صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

residuum of value in his Letters after the chaff has been winnowed out as thoroughly as may be. The great historians of that obscure period, Gibbon, Guizot, Hodgkin, and their fellows, have all given due credit to Sidonius. Hodgkin (Italy and her Invaders) gives more than a hundred pages in the second volume to his life and to translations from his letters and poems. It is from him that we get the most realistic pictures of Roman or barbarian persons or customs, in Church, State, or private life, that have been spared to us from a period so jejune in source-material for reliable history. So we cannot doubt for a moment that it was eminently worth while to include these letters in the Oxford library of translations.

Mr. Dalton has done an admirable piece of work. There is an Introduction of about 140 pages, which many will prize more highly than the text itself. This Introduction deals critically with the facts of the life of Sidonius, with the very intricate history of this obscure period, with the correspondents and the subjectmatter of the correspondence, with the merits and the defects of Sidonius as man and as litterateur, with his style, and with the literary history of his works. Mr. Dalton's facts are well-authenticated, and his judgments impartial. It may be noted, in passing, that he does not fall into the error (cf. Peter, Zeittafeln der Römischen Geschichte, 141) of ascribing to Sidonius the elevation to the consulship. Following the Introduction are a classified bibliography and a very valuable biographical list of correspondents and persons mentioned in the Letters. This list includes a large number of names unfamiliar to the general reader. Something of the careful research it must have involved may be inferred from the frequent necessity in these Letters of distinguishing between two or more persons of the same name. There occur in them for example, besides Sidonius himself, four different persons by the name of Apollinaris, two each called Eutropius, Lupus, Mamertus, Marcellinus, Syagrius, four named Rusticus, and various other confusing duplications. Not only the numbers of the Letters in which the name appears are given in each case, but also practically all the essential facts concerning the lives of those who bore the names. At the end of the second volume are explanatory notes, to which reference throughout the text is made by small figures, and finally there is a General Index.

Of the text the translator has given us an excellent idiomatic version with fidelity to the thought and the temper of the original. Perhaps as good an example as any to illustrate the translator's art and ideals may be taken from the famous letter recounting how Sidonius at Arles before the Emperor Majorian put to rout his enemies who were charging the courtier with the authorship of an offensive anonymous satire (1.11):

igitur insidias nescienti tam Paeonius quam Bigerrus has tetenderunt, ut plurimis coram tamquam ab incauto sciscitarentur, hoc novum carmen an recognosceret. et ille: 'si dixeritis'. cumque frusta diversa quasi per iocum effunderent, solvitur Catullinus

in risum intempestivoque suffragio clamare coepit dignum poema, quod perennandum apicibus auratis iuste tabula rostralis acciperet aut etiam Capitolina. Paeonius exarsit, cui satiricus ille morsum dentis igniti avidius impresserat, atque ad instantes circulatores: iniuriae communis', inquit, 'iam reum inveni. Videtis, ut Catullinus deperit risu: apparet ei nota memorari. Nam quae causa festinam compulit praecipitare sententiam, nisi quod iam tenet totum, qui de parte sic iudicat? atqui Sidonius nunc in Arverno est: unde colligitur auctore illo, isto auditore rem textam'. itur in furias inque convicia absentis nescientis innocentisque; conscientiae, fidei, quaestioni nil reservatur. sic levis turbae facilitatem, qua voluit, et traxit persona popularis. erat enim ipse Paeonius populi totus, qui tribuniciis flatibus crebro seditionum pelagus impelleret. ceterum si requisisses: 'qui genus, unde domo?', non eminentius quam municipaliter natus quemque inter initia cognosci claritas vitrici magis quam patris fecerit, identidem tamen per fas nefasque crescere affectans pecuniaeque per avaritiam parcus, per ambitum prodigus.

"Well, Paeonius and Bigerrus set a trap for the unsuspecting visitor: they took him off his guard, and asked him, before numerous witnesses, whether he was familiar with the new poem. 'Let me hear some of it', said Catullinus. But when they went on jestingly to quote various passages from the satire, he burst out laughing, and asseverated, rather inopportunely, perhaps, that such verses deserved to be immortalized, and set up in letters of gold on the rostra or the Capitol. At this Paconius flamed out, for he was the man whom the fiery tooth of the satirist had most sharply bitten. 'Ha!' he cried to the crowd attracted to the spot, 'I have found out the author of the public outrage. Just look at Catullinus half dead with laughter there; obviously he knew all the points beforehand. How could he thus anticipate, and conclude from a mere part, unless he were already acquainted with the whole? We know that Sidonius is in Auvergne. It is easy to infer that he wrote the thing and that Catullinus was the first to hear it from his lips'. Now I was not only absent, but ignorant and innocent as a babe; that did not prevent a tempest of fury and abuse against me; they cast to the winds loyalty, fair play, and fair inquiry; such power had this popular favorite to draw the fickle crowd whither he would. As you know, Paeonius was a demagogue well versed in the tribune's art of troubling the waters of faction. But if you asked 'whence his descent and where his home?' 'tis known he was nothing more than a plain citizen, whom the eminence of his stepfather more than any distinction of his own house first brought to public notice. He was bent on rising, and more than once let it be seen that he would stick at nothing to attain his end; though mean by nature he would spend freely for his own advancement”.

Parallel versions are available in the case of many of the Letters, as Mr. Dalton generously indicates in various footnotes. Here, for example, are those by Hodgkin (Italy and her Invaders, 2, 352) and the translator of this edition, beginning the well-known description of Theodoric II. (1.2). Both, it will be generally agreed, are characterized by many excellences, but the renderings present marked differences of style:

igitur vir est et illis dignus agnosci, qui eum minus familiariter intuentur: ita personam suam deus arbiter et ratio naturae consummatae felicitatis dote sociata cumulaverunt; mores autem huiuscemodi, ut laudibus eorum nihil ne regni quidem defrudet invidia. si forma quaeratur: corpore exacto, longissimis brevior, pro

cerior eminentiorque mediocribus. capitis apex rotundus, in quo paululum a planitie frontis in verticem caesaries refuga crispatur.

"Theodoric is 'a noticeable man', one who would at once attract attention even from those who casually beheld him, so richly have the will of God and the plan of nature endowed his person with gifts corresponding to his completed prosperity. His character is such that not even the detraction which waits on kings can lessen the praises bestowed upon it. If you enquire as to his bodily shape, he has a well-knit frame, shorter than the very tallest, but rising above men of middle stature. His head is round and dome-like, his curling hair retreats a little from the forehead towards the top" (Hodgkin).

"Well, he is a man worth knowing, even by those who cannot enjoy his close acquaintance, so happily have Providence and Nature joined to endow him with the perfect gifts of fortune; his way of life is such that not even the envy which lies in wait for kings can rob him of his proper praise. And first as to his person. He is well set up, in height above the average man, but below the giant. His head is round, with curled hair retreating somewhat from brow to crown".

Perhaps a couple of happy renderings may be added from the long letter (2. 2) describing his country estate known as Avitacum:

(1) si turbo austrinus insorduit, immane turgescit, ita ut arborum comis, quae margini insistunt, superiectae asperginis fragor impluat: "but if dirty weather comes up from the south the whole lake is swollen into monstrous waves and a rain of spray comes crashing over the tree-tops upon the banks".

(2) iam vero ager ipse, quamquam hoc supra debitum: "it is not in my bond to describe the estate itself".

The inevitable minor defects are not numerous. The Tacitean asyndeton in the following sentence (4.3) tends to obscure the meaning:

"I can only say that no man of our times produces with more effect, in the stress of conflict with the adversary can point with more justice to his own share in maintaining the spirit and the letters of Greece and Rome".

The word "also" is needed in line 15 on page xcii. "Present" is inexact in the footnote on page xciv. Why should anybody longer employ the spelling coena (lix)? The spelling "Caius" is used in 1.xi and 2.145; but the correct form “Gaius” appears in 2.158; there is no defense for the inconsistency, and indeed not much of a case to be made for printing "Caius" anywhere. Why should we perpetuate what every classical scholar now knows to be a mistake due to ignorance?

In one respect the present reviewer would express emphatic dissent from the method employed to present the matter included in the Introduction, i. e. in the treatment of footnotes. Footnotes are useful to scholars for giving references for the verification of statements, or for adding more or less irrelevant and non-essential facts which may appeal to the more curious searcher for truth. But it is nothing short of a nuisance to the reader, and is ruinous to continuity of thought, to be held up in the middle of a sentence or a paragraph by a footnote containing a half page or more of matter of the same general character as the paragraph itself,

extending perhaps even over the leaf. There is lack of consistency in this book in this respect, and plenty of cases where almost all of a long footnote should have been incorporated in the text itself. On page cx, for instance, are repeated references disfiguring the text, all of which would better be at the bottom of the page. On the other hand, most of the matter in such footnotes as note 2 on page lxix should be worked into the text, and only a small residuum left at the bottom of the page.

In conclusion, this reproduction and annotation of a distinctly non-classical writer is to be earnestly commended to the attention of the diligent student of more classical authors, to none, possibly, more than to him who would seek whither the epistolary ideals of the younger Pliny ultimately lead. WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY.

KARL P. HARRINGTON.

[blocks in formation]

LATIN CLUB, WESTERN HIGH SCHOOL, BALTIMORE

The Western High School of Baltimore has a Latin Club, still nameless, but provided with a motto and a symbol. The motto is that of the School, Lucem accepimus, lucem demus; the symbol is a candle. Each member, on signing the roll, receives a small wax candle.

At the first meeting, December 14, two sketches were presented, by members of the Second Year Classes. The one was the story of Androclus and the Lion (see Aulus Gellius 5.14), told in Latin by a girl to a group of girls, with questions, interruptions, and considerable

action.

The other sketch was a dramatization, in four scenes, of Pliny's letter about the Haunted House (Epp. 7.27). Both sketches had been used as class exercises, and were the work of the classes. No costumes were attempted, except that to the ghost a sheet was allowed.

A member of the Fourth Year Class gave a short talk on the Saturnalia. It was the Roman custom of giving tapers at that time which led to the adoption of the candle as the symbol of the Society.

At the second meeting, January 11, the Club was addressed by Professor Ralph V. D. Magoffin, of The Johns Hopkins University, who brought with him a suit-case full of objects from The Johns Hopkins University Classical Collection (see THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 9.99-101) to illustrate a talk on Roman Life, given while the objects were passed from hand to hand among the members. For service of this kind Dr. Magoffin has a special gift; he is most generous in the use of his time and gifts, and the University in the loan of its treasures.

A pretty pantomime illustrating the motto of the Club was devised by the Committee of Managers, who direct the business of the Club, and arrange its programs. In March, an evening entertainment will be given.

WESTERN HIGH SCHOOL, Baltimore, Md.

MARY B. ROCKWOOD.

[graphic]

Entered as second-class matter November 18, 1907, at the Post Office, New York, N. Y., under the Act of Congress of March 1, 1879 NEW YORK, FEBRUARY 26, 1917

VOL. X

VITALIZING SECONDARY LATIN

Editorial

A couple of years ago, I received, from a new subscriber to THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY, a letter containing the following query:

Why can't we have more practical help for vitalizing Secondary Latin, in the early issues of THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY?

In reply, I wrote as follows:

Since THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY began seven or eight years ago, we have had a good many different articles whose purpose, at least, was to supply practical help for vitalizing Secondary Latin. However, man cannot live by bread alone, says a certain book, neither can THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY live by referring constantly to one and the same subject. However, I shall

be glad indeed to have an article from you on the subject.

More than once since, I have had to reply to this same question, asked, now by mail, now by word of mouth. In every instance I have invited the questioner to contribute to THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY along the lines suggested. In no single case has the invitation been accepted. All this reminds me of the words of a certain ritual, "those who wish help themselves should help others". I am reminded too of an excellent editorial, entitled Good Wine Needs No Bush, in The Classical Journal 12.225-229, which appeared after the preceding paragraphs of this editorial had been written. Were there space, I should gladly incorporate it all in my own remarks.

Recently, I prepared a pamphlet of 16 pages, to show concretely how much THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY has done in the way of publishing articles whose purpose is to vitalize Secondary Latin. On pages 2-5 of this pamphlet there is a general description of the contents of Volumes 8 and 9, under the captions Editorials, Leading Articles, Shorter Articles, Reviews, Reports of Associations, Conferences, Clubs, etc., and Lists of Classical Articles in Non-Classical Periodicals. Then follows, on pages 6-15, matter grouped under the caption Some Classified Lists of Articles in THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY, Volumes 1-9. These lists are: I. A Partial List of Articles on the Value of the Classics;

II. A Partial List of Articles on the Teaching of Latin and Greek; III. Selected List of Papers dealing with Various Latin Authors (Caesar, Cicero, Horace, Juvenal, Livy, Lucretius, Pausanias, Plautus and Terence, Sallust, Tacitus, Vergil).

No. 17

This pamphlet was prepared primarily for advertising purposes, in order to secure new members for The Classical Association of the Atlantic States and new subscribers to THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY. However, to present readers of THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY copies will be supplied at five cents per copy. In the absence of a general Index of Volumes 1-10, the pamphlet may prove useful to many.

In this connection one cannot help asking, What really will most benefit the Secondary School teachers of Latin? Will ceaseless talk about methods or classroom devices contribute most to the fulfilment of this purpose? Pedagogical topics, it is true, attract most attention at meetings of Classical Associations, and call forth most discussion. But, after all, is such discussion profitable in any marked degree? How many of those who listen to such papers, or read such papers, take the pains thoroughly to master the point of view and practice of the speaker or the writer? How much change in the methods of this or that auditor or reader is effected by listening to such papers or by reading the discussions? But let us assume, what we hope, that pedagogical discussions have, after all, a deep and lasting reformatory influence. To make the best use of methods, it is necessary-at least so some of us believe to have knowledge to which to apply the methods. How can a teacher best amplify his knowledge of Latin? By sticking only to the things with which he deals every day? by confining himself to Caesar, Cicero, Vergil, and that too within the limits of a strict regard for College Entrance requirements? There has been organized recently in New York State a Classical Reading League (see THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 9.223, 10.125), whose purpose it is to encourage teachers of Latin and Greek to read more Latin and more Greek. This is a very worthy object, and the success which is greeting the establishment of the League is highly gratifying; but one's pleasure is offset by disquietude in the thought that, in order to induce teachers of Latin and Greek to read Latin and Greek, it was necessary to organize, in 1915-1916, a Classical Reading League. To me, personally, it is a very distressing thing that courses in Summer Sessions, in Caesar, Cicero, and Vergil, designed for the benefit of teachers, attract very many more students than do courses on, let us say, Plautus. On the basis of variety alone, it would be highly desirable for teachers in the Secondary Schools to take courses in Latin authors with whom

they are not dealing from day to day. A course in Plautus, to name that course again, would be immensely useful to every teacher of Caesar, Cicero, and Vergil, because Plautus represents Latin in the plastic stage, because Plautus gives us a closer approach to the language of every day life, and because a study of Plautus and of Terence, for example, does, far better than anything else does or can, a very useful service, in explaining how constructions which were stereotyped by the days of Caesar and Cicero, came into being. One reason why the Classics have not been as effective as they might have been in this country is that many teachers of the Classics have too narrow a range of knowledge of the Classics. One very interesting and one very important result of this narrowness of range is that teachers in the Secondary Schools, even those who have won the Doctor's degree, have seldom added a jot or a tittle of knowledge about Classical things to How different what was already known about them. the situation has been among the teachers of the Gymnasia in Germany.

NOTES ON METERS

C. K.

The following notes were suggested by a study of Professor White's work, The Verse of Greek Comedy1. Some of them are comments which it was thought best to exclude from the review of the book, as they would have confused the analysis, which was intended to give the reader as clear a conception as possible of the nature of that great work. For the sake of brevity both the author and his work will be designated by W. I. Quantity in Certain Words (1) In $795 W. says:

A few words in Aristophanes allow lengthening of an initial short in the thesis, as in Homer. Cf. ἀκάματος and ȧávaros in melic dactylic verse. latter occurs also in anapaestic rhythm, even in trimeters.

The and

One not knowing the facts would receive from this statement the impression that, when the sort of verse makes it possible, this a was sometimes, if not usually, short, whereas it seems to be invariably long in verse of every kind. This lengthening was necessary if the word áfávaтos was to be used at all in dactylic or anapaestic verse, and Homer's very frequent use of the word is probably what made the lengthening universal. Even the derivatives always have long a. The use of ȧкáμатоs by Homer was less frequent, and so the lengthening was not invariable in later times.

(2) W. scans 'Tμn as in the hymeneals of Aristophanes, Aves 1720 ff. and Pax 1329 ff. The authorities say that the penult of this word is always long except in Euripides, Troades 331. This verse is corrupt, and we should probably read ἄναξ for Ὑμήν, making the colon exactly like the corresponding colon of the strophe. But still, when they say this always long, they mean that it is long wherever the For my review of this book see THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 9.141144.

is

[blocks in formation]

He calls it a trochaic trimeter catalectic. In Liddell and Scott pû is rendered by "fie! faugh!", and peû is compared. This rendering is obviously incorrect. The speaker, who is carrying fire in a pot, says he must blow it (puaŋréov) lest it go out, and then adds the words quoted above. The scholiast correctly says φυ φυ φυσᾷ τῷ στόματι· Τοῦτο δὲ παρεπιγραφή, 'He blows it with his mouth. This is extra metrum'. The lexicon explains Taperyрaph in such way as to leave the impression that it denotes only "a stage-direction written on the margin". The scholiast also seems to err, if my rendering of his words is correct. It appears more probable that pû û formed a whole colon. It is usually printed correctly in a line to itself, as it must have been written in the manuscript used by the scholiast. If we adopt this scansion and the words ioù, etc., must be trochaic, the first loù may be pronounced like 'you', as in Aves 305, lov lov TŵV ὀρνέων, ἰοὺ ἰοὺ τῶν κοψίκων, which is a trochaic tetrameter catalectic. But be the meter as it may, φυ φυ is not an exclamation, but denotes the sound made by blowing between the lips, the voice accompanying. Just how W. understands it does not appear, but his punctuation certainly might mislead.

[blocks in formation]

But it so happens that the process unintentionally described by W. here has not been without its advocates. Even J. H. H. Schmidt, in the first edition of his Leitfaden in der Rhythmik und Metrik, erroneously assumed suppression of the arsis of the last foot and filled the tempus inane by making the preceding thesis tetraseme. This defeats the very object of the catalexis -to give at the end of each colon time for a full breath to heavily laden soldiers who were marching and singing. This reason no longer existed in the drama, and the catalectic colon only marks the end of a system except in melic passages. How it was recited or sung it would be unsafe to assert positively, but tradition would probably be followed.

IV. Protracted Iambic Tetrameters

W. calls the iambic tetrameter (catalectic) "protracted" when between two cola there is a tempus inane resulting from the suppression of the arsis of the

first foot of the second colon. This had to be filled either by a pause or by protracting one or the other of the theses preceding and following the suppressed arsis. The effect of the suppression may be felt by comparing the following lines:

A captain bold of Halifax who lived in country quarters.

A captain bold of Halifax | lived in country quarters. According to W., who bases his scansion on a fragment of Aristoxenus, the thesis to be protracted is the one that follows the diaeresis, while most modern metricians until recently have protracted the thesis preceding the diacresis.

In my review of W. I said that there is a serious metrical difficulty here. This difficulty will now be stated.

The protracted thesis is of course triseme, but sometimes the one after diaeresis is resolved, and in every instance it is represented by two short syllables, as in Vespae 255,

ἀποσβέσαντες τοὺς λύχνους ἄπιμεν οἴκαδ ̓ αὐτοί.

To me this verse seems so natural that the resolution is unnoticeable, the tribrach Tuer being felt as a resolved trochee would be felt in trochaics, but the ancient doctrine, according to W., requires aπ- to be triseme; so he lengthens the second syllable, not indeed into a full long, but still sufficiently to satisfy the rhythmical sense; in other words, he makes ǎπ- a virtual iambus. This procedure looks suspicious already, but it seems all the more doubtful when we note that the verse is now no longer a protracted tetrameter like the other 24 in the passage, but an ordinary verse. It is unfortunate that W. employs ($75) this very verse to illustrate the.use of as an equivalent of in iambic meter, so that the reader naturally supposes that the accompanying verses are normal tetrameters. This, I am sure, was done inadvertently.

-

[merged small][ocr errors]

It may be incidentally remarked that the doctrine encounters a somewhat analogous obstacle in the case of the scazon, if there is protraction in the last dipody. In the lame iambic trimeter the ending would be, but in the trochaic tetrameter it would be, and yet no one will believe that the following verses would end differently:

τέκτων γάρ εἰμι κοὐχ ἁμαρτάνω κόπτων·
ἀμφιδέξιος γάρ εἰμι κοὐχ ἁμαρτάνω κόπτων·

But it is not settled whether the scazon was read with protraction or not.

V. Diaeresis in Anapaestic Tetrameters

In the review of W. some comments were made which, I now see, may have been misleading. They

were suggested by his treatment of the anapaestic tetrameter, but they referred, not specially to him, but to metricians in general. It seems worth while, however, to examine his views more minutely.

In the anapaestic tetrameter there is diaeresis after the first dimeter in the great majority of cases, but in a number of verses that is exceedingly small in comparison with the total this dimeter ends within a word. These verses Porson proposed to emend. Of this procedure W. (§313) says:

The justification of his proposal, if the Procrustean method in criticism can ever be justified, would be found in the fact that by his proposed changes every anapaestic tetrameter without exception could be rendered with a pause at diaeresis. But in certain tetrameters the first dimeter ends with a progressive word or phrase.

He cites one example each of ἀπό, ὡς, ὅς, ἵνα μή, and two of Teр. The example of dπó, he says, "may be objected to for a different reason". Again he says:

The second dimeter, moreover, in certain tetrameters, begins with a recessive word, av Vesp. 565 (?), μèv Pl. 540, éoμev Av. 722, čoтiv Vesp. 356, before which a pause cannot be made.

Lower down on the same page he writes Av. 722 čoμèv as it is in Dindorf's text, saying:

vμîv éσμèv must be treated as one word, precluding diaeresis of the verse.

Again:

Furthermore, there are tetrameters in which a strong pause is demanded by the sense both before and after the middle of the verse <instances are cited>. In these and in similar cases, it hardly seems possible that a third pause not required by the sense was introduced at diaeresis.

Now it is not my purpose to defend the emendations proposed by Porson and others nor to maintain that the first colon of this verse must end with a word, but to put to the test the objections made by W. to these emendations by examining the facts and the assumptions on which these objections are based.

It will be observed that in the quotations I have made from W. it is constantly assumed or held as a fact that a verse caesura or diaeresis, at least in dicolic verses, must be accompanied by a pause, and that, if a pause cannot be made between two words, these are virtually a single word so far as metrical effect is concerned, and it is assumed that a pause cannot be made in certain defined cases. This last assumption is no doubt correct in some cases, but in others it is not sustained by the Greek poets.

In the review of W. some examples adverse to his views were cited from the so-called elegiac pentameters. In this verse the first colon always ends with a word (divided compound proper names, which could not otherwise be fitted into verse, are freaks unworthy of recognition: they are sometimes even divided between the verses of the distich). Moreover, there was a diseme tempus inane between the cola. When the verse was recited, this gap was almost certainly

« السابقةمتابعة »