Chapter 20

χάριτας ἐπιδεικνυμένης. ὅπερ οὖν ἔφην, οὐ δύναται ψιλὴλέξις ὁμοία γενέσθαι τῇ ἐμμέτρῳ καὶ ἐμμελεῖ, ἐὰν μὴ περιέχῃμέτρα καὶ ῥυθμούς τινας ἐγκατατεταγμένους ἀδήλως. οὐ μέντοιπροσήκει γε ἔμμετρον οὐδ’ ἔρρυθμον αὐτὴν εἶναι δοκεῖν (ποίημαγὰρ οὕτως ἔσται καὶ μέλος ἐκβήσεταί τε ἁπλῶς τὸν αὑτῆς 5χαρακτῆρα), ἀλλ’ εὔρυθμον αὐτὴν ἀπόχρη καὶ εὔμετρον φαίνεσθαιμόνον· οὕτως γὰρ ἂν εἴη ποιητικὴ μέν, οὐ μὴν ποίημάγε, καὶ ἐμμελὴς μέν, οὐ μέλος δέ.τίς δ’ ἐστὶν ἡ τούτων διαφορά, πάνυ ῥᾴδιον ἰδεῖν. ἡ μὲνὅμοια περιλαμβάνουσα μέτρα καὶ τεταγμένους σῴζουσα ῥυθμοὺς 10καὶ κατὰ στίχον ἢ περίοδον ἢ στροφὴν διὰ τῶν αὐτῶν σχημάτωνπεραινομένη κἄπειτα πάλιν τοῖς αὐτοῖς ῥυθμοῖς καὶ μέτροιςἐπὶ τῶν ἑξῆς στίχων ἢ περιόδων ἢ στροφῶν χρωμένη καὶτοῦτο μέχρι πολλοῦ ποιοῦσα ἔρρυθμός ἐστι καὶ ἔμμετρος, καὶὀνόματα κεῖται τῇ τοιαύτῃ λέξει μέτρον καὶ μέλος· ἡ δὲ 15πεπλανημένα μέτρα καὶ ἀτάκτους ῥυθμοὺς ἐμπεριλαμβάνουσακαὶ μήτε ἀκολουθίαν ἐμφαίνουσα αὐτῶν μήτε ὁμοζυγίαν μήτεἀντιστροφὴν εὔρυθμος μέν ἐστιν, ἐπειδὴ διαπεποίκιλταί τισινῥυθμοῖς, οὐκ ἔρρυθμος δέ, ἐπειδὴ οὐχὶ τοῖς αὐτοῖς οὐδὲ κατὰτὸ αὐτό. τοιαύτην δή φημι πᾶσαν εἶναι λέξιν ἄμετρον, ἥτις 20ἐμφαίνει τὸ ποιητικὸν καὶ μελικόν· ᾗ δὴ καὶ τὸν Δημοσθένηκεχρῆσθαί φημι. καὶ ὅτι ἀληθῆ ταῦτ’ ἐστὶ καὶ οὐδὲν ἐγὼκαινοτομῶ, λάβοι μὲν ἄν τις καὶ ἐκ τῆς Ἀριστοτέλους μαρτυρίαςτὴν πίστιν· εἴρηται γὰρ τῷ φιλοσόφῳ τά τε ἄλλαπερὶ τῆς λέξεως τῆς πολιτικῆς ἐν τῇ τρίτῃ βίβλῳ τῶν ῥητορικῶν 25τεχνῶν οἵαν αὐτὴν εἶναι προσῆκεν, καὶ δὴ καὶ περὶ τῆςεὐρυθμίας 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 manifestlyinmetre orinrhythm (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, isinrhythm andinmetre, 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 hisRhetoricthe philosopher, speaking of the various requisites of style in civil oratory, has described the good rhythm which should contribute to it.[184]He

[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 manifestlyinmetre orinrhythm (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, isinrhythm andinmetre, 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 hisRhetoricthe philosopher, speaking of the various requisites of style in civil oratory, has described the good rhythm which should contribute to it.[184]He

[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 manifestlyinmetre orinrhythm (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, isinrhythm andinmetre, 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 hisRhetoricthe 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 P1. Cp. ColeridgeBiogr. 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. Sode 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. 195ibid.“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, WalzRhett. 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 ofexcedereandegrediwith the accusative.6. ἔμμετρον is given not only by E but by Joannes Sicel. (WalzRhett. 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. 4supra).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).

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. ColeridgeBiogr. 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. Sode 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. 195ibid.“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, WalzRhett. 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 ofexcedereandegrediwith the accusative.

6. ἔμμετρον is given not only by E but by Joannes Sicel. (WalzRhett. 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. 4supra).

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).

ὀνομάζει ῥυθμοὺς καὶ πῇ χρήσιμος ἕκαστος αὐτῶν καταφαίνεται,καὶ λέξεις παρατίθησί τινας αἷς πειρᾶται βεβαιοῦντὸν λόγον. χωρὶς δὲ τῆς Ἀριστοτέλους μαρτυρίας, ὅτι ἀναγκαῖόνἐστιν ἐμπεριλαμβάνεσθαί τινας τῇ πεζῇ λέξει ῥυθμούς,εἰ μέλλοι τὸ ποιητικὸν ἐπανθήσειν αὐτῇ κάλλος, ἐκ τῆς πείρας 5τις αὐτῆς γνώσεται.αὐτίκα ὁ κατὰ Ἀριστοκράτους λόγος οὗ καὶ μικρῷ πρότερονἐμνήσθην ἄρχεται μὲν ἀπὸ κωμικοῦ στίχου τετραμέτρου δι’ἀναπαίστων τῶν ῥυθμῶν ἐγκειμένου, λείπεται δὲ ποδὶ τοῦτελείου, παρ’ ὃ καὶ λέληθεν· “μηδεὶς ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες 10Ἀθηναῖοι, νομίσῃ με”· τοῦτο γὰρ εἰ προσλάβοι τὸ μέτρονπόδα ἤτοι κατ’ ἀρχὰς ἢ διὰ μέσου ἢ ἐπὶ τελευτῆς, τέλειονἔσται τετράμετρον ἀναπαιστικόν, ὃ καλοῦσίν τινες Ἀριστοφάνειον·μηδεὶς ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, νομίσῃ με παρεῖναι, 15ἴσον δὲ τῷλέξω τοίνυν τὴν ἀρχαίαν παιδείαν ὡς διέκειτο.τάχα τις ἐρεῖ πρὸς ταῦτα, ὅτι οὐκ ἐξ ἐπιτηδεύσεως τοῦτοἀλλ’ ἐκ ταὐτομάτου ἐγένετο· πολλὰ γὰρ αὐτοσχεδιάζει μέτραἡ φύσις. ἔστω τοῦτο ἀληθὲς εἶναι. ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ συναπτόμενον 20τούτῳ κῶλον, εἰ διαλύσειέ τις αὐτοῦ τὴν δευτέρανσυναλοιφὴν ἣ πεποίηκεν αὐτὸ ἄσημον ἐπισυνάπτουσα τῷτρίτῳ κώλῳ, πεντάμετρον ἐλεγειακὸν ἔσται συντετελεσμένοντουτίμήτ’ ἰδίας ἔχθρας μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεκαὅμοιον τούτοιςκοῦραι 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 lineNow 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]

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 τοῦτοἀλλ’ ἐκ ταὐτομάτου ἐγένετο· πολλὰ γὰρ αὐτοσχεδιάζει μέτραἡ φύσις. ἔστω τοῦτο ἀληθὲς εἶναι. ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ συναπτόμενον 20τούτῳ κῶλον, εἰ διαλύσειέ τις αὐτοῦ τὴν δευτέρανσυναλοιφὴν ἣ πεποίηκεν αὐτὸ ἄσημον ἐπισυνάπτουσα τῷτρίτῳ κώλῳ, πεντάμετρον ἐλεγειακὸν ἔσται συντετελεσμένοντουτί

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 lineNow 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]

[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 PM16 τ(ις) P, V: τῆς M 8 δι’ MV: διςsic 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 V7.πρότερον: viz.2523supra.9. ἀναπαιστικῶν has been suggested here and in2602; but cp. δάκτυλον πόδα8421 and ῥυθμοῖς δακτύλοις20219.10.παρ’ ὅ: cp. note on804supra.11.νομίσῃ με: this (together with the other remarks that follow) confirms the reading adopted in2524supra.—Dionysius’ metrical arrangement of the clauses may be indicated thus:—μηδεὶς ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, νομίσῃ μεμήτ’ ἰδίας ἔχθρας μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεχ’[ἥκειν Ἀριστοκράτους κατηγορήσοντα τουτουΐ,]μήτε μικρὸν ὁρῶντά τι καὶ φαῦλον ἁμάρτημα ἑτοίμως οὕτως ἐπὶ τούτῳπροάγειν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀπέχθειαν·ἀλλ’ εἴπερ ἆρ’ ὀρθῶς ἐγὼ λογίζομαι [καὶ σκοπῶ,]περὶ τοῦ Χερόνησον ἔχειν ἀσφαλῶς ὑμᾶςκαὶ μὴ παρακρουσθένταςἀποστερηθῆναι 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 in2525. The verse-arrangement in line 25infrashows the same thing and also that we must not follow F in reading μήτε (without elision) in2524.27. For this line cp. Schneider’sCallimacheapp. 789, 790, where it is classed among theFragmenta Anonyma.

7.πρότερον: viz.2523supra.

9. ἀναπαιστικῶν has been suggested here and in2602; but cp. δάκτυλον πόδα8421 and ῥυθμοῖς δακτύλοις20219.

10.παρ’ ὅ: cp. note on804supra.

11.νομίσῃ με: this (together with the other remarks that follow) confirms the reading adopted in2524supra.—Dionysius’ metrical arrangement of the clauses may be indicated thus:—

μηδεὶς ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, νομίσῃ μεμήτ’ ἰδίας ἔχθρας μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεχ’[ἥκειν Ἀριστοκράτους κατηγορήσοντα τουτουΐ,]μήτε μικρὸν ὁρῶντά τι καὶ φαῦλον ἁμάρτημα ἑτοίμως οὕτως ἐπὶ τούτῳπροάγειν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀπέχθειαν·ἀλλ’ εἴπερ ἆρ’ ὀρθῶς ἐγὼ λογίζομαι [καὶ σκοπῶ,]περὶ τοῦ Χερόνησον ἔχειν ἀσφαλῶς ὑμᾶςκαὶ μὴ παρακρουσθένταςἀποστερηθῆναι 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 in2525. The verse-arrangement in line 25infrashows the same thing and also that we must not follow F in reading μήτε (without elision) in2524.

27. For this line cp. Schneider’sCallimacheapp. 789, 790, where it is classed among theFragmenta Anonyma.

καὶ τοῦτ’ ἔτι κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν ὑπολάβωμεν αὐτοματισμὸν ἄνευγνώμης γεγονέναι. ἀλλ’ ἑνὸς τοῦ μεταξὺ κώλου συγκειμένουλεκτικῶς τοῦ “ἥκειν Ἀριστοκράτους κατηγορήσοντατουτουί” τὸ συμπλεκόμενον τούτῳ πάλιν κῶλον ἐκ δυεῖν συνέστηκενμέτρων· “μήτε μικρὸν ὁρῶντά τι καὶ φαῦλον 5ἁμάρτημα, ἑτοίμως οὕτως ἐπὶ τούτῳ”· εἰ γὰρ τὸΣαπφικόν τις ἐπιθαλάμιον τουτίοὐ γὰρ ἦν ἀτέρα πάϊς, ὦ γαμβρέ, τοιαύτα ‹ποτα›καὶ τοῦ κωμικοῦ τετραμέτρου, λεγομένου δὲ Ἀριστοφανείουτουδί 10ὅτ’ ἐγὼ τὰ δίκαια λέγων ἦνθουν καὶ σωφροσύνη ’νενόμιστοτοὺς τελευταίους πόδας τρεῖς καὶ τὴν κατάληξιν ἐκλαβὼνσυνάψειε τοῦτον τὸν τρόπονοὐ γὰρ ἦν ἀτέρα πάϊς, ὦ γαμβρέ, τοιαύτα ‹ποτα› καὶ 15σωφροσύνη ’νενόμιστο·οὐδὲν διοίσει τοῦ “μήτε μικρὸν ὁρῶντά τι καὶ φαῦλονἁμάρτημα, ἑτοίμως οὕτως ἐπὶ τούτῳ.” τὸ δ’ ἀκόλουθονἴσον ἐστὶν ἰαμβικῷ τριμέτρῳ τὸν ἔσχατον ἀφῃρημένῳ πόδα“προάγειν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀπέχθειαν”· τέλειον γὰρ ἔσται 20πόδα προσλαβὸν καὶ γενόμενον τοιοῦτοπροάγειν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀπέχθειάν τινα.παρίδωμεν ἔτι καὶ ταῦτα ὡς οὐκ ἐξ ἐπιτηδεύσεως ἀλλ’αὐτοματισμῷ γενόμενα; τί οὖν βούλεται πάλιν τὸ προσεχὲςτούτῳ κῶλον; ἰαμβεῖον γάρ ἐστι καὶ τοῦτο τρίμετρον ὀρθόν 25ἀλλ’ εἴπερ ἆρ’ ὀρθῶς ἐγὼ λογίζομαι,τοῦἄρασυνδέσμου 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 untothis 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 temperancewas 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

οὐ γὰρ ἦν ἀτέρα πάϊς, ὦ γαμβρέ, τοιαύτα ‹ποτα›

καὶ τοῦ κωμικοῦ τετραμέτρου, λεγομένου δὲ Ἀριστοφανείουτουδί 10

ὅτ’ ἐγὼ τὰ δίκαια λέγων ἦνθουν καὶ σωφροσύνη ’νενόμιστο

τοὺς τελευταίους πόδας τρεῖς καὶ τὴν κατάληξιν ἐκλαβὼνσυνάψειε τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον

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

οὐδὲν διοίσει τοῦ “μήτε μικρὸν ὁρῶντά τι καὶ φαῦλονἁμάρτημα, ἑτοίμως οὕτως ἐπὶ τούτῳ.” τὸ δ’ ἀκόλουθονἴσον ἐστὶν ἰαμβικῷ τριμέτρῳ τὸν ἔσχατον ἀφῃρημένῳ πόδα“προάγειν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀπέχθειαν”· τέλειον γὰρ ἔσται 20πόδα 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 προσεχὲςτούτῳ κῶλον; ἰαμβεῖον γάρ ἐστι καὶ τοῦτο τρίμετρον ὀρθόν 25

ἀλλ’ εἴπερ ἆρ’ ὀρθῶς ἐγὼ λογίζομαι,

τοῦἄρασυνδέσμου 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 untothis 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 temperancewas 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

[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 untothis 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 temperancewas 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 P8. ‘For no other girl, O bridegroom, was like unto her.’—Usener’s insertion ofποτα, here and in l. 15infra, 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’ in2528.Forἆραas being “in Poets sometimes much like ἄρα” see L. & S. s.v. (with the examples there quoted).28.νὴ Δία: cp. μὰ Δία in26025. The general sense of the passage is well brought out in the Epitome: καὶ ἔτι τὸ “καὶ σκοπῶ” παρεμπεσὸν ἐπισκοτούμενον τὸ μέτρον ἠφάνισε.

8. ‘For no other girl, O bridegroom, was like unto her.’—Usener’s insertion ofποτα, here and in l. 15infra, 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’ in2528.

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

28.νὴ Δία: cp. μὰ Δία in26025. The general sense of the passage is well brought out in the Epitome: καὶ ἔτι τὸ “καὶ σκοπῶ” παρεμπεσὸν ἐπισκοτούμενον τὸ μέτρον ἠφάνισε.

σκοπῶ,” ὑφ’ οὗ δὴ τὸ μέτρον ἐπισκοτούμενον ἠφάνισται. τὸδ’ ἐπὶ τούτῳ παραλαμβανόμενον κῶλον ἐξ ἀναπαίστων σύγκειταιῥυθμῶν καὶ προάγει μέχρι ποδῶν ὀκτὼ τὸ αὐτὸ σχῆμαδιασῷζονπερὶ τοῦ Χερόνησον ἔχειν ἀσφαλῶς ὑμᾶς καὶ μὴ παρακρουσθέντας, 5ὁμοίον τῷ παρ’ Εὐριπίδῃ τῷδεβασιλεῦ χώρας τῆς πολυβώλουΚισσεῦ, πεδίον πυρὶ μαρμαίρει.καὶ τὸ μετὰ τοῦτο πάλιν κείμενον τοῦ αὐτοῦ κώλου μέρος 10τουτί “ἀποστερηθῆναι πάλιν αὐτῆς” ἰαμβικὸν τρίμετρόνἐστι ποδὶ καὶ ἡμίσει λειπόμενον· ἐγένετο δ’ ἂν τέλειον οὕτωςἀποστερηθῆναι πάλιν αὐτῆς ἐν μέρει.ταῦτ’ ἔτι φῶμεν αὐτοσχέδια εἶναι καὶ ἀνεπιτήδευτα, οὕτωποικίλα καὶ πολλὰ ὄντα; ἐγὼ μὲν οὐκ ἀξιῶ· καὶ γὰρ τὰ 15ἑξῆς τούτοις ὅμοια εὑρεῖν ἔστι, πολλῶν καὶ παντοδαπῶνἀνάμεστα μέτρων τε καὶ ῥυθμῶν.ἀλλ’ ἵνα μὴ τοῦτον ὑπολάβῃ τις μόνον οὕτως αὐτῷκατεσκευάσθαι τὸν λόγον, ἑτέρου πάλιν ἅψομαι τοῦ πάνυἡρμηνεῦσθαι δαιμονίως δοκοῦντος, τοῦ ὑπὲρ Κτησιφῶντος, ὃν 20ἐγὼ κράτιστον ἀποφαίνομαι πάντων λόγων· ὁρῶ δὴ κἀντούτῳ μετὰ τὴν προσαγόρευσιν τῶν Ἀθηναίων εὐθέως τὸνκρητικὸν ῥυθμόν, εἴτε ἄρα παιᾶνά τις αὐτὸν βούλεται καλεῖν(διοίσει γὰρ οὐδέν), τὸν ἐκ πέντε συγκείμενον χρόνων, οὐκαὐτοσχεδίως μὰ Δία ἀλλ’ ὡς οἷόν τε μάλιστα ἐπιτετηδευμένως 25δι’ ὅλου τοῦ κώλου πλεκόμενον τούτουτοῖς 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 thepaeonif 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—

σκοπῶ,” ὑφ’ οὗ δὴ τὸ μέτρον ἐπισκοτούμενον ἠφάνισται. τὸδ’ ἐπὶ τούτῳ παραλαμβανόμενον κῶλον ἐξ ἀναπαίστων σύγκειταιῥυθμῶν καὶ προάγει μέχρι ποδῶν ὀκτὼ τὸ αὐτὸ σχῆμαδιασῷζον

περὶ τοῦ Χερόνησον ἔχειν ἀσφαλῶς ὑμᾶς καὶ μὴ παρακρουσθέντας, 5

ὁμοίον τῷ παρ’ Εὐριπίδῃ τῷδε

βασιλεῦ χώρας τῆς πολυβώλουΚισσεῦ, πεδίον πυρὶ μαρμαίρει.

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

ἀποστερηθῆναι πάλιν αὐτῆς ἐν μέρει.

ταῦτ’ ἔτι φῶμεν αὐτοσχέδια εἶναι καὶ ἀνεπιτήδευτα, οὕτωποικίλα καὶ πολλὰ ὄντα; ἐγὼ μὲν οὐκ ἀξιῶ· καὶ γὰρ τὰ 15ἑξῆς τούτοις ὅμοια εὑρεῖν ἔστι, πολλῶν καὶ παντοδαπῶνἀνάμεστα μέτρων τε καὶ ῥυθμῶν.ἀλλ’ ἵνα μὴ τοῦτον ὑπολάβῃ τις μόνον οὕτως αὐτῷκατεσκευάσθαι τὸν λόγον, ἑτέρου πάλιν ἅψομαι τοῦ πάνυἡρμηνεῦσθαι δαιμονίως δοκοῦντος, τοῦ ὑπὲρ Κτησιφῶντος, ὃν 20ἐγὼ κράτιστον ἀποφαίνομαι πάντων λόγων· ὁρῶ δὴ κἀντούτῳ μετὰ τὴν προσαγόρευσιν τῶν Ἀθηναίων εὐθέως τὸνκρητικὸν ῥυθμόν, εἴτε ἄρα παιᾶνά τις αὐτὸν βούλεται καλεῖν(διοίσει γὰρ οὐδέν), τὸν ἐκ πέντε συγκείμενον χρόνων, οὐκαὐτοσχεδίως μὰ Δία ἀλλ’ ὡς οἷόν τε μάλιστα ἐπιτετηδευμένως 25δι’ 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 thepaeonif 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—

[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 thepaeonif 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 libri5. 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 on2588supra, and also the reading λιποῦσ’ ἀνδρότητα καὶ ἥβην inIl.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 with2569 seems to confirm the conjectureλειπόμενον, though λείπω is sometimes intransitive.13. A rude iambic trimeter of the colloquial kind: cp.25826supra.26. The metrical analysis of the following passage of Demosthenes should be compared and contrasted with its previous division into feet—on18217 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 on11420supra).—Demosthenes’ much-admired exordium in theCrownmay be compared with the Homeric invocation—κέκλυτέ μευ πάντες τε θεοί, πᾶσαί τε θέαιναι.

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 on2588supra, and also the reading λιποῦσ’ ἀνδρότητα καὶ ἥβην inIl.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 with2569 seems to confirm the conjectureλειπόμενον, though λείπω is sometimes intransitive.

13. A rude iambic trimeter of the colloquial kind: cp.25826supra.

26. The metrical analysis of the following passage of Demosthenes should be compared and contrasted with its previous division into feet—on18217 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 on11420supra).—Demosthenes’ much-admired exordium in theCrownmay be compared with the Homeric invocation—

κέκλυτέ μευ πάντες τε θεοί, πᾶσαί τε θέαιναι.

Κρησίοις ἐν ῥυθμοῖς παῖδα μέλψωμεν;ἐμοὶ γοῦν δοκεῖ· ἔξω γὰρ τοῦ τελευταίου ποδὸς τά γε ἄλλαπαντάπασιν ἴσα. ἔστω καὶ τοῦτο, εἰ βούλεταί τις, αὐτοσχέδιον·ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ συναπτόμενον τούτῳ κῶλον ἰαμβεῖόνἐστιν ὀρθόν, συλλαβῇ τοῦ τελείου δέον, ἵνα δὴ κἀνταῦθα 5ἄσημον γένηται τὸ μέτρον, ἐπεὶ μιᾶς γε συλλαβῆς προστεθείσηςτέλειον ἔσται“ὅσην εὔνοιαν ἔχων ἐγὼ διατελῶ.”κἄπειτα ὁ παιὰν ἢ ὁ κρητικὸς ἐκεῖνος ὁ πεντάχρονος ἥξειῥυθμὸς ἐν τοῖς ἑξῆς τούτοις “τῇ πόλει καὶ πᾶσιν ὑμῖν 10τοσαύτην ὑπάρξαι μοι παρ’ ὑμῶν εἰς τουτονὶ τὸνἀγῶνα.” τοῦτο γοῦν ἔοικεν, ὅ τι μὴ κατακλωμένους ἔχειδύο πόδας ἐν ἀρχαῖς, κατὰ γοῦν τὰ ἄλλα πάντα τῷ παρὰΒακχυλίδῃοὐχ ἕδρας ἔργον οὐδ’ ἀμβολᾶς, 15ἀλλὰ χρυσαίγιδος Ἰτωνίαςχρὴ παρ’ εὐδαίδαλον ναὸν ἐλ-θόντας ἁβρόν τι δεῖξαι.ὑφορῶμαί τινα πρὸς ταῦτα καταδρομὴν ἀνθρώπων τῆςμὲν ἐγκυκλίου παιδείας ἀπείρων, τὸ δὲ ἀγοραῖον τῆς ῥητορικῆς 20μέρος ὁδοῦ τε καὶ τέχνης χωρὶς ἐπιτηδευόντων, πρὸς οὓςἀναγκαῖον ἀπολογήσασθαι, μὴ δόξωμεν ἔρημον ἀφεικέναι τὸνἀγῶνα. 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

Κρησίοις ἐν ῥυθμοῖς παῖδα μέλψωμεν;

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

“ὅσην εὔνοιαν ἔχων ἐγὼ διατελῶ.”

κἄπειτα ὁ παιὰν ἢ ὁ κρητικὸς ἐκεῖνος ὁ πεντάχρονος ἥξειῥυθμὸς ἐν τοῖς ἑξῆς τούτοις “τῇ πόλει καὶ πᾶσιν ὑμῖν 10τοσαύτην ὑπάρξαι μοι παρ’ ὑμῶν εἰς τουτονὶ τὸνἀγῶνα.” τοῦτο γοῦν ἔοικεν, ὅ τι μὴ κατακλωμένους ἔχειδύο πόδας ἐν ἀρχαῖς, κατὰ γοῦν τὰ ἄλλα πάντα τῷ παρὰΒακχυλίδῃ

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

ὑφορῶμαί τινα πρὸς ταῦτα καταδρομὴν ἀνθρώπων τῆςμὲν ἐγκυκλίου παιδείας ἀπείρων, τὸ δὲ ἀγοραῖον τῆς ῥητορικῆς 20μέρος ὁδοῦ τε καὶ τέχνης χωρὶς ἐπιτηδευόντων, πρὸς οὓςἀναγκαῖον ἀπολογήσασθαι, μὴ δόξωμεν ἔρημον ἀφεικέναι τὸνἀγῶνα. 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

[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 P1.ῥυθμοῖς: with the first syllable short, as (e.g.) in Aristoph. Nub. 638. As already pointed out, thelengtheningof such syllables would be abnormal in prose. Cp.mediocriterin the passage of Cicero on p.251supra.7. Dionysius can surely only mean that we have here thematerials, 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 by18222supra(see notead 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 ofBacchylides’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, 416ibid.) 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. 11ibid.τάς τε δίκας ἐρήμους ἐκλιπόντας.23. With this and the following pages should be compared the later version found in thede Demosth.cc. 51, 52. There ἄθλιος (which in itself as a good prose word, used frequently by Demosthenes himself as well as by Dionysius9411supra) 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.

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

7. Dionysius can surely only mean that we have here thematerials, 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 by18222supra(see notead 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 ofBacchylides’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, 416ibid.) 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. 11ibid.τάς τε δίκας ἐρήμους ἐκλιπόντας.

23. With this and the following pages should be compared the later version found in thede Demosth.cc. 51, 52. There ἄθλιος (which in itself as a good prose word, used frequently by Demosthenes himself as well as by Dionysius9411supra) 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.

ἦν, ὥσθ’, ὅτε γράφοι τοὺς λόγους, μέτρα καὶ ῥυθμοὺς ὥσπεροἱ πλάσται παρατιθέμενος, ἐναρμόττειν ἐπειρᾶτο τούτοις τοῖςτύποις τὰ κῶλα, στρέφων ἄνω καὶ κάτω τὰ ὀνόματα, καὶπαραφυλάττων τὰ μήκη καὶ τοὺς χρόνους, καὶ τὰς πτώσειςτῶν ὀνομάτων καὶ τὰς ἐγκλίσεις τῶν ῥημάτων καὶ πάντα τὰ 5συμβεβηκότα τοῖς μορίοις τοῦ λόγου πολυπραγμονῶν; ἠλίθιοςμέντἂν εἴη εἰς τοσαύτην σκευωρίαν καὶ φλυαρίαν ὁ τηλικοῦτοςἀνὴρ ἑαυτὸν διδούς. ταῦτα δὴ καὶ τὰ τούτοις παραπλήσιακωμῳδοῦντας αὐτοὺς καὶ καταχλευάζοντας οὐ χαλεπῶς ἄντις ἀποκρούσαιτο ταῦτα εἰπών· πρῶτον μὲν ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄτοπον 10ἦν, εἰ ‹ὁ› τοσαύτης δόξης ἠξιωμένος ἀνὴρ ὅσης οὐδεὶς τῶνπρότερον ὀνομασθέντων ἐπὶ δεινότητι λόγων, ἔργα συνταττόμενοςαἰώνια καὶ διδοὺς ἑαυτὸν ὑπεύθυνον τῷ πάντα βασανίζοντιφθόνῳ καὶ χρόνῳ ἐβουλήθη μηδὲν εἰκῇ μήτε πρᾶγμα παραλαμβάνεινμήτ’ ὄνομα, πολλὴν δ’ ἀμφοῖν ἔχειν τούτων 15πρόνοιαν τῆς τε ἐν τοῖς νοήμασιν οἰκονομίας καὶ τῆς εὐμορφίαςτῆς περὶ τὰ ὀνόματα, ἄλλως τε καὶ τῶν τότε ἀνθρώπων οὐγραπτοῖς ἀλλὰ γλυπτοῖς καὶ τορευτοῖς ἐοικότας ἐκφερόντωνλόγους, λέγω δὲ Ἰσοκράτους καὶ Πλάτωνος τῶν σοφιστῶν·ὁ μὲν γὰρ τὸν πανηγυρικὸν λόγον, ὡς οἱ τὸν ἐλάχιστον 20χρόνον γράφοντες ἀποφαίνουσιν, ἐν ἔτεσι δέκα συνετάξατο, ὁδὲ Πλάτων τοὺς ἑαυτοῦ διαλόγους κτενίζων καὶ βοστρυχίζωνκαὶ πάντα τρόπον ἀναπλέκων οὐ διέλειπεν ὀγδοήκονταγεγονὼς ἔτη· πᾶσι γὰρ δήπου τοῖς φιλολόγοις γνώριμα τὰπερὶ τῆς φιλοπονίας τἀνδρὸς ἱστορούμενα τά τε ἄλλα καὶ 25δὴ 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 hisPanegyric, 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

[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 hisPanegyric, 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

[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 hisPanegyric, 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 M4.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 in26223supramay 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 theC.V.(cp. note on6411supra). 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 theC.V.in mind.26.δέλτον, ‘tablet’: originally so called because of its delta-like, or triangular, shape.

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 in26223supramay 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 theC.V.(cp. note on6411supra). 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 theC.V.in mind.

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

Back to Index Next