A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe, from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 1 (of 3), Classical and mediæval criticismSaintsbury, George
History
A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe, from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 1 (of 3), Classical and mediæval criticism
Saintsbury, George
Criticism -- History; Literature -- History and criticism; Literature, Medieval
δι’ ὧν αὐτῷ ἡ κατὰ διάνοιαν γλυκύτης διαῤῥει. The translation in the
text, which may be varied as "which gives him [or "is the source of"]
his pervading intellectual charm," and which Professor Butcher
approves, seems to suit the immediate context best. But διαῤῥέω very
frequently means “run _off_” or “_away_,” and the general attitude of
disapproval which Photius assumes towards the Herodotean fabling might
seem to warrant “whereby his attraction for the intellect disappears.”
It is evident that the good Patriarch was no sparing or infrequent
novel-reader, for, as has been said, he is copious both on some novels
that we have and on one that we have not. The somewhat monotonous form,
however, of the Lower Greek Romance gives him more room for analysis of
story than for criticism of art. He justly extols the propriety of
Heliodorus, is properly shocked by the looseness of Achilles Tatius, and
puts the lost Iamblichus between them in this respect. His criticism of
the _Æthiopica_—of many million novel reviews the interesting first—may
be given, apart, of course, from the argument of the book, which, as is
usual with him, and not uncommon with his followers to-day, forms the
bulk of the article.
“The book (_syntagma_) is of the dramatic kind [this is noteworthy], and
it uses a style suitable to the plan, for it abounds in simplicity and
sweetness, and in pathetic situations actual or expected. The narrative
is diversified and unexpected, and has strange chance salvations[256]
and bright and pure diction. If, as is reasonable, it sometimes indulges
in tropes, they, too, are brilliant, and exhibit the matter in hand. The
periods are symmetrical and, on the whole, arranged with a view to
succinctness. The plot and the rest are correspondent to the style. His
yarn[257] is of the love of a man and a woman, and he shows an anxious
and careful observance of propriety of sentiment.”
Footnote 256:
σωτηρίαις, a capital phrase for the “rescue or two [and twenty],” the
“hairbreadth 'scapes” of the Romance.
Footnote 257:
This is irresistible for ὑφαίνει.
In Art. 77, on the not very interesting subject of Eunapius, we have the
familiar phrase “New Edition” in its literal Greek form.[258] A fresh
example of the interest he takes in history appears under the head of
Dionysius of Halicarnassus, and in Art. 90 Libanius supplies him with
occasion for criticising a rhetorician pure and simple. He is, he
thinks, exhibited to the best advantage[259] in his “plasmatic”
[speeches written on imaginary topics] and gymnastic discourses rather
than in his others, for by his excessive elaboration and
busybodyness[260] in these others he has hurt the grace and charm of
the,[261] as one may say, naïf and impromptu style, and deprived it of
verisimilitude, causing frequent obscurity by insertions, and sometimes
even by abstraction of the necessary. “But in other respects he is a
canon and standard of Attic speech.”
Footnote 258:
νέα ἐκδόσις.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account