Niebuhr's lectures on Roman history, Vol. 2 (of 3)Niebuhr, Barthold Georg
History
Niebuhr's lectures on Roman history, Vol. 2 (of 3)
Niebuhr, Barthold Georg
Rome -- History
brought about just such revolution in metres as with us. His hexameters
were still clumsy and full of faults, and without any _cæsura_, or
with a false one, though not so bad as in Klopstock. Much as I like
the old _numeri_, the verses of Ennius have something in them which is
unpleasing to me. Besides the metres which are properly lyric, he has
tried all the _rhythmi_; and indeed he has done it with much greater
trueness than the older dramatists. The _senarius_ has already more of
measured syllables, which gave it a firmer hold; but there is between
the verses of Ennius and those of Virgil, as wide a gulf as between the
first attempts of Klopstock and that height of perfection in metrical
art, to which Count Platen has reached. A peculiarity of the old
versification which as yet is far from being clearly made out, was the
slurring of the short syllables (_ecthlipsis_): _ego_ was pronounced as
one syllable, like the Italian _io_; _accipito_, as a dactyl.
Ennius was not an original genius; yet he surely does not deserve the
contempt with which Horace speaks of him. He had had a Greek education
in Calabria; Greek was his second mother tongue, while the Roman was
for him only an acquired language: he therefore wished to help the
Romans to a translated Greek literature. If we compare it with what
the Greek literature then was, that of the Romans was very brilliant.
The Alexandrine period was now already past. Callimachus was dead,
when Livius Andronicus began; Antagoras[44] and Aratus were dead;
Eratosthenes was a mere versifier. On the other hand, the Romans had a
great deal of freshness, and there would have been still more, had not
Ennius caused the foreign influence to get so much the upperhand.
Somewhat younger than Ennius was Pacuvius, his sister’s son, justly
called the Deep. He scorned the pieces of Euripides, which Ennius had
chosen, and only took those of Æschylus and Sophocles, thus putting
himself altogether in opposition to the taste of the Greeks of that age.
Q. Fabius Pictor and L. Cincius Alimentus then wrote the history of
their own nation in Greek. Dionysius, who finds fault with Fabius as
an historian, has never made any objection against his language; on
the contrary, the fact that Dionysius wrote his own history only down
to the beginning of the first Punic war, when Fabius was getting to be
more diffuse, proves that the latter was very readable. Of the same
standing was Acilius. The great Scipio wrote in the form of a letter
to Philip the history of his own wars,[45] and so did his son-in-law
Scipio Nasica that of the war with Perseus. Greek grammarians,
statuaries, and painters were brought in already by Æmilius Paullus for
the education of his children.
WAR WITH THE LIGURIANS; WITH THE CELTIBERIANS. THE THIRD MACEDONIAN
WAR. PEACE WITH THE RHODIANS. FURTHER WARS IN SPAIN. STATE OF AFFAIRS
AT HOME.
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