§ 2) as one of the Thirty
of the editions not noticed above, the reader is Tyrants.
of the editions not noticed above, the reader is Tyrants.
William Smith - 1844 - Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities - c
In Aeschylus the
thus, the scene of the Antigone just referred to de-Chorus is a deeply interested party, often taking a
rives its force in a great measure from the preceding decided and even vehement share in the action,
separate conflicts between Antigone and Ismene, and generally involved in the catastrophe ; but the
and Antigone and Creon ; while the meaning of Chorus of Sophocles has more of the character of a
those two scenes is only brought out fully when they spectator, moderator, and judge, comparatively im-
are viewed in their relation to the third. Aeschy- partial, but sympathising generally with the chief
lus adopted the third actor in his later plays ; and character of the play, while it explains and harmo-
indeed it may be laid down, as a general rule, and nizes, as far as possible, the feelings of all the
one which must have contributed greatly to the actors. It is less mixed up with the general ac-
rapid progress of the art, that every improve- tion than in Aeschylus, but its connexion with
ment, made by either of the great rival dramatists each particular part is closer. The Chorus of So-
of the age, was of necessity adopted by the others. phocles is cited by Aristotle as an example of his
In the time of Sophocles and Euripides, the num- definition of the part to be taken by the Chorus :
ber of three actors was hardly ever exceeded. “It και τον χορόν δε ένα δεί υπολαβείν των υποκριτών
was an object to turn the talents of the few emi- και μόριον είναι του όλου και συναγωνίζεσθαι, μη
nent actors to the greatest possible account, and to ώσπερ Ευριπίδης αλλ' ώσπερ Σοφοκλής (Post. 18);
prevent that injury to the general effect which the where, however, the value of the passage, as a de-
interposition of inferior actors, even in subordinate scription of the choruses of Sophocles is somewhat
parts, must ever produce ; and, in fact, so often diminished by the fact that he is comparing them,
nowadays does produce. " (Müller, Hist. Lit. p. not with those of Aeschylus, but with those of
304. ) In only one play of Sophocles, and that not Euripides, whose choral odes have generally very
acted during his life, does the interposition of a little to do with the business of the play.
fourth actor appear necessary, namely, in the Oedi- By these changes Sophocles made the tragedy a
pus at Colonus ; “ unless we assume that the part drama in the proper sense of the word. The inte-
of Theseus in this play was partly acted by the rest and progress of the piece centred almost en-
person who represented Antigone, and partly by tirely in the actions and speeches of the persons on
the person who represented Ismene : it is, how the stage. A necessary consequence of this alter-
ever, far more difficult for two actors to representation, combined with the addition of the third
one part in the same tone and spirit, than for one actor, was a much more careful elaboration of the
actor to represent several parts with the appropriate dialogue ; and the care bestowed upon this part of
modifications. " (Müller, p. 305, note. ) It would the composition is one of the most striking features
be travelling rather beyond the bounds of this arti- of the art of Sophocles, whether we regard the
cle to describe the manner in which the persons of energy and point of the conversations which take
a Greek drama were distributed among the three place upon the stage, or the vivid pictures of actions
actors, who, by changes of dresses and masks, sus- occurring elsewhere, which are drawn in the
tained all the speaking characters of the play. This speeches of the messengers.
subject, though essential to a full comprehension of It must not, however, be imagined for a moment
the works of Sophocles, belongs rather to the gene that, in bestowing so much care upon the dialogue,
ral history of the Greek drama : it is discussed and confining the choral parts within their proper
very well by Müller, who gives & scheme of the limits, Sophocles was careless as to the mode in
distribution of the parts in the Oresteian trilogy of which he executed the latter. On the contrary,
Aeschylus, and in the Antigone and Oedipus Ty he appears as if determined to use his utmost efforts
rannus of Sophocles (pp. 305—307). Mr. Donald- to compensate in the beauty of his odes for what
son also discusses at some length the distribution he had taken away from their length. His early
of the parts in the Antigono. (Introduction to the attainments in music, — the period in which his
Antigone, § 4. )
lot was cast, when the great cycle of lyric poetry
Sophocles also introduced some very important had been completed, and he could take Simonides
modifications in the choral parts of the drama. and Pindar as the starting points of his efforts, -
According to Suidas (s. v. ), he raised the number the majestic choral poetry of his great predecessor
of the choreutae from twelve to fifteen ; and, al- and rival, Aeschylus, which he regarded rather as
though there are some difficulties in the matter, the a standard to be surpassed than as a pattern to be
general fact is undoubted, that Sophocles fixed the imitated, — combined with his own genius and
number of choreutae at fifteen, the establishment of exquisite taste to give birth to those brief but per-
which, as a rule, would necessarily be accompanied fect effusions of lyric poetry, the undisturbed enjoy-
with more definite arrangements than had previously ment of which was reckoned by Aristophanes as
been made respecting the evolutions of the Chorus. among the choicest fruits of peace (Par, 523).
At the same time the choral odes, which in Aes- Another alteration of the greatest consequence,
chylus occupied a large space in the tragedy, and which, though it was perhaps not originated by
formed a sort of lyric exhibition of the subject in- Sophocles, he was the first to convert into a ge-
terwoven with the dramatic representation, were neral practice, was the abandonment of the trilo-
З к 4
.
## p. 872 (#888) ############################################
872
SOPHOCLES.
SOPHOCLES.
i
gistic form, in so far at least as the continuity of who sneer at it as if it ascribed to the great poets
subject was concerned. In obedience to the esta- of antiquity nioral and artistic purposes of which
blished custom at the Dionysiac festivals, Sopho- they themselves never dreamt. li is quite true
cles appears generally to have brought forward that the earliest and some of the mightiest efforts of
three tragedies and a satyric drama together ; but genius are to a great extent (though never, we
the subjects of these four plays were entirely dis- believe, entirely) unconscious ; and even such pro-
tinct, and each was complete in itself. *
ductions are governed by laws, written in the
Among the merely mechanical improvements human mind and instinctively followed by the poeta
introduced by Sophocles, the most important is laws which it is the task and glory of aesthetic
that of scene-painting, the invention of which is science to trace out in the works of those writers
ascribed to him. (See AGATHA CHIUS. )
who followed them unconsciously ; but such pro-
All these external and formal arrangemer. ts had ductions, however magnificent they may be, are
necessarily the most important influence on the never so perfect, in every respect, as the works of
whole spirit and character of the tragedies of So- the poet who, possessing equal genius, consciously
phocles ; as, in the works of every-first rate artist, and laboriously works out the great principles of
the form is a part of the substance. But it remains his art. It is in this respect that Sophocles sur-
to notice the most essential featuses of the art of passes Aeschylus ; his works are perhaps not
the great tragedian, namely, his choice of subjects, greater, nay,. in native sublimity and spontaneous
and the spirit in which he treated them.
genius they are perhaps inferior, but they are more
The subjects and style of Aeschylus are essenti- perfect ; and that for the very reason now stated,
ally heroic ; those of Sophocles are human. The and which Sophocles himself explained, when he
former excite terror, pity, and admiration, as we said, “ Aeschylus does what is right, but without
view them at a distance ; the latter bring those knowing it. " The faults in Aeschylus, which
same feelings home to the heart, with the addition Sophocles perceived and endeavoured to avoid, are
of sympathy and self-application. No individual pointed out in a valuable passage preserved by
human being can imagine himself in the position Plutarch (de Prof. Virt. p. 79, b. ). The limits of
of Prometheus, or derive a personal warning from this article will not permit us to enlarge any fur-
the crimes and fate of Clytemnestra ; but every one ther on the ethical character of Sophocles, which is
can, in feeling, share the self-devotion of Antigone discussed and illustrated at great length in some of
in giving up her life at the call of fraternal piety, the works referred to above, and also in Schlegel's
and the calmness which comes over the spirit of Lectures on Dramatic Art and Criticism, where the
Oedipus when he is reconciled to the gods. In reader will find an elaborate comparison between
Aeschylus, the sufferers are the victims of an in the three great tragic poets (Lect. 5). We will
exorable destiny ; but Sophocles brings more pro- only add, in conclusion, that if asked for the most
minently into view those faults of their own, which perfect illustration of Aristotle's definition of the
form one element of the άτη of which they are the end of tragedy as δι' ελέου και φόβου περαίνουσα
victims, and is more intent upon inculcating, as the Triv TW TOLOÚTWY Tanuátwv KdJapouv (Poët. 6.
lesson taught by their woes, that wise calmness $2), we would point to the Oedipus at Colonus of
and moderation, in desires and actions, in pro- Sophocles, and we would recommend, as one of the
sperity and adversity, which the Greek poets and most useful exercises in the study of aesthetic
philosophers celebrate under the name of owppo- criticism, the comparison of that tragedy with the
o úvn. On the other hand, he never descends to Eumenides of Aeschylus and the Lear of our own
that level to which Euripides brought down the Shakspere.
art, the exhibition of human passion and suffering iv. The Works of Sophocles. — The number of
for the mere purpose of exciting emotion in the plays ascribed to Sophocles was 130, of which,
spectators, apart from a moral end. The great dis- however, according to Aristophanes of Byzantium,
tinction between the two poets is defined by Aris- seventeen were spurious. He contended not only
totle, in that passage of the Poëtic (6. SS 12, foll. ) with Aeschylus and Euripides, but also Choerilus
which may be called the great text of aesthetic Aristias, Agathon, and other poets, amongst
philosophy, and in which, though the names of whom was his own son lophon ; and he carried
Sophocles and Euripides are not mentioned, there off the first prize twenty or twenty-four times
can be no doubt that the statement that “the tra- frequently the second, and never the third. (Vit.
gedies of most of the more recent poets are uncthical" Anon. ; Suid. s. v. ) It is remarkable, as proving
is meant to apply to Euripides, and that the con- his growing activity and success, that, of his
trast, which he proceeds to illustrate by a compari- 113 dramas, eighty-one were brought out in the
son of Polygnotus and Zeuxis in the art of painting, second of the two periods into which his career is
is intended to describe the difference between the divided by the exhibition of the Antigone, which
two poets, for in another passage of the Poëtic (26. was bis thirty second play (Aristoph. Byz. Aryum.
§ 11) he quotes with approbation the saying of ad Antig. ); and also that all his extant dramas,
Sophocles, that he himself represented men as which of course in the judgment of the grammarians
they ought to be, but Euripides exhibited them as were his best, belong to the latter of these two
they are ;” a remark, by the bye, which as coming periods. By comparing the number of his plays
from the mouth of Sophocles himself, exposes the with the sixty-two years over which his career ex-
absurdity of those opponents of aesthetic science, tended, and also the number belonging to each of
the two periods, Müller obtains the result that he
No blunder can be more gross than to speak at first brought out a tetralogy every three or four
of the Oedipus Tyrannus, the Oedipus at Colonus, years, but afterwards every two years at least ; and
and the Antigone as a trilogy. They have no dru- also that in several of the tetralogies the satyric
matic continuity whatever ; they were composed at drama must have been lost, or never existed, and
three different and distinct periods, and the last that, among those 113 plays there could only hava
was the first exhibited.
been, at the most, 23 satyric dramas to 90 trage.
-
## p. 873 (#889) ############################################
!
-
SOPHOCLES.
SOPHIOCLES.
873
dies (Hist. Lit. pp. 339, 340). The attempt has cause of piety towards the gods, brings down megá-
been made to divide the extant plays and titles of nas annyás as a retribution.
Sophocles into trilogies ; but, as might have been The titles and fragments of the lost plays of
expected from what has been said above respecting Sophocles will be found collected in the chief edi-
the nature of his trilogies, it has signally failed. A tions, and in Welcker's Griechischen Tragödicn.
much more important arrangement has been very In addition to his tragedies, Sophocles is said to
elaborately attempted by Welcker(Griech. Trayöd. ), have written an elegy, paeans, and other poems, and
namely, the classification of the extant playe and a prose work on the Chorus, in opposition to Thespis
fragments according to the poems of the Epic Cycle and Choerilus. (Suid. s. v. )
on which they were founded.
V. Ancient Commentators on Sophocles. - In the
The following is most probably the chronological Scholia, the commentators are quoted by the general
order in which the seven extant tragedies of So- title of oι υπομνηματισται, or oι υπομνηματισάμενοι,
phocles were brought out: - Antigonc, Electra, Among those cited by name, or to whom commen-
Truchiniae, Oedipus Tyrannus, Ajux, Philvetetes, taries on Sophocles are ascribed by other authori-
Ordiprus at Colonus. It is unnecessary to attempt tics, are Aristarchus, Praxiplianes, Didymus, He-
an analysis of these plays, partly because every rodian, Horapollon, Androtion, and Aristophanes
scholar has read or will read them for himself, and of Byzantium. The question of the value of the
partly because they are admirably analysed in Scholia is discussed by Wunder, de Schol. in Soph.
works so generally read as Müller's History of the Auctoritate, Grimae, 1838, 4to. , and Wolff, de
Literature of Ancient Greece, and Schlegel's Lec Sophoclis Scholiorum Laur. Variis Lectionibus, Lips.
turcs. Neither will our space permit us to yield to the 1843, 8vo.
temptation of entering fully into the much disputed vi. Editions of the Plays of Sophocles. — The
question of the object and meaning of the Antigone ; Editio Princeps is that of Aldus, 1502, 8vo. , and
respecting which the reader may consult the edi- there were numerous other editions printed in the
tions of the Antiyone by Böckh, Wex, Hermann, 16th century, the best of which are those of
and Donaldson ; articles by Mr. Dyer, in the H. Stephanus, Paris, 1568, 4to. , and of G. Canterus
Classical Museum, vol. ii. pp. 69, foll. , vol. iii. pp. Antwerp, 1579, 12mo. , both founded on the text
176, foll. ; and articles by G. Wolff, in the Zeits- of Turnebus. None of the subsequent editions de
chrift für Alterthumswissenchaft for 1846, review- serre any particular notice, until we come to those
ing the recent works upon the Antigone. It must of Brunck, in 4 vols. 8vo. , Argentor. 1786–1789,
sufice here to remark that we believe both the and in 2 vols. 4to. , Argentor. 1786 ; both editions
extreme views to be equally remote from the truth ; containing the Greek text with a Latin version,
that the play is not intended to support exclusively and the Scholia and Indices. The text of Brunck,
the rights of law in the person of Creon or those of which was founded on that of Aldus, has formed
liberty in the person of Antigone, but to exhibit the foundation of all the subsequent editions, of
the claims of both, to show them brought into col- which the following are the most important: that
lision when each is forced beyond the bounds of of Musgrave, with Scholia, Notes, and Indices,
moderation ; or, to speak more properly, the colli-Oxon. 1800, 180), 2 vols. 8vo. , reprinted Oxon.
sion is not between law and liberty, but be 1809–1810, 3 vols. 8vo. ; that of Erfurdt, with
tween the two laws of the family and the state, Scholia, Notes, and Indices, Lips. 1802–1825,
of religious duty and civil obedience. Neither 7 vols. 8vo. ; (the valuable notes of Erfurdt to all
party is entirely in the right or entirely in the the tragedies, except the Oedipus at Colonus, were
wrong. The fault of Creon is in the issuing of reprinted in a separate volume, in London, 1824,
a harsh and impious decree, that of Antigone in 8vo. ); that of Bothe, who re-edited Brunck's edi-
rashly and obstinately refusing to submit to it; tion, but with many rash changes in the text,
and therefore each falls a victim to a conflict of the Lips, 1806, 2 vols. 8vo. , last edition, 1827, 1828 ;
two laws for and against which they strive ; while that of Hermann, who completed a new edition,
both, as well as Haemon, are involved by their which Erfurdt commenced, but only lived to publish
individual acts in the more general and antecedent the first two volumes, Lips. 1809—1825, 7 vols.
aty which rests upon the royal family of Thebes. sm. 8vo. ; Hermann's entirely new revision of
At the same time, this does not appear to be all Brunck's edition, with additional Notes, &c. , Lips.
that is contained in the drama. The greater fault 1823—1825, 7 vols. 8vo. ; the edition of Schneider,
is on the side of Creon. Antigone would have with German Notes and a Lexicon, Weimar,
been perfectly in the right to disobey his edict, if 1823—1830, 10 vols. 8vo. ; the London reprint of
all means of obtaining its repeal had been ex- Brunck's edition, with the Notes of Burney and
hausted, although even then strict law might per. Schaefer, 1824, 3 vols. 8vo. ; the edition of
haps have required her martyrdom as the price of Elmsley, with the Notes of Brunck and Schaefer,
her fraternal piety; and perhaps, on the other Lexicon Sophocleum, &c. Oxon. 1826, 2 vols. 8vo. ;
band, the poet meant to teach that there are cases reprinted, Lips. 1827, 8 vols. 8vo. ; that of the
in which law must give way, to avert the fearful text alone by Dindorf, in the Poctae Scenici Graeci,
consequences arising from its strict enforcement. Lips. 1830, 8vo. *, reprinted at Oxford, 1832, with
At all events, it is clear that the sympathy of the the addition of a volume of Notes, 1836, 8vo. ;
poet and of the spectators is with Antigone, though that of Ahrens, containing the text, after Dindorf,
they are constrained to confess that she is not en- with a revised Latin version, by L. Benloew, the
tirely guiltless, nor Creon altogether guilty. But Fragments after Welcker, and new Indices, in
still we think that this sympathy with Antigone Didot's Bibliotheca Scriptorum Graecorum, Paris,
is only secondary to the lesson taught by the faults 1842—1844, imp. 8vo. ; and lastly, by far the
and ruin of both, a lesson which the poet has him-
self distinctly pointed out in the final words of the * An entirely new edition of this invaluable
chorus,--ppoveiv, as opposed to the peyáłoc nóyou work has been for some time announced as forth-
of self-will, an indulgence in which, even in the coming.
## p. 874 (#890) ############################################
874
SOPHOCLES.
SOPHONISBA.
most useful edition for the ordinary student is that dramas were ascribed (Suid. 8. v. ) The name also
by Wunder, in Jacobs and Rost's Bibliotheca occurs on the Orchomenian inscription.
Graeca, containing the text, with critical and ex- 4. An Athenian orator, whose oration for Euc-
planatory notes and introductions, Gothae et Er- temon is quoted by Aristotle. (Rhet. i. 15. )
furdt, 1831-1846, 2 vols. 8vo. in 7 parts, and Ruhnken supposes that it was be, and not the
with a supplemental part of emendations to the poet, who was one of the Probuli, and that he was
Trachiniae, Grimae, 1841, 8vo.
the same as the Sophocles who is mentioned by
For a list of the editions of separate plays, and Xenophon (Hellen. ii. 3.
§ 2) as one of the Thirty
of the editions not noticed above, the reader is Tyrants. (Hist. Crit
. Orat. Gracc. , No. viii. )
referred to Hoffmann's Lexicon Bibliographicum 5. A grammarian, who wrote commentaries on
Scriptorum Graecorum.
the works of Apollonius Rhodiue. (Schol. ad Aris-
Among the numerous translations of Sophocles, toph. Nub. 397 ; Steph. Byz. s. vv. "Alapvos and
very few have been at all successful. There are Kávaot pov. )
English versions by Franklin, Lond. 1758 ; Potter, 6. The son of Amphicleides, a native of Sunium,
Lond. 1788; and Dale, 1824. The best German was the author of a decree expelling the philoso-
translations are those of Solger, Berlin, 1808, 1824, phers from the Attic territory, or, as others say,
2 vols. 8vo. , and Fritz, Berlin, 1843, 8vo. Among forbidding any one, on pain of death, to preside
the translations of separate plays, those of the over a school of philosophy, without the consent of
Antigone, by Böckh and Donaldson, interpaged in the senate and people. After a year the decree
their respective editions, deserve notice ; Böckh, was revoked, and Sophocles was fined five talents.
Berlin, 1843, 8vo. ; Donaldson, London, 1848, 8vo. (Diog. Laërt. v. 38; Pollux, ix. 42; Ath. xiii.
A nearly complete list of the works illustrating p. 610, e. f. ; Alexis, ap. Ath. I. c. ) From the
Sophocles will be found in Hoffmann's Lexicon. fragment of the 'ITTEÚs of Alexis preserved by
They are far too numerous to be mentioned here ; Athenaeus (l. c. ) it is evident that the law was
but it would be wrong to pass over the one, which passed at end of Ol. 115 or the beginning of Ol.
is the most useful of them all for understanding 116, B. C. 316 (Meineke, Hist. Crit. Com. Graec.
the language of the author, namely Ellendt's Lexicon p. 394).
[P. S. ]
Sophocleum, Regimont. Pruss. (Königsberg) 1835, SOPHO'NIAS (Eopovlas), a Greek monk who
2 vols. 8vo.
wrote commentaries on Aristotle. Fabricius con-
2. The son of Ariston and grandson of the elder jectures that he was the same Sophonias to whom
Sophocles, was also an Athenian tragic poet. The one of the epistles of Simon of Constantinople, pro-
love of his grandfather towards him has been al- bably the same with Simon of Thebes (SIMON, No.
ready mentioned ; and it cannot be doubted that 22), is addressed. If this conjecture be admitted he
one chief way in which Sophocles displayed his must be placed about the end of the fourteenth cen-
affection was by endeavouring to train up his tury. The following works of his are extant in MS. :
grandson as the inheritor of his own skill in the - 1. In Aristotelis Categorias de Homonymis, Syn-
art of tragedy. We have no definite statement of onymis, Paronymis, Heteronymis, Polyonymis
, &c.
his age, but he was probably under twenty at the (Labbe, Nova Biblioth. MStorum Librorum, p. 115. )
time of his grandfather's death, as he did not begin 2. Napáopaots els tò nepl Yuxts Toû CODWTÁTOV
to exhibit his own dramas till about ten years kuplov Lopovlov, Paraphrasis sapientissimi Sopho-
after that time, namely in B. C. 396. (Diod xiv. niae in Aristotelis Libros tres de Anima (Lambec.
53, where Eupokañs o Eodukéous must either be Commentar. de Biblioth. Caesaraea, vol. vii. col.
corrected by adding viwvds or vidoùs, or must be 208, ed. Kollar, fol. Vienna, 1766, &c. ; Bandini,
understood to mean the grandson, and not the son). Catal. Codd. Graec. Laurent. Medic. vol. i. p. 297,
He had previously, in B. C. 401, brought out the vol. iii. coll. 19, 278 ; Hardt. Catalog. Codd.
Oedipus at Colonus (Argum. ad Oed. Col. ), and MStorum Graec. Biblioth. Reg. Bavar, vol. iv. p.
we may safely assume that this was not the only 242). Morelli (Biblioth. MSta Graeca et Latina,
one of his grandfather's dramas which he exhibited. vol. i. p. 128, comp. Graec. D. Marci Biblioth. p.
There is much difficulty as to the proper reading of 116, fol. Venet. 1740) speaks of a MS. , Aristotelis
the nunibers of plays and victories ascribed to him. Praedicamentorum Paraphrasis, in the Library of
According to the different readings, he exhibited St. Mark at Venice, which is anonymous, but is,
40 or 11 dramas, and gained 12, 11, or 7 prizes. he says, commonly attributed to the monk Sopho-
(Suid. s. v. ; Diod. l. c. ; comp. Clinton, F. H. nias : it is apparently only another MS. of the
vol. ii. p. xxxv. e. ) All that we know of his work No. 1. No. 2 is in a Florentine MS.
tragedies is contained in a passage of Clemens ascribed, but erroneously, to Simplicius. Beside
Alexandrinus (Protrept. 30, p. 26, Potter), who these works, there is a MS. in the Library of St.
refers to statements made in three of them respect- Mark, containing, -3. Toù coqwTátov uovayou
ing the mere humanity of the Dioscuri. It is, κυρίου Σοφονίου μελέτη, Παύλος εν Αθήναις δημη-
however, a very probable conjecture that, since yopwy, Sophoniae sapientissimi Monachi Declamatio:
Aristophanes of Byzantium pronounced 27 of the Paulus in Athenis Concionem habens ad populum
plays which were extant in his time under the (Graeca D. Marci Biblioth. p. 131). This last
name of the great Sophocles to be spurious, some of work is not mentioned by Fabricius. (Fabric.
these may have been the productions of his grand- Bibl. Graec. vol. iii. pp. 209, 236, vol. xi. Pp.
Suidas also ascribes elegies to the younger 334, 714. )
[J. C. M. ]
Sophocles. (Welcker, die Griech. Trag. p. 979; SOPHONISBA (Σοφόνισσα or Σοφόνιβα, see
Kayser, Hist. Crit. Trag. Graec. pp. 79-81 ; Schweigh. ad Appian. Pun. 27), a daughter of the
Wagner, Poët. Trag. Graec. Frag. in Didot's Carthaginian general, Hasdrubal, the son of Gisco.
Bibliotheca, p. 78. )
She had been betrothed by her father, at a very
3. Suidas also mentions an Athenian tragic and early age, to the Numidian prince Masinissa, but
lyric poet of this name, who lived later than the at a subsequent period Hasdrubal being desirous
poets of the Tragic Pleiad, and to whom fifteen to gain over Syphax, the rival monarch of Numi-
son.
## p. 875 (#891) ############################################
SOPHRON.
875
SOPHRON.
dia, to the Carthaginian alliance, offered him the amusements were connected seem to have been, at
hand of his daughter in marriage.
thus, the scene of the Antigone just referred to de-Chorus is a deeply interested party, often taking a
rives its force in a great measure from the preceding decided and even vehement share in the action,
separate conflicts between Antigone and Ismene, and generally involved in the catastrophe ; but the
and Antigone and Creon ; while the meaning of Chorus of Sophocles has more of the character of a
those two scenes is only brought out fully when they spectator, moderator, and judge, comparatively im-
are viewed in their relation to the third. Aeschy- partial, but sympathising generally with the chief
lus adopted the third actor in his later plays ; and character of the play, while it explains and harmo-
indeed it may be laid down, as a general rule, and nizes, as far as possible, the feelings of all the
one which must have contributed greatly to the actors. It is less mixed up with the general ac-
rapid progress of the art, that every improve- tion than in Aeschylus, but its connexion with
ment, made by either of the great rival dramatists each particular part is closer. The Chorus of So-
of the age, was of necessity adopted by the others. phocles is cited by Aristotle as an example of his
In the time of Sophocles and Euripides, the num- definition of the part to be taken by the Chorus :
ber of three actors was hardly ever exceeded. “It και τον χορόν δε ένα δεί υπολαβείν των υποκριτών
was an object to turn the talents of the few emi- και μόριον είναι του όλου και συναγωνίζεσθαι, μη
nent actors to the greatest possible account, and to ώσπερ Ευριπίδης αλλ' ώσπερ Σοφοκλής (Post. 18);
prevent that injury to the general effect which the where, however, the value of the passage, as a de-
interposition of inferior actors, even in subordinate scription of the choruses of Sophocles is somewhat
parts, must ever produce ; and, in fact, so often diminished by the fact that he is comparing them,
nowadays does produce. " (Müller, Hist. Lit. p. not with those of Aeschylus, but with those of
304. ) In only one play of Sophocles, and that not Euripides, whose choral odes have generally very
acted during his life, does the interposition of a little to do with the business of the play.
fourth actor appear necessary, namely, in the Oedi- By these changes Sophocles made the tragedy a
pus at Colonus ; “ unless we assume that the part drama in the proper sense of the word. The inte-
of Theseus in this play was partly acted by the rest and progress of the piece centred almost en-
person who represented Antigone, and partly by tirely in the actions and speeches of the persons on
the person who represented Ismene : it is, how the stage. A necessary consequence of this alter-
ever, far more difficult for two actors to representation, combined with the addition of the third
one part in the same tone and spirit, than for one actor, was a much more careful elaboration of the
actor to represent several parts with the appropriate dialogue ; and the care bestowed upon this part of
modifications. " (Müller, p. 305, note. ) It would the composition is one of the most striking features
be travelling rather beyond the bounds of this arti- of the art of Sophocles, whether we regard the
cle to describe the manner in which the persons of energy and point of the conversations which take
a Greek drama were distributed among the three place upon the stage, or the vivid pictures of actions
actors, who, by changes of dresses and masks, sus- occurring elsewhere, which are drawn in the
tained all the speaking characters of the play. This speeches of the messengers.
subject, though essential to a full comprehension of It must not, however, be imagined for a moment
the works of Sophocles, belongs rather to the gene that, in bestowing so much care upon the dialogue,
ral history of the Greek drama : it is discussed and confining the choral parts within their proper
very well by Müller, who gives & scheme of the limits, Sophocles was careless as to the mode in
distribution of the parts in the Oresteian trilogy of which he executed the latter. On the contrary,
Aeschylus, and in the Antigone and Oedipus Ty he appears as if determined to use his utmost efforts
rannus of Sophocles (pp. 305—307). Mr. Donald- to compensate in the beauty of his odes for what
son also discusses at some length the distribution he had taken away from their length. His early
of the parts in the Antigono. (Introduction to the attainments in music, — the period in which his
Antigone, § 4. )
lot was cast, when the great cycle of lyric poetry
Sophocles also introduced some very important had been completed, and he could take Simonides
modifications in the choral parts of the drama. and Pindar as the starting points of his efforts, -
According to Suidas (s. v. ), he raised the number the majestic choral poetry of his great predecessor
of the choreutae from twelve to fifteen ; and, al- and rival, Aeschylus, which he regarded rather as
though there are some difficulties in the matter, the a standard to be surpassed than as a pattern to be
general fact is undoubted, that Sophocles fixed the imitated, — combined with his own genius and
number of choreutae at fifteen, the establishment of exquisite taste to give birth to those brief but per-
which, as a rule, would necessarily be accompanied fect effusions of lyric poetry, the undisturbed enjoy-
with more definite arrangements than had previously ment of which was reckoned by Aristophanes as
been made respecting the evolutions of the Chorus. among the choicest fruits of peace (Par, 523).
At the same time the choral odes, which in Aes- Another alteration of the greatest consequence,
chylus occupied a large space in the tragedy, and which, though it was perhaps not originated by
formed a sort of lyric exhibition of the subject in- Sophocles, he was the first to convert into a ge-
terwoven with the dramatic representation, were neral practice, was the abandonment of the trilo-
З к 4
.
## p. 872 (#888) ############################################
872
SOPHOCLES.
SOPHOCLES.
i
gistic form, in so far at least as the continuity of who sneer at it as if it ascribed to the great poets
subject was concerned. In obedience to the esta- of antiquity nioral and artistic purposes of which
blished custom at the Dionysiac festivals, Sopho- they themselves never dreamt. li is quite true
cles appears generally to have brought forward that the earliest and some of the mightiest efforts of
three tragedies and a satyric drama together ; but genius are to a great extent (though never, we
the subjects of these four plays were entirely dis- believe, entirely) unconscious ; and even such pro-
tinct, and each was complete in itself. *
ductions are governed by laws, written in the
Among the merely mechanical improvements human mind and instinctively followed by the poeta
introduced by Sophocles, the most important is laws which it is the task and glory of aesthetic
that of scene-painting, the invention of which is science to trace out in the works of those writers
ascribed to him. (See AGATHA CHIUS. )
who followed them unconsciously ; but such pro-
All these external and formal arrangemer. ts had ductions, however magnificent they may be, are
necessarily the most important influence on the never so perfect, in every respect, as the works of
whole spirit and character of the tragedies of So- the poet who, possessing equal genius, consciously
phocles ; as, in the works of every-first rate artist, and laboriously works out the great principles of
the form is a part of the substance. But it remains his art. It is in this respect that Sophocles sur-
to notice the most essential featuses of the art of passes Aeschylus ; his works are perhaps not
the great tragedian, namely, his choice of subjects, greater, nay,. in native sublimity and spontaneous
and the spirit in which he treated them.
genius they are perhaps inferior, but they are more
The subjects and style of Aeschylus are essenti- perfect ; and that for the very reason now stated,
ally heroic ; those of Sophocles are human. The and which Sophocles himself explained, when he
former excite terror, pity, and admiration, as we said, “ Aeschylus does what is right, but without
view them at a distance ; the latter bring those knowing it. " The faults in Aeschylus, which
same feelings home to the heart, with the addition Sophocles perceived and endeavoured to avoid, are
of sympathy and self-application. No individual pointed out in a valuable passage preserved by
human being can imagine himself in the position Plutarch (de Prof. Virt. p. 79, b. ). The limits of
of Prometheus, or derive a personal warning from this article will not permit us to enlarge any fur-
the crimes and fate of Clytemnestra ; but every one ther on the ethical character of Sophocles, which is
can, in feeling, share the self-devotion of Antigone discussed and illustrated at great length in some of
in giving up her life at the call of fraternal piety, the works referred to above, and also in Schlegel's
and the calmness which comes over the spirit of Lectures on Dramatic Art and Criticism, where the
Oedipus when he is reconciled to the gods. In reader will find an elaborate comparison between
Aeschylus, the sufferers are the victims of an in the three great tragic poets (Lect. 5). We will
exorable destiny ; but Sophocles brings more pro- only add, in conclusion, that if asked for the most
minently into view those faults of their own, which perfect illustration of Aristotle's definition of the
form one element of the άτη of which they are the end of tragedy as δι' ελέου και φόβου περαίνουσα
victims, and is more intent upon inculcating, as the Triv TW TOLOÚTWY Tanuátwv KdJapouv (Poët. 6.
lesson taught by their woes, that wise calmness $2), we would point to the Oedipus at Colonus of
and moderation, in desires and actions, in pro- Sophocles, and we would recommend, as one of the
sperity and adversity, which the Greek poets and most useful exercises in the study of aesthetic
philosophers celebrate under the name of owppo- criticism, the comparison of that tragedy with the
o úvn. On the other hand, he never descends to Eumenides of Aeschylus and the Lear of our own
that level to which Euripides brought down the Shakspere.
art, the exhibition of human passion and suffering iv. The Works of Sophocles. — The number of
for the mere purpose of exciting emotion in the plays ascribed to Sophocles was 130, of which,
spectators, apart from a moral end. The great dis- however, according to Aristophanes of Byzantium,
tinction between the two poets is defined by Aris- seventeen were spurious. He contended not only
totle, in that passage of the Poëtic (6. SS 12, foll. ) with Aeschylus and Euripides, but also Choerilus
which may be called the great text of aesthetic Aristias, Agathon, and other poets, amongst
philosophy, and in which, though the names of whom was his own son lophon ; and he carried
Sophocles and Euripides are not mentioned, there off the first prize twenty or twenty-four times
can be no doubt that the statement that “the tra- frequently the second, and never the third. (Vit.
gedies of most of the more recent poets are uncthical" Anon. ; Suid. s. v. ) It is remarkable, as proving
is meant to apply to Euripides, and that the con- his growing activity and success, that, of his
trast, which he proceeds to illustrate by a compari- 113 dramas, eighty-one were brought out in the
son of Polygnotus and Zeuxis in the art of painting, second of the two periods into which his career is
is intended to describe the difference between the divided by the exhibition of the Antigone, which
two poets, for in another passage of the Poëtic (26. was bis thirty second play (Aristoph. Byz. Aryum.
§ 11) he quotes with approbation the saying of ad Antig. ); and also that all his extant dramas,
Sophocles, that he himself represented men as which of course in the judgment of the grammarians
they ought to be, but Euripides exhibited them as were his best, belong to the latter of these two
they are ;” a remark, by the bye, which as coming periods. By comparing the number of his plays
from the mouth of Sophocles himself, exposes the with the sixty-two years over which his career ex-
absurdity of those opponents of aesthetic science, tended, and also the number belonging to each of
the two periods, Müller obtains the result that he
No blunder can be more gross than to speak at first brought out a tetralogy every three or four
of the Oedipus Tyrannus, the Oedipus at Colonus, years, but afterwards every two years at least ; and
and the Antigone as a trilogy. They have no dru- also that in several of the tetralogies the satyric
matic continuity whatever ; they were composed at drama must have been lost, or never existed, and
three different and distinct periods, and the last that, among those 113 plays there could only hava
was the first exhibited.
been, at the most, 23 satyric dramas to 90 trage.
-
## p. 873 (#889) ############################################
!
-
SOPHOCLES.
SOPHIOCLES.
873
dies (Hist. Lit. pp. 339, 340). The attempt has cause of piety towards the gods, brings down megá-
been made to divide the extant plays and titles of nas annyás as a retribution.
Sophocles into trilogies ; but, as might have been The titles and fragments of the lost plays of
expected from what has been said above respecting Sophocles will be found collected in the chief edi-
the nature of his trilogies, it has signally failed. A tions, and in Welcker's Griechischen Tragödicn.
much more important arrangement has been very In addition to his tragedies, Sophocles is said to
elaborately attempted by Welcker(Griech. Trayöd. ), have written an elegy, paeans, and other poems, and
namely, the classification of the extant playe and a prose work on the Chorus, in opposition to Thespis
fragments according to the poems of the Epic Cycle and Choerilus. (Suid. s. v. )
on which they were founded.
V. Ancient Commentators on Sophocles. - In the
The following is most probably the chronological Scholia, the commentators are quoted by the general
order in which the seven extant tragedies of So- title of oι υπομνηματισται, or oι υπομνηματισάμενοι,
phocles were brought out: - Antigonc, Electra, Among those cited by name, or to whom commen-
Truchiniae, Oedipus Tyrannus, Ajux, Philvetetes, taries on Sophocles are ascribed by other authori-
Ordiprus at Colonus. It is unnecessary to attempt tics, are Aristarchus, Praxiplianes, Didymus, He-
an analysis of these plays, partly because every rodian, Horapollon, Androtion, and Aristophanes
scholar has read or will read them for himself, and of Byzantium. The question of the value of the
partly because they are admirably analysed in Scholia is discussed by Wunder, de Schol. in Soph.
works so generally read as Müller's History of the Auctoritate, Grimae, 1838, 4to. , and Wolff, de
Literature of Ancient Greece, and Schlegel's Lec Sophoclis Scholiorum Laur. Variis Lectionibus, Lips.
turcs. Neither will our space permit us to yield to the 1843, 8vo.
temptation of entering fully into the much disputed vi. Editions of the Plays of Sophocles. — The
question of the object and meaning of the Antigone ; Editio Princeps is that of Aldus, 1502, 8vo. , and
respecting which the reader may consult the edi- there were numerous other editions printed in the
tions of the Antiyone by Böckh, Wex, Hermann, 16th century, the best of which are those of
and Donaldson ; articles by Mr. Dyer, in the H. Stephanus, Paris, 1568, 4to. , and of G. Canterus
Classical Museum, vol. ii. pp. 69, foll. , vol. iii. pp. Antwerp, 1579, 12mo. , both founded on the text
176, foll. ; and articles by G. Wolff, in the Zeits- of Turnebus. None of the subsequent editions de
chrift für Alterthumswissenchaft for 1846, review- serre any particular notice, until we come to those
ing the recent works upon the Antigone. It must of Brunck, in 4 vols. 8vo. , Argentor. 1786–1789,
sufice here to remark that we believe both the and in 2 vols. 4to. , Argentor. 1786 ; both editions
extreme views to be equally remote from the truth ; containing the Greek text with a Latin version,
that the play is not intended to support exclusively and the Scholia and Indices. The text of Brunck,
the rights of law in the person of Creon or those of which was founded on that of Aldus, has formed
liberty in the person of Antigone, but to exhibit the foundation of all the subsequent editions, of
the claims of both, to show them brought into col- which the following are the most important: that
lision when each is forced beyond the bounds of of Musgrave, with Scholia, Notes, and Indices,
moderation ; or, to speak more properly, the colli-Oxon. 1800, 180), 2 vols. 8vo. , reprinted Oxon.
sion is not between law and liberty, but be 1809–1810, 3 vols. 8vo. ; that of Erfurdt, with
tween the two laws of the family and the state, Scholia, Notes, and Indices, Lips. 1802–1825,
of religious duty and civil obedience. Neither 7 vols. 8vo. ; (the valuable notes of Erfurdt to all
party is entirely in the right or entirely in the the tragedies, except the Oedipus at Colonus, were
wrong. The fault of Creon is in the issuing of reprinted in a separate volume, in London, 1824,
a harsh and impious decree, that of Antigone in 8vo. ); that of Bothe, who re-edited Brunck's edi-
rashly and obstinately refusing to submit to it; tion, but with many rash changes in the text,
and therefore each falls a victim to a conflict of the Lips, 1806, 2 vols. 8vo. , last edition, 1827, 1828 ;
two laws for and against which they strive ; while that of Hermann, who completed a new edition,
both, as well as Haemon, are involved by their which Erfurdt commenced, but only lived to publish
individual acts in the more general and antecedent the first two volumes, Lips. 1809—1825, 7 vols.
aty which rests upon the royal family of Thebes. sm. 8vo. ; Hermann's entirely new revision of
At the same time, this does not appear to be all Brunck's edition, with additional Notes, &c. , Lips.
that is contained in the drama. The greater fault 1823—1825, 7 vols. 8vo. ; the edition of Schneider,
is on the side of Creon. Antigone would have with German Notes and a Lexicon, Weimar,
been perfectly in the right to disobey his edict, if 1823—1830, 10 vols. 8vo. ; the London reprint of
all means of obtaining its repeal had been ex- Brunck's edition, with the Notes of Burney and
hausted, although even then strict law might per. Schaefer, 1824, 3 vols. 8vo. ; the edition of
haps have required her martyrdom as the price of Elmsley, with the Notes of Brunck and Schaefer,
her fraternal piety; and perhaps, on the other Lexicon Sophocleum, &c. Oxon. 1826, 2 vols. 8vo. ;
band, the poet meant to teach that there are cases reprinted, Lips. 1827, 8 vols. 8vo. ; that of the
in which law must give way, to avert the fearful text alone by Dindorf, in the Poctae Scenici Graeci,
consequences arising from its strict enforcement. Lips. 1830, 8vo. *, reprinted at Oxford, 1832, with
At all events, it is clear that the sympathy of the the addition of a volume of Notes, 1836, 8vo. ;
poet and of the spectators is with Antigone, though that of Ahrens, containing the text, after Dindorf,
they are constrained to confess that she is not en- with a revised Latin version, by L. Benloew, the
tirely guiltless, nor Creon altogether guilty. But Fragments after Welcker, and new Indices, in
still we think that this sympathy with Antigone Didot's Bibliotheca Scriptorum Graecorum, Paris,
is only secondary to the lesson taught by the faults 1842—1844, imp. 8vo. ; and lastly, by far the
and ruin of both, a lesson which the poet has him-
self distinctly pointed out in the final words of the * An entirely new edition of this invaluable
chorus,--ppoveiv, as opposed to the peyáłoc nóyou work has been for some time announced as forth-
of self-will, an indulgence in which, even in the coming.
## p. 874 (#890) ############################################
874
SOPHOCLES.
SOPHONISBA.
most useful edition for the ordinary student is that dramas were ascribed (Suid. 8. v. ) The name also
by Wunder, in Jacobs and Rost's Bibliotheca occurs on the Orchomenian inscription.
Graeca, containing the text, with critical and ex- 4. An Athenian orator, whose oration for Euc-
planatory notes and introductions, Gothae et Er- temon is quoted by Aristotle. (Rhet. i. 15. )
furdt, 1831-1846, 2 vols. 8vo. in 7 parts, and Ruhnken supposes that it was be, and not the
with a supplemental part of emendations to the poet, who was one of the Probuli, and that he was
Trachiniae, Grimae, 1841, 8vo.
the same as the Sophocles who is mentioned by
For a list of the editions of separate plays, and Xenophon (Hellen. ii. 3.
§ 2) as one of the Thirty
of the editions not noticed above, the reader is Tyrants. (Hist. Crit
. Orat. Gracc. , No. viii. )
referred to Hoffmann's Lexicon Bibliographicum 5. A grammarian, who wrote commentaries on
Scriptorum Graecorum.
the works of Apollonius Rhodiue. (Schol. ad Aris-
Among the numerous translations of Sophocles, toph. Nub. 397 ; Steph. Byz. s. vv. "Alapvos and
very few have been at all successful. There are Kávaot pov. )
English versions by Franklin, Lond. 1758 ; Potter, 6. The son of Amphicleides, a native of Sunium,
Lond. 1788; and Dale, 1824. The best German was the author of a decree expelling the philoso-
translations are those of Solger, Berlin, 1808, 1824, phers from the Attic territory, or, as others say,
2 vols. 8vo. , and Fritz, Berlin, 1843, 8vo. Among forbidding any one, on pain of death, to preside
the translations of separate plays, those of the over a school of philosophy, without the consent of
Antigone, by Böckh and Donaldson, interpaged in the senate and people. After a year the decree
their respective editions, deserve notice ; Böckh, was revoked, and Sophocles was fined five talents.
Berlin, 1843, 8vo. ; Donaldson, London, 1848, 8vo. (Diog. Laërt. v. 38; Pollux, ix. 42; Ath. xiii.
A nearly complete list of the works illustrating p. 610, e. f. ; Alexis, ap. Ath. I. c. ) From the
Sophocles will be found in Hoffmann's Lexicon. fragment of the 'ITTEÚs of Alexis preserved by
They are far too numerous to be mentioned here ; Athenaeus (l. c. ) it is evident that the law was
but it would be wrong to pass over the one, which passed at end of Ol. 115 or the beginning of Ol.
is the most useful of them all for understanding 116, B. C. 316 (Meineke, Hist. Crit. Com. Graec.
the language of the author, namely Ellendt's Lexicon p. 394).
[P. S. ]
Sophocleum, Regimont. Pruss. (Königsberg) 1835, SOPHO'NIAS (Eopovlas), a Greek monk who
2 vols. 8vo.
wrote commentaries on Aristotle. Fabricius con-
2. The son of Ariston and grandson of the elder jectures that he was the same Sophonias to whom
Sophocles, was also an Athenian tragic poet. The one of the epistles of Simon of Constantinople, pro-
love of his grandfather towards him has been al- bably the same with Simon of Thebes (SIMON, No.
ready mentioned ; and it cannot be doubted that 22), is addressed. If this conjecture be admitted he
one chief way in which Sophocles displayed his must be placed about the end of the fourteenth cen-
affection was by endeavouring to train up his tury. The following works of his are extant in MS. :
grandson as the inheritor of his own skill in the - 1. In Aristotelis Categorias de Homonymis, Syn-
art of tragedy. We have no definite statement of onymis, Paronymis, Heteronymis, Polyonymis
, &c.
his age, but he was probably under twenty at the (Labbe, Nova Biblioth. MStorum Librorum, p. 115. )
time of his grandfather's death, as he did not begin 2. Napáopaots els tò nepl Yuxts Toû CODWTÁTOV
to exhibit his own dramas till about ten years kuplov Lopovlov, Paraphrasis sapientissimi Sopho-
after that time, namely in B. C. 396. (Diod xiv. niae in Aristotelis Libros tres de Anima (Lambec.
53, where Eupokañs o Eodukéous must either be Commentar. de Biblioth. Caesaraea, vol. vii. col.
corrected by adding viwvds or vidoùs, or must be 208, ed. Kollar, fol. Vienna, 1766, &c. ; Bandini,
understood to mean the grandson, and not the son). Catal. Codd. Graec. Laurent. Medic. vol. i. p. 297,
He had previously, in B. C. 401, brought out the vol. iii. coll. 19, 278 ; Hardt. Catalog. Codd.
Oedipus at Colonus (Argum. ad Oed. Col. ), and MStorum Graec. Biblioth. Reg. Bavar, vol. iv. p.
we may safely assume that this was not the only 242). Morelli (Biblioth. MSta Graeca et Latina,
one of his grandfather's dramas which he exhibited. vol. i. p. 128, comp. Graec. D. Marci Biblioth. p.
There is much difficulty as to the proper reading of 116, fol. Venet. 1740) speaks of a MS. , Aristotelis
the nunibers of plays and victories ascribed to him. Praedicamentorum Paraphrasis, in the Library of
According to the different readings, he exhibited St. Mark at Venice, which is anonymous, but is,
40 or 11 dramas, and gained 12, 11, or 7 prizes. he says, commonly attributed to the monk Sopho-
(Suid. s. v. ; Diod. l. c. ; comp. Clinton, F. H. nias : it is apparently only another MS. of the
vol. ii. p. xxxv. e. ) All that we know of his work No. 1. No. 2 is in a Florentine MS.
tragedies is contained in a passage of Clemens ascribed, but erroneously, to Simplicius. Beside
Alexandrinus (Protrept. 30, p. 26, Potter), who these works, there is a MS. in the Library of St.
refers to statements made in three of them respect- Mark, containing, -3. Toù coqwTátov uovayou
ing the mere humanity of the Dioscuri. It is, κυρίου Σοφονίου μελέτη, Παύλος εν Αθήναις δημη-
however, a very probable conjecture that, since yopwy, Sophoniae sapientissimi Monachi Declamatio:
Aristophanes of Byzantium pronounced 27 of the Paulus in Athenis Concionem habens ad populum
plays which were extant in his time under the (Graeca D. Marci Biblioth. p. 131). This last
name of the great Sophocles to be spurious, some of work is not mentioned by Fabricius. (Fabric.
these may have been the productions of his grand- Bibl. Graec. vol. iii. pp. 209, 236, vol. xi. Pp.
Suidas also ascribes elegies to the younger 334, 714. )
[J. C. M. ]
Sophocles. (Welcker, die Griech. Trag. p. 979; SOPHONISBA (Σοφόνισσα or Σοφόνιβα, see
Kayser, Hist. Crit. Trag. Graec. pp. 79-81 ; Schweigh. ad Appian. Pun. 27), a daughter of the
Wagner, Poët. Trag. Graec. Frag. in Didot's Carthaginian general, Hasdrubal, the son of Gisco.
Bibliotheca, p. 78. )
She had been betrothed by her father, at a very
3. Suidas also mentions an Athenian tragic and early age, to the Numidian prince Masinissa, but
lyric poet of this name, who lived later than the at a subsequent period Hasdrubal being desirous
poets of the Tragic Pleiad, and to whom fifteen to gain over Syphax, the rival monarch of Numi-
son.
## p. 875 (#891) ############################################
SOPHRON.
875
SOPHRON.
dia, to the Carthaginian alliance, offered him the amusements were connected seem to have been, at
hand of his daughter in marriage.
