to a later age. The metrical writings of Manuel Moschopulus (Opuscula grammat. Moschopuli ed. F. N. Titze Prag. 1822, 8), of Tricha, Elias Charax and Herodianus (Appendix ad Dracon. Strat. libr. de metr.: compl. Trichae, Eliae Mon. et Herodiani tract. de metris graece ex codd. Mscr. ed. Fr. de Furia Lips. 1814, 8), are unimportant. Finally the metrical Scholiasts are to be mentioned, and among them especially Demetrius Triclinius.

Among the Romans, also, the grammarians occupied themselves much with metrical science. We still possess a poem of Terentius Maurus on prosody and metre (in Putsch Grammatt. vett. Lat. p. 2383 sqq.; Terent. Mauri de litteris, syllabis, pedibus et metris ex recensione et cum notis Laur. Santenii absolvit D. I. v. Lennep, Traj. ad Rhen. 1825, 4). Besides him are to be mentioned Servius Maurus Honoratus (Centimetrum in Putsch, p. 1815 sqq. ed. L. v. Santen Lugd. Bat. 1788, 8; ed. F. N. Klein, Confi. 1824, 4), Flavius Mallius Theodorus (de metris, emend. I. F. Heusinger, Guelferb. 1755, 4, auct. Lugd. Bat. 1766, 8), Marius Plotius (de metris liber in Putsch, p. 2623, sqq.), Atilius Fortunatianus (de metris Horatianis in Putsch, p. 2671, sqq.), Maximus Victorinus (libelli tres de re grammatica, de carmine heroico et de ratione metrorum in Lindem. Corp. Grammat. Lat. p. 267, sqq.), Marius Victorinus (in Putsch, p. 245, sqq.), Di. omedes (in Putsch, p. 270, sqq.) and others.

Richard Bentley was the first of modern philologists to make investigations of his own concerning the metrical art of the ancients, particularly in his Schediasma de metris Terentianis (Terentii Comoedia rec. R. Bentley, 1726, 4, Lips. 1791, 8, likewise in Plauti Rudens ed. Fr. Vol. Reiz, Lips. 1789, 8), and applied them with great success in criticism. Fr. Wolfg. Reiz followed him as regards the metres of the Romans. The labors of Benjamin Heath, Rich. Brunck and particularly Rich. Porson (especially in the preface to his second edition of his Hecuba of Euripides, Lond. 1797, Lips. 1824, 8), concerning the metres of the Greek tragedians, are meritorious. Corn. de Pauw and Thom. Gaisford, also, in their editions of Hephaestion, have done something for metrical science.

Gottfried Hermann was the first to bring forward a scientific theory of metres, founded upon Kant's doctrine of the Categories (de metris Graecorum et Romanorum poetarum, Lips. 1796; Handbuch der Metrik, Manual of metrical sci

ence, Leips. 1799; Elementa doctrinae metricae, Lips. 1816; Epitome doctrinae metricae, Lips. 1818. Numerous observations are scattered in his editions of Greek and Roman poets, and in his other philological writings. Concerning the theory of Hermann compare Apel's Metrik, part I. § 44—52, C. Freese, de Hermanni metrica ratione, Hal. 1829). J. H. Voss, in his work: Zeitmessung der deutschen Sprache, Metrical system of the German language, Koenigsb. 1802, advanced a different theory. He reduces the doctrine of rhythm to the doctrine of time in modern music. Aug. Apel in his Metrik, Leipz. 1814, 2 vol. 8, and Aug. Boeckh, in his dissertation: On the metres of Pindar, Berl. 1809, adopted the theory of Voss. The latter however, formed afterwards a theory of his own, founded upon the ancient musicians and philosophers, in his dissertation: de metris Pindari in Tom. I. Pars II. of his edition of Pindar: Pindari opera quae supersunt recens. A. Boeckhius, Lips. 1811-1822, 2 Vol. in 3 Part.

Besides these many others have written partly on rhythmical and metrical science in general, as Cleaver: de rhythmo Graecorum, Oxon. 1789, L. I. Doering: Entwurf der reinen Rhythmik, Plan of a pure rhythmical science, Meissen, 1807, G. F. Mueller: Ueber den Rhythmus, on rhythm, Coeln, 1810, W. Lange, Fundamental-Metrik, Fundamental Metrical Science, 1819, 8, K. Besseldt: Beitraege zur Prosodie und Metrik der deutschen und griechischen Sprache, Contributions to the prosody and metrical science of the German and Greek languages, Halle, 1813, F. A. Gotthold: Anfangsgruende der griechischen, roemischen und deutschen Verskunst, Elements of the metrical art of the Greek, Latin, and German languages, Koenigsb. 1820;-partly on single branches of the science, as A. Seidler: de versibus dochmiacis tragicorum Graec. Lips. 1811, 1812, 2 tom., Karl Lachmann: de choricis systematis tragicorum Graec. libr. IV. Berol. 1819, Franz Spitzner: de versu Graecorum heroico. Accedit dissertatio de media syllaba pentametri Graeci elegiaci auct. Fr. Traug. Friedmann, Lips. 1816, 8, C. Burney Tentamen de metris ab Aeschylo in choricis cantibus adhibitis, Cantabr. 1810, 8.

Besides the above named works, much is to be found partly in separate dissertations, partly in the different editions of Greek and Roman poets. A collection of the most common rhythms and metres is contained in E. Munk's Tabular view

of the Metres of the Greeks and Romans, Glogau and Lissa, 1828. F. Lindemann: Uebungsbuch zur Fertigung griechischer Verse, Book of exercises for making Greek verses, Dresd. 1825, and F. T. Friedmann: Anleitung zur Kentniss und Verfertigung lateinischer Verse, Guide to the knowledge and making of Latin verses, 3d ed. Braunschw. 1832, are deserving of recommendation for writing Greek and Latin

verses.

1*

1

PART I.

THE DOCTRINE OF RHYТНМ.

CHAPTER I.

Definition of Rhythm.-Arsis.-Thesis.

RHYTHM, (numerus) as the artistic form of the material considered with respect to time, is perceptible either in the movement of the body in the dance, or in musical tone in music, or in the articulate sound of speech in poetry. It presents itself to us in a succession of small portions or divisions of time, which must be so constituted that they may be apprehended by the ear. If they follow too rapidly, they run together, and the sense cannot adequately distinguish them from each other; if they follow too slowly, they escape the perception, because a division of time, the beginning and end of which we cannot seize, is the same as infinite to the hearing.

Time, and portions of it appreciable by the senses, are conditions of every Rhythm, even that of nature, as we hear it, for example, in the rolling of the thunder, or the murmuring of the brook, or the whispering of the leaves. The rhythm of art must manifest itself as a whole as the definite form of a definite substance; not only its parts must be limited but it must itself have a beginning and an end. Beginning and end, here, also, must not follow too closely upon each other, nor stand too wide apart; in the former case, the rhythm as a whole would not satisfy the ear; in the latter the hearing would not be able to grasp the rhythm as a whole. A rhythm of art, moreover, as the form of the material whereby a poetical work of art is presented to the senses, must be beautiful, that is, various in its parts, but in such a manner that this variety of the parts may be formed into a unity,-a whole. Without variety of the parts the rhythm would be monotonous, and therefore not beautiful: without unity of the parts,