arians or scholiasts. Ammianus Marcellinus (xxv. 4) says that the
emperor Julian enjoyed reading Bacchylides. It is clear, then, that this
poet continued to be popular during at least the first four centuries of
our era. No inference adverse to his repute can fairly be drawn from the
fact that no mention of him occurs in the extant work of any Attic writer.
The only definite estimate of him by an ancient critic occurs in the
treatise [Greek: Peri Hupsous] commonly translated "On the Sublime," but
meaning rather, "On the Sources of Elevation in Style"; a work ambiguously
ascribed to Cassius Longinus (_circ._ A.D. 260), but more probably due to
some writer of the first century of our era. In chapter xxxiii. of that
treatise, the author asks whether we ought to prefer "greatness" in
literature, with some attendant faults, to flawless merit on a lower level,
and of course replies in the affirmative. In tragedy, he asks, who would be
Ion of Chios rather than Sophocles; or in lyric poetry, Bacchylides rather
than Pindar? Yet Bacchylides and Ion are "faultless, with a style of
perfect elegance and finish." In short, the essayist regards Bacchylides as
a thoroughly finished poet of the second class, who never commits glaring
faults, but never reaches the loftier heights.

The first and most general quality of style in Bacchylides is his perfect
simplicity and clearness. Where the text is not corrupt, there are few
sentences which are not lucid in meaning and simple in structure. This
lucidity is partly due, no doubt, to the fact that he seldom attempts
imagery of the bolder kind, and never has thoughts of a subtle or complex
order. Yet it would be very unjust to regard such clearness as merely a
compensatory merit of lyric mediocrity, or to ignore its intimate connexion
with the man's native grace of mind, with the artist's feeling for
expression, with the poet's delicate skill. How many readers, who could
enjoy and appreciate Pindar if he were less difficult, are stopped on the
threshold by the aspect of his style, and are fain to save their
self-esteem by concluding that he is at once turgid and shallow! A pellucid
style must always have been a source of wide, though modest, popularity for
Bacchylides. If it be true that Hiero preferred him to Pindar, and that he
was a favourite with Julian, those instances suggest the charm which he
must always have had for cultivated readers to whom affairs did not leave
much leisure for stud