Chapter VI — Metre and Rhythm in Greek Tragedy — Greek Tragedy by Gilbert Norwood

Chapter VI 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 “synapheia859 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 pause861 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 catalectic867 (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:—

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

This metre is plainly analogous to Tennyson’s

Dreary gleams about the moorland flying over Locksley Hall.

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

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

The tribrach also is often employed by Euripides:—

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

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

To place a resolved foot practically at the end of the line is bold—the metre is shaken almost to pieces. Here, as in other respects, Euripides points forward to the conversational manner of the New Comedy. But he goes further, and allows feet hitherto not found in trochaics: the anapæst and the dactyl. The latter, however, is extremely rare868 and employed only with proper names:—

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

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

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

οὐ γὰρ ἂν ξυμβαῖμεν 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 passage872 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 almost877 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
– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑	⏗	–
καρδι	ας τερ	ασκοπ	ου ποτ	ατ	αιꞈ‖
1 2 3 4	5	6
– ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑	⏑	– ⏑	⏑	⏗	–
μαντιπολ	ει δ ακελ	ευστος αμ	ισθος α	οιδ	αꞈ‖
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 paragraph878—the second period as we shall now call it.

	– ⏑	⏗	– ⏑ ⏗ – ⏑	–	⏑	–		⏑	–
θαρσος	ευπ	ειθες	ιζ‖ει φρεν	ος φιλ	ον φρον	ονꞈ‖
	1	2	3 4 1		2			3		4
⏑	– ⏑	–	˃ – ⏑ – ⏑ –	⏑	–
χρον⁝ος δε	τοι πρυμν	ησι	ων ξυν	εμβολ	αιςꞈ‖
	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 τοι880 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 ἐπιδράμῃ883 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‖
– ⏑ – ˃ – ⏑	– ⏑	⏑	⏗	–
οις γαρ	αν σεισθ	ῃ θεο	θεν δομος	ατ	αςꞈ‖
– ⏑ – ˃ – ⏑ ⏑ –	⏑ ⏑	–	⏑	–	⏑
ουδεν	ελλειπ	ει γενε	ας επι	πληθος	ερπον ‖
⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –
ο⁝μοιον	ωστε	ποντι	αιςꞈ‖
– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –
οιδμα	δυσπνο	οις οτ	ανꞈ‖
˃ – ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ⏑	⏑ ⏑	⏑ ⏑	⏑	–	⏑	–
Θρησσ⁝αισιν	ερεβος	υφαλον	επιδραμ	ῃ πνο	αιςꞈ‖
⏑ – ˃ – ⏑ – ⏑	– ˃
κυ⁝λινδει	βυσσο	θεν κελ	αιναν ‖
– ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ –
θινα	και δυσ	ανεμ	οιꞈ‖
⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑	– ⏑	⏗	–
στον⁝ῳ βρεμ	ουσιν	αντιπλ	ηγες	ακτ	αιꞈ‖

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.

(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 decided884 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 πολυχρύσου886
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

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〛

I
⎛ 2
⎜ 3—mesode.
⎝ 2

II
⎛ 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 form888 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-two889 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 ⎧ ais ⎨ —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 ⎠

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 ⎠

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
ἀποβώμιος890 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, 1448a: 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, 1449a: 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, 1449a.

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, 1111a). 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, 1449a.

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, 1460b: 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, 1449a.

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, 1452b.

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, 1451b.

72 Ibid. 1456a (Butcher’s translation).

73 Plutarch, Symposiaca, 645 E.

74 Thesm. 100: μύρμηκος ἀτραπούς.

75 Aristotle, Poetic, 1456a.

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, 1453b.

87 De Gloria Atheniensium, 349 E.

88 Poetic, 1455a, 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, 1447b.

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, 1454b.

98 1455a.

99 Rhetoric, II, 1400b.

100 Ibid. 1417b, but the passage is obscure.

101 Eth. Nic. 1150b, 10.

102 Ælian, V.H. XIV, 40.

103 Orator, 51.

104 Poetic, 1452a.

105 Ibid. 1455b.

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, 1454a.

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, 1449b: 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 1448a.

125 1451a, b.

126 1462a.

127 1462a, b. (The phrasing in the summary above is borrowed from Butcher.) See further 1449b.

128 1450b.

129 1450a.

130 1451a.

131 1451a.

132 1451b.

133 1452a.

134 1452a.

135 1452b.

136 οἱ ἐν τῷ φανερῷ θάνατοι.

137 1453a.

138 1453b.

139 1454a, b.

140 pp. 163-5.

141 pp. 313-5.

142 1454b, 1460a.

143 1452b: 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 1455b.

147 1452a.

148 1450b.

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 Theatre³, 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 1456a (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, 1454b.

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, 1454b.

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, 1454b.

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, 1454a.

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, 1458b).

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, 1454a: τοῦ δὲ ἀπρεποῦς καὶ μὴ ἁρμόττοντος (παράδειγμα)... ἡ τῆς Μελανίππης ῥῆσις.

815 Moralia, 110 D, 998 E.

816 Poetic, 1454a.

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, 1460b: 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, 1454a.

831 Ibid. 1461b.

832 Ibid. 1453a. 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, 1454b): 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.

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.

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.

← Back to Greek Tragedy