sacrificed all strangers thrown upon their coast. The recognition here between the brother and sister is so contrived as to be surprising without being unnatural; and the deceit of Thoas is, according to the Greek view, not at all unjustifiable. The following remarks of Müller on this drama are so good that we quote them in their integrity:

"The poet, too, has taken care not to spoil the pleasure with which we contemplate this noble picture, by representing Iphigenia as a priestess who slays human victims on the altar. Her duty is only to consecrate the victims by sprinkling them with water outside the temple; others take them into the temple and put them to death.* Fate, too, has contrived that hitherto no Greek has been driven to this coast. When she flies, however, a symbolical representation is substituted for the rites of an actual sacrifice, whereby the humanity of the Greeks triumphs over the religious fanaticism of the barbarians. Still more attractive and touching is the connexion of Orestes and Pylades, whose friendship is exalted in this more than in any other play. The scene in which the two friends strive which of them shall be sacrificed as a victim and which shall return home, is very affecting, without any design on the part of the poet to call forth the tears of the spectators. According to our ideas, it must be confessed, Pylades yields too soon to the pressing entreaties of his friend, partly because the arguments of

Orestes actually convince him, partly because, as having more faith in the Delphic Apollo, he still retains a hope that the oracle of the god will in the end deliver them both; whereas we desire, even in such cases, an enthusiastic resignation of all thoughts to the one idea, in which no thought can arise except the deliverance of our friend. The feelings of the people of antiquity, however, were made of sterner stuff; their hardihood and simplicity of character would not allow them to be so easily thrown off their balance, and while they preserved the truth of friendship, they could keep their eyes open for all the other duties and advantages of life." *

The Iphigenia in Aulis was not acted till after the poet's death. The progress of the story and the

dénouement are admirable. The resolution of Achilles forbids all idea of using compulsion towards his betrothed; and the whole expedition is at a standstill till at length Iphigenia announces herself as a voluntary victim-the noblest deus ex machiná which ancient tragedy can boast. Her character has been objected to on the ground of inconsistency: her lamentations are too rapidly succeeded, it is said, by her resignation; the woman too quickly becomes the heroine-οὐδὲν ἔοικεν ἡ ἱκετεύουσα τῇ ὑστέρα. We cannot agree in the justice of this criticism. If it is not unnatural for the same person to lament at first, and to be resigned afterwards, neither is the rapidity with which the change takes place unnatural.

*Lit. Ant. Greece, vol. i. pp. 376, 377

Indeed, there are many instances on record of condemned persons, who, as long as there was the very slightest chance of escape, have spared no solicitation, and have given way to humiliating anguish, but who have nevertheless, when the conviction of their doom became certain, risen from the ground, as it were, in a moment, thrown off all appearance of terror, and assumed the cheerfulness of martyrs. Such appears to be the character of Iphigenia in Aulis, in our opinion the nearest approach to a modern heroine to be found in classic poetry.

In the Cyclops, Euripides has given us the only extant specimen of the genuine satyric drama. This drama, as we have said above, was usually a kind of facetious epilogue to the tragic trilogy.* The chorus consisted of satyrs; and the adventures of the hero were always those susceptible of laughable treatment. The subject of the Cyclops is the story of Polyphemus.

* But see note on p. 101.

THE origin of comedy is radically the same as that of tragedy. But while the latter took its rise from the more urbane and polished element of the Bacchic worship, the former sprang from the rural remains of the old and more homely ritual. This was in Greece undoubtedly the more ancient of the two, and, as more exclusively connected with the generative and fertilising attributes of the gods, lingered longest among the villages and woods, and in the hearts of the agricultural population. The Phallic processions, and the rural celebration of the vintage, contained the elements from which sprung the graceful productions of Aristophanes and Menander. Although, however, the sources from which comedy arose were more indigenous than those which gave birth to tragedy; yet there is no doubt that the embodiment of the former in any permanent shape was posterior to that of tragedy. The honour of being the first inventor of comedy is usually supposed to lie between Susarion and Epicharmus. The truth, however, seems to be, that the latter was the first author of written pieces, and therefore must technically be admitted to be the first comic dramatist. The date of his birth is uncertain it was probably about the

year 520 or 530 B. C.; and he was more than ninety when he died. The comedies of Epicharmus were parodies of sacred subjects, and partly also political. Plautus's play of the Menæchmi is said to be founded on one of the dramas of Epicharmus. Phormis and Dinolochus are the other two writers of the Sicilian school whose reputation has been preserved by their contemporaries. The first Attic comedian was Chionides. The titles of three of his plays have come down to us; these were the Ἥρωες, the Πέρσαι ἢ Ασσύριοι, and the Πτωχοί. A contemporary of Chionides was Magnes, from whom Aristophanes borrowed the titles of two of his plays, the Frogs and the Birds, and of whom he speaks in a complimentary manner in the Knights.* Cratinus was born at Athens about the year 519 B. C., and died in 422 B. C., having more than once been a successful competitor against Aristophanes and Eupolis. Crates, Phrynichus, and Hermippus lived about the same time. The first was originally an actor in the plays of Cratinus, but afterwards turned author. Aristophanes speaks very highly of him in the Clouds.†

Phrynichus was a man of inferior ability. He is ridiculed by Hermippus and Aristophanes. Hermippus was a great opponent of Pericles; he prosecuted Aspasia for impiety. Eupolis was the immediate predecessor of Aristophanes, and, with Cratinus, seems to have been looked upon as the leading

*Line 518.

† Line 537.

Hor. i. Sat. 4. 1, 2.