APPENDIX. 405 



AMque Pangafia et Rh6si Mavortia t611u8 

 Atque G6tae atque H6brus et Actias Orithyia. 



Quintilian pronounced Pangaea, Actias, Orithyia ; and doubtless this accentuation in his 

 opinion gave to the words a certain additional volatile grace. But the rhythmical movement 

 was to him precisely what it had been to Virgil. Virgil again said Harpyia Celaeno, Orphei 

 Calliopea, Charybdis, Eurysthea, Dareta, Theseus, Caenea, etc. etc. ; Quintilian Harpyia 

 Celaen6 (? Celaeno), Orphei Calliopea, Charybdis, Eurysthea, Dareta, and so on. Nero, or 

 whoever the poet was, who is satirised by Persius, in 'closing his verse' with Nerlta delphin 

 (? delphin) luxuriated no doubt in the Greek intonation with which he trilled forth these words- 

 But in all these cases the rhythm remained unchanged by change of accent. The accent to 

 them, whether Greek or Latin, was only a heightening of the tone with which the syllable 

 where it fell was pronounced. In the time of Priscian and Servius a great change had already 

 taken place. Greek words were still pronounced with the Greek accent ; but both the Greek 

 and Latin accent had changed their nature. Quantity had perished ; and was only to be 

 acquired by artificial training. What was casually noticed by Quintilian, was to them a 

 matter of vital importance. In his comment on Georgic i, 59 Servius says, ' Sane Epiros 

 Graece profertur, unde etiam e habet accentum. Nam si Latinum asset, pi haberet, quia 

 longa est.' Again and again does he notice this Greek accent. To his ear the accentuated 

 syllable was long, every other short. By study alone he learned the real quantity. We 

 know, he says, the i in amicus to be long, because it has the accent ; the quantity of the a 

 we know only arte. He therefore pronounced J?p?ros, just as a modern Greek does rjireipo's ; 

 he knew only by his art that the i was long. On the other hand he said Epirus ; he knew by 

 his art alone that e was long. So also he pronounced Pangaia, Actias, Orithyia, Charybdis, 

 and the like. To the ear of Virgil or Quintilian altaque was as perfect a dactyl as ardua ; 

 exinde had the same quantity as exire. To the ear of Priscian or Servius altaque was an 

 amphibrachys, exinde a dactyl. The rules of prosody alone taught them otherwise. Now 

 when I think of all this ; when I read the hexameters of a Praecilius, or the Political verses 

 of a Tzetzes, or the drama of a modern Athenian, it seems to me almost preposterous to main- 

 tain that quantity exists even potentially in any modern language with which I am acquainted. 

 When I was in Athens a few months ago, I met with tragedies which looked to the eye like 

 the tragedies of Sophocles. The words were apparently ancient Greek; the metre was the 

 senarius scanned according to accent. Reading them produced in me a strange dream-like 

 sensation. The a of (TirKay^vov was long because it had the accent, so was the a in aeile 

 for the very same reason. The a in airXa'^f^vevcya^ was short, because it was unaccentuated ; 

 so was the a in aei^ei. The i was short in acbiyyos, long in atplyya. To me it is the same 

 with English. Neither my ear nor my reason recognises any real distinction of quantity 

 except that which is produced by accentuated and unaccentuated syllables. To say ' Rapidly 

 is a word to which we find no parallel in Latin ; the first short but accented, the second long 

 but unaccented, the third short ;' or, 



'Sweetly cometh slumber, closing th' oerwearied eyelid 

 is a correct Virgilian hexameter ; 



Sweetly falleth slumber, closing the wearied eyelid. 



