἐν οἷς
ἓν τόδ’ ἐστίν, ὁρᾶν τινα τὰ ἑαυτοῦ. ἐγὼ δὲ πείθομαι ἐκείνην 5
εἶναι πασῶν γυναικῶν καλλίστην, καὶ σοῦ δέομαι μὴ
δεῖσθαι ἀνόμων. ὁ μὲν δὴ λέγων ταῦτα ἀπεμάχετο, ὁ δ’
ἠμείβετο τοῖσδε· Θάρσει Γύγη, καὶ μὴ φοβοῦ μήτ’ ἐμέ, ὡς
πειρώμενόν σου λέγω λόγον τόνδε, μήτε γυναῖκα τὴν ἐμήν,
μή τί σοι ἐξ αὐτῆς γένηται βλάβος. ἀρχὴν γὰρ ἐγὼ μηχανήσομαι 10
οὕτως, ὥστε μηδὲ μαθεῖν αὐτὴν ὀφθεῖσαν ὑπὸ σοῦ.
ἀγαγὼν γάρ σε εἰς τὸ οἴκημα, ἐν ᾧ κοιμώμεθα, ὄπισθε τῆς
ἀνοιγομένης θύρας στήσω· μετὰ δὲ ἐμὲ εἰσελθόντα παρέσται
καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ἡ ἐμὴ εἰς κοίτην. κεῖται δ’ ἐγγὺς τῆς εἰσόδου
θρόνος· ἐπὶ τοῦτον τῶν ἱματίων καθ’ ἓν ἕκαστον ἐκδῦσα 15
θήσει, καὶ καθ’ ἡσυχίαν πολλὴν παρέσται σοι θεάσασθαι.
ὅταν δ’ ἀπὸ τοῦ θρόνου πορεύηται ἐπὶ τὴν εὐνὴν κατὰ νώτου
τε αὐτῆς γένῃ, σοὶ μελέτω τὸ ἐντεῦθεν, ὅπως μή σε ὄψεται
ἀπιόντα διὰ θυρῶν. ὁ μὲν δὴ ὡς οὐκ ἐδύνατο διαφυγεῖν,
ἕτοιμος ἦν [ποιεῖν ταῦτα].” 20
[83]
naked.’ But he cried out and said: ‘My lord, what is this
foolish word thou sayest, bidding me look upon my lady naked?
for a woman, when she puts off her dress, puts off her shamefastness
also. Men of old time have found out excellent precepts,
which it behoves us to learn and observe; and among them
is this—“Let a man keep his eyes on his own.” As for me, I am
fully persuaded that she is the fairest of all women, and I beseech
thee not to require of me aught that is unlawful.’ Thus he
spoke, and strove with him. But the other answered and said:
‘Be of good cheer, Gyges, and fear not that I say this to
prove thee, or that harm will come to thee from my wife.
For, in the first place, I will contrive after such a fashion that
she shall not even know that she has been seen by thee. I will
bring thee into the room where we sleep, and set thee behind the
door that stands ajar; and after I have entered, my wife will
come to bed. Now, near the entrance there is a seat; and on
this she will place each of her garments as she puts them off, so
that thou wilt have time enough to behold. But when she
passes from the seat to the couch, and thou art behind her back,
then take heed that she see thee not as thou goest away through
the door.’ Forasmuch, then, as he could not escape, he consented
to do after this manner.”[90]
1 δ’ F: δὲ PMV: δὲ μέγα Her. (exc. ACP) || λέγεις λόγον Her. 3
ἐκδυομένῳ F, Her.: ἐκδυομένη PMV 5 ἐν τώδε (τῶδε corr.) F, MV: ἐν
τωῖ δε P || ἔνεστιν corr. F1, M 6 εἶναι post γυναικῶν traiciunt
PMV 7 δεῖσθαι F, Her.: χρήιζειν P, MV || ἀνομῶν P || ταῦτα] τοιαῦτα
Her. || post ἀπεμάχετο haec verba habet Her., ἀρρωδέων μή τί οἱ ἐξ
αὐτῶν γένηται κακόν || δὲ P 8 ὡς σέο πειρώμενον (vel πειρώμενος)
Her. 9 λόγον λέγω PMV || τόνδε ... ἐγὼ om. add. in marg. P2
10 τ[ι] σοι cum litura F: τισ P 12 ἄγων P: ἐγὼ Her. || ἐσ P,M ||
ὄπισθεν PMV 13 θυραστήσω P1 14 καὶ post παρέσται om F || ἐς
PMV || δὲ PMV 15 ἐκδῦσα ante καθ’ ponunt PMV || ἐκδύνουσα Her.
16 παρέξει Her. 17 ὅτ’ ἂν FP ut solent: ἐπεὰν Her. || δε P, MV
18 μελέτω σοι F 19 ἰόντα Her. || δ[ι]α cum litura P || ἐδύνατο F,
Her. (exc. RSVb): ἠδύνατο PMV || διαφεύγειν P 20 ἦν ἕτοιμος Her. ||
ποιεῖν ταῦτα (τά γ’ αὐτά P) om. Her.
3. Cp. Diog. Laert. Vit. Pythag. § 43
τῇ δὲ πρὸς τὸν ἴδιον ἄνδρα μελλούσῃ
πορεύεσθαι παρῄνει (sc. Θεανὼ) ἅμα τοῖς
ἐνδύμασι καὶ τὴν αἰσχύνην ἀποτίθεσθαι,
ἀνισταμένην τε πάλιν ἅμ’ αὐτοῖσιν ἀναλαμβάνειν.
14. εἰς κοίτην and ἐγγὺς τῆς εἰσόδου are
Dionysius’ Attic equivalents for ἐς κοῖτον
and ἀγχοῦ τῆς ἐσόδου.
15. καθ’ ἓν ἕκαστον: cp. Herod. viii.
113 ἐκ δὲ τῶν ἄλλων συμμάχων ἐξελέγετο
κατ’ ὀλίγους.
20. Perhaps the effect of Herodotus’
style is best conveyed by the Elizabethan
translation (published in 1584) of Barnaby
Rich, which is, however, confined to books
i. and ii. In The Famous History of
Herodotus, by B. R. (i.e., probably,
Barnaby Rich), Dionysius’ extract from
Herod. i. 8 is freely Englished thus:
“My faithful servant Gyges, whereas
thou seemest not to credit the large
vaunts and often brags which I make
of my lady’s beauty and comeliness (the
ears of men being much more incredulous
than their eyes), behold I will so bring
to pass that thou shalt see her naked.
Whereat the poor gentleman greatly
abashed, and in no wise willing to
assent thereto, made answer as followeth,
My lord (quoth he) what manner of
speech is this which unadvisedly you
use in persuading me to behold my
lady’s secrets, for a woman, you know,
the more in sight the less in shame:
who together with her garments layeth
aside her modesty. Honest precepts
have been devised by our elders which
we ought to remember, whereof this is
one, that every man ought to behold his
own. For mine own part I easily believe
you that of all women in the world there
is none comparable unto her in beauty.
Wherefore I beseech your grace to have
me excused, if in a case so heinous and
unlawful I somewhat refuse to obey your
will. Gyges having in this sort acquitted
himself, fearing the danger that might
ensue, the king began afresh to reply,
saying, My good Gyges, take heart at
grace, and fear not, lest either myself do
go about to examine and feel thy meaning
by the coloured glose of feigned
speech, or that the queen my lady take
occasion to work thy displeasure hereby.
Pull up thy spirits, and leave all to me:
it is I that will work the means, whereby
she shall never know any part of herself
to have been seen by any creature living.
Listen then awhile and give ear to my
counsel:—When night is come, the door
of the chamber wherein we lie being wide
set open, I will covertly place thee behind
the same: straight at my entrance thereinto,
her custom is not to be long after
me, directly at her coming in, there
standeth a bench, whereat unclothing
herself, she accustometh to lay her
garments upon it, propounding her
divine and angelical body, to be seen
and viewed for a long space. This done,
as she turns from the bench to bedward,
her back being toward thee, have care to
slip privily out of the doors lest haply
she espy thee.—The gentleman seeing
himself taken in a trap, that in no wise
he could escape without performance of
his lord’s folly, gave his assent.” [From
the rare copy in the British Museum,
with the spelling modernized.]
If Dionysius does not quote the
sequel of the story, the reason may well
be that he expects his readers to find it,
or to have found it, in the pages of
Herodotus himself.
[84-5]
οὐκ ἂν ἔχοι τις οὐδὲ ἐνταῦθα εἰπεῖν, ὅτι τὸ ἀξίωμα καὶ
ἡ σεμνότης τῶν ὀνομάτων εὔμορφον πεποίηκε τὴν φράσιν·
ἀνεπιτήδευτα γάρ ἐστι καὶ ἀνέκλεκτα, οἷα ἡ φύσις τέθεικεν
σύμβολα τοῖς πράγμασιν· οὐδὲ γὰρ ἥρμοττεν ἴσως κρείττοσι
χρήσασθαι ἑτέροις. ἀνάγκη δὲ δήπου, ὅταν τοῖς κυριωτάτοις 5
τε καὶ προσεχεστάτοις ὀνόμασιν ἐκφέρηται τὰ νοήματα, μηδὲν
σεμνότερον εἶναι, ἢ οἷά ἐστιν. ὅτι δὲ οὐδὲν ἐν αὐτοῖς ἐστι
σεμνὸν οὐδὲ περιττόν, ὁ βουλόμενος εἴσεται μεταθεὶς οὐδὲν
ὅτι μὴ τὴν ἁρμονίαν. πολλὰ δὲ καὶ παρὰ τούτῳ τῷ ἀνδρὶ
τοιαῦτά ἐστιν, ἐξ ὧν ἄν τις τεκμήραιτο, ὅτι οὐκ ἐν τῷ κάλλει 10
τῶν ὀνομάτων ἡ πειθὼ τῆς ἑρμηνείας ἦν, ἀλλ’ ἐν τῇ συζυγίᾳ.
καὶ περὶ μὲν τούτων ἱκανὰ ταῦτα.
IV
ἵνα δὲ πολὺ μᾶλλον αἴσθηταί τις, ὅσην ἔχει ῥώμην ἡ
συνθετικὴ δύναμις ἔν τε ποιήμασι καὶ λόγοις, λήψομαί τινας
εὖ ἔχειν δοκούσας λέξεις, ὧν τὰς ἁρμονίας μεταθεὶς ἀλλοῖα 15
φαίνεσθαι ποιήσω καὶ τὰ μέτρα καὶ τοὺς λόγους. λαμβανέσθω
δὲ πρῶτον μὲν ἐκ τῶν Ὁμηρικῶν ταυτί·
ἀλλ’ ἔχεν ὥστε τάλαντα γυνὴ χερνῆτις ἀληθής,
ἥ τε σταθμὸν ἔχουσα καὶ εἴριον ἀμφὶς ἀνέλκει
ἰσάζουσ’, ἵνα παισὶν ἀεικέα μισθὸν ἄροιτο. 20
τοῦτο τὸ μέτρον ἡρωϊκόν ἐστιν ἑξάπουν τέλειον, κατὰ δάκτυλον
[85]
Here again no one can say that the grace of the style is due
to the impressiveness and the dignity of the words. These have
not been picked and chosen with studious care; they are simply
the labels affixed to things by Nature. Indeed, it would perhaps
have been out of place to use other and grander words. I take
it, in fact, to be always necessary, whenever ideas are expressed
in proper and appropriate language, that no word should be more
dignified than the nature of the ideas. That there is no stately
or grandiose word in the present passage, any one who likes
may prove by simply changing the arrangement. There are
many similar passages in this author, from which it can be
seen that the fascination of his style does not after all lie in
the beauty of the words but in their combination. We need not
discuss this question further.
CHAPTER IV
TO CHANGE ORDER IS TO DESTROY BEAUTY
To show yet more conclusively the great force wielded by the
faculty of composition both in poetry and prose, I will quote
some passages which are universally regarded as fine, and show
what a different air is imparted to both verse and prose by
a mere change in their arrangement. First let these lines be
taken from the Homeric poems:—
But with them was it as with a toil-bowed woman righteous-souled—
In her scales be the weights and the wool, and the balance on high doth she hold
Poised level, that so may the hard-earned bread to her babes be doled.[91]
This metre is the complete heroic metre of six feet, the basis
1 οὐδὲν F 2 πεποίηκεν P 3 ἡ om. PV || τέθεικεν FP: τέθεικε EMV
4 κρείττοσ(ιν) P 5 δὲ δὴ [που] FM: δε P: δὴ Vs 8 περιττὸν οὐδὲ
σεμνὸν F 9 τοῦτο (-τω corr.) τ(ω) P 11 ἦν * * ἀλλ’ P 12 καὶ]
ἦν καὶ M: ἦ καὶ V 13 τις FM: om. PV 14 ποιήμασιν P 15 ἀλλοίας
P 17 μὲν om. PMV || ταυτί PMV: ταῦτα F 18 ἔχεν FM: ἔχον PV Hom.
19 εἰριον deleto accentu P 20 ἄρηται Hom. 21 ἡρωϊκόν PMV:
ἡρῷόν F
3. P gives ἀφηκέναι in 262 22, and
τέθηκεν may possibly be right here. The
-η- forms are found in some MSS. of
Eurip. Hel. 1059 and Demosth. Chers.
34. But cp. 108 13.
9. καὶ παρὰ τούτῳ: perhaps ‘in
Herodotus as well as in Homer.’ Reiske,
πολλὰ δὲ καὶ ‹ἄλλα› παρὰ τούτῳ τῷ
ἀνδρὶ τοιαῦτά ἐστιν.
10. Dionysius seems to allow too little
for the charming naïveté of Herodotus’
mental attitude, which is surely characteristic,
whether or no Herodotus was
the first to tell the story. Cp. D.H.
p. 11 n. 1. The narrative which opens
in Livy xxxix. c. 9 may be compared
and contrasted.
18. The verse illustrations used on pp.
84, 86 are similarly treated by Hermogenes
(Walz Rhett. Gr. iii. 230, 231; cp. p.
715 ibid.).
21. It seems better to read ἡρωϊκόν
here (with PMV) rather than ἡρῷον
(with F), as the form ἡρωϊκός is found
consistently elsewhere (86 3, 88 7, 172
17, 206 10).
Dionysius tends to regard the
Homeric hexameter as the original and
perfect metre, from which all others
are inferior deflexions. Metres, after
all, have their associations; the associations
of the Homeric hexameter were
eminently noble; and so even the choral
odes of Aeschylus gain where the heroic
line is most employed. So much, at
any rate, may be conceded to Dionysius’
point of view, prone though he is to the
kind of exaggeration which Tennyson
(Life i. 469, 470) so effectively parodies.
[86-7]
πόδα βαινόμενον. ἐγὼ δὴ τῶν ὀνομάτων τούτων μετακινήσας
τὴν σύνθεσιν τοὺς αὐτοὺς στίχους ἀντὶ μὲν ἑξαμέτρων ποιήσω
τετραμέτρους, ἀντὶ δὲ ἡρωϊκῶν προσοδιακοὺς τὸν τρόπον
τοῦτον·
ἀλλ’ ἔχεν ὥστε γυνὴ χερνῆτις τάλαντ’ ἀληθής, 5
ἥ τ’ εἴριον ἀμφὶς καὶ σταθμὸν ἔχουσ’ ἀνέλκει
ἰσάζουσ’, ἵν’ ἀεικέα παισὶν ἄροιτο μισθόν.
τοιαῦτά ἐστι τὰ πριάπεια, ὑπό τινων δ’ ἰθυφάλλια λεγόμενα,
ταυτί·
οὐ βέβηλος, ὦ τελέται τοῦ νέου Διονύσου, 10
κἀγὼ δ’ ἐξ εὐεργεσίης ὠργιασμένος ἥκω.
ἄλλους πάλιν λαβὼν στίχους Ὁμηρικούς, οὔτε προσθεὶς
αὐτοῖς οὐδὲν οὔτε ἀφελών, τὴν δὲ σύνθεσιν ἀλλάξας μόνον
ἕτερον ἀποδώσω γένος τὸ τετράμετρον καλούμενον Ἰωνικόν·
ὣς ὁ πρόσθ’ ἵππων καὶ δίφρου κεῖτο τανυσθείς, 15
βεβρυχώς, κόνιος δεδραγμένος αἱματοέσσης.
ὣς ὁ πρόσθ’ ἵππων καὶ δίφρου κεῖτο τανυσθείς,
αἱματοέσσης κόνιος δεδραγμένος, βεβρυχώς.
[87]
of which is the dactyl. I will change the order of the words,
and will turn the same lines into tetrameters instead of hexameters,
into prosodiacs instead of heroics. Thus:—
But it was with them as with a righteous-souled woman toil-bowed,
In her scales weights and wool lie, on high doth she hold the balance
Level-poised, so that bread hardly-earned may be doled to her babes.
Such are the following Priapean, or (as some call them)
ithyphallic, lines:—
I am no profane one, O young Dionysus’ votaries;
By his favour come I too initiate as one of his.[92]
Taking again other lines of Homer, and neither adding nor
withdrawing anything, but simply varying the order, I will
produce another kind of verse, the so-called Ionic tetrameter:—
So there outstretched was he lying, his steeds and his chariot before,
Groaning, convulsively clutching the dust that was red with his gore.[93]
So there outstretched was he lying, his steeds and his chariot before,
At the dust that was red with his gore clutching convulsively, groaning.
1 πόδα δάκτυλον PMV || τῶν] τῶν αὐτῶν PV 3 προσωιδιακοὺς FP:
προσῳδικοὺς MV 5 ἔχεν FMV: ἔχον P scholl. Hermogenis || τάλαντ’ F:
τάλαντα PMV 6 ἥ τ’ FM: ἣ PV || ἐχ(ων)ουσ’ P: ἔχουσα F || ἄνελκει P:
ἕλκει F 8 [ὑ]πό τινων δὲ ἰθυφάλλια cum litura F, MV: διφίλια P
10 συμβέβηλος F || τελεταί (sic) P: λέγεται FMV || δρονύσου P 11
εὐεργεσίης P: ἐργασίης MV: ἐργασίας F || ὀργιασμένος F: ὡργια*σμένος P
13 οὐδὲν αὐτοῖς PV 14 γένος τὸ F: μέλος PMV || τὸ ante καλούμενον
dant PMV 16, 17 om. F 16 αἱματοσέσ(η)ς P: αἱματοέσης V
3. Maximus Planudes (Walz Rhett.
Gr. v. 491), referring to this passage,
says: ἃ πῶς ἂν εἶεν προσῳδικὰ (v. προσῳδιακὰ)
καὶ προσόμοια τοῖς πριαπείοις, ἢ
πάλιν πῶς ταῦτα πριάπεια, οὐδαμῶς ἔχω
συνορᾶν. For the prosodia (προσόδια, sc.
ᾄσματα: also called προσοδιακοί), or processional
songs, see Weir Smyth’s Greek
Melic Poets p. xxxiii.; and for the various
metres employed see pp. xxxiv., xxxv.
ibid. It is clear that Dionysius is not
here thinking specially of the so-called
προσοδιακὸς πούς (– – ᴗ). Cp. Bacchyl.
Fragm. 19 (Bergk: 7, Jebb).—Reading
προσῳδικοὺς (with the inferior MSS.), and
translating by ‘accentual,’ A. J. Ellis
(English, Dionysian, and Hellenic Pronunciation
of Greek p. 37) thinks that
Dionysius means “verses in which the
effect of high pitch was increased by
superadding stress, so as to give it preponderance
over mere quantity”; and
he points out that E. M. Geldart shows
(Journal of Philology 1869, vol. ii. p.
160) that these transformed lines of
Homer, if read as modern Greek, would
give rather rough στίχοι πολιτικοί, or the
usual modern accentual verse [the ‘city
verses’ referred to by Gibbon, c. 53].
Though it is perhaps unlikely that Dionysius
makes any direct reference to such a
change, a stress-accent may, even in his
day, have gradually been triumphing
over that pitch-accent which was consistent
with the observance of metrical
quantity. Cp. F. Spencer French Verse
p. 70.
5. The metrical difficulties presented
by these sections of the C. V. are discussed
in Amsel’s de Vi atque Indole
Rhythmorum quid Veteres Iudicaverint
pp. 32 ff. The unprofitably ingenious
efforts of some ancient writers to derive
every kind of metre from the heroic
hexameter and the iambic trimeter
might be capped, and parodied, by an
attempt to turn such a line as Il. xxiii.
644 (ἔργων τοιούτων. ἐμὲ δὲ χρὴ γήραϊ
λυγρῷ) into an iambic trimeter: the only
thing needed being that the ι of γήραϊ
should be not adscript but subscript.
So Schol. Ven. A (ad loc.) ὅτι ὁ στίχος
οὗτος καὶ ἑξάμετρος γίνεται καὶ τρίμετρος
παρὰ τὴν ἀγωγὴν τῆς προφορᾶς, and Schol.
Townl. ἐπιτέτευκται ὁ στίχος ταῖς κοιναῖς,
ὥστ’ ἢν θέλωμεν καὶ ἴαμβος ἔσται, ὡς τὸ
“σμύρνης ἀκράτου καὶ κέδρου νηλεῖ καπνῷ”
(for the doubtful ascription of this last
line to Callimachus see Schneider’s
Callimachea ii. 777).
10. For the author of these Priapean
verses—Euphorion (or Euphronius) ‘of
the Chersonese’—see the long discussion
in Susemihl’s Gesch. d. griech. Litt. in
der Alexandrinerzeit i. 281, 283. It
is Hephaestion (de Metris Enchiridion
c. 16, ed. Westphal) who attributes the
lines Εὐφορίωνι τῷ Χερρονησιώτῃ.
15. The commentators on Hermogenes
secure trochees by changing the order of
the words in this line—ἔκειτο καὶ δίφρου
τανυσθείς, or τανυσθεὶς κεῖτο καὶ δίφρου.
[88-9]
τοιαῦτ’ ἐστὶ τὰ Σωτάδεια ταυτί·
ἔνθ’ οἱ μὲν ἐπ’ ἄκραισι πυραῖς νέκυες ἔκειντο
γῆς ἐπὶ ξένης, ὀρφανὰ τείχεα προλιπόντες
Ἑλλάδος ἱερῆς καὶ μυχὸν ἑστίης πατρῴης,
ἥβην τ’ ἐρατὴν καὶ καλὸν ἡλίου πρόσωπον. 5
δυναίμην δ’ ἂν ἔτι πολλὰς ἰδέας μέτρων καὶ διαφόρους εἰς τὸν
ἡρωϊκὸν ἐμπιπτούσας στίχον ἐπιδεικνύναι, τὸ δ’ αὐτὸ καὶ τοῖς
ἄλλοις ὀλίγου δεῖν πᾶσι συμβεβηκὸς μέτροις τε καὶ ῥυθμοῖς
ἀποφαίνειν, ὥστε τῆς μὲν ἐκλογῆς τῶν ὀνομάτων τῆς αὐτῆς
μενούσης, τῆς δὲ συνθέσεως μόνης μεταπεσούσης τά τε 10
μέτρα μεταρρυθμίζεσθαι καὶ συμμεταπίπτειν αὐτοῖς τὰ
σχήματα, τὰ χρώματα, τὰ ἤθη, τὰ πάθη, τὴν ὅλην τῶν
ποιημάτων ἀξίωσιν· ἀλλ’ ἀναγκασθήσομαι πλειόνων ἅψασθαι
θεωρημάτων, ὧν ἔνια ὀλίγοις πάνυ ἐστὶ γνώριμα. ἐπὶ πολλῶν
δ’ ἴσως καὶ οὐχ ἥκιστα ἐπὶ τῶν τοιούτων καλῶς ἂν ἔχοι 15
τὰ Εὐριπίδεια ταῦτα ἐπενεγκεῖν·
μή μοι
λεπτῶν θίγγανε μύθων, ψυχή·
τί περισσὰ φρονεῖς; εἰ μὴ μέλλεις
σεμνύνεσθαι παρ’ ὁμοίοις. 20
ταῦτα μὲν οὖν ἐάσειν μοι δοκῶ κατὰ τὸ παρόν. ὅτι δὲ
καὶ ἡ πεζὴ λέξις τὸ αὐτὸ δύναται παθεῖν τῇ ἐμμέτρῳ μενόντων
μὲν τῶν ὀνομάτων, ἀλλαττομένης δὲ τῆς συνθέσεως,
πάρεστι τῷ βουλομένῳ σκοπεῖν. λήψομαι δ’ ἐκ τῆς Ἡροδότου
λέξεως τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς ἱστορίας, ἐπειδὴ καὶ γνώριμός ἐστι 25
τοῖς πολλοῖς, μεταθεὶς τὸν χαρακτῆρα τῆς διαλέκτου μόνον.
[89]
Such are the following Sotadean lines:—
There upon the summit of the burning pyres their corpses lay
In an alien land, the widowed walls forsaken far away,
Walls of sacred Hellas; and the hearths upon the homeland shore,
Winsome youth, the sun’s fair face—forsaken all for evermore![94]
I could, if I wished, adduce many more different types of
measures all belonging to the class of the heroic line, and show
that the same thing is true of almost all the other metres and
rhythms, namely that, when the choice of words remains unaltered
and only the arrangement is changed, the verses invariably
lose their rhythm, while their formation is ruined, together with
the complexion, the character, the feeling, and the whole
effectiveness of the lines. But in so doing I should be obliged
to touch on a number of speculations, with some of which very
few are familiar. To many speculations, perhaps, and particularly
to those bearing on the matter in hand, the lines of Euripides
may fitly be applied:—
With subtleties meddle not thou, O soul of mine:
Wherefore be overwise, except in thy fellows’ eyes
Thou lookest to be revered as for wisdom divine?[95]
So I think it wise to leave this ground unworked for the
present. But anyone who cares may satisfy himself that the
diction of prose can be affected in the same way as that of verse
when the words are retained but the order is changed. I will
take from the writings of Herodotus the opening of his History,
since it is familiar to most people, simply changing the
1 τοιαῦτα PMV || Σωτάδεια Planudes: σωτάδια libri 2 ἄκραισι FM:
ἄκραις PV || ἔγκειντο F 5 ἥβη, suprascr. ν P1 || ἐρατὴν Hermannus:
ἐραστὴν F: ἐρατεινὴν PMV 6 δυναίμην PV: ἐδυνάμην FM 7 δὲ PMV ||
καὶ P: κἂν F: κἀν MV 8 τε om. F 9 ὀμάτων, suprascr. νο P1 10
μεταπιπτούσης (πεσούσης in marg.) F: μεταπεσούσης M: μάλιστα πεσούσης
PV 12 τὰ πάθη om. P 13 ἀλλ’ ἀναγκασθήσομαι] ἀναγκασθήσομαι δὲ F:
ἀλλ’ ἀν(αν)κασθήσομαι P || ἅπτεσθαι P 14 γνώρισμα F1 15 δὲ PMV
|| καὶ om. P 19 μέλλοις F 21 οὗν F 22 ἐμμέτρω ὄντων PMV 23
τῶν F: τῶν αὐτῶν E: om. PMV || ἀλλασομένης P: ἀλλασσομένης MV 24 τῶ
βουλομέν(ω) P || δὲ PMV et 90 1 25 ἐπειδὴ F: ἐπεὶ PMV
1. These lines of Sotades are quoted by
two of the commentators on Hermogenes—by
John of Sicily (Walz vi. 243) and by
an anonymous scholiast (Walz vii. 985).
See further in Glossary, s.v. Σωτάδειος.
7. Palaeographically κἀν (MV) is
tempting, since the other readings (κἂν
and καὶ) could easily be derived from it.
But the difficulty is that Dionysius seems
elsewhere to use the simple dative with
συμβαίνω, and would probably have expressed
the meaning ‘in the case of’ by
ἐπί with the genitive. καὶ ἔν γε τῇ ἀρχαίᾳ
τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ φωνῇ αὐτὸ συμβαίνει τὸ ὄνομα
(Plato Crat. 398 B) is not parallel.
12. Quintil. Inst. Or. ix. 4. 14, 15
“nam quaedam et sententiis parva et
elocutione modica virtus haec sola commendat.
denique quod cuique visum
erit vehementer, dulciter, speciose dictum,
solvat et turbet: aberit omnis vis, iucunditas,
decor ... illud notasse satis
habeo, quo pulchriora et sensu et elocutione
dissolveris, hoc orationem magis
deformem fore, quia neglegentia collocationis
ipsa verborum luce deprehenditur.”
21. ἐάσειν μοι δοκῶ = omittere mihi
placet; cp. Aristoph. Plut. 1186, Aves
671, Vespae 177.
22. Compare the interesting passage in
Cic. Orat. 70. 232 “Quantum autem
sit apte dicere, experire licet, si aut compositi
oratoris bene structam collocationem
dissolvas permutatione verborum;
corrumpatur enim tota res ... perierit
tota res ... videsne, ut ordine verborum
paululum commutato, eisdem tamen
verbis stante sententia, ad nihilum omnia
recidant, cum sint ex aptis dissoluta?”
[Various examples are given in the
course of the section.]
23. The Epitome here has μενόντων
γὰρ τῶν αὐτῶν ὀνομάτων, ἀλλαττομένης δὲ
τῆς συνθέσεως, καταφανὲς τὸ ἐν αὐτῇ
ἄμουσόν τε καὶ ἀκαλλώπιστον.
[90-1]
“Κροῖσος ἦν Λυδὸς μὲν γένος, παῖς δ’ Ἀλυάττου, τύραννος δ’
ἐθνῶν τῶν ἐντὸς Ἅλυος ποταμοῦ· ὃς ῥέων ἀπὸ μεσημβρίας
μεταξὺ Σύρων τε καὶ Παφλαγόνων ἐξίησι πρὸς βορέαν ἄνεμον
εἰς τὸν Εὔξεινον καλούμενον πόντον.” μετατίθημι τῆς λέξεως
ταύτης τὴν ἁρμονίαν, καὶ γενήσεταί μοι οὐκέτι ὑπαγωγικὸν 5
τὸ πλάσμα οὐδ’ ἱστορικόν, ἀλλ’ ὀρθὸν μᾶλλον καὶ ἐναγώνιον·
“Κροῖσος ἦν υἱὸς μὲν Ἀλυάττου, γένος δὲ Λυδός, τύραννος δὲ
τῶν ἐντὸς Ἅλυος ποταμοῦ ἐθνῶν· ὃς ἀπὸ μεσημβρίας ῥέων
μεταξὺ Σύρων καὶ Παφλαγόνων εἰς τὸν Εὔξεινον καλούμενον
πόντον ἐκδίδωσι πρὸς βορέαν ἄνεμον.” οὗτος ὁ χαρακτὴρ οὐ 10
πολὺ ἀπέχειν ἂν δόξειεν τῶν Θουκυδίδου τούτων· “Ἐπίδαμνός
ἐστι πόλις ἐν δεξιᾷ εἰσπλέοντι τὸν Ἰόνιον κόλπον· προσοικοῦσι
δ’ αὐτὴν Ταυλάντιοι βάρβαροι, Ἰλλυρικὸν ἔθνος.”
πάλιν δὲ ἀλλάξας τὴν αὐτὴν λέξιν ἑτέραν αὐτῇ μορφὴν ἀποδώσω
τὸν τρόπον τοῦτον· “Ἀλυάττου μὲν υἱὸς ἦν Κροῖσος, 15
γένος δὲ Λυδός, τῶν δ’ ἐντὸς Ἅλυος ποταμοῦ τύραννος ἐθνῶν·
ὃς ἀπὸ μεσημβρίας ῥέων Σύρων τε καὶ Παφλαγόνων μεταξὺ
πρὸς βορέαν ἐξίησιν ἄνεμον ἐς τὸν καλούμενον πόντον
Εὔξεινον.” Ἡγησιακὸν τὸ σχῆμα τοῦτο τῆς συνθέσεως,
μικρόκομψον, ἀγεννές, μαλθακόν· τούτων γὰρ τῶν λήρων 20
[91]
nature of the dialect: “Croesus was a Lydian by birth and
the son of Alyattes. He was lord over all the nations on this
side of the river Halys, which flows from the south between
Syria and Paphlagonia, and falls, towards the north, into the sea
which is called the Euxine.”[96] I change the order here, and the cast
of the passage will become no longer that of a spacious narrative,
but tense rather and forensic: “Croesus was the son of Alyattes,
and by birth a Lydian. He was lord, on this side of the river
Halys, over all nations; which river from the south flowing
between Syria and Paphlagonia runs into the sea which is called
the Euxine and debouches towards the north.” This style would
seem not to differ widely from that of Thucydides in the words:
“Epidamnus is a city on the right as you enter the Ionian Gulf:
its next neighbours are barbarians, the Taulantii, an Illyrian race.”[97]
Once more I will recast the same passage and give a new form
to it as follows: “Alyattes’ son was Croesus, by birth a Lydian.
Lord over all nations he was, on this side of the river Halys; which
river, from the south flowing between Syria and Paphlagonia,
falls, with northward run, into the Euxine-called sea.” This
affected, degenerate, emasculate way of arranging words resembles
that of Hegesias, the high-priest of this kind of nonsense. He
1 κροῖσσος P || ἀλυάττεω E 2 ἄλυος FMV ut 8, 16 infra FPMV
3 ἐξίησιν P 4 μαιτατίθημι P: μάρτυρα τίθημι M 5 γενησετέμοι
suprascr. αί P1 || ὑπαγωγικὸν F: ἐπαγ(ω)γικον suprascr. ϋ P:
ἐπαγωγικὸν MV 6 οὐδε P,MV 7 ἦν Ἀλυάττου μὲν παῖς E || ἀλυ*άττου
P 9 παφλαγόνων καὶ σύρων F 10 ὁ suprascr. P1 11 δόξειε F
12 (εστι) * * P || πρ(οσ)οικοῦσιν P 13 δὲ PV 14 δὲ ἀλλάξας F:
διαλλάξας PMV || αὐτῆι add. in margine F1: αὐτὴν PM 16 δ’ om. PV
18 ἐξίησιν FM: ἔξεισιν PV || ἐς F: εἰς PMV ut supra 20 ἀγεννες
P,V: ἀγενὲς FMa
3. Hude (following Dionysius) conjecturally
restores τε in the text of
Herodotus. Usener, on the other hand,
thinks that Dionysius has deliberately
inserted τε here and in l. 17 while
omitting it in l. 9.
10. This rugged re-writing of Herodotus
shows a real appreciation of style
and should be compared with the remarks
which Demetrius (de Eloc. § 48)
makes on Thucydides’ avoidance of
smoothness and evenness of composition,
and on his liking for jolting rhythms
(e.g. “from other maladies this year, by
common consent, was free,” rather than
“by common consent, this year was free
from other maladies”): καὶ ὁ Θουκυδίδης
δὲ πανταχοῦ σχεδὸν φεύγει τὸ λεῖον καὶ
ὁμαλὲς τῆς συνθέσεως, καὶ ἀεὶ μᾶλλόν τι
προσκρούοντι ἔοικεν, ὥσπερ οἱ τὰς τραχείας
ὁδοὺς πορευόμενοι, ἐπὰν λέγῃ ὅτι “τὸ μὲν
δὴ ἔτος, ὡς ὡμολόγητο, ἄνοσον ἐς τὰς
ἄλλας ἀσθενείας ἐτύγχανεν ὄν.” ῥᾷον μὲν
γὰρ καὶ ἥδιον ὧδ’ ἄν τις εἶπεν, ὅτι “ἄνοσον
ἐς τὰς ἄλλας ἀσθενείας ὂν ἐτύγχανεν,”
ἀφῄρητο δ’ αὐτοῦ τὴν μεγαλοπρέπειαν.—Hermogenes
(Walz Rhett. Gr. iii. 206)
shows how the passage would be changed
for the worse by such a πλαγιασμός as
the use of a genitive absolute at the
start: e.g. Κροίσου ὄντος κτλ.
11. From this point onwards, the less
important of the manuscript variants are
not recorded in the critical apparatus,
except in the case of P which the editor
has examined personally.
12. Demetrius (de Eloc. § 199), in
quoting this passage, reads ἐσπλέοντι
εἰς: and this may be correct reading
in Thucyd. i. 24.
19. Hegesias, in the eyes of Dionysius,
was a writer whose originality displayed
itself in unnatural contortions of language;
cp. Introduction, pp. 52-55
supra. The merits of a natural, untutored
prose-order have been indicated
once for all by Molière (Le Bourgeois
Gentilhomme ii. 4): “Monsieur Jourdan.
Je voudrais donc lui mettre
dans un billet: Belle Marquise, vos
beaux yeux me font mourir d’amour;
mais je voudrais que cela fût mis d’une
manière galante, que cela fût tourné
gentiment ... Non, vous dis-je, je ne
veux que ces seules paroles-là dans le
billet; mais tournées à la mode, bien
arrangées comme il faut. Je vous prie
de me dire un peu, pour voir, les diverses
manières dont on les peut mettre.—Maître
de Philosophie. On les peut
mettre premièrement comme vous avez
dit: Belle Marquise, vos beaux yeux me
font mourir d’amour. Ou bien: D’amour
mourir me font, belle Marquise, vos beaux
yeux. Ou bien: Vos yeux beaux d’amour
me font, belle Marquise, mourir. Ou
bien: Mourir vos beaux yeux, belle Marquise, d'amour me font. Ou bien: Me font vos yeux beaux mourir, belle
Marquise, d’amour. [This is, apparently
the crowning absurdity.]—M. Jourdain.
Mais de toutes ces façons-là, laquelle est
la meilleure?—Maître de Philosophie.
Celle que vous avez dite: Belle Marquise,
vos beaux yeux me font mourir d’amour.—M.
Jourdain. Cependant je n’ai point
étudié, et j’ai fait cela tout du premier
coup.”
20. The phrase is perhaps suggested
by Aristoph. Nub. 359 σύ τε, λεπτοτάτων
λήρων ἱερεῦ, φράζε πρὸς ἡμᾶς ὅ τι χρῄζεις.
Cp. Cic. pro Sestio 17. 39 “stuprorum
sacerdos,” and also D.H. p. 169 (note
on καὶ πολὺς ὁ τελέτης ἐστὶν ἐν τοῖς
τοιούτοις παρ’ αὐτῷ). ‘Hierophant,’
‘adept,’ ‘past master,’ will give something
of the idea.
[92-3]
ἱερεὺς ἐκεῖνος ἀνὴρ τοιαῦτα γράφων· “Ἐξ ἀγαθῆς ἑορτῆς
ἀγαθὴν ἄγομεν ἄλλην.” “Ἀπὸ Μαγνησίας εἰμὶ τῆς μεγάλης
Σιπυλεύς.” “Οὐ γὰρ μικρὰν εἰς Θηβαίων ὕδωρ ἔπτυσεν ὁ
Διόνυσος· ἡδὺς μὲν γάρ ἐστι, ποιεῖ δὲ μαίνεσθαι.”
ἅλις ἔστω παραδειγμάτων. ἱκανῶς γὰρ οἴομαι πεποιηκέναι 5
φανερὸν ὃ προὔκειτό μοι, ὅτι μείζονα ἰσχὺν ἔχει τῆς
ἐκλογῆς ἡ σύνθεσις. καί μοι δοκεῖ τις οὐκ ἂν ἁμαρτεῖν
εἰκάσας αὐτὴν τῇ Ὁμηρικῇ Ἀθηνᾷ· ἐκείνη τε γὰρ τὸν
Ὀδυσσέα τὸν αὐτὸν ὄντα ἄλλοτε ἀλλοῖον ἐποίει φαίνεσθαι,
τοτὲ μὲν μικρὸν καὶ ῥυσὸν καὶ αἰσχρὸν 10
πτωχῷ λευγαλέῳ ἐναλίγκιον ἠδὲ γέροντι,
τοτὲ δὲ τῇ αὐτῇ ῥάβδῳ πάλιν ἐφαψαμένη
μείζονά τ’ εἰσιδέειν καὶ πάσσονα θῆκεν ἰδέσθαι, κὰδ δὲ κάρητος
οὔλας ἧκε κόμας ὑακινθίνῳ ἄνθει ὁμοίας, 15
αὕτη τε τὰ αὐτὰ λαμβάνουσα ὀνόματα τοτὲ μὲν ἄμορφα καὶ
πτωχὰ καὶ ταπεινὰ ποιεῖ φαίνεσθαι τὰ νοήματα, τοτὲ δ’
ὑψηλὰ καὶ πλούσια [καὶ ἁδρὰ] καὶ καλά. καὶ τοῦτ’ ἦν
σχεδὸν ᾧ μάλιστα διαλλάττει ποιητής τε ποιητοῦ καὶ ῥήτωρ
ῥήτορος, τὸ συντιθέναι δεξιῶς τὰ ὀνόματα. τοῖς μὲν οὖν 20
ἀρχαίοις ὀλίγου δεῖν πᾶσι πολλὴ ἐπιτήδευσις ἦν αὐτοῦ, παρ’
ὃ καὶ καλά ἐστιν αὐτῶν τά τε μέτρα καὶ τὰ μέλη καὶ οἱ
λόγοι· τοῖς δὲ μεταγενεστέροις οὐκέτι πλὴν ὀλίγων· χρόνῳ δ’
[93]
writes, for instance, “After a goodly festival another goodly one
keep we.” “Of Magnesia am I, the mighty land, a man of
Sipylus I.” “No little drop into the Theban waters spewed
Dionysus: Oh yea, sweet it is, but madness it engendereth.”[98]
Enough of examples. I think I have I sufficiently proved my
point that composition is more effective than selection. In fact, it
seems to me that one might fairly compare the former to Athena
in Homer. For she used to make the same Odysseus appear
now in one form, now in another,—at one time puny and
wrinkled and ugly,
In semblance like to a beggar wretched and eld-forlorn,[99]
at another time, by a fresh touch of the selfsame wand,
She moulded him taller to see, and broader: his wavy hair
She caused o’er his shoulders to fall as the hyacinth’s purple rare.[100]
So, too, composition takes the same words, and makes the
ideas they convey appear at one time unlovely, beggarly and
mean; at another, exalted, rich and beautiful. A main difference
between poet and poet, orator and orator, really does lie
in the aptness with which they arrange their words. Almost all
the ancients made a special study of this; and consequently their
poems, their lyrics, and their prose are things of beauty. But
among their successors, with few exceptions, this was no longer so.
1 ἀνὴρ libri: cf. D.H. p. 169 5 ἅλις F: ἂν P || ἔστω F: ἔστω τῶν
PMV || ἱκαν(ῶς) P1 7 δοκεῖ τις οὐκ ἂν PV: οὐ δοκεῖ τις EFM ||
ἁμαρτάνειν PMV 10 μὲν μικρὸν καὶ ῥυσὸν EF: μὲν ῥυσὸν καὶ μικρὸν PMV
11 ἠδὲ] ἠδὲ καὶ F || γέροντα P 12 ῥάβδω P 15 ὑακινθίν(ω) P
16 αὕτη Sylburgius: αὐτή libri 17 πτωχὰ καὶ ταπεινὰ PMV: ταπεινὰ καὶ
πτωχὰ EF || δὲ PMV 18 καὶ ἁδρὰ delevit Sadaeus || τοῦτ’ ἦν σχεδὸν ὧι
PE: τοῦτ’ ἦν ὃ (ᾧ M) FM: τούτῳ V 19 διαλάττει P 20 τὸ EFP: τῷ MV
21 πᾶσιν P || ἐπιτήδευσις Sylburgius: ἐπίδοσις libri 22 τε om. PV
23 οὐκ ἔστι P || χρον(ω) P
2. Possibly Hegesias began one of
his books in this grandiloquent fashion,
referring to his birth in Magnesia at the
foot of Mount Sipylus.
3. μικράν: understand ψακάδα or
λιβάδα. Casaubon conjectured μιαρὰν:
Reiske, μικρὰν ‹χολὴν›.
4. ἡδύς: sc. ὁ ποταμός. An easy
course would be to change ἡδύς to ἡδύ
with Reiske; but there is no manuscript
variant, and the ambiguity and awkward
ellipse may be part of Hegesias’ offence.
13. Vettori suggested the omission
here of θῆκεν ἰδέσθαι.
16. Cp. Isocr. Paneg. § 8 ἐπειδὴ δ’ οἱ
λόγοι τοιαύτην ἔχουσι τὴν φύσιν, ὥσθ’
οἷον τ’ εἶναι περὶ τῶν αὐτῶν πολλαχῶς
ἐξηγήσασθαι, καὶ τά τε μεγάλα ταπεινὰ
ποιῆσαι καὶ τοῖς μικροῖς περιθεῖναι, κτλ.
17. The antitheses are ὑψηλά)(ταπεινά,
πλούσια)(πτωχά, καλά)(ἄμορφα. The
order πτωχὰ καὶ ταπεινά in PMV gives
a chiasmus. ἁδρά is the gloss of some
rhetorician on ὑψηλά (cp. de Demosth.
c. 34, where this gloss actually occurs
in one of the manuscripts). The word
ἁδρός does not belong to Dionysius’
rhetorical terminology; cp. Long. p.
194.
18. ἦν, ‘was all the time,’ ‘is after
all’ (cp. 192 8, etc.).
20. Quintil. ix. 4. 16 “itaque ut
confiteor, paene ultimam oratoribus
artem compositionis, quae quidem perfecta
sit, contigisse: ita illis quoque
priscis habitam inter curas, in quantum
adhuc profecerant, puto. neque enim
mihi quamlibet magnus auctor Cicero
persuaserit, Lysian, Herodotum, Thucydiden
parum studiosos eius fuisse”;
Dionys. Hal. de Demosth. c. 36 πολλή
τις ἐγένετο ἐν τοῖς ἀρχαίοις ἐπιθυμία καὶ
πρόνοια τοῦ καλῶς ἁρμόττειν τὰ ὀνόματα
ἔν τε μέτροις καὶ δίχα μέτρων, καὶ πάντες,
ὅσοι σπουδαίας ἐβουλήθησαν ἐξενεγκεῖν
γραφάς, οὐ μόνον ἐζήτησαν ὀνομάσαι τὰ
νοήματα καλῶς, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτὰ ‹τὰ ὀνόματα›
εὐκόσμῳ συνθέσει περιλαβεῖν.
21. The conjecture ἐπιτήδευσις may
be illustrated by 70 6, 212 19, 256 18,
and also by de Demosth. c. 36 (the
sentence preceding that just quoted).—The
manuscript reading ἐπίδοσις might
possibly be retained and translated
“made numerous contributions to it.”
Disselbeck suggests δόσις, and compares
de Demosth. cc. 18, 48, 51.
[94-5]
ὕστερον παντάπασιν ἠμελήθη καὶ οὐδεὶς ᾤετο δεῖν ἀναγκαῖον
αὐτὸ εἶναι οὐδὲ συμβάλλεσθαί τι τῷ κάλλει τῶν λόγων·
τοιγάρτοι τοιαύτας συντάξεις κατέλιπον οἵας οὐδεὶς ὑπομένει
μέχρι κορωνίδος διελθεῖν, Φύλαρχον λέγω καὶ Δοῦριν καὶ
Πολύβιον καὶ Ψάωνα καὶ τὸν Καλλατιανὸν Δημήτριον 5
Ἱερώνυμόν τε καὶ Ἀντίγονον καὶ Ἡρακλείδην καὶ Ἡγησιάνακτα
καὶ ἄλλους μυρίους· ὧν ἁπάντων εἰ τὰ ὀνόματα
βουλοίμην λέγειν, ἐπιλείψει με ὁ τῆς ἡμέρας χρόνος. καὶ τί
δεῖ τούτους θαυμάζειν, ὅπου γε καὶ οἱ φιλοσοφίαν ἐπαγγελλόμενοι
καὶ τὰς διαλεκτικὰς ἐκφέροντες τέχνας οὕτως εἰσὶν 10
ἄθλιοι περὶ τὴν σύνθεσιν τῶν ὀνομάτων ὥστε αἰδεῖσθαι καὶ
λέγειν; ἀπόχρη δὲ τεκμηρίῳ χρήσασθαι τοῦ λόγου Χρυσίππῳ
τῷ Στωϊκῷ (περαιτέρω γὰρ οὐκ ἂν προβαίην)· τούτου γὰρ
οὔτ’ ἄμεινον οὐδεὶς τὰς διαλεκτικὰς τέχνας ἠκρίβωσεν οὔτε
ἁρμονίᾳ χείρονι συνταχθέντας ἐξήνεγκε λόγους τῶν γοῦν 15
ὀνόματος καὶ δόξης ἀξιωθέντων. καίτοι σπουδάζειν γέ τινες
[95]
At last, in later times, it was utterly neglected; no one thought
it absolutely indispensable, or that it contributed anything to the
beauty of discourse. Consequently they left behind them lucubrations
that no one has the patience to read from beginning
to end. I mean men like Phylarchus, Duris, Polybius, Psaon,
Demetrius of Callatis, Hieronymus, Antigonus, Heracleides,
Hegesianax, and countless others: a whole day would not be
enough if I tried to repeat the bare names of them all.[101] But
why wonder at these, when even those who call themselves
professors of philosophy and publish manuals of dialectic fail so
wretchedly in the arrangement of their words that I shrink from
even mentioning their names? It is quite enough to point, in
proof of my statement, to Chrysippus the Stoic: for farther I
will not go. Among writers who have achieved any name or
distinction, none have written their treatises on dialectic with
greater accuracy, and none have published discourses which are
worse specimens of composition. And yet some of them claimed
1 οὐδεῖσ P 2 τι om. P || τ(ω) P 3 κατέλειπον P 4 φύταρχον PM
5 σάωνα PMV:
σφτατωνα F ||
καλατιανὸν P: καλαντιανὸν MV: καλανδιανὸν F 6 ἀντίγονον F: ἀντίλογον
PMV || ἡγησι(α)νακτα P,F: ἡγησίννακτα M: ἡγησίαν μάγνητα V 7 εἰ
post ὀνόματα ponunt PMV 9 οἱ F2P: om. F1: οἱ τὴν MV 12 τῶι
λόγωι χρυσίππου τοῦ στωικοῦ PMV 13 τοῦτο F 14 οὔτε (ante ἄμεινον)
PMV 15 χείρονι ante ἁρμονίᾳ habent PMV || γ’ οὖν F,M: om. PV 16
σπουδάζειν PMV: σπουδάζεσθαι F
1. ᾤετο δεῖν ἀναγκαῖον αὐτὸ εἶναι:
pleonasm. Perhaps ᾤετ’ ἀσκεῖν ἀναγκαῖον
αὐτὸ εἶναι, or the like.
4. Phylarchus: a native of Athens,
or (acc. to some ancient authorities) of
Naucratis in Egypt. He flourished
under Ptolemy Euergetes (247-222 B.C.),
and continued (in 28 books) the historical
works of Hieronymus and Duris. The
period covered was that from Pyrrhus’
invasion of the Peloponnese to the death
of Cleomenes (272-220 B.C.). Remains in
C. Müller Fragm. Hist. Gr. i. 334-58.
Duris of Samos: a pupil of Theophrastus.
Flourished under Ptolemy
Philadelphus (285-247 B.C.); wrote a
history which extended from the battle
of Leuctra to the year 281 or later.
Among his other writings was a Life of
Agathocles. Fragments in C. Müller
ii. 466-88. He is mentioned in Cic.
ad Att. vi. 1. 18: “num idcirco Duris
Samius, homo in historia diligens, quod
cum multis erravit, irridetur?”
5. Polybius: see Introduction, pp. 51, 52 supra.
Psaon, of Plataea: a third-century
historian, who wrote in thirty books.
Cp. C. Müller iii. 198 (and ii. 360).
Demetrius (of Callatis, Calatis,
Callatia, or Callantia: the town appears
under all these names): wrote thirty
books of history in the third century.
Cp. C. Müller iv. 380, 381.
6. Hieronymus, of Cardia: wrote, in
the third century, a history of the
Diadochi and the Epigoni. Fragments
in C. Müller ii. 450-61.
Antigonus: of uncertain date (probably
second century) and country, but
apparently identical with the Antigonus
mentioned, among writers who had
touched on early Roman history, in
Antiqq. Rom. i. 6 πρῶτον μέν, ὅσα κἀμὲ
εἰδέναι, τὴν Ῥωμαϊκὴν ἀρχαιολογίαν
ἐπιδραμόντος Ἱερωνύμου τοῦ Καρδιανοῦ συγγραφέως,
ἐν τῇ περὶ τῶν Ἐπιγόνων πραγματείᾳ·
ἔπειτα Τιμαίου τοῦ Σικελιώτου,
τὰ μὲν ἀρχαῖα τῶν ἱστοριῶν ἐν ταῖς κοιναῖς
ἱστορίαις ἀφηγησαμένου, τοὺς δὲ πρὸς
Πύρρον τὸν Ἠπειρώτην πολέμους εἰς ἰδίαν
καταχωρίσαντος πραγματείαν· ἅμα δὲ
τούτοις Ἀντιγόνου τε καὶ Πολυβίου, καὶ
Σιληνοῦ, καὶ μυρίων ἄλλων τοῖς αὐτοῖς
πράγμασιν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἐπιβαλόντων· ὧν
ἕκαστος ὀλίγα, καὶ οὐδὲ αὐτὰ διεσπουδασμένως
οὐδὲ ἀκριβῶς, ἀλλ’ ἐκ τῶν ἐπιτυχόντων
ἀκουσμάτων συνθείς, ἀνέγραψεν.—In
the present passage Ἀντίλογον,
Ἀντίλοχον, Ἀντίοχον, and Ἀμφίλοχον
are also read or conjectured.
Heracleides: a historian who probably
flourished during the reign of
Ptolemy Philometor (181-146 B.C.).
Hegesianax: a second-century
historian, who seems to have written
on the history and legends of Troy
(Τρωϊκά). Cp. C. Müller iii. 68-70.
8. Cp. Demosth. de Cor. § 296
ἐπιλείψει με λέγοντα ἡ ἡμέρα τὰ τῶν
προδοτῶν ὀνόματα, and Epist. ad. Hebr.
xi. 32 καὶ τί ἔτι λέγω; ἐπιλείψει με γὰρ
διηγούμενον ὁ χρόνος περὶ Γεδεών, κτλ.
So Cic. Rosc. Am. 32. 89 “tempus,
hercule, te citius quam oratio deficeret,”
and Verr. ii. 2, 21, 52 “nam me dies,
vox, latera deficiant, si hoc nunc
vociferari velim, quam miserum indignumque
sit,” etc.
9. ὅπου γε: cp. Long. de Subl. iv. 4
τί δεῖ περὶ Τιμαίου λέγειν, ὅπου γε καὶ
οἱ ἥρωες ἐκεῖνοι, Ξενοφῶντα λέγω καὶ
Πλάτωνα, καίτοιγε ἐκ τῆς Σωκράτους
ὄντες παλαίστρας, ὅμως διὰ τὰ οὕτως
μικροχαρῆ ποτε ἑαυτῶν ἐπιλανθάνονται;
12. The reading τῷ λόγῳ Χρυσίππου
τοῦ Στωικοῦ (PMV) would mean “to
point, in proof, to the style (τῷ λόγῳ =
‘discourse,’ ‘writing,’ ‘style’; cp. 96 2)
of Chrysippus.” With the general
estimate compare Cic. de Fin. iv. 3. 7
“quamquam scripsit artem rhetoricam
Cleanthes, Chrysippus etiam, sed sic, ut,
si quis obmutescere concupierit, nihil
aliud legere debeat.”
13. The manuscript reading προβαίην
should be retained, as against Usener’s
conjecture προβαῖεν, which perhaps could
hardly mean ‘none could sink to greater
depths than he,’—if that is the sense
intended by Usener. Cp. Aesch. Prom.
V. 247 μή πού τι προὔβης τῶνδε καὶ περαιτέρω—words
which Dionysius may have
had in mind; and Plato Phaedr. 239 D ἃ
δῆλα καὶ οὐκ ἄξιον περαιτέρω προβαίνειν.
16. σπουδάζειν: Usener adopts F’s
reading σπουδάζεσθαι, with the remark
“medii rari vestigium servandum erat.”
But he quotes no examples; and Dionysius
elsewhere uses the active (e.g. σπουδαζόντων,
66 8 supra). The verb is so
frequently found in a passive form and
signification, that it seems unlikely that
forms common to passive and middle
would be used in the middle when the
active was available. A middle future,
σπουδάσομαι, occurs in Plato Euthyphro
3 B and in Demosth. Mid. 213; but the
future middle in many verbs stands
quite by itself, and in the passage of
Demosthenes we have σπουδάσεται ...
σπουδάσατε, while in the passage of Plato
there is an important variation in the
reading.
[96-7]
προσεποιήθησαν αὐτῶν καὶ περὶ τοῦτο τὸ μέρος ὡς ἀναγκαῖον
ὂν τῷ λόγῳ καὶ τέχνας γέ τινας ἔγραψαν ὑπὲρ τῆς συντάξεως
τῶν τοῦ λόγου μορίων· ἀλλὰ πολύ τι πάντες ἀπὸ τῆς
ἀληθείας ἀπεπλάγχθησαν καὶ οὐδ’ ὄναρ εἶδον, τί ποτ’ ἐστὶ
τὸ ποιοῦν ἡδεῖαν καὶ καλὴν τὴν σύνθεσιν. ἐγὼ γοῦν ὅτε 5
διέγνων συντάττεσθαι ταύτην τὴν ὑπόθεσιν, ἐζήτουν εἴ τι
τοῖς πρότερον εἴρηται περὶ αὐτῆς καὶ μάλιστα τοῖς ἀπὸ τῆς
Στοᾶς φιλοσόφοις, εἰδὼς τοὺς ἄνδρας οὐ μικρὰν φροντίδα τοῦ
λεκτικοῦ τόπου ποιουμένους· δεῖ γὰρ αὐτοῖς τἀληθῆ μαρτυρεῖν.
οὐδαμῇ δ’ οὐδὲν εἰρημένον ὑπ’ οὐδενὸς ὁρῶν τῶν γοῦν 10
ὀνόματος ἠξιωμένων οὔτε μεῖζον οὔτ’ ἔλαττον εἰς ἣν ἐγὼ
προῄρημαι πραγματείαν, ἃς δὲ Χρύσιππος καταλέλοιπε
συντάξεις διττὰς ἐπιγραφὴν ἐχούσας “περὶ τῆς συντάξεως
τῶν τοῦ λόγου μερῶν” οὐ ῥητορικὴν θεωρίαν ἐχούσας ἀλλὰ
διαλεκτικήν, ὡς ἴσασιν οἱ τὰς βίβλους ἀνεγνωκότες, ὑπὲρ 15
ἀξιωμάτων συντάξεως ἀληθῶν τε καὶ ψευδῶν καὶ δυνατῶν
καὶ ἀδυνάτων ἐνδεχομένων τε καὶ μεταπιπτόντων καὶ ἀμφιβόλων
καὶ ἄλλων τινῶν τοιουτοτρόπων, οὐδεμίαν οὔτ’ ὠφέλειαν
οὔτε χρείαν τοῖς πολιτικοῖς λόγοις συμβαλλομένας εἰς γοῦν
ἡδονὴν καὶ κάλλος ἑρμηνείας, ὧν δεῖ στοχάζεσθαι τὴν 20
σύνθεσιν· ταύτης μὲν τῆς πραγματείας ἀπέστην, ἐσκόπουν
δ’ αὐτὸς ἐπ’ ἐμαυτοῦ γενόμενος, εἴ τινα δυναίμην εὑρεῖν
φυσικὴν ἀφορμήν, ἐπειδὴ παντὸς πράγματος καὶ πάσης ζητήσεως
αὕτη δοκεῖ κρατίστη εἶναι ἀρχή. ἁψάμενος δέ τινων
θεωρημάτων καὶ δόξας ὁδῷ μοι τὸ πρᾶγμα χωρεῖν ὡς ἔμαθον 25
ἑτέρωσέ ποι ταύτην ἄγουσαν ἐμὲ τὴν ὁδόν, οὐχ ὅποι προὐθέμην
[97]
to make a serious study of this department also, as being
absolutely essential to good writing, and wrote some manuals on
the grouping of the parts of speech. But they all went far
astray from the truth and never even dreamt what it is that
makes composition attractive and beautiful. At any rate, when I
resolved to treat of this subject methodically, I tried to find out
whether anything at all had been said about it by earlier writers,
and particularly by the philosophers of the Porch, because I
knew that these worthies were accustomed to pay no little
attention to the department of discourse: one must give them
their due. But in no single instance did I light upon any
contribution, great or small, made by any author, of any
reputation at all events, to the subject of my choice. As for
the two treatises which Chrysippus has bequeathed to us,
entitled “on the grouping of the parts of speech,” they
contain, as those who have read the books are aware, not a
rhetorical but a dialectical investigation, dealing with the
grouping of propositions, true and false, possible and
impossible, admissible and variable, ambiguous, and so forth.
These contribute no assistance or benefit to civil oratory, so far
at any rate as charm and beauty of style are concerned; and
yet these qualities should be the chief aim of composition. So
I desisted from this inquiry, and falling back upon my own
resources proceeded to consider whether I could find some
starting-point indicated by nature itself, since nature is generally
accepted as the best first principle in every operation and every
inquiry. So applying myself to certain lines of investigation, I
was beginning to think that the plan was making fair progress,
when I became aware that my path of progress was leading me
in a quite different direction, and not towards the goal which I
1 αὐτῶι F,M 2 ὂν F: om. P || τ(ω) λογ(ω) P || γε om. PMV || ἔγραψαν
PM: ἔγραψεν F: ἐπέγραψαν V || ὑπερ * * P 4 ἀπεπλανήθησαν PMV || οὐδε
P, MV 5 ἐγὼ γ’ οὖν F: ἔγωγ’ οὖν PMV || ὅτε διέγνων PMV: ὅτ’ ἔγνων F
9 τόπου] λόγου F || τε ποιημένους P 10 οὐδαμεῖ (suprascr. ηι) P1
|| δ’ om. P || εἰρημένον om. PMV || γοῦν om. PV 13 περὶ] οὐ περὶ PM
14 οὐ] καὶ P 16 τε] δὲ PMV 17 ἀμφιλόβων P 18 οὔτ’ ὠφέλειαν
om. P 19 συμβαλλομένων PMV 20 καὶ F: ἢ PMV 22 δὲ PMV 24
δοκεῖ] δοκεῖ καὶ P 25 μοι FP: τινι MV || τὰ πράγματα προχωρεῖν F
26 ἐμὲ om. F || προὐθέμην PMV: πρ[ου]θέμην ‘πορευοίμην cum litura F
4. οὐδ’ ὄναρ εἶδον = ‘ne somnio quidem
viderunt,’ ‘ne per somnia quidem
viderunt.’
6. For ἔγνων (as a v.l. for διέγνων)
συντάττεσθαι cp. Antiqq. Rom. i. 1 ...
οὔτε διαβολὰς καθ’ ἑτέρων ἐγνωκὼς ποιεῖσθαι
συγγραφέων. The passage which
begins here and ends with the words
πραγματείας ἀπέστην is quoted under
the head Dialectica in von Arnim’s
Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta ii. 67.
9 ff. Cic. Brut. 31. 118 “Tum Brutus:
Quam hoc idem in nostris contingere
intellego quod in Graecis, ut omnes fere
Stoici prudentissimi in disserendo sint
et id arte faciant sintque architecti
paene verborum, idem traducti a disputando
ad dicendum inopes reperiantur.”
13. Diogenes Laertius (vii. 192. 3), in
enumerating Chrysippus’ logical works,
writes: σύνταξις δευτέρα· περὶ τῶν στοιχείων
τοῦ λόγου καὶ τῶν λεγομένων ε′, περὶ
τῆς συντάξεως τῶν λεγομένων δ′, περὶ τῆς
συντάξεως καὶ στοιχείων τῶν λεγομένων
πρὸς Φίλιππον γ′, περὶ τῶν στοιχείων τοῦ
λόγου πρὸς Νικίαν α′, περὶ τοῦ πρὸς ἕτερα
λεγομένου α′.
23. φυσικὴν ἀφορμήν: this suggests
the Stoic point of view.
26. The reading of F looks like an
attempt to gloss προὐθέμην.
[98-9]
καὶ ἀναγκαῖον ἦν ἐλθεῖν, ἀπέστην. κωλύσει δ’ οὐδὲν
ἴσως κἀκείνης ἅψασθαι τῆς θεωρίας καὶ τὰς αἰτίας εἰπεῖν δι’
ἃς ἐξέλιπον αὐτήν, ἵνα μή με δόξῃ τις ἀγνοίᾳ παρελθεῖν
αὐτὴν ἀλλὰ προαιρέσει.
V
ἐδόκει δή μοι τῇ φύσει μάλιστα ἡμᾶς ἑπομένους οὕτω 5
δεῖν ἁρμόττειν τὰ μόρια τοῦ λόγου, ὡς ἐκείνη βούλεται.
αὐτίκα τὰ ὀνόματα πρῶτα ἡγούμην τάττειν τῶν ῥημάτων (τὰ
μὲν γὰρ τὴν οὐσίαν δηλοῦν, τὰ δὲ τὸ συμβεβηκός, πρότερον
δ’ εἶναι τῇ φύσει τὴν οὐσίαν τῶν συμβεβηκότων), ὡς τὰ
Ὁμηρικὰ ἔχει ταυτί· 10
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, Μοῦσα, πολύτροπον
καὶ
μῆνιν ἄειδε, θεά
καὶ
ἠέλιος δ’ ἀνόρουσε λιπών 15
καὶ τὰ παραπλήσια τούτοις· ἡγεῖται μὲν γὰρ ἐν τούτοις τὰ
ὀνόματα, ἕπεται δὲ τὰ ῥήματα. πιθανὸς ὁ λόγος, ἀλλ’ οὐκ
ἀληθὴς ἔδοξεν εἶναί μοι. ἕτερα γοῦν παράσχοιτ’ ἄν τις παραδείγματα
παρὰ τῷ αὐτῷ ποιητῇ κείμενα ἐναντίως συντεταγμένα
ἢ ταῦτα συντέτακται, καλὰ δὲ οὐχ ἧττον καὶ πιθανά. τίνα 20
οὖν ἐστι ταῦτα;
[99]
sought and which I felt I must attain; and so I gave up the
attempt. I may as well, perhaps, touch on that inquiry also,
and state the reasons which led me to abandon it, so that I may
not be open to the suspicion of having passed it by in ignorance,
and not of deliberate choice.
CHAPTER V
NO GRAMMATICAL ORDER PRESCRIBED BY NATURE
Well, my notion was that we ought to follow mother nature
to the utmost, and to link together the parts of speech according
to her promptings. For example, I thought I must place nouns
before verbs: the former, you see, indicate the substance, the
latter the accident, and in the nature of things the substance
takes precedence of its accidents! Thus we find in Homer:—
The hero to me chant thou, Song-queen, the resourceful man;[102]
and
The Wrath sing, Goddess, thou;[103]
and
The sun leapt up, as he left;[104]
and other lines of the same kind, where the nouns lead the way
and the verbs follow. The principle is attractive, but I came to
the conclusion that it was not sound. At any rate, a reader
might confront me with other instances in the same poet where
the arrangement is the opposite of this, and yet the lines are
no less beautiful and attractive. What are the instances in
point?
1 δὲ PV 3 ἀγνοία F 6 ἐκείνηι βεβούληται P 7 πρῶτα post ὀνόματα
om. PMV || ἡγούμην PMV: ἠξίουν F || πρὸ ante τῶν add. PMV 8 οὐσίαν
FV: αἰτίαν PM || δηλοῖ F 9 δε P, V || τῇ φύσει om. F 10 ταυτί om.
PMV 18 παράσχοιτ’ ἄν τις PMV: παράσχοι τις ἂν F 19 τ(ω) αυτ(ω) P
20 δὲ Sauppius: τε libri
5. There seems to be a touch of
quiet humour in Dionysius’ retrospection
(during this causerie of his) on the
simplicity which had led him to think
that he could frame a priori rules as to
Nature’s Order. Cp. 102 15 in particular.
7. F’s reading, πρῶτα τῶν ῥημάτων,
receives some support from 174 18 infra.
But cp. Steph. s.v. πρῶτος.—F’s reading
ἠξίουν is probably due to some
corrector who was unaware that there
is good classical authority for ἡγοῦμαι
= ἡγοῦμαι δεῖν.
The following passage of Quintilian
(ix. 4. 23-27) illustrates this chapter in
many ways: “est et alius naturalis ordo,
ut viros ac feminas, diem ac noctem,
ortum et occasum dicas potius quam
retrorsum. quaedam ordine permutato
fiunt supervacua, ut fratres gemini; nam
si gemini praecesserint, fratres addere
non est necesse. illa nimia quorundam
fuit observatio, ut vocabula verbis, verba
rursus adverbiis, nomina appositis et
pronominibus essent priora. nam fit
contra quoque frequenter non indecore.
nec non et illud nimiae superstitionis, uti
quaeque sint tempore, ita facere etiam
ordine priora; non quin frequenter sit
hoc melius, sed quia interim plus valent
ante gesta ideoque levioribus superponenda
sunt. verbo sensum cludere,
multo, si compositio patiatur, optimum
est. in verbis enim sermonis vis est.
si id asperum erit, cedet haec ratio
numeris, ut fit apud summos Graecos
Latinosque oratores frequentissime. sine
dubio erit omne, quod non cludet,
hyperbaton, et ipsum hoc inter tropos
vel figuras, quae sunt virtutes, receptum
est. non enim ad pedes verba dimensa
sunt, ideoque ex loco transferuntur in
locum, ut iungantur, quo congruunt
maxime. sicut in structura saxorum
rudium etiam ipsa enormitas invenit, cui
applicari et in quo possit insistere.
felicissimus tamen sermo est, cui et rectus
ordo et apta iunctura et cum his numerus
opportune cadens contigit.”
8. πρότερον: probably adverbial; cp.
Hom. Il. vii. 424 and ix. 551.
15. The completed line (Odyss. iii. 1)
is: ἠέλιος δ’ ἀνόρουσε, λιπὼν περικαλλέα
λίμνην κτλ.
18. παράσχοιτ’ ἄν τις: for the middle
voice cp. 214 6 and 122 14.
20. Usener’s οἷά τινα seems a needless
and somewhat violent change for the
manuscript reading τίνα οὖν. No doubt
οἷά ἐστι ταῦτα is found in 100 27; but
(1) Dionysius’ love of μεταβολή in style
should be remembered, (2) οἷά τινα is not
a usual phrase, (3) the lively rhetorical
question is characteristic.
[100-1]
κλῦθί μευ, αἰγιόχοιο Διὸς τέκος Ἀτρυτώνη
καὶ
ἔσπετε νῦν μοι, Μοῦσαι, Ὀλύμπια δώματ’ ἔχουσαι ...
μνῆσαι πατρὸς σεῖο, θεοῖς ἐπιείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ.
ἐν γὰρ τούτοις ἡγεῖται μὲν τὰ ῥήματα, ὑποτέτακται δὲ τὰ 5
ὀνόματα· καὶ οὐδεὶς ἂν αἰτιάσαιτο τὴν σύνταξιν αὐτῶν ὡς
ἀηδῆ.
ἔτι πρὸς τούτοις ἄμεινον ἐδόκουν εἶναι τὰ ῥήματα πρότερα
τάττειν τῶν ἐπιρρημάτων, ἐπειδὴ πρότερόν ἐστι τῇ φύσει τὸ
ποιοῦν ἢ πάσχον τῶν συνεδρευόντων αὐτοῖς, τρόπου λέγω καὶ 10
τόπου καὶ χρόνου καὶ τῶν παραπλησίων, ἃ δὴ καλοῦμεν
ἐπιρρήματα, παραδείγμασι χρώμενος τούτοις·
τύπτε δ’ ἐπιστροφάδην, τῶν δὲ στόνος ὤρνυτ’ ἀεικής ...
ἤριπε δ’ ἐξοπίσω, ἀπὸ δὲ ψυχὴν ἐκάπυσσεν ...
ἐκλίνθη δ’ ἑτέρωσε, δέπας δέ οἱ ἔκπεσε χειρός. 15
ἐν ἅπασι γὰρ δὴ τούτοις ὕστερα τέτακται [ἅμα] τῶν ῥημάτων
τὰ ἐπιρρήματα. καὶ τοῦτο πιθανὸν μὲν ὡς τὸ πρῶτον, οὐκ
ἀληθὲς δὲ ὡς οὐδ’ ἐκεῖνο. τάδε γὰρ δὴ παρὰ τῷ αὐτῷ ποιητῇ
ἐναντίως ἢ ἐκεῖνα εἴρηται·
βοτρυδὸν δὲ πέτονται ἐπ’ ἄνθεσιν εἰαρινοῖσι ... 20
σήμερον ἄνδρα φάοσδε μογοστόκος Εἰλείθυια
ἐκφανεῖ.
ἆρ’ οὖν τι χείρω γέγονε τὰ ποιήματα ὑποταχθέντων ἐνταῦθα
τοῖς ἐπιρρήμασι τῶν ῥημάτων; οὐδεὶς ἂν εἴποι.
ἔτι καὶ τόδε ᾤμην δεῖν μὴ παρέργως φυλάττειν, ὅπως τὰ 25
πρότερα τοῖς χρόνοις καὶ τῇ τάξει πρότερα λαμβάνηται· οἷά
ἐστι ταυτί·
[101]
Hear me, thou Child of the Aegis-bearer, unwearied Power;[105]
and
Tell to me, Muses, now in Olympian halls that abide;[106]
and
Remember thy father, Achilles, thou godlike glorious man.[107]
In these lines the verbs are in the front rank, and the nouns
stationed behind them. Yet no one would impugn the arrangement
of the words as unpleasant.
Moreover, I imagined it was better to place verbs in front
of adverbs, since in the nature of things what acts or is acted
upon takes precedence of those auxiliaries, modal, local, temporal,
and the like, which we call adverbs. I relied on the following
as examples:—
Smote them on this side and on that, and arose the ghastly groan;[108]
Fell she backward-reeling, and gasped her spirit away;[109]
Reeled he backward: the cup from his hand-grasp fell to the floor.[110]
In all these cases the adverbs are placed after the verbs. This
principle, like the other, is attractive; but it is equally unsound.
For here are passages in the same poet expressed in the opposite
way:
Clusterwise hover they ever above the flowers of spring;[111]
To-day shall Eileithyia the Queen of Travail bring
A man to the light.[112]
Well, are the lines at all inferior because the verbs are placed
after the adverbs? No one can say so.
Once more, I imagined that I ought always most scrupulously
to observe the principle that things earlier in time should be
inserted earlier in the sentence. The following are examples:—
3 ἕσπετε F || ἔχουσαι. καὶ M 4 σοῖο Hom. 5 τὰ prius om. PMV 6
αὐτῶν PMV: ταύτην F 8 πρότερα τάττειν PMV: προτάττειν F 9 ἐστι
πρότερον F 10 πάσχειν F1 12 παραδείγμασιν P 13 ὄρνυτ’ PMV
16 γὰρ δὴ F: γὰρ PMV || ἅμα τῶν FPM: καὶ τῶν V1: τῶν V2 18 οὐδὲ
PMV || τάδε γὰρ δὴ F: καὶ γὰρ δὴ καὶ ταῦτα PMV || αὐτῶι F: om. PMV
19 ἢ ἐκεῖνα PMV: ἐκείνοις F 21 φάος δὲ F: φάωσδε P || εἰλήθυια PM
23 χείρω τι PMV || γέγονεν P || ἐνταῦθα PMV: ἐνθάδε F 24 οὐδεὶς
ἂν εἴποι F: om. PMV 25 τόδε Sylburgius: τάδε libri || ὠιμην F, M:
ὠιόμην P, V 26 τῆι τάξει καὶ τοῖς χρόνοις F 27 ταυτί PMV: ταῦτα F
8. πρότερα τάττειν ... ἐπειδὴ πρότερον
ἐστι: probably this pointed repetition
is intentional on the part of
Dionysius. πρότερα τάττειν might afterwards
be changed to προτάττειν for the
sake of brevity.
18. ταῦτα (PMV) may be right, as
ταῦτα in Dionysius can be used of what
follows as well as of what precedes; cp.
n. on 106 5. So in Plato Rep. vi. 510
ῥᾷον γὰρ τούτων προειρημένων μαθήσει,
and Xen. Anab. iii. 1. 41 ὡς μὴ τοῦτο
μόνον ἐννοῶνται τί πείσονται ἀλλὰ καὶ τί
ποιήσουσι. For Thucydides’ usage cp.
Shilleto’s note on Thucyd. i. 31 § 4.
In 100 16-102 25 (and further) there are
several instances in which F’s readings
(though given in the text) may emanate
from some early Greek editor rather than
from Dionysius himself: cp. 100 24 with
112 5.
26. Cp. Ter. Andr. i. 1. 100
“funus interim | procedit: sequimur;
ad sepulcrum venimus; | in ignem impositast;
fletur.”
[102-3]
αὖ ἔρυσαν μὲν πρῶτα καὶ ἔσφαξαν καὶ ἔδειραν
καὶ
λίγξε βιός, νευρὴ δὲ μέγ’ ἴαχεν, ἆλτο δ’ ὀϊστός
καὶ
σφαῖραν ἔπειτ’ ἔρριψε μετ’ ἀμφίπολον βασίλεια· 5
ἀμφιπόλου μὲν ἅμαρτε, βαθείῃ δ’ ἔμβαλε δίνῃ.
νὴ Δία, φαίη τις ἄν, εἴ γε μὴ καὶ ἄλλα ἦν πολλὰ οὐχ οὕτω
συντεταγμένα ποιήματα οὐδὲν ἧττον ἢ ταῦτα καλά·
πλῆξε δ’ ἀνασχόμενος σχίζῃ δρυός, ἣν λίπε κείων.
πρότερον γὰρ δήπου τὸ ἐπανατείνασθαί ἐστι τοῦ πλῆξαι. καὶ 10
ἔτι
ἤλασεν ἄγχι στάς, πέλεκυς δ’ ἀπέκοψε τένοντας
αὐχενίους.
πρῶτον γὰρ δήπου προσῆκεν τῷ μέλλοντι τὸν πέλεκυν
ἐμβάλλειν εἰς τοὺς τένοντας τοῦ ταύρου τὸ στῆναι αὐτοῦ 15
πλησίον. ἔτι πρὸς τούτοις ἠξίουν τὰ μὲν ὀνοματικὰ προτάττειν
τῶν ἐπιθέτων, τὰ δὲ προσηγορικὰ τῶν ὀνοματικῶν,
τὰς δ’ ἀντονομασίας τῶν προσηγορικῶν, ἔν τε τοῖς ῥήμασι
φυλάττειν, ἵνα τὰ ὀρθὰ τῶν ἐγκλινομένων ἡγῆται καὶ τὰ
παρεμφατικὰ τῶν ἀπαρεμφάτων, καὶ ἄλλα τοιαῦτα πολλά. 20
πάντα δὲ ταῦτα διεσάλευεν ἡ πεῖρα καὶ τοῦ μηδενὸς ἄξια
ἀπέφαινε. τοτὲ μὲν γὰρ ἐκ τούτων ἐγίνετο καὶ τῶν ὁμοίων
αὐτοῖς ἡδεῖα ἡ σύνθεσις καὶ καλή, τοτὲ δ’ ἐκ τῶν μὴ τοιούτων
ἀλλ’ ἐναντίων. διὰ ταύτας μὲν δὴ τὰς αἰτίας τῆς τοιαύτης
θεωρίας ἀπέστην. ἐμνήσθην δ’ αὐτῶν καὶ νῦν οὐχ ὡς σπουδῆς 25
[103]
They drew back the beasts’ necks first, then severed the throats and flayed;[113]
and
Clangeth the horn, loud singeth the sinew, and leapeth the shaft;[114]
and
The ball by the princess was tossed thereafter to one of her girls;
But it missed the maid, and was lost in the river’s eddying swirls.[115]
“Certainly,” a reader might reply,—“if it were not for the fact
that there are plenty of other lines not arranged in this order
of yours, and yet as fine as those you have quoted; as
And he smote it, upstrained to the stroke, with an oak-billet cloven apart.[116]
Surely the arms must be raised before the blow is dealt! And
further:—
He struck as he stood hard by, and the axe through the sinews shore
Of the neck.[117]
Surely a man who is about to drive his axe into a bull’s sinews
should take his stand near it first!”
Still further: I imagined it the correct thing to put my
substantives before my adjectives, appellatives before substantives,
pronouns before appellatives; and with verbs, to be very careful
that primary should precede secondary forms, and indicatives
infinitives,—and so on. But trial invariably wrecked these views
and revealed their utter worthlessness. At one time charm
and beauty of composition did result from these and similar
collocations,—at other times from collocations not of this sort
but the opposite. And so for these reasons I abandoned all such
speculations as the above. Nor is it for any serious value it
3 ἆλτο P 5 ἔρριψεν P 7 εἴ γε μὴ F: εἰ PM || καὶ ἄλλα PMV: οὐχ *
F1: ἄλλα suprascr. F2 || ἦν πολλὰ F: πολλὰ ἦν PMa || οὕτως FP1 8
ἢ FV: ἦ M: ἦν P 9 πλῆξε δ’ F: πλῆξεν PMV: κόψε δ’ Hom. || ἣν λίπε]
κάλλιπε P || κιών libri 14 προσῆκεν F: προσήκει PMV 16 τούτοις
καὶ MVs || ἠξίου P 18 δὲ PMV || ἀντωνομασίας PF2M2: ὠνομασίας M1:
ἀντωνυμίας F1V || ῥήμασιν P 19 ἐγκεκλιμένων PMV 20 ἀπαρεμφατικὰ
PV || παρεμφατικῶν P 21 διεσάλευσεν MV 22 ἀπέφαινεν P: ἀπέφηνε MV
23 τότε δ’ F: τοτὲ δὲ PV: τὸ δὲ M 24 ἀλλ’] μηδ’ F || τοιαύτης F:
om. PMV 25 δὲ PMV
1. In Homer αὖ ἔρυσαν should
probably be printed as one word,
αὐέρυσαν. Cp. note on 71 21 supra.
7. All this passage is in close correspondence
with Quintil. ix. 4. 24, as
quoted in the note on 98 7 supra.
9. Homer’s line actually begins with
κόψε δ’ ἀνασχόμενος. Here Dionysius
gives πλῆξε δ’ ἀνασχόμενος, while in
Antiqq. Rom. vii. 62 he has κόψε δ’
ἀπαρχόμενος. In both cases he is,
doubtless, quoting from memory.
10. The order actually adopted by
Homer in these passages is that which
the rhetoricians describe as πρωθύστερον,
ὕστερον πρότερον, ὑστερολογία.
16. ἠξίουν τὰ μὲν ὀνοματικὰ προτάττειν
τῶν ἐπιθέτων: the Greek adjective
(unless emphatic) is usually placed after
the noun. But it could easily be shown
from the varying usage of the modern
European nations that there is no ‘law
of nature,’ one way or the other, on the
subject. In general, however, these logical
notions of grammatical order which
Dionysius felt himself prompted to reject
on behalf of Greek (which is synthetic in
character) tally with the actual practice
of the modern analytical languages.
[104-5]
ἀξίων, καὶ τὰς διαλεκτικὰς παρεθέμην τέχνας οὐχ ὡς ἀναγκαίας,
ἀλλ’ ἵνα μηδεὶς δοκῶν ἔχειν τι αὐτὰς χρήσιμον εἰς τὴν
παροῦσαν θεωρίαν περὶ πολλοῦ ποιῆται εἰδέναι, θηρευθεὶς ταῖς
ἐπιγραφαῖς τῶν πραγματειῶν ὁμοιότητά τινα ἐχούσαις καὶ τῇ
δόξῃ τῶν συνταξαμένων αὐτάς. 5
ἐπάνειμι δ’ ἐπὶ τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὑπόθεσιν ἀφ’ ἧς εἰς ταῦτ’
ἐξέβην, ὅτι πολλὴ πρόνοια τοῖς ἀρχαίοις ἦν καὶ ποιηταῖς καὶ
συγγραφεῦσι φιλοσόφοις τε καὶ ῥήτορσι τῆς ἰδέας ταύτης, καὶ
οὔτε τὰ ὀνόματα τοῖς ὀνόμασιν οὔτε τὰ κῶλα τοῖς κώλοις
οὔτε τὰς περιόδους ἀλλήλαις εἰκῇ συνάπτειν ᾤοντο δεῖν, τέχνη 10
δέ τις ἦν παρ’ αὐτοῖς καὶ θεωρήματα οἷς χρώμενοι συνετίθεσαν
εὖ. τίνα δ’ ἦν τὰ θεωρήματα ταῦτα, ἐγὼ πειράσομαι διδάσκειν,
ὡς ἂν οἷός τε ὦ, ὅσα μοι δύναμις ἐγένετο συνεξευρεῖν,
οὐχ ἅπαντα λέγων ἀλλ’ αὐτὰ τὰ ἀναγκαιότατα.
VI
δοκεῖ μοι τῆς συνθετικῆς ἐπιστήμης τρία ἔργα εἶναι· ἓν 15
μὲν ἰδεῖν, τί μετὰ τίνος ἁρμοττόμενον πέφυκε καλὴν καὶ
ἡδεῖαν λήψεσθαι συζυγίαν· ἕτερον δὲ γνῶναι τῶν ἁρμόττεσθαι
μελλόντων πρὸς ἄλληλα πῶς ἂν ἕκαστον σχηματισθὲν κρείττονα
ποιήσειε φαίνεσθαι τὴν ἁρμονίαν· τρίτον δ’ εἴ τι δεῖται μετασκευῆς
τῶν λαμβανομένων, ἀφαιρέσεως λέγω καὶ προσθέσεως 20
καὶ ἀλλοιώσεως, γνῶναί τε καὶ πρὸς τὴν μέλλουσαν χρείαν
οἰκείως ἐξεργάσασθαι. ὅ τι δὲ τούτων ἕκαστον δύναται, σαφέστερον
ἐρῶ χρησάμενος εἰκόσι τῶν δημιουργικῶν τεχνῶν τισιν
[105]
possesses that I recall this mental process now. I have cited
those manuals on dialectic not because I think it necessary to
have them, but in order to prevent anyone from supposing that
they contain anything of real service for the present inquiry,
and from regarding it as important to study them. It is easy to
be inveigled by their titles, which suggest some affinity with the
subject; or by the reputation of their compilers.
I will now revert to the original proposition, from which I
have strayed into these digressions. It was that the ancients
(poets and historians, philosophers and rhetoricians) were greatly
preoccupied with this branch of inquiry. They never thought
that words, clauses, or periods should be combined at haphazard.
They had rules and principles of their own; and it was
by following these that they composed so well. What these
principles were, I shall try to explain so far as I can; stating,
not all, but just the most essential, of those that I have been
able to investigate.
CHAPTER VI
THREE PROCESSES IN THE ART OF COMPOSITION
My view is that the science of composition has three
functions. The first is that of observing the combinations which
are naturally adapted to produce a beautiful and agreeable united
effect; the second is that of perceiving how to improve the
harmonious appearance of the whole by fashioning properly the
several parts which we intend to fit together; the third is that
of perceiving what is required in the way of modification of the
material—I mean abridgment, expansion and transformation—and
of carrying out such changes in a manner appropriate to the
end in view. The effect of each of these processes I will explain
more clearly by means of illustrations drawn from industrial arts
8 συγγραφεῦσιν et ῥήτορσιν P || φιλοσόφοις τε] καὶ φιλοσόφοις F 10
εἰκῆι sic FP 12 ἐγὼ πειράσομαι FM: πειράσομαι PV 13 ἐξευρεῖν
P 16 μετά τινος P || ἁρμοττόμενον PMV: ἁρμοζόμενον EF 19
φαίνεσθαι ποιήσειεν P, V || εἴ τι P: δὲ τί EFMV || κατασκευ(ης) P 20
ἀφαιρέσ(ως) P || λέγω ... ἀλλοιώσεως om. P || προσθέσεως EF: προσθήκης
PMV 21 τε F: τε πῶς PMV 22 ὅτι F: τί PMV 23 δημιουργῶν PM1V
3. θηρευθείς: cp. Eur. Hippol. 957
θηρεύουσι γὰρ | σεμνοῖς λόγοισιν αἰσχρὰ
μηχανώμενοι, and Xen. Cyrop. viii. 2. 2
τούτοις ἐπειρᾶτο τὴν φιλίαν θηρεύειν.
4. ἐπιγραφαῖς: cp. the excerpt from
Diog. Laert., 96 13 supra, and Cic. de
Or. ii. 14. 61 “in philosophos vestros si
quando incidi, deceptus indicibus librorum,
qui sunt fere inscripti de rebus notis
et illustribus, de virtute, de iustitia, de
honestate, de voluptate, verbum prorsus
nullum intellego; ita sunt angustiis et
concisis disputationibus illigati.”
5. τῶν συνταξαμένων αὐτάς: Zeno and
Chrysippus in particular.
6. The statement in 92 21 is here
resumed.
13. συνεξευρεῖν: perhaps, ‘to investigate
together,’ i.e. by a comparative
method.
14. αὐτὰ τὰ ἀναγκαιότατα: as in
Demosthenes, e.g. de Cor. §§ 126, 168.
16. Probably ἁρμοττόμενον (rather
than ἁρμοζόμενον) should be preferred
here, as ἁρμόττεσθαι is used in the next
line but one. It seems likely that
Dionysius would use the Attic form
ἁρμόττω with aorist ἥρμοσα, ἡρμόσθην,
etc.; cp. 98 6, 106 6, 7, 110 6, 13, 112
2, 4, 124 19, 198 23, 230 22. Perhaps
106 7 should be changed accordingly.
17. λήψεσθαι after πέφυκε = μέλλει.—συζυγίαν:
Dionysius rightly recognizes
that a word-order, already settled in the
writer’s mind, may influence both his
choice of language and grammatical
forms he adopts.
20. προσθέσεως (cp. 116 16) seems
right. But προσθήκη, though generally
used of the part added (114 11, 150 13,
152 12), may (in 212 14, 274 22) refer to
the process: cp. N.T. use of βάπτισμα.
[106-7]
ἃς ἅπαντες ἴσασιν, οἰκοδομικῇ λέγω καὶ ναυπηγικῇ καὶ ταῖς
παραπλησίαις· ὅ τε γὰρ οἰκοδόμος ὅταν πορίσηται τῆν ὕλην
ἐξ ἧς μέλλει κατασκευάζειν τὴν οἰκίαν, λίθους καὶ ξύλα καὶ
κέραμον καὶ τἆλλα πάντα, συντίθησιν ἐκ τούτων ἤδη τὸ
ἔργον τρία ταῦτα πραγματευόμενος, ποίῳ δεῖ λίθῳ τε καὶ ξύλῳ 5
καὶ πλίνθῳ ποῖον ἁρμόσαι λίθον ἢ ξύλον ἢ πλίνθον, ἔπειτα πῶς
τῶν ἁρμοζομένων ἕκαστον καὶ ἐπὶ ποίας πλευρᾶς ἑδράσαι, καὶ
τρίτον, εἴ τι δύσεδρόν ἐστιν, ἀποκροῦσαι καὶ περικόψαι καὶ
αὐτὸ τοῦτο εὔεδρον ποιῆσαι· ὅ τε ναυπηγὸς τὰ αὐτὰ ταῦτα
πραγματεύεται. τὰ δὴ παραπλήσιά φημι δεῖν ποιεῖν καὶ τοὺς 10
μέλλοντας εὖ συνθήσειν τὰ τοῦ λόγου μόρια, πρῶτον μὲν
σκοπεῖν, ποῖον ὄνομα ἢ ῥῆμα ἢ τῶν ἄλλων τι μορίων ποίῳ
συνταχθὲν ἐπιτηδείως ἔσται κείμενον καὶ πῶς οὐκ ἄμεινον
(οὐ γὰρ δὴ πάντα γε μετὰ πάντων τιθέμενα πέφυκεν ὁμοίως διατιθέναι
τὰς ἀκοάς)· ἔπειτα διακρίνειν, πῶς σχηματισθὲν τοὔνομα 15
ἢ τὸ ῥῆμα ἢ τῶν ἄλλων ὅ τι δήποτε χαριέστερον ἱδρυθήσεται
καὶ πρὸς τὰ ὑποκείμενα πρεπωδέστερον· λέγω δὲ ἐπὶ μὲν τῶν
ὀνομάτων, πότερον ἑνικῶς ἢ πληθυντικῶς λαμβανόμενα κρείττω
λήψεται συζυγίαν, καὶ πότερον κατὰ τὴν ὀρθὴν ἐκφερόμενα
πτῶσιν ἢ κατὰ τῶν πλαγίων τινά, καὶ εἴ τινα πέφυκεν ἐξ 20
ἀρρενικῶν γίνεσθαι θηλυκὰ ἢ ἐκ θηλυκῶν ἀρρενικὰ ἢ οὐδέτερα
[107]
familiar to all—house-building, ship-building, and the like.
When a builder has provided himself with the material from
which he intends to construct a house—stones, timbers, tiling,
and all the rest—he then puts together the structure from these,
studying the following three things: what stone, timber and
brick can be united with what other stone, timber and brick;
next, how each piece of the material that is being so united should
be set, and on which of its faces; thirdly, if anything fits badly,
how that particular thing can be chipped and trimmed and made
to fit exactly. And the shipwright proceeds in just the same
way. A like course should, I affirm, be followed by those who
are to succeed in literary composition. They should first consider
in what groupings with one another nouns, verbs, or other parts
of speech, will be placed appropriately, and how not so well; for
surely every possible combination cannot affect the ear in the
same way—it is not in the nature of things that it should be so.
Next they should decide the form in which the noun or verb, or
whatever else it may be, will occupy its place most gracefully
and most in harmony with the ground-scheme. I mean, in the
case of nouns, whether they will offer a better combination if used
in the singular or the plural; whether they should be put in the
nominative or in one of the oblique cases; or which gender should
be chosen if they admit of a feminine instead of a masculine form,
1 ναυτικῆι P, MV 3 λίθοις F 5 δεῖ EV: ex δηῖ P: δὴ FM || ξύλ(ω) et
πλίνθ(ω) P 8 κα(τα)κροῦσαι P1 || καὶ τὸ αὐτὸ EF 9 ἑδραῖον P 10
τὰ δὴ] τὰ F: δή PMV ||ποιεῖν om. F 12 ποί(ω) P 14 μετα
πάτν
sic P 16 ϊδρυθήσεται P: ϊδρυνθήσεται F, EMV
18 πληθυντικῶς] π suprascripto θ̑ P || κρείτω P:
κρείττονα E: κρείττο F 19 πότερα FE 20 καὶ τίνα F 21 ἀρρενι(κων)
P, M: ἀρ’ ἐνικῶν V: ἀρρενων F, E: ἀρσενικῶν s
2. For comparisons between literary
composition and civil or marine architecture
cp. C.V. c. 22, Quintil. Inst.
Or. vii. 1 (proem.), Cic. de Or. iii. 171.
A metaphor from building underlies
the rhetorical use in all or most of
such words as: κανών, γόμφος, πυργοῦν,
ἀντερείδειν, στηριγμός, ἀντιστηριγμός,
ἕδρα, τέκτων, ὕλη, κατασκευάζειν, ἐγκατάσκευος.
5. ταῦτα refers forward here, cp. 112
8 with 112 4. In 110 9 ἥδε refers backward—‘the
foregoing.’
7. ἐπὶ ποίας πλευρᾶς, ‘on what side,’
i.e. ‘with what attention to stratification
or grain.’ A builder likes to place stone
in courses as it lay in the quarry: he
knows that, if what lay horizontally is set
perpendicularly, it will not last so well.
Or the reference here may be simply to
the difference in general appearance
made by laying a stone in one of several
possible ways.
10. If ποιεῖν be omitted with F, it
must be mentally supplied from the
general sense of the verbs that follow.
Cp. Plato Gorg. 491 D ἢ τοῦτο μὲν οὐδὲν
δεῖ, αὐτὸν ἑαυτοῦ ἄρχειν, τῶν δὲ ἄλλων;
Demosth. de Cor. § 139 καίτοι δυοῖν αὐτὸν
ἀνάγκη θάτερον, ἢ μηδὲν ἐγκαλεῖν κτλ.,
Soph. Philoct. 310 ἐκεῖνο δ’ οὐδείς, ἡνίκ’
ἂν μνησθῶ, θέλει | σῶσαί μ’ ἐς οἴκους, id.
Antig. 497 θέλεις τι μεῖζον ἢ κατακτεῖναί
μ’ ἑλών;
13. For οὐκ ἄμεινον Usener substitutes
εὖ ἢ ἄμεινον. The corruption of εὖ ἢ to
οὐκ might easily happen in uncial writing,
and the reading οὐκ is as old as the
Epitome. But the εὖ comes unexpectedly
after ἐπιτηδείως, and the emendation is
not convincing. The manuscript reading
has, therefore, been kept, though
οὐκ ἄμεινον is a difficult litotes.
15. σχηματισθέν: grammatical form,
or construction, is clearly meant here.
16. From here to the end of the
chapter the general sense is: We must,
in the interests of harmonious composition,
make the fullest possible use of
alternative forms—now a noun, now a
verb; now a singular, now a plural;
now a nominative, now an oblique case;
now a masculine, and then a feminine
or neuter; and so with voices, moods,
and tenses—with forms such as τουτονί
and τοῦτον, ἰδών and κατιδών, χωροφιλῆσαι
and φιλοχωρῆσαι, λελύσεται and λυθήσεται,—and
with elision, hiatus, and the
employment of νῦ ἐφελκυστικόν. Many
of these points will be found illustrated
in Ep. ad Amm. II., where the subject
of some of the characters is as follows:
c. 5 use of noun for verb, c. 6 use of
verb for noun, c. 7 substitution of
passive for active voice, c. 9 interchange
of singular and plural number, c. 10
interchange of the three genders, c. 11
use of cases, c. 12 use of tenses. See
D.H. pp. 138-49, together with the
notes added on pp. 178-81. As Ep.
ad Amm. II. shows, Dionysius is fully
alive to the dangers of this continual
straining of language. Absolutely interchangeable
expressions are not common.
18. πληθυντικῶς: cp. the use of the
plural in Virg. Aen. 155 “vos arae
ensesque nefandi, | quos fugi.”
21. ἐκ θηλυκῶν ἀρρενικά: cf. Quintil.
Inst. Or. ix. 3. 6 “fiunt ergo et circa
genus figurae in nominibus, nam et
oculis capti talpae [Virg. Georg. i. 183]
et timidi damae [Virg. Ecl. viii. 28,
Georg. iii. 539] dicuntur a Vergilio; sed
subest ratio, quia sexus uterque altero
significatur, tamque mares esse talpas
damasque quam feminas, certum est.”
Besides the reason given by Quintilian,
the desire to avoid monotony of termination
(excessive ὁμοιοτέλευτον) also counts.—The
present passage may further be
illustrated by Dionysius’ own words in
Ep. ad Amm. II. c. 10: “Examples of
the interchange of masculines, feminines
and neuters, in contravention of the
ordinary rules of language, are such as
the following. He [Thucydides] uses
τάραχος in the masculine for ταραχή in
the feminine, and similarly ὄχλος for
ὄχλησις. In place of τὴν βούλησιν and
τὴν δύναμιν he uses τὸ βουλόμενον and τὸ
δυνάμενον.”
[108-9]
ἐκ τούτων, πῶς ἂν ἄμεινον σχηματισθείη, καὶ πάντα τὰ
τοιαῦτα· ἐπὶ δὲ τῶν ῥημάτων, πότερα κρείττω λαμβανόμενα
ἔσται, τὰ ὀρθὰ ἢ τὰ ὕπτια, καὶ κατὰ ποίας ἐγκλίσεις ἐκφερόμενα,
ἃς δή τινες πτώσεις ῥηματικὰς καλοῦσι, κρατίστην ἕδραν
λήψεται, καὶ ποίας παρεμφαίνοντα διαφορὰς χρόνων καὶ εἴ 5
τινα τοῖς ῥήμασιν ἄλλα παρακολουθεῖν πέφυκε (τὰ δ’ αὐτὰ
ταῦτα καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων τοῦ λόγου μερῶν φυλακτέον, ἵνα
μὴ καθ’ ἓν ἕκαστον λέγω)· ἐπὶ δὲ τούτοις τὰ ληφθέντα
διακρίνειν, εἴ τι δεῖται μετασκευῆς ὄνομα ἢ ῥῆμα, πῶς ἂν
ἐναρμονιώτερόν τε καὶ εὐεδρότερον γένοιτο· τοῦτο τὸ στοιχεῖον 10
ἐν μὲν ποιητικῇ δαψιλέστερόν ἐστιν, ἐν δὲ λόγοις πεζοῖς
σπανιώτερον· πλὴν γίνεταί γε καὶ ἐν τούτοις ἐφ’ ὅσον ἂν
ἐγχωρῇ· ὅ τε γὰρ λέγων “εἰς τουτονὶ τὸν ἀγῶνα” προστέθεικέ
τι τῇ ἀντωνυμίᾳ γράμμα τῆς συνθέσεως στοχαζόμενος· ἄρτιον
γὰρ ἦν “εἰς τοῦτον τὸν ἀγῶνα” εἰπεῖν· καὶ πάλιν ὁ λέγων 15
“κατιδὼν Νεοπτόλεμον τὸν ὑποκριτήν” τῇ προθέσει παρηύξηκεν
τοὔνομα, τὸ γὰρ ἰδὼν ἀπέχρη· καὶ ὁ γράφων “μήτ’ ἰδίας
ἔχθρας μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεχ’ ἥκειν” ταῖς συναλοιφαῖς ἠλάττωκε τὰ
[109]
or a masculine instead of a feminine, or a neuter instead of either:
and so on. With reference to verbs, again: which form it will
be best to adopt, the active or the passive, and in what moods (or
verbal cases, as some call them) they should be presented so as to
receive the best setting, as also what differences of tense should
be indicated; and so with all the other natural accidents of
verbs. These same methods must be followed in regard to the
other parts of speech also; there is no need to go into details.
Further, with respect to the words thus selected, if any noun or
verb requires a modification of its form, it must be decided how
it can be brought into better harmony and symmetry with its
neighbours. This principle can be applied more freely in poetry
than in prose. Still, in prose also, it is applied, where opportunity
offers. The speaker who says “εἰς τουτονὶ τὸν ἀγῶνα”[118]
has added a letter to the pronoun with an eye to the effect
of the composition. The bare meaning would have been sufficiently
conveyed by saying “εἰς τοῦτον τὸν ἀγῶνα”. So in the
words “κατιδὼν Νεοπτόλεμον τὸν ὑποκριτήν”[119] the addition of
the preposition has merely expanded the word into κατιδών,
since ἰδών alone would have conveyed the meaning. So, too,
in the expression “μήτ’ ἰδίας ἔχθρας μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεχ’ ἥκειν”[120]
the writer has cut off some of the letters, and has condensed the
2 τε EFMV1 || κρείττω EF: κρείττονα PMV || λαβόμενα ἔσται F: ἔσται
λαμβανόμενα EPMV 4 καλοῦσιν P 6 πέφυκεν P || δὲ PMV 8 ἓν om. F
9 δεῖται F: δεῖ PMV || μετὰ κα(τα)σκευ(ης) P, M || πῶς Usener: ὡς
libri 12 πλὴν EF: om. PMV || τε PV: om. F1EM || ὅσο*ν F, E: ὁπόσον
PMV 14 ἀντ(ω)νυμία P 17 ἀπέχρη καὶ ὁ F: ἀπέχρηκεν ὅ τε P 18
ἔχθρας] ἔχθρας ἐμὲ Demosth. || ἔνεχ’ F: ἕνεκ’ PV || εικειν P1, V ||
συναλειφαῖς F: συναλιφαῖς P
8. Cp. Batteux Réflexions p. 181:
“Cette opération [sc. μετασκευή] ne peut
pas avoir lieu en français, parce que nos
mots sont faits et consacrés dans leur
forme par un usage que les écrivains ne
peuvent ni changer ni altérer: la poésie
n’a pas sur ce point plus de privilége
que la prose; mais cela n’empêche pas
que nous ne fassions dans notre langue
une grande partie des opérations qu’indique
Denys d’Halicarnasse dans le
chapitre vi. Nous mettons dans nos
verbes un temps pour un autre, l’actif
pour le passif, le passif pour l’actif;
nous prenons les substantifs adjectivement,
les adjectifs substantivement,
quelquefois adverbialement, les singuliers
pour les pluriels, les pluriels pour les
singuliers; nous changeons les personnes;
nous varions les finales, tantôt masculines,
tantôt féminines; nous renversons
les constructions, nous faisons des
ellipses hardies, etc. etc. Tous ceux
qui font des vers savent de combien de
manières on tourne et retourne les expressions
d’une pensée qui résiste; ceux
qui travaillent leur prose le savent de
même que les poëtes.”
9. For Usener’s correction πῶς cp.
106 15, 108 1; and for F’s δεῖται cp.
104 19.
11. Examples in Latin poetry would
be ‘gnatus’ for ‘natus,’ or ‘amarunt’
and ‘amavere’ for ‘amaverunt.’
13. We have an English parallel in
the dialect form ‘thik’ and ‘thikky,’
both of which stand for this; or ‘the
forthcoming’ and ‘the coming’ might
be employed in the translation, and
‘syllable’ be substituted for ‘letter.’
14. ἄρτιον: for the meaning cp.
ἀπέχρη 108 17. The implication is
that τουτονί (as compared with τοῦτον)
is περισσόν.
16. Demosth. περὶ τῆς Εἰρήνης § 6,
πάλιν τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, κατιδὼν
Νεοπτόλεμον τὸν ὑποκριτὴν τῷ μὲν τῆς
τέχνης προσχήματι τυγχάνοντ’ ἀδείας,
κακὰ δ’ ἐργαζόμενον τὰ μέγιστα τὴν πόλιν
καὶ τὰ παρ’ ὑμῶν διοικοῦντα Φιλίππῳ καὶ
πρυτανεύοντα, παρελθὼν εἶπον εἰς ὑμᾶς,
οὐδεμιᾶς ἰδίας οὔτ’ ἔχθρας οὔτε συκοφαντίας
ἕνεκεν, ὡς ἐκ τῶν μετὰ ταῦτ’ ἔργων γέγονε
δῆλον. If κατιδών here means little or
nothing more than ἰδών, we might compare
‘entreat’ in the sense of ‘treat’,
or Chaucer’s use of ‘apperceive’ for
‘perceive.’ Dionysius’ meaning, however,
probably is not that τουτονί and τοῦτον,
κατιδών and ἰδών, are actual synonyms,
but rather that the shorter form would
have sufficed.
17. Demosth. κατὰ Ἀριστοκράτους § 1,
μηδεὶς ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, νομίσῃ
μήτ’ ἰδίας ἔχθρας ἐμὲ μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεχ’ ἥκειν
Ἀριστοκράτους κατηγορήσοντα τουτουΐ,
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
passage is fully discussed (from the
rhythmical, or metrical, point of view)
in C.V. c. 25.
[110-1]
μόρια τοῦ λόγου κἀποκέκρουκέ τινα τῶν γραμμάτων· καὶ ὁ
ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐποίησεν “ἐποίησε” λέγων χωρὶς τοῦ ν̄ καὶ “ἔγραψε”
ἀντὶ τοῦ ἔγραψεν λέγων καὶ “ἀφαιρήσομαι” ἀντὶ τοῦ ἀφαιρεθήσομαι
καὶ πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα, ὅ τ’ “ἐχωροφίλησε” λέγων τὸ
ἐφιλοχώρησε καὶ “λελύσεται” τὸ λυθήσεται καὶ τὰ τοιουτότροπα 5
μετασκευάζει τὰς λέξεις, ἵν’ αὐτῷ γένοιντο ἁρμοσθῆναι καλλίους
καὶ ἐπιτηδειότεραι.
VII
μία μὲν δὴ θεωρία τῆς συνθετικῆς ἐπιστήμης ἡ περὶ
αὐτὰ τὰ πρῶτα μόρια καὶ στοιχεῖα τῆς λέξεως ἥδε· ἑτέρα
δέ, ὥσπερ καὶ κατ’ ἀρχὰς ἔφην, ἡ περὶ τὰ καλούμενα κῶλα, 10
ποικιλωτέρας τε δεομένη πραγματείας καὶ μείζονος, ὑπὲρ ἧς
αὐτίκα δὴ πειράσομαι λέγειν ὡς ἔχω γνώμης. καὶ γὰρ
ταῦτα ἁρμόσαι πρὸς ἄλληλα δεῖ ὥστ’ οἰκεῖα φαίνεσθαι καὶ
φίλα καὶ σχηματίσαι ὡς ἂν ἐνδέχηται κράτιστα προσκατασκευάσαι
τε, εἴ πού τι δέοι, μειώσει καὶ πλεονασμῷ καὶ εἰ 15
δή τιν’ ἄλλην μετασκευὴν δέχεται τὰ κῶλα· τούτων δ’
ἕκαστον ἡ πεῖρα αὐτὴ διδάσκει· πολλάκις γὰρ τουτὶ τὸ
κῶλον τούτου μὲν προτεθὲν ἢ ἐπὶ τούτῳ τεθὲν εὐστομίαν
τινὰ ἐμφαίνει καὶ σεμνότητα, ἑτέραν δέ τινα συζυγίαν λαβὸν
ἄχαρι φαίνεται καὶ ἄσεμνον. ὃ δὲ λέγω, σαφέστερον ἔσται, 20
εἴ τις αὐτὸ ἐπὶ παραδείγματος ἴδοι. ἔστι δή τις παρὰ τῷ
Θουκυδίδῃ λέξις ἐν τῇ Πλαταιέων δημηγορίᾳ πάνυ χαριέντως
συγκειμένη καὶ μεστὴ πάθους ἥδε· “ὑμεῖς τε, ὦ Λακεδαιμόνιοι,
[111]
discourse through the elisions. So again by using “ἐποίησε”
(without the ν) in place of ἐποίησεν, and “ἔγραψε” in place
of ἔγραψεν, and “ἀφαιρήσομαι” in place of ἀφαιρεθήσομαι,
and all instances of the kind; and by saying “ἐχωροφίλησε”
for ἐφιλοχώρησε and “λελύσεται” for λυθήσεται, and things of
that sort:—by such devices an author puts his words into a
new shape, in order that he may fit them together more beautifully
and appropriately.
CHAPTER VII
GROUPING OF CLAUSES
The foregoing, then, is one branch of the art of composition
which requires consideration: namely, that which relates
to the primary parts and elements of speech. But there is
another, as I said at the beginning, which is concerned with the
so-called “members” (“clauses”), and this requires fuller and
more elaborate treatment. My views on this topic I will try to
express forthwith.
The clauses must be fitted to one another so as to present
an aspect of harmony and concord; they must be given the
best form which they admit of; they must further be remodelled
if necessary by shortening, lengthening, and any other
change of form which clauses admit. As to each of these
details experience itself must be your teacher. It will often
happen that the placing of one clause before or after another
brings out a certain euphony and dignity, while a different
grouping sounds unpleasing and undignified. My meaning will
be clearer if illustrated by an example. There is a well-known
passage of Thucydides in the speech of the Plataeans, a delightfully
arranged sentence full of deep feeling, which is as follows:
“And we fear, men of Sparta, lest you, our only hope, should
1 κἀποκέκρουκέ Us.: καὶ π(ερι)κέκρ(ου)κέ P,EFM: καὶ παρακέκρουκε V ||
ὁ ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐποίησεν ἐποίησε F: ὁ ἐποίησε ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐποίησεν P: ὃ (τὸ V)
ἐποίησεν ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐποίησε M, V 2 ἔγραψε ἀντὶ τοῦ ἔγραψεν λέγων καὶ
om. EF 4 ἐχωροφίλησε E: χωροφίλησε F: χωροφιλῆσαι PMV 5 φιλοχωρῆσαι
PMV || τὸ F: λέγων τὸ PMV 6 ΐνα P, MV || ἁρμοσθεῖσαι PMV || καλλίονες
EF 8 συνθετικῆς] συνθέσεως F 9 πρῶτα om. F || καὶ] καὶ τὰ EF ||
ἥδε EFM: om. PV 10 δέ om. P || ὥπερ P || καὶ κατ’] κατ’ F || ἔφην
F: ἔφαμεν PMV 13 ὥστ’ P: ὥστε F: ὡς MV 14 προκατασκευάσαι E 16
μετασκευὴν Schaefer: κατασκευὴν libri 17 ἕκαστα EF 23 ἡμεῖς EF
2. χωρὶς τοῦ ν̄: Dionysius implies
that, in his opinion, the so-called νῦ
ἐφελκυστικόν is, or has become, an
integral part of the verbal termination
and is not reserved for use before vowels
only. His view has some support in
the usage of the best manuscripts.
Usener brackets the words ἔγραψε
... καί. But πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα suggests
their retention, and their omission in
an epitome (E) is natural. Dionysius
wishes to indicate that his statement is
general and does not apply simply to
the particular verb ἐποίησε.
4. φιλοχωρεῖν and χωροφιλεῖν: see
Glossary, under φιλοχωρεῖν.
5. Cp. Demosth. περὶ τῶν Συμμοριῶν
§ 2, πᾶς ὁ παρὼν φόβος λελύσεται.
9. ἥδε = ‘the foregoing,’ cp. n. on
ταῦτα p. 106 supra.
10. ὥσπερ καὶ κατ’ ἀρχὰς ἔφην: 72
9, 104 9. The reading ἔφην (rather
than ἔφαμεν) accords best with Dionysius’
usage.
23. Cp. Cic. Orat. cc. 63, 66 for
similar Latin instances of the effect of
a change in word-order.—The complete
sentence in Thucyd. iii. 57 runs: καὶ
οὔτε τῶν τότε ξυμμάχων ὠφελεῖ οὐδείς,
ὑμεῖς τε, ὦ Λακεδαιμόνιοι, ἡ μόνη ἐλπίς,
δέδιμεν μὴ οὐ βέβαιοι ἦτε.
[112-3]
ἡ μόνη ἐλπίς, δέδιμεν μὴ οὐ βέβαιοι ἦτε.” φέρε δή τις
λύσας τὴν συζυγίαν ταύτην μεθαρμοσάτω τὰ κῶλα οὕτως·
“ὑμεῖς τε, ὦ Λακεδαιμόνιοι, δέδιμεν μὴ οὐ βέβαιοι ἦτε, ἡ
μόνη ἐλπίς.” ἆρ’ ἔτι μένει τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον ἡρμοσμένων τῶν
κώλων ἡ αὐτὴ χάρις ἢ τὸ αὐτὸ πάθος; οὐδεὶς ἂν εἴποι. τί 5
δ’ εἰ τὴν Δημοσθένους λέξιν ταύτην “τὸ λαβεῖν οὖν τὰ
διδόμενα ὁμολογῶν ἔννομον εἶναι, τὸ χάριν τούτων ἀποδοῦναι
παρανόμων γράφῃ” λύσας τις καὶ μεταθεὶς τὰ κῶλα τουτονὶ
τὸν τρόπον ἐξενέγκαι· “ὁμολογῶν οὖν ἔννομον εἶναι τὸ λαβεῖν
τὰ διδόμενα, παρανόμων γράφῃ τὸ τούτων χάριν ἀποδοῦναι,” 10
ἆρ’ ὁμοίως ἔσται δικανικὴ καὶ στρογγύλη; ἐγὼ μὲν οὐκ
οἴομαι.
VIII
ἡ μὲν δὴ περὶ τὴν ἁρμογὴν τῶν κώλων θεωρία τοιαύτη,
ἡ δὲ περὶ τὸν σχηματισμὸν ποδαπή; οὐκ ἔστιν εἷς τρόπος
τῆς ἐκφορᾶς ἁπάντων τῶν νοημάτων, ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν ὡς 15
ἀποφαινόμενοι λέγομεν, τὰ δ’ ὡς πυνθανόμενοι, τὰ δ’ ὡς
εὐχόμενοι, τὰ δ’ ὡς ἐπιτάττοντες, τὰ δ’ ὡς διαποροῦντες, τὰ
δ’ ὡς ὑποτιθέμενοι, τὰ δὲ ἄλλως πως σχηματίζοντες, οἷς
ἀκολούθως καὶ τὴν λέξιν πειρώμεθα σχηματίζειν. πολλοὶ δὲ
δήπου σχηματισμοὶ καὶ τῆς λέξεώς εἰσιν ὥσπερ καὶ τῆς 20
διανοίας, οὓς οὐχ οἷόν τε κεφαλαιωδῶς περιλαβεῖν, ἴσως δὲ
καὶ ἄπειροι· περὶ ὧν καὶ πολὺς ὁ λόγος καὶ βαθεῖα ἡ θεωρία.
οὐ δὴ τὸ αὐτὸ δύναται ποιεῖν τὸ αὐτὸ κῶλον οὕτω σχηματισθὲν
[113]
fail in steadfastness.”[121] Now let this order be disturbed and the
clauses be re-arranged as follows: “And we fear, men of Sparta,
lest you should fail in steadfastness, that are our only hope.”
When the clauses are arranged in this way, does the same fine
charm remain, or the same deep feeling? Plainly not. Again,
take this passage of Demosthenes, “So you admit as constitutional
the acceptance of the offerings; you indict as unconstitutional
the rendering of thanks for them.”[122] Let the order be
disturbed, and the clauses interchanged and presented in the
following form: “So the acceptance of the offerings you admit
as constitutional; the rendering of thanks for them you indict
as unconstitutional.” Will the sentence be equally neat and
effective? I, for my part, do not think so.
CHAPTER VIII
SHAPING OF CLAUSES
The principles governing the arrangement of clauses have
now been stated. What principles govern their shaping?
The complete utterance of our thoughts takes more than one
form. We throw them at one time into the shape of an assertion,
at another into that of an inquiry, or a prayer, or a command, or
a doubt, or a supposition, or some other shape of the kind; and into
conformity with these we try to mould the diction itself. There
are, in fact, many figures of diction, just as there are of thought.
It is not possible to classify them exhaustively; indeed, they are
perhaps innumerable. Their treatment would require a long disquisition
and profound investigation. But that the same clause
is not equally telling in all its various modes of presentation,
1 ἡ μόνη ἐλπίς add. in marg. F || ἡ μόνη] ἡμῶν ἡ EF1M1 || φέρε
... (4) ἦτε add. in marg. F 6 δ’ F: δὲ M: δαὶ PV 8 παρανόμον P:
παράνομον F || γράφηι· F: γράφηι· εἰ P, MV | τοῦτον PMV 10 παράνομον
FP: παρανόμῳ V || ἀποδιδόναι P 14 ποταπή PMV 15 τῆς om. P ||
ἁπάντων EF: om. PMV: τῶν om. F || ὀνομάτων PMV
2. It is impossible to give real
English equivalents in cases like this,—partly
because of the fundamental
differences between the two languages,
and partly because we do not know
Dionysius’ own estimate of the exact
effect which the changes he introduces
have upon the rhythm, emphasis, and
clearness of the sentence. The same considerations
apply in lines 6-10, where the
English principle of emphasis makes it
necessary to depart widely from the
Greek order in both the original and
the re-written form. See Introduction,
pp. 17 ff. supra (under Emphasis). A
striking instance of effective emphasis
in English is Macduff’s passionate out-burst:—
Not in the legions
Of horrid hell can come a devil more damn’d
In ills to top Macbeth.
“If you dispose the words in the usual
manner, and say, ‘A more damned devil
in the legions of horrid hell cannot come
to top Macbeth in ills,’ we shall scarcely
be persuaded that the thought is the
same,” Campbell Philosophy of Rhetoric
p. 496. Biblical instances are: (1)
“Nevertheless even him did outlandish
women cause to sin” (Nehem. xiii. 26);
(2) “Your fathers, where are they? and
the prophets, do they live for ever?”
(Zech. i. 5).
8. Sometimes the manuscript testimony
is quite clear as between such
forms as τουτονί and τοῦτον: cp. 116
9 n. In doubtful cases the -ί form
might be adopted—in 64 6 and 84 17
as well as in 112 8 and 178 10.
14. Cp. Quintil. vi. 3. 70 “figuras
quoque montis, quae σχήματα διανοίας
dicuntur, res eadem recipit omnes, in
quas nonnulli diviserunt species dictorum.
nam et interrogamus et dubitamus et
affirmamus et minamur et optamus,
quaedam ut miserantes, quaedam ut
irascentes dicimus,” and Hor. Ars. P.
108 “format enim natura prius nos
intus ad omnem | fortunarum habitum;
iuvat aut impellit ad iram | aut ad
humum maerore gravi deducit et angit;
| post effert animi motus interprete
lingua.”
[114-5]
ἢ οὕτως. ἐρῶ δὲ ἐπὶ παραδείγματος· εἰ τοῦτον ἐξήνεγκε
τὸν τρόπον ὁ Δημοσθένης τὴν λέξιν ταύτην “ταῦτ’ εἰπὼν
ἔγραψα, γράψας δ’ ἐπρέσβευσα, πρεσβεύσας δ’ ἔπεισα Θηβαίους,”
ἆρ’ οὕτως ἂν συνέκειτο χαριέντως, ὡς νῦν σύγκειται;
“οὐκ εἶπον μὲν ταῦτα, οὐκ ἔγραψα δέ· οὐδ’ ἔγραψα μέν, οὐκ 5
ἐπρέσβευσα δέ· οὐδ’ ἐπρέσβευσα μέν, οὐκ ἔπεισα δὲ Θηβαίους.”
πολὺς δ’ ἂν εἴη μοι λόγος, εἰ περὶ πάντων βουλοίμην λέγειν
τῶν σχηματισμῶν ὅσους τὰ κῶλα ἐπιδέχεται. ἀπόχρη δὲ
εἰσαγωγῆς ἕνεκα τοσαῦτα εἰρῆσθαι.
IX
ἀλλὰ μὴν ὅτι γε καὶ μετασκευὰς δέχεται τῶν κώλων ἔνια 10
τοτὲ μὲν προσθήκας λαμβάνοντα οὐκ ἀναγκαίας ὡς πρὸς τὸν
νοῦν, τοτὲ δὲ ἀφαιρέσεις ἀτελῆ ποιούσας τὴν διάνοιαν, ἃς οὐκ
ἄλλου τινὸς ἕνεκα ποιοῦσι ποιηταί τε καὶ συγγραφεῖς ἢ τῆς
ἁρμονίας, ἵν’ ἡδεῖα καὶ καλὴ γένηται, πάνυ ὀλίγου δεῖν οἴομαι
λόγου. τίς γὰρ οὐκ ἂν ὁμολογήσαι τήνδε τὴν λέξιν ἣν ὁ 15
Δημοσθένης εἴρηκε προσθήκῃ πλεονάζειν οὐκ ἀναγκαίᾳ τῆς
ἁρμονίας ἕνεκα; “ὁ γὰρ οἷς ἂν ἐγὼ ληφθείην, ταῦτα πράττων
καὶ κατασκευαζόμενος, οὗτος ἐμοὶ πολεμεῖ, κἂν μήπω βάλλῃ
μηδὲ τοξεύῃ.” ἐνταῦθα γὰρ οὐχὶ τοῦ ἀναγκαίου χάριν πρόσκειται
τὸ τοξεύειν, ἀλλ’ ἵνα τὸ τελευταῖον κῶλον τὸ “κἂν 20
μήπω βάλλῃ” τραχύτερον τοῦ δέοντος ὂν καὶ οὐχ ἡδὺ ἀκουσθῆναι
[115]
I will show by an example. If Demosthenes had expressed
himself thus in the following passage, “Having spoken thus, I
moved a resolution; and having moved a resolution, I joined
the embassy; and having joined the embassy, I convinced the
Thebans,” would the sentence have been composed with the
charm of its actual arrangement,—“I did not speak thus, and
then fail to move a resolution; I did not move a resolution,
and then fail to join the embassy; I did not join the embassy,
and then fail to convince the Thebans”?[123] It would take me a
long time to deal with all the modes of expression which clauses
admit. It is enough to say thus much by way of introduction.
CHAPTER IX
LENGTHENING AND SHORTENING OF CLAUSES AND PERIODS
I think I can in a very few words show that some clauses
admit changes which take the form now of additions not necessary
to the sense, now of curtailments rendering the sense incomplete;
and that these changes are introduced by poets and prose-writers
simply in order to add charm and beauty to the rhythm. Thus
the following expression used by Demosthenes indisputably contains
a pleonastic addition made for the sake of the rhythm: “He
who contrives and prepares means whereby I may be captured
is at war with me, though not yet shooting javelins or arrows.”[124]
Here the reference to “arrows” is added not out of necessity,
but in order that the last clause “though not yet shooting
javelins,” being rougher than it ought to be and not pleasant to
2 εἰπ(ων) P, MV: εἴπ(ας) F, E 5 οὐκ prim. Dem.: καὶ οὐκ libri 6
δὲ alt om. F 7 δ’ F: om. PMV 14 γένοιτο PMV 15 ὁμολογῆσαι PV:
ὁμολογήσηι F || μὲν post τήνδε habet F 19 ἐνταῦθα ... (21) βάλλῃ
servarunt FM 21 βραχύτερον V: βραχυτέρα ex βραχύτερα P
1. Cicero (Philipp. xii. 3. 7) has the
following climax: “Quid enim potest,
per deos immortales! rei publicae prodesse
nostra legatio? Prodesse dico?
quid, si etiam obfutura est? Obfutura?
quid, si iam nocuit atque obfuit?”
Obviously it would be fatal to re-write
this passage thus: “nostra legatio non
poterit prodesse rei publicae, immo
obfutura est, et iam nocuit.”
2. With εἰπών (rather than εἴπας) cp.
line 5 (εἶπον, not εἶπα), though P gives
προεῖπα in 280 19. In the Epitome εἴπας
is found in V only, the other three
MSS. giving εἰπών.—In Hellenistic times
the non-sigmatic aorists constantly occur
with the -α of the sigmatic aorists; but
it is hardly likely that so good an
Atticist as Dionysius would attribute
εἴπας to Demosthenes, and introduce
cacophony.
4. Cp. Demetr. de Eloc. § 270 λαμβάνοιτ’
ἂν καὶ ἡ κλῖμαξ καλουμένη, ὥσπερ
Δημοσθένει τὸ “οὐκ εἶπον μὲν ταῦτα, οὐκ
ἔγραψα δέ· οὐδ’ ἔγραψα μέν, οὐκ ἔπεισα
δὲ Θηβαίους”· σχεδὸν γὰρ ἐπαναβαίνοντι
ὁ λόγος ἔοικεν ἐπὶ μειζόνων μείζονα· εἰ δὲ
οὕτως εἴποι τις ταῦτα, “εἰπὼν ἐγὼ καὶ
γράψας ἐπρέσβευσά τε καὶ ἔπεισα Θηβαίους,”
διήγημα ἐρεῖ μόνον, δεινὸν δὲ οὐδέν.
8. Dionysius seems subsequently to
have written a special treatise περὶ
σχημάτων: cp. Quintil. ix. 3. 89 “haec
omnia copiosius sunt exsecuti, qui non
ut partem operis transcurrerunt sed
proprie libros huic operi dedicaverunt,
sicut Caecilius, Dionysius, Rutilius,
Cornificius, Visellius aliique non pauci.”
The use of νῦν in de Demosth. c. 39
seems to point to an intention of the
kind on Dionysius’ part: ἐξαριθμεῖσθαι
δὲ νῦν, ὅσα γένη σχηματισμῶν ἐστι τῶν τε
κατωνομασμένων καὶ τῶν ἀκατονομάστων,
καὶ τίσιν αὐτῶν ἡ τοιαύτη μάλιστα πέφυκεν
ἁρμονία χαίρειν, οὐκ ἔχω καιρόν.
10. This sentence of Dionysius himself
may serve to show how successfully and
conveniently Greek, as compared with
English, can make a conjunction depend
on words which came long after (viz.
πάνυ ὀλίγου δεῖν οἴομαι λόγου in line 14).
16. προσθήκῃ οὐκ ἀναγκαίᾳ: compare,
for example, such harmonious redundancies
as οἱ δ’ ἐπεὶ οὖν ἤγερθεν ὁμηγερέες
τ’ ἐγένοντο (Il. i. 57) and “when we
assemble and meet together” (Book of
Common Prayer).
20. Quintil. ix. 4. 63 “namque eo fit ut,
cum Demosthenis severa videatur compositio,
πρῶτον μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι,
τοῖς θεοῖς εὔχομαι πᾶσι καὶ πάσαις, et illa
(quae ab uno, quod sciam, Bruto minus
probatur, ceteris placet) κἂν μήπω βάλλῃ
μηδὲ τοξεύῃ, Ciceronem carpant in his:
Familiaris coeperat esse balneatori, et
Non minimum dura archipiratae. Nam
balneatori et archipiratae idem finis est
qui πᾶσι καὶ πάσαις et qui μηδὲ τοξεύῃ:
sed priora sunt severiora.”
21. In τραχύτερον Dionysius is apparently
referring to the sound of two
spondees (each forming a separate word)
at the end of a sentence, and to the
improvement effected by the addition
of a cretic followed by a spondee.—P
and V give βραχύτερον, which is perhaps
right, since a clause that is shorter than
it ought to be can be improved (cp. 114
16) by extension.
[116-7]
τῇ προσθήκῃ ταύτῃ γένηται χαριέστερον. καὶ ἔτι τὴν
Πλατωνικὴν ἐκείνην περίοδον, ἣν ἐν τῷ ἐπιταφίῳ ὁ ἀνὴρ
γράφει, τίς οὐκ ἂν φαίη παραπληρώματι λέξεως οὐκ ἀναγκαίῳ
προσηρανίσθαι; “ἔργων γὰρ εὖ πραχθέντων λόγῳ καλῶς
ῥηθέντι μνήμη καὶ κόσμος γίνεται τοῖς πράξασι παρὰ τῶν 5
ἀκουσάντων.” ἐνταυθοῖ γὰρ τὸ “παρὰ τῶν ἀκουσάντων” πρὸς
οὐδὲν ἀναγκαῖον λέγεται, ἀλλ’ ἵνα τὸ τελευταῖον κῶλον τὸ
“τοῖς πράξασι” πάρισόν τε καὶ ἐφάμιλλον τοῖς πρὸ αὐτοῦ
γένηται. τί δὲ δὴ τὸ παρ’ Αἰσχίνῃ λεγόμενον τουτί “ἐπὶ
σαυτὸν καλεῖς, ἐπὶ τοὺς νόμους καλεῖς, ἐπὶ τὴν δημοκρατίαν 10
καλεῖς,” τρίκωλον ἐν τοῖς πάνυ ἐπαινούμενον, οὐχὶ τῆς αὐτῆς
ἰδέας ἔχεται; ὃ γὰρ οἷόν τε ἦν ἑνὶ κώλῳ περιληφθῆναι τόνδε
τὸν τρόπον “ἐπὶ σεαυτὸν καὶ τοὺς νόμους καὶ τὴν δημοκρατίαν
καλεῖς,” τοῦτο εἰς τρία διῄρηται, τῆς αὐτῆς λέξεως οὐ τοῦ
ἀναγκαίου ἕνεκα, τοῦ δὲ ἡδίω ποιῆσαι τὴν ἁρμονίαν πολλάκις 15
τεθείσης [καὶ προσέτι πάθος τῷ λόγῳ]. τῆς μὲν δὴ προσθέσεως
ἣ γίνεται τοῖς κώλοις οὗτος ὁ τρόπος· τῆς ἀφαιρέσεως
δὲ τίς; ὅταν τῶν ἀναγκαίων τι λέγεσθαι λυπεῖν μέλλῃ καὶ
διοχλεῖν τὴν ἀκρόασιν, ἀφαιρεθὲν δὲ χαριεστέραν ποιῇ τὴν
ἁρμονίαν· οἷά ἐστιν ἐν μὲν τοῖς μέτροις τὰ Σοφόκλεια ταυτί· 20
μύω τε καὶ δέδορκα κἀξανίσταμαι
πλέον φυλάσσων αὐτὸς ἢ φυλάσσομαι·
ἐνταυθοῖ γὰρ ὁ δεύτερος στίχος ἐκ δυεῖν σύγκειται κώλων οὐχ
ὅλων· τελεία γὰρ ἂν ἡ λέξις ἦν οὕτως ἐξενεχθεῖσα “πλεῖον
[117]
the ear, may be made more attractive by this addition. Again,
the famous period of Plato which that author inserts in the
Funeral Speech has beyond dispute been extended by a supplement
not necessary to the sense: “When deeds have been nobly
done, then through speech finely uttered there come honour
and remembrance to the doers from the hearers.”[125] Here the
words “from the hearers” are not at all necessary to the sense;
they are added in order that the last clause, “to the doers,”
may correspond with and balance what has preceded it. Again,
take these words found in Aeschines, “you summon him against
yourself; you summon him against the laws; you summon him
against the democracy,”[126] a sentence of great celebrity, formed
of three clauses: does it not belong to the class we are considering?
What could have been embraced in one clause as
follows, “you summon him against yourself and the laws and
the democracy,” has been divided into three, the same expression
being repeated not from any necessity but in order to make the
rhythm more agreeable.
In such ways, then, may clauses be expanded: how can they
be abridged? This comes about when something necessary to
the sense is likely to offend and jar on the ear, and when,
consequently, its removal adds to the charm of the rhythm.
An example, in verse, is afforded by the following lines of
Sophocles:—
I close mine eyes, I open them, I rise—
Myself the warder rather than the warded.[127]
Here the second line is composed of two imperfect clauses.
The expression would have been complete if it had run thus,
1 γεγένηται PMV || χαριέστερα F 6 ἐνταυθοῖ ... ἀκουσάντων F, E: om.
PMV 7 τὸ ante τοῖς om. EF 11 ἐπαινουμένοις F 15 ἡδείαν F, M
16 καὶ ... λόγῳ secl. Us.: προσἔτι F, M: πρόσεστι PV 19 ποιῆι P, M:
ποιεῖ EFV: ποιεῖν coni. Reiskius 20 ἁρμονίαν F: ἐρμηνείαν P, MV ||
οἵα F: οἷάπέρ PMV || μὲν F: om. PMV 21 καὶ ξυνίσταμαι P 22 πλέον
... (24) ἐξενεχθεῖσα om. P
2. ὁ ἀνήρ is used by Dionysius with
various shades of meaning,—‘the author,’
‘the Master,’ ‘the worthy,’ etc. Cp.
96 8, 182 2, 184 12, 186 2, 198 4, 228
15, 264 25.
5. In the actual text of Menex. 236
E there is a slight difference of order,
viz. τοῖς πράξασι γίγνεται instead of
γίνεται τοῖς πράξασι (as Dionysius gives
it).
6. The Epitome makes the meaning
quite plain by inserting παραπλήρωμα
τῆς λέξεως between ἀκουσάντων and πρὸς
οὐδέν.
9. Here all MSS. agree in giving the
form τουτί. The same agreement will
be found in 86 9, 110 17, 116 20, 120
24, 156 15, 158 5, etc.
10. Demetrius, de Eloc. § 268, regards
this sentence as an example of three
‘figures,’—anaphora, asyndeton, and
homoeoteleuton. He adds, “Were we
to write ‘you summon him against
yourself and the laws and the democracy,’
the force would vanish together with
the figures.”—Similarly, “Appius eos
[servos] postulavit et produxit” would
be less telling than “Quis eos postulavit?
Appius. Quis produxit? Appius.
Unde? ab Appio” (Cic. pro Milone
22. 59).
11. τῆς αὐτῆς ἰδέας, ‘the same form
of expression,’ i.e. the effectively pleonastic.
16. If the words καὶ προσέτι πάθος
τῷ λόγῳ are retained, ποιῆσαι (in a
slightly different sense) must be repeated
in order to govern πάθος: unless some
such word as γίγνεται can be supplied.
21. The context of these lines of
Sophocles is not known, but the idea
may well be that of ‘uneasy lies the
head’ or οὐ χρὴ παννύχιον εὕδειν βουληφόρον
ἄνδρα (Il. ii. 24). The ‘elliptical’
effect (an ellipse being implied by ἀφαίρεσις,
cp. 116 17) is produced by the
presence of αὐτός, which suggests that
ἑτέρους and ὑφ’ ἑτέρων are to be mentally
supplied.—Cp. Cic. in Q. Caec. Divin.
18. 58 “hic tu, si laesum te a Verre esse
dices, patiar et concedam: si iniuriam
tibi factam quereris, defendam et negabo”;
and Racine Andromaque iv. 5
“Je t’aimais inconstant; qu’aurais-je
fait fidèle?”
[118-9]
φυλάσσων αὐτὸς ἑτέρους ἢ φυλασσόμενος ὑφ’ ἑτέρων,” τὸ δὲ
μέτρον ἠδίκητο καὶ οὐκ ἂν ἔσχεν ἣν νυνὶ χάριν ἔχει. ἐν δὲ
τοῖς πεζοῖς λόγοις τὰ τοιαῦτα· “ἐγὼ δ’ ὅτι μὲν τινῶν κατηγοροῦντα
πάντας ἀφαιρεῖσθαι τὴν ἀτέλειαν τῶν ἀδίκων ἐστίν,
ἐάσω.” μεμείωται γὰρ κἀνταῦθα τῶν πρώτων δυεῖν κώλων 5
ἑκάτερον· αὐτοτελῆ δ’ ἂν ἦν, εἴ τις αὐτὰ οὕτως ἐξήνεγκεν·
“ἐγὼ δ’ ὅτι μὲν τινῶν κατηγοροῦντα ὡς οὐκ ἐπιτηδείων ἔχειν
τὴν ἀτέλειαν πάντας ἀφαιρεῖσθαι καὶ τοὺς δικαίως αὐτῆς
τυχόντας τῶν ἀδίκων ἐστίν, ἐάσω.” ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἐδόκει τῷ
Δημοσθένει πλείονα ποιεῖσθαι πρόνοιαν τῆς ἀκριβείας τῶν 10
κώλων ἢ τῆς εὐρυθμίας.
τὰ δ’ αὐτὰ εἰρήσθω μοι καὶ περὶ τῶν καλουμένων περιόδων·
καὶ γὰρ ταύτας χρὴ τάς τε προηγουμένας καὶ τὰς ἑπομένας
οἰκείως συναρμόττειν, ὅταν ἐν περιόδοις προσήκῃ τὸν λόγον
ἐκφέρειν· οὐ γὰρ δὴ πανταχῇ γε τὸ ἐμπερίοδον χρήσιμον. 15
καὶ αὐτὸ δὲ τοῦτο τὸ θεώρημα τῆς συνθετικῆς ἐπιστήμης ἴδιον,
πότε δεῖ χρῆσθαι περιόδοις καὶ μέχρι πόσου καὶ πότε μή.
X
διωρισμένων δή μοι τούτων ἀκόλουθον ἂν εἴη τὸ λέγειν,
τίνα ἐστὶν ὧν δεῖ στοχάζεσθαι τὸν βουλόμενον συντιθέναι τὴν
λέξιν εὖ καὶ διὰ τίνων θεωρημάτων τυγχάνοι τις ἂν ὧν 20
βούλεται. δοκεῖ δέ μοι δύο ταῦτ’ εἶναι ‹τὰ› γενικώτατα, ὧν
ἐφίεσθαι δεῖ τοὺς συντιθέντας μέτρα τε καὶ λόγους, ἥ τε ἡδονὴ
καὶ τὸ καλόν· ἀμφότερα γὰρ ἐπιζητεῖ ταῦτα ἡ ἀκοή, ὅμοιόν
τι πάσχουσα τῇ ὁράσει· καὶ γὰρ ἐκείνη πλάσματα καὶ γραφὰς
[119]
“myself warding others rather than being warded by others.”
But violence would have been done to the metre, and the line
would not have acquired the charm which it actually has. In
prose there are such instances as: “I will pass by the fact that
it is a piece of injustice, simply because a man brings charges
against some individuals, to attempt to withhold exemption
from every one.”[128] Here, too, each of the two first clauses is
abbreviated. They would have been each complete in itself if
worded thus: “I will pass by the fact that it is a piece of
injustice, simply because a man brings charges against some
individuals and declares them unfit for exemption, to attempt
to withhold that privilege from every one—even those who are
justly entitled to it.” But Demosthenes did not approve of
paying more heed to the exactitude of the clauses than to the
beauty of the rhythm.
I wish what I have just said to be understood as applying
also to what are called “periods.” For, when it is fitting to
express one’s meaning in periods, these too must be arranged so
as to precede or follow each other appropriately. It must, of
course, be understood that the periodic style is not suitable
everywhere: and the question when periods should be used and
to what extent, and when not, is precisely one of those with
which the science of composition deals.
CHAPTER X
AIMS AND METHODS OF GOOD COMPOSITION
Now that I have laid down these broad outlines, the next step
will be to state what should be the aims kept in view by the
man who wishes to compose well, and by what methods his
object can be attained. It seems to me that the two essentials
to be aimed at by those who compose in verse and prose are
charm and beauty. The ear craves for both of these. It is
affected in somewhat the same way as the sense of sight which,
2 νυνὶ χάριν ἔχει EPMV: νῦν ἔχει χάριν F 4 ἀτέλειαν] δωρειὰν Demosth.
6 ἀτελῆ δὲ F 12 τὰ δ’ αὐτὰ F: ταῦτα δὲ MV: ταῦ(τα) δι’ P 13
ταύτας E: ταῦτα F: ταύταις PMV || ταῖς τε προηγουμέναις καὶ ταῖς
ταύταις (ταύταις om. E) ἑπομέναις EPMV 14 ἐν FE: ἐν ταῖς PMV 17
περιόδωι P 18 ὡρισμένων P || τὸ λέγειν PMV: λέγειν F 21 τὰ add.
Sauppius || γενικώτατα F, M: τελικ(ω)τατα P, M1V 22 μέτρα FP: εὖ
μέτρα MV
4. Dionysius does not appear to feel
that τῶν ἀδίκων is in any way ambiguous,—that
it might, at first sight, seem to
depend on τὴν ἀτέλειαν. In Greek a
dependent genitive usually (at any rate
in Thucydides; see p. 337 infra) precedes
the noun on which it depends;
and, in any case, the speaker would
here pause slightly between τὴν ἀτέλειαν
and τῶν ἀδίκων.
15. οὐ γὰρ δὴ πανταχῇ γε τὸ ἐμπερίοδον
χρήσιμον. For an instance of the
‘running’ style, interspersed with the
periodic, see Thucyd. i. 9. 2, where
Shilleto remarks: “This paragraph
seems to me to convey far more than
any other which I have read an exemplification
of the εἰρομένη λέξις of
Aristot. Rhet. iii. 9. 2 (λέγω δὲ εἰρομένην,
ἣ οὐδὲν ἔχει τέλος καθ’ αὑτήν, ἂν μὴ
τὸ πρᾶγμα λεγόμενον τελειωθῇ). How
Thukydides, so great a master of the
κατεστραμμένη, ἐν περιόδοις, λέξις, should
have written it, is to me a marvel.”
[120-1]
καὶ γλυφὰς καὶ ὅσα δημιουργήματα χειρῶν ἐστιν ἀνθρωπίνων
ὁρῶσα ὅταν εὑρίσκῃ τό τε ἡδὺ ἐνὸν ἐν αὐτοῖς καὶ τὸ καλόν,
ἀρκεῖται καὶ οὐδὲν ἔτι ποθεῖ. καὶ μὴ παράδοξον ἡγήσηταί
τις, εἰ δύο ποιῶ τέλη καὶ χωρίζω τὸ καλὸν ἀπὸ τῆς ἡδονῆς,
μηδ’ ἄτοπον εἶναι νομίσῃ, εἴ τινα ἡγοῦμαι λέξιν ἡδέως μὲν 5
συγκεῖσθαι, μὴ καλῶς δέ, ἢ καλῶς μέν, οὐ μὴν καὶ ἡδέως·
φέρει γὰρ ἡ ἀλήθεια τὸ τοιοῦτον καὶ οὐδὲν ἀξιῶ καινόν· ἥ
γε τοι Θουκυδίδου λέξις καὶ ἡ Ἀντιφῶντος τοῦ Ῥαμνουσίου
καλῶς μὲν σύγκειται νὴ Δία, εἴπερ τινὲς καὶ ἄλλαι, καὶ
οὐκ ἄν τις αὐτὰς ἔχοι μέμψασθαι κατὰ τοῦτο, οὐ μὴν ἡδέως 10
γε πάνυ· ἡ δέ γε τοῦ Κνιδίου συγγραφέως Κτησίου καὶ ἡ
τοῦ Σωκρατικοῦ Ξενοφῶντος ἡδέως μὲν ὡς ἔνι μάλιστα, οὐ
μὴν καλῶς γ’ ἐφ’ ὅσον ἔδει· λέγω δὲ κοινότερον, ἀλλ’ οὐχὶ
καθάπαξ, ἐπεὶ καὶ παρ’ ἐκείνοις ἥρμοσταί τινα ἡδέως καὶ
παρὰ τούτοις καλῶς. ἡ δὲ Ἡροδότου σύνθεσις ἀμφότερα 15
ταῦτα ἔχει, καὶ γὰρ ἡδεῖά ἐστι καὶ καλή.
XI
ἐξ ὧν δ’ οἶμαι γενήσεσθαι λέξιν ἡδεῖαν καὶ καλήν, τέτταρά
ἐστι ταῦτα τὰ κυριώτατα καὶ κράτιστα, μέλος καὶ ῥυθμὸς καὶ
μεταβολὴ καὶ τὸ παρακολουθοῦν τοῖς τρισὶ τούτοις πρέπον.
τάττω δὲ ὑπὸ μὲν τὴν ἡδονὴν τήν τε ὥραν καὶ τὴν χάριν καὶ 20
τὴν εὐστομίαν καὶ τὴν γλυκύτητα καὶ τὸ πιθανὸν καὶ πάντα
τὰ τοιαῦτα, ὑπὸ δὲ τὸ καλὸν τήν τε μεγαλοπρέπειαν καὶ τὸ
βάρος καὶ τὴν σεμνολογίαν καὶ τὸ ἀξίωμα καὶ τὸν πίνον καὶ
τὰ τούτοις ὅμοια. ταυτὶ γάρ μοι δοκεῖ κυριώτατα εἶναι καὶ
ὥσπερ κεφάλαια τῶν ἄλλων ἐν ἑκατέρῳ. ὧν μὲν οὖν στοχάζονται 25
πάντες οἱ σπουδῇ γράφοντες μέτρον ἢ μέλος ἢ τὴν
λεγομένην πεζὴν λέξιν, ταῦτ’ ἐστὶ καὶ οὐκ οἶδ’ εἴ τι παρὰ
[121]
when it looks upon moulded figures, pictures, carvings, or any
other works of human hands, and finds both charm and beauty
residing in them, is satisfied and longs for nothing more. And
let not anyone be surprised at my assuming that there are two
distinct objects in style, and at my separating beauty from charm;
nor let him think it strange if I hold that a piece of composition
may possess charm but not beauty, or beauty without charm.
Such is the verdict of actual experience; I am introducing no
novel axiom. The styles of Thucydides and of Antiphon of
Rhamnus are surely examples of beautiful composition, if ever
there were any, and are beyond all possible cavil from this point
of view, but they are not remarkable for their charm. On the
other hand, the style of the historian Ctesias of Cnidus, and that
of Xenophon the disciple of Socrates, are charming in the highest
possible degree, but not as beautiful as they should have been.
I am speaking generally, not absolutely; I admit that in the
former authors there are instances of charming, in the latter of
beautiful arrangement. But the composition of Herodotus has
both these qualities; it is at once charming and beautiful.
CHAPTER XI
GENERAL DISCUSSION OF THE SOURCES OF CHARM AND BEAUTY
IN COMPOSITION
Among the sources of charm and beauty in style there are,
I conceive, four which are paramount and essential,—melody,
rhythm, variety, and the appropriateness demanded by these three.
Under “charm” I class freshness, grace, euphony, sweetness,
persuasiveness, and all similar qualities; and under “beauty”
grandeur, impressiveness, solemnity, dignity, mellowness, and
the like. For these seem to me the most important—the main
heads, so to speak, in either case. The aims set before themselves
by all serious writers in epic, dramatic, or lyric poetry, or
in the so-called “language of prose,” are those specified, and I think
1 ἐστιν F: εἰσιν M: om. PV 2 ἐνὸν ἐν αὐτοῖς F: ἐνὸν αὐτοῖς PMV 8
καὶ ἡ PMV: καὶ EF 9 καὶ οὐκ ... τοῦτο F: om. PMV 14 ἐπεὶ κἀκείνοις
P || καὶ posterius] ὡς καὶ EF: ὡς M 17 γενέσθαι FE 18 κράτιστα PMV:
τὰ κράτιστα F 20 τήν τε EFM: τὴν PV 23 τὸν πίνον] τοπι(θα)ν(ον) P,
EFM1V: πῖνος suprascr. M 26 μέτρον ἡ μέλος P, MV: μέλος ἢ μέτρον F
2. τὸ καλόν: see Glossary, s.v. καλός.
11. For Ctesias cp. Demetr. de Eloc.
§§ 213-16, where a fine passage is
quoted from him; also p. 247 ibid.
Photius (Bibl. Cod. 72) says of Ctesias:
ἔστι δὲ οὗτος ὁ συγγραφεὺς σαφής τε καὶ
ἀφελὴς λίαν· διὸ καὶ ἡδονῇ αὐτῷ σύγκρατός
ἐστιν ὁ λόγος.
12. Ξενοφῶντος: cp. Diog. Laert. ii.
6. 57 ἐκαλεῖτο δὲ καὶ Ἀττικὴ Μοῦσα
γλυκύτητι τῆς ἑρμηνείας, and Cic. Orat.
19. 63 “et Xenophontis voce Musas
quasi locutas ferunt.”—For τοῦ Σωκρατικοῦ
cp. Quintil. x. 1. 75 “Xenophon
non excidit mihi sed inter philosophos
reddendus est.”
14. καθάπαξ, ‘absolutely,’ ‘universally,’
‘exclusively.’ So in 132 16.
18. Cp de Demosth. c. 47 εὕρισκε δὴ
τὰ μὲν αὐτὰ ἀμφοτέρων ὄντα αἴτια, τὰ
μέλη καὶ τοὺς ῥυθμοὺς καὶ τὰς μεταβολὰς
καὶ τὸ παρακολουθοῦν ἅπασιν αὐτοῖς πρέπον,
οὐ μὴν κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον ἑκάτερα
σχηματιζόμενα.
25. ἑκάτερον means (here and in 122 1)
ἥ τε ἡδονὴ καὶ τὸ καλόν.
[122-3]
ταῦθ’ ἕτερον· οἱ δὲ πρωτεύσαντες ἐν ἑκατέρῳ τε τούτων καὶ
ἐν ἀμφοτέροις πολλοί τε καὶ ἀγαθοὶ ἄνδρες· παραδείγματα δὲ
αὐτῶν ἑκάστου φέρειν ἐν τῷ παρόντι οὐκ ἐγχωρεῖ, ἵνα μὴ
περὶ ταῦτα κατατρίψω τὸν λόγον· καὶ ἅμα εἴ τι λεχθῆναι
περί τινος αὐτῶν καθήκει καὶ δεήσει που μαρτυριῶν, ἕτερος 5
αὐτοῖς ἔσται καιρὸς ἐπιτηδειότερος, ὅταν τοὺς χαρακτῆρας τῶν
ἁρμονιῶν ὑπογράφω. νῦν δὲ ταῦτ’ εἰρῆσθαι περὶ αὐτῶν
ἀπόχρη. ἐπάνειμι δὲ πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰς διαιρέσεις, ἃς ἐποιησάμην
τῆς θ’ ἡδείας συνθέσεως καὶ τῆς καλῆς, ἵνα μοι καὶ καθ’ ὁδόν,
ὥς φασι, χωρῇ ὁ λόγος. 10
ἔφην δὴ τὴν ἀκοὴν ἥδεσθαι πρώτοις μὲν τοῖς μέλεσιν,
ἔπειτα τοῖς ῥυθμοῖς, τρίτον ταῖς μεταβολαῖς, ἐν δὲ τούτοις
ἅπασι τῷ πρέποντι. ὅτι δὲ ἀληθῆ λέγω, τὴν πεῖραν αὐτὴν
παρέξομαι μάρτυρα, ἣν οὐχ οἷόν τε διαβάλλειν τοῖς κοινοῖς
πάθεσιν ὁμολογουμένην· τίς γάρ ἐστιν ὃς οὐχ ὑπὸ μὲν ταύτης 15
τῆς μελῳδίας ἄγεται καὶ γοητεύεται, ὑφ’ ἑτέρας δέ τινος οὐδὲν
πάσχει τοιοῦτον, καὶ ὑπὸ μὲν τούτων τῶν ῥυθμῶν οἰκειοῦται,
ὑπὸ δὲ τούτων διοχλεῖται; ἤδη δ’ ἔγωγε καὶ ἐν τοῖς πολυανθρωποτάτοις
θεάτροις, ἃ συμπληροῖ παντοδαπὸς καὶ ἄμουσος
ὄχλος, ἔδοξα καταμαθεῖν, ὡς φυσική τις ἁπάντων ἐστὶν ἡμῶν 20
οἰκειότης πρὸς ἐμμέλειάν τε καὶ εὐρυθμίαν, κιθαριστήν τε
ἀγαθὸν σφόδρα εὐδοκιμοῦντα ἰδὼν θορυβηθέντα ὑπὸ τοῦ
πλήθους, ὅτι μίαν χορδὴν ἀσύμφωνον ἔκρουσε καὶ διέφθειρεν
τὸ μέλος, καὶ αὐλητὴν ἀπὸ τῆς ἄκρας ἕξεως χρώμενον τοῖς
ὀργάνοις τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο παθόντα, ὅτι σομφὸν ἐμπνεύσας ἢ μὴ
[123]
these are all. There are many excellent authors who have been
distinguished in one or both of these qualities. It is not possible
at present to adduce examples from the writings of each one of
them; I must not waste time over such details; and besides, if
it seems incumbent on me to say something about some of them
individually, and to quote from them anywhere in support of
my views, I shall have a more suitable opportunity for doing
so, when I sketch the various types of literary arrangement.
For the present, what I have said of them is quite sufficient.
So I will now return to the division I made of composition into
charming and beautiful, in order that my discourse may “keep
to the track,” as the saying is.
Well, I said that the ear delighted first of all in melody,
then in rhythm, thirdly in variety, and finally in appropriateness
as applied to these other qualities. As a witness to the truth
of my words I will bring forward experience itself, for it
cannot be challenged, confirmed as it is by the general sentiment
of mankind. Who is there that is not enthralled by
the spell of one melody while he remains unaffected in
any such way by another,—that is not captivated by this
rhythm while that does but jar upon him? Ere now I myself,
even in the most popular theatres, thronged by a mixed and
uncultured multitude, have seemed to observe that all of us
have a sort of natural appreciation for correct melody and
good rhythm. I have seen an accomplished harpist, of high
repute, hissed by the public because he struck a single false
note and so spoilt the melody. I have seen, too, a flute-player,
who handled his instrument with the practised skill of a
master, suffer the same fate because he blew thickly or, through
1 τε om. M || τούτων om. PV 3 αὐτῶν FM: αὐτὴν P || ἑκάστου FM: καθ’
ἕκαστον PV || ἐν τῷ παρόντι om. P 4 εἴ τι V: εἴ τινα F: καὶ εἴ τι P:
καὶ εἴ τινα M 6 ἐπιτήδειος F 7 νυνὶ F 9 καὶ καθ’ ὁδόν] καὶ om.
PMV 11 δὴ F: δὲ PMV 12 ἐν F: ἐπὶ PMV 14 παρέξω F 18 τούτων δὲ
EF 20 ἐστὶν ἁπάντων PMV 24 ἀπὸ F: κα(τὰ) P, MV 25 τὸ αὐτὸ F: καὶ
αὐτὸ PV: καὶ αὐτὸν M || σομφὸν F γρ M: ἀσύμφων(ον) P, M1V
9. καθ’ ὁδόν, ὥς φασι, χωρῇ ὁ λόγος.
The metaphor here may be rendered
‘keep to the track’ or ‘keep to the path
prescribed.’ But possibly it is not felt
much more strongly than in Cicero’s “non
quo ignorare vos arbitrer, sed ut ratione
et via procedat oratio” (de Finibus i. 9.
29). Ratione et via (‘rationally and
methodically,’ ‘on scientific principles’)
often corresponds to μεθόδῳ in Greek.
In 96 25 ὁδῷ χωρεῖν is found, and ὁδοῦ
τε καὶ τέχνης χωρίς in 262 21.
13. A clearer rendering might be
“the appropriateness which these three
require.”
19. παντοδαπός: cp. Hor. Ars P.
212 “indoctus quid enim saperet liberque
laborum | rusticus urbano confusus,
turpis honesto?”
20. Probably Dionysius has in mind
a Greek theatre. But Roman theatres
also contained sensitive hearers: cp.
Cic. de Orat. iii. 196 “quotus enim
quisque est qui teneat artem numerorum
ac modorum? at in eis si paulum modo
offensum est, ut aut contractione brevius
fieret aut productione longius, theatra
tota reclamant. quid, hoc non idem fit
in vocibus, ut a multitudine et populo
non modo catervae atque concentus, sed
etiam ipsi sibi singuli discrepantes
eiciantur? mirabile est, cum plurimum
in faciendo intersit inter doctum et
rudem, quam non multum differat in
iudicando”; id. ibid. iii. 98 “quanto
molliores sunt et delicatiores in cantu
flexiones et falsae voculae quam certae
et severae! quibus tamen non modo
austeri, sed, si saepius fiunt, multitudo
ipsa reclamat”; id. Parad. iii. 26
“histrio si paulum se movit extra
numerum aut si versus pronuntiatus est
syllaba una brevior aut longior, exsibilatur,
exploditur.” In modern Italy
(so it is sometimes stated) the least slip
on the part of a singer excites the
audience to howls of derision and execration.
At Athens, an actor’s false
articulation was as fatal as a singer’s
false note: cp. the case of Hegelochus
(Aristoph. Ran. 303, 304).
25. ἀσύμφωνον (found in P and in other
MSS.) is probably an echo from line 23.
[124-5]
πιέσας τὸ στόμα θρυλιγμὸν ἢ τὴν καλουμένην ἐκμέλειαν
ηὔλησε. καίτοι γ’ εἴ τις κελεύσειε τὸν ἰδιώτην τούτων τι ὧν
ἐνεκάλει τοῖς τεχνίταις ὡς ἡμαρτημένων, αὐτὸν ποιῆσαι λαβόντα
τὰ ὄργανα, οὐκ ἂν δύναιτο. τί δήποτε; ὅτι τοῦτο μὲν
ἐπιστήμης ἐστίν, ἧς οὐ πάντες μετειλήφαμεν, ἐκεῖνο δὲ πάθους 5
ὃ πᾶσιν ἀπέδωκεν ἡ φύσις. τὸ δ’ αὐτὸ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ῥυθμῶν
γινόμενον ἐθεασάμην, ἅμα πάντας ἀγανακτοῦντας καὶ δυσαρεστουμένους,
ὅτε τις ἢ κροῦσιν ἢ κίνησιν ἢ φωνὴν ἐν ἀσυμμέτροις
ποιήσαιτο χρόνοις καὶ τοὺς ῥυθμοὺς ἀφανίσειεν. καὶ
οὐχὶ τὰ μὲν ἐμμελῆ καὶ εὔρυθμα ἡδονῆς ἀγωγά ἐστι καὶ 10
πάντες ὑπ’ αὐτῶν κηλούμεθα, αἱ μεταβολαὶ δὲ καὶ τὸ πρέπον
οὐκ ἔχουσι τὴν αὐτὴν ὥραν καὶ χάριν οὐδ’ ὑπὸ πάντων
ὁμοίως διακούονται· ἀλλὰ κἀκεῖνα πάνυ κηλεῖ πάντας ἡμᾶς
κατορθούμενα καὶ εἰς πολλὴν ὄχλησιν ἄγει διαμαρτανόμενα·
τίς γὰρ οὐκ ἂν ὁμολογήσειεν; τεκμαίρομαι δέ, ὅτι καὶ τῆς 15
ὀργανικῆς μούσης καὶ τῆς ἐν ᾠδῇ καὶ τῆς ἐν ὀρχήσει χάριτος
‹μὲν› ἐν ἅπασι διευστοχούσης, μεταβολὰς δὲ μὴ ποιησαμένης
εὐκαίρους ἢ τοῦ πρέποντος ἀποπλανηθείσης βαρὺς μὲν ὁ κόρος,
ἀηδὲς δὲ τὸ μὴ τοῖς ὑποκειμένοις ἁρμόττον φαίνεται. καὶ οὐκ
ἀλλοτρίᾳ κέχρημαι τοῦ πράγματος εἰκόνι. μουσικὴ γάρ τις 20
ἦν καὶ ἡ τῶν πολιτικῶν λόγων ἐπιστήμη τῷ ποσῷ διαλλάττουσα
τῆς ἐν ᾠδῇ καὶ ὀργάνοις, οὐχὶ τῷ ποιῷ· καὶ γὰρ ἐν
ταύτῃ καὶ μέλος ἔχουσιν αἱ λέξεις καὶ ῥυθμὸν καὶ μεταβολὴν
καὶ πρέπον, ὥστε καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτης ἡ ἀκοὴ τέρπεται μὲν τοῖς
μέλεσιν, ἄγεται δὲ τοῖς ῥυθμοῖς, ἀσπάζεται δὲ τὰς μεταβολάς, 25
[125]
not compressing his lips, produced a harsh sound or so-called
“broken note” as he played. Nevertheless, if the amateur
critic were summoned to take up the instrument and himself to
render any of the pieces with whose performance by professionals
he was just now finding fault, he would be unable to do
it. Why so? Because this is an affair of technical skill, in
which we are not all partakers; the other of feeling, which is
nature’s universal gift to man. I have noticed the same thing
occur in the case of rhythms. Everybody is vexed and annoyed
when a performer strikes an instrument, takes a step, or sings a
note, out of time, and so destroys the rhythm.
Again, it must not be supposed that, while melody and
rhythm excite pleasure, and we are all enchanted by them,
variety and appropriateness have less freshness and grace, or less
effect on any of their hearers. No, these too fairly enchant us
all when they are really attained, just as their absence jars
upon us intensely. This is surely beyond dispute. I may refer,
in confirmation, to the case of instrumental music, whether it
accompanies singing or dancing; if it attains grace perfectly and
throughout, but fails to introduce variety in due season or
deviates from what is appropriate, the effect is dull satiety and
that disagreeable impression which is made by anything out
of harmony with the subject. Nor is my illustration foreign
to the matter in hand. The science of public oratory is, after
all, a sort of musical science, differing from vocal and instrumental
music in degree, not in kind. In oratory, too, the words
involve melody, rhythm, variety, and appropriateness; so that, in
this case also, the ear delights in the melodies, is fascinated
by the rhythms, welcomes the variations, and craves always
3 ἐγκαλεῖ F 5 πάθους PMV: πᾶθος F 8 φωνὴν PMV: μορφὴν F 10
εὐμελῆ PMV || ἀγωγά F, suprascr. M: μεστὰ PM1V 13 διακούονται
V: διοικοῦνται FPM 14 ἁμαρτανόμενα PMV 16 ὠιδῆι F, E: ὠιδαῖς
γοητείας P, MV 17 μὲν ins. Us. ex E 19 φαίνεται EF: ἐφάνη PMV 21
διαλλάττουσι τοῖς F 22 ὠιδῆι F: ὠιδαῖς EPMV Syrianus 23 ῥυθμὸν PMV
Syrianus: ῥυθμοὺς EF
3. It would weaken the argument to
add (as has been suggested) ὀρθῶς or
ἄμεινον. The critic may be right, even
if he cannot play at all; and the player
may retort, ‘Play it yourself, then,’
without adding ‘right’ or ‘better.’
5. ἐπιστήμης: cp. Ov. ex Ponto iii.
9. 15 “non eadem ratio est sentire et
demere morbos: | sensus inest cunctis,
tollitur arte malum,” and Cic. de Orat.
iii. 195 “omnes enim tacito quodam
sensu sine ulla arte aut ratione quae sint
in artibus ac rationibus recta ac prava
diiudicant; idque cum faciunt in picturis
et in signis et in aliis operibus,
ad quorum intellegentiam a natura minus
habent instrumenti, tum multo ostendunt
magis in verborum, numerorum vocumque
iudicio; quod ea sunt in communibus
infixa sensibus nec earum rerum quemquam
funditus natura esse voluit expertem.
itaque non solum verbis arte
positis moventur omnes, verum etiam
numeris ac vocibus.”
If πάθος be read, the meaning will
be ‘the other is an instinct imparted to
all by nature.’
8. With μορφήν the translation will
run: ‘when a note on an instrument, a
step in dancing, or a gesture (pose,
attitude) in dancing, is rendered by a
performer out of time, and so the rhythm
is lost.’
14. διαμαρτανόμενα, manqué: cp. ἡμαρτημέναι
πολιτεῖαι, and the like, in Plato.
16. χάριτος depends on διευστοχούσης
(the same construction as with the uncompounded
verb εὐστοχεῖν).
20. This passage (μουσικὴ γάρ ...
οἰκεῖον) is quoted (after Syrianus) in
Walz Rhett. Gr. v. 474.
21. ἦν, ‘was all along,’ ‘is after all’:
cp. 92 18.
22. For the passage that follows cp.
Aristoxenus Harmonics i. 3 πρῶτον μὲν
οὖν ἁπάντων τὴν τῆς φωνῆς κίνησιν διοριστέον
τῷ μέλλοντι πραγματεύεσθαι περὶ
μέλους αὐτὴν τὴν κατὰ τόπον. οὐ γὰρ εἷς
τρόπος αὐτῆς ὢν τυγχάνει· κινεῖται μὲν
γὰρ καὶ διαλεγομένων ἡμῶν καὶ μελῳδούντων
τὴν εἰρημένην κίνησιν, ὀξὺ γὰρ καὶ
βαρὺ δῆλον ὡς ἐν ἀμφοτέροις τούτοις ἔνεστιν—αὕτη
δ’ ἐστὶν ἡ κατὰ τόπον καθ’ ἣν ὀξύ
τε καὶ βαρὺ γίγνεται—ἀλλ’ οὐ ταὐτὸν εἶδος
τῆς κινήσεως ἑκατέρας ἐστίν.
[126-7]
ποθεῖ δ’ ἐπὶ πάντων τὸ οἰκεῖον, ἡ δὲ διαλλαγὴ κατὰ τὸ
μᾶλλον καὶ τὸ ἧττον.
διαλέκτου μὲν οὖν μέλος ἑνὶ μετρεῖται διαστήματι τῷ
λεγομένῳ διὰ πέντε ὡς ἔγγιστα, καὶ οὔτε ἐπιτείνεται πέρα
τῶν τριῶν τόνων καὶ ἡμιτονίου ἐπὶ τὸ ὀξὺ οὔτ’ ἀνίεται τοῦ 5
χωρίου τούτου πλέον ἐπὶ τὸ βαρύ. οὐ μὴν ἅπασα λέξις ἡ
καθ’ ἓν μόριον λόγου ταττομένη ἐπὶ τῆς αὐτῆς λέγεται τάσεως,
ἀλλ’ ἡ μὲν ἐπὶ τῆς ὀξείας, ἡ δ’ ἐπὶ τῆς βαρείας, ἡ δ’ ἐπ’
ἀμφοῖν. τῶν δὲ ἀμφοτέρας τὰς τάσεις ἐχουσῶν αἱ μὲν κατὰ
μίαν συλλαβὴν συνεφθαρμένον ἔχουσι τῷ ὀξεῖ τὸ βαρύ, ἃς 10
δὴ περισπωμένας καλοῦμεν· αἱ δὲ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ τε καὶ ἑτέρᾳ
χωρὶς ἑκάτερον ἐφ’ ἑαυτοῦ τὴν οἰκείαν φυλάττον φύσιν. καὶ
ταῖς μὲν δισυλλάβοις οὐδὲν τὸ διὰ μέσου χωρίον βαρύτητός
τε καὶ ὀξύτητος· ταῖς δὲ πολυσυλλάβοις, ἡλίκαι ποτ’ ἂν
ὦσιν, ἡ τὸν ὀξὺν τόνον ἔχουσα μία ἐν πολλαῖς ταῖς ἄλλαις 15
βαρείαις ἔνεστιν. ἡ δὲ ὀργανική τε καὶ ᾠδικὴ μοῦσα διαστήμασί
τε χρῆται πλείοσιν, οὐ τῷ διὰ πέντε μόνον, ἀλλ’ ἀπὸ
τοῦ διὰ πασῶν ἀρξαμένη καὶ τὸ διὰ πέντε μελῳδεῖ καὶ τὸ διὰ
τεττάρων καὶ τὸ διὰ ‹τριῶν καὶ τὸν› τόνον καὶ τὸ ἡμιτόνιον,
ὡς δέ τινες οἴονται, καὶ τὴν δίεσιν αἰσθητῶς· τάς τε λέξεις 20
τοῖς μέλεσιν ὑποτάττειν ἀξιοῖ καὶ οὐ τὰ μέλη ταῖς λέξεσιν,
ὡς ἐξ ἄλλων τε πολλῶν δῆλον καὶ μάλιστα ἐκ τῶν Εὐριπίδου
μέλων, ἃ πεποίηκεν τὴν Ἠλέκτραν λέγουσαν ἐν Ὀρέστῃ πρὸς
τὸν χορόν·
[127]
what is in keeping with the occasion. The distinction between
oratory and music is simply one of degree.
Now, the melody of spoken language is measured by a single
interval, which is approximately that termed a fifth. When the
voice rises towards the acute, it does not rise more than three
tones and a semitone; and, when it falls towards the grave, it does
not fall more than this interval. Further, the entire utterance
during one word is not delivered at the same pitch of the voice
throughout but one part of it at the acute pitch, another at the
grave, another at both. Of the words that have both pitches,
some have the grave fused with the acute on one and the same
syllable—those which we call circumflexed; others have both
pitches falling on separate syllables, each retaining its own
quality. Now in disyllables there is no space intermediate
between low pitch and high pitch; while in polysyllabic words,
whatever their number of syllables, there is but one syllable that
has the acute accent (high pitch) among the many remaining
grave ones. On the other hand, instrumental and vocal music
uses a great number of intervals, not the fifth only; beginning
with the octave, it uses also the fifth, the fourth, the third, the
tone, the semitone, and, as some think, even the quarter-tone in
a distinctly perceptible way. Music, further, insists that the
words should be subordinate to the tune, and not the tune to
the words. Among many examples in proof of this, let me
especially instance those lyrical lines which Euripides has
represented Electra as addressing to the Chorus in the Orestes:—
2 καὶ τὸ EF: καὶ PMV 4 πέρα] παρα F 5 τόνων om. P || ἡμιτόνιον P:
ἡμιτονίων M 7 ἐπὶ om. PMV 10 συνδιεφθαρμένον FE 11 ἐν ἑτέρῳ τε
καὶ ἑτέρῳ MV: ἕτεραί τε καὶ ἕτεραι P 14 ἡλίκαι ποτ’ ἂν Us.: ἡλίκαι ἂν
E: εἰ καί ποτ’ ἂν PM: εἰ καί ποτ’ ἡλικἂν F: οἷαί ποτ’ ἂν V 15 ταῖς
ἄλλαις EFM: om. PV 19 τὸ διὰ ‹τριῶν καὶ τὸν› τόνον Radermacher: τόνον
F: διάτονον P: διὰ τόνον M: τὸ διάτονον EV 22 ἐκ τῶν EF: τῶν PMV
3. μετρεῖται, ‘is measured,’ ‘is confined,’—terminatur,
coërcetur.—For
various points in this chapter see Introduction,
pp. 39-43 supra. With regard
to the late Mr. W. E. Gladstone’s oratorical
delivery, on a special occasion, Sir
Walter Parratt obligingly makes the
following communication to the editor:
“I heard him make his famous
‘Upas tree’ speech at Wigan, in a
wooden erection, and watched with some
care the inflection of his voice. Addressing
so large a crowd I think he put more
tone into the voice than usual. Roughly
I found that he began his sentences
on
,
generally ending on
,
but sometimes falling the
full octave to
.”
4. ὡς ἔγγιστα, ‘as nearly as possible,’
‘approximately.’
5. “Which measure a Fifth, C to D
one Tone, D to E one Tone, E to F half
a Tone, F to G one Tone,—total C to G,
or a Fifth, three Tones and half. In
Norwegian the interval is said by Professor
Storm to be usually a Fourth, and
in Swedish it is said by Weste to be
about a Third or less,” A. J. Ellis
English, Dionysian, and Hellenic Pronunciations
of Greek, p. 38. (Under the
initial “A. J. E.” occasional quotations
will be made from this pamphlet, to
which the phonetic studies of its author
lend special interest, even when his
conclusions cannot be accepted.)
10. “That is, the voice glides from the
high to the low pitch, and does not jump
from high to low,” A. J. E.
12. “That is, one pitch does not glide
into the other, but each is distinctly
separated, as the notes on a piano.”
A. J. E.
20. δίεσιν: see Gloss., s.v. δίεσις.
23. Line 140 of the Orestes is assigned
to Electra (rather than to the Chorus) not
only by Dionysus but seemingly also by
Diogenes Laert. vii. 5 (Cleanthes). 172
ἐρομένου τινὸς τί ὑποτίθεσθαι δεῖ τῷ υἱῷ,
“τὸ τῆς Ἠλέκτρας, ἔφη: σῖγα σῖγα,
λεπτὸν ἴχνος.”—If the reading λευκὸν
(rather than λεπτὸν) is right, the word
may possibly be understood (like ἀργός)
of swift, glancing feet, though the
notion of rest rather than of movement
is prominent here.
24. Reference may be made to Ruelle’s
“Note sur la musique d’une passage
d’Euripide” in the Annuaire de l’Association
des Études grecques, 1882, pp. 96 ff.
[128-9]
σῖγα σῖγα, λευκὸν ἴχνος ἀρβύλης
τίθετε, μὴ κτυπεῖτ’·
ἀποπρόβατ’ ἐκεῖσ’, ἀποπρό μοι κοίτας.
ἐν γὰρ δὴ τούτοις τὸ “σῖγα σῖγα λευκὸν” ἐφ’ ἑνὸς φθόγγου
μελῳδεῖται, καίτοι τῶν τριῶν λέξεων ἑκάστη βαρείας τε τάσεις 5
ἔχει καὶ ὀξείας. καὶ τὸ “ἀρβύλης” τῇ μέσῃ συλλαβῇ τὴν
τρίτην ὁμότονον ἔχει, ἀμηχάνου ὄντος ἓν ὄνομα δύο λαβεῖν
ὀξείας. καὶ τοῦ “τίθετε” βαρυτέρα μὲν ἡ πρώτη γίνεται,
δύο δ’ αἱ μετ’ αὐτὴν ὀξύτονοί τε καὶ ὁμόφωνοι. τοῦ τε
“κτυπεῖτε” ὁ περισπασμὸς ἠφάνισται· μιᾷ γὰρ αἱ δύο συλλαβαὶ 10
λέγονται τάσει. καὶ τὸ “ἀποπρόβατε” οὐ λαμβάνει τὴν τῆς
μέσης συλλαβῆς προσῳδίαν ὀξεῖαν, ἀλλ’ ἐπὶ τὴν τετάρτην
συλλαβὴν μεταβέβηκεν ἡ τάσις ἡ τῆς τρίτης. τὸ δ’ αὐτὸ
γίνεται καὶ περὶ τοὺς ῥυθμούς. ἡ μὲν γὰρ πεζὴ λέξις
οὐδενὸς οὔτε ὀνόματος οὔτε ῥήματος βιάζεται τοὺς χρόνους 15
οὐδὲ μετατίθησιν, ἀλλ’ οἵας παρείληφεν τῇ φύσει τὰς συλλαβὰς
τάς τε μακρὰς καὶ τὰς βραχείας, τοιαύτας φυλάττει· ἡ δὲ
μουσική τε καὶ ῥυθμικὴ μεταβάλλουσιν αὐτὰς μειοῦσαι καὶ
παραύξουσαι, ὥστε πολλάκις εἰς τἀναντία μεταχωρεῖν· οὐ
[129]
Hush ye, O hush ye! light be the tread
Of the sandal; no jar let there be!
Afar step ye thitherward, far from his bed.[129]
In these lines the words σῖγα σῖγα λευκόν are sung to one
note; and yet each of the three words has both low pitch and
high pitch. And the word ἀρβύλης has its third syllable sung
at the same pitch as its middle syllable, although it is impossible
for a single word to take two acute accents. The first syllable
of τίθετε is sung to a lower note, while the two that follow it
are sung to the same high note. The circumflex accent of
κτυπεῖτε has disappeared, for the two syllables are uttered at
one and the same pitch. And the word ἀποπρόβατε does not
receive the acute accent on the middle syllable; but the pitch of
the third syllable has been transferred to the fourth.
The same thing happens in rhythm. Ordinary prose speech
does not violate or interchange the quantities in any noun or
verb. It keeps the syllables long or short as it has received
them by nature. But the arts of rhythm and music alter them
by shortening or lengthening, so that often they pass into their
opposites: the time of production is not regulated by the
1 σῖγα σῖγα M2: σίγα σίγα cett. (necnon codd. Eur.) || λευκὸν codd.
Dionys.: λεπτὸν Eurip. 2 τίθετ(αι) P1: τιθεῖτ(αι) P2: τιθεῖτε
FEMV || κτυπῆτε P1: κτυπεῖτε cett. 3 ἀποπρόβατ’ V: ἄπο προβᾶτ’ PM:
ἄπο πρόβατ’ FE || ἐκεῖσε libri || ἀποπρόμοι F, EPM: ἀπόπροθι Vs 6 τῆι
F, E: ἐπὶ PMV 8 τίθεται FP: τιθεῖτε EMV 9 δ’ αἱ Us.: δὲ libri 11
ἀποπρόβατ’ V: ἄπο*προβᾶτε P: ἄπο πρόβατε EF: ἄπο προβᾶτ’ ἐκεῖσε M 13
καταβέβηκεν PMV 18 καὶ αὔξουσαι PMV
2. τίθετε is clearly right, notwithstanding
the strong manuscript evidence
(FEMV) for τιθεῖτε.
4. The general sense is that σῖγα is
sung upon a monotone, though the spoken
word had two tones or pitches (the acute
and the grave, the high and the low),
and, “indeed, both of them combined in
the circumflex accent of its first syllable”
(Hadley Essays p. 113).
7. Dionysius clearly means “in speaking,”
and “on two successive syllables.”
Without the latter addition, the case of
an enclitic throwing back its accent on a
proparoxytone word seems to be left out
of account.
14. D. B. Monro Modes of Ancient
Greek Music p. 117 writes: “In English
the time or quantity of syllables is as
little attended to as the pitch. But in
Greek the distinction of long and short
furnished a prose rhythm which was a
serious element in their rhetoric. In the
rhythm of music, according to Dionysius,
the quantity of syllables could be
neglected, just as the accent was neglected
in the melody. This, however, does
not mean that the natural time of the
syllables could be treated with the
freedom which we see in a modern composition.
The regularity of lyric metres
is sufficient to prove that the increase or
diminution of natural quantity referred
to by Dionysius was kept within narrow
limits, the nature of which is to be
gathered from the remains of the ancient
system of Rhythmic. From these sources
we learn with something like certainty
that the rhythm of ordinary speech, as
determined by the succession of long or
short syllables, was the basis of metres
not only intended for recitation, such as
the hexameter and the iambic trimeter,
but also of lyrical rhythm of every kind.”
With this statement should be compared
the extract (given below, l. 17) from
Goodell’s Greek Metric.
16. τῇ φύσει: cp. Cic. Orat. 51. 173
“et tamen omnium longitudinum et
brevitatum in sonis sicut acutarum
graviumque vocum iudicium ipsa natura
in auribus nostris collocavit.” And with
regard to accentuation as well as
quantities: id. ib. 18. 57 “est autem
etiam in dicendo quidam cantus obscurior
... in quo illud etiam notandum mihi
videtur ad studium persequendae suavitatis
in vocibus: ipsa enim natura, quasi
modularetur hominum orationem, in
omni verbo posuit acutam vocem nec
una plus nec a postrema syllaba citra
tertiam; quo magis naturam ducem ad
aurium voluptatem sequatur industria.”
17 ff. Cp. Goodell Chapters on Greek
Metric p. 52: “We find ample recognition
[sc. in these two sentences] of the
fact that in Greek lyric metres, so far as
they come under what we have seen
called μέλη and ῥυθμοί or ‘rhythmi,’ long
and short syllables alike were more or
less variable. In some way the reader
knew in what rhythmical scheme or
pattern the poet intended the verses
to be rendered. To reproduce the
rhythmical pattern which the poet had
in mind, the singer, if not also the
reader, made some long syllables longer
and others shorter than two χρόνοι πρῶτοι,
and made some short syllables longer
than one χρόνος πρῶτος. It seemed to
Dionysius in those cases that one did
not so much regulate the times by the
syllables, but rather regulated the
syllables by the times.”
19. The compound παραύξουσαι, as
given by EF, may be compared with
παραυξηθεῖσα in 152 18. Dionysius does
not avoid hiatus after καί, and so he
would not prefer παραύξουσαι to αὔξουσαι
on this account, though an early reviser
of his text might do so.
εἰς τἀναντία μεταχωρεῖν: e.g., a
short syllable will sometimes be treated
as if it were long and were circumflexed.
[130-1]
γὰρ ταῖς συλλαβαῖς ἀπευθύνουσι τοὺς χρόνους, ἀλλὰ τοῖς
χρόνοις τὰς συλλαβάς.
δεδειγμένης δὴ τῆς διαφορᾶς ᾗ διαφέρει μουσικὴ λογικῆς,
λοιπὸν ἂν εἴη κἀκεῖνα λέγειν, ὅτι τὸ μὲν τῆς φωνῆς μέλος,
λέγω δὲ οὐ τῆς ᾠδικῆς ἀλλὰ τῆς ψιλῆς, ἐὰν ἡδέως διατιθῇ 5
τὴν ἀκοήν, εὐμελὲς λέγοιτ’ ἄν, ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἐμμελές· ἡ δ’ ἐν τοῖς
χρόνοις τῶν μορίων συμμετρία σῴζουσα τὸ μελικὸν σχῆμα
εὔρυθμος, ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἔνρυθμος· πῇ δὲ διαφέρει ταῦτα ἀλλήλων,
κατὰ τὸν οἰκεῖον καιρὸν ἐρῶ. νυνὶ δὲ τἀκόλουθ’ ἀποδοῦναι
πειράσομαι, πῶς ἂν γένοιτο λέξις πολιτικὴ παρ’ αὐτὴν τὴν 10
σύνθεσιν ἡδύνουσα τὴν ἀκρόασιν κατά τε τὰ μέλη τῶν
φθόγγων καὶ κατὰ τὰς συμμετρίας τῶν ῥυθμῶν καὶ κατὰ τὰς
ποικιλίας τῶν μεταβολῶν καὶ κατὰ τὸ πρέπον τοῖς ὑποκειμένοις,
ἐπειδὴ ταῦθ’ ὑπεθέμην τὰ κεφάλαια.
XII
οὐχ ἅπαντα πέφυκε τὰ μέρη τῆς λέξεως ὁμοίως διατιθέναι 15
τὴν ἀκοήν, ὥσπερ οὐδὲ τὴν ὁρατικὴν αἴσθησιν τὰ ὁρατὰ
πάντα οὐδὲ τὴν γευστικὴν τὰ γευστὰ οὐδὲ τὰς ἄλλας αἰσθήσεις
τὰ κινοῦντα ἑκάστην· ἀλλὰ καὶ γλυκαίνουσιν αὐτήν τινες
ἦχοι καὶ πικραίνουσι, καὶ τραχύνουσι καὶ λεαίνουσι, καὶ
πολλὰ ἄλλα πάθη ποιοῦσι περὶ αὐτήν. αἰτία δὲ ἥ τε 20
τῶν γραμμάτων φύσις ἐξ ὧν ἡ φωνὴ συνέστηκεν, πολλὰς
καὶ διαφόρους ἔχουσα δυνάμεις, καὶ ἡ τῶν συλλαβῶν πλοκὴ
παντοδαπῶς σχηματιζομένη. τοιαύτην δὴ δύναμιν ἐχόντων
τῶν τῆς λέξεως μορίων ἐπειδὴ μεταθεῖναι τὴν ἑκάστου φύσιν
οὐχ οἷόν τε, λείπεται τὸ τῇ μίξει καὶ κράσει καὶ παραθέσει 25
συγκρύψαι τὴν παρακολουθοῦσαν αὐτῶν τισιν ἀτοπίαν, τραχέσι
[131]
quantity of the syllables, but the quantity of the syllables is
regulated by the time.
The difference between music and speech having thus been
shown, some other points remain to be mentioned. If the
melody of the voice—not the singing voice, I mean, but the
ordinary voice—has a pleasant effect upon the ear, it will be
called melodious rather than in melody. So also symmetry in
the quantities of words, when it preserves a lyrical effect, is
rhythmical rather than in rhythm. On the precise bearing of
these distinctions I will speak at the proper time. For the
present I will pass on to the next question, and try to show how
a style of civil oratory can be attained which, simply by means
of the composition, charms the ear with its melody of sound, its
symmetry of rhythm, its elaborate variety, and its appropriateness
to the subject. These are the headings which I have set before
myself.
CHAPTER XII
HOW TO RENDER COMPOSITION CHARMING
It is not in the nature of all the words in a sentence to affect
the ear in the same way, any more than all visible objects produce
the same impression on the sense of sight, things tasted on that
of taste, or any other set of stimuli upon the sense to which they
correspond. No, different sounds affect the ear with many
different sensations of sweetness, harshness, roughness, smoothness,
and so on. The reason is to be found partly in the
many different qualities of the letters which make up speech,
and partly in the extremely various forms in which syllables
are put together. Now since words have these properties,
and since it is impossible to change the fundamental nature
of any single one of them, we can only mask the uncouthness
which is inseparable from some of them, by means of
3 δὴ τῆς PMV: τῆς F 4 τὸ μὲν] μὲν τὸ F 5 ἐὰν Us.: κἂν PV: ὃ μὲν FM
|| διατίθησι FM 6 εὐμενὲς P 7 συμμετρία σώζουσα FPM: συμμετριάζουσα
V 8 πῆ F: τῆι P || ἀλλήλων om. P 14 ἐπειδὴ δὲ ταῦθ’ F 18 αὐτὴν
τινὲς EF: τινες αὐτὴν PMV 20 ἥ τε] ἡ EF 23 δὴ] ἤδη F: δὲ ἤδη E
25 τὸ τῆι F, E: τῆι P, MV 25 καὶ τῆι κράσει F 26 συγκρύπτειν EF ||
ἀτοπίαν om. F
1. The subject of ἀπευθύνουσι is, of
course, ἡ μουσική τε καὶ ῥυθμική.
7. συμμετρία: cp. l. 12 τὰς συμμετρίας
τῶν ῥυθμῶν, and 254 10 τεταγμένους
σῴζουσα ῥυθμούς.
9. κατὰ τὸν οἰκεῖον καιρόν: i.e. in
cc. 25, 26.
10. παρ’ αὐτὴν τὴν σύνθεσιν. With
this use of παρά cp. 156 12 παρ’ οὐδὲν
οὕτως ἕτερον ἢ τὰς τῶν συλλαβῶν κατασκευάς,
160 9 παρὰ τὰς τῶν γραμμάτων
συμπλοκάς κτλ., 202 11 καὶ παρὰ τί γέγονε
τούτων ἕκαστον;—In αὐτὴν τὴν σύνθεσιν
the contrast implied is with ἡ ἐκλογὴ
τῶν ὀνομάτων: cp. 252 21 κατὰ γοῦν τὴν
σύνθεσιν αὐτήν· ἐπεὶ καὶ ἡ ἐκλογὴ τῶν
ὀνομάτων μέγα τι δύναται.
23. If ἤδη be read (with F and E) the
meaning will be, “the data being the
letters with their invariable qualities.”
Cp. the German schon.
25. Quintil. ix. 91 “miscendi ergo
sunt, curandumque, ut sint plures, qui
placent, et circumfusi bonis deteriores
lateant. nec vero in litteris syllabisque
natura mutatur, sed refert, quae cum
quaque optime coeat.”
[132-3]
λεῖα μίσγοντα καὶ σκληροῖς μαλακὰ καὶ κακοφώνοις εὔφωνα
καὶ δυσεκφόροις εὐπρόφορα καὶ βραχέσι μακρά, καὶ τἆλλα
τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον εὐκαίρως συντιθέντα καὶ μήτ’ ὀλιγοσύλλαβα
πολλὰ ἑξῆς λαμβάνοντα (κόπτεται γὰρ ἡ ἀκρόασις) μήτε
πολυσύλλαβα πλείω τῶν ἱκανῶν, μήδε δὴ ὁμοιότονα παρ’ 5
ὁμοιοτόνοις μήδ’ ὁμοιόχρονα παρ’ ὁμοιοχρόνοις. χρὴ δὲ καὶ
τὰς πτώσεις τῶν ὀνοματικῶν ταχὺ μεταλαμβάνειν (μηκυνόμεναι
γὰρ ἔξω τοῦ μετρίου πάνυ προσίστανται ταῖς ἀκοαῖς) καὶ
τὴν ὁμοιότητα διαλύειν συνεχῶς ὀνομάτων τε τῶν ἑξῆς
τιθεμένων πολλῶν καὶ ῥημάτων καὶ τῶν ἄλλων μερῶν τὸν 10
κόρον φυλαττομένους, σχήμασί τε μὴ ἐπὶ τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἀεὶ
μένειν ἀλλὰ θαμινὰ μεταβάλλειν καὶ τρόπους μὴ τοὺς αὐτοὺς
ἐπεισφέρειν, ἀλλὰ ποικίλλειν, μηδὲ δὴ ἄρχεσθαι πολλάκις ἀπὸ
τῶν αὐτῶν μηδὲ λήγειν εἰς τὰ αὐτὰ ὑπερτείνοντας τὸν ἑκατέρου
καιρόν. 15
καὶ μηδεὶς οἰηθῇ με καθάπαξ ταῦτα παραγγέλλειν ὡς
ἡδονῆς αἴτια διὰ παντὸς ἐσόμενα ἢ τἀναντία ὀχλήσεως· οὐχ
οὕτως ἀνόητός εἰμι· οἶδα γὰρ ἐξ ἀμφοῖν γινομένην πολλάκις
ἡδονήν, τοτὲ μὲν ἐκ τῶν ὁμοιογενῶν, τοτὲ δὲ ἐκ τῶν ἀνομοιογενῶν·
ἀλλ’ ἐπὶ πάντων οἴομαι δεῖν τὸν καιρὸν ὁρᾶν· οὗτος 20
γὰρ ἡδονῆς καὶ ἀηδίας κράτιστον μέτρον. καιροῦ δὲ οὔτε
ῥήτωρ οὐδεὶς οὔτε φιλόσοφος εἰς τόδε χρόνου τέχνην ὥρισεν,
οὐδ’ ὅσπερ πρῶτος ἐπεχείρησε περὶ αὐτοῦ γράφειν Γοργίας
[133]
mingling and fusion and juxtaposition,—by mingling smooth
with rough, soft with hard, cacophonous with melodious, easy
to pronounce with hard to pronounce, long with short; and
generally by happy combinations of the same kind. Many
words of few syllables must not be used in succession (for this
jars upon the ear), nor an excessive number of polysyllabic words;
and we must avoid the monotony of setting side by side words
similarly accented or agreeing in their quantities. We must
quickly vary the cases of substantives (since, if continued unduly,
they greatly offend the ear); and in order to guard against
satiety, we must constantly break up the effect of sameness
entailed by placing many nouns, or verbs, or other parts of
speech, in close succession. We must not always adhere to the
same figures, but change them frequently; we must not re-introduce
the same metaphors, but vary them; we must not exceed
due measure by beginning or ending with the same words too often.
Still, let no one think that I am proclaiming these as
universal rules—that I suppose keeping them will always produce
pleasure, or breaking them always produce annoyance. I
am not so foolish. I know that pleasure often arises from both
sources—from similarity at one time, from dissimilarity at
another. In every case we must, I think, keep in view good
taste, for this is the best criterion of charm and its opposite.
But about good taste no rhetorician or philosopher has, so
far, produced a definite treatise. The man who first undertook
to write on the subject, Gorgias of Leontini, achieved nothing
2 εὐπρόφορα] εὔφορα F 3 συντεθέντα F 4 πολλὰ ... (5) πολυσύλλαβα
om. P. 7 μηκυνόμενά τε γὰρ F: μηκυνόμεναί τε γὰρ M 8 προίστανται
F 9 τε τῶν Us.: τέ τινων F, E: τινῶν PMV 11 φυλασσομένους EF:
φυλαττόμενον s || ἐπὶ FE: om. PMV || ἀεὶ μένειν EF: διαμένειν PMV 14
ὑπερτείνοντας Us.: ὑπερτείνοντα libri 17 τἀναντία FE: τοὐναντίον PMV
19 ὁμοιογενῶν EM: ὁμοίων γενῶν F: ἀνομοίων PV || ἀνομοιογενῶν EFM:
ὁμογενῶν PV 22 τόδε χρόνου FMV: τὸ λέγειν P 23 πρῶτον P
2. Compare the scholia of Maximus
Planudes on the π. ἰδ. of Hermogenes:
τοῦτο γάρ φησι καὶ Διονύσιος, ὅτι δεῖ
μιγνύειν βραχέσι μακρὰ καὶ πολυσυλλάβοις
ὀλιγοσύλλαβα, τοῦτο γὰρ ἡδέως διατίθησι
τὴν ἀκοήν (Walz Rhett. Gr. v. 520).
12. Cp. Anonymi scholia on Hermog.
π. ἰδ. (Walz vii. 1049), διὰ τοῦτο κάλλους
ἴδιον ὁ ῥυθμός, εἴτε βέβηκεν εἴτε μή·
ἐπειδὴ κατὰ Διονύσιον ἡδύνει τὴν ἀκοὴν
καὶ ποικίλλει, καὶ μὴ ἄρχεσθαι ἀπὸ τῶν
αὐτῶν, μηδὲ λήγειν εἰς αὐτά, ἀλλὰ τὸ ἐξ
ἁπάντων καλῶν ῥυθμῶν, τουτέστι ποδῶν,
συγκεῖσθαι τὸν λόγον· ἀνάγκη γὰρ αὐτὸν
οὕτω καλὸν εἶναι· τάττει δὲ τὸν σπονδεῖον
μετ’ αὐτῶν.
14. ὑπερτείνοντας ... καιρόν: lit. ‘exceeding
due measure in either case.’
On the whole, Usener is perhaps right
in reading the plural here and in l. 11;
clearness, and variety of termination,
recommend the change. But (1) all
MSS. have ὑπερτείνοντα, (2) the singular
has been used in ll. 1, 3, 4 supra, and
so might as well be maintained to the end,
while φυλαττομένους (instead of φυλαττόμενον)
might arise from the initial σ of
σχήμασι.
20. τὸν καιρὸν ὁρᾶν, ‘to have an eye
to (or observe) the rules of good taste,’
is a natural and appropriate expression.
The use of θηρατός in 134 3 is no argument
for reading θηρᾶν here, but rather
tells against the anticipation of so pronounced
a metaphor. Moreover, the
middle voice is found in this sense in
de Demosth. c. 40 τὴν εὐφωνίαν θηρωμένη
καὶ τὴν εὐμέλειαν. With ὁρᾶν cp. de
Demosth. c. 49 ἄλλως τε καὶ τοῦ καιροῦ τὰ
μέτρα ὁρῶν and de Thucyd. c. 1 τῆς
προαιρέσεως οὐχ ἅπαντα κατὰ τὸν ἀκριβέστατον
λογισμὸν ὁρώσης (where θηρώσης
is given in Usener-Radermacher’s text).
21. Quintil. xi. 1. 1 “parata, sicut
superiore libro continetur, facultate
scribendi cogitandique et ex tempore
etiam, cum res poscet, orandi, proxima
est cura, ut dicamus apte; quam virtutem
quartam elocutionis Cicero demonstrat,
quaeque est meo quidem iudicio maxime
necessaria. nam cum sit ornatus orationis
varius et multiplex conveniatque alius
alii: nisi fuerit accommodatus rebus
atque personis, non modo non illustrabit
eam sed etiam destruet et vim rerum in
contrarium vertet.”
22. τόδε χρόνου: Usener reads τόδε
γε (without χρόνου), in view of P’s τὸ
λέγειν. But τόδε γε is unusual in this
sense, whereas ἔτι καὶ εἰς τόδε χρόνου is
found in Antiqq. Rom. i. 16. Cp. i. 38
ibid. καὶ παρὰ Κελτοῖς εἰς τόδε χρόνου
γίνεται: also i. 61, 68, iii. 31, vi. 13.
[134-5]
ὁ Λεοντῖνος οὐδὲν ὅ τι καὶ λόγου ἄξιον ἔγραψεν· οὐδ’ ἔχει
φύσιν τὸ πρᾶγμα εἰς καθολικὴν καὶ ἔντεχνόν τινα περίληψιν
πεσεῖν, οὐδ’ ὅλως ἐπιστήμῃ θηρατός ἐστιν ὁ καιρὸς ἀλλὰ
δόξῃ. ταύτην δ’ οἱ μὲν ἐπὶ πολλῶν καὶ πολλάκις γυμνάσαντες
ἄμεινον τῶν ἄλλων εὑρίσκουσιν αὐτόν, οἱ δ’ 5
ἀγύμναστον ἀφέντες σπανιώτερον καὶ ὥσπερ ἀπὸ τύχης.
ἵνα δὲ καὶ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων εἴπω, ταῦτ’ οἴομαι χρῆναι
φυλάττειν ἐν τῇ συνθέσει τὸν μέλλοντα διαθήσειν τὴν ἀκοὴν
ἡδέως· ἢ τὰ εὐμελῆ καὶ εὔρυθμα καὶ εὔφωνα ὀνόματα, ὑφ’
ὧν γλυκαίνεταί τε καὶ ἐκμαλάττεται καὶ τὸ ὅλον οἰκείως 10
διατίθεται ἡ αἴσθησις, ταῦτα ἀλλήλοις συναρμόττειν, ἢ τὰ
μὴ τοιαύτην ἔχοντα φύσιν ἐγκαταπλέκειν τε καὶ συνυφαίνειν
τοῖς δυναμένοις αὐτὴν γοητεύειν, ὥστε ὑπὸ τῆς ἐκείνων χάριτος
ἐπισκοτεῖσθαι τὴν τούτων ἀηδίαν· οἷόν τι ποιοῦσιν οἱ
φρόνιμοι στρατηλάται κατὰ τὰς συντάξεις τῶν στρατευμάτων· 15
καὶ γὰρ ἐκεῖνοι ἐπικρύπτουσι τοῖς ἰσχυροῖς τὰ ἀσθενῆ, καὶ
γίνεται αὐτοῖς οὐδὲν τῆς δυνάμεως ἄχρηστον. διαναπαύειν
δὲ τὴν ταυτότητά φημι δεῖν μεταβολὰς εὐκαίρους εἰσφέροντα·
καὶ γὰρ ἡ μεταβολὴ παντὸς ἔργου χρῆμα ἡδύ. τελευταῖον
δὲ ὃ δὴ καὶ πάντων κράτιστον, οἰκείαν ἀποδιδόναι τοῖς 20
ὑποκειμένοις καὶ πρέπουσαν ἁρμονίαν. δυσωπεῖσθαι δ’ οὐδὲν
οἴομαι δεῖν οὔτε ὄνομα οὔτε ῥῆμα, ὅ τι καὶ τέτριπται, μὴ
σὺν αἰσχύνῃ λέγεσθαι μέλλον· οὐδὲν γὰρ οὕτω ταπεινὸν ἢ
ῥυπαρὸν ἢ ἄλλην τινὰ δυσχέρειαν ἔχον ἔσεσθαί φημι λόγου
μόριον, ᾧ σημαίνεταί τι σῶμα ἢ πρᾶγμα, ὃ μηδεμίαν ἕξει 25
χώραν ἐπιτηδείαν ἐν λόγοις. παρακελεύομαι δὲ τῇ συνθέσει
[135]
worth mentioning. The nature of the subject, indeed, is not
such that it can fall under any comprehensive and systematic
treatment, nor can good taste in general be apprehended by
science, but only by personal judgment. Those who have
continually trained this latter faculty in many connexions are
more successful than others in attaining good taste, while those
who leave it untrained are rarely successful, and only by a sort
of lucky stroke.
To proceed. I think the following rules should be observed
in composition by a writer who looks to please the ear. Either
he should link to one another melodious, rhythmical, euphonious
words, by which the sense of hearing is touched with a
feeling of sweetness and softness,—those which, to put it broadly,
come home to it most; or he should intertwine and interweave
those which have no such natural effect with those that can
so bewitch the ear that the unattractiveness of the one set is
overshadowed by the grace of the other. We may compare the
practice of good tacticians when marshalling their armies: they
mask the weak portions by means of the strong, and so no
part of their force proves useless. In the same way I maintain
we ought to relieve monotony by the tasteful introduction of
variety, since variety is an element of pleasure in everything we
do. And last, and certainly most important of all, the setting
which is assigned to the subject matter must be appropriate
and becoming to it. And, in my opinion, we ought not to
feel shy of using any noun or verb, however hackneyed, unless
it carries with it some shameful association; for I venture to
assert that no part of speech which signifies a person or a thing
will prove so mean, squalid, or otherwise offensive as to have no
fitting place in discourse. My advice is that, trusting to the
1 οὐδὲν F: οὐδ’ MV: om. P || καὶ F: om. PMV 5 αὐτόν FM: om. PV 6
ἀγύμναστον F, γρ M: ἀνάσκητον PM1V || σπανιωτέρ(αν) P, MV 9 ἢ EFM:
om. PV 10 ἐκμαλάττεται F: μαλάττεται PMV 15 συντάξεις FM: τάξ[ει]ς
cum litura P, V 16 ἐπικρύπτουσι EF: συγκρύπτουσιν P, MV 17 ἄχρηστον
FE: μέρος ἄχρηστον PMV 20 κράτιστον EF: ἐστὶ κράτιστον PMV 21 καὶ
πρέπουσαν om. F 22 δεῖν om. F || ὅτι καὶ τέτριπται EF: ὅτ’ (οὔτ’ V)
ἐπιτέτραπται PMV 23 μέλλον EF: om. PMV 24 ῥυπαρὸν EF: ῥυπαρὸν ἢ
μιαρὸν PV: μιαρὸν M || ἔχον om. F 26 δὲ EF: δὲ ἐν PMV
1. For οὐδ’ ὅτι (as read by Schaefer)
Dobree suggested a number of alternatives,—οἶδ’
(= οἶδα), οὐδὲν, οὐδ’ ὁτιοῦν.
7. The passage that begins here is,
itself, a good example of rhythmical and
melodious writing.
10. τὸ ὅλον: cp. Long. p. 207, s.v.
σύνολον.
15. The description in Iliad iv. 297-300
may be in Dionysius’ mind. Cp.
Cic. Brut. 36. 139 “omnia veniebant
Antonio in mentem; eaque suo quaeque
loco, ubi plurimum proficere et valere
possent, ut ab imperatore equites pedites
levis armatura, sic ab illo in maxime
opportunis orationis partibus collocabantur”;
Xen. Cyrop. vii. 5. 5 ἀναπτυχθείσης
δ’ οὕτω τῆς φάλαγγος ἀνάγκη τοὺς
πρώτους ἀρίστους εἶναι καὶ τοὺς τελευταίους,
ἐν μέσῳ δὲ τοὺς κακίστους τετάχθαι.
19. Cp. Dionys. Hal. Ep. ad Cn.
Pompeium c. 3 ὡς ἡδὺ χρῆμα ἐν ἱστορίας
γραφῇ μεταβολὴ καὶ ποικίλον: Aristot.
Eth. vii. 1154 b μεταβολὴ δὲ πάντων
γλυκύ, κατὰ τὸν ποιητήν: Eurip. Orest.
234 μεταβολὴ πάντων γλυκύ. Dionysius’
whole-hearted faith in the virtues of
μεταβολή (considered in its widest bearings)
rests on a basis of permanent
truth. If we open Shakespeare at
random, we can see how the verbal forms
(‘remember,’ ‘bequeathed,’ ‘sayest,’
‘charged,’ ‘begins’) are varied in the
opening sentence of As You Like It;
and this though our language is almost
wholly analytical. And the words that
fall from Lear in his madness (King
Lear iv. 6) are full of the most moving
μεταβολαί, as well as of the most pathetic
variations from τὸ εὐμελὲς to τὸ ἐμμελές.
[136-7]
πιστεύοντας ἀνδρείως πάνυ καὶ τεθαρρηκότως αὐτὰ ἐκφέρειν
Ὁμήρῳ τε παραδείγματι χρωμένους, παρ’ ᾧ καὶ τὰ
εὐτελέστατα κεῖται τῶν ὀνομάτων, καὶ Δημοσθένει καὶ
Ἡροδότῳ καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις, ὧν ὀλίγῳ ὕστερον μνησθήσομαι
καθ’ ὅ τι ἂν ἁρμόττῃ περὶ ἑκάστου. ταῦτά μοι περὶ τῆς 5
ἡδείας εἰρήσθω συνθέσεως, ὀλίγα μὲν ὑπὲρ πολλῶν θεωρημάτων,
ἱκανὰ δὲ ὡς κεφάλαια εἶναι.
XIII
εἶἑν. καλὴ δ’ ἁρμονία πῶς γένοιτ’ ἂν εἴ τις ἔροιτό με
καὶ ἐκ ποίων θεωρημάτων, οὐκ ἄλλως πως μὰ Δία φαίην ἂν
οὐδ’ ἐξ ἄλλων τινῶν ἢ ἐξ ὧνπερ ἡ ἡδεῖα· τὰ γὰρ αὐτὰ 10
ποιητικὰ ἀμφοῖν, μέλος εὐγενές, ῥυθμὸς ἀξιωματικός, μεταβολὴ
μεγαλοπρεπής, τὸ πᾶσι τούτοις παρακολουθοῦν πρέπον.
ὥσπερ γὰρ ἡδεῖά τις γίνεται λέξις, οὕτω καὶ γενναία τις
ἑτέρα, καὶ ῥυθμὸς ὥσπερ γλαφυρός τις, οὕτω καὶ σεμνός τις
ἕτερος, καὶ τὸ μεταβάλλειν ὥσπερ χάριν ἔχει, οὕτω καὶ 15
πίνον· τὸ δὲ δὴ πρέπον εἰ μὴ τοῦ καλοῦ πλεῖστον ἕξει
μέρος, σχολῇ γ’ ἂν ἄλλου τινός. ἐξ ἁπάντων δή φημι
τούτων ἐπιτηδεύεσθαι δεῖν τὸ καλὸν ἐν ἁρμονίᾳ λέξεως ἐξ
ὧνπερ καὶ τὸ ἡδύ. αἰτία δὲ κἀνταῦθα ἥ τε τῶν γραμμάτων
φύσις καὶ ἡ τῶν συλλαβῶν δύναμις, ἐξ ὧν πλέκεται τὰ ὀνόματα· 20
ὑπὲρ ὧν καιρὸς ἂν εἴη λέγειν, ὥσπερ ὑπεσχόμην.
XIV
ἀρχαὶ μὲν οὖν εἰσι τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης φωνῆς καὶ ἐνάρθρου
[137]
effect of the composition, we should bring out such expressions
with a bold and manly confidence, following the example of
Homer, in whom the most commonplace words are found, and
of Demosthenes and Herodotus and others, whom I will mention
a little later so far as is suitable in each case. I think I have
now spoken at sufficient length on charm of style. My treatment
has been but a brief survey of a wide field, but will furnish
the main heads of the study.
CHAPTER XIII
HOW TO RENDER COMPOSITION BEAUTIFUL
So far, so good. But, if some one were to ask me in what
way, and by attention to what principles, literary structure can
be made beautiful, I should reply: In no other way, believe me,
and by no other means, than those by which it is made charming,
since the same elements contribute to both, namely noble melody,
stately rhythm, imposing variety, and the appropriateness which
all these need. For as there is a charming diction, so there is
another that is noble; as there is a polished rhythm, so also is
there another that is dignified; as variety in one passage adds
grace, so in another it adds mellowness; and as for appropriateness,
it will prove the chief source of beauty, or else the source of
nothing at all. I repeat, the study of beauty in composition should
follow the same lines throughout as the study of charm. The
prime cause, here as before, is to be found in the nature of the
letters and the phonetic effect of the syllables, which are the
raw material out of which the fabric of words is woven. The
time may perhaps now have come for redeeming my promise to
discuss these.
CHAPTER XIV
THE LETTERS: THEIR CLASSIFICATION, QUALITIES, AND
MODE OF PRODUCTION
There are in human and articulate speech a number of first-beginnings
2 χρωμένους EFMV: χρ(ω)μεν(ος) P 4 ὀλίγον F: sed cf. 154 7
7 εἶναι· εἶἑν sic P, FM: εἶεν V 8 με καὶ F: ἢ PMV 9 μὰ PMV: νὴ F
10 οὐδ’] οὐκ PV || ἡ F: om. PMV 13 οὕτω καὶ PMV: οὕτω F 14 ἑτέρα
PMV: ἄρα F || σεμνός τις F: σεμνὸς PMV 15 ἔχει P: ἔχει (ἔχειν V) τινὰ
FMV 16 πινόν (θ suprascripto) P: πιθανόν V: τὸ πῖνον M: πόνον F 18
δεῖν] δὴ F 20 ὀνόματα PE: ὀνόματα ταῦτα FMV 22 φωνῆς καὶ ἐνάρθρου
REF: καὶ ἐνάρθρου φωνῆς αἱ PMVs
6. ὑπέρ = περί: l. 21 infra, 96 2, etc.
Reiske’s ἀπό is attractive; but does
ὀλίγα really = ὀλίγα θεωρήματα?
8. εἶἑν = “So!” The breathing on
the last syllable (as given by the best
manuscripts, here and in other authors)
helps to distinguish this word from the
third pers. plur. optat. of εἰμί.
9. In a negative sentence, μὰ Δία is
to be preferred to νὴ Δία.
13. λέξις: μέλος (cp. l. 11 supra) is
here in question. Hence Usener
suggests μέλισις. Perhaps λέξις (‘the
words,’ ‘the libretto’) is here felt to
include the music,—‘a passage set to
music’: cp. 124 22 καὶ γὰρ ἐν ταύτῃ καὶ
μέλος ἔχουσιν αἱ λέξεις (‘the words’) καὶ
ῥυθμὸν καὶ μεταβολὴν καὶ πρέπον, and
contrast 126 20-1.
16. πίνον, ‘mellowness,’ ‘ripeness’
(see Gloss.). The readings of FPMV
seem all to point in this direction.
πόνον (F’s reading) might possibly mean
either ‘involve trouble’ (to the author)
or ‘suggest painstaking’ (to the reader).
Usener conjectures τόνον.
22. Chapter xiv., which in some respects
is the most interesting in the
treatise, might easily be ridiculed by
one of those scoffers whom Dionysius
elsewhere (252 17) mentions with aversion.
In Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme
(ii. 4) there is much that could serve for
a parody of the C. V.—the Maître de
Philosophie with his “Sans la science,
la vie est presque une image de la mort”
(nam sine doctrina vita est quasi mortis
imago), his “tout ce qui n’est point
prose est vers; et tout ce qui n’est point
vers est prose,” and (particularly) his
remarks on l’orthographie: “Pour bien
suivre votre pensée et traiter cette
matière en philosophe, il faut commencer
selon l’ordre des choses, par une exacte
connaissance de la nature des lettres, et
de la différente manière de les prononcer
toutes. Et là-dessus j’ai à vous dire que
les lettres sont divisées en voyelles, ainsi
dites voyelles parce qu’elles expriment
les voix; et en consonnes, ainsi appelées
consonnes parce qu’elles sonnent avec
les voyelles, et ne font que marquer les
diverses articulations des voix.” These
remarks include descriptions (many of
which are taken almost verbatim from
De Cordemoy’s Discours physique de la
parole, published in 1668) of the mode
in which various letters are formed, and
(incidentally) M. Jourdain’s exclamation,
“A, E, I, I, I, I. Cela est vrai. Vive
la science!”
[138-9]
μηκέτι δεχόμεναι διαίρεσιν, ἃ καλοῦμεν στοιχεῖα καὶ γράμματα·
γράμματα μὲν ὅτι γραμμαῖς τισι σημαίνεται, στοιχεῖα δὲ ὅτι
πᾶσα φωνὴ τὴν γένεσιν ἐκ τούτων λαμβάνει πρώτων καὶ τὴν
διάλυσιν εἰς ταῦτα ποιεῖται τελευταῖα. τῶν δὴ στοιχείων τε
καὶ γραμμάτων οὐ μία πάντων φύσις, διαφορὰ δὲ αὐτῶν 5
πρώτη μέν, ὡς Ἀριστόξενος ὁ μουσικὸς ἀποφαίνεται, καθ’ ἣν
τὰ μὲν φωνὰς ἀποτελεῖ, τὰ δὲ ψόφους· φωνὰς μὲν τὰ
λεγόμενα φωνήεντα, ψόφους δὲ τὰ λοιπὰ πάντα. δευτέρα δὲ
καθ’ ἣν τῶν μὴ φωνηέντων ἃ μὲν καθ’ ἑαυτὰ ψόφους ὁποίους
δή τινας ἀποτελεῖν πέφυκε, ῥοῖζον ἢ σιγμὸν ἢ μυγμὸν ἢ 10
τοιούτων τινῶν ἄλλων ἤχων δηλωτικούς· ἃ δ’ ἐστὶν ἁπάσης
ἄμοιρα φωνῆς καὶ ψόφου καὶ οὐχ οἷά τε ἠχεῖσθαι καθ’ ἑαυτά·
διὸ δὴ ταῦτα μὲν ἄφωνα τινὲς ἐκάλεσαν, θάτερα δὲ ἡμίφωνα.
οἱ δὲ τριχῇ νείμαντες τὰς πρώτας τε καὶ στοιχειώδεις τῆς
φωνῆς δυνάμεις φωνήεντα μὲν ἐκάλεσαν, ὅσα καὶ καθ’ ἑαυτὰ 15
[139]
admitting no further division which we call elements
and letters: “letters” (γράμματα) because they are denoted by
certain lines (γραμμαί), and “elements” (στοιχεῖα) because
every sound made by the voice originates in these, and is
ultimately resolvable into them. The elements and letters are
not all of the same nature. Of the differences between them,
the first is, as Aristoxenus the musician makes clear, that some
represent vocal sounds, while others represent noises: the former
being represented by the so-called “vowels,” the latter by all the
other letters. A second difference is that some of the non-vowels
by their nature give rise to some noise or other,—a whizzing, a
hissing, a murmur, or suggestions of some such sounds, whereas
others are devoid of all voice or noise and cannot be sounded by
themselves. Hence some writers have called the latter “voiceless”
(“mutes”), the others “semi-voiced” (“semi-vowels”).
Those writers who make a threefold division of the first or
elemental powers of the voice give the name of voiced (vowels)
to all letters which can be uttered, either by themselves or
1 ἃ R: ἃς libri 3 πρώτων F:
πρτω
P: πρῶτον RMVs 4 τελευταῖα P: τελευταῖον R: τελευταῖαν FVs: τελευταίαν
M 9 μὴ φωνηέντων REFM: μὲν φωνηέντων PRb: φωνηέντων Vs 10 σιγμὸν
REF: συριγμὸν PMVs || μυγμὸν RE: μιγμὸν F: ποππυσμὸν P: ἀποπτυσμὸν Vs:
ποππυσμὸν ἢ μυγμὸν M 11 δηλωτικούς RF: δηλωτικά EPMVs 13 διὸ δὴ
REF: om. PMVs || θάτερα] καθάπερ F 14 τῆς φωνῆς RFM: φωνῆς PVs
1. The following note, given in Usener-Radermacher
ii. 1, p. 48, is important
for its bearing on the text of the C. V.:
“Scholiasta Hermogenis Περὶ ἰδεῶν I 6
in Walzii rhet. gr. VII. p. 964, 23 (correctus
ex codd. Paris. 1983 = Ra et 2977 =
Rb) ἀλλὰ περὶ μὲν στοιχείων ἄριστα
παραδίδωσιν ὁ Διονύσιος ἐν τῷ περὶ
συνθήκης ὀνομάτων συγγράμματι· λέγει
γὰρ τί συμβέβηκεν ἑκάστῳ τῶν στοιχείων
καὶ ποίαν μὲν δύναμιν ἔχει τὰ φωνήεντα,
ποίαν δὲ τὰ σύμφωνα καὶ πάλιν αὖ τὰ
ἡμίφωνα· πλὴν ἵνα τι καὶ θαυμάσωμεν
τὸν ἄνδρα τῆς δεξιότητος, αὐτὴν παραθώμεθα
τὴν λέξιν· Ἀρχαὶ μὲν ... εἶναι
ἐκεῖνα (p. 969. 18 W.). καὶ ταῦτα μὲν ὁ
Διονύσιος· οἷς προσέχων οὐκ ἂν διαμάρτοις
τοῦ προσήκοντος. εἰ γὰρ σεμνὸν ποιεῖν
ἐθέλεις (sic b: ἐθέλοις a Walzius) τὸν
λόγον, ἐκλεξάμενος τὰ μακρὰ καὶ ὅσα
τεταμένον (τεταγμένον W) λαμβάνει καὶ
διηνεκῆ τὸν αὐλὸν τοῦ πνεύματος λάμβανε·
φεῦγε δὲ τὰ βραχέως ἐξ ἀποκοπῆς τε λεγόμενα
καὶ μιᾷ πληγῇ πνεύματος καὶ τῆς
ἀρτηρίας ἐπὶ βραχὺ κινηθείσης ἐκφερόμενα·
τὰ γὰρ μακρὰ τῶν φωνηέντων τῷ σεμνῷ
μᾶλλον ἁρμόττει ἅτε (εἴ τε b) μηκυνόμενα
κατὰ τὴν ἐκφορὰν καὶ πολὺν ἠχοῦντα
χρόνον· ἀνοίκεια (Walzius: ἀνοίκειον a b)
δὲ τὰ βραχέως λεγόμενα καὶ σπαδονίζοντα
(σπαδωνίζοντα b σπανίζοντα Walzius) τὸν
ἦχον. ἀλλ’ οὐχ ἁπλῶς οὐδὲ (οὔτε libri) τὰ
μακρὰ δεῖ λαμβάνειν, ἀλλὰ τὰ κατὰ τὴν
ἐκφορὰν διογκοῦντα τὸ στόμα καὶ ὅσα
λέγεται τοῦ στόματος ἐπὶ πλεῖστον
ἀνοιγομένου καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος ἄνω
φερομένου (ἀναφερομένου b) πρὸς τὸν
οὐρανόν, ἢ ὅσα περιστέλλει τὰ χείλη καὶ
τὸ πνεῦμα ποιεῖ περὶ τὸ ἀκροστόμιον.
ὥστε δεῖ μάλιστα χρῆσθαι ταῖς λέξεσιν
ὅσαι πλεονάζουσι τῷ τε ᾱ καὶ τῷ ω̄.”
2. Dionysius Thrax Ars Gramm. § 6
(Uhlig p. 9) γράμματα δὲ λέγεται διὰ τὸ
γραμμαῖς καὶ ξυσμαῖς τυποῦσθαι· γράψαι
γὰρ τὸ ξῦσαι παρὰ τοῖς παλαιοῖς.
3. With this passage generally cp.
Aristot. Poet. c. 20 στοιχεῖον μὲν οὖν
ἐστιν φωνὴ ἀδιαίρετος, οὐ πᾶσα δὲ ἀλλ’
ἐξ ἧς πέφυκε συνετὴ γίγνεσθαι φωνή· καὶ
γὰρ τῶν θηρίων εἰσὶν ἀδιαίρετοι φωναί, ὧν
οὐδεμίαν λέγω στοιχεῖον· ταύτης δὲ μέρη
τό τε φωνῆεν καὶ τὸ ἡμίφωνον καὶ ἄφωνον.
ἔστιν δὲ φωνῆεν μὲν ‹τὸ› ἄνευ προσβολῆς
ἔχον φωνὴν ἀκουστήν, οἷον τὸ Σ καὶ τὸ Ρ,
ἄφωνον δὲ τὸ μετὰ προσβολῆς καθ’ αὑτὸ
μὲν οὐδεμίαν ἔχον φωνήν, μετὰ δὲ τῶν
ἐχόντων τινὰ φωνὴν γιγνόμενον ἀκουστόν,
οἷον τὸ Γ καὶ τὸ Δ. ταῦτα δὲ διαφέρει
σχήμασίν τε τοῦ στόματος καὶ τόποις καὶ
δασύτητι καὶ ψιλότητι καὶ μήκει καὶ
βραχύτητι, ἔτι δὲ ὀξύτητι καὶ βαρύτητι καὶ
τῷ μέσῳ· περὶ ὧν καθ’ ἕκαστον ἐν τοῖς
μετρικοῖς προσήκει θεωρεῖν.
6. Aristoxenus, of Tarentum, the
great musical theorist of Greece, lived
during the times of Alexander the Great.
Dionysius refers to him also in de
Demosth. c. 48.
9. Cp. Sext. Empir. adv. Math. i. 102
καὶ ἡμίφωνα μὲν ὅσα δι’ αὑτῶν ῥοῖζον ἢ
σιγμὸν ἢ μυγμὸν ἤ τινα παραπλήσιον ἦχον
κατὰ τὴν ἐκφώνησιν ἀποτελεῖν πεφυκότα,
κτλ.
10. ποππυσμόν, the reading of P, might
mean ‘a popping sound.’
13. The division into vowels, consonants,
and mutes appears in Plato
Cratyl. 424 C ἆρ’ οὖν καὶ ἡμᾶς οὕτω δεῖ
πρῶτον μὲν τὰ φωνήεντα (‘vowels’) διελέσθαι,
ἔπειτα τῶν ἑτέρων κατὰ εἴδη τά
τε ἄφωνα (‘consonants’) καὶ ἄφθογγα
(‘mutes’); ἄφωνα seems in this passage
to mean ‘consonants’; in later times
σύμφωνα was often so used. In the
Philebus 18 D the originator of an ‘art
of grammar’ is attributed to the Egyptian
Theuth.
[140-1]
φωνεῖται καὶ μεθ’ ἑτέρων καὶ ἔστιν αὐτοτελῆ· ἡμίφωνα δ’ ὅσα
μετὰ μὲν φωνηέντων αὐτὰ ἑαυτῶν κρεῖττον ἐκφέρεται, καθ’
ἑαυτὰ δὲ χεῖρον καὶ οὐκ αὐτοτελῶς· ἄφωνα δ’ ὅσα οὔτε τὰς
τελείας οὔτε τὰς ἡμιτελεῖς φωνὰς ἔχει καθ’ ἑαυτά, μεθ’
ἑτέρων δ’ ἐκφωνεῖται. 5
ἀριθμὸς δὲ αὐτῶν ὅστις ἐστίν, οὐ ῥᾴδιον εἰπεῖν ἀκριβῶς,
ἐπεὶ πολλὴν παρέσχε καὶ τοῖς πρὸ ἡμῶν ἀπορίαν τὸ πρᾶγμα·
οἱ μὲν γὰρ ᾠήθησαν εἶναι τριακαίδεκα τὰ πάντα τῆς φωνῆς
στοιχεῖα, κατεσκευάσθαι δὲ τὰ λοιπὰ ἐκ τούτων· οἱ δὲ καὶ
τῶν εἰκοσιτεσσάρων οἷς χρώμεθα νῦν πλείω. ἡ μὲν οὖν ὑπὲρ 10
τούτων θεωρία γραμματικῆς τε καὶ μετρικῆς, εἰ δὲ βούλεταί
τις, καὶ φιλοσοφίας οἰκειοτέρα· ἡμῖν δὲ ἀπόχρη μήτ’ ἐλάττους
τῶν κ̅δ̅ μήτε πλείους ὑποθεμένοις εἶναι τὰς τῆς φωνῆς ἀρχὰς
τὰ συμβεβηκότα αὐτοῖς λέγειν, τὴν ἀρχὴν ἀπὸ τῶν φωνηέντων
ποιησαμένοις. 15
ἔστι δὴ ταῦτα τὸν ἀριθμὸν ζ̄, δύο μὲν βραχέα τό τε ε̄
καὶ τὸ ο̄, δύο δὲ μακρὰ τό τε η̄ καὶ τὸ ω̄, τρία δὲ δίχρονα
τό τε ᾱ καὶ τὸ ῑ καὶ τὸ ῡ, καὶ γὰρ ἐκτείνεται ταῦτα καὶ
συστέλλεται· καὶ αὐτὰ οἱ μὲν δίχρονα, ὥσπερ ἔφην, οἱ δὲ
μεταπτωτικὰ καλοῦσιν. φωνεῖται δὲ ταῦτα πάντα παρὰ τῆς 20
ἀρτηρίας συνηχούσης τῷ πνεύματι καὶ τοῦ στόματος ἁπλῶς
σχηματισθέντος τῆς τε γλώττης οὐδὲν πραγματευομένης ἀλλ’
[141]
together with others, and are self-sufficing; semi-vowels to all
which are pronounced better in combination with vowels, worse
and imperfectly when taken singly; mutes to all which by themselves
admit of neither perfect nor half-perfect utterance, but
are pronounced only in combination with others.
It is not easy to say exactly what the number of these
elements is, and our predecessors also have felt much doubt upon
the question. Some have held that there are only thirteen
elements of speech all told, and that the rest are but combinations
of these; others that there are more than even the twenty-four
which we now recognize. The discussion of this point belongs
more properly to grammar and prosody, or even, perhaps, to
philosophy. It is enough for us to assume the elements of
speech to be neither more nor less than twenty-four, and to
specify the properties of each, beginning with the vowels.
These are seven in number: two short, viz. ε and ο; two
long, viz. η and ω; and three common, viz. α, ι and υ. These
last can be either long or short, and some call them “common,”
as I have just done, others “variable.” All these sounds are
produced from the windpipe, which resounds to the breath, while
the mouth assumes a simple shape; the tongue takes no part
2 αὐτὰ ἑαυτῶν REF: om. PMVs 4 ἡμιτελεῖς REF: ἡμιτελείας PMVs 5 δὲ
ἐκφωνεῖται REFMVs: δὲ καὶ φωνεῖται P 6 ἀριθμὸς RFM: ὁ ἀριθμὸς PVs
11 εἰ δὲ RF: εἰ PMVs 14 τὰ RF: καὶ τὰ PMVs || αὐτοῖς RF: αὐτὴι P, MVs
16 μὲν βραχέα τότε (τὸ R) έ καὶ τὸ ό, δύο δὲ μακρὰ F, ER: μὲν μακρὰ
PMVs 18 καὶ γὰρ ἐκτείνεται ταῦτα RFE: ἃ καὶ ἐκτείνεται PMVs 19 καὶ
αὐτὰ RF: ἃ PMVs || μὲν] μὲν ἤδη R 20 φωνεῖται RF: ἐκφωνεῖται EPMVs ||
παρὰ τῆς EF: ἀπὸ τῆς M: τῆς RPVs 21 συνηχούσης R: συνεχούσης libri ||
τῶι πνεύματι R: τὸ π̅ν̅ι̅ F: τὸ πνεῦμα EPMVs || στόματος] σώματος R
5. “On referring to the treatise of
Aristotle περὶ ἀκουστῶν, the notion which
underlies all Greek phonetics will be seen
to be as follows. Breath is expelled by
the lungs through the windpipe into the
mouth, whence it passes out. The chief
differences of speech-sounds are effected
by ‘the strokes of the air’ (αἱ τοῦ ἀέρος
πληγαί) and the configurations of the
mouth (οἱ τοῦ στόματος σχηματισμοί).
On the state of the lungs, their hardness,
dryness, thickness, or softness,
moistness, freedom, much stress is laid;
and also on the amount and strength of
the ‘stroke,’ which drives out the air
forcibly (ἐκθλίβῃ τὸν ἀέρα βιαίως). Much
is said of a long and short windpipe.
‘All that have long necks speak forcibly,
as geese, cranes, and cocks. When the
windpipe is short, the breath necessarily
falls out quickly, and the stroke of the
air becomes stronger, and all such persons
must speak sharper (ὀξύτερον) because of
the rapidity with which the breath is
borne on.’ But there is not the least
reference to the larynx or vocal chords,
to the real organ by which voice proper
is formed. No doubt Dionysius was not
wiser than Aristotle in these matters.
This must be well borne in mind for
the full appreciation of what follows,”
A. J. E. [But for λάρυγξ cp. the note
on l. 21 infra.]
14. αὐτοῖς: στοιχεῖα (cp. ll. 9 and 10),
rather than αἱ τῆς φωνῆς ἀρχαί, seems
to determine the grammar here. The
reference of αὐτά, αὐτό, τοῦτο, etc., is
often very general; e.g. Aristoph. Ran.
1025 ἀλλ’ ὑμῖν αὔτ’ [sc. τὰ πολεμικά, to
be supplied from τὸν πόλεμον in the
previous line] ἐξῆν ἀσκεῖν, ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἐπὶ
τοῦτ’ [sc. τὸ ἀσκεῖν] ἐτράπεσθε, and 1464
εὖ, πλήν γ’ ὁ δικαστὴς αὐτὰ [sc. τὰ χρήματα,
implied in πόρος] καταπίνει μόνος;
Thucyd. vii. 55 2 τὰ πρὸ αὐτῶν (‘before
the late events’). Cp. also note on 198
18 infra.
Dionysius makes no specific reference,
here or elsewhere in his treatise,
to the diphthongs. The probable inference
is that he regarded them as true
diphthongs, formed from the simple
vowels whose pronunciation is separately
described by him.
16. See Introduction, p. 46 supra, as
to Sir Thomas Smith on this passage.—It
is interesting also to notice the praise
which Smith, in the same treatise on
Greek pronunciation (Havercamp ii. p.
537), lavishes on Dionysius’ description
of various vowels: “Quis Apelles
aut Parrhasius faciem hominis penicillo
vel coloribus exprimere potuit felicius,
differentiamque constituere inter diversos
vultus, quam hic verbis vocalium naturam
distinxit ac separavit?”
21. With συνεχούσης τὸ πνεῦμα the
meaning would be ‘while the windpipe
constricts the breath.’ But the reading
given by R represents the facts with a
fair degree of accuracy, and it may be
compared with Aristot. Hist. An. ix. 4
τὰ μὲν οὖν φωνήεντα ἡ φωνὴ καὶ ὁ λάρυγξ
ἀφίησιν, τὰ δ’ ἄφωνα ἡ γλῶττα καὶ τὰ χείλη.
ἁπλῶς σχηματισθέντος: “meaning
perhaps that the mouth is not continually
varied in shape,” A. J. E.
22. οὐδὲν πραγματευομένης: “that is,
it does not move about, though it directs
the breath,” A. J. E.
ἀλλ’ ἠρεμούσης: “meaning that it
does not vibrate as for λ and ρ,” A. J. E.
[142-3]
ἠρεμούσης. πλὴν τὰ μὲν μακρὰ καὶ τῶν διχρόνων ἃ μακρῶς
λέγεται τεταμένον λαμβάνει καὶ διηνεκῆ τὸν αὐλὸν τοῦ πνεύματος,
τὰ δὲ βραχέα ἢ βραχέως λεγόμενα ἐξ ἀποκοπῆς τε καὶ
μιᾷ πληγῇ πνεύματος καὶ τῆς ἀρτηρίας ἐπὶ βραχὺ κινηθείσης
ἐκφέρεται. τούτων δὴ κράτιστα μέν ἐστι καὶ φωνὴν ἡδίστην 5
ἀποτελεῖ τά τε μακρὰ καὶ τῶν διχρόνων ὅσα μηκύνεται κατὰ
τὴν ἐκφοράν, ὅτι πολὺν ἠχεῖται χρόνον καὶ τὸν τοῦ πνεύματος
οὐκ ἀποκόπτει τόνον· χείρω δὲ τὰ βραχέα ἢ βραχέως λεγόμενα,
ὅτι μικρόφωνά τ’ ἐστὶ καὶ σπαδονίζει τὸν ἦχον. αὐτῶν
δὲ τῶν μακρῶν πάλιν εὐφωνότατον μὲν τὸ ᾱ, ὅταν ἐκτείνηται· 10
λέγεται γὰρ ἀνοιγομένου τε τοῦ στόματος ἐπὶ πλεῖστον καὶ
τοῦ πνεύματος ἄνω φερομένου πρὸς τὸν οὐρανόν. δεύτερον δὲ
τὸ η̄, διότι κάτω τε περὶ τὴν βάσιν τῆς γλώττης ἐρείδει τὸν
ἦχον ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἄνω, καὶ μετρίως ἀνοιγομένου τοῦ στόματος.
τρίτον δὲ τὸ ω̄· στρογγυλίζεται γὰρ ἐν αὐτῷ τὸ στόμα καὶ 15
περιστέλλεται τὰ χείλη τήν τε πληγὴν τὸ πνεῦμα περὶ τὸ
ἀκροστόμιον ποιεῖται. ἔτι δ’ ἧττον τούτου τὸ ῡ· περὶ γὰρ
αὐτὰ τὰ χείλη συστολῆς γινομένης ἀξιολόγου πνίγεται καὶ
στενὸς ἐκπίπτει ὁ ἦχος. ἔσχατον δὲ πάντων τὸ ῑ· περὶ τοὺς
[143]
in the process but remains at rest. But the long vowels, and
those common vowels that are pronounced long, have an
extended and continuous passage of breath, while those that are
short or pronounced as short are uttered abruptly, with one
burst of breath, the movement of the windpipe being but brief.
Of these the strongest, which also produce the most pleasing
sound, are the long ones and those common ones which are
lengthened in utterance, the reason being that they are sounded
for a long time, and do not cut short the tension of the breath.
The short ones, or those pronounced short, are inferior, because
they lack sonorousness and curtail the sound. Again, of the long
vowels themselves the most euphonious is α, when prolonged;
for it is pronounced with the mouth open to the fullest extent,
and with the breath forced upwards to the palate. η holds the
second place, inasmuch as it drives the sound down against the
base of the tongue and not upwards, and the mouth is fairly
open. Third comes ω: in pronouncing this the mouth is
rounded, the lips are contracted, and the impact of the breath is
on the edge of the mouth. Still inferior to this is υ; for,
through a marked contraction taking place right round the
lips, the sound is strangled and comes out thin. Last of
7 ἠχεῖ R (ut videtur) 8 οὐκ ἀποκόπτει τόνον RF: οὐκ ἀποκόπτει χρόνον
E: οὐ κατακόπτει τὸν τόνον PMVs 9 σπαδονίζει PMVs: σπανίζει R (sed
vid. n. 138 1) EF 10 πάλιν REF: om. PMs 12 ἄνω φερομένου
RaPMVs: ἀναφερομένου RbEF 13 διότι REF: ὅτι PMVs || κάτω τε F:
τε κάτω R: κάτω EPMVs 14 ἀλλ’ οὐκ REF: ἀκόλουθον ἀλλ’ οὐκ PMVs || τοῦ
στόματος REFM: om. PVs 16 περιστέλλεται REF: περιστέλλει PMVs 17
ἔτι RF: ἔστι EPMVs 18 γινομένης REF: γενομένης PMVs
5. With regard to the euphoniousness
of the Egyptian vowels there is an interesting
passage in Demetr. de Eloc. § 71:
“In Egypt the priests, when singing
hymns in praise of the gods, employ the
seven vowels, which they utter in due
succession; and the sound of these letters
is so euphonious that men listen to it in
preference to flute and lyre.”
9. σπαδονίζει: see Gloss., s.v.
10. For the effect of the a sound in
Latin cp. Cic. Tusc. Disp. ii. 9. 22
“haec dextra Lernam taetram, mactata
excetra, | placavit: haec bicorporem
afflixit manum: | Erymanthiam haec
vastificam abiecit beluam: | haec e
Tartarea tenebrica abstractum plaga | tricipitem
eduxit Hydra generatum canem”
(a translation of Soph. Trach. 1094-99).
11. Cp. Le Bourg. Gent. ii. 4 “la
voix A se forme en ouvrant fort la
bouche”; and the rest of Molière’s comic
phonetics furnish similar points of coincidence
with this chapter of Dionysius.
12. “The position of the tongue has
to be inferred from the presumed direction
of the breath, on which many other
writers besides Dionysius have laid
stress; for A probably the tongue was
depressed, so as to allow the breath to
enter the mouth freely, and the sound
was either a in ‘father,’ or, with a still
more depressed tongue, the French a in
‘passer,’ which is a common Scotch pronunciation
of the vowel a,” A. J. E.
13. “The description which Dionysius
gives of the production of η and of ε is
unfortunately not of such a kind that
we can with any certainty infer the distinction
of an open or closed sound,”
Blass Pronunciation of Ancient Greek
p. 36 (Purton’s translation).
14. The καί introduces a specification
which is parallel to those which follow κάτω.
15. For the effect of the o sound (notwithstanding
any differences in the two
languages) cp. Cic. Cat. iv. init. “video,
patres conscripti, in me omnium vestra
ora atque oculos conversos. video, vos
non solum de vestro ac reipublicae, verum
etiam, si id depulsum sit, de meo periculo
esse sollicitos.” And in Greek, the
Homeric lines quoted on 154 23, 156 4
infra.—The question whether ω = ‘open’
or ‘closed’ o depends upon what position
of the lips Dionysius’ description is taken
to indicate.
17. ἧττον, ‘less,’ might mean inferior
either in quality of tone or in the degree
of opening of the mouth (A. J. E.).
τὸ ῡ: this vowel can, as in Aristoph.
Plut. 895, be so pronounced as to convey
the sensations of a sycophant in the
presence of roasted meats:—
ἀρνεῖσθον; ἔνδον ἐστίν, ὦ μιαρωτάτω,
πολὺ χρῆμα τεμαχῶν καὶ κρεῶν ὠπτημένων.
ὒ ὗ ὒ ὗ ὒ ὗ ὒ ὗ ὒ ὗ ὒ ὗ,
where B. B. Rogers remarks: “This
line [ὒ ὗ etc.], as Bentley pointed out,
is naso, non ore, efferendus. It represents
a succession of sniffings, produced by the
nose; and not words or inarticulate
sounds spoken with the mouth.”
18. Cp. scholium on Dionysius Thrax
p. 691. 27 B: τὸ ῡ τὰ χείλη συστέλλει
κατὰ τὴν ἐκφώνησιν. φησὶ γὰρ Διονύσιος
ὁ Ἁλικαρνασσεὺς ἐν τῷ περὶ στοιχείων καὶ
συλλαβῶν λόγῳ ὅτι περὶ αὐτὰ τὰ χείλη
συστολῆς γινομένης ἀξιολόγου πνίγεται καὶ
στενὸς ἐκπίπτει ὁ ἦχος.
19. “So far as the lips are concerned,
this description would suit either the
French u or the English oo, but the
latter part of the description is better
suited to French u, and from the Latins
having at this time represented this
sound by their new sign Y (the usual
form of Greek Υ in inscriptions) in place
of their own V (which was our oo), we
may feel sure that the sound was not
English oo, and, if not, that it was most
probably French u, as we know that it
was so subsequently,” A. J. E.
τοὺς ὀδόντας: “as the lips are not
closed, there are only the teeth to limit
the aperture,” A. J. E.—The position
(ἔσχατον πάντων) assigned to iota is to
be noticed: cp. Hermog. π. ἰδ. p. 225
(Walz Rhett. Gr. vol. iii.) τὸ ῑ ... ἥκιστα
σεμνὴν ποιεῖ τὴν λέξιν πλεονάσαν.
[144-5]
ὀδόντας τε γὰρ ἡ κροῦσις τοῦ πνεύματος γίνεται μικρὸν
ἀνοιγομένου τοῦ στόματος καὶ οὐκ ἐπιλαμπρυνόντων τῶν
χειλῶν τὸν ἦχον. τῶν δὲ βραχέων οὐδέτερον μὲν εὔμορφον,
ἧττον δὲ δυσειδὲς τοῦ ε̄ τὸ ο̄· διίστησι γὰρ τὸ στόμα κρεῖττον
θατέρου καὶ τὴν πληγὴν λαμβάνει περὶ τὴν ἀρτηρίαν 5
μᾶλλον.
φωνηέντων μὲν οὖν γραμμάτων αὕτη φύσις· ἡμιφώνων δὲ
τοιάδε· ὀκτὼ τὸν ἀριθμὸν ὄντων αὐτῶν πέντε μέν ἐστιν ἁπλᾶ
τό τε λ̄ καὶ τὸ μ̄ καὶ τὸ ν̄ καὶ τὸ ρ̄ καὶ τὸ σ̄· διπλᾶ δὲ
τρία τό τε ζ̄ καὶ τὸ ξ̄ καὶ τὸ ψ̄. διπλᾶ δὲ λέγουσιν αὐτὰ 10
ἤτοι διὰ τὸ σύνθετα εἶναι, τὸ μὲν ζ̄ διὰ τοῦ σ̄ καὶ δ̄, τὸ δὲ
ξ̄ διὰ τοῦ κ̄ καὶ σ̄, τὸ δὲ ψ̄ διὰ τοῦ π̄ καὶ σ̄ συνεφθαρμένων
ἀλλήλοις ἰδίαν φωνὴν λαμβάνοντα, ἢ διὰ τὸ χώραν ἐπέχειν
δυεῖν γραμμάτων ἐν ταῖς συλλαβαῖς παραλαμβανόμενον ἕκαστον.
τούτων δὴ κρείττω μέν ἐστι τὰ διπλᾶ τῶν ἁπλῶν, 15
ἐπειδὴ μείζονά ἐστι τῶν ἑτέρων καὶ μᾶλλον ἐγγίζειν δοκεῖ
τοῖς τελείοις· ἥττω δὲ τὰ ἁπλᾶ διὰ τὸ εἰς βραχυτέρους
τόπους συνάγεσθαι τὸν ἦχον. φωνεῖται δ’ αὐτῶν ἕκαστον
τοιόνδε τινὰ τρόπον· τὸ μὲν λ̄ τῆς γλώττης πρὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν
ἱσταμένης καὶ τῆς ἀρτηρίας συνηχούσης· τὸ δὲ μ̄ τοῦ μὲν 20
στόματος τοῖς χείλεσι πιεσθέντος, τοῦ δὲ πνεύματος διὰ τῶν
ῥωθώνων μεριζομένου· τὸ δὲ ν̄ τῆς γλώττης τὴν φορὰν τοῦ
πνεύματος ἀποκλειούσης καὶ μεταφερούσης ἐπὶ τοὺς ῥώθωνας
τὸν ἦχον· τὸ δὲ ρ̄ τῆς γλώττης ἄκρας ἀπορριπιζούσης τὸ
πνεῦμα καὶ πρὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν ἐγγὺς τῶν ὀδόντων ἀνισταμένης· 25
[145]
all stands ι: for the impact of the breath is on the teeth as the
mouth is slightly open and the lips do not clarify the sound.
Of the short vowels none has beauty, but ο is less ugly than ε:
for the former parts the lips better than the latter, and receives
the impact more in the region of the windpipe.
So much for the nature of the vowels. The semi-vowels are
as follows. They are eight in number, and five of them are
simple, viz. λ, μ, ν, ρ, and σ, while three are double, viz. ζ, ξ, ψ.
They are called double either because they are composite,
receiving a distinctive sound through the coalescence respectively
of σ and δ into ζ, of κ and σ into ξ, and of π and σ into ψ;
or because they each occupy the room of two letters in the
syllables where they are found. Of these semi-vowels, the double
are superior to the single, since they are ampler than the others
and seem to approximate more to perfect letters. The simple
ones are inferior because their sounds are confined within smaller
spaces. They are severally pronounced somewhat as follows: λ
by the tongue rising to the palate, and by the windpipe helping
the sound; μ by the mouth being closed tight by means of the
lips, while the breath is divided and passes through the nostrils;
ν by the tongue intercepting the current of the breath, and
diverting the sound towards the nostrils; ρ by the tip of the
tongue sending forth the breath in puffs and rising to the palate
1 κροῦσις R: κρίσις EF: κρότησις PVs 2 οὐκ ἐπιλαμπρυνόντων] οὐκέτι
λαμπρυνόντων P 3 εὔμορφον REF: εὔηχον PMVs 4 δυσειδὲς REF: δυσηχὲς
PMVs || τοῦ ε̄ τὸ ο̄ Us.: τὸ ε̄ REFMV, τὸ ο̄ Ps 5 καὶ τὴν REF: τὴν
δὲ PMVs 8 ὀκτὼ RF: ὀκτὼ γὰρ EPMVs || πέντε] ε̄ PVs 9 διπλὰ δὲ τρία
F, RbE: διπλᾶ δὲ καὶ τρία Ra: τρία (γ̄ P) δὲ διπλᾶ PMVs 11 τοῦ
δ̄ καὶ τοῦ σ̄ Ra: τοῦ δ̄ καὶ σ̄ Rb 13 ἰδίαν RF: καὶ ἰδίαν PMVs
14 παραλαμβανόμενον ἕκαστον RF: παραλαμβανόμενα. ἑκάστου PMVs 17
βραχυτέρους F: βαρυτέρους R: βραχυτέρους αὐτῶν E, PM 18 τόπους RFM2:
τόνους EPM1Vs 20 ἱσταμένης REF: ἀνισταμένης PMVs || συνηχούσης REF:
συνηχούσης τὸ πνεῦμα M: συνεχούσης τὸ πνεῦμα PVs 21 διὰ τῶν ... (23)
πνεύματος REFM: om. P 22 ν̄] π̄ R 23 τοὺς ῥώθωνας RPMs: τὸν ῥώθωνα
FE 24 ἀπορριπιζούσης RF: ἀπορραπιζούσης EVs: ἀποραπιζούσης (ρ alt.
suprascr.) P, M
1. μικρὸν ἀνοιγομένου: “no limitation
is necessary, the lips may be as open
for our ee as for our ah, but they may
also be slightly open from the centre to
the corners, no part being in contact,”
A. J. E.
2. “There can be no doubt that our
ee is meant, and, although this is usually
considered to be a ‘bright’ sound, it
will be found that if, while singing it,
and without moving the tongue, the
lips be as much closed as for oo, the
result, which will be French u, is much
more musical. Whatever doubt may
remain from this description of the
precise shades of sound, there can be
none that η, υ, ι had different sounds,
as indeed transcripts of Greek into
Latin letters and Latin into Greek
letters shew that they had, partially
at least, down to the 12th century A.D.,
although the confusion was complete in
the 15th, as it has since remained.
Dionysius does not describe the diphthongs
ΑΥ, ΕΥ, or the digraphs ΑΙ, ΕΙ,
ΟΙ, ΟΥ,” A. J. E.
5. “This would best suit our aw in
awn shortened, that is, very nearly our
o in on. Short ε is not referred to, nor
the short sounds of α, ι, υ,” A. J. E.
11. For the pronunciation of ζ see
Introduction, p. 44, and cp. Dionysius
Thrax Ars Gramm. § 7 (Uhlig p. 14):
ἔτι δὲ τῶν συμφώνων διπλᾶ μέν ἐστι τρία·
ζ̄, ξ̄, ψ̄. διπλᾶ δὲ εἴρηται, ὅτι ἓν ἕκαστον
αὐτῶν ἐκ δύο συμφώνων σύγκειται, τὸ μὲν
ζ̄ ἐκ τοῦ σ̄ καὶ δ̄, τὸ δὲ ξ̄ ἐκ τοῦ κ̄ καὶ σ̄, τὸ
δὲ ψ̄ ἐκ τοῦ π̄ καὶ σ̄.—For the late use of
διά (with the genitive) of the means or
material by or of which a thing is composed
cp. 154 10 and 180 6; also Antiqq.
Rom. i. ἐν ὄρεσι τὰ πολλὰ πηξαμένοις διὰ
ξύλων καὶ καλάμων σκηνὰς αὐτορόφους.
17. ἥττω ... ἦχον: a true phonetic
explanation.
20. For m and n in Greek and Latin
(especially at the end of clauses) cp.
Quintil. xii. 10. 31 “Quid? quod pleraque
nos illa quasi mugiente littera cludimus
M, in quam nullum Graece verbum cadit:
at illi ny iucundam et in fine praecipue
quasi tinnientem illius loco ponunt, quae
est apud nos rarissima in clausulis.”
25. οὐρανὸν ... ὀδόντων. Demosthenes’
difficulty in pronouncing this letter (the
trilled palato-dental r) is well known:
e.g. Quintil. i. 11. 5 “(rho littera), qua
Demosthenes quoque laboravit.”
[146-7]
τὸ δὲ σ̄ τῆς μὲν γλώττης προσαγομένης ἄνω πρὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν
ὅλης, τοῦ δὲ πνεύματος διὰ μέσων αὐτῶν φερομένου καὶ περὶ
τοὺς ὀδόντας λεπτὸν καὶ στενὸν ἐξωθοῦντος τὸ σύριγμα. τρία
δὲ τὰ λοιπὰ ἡμίφωνα μικτὸν λαμβάνει τὸν ψόφον ἐξ ἑνὸς μὲν
τῶν ἡμιφώνων τοῦ σ̄, τριῶν δὲ ἀφώνων τοῦ τε δ̄ καὶ τοῦ κ̄ 5
καὶ τοῦ π̄.
οὗτοι σχηματισμοὶ γραμμάτων ἡμιφώνων. δύναται δ’
οὐχ ὁμοίως κινεῖν τὴν ἀκοὴν ἅπαντα· ἡδύνει μὲν γὰρ αὐτὴν
τὸ λ̄, καὶ ἔστι τὼν ἡμιφώνων γλυκύτατον· τραχύνει δὲ τὸ ρ̄
καὶ ἔστι τῶν ὁμογενῶν γενναιότατον· μέσως δέ πως διατίθησι 10
τὰ διὰ τῶν ῥωθώνων συνηχούμενα τό τε μ̄ καὶ τὸ ν̄
κερατοειδεῖς ἀποτελοῦντα τοὺς ἤχους. ἄχαρι δὲ καὶ ἀηδὲς
τὸ σ̄ καὶ πλεονάσαν σφόδρα λυπεῖ· θηριώδους γὰρ καὶ
ἀλόγου μᾶλλον ἢ λογικῆς ἐφάπτεσθαι δοκεῖ φωνῆς ὁ συριγμός·
τῶν γοῦν παλαιῶν τινες σπανίως ἐχρῶντο αὐτῷ καὶ 15
[147]
near the teeth; and σ by the entire tongue being carried up to
the palate and by the breath passing between tongue and palate,
and emitting, round about the teeth, a light, thin hissing. The
sound of the three remaining semi-voiced letters is of a mixed
character, being formed of one of the semi-voiced letters (σ)
and three of the voiceless letters (δ, κ and π).
Such are the formations of the semi-vowels. They cannot
all affect the sense of hearing in the same way. λ falls
pleasurably on it, and is the sweetest of the semi-vowels; while
ρ has a rough quality, and is the noblest of its class. The ear
is affected in a sort of intermediate way by μ and ν, which are
pronounced with nasal resonance, and produce sounds similar
to those of a horn. σ is an unattractive, disagreeable letter,
positively offensive when used to excess. A hiss seems a sound
more suited to a brute beast than to a rational being. At all
events, some of the ancients used it sparingly and guardedly.
1 προσαγομένης R: προαγομένης EF: προσἀναγομένης P, Vs: προανοιγομένης
M 2 ὅλης REF: ὅλως δὲ M: om. PVs || μέσων αὐτῶν R: μέσον αὐτῶν F:
μέσουν αὐτοῦ M: μέσου αὐτοῦ EPVs 5 δ̄ καὶ τοῦ κ̄ REF: κ̄ καὶ τοῦ δ̄
PMVs 13 καὶ πλεονάσαν REF: καὶ εἰ πλεονάσαι PM: καὶ εἰ πλεονάσειε Vs
14 ἀλόγου RPMVs: ἀλάλου EF
2. Perhaps the variations in the readings
here (cp. also 148 16) indicate that
one or two of the words originally stood
in the dual number.—διὰ μέσου αὐτοῦ
(EPV) would mean ‘through the middle
of the palate.’
9. As in Virgil (Aen. viii. 140: cp. v.
217), “at Maiam, auditis si quicquam
credimus, Atlas, | idem Atlas generat
caeli qui sidera tollit.”—The same view of
l is expressed in Demetr. de Eloc. § 174
πρὸς δὲ τὴν ἀκοὴν (sc. ἡδέα ἐστι) “Καλλίστρατος,
Ἀννοῶν.” ἥ τε γὰρ τῶν λάμβδα
σύγκρουσις ἠχῶδές τι ἔχει, καὶ ἡ τῶν νῦ
γραμμάτων (for the effect of the double
l and n cp. such words as ‘bella’ and
‘donna’ in Italian).
12. It is well known that the Comic
Poets make fun of Euripides’ line ἔσωσά σ’,
ὡς ἴσασιν Ἑλλήνων ὅσοι (Med. 476: with
Porson’s note). Pericles is said to have
led the way in substituting ττ for the
less pleasing σσ (see Lucian’s Iudicium
Vocalium for the substitution itself).
On the other hand, it has been observed
(with reference to de Corona § 208 ἀλλ’
οὐκ ἔστιν, οὐκ ἔστιν ὅπως ἡμάρτετε, ἄνδρες
Ἀθηναῖοι, τὸν ὑπὲρ τῆς ἁπάντων ἐλευθερίας
καὶ σωτηρίας κίνδυνον ἀράμενοι, μὰ τοὺς
Μαραθῶνι προκινδυνεύσαντας τῶν προγόνων
καὶ τοὺς ἐν Πλαταιαῖς παραταξαμένους καὶ
τοὺς ἐν Σαλαμῖνι ναυμαχήσαντας καὶ τοὺς
ἐπ’ Ἀρτεμισίῳ καὶ πολλοὺς ἑτέρους τοὺς ἐν
τοῖς δημοσίοις μνήμασι κειμένους, ἀγαθοὺς
ἄνδρας, οὓς ἅπαντας ὁμοίως ἡ πόλις τῆς
αὐτῆς ἀξιώσασα τιμῆς ἔθαψεν, Αἰσχίνη,
οὐχὶ τοὺς κατορθώσαντας αὐτῶν οὐδὲ τοὺς
κρατήσαντας μόνους): “in defence of
English we may note that this renowned
passage, perhaps the most effective ever
spoken by an orator, has no less than
fifty sigmas in sixty-seven words” (Goodwin’s
edition of Demosth. de Cor. p. 148).
There is also an interesting article on
“Sigmatism in Greek Dramatic Poetry”
in the American Journal of Philology
xxix. 1 (cp. xxxi. 1). Mr. J. A. Scott
there proves by means of examples that
Homer, Pindar, Aeschylus, Sophocles,
Euripides, Aristophanes and the Comic
Poets, do not avoid recurrent sigmas; and
he adds that “the phrases ὁ φιλοσίγματος
and ‘Euripidean sigmatism,’ which rest
on the assumption that Euripides in
a peculiar way marred his style by an
excessive use of sigma, have no basis of
truth to support them.” He further
remarks, “It is Lasus of Hermione
[Athen. 455 c], the so-called teacher of
Pindar, who won a certain kind of fame
by producing asigmatic verses; but it was
evidently a species of poetic gymnastics
such as was later achieved by the poets
of the Ἰλιὰς λειπογράμματος and the
Ὀδύσσεια λειπογράμματος, where the trick
was to write the first book of each poem
without α, the second without β, and so
on.” In Sappho’s Hymn to Aphrodite
(C. V. c. 23) there is no lack of sigmas.
But we may be sure that neither Demosthenes,
nor any good reader of Sappho,
would be guilty of undue sibilation in
the actual delivery of the speech or of
the lines: it is the continual hissing
that, as in English, has to be avoided.
(For the pronunciation of σ, σβ, σγ, σμ,
σσ see Report of Classical Association
on Greek Pronunciation, p. 349 infra, and
Giles’ Comparative Philology p. 115).—Instances
of not unpleasant accumulations
of the s sound in Latin are to be
found in Virg. Aen. v. 46 “annuus
exactis completur mensibus orbis”; Virg.
Georg. i. 389 “et sola in sicca secum
spatiatur harena”; Cic. Topic. i. 1
“maiores nos res scribere ingressos,
C. Trebati, et iis libris, quos brevi
tempore satis multos edidimus, digniores
e cursu ipso revocavit voluntas tua.” Cp.
Quintil. ix. 4. 37 “ceterum consonantes
quoque, earumque praecipue quae sunt
asperiores, in commissura verborum
rixantur, ut si s ultima cum x proxima
confligat; quarum tristior etiam, si
binae collidantur, stridor est, ut ars
studiorum. quae fuit causa et Servio,
ut dixi, subtrahendae s litterae, quotiens
ultima esset aliaque consonante susciperetur;
quod reprehendit Luranius,
Messala defendit.” An example of the
recurrence of the s sound in English
poetry is:—
O the golden sheaf, the nestling treasure-armful!
O the nutbrown tresses nodding interlaced!
George Meredith,
Love in the Valley;
or Shakespeare’s
“This precious stone set in the silver sea;”
or many of the lines in Marlowe’s ‘smooth
song’ “Come live with me, and be my
love.” Of its deliberate elimination an
instance is furnished by John Thelwall’s
English Song without a Sibilant, entitled
“The Empire of the Mind,” in which
the last of the four stanzas runs:—
But when to radiant form and feature,
Internal worth and feeling join
With temper mild and gay goodnature,—
Around the willing heart, they twine
The empire of the mind.
[148-9]
πεφυλαγμένως, εἰσὶ δ’ οἳ καὶ ἀσίγμους ὅλας ᾠδὰς ἐποίουν·
δηλοῖ δὲ τοῦτο καὶ Πίνδαρος ἐν οἷς φησι·
πρὶν μὲν εἷρπε σχοινότενειά τ’ ἀοιδὰ διθυράμβω
καὶ τὸ σὰν κίβδηλον ἀνθρώποις.
τριῶν δὲ τῶν ἄλλων γραμμάτων ἃ δὴ διπλᾶ καλεῖται τὸ ζ̄ 5
μᾶλλον ἡδύνει τὴν ἀκοὴν τῶν ἑτέρων· τὸ μὲν γὰρ ξ̄ διὰ τοῦ
κ̄ καὶ τὸ ψ̄ διὰ τοῦ π̄ τὸν συριγμὸν ἀποδίδωσι ψιλῶν ὄντων
ἀμφοτέρων, τοῦτο δ’ ἡσυχῇ τῷ πνεύματι δασύνεται καὶ ἔστι
τῶν ὁμογενῶν γενναιότατον. καὶ περὶ μὲν τῶν ἡμιφώνων
τοσαῦτα. 10
τῶν δὲ καλουμένων ἀφώνων ἐννέα ὄντων τρία μέν ἐστι
ψιλά, τρία δὲ δασέα, τρία δὲ μεταξὺ τούτων· ψιλὰ μὲν τὸ
κ̄ καὶ τὸ π̄ καὶ τὸ τ̄, δασέα δὲ τὸ θ̄ καὶ τὸ φ̄ καὶ τὸ χ̄,
κοινὰ δὲ ἀμφοῖν τὸ β̄ καὶ τὸ γ̄ καὶ τὸ δ̄. φωνεῖται δὲ
αὐτῶν ἕκαστον τρόπον τόνδε· τρία μὲν ἀπὸ τῶν χειλῶν 15
ἄκρων, ὅταν τοῦ στόματος πιεσθέντος τὸ προβαλλόμενον
ἐκ τῆς ἀρτηρίας πνεῦμα λύσῃ τὸν δεσμὸν αὐτοῦ. καὶ
ψιλὸν μέν ἐστιν αὐτῶν τὸ π̄, δασὺ δὲ τὸ φ̄, μέσον δὲ ἀμφοῖν
τὸ β̄· τοῦ μὲν γὰρ ψιλότερόν ἐστι, τοῦ δὲ δασύτερον. μία
μὲν αὕτη συζυγία τριῶν γραμμάτων ἀφώνων ὁμοίῳ σχήματι 20
λεγομένων, ψιλότητι δὲ καὶ δασύτητι διαφερόντων. τρία δὲ
ἄλλα λέγεται τῆς γλώττης ἄκρῳ τῷ στόματι προσερειδομένης
κατὰ τοὺς μετεώρους ὀδόντας, ἔπειθ’ ὑπὸ τοῦ πνεύματος
[149]
There are writers who used actually to compose entire odes without
a sigma. Pindar shows the same feeling when he writes:—
Ere then crept in the long-drawn dithyrambic song,
And san that rang false on the speaker’s tongue.[130]
Of the three other letters which are called “double,” ζ falls
more pleasurably on the ear than the others. For ξ and ψ give
the hiss in combination with κ and π respectively, both of which
letters are smooth, whereas ζ is softly rippled by the breath and is
the noblest of its class. So much with regard to the semi-vowels.
Of the so-called “voiceless letters,” which are nine in
number, three are smooth, three rough, and three between these.
The smooth are κ, π, τ; the rough θ, φ, χ; the intermediate,
β, γ, δ. They are severally pronounced as follows: three of
them (π, θ, β) from the edge of the lips, when the mouth is
compressed and the breath, being driven forward from the windpipe,
breaks through the obstruction. Among these π is smooth,
φ rough, and β comes between the two, being smoother than the
latter and rougher than the former. This is one set of three
mutes, all three spoken with a like configuration of our organs,
but differing in smoothness and roughness. The next three are
pronounced by the tongue being pressed hard against the
extremity of the mouth near the upper teeth, then being blown
1 καὶ REF: om. PMVs || ὅλας [ὠιδὰ]ς cum litura F, E: ὅλας αὐδὰς R:
ὠιδὰς ὅλας P, MVs 2 δηλοῖ ... (4) ἀνθρώποις om. R || τοῦτο καὶ EF:
τοῦτο PVs 3 ἧρπε F: ἦρχε MV: ἤριπε EPs || σχοινοτενεῖ[ατα] οἶδα cum
rasura F: σχοινοτονει [-τενὴς ἀδα M] φωνήεντα P, V: σχοινοτενῆ φωνήεντα
Es || διθυράμβου F: διθυράμβων EPMVs: om. Athenaeus 4 κίβδηλον EF
Athenaeus: κίβδαλον PMVs || ἀνθρώποις EFM: ἄνθρωποι PVs 7 καὶ τὸ
ψ̄ RE: τὸ δὲ ψ̄ FPMVs 11 καλουμένων RPMVs: om. EF 14 ἐκφωνεῖται
MVs 16 ἄκρων RFM: ἄκρων τὸ π̄ καὶ τὸ φ̄ καὶ τὸ β̄ EPVs || τό τε P
17 τὸ πνεῦμα P || θεσμὸν R 18 αὐτῶν] αὐτοῦ P 23 μετεώρους REF:
μετεωροτέρους PMVs
1. Athenaeus quotes the lines of Pindar
(ll. 3, 4 infra) in x. 455 C and in xi.
467 B. The former passage closely illustrates
Dionysius’ remarks: Πίνδαρος δὲ
πρὸς τὴν ἀσιγμοποιηθεῖσαν ᾠδήν, ὡς ὁ
αὐτός φησι Κλέαρχος, οἱονεὶ γρίφου τινὸς ἐν
μελοποιίᾳ προβληθέντος, ὡς πολλῶν τούτῳ
προσκρουόντων διὰ τὸ ἀδύνατον εἶναι ἀποσχέσθαι
τοῦ σίγμα καὶ διὰ τὸ μὴ δοκιμάζειν,
ἐποίησε·
πρὶν μὲν εἷρπε σχοινοτένειά τ’ ἀοιδὰ
καὶ τὸ σὰν κίβδηλον ἀνθρώποις.
ταῦτα σημειώσαιτ’ ἄν τις πρὸς τοὺς νοθεύοντας
Λάσου τοῦ Ἑρμιονέως τὴν ἄσιγμον
ᾠδήν, ἥτις ἐπιγράφεται Κένταυροι, καὶ ὁ
εἰς τὴν Δήμητρα δὲ τὴν ἐν Ἑρμιόνῃ ποιηθεὶς
τῷ Λάσῳ ὕμνος ἄσιγμός ἐστιν, ὥς φησιν
Ἡρακλείδης ὁ Ποντικὸς ἐν τρίτῳ περὶ
μουσικῆς, οὗ ἐστιν ἀρχή·
Δάματρα μέλπω Κόραν τε Κλυμένοι’ ἄλοχον.
In Pindar’s own text the right reading
possibly is:—
πρὶν μὲν ἕρπε σχοινοτένειά τ’ ἀοιδὰ
διθυράμβων καὶ τὸ σὰν κίβδηλον ἀνθρώποισιν ἀπὸ στομάτων.
Mr. P. N. Ure suggests that Pindar’s
real reference was not to the sound of
san but to its form, and that κίβδηλον
means either ‘misleading’ with reference
to the similarity in form of san to
mu, or ‘spurious,’ as not being the form
for the sibilant employed at Thebes,
where letters were introduced into Greece.
3. σχοινοτένεια: unusual feminine of
σχοινοτενής, ‘stretched out like a measuring
line.’
5. “That the σ in σδ meant z appears
from what Dionysius presently says, that
ζ is ‘quietly roughened by the breath,’
implying that it was voiced,” A. J. E.
p. 44. The statement (p. 43 ibid.) that
dz was probably an impossible initial
combination to a Greek may be
compared with Classical Review xix. 441 as
well as with more ancient evidence.
13. Dionysius’ various statements as
to the aspirates are discussed in E. A.
Dawes’ Pronunciation of the Greek
Aspirates pp. 29 ff. (as well as in Blass’s
Ancient Greek Pronunciation).
15. Dionysius does not actually use
Greek equivalents for the adjectives
labial, dental, and guttural; but he
clearly knows the physiological facts in
which those terms have their origin.
18. As illustrating Dionysius’ own love
of variety, compare μέσον ἀμφοῖν here
with κοινὰ ἀμφοῖν (l. 14), μεταξὺ τούτων
(l. 12), μετρίως καὶ μεταξὺ ἀμφοῖν (150 9),
μέσον δὲ καὶ ἐπίκοινον (150 4).
23. κατὰ τοὺς μετεώρους ὀδόντας. “The
pronunciation of the Greek and Roman
t by placing the tongue against the roots
of the gums in lieu of the upper teeth is
not one of the more serious errors [in
the modern pronunciation of Greek and
Latin], at least it does not strike our
ears as such. But it has always seemed
to me that the taunting verses of Ennius,
O Tite tute Tati tibi tanta tyranne tulisti,
as of Sophocles,
τυφλὸς τά τ’ ὦτα τόν τε νοῦν τά τ’ ὄμματ’ εἶ,
lose a good deal of their effect if the t’s
are muffled behind the gums instead of
being hurled out from the rampart of
the teeth,” J. P. Postgate How to
pronounce Latin p. 11.
[150-1]
ἀπορριπιζομένης καὶ τὴν διέξοδον αὐτῷ κάτω περὶ τοὺς
ὀδόντας ἀποδιδούσης· διαλλάττει δὲ ταῦτα δασύτητι καὶ
ψιλότητι· ψιλὸν μὲν γὰρ αὐτῶν ἐστι τὸ τ̄, δασὺ δὲ τὸ θ̄,
μέσον δὲ καὶ ἐπίκοινον τὸ δ̄. αὕτη δευτέρα συζυγία τριῶν
γραμμάτων ἀφώνων. τρία δὲ τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν ἀφώνων λέγεται 5
μὲν τῆς γλώττης ἀνισταμένης πρὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν ἐγγὺς τοῦ
φάρυγγος καὶ τῆς ἀρτηρίας ὑπηχούσης τῷ πνεύματι, οὐδὲν
οὐδὲ ταῦτα διαφέροντα τῷ σχήματι ἀλλήλων, πλὴν ὅτι τὸ
μὲν κ̄ ψιλῶς λέγεται, τὸ δὲ χ̄ δασέως, τὸ δὲ γ̄ μετρίως καὶ
μεταξὺ ἀμφοῖν. τούτων κράτιστα μέν ἐστιν ὅσα τῷ πνεύματι 10
πολλῷ λέγεται, δεύτερα δὲ ὅσα μέσῳ, κάκιστα δὲ ὅσα ψιλῷ·
ταῦτα μὲν γὰρ τὴν αὑτῶν δύναμιν ἔχει μόνην, τὰ δὲ δασέα
καὶ τὴν τοῦ πνεύματος προσθήκην, ὥστ’ ἐγγύς που τελειότερα
εἶναι ἐκείνων.
XV
ἐκ δὴ τῶν γραμμάτων τοσούτων τε ὄντων καὶ δυνάμεις 15
τοιαύτας ἐχόντων αἱ καλούμεναι γίνονται συλλαβαί. τούτων
δὲ εἰσὶ μακραὶ μὲν ὅσαι συνεστήκασιν ἐκ τῶν φωνηέντων
τῶν μακρῶν ἢ τῶν διχρόνων ὅταν μακρῶς ἐκφέρηται, καὶ
ὅσαι λήγουσιν εἰς μακρὸν ἢ μακρῶς λεγόμενον γράμμα ἢ εἴς
τι τῶν ἡμιφώνων τε καὶ ἀφώνων· βραχεῖαι δὲ ὅσαι συνεστήκασιν 20
ἐκ βραχέος φωνήεντος ἢ βραχέως λαμβανομένου,
καὶ ὅσαι λήγουσιν εἰς ταῦτα. μήκους δὲ καὶ βραχύτητος
[151]
back by the breath, and affording it an outlet downwards round
the teeth. These differ in roughness and smoothness, τ being
the smoothest of them, θ the roughest, and δ medial or common.
This is the second set of three mutes. The three remaining
mutes are spoken with the tongue rising to the palate near the
throat, and the windpipe echoing to the breath. These, again,
differ in no way from one another as regards formation; but κ
is pronounced smoothly, χ roughly, γ moderately and between
the two. Of these the best are those which are uttered with a
full breath; next those with moderate breath; worst those with
smooth breath, since they have their own force alone, while the
rough letters have the breath also added, so that they are somewhere
nearer perfection than the others.
CHAPTER XV
SYLLABLES AND THEIR QUALITIES
Such is the number of the letters, and such are their properties.
From them are formed the so-called syllables. Of these syllables,
those are long which contain long vowels or variable vowels
when pronounced long, and those which end in a long letter or a
letter pronounced long, or in one of the semi-vowels and one of
the mutes. Those are short which contain a short vowel or one
taken as short, and those which end in such vowels. There is
1 ἀποῤῥιπιζομένης RF: ἀπορραπιζομένης E: ἀποραπιζομένης P:
ὑποραπιζομένης M: ὑπορραπιζομένης Vs || αὐτῶν κάτω E: κάτω RF: αὐτῶν
PM: αὐτῷ Vs 2 ἀποδιδούσης RF: ἀποδιδούσης τὸ τ̄ καὶ τὸ θ̄ καὶ τὸ δ̄
PMVs 4 τριῶν RFM: om. PVs 6 πρὸς REF: κατὰ PMVs || τοῦ φάρυγγος
REF: τῆς φάρυγγος PMVs 7 πνεύματι RF: πνεύματι τὸ κ̄ καὶ τὸ χ̄ καὶ τὸ
γ̄ EPMVs || οὐδὲν οὐδὲ Us.: οὐδὲν δὲ οὐδὲ R: οὐδὲν δὲ οὐ F: οὐδενὶ PMVs
10 ἀμφοῖν. τούτων κράτιστα μέν ἐστιν F [E]: ἀμφοῖν τούτοιν (τούτων
b)· κράτιστα μὲν οὖν ἐστιν R: τούτων. κράτιστα μὲν οὖν ἐστιν PMVs 11
δὲ REPMVs: δ’ F || μέσω EPMV,s: μ[έσωι] cum rasura F: μέσα R || κάκιστα
REF: κακίω PMVs || ψιλῷ] ψιλῶι P, EMVs: ψιλῶ F: ψιλῶς Ra: ψιλά Rb
13 ἐγγύς που R: ἐγγὺς τοῦ libri || τελειότερα REF: τελειότερον P:
τελειότατα MVs 14 ἐκείνων P: ἐκεῖνα RFMs, V: om. E 19 ἢ εἴς τι] εἴς
τι F: ἤ τι EP: ἤτοι MV 20 τε καὶ EF: ἢ PMV 21 ἢ βραχέος V
11. Usener seems to carry his faith in
F to excess when, in one and the same
line, he prints δ’ ὅσα and δὲ ὅσα.
Dionysius can hardly have extended his
love for μεταβολή so far as that.
20. Batteaux (p. 208), when comparing
French with the ancient languages in
relations to long and short syllables, has
the following interesting remarks: “Il
n’est pas question de prouver ici que
nous avons des syllabes brèves: nous
sommes presque persuadés que toutes
nos syllabes le sont, tant nous sommes
pressés quand nous parlons. Nous
traitons de même les syllabes latines;
nous les faisons presque toutes brèves,
quand nous lisons: il n’y a guère que
le ω et les η grecs que nous allongions
en lisant. Selon toute apparence, les
Grecs and les Italiens anciens, qui, à en
juger par les modernes, n’étaient pas
moins vifs que nous, ne devaient guère
se donner plus de temps pour peser sur
leurs syllabes longues. Aussi n’était-ce
pas dans la conversation qu’ils mesuraient
leurs syllabes; c’était dans les discours
oratoires, et encore plus dans leurs vers;
c’était là qu’on pouvait observer les
longues et les brèves, et c’est là aussi
que nous les devons observer dans notre
langue.”
[152-3]
συλλαβῶν οὐ μία φύσις, ἀλλὰ καὶ μακρότεραί τινές εἰσι τῶν
μακρῶν καὶ βραχύτεραι τῶν βραχειῶν. ἔσται δὲ τοῦτο
φανερὸν ἐπὶ τῶν παραδειγμάτων.
ὁμολογεῖται δὴ βραχεῖα εἶναι συλλαβή, ἣν ποιεῖ φωνῆεν
γράμμα βραχὺ τὸ ο̄, ὡς λέγεται ὁδός. ταύτῃ προστεθήτω 5
γράμμα ἓν τῶν ἡμιφώνων τὸ ρ̄ καὶ γενέσθω Ῥόδος· μένει
μὲν ἔτι βραχεῖα ἡ συλλαβή, πλὴν οὐχ ὁμοίως, ἀλλ’ ἕξει τινὰ
παραλλαγὴν ἀκαρῆ παρὰ τὴν προτέραν. ἔτι προστεθήτω
ταύτῃ τῶν ἀφώνων γραμμάτων ἓν τὸ τ̄ καὶ γενέσθω τρόπος·
μείζων αὕτη τῶν προτέρων ἔσται συλλαβῶν καὶ ἔτι βραχεῖα 10
μένει. τρίτον ἔτι γράμμα τῇ αὐτῇ συλλαβῇ προστεθήτω τὸ
σ̄ καὶ γενέσθω στρόφος· τρισὶν αὕτη προσθήκαις ἀκουσταῖς
μακροτέρα γενήσεται τῆς βραχυτάτης μένουσα ἔτι βραχεῖα.
οὐκοῦν τέτταρες αὗται βραχείας συλλαβῆς διαφοραὶ τὴν
ἄλογον αἴσθησιν ἔχουσαι τῆς παραλλαγῆς μέτρον. ὁ δ’ αὐτὸς 15
λόγος καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς μακρᾶς. ἡ γὰρ ἐκ τοῦ η̄ γινομένη συλλαβὴ
μακρὰ τὴν φύσιν οὖσα τεττάρων γραμμάτων προσθήκαις
παραυξηθεῖσα τριῶν μὲν προταττομένων, ἑνὸς δὲ ὑποταττομένου,
καθ’ ἣν λέγεται σπλήν, μείζων ἂν δήπου λέγοιτο εἶναι
τῆς προτέρας ἐκείνης τῆς μονογραμμάτου· μειουμένη γοῦν 20
αὖθις καθ’ ἓν ἕκαστον τῶν προστεθέντων γραμμάτων τὰς
ἐπὶ τοὔλαττον παραλλαγὰς αἰσθητὰς ἂν ἔχοι. αἰτία δὲ τίς
ἐστι τοῦ μήτε τὰς μακρὰς ἐκβαίνειν τὴν αὑτῶν φύσιν μέχρι
γραμμάτων πέντε μηκυνομένας μήτε τὰς βραχείας εἰς ἓν ἀπὸ
πολλῶν γραμμάτων συστελλομένας ἐκπίπτειν τῆς βραχύτητος, 25
ἀλλὰ κἀκείνας ἐν διπλασίῳ λόγῳ θεωρεῖσθαι τῶν βραχειῶν
καὶ ταύτας ἐν ἡμίσει τῶν μακρῶν, οὐκ ἀναγκαῖον ἐν τῷ
παρόντι σκοπεῖν. ἀρκεῖ γὰρ ὅσον εἰς τὴν παροῦσαν ὑπόθεσιν
ἥρμοττεν εἰρῆσθαι, ὅτι διαλλάττει καὶ βραχεῖα συλλαβὴ
[153]
more than one kind of length and shortness of syllables: some
are longer than the long and some shorter than the short. And
this will be made clear by consideration of the examples which
I am about to adduce.
It will be admitted that a syllable is short which is formed
by the short vowel ο, as, for example, in the word ὁδός. To
this let the semi-vowel ρ be prefixed and Ῥόδος be formed.
The syllable still remains short; but not equally so, for it
will show some slight difference when compared with the former.
Further, let one of the mutes, τ, be prefixed and τρόπος be
formed. This again will be longer than the former syllables;
yet it still remains short. Let still a third letter, σ, be prefixed
to the same syllable and στρόφος be formed. This will
have become longer than the shortest syllable by three audible
prefixes; and yet it still remains short. So, then, here are
four grades of short syllables, with only our instinctive feeling
for quantity as a measure of the difference. The same principle
applies to the long syllable. The syllable formed from η,
though long by nature, yet when augmented by the addition
of four letters, three prefixed and one suffixed, as in the word
σπλήν, would surely be said to be ampler than that syllable,
in its original form, that consisted of a single letter. At all
events, if it were in turn deprived, one by one, of the added
letters, it would show perceptible changes in the way of diminution.
As to the reason why long syllables do not transcend
their natural quality when lengthened to five letters, nor short
syllables drop from their shortness when reduced from many
letters to one, the former being still regarded as double the
shorts, and the latter as half the longs,—this does not at present
demand examination. It is sufficient to say what is really
germane to the present subject, namely, that one short syllable
4 δὴ] δεῖ P || βραχεῖα EM: βραχέα F: βραχεῖαν PV || συλλαβὴν PV 5
γράμμα βραχὺ EF: βραχὺ γράμμα V: γράμμα P || προστεθήτω EPV: προστιθέτω
M: τίς προσθέτω F 8 ἀκαρὴ P: ἀκαρεὶ MV: om. EF || προστεθήτω EPMV:
προσθέτω F 9 ἓν EF: om. PMV 15 ἄλογον EFV: ἀνάλογον PM 19 μείζονα
ἂν F 20 μειουμένη] μειουμένης P: μειουμένων M || γ’ οὖν αὖθις P, M:
τε οὖν αὖθις F: τε αὖ πάλιν E: δ’ αὖ πάλιν V 21 ἓν PMV: om. EF 22
τοὔλαττον] τὸ λεῖπον PM || τίς ex τί corr. F: ἣ τίς PM, V 23 αὐτῶν
F: ἑαυτῶν PMV 24 ε̄ μηκυνομένας ... (25) γραμμάτων om. F || πέντε
Uptonus, ε̄ Us.: ἑπτὰ PM: δ̄ V
2. Cp. Quintil. ix. 4. 84 “sit in hoc
quoque aliquid fortasse momenti, quod
et longis longiores et brevibus sunt
breviores syllabae; ut, quamvis neque
plus duobus temporibus neque uno
minus habere videantur, ideoque in
metris omnes breves longaeque inter sese
sint pares, lateat tamen nescio quid,
quod supersit aut desit. nam versuum
propria condicio est, ideoque in his
quaedam etiam communes.”
8. ἀκαρῆ: cp. de Isocr. c. 20 ἀκαρῆ δέ
τινα ... ἐνθυμήματα.
12. τρισὶν ... προσθήκαις: the meaning
apparently is that the first prefix
increases the length by one augmentation;
the second, by two; the third, by
three. αὕτη = ἡ συλλαβή στρόφ-.
22. ἐπὶ τοὔλαττον: cp. Aristot. Eth.
Nic. ii. 7. 12 ἡ δὲ προσποίησις ἡ μὲν ἐπὶ
τὸ μεῖζον ἀλαζονεία καὶ ὁ ἔχων αὐτὴν
ἀλαζών, ἡ δ’ ἐπὶ τὸ ἔλαττον εἰρωνεία
καὶ εἴρων [ὁ ἔχων], iv. 7. 14 οἱ δ’ εἴρωνες
ἐπὶ τὸ ἔλαττον λέγοντες χαριέστεροι μὲν
τὰ ἤθη φαίνονται; and Long. de Sublim.
c. 38 αἱ δ’ ὑπερβολαὶ καθάπερ ἐπὶ τὸ
μεῖζον, οὕτως καὶ ἐπὶ τοὔλαττον.
26. θεωρεῖσθαι here (and in 204 3, 210
9) may perhaps supply a parallel (though
not a complete one) of the kind desired
in Classical Quarterly i. 41 n. 1.
[154-5]
βραχείας καὶ μακρὰ μακρᾶς καὶ οὐ τὴν αὐτὴν ἔχει δύναμιν
οὔτ’ ἐν λόγοις ψιλοῖς οὔτ’ ἐν ποιήμασιν ἢ μέλεσιν διὰ μέτρων
ἢ ῥυθμῶν κατασκευαζομένοις πᾶσα βραχεῖα καὶ πᾶσα μακρά.
πρῶτον μὲν δὴ θεώρημα τοῦτο τῶν ἐν ταῖς συλλαβαῖς
παθῶν· ἕτερον δὲ τοιόνδε· τῶν γραμμάτων πολλὰς ἐχόντων 5
διαφορὰς οὐ μόνον περὶ τὰ μήκη καὶ τὰς βραχύτητας ἀλλὰ
καὶ περὶ τοὺς ἤχους, ὑπὲρ ὧν ὀλίγῳ πρότερον εἴρηκα, πᾶσα
ἀνάγκη καὶ τὰς ἐκ τούτων συνισταμένας συλλαβὰς ἢ διὰ
τούτων πλεκομένας ἅμα τήν τε ἰδίαν ἑκάστου σῴζειν δύναμιν
καὶ τὴν κοινὴν ἁπάντων, ἣ γίνεται διὰ τῆς κράσεώς τε καὶ 10
παραθέσεως αὐτῶν· ἐξ ὧν μαλακαί τε φωναὶ γίνονται καὶ
σκληραὶ καὶ λεῖαι καὶ τραχεῖαι, γλυκαίνουσαί τε τὴν ἀκοὴν
καὶ πικραίνουσαι, καὶ στύφουσαι καὶ διαχέουσαι, καὶ πᾶσαν
ἄλλην κατασκευάζουσαι διάθεσιν φυσικήν· αὗται δ’ εἰσὶ μυρίαι
τὸ πλῆθος ὅσαι. 15
ταῦτα δὴ καταμαθόντες οἱ χαριέστατοι ποιητῶν τε καὶ
συγγραφέων τὰ μὲν αὐτοὶ κατασκευάζουσιν ὀνόματα συμπλέκοντες
ἐπιτηδείως ἀλλήλοις, τὰ δὲ γράμματα καὶ τὰς συλλαβὰς
οἰκείας οἷς ἂν βούλωνται παραστῆσαι πάθεσιν ποικίλως
φιλοτεχνοῦσιν, ὡς ποιεῖ πολλάκις Ὅμηρος, ἐπὶ μὲν τῶν 20
προσηνέμων αἰγιαλῶν τῇ παρεκτάσει τῶν συλλαβῶν τὸν
ἄπαυστον ἐκφαίνειν βουλόμενος ἦχον
ἠϊόνες βοόωσιν ἐρευγομένης ἁλὸς ἔξω·
[155]
may differ from another short, and one long from another long,
and that every short and every long syllable has not the same
quality either in prose, or in poems, or in songs, whether these
be metrically or rhythmically constructed.
The foregoing is the first aspect under which we view the
different qualities of syllables. The next is as follows. As
letters have many points of difference, not only in length and
shortness, but also in sound—points of which I have spoken a
little while ago—it must necessarily follow that the syllables,
which are combinations or interweavings of letters, preserve at
once both the individual properties of each component, and the
joint properties of all, which spring from their fusion and juxtaposition.
The sounds thus formed are soft or hard, smooth
or rough, sweet to the ear or harsh to it; they make us pull
a wry face, or cause our mouths to water, or bring about any
of the countless other physical conditions that are possible.
These facts the greatest poets and prose-writers have carefully
noted, and not only do they deliberately arrange their
words and weave them into appropriate patterns, but often, with
curious and loving skill, they adapt the very syllables and
letters to the emotions which they wish to represent. This is
Homer’s way when he is describing a wind-swept beach and
wishes to express the ceaseless reverberation by the prolongation
of syllables:—
Echo the cliffs, as bursteth the sea-surge down on the strand.[131]
1 οὐ F: οὔτε PMV 2 μέτρων ἢ ῥυθμῶν F: ῥυθμῶν ἢ μέτρων PMV 8 καὶ EF:
om. PMV 10 καὶ (posterius) EF: καὶ τῆς PMV 13 πᾶσαν EFM: πᾶσαν τὴν
PV 16 δὴ PMV: ἤδη EF 17 αὐτοὶ EF: αὐτοί τε PMV 18 τὰ δὲ FM: τὰ
EPV 19 οἰκείας F: δὲ οἰκείας E: οἰκείως PM: δὲ οἰκείως V 20 τῶν EF:
om. PMV 21 τὸν om. P 22 ἐκφαίνειν EF: ἐμφαίνειν PMV
1. H. Richards (Classical Review xix.
252) suggests οὔτι, in place of the οὔτε
of PMV and the οὐ of F.
3. If this passage (from 152 4 up to
this point) be taken in connexion with
one from the scholia to Hephaestion and
another from Marius Victorinus (see
Goodell’s Greek Metric pp. 6, 7), we find
the following difference indicated as
between the school of the metrici and
that of the rhythmici: “The metrici
considered the long syllable as always
twice the length of the short; whatever
variation from this ratio the varying
constitution of syllables produced was
treated as too slight to affect the general
flow of verse. The rhythmici, on the
other hand, held that long syllables
differed greatly from each other in
quantity, and that short syllables
differed from each other in some degree,
apart from variations in tempo. The
doctrine of ἀλογία or irrationality,
whereby some syllables were longer or
shorter by a small undefined amount
than the complete long, was associated
by some with this theory, as in a
passage of Dionysius Halic. (C. V. c. 17
οἱ δ’ ἀπὸ τῆς μακρᾶς ... τῶν πάνυ καλῶν
οἱ ῥυθμοί: cp. c. 20 ibid.). Some, at
least, affirmed also that a single consonant
required half the time of a short
vowel, and that two consonants or a
double consonant required the same
time as a short vowel; those writers
accordingly set up a scale of measurement
for syllables, simply counting the
number of time-units required, on this
theory, by the constituent vowels and consonants,”
Goodell Greek Metric pp. 8, 9.
20. Cp. the use of the long o in such
passages as Virg. Aen. iii. 670 ff. “verum
ubi nulla datur dextra adfectare potestas |
nec potis Ionios fluctus aequare sequendo, |
clamorem immensum tollit, quo pontus
et omnes | contremuere undae”; v. 244
ff. “tum satus Anchisa cunctis ex more
vocatis | victorem magna praeconis voce
Cloanthum | declarat viridique advelat
tempora lauro, | muneraque in navis
ternos optare iuvencos | vinaque et
argenti magnum dat ferre talentum.”
See also Demetr. p. 42 for A. C.
Bradley’s comments on Virgil’s line
“tendebantque manus ripae ulterioris
amore.”
23. Aristotle (Poetics c. 22) points out
that it would be disastrous to substitute
the trivial κράζουσιν for βοόωσιν in this
passage.—With regard to the sound of
the line cp. schol. on Il. xvii. 265 καὶ
ἔστιν ἰδεῖν κῦμα μέγα θαλάσσης ἐπιφερόμενον
ποταμοῦ ῥεύματι καὶ τῷ ἀνακόπτεσθαι
βρυχώμενον, καὶ τὰς ἑκατέρωθεν τοῦ
ποταμοῦ θαλασσίας ἠϊόνας ἠχούσας, ὃ
ἐμιμήσατο διὰ τῆς ἐπεκτάσεως τοῦ
βοόωσιν. αὕτη ἡ εἰκὼν Πλάτωνος ἔκαυσε
τὰ ποιήματα· οὕτως ἐναργέστερον τοῦ
ὁρωμένου τὸ ἀκουόμενον παρέστησεν ... τῆς
γὰρ ἐπαλλήλου τῶν ὑδάτων ἐκβολῆς ἡ τοῦ
“βοόωσιν” ἀναδίπλωσις ὁμοίαν ἀπετέλεσε
συνῳδίαν.
[156-7]
ἐπὶ δὲ τοῦ τετυφλωμένου Κύκλωπος τό τε τῆς ἀλγηδόνος
μέγεθος καὶ τὴν διὰ τῶν χειρῶν βραδεῖαν ἔρευναν τῆς τοῦ
σπηλαίου θύρας
Κύκλωψ δὲ στενάχων τε καὶ ὠδίνων ὀδύνῃσιν,
χερσὶ ψηλαφόων· 5
καὶ ἄλλοθί που δέησιν ἐνδείξασθαι βουλόμενος πολλὴν καὶ
κατεσπουδασμένην
οὐδ’ εἴ κεν μάλα πολλὰ πάθῃ ἑκάεργος Ἀπόλλων,
προπροκυλινδόμενος πατρὸς Διὸς αἰγιόχοιο.
μυρία ἔστιν εὑρεῖν παρ’ αὐτῷ τοιαῦτα, χρόνου μῆκος ἢ 10
σώματος μέγεθος ἢ πάθους ὑπερβολὴν ἢ στάσεως ἠρεμίαν ἢ
τῶν παραπλησίων τι δηλοῦντα παρ’ οὐδὲν οὕτως ἕτερον ἢ τὰς
τῶν συλλαβῶν κατασκευάς· καὶ ἄλλα τούτοις ἐναντίως εἰργασμένα
εἰς βραχύτητα καὶ τάχος καὶ σπουδὴν καὶ τὰ τούτοις
ὁμοιογενῆ, ὡς ἔχει ταυτί 15
ἀμβλήδην γοόωσα μετὰ δμωῇσιν ἔειπεν
καὶ
ἡνίοχοι δ’ ἔκπληγεν, ἐπεὶ ἴδον ἀκάματον πῦρ.
ἐφ’ ἧς μὲν γὰρ ἡ τοῦ πνεύματος δηλοῦται συγκοπὴ καὶ τὸ
τῆς φωνῆς ἄτακτον, ἐφ’ ὧν δ’ ἡ τῆς διανοίας ἔκστασις καὶ τὸ 20
τοῦ δείματος ἀπροσδόκητον· ποιεῖ δὲ τούτων ἑκάτερον ἡ τῶν
συλλαβῶν τε καὶ γραμμάτων ἐλάττωσις.
[157]
Or again when, after the Cyclops has been blinded, Homer desires
to express the greatness of his anguish, and his hands’ slow
search for the door of the cavern:—
The Cyclops, with groan on groan and throes of anguish sore,
With hands slow-groping.[132]
And when in another place he wishes to indicate a long impassioned
prayer:—
Not though in an agony Phoebus the Smiter from Far should entreat
Low-grovelling at Father Zeus the Aegis-bearer’s feet.[133]
Such lines are to be found without number in Homer, representing
length of time, hugeness of body, stress of emotion,
immobility of position, or similar effects, simply by the
manipulation of the syllables. Conversely, others are framed to
give the impression of abruptness, speed, hurry, and the like.
For instance,
Wailing with broken sobs amidst of her handmaids she cried,[134]
and
And scared were the charioteers, that tireless flame to behold.[135]
In the first passage the stoppage of Andromache’s breath is
indicated, and the tremor of her voice; in the second, the startled
dismay of the charioteers, and the unexpectedness of the terror.
The effect in both cases is due to the docking of syllables and
letters.
1 τετυφλωμένου E: τετυφωμένου F: τυφλουμένου PMV 2 τὴν διὰ EMV: διὰ
τὴν FP 8 πάθῃ EF: πάθοι PMV Hom. 10 εὑρεῖν om. F 11 ἠρεμίαν]
ὁμιλίαν FM 15 ὁμοιογενῆ F: ὁμο*γενῆ P: ὁμογενῆ MV 16 δμωιῆισιν P:
Τρῴῃσιν Hom. 18 ἔκπληγον PMV 19 ἧς F: ὧν PMV 20 ἔκστασις FM:
ἔκτασις PV 21 δείγματος PV
1. ἀλγηδών: a somewhat poetical
word, though used by Herodotus and
Plato. Its use in a highly figurative
passage of Herodotus (v. 18) is censured
in the de Sublim. iv. 7 καὶ τὸ Ἡροδότειον
οὐ πόρρω, τὸ φάναι τὰς καλὰς γυναῖκας
“ἀλγηδόνας ὀφθαλμῶν.”
4. In these lines, and in 154 23, the
reiteration of the long ω, and of the
long η, is particularly to be noted.
9. προπροκυλινδόμενος: imitated by
Ap. Rhod. Argon. i. 386 προπροβιαζόμενοι,
and ii. 595 προπροκαταΐγδην. Cp.
Odyss. xvii. 524 ἔνθεν δὴ νῦν δεῦρο τόδ’
ἵκετο πήματα πάσχων, | προπροκυλινδόμενος.
10. χρόνου μῆκος: cp. Virg. Aen. i.
272 “hic iam ter centum totos regnabitur
annos,” and iii. 284 “interea magnum
sol circumvolvitur annum.”
11. σώματος μέγεθος: cp. Virg. Aen.
vii. 783 “ipse inter primos praestanti
corpore Turnus.”—πάθους ὑπερβολήν:
cp. Virg. Aen. ix. 475 “at subitus
miserae calor ossa reliquit, | excussi
manibus radii revolutaque pensa.”
12. A blending of (1) παρ’ οὐδὲν οὕτως
ὡς, (2) παρ’ οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἤ.
16. Cp. Virg. Aen. ix. 477 “evolat
infelix et femineo ululatu | scissa comam
muros amens atque agmina cursu | prima
petit,” etc.
18. Batteux (Réflexions pp. 219-21)
quotes and analyzes the well-known
passage of Racine’s Phèdre (v. 6) which
begins: “Un effroyable cri, sorti du
fond des flots, | Des airs en ce moment
a troublé le repos.” He says: “Dans
le dernier morceau de Racine qui peint
l’objet terrible, il n’y a pas un vers qui
n’ait le caractère de la chose exprimée.
Ce sont des sons aigus et perçans, des
syllabes chargée de consonnes, et de
consonnes épaisses: sorti du fond des
flots; notre sang s’est glacé; L’onde
approche, se brise; Son front large est
armé. Des mots qui se heurtent:
effroyable cri; cri redoutable; le crin
s’est hérissé. D’autres mots larges et
spacieux: Cependant, sur le dos de la
plaine liquide, S’élève à gros bouillons
(S’élève rejeté à l’autre vers comme
celui-ci de Despréaux, S’élève un lit de
plume) une montaigne humide; cornes
menaçantes; écailles jaunissantes; Indomptable
taureau, dragon impétueux.
Des syllabes qui se renversent les unes
sur le autres: Sa croupe se recourbe en
replis tortueux. Ce vers, dans un poëme
ancient, eût été célébré de siècle en
siècle.”
[158-9]
XVI
καὶ αὐτοὶ μὲν δὴ κατασκευάζουσιν οἱ ποιηταὶ καὶ λογογράφοι
πρὸς χρῆμα ὁρῶντες οἰκεῖα καὶ δηλωτικὰ τῶν ὑποκειμένων
τὰ ὀνόματα, ὥσπερ ἔφην· πολλὰ δὲ καὶ παρὰ τῶν
ἔμπροσθεν λαμβάνουσιν ὡς ἐκεῖνοι κατεσκεύασαν, ὅσα μιμητικὰ
τῶν πραγμάτων ἐστίν· ὡς ἔχει ταυτί 5
ῥόχθει γὰρ μέγα κῦμα ποτὶ ξερὸν ἠπείροιο.
αὐτὸς δὲ κλάγξας πέτετο πνοιῇς ἀνέμοιο.
αἰγιαλῷ μεγάλῳ βρέμεται, σμαραγεῖ δέ τε πόντος.
σκέπτετ’ ὀιστῶν τε ῥοῖζον καὶ δοῦπον ἀκόντων.
μεγάλη δὲ τούτων ἀρχὴ καὶ διδάσκαλος ἡ φύσις ἡ ποιοῦσα 10
μιμητικοὺς καὶ θετικοὺς ἡμᾶς τῶν ὀνομάτων, οἷς δηλοῦται τὰ
πράγματα κατά τινας εὐλόγους καὶ κινητικὰς τῆς διανοίας
ὁμοιότητας· ὑφ’ ἧς ἐδιδάχθημεν ταύρων τε μυκήματα λέγειν
καὶ χρεμετισμοὺς ἵππων καὶ φριμαγμοὺς τράγων πυρός τε
[159]
CHAPTER XVI
POETIC SKILL IN THE CHOICE AND IN THE
COMBINATION OF WORDS
The poets and prose-writers themselves, then, with their eye
on each object in turn, frame—as I said—words which seem
made for, and are pictures of, the things they connote. But they
also borrow many words from earlier writers, in the very form
in which those writers fashioned them—when such words are
imitative of things, as in the following instances:—
For the vast sea-swell on the beach crashed down with a thunder-shock.[136]
And adown the blasts of the wind he darted with one wild scream.[137]
Even as when the surge of the seething sea falls dashing
(On a league-long strand, with the roar of the rollers thunderous-crashing).[138]
And his eyes for the hiss of the arrows, the hurtling of lances, were keen.[139]
The great originator and teacher in these matters is Nature,
who prompts us to imitate and to assign words by which things
are pictured, in virtue of certain resemblances which are founded
in reason and appeal to our intelligence. It is by her that
we have been taught to speak of the bellowing of bulls, the
whinnying of horses, the snorting of goats, the roar of fire, the
1 μὲν F: τε PMV 2 πρὸς χρῆμα PV: πρόσχημα PM 4 μιμητικὰ EF:
μιμητικώτατα PMV 5 πραγμάτων] γραμμάτων PM 6 ῥόγχθει F: ῥοχθεῖ PMV
8 μεγάλωι P, EM Hom.: μεγάλα F 11 καὶ θετικοὺς ἡμᾶς EF: ἡμᾶς καὶ
θετικοὺς V: καὶ θετικοὺς M: ἡμᾶς P 12 τῆς EF: om. PMV 13 ἧς P:
ὧν EFMV 14 φριμαγμοὺς EF: φριγμοὺς P: φρυαγμοὺς V: φρυμαγμοὺς M ||
τράγων] ταύρων F
2. πρὸς χρῆμα ὁρῶντες: for χρῆμα cp.
160 4. The writer must, in Matthew
Arnold’s phrase, have his “eye on the
object.” Cp. Aristot. Poet. c. xvii. δεῖ
δὲ τοὺς μύθους συνιστάναι καὶ τῇ λέξει
συναπεργάζεσθαι ὅτι μάλιστα πρὸ ὀμμάτων
τιθέμενον· οὕτω γὰρ ἂν ἐναργέστατα ὁρῶν
ὥσπερ παρ’ αὐτοῖς γιγνόμενος τοῖς πραττομένοις
εὑρίσκοι τὸ πρέπον καὶ ἥκιστα ἂν
λανθάνοι τὰ ὑπεναντία: and Long. de
Sublim. c. xv. ἆρ’ οὐκ ἂν εἴποις, ὅτι ἡ
ψυχὴ τοῦ γράφοντος συνεπιβαίνει τοῦ
ἅρματος, καὶ συγκινδυνεύουσα τοῖς ἵπποις
συνεπτέρωται; οὐ γὰρ ἄν, εἰ μὴ τοῖς
οὐρανίοις ἐκείνοις ἔργοις ἰσοδρομοῦσα
ἐφέρετο, τοιαῦτ’ ἄν ποτε ἐφαντάσθη.
4. μιμητικά: cp. Aristot. Poet. c. iv.
τό τε γὰρ μιμεῖσθαι σύμφυτον τοῖς
ἀνθρώποις ἐκ παίδων ἐστί (καὶ τούτῳ
διαφέρουσι τῶν ἄλλων ζῴων ὅτι μιμητικώτατόν
ἐστι καὶ τὰς μαθήσεις ποιεῖται διὰ
μιμήσεως τὰς πρώτας), καὶ τὸ χαίρειν τοῖς
μιμήμασι πάντας.
6. For the repeated r sound cp. the
passage of the Aeneid (i. 108) which
begins “talia iactanti stridens Aquilone
procella,” and schol. on Odyss. v. 402
τῶν δὲ πεποιημένων ἡ λέξις (sc. ῥόχθει)·
τραχὺ γὰρ τὸ ρ, τὸ θ, τὸ χ.
8. Cp. schol. ad Il. ii. 210 συμφυῶς
τῷ ὑποκειμένῳ τετράχυνται τὸ ἔπος ταῖς
ὀνοματοποιΐαις.—In this line F’s reading
μεγάλα accords with a conjecture of
Bentley’s.
9. Cp. Virg. Aen. v. 437 “stat
gravis Entellus nisuque immotus eodem |
corpore tela modo atque oculis vigilantibus
exit.”
11. Not all languages, however, have
the same powers in this direction: cp.
Quintil. i. 5. 72 “sed minime nobis
concessa est ὀνοματοποιΐα; quis enim
ferat, si quid simile illis merito laudatis
λίγξε βιός et σίζε ὀφθαλμός fingere
audeamus? Iam ne balare quidem aut
hinnire fortiter diceremus, nisi iudicio
vetustatis niterentur” (Quintilian has
just before, §§ 67 and 70, referred to
Pacuvius’ repandirostrum and incurvicervicum:
which may be compared with
Ἑρμοκαϊκόξανθος, Aristot. Poet. c. 21);
and viii. 6. 31 “ὀνοματοποιΐα quidem,
id est fictio nominis, Graecis inter
maxima habita virtutes, nobis vix
permittitur ... vix illa, quae πεποιημένα
vocant, quae ex vocibus in usum
receptis quocunque modo declinantur,
nobis permittimus, qualia sunt Sullaturit
et proscripturit.” Greek, English and
German admit onomatopoeia more readily
than Latin and French. Any undue restriction
(such as that indicated by Quintilian
when defining πεποιημένα) hampers
the life of a language. Words should
serve their apprenticeship, no doubt; but
there should be no lack of probationers.
We feel that the language itself is growing
when Cicero uses ‘dulcescit’ of the
growing and ripening grape, or when
Erasmus uses the same word to indicate
that England ‘grew’ upon him the more
he knew it.—For the general question
of the right of coining new words or
reviving disused words see Demetr. pp.
255, 297, 298 (and cp. §§ 94, 220 ibid.).
Many of Dionysius’ remarks, here and
elsewhere, seem to concern the choice
or the manufacture of words rather than
their arrangement; but, from the nature
of the case, he clearly finds it hard to
draw a strict dividing-line either in this
direction or in regard to the entire
λεκτικὸς τόπος as distinguished from the
πραγματικὸς τόπος.
13. In giving the singular, P seems
clearly right here, and as clearly wrong
when giving the plural in 156 19.
[160-1]
βρόμον καὶ πάταγον ἀνέμων καὶ συριγμὸν κάλων καὶ ἄλλα
τούτοις ὅμοια παμπληθῆ τὰ μὲν φωνῆς μιμήματα, τὰ δὲ
μορφῆς, τὰ δὲ ἔργου, τὰ δὲ πάθους, τὰ δὲ κινήσεως, τὰ δ’
ἠρεμίας, τὰ δ’ ἄλλου χρήματος ὅτου δήποτε· περὶ ὧν εἴρηται
πολλὰ τοῖς πρὸ ἡμῶν, τὰ κράτιστα δ’ ὡς πρώτῳ τὸν ὑπὲρ 5
ἐτυμολογίας εἰσαγαγόντι λόγον, Πλάτωνι τῷ Σωκρατικῷ, πολλαχῇ
μὲν καὶ ἄλλῃ μάλιστα δ’ ἐν τῷ Κρατύλῳ.
τί δὴ τὸ κεφάλαιόν ἐστί μοι τούτου τοῦ λόγου; ὅτι
παρὰ μὲν τὰς τῶν γραμμάτων συμπλοκὰς ἡ τῶν συλλαβῶν
γίνεται δύναμις ποικίλη, παρὰ δὲ τὴν τῶν συλλαβῶν σύνθεσιν 10
ἡ τῶν ὀνομάτων φύσις παντοδαπή, παρὰ δὲ τὰς τῶν ὀνομάτων
ἁρμονίας πολύμορφος ὁ λόγος· ὥστε πολλὴ ἀνάγκη καλὴν
μὲν εἶναι λέξιν ἐν ᾗ καλά ἐστιν ὀνόματα, κάλλους δὲ ὀνομάτων
συλλαβάς τε καὶ γράμματα καλὰ αἴτια εἶναι, ἡδεῖαν δὲ διάλεκτον
ἐκ τῶν ἡδυνόντων τὴν ἀκοὴν γίνεσθαι κατὰ τὸ παραπλήσιον 15
ὀνομάτων τε καὶ συλλαβῶν καὶ γραμμάτων, τάς τε
κατὰ μέρος ἐν τούτοις διαφοράς, καθ’ ἃς δηλοῦται τά τε ἤθη
καὶ τὰ πάθη καὶ αἱ διαθέσεις καὶ τὰ ἔργα τῶν προσώπων
καὶ τὰ συνεδρεύοντα τούτοις, ἀπὸ τῆς πρώτης κατασκευῆς τῶν
γραμμάτων γίνεσθαι τοιαύτας. 20
χρήσομαι δ’ ὀλίγοις παραδείγμασι τοῦ λόγου τοῦδε τῆς
σαφηνείας ἕνεκα· τὰ γὰρ ἄλλα πολλὰ ὄντα ἐπὶ σαυτοῦ συμβαλλόμενος
εὑρήσεις. ὁ δὴ πολυφωνότατος ἁπάντων τῶν
[161]
rushing of winds, the creaking of hawsers, and numerous other
similar imitations of sound, form, action, emotion, movement,
stillness, and anything else whatsoever. On these points much
has been said by our predecessors, the most important contributions
being by the first of them to introduce the subject of
etymology, Plato the disciple of Socrates, in his Cratylus especially,
but in many other places as well.
What is the sum and substance of my argument? It is
that it is due to the interweaving of letters that the quality of
syllables is so multifarious; to the combination of syllables that
the nature of words has such wide diversity; to the arrangement
of words that discourse takes on so many forms. The conclusion
is inevitable—that style is beautiful when it contains beautiful
words,—that beauty of words is due to beautiful syllables and
letters,—that language is rendered charming by the things that
charm the ear in virtue of affinities in words, syllables, and letters;
and that the differences in detail between these, through which
are indicated the characters, emotions, dispositions, actions and
so forth of the persons described, are made what they are through
the original grouping of the letters.
To set the matter in a clearer light, I will illustrate my
argument by a few examples. Other instances—and there are
plenty of them—you will find for yourself in the course of your
own investigations. When Homer, the poet above all others
2 μιμήματα EPM: μιμητικὰ V: μηνύματα F 3 ἔργων E: ἔργα M 4 ἐρημίας
F || δήποτε FMV: δὴ P 5 δ’ ὡς F: δε νέμω (νέμων M) ὡς PMV 9, 10, 11
παρὰ] περὶ R || γραμμάτων] πραγμάτων F: cf. 158 5 10 δύναμις
RF: σύνθεσις EPV || σύνθεσιν EF: συνθέσεις PMV: θέσεις R 12 λόγος
REF: λόγος [γ]ίνεται cum litura P, MV 13 κάλλους REF: καλῶν PV 14
αἴτια RMV: αἰτίαν F: αἴτιον EP 15 κατὰ F: καὶ PMV 20 τοιαύτας Us.:
τοιαύτα F, PMV 21 παραδείγμασι F: δείγμασιν P, MV 23 ἁπάντων τῶν
MV: ἁπάντων FP
1. Cp. Virg. Aen. i. 87 “insequitur
clamorque virum stridorque rudentum”;
Ap. Rhod. Argon. i. 725 ὑπὸ πνοιῇ δὲ
κάλωες | ὅπλα τε νήια πάντα τινάσσετο
νισσομένοισιν.
5. So Diog. Laert. (auctore Favorino
in octavo libro Omnigenae historiae):
καὶ πρῶτος ἐθεώρησε τῆς γραμματικῆς
τὴν δύναμιν (Vit. Plat. 25).
8. The following passage (from ὅτι to
καλὰ αἴτια) is quoted in schol. anon. in
Hermog. (Walz Rhett. Gr. vii. 1049),
with the prefatory words ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν
τῷ περὶ συνθέσεως ὀνομάτων περὶ λέξεως
διαλαμβάνων λέγει ὅτι κτλ.
10. The endless possibilities of these
syllabic, verbal, and other permutations
had evidently impressed the imagination
of Dionysius: together with their climax
in literature itself, and in all the great
types of literature.
12. “This sentence (ὥστε πολλὴ
ἀνάγκη ... γράμματα καλὰ αἴτια εἶναι)
puts boldly the truth which Aristotle
had evaded or pooh-poohed in his excessive
devotion to the philosophy of literature
rather than to literature itself”
(Saintsbury History of Criticism i. 130).
21. παραδείγμασι is perhaps to be preferred
to δείγμασι here: cp. 164 16.
22. ἐπὶ σαυτοῦ = per te ipsum, tuopte
Marte: cp. 96 21 ἐσκόπουν δ’ αὐτὸς ἐπ’
ἐμαυτοῦ γενόμενος.
23. πολυφωνότατος In this respect
Homer’s great compeer is Shakespeare,
in whose dramas “few things are more
remarkable than the infinite range of
style, speech, dialect they unfold before
us” (Vaughan Types of Tragic Drama
p. 165).—The passage of Dionysius which
follows might be endlessly illustrated
from Shakespeare; e.g. from Sonnet civ.,
Romeo and Juliet ii. 2 and v. 3, Antony
and Cleopatra ii. 2 (speeches of Enobarbus),
Tempest iii. 1. In the scene
of the Tempest, correspondence and
variety are alike conspicuous. Ferdinand’s
address (beginning “Admired
Miranda!”) tallies—to the line and even
to the half-line—with Miranda’s reply,
and the concluding lines are, in the one
case,
But you, O you,
So perfect and so peerless, are created
Of every creature’s best;
and, in the other,
But I prattle
Something too wildly, and my father’s precepts
I therein do forget.
In the same scene the lines—
O, she is
Ten times more gentle than her father’s crabbed,
And he’s composed of harshness,
would have a very different effect (cp.
quotation from Aristotle’s Poetics on 78
9 supra) if written as follows:—
O, she is
Ten times more gracious than her sire is stern,
And he is merely cruel
(‘merely’ being understood, of course, in
the Shakespearian sense of ‘absolutely’).
[162-3]
ποιητῶν Ὅμηρος, ὅταν μὲν ὥραν ὄψεως εὐμόρφου καὶ κάλλος
ἡδονῆς ἐπαγωγὸν ἐπιδείξασθαι βούληται, τῶν τε φωνηέντων
τοῖς κρατίστοις χρήσεται καὶ τῶν ἡμιφώνων τοῖς μαλακωτάτοις,
καὶ οὐ καταπυκνώσει τοῖς ἀφώνοις τὰς συλλαβὰς οὐδὲ συγκόψει
τοὺς ἤχους παρατιθεὶς ἀλλήλοις τὰ δυσέκφορα, πραεῖαν δέ 5
τινα ποιήσει τὴν ἁρμονίαν τῶν γραμμάτων καὶ ῥέουσαν ἀλύπως
διὰ τῆς ἀκοῆς, ὡς ἔχει ταυτί
ἡ δ’ ἴεν ἐκ θαλάμοιο περίφρων Πηνελόπεια
Ἀρτέμιδι ἰκέλη ἠὲ χρυσῇ Ἀφροδίτῃ.
Δήλῳ δήποτε τοῖον Ἀπόλλωνος παρὰ βωμῷ 10
φοίνικος νέον ἔρνος ἀνερχόμενον ἐνόησα.
καὶ Χλῶριν εἶδον περικαλλέα, τήν ποτε Νηλεὺς
γῆμεν ἑὸν μετὰ κάλλος, ἐπεὶ πόρε μυρία ἕδνα.
ὅταν δ’ οἰκτρὰν ἢ φοβερὰν ἢ ἀγέρωχον ὄψιν εἰσάγῃ, τῶν τε
φωνηέντων οὐ τὰ κράτιστα θήσει ἀλλὰ τῶν ψοφοειδῶν ἢ 15
ἀφώνων τὰ δυσεκφορώτατα λήψεται καὶ καταπυκνώσει τούτοις
τὰς συλλαβάς, οἷά ἐστι ταυτί
σμερδαλέος δ’ αὐτῇσι φάνη κεκακωμένος ἅλμῃ.
τῇ δ’ ἐπὶ μὲν Γοργὼ βλοσυρῶπις ἐστεφάνωτο
δεινὸν δερκομένη, περὶ δὲ Δεῖμός τε Φόβος τε. 20
ποταμῶν δέ γε σύρρυσιν εἰς χωρίον ἓν καὶ πάταγον ὑδάτων
ἀναμισγομένων ἐκμιμήσασθαι τῇ λέξει βουλόμενος οὐκ ἐργάσεται
λείας συλλαβὰς ἀλλ’ ἰσχυρὰς καὶ ἀντιτύπους
[163]
many-voiced, wishes to depict the young bloom of a lovely
countenance and a beauty that brings delight, he will use the
finest of the vowels and the softest of the semi-vowels; he will
not pack his syllables with mute letters, nor impede the utterance
by putting next to one another words hard to pronounce.
He will make the harmony of the letters strike softly and
pleasingly upon the ear, as in the following lines:—
Now forth of her bower hath gone Penelope passing-wise
Lovely as Artemis, or as Aphrodite the Golden.[140]
Only once by the Sun-god’s altar in Delos I chanced to espy
So stately a shaft of a palm that gracefully grew thereby.[141]
Rose Chloris, fair beyond word, whom Nereus wedded of old,
For her beauty his heart had stirred, and he wooed her with gifts untold.[142]
But when he introduces a sight that is pitiable, or terrifying,
or august, he will not employ the finest of the vowels. He will
take the hardest to utter of the fricatives or of the mutes, and
will pack his syllables with these. For instance:—
But dreadful he burst on their sight, with the sea-scum all fouled o’er.[143]
And thereon was embossed the Gorgon-demon, with stony gaze
Grim-glaring, and Terror and Panic encompassed the Fearful Face.[144]
When he wishes to reproduce in his language the rush of
meeting torrents and the roar of confluent waters, he will not
employ smooth syllables, but strong and resounding ones:—
2 ἐπαγαγὼν F 3 χρήσεται ... μαλακωτάτοις om. F 4 συγκόπτει P 6
ποιεῖ P 12 χλωρὴν F || ἴδον PMV || ἥν F 13 γῆμεν ἑὸν] τημέναιον
F || μετα P, M: κατα F: διὰ EV 19 γοργῶι sic F: γοργὼ ceteri ||
βλοσυρώπις F (metri, ut videtur, gratia) 22 ἐργάσεται Us.: ἐργάζεται
F: ἔτι EPMV 23 ἀντιτύπους F: ἀντιτύπους θήσει EPMV
1. κάλλος: cp. scholium in P, ση(μείωσαι)
πῶς κάλλος ἡδο(νῆς) ἐπαγωγὸν
δείκνυ(σιν) Ὅμ(η)ρ(ος).
3. χρήσεται ... καταπυκνώσει ...
συγκόψει ... ποιήσει: general truths
expressed by means of the future tense.
8. Cp. Virg. Aen. i. 496 “regina ad
templum, forma pulcherrima Dido, | incessit
magna iuvenum stipante caterva. |
qualis in Eurotae ripis aut per iuga
Cynthi | exercet Diana choros,” etc.;
and Aen. xii. 67 “Indum sanguineo
veluti violaverit ostro | si quis ebur, aut
mixta rubent ubi lilia multa | alba rosa:
tales virgo dabat ore colores.”
13. In Odyss. xi. 282 the textual
evidence is reported as follows: “διὰ
FHJK, ss. XTU2, Dion. Hal. comp.
verb. 16; δια P; μετὰ XDSTUW, An.
Ox. iv. 310. 5, Bekker An. 1158, Eust.;
μετα G” (Ludwich ad loc.).—In the
present passage of Dionysius the reading
μετά gives an additional μ in the
line: γῆμεν ἑὸν μετὰ κάλλος, ἐπεὶ πόρε
μυρία ἕδνα. For some instances in which
the authorities vary between μετά and
κατά see Ebeling’s Lexicon Homericum,
s.v. μετά.
14. In his selection of tragic qualities
Dionysius seems perhaps to have in view,
once more, the Aristotelian doctrine of
two extremes and a mean.—As the epithet
ἀγέρωχος so closely follows the quotations
from Homer, it is natural to
suppose that Dionysius uses the word
in the Homeric sense of lordly, august,
rather than in the later (bad) sense of
haughty, insolent.
15. Sauppe would insert τὰ δυσηχέστατα
καὶ between ἀλλὰ and τῶν ψοφοειδῶν.
[164-5]
ὡς δ’ ὅτε χείμαρροι ποταμοὶ κατ’ ὄρεσφι ῥέοντες
ἐς μισγάγκειαν συμβάλλετον ὄβριμον ὕδωρ.
βιαζόμενον δέ τινα πρὸς ἐναντίον ῥεῦμα ποταμοῦ μετὰ τῶν
ὅπλων καὶ τὰ μὲν ἀντέχοντα, τὰ δ’ ὑποφερόμενον εἰσάγων
ἀνακοπάς τε ποιήσει συλλαβῶν καὶ ἀναβολὰς χρόνων καὶ 5
ἀντιστηριγμοὺς γραμμάτων
δεινὸν δ’ ἀμφ’ Ἀχιλῆα κυκώμενον ἵστατο κῦμα,
ὤθει δ’ ἐν σάκεϊ πίπτων ῥόος, οὐδὲ πόδεσσιν
εἶχε στηρίξασθαι.
ἀραττομένων δὲ περὶ πέτρας ἀνθρώπων ψόφον τε καὶ μόρον 10
οἰκτρὸν ἐπιδεικνύμενος, ἐπὶ τῶν ἀηδεστάτων τε καὶ κακοφωνοτάτων
χρονιεῖ γραμμάτων, οὐδαμῇ λεαίνων τὴν κατασκευὴν
οὐδὲ ἡδύνων·
σύν τε δύω μάρψας ὥστε σκύλακας ποτὶ γαίῃ
κόπτ’· ἐκ δ’ ἐγκέφαλος χαμάδις ῥέε, δεῦε δὲ γαῖαν. 15
πολὺ ἂν ἔργον εἴη λέγειν, εἰ πάντων παραδείγματα βουλοίμην
φέρειν ὧν ἄν τις ἀπαιτήσειε κατὰ τὸν τόπον τόνδε· ὥστε ἀρκεσθεὶς
τοῖς εἰρημένοις ἐπὶ τὰ ἑξῆς μεταβήσομαι. φημὶ δὴ τὸν
βουλόμενον ἐργάσασθαι λέξιν καλὴν ἐν τῷ συντιθέναι τὰς
φωνάς, ὅσα καλλιλογίαν ἢ μεγαλοπρέπειαν ἢ σεμνότητα περιείληφεν 20
ὀνόματα, εἰς ταὐτὸ συνάγειν. εἴρηται δέ τινα περὶ
τούτων καὶ Θεοφράστῳ τῷ φιλοσόφῳ κοινότερον ἐν τοῖς περὶ
[165]
And even as Wintertide torrents down-rushing from steep hill-sides
Hurl their wild waters in one where a cleft of the mountain divides.[145]
When he depicts a hero, though heavy with his harness,
putting forth all his energies against an opposing stream, and now
holding his own, now being carried off his feet, he will contrive
counter-buffetings of syllables, arresting pauses, and letters that
block the way:—
Round Achilles the terrible surge towered seething on every side,
And a cataract dashed and crashed on his shield: all vainly he sought
Firm ground for his feet.[146]
When men are being dashed against rocks, and he is portraying
the noise and their pitiable fate, he will linger on the
harshest and most ill-sounding letters, altogether avoiding
smoothness or prettiness in the structure:—
And together laid hold on twain, and dashed them against the ground
Like whelps: down gushed the brain, and bespattered the rock-floor round.[147]
It would be a long task to attempt to adduce specimens of
all the artistic touches of which examples might be demanded in
this one field. So, contenting myself with what has been said,
I will pass to the next point.
I hold that those who wish to fashion a style which is
beautiful in the collocation of sounds must combine in it words
which all carry the impression of elegance, grandeur, or dignity.
Something has been said about these matters, in a general way,
by the philosopher Theophrastus in his work on Style, where he
2 ὄβριμον FP: ὄμβριμον EM2V 9 στηρίξασθαι F Hom.: στηρίζεσθαι PMV
10 δραττομένων F || περι F, V: παρα P, M 11 ἐπιδεικνύμενος F:
ἐνδεικνύμενος PMV 14 ποτι F, MV: προτὶ P: cf. 202 6 infra.
17 κατὰ τὸν τόπον τόνδε ὧν ἄν τις ἀπαιτήσειε (hoc verborum ordine) PV
|| κατὰ F: καὶ κατὰ PV 20 καλλιλογίαν ἢ F: καλλιλογίαν καὶ PMV 21
τὸ αὐτὸ F: τοῦτο PMV
1. Cp. Virg. Aen. ii. 496 “non sic,
aggeribus ruptis cum spumeus amnis |
exiit oppositasque evicit gurgite moles,
| fertur in arva furens cumulo camposque
per omnes | cum stabulis armenta trahit.”
7. Cp. Virg. Aen. x. 305 “solvitur
(sc. puppis Tarchontis) atque viros mediis
exponit in undis, | fragmina remorum
quos et fluitantia transtra | impediunt
retrahitque pedes simul unda relabens.”
14. Cp. Virg. Aen. v. 478, “durosque
reducta | libravit dextra media inter
cornua caestus | arduus, effractoque illisit
in ossa cerebro.”—Demetr. (de Eloc. § 219),
in quoting this passage of Homer, couples
with it Il. xxiii. 116 πολλὰ δ’ ἄναντα
κάταντα πάραντά τε δόχμιά τ’ ἦλθον
(Virgil’s “quadripedante putrem sonitu
quatit ungula campum,” Aen. viii. 596).—Another
good Virgilian instance of
adaptation of sound to sense is Georg.
iv. 174 “illi inter sese magna vi bracchia
tollunt | in numerum, versantque tenaci
forcipe ferrum.”
18. φημί seems (cp. the legal use of
aio) to approximate to the sense of κελεύω
(as in Pind. Nem. iii. 28, Soph. Aj.
1108). Either so, or (as Upton suggested)
we may insert δεῖν, or the sense
may simply be, “I say that the man
who aims ... does combine, etc. (i.e.
when he knows his own business).”
19. For the construction λέξιν καλὴν
ἐν τῷ συντιθέναι τὰς φωνάς cp. Fragm.
of Duris of Samos, Ἔφορος δὲ καὶ
Θεόπομπος τῶν γενομένων πλεῖστον ἀπελείφθησαν,
οὔτε γὰρ μιμήσεως μετέλαβον
οὐδεμίας οὔτε ἡδονῆς ἐν τῷ φράσαι,
αὐτοῦ δὲ τοῦ γράφειν μόνον ἐπεμελήθησαν.
20. Here, again, the Aristotelian
‘mean’ may possibly be intended.
22. Theophrastus: for other references
to Theophrastus in the Scripta Rhetorica
of Dionysius see de Lysia cc. 6, 14;
de Isocr. c. 3; de Din. c. 2; de Demosth.
c. 3. The passage of Theophrastus which
Dionysius has in mind here is no doubt
that mentioned by Demetr. de Eloc. § 173
ποιεῖ δὲ εὔχαριν τὴν ἑρμηνείαν καὶ τὰ
λεγόμενα καλὰ ὀνόματα. ὡρίσατο δ’ αὐτὰ
Θεόφραστος οὕτως· κάλλος ὀνόματός ἐστι
τὸ πρὸς τὴν ἀκοὴν ἢ πρὸς τὴν ὄψιν ἡδύ, ἢ
τὸ τῇ διανοίᾳ ἔντιμον.
[166-7]
λέξεως, ἔνθα ὁρίζει, τίνα ὀνόματα φύσει καλά· παραδείγματος
ἕνεκα, ὧν συντιθεμένων καλὴν οἴεται καὶ μεγαλοπρεπῆ γενήσεσθαι
τὴν φράσιν, καὶ αὖθις ἕτερα μικρὰ καὶ ταπεινά, ἐξ ὧν
οὔτε ποίημα χρηστὸν ἔσεσθαί φησιν οὔτε λόγον. καὶ μὰ
Δία οὐκ ἀπὸ σκοποῦ ταῦτα εἴρηται τῷ ἀνδρί. εἰ μὲν οὖν 5
ἐγχωροίη πάντ’ εἶναι τὰ μόρια τῆς λέξεως ὑφ’ ὧν μέλλει
δηλοῦσθαι τὸ πρᾶγμα εὔφωνά τε καὶ καλλιρήμονα, μανίας
ἔργον ζητεῖν τὰ χείρω· εἰ δὲ ἀδύνατον εἴη τοῦτο, ὥσπερ ἐπὶ
πολλῶν ἔχει, τῇ πλοκῇ καὶ μίξει καὶ παραθέσει πειρατέον
ἀφανίζειν τὴν τῶν χειρόνων φύσιν, ὅπερ Ὅμηρος εἴωθεν ἐπὶ 10
πολλῶν ποιεῖν. εἰ γάρ τις ἔροιτο ὅντιν’ οὖν ἢ ποιητῶν ἢ
ῥητόρων, τίνα σεμνότητα ἢ καλλιλογίαν ταῦτ’ ἔχει τὰ ὀνόματα
ἃ ταῖς Βοιωτίαις κεῖται πόλεσιν Ὑρία καὶ Μυκαλησσὸς καὶ
Γραῖα καὶ Ἐτεωνὸς καὶ Σκῶλος καὶ Θίσβη καὶ Ὀγχηστὸς
καὶ Εὔτρησις καὶ τἆλλ’ ἐφεξῆς ὧν ὁ ποιητὴς μέμνηται, οὐδεὶς 15
ἂν εἰπεῖν οὐδ’ ἥντιν’ οὖν ἔχοι· ἀλλ’ οὕτως αὐτὰ καλῶς
ἐκεῖνος συνύφαγκεν καὶ παραπληρώμασιν εὐφώνοις διείληφεν
ὥστε μεγαλοπρεπέστατα φαίνεσθαι πάντων ὀνόματα·
Βοιωτῶν μὲν Πηνέλεως καὶ Λήϊτος ἦρχον
Ἀρκεσίλαός τε Προθοήνωρ τε Κλονίος τε, 20
οἵ θ’ Ὑρίην ἐνέμοντο καὶ Αὐλίδα πετρήεσσαν
Σχοῖνόν τε Σκῶλόν τε πολύκνημόν τ’ Ἐτεωνόν,
Θέσπειαν Γραῖάν τε καὶ εὐρύχορον Μυκαλησσόν,
οἵ τ’ ἀμφ’ Ἅρμ’ ἐνέμοντο καὶ Εἰλέσιον καὶ Ἐρυθράς,
οἵ τ’ Ἐλεῶν’ εἶχον ἠδ’ Ὕλην καὶ Πετεῶνα, 25
Ὠκαλέην Μεδεῶνά τ’ ἐυκτίμενον πτολίεθρον.
ἐν εἰδόσι λέγων οὐκ οἴομαι πλειόνων δεῖν παραδειγμάτων.
[167]
distinguishes two classes of words—those which are naturally
beautiful (whose collocation, for example, in composition will, he
thinks, make the phrasing beautiful and grand), and those, again,
which are paltry and ignoble, of which he says neither good
poetry can be constructed nor good prose. And, really and truly,
our author is not far from the mark in saying this. If, then, it
were possible that all the parts of speech by which a given subject
is to be expressed should be euphonious and elegant, it would
be madness to seek out the inferior ones. But if this be out of
the question, as in many cases it is, then we must endeavour to
mask the natural defects of the inferior letters by interweaving
and mingling and juxtaposition, and this is just what Homer is
accustomed to do in many passages. For instance, if any poet
or rhetorician whatsoever were to be asked what grandeur or
elegance there is in the names which have been given to the
Boeotian towns,—Hyria, Mycalessus, Graia, Eteonus, Scolus,
Thisbe, Onchestus, Eutresis, and the rest of the series which the
poet enumerates,—no one would be able to point to any trace of
such qualities. But Homer has interwoven and interspersed them
with pleasant-sounding supplementary words into so beautiful a
texture that they appear the most magnificent of all names:—
Lords of Boeotia’s host came Leitus, Peneleos,
Prothoenor and Arcesilaus and Clonius for battle uprose,
With the folk that in Hyrie dwelt, and by Aulis’s crag-fringed steep,
And in Schoinus and Scolus, and midst Eteonus’ hill-clefts deep,
In Thespeia and Graia, and green Mycalessus the land broad-meadowed,
And in Harma and Eilesius, and Erythrae the mountain-shadowed,
And they that in Eleon abode, and in Hyle and Peteon withal,
And in Ocalee and in Medeon, burg of the stately wall.[148]
As I am addressing men who know their Homer, I do not
1 ἔνθα] καθ’ ὃ F 2 γενήσεσθαι] γίνεσθαι F 3 αὖθις om. F 4
χρηστὸν ἔσεσθαι] χρήσιμον F 5 ἄπο FPMV || εἴρηται τῷ ἀνδρὶ F: τῷ
ἀνδρὶ εἴρηται PMV 7 καλλιρρήμονα s 11 ἢ ποιητῶν P: ποιητῶν FM
13 βοιωτίαις PV: βοιωτικαῖς F: βοιωτίας M 15 τᾶλλ’ ἐφεξῆς F: τἄλλα
ἑξῆς PM, V 17 συνὕφαγκεν F, EP: συνύφαγγε M: συνύφανεν V 18
μεγαλοπρεπέστερα E || πάντων] τούτων V || ὀνόματα PMV: ὀνομάτων EF 25
ἥδ’ F: οἵδ’ M: ἰδ’ V
1. παραδείγματος ἕνεκα looks like an
adscript (possibly on ὁρίζει: to indicate
that there were many other topics in
Theophrastus’ book), which has found
its way into the text.
4. For the distinction between poetry
and prose cp. Aristot. Rhet. iii. 3 (1406 a)
ἐν μὲν γὰρ ποιήσει πρέπει γάλα λευκὸν
εἰπεῖν, ἐν δὲ λόγῳ τὰ μὲν ἀπρεπέστερα,
τὰ δέ, ἂν ᾖ κατακορῆ, ἐξελέγχει καὶ ποιεῖ
φανερὸν ὅτι ποίησίς ἐστιν, ἐπεὶ δεῖ γε
χρῆσθαι αὐτοῖς, and iii. 4 (1406 b) χρήσιμον
δὲ ἡ εἰκὼν καὶ ἐν λόγῳ, ὀλιγάκις δέ·
ποιητικὸν γάρ.
5. οὐκ ἀπὸ σκοποῦ = ‘haud ab re.’
The minute variations in word-order
between F and P are not usually
given in the critical footnotes. But the
fact that P places (here and in 164 17)
the verb at the end of the sentence is
noteworthy.
18. Cp. Virg. Georg. iv. 334-44;
Aen. vii. 710-21; Milton Par. Lost
i. 351-5. 396-414, 464-9, 576-87
(especially 583-7); and see Matthew
Arnold (On translating Homer: Last
Words p. 29) as to Hom. Il. xvii. 216 ff.
26. Dionysius (here as elsewhere)
doubtless intended his remarks to apply
to the lines that follow his quotation, as
well as to those actually quoted.
27. ἐν εἰδόσι: this expressive phrase is
as old as Homer himself (Il. x. 250 εἰδόσι
γάρ τοι ταῦτα μετ’ Ἀργείοις ἀγορεύεις). It
occurs also in Thucyd. (ii. 36. 4 μακρηγορεῖν
ἐν εἰδόσιν οὐ βουλόμενος ἐάσω).
[168-69]
ἅπας γάρ ἐστιν ὁ κατάλογος αὐτῷ τοιοῦτος καὶ πολλὰ ἄλλα,
ἐν οἷς ἀναγκασθεὶς ὀνόματα λαμβάνειν οὐ καλὰ τὴν φύσιν
ἑτέροις αὐτὰ κοσμεῖ καλοῖς καὶ λύει τὴν ἐκείνων δυσχέρειαν
τῇ τούτων εὐμορφίᾳ. καὶ περὶ μὲν τούτων ἅλις.
XVII
ἐπεὶ δὲ καὶ τοὺς ῥυθμοὺς ἔφην οὐ μικρὰν μοῖραν ἔχειν 5
τῆς ἀξιωματικῆς καὶ μεγαλοπρεποῦς συνθέσεως, ἵνα μηδεὶς
εἰκῇ με δόξῃ λέγειν ῥυθμοὺς καὶ μέτρα μουσικῆς οἰκεῖα θεωρίας
εἰς οὐ ῥυθμικὴν οὐδ’ ἔμμετρον εἰσάγοντα διάλεκτον, ἀποδώσω
καὶ τὸν ὑπὲρ τούτων λόγον. ἔχει δ’ οὕτως·
πᾶν ὄνομα καὶ ῥῆμα καὶ ἄλλο μόριον λέξεως, ὅ τι μὴ 10
μονοσύλλαβόν ἐστιν, ἐν ῥυθμῷ τινι λέγεται· τὸ δ’ αὐτὸ καλῶ
πόδα καὶ ῥυθμόν. δισυλλάβου μὲν οὖν λέξεως διαφοραὶ τρεῖς.
ἢ γὰρ ἐξ ἀμφοτέρων ἔσται βραχειῶν ἢ ἐξ ἀμφοτέρων μακρῶν
ἢ τῆς μὲν βραχείας, τῆς δὲ μακρᾶς. τοῦ δὲ τρίτου τούτου
ῥυθμοῦ διττὸς ὁ τρόπος· ὁ μέν τις ἀπὸ βραχείας ἀρχόμενος 15
καὶ λήγων εἰς μακράν, ὁ δ’ ἀπὸ μακρᾶς καὶ λήγων εἰς βραχεῖαν.
ὁ μὲν οὖν βραχυσύλλαβος ἡγεμών τε καὶ πυρρίχιος
καλεῖται, καὶ οὔτε μεγαλοπρεπής ἐστιν οὔτε σεμνός· σχῆμα
δ’ αὐτοῦ τοιόνδε
λέγε δὲ σὺ κατὰ πόδα νεόχυτα μέλεα. 20
[169]
think there is need to multiply examples. All his Catalogue of
the towns is on the same high level, and so are many other
passages in which, being compelled to take words not naturally
beautiful, he places them in a setting of beautiful ones, and
neutralizes their offensiveness by the shapeliness of the others.
On this branch of my subject I have now said enough.
CHAPTER XVII
ON RHYTHMS, OR FEET
I have mentioned that rhythm contributes in no small degree
to dignified and impressive composition; and I will treat of this
point also. Let no one suppose that rhythm and metre belong
to the science of song only; that ordinary speech is neither
rhythmical nor metrical; and that I am going astray in introducing
those subjects here.
In point of fact, every noun, verb, or other part of speech,
which does not consist of a single syllable only, is uttered in
some sort of rhythm. (I am here using “rhythm” and “foot”
as convertible terms.) A disyllabic word may take three
different forms. It may have both syllables short, or both
long, or one short and the other long. Of this third rhythm
there are two forms: one beginning in a short and ending in a
long, the other beginning in a long and ending in a short. The
one which consists of two shorts is called hegemon or pyrrhich, and
is neither impressive nor solemn. Its character is as follows:—
Pick up the limbs at thy feet newly-scattered.[149]
1 αὐτῷ Toupius: αὐτῶν libri 6 μηδεὶς EF: μή κέ (καὶ M2) τις PM:
μή μέ τις V 7 με om. PMV 10 καὶ ῥῆμα om. P 12 τέσσαρες E 13
βραχέων FM 20 νεόχυτα EF: νεόλυτα PMV
1. Usener’s αὐτῷ (“all his Catalogue
is on the same high level”) is perhaps
preferable to the manuscript reading
αὐτῶν, which, however, may be taken
to refer to πόλεσιν (166 13). Usener’s
suggestion has, it should be pointed
out, been anticipated by Toup (ad
Longin. p. 296).
5. In this chapter Dionysius seems to
have specially in view Aristotle’s Rhetoric
iii. 8 (cp. note on 255 25 infra) and the
Ῥυθμικὰ στοιχεῖα of Aristoxenus. But
his general standpoint probably comes
nearer to that of Aristophanes of
Byzantium and Dionysius Thrax: he
is, that is to say, primarily a metrist
and a grammarian, and at times looks
upon the rhythmists and musicians with
some distrust.
11, 12. Dionysius agrees here with
Aristoxenus, Ῥυθμικὰ στοιχεῖα ii. 16 ᾧ
δὲ σημαινόμεθα τὸν ῥυθμὸν καὶ γνώριμον
ποιοῦμεν τῇ αἰσθήσει, πούς ἐστιν εἷς ἢ
πλείους ἑνός: and § 18 ibid. ὅτι μὲν οὖν
ἐξ ἑνὸς χρόνου ποὺς οὐκ ἂν εἴη φανερόν,
κτλ.
17. See Introduction (p. 6 supra) for
a classified list of the metrical feet
mentioned in this chapter. Voss says
as to the πυρρίχιος, “nullum ex eo
alicuius momenti constitui potest carmen,
cum numero et pondere paene careat.
aptus dumtaxat ad celeres motus exprimendos,
cuius modi erant armati
saltus Corybantum apud Graecos, et
Saliorum apud Romanos”; see also
Hermog. II. ἰδ. i. (Walz iii. p. 293, lines
1-11). Some sensible remarks on the
whole question are made by Quintil. ix.
4. 87: “miror autem in hac opinione
doctissimos homines fuisse, ut alios pedes
ita eligerent aliosque damnarent, quasi
ullus esset, quem non sit necesse in oratione
deprehendi. licet igitur paeona
sequatur Ephorus, inventum a Thrasymacho,
probatum ab Aristotele, dactylumque,
ut temperatos brevibus ac longis;
fugiat molossum et trochaeum, alterius
tarditate alterius celeritate damnata;
herous, qui est idem dactylus, Aristoteli
amplior, iambus humanior videatur;
trochaeum ut nimis currentem damnet
eique cordacis nomen imponat; eademque
dicant Theodectes ac Theophrastus, similia
post eos Halicarnasseus Dionysius:
irrumpent etiam ad invitos, nec semper
illis heroo aut paeone suo, quem, quia
versum raro facit, maxime laudant, uti
licebit. ut sint tamen aliis alii crebriores,
non verba facient, quae neque augeri nec
minui nec sicuti modulatione produci
aut corripi possint, sed transmutatio et
collocatio.”
20. λέγε δὲ σύ κτλ.: source unknown;
perhaps the reference is to the tearing
of Pentheus limb from limb.—A similar
line in Latin would be: “id agite
peragite celeriter,” Marius Victorinus
Ars Gramm. iii. 1.
[170-1]
ὁ δ’ ἀμφοτέρας τὰς συλλαβὰς μακρὰς ἔχων κέκληται μὲν
σπονδεῖος, ἀξίωμα δ’ ἔχει μέγα καὶ σεμνότητα πολλήν·
παράδειγμα δ’ αὐτοῦ τόδε
ποίαν δῆθ’ ὁρμάσω, ταύταν
ἢ κείναν, κείναν ἢ ταύταν; 5
ὁ δ’ ἐκ βραχείας τε καὶ μακρᾶς συγκείμενος ἐὰν μὲν τὴν
ἡγουμένην λάβῃ βραχεῖαν, ἴαμβος καλεῖται, καὶ ἔστιν οὐκ
ἀγεννής· ἐὰν δ’ ἀπὸ τῆς μακρᾶς ἄρχηται, τροχαῖος, καὶ ἔστι
μαλακώτερος θατέρου καὶ ἀγεννέστερος· παράδειγμα δὲ τοῦ
μὲν προτέρου τοιόνδε 10
ἐπεὶ σχολὴ πάρεστι, παῖ Μενοιτίου.
τοῦ δ’ ἑτέρου
θυμέ, θύμ’ ἀμηχάνοισι κήδεσιν κυκώμενε.
δισυλλάβων μὲν δὴ μορίων λέξεως διαφοραί τε καὶ ῥυθμοὶ
καὶ σχήματα τοσαῦτα· τρισυλλάβων δ’ ἕτερα πλείω τῶν 15
εἰρημένων καὶ ποικιλωτέραν ἔχοντα θεωρίαν. ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἐξ
ἁπασῶν βραχείων συνεστώς, καλούμενος δὲ ὑπό τινων χορεῖος
[τρίβραχυς πούς], οὗ παράδειγμα τοιόνδε
Βρόμιε, δορατοφόρ’, ἐνυάλιε, πολεμοκέλαδε,
ταπεινός τε καὶ ἄσεμνός ἐστι καὶ ἀγεννής, καὶ οὐδὲν ἂν ἐξ 20
[171]
That which has both its syllables long is called a spondee, and
possesses great dignity and much stateliness. Here is an example
of it:—
Ah, which way must I haste?—had I best flee
By this path? or by that path shall it be?[150]
That which is composed of a short and a long is called iambus if
it has the first syllable short; it is not ignoble. If it begins
with the long syllable, it is called a trochee, and is less manly
than the other and more ignoble. The following is an example
of the former:—
My leisure serves me now, Menoetius’ son.[151]
Of the other:—
Heart of mine, O heart in turmoil with a throng of crushing cares![152]
These are all the varieties, rhythms, and forms of disyllabic
words. Those of the trisyllabic are distinct; they are more
numerous than those mentioned, and the study of them is more
complicated. First comes that which consists entirely of short
syllables, and is called by some choree (or tribrach), of which the
following is an example:—
Bromius, wielder of spears,
Lord of war and the onset-cheers.[153]
This foot is mean and wanting in dignity and nobility, and
5 ἢ κείναν κείναν ἢ ταύταν PMV: ἢ κείναν ἢ ταύταν E, F 10 μὲν om.
PMV 11 ἐπεὶ σχολὴ EMV: ἐπὶ σχολῆι FP 13 κήδεσι κεκυκώμενε sic F
14 μὲν EPMV: om. F 17 χορεῖος MV: om. FP 18 τρίβραχυς] τροχαῖος F.
uncinis includendum vel τρίβραχυς πούς vel χορεῖος tamquam glossema
quod, margini olim adscriptum, in textum postea irrepserit 20 καὶ
ἀγεννής om. P
2. The high rank assigned to the
spondee is noted in schol. anon. ad
Hermog. II. ἰδ. (Walz Rhett. Gr. vii.
1049): τάττει (sc. Διονύσιος) δὲ τὸν
σπονδεῖον μετ’ αὐτῶν (sc. μετὰ τῶν καλῶν
ῥυθμῶν).—For Dionysius’ view of the
spondee and other feet see also Walz
viii. 980 Διονύσιος μὲν ἐν τῷ περὶ συνθέσεως
ὀνομάτων φησὶν ὅτι ὁ δάκτυλος κτλ.
4. Euripides’ Hec. 162-4 runs thus
in G. G. A. Murray’s text:—
ποίαν ἢ ταύταν ἢ κείναν
στείχω; †ποῖ δ’ ἥσω; †ποῦ τις θεῶν
†ἢ δαιμόνων †ἐπαρωγός;
As the editor remarks later, “metrum
nec in se perfectum,” etc. See also
Porson’s note on the same passage of
the Hecuba.—For a Latin spondaic line
cp. Ennius “olli respondit rex Albai
longai” (Annal. Reliq. i. 31 Vahlen).
7. The iambus and the trochee abound
in ordinary speech, and must therefore
be used in oratory with moderation: cp.
Cic. de Oratore iii. 47 “nam cum sint
numeri plures, iambum et trochaeum
frequentem segregat ab oratore Aristoteles,
Catule, vester, qui natura tamen
incurrunt ipsi in orationem sermonemque
nostrum; sed sunt insignes percussiones
eorum numerorum et minuti pedes”;
Orator 56. 189 “versus saepe in oratione
per imprudentiam dicimus; quod
vehementer est vitiosum, sed non
attendimus neque exaudimus nosmet
ipsos; senarios vero et Hipponacteos
effugere vix possumus; magnam enim
partem ex iambis nostra constat oratio”;
Aristot. Rhet. iii. 8. 4 ὁ δ’ ἴαμβος αὐτή
ἐστιν ἡ λέξις ἡ τῶν πολλῶν· διὸ μάλιστα
πάντων τῶν μέτρων ἰαμβεῖα φθέγγονται
λέγοντες: Poet. iv. 14 μάλιστα γὰρ λεκτικὸν
τῶν μέτρων τὸ ἰαμβεῖόν ἐστιν· σημεῖον δὲ
τούτου· πλεῖστα γὰρ ἰαμβεῖα λέγομεν ἐν
τῇ διαλέκτῳ τῇ πρὸς ἀλλήλους, ἑξάμετρα
δὲ ὀλιγάκις καὶ ἐκβαίνοντες τῆς λεκτικῆς
ἁρμονίας: Demetr. de Eloc. § 43 ὁ δὲ
ἴαμβος εὐτελὴς καὶ τῇ τῶν πολλῶν λέξει
ὅμοιος. πολλοὶ γοῦν μέτρα ἰαμβικὰ λαλοῦσιν
οὐκ εἰδότες.
9. Cp. Aristot. Rhet. iii. 8 ὁ δὲ
τροχαῖος κορδακικώτερος· δηλοῖ δὲ τὰ
τετράμετρα· ἔστι γὰρ ῥυθμὸς τροχαῖος τὰ
τετράμετρα.
11. As in Hor. Epod. ii. 1 “Beatus
ille, qui procul negotiis.”
13. This line of Archilochus is preserved
(together with the six that follow
it) in Stobaeus Florileg. i. 207 (Meineke).
For a similar Latin trochaic verse see
Marius Victorinus i. 12 “Roma, Roma
cerne, quanta sit Deum benignitas.”
18. For the effect of tribrachs in Latin
cp. Marius Victorinus i. 12 “nemus ave
reticuit, ager homine sonat.”
20. καὶ ἀγεννής: these words are
absent from P; perhaps rightly. They
do not sort well with καὶ οὐδὲν ...
γενναῖον.
[172-3]
αὐτοῦ γένοιτο γενναῖον. ὁ δ’ ἐξ ἁπασῶν μακρῶν, μολοττὸν δ’
αὐτὸν οἱ μετρικοὶ καλοῦσιν, ὑψηλός τε καὶ ἀξιωματικός ἐστι
καὶ διαβεβηκὼς ἐπὶ πολύ· παράδειγμα δὲ αὐτοῦ τοιόνδε
ὦ Ζηνὸς καὶ Λήδας κάλλιστοι σωτῆρες.
ὁ δ’ ἐκ μακρᾶς καὶ δυεῖν βραχειῶν μέσην μὲν λαβὼν τὴν 5
μακρὰν ἀμφίβραχυς ὠνόμασται, καὶ οὐ σφόδρα τῶν εὐσχήμων
ἐστὶ ῥυθμῶν ἀλλὰ διακέκλασταί τε καὶ πολὺ τὸ θῆλυ καὶ
ἀγεννὲς ἔχει, οἷά ἐστι ταυτί
Ἴακχε θρίαμβε, σὺ τῶνδε χοραγέ.
ὁ δὲ προλαμβάνων τὰς δύο βραχείας ἀνάπαιστος μὲν καλεῖται, 10
σεμνότητα δ’ ἔχει πολλήν· καὶ ἔνθα δεῖ μέγεθός τι περιτιθέναι
τοῖς πράγμασιν ἢ πάθος, ἐπιτήδειός ἐστι παραλαμβάνεσθαι·
τούτου τὸ σχῆμα τοιόνδε
βαρύ μοι κεφαλᾶς ἐ πίκρανον ἔχειν.
ὁ δὲ ἀπὸ τῆς μακρᾶς ἀρχόμενος, λήγων δὲ εἰς τὰς βραχείας 15
δάκτυλος μὲν καλεῖται, πάνυ δ’ ἐστὶ σεμνὸς καὶ εἰς τὸ κάλλος
τῆς ἑρμηνείας ἀξιολογώτατος, καὶ τό γε ἡρωϊκὸν μέτρον ἀπὸ
τούτου κοσμεῖται ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολύ· παράδειγμα δὲ αὐτοῦ τόδε
Ἰλιόθεν με φέρων ἄνεμος Κικόνεσσι πέλασσεν.
οἱ μέντοι ῥυθμικοὶ τούτου τοῦ ποδὸς τὴν μακρὰν βραχυτέραν 20
[173]
nothing noble can be made out of it. But that which consists
entirely of long syllables—molossus, as the metrists call it—is
elevated and dignified, and has a mighty stride. The following
is an example of it:—
O glorious saviours, Zeus’ and Leda’s sons.[154]
That which consists of a long and two shorts, with the long in
the middle, bears the name of amphibrachys, and has no strong
claim to rank with the graceful rhythms, but is enervated and
has about it much that is feminine and ignoble, e.g.—
Triumphant Iacchus that leadest this chorus.[155]
That which commences with two shorts is called an anapaest,
and possesses much dignity. Where it is necessary to invest
a subject with grandeur or pathos, this foot may be appropriately
used. Its form may be illustrated by—
Ah, the coif on mine head all too heavily weighs.[156]
That which begins with the long and ends with the shorts is
called a dactyl; it is decidedly impressive, and remarkable for
its power to produce beauty of style. It is to this that the
heroic line is mainly indebted for its grace. Here is an
example:—
Sped me from Ilium the breeze, and anigh the Ciconians brought me.[157]
The rhythmists, however, say that the long syllable in this foot
3 διαβεβηκῶς (ῶ suprascripto) P: διαβέβηκεν ὡς M1: διαβεβηκὼς ὡς
M2V: διαβέβηκεν F || τοιόνδε F: τόδε PMV 5 δυεῖν P: δυοῖν MV:
β F 6 μακρὰν F: μακρὰν ἑκατέρας τῶν βραχειῶν PMV || εὐσχήμων EF:
εὐσχημόνων PMV 7 διακεκόλασται F: κέκλασται E 8 ἀγεννες P, M:
ἀγενὲς V: ἀηδὲς F 9 θρίαμβε L. Dindorfius: διθύραμβε libri 11
μέγεθός τι F: μέγεθος PV: μεγέθη M || περιτιθέναι F: περιθεῖναι PMV
12 περιλαμβάνεσθαι F 14 κεφαλᾶς E: κεφαλὰς F: κεφαλῆς PMV || ἔχειν
P: ἔχει EFMV 16 δάκτυλος EFM: δακτ̑ P: δακτυλικὸς V ||
τὸ κάλλος τῆς ἑρμηνείας EF: κάλλος ἁρμονίας PMV 17 ὑπὸ R
2. ἀξιωματικός: various modern examples
of the rhythmical effect of long
and short syllables will be found in
Demetr., e.g. p. 219. Here may be
added, from George Meredith’s Love in
the Valley—
Thicker crowd the shades as the grave East deepens
Glowing, and with crimson a long cloud swells.
Maiden still the morn is; and strange she is, and secret;
Strange her eyes; her cheeks are cold as cold sea-shells.
Here the long syllables in italics may
be contrasted with:
Deals she an unkindness, ’tis but her rapid measure,
– ᴗ ᴗ ᴗ ᴗ
Even as in a dance; and her smile can heal no less.
9. Virg. Ecl. viii. 68 might be fancifully
divided in such a way as to present several feet of this kind:
ᴗ – ᴗ ᴗ – ᴗ ᴗ – ᴗ ᴗ – ᴗ ᴗ – ᴗ
“[ducite] ab urbe | domum me|a carmin|a, ducit|e Daphnim.”
16. Cp. Long. de Sublim. xxxix. 4
ὅλον τε γὰρ ἐπὶ τῶν δακτυλικῶν εἴρηται
ῥυθμῶν· εὐγενέστατοι δ’ οὗτοι καὶ μεγεθοποιοί,
διὸ καὶ τὸ ἡρῷον, ὧν ἴσμεν κάλλιστον,
μέτρον συνιστᾶσιν.
19. This is of course the very start of
Odysseus’ adventures as recounted by
himself. He sails away from Ilium on
as many dactyls as possible.—For dactyls
freely used in the Virgilian hexameter
cp. Aen. ix. 503 “at tuba terribilem
sonitum procul aere canoro [increpuit,
etc.]”; Georg. iii. 284 “sed fugit interea,
fugit irreparabile tempus.”
20. τούτου τοῦ ποδός. “Unless a
lacuna be assumed, a rather violent
assumption, the phrase [i.e. τούτου τοῦ
ποδός] must simply resume the αὐτοῦ
just before the hexameter, the τούτου
just before that, and the δάκτυλος two
lines earlier, which immediately follows
the phrase of description,” Goodell Greek
Metric p. 172.
[174-5]
εἶναί φασι τῆς τελείας, οὐκ ἔχοντες δ’ εἰπεῖν ὅσῳ, καλοῦσιν
αὐτὴν ἄλογον. ἕτερός ἐστιν ἀντίστροφον ἔχων τούτῳ ῥυθμόν,
ὃς ἀπὸ τῶν βραχειῶν ἀρξάμενος ἐπὶ τὴν ἄλογον τελευτᾷ·
τοῦτον χωρίσαντες ἀπὸ τῶν ἀναπαίστων κυκλικὸν καλοῦσι
παράδειγμα αὐτοῦ φέροντες τοιόνδε 5
κέχυται πόλις ὑψίπυλος κατὰ γᾶν.
περὶ ὧν ἂν ἕτερος εἴη λόγος· πλὴν ἀμφότεροί γε τῶν πάνυ
καλῶν οἱ ῥυθμοί. ἓν ἔτι λείπεται τρισυλλάβων ῥυθμῶν γένος,
ὃ συνέστηκεν ἐκ δύο μακρῶν καὶ βραχείας, τρία δὲ ποιεῖ
σχήματα· μέσης μὲν γὰρ γινομένης τῆς βραχείας, ἄκρων δὲ 10
τῶν μακρῶν κρητικός τε λέγεται καὶ ἔστιν οὐκ ἀγεννής.
ὑπόδειγμα δὲ αὐτοῦ τοιοῦτον
οἱ δ’ ἐπείγοντο πλωταῖς ἀπήναισι χαλκεμβόλοις.
ἂν δὲ τὴν ἀρχὴν αἱ δύο μακραὶ κατάσχωσιν, τὴν δὲ τελευτὴν
ἡ βραχεῖα, οἷά ἐστι ταυτί 15
σοὶ Φοῖβε Μοῦσαί τε σύμβωμοι,
ἀνδρῶδες πάνυ ἐστὶ τὸ σχῆμα καὶ εἰς σεμνολογίαν ἐπιτήδειον.
τὸ δ’ αὐτὸ συμβήσεται κἂν ἡ βραχεῖα πρώτη τεθῇ τῶν
μακρῶν· καὶ γὰρ οὗτος ὁ ῥυθμὸς ἀξίωμα ἔχει καὶ μέγεθος·
παράδειγμα δὲ αὐτοῦ τόδε 20
τίν’ ἀκτάν, τίν’ ὕλαν δράμω; ποῖ πορευθῶ;
τούτοις ἀμφοτέροις ὀνόματα κεῖται τοῖς ποσὶν ὑπὸ τῶν μετρικῶν
βακχεῖος μὲν τῷ προτέρῳ, θατέρῳ δὲ ὑποβάκχειος. οὗτοι
δώδεκα ῥυθμοί τε καὶ πόδες εἰσὶν οἱ πρῶτοι καταμετροῦντες
[175]
is shorter than the perfect long. Not being able to say by how
much, they call it “irrational.” There is another foot having
a rhythm corresponding to this, which starts with the short
syllables and ends with the “irrational” one. This they distinguish
from the anapaest and call it “cyclic,” adducing the
following line as an example of it:—
On the earth is the high-gated city laid low.[158]
This question cannot be discussed here; but both rhythms are of
the distinctly beautiful sort. One class of trisyllabic rhythms
still remains, which is composed of two longs and a short. It
takes three shapes. When the short is in the middle and the
longs at the ends, it is called a cretic and has no lack of nobility.
A sample of it is:—
On they sped, borne on sea-wains with prows brazen-beaked.[159]
But if the two long syllables occupy the beginning, and the short
one the end, as in the line
Phoebus, to thee and the Muses worshipped with thee,[160]
the structure is exceptionally virile, and is appropriate for solemn
language. The effect will be the same if the short be placed
before the longs; for this foot also has dignity and grandeur.
Here is an example of it:—
To what shore, to what grove shall I flee for refuge?[161]
To the former of these two feet the name of bacchius is assigned
by the metrists, to the other that of hypobacchius. These are
the twelve fundamental rhythms and feet which measure all
1 ὅσω F: πόσω PMV 2 ἕτερός ἐστιν F: ἕτερον δὲ PMV || ἔχων F: τινα
PMV 3 ἐπὶ τὴν ἄλογον FP1V: ἐπί τιν’ ἄλογον P2: ἐπί τινα λόγον
M || τελευτᾶι τοῦτον FM: τοῦτον τελευτᾷ V: τελευτᾶι P 4 κυκλικὸν
FM2: κύκλον PM1V 6 ὑψί*πολος cum rasura F: ὑψίπυλον PMV 8
τρισύλλαβον F 9 συνέστηκεν F: συνέστηκε μὲν PMV || δὲ ποιεῖ F: δὲ
ἔχει PV 12 τοιοῦτον PM: τοιόνδε FV 13 πρώταις FM2 || ἀπήναισι EP:
ἀπήνεσι MV: ἀπήνεσσι F || χαλκεμβόλοις EF: χαλκεμβόλοισιν PMV 14 ἂν
F: ἐὰν PMV 15 ἡ F: om. PMV 16 σοὶ EPMV: σὺ F || σύμβωμοι EFMV:
συμβῶμεν Ps 17 πάνυ ἐστὶ τὸ EF: δὲ πάνυ τοῦτο PMV || εἰσ σεμνότητα (σ
pr. suprascripto) λογίαν P 18 πρώτη τεθῆι P, MV: συντεθῆι F 21 τίν’
ἀκτάν, τίν’ ὕλαν] τίνα γᾶν τινυδἂν F 22 τοῖς ποσὶν FPM: ῥυθμοῖς V
23 παλιμβάκχειος E
1. ὅσῳ: cp. 190 9, where there is the
same divergence between F and PMV.
2, 4. See Glossary under ἄλογος and
κυκλικός.
13. Usener suggests that this line
may possibly come from the Persae
of Timotheus, some newly-discovered
fragments of which were issued by
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff in 1903.—Similarly,
in Latin, cretics may be
found in such lines of Terence as “tum
coacti necessario se aperiunt” (Andr.
iv. 1).
16.
– – ᴗ – – ᴗ – – ᴗ
“O Phoebus | O Muses | co-worshipped”
might give the metrical
effect, in a rough and uncouth way. In
Latin cp. “baccare, laetare praesente
Frontone” (Rufinus de Metris Comicorum).
18. πρώτη τεθῇ τῶν μακρῶν, ‘at the
head of’; cp. note on 98 7 supra.
21. After πορευθῶ P has a gap which
would contain a dozen letters, and in
the middle of the gap the original
copyist has written οὐδ(ὲν) λείπ(ει).
[176-7]
ἅπασαν ἔμμετρόν τε καὶ ἄμετρον λέξιν, ἐξ ὧν γίνονται στίχοι
τε καὶ κῶλα· οἱ γὰρ ἄλλοι πόδες καὶ ῥυθμοὶ πάντες ἐκ
τούτων εἰσὶ σύνθετοι. ἁπλοῦς δὲ ῥυθμὸς ἢ ποὺς οὔτ’ ἐλάττων
ἔσται δύο συλλαβῶν οὔτε μείζων τριῶν. καὶ περὶ μὲν τούτων
οὐκ οἶδ’ ὅτι δεῖ τὰ πλείω λέγειν. 5
XVIII
ὧν δ’ ἕνεκα νῦν ὑπήχθην ταῦτα προειπεῖν (οὐ γὰρ δὴ τὴν
ἄλλως γέ μοι προὔκειτο μετρικῶν καὶ ῥυθμικῶν ἅπτεσθαι
θεωρημάτων, ἀλλὰ τοῦ ἀναγκαίου ἕνεκα), ταῦτ’ ἐστίν, ὅτι διὰ
μὲν τῶν γενναίων καὶ ἀξιωματικῶν καὶ μέγεθος ἐχόντων
ῥυθμῶν ἀξιωματικὴ γίνεται σύνθεσις καὶ γενναία καὶ μεγαλοπρεπής, 10
διὰ δὲ τῶν ἀγεννῶν τε καὶ ταπεινῶν ἀμεγέθης τις
καὶ ἄσεμνος, ἐάν τε καθ’ ἑαυτοὺς ἕκαστοι τούτων λαμβάνωνται
τῶν ῥυθμῶν, ἐάν τε ἀλλήλοις κατὰ τὰς ὁμοζυγίας
συμπλέκωνται. εἰ μὲν οὖν ἔσται δύναμις ἐξ ἁπάντων τῶν
κρατίστων ῥυθμῶν συνθεῖναι τὴν λέξιν, ἔχοι ἂν ἡμῖν κατ’ 15
εὐχήν· εἰ δ’ ἀναγκαῖον εἴη μίσγειν τοῖς κρείττοσι τοὺς
χείρονας, ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν γίνεται (τὰ γὰρ ὀνόματα κεῖται τοῖς
πράγμασιν ὡς ἔτυχεν), οἰκονομεῖν αὐτὰ χρὴ φιλοτέχνως καὶ
διακλέπτειν τῇ χάριτι τῆς συνθέσεως τὴν ἀνάγκην ἄλλως τε
καὶ πολλὴν τὴν ἄδειαν ἔχοντας· οὐ γὰρ ἀπελαύνεται ῥυθμὸς 20
οὐδεὶς ἐκ τῆς ἀμέτρου λέξεως, ὥσπερ ἐκ τῆς ἐμμέτρου.
μαρτύρια δὲ ὧν εἴρηκα παραθεῖναι λοιπόν, ἵνα μοι καὶ
πίστιν ὁ λόγος λάβῃ. ἔσται δ’ ὀλίγα περὶ πολλῶν. φέρε
δή, τίς οὐκ ἂν ὁμολογήσειεν ἀξιωματικῶς τε συγκεῖσθαι καὶ
[177]
language, metrical or unmetrical, and from them are formed lines
and clauses. All other feet and rhythms are but combinations
of these. A simple rhythm, or foot, will not be less than two
syllables, nor will it exceed three. I do not know that more
need be said on this subject.
CHAPTER XVIII
EFFECT OF VARIOUS RHYTHMS
The reason why I have been led to make these preliminary
remarks (for certainly it was no part of my design to touch
without due cause on metrical and rhythmical questions, but
only so far as it was really necessary) is this, that it is
through rhythms which are noble and dignified, and contain an
element of greatness, that composition becomes dignified, noble,
and splendid, while it is made a paltry and unimpressive sort
of thing by the use of those rhythms that are ignoble and
mean, whether they are taken severally by themselves, or are
woven together according to their mutual affinities. If, then, it
is within human capacity to frame the style entirely from the
finest rhythms, our aspirations will be realized; but if it should
prove necessary to blend the worse with the better, as happens
in many cases (for names have been attached to things in a
haphazard way), we must manage our material artistically. We
must disguise our compulsion by the gracefulness of the composition:
the more so that we have full liberty of action, since
no rhythm is banished from non-metrical language, as some
are from metrical.
It remains for me to produce proofs of my statements, in
order that my argument may carry conviction. Wide as the
field is, a few proofs will suffice. Thus it is surely beyond dispute
4 ἔσται EF: ἐστὶ PMV || δύο EF: δυεῖν P: δυοῖν MV 5 τὰ πλείω FM:
πλείω PV 7 μετρικῶν καὶ ῥυθμικῶν F: ῥυθμικῶν (ῥυθμῶν MV) τε καὶ
μετρικῶν PMV 10 γενναία F: βεβαία PMV 14 δῆλον post συμπλέκωνται
praestant FMV: om. P || ἁπάντων τῶν PMV: ἁπάντων F 17 κεῖται F:
ἔκκειται PM: ἔγκειται V 20 οὐ FP: οὐδὲ MV 23 ἔσται FPM: ἔστι V
3. ἁπλοῦς δὲ ... μείζων τριῶν. A. J.
Ellis (p. 48) says, “This gives a simple
and convenient rule for practising the
quantitative pronunciation of words of
more than three syllables.... The effect
of quantity in prose is the most difficult
thing for moderns to appreciate. Hence
the only easy pronunciation of Greek is
the modern, where quantity is entirely
neglected, and a force-accent used precisely
as in English.”
5. On the subject of metrical feet
Aristotle (Rhet. iii. 8) is brief; Cicero
(Orator cc. 63, 64) is fuller; while
Dionysius in this chapter enters into
still further details. Reference may
also be made to Quintil. ix. 4. 45 ff.
and to Demetr. de Eloc. §§ 38 ff.
6. This passage (down to l. 21) brings
out clearly the importance of rhythm
in prose-writing.
16. εἴη: the less agreeable alternative
is pleasantly treated as though it were
the more remote. Cp. εἴη on 166 8
(though there ἐγχωροίη stands in the
earlier clause, 166 6).
17. H. Richards (Classical Review xix.
252) suggests ἐπίκειται (or σύγκειται), in
order to account for the ἔκκειται of PM
and the ἔγκειται of V.
21. Would not ὥσπερ οὐδὲ ἐκ τῆς
ἐμμέτρου (or the like: cp. 100 18) be
required if the meaning were “any
more than from the metrical”? The
author’s point is brought out more
clearly in 192 21, 196 8, etc. Cp. Quintil.
ix. 4. 87, “miror autem in hac opinione
doctissimos homines fuisse, ut alios
pedes ita eligerent aliosque damnarent,
quasi ullus esset, quem non sit necesse
in oratione deprehendi” (the passage is
more fully quoted on p. 169 supra).
23. περί: no change in the reading is
necessary; cp. 200 4 ὀλίγα περὶ πολλῶν,
and 136 6 ὀλίγα ὑπὲρ πολλῶν θεωρημάτων.
[178-9]
μεγαλοπρεπῶς τὴν Θουκυδίδου λέξιν τὴν ἐν τῷ ἐπιταφίῳ
ταύτην· “Οἱ μὲν πολλοὶ τῶν ἐνθάδε ἤδη εἰρηκότων ἐπαινοῦσι
τὸν προσθέντα τῷ νόμῳ τὸν λόγον τόνδε, ὡς καλὸν ἐπὶ τοῖς
ἐκ τῶν πολέμων θαπτομένοις ἀγορεύεσθαι αὐτόν.” τί οὖν
ἐστιν ὃ πεποίηκε ταύτην μεγαλοπρεπῆ τὴν σύνθεσιν; τὸ ἐκ 5
τοιούτων συγκεῖσθαι ῥυθμῶν τὰ κῶλα. τρεῖς μὲν γὰρ οἱ τοῦ
πρώτου προηγούμενοι κώλου σπονδεῖοι πόδες εἰσίν, ὁ δὲ
τέταρτος ἀνάπαιστος, ὁ δὲ μετὰ τοῦτον αὖθις σπονδεῖος, ἔπειτα
κρητικός, ἅπαντες ἀξιωματικοί. καὶ τὸ μὲν πρῶτον κῶλον
διὰ ταῦτ’ ἐστὶ σεμνόν· τὸ δὲ ἑξῆς τουτί “ἐπαινοῦσι τὸν 10
προσθέντα τῷ νόμῳ τὸν λόγον τόνδε” δύο μὲν ὑποβακχείους
ἔχει τοὺς πρώτους πόδας, κρητικὸν δὲ τὸν τρίτον, εἶτ’
αὖθις ὑποβακχείους δύο καὶ συλλαβὴν ὑφ’ ἧς τελειοῦται τὸ
κῶλον· ὥστ’ εἰκότως σεμνόν ἐστι καὶ τοῦτο ἐκ τῶν εὐγενεστάτων
τε καὶ καλλίστων ῥυθμῶν συγκείμενον. τὸ δὲ δὴ 15
τρίτον κῶλον “ὡς καλὸν ἐπὶ τοῖς ἐκ τῶν πολέμων θαπτομένοις
ἀγορεύεσθαι αὐτόν” ἄρχεται μὲν ἀπὸ τοῦ κρητικοῦ
ποδός, δεύτερον δὲ λαμβάνει τὸν ἀνάπαιστον καὶ τρίτον
σπονδεῖον καὶ τέταρτον αὖθις ἀνάπαιστον, εἶτα δύο τοὺς ἑξῆς
δακτύλους, καὶ σπονδείους δύο τοὺς τελευταίους, εἶτα κατάληξιν. 20
εὐγενὲς δὴ καὶ τοῦτο διὰ τοὺς πόδας γέγονεν. τὰ
[179]
that the following passage in the Funeral Speech of Thucydides
is composed with dignity and grandeur: “Former speakers on
these occasions have usually commended the statesman who caused
an oration to form part of this funeral ceremony: they have felt
it a fitting tribute to men who were brought home for burial
from the fields of battle where they fell.”[162] What has made
the composition here so impressive? The fact that the clauses
are composed of impressive rhythms. For the three feet which
usher in the first clause are spondees, the fourth is an anapaest,
the next a spondee once more, then a cretic,—all stately feet.
Hence the dignity of the first clause. The next clause, “have
usually commended the statesman who caused an oration to form
part of this funeral ceremony,”[163] has two hypobacchii as its first
feet, a cretic as its third, then again two hypobacchii, and a
syllable by which the clause is completed; so that this clause
too is naturally dignified, formed as it is of the noblest and
most beautiful rhythms.
The third clause, “they have felt it a fitting tribute to
men who were brought home for burial from the fields of battle
where they fell,” begins with the cretic foot, has an anapaest
in the second place, a spondee in the third, in the fourth
an anapaest again, then two dactyls in succession, closing with
two spondees and the terminal syllable. So this passage also
owes its noble ring to its rhythmical structure; and most of the
2 ἤδη εἰρηκότων EP: ἤδη om. MV: εἰρηκότων ἤδη F (perperam: cf. vv. 6,
7) 3 τὸν (ante λόγον) om. F 9 κριτικός PM || πρῶτον FM: πρῶτον αὐτῶ
PV 10 τοῦτο PMV 11 ὑποβακχείους ... αὖθις om. P 14 συγγενεστάτων
P 21 δὴ PV: δὲ FM
3. τὸν προσθέντα κτλ.: viz. τὸν
νομοθέτην, δηλονότι τὸν Σόλωνα (schol.
ad Thucyd. ii. 35). Dionysius has this
passage of Thucydides in view when he
writes (Antiqq. Rom. v. 17) ὀψὲ γάρ ποτ’
Ἀθηναῖοι προσέθεσαν τὸν ἐπιτάφιον ἔπαινον
τῷ νόμῳ, εἴτ’ ἀπὸ τῶν ἐπ’ Ἀρτεμισίῳ καὶ
περὶ Σαλαμῖνα καὶ ἐν Πλαταιαῖς ὑπὲρ τῆς
πατρίδος ἀποθανόντων ἀρξάμενοι, εἴτ’ ἀπὸ
τῶν περὶ Μαραθῶνα ἔργων.—Bircovius
illustrates the rhythmical effect of the
Greek by a similar analysis of the
exordium of Livy’s History, “facturusne
operae pretium sim, si a primordio urbis
res populi Romani perscripserim, nec satis
scio nec, si sciam, dicere ausim, quippe
qui cum veterem tum vulgatam esse rem
videam, dum novi semper scriptores aut
in rebus certius aliquid allaturos se aut
scribendi arte rudem vetustatem superaturos
credunt.”
6. The first clause is clearly meant
to be divided as follows:
– – – – – – ᴗ ᴗ – – – – ᴗ –
οἱ μὲν | πολλοὶ | τῶν ἐν|θάδε ἤ|δη εἰ|ρηκότων.
The formation of the anapaest is noticeable,
and in other ways the metrical
division seems rather arbitrary. For
ἐνθάδε ἤδη (without elision of the final ε)
cp. n. on 180 8. [Here and elsewhere, no
attempt has been made to secure metrical
equivalence between the Greek original
and the English version.]
Goodell (Chapters on Greek Metric
p. 42) says of the analysis which begins
here: “It is incredible that the rhetor
supposed he was describing the actual
spoken rhythm, in the sense of Aristoxenus;
he was giving the quantities
of the syllables in the conventional way,
and his readers so understood him.”
9. Cp. the metrical effect of
– ᴗ – ᴗ – ᴗ ᴗ – ᴗ ᴗ – – ᴗ – –
“Who is this | that cometh | from Edom | with dyed garm(ents) | from Bozrah?”
10. Second clause:
ᴗ – – ᴗ – – – ᴗ – ᴗ – – ᴗ – –
ἐπαινοῦ|σι τὸν προσ|θέντα τῷ | νόμῳ τὸν | λόγον τόν|δε.
16. Third clause:
– ᴗ – ᴗ ᴗ – – – ᴗ ᴗ – – ᴗ ᴗ – ᴗ ᴗ –– – –
ὡς καλὸν | ἐπὶ τοῖς | ἐκ τῶν | πολέμων | θαπτομέ|νοις ἀγο|ρεύε|σθαι αὐ|τόν.
It is to be noticed
that Dionysius treats the final syllable
of ἀγορεύεσθαι as long before αὐτόν, and
(more unaccountably) the final syllable
of καλὸν as long before ἐπί. The length
of the diphthong -αι might, no doubt,
be maintained in prose utterance; but
it is not easy to see on what principle
-ο̆ν could be pronounced -ο̄ν before ἐπί.
It might indeed be urged that the final
syllable of a rhythmical phrase must
(like that of a metrical line) be regarded
as indifferent (long or short): cp. Cic.
Orat. 63. 214 “persolutas;—dichoreus;
nihil enim ad rem, extrema illa longa
sit an brevis.” But this is to remind
us once more that, though there is a
sound general basis for the observations
of Dionysius, it is easy for both ancient
and modern theorists to frame rules more
definite than the facts warrant.
[180-1]
πλεῖστα δ’ ἐστὶ παρὰ Θουκυδίδῃ τοιαῦτα, μᾶλλον δὲ ὀλίγα
τὰ μὴ οὕτως ἔχοντα, ὥστ’ εἰκότως ὑψηλὸς εἶναι δοκεῖ καὶ
καλλιεπὴς ὡς εὐγενεῖς ἐπάγων ῥυθμούς.
τὴν δὲ δὴ Πλατωνικὴν λέξιν ταυτηνὶ τίνι ποτὲ ἄλλῳ
κοσμηθεῖσαν οὕτως ἀξιωματικὴν εἶναι φαίη τις ἂν καὶ καλήν, 5
εἰ μὴ τῷ συγκεῖσθαι διὰ τῶν καλλίστων τε καὶ ἀξιολογωτάτων
ῥυθμῶν; ἔστι γὰρ δὴ τῶν πάνυ φανερῶν καὶ περιβοήτων,
ᾗ κέχρηται ὁ ἀνὴρ κατὰ τὴν τοῦ ἐπιταφίου ἀρχήν· “ἔργῳ
μὲν ἡμῖν οἵδε ἔχουσιν τὰ προσήκοντα σφίσιν αὐτοῖς· ὧν
τυχόντες πορεύονται τὴν εἱμαρμένην πορείαν.” ἐν τούτοις δύο 10
μέν ἐστιν ἃ συμπληροῖ τὴν περίοδον κῶλα, ῥυθμοὶ δὲ οἱ
ταῦτα διαλαμβάνοντες οἵδε· βακχεῖος μὲν ὁ πρῶτος· οὐ γὰρ
δή γε ὡς ἰαμβικὸν ἀξιώσαιμ’ ἂν ἔγωγε τὸ κῶλον τουτὶ ῥυθμίζειν
ἐνθυμούμενος ὅτι οὐκ ἐπιτροχάλους καὶ ταχεῖς ἀλλ’
ἀναβεβλημένους καὶ βραδεῖς τοῖς οἰκτιζομένοις προσῆκεν ἀποδίδοσθαι 15
τοὺς χρόνους· σπονδεῖος δ’ ὁ δεύτερος· ὁ δ’ ἑξῆς
δάκτυλος διαιρουμένης τῆς συναλοιφῆς· εἶθ’ ὁ μετὰ τοῦτον
σπονδεῖος· ὁ δ’ ἑξῆς μᾶλλον κρητικὸς ἢ ἀνάπαιστος· ἔπειθ’,
ὡς ἐμὴ δόξα, σπονδεῖος· ὁ δὲ τελευταῖος ὑποβάκχειος, εἰ δὲ
βούλεταί τις, ἀνάπαιστος· εἶτα κατάληξις. τούτων τῶν 20
ῥυθμῶν οὐδεὶς ταπεινὸς οὐδὲ ἀγεννής. τοῦ δὲ ἑξῆς κώλου
τουδί “ὧν τυχόντες πορεύονται τὴν εἱμαρμένην πορείαν”
δύο μέν εἰσιν οἱ πρῶτοι πόδες κρητικοί, σπονδεῖοι δὲ
οἱ μετὰ τούτους δύο· μεθ’ οὓς αὖθις κρητικός, ἔπειτα τελευταῖος
ὑποβάκχειος. ἀνάγκη δὴ τὸν ἐξ ἁπάντων συγκείμενον 25
[181]
passages in Thucydides are of this stamp; indeed, there are few
that are not so framed. So he thoroughly deserves his reputation
for loftiness and beauty of language, since he habitually introduces
noble rhythms.
Again, take the following passage of Plato. What can
be the device that produces its perfect dignity and beauty, if it
is not the beautiful and striking rhythms that compose it? The
passage is one of the best known and most often quoted, and
it is found near the beginning of our author’s Funeral Speech:
“In very truth these men are receiving at our hands their fitting
tribute: and when they have gained this guerdon, they journey
on, along the path of destiny.”[164] Here there are two clauses
which constitute the period, and the feet into which the clauses
fall are as follows:—The first is a bacchius, for certainly I should
not think it correct to scan this clause as an iambic line, bearing
in mind that not swift, tripping movements, but retarded and
slow times are appropriate to those over whom we make mourning.
The second is a spondee; the next is a dactyl, the vowels
which might coalesce being kept distinct; after that, a spondee;
next, what I should call a cretic rather than an anapaest; then,
according to my view, a spondee; in the last place a hypobacchius
or, if you prefer to take it so, an anapaest; then the terminal
syllable. Of these rhythms none is mean nor ignoble. In the
next clause, “when they have gained this guerdon, they journey on,
along the path of destiny,” the two first feet are cretics, and next
after them two spondees; after which once more a cretic, then
lastly a hypobacchius. Thus the discourse is composed entirely
of beautiful rhythms, and it necessarily follows that it is itself
1 ὀλίγα τὰ F: ὀλίγα PMV 3 καλλίστης P || ὡς] καὶ FMV: om. P ||
εὐγενείας P: εὐγενὴς MV || ἐπάγων F: ὡς ἐκλέγων τοὺς PMV 4 ταυτηνὶ
Us.: ταύτην εἰ F: ταύτην PMV 7 φανερὸν καὶ περιβόητον F 9 οἵδ’
ἔχουσιν P: οἵδ’ ἔχουσι FMV 13 ἰαμβικὸν FP: ἴαμβον MV 15 προσήκει F
16 δ ὁ δεύτερος F: δε ἕτερος P, V: δ’ ἕτερος M 17 εἴθ’ ὁ F: εἶτα
PMV 19 ὡς F: ὡς ἡ PMV 25 δὴ] δεῖ F
4. The passage from the Menexenus
is quoted by Dionysius in the de
Demosth. c. 24, with the remark ἡ μὲν
εἰσβολὴ θαυμαστὴ καὶ πρέπουσα τοῖς
ὑποκειμένοις πράγμασι κάλλους τε ὀνομάτων
ἕνεκα καὶ σεμνότητος καὶ ἁρμονίας, τὰ δ’
ἐπιλεγόμενα οὐκέθ’ ὅμοια τοῖς πρώτοις κτλ.
It is also given, as an illustration of the
musical and other effects of periphrasis,
in the de Sublimitate c. 28: ἆρα δὴ
τούτοις μετρίως ὤγκωσε τὴν νόησιν, ἢ ψιλὴν
λαβὼν τὴν λέξιν ἐμελοποίησε, καθάπερ
ἁρμονίαν τινὰ τὴν ἐκ τῆς περιφράσεως
περιχεάμενος εὐμέλειαν;—A somewhat
similar period in Latin is that of Sallust
(Bell. Catilin. i. 1), “omnes homines, qui
sese student praestare ceteris animalibus,
summa ope niti decet, ne vitam silentio
transeant veluti pecora, quae natura prona
atque ventri oboedientia finxit.”
8. First clause:
– – ᴗ – – – ᴗ ᴗ – – ⏓ ᴗ – – – ᴗ ⏓ –
ἔργῳ μὲν | ἡμῖν | οἵδε ἔ|χουσιν | τὰ προσή|κοντα | σφίσιν αὐ|τοῖς.
Here three points call for
comment: (1) οἵδε ἔχουσιν (and not οἵδ’
ἔχουσιν with FPMV) was clearly (cp. l.
16) read by Dionysius: so in the text
of Plato himself; (2) the lengthening of
τά before προσήκοντα (although the usage
of Comedy would seem to show that
such lengthening was uncommon in the
language of ordinary life) is preferred as
giving a cretic; (3) very strangely, it
is thought possible to scan the final
syllable of σφίσιν as long (cp. 178 17,
184 2, 8).
13. We have a considerable part of an
iambic line if we scan thus:
– – ᴗ – – – ᴗ – ᴗ
ἔργῳ | μὲν ἡ|μῖν οἵδ’ | ἔχου|σι.
19. For ὡς ἐμὴ δόξα cp. de Demosth.
c. 39.
22. Second clause:
– ᴗ – – ᴗ – – – – – – ᴗ – ᴗ ––
ὧν τυχόν|τες πορεύ|ονται | τὴν εἱ|μαρμένην | πορείαν.
[182-3]
καλῶν ῥυθμῶν καλὸν εἶναι λόγον. μυρία τοιαῦτ’ ἔστιν εὑρεῖν
καὶ παρὰ Πλάτωνι. ὁ γὰρ ἀνὴρ ἐμμέλειάν τε καὶ εὐρυθμίαν
συνιδεῖν δαιμονιώτατος, καὶ εἴ γε δεινὸς ἦν οὕτως ἐκλέξαι τὰ
ὀνόματα ὡς συνθεῖναι περιττός, καί νύ κεν ἢ παρέλασσεν
τὸν Δημοσθένη κάλλους ἑρμηνείας ἕνεκεν, ἢ ἀμφήριστον 5
ἔθηκεν. νῦν δὲ περὶ μὲν τὴν ἐκλογὴν ἔστιν ὅτε διαμαρτάνει,
καὶ μάλιστα ἐν οἷς ἂν τὴν ὑψηλὴν καὶ περιττὴν καὶ ἐγκατάσκευον
διώκῃ φράσιν, ὑπὲρ ὧν ἑτέρωθί μοι δηλοῦται σαφέστερον.
συντίθησι δὲ τὰ ὀνόματα καὶ ἡδέως καὶ καλῶς νὴ
Δία, καὶ οὐκ ἄν τις αὐτὸν ἔχοι κατὰ τοῦτο μέμψασθαι τὸ 10
μέρος.
ἑνὸς ἔτι παραθήσομαι λέξιν, ᾧ τὰ ἀριστεῖα τῆς ἐν λόγοις
δεινότητος ἀποδίδωμι. ὅρος γὰρ δή τίς ἐστιν ἐκλογῆς τε
ὀνομάτων καὶ κάλλους συνθέσεως ὁ Δημοσθένης. ἐν δὴ τῷ
περὶ τοῦ στεφάνου λόγῳ τρία μέν ἐστιν ἃ τὴν πρώτην 15
περίοδον συμπληροῖ κῶλα, οἱ δὲ ταῦτα καταμετροῦντες οἵδε
εἰσὶν ῥυθμοί· “πρῶτον μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, τοῖς
θεοῖς εὔχομαι πᾶσι καὶ πάσαις.” ἄρχει δὲ τοῦδε τοῦ
κώλου βακχεῖος ῥυθμός, ἔπειθ’ ἕπεται σπονδεῖος, εἶτ’ ἀνάπαιστός 20
τε καὶ μετὰ τούτον ἕτερος σπονδεῖος, εἶθ’ ἑξῆς
κρητικοὶ τρεῖς, σπονδεῖος δ’ ὁ τελευταῖος. τοῦ δὲ δευτέρου
κώλου τοῦδε “ὅσην εὔνοιαν ἔχων ἐγὼ διατελῶ τῇ τε
[183]
beautiful. Countless instances of this kind are to be found in
Plato as well as in Thucydides. For this author has a perfect
genius for discovering true melody and fine rhythm, and if he
had only been as able in the choice of words as he is unrivalled
in the art of combining them, he “had even outstript” Demosthenes,
so far as beauty of style is concerned, or “had left the
issue in doubt.”[165] As it is, he is sometimes quite at fault in his
choice of words; most of all when he is aiming at a lofty, unusual,
elaborate style of expression. With respect to this I explain
myself more explicitly elsewhere. But he does most assuredly
put his words together with beauty as well as charm; and from
this point of view no one could find any fault with him.
I will cite a passage of one other writer,—the one to whom
I assign the palm for oratorical mastery. Demosthenes most
certainly forms a sort of standard alike for choice of words and
for beauty in their arrangement. In the Speech on the Crown
there are three clauses which constitute the first period; and the
rhythms by which they are measured are as follows: “first of all,
men of Athens, I pray to all the gods and goddesses.”[166] A
bacchius begins this first clause; then follows a spondee; next
an anapaest, and after this another spondee; then three cretics in
succession, and a spondee as the last foot. In the second clause,
“that all the loyal affection I bear my whole life through to the
1 ἐστιν εὑρεῖν F, E: ἐστι PMV 2 ἐμμέλειαν EFM: εὐμέλειαν PV 3 οὕτως
EF: οὗτος PMV 5 δημοσθένην EPV: δημοσθένεα M || κάλλους FMV: καὶ
ἄλλους P: κάλλος E 6 ὅτε EF: ἃ PV: ἃ καὶ M 9 συντίθησι δὲ EF: δὲ
συντίθησιν P, MV 12 ἑνὸς] ἐν οἷς P 13 ἀποδίδωμι F: καταδίδωμι PMV
16 ταῦτα] κατὰ ταῦτα PV 17 ῥυθμοί F: οἱ ῥυθμοί PMV 18 δὲ τοῦδε V:
τοῦδε PM: δὲ F
2. ἐμμέλειαν: cp. 122 21, unless 130 6
should seem to support the reading
εὐμέλειαν in the present passage.
5. For Δημοσθένην (as given by some
manuscripts) cp. Demetr. de Eloc. § 175
καὶ ὅλως τὸ νῦ δι’ εὐφωνίαν ἐφέλκονται οἱ
Ἀττικοί, “Δημοσθένην” λέγοντες καὶ
“Σωκράτην.”
7. Cp. Long. de Sublim. c. iii.
ὀλισθαίνουσι δ’ εἰς τοῦτο τὸ γένος
ὀρεγόμενοι μὲν τοῦ περιττοῦ καὶ πεποιημένου
καὶ μάλιστα τοῦ ἡδέος, ἐποκέλλοντες δὲ εἰς
τὸ ῥωπικὸν καὶ κακόζηλον.—Dionysius
perhaps fails to see that a high-pitched
style may sometimes be used μετ’
εἰρωνείας, as Aristotle (Rhet. iii. 7. 11)
says in reference to the Phaedrus.
8. ἑτέρωθι: cp. de Demosth. cc. 6, 7,
24-29, and Ep. ad Cn. Pomp. cc. 1, 2.—For
the probable order in which the
‘Scripta Rhetorica’ appeared see D.H.
pp. 5-7. The de Comp. Verb. is referred
to twice in the de Demosth. (cc. 49, 50).—With
δηλοῦται (not δεδήλωται, de Din.
c. 13, de Demosth. c. 49; nor δηλωθήσεται,
de Lysia cc. 12, 14) cp. de Isaeo c. 2, de
Demosth. c. 57.
9. Dionysius is fond of the asseveration
νὴ Δία, ‘mehercule.’
17. First clause:
– – ᴗ – – ᴗ ᴗ – – – – ᴗ – – ᴗ – – ᴗ – – –
πρῶτον μέν, | ὦ ἄνδρ|ες Ἀθη|ναῖοι, | τοῖς θεοῖς | εὔχομαι | πᾶσι καὶ | πάσαις.
—The expression
καταμετροῦντες may indicate that
Dionysius himself wrote marks of
quantity over the syllables in question:
such marks are given by F in 178 2-4,
10, 11, 16, 17, and are also found in
the Paris Manuscript (1741) of Demetr.
de Eloc. §§ 38, 39.—With the rhythmical
effect of this passage of Demosthenes,
Bircovius compares “Si, patres conscripti,
pro vestris immortalibus in me
fratremque meum liberosque nostros
meritis parum vobis cumulate gratias
egero, quaeso obtestorque, ne meae
naturae potius, quam magnitudini
vestrorum beneficiorum, id tribuendum
putetis” (Cic. Post Reditum in Senatu
Oratio init.).
22. Second clause:
ᴗ – – –⏓ ᴗ – ᴗ – ᴗᴗ ᴗ – – ᴗ ᴗ ⏓ – – ⏓ – –
ὅσην εὔ|νοιαν ἔ|χων ἐγὼ | διατελῶ | τῇ τε πόλει | καὶ πᾶσιν | ὑμῖν.
—There are fresh difficulties in the
“scansion” here. Dionysius speaks as
if the last syllable of εὔνοιαν may (and
indeed preferably) be counted long: this
involves the lengthening of a short
vowel before a single consonant, cp. n.
on 180 8.—With regard to the paeons,
διατελῶ will form a “catalectic” paeon
(ᴗ ᴗ ᴗ –), but τῇ τε πόλει will not form
a “procatarctic” paeon (– ᴗ ᴗ ᴗ) unless
the final syllable of πόλει is reckoned
short.—To extract a molossus from καὶ
πᾶσιν, the last syllable of πᾶσιν must be
lengthened. Strange as it appears, the
cumulative evidence seems (if our text
is sound) to show that Dionysius would
(at any rate, for the purpose of prose
rhythm) lengthen a short vowel before a
single consonant.
[184-5]
πόλει καὶ πᾶσιν ὑμῖν” πρῶτος μὲν ὑποβάκχειός ἐστι πούς,
εἶτα βακχεῖος, εἰ δὲ βούλεταί τις, δάκτυλος· εἶτα κρητικός·
μεθ’ οὕς εἰσι δύο σύνθετοι πόδες οἱ καλούμενοι παιᾶνες· οἷς
ἕπεται μολοττὸς ἢ βακχεῖος, ἐγχωρεῖ γὰρ ἑκατέρως αὐτὸν
διαιρεῖν· τελευταῖος δὲ ὁ σπονδεῖος. τοῦ δὲ τρίτου κώλου τοῦδε 5
“τοσαύτην ὑπάρξαι μοι παρ’ ὑμῶν εἰς τουτονὶ τὸν
ἀγῶνα” ἄρχουσι μὲν ὑποβάκχειοι δύο, ἕπεται δὲ κρητικός,
ᾧ συνῆπται σπονδεῖος· εἶτ’ αὖθις βακχεῖος ἢ κρητικός, καὶ
τελευταῖος πάλιν κρητικός, εἶτα κατάληξις. τί οὖν ἐκώλυε
καλὴν ἁρμονίαν εἶναι λέξεως, ἐν ᾗ μήτε πυρρίχιός ἐστι ποὺς 10
μήτε ἰαμβικὸς μήτε ἀμφίβραχυς μήτε τῶν χορείων ἢ τροχαίων
μηδείς; καὶ οὐ λέγω τοῦτο, ὅτι τῶν ἀνδρῶν ἐκείνων ἕκαστος
οὐ κέχρηταί ποτε καὶ τοῖς ἀγεννεστέροις ῥυθμοῖς. κέχρηται
γάρ· ἀλλ’ εὖ συγκεκρύφασιν αὐτοὺς καὶ συνυφάγκασι διαλαβόντες
τοῖς κρείττοσι τοὺς χείρονας. 15
οἷς δὲ μὴ ἐγένετο πρόνοια τούτου τοῦ μέρους, οἱ μὲν ταπεινάς,
οἱ δὲ κατακεκλασμένας, οἱ δ’ ἄλλην τινὰ αἰσχύνην καὶ
ἀμορφίαν ἐχούσας ἐξήνεγκαν τὰς γραφάς. ὧν ἐστι πρῶτός τε
καὶ μέσος καὶ τελευταῖος ὁ Μάγνης ὁ σοφιστὴς Ἡγησίας·
ὑπὲρ οὗ μὰ τὸν Δία καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους θεοὺς ἅπαντας οὐκ οἶδα τί 20
χρὴ λέγειν, πότερα τοσαύτη περὶ αὐτὸν ἀναισθησία καὶ παχύτης
ἦν ὥστε μὴ συνορᾶν, οἵτινές εἰσιν ἀγεννεῖς ἢ εὐγενεῖς ῥυθμοί,
ἢ τοσαύτη θεοβλάβεια καὶ διαφθορὰ τῶν φρενῶν ὥστ’ εἰδότα
τοὺς κρείττους ἔπειτα αἱρεῖσθαι τοὺς χείρονας, ὃ καὶ μᾶλλον
πείθομαι· ἀγνοίας μὲν γάρ ἐστι καὶ τὸ κατορθοῦν πολλαχῇ, 25
[185]
city and all of you,”[167] first comes a hypobacchius; then a bacchius
or, if you prefer to take it so, a dactyl; then a cretic; after which
there are two composite feet called paeons. Next follows a
molossus or a bacchius, for it can be scanned either way. Last
comes the spondee. The third clause, “may as fully be accorded
by you to support me in this trial,”[167b] is opened by two hypobacchii.
A cretic follows, to which a spondee is attached. Then again a
bacchius or a cretic; last a cretic once more; then the terminal
syllable. Is not a beautiful cadence inevitable in a passage
which contains neither a pyrrhic, nor an iamb, nor an amphibrachys,
nor a single choree or trochee? Still, I do not affirm that none
of those writers ever uses the more ignoble rhythms also. They
do use them; but they have artistically masked them, and have
only introduced them at intervals, interweaving the inferior with
the superior.
Those authors who have not given heed to this branch of
their art have published writings which are either mean, or
flabby, or have some other blemish or deformity. Among them
the first and midmost and the last is the Magnesian, the sophist
Hegesias. Concerning him, I swear by Zeus and all the other
gods, I do not know what to say. Was he so dense, and so
devoid of artistic feeling, as not to see which the ignoble or
noble rhythms are? or was he smitten with such soul-destroying
lunacy, that though he knew the better, he nevertheless invariably
chose the worse? It is to this latter view that I incline.
Ignorance often blunders into the right path: only wilfulness
2 εἶτα κρητικός F: ἔπειτα κρητικός PMV 3 παιᾶνες F: παίωνες PMV 4
ἐκατέρως F: ἑκατέρους PMV || αὐτὸν PV: αὐτῶν FM 5 τοῦδε F: τοῦ PMV
7 ἔπεται δὲ F: ἔπειτα δε P, M: ἔπειτα V 8 καὶ F: καὶ ὁ PMV 11
ἴαμβος F || τροχαίων F: τῶν τροχαίων PMV 17 κατακεκλεισμένας F || καὶ
F: ἢ PMV 19 μέσος καὶ τελευταῖος F: τελευταῖος καὶ μέσος PMV || ὁ
σοφιστὴς F: σοφιστὴς PMV 20 οἶδα τί F: οἶδ’ ὅ τι PMV 22 ἀγεννεῖς F:
εὐγενεῖς PMV || εὐγενεῖς F: ἀγενεῖς PV1: ἀγεννεῖς MV2 25 πολλαχῆι
FP, M: πολλαχοῦ V
4. ἐγχωρεῖ γὰρ ἑκατέρως αὐτὸν
διαιρεῖν: this statement should be
noted, together with the a priori grounds
on which Dionysius elsewhere (e.g. 180
12-16) makes his choice between the
alternatives which present themselves.
6. Third clause:
ᴗ – – ᴗ – – – ᴗ – – – – ᴗ – ⏓ ᴗ –
τοσαύτην | ὑπάρξαι | μοι παρ’ ὑ|μῶν εἰς | τουτονὶ | τὸν ἀγῶ|να.
—If τουτονὶ is a bacchius, it must
be scanned
– – ⏓
τουτονὶ:
and if τὸν ἀγῶν(α)
is a cretic, it must be scanned
– ᴗ –
τὸν ἀγῶν|α!
There are, no doubt, many cases of
abnormal lengthening in Homeric versification
(e.g. φίλε κασίγνητε at the beginning
of a line, Il. iv. 155), but not to
such an extent as would satisfy ‘Eucleides
the elder’: οἷον Εὐκλείδης ὁ ἀρχαῖος, ὡς
ῥᾴδιον ποιεῖν, εἴ τις δώσει ἐκτείνειν ἐφ’
ὁπόσον βούλεται, ἰαμβοποιήσας ἐν αὐτῇ
τῇ λέξει,—“Ἐπιχάρην εἶδον Μαραθῶνάδε
βαδίζοντα” (Aristot. Poet. c. xxii.).
11. μήτε ἰαμβικὸς ... τροχαίων
μηδείς: it is obvious that we could
discover some of these feet in the passage
if we were to choose our own way of
dividing it. If in Latin, for example,
we were to take such a sentence as
quonam igitur pacto probari potest insidias
Miloni fecisse Clodium? (Cic. pro Milone
12. 32), we could extract dactyls, spondees,
trochees, iambi, cretics, anapaests, etc.
from the various section into which we
chose to divide it: e.g.
– ᴗ ᴗ – – – ᴗ – – ᴗ – – ᴗ ᴗ– ᴗ – – – – ᴗ – ᴗ⏓
(1) quonam igi|tur pac|to pro|bari | potest | insi|dias | Milo|ni fe|cisse | Clodium?
– ᴗ ᴗ – – – ᴗ – – ᴗ – – ᴗ ᴗ– ᴗ – – – – ᴗ – ᴗ⏓
(2) quonam i|gitur | pacto | proba|ri po|test in|sidias | Milo|ni fe|cisse Clo|dium?
– ᴗ ᴗ – – – ᴗ – – ᴗ – – ᴗ ᴗ – ᴗ – – – – ᴗ – ᴗ⏓
(3) quonam igi|tur pac|to proba|ri potest | insidi|as Milo|ni fe|cisse Clo|dium?
And so with
several other possible scansions (cp.
Laurand Études sur le style de Cicéron
p. 138).
19. For Hegesias cp. Introduction,
pp. 52-5 supra.
20. μὰ τὸν Δία ... λέγειν: reminiscent
of Demosth. Philipp. iii. 54, Fals. Leg.
220.
[186-7]
προνοίας δὲ τὸ μηδέποτε. ἐν γοῦν ταῖς τοσαύταις γραφαῖς,
αἷς καταλέλοιπεν ὁ ἀνήρ, μίαν οὐκ ἂν εὕροι τις σελίδα
συγκειμένην εὐτυχῶς. ἔοικεν δὴ ταῦτα ὑπολαβεῖν ἐκείνων
κρείττω καὶ μετὰ σπουδῆς αὐτὰ ποιεῖν, εἰς ἃ δι’ ἀνάγκην ἄν
τις ἐμπεσὼν ἐν λόγῳ σχεδίῳ δι’ αἰσχύνης θεῖτο φρόνημα ἔχων 5
ἀνήρ. θήσω δὲ καὶ τούτου λέξιν ἐκ τῆς ἱστορίας, ἵνα σοι
γένηται δῆλον ἐκ τῆς ἀντιπαραθέσεως, ὅσην μὲν ἀξίωσιν ἔχει
τὸ εὐγενὲς ἐν ῥυθμοῖς, ὅσην δ’ αἰσχύνην τὸ ἀγεννές. ἔστιν δ’
ὃ λαμβάνει πρᾶγμα ὁ σοφιστὴς τοιόνδε. Ἀλέξανδρος πολιορκῶν
Γάζαν χωρίον τι τῆς Συρίας πάνυ ἐχυρὸν τραυματίας 10
τε γίνεται κατὰ τὴν προσβολὴν καὶ τὸ χωρίον αἱρεῖ χρόνῳ.
φερόμενος δ’ ὑπ’ ὀργῆς τούς τ’ ἐγκαταληφθέντας ἀποσφάττει
πάντας, ἐπιτρέψας τοῖς Μακεδόσι τὸν ἐντυχόντα κτείνειν, καὶ
τὸν ἡγεμόνα αὐτῶν αἰχμάλωτον λαβών, ἄνδρα ἐν ἀξιώματι
καὶ τύχης καὶ εἴδους, ἐξ ἁρματείου δίφρου δῆσαι κελεύσας 15
ζῶντα καὶ τοὺς ἵππους ἐλαύνειν ἀνὰ κράτος ἐν τῇ πάντων
ὄψει διαφθείρει. τούτων οὐκ ἂν ἔχοι τις εἰπεῖν δεινότερα
πάθη οὐδ’ ὄψει φοβερώτερα. πῶς δὴ ταῦτα ἡρμήνευκεν ὁ
σοφιστής, ἄξιον ἰδεῖν, πότερα σεμνῶς καὶ ὑψηλῶς ἢ ταπεινῶς
καὶ καταγελάστως. 20
“ὁ δὲ βασιλεὺς ἔχων τὸ σύνταγμα προηγεῖτο. καί πως
[187]
never does. At all events, in the host of writings which the
man has left behind him, you will not find one single page successfully
put together. He seems, indeed, to have regarded his
own methods as better than those of his predecessors, and to have
followed them with enthusiasm; and yet anybody else, if he were
to be driven into such errors in an impromptu speech, would
blush for them, were he a man of any self-respect. Well, I will
quote a passage from him also, taken from his History, in order
to make clear to you, by means of a comparison, how splendid
noble rhythms are, and how disgraceful are their opposites. The
following is the subject treated by the sophist. Alexander when
besieging Gaza, an unusually strong position in Syria, is wounded
during the assault and takes the position after some delay. In a
transport of anger he massacres all the prisoners, permitting the
Macedonians to slay all who fall in their way. Having captured
their commandant, a man of distinction for his high station and
good looks, he gives orders that he should be bound alive to a
war-chariot and that the horses should be driven at full speed
before the eyes of all; and in this way he kills him. No one
could have a story of more awful suffering to narrate, nor one
suggesting a more horrible picture. It is worth while to observe
in what style our sophist has represented this scene—whether
with gravity and elevation or with vulgarity and absurdity:—
“The King advanced, at the head of his division. It seems
2 αἷς F: ἃς PMV 3 δὴ F: δε P, MV 4 ἄν τις ἐμπεσὼν PMV: ἐμπεσὼν ἄν
τις F 5 θεῖτο F: ἔθετο PMV 6 ἐκ τῆς F: ἐξ PMV 8 ἔστιν δ’ F: τί δὲ
PMV 10 ἐχυρὸν] εὐχερῶς F 11 χρόνῳ φερόμενος δ’ F: χρόνῳ φερόμενος ὁ
δ’ PMV 12 τε ἐγκαταληφθέντας PMV: τε καταλειφθέντας F 14 αὐτὸν PMV
16 ἐλαύνων MV 17 τούτων F: τοῦτον PMV 18 οὐδὲ ὄψεις φοβεροτέρας
(-ωτ- M) PMV 19 πότερα F: πότερον PMV 21 καὶ πῶς F
1-3. Cp. Dryden Mac Flecknoe ll. 19,
20, “The rest to some faint meaning
make pretence, | But Shadwell never
deviates into sense.” The wilfulness and
malice prepense (πρόνοια) of Hegesias’
stupidity may be illustrated by Dr. Johnson’s
remark about Thomas Sheridan:
“Why, Sir, Sherry is dull, naturally
dull; but it must have taken him a
great deal of pains to become what we
now see him. Such an access of stupidity,
Sir, is not in nature” (Boswell’s Life of
Johnson i. 453).
4. The reading of PMV seems preferable,
since ἄν is not infrequently attached
to adverbs or adverbial phrases such as
δι’ ἀνάγκην.
5. θεῖτο: τίθεμαι used for ἡγοῦμαι, as
in 208 13 and 232 25.—Contrast the active
θήσω in the next line.
9. Arrian (Exped. Alexandri ii. 25. 4)
thus describes the commencement of
Alexander’s siege, and Batis’ defence,
of Gaza (332 B.C.): Ἀλέξανδρος δὲ ἐπ’
Αἰγύπτου ἔγνω ποιεῖσθαι τὸν στόλον. καὶ
ἦν αὐτῷ τὰ μὲν ἄλλα τῆς Παλαιστίνης
καλουμένης Συρίας προσκεχωρηκότα ἤδη·
εὐνοῦχος δέ τις, ᾧ ὄνομα ἦν Βάτις, κρατῶν
τῆς Γαζαίων πόλεως, οὐ προσεῖχεν
Ἀλεξάνδρῳ, ἀλλὰ Ἄραβάς τε μισθωτοὺς
ἐπαγόμενος καὶ σῖτον ἐκ πολλοῦ παρεσκευακὼς
διαρκῆ ἐς χρόνιον πολιορκίαν καὶ τῷ
χωρίῳ πιστεύων, μήποτε ἂν βίᾳ ἁλῶναι,
ἔγνω μὴ δέχεσθαι τῇ πόλει Ἀλέξανδρον.
In continuing and completing (cc. 26,
27) his narrative of the siege, Arrian
makes no mention of the fate of Batis.
On this point Plutarch, too, is silent
(Vit. Alex. c. 25), and so is Diodorus
Siculus xvii. 48. 7. The obviously
rhetorical cast of Hegesias’ narrative,
and of that of Curtius (Histor. Alexandri
Magni iv. 6, 7-30), should cause it to
be accepted with greater reserve than
Grote (xi. 469 n. 1) thinks needful to
maintain.—For the probable share of
Cleitarchus in propagating this story
about Alexander see C. Müller Scriptores
Rerum Alexandri Magni pp. 75, 142;
and for his bombast cp. Long. de Sublim.
iii. 2 and Demetr. de Eloc. § 304.
11. χρόνῳ: viz. after a two months’
siege (Ἀλέξανδρος δὲ στρατεύσας ἐπὶ Γάζαν
φρουρουμένην ὑπὸ Περσῶν καὶ δίμηνον
προσεδρεύσας εἷλε κατὰ κράτος τὴν πόλιν,
Diod. Sic. xvii. 48. 7).—Batis was supported
by only a small force: “modico
praesidio muros ingentis operis tuebatur,”
Curtius iv. 6. 7.
14. ἡγεμόνα: Curtius iv. 6. 7 “praeerat
ei Betis, eximiae in regem suum
fidei.” Josephus (Ant. Iud. xi. 8. 3
Naber) gives the name of the governor
as Βαβημήσης. Arrian gives Batis.
‘Baetis’ seems the right form in 188 13,
and so perhaps in Curtius.
15. εἴδους. It must have been from
the point of view of his countrymen
that Batis possessed εἶδος (cp. 188 16).
Usener suggests ἤθους.
ἐξ ἁρματείου δίφρου: cp. Xen.
Cyrop. vi. 4. 9 ταῦτ’ εἰπὼν κατὰ τὰς
θύρας τοῦ ἁρματείου δίφρου ἀνέβαινεν ἐπὶ
τὸ ἅρμα, where (as here) δίφρος = sella
aurigae.
21. τὸ σύνταγμα: no doubt the
ὑπασπισταί are meant: Alexander is
represented as advancing at the head
of his Guards.—In the English translation
of the passage that follows no
attempt has been made to reproduce all
the peculiarities of Hegesias’ style.
[188-9]
ἐβεβούλευτο τῶν πολεμίων τοῖς ἀρίστοις ἀπαντᾶν ἐπιόντι·
τοῦτο γὰρ ἔγνωστο, κρατήσασιν ἑνὸς συνεκβαλεῖν καὶ τὸ
πλῆθος. ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐλπὶς αὕτη συνέδραμεν εἰς τὸ τολμᾶν,
ὥστ’ Ἀλέξανδρον μηδέποτε κινδυνεῦσαι πρότερον οὕτως. ἀνὴρ
γὰρ τῶν πολεμίων εἰς γόνατα συγκαμφθεὶς ἔδοξε τοῦτ’ Ἀλεξάνδρῳ 5
τῆς ἱκετείας ἕνεκα πρᾶξαι. προσέμενος δ’ ἐγγὺς μικρὸν
ἐκνεύει τὸ ξίφος ἐνέγκαντος ὑπὸ τὰ πτερύγια τοῦ θώρακος,
ὥστε γενέσθαι τὴν πληγὴν οὐ καιριωτάτην. ἀλλὰ τὸν μὲν
αὐτὸς ἀπώλεσεν κατὰ κεφαλῆς τύπτων τῇ μαχαίρᾳ, τοὺς δ’
ἄλλους ὀργὴ πρόσφατος ἐπίμπρα. οὕτως ἄρα ἑκάστου τὸν 10
ἔλεον ἐξέστησεν ἡ τοῦ τολμήματος ἀπόνοια τῶν μὲν ἰδόντων,
τῶν δ’ ἀκουσάντων, ὥσθ’ ἑξακισχιλίους ὑπὸ τὴν σάλπιγγα
ἐκείνην τῶν βαρβάρων κατακοπῆναι. τὸν μέντοι Βαῖτιν αὐτὸν
ἀνήγαγον ζῶντα Λεόνατος καὶ Φιλωτᾶς. ἰδὼν δὲ πολύσαρκον
καὶ μέγαν καὶ βλοσυρώτατον (μέλας γὰρ ἦν καὶ τὸ χρῶμα), 15
μισήσας ἐφ’ οἷς ἐβεβούλευτο καὶ τὸ εἶδος ἐκέλευσεν διὰ τῶν
ποδῶν χαλκοῦν ψάλιον διείραντας ἕλκειν κύκλῳ γυμνόν.
πιλούμενος δὲ κακοῖς περὶ πολλὰς τραχύτητας ἔκραζεν. αὐτὸ
δ’ ἦν, ὃ λέγω, τὸ συνάγον ἀνθρώπους. ἐπέτεινε μὲν γὰρ ὁ
[189]
that the leaders of the enemy had formed the design of meeting
him as he approached. For they had come to the conclusion
that, if they overcame him personally, they would be able
to drive out all his host in a body. Now this hope ran with
them on the path of daring, so that never before had Alexander
been in such danger. One of the enemy fell on his knees, and
seemed to Alexander to have done so in order to ask for mercy.
Having allowed him to approach, he eluded (not without difficulty)
the thrust of a sword which he had brought under the skirts of his
corselet, so that the thrust was not mortal. Alexander himself slew
his assailant with a blow of his sabre upon the head, while the
king’s followers were inflamed with a sudden fury. So utterly was
pity, in the breasts of those who saw and those who heard of the
attempt, banished by the desperate daring of the man, that six
thousand of the barbarians were cut down at the trumpet-call
which forthwith rang out. Baetis himself, however, was brought
before the king alive by Leonatus and Philotas. And Alexander
seeing that he was corpulent and huge and most grim (for he was
black in colour too), was seized with loathing for his very looks
as well as for his design upon his life, and ordered that a ring of
bronze should be passed through his feet and that he should be
dragged round a circular course, naked. Harrowed by pain, as
his body passed over many a rough piece of ground, he
began to scream. And it was just this detail which I now
mention that brought people together. The torment racked him,
1 ἐβεβούλευτο PMV: ἐβουλεύετο F || ἀπαντᾶν om. F || ἐπιόντι
Radermacher: ἐπιών F: εἰσιῶν P, MV 2 συνεκβαλεῖν FMV: συνεκβάλλειν
Ps 3 εἰς τὸ τολμᾶν PMV: om. F 4 πρότερον ἢ οὕτως F 5 συγκαμφθεὶς
PMV: συγκαθίσας F 6 ἰκετείας F || προσέμενος F: προέμενος PMV 7 ὑπὸ
PMV: ἐπὶ F 8 τὴν F: καὶ τὴν PMV 10 ἐπίμπρα F: ἐπίμπρατο MV: ἐπὶ
παλαιαῖς P || οὕτως ἄρα F: οὕτως γὰρ PMV 11 ἐξέστησεν] ἐξήτασεν F ||
τολμήματος F: τολμήσαντος PMV 12 εξακισχιλίους F, MV: τετρακισχιλίους
P 13 βαῖστ[ϊ]ν cum litura P: βασιλέα FMV || αὐτὸν] Sylburgius: αὐτῶν
FM: αὐτοῦ PV 15 καὶ (ante βλοσυρώτατον) F: ὡς PMV || βροσυρώτατον
P: βδελυρώτατον FMV || καὶ τὸ χρῶμα PMV: τὸ σῶμα F 17 ψαλ(ιον) P:
ψαλλίον V: ψέλιον F: ψέλλιον M 18 ἔκραξεν F
1. Blass (Rhythm. Asian. p. 19)
would read εἰσιόντι, comparing intravit
in Curtius iv. 6. 23.
3. συνέδραμεν: cp. Propert. iii. 9. 17
“est quibus Eleae concurrit palma
quadrigae; | est quibus in celeres gloria
nata pedes.”
6. τῆς ἱκετείας: Hegesias may have
used the article in order to avoid the
hiatus Ἀλεξάνδρῳ ἱκετείας. F omits it
(as unnecessary).
7. τὰ πτερύγια τοῦ θώρακος: cp.
Schol. Venet. B ad Hom. Il. iv. 132
ἵνα μὴ χαλεπὴ γένηται ἡ πληγή, εἰς τοῦτο
τὸ μέρος ἄγει, καθ’ ὃ ἀλλήλοις ἐπιφερόμενα
τὰ πτερύγια τοῦ θώρακος ἐσφίγγετο ὑπὸ
τοῦ ζωστῆρος. See also the references
given under πτέρυξ in L. & S., and in
Stephanus.—Perhaps Hegesias has Il. iv.
132 directly in mind. The meaning will
then be (with F’s reading ἐπί), “as his
assailant had struck it [the sword] against
the skirts of Alexander’s corselet.” But
the account in Curtius iv. 6. 15 seems
to confirm ὑπό: “quo conspecto, Arabs
quidam, Darei miles, maius fortuna sua
facinus ausus, gladium clipeo tegens,
quasi transfuga genibus regis advolvitur.
ille adsurgere supplicem, recipique inter
suos iussit. at barbarus gladio strenue
in dextram translato cervicem adpetiit
regis: qui exigua corporis declinatione
evitato ictu in vanum manum barbari
lapsam amputat gladio.”
10. ἐπίμπρα: cp. Curtius iv. 6. 24
“inter primores dimicat; ira quoque
accensus, quod duo in obsidione urbis
eius vulnera acceperat.” The reading
of P, ἐπὶ παλαιαῖς, apparently means
‘over and above the ancient ὀργαί,’ and
it is possible that Hegesias wrote both
this and ἐπίμπρα: or ἐπὶ παλαιαῖς may
gloss πρόσφατος.
12. The number, as given by Curtius
(iv. 6. 30), was “circa decem milia.”
ὑπὸ τὴν σάλπιγγα ἐκείνην = ὑπὸ
τὸ σάλπισμα ἐκεῖνο: cp. Aristot. Rhet.
iii. 6 οἷον τὸ φάναι τὴν σάλπιγγα εἶναι
μέλος ἄλυρον.
15. βλοσυρώτατον: cp. Curtius iv. 6.
27 “non interrito modo sed contumaci
quoquo vultu intuens regem.” Usener
conjectures βλοσυρωπόν, with considerable
probability: cp. 162 19 supra.
17. ψάλιον: cp. Hesych. ψάλια· κρίκοι,
δακτύλιοι, and Antiq. Rom. ii. 38 καὶ
αὐτὴν (Τάρπειαν) ἔρως εἰσέρχεται τῶν
ψαλίων, ἃ περὶ τοῖς ἀριστεροῖς βραχίοσιν
ἐφόρουν (οἱ Σαβῖνοι), καὶ τῶν δακτυλίων.—Probably
here a large curb-chain is
meant, rather than a cheek-ring, which
would be too small. So Curtius iv. 6.
29 “per talos enim spirantis lora traiecta
sunt [cp. Virg. Aen. ii. 273], religatumque
ad currum traxere circa urbem equi
gloriante rege, Achillen, a quo genus
ipse deduceret, imitatum se esse poena
in hostem capienda.” In Homer ἱμάντες
are employed (190 13).
18. πιλεῖν (‘to pound,’ ‘to knead’) is
one of the many forced metaphors in
this excerpt from Hegesias.
[190-1]
πόνος, βάρβαρον δ’ ἐβόα, δεσπότην καθικετεύων· γελᾶν δὲ ὁ
σολοικισμὸς ἐποίει. τὸ δὲ στέαρ καὶ τὸ κύτος τῆς σαρκὸς
ἐνέφαινε Βαβυλώνιον ζῷον ἕτερον ἁδρόν. ὁ μὲν οὖν ὄχλος
ἐνέπαιζε, στρατιωτικὴν ὕβριν ὑβρίζων εἰδεχθῆ καὶ τῷ τρόπῳ
σκαιὸν ἐχθρόν.” 5
ἆρά γε ὅμοια ταῦτ’ ἐστὶ τοῖς Ὁμηρικοῖς ἐκείνοις, ἐν οἷς
Ἀχιλλεύς ἐστιν αἰκιζόμενος Ἕκτορα μετὰ τὴν τελευτήν; καίτοι
τό γε πάθος ἐκεῖνο ἔλαττον· εἰς ἀναίσθητον γὰρ σῶμα ἡ
ὕβρις· ἀλλ’ ὅμως ἄξιόν ἐστιν ἰδεῖν, ὅσῳ διενήνοχεν ὁ ποιητὴς
τοῦ σοφιστοῦ· 10
ἦ ῥα, καὶ Ἕκτορα δῖον ἀεικέα μήδετο ἔργα·
ἀμφοτέρων μετόπισθε ποδῶν τέτρηνε τένοντε
ἐς σφυρὸν ἐκ πτέρνης, βοέους δ’ ἐξῆπτεν ἱμάντας,
ἐκ δίφροιο δ’ ἔδησε· κάρη δ’ ἕλκεσθαι ἔασεν·
ἐς δίφρον δ’ ἀναβὰς ἀνά τε κλυτὰ τεύχε’ ἀείρας 15
μάστιξεν δ’ ἐλάαν, τὼ δ’ οὐκ ἀέκοντε πετέσθην.
τοῦ δ’ ἦν ἑλκομένοιο κονίσαλος· ἀμφὶ δὲ χαῖται
κυάνεαι πίμπλαντο, κάρη δ’ ἅπαν ἐν κονίῃσι
κεῖτο πάρος χαρίεν· τότε δὲ Ζεὺς δυσμενέεσσι
δῶκεν ἀεικίσσασθαι ἑῇ ἐν πατρίδι γαίῃ. 20
ὣς τοῦ μὲν κεκόνιτο κάρη ἅπαν· ἡ δέ νυ μήτηρ
τίλλε κόμην, ἀπὸ δὲ λιπαρὴν ἔρριψε καλύπτρην
τηλόσε, κώκυσεν δὲ μάλα μέγα παῖδ’ ἐσιδοῦσα·
ᾤμωξεν δ’ ἐλεεινὰ πατὴρ φίλος, ἀμφὶ δὲ λαοὶ
[191]
and he kept uttering outlandish yells, asking mercy of Alexander
as ‘my lord’; and his jargon made them laugh. His fat and his
bulging corpulence suggested to them another creature, a huge-bodied
Babylonian animal. So the multitude scoffed at him,
mocking with the coarse mockery of the camp an enemy who
was so repulsive of feature and so uncouth in his ways.”[168]
Is this description, I ask, comparable with those lines of
Homer in which Achilles is represented as maltreating Hector
after his death? And yet the suffering in the latter case is less,
for it is on a mere senseless body that the outrage is inflicted.
But it is worth while, nevertheless, to note the vast difference
between the poet and the sophist:—
He spake, and a shameful mishandling devised he for Hector slain;
For behind each foot did he sunder therefrom the sinews twain
From the ankle-joint to the heel: hide-bands through the gashes he thrust;
To his chariot he bound them, and left the head to trail in the dust.
He hath mounted his car, and the glorious armour thereon hath he cast,
And he lashed the horses, and they with eager speed flew fast.
And a dust from the haling of Hector arose, and tossed wide-spread
His dark locks: wholly in dust his head lay low—that head
Once comely: ah then was the hero delivered over of Zeus
In his very fatherland for his foes to despitefully use.
So dust-besprent was his head; but his mother was rending her hair
The while, and she flung therefrom her head-veil glistering-fair
Afar, and with wild loud shriek as she looked on her son she cried;
And in piteous wise did his father wail, and on every side
1 καθικετεύων Schaefer: καὶ ἱκετεύων libri 2 κοῖτος F: κῦτος MV ||
σαρκὸς F: γαστρὸς PMV 3 ἐνέφαινε MV2: ἀνέφαινε F: ἐνεφαίνετο P ||
ἀδρὸν F: ἁδρόν MV: ἀνδρος P 9 ἐστιν om. P || ὅσω F: πόσω PMV 12
τένοντε F: τένοντας PMV 14 ἔασεν] ἔδησεν F 16 μάστιξέν ῥ’ Hom. ||
ἀέκοντε FMV Hom.: ἄκοντε P 18 πίμπλαντο] πίτναντο Hom. 22 τίλλε F
Hom.: τῆλε PM: τεῖλε V
1. It is not clear whether the strict
distinction between βαρβαρισμός (wrong
vocabulary, spelling, or pronunciation)
and σολοικισμός (wrong syntax) is here
maintained. Possibly Batis may have
offended (1) by using a word (δεσπότης)
abhorrent to all free men of Greek blood,
or (2) by using it in the wrong case, or
(3) by mispronouncing it: cp. Sandys
History of Classical Scholarship i. 148,
for the comprehensiveness of the term
σολοικισμός. But if it be held that
σολοικισμός cannot occur in one isolated
word (cp. Quintil. i. 5. 36), then it may
be supposed that the reference here is
to grammatical blunders in other words
ejaculated by the unhappy Batis.
3. Βαβυλώνιον ζῷον: a comparison
suggests itself with the Assyrian bulls
represented in reliefs (cp. Tennyson’s
Maud, “That oil’d and curl’d Assyrian
Bull”).—The reading of P, ἕτερον ἀνδρός,
might mean ‘far different from a man’
(viri: not ἀνθρώπου, hominis).
4. Hegesias’ use of στρατιωτικός may
be compared with de Lys. c. 12 (of
Iphicrates) ἥ τε λέξις πολὺ τὸ φορτικὸν
καὶ στρατιωτικὸν ἔχει καὶ οὐχ οὕτως
ἐμφαίνει ῥητορικὴν ἀγχίνοιαν ὡς στρατιωτικὴν
αὐθάδειαν καὶ ἀλαζονείαν.
7. ἐστιν αἰκιζόμενος: not simply a
periphrasis for αἰκίζεται.
8. For Hector’s insensibility cp.
Murray’s Rise of the Greek Epic pp. 118,
132.—The savagery of Achilles was,
nevertheless, generally felt to need
extenuation, as may be seen from the
curious explanations proffered in the
scholia: e.g. ὁ δὲ Καλλίμαχός φησιν ὅτι
πάτριόν ἐστι Θεσσαλοῖς τοὺς τῶν φιλτάτων
φονέας σύρειν περὶ τοὺς τῶν φονευθέντων
τάφους, κτλ.
11. Cp. Virg. Aen. ii. 268 ff. (the
vision of the mangled Hector).
[192-3]
κωκυτῷ τ’ εἴχοντο καὶ οἰμωγῇ κατὰ ἄστυ.
τῷ δὲ μάλιστ’ ἂρ ἔην ἐναλίγκιον, ὡς εἰ ἅπασα
Ἴλιος ὀφρυόεσσα πυρὶ σμύχοιτο κατ’ ἄκρης.
οὕτως εὐγενὲς σῶμα καὶ δεινὰ πάθη λέγεσθαι προσῆκεν ὑπ’
ἀνδρῶν φρόνημα καὶ νοῦν ἐχόντων. ὡς δὲ ὁ Μάγνης εἴρηκεν, 5
ὑπὸ γυναικῶν ἢ κατεαγότων ἀνθρώπων λέγοιτ’ ἂν καὶ οὐδὲ
τούτων μετὰ σπουδῆς, ἀλλ’ ἐπὶ χλευασμῷ καὶ καταγέλωτι.
τί οὖν αἴτιον ἦν ἐκείνων μὲν τῶν ποιημάτων τῆς εὐγενείας,
τούτων δὲ τῶν φλυαρημάτων τῆς ταπεινότητος; ἡ τῶν
ῥυθμῶν διαφορὰ πάντων μάλιστα, καὶ εἰ μὴ μόνη. ἐν 10
ἐκείνοις μὲν γὰρ οὐδὲ εἷς ἄσεμνος στίχος οὐδ’ ἀδόκιμος,
ἐνταῦθα δὲ οὐδεμία περίοδος ἥτις οὐ λυπήσει.
εἰρηκὼς δὴ καὶ περὶ τῶν ῥυθμῶν ὅσην δύναμιν ἔχουσιν,
ἐπὶ τὰ λειπόμενα μεταβήσομαι.
XIX
ἦν δέ μοι τρίτον θεώρημα τῶν ποιούντων καλὴν ἁρμονίαν 15
ἡ μεταβολή. λέγω δὲ οὐ τὴν ἐκ τῶν κρειττόνων ἐπὶ τὰ
χείρω (πάνυ γὰρ εὔηθες), οὐδέ γε τὴν ἐκ τῶν χειρόνων ἐπὶ
τὰ κρείττω, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἐν τοῖς ὁμοειδέσι ποικιλίαν. κόρον γὰρ
ἔχει καὶ τὰ καλὰ πάντα, ὥσπερ καὶ τὰ ἡδέα, μένοντα ἐν τῇ
ταυτότητι· ποικιλλόμενα δὲ ταῖς μεταβολαῖς ἀεὶ καινὰ μένει. 20
τοῖς μὲν οὖν τὰ μέτρα καὶ τὰ μέλη γράφουσιν οὐχ ἅπαντα
[193]
Through the city the folk brake forth into shriek and wail at the sight.
It was like unto this above all things, as though, from her topmost height
To the ground, all beetling Troy in flame and in smoke were rolled.[169]
That is the way in which a noble corpse and terrible sufferings
should be described by men of feeling and understanding.
But after the fashion of this Magnesian they could be described
by women only or effeminate men, and even by them not in
earnest, but in a spirit of derision and mockery. To what, then,
is due the nobility of these lines, as compared with the miserable
absurdities of the other passage? Chiefly, if not entirely, to
the difference in the rhythms. In the quotation from Homer
there is not one unimpressive or unworthy verse, while in that
from Hegesias every single sentence will prove offensive.
Having now discussed the importance of rhythm, I will pass
on to the topics that remain.
CHAPTER XIX
ON VARIETY
The third cause of beautiful arrangement that was to be
examined is variety. I do not mean the change from the better
to the worse (that would be too foolish), nor yet that from the
worse to the better, but variety among things that are similar.
For satiety can be caused by all beautiful things, just as by things
sweet to the taste, when there is an unvarying sameness about
them; but if diversified by changes, they always remain new.
Now writers in metre and in lyric measures cannot introduce
2 ἂρ FP: ἄρ’ MV 4 εὐγενὲς σῶμα F: εὐγενῶς ἅμα PMV || δεινὰ FPM:
δεινῶς V 6 ὑπὸ F: ὡς ὑπὸ PMV 8 ἦν F: om. PMV 10 πάντων FM: om. PV
|| καὶ εἰ FPM: εἰ καὶ V || ἐν om. P 11 οὐδὲ εἷς P, MV: οὐδεὶς F ||
οὐδὲ (οὐδ’ V) ἀδόκιμος MV: ἢ ἀδόκιμος F: om. P 12 ἥτις οὐ λυπήσει om.
F 13 δὴ F: δὲ PMV 15 δέ] δή F 19 μένοντα PMV: ὄντα EF 20 δὲ EF:
δ’ ἐν PMV || ἀεὶ EF: ὡς ἀεὶ MV: om. P 21 τοῖς EF: ἐν τοῖς PV: ἐν οἷς M
5. φρόνημα, ‘pride,’ ‘spirit,’ ‘mettle,’
‘feeling,’ ‘self-respect’: cp. 186 5.
6. κατεαγότων, ‘enervated,’ ‘effeminate’
(Lat. fractus): cp. Philo Jud. i.
262 (Mangey) ἄνανδροι καὶ κατεαγότες
καὶ θηλυδρίαι τὰ φρονήματα, i. 273 πάθεσι
τοῖς κατεαγόσι καὶ τεθηλυμμένοις.
8, 9. ἐκείνων refers to the passage
last quoted, τούτων to that quoted first.
The remoteness implied in ἐκείνων is
here that of greatness and antiquity;
the nearness in τούτων, that of the
commonplace and recent.
10. The reading εἰ καὶ (‘although’)
would perhaps be preferable in sense, if
only it had better manuscript attestation.
[In 198 15 there is a similar fluctuation
between καὶ εἰ and εἰ καί.]
13. For various points of rhythm and
metre raised in cc. 18, 19, and elsewhere,
reference may be made to the Introduction,
pp. 33-9.
16. For the importance of variety
(especially in relation to rhythm) cp.
a well-known fragment of Isocrates’ Art
of Rhetoric: ὅλως δὲ ὁ λόγος μὴ λόγος
ἔστω, ξηρὸν γάρ· μηδὲ ἔμμετρος, καταφανὲς
γάρ. ἀλλὰ μεμίχθω παντὶ ῥυθμῷ,
μάλιστα ἰαμβικῷ ἢ τροχαϊκῷ (“prose
must not be merely prose, or it will be
dry; nor metrical, or its art will be
undisguised; but it should be compounded
with every sort of rhythm,
particularly iambic or trochaic”). The
views of Theophrastus on the point are
reported in Cic. de Orat. iii. 48. 184 ff.
“namque ego illud adsentior Theophrasto,
qui putat orationem, quae quidem sit
polita atque facta quodam modo, non
astricte, sed remissius numerosam esse
oportere,” etc.
18. κόρον: cp. Ep. ad Cn. Pomp. c. 3
κόρον δ’ ἔχει, φησὶν ὁ Πίνδαρος [Nem. vii.
52], καὶ μέλι καὶ τὰ τέρπν’ ἄνθε’ ἀφροδίσια,
and Hom. Il. xiii. 636 πάντων μὲν κόρος
ἐστί, κτλ.
19. μένοντα avoids the awkward
hiatus ἡδέα ὄντα. The fact that μένει
follows shortly is not a conclusive objection,
since Dionysius, and Greek authors
generally, were free from the bad taste
which avoids, at all costs, repetitions of
this kind: cp. λαμβανόμενα ... λήψεται
(106 18).
[194-5]
ἔξεστι μεταβάλλειν ἢ οὐχ ἅπασιν οὐδ’ ἐφ’ ὅσον βούλονται.
αὐτίκα τοῖς μὲν ἐποποιοῖς μέτρον οὐκ ἔξεστι μεταβάλλειν,
ἀλλ’ ἀνάγκη πάντας εἶναι τοὺς στίχους ἑξαμέτρους· οὐδέ
γε ῥυθμόν, ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπὸ μακρᾶς ἀρχομένοις συλλαβῆς
χρήσονται καὶ οὐδὲ τούτοις ἅπασι. τοῖς δὲ τὰ μέλη γράφουσιν 5
τὸ μὲν τῶν στροφῶν τε καὶ ἀντιστρόφων οὐχ οἷόν τε
ἀλλάξαι μέλος, ἀλλ’ ἐάν τ’ ἐναρμονίους ἐάν τε χρωματικὰς
ἐάν τε διατόνους ὑποθῶνται μελῳδίας, ἐν πάσαις δεῖ ταῖς
στροφαῖς τε καὶ ἀντιστρόφοις τὰς αὐτὰς ἀγωγὰς φυλάττειν·
οὐδέ γε τοὺς περιέχοντας ὅλας τὰς στροφὰς ῥυθμοὺς καὶ 10
τὰς ἀντιστρόφους, ἀλλὰ δεῖ καὶ τούτους τοὺς αὐτοὺς διαμένειν·
περὶ δὲ τὰς καλουμένας ἐπῳδοὺς ἀμφότερα κινεῖν ταῦτα
ἔξεστι τό τε μέλος καὶ τὸν ῥυθμόν. τά τε κῶλα ἐξ ὧν
ἑκάστη συνέστηκε περίοδος ἐπὶ πολλῆς ἐξουσίας δέδοται
αὐτοῖς ποικίλως διαιρεῖν ἄλλοτε ἄλλα μεγέθη καὶ σχήματα 15
αὐταῖς περιτιθέντας, ἕως ἂν ἀπαρτίσωσι τὴν στροφήν· ἔπειτα
πάλιν δεῖ τὰ αὐτὰ μέτρα καὶ κῶλα ποιεῖν. οἱ μὲν οὖν
ἀρχαῖοι μελοποιοί, λέγω δὲ Ἀλκαῖόν τε καὶ Σαπφώ, μικρὰς
ἐποιοῦντο στροφάς, ὥστ’ ἐν ὀλίγοις τοῖς κώλοις οὐ πολλὰς
εἰσῆγον τὰς μεταβολάς, ἐπῳδοῖς τε πάνυ ἐχρῶντο ὀλίγοις· οἱ 20
δὲ περὶ Στησίχορόν τε καὶ Πίνδαρον μείζους ἐργασάμενοι τὰς
περιόδους εἰς πολλὰ μέτρα καὶ κῶλα διένειμαν αὐτὰς οὐκ
ἄλλου τινὸς ἢ τῆς μεταβολῆς ἔρωτι. οἱ δέ γε διθυραμβοποιοὶ
[195]
change everywhere; or rather, I should say, cannot all introduce
change, and none as much as they wish. For instance, epic
writers cannot vary their metre, for all the lines must necessarily
be hexameters; nor yet the rhythm, for they must use those feet
that begin with a long syllable, and not all even of these. The
writers of lyric verse cannot vary the melodies of strophe and
antistrophe, but whether they adopt enharmonic melodies, or
chromatic, or diatonic, in all the strophes and antistrophes the
same sequences must be observed. Nor, again, must the rhythms
be changed in which the entire strophes and antistrophes are
written, but these too must remain unaltered. But in the so-called
epodes both the tune and the rhythm may be changed.
Great freedom, too, is allowed to an author in varying and
elaborating the clauses of which each period is composed by
giving them different lengths and forms in different instances,
until they complete a strophe; but after that, similar metres and
clauses must be composed for the antistrophe. Now the ancient
writers of lyric poetry—I refer to Alcaeus and Sappho—made
their strophes short, so that they did not introduce many variations
in the clauses, which were few in number, while the use they
made of the epode was very slight. Stesichorus and Pindar and
their schools framed their periods on a larger scale, and divided
them into many measures and clauses, simply from the love of
variety. The dithyrambic poets used to change the modes also,
8 ὑποθῶνται FE: ὑπόθωνται PMV 9 τε καὶ PMV (cf. l. 6 supra): καὶ EF
11 τὰς ἀντιστροφὰς PM: τοὺς ἀντιστρόφους F: ἀντιστροφὰς V 12 ἐπῳδὰς
V || ταῦτά ἐστιν F 14 ἑκάστη συνέστηκεν περίοδος PMV: συνέστηκε
περίοδος ἑκάστη E: συνέστηκε περίοδος F 15 αὐτοῖς secl. Usener 16
αὐταῖς PMV: αὐτοῖς EF || ἂν om. F 18 δὲ om. EF 20 εἰσῆγον τὰς PMV:
εἰσῆγον EF
5. οὐδὲ τούτοις ἅπασι: e.g. not the
cretic, and (strictly) not the trochee.
7. ἐναρμονίους ... χρωματικὰς ...
διατόνους: the distinction between
these scales is indicated in Macran’s
Harmonics of Aristoxenus p. 6: “Was
it then possible to determine for practical
purposes the smallest musical interval?
To this question the Greek theorists gave
the unanimous reply, supporting it by a
direct appeal to facts, that the voice can
sing, and the ear perceive, a quarter-tone;
but that any smaller interval lies beyond
the power of ear and voice alike. Disregarding
then the order of the intervals,
and considering only their magnitudes,
we can see that one possible division of
the tetrachord was into two quarter-tones
and a ditone, or space of two
tones; the employment of these intervals
characterized a scale as of the Enharmonic
genus. Or again, employing
larger intervals one might divide the
tetrachord into, say, two-thirds of a
tone, and the space of a tone and five-sixths:
or into two semitones, and the
space of a tone and a half. The employment
of these divisions or any lying
between them marked a scale as
Chromatic. Or finally, by the employment
of two tones one might proceed
to the familiar Diatonic genus, which
divided the tetrachord into two tones
and a semitone. Much wonder and
admiration has been wasted on the
Enharmonic scale by persons who have
missed the true reason for the disappearance
of the quarter-tone from our modern
musical system. Its disappearance is due
not to the dulness or coarseness of modern
ear or voice, but to the fact that the
more highly developed unity of our
system demands the accurate determination
of all sound-relations by direct or
indirect resolution into concords; and
such a determination of quarter-tones
is manifestly impossible.”
18. ἀρχαῖοι: as compared, say, with
Pindar.
20. οἱ δὲ περὶ Στησίχορόν τε καὶ
Πίνδαρον: the two possible senses of this
and similar phrases may be illustrated
from Plutarch, viz. (1) the man and
his followers, e.g. οἱ περὶ Δημοσθένην
(Plutarch Vit. Demosth. 28. 2); (2) the
man himself, e.g. τοὺς περὶ Αἰσχίνην καὶ
Φιλοκράτην (ibid. 16. 2: cp. 30. 2)
= ‘Aeschines and Philocrates.’ So with
οἱ ἀμφί and οἱ κατά. But sense (2) needs
careful scrutiny wherever it seems to
occur; the meaning may simply be ‘men
like Aeschines,’ etc.—For the ‘graves
Camenae’ of Stesichorus cp. Hor. Carm.
iv. 9. 8, and Quintil. x. 1. 62 “Stesichorus
quam sit ingenio validus, materiae quoque
ostendunt, maxima bella et clarissimos
canentem duces et epici carminis onera
lyra sustinentem.”
21. Such long periods are particularly
effective (cp. 196 13) when they include
clauses of various lengths and end with
an impressive one: e.g. Cic. Catil. ii.
1. 1 “Tandem aliquando, Quirites, L.
Catilinam, | furentem audacia, | scelus
anhelantem, | pestem patriae nefarie
molientem, | vobis atque huic urbi ferro
flammaque minitantem, | ex urbe vel
eiecimus, | vel emisimus, | vel ipsum
egredientem verbis prosecuti sumus”;
and similarly Bossuet Oraison funèbre
de Henriette-Marie de France: “Celui
qui règne dans les cieux | et de qui
relèvent tous les empires, | à qui seul
appartient la gloire, la majesté et
l’indépendance | est aussi le seul qui
se glorifie de faire la loi aux rois, | et
de leur donner, quand il lui plaît, de
grandes et de terribles leçons.”
[196-7]
καὶ τοὺς τρόπους μετέβαλλον, Δωρίους τε καὶ Φρυγίους καὶ
Λυδίους ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ ᾄσματι ποιοῦντες, καὶ τὰς μελῳδίας
ἐξήλλαττον, τοτὲ μὲν ἐναρμονίους ποιοῦντες, τοτὲ δὲ χρωματικάς,
τοτὲ δὲ διατόνους, καὶ τοῖς ῥυθμοῖς κατὰ πολλὴν
ἄδειαν ἐνεξουσιάζοντες διετέλουν, οἵ γε δὴ κατὰ Φιλόξενον καὶ 5
Τιμόθεον καὶ Τελεστήν, ἐπεὶ παρά γε τοῖς ἀρχαίοις τεταγμένος
ἦν καὶ ὁ διθύραμβος.
ἡ δὲ πεζὴ λέξις ἅπασαν ἐλευθερίαν ἔχει καὶ ἄδειαν
ποικίλλειν ταῖς μεταβολαῖς τὴν σύνθεσιν, ὅπως βούλεται.
καὶ ἔστι λέξις κρατίστη πασῶν, ἥτις ἂν ἔχῃ πλείστας 10
ἀναπαύλας τε καὶ μεταβολὰς ἐναρμονίους, ὅταν τουτὶ μὲν ἐν
περιόδῳ λέγηται, τουτὶ δ’ ἔξω περιόδου, καὶ ἥδε μὲν ἡ
περίοδος ἐκ πλειόνων πλέκηται κώλων, ἥδε δ’ ἐξ ἐλαττόνων,
αὐτῶν δὲ τῶν κώλων τὸ μὲν βραχύτερον ᾖ, τὸ δὲ μακρότερον,
καὶ τὸ μὲν αὐτουργότερον, τὸ δὲ ἀκριβέστερον, ῥυθμοί τε 15
ἄλλοτε ἄλλοι καὶ σχήματα παντοῖα καὶ τάσεις φωνῆς αἱ
καλούμεναι προσῳδίαι διάφοροι κλέπτουσαι τῇ ποικιλίᾳ τὸν
κόρον. ἔχει δέ τινα χάριν ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις καὶ τὸ οὕτω
συγκείμενον ὥστε μὴ συγκεῖσθαι δοκεῖν. καὶ οὐ πολλῶν δεῖν
οἶμαι λόγων εἰς τοῦτο τὸ μέρος· ὅτι γὰρ ἥδιστόν τε καὶ 20
κάλλιστον ἐν λόγοις μεταβολή, πάντας εἰδέναι πείθομαι.
παράδειγμα δὲ αὐτῆς ποιοῦμαι πᾶσαν μὲν τὴν Ἡροδότου
λέξιν, πᾶσαν δὲ τὴν Πλάτωνος, πᾶσαν δὲ τὴν Δημοσθένους·
ἀμήχανον γὰρ εὑρεῖν τούτων ἑτέρους ἐπεισοδίοις τε πλείοσι
καὶ ποικιλίαις εὐκαιροτέραις καὶ σχήμασι πολυειδεστέροις 25
χρησαμένους· λέγω δὲ τὸν μὲν ὡς ἐν ἱστορίας σχήματι, τὸν
[197]
introducing Dorian and Phrygian and Lydian modes in the same
song; and they varied the melodies, making them now enharmonic,
now chromatic, now diatonic; and in the rhythms they continually
showed the boldest independence,—I mean Philoxenus, Timotheus,
Telestes, and men of their stamp,—since among the ancients even
the dithyramb had been subject to strict metrical laws.
Prose-writing has full liberty and permission to diversify composition
by whatever changes it pleases. A style is finest of all
when it has the most frequent rests and changes of harmony;
when one thing is said within a period, another without it; when
one period is formed by the interweaving of a larger number of
clauses, another by that of a smaller; when among the clauses
themselves one is short, another longer, one roughly wrought,
another more finished; when the rhythms take now one form,
now another, and the figures are of all kinds, and the voice-pitches—the
so-called “accents”—are various, and skilfully
avoid satiety by their diversity. There is considerable charm,
among efforts of this kind, in what is so composed that it does
not seem to be artificially composed at all. I do not think that
many words are needed on this point. Everybody, I believe,
is aware that, in prose, variety is full of charm and beauty.
And as examples of it I reckon all the writings of Herodotus, all
those of Plato, and all those of Demosthenes. It is impossible
to find other writers who have introduced more episodes than
these, or better-timed variations, or more multiform figures:
the first in the narrative form, the second in graceful dialogue,
7 καὶ F: om. PMV 8 ἔχει καὶ ἄδειαν PMV: καὶ ἄδειαν ἔχει F: ἔχει E
10 ἔχη F: ἔχει P: ἔχοι EMV 11 ἐναρμονίους EF: ἁρμονίας PMV 14 ᾖ] τι
F 15 αὐτουργότερον F: αὐτῶν (om. E) γοργότερον τὸ δὲ βραδύτερον EPMV
|| τὸ δὲ ἀκριβέστερον om. EF 18 ἐν P2MV: ἐτι P1: om. F 19 καὶ
F: om. PMV || δεῖν οἶμαι F: δὲ οἴομαι δεῖν PMV 20 τοῦτο PMV: τουτὶ
F 21 μεταβολή FP: ἡ μεταβολή MV 24 ἀμήχανον PMV: ἀδύνατον EF 25
ποικίλαις F || εὐκαιροτέροις EF: εὐροωτέραις PMV 26 μὲν ὡς] μὲν P ||
ἱστορίαις PMV || σχήματι EF: σχηματισμὸν PM: σχηματισμῷ V
1. For the characteristics of the various
modes cp. (besides the Republic and the
Politics) Lucian Harmonides i. 1 καὶ τῆς
ἁρμονίας ἑκάστης διαφυλάττειν τὸ ἴδιον,
τῆς Φρυγίου τὸ ἔνθεον, τῆς Λυδίου τὸ
Βακχικόν, τῆς Δωρίου τὸ σεμνόν, τῆς
Ἰωνικῆς τὸ γλαφυρόν.
3. τοτὲ μὲν ... τοτὲ δέ: cp. 132 19,
where (as here) F and P have τότε.
5. ἐνεξουσιάζοντες, ‘using full liberty,’
‘showing their independence.’ Cp. de
Thucyd. c. 8 ... οὔτε προστιθεὶς τοῖς
πράγμασιν οὐδὲν ὃ μὴ δίκαιον οὔτε ἀφαιρῶν,
οὐδὲ ἐνεξουσιάζων τῇ γραφῇ, ἀνέγκλητον
δὲ καὶ καθαρὰν τὴν προαίρεσιν ἀπὸ παντὸς
φθόνου καὶ πάσης κολακείας φυλάττων,
and c. 24 ibid. ἐν δὲ τοῖς συνθετικοῖς καὶ
τοῖς προθετικοῖς μορίοις καὶ ἔτι μᾶλλον ἐν
τοῖς διαρθροῦσι τὰς τῶν ὀνομάτων δυνάμεις
ποιητοῦ τρόπον ἐνεξουσιάζων (translated
in D.H. p. 135). So Hor. Carm. iv.
2. 10 “seu per audaces nova dithyrambos |
verba devolvit numerisque fertur | lege
solutis.”
οἱ κατά may refer simply to the
individuals mentioned, or to them and
their contemporaries: cp. note on 194 20.
For Philoxenus, Timotheus (including
the newly discovered Persae),
and Telestes see Jebb’s Bacchylides pp.
47-55; Weir Smyth’s Greek Melic Poets
pp. 460-7; W. von Christ Gesch. der
Griech. Litt.3 pp. 188, 189.
8. ἐλευθερίαν ἔχει καὶ ἄδειαν: it is
a mistake to cut out καὶ ἄδειαν on the
authority of E alone. An Epitomizer
would naturally omit the words, while
Dionysius’ liking for amplitude and
rhythm would as naturally lead him
to use them. Cp. Demosth. Timocr.
§ 205 εἰ δέ τις εἰσφέρει νόμον ἐξ οὗ τοῖς
ὑμᾶς βουλομένοις ἀδικεῖν ἡ πᾶσ’ ἐξουσία
καὶ ἄδεια γενήσεται, οὗτος ὅλην ἀδικεῖ
τὴν πόλιν καὶ καταισχύνει πάντας. The
word ἄδεια is found also in l. 5 supra
and 176 20. The repetition within a
few sentences is not inconsistent with
Dionysius’ practice in such matters:
cp. note on 192 19 supra.
[198-9]
δ’ ὡς ἐν διαλόγων χάριτι, τὸν δ’ ὡς ἐν λόγων ἐναγωνίων
χρείᾳ. ἀλλ’ οὐχ ἥ γε Ἰσοκράτους καὶ τῶν ἐκείνου γνωρίμων
αἵρεσις ὁμοία ταύταις ἦν, ἀλλὰ καίπερ ἡδέως καὶ μεγαλοπρεπῶς
πολλὰ συνθέντες οἱ ἄνδρες οὗτοι περὶ τὰς μεταβολὰς καὶ τὴν
ποικιλίαν οὐ πάνυ εὐτυχοῦσιν· ἀλλ’ ἔστι παρ’ αὐτοῖς εἷς 5
περίοδου κύκλος, ὁμοειδὴς σχημάτων τάξις, φυλακὴ συμπλοκῆς
φωνηέντων ἡ αὐτή, ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα κόπτοντα τὴν
ἀκρόασιν. οὐ δὴ ἀποδέχομαι τὴν αἵρεσιν ἐκείνην κατὰ τοῦτο
τὸ μέρος. καὶ αὐτῷ μὲν ἴσως τῷ Ἰσοκράτει πολλαὶ χάριτες
ἐπήνθουν ἄλλαι ταύτην ἐπικρύπτουσαι τὴν ἀμορφίαν, παρὰ 10
δὲ τοῖς μετ’ ἐκεῖνον ἀπ’ ἐλαττόνων τῶν ἄλλων κατορθωμάτων
περιφανέστερον γίνεται τοῦτο τὸ ἁμάρτημα.
XX
εἷς ἔτι καταλείπεταί μοι λόγος ὁ περὶ τοῦ πρέποντος.
καὶ γὰρ τοῖς ἄλλοις χρώμασιν ἅπασι παρεῖναι δεῖ τὸ πρέπον,
καὶ εἴ τι ἄλλο ἔργον ἀτυχεῖ τούτου τοῦ μέρους, καὶ εἰ μὴ 15
τοῦ παντός, τοῦ κρατίστου γε ἀτυχεῖ. περὶ μὲν οὖν ὅλης τῆς
ἰδέας ταύτης οὐχ οὗτος ὁ καιρὸς ἀνασκοπεῖν· βαθεῖα γάρ τις
αὐτοῦ καὶ πολλῶν πάνυ δεομένη λόγων ἡ θεωρία. ὅσα δὲ εἰς
τοῦτο συντείνει τὸ μέρος ὑπὲρ οὗ τυγχάνω ποιούμενος τὸν
λόγον, εἰ μὴ καὶ τὰ πάντα, μηδὲ τὰ πλεῖστα, ὅσα γε οὖν 20
ἐγχωρεῖ, λεγέσθω.
ὁμολογουμένου δὴ παρὰ πᾶσιν ὅτι πρέπον ἐστὶ τὸ τοῖς
ὑποκειμένοις ἁρμόττον προσώποις τε καὶ πράγμασιν, ὥσπερ
ἐκλογὴ τῶν ὀνομάτων εἴη τις ἂν ἡ μὲν πρέπουσα τοῖς ὑποκειμένοις
ἡ δὲ ἀπρεπής, οὕτω δήπου καὶ σύνθεσις. παράδειγμα 25
δὲ τούτου χρὴ λαμβάνειν τὴν ἀλήθειαν. ὃ δὲ λέγω, τοιοῦτόν
[199]
the third in the practical work of forensic oratory. As for the
methods of Isocrates and his followers, they are not to be compared
with the styles of those writers. The Isocratic authors
have composed much with charm and distinction; but in regard
to change and diversity they are anything but happy. We find
in them one continually recurring period, a monotonous order of
figures, the invariable observance of vowel-blending, and many
other similar things which fatigue the ear. I cannot approve
that school on this side. In Isocrates himself, it may be conceded,
many charms were displayed which helped to hide this blemish.
But among his successors, by reason of their fewer redeeming
excellences, the fault mentioned stands out more glaringly.
CHAPTER XX
ON APPROPRIATENESS
It still remains for me to speak about appropriateness. All
the other ornaments of speech must be associated with what is
appropriate; indeed, if any other quality whatever fails to attain
this, it fails to attain the main essential,—perhaps fails altogether.
Into the question as a whole this is not the right time to go; it
is a profound study, and would need a long treatise. But let me
say what bears on the special department which I am actually
discussing; or if not all that bears on it, nor even the largest
part, at all events as much as is possible.
It is admitted among all critics that appropriateness is that
treatment which suits the actors and actions concerned. Just as
the choice of words may be either appropriate or inappropriate to
the subject matter, so also surely must the composition be. This
statement I had best illustrate from actual life. I refer to
1 ὡς ἐναγωνίων (om. ἐν λόγων) F 2 οὐχ ἥ γε PMV: οὐχ ἡ E: οὐχὶ ἡ F
|| ἐκείνου EF: ἐκείνω PM: ἐκείνων V 3 ἀλλὰ καὶ περιδεῶσ P 5 εἷς
περιόδου om. FE 6 τις post κύκλος add. E (vocabulis εἷς περιόδου
omissis) || φυλακὴ EF: φυσικὴ M: λέξις P: om. V 7 ἀλλὰ F 8 αἴρεσιν
F: διαίρεσιν P 10 ἄλλαι EF: om. PMV 11 ἀπ’ EPV: οὐκ ἀπ’ F, M ||
τῶν ἄλλων om. F 12 γίνεται om. F 13 εἷς ἔτι PMV: ἔτι τις F: ἔτι E
14 καὶ Schaefer: ὡς libri || χρώμασι F: σχήμασιν PMV || ἅπασι om. F
15 ἄλλο om. P || καὶ εἰ F: εἰ καὶ PMV 18 αὐτοῦ P: αὕτη FMV || πάνυ
δεομένη PMV: δεομένη σφόδρα F 20 τὰ πάντα PMV: πάντα F 21 λεγέσθω]
γενέσθω F 23 ἀρμόττον F, E: ἁρμόζον PMV || ὥσπερ F: ὥσπερ ἡ PMV 25
καὶ E: καὶ ἡ FPMV 26 λαμβάνειν F: παραλαμβάνειν PMV
2. The following passage emphasizes
in a striking way the supreme importance
of variety as an element in excellence
of style.
6. φυλακή: P’s reading λέξις may,
as Usener suggests, be a relic of φύλαξις.
14. The manuscript reading ὡς suggests
the possibility that some such words
as εἴρηται πρότερον have been lost after
ἀτυχεῖ in l. 16.
18. αὐτοῦ, ‘the matter,’ ‘the question.’
Cp. Eurip. Phoen. 626 αὐτὸ σημανεῖ (res
ipsa declarabit). See also note on 140
14 supra.
[200-1]
ἐστιν· οὐχ ὁμοίᾳ συνθέσει χρώμεθα ὀργιζόμενοι καὶ χαίροντες,
οὐδὲ ὀλοφυρόμενοι καὶ φοβούμενοι, οὐδ’ ἐν ἄλλῳ τινὶ πάθει ἢ
κακῷ ὄντες, ὥσπερ ὅταν ἐνθυμώμεθα μηδὲν ὅλως ἡμᾶς ταράττειν
μηδὲ παραλυπεῖν. δείγματος ἕνεκα ταῦτ’ εἴρηκα ὀλίγα
περὶ πολλῶν, ἐπεὶ μυρία ὅσα τις ἂν εἰπεῖν ἔχοι τὰς ἰδέας 5
ἁπάσας ἐκλογίζεσθαι βουλόμενος τοῦ πρέποντος· ἓν δὲ ὃ
προχειρότατον ἔχω καὶ κοινότατον εἰπεῖν ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ, τοῦτ’
ἐρῶ. οἱ αὐτοὶ ἄνθρωποι ἐν τῇ αὐτῇ καταστάσει τῆς ψυχῆς
ὄντες ὅταν ἀπαγγέλλωσι πράγματα οἷς ἂν παραγενόμενοι
τύχωσιν, οὐχ ὁμοίᾳ χρῶνται συνθέσει περὶ πάντων, ἀλλὰ 10
μιμητικοὶ γίνονται τῶν ἀπαγγελλομένων καὶ ἐν τῷ συντιθέναι
τὰ ὀνόματα, οὐδὲν ἐπιτηδεύοντες ἀλλὰ φυσικῶς ἐπὶ τοῦτο
ἀγόμενοι. ταῦτα δὴ παρατηροῦντα δεῖ τὸν ἀγαθὸν ποιητὴν
καὶ ῥήτορα μιμητικὸν εἶναι τῶν πραγμάτων ὑπὲρ ὧν ἂν τοὺς
λόγους ἐκφέρῃ, μὴ μόνον κατὰ τὴν ἐκλογὴν τῶν ὀνομάτων 15
ἀλλὰ καὶ κατὰ τὴν σύνθεσιν. ὃ ποιεῖν εἴωθεν ὁ δαιμονιώτατος
Ὅμηρος καίπερ μέτρον ἔχων ἓν ὡς καὶ ῥυθμοὺς ὀλίγους, ἀλλ’
ὅμως ἀεί τι καινουργῶν ἐν αὐτοῖς καὶ φιλοτεχνῶν, ὥστε μηδὲν
ἡμῖν διαφέρειν γινόμενα τὰ πράγματα ἢ λεγόμενα ὁρᾶν. ἐρῶ
δὲ ὀλίγα, οἷς ἄν τις δύναιτο παραδείγμασι χρῆσθαι πολλῶν. 20
ἀπαγγέλλων δὴ πρὸς τοὺς Φαίακας Ὀδυσσεὺς τὴν ἑαυτοῦ
πλάνην καὶ τὴν εἰς ᾅδου κατάβασιν εἰπὼν τὰς ὄψεις τῶν
ἐκεῖ κακῶν ἀποδίδωσιν. ἐν δὴ τούτοις καὶ τὰ περὶ τὸν
Σίσυφον διηγεῖται πάθη, ᾧ φασι τοὺς καταχθονίους θεοὺς
ὅρον πεποιῆσθαι τῆς τῶν δεινῶν ἀπαλλαγῆς, ὅταν ὑπὲρ ὄχθου 25
τινὸς ἀνακυλίσῃ πέτρον· τοῦτο δὲ ἀμήχανον εἶναι καταπίπτοντος
ὅταν εἰς ἄκρον ἔλθῃ πάλιν τοῦ πέτρου. πῶς οὖν
[201]
the fact that we do not put our words together in the same
way when angry as when glad, nor when mourning as when
afraid, nor when under the influence of any other emotion or
calamity as when conscious that there is nothing at all to
agitate or annoy us.
These few words on a wide subject are merely examples of
the countless other things which could be added if one wished
to treat fully all the aspects of appropriateness. But I have one
obvious remark to make of a general nature. When the same men
in the same state of mind report occurrences which they have
actually witnessed, they do not use a similar style in describing
all of them, but in their very way of putting their words together
imitate the things they report, not purposely, but carried away
by a natural impulse. Keeping an eye on this principle, the
good poet and orator should be ready to imitate the things of
which he is giving a verbal description, and to imitate them not
only in the choice of words but also in the composition. This is
the practice of Homer, that surpassing genius, although he has
but one metre and few rhythms. Within these limits, nevertheless,
he is continually producing new effects and artistic refinements,
so that actually to see the incidents taking place would
give no advantage over our having them thus described. I
will give a few instances, which the reader may take as representative
of many. When Odysseus is telling the Phaeacians
the story of his wanderings and of his descent into Hades, he
brings the miseries of the place before our eyes. Among
them, he describes the torments of Sisyphus, for whom they say
that the gods of the nether world have made it a condition
of release from his awful sufferings to have rolled a stone
over a certain hill, and that this is impossible, as the stone
invariably falls down again just as it reaches the top. Now it is
3 μηδὲν ὅλως ἡμᾶς F: καὶ μηδὲν ἡμᾶς ὅλως PMV || πράττειν μηδὲ
παραλυπεῖν F: ταράττηι μηδὲ παραλυπηῖ P, MV 4 δείγματος F: δείγματος
ἢ παραδείγματος PMV 5 ἐπεὶ μυρία PMV: μυρία ἄλλα ἐστὶν F || ἂν F:
αἴτια PMV 10 ἀλλὰ PMV: ἀλλὰ καὶ EF 13 δὴ F: δὲ PMV 17 καίπερ EF:
καί τοι P, MV || ἓν ὡς] ἑν(ως) P: ἐν ᾧ M: ἓν V: om. EF 18 αὐτοῖς EF:
τούτοις PV: τούτω M 20 παράδειγμα P: παραδείγματι V || πολλῶν F: ἐπὶ
πολλῶν PMV 21 δὴ FP: οὖν MV 26 πέτρον F: πέτρον τινά PMV 27 τοῦ
πέτρου om. F
1. It is implied that no general rules
can be laid down on this point, but we
must trust to nature,—to the aesthetic
perceptions of the individual author,—on
the principle that “tristia maestum |
vultum verba decent, iratum plena
minarum, | ludentem lasciva, severum
seria dictu,” Hor. Ars P. 105-7.
3. An early reading may have been
ὥσπερ εὐθυμούμεθα ὅταν μηδὲν ὅλως ἡμᾶς
ταράττῃ μηδὲ παραλυπῇ.
7. προχειρότατον: lit. ‘readiest to
hand.’—The verb προχειρίζεσθαι is
used often by Dionysius (76 2, 236 21,
250 13) in the meaning ‘to select.’
13. ταῦτα δὴ παρατηροῦντα: Dionysius
would (as the trend of his argument
throughout the treatise shows) have an
author not only observe, but improve
upon, the methods of ordinary people.
There is no real discrepancy between
this passage and that quoted (78 18
supra) from Coleridge’s Biographia
Literaria.
17. ῥυθμοὺς ὀλίγους: the two feet
(dactyl and spondee) apparently are
meant. Of course, the hexameter line
can be so divided as to yield longer feet
such as the βακχεῖος (see 206 11) or the
molossus; but such divisions are not
natural.
18. καινουργῶν ... καὶ φιλοτεχνῶν:
see D.H. p. 46.
26. Here, and in 202 8, πέτρος is used
to represent Homer’s λᾶας: in 202 10, 13,
πέτρα. ὄχθος (202 9) = Homer’s λόφος.
[202-3]
δηλώσει ταῦτα μιμητικῶς καὶ κατ’ αὐτὴν τὴν σύνθεσιν τῶν
ὀνομάτων, ἄξιον ἰδεῖν·
καὶ μὴν Σίσυφον εἰσεῖδον κρατέρ’ ἄλγε’ ἔχοντα,
λᾶαν βαστάζοντα πελώριον ἀμφοτέρῃσιν·
ἦ τοι ὁ μὲν σκηριπτόμενος χερσίν τε ποσίν τε 5
λᾶαν ἄνω ὤθεσκε ποτὶ λόφον·
ἐνταῦθα ἡ σύνθεσίς ἐστιν ἡ δηλοῦσα τῶν γινομένων ἕκαστον,
τὸ βάρος τοῦ πέτρου, τὴν ἐπίπονον ἐκ τῆς γῆς κίνησιν, τὸν
διερειδόμενον τοῖς κώλοις, τὸν ἀναβαίνοντα πρὸς τὸν ὄχθον,
τὴν μόλις ἀνωθουμένην πέτραν· οὐδεὶς ἂν ἄλλως εἴποι. καὶ 10
παρὰ τί γέγονε τούτων ἕκαστον; οὐ μὰ Δί’ εἰκῇ γε οὐδ’
ἀπὸ ταὐτομάτου. πρῶτον μὲν ἐν τοῖς δυσὶ στίχοις οἷς
ἀνακυλίει τὴν πέτραν, ἔξω δυεῖν ῥημάτων τὰ λοιπὰ τῆς λέξεως
μόρια πάντ’ ἐστὶν ἤτοι δισύλλαβα ἢ μονοσύλλαβα· ἔπειτα
τῷ ἡμίσει πλείους εἰσὶν αἱ μακραὶ συλλαβαὶ τῶν βραχειῶν 15
ἐν ἑκατέρῳ τῶν στίχων· ἔπειτα πᾶσαι διαβεβήκασιν αἱ τῶν
ὀνομάτων ἁρμονίαι διαβάσεις εὐμεγέθεις καὶ διεστήκασι πάνυ
αἰσθητῶς, ἢ τῶν φωνηέντων γραμμάτων συγκρουομένων ἢ τῶν
ἡμιφώνων τε καὶ ἀφώνων συναπτομένων· ῥυθμοῖς τε δακτύλοις
καὶ σπονδείοις τοῖς μηκίστοις καὶ πλείστην ἔχουσι διάβασιν 20
ἅπαντα σύγκειται. τί δή ποτ’ οὖν τούτων ἕκαστον δύναται;
αἱ μὲν μονοσύλλαβοί τε καὶ δισύλλαβοι λέξεις, πολλοὺς τοὺς
μεταξὺ χρόνους ἀλλήλων ἀπολείπουσαι, τὸ χρόνιον ἐμιμήσαντο
τοῦ ἔργου· αἱ δὲ μακραὶ συλλαβαί, στηριγμούς τινας ἔχουσαι
καὶ ἐγκαθίσματα, τὴν ἀντιτυπίαν καὶ τὸ βαρὺ καὶ τὸ μόλις· 25
τὸ δὲ μεταξὺ τῶν ὀνομάτων ψῦγμα καὶ ἡ τῶν τραχυνόντων
[203]
worth while to observe how Homer will express this by a
mimicry which the very arrangement of his words produces:—
There Sisyphus saw I receiving his guerdon of mighty pain:
A monster rock upheaving with both hands aye did he strain;
With feet firm-fixed, palms pressed, with gasps, with toil most sore,
That rock to a high hill’s crest heaved he.[170]
Here it is the composition that brings out each of the details—the
weight of the stone, the laborious movement of it from
the ground, the straining of the man’s limbs, his slow ascent
towards the ridge, the difficulty of thrusting the rock upwards.
No one will deny the effect produced. And on what does the
execution of each detail depend? Certainly the results do not
come by chance or of themselves. To begin with: in the two
lines in which Sisyphus rolls up the rock, with the exception
of two verbs all the component words of the passage are either
disyllables or monosyllables. Next, the long syllables are half
as numerous again as the short ones in each of the two lines.
Then, all the words are so arranged as to advance, as it were,
with giant strides, and the gaps between them are distinctly perceptible,
in consequence of the concurrence of vowels or the juxtaposition
of semi-vowels and mutes; and the dactylic and spondaic
rhythms of which the lines are composed are the longest possible
and take the longest possible stride. Now, what is the effect of
these several details? The monosyllabic and disyllabic words,
leaving many intervals between each other, suggest the duration of
the action; while the long syllables, which require a kind of pause
and prolongation, reproduce the resistance, the heaviness, the difficulty.
The inhalation between the words and the juxtaposition
8 μέτρου F 9 ὄχλον F 10 μόλις EF: μόγις PMV || ἄλλος F 11 οὐ μὰ
Δί’ Radermacher: οὐκ ἂν F: οὐ γὰρ PMV 12 μὲν ἐν Schaefer: μὲν FMV: ἐν
P, E 13 ἀνακυλίει EF: ἀνακινεῖ PV 15 μακραὶ om. F 16 ἔπειτα πᾶσαι
F: ἔπειθ’ ἅπασαι PMV || διαβεβλήκασιν F 18 γραμμάτων FP: om. EMV 19
τε (post ῥυθμοῖς) F: τε καὶ EPMV 21 ποτ’ οὖν F: om. PMV 22 τοὺς EF:
om. PMV 25 βαρὺ EFM2V: βραδὺ PM1 || μόλις EF: μόγις PMV
6. Cp. Demetr. de Eloc. § 72 ἐν δὲ
τῷ μεγαλοπρεπεῖ χαρακτῆρι σύγκρουσις
παραλαμβάνοιτ’ ἂν πρέπουσα ἤτοι διὰ
μακρῶν, ὡς τὸ “λᾶαν ἄνω ὤθεσκε.” καὶ
γὰρ ὁ στίχος μῆκός τι ἔσχεν ἐκ τῆς συγκρούσεως,
καὶ μεμίμηται τοῦ λίθου τὴν
ἀναφορὰν καὶ βίαν. So Eustathius: τὸ
δὲ “λᾶαν ἄνω ὤθεσκε ποτὶ λόφον” ἐπαινεῖται
χάριν τῆς συνθήκης. ἐμφαίνει γὰρ τὴν
δυσχέρειαν τοῦ τῆς ὠθήσεως ἔργου τῇ τῶν
φωνηέντων ἐπαλληλίᾳ, δι’ ὧν ὀγκούντων τὸ
στόμα οὐκ ἐᾶται τρέχειν ὁ λόγος, ἀλλ’
ὀκνηρὰ βαίνει συνεξομοιούμενος τῇ ἐργωδίᾳ
τοῦ ἄνω ὠθεῖν. The Homeric passage is
imitated in Pope’s Essay on Criticism,
“When Ajax strives some rock’s vast
weight to throw, | The line too labours,
and the words move slow.”—For the
effect of the long unblended vowels cp.
the first of Virgil’s two well-known lines,
“ter sunt conati imponere Pelio Ossam |
scilicet, atque Ossae frondosum involvere
Olympum” (Georg. i. 282).
15. It is not easy to see how this result
is reached. Perhaps in l. 5 the last
syllable of ἤτοι is counted long for the
purpose of the argument. A perception
of the difficulty may have led to the
omission of μακραί in F.
18. The meaning is: ‘either by repetition
of vowels [ἄλγε’ ἔχοντα, λᾶαν] or
by the juxtaposition of semi-vowels and
mutes [with the semi-vowels first: μὴν
Σίσυφον, εἰσεῖδον κρατερά, λᾶαν βαστάζοντα].’—In
204 15 the words πέδονδε
κυλίνδετο may be taken to express the
‘bumps’ of the stone as it rolls down.
22. Cp. Quintil. ix. 4. 98 “est enim
quoddam in ipsa divisione verborum
latens tempus, ut in pentametri medio
spondeo, qui nisi alterius verbi fine
alterius initio constat, versum non
efficit.”—The effect of the short syllables
in counterfeiting delay may be illustrated
by Cic. pro Milone 11. 28
“paulisper, dum se uxor, ut fit, comparat,
commoratus est.”
[204-5]
γραμμάτων παράθεσις τὰ διαλείμματα τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ τὰς
ἐποχὰς καὶ τὸ τοῦ μόχθου μέγεθος· οἱ ῥυθμοὶ δ’ ἐν μήκει
θεωρούμενοι τὴν ἔκτασιν τῶν μελῶν καὶ τὸν διελκυσμὸν τοῦ
κυλίοντος καὶ τὴν τοῦ πέτρου ἔρεισιν. καὶ ὅτι ταῦτα οὐ
φύσεώς ἐστιν αὐτοματιζούσης ἔργα ἀλλὰ τέχνης μιμήσασθαι 5
πειρωμένης τὰ γινόμενα, τὰ τούτοις ἑξῆς λεγόμενα δηλοῖ. τὴν
γὰρ ἀπὸ τῆς κορυφῆς ἐπιστρέφουσαν πάλιν καὶ κατακυλιομένην
πέτραν οὐ τὸν αὐτὸν ἡρμήνευκε τρόπον, ἀλλ’ ἐπιταχύνας τε
καὶ συστρέψας τὴν σύνθεσιν· προειπὼν γὰρ ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ
σχήματι 10
ἀλλ’ ὅτε μέλλοι
ἄκρον ὑπερβαλέειν
ἐπιτίθησι τοῦτο
τότ’ ἐπιστρέψασκε κραταιίς·
αὖτις ἔπειτα πέδονδε κυλίνδετο λᾶας ἀναιδής. 15
οὐχὶ συγκατακεκύλισται τῷ βάρει τῆς πέτρας ἡ τῶν ὀνομάτων
σύνθεσις, μᾶλλον δὲ ἔφθακε τὴν τοῦ λίθου φορὰν τὸ
τῆς ἀπαγγελίας τάχος; ἔμοιγε δοκεῖ. καὶ τίς ἐνταῦθα πάλιν
αἰτία; καὶ γὰρ ταύτην ἄξιον ἰδεῖν· ὁ τὴν καταφορὰν δηλῶν
τοῦ πέτρου στίχος μονοσύλλαβον μὲν οὐδεμίαν, δισυλλάβους 20
δὲ δύο μόνας ἔχει λέξεις. τοῦτ’ οὖν καὶ πρῶτον οὐ διίστησι
τοὺς χρόνους ἀλλ’ ἐπιταχύνει· ἔπειθ’ ἑπτακαίδεκα συλλαβῶν
οὐσῶν ἐν τῷ στίχῳ δέκα μέν εἰσι βραχεῖαι συλλαβαί, ἑπτὰ
δὲ μακραί, οὐδ’ αὗται τέλειοι· ἀνάγκη δὴ κατασπᾶσθαι καὶ
[205]
of rough letters indicate the pauses in his efforts, the delays, the
vastness of the toil. The rhythms, when it is observed how long-drawn-out
they are, betoken the straining of his limbs, the struggle
of the man as he rolls his burden, and the upheaving of the
stone. And that this is not the work of Nature improvising, but
of art attempting to reproduce a scene, is proved by the words
that follow these. For the poet has represented the return of
the rock from the summit and its rolling downward in quite
another fashion; he quickens and abbreviates his composition.
Having first said, in the same form as the foregoing,
but a little more,
And atop of the ridge would it rest[171]—
he adds to this,
some Power back turned it again:
Rushing the pitiless boulder went rolling adown to the plain.[172]
Do not the words thus arranged roll downhill together with the
impetus of the rock? Indeed, does not the speed of the narration
outstrip the rush of the stone? I certainly think so. And
what is the reason here again? It is worth noticing. The
line which described the downrush of the stone has no monosyllabic
words, and only two disyllabic. Now this, in the first
place, does not break up the phrases but hurries them on.
In the second place, of the seventeen syllables in the line ten
are short, seven long, and not even these seven are perfect. So
1 καὶ τὰς ἐποχὰς EF: ἐποχάς τε PMV 6 τὴν ... ἐπιστρέφουσαν ...
κατακυλιομένην πέτραν EF: τὸν ... ἐπιστρέφοντα ... κατακυλιόμενον
πέτρον PMV 13 τοῦτο EFM1: τούτω PM2V 14 ἐπιστρέψασ κε P, E:
ἐπιστέψασ (ρ suprascr.) καὶ F, MV: ἀποστρέψασκε Hom. || κραταὶ· ἲσ P:
κραταις F: κραταιὴ ἴς MV 15 αὖθις PMV 16 συγκατακεκύλισται PMV:
συγκυλίεται EF 18 ἐμοί τε PM: ἐμοὶ F 19 ταύτην PMV: ταύτης F ||
ἄξιον ἰδεῖν PV: ἰδεῖν ἄξιόν ἐστιν F 21 οὖν καὶ F(E): οὐκ ἐᾶι P, MV ||
οὐ διίστησι E: οὐδ’ ἵστησι F: διεστηκέναι PMV 24 δὲ F: δὲ μόναι PMV
|| οὐδ’ F: καὶ οὐδ’ PMV || αὗται F: αὐταὶ PMV || τέλειοι FPV: τέλειαι M
|| δὴ F: οὖν PMV || κατασπᾶσθαι F: κατεσπάσθαι PM: κατεσπᾶσθαι V
15. “Downward anon to the valley
rebounded the boulder remorseless”
(Sandys, in Jebb’s Rhetoric of Aristotle p.
172). Voss marks the contrast between
the slow and the rapid line by translating
the one by “Eines Marmors Schwere
mit grosser Gewalt fortheben,” and the
other by “Hurtig mit Donnergepolter
entrollte der tückische Marmor.”—For
similar adaptations of sound to sense
cp. Lucret. iii. 1000 “hoc est adverso
nixantem trudere monte | saxum quod
tamen e summo iam vertice rursum |
volvitur et plani raptim petit aequora
campi”; Virg. Aen. vi. 616 “saxum
ingens volvunt alii, radiisque rotarum |
districti pendent”; id. ib. viii. 596
“quadripedante putrem sonitu quatit
ungula campum” (in imitation of Il.
xxiii. 116); id. ib. v. 481 “sternitur
exanimisque tremens procumbit humi
bos”; id. ib. ii. 304-8 “in segetem
... de vertice pastor”; Racine Phèdre
v. 6 “L’essieu crie et se rompt: l’intrépide
Hippolyte | Voit voler en
éclats tout son char fracassé; | Dans les
rênes lui-même il tombe embarrassé”;
Pope’s “Up a high hill he heaves a
huge round stone” (Odyss. xi.) or his
“That like a wounded snake drags its
slow length along” (Essay on Criticism),
as compared with his “Thunders impetuous
down, and smokes along the
ground” (Odyss. xi.).—It is an interesting
question whether Dionysius overstates
his case when he makes ‘Homer’ as
conscious and sedulous an artist (ἀεί τι
καινουργῶν καὶ φιλοτεχνῶν, 200 18) as any
later imitator. It is, however, unlikely
that even the earliest poets who were
late enough to produce consummate music
were insensible to the effect of the music
they produced. But great poets in all
ages have had their ear so attuned by
long use and practice to the music of
sounds as to choose the right letters, syllables,
and words almost unconsciously.
19. ταύτην: Usener reads ταῦτ’ ἦν:
but (1) ταύτην refers naturally to αἰτία;
(2) with ἄξιον the verb is often omitted,
e.g. 186 19, 202 2; (3) if there were
a verb, ἐστίν would here be more natural
than ἦν.
22. The meaning is that the absence
of short words implies the absence of
frequent breaks, and this absence contributes
to rapid utterance.
24. τέλειοι, ‘perfect longs.’ The diphthongs
in αὖτις, ἔπειτα, and ἀναιδής,
are simply long by nature; they are
not long by position as well. The ο in
πέδονδε, and the ι in κυλίνδετο, are long
by position but not by nature. The ᾶ
in λᾶας, and the η in ἀναιδής, are long
by nature but not (in the former case) by
position. “Of the seven long syllables
not one—except the last—contains more
elements than are needful to make it
pass for long and at the same time avoid
hiatus; that is, no long vowel or diphthong
is followed by more than one consonant;
two consonants occur only where
required to extend a short vowel to a
long syllable” (Goodell Greek Metric p.
175). Compare 150 22-154 3, and see also
Gloss., s.v. τέλειος.—M here has τέλειαι
(not τέλειοι): cp. τελείας in 174 1.
[206-7]
συστέλλεσθαι τὴν φράσιν τῇ βραχύτητι τῶν συλλαβῶν ἐφελκομένην.
ἔτι πρὸς τούτοις οὐδ’ ὄνομα ἀπὸ ὀνόματος ἀξιόλογον
εἴληφεν διάστασιν· οὔτε γὰρ φωνήεντι φωνῆεν οὔτε ἡμιφώνῳ
ἡμίφωνον ἢ ἄφωνον, ἃ δὴ τραχύνειν πέφυκεν καὶ διιστάναι
τὰς ἁρμονίας, οὐδέν ἐστι παρακείμενον. οὐ δὴ γίνεται διάστασις 5
αἰσθητὴ μὴ διηρτημένων τῶν λέξεων, ἀλλὰ συνολισθαίνουσιν
ἀλλήλαις καὶ συγκαταφέρονται καὶ τρόπον τινὰ μία
ἐξ ἁπασῶν γίνεται διὰ τὴν τῶν ἁρμονιῶν ἀκρίβειαν. ὃ δὲ
μάλιστα τῶν ἄλλων θαυμάζειν ἄξιον, ῥυθμὸς οὐδεὶς τῶν
μακρῶν οἳ φύσιν ἔχουσιν πίπτειν εἰς μέτρον ἡρωϊκόν, οὔτε 10
σπονδεῖος οὔτε βακχεῖος ἐγκαταμέμικται τῷ στίχῳ, πλὴν ἐπὶ
τῆς τελευτῆς· οἱ δ’ ἄλλοι πάντες εἰσὶ δάκτυλοι, καὶ οὗτοι
παραδεδιωγμένας ἔχοντες τὰς ἀλόγους, ὥστε μὴ πολὺ διαφέρειν
ἐνίους τῶν τροχαίων. οὐδὲν δὴ τὸ ἀντιπρᾶττον ἐστὶν εὔτροχον
καὶ περιφερῆ καὶ καταρρέουσαν εἶναι τὴν φράσιν ἐκ τοιούτων 15
συγκεκροτημένην ῥυθμῶν. πολλά τις ἂν ἔχοι τοιαῦτα δεῖξαι
παρ’ Ὁμήρῳ λεγόμενα· ἐμοὶ δὲ ἀποχρῆν δοκεῖ καὶ ταῦτα, ἵν’
ἐγγένηταί μοι καὶ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων εἰπεῖν.
ὧν μὲν οὖν δεῖ στοχάζεσθαι τοὺς μέλλοντας ἡδεῖαν καὶ
καλὴν ποιήσειν σύνθεσιν ἔν τε ποιητικῇ καὶ λόγοις ἀμέτροις, 20
ταῦτα κατ’ ἐμὴν δόξαν ἐστὶ τὰ γοῦν κυριώτατα καὶ κράτιστα.
ὅσα δὲ οὐχ οἷά τε ἦν, ἐλάττω τε ὄντα τούτων καὶ ἀμυδρότερα
καὶ διὰ πλῆθος δυσπερίληπτα μιᾷ γραφῇ, ταῦτ’ ἐν ταῖς καθ’
ἡμέραν γυμνασίαις προσυποθήσομαί σοι, καὶ πολλῶν καὶ ἀγαθῶν
ποιητῶν τε καὶ συγγραφέων καὶ ῥητόρων μαρτυρίοις χρήσομαι. 25
νυνὶ δὲ τὰ καταλειπόμενα ὧν ὑπεσχόμην καὶ οὐδενὸς ἧττον
ἀναγκαῖα εἰρῆσθαι, ταῦτ’ ἔτι προσθεὶς τῷ λόγῳ παύσομαι
[207]
the line has to go tumbling down-hill in a heap, dragged forward
by the shortness of the syllables. Moreover, one word is not
divided from another by any appreciable interval, for vowel does
not meet vowel, nor semi-vowel or mute meet semi-vowel—conjunctions
the natural effect of which is to make the connexions
harsher and less close-fitting. There is, in fact, no perceptible
division if the words are not forced asunder, but they slip into
one another and are swept along, and a sort of great single word
is formed out of all owing to the closeness of the junctures.
And what is most surprising of all, not one of the long feet
which naturally fit into the heroic metre—whether spondee or
bacchius—has been introduced into the line, except at the end.
All the rest are dactyls, and these with their irrational syllables
hurried along, so that some of the feet do not differ much from
trochees. Accordingly nothing hinders the line from being rapid,
rounded and swift-flowing, welded together as it is from such
rhythms as this. Many such passages could be pointed out in
Homer. But I think the foregoing lines amply sufficient, and I
must leave myself time to discuss the remaining points.
The aims, then, which should be steadily kept in view by
those who mean to form a charming and noble style, alike in
poetry and in prose, are in my opinion those already mentioned.
These, at all events, are the most essential and effective. But
those which I have been unable to mention, as being more
minute and more obscure than these, and, owing to their number,
hard to embrace in a single treatise, I will bring before you in
our daily lessons, and I will draw illustrations in support of my
views from many good poets, historians, and orators. But now
I will go on to add to this work, before concluding it, the
remainder of the points which I promised to treat of, and
the discussion of which is as indispensable as any: viz. what
1 συστέλεσθαι P: συντελεῖσθαι F 4 διιστάναι F: διιστάνειν PMV 5
διάτασις F 6 διηρτημένη F 10 ἡρωϊκὸν F: ἡρῶιον P, MV 12 οὗτοι F:
οὗτοί γε PMV 17 δοκεῖ καὶ FM: ἐδόκει P: εἰδοκεῖ V 19 ἡδεῖαν καὶ
καλὴν F: καλὴν καὶ ἡδεῖαν PMV 23 μιᾶι F: μὴ PM: om. V 24 σοι καὶ
PMV: καὶ F || ἀγαθῶν καὶ ποιητῶν τε (τε om. M) καὶ P, M 25 μαρτυρίοις
F: μαρτυρι(ας) P: μαρτυρίαις MV 26 νυνὶ F: νῦν PMV
1. τῇ βραχύτητι κτλ.: i.e. the utterance
must necessarily be rapid when the
syllables are short and trip along.
2. “Again, as between words, there is
no hiatus, no semi-vowel or mute meets a
semi-vowel, there is no rhetorical pause
and no elision, the words almost run
together into one” (Goodell Greek Metric
p. 175).
11. βακχεῖος: see note on 200 17 supra.
13. τὰς ἀλόγους [συλλαβάς]: i.e. the
long syllables in πέδονδε and κυλίνδετο.—With
Usener’s conjecture παραμεμιγμένας
the meaning will be “and these
too are such as have irrational syllables
incorporated with them.”
14. τροχαίων: Schaefer suggests τριβραχέων,
Sauppe χορείων.
18. ἐγγένηται: cp. Antiqq. Rom. vi.
9 ὦ μακάριοι μέν, οἷς ἂν ἐγγένηται τὸν ἐκ
τοῦδε τοῦ πολέμου θρίαμβον καταγαγεῖν.
In 68 11 σχολή is added, ἐὰν δ’ ἐγγένηταί
μοι σχολή: and in 224 22 χρόνος is found
in P and V.
23. ἐν ταῖς καθ’ ἡμέραν γυμνασίαις:
this is one of the incidental references
which show that Dionysius taught
rhetoric at Rome.
[208-9]
* * * τίνες εἰσὶ διαφοραὶ τῆς συνθέσεως καὶ τίς ἑκάστης
χαρακτὴρ ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολύ, τῶν τε πρωτευσάντων ἐν αὐταῖς
μνησθῆναι καὶ δείγματα ἑκάστου παρασχεῖν, ὅταν δὲ ταῦτα
λάβῃ μοι τέλος, τότε κἀκεῖνα διευκρινῆσαι τὰ παρὰ τοῖς
πολλοῖς ἀπορούμενα, τί ποτ’ ἐστὶν ὃ ποιεῖ τὴν μὲν πεζὴν 5
λέξιν ὁμοίαν ποιήματι φαίνεσθαι μένουσαν ἐν τῷ τοῦ λόγου
σχήματι, τὴν δὲ ποιητικὴν φράσιν ἐμφερῆ τῷ πεζῷ λόγῳ
φυλάττουσαν τὴν ποιητικὴν σεμνότητα· σχεδὸν γὰρ οἱ
κράτιστα διαλεχθέντες ἢ ποιήσαντες ταῦτ’ ἔχουσιν ἐν τῇ
λέξει τἀγαθά. πειρατέον δὴ καὶ περὶ τούτων, ἃ φρονῶ, 10
λέγειν. ἄρξομαι δ’ ἀπὸ τοῦ πρώτου.
XXI
ἐγὼ τῆς συνθέσεως εἰδικὰς μὲν διαφορὰς πολλὰς σφόδρα
εἶναι τίθεμαι καὶ οὔτ’ εἰς σύνοψιν ἐλθεῖν δυναμένας οὔτ’ εἰς
λογισμὸν ἀκριβῆ, οἴομαί τε ἴδιον ἡμῶν ἑκάστῳ χαρακτῆρα
ὥσπερ ὄψεως, οὕτω καὶ συνθέσεως ὀνομάτων παρακολουθεῖν, 15
οὐ φαύλῳ παραδείγματι χρώμενος ζῳγραφίᾳ· ὥσπερ γὰρ ἐν
ἐκείνῃ τὰ αὐτὰ φάρμακα λαμβάνοντες ἅπαντες οἱ τὰ ζῷα
γράφοντες οὐδὲν ἐοικότα ποιοῦσιν ἀλλήλοις τὰ μίγματα, τὸν
αὐτὸν τρόπον ἐν ποιητικῇ τε διαλέκτῳ καὶ τῇ ἄλλῃ πάσῃ
τοῖς αὐτοῖς ὀνόμασι χρώμενοι πάντες οὐχ ὁμοίως αὐτὰ συντίθεμεν. 20
τὰς μέντοι γενικὰς αὐτῆς διαφορὰς ταύτας εἶναι
πείθομαι μόνας τὰς τρεῖς, αἷς ὁ βουλόμενος ὀνόματα θήσεται
τὰ οἰκεῖα, ἐπειδὰν τούς τε χαρακτῆρας αὐτῶν καὶ τὰς διαφορὰς
ἀκούσῃ. ἐγὼ μέντοι κυρίοις ὀνόμασιν οὐκ ἔχων αὐτὰς προσαγορεῦσαι
ὡς ἀκατονομάστους μεταφορικοῖς ὀνόμασι καλῶ τὴν
μὲν αὐστηράν, τὴν δὲ γλαφυράν [ἢ ἀνθηράν], τὴν δὲ τρίτην
[209]
are the different styles of composition and what the usual
distinguishing mark of each is. I will include some mention
of those who have been eminent in them, and will also add
examples from each author. When the treatment of these points
is completed, I must proceed to dispose of certain difficulties very
generally felt: what it can be that makes prose appear like a
poem though retaining the form of prose, and verse like prose
though maintaining the loftiness of poetry; for almost all the
best writers of prose or poetry have these excellences in their
style. I must do my best, then, to set forth my views on these
matters also. I will begin with the first.
CHAPTER XXI
THREE MODES, OR STYLES, OF COMPOSITION
I assert without any hesitation that there are many specific
differences of composition, and that they cannot be brought into
a comprehensive view or within a precise enumeration; I think
too that, as in personal appearance, so also in literary composition,
each of us has an individual character. I find not a
bad illustration in painting. As in that art all painters from
life take the same pigments but mix them in the most diverse ways,
so in poetry and in prose, though we all use the same words, we do
not put them together in the same manner. I hold, however, that
the essentially different varieties of composition are the three following
only, to which any one who likes may assign the appropriate
names, when he has heard their characteristics and their differences.
For my own part, since I cannot find recognized names
for them, inasmuch as none exist, I call them by metaphorical
terms—the first austere, the second smooth (or florid), the third
1 hiatum indicavit Schottius 2 τε om. F 4 κακεῖνα P, MV: καὶ ταῦτα
F || διευκρινήσω V || τοῖς FM: om. PV 5 μὲν F: om. PMV 7 λόγῳ om.
PV 9 ἢ om. P 11 δὲ ἀπὸ MV: δὲ κατὰ P 12 εἰδικὰς F (E): ἰδικὰς PMV
|| διαφορὰς πολλὰς F: πολλὰς διαφορὰς PMV 13 εἰς συλλογισμὸν F 14
ἴδιον ἡμῶν ἑκάστῳ χαρακτῆρα] ἰδιώματα ἑκάστῳ χαρακτῆρι F 16 φαύλω F:
φαύλως PMV || ζωγραφία F: ζωγραφιαίω PM 19 πάσῃ Us.: ἁπάση libri 20
ἅπαντες F 22 μόνας EF: om. PMV 25 ἀκατονομάστοις PV 26 ἢ ἀνθηράν
om. P
3. As the sentence stands, the infinitives
μνησθῆναι, παρασχεῖν and διευκρινῆσαι
are without regular government.
βουλόμενος may be inserted after μνησθῆναι,
or (as Usener prefers to think)
something like ἀναγκαῖον γὰρ ἡγοῦμαι
πρῶτον μὲν παραστῆσαι may be supposed
to have fallen out between παύσομαι and
τίνες.
7. Dionysius’ practice of variety in
his own style is shown by his use of
ἐμφερῆ here, as compared with ὁμοίαν in
l. 6.
12. This and the following chapters
should be compared carefully with de
Demosth. cc. 36 ff.
21. For Greek views as to types of
style in general (not simply ἁρμονίαι)
reference may be made to Demetr. pp.
28 ff.
24. At this point in the Epitome, the
Darmstadt codex has (in the margin) ὁ
δὲ Πλούταρχος τὸ μὲν τῆς συνθέσεως ἁδρόν,
τὸ δὲ ἰσχνόν, τὸ δὲ μέσον καλεῖ.
26. ἢ ἀνθηράν: cp. 232 25 (where P
again omits the second epithet) and 248
9 (with critical note).
[210-1]
εὔκρατον· ἣν ὅπως ποτὲ γίνεσθαι φαίην ἄν, ἔγωγε ἀπορῶ,
καὶ “δίχα μοι νόος ἀτρέκειαν εἰπεῖν,” εἴτε κατὰ στέρησιν
τῶν ἄκρων ἑκατέρας εἴτε κατὰ μῖξιν· οὐ γὰρ ῥᾴδιον
εἰκάσαι τὸ σαφές. μή ποτ’ οὖν κρεῖττον ᾖ λέγειν, ὅτι κατὰ
τὴν ἄνεσίν τε καὶ τὴν ἐπίτασιν τῶν ἐσχάτων ὅρων οἱ διὰ 5
μέσου γίνονται πολλοὶ πάνυ ὄντες· οὐ γὰρ ὥσπερ ἐν μουσικῇ
τὸ ἴσον ἀπέχει τῆς νήτης καὶ τῆς ὑπάτης ἡ μέση, τὸν αὐτὸν
τρόπον καὶ ἐν λόγοις ὁ μέσος χαρακτὴρ ἑκατέρου τῶν ἄκρων
ἴσον ἀφέστηκεν, ἀλλ’ ἔστι τῶν ἐν πλάτει θεωρουμένων ὡς
ἀγέλη τε καὶ σωρὸς καὶ ἄλλα πολλά. ἀλλὰ γὰρ οὐχ οὗτος 10
ὁ καιρὸς ἁρμόττων τῇ θεωρίᾳ ταύτῃ· λεκτέον δ’, ὥσπερ ὑπεθέμην,
καὶ περὶ τῶν χαρακτήρων οὐχ ἅπανθ’ ὅσ’ ἂν εἰπεῖν
ἔχοιμι (μακρῶν γὰρ ἄν μοι πάνυ δεήσειε λόγων), ἀλλ’ αὐτὰ
τὰ φανερώτατα.
XXII
τῆς μὲν οὖν αὐστηρᾶς ἁρμονίας τοιόσδε ὁ χαρακτήρ· 15
ἐρείδεσθαι βούλεται τὰ ὀνόματα ἀσφαλῶς καὶ στάσεις λαμβάνειν
ἰσχυράς, ὥστ’ ἐκ περιφανείας ἕκαστον ὄνομα ὁρᾶσθαι,
ἀπέχειν τε ἀπ’ ἀλλήλων τὰ μόρια διαστάσεις ἀξιολόγους
αἰσθητοῖς χρόνοις διειργόμενα· τραχείαις τε χρῆσθαι πολλαχῇ
καὶ ἀντιτύποις ταῖς συμβολαῖς οὐδὲν αὐτῇ διαφέρει, οἷαι 20
γίνονται τῶν λογάδην συντιθεμένων ἐν οἰκοδομίαις λίθων αἱ
μὴ εὐγώνιοι καὶ μὴ συνεξεσμέναι βάσεις, ἀργαὶ δέ τινες καὶ
[211]
harmoniously blended. How I am to say the third is formed I am
at a loss to know—“my mind is too divided to utter truth”[173]: I
cannot see whether it is formed by eliminating the two extremes
or by fusing them—it is not easy to hit on any clear answer.
Perhaps, then, it is better to say that it is by relaxation and
tension of the extremes that the means, which are very numerous,
arise. The case is not as in music, where the middle note is
equally removed from the lowest and the highest. The middle
style in writing does not in the same way stand at an equal
distance from each of the two extremes; “middle” is here a
vague general term, like “herd,” “heap,” and many others. But
the present is not the right time for the investigation of this
particular point. I must say what I undertook to say with
regard to the several styles—not all that I could (I should need
a very long treatise to do that), but just the most salient points.
CHAPTER XXII
AUSTERE COMPOSITION
The characteristic feature of the austere arrangement is
this:—It requires that the words should be like columns firmly
planted and placed in strong positions, so that each word should
be seen on every side, and that the parts should be at appreciable
distances from one another, being separated by perceptible intervals.
It does not in the least shrink from using frequently harsh
sound-clashings which jar on the ear; like blocks of building stone
that are laid together unworked, blocks that are not square
and smooth, but preserve their natural roughness and irregularity.
1 εὔκρατον EF: κοινὴν PMV 2 κατὰ E: κατὰ τὴν FPMV 3 μίξιν F 4
ἦι P: ἦν F || κατὰ τὴν FPMV: κατὰ E 5 τε καὶ τὴν PMV: τε καὶ F: καὶ
E 6 ἐν om. P 7 νήτης F: νεάτης PMV 8 χαρακτὴρ om. PV 9 ἴσως F
11 ὥσπερ F: ὡς PMV 12 καὶ F: om. PMV || ὅσα εἰπεῖν codd.: ἂν ins.
Schaeferus 13 ἄν μοι F: ἂν οἶμαι PMV || δεήσειε F: δεήσει P: δεήσειν
MV 17 περιφερίας F 18 διατάσεις F 20 οἷαι F: οἳ P: οἷον MV 21
αἱ μη F: αἱ μὴτε P, MV 22 καὶ μὴ F: μὴδε P || ἀργαὶ δὲ] γὰρ αἷδε F
1. Here (and in 246 11) it is open to
question whether κοινήν does not fit the
context better than εὔκρατον.
2. The passage of Pindar is quoted
in Cic. Ep. ad Att. xiii. 38 “nunc
me iuva, mi Attice, consilio, ‘πότερον
δίκᾳ τεῖχος ὕψιον,’ id est utrum aperte
hominem asperner et respuam, ‘ἢ σκολιαῖς
ἀπάταις.’ ut enim Pindaro sic ‘δίχα μοι
νόος ἀτρέκειαν εἰπεῖν.’ omnino moribus
meis illud aptius, sed hoc fortasse
temporibus.”
3. κατὰ μῖξιν: sc. τῶν ἄκρων. —Cp.
de Demosth. c. 36 οἱ δὲ συνθέντες ἀφ’
ἑκατέρας τὰ χρησιμώτατα τὴν μικτὴν καὶ
μέσην ἐζήλωσαν ἀγωγήν.
4. μή ποτ’ ... ᾖ: a favourite Platonic
usage, e.g. Gorgias 462 E μὴ ἀγροικότερον
ᾖ τὸ ἀληθὲς εἰπεῖν, Apol. 39 A ἀλλὰ μὴ
οὐ τοῦτ’ ᾖ χαλεπόν, ὦ ἄνδρες, θάνατον
ἐκφυγεῖν, ἀλλὰ πολὺ χαλεπώτερον πονηρίαν.
5. The intermediate, or eclectic, styles
are numerous and differ greatly according
as they relax or strain the extreme, or
pronounced, styles: cp. de Demosth. c. 37
init.
8. A point worth considering is how
far this may seem to make for or against
the view that the Dionysian doctrine
of styles is Peripatetic in origin, being
derived from Theophrastus.
10. σωρός: cp. σωρείτης (Lat. acervalis,
Cic. de Div. ii. 4. 11), in the sense
which it bears in Hor. Ep. ii. 1. 45-47
and Cic. Academ. ii. 16. 49.
15. Batteux (p. 249) would illustrate
the austere style from Rousseau’s Ode
i. 2 (tirée du Psaume xviii.), “Les cieux
instruisent la terre | À révérer leur
auteur; | Tout ce que leur globe enserre |
Célèbre un Dieu créateur,” etc.—With
c. 22 of the C.V. should be compared,
throughout, cc. 38, 39 of the de Demosth.
18. ἀπέχειν τε κτλ.: i.e. it (the austere
style) aims at dividing its clauses from
one another by appreciable pauses.
[212-3]
αὐτοσχέδιοι· μεγάλοις τε καὶ διαβεβηκόσιν εἰς πλάτος ὀνόμασιν
ὡς τὰ πολλὰ μηκύνεσθαι φιλεῖ· τὸ γὰρ εἰς βραχείας συλλαβὰς
συνάγεσθαι πολέμιον αὐτῇ, πλὴν εἴ ποτε ἀνάγκη βιάζοιτο.
ἐν μὲν δὴ τοῖς ὀνόμασι ταῦτα πειρᾶται διώκειν καὶ
τούτων γλίχεται· ἐν δὲ τοῖς κώλοις ταῦτά τε ὁμοίως ἐπιτηδεύει 5
καὶ τοὺς ῥυθμοὺς τοὺς ἀξιωματικοὺς καὶ μεγαλοπρεπεῖς,
καὶ οὔτε πάρισα βούλεται τὰ κῶλα ἀλλήλοις εἶναι οὔτε
παρόμοια οὔτε ἀναγκαίᾳ δουλεύοντα ἀκολουθίᾳ, ἀλλ’ εὐγενῆ
καὶ λαμπρὰ καὶ ἐλεύθερα, φύσει τ’ ἐοικέναι μᾶλλον αὐτὰ
βούλεται ἢ τέχνῃ, καὶ κατὰ πάθος λέγεσθαι μᾶλλον ἢ κατ’ 10
ἦθος. περιόδους δὲ συντιθέναι συναπαρτιζούσας ἑαυταῖς τὸν
νοῦν τὰ πολλὰ μὲν οὐδὲ βούλεται· εἰ δέ ποτ’ αὐτομάτως ἐπὶ
τοῦτο κατενεχθείη, τὸ ἀνεπιτήδευτον ἐμφαίνειν θέλει καὶ
ἀφελές, οὔτε προσθήκαις τισὶν ὀνομάτων, ἵνα ὁ κύκλος
ἐκπληρωθῇ, μηδὲν ὠφελούσαις τὸν νοῦν χρωμένη, οὔτε ὅπως αἱ 15
βάσεις αὐτῶν γένοιντο θεατρικαί τινες ἢ γλαφυραί, σπουδὴν
ἔχουσα, οὐδ’ ἵνα τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ λέγοντος ὦσιν αὐτάρκεις
συμμετρουμένη μὰ Δία, οὐδ’ ἄλλην τινὰ [πραγματείαν] τοιαύτην
ἔχουσα ἐπιτήδευσιν οὐδεμίαν. ἔτι τῆς τοιαύτης ἐστὶν
ἁρμονίας καὶ ταῦτα ἴδια· ἀγχίστροφός ἐστι περὶ τὰς πτώσεις, 20
ποικίλη περὶ τοὺς σχηματισμούς, ὀλιγοσύνδεσμος, ἄναρθρος,
ἐν πολλοῖς ὑπεροπτικὴ τῆς ἀκολουθίας, ἥκιστ’ ἀνθηρά,
μεγαλόφρων, αὐθέκαστος, ἀκόμψευτος, τὸν ἀρχαϊσμὸν καὶ τὸν
πίνον ἔχουσα κάλλος.
ταύτης δὲ τῆς ἁρμονίας πολλοὶ μὲν ἐγένοντο ζηλωταὶ κατά 25
[213]
It is prone for the most part to expansion by means of great
spacious words. It objects to being confined to short syllables,
except under occasional stress of necessity.
In respect of the words, then, these are the aims which it
strives to attain, and to these it adheres. In its clauses it
pursues not only these objects but also impressive and stately
rhythms, and tries to make its clauses not parallel in structure
or sound, nor slaves to a rigid sequence, but noble, brilliant,
free. It wishes them to suggest nature rather than art, and to
stir emotion rather than to reflect character. And as to periods,
it does not, as a rule, even attempt to compose them in such
a way that the sense of each is complete in itself: if it ever
drifts into this accidentally, it seeks to emphasize its own unstudied
and simple character, neither using any supplementary
words which in no way aid the sense, merely in order that the
period may be fully rounded off, nor being anxious that the
periods should move smoothly or showily, nor nicely calculating
them so as to be just sufficient (if you please) for the speaker’s
breath, nor taking pains about any other such trifles. Further,
the arrangement in question is marked by flexibility in its use of
the cases, variety in the employment of figures, few connectives;
it lacks articles, it often disregards natural sequence; it is anything
rather than florid, it is aristocratic, plain-spoken, unvarnished;
an old-world mellowness constitutes its beauty.
This mode of composition was once zealously practised by
1 εἰς F: ἐκ PMV 2 συλλαβὰς F: συλλαβῆς PMV 3 ποτε καὶ ἡ ἀνάγκη F
5 ὁμοίως Us.: ὁμοίως ἢ οὐχ ἧττον P: οὐχ ἧττον ὁμοίως F: οὐχ ἧττον
MV 6 καὶ (alt.) EF: καὶ τοὺς PMV 7 καὶ οὔτε EF: ἐκλέγεται καὶ
οὔτε PMV || εἶναι om. P 8 παρ’ ὅμοια F || ἀναγκαίαι P, M: ἀνάγκηι
F, E: ἀναγκαῖα V || ἀκολουθίαι ἀλλ’ P, MV: ἀκόλουθα δὲ καὶ EF 9
λαμπρὰ EF: ἁπλᾶ PMV 10 ἡ τέχνη F || λέγεται EF 11 συναπαρτιζούσας
E: συναπαρτιζούσαις F: συναρτιζούσας PM: συναρμοζούσας V || ἑαυταῖς
EF (coniecerat Uptonus): om. PMV 12 οὐδὲ EF: οὔτε PMV 17 ἔχουσα
Sylburgius: ἔχουσαι libri || τοῦ δέοντος P 18 συμμετρουμένη
Schaeferus: συμμετρούμεναι libri || πραγματείαν secl. Usenerus 19
ἔχουσα P: ἔχουσαν FM: om. V || ἐπίτηδ’ οὐδεμι(αν) P: ἐπιτηδεύει οὐδὲ
FMV || ἔτι Uptonus: ἐπὶ libri || ἐστὶν F: om. PMV 20 καὶ FP: κατὰ MV
|| ἴδια] δὲ MV || ἀγχίστροφός PM: ἀντίρροπός F 21 ἄναρθρος] ἀναίσθιος
F 22 ὑπεροπτικὴ] ὑποδεκτικὴ F 23 ἀκόμψευστον F || τὸν EF: τὸ PMV
24 πῖνον libri || ἔχοντα F || κάλλος om. F 25 δὲ om. EF
8. Perhaps ἀνάγκῃ δουλεύοντα, ἀνακόλουθα
δὲ καί: with ἐπὶ (‘in the case
of’) retained in l. 19.
11. The meaning is that the austere
style does not seek for periods containing
a complete thought, and that, if
accidentally it stumbles into them, it
wishes to emphasize (by means of careful
abstention from all artificial means of
rounding off the sentence) the absence
of premeditation.—With regard to
Upton’s conjecture ἑαυταῖς it should be
noticed that this is only one of many
instances in which his acuteness has
since been confirmed by manuscript
authority.
18. μὰ Δία: cp. (for the order) νὴ Δία
120 9. μά is here used because of the
preceding negatives.
22. ἐν πολλοῖς ὑπεροπτική κτλ.: in
other words, such a style delights in
anacolutha.
19-24. It is to be noticed, in this and
other sentences, that Dionysius often so
writes as to reflect the character of the
style he is for the moment describing.—Baudat
(p. 58) illustrates the style in
question by quotations from Malherbe
and Boileau, and adds: “Chacun connaît
ces vers du Cor d’Alf. de Vigny:
Roncevaux! Roncevaux! dans ta sombre vallée
L’ombre du grand Roland n’est donc pas consolée!
Le son on y revient six fois, le son an
trois fois, le son au deux fois; ils sont
tous trois sourds et la rime en ée seule
est sonore. La succession de ces sons
produit une harmonie dure, qui a quelque
chose de voilé et de funèbre; on
croit entendre le grondement de l’orage.”
[214-5]
τε ποίησιν καὶ ἱστορίαν καὶ λόγους πολιτικούς, διαφέροντες
δὲ τῶν ἄλλων ἐν μὲν ἐπικῇ ποιήσει ὅ τε Κολοφώνιος Ἀντίμαχος
καὶ Ἐμπεδοκλῆς ὁ φυσικός, ἐν δὲ μελοποιίᾳ Πίνδαρος,
ἐν τραγῳδίᾳ δ’ Αἰσχύλος, ἐν ἱστορίᾳ δὲ Θουκυδίδης, ἐν δὲ
πολιτικοῖς λόγοις Ἀντιφῶν. ἐνταῦθα ἡ μὲν ὑπόθεσις ἀπῄτει 5
πολλὰ παρασχέσθαι τῶν εἰρημένων ἑκάστου παραδείγματα,
καὶ ἴσως οὐκ ἀηδὴς ἂν ὁ λόγος ἐγένετο πολλοῖς ὥσπερ ἄνθεσι
διαποικιλλόμενος τοῖς ἐαρινοῖς· ἀλλ’ ὑπέρμετρον ἔμελλε φανήσεσθαι
τὸ σύνταγμα καὶ σχολικὸν μᾶλλον ἢ παραγγελματικόν·
οὐ μὲν δὴ οὐδ’ ἀνεξέλεγκτα παραλιπεῖν τὰ ῥηθέντα ἥρμοττεν, 10
ὡς δὴ φανερὰ καὶ οὐ δεόμενα μαρτυρίας· ἔδει δέ πως τὸ
μέτριον ἀμφοῖν λαβεῖν καὶ μήτε πλεονάσαι τοῦ καιροῦ μήτ’
ἐλλιπεῖν τῆς πίστεως. τοῦτο δὴ πειράσομαι ποιῆσαι δείγματα
λαβὼν ὀλίγα παρὰ τῶν ἐπιφανεστάτων ἀνδρῶν. ποιητῶν μὲν
οὖν Πίνδαρος ἀρκέσει παραληφθείς, συγγραφέων δὲ Θουκυδίδης· 15
κράτιστοι γὰρ οὗτοι ποιηταὶ τῆς αὐστηρᾶς ἁρμονίας. ἀρχέτω
δὲ Πίνδαρος, καὶ τούτου διθύραμβός τις οὗ ἐστιν ἡ ἀρχή·
δεῦτ’ ἐν χορόν, Ὀλύμπιοι,
ἐπί τε κλυτὰν πέμπετε χάριν, θεοί,
πολύβατον οἵ τ’ ἄστεος ὀμφαλὸν θυόεντα 20
ἐν ταῖς ἱεραῖς Ἀθάναις
[215]
many authors in poetry, history, and civil oratory; pre-eminently
in epic poetry by Antimachus of Colophon and Empedocles the
natural philosopher, in lyric poetry by Pindar, in tragedy by
Aeschylus, in history by Thucydides, and in civil oratory by
Antiphon. At this point the subject would naturally call for the
presentation of numerous examples of each author cited, and
possibly the discourse would have been rendered not unattractive
if bedecked with many such flowers of spring. But then the
treatise would probably be felt to be excessively long—more like
a course of lectures than a manual. On the other hand, it would
not be fitting to leave the statements unsubstantiated, as though
they were obvious and not in need of proof. The right thing, no
doubt, is after all to take a sort of middle course, neither to
exceed all measure, nor yet to fall short of carrying conviction.
I will endeavour to do so by selecting a few samples from the
most distinguished authors. Among poets it will be enough to
cite Pindar, among prose-writers Thucydides; for these are the
best writers in the austere style of composition. Let Pindar
come first, and from him I take a dithyramb which begins—
Shed o’er our choir, Olympian Dominations,
The glory of your grace,
O ye who hallow with your visitations
The curious-carven place,
1 ποιητικοὺς F 2 ἐπικῇ Sylburgius: ἐπιεικη F: ἐπιεικεῖ PMV: om. E 5
ποιητικοῖς F 8 ἐαρινοῖς] ἀριθμ(οις) P 10 οὐδ’ ἀνεξέλεγκτα P: οὐδ’
ἀνεξέλεκτα M: οὐδ’ ἂν ἐξέλεγκτα F 12 μέτριον PV: μέτρον FM 13 δὴ
F 17 τίς οὖν ἐστιν ἀρχῆι P || ἡ ἀρχὴ E: ἀρχὴ FMV 18 δεῦτ’ EFM2V:
ΐδετ’ P, M1 || ἐν χορὸν EFV: ἐν σχορ(ὸν) P 19 πέμπεται P 20 οἵ
τ’] οἳ F || ἄστεως F (ἄστεος praestat idem 222 14) 21 ἀθήναις
libri: sed cf. n. crit. ad 222 14
2. For Antimachus of Colophon cp.
de Imitat. ii. 6 Ἀντίμαχος δὲ εὐτονίας
[ἐφρόντισεν] καὶ ἀγωνιστικῆς τραχύτητος
καὶ τοῦ συνήθους τῆς ἐξαλλαγῆς: Catullus
xcv. 20 “at populus tumido gaudeat
Antimacho”: Quintil. x. 1. 53 “contra
in Antimacho vis et gravitas et minime
vulgare eloquendi genus habet laudem.
sed quamvis ei secundas fere grammaticorum
consensus deferat, et affectibus et
iucunditate et dispositione et omnino
arte deficitur, ut plane manifesto appareat,
quanto sit aliud proximum esse,
aliud parem.” Plato’s admiration for
his poetry is said to have been great.
3. For Empedocles as being a physicist
rather than a poet see Aristot. Poet. i. 9
καὶ γὰρ ἂν ἰατρικὸν ἢ φυσικόν τι διὰ τῶν
μέτρων ἐκφέρωσιν, οὕτω καλεῖν εἰώθασιν,
οὐδὲν δὲ κοινόν ἐστιν Ὁμήρῳ καὶ Ἐμπεδοκλεῖ
πλὴν τὸ μέτρον, διὸ τὸν μὲν ποιητὴν
δίκαιον καλεῖν, τὸν δὲ φυσιολόγον μᾶλλον
ἢ ποιητήν. But on the other side cp.
Lucret. i. 731 “carmina quin etiam
divini pectoris eius | vociferantur et
exponunt praeclara reperta, | ut vix
humana videatur stirpe creatus.” The
fragments of Empedocles go far to justify
Lucretius’ opinion; and the true poetic
gifts of Empedocles, as of Lucretius himself,
may have been seen in his work as a
whole, even more than in its parts.
3, 4. The μεγαλοπρέπεια of Pindar is
emphasized in the de Imitat. B. vi. 2.—Similarly,
ibid., as to Aeschylus: ὁ δ’
οὖν Αἰσχύλος πρῶτος ὑψηλός τε καὶ τῆς
μεγαλοπρεπείας ἐχόμενος, κτλ.
5. For other references to Antiphon
see de Isaeo c. 20, de Thucyd. c. 51,
de Demosth. c. 8, Ep. i. ad Amm. c. 2,
and C.V. c. 10. Also Thucyd. viii. 68
Ἀντιφῶν ἀνὴρ Ἀθηναίων τῶν καθ’ ἑαυτὸν
ἀρετῇ τε οὐδενὸς δεύτερος καὶ κράτιστος
ἐνθυμηθῆναι γενόμενος καὶ ἃ γνοίη εἰπεῖν.—For
Thucydides himself see D.H.
passim (especially pp. 30-34, 104 ff.,
130 ff.).
17. G. S. Farnell Greek Lyric Poetry
p. 417: “The excited nature of the
rhythm throughout, and the rapturous
enthusiasm with which the approach
of spring is described, are eminently
characteristic of the dithyramb at its
best; and it is easy to understand how
such a style, in the hands of inferior
poets, degenerated into the florid inanity
which characterizes the later dithyrambic
poets.”
18. δεῦτ’ ἐν χορόν, ‘come ye to the
dance.’ “ἐν cum accus. (eight times in
Pindar, chiefly in the Aeolic odes) is a
relic of the original stage of the language
when this preposition had the functions
of the Latin in. It is preserved in
Boeotian, Thessalian, North-West Greek,
Eleian, Arcadian, Cyprian, and perhaps
even in the Attic ἔμβραχυ. The accusative
use was abandoned on the rise of ἐν-ς
(cf. ab-s), which, before a vowel, became
εἰς, before a consonant, ἐς” (Weir Smyth
Greek Melic Poets p. 359). P’s curious
reading ἐν σχορ(ὸν) is to be noticed.
20. ὀμφαλόν: the reference is to the
Athenian Acropolis, and the passage
suggested a fitting motto to Otto Jahn
for his Pausaniae Descriptio Arcis
Athenarum.
[216-7]
οἰχνεῖτε πανδαίδαλόν τ’ εὐκλέ’ ἀγοράν,
ἰοδέτων λάχετε στεφάνων τᾶν τ’ ἐαριδρόπων ἀοιδᾶν·
Διόθεν τέ με σὺν ἀγλαΐᾳ
ἴδετε πορευθέντ’ ἀοιδᾶν δεύτερον
ἐπὶ τὸν κισσοδέταν θεόν, 5
τὸν Βρόμιον ἐριβόαν τε βροτοὶ καλέομεν,
γόνον ὑπάτων μὲν πατέρων μέλπομεν
γυναικῶν τε Καδμεϊᾶν [ἔμολον].
ἐναργέα τελέων σάματ’ οὐ λανθάνει,
φοινικοεάνων ὁπότ’ οἰχθέντος Ὡρᾶν θαλάμου 10
εὔοδμον ἐπάγῃσιν ἔαρ φυτὰ νεκτάρεα·
τότε βάλλεται, τότ’ ἐπ’ ἄμβροτον χέρσον ἐραταὶ
ἴων φόβαι, ῥόδα τε κόμαισι μίγνυται
ἀχεῖ τ’ ὀμφαὶ μελέων σὺν αὐλοῖς,
ἀχεῖ τε Σεμέλαν ἑλικάμπυκα χοροί. 15
ταῦθ’ ὅτι μέν ἐστιν ἰσχυρὰ καὶ στιβαρὰ καὶ ἀξιωματικὰ καὶ
πολὺ τὸ αὐστηρὸν ἔχει τραχύνει τε ἀλύπως καὶ πικραίνει
μετρίως τὰς ἀκοὰς ἀναβέβληταί τε τοῖς χρόνοις καὶ διαβέβηκεν
ἐπὶ πολὺ ταῖς ἁρμονίαις καὶ οὐ τὸ θεατρικὸν δὴ
τοῦτο καὶ γλαφυρὸν ἐπιδείκνυται κάλλος ἀλλὰ τὸ ἀρχαϊκὸν 20
ἐκεῖνο καὶ αὐστηρόν, ἅπαντες ἂν εὖ οἶδ’ ὅτι μαρτυρήσειαν οἱ
[217]
The heart of Athens, steaming with oblations,
Wide-thronged with many a face.
Come, take your due of garlands violet-woven,
Of songs that burst forth when the buds are cloven.
Look on me—linked with music’s heaven-born glamour
Again have I drawn nigh
The Ivy-wreathed, on earth named Lord of Clamour,
Of the soul-thrilling cry.
We hymn the Babe that of the Maid Kadmeian
Sprang to the Sire throned in the empyrean.
By surest tokens is he manifested:—
What time the bridal bowers
Of Earth and Sun are by their crimson-vested
Warders flung wide, the Hours.
Then Spring, led on by flowers nectar-breathing,
O’er Earth the deathless flings
Violet and rose their love-locks interwreathing:
The voice of song outrings
An echo to the flutes; the dance his story
Echoes, and circlet-crowned Semele’s glory.[174]
That these lines are vigorous, weighty and dignified, and
possess much austerity; that, though rugged, they are not unpleasantly
so, and though harsh to the ear, are but so in due
measure; that they are slow in their time-movement, and present
broad effects of harmony; and that they exhibit not the showy
and decorative prettiness of our day, but the austere beauty of
a distant past: this will, I am sure, be attested by all readers
2 ιοδέτ(ων) P, MV: ἰαδέτων E: ὅδ’ ἐγὼν F || λαχετε P, EMV: λάχει F
(cp. 224 4) || τᾶν τ’ ἐαριδρόπων Us.: ἄντε ἀριδρόπων F: τ’
ἀντ’ ἐαριδρέπων P: τάν τε ἀριδρέπτων E: τ’ ἀντ’ ἐπαριδρέπων M: τῶν
ἐαριδρέπτων V || ἀοιδάν EFV: λοιβάν PM 3 Διόθεν τέ με] διατεθέντε
F 4 πορευθέντα· οἱ δἂν F: πορευθέντες ἀοιδαὶ (ἀοιδαῖς EV) ceteri
5 κισσοδέταν s: κισσοδόνταν deleto ν priore P (κισσοδόταν leg. Us.):
κισσοδαη F, EMV 6 τὸν P: ὃν ceteri || βρόμιον ὃν EFMV: βρόμι(ον).
τ(ον) P 7 μὲν P: τε EV: μέν τε FM || μέλπε P: μέλπομεν ceteri 8
ἔμολον P: σεμέλαν EV: σεμέλην FM 9 ἐναργέα τελέων Us.: ἐναργεα νεμέω
P, E: ἐν ἄλγεα τεμεῶι F: ἐν ἀργέα νεμέα MV || σάματ’ Us.: τεμάντιν F:
μάντιν cett. 10 φοινικοεάνων Kock: φοινικοεάων F: φοίνικος ἐανῶν
cett. || οἰχθόντες F || ὧραν F: ὥραν cett. || θάλαμοι F 11 εὐόαμον F
|| ἐπάγοισιν F: ἐπαΐωσιν cett. 12 τότε om. F || ἄμβροτον χέρσον EFV:
ἀμβρόταν (αμσβρόταν P) χθόν’ PM 12-13 ἐραταὶ (ἐρατὰς V) ἴων φόβαι
ῥόδατε EV: ἐρατέων φοβερόδατε F: ἐρατὰν· ΐον φοβεράτε P, M 13 κόμισι
F || μίγνυται PM: μίγνυνται EFV 14 ἀχεῖ τε F: οἰχνεῖ τ’ EPM: οἰχνεῖτε
V: ὑμνεῖτε s || ὀμφᾶι F: ὀμφᾶ E: ὀμφα V: ὀμφαῖς PM 15 ἀχεῖ τε
Hermannus: οἰχνεῖ τε libri: ὑμνεῖτε s 18 ἀναβέβληται F: ἀνακέκληται
PMV 19 ἐπὶ F: ἐπὶ τὸ PMV || καὶ οὐ τὸ Us.: καὶ οὔτε PMV: οὐ τὸ F 21
καὶ FM: καὶ τὸ PV || εὖ F: om. PMV
2. λαχεῖν would be infinitive for imperative,
or (rather) infinitive of purpose
after a verb of motion (just as Boeckh,
in l. 7 infra, reads μελπέμεν).
λοιβᾶν (λοιβάν PM) might be taken
to refer to honey, or to ‘drink-offerings
of spring-gathered herbs.’
4. δεύτερον: “post Iovem patrem
secundo loco ad Bacchum filium,” Boeckh.
Or the reference may be to a previous
visit of Pindar to Athens.
9. ‘The clear-seen tokens of his rites
are not unnoticed.’ In other words,
the return of spring indicates to the
god that his festival is at hand: cp.
Aristoph. Nub. 311 (Weir Smyth).
12. βάλλεται ... ἀχεῖ ... ἀχεῖ: schema
Pindaricum.
15. “Metre: paeonic-logaoedic as Ol.
10, Pyth. 5. Schmidt (Eurythmie 428)
regards the metre as logaoedic throughout.
The fragment belongs to the ἀπολελυμένα
μέλη, that is, it is not divided
into strophes,” Weir Smyth.
21. It is convenient to use ‘readers’
occasionally in the translation. But
‘hearers’ (οἱ ἀκούοντες) would more
naturally be used by a Greek: just as
λόγους (218 1) is strictly ‘discourse’
rather than ‘literature.’
[218-9]
μετρίαν ἔχοντες αἴσθησιν περὶ λόγους. τίνι δὲ κατασκευασθέντα
ἐπιτηδεύσει τοιαῦτα γέγονεν (οὐ γὰρ ἄνευ γε τέχνης
καὶ λόγου τινός, αὐτοματισμῷ δὲ καὶ τύχῃ χρησάμενα τοῦτον
εἴληφε τὸν χαρακτῆρα), ἐγὼ πειράσομαι δεικνύναι.
τὸ πρῶτον αὐτῷ κῶλον ἐκ τεττάρων σύγκειται λέξεως 5
μορίων, ῥήματος καὶ συνδέσμου καὶ δυεῖν προσηγορικῶν· τὸ
μὲν οὖν ῥῆμα καὶ ὁ σύνδεσμος συναλοιφῇ κερασθέντα οὐκ
ἀηδῆ πεποίηκε τὴν ἁρμονίαν· τὸ δὲ προσηγορικὸν τῷ συνδέσμῳ
συντιθέμενον ἀποτετράχυκεν ἀξιολόγως τὴν ἁρμογήν· τὸ γὰρ
ἐν χορὸν καὶ ἀντίτυπον καὶ οὐκ εὐεπές, τοῦ μὲν συνδέσμου 10
λήγοντος εἰς ἡμίφωνον στοιχεῖον τὸ ν̄, τοῦ δὲ προσηγορικοῦ
τὴν ἀρχὴν λαμβάνοντος ἀφ’ ἑνὸς τῶν ἀφώνων τοῦ χ̄· ἀσύμμικτα
δὲ τῇ φύσει ταῦτα τὰ στοιχεῖα καὶ ἀκόλλητα· οὐ γὰρ
πέφυκε κατὰ μίαν συλλαβὴν τοῦ χ̄ προτάττεσθαι τὸ ν̄,
ὥστε οὐδὲ συλλαβῶν ὅρια γινόμενα συνάπτει τὸν ἦχον, ἀλλ’ 15
ἀνάγκη σιωπήν τινα γενέσθαι μέσην ἀμφοῖν τὴν διορίζουσαν
ἑκατέρου τῶν γραμμάτων τὰς δυνάμεις. τὸ μὲν δὴ πρῶτον
κῶλον οὕτω τραχύνεται τῇ συνθέσει. κῶλα δέ με δέξαι
λέγειν οὐχ οἷς Ἀριστοφάνης ἢ τῶν ἄλλων τις μετρικῶν
διεκόσμησε τὰς ᾠδάς, ἀλλ’ οἷς ἡ φύσις ἀξιοῖ διαιρεῖν τὸν 20
λόγον καὶ ῥητόρων παῖδες τὰς περιόδους διαιροῦσι.
τὸ δὲ τούτῳ παρακείμενον κῶλον τὸ “ἐπί τε κλυτὰν
πέμπετε χάριν θεοί” διαβέβηκεν ἀπὸ τοῦ προτέρου διάβασιν
ἀξιόλογον καὶ περιείληφεν ἐν αὑτῷ πολλὰς ἁρμονίας ἀντιτύπους.
ἄρχει μὲν γὰρ αὐτοῦ στοιχεῖον ἓν τῶν φωνηέντων τὸ 25
ε̄ καὶ παράκειται ἑτέρῳ φωνήεντι τῷ ῑ· εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ ἔληγε
[219]
whose literary sense has been tolerably developed. I will attempt
to show by what method such results have been achieved, since
it is not by spontaneous accident, but by some kind of artistic
design, that this passage has acquired its characteristic form.
The first clause consists of four words—a verb, a connective,
and two appellatives. Now the mingling and the amalgamation
of the verb and the connective have produced a rhythm
which is not without its charm; but the combination of the
connective with the appellative has resulted in a junction of
considerable roughness. For the words ἐν χορόν are jarring
and uneuphonious, since the connective ends with the semivowel
ν, while the appellative begins with one of the mutes, χ.
These letters by their very nature cannot be blended and compacted,
since it is unnatural for the combination νχ to form part
of a single syllable; and so, when ν and χ are the boundaries of
adjacent syllables, the voice cannot be continuous, but there must
necessarily be a pause separating the letters if each of them is
uttered with its proper sound. So, then, the first clause is
roughened thus by the arrangement of its words. (You must
understand me to mean by “clauses” not those into which Aristophanes
or any of the other metrists has arranged the odes, but
those into which Nature insists on dividing the discourse and
into which the disciples of the rhetoricians divide their periods.)
The next clause to this—ἐπί τε κλυτὰν πέμπετε χάριν
θεοί—is separated from the former by a considerable interval
and includes within itself many dissonant collocations. It begins
with one of the vowels, ε, in close proximity to which is another
vowel, ι—the letter which came at the end of the preceding
1 λόγους ... τέχνης καὶ om. F || τινὶ δε P 3 δὲ καὶ F: καὶ PMV ||
χρησάμενον F 4 ἐγὼ PMV: ὃν ἐγὼ F 5 αὐτὸ F 10 καὶ ἀντίτυπον EF:
ἀντίτυπόν τε PMV || εὐεπὲς EF: εὐπετὲς PMV 13 τῆι φύσει P, M in marg.
F: om. F1: τῆ ῥύσει V 14 προτάττεσθαι F: προτετάχθε P, MV 15 οὐδὲ
PMV: οὔτε F || ὅρια] ὄρια F: δύο (β̄ P) μόρια EPM: δύο τὰ μόρια V ||
συνάπτει] τύπτει F 16 γενέσθαι EF: γίγνεσθαι P: γίνεσθαι MV || μέσοιν
EM 17 ἑκατέρων EF 18 με δέξαι PV: μ’ ἔδοξε FM 19 λέγειν F: νυνὶ
λέγειν PMV 22 δὲ τούτω PV: δ’ επι τούτων F, M 23 θεοὶ FM: om. PV ||
διαβέβηκεν F: βέβηκέ τε PMV 24 αὑτῷ] Sch., αὐτῷ libri 26 ἔληγεν ὁ
F: ἔληξεν τὸ P, MV
5. αὐτῷ: sc. in this author, or in this
passage. Cp. 168 1, 230 29.
13. Dionysius’ general object is to
show that there is a kind of intentional
discord or clash in Pindar’s dithyramb.
17. ‘If each of the letters is uttered
with its proper quality,’ viz. if we say ἐν
χορόν and not ἐγ χορόν.
19. Ἀριστοφάνης: not, of course, the
comic poet of Athens, but the grammarian
of Byzantium.—From this passage,
and from 278 5 infra, it would
appear that Aristophanes divided the
text of Pindar and other lyric poets
into metrical cola. Such cola are found
in the recently-discovered Bacchylides
papyrus (written probably in Dionysius’
own century—the first century B.C.),
which is also the earliest manuscript in
which accents are used.
21. ῥητόρων παῖδες: cp. 266 8 ζωγράφων
τε καὶ τορευτῶν παισίν, ‘the
generation of painters and sculptors.’
So ζωγράφων παῖδες Plato Legg. 769 B,
παῖδες ῥητόρων Luc. Anach. 19. The
term will include pupils or apprentices,
as well as sons: cp. Plato Rep. v. 467 A
ἢ οὐκ ᾔσθησαι τὰ περὶ τὰς τέχνας, οἷον
τοὺς τῶν κεραμέων παῖδας, ὡς πολὺν
χρόνον διακονοῦντες θεωροῦσι πρὶν ἅπτεσθαι
τοῦ κεραμεύειν; Earlier still we have
the schools of the bards—the Ὁμηρίδαι
or Ὁμήρου παῖδες, like ‘the sons of the
prophets’ in the Old Testament. As
used by later writers, the periphrasis
with παῖδες may be compared with οἱ
περί, οἱ ἀμφί (cp. note on 194 20 supra).
26. “The passages relating to Ὀλύμπιοι
ἐπί, and καὶ Ἀθηναίων (Thuc. i. 1),
where the word in each case is said to end
in ι, have led some persons to suppose that
Dionysius pronounced οι and αι as real
diphthongs of two vowels ending in ι.
We know, however, that at this time αι
was a single vowel ε prolonged, and that
it was only called a diphthong because
written with two letters, just as ea in
each, great are often spoken of as a
diphthong, in place of a digraph. We
know also that ι subscript was not pronounced,
and yet Dionysius speaks of
ἀγλαΐᾳ as ending with ι. Consequently
there is no need to suppose that οι was
a real diphthong either. The language
is merely orthographical. As to the
amount of pause, we find similar combinations
within the same Greek word:
οι and ε in οἴεται, ν and δ in ἄνδρα, αι
and α in Αἴας; while ν before τ is quite
common as in ὄντων, and ν before π, κ
becomes μ, γ, as in ἔμπορος, ἐγκρατής.
Hence much of this criticism may be
fanciful. But it is certain that there is
a different feeling respecting the collision
of letters which end and begin a word,
and those which come together in the
same word. Thus in French poetry
open vowels are entirely forbidden. It
is impossible to say ‘cela ira’ in serious
French verse. Yet ‘haïr’ is quite admissible.
Hence there may be some
foundation for the preceding observations,
which, however, like many others
in the treatise, ride a theory very hard,”
A. J. E. [The observations of the critic,
himself, must obviously be accepted
with considerable reserve: see, for example,
the note on 230 19 infra.]
[220-1]
τὸ πρὸ αὐτοῦ. οὐ συναλείφεται δὲ οὐδὲ ταῦτ’ ἀλλήλοις, οὐδὲ
προτάττεται κατὰ μίαν συλλαβὴν τὸ ῑ τοῦ ε̄· σιωπὴ δέ τις
μεταξὺ ἀμφοῖν γίνεται, διερείδουσα τῶν μορίων ἑκάτερον καὶ
τὴν βάσιν αὐτοῖς ἀποδιδοῦσα ἀσφαλῆ. ἐν δὲ τῇ κατὰ μέρος
συνθέσει τοῦ κώλου τοῖς μὲν ἐπί τε συνδέσμοις ἀφ’ ὧν 5
ἄρχεται τὸ κῶλον, εἴτε ἄρα πρόθεσιν αὐτῶν δεῖ τὸ ἡγούμενον
καλεῖν, τὸ προσηγορικὸν ἐπικείμενον μόριον τὸ κλυτὰν
ἀντίτυπον πεποίηκε καὶ τραχεῖαν τὴν σύνθεσιν· κατὰ τί
ποτε; ὅτι βούλεται μὲν εἶναι βραχεῖα ἡ πρώτη συλλαβὴ
τοῦ κλυτάν, μακροτέρα δ’ ἐστὶ τῆς βραχείας ἐξ ἀφώνου τε 10
καὶ ἡμιφώνου καὶ φωνήεντος συνεστῶσα. τὸ δὲ μὴ εἰλικρινῶς
αὐτῆς βραχὺ καὶ ἅμα τὸ ἐν τῇ κράσει τῶν γραμμάτων
δυσεκφόρητον ἀναβολήν τε ποιεῖ καὶ ἐγκοπὴν τῆς ἁρμονίας.
εἰ γοῦν τὸ κ̄ τις ἀφέλοι τῆς συλλαβῆς καὶ ποιήσειεν ἐπί
τε λυτάν, λυθήσεται καὶ τὸ βραδὺ καὶ τὸ τραχὺ τῆς 15
ἁρμονίας. πάλιν τῷ κλυτὰν προσηγορικῷ τὸ πέμπετε
ῥηματικὸν ἐπικείμενον οὐκ ἔχει συνῳδὸν οὐδ’ εὐκέραστον τὸν
ἦχον, ἀλλ’ ἀνάγκη στηριχθῆναι τὸ ν̄ καὶ πιεσθέντος ἱκανῶς
τοῦ στόματος τότε ἀκουστὸν γενέσθαι τὸ π̄· οὐ γὰρ ὑποτακτικὸν
τῷ ν̄ τὸ π̄. τούτου δ’ αἴτιον ὁ τοῦ στόματος 20
σχηματισμὸς οὔτε κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν τόπον οὔτε τῷ αὐτῷ
τρόπῳ τῶν γραμμάτων ἐκφέρων ἑκάτερον· τοῦ μὲν γὰρ ν̄
περὶ τὸν οὐρανὸν γίνεται ὁ ἦχος καὶ τῆς γλώττης ἄκροις
τοῖς ὀδοῦσι προσανισταμένης καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος διὰ τῶν
ῥωθώνων μεριζομένου, τοῦ δὲ π̄ μύσαντός τε τοῦ στόματος 25
[221]
clause. These letters, again, do not coalesce with one another,
nor can ι stand before ε in the same syllable. There is a certain
silence between the two letters, which thrusts apart the two
elements and gives each a firm position. In the detailed
arrangement of the clause the postposition of the appellative part
of speech κλυτάν to the connectives ἐπί τε with which the phrase
opens (though perhaps the first of these connectives should rather
be called a preposition) has made the composition dissonant and
harsh. For what reason? Because the first syllable of κλυτάν
is ostensibly short, but actually longer than the ordinary short,
since it is composed of a mute, a semi-vowel, and a vowel. It
is the want of unalloyed brevity in it, combined with the
difficulty of pronunciation involved in the combination of the
letters, that causes retardation and interruption in the harmony.
At all events, if you were to remove the κ from the syllable
and to make it ἐπί τε λυτάν, there would be an end to both
the slowness and the roughness of the arrangement. Further:
the verbal form πέμπετε, subjoined to the appellative κλυτάν,
does not produce a harmonious or well-tempered sound. The
ν must be firmly planted and the π be heard only when
the lips have been quite pressed together, for the π cannot
be tacked on to the ν. The reason of this is the configuration
of the mouth, which does not produce the two letters
either at the same spot or in the same way. ν is sounded
on the arch of the palate, with the tongue rising towards the
edge of the teeth and with the breath passing in separate
currents through the nostrils; π with the lips closed, the tongue
2 προτάττεται] παρ’ οἷς τάττεται F || τις FM: τις ἡ PV 4 ἀσφαλῆι· ἐν
δὴ P 5 τοῦ κώλου F: τῶν κώλων PMV || σύνδεσμον F 6 δεῖ] δὴ F 8
κατα τί ποτε· ὅτι F: κατά τι δήποτε PMV 9 μὲν εἶναι] μένειν F 11
καὶ ἡμιφώνου om. P || ἑστῶσα P 13 δυσεκφόρητον F: δυσεκφώνητον E:
δυσέκφορον PMV 14 ποιήσει EF 17 τὸν om. EF 18 ἀνάγκηι P 19 τοῦ
στόματος τότε E: το̈́ῦτοτε et in margine στομ(ατος) F: τοῦ π̄ τότε M:
τότε V: τούτου Ps 20 αἴτιον EF: αἴτιος PMV || στόματος] σχήματος V.
22 ἐκφέρον F || ἑκάτερον F: ἑκάτερον τὸ π̄ καὶ τὸ ν̄ PMV || νῦ FM:
om. PV 23 γίνεται F: τε γίνεται PMV || γλώττης F: γλώσσης PMV 24
προἀνισταμένης F, M 25 τε τοῦ στόματος om. F
15. λυτάν, λυθήσεται: possibly an intentional
play on words.
18. Clearly Dionysius does not believe
that, in this passage, final ν before initial
π was pronounced as μ—κλυτάν as
κλυτάμ: though final ν sometimes appears
under this form in inscriptions, as
also does medial ν in such compounds as
συμπόσιον. The literal meaning of the
passage seems to be, ‘The ν must be
firmly planted [pronounced distinctly,
dwelt upon], and κλυτὰν πέμπετε cannot
be run together in one word, as κλυταμπέμπετε
or the like might be.’
[222-3]
καὶ οὐδὲν τῆς γλώττης συνεργούσης τοῦ τε πνεύματος κατὰ
τὴν ἄνοιξιν τῶν χειλῶν τὸν ψόφον λαμβάνοντος ἀθροῦν, ὡς
καὶ πρότερον εἴρηταί μοι· ἐν δὲ τῷ μεταλαμβάνειν τὸ στόμα
σχηματισμὸν ἕτερον ἐξ ἑτέρου μήτε συγγενῆ μήτε παρόμοιον
ἐμπεριλαμβάνεταί τις χρόνος, ἐν ᾧ διίσταται τὸ λεῖόν τε 5
καὶ εὐεπὲς τῆς ἁρμονίας. καὶ ἅμα οὐδ’ ἡ προηγουμένη τοῦ
πέμπετε συλλαβὴ μαλακὸν ἔχει τὸν ἦχον ἀλλ’ ὑποτραχύνει
τὴν ἀκοὴν ἀρχομένη τε ἐξ ἀφώνου καὶ λήγουσα εἰς ἡμίφωνον.
τῷ τε χάριν τὸ θεοὶ παρακείμενον ἀνακόπτει τὸν ἦχον καὶ
ποιεῖ διερεισμὸν ἀξιόλογον τῶν μορίων, τοῦ μὲν εἰς ἡμίφωνον 10
λήγοντος τὸ ν̄, τοῦ δὲ ἄφωνον ἔχοντος ἡγούμενον τὸ θ̄·
οὐδενὸς δὲ πέφυκε προτάττεσθαι τῶν ἀφώνων τὰ ἡμίφωνα.
τούτοις ἐπιφέρεται τρίτον κῶλον τουτί “πολύβατον οἵ
τ’ ἄστεος ὀμφαλὸν θυόεντα ἐν ταῖς ἱεραῖς Ἀθάναις
οἰχνεῖτε.” ἐνταῦθα τῷ τε ὀμφαλὸν εἰς τὸ ν̄ λήγοντι τὸ 15
θυόεντα παρακείμενον ἀπὸ τοῦ θ̄ ἀρχόμενον ὁμοίαν ἀποδίδωσιν
ἀντιτυπίαν τῇ πρότερον, καὶ τῷ θυόεντα εἰς φωνῆεν
τὸ ᾱ λήγοντι ζευγνύμενον τὸ “ἐν ταῖς ἱεραῖς” ἀπὸ
φωνήεντος τοῦ ε̄ λαμβάνον τὴν ἀρχὴν διέσπακε τῷ μεταξὺ
χρόνῳ τὸν ἦχον οὐκ ὄντι ὀλίγῳ. τούτοις ἐκεῖνα ἕπεται 20
“πανδαίδαλόν τ’ εὐκλέ’ ἀγοράν”· τραχεῖα κἀνταῦθα καὶ
ἀντίτυπος ἡ συζυγία· ἡμιφώνῳ γὰρ ἄφωνον συνάπτεται τῷ
ν̄ τὸ τ̄ καὶ διαβέβηκεν ἀξιόλογον διάβασιν ὁ μεταξὺ τοῦ τε
προσηγορικοῦ τοῦ πανδαίδαλον καὶ τῆς συναλοιφῆς τῆς
συναπτομένης αὐτῷ χρόνος· μακραὶ μὲν γὰρ ἀμφότεραι, 25
μείζων δὲ οὐκ ὀλίγῳ τῆς μετρίας ἡ συναλείφουσα τὰ δύο
συλλαβή, ἐξ ἀφώνου τε καὶ δυεῖν συνεστῶσα φωνηέντων· εἰ
[223]
doing none of the work, and the breath forming a concentrated
noise when the lips are opened, as I have said before. While
the mouth is taking one after another shapes that are neither
akin nor alike, some time is consumed, during which the smoothness
and euphony of the arrangement is interrupted. Moreover,
the first syllable of πέμπετε has not a soft sound either, but
is rather rough to the ear, as it begins with a mute and ends with
a semi-vowel. θεοί coming next to χάριν pulls the sound up
short and makes an appreciable interval between the words, the
one ending with the semi-vowel ν, the other beginning with the
mute θ. And it is unnatural for a semi-vowel to stand before
any mute.
Next follows this third clause, πολύβατον οἵ τ’ ἄστεος
ὀμφαλὸν θυόεντα ἐν ταῖς ἱεραῖς Ἀθάναις οἰχνεῖτε. Here
θυόεντα which begins with θ, being placed next to ὀμφαλὸν
which ends in ν, produces a dissonance similar to that previously
mentioned; and ἐν ταῖς ἱεραῖς which opens with the vowel ε,
being linked to θυόεντα which ends with the vowel α, interrupts
the voice by the considerable interval of time there is between
them. Following these come the words πανδαίδαλόν τ’ εὐκλέ’
ἀγοράν. Here, too, the combination is rough and dissonant.
For the mute τ is joined to the semi-vowel ν; and the interval
between the appellative πανδαίδαλον and the elided syllable
which follows it is quite an appreciable gap; for both syllables
are long, but the syllable which unites the two letters ε and υ,
consisting as it does of a mute and two vowels, is considerably
longer than the average. At any rate, if the τ in the syllable
1 γλώττης F: γλώσσης PMV || συνεργούσης] μεριζομένη συνεργούσης F:
ἐνεργούσης PV 2 ὡς F: ὡς δὴ PMV 3 δὲ F: δὴ PMV || τὸ στόμα PMV: τὸν
F 5 εν ὧι διίσταται P: δι’ οὗ συνίσταται FMV || λεῖόν τε F: λεῖον
PMV 6 εὐεπὲς F: εὐπετὲς PV: εὐτελὲς M 7 μακρὸν P 8 ἀρχομένη F:
ἄρχουσά PMV 10 ποιεῖ F: ποιεῖ τὸν PMV || διερεισμὸν Us.: ἐρισμὸν
P: διορισμὸν FMV 11 τὸ ν̄ Sylburgius: τοῦ ν̄ (νῦ F) FMV: om. P ||
θῆτα F 14 ἀθάναις F: ἀθήναις PMV 16 θῆτα F 18 ζευγνύμενον F:
ἐπεζευγμένον PMV 19 λαμβάνοντος F 20 ἦχον] χρόνον F 21 τραχεῖα
κἀνταῦθα om. F 22 συνάπτεται F: συνάπτεται γράμμα PMV 23 διάβασιν
FM1: διάστασιν PVM2 25 συναπτομένης F: ἐπισυναπτομένης PMV ||
χρόνος F: om. PMV || μακρὰ et ἀμφότερα F || μὲν γὰρ] μὲν P: γὰρ F: γάρ
εἰσιν MV 26 μετρίας F: συμμετρίας PMV || τὰ δύο συλλαβή Us.: τὰς δύο
(β̄ P) συλλαβὰς libri 27 δυεῖν FP: δυοῖν MV
2. ὡς καὶ πρότερον εἴρηταί μοι: the
passages which seem to be meant (144 22
and 148 15) do not exactly tally with the
present one.
12. We must supply κατὰ μίαν συλλαβήν,
which words are found in 218 14
and 220 2 (cp. 230 4): otherwise we
are confronted with such examples to
the contrary as ἔνθα and (in this immediate
context) μεταλαμβάνειν, ἀρχόμενον, etc.
21. τ’ εὐ- are treated as one syllable.
So in 218 22, Dionysius probably intends
us to divide as follows:
ᴗ ᴗ –
ἐπιτε|κλυτάν,
etc.
23. In Dionysius’ own words, it might
be said that the interval between the
article ὁ and the noun χρόνος with which
it agrees is quite an ‘appreciable gap.’
Cp. Introduction, p. 12 supra.
24. τῆς συναλοιφῆς: the fused or
blended syllable—τ’ εὐ-.
[224-5]
γοῦν τις αὐτῆς ἀφέλοι τὸ τ̄ καὶ ποιήσειε πανδαίδαλον
εὐκλέ’ ἀγοράν, εἰς τὸ δίκαιον ἐλθοῦσα μέτρον εὐεπεστέραν
ποιήσει τὴν ἁρμονίαν.
ὅμοια τούτοις ἐστὶ κἀκεῖνα “ἰοδέτων λάχετε στεφάνων.”
παράκειται γὰρ ἡμίφωνα δύο ἀλλήλοις τὸ ν̄ καὶ τὸ λ̄, φυσικὴν 5
οὐκ ἔχοντα συζυγίαν τῷ μήτε κατὰ τοὺς αὐτοὺς ‹τόπους μήτε
καθ’› ὁμοίους σχηματισμοὺς τοῦ στόματος ἐκφέρεσθαι. καὶ τὰ
ἐπὶ τούτοις λεγόμενα μηκύνεταί τε ταῖς συλλαβαῖς καὶ διέστηκε
ταῖς ἁρμονίαις ἐπὶ πολύ “στεφάνων τᾶν τ’ ἐαριδρόπων”·
μακραὶ γὰρ καὶ δεῦρο συγκρούονται συλλαβαὶ τὸ δίκαιον 10
ὑπεραίρουσαι μέτρον, ἥ τε λήγουσα τοῦ στεφάνων μορίου δυσὶ
περιλαμβάνουσα ἡμιφώνοις φωνῆεν γράμμα φύσει μακρὸν καὶ
ἡ συναπτομένη ταύτῃ τρισὶ μηκυνομένη γράμμασιν ἀφώνῳ καὶ
φωνήεντι μακρῶς λεγομένῳ καὶ ἡμιφώνῳ· διερεισμός τε οὖν
γέγονε τοῖς μήκεσι τῶν συλλαβῶν, καὶ ἀντιτυπία τῇ παραθέσει 15
τῶν γραμμάτων, οὐκ ἔχοντος τοῦ τ̄ συνῳδὸν τῷ ν̄ τὸν ἦχον,
ὃ καὶ πρότερον εἴρηκα. παράκειται δὲ καὶ τῷ ἀοιδᾶν εἰς τὸ
ν̄ λήγοντι ἀπὸ τοῦ δ̄ ἀρχόμενον ἀφώνου τὸ Διόθεν τε καὶ
τῷ σὺν ἀγλαΐᾳ εἰς τὸ ῑ λήγοντι τὸ ἴδετε πορευθέντ’
ἀοιδᾶν ἀρχόμενον ἀπὸ τοῦ ῑ. πολλά τις ἂν εὕροι τοιαῦτα 20
ὅλην τὴν ᾠδὴν σκοπῶν.
ἵνα δὲ καὶ περὶ τῶν λοιπῶν εἰπεῖν ἐγγένηταί μοι,
Πινδάρου μὲν ἅλις ἔστω, Θουκυδίδου δὲ λαμβανέσθω λέξις ἡ
ἐκ τοῦ προοιμίου ἥδε·
Θουκυδίδης Ἀθηναῖος ξυνέγραψε τὸν πόλεμον τῶν 25
[225]
be removed and πανδαίδαλον εὐκλέ’ ἀγοράν be read, the syllable,
falling into the normal measure, will make the composition more
euphonious.
The words ἰοδέτων λάχετε στεφάνων are open to the same
criticism as those already mentioned. For here two semi-vowels,
ν and λ, come together, although they do not naturally admit of
amalgamation owing to the fact that they are not pronounced ‹at
the same regions nor› with the same configurations of the mouth.
The words that follow these have their syllables lengthened and
are widely divided from one another in arrangement: στεφάνων
τᾶν τ’ ἐαριδρόπων. For here also there is a concurrence of long
syllables which exceed the normal measure,—the final syllable
of the word στεφάνων which embraces between two semi-vowels
a vowel naturally long, and the syllable linked with it, which is
lengthened by means of three letters, a mute, a vowel pronounced
long, and a semi-vowel. Separation is produced by the lengths
of the syllables, and dissonance by the juxtaposition of the letters,
since the sound of τ does not accord with that of ν, as I have
said before. Next to ἀοιδᾶν, which ends in ν, comes Διόθεν τε,
which begins with the mute δ, and next to σὺν ἀγλαΐᾳ, which
ends in ι, comes ἴδετε πορευθέντ’ ἀοιδᾶν, which begins with ι.
Many such features may be found on a critical examination of
the whole ode.
But in order to leave myself time for dealing with what
remains, no more of Pindar. From Thucydides let us take this
passage of the Introduction:—
“Thucydides, an Athenian, composed this history of the war
1 ἀφέλοι Us. (coll. 220 14): ἀφέλοιτο libri 2 εὐπετεστέραν
PM1V: εὐεπεστέραν M2: εὐεπεστάτην F 4 ἰωδέτων M: ὃ δ’ ἐγὼν F ||
λάχετε στεφάνων PMV: λάχει F 5 γὰρ F: om. PMV 6 αὐτοὺς ὁμοίους F:
ὁμοίους PMV: τόπους μήτε καθ’ ins. Usenerus 9 τᾶν τ’] τ’ αὖτ’ P: τ’
αὖ M: ἄν τ’ F: τῶν τ’ V || ἐαριδρόπων F: ἔαριδρέπων PM: ἐἀριδρέπτων
V 13 ἡ] μὴ F || μηκυνομένη FM2: μηκυνθεῖσα PM1V 14 διερισμός
M: διορισμός V 17 ὃ F: ὡς PMV || δὲ] τε F || ἀοιδὰν codd.: λοιβὰν
s 18 ἀφώνου FM: ἄφωνον PV || διατεθὲν τε F: διόθεν τέ με PMV 19
πορευθέντα· οἱ δε F: πορευθέντες ἀοιδαν (-δὰν M, -δανὶ V) PMV 20
ἀρχόμενον] ἀρχαῖοι μόνον F 22 μοι F: μοι χρόνος PV: μοι χρόνων M 25
τῶν] τὸν P
1. ποιήσειε ... ποιήσει: cp. 220 14,
256 23.
6. If Usener’s supplement be not
accepted, we might read τῷ μηδὲ κατὰ
τοὺς ὁμοίους σχηματισμούς, κτλ.
10. δεῦρο συγκρούονται, ‘meet here
with a clash,’ as it were.
17. παράκειται κτλ.: viz. the ν of
ἀοιδᾶν comes next to the δ in διόθεν,
and the ι at the end of ἀγλαΐᾳ precedes
the ι in ἴδετε.—For ν and δ in juxtaposition
cp. English and (where the d
is often slurred in pronunciation) and,
on the other hand, English sound (where
the d is not original).
19. The ι at the end of ἀγλαΐᾳ seems,
therefore, to have been regarded by
Dionysius as a separate letter, and not
as an ι ἀνεκφώνητον. Perhaps it was
sounded in music; cp. the final e in
French. In Dionysius’ time it was not
uncommon to omit it even in writing:
πολλοὶ γὰρ χωρὶς τοῦ ι γράφουσι τὰς
δοτικάς, καὶ ἐκβάλλουσι δὲ τὸ ἔθος φυσικὴν
αἰτίαν οὐκ ἔχον (Strabo xiv. 1. 50).
22. ἐγγένηταί μοι: cp. de Lysia c. 16
ἵνα δὲ καὶ περὶ τῶν ἰδεῶν ἐγγένηταί μοι
τὰ προσήκοντα εἰπεῖν, κτλ.
23. Bircovius compares, with the
following passage of Thucydides, the
opening of Sallust’s Bell. Iug. v. 1:
“Bellum scripturus sum, quod populus
Romanus cum Iugurtha rege Numidarum
gessit, primum quia magnum et atrox
variaque victoria fuit, dehinc quia tum
primum superbiae nobilitatis obviam
itum est; quae contentio divina et
humana cuncta permiscuit eoque vecordiae
processit ut studiis civilibus bellum
atque vastitas Italiae finem faceret.”
24. τοῦ προοιμίου: probably the first
twenty-three chapters are meant—as
far as the word Ἐπίδαμνός ἐστι πόλις
κτλ.
25. In the English translation no
attempt has been made to reproduce the
style of the original Greek. For this
purpose the long sentences employed in
early English prose-writers are most
suitable; e.g. Francis Bacon’s rendering
(Considerations touching a War with
Spain iii. 516, in Harleian Miscellany
v. 84) of Thucyd. i. 23: “The truest
cause of this war, though least voiced,
I conceive to have been this: that the
Athenians being grown great, to the
terror of the Lacedemonians, did impose
upon them the necessity of a war;
but the causes that went abroad in
speeches were these,” etc. Thomas
Hobbes’ translation of the opening of
the History keeps close to the sentence-structure
of the original: “Thucydides,
an Athenian, wrote the war of
the Peloponnesians and the Athenians
as they warred against each other,
beginning to write as soon as the war
was on foot; with expectation it should
prove a great one, and most worthy the
relation of all that had been before it:
conjecturing so much, both from this,
that they flourished on both sides in all
manner of provision; and also because
he saw the rest of Greece siding with
the one or the other faction, some then
presently and some intending so to do,”
etc. Hobbes’ version is well known;
but the unpublished translation of
Francis Hickes [1566-1631], from which
the following extract has been taken by
the courtesy of the Librarian of Christ
Church, Oxford, is also of much interest:
“Thucydides the Athenian hath written
the warres of the Peloponnesians and
Athenians, with all the manner and
fashion of their fight, and tooke in hande
to put the same in writinge, as soone as
ever the said warres weare begone, for a
hope he had, that they would be great,
and more worthy of memorie, than all
the warres of former tyme have been:
conjecturinge so much, because he sawe
them both so richlie abound with all
provisions thereunto belonginge, and all
the rest of the Grecian nations, readie
to joyne themselves to the one side or
the other; some, presentlie upon their
fallinge out, and the rest intendinge to
do the like. This, no doubt, was the
greatest stirre, that ever was amonge
the Grecians, consistinge likewise partly
of the Barbarians, and to speake in a
word, of many and sundrie nations. As
for the acts achieved by them before the
tyme of this warre, or former matters
yet of more antiquitie, it is impossible
to finde out any certaintie, because the
tyme is so long past, since they weare
performed: but, by these conjectures,
which upon due examination of former
tymes, I believe to be true, I must
thinke they weare of no great moment,
either for the course of warre, or any
other respect. Now it is most probable,
that the country which we now call
Grece, had not in old tyme any settled
inhabitants, but did often change her
dwellers, who weare still easie to be
removed from their possessions if they
weare urged by any greater forces, for
when there was as yet no trade of
Merchandise amongst men: no free
entercourse of traffique one with another,
either by land or sea: none that tilled
any more ground, than what would
serve to sustaine their present lives:
none that had any money in this purse
nor any that planted the earth with
fruits for they knewe not how soone
others would come and bereave them of
it, their cities beinge all unwalled and
bearing the mind, that they should
everie where finde enough to serve their
turnes for their dailie sustenance, they
weare therefore easie to be driven out
of any place; and for that cause, did
nether strengthen themselves with great
cities, nor warlike furniture for defence.”
[226-7]
Πελοποννησίων καὶ Ἀθηναίων ὡς ἐπολέμησαν πρὸς ἀλλήλους,
ἀρξάμενος εὐθὺς καθισταμένου καὶ ἐλπίσας μέγαν
τε ἔσεσθαι καὶ ἀξιολογώτατον τῶν προγεγενημένων,
τεκμαιρόμενος ὅτι ἀκμάζοντές τε ᾖσαν ἐς αὐτὸν ἀμφότεροι
παρασκευῇ τῇ πάσῃ, καὶ τὸ ἄλλο Ἑλληνικὸν ὁρῶν 5
ξυνιστάμενον πρὸς ἑκατέρους, τὸ μὲν εὐθύς, τὸ δὲ καὶ
διανοούμενον. κίνησις γὰρ αὕτη μεγίστη δὴ τοῖς Ἕλλησιν
ἐγένετο καὶ μέρει τινὶ τῶν βαρβάρων, ὡς δ’ εἰπεῖν καὶ
ἐπὶ πλεῖστον ἀνθρώπων. τὰ γὰρ πρὸ αὐτῶν καὶ τὰ ἔτι
παλαιότερα σαφῶς μὲν εὑρεῖν διὰ χρόνου πλῆθος ἀδύνατα 10
ἦν· ἐκ δὲ τεκμηρίων, ὧν ἐπὶ μακρότατον σκοποῦντί μοι
πιστεῦσαι ξυμβαίνει, οὐ μεγάλα νομίζω γενέσθαι οὔτε
κατὰ τοὺς πολέμους οὔτε ἐς τὰ ἄλλα. φαίνεται γὰρ ἡ
νῦν Ἑλλὰς καλουμένη οὐ πάλαι βεβαίως οἰκουμένη, ἀλλὰ
μεταναστάσεις τε οὖσαι τὰ πρότερα καὶ ῥᾳδίως ἕκαστοι 15
τὴν ἑαυτῶν ἀπολείποντες βιαζόμενοι ὑπό τινων ἀεὶ
πλειόνων. τῆς γὰρ ἐμπορίας οὐκ οὔσης οὐδ’ ἐπιμιγνύντες
ἀδεῶς ἀλλήλοις οὔτε κατὰ γῆν οὔτε διὰ θαλάσσης,
νεμόμενοί τε τὰ ἑαυτῶν ἕκαστοι ὅσον ἀποζῆν καὶ περιουσίαν
χρημάτων οὐκ ἔχοντες οὐδὲ γῆν φυτεύοντες, ἄδηλον 20
[227]
which the Peloponnesians and the Athenians waged against one
another. He began as soon as the war broke out, in the expectation
that it would be great and memorable above all previous wars.
This he inferred from the fact that both parties were entering upon
it at the height of their military power, and from noticing that the
rest of the Greek races were ranging themselves on this side or on
that, or were intending to do so before long. No commotion ever
troubled the Greeks so greatly: it affected also a considerable
section of the barbarians, and one may even say the greater part of
mankind. Events previous to this, and events still more remote,
could not be clearly ascertained owing to lapse of time. But from
such evidence as I find I can trust however far back I go, I conclude
that they were not of great importance either from a military
or from any other point of view. It is clear that the country
now called Hellas was not securely settled in ancient times, but
that there were migrations in former days, various peoples without
hesitation leaving their own land when hard pressed by superior
numbers of successive invaders. Commerce did not exist, nor
did men mix freely with one another on land or by sea. Each
tribe aimed at getting a bare living out of the lands it occupied.
They had no reserve of capital, nor did they plant the ground
with fruit-trees, since it was uncertain, especially as they had
1 καὶ] τε καὶ P 4 τε om. EF || ἦσαν libri: sed apud Thucydidem lectio
potior ᾖσαν [“ᾖσαν F g Schol. Plat. Rep. 449 A Suid. Phot.:
ἦσαν cett.”] 6 πρὸς ... διανοούμενον om. P 9 πλεῖστον EF: πλεῖστων
sic P: πλείστων MV || καὶ τὰ EFs: καὶ PMV 10 ἐρεῖν P 11 μακρότερον
F 13 πολεμίους P || τὰ ἄλλα PMV: τ’ ἄλλα F 16 ἀπολιπόντες F 17
ἐπιμιγνῦντες ἀλλήλοις (om. ἀδεῶς) F 20 οὐδὲ γῆν φυτεύοντες om. F
4. ᾖσαν: cp. schol. ad Thucyd. i. 1
ᾖσαν] μετὰ σπουδῆς ἐπορεύοντο.
9. τά (before ἔτι) is omitted by the
Palatine and the Ambrosian MSS. in
de Thucyd. c. 20.
[228-9]
ὂν ὁπότε τις ἐπελθὼν καὶ ἀτειχίστων ἅμα ὄντων ἄλλος
ἀφαιρήσεται, τῆς τε καθ’ ἡμέραν ἀναγκαίου τροφῆς πανταχοῦ
ἂν ἡγούμενοι ἐπικρατεῖν οὐ χαλεπῶς ἀνίσταντο.
αὕτη ἡ λέξις ὅτι μὲν οὐκ ἔχει λείας οὐδὲ συνεξεσμένας
ἀκριβῶς τὰς ἁρμονίας οὐδ’ ἔστιν εὐεπὴς καὶ μαλακὴ καὶ 5
λεληθότως ὀλισθάνουσα διὰ τῆς ἀκοῆς ἀλλὰ πολὺ τὸ ἀντίτυπον
καὶ τραχὺ καὶ στρυφνὸν ἐμφαίνει, καὶ ὅτι πανηγυρικῆς
μὲν ἢ θεατρικῆς οὐδὲ κατὰ μικρὸν ἐφάπτεται χάριτος, ἀρχαϊκὸν
δέ τι καὶ αὔθαδες ἐπιδείκνυται κάλλος, ὡς πρὸς εἰδότας
ὁμοίως τοὺς εὐπαιδεύτους ἅπαντας οὐδὲν δέομαι λέγειν, ἄλλως 10
τε καὶ αὐτοῦ τοῦτό γε τοῦ συγγραφέως ὁμολογήσαντος, ὅτι
εἰς μὲν ἀκρόασιν ἧττον ἐπιτερπὴς ἡ γραφή ἐστι, “κτῆμα δ’
εἰσαεὶ μᾶλλον ἢ ἀγώνισμα εἰς τὸ παραυτίκα ἀκούειν
σύγκειται.” τίνα δ’ ἐστὶ τὰ θεωρήματα οἷς χρησάμενος ὁ
ἀνὴρ οὕτως ἀπηνῆ καὶ αὐστηρὰν πεποίηκε τὴν ἁρμονίαν, δι’ 15
ὀλίγων σοι σημανῶ· ῥᾴδιον γὰρ ἔσται μικρὰ μεγάλων εἶναι
δείγματα τοῖς μὴ χαλεπῶς ἐπὶ τὴν τοῦ ὁμοίου τε καὶ ἀκολούθου
μεταβαίνουσιν θεωρίαν.
[229]
no fortifications, when some invader would come and rob them
of their property. They also thought that they could command
the bare necessities of daily life anywhere; and so, for all these
reasons, they made no difficulty about giving up their land.”[175]
There is no need for me to say, when all educated people
know it as well as I, that this passage is not smooth or nicely
finished in its verbal arrangement, and is not euphonious and
soft, and does not glide imperceptibly through the ear, but shows
many features that are discordant and rough and harsh; that
it does not make the slightest approach to attaining the grace
appropriate to an oration delivered at a public festival or to a
speech on the stage, but is marked by a sort of antique and self-willed
beauty. Indeed, the historian himself admits that his
narrative is but little calculated to give pleasure when heard:
“it has been composed as a possession for all time rather than as
an essay to be recited at some particular competition.”[176] I will
briefly point out to you the principles by following which the
author has made the arrangement so rugged and austere. Small
things will readily serve you as samples of great: you can easily
go on noting resemblances and making comparisons for yourself.
3 ἀνίστατο F: ἀπανίσταντο Thucyd. 4 αὕτη EF: αὕτη πάλιν PMV ||
συνεζευγμένας EV 5 καὶ μαλακὴ EFM: om. PV 6 ὀλισθάνουσα P:
ὀλισθαίνουσα FMV 7 καὶ τραχὺ om. EF || στριφνὸν F 11 αὐτοῦ τοῦτό γε
PMV: αὐτοῦ τε F: αὐτοῦ E 14 ὁ ἀνὴρ EF: ἀνὴρ PMV 15 ἀπηνῆ M: ἀπεινῆ
F: εὐπινῆ PV || διαλόγων F1 16 σοι σημανῶ PM: σημανῶ EFV || ῥᾴδιον
Us.: ῥαιδία F: ῥαῖον P, MV || ἐσται F: ἐστι PMV 18 μεταβαίνουσαι F:
μεταβαίνουσι MV
3. For estimates of Thucydides’ style
in general cp. not only this passage of
Dionysius but also D.H. pp. 131-59,
175-82 (Text and Translation of Ep.
ii. ad Amm., together with notes and
some references to Marcellinus); Croiset
Thucydide: Livres i.-ii. pp. 102 ff. and
Histoire de la littérature grecque iv.
pp. 155 ff.; Girard Essai sur Thucydide
pp. 210-19; Blass Att. Bereds. i. pp.
203-44; Norden Kunstprosa i. pp. 96-101;
Jebb in Hellenica pp. 306 ff.
4. This long sentence (Il. 4-14) is,
itself, a good example of Greek word-order
and the lucidity possible to it.
7. Batteux (pp. 250-3) maintains,
in detail, that these comments on the
style of Thucydides would also apply to
a passage of Bossuet (in the Oraison
funèbre de Henriette Anne d’ Angleterre,
duchesse d’Orléans), which “a tous les
caractères d’une composition austère;
c’est partout un style robuste, nerveux,
âpre même quelquefois, et presque
rustique.” The passage is that which
describes the abasement of all human
grandeur by Death: “La voilà, malgré
ce grand cœur, cette princesse si admirée
et si chérie; la voilà, telle que la mort
nous l’a faite. Encore ce reste tel quel
va-t-il disparaître; cette ombre de gloire
va s’évanouir, et nous l’allons voir dépouillée
même de cette triste décoration.
Elle va descendre à ces sombres lieux,
à ces demeures souterraines, pour y
dormir dans la poussière avec les grands
de la terre, comme parle Job; avec ces
rois et ces princes anéantis, parmi
lesquels à peine peut-on la placer, tant
les rangs y sont pressés, tant la mort
est prompte à remplir ces places,” etc.
Batteux begins his careful and interesting
analysis as follows: “Nul choix
des sons. Malgré ce grand cœur est dur.
Cette princesse si est sifflant: si admirée
et si; choc de voyelles. La voilà telle
que la mort nous l’a faite: mots jetés
plutôt que placés. Encore ce reste tel
quel va-t-il dis: pointes de rochers. De
cette triste décoration n’est guère plus
doux. Et ces trois monosyllables brefs
et rocailleux, comme parle Job, etc.
9. αὔθαδες ... κάλλος: this happy
description of Thucydides’ style shows
that Dionysius saw in style a mirror of
the man (cp. ἀνδρὸς χαρακτὴρ ἐκ λόγου
γνωρίζεται, Menand. Fragm. 72, and
Dionys. H. Antiqq. Rom. i. 1 ἐπιεικῶς
γὰρ ἅπαντες νομίζουσιν εἰκόνας εἶναι τῆς
ἑκάστου ψυχῆς τοὺς λόγους).—The general
drift of Dionysius’ phrase is, of course,
commendatory: he does not (cp. 120 8,
9) mean ‘but such beauty as it (Thucydides’
style) displays is archaic and
perverse.’
12. These well-known words of Thucydides
(i. 22. 4) are quoted also in de
Thucyd. c. 7.—A scholium on Thucyd.
(l.c.) runs: κτῆμα] κέρδος. κτῆμα, τὴν
ἀλήθειαν· ἀγώνισμα, τὸν γλυκὺν λόγον.
αἰνίττεται δὲ τὰ μυθικὰ Ἡροδότου. The
passage is well elucidated by Lucian,
and by Pliny the Younger: (1) Lucian
de conscribenda historica c. 42 ὁ δ’ οὖν
Θουκυδίδης εὖ μάλα τοῦτ’ ἐνομοθέτησε, καὶ
διέκρινεν ἀρετὴν καὶ κακίαν συγγραφικήν,
ὁρῶν μάλιστα θαυμαζόμενον τὸν Ἡρόδοτον,
ἄχρι τοῦ καὶ Μούσας κληθῆναι αὐτοῦ τὰ
βιβλία. κτῆμα γάρ φησι μᾶλλον ἐς ἀεὶ
συγγράφειν ἤπερ ἐς τὸ παρὸν ἀγώνισμα,
καὶ μὴ τὸ μυθῶδες ἀσπάζεσθαι, ἀλλὰ τὴν
ἀλήθειαν τῶν γεγενημένων ἀπολείπειν τοῖς
ὕστερον, (2) Pliny Ep. v. 8 “nam plurimum
refert, ut Thucydides ait, κτῆμα
sit an ἀγώνισμα: quorum alterum oratio,
alterum historia est.”
13. εἰσαεί: Thucydides himself
no doubt wrote ἐς αἰεί: see Marcellinus
§ 52 for αἰεί (rather than ἀεί) as constituting
a mark of ἡ ἀρχαία Ἀτθίς in
Thucydides.
14. ὁ ἀνὴρ (divisim) should probably
be read: cp. 230 23.
17. The meaning possibly is, “you
can easily proceed with the same line
of observation right through work which
is consistently of a similar character to
this.”
[230-1]
αὐτίκα ἐν ἀρχῇ τῷ Ἀθηναῖος προσηγορικῷ τὸ ξυνέγραψε
ῥῆμα ἐφαρμοττόμενον διίστησιν ἀξιολόγως τὴν ἁρμονίαν·
οὐ γὰρ προτάττεται τὸ σ̄ τοῦ ξ̄ κατὰ συνεκφορὰν
τὴν ἐν μιᾷ συλλαβῇ γινομένην· δεῖ δὲ τοῦ σ̄ σιωπῇ καταληφθέντος
τότε ἀκουστὸν γενέσθαι τὸ ξ̄. τοῦτο δὲ τραχύτητα 5
ἐργάζεται καὶ ἀντιτυπίαν τὸ πάθος. ἔπειθ’ αἱ μετὰ τοῦτο
γινόμεναι συγκοπαὶ τῶν ἤχων, τοῦ τε ν̄ ‹καὶ τοῦ π̄› καὶ τοῦ
τ̄ καὶ τοῦ π̄ καὶ τοῦ κ̄ τετράκις ἑξῆς ἀλλήλοις παρακειμένων,
χαράττουσιν εὖ μάλα τὴν ἀκοὴν καὶ διασαλεύουσιν ἀξιολόγως
τὰς ἁρμονίας, ὅταν φῇ “τὸν πόλεμον τῶν Πελοποννησίων 10
καὶ Ἀθηναίων”· τούτων γὰρ τῶν μορίων τῆς λέξεως οὐδὲν
ὅ τι οὐ καταληφθῆναί τε δεῖ καὶ πιεσθῆναι πρότερον ὑπὸ
τοῦ στόματος περὶ τὸ τελευταῖον γράμμα, ἵνα τὸ συναπτόμενον
αὐτῷ τρανὴν καὶ καθαρὰν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ λάβῃ δύναμιν.
ἔτι πρὸς τούτοις ἡ τῶν φωνηέντων παράθεσις ἡ κατὰ τὴν 15
τελευταίαν τοῦ κώλου τοῦδε γενομένη ἐν τῷ καὶ Ἀθηναίων
διακέκρουκε τὸ συνεχὲς τῆς ἁρμονίας καὶ διέστακεν πάνυ
αἰσθητὸν τὸν μεταξὺ λαβοῦσα χρόνον· ἀκέραστοι γὰρ αἱ
φωναὶ τοῦ τε ῑ καὶ τοῦ ᾱ καὶ ἀποκόπτουσαι τὸν ἦχον· τὸ
δ’ εὐεπὲς οἱ συνεχεῖς τε καὶ οἱ συλλεαινόμενοι ποιοῦσιν ἦχοι. 20
καὶ αὖθις ἐν τῇ δευτέρᾳ περιόδῳ τὸ προηγούμενον κῶλον
τουτί “ἀρξάμενος εὐθὺς καθισταμένου” μετρίως ἁρμόσας
ὁ ἀνὴρ ὡς ἂν εὔφωνόν τε μάλιστα φαίνοιτο καὶ μαλακόν, τὸ
μετὰ τοῦτο πάλιν ἀποτραχύνει καὶ διασπᾷ τοῖς διαχαλάσμασι
τῶν ἁρμονιῶν· “καὶ ἐλπίσας μέγαν τε ἔσεσθαι καὶ 25
ἀξιολογώτατον τῶν προγεγενημένων.” τρὶς γὰρ ἀλλήλοις
ἑξῆς οὐ διὰ μακροῦ παράκειται τὰ φωνήεντα συγκρούσεις
ἐργαζόμενα καὶ ἀνακοπὰς καὶ οὐκ ἐῶντα τὴν ἀκρόασιν ἑνὸς
κώλου συνεχοῦς λαβεῖν φαντασίαν· ἥ τε περίοδος αὐτῷ
λήγουσα εἰς τὸ “τῶν προγεγενημένων” οὐκ ἔχει τὴν 30
βάσιν εὔγραμμον καὶ περιφερῆ, ἀλλ’ ἀκόρυφός τις φαίνεται
[231]
At the very beginning the verb ξυνέγραψε, being appended
to the appellative Ἀθηναῖος, makes an appreciable break in the
verbal structure, since σ is never placed before ξ with a view to
being pronounced in the same syllable with it. The sound
of σ must be sharply arrested by an interval of silence before
the ξ is heard; and this circumstance causes roughness and
dissonance. Moreover, the interruptions of the voice in what
follows, in consequence of the four successive juxtapositions νπ,
ντ, νπ, νκ, grate violently upon the ear, and cause a remarkable
succession of jolts when he says τὸν πόλεμον τῶν
Πελοποννησίων καὶ Ἀθηναίων. Of these words there is not
one that must not first be checked by the mouth with a stress
on the last letter, in order that the next letter to it may be
uttered clearly and purely with its own proper quality. Furthermore,
the juxtaposition of vowels which is found at the end of
this clause in the words καὶ Ἀθηναίων has broken and made a
gap in the continuity of the arrangement, by demanding quite
an appreciable interval, since the sounds of ι and α are unmingled
and there is an interruption of the voice between them: whereas
euphony is caused by sounds which are continuous and smoothly
blended.
Again, in the second period the first clause ἀρξάμενος εὐθὺς
καθισταμένου has been pretty successfully arranged by the author
in the way in which it would produce the most smooth and
euphonious effect. But he roughens and dislocates the very next
clause by sundering its joints: καὶ ἐλπίσας μέγαν τε ἔσεσθαι
καὶ ἀξιολογώτατον τῶν προγεγενημένων. For thrice in close
succession vowels are juxtaposed which cause clashings and
obstructed utterance, and make it impossible for the ear to take
in the impression of one continuous clause; and the period
which he ends with the words τῶν προγεγενημένων has no well-defined
and rounded close, but seems to be without beginning or
2 ἐφαμαρτόμεν(ον) F: ἐπαγόμενον E 6 μετὰ τούτων F 7 καὶ τοῦ π̄
(post ν̄) ins. Uptonus 8 παρακειμένων Us.: παρακείμεναι libri 11
οὐδὲν PMV: οὐθὲν EF 12 οὖν F: οὐχὶ EPMV: οὐ ‹σιωπῇ› Us. 13 ὑπὸ] ἐπὶ
P || τελευταῖαν F, MV: om. P 17 διέστακεν P, MV: διέστηκε EF 18
γὰρ EF: τε γὰρ PMV 21 καὶ αὖτις F: αὖθις PMV || τὸ F: om. PMV 24
ἀποτραχύνει PV: ἐπιτραχύνει FM || διαχαλάσμασιν P: ἀπὸχαλασμασι F 26
τρὶς Sauppe: τρία libri 27 ἑξῆς οὐ] ἐξ ἴσου P 29 λαβεῖν φαντασίαν
F: φαντασίαν λαμβάνειν PMV
9. Perhaps an effect analogous to that
of syncopation in music is meant.
10, 11. Different words, and a different
order, seem hardly possible here. If
πόλεμον were put after Ἀθηναίων,
the juxtaposed letters would be much
the same as in the existing arrangement.
16. τελευταίαν: it may be that some
word like συγκοπήν is to be supplied.
Or τελευτὴν may be read: or
τελευταῖα.
19. The present passage (lines 15-19)
shows, as Blass (Ancient Greek Pronunciation
p. 66) remarks, that the
educated pronunciation of the Augustan
period did not confuse αι with ε.
22-5. Here, again, the author would
hardly have much choice in the arrangement
of the words in question.
26. τρίς: viz. in the words καὶ ἐλπίσας,
τε ἔσεσθαι, καὶ ἀξιολογώτατον.
[232-3]
καὶ ἀκατάστροφος, ὥσπερ μέρος οὖσα τῆς δευτέρας ἀλλ’ οὐχὶ
[τῆς πρώτης] τέλος.
τὸ δ’ αὐτὸ πέπονθε καὶ ἡ τρίτη περίοδος· καὶ γὰρ ἐκείνης
ἀπερίγραφός ἐστι καὶ ἀνέδραστος ἡ βάσις τελευταῖον ἐχούσης
μόριον “τὸ δὲ καὶ διανοούμενον”· πολλὰς ἅμα καὶ αὐτὴ 5
περιέχουσα φωνηέντων τε πρὸς φωνήεντα ἀντιτυπίας καὶ
ἡμιφώνων πρὸς ἡμίφωνα καὶ ἄφωνα, ἅσπερ ἐργάζεται τὰ μὴ
συνῳδὰ τῇ φύσει τραχύτητας. ἵνα δὲ συνελὼν εἴπω, δώδεκά
που περιόδων οὐσῶν ἃς παρεθέμην, εἴ τις αὐτὰς συμμέτρως
μερίζοι πρὸς τὸ πνεῦμα, κώλων δὲ περιλαμβανομένων ἐν 10
ταύταις οὐκ ἐλαττόνων ἢ τριάκοντα, τὰ μὲν εὐεπῶς συγκείμενα
καὶ συνεξεσμένα ταῖς ἁρμονίαις οὐκ ἂν εὕροι τις ἓξ ἢ ἑπτὰ
τὰ πάντα κῶλα, φωνηέντων δὲ συμβολὰς ἐν ταῖς δώδεκα
περιόδοις ὀλίγου δεῖν τριάκοντα, ἡμιφώνων τε καὶ ἀφώνων
ἀντιτύπων καὶ πικρῶν καὶ δυσεκφόρων παραβολάς, ἐξ ὧν αἵ 15
τε ἀνακοπαὶ καὶ τὰ πολλὰ ἐγκαθίσματα τῇ λέξει γέγονε,
τοσαύτας τὸ πλῆθος ὥστε ὀλίγου δεῖν καθ’ ἕκαστον αὐτῆς
μόριον εἶναί τι τῶν τοιούτων. πολλὴ δὲ καὶ ἡ τῶν κώλων
ἀσυμμετρία πρὸς ἄλληλα καὶ ἡ τῶν περιόδων ἀνωμαλία καὶ
ἡ τῶν σχημάτων καινότης καὶ τὸ τῆς ἀκολουθίας ὑπεροπτικὸν 20
καὶ τὰ ἄλλα ὅσα χαρακτηρικὰ τῆς ἀκομψεύτου τε καὶ
αὐστηρᾶς ἐπελογισάμην ὄντα ἁρμονίας. ἅπαντα γὰρ διεξιέναι
πάλιν ἐπὶ τῶν παραδειγμάτων καὶ καταδαπανᾶν εἰς ταῦτα
τὸν χρόνον οὐκ ἀναγκαῖον ἡγοῦμαι.
XXIII
ἡ δὲ γλαφυρὰ [καὶ ἀνθηρὰ] σύνθεσις, ἣν δευτέραν ἐτιθέμην
[233]
conclusion, as if it were part of the second period and not its
termination.
The third period has the same characteristics. There is a
lack of roundness and stability in its foundation, since it has
for its concluding portion τὸ δὲ καὶ διανοούμενον. Further, it
too contains many clashings of vowel against vowel and of semi-vowels
against semi-vowels and mutes—discords produced by
things in their very nature inharmonious. To sum up, here
are some twelve periods adduced by me—if the breathing-space
be taken as the criterion for the division of period from
period; and they contain no fewer than thirty clauses. Yet of
these not six or seven clauses in all will be found to be
euphoniously composed and finished in their structure; while of
hiatus between vowels in the twelve periods there are almost
thirty instances, together with meetings of semi-vowels and mutes
which are dissonant, harsh, and hard to pronounce. It is to this
that the stoppages and the many retardations in the passage are
due; and so numerous are these concurrences that there is one of
the kind in almost every single section of it. There is a great
lack of symmetry in the clauses, great unevenness in the periods,
much innovation in the figures, disregard of sequence, and all the
other marks which I have already noted as characteristic of the
unadorned and austere style. I do not consider it necessary to
waste our time by going over the whole ground once more with
the illustrative passages.
CHAPTER XXIII
SMOOTH COMPOSITION
The smooth (or florid) mode of composition, which I regarded
2 τῆς πρώτης uncis inclusit Usenerus 4 ἐχούσης Us.: ἔχουσα libri
7 καὶ ... ἐργάζεται om. F || καὶ ἄφωνα P: om. FMV || ἅσπερ] ἅπερ PMV
8 τραχύτητας F: καὶ τραχύτητας PMV 9 εἴ τις] εἴπερ F 10 δὲ F:
δὲ τῶν PMV || περιλαμβανομένων F: ἐμπεριλαμβανομένων PMV 11 ταύταις
F: αὐταῖς PMV 12 τις ἑξῆς ἢ πάντα ταῦτα κῶλα F 13 συλλαβὰς F
14 καὶ ἀφώνων καὶ ἀντιτύπων P 17 τοσαύτας Uptonus: τοσαῦτα libri
(cf. 160 20) 20 σχημάτων F: σχηματισμῶν PMV 21 τὰ ἄλλα
PMV: τἆλλα F || χαρακτηρικὰ F: χαρακτηριστικὰ PV: χαρακτηριστικὰ καὶ
M || ἀκομψεύστου FMV 22 αὐστηρᾶς] ἰσχυρᾶς F || ἀπελογησάμην PM2:
ἐπελογησάμην M1V || διεξιέναι F: ἐπεξιέναι PMV 25 καὶ ἀνθηρὰ om. P
|| ἐτιθέμην F: ἐθέμην PMV
1. Dionysius seems to discern three
periods in the first sentence of Thucydides,
viz. (1) Θουκυδίδης ... ἀλλήλους
(2) ἀρξάμενος ... προσγεγενημένων, (3)
τεκμαιρόμενος ... διανοούμενον. The
general sense here is: ‘as there is no
connexion between ἀρξάμενος and τεκμαιρόμενος,
we must take the latter as
beginning a new period, and yet logically
ἀρξάμενος belongs to it.’ If the words
τῆς πρώτης are to be retained at all,
they might possibly be transported with
τῆς δευτέρας: ‘as though it were a part
of the first period and not the end of
the second.’
4. Usener’s ἐχούσης seems likely,
though the words καὶ γὰρ ... ἡ βάσις
might be regarded as parenthetical and
ἔχουσα as in agreement with περίοδος.
18. πολλὴ δὲ καί κτλ.: cp. Cic. Orat.
ix. 32. 33 “itaque numquam est (Thucydides)
numeratus orator ... sed, cum
mutila quaedam et hiantia locuti sunt,
quae vel sine magistro facere potuerunt,
germanos se putant esse Thucydidas.”
25. For ἀνθηρά cp. n. on 208 26 supra.—The
whole chapter should be compared
with de Demosth. c. 40. In c. 49 of
that treatise Dionysius refers expressly
to his previously written de Compositione:
εἰ δέ τις ἀπαιτήσει καὶ ταῦτ’ ἔτι
μαθεῖν ὅπῃ ποτ’ ἔχει, τοὺς ὑπομνηματισμοὺς
ἡμῶν λαβών, οὓς περὶ τῆς συνθέσεως
τῶν ὀνομάτων πεπραγματεύμεθα, πάντα
ὅσα ποθεῖ τῶν ἐνθάδε παραλειπομένων
εἴσεται (cp. c. 50 ibid.).
[234-5]
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
[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
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.
[236-7]
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.
[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:—
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.
[238-9]
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.
[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!”
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.
[240-1]
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
[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
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).
[242-3]
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
[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
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.
[244-5]
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
[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
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.
[246-7]
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
[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.
CHAPTER 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
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.”
[248-9]
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
[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
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.
[250-1]
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
[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.
CHAPTER 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
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.
[252-3]
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
[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
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 PV1: χερρόνησον
FMV2 || 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.
[254-5]
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
[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
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).
[256-7]
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.
[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]
3 ἀναγκαῖον V γρ M: ἂν δίκαιον PM1 6 τ(ις) P, V: τῆς M 8 δι’
MV: δις 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.
[258-9]
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
[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
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.
[260-1]
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
[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—
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.
[262-3]
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
[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
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.
[264-5]
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
[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
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.
[266-7]
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
[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
3 Ἀρίστωνος] κεφάλου P 4 εὐμελείας M1 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.
[268-9]
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
[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
1 πεσεῖν EP: ἐλθεῖν MV 3 σφαγίδας P: σφραγίδας V 4 ᾔδει ποιεῖν E
8 ἅμα Us.: ἀλλὰ PMV1: ἀλλὰ καὶ V2 21 δὲ EM: τε PV 23 μὲν inseruit
Sadaeus coll. comment. de Demosth. c. 52 || ἐπειδὰν E: ἐπεὶ PV: ἔπειτα
M 25 ποιήση EM1: ποιήσει PM2V 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.
[270-1]
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
[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.
CHAPTER XXVI
HOW VERSE CAN RESEMBLE PROSE
Concerning melodious metrical composition which bears
a close affinity to prose, my views are of the following kind.
The prime factor here too, just as in the case of poetical prose,
is the collocation of the words themselves; next, the composition
of the clauses; third, the arrangement of the periods. He who
wishes to succeed in this department must change the words
about and connect them with each other in manifold ways, and
make the clauses begin and end at various places within the
lines, not allowing their sense to be self-contained in separate
verses, but breaking up the measure. He must make the clauses
vary in length and form, and will often also reduce them to
phrases which are shorter than clauses, and will make the periods—those
at any rate which adjoin one another—neither equal in size
nor alike in construction; for an elastic treatment of rhythms and
metres seems to bring verse quite near to prose. Now those authors
who compose in epic or iambic verse, or use the other regular
metres, cannot diversify their poetical works with many metres
or rhythms, but must always adhere to the same metrical form.
But the lyric poets can include many metres and rhythms in a
single period. So that when the writers of monometers break up
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.”
[272-3]
συντιθέντες ὅταν διαλύσωσι τοὺς στίχους τοῖς κώλοις
διαλαμβάνοντες ἄλλοτε ἄλλως, διαχέουσι καὶ ἀφανίζουσι τὴν
ἀκρίβειαν τοῦ μέτρου, καὶ ὅταν τὰς περιόδους μεγέθει τε καὶ
σχήματι ποικίλας ποιῶσιν, εἰς λήθην ἐμβάλλουσιν ἡμᾶς τοῦ
μέτρου· οἱ δὲ μελοποιοὶ πολυμέτρους τὰς στροφὰς ἐργαζόμενοι 5
καὶ τῶν κώλων ἑκάστοτε πάλιν ἀνίσων τε ὄντων καὶ ἀνομοίων
ἀλλήλοις ἀνομοίους τε καὶ ἀνίσους ποιούμενοι τὰς διαιρέσεις,
δι’ ἄμφω δὲ ταῦτα οὐκ ἐῶντες, ἡμᾶς ὁμοειδοῦς ἀντίληψιν
λαβεῖν ῥυθμοῦ πολλὴν τὴν πρὸς τοὺς λόγους ὁμοιότητα κατασκευάζουσιν
ἐν τοῖς μέλεσιν, ἔνεστί τε καὶ τροπικῶν καὶ 10
ξένων καὶ γλωττηματικῶν καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ποιητικῶν ὀνομάτων
μενόντων ἐν τοῖς ποιήμασιν μηδὲν ἧττον αὐτὰ φαίνεσθαι
λόγῳ παραπλήσια.
μηδεὶς δὲ ὑπολαμβανέτω με ἀγνοεῖν ὅτι κακία ποιήματος
ἡ καλουμένη λογοείδεια δοκεῖ τις εἶναι, μηδὲ καταγινωσκέτω 15
μου ταύτην τὴν ἀμαθίαν, ὡς ἄρα ἐγὼ κακίαν τινὰ ἐν ἀρεταῖς
τάττω ποιημάτων ἢ λόγων· ὡς δὲ ἀξιῶ διαιρεῖν κἀν τούτοις
τὰ σπουδαῖα ἀπὸ τῶν μηδενὸς ἀξίων, ἀκούσας μαθέτω. ἐγὼ
τοὺς λόγους τὸν μὲν ἰδιώτην ἐπιστάμενος ὄντα, τὸν ἀδολέσχην
τοῦτον λέγω καὶ φλύαρον, τὸν δὲ πολιτικόν, ἐν ᾧ τὸ πολὺ 20
κατεσκευασμένον ἐστὶ καὶ ἔντεχνον, ὅ τι μὲν ἂν τῶν ποιημάτων
ὅμοιον εὑρίσκω τῷ φλυάρῳ καὶ ἀδολέσχῃ, γέλωτος ἄξιον
τίθεμαι, ὅ τι δ’ ἂν τῷ κατεσκευασμένῳ καὶ ἐντέχνῳ, ζήλου
καὶ σπουδῆς ἐπιτήδειον τυχάνειν οἴομαι. εἰ μὲν οὖν
διαφόρου προσηγορίας τῶν λόγων ἑκάτερος ἐτύγχανεν, ἀκόλουθον 25
ἦν ἂν καὶ τῶν ποιημάτων ἃ τούτοις ἔοικεν διαφόροις
ὀνόμασι καλεῖν ἑκάτερον· ἐπειδὴ δὲ ὅ τε σπουδαῖος καὶ ὁ
τοῦ μηδενὸς ἄξιος ὁμοίως καλεῖται λόγος, οὐκ ἂν ἁμαρτάνοι
τις τὰ μὲν ἐοικότα τῷ καλῷ λόγῳ ποιήματα καλὰ ἡγούμενος,
[273]
the lines by distributing them into clauses now one way now
another, they dissolve and efface the regularity of the metre; and
when they diversify the periods in size and form, they make us
forget the metre. On the other hand, the lyric poets compose
their strophes in many metres; and again, from the fact that
the clauses vary from time to time in length and form, they
make the divisions unlike in form and size. From both these
causes they hinder our apprehension of any uniform rhythm, and
so they produce, as by design, in lyric poems a great likeness to
prose. It is quite possible, moreover, for the poems to retain
many figurative, unfamiliar, exceptional, and otherwise poetical
words, and none the less to show a close resemblance to prose.
And let no one think me ignorant of the fact that the
so-called “pedestrian character” is commonly regarded as a vice
in poetry, or impute to me, of all persons, the folly of ranking
any bad quality among the virtues of poetry or prose. Let my
critic rather pay attention and learn how here once more I
claim to distinguish what merits serious consideration from what
is worthless. I observe that, among prose styles, there is on
the one side the uncultivated style, by which I mean the prevailing
frivolous gabble, and on the other side the language of
public life which is, in the main, studied and artistic; and so,
whenever I find any poetry which resembles the frivolous gabble
I have referred to, I regard it as beneath criticism. I think
that alone to be fit for serious imitation which resembles the
studied and artistic kind. Now, if each sort of prose had a
different appellation, it would have been only consistent to call
the corresponding sorts of poetry also by different names. But
since both the good and the worthless are called “prose,” it may
not be wrong to regard as noble and bad “poetry” that which
1 διαλύσωσι P: διαλείπωσι M: διαλίπωσι V 3 μεγέθη P 5 τὰσ τροφὰς P
6 ἑκάστοτε Us.: ἑκάστου libri || τε ὄντων M: ὄντων PV 8 ἄμφω δὲ M:
ἄμφω PV 11 τῶν ἄλλων Us.: τῶν ἄλλων τῶν libri 15 καλουμένη om. M ||
τις] τησ P || καταγινωσκέτω MV: καταγιγνωσκέτω P (sed cf. 278 7
et alibi) 17 κ’ ἂν P 19 τοὺς λόγους Schaeferus: τοῦ λόγου libri ||
ἁδολέσχην P 20 τὸ πολὺ PM: πολὺ τὸ V 21 ποιημάτων PM: ποιητῶν V
22 ἁδολέσχηι P || ἄξιον P: ἄξιον αὐτὸ MV 28 ὁμοίως compendio P: om. MV
4. εἰς λήθην ἐμβάλλουσιν: the following
Epigram of Callimachus will illustrate
Dionysius’ meaning:—
ἠῷοι Μελάνιππον ἐθάπτομεν, ἠελίου δέ
δυομένου Βασιλὼ κάτθανε παρθενική
αὐτοχερί· ζώειν γὰρ ἀδελφεὸν ἐν πυρὶ θεῖσα
οὐκ ἔτλη. δίδυμον δ’ οἶκος ἐσεῖδε κακόν
πατρὸς Ἀριστίπποιο, κατήφησεν δὲ Κυρήνη
πᾶσα τὸν εὔτεκνον χῆρον ἰδοῦσα δόμον.
(The text is that of Wilamowitz-Moellendorff
Callimachi Hymni et
Epigrammata p. 59. Upton, who
quotes the epigram, adds: “En tibi ea
omnia, quae tradit Dionysius, accurate
praestita: sententiae inaequales, disparia
membra: ipsi adeo versus dissecti,
nec sensu, nec verborum structura, nisi
in sequentem usque progrediatur, absoluta.
quibus factum est, ut prosaicae
orationi, salva tamen dignitate, quam
proxime accedatur.” Compare also the
first eight lines of Mimnermus Eleg. ii.)
6. ἑκάστοτε: Upton here conjectures
ἑκάστης, Schaefer ἑκάστων.
15. τις to be connected with κακία.
In the next line κακίαν τινά come close
together.
19. μαθέτω: supply πᾶς τις, or the
like, from μηδείς in l. 14. Cp. Hor.
Serm. i. 1. 1 “qui fit, Maecenas, ut
nemo, quam sibi sortem | seu ratio
dederit seu fors obiecerit, illa | contentus
vivat, laudet diversa sequentes?”
[274-5]
τὰ δὲ τῷ μοχθηρῷ πονηρά, οὐδὲν ὑπὸ τῆς τοῦ λόγου ὁμοειδείας
ταραττόμενος. κωλύσει γὰρ οὐδὲν ἡ τῆς ὀνομασίας ὁμοιότης
κατὰ διαφόρων ταττομένης πραγμάτων τὴν ἑκατέρου φύσιν
ὁρᾶν.
εἰρηκὼς δὴ καὶ περὶ τούτων, παραδείγματά σοι τῶν 5
εἰρημένων ὀλίγα θεὶς αὐτοῦ κατακλείσω τὸν λόγον. ἐκ μὲν
οὖν τῆς ἐπικῆς ποιήσεως ταῦτα ἀπόχρη·
αὐτὰρ ὅ γ’ ἐκ λιμένος προσέβη τρηχεῖαν ἀταρπόν·
ἓν μὲν δὴ τοῦτο κῶλον. ἕτερον δὲ
χῶρον ἀν’ ὑλήεντα 10
ἔλαττόν τε τοῦ προτέρου καὶ δίχα τέμνον τὸν στίχον. τρίτον
δὲ τουτί
δι’ ἄκριας
ἔλαττον κώλου κομμάτιον. τέταρτον δὲ
ᾗ οἱ Ἀθήνη 15
πέφραδε δῖον ὑφορβόν
ἐξ ἡμιστιχίων δύο συγκείμενον καὶ τοῖς προτέροις οὐδὲν
ἐοικός. ἔπειτα τὸ τελευταῖον
ὅ οἱ βιότοιο μάλιστα
κήδετο οἰκήων οὓς κτήσατο δῖος Ὀδυσσεύς 20
ἀτελῆ μὲν τὸν τρίτον ποιοῦν στίχον, τοῦ δὲ τετάρτου τῇ
προσθήκῃ τὴν ἀκρίβειαν ἀφῃρημένον. ἔπειτ’ αὖθις
τὸν δ’ ἄρ’ ἐνὶ προδόμῳ εὗρ’ ἥμενον
οὐ συνεκτρέχον οὐδὲ τοῦτο τῷ στίχῳ.
ἔνθα οἱ αὐλὴ 25
ὑψηλὴ δέδμητο
[275]
resembles noble and contemptible prose respectively, and not
to be in any way disturbed by mere identity of terms. The
application of similar names to different things will not prevent
us from discerning the true nature of the things in either case.
As I have gone so far as to deal with this subject, I will
end by subjoining a few examples of the features in question.
From epic poetry it will be enough to quote the following lines:—
But he from the haven went where the rugged pathway led.[194]
Here we have one clause. Observe the next—
Up the wooded land.
It is shorter than the other, and cuts the line in two. The
third is—
through the hills:
a segment still shorter than a clause. The fourth—
unto where Athene had said
That he should light on the goodly swineherd—
consists of two half-lines and is in no way like the former. Then
the conclusion—
the man who best
Gave heed to the goods of his lord, of the thralls that Odysseus
possessed,
which leaves the third line unfinished, while by the addition of
the fourth it loses all undue uniformity. Then again—
By the house-front sitting he found him,
where once more the words do not run out the full course of the
line.
there where the courtyard wall
Was builded tall.
1 οὐδὲν ... ταραττόμενος MV: om. P 3 ταττομένης Sauppius: ταττομένη
libri 5 εἰρηκὼς ... θεὶς Us.: καὶ περὶ τούτων [μὲν add. MV] ἅλις. ὧν
δὲ προυθέμην τὰ παραδείγματα θεὶς PMV 8 ὅ γ’] ὁ Hom. 11 τέμνον EV:
τέμνοντος PM 14 τέταρτον δὲ E: om. PMV 15 ᾗ Hom.: ἧ V: οἷ [fort.
οἷ] PM, E 22 ἔπειτ’ ... ἥμενον om. P 25 ἔνθά οἱ PM
3. κατὰ ... ταττομένης: cp. Ven. A
Schol. on Il. xv. 347 ὅτι Ζηνόδοτος
γράφει ἐπισσεύεσθον. συγχεῖται δὲ τὸ
δυϊκὸν κατὰ πλειόνων τασσόμενον.
6. αὐτοῦ, ‘here,’ ‘on the spot.’ Cp.
Diod. Sic. ii. 60 ἡμεῖς δὲ τὴν ἐν ἀρχῇ
τῆς βίβλου γεγενημένην ἐπαγγελίαν τετελεκότες
αὐτοῦ περιγράψομεν τήνδε τὴν
βίβλον.—With κατακλείσω cp. Antiq.
Rom. vii. 14 τελευτῶν δ’ ὁ Βροῦτος, εἰς
ἀπειλήν τινα τοιάνδε κατέκλεισε τὸν λόγον,
ὡς κτλ.
7. In Latin, Bircovius well compares
Virg. Aen. i. 180-91.
8. Dionysius’ point will be better
appreciated if the passage of the Odyssey
(xiv. 1-7) be given not bit by bit but
as a whole:—
αὐτὰρ ὅ γ’ ἐκ λιμένος προσέβη τρηχεῖαν ἀταρπὸν
χῶρον ἀν’ ὑλήεντα δι’ ἄκριας, ᾗ οἱ Ἀθήνη
πέφραδε δῖον ὑφορβόν, ὅ οἱ βιότοιο μάλιστα
κήδετο οἰκήων, οὓς κτήσατο δῖος Ὀδυσσεύς.
τὸν δ’ ἄρ’ ἐνὶ προδόμῳ εὗρ’ ἥμενον, ἔνθα οἱ αὐλὴ
ὑψηλὴ δέδμητο, περισκέπτῳ ἐνὶ χώρῳ,
καλή τε μεγάλῃ τε, περίδρομος.
15. Compare (in Latin) the opening
of Terence’s Phormio, if written continuously:
“Amicus summus meus et
popularis Geta heri ad me venit. erat
ei de ratiuncula iam pridem apud me
relicuom pauxillulum nummorum: id
ut conficerem. confeci: adfero. nam
erilem filium eius duxisse audio uxorem:
ei credo munus hoc corraditur. quam
inique comparatumst. ei qui minus
habent ut semper aliquid addant ditioribus!”
[276-7]
ἄνισον καὶ τοῦτο τῷ πρότερῳ. κἄπειτα ὁ ἑξῆς νοῦς ἀπερίοδος
ἐν κώλοις τε καὶ κόμμασι λεγόμενος· ἐπιθεὶς γὰρ
περισκέπτῳ ἐνὶ χώρῳ,
πάλιν ἐποίσει
καλή τε μεγάλη τε 5
βραχύτερον κώλου κομμάτιον, εἶτα
περίδρομος
ὄνομα καθ’ ἑαυτὸ νοῦν τινα ἔχον. εἶθ’ ἑξῆς τὰ ἄλλα τὸν
αὐτὸν κατασκευάσει τρόπον· τί γὰρ δεῖ μηκύνειν;
ἐκ δὲ τῆς ποιήσεως τῆς ἰαμβικῆς τὰ παρ’ Εὐριπίδου 10
ταυτί
Ὦ γαῖα πατρὶς ἣν Πέλοψ ὁρίζεται,
χαῖρ’,
τὸ πρῶτον ἄχρι τούτου κῶλον.
ὅς τε πέτραν Ἀρκάδων δυσχείμερον 15
‹Πὰν› ἐμβατεύεις
τὸ δεύτερον μέχρι τοῦδε.
ἔνθεν εὔχομαι γένος.
τοῦτο τρίτον. τὰ μὲν πρότερα μείζονα στίχου, τοῦτο δὲ
ἔλαττον. 20
Αὔγη γὰρ Ἀλέου παῖς με τῷ Τιρυνθίῳ
τίκτει λαθραίως Ἡρακλεῖ·
μετὰ τοῦτο
ξύνοιδ’ ὄρος
Παρθένιον, 25
οὐθέτερον αὐτῶν στίχῳ συμμετρούμενον. εἶτ’ αὖθις ἕτερον
στίχου τε ἔλαττον καὶ στίχου μεῖζον
[277]
This, too, does not balance the former. Further, the order of
ideas in the continuation of the passage is unperiodic, though the
words are cast into the form of clauses and sections. For, after
adding
In a place with a clear view round about,
we shall find him subjoining:
Massy and fair to behold,
which is a segment shorter than a clause. Next we find
Free on every side,
where the one Greek word (περίδρομος) by itself carries a certain
meaning. And so on: we shall find him elaborating everything
that follows in the same way. Why go into unnecessary detail?
From iambic poetry may be taken these lines of Euripides:—
Fatherland, ta’en by Pelops in possession,
Hail![195]
Thus far the first clause extends.
And thou, Pan, who haunt’st the stormy steeps
Of Arcady.[195]
So far the second extends.
Whereof I boast my birth.[195]
That is the third. The former are longer than a line; the last
is shorter.
Me Auge, Aleus’ daughter, not of wedlock
Bare to Tirynthian Heracles.[195]
And afterwards—
This knows
Yon hill Parthenian.[195]
Not one of these corresponds exactly to a line. Then once more
we find another clause which is from one point of view less than
a line and from the other longer—
1 καὶ V: κατὰ PM 4 ἐποίει P 5 καλήν τε μεγάλην τε PM 9 μηκύνειν
P: μηκύνειν τὸν λόγον MV 10 παρ’
εὐριπδι
sic P: εὐριπίδου MV 15 ὅς τε s: ὥστε PMV || δυσχείμερον
ἀρκάδων PMV: transposuit Sylburgius 16 Πὰν inseruit Musgravius 19
μείζονα om. P || στίχου MV:
στχι
P: στίχον s 21 αὐγὴ M: αὐτὴ PV 24 ξύνοιδ’ s: ξύνοιδε P: ξυνοὶδὲ MV
26 οὔθ’ ἕτερον PM: οὐδέτερον V
12. ὁρίζεται: sibi vindicat, ‘annexes.’—The
fragment of Euripides, taken as a
whole, runs thus in Nauck’s collection:—
ὦ γαῖα πατρίς, ἣν Πέλοψ ὁρίζεται,
χαῖρ’, ὅς τε πέτρον Ἀρκάδων δυσχείμερον
‹Πὰν› ἐμβατεύεις, ἔνθεν εὔχομαι γένος.
Αὔγη γὰρ Ἀλέου παῖς με τῷ Τιρυνθίῳ
τίκτει λαθραίως Ἡρακλεῖ· ξύνοιδ’ ὄρος
Παρθένιον, ἔνθα μητέρ’ ὠδίνων ἐμὴν
ἔλυσεν Εἰλείθυια.
25. Παρθένιον: cp. Callim. Hymn. in
Delum 70 φεῦγε μὲν Ἀρκαδίη, φεῦγεν δ’
ὄρος ἱερὸν Αὔγης | Παρθένιον, together
with the scholium ὄρος Ἀρκαδίας τὸ
Παρθένιον, ἔνθα τὴν Αὔγην τὴν Ἀλεοῦ
θυγατέρα, ἱέρειαν τῆς Ἀθηνᾶς, ἔφθειρεν
Ἡρακλῆς.
[278-9]
ἔνθα μητέρ’ ὠδίνων ἐμὴν
ἔλυσεν Εἰλείθυια
καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς τούτοις παραπλήσια.
ἐκ δὲ τῆς μελικῆς τὰ Σιμωνίδεια ταῦτα· γέγραπται δὲ
κατὰ διαστολὰς οὐχ ὧν Ἀριστοφάνης ἢ ἄλλος τις κατεσκεύασε 5
κώλων ἀλλ’ ὧν ὁ πεζὸς λόγος ἀπαιτεῖ. πρόσεχε δὴ τῷ μέλει
καὶ ἀναγίνωσκε κατὰ διαστολάς, καὶ εὖ ἴσθ’ ὅτι λήσεταί σε ὁ
ῥυθμὸς τῆς ᾠδῆς καὶ οὐχ ἕξεις συμβαλεῖν οὔτε στροφὴν οὔτε
ἀντίστροφον οὔτ’ ἐπῳδόν, ἀλλὰ φανήσεταί σοι λόγος εἷς
εἰρόμενος. ἔστι δὲ ἡ διὰ πελάγους φερομένη Δανάη τὰς 10
ἑαυτῆς ἀποδυρομένη τύχας·
ὅτε λάρνακι ἐν δαιδαλέᾳ
ἄνεμός τε μιν πνέων ‹ἐφόρει›
κινηθεῖσά τε λίμνα,
δείματι ἤριπεν οὐκ ἀδιάντοισι παρειαῖς 15
ἀμφί τε Περσέϊ βάλλε φίλαν χέρα
[279]
where the Travail-queen
From birth-pangs set my mother free.[196]
And similarly with the lines which follow these.
From lyric poetry the subjoined lines of Simonides may be
taken. They are written according to divisions: not into those
clauses for which Aristophanes or some other metrist laid down
his canons, but into those which are required by prose. Please
read the piece carefully by divisions: you may rest assured that
the rhythmical arrangement of the ode will escape you, and you
will be unable to guess which is the strophe or which the
antistrophe or which the epode, but you will think it all one
continuous piece of prose. The subject is Danaë, borne across
the sea lamenting her fate:—
And when, in the carved ark lying,
She felt it through darkness drifting
Before the drear wind’s sighing
And the great sea-ridges lifting,
She shuddered with terror, she brake into weeping,
And she folded her arms round Perseus sleeping;
5 ἄλλός τις P || κατεστεύασε P 6 ἀπετεῖ P || δὴ PM: δὲ V 7 κατὰ P:
ταῦτα κατὰ MV 9 ἀντίστροφον PM: ἀντιστροφὴν V || λόγος εἰσειρόμενος
P: λόγος οὑτωσὶ διειρόμενος MV 10 Δανάη] δ’ ἀν ἡ P 13 τέ μιν
Schneidewinus: τε μὴν PM: τ’ ἐμῇ V || ἐφόρει ante μιν Bergkius
inseruit, post πνέων Usenerus 14 τε Brunckius: δὲ PMV 15 ἤριπεν
Brunckius: ἔριπεν P: ἔρειπεν MV || οὐκ Thierschius: οὐτ’ P: οὔτ’ MV
4. Bircovius points out that Hor.
Carm. iii. 27. 33 ff. might be printed as
continuous prose, thus: “quae simul
centum tetigit potentem oppidis Creten:
‘Pater, o relictae filiae nomen, pietasque’
dixit ‘victa furore! unde quo veni? levis
una mors est virginum culpae. vigilansne
ploro turpe commissum, an vitiis carentem
ludit imago vana, quae porta
fugiens eburna somnium ducit?’” etc.
The short rhymeless lines of Matthew
Arnold’s Rugby Chapel might be run
together in the same way, e.g. “There
thou dost lie, in the gloom of the autumn
evening. But ah! that word, gloom, to
my mind brings thee back, in the light
of thy radiant vigour, again; in the
gloom of November we pass’d days not
dark at thy side; seasons impair’d not
the ray of thy buoyant cheerfulness
clear. Such thou wast! and I stand in
the autumn evening, and think of by-gone
evenings with thee.” The word-arrangement
from line to line is such
that this passage might almost be read
as prose, except for a certain rhythm
and for an occasional departure from the
word-order of ordinary prose.
5. Aristophanes: cp. note on 218 19
supra.
8. Compare, for example, the last
two stanzas, printed continuously, of
Tennyson’s In Memoriam cxv.: “Where
now the seamew pipes, or dives in
yonder greening gleam, and fly the
happy birds, that change their sky to
build and brood, that live their lives
from land to land; and in my breast
spring wakens too; and my regret
becomes an April violet, and buds and
blossoms like the rest.”
11. ἀποδυρομένη: probably the Danaë
was a θρῆνος, and in any case it illustrates,
to the full, the “maestius lacrimis
Simonideis” of Catullus (Carm. xxxviii.
8), or Wordsworth’s “one precious,
tender-hearted scroll | Of pure Simonides.”
Cp. also de Imitat. ii. 6. 2 καθ’ ὃ
βελτίων εὑρίσκεται καὶ Πινδάρου, τὸ οἰκτίζεσθαι
μὴ μεγαλοπρεπῶς ἀλλὰ παθητικῶς:
and Quintil. x. 1. 64 “Simonides, tenuis
alioqui, sermone proprio et iucunditate
quadam commendari potest; praecipua
tamen eius in commovenda miseratione
virtus, ut quidam in hac eum parte
omnibus eius operis auctoribus praeferant.”
12. Verse-translations of the Danaë will
be found also in J. A. Symonds’ Studies
of the Greek Poets i. 160, and in Walter
Headlam’s Book of Greek Verse pp. 49-51.
Headlam observes that the Danaë
is a passage extracted from a longer
poem, and that the best commentary on
it is Lucian’s Dialogues of the Sea 12.
Weir Smyth (Greek Lyric Poetry p. 321)
remarks: “It must be confessed that,
if we have all that Dionysius transcribed,
he has proved his point [viz.
that by an arrangement into διαστολαί
the poetical rhythm can be so obscured
that the reader will be unable to recognize
strophe, antistrophe, or epode] so
successfully that no one has been able
to demonstrate the existence of all three
parts of the triad. Wilamowitz (Isyllos
144) claims to have restored strophe
(ἄνεμος ... δούρατι), epode (χαλκεογόμφῳ
... δεινὸν ἦν), and antistrophe (καὶ ἐμῶν
...); ὅτε ... δαιδαλέᾳ belonging to
another triad. To accept this adjustment
one must have faith in the extremely
elastic ionics of the German
scholar. Nietzsche, R. M. 23. 481,
thought that 1-3 formed the end of the
strophe, 4-12 the antistrophe (1-3 = 10-12).
In v. 1 he omitted ἐν and read τ’
ἐμάνη πνείων with ἀλεγίζεις in 10, but
even then the dactyls vary with spondees
over frequently. By a series of reckless
conjectures Hartung extricated strophe
and antistrophe out of the lines, while
Blass’ (Philol. 32. 140) similar conclusion
is reached by conjectures only
less hazardous than those of Hartung.
Schneidewin and Bergk, adopting the
easier course, which refuses all credence
to Dionysius, found only antistrophe
and epode; and so, doubtfully, Michelangeli;
while Ahrens (Jahresber. des
Lyceums zu Hannover, 1853), in despair,
classed the fragment among the ἀπολελυμένα.
Since verses 2-3 may = 11-12,
I have followed Nietzsche, though with
much hesitation. The last seven verses
suit the character of a concluding epode.”
15. ἤριπεν = ἐξεπλάγη (same sense as
Usener’s conjecture φρίττεν).
[280-1]
εἶπέν τ’· ὦ τέκος,
οἷον ἔχω πόνον, σὺ δ’ ἀωτεῖς·
γαλαθηνῷ δ’ ἤθεϊ κνοώσσεις
ἐν ἀτερπέι δούρατι χαλκεογόμφῳ δίχα νυκτὸς ἀλαμπεῖ
κυανέῳ τε δνόφῳ σταλείς. 5
ἅλμαν δ’ ὕπερθεν τεᾶν κομᾶν βαθεῖαν
παριόντος κύματος οὐκ ἀλέγεις
οὐδ’ ἀνέμου φθόγγον, πορφυρέᾳ
κείμενος ἐν χλανίδι πρὸς κόλπῳ καλὸν πρόσωπον.
εἰ δέ τοι δεινὸν τό γε δεινὸν ἦν, 10
καί κεν ἐμῶν ῥημάτων λεπτὸν ὑπεῖχες οὖας·
κέλομαι, εὗδε βρέφος,
εὑδέτω δὲ πόντος, εὑδέτω ἄμετρον κακόν.
μεταβουλία δέ τις φανείη,
Ζεῦ πάτερ, ἐκ σέο· 15
ὅ τι δὴ θαρσαλέον ἔπος εὔχομαι
νόσφι δίκας, σύγγνωθί μοι.
τοιαῦτά ἐστι τὰ ὅμοια τοῖς καλοῖς λόγοις μέτρα καὶ μέλη,
διὰ ταύτας γινόμενα τὰς αἰτίας ἃς προεῖπόν σοι.
τοῦθ’ ἕξεις δῶρον ἡμέτερον, ὦ Ῥοῦφε, “πολλῶν ἀντάξιον 20
ἄλλων,” εἰ βουληθείης ἐν ταῖς χερσί τε αὐτὸ συνεχῶς ὥσπερ
[281]
And “Oh my baby,” she moaned, “for my lot
Of anguish!—but thou, thou carest not:
Adown sleep’s flood is thy child-soul sweeping,
Though beams brass-welded on every side
Make a darkness, even had the day not died
When they launched thee forth at gloaming-tide.
And the surf-crests fly o’er thy sunny hair
As the waves roll past—thou dost not care:
Neither carest thou for the wind’s shrill cry,
As lapped in my crimson cloak thou dost lie
On my breast, little face so fair—so fair!
Ah, were these sights, these sounds of fear
Fearsome to thee, that dainty ear
Would hearken my words—nay, nay, my dear,
Hear them not thou! Sleep, little one, sleep;
And slumber thou, O unrestful deep!
Sleep, measureless wrongs; let the past suffice:
And oh, may a new day’s dawn arise
On thy counsels, Zeus! O change them now!
But if aught be presumptuous in this my prayer,
If aught, O Father, of sin be there,
Forgive it thou.”[197]
Such are the verses and lyrics which resemble beautiful prose;
and they owe this resemblance to the causes which I have already
set forth to you.
Here, then, Rufus, is my gift to you, which you will find
“outweigh a multitude of others,”[198] if only you will keep it in
1 τέκος Athen. ix. 396 E: τέκνον PMV 2 σὺ δ’ ἀωτεῖς
Casaubonus: οὐδ’ αυταις P: σὺ δ’ αὖτε εἷς Athen. (l.c.) 3
ἐγαλαθηνωδει θει P, V: γαλαθηνῷ δ’ ἤτορι Athen.: corr. Bergkius ||
κνοώσσεισ P, V: κνώσσεις Athen. 4 δούρατι Guelf.: δούνατι PM:
δούναντι V || δίχα νυκτὸς ἀλαμπεῖ Us.: δενυκτι λαμπεῖ P, MV 5 σταλείς
Bergkius: ταδ’ εἰσ P, MV 6 ἅλμαν δ’ Bergkius: αὐλεαν δ’ P, V: αὐλαίαν
δ’ M 9 πρὸς κόλπῳ κ. πρ. Us.: πρόσωπον καλον πρόσωπον P: πρόσωπον
καλὸν MV 10 ἦν Sylburgius: ἦι P: ἦ M: ἢ V 11 καί M: κἀί V: κε cum
litura P || λεπτὸν s: λεπτῶν PMV 14 μαιτ(α)βουλία (i.e. μεταβουλία:
cp. 90 4 supra) P: μαιτ(α)βουλίου M: ματαιοβουλία V 17 νόσφι
δίκας Victorius: ηνοφι δικασ P: ἣν ὀφειδίασ MV 19 προεῖπά PMV (cf.
εἴπειεν P, Aristot. Rhet. 1408 a 32) 21 αὐτὸ Sylburgius: αὐτὰ PMV
4. δίχα νυκτός: cp. δίχα μελέτης τε
καὶ γυμνασίας (282 4), which may be an
unconscious echo of this passage. “To
me the expression seems to indicate
that Simonides took a view of the story
different from the ordinary one, and
imagined that the chest was not open
or boat-like but closed over,—a ‘Noah’s
ark.’ This would not have suited the
vase-painters, but there is nothing inconsistent
with it in the poem. Danaë
does not speak of seeing the waves, nor
of the wind ruffling the child’s hair, but
only of ἀνέμου φθόγγον—she heard it.
Hence I think the words imply—‘which,
even apart from its being night, would
be gloomy, and thou wert so launched
forth in the darksome gloaming.’ She
makes no reference to seeing the stars”
(A. S. Way).
5. Schneidewin reads ταθείς.
7. ἀλέγεις: rarely constructed with
the accusative case.
11. ἐμῶν ῥημάτων: constructio ad sensum
with ὑπεῖχες οὖας (= ὑπήκουες).
12. εὗδε βρέφος: the βαυκάλημα (‘cradle-song,
lullaby’) was familiar to the Greeks,
and the mother does not forget it amid
the perils of the sea. Cp. Theocr. xxiv.
7-9—
εὕδετ’ ἐμὰ βρέφεα γλυκερὸν καὶ ἐγέρσιμον ὕπνον·
εὕδετ’ ἐμὰ ψυχά, δύ’ ἀδελφεώ, εὔσοα τέκνα·
ὄλβιοι εὐνάζοισθε καὶ ὄλβιοι ἀῶ ἵκοισθε.
20. From Hom. Il. xi. 514, 515—
ἰητρὸς γὰρ ἀνὴρ πολλῶν ἀντάξιος ἄλλων
ἰούς τ’ ἐκτάμνειν ἐπί τ’ ἤπια φάρμακα πάσσειν.
‘For more than a multitude availeth the leech for our need,
When the shaft sticketh deep in the flesh, when the healing salve must be spread.’
[282-3]
τι καὶ ἄλλο τῶν πάνυ χρησίμων ἔχειν καὶ συνασκεῖν αὑτὸν
ταῖς καθ’ ἡμέραν γυμνασίαις. οὐ γὰρ αὐτάρκη τὰ παραγγέλματα
τῶν τεχνῶν ἐστι δεινοὺς ἀγωνιστὰς ποιῆσαι τοὺς βουλομένους
γε δίχα μελέτης τε καὶ γυμνασίας· ἀλλ’ ἐπὶ τοῖς
πονεῖν καὶ κακοπαθεῖν βουλομένοις κεῖται σπουδαῖα εἶναι τὰ 5
παραγγέλματα καὶ λόγου ἄξια ἢ φαῦλα καὶ ἄχρηστα.
[283]
your hands constantly like any other really useful thing, and
exercise yourself in its lessons daily. No rules contained in
rhetorical manuals can suffice to make experts of those who are
determined to dispense with study and practice. They who are
ready to undergo toil and hardship can alone decide whether
such rules are trivial and useless, or worthy of serious
consideration.
1 αὑτὸν ταῖς Us.: αὐτὸν ταῖσ P: αὐτὸ ταῖς M: αὐταῖς V 3 ἀγωνιστὰς
Sylburgius: δεινοῦσ αν ταγωνιστασ sic P: ἀνταγωνιστὰς etiam MV 4 γε
Us.: τε P: om. MV 5 βουλομένοις PM: om. V || σπουδαῖαν εἶναι (sic)
P: ἢ σπουδαῖα εἶναι MV 6 Διονυσίου αλικαρνα(σεως) πε(ρὶ) συνθέσεως
ὀνομάτων: ~ litteris maiusculis subscripsit P
2. The training meant would consist
chiefly in that general reading of Greek
authors which is indicated in this treatise
or in the de Imitatione, and in Quintilian’s
Tenth Book: it would carry out
the precept “vos exemplaria Graeca |
nocturna versate manu, versate diurna.”
Afterwards would follow the technical
and systematic study of style or eloquence,
regarded as a preparation for
public life.
3. ἀγωνιστάς: cp. note on 268 29
supra and Plato Phaedr. 269 D τὸ μὲν
δύνασθαι, ὦ Φαῖδρε, ὥστε ἀγωνιστὴν τέλεον
γενέσθαι, εἰκός—ἴσως δὲ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον—ἔχειν
ὥσπερ τἆλλα· εἰ μέν σοι ὑπάρχει
φύσει ῥητορικῷ εἶναι, ἔσῃ ῥήτωρ ἐλλόγιμος,
προσλαβὼν ἐπιστήμην τε καὶ μελέτην, ὅτου
δ’ ἂν ἐλλείπῃς τούτων, ταύτῃ ἀτελὴς ἔσῃ.
4. The best Greeks and Romans at all
times believed in work, and in genius as
including the capacity for taking pains.
Compare (in addition to the passage of
the Phaedrus) Soph. El. 945 ὅρα· πόνου
τοι χωρὶς οὐδὲν εὐτυχεῖ: Eurip. Fragm.
432 τῷ γὰρ πονοῦντι χὠ θεὸς συλλαμβάνει:
Aristoph. Ran. 1370 ἐπίπονοί γ’ οἱ δεξιοί:
Cic. de Offic. i. 18. 60 “nec medici, nec
imperatores, nec oratores, quamvis artis
praecepta perceperint, quidquam magna
laude dignum sine usu et exercitatione
consequi possunt”: Quintil. Inst. Or.
Prooem. § 27 “sicut et haec ipsa (bona
ingenii) sine doctore perito, studio pertinaci,
scribendi, legendi, dicendi multa
et continua exercitatione per se nihil
prosunt.” See also note on page 264
supra.
[285]
GLOSSARY
(Including Terms of Rhetoric, Grammar, Prosody, Music,
Phonetics, and Literary Criticism)
In the Glossary, as in the Notes, the following abbreviations are used:—
Long. = ‘Longinus on the Sublime.’
D.H. = ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus: the Three Literary Letters.’
Demetr. = ‘Demetrius on Style.’
ἀγεννής. 90 20, 170 9, etc. Ignoble, mean: in
reference to style. Lat. ignobilis, degener.
ἀγοραῖος. 262 20. Vulgar, colloquial, mechanical. Lat. circumforaneus,
circulatorius. Cp. Lucian de conscrib. hist. § 44 μήτε ἀπορρήτοις καὶ
ἔξω πάτου ὀνόμασι μήτε τοῖς ἀγοραίοις τούτοις καὶ καπηλικοῖς.
ἀγχίστροφος. 212 20. Quick-changing, flexible. Lat. mutabilis. Instances
of its rhetorical use are cited in Long. p. 194. The word has more
warrant as a term of rhetoric than ἀντίρροπος, which is given by F.
ἀγωγή. 68 1, training. 194 9, sequence, movement. 244 24, cast, or
tendency. Cp. some uses of Lat. ductus. Other examples in D.H.
p. 184: to which may be added de Isocr. c. 12 and de Thucyd. c. 27;
Macran’s Harmonics of Aristoxenus pp. 121, 143; Strabo xiv. 1. 41
παραφθείρας τὴν τῶν προτέρων μελοποιῶν ἀγωγήν, and (later)
ἀπεμιμήσατο τὴν ἀγωγὴν τῶν παρὰ τοῖς κιναίδοις διαλέκτων καὶ τῆς
ἠθοποιΐας.—In 124 10 the adjective ἀγωγός is used (as in Eurip. Hec.
536, Troad. 1131) with the genitive in the sense provocative of,
conducive to: cp. de Demosth. c. 55 ἃ δὴ τῶν τοιούτων ἔσται παθῶν
ἀγωγά. [In Troad. 1131 Dindorf, ed. v., gives ἀρωγός without
comment, against the MSS.]
ἀγών. 252 2, 262 23. Contest, pleading, trial. Lat. certamen, actio. Cp.
Long. p. 194, D.H. p. 184, Demetr. p. 263.
ἀδολέσχης. 272 19, 22. Garrulous. Lat. loquax. Cp. Demetr. p. 263.
ἀηδής. 100 7, 124 19, etc. Unpleasant, disagreeable. Lat. iniucundus,
molestus. Similarly ἀηδία, 132 21, 134 14.
ἀθρόος. 222 2. Compressed, concentrated. Lat. consertus, stipatus. In the
passage specified it would seem that Dionysius compares the issue of
the breath to the exit of people through a narrow door, whereby they
are crowded together. The sound of p, which is under discussion,
approaches whistling; and that is the maximum of breath-compression.
[286]
αἵρεσις. 70 15, 198 3, 8, 246 17. School, following. Lat. secta.
αἴσθησις. 130 17, 134 11, 152 15, 218 1. Sense, perception. Lat. sensus.
So αἰσθητός, perceptible, 152 22, 206 6, etc.; and αἰσθητῶς, perceptibly,
126 20, 202 18.
ἀκατάστροφος. 232 1. Without rounding or conclusion. Lat. idonei
exitus expers. Used of a period which does not turn back upon itself—which
is, in fact, not a περίοδος. Cp. the use of εὐκαταστρόφως in
Demetr. de Eloc. § 10.
ἀκατονόμαστος. 208 25. Unnamed, nameless. Lat. appellationis expers.
ἀκέραστος. 230 18. Unmixed, or incapable of mixture. Lat. non permixtus,
s. qui permisceri non potest.
ἀκοή. 70 3, 118 23, 146 8, etc. The sense of hearing: ‘the ear.’ Lat.
auditus. So ἀκρόασις, 116 19, 198 8, etc.
ἀκόλλητος. 218 13. Uncompacted, or incapable of being compacted. Lat.
non compactus, s. qui compingi non potest.
ἀκολουθία. 212 22, 232 20, 254 17. Sequence, the orderly progression
of words. Lat. consecutio, ordo, series. ἐν πολλοῖς ὑπεροπτικὴ τῆς
ἀκολουθίας, 212 22 = prone to anacolouthon. Cp. Long. p. 102, D.H.
p. 184, Demetr. p. 263. Similarly ἀκόλουθος is used of what follows
naturally, 130 9, 228 17, etc.
ἀκόμψευτος. 212 23, 232 21. Unadorned. Lat. incomptus. Used of a
style which is sans recherche, sans parure. Cp. Cic. Orat. 24. 78 “nam
ut mulieres esse dicuntur non nullae inornatae, quas id ipsum deceat,
sic haec subtilis oratio etiam incompta delectat.”
ἀκόρυφος. 230 31. Without a capital or beginning. Lat. sine fastigio, sine
initio. Used of a period without a proper beginning and therefore
imperfectly rounded: whereas true periods are εὐκόρυφοι καὶ στρογγύλαι
ὥσπερ ἀπὸ τόρνου (de Demosth. c. 43).
ἀκρίβεια. 118 10, 206 8, 266 11, etc. Exactitude, precision, finish. Lat.
perfectio, absolutio, subtilitas. Used of an ars exquisita, a style soigné.
So ἀκριβής 196 15, and ἀκριβοῦν 94 14 and 242 9. Cp. D.H. p.
184, and Demetr. p. 264 (where the slightly depreciatory sense of
‘correctness,’ ‘nicety,’ is also illustrated: cp. C.V. 274 22).
ἀκροστόμιον. 142 17. The edge of the mouth or lips. Lat. summum os,
labrorum margo. Cp. 148 22 τῆς γλώττης ἄκρῳ τῷ στόματι προσερειδομένης
κατὰ τοὺς μετεώρους ὀδόντας.
ἀκώλιστος. 234 23. Without members or clauses. Lat. sine membris. Used
of a period not divided, or jointed, into clauses.
ἀλήθεια. 198 26. Human experience. Lat. veritas vitae, usus rerum, vita,
usus. The actual facts of life are meant, as opposed to the theories of
the schools. Cp. de Isaeo c. 18 ὅτι μοι δοκεῖ Λυσίας μὲν τὴν ἀλήθειαν
(‘the truth of nature,’ ‘a natural simplicity’) διώκειν μᾶλλον, Ἰσαῖος
δὲ τὴν τέχνην.
[287]
ἄλογος. 66 18, 146 14, 152 15, 174 2, 3, 206 13, 244 22.
Irrational; unguided by reason; subconscious; incalculable; instinctive;
spontaneous. Lat. rationis expers. With the use in 146 14 (where
the Epitome has ἀλάλου) may be compared the process by which
ἄλογον in Modern Greek has come to mean ‘horse.’ With ἄλογος
αἴσθησις in 152 15 and 244 22 cp. the use of “tacitus sensus” in
Cic. de Orat. iii. 195 “omnes enim tacito quodam sensu sine ulla
arte aut ratione quae sint in artibus ac rationibus recta ac prava
diiudicant” and Orat. 60. 203 “aures ipsae tacito eum (modum)
sensu sine arte definiunt”: see also de Lysia c. 11, de Demosth.
c. 24, de Thucyd. c. 27. For the doctrine of ἀλογία in relation
to metre see p. 154 supra and Goodell Greek Metric pp. 109 ff. (with
references to Aristoxenus, Westphal, etc., pp. 150 ff.). The notion
of incommensurability is, of course, present in the term: cp. Aristox.
p. 292 ὥρισται δὲ τῶν ποδῶν ἕκαστος ἤτοι λόγῳ τινὶ ἢ ἀλογίᾳ
τοιαύτῃ, ἥτις δύο λόγων γνωρίμων τῇ αἰσθήσει ἀνὰ μέσον ἔσται,
which Goodell (p. 110) translates, “each of the feet is determined
and defined either by a precise ratio or by an incommensurable ratio
such that it will be between two ratios recognizable by the sense.”
ἀμεγέθης. 176 11. Wanting in size or dignity. Lat. exilis. Cp. Long.
de Sublim. xl. 2 οὐκ ὄντες ὑψηλοὶ φύσει, μήποτε δὲ καὶ ἀμεγέθεις.
ἄμετρος. 74 4, 176 1, 21, etc. Unmetred, unmetrical. Lat. (oratio) soluta.
It is interesting to note the variety of Dionysius’ expressions for ‘prose’
or ‘in prose’—λέξις ἄμετρος, λέξις πεζή, λέξις ψιλή, λόγος ἀποίητος,
λόγοι ἄμετροι, λόγοι or λόγος simply (272 9, 13), δίχα μέτρου
(252 20), λεκτικῶς (258 3), etc. Cp. Plato Rep. 366 E, 390 A, etc.
ἀμορφία. 184 18, 198 10. Unsightliness. Lat. deformitas. So ἄμορφος
92 16.
ἄμουσος. 74 11, 122 19. Rude, uncultured. Lat. insulsus, illiteratus,
infacetus.
ἀμυδρός. 206 22. Faint, obscure. Lat. subobscurus.
ἀμφίβολος. 96 17. Ambiguous. Lat. dubius, ambiguus, qui in duos
pluresve sensus verti potest.
ἀμφίβραχυς. 172 6, 184 11. Amphibrachys. The metrical foot ᴗ – ᴗ.
ἀναβολή. 164 5, 220 13. Retardation. Lat. mora, intervallum. So ἀναβάλλειν
180 15, 216 18: cp. de Demosth. c. 54 (ταῦτ’ ἐσπευσμένως
εἰπέ, ταῦτ’ ἀναβεβλημένως), and c. 43.
ἀναισθησία. 184 21. Insensibility, stupidity. Lat. stupor. Compare
ἀναίσθητος 190 8, and see the editor’s Ancient Boeotians pp. 4-8.
ἀνακοπή. 164 5, 230 28, 232 16. Stoppage, clashing. Lat. impedimentum,
offensio. Fr. refoulement. Cp. de Demosth. c. 38, and also the verb
ἀνακόπτειν 222 9.
ἀνάπαιστος. 172 10, etc. Anapaest. The metrical foot ᴗ ᴗ –.
ἀνάπαυλα. 196 11. Rest, pause. Lat. mora, intermissio. The ‘reliefs’
afforded by variety of structure, etc., are meant.
ἀναπλέκειν. 264 23. To bind up the hair. Lat. caesariem reticulo colligere.
ἄναρθρος. 212 21. Without joints or articles. Lat. sine articulis.
[288]
ἀνδρώδης. 174 17. Manly, virile. Lat. virilis. Cp. de Demosth. cc. 39,
43, and Quintil. v. 12. 18.
ἀνέδραστος. 232 4. Unsteady. Lat. instabilis. Used of a period which
has no proper base or termination. The opposite of ἑδραῖος (Demetr.
p. 277).
ἀνεπιτήδευτος. 84 3, 212 13, 260 14. Unsought, unstudied. Lat. nullo
studio delectus, non exquisitus. So ἀνέκλεκτος 84 3: not picked with
care.
ἄνεσις. 210 5. Loosening. Lat. remissio. Cp. Plato Rep. i. 349 E ἐν τῇ
ἐπιτάσει καὶ ἀνέσει τῶν χορδῶν πλεονεκτεῖν, and ἀνίεται 126 5.
ἀνθηρός. 212 22 (cp. 208 26, 232 25). Florid. Lat. floridus. Fr.
fleuri. Cp. Quintil. xii. 10. 58 “namque unum [dicendi genus]
subtile, quod ἰσχνόν vocant, alterum grande atque robustum, quod
ἁδρόν dicunt, constituunt; tertium alii medium ex duobus, alii floridum
(namque id ἀνθηρόν appellant) addiderunt.” ‘Florid’ (like ‘flowery’)
has acquired rather a bad sense, whereas the Greek word suggests
‘flower-like,’ ‘full of colour,’ ‘with delicate touches and associations.’
ἀντίθετος. 246 6. Antithetic (σχηματισμοὶ ... ἀντίθετοι). Cp. Demetr.
pp. 266, 267, s.v. ἀντίθεσις.
ἀντιστηριγμός. 164 6. Resistance, stumbling-block. Lat. impedimentum,
obstaculum. Cp. de Demosth. c. 38 ἀνακοπὰς καὶ ἀντιστηριγμοὺς
λαμβάνειν καὶ τραχύτητας ἐν ταῖς συμπλοκαῖς τῶν ὀνομάτων ἐπιστυφούσας
τὴν ἀκοὴν ἡσυχῇ [ἡ αὐστῆρα ἁρμονία] βούλεται.
ἀντίστροφος. 174 2, 194 6, 9, 11, 278 9. Corresponding, counterpart.
Lat. respondens. Frequently used by Dionysius of the second stanza
(ἀντιστροφή, 254 18), sung by the Chorus in its counter-movement.
Cp. schol. ad Aristoph. Plut. 253 μεταξὺ τῆς τε στροφῆς καὶ τῆς
ἀντιστρόφου: and de Demosth. c. 50 κἄπειτα πάλιν τοῖς αὐτοῖς
ῥυθμοῖς καὶ μέτροις ἐπὶ τῶν αὐτῶν στίχων ἢ περίοδων, ἃς ἀντιστρόφους
ὀνομάζουσι, χρωμένη.
ἀντιτυπία. 202 25, 222 17, 224 15, 230 6, 232 6, 244 25. Repulsion,
clashing, dissonance. Lat. conflictio, asperitas. So the adjective ἀντίτυπος
in 162 23, 210 20, etc. Hesychius, ἀντιτύποις· σκληροῖς.
ἀντονομασία. 70 19, 102 18. Pronoun. Lat. pronomen. In 108 14
ἀντωνυμία is found; and this (the more usual) form should perhaps
be read throughout.
ἀνωμαλία. 232 19. Unevenness. Lat. inaequalitas. Fr. inégalité.
ἀξίωμα. 84 1, 120 23, 170 2, 174 19. Dignity. Lat. dignitas. Fr.
dignité. In 96 16 the sense is a proposition (pronuntiatum, Cic. Tusc.
i. 7. 14; enuntiatio, Cic. de Fato 10. 20).—The adjective ἀξιωματικός
(‘dignified’) occurs in 136 11, 168 6, etc., and the adverb ἀξιωματικῶς
in 176 24.—In 88 13, 186 7, ἀξίωσις = reputation, excellence.
ἀπαγγελία. 204 18. Narration. Lat. narratio. Sometimes the word is
used, like ἑρμηνεία, of style (elocutio) in general: cp. de Demosth.
c. 25, and Chrysostom (in a passage which, as revealing the pupil of
Libanius and as illustrating many things in the C.V., may be quoted
at some length): ἐγὼ δὲ εἰ μὲν τὴν λειότητα Ἰσοκράτους ἀπῄτουν,
καὶ τὸν Δημοσθένους ὄγκον, καὶ τὴν Θουκυδίδου σεμνότητα, καὶ τὸ
Πλάτωνος ὕψος, ἔδει φέρειν εἰς μέσον ταύτην τοῦ Παύλου τὴν
μαρτυρίαν. νῦν δὲ ἐκεῖνα μὲν πάντα ἀφίημι, καὶ τὸν περίεργον τῶν
ἔξωθεν καλλωπισμόν, καὶ οὐδέν μοι φράσεως, οὐδὲ ἀπαγγελίας μέλει·
ἀλλ’ ἐξέστω καὶ τῆ λέξει πτωχεύειν, καὶ τὴν συνθήκην τῶν ὀνομάτων
ἁπλῆν τινα εἶναι καὶ ἀσφαλῆ, μόνον μὴ τῇ γνώσει τις καὶ τῇ
τῶν δογμάτων ἀκριβείᾳ ἰδιώτης ἔστω (de Sacerdotio iv. 6).—The verb
ἀπαγγέλλειν occurs in 200 9, 11.
[289]
ἀπαρέμφατος. 102 20. Infinitive. Lat. infinitivus (sc. modus). [The
infinitive, unlike the indicative and other moods, does not indicate
difference of meaning by means of inflexions denoting number and
person. Whence the Greek name: cp. παρεμφατικός, p. 315 infra.]
ἀπαριθμεῖν. 268 8. To recount, to run over. Lat. percensere.
ἀπαρτίζειν. 194 16. To round off, to complete. Lat. adaequare, absolvere.
Cp. de Demosth. c. 50 καὶ μέτρα τὰ μὲν ἀπηρτισμένα καὶ τέλεια, τὰ δ’
ἀτελῆ: Ev. Luc. xiv. 28 τίς γὰρ ἐξ ὑμῶν, θέλων πύργον οἰκοδομῆσαι,
οὐχὶ πρῶτον καθίσας ψηφίζει τὴν δαπάνην, εἰ ἔχει τὰ πρὸς ἀπαρτισμόν
(completion); So κατὰ ἀπαρτισμόν, in 246 18, means completely,
absolutely, narrowly. In Classical Review xxiii. 82, the present writer
has suggested that κατὰ ἀπαρτισμόν are the words missing in
Oxyrhynchus Papyri vi. 116, where Grenfell and Hunt give ἐν πλάτει
καὶ οὐ κ[.............]ν. θεωρητέα ἐστίν, or the like, may
have preceded: cp. 152 26 supra (and note).
ἀπαρχαί. 76 2. Firstfruits. Lat. primitiae. Used here in connexion with
the verb προχειρισάμενος, cum delibavero.
ἀπατηλός. 236 10. Seductive. Lat. suavis et oblectans, illecebrosus.
ἀπερίγραφος. 232 4. Not circumscribed. Lat. nullis limitibus circumscriptus.
ἀπερίοδος. 234 23, 276 1. Without a period. Lat. periodo non absolutus.
ἀπευθύνειν. 130 1. To regulate. Lat. tamquam ad regulam dirigere.
ἀπηνής. 228 15. Crabbed, rugged. Lat. durus.
ἁπλοῦς. 144 8, 17, 176 3. Simple, uncompounded. Lat. simplex.
ἀποίητος. 70 4. In plain prose. Lat. prosaicus. Cp. s.v. ἄμετρος.
ἀποκλείειν. 144 23. To shut off, to intercept. Lat. intercludere.
ἀποκόπτειν. 142 8, 230 19. To cut short. Lat. rescindere. So ἐξ
ἀποκοπῆς (142 3) = with a snap, abruptly. See the exx. given, s.v.
ἀποκοπή, in Demetr. p. 268.
ἀποκυματίζειν. 240 22. To ruffle. Lat. reddere inquietum, fluctibus agitare.
ἀπορριπίζειν. 144 24, 150 1. To blow away. Lat. flatu abigere. In both
these passages there is some manuscript support for ἀπορραπίζειν. In
144 24 the sense (with ἀπορραπιζούσης) would be ‘to send out the
breath in beats,’ ‘to cause the breath to vibrate.’
ἀποτραχύνειν. 218 9, 230 24. To roughen. Lat. exasperare.
ἀργός. 210 22. Unwrought. Lat. rudis. In 250 8 ἀργία is used for
‘idleness,’ with reference to the Epicurean attitude towards the refinements
of style.
ἄρθρον. 70 17. Article. Lat. articulus. See D.H. pp. 185, 186;
Demetr. p. 269. ἄρθρον (‘joint’) and σύνδεσμος (‘sinew’ or ‘ligament’)
are terms borrowed from anatomy.
[290]
ἀριθμοί. 244 27. Numbers, cadences. Lat. numeri, numeri oratorii. Cp.
de Demosth. c. 53 φέρε γὰρ ἐπιχειρείτω τις προφέρεσθαι τούσδε τοὺς
ἀριθμούς· Ὄλυνθον μὲν δὴ καὶ Μεθώνην κτλ. As Aristotle (Rhet.
iii. 8. 2) says, περαίνεται δὲ ἀριθμῷ πάντα· ὁ δὲ τοῦ σχήματος τῆς
λέξεως ἀριθμὸς ῥυθμός ἐστιν, οὗ καὶ τὰ μέτρα τμητά.
ἀριστεῖα. 182 12. Lead, supremacy. Lat. primas (dare).
Ἀριστοφάνειος. 256 13, 258 9. Aristophanic. Lat. Aristophaneus. The
reference is to the anapaestic tetrameter called ‘Aristophanic.’
Hephaestion (Ench. c. 8) explains the term thus: κέκληται δὲ
Ἀριστοφάνειον, οὐκ Ἀριστοφάνους αὐτὸ εὑρόντος πρῶτον, ἐπεὶ καὶ
παρὰ Κρατίνῳ ἐστί·
χαίρετε δαίμονες οἳ Λεβάδειαν Βοιώτιον οὖθαρ ἀρούρης·
ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸ τὸν Ἀριστοφάνην πολλῷ αὐτῷ κεχρῆσθαι.
ἁρμογή. 112 13, 218 9, 236 5, 270 9. Junction, combination. Lat.
coagmentatio.
ἁρμονία. 72 6, 9, 74 4, 10, 19, 84 9, 15, 90 5, 94 15, 104 19, 114 14,
17, 116 15, 20, passim. Adjustment, arrangement, balance, harmonious
composition. Lat. apta structura, concinna orationis compositio, aptus
ordo partium inter se cohaerentium. Fr. enchaînement. But, as distinguished
from ἁρμογή or from σύνθεσις, ἁρμονία seems usually to
connote ‘harmony’ in the more restricted (musical) sense of notes in
fitting sequence: cp. our ‘arrangement’ of a song or piece of music.
In fact, Dionysius’ three ἁρμονίαι might well be described as three
‘modes of composition,’ and ‘tune’ (the meaning which ἁρμονία bears
in Aristot. Rhet. iii. 1. 4) might sometimes serve as a suitable rendering
even in reference to literary composition or oratorical rhythm. The
original use of the word in Greek carpentry (which employed dovetailing
in preference to nails) finds an excellent illustration in the
words of a contemporary of Dionysius, Strabo (Geogr. iv. 4): διόπερ
οὐ συνάγουσι τὰς ἁρμονίας τῶν σανίδων, ἀλλ’ ἀραιώματα καταλείπουσιν.
We have perhaps no single English word which can, like
ἁρμονία, incline, according to the context, to the literal sense (‘a fitting,’
‘a juncture’), or to the metaphorical meaning (‘harmony,’ as ‘harmony’
was understood by the Greeks); but see T. Wilson’s definition of
‘composition’ under σύνθεσις, p. 326 infra, and compare one of the
definitions of ‘harmony’ in the New English Dictionary: “pleasing
combination or arrangement of sounds, as in poetry or in speaking:
sweet or melodious sound.”—The verb ἁρμόττειν is found in 98 6,
104 17, etc.
ἀρρενικός. 106 21. Of the masculine gender. Lat. masculinus.
ἀρτηρία. 140 21, 142 4, 144 5, 20, 148 17. Windpipe. Lat. arteria.
ἀρχαϊσμός. 212 23. A touch of antiquity. Lat. sermonis prisci imitatio.
Cp. ἀρχαϊκός, 216 20, 228 8. So ἀρχαιοπρεπῆ σχήματα (236 8) =
figurae orationis quae vetustatem redolent. As Quintilian (viii. 3. 27)
says, “quaedam tamen adhuc vetera vetustate ipsa gratius nitent.” Cp.
D.H. p. 186 (s.v. ἀρχαιοπρεπής) and Demetr. p. 269 (s.v. ἀρχαιοειδής):
also de Demosth. c. 48.
[291]
ἀρχαί. 136 22, 140 13. First beginnings. Lat. principia.
ἄσεμνος. 110 20, 170 20, 176 12, 192 11. Undignified. Lat. dignitatis
expers, minime venerandus. Cp. D.H. p. 269.
ἄσημος. 256 22, 262 6. Unnoticed. Lat. obscurus.
ἄσιγμος. 148 1. Without a sigma. Lat. carens littera sigma.
ᾆσμα. 196 2. Song, lay. Lat. carmen, canticum.
ἀσύμμετρος. 124 8, 236 1. Incommensurable, disproportionate, incorrect.
Lat. incommensurabilis, sine iusta proportione, inconcinnus. So ἀσυμμετρία
232 19. Some good illustrations (drawn from Cicero) of
constructions symétriques will be found in Laurand’s Études sur le style
des discours de Cicéron pp. 118-21.
ἀσύμμικτος. 218 12. Unblended, or incapable of being blended. Lat. non
permixtus, s. qui permisceri non potest.
ἀσύμφωνος. 122 23. Out of tune. Lat. dissonus.
ἄτακτος. 156 20, 254 16. Disordered, irregular. Lat. perturbatus, nullo
ordine compositus, incompositus.
ἀτοπία. 130 26. Awkwardness, clumsiness. Lat. rusticitas, ineptia.
αὐθάδης. 228 9. Wilful, headstrong, unbending. Lat. ferox, pertinax. Cp.
Long. de Subl. xxxii. 3 ὁ δὲ Δημοσθένης οὐχ οὕτως μὲν αὐθάδης
ὥσπερ οὗτος (sc. ὁ Θουκυδίδης), κτλ.
αὐθέκαστος. 212 23. Outspoken, downright. Lat. rigidus. In Plutarch’s
Cato c. 6 Cato is described as ἀπαραίτητος ὢν ἐν τῷ δικαίῳ καὶ τοῖς
ὑπὲρ τῆς ἡγεμονίας προστάγμασιν ὄρθιος καὶ αὐθέκαστος (cp. the
rigida innocentia attributed to him by Livy xxxix. 40. 10). In
Aristotle (Eth. Nic. iv. 7. 4) the αὐθέκαστος hits the mean between
the ἀλαζών and the εἴρων.
αὐλός. 142 2. Passage, channel. Lat. meatus.
αὐστηρός. 208 26, 210 15, 216 17, 21, 228 15, 232 22, 248 9. Austere,
severe. Lat. severus (cp. Quintil. ix. 4. 97, 120, 128). Compare the
antithetic expressions quoted from Dionysius in D.H. p. 186, and add
de Demosth. c. 38 init. Also see s.v. στρυφνός, p. 323 infra.
αὐτάρκης. 212 17, 282 2. Sufficient, self-sufficing. Lat. sufficiens, per se
sufficiens.
αὐτίκα. 98 7, 194 2, 256 7, 268 6. To begin with, for example. Lat.
exempli gratia.
αὐτόματος. 256 19. Self-acting, spontaneous. Lat. spontaneus, ultroneus.
Cp. αὐτομάτως 212 12; αὐτοματίζειν 204 5; αὐτοματισμός 218 3,
258 1, 24. In 256 19 ἐκ τοῦ αὐτομάτου = sponte sua, fortuito.
αὐτοσχέδιος. 212 1, 260 14, 262 3. Improvised. Lat. fortuitus, extemporalis,
inelaboratus, tumultuarius. So αὐτοσχεδίως 260 25, and
αὐτοσχεδιάζειν 256 19 (πολλὰ γὰρ αὐτοσχεδιάζει μέτρα ἡ φύσις =
multos versus sponte solet natura effundere). Cp. Demetr. p. 270
s.v. αὐτοσχεδιάζειν, and see σχέδιος p. 327 infra.
[292]
αὐτοτελής. 118 6, 140 1. Complete in itself, absolute. Lat. perfectus,
absolutus. So αὐτοτελῶς 140 3. The meaning of the word is well
illustrated by Diodorus Siculus xii. 1 init. οὔτε γὰρ τῶν νομιζομένων
ἀγαθῶν οὐδὲν ὁλόκληρον εὑρίσκεται δεδομένον τοῖς ἀνθρώποις οὔτε τῶν
κακῶν αὐτοτελὲς ἄνευ εὐχρηστίας.
αὐτουργός. 196 15. Self-wrought, rudely wrought. Lat. rudis. Cp. de
Demosth. c. 39 (as quoted s.v. συναπαρτίζειν, p. 325 infra).—The active
sense of αὐτουργός finds a good illustration in Euripides’ well-known
line: αὐτουργός, οἵπερ καὶ μόνοι σῴζουσι γῆν (Orest. 920).
ἀφαίρεσις. 104 20, 114 12, 116 17. Deduction, abridgment. Lat.
detractio. In 116 17 τῆς ἀφαιρέσεως δὲ τίς (τρόπος) almost = ‘what
is the nature of ellipsis?’ As line 18 shows, something necessary to
the sense is supposed to be omitted: e.g. the presence of αὐτός in 116 22
implies a contrast with ἕτερος (118 1).
ἀφανίζειν. 166 10, 260 1, 272 2. To put out of sight. Lat. abscondere.
ἀφελής. 212 14. Simple, plain. Lat. simplex, subtilis. Cp. D.H. p. 187.
ἀφορμή. 96 23. Starting-point. Lat. initium, principium. Cp. Dionys.
Hal. Antiq. Rom. i. 4 τῆς ἀοιδίμου γενομένης καθ’ ἡμᾶς πόλεως,
ἀδόξους πάνυ καὶ ταπεινὰς τὰς πρώτας ἀφορμὰς λαβούσης.
ἀφροδίτη. 74 13. Beauty. Lat. venustas, venus. Cp. de Lysia c. 11 ἐὰν
δὲ μηδεμίαν ἡδονὴν μηδὲ ἀφροδίτην ὁ τῆς λέξεως χαρακτὴρ ἔχῃ,
δυσωπῶ καὶ ὑποπτεύω μήποτ’ οὐ Λυσίου ὁ λόγος, καὶ οὐκέτι
βιάζομαι τὴν ἄλογον αἴσθησιν: also c. 18 ibid.
ἄφωνος. 138 13, 140 3, 146 5, 148 11, 20, 220 10. Voiceless, mute.
Lat. vocis expers, mutus. From the standpoint of the modern science of
phonetics, in which the term ‘voiceless’ is reserved for sounds that
are not accompanied by a vibration of the vocal chords, it might be
well in the translation of this word to substitute ‘non-vocalic’ for
‘voiceless,’ and ‘vocalic’ for ‘voiced.’
ἄχαρις. 110 20, 146 12. Graceless. Lat. invenustus.
βαίνειν. 86 1. To scan. Lat. scandere. Cp. Aristot. Metaph. xiii. 6,
1093 a 30 βαίνεται δὲ [τὸ ἔπος] ἐν μὲν τῷ δεξιῷ ἐννέα συλλαβαῖς,
ἐν δὲ τῷ ἀριστερῷ ὀκτώ.—In 236 4 βεβηκώς is used of a firm,
regular tread: Lat. incedere.
βακχεῖος. 174 23, 180 12, 182 19. Bacchius. The metrical foot – – ᴗ.
βαρύς. 126 6, 8, 10, 16, 128 5, 8. Grave (accent), low (pitch). Lat. gravis.
Cp. Monro Modes of Ancient Greek Music p. 113: “Our habit of
using Latin translations of the terms of Greek grammar has tended
to obscure the fact that they belong in almost every case to the
ordinary vocabulary of music. The word for ‘accent’ (τόνος) is
simply the musical term for ‘pitch’ or ‘key.’ The words ‘acute’
(ὀξύς) and ‘grave’ (βαρύς) mean nothing more than ‘high’ and ‘low’
in pitch. A syllable may have two accents, just as in music a
syllable may be sung with more than one note.” So βαρύτης 126 13
= ‘low pitch.’—In 120 23 and 236 8 βάρος = ‘gravity’ (in the sense
of ‘dignity’), Fr. gravité.
βάσις. 142 13, 210 22, 212 16, 220 4, 230 31, 232 4, 234 7. Base.
Lat. basis, fundamentum.—The word is specially used of a measured
step or metrical movement,—of a rhythmical clause in a period and
particularly of its rhythmical close (Lat. clausula). In 230 30 and 232 5
it is the iambic endings προγεγενημένων and διανοούμενον that are
considered objectionable (ἀνέδραστοι, ἀπερίγραφοι: endings such as
πορείαν and ἀκουσάντων would be regarded as ἀσφαλεῖς, de Demosth.
cc. 24, 26). Terminations of this kind will be avoided in a style
(like the γλαφυρὰ σύνθεσις) which desires τῶν περιόδων τὰς τελευτὰς
εὐρύθμους εἶναι,—desires that the chutes of the periods should be
nombreuses.—Further light on the meaning of βάσις will be found
in de Demosth. cc. 24, 39, 43, 45.
[293]
βοστρυχίζειν. 264 22. To curl, to dress the hair. Lat. crines calamistro
convertere. Cp. the use of concinni in Cic. de Orat. iii. 25. 100.
βούλεσθαι. 220 9, 234 5, 14, 19, 236 4, 7, etc. To aim, to aspire.
Lat. studere. Cp. D.H. p. 187, Demetr. p. 271. This meaning
(‘aims at being,’ ‘tends to be’) is, of course, Platonic and Aristotelian.
βραχυσύλλαβος. 168 17. Consisting of short syllables. Lat. brevibus syllabis
constans.
βραχύτης. 150 22, 154 6. Shortness. Lat. brevitas.
γένεσις. 138 3. Origin. τὴν γένεσιν λαμβάνει = Lat. originem sumit.
γενικός. 68 20, 118 21, 208 21. General, generic. Lat. generalis.
γενναῖος. 68 4, 136 13, 146 10, 148 9, 172 1, 176 9, 10. Noble.
Lat. generosus. Such English renderings as ‘virile,’ ‘robust,’ ‘gallant,’
‘splendid,’ ‘high-spirited’ may also be suggested. In Plato Rep. ii.
372 B μάζας γενναίας = ‘lordly cakes’; in Long. de Subl. xv. 7 οἱ
γενναῖοι = ‘fine, grand, gallant fellows.’ Cp. C.V. 170 9 μαλακώτερος
θατέρου καὶ ἀγεννέστερος.
γλαφυρός. 136 14, 208 26, 212 16, 216 20, 232 25, 248 9. Smooth,
polished, elegant. Lat. politus, ornatus, elegans. Fr. élégant, orné, poli.
Cp. Demetr. p. 272, and de Isocr. c. 2 ὁ γὰρ ἀνὴρ οὕτος τὴν εὐέπειαν
ἐκ παντὸς διώκει καὶ τοῦ γλαφυρῶς λέγειν στοχάζεται μᾶλλον ἢ τοῦ
ἀφελῶς, and de Demosth. c. 40 ἡ δὲ μετὰ ταύτην ἡ γλαφυρὰ καὶ
θεατρικὴ καὶ τὸ κομψὸν αἱρουμένη πρὸ τοῦ σεμνοῦ τοιαύτη.
γλυκαίνειν. 130 18, 134 10, 154 12. To touch with sweetness. Lat.
delenire, voluptate perfundere. Cp. γλυκύτης 120 21, γλυκύς 146 9.
γλυπτός. 264 18. Carven, chiselled. Lat. caelatus. So γλυφή, carving,
120 1.
γλῶττα. 78 17. An unfamiliar term. Lat. vocabulum inusitatum. So
γλωττηματικός, 252 23, 272 11, and D.H. p. 187, s.v. Obsolete, or
obsolescent, words (mots surannés) are often meant.—In 80 17 γλῶττα =
διάλεκτος (88 26).
γοητεύειν. 122 16, 134 13. To entice. Lat. pellicere.
γράμμα. 130 21, 138 5, etc. Letter of the alphabet. Lat. littera. ἡ
γραμματική (140 11) = grammar; γραμμαί (138 2) = the lines, or
strokes, from which γράμματα are formed. In 264 18 γραπτός =
written.
γραφή. 68 12, 184 18, 186 1, 206 23, 228 12. Writing, composition
(in the wider sense). In 118 24 and 234 13 γραφαί = pictures.
[294]
γυμνασία. 206 24, 282 2, 4. Exercise, lesson. Lat. exercitatio. So γυμνάζειν
(134 4), to practise, to train.
δάκτυλος. 84 21, 172 16, 202 19. Dactyl. The metrical foot – ᴗ ᴗ.
δασύς. 148 12, 13, 18, 19, 150 3, 12. Rough, aspirated. Lat. asper.
So δασύτης 148 21, 150 2 and δασύνειν 148 8. Cp. Aristot. Poet. c. 20
for δασύτης and ψιλότης, and see A. J. Ellis English, Dionysian, and
Hellenic Pronunciations of Greek pp. 45, 46, where δασύς and ψιλός
are translated by ‘rough’ and ‘smooth,’ which seems the safest course
to follow when (as here) the terminology of Dionysius’ phonetics is full
of difficulties. Aristotle (De audibilibus 804 b 8) defines thus: δασεῖαι
δ’ εἰσὶ τῶν φωνῶν ὅσαις ἔσωθεν τὸ πνεῦμα εὐθέως συνεκβάλλομεν
μετὰ τῶν φθόγγων, ψιλαὶ δ’ εἰσὶ τοὐναντίον ὅσαι γίγνονται χωρὶς
τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος ἐκβολῆς.
δαψιλής. 108 11. Plentiful. Lat. abundans.
δεῖγμα. 200 4, 208 3, 214 13, 228 17. Sample. Lat. exemplum.
δεινότης. 182 13, 264 12. Oratorical mastery. Lat. facultas dicendi,
eloquentia. So δεινός 282 3: see also 182 3. Cp. D.H. pp. 187, 188;
Demetr. pp. 273, 274.
δεξιῶς. 80 14, 92 20. Deftly. Lat. sollerter, feliciter. In 80 14 σφόδρα
δεξιῶς = ‘with great dexterity, or adroitness,’ ‘with great delicacy of
touch.’
δεσμός. 148 17. Fastening. Lat. vinculum.
δηλωτικός. 158 2. Indicative of. Lat. significans.
δημηγορία. 110 22, 252 2. A public discourse, or harangue. Lat. contio.
Cp. D.H. p. 188.
δημιούργημα. 64 8, 120 1. A piece of workmanship. Lat. opus, opificium.
So δημιουργικός (‘industrial’) 104 23. Cp. D.H. p. 274. Quintil.
(ii. 15. 4) translates πειθοῦς δημιουργός by persuadendi opifex.
διαβεβηκέναι. 172 3, 202 16, 212 1, 216 18, 218 23, 222 23, 244 19.
To have a mighty stride, to be planted wide apart. Lat. latis passibus
incedere. Fr. marcher à grands pas. In 202 17, 20, 218 23, and 222
23 the noun διάβασις is used with reference to the intervals which long
syllables and clashing consonants make in pronunciation by retarding
the utterance. The μεγάλα τε καὶ διαβεβηκότα εἰς πλάτος ὀνόματα
of 212 1 are les grands mots à larges allures.
διάθεσις. 154 14, 160 18. Condition, arrangement. Lat. affectus, dispositio.
διαιρεῖν. 180 17, 184 5, 194 15, 218 20, 21, 272 17. To divide, to
resolve. Lat. seiungere, resolvere. So διαίρεσις 122 8, 138 1, 272 7.
διακεκλάσθαι. 172 7. To be broken or enervated. Lat. frangi, corrumpi, in
delicias effundi. Cp. similar uses of διαθρύπτεσθαι. In de Demosth.
c. 43 ῥυθμοὶ διακλώμενοι are opposed to ῥυθμοὶ ἀνδρώδεις.
διακλέπτειν. 176 19. To disguise. Lat. obscurare, occulere.
διακόπτειν. 268 15. To cut short, to silence. Lat. praecidere.
διακοσμεῖν. 218 20. To arrange. Lat. ordinare.
διακρούειν. 230 17. To break into. Lat. interrumpere.
[295]
διαλαμβάνειν. 72 10, 166 17, 180 12, 184 14, 270 20, 272 2. To
divide, to diversify. Lat. distinguere.
διαλέγεσθαι. 208 9. To write in prose. Lat. soluta oratione uti.
διάλειμμα. 204 1. A pause. Lat. intermissio.
διάλεκτος. 78 16, 80 3, 16, 88 26, 126 3, 160 14, 168 8, 208 19, 246 7.
Language. Lat. sermo. Sometimes used with special reference to a
‘dialect,’ as in 80 16, 88 26 (so τὴν Ἀτθίδα γλῶτταν 80 17 = τὴν
Ἀτθίδα διάλεκτον de Demosth. c. 41); and in other passages, with much
the same sense as λέξις (elocutio).—In 68 9, 94 10, 14, 96 15, 104 1,
the adjective διαλεκτικός means ‘pertaining to dialectic.’
διαλλαγή. 126 1. Difference. Lat. differentia. So διαλλάττειν, 92 19,
150 2, 152 29.
διάλογος. 198 1, 264 22. Dialogue. Lat. dialogus. Cp. Demetr. p. 274.
διαλύειν. 132 9, 272 1. To break up, to resolve. Lat. dissolvere. So
διάλυσις 138 4.
διαναπαύειν. 134 17. To relieve, to break up. Lat. diluere.
διάνοια. 74 7, 16, 112 21. Mind, thought. Lat. mens, cogitatio.
διὰ πέντε. 126 4, 17. The interval of a fifth. Lat. diapente, quinque
tonorum intervallum. So διὰ πασῶν 126 18, of the octave.
διαποικίλλειν. 214 8, 248 10, 254 18. To variegate. Lat. depingere,
distinguere.
διαρτᾶν. 206 6. To separate, to break up. Lat. seiungere. Cp. de Demosth.
c. 40 ἵνα δὲ μὴ δόξωμεν διαρτᾶν τὰς ἀκολουθίας.
διασαλεύειν. 102 21, 230 9, 240 13. To shake (as by storm), to disturb.
Lat. perturbare, concutere. In 230 9 and 240 13 the reference is
to troubling the smooth waters of the cadences by sounds that jolt
and jar.
διασπᾶν. 222 19, 230 24. To dislocate. Lat. divellere. Cp. Demetr.
p. 274, s.v. διασπασμός, and Quintil. ix. 4. 33 “tum vocalium concursus;
qui cum accidit, hiat et intersistit et quasi laborat oratio.”
διάστασις. 206 3, 5, 210 18. Distance. Lat. distantia.
διάστημα. 126 3, 16, 270 12. Interval. Lat. spatium, intervallum.
διαστολή. 278 5, 7. Division. Lat. divisio. By διαστολαί (which he
opposes to metrical cola) Dionysius means the natural divisions, or
pauses, observed in prose in order to bring out the sense and to secure
good delivery, in accordance with the requirements of grammar and
rhetoric. Cp. the later use of διαστολή for division by means of a
comma—for punctuation, as we should say.
διατέμνειν. 270 13. To cut up. Lat. discindere, concidere.
διατιθέναι. 130 5, 15, 134 8, 11. To affect. Lat. adficere.
διάτονος. 194 8, 196 4. Diatonic. Lat. diatonicus. For the diatonic
scale see n. on 194 8.
διαφορά. 68 21, 152 14, etc. Difference, variety. Lat. differentia.
διαχάλασμα. 230 24. Loosening. Lat. resolutio. Cp. Epicrates (ap.
Athen. xiii. 570 B) on Lais in her old age: ἐπεὶ δὲ δολιχὸν τοῖς
ἔτεσιν ἤδη τρέχει | τὰς ἁρμονίας τε διαχαλᾷ τοῦ σώματος.
[296]
διελκυσμός. 204 3. Struggle, tussle. Lat. luctatio. Cp. argum. Aristoph.
Acharn. εἶτα γενομένου διελκυσμοῦ κατενεχθεὶς ὁ χορὸς ἀπολύει τὸν
Δικαιόπολιν, i.e. “a tussle (wrangle) arises, in which the Chorus is
overborne and lets go Dicaeopolis.”
διέξοδος. 150 1. Outlet, egress. Lat. exitus.
διερείδειν. 220 3. To thrust apart. Lat. disiungere. The object of the
thrusting apart (or separation) is to give each word a firm position (as
with the combination of strut and tie in Caesar’s bridge over the
Rhine, for which see E. Kitson Clark in Classical Review xxii. 144-147).
So διερεισμός 222 10, 224 14. In 202 9 διερείδεσθαι = conniti.
δίεσις. 126 20. A quarter-tone, or any interval smaller than a semitone.
Lat. diesis. As to the reason for the disappearance of the quarter-tone
from our modern musical system see n. on 194 7 (extract from
Macran’s Harmonics of Aristoxenus). See, further, L. and S., s.v.
δίεσις and λεῖμμα. The word occurs also in de Lys. c. 11 ὥστε μηδὲ
τὴν ἐλαχίστην ἐν τοῖς διαστήμασι δίεσιν ἀγνοεῖν. Suidas defines
δίεσις as τὸ ἐλάχιστον μέτρον τῶν ἐναρμονίων διαστημάτων. Cp.
Vitruv. de Arch. v. 3.
διευκρινεῖν. 208 4. To determine. Lat. diiudicare.
διευστοχεῖν. 124 17. To go straight to the mark. Lat. recta ad scopum
tendere. For the genitive cp. Polyb. ii. 45 (of Aratus) ἄνδρα δυνάμενον
πάσης εὐστοχεῖν περιστάσεως.
διηνεκής. 142 2. Unbroken, uninterrupted. Lat. continuus, perpetuus.
διθυραμβοποιός. 194 23. Writer of dithyrambs. Lat. dithyrambicus poëta.
Cp. D.H. p. 188, s.v. διθύραμβος.
διιστάναι. 144 4, 202 17, 204 21, 206 4, 222 5, 224 8, 236 6. To keep
apart. Lat. diducere. Cp. Diog. Laert. iv. 6 ἦν δὲ [ὁ Ἀρκεσίλαος]
ἐν τῇ λαλιᾷ διαστατικὸς τῶν ὀνομάτων, i.e. distinct in his enunciation.
In 230 17 διέστακεν = διέσπακεν.
δίκαιος. 224 2, 10. Legitimate, regular. Lat. iustus. The normal
measure of a long syllable is meant.
δικανικός. 112 11, 252 2. Forensic. Lat. iudicialis, forensis.
διορίζειν. 218 16. To separate by a boundary. Lat. disterminare.
διοχλεῖν. 116 19, 122 18. To distress. Lat. sollicitare.
διπλοῦς. 144 9, 10, 15. Double, compound. Lat. duplex. Cp. Demetr.
p. 276.
δισύλλαβος. 126 13, 168 12, 170 14, 202 14. Disyllabic. Lat. disyllabus.
αἱ δισύλλαβοι (λέξεις) = disyllables.
δίχρονος. 140 17, 19, 142 1, 6, 150 18. Double-timed, doubtful, common.
Lat. communis, anceps.
δόξα. 134 4. Opinion, personal judgment. Lat. opinio. Opposed to
ἐπιστήμη.
δύναμις. 72 25, 26, 130 22, 23, 134 17, 136 20, etc. Power, faculty,
function. Lat. potentia, facultas. Used, more than once in this treatise,
of ‘phonetic value’ or ‘effect.’ Fr. valeur. In 266 7 τῆς ἑαυτοῦ
δυνάμεως denotes ‘mental powers,’ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ διανοίας being used
in the parallel passage of de Demosth. c. 51.
[297]
δυσειδής. 144 4. Ungraceful. Lat. deformis.
δυσέκφορος. 132 2, 162 5, 16, 232 15. Hard to pronounce. Lat. difficilis
pronuntiatu. Cp. δυσεκφόρητος in 220 13.
δυσηχής. 162 15. Ill-sounding. Lat. ingratus auditu. [According to
Sauppe’s conjecture on p. 163 n.: cp. δυσηχές 144 4, as given by PMV.]
δυσπερίληπτος. 206 23. Not easily included. Lat. qui facile includi nequit.
δυσχέρεια. 134 24, 168 3. Offensiveness. Lat. molestia.
δυσωπεῖσθαι. 134 21. To be shy of. Lat. prae pudore reformidare. The
active voice is found in de Lys. c. 11.
Δώριος. 196 1. Dorian. Lat. Dorius, Doricus. Cp. Monro’s Modes of
Ancient Greek Music, passim.
ἐγγίζειν. 144 16. To approach. Lat. appropinquare.
ἐγκάθισμα. 202 25, 232 16. Dwelling on a syllable, prolongation. Lat.
sessio, mora vocis tamquam considentis. Fr. temps d’arrêt. Cp. de
Demosth. c. 43 ἐν τούτοις γὰρ δὴ τά τε φωνήεντα πολλαχῇ συγκρουόμενα
δῆλά ἐστι καὶ τὰ ἡμίφωνα καὶ ἄφωνα, ἐξ ὧν στηριγμούς
τε καὶ ἐγκαθισμοὺς αἱ ἁρμονίαι λαμβάνουσι καὶ τραχύτητας αἱ
φωναὶ συχνάς.
ἐγκαταπλέκειν. 134 12. To interweave. Lat. innectere. The uncompounded
πλέκειν occurs in 154 9.
ἐγκατάσκευος. 182 7. Highly-wrought. Lat. elaboratus. Cp. Demetr. de
Eloc. § 15 οὕτω γὰρ καὶ ἐγκατάσκευος ἔσται (ὁ λόγος) καὶ ἁπλοῦς ἅμα,
καὶ ἐξ ἀμφοῖν ἡδύς, καὶ οὔτε μάλα ἰδιωτικὸς οὔτε μάλα σοφιστικός.
See, further, D.H. pp. 189, 194, and Demetr. p. 276.
ἔγκλισις. 108 3, 264 5. Mood (of verb). Lat. modus. Cp. de Demosth.
c. 52 γένη, πτώσεις, ἀριθμούς, ἐγκλίσεις. In 102 19 τῶν ἐγκλινομένων
= ‘derivative, or secondary, forms.’
ἐγκοπή. 220 13. Hindrance, interruption. Lat. impedimentum. Cp. Ep.
i. ad Cor. ix. 12 ἵνα μὴ ἐγκοπήν τινα δῶμεν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ τοῦ
Χριστοῦ. [In Long. de Subl. xli. 3 κατ’ ἐγκοπάς seems to refer to
notches or incisions as made by carpenters in dovetailing.]
ἐγκύκλιος. 262 20. Broad, general (of education). Lat. orbis doctrinae.
(Quintil. i. 10. 1.) Wilamowitz-Moellendorff Greek Historical Writing
p. 15: “At latest in the school of Posidonius—and I think a little
earlier—the so-called ἐγκύκλιος παιδεία, or ‘universal instruction,’
was formed into a system which has continued to our own Universities
in the form of ‘the seven liberal arts.’ The study of history has no
place in it; astronomy, architecture, and medicine have.”
ἕδρα. 108 4, 234 2, 244 18. Position, foundation. Lat. sedes. Cp.
Demetr. p. 277. So ἑδράσαι 106 7, ἀνέδραστος 232 4, δύσεδρος 106
8, εὔεδρος 106 9.
εἰδικός. 208 12, 246 19. Specific. Lat. specialis.
εἰκαῖος. 74 10. Random, casual. Lat. temerarius.
εἰκών. 124 20. Illustration. Lat. similitudo.
εἰλικρινῶς. 220 11. Completely, with no alloy. Lat. sincere.
εἰσαγωγή. 114 9. Introduction. Lat. praefatio.
[298]
ἐκλογή. 68 4, 12, 74 15, 78 8, 182 6, 200 15, 246 13, 252 27.
Choice. Lat. delectus. The ἐκλογή of words is constantly contrasted
with their σύνθεσις. Cp. ἐκλέγειν 74 9, 182 3.
ἐκλογίζεσθαι. 200 6. To consider fully. Lat. expendere, percensere.
ἐκμαλάττειν. 134 10. To soften. Lat. emollire, mulcere.
ἐκμάττεσθαι. 250 14. To take the impress of. Lat. exprimere, imitari. Cp.
de Demosth. c. 4 τὴν ἐπίθετον καὶ κατεσκευασμένην φράσιν τῶν περὶ
Γοργίαν ἐκμέμακται, and c. 13 τὸν Λυσιακὸν χαρακτῆρα ἐκμέμακται
εἰς ὄνυχα (i.e. ad unguem, ad amussim).
ἐκμέλεια. 124 1. False note. Lat. dissonantia.
ἐκμιμεῖσθαι. 70 4. To copy. Lat. imitari, imitando effingere.
ἐκπληροῦν. 212 15. To fill out, to round off. Lat. orbem orationis implere.
ἔκστασις. 156 20. Astonishment. Lat. stupor. Cp. Ev. Marc. xvi. 8
εἶχε δὲ αὐτὰς τρόμος καὶ ἔκστασις.
ἔκτασις. 204 3, 268 19. Stretching, lengthening. Lat. productio. Cp.
Demetr. p. 277.
ἐκτείνειν. 140 18, 142 10. To lengthen, to prolong. Lat. producere.
ἐκφαίνειν. 154 22. To reproduce. Lat. referre.
ἐκφανής. 246 1. Prominent. Lat. conspicuus.
ἐκφέρειν. 68 12, 84 6, 94 10, 15, 106 19, 108 3, 112 9, 114 1, 116 24,
118 6, 15, etc. To utter, to produce: with various cognate meanings.
Lat. edere, promere.
ἐκφορά. 112 15, 142 7. Utterance. Lat. pronuntiatio.
ἐκφωνεῖν. 140 5. To pronounce. Lat. pronuntiare. Cp. Demetr. p. 278.
ἐλάττωσις. 156 22. Curtailment. Lat. imminutio.
ἐλεγειακός. 256 23. Elegiac. Lat. elegiacus. Coupled with πεντάμετρον.
ἐλεύθερος. 212 9. Unfettered. Lat. liber. Epithet applied to κῶλα.
ἐμπερίοδος. 118 15. In periods, periodic. Lat. periodo inclusus.
ἐμφαίνειν. 110 19, 212 13, 228 7, 254 17, 21. To indicate. Lat.
indicare, ostendere.
ἐναγώνιος. 90 6, 198 1. Forensic. Lat. forensis. With some notion of
combative, incisive, vehement. Cp. δικανικός, p. 196 supra.
ἔναρθρος. 136 22. Articulate. Lat. articulatus.
ἐναρμόνιος. 194 7, 196 3, 11. Enharmonic. Lat. enarmonicus. For the
enharmonic scale see note on 194 7.—In 108 10 and 196 11 the word
is used in a less restricted sense. Cp. de Demosth. c. 24 νῦν μὲν γὰρ
δυσὶ περιλαμβανομένη κώλοις σύμμετρός ἐστι [ἡ περίοδος] καὶ
ἐναρμόνιος καὶ στρογγύλη καὶ βάσιν εἴληφεν ἀσφαλῆ.
ἐνδεχομένων. 96 17. Admissible. Lat. licitus.
ἐνεξουσιάζειν. 196 5: see n. ad loc.
ἐνέργεια. 204 1, 268 5. Activity. Lat. actio.
ἑνικῶς. 106 18. In the singular number. Lat. singulariter.
ἔντεχνος. 134 2, 272 21, 23. According to the rules of art, artistic,
systematic. Lat. artificiosus.
[299]
ἑξάμετρος. 194 3. Of six measures, hexameter (line: στίχος). Lat.
hexameter.
ἑξάπους. 84 21. Of six feet. Lat. sex constans pedibus.
ἕξις. 66 1, 122 24, 268 4, 11, 26. State or habit (of body or mind);
skill based on practice. Lat. habitus, habilitas, peritia.
ἐπαγγέλλεσθαι. 94 9. To profess to teach a subject. Lat. profiteri.
ἐπαγωγός. 162 2. Conducive to. Lat. aptus ad inducendum. For the
genitive cp. s.v. ἀγωγή, p. 285 supra.
ἐπανθεῖν. 198 10. To bloom. Lat. efflorescere.
ἐπεισόδιον. 196 24. Pleasure-giving addition, episode. Lat. episodium.
ἐπιγραφή. 96 13, 104 4. Title. Lat. inscriptio.
ἐπιδείκνυσθαι. 162 2, 228 9, 254 1. To make a display of. Lat. prae
se ferre, ostentare.
ἐπιθαλάμιον (sc. ποίημα). 258 7. Bridal song. Lat. epithalamium.
ἐπίθετον. 102 17. An addition, epithet, adjective (‘the qualifier,’ Puttenham’s
sixteenth-century Arte of English Poesie). Lat. ad nomen
adiunctum, appositum (Quintil. viii. 3. 43; 6. 29). The ἐπίθετον
seems to be regarded by Dionysius as a separate part of speech: cp.
Steinthal Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft bei den Griechen und Römern
ii. p. 251 “Was das ἐπίθετον, das Adjectivum betrifft: so ist es
im Alterthum vielleicht von Niemandem, höchstens aber nur von dem
einen oder andren Grammatiker zum besonderen Redetheil gemacht.”
ἐπικίνδυνος. 80 13. Hazardous. Lat. periculosus. Aventuré would
perhaps be a better French equivalent, in this context, than risqué.
ἐπίκοινος. 150 4. Common (i.e. belonging equally to both). Lat.
communis.
ἐπικός. 214 2, 274 7. Epic. Lat. epicus. ἐπικὴ ποίησις = epic poetry.
ἐπικρύπτειν. 134 16, 198 10. To hide, to veil. Lat. occultare.
ἐπιλαμπρύνειν. 144 2. To make crisp and clear. Lat. clarum reddere. Cp.
Plut. Mor. 912 C καὶ οἱ βάτραχοι, προσδοκῶντες ὄμβρον, ἐπιλαμπρύνουσι
τὴν φωνὴν ὑπὸ χαρᾶς.
ἐπίρρημα. 70 21. Adverb. Lat. adverbium.
ἐπισκοτεῖν. 134 14, 260 1. To overshadow. Lat. obscurare.
ἐπίστασις. 68 1. Attention. Lat. cura. Cp. ἀνεπιστάτως, heedlessly,
74 6: so Long. de Subl. xxxiii. 4 ὑπὸ μεγαλοφυΐας ἀνεπιστάτως
παρενηνεγμένα, ‘introduced with all the heedlessness of genius.’
ἐπιστήμη. 104 15, 110 8, 124 5, 21, 134 3. Knowledge, science. Lat.
scientia.
ἐπίτασις. 210 5. Tightening. Lat. intentio.
ἐπιτάφιος. 116 2, 178 1, 180 8. Funeral speech (sub. λόγος). Lat. oratio
funebris.
ἐπιταχύνειν. 204 8, 22. To quicken. Lat. accelerare.
ἐπιτείνειν. 126 4. To raise the pitch. Lat. intendere.
ἐπιτερπής. 228 12. Delightful. Lat. iucundus.
ἐπιτετηδευμένως. 260 25. Deliberately. Lat. de industria. Cp. ἐπιτηδεύειν
136 18, and ἀνεπιτήδευτος (p. 288 supra).
[300]
ἐπιτήδευσις. 70 6, 212 19. Pains, study. Lat. studium, industria.
ἐπιτρόχαλος. 180 14. Running, tripping. Lat. velox, volubilis. Cp. de
Demosth. c. 40 ἐπιτρόχαλος δή τις γίνεται καὶ καταφερὴς ἡ ῥύσις
τῆς λέξεως, ὥσπερ κατὰ πρανοῦς φερόμενα χωρίου νάματα μηδενὸς
αὐτοῖς ἀντικρούοντος.—In Hom. Il. iii. 213 ἐπιτροχάδην = trippingly,
unfalteringly.
ἐπιτυχής. 268 13. Successful. Lat. voti compos.
ἐπιφέρειν. 88 16. To quote. Lat. citare, laudare, proferre. Cp. Demetr.
p. 281.
ἐποποιός. 194 2, 236 15. Epic poet. Lat. poëta epicus. So τὰ ἔπη (270
19) = versus epici.
ἐποχή. 204 2. Delay, suspense. Lat. impedimentum, retentio.
ἐπῳδός. 194 12, 278 9. After-song, coda, epode. In this sense (that of the
part of a lyric ode which is sung after the strophe and antistrophe)
the word is feminine. In 194 20, if the masculine ὀλίγοις is rightly
read, the special meaning of ἐπῳδός will be refrain, burden: a meaning
somewhat nearer that of the Latin epodos.
ἐρείδειν. 142 13. To thrust. Lat. trudere. So ἔρεισις 204 4. In 210 16
ἐρείδεσθαι = to be firmly planted.
ἑρμηνεία. 66 18, 76 9, 78 19, 84 11, 172 17, 182 5. Expression, style.
Lat. elocutio. The word appears in the title of the treatise περὶ
ἑρμηνείας which passes under the name of Demetrius. So ἑρμηνεύειν
(to express) in 76 9, 186 18, 204 8, 260 20. Cp. Demetr. p. 282
(s.v. ἑρμηνεία and ἑρμηνεύειν).
ἐτυμολογία. 160 6. Etymology: with reference to Plato’s Cratylus. For
Latin equivalents cp. Quintil. i. 6. 28 “etymologia, quae verborum
originem inquirit, a Cicerone dicta est notatio, quia nomen eius apud
Aristotelem invenitur σύμβολον, quod est nota; nam verbum ex
verbo ductum, id est veriloquium, ipse Cicero, qui finxit, reformidat.
sunt qui vim potius intuiti originationem vocent.”
εὐγενής. 136 11, 178 14, 21, 180 3. Well-born, noble. Lat. generosus.
So εὐγενεία 192 8. The εὐγενής is not necessarily γενναῖος (Aristot.
Rhet. ii. 15. 3).
εὔγλωσσος. 70 2. Pleasant on the tongue. Lat. suavis.
εὔγραμμος. 230 31, 246 3. Well-drawn, well-defined. Lat. definitus.
εὐγώνιος. 210 22. Four-square. Lat. qui angulis rectis constat, quadratus.
εὐέπεια. 240 5, 18, 246 1, 268 28. Beauty of language. Lat.
verborum elegantia. In this treatise Dionysius clearly uses the word
with special reference to his main subject—beauty of sound, euphony.
So also εὐεπής 218 10, 222 6, 224 2, 228 5, 230 20; and εὐεπῶς
232 11. In the Classical Review xviii. 19 the present writer has tried
to show that, even in an author so early as Sophocles (Oed. Tyr. 928),
the word εὐέπεια is to be understood in a rhetorical sense (‘elegant
language,’ ‘neatly-turned phrase’: with direct reference to the employment
of a ‘figure’ of rhetoric). But, later, the word was used
of ‘eloquence’ generally (as in the well-known epigram of Simmias
on the tomb of Sophocles himself); and to this wider meaning
Dionysius here gives a special turn of his own.
[301]
εὐήτριος. 234 12. With fine thread, well-woven. Lat. bene textus.
εὔκαιρος. 134 18, 196 25. Timely. Lat. opportunus, tempestivus. So
εὐκαίρως 132 3, εὐκαιρίαν 242 3.
εὐκαταφρόνητος. 74 12. Contemptible. Lat. abiectus, humilis.
εὔκρατος. 210 1, 246 11. Well-blended. Lat. temperatus. Cp. de Demosth.
c. 3 ἡ Θρασυμάχειος ἑρμηνεία, μέση τοῖν δυεῖν καὶ εὔκρατος: Cic.
Orat. 6. 21 “est autem quidam interiectus inter hos medius et quasi
temperatus,” etc.—Both in 210 1 and in 246 11 the well-supported
variant κοινήν is to be noted: it may conceivably have originated in
a gloss on εὔκρατον.—In 220 17 the similar adjective εὐκέραστος is
used, though not in reference to the three ἁρμονίαι.
εὐλάβεια. 234 17. Caution. Lat. cautio. Used in the phrase δι’ εὐλαβείας
ἔχει.
εὔλογος. 158 12. Reasonable. Lat. rationi consentaneus. The reference
is to resemblances which are not ἄλογοι, but have a natural basis and
are grounded in reason.
εὐμελής. 130 6, 134 9. Melodious. Lat. canorus.—On the other hand,
ἐμμελής = in melody, set to music: 124 10, 130 6, 254 2, 8, 270 5;
and so ἐμμέλεια 122 21, 182 2, 266 4.
εὔμετρος. 254 6. Metrical; possessing good metrical qualities. Lat. metricus.—On
the other hand, ἔμμετρος = in metre: 74 4, 76 1, 168 8, 176
1, 21, 254 2, 4, 14, 270 5. In 270 10 ἐμμετρία has good manuscript
authority. Cp. Aristot. Rhet. iii. 8. 1 τὸ δὲ σχῆμα τῆς λέξεως δεῖ
μήτε ἔμμετρον εἶναι μήτε ἄρρυθμον.
εὔμορφος. 84 2, 144 3, 162 1. Of beautiful form. Lat. formosus. So
εὐμορφία 168 4, 264 16.
εὐπάθεια. 250 4. Pleasure. Lat. voluptas. Plur. εὐπάθειαι = Lat.
deliciae.
εὐπαίδευτος. 228 10. Scholarly, cultured. Lat. doctus.
εὐπετής. 218 10, 222 6. Flowing easily. Lat. volubilis. [According to
the reading of P in each passage. But εὐεπές should probably be
read.] Cp. εὔρους in 240 21 and (according to P) in 196 25.
εὐπρόφορος. 132 2. Easy to pronounce. Lat. facilis pronuntiatu.
εὔρους. 240 21. Flowing, copious. Lat. copiosus. See also s.v. εὐπετής,
supra.
εὔρυθμος. 124 10, 130 8, 134 9, 236 3, 254 6, 18. Rhythmical. Lat.
numerosus, moderatus (Cic. de Orat. iii. 48. 184; ii. 8. 34). So εὐρυθμία
118 11, 122 21, 182 2, 254 27: cp. Cic. Orat. 65. 220 “multum
interest utrum numerosa sit, id est, similis numerorum, an plane e
numeris constet oratio,” and Quintil. ix. 4. 56 “idque Cicero optime
videt, ac testatur frequenter, se, quod numerosum sit, quaerere; ut
magis non ἄρρυθμον, quod esset inscitum atque agreste, quam ἔνρυθμον,
quod poëticum est, esse compositionem velit.” For ἔνρυθμος see 130 8.
εὐστομία. 110 18, 120 21. Beauty of sound. Lat. soni suavitas. Cp.
Plato Crat. 405 D, 412 E.
εὔσχημος. 172 6. Graceful. Lat. decorus, speciosus.
[302]
εὐτελής. 78 10, 136 3. Commonplace, cheap, vulgar. Lat. vilis. Cp.
D.H. p. 193, and Aristot. Rhet. iii. 7. 2.
εὔτροχος. 206 14. Running easily. Lat. celer, volubilis. Cp. γλῶσσα
εὔτροχος = a glib tongue (Eur. Bacch. 268).
εὐτυχῶς. 186 3. Happily, successfully. Lat. feliciter. Cp. εὐτυχοῦσιν
198 5, and ἀτυχεῖ 198 16.
εὐφωνία. 266 4. Euphony, musical sound. Lat. vocis dulcedo s. suavitas.
So εὔφωνος 132 1, 134 9, 142 10, 166 7, 17, 230 23, 234 14. For
a modern view of the effect of euphony cp. the words of Jowett
(Dialogues of Plato i. 310): “In all the higher uses of language the
sound is the echo of the sense, especially in poetry, in which beauty
and expressiveness are given to human thoughts by the harmonious
composition of the words, syllables, letters, accents, quantities, rhythms,
rhymes, varieties and contrasts of all sorts.” Hence, though no lover
of the vicious style sometimes termed “poetic prose,” Jowett says in his
Notes and Sayings: “If I were a professor of English, I would teach
my men that prose writing is a kind of poetry.”
ἐφάμιλλος. 116 8. Rivalling, a match for. Lat. aemulus, haud impar.
ἡγεμών. 168 17. Hegemon. The metrical foot ᴗ ᴗ. Cp. de Demosth.
c. 47 ὥσπερ οἴονταί τινες καὶ καλοῦσι τὸν οὕτως κατασκευασθέντα
ῥυθμὸν ἡγεμόνα.
Ἡγησιακός. 90 19. Hegesian, recalling Hegesias. Lat. Hegesiacus. For
Hegesias see Introduction, pp. 52-55 supra.
ἡδονή. 80 16, 118 22, 120 20, 132 19, 21. Charm. Lat. iucunditas,
dulcedo. Fr. charme, agrément, attrait. Cp. 120 20-24 τάττω δὲ ὑπὸ
μὲν τὴν ἡδονὴν τήν τε ὥραν καὶ τὴν χάριν καὶ τὴν εὐστομίαν
καὶ τὴν γλυκύτητα καὶ τὸ πιθανὸν καὶ πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα, ὑπὸ δὲ
τὸ καλὸν τήν τε μεγαλοπρέπειαν καὶ τὸ βάρος καὶ τὴν σεμνολογίαν
καὶ τὸ ἀξίωμα καὶ τὸν πίνον καὶ τὰ τούτοις ὅμοια. See also
Demetr. p. 284. So ἡδύς (suavis, iucundus; sweet, pleasing, agreeable,
attractive, charming), 68 6, 74 13, etc.
ἡδύνειν. 130 11, 146 8, 148 6, 160 15, 164 13. To sweeten; to delight, to
charm. Lat. dulce reddere; demulcere.
ἦθος. 88 12, 160 17, 212 11. Character. Lat. mos, indoles. Cp. Demetr.
p. 284, D.H. p. 193. See Jebb’s Attic Orators i. 30, 31 for pathos
and ethos in Antiphon (with reference to C.V. 212 10). According
to Aristotle’s Rhetoric, a speech may be in, or out of, character in
reference to (1) speaker, (2) audience, (3) subject.
ἡμιστίχιον. 274 17. A half-line, half-verse. Lat. hemistichium. Cp.
Demetr. p. 284, s.v. ἡμίμετρον.
ἡμιτελής. 140 4. Half-perfect. Lat. semiperfectus.
ἡμιτόνιον. 126 5, 19. A half-tone, semitone. Lat. hemitonium.
ἡμίφωνος. 138 13, 140 1, 144 7, 146 5, 220 11. Semi-voiced, semi-vocal.
Lat. semivocalis. ἡμίφωνα γράμματα = litterae semivocales. Cp.
s.v. ἄφωνος, p. 292 supra.
[303]
ἠρεμία. 156 11, 160 4. Rest, immobility. Lat. quies, tranquillitas. So
ἠρεμεῖν 142 1.
ἡρωϊκός. 84 21, 86 3, 88 7, 172 17, 206 10. Heroic (sc. στίχος: the
hexameter line). Lat. heroicus. In 172 17 and 206 10, with μέτρον.
ἡσυχῇ. 148 8. Softly, gently. Lat. sensim.
ἠχεῖσθαι. 138 12, 142 7. To be sounded. Lat. pronuntiari, sonare.
ἦχος. 130 19, 138 11, 142 14, 19, etc. Sound. Lat. sonus.
θεατρικός. 212 16, 216 19, 228 8, 236 11. Theatrical, showy. Lat.
theatralis. Cp. de Demosth. c. 25 ἐπὶ τὰ θεατρικὰ τὰ Γοργίεια ταυτὶ
παραγίνεται, τὰς ἀντιθέσεις καὶ τὰς παρισώσεις λέγω.
θεοβλάβεια. 184 23. Madness, blindness. Lat. mens divinitus laesa.
θεώρημα. 72 12, 16, 88 14, 96 25, 104 11, etc. Investigation, speculation;
rule. Lat. quaestio; praeceptum artis. Cp. θεωρία 66 8, 96 14,
98 2, 102 25, 104 3, etc., and θεωρεῖν 152 26, 204 3, 210 9.
θηλυκός. 106 21. Of the feminine gender. Lat. femininus.
θῆλυς. 172 7. Effeminate. Lat. muliebris, effeminatus. Cp. Larue van
Hook Metaphorical Terminology of Greek Rhetoric, p. 26, s.v. ἀνδρώδης.
θηριώδης. 146 13. Beast-like. Lat. ferinus. The term will, of course,
apply to vipers as well as other animals: cp. τὸ θηρίον in Acta Apost.
xxviii. 4, and ἡ θηριακή (‘antidote against a poisonous bite’), whence
the word treacle.
θορυβεῖν. 122 22. To hiss off the stage. Lat. explodere.
θρυλιγμός. 124 1. Harsh sound, false note. Lat. murmur inconcinnum,
dissonantia. Cp. Hymn. Hom. in Merc. 486 ὃς δέ κεν αὐτὴν | νῆϊς
ἐὼν τὸ πρῶτον ἐπιζαφελῶς ἐρεείνῃ, | μὰψ αὔτως κεν ἔπειτα μετήορά
τε θρυλίζοι.
ἰαμβεῖον. 258 25, 262 4. Iambic line. Lat. versus iambicus.
ἴαμβος. 170 7, 270 19. Iambus. The metrical foot ᴗ –. The adjective
ἰαμβικός in 184 11, 258 19, 276 10.
ἰδέα. 88 6, 104 8, 116 12, 198 17, 200 5, 248 4. Kind, aspect. Lat.
genus, aspectus.
ἰδίωμα. 240 23. Peculiarity. Lat. proprietas. Cp. Long. p. 278, D.H.
p. 193.
ἰδιώτης. 124 2, 272 19. Amateur, uncultivated. Lat. imperitus. Idiots
long bore this meaning of ‘ordinary persons’ in English: cp. Jeremy
Taylor, “humility is a duty in great ones as well as in idiots.”
ἰθυφάλλιον. 86 8. Ithyphallic poem. Lat. carmen ithyphallicum. A
poem composed in the measure of the hymns to Priapus. Cp.
Masqueray Abriss der griechischen Metrik pp. 191, 192.
ἰσομεγέθης. 270 16. Equal in size. Lat. par magnitudine.
ἱστορία. 214 1. History. Lat. historia. So ἱστορικός, suited to narrative,
90 6. In 66 14 ἱστορία = inquiry, investigation.
ἰσχυρός. 162 23, 210 17, 216 16. Strong, vigorous. Lat. firmus, robustus.
In 216 16 there may be some sense of nerveux.—ἰσχύς occurs in 68 19,
72 19, etc.; ῥώμη in 84 13; κράτος in 72 14.
[304]
Ἰωνικός. 86 14. Ionic. Lat. Ionicus. The Ionic tetrameter is meant.
Cp. Masqueray, op. cit. pp. 137 ff.
καθαρός. 68 4, 74 18, 230 14. Pure. Lat. purus. For Greek and
Latin authors as conscious purists, cp. Terence’s “in hac est pura
oratio,” or Dionysius’ τὸ καθαρεύειν τὴν διάλεκτον (de Lysia c. 2).
See C. N. Smiley’s dissertation on Latinitas and Ἑλληνισμός, and L.
Laurand’s Études sur le style des discours de Cicéron pp. 19 ff. (the
section headed “Pureté de la langue”).
καθολικός. 134 2. General. Lat. universalis.
καινότης. 232 20. Novelty. Lat. novitas. Used in a condemnatory
sense: ‘innovation,’ ‘singularity,’ ‘eccentricity.’
καινοτομεῖν. 254 23. To break new ground. Lat. novare. It is a mining
metaphor—from the opening of a new vein. Cp. de Thucyd. c. 2.
καινουργεῖν. 200 18. To introduce new features. Lat. novitati studere.
καιρός. 132 15, 20, 21. Sense of measure, tact, taste. See S. H. Butcher’s
Harvard Lectures on Greek Subjects, pp. 117-120, for καιρός as a word
without any single or precise equivalent in any other language. Cp.
εὔκαιρος 134 18, 196 25; εὐκαίρως 132 3; εὐκαιρία 242 3.
κακόφωνος. 132 1, 164 11. Ill-sounding. Lat. male sonans. Cp. Demetr.
p. 286.
καλλιεπής. 180 3. Choice in diction. Lat. suaviloquens. It is the word
used of Agathon in Aristoph. Thesm. 49 (Classical Review xviii. 20).
Cp. D.H. p. 193, with the passages there quoted: to which may be
added Plato Apol. 17 B κεκαλλιεπημένους λόγους, and (for ἔπος only)
Thucyd. iii. 67 λόγοι ἔπεσι κοσμηθέντες and ii. 41 ὅστις ἔπεσι μὲν
τὸ αὐτίκα τέρψει.
καλλιλογία. 164 20, 166 12. Elegant language. Lat. venusta elocutio.
So καλλιλογεῖν of ‘verbal embellishment,’ 80 12.
καλλιρήμων. 74 18, 166 7. Couched in elegant phrase. Lat. elegantibus
ornatus verbis.
κάλλος. 78 19, 84 10, 94 2, 160 13, 172 16, 182 5, 256 5. Beauty (of
language). Lat. pulchritude. Cp. Aristot. Rhet. iii. 2. 13.
καλός. 118 23, 120 22, 136 8, 160 13, 14, 178 15, passim. Beautiful.
Lat. pulcher. The word is inadequately translated by ‘beautiful’;
and ‘fine’ has unfortunate associations of its own, especially in relation
to writing. ‘Noble’ would often be nearer the mark, but that rendering
is needed for γενναῖος and εὐγενής (cp. 136 13, 178 15, etc.).
In English we lack a single word to denote that noble beauty which
is sometimes seen in a human face, and which suggests an ultimate
harmony of things. The meaning of καλός, as distinguished from
ἡδύς (in reference to composition), may be gathered from such passages
as 68 5 (τῷ σεμνῷ τὸ ἡδύ) and 120 22-24 (see under ἡδονή, p. 302
supra). The antithesis is not, as has sometimes been thought, that
of pleasure to the ear and beauty to the mind. In this treatise
Dionysius is dealing not with subject matter (ὁ πραγματικὸς τόπος)
but with expression, and that chiefly from the euphonic point of view.
καλός includes certain forms of pleasure—of the ear as well as of the
mind: cp. Aristot. Rhet. iii. 1405 b and Demetr. de Eloc. § 177 ὡρίσατο
δ’ αὐτὰ (καλὰ ὀνόματα) Θεόφραστος οὕτως· κάλλος ὀνόματός ἐστι
τὸ πρὸς τὴν ἀκοὴν ἢ πρὸς τὴν ὄψιν ἡδύ, ἢ τὸ τῇ διανοίᾳ ἔντιμον.
Cp., further, gravitas)(suavitas, Cic. Or. §§ 62, 182; honestus)(iucundus,
Quintil. ix. 4. 146; ἡδεῖαν καὶ μεγαλοπρεπῆ Aristot. Rhet. iii. 12.
[305]
κατακεκλασμένος. 184 17. Broken, nerveless. Lat. fractus, mollis. Fr.
faible, maigre, rompu. Cp. κατακλωμένους, 262 12, where Dionysius
seems to indicate the broken (but by no means nerveless) foot
– ᴗ – –
(τοσαύ)την ὑπάρξαι.
So Long. de Subl. xli. 1 μικροποιοῦν δ’ οὐδὲν
οὕτως ἐν τοῖς ὑψηλοῖς, ὡς ῥυθμὸς κεκλασμένος λόγων καὶ σεσοβημένος,
οἷον δὴ πυρρίχιοι καὶ τροχαῖοι καὶ διχόρειοι, τέλεον εἰς
ὀρχηστικὸν συνεκπίπτοντες. Cp. Demetr. p. 287.
καταλαμβάνειν. 230 4, 12. To check. Lat. cohibere, premere. Usener’s
insertion of σιωπῇ in 230 12 is perhaps unnecessary. Herod. v. 21
ὁ τῶν Περσέων θάνατος οὕτω καταλαμφθεὶς ἐσιγήθη (i.e. “Persarum
caedes ita silentio compressa est”) does not decide the point.
κατάληξις. 178 20, 184 9, 258 13. Final syllable. Lat. syllaba terminalis.
With 178 20 cp. 178 13 καὶ συλλαβὴν ὑφ’ ἧς τελειοῦται τὸ
κῶλον. See also Long. de Subl. xli. 2 τὰς ὀφειλομένας καταλήξεις,
and Demetr. p. 287 (s.v. καταληκτικός).
κατάλογος. 168 1. Catalogue. Lat. enumeratio. The Homeric ‘Catalogue’
(in Il. ii.) is meant.
καταμετρεῖν. 174 24, 182 16. To measure. Lat. emetiri. Cp. de Demosth.
c. 39.
καταπυκνοῦν. 162 4, 16. To pack. Lat. stipare. Fr. charger.
κατασκευή. 70 4, 156 13, 160 19, 164 12. Artistic treatment. Lat.
ornatus. The Latin apparatus, and French apprêt, will also give something
of the meaning. Cp. κατασκευάζειν 106 3, 140 9, 154 3, 14,
17, 158 1, 4, etc. See also D.H. p. 194, under κατασκευή (with
the passages there quoted) and κατασκευάζειν.
κατασπᾶν. 204 24. To pull down. Lat. detrahere. Cp. the use of κατεσπευσμένα
and κατεσπεῦσθαι in Long. de Subl. xix. 2, xl. 4. [It is
possible that κατεσπεῦσθαι should be read in C.V. 204 24.]
κατάστασις. 200 8. State. Lat. condicio.
καταφορά. 204 19. Downrush. Lat. decursus.
καταχλευάζειν. 264 9. To jeer. Lat. cavillari, irridere.
κατάχρησις. 78 16. Catachresis. Lat. abusio. A definition is given by
Quintil. viii. 6. 34 “eo magis necessaria κατάχρησις, quam recte
dicimus abusionem, quae non habentibus nomen suum accommodat, quod
in proximo est: sic Equum divina Palladis arte Aedificant.” Cp. Cic.
Orat. 27. 94, where the same Latin equivalent is given, though not
the same description of the figure: “Aristoteles autem translationi et
haec ipsa subiungit et abusionem, quam κατάχρησιν vocant, ut cum
minutum dicimus animum pro parvo, et abutimur verbis propinquis,
si opus est, vel quod delectat vel quod decet” (cp. Auct. ad Her. iv.
c. 33). In Cic. Acad. ii. 47. 143, “Quid ergo Academici appellamur?
an abutimur gloria nominis?” the meaning probably is: ‘do we use
the glorious name of ‘Academic’ in an unnatural way?’
[306]
κατεσπουδασμένος. 156 7. Earnest. Lat. anxius, instans. Cp. Herod. ii.
174.
κεραννύναι. 218 7, 240 17, 246 12, 248 17, etc. To mix, to temper.
Lat. commiscere, temperare. Cp. the adjectives εὔκρατος and εὐκέραστος,
p. 301 supra. The general sense in 248 17 is, ‘qui aient su mieux
qu’eux faire un heureux mélange des couleurs.’
κερατοειδής. 146 12. Sounding like a horn. Lat. sonus veluti corneus.
κερατοειδεῖς ἤχους = ‘sounds like (the sounds of) a horn’: cp. Hymn.
Hom. in Merc. 81 μυρσινοειδέας ὄζους, ‘branches like (the branches
of) myrtle.’
κεφάλαιον. 68 18, 120 25, 130 14, 136 7, 160 8. Heading, topic, sum and
substance. Lat. caput, summa. So κεφαλαιωδῶς, 112 21, under heads.
κηλεῖν. 124 13. To charm. Lat. permulcere.
κινεῖν. 146 8, 194 12. To excite, to disturb. Lat. movere. So κίνησις,
movement, 124 8, 160 3, 244 20; and κινητικός, 158 12.
κλέπτειν. 196 17. To cheat, to disguise. Lat. dissimulare, obtegere. Cp.
Demetr. p. 288.
κοινός. 120 13, 122 14, 148 14, 164 22, 200 7, 210 1 (according to one
reading), 236 11, 252 28. Common, mixed, general. Lat. communis.
For the meaning ‘in general terms’ cp. de Dinarcho c. 8 λέγω δὲ
ταῦτα οὐκ ἐν τῷ καθόλου τρόπῳ, ὡς μηδὲν τούτων κατορθοῦντος,
ἀλλ’ ἐν τῷ κοινοτέρῳ καὶ ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολύ.
κολακικός. 236 9. Alluring. Lat. blandus.
κόμμα. 270 15, 276 2. Short clause, phrase. Lat. incisum (Cic. Orat.
62. 211; Quintil. ix. 4. 22). Fr. incise. Cp. Demetr. p. 288;
Quintil, ix. 4. 122 “incisum (quantum mea fert opinio) erit sensus
non expleto numero conclusus, plerisque pars membri”; C.V. 270 15
κόμματα ... βραχύτερα κώλων. So κομμάτιον 274 14, 276 6.
[The terms comma, colon, and period are now specially applied to
punctuation.] For illustrations of κῶλα and κόμματα drawn from
Cicero see Laurand’s Études p. 128. In de Demosth. c. 39 the
adjective κομματικῶς is found: ἀποιήτως δέ πως καὶ ἀφελῶς
καὶ τὰ πλείω κομματικῶς (i.e. per brevia commata et incisa) κατεσκευάσθαι
βούλεται.
κόπτειν. 132 4, 198 7. To smite upon, to weary. Lat. obtundere. Used
in reference to the ear, when it receives ‘hammer-strokes of sound.’
κόρος. 124 18, 132 11, 192 18, 196 18, 252 25. Satiety. Lat. satietas
(Cic. Orat. 65. 219). In using this word Dionysius often has in mind
Pindar Nem. vii. 52 (κόρον δ’ ἔχει καὶ μέλι καὶ τὰ τέρπν’ ἄνθε’
ἀφροδίσια): a passage which he quotes in Ep. ad Pomp. c. 3.
κορυφή. 248 4. Top, head. Lat. caput. Cp. κορυφαῖος (headman)
and ἀκόρυφος (230 31).
[307]
κορωνίς. 94 4. Colophon, finis. Lat. coronis. μέχρι κορωνίδος διελθεῖν
= ‘usque ad calcem perlegere,’ ‘from title to colophon.’
κρᾶσις. 130 25, 154 10, 220 12. A mixing, blending. Lat. mistura.
κράτιστος. 70 1, 120 18, 134 20, 142 5, 150 10, 160 5, 162 3, 15,
176 15, 196 10, 206 21, 214 16, 250 16, 260 21. Strongest, finest,
best. Lat. fortissimus, optimus. It is not always easy to determine
in these passages whether the meaning is general or special. But in
162 3 κρατίστοις is opposed to μαλακωτάτοις. When he wishes to be
quite explicit, Dionysius can use ἰσχυρός (162 23), or βέλτιστος.
κράτος. 70 5, 72 14, etc. Force, power. Lat. vis, robur.
κρητικός. 174 11, 260 23, 262 9. Cretic. The metrical foot – ᴗ –. For
the cretic foot cp. Cic. de Orat. iii. 47. 183 and Or. 64. 218; Quintil.
ix. 4. 81, 97, 104, 107. In the Epitome c. 17 the equivalent term
ἀμφίμακρος is used instead of κρητικός. For the excessive use in
prose of the cretic (as, indeed, of any other distinctly metrical) rhythm
cp. Walter C. Summers in Classical Quarterly ii. 173.
κριτήριον. 250 7. Criterion. Lat. iudicium.
κροῦσις. 124 8, 144 1, 268 7. Stroke; note (of an instrument). Lat.
pulsus.
κτενίζειν. 264 22. To comb. Lat. pectere. Parallel metaphors from
Latin literature are quoted in Larue van Hook’s Metaphorical Terminology
of Greek Rhetoric p. 23.
κυκλικός. 174 4. Cyclic. Lat. cyclicus. Goodell (Greek Metric pp. 168
ff.) points out that the much-debated question of ‘cyclic’ or ‘three-timed’
anapaests and dactyls hinges on this passage (174 4), together
with part of c. 20 (204 16-206 16). As he says (p. 175 ibid.), “It is
clear that Dionysius does not regard even these irrational dactyls as
three-timed merely; the nearest approach to that view is in the
remark that some are not much longer than trochees. But that
implies that even the briefest are somewhat longer than trochees.”
Goodell also suggests (p. 181) that κυκλικός in Dionysius corresponds
to στρογγύλος in a passage of Aristides Quintilianus. Clearly the
elaborate structure of the ‘cyclic dactyl’ cannot stand securely upon
so slight a foundation as these statements of Dionysius. See further in
Goodell (op. cit.), and also in L. Vernier Traité de métrique grecque et
latine c. 14 pp. 169 ff.
κύκλος. 198 6, 212 14, 246 3. A circle, a round. Lat. orbis, ambitus.
κύριος. 84 5, 208 24, 246 11. Accredited, regular, proper. Lat. proprius.
Fr. propre (in le mot propre). Cp. D.H. p. 195, Demetr. p. 289;
and (in addition to the passages there quoted) Quintil. i. 5. 71 “propria
sunt verba, cum id significant, in quod primo denominata sunt: translata,
cum alium natura intellectum, alium loco praebent.” The meaning
‘proper,’ ‘literal,’ is well illustrated by 208 24, where κυρίοις (‘used
in the ordinary sense’) is opposed to μεταφορικοῖς.
κῶλον. 72 6, 9, 104 9, 110 10, 176 2, 178 6, 7, 194 13, 22, 218 18,
230 16, 234 20, 21, 276 2, 6, 14, 278 6, etc., passim. Member, clause,
group of words. Lat. membrum. Fr. membre de phrase. Cp. Demetr.
p. 289, and Aristot. Rhet. iii. 9. 5 κῶλον δ’ ἐστὶν τὸ ἕτερον μόριον
ταύτης [sc. περιόδου], Quintil. ix. 4. 22 “membra, quae κῶλα
(dicuntur),” Long, de Subl. xl. 1 ἡ τῶν μελῶν [this illustrates the
metaphor in κῶλον] ἐπισύνθεσις. For the length of the κῶλον cp.
Sandys’ Orator of Cicero p. 222 and Laurand’s Études pp. 127-9;
and see, generally, A. du Mesnil Über die rhetorischen Kunstformen,
Komma, Kolon, Periode.
[308]
κωμῳδεῖν. 264 9. To scoff. Lat. iocari, illudere.
λαμβάνειν. 100 26, 104 17, 20, 106 18, 19, 108 2, 5, 8, passim. To
take, to employ. Lat. sumere, adhibere.
λεαίνειν. 130 19, 164 12. To smooth, to fall softly on. Lat. polire, mulcere.
λεῖος. 132 1, 154 12, 162 23, 222 5, 228 4, 234 14. Smooth. Lat.
levis. So λειότης (douceur) 240 6. Cp. Demetr. de Eloc. § 176 παρὰ
δὲ τοῖς μουσικοῖς λέγεταί τι ὄνομα λεῖον, καὶ ἕτερον τὸ τραχύ, καὶ
ἄλλο εὐπαγές, καὶ ἄλλ’ ὀγκηρόν. λεῖον μὲν οὖν ἐστιν ὄνομα τὸ
διὰ φωνηέντων ἢ πάντων ἢ διὰ πλειόνων, οἷον Αἴας, τραχὺ δὲ οἷον
βέβρωκεν.
λεκτικός. 66 7, 96 9. Relating to style or expression. Lat. qui ad elocutionem
spectat. ὁ λεκτικὸς τόπος = the province of expression, as distinguished
from ὁ πραγματικὸς τόπος.—λεκτικῶς, 258 3, = after the manner of
prose.
λέξις. 66 16, 70 3, 11, 14, 74 3, 8, 84 15 (‘passages’), 88 22, 25,
90 4, 110 9, 112 6, passim. Speech or language; utterance; diction;
style; word, expression, passage. Lat. dictio, elocutio, verbum s. locutio.
For the broad meaning ‘word’ or ‘phrase,’ common in Greek writers
of the later periods, cp. 66 16, 124 23, 128 5, 168 10, 202 22, 206 6,
268 19.
λῆρος. 90 20. Trumpery. Lat. ineptiae. Cp. de Demosth. c. 25 καὶ διὰ
τῶν λήρων τούτων κοσμεῖ τὴν φράσιν.
λιτός. 76 8. Trifling. Lat. exiguus, humilis. For λιτός = plain, simple,
cp. Aristot. Rhet. iii. 16 ποικίλος καὶ οὐ λιτός.
λογάδην. 210 21. Casually. Lat. fortuito. Dionysius has in mind not
selected stones, but stones collected (picked up) as they lie. Cp. Joseph.
Antiqq. Iud. iv. 8. 5 (Naber) καὶ βωμὸς εἷς ἐκ λίθων μὴ κατειργασμένων
ἀλλὰ λογάδην συγκειμένων (i.e. collecticiis), and Thucyd. iv. 31
καὶ γάρ τι καὶ ἔρυμα αὐτόθι ἦν παλαιὸν λίθων λογάδην πεποιημένον,
vi. 66 καὶ ἐπὶ τῷ Δάσκωνι ἔρυμά τι, ᾗ εὐεφοδώτατον ἦν τοῖς
πολεμίοις, λίθοις λογάδην καὶ ξύλοις διὰ ταχέων ὤρθωσαν.
λογικός. 146 14. Rational. Lat. rationalis. This passage (θηριώδους γὰρ
καὶ ἀλόγου μᾶλλον ἢ λογικῆς ἐφάπτεσθαι δοκεῖ φωνῆς ὁ συριγμός)
helps to illustrate the use of λογικός in 130 3 (δεδειγμένης τῆς διαφορᾶς
ᾗ διαφέρει μουσικὴ λογικῆς), where singing and ordinary speech (the
sounds of music and those of spoken language) are contrasted.
λογογράφος. 158 1. Prose-writer. Lat. solutae orationis scriptor. So
perhaps Aristot. Rhet. ii. 11 καὶ ὧν ἔπαινοι καὶ ἐγκώμια λέγονται
ἢ ὑπὸ ποιητῶν ἢ λογογράφων, and Thucyd. i. 21 καὶ οὔτε ὡς ποιηταὶ
ὑμνήκασι ... οὔτε ὡς λογογράφοι ξυνέθεσαν κτλ.: though in
both these passages ‘chroniclers’ may be specially meant. For the
meaning ‘professional speech-writer’ cp. Aristot. Rhet. iii. 12. 2.
In C.V. 154 17 συγγραφέων is found in the same sense (‘prose-writers’)
as λογογράφοι in 158 1.
[309]
λογοείδεια. 272 15. Prose-character. Lat. color prosaicus. Fr. la couleur
prosaïque. The word is well explained and illustrated by a scholiast
on Hephaestion (Westphal Scriptores Metrici Graeci i. 167): πολιτικὸν
δέ ἐστι τὸ ἄνευ πάθους ἢ τρόπου πεποιημένον, οἷον
ἵππους τε ξανθὰς ἑκατὸν καὶ πεντήκοντα [Il. xi. 680],
ὅπερ ταὐτόν ἐστι τῷ λογοειδεῖ.—In Demetr. de Eloc. § 41 τὸ λογικόν
is found in the same sense.
λόγος. 64 13, 66 5, 8, 70 10, 72 7, 10, 14, 74 6, 76 2, 84 14, 16,
92 23, 94 2, passim. Discourse, language. Lat. oratio, sermo. Often
used of prose, as opposed to poetry: cp. 84 14, 16, 108 11 (λόγοις
πεζοῖς), 118 22, 154 2 (λόγοις ψιλοῖς), 166 4, 208 6, 270 17,
272 9, 13, 17, 19, 28, 278 6, 9 (where the meaning probably is ‘a
piece of continuous prose’), 280 18; so καὶ ἐν ποιήσει καὶ ἐν λόγοις
(Aristot. Rhet. iii. 2. 7; further references in Bonitz’ Index Aristotelicus
p. 433). In many passages (e.g. 66 5, 210 8, 218 1, 248 4) ‘writing’
or ‘literature’ (cp. ἡ τῶν λόγων φιλοσοφία = ‘the study of literature,’
Rhet. ad Alex. c. 1) will be a possible modern equivalent, though we
must always bear in mind the Greek point of view, that what we
call ‘literature’ was something conveyed by the living voice,—something
spoken or read aloud.—See also s.v. ἄμετρος p. 287 supra.
Λύδιος. 196 2. Lydian. Lat. Lydius. Cp. Monro’s Modes of Ancient
Greek Music, passim.
μαλακός. 132 1, 154 11, 162 3, etc. Soft. Lat. mollis. So μαλθακός
90 20. In some passages (90 20, 170 9) the word suggests the
idea of ‘lacking in backbone,’ ‘unmanly,’ ‘effeminate.’ Fr. délicat, or
(rather) mou.
μεγαλοπρεπής. 136 12, 166 2, 18, etc. Grand, impressive, splendid.
Lat. magnificus. Fr. magnifique. So μεγαλοπρέπεια (la grandeur),
120 22, 164 20.
μέγεθος. 172 11, 174 19. Grandeur, elevation. Lat. magnitudo, sublimitas.
Fr. ampleur. Cp. Demetr. p. 292.
μεθαρμόζειν. 112 2. To arrange differently, to re-arrange. Lat. aliter
componere.
μειοῦν. 128 18, 152 20. To lessen, to curtail. Lat. minuere. Fr. retrancher.
So μείωσις 110 15. The word does not, in the C.V., bear
the special sense of extenuare.
μελικός. 130 7, 252 21, 254 21, 278 4. Melodious, lyric. Lat. lyricus.
In English ‘lyric’ is a more generally intelligible rendering than
‘melic,’ though less exact. “To the writers of the Alexandrian age,
who introduced and gave currency to the expression, ‘lyric’ meant
primarily what the name imports—poetry sung to the accompaniment
of the lyre.... More appropriate than ‘lyric,’ as an exact and
comprehensive designation of all poetry that was sung to a musical
accompaniment, is ‘melic,’ the term in vogue among the Greeks of the
classic ages,” Weir Smyth Greek Melic Poets pp. xvii, xviii. Apparently
the adjectives μελικός and λυρικός are both late.
[310]
μελιχρός. 70 2. Honey-sweet. Lat. mellitus. Cp. de Demosth. c. 48 ἔν τε
ταῖς μεταβολαῖς τοτὲ μὲν τὸ ἀρχαιοπρεπὲς καὶ αὐστηρόν, τοτὲ δὲ
τὸ μελιχρὸν καὶ φιλόκαινον ἐμφαινόμενον.
μέλος. 204 3, limb: 122 24, 126 21 (bis), 194 7, 13, tune, melody: 120
18, 122 11, 130 4, 11, melodious effect, tunefulness: 92 22, 120 26,
126 23, 154 2, 192 21, 194 5, 250 11, 16, 254 5, 8, 15, 272 10,
278 6, 280 18, words set to music, song, aria, chant, lay, lyric. Lat.
cantus, carmen, etc. Similarly also μελοποιία 214 3: μελοποιός 194
18, 236 16, 22, 248 13, 270 22, 272 5: μελῳδεῖν 126 18, 128 5:
μελῳδία 122 16, 194 8, 196 2.
μερίζειν. 144 22, 220 25. To divide. Lat. distribuere.
μέρος. 68 6, 70 14, 96 1, etc. Part. Lat. pars. τὰ τῆς λέξεως μέρη =
‘the parts of speech,’ 70 14, 96 14, etc. See also μόριον, p. 311.
μέσος. 148 18, 150 11, 210 6, 7, 8, 236 2, 246 10. Middle, intermediate,
average. Lat. medius. So μέσως 146 10, and μεσότης 246 15 (bis)
(with reference to Aristotle’s use of the word for le juste milieu), 248 11.
μεταβάλλειν. 194 1, 2. To change, to vary. Lat. mutare. As its passive,
μετακειμένην 266 1.
μεταβολή. 120 19, 122 12, 124 11, 25, 134 18, 19. Variety. Lat.
varietas, diversitas. The object of μεταβολή, as conceived by
Dionysius, is to diversify style in order to avoid a monotonous uniformity.
Variety is one of the chief essentials of good writing, not
only in Greek but in all other languages.
μεταλαμβάνειν. 132 7. To interchange. Lat. commutare.
μεταπτωτικός. 140 20. Variable. Lat. mutabilis. So μεταπίπτειν 96
17, 250 7.
μετασκευή. 104 19, 108 9, 110 16 (e coni. Schaef.), 114 10. Modification.
Lat. mutatio. So μετασκευάζειν 110 6. Cp. text in 110 16 with 104
19, 108 9.
μεταφορά. 78 15. Transference, metaphor. “The figure of transport,”
Puttenham. Lat. translatio.
μετέωρος. 148 23. Upper. Lat. superior (τοὺς μετεώρους ὀδόντας = dentes
superiores).
μετοχή. 72 1. Participle. Lat. participium. Cp. D.H. p. 196.
μετρικός. 140 11, 172 2, 174 22, 176 7, 218 19. Metrical. Lat. metricus.
172 2 and 174 22 οἱ μετρικοί = ‘the metrists,’ ‘the theorists on
metre’: cp. οἱ ῥυθμικοί 172 20.
μέτριος. 132 8, 150 9, 214 12, 222 26, 230 22, 234 22, 246 13. Moderate,
fair. Lat. aequus.
μέτρον. 74 5, 84 16, 88 6, 8, 92 22, 118 22, 120 26, 172 17, passim.
Measure, metre, verse, line. Lat. metrum, versus. In Aristot. Poet. iv.
7 metres are described as sections of rhythm (τὰ γὰρ μέτρα ὅτι μόρια
τῶν ῥυθμῶν ἐστι φανερόν): that is, they are ‘measures,’ or ‘verses’;
‘parts of rhythm,’ which is indefinite and never comes to an end—μέτρον
being rhythm cut, as it were, into definite lengths (Cope
Introduction to Aristotle’s Rhetoric p. 387). When contrasted with
μέλη (cp. Plato Gorg. 502 C τό τε μέλος—‘the music’—καὶ τὸν
ῥυθμὸν καὶ τὸ μέτρον), μέτρα seems to denote the non-lyrical metres
generally (hexameters, iambic trimeters, etc.): see 92 22, 120 26, 192
21, and especially 270 18-23.
[311]
μῆκος. 150 22, 154 6, 204 2, 224 15, 264 4. Length. Lat. longitudo.
So μηκύνειν (to lengthen) 132 7, 152 24, 224 8, 13, 246 8. In 246 8
(and also in 276 9, where P gives μηκύνειν and MV give μηκύνειν
τὸν λόγον) μηκύνειν is used absolutely (= μακρηγορεῖν: cp. Aristoph.
Lys. 1131 πόσους εἴποιμ’ ἂν ἄλλους, εἴ με μηκύνειν δέοι;). In
132 7 the meaning is ‘to prolong, or continue, in the same case with
similar terminations’: just as Dionysius himself, inadvertently no
doubt, repeats -ων in 132 9, 10.
μῖγμα. 208 18. Mixture, blend. Lat. mistura. Cp. μῖξις 130 25, 166 9;
and also D.H. p. 197. It is possible that Dionysius may have written
μεῖγμα, as in earlier Greek: in Ep. ad Pomp. c. 2 it is to be noticed
that the manuscripts give δεῖγμα, where the sense clearly calls for
μεῖγμα.
μικρόκομψος. 90 20. Affected, finical. Lat. bellulus.
μικρολογία. 266 11. Trifling, pettiness. Lat. rerum minutarum cura. In
Theophrastus’ Characters the word is used of attention to trifles on the
part of the mean or parsimonious man. Cp. also Demetr. p. 293, s.v.
μικρολογεῖν.
μικρόφωνος. 142 9. Small-voiced, non-resonant. Lat. qui vocem habet
exiguam, sonum exiliorem.
μίμημα. 160 2. Imitation. Lat. imitamentum. [F.’s reading here is
μηνύματα, ‘expressions which indicate’: cp. de Demosth. c. 51 init.]
μιμητικός. 158 4, 11, 200 11. Imitative. Lat. ad imitandum aptus. So
μιμητικῶς 202 1.
μνημεῖον. 266 7. Memorial. Lat. monumentum.
μολοττός. 172 1, 184 4. Molossus. Lat. molossus. The metrical foot
– – –.
μονογράμματος. 152 20. Consisting of a single letter. Lat. qui unius est
litterae.
μονόμετρος. 270 23. Consisting of one metre. Lat. monometer. Applicable
to poems, like the Iliad and the Aeneid, which are written throughout
in a single metre.
μονοσύλλαβος. 168 11, 202 14. Monosyllabic. Lat. monosyllabus.
μόριον. 70 10, 96 3, 98 6, 106 11, 12, passim. Part, especially part of
speech. Lat. pars, pars orationis. The meaning ‘part of speech’
appears in such passages as ποῖον ὄνομα ἢ ῥῆμα ἢ τῶν ἄλλων τι
μορίων (106 12), τὰ μόρια τοῦ λόγου (110 1), ἓν μόριον λόγου (126 7),
πᾶν ὄνομα καὶ ῥῆμα καὶ ἄλλο μόριον λέξεως (168 10). ‘Words’
simply might serve as a rendering in many cases, except that it is
usually well to preserve Dionysius’ idea of ‘words in their syntactical
relations,’ ‘words in a sentence.’ In 232 18 the meaning may be ‘in
every word’: so 130 7, 134 25, 220 3, 222 10, 224 11.
[312]
μοῦσα. 126 16, 252 20. Music, melody. Lat. musica concinnitas. So
μουσική 124 20, 128 18; ὁ μουσικός 138 6.
μυγμός. 138 10. A moaning, muttering, murmur, humming. Lat. gemitus.
Cp. Demetr. p. 294, and Aesch. Eum. 117, 120.
μύκημα. 158 13. Bellowing. Lat. mugitus.
νεαρός. 66 16, 246 5. Youthful. Lat. iuvenilis. Cp. note on μειρακιώδης
in D.H. p. 196.
νήτη. 210 7. Lowest note. Lat. ima chorda. See L. & S. s.v. νεάτη.
νόημα. 66 5, 74 16, 84 6, 92 17, 112 15, 264 16. Idea. Lat. sententia.
Cp. νόησις (thought, perception) 74 3, 268 9; and D.H. p. 197.
νοῦς. 212 15, 276 1, 8. Meaning. Lat. sententia. Fr. sens, pensée.
ξένος. 78 17, 252 24, 272 11. Foreign, strange, unfamiliar. Lat. peregrinus,
inusitatus, arcessitus. Cp. D.H. p. 197, Demetr. p. 294, and
Classical Review xviii. 20 (as to ξενικός).
οἰκεῖος. 110 13, 126 1, 134 20, 140 12, 154 19, 158 2, 168 7. Akin,
appropriate, fitting. Lat. cognatus, domesticus, decorus. So οἰκείως 72 8,
118 14, 134 10: οἰκειότης 122 21, 240 7: οἰκειοῦν 122 17. If the
metaphors are to be fully pressed, we might render οἰκεῖα καὶ φίλα
in 110 13 by ‘to seem loving members of the same family,’ and οἰκείως
in 118 14 by ‘in harmony with their inner significance.’ In 122 21
οἰκειότης is ‘a natural inclination or instinct.’ On 122 17 there is the
following scholium in M: οἰκειοῦται ἀντὶ τοῦ εὐσταθῶς ἥδεται. In
126 1 τὸ οἰκεῖον (appropriateness) seems almost to stand for τὸ πρέπον
and to be an illustration of Dionysius’ own love for variety. It is
this unusually copious vocabulary of his that does much to relieve
the dull monotony of a technical treatise. “In the works of Dionysius,
the great representative of a later school of criticism [sc. than that of
Aristotle], we meet for the first time a wealth of rhetorical terminology.
In his numerous writings we find freely used a fully developed
vocabulary, which is completely adequate for the purposes of the professional
rhetorician and the broad literary critic” (Larue van Hook
Metaphorical Terminology, etc. p. 8).
οἰκονομεῖν. 176 18. To manage. Lat. administrare, tractare. So οἰκονομία
264 16. Cp. Aristot. Poet. xiii. 6 καὶ ὁ Εὐριπίδης, εἰ καὶ τὰ ἄλλα
μὴ εὖ οἰκονομεῖ, ἀλλὰ τραγικώτατός γε τῶν ποιητῶν φαίνεται:
Long. de Subl. i. 4 καὶ τὴν τῶν πραγμάτων τάξιν καὶ οἰκονομίαν:
Quintil. Inst. Or. iii. 3. 9 “oeconomiae, quae Graece appellata ex cura
rerum domesticarum et hic per abusionem posita nomine Latino caret.”
ὀλιγοσύλλαβος. 132 3. Consisting of few syllables. Lat. qui paucis constat
syllabis.
ὀλιγοσύνδεσμος. 212 21. Sparing in connectives. Lat. qui paucis utitur
convinctionibus.
ὁμογενής. 146 10, 148 9. Of the same race or family. Lat. congener. Cp.
ὁμοιογενής (of like kind) 72 24, 132 19, 156 15; also ἀνομοιογενής
132 19.
[313]
ὁμοειδής. 192 18, 198 6, 270 19. Of the same species or kind. Lat. uniformis.
So ὁμοείδεια 274 1. Cp. Cic. ad Att. ii. 6 “etenim γεωγραφικά
quae constitueram magnum opus est ... et hercule sunt res
difficiles ad explicandum et ὁμοειδεῖς nec tam possunt ἀνθηρογραφεῖσθαι
quam videbantur.”
ὁμοζυγία. 176 13, 254 17. Connexion, affinity. Lat. coniugatio.
ὁμοιοσχήμων. 270 16. Like in shape. Lat. forma consimilis.
ὁμοιότονος. 132 6. Similarly accented. Lat. qui similis est toni.
ὁμοιόχρονος. 132 6 (bis). Of like quantity. Lat. qui similia habet tempora.
ὁμότονος. 128 7. Of the same pitch or accent. Lat. eiusdem toni s. accentus.
ὁμόφωνος. 128 9. With the same note. Lat. eiusdem chordae s. soni.
ὄνομα. 66 5, 70 9, 13, 20, 74 12, 84 6 passim. Word, noun. Lat.
vocabulum, nomen. In 168 10, 264 5, etc., the meaning is ‘noun’; in
264 3, etc., ‘word.’
ὀνομασία. 74 17, 234 5, 252 23, 274 2. Wording, naming, language.
Lat. elocutio, appellatio. Cp. Rhet. ad Alex. c. 27 ἀντίθετον μὲν οὖν ἐστι
τὸ ἐναντίαν τὴν ὀνομασίαν ἅμα καὶ τὴν δύναμιν τοῖς ἀντικειμένοις
ἔχον, ἢ τὸ ἕτερον τούτων: Aristot. Poet. vi. 18 λέγω δέ, ὥσπερ πρότερον
εἴρηται, λέξιν εἶναι τὴν διὰ τῆς ὀνομασίας ἑρμηνείαν: Dionys.
Hal. de Demosth. cc. 18, 34, 40: Demetr. de Eloc. §§ 91, 304.
ὀνοματικά, τά. 70 18, 102 16, 17, 132 7. Nouns substantive. Lat. nomina
substantiva.
ὀξύς. 126 5, 8, 10, 128 6, 8. Acute (accent), high (pitch). Lat. acutus.
So ὀξύτης 126 14. Cp. s.v. βαρύς, p. 292 supra. In Aristot. Poet.
c. 20 ὀξύτητι καὶ βαρύτητι καὶ τῷ μέσῳ = ‘according as they [the
letters] are acute, grave, or of an intermediate tone.’
ὀξύτονος. 128 9. With high pitch or acute accent. Lat. qui acutum tonum
s. accentum habet.
ὅρασις. 118 24. Seeing, the act of sight. Lat. visus.
ὄργανον. 122 25, 124 4, 22. Musical instrument. Lat. instrumentum.
So the adjective ὀργανικός (instrumental) in 124 16, 126 16.
ὀρθός. 106 19. Nominative. Lat. rectus (casus): viz. ‘uninflected.’ In
102 19 ‘primary,’ as opposed to ‘secondary’; in 108 3 ‘active,’ as opposed
to ‘passive.’ In 258 25 and 262 5 the meaning is ‘correct’; in
90 6 perhaps ‘tense’ (see the exx. given in L. & S. under the heading
‘excited’), the opposite of ὕπτιος (supinus).
ὁρίζειν. 132 22, 166 1, 234 21. To define, to limit. Lat. definire.
ὅρος. 182 13, 200 25, 210 5. Standard, condition, boundary. Lat. regula,
condicio, finis. With the sense norma et regula in 182 13 cp. Long.
de Subl. xxxii. 1 ὁ γὰρ Δημοσθένης ὅρος καὶ τῶν τοιούτων, Dionys.
H. de Demosth. c. 1 ἧς (λέξεως) ὅρος καὶ κανὼν ὁ Θουκυδίδης.
οὐδέτερος. 106 21. Neuter. Lat. qui neutri generis est. Cp. D.H. p. 198.
οὐρανός. 142 12, 144 19, 150 6, 220 23. Palate. Lat. palatum. In the
margin of R (with reference to 142 12) there is the note: τὴν ὑπερῴαν
φησίν. This sense of οὐρανός is found several times in Aristotle (see
Bonitz’ Index), and not (as has sometimes been supposed) for the first
time in Dionysius. Cp. the converse caeli palatum in Ennius apud Cic. de
Nat. Deor. ii. 18. 48 “sed dum, palato quid sit optimum, iudicat
[Epicurus], caeli palatum (ut ait Ennius) non suspexit.”
[314]
οὐσία. 98 8. Substance, essence. Lat. substantia.
ὄχλησις. 132 17. Annoyance, disgust. Lat. molestia.
ὄψις. 162 1, 14, 234 9. Appearance, visage. Lat. vultus, aspectus.
πάθος. 66 15, 88 12, 110 23, 112 5, 122 15, passim. Feeling, experience,
emotion, affection, passion. Lat. affectus (Quintil. vi. 2. 8), animi motus
(Cic. de Or. i. 5. 17), perturbatio (id. Tusc. iv. 5. 10). Cp. D.H. pp.
198, 199.—In 154 5, 268 18 πάθη = ‘properties,’ ‘modifications,’
‘differences.’
παιάν. 184 3, 260 23, 262 9. Paeon. Lat. paeon. The metrical foot
so called, consisting of three short syllables and one long in four
possible orders—(1) –ᴗᴗᴗ, (2) ᴗ–ᴗᴗ, (3) ᴗᴗ–ᴗ, (4) ᴗᴗᴗ–. These
four varieties are sometimes called the first, second, third, and fourth paeon
respectively. Cp. Aristot. Rhet. iii. 8. 4-6, Cic. de Orat. iii. 47. 183,
Quintil. ix. 4. 47; and see Demetr. p. 296, s.v. παιών. Demetrius
(§§ 38, 39) refers to two varieties only: cp. the note on 182 22 supra.
παιδεία. 64 11, 262 20. Culture. Lat. doctrina, humanitas.
πανηγυρικός. 228 7, 246 7. Festal, panegyrical. Lat. panegyricus. With
the notion of ornate: cp. de Demosth. c. 8 (διάλεκτον) μεγαλοπρεπῆ λιτήν,
περιττὴν ἀπέριττον, ἐξηλλαγμένην συνήθη, πανηγυρικὴν ἀληθινήν,
αὐστηρὰν ἱλαράν, σύντονον ἀνειμένην, ἡδεῖαν πικράν, ἠθικὴν παθητικήν.
παραβολή. 232 15. Meeting, juxtaposition. Lat. concursus.
παράγγελμα. 270 3, 282 2, 7. Rule, precept. Lat. artis praeceptum.
Cp. Long. de Subl. c. 2 τεχνικὰ παραγγέλματα, c. 6 ὡς εἰπεῖν ἐν
παραγγέλματι (‘if I must speak in the way of precept’). So παραγγέλλειν
132 16, 268 11 (cp. de Lysia c. 24 ταῦτα μὲν δὴ παραγγέλλουσι
ποιεῖν οἱ τεχνογράφοι), and παραγγελματικός 214 9 (= plenus
praeceptis, doctrinis, regulis).
παράδειγμα. 92 5, 136 2, 152 3, 214 6, 232 23, 240 24, etc. Instance.
Lat. exemplum. τὰ παραδείγματα is often used of appropriate
(perhaps customary, or stock) examples: cp. de Isocr. cc. 10, 15,
de Demosth. cc. 13 (middle), 53, and contrast de Lysia c. 34 and de
Demosth. cc. 13 (end), 20.
παραδιώκειν. 206 13. To hurry along. Lat. abripere. Cp. the use of
συνδεδιωγμένον in Long. de Subl. c. 21, and of κατεσπευσμένα c. 19
ibid.—Usener adopts, in this passage, his own conjecture παραμεμιγμένας.
παράθεσις. 130 25, 154 11, 166 9, etc. Placing. Lat. collocatio.
παρακεκινδυνευμένος. 234 16. Daring, bold, venturesome. Lat. audax
(as in Hor. Carm. iv. 2. 10). Fr. aventuré. Cp. Aristoph. Ran. 99
τοιουτονί τι παρακεκινδυνευμένον, | αἰθέρα Διὸς δωμάτιον, ἢ χρόνου
πόδα: and see s.v. ἐπικίνδυνος p. 299 supra. The word is used also in
de Lys. c. 13, de Isocr. c. 13, Ep. ad Pomp. c. 2.
παρακολουθεῖν. 108 6, 130 26, 136 12. To accompany. Lat. accidere,
consequi.
[315]
παραλαμβάνειν. 144 14, 172 12, 260 2, 264 14. To introduce, to employ.
Lat. assumere, adhibere.
παραλλαγή. 152 8, 15, 22. Divergence. Lat. discrimen, permutatio.
παραπλήρωμα. 116 3, 166 17. Supplement, expletive. Lat. explementum,
complementum. Cp. Cic. Or. 69. 230 “apud alios autem et Asiaticos
maxime numero servientes inculcata reperias inania quaedam verba
quasi complementa numerorum”; and also Demetr. p. 296, s.v.
παραπληρωματικός. The word occurs elsewhere in Dionysius: de
Isocr. c. 3, de Demosth. cc. 19, 39.
παρατιθέναι. 104 1. To bring forward, to cite. Lat. apponere, in medium
adducere.
παραυξάνειν (παραύξειν). 128 19, 152 18. To lengthen, to augment. Lat.
augere.
παρέκτασις. 154 21. Prolongation. Lat. extensio.
παρεμφαίνειν. 108 5. To hint at, to indicate. Lat. obiter indicare. Cp.
Demetr. p. 297.
παρεμφατικός. 102 20. Indicative. Lat. indicativus. Cp. ἀπαρέμφατος
p. 289 supra.
παρέργως. 100 25. By the way, cursorily. Lat. obiter.
παρθενωπός. 234 15. Of maiden aspect. Lat. qui virgineo vultu est. The
word seems to occur elsewhere only in Eurip. El. 948 ἀλλ’ ἔμοιγ’ εἴη
πόσις | μὴ παρθενωπός, ἀλλὰ τἀνδρείου τρόπου [Gilbert Murray: “Ah,
that girl-like face! | God grant not that, not that, but some plain
grace | Of manhood to the man who brings me love”]. Cp. Cic. Orat. 19.
64 “nihil iratum habet [oratio philosophorum], nihil invidum, nihil
atrox, nihil miserabile, nihil astutum; casta, verecunda, virgo incorrupta
quodam modo.”
πάρισος. 116 8, 212 7, 246 6. Parallel in structure. Lat. qui constat
similibus membris. Cp. Aristot. Rhet. iii. 9. 9 παρίσωσις δ’ ἐὰν ἴσα τὰ
κῶλα, παρομοίωσις δ’ ἐὰν ὅμοια τὰ ἔσχατα ἔχῃ ἑκάτερον τὸ κῶλον
(where ὅμοια τὰ ἔσχατα indicates final letters that rhyme).
παριστάναι. 154 19. To represent, to describe. Lat. depingere. Cp. Long.
p. 282.
παρόμοιος. 212 8, 246 6. Parallel in sound. Lat. qui constat similibus
sonis.
παχύτης. 184 21. Stupidity, fat-headedness. Lat. stupor, ingenium crassum.
Cp. D.H. p. 200, s.v. παχύς.
πεζός. 70 3, 76 2, 80 3, 108 11, etc. In prose, prosaic. Lat. pedester.
πεζὴ λέξις, πεζὴ διάλεκτος, πεζὸς λόγος, πεζοὶ λόγοι = oratio soluta.
Cp. Quintil. x. 1. 81 “multum enim supra prosam orationem et quam
pedestrem Graeci vocant surgit [Plato].” In 120 27 the metaphor
seems still to be strongly felt—‘marching on foot,’ ‘pedestrian.’
πειθώ. 84 11. Persuasiveness. Lat. persuadendi vis.
πεῖρα. 66 14, 102 21, 256 5, etc. Experience. Lat. experientia.
πεντάμετρος. 256 23. Consisting of five metrical feet. Lat. pentameter.
πεντάχρονος. 262 9. Consisting of five times. Lat. qui constat temporibus
quinque. See s.v. χρόνοι p. 333 infra.
[316]
πεποιημένος. 78 17, 252 24. Invented, original, newly-coined. Lat.
factus, novatus (Cic. de Orat. iii. 38. 154; i. 34. 155). Fr. forgé
tout exprès. Cp. Aristot. Poet. xxi. 9; Demetr. p. 297; Quintil. viii.
6. 32 “vix illa, quae πεποιημένα vocant, quae ex vocibus in usum
receptis quocunque modo declinantur, nobis permittimus, qualia sunt
Sullaturit et proscripturit.”
περιβόητος. 180 7. Notorious, celebrated. Lat. decantatus, celebratus.
περίοδος. 72 7, 10, 104 10, 116 2, etc. Period. Lat. periodus, comprehensio,
verborum ambitus, etc. See Demetr. p. 298 for various references
and equivalents, and also p. 323 (Index); Sandys’ Orator p. 217;
Laurand’s Études pp. 126, 128.—According to Dionysius, the period
should not be used to excess [see n. on 118 15]. Another weakness of
the periodic construction is elsewhere noted by him: τοῦτο δὲ [sc.
τὸ παθητικὸν] ἥκιστα δέχεται περίοδος (de Isocr. c. 2).
περισπασμός. 128 10. The circumflex accent. Lat. circumflexio, accentus
circumflexus. Cp. περισπωμένας 126 11: ‘drawn around,’ ‘twisted,’
‘circumflexed.’ Aristotle denotes the circumflex accent by the term
‘middle’: ἔστιν δὲ αὐτὴ μὲν ἐν τῇ φωνῇ, πῶς αὐτῇ δεῖ χρῆσθαι
πρὸς ἕκαστον πάθος, οἷον πότε μεγάλῃ καὶ πότε μικρᾷ καὶ μέσῃ,
καὶ πῶς τοῖς τόνοις, οἷον ὀξείᾳ καὶ βαρείᾳ καὶ μέσῃ, καὶ ῥυθμοῖς
τίσι πρὸς ἕκαστα (Aristot. Rhet. iii. 1. 4).
περιστέλλειν. 142 16. To contract, to pucker up. Lat. contrahere.
περιττός. 74 13, 84 8, 182 4, 7. Extraordinary, richly wrought; exceedingly
good, unsurpassed. Lat. excellens, curiosus, elaboratus. Cp.
Long. de Subl. xl. 2 (where the word is opposed to κοινὸς καὶ δημώδης),
iii. 4, xxxv. 3. See also de Isocr. c. 3, de Demosth. cc. 8, 56, Ep. ad
Pomp. c. 2 (περιττολογία): also Demetr. p. 298 (περισσοτεχνία).
περιφανής. 244 18. Seen on every side. Lat. conspicuus. So περιφάνεια
210 17, 234 2 (‘so that each word should admit an all-round view
of it’).—PMV give περιφανές (not περιφερές) in 246 3.
περιφερής. 206 15, 230 31, 246 3. Circular, rounded. Lat. rotundus.
Cp. [Dionys. Hal.] Ars Rhet. x. 13 τὰ στρογγύλα καὶ τὰ περιφερῆ
λέγειν προοίμια. In Demetr. de Eloc. § 13 περιφερεῖς στέγαι =
vaulted roofs.
πεφυκέναι (c. infin.). 66 16, 70 3, 104 16, etc. To have a gift for, a
liking for. Lat. solere, amare.
πεφυλαγμένως. 148 1. Guardedly. Lat. caute. The word is used in
the Attic period by Xenophon and Isocrates.
πιέζειν. 144 21, 148 16, 220 18, 230 12. To close tight, to compress.
Lat. comprimere.
πιθανός. 98 17, 20, 100 17, 120 21. Attractive, plausible. Lat. probabilis,
verisimilis.
πικρός. 232 15. Bitter, harsh. Lat. acerbus. So πικραίνειν 130 19,
154 13, 216 17.
πίνος. 120 23, 136 16, 212 24, 236 8. Mellowing deposit, tinge of antiquity,
flavour of archaism. Lat. antiquitas, antiquitas impexa (Tac. Dial. c. 20),
nitor obsoletus (Auct. ad Her. iv. 4. 46). There is a suggestion of négligé
or abandon about the word, but on the whole it is not uncomplimentary:
cp. Ep. ad Pomp. c. 2 ὅ τε πίνος ὁ τῆς ἀρχαιότητος ἠρέμα αὐτῇ καὶ
λεληθότως ἐπιτρέχει, and de Demosth. c. 38 ἀλλ’ [ἵνα] ἐπανθῇ τις αὐταῖς
χνοῦς ἀρχαιοπινὴς καὶ χάρις ἀβίαστος. The compound εὐπίνεια is
found in Long. de Subl. xxx. 1. There is a scholium (preserved in M)
on 120 23, which is, unfortunately, vague and uncertain: πῖνος κυρίως
ὁ ῥύπος, ἀφ’ οὗ πιναρὰ ῥάκη. λέγεται δὲ καὶ τὸ ἐπανθοῦν τισὶ
χνοῶδες ὡς ἐπὶ μήλων καὶ ἀπίων. ἀπὸ τούτου καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ λόγου
τὸ ἐπιφαινόμενον αὐτῷ ἐν τῇ συνθήκῃ τῆς λέξεως ποιὸν πίνον
ὀνομάζει. ἔστι δὲ πῖνος καὶ ὄνομα τόπου.
[317]
πλάγιος. 106 20. Oblique. Lat. obliquus (casus).
πλανᾶσθαι. 254 16, 270 18. To wander, to be irregular. Lat. vagari.
Used in reference to vague, elastic metre. So περιπεπλανημένα μέτρα
in de Demosth. c. 50.
πλάσμα. 90 6, 118 24. Cast, form. Lat. imago, forma dicendi. Cp. Ep.
ad Pomp. c. 4 ὕψος δὲ καὶ κάλλος καὶ μεγαλοπρέπειαν καὶ τὸ
λεγόμενον ἰδίως πλάσμα ἱστορικὸν Ἡρόδοτος ἔχει (viz. “elevation,
beauty, stateliness, and what is specifically called the ‘historical
vein’”); Long. de Subl. xv. 8 ποιητικὸν τοῦ λόγου καὶ μυθῶδες
τὸ πλάσμα (the ‘form’). In de Demosth. c. 34 πλάσμα seems to have
the same meaning as χαρακτῆρ in c. 33 ibid. [The musical meaning
of moulded delivery, modulation does not emerge in the C.V.]
πλάστης. 264 2. Modeller, in clay or wax. Lat. fictor.
πλάτος. 210 9, 212 1, 246 19. Breadth. Lat. latitudo. So πλατύς 244
18. In 210 9 the meaning is, ‘belongs to the class of ideas which are
regarded with a wide indefiniteness.’ So in Latin platice = πλατικῶς =
‘broadly,’ ‘generally’: cp. Usener Rhein. Mus. xxiv. 311. See also
under ἀπαρτίζειν, p. 289 supra.
πλεονάζειν. 146 13, 214 12. To exceed due bounds. Lat. redundare. So
πλεονασμός, redundantia, 110 15.
πληγή. 142 4, 16, 144 5. Stroke, impact. Lat. ictus, percussio.
πληθυντικῶς. 106 18. In the plural number. Lat. pluraliter.
πλοκή. 72 5, 130 22, 166 9. Combination. Lat. copulatio.
πλούσιος. 92 18. Rich. Lat. opulentus. The word is contrasted with
πτωχός (92 17), beggarly, mendicus: for which cp. the expression
τῇ λέξει πτωχεύειν in the passage quoted, from Chrysostom, under
ἀπαγγελία p. 288 supra.
πνίγειν. 142 18. To stifle, to smother. Lat. suffocare.
ποίημα. 76 10, 78 5, 100 23, 154 2, 166 4, 192 8, 250 10, 16, 254
4, 7, 272 14. Poem; line of a poem (in this sense, more commonly
στίχος or ἔπος). Lat. poëma, versus. So ποιεῖν 208 9, ‘to write
poetry,’ and ποιητής 74 8 (but in 214 16 ποιηταί means ‘writers’
generally: cp. de Demosth. c. 37 παρ’ οὐδενὶ οὔτε ἐμμέτρων οὔτε πεζῶν
ποιητῇ λόγων). ποίημα sometimes refers specially to epic and dramatic
poetry (in contrast to song-poetry). In 64 10 the meaning is ‘product’
simply. For ‘poetry’ ποίησις is found: 214 1, 2, 252 24, 270
21, 274 7, 276 10.
[318]
ποιητικός. 70 2, 4, 108 11, 206 20, 208 8, 19, 252 20, 23, 29, etc.
Poetical. Lat. poëticus. In 136 11 the meaning is ‘productive of.’
ποικιλία. 130 13, 192 18, 196 17, 25, 198 5. Variety, decoration. Lat.
varietas. So ποικίλλειν 132 13, 192 20, 196 9; and ποικίλος 110 11,
154 19, 160 10, etc. ποικίλος may be rendered by such adjectives
as ‘elaborate,’ ‘curious,’ ‘laborious,’ ‘multifarious,’ ‘kaleidoscopic,’
‘ever-varying.’
πολιτικός. 64 15, 72 17, 124 21, 130 10, 214 1, 5, 254 25, 266 7, 272
20. Civil, parliamentary, political, public. Lat. civilis. See D.H. p.
203 for an explanatory note on πολιτικός. In 72 17, P has ῥητορικοῖς
ἀνδράσι, which is an unlikely periphrasis for ῥήτορσι (104 8), but
may well indicate the general meaning of πολιτικοῖς ἀνδράσι: cp. de
Demosth. c. 23 ταῦτα δὲ πολιτικοῖς καὶ ῥήτορσιν ἀνδράσι μελήσει.
Compare generally, in Aristot. Poet. c. vi., the words τῆς πολιτικῆς καὶ
ῥητορικῆς ἔργον ἐστίν, and οἱ μὲν γὰρ ἀρχαῖοι πολιτικῶς ἐποίουν
λέγοντας, οἱ δὲ νῦν ῥητορικῶς.
πολύμετρος. 272 5. Of many measures or metres. Lat. qui multis constat
metris.
πολύμορφος. 160 12. Of many forms. Lat. multiformis. Cp. πολυειδής
196 25, πολυειδῶς 270 11.
πολυπραγμονεῖν. 264 6. To bother about. Lat. summa cura elaborare.
πολυσύλλαβος. 126 14, 132 5. With many syllables. Lat. qui syllabis
pluribus constat.
πολύφωνος. 160 23. Of many voices. Lat. qui multas voces emittit. Used
of the variety of tones in Homer’s ‘composition.’ In the de Sublim. c.
xxxiv. the term is applied to Hypereides, who οὐ πάντα ἑξῆς καὶ
μονοτόνως [i.e. at one sustained high pitch] ὡς ὁ Δημοσθένης λέγει.
πούς. 86 1, 168 12, 172 20, 174 22, 24, 178 7, 184 1, 256 9, 12, 258
19, 260 3. Metrical foot. Lat. pes. τὸ δ’ αὐτὸ καλῶ πόδα καὶ
ῥυθμόν 168 11. Aristoxenus, Ῥυθμικὰ στοιχεῖα ii. 16, writes: ᾧ
σημαινόμεθα τὸν ῥυθμὸν καὶ γνώριμον ποιοῦμεν τῇ αἰσθήσει, πούς
ἐστιν εἷς ἢ πλείους. Cope (Introduction to Aristotle’s Rhetoric p. 383)
thinks that Dionysius neglects the important distinction between
βάσις, the unit of rhythm, and πούς, the unit of metre. Goodell
(Greek Metric p. 47) thus paraphrases a passage of Marius Victorinus
(p. 44 K.): “Between foot and ‘rhythmus’ there is this difference,
that a foot cannot exist without rhythm, but a ‘rhythmus’ moves
rhythmically without being divisible into feet.” [It is this kind of
‘rhythmus’ that counts in rhythmical prose.]
πραγματεία. 68 8, 14, 17, 70 8, etc. Inquiry, treatise, work. Lat. studium,
commentatio, opus. So πραγματεύεσθαι 106 5, 10, 140 22, 268 7.
πραγματικός. 66 6. Pertaining to subject matter or invention. Lat. negotialis.
Cp. Quintil. iii. 7. 1 “a parte negotiali, hoc est πραγματικῇ.” The
πραγματικὸς τόπος (“tractatio rerum et sententiarum”) covers subject
matter, things, thoughts; the λεκτικὸς τόπος includes expression,
form, style.
πραΰς. 162 5, 244 21. Gentle. Lat. lenis. Cp. Demetr. p. 299.
πρέπον, τό. 120 19, 122 13, 124 11, 136 12, 198 13, 14. Propriety,
appropriateness, fitness. Lat. decorum. Fr. la convenance. Cp. Cic.
Orat. 21. 70 “ut enim in vita, sic in oratione nihil est difficilius quam
quid deceat videre. πρέπον appellant hoc Graeci; nos dicamus sane
decorum; de quo praeclare et multa praecipiuntur et res est cognitione
dignissima: huius ignoratione non modo in vita, sed saepissime et in
poëmatis et in oratione peccatur.” The Greek rhetoricians drew the
term from the language of ethics. Aristot. Rhet. iii. 7. 1 τὸ δὲ πρέπον
ἕξει ἡ λέξις, ἐὰν ᾖ παθητική τε καὶ ἠθικὴ καὶ τοῖς ὑποκειμένοις
πράγμασιν ἀνάλογον. So πρεπώδης 106 17.
[319]
πριάπειος. 86 8. Priapean: as a metrical term. Lat. Priapeius. Effeminate
and ribald verse, written in honour of Priapus, and involving a
mutilation of the heroic line.
προέκθεσις. 242 2. A prefatory account. Lat. expositio antea data.
πρόθεσις. 70 21, 108 16, 220 6. Preposition. Lat. praepositio.
πρόνοια. 184 16, 186 1. Deliberation. Lat. consilium.
προοίμιον. 224 24, 252 3. Introduction. Lat. exordium.
προπετής. 244 22. Flowing. Lat. volubilis, profluens.
προσαγόρευσις. 260 22. Address. Lat. allocutio, compellatio.
προσερανίζειν. 116 4. To augment. Lat. cumulare. The period in question
has been aided (so to say) by the alms of expletives. For the metaphor
cp. συνερανιζόμενα de Isocr. c. 3 and ἔρανον de Imitat. B. vi. 2.
προσερείδειν. 148 22. To drive against. Lat. impingere, allidere. In 220
24 προσανίστασθαι is similarly used of ‘rising against.’
προσεχής. 84 6. Obvious, natural, allied, appropriate. Lat. proximus,
cognatus (cum re coniunctus). In 258 24 the sense is ‘adjoining.’
προσηγορικός. 70 17, 102 17, 18, 218 6, 11, 220 7, 16, 222 24,
230 1. Appellative. Lat. appellativus. ὄνομα προσηγορικόν =
common noun, Lat. nomen appellativum. It would appear from Dionysius
Thrax (Ars Grammatica p. 23 Uhlig) that ὄνομα might include
προσηγορία (= ὄνομα προσηγορικόν), while προσηγορία could cover
participles (μετοχαί) and adjectives (ἐπίθετα) as well as common nouns.
But the strict division is that of proper names and general terms, as
given by Dionysius Thrax (ibid. pp. 33, 34): κύριον μὲν οὖν ἐστι τὸ
τὴν ἰδίαν οὐσίαν, σημαῖνον, οἷον Ὅμηρος, Σωκράτης. προσηγορικὸν
δέ ἐστι τὸ τὴν κοινὴν οὐσίαν σημαῖνον, οἷον ἄνθρωπος, ἵππος. In
such passages as 222 24 and 230 1 ‘adjective’ would be an appropriate
modern rendering. Quintil. i. 4. 21 “vocabulum an appellatio dicenda
sit προσηγορία et subicienda nomini necne, quia parvi refert, liberum
opinaturis relinquo.” In 272 25 προσηγορία = appellation.
προσίστασθαι. 132 8. To offend. Lat. obstrepere. Cp. de Isocr. c. 2
προσιστάμενος ταῖς ἀκοαῖς, c. 14 ibid. τῷ γὰρ μὴ ἐν καιρῷ γίνεσθαι,
μηδ’ ἐν ὥρᾳ, προσίστασθαί φημι ταῖς ἀκοαῖς, Antiqq. Rom. i. 8
μονοειδεῖς γὰρ ἐκεῖναί τε καὶ ταχὺ προσιστάμεναι (= cito offendunt)
τοῖς ἀκούουσιν.
προσκατασκευάζειν. 110 14 (v.l. προκατασκευάζειν). To model further,
remodel. Lat. insuper instruere.
προσοδιακός. 86 3. Processional: see n. ad loc.
[320]
προσῳδία. 128 12, 196 17, 268 20. Accent. Lat. accentus. The word
is defined in 196 17 τάσεις φωνῆς αἱ καλούμεναι προσῳδίαι. See
further s.v. τόνος p. 329 infra, and compare Bywater Aristotle on the
Art of Poetry p. 336 “προσῳδία with Aristotle comprises accent,
breathing, and quantity—all the elements in the spoken word which
in the ancient mode of writing were left to be supplied by the reader.”
The symbols used in accentuation are supposed to have been introduced
by Aristophanes of Byzantium, if not by some still earlier scholar, in order
to recall to Greeks and teach foreign learners the true intonation of the
language, which was in danger of being corrupted and forgotten when the
Greek world grew vast and came to include so many foreign elements.
πρόσωπον. 160 18, 198 23. Person, character. Lat. persona. Cp. Demetr.
p. 300.
πτῶσις. 106 20, 108 4, 132 7, 212 20, 264 4. Grammatical case. Lat.
casus. ‘Verbal cases’ are mentioned in 108 4; in Aristotle the term
πτῶσις includes inflexions in general.
πυρρίχιος. 168 17. Pyrrhic. Lat. pyrrhichius. The metrical foot ᴗ ᴗ.
ῥῆμα. 70 13, 21, 168 10, 218 6, 7, 264 5. Verb. Lat. verbum. So
ῥηματικός 108 4 (verbal), 220 17 (verbal form).
ῥήτωρ. 74 8, 132 22, 166 12, 200 14, 206 25, 218 21, 236 20, 242 7,
248 15. Orator, rhetorician. Lat. orator, rhetor. As in English we
have no similarly two-sided word, it is often hard to decide between
the renderings, ‘speaker’ and ‘teacher of speaking.’ So ῥητορικός
68 9, 254 25, 262 20.
ῥοῖζος. 138 10. A whizzing. Lat. stridor.
ῥυθμίζειν. 180 13. To bring into rhythm, to scan. Lat. scandere. Cp.
the use of βαίνειν and διαιρεῖν.
ῥυθμός. 120 18, 122 12, 124 6, 9, passim. Rhythm, harmonious movement
of speech. Lat. numerus. For le nombre oratoire in Cicero (whose
prose, however, like Roman prose generally, must not be taken to follow
exclusively Attic standards) see Laurand’s Études pp. 109-11, and
cp. Cic. Orat. 20. 67 “quicquid est enim, quod sub aurium mensuram
aliquam cadat, etiamsi abest a versu—nam id quidem orationis est
vitium—numerus vocatur, qui Graece ῥυθμός dicitur.” Quintil. Inst. Or.
ix. 4. 45 “omnis structura ac dimensio et copulatio vocum constat aut
numeris (numeros ῥυθμούς accipi volo) aut μέτροις, id est dimensione
quadam.” It was a suggestive saying of Scaliger’s that metre gives the
exact ‘measure’ of the line, rhythm its ‘temperament.’ As Dionysius
identifies ῥυθμός and πούς (168 11; cp. 176 2, 3), we may translate
ῥυθμός by ‘foot’ in 180 11, 182 19 (cp. σπονδεῖος πούς 178 7),
200 17, 206 9, etc.—Cp. Aristot. Rhet. iii. 8. 2 τὸ δὲ ἄρρυθμον
ἀπέραντον, δεῖ δὲ πεπεράνθαι μέν, μὴ μέτρῳ δέ· ἀηδὲς γὰρ καὶ
ἄγνωστον τὸ ἄπειρον. περαίνεται δὲ ἀριθμῷ πάντα· ὁ δὲ τοῦ
σχήματος τῆς λέξεως ἀριθμὸς ῥυθμός ἐστιν, οὗ καὶ τὰ μέτρα
τμητά· διὸ ῥυθμὸν δεῖ ἔχειν τὸν λόγον, μέτρον δὲ μή· ποίημα
γὰρ ἔσται. ῥυθμὸν δὲ μὴ ἀκριβῶς· τοῦτο δὲ ἔσται ἐὰν μέχρι του ᾖ.
So ῥυθμικός 128 18 (where the reference is to lyric metres), 168 8,
172 20 (cp. οἱ μετρικοί), 176 7. Quintilian (ix. 4. 68) provides a good
example of the divisions recognized by the rhythmici: “quis enim
dubitet, unum sensum in hoc et unum spiritum esse: animadverti,
iudices, omnem accusatoris orationem in duas divisam esse partes? tamen
et duo prima verba et tria proxima et deinceps duo rursus ac tria
suos quasi numeros habent spiritum sustinentes, sicut apud rhythmicos
aestimantur.”
[321]
ῥυπαρός. 134 24. Filthy, sordid. Lat. sordidus.
ῥύσις. 244 21. Flow. Lat. fluxus.
ῥυσός. 92 10. Wrinkled. Lat. rugosus.
ῥώθωνες. 144 22, 23, 146 11, 220 25. Nostrils. Lat. nares. In 146 11
διὰ τῶν ῥωθώνων συνηχούμενα = nasal.
Σαπφικός. 258 7. Of Sappho. Lat. Sapphicus.
σαφήνεια. 160 22. Clearness, lucidity. Lat. perspicuitas. Fr. clarté,
netteté. The adjective σαφής occurs in 210 4.
σελίς. 186 2. Page. Lat. pagina libri.
σεμνότης. 84 2, 110 19, 164 20, 166 12, 170 2, 172 11, 236 8.
Gravity, majesty. Lat. granditas, dignitas, gravitas. Fr. majesté. So
σεμνολογία 120 23, 174 17; σεμνός 68 5, 80 12, 84 8, etc. It is
not easy to find a good equivalent for σεμνός, as ‘dignified’ comes
nearer to ἀξιωματικός; ‘impressive’ (or the like) to μεγαλοπρεπής;
‘lofty,’ ‘elevated,’ or ‘sublime,’ to ὑψηλός. ‘Solemn,’ ‘majestic,’
‘august,’ or ‘stately’ will sometimes serve.
σημαίνειν. 74 3, 134 25. To betoken, to express. Lat. significare.
σιγμός. 138 10. A hissing. Lat. sibilus. Fr. sifflement.
σιωπή. 218 16, 220 2, 230 4. Silence, interval, pause. Lat. silentium,
intermissio. Modern metrists who confine their attention to syllables
are apt to neglect the interrelations of silence and sound. Dionysius
would, on the contrary, have recognized that the pauses denoted by
punctuation are the key to the metre in such lines as “Thy rankest
fault; all of them; and require” (Tempest v. 1).
σκαιότης. 250 8. Clumsiness, stupidity. Lat. rusticitas, imperitia. Fr.
gaucherie: cp. the editor’s Ancient Boeotians p. 6.
σκευωρία. 264 7. Elaboration. Lat. cura artificiosa. Cp. de Thucyd.
c. 5 σκευωρίαν τεχνικήν, c. 29 μᾶλλον δὲ διθυραμβικῆς σκευωρίας
οἰκειότερον: Hesych. σκευωρία· κατασκευή.
σκιερός. 234 13. Shady, dark. Lat. obscurus.
σκληρός. 132 1, 154 12. Hard. Lat. durus. Cp. D.H. p. 205.
σομφός. 122 25. Thick, husky. Lat. subraucus, fuscus. Cp. Schol. in M,
σομφὸν ἤγουν θρυλιγμὸν καὶ ἐκμέλειαν. Some of the MSS. give
ἀσύμφωνον, thus repeating a word used a few lines earlier.
σοφιστής. 190 10, 264 19. Sophist. Lat. sophista. The comprehensiveness
of the term is well illustrated by the fact that in the former
passage it is applied to Hegesias, in the latter to Isocrates and Plato.
In the parallel passage of the de Demosth. (c. 51) ὁρῶν γε δὴ τούτους
τοὺς θαυμαζομένους ἐπὶ σοφίᾳ καὶ κρατίστων λόγων ποιητὰς νομιζομένους
Ἰσοκράτην καὶ Πλάτωνα γλυπτοῖς καὶ τορευτοῖς ἐοικότας
ἐκφέροντας λόγους. Cp. Demetr. p. 301.
[322]
σπαδονίζειν. 142 9. To emasculate, to cramp. Lat. spadonium sonum
reddere. This reading seems preferable on several grounds: (1) it is
the more difficult of the two; (2) the sense of ‘choke the voice’ seems
to agree well with οὐδὲ συγκόψει τοὺς ἤχους (162 4 ‘and will not
impede the voice’); (3) σπανίζειν (intransitive: cp. de Demosth. c.
32, de Thucyd. c. 19) τοῦ ἤχου would be more common than σπανίζειν
τὸν ἦχον: (4) σπαδονισμοὺς τῶν ἤχων (‘impediments to sound,’
‘arrested sounds’) occurs, without variant, in de Demosth. c. 40, and is
adopted by U.-R. as well as by other editors; (5) the authority
of R seems to support σπαδονίζει rather than (as U.-R. think) σπανίζει.
σπονδεῖος. 170 2, 178 7 (with πόδες), 202 20. Spondee. The metrical
foot – –. Vossius thus describes the effect of the spondee: “hic
pes incessum habet tardum et magnificum; itaque rebus gravibus, et
maxime sacris, vel ipso attestante vocabulo, imprimis adhibetur.” Cp.
Hor. Ars Poet. 255 “tardior ut paulo graviorque veniret ad aures,
| spondeos stabiles in iura paterna recepit [sc. iambus],” and Cic. Orat.
64. 216.
σπουδάζειν. 66 8, 94 16. To be eager. Lat. studere, sedulo operam navare.
For the middle voice of this verb see note on p. 95 supra. The noun
σπουδή occurs in 156 14, 186 4, 192 7, 212 16.
σταθερός. 234 4. Steadfast. Lat. stabilis. τὸ σταθερόν = la lenteur grave.
στάθμη. 236 4. A carpenter’s line or rule. Lat. amussis. ἀπὸ στάθμης
= velut ad amussim, ‘regulated by line and rule, by square and
level.”
στενός. 142 19, 146 3. Narrow. Lat. angustus. In 146 3 it is coupled
with λεπτός.
στηριγμός. 202 24. A sustaining (of the voice on certain syllables), a pause.
Lat. mora. See under ἐγκάθισμα, p. 297 supra; and under ἀντιστηριγμός,
p. 288 supra. So στηριχθῆναι 220 18, ‘to be firmly planted,’
‘to be sustained.’
στιβαρός. 216 16. Hardy, robust. Lat. robustus. The word occurs also
in de Thucyd. c. 24. Cp. the French nerveux. Hesych. στιβαρόν·
εὔρωστον, βαρύ, εὔτονον, στεῤῥόν, ἰσχυρόν. As is pointed out by
Larue van Hook (Metaphorical Terminology of Greek Rhetoric p. 20),
both Latin and English abound in similar terms of style drawn from
good physical condition: nervi, vires, vigor, lacerti, ossa, robur: full-blooded,
hearty, lively, lusty, muscular, nervous, robust, sinewy, supple,
strenuous, vigorous, etc.
στίχος. 86 2, 12, 88 7, etc. A line of poetry. Lat. versus. In de
Thucyd. c. 19 the word is used with reference to prose: ὅτι πολλὰ
καὶ μεγάλα πράγματα παραλιπών, τὸ προοίμιον τῆς ἱστορίας μέχρι
πεντακοσίων ἐκμηκύνει στίχων.
στοιχεῖον. 70 11, 20, 108 10, 110 9, 138 1, etc. Element. Lat. elementum.
So στοιχειώδης 138 14. With the use of στοιχεῖον in c. 14 cp.
Aristot. Poet. c. 20, where the word is defined as φωνὴ ἀδιαίρετος, οὐ
πᾶσα δέ, ἀλλ’ ἐξ ἧς πέφυκε συνετὴ γίγνεσθαι φωνή. In 108 10
the meaning practically is ‘principle,’ ‘rule.’
[323]
στρέφειν. 264 3, 270 11. To turn, to twist. Lat. torquere. In 270 11
the meaning may be conveyed by ‘to change the words about,’ ‘to
permute or vary the order of the words,’ ‘to give a new turn to the
sentence.’
στρογγύλος. 112 11. Compact, rounded, terse. Lat. rotundus. Fr. arrondi.
See the examples quoted in D.H. p. 205, and add de Lys. c. 9
στρογγύλη καὶ πυκνή, de Isaeo c. 3 στρογγύλη τε καὶ δικανικὴ
οὐχ ἧττόν ἐστιν ἡ Ἰσαίου λέξις τῆς Λυσίου. So στρογγυλίζειν
142 15. Latin equivalents, or parallels, may be found in Horace’s ore
rotundo (Ars P. 323), Cicero’s contortus (Orat. 20. 66), Quintilian’s
corrotundare (xi. 3. 102). “στρογγύλος is used of the new stylistic
artifices of the sophistical rhetoric by Aristophanes Acharn. 686
(στρογγύλοις τοῖς ῥήμασι), and by Plato Phaedr. 234 E. In later
usage it is constantly used of periodic composition” (G. L. Hendrickson
in American Journal of Philology xxv. 138).
στροφή. 194 6, 9, 10, 16, 19, 254 13, 272 5, 278 8. Strophe,
stanza. Lat. stropha.
στρυφνός. 228 7. Harsh, astringent. Lat. acerbus. See D.H. p. 205
(s.v. στριφνός: in C.V. 228 7 F has στριφνόν), with the reference to
Jebb’s equivalent ‘biting flavour’ (Att. Orr. i. 35).
στύφειν. 154 13. To draw up the mouth. Lat. astringere. Used of sounds
that make the hearer pull a wry face and screw up his lips. Cp. de
Demosth. c. 38 ἀνακοπὰς καὶ ἀντιστηριγμοὺς λαμβάνειν καὶ τραχύτητας
ἐν ταῖς συμπλοκαῖς τῶν ὀνομάτων ἐπιστυφούσας τὴν ἀκοὴν
ἡσυχῇ βούλεται.
συγγραφεύς. 74 8, 76 3, 154 17, 206 25, 214 15, 228 11, 236 18, 248
14. Prose-writer, historian. Lat. scriptor (prosaicus); (scriptor) historicus.
ἱστοριογράφος (de Thucyd. c. 2) is a less ambiguous expression than
συγγραφεύς (c. 5 ibid.) or than λογογράφος (c. 20 ibid.).—In 68 9
συγγράφειν = to compose (a treatise).
συγκοπή. 156 19, 230 7. Stoppage. Lat. impeditio. So συγκόπτειν
(‘impede the voice,’ ‘check the utterance’) 162 4. [This meaning
seems to bring the three passages fairly into line: otherwise συγκοπαὶ
τῶν ἤχων, in 230 7, might well mean ‘durae sonorum collisiones et
concursiones.’]
συγκροτεῖν. 206 16. To weld together. Lat. compingere, coagmentare.
σύγκρουσις. 230 27. Collision, concurrence, consonance. Lat. concursus.
Fr. rencontre. So συγκρούειν 202 18, 224 10. Cp. Demetr. p. 302.
The reference is to a succession of two vowels which do not form a
diphthong, either in the same word (e.g. λᾶαν) or with hiatus between
two words (e.g. ἄλγε’ ἔχοντα: or καὶ ἐλπίσας, τε ἔσεσθαι, καὶ ἀξιολογώτατον).
Cp. de Demosth. c. 43. Cicero’s opinion of the ‘concourse
of vowels’ (quoted by Quintil. ix. 4. 37) is given in Orat. 23. 77
“verba etiam verbis quasi coagmentare neglegat; habet enim ille
tamquam hiatus et concursus vocalium molle quiddam et quod indicet
non ingratam neglegentiam de re hominis magis quam de verbis
laborantis.” On the other hand, Pope (Essay on Criticism) states and
exemplifies the weak side of hiatus by means of the line, ‘Tho’ oft the
ear the open vowels tire’; and Cicero himself (Orat. 44. 150) writes,
“quod quidem Latina lingua sic observat, nemo ut tam rusticus sit qui
vocales nolit coniungere.” In English, the question of hiatus raises
sundry points of an interesting kind. Should we, for example, say
‘an historian’ and ‘an historical book,’ on the ground that the initial
aspirate is evanescent when the accent falls on the second syllable;
and similarly ‘an united family’ but ‘a union of hearts’?
[324]
συγκρύπτειν. 130 26. To hide, to disguise. Lat. occulere.
συγξεῖν. 210 22, 228 4, 232 12, 234 19. To polish. Lat. expolire. Cp. de
Demosth. c. 40 πολλὴν σφόδρα ποιουμένη φροντίδα τοῦ συνεξέσθαι
καὶ συνηλεῖφθαι καὶ προπετεῖς ἁπάντων αὐτῶν εἶναι τὰς ἁρμονίας.
συγχρώζεσθαι. 244 17. To be closely joined. Lat. cohaerere, mutuo se
contingere.
συζυγία. 84 11, 104 17, 106 19, etc. Coupling, grouping, combination. Lat.
coniunctio. Fr. liaison. So de Demosth. c. 40 (the passage quoted s.v.
συμβολή, infra).
συλλαβή. 150 16. Syllable. Lat. syllaba. Words like this serve to
remind us how much of our modern rhetorical and grammatical
terminology is taken direct from the Greek.
συλλεαίνειν. 230 20. To rub smooth, to polish. Lat. levigare, polire.
Cp. de Demosth. c. 43 ἐν δὲ τῇ δευτέρᾳ περιόδῳ τραχύνεται μὲν ἡ
σύνθεσις ἐν τῷ “μεγάλη γὰρ ῥοπή” διὰ τὸ μὴ συναλείφεσθαι τὰ
δύο ρ ρ, καὶ ἐν τῷ “ἀνθρώπων πράγματα” διὰ τὸ μὴ συλλεαίνεσθαι
‹τὸ ν› τῷ ἑξῆς.
συμβεβηκότα, τά. 98 8, 9, 140 14, 264 6, 268 19. The accidental, non-essential,
qualities of a thing. Lat. accidentia. In 268 19 the reference
is to the changes which words undergo in the way of contraction,
expansion, acute or grave accentuation, etc.
συμβολή. 210 20, 232 13. Clashing. Lat. concursus. In 232 13 the
reference is to les chocs des voyelles. Cp. de Demosth. c. 40 καὶ διὰ
τοῦτο φεύγει μὲν ἁπάσῃ σπουδῇ τὰς τῶν φωνηέντων συμβολὰς ὡς
τὴν λειότητα καὶ τὴν εὐέπειαν διασπώσας, φεύγει δέ, ὅση δύναμις
αὐτῇ, τῶν ἡμιφώνων τε καὶ ἀφώνων γραμμάτων τὰς συζυγίας, ὅσαι
τραχύνουσι τοὺς ἤχους καὶ ταράττειν δύνανται τὰς ἀκοάς.
σύμβολον. 84 4. Token, label. Lat. signum.
συμμετρία. 130 7, 12, 246 2, 4, 270 10. Due proportion. Lat. iusta
mensura. In 270 10 συμμετρία would seem to mean the arrangement of
the periods within the lines or verses (μέτρα: the variant ἐμμετρία is to
be noticed); and with it should be compared συμμέτρως in 270 13,
though there Upton suggests ἀσυμμέτρως and Schaefer συμμέτροις.
συμμέτρως occurs also in 232 9; and συμμετρεῖν in 212 18, 276 26.
Cp. de Demosth. c. 43 ὥστε συμμετρηθῆναι πρὸς ἀνδρὸς πνεῦμα.
συμπληροῦν. 180 11, 182 16. To complete, to constitute. Lat. absolvere.
συμπλοκή. 160 9, 198 6, 240 16. Intertwining, blending. Lat. implicatio.
So συμπλέκειν 154 17, 258 4. For the metaphor from weaving cp.
ῥάπτειν and ὑφαίνειν: Pindar Nem. iv. 153 ῥήματα πλέκων:
Swinburne Erechtheus 1487 “I have no will to weave too fine or far, |
O queen, the weft of sweet with bitter speech.”
[325]
σύμπτωσις. 240 12. Concurrence. Lat. concursus.
συμφορητός. 72 22. Collected promiscuously, miscellaneous. Lat. collatus,
collecticius.
συνάγειν. 144 18, 212 3. To contract. Lat. contrahere, coarctare.
συναλοιφή. 108 18, 180 17, 218 7, 222 24, 256 22. Blending, fusion,
amalgamation. Lat. coitus, vocalium elisio. Fr. synalèphe (contraction,
ou jonction de plusieurs voyelles). So συναλείφειν 220 1, 222 26, 234
8, 236 6, 244 17. Compare Demetr. p. 303, together with the
passage there quoted from Quintil. ix. 4. 35-7 (including the words
“coëuntes litterae, quae συναλοιφαί dicuntur”), and see (as to hiatus)
Sandys’ Orator pp. 160 ff. and Laurand’s Études pp. 114-6. Cp.
de Demosth. c. 43 καὶ κατ’ ἄλλους δύο τόπους ἢ τρεῖς τὰ ἡμίφωνα
‹καὶ ἄφωνα› παραπίπτοντα ἀλλήλοις τὰ φύσιν οὐκ ἔχοντα συναλείφεσθαι
ἔν τε τῷ “τὸν Φίλιππον” καὶ ἐν τῷ “ταύτῃ φοβερὸν
προσπολεμῆσαι” ταράττει τοὺς ἤχους μετρίως καὶ οὐκ ἐᾷ φαίνεσθαι
μαλακούς· ἐν δὲ τῇ δευτέρᾳ περιόδῳ κτλ. (the remainder of the
passage is given under συλλεαίνειν, p. 324 supra).
συναπαρτίζειν. 212 11, 270 13. To complete (the sense) simultaneously. Cp.
Demetr. de Eloc. §§ 2, 10 (together with ἀπαρτίζειν in Glossary p. 267
ibid.), and also the note on pp. 270, 271 supra. Cp. de Demosth. c. 39
ἔτι τῆς ἁρμονίας ταύτης οἰκεῖόν ἐστι καὶ τὸ τὰς περιόδους αὐτουργούς
τινας εἶναι καὶ ἀφελεῖς καὶ μήτε συναπαρτιζούσας ἑαυταῖς τὸν
νοῦν μήτε συμμεμετρημένας τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ λέγοντος μηδέ γε
παραπληρώμασι τῶν ὀνομάτων οὐκ ἀναγκαίοις ὡς πρὸς τὴν ὑποκειμένην
διάνοιαν χρωμένας μηδ’ εἰς θεατρικούς τινας καὶ γλαφυροὺς
καταληγούσας ῥυθμούς.
συνάπτειν. 202 19, 240 20, 262 4. To link together. Lat. adiungere, connectere.
Dionysius’ love of variety may be seen by comparing together
262 4, 258 4, 256 20, 22, 258 24.
συναρμόττειν. 118 14, 134 11, 234 19. To adapt one thing to another.
Lat. accommodare. Used with reference to adjusting, dovetailing,
interlinking.
συνασκεῖν. 282 1. To practise simultaneously. Lat. simul exercere.
σύνδεσμος. 70 14, 17, 72 1, 218 7, 220 5, 258 27. Conjunction, connective,
connecting word. Lat. copula, coniunctio. ‘Particle,’ or ‘connecting-particle,’
will sometimes be a suitable rendering, as the term includes
particles like ἄρα (258 27) and μέν and δή (Demetr. de Eloc. §§ 55, 56,
196), and may even be applied to prepositions (220 5, 6). In a
difficult passage of Aristot. Poetics (xx. 6), among the examples offered
of σύνδεσμος are ἀμφί, περί, μέν, ἤτοι, as well as δέ. A good account
of the word will be found in Cope’s Introduction to Aristotle’s Rhetoric
pp. 371-4, 392-7. See further Quintil. i. 4. 18; Aristot. Rhet.
iii. 6. 6.
συνεδρεύειν. 100 10, 160 19. To attend, to accompany. Lat. assidere,
adiungi. Used, in 100 10, of the accompanying relations (mode,
place, time, etc.), which adverbs denote in reference to verbs.
[326]
συνεκτρέχειν. 274 24. To run out together, to be of the same length.
Lat. aequis passibus concurrere.
συνεκφέρειν. 240 11. To pronounce concurrently. Lat. simul pronuntiare.
Cp. συνεκφορά 230 3.
συνεφθαρμένος. 126 10, 144 12, 234 13. Imperceptibly blended, melting
into each other. Lat. commistus. φθορά is the technical term for the
mixing of colours in painting: e.g. Plut. Mor. 346 A καὶ γὰρ Ἀπολλόδωρος
ὁ ζωγράφος, ἀνθρώπων πρῶτος ἐξευρὼν φθορὰν καὶ ἀπόχρωσιν
σκιᾶς, Ἀθηναῖος ἦν. Perhaps it is this sense of ‘fusion’ that led
to φθορά being used, in Byzantine music, in some such sense as
‘modulation.’
συνεχής. 230 17, 20, 244 21, 246 1. Continuous, unbroken. Lat. continuus.
So συνεχῶς 132 9, 230 29, 280 21. συνέχεια (240 5) = coherence,
‘continuus compositionis tenor.’
συνηχεῖν. 140 21, 144 20, 146 11. To sound at the same time. Lat.
consonare. In 140 21 the translation of the manuscript reading
συνεχούσης may be “while all these are pronounced, the windpipe
constricts the breath,” A. J. Ellis op. cit. p. 41 (with the note,
“probably this is what Dionysius considered the cause of voice”).
σύνθεσις. 68 5, 7, 19, 70 3, 9, 72 8, 74 15, 78 9, 86 2, 13, 90 19, 134
26 etc., 200 10, 16, 202 1, 7, 204 9, 232 25, 240 23, 270 9. Composition.
Lat. compositio. ‘Composition’ (with the addition of ‘literary,’ to
mark it off from other kinds of composition) seems the least inadequate
English rendering of σύνθεσις, and comes nearest to the usual Latin title.
To judge by the actual contents of the treatise (which go beyond Dionysius’
occasional and fragmentary definitions), the term ‘putting-together’ can
be applied not only to ὀνόματα, but (on the one side) to γράμματα and
συλλαβαί and (on the other) to κῶλα and περίοδοι, and to a poem of
Sappho or the proem of Thucydides. Hence ‘arrangement (or order,
ordonnance) of words’ proves, in practice, too narrow a title, though the
euphonic and symphonic arrangement of words and the elements of
words is the main theme, and though there is (as has been pointed out
in the Introduction, p. 11 supra) some danger of ‘literary composition’
seeming to promise a treatment of the πραγματικὸς τόπος. One of the
definitions of composition in the New English Dictionary will apply very
fairly to the de Compositione Verborum: “the due arrangement of words
into sentences, and of sentences into periods; the art of constructing
sentences and of writing prose or verse,” while ἁρμονία (which is
σύνθεσις in special reference to skilful and melodious combination)
might well be defined in the words there quoted from the Arte of
Rhetorique of T. Wilson (1553 A.D.): “composition ... is an apt
joyning together of wordes in such order, that neither the eare shall
espie any jerre, nor yet any man shalbe dulled with overlong drawing
out of a sentence.” The form συνθήκη is found, in practically the same
sense as σύνθεσις, in the Epitome c. 3; in Lucian de conscrib. hist. c. 46 καὶ
μὴν καὶ συνθήκῃ τῶν ὀνομάτων εὐκράτῳ καὶ μέσῃ χρηστέον; and in
Chrysostom de Sacerdotio iv. 6 (quoted under ἀπαγγελία p. 288 supra).
As Latin equivalents (in addition to ‘de Compositione Verborum’), ‘de
Collocatione Verborum’ or ‘de Constructione Verborum’ might be
supported out of Cicero’s Orator and de Oratore; and something might
be said, too, in favour of ‘de Structura Orationis’ or (more fully)
‘de compositione, seu orationis partium apta inter se collocatione.’—συνθετικός
occurs in 104 15, and σύνθετος in 144 11, 176 3, 184 3.
[327]
σύνοψις. 208 13. A general view. Lat. conspectus. εἰς σύνοψιν ἐλθεῖν
δυνάμενος would, in Aristotle’s conciser phrase, be: εὐσύνοπτος.—The
verb συνορᾶν occurs in 184 22, συνιδεῖν 182 3.
συντάττεσθαι. 80 5, 94 15, 96 6, 98 19, 20, 104 5, 106 13, 264 21. To
put together, to compose, to treat of. Lat. componere, tractare. So σύνταγμα
214 9, and σύνταξις (‘arrangement,’ ‘co-ordination,’ ‘treatise’) 94 3,
96 2, 13, 16, etc.
συντιθέναι. 68 3, 74 12, 106 11, etc. To arrange words or sounds, to
compose. Lat. componere.
συνυφαίνειν. 134 12, 166 17, 184 14, 234 9, 20, 240 7. To weave together.
Lat. contexere. Lucian (de conscrib. hist. 48) uses the word: καὶ ἐπειδὰν
ἀθροίσῃ ἅπαντα ἢ τὰ πλεῖστα, πρῶτα μὲν ὑπόμνημά τι συνυφαινέτω
αὐτῶν κτλ. [The passage is given in full under χρῶμα, p. 333 infra.]
συνῳδός. 220 17, 224 16, 232 8. In harmony with, accordant. Lat.
concors.
συριγμός. 146 14, 148 7, 160 1. A hissing. Lat. sibilus. So σύριγμα 146
3. In 160 1 the reference is to the ‘whistling of ropes,’ the ‘shrieking
of tackle’: cp. Virg. Aen. i. 87 “insequitur clamorque virum
stridorque rudentum.”
σύρρυσις. 162 21. A flowing together, conflux. Lat. concursus. Two forms
of the word are found: σύρρευσις and (as here) σύρρυσις.
συστέλλειν. 140 19, 152 25, 206 1. To compress. Lat. contrahere,
corripere. So συστολή 142 18, 268 20.
συστρέφειν. 204 9. To abbreviate. Lat. contrahere. Cp. D.H. p. 206,
and Demetr. p. 305 (s.v. συστροφή). The condensation indicated in
204 9 consists in the fact that the rolling down of the stone is described
in a single line, whereas the rolling up takes four lines.
σφραγίς. 268 3. Seal, impression of a seal. Lat. signum.
σχέδιος. 186 5. Sudden, off-hand, impromptu. Lat. extemporalis. Cp.
αὐτοσχέδιος p. 291 supra.
σχῆμα. 88 12, 90 19, 130 7, 132 11, 148 20 etc., 196 25, 26, 198 6,
passim. Figure, attitude. Lat. figura. See D.H. p. 206, and Demetr.
p. 305, for various quotations and references (to which may be added
Causeret La Langue de la rhétorique et de la critique littéraire dans
Ciceron pp. 176 ff.). Sometimes ‘construction’ will be a good rendering
(e.g. de Isocr. c. 3), or ‘form’ (de Thucyd. c. 37): cp. Cic. Brut. 17. 69
(‘sententiarum orationisque formae’). ‘Turns of expression’ (tours de
phrase) will also serve occasionally.
σχηματίζειν. 104 18, 106 15, 108 1, 110 14, 112 18, 19, etc. To use a
figure, to shape, to construct. Lat. figurare. Cp. D.H. p. 206, Demetr.
p. 305.
σχηματισμός. 112 14, 20, 146 7, 212 21, etc. Configuration, construction;
the employment of figures or turns of phrase. Lat. conformatio, figuratio.
[328]
σχολικός. 214 9. After the manner of lectures, tedious. Lat. longus.
Dionysius has in mind treatises which are ‘academic’ rather than
practical. Cp. Long. de Sublim. iii. 5 πολλὰ γὰρ ὥσπερ ἐκ μέθης τινὲς
εἰς τὰ μηκέτι τοῦ πράγματος, ἴδια ἑαυτῶν καὶ σχολικὰ παραφέρονται
πάθη.
σῶμα. 134 25. Person. Lat. persona. Same sense as πρόσωπον: compare,
in Ep. ii. ad Amm. c. 14, πρόσωπα δὲ παρ’ αὐτῷ τὰ πράγματα
γίνεται with πράγματα δὲ ἀντὶ σωμάτων τὰ τοιαῦτα ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ
γίνεται.
Σωτάδειος. 88 1. Sotadean. Lat. Sotadeus. So called from Sotades, a
native of Maroneia or of Crete, who lived under the early Ptolemies.
The structure of the Sotadean verse is analyzed in P. Masqueray’s
Abriss der griechischen Metrik pp. 141-4. For some further references
see Demetr. p. 244.
ταμιεύειν. 246 4. To regulate, to manage. Lat. temperare, dispensare.
τάξις. 72 12, 18, 198 6, etc. Order. Lat. dispositio. Not identical in
sense with σύνθεσις, which (in 72 18) forms part of one and the same
sentence as τάξις. τάξις often (e.g. Aristot. Rhet. iii. 12. 6) refers to
the marshalling of the subject matter of a speech.—The verb τάττειν
occurs (with various senses) in 126 7, 196 6, 254 10, etc.
ταπεινός. 74 12, 78 10, 80 13, 92 17, 134 23, 166 3, 176 11, 186 19.
Low, mean, vulgar. Lat. humilis, abiectus. So ταπεινότης 192 9.
τάσις. 126 7, 9, 128 5, 11, 196 16. Tension, pitch, accent. Lat. intentio
(vocis), accentus. Cp. προσῳδία p. 320 supra, and τόνος p. 329 infra.
Definition in 196 16: τάσεις φωνῆς αἱ καλούμεναι προσῳδίαι.
Quintil. i. 5. 22 “adhuc difficilior observatio est per tenores, (quos
quidem ab antiquis dictos tonores comperi, videlicet declinato a Graecis
verbo, qui τόνους dicunt) vel accentus, quas Graeci προσῳδίας vocant,”
etc.
ταυτολογία. 240 26. Verbal reiteration, tautology. Lat. eiusdem verbi iteratio.
This is, apparently, the earliest recorded use of the word, though Polybius
employs the verb ταυτολογεῖν. Quintil. viii. 3. 50 “sicut ταυτολογία,
id est eiusdem verbi aut sermonis iteratio. haec enim quamquam non
magnopere a summis auctoribus vitata, interim vitium videri potest,
in quod saepe incidit etiam Cicero, securus tam parvae observationis:
sicut hoc loco, Non solum igitur illud iudicium iudicii simile, iudices, non
fuit.” The English word tautology must have been unfamiliar when
Philemon Holland translated the Morals of Plutarch, since it is one of
the terms included in the “explanation of certain obscure words”
appended to Holland’s volume.
ταυτότης. 134 18, 192 20. Sameness, monotony. Lat. rerum earundem
iteratio. Contrasted with μεταβολή: as in 134 18 διαναπαύειν δὲ
τὴν ταυτότητά φημι δεῖν μεταβολὰς εὐκαίρους εἰσφέροντα.—Aristotle
uses the word several times, in the sense of ‘identity.’
τέλειος. 84 21, 116 24, 144 17, 150 13, etc. Complete, perfect. Lat.
absolutus, perfectus. See, further, note on 204 24.—So τελειοῦν 178
13.—In 120 4, 268 5, τέλος = ‘end,’ ‘object.’
[329]
τελεταί. 252 15. Rites, mysteries. Lat. sacra arcana, ritus et caerimoniae.
αἱ τελεταὶ τοῦ λόγου = sacra eloquentiae.
τετράμετρος. 86 3, 14, 256 8, 13. Consisting of four metres or measures.
Lat. tetrametrus (sc. versus: στίχος).
τετριμμένος. 252 29. Homely, ordinary. Lat. tritus. Fr. ordinaire. The
word sometimes inclines to the sense ‘vulgar,’ ‘hackneyed,’ ‘banal,’
‘rebattu’: cp. τέτριπται 134 22.
τέχνη. 68 9, 94 10, 14, 96 2, 104 10, 132 22, etc. Art, handbook. Lat.
ars. αἱ τέχναι in Dionysius (cp. αἱ τέχναι τῶν λόγων, Aristot. Rhet. i.
1. 3) refers specially to rhetorical handbooks: e.g. 270 4, 282 3. αἱ
ῥητορικαὶ τέχναι is often used to designate the Rhetoric of Aristotle:
e.g. 254 25, and Ep. i. ad Amm. cc. 1, 2, etc.—In 124 3 τεχνίτης =
‘craftsman,’ ‘professional.’
τὴν ἄλλως. 176 6. To no purpose. Lat. temere. Coupled here with a
negative: cp. Suidas, τηνάλλως. μάτην. καὶ οὐ τηνάλλως μετὰ τῆς
ἀποφάσεως λέγεται.
τομή. 72 2. Division. Lat. partitio. Fr. partie, subdivision.
τόνος. 126 5, 15, 19, 142 8. Tone, tension, pitch, accent. Lat. tonus,
intentio (vocis), accentus. If τόνον be read in 136 16 and τόνος in
236 8, the meaning will be energy: cp. D.H. p. 207. See also under
τάσις p. 328 supra, and under περισπασμός p. 316 supra (for a passage
of Aristot Rhet. iii. 1. 4).
τόπος. 66 6, 96 9, 144 18, 164 17, 248 8. Place, heading, department.
Lat. locus. The πραγματικὸς τόπος (66 6) is the locus rerum, as opposed
to the λεκτικὸς τόπος (96 9). In this connexion not only τόπος, but
τρόπος, τύπος, χαρακτήρ and μέρος are sometimes used by Dionysius.
τορευτός. 264 18. Worked in relief, chased. Lat. caelatus. So τορευτής
= caelator, 266 8.
τραγῳδοποιός. 236 17, 248 14. Tragic poet, tragedian. Lat. tragicus poëta.
[For the Greek expressions used to denote tragic and comic poets see
H. Richards in the Classical Review xiv. 211.]
τρανός. 230 14. Clear, distinct. Lat. perspicuus. In earlier Greek the
form τρανής is used: cp. Soph. Ajax 23 ἴσμεν γὰρ οὐδὲν τρανές, ἀλλ’
ἀλώμεθα.
τραχύτης. 230 5, 232 8. Roughness. Lat. asperitas. Fr. âpreté, dureté.
So τραχύς 130 26, 154 12, 228 7, 234 15, etc.; and τραχύνειν 130
19, 146 9, 202 26, 206 4, 216 17, 218 18, 240 17. By ‘rough’
letters, in 202 26, Dionysius may probably mean the following letters
found in the four lines quoted in 202 3-6: Σ, σ, φ (?), σ, γ, χ, στ,
ζ, σ, σκ, πτ, σχ, σκ, φ (?); and among these, σκ, σχ and πτ may be
regarded as ‘juxtapositions of rough letters.’
τρίκωλον. 116 11. A sentence consisting of three members or clauses. Lat.
oratio trimembris. τὸ τρίκωλον is here a noun: on the same
principle as, for example, ἡ τρίοδος (= trivium).
τρίμετρος. 258 19, 25. Consisting of three metres or measures. Lat.
trimetrus (sc. versus: στίχος).
τρισύλλαβος. 170 15, 174 8. Consisting of three syllables. Lat. trisyllabus.
[330]
τρόπος. 196 1. Mode (in music). Lat. modus. Cp. Monro’s Modes of
Ancient Greek Music p. 2. In 132 12 the word means trope (metaphor
particularly: cp. Quintil. viii. 6. 4): so τροπικός (figurative; Fr.
figuré) 78 16, 252 24, 272 10.
τροχαῖος. 170 8, 184 11. Trochee. The metrical foot – ᴗ.
τρυφερός. 236 9. Delicate, dainty. Lat. delicatus, nitidus.
τύπος. 70 7, 268 2, 17, 24. Outline, form. Lat. forma, figura.
ὕλη. 266 9. Material. Lat. materia. Fr. matière.
ὑπαγωγικός. 90 5. Drawn slowly out, prolonged. Lat. dilatatus. Cp. de
Demosth. c. 4 διώκει δ’ ἐκ παντὸς τρόπου τὴν περίοδον οὐδὲ ταύτην
στρογγύλην καὶ πυκνὴν ἀλλ’ ὑπαγωγικήν τινα καὶ πλατεῖαν καὶ
πολλοὺς ἀγκῶνας, ὥσπερ οἱ μὴ κατ’ εὐθείας ῥέοντες ποταμοὶ ποιοῦσιν,
ἐγκολπιζομένην. It is possible, however, that in the de Comp. Verb.
the word has an active meaning similar to that of ἐπαγωγικός, in
which case the rendering will be ‘the effect of the passage will no
longer be that of a narrative which gently carries the reader on.’
ὑπαλλαγή. 78 16. Hypallage. Lat. hypallage. Quintil. ix. 6. 23 “nec
procul ab hoc genere discedit μετωνυμία, quae est nominis pro nomine
positio. cuius vis est, pro eo, quod dicitur, causam, propter
quam dicitur, ponere; sed, ut ait Cicero, ὑπαλλαγήν rhetores dicunt.
haec inventas ab inventore et subiectas res ab obtinentibus significat:
ut Cererem corruptam undis, et receptus Terra Neptunus classes Aquilonibus
arcet.” Cp. Cic. Orat. 27. 93 “hanc ὑπαλλαγήν rhetores, quia quasi
summutantur verba pro verbis, μετωνυμίαν grammatici vocant, quod
nomina transferuntur.”
ὑπάτη. 210 7. Top note. Lat. chorda suprema. See L. & S. s.v.
ὑπεραίρειν. 224 11. To exceed. Lat. transgredi.
ὑπερβολή. 156 11. Excess, violence. Lat. impetus, ardor. [Not here used
in the technical sense of superlatio, traiectio.]
ὑπέρμετρος. 214 8. Exceeding due measure, excessively long. Lat. excedens
mensuram. [Not here used in the technical sense of passing beyond
the bounds of metre: Demetr. de Eloc. § 118 ποίημα γὰρ ἄκαιρον
ψυχρόν, ὥσπερ καὶ τὸ ὑπέρμετρον, ‘a bit of verse out of place is
just as inartistic as the disregard of metrical rules in poetry.’]
ὑπεροπτικός. 232 20. Disdainful. Lat. ad contemnendum pronus.
ὑπερτείνειν. 132 14. To exceed. Lat. transcendere.
ὑπηχεῖν. 150 7. To sound in answer to, to re-echo. Lat. resonare.
ὑποβάκχειος. 174 23, 178 11, 13. Hypobacchius. The metrical foot
ᴗ – –. The Epitome (c. 17) gives παλιμβάκχειος in the same sense
as ὑποβάκχειος.
ὑπογράφειν. 122 7. To sketch. Lat. adumbrare. Fr. esquisser.
ὑπόδειγμα. 174 12. Pattern, specimen. Lat. documentum, exemplum.
ὑπόθεσις. 104 6. Subject, theme. Lat. argumentum operis. So τὰ ὑποκείμενα
(the subject matter) 74 9, 106 17, 130 13, 134 21, 158 2.
ὑπόμνησις. 80 1. Reminder. Lat. admonitio. ὑπομνήσεως ἕνεκα =
memoriae causa.
[331]
ὑποτακτικός. 220 19. Subordinate. Lat. subditus. Dionysius seems to mean
that π is not apt to be amalgamated with, or absorbed in, a preceding ν.
[The second vowel in a diphthong could be described as ὑποτακτικὸν
φωνῆεν.] The verb ὑποτάττειν occurs in 100 23 and 126 21.
ὑποτίθεσθαι. 194 8. To take as a subject. Lat. argumentum sibi sumere.
This (rather than ‘to postulate’) seems to be the meaning.
ὑποτραχύνειν. 222 7. To grate slightly on the ear. Lat. leni horrore
aures afficere.
ὕπτιος. 108 3. Passive. Lat. supinus.
ὕφος. 234 12. Woven stuff, a web. Lat. tela. The word is used
metaphorically in Long. de Subl. i. 4 τοῦ ὅλου τῶν λόγων ὕφους.
ὑψηλός. 92 18, 172 2, 180 2, 182 7. Lofty, elevated. Lat. sublimis.
φαντασία. 230 29. Representation, image. Lat. imago.
φάρμακον. 208 17. Colour (for painting). Lat. pigmentum. For φάρμακα (= βάμματα, χρώματα) cp. Horace’s “lana Tarentino violas imitata
veneno” (Ep. ii. 1. 207).
φάρυγξ. 150 7. Throat. Lat. guttur. Here used in the masculine
gender, according to the best-supported reading. Galen (on Hippocr.
Progn. p. 45), ὅτι φάρυγγα τὴν προκειμένην χώραν στομάχου τε καὶ
λάρυγγος ὀνομάζει δῆλόν ἐστι.
φθαρτός. 266 9. Perishable. Lat. mortalis, periturus.
φθόγγος. 128 4, 130 12, 268 10. Sound, note. Lat. sonus.
φιλόκαλος. 66 16. Loving beauty, artistic. Lat. pulchritudinis studiosus.
φιλόλογος. 264 24. Loving literature, literary; a scholar. Lat. litterarum
studiosus; litteratus, philologus.
φιλοπονία. 264 25. Loving care; industry. Lat. diligentia: which
(etymologically) contains the same suggestion of ‘work done con amore.’
φιλόσοφος. 74 8, 132 22, 164 22, 248 15. Philosopher. Lat. philosophus.
The comprehensive sense in which philosophy is understood may be
illustrated from φιλοσοφία (140 12) and φιλοσοφεῖν (70 12). Cp. in
modern times such academic vestiges of ancient usage as ‘Natural
Philosophy’ or ‘Ph. D.’ In Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme (ii. 4) rhetoric
is taught by the Maître de Philosophie; and Dionysius is fond of
contrasting the philosophical, or scientific, rhetoric (ἡ φιλόσοφος
ῥητορική) of the best Attic times with the later and purely empirical
Asiatic rhetoric, to which he applies the epithet ἀμαθής. See further
in D.H. p. 208.
φιλοτεχνεῖν. 154 20, 200 18. To practise an art lovingly, to be devoted to
it. Lat. artem amare, in artem incumbere. So φιλοτέχνως 176 18.
φιλοτεχνεῖν, φιλότεχνος and φιλοτεχνία are all used by Plato in
reference to art pursued con amore; and Cicero (ad Att. xiii. 40. 1)
uses φιλοτέχνημα of an elaborate work of art—a chef-d’œuvre:
“Ubi igitur φιλοτέχνημα illud tuum quod vidi in Parthenone, Ahalam
et Brutum?”
φιλοχωρεῖν. 110 5. To cling to a place, to haunt it. Lat. libenter in loco
commorari. φιλοχωρεῖν is used repeatedly by Dionysius in the Antiqq.
Rom. (e.g. i. 13 Ἀρκαδικὸν γὰρ τὸ φιλοχωρεῖν ὄρεσιν and v. 63
παρεκελεύοντο ἀλλήλοις μὴ φιλοχωρεῖν ἐν πόλει μηδενὸς αὐτοῖς
ἀγαθοῦ μεταδιδούσῃ) and φιλοχωρία in i. 27 (ὑπὸ τῆς φιλοχωρίας
κρατουμένους). Plutarch uses the word in reference to his birthplace
Chaeroneia, telling us that he ‘clung fondly to the spot,’ lest by leaving
it he should make a small place, but one which had witnessed thrilling
scenes, ‘smaller yet’ (ἡμεῖς δὲ μικρὰν οἰκοῦντες πόλιν, καὶ ἵνα μὴ
μικροτέρα γένηται φιλοχωροῦντες, Plut. Demosth. c. 2). The form
χωροφιλεῖν seems to occur twice only in good Greek authors: (1)
Antiphon de Caede Herodis § 78 εἰ δ’ ἐν Αἴνῳ χωροφιλεῖ [probably it
is to this passage that Dionysius here refers]; (2) Ep. Thaletis ap.
Diog. L. i. 44 σὺ μέντοι χωροφιλέων ὀλίγα φοιτέεις ἐς Ἰωνίην.
[332]
φλυαρία. 264 7, 268 15. Nonsense, foolery. Lat. nugae, ineptiae. So
φλυάρημα (futility) 192 9. Notwithstanding the remarks in Stephanus,
it would seem more natural to take φλύαρος as an adjective (than
as a noun) in 272 20, 22, and this for two reasons: (1) the form
φλυαρία has been used shortly before; (2) the adjectival use is
sufficiently established by Hesychius’ note (φαῦλος, εὐήθης) and by
that of Thom. M. p. 376 Ritschl (πολύλογος), while ἡ φλύαρος
φιλοσοφία occurs in the Septuagint (Maccab. iv. 5, 10) and καὶ ὅλως
ἀποδείκνυσι τὸν Πυθαγόρου λόγον φλύαρον in Plut. Mor. 169 E.
φορά. 144 22, 204 17, 244 20. Current, rush. Lat. cursus, impetus.
φορτικός. 252 14. Coarse, rude. Lat. insolens, importunus, insulsus.
φράσις. 84 2, 166 3, 182 8, 206 1, 15, 208 7, 250 14. Style, expression.
Lat. elocutio. Cp. Quintil. viii. 1. 1 “igitur, quam Graeci
φράσιν vocant, Latine dicimus elocutionem. ea spectatur verbis aut
singulis aut coniunctis.”
φριμαγμός. 158 14. Snorting. Lat. fremitus. It is hardly likely that
the word here means no more than βληχή, bleating.
Φρύγιος. 196 1. Phrygian. Lat. Phrygius. Cp. Monro’s Modes of Ancient
Greek Music, passim.
φυλακή. 198 6. Preservation. Lat. conservatio.—In the de Imitat. B. vi.
3 the reading φυλακή (if correct) will correspond to the middle
φυλάττεσθαι (not to φυλάττειν).
φυσικός. 96 23, 214 3, 224 5, 240 8, etc. Natural. Lat. naturalis. So
φυσικῶς 200 12. ὁ φυσικός, in 214 3, = ‘the natural philosopher,’
‘the physicist’ (of Empedocles). In 134 2 οὐδ’ ἔχει φύσιν τὸ πρᾶγμα
... πεσεῖν the meaning is ‘nor is the subject of such a nature that
it can fall.’
φωνή. 130 4, 21, 136 22, 138 7, etc. Voice, sound. Lat. vox, sonus, sonus
vocalis. Cp. φωνεῖν (‘to pronounce,’ etc.) 140 1, 20, 144 18, 148 14.
φωνήεις. 138 8, 9, 15, 140 2, 144 7, 150 17, 152 4, 220 11. Voiced.
Lat. vocalis. φωνήεντα γράμματα = litterae vocales = vowels. For the
term ‘voiced’ see s.v. ἄφωνος p. 292 supra. Cp. Dionys. Thrax Ars
Gramm. p. 9 (ed. Uhlig) φωνήεντα δὲ λέγεται, ὅτι φωνὴν ἀφ’
ἑαυτῶν ἀποτελεῖ.
φωτεινός. 234 13. Full of light. Lat. lucidus, luminosus.
[333]
χαρακτήρ. 68 21, 80 17, 90 10, etc. Characteristic stamp, type. Lat.
forma, nota. So the adjective χαρακτηρικός in 232 21 (cp. de
Demosth. c. 39 init.). See further in D.H. p. 208, Demetr. p. 308.—In
230 9 the verb χαράττειν = ‘to irritate.’
χάρις. 112 5, 120 20, 124 12, etc. Charm, grace. Lat. venustas, lepor.
Fr. grâce. Cp. Demetr. p. 308. So χαρίεις (‘refined,’ ‘elegant,’
‘accomplished,’ ‘consummate’) 106 16, 116 1, 154 16; χαριέντως
110 22.
χλευασμός. 192 7. Scoffing, satire. Lat. derisio, illusio. χλευάζειν 270 3.
χορδή. 122 23. String, note. Lat. chorda.
χορεῖος. 170 17, 184 11. Choree. Lat. choreus. The metrical foot ᴗ ᴗ ᴗ.
In 170 18 the reading τρίβραχυς πούς (τροχαῖος πούς F) seems to
be a gloss. The term χορεῖος is applied to the trochee more commonly
than to the tribrach. The Epitome (c. 17) gives χορεῖος (without
addition).
χρεία. 104 21, 198 2. Use, practical work. Lat. usus. Cp. de Demosth.
c. 45, de Thucyd. c. 55. There may also be some notion of practical
need, stress: cp. ἐν χρείᾳ δορός (Soph. Aj. 963) and ὑπὸ τῆς χρείας
αὐτῆς (schol. on Hom. Odyss. viii. 163).
χρεμετισμός. 158 14. Neighing, whinnying. Lat. hinnitus.
χρῆμα. 158 2. Object. Lat. res ipsa. Cp. note on p. 158 supra.
χρόνοι. 130 1, 164 5, 204 22 (lit. ‘does not divide the times’), 210 19,
216 18, 234 4, 244 19, 264 4. Times, time-intervals, time-spaces,
rests, pauses. Lat. tempora, morae. So in 128 15 χρόνους = ‘the
length of syllables,’ and in 130 7 ἐν τοῖς χρόνοις τῶν μορίων = ‘in
the duration of words,’ ‘in quantity.’ χρόνων = ‘tenses,’ 108 5;
χρόνιος = diuturnus, 202 23; χρονίζειν = immorari, 164 12.
χρῶμα. 88 12, 198 14. Colour. Lat. color. In 198 14 χρώμασιν should
be retained (in place of Usener’s χρήμασιν) in the sense of ‘ornaments’;
the ornaments in question being μέλος εὐγενές, ῥυθμὸς ἀξιωματικός,
μεταβολὴ μεγαλοπρεπής (136 11, where compare τὸ πᾶσι τούτοις
παρακολουθοῦν πρέπον with τοῖς ἄλλοις χρώμασιν ἅπασι παρεῖναι
δεῖ τὸ πρέπον in 198 14). Compare too de Demosth. c. 22 κοσμοῦντος
ἅπαντα καὶ χρωματίζοντος τῇ πρεπούσῃ ὑποκρίσει ἧς δεινότατος
ἀσκητὴς ἐγένετο, and the use of χρῶμα (or χρώματα) in de Isaeo c. 4
and de Thucyd. c. 42. Photius (Bibl. Cod. 214) has ἔστι δὲ ἡ
φράσις τῷ ἀνδρὶ σαφὴς μὲν καὶ καθαρὰ καὶ σπουδῇ φιλοσόφῳ
πρέπουσα, οὐ μήν γε τοῖς κεκαλλωπισμένοις καὶ περιττοῖς ἐξωραϊζομένη
χρώμασι καὶ ποικίλμασι τῆς ῥητορείας. Similarly color in
Quintil. x. 1. 116, and Cic. de Orat. iii. 25. 100. The stage at which
the χρῶμα would best be introduced in a historical work is suggested
in a passage of Lucian (de conscrib. hist. 48): καὶ ἐπειδὰν ἀθροίσῃ
ἅπαντα ἢ τὰ πλεῖστα, πρῶτα μὲν ὑπόμνημά τι συνυφαινέτω αὐτῶν
καὶ σῶμα ποιείτω ἀκαλλὲς ἔτι καὶ ἀδιάρθρωτον· εἶτα ἐπιθεὶς τὴν
τάξιν ἐπαγέτω τὸ κάλλος καὶ χρωννύτω (i.e. ‘tinge’) τῇ λέξει καὶ
σχηματιζέτω καὶ ῥυθμιζέτω. But might it not be more truly said
that a great historian like Gibbon has his χρῶμα from the beginning,
—from the moment when he stands in the Forum and conceives his
vast theme? It is in fact one aspect of his inspiration.
[334]
χρωματικός. 194 7, 196 3. Chromatic. Lat. chromaticus. For the
chromatic scale see note on 194 7.
χώρα. 144 13. Room, space. Lat. locus, spatium. χωρίον in 126 6 =
‘distance,’ ‘interval.’
ψιλός. 130 5, 148 7, 12 (bis), 18, 19, 150 3, 9, 154 2, 250 12, 254 1.
Bare, smooth, unaspirated. Lat. lenis. So ψιλότης 148 21. See s.v.
δασύς p. 294 supra, with the reference there given to A. J. Ellis’
pamphlet. In 148 7 Ellis takes ‘smooth’ to mean ‘unaccompanied
by voice, but in this case possibly not mute.’ In 130 5 the ‘ordinary’
voice, the voice ‘pure and simple’ (or ‘without addition’), is meant:
cp. 154 2, 250 12, 254 1. So ἐν τοῖς ψιλοῖς λόγοις Aristot. Rhet.
iii. 2. 3, and “nuda oratio” Cic. Orat. 55. 183.
ψοφοειδής. 162 15. Sounding. Lat. sonans. If the term is technical, it
may perhaps be translated by fricative; it can hardly be so wide as
consonantal.
ψόφος. 138 7, 8, 9, 12, 146 4, 222 2. A sound, a noise. Lat. sonus,
strepitus. The consonants (litterae consonantes) are called ψόφοι, as
contrasted with the φωνήεντα γράμματα.
ψῦγμα. 202 26. Inhalation. Lat. respiratio. Used particularly of the
‘catch of the breath’ (interspiratio) between one word and another.
[ψῦγμα must, of course, be distinguished from ψῆγμα: cp. Long.
p. 174.]
ᾠδή. 124 16, 22, 148 1, 224 21, 278 8. Song, lay, ode. Lat. cantus,
carmen. So ᾠδικός = vocal (of the voice accompanied by music),
126 16, 130 5.
ὤρα. 78 12. Care, heed. Lat. cura. Cp. Hesychius: ὥρα ... ψιλῶς δὲ
φροντίς, ἐπιμέλεια· ὅθεν ὀλίγωρον (i.e. ‘a poco curante,’ ‘a Hippocleides’)
λέγομεν τὸν ὀλίγην ἔχοντα φροντίδα. In 78 12 M has γρ
φροντίδα in the margin.
ὥρα. 120 20, 124 12, 162 1. Freshness, bloom, beauty. Lat. venustas, flos.
Fr. fraîcheur. Cp. Ep. ad Cn. Pomp. c. 2 (quoted from de Demosth. c. 5:
in reference to Plato’s style ὅ τε πίνος ὁ τῆς ἀρχαιότητος ἠρέμα αὐτῇ
καὶ λεληθότως ἐπιτρέχει ἱλαρόν τέ τι καὶ τεθηλὸς καὶ μεστὸν ὥρας
ἄνθος ἀναδίδωσι, καὶ ὥσπερ ἀπὸ τῶν εὐωδεστάτων λειμώνων αὔρα
τις ἡδεῖα ἐξ αὐτῆς φέρεται).—In 68 14 and 76 6 ὥρα = ‘time,’ ‘season.’
ὡραϊσμός. 66 18. Adornment, elegance. Lat. elegantia.
[335]
APPENDIX A
OBSCURITY IN GREEK
The natural lucidity of the Greek language is sometimes assumed by its
modern admirers to extend to all the writings of Greek authors. But the
ancients themselves made no such extravagant claims. They might praise
Lysias as a model of clearness; but they knew well the difficulties, of
subject matter or expression, to be met with not only in Heracleitus[199] or
Lycophron, but in masters so great as Pindar, Aeschylus, Thucydides,
and the author of that excellent definition which sees in lucidity a
fundamental virtue of style—Aristotle himself. Thucydides (to take one
writer only out of this group of four) is taxed with obscurity by critics other
than Dionysius. Marcellinus, although not otherwise in entire agreement
with Dionysius, attributes this particular defect to Thucydides and regards
it as deliberate: ἀσαφῶς δὲ λέγων ἐπίτηδες, ἵνα μὴ πᾶσιν εἴη βατὸς
μηδὲ εὐτελὴς φαίνηται παντὶ τῷ βουλομένῳ νοούμενος εὐχερῶς, ἀλλὰ
τοῖς λίαν σοφοῖς δοκιμαζόμενος παρὰ τούτοις θαυμάζηται ... τὸ δὲ
τῆς συνθέσεως τραχύτητος μεστὸν καὶ ἐμβριθὲς καὶ ὑπερβατικόν, ἐνίοτε
δὲ ἀσαφές ... ἀσαφὴς τὴν διάνοιαν διὰ τὸ ὑπερβατοῖς χαίρειν
(Marcell. Vita Thucyd. §§ 35, 50, 56). An epigram in the Greek Anthology
is pitched in the same key:—
ὦ φίλος, εἰ σοφὸς εἶ, λάβε μ’ ἐς χέρας· εἰ δέ γε πάμπαν
νῆϊς ἔφυς Μουσέων, ῥίψον ἃ μὴ νοέεις.
εἰμὶ δέ γ’ οὐ πάντεσσι βατός· παῦροι δ’ ἀγάσαντο
Θουκυδίδην Ὀλόρου, Κεκροπίδην τὸ γένος.
Anth. Pal. ix. 583.
And Cicero, in a more uncompromising way, condemns the Speeches as
scarcely intelligible: “ipsae illae contiones ita multas habent obscuras
abditasque sententias, vix ut intellegantur; quod est in oratione civili
vitium vel maximum” (Cic. Orat. 9. 30).
Obscurity in matter and obscurity in expression are intimately allied.
Euripides, in the Frogs, says of Aeschylus that he was obscure in setting
forth his plots (ἀσαφὴς γὰρ ἦν ἐν τῇ φράσει τῶν πραγμάτων, Aristoph.
Ran. 1122). Dionysius attributes to Lysias, as compared with Thucydides
[336]
and Demosthenes, a lucidity which embraces matter as well as expression
and treats words as the servants of thought: τρίτην ἀρετὴν ἀποφαίνομαι
περὶ τὸν ἄνδρα τὴν σαφήνειαν, οὐ μόνον τὴν ἐν τοῖς ὀνόμασιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ
τὴν ἐν τοῖς πράγμασιν· ἔστι γάρ τις καὶ πραγματικὴ σαφήνεια οὐ
πολλοῖς γνώριμος. τεκμαίρομαι δέ, ὅτι τῆς μὲν Θουκυδίδου λέξεως καὶ
Δημοσθένους, οἳ δεινότατοι πράγματα ἐξειπεῖν ἐγένοντο, πολλὰ δυσείκαστά
ἐστιν ἡμῖν καὶ ἀσαφῆ καὶ δεόμενα ἐξηγητῶν ... τούτου δὲ
αἴτιον, ὅτι οὐ τοῖς ὀνόμασι δουλεύει τὰ πράγματα παρ’ αὐτῷ [sc. Λυσίᾳ],
τοῖς δὲ πράγμασιν ἀκολουθεῖ τὰ ὀνόματα (de Lysia, c. 4). So far as
the two can be separated, it is with wording rather than with subject
matter that the present appendix is concerned.
One principal cause of obscurity is the anxious search for brevity.
Dionysius sees this, especially in regard to Thucydides; and “brevis esse
laboro, | obscurus fio” has many an analogue in his critical pages (e.g. ἀσαφὲς
γίνεται τὸ βραχύ and διὰ τὸ τάχος τῆς ἀπαγγελίας ἀσαφὴς ἡ λέξις
γίνεται, de Thucyd. c. 24 and Ep. ii. ad Amm. c. 2). At the same time, he
does not seem to concede enough to the claims of brevity in C.V. 118 1, 2,
where it is not simply a question of ‘offending the ear,’ or of ‘spoiling the
metre,’ or even of ‘charm.’ The two lines there quoted from Sophocles have
something of that πολύνους βραχυλογία which has been justly attributed
to Thucydides.[200]
But too many words may be just as fatal to clearness as too few. As
Aristotle says (Rhet. iii. 12. 6), lucidity is imperilled when a style is prolix,
no less than when it is condensed. A disjointed and rambling diffuseness
is condemned by Demetrius (de Eloc. § 192); and Dionysius (Ep. ii. ad Amm.
c. 15) remarks that numerous parentheses make the meaning hard to follow
(... αἱ μεταξὺ παρεμπτώσεις πολλαὶ γινόμεναι καὶ μόλις ἐπὶ τὸ
τέλος ἀφικνούμεναι, δι’ ἃς ἡ φράσις δυσπαρακολούθητος γίνεται).[201]
It is, however, the arrangement of words (even more than their number,
large or small) that contributes to lucidity or its opposite. Quintilian (ix.
4. 32) says “amphiboliam quoque fieri vitiosa locatione verborum, nemo
est qui nesciat”; and certainly the importance of a right order, in its
bearing on clearness, is very great even in the highly inflected languages.
Elsewhere (viii. 2. 16) Quintilian gives some good examples of ambiguities
to be avoided: “vitanda est in primis ambiguitas, non haec solum, de cuius
genere supra dictum est, quae incertum intellectum facit, ut Chremetem
audivi percussisse Demean,[202] sed illa quoque, quae, etiamsi turbare non
potest sensum, in idem tamen verborum vitium incidit, ut si quis dicat,
visum a se hominem librum scribentem. nam etiamsi librum ab homine
scribi patet, male tamen composuerit feceritque ambiguum, quantum in
ipso fuit.” Quintilian’s ideal is a fine one, but it is not always possible to
[337]
attain it in Latin or in Greek. The freedom of the classical word-order,
so desirable on other grounds, stands in the way here.
Illustrations of a certain degree of ambiguity will be found in some
instances of the dependent genitive in Greek, as used especially in
Thucydides. Thucydides usually places the dependent genitive before the
noun on which it depends.[203] As, however, his rule is not invariable, it
cannot be said that in all the following examples (which are designedly
of a promiscuous character) the reader is absolved, as Quintilian evidently
thinks he should be, from making his conception of the general sense
help in determining the grammatical construction:—
(1) καὶ μετὰ τῆς ἥσσονος ἅμα ἐλπίδος ὀλίγων ἡμερῶν ἕνεκα μεγάλου μισθοῦ δόσεως
ἐκείνοις ξυναγωνίζεσθαι, Thucyd. i. 143.
(2) εἴ τις ὑπομένοι καὶ μὴ φόβῳ ῥοθίου καὶ νεῶν δεινότητος κατάπλου ὑποχωροίη,
iv. 10.
(3) Κερκυραῖοι δὲ μετὰ τῆς ξυμμαχίας τῆς αἰτήσεως καὶ ταῦτα πιστεύοντες ἐχυρὰ
ὑμῖν παρέξεσθαι ἀπέστειλαν ἡμᾶς, i. 32.
(4) οἵπερ τῶν ὁλκάδων ἕνεκα τῆς ἐς Σικελίαν κομιδῆς ἀνθώρμουν πρὸς τὰς ἐν
Ναυπάκτῳ ναῦς, vii. 34.
(5) ἄπιστα μὲν ἴσως, ὥσπερ καὶ ἄλλοι τινές, δόξω ὑμῖν περὶ τοῦ ἐπίπλου τῆς
ἀληθείας λέγειν, vi. 33.
(6) τά τε τῆς ἀντιμιμήσεως αὐτῶν τῆς παρασκευῆς ἡμῶν τῷ μὲν ἡμετέρῳ τρόπῳ
ξυνήθη τέ ἐστι κτλ., vii. 67.
(7) τοὺς γὰρ ἂν ψιλοὺς τοὺς σφῶν καὶ τὸν ὄχλον τῶν Συρακοσίων τοὺς ἱππέας
πολλοὺς ὄντας, σφίσι δ’ οὐ παρόντων ἱππέων, βλάπτειν ἂν μεγάλα, vi. 64.
(8) καὶ τοῦ Κλέωνος καίπερ μανιώδης οὖσα ἡ ὑπόσχεσις ἀπέβη, iv. 39.
(9) καὶ τριήρης τῇ αὐτῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἁλίσκεται τῶν Ἀθηναίων ὑπὸ τῶν Συρακοσίων
ἐφορμοῦσα τῷ λιμένι, vii. 3.[204]
Similarly in other authors: e.g. καὶ δὴ καὶ τότε τοῦ Θρασυμάχου τὴν
ἀπόρρησιν οὐκ ἀπεδέξατο, Plato Rep. ii. 357 A (where, however, the meaning
may be “would not accept from Thrasymachus his withdrawal”); and
ὣς φάτο, τῷ δ’ ἄρα πατρὸς ὑφ’ ἵμερον ὦρσε γόοιο, Hom. Il. xxiv. 507; and
τούτων ἐγὼ οὐκ ἔμελλον, ἀνδρὸς οὐδενὸς
φρόνημα δείσασ’, ἐν θεοῖσι τὴν δίκην
δώσειν.
Soph. Antig. 458-60.[205]
If in some of these instances the order is not absolutely unambiguous,
still less is it so in other and more miscellaneous extracts about to be given.
The writer of artistic prose, as of poetry, has to satisfy claims which are
often hard to reconcile: those of clearness, of emphasis, and of euphony.[206]
[338]
The result may often be a more or less unconscious compromise in which
one of the elements prospers at the expense of the others. Euphony, to
take that element alone, is expected to please the ear in many different
ways—by the avoidance of harsh letters (found singly or in combination),
of short syllables in close succession, of monotony in word-terminations,
of monotony in every shape and form. Obscurity may well
ensue, especially in a literature which does not aid the eye by means of
punctuation, capital letters (to denote proper names or the beginning of a
sentence), italic type, or division into paragraphs and chapters. To set against
these deficiencies, there was the help provided by the reciter or the skilled
anagnostes; and it is often interesting to speculate how, by a slight pause
or modulation of the voice, a practised reader would be able to remove a
seeming ambiguity. In poetry, again, metre would often be an aid to clear
delivery, though its exigencies might on the other hand have led to some
ambiguities in the actual writing. No careful modern student of a highly-wrought
speech, like the Crown of Demosthenes, can have failed to be
arrested momentarily, here and there, by some slight ambiguity which, as
far as he can judge, might have been removed by an equally slight change
in the word-order; and he gains much in the appreciation of Demosthenes
if he is thus led to consider what are the subtle laws of rhythm and melody
to which an absolutely unimpeachable lucidity has (in however small a
degree) given way. He will certainly be led to the conclusion that, in
Greek, good order is by no means the simple thing it may seem when
achieved, but rather is the highly complex result of the play of many
forces. The following examples, drawn from various authors in poetry and
in prose, may be found suggestive. They are of set purpose presented
without any attempt at sequence or classification, except that a considerable
number of extracts from the de Corona are grouped together:—
(1) καί μοι τὸν υἱόν, εἰ μεμάθηκε τὸν λόγον
ἐκεῖνον, εἴφ’, ὃν ἀρτίως εἰσήγαγες.
Aristoph. Nub. 1148.
(2) ἀλλά μιν αὖτις ἀναρπάξασα θύελλα
πόντον ἐπ’ ἰχθυόεντα φέρεν βαρέα στενάχοντα.
Hom. Odyss. xxiii. 316.[207]
(3) ἠδ’ ὡς εἰς Ἀίδεω δόμον ἤλυθεν εὐρώεντα,
ψυχῇ χρησόμενος Θηβαίου Τειρεσίαο,
νηῒ πολυκλήιδι.
id. ib. xxiii. 322.[207]
(4) ὅτι Ἱππίας μὲν πρεσβύτατος ὢν ἦρχε τῶν Πεισιστράτου υἱέων.
Thucyd. i. 20.
Here τῶν Πεισιστράτου υἱέων depends on πρεσβύτατος ὤν, not on ἦρχε.
(5) κράτιστα τοίνυν τῶν παρόντων ἐστὶ νῷν
θεῶν ἰόντε προσπεσεῖν του πρὸς βρέτας.
Aristoph. Eq. 30, 31.
Here the actor would pause slightly after νῷν, at the end of the metrical
line.
(6) τοῦτ’ οὖν ἔβλαψα τί δράσας;
id. Ran. 1064.
[339]
Careful delivery would make it quite plain that the meaning is: τί οὖν
ἔβλαψα, δράσας τοῦτο;
(7) σαφῶς γὰρ ἄν, εἰ πείθοιμι ὑμᾶς καὶ τῷ δεῖσθαι βιαζοίμην ὀμωμοκότας, θεοὺς
ἂν διδάσκοιμι μὴ ἡγεῖσθαι ὑμᾶς εἶναι.
Plato Apol. c. 24.
(8) καὶ ἐς τύχας πρὸς πολλῷ δυνατωτέρους ἀγωνιζόμενοι καταστῆναι.
Thucyd. i. 69.
(9) οὐδ’ ἐκλογίσασθαι πώποτε πρὸς οἵους ὑμῖν Ἀθηναίους ὄντας καὶ ὅσον ὑμῶν
καὶ ὡς πᾶν διαφέροντας ὁ ἀγὼν ἔσται.
id. i. 70.
ὑμῖν is probably to be connected with ὁ ἀγὼν ἔσται. Its present
position has the effect of marking the contrast between ὑμῖν and Ἀθηναίους,
and further of breaking the monotony of the accusative-endings οἵους
Ἀθηναίους ὄντας. It should, however, be remembered that in a highly
inflected language like Greek a noun may stand in a vague general case
relation (genitive, dative, or accusative) to the whole sentence in a way
that is impossible in an uninflected language. This may be so here, and
in some of the other passages quoted.
(10) ῥηθήσεται δὲ οὐ παραιτήσεως μᾶλλον ἕνεκα ἢ μαρτυρίου καὶ δηλώσεως πρὸς
οἵαν ὑμῖν πόλιν μὴ εὖ βουλευομένοις ὁ ἀγὼν καταστήσεται.
id. i. 73.
Similarly ὑμῖν (‘you will find,’ etc.) is to be taken with ὁ ἀγὼν καταστήσεται.
It is contrasted with πόλιν and paves the way for βουλευομένοις.
(11) ἔνθ’ ὅ γε τοὺς ἐλεεινὰ κατήσθεε τετριγῶτας·
μήτηρ δ’ ἀμφεποτᾶτο ὀδυρομένη φίλα τέκνα.
Hom. Il. ii. 314-15.
Connect ἐλεεινὰ τετριγῶτας, and ἀμφεποτᾶτο φίλα τέκνα.
(12) ὡς οὖν δεινὰ πέλωρα θεῶν εἰσῆλθ’ ἑκατόμβας.
id. ib. ii. 321.
Connect θεῶν ἑκατόμβας.
(13) καίτοι σ’ ἐγὼ ’τίμησα τοῖς φρονοῦσιν εὖ.
Soph. Antig. 904.
εὖ with ἐτίμησα. The line occurs in the suspected portion of the
Antigone. But, so far as this particular point is concerned, cp. the order of
μόνος in—
τὰ κοινὰ χαίρων οὐ δίκαια δρᾷ μόνος.
Eurip. Ion 358.
(14) τίνος δ’ Ἀτρεῖδαι τοῦδ’ ἄγαν οὕτω χρόνῳ
τοσῷδ’ ἐπεστέφοντο πράγματος χάριν,
ὅν γ’ εἶχον ἤδη χρόνιον ἐκβεβληκότες;
Soph. Philoct. 598.
Here strict lucidity is sacrificed to emphasis. τίνος must be joined
with πράγματος (not with τοῦδε).
(15) στέμματ’ ἔχων ἐν χερσὶν ἑκηβόλου Ἀπόλλωνος
χρυσέῳ ἀνὰ σκήπτρῳ.
Hom. Il. i. 14.
(16) περὶ τούτων δ’ ὄντος τουτουὶ τοῦ ἀγῶνος, ἀξιῶ καὶ δέομαι πάντων ὁμοίως ὑμῶν
ἀκοῦσαί μου περὶ τῶν κατηγορημένων ἀπολογουμένου δικαίως, ὥσπερ οἱ νόμοι κελεύουσιν,
οὓς ὁ τιθεὶς ἐξ ἀρχῆς Σόλων κτλ.
Demosth. de Cor. § 6.
[340]
δικαίως qualifies ἀκοῦσαι: cp. the position of γενναίως in de Cor. § 97
(quoted in Introduction p. 24 supra). The present order is not only
emphatic, but also serves to connect δικαίως closely with ὥσπερ κτλ., and
thus to a certain extent actually to avoid ambiguity.
(17) σκέψασθ’ ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι καὶ θεωρήσατε ὅσῳ καὶ ἀληθέστερον καὶ ἀνθρωπινώτερον
ἐγὼ περὶ τῆς τύχης τούτου διαλεχθήσομαι.
Demosth. de Cor. § 252.
(18) τὸ μὲν τοίνυν προελέσθαι τὰ κάλλιστα καὶ τὸ τῶν οἰηθέντων Ἑλλήνων, εἰ
πρόοιντο ἡμᾶς, ἐν εὐδαιμονίᾳ διάξειν, αὐτῶν ἄμεινον πράττειν τῆς ἀγαθῆς τύχης τῆς
πόλεως εἶναι τίθημι.
id. ib. § 254.
(19) τοῦ μὲν οὖν γράψαι πράττοντα καὶ λέγοντα τὰ βέλτιστά με τῷ δήμῳ διατελεῖν
καὶ πρόθυμον εἶναι ποιεῖν ὅ τι ἂν δύνωμαι ἀγαθόν, καὶ ἐπαινεῖν ἐπὶ τούτοις, ἐν τοῖς
πεπολιτευμένοις τὴν κρίσιν εἶναι νομίζω.
id. ib. § 56.
(20) οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἥψατ’ αὐτῶν | παρόντων ἡμῶν, κτλ.
id. ib. § 30.
The vertical stroke, here and elsewhere, may serve to indicate the
possibility of a slight pause in utterance, and Aristotle’s remarks on the
obscurity of Heracleitus may be recalled: τὰ γὰρ Ἡρακλείτου διαστίξαι
(‘to punctuate’) ἔργον διὰ τὸ ἄδηλον εἶναι ποτέρῳ πρόσκειται, τῷ ὕστερον
ἢ τῷ πρότερον, οἷον ἐν τῇ ἀρχῇ αὐτοῦ τοῦ συγγράμματος· φησὶ γὰρ
“τοῦ λόγου τοῦδ’ ἐόντος ἀεὶ ἀξύνετοι ἄνθρωποι γίγνονται”· ἄδηλον γὰρ
τὸ ἀεί, πρὸς ὁποτέρῳ ‹δεῖ› διαστίξαι.
Aristot. Rhet. iii. 5.
(21) λοιπὸν τοίνυν ἦν καὶ ἀναγκαῖον ἅμα | πᾶσιν οἷς ἐκεῖνος ἔπραττ’ ἀδικῶν ὑμᾶς
ἐναντιοῦσθαι δικαίως.
Demosth. de Cor. § 69.
(22) ταῦτα τοίνυν εἰδὼς Αἰσχίνης οὐδὲν ἧττον ἐμοῦ | πομπεύειν ἀντὶ τοῦ κατηγορεῖν
εἵλετο.
id. ib. § 124.
(23) συνέβαινε δ’ αὐτῷ | τῷ πολέμῳ κρατοῦντι, κτλ.
id. ib. § 146.
(24) τότε τοίνυν κατ’ ἐκεῖνον τὸν καιρὸν ὁ Παιανεὺς ἐγὼ Βάτταλος Οἰνομάου τοῦ
Κοθωκίδου σοῦ | πλείονος ἄξιος ὢν ἐφάνην τῇ πατρίδι.
id. ib. § 180.
(25) εἰ γὰρ ὡς οὐ τὰ βέλτιστα ἐμοῦ πολιτευσαμένου | τουδὶ καταψηφιεῖσθε,
ἡμαρτηκέναι δόξετε, οὐ τῇ τῆς τύχης ἀγνωμοσύνῃ τὰ συμβάντα παθεῖν.
id. ib. § 207.
(26) οὐκ ἂν οἷα σὺ νῦν ἔλεγες, τοιαῦτα κατηγόρει, παραδείγματα πλάττων | καὶ
ῥήματα καὶ σχήματα μιμούμενος κτλ.
id. ib. § 232.
(27) σὺ τοίνυν ταῦτ’ ἀφεὶς ἐμὲ τὸν παρὰ τουτοισὶ πεπολιτευμένον αἰτιᾷ, καὶ ταῦτ’ |
εἰδὼς ὅτι, καὶ εἰ μὴ τὸ ὅλον, μέρος γ’ ἐπιβάλλει τῆς βλασφημίας ἅπασι, καὶ μάλιστα σοί.
id. ib. § 272.
Here may be added, from R. Y. Tyrrell’s edition of Eurip. Bacchae p. 36,
an interesting note suggested by the distance which parts μόσχων from
ἀγελαῖα βοσκήματα in Bacch. 678: “The Greek writers are not nearly so
sensitive about the order of words as we are. Surely we have something at
least as strange in the order of words in 684 where ἐλάτης certainly
depends on φόβην not on νῶτα. See Comm. on 860 for more curious
inversions of the natural order; and compare in Soph. Oed. R. 1251 χὤπως
μὲν ἐκ τῶνδ’ οὐκέτ’ οἶδ’ ἀπόλλυται; O.C. 1427 τίς δὲ τολμήσει κλύων | τὰ
[341]
τοῦδ’ ἕπεσθαι τἀνδρός; Perhaps the best instance in Greek of a violent
hyperbaton is Ar. Thesm. 811 οὐδ’ ἂν κλέψασα γυνὴ ζεύγει κατὰ πεντήκοντα
τάλαντα | ἐς πόλιν ἔλθοι τῶν δημοσίων ‘nor would a lady ride in
her chariot to the town after pilfering the public exchequer to the tune of 50
talents.’” Probably the Greek authors, in such instances, were not blind
to the liberties they were taking with the natural and lucid order of words;
but they trusted to delivery’s artful aid. And about the order adopted in
the passage quoted from the Thesmophoriazusae there seems to be a touch of
intentional comedy.
It is worth notice, in connexion with Thucydides and word-order, that
the Vatican manuscript B, which is at its best from vi. 92 to the end of
viii., frequently exhibits an order of words which is peculiar to it and may
point to a reviser’s deliberate effort after greater lucidity. In reference to
the text presented by the newly discovered Commentary on Thucydides ii.,
Grenfell and Hunt (Oxyrhynchus Papyri vi. p. 113) say: “As usual, the
text of the papyrus is of an eclectic character and does not consistently agree
with either family [of the MSS. of Thucydides]; but it supports the ABEFM
group seven times against only four agreements with the other [viz. CG].
Several new readings occur of which we append a list.”
With regard to the 27 passages quoted above from various authors it
may be remarked in general that, while in some of them there are real
obscurities, in others the ambiguity is purely grammatical. And it might
almost be laid down as a principle of Greek language that grammatical
rules may be freely neglected where the neglect of them does not make
the meaning seriously ambiguous, and is desirable in order to secure
emphasis, euphony, or some similar object.
[342]
APPENDIX B
ILLUSTRATIONS OF WORD-ORDER IN GREEK AND
MODERN LANGUAGES
A few modern translations of some short Greek passages may be appended,
in order to exemplify some of the leading differences, in regard to word-order,
between ancient and modern languages. From these it will be seen
how much English, French, and German differ among themselves; and,
indeed, how great is the variety presented by good English versions of one
and the same Greek passage. Dionysius himself (p. 266 supra) refers to the
opening of Plato’s Republic, and that opening passage may here be given at
sufficient length to illustrate sentence-order and clause-order as well as
word-order. Then will be added, from the de Corona (which Dionysius
regards as the greatest of all speeches), the opening, the conclusion, and a
famous piece of narrative.
MODERN TRANSLATIONS
I. Opening of Plato’s Republic
(1) Κατέβην χθὲς εἰς Πειραιᾶ μετὰ Γλαύκωνος τοῦ Ἀρίστωνος
προσευξόμενός τε τῇ θεῷ καὶ ἅμα τὴν ἑορτὴν βουλόμενος θεάσασθαι
τίνα τρόπον ποιήσουσιν ἅτε νῦν πρῶτον ἄγοντες. καλὴ μὲν οὖν μοι
καὶ ἡ τῶν ἐπιχωρίων πομπὴ ἔδοξεν εἶναι, οὐ μέντοι ἧττον ἐφαίνετο
πρέπειν ἣν οἱ Θρᾷκες ἔπεμπον. προσευξάμενοι δὲ καὶ θεωρήσαντες
ἀπῇμεν πρὸς τὸ ἄστυ. κατιδὼν οὖν πόρρωθεν ἡμᾶς οἴκαδε ὡρμημένους
Πολέμαρχος ὁ Κεφάλου ἐκέλευσε δραμόντα τὸν παῖδα περιμεῖναί ἑ
κελεῦσαι. καί μου ὄπισθεν ὁ παῖς λαβόμενος τοῦ ἱματίου, Κελεύει
ὑμᾶς, ἔφη, Πολέμαρχος περιμεῖναι. Καὶ ἐγὼ μετεστράφην τε καὶ
ἠρόμην ὅπου αὐτὸς εἴη. Οὗτος, ἔφη, ὄπισθεν προσέρχεται· ἀλλὰ
περιμένετε. Ἀλλὰ περιμενοῦμεν, ἦ δ’ ὃς ὁ Γλαύκων.
(2) J’étais descendu hier au Pirée avec Glaucon, fils d’Ariston, pour faire
notre prière à la déesse et voir aussi comment se passerait la fête, car c’était la
première fois qu’on la célébrait. La pompe, formée par nos compatriotes, me
parut belle, et celle des Thraces ne l’était pas moins. Après avoir fait notre
[343]
prière et vu la cérémonie, nous regagnâmes le chemin de la ville. Comme nous
nous dirigions de ce côté, Polémarque, fils de Céphale, nous aperçut de loin, et
dit à son esclave de courir après nous et de nous prier de l’attendre. Celui-ci
m’arrêtant par derrière par mon manteau: Polémarque, dit-il, vous prie de
l’attendre. Je me retourne et lui demande où est son maître: Le voilà qui me
suit, attendez-le un moment. Eh bien, dit Glaucon, nous l’attendrons.
Victor Cousin.
(3) Ich ging gestern mit Glaukon, dem Sohne des Ariston, in den Peiraieus
hinunter; theils um die Göttin anzubeten, dann aber wollte ich auch zugleich
das Fest sehen, wie sie es feiern wollten, da sie es jetzt zum ersten Mal begehen.
Schön nun dünkte mich auch unserer Einheimischen Aufzug zu sein; nicht
minder vortrefflich jedoch nahm sich auch der aus, den die Thrakier geschickt
hatten. Nachdem wir nun gebetet und die Feier mit angeschaut hatten, gingen
wir fort nach der Stadt. Wie nun Polemarchos, der Sohn des Kephalos, uns
von fern nach Hause zu steigen sah, hiess er seinen Knaben laufen und uns
heissen, ihn erwarten. Der Knabe also fasste mich von hinten beim Mantel und
sprach: Polemarchos heisst Euch, ihn erwarten. Ich wendete mich um und
fragte, wo denn er selbst wäre. Hier, sprach er, kommt er hinter Euch, wartet
nur. Nun ja, wir wollen warten, sagte Glaukon.
Friedrich Schleiermacher.
(4) I went down yesterday to the Piraeus with Glaucon the son of Ariston,
to offer up prayer to the goddess, and also from a wish to see how the festival,
then to be held for the first time, would be celebrated. I was very much
pleased with the native Athenian procession; though that of the Thracians
appeared to be no less brilliant. We had finished our prayers and satisfied our
curiosity, and were returning to the city, when Polemarchus the son of
Cephalus caught sight of us at a distance, as we were on our way towards
home, and told his servant to run and bid us wait for him. The servant
came behind me, took hold of my cloak, and said, ‘Polemarchus bids you wait.’
I turned round and asked him where his master was. ‘There he is,’ he replied,
‘coming on behind: pray wait for him.’ ‘We will wait,’ answered Glaucon.
Davies and Vaughan.
(5) I went down yesterday to the Piraeus with Glaucon the son of Ariston,
that I might offer up my prayers to the goddess; and also because I wanted to
see in what manner they would celebrate the festival, which was a new thing.
I was delighted with the procession of the inhabitants; but that of the
Thracians was equally, if not more, beautiful. When we had finished our
prayers and viewed the spectacle, we turned in the direction of the city; and
at that instant Polemarchus the son of Cephalus chanced to catch sight of us
from a distance as we were starting on our way home, and told his servant to
run and bid us wait for him. The servant took hold of me by the cloak behind,
and said: Polemarchus desires you to wait. I turned round, and asked him
where his master was. There he is, said the youth, coming after you, if you
will only wait. Certainly we will, said Glaucon.
B. Jowett.
(6) I went down to the Peiraeus yesterday with Glaucon, the son of Ariston.
As this was the first celebration of the festival, I wished to make my prayers
[344]
to the goddess and see the ceremony. I liked the procession of the residents, but
I thought that the Thracian ordered theirs quite as successfully. We had
offered our prayers and finished our sight-seeing, and were leaving for the city,
when from some way off, Polemarchus, the son of Cephalus, saw that we were
starting homewards, and sent his slave to run after us and bid us wait. The
lad caught my cloak from behind and said: ‘Polemarchus bids you wait.’ I
turned round and asked him where his master was. ‘He is coming behind,’
he said; ‘but will you please wait?’ ‘Surely we will,’ said Glaucon.
A. D. Lindsay.
II. Opening of Demosthenes’ Speech on the Crown
(1) Πρῶτον μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, τοῖς θεοῖς εὔχομαι πᾶσι καὶ
πάσαις, ὅσην εὔνοιαν ἔχων ἐγὼ διατελῶ τῇ τε πόλει καὶ πᾶσιν ὑμῖν,
τοσαύτην ὑπάρξαι μοι παρ’ ὑμῶν εἰς τουτονὶ τὸν ἀγῶνα, ἔπειθ’ ὅπερ
ἐστὶ μάλισθ’ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καὶ τῆς ὑμετέρας εὐσεβείας τε καὶ δόξης,
τοῦτο παραστῆσαι τοὺς θεοὺς ὑμῖν, μὴ τὸν ἀντίδικον σύμβουλον
ποιήσασθαι περὶ τοῦ πῶς ἀκούειν ὑμᾶς ἐμοῦ δεῖ (σχέτλιον γὰρ ἂν εἴη
τοῦτό γε), ἀλλὰ τοὺς νόμους καὶ τὸν ὅρκον, ἐν ᾧ πρὸς ἅπασι τοῖς
ἄλλοις δικαίοις καὶ τοῦτο γέγραπται, τὸ ὁμοίως ἀμφοῖν ἀκροάσασθαι.
τοῦτο δ’ ἐστὶν οὐ μόνον τὸ μὴ προκατεγνωκέναι μηδέν, οὐδὲ τὸ τὴν
εὔνοιαν ἴσην ἀποδοῦναι, ἀλλὰ τὸ καὶ τῇ τάξει καὶ τῇ ἀπολογίᾳ, ὡς
βεβούληται καὶ προῄρηται τῶν ἀγωνιζομένων ἕκαστος, οὕτως ἐᾶσαι
χρήσασθαι.
(2) Athéniens, j’adresse d’abord une prière à tous les dieux, à toutes les
déesses. Si j’ai toujours voulu le bien de la république et de vous tous, fassent
ces dieux qu’aujourd’hui, dans cette lutte, je trouve en vous la même bienveillance!
Puissent-ils vous persuader aussi, comme le veulent votre intérêt, votre
religion, votre gloire, que, sur la manière de m’entendre, ce n’est pas mon
adversaire qu’il est juste de consulter,—ma condition en deviendrait trop
dure,—ce sont les lois et votre serment! Votre serment, où sont écrites ces
paroles, pleines d’équité, comme tout le reste: écouter également les deux parties.
Cela ne veut pas dire seulement: nous n’apporterons aucune prévention, et
nous donnerons à tous deux une faveur égale. Cela veut dire aussi: nous ne
contraindrons personne, ni dans la disposition de ses moyens ni dans l’ordre
de sa défense; quel que soit le plan adopté par celui qui vient plaider sa
cause, nous lui permettrons de le suivre en toute liberté.
Rodolphe Dareste.
(3) Für das Erste, Ihr Männer Athens, flehe ich alle Götter und Göttinnen
an, dass so viel Wohlwollen, als ich jederzeit der Stadt und Euch allen
bewiesen, mir in gleichem Maasse von Euch für den gegenwärtigen Handel zu
Theil werde; dann, dass die Götter Euch das in den Sinn geben, was Euch
und Euerm Gewissen und Ansehn am meisten ziemt: nicht von dem Gegner
Rath zu nehmen, wie Ihr mich anhören sollt—denn arg wäre das—sondern
von den Gesetzen und dem Eide, in welchem, ausser allen andern Rechten, auch
diess verordnet ist: beiden Parteien auf gleiche Weise Gehör zu geben. Diess
heisst aber nicht bloss, keine Meinung vorher zu fassen; auch nicht, beiden
gleiches Wohlwollen zu schenken; sondern ebenfalls, Jedem der Streitenden
[345]
diejenige Anordnung und Vertheidigungsart zu gestatten, die er gut gefunden
und gewählt hat.
Friedrich Jacobs.
(4) I begin, men of Athens, by praying to every God and Goddess, that the
same goodwill, which I have ever cherished towards the commonwealth and
all of you, may be requited to me on the present trial. I pray likewise—and
this specially concerns yourselves, your religion, and your honour—that the Gods
may put it in your minds, not to take counsel of my opponent touching the
manner in which I am to be heard—that would indeed be cruel!—but of the
laws and of your oath; wherein (besides the other obligations) it is prescribed
that you shall hear both sides alike. This means, not only that you must
pass no pre-condemnation, not only that you must extend your goodwill
equally to both, but also that you must allow the parties to adopt such order
and course of defence as they severally choose and prefer.
C. R. Kennedy.
III. Conclusion of Demosthenes’ Speech on the Crown
(1) Μὴ δῆτ’, ὦ πάντες θεοί, μηδεὶς ταῦθ’ ὑμῶν ἐπινεύσειεν, ἀλλὰ
μάλιστα μὲν καὶ τούτοις βελτίω τινὰ νοῦν καὶ φρένας ἐνθείητε, εἰ δ’
ἄρ’ ἔχουσιν ἀνιάτως, τούτους μὲν αὐτοὺς καθ’ ἑαυτοὺς ἐξώλεις καὶ
προώλεις ἐν γῇ καὶ θαλάττῃ ποιήσατε, ἡμῖν δὲ τοῖς λοιποῖς τὴν
ταχίστην ἀπαλλαγὴν τῶν ἐπηρτημένων φόβων δότε καὶ σωτηρίαν
ἀσφαλῆ.
(2) Dieux puissants! n’écoutez pas ces vœux impies! inspirez plutôt à
ces hommes un autre esprit et des pensées meilleures! Ou, si leur méchanceté
est incurable, frappez-les, exterminez-les sur terre et sur mer. Pour nous, délivrez-nous
au plus tôt des dangers qui nous menacent, sauvez-nous, protégez-nous à
jamais!
R. Dareste.
(3) Möchte doch, o all’ Ihr Götter! keiner von Euch dieses billigen,
sondern Ihr vor allen Dingen auch diesen hier einen bessern Sinn und besseres
Gemüth verleihen; wenn sie aber unheilbar sind, sie allein für sich dem
Verderben überliefern, uns, den Übrigen, aber die schnellste Befreiung von den
obschwebenden Besorgnissen und unerschütterte Wohlfahrt gewähren.
F. Jacobs.
(4) Never, Powers of Heaven, may any brow of the Immortals be bent in
approval of that prayer! Rather, if it may be, breathe even into these men a
better mind and heart; but if so it is that to these can come no healing, then
grant that these, and these alone, may perish utterly and early on land and on
the deep: and to us, the remnant, send the swiftest deliverance from the terrors
gathered above our heads, send us the salvation that stands fast perpetually.
R. C. Jebb.
(5) Never, ye gods, vouchsafe assent to such a prayer! Rather, if it may
be, inspire even these men with a better mind and heart; but, if they are
indeed past healing, bring them, and them alone, to swift and utter ruin by
[346]
land and sea; and to us who yet remain grant the speediest release from the
terrors that hang over us; grant us a sure salvation!
S. H. Butcher.
IV. Narrative Passage from Demosthenes’ Speech on the Crown
(§§ 169, 170)
(1) Ἑσπέρα μὲν γὰρ ἦν, ἧκε δ’ ἀγγέλλων τις ὡς τοὺς πρυτάνεις ὡς
Ἐλάτεια κατείληπται. καὶ μετὰ ταῦθ’ οἱ μὲν εὐθὺς ἐξαναστάντες
μεταξὺ δειπνοῦντες τοὺς τ’ ἐκ τῶν σκηνῶν τῶν κατὰ τὴν ἀγορὰν
ἐξεῖργον καὶ τὰ γέρρ’ ἐνεπίμπρασαν, οἱ δὲ τοὺς στρατηγοὺς μετεπέμποντο
καὶ τὸν σαλπιγκτὴν ἐκάλουν· καὶ θορύβου πλήρης ἦν ἡ πόλις. τῇ δ’
ὑστεραίᾳ, ἅμα τῇ ἡμέρᾳ, οἱ μὲν πρυτάνεις τὴν βουλὴν ἐκάλουν εἰς τὸ
βουλευτήριον, ὑμεῖς δ’ εἰς τὴν ἐκκλησίαν ἐπορεύεσθε, καὶ πρὶν ἐκείνην
χρηματίσαι καὶ προβουλεῦσαι πᾶς ὁ δῆμος ἄνω κάθητο. καὶ μετὰ
ταῦτα ὡς ἦλθεν ἡ βουλὴ καὶ ἀπήγγειλαν οἱ πρυτάνεις τὰ προσηγγελμέν’
ἑαυτοῖς καὶ τὸν ἥκοντα παρήγαγον κἀκεῖνος εἶπεν, ἠρώτα μὲν ὁ
κῆρυξ “τίς ἀγορεύειν βούλεται;” παρῄει δ’ οὐδείς. πολλάκις δὲ τοῦ
κήρυκος ἐρωτῶντος οὐδὲν μᾶλλον ἀνίστατ’ οὐδείς, ἁπάντων μὲν τῶν
στρατηγῶν παρόντων, ἁπάντων δὲ τῶν ῥητόρων, καλούσης δὲ τῆς κοινῆς
τῆς πατρίδος φωνῆς τὸν ἐροῦνθ’ ὑπὲρ σωτηρίας· ἣν γὰρ ὁ κῆρυξ κατὰ
τοὺς νόμους φωνὴν ἀφίησι, ταύτην κοινὴν τῆς πατρίδος δίκαιον ἡγεῖσθαι.
(2) C’était le soir. Arrive un homme qui annonce aux prytanes que
l’Élatée est prise. Aussitôt les uns se lèvent de table, chassent les marchands
de la place publique et brûlent leurs tentes; les autres mandent les stratéges,
appellent le trompette; ce n’est que trouble dans toute la ville. Le lendemain,
au point du jour, les prytanes convoquent le conseil. Vous, de votre côté, vous
vous rendez à l’assemblée, et avant que le conseil eût rien agité, rien résolu,
tout le peuple était rangé à ses places sur la colline. Bientôt après, les
membres du conseil arrivent; les prytanes déclarent la nouvelle, et font
paraître celui qui l’a apportée; cet homme parle lui-même. Le héraut
demande: ‘Qui veut monter à la tribune?’ Personne ne se lève. Il
recommence plusieurs fois. Personne encore. Et tous les stratéges, tous les
orateurs étaient présents; et la patrie, de cette voix qui est la voix de tous,
appelait un citoyen qui parlât pour la sauver; car la voix du héraut qui se
fait entendre, quand les lois l’ordonnent, c’est la voix de la patrie.
R. Dareste.
(3) Es war Abend. Da kam Einer mit der Meldung zu den Prytanen,
dass Elateia eingenommen sey. Hierauf standen diese sogleich von der
Mahlzeit auf, trieben die Leute aus den Buden auf dem Markte fort, und
steckten das Holzwerk davon in Brand; andere schickten nach den Strategen,
und riefen den Trompeter herbei. Die Stadt war in grösster Bewegung. Am
folgenden Morgen, bei Tages Anbruch, riefen die Prytanen den Senat auf das
Stadthaus, Ihr aber begabt Euch in die Versammlung, und ehe der Senat noch
sein Geschäft vollbracht und einen vorläufigen Beschluss gefasst hatte, sass das
ganze Volk schon oben. Und als hierauf der Senat eintrat, und die Prytanen
das, was ihnen gemeldet worden war, öffentlich bekannt machten, und den
[347]
Überbringer der Nachricht vorführten, und auch dieser gesprochen hatte, fragte
der Herold: Wer will sprechen? Niemand aber meldete sich. Wiewohl nun
der Herold seine Frage oft wiederholte, trat darum, doch Keiner auf, obgleich
alle Strategen gegenwärtig waren, und alle Redner und das Vaterland mit
gemeinsamer Stimme einen Sprecher für seine Rettung aufrief; denn die
Stimme, die der Herold dem Gesetze gemäss ertönen lässt, kann mit allem
Rechte für die Stimme des gesammten Vaterlandes gehalten werden.
F. Jacobs.
(4) It was evening when a courier came to the presidents of the assembly
with the news that Elateia had been seized. The presidents instantly rose from
table—they were supping at the moment: some of them hastened to clear the
market-place of the shopmen, and to burn the wickerwork of the booths: others,
to send for the generals and order the sounding of the call to the Assembly.
The city was in a tumult. At dawn next day the presidents convoked the
Senate, you hurried to the Ekklesia, and before the Senate could go through its
forms or could report, the whole people were in assembly on the hill. Then,
when the Senate had come in, when the presidents had reported the news that
they had received, and had introduced the messenger, who told his tale, the
herald repeatedly asked, Who wishes to speak? But no one came forward.
Again and again he put the question—in vain. No one would rise, though
all the generals, though all the public speakers were present, though our Country
was crying aloud, with the voice that comes home to all, for a champion of the
commonwealth—if in the solemn invitation given by the herald we may truly
deem that we hear our Country’s summons.
R. C. Jebb.
[348]
APPENDIX C
GREEK PRONUNCIATION: SCHEME OF THE CLASSICAL
ASSOCIATION
In October 1908 the Classical Association adopted a number of recommendations
made by its Greek Pronunciation Committee, and has since
published them for the use of teachers and others. They are put forward
“not as constituting a complete scientific scheme, but as approximations
which, for teaching purposes, may be regarded as practicable, and at the
same time as a great advance on the present usage, both for clearness in
teaching and for actual likeness to the ancient sounds.” The period (the
early fourth century B.C.) to which they are intended mainly to apply is one
whose literature Dionysius studied rather than that in which he lived (cp.
pages 43-46 above). But his scattered hints are of great moment in the
whole inquiry; and if they are read with care and with reference to their
bearing, not only on disputed points, but on points which (largely through
the evidence they furnish) are undisputed, it will be seen how much we
owe to them when making any attempt to reconstruct the pronunciation
of the classical period. The principal passages of Dionysius’ text which
throw light upon the question of Greek pronunciation and accentuation will
be found on pages 126-130, 136-150, 218-224, 230 above. The following
are the suggestions made by the Classical Association:—
Vowels
ᾱ and α, ῑ and ι, ε and ο, η and ω may be pronounced as the corresponding
vowels in Latin, i.e.
ᾱ, as a in father,
α, as a in aha.
ῑ, as ee in feed.
ι, as i in Fr. piquet, nearly as Eng. i in fit.
ε, as e in fret.
ο, as o in not.
η (long e), as e in Lat. mēta, Eng. a in mate.
ω (long o), as o in Lat. Rōma, Eng. home.
[349]
The pronunciation recommended for η and ω is dictated by practical considerations.
But in any school where the pupils have been accustomed to distinguish
the sounds of French è and é, the Committee feels that the open sound (of è in il
mène), which is historically correct for η, may well be adopted. In the same way
there is no doubt that the pronunciation of ω in the fifth century B.C. was the open
sound of oa in Eng. broad, not that of the ordinary English ō. But since the
precise degree of openness varied at different epochs, the Committee, though
preferring the open pronunciation, sees no sufficient reason for excluding the
obviously convenient practice of sounding ω just as Latin ō. For both Greek and
Latin the diphthongal character of the English vowels in mate and home, i.e. the
slight ĭ sound in mate and the slight ŭ sound in home, own, is incorrect. But the
discrepancy is not one which any but fairly advanced students need be asked to
notice, unless indeed they happen to be already familiar with the pure vowel
sounds of modern Welsh or Italian.
υ as French ŭ in du pain.
ῡ as French ū in rue or Germ. ü in grün.
In recommending this sound for the Greek υ, the Committee is partly guided by
the fact that its correct production is now widely and successfully taught in
English schools in early stages of instruction in French and German. But in any
school where the sound is strange to the pupils at the stage at which Greek is
begun, if it is felt that the effort to acquire the sound would involve a serious
hindrance to progress, the Committee can only suggest that, for the time, the υ
should be pronounced as Latin u (short as oo in Eng. took, long as oo in Eng. loose),
though this obscures the distinction between words like λύω and λούω.
Diphthongs
αι = α + ι nearly as ai in Isaiah (broadly pronounced), Fr. émail.
οι = ο + ι as Eng. oi in oil.
υι = υ + ι as Fr. ui in lui.
In ᾳ, ῃ, ῳ the first vowel was long, and the second only faintly heard.
ει. The precise sound of ει is difficult to determine, but in Attic Greek
it was never confused with η till a late period, and to maintain the distinction
clearly it is perhaps best for English students to pronounce it as
Eng. eye, though in fact it must have been nearer to Fr. ée in passée, Eng.
ey in grey. The Greek Ἀλφειός is Latin Alphēus.
αυ = au, as Germ. au in Haus, nearly as Eng. ow in gown.
ευ = eu, nearly as Eng. ew in few, u in tune.
ου as Eng. oo in moon, Fr. ou in roue.
Consonants
π, β, τ, δ, κ, and γ as p, b, t, d, k, and g respectively in Latin; except
that γ (before γ, κ, and χ) is used to denote the nasal sound heard in Eng.
ankle, anger.
ρ, λ, μ, ν as Lat. r, l, m, n.
σ, ς always as Lat. s (Eng. s in mouse), except before β, γ and μ, where
the sound was as in Eng. has been, has gone, has made: e.g. ἄσβεστος,
φάσγανον, ἑσμός.
ξ as Eng. x in wax, and ψ as Eng. ps in lapse.
ζ as Eng. dz in adze, ds in treads on.
[350]
Aspirates
The Committee has carefully considered the pronunciation of the
aspirated consonants in Greek. It is certain that the primitive pronunciation
of χ, θ, φ was as k.h, t.h, p.h, that is as k, t, p followed by a strong
breath, and the Committee is not prepared to deny that this pronunciation
lasted down into the classical period. Further, there is no doubt that the
adoption of this pronunciation makes much in Greek accidence that is
otherwise obscure perfectly comprehensible. If φαίνω be pronounced
πhαίνω, it is readily understood why the reduplicated perfect is πεπhηνα;
but if it be pronounced fαινω, the perfect, pronounced πεfηνα, is anomalous.
The relation of ἀφίστημι and the like to ἵστημι, of φροῦδος to ὁδός, of
θρίξ to τρίχα becomes intelligible when it is seen that θ, φ, and χ contain
a real h-sound. This advantage seems to be one of the reasons why it has
been adopted in practice by a certain number of English teachers.
In the course of time the pronunciation of the aspirates changed by
degrees to that of fricatives, which is now current in most districts of
Greece, φ becoming f, θ pronounced as th, in English thin, and χ acquiring
the sound of the German ch.[208]
If the later sounds are accepted, no change in the common pronunciation of θ
and φ in England will be required, but it will remain desirable to distinguish
between the sounds of κ and χ, which are at present confused: ἄκος and ἄχος, καίνω
and χαίνω being now pronounced alike. This may be done by giving χ the sound
of kh, or of German ch, as in auch. The Committee would, on the whole, recommend
the latter alternative as being more familiar in German, Scotch, and Irish
place-names.[209]
The Committee, though loath to do anything to discourage the primitive pronunciation
of the aspirates, has not been able to satisfy itself that it would be easy
to introduce this pronunciation into schools to which it is strange; and it is of
opinion that it is not advisable to recommend anything at present that might
increase the labour of the teacher or the student of Greek. It therefore abstains
from recommending any change in the common pronunciation of the aspirates
except in the case of χ.
Accentuation
There is no doubt that in the Classical period of Greek the accented
syllables were marked by a higher pitch or note than the unaccented, and
not by more stress, not, that is, with a stronger current of breath and more
muscular effort. Therefore, unless the student is capable of giving a
musical value to the Greek signs of accent, it is doubtful whether he should
[351]
attempt to represent them in pronunciation; for in many cases we should
make our pronunciation more, not less remote from that of the Greeks
themselves if we gave to their accented syllables the same stress as we do to
the accented syllables in English; for example, in paroxytone dactyls
(κεχρημένος) when the penult is stressed, the quantity of the long antepenult
is apt to be shortened and its metrical value destroyed.[210] But where there
is no conflict between accent and quantity (ἀγαθός), something may be said
for stressing moderately the accented syllable, and so distinguishing e.g.
καλῶς and κάλως, Διός and δῖος, ταὐτά and ταῦτα.[211]
Footnotes
[353]
A. INDEX OF PASSAGES QUOTED IN THE
DE COMPOSITIONE
The thick numerals indicate the pages on which the quotations are found.
Aeschines Ctes. 202, 116
Archilochus Fragm. 66, 170
Aristophanes Nubes 961, 256;
ib. 962, 258
Aristotle Rhet. iii. 8, 254
Bacchylides Fragm. 11, 262
Callimachus Fragm. 391, 256
Demosthenes Aristocr. 1, 108, 252.
Chers. 48, 250.
De Cor. 1, 108, 182, 184, 260;
119, 112;
179, 114.
Lept. 2, 118.
De Pace 6, 108.
Philipp. iii. 17, 114
Epicurus Fragm. 230, 250.
Euphorio Chersonesita Fragm., 86
Euripides Hecuba 163-4, 170.
Hippolytus 201, 172.
Orestes 140-2, 128.
Fragm. 229 (Archelaus), 260;
696 (Telephus), 276-8;
924, 88
Hegesias Fragm., 92;
186-90
Herodotus i. 6, 90;
i. 8-10, 80-82.
Homer Iliad i. 1, 98;
i. 459, 102;
ii. 89, 100;
ii. 209, 158;
ii. 422, 102;
ii. 484, 100;
ii. 494-501, 166;
iv. 125, 102;
iv. 452-3, 164;
v. 115, 100;
xi. 514, 280;
xii. 207, 158;
xii. 433-5, 84;
xiii. 392-3, 86;
xvi. 361, 158;
xvii. 265, 154;
xviii. 225, 156;
xix. 103-4, 100;
xxi. 20, 100;
xxi. 196-7, 248;
xxi. 240-2, 164;
xxii. 220-1, 156;
xxii. 395-411, 190-2;
xxii. 467, 100;
xxii. 476, 156;
xxiii. 382, 182;
xxiv. 486, 100.
Odyssey i. 1, 98;
iii. 1, 98;
iii. 449-50, 102;
v. 402, 158;
vi. 115-6, 102;
vi. 137, 162;
vi. 162-3, 162;
vi. 230-1, 92;
ix. 39, 172;
ix. 289-90, 164;
ix. 415-6, 156;
xi. 36-7, 162;
xi. 281-2, 162;
xi. 593-8, 202-4;
xiv. 1-8, 274-6;
xiv. 425, 102;
xv. 125-7, 64;
xvi. 1-16, 76-78;
xvi. 273, 92;
xvii. 36, 37, 162;
xix. 53, 54, 162;
xxii. 17, 100
Isocrates Areop. 1-5, 242-4
Orphica Fragm., 252
Philoxenus Fragm. 6, 68
Pindar Fragm. 75, 214-6;
79, 148;
213, 210
Plato Menex. 236 D, 180;
236 E, 116;
Rep. i. 1, 266
Sappho Fragm. 1 (Hymn to Aphrodite), 238-40;
106, 258
Simonides Fragm. 37 (Danaë), 278-80
Sophocles Fragm. 706, 116
Sotades Fragm., 88
Thucydides i. 1, 224-28;
i. 22, 228;
i. 24, 90;
ii. 35, 178;
iii. 57, 110
Anonymous Fragments (chiefly Lyrical) on pages 68 (Bergk 85), 168 (Bergk 112, Nauck 136), 170 (N. 138; B. 108);
172 (N. 139, 140);
174 (B. 110, N. 143; B. 111, N. 141; B. 116, N. 144; B. 117, N. 142);
262 (B. 118)
[354]
B. INDEX OF NAMES AND MATTERS
The numerals indicate the pages to which reference is made. As the contents of the Greek
text are fully summarized on pp. 1-9 supra, and as many of the more characteristic Greek words
find a place in the Glossary, the brief entries in Index B will be found to refer mainly to the
Introduction and the Notes.
Accent 41-43, 126 ff., 196, 292, 320, 328, 329
Adjective 102, 103, 299
Adverb 70, 100, 299
Aeschines 116
Aeschylus 12, 20, 214, 215
Agathon 304
Alcaeus 194, 248, 249
Alexander of Macedon 186, 187
Amphibrachys 172, 184, 287
Anacreon 236
Anagnostes 338
Anapaest 172, 287
Anaximenes xi (Preface). See also under ‘Rhetorica ad Alexandrum,’ p. 357 infra
Anthology, epigrams from 66, 335
Antigonus 94
Antimachus 214
Antiphon 29, 120, 332
Antithesis 247, 288
Aphrodite, Sappho’s Hymn to 238-41
Apollonius Rhodius 156
Appellative 71, 319
Archaism 212, 290
Archilochus 171
Architecture in relation to literary composition 28, 106
Aristophanes 12, 22, 123, 143, 290, 304, 311, 314, 335
Aristophanes of Byzantium 218, 278, 320
Aristotle x-xii (Preface), 15, 34, 35, 39, 40, 48, 71, 75, 139, 153, 155, 163, 165, 166, 168, 171, 176, 189, 214, 246, 247, 248, 249, 254, 255, 268, 290, 291, 292, 301, 308, 309, 310, 312, 313, 315, 316, 318, 319, 320, 325, 329, 334, 336, 337, 340, passim
Aristoxenus 42, 43, 48, 125, 138, 168, 287, 318
Arnold, Matthew 26, 158, 167, 278
Arrian 186, 187
Article 70, 289
Aspirates 149, 294, 350
Athenaeus 148, etc.
Auctor ad Herennium 316
Audiences, their sensitiveness to the music of sounds 40, 120 ff.
Austere composition or harmony 210 ff.
Bacchius 174, 292
Bacchylides 49, 219, 262, 263
Bacon, Francis 225
Beauty of style. See under ‘nobility’
Biblical illustrations 24, 31, 36, 37, 113, 178, 289, 297, 298, 303, 332, etc.
Blackmore, R. D. 37
Boeotian towns 166-68
Boileau 31
Bossuet 195, 228
Buchanan, George 46
Buffon 29
Caesar, Julius 13, 267, 296
Callimachus 87, 256 (attribution doubtful), 272, 277
Candaules, story of 81
Carlyle 37
Case 320, with references there given
Catullus 239, 278
Chapters, division into 9, 11
Charm of style 120 ff., 130 ff.
Cheke, Sir John 45, 46
Chiastic arrangement 14, 19
Choice, or selection, of words 69, 73, 79, etc.
Choree 170, 333
Chromatic scale 194
Chronological table of authors quoted or mentioned in the C.V. 50
Chrysippus 94, 95, 96, 97
Chrysostom 67, 251, 288
Cicero 15, 18, 25, 26, 28, 35, 37, 38, 48, 53, 54, 55, 72, 73, 89, 114, 124, 159, 203, 266, 271, 286, 301, 305, 306, 315, 316, 319, 330, 331, 334, 335, passim
[355]
Circumflex accent 126 ff.
Clearness in Greek word-order 12-13, 15-17.
See also under ‘Obscurity,’ p. 356 infra
Cleitarchus 187
Climax 114
Coleridge, S. T. 36, 38, 79, 254
Colon. See under ‘Member’
‘Comma’ 306, with references there given
Common vowels. See under ‘Doubtful’
Comparative Method (in relation to literary study) 48
Composition 10, 71 ff., 208 ff., 326, passim
Conjunctions or connectives 71, 325
Coray 243
Cousin, Victor 343
‘Cratylus’ of Plato 160
Cretic 174, 307
Ctesias 120
Curtius 187, 188, 189
‘Cyclic’ 174, 307
Dactyl 172, 173
‘Danaë’ of Simonides 278-81
Dareste, Rodolphe 344, 345, 346
Date of the ‘de Compositione’ 1, 60
Delphi, hymns found at 43
Demetrius of Callatis 94
Demetrius, the supposed author of the
De Elocutione 16, 18, 19, 90, 91, 286, 305, 308, passim
Democritus 248, 249
Demosthenes 13, 16, 17, 20, 23, 24, 25, 29, 33, 34, 39, 41, 146, 182, 196, 248, 249, 339, 340, passim.
See also Index A
Dentals 149
Dependent genitive, order of 337
Dialectic 69, 94, 104
Diatonic scale 194
Diodorus Siculus 187, 237, 274
Diogenes Laertius 82, 97, 251
Dionysius of Halicarnassus 1, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 29, 48, 207, 229, passim
Dionysius Thrax 47, 71, 139, 145, 319, 332
Diphthongs 219
Dithyramb 214
Dorian mode 196
Doubtful vowels 296, with references there given (s.v. δίχρονος)
Dryden 186
Duris 94
Eliot, George 37
Empedocles 34, 214, 332
Emphasis 17-26
English language 31, 35, 36, 342 ff., passim
Enharmonic scale 194
‘Enjambement’ 270-73, 275, 278, 325
Ennius 170, 314
Ephorus 236, 237
Epic Cycle, poets of the 248
Epic poetry 214, 274, passim.
See also under ‘Homer,’ p. 356 infra
Epicurus 250, 251
Epitome: Greek Epitome of C.V. 10, 57, 65, 89, 116, 197, 209
Epode 300, with references there given
Erasmus 45, 159
Etymology 160, 300
Euphony 27-29, 338, etc.
Euphorio Chersonesita 87
Euripides 22, 23, 24, 146, 236, 237.
See also Index A
Eustathius 202
Fifth, the musical interval so called 126
Flaubert, Gustav 28
Fléchier 243
Fletcher 46 (‘Elder Brother’)
Florentine manuscript of the C.V. 56-58
Foot, metrical 168
France, Anatole 27
Freedom of Greek word-order 11-14
French language 31, 36, 270, 342 ff., passim
Galen 331
Gardiner, Stephen 46
Gellius, Aulus 28
Gender 106, 107
German language 33, 36, 342 ff., passim
Gibbon, Edward 46, 86, 237
Gladstone, William Ewart 126, 235
Glossary 285-334 (cp. Preface ix, x)
Goethe 36
Gorgias 132
Grammar 46, 47
Grave accent 126 ff.
Gutturals 149
‘Harmony’ 290, with references there given
Havercamp 45
Hector and Achilles 190, 191
Hegemon 168
Hegesianax 94, 95
Hegesias 52-55, 90, 184-92
Heracleides 94, 95
Heracleitus 335, 340
Hermogenes 26, 85, 87, 90
Herodotus 16, 24, 26, 30, 80 ff., 90, 120, 196, 248, 249
Hesiod 236, 237
Hesychius, 69, 189, 288, 322, 332
Hexameter 85, 87
Hiatus 39, 323
Hibeh Papyri xi (Preface), 41
[356]
Hickes, Francis 226
Hieronymus 94
Hobbes, Thomas 226
Holland, Philemon 328
Homer vii-ix (Preface), 13, 14, 19, 33, 34, 76 ff., 136, 248, 274, 337, passim.
See also Index A
Horace ix (Preface), 15, 48, 78, 81, 113, 195, 197, 200, 267, 273, 278, 322, 323, 336, passim
Hypallage 78, 330
Hyperbaton 26, 340
Hypobacchius 174
Hysteron proteron 102
Iambus 170
Intermediate or harmoniously blended composition 246 ff., 301
Invention (of subject matter) 1, 67, 318, etc.
Ionic tetrameter 86, 304
‘Irrational’ 154, 174, 207, 286, 287
Isocrates 11, 29, 78, 92, 192, 198, 236, 237, 242 ff., 264
Ithyphallic poem 86, 303
Jacobs, Friedrich 345, 346
James I., King 46
Johnson, Samuel 186
Josephus 187, 308
Labials 149
Latin (especially Latin word-order, as compared with that of Greek and the modern languages) 13, 21, 25, 29-33, 48, etc.
Lemaître, Jules 31
Lessing 31
Letters 138 ff.
‘Literature’ 34, 217, 309
Livy 178
‘Longinus’ de Sublimitate 14, 26, 48, 74, 239, passim
Lucian 68, 196, 229, 279, 327, 333
Lucidity. See under ‘Clearness’
Lucretius 204, 214
Luther 267
Lydian mode 196
Lysias 16, 55
Malherbe 31
Manuscripts of the C.V. x (Preface), 56-59
Marcellinus 228, 229, 335
Marlowe 35, 147
Maximus Planudes 86
Melic poetry 309, with references there given
Member (clause, ‘colon’) 73, 110 ff., 307
Menander 229
Meredith, George 147, 172
Metaphor 54, 310
Metre 33-39, 310
Metrici 154, 172, 174, 218, 310
Milton 22, 23, 36, 167
Mimnermus 273
Modern languages (especially in relation to word-order) 12, 29-33, 103, etc.;
342-47
Modes, musical 196
Molière 91, 138
Molossus 172
Music 39-41, 124 ff.
Mute letters 138 ff., 292
Natural order of words 98 ff.
Neoptolemus 15
Nobility of style 120 ff., 136
Normal word-order in Greek 14, 15
Noun 71, 98-100, 313
Number, grammatical 106, 107
Obscurity 16, 17, 335-41.
See also under ‘Clearness,’ p. 355 supra
Onomatopoeia 158, 159, 316
Order of words in Greek and other languages 11-39, 98 ff., passim
Orphic fragments 252
Ovid 33, 124
Oxyrhynchus Papyri 29, 237, 289
Paeon 314, with references there given
Painting in relation to literary composition 208
Paris Manuscript of the C.V. x (Preface), 56-58
Participle 72, 310
Parts of speech 71 ff.
Passion 314, with references there given
Pentameter 256, 315
Period 13, 73, 118
Peripatetics 48.
See also under ‘Aristotle’ (p. 354 supra), and ‘Theophrastus’ (p. 357 infra)
Philo Judaeus 192
‘Philosophy’ 331
Philoxenus 196, 197
Phonetics 43, 44, 140 ff.
Photius 333
‘Phrase’ 306, with references there given
Phrygian mode 196
Phylarchus 94
Pindar 49, 194, 214 ff.
See also under Index A
Plato 14, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 29, 31, 33, 34, 139, 180, 182, 196, 248, 249, 264 ff., passim.
See also under Index A
Pliny the Younger 229
Plural 106, 107
Plutarch 67, 187, 264, 299, 326, 330, 332
[357]
Poetry (in relation to prose) 33-39, 250 ff., etc.
Polybius 51, 52, 94, 296
Pope, Alexander vii (Preface), 202, 205, 324
Porson, Richard 14, 146
Preposition 71, 319
Pronoun 70, 102, 288
Pronunciation 43-46, 140 ff., 348-51, passim
Propertius 188
‘Propriety’ 39, 198 ff., 318, 319, passim
Prose (in relation to poetry) 33-39, 250 ff., 287 (ἄμετρος), 309 (λόγος), etc.
Prosodiacs 86
Psaon 94
Punctuation 306, 340
Puttenham 299
Pyrrhic 168
Quantity, effect of syllabic quantity in prose 29
Quintilian 11, 15, 18, 19, 23, 26, 27, 28, 30, 34, 38, 46, 47, 53, 70, 71, 81, 89, 93, 98, 145, 152, 168, 195, 203, 248, 250, 265, 266, 300, 301, 305, 306, 315-21, 325, 328, 330, 332, 336, passim
Quotations in the C.V. 49-56.
See also Index A
Racine 118, 157, 205, 270
Reading (learning to read) 268, 269
Renan, Ernest 31
‘Rhetor Graecus’ 57, 138
Rhetorica ad Alexandrum xi (Preface), 26, 75, 313, 336
Rhetorical Handbooks 270, 282, 329
Rhyme or jingle 64, 65, 315
Rhythm 33-39, 168 ff., 176 ff., 320
Rhythmici 154, 172
Rich, Barnaby 82
Rousseau 211
Rufus Metilius xii (Preface), 1, 66
Ruskin 37
Sallust 38, 180, 225
San 148, 149
Sappho vii-viii (Preface), 49, 194, 236 ff., 258.
See also Index A
Scales, musical 194
Schema Pindaricum 217
Schleiermacher, Friedrich 343
Scholia (to Homer and other authors) 76, 132, 155, 158, 170, 188, 191, 229, 274, 277, 288, 333, etc.
Semivowels 138 ff., 302
Sextus Empiricus 139
Shakespeare 44, 81, 112, 135, 147, 161, 321
Sheridan 250
Sigmatism 146, 147
Simonides vii-viii (Preface), 49, 236, 278 ff.
Simplicity of diction illustrated and commended 75-85, 134-37
Smith, Sir Thomas 45, 46, 141
Smooth composition or harmony 232 ff., 293
Socrates 120, 160
Solecism 190
Sophist 184, 264, 321
Sophocles 248, 249, 337.
See also Index A
Sotades 88, 328
Sound an echo to the sense 156 ff., 200 ff.
Sources of the C.V. 47-49
Spondee 170, 322
Stesichorus 194, 195, 248
Stevenson, Robert Louis 32, 40
Stoics 48, 71, 94-97, 104
Strabo 55, 285, 290
Strophe 194 etc., 323
Styles of composition 208 ff.
Substance and Form viii (Preface);
cp. Demetr. pp. 34 ff.
Suidas 237, 296
Summary of the C.V. 1-9
‘Suspense’ 13
Swinburne, Algernon Charles 271, 325
Syllables 150 ff., 324
Synaloepha 108 etc., 325
Tacitus 316
Taste 132, 134, 304
‘Tautology’ 240, 328
Taylor, Jeremy 303
Telestes 196, 197
Tennyson 86, 190, 271, 278
Tense 108, 333
Terence 101, 275
Tetrameters 87, 329
Text of the C.V. x (Preface), 56-59, passim
Thelwall, John 147
Theocritus 281
Theodectes 47, 71
Theophrastus 34, 37, 48, 164, 165, 193, 305, etc.
Theopompus 29, 236, 237
Thucydides 13, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 23, 33, 34, 120, 178, 214, 224 ff., 335-7, passim.
See also Index A
Timotheus 175, 196, 197
Title of the C.V. 10, 326
Tragic poets 236, 248, 329
Tribrach 170.
See also under ‘Choree,’ p. 354 supra
Trimeter 258, 329
Trisyllable 170, 329
Trochee 170, 330
Types of style 208 ff.
[358]
Usage as the sovereign arbiter 102
Variety 29, 39, 192 ff., 310
Vedic Sanskrit 42
Verbs 71, 98-100, 108, 320
Vigny, Alfred de 213
Virgil 19, 21, 156, 157, 164, 173, 204, 327, etc.
Vowels 138 ff., 332
Welsh language 31
Wilson, Thomas [of Eton and King’s College, Cambridge; earliest translator of any part of Demosthenes into English] 326
Wordsworth viii (Preface), 79, 271
Xenophon 14, 19, 23, 120
Zeta, pronunciation of 44, 45
THE END
Printed by R. & R. Clark, Limited, Edinburgh.
Cambridge University Press.
By Professor W. RHYS ROBERTS.
The following contributions made to Greek literary and literary-historical
study by Dr. Roberts are published at the Cambridge University Press.
The volumes are arranged in the order of their original appearance.
THE ANCIENT BOEOTIANS: their Character and Culture, and
their Reputation. With a Map, a Table of Dates, and a List of
Authorities. Demy 8vo. 5s.
STUDY OF GREEK. A Chapter in Frederic Spencer’s Chapters
on the Aims and Practice of Teaching. Third Impression, 1903.
Crown 8vo. 6s.
LONGINUS ON THE SUBLIME. The Greek Text edited after
the Paris Manuscript, with Translation, Facsimiles, and Appendices
(Textual, Linguistic, Literary, and Bibliographical). Second Edition,
1907. Demy 8vo. 9s.
DIONYSIUS OF HALICARNASSUS: The Three Literary
Letters. The Greek Text edited with Translation, Facsimile, Notes,
Glossary of Rhetorical Terms, Bibliography, and Introductory Essay
on Dionysius as a Literary Critic. Demy 8vo. 9s.
DEMETRIUS ON STYLE. The Greek Text of Demetrius
de Elocutione. Edited after the Paris Manuscript, with Translation,
Facsimiles, Glossary, etc., and Introductory Essay on the Greek Study
of Prose Style. Demy 8vo. 9s. net.
EXTRACTS FROM REVIEWS OF DEMETRIUS ON STYLE.
Professor B. L. Gildersleeve in the AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.—“It
is to me a welcome sign of the times that Mr. Roberts has attracted so much
attention and gained so much reputation by his admirable editions of Longinus on the
Sublime and of The Three Literary Letters of Dionysius of Halicarnassus, to which
he has now added Demetrius on Style.... As for Demetrius, nothing could be
more timely than the revival of his admirable manual.... No wonder that one
hails with satisfaction the prospect of a new edition of the De Compositione by so
competent a hand as Mr. Roberts, if indeed we may construe his suggestion as a
promise.”
ATHENÆUM.—“We have to congratulate Professor Roberts on the completion
of another preliminary study for his projected work on ‘Ancient Literary Criticism,’
which is a worthy companion to his Longinus and The Three Literary Letters of
Dionysius.... These three books are indispensable to the student of Greek
literature.... In the translation Professor Roberts seems to have improved on his
former versions; this is more easy and effective.”
TIMES.—“Dr. Roberts has introduced to English readers some choice literary
morsels. His Longinus on the Sublime, the first of the ancient works on literary
criticism which he edited—we might almost say, to our shame, rescued from oblivion—is
a most able and inspiring book.... Demetrius on Style is edited equally well.
The translation, indeed, is even better; idiomatic and pleasant to read, it is often
most happy, and there are very few passages where we should differ in our rendering
of the Greek.”
SPECTATOR.—“Dr. Roberts is to be congratulated upon the accomplishment
of a worthy task. His edition of the famous treatise known as Demetrius on Style
is a credit to our English learning. The editor is not merely a scholar, he is a man
of letters as well; and in his notes he has applied the maxims of the ancient Greek
to the literature of to-day with the utmost skill. Indeed, though Greek lies at this
moment under a cloud of suspicion, we can none the less recommend this work
without diffidence or fear, since no English writer can study Dr. Roberts’s translation
and notes without purging his own composition of faults innumerable.”
GUARDIAN.—“Dr. Rhys Roberts here gives us a third instalment of his
work on the Greek literary critics, and the further he proceeds the greater becomes
the benefit that he is conferring on classical scholars. It is much to have made the
masterpieces of the later Greek criticism generally accessible, and especially to have
rescued Dionysius of Halicarnassus from a neglect and contempt that were wholly
undeserved, to have given him new utterance, to have shown that even for moderns
his precepts are not obsolete. Nor is the chorus of approval with which Dr. Roberts’s
work has been received, both at home and abroad, any louder than is warranted.
His own style and taste are above reproach, and his learning is abundant.”
WESTMINSTER REVIEW.—“Dr. W. Rhys Roberts has taken for his
province the whole subject of Greek literary criticism. In 1899 appeared his
scholarly and exhaustive edition of Longinus on the Sublime, which was followed, two
years later, by an admirable edition of The Three Literary Letters of Dionysius of
Halicarnassus. He has now laid English scholarship under a further obligation by
his even more admirable edition of Demetrius on Style. Each of these three texts is
accompanied by a translation at once accurate, terse, lucid, and idiomatic.”
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION.—“We make no doubt that Professor Roberts’s
earlier books—Longinus on the Sublime and The Three Literary Letters of Dionysius—are
known to those of our readers who are serious students of Greek. We believe
they have done a good deal already to restore ancient criticism to the place which it
used to hold. The present volume is a worthy companion to the other two.”
Professor R. Y. Tyrrell in HERMATHENA.—“This edition is of wide scope
and excellent design. It includes an Essay on Greek Prose Style, a full summary of the
treatise itself, and a careful treatment of the difficult questions concerning its date
and authorship. The fact that this is the first English text and the first English
translation of a very valuable and interesting work gives it an added importance, and
opens up what will be a new field for many scholars.... The translation, which is
exceedingly vigorous, elegant and ingenious, has one other signal merit: it never
‘hedges’: the translator never hides a doubt about the meaning under ambiguous
language; he leaves no uncertainty about the meaning which he attaches to the text;
and in the few places where we may venture to take a different view we feel that
there is always something to be said for the version which we reject.... Dr. Roberts
has a very keen eye and ear for literary beauty; and the treatise affords ample scope
for the employment of his wide and various knowledge of modern literature....
The De Elocutione is a treatise full of interesting and suggestive comment; and all
lovers of literature owe their best thanks to Professor Roberts for the edition of it
which he has put in their hands.”
The volume has also been favourably reviewed by the following
Continental scholars: Dr. Ph. Weber (Neue Philologische Rundschau),
M. Théodore Reinach (Revue des Études Grecques), Professor Amédée
Hauvette (Revue Critique d’histoire et de littérature), Professor Ch. Michel
(Revue de l’Instruction publique en Belgique), and Professor Giovanni Setti
(La Cultura).