RHYTHM IN VERSE.*

Ma. BAYFIELD'S aim in The Measures of the Poets is " to provide

students of English verse with a system of prosody that is on the one hand sound in principle, and on the other not liable to break down when brought to the test of application." The principle may be described briefly in the words of W. Christ : " Pedes simplices principales stint duo, quatuor et trium temporum

(xpovoir irphrom): dactylus, trochaeus. Nam iambicos et

anapaesticos ordines nihil aliud ease patet quam trochaicos aut dactylicos, quibus anacrusis monosyllaba aut disyllaba praemissa sit." Mr. Bayfield's system is not novel in itself ; the novelty consists in its application to English verse. The author mentions The Science of English Verse, in which " the American poet and musician Sidney Lanier advocated the trochaic base for our lyrics, but strangely enough retained the iambio base for blank verse." Mr. Bayfield applies the method to the whole field of English verse. Of the iambus itself, he tells us, " this is not used as a metrical foot in English. The Greeks appear to have employed it occasionally, but only with the stress on the first syllable." Further, he writes :—

" The Iambic line corresponds to our heroic line in being the staple measure of Greek tragedy. From a failure to distinguish between Metre and Rhythm, it was in Roman times supposerto be composed of iambi. To this fundamental error which was shared and handed down by Horace (Ars Pod. 251ff.), and blindly accepted by the literary world at the Revival of Learning, the present hopeless condition of English prosody is largely if not entirely due. For Greek and Latin verse the mistaken view was corrected as much as fifty years age by J. H. H. Schmidt in hie works on the Rhythmic and Metric of the classical languages."

It is impossible to treat the questions raised by this paragraph adequately in the space at our service. The passage in the Are Poetica is somewhat obscure in its intention, and may be coloured by Horaee's accustomed irony, though this is not Ritter's opinion. It is clear that Latin practice admitted a spondee, though not in the second, fourth, or sixth place. Archi- lochus admitted a spondee. What is not clear is how far Horace allowed the practice, and whether he condemns Accius and Ennius equally, or contrasts them to the advantage of Accius. As to the iambic trimeter itself, we may refer our readers to a passage in M. Alfred Croiset's volume, La Poesie de Finders et Lea Lois du. Lyristne Grec (p. 37, note 3). Our main concern should be with the practice of Horace ; the Are Poetica is not to be considered simply as a treatise on verse.

In following Greek models, the Latin poets found that their language presented the same inherent difficulty as our own, Latin being naturally more an accentual than a quantitative speech. The difficulty is the same as our own in kind, if not in extent. Mr. Bayfield writes :-

" It has been urged against this notation, that in English

• The Measures of the Poets. By M. A. Hayfield, M.A. Cambridge : at the University Pram. Ps. net.) poetry the dominating factor is stress, not quantity. That this is so cannot be doubted, but in spite of determined efforts I have found it undesirable, and indeed impossible, to discard the nota- tion. However conventional it may be when applied to our verse, it is far the most convenient for exposition, and is indis- pensable for contrasting, as will occasionally be necessary, the traditional system with that set forth here.'

We are willing to accept the convention for the sake of its convenience ; but a rhythm based upon accent is essentially different from a rhythm based upon quantity. The difference in length between two long syllables is far less variable than the difference in stress between two stressed syllables. Moreover, the rhythm of quantity must have been varied, or even inter- rupted, by accent ; and, in the same way, the rhythm of accent is

modified by quantity. It is important, as M. Croiset pointed out, to distinguish the rhythm from the syllables, and notes and movements, through which it expresses itself. Greek lyrism was inseparable from music, and the hexameters of Homer were chanted to a measure governed by the lyre. Our verse has not maintained its connexion with music ; even though some exquisite Elizabethan lyrics and the airs of Mr. Henry Lawes may haunt our memory. Mr. Bayfield lays down the rule that " in verse the stresses must recur at regular intervals." Modern verse, in the case of vers libres, and modern music, ignore the rule ; the particular instance we have in mind being a poem called "The Return," by Mr. Pound, set to music by Mr.

Rummel. To quote M. Croiset again: "Il y a aujourd'hui des

ceuvres musicales tries savantes et trey belles dans lesquelles la rhythms n'est guere, pour ainsi dire, qu'un cadre abstrait oit le genie du musicien repand librement des melodies souples et ondoyantes. La Grece antique n'avait que des rhythmes nets et hien marques des rhythmes de clause, comme on dit main- tenant." A rule such as Mr. Bayfield's, or a definition such as

Mr. Mackail's " pattern with a repeat," limits the question of rhythm too narrowly.

The character of our heroic verse owes nothing to music, even though the rhythm is strongly marked. While length or quantity is musical, stress has a more dramatic quality, the emphasis of a gesture ; and we should remember that gesture is also rhythmical, fulfilling a period of time. It is gesture, not music, that makes the beauty of " This bodiless creation, ecstasy Is very cunning in.

Ecstasy !"

Here, there is no distribution of stress ; the whole weight of the line is accumulated upon the first syllable of Hamlet's exclama- tion. Milton, as Dean Beeching pointed out, employs a doubled vowel to increase the emphasis on a syllable already stressed. as in " By mee ; not you but mee they have despis'd." Clearly the normal stress of the metre, to Milton's ear, seemed insufficient ; he needed a weightier emphasis.

Mr. Bayfield has not been blind to these questions, though we think he has not discussed them sufficiently. After all, we are not asked to believe that poets like Gray and Milton knew nothing of prosody, or that Mr. Bayfield's system is that of the Greek lyrical poets. Prosody is a matter for the gram- marians, rather than for the poets, who are an incorrigibly idle race, with delicate ears. We have been inclined to resent the author's allusion to Horace, one of the perfect poets, and the most fastidious. We differ from him as to elision. We incline also to doubt the propriety of employing an identical notation for quantitative and for accentual verse, since it may lead to a confusion between two entirely different modes of rhythm. But the principle of his scheme is sound, and in the application of it to English verse he has shown, besides the wisdom of his instinct, a careful patience that is beyond praise.