Chapter 30

[1]Regarded from this point of view, the Chronological Table given on page50is full of interest.

[2]Reference may also be made to pages27-29,33,34,40-55,74-85,92-95,98ff.,122-127,134-137,154-167,184-193,200-207,236-241,264-281. Especially to be noticed is that warm praise of simplicity (pp.76-85,134-137) which should suffice to prove that Dionysius is not a ‘rhetorician’ in any invidious sense.

[3]See Glossary, s.v. σύνθεσις.

[4]de Isocratec. 2, δουλεύει γὰρ ἡ διάνοια πολλάκις τῷ ῥυθμῷ τῆς λέξεως, καὶ τοῦ κομψοῦ λείπεται τὸ ἀληθινόν ... βούλεται δὲ ἡ φύσις τοῖς νοήμασιν ἕπεσθαι τὴν λέξιν, οὐ τῇ λέξει τὰ νοήματα.

[5]The Greek word (κεφάλαια,capita) corresponding to ‘chapters’ occurs several times in theC.V.(see Glossary, s.v.); and one (περιοχή) of the words corresponding to ‘paragraph’ is found in thede Thucyd.c. 25. The paramount importance and dignity of the πραγματικὸς τόπος is indicated in theC.V.669-15, and in thede Demosth.c. 58 fin.

[6]Quintilian (Inst. Or.ix. 4. 23) applies the termnaturalis ordoto such collocations asviros ac feminas,diem ac noctem,ortum et occasum. But even here the order, though perhaps natural, is certainly not necessary.

[7]A good example of the severance of χρόνος from itsarticleby an adjectival phrase will be found in theC. V.itself,22222: ἡμιφώνῳ γὰρ ἄφωνον συνάπτεται τῷ ν̄ τὸ τ̄ καὶ διαβέβηκεν ἀξιόλογον διάβασινὁμεταξὺ τοῦ τε προσηγορικοῦ τοῦ “πανδαίδαλον” καὶ τῆς συναλοιφῆς τῆς συναπτομένης αὐτῷχρόνος. The convenience of this articular bracket is obvious.

[8]Cp. ὀρνίθων ... προκαθιζόντων, Hom.Il.ii. 459-63.

[9]Attention is called to the elaborate word-order by Mr. P. N. Ure in his edition of this portion of Thucydides. The extent to which prepositions can be parted from cases, in post-Homeric as well as in Homeric Greek, is worth notice as a somewhat different illustration of the freedom of Greek order. See, for example, the remarks in Liddell and Scott’sLexiconon the position of εἰς.

[10]In CaesarB.G.ii. 25 more than a hundred words come between the subject,Caesarand the main verbprocessit.

[11]e.g. ‘A quarrel had arisen between a big and a little boy about a big and a little coat.’

[12]A good illustration of the freedom of order possible (at any rate theoretically) in Greek, even within the limits of verse, is supplied in a letter from Richard Porson to Andrew Dalzel: “There is a passage of Sophocles three times quoted by Plutarch, and always in a different order, but so as in the three variations to remain a senarian. Now the fragment consists of five words, and the sense is this: ‘(The physicians) wash away bitter bile with bitter drugs [πικροῖς πικρὰν κλύζουσι φαρμάκοις χολήν].’ The five words, you know, will admit of one hundred and twenty permutations, and what is extremely odd, these words will admit twenty transpositions [which Porson proceeds to indicate], and still constitute a trimeter iambic.”—Luard’sCorrespondence of Richard Porsonpp. 91, 92.

[13]HoraceArs Poetica40,cui lecta potenter erit res,nec facundia deseret hunc nec lucidus ordo.Can the obscurepotenterhere be a Latin translation of some such technical term (found by Horace or Neoptolemus in the Greek writers on literary criticism) as δυνατῶς or δεινῶς or πιθανῶς?

[13]HoraceArs Poetica40,

cui lecta potenter erit res,nec facundia deseret hunc nec lucidus ordo.

Can the obscurepotenterhere be a Latin translation of some such technical term (found by Horace or Neoptolemus in the Greek writers on literary criticism) as δυνατῶς or δεινῶς or πιθανῶς?

[14]Demetrius, for example, evidently expects to find more lucidity in the plain style (the ἰσχνὸς χαρακτήρ) of a Lysias than in the elevated style (μεγαλοπρεπὴς χαρακτήρ) of a Thucydides: see the summary inDemetrius on Stylepp. 33, 34. And a principal reason for this is that the former keeps more closely than the latter to the normal order of words in Greek (de Eloc.§§ 191 ff.). For Herodotus as compared with Thucydides cp.de Imit.ii. 3. 1 τῆς σαφηνείας δὲ ἀναμφισβήτως Ἡροδότῳ τὸ κατόρθωμα δέδοται (quoted in the editor’sDionysius of Halicarnassus: the Three Literary Lettersp. 173).

[15]εὐαρίθμητοι γάρ τινές εἰσιν οἷοι πάντα τὰ Θουκυδίδου συμβαλεῖν, καὶ οὐδ’ οὗτοι χωρὶς ἐξηγήσεως γραμματικῆς ἔνια,de Thucyd.c. 51.

[16]οὐ γὰρ ἀγοραίοις ἀνθρώποις οὐδ’ ἐπιδιφρίοις ἢ χειροτέχναις οὐδὲ τοῖς ἄλλοις οἳ μὴ μετέσχον ἀγωγῆς ἐλευθερίου ταύτας κατασκευάζεσθαι τὰς γραφάς, ἀλλ’ ἀνδράσι διὰ τῶν ἐγκυκλίων μαθημάτων ἐπὶ ῥητορικήν τε καὶ φιλοσοφίαν ἐληλυθόσιν, οἷς οὐδὲν φανήσεται τούτων ξένον,de Thucyd.c. 50. A comprehensive condemnation of ἀσάφεια is found in the same essay, c. 52: ἡ πάντα λυμαινομένη τὰ καλὰ καὶ σκότον παρέχουσα ταῖς ἀρεταῖς ἀσάφεια.

[17]See, further, the Appendix headed “Obscurity in Greek.”

[18]In the same way, Dionysius must surely feel the loss both of clearness and of emphasis involved in transferring ἡ μόνη ἐλπίς (1121 and 4) from the middle to the end of the sentence. χάρις and πάθος may cover these cardinal points: “no clearness no charm,” he might well say,—“no emphatic order no full expression of feeling.”

[19]Cp.Demetrius on Stylep. 278 (Glossary, s.v. ἔμφασις).

[20]Cp. Lewis Campbell in theClassical Reviewiv. 301, and Goodell in the paper named on p.33infra. In the matter of emphasis, Greek sentences are usually constructed on a diminuendo, English sentences on a crescendo principle. The English of μὴ ’φευρεθῇςἄνους τε καὶ γέρωνἅμα (Soph.Antig.281) is, as Jebb gives it, “lest thou be found at oncean old man and foolish.” As fuller examples, in prose and verse, Mr. L. H. G. Greenwood suggests thePhaedrus230B, C(Νὴ τὴν Ἥραν ... Φαῖδρε) and theRhesus78-85, 119-130.

[21]The views of Quintilian and Demetrius with regard to rhythm are applicable also to emphasis: Quintil. ix. 4. 67 “nam ut initia clausulaeque plurimum momenti habent, quotiens incipit sensus aut desinit: sic in mediis quoque sunt quidam conatus, iique leviter insistunt. currentium pes, etiamsi non moratur, tamen vestigium facit”; Demetrius (de Eloc.§ 39) πάντες γοῦν ἰδίως τῶν τε πρώτων μνημονεύομεν καὶ τῶν ὑστάτων, καὶ ὑπὸ τούτων κινούμεθα, ὑπὸ δὲ τῶν μεταξὺ ἔλαττον ὥσπερ ἐγκρυπτομένων ἢ ἐναφανιζομένων.

[22]The initial emphasis is here reinforced by μέν and δέ: elsewhere by the chiastic arrangement, as in (10).

[23]Compare the occasional postponement of a relative pronoun with the same object: e.g. Thucyd. i. 77βιάζεσθαιγὰρ οἷς ἂν ἐξῇ, δικάζεσθαι οὐδὲν προσδέονται.

[24]Our poets can, and do, imitate the emphatic position of a word placed at the beginning of a line with a stop immediately following (as βάλλ’ in Hom.Il.i. 52, κόπτ’ inOdyss.ix. 290, andhaesitin Virg.Aen.xi. 803):—And over them triumphant Death his dartShook, but delayed to strike.MiltonParadise Lostxi. 491.Or (still nearer to the ‘me, me, adsum,’ of Virgil):—Me, though just right, and the fixed laws of Heaven,Did first create your leader—next, free choice,With what besides in council or in fightHath been achieved of merit—yet this loss,Thus far at least recovered, hath much moreEstablished in a safe, unenvied throne,Yielded with full consent.MiltonParadise Lostii. 18-24.

And over them triumphant Death his dartShook, but delayed to strike.

MiltonParadise Lostxi. 491.

Or (still nearer to the ‘me, me, adsum,’ of Virgil):—

Me, though just right, and the fixed laws of Heaven,Did first create your leader—next, free choice,With what besides in council or in fightHath been achieved of merit—yet this loss,Thus far at least recovered, hath much moreEstablished in a safe, unenvied throne,Yielded with full consent.

MiltonParadise Lostii. 18-24.

[25]Here τούτους is emphasized by καί as well as by its position well in front of the verb which governs it, while μισθοῦ depends for its emphasis on its position alone. ‘But even these hidden piles did divers (entering the water) saw off—for pay.’ Compare the analysis which Quintilian (ix. 4. 29) gives of Cicero’s “ut tibi necesse esset in conspectu populi Romani vomerepostridie.”

[26]For the rhetorical and metrical effect Sandys (ad loc.) compares MiltonParadise Lostvi. 912, “Firm they might have stood, | Yet fell.”

[27]In this sentence the orator would probably pause slightly before γενναίως, and thus (1) emphasize it; (2) separate it from διδῷ. Other means (illustrated by various examples in this Introduction) of throwing a word into relief are: the interposition of a number of unemphatic words, the use of particles such as μέν and δέ, the placing of emphatic words in contrasted pairs near together or remote from one another.

[28]The order here (1) avoids the juxtaposition of too many accusative-terminations; (2) provides a conclusion which satisfies ear and mind alike.

[29]The position of τἄμ’ here may be compared with that of ἐμούς in Eurip.Med.1045 ἄξω παῖδας ἐκ γαίαςἐμούς(‘for they are mine’). In English, too, both the end and the beginning may be emphatic: e.g. “silver and goldhave Inone.”

[30]Quoted by Dionysius (C.V.c. 3), though without any special reference to the point ofemphasis.

[31]Quoted by T. D. GoodellSchool Grammar of Attic Greekp. 296. ἡμεῖς seems to owe some at least of its emphasis to its late insertion. If placed immediately after ηὐξήσαμεν, it would, surely, lose a little in weight. Goodell does right to include some treatment of the question of Greek word-order in a Grammar intended primarily for use in schools. It should be pointed out even to beginners that so simple a sentence as οἱ δ’ Ἀθηναῖοι ἐνίκησαν τοὺς Λακεδαιμονίους can be arranged in half-a-dozen ways, each with its own separate shade of meaning. Compare the remarks of W. H. D. Rouse with regard to the teaching of Latin: “It is possible by question and answer to make clear from the first the essential structure of an inflected language, as depending for emphasis on the order of words; and this lies at the root of style. Thus a simple sentence may give matter for several questions. TakeCaesar Labienum laudat. I may ask,Quem laudat Caesar?Answer:Labienum laudat Caesar.Question:Quid facit Caesar?Answer:Laudat Labienum Caesar.If all the texts read are treated in this way, the pupils become used to correct accidence, syntax, and order, and learn the elements of style” (Classical Reviewxxi. 130; cp. also W. H. S. JonesThe Teaching of Latinp. 33). An instructive contrast might be drawn, with reference to the context in either case, betweenRomanus sum civisin Livy ii. 12, andCivis Romanus sumin CiceroVerr.II.v. 65, 66.

[32]With “verbi transgressio” cp. “verborum concinna transgressio” in Cic.de Orat.iii. 54. 207.

[33]A modern reader might be disposed to see an example of emphasis in the illustrative passage which “Longinus” here quotes from Herodotus vi. 11. InhyperbatatheTreatise on the Sublimeitself greatly abounds, being much influenced (in this as in other ways) by Plato. For examples ofhyperbatonin Plato see Riddell’s edition of theApology, pp. 228 ff. Among modern English writers, Matthew Arnold had a curious and perhaps half-humorous trick of securing emphasis by a “bold and hazardous”hyperbaton(cp.de Sublim.xxii. 4), which keeps back the verb till the end of the sentence: e.g. “And a good deal of ignorance about these there certainly, among English public men, is”; “the grand thing in teaching is to have faith that some aptitudes for this every one has”; “one thing that Protestants have, and that the Catholics think they have a right, where they are in great numbers, to have too, this thing to the Prussian Catholics Prussia has given.” Such oddities are, in English, usually of a playful and undress character: e.g. “it was really a party that one might feel proud of having been asked to; at least I might, and did, very” (Life and Letters of Sir Richard Claverhouse Jebbp. 93; cp. J. D. Duff’s remarks, on the same page, with regard to the literary adequacy of the following English translation of a pathetic sentence in one of Demosthenes’ greatest speeches: “this woman in the first instance merely quietly to drink and eat dessert they tried to force, I should suppose”).

[34]The immediately preceding sentence in Quintilian is “venio nunc ad ornatum, in quo sine dubio plus quam in ceteris dicendi partibus sibi indulget orator.” This may be compared with Dionysius’ view that it is the accessory arts (such as theheighteningof style) that best reveal the orator’s power: ἐξ ὧν μάλιστα διάδηλος ἡ τοῦ ῥήτορος γίνεται δύναμις (de Thucyd.c. 23). In this attitude there is always some danger (unless, like Dionysius himself, a writer has a saving belief in the virtue of simplicity) of falling into that vice ofécrire trop bien, which, according to M. Anatole France, is the worst of all literary vices.

[35]If we were to say that in a Greek sentence there are two kinds of arrangement, viz. (1) grammatical arrangement which aims at clearness, and (2) rhetorical arrangement which aims at (α) emphasis, and (β) euphony; then it must be admitted that Dionysius’ real subject is (2) (β)

[36]The lines quoted from Homer in c. 16 are particularly telling.

[37]C.V.24423. Perhaps ‘spontaneous’ or ‘subconscious’ would be a better translation than ‘instinctive.’ Dionysius certainly does not intend to excludetraining.

[38]The judgment of the ear appears to be indicated by the words τοῦ πυκνὰ μεταπίπτοντος κριτηρίου at the end of c. 24.

[39]Cp.C.V.c. 6.

[40]Cic.ad Att.xiv. 20. Dionysius Halic.Ant. Rom.i. 1 ἐπιεικῶς γὰρ ἅπαντες νομίζουσιν εἰκόνας εἶναι τῆς ἑκάστου ψυχῆς τοὺς λόγους. BuffonDiscours de réception à l’Académie, 1753: “le style est l’homme même.” Cp. PlatoRep.iii. 400Dτί δ’ ὁ τρόπος τῆς λέξεως, ἦν δ’ ἐγώ, καὶ ὁ λόγος; οὐ τῷ τῆς ψυχῆς ἤθει ἕπεται;

[41]Cp. p.24supra. The desire to avoid monotony of termination would seem to be the main explanation of such collocations as οὗ τοῖς ἄλλοις εἴργεσθαι προαγορεύουσι τοῖς τοῦ φόνου φεύγουσι τὰς δίκας and τῷ αὐτῷ χρῶνται νόμῳ τούτῳ [Antiphon v.]. Additional emphasis, too, falls on τοῖς ἄλλοις and τῷ αὐτῷ, as on σωτηρίαν ἀσφαλῆ in Demosthenes’ peroration.

[42]In describing the smooth or elegant style of composition (as practised by Isocrates and his followers, including Theopompus), Dionysius notes, as one of its characteristics, the avoidance of hiatus. This avoidance is to be noticed in the recently discoveredHellenica; and without basing any positive conclusion on the fact, Grenfell and Hunt point out that the author usually avoids hiatus “even at the cost of producing an unnatural order of words, e.g. ἐπηρμένοι μισεῖν ἦσαν τοὺς Λακεδαιμονίους and ἴωμεν, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἔφη, πολῖται, ἐπὶ τοὺς τυράννους” (Oxyrhynchus Papyriv. 124).

[43]e.g. the greater tendency in Latin to place the principal verb at the end of the sentence. Cp. Quintil. ix. 4. 26 “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.” In Latin the words μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα οὐ πολλῷ ὕστερον Εὔβοια ἀπέστη ἀπ’ Ἀθηναίων would naturally run “haud multum postea Euboea ab Atheniensibus defecit” (J. P. PostgateSermo Latinusp. 7).

[44]On the other side, the classical writers not seldom yield to the temptation to write long and rambling sentences, whereas the best English authors are stimulated by the very absence of inflexions to arrange their thoughts with great care and clearness within the sentence and the paragraph. By these and other means English prose becomes, in the hands of a great master, an instrument of surpassing force and beauty. As there are differences in word-order between Greek and Latin, so are there among the modern analytical languages, though (in a comparison) it may be legitimate to group those languages together. An order regarded as natural (i.e. customary) in one modern language will not be so regarded in another. Further, a language like German (though it is often unable to follow the Greek order without ambiguity: cp. Lessing’sLaocoonc. 18) possesses a greater number of inflexions than English or French. Welsh, too, has certain syntactical features which enable it often to reproduce the Greek order more faithfully than English can do. For example: in St. John’s Gospel xvii. 9 where the Greek has οὐ περὶ τοῦ κόσμου ἐρωτῶ, ἀλλὰ περὶ ὧν δέδωκάς μοι, ὅτι σοί εἰσιν, the Welsh version givesNid dros y byd yr wyf yn gweddio, ond dros y rhai a roddaist i mi; canys eiddot ti ydynt.And PlatoApol.c. 33 καὶ ἐὰν ταῦτα ποιῆτε, δίκαια πεπονθὼς ἐγὼ ἔσομαι ὑφ’ ὑμῶν, αὐτός τε καὶ οἱ υἱεῖς: Welsh,Ac os hyn a wnewch, yr hyn sydd gyfiawn fyddaf fi wedi ei dderbyn oddiar eich llaw, myfi a’m meibion.[These Welsh instances are given on p. 38 of the present editor’s chapter on the Teaching of Greek, in F. Spencer’sAims and Practice of Teaching.] In Appendix II. at the end of this volume will be found a few idiomatic modern renderings (in English, French, and German) from Greek prose originals.

[45]LemaîtreLes Contemporainsi. 205.

[46]BoileauL’Art poétiquei. 133.

[47]Edinburgh edition of Stevenson’s works, iii. 236-61 (Miscellanies). “It is a singularly suggestive inquiry into a subject which has always been considered too vague and difficult for analysis, at any rate since the days of the classical writers on rhetoric, whom Stevenson had never read” (Graham Balfour’sLife of Robert Louis Stevensonii. 11). S. H. Butcher (Harvard Lecturespp. 242, 243) regards the essay as “a pretty precise modern parallel to the speculations of Dionysius,” and quotes some passages in proof. The following is an example of such points of contact. Stevenson: “Each phrase in literature is built of sounds, as each phrase in music consists of notes. One sound suggests, echoes, demands and harmonizes with another; and the art of rightly using these concordances is the final art in literature.” Dionysius (C.V.c. 16): ὥστε πολλὴ ἀνάγκη καλὴν μὲν εἶναι λέξιν ἐν ᾗ καλά ἐστιν ὀνόματα, καλῶν δὲ ὀνομάτων συλλαβάς τε καὶ γράμματα καλὰ αἴτια εἶναι, ἡδεῖάν τε διάλεκτον ἐκ τῶν ἡδυνόντων τὴν ἀκοὴν γίνεσθαι. Compare p.40infraas to the music of sounds; and seeDemetrius on Stylep. 43, as to Stevenson and other English writers on style.

[48]Compare especially the speeches inIl.ix., and the warm eulogies they have drawn from Quintilian (x. 1. 47; cp. x. 1. 27, with reference to Theophrastus) and from many others since his time. Dionysius’versificationof Demosthenes, andprosificationof Simonides, in c. 25 and c. 26, may not seem altogether happy, but one or two points should be remembered in his favour. He does not recognize merely mechanical conceptions of literature: such as are implied in the Latin-derived wordsproseandverse, or inliteratureitself. He would probably have agreed with Aristotle that “Homer and Empedocles have nothing in common but the metre, so that it would be right to call the one poet, the other physicist rather than poet” (Aristot.Poet.i. 9, S. H. Butcher). He might probably have also maintained that, in essentials, Theognis is less of a poet than Plato. And in modern times, if he had known them, he might have called attention to the rhymed rhetoric which often passed as poetry in eighteenth-century England, and have asked whether the elevation of thought and the measured cadences of Demosthenes did not entitle him to a higher poetic rank than that.

[49]Of Thucydides: ποιητοῦ τρόπον ἐνεξουσιάζων (de Thucyd.c. 24). Of Plato: ᾔσθετο γὰρ τῆς ἰδίας ἀπειροκαλίας καὶ ὄνομα ἔθετο αὐτῇ τὸ διθύραμβον, ὃ νῦν ἂν ᾐδέσθην ἐγὼ λέγειν ἀληθὲς ὄν. τοῦτο δὲ παθεῖν ἔοικεν, ὡς ἐγὼ νομίζω, τραφεὶς μὲν ἐν τοῖς Σωκρατικοῖς διαλόγοις ἰσχνοτάτοις οὖσι καὶ ἀκριβεστάτοις, οὐ μείνας δ’ ἐν αὐτοῖς ἀλλὰ τῆς Γοργίου καὶ Θουκυδίδου κατασκευῆς ἐρασθείς (Ep. ad Cn. Pomp.c. 2;de Demosth.c. 6. See further inDemetrius on Stylep. 14, n. 1).

[50]It will be noticed that the only question here is about differences of form. But it is one of Dionysius’ great merits to have proclaimed so clearly the leading part which beauty of form (not simply verse, but expression generally) plays in all high poetry. Aristotle was by no means insensible to this essential element, but he is apt to dwell more fully (though we must remember the fragmentary condition of thePoetics) on the associations of ποιητής than on those of ἀοιδός. It is in connexion withproserather than with poetry, that it seems necessary to lay most stress upon the intellectual and logical elements involved, and to pay heed not only to the nature of the subject matter itself but to the sustained argument in which it is presented. Reason in prose and emotion in poetry: these are perhaps the two leading elements, if any distinction of the kind is to be attempted.

[51]Aristot.Rhet.iii. 1. 9; 8. 1 and 3; 2. 1. Cp. Cic.Orat.56. 187 “perspicuum est igitur numeris astrictam orationem esse debere, carere versibus; sed ei numeri poëticine sint an ex alio genere quodam deinceps est videndum”; 57. 195 “ego autem sentio omnes in oratione esse quasi permixtos et confusos pedes; nec enim effugere possemus animadversionem, si semper eisdem uteremur, quia nec numerosa esse, ut poëma, neque extra numerum, ut sermo vulgi, esse debet oratio: alterum nimis est vinctum, ut de industria factum appareat, alterum nimis dissolutum, ut pervagatum ac vulgare videatur.” Alsoibid.51. 172; 57. 194-196; 58. 198; 68. 227. Cicero’s correct attitude is the more noticeable that he is commonly supposed to have been swayed by Asiatic rather than by Attic influences.

[52]C.V.c. 25 χωρὶς δὲ τῆς Ἀριστοτέλους μαρτυρίας, ὅτι ἀναγκαῖόν ἐστιν ἐμπεριλαμβάνεσθαί τινας τῇ πεζῇ λέξει ῥυθμούς, εἰ μέλλοι τὸ ποιητικὸν ἐπανθήσειν αὐτῇ κάλλος, ἐκ τῆς πείρας τις αὐτῆς γνώσεται.

[53]The modern custom is to view with some suspicion these inversions when found in prose composition, though in German prose they are common enough. It would be interesting to take two such sentences of the New Testament as μεγάλη ἡ Ἄρτεμις Ἐφεσίων (Acts xix. 28, 34) and ἔπεσεν, ἔπεσεν Βαβυλὼν ἡ μεγάλη (Apoc. xiv. 8), and see how they have been rendered into various modern languages by translators generally (both in authorised and unauthorised versions). It would probably be found that the French language here has been true to what Dionysius would call its λογοείδεια, or essentially prose character. In English the justification of the inversion would be the emotional nature of the original passages, which may be held to raise them to the same plane as poetry. [It would, on the other hand, be not good but bad journalism to write, “Uproarious were the proceedings at yesterday’s meeting of the Grand Committee.”] For the effect of word-order in English verse see an extract from Coleridge’sBiographia Literariain the notes, p.79infra. Coleridge was fond of offering, as a rough definition of poetry, “the best words in the best order.”

[54]See the notes on c. 25; particularly that on25611.

[55]The words “How art thou” are, it will be noticed, differently divided in these two lines with a kind of Dionysian freedom.

[56]Ruskin continually, and Carlyle often (e.g.Sartor Resartusbk. iii. c. 8), provides examples of iambic rhythm. So George EliotMill on the Flossbk. vii.: “living through again, in one supreme moment, the days when they had clasped their little hands in love, and roamed the daisied fields together.” And Blackmore, inLorna Doonec. 3: “The sullen hills were flanked with light, and the valleys chined with shadow, and all the sombrous moors between awoke in furrowed anger.” [Blackmore sometimes falls also into the hexameter rhythm, as in the same chapter: “And suddenly a strong red light, cast by the cloud-weight | downwards, | spread like | fingers | over the | moorland, || opened the | alleys of | darkness, and | hung on the | steel of the | riders.”]

[57]Cicero’s conception of the requirements of rhythmical prose (as compared with those of verbal fidelity) is curiously illustrated by the way in which he is supposed to have recast the letter sent by Lentulus to Catiline. SallustCat.44 “quis sim ex eo quem ad te misi cognosces: fac cogites in quanta calamitate sis et memineris te virum esse: consideres quid tuae rationes postulent: auxilium petas ab omnibus etiam ab infimis.” CiceroCat.iii. 12 “quis sim scies ex eo quem ad te misi: cura ut vir sis et cogita quem in locum sis progressus: vide ecquid tibi iam sit necesse et cura ut omnium tibi auxilia adiungas, etiam infimorum.” Cp. A. C. Clark (reviewing Zieliňski)Classical Reviewxix. 172.

[58]Cp.C.V.17620 οὐ γὰρ ἀπελαύνεται ῥυθμὸς οὐδεὶς ἐκ τῆς ἀμέτρου λέξεως, ὥσπερ ἐκ τῆς ἐμμέτρου. With regard to the occasional presence in prose of metrical or quasi-metrical lines, the likely explanation seems often to be one which Dionysius does not favour (πολλὰ γὰρ αὐτοσχεδιάζει μέτρα ἡ φύσις,25619), rather than one which recognizes μέτρα καὶ ῥυθμούς τιναςἐγκατατεταγμένους ἀδήλως(2543).

[59]D. B. MonroModes of Ancient Greek Musicp. 118.

[60]From the essay (already mentioned) onStyle in Literature.

[61]de Demosth.c. 22.

[62]So that, in12615, τὸν ὀξὺν τόνον = ‘the high pitch’ = ‘the acute accent.’

[63]W. H. D. Rouse’s edition ofMatthew Arnold on translating HomerIntrod. p. 7.

[64]A. J. Ellis and F. Blass (in the publications mentioned later).

[65]Arnold and ConwayRestored Pronunciation of Greek and Latinpp. iv. 3, 7, 20-26. Cp. also the pamphlet on thePronunciation of Greekissued by the Classical Association in 1908 (pp.348-51infra). In theContemporary Reviewof March 1897 the history of Greek pronunciation in England is ably sketched by J. Gennadius.

[66]Even the pronunciation of the poet’s name has changed with the lapse of centuries; and the spellingShakspereis preferred by some authorities not only because it has excellent manuscript authority, but because it may serve to remind us that “he and his fellows pronounced his nameShahk-spare, with theaof father inShahk, and with the Frenche(oura) inspare” (Furnivall).

[67]Quintil. i. 10. 17 “siquidem Archytas atque Aristoxenus etiam subiectam grammaticen musicae putaverunt,” etc.

[68]C.V.687-11, ... 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, ὡς ἐγὼ πείθομαι.

[69]Some reference to Quintilian’s own apparent indebtedness to thede Imitationeof Dionysius will be found inDemetrius on Stylep. 25.

[70]de Sublim.xxxix. 1. In the editor’s article on the “Literary Circle of Dionysius of Halicarnassus” (Classical Reviewxiv. 439-42), an endeavour is made to view the literary life of Dionysius in relation to its Roman surroundings.

[71]The more recent writers on rhetoric (οἱ νέοι τεχνογράφοι,de Isaeoc. 14) would not greatly appeal to Dionysius.

[72]Cp.25423,2563,16422,1386.

[73]The quotations from Aristotle and other writers in the Notes will serve to indicate roughly the obligations of Dionysius to his predecessors.

Back to Index Next