ἐπεισόδιον may be compared with ἐξόδιον (from ἔξοδος); it seems to be derived from ἐπείσοδος, in the sense the word has in Sophocles, O. C. 729 ὁρῶ τιν᾿ ὑμᾶς ὀμμάτων εἰληφότας φόβον νεώρη τῆς ἐμῆς ἐπεισόδου ('my coming in upon you'). This seems to me a more 1452b20 probable explanation than those noted by Haigh, Tragic Drama of the Greeks p. 353 .

12.5 L' Epiſode est tout ce qui est entre les chants du Chœur.] ¹

12.5 P. 86. BETWEEN ENTIRE CHORAL ODES.

I confess myself not satisfied as to the meaning of this expression, . I have therefore adhered to the fair and literal translation of the words. But what is an entire choral ode or song? Is it that, which is in the regular lyric form, in strophe and antistrophe? So it seems most natural to understand it. But a difficulty meets us. For when the , as it often, and indeed almost always, happens, is not such a regular Antistrophic Ode ¹ , what name is to be given to that part of the Tragedy, which lies between the and the first Antistrophic Ode? It cannot make a part of the , for that ends with the . The Exode is out of the question. There remains only the Episode; and to that it cannot belong, consist- ent with Aristotle's definition of , because it will not be, according to this sense of , "between entire choral Odes." If we take entire to mean, all choral, i. e. not broken and interrupted by the , or the persons of the drama, we shall still be embarrassed with the same difficulty: for, whenever the is not, in this sense, entire, which is frequently the case, the part between that and the first entire Ode, will be without a name.

Shall we, then, with some commentators, suppose Aristotle by , to have meant only, — i. e. melodies sung by the whole chorus? ² This removes the difficulty. Yet I can hardly conceive, that he would have expressed himself in a manner so wantonly ambiguous, when the clear and decisive expression — , which he presently after uses, was so obvious. ³

From an accurate and philosophical writer, one would naturally expect a chapter of definitions to be clear. But whoever expects it here will certainly be disappointed. Almost every definition, to be perfectly intelligible, wants other definitions, which are not given, and which the obscure and imperfect information to be found in other antient authors will not enable us to supply.

THIS part of the drama comprehends every thing contained between the odes of the chorus. That is in fact all the piece except the prologue, which precedes the first ode; and the exode, which succeeds、 the last. The intervals of the representation, and confequently the number

number of acts, depend on the number of these odes, which is different in different tragedies, and varies from three to seven. It is impoffible to read a Greek tragedy, without seeing the abfurdity of those critics who have tried to reduce all those dramas to five acts in obedience to the EX POST FACTO law of Horace. • Neve minor, neu fit quinto productior actu 'Fabula.'

• Let not your play have fewer acts than five, Nor more.' COLMAN. Metastafio observes on this subject that ' in Horace's time the • Romans were accustomed to five acts, and to four rests or intervals. • And Horace very reasonably supposed that a poet would hazard the • success of his drama, however perfect, if he tried to bring the audience ، ، to a custom different from that which prevailed in the public theatres at the time when he wrote. If Horace had written his Art of Poetry forty years before, he would probably have recommended the divi- • fion of the drama into three acts, for the fame reason that forty years • after he advised it to be made in five. For in an epistle of Cicero to his brother Quintus it appears evident that the public dramas were ⚫ then commonly divided into three, and not five acts. [1] " Before I con- [1] Illud te ad extremum et oro et hortor ut tanquam poetæ boni et actores industrii < folent, fic tu in extremâ parte et conclusione muneris ac negotii tui, diligentiffimus fis; ut ' hic tertius annus imperii tui, tanquam tertius actus, perfectissimus & ornatiffimus videatur.' CIC. EP. AD QUINT. FRUT. L. I. EP. I. IN FINE. Perhaps, however it may not be difficult to reconcile this passage of Tully with the rule of Horace if we look to the Latin tragedies. Those of Seneca have each four choral odes, dividing the piece into five acts. And yet, according to the pofition of Aristotle, as those only

POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. " I conclude, I beg and exhort you, that after the example of good " poets, and industrious actors, you would be particularly diligent in the " latter part and conclufion of your office and employment, that this " third year of your command, like the third act of a drama, may ap- " pear most perfect and splendid." ESTRATTO DELLA POETICA, page 245. The fame would be the reason why an English, and an Italian critic would give different advice on this head. And the propriety of fuch a distinction has been justified by experience in both instances. Metastasio tells us, an attempt was made to introduce the five act drama on the Italian stage, which was obliged to be dropped from the cold reception it met with on account of its novelty; and some years ago a trial was made of the drama of three acts on our stage with no better success. Hecuba and the Desart Island barely stood their nine nights. The Way to Keep Him still remains, (and very deservedly,) a popular comedy, but with the addition of two acts. That this proceeds from a dislike to innovation, and not from any intrinfic merit in the rule of Horace, appears from our having no objection to it in the comic opera, where it is authorised by custom. I must confefs the space of three acts seems quite sufficient for the single circumstance of an action which is the proper object of dramatic only are efteemed acts, or episodes, that are included between the fongs of the chorus, the second, third, and fourth, could only have properly that appellation, the first being the prologue, and the last the exode. Horace, therefore, speaks according to the mode of the Roman theatre, while Tully adopts the division of the Greeks. imitation.

imitation. The obligation laid on the poet to protract his piece to five acts occafioned our earlier poets to have recourse to the double plot; and the modern tragedy which confines itself to one action, from its length partakes something of the (K) watery quality which Aristotle tells us would attend a fimple dramatic fable, if drawn to the length of the epopee. Besides, the division of the fable into three parts, a middle, a beginning, and an end, which Aristotle [L] has defined to be necessary to constitute an entire action, naturally suggests such a division of the drama which is to imitate an entire action. To use the words of an ingenious writer, • The first act, or beginning will fix the spectator's ' attention by opening the plot, and raifing his attention. The fecond, or middle will further continue his perplexity till he is utterly at a • loss to conceive how the piece will terminate. And the third, or end • will relieve him from his embarrafssment and agreeable anxiety after it is carried to the utmost, by an unexpected, yet natural cataftrophe [M].' We are not only indebted to the Latin crítics for the division of the drama into acts, but for the fubdivision of those acts into scenes. As the act was determined by the ode of the chorus in tragedy, and the vacancy of the stage in comedy [N], so the end of the scene was marked by [κ] ὑδαρῆ. Poetic, Chap. xxvI. [L] Poetic, Chap. VII. [M] Letters of Literature, Letter xxI. [N] The division of scenes in Shakespear is marked by their actual change. When the pedantry of the self-named scholars of Ariftotle first took poffeffion of our stage, one of the rules

POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. by the entrance, or exit of a character; and this they expressed by naming all the characters at the beginning of the first scene of the first act who were then on the stage; and when a person either entered or went out repeating the names with the addition or omiffion of that person [o]. All this the modern theatre obviates, by fimply marking the entrance and departure of the characters. Till very lately, new plays were always on their first publication printed in the Latin mode. At length however good sense prevailed over pedantry, and we have restored that form of stage direction which is most convenient, reviving the custom of our older writers, except as to the language, most of their directions being in Latin, as Exit cum fuis, Exeunt omnes, Manet. We only retain Exit, and Exeunt. rules was, never to change the scene, or leave the stage vacant, in the middle of an act. This Metastasio breaks through, (see his Operas paffim.) It never prevailed on our theatre. I own I am utterly unable to see what possible advantage can be derived from the observance, or disadvantage from the breach of it. [o] For instance: they would have written the first scene of the fifth act of Henry Iv. Part 1. thus: Аст v. SCENE I. King Henry, Prince of Wales, Lord John of Lancaster, Earl of Westmorland, Sir Walter Blunt, Sir John Falstaff. SCENE II. King Henry, Prince of Wales, Lord John of Lancaster, Earl of Westmorland, Sir Walter Blunt, Sir John Falstaff, Worcester, Vernon. SCENE III. King Henry, &c. reciting all the names again, except Worcester and Vernon. Ff The

" 218- The Abbé D'Aubignac was for following the example of the ancients, and laying afide all fstage directions whatever, merely because they never used them. From the same principle, why not propose the disuse of capital letters, stops, and division of words, in writing and printing? It is not very foreign to this subject to remark what was called 'the • dumb show,' in our old plays. This appears to have been a kind of pantomimical exhibition of the principal circumftances of the piece previous to its commencement. There is a remarkable one in Hamlet. Before the opening of the supposed play to be exhibited to the king and queen, the following stage direction appears. • Trumpets found, dumb shew ، follows, which is accurately described, and appears to contain every circumstance of the murder of Hamlet's father. Now there is no apparent reason why the ufurper should not be as much affected by this mute representation of his crime, as he is afterwards when the fame. action is accompanied by words.. I once conceived this might have been a kind of direction to the players which was from mistake inferted in the editions; but the fubsequent conversation between Hamlet and Ophelia, entirely destroys fuch a notion. This observation leads me to another. The use of soliloquies; either. when the character is quite alone, or when he speaks to himself in company, which last is generally diftinguished by the word ' aside,' in the margin. Though in real life this custom of thinking aloud hardly ever happens, yet we are so accustomed to it on the stage, and it is often so useful in developing a character that I think it may fairly be permitted. But no incident, even the most trifling, should ever arise from

POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. { from overhearing a foliloquy. The conversation of Mungo to his hamper in the Padlock, which is overheard by Don Diego, does not fall under this fault, as such a real conversation is perfectly confiftent with the character of the grumbling negro. To return to the word episode. It seems inconsistent, to a reader unacquainted with the origin of the Greek tragedy, that the principal part of it comprehending the body of the fable should be distinguished by a name which usually implies a digreffion, or some tale that is not immediately connected with the leading epic, or dramatic action, and in which sense it is frequently employed in the treatise before us. To explain this, it will be necessary to take a short view of the rife and progress of the ancient drama. Tragedy owed its birth to a kind of ode in honor of Bacchus which was performed at the festival of that deity by rival poets, and the prize given to the successful candidate was a goat, from whence it received its name [P]. It occurred first to Thespis, one of these contending bards, to enliven the dulness of his periodic song by some tale or fable to be recited between the intervals by one of the perfons employed to fing in the ode. To this person Æschylus added a second actor, as Sophocles afterwards did a third, forming a dramatic dialogue in which the ori- [P] Τραγωδία, literally means the fong of the goat. So Horace, * Carmine qui tragico vilem certavit ob hircum.' ART. POET. 220. He who the prize, a filthy goat, to gain, • At first contended in the tragic strain.' Ff2 COLMAN. :: ginal

ginal reciter of the fable, taken from the musical performers of the ode, had only a fubordinate part. For a confiderable time however, the musical part continued to be confidered as the chief; and the dramatic part as a kind of deviation from the regular form of tragedy [Q], which was sanctioned by religion, and supported and regulated by the magiftrates, and from that circumftance received the appellation of episode, which it ever afterwards retained. From this it is obvious, that the chorus was not the choice of the poet, but a necessary appendage to the theatre which neither law nor custom would permit him to dispense with. This particular circumftance of the Greek tragedy, which occafioned them to smuggle as it were the dramatic fable on the public between the pauses of a musical composition, cannot fail of reminding us of the mode adopted by the provincial theatres to avoid the rigor of the law before the late act in their favor, by receiving money for a concert of mufic, and announcing a play to be acted gratis during the intervals [R]. NOTE [Q] From this custom of deviating from the original design of praising Bacchus in these odes, arofe the Greek proverb Ουδὲν πρὸς Διονυσιὰν. 'It has nothing to do with Bacchus," which was applied generally to any thing introduced foreign to the subject in question. ، Good- [R] By such a fubterfuge was the illustrious Garrick first ushered to the public notice. The curious reader will not be difpleased to fee a copy of the bill that announced him. • man's Fields, October 19, 1741. At the late theatre in Goodman's Fields, this day will • be performed, a concert of vocal and instrumental music, divided into two parts. Tickets at three, two, and one shilling. Places for the boxes to be taken at the Fleece Tavern, ' near the theatre. N. B. Between the two parts of the concert will be prefented an hifto- ( rical play, called The Life and Death of King Richard the Third: containing the distresses • of King Henry VI. the artful acquisition of the crown by King Richard, the murder of • young King Edward the Fifth and his brother in the Tower; the landing of the Earl of ‹ Richmond, and the death of King Richard, in the memorable battle of Bofworth Field, ' being

ἔστι δὲ πρόλογος μὲν μέρος ὅλοντρα - γῳδίας τὸ πρὸ χοροῦ παρόδου: iam incipit ulna sua uti et sic disputare, ut missa interna tragicae poesis natura curet, ne forte quo nomine singulae tragoediarum particulae vocandae sint lectores nesciant. prologus est igitur tota tragoediae pars quae posita est ante chori carmen parodicum. nomen πάροδον h. 1. non de chori in orchestram ingressu sed de tragoediae parte quadam intelligendum esse definitio παρόδου quae statim sequitur ostendit. Aristophanes tragoediae initium, h. e. primam orationem eius qui primum inducitur, πρόλογον appellavit in Ranis v. 1119., ubi Euripidem Aeschyli tragoedias exagitantem haec dicere fecit: καὶ μὴν ἐπ᾿ αὐτοὺς τοὺς προλόγους σοι τρέψομαι, ὅπως τὸ πρῶτον τῆς τραγῳδίας μέρος πρώτιστον αὐτοῦ βασανιῶ τοῦ δεξιοῦ. ibidem cum Aeschylo imperatum esset ut πρόλογον ἐκ τῆς Ὀρεστείας recitaret, ille dicto audiens tres versus qui primi sunt in Choephoris ac deinde quartum et quinti dimidiam partem ex oratione Orestis protulit. verus Aristoteles in Rhetoricis III, 14 init. cuiusvis carminis exordium πρόλογον vocat: τὸ μὲν οὖν προοίμιόν ἐστιν ἀρχὴ λόγου, ὅπερ ἐν ποιήσει πρόλογος καὶ ἐν αὐλήσει προαύλιον· πάντα γὰρ ἀρχαὶ ταῦτ᾽ εἰσί, καὶ οἷον ὁδοποίησις τῷ ἐπιόντι. haec significatio nomini plane convenit: πρόλογος enim ea est oratio quae ceteris prius admittitur. sed si ὁ λόγος opponitur τῷ μέλει, prologus ea complectitur quae ante chori adventum in scena peraguntur, h. e. quae prius dicuntur quam cantus inchoatur. hoc intellectu πρόλογον dictum accepit scriptor anonymus apud Küsterum ante comoedias Aristophanis p. XIV (apud Bekkerum p. XII): πρόλογος τὸ μέχρι τῆς εἰσόδου τοῦ χοροῦ μέρος. conf. Tzetzae Versus de tragica poesi editi a Dübnero in Museo Rhen. philolog. vol. IV. p. 403. πρόλογος μέν ἐστι τὸ μέχρι χοροῦ τῆς εἰσόδου. nec vero haec significatio multum immutatur, si quando chorus ante adest quam histriones' in scenam ingressi sunt, quod factum videmus in Aeschyli Persis et Supplicibus atque in Rheso Euripidis: tum enim πρόλογος continet illa quae ante a coryphaco recitantur quam totius chori canticum incipit, quae unius choreutae recitatio et λόγος et λέξις appellari potest. itaque in Persis prologus continetur v. 1-64., in Supplicibus v. 1-40., in Rheso v. 1-22. longius autem in prologo definiendo a significatione vocis πρόλογος recessit technicus hic noster, dum quae primam λέξιν totius chori praecedunt eo nomine complectitur. secundum hanc sententiam dimidia paene Oedipi Colonei pars (v. 1-667) ingenti prologo occupatur, sed ea culpa non est praestantissimi poetae: immo in culpa sunt technici notiones suas ex vagis notis componentes. cur ὅλον μέρος, non μέρος simpliciter, scripserit et hic et paulo post ubi episodium et exodus definitur, id in tali scriptore non curiose quaerendum existimo. fortasse significari voluit prologi ambitum plerumque satis magnum esse, item episodii exodique. ἐπεισόδιον δὲ μέρος ὅλον τραγῳδίας τὸ μεταξὺ ὅλων χορικῶν μελῶν: quae ab histrionibus inter duo chori cantica aut inter semet ipsos aut inter ipsos et choreutas peraguntur, ἐπεισόδιον efficiunt. nomen inde factum est, quod actorum colloquia nascentis artis tragicae aetate canticis choricis tamquam quoddam alienum vel secundarium interserebantur. ὅλα μέλη chori quae circumdant ἐπεισόδιον, aut parodus et stasimum aut duo stasima esse possunt. conf. anonymus apud Küsterum 1. c. ἐπεισόδιον τὸ μεταξύ δύο χορικῶν μελῶν. Tzetzes 1. c. ἐπεισόδιος δέ ἐστιν... λόγος μεταξὺ πλὴν μελῶν χορῶν (lege χοροῦ) δύο. ἔξοδος δὲ μέρος ὅλον τραγωδίας μεθ' ὃ οὐκ ἔστι χοροῦ μέλος: accuratius scripsisset ὅλου χοροῦ μέλος. in ipsa enim exodo singuli choreutae in κόμμοις interdum respondent canticis ab histrionibus ex scena fusis, et minora singulorum choreutarum carmina decantari et anapaesti coryphaei recitari possunt. ceterum vel sic definitio accommodari nequit ad omnes tragoedias, si quidem Aeschyli Supplices totius chori cantico concluduntur, et Eumenides in fine novi chori carmine instructae sunt. scriptor anonymus (apud Küsterum p. XIV) comoediae exodum a nostro tehnico discedens sic definivit: ἔξοδος τὸ ἐπὶ τέλει λεγόμενον τοῦ χοροῦ. huic consentit scholiasta Aristophanis ad Vespas v. 270., Pollux IV, 108., Hesychius s. v. ἐξόδιοι νόμοι. imperite Tzetzes 1. c. vers. 24. ἡ δ' ἔξοδός τις τυγχάνει χοροῦ λόγος, μεθ' ὃν χοροῖς οὐκ ἔστι τι λέγειν μέλος. πάροδος μὲν ἡ πρώτη λέξις ὅλου χοροῦ: si nomen παρόδου (Einzug) premis, quae chorus canit vel coryphaeus recitat, dum choreutae in orchestram sive a dextra sive a sinistra parte per apsides ingrediuntur, ea voce consignantur. id fere fecerunt grammatici, ut scholiasta Euripidis ad Phoeniss. v. 210 (202): πάροδος δὲ ἐστιν ᾠδὴ· χοροῦ βαδίζοντος ἀδομένη ἅμα τῇ εἰσόδῳ. item scholiasta Aristophanis ad Vespas v. 270., qui coryphaei exhortationem inter chori in orchestram adventum (230-247) enuntiatam πάροδον appellavit. alios grammaticorum de parodo locos collectos attulit G. C. W. Schneiderus de Re scenica Atheniensium pag. 205 sq., quibus iam addendus est I. Tzetzae definitio in Versibus de tragica poesi v. 35-42. a Dübnero evulgatis in Museo Rhen. philologico t. IV. p. 403. eiusmodi vero parodus multis tragoediis omnino deest, Sophocliis quidem omnibus, excepta Aiace, deest. hoc cum alios tum Pseudo - Aristotelem videtur impulisse, ut aliam definitionem parodi excogitarent. nam hic noster nonnisi totius chori primum carmen ( πρώτην λέξιν iste dixit) nomine parodi intelligi voluit, eodemque intellectu eandem vocem a Plutarcho acceptam fuisse patet ex illius quaestione an seni sit gerenda res publica c. 3. p. 785 A (IV. I. p. 152. apud Wyttenb.): Σοφοκλῆς δὲ λέγεται μὲν ὑπὸ τῶν υἱῶν παρανοίας δίκην φεύγων ἀναγνῶναὶ τὴν ἐν Οἰδίποδι τῷ ἐπὶ Κολωνοῦ πάροδον, ᾗ ἐστιν ἀρχὴ εὐίππου ( ν. 668), ξένε, τᾶσδε χώρας.” quae sint huiusce definitionis τῆς παρόδου incommoda, neuter eorum videtur vidisse vel curavisse. iam enim, ut ante notavimus, dimidia fere Oedipi Colonei pars prologus est. porro idem huius fabulae carmen (v. 668 sqq.) non minus pro stasimo quam pro parodo haberi potest. nam quia omnes chori personae hic demum canere incipiunt, parodus est. sed idem canticum stasimum est, quia neque anapaestorum neque trochaeorum systemata admixta sunt. idem dici potest de primo carmine chorico Oedipi Regis v. 151 - 215. aliisque pluribus. his expositis, dicendum restat cur λέξιν ὅλου χορού h. 1. legamus, ubi μέλος exspectamus. hoc ego technico nostro parum caute scribenti excidisse puto, quemadmodum apud Photium et Suidam legimus μονῳδία λέ γεται, ὅταν εἶς μόνος λέγῃ τὴν ᾠδήν. conf. Argumentum Persarum Aeschyli τῶν δὲ χορῶν τὰ μὲν ἐστι παροδικά, ὡς ὅτε λέγει δι' ἣν αἰτίαν πάρεστιν, ὡς τὸ “ Τύριον οἶδμα λιποῦσα,” h. e. primum carmen choricum Phoenissarum Euripidis v. 202 sqq. Tzetzes 1. c. ὅλου χοροῦ λέξις τε πρώτη τυγχάνει· ᾠδὴν ὁ Εὐκλείδης δέ, λέξιν οὐ λέγει. accuratius igitur Euclides locutus est de parodo quam ceteri technici solebant. de iis qui parodum λέξιν et qui αδὴν nominabant, Tzetzes v. 42. monet, et recte monet, ut mihi videtur, ταυτὸν τάχα λέγοντες ἐν πολλοῖς λόγοις. Hermannus et Müllererus, ille in Commentariis ad h. 1. pag. 142., hic in Museo Rhenano philolog. t. V. p. 362., existimant λέξιν, non ᾠδήν, consulto ab Aristotele positam esse, ne systemata anapaestica 2), quae ab uno coryphaeo recitata esse, non a toto choro cantata, certum est, a parodo excluderentur. sed ita 2) Nobile exemplum anapaestorum ab uno coryphaeo recitatorum et strophis intersertorum praebet parodus Antigonae Sophocliae v. 100 - 161.auctor personatus sibi ipse non constabit, cum parodum totius chori λέξιν esse dicit et nihilo minus unius coryphaei anapaestos recipere voluit, aut ille hoc ignoravit, anapaestos non cani a choro sed recitari a coryphaeo. accedit quod ὅλου χοροῦ λέξις nihil nisi carmen esse potest: totus enim chorus nunquam loquitur, sed semper canit. hoc recte monuit Tyrwhittus. diligenter et docte, ut solet, Odofr. Müllerus nuper de parodo disputavit in Museo Rhenano philolog. t. V. p. 360 sqq., sed virum aequissimum sententiam suam aliqua ex parte immutaturum esse, ubi haec legerit, confido. στάσιμον δὲ μέλος χοροῦ τὸ ἄνευ ἀναπαίστου καὶ τροχαίου: τὸ ἄνευ ἀναπαίστου καὶ τροχαίου τo consilio addita esse puto, ut, si quando stasimo coniuncta essent systemata anapaestica vel trochaica, haec ad ipsum stasimum non pertinere moneretur. sic in Sophoclis Aiace post prologum (v. 1-133), dum chorus in orchestram ingreditur, primum sex systemata anapaestica a coryphaeo recitantur (v. 134-171), iisque parodus absolvitur, tum sequitur carmen a choro stante ( στάσιμον) decantatum (v. 172 - 200). dum anapaesti illi recitantur, chorus non stat sed in orchestrae mediam partem ingreditur. aliud exemplum ex Aeschyli Agamemnone petere licet. chorus ingredi orchestram incipit a versu 40., et hinc usque ad v. 103. novem systemata anapaestica a coryphaco recitantur, et haec τὴν πάροδον efficiunt; continuo sequitur stantis chori carmen ( στάσιμον) a versu 104. usque ad 257. in eiusdem Supplicibus statim ab initio chorus ingreditur, quod dum fit, coryphaeus decem systemata anapaestica (v. 1-40) recitat, quo facto stantis chori carmen inchoatur. eiusmodi igitur systemata a carmine chorico excludi technicus voluit. sed idem cur etiam ἄνευ τροχαίου addidit ? scilicet τροχερός est numerus trochaicus et ad saltandum aptus, non ad standum, ideoque cantica ex trochaeis continuis composita ex stasimis eximenda putavit. fortasse cogitavit eiusmodi carmina quae apud Aeschylum in Eumenid. v. 997-1002. leguntur: χαίρετ' ἀστικὸς λεώς, ἴκταρ ἥμενοι Διός, παρθένου φίλας φίλοι σωφρονοῦντες ἐν χρόνῳ. Παλλάδος δ' ὑπὸ πτεροῖς ὄντας ἅζεται πατήρ. baec et similia a saltante choro cantata esse dubitari nequit. conf. eiusdem fabulae v. 1014 - 1020. Prometh. v. 415-417. 420-422. Hermannus olim (in Comment. ad h. 1.) stasima inde dicta putabat, quod carmina essent perpetua sive systematis anapaesticis trochaicisve non interrupta, sed hanc sententiam ab ipso iam improbari credo. nam perpetuus Graece dicitur non στάσιμος sed συνεχής. stasima recte tradunt grammatici Graeci dicta esse propterea quod canerentur a stantibus choreutis, quamquam modicos ac decoros motus ne ab his quidem carminibus remotos fuisse verisimile videtur. locos grammaticorum de στασίμοις exponentium collectos posuit Schneiderus in Re scenica Atheniensium p. 207. conf. Odofr. Müllerus ad Aeschyli Eumenides p. 95. illis locis iam accedit Tzetzes 1. c. vers. 51 sqq. ἄλλοι δὲ τὸ στάσιμον χοροῦ φασὶν μέρος (1. μέλος) ἄνευ ἀναπαίστου καὶ τροχαίου τῶν μέτρων· πάλιν ὁ Εὐκλείδης δέ φησιν σιν ὧδέ πως · ὅταν χορὸς στάς τι κατάρχεται λέγειν. in versu postremo λέγειν negligenter dictum esse pro άδειν memineris. Tzetzes illam priorem definitionem et alteram Euclidis non re sed verbis differre pronuntiat ( καὶ ταῦτα πολλοῖς ἓν τελοῦσι τοῖς λόγοις), et recte pronuntiat, quoniam, dum illa systemata anapaestica recitantur, choreutae in mediam orchestrae partem procedunt, itemque non stantes sed saltantes trochaica systemata decantare solent. itaque μέλος χοροῦ ἄνευ ἀναπαίστου καὶ τροχαίου idem est atque μέλος ὃ χορευταὶ στάντες ἄδουσιν. κόμμος δὲ θρήνος κοινὸς χοροῦ καὶ ἀπὸ σκηνῆς: nomen κόμμοι inde factum est, quod plerumque unus vel alter canentium sese plangebat doloris ostentandi causa.mira est huius technici etiam h. 1. sive dicendi brevitas sive negligentia. debuit saltem κόμμος δὲ θρήνος κοινὸς τοῦ χοροῦ καὶ τῶν ἀπὸ σκηνῆς, sed articulum saepius hoc capite omisit, ubi verus Aristoteles haud dubie illum positurus erat. de commo absurda quidem Tzetzes attulit, sed quae contemnere nobis non licet, propterea quod ex eius verbis patet, huius technici definitionem ignotam ei non fuisse: scribit igitur 1. c. vers. 64 sqq. οὗτος δ᾽ ὁ κόμμος τοῦ χοροῦ τελῶν μέρος ὑποκριταῖς ἦν ὡς πολὺ συνηγμένος, κόμμος δὲ θρήνου πενθικώτερος πλέον. ὁ θρῆνός ἐστιν ἠρεμέστερον μέλος. κόμμον πάλιν ἄλλος δέ τις θρῆνον λέγει, κοινὸν χοροῦ σκηνῆς τε τυγχάνει λέγων.