Page:History of Greece Vol I.djvu/415

 J5SCHYLUS. 383 to the received vein of religious tradition with the same strictness as Sophokles yet the ascendency and interference of the goda is never out of sight, and the solemnity with which they are represented, set off by a bold, figurative, and elliptical style* of in the mysteries (Aristot Ethic. Nicom. iii. 2; Clemens Alex. Strum, ii. p. 387) ; the story is different again in ^Elian, V. H. v. 19. How little can be made out distinctly respecting this last accusation may be seen in Lobeck, Aglaopham. p. 81. Cicero (Tusc. Dis. ii. 10) calls JEschylus " almost a Pythagorean :" upon what the epithet is founded we do not know. There is no evidence to prove to us that the Prometheus Vinctns was considered as impious by the public before whom it was represented; but its obvious meaning has been so regarded by modern critics, who resort to many different explanations of it, in order to prove that when properly construed it is not impious. But if we wish to ascertain what ^Eschylus really meant, we ought not to consult the religious ideas of modern times ; we have no tast except what we know of the poet's own time and that which had pre- ceded him. The explanations given by the ablest critics seem generally to exhibit a predetermination to bring out Zeus as a just, wise, merciful, and all-powerful Being ; and all, in one way or another, distort the figures, alter the perspective, and give far-fetched interpretations of the meaning, of this striking drama, which conveys an impression directly contrary (see Welck- er, Trilogie, JEsch. p. 90-117, with the explanation of Dissen there given; Klausen, Theologum. J^sch. p. 140-154; Schumann, in his recent transla- tion of the play, and the criticism on that translation in the Wiener Jahr- bucher, vol. cix. 1845, p. 245, by F. Hitter). On the other hand, Schutz (Excurs. ad Prom. Vinct. p. 149) thinks that -ZEschylus wished by means of this drama to enforce upon his countrymen the hatred of a despot. Though I do not agree in this interpretation, it appears to me less wide of the truth than the forcible methods employed by others to bring the poet into har- mony with their own religious ideas. Without presuming to determine whether ^Eschylus proposed to himself any special purpose, if we look at the JEschylean Prometheus in reference only to ancient ideas, it will be found to borrow both its characters and all its main circumstances from the legend in the Hesiodic Theogony. Zeus acquires his supremacy only by overthrowing Kronos and the Titans. the Titan god Prometheus is the pronounced champion of helpless man, and negotiates with Zeus on their behalf: Zeus wishes to withhold from them the most essential blessings, which Prometheus employs deceit and theft to procure for them, and ultimately with success ; undergoing, however, severa punishment for so doing from the superior force of Zeus. These are the main features of the .^Eschylean Prometheus, and they are all derived from the legend as it stands in the Theogony. As for the human race, tkey are depicted as abject and helpless in an extreme degree, in -5Cschylus even