De Heliodoro et Achille Tatio judicium

What is the distinction between the writings, of which Charicleia is the subject of one, and Leucippe of the other?

I know many, even of the most educated, who dispute about these two erotic writings, of which Charicleia is the subject of one, and Leucippe of the other, maidens both charming in appearance and much superior in character. For some say that the work about Charicleia wins by a landslide over the erotic composition of Leucippe, while others say the diametrically opposite, that the former is rather defeated by the latter. But I, having been conversant with both books and having carefully examined both the words and the thoughts of both, do not side with any of those who have judged so and pronounced dogmatically against the one or the other, but I have judged that each of the writings is both defeated by the other and in turn conquers it; however, that the one about Charicleia prevails for the most part.

For the beauty of the story about her is neither very artificial and theatrical, nor indeed Attic and disdainful, but excels in magnificence. Nor is it deprived of the pleasing and of what gives delight, but it is bedecked with delicate and beautiful words, and with variations of figures and novelty of phrasing it is constructed toward the sublime. It is composed very gracefully and is animated with paradoxical and concise thoughts, and it is structured according to the arts of Isocrates and Demosthenes. For from afar the underlying theme appears to be managed, and the opposing element is immediately referred back to it. Indeed, one reading it for the first time, thinking that many things are superfluous, as the story proceeds, will marvel at the author's structure. And the very beginning of the work resembles coiled snakes; for they, having hidden their head within the coil, have put forth the rest of their body, and the book, having let the introduction of the plot slip into the middle, has, as if by lot, made the middle its beginning. And the language luxuriates in the flowers of every grace. And it is pleasant in its diction and the eloquence of the speaker, and beautiful in its loftiness and in seeming for the most part to be composed with the grandeur of meter. It is also embellished with episodic narratives that breathe, as one might say, an Aphrodisian charm. And its eloquence, which sweetly charms the fastidious ear, is poetically crafted without being ponderous, while its compact and heroic quality is diffused with beauty of language. But what I know most people criticize, concerning Charicleia I mean, that she does not speak in a womanly or feminine way for the orator, but contrary to art her tongue is elevated towards the more sophistic, this I myself do not know how I could praise enough. For she is not introduced by the author as an uneducated maiden, but as one initiated by the Pythian, for which reason even many of her laments she utters as oracles, and she is inspired like the frantic prophetesses, and is wholly of the tripodic cauldron.

Moreover, the author attributes verisimilitude to the other characters as well. Indeed, the absurdities of the plots, which one would not be able to cover up, this author, by narrating them fittingly, has shown them to be better when told than they were worse when done. Thus, indeed, he also removes the old man Calasiris from the blame for pandering, a matter not very believable until this author, with the variety of his art, repelled what seemed to be culpable. And what is more marvelous, is that in so fluid and diffuse a work he has preserved the compact and, as it were, unyielding nature of chastity and having once drawn down the soul of Charicleia into love from the

De Heliodoro et Achille Tatio judicium

Τίς ἡ διάκρισις τῶν συγγραμμάτων, ὧν τῷ μὲν Χαρίκλεια, τῷ δὲ Λευκίππη ὑποθέσεις καθεστήκατον;

Πολλοὺς οἶδα καὶ τῶν ἄγαν πεπαιδευμένων ἀμφισβητοῦντας περὶ τῶν δύο τούτων ἐρωτικῶν συγγραμμάτων, ὧν τῷ μὲν ἡ Χαρίκλεια τῷ δὲ ἡ Λευκίππη ὑποθέσεις καθεστήκατον, κόραι καὶ τὸ εἶδος ἀστεῖαι καὶ τὸ ἦθος κατὰ πολὺ κρείττους. οἱ μὲν γὰρ ὅλαις ψήφοις νικᾶν φασι τὸ τῆς Χαρικλείας σύγγραμμα τὴν ἐρωτικὴν τῆς Λευκίππης κατασκευήν, οἱ δὲ ἐκ διαμέτρου ἐκείνην μᾶλλον ἡττᾶσθαι ταύτης. ἐγὼ δὲ ἀμφοτέροις τοῖς βι βλίοις ὡμιληκὼς καὶ τάς τε λέξεις ἀμφοῖν καὶ τὰς διανοίας ἀκρι βωσάμενος οὐδενὶ προστίθεμαι τῶν οὕτω διακρινάντων καὶ ἀποτόμως κατὰ τῆς ἑτέρας ἀποφηναμένων, ἀλλ' ἑκάτερον τῶν συγγραμμάτων καὶ ἡττᾶσθαι θατέρου καὶ νικᾶν ἐκεῖνο παρὰ μέρος κέκρικα· κρατεῖν μέντοι γε τῷ πλείονι μέρει τὸ τῆς Χαρικλείας.

Ἔστι γὰρ τὸ κάλλος τοῦ κατ' αὐτὴν λόγου οὔτε πάνυ κομμωτικὸν καὶ θεατρικὸν οὔτε μὴν Ἀττικόν τε καὶ ὑπερήφανον ἀλλὰ τῷ μεγαλοπρεπεῖ διαπρέπον. οὐδὲ τοῦ εὐτερποῦς καὶ τοῦ πρὸς ἡδονὴν ἐστέρηται, ὀνόμασι δὲ περιήνθιστα ἁβροῖς καὶ ὡραίοις σχημάτων τ' ἐξαλλαγαῖς καὶ τῇ καινοτομίᾳ τῆς φράσεως πρὸς τὸ ὑψηλότερον συγκεκρότηται. ἥρμοσται δὲ πάνυ χαριέντως καὶ ἐννοίαις παραδόξοις καὶ συντόμοις ἐψύχωται, ᾠκονόμηται δὲ κατὰ τὰς Ἰσοκράτους καὶ ∆ημοσθένους τέχνας. πόρρωθέν τε γὰρ τὸ ὑποτρέχον διοικούμενον φαίνεται καὶ τὸ ἀντιπῖπτον εὐθὺς πρὸς τοῦτο ἐπαναδίδοται. ὅ γέ τοι πρώτως ἀναγινώσκων ἐκ περιττοῦ τὰ πολλὰ κεῖσθαι οἰόμενος, προϊόντος τοῦ λόγου, τὴν οἰκονομίαν τοῦ συγγεγραφότος θαυμάσεται· καὶ αὐτὴ δὲ ἡ ἀρχὴ τοῦ συγγράμματος ἔοικε τοῖς ἑλικτοῖς ὄφεσι· οὗτοι τε γὰρ τὴν κεφαλὴν εἴσω τῆς σπείρας κατακαλύψαντες, τὸ λοιπὸν σῶμα προβέβληνται, καὶ τὸ βιβλίον τὴν τῆς ὑποθέσεως εἰσβολὴν ἐν μέσῳ διολισθήσασαν ὥσπερ κληρωσάμενον ἀρχὴν πεποίηται τὴν μεσότητα. Τρυφᾷ δὲ ὁ λόγος πάσης χάριτος ἄνθεσι. καὶ ἡδὺς μέν ἐστι τῇ λέξει καὶ τῇ εὐστομίᾳ τοῦ ῥητορεύσαντος, καλὸς δὲ τῇ ὑψηγορίᾳ καὶ τῷ δοκεῖν κατ' ἔμμετρον μεγαληγορίας τὰ πολλὰ συγκεῖσθαι. κεκαλλώπισται δὲ καὶ ἐπεισοδίοις διηγήμασι χάριν, ὡς ἂν εἴποι τις, ἀφροδίσιον πνέουσι. καὶ ἔστιν αὐτῷ τὸ μὲν εὔγλωττον καὶ τὴν λίχνον καταμελιττοῦν ἀκοὴν ποιητικῶς κατεσκευασμένον ἄνευ τοῦ φορτικοῦ, τὸ δὲ συνεστηκός τε καὶ οἷον ἡρωϊκὸν καλλιεπείᾳ διακεχυμένον. Ὃ δὲ πλείστους οἶδ' ἐπαιτιωμένους, τὸ περὶ τῆς Χαρικλείας φημί, ὅτι μὴ γυναικεῖον μηδὲ θῆλυ τῷ ῥήτορι φθέγγεται, ἀλλὰ παρὰ τὴν τέχνην αὐτῇ ἡ γλῶττα ἐπῆρται πρὸς τὸ σοφιστικώτερον, τοῦτο αὐτὸς οὐκ ἔχω ὅπως ἂν ἀρκούντως ἐπαινέσαιμι. οὐ γὰρ κατὰ κόρας ἰδιώτιδας εἰσῆκται τῷ συγγραφεῖ, ἀλλὰ τετελεσμένη κἀκ τοῦ Πυθίου, διὸ καὶ τὰ πολλὰ τῶν θρήνων χρηστηριάζει, ἐνθεάζει τε κατὰ τὰς ἔκφρονας μάντιδας καὶ ὅλη τοῦ τριποδικοῦ πέφυκε λέβητος.

Πάνυ δὲ καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις προσώποις τὸ εἰκὸς ὁ συγγραφεὺς ἀποδίδωσι. τάς γέ τοι ἀτόπους τῶν ὑποθέσεων, ἃς οὐκ ἄν τις δυνηθείη περικαλύψασθαι, οὗτος εὐπρεπῶς διηγούμενος κρείττονας δέδειχε λεγομένας ἢ χείρονας πεπραγμένας. οὕτω γέ τοι καὶ τὸν πρεσβύτην Καλάσιριν ἐξαιρεῖ τῆς ἐπὶ τῇ προαγωγείᾳ μέμψεως, πρᾶγμα τῶν μὴ πάνυ πιστευομένων πρὶν ἂν ὁ συγγραφεὺς οὗτος τῷ ποικίλῳ τῆς τέχνης τὸ δοκοῦν ὑπαίτιον ἀπώσατο. καὶ τό γε θαυμασιώτερον, ὅτι ἐν ὑγρῷ οὕτω καὶ διακεχυμένῳ συγγράμματι τὸ συνεστηκός τε καὶ οἷον αὔθαδες τῆς σωφροσύνης ἐτήρησε καὶ τὴν τῆς Χαρικλείας ψυχὴν ἅπαξ κατασπάσας εἰς ἔρωτα ἀπὸ τῆς