II

καὶ ἔμφρονος δεῖ τῆς πρώτης ἐπιστάσεώς τε καὶ ἀγωγῆς, εἰμέλλουσι 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 καὶσυνθέσει ταῦτα κοσμήσειν μεμιγμένον ἐχούσῃ τῷ σεμνῷ τὸ 5ἡδύ. εἰς δὴ τοῦτο τὸ μέρος, ὃ δεῖ πρῶτον νέοις ἀσκεῖσθαι,“συμβάλλομαί σοι μέλος εἰς ἔρωτα” τὴν περὶ τῆς συνθέσεωςτῶν ὀνομάτων πραγματείαν ὀλίγοις μὲν ἐπὶ νοῦν ἐλθοῦσαν,ὅσοι τῶν ἀρχαίων ῥητορικὰς ἢ διαλεκτικὰς συνέγραψαν τέχνας,οὐδενὶ δ’ ἀκριβῶς οὐδ’ ἀποχρώντως μέχρι τοῦ παρόντος ἐξειργασμένην, 10ὡς ἐγὼ πείθομαι. ἐὰν δ’ ἐγγένηταί μοι σχολή, καὶπερὶ τῆς ἐκλογῆς τῶν ὀνομάτων ἑτέραν ἐξοίσω σοι γραφήν,ἵνα τὸν λεκτικὸν τόπον τελείως ἐξειργασμένον ἔχῃς. ἐκείνηνμὲν οὖν τὴν πραγματείαν εἰς νέωτα πάλιν ὥραις ταῖς αὐταῖςπροσδέχου θεῶν ἡμᾶς φυλαττόντων ἀσινεῖς τε καὶ ἀνόσους, εἰ 15δήποτε ἡμῖν ἄρα τούτου πέπρωται βεβαίως τυχεῖν· νυνὶ δὲἣν 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, καὶτίνων στοχάζεται καὶ πῶς αὐτῶν τυγχάνει, καὶ τίνες αἱ γενικώταται 20αὐτῆς εἰσι διαφοραὶ καὶ τίς ἑκάστης χαρακτὴρ καὶ ποίανinspiration. Young people need, at the beginning, much prudent[69]oversight and guidance, if they are not to utterWhat word soe’er may have sprungTo 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

inspiration. Young people need, at the beginning, much prudent[69]oversight and guidance, if they are not to utterWhat word soe’er may have sprungTo 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

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 sprungTo 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 F2. 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. Luciande 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 ofvariety(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 inClassical Reviewxix. 252.7. M. Schmidt’s conjectureμέλος(M. SchmidtDiatribe in Dithyrambum, Berol. 1845) seems to be established by Athenaeus xv. 692Dἐπεὶ δ’ ἐνταῦθα τοῦ λόγου ἐσμέν, συμβαλοῦμαί τι μέλος ὑμῖν εἰς ἔρωτα, κατὰ τὸν Κυθήριον ποιητήν: cp.ib.vi. 271Bσυμβαλοῦμαί τι καὶ αὐτὸς μέλος εἰς ἔρωτα τῷ σοφῷ καὶ φιλτάτῳ Δημοκρίτῳ.—In itself, however, συμβάλλομαι μέρος gives good sense (cp. PlatoLegg.836Dτί 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.—Forσυνθέσεωςsee 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 inClassical 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: compare864,9015,10012, 27,1065, and contrast9820, 21,10016, 17, 18.

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. Luciande 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 ofvariety(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 inClassical Reviewxix. 252.

7. M. Schmidt’s conjectureμέλος(M. SchmidtDiatribe in Dithyrambum, Berol. 1845) seems to be established by Athenaeus xv. 692Dἐπεὶ δ’ ἐνταῦθα τοῦ λόγου ἐσμέν, συμβαλοῦμαί τι μέλος ὑμῖν εἰς ἔρωτα, κατὰ τὸν Κυθήριον ποιητήν: cp.ib.vi. 271Bσυμβαλοῦμαί τι καὶ αὐτὸς μέλος εἰς ἔρωτα τῷ σοφῷ καὶ φιλτάτῳ Δημοκρίτῳ.—In itself, however, συμβάλλομαι μέρος gives good sense (cp. PlatoLegg.836Dτί 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.—Forσυνθέσεωςsee 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 inClassical 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: compare864,9015,10012, 27,1065, and contrast9820, 21,10016, 17, 18.

κρατίστην αὐτῶν εἶναι πείθομαι, καὶ ἔτι πρὸς τούτοις, τί ποτ’ἐστὶ τὸ ποιητικὸν ἐκεῖνο καὶ εὔγλωσσον καὶ μελιχρὸν ἐν ταῖςἀκοαῖς, ὃ πέφυκε τῇ συνθέσει τῆς πεζῆς λέξεως παρακολουθεῖν,ποιητικῆς τε κατασκευῆς τὸν ἀποίητον ἐκμιμουμένης λόγον καὶσφόδρα ἐν τῇ μιμήσει κατορθούσης ποῦ τὸ κράτος, καὶ διὰ 5ποίας ἂν ἐπιτηδεύσεως ἐγγένοιτο ἑκάτερον αὐτῶν. τοιαυτὶμὲν δή τινά ἐστιν ὡς τύπῳ περιλαβεῖν ὑπὲρ ὧν μέλλω λέγειν,ἄρχεται δὲ ἐνθένδ’ ἡ πραγματεία.IIἡ σύνθεσις ἔστι μέν, ὥσπερ καὶ αὐτὸ δηλοῖ τοὔνομα,ποιά τις θέσις παρ’ ἄλληλα τῶν τοῦ λόγου μορίων, ἃ δὴ καὶ 10στοιχεῖά τινες τῆς λέξεως καλοῦσιν. ταῦτα δὲ Θεοδέκτης μὲνκαὶ Ἀριστοτέλης καὶ οἱ κατ’ ἐκείνους φιλοσοφήσαντες τοὺςχρόνους ἄχρι τριῶν προήγαγον, ὀνόματα καὶ ῥήματα καὶσυνδέσμους πρῶτα μέρη τῆς λέξεως ποιοῦντες. οἱ δὲ μετὰτούτους γενόμενοι, καὶ μάλιστα οἱ τῆς Στωικῆς αἱρέσεως 15ἡγεμόνες, ἕως τεττάρων προὐβίβασαν, χωρίσαντες ἀπὸ τῶνσυνδέσμων τὰ ἄρθρα. εἶθ’ οἱ μεταγενέστεροι τὰ προσηγορικὰδιελόντες ἀπὸ τῶν ὀνοματικῶν πέντε ἀπεφήναντο τὰ πρῶταμέρη. ἕτεροι δὲ καὶ τὰς ἀντονομασίας ἀποζεύξαντες ἀπὸ τῶνὀνομάτων ἕκτον στοιχεῖον τοῦτ’ ἐποίησαν. οἱ δὲ καὶ τὰ 20ἐπιρρήματα 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 IICOMPOSITION DEFINEDCompositionis, 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

ἡ σύνθεσις ἔστι μέν, ὥσπερ καὶ αὐτὸ δηλοῖ τοὔνομα,ποιά τις θέσις παρ’ ἄλληλα τῶν τοῦ λόγου μορίων, ἃ δὴ καὶ 10στοιχεῖά τινες τῆς λέξεως καλοῦσιν. ταῦτα δὲ Θεοδέκτης μὲνκαὶ Ἀριστοτέλης καὶ οἱ κατ’ ἐκείνους φιλοσοφήσαντες τοὺςχρόνους ἄχρι τριῶν προήγαγον, ὀνόματα καὶ ῥήματα καὶσυνδέσμους πρῶτα μέρη τῆς λέξεως ποιοῦντες. οἱ δὲ μετὰτούτους γενόμενοι, καὶ μάλιστα οἱ τῆς Στωικῆς αἱρέσεως 15ἡγεμόνες, ἕως τεττάρων προὐβίβασαν, χωρίσαντες ἀπὸ τῶνσυνδέσμων τὰ ἄρθρα. εἶθ’ οἱ μεταγενέστεροι τὰ προσηγορικὰδιελόντες ἀπὸ τῶν ὀνοματικῶν πέντε ἀπεφήναντο τὰ πρῶταμέρη. ἕτεροι δὲ καὶ τὰς ἀντονομασίας ἀποζεύξαντες ἀπὸ τῶνὀνομάτων ἕκτον στοιχεῖον τοῦτ’ ἐποίησαν. οἱ δὲ καὶ τὰ 20ἐπιρρήματα 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 IICOMPOSITION DEFINEDCompositionis, 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

[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.

Compositionis, 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 P15 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 F4.κατασκευῆς: see Gloss., s.v.5. Usener’s conjecture εὖ τί may derive some colour from the manuscript readings in7210. But27011 shows that εὖ is not necessary here, and ποῦ is nearer the manuscript tradition. Cp. also2503 (κατορθουμένοις),19811 (κατόρθωμα),de Thucyd.c. 1 (τῆς δυνάμεως οὐκ ἐν ἅπασι τοῖς ἔργοις κατορθούσης). Other examples are quoted in Long. p. 202.7.ὑπέρ: cp.723, 17: περί,6812.10.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 thede 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.968, 12infra.17.τὰ προσηγορικὰ διελόντες: cp. Dionysius ThraxArs 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 (likebene facerein Plautus) was regarded as a quasi-compound. It is to be remembered that the division of words in writing is a later invention.

4.κατασκευῆς: see Gloss., s.v.

5. Usener’s conjecture εὖ τί may derive some colour from the manuscript readings in7210. But27011 shows that εὖ is not necessary here, and ποῦ is nearer the manuscript tradition. Cp. also2503 (κατορθουμένοις),19811 (κατόρθωμα),de Thucyd.c. 1 (τῆς δυνάμεως οὐκ ἐν ἅπασι τοῖς ἔργοις κατορθούσης). Other examples are quoted in Long. p. 202.

7.ὑπέρ: cp.723, 17: περί,6812.

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 thede 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.968, 12infra.

17.τὰ προσηγορικὰ διελόντες: cp. Dionysius ThraxArs 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 (likebene facerein Plautus) was regarded as a quasi-compound. It is to be remembered that the division of words in writing is a later invention.

τῶν συνδέσμων καὶ τὰς μετοχὰς ἀπὸ τῶν προσηγορικῶν, οἱ δὲκαὶ ἄλλας τινὰς προσαγαγόντες τομὰς πολλὰ τὰ πρῶτα μόριατῆς λέξεως ἐποίησαν· ὑπὲρ ὧν οὐ μικρὸς ἂν εἴη λόγος. πλὴνἥ γε τῶν πρῶτων εἴτε τριῶν ἢ τεττάρων εἴθ’ ὅσων δήποτεὄντων μερῶν πλοκὴ καὶ παράθεσις τὰ λεγόμενα ποιεῖ 5κῶλα, ἔπειθ’ ἡ τούτων ἁρμονία τὰς καλουμένας συμπληροῖπεριόδους, αὗται δὲ τὸν σύμπαντα τελειοῦσι λόγον. ἔστι δὴτῆς συνθέσεως ἔργα τά τε ὀνόματα οἰκείως θεῖναι παρ’ ἄλληλακαὶ τοῖς κώλοις ἀποδοῦναι τὴν προσήκουσαν ἁρμονίαν καὶ ταῖςπεριόδοις διαλαβεῖν εὖ τὸν λόγον. 10δευτέρα δ’ οὖσα μοῖρα τῶν περὶ τὸν λεκτικὸν τόπονθεωρημάτων κατὰ γοῦν τὴν τάξιν (ἡγεῖται γὰρ ἡ τῶνὀνομάτων ἐκλογὴ καὶ προϋφίσταται ταύτης κατὰ φύσιν)ἡδονὴν καὶ πειθὼ καὶ κράτος ἐν τοῖς λόγοις οὐκ ὀλίγῳκρεῖττον ἐκείνης ἔχει. καὶ μηδεὶς ἡγήσηται παράδοξον, εἰ 15πολλῶν καὶ μεγάλων ὄντων θεωρημάτων περὶ τὴν ἐκλογήν,ὑπὲρ ὧν πολὺς ἐγένετο φιλοσόφοις τε καὶ πολιτικοῖς ἀνδράσιλόγος, ἡ σύνθεσις δευτέραν ἔχουσα χώραν τῇ τάξει καὶ λόγωνοὐδέ, πολλοῦ δεῖ, τῶν ἴσων ἐκείνῃ τυχοῦσα τοσαύτην ἰσχὺνἔχει καὶ δύναμιν ὥστε περιεῖναι πάντων τῶν ἐκείνης ἔργων 20καὶ κρατεῖν, ἐνθυμούμενος ὅτι καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων τεχνῶν,ὅσαι διαφόρους ὕλας λαμβάνουσαι συμφορητὸν ἐκ τούτωνποιοῦσι τὸ τέλος, ὡς οἰκοδομική τε καὶ τεκτονικὴ καὶ ποικιλτικὴκαὶ ὅσαι ταῖς τοιαύταις εἰσὶν ὁμοιογενεῖς, αἱ συνθετικαὶδυνάμεις τῇ μὲν τάξει δεύτεραι τῶν ἐκλεκτικῶν εἰσι, τῇ δὲ 25δυνάμει 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,

[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,

[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. P18 οἰκείως θεῖναι τά τε ὀνόματα (verbis in hunc modum dispositis) PMV || παράλληλα PM, corr. F19 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 F119 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 E6.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 omnesarte 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 in11815.12. κατανοοῦντι (the more difficult and better supported reading) may be right, cp.9012 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.

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 omnesarte 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 in11815.

12. κατανοοῦντι (the more difficult and better supported reading) may be right, cp.9012 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.

τοῦ προκειμένου, μή τι δόξωμεν ἐξ ἑτοίμου λαμβάνειν τῶν ἀμφισβήτησιν ἐχόντων λόγων.IIIἔστι τοίνυν πᾶσα λέξις ᾗ σημαίνομεν τὰς νοήσεις ἡ μὲνἔμμετρος, ἡ δὲ ἄμετρος· ὧν ἑκατέρα καλῆς μὲν ἁρμονίαςτυχοῦσα καλὸν οἵα τ’ ἐστὶ ποιεῖν καὶ τὸ μέτρον καὶ τὸν 5λόγον, ἀνεπιστάτως δὲ καὶ ὡς ἔτυχεν ῥιπτομένη προσαπόλλυσικαὶ τὸ ἐν τῇ διανοίᾳ χρήσιμον. πολλοὶ γοῦν καὶποιηταὶ καὶ συγγραφεῖς φιλόσοφοί τε καὶ ῥήτορες λέξειςπάνυ καλὰς καὶ πρεπούσας τοῖς ὑποκειμένοις ἐκλέξαντεςἐπιμελῶς, ἁρμονίαν δὲ αὐταῖς ἀποδόντες εἰκαίαν τινὰ καὶ 10ἄμουσον οὐδὲν χρηστὸν ἀπέλαυσαν ἐκείνου τοῦ πόνου. ἕτεροιδ’ εὐκαταφρόνητα καὶ ταπεινὰ λαβόντες ὀνόματα, συνθέντεςδ’ αὐτὰ ἡδέως καὶ περιττῶς πολλὴν τὴν ἀφροδίτην τῷ λόγῳπεριέθηκαν. καὶ σχεδὸν ἀνάλογόν τι πεπονθέναι δόξειεν ἂνἡ σύνθεσις πρὸς τὴν ἐκλογήν, ὃ πάσχει τὰ ὀνόματα πρὸς 15τὰ νοήματα. ὥσπερ γὰρ οὐδὲν ὄφελος διανοίας ἐστὶ χρηστῆς,εἰ μή τις αὐτῇ κόσμον ἀποδώσει καλῆς ὀνομασίας, οὕτωκἀνταῦθα οὐδέν ἐστι προὔργου λέξιν εὑρεῖν καθαρὰν καὶ καλλιρήμονα,εἰ μὴ καὶ κόσμον αὐτῇ τις ἁρμονίας τὸν προσήκονταπεριθήσει. 20ἵνα δὲ μὴ δόξω φάσιν ἀναπόδεικτον λέγειν, ἐξ ὧνἐπείσθην 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 IIITHE MAGICAL EFFECT OF COMPOSITION, OR WORD-ORDEREvery 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

τοῦ προκειμένου, μή τι δόξωμεν ἐξ ἑτοίμου λαμβάνειν τῶν ἀμφισβήτησιν ἐχόντων λόγων.

ἔστι τοίνυν πᾶσα λέξις ᾗ σημαίνομεν τὰς νοήσεις ἡ μὲνἔμμετρος, ἡ δὲ ἄμετρος· ὧν ἑκατέρα καλῆς μὲν ἁρμονίαςτυχοῦσα καλὸν οἵα τ’ ἐστὶ ποιεῖν καὶ τὸ μέτρον καὶ τὸν 5λόγον, ἀνεπιστάτως δὲ καὶ ὡς ἔτυχεν ῥιπτομένη προσαπόλλυσικαὶ τὸ ἐν τῇ διανοίᾳ χρήσιμον. πολλοὶ γοῦν καὶποιηταὶ καὶ συγγραφεῖς φιλόσοφοί τε καὶ ῥήτορες λέξειςπάνυ καλὰς καὶ πρεπούσας τοῖς ὑποκειμένοις ἐκλέξαντεςἐπιμελῶς, ἁρμονίαν δὲ αὐταῖς ἀποδόντες εἰκαίαν τινὰ καὶ 10ἄμουσον οὐδὲν χρηστὸν ἀπέλαυσαν ἐκείνου τοῦ πόνου. ἕτεροιδ’ εὐκαταφρόνητα καὶ ταπεινὰ λαβόντες ὀνόματα, συνθέντεςδ’ αὐτὰ ἡδέως καὶ περιττῶς πολλὴν τὴν ἀφροδίτην τῷ λόγῳπεριέθηκαν. καὶ σχεδὸν ἀνάλογόν τι πεπονθέναι δόξειεν ἂνἡ σύνθεσις πρὸς τὴν ἐκλογήν, ὃ πάσχει τὰ ὀνόματα πρὸς 15τὰ νοήματα. ὥσπερ γὰρ οὐδὲν ὄφελος διανοίας ἐστὶ χρηστῆς,εἰ μή τις αὐτῇ κόσμον ἀποδώσει καλῆς ὀνομασίας, οὕτωκἀνταῦθα οὐδέν ἐστι προὔργου λέξιν εὑρεῖν καθαρὰν καὶ καλλιρήμονα,εἰ μὴ καὶ κόσμον αὐτῇ τις ἁρμονίας τὸν προσήκονταπεριθήσει. 20ἵνα δὲ μὴ δόξω φάσιν ἀναπόδεικτον λέγειν, ἐξ ὧνἐπείσθην 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 IIITHE MAGICAL EFFECT OF COMPOSITION, OR WORD-ORDEREvery 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

[75]

that we may not be thought to assume off-hand the truth of a doubtful proposition.

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 F122 κρεῖττον] καὶ κρεῖττον F || τελεώτερον M1.ἐξ ἑτοίμου λαμβάνειν: cp.7813 ἐξ ἑτοίμου λαβὼν ἐχρήσατο.9. There is much similarity, both in thought and in expression, between this passage and thede Sublimitatexl. 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 thede Subl.had, as he himself tells us, dealt with the subject of composition ἐν δυσὶν συντάγμασιν (xxxix. 1ibid.).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 (24616).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. PlatoAlcib. II.149Eὥστε οὐδὲν αὐτοῖς ἦν προὔργου θύειν τε καὶ δῶρα τελεῖν μάτην.21. MS. Canon. 45 has φάσιν, ἀναπόδεικτον, as reported (Journal of Philologyxxvii. 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 theRhet. ad Alex.1432 a 33, anoathis defined as: μετὰ θείας παραλήψεως φάσις ἀναπόδεικτος.

1.ἐξ ἑτοίμου λαμβάνειν: cp.7813 ἐξ ἑτοίμου λαβὼν ἐχρήσατο.

9. There is much similarity, both in thought and in expression, between this passage and thede Sublimitatexl. 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 thede Subl.had, as he himself tells us, dealt with the subject of composition ἐν δυσὶν συντάγμασιν (xxxix. 1ibid.).

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 (24616).

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. PlatoAlcib. II.149Eὥστε οὐδὲν αὐτοῖς ἦν προὔργου θύειν τε καὶ δῶρα τελεῖν μάτην.

21. MS. Canon. 45 has φάσιν, ἀναπόδεικτον, as reported (Journal of Philologyxxvii. 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 theRhet. ad Alex.1432 a 33, anoathis defined as: μετὰ θείας παραλήψεως φάσις ἀναπόδεικτος.

τὴν σύνθεσιν, ἔργῳ πειράσομαι δεικνύναι, ἐμμέτρων τε καὶπεζῶν λόγων ἀπαρχὰς ὀλίγας προχειρισάμενος. λαμβανέσθωδὲ ποιητῶν μὲν Ὅμηρος, συγγραφέων δὲ Ἡρόδοτος· ἀπόχρηγὰρ ἐκ τούτων καὶ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων εἰκάσαι. ἔστι δὴ παρ’Ὁμήρῳ μὲν ὁ παρὰ τῷ συβώτῃ καταγόμενος Ὀδυσσεὺς περὶ 5τὴν ἑωθινὴν ὥραν ἀκρατίζεσθαι μέλλων, ὡς τοῖς παλαιοῖςἔθος ἦν· ἔπειτα ὁ Τηλέμαχος αὐτοῖς ἐπιφαινόμενος ἐκ τῆς εἰςΠελοπόννησον ἀποδημίας· πραγμάτια λιτὰ καὶ βιωτικὰἡρμηνευμένα ὑπέρευ. ποῦ δ’ ἐστὶν ἡ τῆς ἑρμηνείας ἀρετή;τὰ ποιήματα δηλώσει παρατεθέντα αὐτά· 10τὼ δ’ αὖτ’ ἐν κλισίῃς Ὀδυσεὺς καὶ δῖος ὑφορβὸςἐντύνοντ’ ἄριστον ἅμ’ ἠοῖ κειαμένω πῦρἔκπεμψάν τε νομῆας ἅμ’ ἀγρομένοισι σύεσσι.Τηλέμαχον δὲ περίσσαινον κύνες ὑλακόμωροιοὐδ’ ὕλαον προσιόντα. νόησε δὲ δῖος Ὀδυσσεὺς 15σαίνοντάς τε κύνας, ὑπὸ δὲ κτύπος ἦλθε ποδοῖιν·αἶψα δ’ ἄρ’ Εὔμαιον προσεφώνεεν ἐγγὺς ἐόντα·Εὔμαι’, ἦ μάλα τίς τοι ἐλεύσεται ἐνθάδ’ ἑταῖροςἢ καὶ γνώριμος ἄλλος, ἐπεὶ κύνες οὐχ ὑλάουσιν,ἀλλὰ περισσαίνουσι· ποδῶν δ’ ὑπὸ δοῦπον ἀκούω. 20οὔπω πᾶν εἴρητο ἔπος, ὅτε οἱ φίλος υἱὸςἔστη 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 wightMade 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 houndsThat 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 faceWas there in the door,—his son! and Eumaeus sprang up in amaze.

τὼ δ’ αὖτ’ ἐν κλισίῃς Ὀδυσεὺς καὶ δῖος ὑφορβὸςἐντύνοντ’ ἄριστον ἅμ’ ἠοῖ κειαμένω πῦρἔκπεμψάν τε νομῆας ἅμ’ ἀγρομένοισι σύεσσι.Τηλέμαχον δὲ περίσσαινον κύνες ὑλακόμωροιοὐδ’ ὕλαον προσιόντα. νόησε δὲ δῖος Ὀδυσσεὺς 15σαίνοντάς τε κύνας, ὑπὸ δὲ κτύπος ἦλθε ποδοῖιν·αἶψα δ’ ἄρ’ Εὔμαιον προσεφώνεεν ἐγγὺς ἐόντα·Εὔμαι’, ἦ μάλα τίς τοι ἐλεύσεται ἐνθάδ’ ἑταῖροςἢ καὶ γνώριμος ἄλλος, ἐπεὶ κύνες οὐχ ὑλάουσιν,ἀλλὰ περισσαίνουσι· ποδῶν δ’ ὑπὸ δοῦπον ἀκούω. 20οὔπω πᾶν εἴρητο ἔπος, ὅτε οἱ φίλος υἱὸςἔστη 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 wightMade 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 houndsThat 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 faceWas there in the door,—his son! and Eumaeus sprang up in amaze.

[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 wightMade 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 houndsThat 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 faceWas 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) P5. The extract from theOdysseywell 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. OnOdyss.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 theexempla Latinasuggested 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 in7617, and πέσεν in781.14. 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 onIliadii. 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).

5. The extract from theOdysseywell 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. OnOdyss.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 theexempla Latinasuggested 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 in7617, and πέσεν in781.

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 onIliadii. 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).

ἐκ δ’ ἄρα οἱ χειρῶν πέσεν ἄγγεα, τοῖς ἐπονεῖτοκιρνὰς αἴθοπα οἶνον. ὁ δ’ ἀντίος ἔδραμ’ ἄνακτος·κύσσε δέ μιν κεφαλήν τε καὶ ἄμφω φάεα καλὰχεῖράς τ’ ἀμφοτέρας· θαλερὸν δέ οἱ ἔκπεσε δάκρυ.ταῦθ’ ὅτι μὲν ἐπάγεται καὶ κηλεῖ τὰς ἀκοὰς ποιημάτων 5τε τῶν πάνυ ἡδίστων οὐδενὸς ἥττω μοῖραν ἔχει, πάντες ἂνοἶδ’ ὅτι μαρτυρήσειαν. ποῦ δὴ αὐτῶν ἐστιν ἡ πειθὼ καὶδιὰ τί τοιαῦτά ἐστι, πότερον διὰ τὴν ἐκλογὴν τῶν ὀνομάτωνἢ διὰ τὴν σύνθεσιν; οὐδεὶς ἂν εἴποι διὰ τὴν ἐκλογήν, ὡςἐγὼ πείθομαι· διὰ γὰρ τῶν εὐτελεστάτων καὶ ταπεινοτάτων 10ὀνομάτων πέπλεκται πᾶσα ἡ λέξις, οἷς ἂν καὶ γεωργὸς καὶθαλαττουργὸς καὶ χειροτέχνης καὶ πᾶς ὁ μηδεμίαν ὤραν τοῦλέγειν εὖ ποιούμενος ἐξ ἑτοίμου λαβὼν ἐχρήσατο. λυθέντοςγοῦν τοῦ μέτρου φαῦλα φανήσεται τὰ αὐτὰ ταῦτα καὶ ἄζηλα·οὔτε γὰρ μεταφοραί τινες ἐν αὐτοῖς εὐγενεῖς ἔνεισιν οὔτε 15ὑπαλλαγαὶ οὔτε καταχρήσεις οὔτ’ ἄλλη τροπικὴ διάλεκτοςοὐδεμία, οὐδὲ δὴ γλῶτται πολλαί τινες οὐδὲ ξένα ἢ πεποιημέναὀνόματα. τί οὖν λείπεται μὴ οὐχὶ τὴν σύνθεσιν τοῦκάλλους τῆς ἑρμηνείας αἰτιᾶσθαι; τοιαῦτα δ’ ἐστὶ παρὰ τῷ[79]Dropped from his hands to the floor the bowls, wherein erst he beganThe 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 norhypallagesnorcatachresesnor 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

ταῦθ’ ὅτι μὲν ἐπάγεται καὶ κηλεῖ τὰς ἀκοὰς ποιημάτων 5τε τῶν πάνυ ἡδίστων οὐδενὸς ἥττω μοῖραν ἔχει, πάντες ἂνοἶδ’ ὅτι μαρτυρήσειαν. ποῦ δὴ αὐτῶν ἐστιν ἡ πειθὼ καὶδιὰ τί τοιαῦτά ἐστι, πότερον διὰ τὴν ἐκλογὴν τῶν ὀνομάτωνἢ διὰ τὴν σύνθεσιν; οὐδεὶς ἂν εἴποι διὰ τὴν ἐκλογήν, ὡςἐγὼ πείθομαι· διὰ γὰρ τῶν εὐτελεστάτων καὶ ταπεινοτάτων 10ὀνομάτων πέπλεκται πᾶσα ἡ λέξις, οἷς ἂν καὶ γεωργὸς καὶθαλαττουργὸς καὶ χειροτέχνης καὶ πᾶς ὁ μηδεμίαν ὤραν τοῦλέγειν εὖ ποιούμενος ἐξ ἑτοίμου λαβὼν ἐχρήσατο. λυθέντοςγοῦν τοῦ μέτρου φαῦλα φανήσεται τὰ αὐτὰ ταῦτα καὶ ἄζηλα·οὔτε γὰρ μεταφοραί τινες ἐν αὐτοῖς εὐγενεῖς ἔνεισιν οὔτε 15ὑπαλλαγαὶ οὔτε καταχρήσεις οὔτ’ ἄλλη τροπικὴ διάλεκτοςοὐδεμία, οὐδὲ δὴ γλῶτται πολλαί τινες οὐδὲ ξένα ἢ πεποιημέναὀνόματα. τί οὖν λείπεται μὴ οὐχὶ τὴν σύνθεσιν τοῦκάλλους τῆς ἑρμηνείας αἰτιᾶσθαι; τοιαῦτα δ’ ἐστὶ παρὰ τῷ

[79]Dropped from his hands to the floor the bowls, wherein erst he beganThe 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 norhypallagesnorcatachresesnor 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

[79]

Dropped from his hands to the floor the bowls, wherein erst he beganThe 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 norhypallagesnorcatachresesnor 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 F219 τοιαῦτ(α) (εστι) P,MV7. Perhaps ποῦ δὲ δή: cp.1169.9. 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 (Poeticsxxii. 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 inClass. 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, | tantumde medio sumptisaccedit 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 thede Demosth.c. 28, and more than once in theAntiqq. Rom.16.ὑπαλλαγαί, καταχρήσεις: see Glossary, s. vv.17. Usener reads γλῶτται παλαιαί τινες. But (1) γλῶτται are usually παλαιαί (cp. GalenGloss. 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 Lysiac. 1 οὔτε πολλοῖς τισι κατέλιπεν ὑπερβολήν, κτλ.18, 19. An interesting modern parallel is that passage in Coleridge’sBiographia Literaria(c. 18) which touches on the stanza (in Wordsworth’sLyrical 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 theorderin which the rustic would have placed the words? I am grievously deceived, if the following lesscompactmode 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 themusicin Wordsworth’sAffliction of Margaret.

7. Perhaps ποῦ δὲ δή: cp.1169.

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 (Poeticsxxii. 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 inClass. 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, | tantumde medio sumptisaccedit 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 thede Demosth.c. 28, and more than once in theAntiqq. Rom.

16.ὑπαλλαγαί, καταχρήσεις: see Glossary, s. vv.

17. Usener reads γλῶτται παλαιαί τινες. But (1) γλῶτται are usually παλαιαί (cp. GalenGloss. 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 Lysiac. 1 οὔτε πολλοῖς τισι κατέλιπεν ὑπερβολήν, κτλ.

18, 19. An interesting modern parallel is that passage in Coleridge’sBiographia Literaria(c. 18) which touches on the stanza (in Wordsworth’sLyrical 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 theorderin which the rustic would have placed the words? I am grievously deceived, if the following lesscompactmode 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 themusicin Wordsworth’sAffliction of Margaret.

Back to Index Next