or,
[a]Ἡκώ νεκρον κευθμωνα και σκοτου ρυλας.]
[a]Παλαί κυνηγετουντα και μετρουμενον.]
[a]Ειπέρ δικαιος εστ' εμος τα πατροθεν.]
[a]Τινάς ποθ' ἑδρας τασδε μοι θοαζετε.]
Second Foot.—In the second place, it is also matter of indifference whether the foot be sounded as Aúgust or as augúst. In the first of the four lines quoted above we may say either [a]νέκρων] or [a]νεκρών], without violating rhythm of the verse.
Third Foot.—In this part of the senarius it is no longer a matter of indifference whether the foot be sounded as Aúgust or as augúst; that is, it is no longer a matter of indifference whether the arsis and the quantity coincide. In the circumstance that the last syllable of the third foot must be accented (in the English sense of the word), taken along with a second fact, soon about to be exhibited, lies the doctrine of the penthimimer and hephthimimer cæsuras.
The proof of the coincidence between the arsis and the quantity in the third foot is derived partly from à posteriori, partly from à priori evidence.
1. In the Supplices of Æschylus, the Persæ, and the Bacchæ, three dramas where licences in regard to metre are pre-eminently common, the number of lines wherein the sixth syllable (i. e. the last half of the third foot) is without an arsis, is at the highest sixteen, at the lowest five; whilst in the remainder of the extant dramas the proportion is undoubtedly smaller.
2. In all lines where the sixth syllable is destitute of ictus, the iambic character is violated: as—
[a]Θρηκην περαράντες μογις πολλῳ πονῳ.]
[a]Δυοιν γεροντοίν δε στρατηγειται φυγη.]
These are facts which may be verified either by referring to the tragedians, or by constructing senarii like the lines last quoted. The only difficulty that occurs arises in determining, in a dead language like the Greek, the absence or presence of the arsis. In this matter the writer has satisfied himself of the truth of the two following propositions:—1. That the accentuation of the grammarians denotes some modification of pronunciation other than that which constitutes the difference between Aúgust and augúst; since, if it were not so, the word [a]ἅγγελον] would be sounded like mérrily, and the word [a]ἁγγέλων] like disáble; which is improbable. 2. That the arsis lies upon radical rather than inflectional syllables, and out of two inflectional syllables upon the first rather than the second; as [a]βλέπ-ω], [a]βλεψ-άσ-α], not [a]βλεπ-ώ], [a]βλεψ-ασ-ά]. The evidence upon these points is derived from the structure of language in general. The onus probandi lies with the author who presumes an arsis (accent in the English sense) on a non-radical syllable.