VI

ἀξίων, καὶ τὰς διαλεκτικὰς παρεθέμην τέχνας οὐχ ὡς ἀναγκαίας,ἀλλ’ ἵνα μηδεὶς δοκῶν ἔχειν τι αὐτὰς χρήσιμον εἰς τὴνπαροῦσαν θεωρίαν περὶ πολλοῦ ποιῆται εἰδέναι, θηρευθεὶς ταῖςἐπιγραφαῖς τῶν πραγματειῶν ὁμοιότητά τινα ἐχούσαις καὶ τῇδόξῃ τῶν συνταξαμένων αὐτάς. 5ἐπάνειμι δ’ ἐπὶ τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὑπόθεσιν ἀφ’ ἧς εἰς ταῦτ’ἐξέβην, ὅτι πολλὴ πρόνοια τοῖς ἀρχαίοις ἦν καὶ ποιηταῖς καὶσυγγραφεῦσι φιλοσόφοις τε καὶ ῥήτορσι τῆς ἰδέας ταύτης, καὶοὔτε τὰ ὀνόματα τοῖς ὀνόμασιν οὔτε τὰ κῶλα τοῖς κώλοιςοὔτε τὰς περιόδους ἀλλήλαις εἰκῇ συνάπτειν ᾤοντο δεῖν, τέχνη 10δέ τις ἦν παρ’ αὐτοῖς καὶ θεωρήματα οἷς χρώμενοι συνετίθεσανεὖ. τίνα δ’ ἦν τὰ θεωρήματα ταῦτα, ἐγὼ πειράσομαι διδάσκειν,ὡς ἂν οἷός τε ὦ, ὅσα μοι δύναμις ἐγένετο συνεξευρεῖν,οὐχ ἅπαντα λέγων ἀλλ’ αὐτὰ τὰ ἀναγκαιότατα.VIδοκεῖ μοι τῆς συνθετικῆς ἐπιστήμης τρία ἔργα εἶναι· ἓν 15μὲν ἰδεῖν, τί μετὰ τίνος ἁρμοττόμενον πέφυκε καλὴν καὶἡδεῖαν λήψεσθαι συζυγίαν· ἕτερον δὲ γνῶναι τῶν ἁρμόττεσθαιμελλόντων πρὸς ἄλληλα πῶς ἂν ἕκαστον σχηματισθὲν κρείττοναποιήσειε φαίνεσθαι τὴν ἁρμονίαν· τρίτον δ’ εἴ τι δεῖται μετασκευῆςτῶν λαμβανομένων, ἀφαιρέσεως λέγω καὶ προσθέσεως 20καὶ ἀλλοιώσεως, γνῶναί τε καὶ πρὸς τὴν μέλλουσαν χρείανοἰκείως ἐξεργάσασθαι. ὅ τι δὲ τούτων ἕκαστον δύναται, σαφέστερονἐρῶ χρησάμενος εἰκόσι τῶν δημιουργικῶν τεχνῶν τισιν[105]possesses that I recall this mental process now. I have cited those manuals on dialectic not because I think it necessary to have them, but in order to prevent anyone from supposing that they contain anything of real service for the present inquiry, and from regarding it as important to study them. It is easy to be inveigled by their titles, which suggest some affinity with the subject; or by the reputation of their compilers.I will now revert to the original proposition, from which I have strayed into these digressions. It was that the ancients (poets and historians, philosophers and rhetoricians) were greatly preoccupied with this branch of inquiry. They never thought that words, clauses, or periods should be combined at haphazard. They had rules and principles of their own; and it was by following these that they composed so well. What these principles were, I shall try to explain so far as I can; stating, not all, but just the most essential, of those that I have been able to investigate.CHAPTER VITHREE PROCESSES IN THE ART OF COMPOSITIONMy view is that the science of composition has three functions. The first is that of observing the combinations which are naturally adapted to produce a beautiful and agreeable united effect; the second is that of perceiving how to improve the harmonious appearance of the whole by fashioning properly the several parts which we intend to fit together; the third is that of perceiving what is required in the way of modification of the material—I mean abridgment, expansion and transformation—and of carrying out such changes in a manner appropriate to the end in view. The effect of each of these processes I will explain more clearly by means of illustrations drawn from industrial arts

δοκεῖ μοι τῆς συνθετικῆς ἐπιστήμης τρία ἔργα εἶναι· ἓν 15μὲν ἰδεῖν, τί μετὰ τίνος ἁρμοττόμενον πέφυκε καλὴν καὶἡδεῖαν λήψεσθαι συζυγίαν· ἕτερον δὲ γνῶναι τῶν ἁρμόττεσθαιμελλόντων πρὸς ἄλληλα πῶς ἂν ἕκαστον σχηματισθὲν κρείττοναποιήσειε φαίνεσθαι τὴν ἁρμονίαν· τρίτον δ’ εἴ τι δεῖται μετασκευῆςτῶν λαμβανομένων, ἀφαιρέσεως λέγω καὶ προσθέσεως 20καὶ ἀλλοιώσεως, γνῶναί τε καὶ πρὸς τὴν μέλλουσαν χρείανοἰκείως ἐξεργάσασθαι. ὅ τι δὲ τούτων ἕκαστον δύναται, σαφέστερονἐρῶ χρησάμενος εἰκόσι τῶν δημιουργικῶν τεχνῶν τισιν

[105]possesses that I recall this mental process now. I have cited those manuals on dialectic not because I think it necessary to have them, but in order to prevent anyone from supposing that they contain anything of real service for the present inquiry, and from regarding it as important to study them. It is easy to be inveigled by their titles, which suggest some affinity with the subject; or by the reputation of their compilers.I will now revert to the original proposition, from which I have strayed into these digressions. It was that the ancients (poets and historians, philosophers and rhetoricians) were greatly preoccupied with this branch of inquiry. They never thought that words, clauses, or periods should be combined at haphazard. They had rules and principles of their own; and it was by following these that they composed so well. What these principles were, I shall try to explain so far as I can; stating, not all, but just the most essential, of those that I have been able to investigate.CHAPTER VITHREE PROCESSES IN THE ART OF COMPOSITIONMy view is that the science of composition has three functions. The first is that of observing the combinations which are naturally adapted to produce a beautiful and agreeable united effect; the second is that of perceiving how to improve the harmonious appearance of the whole by fashioning properly the several parts which we intend to fit together; the third is that of perceiving what is required in the way of modification of the material—I mean abridgment, expansion and transformation—and of carrying out such changes in a manner appropriate to the end in view. The effect of each of these processes I will explain more clearly by means of illustrations drawn from industrial arts

[105]

possesses that I recall this mental process now. I have cited those manuals on dialectic not because I think it necessary to have them, but in order to prevent anyone from supposing that they contain anything of real service for the present inquiry, and from regarding it as important to study them. It is easy to be inveigled by their titles, which suggest some affinity with the subject; or by the reputation of their compilers.

I will now revert to the original proposition, from which I have strayed into these digressions. It was that the ancients (poets and historians, philosophers and rhetoricians) were greatly preoccupied with this branch of inquiry. They never thought that words, clauses, or periods should be combined at haphazard. They had rules and principles of their own; and it was by following these that they composed so well. What these principles were, I shall try to explain so far as I can; stating, not all, but just the most essential, of those that I have been able to investigate.

My view is that the science of composition has three functions. The first is that of observing the combinations which are naturally adapted to produce a beautiful and agreeable united effect; the second is that of perceiving how to improve the harmonious appearance of the whole by fashioning properly the several parts which we intend to fit together; the third is that of perceiving what is required in the way of modification of the material—I mean abridgment, expansion and transformation—and of carrying out such changes in a manner appropriate to the end in view. The effect of each of these processes I will explain more clearly by means of illustrations drawn from industrial arts

8 συγγραφεῦσιν et ῥήτορσιν P || φιλοσόφοις τε] καὶ φιλοσόφοις F 10 εἰκῆι sic FP 12 ἐγὼ πειράσομαι FM: πειράσομαι PV 13 ἐξευρεῖν P 16 μετά τινος P || ἁρμοττόμενον PMV: ἁρμοζόμενον EF 19 φαίνεσθαι ποιήσειεν P, V || εἴ τι P: δὲ τί EFMV || κατασκευ(ης) P 20 ἀφαιρέσ(ως) P || λέγω ... ἀλλοιώσεως om. P || προσθέσεως EF: προσθήκης PMV 21 τε F: τε πῶς PMV 22 ὅτι F: τί PMV 23 δημιουργῶν PM1V3.θηρευθείς: cp. Eur.Hippol.957 θηρεύουσι γὰρ | σεμνοῖς λόγοισιν αἰσχρὰ μηχανώμενοι, and Xen.Cyrop.viii. 2. 2 τούτοις ἐπειρᾶτο τὴν φιλίαν θηρεύειν.4.ἐπιγραφαῖς: cp. the excerpt from Diog. Laert.,9613supra, and Cic.de Or.ii. 14. 61 “in philosophos vestros si quando incidi, deceptus indicibus librorum, qui sunt fere inscripti de rebus notis et illustribus, de virtute, de iustitia, de honestate, de voluptate, verbum prorsus nullum intellego; ita sunt angustiis et concisis disputationibus illigati.”5.τῶν συνταξαμένων αὐτάς: Zeno and Chrysippus in particular.6. The statement in9221 is here resumed.13.συνεξευρεῖν: perhaps, ‘to investigatetogether,’ i.e. by a comparative method.14.αὐτὰ τὰ ἀναγκαιότατα: as in Demosthenes, e.g.de Cor.§§ 126, 168.16. Probablyἁρμοττόμενον(rather than ἁρμοζόμενον) should be preferred here, as ἁρμόττεσθαι is used in the next line but one. It seems likely that Dionysius would use the Attic form ἁρμόττω with aorist ἥρμοσα, ἡρμόσθην, etc.; cp.986,1066, 7,1106, 13,1122, 4,12419,19823,23022. Perhaps1067 should be changed accordingly.17.λήψεσθαιafter πέφυκε = μέλλει.—συζυγίαν: Dionysius rightly recognizes that a word-order, already settled in the writer’s mind, may influence both his choice of language and grammatical forms he adopts.20.προσθέσεως(cp.11616) seems right. But προσθήκη, though generally used of the part added (11411,15013,15212), may (in21214,27422) refer to the process: cp. N.T. use of βάπτισμα.

3.θηρευθείς: cp. Eur.Hippol.957 θηρεύουσι γὰρ | σεμνοῖς λόγοισιν αἰσχρὰ μηχανώμενοι, and Xen.Cyrop.viii. 2. 2 τούτοις ἐπειρᾶτο τὴν φιλίαν θηρεύειν.

4.ἐπιγραφαῖς: cp. the excerpt from Diog. Laert.,9613supra, and Cic.de Or.ii. 14. 61 “in philosophos vestros si quando incidi, deceptus indicibus librorum, qui sunt fere inscripti de rebus notis et illustribus, de virtute, de iustitia, de honestate, de voluptate, verbum prorsus nullum intellego; ita sunt angustiis et concisis disputationibus illigati.”

5.τῶν συνταξαμένων αὐτάς: Zeno and Chrysippus in particular.

6. The statement in9221 is here resumed.

13.συνεξευρεῖν: perhaps, ‘to investigatetogether,’ i.e. by a comparative method.

14.αὐτὰ τὰ ἀναγκαιότατα: as in Demosthenes, e.g.de Cor.§§ 126, 168.

16. Probablyἁρμοττόμενον(rather than ἁρμοζόμενον) should be preferred here, as ἁρμόττεσθαι is used in the next line but one. It seems likely that Dionysius would use the Attic form ἁρμόττω with aorist ἥρμοσα, ἡρμόσθην, etc.; cp.986,1066, 7,1106, 13,1122, 4,12419,19823,23022. Perhaps1067 should be changed accordingly.

17.λήψεσθαιafter πέφυκε = μέλλει.—συζυγίαν: Dionysius rightly recognizes that a word-order, already settled in the writer’s mind, may influence both his choice of language and grammatical forms he adopts.

20.προσθέσεως(cp.11616) seems right. But προσθήκη, though generally used of the part added (11411,15013,15212), may (in21214,27422) refer to the process: cp. N.T. use of βάπτισμα.

ἃς ἅπαντες ἴσασιν, οἰκοδομικῇ λέγω καὶ ναυπηγικῇ καὶ ταῖςπαραπλησίαις· ὅ τε γὰρ οἰκοδόμος ὅταν πορίσηται τῆν ὕληνἐξ ἧς μέλλει κατασκευάζειν τὴν οἰκίαν, λίθους καὶ ξύλα καὶκέραμον καὶ τἆλλα πάντα, συντίθησιν ἐκ τούτων ἤδη τὸἔργον τρία ταῦτα πραγματευόμενος, ποίῳ δεῖ λίθῳ τε καὶ ξύλῳ 5καὶ πλίνθῳ ποῖον ἁρμόσαι λίθον ἢ ξύλον ἢ πλίνθον, ἔπειτα πῶςτῶν ἁρμοζομένων ἕκαστον καὶ ἐπὶ ποίας πλευρᾶς ἑδράσαι, καὶτρίτον, εἴ τι δύσεδρόν ἐστιν, ἀποκροῦσαι καὶ περικόψαι καὶαὐτὸ τοῦτο εὔεδρον ποιῆσαι· ὅ τε ναυπηγὸς τὰ αὐτὰ ταῦταπραγματεύεται. τὰ δὴ παραπλήσιά φημι δεῖν ποιεῖν καὶ τοὺς 10μέλλοντας εὖ συνθήσειν τὰ τοῦ λόγου μόρια, πρῶτον μὲνσκοπεῖν, ποῖον ὄνομα ἢ ῥῆμα ἢ τῶν ἄλλων τι μορίων ποίῳσυνταχθὲν ἐπιτηδείως ἔσται κείμενον καὶ πῶς οὐκ ἄμεινον(οὐ γὰρ δὴ πάντα γε μετὰ πάντων τιθέμενα πέφυκεν ὁμοίως διατιθέναιτὰς ἀκοάς)· ἔπειτα διακρίνειν, πῶς σχηματισθὲν τοὔνομα 15ἢ τὸ ῥῆμα ἢ τῶν ἄλλων ὅ τι δήποτε χαριέστερον ἱδρυθήσεταικαὶ πρὸς τὰ ὑποκείμενα πρεπωδέστερον· λέγω δὲ ἐπὶ μὲν τῶνὀνομάτων, πότερον ἑνικῶς ἢ πληθυντικῶς λαμβανόμενα κρείττωλήψεται συζυγίαν, καὶ πότερον κατὰ τὴν ὀρθὴν ἐκφερόμεναπτῶσιν ἢ κατὰ τῶν πλαγίων τινά, καὶ εἴ τινα πέφυκεν ἐξ 20ἀρρενικῶν γίνεσθαι θηλυκὰ ἢ ἐκ θηλυκῶν ἀρρενικὰ ἢ οὐδέτερα[107]familiar to all—house-building, ship-building, and the like. When a builder has provided himself with the material from which he intends to construct a house—stones, timbers, tiling, and all the rest—he then puts together the structure from these, studying the following three things: what stone, timber and brick can be united with what other stone, timber and brick; next, how each piece of the material that is being so united should be set, and on which of its faces; thirdly, if anything fits badly, how that particular thing can be chipped and trimmed and made to fit exactly. And the shipwright proceeds in just the same way. A like course should, I affirm, be followed by those who are to succeed in literary composition. They should first consider in what groupings with one another nouns, verbs, or other parts of speech, will be placed appropriately, and how not so well; for surely every possible combination cannot affect the ear in the same way—it is not in the nature of things that it should be so. Next they should decide the form in which the noun or verb, or whatever else it may be, will occupy its place most gracefully and most in harmony with the ground-scheme. I mean, in the case of nouns, whether they will offer a better combination if used in the singular or the plural; whether they should be put in the nominative or in one of the oblique cases; or which gender should be chosen if they admit of a feminine instead of a masculine form,

[107]familiar to all—house-building, ship-building, and the like. When a builder has provided himself with the material from which he intends to construct a house—stones, timbers, tiling, and all the rest—he then puts together the structure from these, studying the following three things: what stone, timber and brick can be united with what other stone, timber and brick; next, how each piece of the material that is being so united should be set, and on which of its faces; thirdly, if anything fits badly, how that particular thing can be chipped and trimmed and made to fit exactly. And the shipwright proceeds in just the same way. A like course should, I affirm, be followed by those who are to succeed in literary composition. They should first consider in what groupings with one another nouns, verbs, or other parts of speech, will be placed appropriately, and how not so well; for surely every possible combination cannot affect the ear in the same way—it is not in the nature of things that it should be so. Next they should decide the form in which the noun or verb, or whatever else it may be, will occupy its place most gracefully and most in harmony with the ground-scheme. I mean, in the case of nouns, whether they will offer a better combination if used in the singular or the plural; whether they should be put in the nominative or in one of the oblique cases; or which gender should be chosen if they admit of a feminine instead of a masculine form,

[107]

familiar to all—house-building, ship-building, and the like. When a builder has provided himself with the material from which he intends to construct a house—stones, timbers, tiling, and all the rest—he then puts together the structure from these, studying the following three things: what stone, timber and brick can be united with what other stone, timber and brick; next, how each piece of the material that is being so united should be set, and on which of its faces; thirdly, if anything fits badly, how that particular thing can be chipped and trimmed and made to fit exactly. And the shipwright proceeds in just the same way. A like course should, I affirm, be followed by those who are to succeed in literary composition. They should first consider in what groupings with one another nouns, verbs, or other parts of speech, will be placed appropriately, and how not so well; for surely every possible combination cannot affect the ear in the same way—it is not in the nature of things that it should be so. Next they should decide the form in which the noun or verb, or whatever else it may be, will occupy its place most gracefully and most in harmony with the ground-scheme. I mean, in the case of nouns, whether they will offer a better combination if used in the singular or the plural; whether they should be put in the nominative or in one of the oblique cases; or which gender should be chosen if they admit of a feminine instead of a masculine form,

1 ναυτικῆι P, MV 3 λίθοις F 5 δεῖ EV: ex δηῖ P: δὴ FM || ξύλ(ω) et πλίνθ(ω) P 8 κα(τα)κροῦσαι P1|| καὶ τὸ αὐτὸ EF 9 ἑδραῖον P 10 τὰ δὴ] τὰ F: δή PMV ||ποιεῖν om. F 12 ποί(ω) P 14 μετα πάτνsic P 16 ϊδρυθήσεται P: ϊδρυνθήσεται F, EMV 18 πληθυντικῶς] π suprascripto θ̑ P || κρείτω P: κρείττονα E: κρείττο F 19 πότερα FE 20 καὶ τίνα F 21 ἀρρενι(κων) P, M: ἀρ’ ἐνικῶν V: ἀρρενων F, E: ἀρσενικῶν s2. For comparisons between literary composition and civil or marine architecture cp.C.V.c. 22, Quintil.Inst. Or.vii. 1 (proem.), Cic.de Or.iii. 171. A metaphor from building underlies the rhetorical use in all or most of such words as: κανών, γόμφος, πυργοῦν, ἀντερείδειν, στηριγμός, ἀντιστηριγμός, ἕδρα, τέκτων, ὕλη, κατασκευάζειν, ἐγκατάσκευος.5.ταῦταrefers forward here, cp.1128 with1124. In1109 ἥδε refers backward—‘the foregoing.’7.ἐπὶ ποίας πλευρᾶς, ‘on what side,’ i.e. ‘with what attention to stratification or grain.’ A builder likes to place stone in coursesas it lay in the quarry: he knows that, if what lay horizontally is set perpendicularly, it will not last so well. Or the reference here may be simply to the difference in general appearance made by laying a stone in one of several possible ways.10. Ifποιεῖνbe omitted with F, it must be mentally supplied from the general sense of the verbs that follow. Cp. PlatoGorg.491Dἢ τοῦτο μὲν οὐδὲν δεῖ, αὐτὸν ἑαυτοῦ ἄρχειν, τῶν δὲ ἄλλων; Demosth.de Cor.§ 139 καίτοι δυοῖν αὐτὸν ἀνάγκη θάτερον, ἢ μηδὲν ἐγκαλεῖν κτλ., Soph.Philoct.310 ἐκεῖνο δ’ οὐδείς, ἡνίκ’ ἂν μνησθῶ, θέλει | σῶσαί μ’ ἐς οἴκους, id.Antig.497 θέλεις τι μεῖζον ἢ κατακτεῖναί μ’ ἑλών;13. Forοὐκ ἄμεινονUsener substitutes εὖ ἢ ἄμεινον. The corruption of εὖ ἢ to οὐκ might easily happen in uncial writing, and the reading οὐκ is as old as the Epitome. But the εὖ comes unexpectedly after ἐπιτηδείως, and the emendation is not convincing. The manuscript reading has, therefore, been kept, though οὐκ ἄμεινον is a difficult litotes.15.σχηματισθέν: grammatical form, orconstruction, is clearly meant here.16. From here to the end of the chapter the general sense is: We must, in the interests of harmonious composition, make the fullest possible use of alternative forms—now a noun, now a verb; now a singular, now a plural; now a nominative, now an oblique case; now a masculine, and then a feminine or neuter; and so with voices, moods, and tenses—with forms such as τουτονί and τοῦτον, ἰδών and κατιδών, χωροφιλῆσαι and φιλοχωρῆσαι, λελύσεται and λυθήσεται,—and with elision, hiatus, and the employment of νῦ ἐφελκυστικόν. Many of these points will be found illustrated inEp. ad Amm. II., where the subject of some of the characters is as follows: c. 5 use of noun for verb, c. 6 use of verb for noun, c. 7 substitution of passive for active voice, c. 9 interchange of singular and plural number, c. 10 interchange of the three genders, c. 11 use of cases, c. 12 use of tenses. See D.H. pp. 138-49, together with the notes added on pp. 178-81. AsEp. ad Amm. II.shows, Dionysius is fully alive to the dangers of this continual straining of language. Absolutely interchangeable expressions are not common.18.πληθυντικῶς: cp. the use of the plural in Virg.Aen.155 “vos arae ensesque nefandi, | quos fugi.”21.ἐκ θηλυκῶν ἀρρενικά: cf. Quintil.Inst. Or.ix. 3. 6 “fiunt ergo et circa genus figurae in nominibus, nam etoculis capti talpae[Virg.Georg.i. 183] ettimidi damae[Virg.Ecl.viii. 28,Georg.iii. 539] dicuntur a Vergilio; sed subest ratio, quia sexus uterque altero significatur, tamque mares esse talpas damasque quam feminas, certum est.” Besides the reason given by Quintilian, the desire to avoid monotony of termination (excessive ὁμοιοτέλευτον) also counts.—The present passage may further be illustrated by Dionysius’ own words inEp. ad Amm. II.c. 10: “Examples of the interchange of masculines, feminines and neuters, in contravention of the ordinary rules of language, are such as the following. He [Thucydides] uses τάραχος in the masculine for ταραχή in the feminine, and similarly ὄχλος for ὄχλησις. In place of τὴν βούλησιν and τὴν δύναμιν he uses τὸ βουλόμενον and τὸ δυνάμενον.”

2. For comparisons between literary composition and civil or marine architecture cp.C.V.c. 22, Quintil.Inst. Or.vii. 1 (proem.), Cic.de Or.iii. 171. A metaphor from building underlies the rhetorical use in all or most of such words as: κανών, γόμφος, πυργοῦν, ἀντερείδειν, στηριγμός, ἀντιστηριγμός, ἕδρα, τέκτων, ὕλη, κατασκευάζειν, ἐγκατάσκευος.

5.ταῦταrefers forward here, cp.1128 with1124. In1109 ἥδε refers backward—‘the foregoing.’

7.ἐπὶ ποίας πλευρᾶς, ‘on what side,’ i.e. ‘with what attention to stratification or grain.’ A builder likes to place stone in coursesas it lay in the quarry: he knows that, if what lay horizontally is set perpendicularly, it will not last so well. Or the reference here may be simply to the difference in general appearance made by laying a stone in one of several possible ways.

10. Ifποιεῖνbe omitted with F, it must be mentally supplied from the general sense of the verbs that follow. Cp. PlatoGorg.491Dἢ τοῦτο μὲν οὐδὲν δεῖ, αὐτὸν ἑαυτοῦ ἄρχειν, τῶν δὲ ἄλλων; Demosth.de Cor.§ 139 καίτοι δυοῖν αὐτὸν ἀνάγκη θάτερον, ἢ μηδὲν ἐγκαλεῖν κτλ., Soph.Philoct.310 ἐκεῖνο δ’ οὐδείς, ἡνίκ’ ἂν μνησθῶ, θέλει | σῶσαί μ’ ἐς οἴκους, id.Antig.497 θέλεις τι μεῖζον ἢ κατακτεῖναί μ’ ἑλών;

13. Forοὐκ ἄμεινονUsener substitutes εὖ ἢ ἄμεινον. The corruption of εὖ ἢ to οὐκ might easily happen in uncial writing, and the reading οὐκ is as old as the Epitome. But the εὖ comes unexpectedly after ἐπιτηδείως, and the emendation is not convincing. The manuscript reading has, therefore, been kept, though οὐκ ἄμεινον is a difficult litotes.

15.σχηματισθέν: grammatical form, orconstruction, is clearly meant here.

16. From here to the end of the chapter the general sense is: We must, in the interests of harmonious composition, make the fullest possible use of alternative forms—now a noun, now a verb; now a singular, now a plural; now a nominative, now an oblique case; now a masculine, and then a feminine or neuter; and so with voices, moods, and tenses—with forms such as τουτονί and τοῦτον, ἰδών and κατιδών, χωροφιλῆσαι and φιλοχωρῆσαι, λελύσεται and λυθήσεται,—and with elision, hiatus, and the employment of νῦ ἐφελκυστικόν. Many of these points will be found illustrated inEp. ad Amm. II., where the subject of some of the characters is as follows: c. 5 use of noun for verb, c. 6 use of verb for noun, c. 7 substitution of passive for active voice, c. 9 interchange of singular and plural number, c. 10 interchange of the three genders, c. 11 use of cases, c. 12 use of tenses. See D.H. pp. 138-49, together with the notes added on pp. 178-81. AsEp. ad Amm. II.shows, Dionysius is fully alive to the dangers of this continual straining of language. Absolutely interchangeable expressions are not common.

18.πληθυντικῶς: cp. the use of the plural in Virg.Aen.155 “vos arae ensesque nefandi, | quos fugi.”

21.ἐκ θηλυκῶν ἀρρενικά: cf. Quintil.Inst. Or.ix. 3. 6 “fiunt ergo et circa genus figurae in nominibus, nam etoculis capti talpae[Virg.Georg.i. 183] ettimidi damae[Virg.Ecl.viii. 28,Georg.iii. 539] dicuntur a Vergilio; sed subest ratio, quia sexus uterque altero significatur, tamque mares esse talpas damasque quam feminas, certum est.” Besides the reason given by Quintilian, the desire to avoid monotony of termination (excessive ὁμοιοτέλευτον) also counts.—The present passage may further be illustrated by Dionysius’ own words inEp. ad Amm. II.c. 10: “Examples of the interchange of masculines, feminines and neuters, in contravention of the ordinary rules of language, are such as the following. He [Thucydides] uses τάραχος in the masculine for ταραχή in the feminine, and similarly ὄχλος for ὄχλησις. In place of τὴν βούλησιν and τὴν δύναμιν he uses τὸ βουλόμενον and τὸ δυνάμενον.”

ἐκ τούτων, πῶς ἂν ἄμεινον σχηματισθείη, καὶ πάντα τὰτοιαῦτα· ἐπὶ δὲ τῶν ῥημάτων, πότερα κρείττω λαμβανόμεναἔσται, τὰ ὀρθὰ ἢ τὰ ὕπτια, καὶ κατὰ ποίας ἐγκλίσεις ἐκφερόμενα,ἃς δή τινες πτώσεις ῥηματικὰς καλοῦσι, κρατίστην ἕδρανλήψεται, καὶ ποίας παρεμφαίνοντα διαφορὰς χρόνων καὶ εἴ 5τινα τοῖς ῥήμασιν ἄλλα παρακολουθεῖν πέφυκε (τὰ δ’ αὐτὰταῦτα καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων τοῦ λόγου μερῶν φυλακτέον, ἵναμὴ καθ’ ἓν ἕκαστον λέγω)· ἐπὶ δὲ τούτοις τὰ ληφθένταδιακρίνειν, εἴ τι δεῖται μετασκευῆς ὄνομα ἢ ῥῆμα, πῶς ἂνἐναρμονιώτερόν τε καὶ εὐεδρότερον γένοιτο· τοῦτο τὸ στοιχεῖον 10ἐν μὲν ποιητικῇ δαψιλέστερόν ἐστιν, ἐν δὲ λόγοις πεζοῖςσπανιώτερον· πλὴν γίνεταί γε καὶ ἐν τούτοις ἐφ’ ὅσον ἂνἐγχωρῇ· ὅ τε γὰρ λέγων “εἰς τουτονὶ τὸν ἀγῶνα” προστέθεικέτι τῇ ἀντωνυμίᾳ γράμμα τῆς συνθέσεως στοχαζόμενος· ἄρτιονγὰρ ἦν “εἰς τοῦτον τὸν ἀγῶνα” εἰπεῖν· καὶ πάλιν ὁ λέγων 15“κατιδὼν Νεοπτόλεμον τὸν ὑποκριτήν” τῇ προθέσει παρηύξηκεντοὔνομα, τὸ γὰρ ἰδὼν ἀπέχρη· καὶ ὁ γράφων “μήτ’ ἰδίαςἔχθρας μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεχ’ ἥκειν” ταῖς συναλοιφαῖς ἠλάττωκε τὰ[109]or a masculine instead of a feminine, or a neuter instead of either: and so on. With reference to verbs, again: which form it will be best to adopt, the active or the passive, and in what moods (orverbal cases, as some call them) they should be presented so as to receive the best setting, as also what differences of tense should be indicated; and so with all the other natural accidents of verbs. These same methods must be followed in regard to the other parts of speech also; there is no need to go into details. Further, with respect to the words thus selected, if any noun or verb requires a modification of its form, it must be decided how it can be brought into better harmony and symmetry with its neighbours. This principle can be applied more freely in poetry than in prose. Still, in prose also, it is applied, where opportunity offers. The speaker who says “εἰς τουτονὶ τὸν ἀγῶνα”[118]has added a letter to the pronoun with an eye to the effect of the composition. The bare meaning would have been sufficiently conveyed by saying “εἰς τοῦτον τὸν ἀγῶνα”. So in the words “κατιδὼν Νεοπτόλεμον τὸν ὑποκριτήν”[119]the addition of the preposition has merely expanded the word into κατιδών, since ἰδών alone would have conveyed the meaning. So, too, in the expression “μήτ’ ἰδίας ἔχθρας μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεχ’ ἥκειν”[120]the writer has cut off some of the letters, and has condensed the

[109]or a masculine instead of a feminine, or a neuter instead of either: and so on. With reference to verbs, again: which form it will be best to adopt, the active or the passive, and in what moods (orverbal cases, as some call them) they should be presented so as to receive the best setting, as also what differences of tense should be indicated; and so with all the other natural accidents of verbs. These same methods must be followed in regard to the other parts of speech also; there is no need to go into details. Further, with respect to the words thus selected, if any noun or verb requires a modification of its form, it must be decided how it can be brought into better harmony and symmetry with its neighbours. This principle can be applied more freely in poetry than in prose. Still, in prose also, it is applied, where opportunity offers. The speaker who says “εἰς τουτονὶ τὸν ἀγῶνα”[118]has added a letter to the pronoun with an eye to the effect of the composition. The bare meaning would have been sufficiently conveyed by saying “εἰς τοῦτον τὸν ἀγῶνα”. So in the words “κατιδὼν Νεοπτόλεμον τὸν ὑποκριτήν”[119]the addition of the preposition has merely expanded the word into κατιδών, since ἰδών alone would have conveyed the meaning. So, too, in the expression “μήτ’ ἰδίας ἔχθρας μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεχ’ ἥκειν”[120]the writer has cut off some of the letters, and has condensed the

[109]

or a masculine instead of a feminine, or a neuter instead of either: and so on. With reference to verbs, again: which form it will be best to adopt, the active or the passive, and in what moods (orverbal cases, as some call them) they should be presented so as to receive the best setting, as also what differences of tense should be indicated; and so with all the other natural accidents of verbs. These same methods must be followed in regard to the other parts of speech also; there is no need to go into details. Further, with respect to the words thus selected, if any noun or verb requires a modification of its form, it must be decided how it can be brought into better harmony and symmetry with its neighbours. This principle can be applied more freely in poetry than in prose. Still, in prose also, it is applied, where opportunity offers. The speaker who says “εἰς τουτονὶ τὸν ἀγῶνα”[118]has added a letter to the pronoun with an eye to the effect of the composition. The bare meaning would have been sufficiently conveyed by saying “εἰς τοῦτον τὸν ἀγῶνα”. So in the words “κατιδὼν Νεοπτόλεμον τὸν ὑποκριτήν”[119]the addition of the preposition has merely expanded the word into κατιδών, since ἰδών alone would have conveyed the meaning. So, too, in the expression “μήτ’ ἰδίας ἔχθρας μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεχ’ ἥκειν”[120]the writer has cut off some of the letters, and has condensed the

2 τε EFMV1|| κρείττω EF: κρείττονα PMV || λαβόμενα ἔσται F: ἔσται λαμβανόμενα EPMV 4 καλοῦσιν P 6 πέφυκεν P || δὲ PMV 8 ἓν om. F 9 δεῖται F: δεῖ PMV || μετὰ κα(τα)σκευ(ης) P, M || πῶς Usener: ὡς libri 12 πλὴν EF: om. PMV || τε PV: om. F1EM || ὅσο*ν F, E: ὁπόσον PMV 14 ἀντ(ω)νυμία P 17 ἀπέχρη καὶ ὁ F: ἀπέχρηκεν ὅ τε P 18 ἔχθρας] ἔχθρας ἐμὲ Demosth. || ἔνεχ’ F: ἕνεκ’ PV || εικειν P1, V || συναλειφαῖς F: συναλιφαῖς P8. Cp. BatteuxRéflexionsp. 181: “Cette opération [sc. μετασκευή] ne peut pas avoir lieu en français, parce que nos mots sont faits et consacrés dans leur forme par un usage que les écrivains ne peuvent ni changer ni altérer: la poésie n’a pas sur ce point plus de privilége que la prose; mais cela n’empêche pas que nous ne fassions dans notre langue une grande partie des opérations qu’indique Denys d’Halicarnasse dans le chapitre vi. Nous mettons dans nos verbes un temps pour un autre, l’actif pour le passif, le passif pour l’actif; nous prenons les substantifs adjectivement, les adjectifs substantivement, quelquefois adverbialement, les singuliers pour les pluriels, les pluriels pour les singuliers; nous changeons les personnes; nous varions les finales, tantôt masculines, tantôt féminines; nous renversons les constructions, nous faisons des ellipses hardies, etc. etc. Tous ceux qui font des vers savent de combien de manières on tourne et retourne les expressions d’une pensée qui résiste; ceux qui travaillent leur prose le savent de même que les poëtes.”9. For Usener’s correctionπῶςcp.10615,1081; and for F’s δεῖται cp.10419.11. Examples in Latin poetry would be ‘gnatus’ for ‘natus,’ or ‘amarunt’ and ‘amavere’ for ‘amaverunt.’13. We have an English parallel in the dialect form ‘thik’ and ‘thikky,’ both of which stand forthis; or ‘the forthcoming’ and ‘the coming’ might be employed in the translation, and ‘syllable’ be substituted for ‘letter.’14.ἄρτιον: for the meaning cp. ἀπέχρη10817. The implication is that τουτονί (as compared with τοῦτον) is περισσόν.16. Demosth. περὶ τῆς Εἰρήνης § 6, πάλιν τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, κατιδὼν Νεοπτόλεμον τὸν ὑποκριτὴν τῷ μὲν τῆς τέχνης προσχήματι τυγχάνοντ’ ἀδείας, κακὰ δ’ ἐργαζόμενον τὰ μέγιστα τὴν πόλιν καὶ τὰ παρ’ ὑμῶν διοικοῦντα Φιλίππῳ καὶ πρυτανεύοντα, παρελθὼν εἶπον εἰς ὑμᾶς, οὐδεμιᾶς ἰδίας οὔτ’ ἔχθρας οὔτε συκοφαντίας ἕνεκεν, ὡς ἐκ τῶν μετὰ ταῦτ’ ἔργων γέγονε δῆλον. If κατιδών here means little or nothing more than ἰδών, we might compare ‘entreat’ in the sense of ‘treat’, or Chaucer’s use of ‘apperceive’ for ‘perceive.’ Dionysius’ meaning, however, probably is not that τουτονί and τοῦτον, κατιδών and ἰδών, are actualsynonyms, but rather that the shorter form would havesufficed.17. Demosth. κατὰ Ἀριστοκράτους § 1, μηδεὶς ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, νομίσῃ μήτ’ ἰδίας ἔχθρας ἐμὲ μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεχ’ ἥκειν Ἀριστοκράτους κατηγορήσοντα τουτουΐ, μήτε μικρὸν ὁρῶντά τι καὶ φαῦλον ἁμάρτημ’ ἑτοίμως οὕτως ἐπὶ τούτῳ προάγειν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀπέχθειαν, ἀλλ’ εἴπερ ἄρ’ ὀρθῶς ἐγὼ λογίζομαι καὶ σκοπῶ, ὑπὲρ τοῦ Χερρόνησον ἔχειν ὑμᾶς ἀσφαλῶς καὶ μὴ παρακρουσθέντας ἀποστερηθῆναι πάλιν αὐτῆς, περὶ τούτου μοί ἐστιν ἅπασ’ ἡ σπουδή. The passage is fully discussed (from the rhythmical, or metrical, point of view) inC.V.c. 25.

8. Cp. BatteuxRéflexionsp. 181: “Cette opération [sc. μετασκευή] ne peut pas avoir lieu en français, parce que nos mots sont faits et consacrés dans leur forme par un usage que les écrivains ne peuvent ni changer ni altérer: la poésie n’a pas sur ce point plus de privilége que la prose; mais cela n’empêche pas que nous ne fassions dans notre langue une grande partie des opérations qu’indique Denys d’Halicarnasse dans le chapitre vi. Nous mettons dans nos verbes un temps pour un autre, l’actif pour le passif, le passif pour l’actif; nous prenons les substantifs adjectivement, les adjectifs substantivement, quelquefois adverbialement, les singuliers pour les pluriels, les pluriels pour les singuliers; nous changeons les personnes; nous varions les finales, tantôt masculines, tantôt féminines; nous renversons les constructions, nous faisons des ellipses hardies, etc. etc. Tous ceux qui font des vers savent de combien de manières on tourne et retourne les expressions d’une pensée qui résiste; ceux qui travaillent leur prose le savent de même que les poëtes.”

9. For Usener’s correctionπῶςcp.10615,1081; and for F’s δεῖται cp.10419.

11. Examples in Latin poetry would be ‘gnatus’ for ‘natus,’ or ‘amarunt’ and ‘amavere’ for ‘amaverunt.’

13. We have an English parallel in the dialect form ‘thik’ and ‘thikky,’ both of which stand forthis; or ‘the forthcoming’ and ‘the coming’ might be employed in the translation, and ‘syllable’ be substituted for ‘letter.’

14.ἄρτιον: for the meaning cp. ἀπέχρη10817. The implication is that τουτονί (as compared with τοῦτον) is περισσόν.

16. Demosth. περὶ τῆς Εἰρήνης § 6, πάλιν τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, κατιδὼν Νεοπτόλεμον τὸν ὑποκριτὴν τῷ μὲν τῆς τέχνης προσχήματι τυγχάνοντ’ ἀδείας, κακὰ δ’ ἐργαζόμενον τὰ μέγιστα τὴν πόλιν καὶ τὰ παρ’ ὑμῶν διοικοῦντα Φιλίππῳ καὶ πρυτανεύοντα, παρελθὼν εἶπον εἰς ὑμᾶς, οὐδεμιᾶς ἰδίας οὔτ’ ἔχθρας οὔτε συκοφαντίας ἕνεκεν, ὡς ἐκ τῶν μετὰ ταῦτ’ ἔργων γέγονε δῆλον. If κατιδών here means little or nothing more than ἰδών, we might compare ‘entreat’ in the sense of ‘treat’, or Chaucer’s use of ‘apperceive’ for ‘perceive.’ Dionysius’ meaning, however, probably is not that τουτονί and τοῦτον, κατιδών and ἰδών, are actualsynonyms, but rather that the shorter form would havesufficed.

17. Demosth. κατὰ Ἀριστοκράτους § 1, μηδεὶς ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, νομίσῃ μήτ’ ἰδίας ἔχθρας ἐμὲ μηδεμιᾶς ἕνεχ’ ἥκειν Ἀριστοκράτους κατηγορήσοντα τουτουΐ, μήτε μικρὸν ὁρῶντά τι καὶ φαῦλον ἁμάρτημ’ ἑτοίμως οὕτως ἐπὶ τούτῳ προάγειν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀπέχθειαν, ἀλλ’ εἴπερ ἄρ’ ὀρθῶς ἐγὼ λογίζομαι καὶ σκοπῶ, ὑπὲρ τοῦ Χερρόνησον ἔχειν ὑμᾶς ἀσφαλῶς καὶ μὴ παρακρουσθέντας ἀποστερηθῆναι πάλιν αὐτῆς, περὶ τούτου μοί ἐστιν ἅπασ’ ἡ σπουδή. The passage is fully discussed (from the rhythmical, or metrical, point of view) inC.V.c. 25.

μόρια τοῦ λόγου κἀποκέκρουκέ τινα τῶν γραμμάτων· καὶ ὁἀντὶ τοῦ ἐποίησεν “ἐποίησε” λέγων χωρὶς τοῦ ν̄ καὶ “ἔγραψε”ἀντὶ τοῦ ἔγραψεν λέγων καὶ “ἀφαιρήσομαι” ἀντὶ τοῦ ἀφαιρεθήσομαικαὶ πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα, ὅ τ’ “ἐχωροφίλησε” λέγων τὸἐφιλοχώρησε καὶ “λελύσεται” τὸ λυθήσεται καὶ τὰ τοιουτότροπα 5μετασκευάζει τὰς λέξεις, ἵν’ αὐτῷ γένοιντο ἁρμοσθῆναι καλλίουςκαὶ ἐπιτηδειότεραι.VIIμία μὲν δὴ θεωρία τῆς συνθετικῆς ἐπιστήμης ἡ περὶαὐτὰ τὰ πρῶτα μόρια καὶ στοιχεῖα τῆς λέξεως ἥδε· ἑτέραδέ, ὥσπερ καὶ κατ’ ἀρχὰς ἔφην, ἡ περὶ τὰ καλούμενα κῶλα, 10ποικιλωτέρας τε δεομένη πραγματείας καὶ μείζονος, ὑπὲρ ἧςαὐτίκα δὴ πειράσομαι λέγειν ὡς ἔχω γνώμης. καὶ γὰρταῦτα ἁρμόσαι πρὸς ἄλληλα δεῖ ὥστ’ οἰκεῖα φαίνεσθαι καὶφίλα καὶ σχηματίσαι ὡς ἂν ἐνδέχηται κράτιστα προσκατασκευάσαιτε, εἴ πού τι δέοι, μειώσει καὶ πλεονασμῷ καὶ εἰ 15δή τιν’ ἄλλην μετασκευὴν δέχεται τὰ κῶλα· τούτων δ’ἕκαστον ἡ πεῖρα αὐτὴ διδάσκει· πολλάκις γὰρ τουτὶ τὸκῶλον τούτου μὲν προτεθὲν ἢ ἐπὶ τούτῳ τεθὲν εὐστομίαντινὰ ἐμφαίνει καὶ σεμνότητα, ἑτέραν δέ τινα συζυγίαν λαβὸνἄχαρι φαίνεται καὶ ἄσεμνον. ὃ δὲ λέγω, σαφέστερον ἔσται, 20εἴ τις αὐτὸ ἐπὶ παραδείγματος ἴδοι. ἔστι δή τις παρὰ τῷΘουκυδίδῃ λέξις ἐν τῇ Πλαταιέων δημηγορίᾳ πάνυ χαριέντωςσυγκειμένη καὶ μεστὴ πάθους ἥδε· “ὑμεῖς τε, ὦ Λακεδαιμόνιοι,[111]discourse through the elisions. So again by using “ἐποίησε” (without the ν) in place of ἐποίησεν, and “ἔγραψε” in place of ἔγραψεν, and “ἀφαιρήσομαι” in place of ἀφαιρεθήσομαι, and all instances of the kind; and by saying “ἐχωροφίλησε” for ἐφιλοχώρησε and “λελύσεται” for λυθήσεται, and things of that sort:—by such devices an author puts his words into a new shape, in order that he may fit them together more beautifully and appropriately.CHAPTER VIIGROUPING OF CLAUSESThe foregoing, then, is one branch of the art of composition which requires consideration: namely, that which relates to the primary parts and elements of speech. But there is another, as I said at the beginning, which is concerned with the so-called “members” (“clauses”), and this requires fuller and more elaborate treatment. My views on this topic I will try to express forthwith.The clauses must be fitted to one another so as to present an aspect of harmony and concord; they must be given the best form which they admit of; they must further be remodelled if necessary by shortening, lengthening, and any other change of form which clauses admit. As to each of these details experience itself must be your teacher. It will often happen that the placing of one clause before or after another brings out a certain euphony and dignity, while a different grouping sounds unpleasing and undignified. My meaning will be clearer if illustrated by an example. There is a well-known passage of Thucydides in the speech of the Plataeans, a delightfully arranged sentence full of deep feeling, which is as follows: “And we fear, men of Sparta, lest you, our only hope, should

μία μὲν δὴ θεωρία τῆς συνθετικῆς ἐπιστήμης ἡ περὶαὐτὰ τὰ πρῶτα μόρια καὶ στοιχεῖα τῆς λέξεως ἥδε· ἑτέραδέ, ὥσπερ καὶ κατ’ ἀρχὰς ἔφην, ἡ περὶ τὰ καλούμενα κῶλα, 10ποικιλωτέρας τε δεομένη πραγματείας καὶ μείζονος, ὑπὲρ ἧςαὐτίκα δὴ πειράσομαι λέγειν ὡς ἔχω γνώμης. καὶ γὰρταῦτα ἁρμόσαι πρὸς ἄλληλα δεῖ ὥστ’ οἰκεῖα φαίνεσθαι καὶφίλα καὶ σχηματίσαι ὡς ἂν ἐνδέχηται κράτιστα προσκατασκευάσαιτε, εἴ πού τι δέοι, μειώσει καὶ πλεονασμῷ καὶ εἰ 15δή τιν’ ἄλλην μετασκευὴν δέχεται τὰ κῶλα· τούτων δ’ἕκαστον ἡ πεῖρα αὐτὴ διδάσκει· πολλάκις γὰρ τουτὶ τὸκῶλον τούτου μὲν προτεθὲν ἢ ἐπὶ τούτῳ τεθὲν εὐστομίαντινὰ ἐμφαίνει καὶ σεμνότητα, ἑτέραν δέ τινα συζυγίαν λαβὸνἄχαρι φαίνεται καὶ ἄσεμνον. ὃ δὲ λέγω, σαφέστερον ἔσται, 20εἴ τις αὐτὸ ἐπὶ παραδείγματος ἴδοι. ἔστι δή τις παρὰ τῷΘουκυδίδῃ λέξις ἐν τῇ Πλαταιέων δημηγορίᾳ πάνυ χαριέντωςσυγκειμένη καὶ μεστὴ πάθους ἥδε· “ὑμεῖς τε, ὦ Λακεδαιμόνιοι,

[111]discourse through the elisions. So again by using “ἐποίησε” (without the ν) in place of ἐποίησεν, and “ἔγραψε” in place of ἔγραψεν, and “ἀφαιρήσομαι” in place of ἀφαιρεθήσομαι, and all instances of the kind; and by saying “ἐχωροφίλησε” for ἐφιλοχώρησε and “λελύσεται” for λυθήσεται, and things of that sort:—by such devices an author puts his words into a new shape, in order that he may fit them together more beautifully and appropriately.CHAPTER VIIGROUPING OF CLAUSESThe foregoing, then, is one branch of the art of composition which requires consideration: namely, that which relates to the primary parts and elements of speech. But there is another, as I said at the beginning, which is concerned with the so-called “members” (“clauses”), and this requires fuller and more elaborate treatment. My views on this topic I will try to express forthwith.The clauses must be fitted to one another so as to present an aspect of harmony and concord; they must be given the best form which they admit of; they must further be remodelled if necessary by shortening, lengthening, and any other change of form which clauses admit. As to each of these details experience itself must be your teacher. It will often happen that the placing of one clause before or after another brings out a certain euphony and dignity, while a different grouping sounds unpleasing and undignified. My meaning will be clearer if illustrated by an example. There is a well-known passage of Thucydides in the speech of the Plataeans, a delightfully arranged sentence full of deep feeling, which is as follows: “And we fear, men of Sparta, lest you, our only hope, should

[111]

discourse through the elisions. So again by using “ἐποίησε” (without the ν) in place of ἐποίησεν, and “ἔγραψε” in place of ἔγραψεν, and “ἀφαιρήσομαι” in place of ἀφαιρεθήσομαι, and all instances of the kind; and by saying “ἐχωροφίλησε” for ἐφιλοχώρησε and “λελύσεται” for λυθήσεται, and things of that sort:—by such devices an author puts his words into a new shape, in order that he may fit them together more beautifully and appropriately.

The foregoing, then, is one branch of the art of composition which requires consideration: namely, that which relates to the primary parts and elements of speech. But there is another, as I said at the beginning, which is concerned with the so-called “members” (“clauses”), and this requires fuller and more elaborate treatment. My views on this topic I will try to express forthwith.

The clauses must be fitted to one another so as to present an aspect of harmony and concord; they must be given the best form which they admit of; they must further be remodelled if necessary by shortening, lengthening, and any other change of form which clauses admit. As to each of these details experience itself must be your teacher. It will often happen that the placing of one clause before or after another brings out a certain euphony and dignity, while a different grouping sounds unpleasing and undignified. My meaning will be clearer if illustrated by an example. There is a well-known passage of Thucydides in the speech of the Plataeans, a delightfully arranged sentence full of deep feeling, which is as follows: “And we fear, men of Sparta, lest you, our only hope, should

1 κἀποκέκρουκέ Us.: καὶ π(ερι)κέκρ(ου)κέ P,EFM: καὶ παρακέκρουκε V || ὁ ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐποίησεν ἐποίησε F: ὁ ἐποίησε ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐποίησεν P: ὃ (τὸ V) ἐποίησεν ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐποίησε M, V 2 ἔγραψε ἀντὶ τοῦ ἔγραψεν λέγων καὶ om. EF 4 ἐχωροφίλησε E: χωροφίλησε F: χωροφιλῆσαι PMV 5 φιλοχωρῆσαι PMV || τὸ F: λέγων τὸ PMV 6 ΐνα P, MV || ἁρμοσθεῖσαι PMV || καλλίονες EF 8 συνθετικῆς] συνθέσεως F 9 πρῶτα om. F || καὶ] καὶ τὰ EF || ἥδε EFM: om. PV 10 δέ om. P || ὥπερ P || καὶ κατ’] κατ’ F || ἔφην F: ἔφαμεν PMV 13 ὥστ’ P: ὥστε F: ὡς MV 14 προκατασκευάσαι E 16 μετασκευὴν Schaefer: κατασκευὴν libri 17 ἕκαστα EF 23 ἡμεῖς EF2.χωρὶς τοῦ ν̄: Dionysius implies that, in his opinion, the so-called νῦ ἐφελκυστικόν is, or has become, an integral part of the verbal termination and is not reserved for use before vowels only. His view has some support in the usage of the best manuscripts.Usener brackets the wordsἔγραψε ... καί. But πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα suggests their retention, and their omission in an epitome (E) is natural. Dionysius wishes to indicate that his statement is general and does not apply simply to the particular verb ἐποίησε.4.φιλοχωρεῖνandχωροφιλεῖν: see Glossary, under φιλοχωρεῖν.5. Cp. Demosth. περὶ τῶν Συμμοριῶν § 2, πᾶς ὁ παρὼν φόβος λελύσεται.9.ἥδε= ‘the foregoing,’ cp. n. on ταῦτα p.106supra.10.ὥσπερ καὶ κατ’ ἀρχὰς ἔφην:729,1049. The reading ἔφην (rather than ἔφαμεν) accords best with Dionysius’ usage.23. Cp. Cic.Orat.cc. 63, 66 for similar Latin instances of the effect of a change in word-order.—The complete sentence in Thucyd. iii. 57 runs: καὶ οὔτε τῶν τότε ξυμμάχων ὠφελεῖ οὐδείς, ὑμεῖς τε, ὦ Λακεδαιμόνιοι, ἡ μόνη ἐλπίς, δέδιμεν μὴ οὐ βέβαιοι ἦτε.

2.χωρὶς τοῦ ν̄: Dionysius implies that, in his opinion, the so-called νῦ ἐφελκυστικόν is, or has become, an integral part of the verbal termination and is not reserved for use before vowels only. His view has some support in the usage of the best manuscripts.

Usener brackets the wordsἔγραψε ... καί. But πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα suggests their retention, and their omission in an epitome (E) is natural. Dionysius wishes to indicate that his statement is general and does not apply simply to the particular verb ἐποίησε.

4.φιλοχωρεῖνandχωροφιλεῖν: see Glossary, under φιλοχωρεῖν.

5. Cp. Demosth. περὶ τῶν Συμμοριῶν § 2, πᾶς ὁ παρὼν φόβος λελύσεται.

9.ἥδε= ‘the foregoing,’ cp. n. on ταῦτα p.106supra.

10.ὥσπερ καὶ κατ’ ἀρχὰς ἔφην:729,1049. The reading ἔφην (rather than ἔφαμεν) accords best with Dionysius’ usage.

23. Cp. Cic.Orat.cc. 63, 66 for similar Latin instances of the effect of a change in word-order.—The complete sentence in Thucyd. iii. 57 runs: καὶ οὔτε τῶν τότε ξυμμάχων ὠφελεῖ οὐδείς, ὑμεῖς τε, ὦ Λακεδαιμόνιοι, ἡ μόνη ἐλπίς, δέδιμεν μὴ οὐ βέβαιοι ἦτε.

ἡ μόνη ἐλπίς, δέδιμεν μὴ οὐ βέβαιοι ἦτε.” φέρε δή τιςλύσας τὴν συζυγίαν ταύτην μεθαρμοσάτω τὰ κῶλα οὕτως·“ὑμεῖς τε, ὦ Λακεδαιμόνιοι, δέδιμεν μὴ οὐ βέβαιοι ἦτε, ἡμόνη ἐλπίς.” ἆρ’ ἔτι μένει τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον ἡρμοσμένων τῶνκώλων ἡ αὐτὴ χάρις ἢ τὸ αὐτὸ πάθος; οὐδεὶς ἂν εἴποι. τί 5δ’ εἰ τὴν Δημοσθένους λέξιν ταύτην “τὸ λαβεῖν οὖν τὰδιδόμενα ὁμολογῶν ἔννομον εἶναι, τὸ χάριν τούτων ἀποδοῦναιπαρανόμων γράφῃ” λύσας τις καὶ μεταθεὶς τὰ κῶλα τουτονὶτὸν τρόπον ἐξενέγκαι· “ὁμολογῶν οὖν ἔννομον εἶναι τὸ λαβεῖντὰ διδόμενα, παρανόμων γράφῃ τὸ τούτων χάριν ἀποδοῦναι,” 10ἆρ’ ὁμοίως ἔσται δικανικὴ καὶ στρογγύλη; ἐγὼ μὲν οὐκοἴομαι.VIIIἡ μὲν δὴ περὶ τὴν ἁρμογὴν τῶν κώλων θεωρία τοιαύτη,ἡ δὲ περὶ τὸν σχηματισμὸν ποδαπή; οὐκ ἔστιν εἷς τρόποςτῆς ἐκφορᾶς ἁπάντων τῶν νοημάτων, ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν ὡς 15ἀποφαινόμενοι λέγομεν, τὰ δ’ ὡς πυνθανόμενοι, τὰ δ’ ὡςεὐχόμενοι, τὰ δ’ ὡς ἐπιτάττοντες, τὰ δ’ ὡς διαποροῦντες, τὰδ’ ὡς ὑποτιθέμενοι, τὰ δὲ ἄλλως πως σχηματίζοντες, οἷςἀκολούθως καὶ τὴν λέξιν πειρώμεθα σχηματίζειν. πολλοὶ δὲδήπου σχηματισμοὶ καὶ τῆς λέξεώς εἰσιν ὥσπερ καὶ τῆς 20διανοίας, οὓς οὐχ οἷόν τε κεφαλαιωδῶς περιλαβεῖν, ἴσως δὲκαὶ ἄπειροι· περὶ ὧν καὶ πολὺς ὁ λόγος καὶ βαθεῖα ἡ θεωρία.οὐ δὴ τὸ αὐτὸ δύναται ποιεῖν τὸ αὐτὸ κῶλον οὕτω σχηματισθὲν[113]fail in steadfastness.”[121]Now let this order be disturbed and the clauses be re-arranged as follows: “And we fear, men of Sparta, lest you should fail in steadfastness, that are our only hope.” When the clauses are arranged in this way, does the same fine charm remain, or the same deep feeling? Plainly not. Again, take this passage of Demosthenes, “So you admit as constitutional the acceptance of the offerings; you indict as unconstitutional the rendering of thanks for them.”[122]Let the order be disturbed, and the clauses interchanged and presented in the following form: “So the acceptance of the offerings you admit as constitutional; the rendering of thanks for them you indict as unconstitutional.” Will the sentence be equally neat and effective? I, for my part, do not think so.CHAPTER VIIISHAPING OF CLAUSESThe principles governing the arrangement of clauses have now been stated. What principles govern their shaping?The complete utterance of our thoughts takes more than one form. We throw them at one time into the shape of an assertion, at another into that of an inquiry, or a prayer, or a command, or a doubt, or a supposition, or some other shape of the kind; and into conformity with these we try to mould the diction itself. There are, in fact, many figures of diction, just as there are of thought. It is not possible to classify them exhaustively; indeed, they are perhaps innumerable. Their treatment would require a long disquisition and profound investigation. But that the same clause is not equally telling in all its various modes of presentation,

ἡ μὲν δὴ περὶ τὴν ἁρμογὴν τῶν κώλων θεωρία τοιαύτη,ἡ δὲ περὶ τὸν σχηματισμὸν ποδαπή; οὐκ ἔστιν εἷς τρόποςτῆς ἐκφορᾶς ἁπάντων τῶν νοημάτων, ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν ὡς 15ἀποφαινόμενοι λέγομεν, τὰ δ’ ὡς πυνθανόμενοι, τὰ δ’ ὡςεὐχόμενοι, τὰ δ’ ὡς ἐπιτάττοντες, τὰ δ’ ὡς διαποροῦντες, τὰδ’ ὡς ὑποτιθέμενοι, τὰ δὲ ἄλλως πως σχηματίζοντες, οἷςἀκολούθως καὶ τὴν λέξιν πειρώμεθα σχηματίζειν. πολλοὶ δὲδήπου σχηματισμοὶ καὶ τῆς λέξεώς εἰσιν ὥσπερ καὶ τῆς 20διανοίας, οὓς οὐχ οἷόν τε κεφαλαιωδῶς περιλαβεῖν, ἴσως δὲκαὶ ἄπειροι· περὶ ὧν καὶ πολὺς ὁ λόγος καὶ βαθεῖα ἡ θεωρία.οὐ δὴ τὸ αὐτὸ δύναται ποιεῖν τὸ αὐτὸ κῶλον οὕτω σχηματισθὲν

[113]fail in steadfastness.”[121]Now let this order be disturbed and the clauses be re-arranged as follows: “And we fear, men of Sparta, lest you should fail in steadfastness, that are our only hope.” When the clauses are arranged in this way, does the same fine charm remain, or the same deep feeling? Plainly not. Again, take this passage of Demosthenes, “So you admit as constitutional the acceptance of the offerings; you indict as unconstitutional the rendering of thanks for them.”[122]Let the order be disturbed, and the clauses interchanged and presented in the following form: “So the acceptance of the offerings you admit as constitutional; the rendering of thanks for them you indict as unconstitutional.” Will the sentence be equally neat and effective? I, for my part, do not think so.CHAPTER VIIISHAPING OF CLAUSESThe principles governing the arrangement of clauses have now been stated. What principles govern their shaping?The complete utterance of our thoughts takes more than one form. We throw them at one time into the shape of an assertion, at another into that of an inquiry, or a prayer, or a command, or a doubt, or a supposition, or some other shape of the kind; and into conformity with these we try to mould the diction itself. There are, in fact, many figures of diction, just as there are of thought. It is not possible to classify them exhaustively; indeed, they are perhaps innumerable. Their treatment would require a long disquisition and profound investigation. But that the same clause is not equally telling in all its various modes of presentation,

[113]

fail in steadfastness.”[121]Now let this order be disturbed and the clauses be re-arranged as follows: “And we fear, men of Sparta, lest you should fail in steadfastness, that are our only hope.” When the clauses are arranged in this way, does the same fine charm remain, or the same deep feeling? Plainly not. Again, take this passage of Demosthenes, “So you admit as constitutional the acceptance of the offerings; you indict as unconstitutional the rendering of thanks for them.”[122]Let the order be disturbed, and the clauses interchanged and presented in the following form: “So the acceptance of the offerings you admit as constitutional; the rendering of thanks for them you indict as unconstitutional.” Will the sentence be equally neat and effective? I, for my part, do not think so.

The principles governing the arrangement of clauses have now been stated. What principles govern their shaping?

The complete utterance of our thoughts takes more than one form. We throw them at one time into the shape of an assertion, at another into that of an inquiry, or a prayer, or a command, or a doubt, or a supposition, or some other shape of the kind; and into conformity with these we try to mould the diction itself. There are, in fact, many figures of diction, just as there are of thought. It is not possible to classify them exhaustively; indeed, they are perhaps innumerable. Their treatment would require a long disquisition and profound investigation. But that the same clause is not equally telling in all its various modes of presentation,

1 ἡ μόνη ἐλπίς add. in marg. F || ἡ μόνη] ἡμῶν ἡ EF1M1|| φέρε ... (4) ἦτε add. in marg. F 6 δ’ F: δὲ M: δαὶ PV 8 παρανόμον P: παράνομον F || γράφηι· F: γράφηι· εἰ P, MV | τοῦτον PMV 10 παράνομον FP: παρανόμῳ V || ἀποδιδόναι P 14 ποταπή PMV 15 τῆς om. P || ἁπάντων EF: om. PMV: τῶν om. F || ὀνομάτων PMV2. It is impossible to give real English equivalents in cases like this,—partly because of the fundamental differences between the two languages, and partly because we do not know Dionysius’ own estimate of the exact effect which the changes he introduces have upon the rhythm, emphasis, and clearness of the sentence. The same considerations apply in lines 6-10, where the English principle of emphasis makes it necessary to depart widely from the Greek order in both the original and the re-written form. See Introduction, pp.17ff.supra(under Emphasis). A striking instance of effective emphasis in English is Macduff’s passionate out-burst:—Not in the legionsOf horrid hell can come a devil more damn’dIn ills to top Macbeth.“If you dispose the words in the usual manner, and say, ‘A more damned devil in the legions of horrid hell cannot come to top Macbeth in ills,’ we shall scarcely be persuaded that the thought is the same,” CampbellPhilosophy of Rhetoricp. 496. Biblical instances are: (1) “Nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin” (Nehem.xiii. 26); (2) “Your fathers, where are they? and the prophets, do they live for ever?” (Zech.i. 5).8. Sometimes the manuscript testimony is quite clear as between such forms as τουτονί and τοῦτον: cp.1169 n. In doubtful cases the -ί form might be adopted—in646 and8417 as well as in1128 and17810.14. Cp. Quintil. vi. 3. 70 “figuras quoque montis, quae σχήματα διανοίας dicuntur, res eadem recipit omnes, in quas nonnulli diviserunt species dictorum. nam et interrogamus et dubitamus et affirmamus et minamur et optamus, quaedam ut miserantes, quaedam ut irascentes dicimus,” and Hor.Ars. P.108 “format enim natura prius nos intus ad omnem | fortunarum habitum; iuvat aut impellit ad iram | aut ad humum maerore gravi deducit et angit; | post effert animi motus interprete lingua.”

2. It is impossible to give real English equivalents in cases like this,—partly because of the fundamental differences between the two languages, and partly because we do not know Dionysius’ own estimate of the exact effect which the changes he introduces have upon the rhythm, emphasis, and clearness of the sentence. The same considerations apply in lines 6-10, where the English principle of emphasis makes it necessary to depart widely from the Greek order in both the original and the re-written form. See Introduction, pp.17ff.supra(under Emphasis). A striking instance of effective emphasis in English is Macduff’s passionate out-burst:—

Not in the legionsOf horrid hell can come a devil more damn’dIn ills to top Macbeth.

“If you dispose the words in the usual manner, and say, ‘A more damned devil in the legions of horrid hell cannot come to top Macbeth in ills,’ we shall scarcely be persuaded that the thought is the same,” CampbellPhilosophy of Rhetoricp. 496. Biblical instances are: (1) “Nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin” (Nehem.xiii. 26); (2) “Your fathers, where are they? and the prophets, do they live for ever?” (Zech.i. 5).

8. Sometimes the manuscript testimony is quite clear as between such forms as τουτονί and τοῦτον: cp.1169 n. In doubtful cases the -ί form might be adopted—in646 and8417 as well as in1128 and17810.

14. Cp. Quintil. vi. 3. 70 “figuras quoque montis, quae σχήματα διανοίας dicuntur, res eadem recipit omnes, in quas nonnulli diviserunt species dictorum. nam et interrogamus et dubitamus et affirmamus et minamur et optamus, quaedam ut miserantes, quaedam ut irascentes dicimus,” and Hor.Ars. P.108 “format enim natura prius nos intus ad omnem | fortunarum habitum; iuvat aut impellit ad iram | aut ad humum maerore gravi deducit et angit; | post effert animi motus interprete lingua.”

ἢ οὕτως. ἐρῶ δὲ ἐπὶ παραδείγματος· εἰ τοῦτον ἐξήνεγκετὸν τρόπον ὁ Δημοσθένης τὴν λέξιν ταύτην “ταῦτ’ εἰπὼνἔγραψα, γράψας δ’ ἐπρέσβευσα, πρεσβεύσας δ’ ἔπεισα Θηβαίους,”ἆρ’ οὕτως ἂν συνέκειτο χαριέντως, ὡς νῦν σύγκειται;“οὐκ εἶπον μὲν ταῦτα, οὐκ ἔγραψα δέ· οὐδ’ ἔγραψα μέν, οὐκ 5ἐπρέσβευσα δέ· οὐδ’ ἐπρέσβευσα μέν, οὐκ ἔπεισα δὲ Θηβαίους.”πολὺς δ’ ἂν εἴη μοι λόγος, εἰ περὶ πάντων βουλοίμην λέγειντῶν σχηματισμῶν ὅσους τὰ κῶλα ἐπιδέχεται. ἀπόχρη δὲεἰσαγωγῆς ἕνεκα τοσαῦτα εἰρῆσθαι.IXἀλλὰ μὴν ὅτι γε καὶ μετασκευὰς δέχεται τῶν κώλων ἔνια 10τοτὲ μὲν προσθήκας λαμβάνοντα οὐκ ἀναγκαίας ὡς πρὸς τὸννοῦν, τοτὲ δὲ ἀφαιρέσεις ἀτελῆ ποιούσας τὴν διάνοιαν, ἃς οὐκἄλλου τινὸς ἕνεκα ποιοῦσι ποιηταί τε καὶ συγγραφεῖς ἢ τῆςἁρμονίας, ἵν’ ἡδεῖα καὶ καλὴ γένηται, πάνυ ὀλίγου δεῖν οἴομαιλόγου. τίς γὰρ οὐκ ἂν ὁμολογήσαι τήνδε τὴν λέξιν ἣν ὁ 15Δημοσθένης εἴρηκε προσθήκῃ πλεονάζειν οὐκ ἀναγκαίᾳ τῆςἁρμονίας ἕνεκα; “ὁ γὰρ οἷς ἂν ἐγὼ ληφθείην, ταῦτα πράττωνκαὶ κατασκευαζόμενος, οὗτος ἐμοὶ πολεμεῖ, κἂν μήπω βάλλῃμηδὲ τοξεύῃ.” ἐνταῦθα γὰρ οὐχὶ τοῦ ἀναγκαίου χάριν πρόσκειταιτὸ τοξεύειν, ἀλλ’ ἵνα τὸ τελευταῖον κῶλον τὸ “κἂν 20μήπω βάλλῃ” τραχύτερον τοῦ δέοντος ὂν καὶ οὐχ ἡδὺ ἀκουσθῆναι[115]I will show by an example. If Demosthenes had expressed himself thus in the following passage, “Having spoken thus, I moved a resolution; and having moved a resolution, I joined the embassy; and having joined the embassy, I convinced the Thebans,” would the sentence have been composed with the charm of its actual arrangement,—“I did not speak thus, and then fail to move a resolution; I did not move a resolution, and then fail to join the embassy; I did not join the embassy, and then fail to convince the Thebans”?[123]It would take me a long time to deal with all the modes of expression which clauses admit. It is enough to say thus much by way of introduction.CHAPTER IXLENGTHENING AND SHORTENING OF CLAUSES AND PERIODSI think I can in a very few words show that some clauses admit changes which take the form now of additions not necessary to the sense, now of curtailments rendering the sense incomplete; and that these changes are introduced by poets and prose-writers simply in order to add charm and beauty to the rhythm. Thus the following expression used by Demosthenes indisputably contains a pleonastic addition made for the sake of the rhythm: “He who contrives and prepares means whereby I may be captured is at war with me, though not yet shooting javelins or arrows.”[124]Here the reference to “arrows” is added not out of necessity, but in order that the last clause “though not yet shooting javelins,” being rougher than it ought to be and not pleasant to

ἀλλὰ μὴν ὅτι γε καὶ μετασκευὰς δέχεται τῶν κώλων ἔνια 10τοτὲ μὲν προσθήκας λαμβάνοντα οὐκ ἀναγκαίας ὡς πρὸς τὸννοῦν, τοτὲ δὲ ἀφαιρέσεις ἀτελῆ ποιούσας τὴν διάνοιαν, ἃς οὐκἄλλου τινὸς ἕνεκα ποιοῦσι ποιηταί τε καὶ συγγραφεῖς ἢ τῆςἁρμονίας, ἵν’ ἡδεῖα καὶ καλὴ γένηται, πάνυ ὀλίγου δεῖν οἴομαιλόγου. τίς γὰρ οὐκ ἂν ὁμολογήσαι τήνδε τὴν λέξιν ἣν ὁ 15Δημοσθένης εἴρηκε προσθήκῃ πλεονάζειν οὐκ ἀναγκαίᾳ τῆςἁρμονίας ἕνεκα; “ὁ γὰρ οἷς ἂν ἐγὼ ληφθείην, ταῦτα πράττωνκαὶ κατασκευαζόμενος, οὗτος ἐμοὶ πολεμεῖ, κἂν μήπω βάλλῃμηδὲ τοξεύῃ.” ἐνταῦθα γὰρ οὐχὶ τοῦ ἀναγκαίου χάριν πρόσκειταιτὸ τοξεύειν, ἀλλ’ ἵνα τὸ τελευταῖον κῶλον τὸ “κἂν 20μήπω βάλλῃ” τραχύτερον τοῦ δέοντος ὂν καὶ οὐχ ἡδὺ ἀκουσθῆναι

[115]I will show by an example. If Demosthenes had expressed himself thus in the following passage, “Having spoken thus, I moved a resolution; and having moved a resolution, I joined the embassy; and having joined the embassy, I convinced the Thebans,” would the sentence have been composed with the charm of its actual arrangement,—“I did not speak thus, and then fail to move a resolution; I did not move a resolution, and then fail to join the embassy; I did not join the embassy, and then fail to convince the Thebans”?[123]It would take me a long time to deal with all the modes of expression which clauses admit. It is enough to say thus much by way of introduction.CHAPTER IXLENGTHENING AND SHORTENING OF CLAUSES AND PERIODSI think I can in a very few words show that some clauses admit changes which take the form now of additions not necessary to the sense, now of curtailments rendering the sense incomplete; and that these changes are introduced by poets and prose-writers simply in order to add charm and beauty to the rhythm. Thus the following expression used by Demosthenes indisputably contains a pleonastic addition made for the sake of the rhythm: “He who contrives and prepares means whereby I may be captured is at war with me, though not yet shooting javelins or arrows.”[124]Here the reference to “arrows” is added not out of necessity, but in order that the last clause “though not yet shooting javelins,” being rougher than it ought to be and not pleasant to

[115]

I will show by an example. If Demosthenes had expressed himself thus in the following passage, “Having spoken thus, I moved a resolution; and having moved a resolution, I joined the embassy; and having joined the embassy, I convinced the Thebans,” would the sentence have been composed with the charm of its actual arrangement,—“I did not speak thus, and then fail to move a resolution; I did not move a resolution, and then fail to join the embassy; I did not join the embassy, and then fail to convince the Thebans”?[123]It would take me a long time to deal with all the modes of expression which clauses admit. It is enough to say thus much by way of introduction.

I think I can in a very few words show that some clauses admit changes which take the form now of additions not necessary to the sense, now of curtailments rendering the sense incomplete; and that these changes are introduced by poets and prose-writers simply in order to add charm and beauty to the rhythm. Thus the following expression used by Demosthenes indisputably contains a pleonastic addition made for the sake of the rhythm: “He who contrives and prepares means whereby I may be captured is at war with me, though not yet shooting javelins or arrows.”[124]Here the reference to “arrows” is added not out of necessity, but in order that the last clause “though not yet shooting javelins,” being rougher than it ought to be and not pleasant to

2 εἰπ(ων) P, MV: εἴπ(ας) F, E 5 οὐκ prim. Dem.: καὶ οὐκ libri 6 δὲ alt om. F 7 δ’ F: om. PMV 14 γένοιτο PMV 15 ὁμολογῆσαι PV: ὁμολογήσηι F || μὲν post τήνδε habet F 19 ἐνταῦθα ... (21) βάλλῃ servarunt FM 21 βραχύτερον V: βραχυτέρα ex βραχύτερα P1. Cicero (Philipp.xii. 3. 7) has the following climax: “Quid enim potest, per deos immortales! rei publicae prodesse nostra legatio? Prodesse dico? quid, si etiam obfutura est? Obfutura? quid, si iam nocuit atque obfuit?” Obviously it would be fatal to re-write this passage thus: “nostra legatio non poterit prodesse rei publicae, immo obfutura est, et iam nocuit.”2. Withεἰπών(rather than εἴπας) cp. line 5 (εἶπον, not εἶπα), though P gives προεῖπα in28019. In the Epitome εἴπας is found in V only, the other threeMSS.giving εἰπών.—In Hellenistic times the non-sigmatic aorists constantly occur with the -α of the sigmatic aorists; but it is hardly likely that so good an Atticist as Dionysius would attribute εἴπας to Demosthenes, and introduce cacophony.4. Cp. Demetr.de Eloc.§ 270 λαμβάνοιτ’ ἂν καὶ ἡ κλῖμαξ καλουμένη, ὥσπερ Δημοσθένει τὸ “οὐκ εἶπον μὲν ταῦτα, οὐκ ἔγραψα δέ· οὐδ’ ἔγραψα μέν, οὐκ ἔπεισα δὲ Θηβαίους”· σχεδὸν γὰρ ἐπαναβαίνοντι ὁ λόγος ἔοικεν ἐπὶ μειζόνων μείζονα· εἰ δὲ οὕτως εἴποι τις ταῦτα, “εἰπὼν ἐγὼ καὶ γράψας ἐπρέσβευσά τε καὶ ἔπεισα Θηβαίους,” διήγημα ἐρεῖ μόνον, δεινὸν δὲ οὐδέν.8. Dionysius seems subsequently to have written a special treatise περὶ σχημάτων: cp. Quintil. ix. 3. 89 “haec omnia copiosius sunt exsecuti, qui non ut partem operis transcurrerunt sed proprie libros huic operi dedicaverunt, sicut Caecilius, Dionysius, Rutilius, Cornificius, Visellius aliique non pauci.” The use of νῦν inde Demosth.c. 39 seems to point to an intention of the kind on Dionysius’ part: ἐξαριθμεῖσθαι δὲ νῦν, ὅσα γένη σχηματισμῶν ἐστι τῶν τε κατωνομασμένων καὶ τῶν ἀκατονομάστων, καὶ τίσιν αὐτῶν ἡ τοιαύτη μάλιστα πέφυκεν ἁρμονία χαίρειν, οὐκ ἔχω καιρόν.10. This sentence of Dionysius himself may serve to show how successfully and conveniently Greek, as compared with English, can make a conjunction depend on words which came long after (viz. πάνυ ὀλίγου δεῖν οἴομαι λόγου in line 14).16.προσθήκῃ οὐκ ἀναγκαίᾳ: compare, for example, such harmonious redundancies as οἱ δ’ ἐπεὶ οὖν ἤγερθεν ὁμηγερέες τ’ ἐγένοντο (Il.i. 57) and “when we assemble and meet together” (Book of Common Prayer).20. Quintil. ix. 4. 63 “namque eo fit ut, cum Demosthenis severa videatur compositio, πρῶτον μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, τοῖς θεοῖς εὔχομαι πᾶσι καὶ πάσαις, et illa (quae ab uno, quod sciam, Bruto minus probatur, ceteris placet) κἂν μήπω βάλλῃ μηδὲ τοξεύῃ, Ciceronem carpant in his:Familiaris coeperat esse balneatori, etNon minimum dura archipiratae. Nambalneatorietarchipirataeidem finis est qui πᾶσι καὶ πάσαις et qui μηδὲ τοξεύῃ: sed priora sunt severiora.”21. InτραχύτερονDionysius is apparently referring to the sound of two spondees (each forming a separate word) at the end of a sentence, and to the improvement effected by the addition of a cretic followed by a spondee.—P and V give βραχύτερον, which is perhaps right, since a clause that isshorterthan it ought to be can be improved (cp.11416) by extension.

1. Cicero (Philipp.xii. 3. 7) has the following climax: “Quid enim potest, per deos immortales! rei publicae prodesse nostra legatio? Prodesse dico? quid, si etiam obfutura est? Obfutura? quid, si iam nocuit atque obfuit?” Obviously it would be fatal to re-write this passage thus: “nostra legatio non poterit prodesse rei publicae, immo obfutura est, et iam nocuit.”

2. Withεἰπών(rather than εἴπας) cp. line 5 (εἶπον, not εἶπα), though P gives προεῖπα in28019. In the Epitome εἴπας is found in V only, the other threeMSS.giving εἰπών.—In Hellenistic times the non-sigmatic aorists constantly occur with the -α of the sigmatic aorists; but it is hardly likely that so good an Atticist as Dionysius would attribute εἴπας to Demosthenes, and introduce cacophony.

4. Cp. Demetr.de Eloc.§ 270 λαμβάνοιτ’ ἂν καὶ ἡ κλῖμαξ καλουμένη, ὥσπερ Δημοσθένει τὸ “οὐκ εἶπον μὲν ταῦτα, οὐκ ἔγραψα δέ· οὐδ’ ἔγραψα μέν, οὐκ ἔπεισα δὲ Θηβαίους”· σχεδὸν γὰρ ἐπαναβαίνοντι ὁ λόγος ἔοικεν ἐπὶ μειζόνων μείζονα· εἰ δὲ οὕτως εἴποι τις ταῦτα, “εἰπὼν ἐγὼ καὶ γράψας ἐπρέσβευσά τε καὶ ἔπεισα Θηβαίους,” διήγημα ἐρεῖ μόνον, δεινὸν δὲ οὐδέν.

8. Dionysius seems subsequently to have written a special treatise περὶ σχημάτων: cp. Quintil. ix. 3. 89 “haec omnia copiosius sunt exsecuti, qui non ut partem operis transcurrerunt sed proprie libros huic operi dedicaverunt, sicut Caecilius, Dionysius, Rutilius, Cornificius, Visellius aliique non pauci.” The use of νῦν inde Demosth.c. 39 seems to point to an intention of the kind on Dionysius’ part: ἐξαριθμεῖσθαι δὲ νῦν, ὅσα γένη σχηματισμῶν ἐστι τῶν τε κατωνομασμένων καὶ τῶν ἀκατονομάστων, καὶ τίσιν αὐτῶν ἡ τοιαύτη μάλιστα πέφυκεν ἁρμονία χαίρειν, οὐκ ἔχω καιρόν.

10. This sentence of Dionysius himself may serve to show how successfully and conveniently Greek, as compared with English, can make a conjunction depend on words which came long after (viz. πάνυ ὀλίγου δεῖν οἴομαι λόγου in line 14).

16.προσθήκῃ οὐκ ἀναγκαίᾳ: compare, for example, such harmonious redundancies as οἱ δ’ ἐπεὶ οὖν ἤγερθεν ὁμηγερέες τ’ ἐγένοντο (Il.i. 57) and “when we assemble and meet together” (Book of Common Prayer).

20. Quintil. ix. 4. 63 “namque eo fit ut, cum Demosthenis severa videatur compositio, πρῶτον μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, τοῖς θεοῖς εὔχομαι πᾶσι καὶ πάσαις, et illa (quae ab uno, quod sciam, Bruto minus probatur, ceteris placet) κἂν μήπω βάλλῃ μηδὲ τοξεύῃ, Ciceronem carpant in his:Familiaris coeperat esse balneatori, etNon minimum dura archipiratae. Nambalneatorietarchipirataeidem finis est qui πᾶσι καὶ πάσαις et qui μηδὲ τοξεύῃ: sed priora sunt severiora.”

21. InτραχύτερονDionysius is apparently referring to the sound of two spondees (each forming a separate word) at the end of a sentence, and to the improvement effected by the addition of a cretic followed by a spondee.—P and V give βραχύτερον, which is perhaps right, since a clause that isshorterthan it ought to be can be improved (cp.11416) by extension.

Back to Index Next