even Lucilius employs humor of the ironic type more freely than has ordinarily been supposed, and probably advocates this type of humor, or at least protests in his critical satires against the charge of employing malicious invective.

In Chapter III, Lucilius and the Greek Satirists, I attempt by a preliminary survey of this most difficult field to outline tentatively the general nature of the relationship between the Greek philosophic satirists of the Hellenistic period, whose tone and spirit is best summed up by the term τὸ σπουδαιογέλοιον and Lucilius. Here results are necessarily problematical, as we are dealing exclusively with fragments, but sufficient evidence is disclosed for making at least a plausible case for a fairly wide acquaintance of Lucilius with the somewhat inchoate expressions of the satiric spirit in Greek literature, especially with the Sarpißal of Bion of Borysthenes. In any case the influence of certain widely spread Greek satiric forms, which have not yet crystallized into a satiric genre, upon Lucilius seems probable.

My purpose in the last three chapters of this book is to make a concrete application of the theoretical principles set forth in the first three chapters to the question of the exact nature of Horace's imitation of Lucilius. Chapter IV, The Satires of Horace's First Book, shows that Horace did in practice use the themes of several Lucilian satires, notably satires 1, 2, 4, 5, and 9, as common material to be transformed by the alembic of his genius into the most perfect examples of the satirist's art in the annals of literary history. An examination of the critical satires 1, 4 and 1, 10 shows that Horace was in all probability a convinced adherent of the later and more refined interpretations of the plain style and the ironic type of humor appropriate to that style. Yet his literary criticism, even his strictures upon Lucilius are presented in a form clearly reminiscent in its essential outlines of the critical satires of Lucilius. Finally Horace, like Lucilius, is found, notably in the first and fourth satires, to be strongly influenced by the Greek satirists, the Cynics and Stoics of the Hellenistic period. My whole analysis is an endeavor to define concretely the nature of Horace's imitation of Lucilius, to show that Horace is at once an imitator as

defined by the Classical Theory of Imitation and according to his own explicit admission, and yet a profoundly original poet, who gives consummate expression to his own theories of art and life and to the literary, social, and ethical ideals of the Augustan age. An understanding of the delicacy and the intricacy of this imitative relationship between Lucilius and Horace as revealed in the first book of the satires is, I believe, of great value for an intelligent understanding of the Classical Theory of Imitation.

In Chapter V, The Satires of Book II, I continue the comparative analysis of the satires of Lucilius and Horace. In this book we find a consciousness on the part of Horace that his satire of the first book was in some measure open to the criticism of being nimis acer. In consequence we shall find a distinct decline in the employment of purely personal satire and in the use of proper names, accompanied by a notable advance in the use of those popular philosophic themes suited for the expression of social satire and social philosophy. The conscious relationship with the more formally articulated popular philosophic discourses of the Cynics and Stoics is increasingly apparent, notably in such satires as 2, 3, and 7. Horace's concern is with the art of life and in this sense most of the satires of this second book may be said to pave the way for the epistles. And yet we still have abundant evidence in all the satires of the book except the sixth of the continued influence of Lucilian themes or of the Lucilian formulation of well-worn Stoic and Cynic commonplaces and stock examples upon the satires of this book. Horace seems, however, to have shifted his interest to those more general satires of Lucilius, which probably stood in closest relation to Lucilius' expression of his underlying philosophy of life as moulded by the influence of Greek philosophy, and by the popular forms of Greek philosophic exposition. I may add that Horace's relation to Lucilius is now freer and more independent. Such apprentice studies in the Lucilian manner as satire 1, 2, and 1, 7, are conspicuously absent from this book.

In Chapter VI, The Epistles and the Ars Poetica, we shall find the mould of satiric tradition partly broken. Horace,

never a slavish imitator, seems to feel that having served his exacting and willing apprenticeship to the laws of satiric composition, and having given concrete illustration of his acceptance of the great classical tradition and the law of his genre (the lex operis), he has now attained complete mastery of the form best suited to express his critical judgment upon the ideals of the Augustan age. Out of the material of the Lucilian satiric genre he has evolved the new mould of Horatian satire. We still find in the first book of the epistles distinct traces of Lucilian coloring, but a marked diminution in the direct use of extended Lucilian themes. On the other hand in the Ars Poetica he may be almost said to warn us that the perfect mastery of the form such as he reveals in his epistles can only be attained by a reasoned and detailed knowledge of the laws of the genre, the selection of a congenial theme, and the imitative and stylistic development of that theme in almost complete accord with the stylistic theories which I have described in my first three chapters. As if to give concrete proof of this belief, Horace appears to have taken as the point of departure for the form and for certain of the topics treated in his Ars Poetica, the eloaywyn addressed by Lucilius to the young historian Iunius Congus. In a very real sense the Ars Poetica affords a most interesting demonstration of the essential soundness of the thesis set forth in the theoretical chapters of this book, and a concrete illustration of Horace's reasoned adherence to the Classical Theory of Imitation. Taken in connection with chapters 4 and 5, it emphasizes the essential unity in the theory and practise of Horace the critic and Horace the satirist.

My present work would not have been possible without the remarkable edition of Lucilius by Marx and the illuminating Untersuchungen zu Lucilius of Cichorius. My indebtedness to these two works will appear constantly in the pages of this book. Equally heavy is my obligation to the editors of Horace. First and foremost among them I must express my deep sense of gratitude and high admiration for the great edition of Lejay. In the appreciation of the importance of Greek satiric influences Lejay's general introduction and his introductions to the individual satires have been of constant value. The text of Horace

which I follow is that of the Heinze-Kiessling 4th edition. My indebtedness to the incisive commentary of this edition will be apparent to all my professional readers. In the case of the distinguished company of English and American editors whose humane scholarship has done so much to preserve for Horace his traditional place in the affections of our English speaking race, I must content myself with a general acknowledgment of benefits received. The editions of Wickham, Palmer, Greenough, Rolfe, and Morris have long been my familiar friends.

The point of view presented in my first chapter has been greatly influenced by Stemplinger's study, Das Plagiat in der Griechischen Literatur. To the long list of my helpers in the second and third chapters due acknowledgment is made by the constant citations of their works in my notes.

This study has developed in the milieu and under the direct inspiration of the remarkable series of studies in the field of Roman satire and Greco-Roman rhetoric made by a group of American colleagues and friends. The studies of Wilson, Knapp, Rolfe, Webb, Ogle, Jackson, Ullman, Hendrickson, and others have been a continuous incentive to me to seek to attain the same thoroughness of scrutiny, restraint in statement, and lucidity of form,-in short, to emulate the virtues of the plain style, the tradition of which they so worthily maintain. I have profited greatly by the advice of my friend Professor A. G. Laird of the Department of Greek of the University of Wisconsin, who has aided me in the reading of the proof of this book. Professor Clifford H. Moore and my classmate, Professor E. K. Rand, of the Classical Department of Harvard University have given me valuable suggestions upon the fourth and fifth chapters and upon the general scope of the work.

Above all my friends and colleagues, it is a pleasure to express my especial gratitude to Professor George L. Hendrickson of Yale University. Professor Hendrickson has read the MS. of this book, and has given me in unstinted measure the benefit of his wide knowledge in the fields of ancient rhetoric and satire. In numerous places he has by his incisive and sympathetic criticism led me to corrections of fact and to

revisions of statement and argument which have helped to a clearer understanding and presentation of the truth.

The publication of this study has been rendered possible by the liberality of the University of Wisconsin, which has freely aided this investigation at every stage of its progress, and which through its committee on publications undertook the entire expense for the publication of this book.

It is with real satisfaction after twenty years of service at the University of Wisconsin that I take this occasion to express my gratitude to the administrative officers of the University of Wisconsin, to my colleagues in the Department of Classics, and to my many friends in the faculty for their encouragement and generous help..

The Index is the work of my former student, Dr. Marie McClernan, to whose scholarship and industry I am deeply indebted.

And finally, it would have been quite impossible to have planned or to have brought to conclusion the present work, which has been largely pursued amid the manifold distractions and engrossing duties of an American citizen in war time, without the patience, encouragement, and unfaltering faith of her to whom this book is dedicated.

Madison, Wis.

May 14, 1919

GEORGE CONVERSE FISKE