2. The classical systems are founded upon quantity.
3. The English upon accent.
4. Nevertheless, notwithstanding the difference of the principle upon which they are constructed, the classical metres, even as read by Englishmen, and read accentually, are metrical to English ears.
[§ 659]. Preliminary to the investigation of the problem in question it is necessary to remark—
1. That, the correctness or incorrectness of the English pronunciation of the dead languages has nothing to do with the matter. Whether we read Homer exactly, as Homer would read his own immortal poems, or whether we read them in such a way as would be unintelligible to Homer reappearing upon earth, is perfectly indifferent.
2. That whether, as was indicated by the author of Μέτρον ἄριστον, we pronounce the anapæst pătŭlæ, precisely as we pronounce the dactyle Tītўrĕ, or draw a distinction between them is also indifferent. However much, as is done in some of the schools, we may say scri-bere rather than scrib-ere, or am-or, rather than a-mor, under the notion that we are lengthening or shortening certain syllables, one unsurmountable dilemma still remains, viz., that the shorter we pronounce the vowel, the more we suggest the notion of the consonant which follows it being doubled; whilst double consonants lengthen the vowel which precedes them. Hence, whilst it is certain that patulæ and Tityre may be pronounced (and that without hurting the metre) so as to be both of the same quantity, it is doubtful what that quantity is. Sound for sound Tĭtyre may be as short as pătulæ. Sound for sound pāttulæ may be as long as Tīttyre.
Hence, the only assumptions requisite are—
a. That Englishmen do not read the classical metres according to their quantities.
b. That, nevertheless, they find metre in them.
[§ 660]. Why are the classical metres metrical to English readers?—Notwithstanding the extent to which quantity differs from accent, there is no metre so exclusively founded upon the former as to be without a certain amount of the