Note 103 — GREECE BEYOND PELOPONNESUS. (continued 5)

“I take this opportunity of saying a few words about this not sufficiently valued author. There are writers whose works are read, without their containing any substance, and without their being at all comparable to others, merely because they have once got a name. Others deserving of respect are now neglected, while formerly they were studied. Dion Chrysostomus is one of these latter. He is indeed sophistical, but there is among his works a whole series of thoroughly beautiful orations, showing great intellect, which is, after all, the main thing. Sidonius Apollinaris’ Latinity is very rustic; but he is a man of talent; so also Libanius, although he is already too sophistical. Others, as Aelius Aristides, who are so devoid of talent and so absurd, that we feel inclined at once to throw their works among the rubbish, are placed on an equality with the former. To the same class belong Themistius and Fronto, the latter of whom does nothing but pile up words. In regard to talented writers, we must not allow ourselves to be prejudiced by the fact that they belong to a late period. The language of Dion Chrysostomus is very good; it is a fine imitation of Attic Greek, and this is not only my opinion, but the judgment of Valckenaer, Hemsterhuys, Ruhnkenius, and others; his style is like that of Xenophon, who, after all, is read and studied in schools only on account of his language.”