CHAPTER XXIV
HARMONIOUSLY-BLENDED, OR INTERMEDIATE, COMPOSITION
The third kind of composition is the mean between the two already mentioned. I call it _harmoniously blended_ for lack of a proper and better name. It has no form peculiar to itself, but is a sort of judicious blend of the two others and a selection from the most effective features of each. This kind, it seems to me, deserves to win the first prize; for it is a sort of mean, and excellence in life and conduct [and the arts] is a mean, according to Aristotle and the other philosophers of his school. As I said before, it is to be viewed not narrowly but broadly. It has many specific varieties. Those who have adopted it have not all had the same
[Page 248]
αὐτῇ οὐ τὰ αὐτὰ πάντες οὐδ’ ὁμοίως ἐπετήδευσαν, ἀλλ’ οἱ μὲν ταῦτα μᾶλλον, οἱ δ’ ἐκεῖνα, ἐπέτεινάν τε καὶ ἀνῆκαν ἄλλως ἄλλοι τὰ αὐτά, καὶ πάντες ἐγένοντο λόγου ἄξιοι κατὰ πάσας τὰς ἰδέας τῶν λόγων. κορυφὴ μὲν οὖν ἁπάντων καὶ σκοπός, 5
ἐξ οὗ περ πάντες ποταμοὶ καὶ πᾶσα θάλασσα καὶ πᾶσαι κρῆναι,
δικαίως ἂν Ὅμηρος λέγοιτο. πᾶς γὰρ αὐτῷ τόπος, ὅτου τις ἂν ἅψηται, ταῖς τε αὐστηραῖς καὶ ταῖς γλαφυραῖς ἁρμονίαις εἰς ἄκρον διαπεποίκιλται. τῶν δ’ ἄλλων ὅσοι τὴν αὐτὴν 10 μεσότητα ἐπετήδευσαν, ὕστεροι μὲν Ὁμήρου μακρῷ παρ’ ἐκεῖνον ἐξεταζόμενοι φαίνοιντ’ ἄν, καθ’ ἑαυτοὺς δὲ εἰ θεωροίη τις αὐτούς, ἀξιοθέατοι, μελοποιῶν μὲν Στησίχορός τε καὶ Ἀλκαῖος, τραγῳδοποιῶν δὲ Σοφοκλῆς, συγγραφέων δὲ Ἡρόδοτος, ῥητόρων δὲ Δημοσθένης, φιλοσόφων δὲ κατ’ ἐμὴν δόξαν Δημόκριτός 15 τε καὶ Πλάτων καὶ Ἀριστοτέλης· τούτων γὰρ ἑτέρους εὑρεῖν ἀμήχανον ἄμεινον κεράσαντας τοὺς λόγους. καὶ περὶ μὲν τῶν χαρακτήρων ταῦθ’ ἱκανά. παραδείγματα γὰρ τούτων οὐκ οἴομαι δεῖν φέρειν, φανερῶν πάνυ ὄντων καὶ οὐδὲν δεομένων λόγου. 20
εἰ δέ τινι δοκεῖ καὶ πόνου πολλοῦ ταῦτα καὶ πραγματείας
8 ἂν om. F || ὅτου EF: ὅπου M: τὸ οὗ P 9 ἅψοιτο EF || ταῖς γλαφυραῖς] ἀνθηραῖς EF 10 αὐτὴν EF: αὐτὴν ἐκείνωι P, MV 11 μὲν] μέντοι EF 13 Στησίχορος ... τραγῳδοποιῶν δὲ om. F 16 γὰρ F: δὲ PMV 19 φέρειν om. F 21 τινι MV (τῳ Demosth.): τι μοι F: τις P
5. Homer is a beacon (a watchtower) set upon a hill.—The close correspondence between Dionysius and Quintilian has often been illustrated in these notes; and with the present page should be compared Quintil. x. 1. 46 “igitur, ut Aratus _ab Iove incipiendum_ putat, ita nos rite coepturi ab Homero videmur. hic enim, quemadmodum _ex Oceano_ dicit ipse _amnium fontiumque cursus initium capere_, omnibus eloquentiae partibus exemplum et ortum dedit.”
10. Neither here nor elsewhere does Dionysius say anything about the poets of the Epic Cycle. Attention is called to his silence by T. W. Allen in the _Classical Quarterly_ ii. 87.
13. =Stesichorus=: cp. _de Imitat._ B. vi. 2 ὅρα δὲ καὶ Στησίχορον ἔν τε τοῖς ἑκατέρων τῶν προειρημένων πλεονεκτήμασι κατορθοῦντα, κτλ.; Long. _de Sublim._ xiii. 3 (as to Stesichorus, Herodotus and Plato, in relation to Homer) μόνος Ἡρόδοτος Ὁμηρικώτατος ἐγένετο; Στησίχορος ἔτι πρότερον ὅ τε Ἀρχίλοχος, πάντων τε τούτων μάλιστα ὁ Πλάτων ἀπὸ τοῦ Ὁμηρικοῦ κείνου νάματος εἰς αὑτὸν μυρίας ὅσας παρατροπὰς ἀποχετευσάμενος.
14. =Alcaeus=: _de Imitat._ B. vi. 2 Ἀλκαίου δὲ σκόπει τὸ μεγαλοφυὲς καὶ βραχὺ καὶ ἡδὺ μετὰ δεινότητος κτλ.; Quintil. x. 1. 63 “Alcaeus in parte operis _aureo plectro_ merito donatur, qua tyrannos insectatus multum etiam moribus confert; in eloquendo quoque brevis et magnificus et diligens et plerumque oratori similis: sed et lusit et in amores descendit, maioribus tamen aptior.”
=Sophocles=: Σοφοκλῆς δὲ ἔν τε τοῖς ἤθεσι καὶ τοῖς πάθεσι κτλ. (_de Imitat._, _ut supra_).
=Herodotus=: cp. D.H. pp. 10, 11, 12, etc.
15. =Demosthenes=: cp. D.H. pp. 13, 15, 16, 19, 22, 23, etc., and Demetr. pp. 11, 12, etc.
=Democritus=: cp. Cic. _Orat._ 20, 67 “itaque video visum esse nonnullis, Platonis et Democriti locutionem, etsi absit a versu, tamen, quod incitatius feratur et clarissimis verborum luminibus utatur, potius poëma putandum quam comicorum poëtarum”; id. _de Orat._ i. 49 “quam ob rem, si ornate locutus est, sicut et fertur et mihi videtur, physicus ille Demokritus, materies illa fuit physici, de qua dixit, ornatus vero ipse verborum oratoris putandus est”; id. _ib._ i. 42 “Democritii ... ornati homines in dicendo et graves.”
16. =Plato=: cp. D.H. pp. 16, 19, 27-30, 36, etc. and Demetr. pp. 12, 13, 14, etc.
=Aristotle=: cp. _de Imitat._ B. vi. 4 παραληπτέον δὲ καὶ Ἀριστοτέλην εἰς μίμησιν τῆς τε περὶ τὴν ἑρμηνείαν δεινότητος καὶ τῆς σαφηνείας, καὶ τοῦ ἡδέος καὶ πολυμαθοῦς· τοῦτο γὰρ ἔστι μάλιστα παρὰ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς τούτου λαβεῖν.
[Page 249]
aims nor the same methods; some have made more use of this method, others of that; while the same methods have been pursued with less or greater vigour by different writers, who have yet all achieved eminence in the various walks of literature. Now he who towers conspicuous above them all,
Out of whose fulness all rivers, and every sea, have birth, And all upleaping fountains,[179]
is, we must admit, Homer. For whatever passage you like to take in him has had its manifold charms brought to perfection by a union of the severe and the polished forms of arrangement. Of the other writers who have cultivated the same golden mean, all will be found to be far inferior to Homer when measured by his standard, but still men of eminence when regarded in themselves: among lyric poets Stesichorus and Alcaeus, among tragedians Sophocles, among historians Herodotus, among orators Demosthenes, and among philosophers (in my opinion) Democritus, Plato, and Aristotle. It is impossible to find authors who have succeeded better in blending their writings into harmonious wholes. As regards types of composition the foregoing remarks will suffice. I do not think it necessary to quote specimen passages from the authors just mentioned, since they are known to all and need no illustration.
Now if any one thinks that these things are worth much toil
[Page 250]
μεγάλης ἄξια εἶναι, καὶ μάλα ὀρθῶς δοκεῖ κατὰ τὸν Δημοσθένην· ἀλλ’ ἐὰν λογίσηται τοὺς ἐξακολουθοῦντας αὐτοῖς κατορθουμένοις ἐπαίνους καὶ τὸν καρπὸν τὸν ἀπ’ αὐτῶν ὡς γλυκύς, εὐπαθείας ἡγήσεται τοὺς πόνους. Ἐπικουρείων δὲ χορόν, οἷς οὐδὲν μέλει τούτων, παραιτοῦμαι· τὸ γὰρ “οὐκ 5 ἐπιπόνου τοῦ γράφειν ὄντος,” ὡς αὐτὸς Ἐπίκουρος λέγει, “τοῖς μὴ στοχαζομένοις τοῦ πυκνὰ μεταπίπτοντος κριτηρίου” πολλῆς ἀργίας ἦν καὶ σκαιότητος ἀλεξιφάρμακον.
XXV
τούτων δή μοι τέλος ἐχόντων, ἐκεῖνά σε οἴομαι ποθεῖν ἔτι ἀκοῦσαι, πῶς γίνεται λέξις ἄμετρος ὁμοία καλῷ ποιήματι ἢ 10 μέλει, καὶ πῶς ποίημά γε ἢ μέλος πεζῇ λέξει καλῇ παραπλήσιον. ἄρξομαι δὲ πρῶτον ἀπὸ τῆς ψιλῆς λέξεως, ἕνα τῶν ἀνδρῶν προχειρισάμενος ὃν ἐν τοῖς μάλιστα οἶμαι τὴν ποιητικὴν ἐκμεμάχθαι φράσιν, βουλόμενος μὲν καὶ πλείους, οὐκ ἔχων δὲ χρόνον ἱκανὸν ἅπασι. φέρε δὴ τίς οὐκ ἂν 15 ὁμολογήσειεν τοῖς κρατίστοις ἐοικέναι ποιήμασί τε καὶ μέλεσι
3 τὸν ἀπ’ αὐτῶν F: τῶν ἁπάντων PMV 5 οὐκἐπὶ πόνου P, MV 6 ἐπίπονον F 10 λέξις ἄμετρος] πεζὴ λέξις F || ἄμετρος ... πεζῇ om. F 13 ὃν ... βουλόμενος om. P
1. =κατὰ τὸν Δημοσθένην=: cp. _de Demosth._ c. 52 εἰ δὲ τῷ δοκεῖ ταῦτα καὶ πόνου πολλοῦ καὶ πραγματείας μεγάλης εἶναι, καὶ μάλα ὀρθῶς δοκεῖ κατὰ τὸν Δημοσθένην· οὐδὲν γὰρ τῶν μεγάλων μικρῶν ἐστι πόνων ὤνιον. ἀλλ’ ἐὰν ἐπιλογίσηται τοὺς ἀκολουθοῦντας αὐτοῖς καρπούς, μᾶλλον δ’ ἐὰν ἕνα μόνον τὸν ἔπαινον, ὃν ἀποδίδωσιν ὁ χρόνος καὶ ζῶσι καὶ μετὰ τὴν τελευτήν, πᾶσαν ἡγήσεται τήν [τε] πραγματείαν ἐλάττω τῆς προσηκούσης. The reference in both cases is to Demosth. _Chers._ § 48 εἰ δέ τῳ δοκεῖ ταῦτα καὶ δαπάνης μεγάλης καὶ πόνων πολλῶν καὶ πραγματείας εἶναι, καὶ μάλ’ ὀρθῶς δοκεῖ· ἀλλ’ ἐὰν λογίσηται τὰ τῇ πόλει μετὰ ταῦτα γενησόμενα, ἂν ταῦτα μὴ ’θέλῃ, εὑρήσει λυσιτελοῦν τὸ ἑκόντας ποιεῖν τὰ δέοντα.
4. For the general attitude of =Epicurus= cp. Quintil. ii. 17. 15 “nam de Epicuro, qui disciplinas omnes fugit, nihil miror,” and _ib._ xii. 2. 24 “nam in primis nos Epicurus a se ipse dimittit, qui fugere omnem disciplinam navigatione quam velocissima iubet [Diog. Laert. _Vit. Epic._ 6 παιδείαν δὲ πᾶσαν (i.e. τὴν ἐγκύκλιον παιδείαν), μακάριε, φεῦγε τὸ ἀκάτιον ἀράμενος]”; Cic. _de Finibus_ i. 5. 14 “sed existimo te minus ab eo [sc. Epicuro] delectari, quod ista Platonis, Aristotelis, Theophrasti orationis ornamenta neglexerit.”—Probably the Epicurean philosopher Philodemus is among those who are criticized in the πραγματεία ἣν συνεταξάμην ὑπὲρ τῆς πολιτικῆς φιλοσοφίας πρὸς τοὺς κατατρέχοντας αὐτῆς ἀδίκως (_de Thucyd._ c. 2).
5-8. Usener (_Epicurea_, fragm. 230) gave this passage as follows: τὸ γὰρ ἐπίπονον τοῦ γράφειν ὄντως, ὡς αὐτὸς Ἐπίκουρος λέγει, τοῖς μὴ στοχαζομένοις τοῦ πυκνὰ μεταπίπτοντος κριτηρίου πολλῆς ἀργίας ἦν καὶ σκαιότητος ἀλεξιφάρμακον.
5. =οὐκ ἐπιπόνου=: cp. Sheridan _Clio’s Protest_: “You write with ease, to shew your breeding; | But easy writing’s vile hard reading”; Quintil. x. 3. 10 “summa haec est rei: cito scribendo non fit, ut bene scribatur; bene scribendo fit, ut cito.”
7. =κριτηρίου=: for κριτήριον as an Epicurean term cp. Diog. Laert. _Vit. Epic._ 147 ὥστε τὸ κριτήριον ἅπαν ἐκβαλεῖς. The ‘variable criterion’ or ‘shifting standard,’ in Dionysius’ quotation, is either the _judgment of the ear_ (regarded as a part of _sensation_ generally) or the _literary fashion of the day_.
8. Chapter 24 may be compared throughout with _de Demosth._ c. 41.
9. For the relations of Prose to Verse see Introduction, pp. 33-9.
16. The metrical lines which Dionysius thinks he detects in Demosthenes are not more (nor less) convincing than the rude hexameters which have been pointed out in Cicero: _latent_ lines cannot be expected to be obvious. _Ad Quirites post reditum_ 16 “sed etiam rerum mearum gestarum _auctores, testes, laudatoresque fuere_” [but the better reading here is _laudatores fuerunt_]. _Pro Archia Poëta_ i. 1 “si quid est in me ingenii, iudices, quod sentio quam sit exiguum, aut si qua exercitatio dicendi, _in qua me non infiteor mediocriter esse_ versatum,” etc. _Tusc. Disp._ iv. 14. 31 “illud animorum corporumque dissimile, quod animi valentes _morbo temptari possunt, ut corpora possunt_.” _Pro Roscio Amer._ i. 1 “credo ego vos, iudices, mirari quid _sit quod, cum tot summi oratores hominesque_ nobilissimi sedeant, ego potissimum surrexerim.” Cp. Livy xxi. 9 “nec tuto eos adituros inter tot tam effrenatarum gentium _arma, nec Hannibali in tanto discrimine rerum_ operae esse legationes audire,” and Tacitus _Ann._ i. 1 “_urbem Romam a principio reges habuere_.” In most of these passages except the last, the natural pauses in delivery would destroy any real hexameter effect. See further in Quintil. ix. 4. 72 ff.—Among later Greek writers, St. John Chrysostom, in his _de Sacerdotio_ iii. 14 and 16, is supposed to yield one entire hexameter and part of another: [ἀπ’ ἐκείνου] τοῦ καπνοῦ προέφλεξε καὶ ἠμαύρωσεν ἅπασαν, and βιάζωνται διὰ τὴν τῆς γαστρὸς ἀνάγκην.
[Page 251]
and great effort, he is, according to Demosthenes, decidedly in the right.[180] Nay, if he considers the credit which attends success in them and the sweetness of the fruit they yield, he will count the toil a pleasure. I beg pardon of the Epicurean choir who care nothing for these things. The doctrine that “writing,” as Epicurus himself says, “is no trouble to those who do not aim at the ever-varying standard”[181] was meant to forestall the charge of gross laziness and stupidity.