Professional Documents
Culture Documents
HANDBOOK
OF
A.
:% DE OROOT
j.
8,
HE HAGUE
ftf*
THE UNIVERSITY
OF ILLINOIS
LIBRARY
460
G83h
V,
/
\v
CMss^S
tfi
APR
p,
200B
w 25
m
1181
DEC 1 1
SEP 3
1515
N0V2Q1S&
DU: Mfrffi
OCT
'APR
19
L161 H41
A HANDBOOK
OF
ANTIQUE PROSE-RHYTHM
BY
DR A. W. DE GROOT
CONSERVATOR OF THE LIBRARY OF
J.
B.
1919
^0
PREFACE.
This work
tries
to
new
method
and
will
must therefore
method,
to this
naturally
to
criticism.
have
and
to give
as
few hypotheses as
could, as
am
fully
aware
that the
will require
important modi-
Of one thing
with this method,
one,
at
am
that is
mine or a similar
any
rate
results can
be obtained.
am
quite
fest',
to
lay
claim
to
name,
it
will
have
to
change the
usual
method
bring
of investigation altogether.
this
To
of
\y
clearly
to
light,
obliged to discuss
brevity
their
I
when
if
with
theories
this,
and opinions:
myself to
my work
would have
I
failed in its
hope
U
cp
IV
understand that
it
is
not
my
wish or intention
character.
I
to give to
my work
the
somewhat polemic
By choosing
more
attractive.
have
tried to
make
little
matter which
One
be
to investigate
text.
As
wanted such a
tence-metre
as such.
of
Demosthenes,
Further
take
the
liberty
of
words
col.
of
Mr.
Ammon
I
(Berl. Philol.
Wochenschrift 1918,
495)
viz. that
Caesarea as
metrical
must be ascribed
to a
natural misunderstanding
of his valuable
remarks as well
I
as
of
those
of
professor
D.
V.
Hesseling in Leyden
shall
be glad
to avail
I
Of course
valuable
Laurand's
clear
E'tude sur
many
other works.
and the
will
later
graphy
one.
I
the
modern
of a
theories of
Zander
comparative method.
V
In conclusion
that
I
want
their
to
express
to
it
my
gratitude to those
First of all to
for the
I
have offered
J.
services
if
me.
professor
van Wageningen:
showed
in
my
work,
could
it;
his
many
respects.
To my
whose
my task
no small degree.
To
I
and
have improved
Mr.
J.
my work
who
consideassisted
rably.
To my
friend
G. Holthuis,
me
And
last
G. Dudok,
who
2013
http://archive.org/details/handbookofantiqu01groo
CONSTENTS. *)
FIRST LECTURE.
Methodological problems.
There
is
a definable prose-rhythm
different authors
show
seis of Plutarch
show
the
same
themselves
6;
Demosthenes
avoids
www, wwww,
of
^^^-w^;
by choice
words or by arrangement
out the
words
Thumb
points
SECOND LECTURE.
Methodological problems ; sentence -metre of Demosthenes.
It
is
necessary
to investigate
18;
Thucydides
in entirely or
as
appears
www, ^^w,
is
etc.
in
Demosthenes, and
Reference
made
to the pages.
VIII
other
tendencies;
is
Norden's
scheme
for
the
clausula of
Demosthenes
wrong
33;
how
to
of the clausula in
THIRD LECTURE.
Methodological problems; clausula of Plutarch
Philo Judaeus.
and
Tendency
,
of increasing
etc.
in Plutarch 42;
(
^w^
w w,
43;
tendency
in
FOURTH LECTURE.
Plato
Clausula of Plato 59
the
quantity
of
the
final
indifferent
not an hexameter-ending
IX
five chronological
its
groups
statistics of
the
method
of
using the
statistics to
is
quite
wrong
FIFTH LECTURE.
Chariton, Libanins, Herodes, Lesbonax, typology.
Consequences
of
the
application
of
non-comparing
for Libanius
methods by Heibges
83;
for Charito,
by Heitmann
in the
;
typology
is
;
probably absent
Greek
clausula
of
{Novotny)
90
Zander's
hypothesis 94
96.
quintessence
SIXTH LECTURE.
History of the method of research ; first stage of the clausula.
Merits
Kroll,
of
Litzica,
Jordan,
Maas,
Thumb, Novotny,
statistics
classical stage, 2
rhythmical
stage
of
109;
theory of
Greek sentence-
metre
112.
X
SEVENTH LECTURE.
Development of the clausula; Wilamowitz.
Typology
preserves
the
is
falling
rhythm
119;
the
and by-forms
1
123;
;
relation
Latin prose-metre,
of
25
in Latin
prose
we
metrical
authors:
1
1.
Sallust
of
and Livy,
Cicero and
typical
the
others
25
clausula
Sallust
of
and Livy a
Latin
clausula
of
127;
clausula
Cicero
infuenced
by
Hegesias
the
in
characteristics of
Hellenistic
EIGHTH LECTURE.
Last stage ; rhythm and the Greek language.
32 the
;
diffe-
33
the
is
34 influence
words
importance
of
prose-rhythm
for
textual
criticism 143.
XI
NINTH LECTURE.
Statistical
14.7.
TABLES.
, ,
Frequency
of
authors
of
w, www,
of
Thrasymachus
183;
182;
the
more
184;
rhetoric
of
parts
of
Thucydides
Thucydides
Demosthenes;
for
of
the
clausula
Plutarch
Philo
196197; typology
BIBLIOGRAPHY,
p. 200.
CURVES.
Thucydides' clausula and sentence-metre 219; Demosthenes 220; Plato 221; Philo 222; Plutarch 223; Livy 224;
Cicero 226.
INDEX.
A.
W. DE GROOT, A
handbook
of antique prose-rhythm,
I.
CORRIGENDA.
Page
instead of
D. V. Hesseling.
XI,
80, 80,
15, 13,
Thucydides
Thycydides.
0-00
o/
.
4-9%
102,
p.
00 and
00.
numerum suum
oratorium
in
'Quomodo
potuerit'.
results.
123,
124,
127,
avoided
exists
sought.
exist.
135,
136,
137, 162,
passim p. 00. ), line 24, and as an hexameter ending: instead of and. instead of caesura. 2, diaeresis
note
23,
24,
10,
9,
65%
50
0/
50%.
65
0/
.
162, 163,
166,
psychical
pscyhical.
read
reed.
192,
27,
6q$ws
line
1,
defrwg
instead of
196197
(table),
TABLE OF CLAUSULAE,
TABLE OF CLAUSULA.
(10)
Polemo.
of:
instead
(10)
~ *
-
--^
-
Polemo.
- ^
v_^_.
;=:.
197, 197,
line
23,and
12,
8,
- ^
24:
instead of
w -^^.
metrique
134,
etc.
^
should be
130, 134.
201,
23
La
prose
130,
omitted.
228,
Wilamowitz
103,
instead of
ANTIQUE PROSE-RHYTHM
FIRST LECTURE.
Is
there indeed
will
prose-rhythm?
be the
most
of the
of
you,
when
Are we not
units
prose" because of
occurrence of
to
It
vagueness?
Are we not
to ascribe the
all
phemomena
first of all.
chance?
ought
to
systematic
statistic
shows
us,
that
distribution of metrical
forms
To prove
of
1000 syllables.
These
syllables
we
Out
can't
be
whether
the}/ are
long or short.
Here we have
of
datum.
each
group
of
000 syllables
is
we
no third short
and see
how many
There may be
e.g. in juera
ww
w w
^[
xcbv tzglqovicov
or or
or
Jiagovotv
2,
yvvcux&v naQOvxwv
yvvcuxwv
3,
'[
etc.
We now
ones.
write
down how
1
long,
first
life
long, 2
For the
Pyrrhus of Plutarch
found the
following figures.
Thucydides
180
Plutarch
237
144
113
57
60
40
18
40
23
20
2
4
1
Certain
relations
is
are
we
see at
two columns:
presented.
in
it
ww
is
most strongly
is
re-
So
more
no
long
syllable
syllables
two between
When
tain
we
notice a cer-
difference.
w w
The
all
w w
this to
w, and
the form
w and w
now be
put are
:
w.
question might
we not to ascribe
connection with
chance?
Will not,
in
be
is
1000
Thucydides
exactly
240,
ww
exactly
for
w w
113,
for
w
70,
w
then
exactly 57.
Suppose we had
the
120
and
our previous
We
doubt whether
is
any
very
difference
between the
two
authors.
We
doubt
sufficient material at
your dispo-
To
give
not sufficient
Therefore
my
on these 1000
I
syllables only.
I
Of
practically
all
the authors
investigated,
of
1000
syllables.
The
question
in the
is
now: do
the figures
of all these
groups point
same
direction?
it
From
more extensive
investigation
appears very
is
As an example
w w.
of
this
The frequency
Thucydides
is
form
in the
twelve pieces of
the following:
From
of
this
we
works
Thu-
In
70 and 113.
In Plutarch,
The
highest
figure
in
Thucydides
is
considerably
in Plutarch.
hope
that
by means
of these figures
is
have con-
no question
de grouper 1000
de grouper
chiffres.
is
per les
The average
Thucydides
figure for
w w
syllables
for
Are
form
This
we
in
is
Plutarch or to an avoidance of
it
in
Thucydides ?
a question
we
shall
have
to
in the
difference
tarch.
owing
form
in
Plu-
In the
crates,
same manner
also
investigated
Xenophon,
Iso-
Moralia of Plutarch.
As an average
figure for
w w on
Xenophon
Isocrates
97-2.
852.
111-5. 105-0.
80-5.
Demosthenes
Plato, Republic
Plato,
Laws
Consolatio ad Ap.
102-0.
97-7.
Thucydides
Plutarch
138-8.
Probably you
another
conclusive
will
be convinced now.
But
we have
form an
proof.
Not long
of
ago
Stiefenhofer
convinced
us
that
the
ovyxQioeig
Plutarch
He showed
life
us that the
language
of
these
ovyxQioeis,
in
Greek and
that
Roman,
This
tarch.
in itself is
attention.
which
for reasons
be dispensed with.
by
Plutarch,
they have
to
show
same
Is this the
case?
To prove
we
give
the
following
ww
on 1000 syllables:
w_w
131
Average
It
137.1.
seems
to
me
The
have been
more
of
conclusive.
the
previous
investigation.
Attention
should also be
Another example.
In the
same manner
in
as
we have
Whereas,
Greek prose,
never been
last,
we
as
as
of,
know, the
first
possibility has
thought
out
the
which
investi-
Thumb
gations
In other
words
e.
w
We
wing
ww www
,
etc.
may be
determined.
follo-
for
the
first
onnesian
first
war,
and
for
the
first
1000
syllables
of
the
Philippic.
Thucydides
302
139
Demosthenes
308
128 129
7
66
26
13
5 6 7
The
that
3
1
greatest difference
is,
the
choriamb
ww
ww
is
more
forms
Will
www wwww
,
etc.
rarely
occur there.
this
To prove
66
51
choriamb.
ww
71
Thucydides
69 80 63 63
57
72
62
73
80.
Demosthenes
129
93
112
132
126
95 126
101
106
103
109
81.
About
this there
Now
the
longer series.
Thucydides.
Demosthenes.
3
7
26
26
21
13
11
13 2 3 10
5
8
6
2
28
22
3 4
7
1
2 2
23
14
5 13
3
3 2
1
29
35
9 8 8
12
13
30
20
31
6
12
7
3
1
10
7
24
315
12
3
19
108
35
106
Average.
Thucydides
133-9
67-3
109-4
26-3
8-8
9-0
1-6
2-9
0-7
Demosthenes 147*9
In a similar
Thumb
he
proof of
was
right
when
This
it
stated
tribrach.
Thumb
very important.
it
Munscher thinks
before.
statistics,
He
forgets,
so that his
been
incorrect.
For so much
to
said on
be incorrect
on.
Marbe
which
Thumb were
This
first
the
first
to point out to us in
way
draw
cretic
But secondly
we
are
now
able to
the following
conclusions
at all
w
same
of
has not
to the
ww
I
Demosthenes
for
the cretic.
Already the
make mention
sa}7
it
of this.
is
But
this
assertion
need hardly
not based on
in
statistics.
And
to
investigations:
the clausulae
in
as
such,
the
cretic
Demosthenes.
It
will
results of
this:
our investigation.
Of great importance
This difference
is
also
of the
Laws
to
a great difference.
owing
the
of short syllables.
this,
but he only
).
www
This
know
more
certain result.
10
figures
Laws.
Average.
w WW
4
-5 6
Average
112-8 47-5 40-3
13-3
5-3
146-2
64-0
30-7
90
2-7
1-2
2-8
0-5
7
-8
00
0-2
00
0-3
9
There are two curves
In the
0-0
here,
ww
occur
is just
the reverse.
it
We
is
see
that
is
not
the
preferred.
Though
in
forms
don't
^^^>w
occur
so
often
and
of
wwwww
quent in
the
themselves
Laws
I
shown
for such a
quotient.
What
want
to
say
is
this:
in the
much in
the
Laws
the quotient
60 30
:
= 2.
11
The
is
Republic
(average).
Laws
(average).
Quotient.
1-3 1-5
30-7
40-3
13-3
90
2-7
1-2
53
2-8
2-0
2-3
now
understand
why
works
EJiavacpEocov,
ajzoho/uevwv,
etc.
You
tQonov
will
also
?
understand
why
he so often says
xivd
xivd
w^w^
:
and not
can
xqotiov
w ww.
For
such
choice
metrical
effect
only
be produced
either by
of words
of
the
i.e.
author
may make
instead
use of xa&djieQ
of
instead
fie%Qi7iEQ
etc.,
coojzeq,
www
i.e.
w,
or
of
instead
of ecooneo,
www
:
instead of
w w,
use of
or by arrangement of words
xQonov instead of xqotzov
^S^'.
xivd,
he
may make
xtvd
i.e.
wwww
we
fix
instead of
*W
The importance
later
of
all
this,
to
shall refer to
it
on
Of
late elaborate
investigations
by means
of this
12
It
has
been found
that
Plato
used
in
his
later
works
xaddjiEQ instead of
ojojieq,
/u%QuieQ
instead of ewotieq.
To
us
this
becomes
than
I
quite
clear
now.
There
is
no easier
means
to get a particular
syllables
by
substituting one
synonym
that also
for another.
in
And when
sula
of
tell
the
clau-
Plato
there
agree with
the metre
Plato's
works
also
the form
his
w ^.
prose
shows.
-,
etc.
frequently
than in
all
other writers
in-
by
us.
That textual
criticism
be
it
only
on
moderate scale
you.
might
avail
itself of this
need not
in
tell
That
this
And
Typical
perhaps
may
is
lead to prove
more
of the
and
effectively
for
II
the
genuineness of
e.g.
many
Moralia.
Demosthenes
ed. Weil):
the following
sentence (Olynth.
[5],
13 To
/uev
detxvvvai,
3
XoidoQiav
TiojTiox*
av
(pijoeie
3
xevtjv dtxaicog
'
xd de
jidvft
boa
engage
diEg~iovxa,
lop
xal
f$Qa%Eog
Xoyov
ov/upaivEi
delo&ai,
exeZvov,
ovjLKpeoeiv
etofjo&ai,
xov
r'
ojieq
oxi
ndvxa
Sie^eXtjXvv^ev
olg
ijxst
jiqoxeqov
xr\v
naoa-
xoovofXEvog
jxody/uax'
xeXevxtjv xd
avxcp, i.e.
Typical
(Life of
for
Plutarch
I):
are
e.g.
the following
words
Philopoimen
fjv
KXiavSgog
From
Mexu
Plato
we may
noXixdag,
i.e.
or (858#)
rsXoiav, cb
g~V,
14
ojojieQ
xaxe%ofjivoig
vojuo&haig
rjdrj
o/jloiol
yiyvoifieff
i.e.
'.
av
vno
vojuolhxeiv etc.,
It
was
my
of
intention to give
you an idea
of the imtrust-
worthiness
himself
their
results.
first
Thumb
Greek prose.
Also
On Thumb's work we
can
in
general
make
sqq.)
Brugmann's Grammatik
(p.
666
he reproaches the
not
modern
all
clausulae-investigators
with
having
first
of
investigated the
immanent
opinion,
rhythm
and
of the
Greek language.
I
He
is
even
of
in this respect
investigation
of
the
Greek
quantitative
clausula
has in
general
I
To
his
remarks
The avoidance
is
of
^w^
www^
differ
etc.
f
by Demosthenes
not
sufficiently
appreciated
by him.
He
says
different
forms
in
much
from those
lies in
the nature
15
of
ww^>
rarely occurs.
(2)
Demosthenes
so far one-
is
in
sided that
We
may
the
for
The method-Marbe is intended for modern languages, where seldom two or more accents follow one another. For in these modern languages we count the number of unaccented syllables which lie between two
Marbe.
accented ones, and in this
v~
way we
often
arrive
at
the
most interesting
results, as
Why
do
in
The
principal reason
into account
is,
which have
Latin
of
to
be taken
do not depend, as
the
but
on
more
subjective
factor,
sentence-rhythm,
different.
or emphasis, or stress.
This
is
something quite
the
According
syllable
to
Marbe's scansion
accentuated or
same word,
the
same
may be
16
not,
as
sentence-rhythm requires.
is
In
Latin,
however, a
syllable
The
one-sidedness, there-
fore, of the
method
it
of
Thumb
back
to its origin,
He
did
for
not
show
us
how
with
think
to
compare
those
shall
his
clau-
own
to
results
sentence-rhythm
of
sula-investigations.
Therefore
his
we
we
it
be able
improve upon
he
method by making
attempt
be
is
more complete.
the help
Why
his
failed in this
it
obvious
With
of
method
would
an
impossibility to
compare them.
of
of
We
gladly acknowledge
the
having
having
formulated
solved
it.
problem
but
not
SECOND LECTURE.
In
my
last lecture
spoke
to
Greek occur
such
as
Some
Plato,
prefer
combinations
avoid
^w^^^^
etc.
Some, as
show
a clear development in
of
development
which
have only
given
you a
words
in
his latter
works has
may,
explanation.
We
Is this
in the
meantime, put
syllables, or is there
more behind
it?
Has Demosthenes
form
shown a preference
*
for the
is
sought by Demosthenes,
the combination
*-*
we do
is
not
know
yet whether
w ^ ^ as much sought as ^ w We know that Demosthenes has also sought the form ^^ was then quite immaterial him whether he used series of dactyls or choriambs, w^ ^^ ^^ or ^^ ^^ ^^ So
just
.
it
to
we
only:
shall
have
to
investigate
more.
The
question
is
how?
18
made use
to
of a
method some
me
number
I
of syl-
lables, e.g. 6, 7, or
and added
the
out of
account.
e.g.
We
etc.
then get 2
These are
short,
6 short and
long, 5 short
syllables,
We
^______^
w^wwww~ _^_^^^^^
^^w^~
w_-w--.w>~'w>-i,
etc.
11
126
127
w
investigate
128
~
how
often these combinati-
We
can
now
19
You
will believe
me when
say that
in Plato's later
^^^- _~ w_wwwww;~:
wwwww^-r,
in his older
etc.
are
works.
We
cut,
so
combinations.
It
will
of the different
combinations
the
different
writers.
In
the
same manner
be
In
last
may
investigated.
Here
differences
will
be found.
the
same manner
may be
will
The
may be comwill
be found.
So,
is
in
w ^,
Now,
much
more
or
frequent
than
:
in
Thucydides.
was
sight
it
Plutarch?
At
first
one
would be
inclined
to
is
answer:
not the
this form.
For
20
double trochee one of the most favourite clausulae, which
are frequently found in Greek as well as in Latin prose?
I
cannot,
of this arguthat,
ment.
On
the
we have
i.e.
to
it
acknowledge
will
be impossible
Plutarch
or
which prose
the
prose
of
that
of
Thucydides
we must
might appear
paid
later
on that Thucydides
to
as
of
well
as
Plutarch
short
attention
in
the arrangement
prose,
long and
in
syllables
their
the
latter,
however,
a higher degree.
all.
to
be
settled first of
We
is
have
what may we
frequency
of
What
the
different
forms
to
be found
in
Greek prose
ordinary speech?
I
it
is
to
arrangement
in the sentence,
and
for
the
following reasons.
I
think,
we
of
are
there
justified
is
to
suppose that
in artless
natural
writing
no system
whatsoever
This
in
is to
the
arrangement
be
Let
sake of argument,
syllables are
Greek long
much
:
1.
21
^,
This proportion of
the
true
frequency of
2
,
Ions: syllables
,
=
If
f is not
one,
but
may
this
be
ww will
You
will
general occur
that
more
frequently
than
w^w.
to
j
see
show
tendency
occur \ time as
much
former.
The
or
form
as
ww ww as
,
however,
w w,
of
x,
same number
long
and
of short syllables.
If
we
call the
^ww
it
that
of
of
^^ ^
as
will
is
The frequency
;
^^
of
is
twice
will
as
great
the
The frequency
2
w
of
I
be
x,
that of
2 x.
Now,
we may
etc.
calculate
in
the
frequency
^^^,
syllable
^^-, ^ ^,
I
Thucydides.
As
of
said before,
the last
of
we
22
If
we now
of
and short
syllables of
room
this.
tendencies.
of
We
shall
calculate
Now,
the
ratio
the
compared with
577
Greek seems
to
be nearly
Plato
same
in
Thuof
ratio
p.
The frequency
The
frequency, then, of
____ = __._ = w = = w_ = = w
px px
p x px
p2X
p2 X
2
(==
423
-2 x)
The sum
This
If
total
is
x
of
total
amount
3 px
3 p 2x
in fact these
in
what we
fre-
are
accustomed
of
quency
that of
= t^t^
etc.
100
% = 7.63 %,
%,
23
As
those,
which were
found by
us.
comparison
Theoretical
calculation.
Clausula-
Sentencemetre.
5-8o/o
0/
metre.
8-5o/
8-8,
7-63
10-01
o/
o/
7-9,10-4
10-7,
9-3, 11-3o/
14-19%
19-38<y
13-6,14-2,18-5%
18-3o/o
of
14-5,1 4-4,13-90/
20-3
really
o/
The
correspondence
these
numbers
is
extraordinary.
The form
last
:=:
the
to
syllable
of
which
is
assumed
be anceps.
frequency
Accorshould
first
calculation
It
its
clausulae
of
Thucydides
figure
is
%.
The average
was
29*6
%, %.
the
for
the
second
With
first
Plutarch,
thousand
%,
for the
think, the
Thucydides
it.
A
a
chance.
But in
this
case
24
difference of 14-2
/
and
29-1
I
%
will
is
draw an
inference from, as
We
are
artless
st3/le,
are,
therefore,
to
now
justified to
suppose that
we
of
allowed
consider
Thucydides as an example
i.e.
regard
short
to
his
metre,
i.e.
the
arrangement
for
of
long and
syllables.
the form
^
of the
(14-19
clausula
to a to
% 18-5 ww
in
Thucydides
example.
If
is
responsible, points
divergence from
conclusion
this
afterwards
we come
is
the
by our
investigations
that this
his
as
prose rhythm in
its
first
stage
shows an increasing
difference as
number
an ^impoverishment", as has
is this
been assumed.
however,
com-
will
be found
when we
order to
I
show more
parts,
I
clearly
how
far
our figures
are reliable,
into
two equal
should
For
the
frequency of each
attention
of
like
draw your
exceeds
especially
each couple
0-8%
25
THUCYDIDES' CLAUSULA.
I
II
III
B.
IV
Difference of the
Clausula form.
Group A.
Percentages.
Group
Average.
Percentages.
groups
and B.
^^
www
0-8
0-2
0-50
14-20
2-00 5-20
1-25
0-6
w w
14-0
2-4 5-0
1-1
14-4
1-6
0-4
0-8 0-4
0-3
2-5
1-2
w_^^^
^^-ww
5-4
1-4
^^^ ^^
^^^^ ^>w ^^
4-7
2-7
9-1
2-2
1-5
345
2-10 9-35
^ -WW
w w
w w w
9-6 2-4
3.5
0-5
2-7
2-55 3-70
3-9
2-8
2-1
ww
3-4 2-6
3-10
235
6-25
7-85
^^
_ww_w
5-6
8-1
6-9
7-6
0-5 2-9
0-5
19-7
16-8
6-3
18-25
WW
that,
5-8
6-05
without
as
sufficient
ground,
of
took Thucydides as a
norm,
his
an example
I
natural
metre.
hope
wrongly
26
neglected the difference between rhetoric and non-rhetoric
parts.
of
This
is
to a
work
Rollmann.
From
work
bicae 76*6
%;
Periclis oratio
cap. 140
144), the
same forms
manner
in
72-3%; material
Leaving
alone
the
altogether
et
arbitrary
creticae
choriambicae
have been
added together;
for this
clausulae creticae:
clausulae choriambicae
leaving
alone
the
arbitrary
manner
in
which everything
clausulae
for
made
to
the
e.g.
27
xr\v
xe
ya.Q
juafirjjuaxog
rj
dedjuaxog
jur)
xQvepdh av
tig
(bcpeXrjdeir),
Ttiotevovteg ov xaXg
naQaoxevaig xo nXeov
xal andxaig
tj
xq>
ay
f/jucbv
avxcbv eg xaqy
evxpvxco.
There
of such
9 clausulae!
in getting
In spite
more than
(lib.
we now
calculate (in
what manner we
shall explain
for 76*6
for 72-3 for 59.3
It
%
/
a probable error of
a probable error of a probable error of
2-0,
2-1,
.
2*3.
is
Would
1-2,
not
seem
79-^
=^,
in addition
28
lo
the
what
a
is
aimed at?
conclusion
to
would draw
slight
show what
differences
comparison
A
Xenophon
sentence-
B
Thucydides
sentence-
c
Thucydides
clausula
Differences between
metres
metres
A&B
0-3
1-6
0-1
A& C
0-3
1-4
&C
o-o
0-8
o/
0-5
0-5
12-8
1-7
14-4
1-8
14-2
2-0
5-2
1-3
0-2 0-2
1-6
0-3
1-2
0-1
4-0
1-4
3-1
3-6
1-1
0-4
0-3
0-4 0-9
0-2
2-7
3-5
2-1
0-4
0-1
0-8 0-8
0-6
2-0
7-8
2-9
8-8
9-4
2-6
3-7
3-1
10
1-6
2-6
5-1
30
5-1
04
0-0
0-1
o-o
1-4
0-4
1-4
2-4
2-5
1-3
0-7
1-4
0-6
1-1
10
9-1
2-4
6-3
7-9
0-3
9-4
6-5
0-3
0-9
2-8 2-3
7-5
3-1
5-6
1-4
2-1
25-8
20-4
2-6
18-3
6-1
54
37
2-4
3-5
29
The
in
differences
that
we
in-
voluntarily
pay
attention to the
form
^ only, which,
figure,
in
namely
and not
25-8
Is
over against
204%
is
and
18-3%
Thucydides.
of a real difference
of
difference
that
limited material?
by
more extensive
parts
of
researches.
The very
of,
tendencies altogether.
Quite different
is
the case
of
the
will
and
of
statistics.
The
investigation
I
that
could not
I
gations.
will
much importance refrain from making more minute investinow give you a summary of the results
appeared
of so of
me
yielded
by a comparison
the metre of
Demosthenes
is
Demosthenian prose
charac-
by
com-
binations
(hg a/uaxov
Ideiv.
(2)
Tendency
of reiterations.
is
Reiteration of dactyls,
reiteration of
sought
iambs and
avoided.
30
(3)
Tendency
or
of
e.g.
of
ww w w,
cretics is
(4)
w^ ^w ^ w avoided,
e.g.
any combination
,
or
ww
as
^.
Tendency
are avoided
increases
:
more strongly
elQijvijg
the
number
nlovoioi
dk
syllables
ovoy\q
ix
nxwywv
/nerd
yeyovaoiv,
jceqi
w ww w|
tieqi
xd
deovg xd
xaxdlvoiv
xfjg nolixeiag,
wwwwwww
is
think
you
will
to
be
preferred to that of
The
latter
does
figures:
ww w w w v w w w w ^
viz.:
(eighteen syllables),
(eighteen syllables),
frequency
5,
in either of in either of
them,
^
When we
of our
frequency
try,
6,
them.
however,
1
to analyse
them by means
get the follow-
method
of the
28
possibilities,
we
|
ing distribution:
^ ^ ^ w _w_w
|
and
__
^_
31
The
cretic
rhythm
is
it
will
be
and choriambs.
By means
been able
of
Marbe's method
we
Demosthenes
ovx
aftv/urjieov,
which
certainly
exists,
reiteration of
Investigators of
number
of unaccented states
the
method
of
same
results.
_r_
_r
j__
jr_
II
___
__
__
___
of in-
The tendency
of increasing avoidance,
which
men-
32
tioned above,
logical
will
of
be quite clear
view.
If
to
point
series
of
writer
to
avoid
long
long
syllables,
and
to
can
hardly
be
to
avoided
the
same degree.
increases,
In
Plato,
this
e.g.
The
latter
will
seem
the
him
of
to
the former.
As
number
all
syllables
tendency
will
become
the
stronger.
we
Laws
^^^ wwww
may be sign we
etc.
as
compared with
Republic
(By a
Frequency
in the
Republic
syllables,
Laws
syllables.
on 1000
on 1000
Average.
Average.
40-3
13-3
5-3 2-8
Quotient.
1-3 1-5
30-7
9-0
2-7
1-2
(+)
(+)
2-0
2-3
(+) (+)
way
it
is
possible to
compare
however,
in
either case
we
33
same percentage,
the
the
metre
at
i.e.
end
of
the
there
would be no metrical
Could
it
be demondiffers
strated,
from that
to
view an independent, or
But so great
is
the
power
of a priori
which
is
modern
literature,
because their
only rarely
is
and acknowledged.
As
is
to
Demosthenian metre
are made.
term rhythm
used
assertions
In
his
gives
the
following
scheme
favourite
clausulae
for
Demosthenes:
34
If
this
scheme be
through
correct,
forms
at
the
end
of
the
sentence
than
the
whole
sentence.
Thumb,
Munscher, and
it
many
by accepting
We
Demosthenes.
Frequency Frequency
in the
at the
end
Quotient
sentence
o/
of the sentence
8-0
8-0
90
4-1
11-2
4-0 4-3 4-8
5-8
3-7
3-1
(+)
(-) (-)
5-9
4-6
(+)
4-1
7-2
(+) (-)
-w
1-7
(+)
12-4
18-9
18-7
(++)
(-)
190
The form
The
is
^
dicretic
'famous'
frequently
in the clausula.
For
ww
found there.
and
w w)
only 18*7%
in the clausula.
'AUd
del,
as Aristoteles says
35
in his Rhetorics, SrjXrjv elvm xr\v xsXevxrjv,
ju)]dk
jutj
did
xr\v
TiaQayQCKprjv,
alia
did
xov qv&jllov.
Only one
clausula.
?
They
are the
double trochee:
?
txteyovoiv,
w
1
and
^^
trochee
clausula.
I
ww
e.g.
1
wvtEQ
[tiov
dv&Qcbmvov.
The double
8*9
it
reaches
24
in
the
sentence,
in
the
draw your
gives the
5-8
912
1316 1720 2124 2528 2932
For the sake
1,
www w_ww ww ww w_ w
w
have been indicated by
as follows:
of brevity they
5,
9,
13,
The
(5)
results
may be summed up
of
Tendency
is
dependence.
The
clausula of De-
mosthenes
metre.
(6)
Tendency
of
independence.
In
the clausula as
The
36
the highest importance which
is
is
exMyovoiv
ww
to
of
the clausula?
Does
to find out
what
should really be
Let
it
the
the
sentence,
except
w w.
form
is
Let
it
be
assumed
quotient
is
that this
2.
The frequency
-
the
in the sentence
really
12-4/
our supposition
correct,
If,
we
shall
find
24*8
%
is
at the
2,
end
of the sentence.
however, the
quotient
the form
this
will hold
good
w w. We
may
find e.g.:
Sentencemetres.
Clausula-
metres.
Quotient.
Sum
will
total
/,
2 (+)
2
(+)
(+)
4
5
8
10
2 (+)
2
12%
24
2 (+)
In
other words:
distribution of metrical
37
forms.
Unnecessary
to
we have
to
be content
or for
all
of
of
sign.
cases
is
really
surprising to see
'ideal'
how
often the
percentages
approach the
figures.
Let us
now
way:
Quotier
Clausula-
metres.
metres.
0-2
1-0%
5(-)
5 (-)
2 2
20 40
6-0
0-4
8-0
(+) (+)
12-0
What would
First of all
it
it
prove?
that the
would prove
forms
ww w
it
w w w, which, as you see, constitute the form w w w!, are not preferred, but avoided. Further wouldprovethattheforms(w)w w wand(w) w
and
do not
say:
really belong together.
is
On
the contrary,
we must
not four
www
avoided,
w^
www
it
is
preferred.
is
w w,
if
but five:
of the syllable
it
or w w. which precedes w w,
gives a bad clausula;
not indifferent:
is
short,
38
if
it
is
long,
it
gives a
good
clausula.
is
Whenever
indifferent,
it it
appears
does not
We may
syllable
state:
the
length
of indifferent quantity.
is
To
find
rent syllable
of
Where
the
a clausula
of the
sentence,
subdivisions of
the
it
will
show
same
is
quotient.
Of
course,
investigated,
to
row
of
signs, or of
felt
:
obliged to
make
this digression to
answer the
question
it
how
is
long
is
the clausula of
Demosthenes? Does
really
w w?
if
This
Even
Demosthenes.
Sentencemetres.
Clausula-
metres.
2-6
4-6
Quotient,
1-0
2-1
2-5%
2.2 3-2
4-5
4-9 6-8
1-5 1-5
39
If
we
the agreement
striking:
Clausula-
metres.
7-7
Quotient.
1.53 1-52
4-7
7-7
(+)
We
11-7
We
us.
do
has taught
we
on
THIRD LECTURE.
In
my
last
lecture
'
discussed
new method
concluded
of
investigating
antique
of
prose-metre.
gives
We
a
that
the
method
Marbe
only
We
to
absolutely
unmetrical.
We
investigated
We
stated
that
to
the
clausula
of
Demosthenes
had
in
most cases
part of the
five
it
of
was
w w.
Indeed
figure
was higher
as something
than
we
could expect.
From
this
we
is
You
metre
I
will
in dealing
never
antique rhetoricians,
where
had a reason
it
From
a methodological
first
standpoint
tive facts
is
necessary to investigate
find,
what objec-
we
of
can
the
to
treat
and ideas
rule
to
is
ancients,
this
neglected, one
may be
Norden
Or one may
41
be tempted as
e.g.
Blass,
Zander,
and Bornecque,
to
facts.
It is
necessary
first to
ascertain
what
Before
of Plutarch
and
some other
theoretical question.
It
in
of
was
12-4/o>
the
sentence of Thucydides
dides 14-2%.
in the clausula of
Thucy-
On
we
1
Demosthenes
got
/o
8-9
%.
1
We
2*4
and
8.9
was
only.
to consult the
theory of probability.
tendency which
quite the
same
two
different prose-texts,
how
great
is
the probability
that
we
between 12
% and
18%?
We
tigated.
may
The
number
more
42
the exact
meaning
of the
probable error
refer here to
The probable
form
w w m Demosthenes
it
0-6745
J/
mm
'-.
is
between 12-41-0 and 124 -f 1-0, or between 11-4 and 1 3*4, as that it is lower than 114 or higher than 1 34.
The
we
e.g.
due
is
to
chance
very small.
it.
something
behind
The
not altogether
that
in
As
die
certainty
as
:
we
can
calculate
3,
we
no
have
6 chance to get a
exists
in
we
can
the
probability
that
our case.
The
probability
that
in
between
:
124%
and
8*9
our case
smaller than
5000.
We
shall
now
As we saw
in
our
first lecture,
You
understand that
Whoever
in
presumably avoid
and so
on.
is
This
It
is
possible, as
we saw
in
which the
by
certain
form
in
Thucydides by
same
form
in Plutarch/
So
Quotient.
(113120)
10-3
3-8
1-7
1-7
6-3
3-3
1-6(-)
1-1
(121124) (125126)
(127) (128)
2-4
2-1
( (
(-)
2-8
9-3
The form
more
An
is
into of
his
I
given
by a comparison
his
clausula.
To
understand
this,
you
to the cor-
responding figures.
44
'clausula' of Plutarch.
they
him,
partly avoided.
The
modern
The form
w w
w w w in
is
often
combined with
and
one scheme
for
all
it
is
still
is
the base of
eg
prose-metre.
is
This
form,
however:
in
ndoiv
ydQag
eX&elv,
the
other subdivisions
w w.
Autarch.
sentence-
The
quotients are:
Clausulametres.
Quotient.
metres.
1-50%
2-00
1-60
3-10
3-15 2-55
2-07
(+) 1-58(+)
1-59(+)
1-80
1-90
3-85
2.14 2-16
(+)
4-10
4-05
(+)
1-40
2-89(+)
2-20
1-30
4-25
4.05
1-93(+)
3-12
(+)
45
The
give
quotient
for
is
w
The
Is
ww
other
there
is
2*89,
it
that
is
for
ww
lower
the
3*12.
forms,
an}7
true,
quotients.
indeed
connection
cretic,
and
Only a more
Suffice
it
by means
which
it
can be answered.
of investigating the clausula of the
It
is
second column
be clear to
(clausula
with
each
other.
will
you
it
that
scientific base,
nor can
The double
cretic,
indeed,
frequency in the
its
frequency
whole sentence.
So
it
Plutarch.
Sentencemetres.
Clausula-
metres.
Quotient.
2-09 2-89
_w_ w __ w w_ w w w
In
13-90%
1-40
29-10
4-05
2.35
(+)
(+)
form
4-00
I
1-70(-)
to
passing
drew
your
it
attention
felt
the
w
of
w w.
sentence,
Whether
is
is
as a separate part
the
That
w w
is
*6
a good clausula can hardly be doubted.
length of the clausula
in
trochee
four,
is
preceded by a
viz.
problem.
Only
to
state
this
way
to its solution,
and
undertook
as
my
task.
Some
years
ago Mr.
Henderson
in
the
American
whereas
Greek
quantitative clausula,
it
is
of Latin origin.
avdQcbjiovg naidevovoiv
oo
oo
oo
oo
.,
or
dv&QCDTiovg Xinelv
oo
oo
oo
oo
.,
or
or
av$QWJia)v xarahyovrcov
leyovoi jimdevovxcov
...oo
. . .
oo
oo
oo
oo
oo...,
oo
oo
oo
oo
oo
J>...
In general, the
is:
main
last
rule of this
Greek
accent-clausula
Now,
certain
if
the
supposition
is
is
ones
in
in later
this
connection shows
itself
the
clausula,
may be
from
47
to
i.e.
Cfl
0>
C/
CO
. .
.j
to the accent-clausula.
This
and short
sign
co
Therefore
it
is
for
not
felt;
we
shall
indicate
by w.
Now,
we
can
perhaps
explain
co
c/>
c/>
J)
from
w
is
-^.
In this
way
w
however,
w
it
or
instance
eg
comes
that
ndoL xaxaXineTv.
could be demonstrated
^ w
and
and
^
my
w ^,
if
anywhere,
occur
Greek
authors,
be upheld.
As
the
far
as this
we have
regarded the
of
'clausula' as
end
of
the sentence
short
syllables
consisting
a combination of
to
long
and
which
it
is
preferred
other
combinations.
exists,
We may
call
There
however, another
'clausula',
which combination
is
is
avoided.
it
This negative
is
clausula
known
to us
.
from Plutarch:
formed there
by
the series
48
You should
have seen
in the
,
rightly
understand what
mean.
We
,
etc.
This
is
When, however,
the clausula
is
should
to
i.e.
be regarded as a negative
is
we mean
is
say that
that the
in
avoided as such,
of the sentence
form
a
at the
end
avoided
fore, at the
end
In
metrically
is
separated.
ordinary
In
Greek
it
prose
is
its
frequency
nearly
20*4%.
Plutarch
it
11-4% throughout
%
the
sentence.
In
In his clausula
is
7-8
passing
is
we
involuntarily
approach a question,
which
By modern
scholars
the
clausula
is
often
used
in
Many
as
they would
give bad
have been
Of course the
shown by
as an
may be used
a conjecture.
argument
in
favour of a reading or
But how?
We
clausulae:
49
If,
however,
we compare
It
is
seen
e.g.
the
form
of
w ^^w
the
:
xexzrjjuevco juetqiol in
is
Plutarch
the
end
sentence
much more
i.e.
frequent than
Thucydides
occur
3*85%
2-0%,
nearly
this is
two times as
due
to a pre-
many
in Plutarch.
Whether
in the
whole sentence,
is
is
a matter
undoubtedly a tendency,
a
of
the
form
w.
w^^
criticism
at
the
end
just
sentence.
it
As
as
to
textual
we must
is
as
well regard
,
favourite
-^^^
at
w Wj w
that
of
There
only
this
difference
the
end
is
sentence:
the
first
mentioned form,
however,
preferred everywhere.
therefore,
We
(1)
must,
sharply
distinghuish between
two tendencies:
a tendency in favour of forms in the whole sentence, or the reverse.
(2)
or the reverse.
50
The
dides.
in
first
mentioned tendency
may be measured by
that of
in
Thucy-
Thucydides
1 1
in Plutarch
only
*4
%.
The
those
by comparing the
of
the
sentence
it
Plutarch:
we
got
11*4% and
The combination
difference
two tendencies
into
the
which
obvious
when we
7-8o/
Thucydides:
If,
therefore,
to
we want
textual
to
investigations
result of the
criticism,
we have
to
take the
to
two tendencies
into account.
So we have
of
Thucydides.
not
irrelevant.
These
inclined
to
facts
are
For we might be
,
consider the
forms
w
as
of
is
>^^^
^ ^,
and
^
known
good
clausulae.
Zielinski,
making a comparison
of
with
textual
criticism.
According
to
is
more
likely
to
51
is
clear
in
e.g.
that
the
at the
^^w,
just
Plutarch
end
of the sentence is
little
in the sentence:
3*85%
3-70 %
When we
is
know, however,
that this
in
form as a
sentence-ending
viz.
1
much
less
frequent
Thucydides,
-8
%,
it
is
has
Only
this
tendenc}/
we
have
we know
as a
6-5
that the
form
was
felt
by Plutarch
good
%j at the end 9*8 % Yet in the clausula of Thucydides The sum, the this form is nearly as frequent: 9*5 %
result
of
is
the
of
above
therefore
(i.e.
tendency
in
(i.e.
the
whole sentence)
the
is
only)
As
to
textual
therefore,
we may
regard the
clausula form
w
up,
for
as metrically indifferent.
criticism
To sum
the
result
of
textual
we have
to take
two tendencies
into consideration.
To
find
out
this result
with that of
writer
expect
52
to
when we compare
Plutarch's
clausula
shall
with
his
sentence-metre.
On
the contrary,
we
The
of
which
no principal features
double
origin
be seen.
of the differences
form
for
xextrj/ueva)
to
in
be regarded as a
spite of the fact
good clausula
textual
it
criticism,
that, as a clausula,
will
be expected
of
Plutarch
show
the
same
Lives.
me
Thucydides
Clausula-
Sentence-
Clausula-
Clausula-
metre
metre
metre
27.007,,
metre
ww
r
By
find an
___
w
13-90%
29-10%
9-95"/,, 9-95%
14-2%
6-10%
6-507 6-50%
9O0Y,
5-2%
9-80% 9-807,,
900%
9-4%
investigating
more material we
shall of course
In
conclusion
,
we would
it
Is
53
or
w?
The
first
is
indeed the
case.
We
shall try to
metre
metre
metre
metre
81
0-50
82
83
100 140
095 215
150 T65 155 100
1.75
2 10
2 3
w-
84 85
86
87
4
5
0-15
015 040
0-65
+ +
-f
0'40
6
7
w-
88
89
0*90
8 9
10
090
1.00
1-60
WW,
90
91
2.50
0'50
210
195 180
92 93 94 95
-
190
1-20 l'OO
0-70 0-60
245 220
1-85
020 030 050 070 090 060 060 090 090 040
065
0*35
4-
+
4-
030
0-95
155
0-85
444-
095
135
1'40
1-40
+
4-
44-
96
no
T50
Sentence- Clausula-
metre
metre
105 106
107 108
w^>_w
w_-
w ~ w
ww w
w
w
w w w
110
0-80
1-10
065
1'45
4-
1-20
1-45
H-
0-70
109
110
111
112
w w w w
w w
w
+
444-
0*40
0'80
l'OO
090
135 145
1
w060
35
54
From
these tables
we
Plutarch.
SentenceClausula-
metre
metre
Quotient
ww w
6-90
12 65
16
^^^^_ ^^
^ w
w
1645
105108 109112
w w
3-70
2-80
The
of the
slight differences
of quotients
may be
preferred
cannot be denied.
The
scholars.
by recent
The same
is
And
It
yet
also
shows many
common
with Plutarch.
>
The
sum total of the favourite forms in Philo is 84-4/ the sum total of the same forms in Thucydides is only 52-1 % The number of exceptional cases in Philo is 15-6/o> the number of the same forms in Thucydides reaches 47*9 %
A
of
clear
view
by our graphical
scheme.
In the
same way
shall give
you a comparison
have
are
As
to
remember what
which we
55
able to
state
chance.
tendencies.
will
prove
to
be
more
gations
ever,
the reverse.
In
no
case,
how-
are these
or as in Philo.
In
Philo
If
the curve.
we we
clearly see
some culminating
points in
we
Quotient.
2-0
1-6
(+)
HI
__
(+) (+)
1-8
1-9 1-2
1-6
(+)
(+)
(+) (+)
4-5
IV
1-4 1-2
(+)
V
The
first
(+)
M
form:
xzrj/uaz
eXeItiezo
is
(+)
entirely absent in
I
Demosthenes, Plutarch,
and,
as far as
investigated, in
it
Very frequently
occurs
56
later
on
in
in
Plato
it
is felt
as
a favourite form.
The form
nearly
all
-^^^^,
Greek
is
yevojuevwv
is
It
very
frequent in
metrical
authors.
is
the typical
Greek
it
clausula,
which
if
In Philo
is
only sought,
to
For,
if
we
try
we
ing figures.
Philo.
Sentence-
Clausula-
metre
metre
1
Quotient
3'0
wwwww ^w^^
If
xo yevojueva
\
x (bv
yevojuevwv
% 5*9 %
3'0
to
'0
9-6%
is
1*6(4-)
The preceding
the clausula
to
syllable,
is
therefore,
not indifferent.
it
be
^^^^ ^^w^:.
speak
third
of
it
be a good clausula,
ought
fourth
paeon,
is,
as
you
we
shall
below.
fourth
The
exUyovoiv
later
and
in
form:
all
naoiv
av&owjioig,
and
occur
nearly
our authors:
only Plato's
to
of the clausula
Plut.
Philo
:=:.
Demosth.
Plato Rep.
Plato
Laws
exleyovoiv
14*2
189
8*0
29*1
182
15'8
139
5*7
naOLV avftocbnoig
9'4
98
65
60
57
In this connection
to
I
feel
obliged to
draw your
attention
also in Latin.
think,
we
zd yevo/uev
jtaoi
avQO)noig
naQEypvoiv
naOL xaxeXemo/JLE^a
as by-forms of
^.
grouping the
clausula-forms
arbitrarily
syllable.
substitute
two short
one long
a bad clau-
By
so doing
we
should often
make
sula of a
for
all
these forms
makes
in
it
is
Now,
these
by-forms
be preferred
form.
but,
Of
I
much
lower,
think,
you
will
not
regard
this absolute
we ought
denoting
is
not to
a
regard
this
often
thought.
On
the
contraiy,
it
form
which comes
first in
our scheme as
contains the
nothing more.
We
will
As
regards
we
a moment.
58
The
dicretic
significance of the
clausula,
is
fifth
form naoi
njuw/uevoig, the
It
generally overestimated.
is
it
is
often
cretic
the
is
basis of
all
prose-metre,
and from
cretic is
this
postulate
deduced
one
of the
The
is,
deductive
method
in investigating antique
prose-rhythm
however,
arbitrary
i.e.
Only
in a
few writers,
in Philo
^ occurs
,
as a favourite form.
As you
,
will
etc.
see,
In
this
way we
get
some
insight
into
the simple
means by which
rhythm.
entirely.
The
Only
details
we
miss almost
reading
aloud
FOURTH LECTURE.
As
in
far
as this
I
whose metre
of
their
was not
course
activity.
Probably there
no change,
is
no evolution
with the
in their clausula.
Quite different
the case
artist
of
whom
you a
with Plato.
In order to give
of
his
metre,
shall
remind you
of the
method-Marbe
and end
for the
Laws.
Republic
the
of
as
the
of the first
group
works
Laws
a
his later
and
^^-.
important
than
his
Even
more
sentence-metre
is
Not only as
It is
Laws
comRe-
show a
certain culmination.
very interesting
to
e.g. of the
form
^ ^
in the
Laws.
60
Frequency
(i
of the clausula
w w.
164
14-3
n percentages).
Phaedrus
140
Thucydides
(first
thousand)
Convivium
Thucydides
(second thousand)
14-4
Phaedo
Theaetetus
141
135 160
Demosthenes
Philo
189
18 2
Parmenides
Republic:
Chariton
213
1
Book
12 5
Lesbonax
Herodes
Libanius
Plutarch
(first
14
1
II
149
122
121
12 6
16
III
161
IV
V
296
28-6
thousand)
VI
VII
VIII
15-8
Plutarch
135
161
14 3
(second thousand)
Plato
IX
14
1
Apology
Crito
X
Philebus
Politicus
169
15 8
50
7-1
Protagoras
140 133
Charmides Laches
Lysis
Sophistes
Critias
97
13
152
130
14*7
Timaeus
Laws:
Euthyphro
Gorgias Hippias minor
127
12-2
Book
82
7-5 5'0
152
II
Euthydemus
Cratylus
158
161
III
IV
5-3
Meno
Menexenus
142
11-4
V
VI
45 33
61
VII
VIII
6-4
XII
46
67
5-7
Epinomis
(first
IX
hundred)
X
XI
In
56
4-5
Epistula 7 ma
40 90
the
Laws
ii
(-) (_)
HI
ww w WW
IV
(-)
ww
we
find again in Plutarch,
Only one
viz.
of these
It
forms
ww^
is
the
By way
of the
of exception
one
few passages
which have
been confirmed by us
(Rhet.
Ill
most
striking
manner.
He
says
8.
1409 a
Jiaiavog
. .
2):
eoxi
de
dvo
eidr]
jLiev
ev
ciQxfj
dojuoxxei
xoeig,
fj
(^ww)
do%ovoi
de juaxod xelevxaia
(ww- w
).
/uexd
de ydv vdaxd x
dbxeavov y)cpdvioe
vvg~.
And
. . .
little q>
above:
exQcbvxo juev
nmdv,
The
typical
fourth
paeon
is
Latin
it
is
the
Greek
clausula.
62
Most important
as a clausula.
is
the
occurrence of
)w
Quotient.
To
this clausula
may
belong:
7iaoiv iyyiyvetat
( )
)
*
'
'
(-(-)
(-)-)
(
jidvTcov exyiyvsxai
jiaoiv
eyyiyveodm
is
final
There
in
all
of
them there
syllable,
thesis
to
these
to
facts
than
the
last
three
syllables
be a
cretic
or a molossus
To show
speak
In
to
this
clearly
to
you
for a
moment
I
my
investigation
last syllable,
except in Plato.
For
this investigation
would
should
of 128 cases,
It
we
have had
to
investigate
256 forms.
is
the
general
this
statistics.
The
questioned by Miinscher
000) on the authority of
col.
The passages
of
63
us even more than those of
better
many
recent scholars:
we had
Besides
we may
But
all
these
this:
what do
statistics
show
that in the
is
Laws
the sentence as
general
we
expected
otherwise.
from
viz.:
www; ^^ But
.
this
this
form
occurs
when we
that
re-
member
quency
and
he avoids
fre-
the choriamb.
of the
We
may draw
forms ending
in
^,
as
well as a curve
is
and
most interesting see how the forms w www www are more frequent than ^ w-w and ^^ For quite the other forms the
to
.
all
ratio is
the reverse.
In this
way
it
shown by
means
of simple statistics.
all
And
it
is
quite interesting to
observe that
from a paper
Kaluscha
who made
a rather curious
64
use of his
statistics:
the idea,
to him.
seems
to
be unknown
So we see
is
not anceps.
Now
rfjg
the
same
for
w ^i
where
The
quotient
the
the
first
is
sentence-metre
The same
we
return
Laws.
either
It
appears that
in the dicretic
form
cretic
can, so to say,
be
re-
placed
by a molossus.
double
molossus,
however,
we
The
else.
latter is
more impor-
Plato than
is
for
instance,
ixUyovoiv.
On
the whole
we
You
w
this
work has been composed, the lower the percentage. will remember that the form naoiv dv&Qcojiotg, w, plays a part in Greek prose metre: even
is
form
avoided in Plato.
65
I II
Ill
_WWW ww w ww w -WW w
(
seems
).
to
be preferred
IV
(including
w
etc.
w,
,
as clausulae).
The avoidance
for this reason that
logical
of
it
the
is
clausula
heroica
is
important
symptom
in
of a general
psycho-
law,
which
is
antique prose-rhythm.
Any metre
dans
with poetry
is
avoided.
Bornecque
in his
most important
de
work
'La
is
prose
metrique
la
correspondance
Ciceron'
even inclined
is
whole prose-
metre of Cicero
to
be explained by
this factor.
clausula.
So he He says among
crois,
d'ailleurs,
donner de
flatter
la
me
de
l'avoir
me
...
hasarde a exposer
celle
que
les faits
m'ont sugger^e
Le
est d'6viter
que
la fin
de vers etc'
is
This opinion
agree with
very one-sided.
the
Probably you
will
me
that
metre
of
Demosthenes, which
be explained
in this
way.
of the
metre
66
of Cicero
and
of
Livy
will
The main
the form of the
opinion of Bornecque,
however,
is
is
this:
word preceding
determined
by
of
This
meHrique lorsque
mot
final'
We
word
Demosthenes favours
last
form
w ^,
like
If,
he
likes to
in
have before a
avxovg
jiotovoiv
a form
avzovg.
tioiovoiv,
however, the
word
is
ixMyovoiv,
we do
the
not understand
how
it
we
of
the
clausula,
and
to
state
that
all
exMyovoiv
the pre-
forms
itself
beautiful clausula,
and that
By means
of this
argument
theory
is,
as
far
as
see, refuted in a
most simple
the
regarded as unimportant.
They
clearly
show
the signi-
They
it
instance
by the
clausula heroica
it,
of Cicero.
is
He seldom
of
uses
it,
an hexameter.
We
know
that
67
in
Cicero's
in
a four- or five-syllabic
word
or word-group.
The
vincla resovit,
and
lamentabile regnum.
Only
ridarum,
here.
If,
a few
e.g.
Tynda-
however,
heroicae of
endings.
Zielinski
I
at the clausulae
not hexameter-
quote here
by
Quinctius cupit
commemorare
paulo post
commemorabo
praetura Siciliensi
passuum conficerentur
videt discruciatur
cautius composuisses
pecuniam corripiendam
copiosus
est,
commemoravit
conscios flagitiorum.
So important a
in
part
of poetical
metra play
prose metre.
The avoidance
in this
of
ww
in Plato
manner.
68
It
is
how
in
is
in the
some forms
of
of
Plato's
Bij
means
hypothesis
we
can
dis-
II.
Charmides,
min.,
Laches,
Lysis,
Euthyphro,
Gorgias,
Hippias
Republic.
Philebus,
Politicus,
IV.
Sophistes,
Critias,
Timaeus.
V.
Laws.
is
This distinction
made by Kaluscha
It
in
his
paper
on the chronology
of Plato's dialogues.
contains valuable
is
intentionally
in a rather
and so
far
as
it
is
used
way.
No comparison whatever
with sentence-
metre
is
made.
before, to be
The notion 'percentage' seems, as I said unknown to him. I will not, however, speak
evolution
to
about
this
matter here.
The gradual
which
alluded appears
figures.
69
Group
II
III
IV
3-50/0
50
7-6 76
6*2
8.1 81
7-3
9-1 91
26
11*6
( )w
6*9 69
61
7*7
5-7
7-1
55 70
139
52
3-7
32
91
13
5-70/
143
143
These
collected
figures
work
out.
Some
of the clausulae
show
And we
of these
are allowed
in
forms
is
those
of
Plato's
chronology of which
not quite
certain ?
The
the
somewhat
as follows.
The
who
As
first
occupied themselves
with
it
all
agreed on
earliest
this
of his
works.
there
scholars, but
even
them
adhered
to this theory.
Some
time
later,
however,
statistical
evidence seemed
70
to
show very
clearly,
that the
is
in
a later period.
"... Meistens
Raeder
ob die aus
dem
is
overcome
was even
a scientific require-
ment, and he
the
who
has any
faith in statistics
late.
had
to join
to
Owing
of,
this there
or rather
make
their
ideas
In
correspond
this
to
investigations.
connection
may
quote Pohlenz,
who
Von Arnim (Gotting. Gelehrte Anz. 1916, Es war also nicht Willktir oder Zufall, wenn p. 259): fast alle modernen Forscher den Lysis mit dem Symposion in engste Verbinding brachten, und wenn v. A. diese gewaltsam lost, so wird man hier wirklich den Gedanken
says about
nicht los,
'.
on
this
subject
moves
in
the
same
direction.
ticular preference is
shown
in the different in
works
for the
treatment
of
parallel passages
different
works,
the
like to determine.
Some
71
of
them,
of
such as
their
Von Arnim,
are of
result
investigation
Prioritat des
such as
jg.
W.
parallel
passages
will
often
convince
all
the
writer
only.
Some
ations,
statistical investig-
convinced
late;
that
the
written
this
is
view
still
Schleiermacher
Ovink. wrongly.
it
But most
of
For
statistical investigations
happens so often
the well-known
in
of
statistical
and wrong
grouping.
that
Too
little
different
tendencies
As
to
tried
For, as
you
will
remember, there
is
obvious.
If
we we
possible.
72
Plato.
Frequency
Phaedrus
11
III
IV
V
37
13
WS_^W
V4
61
7*7
57
71
143
5'5
52 32
91
____
_w
w;
94
164
70
139
14'3
57
126
11-6
(_)
www^ _^ w
As you
will
49
62
3*5
50
7'5-
6*2
8-1
73
91
6'8
notice:
even
are
the
forms
^^^,
in the
ww w,
drus.
and
w w,
clausulae
more frequent
(
Phae-
The very
^ww^ and )^
to
^^>
we
have
in the later
You
will
be inclined
suppose that
however,
is
work.
Among
language,
the
works
It
of
Plato
the Phaedrus
is
a very
particular work.
is
which
is
nor
anywhere
that
it
else in Greek.
Nor
will
it
surprise
ou
to see
has
shows a logaoedic
character.
73
Plato.
Sentence-metre.
Phaedrus
Chapt.
1st
XXVI
2nd
thousand
syllables
Republic
Laws
thousand
Average
syllables
174
167
17
_
3 _4 _ 5 6
-
os
146-2
112-8
85
12
74
21
79S
165
5*5
640
30*7
47-5 40*3
13-8
8 2
90
2-7
1-2
10
53
2'8
8 9
It
00 02
05
00 03
is
dance
can
of dactylic
Of
this fact
everyone
Remarks on
in
It
some commentaries,
is
frequent,
etc.
like this:
Ilaoa
(251
e
),
yaQ
fjv
xo
JidXai
meganr)
ww ww w
etc.
74
We
viz.:
(1)
may
the
are
all
three
the
criteria
which
distinguish
Phaedrus from
other dialogues,
(3)
poetical
choice of words,
avoidance of hiatus.
of
We
shall
now
Therefore
Barwick,
especially
draw your
attention to a
work
of
De
Platonis
Phaedri temporibus,
of 1913.
Of
know
Phaedrus, but he
cleverly
is
a scholar
who
is
He
gives
his opinion in a
statistics,
few
he does
And
that
he has a
fact
the problem
he
gives
not
quite
able to defend,
becomes
by means
of metrical
mean
the use of
cbg in
the Phaedrus, to
which
In a
that the
Phaedrus as
of
The number
hiatus
in
Plato's
In the later
It
works
is
this
frequency varies
75
that
the
Phaedrus has
23.90,
a figure that
lies
exactly
avoided
in
the
later
dialogues
is
figures,
If,
nor
this,
as
however,
we
think
determine the
fix
the Phaedrus
before the
In
Timaeus, Laws.
after
the Parmenides
is
very
unlikely.
viz.
that
Phaedrus belongs
to
the time
poetical
when
style
of
this
work
of
avoidance
that
to
it.
which,
course,
is
not so strong as
special
attention
of
the
time
when he
pays
We
offers
Phaedrus,
style
by recent scholars
many illustrations of wrong statistical methods. The frequent use of xl jur]v is indeed, as has been
of a later origin of this
work,
But what
is
remarkable here?
in the treatment of
76
hiatus,
stands
quite
alone.
Though
it
is
by no means
we
the
get here
affirmative
a percentage of 68-8 on
rhetoric questions,
next.
total of affirmative
i.
e.
the figure
coming
Frequency
Phaedrus
Republic
of
tl fxr\v
on the sum
rhetoric questions.
68-8
23-3
Sophistes
Politicus
19-7
37-7
Theaetetus
46*4
11*8
Philebus
347
37-2
Parmenides
Besides,
the
alia
Laws
relatively
xal
jurjv,
Phaedrus has a
fjaqv,
very high
as
number
of
ye
fxrjv,
and
may
be
propaganda work
on
Plato,
of Plato's
logic (p.
184.).
No
other
hypothesis
suit
can
satisfy
us
than
of
that
these
expressions
the
poetical
rhetoric
the
Phaedrus:
Also
In
in
the
former dialogues
it
we
is
sometimes replaced by
The
on
same
is
true
Now, we know
e.g.
that
in the later
works
on
wcpefojuog
77
the
hiatus
as
troublesome: on
is
is
quite
the reverse!
other reason
why
dfjXov
on
is
avoided
in the
Phaedrus,
and replaced by
dfjlov cog.
Now,
3^ears.
in the
Phaedrus
cog is
is
compared whith
that
on
is
again
Baris
He
the
why
dfjlov cog is
is
he asks:
(p.
why
chg
so frequent here?
His answer
is
643i).
sit,
alia re,
me quidem
res
cum Phaedri
understand
Is this
To
metra.
the
true
reason
seeks logaoedic
Now,
on,
i.e.
cog
If
on
of
two
and
short ones.
dfjlov cog
and
dfjlov
?
he has
to
choose between
w
The
w^^
however,
between a
cretic
and a
is
tribrach.
tribrach,
is
avoided here.
This
78
We
where a
favourite
instead of on.
all
the passages
I
where
on,
in the
same
sense,
got 21
and 27 times
Has
Plato's
choice indeed
been
influenced
is
by
his
this question
of
Its
solution
Plato's choice of
words
The
times,
of
cog
result
my
investigation
is
that cbg
is
used 27
and
of
On
used
21
which
of the
cog
^^ In the 42 cases, where Plato could choose between w wwww and ^^ w and ww on the one ^w^^^ on the other, he chose 34 times one
from one
good forms
w
(
or
side,
etc.
of the
to
former combinations.
that the
From
this
we
are allowed
peculiaris
infer
remark
of
sermo
of the
The word on
if it
is
tried
get
w
it.
or
ww
79
In
this
manner
the
influence
of
sentence-metre on
of statistics.
the choice of
Any
(1)
definite
choice of
If
words
first
(2)
is
order of words.
chosen, these
the
way
and
synonyms such
as
(bg
and
first
on, cdotieq
into consideration in
the
place,
is
these very
synonyms
that play
a predominant part in
statistics.
Also
some other
in
peculiarities
of
the Phaedrus
can
be explained
this
whereas
origin.
ojojzeq
Now,
is
e
In
may
also
be a
favourite archaism.
Tcb
ovxi
and
fits
fj
So one thing
the
all
same
direction:
word
hope
that
my
When we
its
acknowledge now
that the
Phaedrus with
it
peculiar
color poeticus
is
clear
we
are allowed
this
criteria
80
color
poeticus.
So
the
hiatus
must be excluded as a
rd>
criterion,
as
ovn and
fj
ov,
which depends on
as
far
So
as
it
the
of
whole sentence.
On
of
this
metre,
for
the
main features
and
avoidance
etc.
of the clausulae
-WW
blic
with long
final syllable
7-94%),
ww_w:
ww
tion
of
(Phaedr.
wwww
will
The
peculiar substitu-
for
dfjlov
on
in
some passages
be
sufficiently clear
now.
ionic dativi,
ju/jv
belong
31
criteria
are
known
It
to
which
we
use
as
in
Of even these
Theaetetus,
in
only
are
missing
in the
in
the
the
Phaedrus,
however, 20!
Of the remaining
many
occur in the
81
to
of
also in
the
former
Those which
finally remain,
discussed before:
This
may
suffice
conclude
that,
as far as
any
faith
can be put in
statistical
evidence,
the
the group to
Thus
In
different causes
consequences.
dfjXov
hiatus
which may
arise
after
however,
to
in the
Phaedrus an hiatus
this
this
be
felt,
factor
is
wanting.
The avoidance
statistics of
of the tribrach in
dijlov on.
So
to
is
the
avoidance of
using
is
why
the use
the
words
in
not quite
of
same.
On
this
work
Von
is
Arnim, published
failed.
in the
He vehemently
defends
that
the
Phaedrus
posterior to the
Republic.
Elsewhere he says
to
that his
I
sufficient
prove
it
irrefutably.
:
think
his
des Phaidros,
161)
is
more
It
Plato's
later
works.
The
peculiar metre, as
(1
)
we saw
only by means of
order of words
choice of words.
The
first
way
is
often
chosen by Plato.
less
The
by
frequent
of
use of
tqojzov
rivd
rivd,
xqotiov,
frequent one
position,
of
it,
examples
separate treatment.
To
first
these
may be added
is
the frequency of
compounds
the
part of which
/tew
or dia
or
as
of
in
nam and
,
so
on,
the
frequency
of
participia
such
y.aradtxojuevog,
diafoyojuevog,
dedojuevog,
the
frequency
forms such as
xaraudftcooLv
etc.
and so
on.
Words ending
og,
ov,
av
are used by preference before a vowel. Some one may find time to show this fact by means of statistics. And what words are more likely to be chosen or rejected
and on
in
ooojieq
and xa&aneQ,
juexQiJteQ
and ecoomQ
the
Laws?
We
ought even to
say
that,
consequences,
we
And when
obvious tendencies
in this direction,
other?
FIFTH LECTURE.
About the ancient
read
in
recent
literature.
his
may be own
defend by means
is
put whether
to chance.
the
frequency
these
forms
may be due
Very
can
method ought
to
be found by means
which
system
this true
moment ago
accepted.
is
we spoke
a
of
which
nor
to
be
universally
Neither
here
made
if
with
detail.
us, as
any
doubt as
read
in
their reliability
(p.
were impossible.
gravitas
Thus we
ubertasque
Heibges
7):
*Sed
dicendi
paucae
illae
formae
clausularum
et
2.
z= B.
84
3.
4.
C.
As you
it
scheme
1,
is
is
wrong.
The forms
by
I
2,
some
is,
authors, avoided
others.
The
with
last
form
w ww
he deals
in
(p. 9):
as far as
the
same
is
Chariton,
whom
particular.
He
Now,
the form
^ ^^
it
is
one
of his
formae
principales:
is
avoided.
In reading this
to
here
in
Heibges, nor
in
is
Herany
It is
the
clausula
of
Libanius there
Thumb's
Seldom
its
importance.
authors mentioned,
that
sometimes, however,
in
such a
way
it.
can be clearly proved that the forms ^ Though w do not metrically belong together, on and generally favoured, the other the contrary, - ^
is
is
generally
avoided,
these
forms
are
often
grouped
to
together.
fact
Though
in
there
can
be
no doubt as
is
the
that
Chariton
avoided,
w
it
^^
favoured,
but
^^
^^
is
cretic.
85
It
word
'system'
used
in different senses.
It
of interpretation, as e.g.
Norden's
it
Demosthenes, or
system
of
28 possible forms.
The The
first is
latter
quite
objective,
as
it
may
arrangement
of long
and short
As
to
far as
it
is
1
28 possible combinations,
it is
possible
however,
as follows.
Positi ve clausala in Chariton.
Thucydides.
(iwv) hyojuevcov
jtaotv
Chariton
11-3
haQyeoiv
( )U^ww ^^^^_
s_.
5-2
21
142
5-9
21-3
exMyovoiv
Jidoiv avftgcDTZoig
:=1
92
17-6
7-2
ovfxnaoiv EJ;EQ%EXai
w
He
W^
26
)
^_^
Greek
clausulae.
^^ ^^
86
as
a by-form of
w w
The
Negative clausula
tovg dv&Qcbjiovg
decor egya xafohai
Statistical
in
Chariton.
Thucydides.
Chariton.
3*1
183
> w
seems
to
79
2*0
evidence
shows
the
the authors
as yet investigated
by
us.
sentence re-
mains a question
as
that
for
Chariton by Heibges,
been done
for
Libanius by Heitmann.
The same
Clausula of Libanius.
Thucydides.
Libanius.
142
161
'principal'
ww
in this
94
2-6
3-7
76
5-8 5-5
w_w_
By comparing
forms
way
Thucydides, the
hypothetical.
We
are
even
justified
in to
supposing
Libanius,
the
form
ww
w
was
indifferent
whereas
was avoided.
Of course Heitmann
87
combines
w ^
It
with
w.
So he
is
induced to
which comparison
the least sense.
is
given
is
in
it
has not
rightly
exists here at
it
is
low
figure.
Negative
(?)
clausula of Libanius.
Thucydides.
Libanius.
79
20*4
77
116
statistical
in
Here as well as
investigation
of
his
evidence.
In
Greek form:
Libanius.
Thucydides.
www^
is
52
28
not favoured.
Some
certain
that of
3^ears
ago
Thucydides and
Lesbonax
(236 cases)
Herodes
(297 cases)
Thucydides
(2000 cases)
114
161
142
106
20-8
84
17 5
93
183
30
20
26
88
Besides these figures correspond strikingly with those
of
Thucydides'
sentence-metre
of
our
theoretical calculations.
Lesb.
calc.
1T4
142
183
144
142
This
of
208
175
204
in
183
fact constitutes
an important argument
in
favour
the
hypothesis
if
that
Thucydides there
exist
only
slight,
any,
metrical
tendencies.
On
account of
my
5):
und
Lesbonax-Herodes
andererseits,
in
ware das
ein wichtiger
Beweis
fiir
den auch
Rhythmus bewussten
altattische Literatur\
put,
The
the
question should,
of
however, be
tendencies
whether
in
absence
metrical
we
are allowed to
same forms
two
facts.
in different authors,
is
we
a con-
preferences do not
exist,
a conscious imitation as
meant
by Munscher, becomes
Before
quite hypothetical.
we
continue,
you another
it.
methodological question
In
probably
we
can solve
in
different
89
authors
whether there
was a preference
that
for
arbitrary
In
doing so
double
we have
not
postulated
the
all
cretic
or the
prose-metre.
We have
is
such a
we
are
used
to
call
metrical
feet.
We
have
question,
how
this
has
caused
usage?
seen,
were twofold.
Firstly
the factor
which might be
words
of
is
the
at
language.
Where
of
this
dependence
part.
Where, by
other factors
are at
work
as well,
we
have
tried to
determine and to
We
of
found that
for
particular
With
the
help
some simple
in
mathematical formulae
we have
is
succeeded
determining
how
found inductively
be
was reduced
to a
minimum.
90
A
a
this
that
we have now
is
means
determine
how
great
the
chance
that
This
may be
of
two
texts
may be due
to imitation.
striking agreement,
however,
to
this factor.
On
ad
other hand:
is
if
we
chance
Apollonium quite
than
in
all
work
this
Plutarch
Plutarch.
But when
it
is
consi-
to
domain
of
the
secondary
the
will
importance
be readily
understood.
I
point out
We
:
we have answered
it
as follows
An
other question
is:
is
typology ?
91
An
investigation
negative
is
every
had a preference
*)
That
in
was more
ones
difficult
where a
single long
word
consists
of short
this
of typology.
this: that at
any
rate
feet,
if
(I
or verse-feet)
existing
at
all,
at
any
rate secondary.
of
is
By means
for
feet
of this
investigation the
interesting
it
method
be,
may
condemned
Greek prose.
and especially
is
quite cor-
words
just as apodictic
of his adversaries.
And where
in
first
we
of
in
is
the back-ground,
all,
and typology
last of
all.
form
we
of investigation of Bor-
See
table.
92
necque, and
I
hope
that
Novotny
There
though
here
is
it
are, indeed,
some
in
differences in word-division,
should be borne
mind
between the
and
for for
as e.g. for
w w
it
in
Thucydides
is
one type
avxov
e.g.
*>'
for exteyovntv,
^,
vp*
figure
%
29-1
for the
group
and
for the
in
Thuc3^dides,
as a whole in
Plutarch.
in
^w
the
is
felt
as a metrical unity.
if
The metre
at
primary,
is
typology,
It
existing in
that
Greek prose
secondary.
may be
the
avoidance of a
final
logy'.
may be
that in
there
exists
yet 200
errors,
cases),
In general,
however, the
ratios
,
w w,
93
from
this
rhythm here.
Besides
question?
how
then does
Novotny consider
this
is
He
formed by the
especially the
by means
the
of
order of the
to
last.
last
word
is
of the
phrase and
7
the
word next
This
is right,
why
order
words changed?
syllables,
Only
as
is
to get a certain
order of long
cannot exist
Besides:
:
and short
here.
an
accent-clausula
this
than metrel
we
in
have seen
Plutarch
get
it
w w,
is,
that
tries to
w w;
get a
whatever precedes,
indifferent
of the
to him.
The word-order
to
means
certain
clausula:
words.
For and
vincla
is
we may add to it: choice of resolvunt we cannot substitute resolvunt bad clausula. But we can write vincla
it
this is done,
is
done
forms
^^ w
period,
and
w, and
rest
the
has
already been
in
suggested by Thumb.
The
really
new element
94
try
his
Does not
who
said:
la
'On
dit
lorsque
forme
la
du
dernier
determine
mot
final'?
As
tried
to
explain,
our
investigations
were an
is
in ancient
authors there
really exists,
is
scholars, however,
agree to assume
it
as
a basis
of prose-rhythm.
Some
^l
is
it
is
repeated.
So,
according to them,
if
it
is
repeated.
Zander,
famous Eurhythmia
(I,
p. 207) says:
'Nam
membri
redditur
quantum
quoque
loco
a
aut
postrema
alteri
parte
aut
geminatur continenter,
clausulae
clausulae:
sit
congruenter,
sit
tantum
habendum
est
sed ut
rhythmus
aliquis, utique
necesse est
aliqua
terminatio'.
If
we
cannot see
why
there
of
certain
metrical
forms
95
frequently
than
we
should expect,
i.e.
more
in
frequently
any respect
He
which he regards as
metrical,
is
reiter-
ation of forms.
This analysis
full
Firstly,
syl-
he assumes
lables can
in
a most arbitrary
way
that
two short
Secondly, he
assumes
that
.
w w
is
to
Each
of these
assumptions ought
in
be sepa-
rately
tition
proved.
of
Of course
those
This repetition
will
be most
frequent
authors
who make
are,
more
use
e.g.
of
certain
forms.
in
such
as
^w
is
Demosthenes
to
course,
often repeated.
repetitions
Zander ought
we
should expect.
forms'.
'Rhythm
metrical
But
where
which
is
^ in Plutarch,
Are we
to
form
|
so
common
there?
scan
w? We can, however, prove that w ^ w ^. nearly as much favoured as no connection between the preference for w
w
is
^
there
Is
itself
and 'rhythm'?
It
is
only an hypothesis.
is
its
For what
of
basis?
It
assertions
which are
96
supposed
tition.
to
is
to
by him
this argumentation
of
is
methodologically incorrect.
The
texts
the
mostly
vague,
contradictory,
wrong.
You need
by
only
remember what
cies
vestigations.
Anyone who,
in
and
others,
investigating
ancient
prose-rhythm bases
never arrive
at conclusive results:
he has
built
upon sand.
I
I
am
sure
now
that
3'ou
understand
I
me
quite well.
shall
metre.
There
is
rhythm
This
in the
rhythm
harmony which
intuition,
is
generally
be
grasped by
statistics.
think,
this
the
deepest
essence of prose-rhythm.
'There
separable,
is
rhythm
of thought distinguishable,
if
not
of language, controlling
and
supplementing the
phonetic
rhythm.
In
poetry,
97
phonetic rhythm
rhythm'.
is,
as
These words
work
style'
'Rhythm as a distinguishing
(p.
3 and
4).
If
this assertion is
not objected
to,
we
also
is
know
that
which
same
metres.
this
is
recognised,
we
understand
certain
that a peculiar
forms
form.
at the
end
same
in
An
importance for
the rhythm
the
if
it
is
not repeated.
And
It
same way
marks
way
it
unites thought
and form.
This
is
SIXTH LECTURE.
To
origin,
task.
write
its
the
history
its
of
antique
is
prose-rhythm,
its
evolution,
decline,
an extremely
difficult
yet to be
into
this
done.
of
And
own
yet the
field
investigation,
more
sceptic
we
be-
come
as to our
conclusions.
Let us
first
give a short
Immediately
in
felt
cadences
necessity
of
putting the
statements to the
test.
felt
who
somewhat
different
sceptical
by showing
sentence.
for
between
of the
close
The
first
the
Greek accentual
(1)
was
and
investigated in
(2)
great outlines
how many
'good'
how many
quite conto
results
were compared.
and
in
this
These
results
were
vincing,
connection
Litzica
deserves
be
particularly mentioned.
The importance
of
these investigations
was
entirely
99
misunderstood by
W. Meyer
himself;
to
it
seems
that this
work
out his
own
clausula
The second important step for the Greek accentual was taken much later. Instead of regarding the 'good' clausulae as one unity, Dewing investigates sepathe
rately
frequency
of
the
different
possible
it
forms
w w,
cJ>c/)J3,
wc/5coc/>, etc.
In this
way
in
is
possible to
of the
same forms
and
that
non-rhythmical
am
Dewing
favoured
and other
at
all.
Very
examples
clausula,
little
use
has
of
these excellent
quantitative
Zielinski,
for
the investigation
for
Greek
and
the Latin
clausula.
Norden,
Zander,
Bornecque,
went on constructing
their
a-priori
Only a few
are
the
These
remarks
Jordan,
Maas,
Thumb, following
convinced
the
researches of
not yet
by the
results
of
the
clausula-investigations
100
before the rhythm of the whole sentence has been carefully
studied.
It
why
critics
As
and
far
as
their value
sufficiently,
his
prose-rhythm
in
making the
right use
In
modern
literature
may
drawn
of
scholars.
Zielinski.
This
is
and
The importance
If
controversy has
scholars had
been con-
texts,
and
way
be obtained,
facts
this
polemic would
The simple
of
stated
Here
rhythmical
and there
prose
interesting
are those of
to
noted.
The most
interesting
typology.
We
it
highly
accom-
plish the
to this
method.
Finally,
101
of
so
eminent
critics
as Kroll and
modern
investigations
in a posi-
to collect material
them-
selves,
we
some
prose-rhythm, instead
results
On
the
is
quantity
of
the
final
syllable
in
Leo
*)
final
words
in
the
hexameter,
an avoidance
occurring
already in Cicero,
by means
of
(which
is
found
in Quintilian)
Comparative
researches will
show you
later
on
that
in the clausula
by
Cicero himself.
there
ways
to inquire into
antique prose-rhythm.
The one
is to
about
it.
The
other
is
*)
De
Statii Silvis.
102
The
sula
is
As
i.e.
far as
they are
belonging to the
secondary
function
of
the
As
was
himself.
The
facts
show us
been the
case.
Especially
the
more
subtile
problems,
last syllable,
What
long
facts.
avoidance
of
final
I
words
in
think,
we may
by changing
the
title
of
the
work
of
construxit
Cicero,
of
quatenus
concipere potuerit'.
Aesthetic
criteria
is
Why
of the results
some
respects
antique
theory
may become
of
importance.
This importance
may be
illustrated as follows.
103
According
is
to
we
as a
original
form than
Likewise
in this
respect
we
prefer
to
The
especially
that
in
study, however, of
the
researches
tragic
of
have proved
is
it
the
Greek
form
trimeter
'resolution'
not a
symptom
to
of decline or
even
of
belongs
the
original
the
verse.
to
Now,
a
this fact
may
in
be
phenomenon
the 'prin-
forms.
In Philo, e.g.,
that
fact
1*9(4-),
whereas
of
has a quotient
reaches
only
*6(-}-).
This
We
w
I
as a real
form
^^^ w.
think, in
104
given
wrong bend
to
modern
I
thought.
There
is
no
argument whatsoever, as
far as
see, to consider w
w
Let
assume
^^w w.
cited
in
On
may be
suffice
to
favour
in
this
the
opposite view.
it
quote
connection Laurand
(Etudes p.
187):
attentif
dit
mene,
que
le
je crois,
p6on
est
a dire que
le
il
peon
dit
et le cretique
ont tous
ne
et
jamais que
le
le
p6on
est
du cretique
pour
remplacer.
totalement
Bien plus,
etrangere,
cette
ainsi
lui est
les
autres
thoriciens anciens
de
la
clausule;
indiquent un certain
nombre de pieds
la
place de
comme
le
un
trimetre'.
Of course
thing quite
(
this
holds
is
called substitution,
which
common
(Norden).
ils
syllabe
meme
105
de Ciceron:
caractere
la difference
des durees.
clausules
Ciceron trouve un
qu'elles
different
aux
suivant
sont
plus de
clausule
dispondai'que
(
^)
loin
rente
du dichor^e
finales
w w)
my
d'en etre
equivalent.
Ces deux
les statistiques'.
I
can formulate
dass
man
nicht
observieren,
messen
soil'.
A
method
method
to
investigating
ancient prose-rhythm,
e.
the
Some modern
as
is
clausula-investigators
seem
to
be
of
much
as possible.
Firstly,
a dry and
of
somewhat
statistics
inferior
work.
Secondly a vast
collection
literary
Whoever
'calculates' percriticises
106
aesthetically
Aesthetic spe-
facts.
think,
is
the
first
of
these
objections
to
statistical
researches
The
science of proseIt
metre
is
really be-
longs to psychology.
of psychological researches.
Whoever
experimental
work should
As
to
the second
objection
we would
say
that,
if
does not
using them.
On
is
the contrary,
due either
to the writer
who
uses
to the
who
statistics.
There seems
we
ought
to
our opinions.
Many
scholars
I
make
think
percentages.
which
will
prove
to
be wrong because
statistics
have been
ignored.
107
The
tive
methods
the
first
of
discoveries
Blass)
themselves.
Further
frequent
many
students could
common
it
Then
has
and controversies
means
of statistics exclusively.
Finally
it
where there
is
perhaps no metre
at
all.
clearly appears.
of
We
Greek
identical
An
entirely
problem
is
that
of
the
origin
of
Greek prose-
metre,
i.e.
Greek prose.
The mania
chus
as the
Greeks
everything to a definite
inventor
Greek prose-metre.
the
first
Perhaps
Thrasymachus was
really
to
108
prose.
entitle
to
us
the main
this.
All
this point.
Greek
clausula,
of his sentence-
endings.
That
his
speeches
in
the
first
book
of
the
as
the rhythmical
speeches
in
Ammianus Mar-
cellinus can
If
these speeches of
in Virgil,
they should
have occurred
Plato's
later
works,
e.g. in the
Laws,
On
matter
cannot
be
maintained.
Thrasymachus
tries
to
in
Greek
more
and
especially
this
is
end
of both coincide.
tried
Besides,
to
really
The combination
of
As soon
the
as
evolution
was
Firstly
109
mosthenes
Phaedrus)
imitates
the
hexameter,
Further
and
Plato
(in
his
to
logaoedic
metra.
^^^,
,
wwww
etc.
Plutarch
etc.,
on the other
hand he
mark
by using
The
cannot
see
why
more
intimately connected
shows
its
favourite forms.
*)
From
very beginning
this last
tendenc} strongly
7
Greek verse
forms which
w^< w and w
Nor
is it
in
manners.
always possible
to distinguish
dis-
tinguish three
cal
The
stage
we
stage.
The
the
second
we
shall
the
Hellenistic
stage.
In
it
third
metre has
disappeared:
we
shall call
*)
110
In
the
first
is
prominent.
There
metre
of
Thrasymachus,
Demosthenes.
metre.
In
Thucydides,
it
of
is
Plato,
of
Isocrates, of
Typical for
his
first
the developis
ment
of
Plato's
works there
no
later
on metrical tendencies
arise,
In
this
connection
we must
It
just
point
to
a widethat
spread
misunderstanding.
in
its
is
generally
believed
prose-metre
of forms.
first
stage
shows an impoverishment
p.
189):
les
'En
clausules
primitifs.
Phistoire
diverses
Tout au
juger,
les
se
sont
renstreintes
Rome
on constate de Ciceron a
Symmaque une
serie
d'appauvrissements successes'.
This opinion
is
due
always
modern
clausula-research, and
noticeable.
It
many
misunderstandings.
senses.
of
It
The word
e.g.
used
in
different
serves
number
forms used
111
(indeed, the
small),
number
forms,
of
is
very
or
it
number
of
favourite
in
Plato
more
the
word, the
wrong.
nearly
all
metrical
in
authors
nearly
all
forms
will
be
found.
of
Only
the
later
rhytmical
writers the
In
number
Procopius of
(8*8%),
in
all
Caesarea,
possibilities
all
among
his
exceptions
be found.
Therefore,
his
prose
number
of favourite
forms
is
very limited.
The only
Now,
the
number
of these preferred
we
might speak of
true. It
an impoverishment. This
is
is,
not true,
for
instance,
that
Greek
in the
time of
Cicero.
*-"
i=i),
Demosthenes
Philo,
has
only
If
however, many.
we
should be inclined
to use the
word impoverishment
obliged
his
in the
former sense,
we
should
be
to
to
acknowledge
that
Demosthenes,
owing
112
in
fact
far
Philo,
on the other
hand, shows
nesia.
more
is
Mag-
Cicero
more
the
Hegesias.
Only
But
why?
Because
in Latin there
Sallust, only
one single
line,
This
tors.
line consists
Here, indeed,
we
To understand
Greek prose-metre,
the conditions
fully
it
the
position
of
to
the
writers
in
of
will
at
be necessary
keep
mind
which
that time
which were
intellectual
entirely different
life
from those
The
of that period
it
was not
influenced to such
an extent by reading as
is
nowadays.
it
There were no
more
at the
important
course,
works,
which
then.
we now
The
read as a matter of
were lacking
desire for
knowledge
in puns,
Hence
of
Hence
the
Hence
very
important
place
in their literature.
Hero-
113
dotus
their
works
to
the
audience in
Athens and
to
Olympia. Their
it
be read, but
is
certainly intended to
be heard.
is
the
whole sentence
of the
argumentation.
This
rhythm
of
course
only partly
out
less
of accents in a
more or
way may
Sentence-metre
is
rhythm
of the period.
of
One
is
the
of sentence-metre
the syllables.
itself
by means
of
a negative tendency,
of long,
and long
appears indeed
the
in the
speeches of Demosthenes.
etc.
Not
only
him,
forms
www, wwww,
,
are avoided
,
by
to
but also
etc.
In Philo
this
114
But sentence-rhythm
of the sentence, or at the
is
heard particularly
at the
end
end
of a part of a sentence.
The form
is
w^^
%)
:
is
the typical
Aristotle.
Greek
clausula.
it
It
especially
mentioned by
Of course
is
for the
same reason
In
its
frequency
metrical
culminates
in
it
the
Laws (18-0%).
where
Plato's
development
appears rather
w
it
and
is
seems
to
have been
It
to
him a
to
clausulae.
is
curious
is
favoured only
when preceded
by a long
ret
yevo/Lteva is
avoided.
may be
noted
yevojuevwv
is strictly in is
preferred to yevo/ueva
a preference which
w w.
all
is
Next
to
this
played
noticeable preference
exists
in
nearly
and Libanius.
tendency
in
The
existence,
however,
of
any metrical
these authors
been
that
sufficiently
Maas
in
his
115
not allege anything serious against
it
made with
is
non-metrical prose!
facts in the history of
One
by
Plato.
of
the
most remarkable
Greek prose-metre
w
is
the
form
about
14-2%;
in the
in the
in
occurs
still
13-9%;
preceding dialogues
just a little
more
frequent,
the
Laws about
because
%.
Even
in
Isocrates
it
is
rather
frequent,
Plato obviously
prefers
ww
to
w
etc.
which
is
a priori intelligible:
fact for
therefore
Latin prose
145),
Greek prose:
'Cicero
Quintilian
and
all
modern
writers
on
the
member is As to
that
their
treated as long'.
the preceding
syllables
it
may be remarked
Here and there
quantity
is
mostly indifferent.
w w over against w w but a preference for a preceding cretic: 'w w w can hardly be stated anywhere:
a preference seems to exist for
?
if
it
exists
at
all,
this
preference
is
at
strong.
It
may be
cannot be determined
less
citing
antique statements or
by giving more or
116
method
of
comparison.
is
the form
w.
is
nearly everywhere
more frequent
in
as a clausula than
it
in the sentence.
Only
Demosthenes
is
not favoured,
and
here,
in Plato,
it
who
is
avoided already
works.
It
is,
more strongly
in Philo
in the later
On
very
later
w
we
due
.
w^i
which
is
common
works,
in in
Latin
prose,
is
found only
in
Plato's
the
and
later
authors.
preference for
ww
or rather for
it
w
to
we
of
is
to a preference for
w
this
w
form
In
or for ww w ww in
,
The occurrence
more
Hegesias appears
have
greatly
Cicero.
influenced
the
it
Latin
prose-metre,
especially
we
look for
vain.
Plato
as
prefers
w
A
^w
as
well
he prefers
w w
>
'
to
to
is
^w ww
which
is
It is
117
this
may be
the
why
it
is
avoided
in Latin
is
prose too.
The form
(especially in Philo
and Chariton): so
cannot be regarded
as an equivalent of
The form
in
is
w w. ww w
is
is
rather frequent.
It
more
is
normal frequency
is
about 6*5
in the
%, Laws
in the
it
Republic
its
figure
is
1'3%!
Why
these forms
w^^}
w w, w^
w
I
w,
w
in
wv~"i
favoured ones
may be
that
(2)
tendency
to
use
such
forms
as
produce
either
falling
a sharply
themselves contain
a repetition of metrical
As
of the
avoidance
of
^^^
^^ w,
and
of
w^
118
to
the
second,
it
is
all
these
themselves:
to
w w consists of w and ^^ ^^ ^w consists of ^^ and ^^ w w consists of w and w ^ there a preference for w In w w w may therefore consists of ^;
is
it
and
^-.
the fact
formulated: for
question
who
in
can give a
satisfactor}^
aswer
to the
why
SEVENTH LECTURE.
Before
discussing
the
relation
Latin prose-metre,
questions,
viz.
we
'syllaba anceps',
The problem
to
of
typology
my
material sufficient
draw
Neither
can
it
metrical authors,
the typology of
nor can
typolog}
7
,
wherever
rhythm
of
hexameter
it
it
avoids
The same
Now,
obvious
in in
effect is
aimed
at
by
avoiding:
Greek
is
many
cases
where any
influence of word-accent
120
Therefore
it
composing
to
it.
it.
Nevertheless
some well-known
facts point
The
in
it.
To
in
ascribe,
of
Cicero, and of
diaeresis
other.
w
>
^^
it
w
,
to a
mysterious fear of
the
would mean
it
substituting
one problem
for
>-:
an
Why
and
ww
an d
why
is
as strongly avoided in
w w,
is
somewhat
strange.
The
true expla-
something
of
the
falling
rhythm
been
V>
t/)
C/)
peculiarity.
121
So
in
the
poetry
as
well.
The
artist
can try
to
produce the
same
effect
by using
w ^
instead of
w w w.
The avoided forms, however, if also occurring in poetry, show in Latin prose a tendency to avoid exactly those ,^ types which are common in verse. The form i=i,
for instance,
which
is
most common
in the
few hexameteris
Livy
this
Though ,^ form
end
of
it
w ^
in
the
most common,
it
the
a sentence,
and
that verse-ending
some cases
coincide.
In this
manner
the
clausula
ww ^
the
final
frequently.
of
I
typology
is
the
quantity
of
syllable.
have already
referred to this
It
more than
this
once.
me
clear
tinguish
(1)
between two
quite different
phenomena:
matter.
Whether
trimeter
consists
of
it
three
times
tri-
w w
or of three times
remains a
122
meter.
either
It
is
first of
is
trochee,
In
this
or
case
trochee.
that
a long syllable
we may
some
special
cases.
We
final syllable is
lengthened
this
by
pronunciation,
we
cannot
see
how
long
syllable can
(2)
be shortened.
to
as
the
of a syllable
does
matter.
The
metre,
in
long
final syllable.
is
this trimeter is
we
that
is
lengthened, so to say,
is
it
was
I
quite indifferent
to
the
mean
the cases
of
group
the syllable
was
On
the contrary,
syllable,
there
is
often a tendency
long
44).
This tendency
found
trimeters ending
a cretic
word
occur
or word-combination:
is
preferred to
w<^.
cases
in
Now,
analogous
the
clausula.
In
wwww;
final syllable.
This
123
is
made probable by
who
speaks
only of
Plato
^^^
is
it
confirmed by
for
statistical
evidence:
shows a preference
quite
>^^^
to
^^^-^.
Kaluscha
wrong
in
results
s-z
of research.
In
in
w
other
w w
^^,
to
forms,
problem
he
prefers
An
lutions
even more
difficult
is
and by-forms.
have often stated
of
in
We
be said
different
Latin prose-metre,
the
same author
resemblance.
resemblance
is
to call dissolution,
and
substitution.
think
we have even
On
the contrary, as
that
we have
seen before,
syllables
we are not allowed to assert may be somewhere substituted one short syllable may replace
either
two short
nor that
can only
a long one:
it
by
or the form
ww^,
followed
'by-
It
is
124
form'
is
it
might wrongly
form
is
more favoured, or
whereas the
more
for
important.
is
as
a clausula
sk:
is
1-9 (+),
I
is
only
^^^ ^ ^^^ ^ w w belong together. Why, (quotient 1*6 (+)), and ^ should be the most imhowever, the form w
sufficient
1-6 (+).
think
we have
cannot see.
same
are
cipal'
facts in the
prose of Cicero,
which phenomenon,
Zielinski's
I
does not
antique
appear
from
curious
referred
statistics.
To
you
before.
that
of
three short
syllables
may have
caused
the
wrong conception
the
form
^^^
and the
many different opinions about Aristotle's The question remains: how can it be
rent forms metrically belong together?
It
fourth paeon.*)
seen that
diffe-
is
more easy
to state that
in
together.
is
Nearly everywhere
s^
is
favoured,
sought.
So
it
cannot be asserted
<)
Cf. esp.
Norden, 'Kunstprosa' 2
p. 916/17.
125
that
these
we
should
fact that
It
be inclined
in
is
more
difficult to
formulate,
when we
are allowed
to
assume
of
verse-metre
relations.
may be
In
applied
caution
often
If,
to
show
two
such
verse-metre
is
allowed to
indeed,
of
or
ww.
contain the
same number
morae,
in
one form,
(e.g.
^^ stands ^w^
and
^
the
to
nearly
same
this
,
extent,
there
arises
some
for
probability
that these
Other arguments
Plato,
in
may
in
strengthen
In
instance,
w
metre
is
^w
in
<->
^ and
^^>
the
final syllable
Too
*)
often,
most question-
able hypotheses.
Whoever would
relation
first
like to
sharply
between two
entirely
different
*) See Heibges, and his way of grouping together and neglecting the simple form
ww
different
forms
126
The one group seems to begin chronologically with Cicero. The deviations of his successors from prose-metre point all to the same direction: impoverishment of favourite forms. The number of favourite forms becomes smaller; besides the number of
groups of Latin authors.
cases of these forms
becomes
greater,
become
is
laws.
The
other
group
of
It
authors,
however,
quite independent
from Cicero.
seems
to
and
Sallust.
Their metre
any features
in
common
with Cicero.
the heroic
clausula, the
same form
is
The same
are
true
for
^^^n.
and
Sallust avoid
w ^
to
'*->
^,
among
the
most favourite
be no
of Cicero's sentence-endings.
difficulty in finding out the
There seems
the
same metre
of
in
nearly
details.
It
is
not altogether
devoid
all
interest
Greek
who shows
is
number
of
in the
come down
Not
less
Cicero imitates
Hegesias,
them.
That he omits
form did not
form
^^ww
only
proves that
this
language.
127
In vain, however,
sible
would we
the
Greek
is
origin
of of
that
the
group
Livy and
is
true that
there exist
but
the
differences
however,
origin
much
greater.
We
This
cannot
but
regard
as
purely Latin.
may have
the
verse.
Romans had become more familiar with Greek The true origin of this Latin clausula, however,
be found
in Latin literature itself.
It
seems
to
seems
to
of the
hexameter verse.
half hexameters,
In
Demosthenes we
his
often
meet with
and
same way
by Latin hexameters,
think
more
especially
by
Virgil.
of the praefatio:
. .
.'
.
The
his
clausula of Livy
of
stimulated
by
knowledge
Greek
literature,
really strikes us
that
ww
forms
dactylic
and w ^ ^^ w and
^-^^
are favoured.
128
with the influence of Virgilian words and syntax on his prose.
Therefore
it
seems probable
that
we have
found here a
Now,
by
In
his
Hegesias
Magnesia
the
or
other
'Asianic'
writers.
few
fragments
following
forms
appear as
favoured ones:
most favoured:
ww w
among
(often
preceded by a
cretic),
rather favoured:
and
ww^-w.
Besides
we
note
others:
^ w^w
is
and
A
pared
the
curious
agreement with
Cicero
found
in the
w^^
w w. An other w w. frequency of ^
It
as comis
striking
feature
to
his
his
wwww
the forms
only,
which proves
that
absence
in
Latin has to be
To
^^ ^.
is
Though
than
number
of favourite
forms
really greater
that
of
Hegesias,
total
their
total
frequency
of
does not
reach
the
sum
of
the
cases
'good'
forms
in
129
Hegesias.
of
It is
clear
from these
to a
modelling
to a later
Hegesias according
of
period
evolution,
of
which
freshness.
development
fresh-
ness
which only by
imitation:
his later
ridiculous
lost,
it
when sense
metre
is
monotony. Hegesias'
seems
to
Latin clausula.
Generally
speaking
we may
It
say that
Greek and
points, also
many
show many
is
differences.
may be
e.g.
w www w
Of
course,
heroica,
is
in
may be
of
prominent than
is
in
Greek,
one
of the typical
an exception should be
but though
is
made
avoided
for
in
.
the
clausula
Latin,
some
in
of
the
especially
wwww
ww ww.
lively
Nor do we
find
anywhere
Latin the
130
whose
metrical
late
and then
AH
these questions,
however, have
to
The
Hegesias.
Hellenistic
stage
there
is
seems
to
us
to
begin
with
his
Though
some
difference
between
monotony sharply
Greek
classic period.
The main
prose-metre
For, beside
characteristics,
for
however,
first
of
later
the
time
clearly
in Philo.
wwww __ ww ww, w
bably Philostratus.
and
><,
wwww, w w,
In
w
thinks
two
brilliant
Greek
Asianic
clausula. *)
He
(quoting
Marx)
that
the
into
clausulae
(Hegesias
etc.)
were introduced
dominated by
should
Rome
Latin
at the
literature
was
uninterruptedly
In
this
Hellenistic
tradition.
Greek,
of
this
have been
otherwise:
*)
by the
Lit.
imitation
manner
p.
of
Die griech.
1900, p. 37
Hermes
103104;
131
restored.
think, this
Plutarch
metrical
Flavii
the
clausula
did
Nor can
it
be
said
that
w w, w
Greek,
form.
and
w
is
w
realty
more
later
typical
and
In
wwww ww ww a more
others.
his
typical
Greek
fact,
mainly
investigations
Norden and
in
But
it
would lead
and the
us
too
far
to
discuss
detail
assertions
inferences
EIGHTH LECTURE.
I
on.
may be
words the
of
in
a few
Modern
scholars
On
we
try
to
between
the
first
Greek metrical
have
(1)
clausula
we
shall
to
it
Is
the accented syllable in the rhythmical cadence? In Latin, the existence of this relation cannot be denied.
tion,
The
rela-
is,
of course,
than
in
Greek.
Greek
which those
of
the
first
ffyzantine
cadences?
(3)
What
of
is
what
it
that
the
Byzantine?
of
shall
show
later
on
that
is
the typology
the
illustrates
133
I
Harmon
of
Ammianus
this
on
point.
Such an
of a
investigation
could
only have
comparative method.
hypothesis in a few words,
order to explain
my
of
the
the
origin
the
rhythmical cadence,
the
The sense
~
and
'
had disappeared.
The metre
tible
of
to
the
in
ear
the
to
only by changing
in
into
rhythm,
same manner
mutilate
do, in this
r
accustomed
recited, as
Homer.
way:
t
Homer,
of course,
was
we
and so
on.
This
means
that
some long
syllables are
accentuated, whereas mainly the short ones are not accentuated. In this
way modern
syllable,
is satisfied.
It is
said
that
the
bears the
'ictus'.
Now,
of
in
the
the metre
the
when
the
clausula
was
treated.
Their
way
of
reciting
the quan-
134
titative
clausula
been
like
ours,
i.e.:
substituting
rhythm
m
v>\
c/>
metre.
Thus
v'
treateQ as
co
en
in
s-^
as
c/>
c/)
(s>
ww ww
in
c/>
',
was
""
N-''
as
{/i
tn
in
s *
'
as
(/>
c/>
(/)(/>
c/)
Reading
for
this
manner was
difficult
call
reason,
that
syllables
the ictus,
would be
really
which had
this this
(I
If,
therefore,
other,
clausula
had
be imitated
in
some way or
mean the 'ictus' and the word-accent) coincide. So the Greek accent-clausula has not developed from
Greek
There
quantitative
is
the
it.
clausula, but
line
it
is
an imitation of
no regular
of
development, neither a
Wilamowitz,
however,
is
wrong
time
when
slightest
rhythm are
the
Besides,
attention
was paid
to quantity in particular
places, neither
where
were
long, nor
All this
would
if
the
the
Greek metre.
To
ascribe,
the origin of a
135
so important a part in the whole of the Greek genius in
literature,
to
the invention of
in
some
orator or rhetorican,
would be more
On
from
Latin
are
not very
convincing.
*)
argument
Latin,
is
typically
rather weak.
this
accent
when accent-hymns
is
arise independently
the
clausula.
in reality.
Himerius,
as
far
eo
.
.
while
Latin
.
c/>
v>
c/>
dn
...
is
J>
())viv)w ...
that in
Secondly there
J>
Greek
of
the form
&
.
v>
v>
.,
where
it
occurs,
viz. in
is
by-form
*).
Thirdly in Greek,
>
Pro-
& &
c/>
occurs,
no prototype
which
for
is
co
to
be found
c/5
in Latin
in
good
the
one.
J)
c/3
v)
Sophronius: so
both cases
number
As
18
to the
typology of the
2
)
20.
136
form
in
a>
v>
v>
</>
</>
in
.,
it
it
does form
Latin,
to
a
,
Latin
(or
Greek) typology
of
the
w
with
di
w
eo co
or
.
.
w
of
w Wj
but
to
a connection
is
eo
.,
to
be found
of
in Latin.
In
Ammianus
the
clausula
corresponds
clearly
( J>
with
u>
,
that
c#>
of
the
^ w
. ,
has been
clearly
most favoured
points
to
of all types of
dn
<n
<n
which
the typology
^,
co co cA
.
.
w
.,
and
&
nor of
w, w
dn
ww-.
w
The
or
w
found
in
w
it
special
typology has up to
v,
now been
force
Greek.
The form
shows
is
In
v>
is
lacking in Latin.
i
In Procopius
of this
the typology
<n
typology
to
preserve the
falling
rhythm
also in
the word-division.
So
t
C/3
>
r
C/3
Ui
r
and
C/3
C/3
C/3
C/3
is
avoided
in
the
tragic
trimeter and
still
more
rigidly
of course
and
and
*)
^^ ,w.
This tendency of avoiding final words of four syllables has nothing to do with the avoidance of final words of five syllables.
137
The
by a
Now,
all this
is
a greater agreement
quantita-
Latin accent-clausula.
is
en
en
en
en
en
dn
a by-form of
en
c/i c/3
dn
en
en
the
metrical
prototype
of
en
en
we want
of
to con-
sider
as
such,
a form which,
dn en en
dn
course,
develops
the
much more
easily into
en
en
In
Greek
fore.
form
w
some
c/5
^ w
dn
to
the
we
u>
well as
dn en
of those that
<s>
.
. .
come
is
does not
know
ch
en en
oj
<s>
<s>
en
c/3
vj
the prototype
of
which
is
^^ w^)
is
and which
others
the
in
highly favoured
later
Greek,
among
In
Philo,
Chariton and
especially Philemon.
Greek
quantitative clausula
In
agreement with
Where
Latin
the
and
that
the case in
many
respects
these
Greek and
138
Latin quantitative clausula.
So
the
Greek accent-clausula
very imita-
can
in
Thus
tion,
becomes
is
clear that,
owing
to this
which
is
In
no development
(in its
more
limited sense),
as
dr>
it
in
Latin,
c/>
c/5
w and
v>
v>
c/>
crop up,
have
of the
Greek
far
clausula,
and
Greek prose-metre
knowledge
of
facts
general,
as
as
it,
our
I
present
enables us to see
the
to
shall
deal in a few
words with
means by which
The
one
metre
the
sula
of
upon
is
word-order
cannot
only
be
denied.
Firstly
to
it
this
influence
the
two
means
arrive
is
at
definite
or
rr^/thm.
to
Secondly
clearly
seen
from
tendency
at
the
end
the sentence:
c
nius', in
etc.
Plutarch 'yevojuevwv',
frequently used
it
yev6jueva', in
are
at
the
to
close
the
period or
colon.
Thirdly
is
known
139
of the
two
last
words
of
the
sentence,
e.g.
c
in
Cicero:
tqojiov
,
and so
on.
The
facts.
problems,
however,
concerning
this
influence
laws
to
of
only
the
known
to
us.
us,
laws
less
of
even
known
may
suffice
to
illustrate its
A
of
manuscripts of Plutarch
some works,
in
to suit
Byzantine prose-rhythm.
clear
A
into
example
of this
tendency
is
the alteration of
More
or
often
one
of
w w, or w
I
www
forms.
rfj
shall
give
oipei JzaoaToeyeiv
becomes
JiaQaTQE%Eiv
rfj oyjet,
(www
a>
oo
u>
w w w
beco-
mes
J>
w w
c/>).
(paiveofiai
del
comes
OJiovdaoiLxbg
xal
140
(
ww
w
u)
c/>
becomes
u)
u>
the
avoided
form
dn
v>
f/i
becomes the
icbv
favourite form
djnijUf]iov
v> )
ovdev
al'oxQwv
anokEiJiEi
aloyowv
(
becomes
xo)v
ovdev
ajuijurjTov
djtohiTiei
,
becomes the
fa-
avoided form
vourite form
In
www
it
^ w ^ ^ ^ becomes the
J>c/>c/>ce/wc/>)'
Plato
may be observed
is
that at the
end of the
zivd,
sentence there
in
^^^
yEvofihcov
many
close
of
the
sentence,
such
as:
XfyojuEva
(wwww^
?
yoacpojuevcov
((
(www
xciteXijie
jiQog
avrov
)w w),
).
(www
(www
),
),
IJeqikMovs
deo/uerovg
(www
)f
(^--ww^),
oiKOVOjulav
(^--^w
{^^-s^s
In
),
dvvdjUECog
(ww^
fXEyaXocpqoovvi]v
statuit, faciunt,
numerum,
used
are
to get at the
ww^.
legiones,
The same
erunt,
is
conficiebat,
consequerentur,
populorum,
in deditionem, in
order to get
ww ^.
Romam venisset,
w.
belli,
introductus, decer-
Demosthenes,
of
141
consonant,
in
order to
produce
ww
end
of course
these
words are
of a sentence or
syllable, in xov TtoXe/uov.
by a long
. . .
order to produce
^^
or
e.g.:
ovx
em
may
be
of
illustrated
by a negative tendency.
ignoring
neglecting
The
his
later copyists
Procopius,
rhythm, have
x
).
often
of his sentence-endings
I,
Thus
ak'iov
Procopius
(ed.
Haury
p.
12 10
loyov nollov
In this
has
the
that
been modified
way
seen
rhythm
of
can be
in
such a
way
The
examples
ojg
imitation of
of
Herodotus by Procopius
offers
many
2
).
upon word-order
xaypvg
(
becomes
ovxoi
(bg eiypv
k u>ib
c/>)j
/ulev
vdjuotoi
xoiovxoioi
%@ea)vxai
(.
.
becomes
.
roiovroig
o>
in
os
c/)
.)J
erdooovro de
becomes
xal
hd^avro
code
v>
v>
).
With
choice
metre upon
influence
to arrive
of words
closely connected.
it
Also
this
exists undoubtedly, as
at
is
one
of the
its
few means
is
a favourite metre.
!)
Further
existence
proved by
2
)
See Cronert [on Haury]. See Braun, Die Nachahmung Herodots durch Prokop.
142
simple
statistics
of
wg and Su
in
the
different quantity.
ojg
From
or on
influenced
by the metre.
The
choice
made between
in
The importance
following examples.
of this influence
As
Demosthenes
}
to
avoid
^ww wwww,
and
etc.
He
!)
prefers edcoxajuev to
so on.
30, 37
When
the
comparing Isaeus
fact
12 with
Demosthenes
2
)
same
can be seen:
axQifieoxdnjv jiaocbv
Demosthenes.
^^^^
*
avviaxe
ydo
mosthenes.
'ww
nvkg
k'dog~av
ov xaXrjdrj juaQTVQfjoai.
nveg ov
limited
in
favour of
edifoiv'6 )
3
)
Fuhr, Rh. Mus. 57, 1902, p. 426 sqq. Fuhr, Berl. Philol. Woch. 1904, col. 1030 sq. This factor has been neglected by Rodiger, Glotta
8,
1917,
p.
16.
143
(esp.
fiedg
eftelei
^^^^
and so
),
for
ojotieq is
used xaddneQ,
I
for
hoojiEQ
/jL%qi71q,
on.
Other examples
gave
before.
can be stated.
to illustrate this to
easily
that
be given
I
sincerely
hope
show
relation
between choice
in a
of
words, order
satisfactory
to
words,
and
prose-metre
much more
I
In conclusion
of
want
make
on the importance
criticism.
As
whether
we
can investigate
differ
manuscripts
text.
of
the
same author
point, as
as
we
two
directions: they
may be
With non-rhythmical
deviations
mean
deviations which
to the
metre
I
With
rhrythmical deviations
mean
is offe-
made
like a
in
order to get
more
'open' rhythm,
i.e.
something
rhythm with a
144
considerable
number
of
two
last
accented ones.
is
The
clausula: xavxr\
wxrjvzat for
instance
d(jxyV,
changed
on.
I'xojv
into fyajv
and so
The
correctness
of
if
this
it
remark seems
to
be
liable
to serious doubt.
For
were
correct, there
viz.
would be
a tendency to get
many
the
(the
more
last
rhythm
of
cented
(.
.
syllables
to
.
between
.
the
. .
two
last
.
accented
ones
co
.,
...(oa),cB09,
co co co to
.),
most deviations
from
this rule
may seem
to
A
Here
more
the
of
interesting case
offered
by
I
the Byzantine
spoke before.
into the
is
changed
rhythm
struggle
centuries.
between
the
sense
for
rhythm
of
As
regards
of
the
criticism
single
passages,
(1) in
our
knowledge
prose-metre
may be used
order to
(2) in
choose between
Of course
the
principal
factors
which have
to
be
145
do with prose-metre
general
of the
itself.
These
factors
value
of
Greek language, the syntax of the author in question, and so on. These factors must form the basis of all They must play a predominant part further speculations.
especially
there
where a
certain
reading occurs in
all
textual
criticism,
it
is
necessary
it
to
ascertain
what
value
we would
to
ascribe to
in
we
have
quite
equivalent
In
this
case,
i.e.
ceteris
be inclined
is
to decide in favour
the
better
metre.
What
that
it
'better'
metre?
have
i.e.
tried to
show before
is
is
most favoured
at the
end
of the
as
of the
On
the
is
work
here:
(1)
the
dependence
of
the author
upon the
The
strongest arguments
146
exist there
rather frequently in
a certain
text,
e.g.
ww>^ w^^w-j
f
,
etc. in
Demosthenes,
etc. in
Plutarch,
later
ww w
3/ears,
and
*-"
>=*
as
less
clausulae
in
Plato's
and so on.
Much
convincing
may be
the
argumentation where
we have
to decide
As
have
to
such
questions
many premature
to
conclusions
to
been
made.
of
traced
an
application
sufficiently
in
metrical
knowing the
form
rules themselves.
Thus Baehrens
his
glects
The
NINTH LECTURE.
With
to
us in a
others
some
of
connected.
cases of
in
Suppose
w
there
an other author on
is
of the
same
form,
that
any reason
infer
from
this difference
there
texts
exists
a real metrical
difference
to
between the
two
that
chance?
Suppose
there
indeed a
is
it
real
these
two authors,
by means
to
of a quotient
v^n
2?
Would
it
be possible
greater
find
how much
the
chance
it
that
real
to
difference
than that
merely due
I
chance?
I
So
far as
think
we
by recent
towards
The
3'et
consequences
of
this
attitude
shown by
me.
And
the
same or nearly
in other
the
same questions
branches of science,
148
such
as
e.g.
in
astronomy,
in
all
in
biology,
in
differential
psychology.
Now,
these
cases
they
have been
way.
We
from the results obtained there as a basis for the following researches.
1.
In
classifying
in
may
occur
of
antique prose,
often
referred
you
to a
scheme
the
128
combinations
may be
the
fact
is
superfluous to emphasize
of the
is
in
doing
so,
no length whatsoever
clausula
postulated.
To
not
the
same
fix
eight syllables.
On
real
is
way
to
the
Where we
^^
hand
at
>=;,
and
of
/ 2 /
for
>
w,
>
2%
for
on the other
w w w,
4%
for
and
of
5%
f r
lt
appears from
first of
these
Sentencemetre.
Clausula-
metre.
4-0 o/ 5-0 o/
Quotient.
2-0% 2-5%
2(+) 2(+)
149
From
been
of
felt
this
we may
form
:=:
has
as a metrical unity in
and
the
clausula here
five or
In
way
it
becomes
group
clear in
diffe-
At
first
sight
we
might be inclined
to
in this
way:
and so
on.
This
way
in
of
Kaluscha.
made
more
more
it
against
distant
it.
We
will
are
assuming
that
the
syllable
its
quantity
be metrically
indifferent.
Consequently
is
desirable
w w w and
their
first
w
syllable,
is
which
differ
only
as
regards
for
or
^^^^^
On
and
^w^w,
of
true.
There-
way
grouping
is
that in
combinations of the
final syllables
150
and so
2.
on.
The
reliability
firstly
In doing so
is
errors
practically
syllables
without
making
mistakes
now and
is
then.
so large,
But
It
we meet
is
rather
whether
of
in
of Plutarch
noifjoco
with
that
Thucydides
we
is
shall
it
take e.g.
as
or as
nor
r\v
we
ded
shall
regard avxov
as
or as
in
w
is
Provi-
that
we
to
There
no reason
whatsoever
may
cause a difference
in
151
ww
registered
author,
in Plutarch,
On
we have
in
a material of
(a
whom we may
liquida
call
B.
We
muta cum
nowhere lengthens a
which
We
state that
nowhere
differen-
some form
applied,
in B.
Let the
but
same procedure
let
of
collecting
that
material
be
us
now assume
muta cum
will
liquida
What
happen now?
to the first
Many
in
syllables
scansion
Owing
number
of
(i.e.
that for
author
and
that
for
the author
B)
will
become
which
number
larger,
of long syllables
is
For
the combination
wwwwwwww
If
greatest
(i.e.
number
were
of
cases.
the
syllables
question
cum
dure would be
the frequency of
felt
For instance
at the
all
the
would increase
If
expense
of the frequency of
of
^^.
they were
antepenults
the
sentence,
152
woulds increase
the the
at the
expense
of the frequency of
^
on.
same way
expense
the frequency of
w would increase
-w>^ ^,
and so
at the
of the frequency of
In both authors, in
as well as in B, this
would be the
case to the
same
extent.
comparison
of
way
same
viz.
result
as the
figures
of
that
The
question
becomes
quite different,
when we apply
Suppose we
two
authors.
muta cum
If
liquida lengthens
by
position, but
not so in B.
into
in
account,
statistics,
may
w w,
say
Nor need
of
much on
point:
in
two
different authors
the remarks of Munscher, who expresses his such researches, as it had not been clearly stated in what way dubious quantities had been regarded, are incorrect. Compare Bursian's Jahresbericht.
*)
That
is
why
doubt as
to the results of
153
rules
for
each
of
them.
to
Even
if
changed according
to
how we regard either of these dubious cases, whether we suppose that muta cum liquida lengthens a syllable,
or not.
Suppose
e,
that
it
the vowels
this
and v had
to
evolution
had
be neglected.
For
if
we
did not,
for instance
would be
made
metre
author,
impossible.
of
In
one
author
clausulae
of
the
same
we
into account.
From
interesting
appears
again,
of
how
methodologically
is.
the
investigation
antique prose-rhythm
When
statistical
help
of
of
an
author uses
cases
the
muta cum
metrical tendencies
elg
ovx
djtoKQovei,
avxovg
ajioxXiveiv,
at
tence, while
this
he generally prefers
^^ w ^
mind
w,
may become
liquida.
it
muta cum
Then,
must be borne
in
154
sentence, those for the forms occurring at the end of the
we
is
try
statistics,
we
should be obliged
assume a
and
it
this
we
In
com-
end
never
disappear.
differences
This comparison
will
show
all
the metrical
of the sentence.
for instance,
^^^
in the sentence,
same form
as a
it.
Nevertheless
its
frequenc} in
7
much
greater,
and
in this
manner
In
order to
scholars,
in
be able
it
to
compare
results obtained
by
different
is
desirable to
been chosen
give a
list
such
dubious cases.
shall
ovv-,
not vv-]
and
dei
Tioieiv
a short
vowel
before
is
/fy*,
cum
liquida, except
yju,
nor
is
before an
final
initial
is
vowel
of a following
word;
elision of a short
initial
vowel
of
vowel
the next
word
155
vowel
etc.)
is
ened aviov
3.
In the second
numtwo
we have
draw any
investigated
two clausulae
of the author
we
inference what-
If
we
should find
two forms
^=:,
and
in
B two forms
are
are
^,
clausulae of clausulae of
is
A
B
w ^,
w,
clau-
nor nor
sulae of
If,
there
and those
of B.
however,
we
sulae taken
to
from
random,
?
all
of
which
will
prove
be
of
the
all
form
of
w
will
clausulae,
:==:,
which
be
infer
of
the
form
great
we
should
be allowed
with
probability:
(1) that in
A
B
about
100%
100%
form
w ^,
(2) that in
about
form
(3) that
;=:,
forms of
and those
of
in general.
156
From
number
of
this
example
it
will
be clear
to
you
that the
relia-
example.
If
we
A
of
three
the
clausulae,
one
of
be
form
w w,
the
however,
of the
form
w, we should
not be
about
33%
we
of the clau-
would be
form
of
the
form
If,
w w,
however,
and about 61
should
the
w.
have
w w,
and
670
of
the form
If
:=:,
this conclusion
would hardly
be premature.
yield
the
same
figures,
become a
certainty.
The
lowing:
question
is
it
which
will
occupy us next
in
is
the
fol-
possible to
determine
scientific
is
way
able
what degree
to give?
4.
It
cannot be
my
for
me
to
give you
an independent judgment on
practical side of the
such
questions.
us.
Only the
found
can interest
An
empirically
percentage
represents
only
As
a rule the
157
percentage
ratios.
forms
only
error
1
an
of
approximation
to
the
true
The mean
expressed by a formula
mean
where / represents
cases investigated.
error
=
this
/>(100-/) | 1/ ^
-,
the
number
of
Can
philological material?
Now, we can
material into
investigate
whether
ex
in
dividing our
,
1/
where
percentage
single
group
=
N
the
number
>
of
1/
n~~
where
z= number of
answer
this question
divided
my
material
the
cases.
For each
of
these
groups
calculated
first
the
and
e2
every time
five
cases
el
does not
e2
-
expect an
exact agreement of
and
158
TABLE.
Livy, sentence-metre, five groups of 200 cases.
Difference
IT
3P"
Five groups of
^
Average
Fl
8*
between the
last
Number
of the
number
Form.
\
%
0-9%
15
SI
two
of cases
form.
T
II
colums,
l
62
(0
07
I'l
+08
916
1724
^- ww_www>-.-
3 5
5
7
23
2-8
T4
+ 03
0-6
-0-2 4-03
6
13
7
06
14 14
12
25-32 3340
15 10
2
5
8 11
3
7
57
16
1*1
^w_ w__
w-
9
7
26 60 66
111
2-7
4148
15 12
13
13
19
26
11
17
+0-9
14 16 10
18
0-7
15 15 25 30 26
34
12
1*4
22
11
+ 1-2
+01
0-3
9
15
3
12
8 13 15
9
7
6-3 4-3
17
10 15
2-4
14
21
1-5
+ 10
03 + 0.7 + 0.4 + 13
+3-2
25 19 17 15 19
i
95
4-2
18
2-2
16
12 26 21 20 20 18 20 18 18 13
99
8-7
113120
121-128
25 23
5-8
21
44 24 46 20 32
166
1
20 26
The
in
in
result is that in
1 1
of the
is
It
an a posteriori
5 cases
*)
it
way
is
smaller.
appears from
this that
indeed
f)
5
200,
average %.
159
the
formula
1/
m~
>
applicable to our
In
now
we
for
is
shall
assume
that
the
formula
1/
irp-
the
mean
The
Let
are
it
somewhat
and
at
as follows.
argument
that the
that
Laws
real
homogeneous
unity,
the
of
percentage
sentence
follows.
is
If
the
If
double trochees
this
the
end
the
be the case,
of
we may
is
reason as
material
1000 clausulae
of
taken from
is
the
Laws,
double trochees
a.
cal-
culated,
we
on.
Another group
of
b,
and
b
6,
so
The
These
the
errors
errors
which
are
are
made
are
6,
etc.
probably
distributed
in
Half the
distributed
number
of
figures
6,
6,
etc.,
if
between
and +0-6745
-0-6745
|/*!50p!>
|/^p^,
160
lie
_2
_3
|/Al00p/)
j/^100-/)
To
simplify
and
+2 j/>flMp4.
will
lie
-/, +3 j/X100 N
calculations
I
such
taken from
keitslehre, 2
nd
W.
ed.,
Kopenhagen
1913, p. 74.
161
TABLE
of of
the
number
of deviations
on 10000 which,
in the case
an ideal distribution,
,
. .
will lie
be between deviation
.
d
Number
of
Number
d
(deviation)
e
deviations on 10000
of deviations on 10000
of
(deviation)
e
deviations on 10000
between and d.
between
and
d.
between and d.
4987 4990 4993 4995 4997 4998 4999 4999 4999 5000 5000
1.50
199
1.55
30
0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95
1.00
1
05
398 596 793 987 1179 1368 1554 1736 1915 2088 2258 2422 2580 2734 2881 3023 3159 3289 3413 3531 3643 3749 3849 3944 4032 4115 4192 4265
2.00 2.05 2.10 2.15 2.20 2.25 2.30 2.35 2.40 2.45 2.50 2.55 2.60 2.65 2.70 2.75 2.80 2.85 2.90 2.95
4332 4394 4452 4505 4554 4599 4641 4678 4713 4744 4773 4798 4821 4842 4861 4878 4893 4906 4918 4929 4938 4946 4953 4960 4965 4970 4970 4978 4981 4984
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3 3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8 3.9
162
5.
So with
will
ner,
is
it
be possible
determine
how
empirically found
expression
could
figure
of
real
a true tendency.
If
it
be assumed as a certainty
1
42
w w
it
non-metrical
prose
is
correct,
and
if
we
29%
of the
same form
in Plutarch,
is
how much
two
texts
exists.
on
this point,
Another question
of
arises.
Suppose
prose
is
ww
in non-metrical
14*2%,
29-0%, how
sight
can
this
difference be
to
measured?
At
first
290%
from 14-2%
by
figures:
If
this
14-2 (0/ ) 14-8. (%) should be done, the conclusion must be accepted
that the
16%
in metrical
prose from
as
that
in
non-metrical prose
deviation of
is
exactly as strong
metrical prose
it
causing
50%
in
from
see
65%
that,
in non-metrical prose.
And
yet
is
easy to
when
only
it
of
non-metrical prose,
is
much more
an
artist
163
to
raise
figure
from
to
(%)
to
figure
from 50 (%)
65 (%).
Owing
it
mula
for
appears to be more
# of a quotient -j-
16
and
65
j.
Is this
way
I
tendency
quite
correct?
am
is
possible at
all
in
posing for a
to
moment
is
that theoretically
difficult to
would be possible
In
do
so,
it
extremely
of
favour,
however,
cited.
the
quotient
some undeniable
facts
may be
If
it
be assumed that
in non-metrical
1
^ ^
the
is
1
:
has a frequency of
%, and
ratio in
3,
which short
the frequency of
and
of
w_ w ^^
will
will
be
be
3%, 9%.
where
this
Now,
ones
for
is
if
there exists
some
but
metrical text,
ratio of the
number
quite
the same,
where
exists
a preference
the frequency
viz.
^ ^,
164
of
which form
is
twice as great,
viz.
24%, we
shall get
Non-metrical
prose.
Metrical
prose.
Quotient.
3% 9%
w w w
6%
18%
in
think,
we
the
same
for
as for
w w.
it
If,
however,
this
ought
to
be expressed
if
same way
in
the
difference
taken as a
means
and 9
we
get 3 for
is
w w
we
for
>-i.
If
the quotient
taken,
get
2 in both cases.
coefficient
TABLES.
In investigating
of
Greek
method
material
Marbe
not
have neglected
to
interpunctions.
Those who
are
accustomed
deal
with
statistical
errors
of
which tend
in
to
neutralize
each
other,
as
for
instance
about the
reliability of this
method.
165
Neglecting
this
all
interpunctions
enables us to exclude
editors into diffe-
by the
rent texts.
The varying
interpunction
authors,
comparison between
different
different
in different editions
impossible.
this
One
serious objection
may be made
against
procedure.
By applying
it,
For
instance,
if
an author avoids
the
^w^
In
end
of
may
www represent ^^
at
may
in
be 'anceps'.
the
mean
the
general tendencies,
If
,
as
it
e.g.
avoidance of
some forms
as
all
w^^^w
and
others, the
same
authors investigated.
When
mined, one
may
investigate
of the
will
have
to
place
made mechanical
calculations.
166
If
we
into
account,
editors, or
first
interpunction
interpunction.
of the
In the
diffe-
rent
way,
the
second case a
new
subjective
factor
really
dangerous one.
For
to the
we
we
are inclined to
results
we
on.
expect.
we
expect an avoidance of
wwww,
^^,^^
is
instead
of
^^^^
we
The
and so
interpunction
run
much
in
our material;
little
if
interpuncfirst-
neglected
we may
find too
in
it.
can be corrected.
For
if
by
is
we
is
Demosthenes a
series of short
often broken
for
same
true
Nevertheless our
in
method
authors, reserve.
clearly
shows
both
and
In
we
each other
just reverse.
167
Frequency
in
of
different
authors.
The
figures
are
derived from a
THUCYDIDES.
Book
180 113 57
161
I.
150
165
70
-2-3
40
18 12 2
^4-5-6-1^8-910
11
58 28 32
13
7
89 47 46 23
13 4 6
98 62 40
19
160 113 57
200
107
165
35
15 10 13 5
1
60 37
13 7
11
93 55 43
19 5
188 105
173
64 40
14
99 68 36
13
155 91 62
31 21 14
169 109
167
46 33
17
8 8
5
1 1
4 3
1
3 3 3 3
4
1
3 2 3
8 4 2
2 2 2
1
8 6
1
15
8
3
6
7
2 5
1
4
1
4
1
10 5 5 8 3
1
85 49 30 32 6
10
4 3 2
1
1
1
1
1 1
12
1 1
13 14 15
XENOPHON.
Cyropaedia, book
I.
_^
161
171
149
137
-2
3^
^4
78 59 35
14 15 10
77
96
61
44 43 24
6
11
37
16 18
95 48 39 20
16 13
1
136 92 45
31 21
185
101
47
51 17
179 110 55 36 22
14
7
172 106
231 103
142 114
58 38
17
45
41
25
13
40 40 20
14 5 5
1
187 109 50 37
17
162
85
51 31 18 15
11
56-7 -8
20
7 5
9
1
910
11
6 4 2 2
5 2 7 2
9 8 4
1
1
8
7
4
3
1
3
1 1
4 2
6 5
2
1
6 9
7
4
1 1
6
2
3 3
12 13 1415
1
1
1 1
16
168
ISOCRATES.
Panegyricus,
I
sqq.
182 152 133
w 2
34^
5
140
84
57 32 22
17
159 74 59
173 75
171
85
51
40
19
11
48 36 20
9
11
156 87 47
41
17
36 23
17
158 97 57 35
84
61
89
72 23
78 70
31
38
12
162 79 67 44
15
170
91
151
99
53 29
21
54 37
21
11
20
13
25
11
22
11
6,7w '8^
8 5
1
11
5 3
1
910
11
3
1
6 4
2
4 4 3 2
1
13 12 7
2
6
2
17 5
16
6
2
1
1
4 4
1
1 1
2
1
8 4 3 3
1
5 2 2
1
6 6 4
1
10
18 5
5 2
4
2
6
2
13 14 15
12
2
1
1
1
1
1 1
16 17 18-
DEMOSTHENES.
Philipp. A.
Olynth. A.
Olynth. B.
Olynth.
<_<
10^
^11^
147 103
134
111
118 109
158 130
74 28 24
12
73 36
21
68 48 30
6
7
1
69 46
17 2
144 108 69 39
21 14
7
114 123
61
165 106 70
41 21
133 102 75
40
21 14
7
43 23
10 7 2
1
8
3 4
8 5 3 2 3
1
9
5 5 5
4 3
2
3
1
2
1
2
1
69
[DEMOSTHENES].
77(00?
ri]v
-^
3 4
^
2
172
95 67 43
18 14 2 4
2 2
1
150 86 74 38 23
14 8 2 3
1
567
8910
11
PLATO.
Republic.
Book
B
102
r
46
42
17 13
'
93
42 32 25
15
E
83 67 28
15 2 3
3 _4
^-2
119 65 45
14
102 57
105 62
118
118
8-.9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
-6w7
5-
29 24
11
46
15 16
48 30
21 10
65
31
9 6
6
5 2 2
1
4
2
1
6
2
1
6 4
2
1
4 6
3
1
8 4 3
1
1
28 9 4
3 3
1
2
1
1
1 1
17 18^
20
19-
170
PLATO.
Laws.
Book
I.
II.
in.
IV.
_2 ~_3 ^4 5
81
50 32
17
82 62 28 20
14 9
66 59 27 22
14
85 57
31
93 53 28
14 14
76 59 35
21 13 4 5 3
96 42
31
83 68 30
15
11
23
13 2 6 4 2
1
27
15
6
^-1^
^8^ ^9-10
9 6 6
1
4
5
9 8 4
9 6
1
9
3
1
3 5
6
3
1
3
2
1 1
1
1
1 1
2
1
1
12
11
13 ^14^
PLUTARCH.
Pyrrhus. Book
I.
_-w
^
2
6^
237
144
196 143
71
190 152
225
135 77 27
13
7
186 142
^3~
A^
-5 -7
8
60 40 23
4
1
36
17
80 35
12
66 37
21
34
14 8
1
148 76 36
15
7
141
163 126
171
68 32
17
80 43
16
135 92 29
15
184 138 65 32 25
10 2
1
197 127
68 32
13
11
6 4
1
4
2 2
6
2 2
8
1
6
5 3
5 3
1
2
1
6 2 3
1
2 3
4
1 1 1
9
toil 12
1
171
[PLUTARCH].
Consolatio ad Apollonium.
_^
v_
^2
3 _4 5
6-
160 102 75
34
17
11
-7w
_9
_8
5 4
4
1
-10-
PLUTARCH.
ZvyXQlOEiq.
Dem.
.,
a.
Ant.
a.
Cato.
W W
^2 ^3 w4w ^5^ w6-7-9-
/w
187
131
74 40
19 8 2
1 1
188 119 74 36
19 14
1
1
1
171
134 79
41 14
6 4
1
178 143 73 30 20 9
2
1
201 132 72
204
155 70
31 14 8 2 2
1
185 134 70
172 139 78
33
15 7
45
15 5
7
38
16 7 2 2
1
a-
4 3
172
1000
SYLLABLES.
>->
o C
u U o
o B
Q
167-7 97-2 50-3
<u
Q
1988 1600
o D
Plato
o e
3*
"3
Rep. Laws.
a-
171-1
23 _4 5^6 7 -8
_9-
977
57
1
185 8
1050
580
35-2
699
40-
70.5
565
35-4
366
197
101
7 3
383
19-3
128
198 137
7-8
22-3
9.4
405 205
140
828 138-8 1020 137-1 750 73-8 563 72-9 368 303 344 340
199
12 9
199
42
3'1
86 45 28
19
63
2.8
4-7
32
2-2
19
1-3
50 30 25
1-5
76 55
3-5
64
5-4
170 110
16-5
50 40 40
10
8-0 3-0
1-4
2-4
26
19 ro
2-1
14
14-15
-16-
11 12 13
17 18-1920-
-10-
0-8
05 03
0-2
07 02
0-5
08 07
01
04
01
0-5
04 04 03
01
05 02 03
0.2
0-8
0*3
08
0*3
o-i
0'2
O'l
02 03
01
03 02
01
o-i
01
01
01
THUCYDIDES.
Book
I.
2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9
302 139 66 26
13
399
128
51
384 340
135
71 21
138
341 142
26
11
69 28
6
3 2
80
22
2 4 2
312 139 63 23
14
7
8
2
1
361 139 63 29 9
1
317
137 57
343
135 72
372
142 62
347 123 73
31 10
1
384
110
35
8 5
1
30
8
3
1
20
12
80 24
7
3
1
1
3
1
3
1
3
1
2
1
173
XENOPHON.
Cyropaedia, book
392 124 63 28
8 2
2
I.
411 128 56
344
141
379
147
402
149
51
26
7
64 30
9
1
44
19
339 124 69
31
11
358
154
303
144 53 29
7 7
1
347
111
313
144
29
3
2 2
60 30
11
66
32
65
18
11
341 127 77
28
14
3
9 4
1
20
6
1
2
1
3
1
4 2
2
1
391 128 65 23 8 3
3
2
1
ISOCRATES.
Panegyricus
406
135
I
sqq.
64 23
7
1
1
382 119 68 24
11
1
395
113
374 323
131 121
358
138
345
121
365
137
373
128 74 20 8
3
380
140
361 132
369
128 78
21
54 27
16
1
52 30
11
68 35
6
68
19 13 2
1
68 23
13
1
69
24
7
1
54 36 9
1
1
54 36 9
3
1
6
2
1
5
1
DEMOSTHENES.
Philipp.
A.
Olynth. A.
Olynth. B.
Olynth.
R
340
149
101
336
330
157
345
154 112
3
282
129 132
10
2
327
130 126
5
2
338
167
2 -3 4 5 -6 7
-8
W--
128 129
7
93
13 2
1
1
95
5 3
13
2
174
[DEMOSTHENES].
IIqoq
rijv
moToA.r]v tov
&diJi7iov.
W
2 3 45
337 134 73 28
9 4
356
140 72 22
10
1
PLATO.
Republic.
Book
B.
r.
A.
,,
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
149 110 74 75 35 29 12 9 1 4 2 3
1
140 162 53 62 39 25 5 6
2
1
151
165
56 29
11
64 27
11
7
1
PLATO.
Laws.
Book
I.
II.
III.
IV.
3 _ 4_
-5 6 -7
87 128 57 43 43 38
13 12
1
128 122
41
30
12
50 36
10
1
98 118 49 42 50 41
17
108 113 56 42 41 43
12
11
4 4
4
3 2
4
3
1
16 6 3
15
5 2
1
6
3
175
PLUTARCH.
Pyrrhus.
233
.
Book
238
138
I.
244
145 68
51 6 2
235
160 79
228
142
2 3 4 5
6-
140 58
61 7
60
51
11
44
5
2
251 165 51 51
7
236
161 61
229 281
150 65
51
255 277
177
282
153
178
65 50
6 5 2
1
48 9
4
1
54 45
5
1
50 49
5 2
6
3
1
157 53 55 4
1 1
49 48
8 4
4
2
3
2
7 8
9
10
1 1
PLUTARCH.
Consolatio ad Apollonium.
3 4 5 -6 7 -8 9
328 154 56 27
10
PLUTARCH.
HvyxQioeig.
Dem.
__
i.
Ant.
Thes.a .Rom.
253
Sol.
a.
Popl.
Arist. a.Cato.
2 3
266
165 52 45
11
285
152 52
142
4 5 6
40
13 3
1
43 50
2
259 168 52 54
2 3
249
148
236
153
267 165
61
259
171
49
59
7
3 2
2
1
56 55 4 4
2
45
10
1
57 40 9
2
176
1000
SYLLABLES.
t-,
T3
A
O
X!
5
o o S
5
CO
O 3
ji
o s
0J
Plato
tj
ti
Rep. Laws.
"5
9.
3 6 7 8 9
4 5
-2
3502 3600 3693 3299 3465 1339 133-8 1286 143-9 137-0 1462 673 61M 643 114 3 72.5 640 8-6 25-0 263 26-9 265 307
9-0
9-8
12 8
47-5
594
50-3
6-6
403
13-3 5-3 2-8
570 270
100
97
1-5 1-3
1-5
29
1'5
33
1-5
0-6
0-1
95 25
9-0
.2-7
528 485 73
1-2
28 08
01 01
30
10
1-0
26
0-8
0-4
03 02
03
01
0-2
0-5
0-3
10 11
o-i
128
FORMS
For
DIFFERENT AUTHORS.
first
book has
in Classical
been scanned.
Quarterly 1915,
For
p.
my
paper
231
sqq.
edition of Benseler
and
Blass, Leipzig
'editio
minor'
of
of
A. Hug, 1905,
been used.
The beginning
been taken.
177
edition of
The
the
1000 syllables
and
The
clausulae of
Demosthenes (898
F,
FIeqi
rfjg
Olynth. A, B,
eiQrjvrjg,
B,
ITsqI
rcov
of
sentence-metre
For
32.
The
been used.
his sentence-metre
first
beginning of the
book
of the
of
Laws.
edition
The
figures
his
sentence-metre
of IIeqI (pdav&Qcomag
V,
p.
279
etc.)
The
have
vol. V, p.
279 sqq.
(IleQi
<pdav&Qcomas
500 cases).
178
<u
73
73.
S
a.
<u
o u
a;
<u
as 3
o S
7)
S-3
J8
c
a;
C/3
O 3
14
Si
X
Sum
1
c a
C/3 C/3
so
Ph
o*
c
<u
IX
7}
total:
1000 1000
2
I
2
I
2 3 4 5 6
7
1 1
o
1
2 3
6
1
3
1
2 2
3 3 4
3 4 5
2 10 4 8
5
5
6
2 5
7
1 1
9
:
6
5
8 9 10
11
2
1
12
5
2
3
3
2
1
3
1
16
8
12 3
! 15 9
7
6 10
4
8 5 6
7
4 6
7 7
12
6
7
3
5
10 8
9
5
13 14 15 16
17
13
14 18 14
11
6
7
1
4
1
8
5
10 14
19
3
12
8 9
10
1
2
1
4
2
11
3 8 3
11
5 3
18 19
6
3
7
13
5
6
13 2 10 5
11
2
5
5
2 J
20
21
6
1
17
22 23 24 25
10
6
1
8 8
?|
5
6 8 10 15
5
6 3
7
4
9
10
()
26
27 28 29 30
31
11
11
5 8
10
11
8 3
7
3 3 7 3
12
4 6 9
6 6 8
5
4
3
1
1
12
11
8
7 8
4
32
8 15
5 8
5
4
3
9
12
179
x
C3
7)
U3
.
ti (h
t
H
c/3
MB
O
a;
CJ <u
D s 1-3
i Si
^
en
O
<u
5
as
S
aJ
=3
S SO Q Q
C/3
a o fl U
rt
<u
Si
Oh
U
v:
c/3
Sum
33 34 35 36 37 38 39
total:
500
2 3
338
4
3
7
1
1 1
6
5
3 8
6
7
4 6
7
9
3 3
6 8
2
2 3
1
2 14
9
14
5
7
9 6
7
9
14 5
8
8
12 2 3
4
5 2 4
1
4 4
10
6 18
11
3 4
14
12
8
7
8
7
40
41
9
11
13
6
10
4
5 5
3 16 7
12
7
11
4 4 3 8 6 10
7
11
42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
51
4 4 4 4 6
13
6 2 6 2
2 7
11
5
11
6
1
5 10
11
5 5 2
1
7
11
6 8
7
2 5 5
12 3 2
5
2
9 16 6 2 14
15
5 8 3 5 5 2 4 2 3 4 3 3 2 2
4 4
11 7
6
10
11 4
1
6
11
5 5
9 5
10
7
4
1
6
3
2
8
7
4
5 10 2 9
5 5 13
1
1
2
1
1
4
3
6 13 6
11
4
3 5
6
2 6
1
4
1
52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61
4 5 10
11
11
4 8
7
8 4
7
6
16 7 14
7
6 8 9 8
3 3 12
5 8 4 5 9 6 4 6
11
4
11
11
4
8
1
6
7 5
15 8 8
12 13 2
17
5
7
11
9 8
15
10
4
4 6 7 6
7
1
8 10 10 8
12
13
1
16
5
6 8
10
11
62 63 64
6 8
11
16 14
11
4
17
26
13
26
9 6 8 9 9 16 9
9 8 9 4
12
11
4 8
5 3
7
6 4 4 6
2
4
12
14 13
2 3 7 10 15 13
14 10 5
7
5
7
4
2
7
5 17 7 3
4 2
7
7
8 8 9
10 4
6 4 2
20
8
11
16
8 6 9
180
4;
4^
ai
03 73
V
T3
rt
4
o o c B o c O
is
(a 03
if}
% 2 C
tS
QJ
s
2.
a;
S3 x:
of U
o
e
<u c/)
H
C/3
iSB
0-(
sS
C/3
<u
c/)
Sum
65 66
67 68
total
1000
000 1000 1000 1000 898 1000 000 1000 1000 1000 500 338
!
4 4
11
5 3 5
7
2 10
2 3
1 1
1
2 3
69 70
71
4
3
7 13 4
4
10 18 15 5
11
6 8 4
3
6 6
7
4
7
1 1
8
10
72 73
6 9 6
14
6 8
10
5
3 3
1
2 3 5
1
19
18
11
6
5
74
75 76 77 78 79
7 5 9 7
7
14 12 9 8
11 11
6
13
11
4 4
5
29
8
18
25
13 17 12 10 13 14 2 3
14 3 15 12 3 7
2 3 6 3 10 18 6 16 5
3 6 5
1
1
4
3
2 2
6 8
5 12 15 4
1
8
3 5 13
11
8 8 4
11
10
7
6 8
5
7
4 4 4
7
6
5 21 3 5
11
80
81
82 83 84 85
10 16 4 6 9
11
3 12 5
5 5 16 3
4 9 8
17
22
17 16 17
5 13
5 2
2 2 2
1
8
5 10 8
6
13 18
1
1 1
1
4
1
4
7
11
9
10
10
7 5
7
7
86
87 88 89
9 8 8
2
3 6 3 9
11
11
9
10 10
10 14
20
14 19 17
11
23
16 14 14
4 9
2 5 3
4
3 12 5
14
8 6
3 17 3 5 6
4
2
8
7
8 13
7
6
11
5
11
6 9 7 9 9 9 10 5 19 12 10
7
8 8
3
3 8
6
3 2
1
9
17
20
8 6 5 13 9
11
16 16 5
18 18
4
8 6
10
4
7
24
12
20
16
4
11
11
90
91
6
7
11
92 93 94 95 96
16 10 14 5 14
14 13 12
14 10
34
16 21
26
18
11
8
12
8
13 10 7 21
8
7
8 9 10
10 16
22
12
10 10
4
11
25
21 18 14
16
8 15
18 14 17
28 26 23
6 2
13 13
6
16
12
8
10
12
181
d'
<u
J-.
ah 3 6
TJ
in
7)
Ih aj as
S ^ 7 a. o a
CI
<u
<u
*->
q>
-G
"tJ
</)
c/)
3 3
a3
si
5
3
a)
a a V
CJ
72 ~C
Du,
d?
<U
o C
c
rp -C 0H
o"3 V) 3
*
<u
Q
c/3
c/3
<u
U
338
S
WD
<U
(U c/3
CO
Sum
97 98 96 100
101
total
1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 898 lOOOl 1000 1000 1000 lOOOl 500
6 6
11
3 6
9
10 14
11
6 8 9
11
2 5
7
1
1 1
2
1
6 6
12
2
6
13
7
5 3 10
10
7
2 5 13
6
11
6
13 10 12
7
14 19 5 14
15 12 14
14
17
3 3
9 9
12
1
20
7
5 12 9 10
9
16 5
22
19
15
7
22
12
9 8
12 10 12
15 7
8
10 12 16 16 3 10
6 9 13
7
7 6
11
7
6 6 5 9 12
12
10
6
13 13
3 6 8 6 2 3
3 5
11
9 4 4
17 12 16
6 8
15 3
9
11
8
7
8
13
17
10 19
11
21
14 12 15
5 15
12
4
8 10 6
4 14
7
15
9 9
14
3 16 10
11
4 16
7
13 10 14 17 14 2
8
13 12 13
6 8 8
12
8
17
9
14
8
17 15 13
8
11
2
7
8
11
19
11
4 3
10 13 8 15
11 11
4 9
7
15
5
30
14 12 18 15
1
16
9
12
8 10
10
4
8
12
3 5
14
4
1
7 3
7
8 9
10
7
3
1
U
5 10
1
6
12 16 5 10 8 16 12
20
19
14
21 12 12
11
16 10
120
121
20
10 12 13 18 16
15
1
9 7
5
7
8 4
7
2 8 10
9
5
7
6
2
17 12
5 17
13 13 14 17 12
16 13 19
11
18
16 15
8 13
1
4 3
5
12 21 18 14
9
10
4 4
6
17
8
11
9
7
28
23
22 27 49
10
15
9
3
4 4 6 4 4
3
8
13 12 16 21 31
6 8 6 8
11
2 2 2
1
13
7
14
182
THRASYMACHUS.
not enable us to
his
The few fragments wich have come down to us, do draw certain conclusions with regard to
Only the form
w
altogether
chance.
On
12 sentence-endings
we
of form.
following.
wwww ww *w
^
Cfjtovotv exdxeQOL
avdyxt] de Xeyeiv.
v7iooyj]0i tag ahiag.
w^ w w
s-g:
eooj(p()ovovjuev.
ii
TOIOVTOV
^o/ft)
EOtCLl)
w w w
w w
Among
and
the kola
rcdAecog axoveiv
Ivovxa.
ovoa naoLv.
jivvfidveofiai.
(pdoviKovvxag nao%eiv.
0(DCpQOvi,ElV ElCO'&EV.
we may
>=-:.
note
rolg vecdteqoioi
w ^,
183
THUCYDIDES.
Clausula of
some
II,
of
the
more
work:
I,
140-144;
l
35-46.
33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
41
1
2 3
4
5
1 1
6
7
65 66 67 68 69 70
71
97
98 99
1
100
101
5
2 5
1 1 1
8 9
10
11
2 2
1
12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19
2
1
42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
51
72 73 74
75 76 77 78 79 80
81
2
1
3
2 5
1
1
3
1
1
1 1
20
21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
1
1 1
52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59
3
2
82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
91
2 2 2
1
2
1 1
2
1
2
2 2 2
2
1
120
121
60
1
61
32
62 63 64
92 93 94 95 96
2
1
2 2
3 2 4 5
184
THUCYDIDES.
Comparison
of his clausula with his sentence-metre.
M-l
i
oo
O m
the
Number
of
3
Form.
CO
3>
P
is
J3
"u
rheto
yj
part
the form.
Clausu
Sum
total
of cases in
1000 2000
130
vestigated
_______ v_ ^
V
0-5%
144 18
0-5
142
16*2
Ss
-^
^^s
v.
20 36
^-^
l'l isi
^
20 33
5'2 5-4
v_.^_.w
v^v_^v_^
VJN_,
13
S-s
53-56 41-48 97-100 57-60 61-64 57-64 73-80 113-120 121-128 113-128 101-104 91-92 51-52
v_^ v^^ri
^.^
,
>,
^ ^^ ^
^ ^
v-
27 29 88 30
51
2-5
35
21
94 26 37
31
92
18
_^V
^-^
s^=^
^ ^
-
40 54 94 65
10-3 10*0
29 34 63 79
8'5
15
x_^_, ^
s
^-; v.^
97
18-3
^^
vjxw v
^ ^ ^^
204
208
9-2
/
26 23
1*5
61
2'3
11
The
in
Greek prose,
e.g.
w ww
,
w^
185
ww
17
32,
ww 101 104.
of
etc.
They comprise
nearly: 33
in
The forms
^_r
64,
in
if
comprise
Thucy-
dides'
sentence-metre 23*8
the
%,
%,
So,
the
clausula
more
%.
in the
speeches
wwww? ww w?
to
and
Rollmann seem
be wholly
false.
DEMOSTHENES.
Comparison
Number
of the form.
of
his
Favoured
forms.
Form.
www wwv. w_ _w_www wwww www www w>. www _ ww ww w w w w _____ www w ww w ww ww _____ w
ww _ _ w ww wv
o-i%
12-4
31
189 31
w
-____-
05
12
07 06
8
04
11
4-4
12
80
4*1
36 80 40
4-8
6-7
01
0-8
www
39 46
8-5
29
4-8
7*7
127 109
9-0
11*7 7-7
112
18-7 3-7
199
7-2
18 T7
30
31
186
Comparison
of the sentence-metre of
Thucydides and
Demosthenes
in
by means
of
method
of
Marbe.
etc.
are avoided.
Thuc. Dem.
Form.
%
1
S-8
^3 +
(
00
0-2
65 33 97
17 81
01
0-2
00 00 00 00
O'O
~
j
~~
I
s^^v^^O'O
^^^^^^ __^^^
^^^^
2
00 00 03 00
08 00
03
0-4
49
113 9 73
41
00
11
0*1
00 00
01
0*4 0-6
00 00
0-1
105
11
25 89 57
121
04
0'7
00 00
0*2
53 05
11
0'9
01
66 98 68
114 100 72
04 06
11
01
04
VI
00
0.1 0-1
01
0-1
09
PI
P3
00 04
E)
33 05
187
Dactyls and choriambs.
122 116 104
Thuc.
%
05
14
0-6
Dem.
^^(i=i)
+
is
favoured.
16
30
T9 T7
80
19
16
74 37
06 07
0-6
07 29 06
0-9 2-2
73
155
26
77
06
0'7
is
avoided.
Dem.
0*2
(-
85 43
07 04
04 03
(-
Reiteration of cretics
is
favoured.
Thuc.
56
10
Dem.
13 14 P2
(+) (+) (+)
11
07
TO
55
Combinations of
cretics
of
iambs
94 92
112 107 108
07 04
T6 19
1-3
08
15
10
07 08
188
The form
course.
^^ w
73 74 75 76 77 78 79
in the
sentence
is
favoured of
Thuc.
Dem.
Quotient
04
0'7
00
2-9
4-1
1-6
(-)
(+) (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) (+)
05 09 07
0-7
08
T8
2-0
3-1
22
17 16 17
2-4
1-6
1-1
80
10 16
of
The
highest
quotients, *nts,
l
course,
and
ww
^^^
the lowest
Tendency
:
of increasing
avoidance (see
p. 30).
Thuc. Dem.
16
0-7
Thuc. Dem.
I
Quotient.
02
1-7
_ -
80 48
112 32
16
1'3
5-5
45
21
17
V2 (+)
96 64 128
>
19 15 14
\\\
05 07 no
>
16 /
19
1-1
(+)
26
2.8
26
2 8
1-5
09
3'1
(-) (-)
For
'w
?
^--
'"
'**
page
176.
ISOCRATES.
Comparison of the frequency
that of Thucydides.
The
is
short penult
seems
to
by
Isocrates.
,.
,
Favoured
v_x,
w,
w w
wws^
^,
^,
except
189
Isocrates (Panegyricus). Quotient. Clausula. Clausula. (sum total 2000 (sum total 338
Thucydides.
cases).
cases).
1-8 9-16
17-18 19-20
3'3
v_^v_^ _s_;^=:
52 05
14
06 45
o-o
5'5
(
(
(
12
CM
1*2
21-24 25-32 33-34 35-36 37-40 41-48 49-52 53-56 57-60 61-64 65-68 69-72 73-80 81-96 97-100 01-104 05-112
13-128
^ ^
^
v__i=i ^_-^WV_,
^^ -^-^ ^^
V_*
20 50
0-8
12 12
39 03
0-9 0-9
17 13
2-7
1-4
V^^-"
x_.^=;
wv_^
13 21 37 16
23
15
2-7
15
0*6
v_^^ ^i=:
v_^=i
v_^^^._ v_^v_
-^-v_
'
^
iS*
26 29 34 23 35
7-9
18 12
14
2-4
33 39 60
11-3
>=*
10 VI 17 14
12
VI
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
i=i
%_^N
142
170
3*3
5-1
V_.V_
>
^
V^
31 61
94
183
125 185
V2 13 10
(
(+) (+)
Only a comparison with Isocrates' sentence-metre can give a certain clue to his clausula-metre.
190
PLATO. LAWS.
Comparison of the clausula with the sentence-metre. The figures
for the clausula
t fc g
Form ^ orm
3 p
-
c?2 3 xj *H G
VIZ
>*
<U CJ fl
8 6
D B
4)
<u U)
c V
a 3 3 13 p
CTJ
Favoured
forms.
Avoided
forms.
Cfl
C/3
c/3
D
62
126
1-6 (+) 1-9 (+) 1-3
1-8 9-16 17-24 25-32 33-40 41-48 49-56 57-64 65-72 73-80 81-88 89-96 97-104
105-112 113-120 121-128
36
3.8% 68 39 70 42
3*7
30
3-7
1'9
(-) (-)
(+) (+)
5'7
1'4 (+)
5'1
4*2
11
2-1
54
7.9
116
13-0 8-7
1*3
60
6-5
5'2
4-0
1-8
3'9
70
6-4
22 35 44
6-0
(-) (-)
2-0
1-5
(
(-) (-) (-) (-)
88
100
7.5
1-0 1-5
1-6
90
133
60
8-2
191
PLATO. LAWS.
Investigation into the quantity of the last syllable.
Sentence-metre.
A.
B.
C
g
<u
a u
C.
su a-
me
re.
D.
o 3
Frequency
of
V o
3
final syllable
1-8
1-4
9-16
17-24 25-32 33-40 41-48 49-56 57-64 65-72 73-80 81-88 89-96 97-104 105-112 113-120 121-128
2*2
19 41
1-71
+ +
24
3'8
38
8-8
1-1
+ +
2-5 3-6
23
T8
2-7
31! 23
21
4-
1-9
2-7
2-7
1-0
+ + ++ ++ + + + + + + + +
18
30 24
8'2
41
2-6
17 15
22 24 33
2-7
51
29 40 38 30 28 46 42 40 54 78
+
?
34
4-2
8'8
+ + + + + + + +
30 06
10 14 15
57 07
1-2
21
29
37 41
5'2
23
19
30
PLATO.
Investigation into the
resulting
Quotients
E),
and C (= table
denoting
final syllable,
F),
B and D (=
table
It
denoting the
same
for
the
final syllable.
higher degree
when
192
1-8 9-16
17-24 25-32 33-40 41-48 49-56 57-64 65-72 73-80 81-88 89-96 97-104 105-112 113-120 121-128
wwwww .www wwww; www ww_ww w_ww ww ww ww__w www www w_w ww w
1 1 1 i l
1
(+) (+)
2*0 (+)
2-1
1*7
Preference for
over
w www
(+)
(-) (-)
(+)
(-) (-)
1-3 (+)
l'l (+) 2-8 (+) 2-2 (+)
l
i
j
!
1*5 (+)
(-)
i
1 !
4
4
(((((--
( (
PLATO.
Some
it
probable that a dialogue belongs to the second chronogroup, which comprises the Republic, the Theae-
logical
tetus,
rence
the
Republic,
Ph
in
the
Phaedrus,
in the
Theaetetus.
See Barwick's
tables.
and
ahj&EOTara.
2.
viziXapeg in
answers
(
3.
v w
-
T Ph R T R T Ph R
193
4.
5.
6.
7.
yovv doxei
R T Ph R R T
answer
8. 9.
10.
11.
12. 13.
fjLYjV;
T T T T T Ph
Jiobg;
fj
Ttfj;
Jtcbg;
14.
R R R R R R R R
on page
59).
yaQ;
ydg av;
d'ov fxellei;
17. 18.
19.
20.
%i
o ov;
83
3/
21. 22.
23.
24.
xi
xi
yaQ ov;
yaQ;
aXXa, xi /ueXXei;
alio, xi fxr]v;
R R R R T R T Ph R R T Ph R R R
frequent
/UaXQCp Or
drjXov d>g
jLLVQLO)
('.
dfjXov oxi)
Ionic datives
T Ph R T R Ph R
194
28.
eigrjiai
fin zurtickverweisenden
Relativsatzen)
29. 30.
iQQJj&tj (item)
xa&djzeQ
('.
ojojieq)
31.
T Ph R T T Ph R T Ph R
PLUTARCH.
Comparison
of his clausula with his sentence-metre.
h I S
Form.
in
Favoured
o 3
forms.
17-18 81-96 21-24 1_8 9-16 35-36 69-72 37-40 105-112 53-56 41-48 97-100 57-60 61-64 57-64 73-80 113-120 121-128 113-128 101-104 91-92 51-52
1-10%
13-90 3-70 2-00
1-10
10
2-1
l'O 1-6
www; www.
_w___w
^ ww w
_n
610
2-10
(+ (+ (+ ((((+ ((-
580
4-io 6*50
4-70
w_ww
w
260
9-80 2-35 3-30 2-40
2 05
1-6
1-5
400
7-20 2*50
3-6o
1-7
w__ w ww w
w w
s-:
2-2
1-8
TO (1-4
320 680
5-io
225
4-30 4-70
((-
630 510
11-40
360
4-20
780
2-45 4-05 0-85
w w_ ww ww
390
1-40
2-40
2 8
195
Syn crises.
(246 cases).
14 58 916
1718 1920 2124
% 2
2
Lives
13'9
%
(Clausula).
Syncrises
(sentence).
3 8
1
61
25-34 3536 3740 4148 4952 5356 5764 6568 6972 7380 8196 97100
101
65
90
2 2 2
4
2
1
6
5
27
3 2
104
128
105112 113120
121
9 4 4
196
PHILO.
Comparison
0)
<ti
c
Jt.
1
Form.
B
3 3
S-I
Favoured
forms.
Avoided
forms.
<U
>
w w w^ w_-_w^ w^^w ^-^~ ^w www w_ ^w w 105-112 w ^w 53-56 41-48 w _w w 97-100 www ww 57-60 w ww 61-64 ww 57-64 w 73-80 w 13-120 w 121-128 113-128 w 101-104 ww w 91-92 w ^w 51-52 w_
1
ww>
ww:=:
0'4% 20
12'7 2-3
50
14
1-2
180
2-8
(+) (+)
30
5-9 2-3 3.2
3.1
10
9'8
3-0
1*7
w s_^^
^^^w
v^,
wwwwW
06 62
6*2
3-8
19
20
16
1'2
98
4-0 6-4 2*8 2-8 4-8 7.6 6'4
160
4-6
1-4
46
1-6
46 36
5-4
w w wW www w
-
-^ ^r:
<
--
V^/
^~-
ww
13
11
9-0
12
'
6 5
6-4
20 30
T6
32
2-2
w-^
w_
120
4-2
46
16
3-0
4-0 2-8
(-) (-)
(-)
(-)
26
1-1
20
|*7
15 (+)
(+)
w w
_^ w
w>
18
TABLE OF CLAUSULA WHICH HAVE BEEN FAVOURED (OR AVOIDED) BY DIFFERENT AUTHORS.
Favoured.
(1)
Avoided.
Thrasymachus.
Thucydides.
_.__^
(2)
_ _^.
^
wwic
Sum
total of
:
cases
in-
(3)
Plato (Laws).
^^^~
vestigated
1000 1000 1000 1000 100011000 2000 898 2000 3778 3781 500
338
866 1646
16
5-6
5-4
36 29
144
4-0
20
2-8
7-8
106
68 19
75
8.9 5.9
31
12-7
26 13-0 9.2 18-8 108 5-2 06 100 6-2 12-6 98 6-2 21 36 2-6 142 18-9 29-1 13-9 5-7 181
8-5
50 129 45 09 5-9
17-0 21-3
3-3
14-3
(4)
(~
Isocrates.
11-6
(5)
etc.)
4-1
4-8
97100 6572 2124 1718 5356 6164 117120 3536 9192 123124 7380 113-128 121128 125128 127128 4148
101
88 25
2-7
1-8
80
0-1
2-4
3-1 1-7
3-8
6'5 2-5
9.8
9'4
8*0
9-8 61
2.4
6-0
Demosthenes.
Philo.
11
31
0-1
4-1
40 20
10 31
58 37
11
05 30 54 60
VI
08
2-5
5-1
28 32 23 04
4-0
31
08
T2 31
46
6-2 2-8
(6)
35
2-0
47 39
11
60
12
o-o
1'8
05
2-6
51
1-4 1:4 3-1
46 59
0-4
54 50
1-3
40 32
3-5
02 40
4-8 4-3
48
3-4
3'4
4'9
24 23 20
1-6
20 46
5-4
7-2
5-8
5-6
33
41
21
1-4
23 24 65
20-4
18 32
12-7 19'9
2-0
23 20
13
23
2-4 7'9
56 258
11-4 7'6
08 30 33
117
20 06
3*0
09
7-7
41
0-8
06
70
1-3
8-2
47 42 25
10
3'3
13-3
5-1
62
4-5
4-1
80
5-2
3-2
1-1
6-4 3-6
1-2 6'4
4-2
(7)
Flavius Josephus.
w>~,w:
62
8-5
0-1
(8)
1-0
Charito.
^^^^
2-0
30
3-7
32
4-8
3'7
0-6
104
51
51
67
7-2
3'7
7-2
42
1-4
1-5
32
5-5
2-6
26
1-5
5152
37 15
26
1-2
39
2-4
6-1
1.1
17
17
31
25 09
16 18
51
(9)
') ')
Plutarch.
Figures derived from Heibges, for Bell. Jud. and Antiquit. Figures derived from Heibges.
(10)
Polemo.
197
few features
material
of typology in their
little
The
following tables
illustrate
my
metre
is
include
The
results
seem
to
For
it
wwori, ww-we.g.:
:=n,
Though
it
may be
first
good
that
it
is
desirable to study
sentence,
really
intend to
come back
to these
problems.
FORM
Form
last
w ^
Philo.
of the
Thucydides. Demosthenes.
Plutarch.
word:
2 15
^ ^ ^ -^ ^^
%
2-6
%
3
1-6
%
O'O
%
6 10 47
15 10
0-0
198
43
10
566
131
53 117
16 3
276
60-9
8'3
12
200
38*3
122
57-3
18'3
23
21
350
79
100*0
76
192
16 1000
4 60
67
1000
82
122 1000
198
word
Thucydides. Demosthenes.
Philo.
Plutarch.
ends:
^
-
(,)
% W
~
i=i
%
3 53
%
00
12
%
10
jir;
w ^ ^ ^
Wj ,^
15
50 33 6
106
12
130 57
2
15 8
00 90
487 333
26 34 4
76
342 447
54 37
10
111
53
1000
90
1000
lOO'O
245
FORM -x
Form
last
w.
Philo.
of the
Plutarch.
word
w _^
S
%
00
1
1
%
42
o-o
3 18
1
%
4
5
%
00 00
4 25 4
4-2
16-7
00 89
111
>
^~^
4
17
125
75-0
4-2
121
w-^w,;^
^^
S~-s
708
8-3
w^w^
word
27 8
1
600
17-8
758
121
00
24
lOO'O
4-2
22
1000
33
00
100-0
24
1000
45
A
-~-
Philo.
/o
Plutarch.
ends:
;=
ww%-^=: s~*w,v_*>=:
(,)
% 00
1
% 28
00 83
55-6 30-6
2-8
o-o
% 00
00
4 26
17
8-5
2-8
1
4
5 31 14
1
v_*nX=
:
14
20
10
57'1
20
11
1
73 91 564
25-4
1-9
28-6
o-o
55'3 36-2
00
47
35
1000
36
1000
55
1000
1000
FORM
Form
last
-_Philo.
of the
Thucydides. Demosthenes.
Plutarch.
word:
!ri
% 0*0
9
12
% 36
!
%
1
!
1-5
% O'O
6
3
__^
^ w
<-;
^ w w
20
2
30
25
18 7
1
35-7
298
21*4
8-3
17 14
29
5
146
27
5
73 659
12-0
12
100*0
76 00
1000
o
41
o-o
43
1000
84
66
100-0
199
word
(,)
Thucydides. Demosthenes.
p=
i=i
Philo.
1
Plutarch.
w w
_v_x
ends:
% 00
9
13
14*8
%
3
2*0
% VI
18-1
% 00
6 8
w
iri
i=l
21-3
,w
-^
26
13
-^
426 213
30 38 32 47
1
198
25'2 21-2
31-1
1
17 14
98
131
149
45-8 20-2 0*0
100-0
43
19
30
17
492 279
00
61
0-7
00
61
1000
151
1000
94
1000
Adams, C. D. De periodorum formis et successionibus mosthenis oratione Chersonitica. Diss. Kiel 1891.
Ahlberg, A.
p.
in
De-
W.
Prolegomena
in
Sallustium.
Goteborg 1911,
distinxit C. U.
175, n.
1.
Ammianus
Clark
etc. vol.
Marcellinus.
1,
Recens.
rhythmiceque
1910. G. Bericht iiber die Literatur zu Ciceros rhetorischen Schriften aus den Jahren 19051909. (Bursian's) Jahresbericht. Bd. 143, 1910, p. 112175. [on Zielinski], Berl. Philol. Woch. 1918, col. 482 sqq. [on De Groot], Berl. Philol. Woch, 1918, col. 673 sqq. Arndt, E. De ridiculi doctrina rhetorica. Kirchhain 1904. Arnold, C. P. Caesarius von Arelate. Leipz. 1894, p, 85, 46890. Ausserer, A. De clausulis Minucianis et de Ciceronianis quae quidem inveniuntur in libello de senectute. (Commentationes Aenipontanae I). Ad Aenipontem 1906. Bachmann, A. Aiax et Ulixes declamationes. Diss. Minister 1911.
praefatio. Berlin
Ammon,
Baehrens,
praefatio
W.
1910.
A.
maior.
n. d.
Accedit
Plinii
editionis
editionis.
novae
Diss.
Groningen
Panegyrici
Leipz.
1911, p.
XXIX.
Rhein.
Zu Florus. Wiener Studien 1912, p. 402 sqq. Zu den philosophischen Schriften des Apulejus.
Museum
Compare
N. F. 67, 1912 sqq., 264 sqq. _. Zu Curtius Rufus. Rhein. Kroll, Glotta 8, p. 326.
.
Museum
68, 1913, p.
429 sqq.
Erwiderung. Berliner Philol. Wochenschr. 1918, col. 311. Vermischte Beitrage. Berliner Philol. Wochenschr. 1918,
col.
501 sqq.
Bainvel, J. V. La prose metrique et la prose rhythmique. Etudes religieuses 59, 1893, p. 143155. Ballou, S. H. De clausulis a Flavio Vopisco Syracusio scriptore historiae Augustae adhibitis. Diss. Giessen. Weimar 1912. Bayard, L. Le latin de Saint Cyprien. These Paris 1902, p. 298, sqq. Becker, H. Hermogenis Tarsensis de rhythmo oratorio doctrina.
Diss. Miinster 1896.
vol.
II.
201
Bellet, C. P.
Paris 1897.
et la
prose rhythmee.
Les
copaux.
Nom.
.
ed.
origines de l'Eglise de France et les fastes epossuivie d'une etude sur le 'cursus' et la critique.
Paris 1898.
La
prose
rhythmee
et
la
critique
hagiographique.
Paris 1899.
.
540, 3138.
Beltrami, A. II 'numerus' e Frontone. Rivista di Filologia 36, 545566. Bickel, E. Die Schrift des Martinus von Bracara, Formula vitae honestae. Rhein. Museum, N. F., 60, 1905, p. 516520. Der Prosarhythmus. In: Gercke-Norden, Einleitung in
.
die Altertumswissenschaft,
2.
Leipzig
etc.
Bigelmair, A. Blacha, F. v.
clericorum' ein
Zeno von Verona. Miinster 1904, p. 131. Der Pseudocypriamische Traktat 'de singularitate
des Novatian. Diss. Breslau 1913.
Werk
Blass, F.
Gymnasialw. 34, 1880, p. 264. Rhein. Museum 33, p. 493 sqq. Attische Beredsamkeit 2 Leipzig 1887-98. De numeris Isocrateis. Univ. Progr. Kiel 1891. La prose metrique et la dialogue des orateurs.
.
Revue
de
Phil. 23,
1899, p. 334.
.
Lycurgi oratio
in
Leocratem
Literaturz.
etc.
Leipzig 1899.
1865.
Compare
Berliner
p.
Fuhr, Deutsche
Philol.
1899,
Drerup.
Boficl 1899,
Wochenschr.
1900,449-52.
C m
i
a,
73-76.
.
Kunstprosa.
Isokrates,
36,
Kritische
Album gratulatorium
Observationes
pertz 1902, p. 53.
.
Herwerden
1902, p. 22.
in Platonis
convivium. Festschrift
Gom-
Die
Reden.
Neue Jahrbiicher
.
Demosthenes' olynthischen
Die Rhythmische Komposition des Hebraerbriefes. Kritiken 75, 1902, p. 420. (Barnabas') Brief an die Hebraer. Text mit Angabe der Rhythmen. Halle 1903. Die doppelte Form der 3. Phjlippika des Demosthenes. Neue Jahrb. 13, 1904, p. 486. Die Rhythmen der asianischen und romischen Kunstprosa. Leipzig 1905.
Theol. Studien
u.
.
202
.
On
attic
Zur Rhythmik
Studien
u.
Beitrage zur
Forderung
christlicher Theologie 10, 1906, p. 31. Compare Woch. klass. Phil. 1906. col.
Draseke,
1259.
Bonwetsch, G. N.
Diognet.
Nachrichten der kgl. Ges. der Wiss. zu Gottingen 1902, p. 62134. Quid de structura rhetorica praeceperint grammatici atque rhetores latini. Thesis. Parisiis 1898. La prose metrique et le Dialogue des orateurs. Revue de philol. 23, 1899, p. 334342. Les lois metriques de la prose oratoire latine d'apres Revue de philol. 24, 1900, p. 201 sqq. le panegyrique de Trajan. Les lois metriques de la prose oratoire latine d'apres le Brutus. Revue de Philol. 26, 1902, p. 105. La rhetorique a Herennius et les clausules metriques. Melanges Boissier, p. 7379, 1903. Les clausules metriques dans Minucius Felix. Musee Beige 7, 1903, p. 247-265. Les clausules metriques dans Florus. Musee Beige 7, 1903, p. 16-36. Wie soil man die metrischen Klauseln studieren? Rhein. Museum 58, 1903, p. 371 sqq. Revue de Les clausules metriques dans l'Orator.
Bornecque, H.
.
philol. 29,
1905, p. 40-50. Les clausules metriques latines. Lille 1907. Compare P i c h o n, Revue critique 1908, p. 38789.
.
Bourgery, A.
34, 1910, p. 558 sqq.
Revue de
Philol.
Bouvy, E.
.
Rhythme
Poetes et melodes. Nimes 1886. Bresslau, H. Handbuch der Urkundenlehre fur Deutschland und Leipz. 1880, p. 588 sqq. Italien, I. Brinkmann, A. Klassische Reminiszenzen. Rhein. Museum 60,
1903, p. 631.
Brugnola, V.
di filol.
etc.
39,
Sulla clausula Ciceroniana 'esse videatur'. 1911, p. 558, and in 'Arpinum' 1, 1912, nr. 1.
Rivista
Burdach, K.
Sitz.-Ber.
der
Burn,
Ober den Satzrhythmus der deutschen Prosa. preuss. Akad. 1909, p. 52035. [On Latin prose-rhythm]. A. E. An introduction to the Creeds and to Te Deum.
p.
240-42.
J.
De
clausulis
These Montpellier.
Compare Curcio,
a Sedulio in eis libris qui inscribuntur Toulouse 1904. Rivista di filol. e d'istruz. class. 34, 1906, p.
203
critique 1905, 2, p. 478 sqq., 1905, p. 331. Ceci, L. II ritmo delle orazioni di Cicerone. I. La prima Catalinaria. Testo con la scansione delle clausole metriche. Torino etc. 1906. Compare Curcio, Rivista di filol. e d'istruz. class. 34, 1906, p. 349 sqq. Christ, "W. von Qriechische Literaturgeschichte 6 I, Munchen
349 sqq.
Lejay, Revue
9,
Hubaux,
Musee Beige
notes by
J.
von O. Jahn-W. Kroll. Berlin 1908. Orator, with introd. essays and critical and explanatory E. Sandys. Cambridge 1885. De oratore, erkl. von K. W. P i d e r i t. Leipzig
1886-1890.
The correspondence
L.
of
C.
etc.
by
.
R. Y.
Tyr
a.
C.
Purser.
Dublin etc. 1890-1906. Vol. 112, p LXVII note. Ciceronis orationum scholiastae, Rec. T. Stangl.
,
Leipzig 1912.
Clark, A. C.
p.
Zielinski's
Clauselgesetz.
Class.
Review
19,
1905,
164 sqq.
Cluniacensis of Poggio.
.
Anecdota Oxoniensia. Class, series, 10. The vetus Oxford 1905. Fontes prosae numerosae. Oxford 1909. Compare Amnion, Berliner philol. Wochenschr. 1910, p. 1605 1607. S e r r u y s, Revue de philol. 34, 2, p. 306. The cursus in mediaeval and vulgar Latin. Oxford 1910. Compare Wessely, Wochenschr. fur klass. Philologie 1910, p. 95051. Roberts, Class. Rev. 25, p. 57. B e r m a, Museum 18, p. 247-49. Prose- rhythm in English. Oxford 1913. See Oxford Magazine April 24, 1913. Recent developments in textual criticism. Oxford
.
1914, p.
15 sqq.
Clark,
C.
U.
Ammiani
rerum
gestarum
quae supersunt.
I.
Couture,
et la litterature
Encore
la question
du cursus.
louse) 16,
1893, p. 9-14.
Cronert,
N.
F., 54,
W.
1899, p. 580 sqq. [on Haury], Gott. Gel. Anzeigen 1916, p. 391.
204
Ciceronis et Calvi reliquorumque Atticorum genere Acide prope Catinam 1899, p. 5969. Dabin, A. Nos oremus. Paroles et chant. Revue du chant gregorien (de Grenoble) III, 1894-95, p. 106-11, 123-27. Dechevrens, A. Composition musicale et composition litteraire. Paris 1910, p. 118-168.
dicendi quaestiones.
Curcio, C.
De
Groot, see Groot De. Jonge, see Jonge De. Dewing, H. B. The origin
Greek.
De De
of the accentual prose rhythm in American Journal of Philology 31, 1910, p. 312328. Compare Maas, Byzant Zeitschr. 20, p. 306. Accentual cursus in Byzantine Greek Prose with
.
reference to Procopius of Caesarea. Transactions Connecticut Acad, of Arts a. Sc. 14, 1910, p. 415 sqq. Hiatus in the accentual clausulae of Byzantine Greek American Journal of Philol. 32, 1911, p. 188 sqq. prose. Di Capua, P.*) [on Shipley and others], Bollett. die filol. class.
especial
.
18,
1911-12,
p.
.
244
sq.
e le varianti del
.
Le clausule metriche nelf Apologetico di Tertulliano Codex Fuldensis. Monza 1912. From Scuola Cattolica 40. De numero in vetustis Sacramentariis: quae instrumenta
adiumenta ad clausulas efficiendas in Sacramentariis adhibeantur. From Ephemerides Liturgicae 1912, p. 459-476, 526-535, 591-600.
vel
Osservazioni
Tertulliano.
i
critiche
19, in
Bollett. di
.
filol.
class.
Apologetica
di
Le clausole
Bollett.
S.
due accenti.
di
filol.
class.
12 sqq.
[On
Terzaghi, Ciceronis
Glotta 6, 1915, p. 379 sq e le clausole metriche da osservarsi nella riforma et nella compilazione degli oremus e delle prose liturgiche. Monza 1913. From Scuola cattolica 1912. Una glossa in Quintiliano, Inst. Orat. IX, 4, 105. Boll. di filol. class. 19, 1912-13, p. 207. Cassiodoro, De institutione divinarum litterarum C. XV.
II
De Compare Kroll,
'cursus'
19, 1912, p. 89 sq. L'evoluzione della prose metrica latina nei prima tre Didaskaleion 2, 1913, secoli D. C. e la data dell' Ottavio di Minucio. p. 1-41. Minucio Felice, Octavius, 7, 4. Didaskaleion 2, 1913. [On Ballou, Laurand, Raspante], Bollett. di filol. class. 20, 1913, p. 129 sqq., 202 sqq., 277 sqq.
Boll, di
filol.
class.
*)
Beige,
Bullet,
bibl.
18,1914,
p. 10 sqq.
205
cursus nel De consolatione philos. e nei trattati Didaskaleion 3, 1915, p. 269303. Le numerus dans le Breviarium d'Eutrope. Bollett. di class., 23, 1916, p. 17-18. Dostler, G-. Das Klauselgesetz bei Curtius. Kempten 1907. Draheim, H. Lateinischer Prosarhythmus. Wochenschr. fur klass.
II
.
theologici di Boecio,
filol.
1910, col. 1294-1302, 1353-1358. Die Anfange der rhetorischen Kunstprosa. Jahrbiicher fur class. Philol. 27, 1903, p. 234 sqq. Untersuchungen zur alteren griechischen Prosaliteratur. Jahrbiicher suppl. 27, 1903, p. 219. Compare Schwartz, Bed. Philol. Woch. 1903, p. 97; Thiele, Wochenschr. klass. Phil. 1905, p. 284.
Philol. 27,
Drerup, E.
.
Droz, E.
sancon 1885.
De
Frontonis
institutione
oratoria.
These
Paris,
Be-
Duchesne.
des chartes 1889,
p.
Dupuis,
I.
Note sur l'origine du cursus. Bibliotheque de l'ficole 16163. Le nombre oratoire. I Contra la 'prose metrique' II
Engelbrecht, A. Stilfragen bei lateinischen Autoren in ihrer Nutzanwendung auf die Kirchenschriftsteller. Zeitschr. fur die osterr. Gymnas. 53, 1902, p. 1-20.
Ernst. De genere dicendi et compositione rhetorica in prioribus Ciceronis orationibus. Progr. Neu-Ruppin 1885. Eysert, L. Zum Rhythmus bei Demosthenes. Zeitschr. fur die
osterr.
Gymnas.
45,
1894, p. 720-21.
II
Ferretti,
riane.
P.
cursus metrico
il
K.
De errore profanarum religionum. Edid. Praefatio p. XXV. Compare Baehrens, Rhein. Museum 67, p. 128. Freund, J. De C. Suetoni Tranquilli usu atque genere dicendi. Diss. Breslau 1900, p. 39 sqq. Fritzsch, F. V. De numeris orationis solutae. Progr. Rostock 1875. Fuhr, K. Rhein. Museum 57, 1902. p. 426 sqq. Bed. Philol. Wochenschr. 24, 1904, col. 1030 sq. n. 5. G-abrielli, A. L'epistole di Cola di Renzo e l'epistolografia Archivio della R. Societa Romana di ivale. p. 381-379 (p. 391-395, 420-422 on the cursus). Gastoue, A. Cours theorique et pratique de plainchant romain gregorien. Paris 1904. p. 189-193. Les origines du chant Romain. Paris 1907, p. 18691. Gatard, A. 'Accent' in Dictionnaire d' archeol. chret. I. Paris
Ziegler,
W.
1907, p. 220-40.
Gatscha, F.
tria.
Dissertationes
206
Vindobonenses VI, 1898, p. 139-190; see p. 159-176. J. van. De statistiek en de taalwetenschap. Nieuwe taalgids 9, 1915, p. 65-95. Giry, A. Manuel de diplomatique. Paris 1894, p. 454462.
philologicae
Ginniken,
Gladitsch, J. De clausulis Quintilianeis. Diss. Breslau 1909. Golz, G. Der rhythmische Satzschluss in den grosseren pseudoquintilianischen Deklamationen.
Diss. Kiel 1913.
Glotta 8, p. 326. de. Vorlaufige Mitteilung zu Zielinskis constructivem Rhythmus, S. 5 ff. Berliner Philol. Wochenschr. 1914, col. 1054-55. Notes on Procopius of Caesarea. Class. Quarterly 1915,
r
1
Compare K Groot, A.
,
1,
W.
p.
97 sq.
prose.
Methodological investigations into the rhythm of Greek Class. Quarterly 1915, p. 23144. ii n s c h e r, Bursians Jahresbericht 1915, Bericht fiber Compare die Lit. z. zw. Sophistik 1910-15, p. 148 sq. Prosarhythmus. Berliner Philol. Wochenschr. 1915, col.
,
1135 sq.
Eine neue Methode der Klauselforschung. Berliner Wochenschr. 1917, col. 1158 [on Novotny]. Untersuchungen zum byzantinischen Prosarhythmus (Prokopios von Casarea). Groningen (Holland) 1918. See Ammon. Grospellier, A. Le rhythme des oraisons. Revue du chant gregorien (de Grenoble) 5, 1897, p. 102-176; 6, 1898, p. 38-43. Hanssen, F. Ein musikalisches Accentgesetz in der quanti,
Philol.
tierenden
Poesie
der
Griechen.
Rhein.
Museum.
dicendi
N.
F.
38,
1883, p.
in
222-244.
Harendza, G.
epistolis
usus
sit.
quo Hieronymus
Harkness, A. G.
poetry.
The first monosyllable in Latin prose and Americ. Journ. of Philol. 31, 1910, p. 154174.
p. p.
Compare Skutsch,
429.
in
Connecticut
Hartmann, M.
Havet,
J.
De
Questions merovingiennes VII. Les actes des eveques du Mars. Bibl. de l'ecole des Chartes 54, 1893, p. 597-692 (esp. p. 639-645). Havet, L. Prose metrique. Paper in the Grande Encyclopedic Paris s.d. 27, p. 804-806. Byz. Zeitschr. 8, p. 535 sqq. [On W. Meyer, Der accentuierte Satzschluss], Revue critique 32, 1891, p. 207 sqq. La prose metrique de Symmache et les origines du
, ,
cursus.
Paris 1892.
207
Compare Bornecque, Revue de Philol. 18, Revue critique 53, 1893. W. Meyer, Gotting.
1893.
Cicero,
sqq., 141 sqq.
,
De
Oratore.
Revue de
Philol.
1893, p. 33
Many
editions.
,
Cours elementaire de metrique Paris 3 1893. 517 sqq. La prose metrique de Martial.
grecque
et latine etc.
Revue de
Philol. 27,
1903, p. 123-124.
,
Philol. 28,
1904, p. 57-59.
Manuel de critique verbale appliquee aux textes latins. Paris 1911, pag. 89-96. [Letter adressed to Stangl], Wochenschr. f. klass. Philol. 29, 1912. col. 1357-58. Heibges, S. De clausulis Charitoneis. Halis Sax. 1911, p. 28 sqq. Heisenberg, A. [on Haury's edition of Procopius], Berliner Philol. Wochenschr. 1909, 7 Aug. Heitmann, M. De clausulis Libanianis. Diss. Miinster 1912. Compare as, Wochenschrift fur klass. Philol. 30, 21, p. 576 sqq. [Valuable review]. Hendrickson, G. L. The commentariolum petilionis attributed Decennial Publications VI, Chicago. to Quintus Cicero. Compare Jahresbericht des philol. Vereins zu Berlin 31, p. 287. Accentual clausulae in Greek prose of the first and second centuries of our era. American Journal of Philol. 1908, p. 280 sqq. Hermann, G. Opuscula I, p. 121 sqq. Hoflinger, J. Bobiensia. Diss. Wiirzburg 1912. Hofacker, K. De clausulis C. Caecili Plini Secundi. Diss. Bonn 1903. Hoppe, H. Syntax und Stil des Tertullian, 1903, p. 154 sqq. Hugh, Pitz Th. Aristotle's theory of rhythm. Proceed, of the Amer. Philol. Ass. 44, 1914, p. 23-26. Immisch, O. Sprach- und stilgeschichtliche Parallelen zwichen Griechisch und Lateinisch. Neue Jahrb. fur das klass. Altert. 29, 1912, p. 31 spp. Neue Wege der Platonforschung. Neue Jahrb. 1915, p. 270. Johnson, C. L. The motion of the voice in connection with accent and accentual arsis and thesis. Studies in honour of Gildersleeve. Baltimore 1902. Jonge, E. de. Les theories recentes sur la prose metrique en latin. Musee Beige 6, 1902, p. 262-79. Les clausules de St. Cyprien. Musee Beige 6, 1902,
,
Ma
W.
p.
344-63.
208
.
Les
clausules
in
metriques
di
dans
e
St.
d'istr.
Cyprien,
class.
Louvain
34, 1906,
etc.
1905.
Compare
p.
Curcio
Rivista
filol.
349 sqq.
Jordan, H.
Rhythmische Prosa
in
critique 1905,
in
Gibt
Krit 79,
es
Rhythmik
Theol. Stud.
1906, p. 634. der altchristlichen Literatur. Leipz. 1911, esp. p. 57, 68, 230, 372, 452, 502. Josephy. Der oratorische Numerus bei Isokrates und Demosthenes mit Beriicksichtigung der Lehren der alten Rhetoren. Diss. Zurich 1887.
u.
Geschichte
Kaibel, G.
p.
Stil
und Text de
Uohxda
89
sqq.,
94 sqq.
Kalinka. [On Zielinski], Algem. Literaturblatt 1909, p. 69. Kallenberg, H. 'On und cog bei Plato als Hilfsmittel zur Bestimmung der
Zeitfolge seiner Schriften. Rhein.
Kaluscha,
W.
Museum 1913, p. 465 sqq. Zur Chronologie der platonischen Dialoge. Wiener
Studien 26, 1904, 2 Heft. p. 190 sqq. Kauer, It. Studien zu Pacianus, II. Jahresber. des k.k. Staatsgymn. zu Wien XIII. Bez. 1902. Kawczinski, M. Essai comparatif sur l'histoire des rhythmes. Paris 1889. Kayser, S. Etude sur la lanque d'Hypercides. Musee Beige 4,
p.
95-104. 201-222.
Kirchhoff,
Lipsiae 1902.
A.
De
Apuleji
clausularum
compositione
et
arte.
Kirsten, C.
lungen.
fertur,
p.
Bd.
7,
Heft
Kling, H.
institutionis
De
52-56.
Klotz, A.
65, N.F.,
1906, p.
Kroll,
W.
. .
die expositio totius mundi et gentium. Philologus 113 sq. Berliner Philol. Wochenschr. 23, 1903, col. 207. Berliner Philol. Wochenschr. 25, 1905, col. 1659 sqq. Moderne lateinische Syntax. Neue Jahrbiicher fur das
Uber
1910, p. 318-326.
Berlin 1917, p. 66 sqq. Literaturbericht, Glotta, vol. 5 sqq., 1914 etc. See Cicero. Krumbacher, K. Geschichte der byzantinischen Literatur
. .
2
.
Munchen
209
Langen, P. Bemerkungen iiber die Beobachtung des Wortaccentes im alteren lateinischen Drama. Philologus 46, 1888, p. 409, n. 2. Laurand, L. Etudes sur le style des discours de Ciceron, avec une esquisse de l'histoire du 'cursus'. Paris 1907. De M. Tulli Ciceronis studiis rhetoricis. Paris 1907, p. 48-49, 57 n. 3, 101-2. Die Satzschliisse der Interpolationen in dem Traktat De Unitate Ecclesiae. Berliner Philol. Woch. 29, 1909, col. 1015-16.
.
De numero
Le
rythme
oratorio
oratoire
I
in
Ciceronis
orationibus.
Vox
Urbid
12,
1909, p. 18-19.
.
dans
Ciceron.
L'enseignement
Le cursus du
au VII e
siecle.
L'enseignem Chretien,
Julien de Spire.
Bonaventure.
Le cursus dans la legende de saint Francois par Recherches de science religieuse I, 1910, p. 35158. Le cursus dans la legende de saint Francois par saint Rev. d'Hist. Eccles. 11, 1910, p. 257-62. Les fins d'hexametre dans les discours de Ciceron.
.
Revue de
philol. 35,
,
1911, p. 75 sqq.
les
hagiographes dominicains.
ce qu'on ignore du cursus.
Analecta
Bollandiana (1912?)
,
et
Musee
Beige
17,
1913, p. 91-107.
Classical
Compare Lindsay,
Jahresbericht
Review
1913,
Dec,
Luterbacher,
des
Philol.
Vereins
Thomas,
f.
,
Revue
klass. Philol.
La
[on
critique 1913, 1 1914, col 465. theorie du cursus dans saint Augustin.
4,
Recherches
18,
de science religieuse
,
1914,
in
p.
10 sqq.
Lehmann Haupt,
Athen.
C. F.
Klio 6, 1906, p. 313 sqq. Lehnert, G-. Bericht iiber die rhetorische Literatur bis 1906. (Bursian's) Jahresbericht. Bd. 142, 1909, p. 226-340, esp. 237 sqq. Bericht iiber die Literatur zu Apuleius und zurHistoria Apollonii aus den Jahren 1897 1914. Bursian's Jahresbericht 44, p. 12 14. Lejay, P. [On Meyer, Blass, Jordan, Candel, De Jonge, Zielinski], Revue critique, N. S. 60, 1905, p. 478 sqq. [On Anonymi de rebus Bellicis liber, ed. Schneider 1908], Revue critique 1909, II, p. 289-91.
, ,
Lenchantin De Gubernatis, M.
Asinio Pollione.
II
ritmo in un frammento di
210
Leo, F.
,
Hermes
De
Stati Silvis
commentatio.
1892.
Lietzmann, H.
Bonn
style.
gereimter Prosa.
1905, p. 3.
Lipsky, A.
Diss.
Rhythm as
1907.
New York
Litzica, C. Das Meyersche Satzschlussgesetz in der byzantinischen Prosa. Diss. Miinchen 1898. Compare Ha vet, Byzant. Zeitschr. 8, 1899, p. 535 sqq. Lofstedt, E. Zu Senecas Briefen. Eranos 14, 1914, p. 142 sqq. Arnoliana Lunds Univ. Arsskrift, N. F. I, p. 12, 1917. Compare Baehrens, Bed. Philol. Woch. 1917, col. 1291.
, ,
Erklarung.
Berliner Philol. Wochenschr. 1918, col. 311. clausulis Arnobianis. Diss. Vratisl. 1910. h, Glotta 4, p. 425 sqq.
[On
Zielinski], Jahresbericht
p. 263.
Maas, P.
Manasses.
Berl. Philol.
Rhythmisches zu der Kunstprosa des Konstantinos Byz. Zeitschr. 11, 1900, p. 505. [On W. Fritz, Synesios, Abh. Bayer. Akad. 1905],
1908, p. 611.
[On Dewing], Byz. Zeitschr. 19, 1910, p. 592. Wochenschr. fur klass. Philol. 1911, col. 1254 sqq. Die Rhythmik der Satzschliisse bei dem Historiker
Prokopios.
Byz. Zeitschr. 21, 1912, p. 52 sqq. [On Dewing], Byz. Zeitschr. 21, 1912, p. 287 sq. [On Heitmann], Woch. fur klass. Phiiol. 1913, no. 21. Mace, A. Essai sur Suedone. Paris 1900, p. 379-400.
.
Mack, K.
Wien
1914.
bei
Demosthenes. Programm
Marbe, K. Ober den Rhythmus der Prosa, Progr. Giessen 1904. Martin, A. [on Blass], Revue critique 1903, I, p. 9. Marx, P. Ad Herennium libri IV. Leipzig 1894. Prolegomena
p.
99-102.
.
May,
J.
neueren Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der fur das klass. Alt. 20, 1908, p. 233. Rhythmische Analyse der Rede Cicero's pro Sex. Roscio
Ueber
die
Neue Jahrbucher
Amerino, Leipzig 1905. Zur Kritik der Proomien des Demosthenes. Leipzig 1905.
211
uber die Literatur zu Ciceros Reden aus den (Bursian's) Jahresbericht 1907, II, p. 123 sqq. Rhythmen bei Demosthenes und Cicero. Wochenschr.
Bericht
Philol. u.
Jahren 190306.
f.
45.
Vers, in
Rhythmen
in
Ciceros
katilinarischen
Durlach 1909.
Rhythmische Formen, nachgewiesen durch Beispiele aus Cicero und Demosthenes, Leipzig Fock 1909. Compare A m m o n, Berliner Philol. Wochenschr. 1910, col. 156671, Bitschofsky, Zeitschr. f. osterr. Gymnasien 60, p. 752 sq. Rhythmen in Ciceros Reden. Wiss. Beilage zum Jahresbericht des Gymnasiums in Durlach 1912.
.
Compare
40-42.
Loschhorn,
Wochenschr.
1913, col.
Meader, C. L. Types of sentence structure of prose writers. Transact. Americ. Philol. Ass. 36. 1905. p. 32. Meister, L. Kritische Bemerkungen zu den Reden des Demosthenes nebst einem Anhang iiber Ciceros Rede in Pisonem. Progr. Durlach
Gymn.
1914.
.
Tullianae ad libros qui inscribuntur De Lipsiae [1912], p. 7273. Meyer, G. [On W. Meyer, Der accentuierte Satzschluss], Berliner Philol. Wochenschr. 1892, col. 182 sq. Meyer, Fragmenta Burana, Berlin 1901. Sonderabdruckaus der Festschrift zur Feier des 150-jahrigen Bestehens der kgl. Gesellschaft der Wiss. zu Gottingen 1901. p. 148 sqq. Abhandl. d. Gott. Ges. d. Wiss. 1901, p. 157 sqq. Das turiner Bruckstiick der altesten irischen Liturgie. Gelehrte Nachrichten, Phil. Classe 1903, p. 163-214, esp. 209. Gott. Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur mittellateinischen Rhythmik, Berlin 1905. Miller, C. E. The relation of the rhythm of poetry to that of the spoken language. Studies in honor of Basil L. Gildersleeve. Baltimore 1902, p. 497-511. Misset. [On N. Valois, Etude sur la rhythme des bulles pontificales], Lettres chretiennes [revue publiee a Lille], 5, 1882, p. 8990. Compare L a u r a n d, Etudes, p. 365, note. Mocquerreau. Le cursus et la psalmodie. Paleographie musicale 5, 1893, p. 27-30. Note sur l'influence de l'accent et du cursus toniques
Quaestiones
oratore pertinentes.
W.
.
W.
latins
dans
le
chant ambrosien.
J.
fasc. IX.
Moller,
Minister 1912.
De
clausulis a Q. Aurelio
Symmacho
adhibitis.
Diss.
212
Compare Forster, Class. Journal 8, 15, Tol ki eh n, Wochenschr. fur klass. Philol. 31, p. 10-11. Munch, V. De clausulis a Valerio Maximo adhibitis. Diss. Vratislav. 1909. Miinscher, K. (Bursian's) Jahresbericht, Bd. 70, 1905, p. 150-152.
.
Die Rhythmen
in
Isokrates Panegyrikos,
in
Gymn.
Progr.
Ratibor, 1908.
Ciceros Orator, in
[On
De
Groot],
(Bursian's)
Jahresbericht,
Bd.
170,
Nassal, P., Aesthetisch-rhetorische Beziehungen zwischen Dionysius von Halicarnass und Cicero. Diss. Tubingen 1910.
Compare
Zeitschr.
f.
osterr.
Gymn.
64, 4.
Minucii Felicis aetate et genere dicendi. Vorlesungsverz. Univ. Greifswald 1897, p. 18 sqq. Gotting. Gel. Anzeigen 1904, p. 310. Die antike Kunstprosa 2 Leipz. etc. 1909. Esp. Nachtrage. Agnostos Theos. Leipzig etc. 1913. Novak, It. In panegyricos latinos studia grammatica et critica.
.
Norden, E.
De
Prag 1901.
filologicke 1914, p.
.
Z nove litartury o rhythmu anticke pr6sy. Listy 88-102, 192-212, 414-422. Eine neue Methode der Klauselforschung. Berl. Philol. Wochenschr. 1917, col. 217 sqq. Paleographie Musicale. Par les Benedictins de Solesmes. Solesmes 1894. Partzinger, P. Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Entwicklung des ciceronischen stils. Landshut 1910, p. 128-129. Peters, K. Festschrift fur Raspe. Parchim 1883, p. 8-19. Petersen, E. Rhythmus. Gott. Gel. Abhandl. 1917. Peterson, W. The Vatican codex of Ciceros Verrines. Amer. Journal of Philol. I9aa, p. 409-36. Pichon, R. Lactance. These Paris 1901, p. 324-34, 439-40. Etudes sur l'histoire de la litterature latine dans les Gaules. Les derniers ecrivains profanes. Paris 1906, p. 297 sqq. Le texte de Quinte Curce et la prose metrique. Revue de Philol. 30, 1906, p. 90-100. Pietsch, G. De Choricio Patrocli declamationis auctore. Breslauer Philol. Abh., ed. by Forster, Heft 42, 1910. Compare M a a s, Wochenschr. f. klass. Philol. 28, 1911, col. 1253. Pohlenz, M. Eine byzantinische Recenzion Plutarchischer SchrifGotting. ten. Gel. Nachrichten 1913, p. 338 sqq. Poppel, G. van. Over rhythmisch proza in literatuur en liturgie. De Katholiek 140, 1911, p. 384-99; 438-52.
r
Novotny, P.
213
Pothier, J. Les melodies gregoriennes. Tournay 1880, p. 237. Previtera, L. De nutnero sive clausula sive structura sive cursu.
Syracusis 1899.
f.
klass. Philol.
1903.
statistico
nelle
nuove ricerche
della prosa
metrica.
Giarre 1903.
Compare Laurand, E'tudes, p. 189, n. 5, Kroll, Bed. Philol. Woch. 1904, col. 1550, De Jonge, Bull. bibl. du Mus. beige 8, 14. Przychocki. De Gregorii Naz. epistulis quaestiones selectae. Compare Maas, Byzant. Zeitschr. 22, p. 246, Jager, Deutsche
Lit. Zeit.
Quentin, H.
Melanges
1913, col. 1180. La plus ancienne vie de saint Sevrin de Bordeaux. Couture. Toulouse 1902, p. 1214.
Radermacher, L.
65, 1906, p. 149.
Griechischer
Sprachgebrauch.
Philologus
attributo
u.
z.
Raspante,
a Lattanzio.
fruhchristl.
S.
II
nurnerus nel
De mortibus persecutorum
Studien
z.
gr.
agypt.
Richter, E.
Rittelmeyer, F.
1915, p. 81 sqq.
Rollmann, B.
Sabbadini, R.
1897, p. 600-601.
,
De numeri
inscribitur obviis.
,
in dialogo qui Vergilius orator an Rivista di filologia 1897, p. 600 sqq. [on inscriptions], Riv. di filol. 26, 1898, p. 126.
De numeris
poeta
52, p. 288-307.
Schanz, M.
Diss.
Rom. Literaturgeschichte. I, 2, p. 206-7, 1909. Schlicher, J. J. The origin of rhythmical verse in late Latin. Chicago 1900. Appendix I, p. 83-87. Schmid, W., see Christ, W. von. Schmidt, A. Zur Lehre vom oratorischen Nurnerus. Progr.
J. Das rhythmische 1893, p. 209-247.
,
Element
in
Gymn.
46.
1895, p. 97-109.
Schmiedeberg, P.
Sangallensibus.
De Asconi
214
Schober, E.
Diss. Halle 1904.
lege agr.
J. K. Clauseltheorie und Textkritik. Zu Cic. De Wochenschr. f. klass. Philol. 1914, col. 1430 sq. Serruys, D. Les procedes toniques d'Himerius et les origines du Melanges Havet 1909. 'cursus' Byzantin. Sheily, J. [On Clark etc.], Rhytmical prose in Latin and English. The Church Quarterly Review 74, 1912, p. 81 sqq. Shipley, P. W. The treatment of dactylic words in the rhythmic
II,
Schonberger,
59.
prose
with special reference to the sense pauses. Transact, 1911, p. 139 sqq. The heroic clausula in Cicero and Quintilian, Class. Philology 6, 1911, 410 sqq. Compare Di Capua, Boll, di Filol. class. 18, 1911-12, p. 244 sqq. Preferred and avoided combinations of the enclitic 'que' Class. Philology 8, 1913, 23 sqq. in Cicero. Compare S c h m a 1 z, Wochensch. fur klass. Philologie 1914, col. 239. Sievers, E. Ein neues Hilfsmittel der philologischen Kritik. Verhandlungen der Vers. d. Philol. u. Schulm. 47, 1903, p. 33. Sinko, Th. Die Descriptio orbis terrae. Archif f. latein. Lexikogr. 13, 1904, p. 535 sqq. Skutsch, F. Zu Favonius Eulogius und Chalcidius. Philologus 61, 1902, p. 193 sqq. Rhein. Firmicus de errore profanarum religionum. Museum N. F. 60, 1905, p. 262-72. Die lateinische Sprache, in Die Kultur der Gegenwart,
of
Cicero,
,
of the
Amer.
I,
8,
d.
Glotta
1909,
p.
399.
413 sq.;
4,
[On
Gaffiot,
Smedt, C. de.
Analecta bollandiana 16, Stange, C. De Arnobii oratione. Saargemiind 1893 II: De clausula Arnobiana, p. 1336. Stangl, Th. Bobiensia. Neue Beitrage zu den Bobienser Ciceroscholien. Rhein. Museum 65, 1910, p. 88, 249, 420 sqq. Zu Ciceros rhetorischen schriften. Wochenschr. f.
.
Pour le vrai latin], Glotta 3, 1912. p. 366 sqq. Le cursus dans les documents hagiographiques, 1897, p. 501-06; 17, 1898, p. 387-92.
klass. philol.
Steeger, T. Die Klauseltechniek Leos des Grossen in seinen Sermonen. Haszfurt 1908. Stiefenhofer, A. Die Echtheitsfrage der biographischen Synkriseis Plutarchs. Tubingen 1915, p. 27, A. 60 (= Philologus 73, 1914-16, p. 462).
215
Strauss,
Progr.
Diss.
class.
C.
Die
Klauselrhythmen
Gymn. Landau
1910.
Sundermeyer, A.
De
Terzaghi, N. Ciceronis De re publica IV, 11. 191112, p. 55-58. Compare D i C a p u a, Le clausule in S. Agostino. Le clausole ritmiche negli Opuscoli di
.
Sinesio. Didas-
kaleion
22,
1913,
p.
207,
Draseke,
Woch.
Wochenschr.
15, p.
411-12;
Berl. Philol.
1906, col. 777; Byz. Zeitschr. 18, p. 342. Thalheim, Th. Zu Lykurgos und Lysias. Progr. Hirschberg i. I. Der Rhythm us bei Lykurgos. Schl. 1900. Compare Drerup, Berl. Philol. Woch. 20, 1900, col. 1313-18, Thalheim, Berl. Philol. Woch. 1900, col. 1534. Thiele, G-. Ionisch-attische Studien. I Gorgias. Hermes 36, 1901, p. 218. Thomas, E. Petrone 3 Paris 1912, p. 193-200. A. Arch. f. Papyrusk, 3, 1906, p. 458.
,
Thumb,
Germanisch-roman. Monatschrift 1911, p. 4. In K. Brugmann's Griechische Grammatik, 4th ed. by A. Thumb, Munchen 1913, p. 666-672. Satzrhythmus und Satzmelodie in der altgriechischen
.
Sprache.
1,
1913.
f.
klass.
Philol.
1913;
15.
servir
Notices et extraits de divers manuscrits latins pour a l'histoire des doctrines gramm. du moyen age. Notices et extr. des mss. de la Bibl. imper. 22, 2e partie 1868, p. 48185. Tolkiehn, J. [On De Jonge], Berl. Philol. Wochenschr. 26, 1906,
col. 907.
Thurot, C.
Greek hexameter.
Her-
Metrical
prose
(On
Frei-
Bornecque
Hermathena 13, 1905, p. 289 sqq., esp. 302. Unser, H. uber den Rhythmus der deutschen Prosa. Diss.
etc.].
burg 1906.
Vacandard,
17377.
la liturgie.
.
E.
Saint
Victrice.
Paris
1903,
appendice
B,
p.
Le cursus, son origine, son histoire, son emploie dans Revue des quest hist. 78, 1904, p. 59-102, 699. Valentin, L. Saint Prosper d'Aquitaine. Toulouse, p. 86588. Valois, N. De arte scribendi epistulas apud Gallicos medii aevi
Paris 1880, p. 7080.
scriptores rhetoresve.
216
Bibl. de fitude sur le rhythme des bulles pontificales. l'Ecole des Chartes 42, 1881, p. 161-98, 257-72. Vendryes, J. Recherches sur l'histoire et les effets de l'intensite These Paris 1902, p. 71-72. initiale en latin. Verral, A. Longinus on the rhythmus of Demosthenes. Review 19 (1905), p. 254. Class. Compare Lehnert, (Bursian's) Jahresber. 1909, 380, p. 321.
.
W.
Volkmann, R. Die Rhetorik der Griechen und Romer. Vossius, G. J. Commentariorum rhetoricorum libri VI 5 Marpurgi 1781. "Waltzing, J. P. Octavius de Minucius Felix. Lille-Paris 1909. Partie du maitre p. 137139; partie de l'eleve p. 192-93. Watson, E. W. The style and language of St. Cyprian, chapter I 13, Rhythm. Studia bibliaca et ecclesiastica, 4, Oxford 1896, p. 217-21. Wehofer. Untersuchungen zur altchristlichen epistolographie.
,
Sitz. Ber.
Wien Weil, H.
143, 1901.
Les harangues
de
Demosthene.
Paris
1912,
p.
LI,
esp. note 2.
Weinstock.
Compare Bed.
De
Wendland, P.
Erotico Lysiaco. Diss. Munster 1912, p. 86. Quaestiones rhetoricae. Progr. acad. Gottingen 1914.
1915, col. 28. in the pronunciation of Latin. Compare Berl. Philol. Woch. 1914. Wichmann, C. De numeris quos adhibuit Demosthenes in oraDiss. Kiel 1892. tione Philippica prima. Wilamowitz Moellendorf, U. von. Lesefriichte Hermes 34, 1899, p. 214-18, laa. Hermes 35, (1900) p. 37, p. 536-42. In Die Kultur der Gegenwarts i, g, 1907, p. 65 sqq.,
Philol.
Woch.
Westaway, K. M.
p.
104, p.
153.
in
1904, p.
386-95;
Winterfeld, P.
Bennonis.
Justini
Sitz. Ber.
.
presbyteri.
f.
alt.
27, 1901, p.
gard.
Neues Archiv.
.
d.
G.
f.
alt
237-44.
Zu Avianus.
Rhein.
bei
Museum
1.
61,
1902, p.
Favonius Eulogius.
Philologus
Rhein. Mus.
57,
1902, p. 549-558.
217
Philologus 63, 1904, p. 31520. des Eugippus und der rhythmische Satzschluss. Rhein. Museum 1903, p. 363 sqq. Wissowa, G. Genethliacon Carl Robert uberr. von der Graeca Halensis 1910, p. 59 sqq. Wolff, J. De clausulis Ciceronianis. Jahrbucher f. Philol. Suppl. 26, 1901, p. 581 sqq. Wuest, G. De clausula rhetorica quae praecepit Cicero quatenus Diss. Argentor 5, 1881, p. 227328. in orationibus secutus sit. Zander, C. Eurhythmia vel compositio rhythmica prosae antiquae. Eurhythmia Demosthenis. II. Numeri latini aetas integra. III. EuI. rhythmia Ciceronis. Leipzig. Ziegler, K. Neue Firmicus-Lesungen. Rhein. Museum, N. F.,
Felix,
Zu Minucius
Die
Handschrift
60,
1905, p. 273-96.
,
vid. Firmicus Maternus. Zielinski, Th. Das Clauselgesetz in Ciceros Reden. Philologus, S. B. 9, 1904, p. 589 sqq. Das Ausleben des Clauselgesetzes in der rom. Kunstprosa (I. Die Panegyriker; II. Cyprian). Leipz. 1906 (= Philol. S. B 10, 1906, p. 429 sqq). Textkritik u. Rhythmusgesetze in Ciceros Reden. Philol 65, 1906, p. 604 sqq. Der Rhythmus der rom. Kunstprosa und seine psycho logischen Grundlagen. Archiv. f. d. gesammte Psychologie 7, 1906, p 128-42. [On May], Bed. Philol. Wochenschr. 26, 1906, col 777 sqq., 286 sqq.
.
CURVES.
I.
THUCYDIDES.
a n
It
/
clausula-
metre.
;
-V"
*/
**\
v^^A*I
sentence-
metre.
*~n*+&*toLkjdx4 .
*l
S
>
>
>
!
fe
SJJi!
j
J
9
|
18*
i
> 1
#
1
>
*
1
*
i
>
striking
and
his
clausula.
The few
deviations
(e.
g.
for
(p.
18485,
p.
220
II.
DEMOSTHENES.
clausula-melre.
sentence-metre.
These
preferred clausula,
p.
p.
:>=d
3334.
221
III.
PLATO.
a
ft
LAWS.
frequency of the forms ending in a long syllable. frequency of these very forms ending in a short
. .
.
syllable.
?JLcJ:*
From
the
last
p.
these
curves
it
appears
clearly,
is
that
the
quantity
all;
is
of
works
owing
not indifferent at
see
above
more
one
to the greater
frequency of
Greek language
this
->-
good
for
y
the
clausula
wv_/w
where
*w
is
preferred to
- w
over a
dactyl.
On
it
appears that
ww^
,
is
pre-
ferred to
wwww,
only
which
of
fact agrees
who
speaks
the
is
fourth
paean (^-^-^w
Likewise
not
;
.-~
same
).
preferred to
the
is
222
w and < and inferred that above pp. 191 192, and 6164.
true
for
-
w, from which
it
may be
See
belong together.
IV.
PHILO.
clausula-
metre.
sentence-
metre.
3
I
*
I
J
>
3
i
J
t
I
>
i
?
I
>
*
j
U
?
These
curves
clearly
w~_.^ ^ w ^
See above
p.
(e.g.
),
and
-
show
that
the
clausulae
,
- ^n,
-,
>=:
196,
223
V.
PLUTARCH.
clausula-
metre.
sentence-
metre.
39,
and
p.
185.
See
also
my
remarks
in Berliner Philologische
Wochenschrift
224
VI.
LIVY.
clausula-
sentence-
metre. metre.
of
is
our results in
The
material on
the
which the
curve
based comprises
1.000
cases from
The other is based upon the same number of cases The curves are nearly the same. The agreement would have been much more striking, if not the frequency of sixsame book.
225
72
pZ,
mi n%
m
ft
H
.
.
3l
Bl
fl
clausula-
sentence-
metre.
metre.
a n
41 it
:
1*
u\
'/
y/
/'
"
'1
"1 "I
/
/ / *
Aw
^
*
ft
>
>
>
\ \
1 1
T
*
in Jurn
S
a
*
a ?
;
a
1
*
J
*
1
i
1
>
a
'
;
s
i
'.
i I
3
1
1 1 t
)
3
i >
syllabic
forms,
but that
of
five-
represented.
The
pp.
See above
Latino,
112,
and
my
paper:
De numero
oratorio
-
which
in.
Livy prefers
:=:,
-"
:=:,
and
226
VII.
CICERO.
clausula-
metre.
sentence-
metre.
mm
i
WW W M
ni
T
i
'
of Cicero for
w.
volume
my
paper:
De numero
of this work.
INDEX
Ammianus
Apulejus
Aristotle
Marcellinus
108, 129,
133 146
61, 114
70, 81
Arnim (Von)
Baehrens Barwick
Blass
86 46 87
141
135 133
146
Homer
Isaeus
Isocrates
115,
74 et passim
8 et passim
65, 91, 99
142 188
Bornecque
Bornecque Zielinski
Charito
83,
100
130
Johannsen Jordan
Kaluscha
63, 68,
160
99
123,
149
175,
176 143
Krumbacher
Kuiper (W.
Lactantius
E.
J.)
98
71
Cronert
141,
Demosthenes
8 sqq., 29 sqq.
185 sqq.
I
121
104,
st
passim;
135
Laurand
110
105
see contents.
Dewing
Flavius Josephus
Leo Lesbonax
Libanius
101,
87
86
97
130
142
Lipsky
Litzica
Fuhr
98
112,
121,
Gompertz Gropp
71
31
Livy Lutoslawski
126 sqq.
76
87, 99
6,
Harmon
Haury Havet
Heibges
133
141
122
83, 125
14 et
passim
130
99,
65 25 sqq., 34, 62
134
152
88,
228
Natorp
7
Norden Novotny
Ovink
Philemon Philo Judaeus
Philostratus
9 et passim, 33, 99
91 sqq., 99
Rodiger Rollmann
Sallust
112,
142
26
126 sqq.
71
71
137
115
111,
135
5
54 sqq., 112
130
11
Plato
et passim, 172,
176
Thrasymachus
Thumb
Thucydides
Virgil
14 et passim, 84, 99
Plutarch
20 et passim
127
Pohlenz
70,
139 130
Polemo
Procopius
Quintilianus
90,
Wilamowitz
130,
134
111,
120, 135,
143
Xenophon
101
28 94 sqq., 99
67
99,
sqq.
Zander
Raeder
arrangement of words
choice of words
ictus
133, ssq.
11, 11,
70
Zielinski
124
138
141
43
order of words; see arrangement of the Greek rhythmical clausula 132 sqq.
origin of the clausula 107 sqq.
resolutions
103
CORRIGENDA.
Page
7, line 4, 336
instead of
308.
62,
23, 463
000.
GRONI
lilt
3 0112
023611285