CHAPTER VIMETRE AND RHYTHM IN GREEK TRAGEDY

Poetry is illuminating utterance consisting of words the successive sounds of which are arranged according to a recurrent pattern. The soul of poetry is this illumination, its body this recurrent pattern of sounds; and it is with the body that we are now to deal. At the outset we must distinguish carefully between rhythm and metre. Rhythm is the recurrence just mentioned—the structure; metre is the gathering together of sounds into masses upon which rhythm shall do its work. Metre, so to put it, makes the bricks, while rhythm makes the arch.

Greek metre is based, not upon stress-accent,[858]but upon quantity—the length of time needed for the pronunciation of a syllable. In English the line

My bosom’s lord sits lightly in his throne

is “scanned” (that is to say, marked off into “feet”—the metrical units) as a series of five iambi; the iambus being a foot which consists of an unaccented, followed by an accented, syllable. The word “bosoms” can stand where it does because the stress of the voice naturally falls upon the first syllable of “bosom”; to begin a line with “my seréne bosom” would clearly be wrong. Thelengthof the syllables has no effect on the scansion. That “sits” needs as long a time for itsutterance as the first syllable of “lightly” does not alter the fact that “sits light-” is an accentual iambus.

Greek words, on the other hand, as metrical material, are considered only from the quantitative point of view, not the accentual. The voice-stress in the word λόγους rests upon the first syllable, but the word is an iambus, a “short” followed by a “long” (marked respectively thus ⏑–). Whereas an English blank verse consists of five accentual iambi,e.g.

To ént|ertaín | divíne | Zenócr|até,

the corresponding verse of all the Greek dramatists is composed of six feet each of which is theoretically a quantitative iambus, and most of which actually are such. ThusAndromache, v. 241 is to be scanned

When is a syllable long and when short? A few rules will settle all but a minority.Allsyllables are long—

(i) Which contain a necessarily long vowel (η or ω),e.g.μη̄ν, τω̄ν.

(ii) Which contain a diphthong oriotasubscript,e.g.ο̅ι̅νος, α̅ι̅νο̅υ̅μεν, ρᾳ̅διως; save that the first syllable of ποιῶ and τοιοῦτος (and their parts) is often short.

(iii) Which end with a double consonant (ζ, ξ, ψ),e.g.ο̄ζος, ε̄ξω, ε̄ψαυσα.

(iv) Which have the circumflex accent,e.g.υμῖ̅ν, μῦ̅ς.

Mostsyllables are long the vowel of which is followed by two consonants. But there is some difficulty about this very frequent case. It can arise in three ways:—

(a) Both consonants may be in the same word as the vowel. Then the syllable is long, save when the consonants are (i) a voiced stop (β, γ, δ) followed by ρ; or (ii) a voiceless stop or spirant (κ, π, τ; θ, φ, χ) followed by a liquid or nasal (λ, ρ, μ, ν)—in both of which cases the syllable can be counted long or short at pleasure. Thus ε̄σμεν, μο̄ρφη, ᾱνδρος; but the firstsyllables of ιδρις, τεκνον, ποτμος are “doubtful”—they can be either long or short as suits the poet.

(b) One of the consonants may end its word and the other begin the next. Such syllables arealllong. Thus, τηκτο̄ς μολυβδος, ανδρε̄ς σοφοι, although both these long syllables are “short by nature” (see below).

(c) Both consonants may occur at the beginning of the second word. If the vowel is naturally short, the syllable is almost always short, though such scansions as σε̄ κτενω are occasionally found. But if the second word begins with a double consonant or σ followed by another consonant, the syllable is always long. Thus ο̄ ξενος, τῑ ζητεις, ταυτᾱ σκοπουμεν.

A vowel, naturally short, when thus lengthened is said to be “lengthened by position.”

The following types of syllable arealwaysshort:—

(i) Those containing a naturally short vowel (ε or ο) not lengthened by position,e.g.ε̆κων, ο̆λος.

(ii) Final α of the third declension neuter singular (σωμᾰ), third declension accusative singular (ελπιδᾰ, δρασαντᾰ), and all neuters plural (τᾰ, σωματᾰ, τοιαυτᾰ).

(iii) Final ι (e.g.εστῐ, τῐ), save, of course, when it is part of a diphthong.

(iv) The accusative -ας of the third declension (ανδρᾰς, πονουντᾰς). But μουσᾱς (first declension). The quantity in both cases is that of the corresponding nominative.

Hiatus is practically unknown. That is, a word ending in a vowel is not to be followed by a word beginning with a vowel, unless one vowel or the other disappears. Almost always it is the first vowel which is thus cut off, the process being called “elision.” In verse one would not write πάντα εἶπε, but πάντ’ εἶπε; not ἔτι εἶναι, but ἔτ’ εἶναι. When the first vowel is long and the second short, the latter is cut off by “prodelision,” a much rarer occurrence. Thus τούτῳ ἀνεῖπε would become τούτῳ ’νεῖπε. Two long vowels, as in καλὴ ἡμέρα, are not used together at all. But the rule as tohiatus does not normally apply at the end of a verse; usually one can end a verse with an unelided vowel and begin the next with a vowel. If in any metrical scheme this liberty is not allowed, it is said that “synapheia[859]prevails.”

We are now in a position to discuss the various metres to be found in Greek Tragedy.

Practically all the dialogue and speeches are written in this metre. The student would do well to grow thoroughly accustomed to reading these aloud with correct quantities before he attempts the others.

The iambic line consists of six feet, any one of which may be an iambus. But a “pure” iambic line, one in which every foot is an iambus, as inAndromache, v. 241 (see above), is very rare. A speech written solely in such feet would be highly monotonous and far too rapid. Other feet are therefore allowed, under restrictions, to take the place of the iambus.

By far the commonest of these is the spondee, which consists of two long syllables (λο̄γχη̄, πᾱντω̄ν). This can occur in the first, third, or fifth places—one, two, or all three. Thus:—

Next, the lightness and variety is often greatly increased by the use of “resolved”[860](or broken-up) feet. Each long syllable being regarded as equal to two “shorts,” it follows that the iambus can be “resolved” into ⏑⏑⏑, the spondee into –⏑⏑, ⏑⏑– (and ⏑⏑⏑⏑, but this last is not employed in iambics).

Of these three the tribrach (⏑⏑⏑) is much the most frequent. As it corresponds to the iambus, it can occur in any place, save the sixth; it is exceedingly rare in the fifth place:—

The dactyl (–⏑⏑) is allowed in those places to which the spondee is admitted, save the fifth (just as the tribrach is excluded from the sixth). Thus:—

It is rare in the first foot.

Least common of all is the anapæst (⏑⏑–), which appears only in the first foot, unless it is contained entirely in a proper name, when it can occur in any place save the sixth. This license is due to necessity: such a name as Ἀντῐγόνη could not otherwise be introduced into iambics at all. Examples:—

Occasionally a line is to be found with two or even three resolved feet:—

Two licenses should be noted. The last syllable of the line may be short; no doubt the pause[861]at the endwas felt to help it out. Lines of this kind are innumerable,e.g.:—

⏑⏑Κρατος Βια τε σφῳν μεν εντολη | Διος (Prom. Vinctus, 12)

(which is followed by a vowel—ἔχει). It matters little whether such syllables are marked as short, as long, or with the sign of doubtful quantity ( ᷋). Next, synizesis (συνίζησις, “collapse”) occurs now and then—two syllables coalesce and are scanned as one,e.g.μ̅η̅ ̅ο̅υ̅, πολε̅ω̅ς:—

(Synizesis is specially common in the various cases of θεός and θεά.)

Finally, two important rules of rhythm remain to be stated.

First, there must be a “cæsura”[862]in either the third or the fourth foot. A cæsura is a gap between words in the middle of a foot. Either the third foot, then, or the fourth must consist partly of one word, partly of another. It is indicated in scansion by the sign ‖. Many verses have this necessary cæsura in the third foot only,e.g.:—

Many show it in the fourth only:—

A still larger number have cæsura in both places:—

This usage is essential to rhythm. It is of course possible for every foot in the line to exhibit a cæsura, butone in the midst is necessary to prevent the line from falling into pieces. That coextension of word and foot which is naturally frequent must at one point be emphatically excluded, so that the whole line may be felt as a single rhythmical whole. Such “lines” as

– – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – – – ⏑ ⏑ταυτην αναξ λεγει καλην ειναι πολιν,

⏑ – ⏑– – – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑Οδυσσεως δουλοι μαχουμενοι ταχα,

are utterly impossible.[863]The first falls into six scraps, and the second into two mere lumps, of equal length. If a breach of the rule ever occurs, it is for a special reason. When Sophocles (Œd. Tyr., 738) writes

ὦ Ζεῦ, τί μου δρᾶσαι βεβούλευσαι πέρι;

the dragging rhythm well represents the dawning dread of Œdipus. But the main cæsura may be dispensed with if the third foot ends with an elision, apparently because, if the word could be written in full, the fourth foot would be divided between two words. Thus:—

χαῖρ’· οὐ γὰρ ἐχθαίρω σ’· ἀπώλεσας δ’ ἐμέ (Alcestis, 179).

ζητοῦσι τὸν τεκόντ’· ἐγὼ δὲ διαφέρω (Heracles, 76).

The other rule is that generally called “the rule of the Final Cretic”.[864]It is most simply stated thus: if there is a cæsura in the fifth foot, that foot must be an iambus,e.g.:—

⏑ – ⏑ –μη με̄ στυγησῃς· ουχ εκων | γαρ ‖ αγγ|ελω (Troades, 710).

⏑ – ⏑ –τον τουδε νεκρον ουκ αθαπτ|ον ‖ αν | λιποις (Ibid., 738).

This rule does not exclude from the first half of the foot longmonosyllableswhich are in meaning and syntax closely connected with the “cretic” word or words. Thus τῶν σωμάτων is a quite correct ending, but not τούτων σωμάτων.

Subjoined is a scheme of the iambic verse as written by the tragedians. The writers of comedy allowed themselves licenses with which we are not here concerned. Euripides is much fonder of resolved feet than Æschylus or Sophocles.

1 2 3 4 5 6⏑– ⏑– ⏑‖– ⏑‖– ⏑– ⏑–⏑⏑⏑ ⏑⏑⏑ ⏑‖⏑⏑ ⏑‖⏑⏑ ⏑⏑⏑ ⏑⏑– – [⏑⏑–] –‖– [⏑⏑–] – ––⏑⏑ –‖⏑⏑ [⏑⏑–]⏑⏑– [⏑⏑–]

Under this head we shall deal only with trochees as used in dialogue. Originally all dialogue was written in this metre,[865]and they sometimes appear in extant plays when the situation is too hurried or excited for iambics though not agitated enough for lyrical dialogue. These passages are not usually long, and it is interesting to note that the longest are found in the two most melodramatic plays,OrestesandIphigenia at Aulis.[866]The metre is always the trochaic tetrameter catalectic[867](sometimes called the trochaicoctonarius), that is, a line consisting of eight feet, mostly trochees, with “catalexis”. Catalexis occurs when the last foot of a line has not its full number of syllables, the remainder being filled by a pause in delivery.

Pure trochaic verses are occasionally to be found:—

The mark ꞈ means that there is a pause equivalent in length to a short syllable. It is often found in the scansion of lyrics, and there one also at times uses -̭ ⏗̭ ⏘̭, which mean pauses equivalent to two, three, and four short syllables respectively. As in iambics, the last syllable may be short by nature:—

This metre is plainly analogous to Tennyson’s

Dreary gleams about the moorland flying over Locksley Hall.

But such purely trochaic lines are rare. Other feet are usually admitted, especially the spondee:—

Spondees may occur only in the second, fourth, or sixth foot.

The tribrach also is often employed by Euripides:—

The fifth foot is the favourite place for the tribrach, and next to that the first:—

Euripides, late in his career, introduced a good deal of license, here as elsewhere. Firstly, tribrachs become far more frequent and occur in unusual places:—

To place a resolved foot practically at the end of the line is bold—the metre is shaken almost to pieces. Here, as in other respects, Euripides points forward to the conversational manner of the New Comedy. But he goes further, and allows feet hitherto not found in trochaics: the anapæst and the dactyl. The latter, however, is extremely rare[868]and employed only with proper names:—

The anapæst is commoner (there is a proper-name instance in the line just quoted):—

There is no rule as to cæsura. The end of the fourth foot regularly coincides with the end of a word; such an arrangement is named diæresis.[869]In all extant tragedy only one certain exception to this rule is found:—

Since diæresis is practically always found in so many hundreds of lines, being preserved even in the loosest writing of Euripides, why should we regard the recognized trochaic verse as an unity? Why not write,e.g.:—

οὐ γὰρ ἂν ξυμβαῖμεν ἄλλωςἢ ’πὶ τοῖς εἰρημένοις,ὥστ’ ἐμὲ σκήπτρων κρατοῦντατῆσδ’ ἄνακτ’ εἶναι χθονός (Phœnissæ, 590sq.).

οὐ γὰρ ἂν ξυμβαῖμεν ἄλλως

ἢ ’πὶ τοῖς εἰρημένοις,

ὥστ’ ἐμὲ σκήπτρων κρατοῦντα

τῆσδ’ ἄνακτ’ εἶναι χθονός (Phœnissæ, 590sq.).

If the line falls into two clearly marked halves, why not show this to the eye? There is no unanswerable objection to doing so—the passage above corresponds exactly in rhythmical form to much English verse,e.g.:—

Art is long, and Time is fleeting,And our hearts, though stout and brave,Still, like muffled drums, are beatingFuneral marches to the grave.

Art is long, and Time is fleeting,

And our hearts, though stout and brave,

Still, like muffled drums, are beating

Funeral marches to the grave.

The practice in English is to break up the long trochaic “line” into two when the words at the diæresis rhyme (as in the above passage from Longfellow), but not to do so when the only rhymes occur at the catalectic foot. We print the opening of another poem by Longfellow thus:—

In the market-place of Bruges stands the belfry old and brown;Thrice consumed and thrice rebuilded, still it watches o’er the town.

In the market-place of Bruges stands the belfry old and brown;

Thrice consumed and thrice rebuilded, still it watches o’er the town.

In Greek there is, of course, no rhyme-scheme to settle this, but the regular catalexis is felt to mark off separate units. The entire question depends upon personal fancy,[870]though the instance from thePhiloctetesshows that Sophocles at any rate regarded the whole octonarius as the unit.

Subjoined is the scheme:—

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8–⏑ –⏑ –⏑ –⏑ –⏑ –⏑ –⏑ –ꞈ⏑⏑⏑ – – ⏑⏑⏑ – – ⏑⏑⏑ – – ⏑⏑⏑⏑⏑⏑ [–⏑⏑] ⏑⏑⏑ ⏑⏑⏑⏑⏑– ⏑⏑– ⏑⏑–[–⏑⏑]

Whereas iambics and trochaics were declaimed by the actors, anapæsts were used mostly by the chorus, and were chanted in recitative. They are found when the chorus move into the orchestra, or salute the entrance of a new character. Most tragedies end with a brief anapæstic system, executed by the singers as they depart.

The most usual line is a tetrapody—that is, a verse of four feet:—

⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ –τι συ προς | μελαθροις | τι συ τῃδ|ε πολεις; (Alcestis, 29).

But lines consisting of anapæsts alone are very uncommon. The spondee is often found:—

– – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – – –ουκ ηρκ|εσε σοι | μορον Αδμ|ητου (Alcestis, 32).

Dactyls also are frequent:—

– – ⏑ ⏑ – – ⏑ ⏑ – –σφηλαντ|ι τεχνῃ | νυν δ επι | τῃδ αυ (Ibid., 34).

No other foot is admitted, but each of these three may occur at any place in the line.

Besides the tetrapody, we find now and then a dipody, or verse of two feet.

Anapæstic systems are invariably closed by a catalectic verse:—

– – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑– –αυτη | προθανειν | Πελιου | παιςꞈ̄ (Ibid., 37).

In systems of considerable length such lines occur at intervals. They are called “parœmiacs”.[871]

The metres of Greek songs form a difficult and complicated study. So long as we do not know the music composed for them, the scansion of lyrics must remain a more difficult and doubtful question than that of the iambics, episodic trochaics, and anapæsts.

The best preparation for their study is the habit of reading iambics and trochaics with correct quantities and natural emphasis. Let us, so prepared, address ourselves to the following passage[872]from theAgamemnon(975sqq.):—

Τίπτε μοι τόδ’ ἔμπεδονδεῖμα προστατήριονκαρδίας τερασκόπου ποτᾶται;μαντιπολεῖ δ’ ἀκέλευστος ἄμισθος ἀοιδά,οὐδ’ ἀποπτύσαι δίκανδυσκρίτων ὀνειράτωνθάρσος εὐπειθὲς ἵζει φρενὸς φίλον θρόνον;χρόνος δέ τοι πρυμνησίων ξυνεμβολαῖςψαμμίας ἐξ ἀκτᾶς βέβηκεν, εὖθ’ ὑπ’ Ἴλιονὦρτο ναυβάτας στρατός.

Τίπτε μοι τόδ’ ἔμπεδον

δεῖμα προστατήριον

καρδίας τερασκόπου ποτᾶται;

μαντιπολεῖ δ’ ἀκέλευστος ἄμισθος ἀοιδά,

οὐδ’ ἀποπτύσαι δίκαν

δυσκρίτων ὀνειράτων

θάρσος εὐπειθὲς ἵζει φρενὸς φίλον θρόνον;

χρόνος δέ τοι πρυμνησίων ξυνεμβολαῖς

ψαμμίας ἐξ ἀκτᾶς βέβηκεν, εὖθ’ ὑπ’ Ἴλιον

ὦρτο ναυβάτας στρατός.

It soon becomes plain that the passage is, at any rate in the main, trochaic. The first two lines scan easily, ending with a catalectic foot. We note that the third seems to drag at the end:—

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – –καρδι|ας τερ|ασκοπ|ου ποτ|αται,

for we remember that in the trochaic octonarius the last complete foot is never a spondee. But in the fourth line we are quite baffled:—

– ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ –μαντιπ|ολει δ | ακελευστ|ος...?

Anapæsts are very rare in trochaics, iambi unknown. That the iambus should never replace the trochee is quite natural. It would be hideous rhythm, in the first line ofLocksley Hall, instead of “Cómrades, leave me here a little ...,” to write “Dragoóns, leave me ...”. The foot ο̆λεῑ cannot be right. The line seems hopeless; or rather, if we have any knowledge of Homeric and Virgilian metre, we recognize something like the dactylic hexameter:—

– ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – –μαντιπολ|ει δ ακελ|ευστος αμ|ισθος α|οιδα.

But is such a passage possible in a trochaic passage written for Greek music? It is known that in Greek music the notes corresponded closely to the syllables; music composed for trochees will certainly be in three-eighths time, for dactyls in four-eighths time. All these feet should have three beats, not four.

The next two lines are plainly similar to the first and second. In the seventh line we first wonder why, though we are in the midst of a grammatical sentence, the words should begin farther to the right than is usual, as if for a new paragraph. When we try to scan, we find once more the iambus-difficulty:—

– ⏑ – – ⏑ –θαρσος | ευπειθ|ες ιζ....

If we work backwards from the end, -ος φιλον θρονον gives the familiar trochaic-octonarius ending, –⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ.But the middle of the line has fallen to pieces, and for the present we leave it.

The eighth line seems at first more familiar. Is it not the ordinary iambic senarius of § II? But where is the cæsura? And can we suddenly insert an iambic line into a trochaic system? Is it then possible after all to scan it as some kind of trochaics? Begin at the end. ... ε̅μ̅βο̆λα̅ι̅ςꞈ suits excellently; and if we work backwards we soon find that the whole would fall readily into trochaics if only we could ignore the first syllable:—

But why should we ignore it? And why does the line begin farther to the left?

The ninth line again offers perplexity in the first half, clearness in the second:—

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ᷋ηκεν | ευθ υπ | Ιλι|ονꞈ.

Grown by this time bolder, we attack the first half in detail, working backwards. ᾱς βε̆ is easy. Then ἐξ ακτ ... may be either –⏑ or – –, both of which are admissible. We are left with ψ̅α̅μμῐᾱς. Reading the whole line over slowly, marking the trochees carefully, we find ourselves somehow dwelling on the last syllable of ψαμμίας. Why should we? If that syllable were only –⏑, all would be well; but it is not. Finally, the tenth and last line is quite easy:—

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑–ωρτο | ναυβατ|ας στρατ|οςꞈ.

The whole passage then is trochaic; but we have met four difficulties: (i) the necessity to dwell upon certain syllables, (ii) the irrational presence of dactyls, (iii) the temptation to ignore the first syllable of χρόνος, (iv) the insetting of θάρσος. Understanding of these four facts will carry us a long way. We take them in order.

Our first point indicates that we must revise that division of all syllables into “longs” of equal value and “shorts” of equal value (each “long” being exactly equivalent to two “shorts”) which obtains in iambics.The lyric metres recognize syllables of greater length than ⏑⏑. Most frequent is the length ⏗, equal to ⏑⏑⏑. A syllable of this length is therefore admitted in lyric trochaic systems as a whole foot, and investigations, such as we have practised above, will generally show where such a foot is to be postulated. We can now scan certain portions which we found troublesome:—

– ⏑ ⏗ – ⏑ ⏗θαρσος | ευπ | ειθες | ιζ | ...

– ⏑ ⏗ – ⏑ –ψαμμι|ας | εξ ακτ | ας....

Moreover, as we were suspicious of the final spondee (replacing the expected trochee) in the third line, we obtain at any rate a quasi-trochee by scanning thus:—

This prolongation of a syllable is called τονή (“stretching”). Such a syllable may fill a foot, as in trochaics, and this rhythm is said to be syncopated.[873]

Next comes the dactylic fourth line, which introduces another vital rule. Trochaic systems admit, not genuine dactyls, but “cyclic” dactyls. To the “long” of each foot and to the first “short” is given less than their usual length: the rhythm is accelerated, so that –⏑ is equivalent to –, and the whole cyclic dactyl, marked ᷋⏑, is equivalent to a trochee.[874]Whenever we see a number of apparent dactyls, we must examine the whole passage to find whether it is trochaic or not. Trochaic systems which contain cyclic dactyls are called “logaoedic”.[875]The present line, then, being trochaic, we feel the samedoubt of the final spondee (which would equal ⏑⏑⏑⏑, not ⏑⏑⏑, as it should) which we felt in the third line, and scan the whole:—

Our third question touched the first syllable of χρόνος in the sixth line. It is, as a fact, to be regarded as standing outside the metrical line—a kind of prelude, called “anacrusis”.[876]It is plain that neglect of anacrusis will often throw our scansion out completely. A useful rule can be given: in almost[877]any line, whatever comes before the first long syllable forms an anacrusis. The reason is that the first syllable of a foot must have an “ictus” (see below) or stress-accent, and the foot-ictus normally falls on long syllables. It becomes natural then to pronounce the first short or shorts (if any) quickly, and to give the first long the ictus; in this way the short is felt as a mere preliminary to the line. The anacrusis, however, can be of three forms, ⏑, ⏑⏑, –. Its length must be that of the second part of the characteristic foot, ⏑ for trochees, – or ⏑⏑ for dactyls, and so forth. It is marked off from the first foot by the sign ⁝.

The fourth point was the insetting of θάρσος. It happens in the middle of a grammatical sentence, so that there can be no question of an ordinary paragraph. But if it does not point to a break in sense, its only reference can be rhythmical. The whole passage must fall into two distinct rhythmical paragraphs. Let us scan them separately and endeavour to find a reason for this break. Take the first, scanning, marking, and numbering the feet:—

Back to Index Next