many authors in poetry, history, and civil oratory; pre-eminently in epic poetry by Antimachus of Colophon and Empedocles the natural philosopher, in lyric poetry by Pindar, in tragedy by Aeschylus, in history by Thucydides, and in civil oratory by Antiphon. At this point the subject would naturally call for the presentation of numerous examples of each author cited, and possibly the discourse would have been rendered not unattractive if bedecked with many such flowers of spring. But then the treatise would probably be felt to be excessively long—more like a course of lectures than a manual. On the other hand, it would not be fitting to leave the statements unsubstantiated, as though they were obvious and not in need of proof. The right thing, no doubt, is after all to take a sort of middle course, neither to exceed all measure, nor yet to fall short of carrying conviction. I will endeavour to do so by selecting a few samples from the most distinguished authors. Among poets it will be enough to cite Pindar, among prose-writers Thucydides; for these are the best writers in the austere style of composition. Let Pindar come first, and from him I take a dithyramb which begins—
Shed o’er our choir, Olympian Dominations,
The glory of your grace,
O ye who hallow with your visitations
The curious-carven place,
1 ποιητικοὺς F 2 ἐπικῇ Sylburgius: ἐπιεικη F: ἐπιεικεῖ PMV: om. E 5 ποιητικοῖς F 8 ἐαρινοῖς] ἀριθμ(οις) P 10 οὐδ’ ἀνεξέλεγκτα P: οὐδ’ ἀνεξέλεκτα M: οὐδ’ ἂν ἐξέλεγκτα F 12 μέτριον PV: μέτρον FM 13 δὴ F 17 τίς οὖν ἐστιν ἀρχῆι P || ἡ ἀρχὴ E: ἀρχὴ FMV 18 δεῦτ’ EFM2V: ΐδετ’ P, M1 || ἐν χορὸν EFV: ἐν σχορ(ὸν) P 19 πέμπεται P 20 οἵ τ’] οἳ F || ἄστεως F (ἄστεος praestat idem [222] 14) 21 ἀθήναις libri: sed cf. n. crit. ad [222] 14
2. For Antimachus of Colophon cp. de Imitat. ii. 6 Ἀντίμαχος δὲ εὐτονίας [ἐφρόντισεν] καὶ ἀγωνιστικῆς τραχύτητος καὶ τοῦ συνήθους τῆς ἐξαλλαγῆς: Catullus xcv. 20 “at populus tumido gaudeat Antimacho”: Quintil. x. 1. 53 “contra in Antimacho vis et gravitas et minime vulgare eloquendi genus habet laudem. sed quamvis ei secundas fere grammaticorum consensus deferat, et affectibus et iucunditate et dispositione et omnino arte deficitur, ut plane manifesto appareat, quanto sit aliud proximum esse, aliud parem.” Plato’s admiration for his poetry is said to have been great.
3. For Empedocles as being a physicist rather than a poet see Aristot. Poet. i. 9 καὶ γὰρ ἂν ἰατρικὸν ἢ φυσικόν τι διὰ τῶν μέτρων ἐκφέρωσιν, οὕτω καλεῖν εἰώθασιν, οὐδὲν δὲ κοινόν ἐστιν Ὁμήρῳ καὶ Ἐμπεδοκλεῖ πλὴν τὸ μέτρον, διὸ τὸν μὲν ποιητὴν δίκαιον καλεῖν, τὸν δὲ φυσιολόγον μᾶλλον ἢ ποιητήν. But on the other side cp. Lucret. i. 731 “carmina quin etiam divini pectoris eius | vociferantur et exponunt praeclara reperta, | ut vix humana videatur stirpe creatus.” The fragments of Empedocles go far to justify Lucretius’ opinion; and the true poetic gifts of Empedocles, as of Lucretius himself, may have been seen in his work as a whole, even more than in its parts.
3, 4. The μεγαλοπρέπεια of Pindar is emphasized in the de Imitat. B. vi. 2.—Similarly, ibid., as to Aeschylus: ὁ δ’ οὖν Αἰσχύλος πρῶτος ὑψηλός τε καὶ τῆς μεγαλοπρεπείας ἐχόμενος, κτλ.
5. For other references to Antiphon see de Isaeo c. 20, de Thucyd. c. 51, de Demosth. c. 8, Ep. i. ad Amm. c. 2, and C.V. c. 10. Also Thucyd. viii. 68 Ἀντιφῶν ἀνὴρ Ἀθηναίων τῶν καθ’ ἑαυτὸν ἀρετῇ τε οὐδενὸς δεύτερος καὶ κράτιστος ἐνθυμηθῆναι γενόμενος καὶ ἃ γνοίη εἰπεῖν.—For Thucydides himself see D.H. passim (especially pp. 30-34, 104 ff., 130 ff.).
17. G. S. Farnell Greek Lyric Poetry p. 417: “The excited nature of the rhythm throughout, and the rapturous enthusiasm with which the approach of spring is described, are eminently characteristic of the dithyramb at its best; and it is easy to understand how such a style, in the hands of inferior poets, degenerated into the florid inanity which characterizes the later dithyrambic poets.”
18. δεῦτ’ ἐν χορόν, ‘come ye to the dance.’ “ἐν cum accus. (eight times in Pindar, chiefly in the Aeolic odes) is a relic of the original stage of the language when this preposition had the functions of the Latin in. It is preserved in Boeotian, Thessalian, North-West Greek, Eleian, Arcadian, Cyprian, and perhaps even in the Attic ἔμβραχυ. The accusative use was abandoned on the rise of ἐν-ς (cf. ab-s), which, before a vowel, became εἰς, before a consonant, ἐς” (Weir Smyth Greek Melic Poets p. 359). P’s curious reading ἐν σχορ(ὸν) is to be noticed.