boy who was sent to fetch water for the reapers, and was never seen again. A tradition which, though only transmitted orally by the shepherds, is more reasonable than some written records, is to the effect that he perished in the summer while hunting. The fact that he was the son of Upius, the king, the father also of Iollas and Mariandynus, lends credence to this tradition, for it is not to be supposed that a prince acted as sutler to the shepherds. Though one may well question whether Lityerses in the above story was the son of King Midas-in fact some accounts deny that he was-yet I would defend the tradition that Borcos was a prince. Let it be remembered that it was a common practice among the ancients for the princes to be given charge of the herds; instance Paris and Ganymede. The song called Borimos, or Borcos if you will, was named after the lad. It was not unlike the song called Adonima, or Adoniasmos, or Adoniaoedes, which the Egyptians sang in memory of Adonis. The tale of Adonis, and the ceremony in his memory, is familiar from the pages of Theocritus and others. Another song of like character called maneros, or

μavéρws, as Pausanias writes it in his note-book, took its name from the inventor of agriculture, who was also a disciple of the Muses. In Sicily there was a poem called Persephate, which was yearly sung in commemoration of the search of Ceres for Libera. In like vein Theocritus relates the story of Hercules' search for Hylas. There remains to mention one other style of pastoral, which was chanted in concert, in thanksgiving to the Hours. Theodoric the Colophonian is the reputed author of this variety. These Hours are not to be confused with the hours which mark the time of day, for they are the Hours which preside over the changes of the seasons. But we must not dwell longer upon this subject.

So much for the origin of the pastoral, its species, and its subjects. Of the composition of each species the proper treatment is given in the proper place, and we here close the strictly historical treatment.

I. 5.

COMEDY AND TRAGEDY

From pastoral poetry comedy subsequently sprang, and we find Theocritus applying a common term to the pastoral and to the drama: κωμάσδω ποτὶ τὴν ̓Αμαρυλλίδα (I make merry with Amaryllis). Just as the Sicilians arrogate to themselves the invention of the bucolic, so also they claim the origin of comedy. They avow that Epicharmus was a citizen of a colony established by the Megarians, and that as he lived before Chionides and Magnes, he destroys the claim of the latter to the invention of comedy. Not only do the Sicilians make this claim for the origin of comedy, but they also assert that they refined and ennobled it, for they say that the credit for enlivening the antiquated raillery with a plot belongs to Phormis and Epicharmus. The Sicilian claim is further supported by the argument that while the Attic Greeks use the verb párтew (to do), the Dorians use Spâv (to do), the word from which 'drama' comes. Again, the Attic Greeks use the word uos for a village, the Dorians, kúμŋ, whence κwμáčev (to make merry, to go about the villages reveling). This reveling took place after dinner, as a relief from the day's work.

The Greeks required only a very sparing breakfastjentatio, as we call it, whence jento, related to the Greek verb in ὅτι δεῖ ἴειν—Dorian ἴεν (because one must be leaving), and they took little more at luncheon, a meal named from the mid-day hour, in which they took refreshment. Another luncheon was the prandium (literally, early in the day), so called because by it one was once more prepared for his work. Similarly, the Greeks call it deîπvov, a contraction for de πovev (one must be at work). It was clearly a meal to put one in condition for further work.

Later in the day, when work was over, there was a more pretentious and elaborate meal, which was eaten in the society of one's family or intimate friends. This meal was called coena, because it was eaten 'in common' (ková), and was not a private meal. The Greeks called it Sópπov, a contraction for the phrase παρὰ τὸ δόρυ παύειν (to rest beside the spear). This word of course originated in the army, and implies that the soldiers did not bathe or lay aside their arms unless their work was over.

The young men, then, with leisure on their hands, took advantage of the freedom of the night, and, safely away from masters, patrons, or parents, ran to and fro in the country districts. At that time they did not, as was the later custom, assemble in the cities. The same custom under the same name held in the Roman times; thus we read of comessationes (revelings) in Livy. The sports indulged in in the villages were quite properly called comoedia, a compound of woń (ode) and kúμn (village). They were thus distinguished from the odes sung in the pastures or fields, at tombs or altars. Many extant passages of Epicharmus witness to this etymology: Ἐκ μὲν θυσίας θοίνη, ἐκ θοίνης πόσις, ἐκ πόσιος κῶμος, ἐκ κώμου θυανία, ἐκ θυανίας δίκη, ἐκ καταδίκης πέδαι τε, καὶ σφάκελος, καὶ ζημία (from the sacrifice comes the feast, from the feast drinking, from drinking revelry, from revelry swinishness, from swinishness conviction in court, and from the court's sentence, fetters and gangrene and a fine). In this passage Kwμos defines frenzy induced by drinking and carousing. Let us also add the passage from the Fourth Book of Theopompus' Histories, relative to the untimely incontinence of Philip of Macedon: καὶ πιὼν δε τὴν νύκτα πᾶσαν, καὶ μεθυαθεὶς ἤδη πρὸς ἡμέραν ἐκώμαζεν (wantoning all the night and drunken as well, he reveled even until day). Thus there would be sporting even after light, as Martial said of that Acerra whom he facetiously described. Again, in his The Twofold Indictment (Discategorumenos) Lucian

has Luna shining on τοῖς κωμάζουσι (the revelers.) Then there is the verb émiкwμážev (to rush on with a party of revelers), where the prefix has the same force as in ÉTITIкρaívev (to make still more keen). The verb means that the reveling is resumed, and does not refer to the drinking on the day after the festivity, as Origen states. The same idea is expressed by a less common verb, ßadλíčev (to throw the leg about, to dance). Perhaps it is from this word that we get the name Ballio for a worthless fellow, a name which Alexis, Sophron, and Epicharmus all use in their comedies.

As of other things, so of the arts, time is the refiner and systematizer, so that with more cultured generations comedy conformed to artistic principles, and yielded to prescribed limits. Thus fixed regulations determined the time and place for presenting comedy.

Some say that comedy took its rise from the songs at the cross-roads and in the villages in honor of Apollo Nomius, the pastoral divinity, but this must be regarded as a later development. It was not the original comedy, but was developed from comedy. Nor would we fall into the error of Idomeneus, who ventured to assert that the Pisistratidae invented merry-making and revelries (@aλíaι kaÌ κώμοι). Their service was to refine the primitive and unrestrained inventions of others. And you must avoid the like error of Varro, when he says that comedy originated with the young men who went about the villages telling stories for money, for comedy was known in the villages before this practice; and surely amusement is older than its employment for gain. So there is no truth in that report. Lastly, it is said that Epicharmus gave comedy its name, when, as an exile on Cos, he was writing plays; but the fact is that comedy came to him ready named, and his part was to refine it.

We learn from history that tragedy was early known, for at the grave of Theseus the tragic poets vied with one

If you take it as a whole,

another. However, tragedy is not, as reported, older than comedy, for the homelier or more every-day life finds its way into song first; thus, nuptials before tragic situations, drinking bouts before continence, the conversation of ordinary life before a pretentious style of discourse, and pastoral life before court life. Moreover, this claim that tragedy antedates comedy is based upon false reasoning. It is said that the Iliad is older than the Odyssey, and that the Iliad is the model for tragedy, and the Odyssey for comedy. Now I would not presume to say which one was written earlier, for it is a debatable question, but I do think that the Odyssey, which is written in a looser style, should be read first. Furthermore I do not think that all writing should be referred to Homer as a standard, for he ought to be judged by a standard himself. Again, who does not see that the Odyssey is essentially a tragedy? In the Iliad, on the other hand, there is no tragic sequence. it is one long string of deaths. It begins with a pestilence, which destroys more men than the entire war; it ends with the death of only one person, and he is not even mentioned by name. And though the poem is called the Iliad, Ilium is not destroyed in this poem, but in the Odyssey. On the other hand, in the major part of the Odyssey only one character, Elpenor, dies, and he was drunk; for the destruction of the companions of Odysseus is barely mentioned, and without any emotional appeal. There are pictures of sweet intercourse, there is drinking, song, and dance. At the dénouement, however, the wooers are slain, and the deus ex machina, a property of tragedy, is employed. Finally, Aristotle laughs at those who think that the Iliad or the Odyssey is a complete organism with one plot, for he says that one may draw several plots from either one, because there are many parts and many episodes. So it was that the ancients were accustomed to recite certain episodes taken from the body of the work, as the battle at the ships, the catalogue of ships, the summoning of the spirits, the events