For p. 4357. Dramatic imitation cannot be spontaneous and truly in accordance with nature, except in relation to a single character, or 2 at most, and only in certain scenes, namely in those which correspond to the actual situation of the poet’s spirit. But here it is always the poet himself who portrays, or rather speaks, under another name; and that is not true imitation, but almost a disguise. In all of the other characters and other scenes, the poetry is necessarily sophistic. In any event, such scenes, in which the poet expressed his present feelings, emotions, etc., under the name of some historical figure, could be good poetry if they were composed as separate scenes: the poet may have good reasons for hiding behind another name; he may feel more comfortable, if nothing else; and the relationship which he discovers and describes between his own situation [4399] and that of some other historical figure is, in a certain way, poetic, etc. (28 Sept. 1828.)
For p. 4372. *“Serbian Popular Poetry, translated into English verse by Mr. Bowring, London 1827, 12°. These poems, a French translation of which is expected soon, are taken from a collection published in Vienna in 1824 by Vuk Stefanović, author of a Serbian grammar.”* Journal des savans, 1827, p. 445, July.1 (29 Sept. 1828.)
*“La Civilisation considérée sous le rapport du feu et relativement à la supériorité de l’homme sur le reste des animaux, Paris, Baudouin frères, 8° of 63 pp., price 1 franc and 50 centîmes.” Ibid., p. 445, 1826, July, “New books.”*2 (2 Oct. 1828.)
*“He recognizes” (Monsieur Poirson, author of a compendium of Roman history printed in Paris, 1825 and ff., and moreover defender of historical truth in the first centuries of Rome) “that there are strong doubts about the truth of the adventures of Horatius Cocles, Mucius Scaevola, and Clelia.”* Ibid., 1826, August, p. 466.3 (3 Oct. 1828.)
*“The Khirkiz” (nomadic nation, in the North of Central Asia) “also have historical songs” (not written) “which recall the brave deeds of their heroes; but these are only performed by professional singers, and Monsieur de Meyendorff” (Russian baron, traveler, author of a Voyage d’Orenbourg à Boukhara, fait en 1820, Paris 1826, from which this information is taken) “was disappointed that he could only hear one of them.” Ibid., September, p. 518. “Several of them” (of the Khirkiz), says Monsieur de Meyendorff, ibid., [4400] “pass the night sitting on a stone and looking at the moon, and improvising quite sad words to tunes that are no less so.”*1 (3 October 1828.)
“Grammatica Daco-romana, sive Valachica translated into Latin and given this order by J. Alexi, Vienna 1826, 8°.” Ibid., Sept. 1826, p. 573.
For p. 4375. Wesseling in his Preface to Herodotus, in that part describing his life and writings, quoted by Schweighaeuser in the footnotes to his own preface to Herodotus, Strasbourg 1816, tome 1, states at pages XXII–III of this edition: *“So he left his country, and set off for Greece. This is what those words of Lucian refer to” (In Herodotus, ch. 1, p. 832—Tome 4, Bipontine edition, p. 116), “which have seemed to many difficult to understand: ‘πλεύσας γὰρ οἴκοθεν’ Herodotus ‘ἐκ τῆς Καρίας εὐθὺ τῆς ῾Ελλάδος, ἐσκοπεῖτο’ [‘having sailed away from home,’ Herodotus, ‘from Caria looked directly to Greece’] that is that he was trying to find in what way finally and without great effort he could become distinguished and famous. And just at that very time, it was the solemn period of the Olympic games: Herodotus hastened to the contest, and in front of a huge audience of Greeks he recited his Histories.2 For they do not say that Herodotus finished the books of his histories at Halicarnassus, but that, when they had been composed on the island of Samos, which we learn from the Suda, he took them with him from Caria to the Olympic gathering and it was to the Greeks, to spread his fame among them, that he read them. Scholars point to the LXXXI Olympiad as the occasion of the recital, a time which fits in well with the period of Herodotus: nor do I have any intention of challenging this, still less [4401] because the age of the young Thucydides fits in with this Olympiad at Elis. Thucydides was present with his father Olorus while still a youngster (Suda under “Thucydides”) ‘ἔτι παῖς ὢν’ [‘while still a boy’] when Herodotus recited his histories to the greatest applause from the Greeks, and he wept, already inspired to emulate Herodotus in the pursuit of such praise; when Herodotus noticed this, he said to Olorus (Marcellinus, Vita Thucydidis, p. 9), ‘ὀργᾷ ἡ φύσις τοῦ υἱοῦ σοῦ πρὸς τὰ μαθήματα’ [‘your son’s nature drives him toward knowledge’] a wonderful thing to say about a 15-year-old boy, who was weeping because of his desire for glory. Nor have I forgotten about the second recitation, which took place in Athens in the third year of the LXXXIII Olympiad; a recital which Thucydides could certainly have heard, but as an adult and not a boy. H. Dodwell (Apparatus of Thucydides’s Annales, p. 23) with learned arguments accepts this and is in agreement with Edoardo Corsini (Fasti Attici, tome 3, p. 203, 213) who, however, is not in complete agreement with him, and conjectures that that recital took place during the LXXXIV Olympiad … It is much more likely that in Athens he read his books in front of the Council, as Jerome writes, and was honored, and that this happened on the day of the Panathenaea in the third year of the LXXXIII Olympiad, all of which is illustrated by the elegant learning of Scaliger (Ad Eusebii Chronica, p. 104).”* Schweighaeuser makes no note to this entire passage. —This tradition concerning Herodotus seems to be evidence at least that the earliest prose was read to the people, and that is how it was made public, in the same way as verse; or, if nothing else that it must derive from the ancient [4402] practice of reciting or singing poetical compositions in public. (7 Oct. 1828.)
Wesseling loc. cit., p. XXVI. *“It was Herodotus’s custom (see bk. 5, 36; 7, 93, 213; 1, 75) to call the first books: τὸν πρῶτον λόγον, τοὺς πρώτους λόγους [the first logos, the first logoi], and the following τοὺς ὄπισθε λόγους, τοὺς ὀπίσω λόγους [the following logoi]”* —Schweighaeuser, ibid., in a note. *“Neither in these places, nor in similar ones, should the word λόγος be understood as if it meant that each and every one of the nine books of his Histories should be called λόγους: λόγος in these places means nothing other than narration or history, as we would say in our language: and for this reason also Hecataeus, to quote an example, is called by Herodotus λογοποιὸς, 2, 143, ll. 36 and 125, that is, a writer of Histories; and, still speaking of Hecataeus, Herodotus, 6, 137, says, ‘῾Εκαταῖος ἐν τοῖσι λόγοισι,’ Hecataeus in his histories; finally 7, 152, where he says ‘πάντα τὸν λόγον’ he means the whole of his history. So, where he says that he will speak of a certain thing ‘ἐν ἄλλῳ λόγῳ’ [‘in another logos’], he does not always mean in another of the nine books of his histories, but also in another part of the same book; as in bk. 6, ch. 39, where the things he declares that he will expound ‘ἐν ἄλλῳ λόγῳ,’ can be read in ch. 103 of the same sixth book. In the same way, when Pausanias, bk. 3, ch. 2, says ‘῾Ηρόδοτος ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τῷ ἐς Κροῖσον,’ he is not saying Herodotus in his book on Croesus, but [4403] Herodotus in that narration (or in that part of his histories) which deals with Croesus. Similarly, Pausanias again, bk. 5, ch. 26, p. 447, says ‘῾Ηρόδοτος ἐν τοῖς λόγοις,’ Herodotus in his histories. But with regard to the use of this word λόγος, see here at this point Wesseling, who rightly points out”—that is p. XXIX—1 “I can affirm that none of the ancients has ever referred to the Λόγους Herodoti Λιβυκοὺς [the Libyan logoi of Herodotus]” (cited by Herodotus himself, 2, 161, and by some thought to be different from the Histories) “whereas on the contrary many have quoted from book four (of the Histories) about African matters: that in fact he himself often calls a part of the book λόγον and λόγους: about the killing of Cimon, father of Miltiades ‘τὸν μὲν ἐγὼ ἐν ἄλλῳ λόγῳ σημανέω’ [‘which I will relate in another logos’]” (bk. 6, 39): “and he spoke
of it in ch. 103. The exact match to the instance in ch. 75 of book one.” —“That is” (Schweighaeuser notes ibid.), “what he says in ch. 75 of book one he will disclose ‘ἐν τοῖσι ὀπίσω λόγοισι’ [‘in the subsequent logoi’], we see disclosed not in any of the following books, but in ch. 124 of the same bk. 1.”* —See p. 4467. However λόγος in these cases does not mean narration or history, but prose, unlike ἔπη [epic poetry] or μέλη [lyric poetry] (carmina–oratio) [poems–discourse]; καταλογάδην in prose; λογοποιὸς prose writer, unlike ἐποποιὸς [epic poet], etc. But whether because the first prose works written among the Greeks were histories, or most of them were historical in those early times, or finally because the historical genre [4404] did not have any particular name at first, and perhaps (as is entirely natural) it did not exist entirely separate from the other kinds of writing, that is, there were no works of pure history, or narrative, but works rather in which different subject matters and characteristics were mixed and confused, etc. (11 Oct. 1828), the general name of prose λόγος was appropriated for histories, and Herodotus called the historian Hecataeus λογοποιὸν prose writer. And when prose works began to be divided into books, these books were still called prose, i.e., logoi λόγοι, prose 1, prose 2, etc., 9 pieces of prose (῾Ηροδότου λόγοι ἐννέα [the nine logoi of Herodotus] is in fact the title of the Aldine edition of Herodotus, 1st Greek ed., Venice 1502): almost as if to confirm that the assemblage of books, according to the opinion of Wolf,1 began with the prose writers. And as luminous confirmation of Wolf’s view that writing and prose were originally the same thing, we find, something which neither he nor others have noted in this respect, that συγγραφεὺς is a synonym for historian. See Scapula, etc., under σύγγραμμα [written composition], συγγραφὴ [narrative, history], λογοποιὸς [writer of histories, of prose]. See p. 4406.
Greek dialects. *“Nor must we assume that in all those places where in all the preceding books there still exist common verb forms” (in Herodotus), “when in other passages we see the writer in place of those same words make use of forms proper to the Ionians, that they have been introduced through the indiscipline or negligence of copyists. It was, however, perfectly acceptable for an Ionian writer to use common forms of verbs indiscriminately alongside those which were proper to Ionians: and I feel that I can understand through very reliable documents, that at one time Homer, and Herodotus in the same way, and others, took advantage of this [4405] and … deliberately followed this variation. I considered there to be no more reason why the clear words of Hermogenes on this matter, when he tells us that Herodotus wrote not in a pure but in a mixed dialect (De formis orationis, bk. 2, p. 513, cf. p. 406), should be interpreted by us any differently, following our very learned Wesseling (Dissertatio Herodotea, pp. 147–48).”* Schweighaeuser, Preface to Herodotus, pp. VIII–IX.1 And ibid., p. IX, note: *“we know that Schaefer, an excellent scholar of our Writer, after having begun his edition of the Histories, in which he started to remove throughout the common forms of verbs and substitute Ionic forms for them, soon turned to better things and abandoned his first intention.”* (11 Oct. 1828.)
For p. 4359. The passage quoted in the previous thought shows that such opinion (nowadays generally rejected by scholars) was held until 1816 (date of the Strasbourg edition of Herodotus) by someone such as Schweighaeuser. (11 Oct. 1828.)
“Enfin, l’objet de notre sympathie la plus habituelle” (dans l’Iliade), “c’est Hector: et si d’un côté nous sommes entraînés par le talent du poète à désirer la prise de Troie, nous éprouvons de l’autre une sensation constamment pénible, en voyant dans le défenseur de cette cité malheureuse, le seul caractère auquel tous nos sentimens délicats et généreux se puissent allier sans mélange. Ce défaut, car c’en serait un, si le poète avait eu pour but de former un tout consacré seulement à célébrer la gloire d’Achille; ce défaut, disons-nous, [4406] a tellement frappé des critiques, qu’ils ont attribué à Homère l’intention d’élever les Troyens fort au-dessus des Grecs; et la pitié qu’il cherche à exciter pour le malheur des premiers leur a paru confirmer cette opinion” [“Finally, the object of our most frequent sympathy” (in the Iliad), “is Hector: and if on the one hand we are drawn by the skill of the poet to desire the capture of Troy, we feel on the other constant pain at seeing in the defender of that unhappy city the only character for whom all our delicate and generous feelings, without impairment, can join together. This failing, for it would be a failing if the poet’s aim had been to create something devoted solely to the celebration of the glory of Achilles; this fault, I repeat, has made such an impression on critics that they have ascribed to Homer the intention to raise the Trojans far above the Greeks; and the compassion which he seeks to excite for the unhappiness of the former has seemed to them to confirm this view”]. B. Constant, De la religion, bk. 8, ch. 1, tome 3, Paris 1827, pp. 430–31. Note that also Constant (who absolves the Iliad from this defect, claiming that it was not originally a single poem) recognizes nevertheless in this passage that the exciting of compassion, etc., for Hector, etc., and the praises which seem to be given to the Trojans, etc., are such in the intention of the poet, and would have been contrary to the unity of interest for Achilles, etc., although in that same book and in the previous one he observes and demonstrates the great difference between the customs and ideas of civilized times and those of the times of the Iliad.1 (12 Oct. 1828.) See. p. 4413.
For p. 4404. Here therefore historian, prose writer, and writer or composer in writing (συγγραφεὺς); history, prose, book, and writing or written composition (σύγγραμμα, συγγραφὴ: see the Greek index of Arrian’s Anabasis, under συγγραφὴ), often used to mean the same thing. What better confirmation of Wolf’s highly perceptive observation? (12 Oct. [1828]). See p. 4431.
“Les Sagas, ou traditions des Scandinaves, qui, de père en fils, avaient conservé dans leur mémoire des récits assez étendus pour qu’on en ait rempli des bibliothèques lorsque l’art d’écrire est devenu commun en Scandinavie, servent à nous faire concevoir la possibilité d’une conservation orale des poèmes homériques. L’histoire [4407] entière du Nord, dit Botin (Histoire de Suède, ch. 8), était rédigée en poèmes non écrits. (Il y a encore de nos jours, dans la Finlande, des paysans dont la mémoire égale celle des rhapsodes grecs. Ces paysans composent presque tous des vers, et quelques-uns récitent de très-longs poèmes, qu’ils conservent dans leur souvenir, en les corrigeant, sans jamais les écrire)” [“The Sagas, or traditions of the Scandinavians, who, from father to son, had conserved stories in their memory that were long enough to fill libraries with once the art of writing had become common in Scandinavia, help us to conceive the possibility of the oral conservation of the Homeric poems. The whole history of the North, says Botin (Histoire de Suède, ch. 8), was composed in poems that were not written. (Still today, in Finland, there are peasants whose memory matches that of the Greek rhapsodes. These peasants nearly all compose verses, and some of them recite very long poems, which they keep in their memory, and correct them, without ever writing them down)”] “(Rühs, Finnland und seine Bewohner).” (And it is quite natural that rough peasants who do not use or possess writing will be the same as the Greeks in those times when writing was still not used even by the more educated classes.) “Bergmann (Streifereyen unter den Calmucken 2, 213)a parle d’un poème Calmouk, de 360 chants, à ce qu’on assure, et qui se conserve depuis des siècles dans la mémoire de ce peuple. Les rhapsodes, qu’on nomme Dschangarti, savent quelquefois vingt de ces chants par coeur, c’est-à-dire un poème à peu près aussi étendu que l’Odyssée; car par la traduction que Bergmann nous donne d’un de ces chants, nous voyons qu’il n’est guère moins long qu’une rhapsodie homérique” [“Bergmann (Streifereyen unter den Calmucken 2, 213) speaks of a Kalmuk poem, comprising 360 songs, so we are told, and which has been preserved for centuries in the memory of this people.
The rhapsodes, who are called Jangarchi,1 sometimes know twenty of these songs by heart, that is to say a poem almost as long as the Odyssey; for it can be seen from the translation Bergmann gives of one of these songs that it is scarcely less long than a Homeric rhapsody”]. (Now would it be credible for all of this poem to be composed by one single person although the Kalmuks also traditionally claim that it is?) “‘Notre vie sociale,’ observe M. de Bonstetten (Voyage en Italie, p. 12), ‘disperse tellement nos facultés, que nous n’avons aucune idée juste de la mémoire de ces hommes demi-sauvages, [4408] qui, n’étant distraits par rien, mettaient leur gloire à réciter en vers les exploits de leurs ancêtres’” [“‘Our social life,’ observes Monsieur de Bonstetten (Voyage en Italie, p. 12), ‘so disperses our faculties that we have no accurate idea of these half-savage men’s memory, who, undistracted by anything, invested their glory in singing in verse of the exploits of their ancestors’”]. B. Constant, De la religion, bk. 8, dedicated to proving that the Iliad and the Odyssey are by different authors from different periods, and that the second comes after the first, ch. 3, tome 3, Paris 1827, pp. 443–44. (12 Oct. 1828.)
Zibaldone Page 329
