are not involved or obscure. Sometimes they are long, but then they consist of clauses arranged in succession and connected by simple particles like "and" or "but." The periodical sentence, such as it is found in Thucydides and later writers, is foreign to Herodotus. His sentences resemble rather those of a modern English writer than those of the later more rhetorical classical authors. It belongs to the simplicity of his style that Herodotus seldom employs the form of indirect quotation. He inserts many imaginary conversations in his work, but these are all given as if in the actual words of the speakers, not reported in the third person. His style is picturesque and interesting, but seldom rises to eloquence. At times he is grave and almost stately in expression, but more often naive and simple. He employs Homeric phrases to add dignity to his expression much as biblical phrases are used by modern authors. The general impression produced by his style is that of simplicity and straightforwardness with utter freedom from affectation. His dialect is Ionic, with occasional admixture of Homeric and other elements, and his work marks the highest development of Ionic prose. Some idea of Herodotus's style may be obtained from a translation of part of his digression about the Scythians (Book IV, 11), a passage which serves also as a specimen of the numerous digressions which he allowed himself and of the almost childlike faith with which he accepted stories of past times and distant lands:

Digression concerning the Scythians.

There is also another story, as follows, to which I myself incline: that the nomadic Scythians, living in Asia, when they were hard pressed in war by the Massagetæ, crossed the river Araxes and went away to the country of Cimmeria (for the country which the Scythians now inhabit is said to have belonged in ancient times to the Cimmerians), and that the Cimmerians, when the Scythians came against them took counsel, since a great army was coming against them, and their opinions were divided, both being vehement, but

that of the chiefs being better; for the opinion of the common people was that it was best to go away and that it was not worth while to put themselves in danger for the sake of mere soil; but that of the chiefs was to fight to the last gasp for their country against the invaders. Now neither was the people willing to yield to the chiefs nor the chiefs to the people; so the former decided to go away without fighting and give up the land to the invaders; but the chiefs determined to die and be laid in their own land and not to join the people in flight, considering all the blessings they had enjoyed and all the evils they must expect to encounter as fugitives from their country. And when they had thus determined they divided and made themselves equal in number and fought with each other. And when they had all been slain by one another, the people of the Cimmerians buried them by the river Tyras (and their tomb is still visible), and when they had buried them then they made their migration from the country. And the Scythians came and took the land which was empty.

Herodotus

by the new intellectual

life.

Herodotus belongs chronologically to the Attic period, but in dialect, style, and manner of thought he is the natural successor of the logographers. He is filled little affected with admiration for the greatness of Athens, but is little affected by the new intellectual activity of that brilliant centre of Greek life and thought. His mind was under the influence of the poets of old, and among his Athenian contemporaries the tragedians Eschylus and Sophocles appealed to him far more than did the sophists and orators of the day. He marks at once the beginning of critical historical writing and of really artistic prose, but at the same time he is the last important writer of Ionic prose and the last writer whose prose is free from the influence of dialectics and oratory. The charm of his style is great, but it lacks the incisive vigor of Thucydides and the fiery eloquence of Demosthenes.

Ctesias of Cnidus, born in the second half of the fifth century B. C., was by profession a physician. He fell into the hands of the Persians as a prisoner of war, and became

court physician at Susa, where he remained seventeen years. He was present as the physician of King Artaxerxes at the battle of Cunaxa in 401. He was held in great

Ctesias.

honor, and had access to the royal archives, which he used in composing his works. He wrote on historical, geographical, and medical subjects, his most celebrated works being the Persica, or History of Persia, and the Indica, or Description of India. Only fragments of these works remain. His style is said by ancient writers to have been pleasing and clear, though somewhat prolix. He had ample sources of information, and his books were therefore valuable, but he was not always careful or even truthful in his statements. His works were full of petty antagonism to Herodotus, and, like him, he belongs in spirit to the period before the great influence of Athens in spite of his comparatively late date.

BOOK II

THE ATTIC PERIOD

CHAPTER XVI

ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE DRAMA

Athens in the fifth century-Rise of drama from the dithyramb— Thespis, about 550 B. C.-Chœrilus, about 550 to about 480 B. C.-Pratinas, about 500 B. C.-Phrynichus, about 540-476 B. C.-Festivals of Dionysus at Athens-The drama supported by the state-The chorus-The poet and the actors-Payments and prizes-The theatre-Divisions of Greek plays.

Athens in the fifth century.

IN the sixth century B. C. Athens was already one of the most important cities of Greece, and we have seen that under Pisistratus and his sons, Anacreon, Simonides, and other foreign poets were attracted thither. In the fifth century, especially after the foundation of the confederacy of Delos, Athens was politically the most prominent of the Greek states, and at the same time the chief centre of intellectual and artistic life. The citadel was adorned with beautiful buildings and monuments of all kinds; artists, poets, philosophers, and sophists were eager to practise their crafts and professions in the city whose commerce and manufactures attracted hosts of foreign traders and whose great wealth was increased by the tribute of her allies. The festivals of the gods became brilliant and splendid as never before. Wealthy, powerful, and cosmopolitan Athens was the natural patron of all the liberal arts, and her people, alert,

vigorous, self-confident, and at the same time filled with love of beauty and appreciation of all kinds of artistic and literary excellence, were ready not only to receive and adapt the best that other parts of Greece could offer, but also to produce from among themselves the greatest artists, poets, orators, and thinkers of the ancient world. The Athenians believed that their race had inhabited Attica from time immemorial, but they knew that the original stock had received additions from various Greek tribes. It was a mixed race, though in the main Ionic, and its speech, Ionic for the most part, was so modified that it was understood in all parts of the Greek world, and became in the end the common language, at least for literary purposes, of the whole Greek race. Under these circumstances it is natural that Attic literature in the fifth century was of the greatest importance.

The beginnings of drama.

Of all the literary movements of the fifth century the development of the Attic drama is the most important. But the beginnings of drama belong in earlier times and must be discussed briefly before the work of the great dramatists of the fifth century can be understood. The drama is of Attic origin, but is a development from the rustic songs of Dionysus which were common to all parts of Greece under the name of dithyrambs. We have seen (page 113) that Arion developed the dithyramb into an artistic form. Whether the drama arose from the dithyramb as presented by Arion or from its more primitive form is uncertain, but as the dithyramb continued in vogue in Athens after the rise of the drama, the latter alternative is more probable. At any rate, there were in the Attic villages choral songs in honor of Dionysus, and the leader of the chorus probably took the part of a messenger from the god, and told stories or myths pertaining to the trials and sufferings which the god endured on earth. The choral songs were then for the most part wailings and lamentations for those sufferings.