xiv 



RISE AND PROGRESS 



later times, it is necessary to keep constantly in 

 remembrance that the ancient and modern drama 

 are constructed upon different principles. In 

 the ancient drama the plot arises out of the ex- 

 pansion of a single incident : no wonder that it 

 is simple ! In the modern drama the plot arises 

 out of the compression of a whole narrative : no 

 wonder that it is intricate ! 



Even upon the plays of SOPHOCLKS,* who is 

 universally acknowledged to have carried Greek 

 tragedy to the highest pitch of perfection, this 

 original principle of structure had a prodigious 

 effect. But he was more of an artist than 

 JEschylus : he was more happy in the selection 

 and arrangement of his fables ; and abounds 

 more in the well-wrought interest and striking 

 reverses, which Aristotle instructs us to esteem 

 as the triumphs of dramatic skill. That these 

 are compatible with a rigid unity of action is 

 sufficiently proved by the manner in which 

 Sophocles has treated the legend of OEdipus, in 

 the best of all his productions ; while the failure 

 of Corneille and of Voltaire, in their several 

 attempts to extend the combinations and improve 

 the conduct of the plot, is perhaps the most 

 decisive tribute to the ability of the Greek poet 

 in the management of that difficult subject His 

 general desire to heighten the interest of his 

 fables is shown by the addition he made to the 

 number of actors, who might be simultaneously 

 brought upon the stage ; an improvement cer- 

 tainly copied by ^schylus in the latter part of 

 his career. But, besides this technical addition 

 to the facilities of the dramatic art, Sophocles 

 was in other respects an improver on the 

 $!schylean model. The ideal region, in which 

 his imagination loved to expatiate, was different 

 from that of the elder bard ; peopled not with 

 supernatural terrors and shapes of colossal mag- 

 nitude, but with images of perfect majesty, 

 serenity, and beauty. The impress of such lofty 

 and noble contemplations is seen in the almost 

 faultless excellence of his style. It is not wild, 

 unequal, and irregularly grand ; but stately, 

 sober, and elaborate. The few sallies which he 

 makes in the manner of ^Eschylus, fail, as imita- 

 tions often do, by putting on the external shape 

 without the vivifying spirit of the original. But 

 in these passages the poetry of Sophocles is wan- 

 dering from its native channel, along which it 

 usually flows, a mild majestic stream, seldom 

 ruffled by the tempest, seldom breaking in upon 

 its limits, but bearing on its aspect the unques- 

 tionable symbols of dignity and power. 



With the third of the great tragic writers of 



* B. C. 49540;. 



Athens the decline of the art at once commenced 

 and was consummated. Active and fertile as 

 the genius of EURIPIDES* was, it would perhaps 

 have been vain for him to contend with either of 

 his predecessors on ground already occupied by 

 them ; with /Kscliylus in force and grandeur, or 

 with Sophocles in purity of style, in symmetry of 

 plot, and in the beauty and impress! veness of 

 moral lessons. But Euripides made no such 

 effort. He struck into a new path more in con- 

 sonance with the depraved taste and degenerate 

 manners of the generation by which he was 

 surrounded. To say that the ideal was totally 

 banished from his works would be false ; but 

 the ideal world of his fancy was not one of 

 sublime elevation nor of stately repose; it was 

 full of sickly sentiment and disorderly passion. 

 The standard above humanity was discarded ; but 

 a standard beyond humanity was substituted in 

 its room. In seeking to keep up a tempest of 

 perpetual agitation, to harrow the weaker feel- 

 ings of our nature, Euripides showed men as 

 they never show themselves ; he enhanced volup- 

 tuousness and aggravated error. In character, 

 language, costume, and attitude, that Homeric 

 tone of masculine greatness, which had hitherto 

 ennobled the stage, disappeared. With this 

 departed likewise the solemn march and simple 

 evolution of the tragic fable. Their place was 

 supplied by plots perplexed without interest, and 

 fantastic without ingenuity. Nor were these the 

 only faults of the new school. The choric odes, 

 though adorned with poetical graces, were but 

 loosely connected with the business of the scene : 

 the dialogue was disfigured by the quirks of 

 sophistry, and the pomp of rhetorical declama- 

 tion; qualities which probably contributed to 

 make Euripides so marked an idol of Parisian 

 taste. Hence, notwithstanding the many merits 

 of this writer as a poet ; his pathos, his tender- 

 ness, his love of nature, his insight into the heart 

 of man ; to him must mainly be imputed the 

 ruin of the tragic drama among the Greeks. 

 His very beauties made him a fatal example. 

 He thought too much of himself, and too little of 

 his subject ; the play was bad when the poetry 

 was exquisite ; his aim was occasional effect, 

 rather than steady and consistent excellence. If 

 his perceptions were keen, his discrimination 

 was not equally acute ; he mistook the coarse, 

 or the ludicrous, for the simple ; and if he some- 

 times made little things great, he more frequent- 

 ly made great things little. In the pathetic, his 

 most successful branch of writing, he is often a 

 plagiarist on his own conceptions ; in ethics he 



B. C. 479-404. 



