Part 16
“Except for the troubled reign of Marcus Aurelius, the Roman Empire under the Antonines enjoyed profound peace, broken only by distant wars on the frontier. Within the empire life appeared to be, as it had been in the first century, a steady forward movement for the diffusion and enrichment of civilization. The creative power of Rome seemed to have reached its zenith. There was, however, one disquieting symptom: after the brilliant age of the Flavians we note an almost complete sterility in literature and art. After Tacitus, and after the artists who worked for Trajan ... the decades that followed failed to produce a single great writer or a single notable monument of art....
“Even before the time of war and pestilence in the reign of Marcus Aurelius, we mark in the whole of intellectual life not merely a pause but even a backward movement. The only exception is a revival of Greek rhetorical prose, perfect in form but monotonous in substance. Its chief representative is the sophist and rhetorician, Aristides, and his best work is his _Panegyric_ on Rome. The _Dialogues_ of Lucian are witty and interesting; he was a sceptic and a humorist who mocked all ideals both new and old. In the West there are only two names to be quoted, that of the satirist Juvenal, a gloomy and bitter observer of the dark side of human life, and that of Pliny the Younger, a shallow orator and a brilliant representative of the epistolary style. The rest both in Greece and in Italy are writers of handbooks, text-books, and of miscellaneous collections of entertaining stories for the amusement and instruction of the reader.”
Rostovtzeff’s omission of all reference to the Greek Romances (even to Lucian’s) and to Apuleius shows how completely they have been disregarded. Yet for a picture of the social life of the second and the third centuries and of the psychology of the men of the time the Greek Romances and Apuleius are a revelation.
The Roman empire had checked both political activity and oratory, indeed the orator had been succeeded by the rhetor in Greece and Rome. In the unified Mediterranean world trade had developed greatly and travellers had followed traders from one country to another, among them the lecturing sophists. The new lands visited had their curiosities and splendors so travellers’ tales multiplied with descriptions often worthy of a natural history. Men, diverted from the aims of personal ambition which military conquest or a democratic state had afforded, now sought release and excitement in the personal relations. Women achieved a new freedom and a new importance. The emotional life came to have a new interest and this led to the development of the prose romance.
From the east came, with rich material resources, a wealth of new ideas, a mingling of superstition, magic, religion and philosophy. Just as man’s emotions were turned inward so was his thought. The greatest new adventure became the quest for a solution of life itself. The romances of the early empire whatever their type reflect the age: its craving for excitement, its desire for adventure, its dread of brigands, its curiosity about the new, its interest in art, its wish for fulfillment of emotion in romantic love, its awareness of unsolved mysteries in man and the universe. With even the partial re-dating of the Greek Romances all sorts of subjects open up for investigation such as the apparatus of religion in the use of oracles, dreams, epiphanies; the interest in works of art; the new position of women. At any time in the future new fragments of romances may be discovered, or new dating of some of the old ones may be made possible. But even now while archaeological discoveries are suspended and publication of new editions is delayed, we may read and re-read these amazing old stories and see what escape literature was in the second and third centuries. The Greek Romances have much to tell us of the psychology of their authors, their characters, and their readers. They have a deep human value.
“Homo sum: humani nil a me alienum puto.”
FOOTNOTES
[1]Translated by George Thornley, revised by J. M. Edmonds, in _Daphnis and Chloe by Longus_ in _The Loeb Classical Library_.
[2]By Stephen Gaselee, “Appendix on the Greek Novel,” in _Daphnis and Chloe_ in _The Loeb Classical Library_, New York, 1916, pp. 410-11.
[3]R. M. Rattenbury in _New Chapters in the History of Greek Literature, Third Series_, Oxford, 1933, p. 211.
[4]P. D. Huet, _Traité de l’origine des Romans_, 1671.
[5]J. Dunlop, _The History of Fiction_, Edinburgh, 1816.
[6]A. Chassang, _Histoire du roman ... dans l’antiquité grecque et latine_, Paris, 1862.
[7]V. Chauvin, _Les romanciérs grecs et latins_, 1864.
[8]_Caritone di Afrodisia, Le Avventure di Cherea e Calliroe_, romanzo tradotto da Aristide Calderini, Torino, 1913.
[9]Her. I. 8-12.
[10]Her. II. 121.
[11]Her. IX. 108-13.
[12]L. Whibley, _A Companion to Greek Studies_, Cambridge, 1916, p. 155. For a discussion of these stories and the novelle see E. H. Haight, _Essays on Ancient Fiction_, New York, 1936.
[13]Alfred Croiset and Maurice Croiset, _An Abridged History of Greek Literature_, translated by G. F. Heffelbower, New York, 1904, p. 517.
[14]H. Bornecque, _Les Déclamations et les Déclamateurs d’après Sénèque le père_, Lille, 1902, p. 130.
[15]_Caritone di Afrodisia, Le Avventure di Cherea e Calliroe_, Aristide Calderini, Torino, 1913.
[16]New York, 1916.
[17]Oxford, 1933.
[18]_Op. cit._, pp. 212-13.
[19]_Op. cit._, p. 385.
[20]_Op. cit._, pp. 387-93.
[21]_Ibid._, pp. 397-99.
[22]_Op. cit._, pp. 219-23.
[23]_Op. cit._, pp. 223-254.
[24]See Notes.
[25]_Pap. Fayûm_, London, 1900, I (pp. 74 ff.) and _Pap. Oxyrh._ 1019 (vol. VII. 1910, pp. 143 ff.), both of the early III century, found in 1906 and 1910.
[26]Preface to _Chariton’s Chaereas and Callirhoe_, Ann Arbor and London, 1939. Throughout this chapter I use this translation of Chariton by Warren E. Blake and the Greek text edited by him, _Charitonis Aphrodisiensis, de Chaerea et Callirhoe amatoriarum narrationum libri octo_, Oxford, 1938.
[27]IV. 4, 7-10; IV. 5, 8; IV. 6, 4; IV. 6, 8 (2 letters); VIII. 4, 2-3; VIII. 4, 5-6.
[28]III. 2.
[29]II. 1.
[30]II. 9.
[31]V. 5.
[32]VI. 2.
[33]I. 1.
[34]I. 6.
[35]III. 2.
[36]VI. 4.
[37]III. 3.
[38]VII. 4.
[39]II. 5.
[40]IV. 3.
[41]VIII. 7, 8.
[42]VII. 1 = _Il._ X. 540.
[43]VI. 2 = _Il._ I. 317.
[44]VII. 4 = _Il._ XIII. 131.
[45]VII. 4 = _Il._ X. 483.
[46]V. 4 = _Il._ IV. 1.
[47]II. 9 = _Il._ XXIII. 66-67.
[48]V. 5 = _Il._ III. 146.
[49]V. 5 = _Odys._ I. 366. See also IV. 7 = _Odys._ XVII. 37; VI. 4 = _Odys._ VI. 102.
[50]II. 3 = _Odys._ XVII. 485, 487; IV. 1 = _Il._ XXIII. 71; IV. 1 = _Odys._ XXIV. 83; VI. 4 = _Odys._ XV. 21; VII. 2 = _Il._ XXII. 304-5.
[51]I. 1 = _Il._ XXI. 114.
[52]I. 4 = _Il._ XVIII. 23-25.
[53]III. 5 = _Il._ XXII. 82-83.
[54]IV. 5 = _Il._ XXI. 114.
[55]VI. 1 = _Il._ XXIV. 10-11.
[56]VIII. 1 = _Odys._ XXIII. 296.
[57]III. 5 = _Il._ XXII. 82-83.
[58]II. 9 = _Il._ XXIII. 66-67.
[59]V. 5 = _Il._ III. 146.
[60]Aristide Calderini, _Caritone di Afrodisia, Le avventure di Cherea e Calliroe_, Torino, 1913, pp. 154-58.
[61]Calderini, _op. cit._, pp. 159-60; V. 8.
[62]IV. 4.
[63]Calderini, _op. cit._, pp. 163-64.
[64]Xenophon of Ephesus, _Ephesiaca_, V. 1.
[65]III. 12; IV. 2.
[66]II. 13, G. Dalmeyda, _Xénophon d’Éphèse, Les Éphésiaques_, Paris, 1926, p. 33, n. 1.
[67]Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, pp. xiii-xiv.
[68]Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, pp. xii-xv, xxxviii-ix.
[69]V. 8.
[70]V. 14.
[71]Dalmeyda, op. cit., p. xxiii, for example in the love-story of Aegialeus, V. 1, 4, for the climax: καὶ ἀπηλαύσοµεν ὦν ἕνεκα συνήλθοµεν.
[72]Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, pp. xvi-xviii; Calderini, _op. cit._, p. 85.
[73]I. 8.
[74]V. 10.
[75]Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, pp. xxiv-xxv.
[76]I. 11.
[77]IV. 2.
[78]I. 12.
[79]V. 10-11.
[80]V. 4.
[81]II. 13; III. 3.
[82]III. 11-12.
[83]IV. 3.
[84]V. 4.
[85]V. 13.
[86]Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, pp. xvi-xviii.
[87]Calderini, _op. cit._, pp. 120-25.
[88]Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, pp. xviii-xxiv.
[89]Calderini, _op. cit._, p. 113.
[90]See the story of the old Spartan and his mummy, V. 1.
[91]Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, p. xxvii.
[92]Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, pp. xxviii-ix.
[93]I. 2; I. 8.
[94]I. 6, V. 4; II. 1, II. 12; III. 2, I. 12, V. 11.
[95]V. 15.
[96]V. 1.
[97]I. 14.
[98]Chariton, III. 5. See Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, p. xxx.
[99]II. 4. Chariton, V. 10.
[100]_Iliad_, XXII, 389-90; Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, p. xxix.
[101]III. 7; Chariton, I. 6; IV. 1.
[102]V. 8; Chariton, V. 10.
[103]Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, pp. xxxii-iii.
[104]For this introduction to Heliodorus I am largely indebted to the edition of _Les Éthiopiques_ edited by R. M. Rattenbury. T. W. Lumb, J. Maillon, Paris, vol. I, 1935; vol. II, 1938. For the _Testimonia_ see _Heliodori Aethiopica_ by Aristides Colonna, Rome, 1938, pp. 361-72.
[105]R. M. Rattenbury, T. W. Lumb, J. Maillon, _op. cit._, I, ix-xi.
[106]R. M. Rattenbury, T. W. Lumb, J. Maillon, _op. cit._, I, xiii-xv.
[107]Aristide Calderini, _Le Avventure di Cherea e Calliroe_, Torino, 1913, pp. 176-77.
[108]II. 35, translated by the Rev. Rowland Smith, in _The Greek Romances of Heliodorus, Longus, and Achilles Tatius_, London, 1855, pp. 61-62. It is impossible to reproduce in English the Greek’s hidden references to the names of Chariclea, Famed-for-her-Grace, and of Theagenes, the Goddess-Born.
[109]Translated by the Rev. Rowland Smith, _op. cit._, pp. 196-97.
[110]Calderini, _op. cit._, pp. 118-25.
[111]R. M. Rattenbury, T. W. Lumb, J. Maillon, _op. cit._, I, lxxxviii-ix.
[112]Calasiris in II and III; Cnemon in I, II and VI; Achaemenes in VIII; Sisimithres and Charicles in X.
[113]R. M. Rattenbury, T. W. Lumb, J. Maillon, _op. cit._, II, 87, n. 1.
[114]IV. 3, _Il._ XXII. 108-897: VII. 4-6, _Il._ III. 88-244 and _Il._ XXII. 136-436; V. 5, _Odys._ XIX. 392-94; VI. 14, _Odys._ XI.
[115]R. M. Rattenbury, T. W. Lumb, J. Maillon, _op. cit._, I, lxxxix-xcii.
[116]S. L. Wolff, _The Greek Romances in Elizabethan Prose Fiction_, New York, 1912, pp. 150-52.
[117]Calderini, _op. cit._, pp. 106-7.
[118]Arsace is not an historical character.
“Le personnage féminin d’Arsacé semble bien être de l’invention d’Héliodore, mais il se peut qu’il se soit souvenu, en créant son nom, d’Arsacés, le fondateur de l’empire des Parthes, et des Arsacides, ainsi que d’Arsamés, grandpère de Darius (Hér. I, 209). D’après Suidas (s.d. Θεοκλυτήσαντες) Darius avait une fille nommée Arsamé.”
R. M. Rattenbury, T. W. Lumb, J. Maillon, _op. cit._, II, 113, n. 1.
[119]R. M. Rattenbury, T. W. Lumb, J. Maillon, _op. cit._, I, lxxxv-viii.
[120]R. M. Rattenbury, T. W. Lumb, J. Maillon, _op. cit._, I, xviii-xx.
[121]“Héliodore pratique avec une réelle habileté l’art des suspensions et des retours. L’unité du récit n’est jamais compromise.”
R. M. Rattenbury, T. W. Lumb, J. Maillon, _op. cit._, II, 37, n. 3.
[122]R. M. Rattenbury, T. W. Lumb, J. Maillon, _op. cit._, I, xx-xxi and lxxxv-viii; A. Calderini, _op. cit._, pp. 176-77.
[123]See _The Cambridge Ancient History_, Cambridge (Eng.), 1934, X, 506-11; 1936, XI, 700-1; Philostratus, _The Life of Apollonius of Tyana_ translated by F. C. Conybeare in _The Loeb Classical Library_, 2 vols. New York, 1912.
[124]Translated by the Rev. Rowland Smith, _op. cit._, p. 259.
[125]p. 78.
[126]III. 12-15.
[127]V. 22, _Odys._ XIII. 332, XVIII. 66-70, _Il._ XIX. 47-49.
[128]V. 11, _Odys._ VI. 180; V. 15, _Il._ III. 65; VII. 10, _Il._ VI. 235-36.
[129]VII. 9, _Il._ XXIV. 3-12; VI. 5, _Il._ I. 106-7; IV. 7, _Il._ XVI. 21.
[130]J. W. H. Walden, _Stage-terms in Heliodorus’s Aethiopica_, in “Harvard Studies in Classical Philology,” V (1894), 1-43.
[131]V. 6, II. 11, I. 3, II. 4 and 23, VI. 12, IX. 5, VI. 14.
[132]X. 12, VII. 6-8, VIII. 17. Calderini, _op. cit._, pp. 159-63.
[133]On the style of Heliodorus, see Maillon in R. M. Rattenbury, T. W. Lumb, J. Maillon, _op. cit._, I, xcii-xciii.
[134]IV. 4. Translated by the Rev. Rowland Smith, _op. cit._, p. 81.
[135]Aristide Calderini, _Caritone di Afrodisia, Le Avventure di Cherea e Calliroe_, Torino, 1913, p. 191.
[136]From the introduction to _Achilles Tatius_ with an English translation by S. Gaselee, in _The Loeb Classical Library_. The translations used in this chapter are from this volume.
[137]GH in Grenfell and Hunt, _Oxyrhynchus Papyri_, X, 135, no. 1250.
[138]R. T. Rattenbury, _New Chapters in the History of Greek Literature: Third Series_: Oxford, 1933, pp. 254-57.
[139]F. A. Todd, _Some Ancient Novels_, Oxford, 1940, p. 33; S. Gaselee, _op. cit._, pp. xv-xvi.
[140]F. A. Todd, _op. cit._, p. 33; S. L. Wolff, _The Greek Romances in Elizabethan Prose Fiction_, New York, 1912, pp. 248-56.
[141]Pal. Anth. IX. 203.
[142]J. S. Phillimore, “The Greek Romances,” in _English Literature and the Classics_, Oxford, 1912, pp. 108-15.
[143]J. S. Phillimore, _op. cit._, p. 115.
[144]S. Gaselee, _op. cit._, p. 455.
[145]II. 5.
[146]III. 10.
[147]VI. 16.
[148]VII. 5.
[149]I. 3.
[150]V. 18-20.
[151]V. 25-27.
[152]VIII. 7.
[153]II. 11-17.
[154]II. 23.
[155]IV. 1.
[156]VII. 12, 14. Compare also the dream in I. 3.
[157]III. 15; V. 7; VII. 3-5.
[158]VIII. 4-5, 15-17.
[159]II. 13, 15-18.
[160]VIII. 17-18.
[161]V. 11, 13.
[162]V. 22.
[163]V. 14.
[164]V. 16.
[165]V. 25-27.
[166]VI. 9-11.
[167]V. 17, 22.
[168]VI. 1-2.
[169]VIII. 5.
[170]R. M. Rattenbury, _op. cit._, pp. 256-57.
[171]III. 14.
[172]VI. 7.
[173]VII. 9.
[174]V. 17.
[175]VIII. 17-19.
[176]I. 4.
[177]I. 9. Compare V. 13.
[178]I. 16-18.
[179]II. 35-38.
[180]I. 8.
[181]II. 7-8.
[182]IV. 8.
[183]I. 10.
[184]II. 4.
[185]II. 37.
[186]V. 5.
[187]II. 7-8.
[188]IV. 8-10, 15-17, V. 22, 26.
[189]VIII. 5-7, 11-14.
[190]II. 19.
[191]V. 16.
[192]VIII. 5.
[193]VIII. 11-12.
[194]IV. 1; VII. 12.
[195]VI. 21.
[196]VII. 12.
[197]VII. 12.
[198]VIII. 1-3.
[199]VIII. 1-3, 5, 10.
[200]II. 12; V. 3.
[201]II. 14.
[202]II. 2; V. 2; VI. 3-4.
[203]II. 36.
[204]I. 8; II. 1, 15, 23, 34.
[205]I. 8; IV. 4-5.
[206]I. 12.
[207]II. 20-22.
[208]VIII. 9.
[209]V. 27.
[210]V. 5.
[211]II. 2.
[212]I. 1-2.
[213]III. 6-8.
[214]V. 3-5.
[215]II. 3.
[216]II. 11.
[217]II. 19.
[218]I. 15.
[219]III. 1-5.
[220]IV. 11-12; III. 24-25; IV. 2-3, 4, 19.
[221]S. L. Wolff, _op. cit._, pp. 202-11.
[222]J. S. Phillimore, _op. cit._, pp. 115-16.
[223]F. A. Todd, _Some Ancient Novels_, London, 1940, p. 35.
[224]G. Dalmeyda, _Longus, Pastorales (Daphnis et Chloé)_, Paris, 1934, pp. xxi-xxii.
[225]Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, p. xxiv, “un des plus grands charmes de son roman est le cadre de nature, et l’intime union du décor et des personnages: dans ce sol plaisant et fertile, les deux héros semblent avoir leurs racines comme de jeunes plantes.”
[226]I. 4-5.
[227]I. 7.
[228]II. 23.
[229]III. 27.
[230]IV. 34.
[231]II. 39.
[232]II. 4-7.
[233]IV. 36.
[234]IV. 37.
[235]IV. 39.
[236]IV. 3.
[237]IV. 13.
[238]IV. 26.
[239]Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, pp. xxvii-xxxi.
[240]III. 10.
[241]I. 14.
[242]IV. 27.
[243]I. 18.
[244]I. 25.
[245]III. 6.
[246]IV. 28.
[247]II. 15-17.
[248]IV. 3.
[249]I. 4; II. 23.
[250]II. 23-24; IV. 39.
[251]I. 10 and 24.
[252]I. 30.
[253]III. 12.
[254]II. 35-37.
[255]IV. 15.
[256]IV. 40.
[257]III. 21.
[258]Cp. II. 4 with Bion IV.
[259]Cp. I. 18 with Moschus I. 27.
[260]II. 33. See on the bucolic tradition, Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, p. xxiii with n. 4.
[261]Calderini, _op. cit._, pp. 169-70.
[262]Theoc. I. 45-56.
[263]III. 21.
[264]Theoc. VIII. 53-56.
[265]Horace is the only other ancient writer who uses the name Chloe, C. I. 23; III. 7, 9, 26.
[266]I. 17, with Courier’s excellent emendation of the ms. χλόης (for χλόας) to πόας, Sappho 2.
[267]IV. 8, Sappho 94.
[268]III. 33-34. Sappho 93.
[269]J. M. Edmonds, _Daphnis and Chloe_ in _The Loeb Classical Library_, p. xi, n. 1.
[270]Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, pp. xxxiv-v.
[271]II. 7, Vergil _Ec._ I. 5.
[272]J. M. Edmonds, _op. cit._, p. ix.
[273]Calderini, _op. cit._, pp. 145-47.
[274]Dalmeyda, _op. cit._, pp. xxxviii-xlii.
[275]I. 13.
[276]I. 16.
[277]II. 2.
[278]III. 20.
[279]I. 13.
[280]II. 1-2.
[281]III. 3.
[282]IV. 37-39.
[283]II. 32.
[284]II. 3-6.
[285]I. 27.
[286]II. 34.
[287]II. 2.
[288]S. L. Wolff, _op. cit._, p. 162.
[289]F. A. Todd, _op. cit._, p. 64.
[290]Paul-Louis Courier, _Les Pastorales de Longus ou Daphnis et Chloé_, traduction de Messire Jacques Amyot revue, corrigée, complétée et de nouveau refaite in grande partie, Paris, 1925, _Preface_, p. xxii. See also _Bibliographie_.
[291]Suidas, as quoted in the _Enc. Brit._ XIV. Vol. 14, p. 460.
[292]Maurice Croiset, _Essai sur la vie et les œuvres de Lucien_, Paris, 1882.
[293]Basil L. Gildersleeve, _Essays and Studies_, Baltimore, 1890.
[294]For a concise tabular classification of Lucian’s works, based on Croiset’s arrangement, see H. W. Fowler and F. G. Fowler, _The Works of Lucian of Samosata_, 4 vols. Oxford, 1905, I, xiv-xviii. To be specially noted are the influences in definite periods of the rhetoricians, of philosophy, of New Comedy, of Menippus, of Old Comedy.
[295]Translated by A. M. Harmon, in _Lucian_, in _The Loeb Classical Library_, III, 223, 225.
[296]Harmon, _op. cit._, III, 231, 233.
[297]Xenophon, _Memorabilia_, II, 1, 21.
[298]See M. Croiset, _op. cit._, Chap. II.
[299]C. 47.
[300]Horace, _Ep._ I. 1, 14.
[301]Harmon, _op. cit._, II, 487, 495.
[302]Harmon, _op. cit._, V, 1.
[303]Harmon, _op. cit._, V, 47-49.
[304]M. Croiset, _op. cit._, pp. 140-43, 188-92.
[305]M. Croiset, _op. cit._, p. 82.
[306]F. Cumont in the _Mémoires couronnées de l’académie de Belgique_, Vol. XL (1887), summarized by Harmon, _op. cit._, IV, 173.
[307]M. Croiset, _op. cit._, p. 131.
[308]Gildersleeve, _op. cit._, p. 327.
[309]Harmon, _op. cit._, III, 411.
[310]Harmon, _op. cit._, III, 481.
[311]M. Croiset, _op. cit._, p. 176.
[312]Teubner text, I (1896), 319-27; H. W. Fowler and F. G. Fowler, _The Works of Lucian_, II, 27-34.
[313]H. W. Fowler and F. G. Fowler, _op. cit._, II, 29.
[314]H. W. Fowler and F. G. Fowler, _op. cit._, II, 33.
[315]M. Croiset, _op. cit._, p. 303.
[316]H. W. Fowler and F. G. Fowler, _op. cit._, II, 123, C. 27.
[317]H. W. Fowler and F. G. Fowler, _op. cit._, II, 128-29, CC. 39, 41.
[318]H. W. Fowler and F. G. Fowler, _op. cit._, II, 133-35, CC. 54-61.
[319]Gildersleeve, _op. cit._, p. 316.
[320]See Philip Babcock Gove, _The Imaginary Voyage in Prose Fiction_, New York, 1941.
[321]A secondary Preface to Book II may be found in _Babble Beforehand: Dionysus_. In it Lucian speaks of a literary novelty he is producing under the influence of Dionysus and Silenus, an old man’s lengthy babbling.
[322]I. 4. The translations of the _True History_ are from A. M. Harmon, _Lucian_, I, 247-357 in _The Loeb Classical Library_.
[323]I. 13.
[324]I. 26.
[325]II. 31.
[326]II. 47.
[327]Gildersleeve, _op. cit._, pp. 318-19.
[328]See E. Rohde, _Der Griechische Roman_, Leipzig, 1914, pp. 204-209; 242-50, 260 ff.; C. S. Jerram, _Luciani Vera Historia_, Oxford, 1887, I, 120 and _passim_; H. W. L. Hime, _Lucian the Syrian Satirist_, London, 1900, app. pp. 91-95; F. W. Householder, Jr., _Literary Quotation and Allusion in Lucian_, New York, 1941.
[329]F. G. Allinson, _Lucian Satirist and Artist_, Boston, 1926, p. 123.
[330]I. 29.
[331]II. 17 and 19.
[332]I. 20, Thuc. V. 18.
[333]I. 16, Her. III. 102.
[334]I. 16, Her. IV. 191.
[335]I. 23, Her. I. 202; IV. 75.
[336]I. 29, Her. II. 62.
[337]I. 40, Her. II. 156.
[338]II. 2, Her. IV. 28.
[339]II. 5, Her. III. 113.
[340]II. 31.
[341]I. 3.
[342]II. 20.
[343]II. 24.
[344]II. 28.
[345]II. 22.
[346]II. 15.
[347]II. 25-26.
[348]II. 35-36.
[349]II. 28, _Odys._ X. 302-306.
[350]II. 33, _Odys._ XIX. 562-67.
[351]II. 46, _Odys._ XII. 37-200.
[352]II. 20.
[353]See M. Croiset, _op. cit._, C. XII, “La fantaisie chez Lucien”; and F. G. Allinson, _op. cit._, _passim_.
[354]Andrew Lang, _Letters to Dead Authors_, New York, 1893, pp. 53-54.
[355]Ben Edwin Perry, _The Metamorphoses Ascribed to Lucius of Patrae_, Princeton, 1920.
[356]_Bibl. Cod._ 129, Migne.
[357]B. E. Perry, _op. cit._, pp. 52-55.
[358]M. Croiset, _op. cit._, p. 48.
[359]Harmon, _op. cit._, V, 101-207.
[360]M. Rostovtzeff, _Seminarium Kondakovianum_, II, 135-38, Prague, 1928; _Papyri Greci e Latini_, VIII. No. 981. For a different point of view see F. Zimmermann, “Lukians Toxaris und das Kairener Romanfragment” in _Philologische Wochenschrift_, 55 (1935), 1211-16.
[361]R. M. Rattenbury, “Romance: the Greek Novel” in _New Chapters in the History of Greek Literature, Third Series_, pp. 240-44.
[362]M. Rostovtzeff, _Scythien und der Bosporus_, Berlin, 1931, I, 96-99.
[363]M. Croiset, _op. cit._, p. 51.
[364]Quis ille? _Met._ I. 1.
[365]E. H. Haight, _Apuleius and his Influence_, New York, 1927; “The Myth of Cupid and Psyche in Ancient Art” in _Art and Archaeology_, III (1916), 43-52, 87-97; “The Myth of Cupid and Psyche in Renaissance Art,” “The Vassar College Psyche Tapestries,” in _Art and Archaeology_, XV (1923), 107-116; “Apuleius’ Art of Story-Telling” in _Essays on Ancient Fiction_, New York, 1936.
[366]From E. H. Haight, “Apuleius’ Art of Story-Telling,” in _Essays on Ancient Fiction_, New York, 1936, p. 152.
[367]_Met._ XI, 23.
[368]Hermann Riefstahl, _Der Roman des Apuleius_, Frankfurt am Main, 1938, pp. 83-84.
[369]Riefstahl, _op. cit._, p. 85.
[370]For an account of Aristides and the Milesian Tales see L. C. Purser, _The Story of Cupid and Psyche as related by Apuleius_, London, 1910, Excursus I.
[371]_Apologia_, 55, 56.
[372]Riefstahl, _op. cit._, pp. 84-85.
[373]_Met._ XI. 22.
[374]S. Gaselee, _Apuleius the Golden Ass being the Metamorphoses of Lucius Apuleius_, in _The Loeb Classical Library_, XI. 4.
[375]For Riefstahl’s whole theory of “Apuleius und die griechischen Liebesromane” see _op. cit._, pp. 82-95.
[376]See the review of Riefstahl’s work by H. W. Prescott in _A.J.P._, 61 (1940), pp. 115-17.
[377]To complete the list of different types of novels, we might add the realistic novel of low life, Petronius’ _Satyricon_. Since its affiliations are with the Menippean satire and not with the Greek Romances, I have omitted any study of it here. See E. H. Haight, _Apuleius and his Influence_, pp. 7-8; “Satire and the Latin Novel” in _Essays on Ancient Fiction_, pp. 86-120. For a recent review of the literature about the _Satyricon_ and a brilliant re-interpretation of it see Gilbert Highet “Petronius the Moralist” in _T.P.A.P.A._, LXXII (1941), 176-94.
[378]M. Rostovtzeff, _A History of the Ancient World, Volume II. Rome_, Oxford, 1927, pp. 239-41. Yet see pp. 181-85 for Rostovtzeff’s knowledge of the Greek Romances.
INDEX