[69]. συγγραφεῖς. The opposition is as old as Plato, though συγγραφεὺς is sometimes limited to “historian.”
[70]. The “leading of the soul” to truths, and gifts, and pleasures. Aristotle likewise adopts the word: and indeed it contains in itself the soul of criticism, though in Plato himself it sometimes has an unfavourable meaning, of “allurement,” “seduction.”
[71]. Enn., vi. 1. Separately printed with Proclus, in an edition which I have not seen, by Creuzer, in 1814. M. Théry included a French translation in the rather capriciously selected but interesting appendix of pièces justificatives appended to his Histoire des Opinions; and I believe there is another.
[72]. Op cit. plur., p. 484.
[73]. Sacred Latin Poetry (ed. 2, London, 1864), p. 30, note.
[74]. μάλιστα προστίθησι τῷ λόγῳ χάριν καὶ ἡδονήν.
[75]. Ed. Schrader, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1890.
[76]. For this and the subsequent oddity see Schrader (op. cit., Ad Odysseam), pp. 40-43. The subject is dealt with, from another point of view, in a monograph by M. Carroll, Aristotle’s Poetics in the Light of the Homeric Scholia, Baltimore, 1895.
[77]. My copy of this is the separate edition of Van Goens (Trajecti ad Rhenum, 1765). It can hardly be necessary to say that the subject is the famous and beautiful opening of Od. xiii. As for the treatment—the cave, the double entrance, the nymphs, the vases, the bees, are all allegorised to the nth, pressed to death, broken on the wheel, sublimated to a non-essence in the Neo-Platonic laboratory.