§ 65.Quintilian now proceeds to deal with the Comic and Tragic Drama. In theπερὶ μιμήσεωςof Dionysius there is nothing about the Old Comedy, and very little that corresponds with Quintilian in the sections on Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides. Both however pass from Euripides to Menander.The Old Comedy (§§65-66) was closely connected with the political life of the day, as may be seen from its plots, and especially from theparabases. When the licence of ridicule was curbed (by the lawsμὴ κωμῳδεῖνandμὴ κωμῳδεῖν ὀνομαστί), it passed into what is known as Middle Comedy (B.C.404-338), in which literary and speculative pursuits take the place of politics; its atmosphere is not that of the agora, but of the literary academies and schools of philosophy. In the New Comedy (§§69-72) the Chorus, which has been becoming less and less important, is altogether abandoned, along with other features which the Middle Comedy had in common with the Old. Its strength lies in its delineation of social life and manners, and the materials on which it relied were handed on to Rome, whence, through Plautus and Terence, they were transmitted to Modern Comedy.Quintilian takes no notice of what is termed Middle Comedy. Between the Old and the New, Tragedy is made to find a place (§§66-67), the plays of Euripides affording a transition to those of Menander.antiqua comoedia: cp. veteris comoediae§§9and 82. See Hor. Sat. i. 4, 2: 10, 17.sinceram ... gratiam:§44sana et vere Attica:§100illam solis concessam Atticis venerem:§107illa quae Attici mirantur. The same phrase occurs xii. 10, 35. Of Roman Comedy he says (i. 8, 8) in comoediis elegantia et quidam velutἀττικισμόςinveniri potest.libertatis=παρρησίας§§94,104. Hor. Sat. i. 4, 5 multa cum libertate notabant: A. P. 281-284 successit vetus his comoedia, non sine multa Laude; sed in vitium libertas excidit et vim Dignam lege regi; lex est accepta chorusque Turpiter obticuit sublato iure nocendi. Isocr. de Pace 14ἐγὼ δ᾽ οἶδα μὲν ὅτι ... δημοκρατίας οὔσης οὐκ ἔστι παρρησία πλὴν ... ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ τοῖς κωμῳδιδασκάλοις. Marc. Aurel. xi. 6:)ἡ ἀρχαία κωμῳδία ... παιδαγωγικὴν παρρησίαν ἔχουσα.—For the reading see Crit. Notes.grandis=ὑψηλός,§77:2 §16(where it is opposed totumidus). Hor. A. P. 93-4 Interdum tamen et vocem comoedia tollit. Iratusque Chremes tumido delitigat ore.elegans:§§78,87,93,99:2 §19, ‘choice,’ ‘tasteful.’ Cp. Cic. Brut. §272 verborum delectus elegans. In the treatise ad Herenn. (iv. 12)elegantiastands along withcompositioanddignitasas a requisite of style: it includesLatinitas(which avoids solecisms and barbarisms), andexplanatio, which usesverba usitataandpropria.venusta: vi. 3, 18 venustum esse quod cum venere quadam et gratia dicatur apparet. Krüger sees in these adjj. a reference to the main characteristics of the three different styles distinguished by rhetoricians,§44.nescio an ulla: seeCrit. Notes.ut Achillen: Il. ii. 673-4Νιρεύς, ὃς κάλλιστος ἀνὴρ ὑπὸ Ἴλιον ἦλθε Τῶν ἄλλων Δαναῶν μετ᾽ ἀμύμονα Πηλεΐωνα: ib. 768. Alcaeus fr. 63Κρονίδα βασιλήας γένος Αἴαν, τὸν ἄριστον πεδ᾽ Ἀχιλλέα.similior oratoribus:§63plerumque oratori similis. The same description of the style of the Old Comedy is given by one of the rhetoricians, Walz Rhet. Gr. v. 471 (cp. vi. 164, vii. 932)λόγοειδεστέρα‧τοῦτ᾽ἔστιν ἡ κωμικωτέρα καὶ προσβεβληκυῖα λόγῳ πεζῷ κατὰ συνθήκην, ὅθεν τινὲς καὶ ῥητορικὴν ἔμμετρον τὴν κωμῳδίαν ἐκόλεσαν.Students of oratory went to the comic actors forpronuntiatioandgestus: i. 11, 1-14: 12, 14: xi. 3, 181.I:66Plures eius auctores,Aristophanestamen etEupolisCratinusque praecipui. Tragoedias primus in lucemAeschylusprotulit, sublimis et gravis et grandiloquussaepe usque ad vitium, sed rudis in plerisque et incompositus; propter quod correctas eius fabulas in certamen deferre posterioribus poetis Athenienses permiserunt, suntque eo modo multi coronati.§ 66.Aristophanes ... Eupolis ... Cratinus. The same representatives of Old Comedy are named in Hor. Sat. i. 4, 1: cp. Persius i. 123 Audaci quicumque adflate Cratino Iratum Eupolidem praegrandi cum sene palles. So also Dionysius, Art. Rhet. viii. 11, p. 302 R (there is nothing about Old Comedy in theἀρχ. κρ.):ἡ δὲ κωμῳδία ὅτι πολιτεύεται ἐν τοῖς δράμασι καὶ φιλοσοφεῖ, ἡ τῶν περὶ τὸν Κρατῖνον καὶ Ἀριστοφάνην καὶ Εὔπολιν, τί δεῖ καὶ λέγειν; Velleius i. 16, 3: Diomed. p. 489 K (p. 9 Reiff.) ‘Ar. Eup. et Crat. qui vel principum vitia sectati acerbissimas comoedias composuerunt.’ The chronological order would be, Cratinus (519-422), Aristophanes (448-380), Eupolis (446-410). In 424B.C.Cratinus with hisΠυτίνη(‘Wine-flask’) gained the victory over theCloudsof Aristophanes, while in the previous year Eupolis is said to have helped his greater rival in the composition of theKnights. Cratinus was the real originator of political comedy: see the grammarian quoted by Meineke (i. p. 540): ‘he added a serious moral object to the mere amusement in comedy, by reviling evil-doers (τοὺς κακῶς πράττοντας διαβάλλων, cp. insectandis vitiis) and chastising them with his comedy, as it were with a public scourge’: cp. Platon. de Com. p. 27οὐ γὰρ ὥσπερ ὁ Ἀριστοφάνης ἐπιτρέχειν τὴν χάριν τοῖς σκώμμασι ποιεῖ ... ἀλλ᾽ ἁπλῶς καὶ κατὰ τὴν παροιμίαν γυμνῇ κεφαλῇ τίθησι τὰς βλασφημίας κατὰ τῶν ἁμαρτανόντων.primus. Just as in treating of Comedy Quintilian passes over the Megarian farces of Susarion, and such earlier writers as Chionides and Magnes, so now he omits all mention of Pratinas, Choerilus, Thespis and Phrynichus. Thespis introduced the actor (ὑποκριτής) and arranged that the dithyrambic choruses should be interrupted by regular dialogue between the coryphaeus and the actor. This step secured the entrance of the dramatic element, as distinct from the lyric, and made subsequent development easy. Aeschylus is however the real founder of tragedy: he introduced a second actor and subordinated the choral song to the dialogue, besides elaborating the machinery of the stage and the scenic decoration employed thereon. Cp. Hor. A. P. 275 sqq.sublimis, &c. Cp. Dionysius, l.c., (Usener, p. 21)Ὁ δ᾽ οὖν Αἰσχυλος πρῶτος ὑψηλός τε καὶ τῆς μεγαλοπρεπείας ἐχόμενος, καὶ ἠθῶν καὶ παθῶν τὸ πρέπον εἰδώς, καὶ τῇ τροπικῇ καὶ τῇ κυρίᾳ λέξει διαφερόντως // κεκοσμημενος, πολλαχοῦ δὲ καὶ αὐτος δημιουργὸς καὶ ποιητὴς ἰδίων ὀνομάτων καὶ πραγμάτων.grandiloquus. Cp. Aristoph. Frogs 823βρυχώμενος ἥσει ῥήματα γομφοπαγῆ, 939τὴν τέχνην ... οἰδοῦσαν ὑπὸ κομπασμάτων καὶ ῥημάτων ἐπαχθων, 1004,ἀλλ᾽ ὦ πρῶτος τῶν Ἑλλήνων πυργώσας ῥήματα σεμνὰ καὶ κοσμήσας τραγικὸν λῆρον κ.τ.λ.So too the biographer of Aeschylus,κατὰ δὲ τὴν σύνθεσιν τῆς ποιήσεως ζηλοῖ τὸ ἁδρὸν(see on§44)ἀεὶ πλάσμα ... πᾶσι τοῖς δυναμένοις ὄγκον τῇ φράσει περιθεῖναι χρώμενος.Hor. A. P. 280 ‘et docuit magnumque loqui nitique cothurno.’rudis et incompositus, ‘uncouth and inharmonious.’ Cp. horride atque incomposite2 §17: and note oncompositus§44. In the de Comp. Verb. c. 22 Dionysius names Aeschylus along with Antimachus as a representative ofἡ αὐστηρὰ ἁρμονία(p. 150 R). Forrudiscp. Hor. Sat. i. 10, 66 rudis et Graecis intacti carminis auctor: forincompositussee Introd.p. xlv. The author of the treatise ‘On the Sublime’ qualifies his eulogy of Aeschylus by adding in the same way that his plays were frequently unpolished, ill digested, and rough in style.in plerisque; neut. ‘in general,’ ‘for the most part.’ See Intod. p. xlvii.propter quod= quam ob rem:7 §6:5 §23. See on§10.correctas ... permiserunt. This passage has been the subject of much controversy. It seems inconsistent with our knowledge of the statute passed by the orator Lycurgus (396) enacting that official copies of the plays of the three great tragedians should be made, and that no new performance of them should be allowed without a comparison of the acting copy with the State MS. Perhaps Quintilian misunderstood the phraseδράματα διεσκευασμένα, commonly applied to plays revised by the author himself with a view to a second representation. Madvig however (Kl. philol. Schr. 1875, pp. 464-5) thinks it quite probable that revised versions of plays of Aeschylus were allowed to be brought into competition by later poets (say in the latter half of the 4th century), when Aeschylus came in for criticism on the score of the defects alluded to above (rudis et incompositus), but when, on the other hand, creative genius was not so abundant. Krüger quotes Rohde (‘Scenica,’ Rhein. Mus. 1883, vol. 38, p. 289 sqq.), who sees in the words of the scholiast on Arist. Ach. 10 (μόνου αὐτοῦ τὰ δράματα ψηφίσματι κοινῷ καὶ μετὰ θάνατον ἐδιδάσκετο) a compliment paid to Aeschylus alone, and consisting not merely in the appreciative revival of his plays after his death, but in the fact that they were reproduced not asπαλαιαίbut as new dramas, were provided afresh with choruses by the archon, and were admitted to competition at the great Dionysia (where only new tragedies were represented) if any one appeared, who in the name of the dead poet asked to be provided with a chorus. Cp.οὐκ ὀλίγας μετὰ τελευτὴν νίκας ἀπηνέγκατο, vit. Acschyl. 68, Dindorf5.I:67Sed longe clarius inlustraverunt hoc opusSophoclesatqueEuripides, quorum in dispari dicendi via uter sit poeta melior inter plurimos quaeritur. Idque ego sane, quoniam ad praesentem materiam nihil pertinet, iniudicatumrelinquo. Illud quidem nemo non fateatur necesse est, iis qui se ad agendum comparant utiliorem longe fore Euripiden.§ 67.longe, with the comp. vi. 4, 21: 3 §13. Cp. Verg. Aen. ix. 556: Vell. ii. 74, 1. In Cicerolongeis used only with the superl. (and withalius: pro Caec. i. §3) with the compar. he generally hasmulto. Quintilian has alsolonge princeps§61: andmultowith superl., e.g. i. 2, 24.opus: sc. tragoedias in lucem proferendi. See on§9.in dispari dicendi via. By Dionysius Euripides is made the only representative of the ‘smooth’ style of composition (γλαφυρὰ ἁρμονία, de Comp. Verb. c. 23), while Sophocles represents the middle style (κοινήorμέση ἁρμονία, ib. c. 24). This must of course be kept distinct from the threeλέξεις, or styles ofdiction, which he enumerates in his essay on Demosthenes, c. 1-3.quaeritur. Modern criticism has takenup the issue, and Euripides has suffered from being identified with what was practically a dramatic revolution. Schlegel depreciated him as contrasting with Sophocles in many points. Mr. Jebb’s utterance will stand: ‘no one is capable of feeling that Sophocles is supreme who does not feel that Euripides is admirable’ (Att. Or. i. p. xcix).utiliorem: somagis accedit oratorio generiimmediately below: Dionysius l.c. xi. (Usener, p. 22)κεκραμένη μεσότητι τῆς λέξεως κέχρηται.I:68Namque is et sermone (quod ipsum reprehendunt quibus gravitas et cothurnus et sonus Sophocli videtur esse sublimior) magis accedit oratorio generi, et sententiis densus et in iis quae a sapientibus tradita sunt paene ipsis par, et dicendo ac respondendo cuilibet eorum qui fuerunt in foro diserti comparandus; in adfectibus vero cum omnibus mirus, tum in iis qui in miseratione constant facile praecipuus.§ 68.quod ipsum reprehendunt: seeCrit. Notes.gravitas ... sublimior. The use of the comparative takes away from the difficulty which commentators have found in the conjunction ofsublimioras a predicate withgravitasandcothurnusas well as withsonus.—Forcothurnus, cp. Iuv. vi. 634 Fingimus haec, altum Satira sumente cothurnum Scilicet et finem egressi legemque priorum Grande Sophocleo carmen bacchamur hiatu.sententiis densus: cp.sent. creber§102: and fordensus(= pressus)§§73,76. Euripides had been a pupil of Anaxagoras. Something might be said in support of Halm’s suggestion to insertestafterdensus.sapientibus. In Euripides philosophy is brought on the stage, and different theories are put forward in his plays as to such questions as the moral government of the world, the opposition between freedom and authority, the nature of punishment, the question of a future life, &c.dicendo ac respondendo. In this appears the influence of his sophistic training. Euripides knew his audience, and in his plays the characters indulge to the full all the tendencies that were fostered by the sophistic habit of debate, while the chorus is as it were the jury to which they address their arguments for and against a particular proposition. Cp. Dion. l.c.πολὺς ἐν ταῖς ῥητορικαῖς εἰσαγωγαῖς.adfectibus ... miseratione. Arist. Poet. 13τραγικώτατός γε τῶν ποιητῶν φαίνεται.facile. Sofacile princepsCic. ad Fam. vi. 10, 2:facile primuspro Rosc. Amer. §15. For the reading seeCrit. Notes.I:69Hunc admiratus maxime est, ut saepe testatur, et secutus, quamquam in opere diverso,Menander, qui vel unus meo quidem iudicio diligenter lectus ad cuncta quae praecipimus effingenda sufficiat: ita omnemvitae imaginem expressit, tanta in eo inveniendi copia et eloquendi facultas, ita est omnibus rebus, personis, adfectibus accommodatus.§ 69.testatur: not in any extant fragment, though it is by no means improbable that in some of his numerous plays Menander expressed an admiration for the most popular tragedian of the day.Menander, 342-290B.C.At his death the Athenians erected his tomb near the cenotaph of Euripides, in token of the affectionate regard in which he had held the elder poet. ‘Euripides was the forerunner of the New Comedy; the poets of this species admired him especially, and acknowledged him for their master. Nay, so great is this affinity of tone and spirit between Euripides and the poets of the New Comedy, that apothegms of Euripides have been ascribed to Menander andvice versa. On the contrary, we find among the fragments of Menander maxims of consolation which rise, in a striking manner, even into the tragic tone.’ Schlegel. See Meineke Com. Frag. iv. Epimetrum ii., Menander imitator Euripidis.omnem vitae imaginem. Menander was the ‘mirror of life’: cp. the exclamation of Aristophanes of ByzantiumὮ Μένανδρε καὶ βίε, πότερος ἄρ᾽ ὑμῶν πότερον ἐμιμήσατο;Manilius v. 470 MenanderQui vitam ostendit vitae. So Cicero in a fragment of the De Republica (or the Hortensius, Usener, p. 120): Comoedia est imitatio vitae, speculum consuetudinis, et veritatis imago.—For this use ofexprimere, a figure from the plastic art, cp. Hor. A. P. 32-3.tauta in eo, &c.Cp. with this Dionysius l.c. (Usener, p. 22)τῶν δὲ κωμῳδῶν μιμητέον τὰς λεκτικὰς ἀρετὰς ἁπάσας‧ εἰσὶ γὰρ καὶ τοῖς ὀνόμασι καθαροὶ καὶ σαφεῖς, καὶ βραχεῖς καὶ μεγαλοπρεπεῖς καὶ δεινοὶ καὶ ἠθικοί. Μενάνδρου δὲ καὶ τὸ πραγματικὸν θεωρητέον.I:70Nec nihil profecto viderunt qui orationes, quae Charisi nomini addicuntur, a Menandro scriptas putant. Sed mihi longe magis orator probari in opere suo videtur, nisi forte aut illa iudicia, qua Epitrepontes, Epicleros, Locroe habent, aut meditationes in Psophodee, Nomothete, Hypobolimaeo non omnibus oratoriis numeris sunt absolutae.§ 70.nihil viderunt: they have not ‘lacked discrimination.’ So, of political insight or foresight, Cic. pro. Leg. Manil. §64 sin autem vos plus in republica vidistis: Phil. ii. §39 cum me vidisse plus fateretur, se speravisse meliora.Charisius, an Athenian orator, a contemporary of Demosthenes, who wrote speeches for others, in which he was thought to imitate Lysias: he was in turn imitated by Hegesias, Cic. Brut. §286.addicuntur: Aul. Gell. iii. 3. 13 istaec comoediae nomini eius (Plauti) addicuntur.in opere suo: ‘I consider that he proves his oratorical ability far more in his own department’ (i.e. as a writer of comedy)—than in those speeches of Charisius, supposing that he did compose them. Foropussee on§9: cp.§67.nisi forte, ironical: see on5 §6: cp.2 §8. The formula introduces ‘a case which is in fact inadmissible, but is intended to suggest to another person that he cannot differ from our opinion, without admitting as true a thing which is improbable and absurd,’ Zumpt §526.iudicia ... meditationes: ‘judicial pleadings,’ speeches suitable to be made before a court—‘extra-judicial pleadings,’ law-school speeches,declamationes,μελέται. Cp. iv. 2, 29 cum sit declamatio forensium actionum meditatio:5 §14.—The names are those of some of Menander’s comedies: The Trusting, The Heiress, The Locri, The Timid Man, The Lawyer, The Changeling. The second and the last are known to have been imitated by Caecilius. For the reading seeCrit. Notes.numeris: here as at§91rather than as at§4, where see note. Here it only =partibusand has nothing to do with rhythmical composition. In this sense it is found almost invariably withomnis: Varro apud Aul. Gell. xiii. 11, 1 ipsum deinde convivium constat ex rebus quatuor, et tum denique omnibus suis numeris absolutum est, &c.: Cic. de N. D. ii. §37 mundum ... perfectum expletumque omnibus suis numeris et partibus: de Div. i. §23 quod omnes habet in se numeros: de Off. iii. §14: de Fin. iii. §24 omnes numeros virtutis continent: Sen. Ep. 71 §16 (veritas) habet numeros suos: plena est: 95 §5: Iuv. vi. 249: Tac. Dial. 32 per omnes eloquentiae numeros isse. So viii. pr. §1 per omnes numeros penitus cognoscere.I:71Ego tamen plus adhuc quiddam collaturum eum declamatoribus puto, quoniam his necesse est secundumcondicionem controversiarum plures subire personas, patrum filiorum, militum rusticorum, divitum pauperum, irascentium deprecantium, mitium asperorum; in quibus omnibus mire custoditur ab hoc poeta decor.§ 71.plus adhuc quiddam=πλέον τι, orἔτι καὶ πλέον.Adhucwith compar. (foretiam) is post-Augustan: cp.§99. Herequiddam(likeτι) is used to modify the force of the comparative. So adhuc melius ii. 4, 13: adhuc difficilior i. 5, 22: liberior adhuc disputatio vii. 2, 14: and Tac. Germ. 29: Suet. Nero 10: Sen. Ep. 85, 24: Spalding on i. 5, 22.declamatoribus. Students in the schools of rhetoric, and even speakers of a more mature type, practised declamation at Rome in the shape of oratorical compositions on questions which, though fictitious, were yet akin to such as were argued in the law-courts. The youthful aspirant learned in this way to speak inpublic (Cic. de Orat. i. §149: Quint. ii. 10, 4: ib. §12), while the orator had the opportunity of perfecting his articulation and delivery. To these two aims the Greek termsμελέτηandφωνασκίαcorrespond: for the first cp. de Orat. i. §251, and for the second Brut. §310. It was in the age of the decadence of Roman oratory that declamation came to be an end in itself. At first it had been merely a preparatory exercise; now, under the head ofsuasoriae(deliberativae materiae) andcontroversiae(iudiciales materiae), finished oratorical compositions were produced, graced by all the ornaments of genuine rhetoric. Cp. Tac. Dial. 35.controversiarum. Cp. iv. 2, 97 evenit aliquando in scholasticis controversiis quod in foro an possit accidere dubito: iii. 8, 51 praecipue declamatoribus considerandum est quid cuique personae conveniat, qui parcissimas controversias ita dicunt ut advocati: plerumque filii, parentes, divites, senes, asperi, lenes, avari, denique superstitiosi, timidi, derisores fiunt, ut vix comoediarum actoribus plures habitus in pronuntiando concipiendi sunt, quam his in dicendo.decor: see on§27.I:72Atque ille quidem omnibus eiusdem operis auctoribus abstulit nomen et fulgore quodam suae claritatis tenebras obduxit. Tamen habent alii quoque comici, si cum venia leguntur, quaedam quae possis decerpere, et praecipuePhilemon; qui ut prave sui temporis iudiciis Menandro saepe praelatus est, ita consensu tamen omnium meruit credi secundus.§ 72.eiusdem operis, i.e. Comedy, not the New Comedy only, as is shown byalii comicibelow. Along with Menander and Philemon, Velleius (i. 16, 3) and Diomedes (p. 489 K, p. 9 Reiff.) mention Diphilus, on whom both Plautus and Terence drew for material.nomen: see on§87.fulgore ... obduxit: ‘has put them in the shade by the brightness of his own glory.’cum venia: cp. i. 5, 11: Ov. Tr. i. 1, 46 scriptaque cum venia qualiacumque leget: ib. iv. 1, 104 cum venia facito, quisquis es, ista legas. Kiderlin rightly holds this reading to be, not only possible, but at least as appropriate tohabent quaedamas any of the conjectures (see Crit. Notes) by which it has been proposed to supplant it. Theseverecritic will perhaps not find anything in the other comic poets useful for the orator: but he who reads them with indulgence (i.e. making allowance for their poverty as compared with Menander) will find something. It is different with Menander, in whose plays even the rigorous critic will find everything that the orator needs (§69).Philemon, of Soli in Cilicia, 360-262. Fragments of fifty-six of his ninety plays are extant. HisΘησαυρόςwas used by Plautus for theTrinummus, and hisἜμποροςfor theMercator.prave, ‘adverbium pro sententia.’ Cp. iii. 7, 18 quidam sicut Menander iustiora posteriorum quam suae aetatis iudicia sunt consecuti: Aul. Gell. 17, 1 Menander a Philemone nequaquam pari scriptore in certaminibus comoediarum ... saepenumero vincebatur.—SeeCrit. Notes.meruit credi= merito creditus est (or creditur). Cp.§74. Elsewheremereomeans little more thanadipisci,consequi:§§94,116: vi. 4, 5 nec immerito quidam ... meruerunt nomina patronorum. For the nomin. with inf. cp.§97qui esse docti adfectant: Ov. Met. xiii. 314 esse reus merui.§73-75.Greek Historians:—In hisἈρχαίων κρίσις(orπερὶ μιμήσεως2) Dionysius says nothing of Ephorus, Clitarchus, or Timagenes, but draws a more elaborate parallel (Usener, p. 22) between Herodotus and Thucydides, as well as between Philistus and Xenophon: Theopompus he treats by himself. Illustrativepassages are found also in theIudicium de Thucydideand theEpistola ad Cn. Pompeium(de Praecip. Historicis). Cp. also Cicero, de Orat. ii. §55 sq., where the order is Herodotus and Thucydides, Philistus, Theopompus and Ephorus, Xenophon, Callisthenes, and Timaeus. For the last two Quint. substitutes Clitarchus and Timagenes. Cp. Introd.p. xxxiii.I:73Historiam multi scripsere praeclare, sed nemo dubitat longeduos ceteris praeferendos, quorum diversa virtus laudem paene est parem consecuta. Densus et brevis et semper instans sibiThucydides, dulcis et candidus et fususHerodotus: ille concitatis hic remissis adfectibus melior, ille contionibus hic sermonibus, ille vi hic voluptate.§ 73.scripsere. In i. 5, 42 Quint. (speaking of the formsscripsereandlegere) says ‘evitandae asperitatis gratia mollitum est ut apud veteres pro malemereris, malemerere,’ ib. §44 ‘quid? non Livius circa initia statim primi libri,tenuere, inquit,arcem Sabini? et mox,in adversum Romani subiere? sed quem potius ego quam M. Tullium sequor, qui in Oratore,non reprehendo, inquit,scripsere; scripserunt esse verius sentio.’ The passage referred to is Or. §157. The termination-erefor-eruntis ‘found in some of the earliest inscriptions, and is not uncommon in Plautus and Terence,rare in Ciceroand Caesar, but frequent in dactylic poets and Livy,’ Roby, §578. Mr. Sandys also quotes Dr. Reid: ‘There is hardly a sound example of-erein the perfect in any really good MS. of Cicero (see Neue, ii. 390 ff.); and similarly in the case of Caesar.’ Quintilian has permiserunt,§66(where the later MSS. give-ere): illustraverunt§67: viderunt§70: indulsere§84. See Bonnell, Proleg. de Gramm. Quint. p. xxvii.nemo dubitat ... praeferendos. The acc. and inf. withdubito(for the negative expression of doubt) is much the more common construction in Quint. (cp.§81,4 §2), though he also usesquinand subj. (e.g.2 §1: xii. 1, 42 ad hoc nemo dubitabit quin ... magis e republica sit). A study of the instances in Bonn. Lex. will fail to reveal any principle of difference: cp. vii. 6, 10 quis dubitaret quin ea voluntas fuisset testantis? with ix. 4, 68 quis enim dubitet unum sensum in hoc et unum spiritum esse? and i. 10, 12 atqui claros nomine sapientiae viros nemo dubitaverit studiosos musices fuisse. The acc. with inf. belongs on the whole to the usage of the Silver Age, being frequent in Livy, Nepos (e.g. his opening words ‘non dubito fore plerosque, Attice’), Tacitus, Pliny (e.g. praef. 18 nec dubitamus multa esse), Pliny the Younger, Tacitus and Suetonius. It never occurs in Caesar or Sallust, and in Cicero only in doubtful cases: these are his youthful transl. of Xenophon’s Oeconomicus, where he has (§6) quis enim dubitet nihil esse pulchrius in omni ratione vitae dispositione atque ordine? ad Att. vii. 1, 2, where the passage may be differently construed: de Fin. iii. 11, 38 nihil est enim de quo minus dubitari possit quam et honesta expetenda per se et eodem modo turpia per se esse fugienda. In the last instance the dependent clause ‘de quo ... possit’ = ‘certius’: and after ‘quam’ ‘illud’ may be supplied. On the other hand cp. forquinRep. i. 23: Brut. §71: de Sen. §31: in Verr. ii. 1, 40. In young Cicero’s letter to Tiro (ad Fam. xvi. 21, 2) we find the acc. c. inf., though below (§7) he has the usual construction.diversa virtus ... consecuta: as for example from Dionysius, Epist. ad Cn. Pomp. pp. 775-7 R (Usener, p. 57 sq.).Densus,§68. It is opposed tofusushere as in§106tocopiosus. Cp. Dionysius, p. 869 R,τό τε πειρᾶσθαι δι᾽ ἐλαχίστων ὀνομάτων πλεῖστα σημαίνειν πράγματα, καὶ πολλὰ συντιθέναι νοήματα εἰς ἕν.brevis: Dion.Ἀρχ. κρ.p. 425 R (Usener, pp. 22-3)καὶ τὸ μὲν σύντομόν ἐστι παρὰ Θουκυδίδῃ τὸ δ᾽ ἐναργὲς παρ᾽ ἀμφοτέροις. This is what Dion. callsτὸ τάχος τῆς σημασίαςp. 793 R (Us. p. 82).semper instans sibi, ‘ever pressing on.’ Thucydides does not ‘let things drift,’ but closely follows up each thought, making every word tell, and even hurrying on to a new idea before he has fully developed the previous one: Dion. l.c.καὶ ἔτι προσδεχόμενόν τι τὸν ἀκροατὴν ἀκούσεσθαι καταλιπεῖν. Cp. xi. 3, 164 instandum quibusdam in partibus et densanda oratio. Hor. Ep. i. 2, 71 nec praecedentibus insto: cp. Sat. i. 10, 9 est brevitate opus ut currat sententia neu se impediat verbis lassas onerantibus aures.—Cicero’s references to Thucydides are similar: Orat. §40 Thucydides praefractior nec satis ut ita dicam rotundus; de Orat. ii. §56 creber est rerum frequentia ... porro verbis est aptus et pressus; ibid. §93 (with Pericles and Alcibiades) subtiles, acuti, breves, sententiisque magis quam verbis abundantes; Brut. §29 grandes erant verbis, crebrisententiis, compressione rerum breves et ob eam ipsam causam interdum subobscuri.dulcis,§77, ‘pleasing,’ cp. voluptate, below. So Cic. Hortens. ‘quid enim aut Herodoto dulcius aut Thucydide gravius?’Γλυκύτηςis one of the essentials ofἡδεῖα λέξιςin Dionysius (de Comp. Verb. xi. p. 53 R). In the preceding chapter he has distinguished betweenἡ ἡδονήandτὸ καλόν, allowing the latter to Thucydides and both to Herodotus:ἡ δὲ Ἡροδότου σύνθεσις ἀμφότερα ταῦτα ἔχει‧ καὶ γὰρ ἡδεῖά ἐστι καὶ καλή.Hermogenes (ii. p. 226) makesγλυκύτηςthe characteristic of Herodotus on account of the attractiveness of his digressions.candidus:§§113,121: Cic. Orat. §53 elaborant alii in ... puro et quasi quodam candido genere dicendi. So in ii. 5, 19 Quintilian recommends young persons to read candidum quemque et maxime expositum,—Livy rather than Sallust: of Livy he says elsewhere (§101) in narrando mirae iucunditatis clarissimique candoris. The word denotes ‘clearness,’ ‘transparency’: Dion. (Ἀρχ. κρ.R, Us. p. 22)τῆς δὲ σαφηνείας ἀναμφισβητήτως Ἡροδότῳ τὸ κατόρθωμα δέδοται. Such a quality of style is the revelation of a man’s inner nature. It avoids all adventitious ornament (ibid.τῷ ἀφελεῖ αὐτοφυεῖ ἀβασανίστῳ). Unduebrevitasoften interferes with it (ἀσαφὲς γίγνεται τὸ βραχύ), so that the word gives a partial antithesis tobrevis.fusussupplies the antithesis todensusas well as tosemper instans sibi. Cp.§77: ii. 3, 5 constricta an latius fusa oratio: ix. 4, 138 fusi ac fluentes. So Cicero Orat. §39 alter sine ullis salebris quasi sedatus amnis fluit, alter incitatior fertur.concitatis ... remissis adfectibus. Dionysius, speaking ofτῶν ἠθων τε καὶ παθῶν μίμησις(ad Cn. Pomp. p. 776 R, Us. p. 58), saysδιῄρηνται τὴν ἀρετὴν ταύτην οἱ συγγράφεις‧ Θουκυδίδης μὲν γὰρ τὰ πάθη δηλῶσαι κρείττων, Ἡρόδοτος δὲ τὰ γ᾽ ἤθη παραστῆσαι δεινότερος.So (Ἀρχ. κρ.p. 425 R, Us. p. 23)ἐν μέντοι τοῖς ἠθικοῖς κρατεῖ Ἡρόδοτος, ἐν δὲ τοῖς παθητικοῖς ὁ Θουκυδίδης. Cp. p. 793 Rὑπὲρ ἅπαντα δ᾽ αὐτοῦ ταῦτα τὸ παθητικόν.For the distinction betweenτὸ ἠθικόν(the appeal to the moral sense) andτὸ παθητικόν(the appeal to the emotions) see Cic. Orat. §128: Quint. vi. 2, §§8-10 Adfectus igitur hos concitatosπάθοςillos mites atque compositosἦθοςesse dixerunt, and sq. Cp. §§48 and 101 of this book, and iii. 4, 15 concitandis componendisve adfectibus.contionibus ... sermonibus: not the same antithesis asnarrando ... contionibus§101, q.v. The opposition here is between the set harangues of Thucydides and the less formal conversations of Herodotus. In Thucydides the only dialogues are that between the Melians and the Athenians in Book V, and that between Archidamus and the Plataeans in Book II, whereas Herodotus ‘seldom speaks where there is a fair pretext for making the characters speak.... Even the longer speeches have usually the conversational tone rather than the rhetorical,’ Jebb. (Hild is wrong in referringsermonibustoτὸ πραγματικὸν εἶδοςin Dionysius andcontionibustoτὸ λεκτικόν:Ἀρχ. κρ.p. 424 R, Us. p. 22: cp. de Admir. Deor. vi. c. 51, p. 1112 R sq.). The speeches of Thucydides are criticised by Dionysius (under the head both ofτὸ πραγματικὸν μέροςandτὸ λεκτικόν) in his Iudicium, ch. 34, p. 896 R sq. Herodotus on the other hand (ibid. 23 ad fin.),οὐδὲ δημηγορίαις πολλαῖς ... οὐδ᾽ ἐναγωνίοις κέχρηται λόγοις, οὐδ᾽ ἐν τῷ παθαίνειν καὶ δεινοποιεῖν τὰ πράγματα τὴν ἀλκὴν ἔχει.Dionysius’s own opinion of the speeches in Thucydides is seen from the last chapter of his Iudicium (pp. 950-2 R) to have agreed with that of Cicero, Orator §30: ipsae illae contiones ita multas habent obscuras abditasque sententias vix ut intellegantur. (Cp. Brutus §287.) On this ground he says nihil ab eo transferri potest ad forensem usum et publicum: cp. de Opt. Gen. 15, 16. Dionysius, however (ch. 34 ad init.) indicates that some people thought differently:τῶν δημηγοριῶν ἐν αἷς οἴονταί τινες τὴν ἄκραν τοῦ συγγραφέως εἶναι δύναμιν.—For the speeches see Blass, Att. Bereds p. 231 sq.: and Jebb’s Essay inHellenica, esp. pp. 269-275.vi ... voluptate. Many passages may be quoted from Dionysius to illustrate this antithesis:Ἀχρ. κρ.p. 425 R, Usener p. 23ῥώμῃ δὲ καὶ ἰσχύι καὶ τόνῳ καὶ τῷ περιττῷ καὶ πολυσχηματίστῳ παρηυδοκίμησε Θουκυδίδης: ἡδονῇ δὲ καὶ πειθοῖ καὶ χάριτι ... μακρῷ διενεγκόντα τὸν Ἡρόδοτον εὑρίσκομεν: ad. Cn. Pomp. iii. p. 776 R (Us. p. 58)ἕπονται ταύταις αἱ τὴν ἰσχὺν καὶ τὸν τόνον καὶ τὰς ὁμοιοτρόπους δυνάμεις τῆς φράσεως ἀρεταὶ περιέχουσαι. κρείττων ἐν ταύταις Ἡροδότου Θουκυδίδης. ἡδονὴν δὲ καὶ πειθὼ καὶ τέρψιν καὶ τὰς ὁμοιογενεῖς ἀρετὰς εἰσφέρεται μακρῷ Θουκυδίδου κρείττονας Ἡρόδοτος.So Iud. de Thucyd. 23, p. 866 Rπειθοῦς τε καὶ χαρίτων καὶ τῆς εἰς ἀκρὸν ἡκούσης ἡδονῆς ἕνεκα.So in the Epist. ad Pomp. iii. p. 767 R he praises Herodotus for his choice of subject (ὑπόθεσιν ... καλὴν καὶ κεχαρισμένην τοῖς ἀναγνωσομένοιςUs. p. 50), while Thucyd. was consciousὅτι εἰς μὲν ἀκρόασιν ἧττον ἐπιτερπὴς ἡ γραφή ἐστι(de Comp. Verb. p. 165 R). It is his variety (μεταβολὴ καὶ ποικίλον) and the providing of agreeableἀναπαύσειςthat give Hdt. his charm:καὶ γὰρ τὸ βιβλίον ἢν αὐτοῦ λάβωμεν μέχρι τῆς ἐσχάτης συλλαβῆς ἀγάμεθα καὶ ἀεὶ τὸ πλεῖον ἐπιζητοῦμενp. 772 R: while Thucydides is by comparisonἀσαφὴς καὶ δυσπαρακολούθητοςp. 773 (Usener pp. 54-5).For vi cp. also Orat. §39 alter incitatior fertur, et de bellicis rebus canit etiam quodam modo bellicum: for voluptate Quint. ix. 4, 18 in Herodoto vero cum omnia, ut ego quidem sentio, leniter fluunt, tum ipsaδιάλεκτοςhabet eam iucunditatem ut latentes in se numeros complexa videatur. And again Dionysius, p. 777 R: Us. p. 59διαφέρουσι δὲ κατὰ τοῦτο μάλιστα ἀλλήλων ὅτι τὸ μὲν Ἡροδότου κάλλος ἱλαρόν ἐστι, φοβερὸν δὲ(‘impressive’)τὸ Θουκυδίδου.I:74Theopompushis proximusut in historia praedictis minor, ita oratori magis similis, ut qui, antequam est ad hoc opus sollicitatus, diu fuerit orator.Philistusquoque meretur qui turbae quamvis bonorum post eos auctorum eximatur, imitator Thucydidi et ut multo infirmior,ita aliquatenus lucidior.Ephorus, ut Isocrati visum, calcaribus eget.Clitarchiprobatur ingenium, fides infamatur.
§ 65.Quintilian now proceeds to deal with the Comic and Tragic Drama. In theπερὶ μιμήσεωςof Dionysius there is nothing about the Old Comedy, and very little that corresponds with Quintilian in the sections on Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides. Both however pass from Euripides to Menander.The Old Comedy (§§65-66) was closely connected with the political life of the day, as may be seen from its plots, and especially from theparabases. When the licence of ridicule was curbed (by the lawsμὴ κωμῳδεῖνandμὴ κωμῳδεῖν ὀνομαστί), it passed into what is known as Middle Comedy (B.C.404-338), in which literary and speculative pursuits take the place of politics; its atmosphere is not that of the agora, but of the literary academies and schools of philosophy. In the New Comedy (§§69-72) the Chorus, which has been becoming less and less important, is altogether abandoned, along with other features which the Middle Comedy had in common with the Old. Its strength lies in its delineation of social life and manners, and the materials on which it relied were handed on to Rome, whence, through Plautus and Terence, they were transmitted to Modern Comedy.Quintilian takes no notice of what is termed Middle Comedy. Between the Old and the New, Tragedy is made to find a place (§§66-67), the plays of Euripides affording a transition to those of Menander.antiqua comoedia: cp. veteris comoediae§§9and 82. See Hor. Sat. i. 4, 2: 10, 17.sinceram ... gratiam:§44sana et vere Attica:§100illam solis concessam Atticis venerem:§107illa quae Attici mirantur. The same phrase occurs xii. 10, 35. Of Roman Comedy he says (i. 8, 8) in comoediis elegantia et quidam velutἀττικισμόςinveniri potest.libertatis=παρρησίας§§94,104. Hor. Sat. i. 4, 5 multa cum libertate notabant: A. P. 281-284 successit vetus his comoedia, non sine multa Laude; sed in vitium libertas excidit et vim Dignam lege regi; lex est accepta chorusque Turpiter obticuit sublato iure nocendi. Isocr. de Pace 14ἐγὼ δ᾽ οἶδα μὲν ὅτι ... δημοκρατίας οὔσης οὐκ ἔστι παρρησία πλὴν ... ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ τοῖς κωμῳδιδασκάλοις. Marc. Aurel. xi. 6:)ἡ ἀρχαία κωμῳδία ... παιδαγωγικὴν παρρησίαν ἔχουσα.—For the reading see Crit. Notes.grandis=ὑψηλός,§77:2 §16(where it is opposed totumidus). Hor. A. P. 93-4 Interdum tamen et vocem comoedia tollit. Iratusque Chremes tumido delitigat ore.elegans:§§78,87,93,99:2 §19, ‘choice,’ ‘tasteful.’ Cp. Cic. Brut. §272 verborum delectus elegans. In the treatise ad Herenn. (iv. 12)elegantiastands along withcompositioanddignitasas a requisite of style: it includesLatinitas(which avoids solecisms and barbarisms), andexplanatio, which usesverba usitataandpropria.venusta: vi. 3, 18 venustum esse quod cum venere quadam et gratia dicatur apparet. Krüger sees in these adjj. a reference to the main characteristics of the three different styles distinguished by rhetoricians,§44.nescio an ulla: seeCrit. Notes.ut Achillen: Il. ii. 673-4Νιρεύς, ὃς κάλλιστος ἀνὴρ ὑπὸ Ἴλιον ἦλθε Τῶν ἄλλων Δαναῶν μετ᾽ ἀμύμονα Πηλεΐωνα: ib. 768. Alcaeus fr. 63Κρονίδα βασιλήας γένος Αἴαν, τὸν ἄριστον πεδ᾽ Ἀχιλλέα.similior oratoribus:§63plerumque oratori similis. The same description of the style of the Old Comedy is given by one of the rhetoricians, Walz Rhet. Gr. v. 471 (cp. vi. 164, vii. 932)λόγοειδεστέρα‧τοῦτ᾽ἔστιν ἡ κωμικωτέρα καὶ προσβεβληκυῖα λόγῳ πεζῷ κατὰ συνθήκην, ὅθεν τινὲς καὶ ῥητορικὴν ἔμμετρον τὴν κωμῳδίαν ἐκόλεσαν.Students of oratory went to the comic actors forpronuntiatioandgestus: i. 11, 1-14: 12, 14: xi. 3, 181.I:66Plures eius auctores,Aristophanestamen etEupolisCratinusque praecipui. Tragoedias primus in lucemAeschylusprotulit, sublimis et gravis et grandiloquussaepe usque ad vitium, sed rudis in plerisque et incompositus; propter quod correctas eius fabulas in certamen deferre posterioribus poetis Athenienses permiserunt, suntque eo modo multi coronati.§ 66.Aristophanes ... Eupolis ... Cratinus. The same representatives of Old Comedy are named in Hor. Sat. i. 4, 1: cp. Persius i. 123 Audaci quicumque adflate Cratino Iratum Eupolidem praegrandi cum sene palles. So also Dionysius, Art. Rhet. viii. 11, p. 302 R (there is nothing about Old Comedy in theἀρχ. κρ.):ἡ δὲ κωμῳδία ὅτι πολιτεύεται ἐν τοῖς δράμασι καὶ φιλοσοφεῖ, ἡ τῶν περὶ τὸν Κρατῖνον καὶ Ἀριστοφάνην καὶ Εὔπολιν, τί δεῖ καὶ λέγειν; Velleius i. 16, 3: Diomed. p. 489 K (p. 9 Reiff.) ‘Ar. Eup. et Crat. qui vel principum vitia sectati acerbissimas comoedias composuerunt.’ The chronological order would be, Cratinus (519-422), Aristophanes (448-380), Eupolis (446-410). In 424B.C.Cratinus with hisΠυτίνη(‘Wine-flask’) gained the victory over theCloudsof Aristophanes, while in the previous year Eupolis is said to have helped his greater rival in the composition of theKnights. Cratinus was the real originator of political comedy: see the grammarian quoted by Meineke (i. p. 540): ‘he added a serious moral object to the mere amusement in comedy, by reviling evil-doers (τοὺς κακῶς πράττοντας διαβάλλων, cp. insectandis vitiis) and chastising them with his comedy, as it were with a public scourge’: cp. Platon. de Com. p. 27οὐ γὰρ ὥσπερ ὁ Ἀριστοφάνης ἐπιτρέχειν τὴν χάριν τοῖς σκώμμασι ποιεῖ ... ἀλλ᾽ ἁπλῶς καὶ κατὰ τὴν παροιμίαν γυμνῇ κεφαλῇ τίθησι τὰς βλασφημίας κατὰ τῶν ἁμαρτανόντων.primus. Just as in treating of Comedy Quintilian passes over the Megarian farces of Susarion, and such earlier writers as Chionides and Magnes, so now he omits all mention of Pratinas, Choerilus, Thespis and Phrynichus. Thespis introduced the actor (ὑποκριτής) and arranged that the dithyrambic choruses should be interrupted by regular dialogue between the coryphaeus and the actor. This step secured the entrance of the dramatic element, as distinct from the lyric, and made subsequent development easy. Aeschylus is however the real founder of tragedy: he introduced a second actor and subordinated the choral song to the dialogue, besides elaborating the machinery of the stage and the scenic decoration employed thereon. Cp. Hor. A. P. 275 sqq.sublimis, &c. Cp. Dionysius, l.c., (Usener, p. 21)Ὁ δ᾽ οὖν Αἰσχυλος πρῶτος ὑψηλός τε καὶ τῆς μεγαλοπρεπείας ἐχόμενος, καὶ ἠθῶν καὶ παθῶν τὸ πρέπον εἰδώς, καὶ τῇ τροπικῇ καὶ τῇ κυρίᾳ λέξει διαφερόντως // κεκοσμημενος, πολλαχοῦ δὲ καὶ αὐτος δημιουργὸς καὶ ποιητὴς ἰδίων ὀνομάτων καὶ πραγμάτων.grandiloquus. Cp. Aristoph. Frogs 823βρυχώμενος ἥσει ῥήματα γομφοπαγῆ, 939τὴν τέχνην ... οἰδοῦσαν ὑπὸ κομπασμάτων καὶ ῥημάτων ἐπαχθων, 1004,ἀλλ᾽ ὦ πρῶτος τῶν Ἑλλήνων πυργώσας ῥήματα σεμνὰ καὶ κοσμήσας τραγικὸν λῆρον κ.τ.λ.So too the biographer of Aeschylus,κατὰ δὲ τὴν σύνθεσιν τῆς ποιήσεως ζηλοῖ τὸ ἁδρὸν(see on§44)ἀεὶ πλάσμα ... πᾶσι τοῖς δυναμένοις ὄγκον τῇ φράσει περιθεῖναι χρώμενος.Hor. A. P. 280 ‘et docuit magnumque loqui nitique cothurno.’rudis et incompositus, ‘uncouth and inharmonious.’ Cp. horride atque incomposite2 §17: and note oncompositus§44. In the de Comp. Verb. c. 22 Dionysius names Aeschylus along with Antimachus as a representative ofἡ αὐστηρὰ ἁρμονία(p. 150 R). Forrudiscp. Hor. Sat. i. 10, 66 rudis et Graecis intacti carminis auctor: forincompositussee Introd.p. xlv. The author of the treatise ‘On the Sublime’ qualifies his eulogy of Aeschylus by adding in the same way that his plays were frequently unpolished, ill digested, and rough in style.in plerisque; neut. ‘in general,’ ‘for the most part.’ See Intod. p. xlvii.propter quod= quam ob rem:7 §6:5 §23. See on§10.correctas ... permiserunt. This passage has been the subject of much controversy. It seems inconsistent with our knowledge of the statute passed by the orator Lycurgus (396) enacting that official copies of the plays of the three great tragedians should be made, and that no new performance of them should be allowed without a comparison of the acting copy with the State MS. Perhaps Quintilian misunderstood the phraseδράματα διεσκευασμένα, commonly applied to plays revised by the author himself with a view to a second representation. Madvig however (Kl. philol. Schr. 1875, pp. 464-5) thinks it quite probable that revised versions of plays of Aeschylus were allowed to be brought into competition by later poets (say in the latter half of the 4th century), when Aeschylus came in for criticism on the score of the defects alluded to above (rudis et incompositus), but when, on the other hand, creative genius was not so abundant. Krüger quotes Rohde (‘Scenica,’ Rhein. Mus. 1883, vol. 38, p. 289 sqq.), who sees in the words of the scholiast on Arist. Ach. 10 (μόνου αὐτοῦ τὰ δράματα ψηφίσματι κοινῷ καὶ μετὰ θάνατον ἐδιδάσκετο) a compliment paid to Aeschylus alone, and consisting not merely in the appreciative revival of his plays after his death, but in the fact that they were reproduced not asπαλαιαίbut as new dramas, were provided afresh with choruses by the archon, and were admitted to competition at the great Dionysia (where only new tragedies were represented) if any one appeared, who in the name of the dead poet asked to be provided with a chorus. Cp.οὐκ ὀλίγας μετὰ τελευτὴν νίκας ἀπηνέγκατο, vit. Acschyl. 68, Dindorf5.I:67Sed longe clarius inlustraverunt hoc opusSophoclesatqueEuripides, quorum in dispari dicendi via uter sit poeta melior inter plurimos quaeritur. Idque ego sane, quoniam ad praesentem materiam nihil pertinet, iniudicatumrelinquo. Illud quidem nemo non fateatur necesse est, iis qui se ad agendum comparant utiliorem longe fore Euripiden.§ 67.longe, with the comp. vi. 4, 21: 3 §13. Cp. Verg. Aen. ix. 556: Vell. ii. 74, 1. In Cicerolongeis used only with the superl. (and withalius: pro Caec. i. §3) with the compar. he generally hasmulto. Quintilian has alsolonge princeps§61: andmultowith superl., e.g. i. 2, 24.opus: sc. tragoedias in lucem proferendi. See on§9.in dispari dicendi via. By Dionysius Euripides is made the only representative of the ‘smooth’ style of composition (γλαφυρὰ ἁρμονία, de Comp. Verb. c. 23), while Sophocles represents the middle style (κοινήorμέση ἁρμονία, ib. c. 24). This must of course be kept distinct from the threeλέξεις, or styles ofdiction, which he enumerates in his essay on Demosthenes, c. 1-3.quaeritur. Modern criticism has takenup the issue, and Euripides has suffered from being identified with what was practically a dramatic revolution. Schlegel depreciated him as contrasting with Sophocles in many points. Mr. Jebb’s utterance will stand: ‘no one is capable of feeling that Sophocles is supreme who does not feel that Euripides is admirable’ (Att. Or. i. p. xcix).utiliorem: somagis accedit oratorio generiimmediately below: Dionysius l.c. xi. (Usener, p. 22)κεκραμένη μεσότητι τῆς λέξεως κέχρηται.I:68Namque is et sermone (quod ipsum reprehendunt quibus gravitas et cothurnus et sonus Sophocli videtur esse sublimior) magis accedit oratorio generi, et sententiis densus et in iis quae a sapientibus tradita sunt paene ipsis par, et dicendo ac respondendo cuilibet eorum qui fuerunt in foro diserti comparandus; in adfectibus vero cum omnibus mirus, tum in iis qui in miseratione constant facile praecipuus.§ 68.quod ipsum reprehendunt: seeCrit. Notes.gravitas ... sublimior. The use of the comparative takes away from the difficulty which commentators have found in the conjunction ofsublimioras a predicate withgravitasandcothurnusas well as withsonus.—Forcothurnus, cp. Iuv. vi. 634 Fingimus haec, altum Satira sumente cothurnum Scilicet et finem egressi legemque priorum Grande Sophocleo carmen bacchamur hiatu.sententiis densus: cp.sent. creber§102: and fordensus(= pressus)§§73,76. Euripides had been a pupil of Anaxagoras. Something might be said in support of Halm’s suggestion to insertestafterdensus.sapientibus. In Euripides philosophy is brought on the stage, and different theories are put forward in his plays as to such questions as the moral government of the world, the opposition between freedom and authority, the nature of punishment, the question of a future life, &c.dicendo ac respondendo. In this appears the influence of his sophistic training. Euripides knew his audience, and in his plays the characters indulge to the full all the tendencies that were fostered by the sophistic habit of debate, while the chorus is as it were the jury to which they address their arguments for and against a particular proposition. Cp. Dion. l.c.πολὺς ἐν ταῖς ῥητορικαῖς εἰσαγωγαῖς.adfectibus ... miseratione. Arist. Poet. 13τραγικώτατός γε τῶν ποιητῶν φαίνεται.facile. Sofacile princepsCic. ad Fam. vi. 10, 2:facile primuspro Rosc. Amer. §15. For the reading seeCrit. Notes.I:69Hunc admiratus maxime est, ut saepe testatur, et secutus, quamquam in opere diverso,Menander, qui vel unus meo quidem iudicio diligenter lectus ad cuncta quae praecipimus effingenda sufficiat: ita omnemvitae imaginem expressit, tanta in eo inveniendi copia et eloquendi facultas, ita est omnibus rebus, personis, adfectibus accommodatus.§ 69.testatur: not in any extant fragment, though it is by no means improbable that in some of his numerous plays Menander expressed an admiration for the most popular tragedian of the day.Menander, 342-290B.C.At his death the Athenians erected his tomb near the cenotaph of Euripides, in token of the affectionate regard in which he had held the elder poet. ‘Euripides was the forerunner of the New Comedy; the poets of this species admired him especially, and acknowledged him for their master. Nay, so great is this affinity of tone and spirit between Euripides and the poets of the New Comedy, that apothegms of Euripides have been ascribed to Menander andvice versa. On the contrary, we find among the fragments of Menander maxims of consolation which rise, in a striking manner, even into the tragic tone.’ Schlegel. See Meineke Com. Frag. iv. Epimetrum ii., Menander imitator Euripidis.omnem vitae imaginem. Menander was the ‘mirror of life’: cp. the exclamation of Aristophanes of ByzantiumὮ Μένανδρε καὶ βίε, πότερος ἄρ᾽ ὑμῶν πότερον ἐμιμήσατο;Manilius v. 470 MenanderQui vitam ostendit vitae. So Cicero in a fragment of the De Republica (or the Hortensius, Usener, p. 120): Comoedia est imitatio vitae, speculum consuetudinis, et veritatis imago.—For this use ofexprimere, a figure from the plastic art, cp. Hor. A. P. 32-3.tauta in eo, &c.Cp. with this Dionysius l.c. (Usener, p. 22)τῶν δὲ κωμῳδῶν μιμητέον τὰς λεκτικὰς ἀρετὰς ἁπάσας‧ εἰσὶ γὰρ καὶ τοῖς ὀνόμασι καθαροὶ καὶ σαφεῖς, καὶ βραχεῖς καὶ μεγαλοπρεπεῖς καὶ δεινοὶ καὶ ἠθικοί. Μενάνδρου δὲ καὶ τὸ πραγματικὸν θεωρητέον.I:70Nec nihil profecto viderunt qui orationes, quae Charisi nomini addicuntur, a Menandro scriptas putant. Sed mihi longe magis orator probari in opere suo videtur, nisi forte aut illa iudicia, qua Epitrepontes, Epicleros, Locroe habent, aut meditationes in Psophodee, Nomothete, Hypobolimaeo non omnibus oratoriis numeris sunt absolutae.§ 70.nihil viderunt: they have not ‘lacked discrimination.’ So, of political insight or foresight, Cic. pro. Leg. Manil. §64 sin autem vos plus in republica vidistis: Phil. ii. §39 cum me vidisse plus fateretur, se speravisse meliora.Charisius, an Athenian orator, a contemporary of Demosthenes, who wrote speeches for others, in which he was thought to imitate Lysias: he was in turn imitated by Hegesias, Cic. Brut. §286.addicuntur: Aul. Gell. iii. 3. 13 istaec comoediae nomini eius (Plauti) addicuntur.in opere suo: ‘I consider that he proves his oratorical ability far more in his own department’ (i.e. as a writer of comedy)—than in those speeches of Charisius, supposing that he did compose them. Foropussee on§9: cp.§67.nisi forte, ironical: see on5 §6: cp.2 §8. The formula introduces ‘a case which is in fact inadmissible, but is intended to suggest to another person that he cannot differ from our opinion, without admitting as true a thing which is improbable and absurd,’ Zumpt §526.iudicia ... meditationes: ‘judicial pleadings,’ speeches suitable to be made before a court—‘extra-judicial pleadings,’ law-school speeches,declamationes,μελέται. Cp. iv. 2, 29 cum sit declamatio forensium actionum meditatio:5 §14.—The names are those of some of Menander’s comedies: The Trusting, The Heiress, The Locri, The Timid Man, The Lawyer, The Changeling. The second and the last are known to have been imitated by Caecilius. For the reading seeCrit. Notes.numeris: here as at§91rather than as at§4, where see note. Here it only =partibusand has nothing to do with rhythmical composition. In this sense it is found almost invariably withomnis: Varro apud Aul. Gell. xiii. 11, 1 ipsum deinde convivium constat ex rebus quatuor, et tum denique omnibus suis numeris absolutum est, &c.: Cic. de N. D. ii. §37 mundum ... perfectum expletumque omnibus suis numeris et partibus: de Div. i. §23 quod omnes habet in se numeros: de Off. iii. §14: de Fin. iii. §24 omnes numeros virtutis continent: Sen. Ep. 71 §16 (veritas) habet numeros suos: plena est: 95 §5: Iuv. vi. 249: Tac. Dial. 32 per omnes eloquentiae numeros isse. So viii. pr. §1 per omnes numeros penitus cognoscere.I:71Ego tamen plus adhuc quiddam collaturum eum declamatoribus puto, quoniam his necesse est secundumcondicionem controversiarum plures subire personas, patrum filiorum, militum rusticorum, divitum pauperum, irascentium deprecantium, mitium asperorum; in quibus omnibus mire custoditur ab hoc poeta decor.§ 71.plus adhuc quiddam=πλέον τι, orἔτι καὶ πλέον.Adhucwith compar. (foretiam) is post-Augustan: cp.§99. Herequiddam(likeτι) is used to modify the force of the comparative. So adhuc melius ii. 4, 13: adhuc difficilior i. 5, 22: liberior adhuc disputatio vii. 2, 14: and Tac. Germ. 29: Suet. Nero 10: Sen. Ep. 85, 24: Spalding on i. 5, 22.declamatoribus. Students in the schools of rhetoric, and even speakers of a more mature type, practised declamation at Rome in the shape of oratorical compositions on questions which, though fictitious, were yet akin to such as were argued in the law-courts. The youthful aspirant learned in this way to speak inpublic (Cic. de Orat. i. §149: Quint. ii. 10, 4: ib. §12), while the orator had the opportunity of perfecting his articulation and delivery. To these two aims the Greek termsμελέτηandφωνασκίαcorrespond: for the first cp. de Orat. i. §251, and for the second Brut. §310. It was in the age of the decadence of Roman oratory that declamation came to be an end in itself. At first it had been merely a preparatory exercise; now, under the head ofsuasoriae(deliberativae materiae) andcontroversiae(iudiciales materiae), finished oratorical compositions were produced, graced by all the ornaments of genuine rhetoric. Cp. Tac. Dial. 35.controversiarum. Cp. iv. 2, 97 evenit aliquando in scholasticis controversiis quod in foro an possit accidere dubito: iii. 8, 51 praecipue declamatoribus considerandum est quid cuique personae conveniat, qui parcissimas controversias ita dicunt ut advocati: plerumque filii, parentes, divites, senes, asperi, lenes, avari, denique superstitiosi, timidi, derisores fiunt, ut vix comoediarum actoribus plures habitus in pronuntiando concipiendi sunt, quam his in dicendo.decor: see on§27.I:72Atque ille quidem omnibus eiusdem operis auctoribus abstulit nomen et fulgore quodam suae claritatis tenebras obduxit. Tamen habent alii quoque comici, si cum venia leguntur, quaedam quae possis decerpere, et praecipuePhilemon; qui ut prave sui temporis iudiciis Menandro saepe praelatus est, ita consensu tamen omnium meruit credi secundus.§ 72.eiusdem operis, i.e. Comedy, not the New Comedy only, as is shown byalii comicibelow. Along with Menander and Philemon, Velleius (i. 16, 3) and Diomedes (p. 489 K, p. 9 Reiff.) mention Diphilus, on whom both Plautus and Terence drew for material.nomen: see on§87.fulgore ... obduxit: ‘has put them in the shade by the brightness of his own glory.’cum venia: cp. i. 5, 11: Ov. Tr. i. 1, 46 scriptaque cum venia qualiacumque leget: ib. iv. 1, 104 cum venia facito, quisquis es, ista legas. Kiderlin rightly holds this reading to be, not only possible, but at least as appropriate tohabent quaedamas any of the conjectures (see Crit. Notes) by which it has been proposed to supplant it. Theseverecritic will perhaps not find anything in the other comic poets useful for the orator: but he who reads them with indulgence (i.e. making allowance for their poverty as compared with Menander) will find something. It is different with Menander, in whose plays even the rigorous critic will find everything that the orator needs (§69).Philemon, of Soli in Cilicia, 360-262. Fragments of fifty-six of his ninety plays are extant. HisΘησαυρόςwas used by Plautus for theTrinummus, and hisἜμποροςfor theMercator.prave, ‘adverbium pro sententia.’ Cp. iii. 7, 18 quidam sicut Menander iustiora posteriorum quam suae aetatis iudicia sunt consecuti: Aul. Gell. 17, 1 Menander a Philemone nequaquam pari scriptore in certaminibus comoediarum ... saepenumero vincebatur.—SeeCrit. Notes.meruit credi= merito creditus est (or creditur). Cp.§74. Elsewheremereomeans little more thanadipisci,consequi:§§94,116: vi. 4, 5 nec immerito quidam ... meruerunt nomina patronorum. For the nomin. with inf. cp.§97qui esse docti adfectant: Ov. Met. xiii. 314 esse reus merui.§73-75.Greek Historians:—In hisἈρχαίων κρίσις(orπερὶ μιμήσεως2) Dionysius says nothing of Ephorus, Clitarchus, or Timagenes, but draws a more elaborate parallel (Usener, p. 22) between Herodotus and Thucydides, as well as between Philistus and Xenophon: Theopompus he treats by himself. Illustrativepassages are found also in theIudicium de Thucydideand theEpistola ad Cn. Pompeium(de Praecip. Historicis). Cp. also Cicero, de Orat. ii. §55 sq., where the order is Herodotus and Thucydides, Philistus, Theopompus and Ephorus, Xenophon, Callisthenes, and Timaeus. For the last two Quint. substitutes Clitarchus and Timagenes. Cp. Introd.p. xxxiii.I:73Historiam multi scripsere praeclare, sed nemo dubitat longeduos ceteris praeferendos, quorum diversa virtus laudem paene est parem consecuta. Densus et brevis et semper instans sibiThucydides, dulcis et candidus et fususHerodotus: ille concitatis hic remissis adfectibus melior, ille contionibus hic sermonibus, ille vi hic voluptate.§ 73.scripsere. In i. 5, 42 Quint. (speaking of the formsscripsereandlegere) says ‘evitandae asperitatis gratia mollitum est ut apud veteres pro malemereris, malemerere,’ ib. §44 ‘quid? non Livius circa initia statim primi libri,tenuere, inquit,arcem Sabini? et mox,in adversum Romani subiere? sed quem potius ego quam M. Tullium sequor, qui in Oratore,non reprehendo, inquit,scripsere; scripserunt esse verius sentio.’ The passage referred to is Or. §157. The termination-erefor-eruntis ‘found in some of the earliest inscriptions, and is not uncommon in Plautus and Terence,rare in Ciceroand Caesar, but frequent in dactylic poets and Livy,’ Roby, §578. Mr. Sandys also quotes Dr. Reid: ‘There is hardly a sound example of-erein the perfect in any really good MS. of Cicero (see Neue, ii. 390 ff.); and similarly in the case of Caesar.’ Quintilian has permiserunt,§66(where the later MSS. give-ere): illustraverunt§67: viderunt§70: indulsere§84. See Bonnell, Proleg. de Gramm. Quint. p. xxvii.nemo dubitat ... praeferendos. The acc. and inf. withdubito(for the negative expression of doubt) is much the more common construction in Quint. (cp.§81,4 §2), though he also usesquinand subj. (e.g.2 §1: xii. 1, 42 ad hoc nemo dubitabit quin ... magis e republica sit). A study of the instances in Bonn. Lex. will fail to reveal any principle of difference: cp. vii. 6, 10 quis dubitaret quin ea voluntas fuisset testantis? with ix. 4, 68 quis enim dubitet unum sensum in hoc et unum spiritum esse? and i. 10, 12 atqui claros nomine sapientiae viros nemo dubitaverit studiosos musices fuisse. The acc. with inf. belongs on the whole to the usage of the Silver Age, being frequent in Livy, Nepos (e.g. his opening words ‘non dubito fore plerosque, Attice’), Tacitus, Pliny (e.g. praef. 18 nec dubitamus multa esse), Pliny the Younger, Tacitus and Suetonius. It never occurs in Caesar or Sallust, and in Cicero only in doubtful cases: these are his youthful transl. of Xenophon’s Oeconomicus, where he has (§6) quis enim dubitet nihil esse pulchrius in omni ratione vitae dispositione atque ordine? ad Att. vii. 1, 2, where the passage may be differently construed: de Fin. iii. 11, 38 nihil est enim de quo minus dubitari possit quam et honesta expetenda per se et eodem modo turpia per se esse fugienda. In the last instance the dependent clause ‘de quo ... possit’ = ‘certius’: and after ‘quam’ ‘illud’ may be supplied. On the other hand cp. forquinRep. i. 23: Brut. §71: de Sen. §31: in Verr. ii. 1, 40. In young Cicero’s letter to Tiro (ad Fam. xvi. 21, 2) we find the acc. c. inf., though below (§7) he has the usual construction.diversa virtus ... consecuta: as for example from Dionysius, Epist. ad Cn. Pomp. pp. 775-7 R (Usener, p. 57 sq.).Densus,§68. It is opposed tofusushere as in§106tocopiosus. Cp. Dionysius, p. 869 R,τό τε πειρᾶσθαι δι᾽ ἐλαχίστων ὀνομάτων πλεῖστα σημαίνειν πράγματα, καὶ πολλὰ συντιθέναι νοήματα εἰς ἕν.brevis: Dion.Ἀρχ. κρ.p. 425 R (Usener, pp. 22-3)καὶ τὸ μὲν σύντομόν ἐστι παρὰ Θουκυδίδῃ τὸ δ᾽ ἐναργὲς παρ᾽ ἀμφοτέροις. This is what Dion. callsτὸ τάχος τῆς σημασίαςp. 793 R (Us. p. 82).semper instans sibi, ‘ever pressing on.’ Thucydides does not ‘let things drift,’ but closely follows up each thought, making every word tell, and even hurrying on to a new idea before he has fully developed the previous one: Dion. l.c.καὶ ἔτι προσδεχόμενόν τι τὸν ἀκροατὴν ἀκούσεσθαι καταλιπεῖν. Cp. xi. 3, 164 instandum quibusdam in partibus et densanda oratio. Hor. Ep. i. 2, 71 nec praecedentibus insto: cp. Sat. i. 10, 9 est brevitate opus ut currat sententia neu se impediat verbis lassas onerantibus aures.—Cicero’s references to Thucydides are similar: Orat. §40 Thucydides praefractior nec satis ut ita dicam rotundus; de Orat. ii. §56 creber est rerum frequentia ... porro verbis est aptus et pressus; ibid. §93 (with Pericles and Alcibiades) subtiles, acuti, breves, sententiisque magis quam verbis abundantes; Brut. §29 grandes erant verbis, crebrisententiis, compressione rerum breves et ob eam ipsam causam interdum subobscuri.dulcis,§77, ‘pleasing,’ cp. voluptate, below. So Cic. Hortens. ‘quid enim aut Herodoto dulcius aut Thucydide gravius?’Γλυκύτηςis one of the essentials ofἡδεῖα λέξιςin Dionysius (de Comp. Verb. xi. p. 53 R). In the preceding chapter he has distinguished betweenἡ ἡδονήandτὸ καλόν, allowing the latter to Thucydides and both to Herodotus:ἡ δὲ Ἡροδότου σύνθεσις ἀμφότερα ταῦτα ἔχει‧ καὶ γὰρ ἡδεῖά ἐστι καὶ καλή.Hermogenes (ii. p. 226) makesγλυκύτηςthe characteristic of Herodotus on account of the attractiveness of his digressions.candidus:§§113,121: Cic. Orat. §53 elaborant alii in ... puro et quasi quodam candido genere dicendi. So in ii. 5, 19 Quintilian recommends young persons to read candidum quemque et maxime expositum,—Livy rather than Sallust: of Livy he says elsewhere (§101) in narrando mirae iucunditatis clarissimique candoris. The word denotes ‘clearness,’ ‘transparency’: Dion. (Ἀρχ. κρ.R, Us. p. 22)τῆς δὲ σαφηνείας ἀναμφισβητήτως Ἡροδότῳ τὸ κατόρθωμα δέδοται. Such a quality of style is the revelation of a man’s inner nature. It avoids all adventitious ornament (ibid.τῷ ἀφελεῖ αὐτοφυεῖ ἀβασανίστῳ). Unduebrevitasoften interferes with it (ἀσαφὲς γίγνεται τὸ βραχύ), so that the word gives a partial antithesis tobrevis.fusussupplies the antithesis todensusas well as tosemper instans sibi. Cp.§77: ii. 3, 5 constricta an latius fusa oratio: ix. 4, 138 fusi ac fluentes. So Cicero Orat. §39 alter sine ullis salebris quasi sedatus amnis fluit, alter incitatior fertur.concitatis ... remissis adfectibus. Dionysius, speaking ofτῶν ἠθων τε καὶ παθῶν μίμησις(ad Cn. Pomp. p. 776 R, Us. p. 58), saysδιῄρηνται τὴν ἀρετὴν ταύτην οἱ συγγράφεις‧ Θουκυδίδης μὲν γὰρ τὰ πάθη δηλῶσαι κρείττων, Ἡρόδοτος δὲ τὰ γ᾽ ἤθη παραστῆσαι δεινότερος.So (Ἀρχ. κρ.p. 425 R, Us. p. 23)ἐν μέντοι τοῖς ἠθικοῖς κρατεῖ Ἡρόδοτος, ἐν δὲ τοῖς παθητικοῖς ὁ Θουκυδίδης. Cp. p. 793 Rὑπὲρ ἅπαντα δ᾽ αὐτοῦ ταῦτα τὸ παθητικόν.For the distinction betweenτὸ ἠθικόν(the appeal to the moral sense) andτὸ παθητικόν(the appeal to the emotions) see Cic. Orat. §128: Quint. vi. 2, §§8-10 Adfectus igitur hos concitatosπάθοςillos mites atque compositosἦθοςesse dixerunt, and sq. Cp. §§48 and 101 of this book, and iii. 4, 15 concitandis componendisve adfectibus.contionibus ... sermonibus: not the same antithesis asnarrando ... contionibus§101, q.v. The opposition here is between the set harangues of Thucydides and the less formal conversations of Herodotus. In Thucydides the only dialogues are that between the Melians and the Athenians in Book V, and that between Archidamus and the Plataeans in Book II, whereas Herodotus ‘seldom speaks where there is a fair pretext for making the characters speak.... Even the longer speeches have usually the conversational tone rather than the rhetorical,’ Jebb. (Hild is wrong in referringsermonibustoτὸ πραγματικὸν εἶδοςin Dionysius andcontionibustoτὸ λεκτικόν:Ἀρχ. κρ.p. 424 R, Us. p. 22: cp. de Admir. Deor. vi. c. 51, p. 1112 R sq.). The speeches of Thucydides are criticised by Dionysius (under the head both ofτὸ πραγματικὸν μέροςandτὸ λεκτικόν) in his Iudicium, ch. 34, p. 896 R sq. Herodotus on the other hand (ibid. 23 ad fin.),οὐδὲ δημηγορίαις πολλαῖς ... οὐδ᾽ ἐναγωνίοις κέχρηται λόγοις, οὐδ᾽ ἐν τῷ παθαίνειν καὶ δεινοποιεῖν τὰ πράγματα τὴν ἀλκὴν ἔχει.Dionysius’s own opinion of the speeches in Thucydides is seen from the last chapter of his Iudicium (pp. 950-2 R) to have agreed with that of Cicero, Orator §30: ipsae illae contiones ita multas habent obscuras abditasque sententias vix ut intellegantur. (Cp. Brutus §287.) On this ground he says nihil ab eo transferri potest ad forensem usum et publicum: cp. de Opt. Gen. 15, 16. Dionysius, however (ch. 34 ad init.) indicates that some people thought differently:τῶν δημηγοριῶν ἐν αἷς οἴονταί τινες τὴν ἄκραν τοῦ συγγραφέως εἶναι δύναμιν.—For the speeches see Blass, Att. Bereds p. 231 sq.: and Jebb’s Essay inHellenica, esp. pp. 269-275.vi ... voluptate. Many passages may be quoted from Dionysius to illustrate this antithesis:Ἀχρ. κρ.p. 425 R, Usener p. 23ῥώμῃ δὲ καὶ ἰσχύι καὶ τόνῳ καὶ τῷ περιττῷ καὶ πολυσχηματίστῳ παρηυδοκίμησε Θουκυδίδης: ἡδονῇ δὲ καὶ πειθοῖ καὶ χάριτι ... μακρῷ διενεγκόντα τὸν Ἡρόδοτον εὑρίσκομεν: ad. Cn. Pomp. iii. p. 776 R (Us. p. 58)ἕπονται ταύταις αἱ τὴν ἰσχὺν καὶ τὸν τόνον καὶ τὰς ὁμοιοτρόπους δυνάμεις τῆς φράσεως ἀρεταὶ περιέχουσαι. κρείττων ἐν ταύταις Ἡροδότου Θουκυδίδης. ἡδονὴν δὲ καὶ πειθὼ καὶ τέρψιν καὶ τὰς ὁμοιογενεῖς ἀρετὰς εἰσφέρεται μακρῷ Θουκυδίδου κρείττονας Ἡρόδοτος.So Iud. de Thucyd. 23, p. 866 Rπειθοῦς τε καὶ χαρίτων καὶ τῆς εἰς ἀκρὸν ἡκούσης ἡδονῆς ἕνεκα.So in the Epist. ad Pomp. iii. p. 767 R he praises Herodotus for his choice of subject (ὑπόθεσιν ... καλὴν καὶ κεχαρισμένην τοῖς ἀναγνωσομένοιςUs. p. 50), while Thucyd. was consciousὅτι εἰς μὲν ἀκρόασιν ἧττον ἐπιτερπὴς ἡ γραφή ἐστι(de Comp. Verb. p. 165 R). It is his variety (μεταβολὴ καὶ ποικίλον) and the providing of agreeableἀναπαύσειςthat give Hdt. his charm:καὶ γὰρ τὸ βιβλίον ἢν αὐτοῦ λάβωμεν μέχρι τῆς ἐσχάτης συλλαβῆς ἀγάμεθα καὶ ἀεὶ τὸ πλεῖον ἐπιζητοῦμενp. 772 R: while Thucydides is by comparisonἀσαφὴς καὶ δυσπαρακολούθητοςp. 773 (Usener pp. 54-5).For vi cp. also Orat. §39 alter incitatior fertur, et de bellicis rebus canit etiam quodam modo bellicum: for voluptate Quint. ix. 4, 18 in Herodoto vero cum omnia, ut ego quidem sentio, leniter fluunt, tum ipsaδιάλεκτοςhabet eam iucunditatem ut latentes in se numeros complexa videatur. And again Dionysius, p. 777 R: Us. p. 59διαφέρουσι δὲ κατὰ τοῦτο μάλιστα ἀλλήλων ὅτι τὸ μὲν Ἡροδότου κάλλος ἱλαρόν ἐστι, φοβερὸν δὲ(‘impressive’)τὸ Θουκυδίδου.I:74Theopompushis proximusut in historia praedictis minor, ita oratori magis similis, ut qui, antequam est ad hoc opus sollicitatus, diu fuerit orator.Philistusquoque meretur qui turbae quamvis bonorum post eos auctorum eximatur, imitator Thucydidi et ut multo infirmior,ita aliquatenus lucidior.Ephorus, ut Isocrati visum, calcaribus eget.Clitarchiprobatur ingenium, fides infamatur.
§ 65.Quintilian now proceeds to deal with the Comic and Tragic Drama. In theπερὶ μιμήσεωςof Dionysius there is nothing about the Old Comedy, and very little that corresponds with Quintilian in the sections on Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides. Both however pass from Euripides to Menander.The Old Comedy (§§65-66) was closely connected with the political life of the day, as may be seen from its plots, and especially from theparabases. When the licence of ridicule was curbed (by the lawsμὴ κωμῳδεῖνandμὴ κωμῳδεῖν ὀνομαστί), it passed into what is known as Middle Comedy (B.C.404-338), in which literary and speculative pursuits take the place of politics; its atmosphere is not that of the agora, but of the literary academies and schools of philosophy. In the New Comedy (§§69-72) the Chorus, which has been becoming less and less important, is altogether abandoned, along with other features which the Middle Comedy had in common with the Old. Its strength lies in its delineation of social life and manners, and the materials on which it relied were handed on to Rome, whence, through Plautus and Terence, they were transmitted to Modern Comedy.Quintilian takes no notice of what is termed Middle Comedy. Between the Old and the New, Tragedy is made to find a place (§§66-67), the plays of Euripides affording a transition to those of Menander.antiqua comoedia: cp. veteris comoediae§§9and 82. See Hor. Sat. i. 4, 2: 10, 17.sinceram ... gratiam:§44sana et vere Attica:§100illam solis concessam Atticis venerem:§107illa quae Attici mirantur. The same phrase occurs xii. 10, 35. Of Roman Comedy he says (i. 8, 8) in comoediis elegantia et quidam velutἀττικισμόςinveniri potest.libertatis=παρρησίας§§94,104. Hor. Sat. i. 4, 5 multa cum libertate notabant: A. P. 281-284 successit vetus his comoedia, non sine multa Laude; sed in vitium libertas excidit et vim Dignam lege regi; lex est accepta chorusque Turpiter obticuit sublato iure nocendi. Isocr. de Pace 14ἐγὼ δ᾽ οἶδα μὲν ὅτι ... δημοκρατίας οὔσης οὐκ ἔστι παρρησία πλὴν ... ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ τοῖς κωμῳδιδασκάλοις. Marc. Aurel. xi. 6:)ἡ ἀρχαία κωμῳδία ... παιδαγωγικὴν παρρησίαν ἔχουσα.—For the reading see Crit. Notes.grandis=ὑψηλός,§77:2 §16(where it is opposed totumidus). Hor. A. P. 93-4 Interdum tamen et vocem comoedia tollit. Iratusque Chremes tumido delitigat ore.elegans:§§78,87,93,99:2 §19, ‘choice,’ ‘tasteful.’ Cp. Cic. Brut. §272 verborum delectus elegans. In the treatise ad Herenn. (iv. 12)elegantiastands along withcompositioanddignitasas a requisite of style: it includesLatinitas(which avoids solecisms and barbarisms), andexplanatio, which usesverba usitataandpropria.venusta: vi. 3, 18 venustum esse quod cum venere quadam et gratia dicatur apparet. Krüger sees in these adjj. a reference to the main characteristics of the three different styles distinguished by rhetoricians,§44.nescio an ulla: seeCrit. Notes.ut Achillen: Il. ii. 673-4Νιρεύς, ὃς κάλλιστος ἀνὴρ ὑπὸ Ἴλιον ἦλθε Τῶν ἄλλων Δαναῶν μετ᾽ ἀμύμονα Πηλεΐωνα: ib. 768. Alcaeus fr. 63Κρονίδα βασιλήας γένος Αἴαν, τὸν ἄριστον πεδ᾽ Ἀχιλλέα.similior oratoribus:§63plerumque oratori similis. The same description of the style of the Old Comedy is given by one of the rhetoricians, Walz Rhet. Gr. v. 471 (cp. vi. 164, vii. 932)λόγοειδεστέρα‧τοῦτ᾽ἔστιν ἡ κωμικωτέρα καὶ προσβεβληκυῖα λόγῳ πεζῷ κατὰ συνθήκην, ὅθεν τινὲς καὶ ῥητορικὴν ἔμμετρον τὴν κωμῳδίαν ἐκόλεσαν.Students of oratory went to the comic actors forpronuntiatioandgestus: i. 11, 1-14: 12, 14: xi. 3, 181.
§ 65.Quintilian now proceeds to deal with the Comic and Tragic Drama. In theπερὶ μιμήσεωςof Dionysius there is nothing about the Old Comedy, and very little that corresponds with Quintilian in the sections on Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides. Both however pass from Euripides to Menander.
The Old Comedy (§§65-66) was closely connected with the political life of the day, as may be seen from its plots, and especially from theparabases. When the licence of ridicule was curbed (by the lawsμὴ κωμῳδεῖνandμὴ κωμῳδεῖν ὀνομαστί), it passed into what is known as Middle Comedy (B.C.404-338), in which literary and speculative pursuits take the place of politics; its atmosphere is not that of the agora, but of the literary academies and schools of philosophy. In the New Comedy (§§69-72) the Chorus, which has been becoming less and less important, is altogether abandoned, along with other features which the Middle Comedy had in common with the Old. Its strength lies in its delineation of social life and manners, and the materials on which it relied were handed on to Rome, whence, through Plautus and Terence, they were transmitted to Modern Comedy.
Quintilian takes no notice of what is termed Middle Comedy. Between the Old and the New, Tragedy is made to find a place (§§66-67), the plays of Euripides affording a transition to those of Menander.
antiqua comoedia: cp. veteris comoediae§§9and 82. See Hor. Sat. i. 4, 2: 10, 17.
sinceram ... gratiam:§44sana et vere Attica:§100illam solis concessam Atticis venerem:§107illa quae Attici mirantur. The same phrase occurs xii. 10, 35. Of Roman Comedy he says (i. 8, 8) in comoediis elegantia et quidam velutἀττικισμόςinveniri potest.
libertatis=παρρησίας§§94,104. Hor. Sat. i. 4, 5 multa cum libertate notabant: A. P. 281-284 successit vetus his comoedia, non sine multa Laude; sed in vitium libertas excidit et vim Dignam lege regi; lex est accepta chorusque Turpiter obticuit sublato iure nocendi. Isocr. de Pace 14ἐγὼ δ᾽ οἶδα μὲν ὅτι ... δημοκρατίας οὔσης οὐκ ἔστι παρρησία πλὴν ... ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ τοῖς κωμῳδιδασκάλοις. Marc. Aurel. xi. 6:)ἡ ἀρχαία κωμῳδία ... παιδαγωγικὴν παρρησίαν ἔχουσα.—For the reading see Crit. Notes.
grandis=ὑψηλός,§77:2 §16(where it is opposed totumidus). Hor. A. P. 93-4 Interdum tamen et vocem comoedia tollit. Iratusque Chremes tumido delitigat ore.
elegans:§§78,87,93,99:2 §19, ‘choice,’ ‘tasteful.’ Cp. Cic. Brut. §272 verborum delectus elegans. In the treatise ad Herenn. (iv. 12)elegantiastands along withcompositioanddignitasas a requisite of style: it includesLatinitas(which avoids solecisms and barbarisms), andexplanatio, which usesverba usitataandpropria.
venusta: vi. 3, 18 venustum esse quod cum venere quadam et gratia dicatur apparet. Krüger sees in these adjj. a reference to the main characteristics of the three different styles distinguished by rhetoricians,§44.
nescio an ulla: seeCrit. Notes.
ut Achillen: Il. ii. 673-4Νιρεύς, ὃς κάλλιστος ἀνὴρ ὑπὸ Ἴλιον ἦλθε Τῶν ἄλλων Δαναῶν μετ᾽ ἀμύμονα Πηλεΐωνα: ib. 768. Alcaeus fr. 63Κρονίδα βασιλήας γένος Αἴαν, τὸν ἄριστον πεδ᾽ Ἀχιλλέα.
similior oratoribus:§63plerumque oratori similis. The same description of the style of the Old Comedy is given by one of the rhetoricians, Walz Rhet. Gr. v. 471 (cp. vi. 164, vii. 932)λόγοειδεστέρα‧τοῦτ᾽ἔστιν ἡ κωμικωτέρα καὶ προσβεβληκυῖα λόγῳ πεζῷ κατὰ συνθήκην, ὅθεν τινὲς καὶ ῥητορικὴν ἔμμετρον τὴν κωμῳδίαν ἐκόλεσαν.Students of oratory went to the comic actors forpronuntiatioandgestus: i. 11, 1-14: 12, 14: xi. 3, 181.
I:66Plures eius auctores,Aristophanestamen etEupolisCratinusque praecipui. Tragoedias primus in lucemAeschylusprotulit, sublimis et gravis et grandiloquussaepe usque ad vitium, sed rudis in plerisque et incompositus; propter quod correctas eius fabulas in certamen deferre posterioribus poetis Athenienses permiserunt, suntque eo modo multi coronati.
§ 66.Aristophanes ... Eupolis ... Cratinus. The same representatives of Old Comedy are named in Hor. Sat. i. 4, 1: cp. Persius i. 123 Audaci quicumque adflate Cratino Iratum Eupolidem praegrandi cum sene palles. So also Dionysius, Art. Rhet. viii. 11, p. 302 R (there is nothing about Old Comedy in theἀρχ. κρ.):ἡ δὲ κωμῳδία ὅτι πολιτεύεται ἐν τοῖς δράμασι καὶ φιλοσοφεῖ, ἡ τῶν περὶ τὸν Κρατῖνον καὶ Ἀριστοφάνην καὶ Εὔπολιν, τί δεῖ καὶ λέγειν; Velleius i. 16, 3: Diomed. p. 489 K (p. 9 Reiff.) ‘Ar. Eup. et Crat. qui vel principum vitia sectati acerbissimas comoedias composuerunt.’ The chronological order would be, Cratinus (519-422), Aristophanes (448-380), Eupolis (446-410). In 424B.C.Cratinus with hisΠυτίνη(‘Wine-flask’) gained the victory over theCloudsof Aristophanes, while in the previous year Eupolis is said to have helped his greater rival in the composition of theKnights. Cratinus was the real originator of political comedy: see the grammarian quoted by Meineke (i. p. 540): ‘he added a serious moral object to the mere amusement in comedy, by reviling evil-doers (τοὺς κακῶς πράττοντας διαβάλλων, cp. insectandis vitiis) and chastising them with his comedy, as it were with a public scourge’: cp. Platon. de Com. p. 27οὐ γὰρ ὥσπερ ὁ Ἀριστοφάνης ἐπιτρέχειν τὴν χάριν τοῖς σκώμμασι ποιεῖ ... ἀλλ᾽ ἁπλῶς καὶ κατὰ τὴν παροιμίαν γυμνῇ κεφαλῇ τίθησι τὰς βλασφημίας κατὰ τῶν ἁμαρτανόντων.primus. Just as in treating of Comedy Quintilian passes over the Megarian farces of Susarion, and such earlier writers as Chionides and Magnes, so now he omits all mention of Pratinas, Choerilus, Thespis and Phrynichus. Thespis introduced the actor (ὑποκριτής) and arranged that the dithyrambic choruses should be interrupted by regular dialogue between the coryphaeus and the actor. This step secured the entrance of the dramatic element, as distinct from the lyric, and made subsequent development easy. Aeschylus is however the real founder of tragedy: he introduced a second actor and subordinated the choral song to the dialogue, besides elaborating the machinery of the stage and the scenic decoration employed thereon. Cp. Hor. A. P. 275 sqq.sublimis, &c. Cp. Dionysius, l.c., (Usener, p. 21)Ὁ δ᾽ οὖν Αἰσχυλος πρῶτος ὑψηλός τε καὶ τῆς μεγαλοπρεπείας ἐχόμενος, καὶ ἠθῶν καὶ παθῶν τὸ πρέπον εἰδώς, καὶ τῇ τροπικῇ καὶ τῇ κυρίᾳ λέξει διαφερόντως // κεκοσμημενος, πολλαχοῦ δὲ καὶ αὐτος δημιουργὸς καὶ ποιητὴς ἰδίων ὀνομάτων καὶ πραγμάτων.grandiloquus. Cp. Aristoph. Frogs 823βρυχώμενος ἥσει ῥήματα γομφοπαγῆ, 939τὴν τέχνην ... οἰδοῦσαν ὑπὸ κομπασμάτων καὶ ῥημάτων ἐπαχθων, 1004,ἀλλ᾽ ὦ πρῶτος τῶν Ἑλλήνων πυργώσας ῥήματα σεμνὰ καὶ κοσμήσας τραγικὸν λῆρον κ.τ.λ.So too the biographer of Aeschylus,κατὰ δὲ τὴν σύνθεσιν τῆς ποιήσεως ζηλοῖ τὸ ἁδρὸν(see on§44)ἀεὶ πλάσμα ... πᾶσι τοῖς δυναμένοις ὄγκον τῇ φράσει περιθεῖναι χρώμενος.Hor. A. P. 280 ‘et docuit magnumque loqui nitique cothurno.’rudis et incompositus, ‘uncouth and inharmonious.’ Cp. horride atque incomposite2 §17: and note oncompositus§44. In the de Comp. Verb. c. 22 Dionysius names Aeschylus along with Antimachus as a representative ofἡ αὐστηρὰ ἁρμονία(p. 150 R). Forrudiscp. Hor. Sat. i. 10, 66 rudis et Graecis intacti carminis auctor: forincompositussee Introd.p. xlv. The author of the treatise ‘On the Sublime’ qualifies his eulogy of Aeschylus by adding in the same way that his plays were frequently unpolished, ill digested, and rough in style.in plerisque; neut. ‘in general,’ ‘for the most part.’ See Intod. p. xlvii.propter quod= quam ob rem:7 §6:5 §23. See on§10.correctas ... permiserunt. This passage has been the subject of much controversy. It seems inconsistent with our knowledge of the statute passed by the orator Lycurgus (396) enacting that official copies of the plays of the three great tragedians should be made, and that no new performance of them should be allowed without a comparison of the acting copy with the State MS. Perhaps Quintilian misunderstood the phraseδράματα διεσκευασμένα, commonly applied to plays revised by the author himself with a view to a second representation. Madvig however (Kl. philol. Schr. 1875, pp. 464-5) thinks it quite probable that revised versions of plays of Aeschylus were allowed to be brought into competition by later poets (say in the latter half of the 4th century), when Aeschylus came in for criticism on the score of the defects alluded to above (rudis et incompositus), but when, on the other hand, creative genius was not so abundant. Krüger quotes Rohde (‘Scenica,’ Rhein. Mus. 1883, vol. 38, p. 289 sqq.), who sees in the words of the scholiast on Arist. Ach. 10 (μόνου αὐτοῦ τὰ δράματα ψηφίσματι κοινῷ καὶ μετὰ θάνατον ἐδιδάσκετο) a compliment paid to Aeschylus alone, and consisting not merely in the appreciative revival of his plays after his death, but in the fact that they were reproduced not asπαλαιαίbut as new dramas, were provided afresh with choruses by the archon, and were admitted to competition at the great Dionysia (where only new tragedies were represented) if any one appeared, who in the name of the dead poet asked to be provided with a chorus. Cp.οὐκ ὀλίγας μετὰ τελευτὴν νίκας ἀπηνέγκατο, vit. Acschyl. 68, Dindorf5.
§ 66.Aristophanes ... Eupolis ... Cratinus. The same representatives of Old Comedy are named in Hor. Sat. i. 4, 1: cp. Persius i. 123 Audaci quicumque adflate Cratino Iratum Eupolidem praegrandi cum sene palles. So also Dionysius, Art. Rhet. viii. 11, p. 302 R (there is nothing about Old Comedy in theἀρχ. κρ.):ἡ δὲ κωμῳδία ὅτι πολιτεύεται ἐν τοῖς δράμασι καὶ φιλοσοφεῖ, ἡ τῶν περὶ τὸν Κρατῖνον καὶ Ἀριστοφάνην καὶ Εὔπολιν, τί δεῖ καὶ λέγειν; Velleius i. 16, 3: Diomed. p. 489 K (p. 9 Reiff.) ‘Ar. Eup. et Crat. qui vel principum vitia sectati acerbissimas comoedias composuerunt.’ The chronological order would be, Cratinus (519-422), Aristophanes (448-380), Eupolis (446-410). In 424B.C.Cratinus with hisΠυτίνη(‘Wine-flask’) gained the victory over theCloudsof Aristophanes, while in the previous year Eupolis is said to have helped his greater rival in the composition of theKnights. Cratinus was the real originator of political comedy: see the grammarian quoted by Meineke (i. p. 540): ‘he added a serious moral object to the mere amusement in comedy, by reviling evil-doers (τοὺς κακῶς πράττοντας διαβάλλων, cp. insectandis vitiis) and chastising them with his comedy, as it were with a public scourge’: cp. Platon. de Com. p. 27οὐ γὰρ ὥσπερ ὁ Ἀριστοφάνης ἐπιτρέχειν τὴν χάριν τοῖς σκώμμασι ποιεῖ ... ἀλλ᾽ ἁπλῶς καὶ κατὰ τὴν παροιμίαν γυμνῇ κεφαλῇ τίθησι τὰς βλασφημίας κατὰ τῶν ἁμαρτανόντων.
primus. Just as in treating of Comedy Quintilian passes over the Megarian farces of Susarion, and such earlier writers as Chionides and Magnes, so now he omits all mention of Pratinas, Choerilus, Thespis and Phrynichus. Thespis introduced the actor (ὑποκριτής) and arranged that the dithyrambic choruses should be interrupted by regular dialogue between the coryphaeus and the actor. This step secured the entrance of the dramatic element, as distinct from the lyric, and made subsequent development easy. Aeschylus is however the real founder of tragedy: he introduced a second actor and subordinated the choral song to the dialogue, besides elaborating the machinery of the stage and the scenic decoration employed thereon. Cp. Hor. A. P. 275 sqq.
sublimis, &c. Cp. Dionysius, l.c., (Usener, p. 21)Ὁ δ᾽ οὖν Αἰσχυλος πρῶτος ὑψηλός τε καὶ τῆς μεγαλοπρεπείας ἐχόμενος, καὶ ἠθῶν καὶ παθῶν τὸ πρέπον εἰδώς, καὶ τῇ τροπικῇ καὶ τῇ κυρίᾳ λέξει διαφερόντως // κεκοσμημενος, πολλαχοῦ δὲ καὶ αὐτος δημιουργὸς καὶ ποιητὴς ἰδίων ὀνομάτων καὶ πραγμάτων.
grandiloquus. Cp. Aristoph. Frogs 823βρυχώμενος ἥσει ῥήματα γομφοπαγῆ, 939τὴν τέχνην ... οἰδοῦσαν ὑπὸ κομπασμάτων καὶ ῥημάτων ἐπαχθων, 1004,ἀλλ᾽ ὦ πρῶτος τῶν Ἑλλήνων πυργώσας ῥήματα σεμνὰ καὶ κοσμήσας τραγικὸν λῆρον κ.τ.λ.So too the biographer of Aeschylus,κατὰ δὲ τὴν σύνθεσιν τῆς ποιήσεως ζηλοῖ τὸ ἁδρὸν(see on§44)ἀεὶ πλάσμα ... πᾶσι τοῖς δυναμένοις ὄγκον τῇ φράσει περιθεῖναι χρώμενος.Hor. A. P. 280 ‘et docuit magnumque loqui nitique cothurno.’
rudis et incompositus, ‘uncouth and inharmonious.’ Cp. horride atque incomposite2 §17: and note oncompositus§44. In the de Comp. Verb. c. 22 Dionysius names Aeschylus along with Antimachus as a representative ofἡ αὐστηρὰ ἁρμονία(p. 150 R). Forrudiscp. Hor. Sat. i. 10, 66 rudis et Graecis intacti carminis auctor: forincompositussee Introd.p. xlv. The author of the treatise ‘On the Sublime’ qualifies his eulogy of Aeschylus by adding in the same way that his plays were frequently unpolished, ill digested, and rough in style.
in plerisque; neut. ‘in general,’ ‘for the most part.’ See Intod. p. xlvii.
propter quod= quam ob rem:7 §6:5 §23. See on§10.
correctas ... permiserunt. This passage has been the subject of much controversy. It seems inconsistent with our knowledge of the statute passed by the orator Lycurgus (396) enacting that official copies of the plays of the three great tragedians should be made, and that no new performance of them should be allowed without a comparison of the acting copy with the State MS. Perhaps Quintilian misunderstood the phraseδράματα διεσκευασμένα, commonly applied to plays revised by the author himself with a view to a second representation. Madvig however (Kl. philol. Schr. 1875, pp. 464-5) thinks it quite probable that revised versions of plays of Aeschylus were allowed to be brought into competition by later poets (say in the latter half of the 4th century), when Aeschylus came in for criticism on the score of the defects alluded to above (rudis et incompositus), but when, on the other hand, creative genius was not so abundant. Krüger quotes Rohde (‘Scenica,’ Rhein. Mus. 1883, vol. 38, p. 289 sqq.), who sees in the words of the scholiast on Arist. Ach. 10 (μόνου αὐτοῦ τὰ δράματα ψηφίσματι κοινῷ καὶ μετὰ θάνατον ἐδιδάσκετο) a compliment paid to Aeschylus alone, and consisting not merely in the appreciative revival of his plays after his death, but in the fact that they were reproduced not asπαλαιαίbut as new dramas, were provided afresh with choruses by the archon, and were admitted to competition at the great Dionysia (where only new tragedies were represented) if any one appeared, who in the name of the dead poet asked to be provided with a chorus. Cp.οὐκ ὀλίγας μετὰ τελευτὴν νίκας ἀπηνέγκατο, vit. Acschyl. 68, Dindorf5.
I:67Sed longe clarius inlustraverunt hoc opusSophoclesatqueEuripides, quorum in dispari dicendi via uter sit poeta melior inter plurimos quaeritur. Idque ego sane, quoniam ad praesentem materiam nihil pertinet, iniudicatumrelinquo. Illud quidem nemo non fateatur necesse est, iis qui se ad agendum comparant utiliorem longe fore Euripiden.
§ 67.longe, with the comp. vi. 4, 21: 3 §13. Cp. Verg. Aen. ix. 556: Vell. ii. 74, 1. In Cicerolongeis used only with the superl. (and withalius: pro Caec. i. §3) with the compar. he generally hasmulto. Quintilian has alsolonge princeps§61: andmultowith superl., e.g. i. 2, 24.opus: sc. tragoedias in lucem proferendi. See on§9.in dispari dicendi via. By Dionysius Euripides is made the only representative of the ‘smooth’ style of composition (γλαφυρὰ ἁρμονία, de Comp. Verb. c. 23), while Sophocles represents the middle style (κοινήorμέση ἁρμονία, ib. c. 24). This must of course be kept distinct from the threeλέξεις, or styles ofdiction, which he enumerates in his essay on Demosthenes, c. 1-3.quaeritur. Modern criticism has takenup the issue, and Euripides has suffered from being identified with what was practically a dramatic revolution. Schlegel depreciated him as contrasting with Sophocles in many points. Mr. Jebb’s utterance will stand: ‘no one is capable of feeling that Sophocles is supreme who does not feel that Euripides is admirable’ (Att. Or. i. p. xcix).utiliorem: somagis accedit oratorio generiimmediately below: Dionysius l.c. xi. (Usener, p. 22)κεκραμένη μεσότητι τῆς λέξεως κέχρηται.
§ 67.longe, with the comp. vi. 4, 21: 3 §13. Cp. Verg. Aen. ix. 556: Vell. ii. 74, 1. In Cicerolongeis used only with the superl. (and withalius: pro Caec. i. §3) with the compar. he generally hasmulto. Quintilian has alsolonge princeps§61: andmultowith superl., e.g. i. 2, 24.
opus: sc. tragoedias in lucem proferendi. See on§9.
in dispari dicendi via. By Dionysius Euripides is made the only representative of the ‘smooth’ style of composition (γλαφυρὰ ἁρμονία, de Comp. Verb. c. 23), while Sophocles represents the middle style (κοινήorμέση ἁρμονία, ib. c. 24). This must of course be kept distinct from the threeλέξεις, or styles ofdiction, which he enumerates in his essay on Demosthenes, c. 1-3.
quaeritur. Modern criticism has takenup the issue, and Euripides has suffered from being identified with what was practically a dramatic revolution. Schlegel depreciated him as contrasting with Sophocles in many points. Mr. Jebb’s utterance will stand: ‘no one is capable of feeling that Sophocles is supreme who does not feel that Euripides is admirable’ (Att. Or. i. p. xcix).
utiliorem: somagis accedit oratorio generiimmediately below: Dionysius l.c. xi. (Usener, p. 22)κεκραμένη μεσότητι τῆς λέξεως κέχρηται.
I:68Namque is et sermone (quod ipsum reprehendunt quibus gravitas et cothurnus et sonus Sophocli videtur esse sublimior) magis accedit oratorio generi, et sententiis densus et in iis quae a sapientibus tradita sunt paene ipsis par, et dicendo ac respondendo cuilibet eorum qui fuerunt in foro diserti comparandus; in adfectibus vero cum omnibus mirus, tum in iis qui in miseratione constant facile praecipuus.
§ 68.quod ipsum reprehendunt: seeCrit. Notes.gravitas ... sublimior. The use of the comparative takes away from the difficulty which commentators have found in the conjunction ofsublimioras a predicate withgravitasandcothurnusas well as withsonus.—Forcothurnus, cp. Iuv. vi. 634 Fingimus haec, altum Satira sumente cothurnum Scilicet et finem egressi legemque priorum Grande Sophocleo carmen bacchamur hiatu.sententiis densus: cp.sent. creber§102: and fordensus(= pressus)§§73,76. Euripides had been a pupil of Anaxagoras. Something might be said in support of Halm’s suggestion to insertestafterdensus.sapientibus. In Euripides philosophy is brought on the stage, and different theories are put forward in his plays as to such questions as the moral government of the world, the opposition between freedom and authority, the nature of punishment, the question of a future life, &c.dicendo ac respondendo. In this appears the influence of his sophistic training. Euripides knew his audience, and in his plays the characters indulge to the full all the tendencies that were fostered by the sophistic habit of debate, while the chorus is as it were the jury to which they address their arguments for and against a particular proposition. Cp. Dion. l.c.πολὺς ἐν ταῖς ῥητορικαῖς εἰσαγωγαῖς.adfectibus ... miseratione. Arist. Poet. 13τραγικώτατός γε τῶν ποιητῶν φαίνεται.facile. Sofacile princepsCic. ad Fam. vi. 10, 2:facile primuspro Rosc. Amer. §15. For the reading seeCrit. Notes.
§ 68.quod ipsum reprehendunt: seeCrit. Notes.
gravitas ... sublimior. The use of the comparative takes away from the difficulty which commentators have found in the conjunction ofsublimioras a predicate withgravitasandcothurnusas well as withsonus.—Forcothurnus, cp. Iuv. vi. 634 Fingimus haec, altum Satira sumente cothurnum Scilicet et finem egressi legemque priorum Grande Sophocleo carmen bacchamur hiatu.
sententiis densus: cp.sent. creber§102: and fordensus(= pressus)§§73,76. Euripides had been a pupil of Anaxagoras. Something might be said in support of Halm’s suggestion to insertestafterdensus.
sapientibus. In Euripides philosophy is brought on the stage, and different theories are put forward in his plays as to such questions as the moral government of the world, the opposition between freedom and authority, the nature of punishment, the question of a future life, &c.
dicendo ac respondendo. In this appears the influence of his sophistic training. Euripides knew his audience, and in his plays the characters indulge to the full all the tendencies that were fostered by the sophistic habit of debate, while the chorus is as it were the jury to which they address their arguments for and against a particular proposition. Cp. Dion. l.c.πολὺς ἐν ταῖς ῥητορικαῖς εἰσαγωγαῖς.
adfectibus ... miseratione. Arist. Poet. 13τραγικώτατός γε τῶν ποιητῶν φαίνεται.
facile. Sofacile princepsCic. ad Fam. vi. 10, 2:facile primuspro Rosc. Amer. §15. For the reading seeCrit. Notes.
I:69Hunc admiratus maxime est, ut saepe testatur, et secutus, quamquam in opere diverso,Menander, qui vel unus meo quidem iudicio diligenter lectus ad cuncta quae praecipimus effingenda sufficiat: ita omnemvitae imaginem expressit, tanta in eo inveniendi copia et eloquendi facultas, ita est omnibus rebus, personis, adfectibus accommodatus.
§ 69.testatur: not in any extant fragment, though it is by no means improbable that in some of his numerous plays Menander expressed an admiration for the most popular tragedian of the day.Menander, 342-290B.C.At his death the Athenians erected his tomb near the cenotaph of Euripides, in token of the affectionate regard in which he had held the elder poet. ‘Euripides was the forerunner of the New Comedy; the poets of this species admired him especially, and acknowledged him for their master. Nay, so great is this affinity of tone and spirit between Euripides and the poets of the New Comedy, that apothegms of Euripides have been ascribed to Menander andvice versa. On the contrary, we find among the fragments of Menander maxims of consolation which rise, in a striking manner, even into the tragic tone.’ Schlegel. See Meineke Com. Frag. iv. Epimetrum ii., Menander imitator Euripidis.omnem vitae imaginem. Menander was the ‘mirror of life’: cp. the exclamation of Aristophanes of ByzantiumὮ Μένανδρε καὶ βίε, πότερος ἄρ᾽ ὑμῶν πότερον ἐμιμήσατο;Manilius v. 470 MenanderQui vitam ostendit vitae. So Cicero in a fragment of the De Republica (or the Hortensius, Usener, p. 120): Comoedia est imitatio vitae, speculum consuetudinis, et veritatis imago.—For this use ofexprimere, a figure from the plastic art, cp. Hor. A. P. 32-3.tauta in eo, &c.Cp. with this Dionysius l.c. (Usener, p. 22)τῶν δὲ κωμῳδῶν μιμητέον τὰς λεκτικὰς ἀρετὰς ἁπάσας‧ εἰσὶ γὰρ καὶ τοῖς ὀνόμασι καθαροὶ καὶ σαφεῖς, καὶ βραχεῖς καὶ μεγαλοπρεπεῖς καὶ δεινοὶ καὶ ἠθικοί. Μενάνδρου δὲ καὶ τὸ πραγματικὸν θεωρητέον.
§ 69.testatur: not in any extant fragment, though it is by no means improbable that in some of his numerous plays Menander expressed an admiration for the most popular tragedian of the day.
Menander, 342-290B.C.At his death the Athenians erected his tomb near the cenotaph of Euripides, in token of the affectionate regard in which he had held the elder poet. ‘Euripides was the forerunner of the New Comedy; the poets of this species admired him especially, and acknowledged him for their master. Nay, so great is this affinity of tone and spirit between Euripides and the poets of the New Comedy, that apothegms of Euripides have been ascribed to Menander andvice versa. On the contrary, we find among the fragments of Menander maxims of consolation which rise, in a striking manner, even into the tragic tone.’ Schlegel. See Meineke Com. Frag. iv. Epimetrum ii., Menander imitator Euripidis.
omnem vitae imaginem. Menander was the ‘mirror of life’: cp. the exclamation of Aristophanes of ByzantiumὮ Μένανδρε καὶ βίε, πότερος ἄρ᾽ ὑμῶν πότερον ἐμιμήσατο;Manilius v. 470 MenanderQui vitam ostendit vitae. So Cicero in a fragment of the De Republica (or the Hortensius, Usener, p. 120): Comoedia est imitatio vitae, speculum consuetudinis, et veritatis imago.—For this use ofexprimere, a figure from the plastic art, cp. Hor. A. P. 32-3.
tauta in eo, &c.Cp. with this Dionysius l.c. (Usener, p. 22)τῶν δὲ κωμῳδῶν μιμητέον τὰς λεκτικὰς ἀρετὰς ἁπάσας‧ εἰσὶ γὰρ καὶ τοῖς ὀνόμασι καθαροὶ καὶ σαφεῖς, καὶ βραχεῖς καὶ μεγαλοπρεπεῖς καὶ δεινοὶ καὶ ἠθικοί. Μενάνδρου δὲ καὶ τὸ πραγματικὸν θεωρητέον.
I:70Nec nihil profecto viderunt qui orationes, quae Charisi nomini addicuntur, a Menandro scriptas putant. Sed mihi longe magis orator probari in opere suo videtur, nisi forte aut illa iudicia, qua Epitrepontes, Epicleros, Locroe habent, aut meditationes in Psophodee, Nomothete, Hypobolimaeo non omnibus oratoriis numeris sunt absolutae.
§ 70.nihil viderunt: they have not ‘lacked discrimination.’ So, of political insight or foresight, Cic. pro. Leg. Manil. §64 sin autem vos plus in republica vidistis: Phil. ii. §39 cum me vidisse plus fateretur, se speravisse meliora.Charisius, an Athenian orator, a contemporary of Demosthenes, who wrote speeches for others, in which he was thought to imitate Lysias: he was in turn imitated by Hegesias, Cic. Brut. §286.addicuntur: Aul. Gell. iii. 3. 13 istaec comoediae nomini eius (Plauti) addicuntur.in opere suo: ‘I consider that he proves his oratorical ability far more in his own department’ (i.e. as a writer of comedy)—than in those speeches of Charisius, supposing that he did compose them. Foropussee on§9: cp.§67.nisi forte, ironical: see on5 §6: cp.2 §8. The formula introduces ‘a case which is in fact inadmissible, but is intended to suggest to another person that he cannot differ from our opinion, without admitting as true a thing which is improbable and absurd,’ Zumpt §526.iudicia ... meditationes: ‘judicial pleadings,’ speeches suitable to be made before a court—‘extra-judicial pleadings,’ law-school speeches,declamationes,μελέται. Cp. iv. 2, 29 cum sit declamatio forensium actionum meditatio:5 §14.—The names are those of some of Menander’s comedies: The Trusting, The Heiress, The Locri, The Timid Man, The Lawyer, The Changeling. The second and the last are known to have been imitated by Caecilius. For the reading seeCrit. Notes.numeris: here as at§91rather than as at§4, where see note. Here it only =partibusand has nothing to do with rhythmical composition. In this sense it is found almost invariably withomnis: Varro apud Aul. Gell. xiii. 11, 1 ipsum deinde convivium constat ex rebus quatuor, et tum denique omnibus suis numeris absolutum est, &c.: Cic. de N. D. ii. §37 mundum ... perfectum expletumque omnibus suis numeris et partibus: de Div. i. §23 quod omnes habet in se numeros: de Off. iii. §14: de Fin. iii. §24 omnes numeros virtutis continent: Sen. Ep. 71 §16 (veritas) habet numeros suos: plena est: 95 §5: Iuv. vi. 249: Tac. Dial. 32 per omnes eloquentiae numeros isse. So viii. pr. §1 per omnes numeros penitus cognoscere.
§ 70.nihil viderunt: they have not ‘lacked discrimination.’ So, of political insight or foresight, Cic. pro. Leg. Manil. §64 sin autem vos plus in republica vidistis: Phil. ii. §39 cum me vidisse plus fateretur, se speravisse meliora.
Charisius, an Athenian orator, a contemporary of Demosthenes, who wrote speeches for others, in which he was thought to imitate Lysias: he was in turn imitated by Hegesias, Cic. Brut. §286.
addicuntur: Aul. Gell. iii. 3. 13 istaec comoediae nomini eius (Plauti) addicuntur.
in opere suo: ‘I consider that he proves his oratorical ability far more in his own department’ (i.e. as a writer of comedy)—than in those speeches of Charisius, supposing that he did compose them. Foropussee on§9: cp.§67.
nisi forte, ironical: see on5 §6: cp.2 §8. The formula introduces ‘a case which is in fact inadmissible, but is intended to suggest to another person that he cannot differ from our opinion, without admitting as true a thing which is improbable and absurd,’ Zumpt §526.
iudicia ... meditationes: ‘judicial pleadings,’ speeches suitable to be made before a court—‘extra-judicial pleadings,’ law-school speeches,declamationes,μελέται. Cp. iv. 2, 29 cum sit declamatio forensium actionum meditatio:5 §14.—The names are those of some of Menander’s comedies: The Trusting, The Heiress, The Locri, The Timid Man, The Lawyer, The Changeling. The second and the last are known to have been imitated by Caecilius. For the reading seeCrit. Notes.
numeris: here as at§91rather than as at§4, where see note. Here it only =partibusand has nothing to do with rhythmical composition. In this sense it is found almost invariably withomnis: Varro apud Aul. Gell. xiii. 11, 1 ipsum deinde convivium constat ex rebus quatuor, et tum denique omnibus suis numeris absolutum est, &c.: Cic. de N. D. ii. §37 mundum ... perfectum expletumque omnibus suis numeris et partibus: de Div. i. §23 quod omnes habet in se numeros: de Off. iii. §14: de Fin. iii. §24 omnes numeros virtutis continent: Sen. Ep. 71 §16 (veritas) habet numeros suos: plena est: 95 §5: Iuv. vi. 249: Tac. Dial. 32 per omnes eloquentiae numeros isse. So viii. pr. §1 per omnes numeros penitus cognoscere.
I:71Ego tamen plus adhuc quiddam collaturum eum declamatoribus puto, quoniam his necesse est secundumcondicionem controversiarum plures subire personas, patrum filiorum, militum rusticorum, divitum pauperum, irascentium deprecantium, mitium asperorum; in quibus omnibus mire custoditur ab hoc poeta decor.
§ 71.plus adhuc quiddam=πλέον τι, orἔτι καὶ πλέον.Adhucwith compar. (foretiam) is post-Augustan: cp.§99. Herequiddam(likeτι) is used to modify the force of the comparative. So adhuc melius ii. 4, 13: adhuc difficilior i. 5, 22: liberior adhuc disputatio vii. 2, 14: and Tac. Germ. 29: Suet. Nero 10: Sen. Ep. 85, 24: Spalding on i. 5, 22.declamatoribus. Students in the schools of rhetoric, and even speakers of a more mature type, practised declamation at Rome in the shape of oratorical compositions on questions which, though fictitious, were yet akin to such as were argued in the law-courts. The youthful aspirant learned in this way to speak inpublic (Cic. de Orat. i. §149: Quint. ii. 10, 4: ib. §12), while the orator had the opportunity of perfecting his articulation and delivery. To these two aims the Greek termsμελέτηandφωνασκίαcorrespond: for the first cp. de Orat. i. §251, and for the second Brut. §310. It was in the age of the decadence of Roman oratory that declamation came to be an end in itself. At first it had been merely a preparatory exercise; now, under the head ofsuasoriae(deliberativae materiae) andcontroversiae(iudiciales materiae), finished oratorical compositions were produced, graced by all the ornaments of genuine rhetoric. Cp. Tac. Dial. 35.controversiarum. Cp. iv. 2, 97 evenit aliquando in scholasticis controversiis quod in foro an possit accidere dubito: iii. 8, 51 praecipue declamatoribus considerandum est quid cuique personae conveniat, qui parcissimas controversias ita dicunt ut advocati: plerumque filii, parentes, divites, senes, asperi, lenes, avari, denique superstitiosi, timidi, derisores fiunt, ut vix comoediarum actoribus plures habitus in pronuntiando concipiendi sunt, quam his in dicendo.decor: see on§27.
§ 71.plus adhuc quiddam=πλέον τι, orἔτι καὶ πλέον.Adhucwith compar. (foretiam) is post-Augustan: cp.§99. Herequiddam(likeτι) is used to modify the force of the comparative. So adhuc melius ii. 4, 13: adhuc difficilior i. 5, 22: liberior adhuc disputatio vii. 2, 14: and Tac. Germ. 29: Suet. Nero 10: Sen. Ep. 85, 24: Spalding on i. 5, 22.
declamatoribus. Students in the schools of rhetoric, and even speakers of a more mature type, practised declamation at Rome in the shape of oratorical compositions on questions which, though fictitious, were yet akin to such as were argued in the law-courts. The youthful aspirant learned in this way to speak inpublic (Cic. de Orat. i. §149: Quint. ii. 10, 4: ib. §12), while the orator had the opportunity of perfecting his articulation and delivery. To these two aims the Greek termsμελέτηandφωνασκίαcorrespond: for the first cp. de Orat. i. §251, and for the second Brut. §310. It was in the age of the decadence of Roman oratory that declamation came to be an end in itself. At first it had been merely a preparatory exercise; now, under the head ofsuasoriae(deliberativae materiae) andcontroversiae(iudiciales materiae), finished oratorical compositions were produced, graced by all the ornaments of genuine rhetoric. Cp. Tac. Dial. 35.
controversiarum. Cp. iv. 2, 97 evenit aliquando in scholasticis controversiis quod in foro an possit accidere dubito: iii. 8, 51 praecipue declamatoribus considerandum est quid cuique personae conveniat, qui parcissimas controversias ita dicunt ut advocati: plerumque filii, parentes, divites, senes, asperi, lenes, avari, denique superstitiosi, timidi, derisores fiunt, ut vix comoediarum actoribus plures habitus in pronuntiando concipiendi sunt, quam his in dicendo.
decor: see on§27.
I:72Atque ille quidem omnibus eiusdem operis auctoribus abstulit nomen et fulgore quodam suae claritatis tenebras obduxit. Tamen habent alii quoque comici, si cum venia leguntur, quaedam quae possis decerpere, et praecipuePhilemon; qui ut prave sui temporis iudiciis Menandro saepe praelatus est, ita consensu tamen omnium meruit credi secundus.
§ 72.eiusdem operis, i.e. Comedy, not the New Comedy only, as is shown byalii comicibelow. Along with Menander and Philemon, Velleius (i. 16, 3) and Diomedes (p. 489 K, p. 9 Reiff.) mention Diphilus, on whom both Plautus and Terence drew for material.nomen: see on§87.fulgore ... obduxit: ‘has put them in the shade by the brightness of his own glory.’cum venia: cp. i. 5, 11: Ov. Tr. i. 1, 46 scriptaque cum venia qualiacumque leget: ib. iv. 1, 104 cum venia facito, quisquis es, ista legas. Kiderlin rightly holds this reading to be, not only possible, but at least as appropriate tohabent quaedamas any of the conjectures (see Crit. Notes) by which it has been proposed to supplant it. Theseverecritic will perhaps not find anything in the other comic poets useful for the orator: but he who reads them with indulgence (i.e. making allowance for their poverty as compared with Menander) will find something. It is different with Menander, in whose plays even the rigorous critic will find everything that the orator needs (§69).Philemon, of Soli in Cilicia, 360-262. Fragments of fifty-six of his ninety plays are extant. HisΘησαυρόςwas used by Plautus for theTrinummus, and hisἜμποροςfor theMercator.prave, ‘adverbium pro sententia.’ Cp. iii. 7, 18 quidam sicut Menander iustiora posteriorum quam suae aetatis iudicia sunt consecuti: Aul. Gell. 17, 1 Menander a Philemone nequaquam pari scriptore in certaminibus comoediarum ... saepenumero vincebatur.—SeeCrit. Notes.meruit credi= merito creditus est (or creditur). Cp.§74. Elsewheremereomeans little more thanadipisci,consequi:§§94,116: vi. 4, 5 nec immerito quidam ... meruerunt nomina patronorum. For the nomin. with inf. cp.§97qui esse docti adfectant: Ov. Met. xiii. 314 esse reus merui.
§ 72.eiusdem operis, i.e. Comedy, not the New Comedy only, as is shown byalii comicibelow. Along with Menander and Philemon, Velleius (i. 16, 3) and Diomedes (p. 489 K, p. 9 Reiff.) mention Diphilus, on whom both Plautus and Terence drew for material.
nomen: see on§87.
fulgore ... obduxit: ‘has put them in the shade by the brightness of his own glory.’
cum venia: cp. i. 5, 11: Ov. Tr. i. 1, 46 scriptaque cum venia qualiacumque leget: ib. iv. 1, 104 cum venia facito, quisquis es, ista legas. Kiderlin rightly holds this reading to be, not only possible, but at least as appropriate tohabent quaedamas any of the conjectures (see Crit. Notes) by which it has been proposed to supplant it. Theseverecritic will perhaps not find anything in the other comic poets useful for the orator: but he who reads them with indulgence (i.e. making allowance for their poverty as compared with Menander) will find something. It is different with Menander, in whose plays even the rigorous critic will find everything that the orator needs (§69).
Philemon, of Soli in Cilicia, 360-262. Fragments of fifty-six of his ninety plays are extant. HisΘησαυρόςwas used by Plautus for theTrinummus, and hisἜμποροςfor theMercator.
prave, ‘adverbium pro sententia.’ Cp. iii. 7, 18 quidam sicut Menander iustiora posteriorum quam suae aetatis iudicia sunt consecuti: Aul. Gell. 17, 1 Menander a Philemone nequaquam pari scriptore in certaminibus comoediarum ... saepenumero vincebatur.—SeeCrit. Notes.
meruit credi= merito creditus est (or creditur). Cp.§74. Elsewheremereomeans little more thanadipisci,consequi:§§94,116: vi. 4, 5 nec immerito quidam ... meruerunt nomina patronorum. For the nomin. with inf. cp.§97qui esse docti adfectant: Ov. Met. xiii. 314 esse reus merui.
§73-75.Greek Historians:—In hisἈρχαίων κρίσις(orπερὶ μιμήσεως2) Dionysius says nothing of Ephorus, Clitarchus, or Timagenes, but draws a more elaborate parallel (Usener, p. 22) between Herodotus and Thucydides, as well as between Philistus and Xenophon: Theopompus he treats by himself. Illustrativepassages are found also in theIudicium de Thucydideand theEpistola ad Cn. Pompeium(de Praecip. Historicis). Cp. also Cicero, de Orat. ii. §55 sq., where the order is Herodotus and Thucydides, Philistus, Theopompus and Ephorus, Xenophon, Callisthenes, and Timaeus. For the last two Quint. substitutes Clitarchus and Timagenes. Cp. Introd.p. xxxiii.
§73-75.Greek Historians:—
In hisἈρχαίων κρίσις(orπερὶ μιμήσεως2) Dionysius says nothing of Ephorus, Clitarchus, or Timagenes, but draws a more elaborate parallel (Usener, p. 22) between Herodotus and Thucydides, as well as between Philistus and Xenophon: Theopompus he treats by himself. Illustrativepassages are found also in theIudicium de Thucydideand theEpistola ad Cn. Pompeium(de Praecip. Historicis). Cp. also Cicero, de Orat. ii. §55 sq., where the order is Herodotus and Thucydides, Philistus, Theopompus and Ephorus, Xenophon, Callisthenes, and Timaeus. For the last two Quint. substitutes Clitarchus and Timagenes. Cp. Introd.p. xxxiii.
I:73Historiam multi scripsere praeclare, sed nemo dubitat longeduos ceteris praeferendos, quorum diversa virtus laudem paene est parem consecuta. Densus et brevis et semper instans sibiThucydides, dulcis et candidus et fususHerodotus: ille concitatis hic remissis adfectibus melior, ille contionibus hic sermonibus, ille vi hic voluptate.
§ 73.scripsere. In i. 5, 42 Quint. (speaking of the formsscripsereandlegere) says ‘evitandae asperitatis gratia mollitum est ut apud veteres pro malemereris, malemerere,’ ib. §44 ‘quid? non Livius circa initia statim primi libri,tenuere, inquit,arcem Sabini? et mox,in adversum Romani subiere? sed quem potius ego quam M. Tullium sequor, qui in Oratore,non reprehendo, inquit,scripsere; scripserunt esse verius sentio.’ The passage referred to is Or. §157. The termination-erefor-eruntis ‘found in some of the earliest inscriptions, and is not uncommon in Plautus and Terence,rare in Ciceroand Caesar, but frequent in dactylic poets and Livy,’ Roby, §578. Mr. Sandys also quotes Dr. Reid: ‘There is hardly a sound example of-erein the perfect in any really good MS. of Cicero (see Neue, ii. 390 ff.); and similarly in the case of Caesar.’ Quintilian has permiserunt,§66(where the later MSS. give-ere): illustraverunt§67: viderunt§70: indulsere§84. See Bonnell, Proleg. de Gramm. Quint. p. xxvii.nemo dubitat ... praeferendos. The acc. and inf. withdubito(for the negative expression of doubt) is much the more common construction in Quint. (cp.§81,4 §2), though he also usesquinand subj. (e.g.2 §1: xii. 1, 42 ad hoc nemo dubitabit quin ... magis e republica sit). A study of the instances in Bonn. Lex. will fail to reveal any principle of difference: cp. vii. 6, 10 quis dubitaret quin ea voluntas fuisset testantis? with ix. 4, 68 quis enim dubitet unum sensum in hoc et unum spiritum esse? and i. 10, 12 atqui claros nomine sapientiae viros nemo dubitaverit studiosos musices fuisse. The acc. with inf. belongs on the whole to the usage of the Silver Age, being frequent in Livy, Nepos (e.g. his opening words ‘non dubito fore plerosque, Attice’), Tacitus, Pliny (e.g. praef. 18 nec dubitamus multa esse), Pliny the Younger, Tacitus and Suetonius. It never occurs in Caesar or Sallust, and in Cicero only in doubtful cases: these are his youthful transl. of Xenophon’s Oeconomicus, where he has (§6) quis enim dubitet nihil esse pulchrius in omni ratione vitae dispositione atque ordine? ad Att. vii. 1, 2, where the passage may be differently construed: de Fin. iii. 11, 38 nihil est enim de quo minus dubitari possit quam et honesta expetenda per se et eodem modo turpia per se esse fugienda. In the last instance the dependent clause ‘de quo ... possit’ = ‘certius’: and after ‘quam’ ‘illud’ may be supplied. On the other hand cp. forquinRep. i. 23: Brut. §71: de Sen. §31: in Verr. ii. 1, 40. In young Cicero’s letter to Tiro (ad Fam. xvi. 21, 2) we find the acc. c. inf., though below (§7) he has the usual construction.diversa virtus ... consecuta: as for example from Dionysius, Epist. ad Cn. Pomp. pp. 775-7 R (Usener, p. 57 sq.).Densus,§68. It is opposed tofusushere as in§106tocopiosus. Cp. Dionysius, p. 869 R,τό τε πειρᾶσθαι δι᾽ ἐλαχίστων ὀνομάτων πλεῖστα σημαίνειν πράγματα, καὶ πολλὰ συντιθέναι νοήματα εἰς ἕν.brevis: Dion.Ἀρχ. κρ.p. 425 R (Usener, pp. 22-3)καὶ τὸ μὲν σύντομόν ἐστι παρὰ Θουκυδίδῃ τὸ δ᾽ ἐναργὲς παρ᾽ ἀμφοτέροις. This is what Dion. callsτὸ τάχος τῆς σημασίαςp. 793 R (Us. p. 82).semper instans sibi, ‘ever pressing on.’ Thucydides does not ‘let things drift,’ but closely follows up each thought, making every word tell, and even hurrying on to a new idea before he has fully developed the previous one: Dion. l.c.καὶ ἔτι προσδεχόμενόν τι τὸν ἀκροατὴν ἀκούσεσθαι καταλιπεῖν. Cp. xi. 3, 164 instandum quibusdam in partibus et densanda oratio. Hor. Ep. i. 2, 71 nec praecedentibus insto: cp. Sat. i. 10, 9 est brevitate opus ut currat sententia neu se impediat verbis lassas onerantibus aures.—Cicero’s references to Thucydides are similar: Orat. §40 Thucydides praefractior nec satis ut ita dicam rotundus; de Orat. ii. §56 creber est rerum frequentia ... porro verbis est aptus et pressus; ibid. §93 (with Pericles and Alcibiades) subtiles, acuti, breves, sententiisque magis quam verbis abundantes; Brut. §29 grandes erant verbis, crebrisententiis, compressione rerum breves et ob eam ipsam causam interdum subobscuri.dulcis,§77, ‘pleasing,’ cp. voluptate, below. So Cic. Hortens. ‘quid enim aut Herodoto dulcius aut Thucydide gravius?’Γλυκύτηςis one of the essentials ofἡδεῖα λέξιςin Dionysius (de Comp. Verb. xi. p. 53 R). In the preceding chapter he has distinguished betweenἡ ἡδονήandτὸ καλόν, allowing the latter to Thucydides and both to Herodotus:ἡ δὲ Ἡροδότου σύνθεσις ἀμφότερα ταῦτα ἔχει‧ καὶ γὰρ ἡδεῖά ἐστι καὶ καλή.Hermogenes (ii. p. 226) makesγλυκύτηςthe characteristic of Herodotus on account of the attractiveness of his digressions.candidus:§§113,121: Cic. Orat. §53 elaborant alii in ... puro et quasi quodam candido genere dicendi. So in ii. 5, 19 Quintilian recommends young persons to read candidum quemque et maxime expositum,—Livy rather than Sallust: of Livy he says elsewhere (§101) in narrando mirae iucunditatis clarissimique candoris. The word denotes ‘clearness,’ ‘transparency’: Dion. (Ἀρχ. κρ.R, Us. p. 22)τῆς δὲ σαφηνείας ἀναμφισβητήτως Ἡροδότῳ τὸ κατόρθωμα δέδοται. Such a quality of style is the revelation of a man’s inner nature. It avoids all adventitious ornament (ibid.τῷ ἀφελεῖ αὐτοφυεῖ ἀβασανίστῳ). Unduebrevitasoften interferes with it (ἀσαφὲς γίγνεται τὸ βραχύ), so that the word gives a partial antithesis tobrevis.fusussupplies the antithesis todensusas well as tosemper instans sibi. Cp.§77: ii. 3, 5 constricta an latius fusa oratio: ix. 4, 138 fusi ac fluentes. So Cicero Orat. §39 alter sine ullis salebris quasi sedatus amnis fluit, alter incitatior fertur.concitatis ... remissis adfectibus. Dionysius, speaking ofτῶν ἠθων τε καὶ παθῶν μίμησις(ad Cn. Pomp. p. 776 R, Us. p. 58), saysδιῄρηνται τὴν ἀρετὴν ταύτην οἱ συγγράφεις‧ Θουκυδίδης μὲν γὰρ τὰ πάθη δηλῶσαι κρείττων, Ἡρόδοτος δὲ τὰ γ᾽ ἤθη παραστῆσαι δεινότερος.So (Ἀρχ. κρ.p. 425 R, Us. p. 23)ἐν μέντοι τοῖς ἠθικοῖς κρατεῖ Ἡρόδοτος, ἐν δὲ τοῖς παθητικοῖς ὁ Θουκυδίδης. Cp. p. 793 Rὑπὲρ ἅπαντα δ᾽ αὐτοῦ ταῦτα τὸ παθητικόν.For the distinction betweenτὸ ἠθικόν(the appeal to the moral sense) andτὸ παθητικόν(the appeal to the emotions) see Cic. Orat. §128: Quint. vi. 2, §§8-10 Adfectus igitur hos concitatosπάθοςillos mites atque compositosἦθοςesse dixerunt, and sq. Cp. §§48 and 101 of this book, and iii. 4, 15 concitandis componendisve adfectibus.contionibus ... sermonibus: not the same antithesis asnarrando ... contionibus§101, q.v. The opposition here is between the set harangues of Thucydides and the less formal conversations of Herodotus. In Thucydides the only dialogues are that between the Melians and the Athenians in Book V, and that between Archidamus and the Plataeans in Book II, whereas Herodotus ‘seldom speaks where there is a fair pretext for making the characters speak.... Even the longer speeches have usually the conversational tone rather than the rhetorical,’ Jebb. (Hild is wrong in referringsermonibustoτὸ πραγματικὸν εἶδοςin Dionysius andcontionibustoτὸ λεκτικόν:Ἀρχ. κρ.p. 424 R, Us. p. 22: cp. de Admir. Deor. vi. c. 51, p. 1112 R sq.). The speeches of Thucydides are criticised by Dionysius (under the head both ofτὸ πραγματικὸν μέροςandτὸ λεκτικόν) in his Iudicium, ch. 34, p. 896 R sq. Herodotus on the other hand (ibid. 23 ad fin.),οὐδὲ δημηγορίαις πολλαῖς ... οὐδ᾽ ἐναγωνίοις κέχρηται λόγοις, οὐδ᾽ ἐν τῷ παθαίνειν καὶ δεινοποιεῖν τὰ πράγματα τὴν ἀλκὴν ἔχει.Dionysius’s own opinion of the speeches in Thucydides is seen from the last chapter of his Iudicium (pp. 950-2 R) to have agreed with that of Cicero, Orator §30: ipsae illae contiones ita multas habent obscuras abditasque sententias vix ut intellegantur. (Cp. Brutus §287.) On this ground he says nihil ab eo transferri potest ad forensem usum et publicum: cp. de Opt. Gen. 15, 16. Dionysius, however (ch. 34 ad init.) indicates that some people thought differently:τῶν δημηγοριῶν ἐν αἷς οἴονταί τινες τὴν ἄκραν τοῦ συγγραφέως εἶναι δύναμιν.—For the speeches see Blass, Att. Bereds p. 231 sq.: and Jebb’s Essay inHellenica, esp. pp. 269-275.vi ... voluptate. Many passages may be quoted from Dionysius to illustrate this antithesis:Ἀχρ. κρ.p. 425 R, Usener p. 23ῥώμῃ δὲ καὶ ἰσχύι καὶ τόνῳ καὶ τῷ περιττῷ καὶ πολυσχηματίστῳ παρηυδοκίμησε Θουκυδίδης: ἡδονῇ δὲ καὶ πειθοῖ καὶ χάριτι ... μακρῷ διενεγκόντα τὸν Ἡρόδοτον εὑρίσκομεν: ad. Cn. Pomp. iii. p. 776 R (Us. p. 58)ἕπονται ταύταις αἱ τὴν ἰσχὺν καὶ τὸν τόνον καὶ τὰς ὁμοιοτρόπους δυνάμεις τῆς φράσεως ἀρεταὶ περιέχουσαι. κρείττων ἐν ταύταις Ἡροδότου Θουκυδίδης. ἡδονὴν δὲ καὶ πειθὼ καὶ τέρψιν καὶ τὰς ὁμοιογενεῖς ἀρετὰς εἰσφέρεται μακρῷ Θουκυδίδου κρείττονας Ἡρόδοτος.So Iud. de Thucyd. 23, p. 866 Rπειθοῦς τε καὶ χαρίτων καὶ τῆς εἰς ἀκρὸν ἡκούσης ἡδονῆς ἕνεκα.So in the Epist. ad Pomp. iii. p. 767 R he praises Herodotus for his choice of subject (ὑπόθεσιν ... καλὴν καὶ κεχαρισμένην τοῖς ἀναγνωσομένοιςUs. p. 50), while Thucyd. was consciousὅτι εἰς μὲν ἀκρόασιν ἧττον ἐπιτερπὴς ἡ γραφή ἐστι(de Comp. Verb. p. 165 R). It is his variety (μεταβολὴ καὶ ποικίλον) and the providing of agreeableἀναπαύσειςthat give Hdt. his charm:καὶ γὰρ τὸ βιβλίον ἢν αὐτοῦ λάβωμεν μέχρι τῆς ἐσχάτης συλλαβῆς ἀγάμεθα καὶ ἀεὶ τὸ πλεῖον ἐπιζητοῦμενp. 772 R: while Thucydides is by comparisonἀσαφὴς καὶ δυσπαρακολούθητοςp. 773 (Usener pp. 54-5).For vi cp. also Orat. §39 alter incitatior fertur, et de bellicis rebus canit etiam quodam modo bellicum: for voluptate Quint. ix. 4, 18 in Herodoto vero cum omnia, ut ego quidem sentio, leniter fluunt, tum ipsaδιάλεκτοςhabet eam iucunditatem ut latentes in se numeros complexa videatur. And again Dionysius, p. 777 R: Us. p. 59διαφέρουσι δὲ κατὰ τοῦτο μάλιστα ἀλλήλων ὅτι τὸ μὲν Ἡροδότου κάλλος ἱλαρόν ἐστι, φοβερὸν δὲ(‘impressive’)τὸ Θουκυδίδου.
§ 73.scripsere. In i. 5, 42 Quint. (speaking of the formsscripsereandlegere) says ‘evitandae asperitatis gratia mollitum est ut apud veteres pro malemereris, malemerere,’ ib. §44 ‘quid? non Livius circa initia statim primi libri,tenuere, inquit,arcem Sabini? et mox,in adversum Romani subiere? sed quem potius ego quam M. Tullium sequor, qui in Oratore,non reprehendo, inquit,scripsere; scripserunt esse verius sentio.’ The passage referred to is Or. §157. The termination-erefor-eruntis ‘found in some of the earliest inscriptions, and is not uncommon in Plautus and Terence,rare in Ciceroand Caesar, but frequent in dactylic poets and Livy,’ Roby, §578. Mr. Sandys also quotes Dr. Reid: ‘There is hardly a sound example of-erein the perfect in any really good MS. of Cicero (see Neue, ii. 390 ff.); and similarly in the case of Caesar.’ Quintilian has permiserunt,§66(where the later MSS. give-ere): illustraverunt§67: viderunt§70: indulsere§84. See Bonnell, Proleg. de Gramm. Quint. p. xxvii.
nemo dubitat ... praeferendos. The acc. and inf. withdubito(for the negative expression of doubt) is much the more common construction in Quint. (cp.§81,4 §2), though he also usesquinand subj. (e.g.2 §1: xii. 1, 42 ad hoc nemo dubitabit quin ... magis e republica sit). A study of the instances in Bonn. Lex. will fail to reveal any principle of difference: cp. vii. 6, 10 quis dubitaret quin ea voluntas fuisset testantis? with ix. 4, 68 quis enim dubitet unum sensum in hoc et unum spiritum esse? and i. 10, 12 atqui claros nomine sapientiae viros nemo dubitaverit studiosos musices fuisse. The acc. with inf. belongs on the whole to the usage of the Silver Age, being frequent in Livy, Nepos (e.g. his opening words ‘non dubito fore plerosque, Attice’), Tacitus, Pliny (e.g. praef. 18 nec dubitamus multa esse), Pliny the Younger, Tacitus and Suetonius. It never occurs in Caesar or Sallust, and in Cicero only in doubtful cases: these are his youthful transl. of Xenophon’s Oeconomicus, where he has (§6) quis enim dubitet nihil esse pulchrius in omni ratione vitae dispositione atque ordine? ad Att. vii. 1, 2, where the passage may be differently construed: de Fin. iii. 11, 38 nihil est enim de quo minus dubitari possit quam et honesta expetenda per se et eodem modo turpia per se esse fugienda. In the last instance the dependent clause ‘de quo ... possit’ = ‘certius’: and after ‘quam’ ‘illud’ may be supplied. On the other hand cp. forquinRep. i. 23: Brut. §71: de Sen. §31: in Verr. ii. 1, 40. In young Cicero’s letter to Tiro (ad Fam. xvi. 21, 2) we find the acc. c. inf., though below (§7) he has the usual construction.
diversa virtus ... consecuta: as for example from Dionysius, Epist. ad Cn. Pomp. pp. 775-7 R (Usener, p. 57 sq.).
Densus,§68. It is opposed tofusushere as in§106tocopiosus. Cp. Dionysius, p. 869 R,τό τε πειρᾶσθαι δι᾽ ἐλαχίστων ὀνομάτων πλεῖστα σημαίνειν πράγματα, καὶ πολλὰ συντιθέναι νοήματα εἰς ἕν.
brevis: Dion.Ἀρχ. κρ.p. 425 R (Usener, pp. 22-3)καὶ τὸ μὲν σύντομόν ἐστι παρὰ Θουκυδίδῃ τὸ δ᾽ ἐναργὲς παρ᾽ ἀμφοτέροις. This is what Dion. callsτὸ τάχος τῆς σημασίαςp. 793 R (Us. p. 82).
semper instans sibi, ‘ever pressing on.’ Thucydides does not ‘let things drift,’ but closely follows up each thought, making every word tell, and even hurrying on to a new idea before he has fully developed the previous one: Dion. l.c.καὶ ἔτι προσδεχόμενόν τι τὸν ἀκροατὴν ἀκούσεσθαι καταλιπεῖν. Cp. xi. 3, 164 instandum quibusdam in partibus et densanda oratio. Hor. Ep. i. 2, 71 nec praecedentibus insto: cp. Sat. i. 10, 9 est brevitate opus ut currat sententia neu se impediat verbis lassas onerantibus aures.—Cicero’s references to Thucydides are similar: Orat. §40 Thucydides praefractior nec satis ut ita dicam rotundus; de Orat. ii. §56 creber est rerum frequentia ... porro verbis est aptus et pressus; ibid. §93 (with Pericles and Alcibiades) subtiles, acuti, breves, sententiisque magis quam verbis abundantes; Brut. §29 grandes erant verbis, crebrisententiis, compressione rerum breves et ob eam ipsam causam interdum subobscuri.
dulcis,§77, ‘pleasing,’ cp. voluptate, below. So Cic. Hortens. ‘quid enim aut Herodoto dulcius aut Thucydide gravius?’Γλυκύτηςis one of the essentials ofἡδεῖα λέξιςin Dionysius (de Comp. Verb. xi. p. 53 R). In the preceding chapter he has distinguished betweenἡ ἡδονήandτὸ καλόν, allowing the latter to Thucydides and both to Herodotus:ἡ δὲ Ἡροδότου σύνθεσις ἀμφότερα ταῦτα ἔχει‧ καὶ γὰρ ἡδεῖά ἐστι καὶ καλή.Hermogenes (ii. p. 226) makesγλυκύτηςthe characteristic of Herodotus on account of the attractiveness of his digressions.
candidus:§§113,121: Cic. Orat. §53 elaborant alii in ... puro et quasi quodam candido genere dicendi. So in ii. 5, 19 Quintilian recommends young persons to read candidum quemque et maxime expositum,—Livy rather than Sallust: of Livy he says elsewhere (§101) in narrando mirae iucunditatis clarissimique candoris. The word denotes ‘clearness,’ ‘transparency’: Dion. (Ἀρχ. κρ.R, Us. p. 22)τῆς δὲ σαφηνείας ἀναμφισβητήτως Ἡροδότῳ τὸ κατόρθωμα δέδοται. Such a quality of style is the revelation of a man’s inner nature. It avoids all adventitious ornament (ibid.τῷ ἀφελεῖ αὐτοφυεῖ ἀβασανίστῳ). Unduebrevitasoften interferes with it (ἀσαφὲς γίγνεται τὸ βραχύ), so that the word gives a partial antithesis tobrevis.
fusussupplies the antithesis todensusas well as tosemper instans sibi. Cp.§77: ii. 3, 5 constricta an latius fusa oratio: ix. 4, 138 fusi ac fluentes. So Cicero Orat. §39 alter sine ullis salebris quasi sedatus amnis fluit, alter incitatior fertur.
concitatis ... remissis adfectibus. Dionysius, speaking ofτῶν ἠθων τε καὶ παθῶν μίμησις(ad Cn. Pomp. p. 776 R, Us. p. 58), saysδιῄρηνται τὴν ἀρετὴν ταύτην οἱ συγγράφεις‧ Θουκυδίδης μὲν γὰρ τὰ πάθη δηλῶσαι κρείττων, Ἡρόδοτος δὲ τὰ γ᾽ ἤθη παραστῆσαι δεινότερος.So (Ἀρχ. κρ.p. 425 R, Us. p. 23)ἐν μέντοι τοῖς ἠθικοῖς κρατεῖ Ἡρόδοτος, ἐν δὲ τοῖς παθητικοῖς ὁ Θουκυδίδης. Cp. p. 793 Rὑπὲρ ἅπαντα δ᾽ αὐτοῦ ταῦτα τὸ παθητικόν.For the distinction betweenτὸ ἠθικόν(the appeal to the moral sense) andτὸ παθητικόν(the appeal to the emotions) see Cic. Orat. §128: Quint. vi. 2, §§8-10 Adfectus igitur hos concitatosπάθοςillos mites atque compositosἦθοςesse dixerunt, and sq. Cp. §§48 and 101 of this book, and iii. 4, 15 concitandis componendisve adfectibus.
contionibus ... sermonibus: not the same antithesis asnarrando ... contionibus§101, q.v. The opposition here is between the set harangues of Thucydides and the less formal conversations of Herodotus. In Thucydides the only dialogues are that between the Melians and the Athenians in Book V, and that between Archidamus and the Plataeans in Book II, whereas Herodotus ‘seldom speaks where there is a fair pretext for making the characters speak.... Even the longer speeches have usually the conversational tone rather than the rhetorical,’ Jebb. (Hild is wrong in referringsermonibustoτὸ πραγματικὸν εἶδοςin Dionysius andcontionibustoτὸ λεκτικόν:Ἀρχ. κρ.p. 424 R, Us. p. 22: cp. de Admir. Deor. vi. c. 51, p. 1112 R sq.). The speeches of Thucydides are criticised by Dionysius (under the head both ofτὸ πραγματικὸν μέροςandτὸ λεκτικόν) in his Iudicium, ch. 34, p. 896 R sq. Herodotus on the other hand (ibid. 23 ad fin.),οὐδὲ δημηγορίαις πολλαῖς ... οὐδ᾽ ἐναγωνίοις κέχρηται λόγοις, οὐδ᾽ ἐν τῷ παθαίνειν καὶ δεινοποιεῖν τὰ πράγματα τὴν ἀλκὴν ἔχει.Dionysius’s own opinion of the speeches in Thucydides is seen from the last chapter of his Iudicium (pp. 950-2 R) to have agreed with that of Cicero, Orator §30: ipsae illae contiones ita multas habent obscuras abditasque sententias vix ut intellegantur. (Cp. Brutus §287.) On this ground he says nihil ab eo transferri potest ad forensem usum et publicum: cp. de Opt. Gen. 15, 16. Dionysius, however (ch. 34 ad init.) indicates that some people thought differently:τῶν δημηγοριῶν ἐν αἷς οἴονταί τινες τὴν ἄκραν τοῦ συγγραφέως εἶναι δύναμιν.—For the speeches see Blass, Att. Bereds p. 231 sq.: and Jebb’s Essay inHellenica, esp. pp. 269-275.
vi ... voluptate. Many passages may be quoted from Dionysius to illustrate this antithesis:Ἀχρ. κρ.p. 425 R, Usener p. 23ῥώμῃ δὲ καὶ ἰσχύι καὶ τόνῳ καὶ τῷ περιττῷ καὶ πολυσχηματίστῳ παρηυδοκίμησε Θουκυδίδης: ἡδονῇ δὲ καὶ πειθοῖ καὶ χάριτι ... μακρῷ διενεγκόντα τὸν Ἡρόδοτον εὑρίσκομεν: ad. Cn. Pomp. iii. p. 776 R (Us. p. 58)ἕπονται ταύταις αἱ τὴν ἰσχὺν καὶ τὸν τόνον καὶ τὰς ὁμοιοτρόπους δυνάμεις τῆς φράσεως ἀρεταὶ περιέχουσαι. κρείττων ἐν ταύταις Ἡροδότου Θουκυδίδης. ἡδονὴν δὲ καὶ πειθὼ καὶ τέρψιν καὶ τὰς ὁμοιογενεῖς ἀρετὰς εἰσφέρεται μακρῷ Θουκυδίδου κρείττονας Ἡρόδοτος.So Iud. de Thucyd. 23, p. 866 Rπειθοῦς τε καὶ χαρίτων καὶ τῆς εἰς ἀκρὸν ἡκούσης ἡδονῆς ἕνεκα.So in the Epist. ad Pomp. iii. p. 767 R he praises Herodotus for his choice of subject (ὑπόθεσιν ... καλὴν καὶ κεχαρισμένην τοῖς ἀναγνωσομένοιςUs. p. 50), while Thucyd. was consciousὅτι εἰς μὲν ἀκρόασιν ἧττον ἐπιτερπὴς ἡ γραφή ἐστι(de Comp. Verb. p. 165 R). It is his variety (μεταβολὴ καὶ ποικίλον) and the providing of agreeableἀναπαύσειςthat give Hdt. his charm:καὶ γὰρ τὸ βιβλίον ἢν αὐτοῦ λάβωμεν μέχρι τῆς ἐσχάτης συλλαβῆς ἀγάμεθα καὶ ἀεὶ τὸ πλεῖον ἐπιζητοῦμενp. 772 R: while Thucydides is by comparisonἀσαφὴς καὶ δυσπαρακολούθητοςp. 773 (Usener pp. 54-5).
For vi cp. also Orat. §39 alter incitatior fertur, et de bellicis rebus canit etiam quodam modo bellicum: for voluptate Quint. ix. 4, 18 in Herodoto vero cum omnia, ut ego quidem sentio, leniter fluunt, tum ipsaδιάλεκτοςhabet eam iucunditatem ut latentes in se numeros complexa videatur. And again Dionysius, p. 777 R: Us. p. 59διαφέρουσι δὲ κατὰ τοῦτο μάλιστα ἀλλήλων ὅτι τὸ μὲν Ἡροδότου κάλλος ἱλαρόν ἐστι, φοβερὸν δὲ(‘impressive’)τὸ Θουκυδίδου.
I:74Theopompushis proximusut in historia praedictis minor, ita oratori magis similis, ut qui, antequam est ad hoc opus sollicitatus, diu fuerit orator.Philistusquoque meretur qui turbae quamvis bonorum post eos auctorum eximatur, imitator Thucydidi et ut multo infirmior,ita aliquatenus lucidior.Ephorus, ut Isocrati visum, calcaribus eget.Clitarchiprobatur ingenium, fides infamatur.