CHAPTER VI_Greek tragedy

METRE AND RHYTHM IN GREEK TRAGEDY

§ I. INTRODUCTION

Poetry is illuminating utterance consisting of words the successive

sounds of which are arranged according to a recurrent pattern. The soul

of poetry is this illumination, its body this recurrent pattern of

sounds; and it is with the body that we are now to deal. At the outset

we must distinguish carefully between rhythm and metre. Rhythm is the

recurrence just mentioned—the structure; metre is the gathering together

of sounds into masses upon which rhythm shall do its work. Metre, so to

put it, makes the bricks, while rhythm makes the arch.

Greek metre is based, not upon stress-accent,[858] but upon quantity—the

length of time needed for the pronunciation of a syllable. In English the

line

My bosom’s lord sits lightly in his throne

is “scanned” (that is to say, marked off into “feet”—the metrical units)

as a series of five iambi; the iambus being a foot which consists of an

unaccented, followed by an accented, syllable. The word “bosoms” can

stand where it does because the stress of the voice naturally falls upon

the first syllable of “bosom”; to begin a line with “my seréne bosom”

would clearly be wrong. The _length_ of the syllables has no effect on

the scansion. That “sits” needs as long a time for its utterance as the

first syllable of “lightly” does not alter the fact that “sits light-” is

an accentual iambus.

Greek words, on the other hand, as metrical material, are considered only

from the quantitative point of view, not the accentual. The voice-stress

in the word λόγους rests upon the first syllable, but the word is an

iambus, a “short” followed by a “long” (marked respectively thus ⏑–).

Whereas an English blank verse consists of five accentual iambi, _e.g._

To ént|ertaín | divíne | Zenócr|até,

the corresponding verse of all the Greek dramatists is composed of six

feet each of which is theoretically a quantitative iambus, and most of

which actually are such. Thus _Andromache_, v. 241 is to be scanned

⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

When is a syllable long and when short? A few rules will settle all but a

minority. _All_ syllables are long—

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

(ii) Which contain a diphthong or _iota_ subscript, _e.g._ ο̅ι̅νος,

α̅ι̅νο̅υ̅μεν, ρᾳ̅διως; save that the first syllable of ποιῶ and τοιοῦτος

(and their parts) is often short.

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

ε̄ψαυσα.

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

_Most_ syllables are long the vowel of which is followed by two

consonants. But there is some difficulty about this very frequent case.

It can arise in three ways:—

(_a_) Both consonants may be in the same word as the vowel. Then the

syllable is long, save when the consonants are (i) a voiced stop (β, γ,

δ) followed by ρ; or (ii) a voiceless stop or spirant (κ, π, τ; θ, φ,

χ) followed by a liquid or nasal (λ, ρ, μ, ν)—in both of which cases

the syllable can be counted long or short at pleasure. Thus ε̄σμεν,

μο̄ρφη, ᾱνδρος; but the first syllables of ιδρις, τεκνον, ποτμος are

“doubtful”—they can be either long or short as suits the poet.

(_b_) One of the consonants may end its word and the other begin the

next. Such syllables are _all_ long. Thus, τηκτο̄ς μολυβδος, ανδρε̄ς

σοφοι, although both these long syllables are “short by nature” (see

below).

(_c_) Both consonants may occur at the beginning of the second word. If

the vowel is naturally short, the syllable is almost always short, though

such scansions as σε̄ κτενω are occasionally found. But if the second

word begins with a double consonant or σ followed by another consonant,

the syllable is always long. Thus ο̄ ξενος, τῑ ζητεις, ταυτᾱ σκοπουμεν.

A vowel, naturally short, when thus lengthened is said to be “lengthened

by position.”

The following types of syllable are _always_ short:—

(i) Those containing a naturally short vowel (ε or ο) not lengthened by

position, _e.g._ ε̆κων, ο̆λος.

(ii) Final α of the third declension neuter singular (σωμᾰ), third

declension accusative singular (ελπιδᾰ, δρασαντᾰ), and all neuters

plural (τᾰ, σωματᾰ, τοιαυτᾰ).

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

diphthong.

(iv) The accusative -ας of the third declension (ανδρᾰς, πονουντᾰς).

But μουσᾱς (first declension). The quantity in both cases is that of the

corresponding nominative.

Hiatus is practically unknown. That is, a word ending in a vowel is not

to be followed by a word beginning with a vowel, unless one vowel or

the other disappears. Almost always it is the first vowel which is thus

cut off, the process being called “elision.” In verse one would not

write πάντα εἶπε, but πάντ’ εἶπε; not ἔτι εἶναι, but ἔτ’ εἶναι. When

the first vowel is long and the second short, the latter is cut off by

“prodelision,” a much rarer occurrence. Thus τούτῳ ἀνεῖπε would become

τούτῳ ’νεῖπε. Two long vowels, as in καλὴ ἡμέρα, are not used together at

all. But the rule as to hiatus does not normally apply at the end of a

verse; usually one can end a verse with an unelided vowel and begin the

next with a vowel. If in any metrical scheme this liberty is not allowed,

it is said that “synapheia[859] prevails.”

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

Greek Tragedy.

§ II. THE IAMBIC METRE

Practically all the dialogue and speeches are written in this metre. The

student would do well to grow thoroughly accustomed to reading these

aloud with correct quantities before he attempts the others.

The iambic line consists of six feet, any one of which may be an iambus.

But a “pure” iambic line, one in which every foot is an iambus, as in

_Andromache_, v. 241 (see above), is very rare. A speech written solely

in such feet would be highly monotonous and far too rapid. Other feet are

therefore allowed, under restrictions, to take the place of the iambus.

By far the commonest of these is the spondee, which consists of two long

syllables (λο̄γχη̄, πᾱντω̄ν). This can occur in the first, third, or

fifth places—one, two, or all three. Thus:—

– – ⏑– ⏑ – ⏑ – – – ⏑ –

– – ⏑ – – – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

Next, the lightness and variety is often greatly increased by the use of

“resolved”[860] (or broken-up) feet. Each long syllable being regarded as

equal to two “shorts,” it follows that the iambus can be “resolved” into

⏑⏑⏑, the spondee into –⏑⏑, ⏑⏑– (and ⏑⏑⏑⏑, but this last is not employed

in iambics).

Of these three the tribrach (⏑⏑⏑) is much the most frequent. As it

corresponds to the iambus, it can occur in any place, save the sixth; it

is exceedingly rare in the fifth place:—

– – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – – ⏑ – – – ⏑ –

⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – – ⏑ –

The dactyl (–⏑⏑) is allowed in those places to which the spondee is

admitted, save the fifth (just as the tribrach is excluded from the

sixth). Thus:—

– – ⏑ – – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – – – ⏑ –

⏑ – ⏑ – – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – – – ⏑ –

It is rare in the first foot.

Least common of all is the anapæst (⏑⏑–), which appears only in the first

foot, unless it is contained entirely in a proper name, when it can occur

in any place save the sixth. This license is due to necessity: such a

name as Ἀντῐγόνη could not otherwise be introduced into iambics at all.

Examples:—

⏑ ⏑ – ⏑– ⏑ – ⏑ – – – ⏑ –

– – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑⏑ – ⏑ –

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

– – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

– ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

Two licenses should be noted. The last syllable of the line may be short;

no doubt the pause[861] at the end was felt to help it out. Lines of

this kind are innumerable, _e.g._:—

⏑⏑

Κρατος Βια τε σφῳν μεν εντολη | Διος (_Prom. Vinctus_, 12)

(which is followed by a vowel—ἔχει). It matters little whether such

syllables are marked as short, as long, or with the sign of doubtful

quantity ( ᷋). Next, synizesis (συνίζησις, “collapse”) occurs now and

then—two syllables coalesce and are scanned as one, _e.g._ μ̅η̅ ̅ο̅υ̅,

πολε̅ω̅ς:—

– – ⏑ – – – ⏑ – – – ⏑ –

– ⏑ – – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

– – ⏑ – – – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑

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

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

First, there must be a “cæsura”[862] in either the third or the fourth

foot. A cæsura is a gap between words in the middle of a foot. Either the

third foot, then, or the fourth must consist partly of one word, partly

of another. It is indicated in scansion by the sign ‖. Many verses have

this necessary cæsura in the third foot only, _e.g._:—

⏑ – ⏑ – – – ⏑ – – – ⏑ ⏑

Many show it in the fourth only:—

– – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – – – ⏑ ⏑

A still larger number have cæsura in both places:—

– – ⏑ – – – ⏑ – – – ⏑ ⏑

This usage is essential to rhythm. It is of course possible for every

foot in the line to exhibit a cæsura, but one in the midst is necessary

to prevent the line from falling into pieces. That coextension of word

and foot which is naturally frequent must at one point be emphatically

excluded, so that the whole line may be felt as a single rhythmical

whole. Such “lines” as

– – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – – – ⏑ ⏑

ταυτην αναξ λεγει καλην ειναι πολιν,

⏑ – ⏑– – – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑

Οδυσσεως δουλοι μαχουμενοι ταχα,

are utterly impossible.[863] The first falls into six scraps, and the

second into two mere lumps, of equal length. If a breach of the rule ever

occurs, it is for a special reason. When Sophocles (_Œd. Tyr._, 738)

writes

ὦ Ζεῦ, τί μου δρᾶσαι βεβούλευσαι πέρι;

the dragging rhythm well represents the dawning dread of Œdipus. But the

main cæsura may be dispensed with if the third foot ends with an elision,

apparently because, if the word could be written in full, the fourth foot

would be divided between two words. Thus:—

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

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

The other rule is that generally called “the rule of the Final

Cretic”.[864] It is most simply stated thus: if there is a cæsura in the

fifth foot, that foot must be an iambus, _e.g._:—

⏑ – ⏑ –

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

⏑ – ⏑ –

τον τουδε νεκρον ουκ αθαπτ|ον ‖ αν | λιποις (_Ibid._, 738).

This rule does not exclude from the first half of the foot long

_monosyllables_ which are in meaning and syntax closely connected with

the “cretic” word or words. Thus τῶν σωμάτων is a quite correct ending,

but not τούτων σωμάτων.

Subjoined is a scheme of the iambic verse as written by the tragedians.

The writers of comedy allowed themselves licenses with which we are not

here concerned. Euripides is much fonder of resolved feet than Æschylus

or Sophocles.

1 2 3 4 5 6

⏑– ⏑– ⏑‖– ⏑‖– ⏑– ⏑–

⏑⏑⏑ ⏑⏑⏑ ⏑‖⏑⏑ ⏑‖⏑⏑ ⏑⏑⏑ ⏑⏑

– – [⏑⏑–] –‖– [⏑⏑–] – –

–⏑⏑ –‖⏑⏑ [⏑⏑–]

⏑⏑– [⏑⏑–]

§ III. THE TROCHAIC TETRAMETER

Under this head we shall deal only with trochees as used in dialogue.

Originally all dialogue was written in this metre,[865] and they

sometimes appear in extant plays when the situation is too hurried or

excited for iambics though not agitated enough for lyrical dialogue.

These passages are not usually long, and it is interesting to note that

the longest are found in the two most melodramatic plays, _Orestes_ and

_Iphigenia at Aulis_.[866] The metre is always the trochaic tetrameter

catalectic[867] (sometimes called the trochaic octonarius), that is,

a line consisting of eight feet, mostly trochees, with “catalexis”.

Catalexis occurs when the last foot of a line has not its full number of

syllables, the remainder being filled by a pause in delivery.

Pure trochaic verses are occasionally to be found:—

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

The mark ꞈ means that there is a pause equivalent in length to a short

syllable. It is often found in the scansion of lyrics, and there one also

at times uses -̭ ⏗̭ ⏘̭, which mean pauses equivalent to two, three, and

four short syllables respectively. As in iambics, the last syllable may

be short by nature:—

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑–

857).

This metre is plainly analogous to Tennyson’s

Dreary gleams about the moorland flying over Locksley Hall.

But such purely trochaic lines are rare. Other feet are usually admitted,

especially the spondee:—

– ⏑ – – – ⏑ – – – ⏑ – – – ⏑ –

Aul._, 320).

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

The tribrach also is often employed by Euripides:—

– ⏑ – – – ⏑ – – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – – – ⏑ –

756).

– ⏑ – – – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

Taur._ 1232).

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

the first:—

⏑ ⏑⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – – – ⏑ –

740).

Euripides, late in his career, introduced a good deal of license, here

as elsewhere. Firstly, tribrachs become far more frequent and occur in

unusual places:—

⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ᷋

609).

To place a resolved foot practically at the end of the line is bold—the

metre is shaken almost to pieces. Here, as in other respects, Euripides

points forward to the conversational manner of the New Comedy. But he

goes further, and allows feet hitherto not found in trochaics: the

anapæst and the dactyl. The latter, however, is extremely rare[868] and

employed only with proper names:—

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – – – ⏑ –

(_Orestes_, 1535).

– ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ᷋

Aul._, 882).

The anapæst is commoner (there is a proper-name instance in the line just

quoted):—

– ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – – ⏑ – – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

(_Orestes_, 797).

– ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – – – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – – ⏑ ᷋

612).

There is no rule as to cæsura. The end of the fourth foot regularly

coincides with the end of a word; such an arrangement is named

diæresis.[869] In all extant tragedy only one certain exception to this

rule is found:—

– ⏑ – – – ⏑ – – – ⏑ – – – ⏑ ᷋

1402).

Since diæresis is practically always found in so many hundreds of lines,

being preserved even in the loosest writing of Euripides, why should we

regard the recognized trochaic verse as an unity? Why not write, _e.g._:—

οὐ γὰρ ἂν ξυμβαῖμεν ἄλλως

ἢ ’πὶ τοῖς εἰρημένοις,

ὥστ’ ἐμὲ σκήπτρων κρατοῦντα

τῆσδ’ ἄνακτ’ εἶναι χθονός (_Phœnissæ_, 590 _sq._).

If the line falls into two clearly marked halves, why not show this to

the eye? There is no unanswerable objection to doing so—the passage above

corresponds exactly in rhythmical form to much English verse, _e.g._:—

Art is long, and Time is fleeting,

And our hearts, though stout and brave,

Still, like muffled drums, are beating

Funeral marches to the grave.

The practice in English is to break up the long trochaic “line” into

two when the words at the diæresis rhyme (as in the above passage

from Longfellow), but not to do so when the only rhymes occur at the

catalectic foot. We print the opening of another poem by Longfellow thus:—

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

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

In Greek there is, of course, no rhyme-scheme to settle this, but

the regular catalexis is felt to mark off separate units. The entire

question depends upon personal fancy,[870] though the instance from

the _Philoctetes_ shows that Sophocles at any rate regarded the whole

octonarius as the unit.

Subjoined is the scheme:—

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

–⏑ –⏑ –⏑ –⏑ –⏑ –⏑ –⏑ –ꞈ

⏑⏑⏑ – – ⏑⏑⏑ – – ⏑⏑⏑ – – ⏑⏑⏑

⏑⏑⏑ [–⏑⏑] ⏑⏑⏑ ⏑⏑⏑

⏑⏑– ⏑⏑– ⏑⏑–

[–⏑⏑]

§ IV. THE ANAPÆSTIC METRE

Whereas iambics and trochaics were declaimed by the actors, anapæsts were

used mostly by the chorus, and were chanted in recitative. They are found

when the chorus move into the orchestra, or salute the entrance of a new

character. Most tragedies end with a brief anapæstic system, executed by

the singers as they depart.

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

⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ –

τι συ προς | μελαθροις | τι συ τῃδ|ε πολεις; (_Alcestis_, 29).

But lines consisting of anapæsts alone are very uncommon. The spondee is

often found:—

– – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – – –

ουκ ηρκ|εσε σοι | μορον Αδμ|ητου (_Alcestis_, 32).

Dactyls also are frequent:—

– – ⏑ ⏑ – – ⏑ ⏑ – –

σφηλαντ|ι τεχνῃ | νυν δ επι | τῃδ αυ (_Ibid._, 34).

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

in the line.

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

feet.

Anapæstic systems are invariably closed by a catalectic verse:—

– – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑– –

αυτη | προθανειν | Πελιου | παιςꞈ̄ (_Ibid._, 37).

In systems of considerable length such lines occur at intervals. They are

called “parœmiacs”.[871]

§ V. LYRICS

The metres of Greek songs form a difficult and complicated study. So long

as we do not know the music composed for them, the scansion of lyrics

must remain a more difficult and doubtful question than that of the

iambics, episodic trochaics, and anapæsts.

The best preparation for their study is the habit of reading iambics

and trochaics with correct quantities and natural emphasis. Let us,

so prepared, address ourselves to the following passage[872] from the

_Agamemnon_ (975 _sqq._):—

Τίπτε μοι τόδ’ ἔμπεδον

δεῖμα προστατήριον

καρδίας τερασκόπου ποτᾶται;

μαντιπολεῖ δ’ ἀκέλευστος ἄμισθος ἀοιδά,

οὐδ’ ἀποπτύσαι δίκαν

δυσκρίτων ὀνειράτων

θάρσος εὐπειθὲς ἵζει φρενὸς φίλον θρόνον;

χρόνος δέ τοι πρυμνησίων ξυνεμβολαῖς

ψαμμίας ἐξ ἀκτᾶς βέβηκεν, εὖθ’ ὑπ’ Ἴλιον

ὦρτο ναυβάτας στρατός.

It soon becomes plain that the passage is, at any rate in the main,

trochaic. The first two lines scan easily, ending with a catalectic foot.

We note that the third seems to drag at the end:—

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – –

καρδι|ας τερ|ασκοπ|ου ποτ|αται,

for we remember that in the trochaic octonarius the last complete foot is

never a spondee. But in the fourth line we are quite baffled:—

– ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ –

μαντιπ|ολει δ | ακελευστ|ος...?

Anapæsts are very rare in trochaics, iambi unknown. That the iambus

should never replace the trochee is quite natural. It would be hideous

rhythm, in the first line of _Locksley Hall_, instead of “Cómrades, leave

me here a little ...,” to write “Dragoóns, leave me ...”. The foot ο̆λεῑ

cannot be right. The line seems hopeless; or rather, if we have any

knowledge of Homeric and Virgilian metre, we recognize something like the

dactylic hexameter:—

– ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – –

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

But is such a passage possible in a trochaic passage written for Greek

music? It is known that in Greek music the notes corresponded closely

to the syllables; music composed for trochees will certainly be in

three-eighths time, for dactyls in four-eighths time. All these feet

should have three beats, not four.

The next two lines are plainly similar to the first and second. In

the seventh line we first wonder why, though we are in the midst of a

grammatical sentence, the words should begin farther to the right than is

usual, as if for a new paragraph. When we try to scan, we find once more

the iambus-difficulty:—

– ⏑ – – ⏑ –

θαρσος | ευπειθ|ες ιζ....

If we work backwards from the end, -ος φιλον θρονον gives the familiar

trochaic-octonarius ending, –⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ. But the middle of the line has

fallen to pieces, and for the present we leave it.

The eighth line seems at first more familiar. Is it not the ordinary

iambic senarius of § II? But where is the cæsura? And can we suddenly

insert an iambic line into a trochaic system? Is it then possible

after all to scan it as some kind of trochaics? Begin at the end. ...

ε̅μ̅βο̆λα̅ι̅ςꞈ suits excellently; and if we work backwards we soon find

that the whole would fall readily into trochaics if only we could ignore

the first syllable:—

– ⏑ – – – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

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

left?

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

the second:—

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ᷋

ηκεν | ευθ υπ | Ιλι|ονꞈ.

Grown by this time bolder, we attack the first half in detail, working

backwards. ᾱς βε̆ is easy. Then ἐξ ακτ ... may be either –⏑ or – –, both

of which are admissible. We are left with ψ̅α̅μμῐᾱς. Reading the whole

line over slowly, marking the trochees carefully, we find ourselves

somehow dwelling on the last syllable of ψαμμίας. Why should we? If that

syllable were only –⏑, all would be well; but it is not. Finally, the

tenth and last line is quite easy:—

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑–

ωρτο | ναυβατ|ας στρατ|οςꞈ.

The whole passage then is trochaic; but we have met four difficulties:

(i) the necessity to dwell upon certain syllables, (ii) the irrational

presence of dactyls, (iii) the temptation to ignore the first syllable of

χρόνος, (iv) the insetting of θάρσος. Understanding of these four facts

will carry us a long way. We take them in order.

Our first point indicates that we must revise that division of all

syllables into “longs” of equal value and “shorts” of equal value (each

“long” being exactly equivalent to two “shorts”) which obtains in

iambics. The lyric metres recognize syllables of greater length than

⏑⏑. Most frequent is the length ⏗, equal to ⏑⏑⏑. A syllable of this

length is therefore admitted in lyric trochaic systems as a whole foot,

and investigations, such as we have practised above, will generally show

where such a foot is to be postulated. We can now scan certain portions

which we found troublesome:—

– ⏑ ⏗ – ⏑ ⏗

θαρσος | ευπ | ειθες | ιζ | ...

– ⏑ ⏗ – ⏑ –

ψαμμι|ας | εξ ακτ | ας....

Moreover, as we were suspicious of the final spondee (replacing

the expected trochee) in the third line, we obtain at any rate a

quasi-trochee by scanning thus:—

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ⏗ –

This prolongation of a syllable is called τονή (“stretching”). Such a

syllable may fill a foot, as in trochaics, and this rhythm is said to be

syncopated.[873]

Next comes the dactylic fourth line, which introduces another vital

rule. Trochaic systems admit, not genuine dactyls, but “cyclic” dactyls.

To the “long” of each foot and to the first “short” is given less than

their usual length: the rhythm is accelerated, so that –⏑ is equivalent

to –, and the whole cyclic dactyl, marked ᷋⏑, is equivalent to a

trochee.[874] Whenever we see a number of apparent dactyls, we must

examine the whole passage to find whether it is trochaic or not. Trochaic

systems which contain cyclic dactyls are called “logaoedic”.[875] The

present line, then, being trochaic, we feel the same doubt of the final

spondee (which would equal ⏑⏑⏑⏑, not ⏑⏑⏑, as it should) which we felt in

the third line, and scan the whole:—

– ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ ⏗ –

Our third question touched the first syllable of χρόνος in the sixth

line. It is, as a fact, to be regarded as standing outside the metrical

line—a kind of prelude, called “anacrusis”.[876] It is plain that neglect

of anacrusis will often throw our scansion out completely. A useful rule

can be given: in almost[877] any line, whatever comes before the first

long syllable forms an anacrusis. The reason is that the first syllable

of a foot must have an “ictus” (see below) or stress-accent, and the

foot-ictus normally falls on long syllables. It becomes natural then to

pronounce the first short or shorts (if any) quickly, and to give the

first long the ictus; in this way the short is felt as a mere preliminary

to the line. The anacrusis, however, can be of three forms, ⏑, ⏑⏑, –. Its

length must be that of the second part of the characteristic foot, ⏑ for

trochees, – or ⏑⏑ for dactyls, and so forth. It is marked off from the

first foot by the sign ⁝.

The fourth point was the insetting of θάρσος. It happens in the middle

of a grammatical sentence, so that there can be no question of an

ordinary paragraph. But if it does not point to a break in sense, its

only reference can be rhythmical. The whole passage must fall into two

distinct rhythmical paragraphs. Let us scan them separately and endeavour

to find a reason for this break. Take the first, scanning, marking, and

numbering the feet:—

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

τιπτε | μοι τοδ | εμπεδ|ονꞈ‖

1 2 3 4

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

δειμα | προστατ|ηρι|ονꞈ‖

1 2 3 4

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ⏗ –

1 2 3 4 5 6

– ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ ⏗ –

1 2 3 4 5 6

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

ουδ απ|οπτυσ|αι δικ|ανꞈ‖

1 2 3 4

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

δυσκριτ|ων ον|ειρατ|ωνꞈ‖

1 2 3 4

If we examine this to find structural unity, it soon appears. The first

pair of lines answers to the last, and line three to line four, in the

number of their feet 4 + 4, 6, 6, 4 + 4. The correspondence is indicated

thus:—

⎰ 4

⎛ ⎱ 4

⎜ ⎛ 6

⎜ ⎝ 6

⎝ ⎰ 4

⎱ 4

Each of these masses, it will be noticed, is marked off by the sign ‖.

Such a mass is named a “sentence” or “colon” (κῶλον, “limb”), and such a

balanced structure of cola is named a “period” (περίοδος, “circuit”). It

happens that in the passage just examined the “sentence” division always

occurs at the end of a word, but this is not invariably so. We proceed

now with the second paragraph[878]—the second period as we shall now call

it.

– ⏑ ⏗ – ⏑ ⏗ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

⏑ – ⏑ – ˃ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

1 2 3 4 5 6

– ⏑ ⏗ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

ψαμμι|ας | εξ ακτ|ας βεβ‖ηκεν | ευθ υπ | Ιλι|ονꞈ‖

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

ωρτο | ναυβατ|ας στρατ|οςꞈ‖

1 2 3 4

That is: 4 + 4, 6, 4 + 4, 4. This would be an obviously well-balanced

structure but for the last colon, to which nothing corresponds. Such

an extra sentence is called a “postlude” (ἐπῳδικόν). Non-corresponding

sentences like this are far from rare.[879] They may occur at the

beginning of the period (“prelude,” προῳδικόν), in the middle (“mesode,”

μεσωδικόν), or at the end. This very period supplies an example of a

mesode as well as of a postlude. The scheme is:—

⎰ 4

⎛ ⎱ 4

⎜ 6—mesode.

⎝ ⎰ 4

⎱ 4

4—postlude.

The whole passage, then, consists of two periods connected by meaning and

grammar, but—for us—by no more intimate musical bond than the common use

of trochees. But the dance and music which accompanied the whole would

clearly demonstrate its unity. The end of a period is indicated by ‖.

It is necessary now to consider briefly the passage which immediately

follows (vv. 988 _sqq._):—

Πεύθομαι δ’ ἀπ’ ὀμμάτων

νόστον, αὐτόμαρτυς ὤν·

τὸν δ’ ἄνευ λύρας ὅμως ὑμνῳδεῖ

θρῆνον Ἐρινύος αὐτοδίδακτος ἔσωθεν

θυμός, οὐ τὸ πᾶν ἔχων

ἐλπίδος φίλον θράσος.

σπλάγχνα δ’ οὔτοι ματάζει πρὸς ἐνδίκοις φρεσίν

τελεσφόροις δίναις κυκλούμενον κέαρ.

εὔχομαι δ’ ἐξ ἐμᾶς τοι[880] ἐλπίδος ψύθη πεσεῖν

ἐς τὸ μὴ τελεσφόρον.

This is an exact counterpart in syllables, feet, cola, and periods, of

the first passage. The first is called the “strophe” (στροφή, “turn”),

the second the “antistrophe” (ἀντιστροφή, “counter-turn”). The chorus,

while singing the one, performed various evolutions about the orchestra,

and these were repeated exactly, but in reversed order, while they sang

the antistrophe. All these lyrics are so constructed; the normal tragic

“chorus” consists of one or more such pairs, though occasionally the

antistrophe is followed by a passage called an “epode”.[881] The epodes

correspond to each other, not to the strophes. This equivalence of

strophe and antistrophe is often of value in determining the quantities

or the text in one of them.

We have now gained some insight into the nature of a Greek choric song.

But before proceeding further it will be well to deepen our impression by

taking from the _Agamemnon_ (vv. 160 _sqq._) another, and a simpler, pair

of strophes:—

Ζεύς, ὅστις ποτ’ ἐστίν, εἰ τόδ’ αὐτῷ φίλον κεκλημένῳ,

τοῦτό νιν προσεννέπω.

οὐχ ἔχω προσεικάσαι, πάντ’ ἐπισταθμώμενος,

πλὴν Διός, εἰ τὸ μάταν ἀπὸ φροντίδος ἄχθος

χρὴ βαλεῖν ἐτητύμως.

οὐδ’ ὅστις πάροιθεν ἦν μέγας, παμμάχῳ θράσει βρύων,

οὐδὲ λέξεται πρὶν ὤν·

ὃς δ’ ἔπειτ’ ἔφυ τριακτῆρος οἴχεται τυχών.

Ζῆνα δέ τις προφρόνως ἐπινίκια κλάζων

τεύξεται φρενῶν τὸ πᾶν.

⏗|⏗|–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|⏗‖–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|⏗‖–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

–⏑⏑|–⏑⏑|–⏑⏑|–⏑⏑|⏗|–ꞈ‖

–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

⎰ 6

⎛ ⎱ 4

⎜ ⎛ 4

⎜ ⎜ 4—mesode.

⎜ ⎝ 4

⎝ ⎰ 6

⎱ 4

The chief interest of this subject is the art wherewith the Greek masters

accompanied variations of emotion and the like with variations of rhythm.

This passage affords a simple and stately example. The heavy opening (⏗⏗)

is followed by the more confident trochees till, at the last line but

one, religious rapture (in the strophe) and the ardour of triumph (in the

antistrophe) burst forth with the leaping cyclic dactyls.

We have now become acquainted with three rhythmical masses: the colon,

the period, the strophe. Are there others? What is a “verse” in lyrics?

There is no such thing.[882] One must, of course, distinguish between a

“line” and a “verse”. Lines there must be—that is an affair of the scribe

and the printer; verses are rhythmical units, and there is no rhythmical

mass in Greek lyrics between the colon and the period. How then are we

to arrange our periods, there being no verse-division? The most obvious

way is to write each colon as a separate line. The difficulty is that we

shall often be compelled to break words:—

θάρσος εὐπειθὲς ἵζ-

ει φρενὸς φίλον θρόνον ...

ψαμμίας ἐξ ἀκτᾶς βέβ-

ηκεν....

Another method is to let each line run on until we reach a colon-ending

which coincides with a word-ending. Here is no new rhythmical rule: it is

purely a question of convenience for the eye. Next, shall we ever write

lines of (say) two cola the first of which does close with a word-ending?

It is natural so to do when to the two cola in question there correspond

(whether periodically or strophically) two cola which _must_ on this

system fill one line only. For instance, in Æsch., _Supplices_, 656, we

shall write—

– ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏗ –⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏗ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑–

και γαρ υποσκιων ‖ νυν στοματων ποτασθ‖ω φιλοτιμος ευχα ‖,

though the first colon ends at the end of ὑποσκίων, because the

corresponding passage of the antistrophe runs—

– ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏗ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏗ –⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ᷋

και γεραροι δε πρεσβ‖υτοδοκοι γεμοντ‖ων θυμελαι φλεγοντων ‖,

where the first colon ends inside a word. It is purely a matter of taste

whether we give a line to each colon, in which case the drawback is

the breaking of words, or continue our line till breaking of words is

excluded, the trouble about which method is the reader’s difficulty in

seeing where some of the cola begin.

We must now consider the most vital and difficult portion of our subject.

How are we to determine the cola? The colon is the very soul of the

rhythm. The period is generally too long for the ear to receive it as one

artistic impression. The foot is too short; moreover, the mere foot too

often tends to play one false: irrational syllables and τονή are against

us. But the colon is neither too long nor too short. The colon-division

serves the same purpose as non-commissioned officers in a regiment, or

the determination of watersheds in geography—it gives a sense both of

grouping and of control.

What precisely _is_ a colon? It is as much of a strophe as can be uttered

without making a new start. It is the embodiment of rhythm, as the foot

is the embodiment of metre. In other words, it is a series of feet

bound into a rhythmical unity by the presence of one main ictus. Three

questions, then, arise. (i) What is an ictus? (ii) Which is the main

ictus of a series? (iii) Can we with certainty determine the beginning

and end of a colon when we have identified the main ictus?

(i) Ictus is stress-accent. The ictus of any single word is usually

obvious. In the word “maritime” it falls upon the first syllable, in

“dragoon” upon the second, in “cultivation” upon the third. In πάντων,

λυσαμένοις, and κατάπαστος, it falls upon the first, second, and third

respectively. Greek metre is based upon quantity, but Greek rhythm

(like all other rhythm) is based upon ictus. A strophe can, and must,

be scanned foot by foot on quantity alone; but when we go beyond the

foot-division to exhibit the structure of the whole, we must refer to

ictus and nothing but ictus—for structure is an affair of cola, and the

colon is created by the main ictus.

(ii) Among the many word-ictuses of a considerable passage, a few will

be found which are heavier than the rest. These are simply the ictuses

of the most important words. Each of these prominent ictuses gathers

the neighbouring minor ictuses into a group round itself. We should

begin then by fixing some obvious example, one (that is) where the main

ictus is unmistakable, and on this basis attempt, by the help of the

correspondences which we expect, to determine other main ictuses. The

strophe will thus gradually fall into cola. This leads us at once to our

third question.

(iii) Can we with certainty determine the extent of each colon?

Unfortunately no simple invariable rule can be given for the settlement

of this vital point. But certain useful principles may be mentioned.

(_a_) A well-trained ear is the chief guide. Intelligent and careful

reading aloud of an English prose-passage will show this. Take first (the

best-known version of) a famous sentence of John Bright:—

The Angel of Death is abroad in the land: you may almost hear

the beating of his wings.

It is plain that this falls into two rhythmical parts, though we shall

not expect them to correspond, since this is prose, not verse. If we

set a dash for each syllable and mark the ictuses by one or more dots

according to their strength, we find this scheme:—

⁚ ⁝ ⁚ ·

- - - - - - - - - - - ‖

· ⁚ ⁝ ⁚

- - - - - - - - - - - ‖

(It will be noticed that in this superb passage the two periods do, as it

happens, correspond in length.)

Who hath believed our report? And to whom is the arm of the

Lord revealed? (_Isaiah_ liii. 1).

· ⁚ ⁝ · ⁚ ⁝ ⁚

- - - - - - - ‖ - - - - - - - - - - - ‖

So with longer passages, where, however, we shall find at times that our

voice quite naturally makes a colon-ending in the midst of a grammatical

sentence.

Therefore let us also, ‖ seeing we are compassed about ‖ with

so great a cloud of witnesses, ‖ lay aside every weight, ‖ and

the sin which doth so easily beset us, ‖ and let us run with

patience ‖ the race that is set before us ‖ (_Hebrews_ xii. 1,

R.V.).

· ⁚ ·

- - - - - -

· ⁚ ·

- - - - - - - -

· ⁚ ⁝

- - - - - - - - -

· ⁚ ⁝

- - - - - - -

⁚ ⁝ ⁚

- - - - - - - - - - - -

· ⁚ ⁝

- - - - - - -

⁝ ⁚ ·

- - - - - - - -

(Observe how, in the last two cola, first the mounting and then the

declining emphasis provide a splendid close.)

Let us now attempt so to catch the rhythm of a passage from Sophocles

(_Antigone_, 582 _sqq._) if set out as prose.

εὐδαίμονες οἷσι κακῶν ἄγευστος αἰών. οἷς γὰρ ἂν σεισθῇ θεόθεν

δόμος, ἄτας οὐδὲν ἐλλείπει, γενεᾶς ἐπὶ πλῆθος ἕρπον· ὅμοιον

ὥστε ποντίαις οἶδμα δυσπνόοις ὅταν θρῄσσαισιν ἔρεβος ὕφαλον

ἐπιδράμῃ πνοαῖς, κυλίνδει βυσσόθεν κελαινὰν θῖνα, καὶ δυσάνεμοι

στόνῳ βρέμουσιν ἀντιπλῆγες ἀκταί. ἀρχαῖα τὰ Λαβδακιδᾶν οἴκων

ὁρῶμαι πήματα φθιτῶν ἐπὶ πήμασι πίπτοντ’, οὐδ’ ἀπαλλάσσει

γενεὰν γένος, ἀλλ’ ἐρείπει θεῶν τις, οὐδ’ ἔχει λύσιν. νῦν γὰρ

ἐσχάτας ὑπὲρ ῥίζας ὃ τέτατο φάος ἐν Οἰδίπου δόμοις, κατ’ αὖ νιν

φοινία θεῶν τῶν νερτέρων ἀμᾷ κονίς, λόγου τ’ ἄνοια καὶ φρενῶν

Ἐρινύς.

If we first mark the quantities (ignoring, as we must at first, the

possibility of ⏗ and ⏘) and go over the whole carefully, we soon find

that it falls into two corresponding portions: εὐδαίμονες ... ἀκταί

is the strophe, ἀρχαῖα ... Ἐρινύς the antistrophe. Next we look for

rhythmical units. On the one hand, there is the great difficulty that,

since we must have both periodic and strophic equivalence, certain cola

may take in words not belonging to the same sense-groups or grammatical

clauses. On the other hand, the fact that we have two great masses which

correspond exactly will help us. First, then, we note that εὐδαίμονες

... αἰών looks promising, and observing that this points to ἀρχαῖα ...

ὁρῶμαι as a colon also, and that this is in itself likely, we mark off

both these groups. Conversely, at the end of the antistrophe, λόγου ...

Ἐρινύς attracts us, and this is supported by the naturalness of στόνῳ ...

ἀκταί at the end of the strophe. Working backwards, and seeing a pause in

the punctuation at precisely the same place in both halves, namely, after

πνοαῖς and δόμοις, we assume that κυλίνδει ... δυσάνεμοι and κατ’ αὖ ...

κονίς are correspondent masses. But each is too long—sixteen syllables—to

be pronounced as a unit. We soon perceive that κυλίνδει ... κελαινάν,

θῖνα ... δυσάνεμοι, κατ’ αὖ ... τῶν, νερτέρων ... κονίς, are all separate

cola. Going backwards again, we find that ἐπιδράμῃ[883] πνοαῖς and

Οἰδίπου δόμοις, ὕφαλον ... πνοαῖς and φάος ... δόμοις, Θρῄσσαισιν ...

πνοαῖς and ῥίζας ... δόμοις, and indeed longer masses still, all give a

metrical correspondence. Which pair are we to select? οἶδμα ... πνοαῖς (=

νῦν ... δόμοις) is too long; ἐπιδράμῃ πνοαῖς (= Οἰδίπου δόμοις) is too

short. For we seek the longest unit which is convenient. We therefore

mark off οἶδμα ... ὅταν, νῦν ... ὑπέρ, Θρῄσσαισιν ... πνοαῖς, ῥίζας ...

δόμοις as cola. The same method will give us ὅμοιον ... ποντίαις and θεῶν

... λύσιν. Then we find ourselves left with οἷς γάρ ... ἕρπον and πήματα

... ἐρείπει, which we divide after ἄτας and πίπτοντ’.

At last we can set out the passage according to its structure. The

strophe runs thus:—

˃ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ⏗ –

ευ⁝δαιμονες | οισι κακ|ων α|γευστος | αι|ωνꞈ‖

– ⏑ – ˃ – ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ ⏗ –

– ⏑ – ˃ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑

⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

ο⁝μοιον | ωστε | ποντι|αιςꞈ‖

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

οιδμα | δυσπνο|οις οτ|ανꞈ‖

˃ – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ –

⏑ – ˃ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ˃

κυ⁝λινδει | βυσσο|θεν κελ|αιναν ‖

– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –

θινα | και δυσ|ανεμ|οιꞈ‖

⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ ⏗ –

There are two periods:—

I II

⎛ 6 ⎛ 6

⎝ 6 ⎜ ⎰ 4

⎜ ⎛ ⎱ 4

⎜ ⎜ 6—mesode.

⎜ ⎜ ⎰ 4

⎜ ⎝ ⎱ 4

⎝ 6

To this the antistrophe of course corresponds, though here and there an

irrational long corresponds to a short (e.g. -εῑπε͐ι to ε̄ρπο̆ν); the

last syllable of πήματα is lengthened by the following φθ.

It should be noted that this scheme differs somewhat from that given

in Jebb’s edition of the _Antigone_ (pp. lxi. _sq._). One reader’s ear

differs from that of another: hence the frequent divergencies to be

observed between editors in the arrangement of many lyrics.

(_b_) The ancient writer Aristoxenus gives certain rules as to the

maximum length of cola. They may be stated as follows:—

(i) There are three types of colon, the equal, the unequal, and the

quinquepartite. The equal cola are the dipody of 1 + 1 feet, the

tetrapody of 2 + 2; the unequal are the tripody of 2 + 1, and the

hexapody of 4 + 2; the quinquepartite is the pentapody of 3 + 2.

(ii) Equal cola must not be of greater length than sixteen “shorts”.

Therefore we may have a dipody of any foot, and a tetrapody of any save

those of more than four shorts in value; that is (_e.g._) a dipody of

cretics (–⏑–) is allowed, but not a tetrapody of that foot, which would

give 5 × 4 = 20 “shorts”.

(iii) Unequal cola may have the length of eighteen “shorts”. A tripody,

therefore, of any foot is allowed, but a hexapody of trochees only: a

hexapody of spondees would give 4 × 6 = 24 “shorts”.

(iv) Quinquepartite cola may extend to the value of twenty-five “shorts”.

Pentapodies are therefore possible of trochees, dactyls, spondees and

five-time feet.

(_c_) Certain detailed hints may be added:—

(i) The tetrapody is the most frequent length, the pentapody the rarest.

(ii) The end of a colon is often indicated in dactyls by a spondee, in

trochees by a single long syllable (whether ⏗ or –ꞈ).

(iii) In any one period there is a tendency to conformity in length. If 6

+ 5 + 4 and 6 + 6 + 4 are _prima facie_ equally possible, the latter is

as a rule to be preferred. In spite of the difference in sum-total (6 +

6 + 4 = 16; 6 + 5 + 4 = 15), this question often arises, because of the

possibility of τονή. It has to be decided[884] whether (_e.g._) παντός at

the close of a colon is to be scanned as two feet or one:

⏗ –

παντ|οςꞈ‖

– ⏑

| παντος ‖.

* * * * *

It is now time to offer an account of the various feet used in lyrics.

(_a_) _Trochees._—With these we are now familiar. This foot is often

called a choree, chorees with anacrusis being iambi,[885] without

anacrusis trochees. The trochee is the most frequent foot in lyrics. Such

systems express ordinary strong interest. Whenever more definite emotion

is to be conveyed, either cyclic dactyls are introduced, or a change is

made to some other metre:—

Κολχίδος τε γᾶς ἔνοικοι

παρθένοι, μάχας ἄτρεστοι (_Prom. Vinctus_, 415).

–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–⏑‖

–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–⏑‖.

So in English:—

Then, upon one knee uprising,

Hiawatha aimed an arrow.—(Longfellow.)

Resolution into tribrachs is frequent:—

⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑

Αραβι|ας τ αρ|ειον | ανθος ‖ (_Prom. Vinctus_, 420).

Anacrusis is common.

(_b_) _Dactyls._—These are found pure, or mingled with spondees or

quasi-trochees (⏗⏑). They are often employed to express excitement and

awe:—

ὦ Διὸς ἁδυεπὲς φάτι, τίς ποτε τᾶς πολυχρύσου[886]

Πυθῶνος ἀγλάας ἔβας; (_Œd. Tyr._, 151).

–⏑⏑|–⏑⏑|–⏑⏑‖–⏑⏑|–⏑⏑|– –‖

–⁝⏗⏑|⏗⏑|⏗⏑|–ꞈ̄‖

Anacrusis is found, as in the second line above and in _Medea_, 635:—

– – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – – ⏗ – – – ⏗ ⏑ –

The tetrapody without spondees or catalexis gives an exquisite heaving

effect in Soph. _Electra_, 147-9:—

ἀλλ’ ἐμέ γ’ ἁ στονόεσσ’ ἄραρεν φρένας,

ἃ Ἴτυν αἰὲν Ἴτυν ὀλοφύρεται,

ὄρνις ἀτυζομένα, Διὸς ἄγγελος.

Ariel’s lines in _The Tempest_ (V. i.):—

Merrily, merrily, shall I live now,

Under the blossom that hangs on the bough,

are dactylic tetrapodies with catalexis.

(_c_) _Spondees._—It is not certain that these are used as a base, though

as a variant in anapæstic and dactylic metre they are common. _Iph.

Taur._, 123-5, may be taken as spondees:—

εὐφαμεῖτ’ ὦ

πόντου δισσὰς συγχωρούσας

πέτρας Ἀξείνου ναίοντες.

– –|– –|

– –|– –|– –|– –|

But they may be quasi-anapæsts, the whole passage which they introduce

being an anapæstic entrance-march, though heavily spondaic. _Ion_, 125-7:

ὦ Παιάν, ὦ Παιάν,

εὐαίων, εὐαίων

εἴης, ὦ Λατοῦς παῖ,

is scanned by Dr. J. H. H. Schmidt as molossi, a molossus being – – –.

Spondaic systems are scarcely to be found in English.[887]

(_d_) _Cretics._—This foot (–⏑–) is rare; it generally expresses piteous

agitation:—

φρόντισον, καὶ γενοῦ πανδίκως

εὐσεβὴς πρόξενος·

τὰν φυγάδα μὴ προδῷς,

τὰν ἕκαθεν ἐκβολαῖς

δυσθέοις ὀρμέναν (Æsch., _Supplices_, 418 _sqq._).

–⏑–|–⏑–|–⏑–‖

–⏑–|–⏑–‖

–⏑⏑⏑|–⏑–‖

–⏑–|–⏑–‖

Few cretics are found in English, though Tennyson’s brief poem _The Oak_

is written entirely in this metre, _e.g._:—

All his leaves

Fall’n at length,

Look, he stands,

Trunk and bough,

Naked strength.

Most English verse of cretic appearance is shown by the context to be

trochaic with alternate τονή. So in _A Midsummer Nights Dream_, II. i.:—

Over hill, over dale,

Thorough bush, thorough brier,

Over park, over pale,

Thorough flood, thorough fire,

which is followed by

I do | wander | every|where ꞈ |

Swifter | than the | moones | sphere ꞈ | etc.

We are forbidden to view the Greek cretics given above in the same

way, by the resolved feet. If we scan φρόντισον καὶ γενοῦ πανδίκως

as –⏑|⏗|–⏑|⏗|–⏑|–ꞈ‖, this method will give us in the fourth line

–⏑|⏑⏑|–⏑|–‖, where the second foot is impossible. ⏑⏑ can take the place

of –, but never of ⏗.

(_e_) _Bacchiacs._—This curious foot consists of – –⏑, the system being

invariably introduced by anacrusis. Bacchiacs are regularly associated

with dochmiacs (see below). They express strong emotion, generally

mingled with perplexity or vacillation; resolved feet are therefore often

found:—

τίς ἀχώ, τίς ὀδμά

προσέπτα μ’ ἀφεγγής; (_Prom. Vinctus_, 115).

⏑⁝– –⏑|– –ꞈ‖

⏑⁝– –⏑|– –ꞈ‖.

στενάζω; τί ῥέξω; γελῶμαι πολίταις.

ἔπαθον ὦ δύσοιστα (_Eumenides_, 788 _sq._).

⏑⁝– –⏑|– –⏑‖– –⏑|– –ꞈ‖

⏑⁝⏑⏑–⏑|– –ꞈ‖.

Ye storm-winds of Autumn!

Who rush by, who shake

The window, and ruffle

The gleam-lighted lake.—(M. Arnold.)

⏑⁝– –⏑|– –ꞈ‖

⏑⁝– –⏑|–⏗̭‖

⏑⁝– –⏑|– –ꞈ‖

⏑⁝– –⏑|–⏗̭‖.

But it should be noted that, though bacchiac scansion seems soundest for

the above—“storm-winds” for instance has two ictuses—the poet probably

meant the lines for dactylic dipodies with anacrusis: “storm-winds of”

thus would be an accentual dactyl. But that would slur “winds” unduly.

(_f_) _Ionics._—These are formed by – –⏑⏑. When anacrusis is found—the

usual form—the foot is often called _Ionicus a minore_ (_i.e._ ⏑⏑– –);

otherwise it is called _Ionicus a maiore_:—

κυανοῦν δ’ ὄμμασι λεύσσων φονίου δέργμα δράκοντος

πολύχειρ καὶ πολυναύτας Σύριόν θ’ ἅρμα διώκων (_Persæ_, 81 _sq._).

⏑⏑⁝– –⏑⏑|– –⏑⏑‖– –⏑⏑|– –ꞈ̄‖.

A strange variant is ⏑–⏑–; the variation is called “anaclasis”

(“breaking-up”). Thus the above passage proceeds—

ἐπάγει δουρικλύτοις ἀνδράσι τοξόδαμνον Ἄρη.

⏑⏑⁝– –⏑⏑|– –⏑⏑‖–⏑–⏑|–ꞈ̄‖.

Ionics are employed to express strong excitement governed by confident

courage. The first lyric of the _Persæ_ begins with a splendid example.

It is sung by the Persian counsellors in expectation of Xerxes’ triumph,

and makes a strong contrast with the piteous rhythms of the close. This

poem should be studied carefully in comparison with another in the same

metre—the opening of the first chorus in the _Bacchæ_ (vv. 64 _sqq._):—

Ἀσίας ἀπὸ γαίας

ἱερὸν Τμῶλον ἀμείψασα θοάζω

Βρομίῳ πόνον ἡδύν

κάματόν τ’ εὐκάματον, Βάκχιον εὐαζομένα.

τίς ὁδῷ; τίς ὁδῷ; τίς μελάθροις; ἔκτοπος ἔστω,

στόμα τ’ εὔφημον ἅπας ἐξοσιούσθω·

τὰ νομισθέντα γὰρ ἀεὶ Διόνυσον ὑμνήσω.

⏑⏑⁝⏘⏑⏑|– –ꞈ̄‖

⏑⏑⁝– –⏑⏑|– –⏑⏑|– –ꞈ̄‖

⏑⏑⁝⏘⏑⏑|– –ꞈ̄〛

⏑⏑⁝– –⏑⏑|– –⏑⏑|– –⏑⏑|⏘ꞈ̄〛

⏑⏑⁝⏘⏑⏑|– –⏑⏑|– –⏑⏑|– –ꞈ̄‖

⏑⏑⁝– –⏑⏑|– –⏑⏑|– –ꞈ̄‖

⏑⏑⁝– –⏑⏑|– –⏑⏑|–⏑–˃|⏘ꞈ̄〛

⎛ 2

⎜ 3—mesode.

⎝ 2

⎛ 2

⎝ 2

III

⎰ 2

⎛ ⎱ 2

⎜ 3—mesode

⎝ ⎰ 2

⎱ 2

This song of the Bacchantes, like that of the Persians, expresses both

excitement and confidence; both are magnificent, and the _metre_ is the

same. But the difference is unmistakable; it lies in the _rhythm_. In

Æschylus the practically unvaried rhythm and the gorgeous language give

to such a passage as πολύχειρ καὶ πολυναύτας Σύριόν θ’ ἅρμα διώκων an

almost intolerable weight and austere pomp. Euripides, by use of the

doubly-lengthened syllable, by varying the extent of his cola, and by

the irrationality of the penultimate foot, has, within the limits of the

same metre, produced a sense of exotic beauty and urgency, a thrill of

wildness as well as of awe.

(_g_) _Choriambics._—These consist of –⏑⏑–. Anacrusis is not found:—

δεινὰ μὲν οὖν, δεινὰ ταράσσει σοφὸς οἰωνοθέτας

οὔτε δοκοῦντ’ οὔτ’ ἀποφάσκονθ’· ὅτι λέξω δ’ ἀπορῶ (_Œd. Tyr._,

483 _sq._).

–⏑⏑–|–⏑⏑–‖–⏑⏑–|–⏑⏑–‖

This measure expresses great agitation and perplexity. In the passage

just cited they pass into ionics, which indicate a gradual comparative

calming of mind. For example, the antistrophe reads:—

ἀλλ’ ὁ μὲν οὖν Ζεὺς ὅ τ’ Ἀπόλλων συνετοὶ καὶ τὰ βροτῶν

εἰδότες· ἀνδρῶν δ’ ὅτι μάντις πλέον ἢ ’γω φέρεται

κρίσις οὐκ ἔστιν ἀληθής· σοφίᾳ δ’ ἂν σοφίαν

παραμείψειεν ἀνήρ.

–⏑⏑–|–⏑⏑–‖–⏑⏑–|–⏑⏑–‖

⏑⏑⁝– –⏑⏑|– –⏑⏑‖– –⏑⏑|⏘ꞈ̄‖

⏑⏑⁝– –⏑⏑|⏘ꞈ̄‖.

The late Rupert Brooke left some exquisite _Experiments_ in this metre,

_e.g._:—

Ah! Not now, when desire burns, and the wind calls, and the suns of

spring

Light-foot dance in the woods, whisper of life, woo me to wayfaring.

That is—

⏗⏗|–⏑⏑–|–⏑⏑–‖–⏑⏑–|⏗⏗‖

(_h_) _Dochmiacs._—It is convenient to discuss these here, though the

dochmius is not a foot, but a colon. The rule both of metre and music

is that all feet or bars should have the same time-value; a trochaic

colon may contain ⏗ or ᷋⏑ as well as –⏑, but not –⏑⏑. Dochmiacs are

generally regarded as an exception to this rule. The dochmius is a colon

of which the simplest form[888] is ⏑– –⏑–, to be divided ⏑⁝– –⏑|–ꞈ||,

_e.g._ κακορρημόνων. The dochmius is always catalectic, but the anacrusis

of one serves to complete the trochee of the preceding colon:—

φανήτω μόρων ὁ κάλλιστ’ ἐμῶν

ἐμοὶ τερμίαν ἄγων ἁμέραν (_Antigone_, 1329 _sq._).

⏑⁝– –⏑|–⏑‖– –⏑|–ꞈ‖.

But this simplest form is not the most frequent, and a considerable

sequence is rare. Resolution of one or more long syllables is very

common. The favourite form is ⏑⁝⏑⏑–⏑|–ꞈ‖:—

περίβαλον γάρ οἱ πτεροφόρον δέμας (_Agamemnon_, 1147).

⏑⁝⏑⏑–⏑|–⏑‖⏑⏑–⏑|–ꞈ‖

This metre is frequent in passages of lamentation, and as these are

extremely numerous the dochmiac measure is one of the most important.

It is also perhaps the most difficult, because of the many varieties

admitted. In all, twenty-two[889] forms are said to be found, though

several of these are rare; this great number is due to resolution and

irrational long syllables. Thus—

ἰὼ σκότου

νέφος ἐμὸν ἀπότροπον, ἐπιπλόμενον ἄφατον

ἀδάματόν τε καὶ δυσούριστον ὄν (_Œd. Tyr._, 1313).

⏑⁝⏘⏑|–ꞈ‖

⏑⁝⏑⏑⏑⏑⏑|⏑⏑⏑‖⏑⏑⏑⏑⏑|⏑⏑ꞈ‖

⏑⁝⏑⏑–⏑|–⏑‖– –⏑|–ꞈ‖.

The second line of course would by itself have no rhythm at all, being

so completely broken to pieces, in order to express the extreme limit of

agitation possible in articulate speech. But it gains rhythm from the

clearer lines of the context. The antistrophe shows a further variety—an

irrational syllable in the last line:—

ἰὼ φίλος,

σὺ μὲν ἐμὸς ἐπίπολος ἔτι μόνιμος· ἔτι γάρ

ὑπομένεις με τὸν τυφλὸν κηδεύων.

(κηδευ͐ων). Evidently it is important to accustom one’s ear thoroughly to

the basic form ⏑– –⏑– and to ⏑⏑⏑–⏑–. Another instance may be of use:—

ἆρα πύλαι κλῄθροις χαλκόδετ’ ἔμβολά τε

λαϊνέοισιν Ἀμφίονος ὀργάνοις

τείχεος ἥρμοσται; (_Phœnissæ_, 114 _sqq._).

˃⁝⏑⏑–˃|–˃‖⏑⏑–⏑|⏑⏑ꞈ‖

⏑⁝⏑⏑–⏑|–˃‖⏑⏑–⏑|–ꞈ‖

˅⁝⏑⏑–˃|–ꞈ‖.

The last division of our subject is the different types of period, the

various ways in which cola are combined and correspond. It should be

noted that a colon with anacrusis can correspond to one without; so of

catalexis and τονή.

(i) The simplest form is the _stichic_ (στίχος “a row”), in which the

cola are of the same length. The scheme

⎧ _a_ ⎧ 2 ⎧ 4 ⎧ 6 ⎧ _a_

is ⎨ —that is ⎨ or ⎨ or ⎨ , etc.—or ⎨ _a_ and so forth:

⎩ _a_ ⎩ 2 ⎩ 4 ⎩ 6 ⎩ _a_

πᾶς γὰρ ἱππηλάτας

καὶ πεδοστιβὴς λεώς (_Persæ_, 126 _sq._).

–⏑|⏗|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ〛.

Where correspondence is indicated by

⎛ 4

⎝ 4.

It makes no difference that ⏗ is answered by –⏑ in the second foot.

(ii) To the stichic corresponds the _palinodic_ period (παλινῳδία,

“repetition”), in which not a single colon but a group of cola is

repeated so far as length is concerned:—

μείξουσιν ἢ πρὸς Πυθίαις ἢ λαμπάσιν ἀκταῖς,

οὗ πότνιαι σεμνὰ τιθηνοῦνται τέλη (_Œd. Col._, 1047 _sq._).

–⁝⏗⏑|– –|⏗⏑|– –‖–⏑⏑|– –‖

–⁝⏗⏑|⏘|–⏑⏑|– –‖⏗⏑|–ꞈ̄‖

⎰ 4 ⎞

⎛ ⎱ 2 ⎟ ⎞

⎝ ⎰ 4 ⎠ ⎟

⎱ 2 ⎠

This type of period is frequent in English poetry, where the use of rhyme

and the absence of τονή make the cola perfectly plain, _e.g._:—

Love still has something of the sea

From whence his Mother rose;

No time his slaves from care sets free,

Or gives their hearts repose.—(Sedley.)

⎰ 4 ⎞

⎛ ⎱ 3 ⎟ ⎞

⎝ ⎰ 4 ⎠ ⎟

⎱ 3 ⎠

(iii) _Antithetic_ periods are formed by the inverted repetition whether

of different cola or of different groups of cola.

(_a_) The simplest type is that in which a series of ungrouped cola is

repeated in inverse order:—

διανταίαν λέγεις δόμοισι καί

σώμασιν πεπλαγμέναν

ἀναυδάτῳ μένει

ἀραίῳ τ’ ἐκ πατρὸς διχόφρονι πότμῳ (_Septem_, 895 _sqq._).

⏑⁝⏗|⏗|–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

⏑⁝⏗|⏗|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

⏑⁝⏗|⏗|–⏑|–⏑|–⏑⏑|–˃〛.

6 ⎞

4 ⎞ ⎟

4 ⎠ ⎟

6 ⎠

(_b_) In a similar manner groups may be repeated antithetically.

Each group retains its internal order; hence such periods are called

“palinodic-antithetic”:—

δι’ αἰῶνος μακροῦ πάνολβον·

ἔνθεν πᾶσα βοᾷ χθών,

“φυσιζόου γένος τόδε Ζηνός ἐστιν ἀληθῶς·

τίς γὰρ ἂν κατέπαυσεν Ἥρας νόσους ἐπιβούλους;”

Διὸς τόδ’ ἔργον καὶ τόδ’ ἂν γένος λέγων

ἐξ Ἐπάφου κυρήσαις (Æsch., _Supplices_, 582 _sqq._).

⏑⁝⏗|⏗|–⏑|–⏑|⏗|–ꞈ‖

–˃|–⏑⏑|⏗|–ꞈ‖

⏑⁝–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|⏗‖–⏑|–⏑⏑|⏗|–ꞈ‖

–⏑|–⏑⏑|–⏑|⏗‖–⏑|–⏑⏑|⏗|–ꞈ‖

⏑⁝–⏑|–˃|–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

–⏑⏑|–⏑|⏗|–ꞈ〛.

⎰ 6 ⎞

⎛ ⎱ 4 ⎟ ⎞

⎜ ⎰ 4 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟

⎜ ⎛ ⎱ 4 ⎟ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟

⎜ ⎝ ⎰ 4 ⎠ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

⎜ ⎱ 4 ⎠ ⎟ ⎟

⎝ ⎰ 6 ⎠ ⎟

⎱ 4 ⎠

(iv) Any of the three periods just described, the stichic, the palinodic,

the antithetic (whether simple or palinodic-antithetic) may be “mesodic,”

that is, it may be grouped round a central colon (the mesode), to which

no colon corresponds, save of course the mesode of the other _strophe_.

The schemes, then, are:—

(_a_) Stichic-mesodic.

_a_ ⎞

_x_ ⎟

_a_ ⎠

(_b_) Palinodic-mesodic.

⎰ _a_ ⎞

⎛ ⎱ _b_ ⎟ ⎞

⎜ _x_ ⎟ ⎟

⎝ ⎰ _a_ ⎠ ⎟

⎱ _b_ ⎠

(_c_) Antithetic-mesodic.

_a_ ⎞

_b_ ⎞ ⎟

_x_ ⎟ ⎟

_b_ ⎠ ⎟

_a_ ⎠

(_d_) Palinodic-antithetic-mesodic.

⎰ _a_ ⎞

⎛ ⎱ _b_ ⎟ ⎞

⎜ ⎰ _c_ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟

⎜ ⎛ ⎱ _d_ ⎟ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟

⎜ ⎜ _x_ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

⎜ ⎝ ⎰ _c_ ⎠ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

⎜ ⎱ _d_ ⎠ ⎟ ⎟

⎝ ⎰ _a_ ⎠ ⎟

⎱ _b_ ⎠

(_a_) The stichic-mesodic:—

ἀμηχανῶ φροντίδος στερηθείς

εὐπάλαμον μέριμναν

ὅπα τράπωμαι, πίτνοντος οἴκου (_Agamemnon_, 1530 _sqq._).

⏑⁝–⏑|⏗|–⏑|–⏑|⏗|–ꞈ‖

–⏑⏑|–⏑|⏗|–ꞈ‖

⏑⁝–⏑|⏗|–⏑|–⏑|⏗|–ꞈ‖.

6 ⎞

4 ⎟

6 ⎠

(_b_) The palinodic-mesodic:—

ἐμοὶ χρῆν συμφοράν,

ἐμοὶ χρῆν πημονὰν γενέσθαι,

Ἰδαίαν ὅτε πρῶτον ὕλαν

Ἀλέξανδρος εἰλατίναν

ἐτάμεθ’, ἅλιον ἐπ’ οἶδμα ναυστολήσων (_Hecuba_, 629 _sqq._).

⏑⁝⏗|⏗|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

⏑⁝⏗|⏗|–⏑|–⏑|⏗|–ꞈ‖

–˃|–⏑⏑|–⏑|–˃‖

⏑⁝⏗|–⏑|–⏑⏑|–ꞈ‖

⏑⁝⏑⏑⏑|⏑⏑⏑|–⏑|–⏑|⏗|–ꞈ‖.

⎰ 4 ⎞

⎛ ⎱ 6 ⎞ ⎟

⎜ 4 ⎟ ⎟

⎝ ⎰ 4 ⎟ ⎠

⎱ 6 ⎠

(_c_) The antithetic-mesodic:—

σύ τοι σύ τοι κατηξίωσας,

ὦ βαρύποτμε, κοὐκ

ἄλλοθεν ἔχει τύχᾳ

τᾶδ’ ἀπὸ μείζονος·

εὖτέ γε παρὸν φρονῆσαι ... (_Philoctetes_, 1095 _sqq._).

⏑⁝–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–⏑‖

–⏑|⏑⏑⏑|–ꞈ‖

˃⁝⏑⏑⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

–⏑⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

˃⁝⏑⏑⏑|–⏑|⏗|–ꞈ‖.

4 ⎞

3 ⎞ ⎟

3 ⎟ ⎟

3 ⎠ ⎟

4 ⎠

(_d_) The palinodic-antithetic-mesodic:—

μή μοι μὴ προδίδου·

μόνος μόνῳ κόμιζε πορθμίδος σκάφος.

χαιρέτω μὲν αὖλις ἥδε, χαιρέτω δὲ θυμάτων

ἀποβώμιος[890] ἃν ἔχει θυσίαν

Κύκλωψ Αἰτναῖος ξενικῶν κρέων κεχαρμένος βορᾷ.

νηλής, ὦ τλᾶμον

ὅστις δωμάτων ἐφεστίους ... (_Cyclops_, 351 _sqq._).[891]

–˃|–⏑⏑|–ꞈ‖

⏑⁝–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–⏑‖–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

ω⁝–⏑⏑|–⏑|–⏑⏑|–ꞈ‖

–˃|–˃|–⏑⏑|–⏑‖–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ‖

–˃|–˃|–ꞈ‖

⏗|⏗|–⏑|–⏑|–⏑|–ꞈ〛.

⎰ 3 ⎞

⎛ ⎱ 6 ⎟ ⎞

⎜ ⎛ ⎰ 4 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟

⎜ ⎜ ⎱ 4 ⎟ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟

⎜ ⎜ 4 ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

⎜ ⎜ ⎰ 4 ⎠ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

⎜ ⎝ ⎱ 4 ⎠ ⎟ ⎟

⎜ ⎰ 3 ⎠ ⎟

⎝ ⎱ 6 ⎠

Most of the periodic structures which have been described are by no means

obvious to the ear. A trained sense of rhythm, attention to quantity,

and careful practice, will reduce the difficulties. But in any case

Greek periods are far less easy to grasp than English. Their variety

and length, the frequent occurrence of prolongation, resolution, and

irrational syllables, the possibility of preludes or postludes—all these

are formidable to modern students, who lack the help of the music. We may

perhaps work out the period with ease on paper, but our ear often cannot

appreciate the balance and contour of the whole as it can in English

lyrics, where we have the immense assistance of a rhyme-scheme. But it

is no sound deduction that the study of Greek lyric metre and rhythm is

therefore useless. We cannot always hear the period—that is a question of

music; but we can always hear the colon—that is a question of language.

To utter the cola correctly is easy after a little practice; and it is

these “sentences” which, by their own internal rhythmical nature and by

the identities or contrasts existing between them, reinforce and more

pungently articulate the sense of the words wherefrom they are moulded.

FOOTNOTES

[1] See Haigh, _The Tragic Drama of the Greeks_, pp. 19 _sq._

[2] It arose in a similar fashion to tragedy, from the phallic songs to

Dionysus at his winter festival.

[3] τί ταῦτα πρὸς τὸν Διόνυσον; (Plutarch, _Symposiaca_, 615 A).

[4] Pp. 39-41.

[5] These first paragraphs give a summary of the view almost universally

held as to the origin of Greek tragedy. Of late, however, Professor Sir

William Ridgeway (_The Origin of Tragedy, with Special Reference to

the Greek Tragedians_, Cambridge, 1910) has combated current beliefs

with great vigour. His belief is (p. 186) “that Tragedy arose in the

worship of the dead, and that the only Dionysiac element in the Drama

was the satyric play”. Aristotle’s evidence (see p. 4) he dismisses as

mistaken, because “Aristotle was only interested in Tragedy as a fully

developed art, and paid little heed to its early history” (p. 57). The

present writer is bound to confess that, after following and estimating

to the best of his ability the numerous and heterogeneous statements put

forward in evidence, he cannot regard Professor Ridgeway’s contention

as proved. It is undoubtedly true that many extant tragedies centre

more or less vitally upon a tomb, but many do not. The mimetic ritual

in honour of the slain Scephrus (p. 37) is real evidence, so far as it

goes; but the utmost it proves is that Greek tragedy _could_ have arisen

from such funeral performances—it does not show that it did. The most

remarkable point in the book is the discussion of the well-known passage

in Herodotus (V, 67): τά τε δὴ ἄλλα οἱ Σικυώνιοι ἐτίμων τὸν Ἄδρηστον καὶ

δὴ πρὸς τὰ πάθεα αὐτοῦ τραγικοῖσι χοροῖσι ἐγέραιρον, τὸν μὴν Διόνυσον οὐ

τιμέωντες, τὸν δὲ Ἄδρηστον. Κλεισθένης δὲ χοροὺς μὲν τῷ Διονύσῳ ἀπέδωκε,

τὴν δὲ ἄλλην θυσίην Μελανίππῳ (see Ridgeway, p. 28): “The men of Sicyon

paid honours to Adrastus, and in particular they revered him with tragic

choruses because of his sufferings, herein honouring not Dionysus, but

Adrastus. Cleisthenes gave the choruses to Dionysus, and the rest of the

offering to Melanippus.” It may well be that Professor Ridgeway is right

in asserting that ἀπέδωκε means not “restored” but “gave”—that is, these

tragic choruses were originally of the funereal kind which he suggests

for all primitive Greek tragedy. This is excellent evidence for his

contention, so far as it goes, but it only proves one example. Herodotus’

words, on the other hand, imply that he believed tragedy to be normally

Dionysiac. To sum up, we cannot regard Professor Ridgeway as having

succeeded in damaging the traditional view.

[6] Aristotle, _Poetic_, 1448_a_: διὸ καὶ ἀντιποιοῦνται τῆς τε τραγῳδίας

καὶ τῆς κωμῳδίας οἱ Δωριεῖς.

[7] _Ol._, XIII, 18 _sq._: ταὶ Διωνύσου πόθεν ἐξέφανεν σὺν βοηλάτᾳ

χάριτες διθυράμβῳ; _i.e._ as the context shows, the dithyramb appeared

first at Corinth.

[8] α for η, and sometimes -ᾶν as the inflexion of the feminine genitive

plural.

[9] _Poetic_, 1449_a_: γενομένη δ’ οὖν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς αὐτοσχεδιαστική ... ἀπὸ

τῶν ἐξαρχόντων τὸν διθύραμβον ... κατὰ μικρὸν ηὐξήθη προαγόντων ὅσον

ἐγίγνετο φανερὸν αὐτῆς, καὶ πολλὰς μεταβολὰς μεταβαλοῦσα ἡ τραγῳδία

ἐπαύσατο, ἐπεὶ ἔσχε τὴν αὐτῆς φύσιν. καὶ τό τε τῶν ὑποκριτῶν πλῆθος ἐξ

ἑνὸς εἰς δύο πρῶτος Αἰσχύλος ἤγαγε καὶ τὰ τοῦ χοροῦ ἠλάττωσε καὶ τὸν

λόγον πρωταγωνιστὴν παρεσκεύασεν, τρεῖς δὲ καὶ σκηνογραφίαν Σοφοκλῆς.

ἔτι δὲ τὰ μέγεθος ἐκ μικρῶν μύθων καὶ λέξεως γελοίας διὰ τὸ ἐκ σατυρικοῦ

μεταβαλεῖν ὀψὲ ἀπεσεμνύνθη. τό τε μέτρον ἐκ τετραμέτρου ἰαμβεῖον ἐγένετο·

τὸ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτον τετραμέτρῳ ἐχρῶντο διὰ τὸ σατυρικὴν καὶ ὀρχηστικωτέραν

εἶναι τὴν ποίησιν ... ἔτι δὲ ἐπεισοδίων πλήθη. καὶ τὰ ἄλλ’ ὡς ἕκαστα

κοσμηθῆναι λέγεται.... Here and elsewhere, in quoting from the _Poetic_,

I borrow Butcher’s admirable translation.

[10] These narratives and conversations were naturally regarded as

interruptions in the main business, and this feeling is marked by the

name always given to the “acts” of a play, ἐπεισόδια (“episodia”), _i.e._

“interventions” or “interruptions”.

[11] The text of the treatise is, however, incomplete. The author of the

pseudo-Platonic _Minos_ (321 A) speaks of the current belief that Thespis

was the originator of tragedy.

[12] This is a mere name for a really anonymous collection of information

on philosophical and other history.

[13] _Ars Poetica_, 275-7.

[14] _Poetic_, 1449_a_.

[15] βασιλεὺς ἦν Χοίριλος ἐν σατύροις (Plotius, _De Metris_, p. 2633,

quoted by Haigh, _Tragic Drama_, p. 40).

[16] _Frogs_, 689: εἴ τις ἥμαρτε σφαλείς τι Φρυνίχου παλαίσμασιν. The

allusion in the first instance points undoubtedly to the famous _general_

Phrynichus; but his political machinations are jokingly referred to as a

“wrestling-bout” because of the celebrated description in his namesake

the playwright.

[17] Herod. VI, 21.

[18] _Wasps_, 220 (μέλη ἀρχαιομελισιδωνοφρυνιχήρατα).

[19] _Birds_, 748-51, reading ὥσπερ ἡ μέλιττα.

[20] λάμπει δ’ ἐπὶ πορφυρέαις παρῇσι φῶς ἔρωτος. Notice the exquisite

alliteration. Sophocles no doubt had this line in mind when he wrote

_Antigone_ 782.

[21] The writer of the Argument to the _Persæ_ says: Γλαῦκος ἐν τοῖς περὶ

Αἰσχύλου μύθων ἐκ τῶν Φοινίσσων Φρυνίχου φησὶ τοὺς Πέρσας παραπεποιῆσθαι.

The late Dr. Verrall (_The Bacchantes of Euripides and Other Essays_, pp.

283-308) believed that not only is the _Persæ_ modelled on the _Phœnissæ_

but _Æschylus_ incorporated a large portion of Phrynichus’ play with

little change (_Persæ_ vv. 480-514 especially).

[22] By M. Croiset, _Hist. de la Litt. grecque_, III, p. 49.

[23] This is asserted by his epitaph:—

Αἴσχυλον Εὐφορίωνος Ἀθηναῖον τόδε κεύθει

μνῆμα καταφθίμενον πυροφόροιο Γέλας,

ἀλκὴν δ’ εὐδόκιμον Μαραθώνιον ἄλσος ἂν εἴποι

καὶ βαθυχαιτήεις Μῆδος ἐπιστάμενος.

These verses are said to come from the pen of Æschylus himself. For once

such tradition appears to be true. No forger would have had the audacity

to omit all reference to the plays.

[24] This, however, is certainly stated by Aristotle (_Nic. Ethics_,

1111_a_). On the other hand, Æschylus says in the _Frogs_ (886); Δήμητερ,

ἡ θρέψασα τὴν ἐμὴν φρένα, εἶναί με τῶν σῶν ἄξιον μυστηρίων.

[25] Aristotle, Poetic, 1449_a_.

[26] The following plays were performed with two actors only: of

Æschylus, _Supplices_, _Prometheus_, _Persæ_, _Seven against Thebes_; of

Euripides, _Medea_, and perhaps _Alcestis_.

[27] By Plutarch, _Life of Cimon_, VIII. Haigh (_The Tragic Drama of the

Greeks_, p. 128²) gives good reasons for rejecting the story.

[28] One of these occasions was that on which he presented the _Œdipus

Tyrannus_.

[29] A fragment of Ion’s Ἐπιδημίαι remarks: τὰ μέντοι πολιτικὰ οὔτε σοφὸς

οὔτε ῥεκτήριος ἦν, ἀλλ’ ὡς ἄν τις εἷς τῶν χρηστῶν Ἀθηναίων.

[30] Aristophanes, too, in the _Frogs_ (v. 82), bears witness to his

charm: ὁ δ’ εὔκολος μὲν ἐνθάδ’, εὔκολος δ’ ἐκεῖ· “Sophocles, on the other

hand, is gentle here (_i.e._ in Hades) as he was in life.”

[31] _Œd. Col_. 1225-8.

[32] _Poetic_, 1460_b_: Σοφοκλῆς ἔφη αὐτὸς μὲν οἵους δεῖ ποιεῖν,

Εὐριπίδην δὲ οἷοι εἰσίν.

[33] Plutarch, _De Profectu in Virtute_, 79 B: ὁ Σοφοκλῆς ἔλεγε, τὸν

Αἰσχύλου διαπεπαιχὼς ὄγκον, εἶτα τὸ πικρὸν καὶ κατάτεχνον τῆς αὐτοῦ

κατασκευῆς, τρίτον ἤδη τὸ τῆς λέξεως μεταβάλλειν εἶδος ὅπερ ἐστὶν

ἠθικώτατον καὶ βέλτιστον.

[34] See Haigh, _Tragic Drama_, p. 162.

[35] Aristotle, _Poetic_, 1449_a_.

[36] Suidas (_s.v._ Σοφοκλῆς): καὶ αὐτὸς ἦρξε τοῦ δρᾶμα πρὸς δρᾶμα

ἀγωνίζεσθαι, ἀλλὰ μὴ τετραλογίαν.

[37] In the Anonymous _Life_.

[38] See Haigh, _Attic Tragedy_, pp. 139 _sq._, where this excellent

point is made.

[39] The most celebrated is the description of the sun as a “clod”

(_Orestes_, 983). _Alcestis_, 904 _sqq._, may very possibly refer to the

death of Anaxagoras’ son.

[40] XV, 20.

[41] A passage in his _Life_ suggests that he was indifferent to the

strictly “theatrical” side of his profession: οὐδεμίαν φιλοτιμίαν περὶ

τὰ θέατρα ποιούμενος· διὸ τοσοῦτον αὐτὸν ἔβλαπτε τοῦτο ὅσον ὠφέλει τὸν

Σοφοκλέα.

[42] _Oxyrhynchus Papyri_, Vol. IX, pp. 124-82.

[43] Pp. 29 _sq._

[44] ἀκριβῶς ὅλως περιείληφεν τὸν Ἀναξαγόρειον διάκοσμον ἐν τρισὶν

περιόδοις.

[45] Aristotle, _Poetic_, 1452_b_.

[46] Not all. The elegance of his iambic style excited Aristophanes’

admiration: indeed he confessed to imitating it, and the great Cratinus

invented a significant compound verb εὐριπιδαριστοφανίζειν. See Meineke,

_Frag. Comicorum Græcorum_, II, 1142.

[47] _Frogs_, v. 1122: ἀσαφὴς γὰρ ἦν ἐν τῇ φράσει τῶν πραγμάτων.

[48] vv. 846-54.

[49] vv. 518-44.

[50] _Frogs_, 939 _sqq._

[51] _Ibid._ 948 _sqq._

[52] _Ibid._ 959: σύνεσμεν may recall Grant Allen’s famous sentence about

taking Hedda Gabler down to dinner.

[53] Of these three points the first two come from Suidas (under the

article Νεόφρων), the third from the argument to the extant _Medea_: τὸ

δρᾶμα δοκεῖ ὑποβαλέσθαι τὰ Νεόφρονος διασκευάσας, ὡς Δικαίαρχός τε περὶ

τοῦ Ἑλλάδος βίου καὶ Ἀριστοτέλης ἐν ὑπομνήμασι.

[54] vv. 1211-6.

[55] There is good reason to suppose that what we possess is a second

version. The scholiast on Aristophanes mentions passages as parodies of

lines in the _Medea_ which we no longer read there.

[56] In his ὑπομνήματα, quoted by the Argument to the _Medea_.

[57] πρῶτος εἰς τὸ νῦν μῆκος τὰ δράματα κατέστησεν.

[58] Unless we except the _Rhesus_ (996 lines).

[59] The original form of it seems to have been:—

ὥστ’ οὐχ ὑπάρχων ἀλλὰ τιμωρούμενος

ἀγωνιοῦμαι.

[60] The name is not certain. The book is variously called ὑπομνήματα

(“notes”), ἐπιδημίαι (“visits”), and συνεκδημητικός. The first is not a

“name”—it merely describes the book. The second was explained by Bentley

to mean “accounts of the visits to our island of Chios by distinguished

strangers”. The third could mean something like “traveller’s companion”.

[61] Plutarch (_De Profectu in Virtute_, 79 E), no doubt quoting from

Ion, tells us that at a critical moment in a boxing match Æschylus nudged

Ion and said: “You see what a difference training makes? The man who has

received the blow is silent, while the spectators cry aloud.”

[62] Plutarch, _Pericles_, Chap. V.

[63] v. 835. To the scholium on this line we owe much of our information

about Ion.

[64] One of them bears the curious title “Great Play” (μέγα δρᾶμα), but

nothing is known of it.

[65] _Frogs_, 1425.

[66] XXXIII, 5 (Prof. Rhys Roberts’ translation).

[67] Diog. Laert. II, 133.

[68] Croiset III, p. 400 (n.), thus explains the strange words of Suidas,

ἐπεδείκνυτο δὲ κοινῇ σὺν καὶ Εὐριπίδῃ.

[69] Haigh, _Tragic Drama of the Greeks_, p. 409.

[70] Ath. X, 451 C.

[71] Aristotle, _Poetic_, 1451_b_.

[72] _Ibid._ 1456_a_ (Butcher’s translation).

[73] Plutarch, _Symposiaca_, 645 E.

[74] _Thesm._ 100: μύρμηκος ἀτραπούς.

[75] Aristotle, _Poetic_, 1456_a_.

[76] _Ibid._

[77] _Ibid._

[78] Such a sentence as that of M. Orgon in _Le jeu de l’amour et du

hasard_ (I, ii.): “Va, dans ce monde, il faut être un peu trop bon pour

l’être assez,” strikes one as thoroughly Agathonesque.

[79] _Protagoras_, 315 E.

[80] _Symposium_, 198 C. Socrates says of Agathon’s panegyric upon Eros:

καὶ γάρ με Γοργίου ὁ λόγος ἀνεμίμνησκεν. The whole speech of Agathon

is intended to show these characteristics. Cp., for example, 197 D:

πρᾳότητα μὲν πορίζων, ἀγριότητα δ’ ἐξορίζων· φιλόδωρος εὐμενείας, ἄδωρος

δυσμενείας κτἑ.

[81] _Thesm._ 130 _sqq._

[82] _Ibid._ 54 _sqq._

[83] It is noteworthy that Socrates’ famous “prophecy of Shakespeare”

(_Symposium_, 223 D), “one who can write comedy can write tragedy and

_vice versa_,” is addressed to Agathon and Aristophanes jointly.

[84] The attribution of this play to Critias is not certain, but

probable; it is accepted by Wilamowitz. The new life of Euripides by

Satyrus (see above, p. 18) attributes it to that poet.

[85] _Eratosthenes_, II.

[86] _Poetic_, 1453_b_.

[87] _De Gloria Atheniensium_, 349 E.

[88] _Poetic_, 1455_a_, _b_.

[89] Aristotle, _Rhetoric_, III, 12, 2: βαστάζονται δὲ οἱ ἀναγνωστικοί,

οἷον Χαιρήμων· ἀκριβὴς γὰρ ὥσπερ λογογράφος.

[90] “You know how to feel contempt before you have learnt wisdom,” or,

to reproduce (however badly) the play upon words, “You practise contempt

before using contemplation”.

[91] Athenæus, fr. 10: δρᾶμα πολύμετρον.

[92] _Poetic_, 1447_b_.

[93] vv. 677-774.

[94] Symonds, _Studies in the Greek Poets_, II, p. 26.

[95] _Adversus Indoctos_, 15.

[96] Athenæus III, 98 D, reports, for example, that he called a javelin

βαλλάντιον (properly “purse”), because “it is thrown in the face of the

foe” (ἐναντίον βάλλεται).

[97] _Poetic_, 1454_b_.

[98] 1455_a_.

[99] _Rhetoric_, II, 1400_b_.

[100] _Ibid._ 1417_b_, but the passage is obscure.

[101] _Eth. Nic._ 1150_b_, 10.

[102] Ælian, V.H. XIV, 40.

[103] _Orator_, 51.

[104] _Poetic_, 1452_a_.

[105] _Ibid._ 1455_b_.

[106] “First there came a circle with a dot in the middle,” etc.

[107] θέλω τύχης σταλαγμὸν ἢ φρενῶν πίθον.

[108] That he belongs to the fourth century is not certain, though

extremely probable.

[109] We have only one title (_Telephus_) which implies a legendary theme.

[110] Meineke suggests that the subject is an incident related by

Xenophon, _Hellenica_, VI, iv. 33, 34.

[111] He might at least have written τοῖς ἀμείνοσιν.

[112] The meaning of this name is unknown.

[113] Athenæus XIII, 595 F.

[114] He uses the diminutive δραμάτιον.

[115] κατὰ ἰατρῶν (Stobæus, 102, 3). He was thus a precursor of Molière

and Mr. Bernard Shaw.

[116] Diogenes Laertius, VII, 173.

[117] This point is made by Bernhardy, _Grundriss der Gr. Litteratur_ II,

ii. p. 72.

[118] His date is not, however, certain, and there is some reason to

assign his _floruit_ to the time of Alexander the Great.

[119] The most amazing example is that of the “Three Unities”—those of

Action, Time, and Place—of which such a vast amount has been heard and

which ruled tyrannically over French “classical” tragedy. It is difficult

to believe that Aristotle never mentions the “Three Unities”. On the

Unity of Action he has, of course, much to say; the Unity of Time is

dismissed in one casual sentence. As to the Unity of Place there is not a

word. (It is signally violated in the _Eumenides_ and the _Ajax_.)

[120] _Poetic_, 1454_a_.

[121] _Ibid._

[122] See Wilamowitz-Moellendorff’s magnificent _Einleitung in die

griechische Tragödie_, pp. 48-51 (_e.g._ “nicht mehr Aristoteles der

aesthetiker sondern Aristoteles der historiker ist der ausgangspunkt

unserer betrachtung” and “unser fundament ist und bleibt was in der

poetik steht”).

[123] _Poetic_, 1449_b_: ἔστιν οὖν τραγῳδία μίμησις πράξεως σπουδαίας καὶ

τελείας μέγεθος ἐχούσης, ἡδυσμένῳ λόγῳ χωρὶς ἑκάστῳ τῶν εἰδῶν ἐν τοῖς

μορίοις, δρώντων καὶ οὐ δι’ ἀπαγγελίας, δι’ ἐλέου καὶ φόβου περαίνουσα

τὴν τῶν τοιούτων παθημάτων κάθαρσιν.

[124] 1448_a_.

[125] 1451_a_, _b_.

[126] 1462_a_.

[127] 1462_a_, _b_. (The phrasing in the summary above is borrowed from

Butcher.) See further 1449_b_.

[128] 1450_b_.

[129] 1450_a_.

[130] 1451_a_.

[131] 1451_a_.

[132] 1451_b_.

[133] 1452_a_.

[134] 1452_a_.

[135] 1452_b_.

[136] οἱ ἐν τῷ φανερῷ θάνατοι.

[137] 1453_a_.

[138] 1453_b_.

[139] 1454_a_, _b_.

[140] pp. 163-5.

[141] pp. 313-5.

[142] 1454_b_, 1460_a_.

[143] 1452_b_: ἔστιν δὲ πρόλογος μὲν μέρος ὅλον τραγῳδίας τὸ πρὸ χοροῦ

παρόδου, ἐπεισόδιον δὲ μέρος ὅλον τραγῳδίας τὸ μεταξὺ ὅλων χορικῶν μελῶν,

ἔξοδος δὲ μέρος ὅλον τραγῳδίας μεθ’ ὃ οὐκ ἔστι χοροῦ μέλος, χορικοῦ δὲ

πάροδος μὲν ἡ πρώτη λέξις ὅλη χοροῦ, στάσιμον δὲ μέλος χοροῦ τὸ ἄνευ

ἀναπαίστου καὶ τροχαίου, κόμμος δὲ θρῆνος κοινὸς χοροῦ καὶ τῶν ἀπὸ σκηνῆς.

[144] p. 4.

[145] Chap. VI.

[146] 1455_b_.

[147] 1452_a_.

[148] 1450_b_.

[149] Plato (_Symposium_, 175 E) makes Socrates congratulate Agathon

on his success in the presence of “more than 30,000 Greeks”. Modern

archæologists, by statistics based on the seating-accommodation, would

reduce this figure to 17,000.

[150] There are fourteen of these at Athens.

[151] This account is based on Dörpfeld (_Das griechische Theater_,

Abschnitt VII) who believes there was no stage, and on Haigh (_Attic

Theatre_³, edited by Mr. Pickard-Cambridge, Chap. III) who believes there

was a stage.

[152] That is, shorter, viewed from left to right by the spectators. The

depth of the Vitruvian stage was 10 feet.

[153] Vitruvius V, vii, 3-4.

[154] By Wieseler and others.

[155] Haigh³, pp. 165-74.

[156] ἀναβαίνω: _Knights_, 148; _Acharnians_, 732; _Wasps_, 1342.

[157] καταβαίνω: _Eccles._ 1151; _Wasps_, 1514.

[158] Euripides, _Ion_, 727, _Electra_, 4 _sq._, _Herc. Fur._ 119. As

Haigh (3rd ed., p. 167) points out, “in the last passage it is the chorus

which makes the complaint; so that in this case, if there was any visible

ascent, it cannot have been the ascent to the stage”.

[159] This is a strong and favourite argument for the stage; when Haigh

(3rd ed., p. 168) denies this because “a sufficient reason is ...

the fact that, if they had gone into the palace, the scene of action

would have been left empty for the time being,” he forgets that such a

departure of the chorus is quite possible. It occurs in _Eumenides_,

_Ajax_, _Alcestis_, and _Helena_, not to mention Comedy.

[160] Haigh³, p. 170 _sq._

[161] _Symposium_, 194 B.

[162] _Ars Poetica_, 278: Æschylus et modicis instravit pulpita tignis.

[163] _Das Gr. Theater_, p. 350.

[164] He wrote a lexicon to Plato in the third century after Christ.

[165] Dörpfeld gives various optical diagrams to exhibit the effects.

[166] We incessantly see this effect in modern theatres. But in Greece

the presence of the chorus performing below would force spectators to

regard the building as suspended.

[167] Save, of course, those on the new lowest seats, which went down to

the new level of the excavated half. Dörpfeld has discovered evidence

that the present lowest seats at Athens were added after the rest.

[168] _Das griechische Theater_, p. 364. After the publication of this

view Dörpfeld altered his opinion, and suggested (_Bull. Corr. Hell._

1896, p. 577 _sqq._) that V. means not the ordinary Greek Theatre, but

the Græco-Roman type found in Asia Minor. But this seems worse than his

first thought. See Haigh³, pp. 147 _sq._

[169] _Ibid._ pp. 146 _sq._

[170] In Plato’s time this was notably so (_Laws_, 659 A-C, 700 C, 701 A).

[171] Plutarch, _Nicias_, 524 D.

[172] Aristotle, _Rhetoric_, III, i.

[173] This is the usual term employed. See, however, Haigh³, p. 13,

note 3: “the word τετραλογία was applied only to a group of four plays

connected in subject,” etc.

[174] This was certainly the number for comedy; it is assumed for tragedy.

[175] τράγος. This was supposed to be the origin of the word “tragedy”

(τραγῳδία “goat-song”).

[176] Vitruvius, V, vi., and Pollux, iv., 126.

[177] Professor Ridgeway makes much use of this custom in his theory that

Greek drama originated in celebrations at the tombs of great persons. See

his _Origin of Tragedy_, and pp. 2 _sq._ above.

[178] Haigh³, p. 187.

[179] _Clouds_, 225.

[180] Pollux (iv. 128), who gives the most definite description, adds:

“one must understand it at each door, as it were in each house,” but his

unsupported testimony on any subject is not trustworthy.

[181] In fact Pollux, who is fond of making a particular case into a

general rule, may have had this instance in his head. He writes (iv.

128): “the eccyclema is a lofty stand raised upon timbers and carrying a

chair” (ἐπὶ ξύλων ὑψηλὸν βάθρον ᾧ ἐπίκειται θρόνος).

[182] Ar. _Knights_, 1249.

[183] This story occurs in the anonymous _Life_ of Æschines.

[184] They are mutes, for the lines supposed to be uttered by one or both

behind the scenes were probably delivered by one of the actors not needed

“in front”.

[185] The _Œdipus Coloneus_ is an exception. See Jebb’s _Introduction_,

3rd ed., pp. 7, 8.

[186] Cp. the vigorous protest of Pratinas (p. 6).

[187] Pherecrates, _Cheiron_, frag. 1, cp. Arist. _Thesmoph._ 100.

[188] Ar. _Frogs_, 1314.

[189] We hear from the scholiast on _Choephorœ_, 900, that the same actor

took the part of Pylades and of the servant who gives the alarm. The

latter after arousing Clytæmnestra rushes within, and when the Queen has

uttered five lines Pylades appears accompanying Orestes. This example is

given by Haigh³, p. 232.

[190] Told by the scholiast on Aristophanes, _Frogs_, 303.

[191] The slovenliness in this regard of many modern actors is mostly due

to “long runs”. After saying the same thing hundreds of times, an actor

naturally tends to mechanical diction. The writer has heard a performer

in an emotional crisis suddenly (as it appeared) call for champagne.

Feeling sure that “Pommery” could not be right, he reflected, and

discovered that the mysterious syllables meant “Poor Mary!” Even actors

at the head of the profession are guilty of such things as “the lor of

Venice”.

[192] See Haigh³, p. 279 _sq._, for some highly interesting extracts.

[193] _Poetic_ 1456_a_ (tr. Butcher).

[194] _Ibid._

[195] This was the normal mode of entry, but the plot sometimes demanded

others. In the _Eumenides_ the Chorus rush in pell-mell; so probably in

the _Bacchæ_; in the Euripidean _Supplices_ they are discovered grouped

around the Queen.

[196] See pp. 344 _sq._

[197]

ὥστ’ εἴ τις ὀρχοῖτ’ εὖ, θέαμ’ ἦν· νῦν δὲ δρῶσιν οὐδέν,

ἀλλ’ ὥσπερ ἀπόπληκτοι βάδην ἑστῶτες ὠρύονται.

[198] Haigh³, p. 318. Both the gestures described sound like a curious

anticipation of the gestures favoured by the performers of “coon-songs”.

[199] This was not always an advantage when comedy held the scene. There

is a delightfully impudent passage in the _Frogs_ (v. 297) where Dionysus

to escape a hobgoblin appeals to his own priest for protection.

[200] For a detailed description of the seating see Haigh³, pp. 94-101.

[201] It is a fact familiar to students of comparative religion that

obscenity is often a part of ritual. This is true of several Greek

worships, including that of Dionysus. Hence even tragedy retained its

satyric complement, though satyric drama regularly showed obscene

features.

[202] Puchstein would date it earlier (end of the fifth century).

[203] Plutarch, _Liber Amatorius_, 756 B, C.

[204] ἐκσυρίττειν (“to hiss off”).

[205] Demosthenes, _De Falsa Legatione_, § 337.

[206] _Ethics_, X, 1175 B.

[207] _Date_: uncertain. Professor Tucker thinks the year 492-1 probable;

Æschylus was then thirty-three years old. Historical considerations are

here of doubtful value, but the technique of the play seems to prove

beyond question that it is an early work.

_Arrangement_: protagonist, Danaus, Egyptian herald; deuteragonist, King

of Argos.

[208] In the centre of the orchestra, as always.

[209] Danaus is necessarily dismissed so that the actor who impersonates

him may appear as the Egyptian herald.

[210] vv. 991-2.

[211] vv. 994-1013.

[212] Ζεύς (or words derived therefrom) occurs about sixty times.

[213] vv. 91-5 (Professor Tucker’s translation).

[214] vv. 230-1.

[215] _Date_: 472 B.C. _Arrangement_: protagonist, Atossa and Xerxes;

deuteragonist, Messenger and Darius.

[216] The actor who presents the queen has now to present the king.

[217] This was a satyric play, and must not be confused with the extant

_Prometheus_.

[218] See Patin, _Eschyle_, p. 211.

[219] _Henry V_, IV, viii.

[220] vv. 361-2.

[221] _Arrangement_: protagonist: Eteocles and Antigone; deuteragonist,

messenger, and herald. The part of Ismene was taken by a member of the

chorus.

[222] _Frogs_, 1021.

[223] vv. 591-4.

[224] _Life of Aristides_, III.

[225] Dr. Verrall, however, in his Introduction (pp. xiv, xv) sees

technical drama of the highest kind in the choosing of the champions. As

the Theban warriors are told off one by one, the chorus (and audience)

see with ever-increasing horror that Eteocles must be left as the

opponent of Polynices.

[226] Müller-Heitz (_Griechische Litteraturgeschichte_, ii. p. 88)

point out, also, that this play needs more elaborate machinery than any

other extant drama. But it may well be doubted whether all the effects

mentioned by the poet are realized.

[227] Bia (“Violence”), also present, is a mute.

[228] See H. Weil’s masterly _Note sur le Prométhée d’Eschyle_ (_Le drame

antique_, pp. 86-92).

[229] Zeus had intended to wed Thetis. On hearing the secret, he married

her to Peleus, who became the father of Achilles.

[230] It is fairly certain that it dealt with Menelaus’ visit to Egypt on

his way back from Troy. He was shipwrecked on an island and the prophetic

Proteus gave him advice, sending him first to Egypt. See _Odyssey_, IV,

351-586.

[231] _Arrangement_: protagonist, Clytæmnestra; deuteragonist, Herald,

Cassandra; tritagonist, Sentinel, Agamemnon, Ægisthus.

[232] See especially his _Introduction_ (pp. xiii-xlvii of the 2nd

edition).

[233] This is noted by an admirable touch. Almost always a tragedy

ends with words of the chorus as the least impassioned parties. In the

_Agamemnon_ the closing words are uttered by Clytæmnestra.

[234] _Choephorœ_, 889.

[235] _The Relapse_, V, iv. 135.

[236] _Arrangement_: protagonist, Orestes; deuteragonist, Electra,

Clytæmnestra; tritagonist, Pylades, nurse, attendant, Ægisthus.

[237] This is of course a conventional _mise-en-scène_; we are to imagine

the tomb as distant from the palace.

[238] On this and the other “tokens” see below, p. 258.

[239] The dead man is undoubtedly supposed to send aid in a mysterious

way, but no ghost appears, as in the _Persæ_. This discrepancy points

to a change in religious feeling. Clytæmnestra’s shade “appears” in the

_Eumenides_, but as a dream (see v. 116).

[240] vv. 870-4. It seems most natural to suppose that they altogether

quit the orchestra, returning before v. 930.

[241] Not quite, however. The poet is to depict a man, with whom we are

to sympathize, almost in the act of slaying his mother. Not only Orestes,

but the spectator also, needs as much spiritual fortification as can be

provided.

[242] vv. 313: δράσαντι παθεῖν.

[243] _Arrangement._—Croiset gives: protagonist, Orestes; deuteragonist,

Apollo; tritagonist, Athena, priestess, ghost of Clytæmnestra. This

_grouping_ is certainly right, but it is not easy to suppose that the

part of Athena was given to the tritagonist. It seems better to give

Athena, etc., to the protagonist, Apollo to the second, and Orestes to

the third actor.

[244] Probably the _eccyclema_ was used. See pp. 66-8.

[245] vv. 517-9:—

ἔσθ’ ὅπου τὸ δεινὸν εὖ

καὶ φρενῶν ἐπίσκοπον

δεῖ μένειν καθήμενον.

[246] The actual rule of the Areopagite Court was that if the votes were

even the defendant was acquitted. This rule was explained as derived from

the “Vote of Athena” in the trial of Orestes. It seems then that Athena’s

vote here makes inequality, not equality. Therefore her pebble is not put

into either urn, but laid between them.

[247] It is implied by the title of the drama that they assume the title

Eumenides or “Gracious Ones,” but this title is not used in the play

itself. Their most usual name was Σεμναί, “Awful Ones”.

[248] v. 644.

[249] In her great speech to the court she plainly adopts the language of

the Furies. See below.

[250] v. 747: ἡμῖν γὰρ ἔρρειν, ἢ πρόσω τιμὰς νέμειν.

[251] Dr. Verrall (_Introduction_ to his edition, pp. xxxii, xxxiii)

explains the reconciliation of the Furies as the result of a mystic

revelation conveyed not in words but through a kind of spiritual

magnetism exercised by Athena when she draws near to them at v. 886 (he

notes the break in syntax at this point); such an influence could not be

shown forth in words—it is too sacred and mysterious. But if a poet does

undertake to dramatize the truths of religion, he must do so in dramatic

form; he ought not suddenly to throw up his task. Several places in

Æschylus can be found where he does put such ideas into words.

[252] This appears to me certain from Athena’s language to the court, but

the reader should not suppose that the Furies say so definitely; they

acquiesce.

[253] vv. 696-8.

[254] This vital point is admirably demonstrated by Dr. Verrall on v.

1046.

[255] This number is not certain. It is probably an under-statement.

[256] ποδαπὸς ὁ γύννις;

[257] ἐνθουσιᾷ δὴ δῶμα, βακχεύει στέγη.

[258] βρῦτον.

[259] _On the death of Kirk-White_: “’Twas thine own genius gave the

fatal blow,” etc. The fiery verse, ὅπλων ὅπλων δεῖ· μὴ πύθῃ τὸ δεύτερον,

recalls the famous line: “A horse, a horse! My kingdom for a horse!”

[260] _Frogs_, 911-3.

[261] Meineke, II, p. 1177.

[262]

οἱ θεῶν ἀγχίσποροι

οἱ Ζηνὸς ἐγγύς ὧν κατ’ Ἰδαῖον πάγον

Διὸς πατρῴου βωμός ἐστ’ ἐν αἰθέρι,

κοὔπω σφιν ἐξίτηλον αἷμα δαιμόνων.

Cp. Plato, _Republic_, 391 E.

[263] _Oration_ 52.

[264] Only one has survived, that of Sophocles.

[265] _Titus Andronicus_, II, i. 5-7.

[266] _Frogs_, 924-5.

[267] _Ag._ 494-5. In spite of Dr. Verrall’s ingenious remarks, it seems

best to take this phrase in the traditional way, as a mere extravagance.

[268] _P.V._ 170.

[269] _Septem_, 493-4.

[270] _Choeph._ 451-2.

[271] _Eum._ 137-8.

[272] _Frogs_, 1261-95.

[273] _Suppl._ 836-7. I see no reason for supposing that the Greek is

defective.

[274] _Ibid._ 12.

[275] _Ibid._ 608.

[276] _Persæ_, 115.

[277] _Ibid._ 346.

[278] _Persæ_ 395.

[279] _Ibid._ 815.

[280] _Septem_, 593.

[281] _P.V._ 89-90.

[282] _Ibid._ 993.

[283] _Ag._ 1434.

[284] _Choeph._ 647.

[285] _Eum._ 694.

[286] Haigh, _Tragic Drama_, pp. 82 _sq._

[287] _Frogs_, 932.

[288] Professor Gilbert Murray, _Literature of Ancient Greece_, p. 217.

[289] vv. 908 _sqq._

[290] Frogs, 1119 _sqq._

[291] Dr. Verrall’s theory is still, I believe, accepted only by a

minority.

[292] _P.V._ vv. 350-2.

[293] _Danaides._

[294] Cp. _Septem_, 592-4 (Aristides), _P.V._ 1068 (Themistocles), and

the references to the Areopagus (vv. 681-710) and to the Athenian Empire

(vv. 398-401) in the _Eumenides_.

[295] _Choeph._ 313 _sq._: δράσαντι παθεῖν, τριγέρων μῦθος τάδε φωνεῖ.

[296] _Ag._ 750-7.

[297] _Septem_, 689-91.

[298] _Choeph._ 1076.

[299] Æschylus never worked himself entirely free from this savage

conception of sin as a material defilement. Orestes, among the proofs

that he has expiated his offence, mentions the use of swine’s blood as a

cleansing power (_Eum._ v. 283).

[300] See Dr. Verrall’s discussion of the prologue to the _Eumenides_,

_Euripides the Rationalist_, pp. 220-4.

[301] _Eum._ vv. 640-51.

[302] _Arrangement_: protagonist, Ajax, Teucer (Ajax, when dead, is

represented by a lay figure); deuteragonist, Odysseus, Tecmessa;

tritagonist, Athena, messenger, Menelaus, Agamemnon.

[303] For the arguments see Jebb’s _Introduction_ (pp. li-liv) to the

_Ajax_. He thinks _Antigone_ the earlier.

[304] vv. 520-1: “Nay, have thought even of me. A man should sure be

mindful of any joy that hath been his.” But of course the quality spoken

of evaporates in such a “translation”.

[305] In the address to his child he throws a half-line to the mother

(v. 559) and at the beginning of his disguised farewell to the chorus he

expresses pity for Tecmessa (vv. 650-3), but there is nothing to show

that this is not feigned, like his implied renunciation of suicide.

[306] See Jebb’s _Introduction_ to the play (pp. xxviii-xxxii).

[307] The _arrangement_ is uncertain. Jebb gives, protagonist: Antigone,

Tiresias, Eurydice; deuteragonist: Ismene, guard, Hæmon, the messengers;

tritagonist: Creon. Croiset gives, protagonist: Antigone, Hæmon;

deuteragonist: Ismene, guard, Tiresias, messengers; tritagonist: Creon,

Eurydice.

[308] vv. 904-12. See Jebb’s discussion in his _Appendix_.

[309] vv. 450-70.

[310] _Rhetoric_, III, xvi. 9.

[311] Jebb’s _Introduction_, pp. xvii-xx.

[312] See pp. 8, 15.

[313] _Arrangement_ probably: protagonist, Electra; deuteragonist,

Orestes and Clytæmnestra; tritagonist, Pædagogus, Chrysothemis, Ægisthus.

[314] Jebb, however, gives substantial reasons for putting it later. See

his _Introduction_, pp. lvi-lviii.

[315] vv. 1424-5.

[316] _Choeph._ 1075-6 (Verrall’s translation).

[317] vv. 1508 _sqq._ (Jebb’s translation).

[318] vv. 616-21.

[319] This seems a fair deduction, not only from the whole situation, but

from the pause after Αἴγισθον in v. 957; also perhaps from the emphatic

ἐμοί of v. 974. Cp. also 582 _sqq._ and especially the comment of the

chorus in v. 1080 (διδύμαν ἑλοῦσ’ Ἐρινύν).

[320] vv. 1331-3.

[321] _Arrangement_: protagonist, Œdipus; deuteragonist, Priest, Jocasta,

servant of Laius; tritagonist, Creon, Tiresias, the two messengers.

[322] vv. 774 _sqq._

[323] It is true that when the prophet mentions the parents of Œdipus

quite definitely (v. 436) the king is startled. But this is one point

only. All the other remarks of Tiresias are ignored.

[324] See Aristotle, _Poetic_, 1454_b_.

[325] vv. 130-1.

[326] See pp. 127-8.

[327] vv. 124-5.

[328] The entry of Fortinbras at the end of _Hamlet_ is closely similar.

Perhaps it is fear of anti-climax which causes producers nowadays to omit

this finale.

[329] Note his preciosity, vv. 942, 959, 1028.

[330] He first (v. 1026) says that he found the infant Œdipus; only later

(1038) does he admit that another man has been concerned.

[331] vv. 758-64.

[332] vv. 1117-8.

[333] v. 1141.

[334] _Arrangement_: protagonist, Deianira, Heracles; deuteragonist,

Hyllus, Lichas; tritagonist, nurse, messenger, old man.

[335] See Jebb’s _Introduction_, pp. xxxviii _sq._

[336] vv. 575-7 (Jebb’s translation).

[337] vv. 547-9.

[338] These remarks are not vitiated by the fact (see Jebb on v. 1224)

that legend wedded Iole to Hyllus. If the command of Heracles is as

objectionable as Jebb appears to think, why did Sophocles go out of his

way to cause the hero himself, instead of some other, to enjoin the

marriage?

[339] vv. 719 _sq._

[340] This accounts also for the absurd behaviour of the nurse (vv. 927

_sq._) who instead of interfering hastens away to Hyllus, entirely unlike

other such women in tragedy.

[341] See the speech of Lichas (vv. 248-86).

[342] Deianira’s plan, moreover, reads like a sort of dilution of

Medea’s, and her last moments (vv. 900-22) recall the description in the

_Alcestis_ (vv. 158-84).

[343] v. 427. Cp. Eur. _Helena_, 567: ποίας δάμαρτος;

[344] Jebb points out that _Trach._ 416 and _Supplices_ 567 are

practically identical.

[345] v. 1140.

[346] 268.

[347] vv. 9-14.

[348] That even the equable Sophocles did on occasion embody criticism

of other playwrights in his works is shown by such passages as _Electra_

1288 _sqq._, _Œd Col._ 1148-9.

[349] _Arrangement_: protagonist, Philoctetes; deuteragonist,

Neoptolemus; tritagonist, Odysseus, merchant, Heracles.

[350] vv. 1007-15.

[351] _E.g._ Mahaffy (_History of Gk. Lit., Poets_, pp. 309-12).

[352] Christ (_Geschichte der Gr. Lit._ p. 210) who compares Heracles

here to the δαιμόνιον σημεῖον of Socrates.

[353] K. O. Müller (_Gr. Lit._, ii. p. 124) who is opposed by Bernhardy

(II, ii. p. 370).

[354] vv. 1404 _sqq._

[355] When he threatens to shoot Odysseus (vv. 1299 _sqq._).

[356] v. 670: εὐεργετῶν γὰρ καὐτὸς αὔτ’ ἐκτησάμην.

[357] See Jebb’s 2nd edition (p. xxvii with footnote).

[358] _Or._ 52.

[359] vv. 936 _sqq._, 987 _sq._, etc.

[360] vv. 187-90 (Jebb’s reading and translation).

[361] v. 1455.

[362] vv. 282-4. Notice also the phrase ξὺν ᾗ (v. 268) used of his malady.

[363] Jebb (_Introd._ pp. xl, xli, 2nd ed.) seems unwilling to allow any

direct allusions. But see vv. 385 _sqq._, 456 _sqq._, and particularly

1035 _sqq._; all three passages show a peculiar emphasis; vv. 1047-51 are

quite in the tone of Thucydides’ “Melian dialogue”.

[364] The _arrangement_ of the parts is not certain. But the important

fact seems clear that a fourth actor was here used not tentatively (as

in other cases) but in a very remarkable degree. Jebb gives: protagonist,

Œdipus; deuteragonist, Antigone; tritagonist, Ismene and Creon; fourth

actor, “Stranger,” Theseus, Polynices, messenger. Croiset: protagonist,

Œdipus; deuteragonist, Antigone; fourth actor, Theseus; all the other

parts to the tritagonist.

[365] Creon, vv. 854 _sq._; Antigone, v. 1195.

[366] v. 106.

[367] vv. 1563 _sq._ The same word recurs in Antigone’s lament (v. 1682):

ἄσκοποι δὲ πλάκες ἔμαρψαν.

[368] Note specially the word τοὐπιεικές (v. 1127) though the idea is of

course expressed by the whole play.

[369] vv. 670-80 (Jebb’s version).

[370] See below, p. 185.

[371] σμικρὸς λόγος four times (vv. 569, 620, 1116, 1152), σμικρὸν ἔπος

once (v. 443), and ἓν μόνον ἔπος once (v. 1615 _sqq._). Dr. Mackail

(_Lectures on Greek Poetry_, p. 150) has indicated this point. See also

_Electra_, 415.

[372] vv. 670 _sqq._: The parallel I owe to Jebb’s note.

[373] vv. 1503 _sq._

[374] _King Lear_, III, iv.

[375] vv. 1627 _sq._ Cp. 1 Sam. iii. 10.

[376] Deut. xxxiv. 6.

[377] Heb. xi. 22.

[378] vv. 62 _sq._: “Such ... are these haunts, not honoured in story,

but rather in the life that loves them” (Jebb).

[379] v. 472.

[380] v. 506.

[381] vv. 964 _sq._

[382] vv. 1422-5.

[383] See Jebb, _Introduction_, pp. xxi _sq._

[384] See his splendid exculpatory speeches to the chorus (vv. 258-91)

and to Creon (vv. 960-1013).

[385] See pp. 10, 12 _sq._

[386] _Ad Quintum Fratrem_, II, xv. 3.

[387] Fr. 344: πόνου μεταλλαχθέντος οἱ πόνοι γλυκεῖς, and fr. 345: μόχθου

γὰρ οὐδεὶς τοῦ παρελθόντος λόγος; recall _Æneid_, I, 203: _forsan et haec

olim meminisse iuuabit_.

[388] _De Subl._ XV, 7: ἄκρως πεφάντασται.

[389] For the Recognition-scene of this play, cp. Aristotle, _Poetic_,

1454_b_.

[390] _Birds_, vv. 100 _sqq._

[391] These have been published and annotated by Dr. A. S. Hunt (who,

with Dr. B. P. Grenfell, discovered these and so many other precious

remains) in Vol. IX of the _Oxyrhynchus Papyri_.

[392] Welcker thought that the wanderings of Europa formed the subject.

[393] The word ῥοῖβδος is inserted as a stage-direction (παρεπιγραφή). It

no doubt means that the babe Hermes is playing his lyre “within”.

[394] The passage is amusing: χαίρει ἀλύων, “he is in a rapture of joy,”

is an excellent phrase for this earliest of _maestri_; but, as Dr. Hunt

remarks, his audience of one (Cyllene) seems not to share his ecstasy:

παραψυκτήριον κείνῳ μόνον.

[395] The name is not certain. All that can be asserted is that the

tragedy dealt with Eurypylus’ death, in defence of Troy, at the hands of

Neoptolemus.

[396] See pp. 15-17.

[397] See _e.g._ the remarks in Creon’s opening speech (_Ant._ vv.

175-90).

[398] _O.T._ 587-8:

ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν οὔτ’ αὐτὸς ἱμείρων ἔφυν

τύραννος εἶναι μᾶλλον ἢ τύραννα δρᾶν.

[399] _Electra_, vv. 328 _sqq._

[400] See p. 16.

[401] _Electra_, 303-16.

[402] For this and other metrical terms which follow see Chapter VI.

[403] There are no less than thirty iambic lines thus divided. The name

for such division is ἀντιλαβή.

[404] _Phil._ vv. 287-92.

[405] _O.C._ 1697, translated by Jebb: “Ah, so care past can seem lost

joy!”

[406] _Electra_, 1165 _sq._

[407] Dr. J. W. Mackail (_Lectures on Greek Poetry_, p. 150 _sq._) has

described these lines with brilliant aptness. “The language is so simple,

so apparently unconscious and artless, that its overwhelming effect makes

one gasp: it is like hearing human language uttered, and raised to a new

and incredible power, by the lips of some one more than human.”

[408] _O.C._ 607 _sqq._ The wonderful version of these first few fines is

by Professor Gilbert Murray.

[409] _Ajax_, 815 _sqq._

[410] _O.C._ 1586 _sqq._

[411] This figure includes the _Rhesus_, the authenticity of which is not

certain.

[412] It is almost certain that only two actors were employed, Alcestis

being mute in the last scene (_i.e._ the character was apparently

borne by a supernumerary, not the actor who had delivered her earlier

speeches), and the few lines of the child Eumelos being sung by a

chorister. Croiset suggests: protagonist, Apollo, Alcestis, Heracles,

Pheres; deuteragonist, Thanatos, maidservant, Admetus, attendant.

[413] The true explanation, as Dr. Hayley points out, is that the two

actors are already engaged (as A. and H.) so that the queen is presented

by a mute. I cannot, however, agree that this is “a clumsy device”.

Admetus deserved some modification of his delight; we may, moreover,

feel that Alcestis would not wish to show precipitation in greeting the

husband who had interred her with such strange promptitude.

[414] The celebrated “tag” beginning πολλαὶ μορφαὶ τῶν δαιμονίων (vv.

1159-63), which is found also at the close of _Medea_ (practically),

_Helena_, _Andromache_, and _Bacchæ_.

[415] There are no satyrs and no indecency of language.

[416] _E.g._ v. 58: πῶς εἶπας; ἀλλ’ ἦ καὶ σοφὸς λέληθας ὤν; “What! _you_

among the philosophers!”

[417] The late Dr. A. W. Verrall’s brilliant theory of this play it will

be better to discuss later (see pp. 190 _sq._).

[418] vv. 763 _sq._

[419] vv. 280-325.

[420] _Euripides the Rationalist_, pp. 1-128.

[421] The hurried obsequies probably do not fall into this category. We

are almost certainly to assume that as Alcestis’ sacrifice is to be made

on a certain day, that day must see her not only expire, but actually

delivered up to the power of death. See Dr. H. W. Hayley’s _Introduction_

to the play (pp. xxxi _sq._) and my _Riddle of the Bacchæ_, pp. 143 _sq._

[422] I cannot write with decision about the _Alcestis_, because on the

one hand universal testimony and opinion date it as only seven years

anterior to the _Medea_, while my own instinct would put it quite twenty

years earlier than that play. To me it reads essentially like the work of

a young but highly-gifted playwright who has recently lost his wife.

[423] These celebrated lines (vv. 230-51) are not in character. They form

a splendid and moving criticism of the attitude adopted by the poet’s

own Athenian contemporaries towards women, but have only a very partial

application to herself.

[424] (i) In vv. 1231-5, there is a very clear dittography. That is,

either 1231-2, or 1233-5 would serve excellently as a speech of the

chorus-leader; but it is unlikely that the poet meant both to be used;

(ii) vv. 1236-50 read like another and far shorter version of the great

soliloquy 1021-80; (iii) it seems odd that Medea, after finally gaining

courage to slay her children, should before doing so, be seen again

and join in conversations; (iv) vv. 1375-7 give the impression (as Dr.

Verrall has pointed out) that the play is to end, not as it does, but

with some kind of arrangement between Medea and Jason; (v) one or two

ancient quotations purporting to come from this play are not to be found

in our texts.

[425] See pp. 21 _sq._

[426] v. 389 _sqq._

[427] _Poetic_, 1454_b_.

[428] _Four Plays of Euripides_, pp. 125-30.

[429] vv. 1381-3.

[430] v. 472: ἀναίδεια.

[431] v. 364: κακῶς πέπρακται πανταχῇ· τίς ἀντερεῖ;

[432] vv. 801 _sq._

[433] v. 450.

[434] v. 1367.

[435] vv. 944 _sq._ Two MSS., however (followed by Murray), give the

second line to Medea.

[436] v. 349: αἰδούμενος δὲ πολλὰ δὴ διέφθορα.

[437] vv. 309 _sq._

[438] v. 454.

[439] vv. 930 _sq._

[440] vv. 824-45.

[441] vv. 1081-1115.

[442] _Arrangement_: protagonist, Iolaus, Eurystheus; deuteragonist,

Demophon, Alcmena; tritagonist, Copreus, Macaria, attendant, messenger.

There were a great number of mutes: Acamas, the sons of Heracles, and

probably some Athenian soldiers.

[443] It has only 1055 lines, but there are probably gaps in our text.

[444] This name is not mentioned by Euripides. The scholiasts have taken

it from _Iliad_, XV, 639.

[445] In the Peloponnesian war. The Spartans were believed the

descendants of Hyllus and his brothers.

[446] Professor Murray, however, supposes another lacuna here, and thinks

there were two semi-choruses, one party supporting Alcmena, the other

disagreeing.

[447] Even in ancient times it seems to have enjoyed little attention.

[448] v. 638.

[449] v. 625.

[450] vv. 9 _sq._, 540.

[451] vv. 869 _sqq._

[452] vv. 910 _sqq._

[453] Down to v. 847 his story contains nothing superhuman. Then “up

to this point I saw with mine own eyes; the rest of my tale depends on

hearsay,” τἀπὸ τοῦδ’ ἤδη κλύων λέγοιμ’ ἂν ἄλλων, δεῦρο δ’ αὐτὸς εἰσιδών·

And when he mentions the identification of the miraculous lights with

Hebe and Heracles, he attributes the theory to οἱ σοφώτεροι, “cleverer

heads than mine,” as we may translate it.

[454] The oracle has demanded the daughter of “a well-born father,” and

she of course mentions her own qualification in this respect, without

proceeding to dilate (as one would think inevitable in Euripides—or

anyone else) on the quite unrivalled “nobility” of her father.

[455] vv. 513, 563.

[456] _Hercules Furens_, vv. 151-64.

[457] vv. 997-9; v. 990, referring to the hostility of Hera, is too vague

to stand as a warrant for the divine birth of Heracles.

[458] vv. 240 _sq._

[459] It has been thought that vv. 819-22 indicate the sacrifice of the

maiden. They describe the soothsayers’ offering just before the battle:

ἀφίεσαν λαιμῶν βροτείων εὐθὺς οὔριον φόνον. If βροτείων is right (though

βοτείων, “of sheep,” is a tempting alteration) the reference to the

girl’s heroism is brutally curt.

[460] vv. 597 _sqq._

[461] There is, however, in vv. 45-7 an isolated statement which vaguely

contradicts this.

[462] Her remark on hearing the news (v. 665): τοῦδ’ οὐκέθ’ ἡμῖν τοῦ

λόγου μέτεστι δή, sets the seal upon her utter feebleness of mind.

[463] vv. 1035-7.

[464] vv. 1049-52 and elsewhere in the last scene.

[465] vv. 1020-5.

[466] _Arrangement_ (according to Croiset): protagonist, Hippolytus;

deuteragonist, Aphrodite, Phædra, Theseus (the body of Phædra being

represented by a lay-figure); tritagonist, Artemis, servant (who

announces the suicide), nurse, messenger.

[467] This additional name (_The Crowned H._) was given to distinguish

the play from the earlier Ἱππόλυτος Καλυπτόμενος (now lost), or

_Hippolytus Veiled_.

[468] vv. 73-87.

[469] vv. 121-5.

[470] vv. 208-31. Cp. vv. 219-21 with vv. 1375 _sq._

[471] vv. 732-51.

[472] vv. 828-9.

[473] vv. 1423-30.

[474] vv. 616-68. He seems to begin listening to the sound of his own

voice at v. 654.

[475] vv. 728-31.

[476] vv. 831-3. Hippolytus agrees, vv. 1379-83.

[477] vv. 967-9, where note the emphatic ἐγώ. And the word νόθος is

frequent in the play; see especially Hippolytus’ exclamation in vv.

1082-3, which, by a finely dramatic stroke, immediately turns Theseus’

anger to hot fury.

[478] vv. 337-41.

[479] Professor Murray.

[480] vv. 29-33.

[481] Cp. vv. 490 _sq._

[482] vv. 191-7 (Professor Murray’s translation).

[483] vv. 439-61.

[484] Cp. vv. 474 _sq._:—

λῆξον δ’ ὑβρίζουσ’· οὐ γὰρ ἄλλο πλὴν ὕβρις

τάδ’ ἐστί, κρείσσω δαιμόνων εἶναι θέλειν.

[485] vv. 493-6.

[486] vv. 507 _sq._

[487] vv. 1034 _sq._

[488] vv. 415 _sqq._ Compare her whole attitude. Indeed the poet

suggests, as at any rate a collateral reason for her destruction of

Hippolytus, a fear that he will reveal her secret (vv. 689-92).

[489] vv. 373-430.

[490] _Agamemnon_, vv. 160-83.

[491] In the first edition of the play, to which it seems that most of

the ancient strictures apply.

[492] vv. 135-40.

[493] v. 384: τερπνὸν κακόν.

[494] v. 281: ἔκδημος ὦν γὰρ τῆσδε τυγχάνει χθονός.

[495] v. 384: μακραί τε λέσχαι καὶ σχολή, τερπνὸν κακόν.

[496] vv. 337, _sqq._

[497] v. 328, etc.

[498] vv. 503-6.

[499] v. 512.

[500] See Professor Murray’s admirable remarks (p. 81 of his translation).

[501] In the trivial question, v. 516: πότερα δὲ χριστὸν ἢ ποτὸν τὸ

φάρμακον; she is dangerously toying with the proposal. The nurse’s reply

is a half-quaint, half-heartbreaking quotation from childish days when

the little Phædra was querulous with her “medicine” as now: ὄνασθαι, μὴ

μαθεῖν, βούλει, τέκνον.

[502] We notice incidentally the amazing dexterity shown by the line

(565) in which she announces her discovery: σιγήσατ’, ὦ γυναῖκες,

ἐξειργάσμεθα. It is a perfectly clear piece of Greek; it is also a series

of gasps.

[503] v. 1035.

[504] See the Greek _Argument_.

[505] In our play the poet leaves his heroine silent on this topic, but

hints it himself for us. See vv. 151-54, 967-70.

[506] _Frogs_, 1041; _Thesm._ 497, 547.

[507] _Frogs_, 101, 1467; _Thesm._ 275-6.

[508] _Hipp._ 612.

[509] vv. 960 _sq._, 1076 _sq._

[510] vv. 1060-3.

[511] Aristophanes in the _Clouds_ (v. 1165 _sq._) parodies vv. 174 _sq._

The _Clouds_ was produced in 423 B.C. In _Hecuba_, v. 462, reference

seems to be made to the re-establishment of the Delian festival in 426

B.C.

[512] Its popularity in Byzantine times is no bar to this statement.

Probably all the three plays, _Hecuba_, _Phœnissæ_, and _Orestes_, were

chosen because the Greek was comparatively easy. Euripides was already

sufficiently ancient to make this an important consideration.

Miss L. E. Matthaei’s essay should, however, be read (_Studies in Greek

Tragedy_, pp. 118-57). With admirable insight and skill this scholar

seeks to show that the _Hecuba_ is a study, first, of “conventional”

justice, the claim of the community, shown in the sacrifice of Polyxena;

and, secondly, of “natural” justice, seen in Hecuba’s revenge. Miss

Matthaei’s treatment, however subjective, is trenchant and illuminating,

especially as regards the psychology of Hecuba and Odysseus, the value

of Polyxena’s surrender, and the _finale_. But concerning the vital

point, lack of dramatic unity, she has little to say, apparently only the

suggestion (p. 140) that “the cumulative effect of finding the body of

Polydorus after having seen Polyxena taken away is the deciding factor;

otherwise the end of the play would have been simply unbelievable”. The

strength of this argument is very doubtful.

[513] See Mr. Hadley’s admirable _Introduction_ to the play (pp. ix-xii).

[514] vv. 779 _sq._

[515] vv. 428-30, 671, 894-7, 1287 _sq._

[516] v. 230.

[517] vv. 814-9, 1187-94.

[518] In 427 B.C.

[519] vv. 905 _sqq._

[520] vv. 342-78.

[521] vv. 518-82.

[522] vv. 953-67.

[523] vv. 796 _sq._ provide an example:—

ἔκτεινε, τύμβου δ’, εἰ κτανεῖν ἐβούλετο,

οὐκ ἠξίωσεν, ἀλλ’ ἀφῆκε πόντιον.

[524] Note his absurd insistence (vv. 531-3) on his own trivial part in

the sacrifice-scene.

[525] vv. 592-603 (the last line being an apology for the digression),

864-7.

[526] vv. 799 _sqq._

[527] vv. 585 _sqq._, 806-8.

[528] v. 421: ἡμεῖς δὲ πεντήκοντά γ’ ἄμμοροι τέκνων. Comment seems

obvious: “Actually enough children to row a galley!” (πεντηκόντορος ναῦς).

[529] vv. 68 _sqq._

[530] vv. 702 _sqq._

[531] Probably it was composed during the early years of the

Peloponnesian war, as the scholiast suggests in a note on v. 445.

[532] Schol. on v. 445.

[533] Her son, who is not given a name in the play, no doubt obtains it

from this prophecy.

[534] Mention of such a conflict naturally occurs (vv. 588 _sq._) in the

heat of their quarrel, but it comes to nothing. That the old king has no

military following seems certain from the silence of both parties. See

particularly vv. 752 _sqq._

[535] vv. 732 _sqq._ Note the stammering repetition of τις—he cannot even

suggest a name.

[536] It may be answered that here, as elsewhere, the time consumed by

the choric ode is conventionally supposed long enough to allow for the

alleged synchronous action. But how much time is required? Orestes is

to place Hermione in Menelaus’ care, journey to Delphi, and arrange his

plot; then the slaves are to carry the body home. This certainly means

three days; one would expect a week. Thus Peleus only hears of Hermione’s

departure three days (perhaps a week) after it has occurred. Is this

credible? See also the conversation between him and the chorus which

implies that the news has reached him within an hour or two.

[537] _Four Plays of Euripides_, pp. 1-42.

[538] vv. 1239 _sqq._ (Δελφοῖς ὄνειδος).

[539] It is usually supposed to mean “one of the second-rate plays”.

[540] vv. 929-53.

[541] vv. 595-601.

[542] v. 964: ἦλθον δὲ σὰς μὲν οὐ σέβων ἐπιστολάς, κτἑ. There can be

hardly a doubt that these words refer to their parting before her

marriage, when she forbade him to see her again.

[543] vv. 639, 708 _sqq._ Cp. Verrall, p. 38.

[544] _Eg._ vv. 229 _sq._

[545] Cp. Verrall, pp. 29 _sq._

[546] v. 166. This is the type of drama at which Sophocles shook his

head and which Aristophanes reviled. But it must have made many a

slave-holding citizen in the theatre suddenly raise his brows and fall to

thinking of words let drop an hour ago at home.

[547] vv. 1147 _sqq._: The some one of course might be anyone. The

speaker elects to assume that the god is actually present.

[548] vv. 1002 _sqq._, especially 1004.

[549] vv. 464-94.

[550] vv. 147-80.

[551] vv. 164 _sqq._

[552] vv. 445-63.

[553] _Eg._ vv. 632 _sqq._

[554] _Arrangement_ (according to Croiset): protagonist, Amphitryon,

Madness; deuteragonist, Megara, Iris, Theseus; tritagonist, Lycus,

Heracles, messenger. Of course the dead bodies are lay figures. Other

arrangements are possible.

[555] vv. 637-700.

[556] vv. 70-9, 460-89.

[557] vv. 1255-1310, 1340-93.

[558] vv. 140-235.

[559] _Four Plays of Euripides_, pp. 134-98.

[560] vv. 339 _sqq._, etc.

[561] vv. 798 _sqq._

[562] vv. 1340-6.

[563] Especially vv. 1269 _sqq._

[564] The appearance of Pallas (vv. 1002-6) is regarded by Verrall as “a

chance blow received by the madman from the falling ruins of the chamber”.

[565] In vv. 562-82 he raves, however eloquently. One man cannot capture

a whole fortress and punish a hostile population as Amphitryon (vv.

585-94) feels, though his caution and prosaic advice are painfully

ludicrous considering the vast claims he has made for his son an hour ago.

[566] v. 1222.

[567] Compare the similar explanation of a wonderful feat actually

offered by Lycus (vv. 153 _sq._).

[568] Cp. Verrall, pp. 147 _sq._

[569] _Ibid._ pp. 156, 162.

[570] vv. 65-6.

[571] vv. 485-9.

[572] _Probable Arrangement_: protagonist, Theseus, messenger;

deuteragonist, Adrastus, Evadne; tritagonist, Æthra, herald, Iphis,

Athena.

[573] The plot strongly recalls the incident after the battle of Delium

(424 B.C.), when the victorious Bœotians at first refused to surrender

the Athenian dead, and the alliance between Athens and Argos (420 B.C.).

[574] The Hypothesis says: τὸ δὲ δρᾶμα ἐγκώμιον Ἀθηναίων (altered by

Dindorf with general approval to Ἀθηνῶν).

[575] vv. 195-218.

[576] vv. 403-56.

[577] vv. 297-331.

[578] She has arrayed herself, not in black but in festal robes (vv.

1054-6)—an interesting parallel with the fine ending of the second act of

Mr. Shaw’s _Doctor’s Dilemma_.

[579] _Probable Arrangement_: protagonist, Ion, Pædagogus; deuteragonist,

Hermes, Creusa; tritagonist, Xuthus, servant, prophetess, Athena.

[580] vv. 1537 _sq._

[581] ἀμαθής (v. 916, used by Creusa).

[582] ὁ κακός (v. 952, used by the Pædagogus).

[583] v. 1595.

[584] vv. 550 _sqq._ are probably significant (and Ion actually the son

of Xuthus).

[585] Cp. v. 1324 and the rest of the short conversation between her and

Ion, which is of course charming on any view of the play.

[586] vv. 859 _sqq._

[587] vv. 1029 _sqq._

[588] Cp. v. 1419: οὐ τέλεον, οἷον δ’ ἐκδίδαγμα κερκίδος, and Ion’s

acknowledgment (v. 1424): ἰδού· τόδ’ ἐσθ’ ὕφασμα, θέσφαθ’ ὡς εὑρίσκομεν.

This latter surely means that Ion is as satisfied as one can expect to be

in tracing the fulfilment of oracles.

[589] Cp. v. 1565: μηχαναῖς ἐρρύσατο.

[590] v. 1550: πρόσωπον.

[591] οὐ πέδον τίκτει τέκνα says the elder man (v. 542), casually turning

his back on the glory of his wife’s family (cp. vv. 265-8).

[592] vv. 585 _sqq._

[593] vv. 738-46.

[594] v. 768 _sqq._

[595] vv. 1215 _sqq._

[596] His very religion, when put to the test, is mostly intellectual.

Apollo’s moral shortcomings only cause him to shake his head gravely; but

when the god’s truthfulness is exploded, the whole fabric of his belief

collapses.

[597] vv. 369-72.

[598] vv. 436-51. The above paraphrase is probably not too colloquial

(cp. especially v. 437: τί πάσχει; and v. 439: μὴ σύ γε). In fact, as the

speech is so very explicit and unadorned, and as Ion is probably uttering

it while he performs his tasks (see 434-6, after which these reflections

begin in the middle of a line), we perhaps overhear thoughts rather than

words.

[599] vv. 589 _sqq._

[600] vv. 1312 _sqq._

[601] vv. 1546 _sqq._

[602] vv. 369 _sqq._

[603] vv. 308, etc.

[604] vv. 1397 _sqq._

[605] vv. 1468 _sq._

[606] _Arrangement_ (probable): protagonist, Hecuba; deuteragonist,

Athena, Cassandra, Andromache, Helen; tritagonist, Poseidon, Talthybius,

Menelaus.

[607] Ælian, _Var. Hist._ ii. 8.

[608] There are reminders of the western lands in vv. 220 _sqq._

[609] vv. 703 _sqq._

[610] vv. 1158 _sqq._

[611] v. 764: ὦ βάρβαρ’ ἐξευρόντες Ἕλληνες κακά (Andromache’s phrase).

[612] vv. 884 _sqq._ (The first line refers to air.) If we possess any

evidence as to the theological belief of the poet himself it is probably

contained in these lines.

[613] vv. 469 _sqq._, 841 _sqq._, 1060 _sqq._ (especially the poignant

μέλει μέλει μοι), 1240 _sqq._

[614] vv. 1204 _sqq._:—

τοῖς τρόποις γὰρ αἱ τύχαι,

ἔμπληκτος ὡς ἄνθρωπος, ἄλλοτ’ ἄλλοσε

πηδῶσι.

The phrasing points back effectively to Poseidon’s description of

Athena’s fickleness (vv. 67 _sq._: τί δ’ ὧδε πηδᾷς ἄλλοτ’ εἰς ἄλλους

τρόπους;).

[615] The _arrangement_ is uncertain. Perhaps: protagonist, Iphigenia;

deuteragonist, Orestes, messenger, Athena; tritagonist, herdsman,

Pylades, Thoas.

[616] Murray and others place it about 414-2, Wilamowitz, 411-9.

[617] v. 1205: πιστὸν Ἑλλὰς οἶδεν οὐδέν.

[618] v. 626: πῦρ ἱερὸν ἔνδον, χάσμα δ’ εὐρωπὸν πέτρας—a marvellous line.

[619] vv. 823-6.

[620] v. 677: Φωκέων τ’ ἐν πολυπτύχῳ χθονί.

[621] See especially the lovely song, vv. 1089 _sqq._

[622] vv. 968 _sqq._

[623] One can hardly doubt that this is the intention of the scene on the

Taurian beach (vv. 281-94).

[624] vv. 711 _sqq._ The feelings of the Delphian hierarchy, when Orestes

after all actually returned, bringing with him the image—about which they

cared not a farthing—may be imagined by the irreverent.

[625] v. 77.

[626] v. 275.

[627] vv. 380 _sqq._

[628] vv. 719 _sq._

[629] See Verrall, _Eur. the Rationalist_, pp. 217-30 (_Euripides in a

Hymn_).

[630] Longinus, _de Subl._ xv. 3.

[631] vv. 970 _sqq._

[632] v. 73: ἐξ αἱμάτων γοῦν ξάνθ’ ἔχει τριχώματα, a grotesque thought

which we have just heard (as Murray points out in his _apparatus_) from

Iphigenia as part of her dream.

[633] vv. 281 _sqq._

[634] vv. 961 _sqq._

[635] θεᾶς βρέτας is now the prescription, as we may call it. Cp. vv.

980, 985-6, and 1038-40.

[636] vv. 939 _sqq._

[637] ψῆφος (v. 945). He means “assembly (which votes),” but he has ψῆφος

on the brain, as well he might have (vv. 965 _sq._).

[638] vv. 739 _sq._ and 1046: Πυλάδης δ’ ὅδ’ ἡμῖν ποῦ τετάξεται φόνου—if

this is a task set by Apollo there must be murder in it.

[639] v. 933.

[640] _Arrangement_: protagonist, Electra; deuteragonist, Orestes,

Clytæmnestra; tritagonist, farmer, old man, messenger, Castor. Pylades

and Polydeuces were represented by a mute actor.

[641] From vv. 1347-56 it is clear that the Sicilian expedition had

already sailed, but that news of the disaster had not yet reached Athens.

[642] Bernhardy, _Geschichte der griechischen Poesie_ II, ii. p. 490.

[643] vv. 1041-3.

[644] vv. 9-10.

[645] 1142-6.

[646] vv. 652-60.

[647] v. 54.

[648] The peasant tells us that Electra’s banishment to the country is

due to her mother’s efforts when Ægisthus wished to kill her (vv. 25

_sqq._). Electra puts the matter very differently (vv. 60 _sq._). The

horrible story in vv. 326 _sqq._ is probably untrue; cp. ὡς λέγουσιν.

[649] vv. 77-8, 354 _sq._

[650] vv. 367 _sqq._

[651] vv. 255 _sqq._

[652] vv. 1294, 1296 _sq._, 1302.

[653] vv. 737-45.

[654] Expedit esse deos.

[655] “If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent Him.”

[656] vv. 1245 _sq._

[657] vv. 1327 _sqq._

[658] vv. 1301-7. The first line, μοῖρά τ’ ἀνάγκης ἦγ’ ᾗ τὸ χρεών, is an

exceptionally fine instance of misty verbiage.

[659] See Verrall’s discussion in his edition of the _Choephorœ_ (Introd.

pp. xxxiii-lxx).

[660] _Probable Arrangement_: protagonist, Helen, the god (whether

Castor or Pollux); deuteragonist, Teucer, Menelaus, Egyptian messenger;

tritagonist, old woman, Greek messenger, Theonoe, Theoclymenus.

[661] v. 616: ὦ χαῖρε, Λήδας θύγατερ, ἐνθάδ’ ἦσθ’ ἄρα;

[662] v. 151.

[663] vv. 832, 1048, 491, 1050-2.

[664] vv. 183 _sqq._

[665] vv. 1107 _sqq._

[666] vv. 878 _sqq._

[667] vv. 1013-6:—

καὶ γὰρ τίσις τῶνδ’ ἐστὶ τοῖς τε νερτέροις

καὶ τοῖς ἄνωθεν πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις. ὁ νοῦς

τῶν κατθανόντων ζῇ μὲν οὔ, γνώμην δ’ ἔχει

ἀθάνατον, εἰς ἀθάνατον αἰθέρ’ ἐμπεσών.

The precision of the wording is remarkable.

[668] _Troades_, 884 _sqq._

[669] See _Four Plays of Euripides_, pp. 43-133 (_Euripides’ Apology_).

[670] vv. 1301 _sqq._

[671] The idea is taken from the famous recantation of Stesichorus, which

asserted that Helen never went to Troy.

[672] In the inflated affectation of such things as vv. 355-6 and 629

parody of some contemporary lyrist is quite possible.

[673] vv. 20-1, 256-9 (rejected by Murray, after Badham).

[674] vv. 138 _sqq._, 205 _sqq._, 284-5.

[675] vv. 744-60.

[676] _Arrangement_ (according to Croiset): protagonist, Jocasta, Creon;

deuteragonist, Antigone, Polynices, Menœceus; tritagonist, pædagogus,

Eteocles, Tiresias, messengers, Œdipus.

[677] Perhaps one reason was the great sweep of story which it covers.

[678] See Mr. J. U. Powell’s careful and lucid account in his edition

(pp. 7-32).

[679] Verrall, _Eur. the Rationalist_, pp. 236 _sq._

[680] Mr. J. U. Powell, whose edition should be consulted.

[681] vv. 1233 _sq._:—

ὑμεῖς δ’ ἀγῶν’ ἀφέντες, Ἀργεῖοι, χθόνα

νίσεσθε, βίοτον μὴ λιπόντες ἐνθάδε,

are out of the question as work of Euripides. There are several other

faults.

[682] vv. 1259 _sqq._

[683] Mr. Powell, however, rightly remarks that vv. 1265-6 are “strained”.

[684] vv. 1758 _sq._

[685] vv. 1524 _sq._

[686] So the scholiast: ὅ τε ἐπὶ πᾶσι μετ’ ᾠδῆς ἀδολέσχου φυγαδευόμενος

Οἰδίπους προσέρραπται διὰ κενῆς.

[687] vv. 1090-1199 (the ῥῆσις containing the description of the Seven).

[688] vv. 1182 _sqq._

[689] Verrall (_Eur. the Rationalist_, pp. 231-60) believed that those

parts which introduce Antigone are un-Euripidean. The terrace-scene

has already been discussed. In the body of the play, as he argues

with much point, wherever mention of Antigone occurs, it is obtrusive

and embarrassing. Her lament with Œdipus at the close contains many

inappropriate features. He concludes that Œdipus is an allegory of

Euripides himself, leaving Athens in sorrow at the end of his life, and

that Antigone represents his literary offspring, the plays. The Sphinx

is “the spirit of mystery and darkness,” which the poet has fought and

quelled. All this was composed by a poet of the Euripidean circle to

commemorate the master; it includes a compliment—the quotation from the

_Œdipus Tyrannus_—to Sophocles, who had shown public respect to his rival

when the news of his death reached Athens.

[690] One notices the criticism (vv. 751 _sq._) of Æschylus, _Septem_

(vv. 375 _sqq._) when Eteocles declares that to give a list of his

champions would be waste of time.

[691] The “popular” character of the _Phœnissæ_ is brought out by the

relish with which the _Argument_ enumerates its murderous happenings.

[692] In this passage an allusion has by some been supposed to

Alcibiades’ return to Athens (411 B.C.).

[693] Cp. vv. 302 _sq._ (γηραιὸν πόδ’ ἕλκω) with v. 316 (περιχορεύουσα).

[694] vv. 528 _sqq._

[695] Croiset gives the probable _arrangement_: protagonist, Orestes,

messenger; deuteragonist, Electra, Menelaus, Phrygian; tritagonist,

Helen, Tyndareus, Pylades, Hermione, Apollo.

[696] See Murray’s text.

[697] vv. 1167 _sqq._

[698] vv. 491-525.

[699] vv. 28 _sqq._

[700] vv. 285 _sqq._ Menelaus (v. 417) casually calls Apollo “stupid”.

[701] vv. 380 _sqq._

[702] v. 386.

[703] v. 388.

[704] v. 390.

[705] vv. 544 _sqq._ The flatness of the translation given above is

not, I think, inappropriate, νῦν δὲ σὴν ταρβῶ τρίχα (v. 550), is merely

hideous. μαστοῖς τὸν ἔλεον θηρώμεναι (v. 568), is even worse.

[706] v. 551.

[707] v. 634.

[708] v. 397.

[709] vv. 640 _sq._

[710] vv. 658-61.

[711] vv. 932 _sqq._

[712] v. 1576: ποτέρον ἐρωτᾶν ἢ κλύειν ἐμοῦ θέλεις;

[713] v. 396.

[714] His “progression, upward in strength and downward in reason, is

visible throughout,” says Dr. Verrall (_Four Plays_, p. 245), whose

eloquent and vivid essay on this drama should be carefully studied.

[715] vv. 1204 _sqq._: ὦ τὰς φρένας μὲν ἄρσενας κεκτημένη....

[716] vv. 615 _sqq._

[717] vv. 72-92. Compare the amusing little passage-of-arms, vv. 107-11

(see Verrall, _Four Plays_, pp. 219 _sq._).

[718] vv. 126 _sqq._

[719] vv. 1-3.

[720] vv. 78 _sq._

[721] v. 121.

[722] vv. 960 _sqq._

[723] At v. 1539 (very late in the day) they discuss whether it is

their duty to inform the State of the murderous plot against Helen and

Hermione. Even then they decide to do nothing.

[724] vv. 1547 _sqq._

[725] Note vv. 743, 745, 747, 749, and the excitement in the last two

verses.

[726] vv. 481 _sqq._

[727] vv. 371 _sqq._

[728] v. 1323.

[729] vv. 37 _sqq._

[730] vv. 395 _sqq._

[731] Contrast v. 420: μέλλει· τὸ θεῖον δ’ ἐστὶ τοιοῦτον φύσει; with v.

423: ὡς ταχὺ μετῆλθόν σ’ αἷμα μητέρος θεαί.

[732] vv. 360 _sqq._

[733] v. 373.

[734] First Menelaus says that Glaucus spoke to him “from the waves” (v.

362), but from v. 365 (ἐμφανῶς κατασταθείς) it seems that the person

is standing on the shore. Such inconsistencies are significant, and in

Euripides common. They indicate how much accuracy the narrator commands.

[735] vv. 1493 _sqq._

[736] vv. 1662-3.

[737] Professor Gilbert Murray (_Euripides and his Age_, pp. 160 _sqq._)

has some beautiful and striking observations on the epiphany of Apollo

and its effect on the raving mortals below: a trance falls upon them from

which they awake purged of hate and anger. But could Euripides, can we,

attribute this to a god who has commanded matricide? And the effect is

largely spoiled by Orestes (vv. 1666 _sqq._): “Prophetic Loxias, what

oracles are thine! Thou art not, then, a lying prophet, but a true. Yet

had I begun to dread lest, when I heard thy voice as I thought, it was

that of a fiend.” ... These are not the tones of blissful faith.

[738] Paley says that this play is more frequently quoted by ancient

writers than all the works of Æschylus and Sophocles together.

[739] vv. 174 _sqq._

[740] _Arrangement_: Protagonist, Pentheus, Agave; deuteragonist,

Dionysus, Tiresias; tritagonist, Cadmus, guard, messengers.

[741] Before Cadmus’ speech, a passage has been lost in which the

mourners adjusted the torn fragments.

[742] There is another gap at this point. A considerable number of

Dionysus’ lines are missing, and no doubt also further conversation

between Cadmus and Agave.

[743] See Professor Murray (_Euripides and his Age_, pp. 183 _sq._). I

now think that what I wrote about the psychology of Dionysus and Pentheus

(_The Riddle of the Bacchæ_, pp. 66 _sq._, 87-101) is over-elaborated.

[744] vv. 824-45.

[745] vv. 732-51.

[746] Professor Murray’s beautiful translation of these lyrics will be

familiar to most readers.

[747] Murray, _Euripides and his Age_, p. 196. My quotation, of course,

does not imply that Professor Murray is guilty of the confusion of

thought in question.

[748] The view mentioned in this paragraph will be found worked out in

the present writer’s _Riddle of the Bacchæ_. This theory has met with

much scepticism, but received the honour of almost entire acceptance

by the late Dr. Verrall in _The Bacchantes of Euripides_. Dr. Verrall

improved the statement of the theory, in particular by rejecting the

supposition of a plot between Tiresias and the Stranger. Mr. W. H.

Salter, in his delightful _Essays on Two Moderns_, also accepts this view

of the play in the main (pp. 50-68). Dr. R. Nihard, in _Le Problème des

Bacchantes d’Euripide_ (Louvain, 1912), a useful study, rejects it.

[749] vv. 632 _sq._:—

πρὸς δὲ τοῖσδ’ αὐτῷ τάδ’ ἄλλα Βάκχιος λυμαίνεται·

δώματ’ ἔρρηξεν χαμᾶζε. συντεθράνωται δ’ ἅπαν ...

συντεθράνωται, however, is elsewhere only known to us by the explanation

of Hesychius, συμπέπτωκε, and Verrall points out that it ought to mean

“it has all been put together again”.

[750] To this view no complete answer has yet been made. All that can

possibly be said is what Professor Gilbert Murray (_Euripides and his

Age_, pp. 186 _sq._) and (in a letter to the present writer) Professor

U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff suggest, that the palace is in the main

destroyed, but the façade is more or less undamaged. This does away

with the testimony to Dionysus’ imposture which the audience receive

from their own eyes, but it leaves untouched the incredible silence of

Pentheus. Moreover, Dionysus’ words as they stand mean that the building

is utterly destroyed. That they do not mean this is only suggested in

despair, because, if they do mean this, they are absurdly and patently

false.

[751] v. 233 _sq._: ξένος, γόης ἐπῳδός.

[752] The attachment between Artemis and Hippolytus is a remarkable

exception. The stories concerning the “loves” of gods and goddesses for

mortals are evidently beside the question.

[753] vv. 1325 _sq._

[754] _Bellerophon_, _fr._ 294, 7: εἰ θεοί τι δρῶσιν αἰσχρόν, οὐκ εἰσὶν

θεοί.

[755] _Arrangement_: Croiset gives: protagonist, Agamemnon, Achilles;

deuteragonist, Old Man, Iphigenia, messenger; tritagonist, Menelaus,

Clytæmnestra.

[756] For these see Professor Murray’s text, especially his preface.

[757] It contains, for instance, unmetrical verses.

[758] vv. 1366 _sq._

[759] vv. 919-74.

[760] For what follows cp. Professor Murray, _Euripides and his Age_, pp.

173-5.

[761] v. 414.

[762] The elision of αι in v. 407.

[763] _Poetic_, 1454_a_.

[764] _Arrangement_: protagonist, Odysseus; deuteragonist, Silenus;

tritagonist, Polyphemus.

[765] The _Detectives_ (Ἰχνευταί) of Sophocles is now known to us by

extensive fragments, see pp. 175 _sq._

[766] Murray puts it “perhaps even before 438”.

[767] It attracted little attention from ancient scholars. There are no

scholia, and the hypothesis is incomplete.

[768] _Odyssey IX._ 105-566.

[769] Cp. vv. 549, 672-5, with _Od. IX._ vv. 366, 408-12.

[770] Cp. vv. 460-3 with _Od. IX._ 384-8.

[771] See p. 2.

[772] Anapæsts in other feet than the first, and occasional violations of

the rule of the final cretic (see Chapter VI).

[773] vv. 316-41.

[774] The _arrangement_ of the cast is not clear; perhaps: protagonist,

Hector, Odysseus; deuteragonist, Æneas, Rhesus, Diomedes, charioteer;

tritagonist, Dolon, herdsman, Athena, Muse. The brief part of Paris may

have been taken by Diomedes or Odysseus, possibly by a fourth actor.

[775] ἀνθρωποδαίμων (v. 971).

[776] vv. 474-84.

[777] vv. 546-56.

[778] An excellent summary of the evidence (to which I am indebted) is to

be found in the _Introduction_ to Professor Murray’s verse-translation.

[779] Its author, however, is by no means convinced by them. He gives

also interesting information on other points.

[780] That is, the two prologues mentioned in the _Argument_ were added

for later performances.

[781] Another argument on this side, which is perhaps new, lies in the

fact that almost all the action takes place at night—an unique feature.

The ancient theatre, of course, could not be darkened. It might be urged

that the drama was meant for readers only, and so comes from one of the

ἀναγνωστικοί of the fourth century (see p. 32).

[782] vv. 319-23.

[783] vv. 422-53.

[784] It suffices to mention Scaliger, Böckh, Hermann, Valckenaer, and

Wilamowitz-Moellendorff.

[785] Upheld, _e.g._ by Christ and Murray.

[786] Schol. on v. 528.

[787] vv. 962-73.

[788] On the whole question see Mr. W. H. Porter’s excellent paper, “The

Euripidean _Rhesus_ in the Light of Recent Criticism” (_Hermathena_,

xvii. pp. 348-80), and his useful edition of the play.

[789] Cp. pp. 119 _sq._, 165 _sq._

[790] Euripides revises even the diction of his predecessor. Æschylus

wrote φαγέδαινα δ’ ἥ μου σάρκας ἐσθίει ποδός; Euripides repeats the line

with the verb altered to θοινᾶται (Aristotle, _Poetic_, 1458_b_).

[791] vv. 1520-7.

[792] _Quomodo historia conscribenda_, § 1.

[793] See Hartung’s masterly treatment in _Euripides Restitutus_, II, pp.

344-60.

[794] Ruskin, _Mornings in Florence_, I, 14.

[795] The statements in this sentence are taken from Hartung, who bases

his conception here upon other authors; there are no Euripidean fragments

to this effect.

[796] Eratosthenes (_Catast._ 15, quoted by Nauck) says: οὐχ εἵλετο τῷ

πατρὶ συμμένειν οὐδὲ τῇ μητρί, ἀλλ’ αὐθαίρετος εἰς τὸ Ἄργος ἀπῆλθε μετ’

ἐκείνου εὐγενές τι φρονήσασα. The last three words suggest a scene of

irresolution followed by a speech of high resolve, as in the _Iphigenia

at Aulis_.

[797] I, 33.

[798] See Goethe’s enthusiastic and brilliant discussion, _Altgriechische

Literatur_ (Works, Vol. V, p. 127, edition of 1837).

[799] Hartung’s brilliant sketch of Phaethon’s character (_Eur.

Restitutus_, II, pp. 192 _sq._), however imaginary, will be read with

interest.

[800] This is an acute suggestion of Goethe.

[801] ὡς πανταχοῦ γε πατρὶς ἡ βόσκουσα γῆ.

[802] δένδρεα φίλοισιν ὠλέναισι ψυκτήρια λέξεται.

[803] The chorus in their terror bid the queen seek refuge with her

father Oceanus.

[804] See _Oxyrhynchus Papyri_, VI, pp. 19-106.

[805] The scholiast on _Frogs_, v. 53, which was performed in 405 B.C.

(the year after Euripides’ death) mentions the _Hypsipyle_ among recent

plays.

[806] The critic Didymus, for instance, knew the _Hypsipyle_ better than

the _Bacchæ_. For “Achelous” as a synonym for “water” he quotes the

former play rather than _Bacchæ_, 625. See Macrobius, V, xviii. 12.

[807] That is, “the beginning of doom”.

[808] Hartung, _Eur. Rest._ II, p. 442.

[809] Μελανίππη ἡ σοφή, so called to distinguish it from Μ. δέσμωτις,

or _Melanippe in Prison_. The latter play seems to have been much less

important. Unfortunately there is often a doubt, when authorities quote

the “_Melanippe_,” from which of the two the quotation comes.

[810] See pp. 313-5.

[811] ἔχει δὲ διπλοῦν σχῆμα, τὸ μὲν τοῦ ποιητοῦ, τὸ δὲ τοῦ προσώπου τοῦ

ἐν τῷ δράματι, τῆς Μελανίππης (quoted by Nauck).

[812] _Jupiter Tragœdus_, 41.

[813] Hartung assigns it to 448 B.C.

[814] Cp. Aristotle’s criticism, _Poetic_, 1454_a_: τοῦ δὲ ἀπρεποῦς καὶ

μὴ ἁρμόττοντος (παράδειγμα) ... ἡ τῆς Μελανίππης ῥῆσις.

[815] _Moralia_, 110 D, 998 E.

[816] _Poetic_, 1454_a_.

[817]

κοίλοις ἐν ἄλυχνος ὥστε θὴρ μόνος (_fr._ 425).

[818]

τίς δ’ οἶδεν εἰ τὸ ζῆν μέν ἐστι κατθανεῖν,

τὸ κατθανεῖν δὲ ζῆν κάτω νομίζεται;

[819] 1 Cor. xv. 33.

[820] _Fr._ 1034:—

ἅπας μὲν ἀὴρ ἀετῷ περάσιμος,

ἅπασα δὲ χθὼν ἀνδρὶ γενναίῳ πατρίς.

[821] _Fr._ 475.

[822] Mr. F. Manning, _Scenes and Portraits_ (_Preface_, p. viii).

[823] Aristotle, _Poetic_, 1460_b_: Σοφοκλῆς ἔφη αὐτὸς μὲν οἵους δεῖ

ποιεῖν, Εὐριπίδην δὲ οἷοί εἰσιν.

[824] _Frogs_, vv. 850, 1043 _sq._

[825] _Ibid._ 954-8.

[826] _Ibid._ 1304-8, 1314, 1348.

[827] _Ibid._ 1309-63.

[828] _Ibid._ 1378-1410.

[829] _Ibid._ 1198 _sqq._

[830] _Poetic_, 1454_a_.

[831] _Ibid._ 1461_b_.

[832] _Ibid._ 1453_a_. ὁ Εὐριπίδης εἰ καὶ τὰ ἄλλα μὴ εὖ οἰκονομεῖ ἀλλὰ

τραγικώτατός γε τῶν ποιητῶν φαίνεται.

[833] _Andromache_, _Electra_, _Bacchæ_, _Rhesus_, and the original text

of the _Iphigenia at Aulis_ (see Murray’s _Apparatus_ at the end of the

play). Aristotle naturally allows such as these (_Poetic_, 1454_b_):

μηχανῇ χρηστέον ἐπὶ τὰ ἔξω τοῦ δράματος, κτἑ.

[834] In the extant plays. Of course there were others, which we cannot

discuss with knowledge, _e.g._ the close of _Melanippe the Wise_.

[835] For the _Iphigenia_ carries the _Helena_ with it (see the

discussion of the latter, pp. 260 _sqq._). As a matter of cold fact, to

be sure, Theoclymenus could never have overtaken the Greeks.

[836] _Frogs_, 1198-1247.

[837] He seems in private conversation to have maintained the necessity

of this; compare the criticism of Æschylus which he utters in the

_Frogs_, 1122: ἀσαφὴς γὰρ ἦν ἐν τῇ φράσει τῶν πραγμάτων. φ.τ.π. is

precisely “prologue” in the Euripidean sense.

[838] _Herc. Fur._, 601 _sqq._

[839] Mr. G. B. Shaw.

[840] _Troades_, vv. 1204-6. Cp. _Helena_, 1140-3.

[841] See Mr. W. H. S. Jones, _The Moral Standpoint of Euripides_, pp. 28

_sq._ This view is also set forth by Jebb, _The Growth and Influence of

Classical Greek Poetry_, p. 218, and by Nestle, _Euripides der Dichter

der Gr. Aufklärung_, p. 174.

[842] _Orestes_, vv. 982 _sqq._: μόλοιμι τὰν οὐρανοῦ κτἑ.

[843] See Mr. E. F. Carritt, _The Theory of Beauty_, p. 156.

[844] _Ibid._ p. 89.

[845] v. 618.

[846] _Helena_, vv. 489 _sqq._

[847] _Iph. Aul._, vv. 819 _sqq._

[848] _Ion_, v. 1039.

[849] _The Possessed_, Ch. I.

[850] v. 674: ὦ πατρὸς ὅμαιμε θεῖε.

[851] _Orestes_, vv. 71-111.

[852] M. Arnold, _The Scholar-Gipsy_. Cp. Mrs. Browning’s well-known

lines on “Our Euripides the human”.

[853] _Fr._ 916:—

μή μοι

λεπτῶν θίγγανε μύθων, ψυχή·

τί περισσὰ φρονεῖς, εἰ μὴ μέλλεις

σεμνύνεσθαι παρ’ ὁμοίοις;

[854] _Fr._ 894:—

σοφὸν γὰρ ἄνδρα, κἂν ἑκὰς ναίῃ χθονός,

κἂν μήποτ’ ὄσσοις εἰσίδω, κρίνω φίλον.

And Nestle (p. 368) aptly quotes from Schiller’s _Don Carlos_ (III, 10):

Das Jahrhundert

Ist meinem Ideal nicht reif. Ich lebe

Ein bürger derer, welche kommen werden.

[855] See the celebrated sketch of progressive degradation in Thucydides

(III, 82, 83).

[856] Dr. W. Nestle’s work is entitled _Euripides der Dichter der

griechischen Aufklärung_.

[857] _Herc. Fur._, 673 _sqq._

[858] A totally different thing from the written Greek accents ΄, `, and

῀, which refer to pitch, not stress.

[859] συνάφεια, “connexion,” “continuity.”

[860] These cause almost all the difficulty of scanning iambics. Till one

is quite familiar with them it is a good plan to begin at the end. Nearly

all resolved feet occur in the third or fourth place.

[861] Sophocles sometimes neglects this pause. Not only does he

occasionally end a line with a word (such as the definite article) which

belongs closely to the first word of the next line; in a few places he

elides a vowel at the end before a vowel in the following line. See, for

instance, _Œd. Tyr._, 29.

[862] Latin, _cæsura_ “a cutting”.

[863] No such lines are extant in Greek, but an analogy can be found in

Ennius’ hexameter:

Sparsis hastis longis campus splendet et horret.

In the _Peruigilium Veneris_, the trochee is much too often contained in

a single word, _e.g._:

Hybla totos funde flores, quotquot annus adtulit.

[864] It is so called because the second half of the fifth foot _plus_

the sixth will obviously have the metrical form –⏑–, which sequence of

syllables, when it forms a single foot (as, of course, it does not in

iambics), is called a cretic. The rule is therefore often thus stated:

“When the final cretic extends over a whole word or whole words, it must

be preceded by a short syllable”.

[865] Iambics were adopted because nearer to the rhythm of everyday

speech. It has been held, for instance by Dr. J. H. H. Schmidt, that

iambics are nothing but trochaics with “anacrusis” (for this term see

below, p. 342). So near is the iambic metre to ordinary talk that one now

and again finds accidental “lines” in prose. Thus Demosthenes (_Olynth._,

I, 5) writes δῆλον γάρ ἐστι τοῖς Ὀλυνθίοις ὅτι.... George Eliot, early in

_Middlemarch_, actually produces two consecutive “lines”: “Obliged to get

my coals by stratagem, and pray to heaven for my salad-oil”.

[866] Euripides is much fonder of this metre than the other two

masters. Sophocles in particular is very sparing of it. That passage

(_Philoctetes_, 1222 _sqq._), where Odysseus and Neoptolemus hurry upon

the scene in violent (iambic) altercation, would infallibly have been put

into trochaics by Euripides.

[867] From καταλήγω, “to stop short”.

[868] The two instances given are, in fact, all that I have found.

[869] διαίρεσις, “division”.

[870] For example, the splendid poem by Anacreon beginning πῶλε Θρῃκίη is

printed by some in long lines, by others in short, even though the first,

third, etc., long lines are not catalectic.

[871] The meaning of this term is uncertain.

[872] I have, here and later, printed the readings and arrangement best

suited to my purpose.

[873] Greek συγκοπή, “coalescence”. But ⏗ need not fill a foot: for

instance in a true _dactylic_ system we find (_Œd. Col._, 1082):—

– ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – – ⏗ ⏑ ⏗ ⏑ – –

Analogously to ⏗ as a trochee, dactyls admit ⏘ (= ⏑⏑⏑⏑) as a foot.

– ⏑⏑ ⏘ ⏘ ⏗ ⏑ – – – ⏑ ⏑ ⏘ –

[874] Before condemning this statement as a mere evasion, the student

should reflect that all such poetry is written for music, which would in

performance make the rhythm “come right”.

[875] λογαοιδικός, “mingled of prose and verse”.

[876] ἀνάκρουσις, “striking up”.

[877] Not all, for the first short syllable may be part of a resolved

foot.

[878] The first syllable of πρυμνησίων in the second line, though long,

is musically equivalent to a short. Such syllables are marked with the

sign ˃, and the foot τοῑ πρυ͐μν- may be called an “accelerated spondee”.

Syllables which carry a musical length different from their metrical

length are named “irrational”.

[879] The existence of these cola forms (to us who have not the music

written for Greek lyrics) one of the greatest obstacles to a clear and

easy perception of periodic structure.

[880] In lyrics a long syllable (if it does not end with a consonant) may

be shortened—instead of disappearing by elision—before a vowel.

[881] ἡ ἐπῳδός. The masculine word, ὁ ἐπῳδός, has a different meaning,

with which we are familiar from the _Epodes_ of Horace—a poem which

repeats from beginning to end the same period, each period being usually

two cola “which either have equal length, or the second of which is

catalectic or ‘falling’ or is even shortened by an entire measure” (see

Schmidt’s _Introduction_, Eng. tr. by Prof. J. W. White, pp. 93 _sqq._).

[882] Though my obligations to Dr. J. H. H. Schmidt’s volumes, especially

_Die Eurhythmie in den Chorgesängen der Griechen_, are very great, I

cannot see in his verse-pause—according to him (_Eurhythmie_, p. 89)

the foundation of his system—anything but a delusion. Dr. Schmidt’s own

appendices show a good minority of “verses” which end with no pause.

[883] The first two syllables (⏑⏑) correspond to the first (–) of Οἰδίπου.

[884] How? By examination of the whole period. If we look at the seventh

line of the strophe from _Antigone_, scanned above, it may seem arbitrary

to write

– ˃

| αιναν ‖

rather than

⏗ –

| αιν|ανꞈ‖.

But the former method is suggested by the corresponding fourth line,

which cannot possibly be scanned otherwise than as above, and which

therefore has four feet; hence we scan -αιναν so as to give the seventh

line also four, not five, feet altogether.

[885] It is therefore possible to scan the ordinary iambics of dialogue

as trochees:—

˃ – ⏑ – ˃ – ⏑ – ˃ – ⏑ –

This is the method followed by Dr. J. H. H. Schmidt, and of course

changes altogether the rules given above (§ II), but will hardly perplex

the student. It has the advantage of bringing “iambic” dialogue closer to

lyric and to episodic trochees, but it has seemed more convenient to keep

the traditional statement.

[886] Printed as one line, though containing a colon which ends with the

end of a word, because the corresponding line of the antistrophe contains

a colon which does not:—

πρῶτά σε κεκλόμενος, θύγατ‖ερ Διός, ἄμβροτ’ Ἀθάνα....

[887] Because spondaic _words_ are lacking. It is sometimes said that

the only spondee in English is “amen”. The peculiar pronunciation of

this word is due to the fact that it is so often sung to music where

each syllable is given a whole bar. The name of Seaford in Sussex is

undoubtedly pronounced by its inhabitants ∸∸; but one may perhaps

therefore argue that it should be written “Sea Ford”.

[888] This important sequence may be conveniently memorized—if we

substitute accent for quantity—by the sentence “Attack Rome at once”.

[889] I take this figure from Schmidt’s _Introduction_ (English

Translation, p. 76).

[890] The first two syllables of this word form the anacrusis, though the

metre is trochaic; that is, we find ⏑⏑ instead of ⏑. In such cases the

two “shorts” are given the length of one only, and this is indicated by

the sign ω.

[891] I have taken Schmidt’s readings and arrangement for the sake of an

example. Murray’s arrangement is quite different.

INDICES

I. GREEK

Names of plays, etc., in capitals

ΑΘΛΑ, 5.

ΑΙΑΣ, 132-6.

— ΜΑΣΤΙΓΟΦΟΡΟΣ, 132-6.

ΑΙΤΝΑΙΑΙ, 119.

ΑΛΚΗΣΤΙΣ, 186-92.

ἀναβαίνω, 54 n.

ἀνάγκη, 38.

ἀναγνωστικοί, 32, 293 n.

ἀναίδεια, 325.

ἀνάκρουσις, 342 n.

ΑΝΔΡΟΜΑΧΗ, 219-28.

ἀνὴρ δίψυχος, 311.

ΑΝΤΙΓΟΝΗ, 136-41.

ἀντιλαβή, 181 n.

ἀντιστροφή, 344.

ἀπέδωκε, 3 n.

ἀπὸ σκηνῆς, 57.

ἄτη, 129.

αὖθις, 83.

ΑΧΑΙΩΝ ΣΥΛΛΟΓΟΣ, 174.

ΑΧΙΛΛΕΩΣ ΕΡΑΣΤΑΙ, 174.

ΒΑΚΧΑΙ, 277-85.

βαλλάντιον, 34 n.

ΒΑΣΣΑΡΑΙ, 117.

ΒΑΣΣΑΡΙΔΕΣ, 117.

βρῦτον, 118 n.

δαιμόνιον σημεῖον, 163 n.

διαίρεσις, 336 n.

ΔΙΔΑΣΚΑΛΙΑΙ, 62.

δράσαντι παθεῖν, 110 n., 129 and n.

ΕΚΑΒΗ, 215-9.

ἐκσυρίττειν, 83 n.

ΕΚΤΟΡΟΣ ΛΥΤΡΑ, 118.

ἐλελελεῦ, 25.

ΕΛΕΝΗ, 258-64.

ΕΛΕΥΣΙΝΙΟΙ, 119.

ἐπεισόδια, 4 n.

ΕΠΙΔΗΜΙΑΙ, 23 n.

ἐπὶ σκηνῆς, 57, 59.

ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς, 54.

ἐπί τινος μετεώρου, 57.

ἐπῳδικόν, 344.

ἐπῳδός, 345 n.

ΕΥΜΕΝΙΔΕΣ, 111-7.

εὐριπιδαριστοφανίζειν, 19 n.

ΗΔΩΝΟΙ, 117.

ΗΛΕΚΤΡΑ, 141-5, 252-8.

ΗΛΙΑΔΕΣ, 119.

ἡμιχόρια, 78.

ΗΡΑΚΛΕΙΔΑΙ, 200-5.

ΗΡΑΚΛΗΣ ΜΑΙΝΟΜΕΝΟΣ, 228-34.

θεῖον, τὸ, 30.

θεός, 283.

ΘΕΡΙΣΤΑΙ, 192, 296.

θεωρικόν, τὸ, 82.

ΘΡΗΙΣΣΑΙ, 119.

θυμέλη, 51.

θυμός, 22, 198.

ΙΚΕΤΙΔΕΣ, 84-6, 234-6.

ἴκρια, 81.

ΙΠΠΟΛΥΤΟΣ ΚΑΛΥΠΤΟΜΕΝΟΣ, 205 n.

— ΣΤΕΦΑΝΗΦΟΡΟΣ, 205-15.

— ΣΤΕΦΑΝΙΑΣ, 205-15.

ΙΦΙΓΕΝΕΙΑ Η ΕΝ ΑΥΛΙΔΙ, 285-9.

— — — ΤΑΥΡΟΙΣ, 247-52.

ΙΧΝΕΥΤΑΙ, 175-6, 289 n.

ΙΩΝ, 236-43.

ΚΑΒΕΙΡΟΙ, 119.

καταβαίνω, 54 n.

καταλήγω, 334 n.

κερκίδες, 51.

κλίμακες, 51.

κόθορνος, 69.

κομμοί, 74.

κομμός, 107.

κορυφαῖος, 78.

κρηπίς, 68.

ΚΥΚΛΩΨ, 289-91.

κῶλον, 343.

λογαοιδικός, 341 n.

λογεῖον, 52.

ΛΥΚΟΥΡΓΕΙΑ, 117.

ΜΕΓΑ ΔΡΑΜΑ, 24 and n.

ΜΕΛΑΝΙΠΠΗ ΔΕΣΜΩΤΙΣ, 305 n.

— Η ΣΟΦΗ, 305 n.

μεσῳδικόν, 344.

ΜΗΔΕΙΑ, 192-9.

μηχανή, 65.

μύρμηκος ἀτραπούς, 26 n.

ΜΥΡΜΙΔΟΝΕΣ, 118.

ΝΕΑΝΙΣΚΟΙ, 117.

ΝΗΡΗΙΔΕΣ, 118.

ΝΙΟΒΗ, 119.

νόμοι, 72.

ὄγκος, 69.

ΟΙΔΙΠΟΥΣ ΕΠΙ ΚΟΛΩΝΩΙ, 167-73.

— ΤΥΡΑΝΝΟΣ, 145-54.

οἱ ἐν τῷ φανερῷ θάνατοι, 45 and n.

ΟΙ ΕΠΤΑ ΕΠΙ ΘΗΒΑΣ, 89.

οἰκεῖα πράγματα, 20.

ὀκρίβας, 56, 57.

ΟΡΕΣΤΗΣ, 268-77.

ὀρχήστρα, 50.

παλινῳδία, 360.

παραχορήγημα, 71.

παρασκήνια, 51.

παρεπιγραφή, 175.

πάροδοι, 51.

περίακτοι, 63.

περίοδος, 343.

ΠΕΡΣΑΙ, 86.

προεδρία, 81.

ΠΡΟΜΗΘΕΥΣ ΔΕΣΜΩΤΗΣ, 91-8.

— ΛΥΟΜΕΝΟΣ, 92-3.

— ΠΥΡΦΟΡΟΣ, 92-3.

προπομποί, 116.

προῳδικόν, 344.

πρωταγωνιστής, 72.

ῥαβδοφόροι, 82.

ΡΗΣΟΣ, 291-5.

ῥοῖβδος, 175 n.

σεμναί, 113 n.

σκηνή, 52, 54.

σμικρὸν ἔπος, 171 and n.

σμικρὸς λόγος, 171 and n.

Σπάρτην ἔλαχες, ταύτην κόσμει, 295.

στίχος, 359.

στροφή, 344.

συγκοπή, 341 n.

συνάφεια, 330 n.

ΣΥΝΔΕΙΠΝΟΙ, 174.

ΣΥΝΕΚΔΗΜΗΤΙΚΟΣ, 23 n.

συνίζησις, 332.

τὰ ἀπὸ τῆς σκηνῆς, 54.

τετραλογία, 61 n.

τί ταῦτα πρὸς τὸν Διόνυσον; 2 n.

τὸ δὲ δρᾶμα τῶν δευτέρων, 223 and n.

τὸ θεῖον, 30.

τὸ θεωρικόν, 82.

τονή, 341, 347, 352, 355, 360.

τράγος, 62 n.

τραγῳδία, 62 n.

ΤΡΑΧΙΝΙΑΙ, 154-60.

τριβή, 38.

ΤΡΩΙΑΔΕΣ, 243-6.

τύχη, 28, 32.

ὑποκριτής, 1.

ὑπομνήματα, 22, 23 n.

ὑπορχήματα, 78.

ΦΙΛΟΚΤΗΤΗΣ, 161.

ΦΟΙΝΙΣΣΑΙ, 264-8.

φράσις τῶν πραγμάτων, 316 n.

ΦΡΥΓΕΣ, 118.

φύσις, 318.

ΧΟΗΦΟΡΟΙ, 106-10.

ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ ΠΑΣΧΩΝ, 41.

ΨΥΧΟΣΤΑΣΙΑ, 120.

II. PLACES, ETC.

A. = Aristophanes, Æ. = Æschylus, E. = Euripides, S. = Sophocles,

Sh. = Shakespeare.

Abdera, 298.

Acharnæ, in _Acharnians_, 296.

Achelous, in _Trachiniæ_, 160.

— 304 n.

Acropolis, 14, 49, 239.

— in _Eumenides_, 113.

Ægospotami, 13, 182, 324.

Æthiopia, in _Andromeda_, 299.

Ætolia, in _Cresphontes_, 307-8.

Alexandria, Library of, 39.

— Pleiad of, 39.

— Theatrical activity in, 3rd century B.C., 39.

Amphipolis, 294.

Arachnæus, Mount, in _Agamemnon_, 101.

Arden, Forest of, 63.

Areopagus, in _Eumenides_, 112 ff., 128 n.

Argolid plain, in S.’s _Electra_, 63.

Argos, in _Agamemnon_, 99 ff.

— — _Choephorœ_, 106.

— — _Eumenides_, 112.

— — _Supplices_ of Æ., 84.

— — E.’s _Electra_, 253.

— — — _Heracleidæ_, 200 ff.

— — — _Orestes_, 268 ff.

— — — _Supplices_, 234 n., 235.

— — — _Telephus_, 295.

— 316, 321.

Asia Minor, Græco-Roman theatres in, 59 n.

Asopus, plain of, in _Agamemnon_, 124.

Athens, 228-9, 244, 252 n., 307, 312, 324-5.

— Agathon of, 21.

— and drama, 3, 5.

— — Euripides, 317 ff.

— Athena’s temple in, 63.

— in _Eumenides_, 111 ff.

— — _Œd. Coloneus_, 168 ff., 185.

— — E.’s _Erechtheus_, 297.

— — — _Hippolytus_, 205 ff., 213.

— — — _Ion_, 236 ff.

— — — _Supplices_, 234 n., 235.

— local cults of, in Æ., 128.

— Phrynichus of, 6.

— Sophocles of, 12.

Athens’ war with Eleusis, 119.

Athos, Mt., in _Agamemnon_, 101.

Attica, 4, 279.

— and Furies, 131.

— E.’s cenotaph in, 18.

— in _Eumenides_, 113.

— — _Heracleidæ_, 200.

— — _Medea_, 194.

Aulis, 247, 270.

— in _Iph. at A._, 285 ff.

Bradfield College, Gk. plays at, 55.

Byzantium, 313.

— Homer, the tragedian of? 40.

— Python of? 39.

Caria, Mausolus, k. of, 38.

Catana, Python of? 39.

Chæronea, battle of, 31.

Chapel, Sistine, 102.

Chios, Ion of, 21 ff.

— Sophocles in, 15.

Chryse, in S.’s _Philoctetes_, 161.

Cithæron, Mt., in _Œd. Tyr._, 147 ff.

— — — E.’s _Bacchæ_, 277 ff.

Colchis, Mt., in E.’s _Medea_, 192 ff.

Colonus, Eumenides at, 172.

— in _Œd. Coloneus_, 168 ff.

— Sophocles’ home, 172.

— — song, 71.

Congo, Upper, 248.

Corinth, 22.

— and drama, 3.

— in _Œd. Tyr._, 147.

— — _Medea_, 192 ff., 313.

Crete, in _Hippolytus_, 206 ff.

Cynthus, 249.

Cyzicus, 167.

Delium, 234 n.

Delphi, 257.

— in _Choephorœ_, 108, 110.

— — _Eumenides_, 111 ff., 63.

— — S.’s _Electra_, 142.

— — — _Œd. Tyr._, 147 ff.

— — E.’s _Andromache_, 220 ff.

— — — _Ion_, 236 ff., 314.

— — — _Iph. T._, 247 ff.

— — — _Medea_, 193.

— — — _Phœnissæ_, 264.

Dodona, in E.’s _Andromache_, 221.

Egypt, 184.

— in _Prom. V._, 94.

— — _Supplices_ of Æ., 84 ff.

— — _Helena_ of E., 259 ff., 322.

Eleusis, Æ. of, 10, 119.

— mysteries of, 10, 11, 173.

Eleutheræ, priest of Dionysus of, 80.

England and Education, 324.