The art of scansion
Date: 2026-04-21T00:00:00+00:00
Keywords: English language -- Versification; Browning; Elizabeth Barrett; 1806-1861 -- Correspondence; Latin language -- Metrics and rhythmics; Greek language -- Metrics and rhythmics; Price; Uvedale; Sir; 1747-1829 -- Correspondence

The Project Gutenberg eBook of The art of scansion

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

Title: The art of scansion

Author: Elizabeth Barrett Browning

Author of introduction, etc.: Alice Meynell

Clement King Shorter

Other: Sir Uvedale Price

Release date: April 21, 2026 [eBook #78519]

Language: English

Original publication: London: Clement Shorter, 1916

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/78519

Credits: Richard Tonsing and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This book was produced from images made available by the HathiTrust Digital Library.)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ART OF SCANSION ***

Transcriber’s Note:

New original cover art included with this eBook is granted to the public domain.

THE ART
OF
SCANSION

BY
Elizabeth Barrett Browning
WITH AN INTRODUCTION
BY
ALICE MEYNELL
LONDON

Privately printed by Clement Shorter, December 1916

PREFACE

My friend Mrs. Meynell has obliged me with a few words of introduction to this letter by Elizabeth Barrett Browning, here printed for the first time in an edition of twenty-five copies. It was written when she was twenty-one years of age, and residing at her father’s house near Ledbury in Herefordshire. She did not meet Robert Browning until nineteen years later, but her girlish enthusiasm for poetry is reflected in this letter. Her correspondent, Sir Uvedale Price (1747–1829), did not live to see her recognition as a great poet, although her Essay on Mind was published when she was nineteen and her Battle of Marathon, published in our day, was written at the age of fourteen. Price was a Herefordshire neighbour. He was a schoolfellow of Charles James Fox at Eton. He had great ideas on gardening, and developed them in his own grounds at Foxley and wrote an Essay on the Picturesque in 1784, enlarged afterwards into a three-volume work. Sir Walter Scott utilised Price’s ideas when he laid out the gardens at Abbotsford. Price was created a baronet in 1828. Letters from him are to be found in Miss Berry’s Journals. Miss Barrett’s letter was doubtless inspired by Uvedale Price’s An Essay on the Modern Pronunciation of Greek and Latin, which he had had privately printed at Oxford in the year 1827. I have not seen the book, a copy of which he doubtless gave to his fair neighbour. Its perusal served, I am sure, to explain certain obscure allusions in the letter. It urged that “our system of pronouncing the ancient languages is at variance with the principles and established rules of ancient prosody and the practice of the best poets.”

CLEMENT SHORTER.

INTRODUCTION

It is interesting to see Elizabeth Barrett eager over the dead languages. In her own living language she was modern in her day, more modern than any contemporary except the poet whom, nearly twenty years after this letter was written and the controversy closed, she married. It was modern to write poetry as she wrote, with an emphatic use of modern prose words; unlike Wordsworth’s, not at all childlike as were his. Robert Browning and Elizabeth have a peculiar tone of defiance in their nineteenth-century English; in the most gentle Elizabeth’s verse it is nearly swaggering, certainly swashing and martial. Nothing could be more sharply cut off from the eighteenth century, and the seventeenth, and the sixteenth than the vocabulary of Aurora Leigh, and, English apart, nothing could be more separated from Antiquity than the style that was most characteristically hers. In her quieter moments, when she is not marching, in doublet and hose, the march of her blank verse, but pacing softly in the strictest measure of the bonds that all true poets so love—the bonds of numbers, stress, quantity, rhyme, and final shape—the great beauty of her sonnets proves her delight in that order, and in these the diction is inconspicuous. It is in the romantic poems, those that deal with the lady and the knight, that the modernism is again evident. Where, in her language, is any trace of her reading of the older English? Where in her style is any sign of her Latin and Greek? In her most characteristic work she does not sow with her hand; she tosses out the basketful, with a gesture generous but wilful. In one respect—the point on which there was no question of deference to Antiquity—she shows none to her English masters. Thence her rhymes: “children” and “bewildering,” “islands” and “silence,” and the rest. She had the right to make these experiments, and it is as evident a sign of her resolute novelty as her husband’s different and less tolerable rhymes were of his. But we may take such rhymes not only as demonstrations of a new independence; they may have been in part due to her peculiar position as the most secluded of poets. Elizabeth Barrett saw and spoke to very few. She cannot have gathered much of the pronunciation of English that was then usual. The friend to whom as a girl she wrote this and other letters on the art of metre was so old as to be numbered among eighteenth-century authors; he was not of her time. If she had the habit of dropping her final g’s, for instance, there might be none to correct it. It is noticeable that she writes of the word “patriotism” as generally pronounced in five syllables. The accepted way is to sound it as only three—crowded ones, it is true, but only three, and any other way would seem to us provincial. Especially would an educated ear resent the pronouncing of the last three letters in “patriotism” in two syllables.

Elizabeth Barrett’s comments on a few of Milton’s lines leave her reader at liberty to accept them or depart from them. No authority except that of Milton’s shade will ever decide a question as to one of his lines (page 10): whether we should begin it with two rather strained iambic feet (which would be my scansion) or with a strained long syllable followed by a dactyl (which is hers). It is remarkable, by the way, that she never uses the word “stress” in writing of English prosody. It seems to me to be the only safe word; “accent” being alien and ambiguous, and “quantity” a valuable but nearly lawless part of our metre—present in every poet’s intention in his line, but perhaps best unnamed.

“Her glories shall never fade,” wrote Browning of his wedded poet (in regard, by the way, to a poem in which she rhymed “common” with “human”), and they never shall. She is within English literature for ever and ever. Coventry Patmore held poetry to be the gravest among the undertakings of man, and Elizabeth Barrett Browning—child, maid, and wife—took her vocation with gravity, passion, and delight. In this controversy on “accents” ancient and modern, she withstands her old friend, literally foot to foot. She might even, but that she was humbly obstinate and courteous and sweet, have lost her temper over a matter so exciting. And what is so exciting to poets as these questions of their technique? If I had ever had a fierce passage of arms with Francis Thompson (but I never had) it would have been on the question of trochaic endings, and whether one might pause on them before carrying on the weak syllable to the next line. The girl who so passionately cared for her Greek was, in time, the great woman who wrote memorable English passionately. The slightness of the connexion between two such beloved studies seems an incident in her life not easily understood; but she was for poetry first and last.

ALICE MEYNELL.

THE ART OF SCANSION
A Letter from Elizabeth Barrett, afterwards Mrs. Browning, to Uvedale Price, afterwards Sir Uvedale Price, Bart.

To UVEDALE PRICE, Esq.

Hope End. April, 1827.

My dear Sir,—I shall not detain you for any unnecessary prologuizing purpose, but with your permission shall go en avant at once, and “tell you what I am going to say.” Pray have a great deal of indulgence ready for me, for I assure you I shall want all you can spare. Page 32. “There is a manifest absurdity in transferring the Latin mode of accentuation to the Greek, yet we certainly should not like to follow the Greek mode.” Here you give the general taste a great deal more credit than it deserves, and more than you would give if you were acquainted with a material circumstance which I certainly imagined I had mentioned to you, but which either you must have overlooked in one of my letters, or I omitted in the great hurry with which I wrote one of them. This is that they do at the Charterhouse precisely what you say we should not like to do: they read Greek by the Greek accents, and then dismiss their prisca fides for the sake of embracing a new kind of idolatry, which has not even the advantage of being sanctified (may I profane that word?) by old prejudices. In short they have left Belzebub and taken to Beelzebul, and therefore I hope you will grant them, par parenthèse, the special licence of liking to do anything that we certainly should not like to do; and of being, at least in this instance, “uniformly and consistently absurd.”

Page 34. There is a difference in the character of the anapæstic and dactylic rapidity, and one that has been very happily marked by Marmontel in a very few words, “le dactyl s’elance, et l’anapeste se précipite.” This, I am persuaded, is not, what it may perhaps appear at first sight, a fanciful distinction. I am very sure it is not and cannot help pausing here to say how much I have been struck with the whole of this forcible illustration of Marmontel’s position. Milton who often likes to fill English verse from the iambic and trochaic dynasties,—you must let me think so still,—seems to have been quite aware of the distinction on which the position is founded: and has made admirable use of it in a line expressive of the lost Angels’ ‘ruining’ from Heaven—

Eternal wrath

Burnt āftĕr thĕm | tŏ thĕ bōttŏmlĕss pīt.

where by the grand situation of the first long monosyllable we have revealed to us, first the Avenger with fixed foot on the battlement of Heaven,—and then the dactylic out-darting of the scorching thunderbolt—and then the headlong and precipitate descent of the condemned.

The intermediate monosyllable which, as you observe, is necessary in an hexametral union of the two rhythms has been omitted by Milton, and perhaps with a view to the expression. For the pause by which we compensate the metre, adds, as I conceive, very singularly to the effect of this sublime line; by giving something unusual to the cadence that arrests the attention with the voice; as if one fear made us take breath a moment before we could turn from the contemplation of power to its terrible effect. Reasoning as Paley’s savage did about the watch, it becomes clear to me that the remarkable construction of this line is not accidental, and what makes me still more satisfied that Milton really intended to express the distinction in question is the circumstance that during the whole of his description he has had so evidently in his head the sublime combat of the immortals in the Theogony, where Hesiod has made use of the very same cadence,—tho’ of course with an intermediate syllable,—to express the precipitation of the conquered.

Ουρανοθεν κατιων δεκατη

It is clear then to my mind that Milton considered his “tŏ thĕ bōttŏmlĕss pīt” as equivalent to Hesiod’s κατιων δεκατη; and that consequently he would have agreed with you in your pronunciation of the Greek, and have accepted your position. “Accent, in its modern sense, gives length—both the first syllable of bot´tomless and the concluding word pit´ being accented,—and long, according to Hesiod’s analogy,—if that be admitted, tho’ short according to the new heresy. Do not be ungrateful to Milton, and try to resolve his verse into iambi and trochees: which you will here find a much too difficult matter to accomplish. This is one instance out of the thousand he offers us:

Of English cut on Greek and Latin.

I know you will add, and justly;

Like fustian heretofore on satin.

“Page 36. In the second book of the Æneid, there is an instance of a mixture of the two rhythms, but where the expression is chiefly in the anapæstic.” I dare to contend upon your own principle founded on Marmontel’s distinction that in your simile quoted from Virgil, the expression neither lies chiefly in the anapæstic cadence, or chiefly in the dactylic but equally in both. I appeal to Philip against Philip,—and beg you to consider whether the dactylic impetus at the beginning of the line Fertur in arva furens cumulo does not bring to the mind the first out-bursting of the spumeus amnis, where it leaps forward from the stronghold of its banks,—as much as the anapæstic fall does its rushing descent upon the plains. You, who are so just and rigid in your ‘division of property’ should really adjudge this case equitably.

Page 37. “We have not many choriambi in English and of them none I believe are of Greek or Latin or perhaps of Saxon origin.” I like so much all you say about the choriambi, that I am the more sorry you should shut the door of English poetry in their face.

If they were lame
Ugly and slanderous to our mother tongue
I would not care, I then might be content

but it really seems to me a little hard that we should be denied their acquaintance the minute after you have proved it to be most desirable. I shall try to maintain that, neither we or the choriambi having a disinclination to each other’s company, you are very uncharitable to make such mischief between us; and I shall therefore put down one or two respectably sounding words derived from the Greek and Latin,—tho’ not from Greek and Latin choriambi,—as candidates for that rank in English. You will, I think, admit chārăctĕrīze—tēmpĕrămēnt—tēmpĕrăture,—if you can by any means get over their disallegiance to ancient quantity. You may, perhaps admit pātrĭŏtīsm: but I bring this example forward with no kind of triumph: for, in common discourse, we pronounce it much as five syllables; and find it rough and unmanageable on reducing it to four; which however, I believe, is undeviatingly done in poetry. The most inharmonious line Campbell ever wrote has no reason to be obliged to it—

If the pātrĭŏtīsm ŏf yŏur fathers.

You may not, a fortiori, refuse to admit rīghtĕousnēss—of Saxon extraction,—

“Just confidence and native rīghtĕoŭsnēss”

and its connections par la suite; hīdĕoŭsnēss—glōrĭoŭsnēss—hōrrĭblĕnēss, &c.

I think līnĕămēnt tho’ pleading guilty to the imperfections you find out in chārĭŏtēer, has no weak claim—

“Six wings he wore to shade

His līnĕămēnts divine.”

And vīrtŭŏsēst,—rather a rusty word,—receives testimonials from Milton for itself and kindred—

Seems wisest, vīrtŭŏsēst, discreetest, best.

It seems to me that you can only make one objection to my next candidate—

Oh ālĭĕnāte from God! oh spirit accursed—

And that another is almost unexceptionable

Plēnĭpŏtēnt on earth of matchless might,

I feel so sure about this last word plēnĭpŏtēnt that I should not scruple to treat him as Atlas and make him bear the whole burden of my defence—without going on,—which I might do,—to such compound tetrasyllables as ōvĕrfătīgue—ōvĕr-dĕlīght—cōnquerŏr-like sex. Nēvĕrthĕlēss before dismissing the subject, it is quite proper for me to be candid, and confess that I am aware of the imperfection of most of our choriambi, and that, generally speaking, the foot is considerably mutatus ab illo in the process of its naturalization into our language. But you do recognise our dactyls; for which they owe you no obligation; for you must do so on your principle, and the recognition is unattended with any complimentary or obliging expression on your part,—rather with Boileau’s pathetic remonstrance.

Que vous ont fait nos oreilles

Pour les traites si durement?

Therefore I submit to you whether our choriambi do not deserve a similar recognition, tho’ possibly a similar remonstrance.

Page 46. “If my mode of accenting Pope’s verse be thought the right one, it seems clear that a trochee at the beginning of an English verse, if followed by another trochee, tho’ it may give vigour, does not also produce grace.” I have so little intention of decrying the choriambus, in marking down the above passage, that I have merely been induced to do so by sympathizing very strongly with your delighted feelings respecting it,—and by a consequent regret that you should depreciate its propriety in the second place,—which you seem to do, with some reservation. There can I should think be no doubt as to the propriety of your reading, in Pope’s line,—

Jumping hīgh ŏ’er thĕ shrūbs ŏf thĕ rōugh grōund

and there can be no doubt that, according to your reading, the line has much more vigour than grace. The ungracefulness, however, seems to me produced, not so much by the choriambus, as by that very rough termination of the whole—a spondee preceded by a pyrrhic; so that, according to my idea, ce n’est que le dernier pas qui coute,—unless indeed we take into consideration the cacophonous assembage of harsh consonants and vowels which are “rather seen than heard.” As the line stands, however, it is extremely expressive, but perhaps hardly a fair specimen of the introduction of a choriambus into the second place. There is a considerable degree less roughness and more impetuous energy in the following example

Shoots ĭnvīsĭble vīrtue ē’en tŏ thĕ dēep

where the dernier pas is composed of another choriambus. I hope you do not disapprove of choriambi introduced into the internal part of the line, but as you only mention, approvingly, the incipient and final choriambus I am half afraid that you do.

I shall not be satisfied if you profess to tolerate them sometimes “for the sake of expression,” a principle on which we admire many deformities, and among them those multiplied elisions that make Virgil’s line a “monstrum nonendum informe” in itself: The plea of expression in versification is something like the plea of expediency in morals; and the internal choriambi do not seem to me reduced to such a last resource. When a dactyl, or amphibrach, begins the verse, the choriambus appears to follow it in a singularly pleasing manner, giving to the cadence of the line a swelling graceful movement which is quite delightful to my ear: as in Lord Byron’s

Thou wert a bēautĭfŭl thōught, and softly bodied forth

or Shakespeare’s

As zephyr blōwĭng bĕlōw the violet—

which you can hardly find fault with; for you say (page 65) in your observations on amicitiam that “its cadence (that of a choriambus with a preceding short syllable) is of a very pleasing kind.” Also before the last iambus, as Chamberlayn has it,

His yielding spirits now prepare to meet

Death, clothed in thoughts whīte ăs hĭs wīnding sheet.

I think with regard to these examples that they are both harmonious and expressive; tho’ in all of them we feel the “fall” which you mention,—in the case of the choriambus following the commencing trochee,—rather in a tone of regret as far as relates to the general harmony. To go to another part of the subject, I observe that you only notice two feet which follow the trochee commencing an English verse: viz. the iambus usually, and the trochee casually: whereas it is sometimes followed by a pyrrhic as in Milton’s—

“Mȳrĭăds, bĕtwēen two brazen mountains lodged”

“Embry̆ŏes and īdiots, eremites and friars—”

and not unfrequently by a spondee with very good effect—

“Bōne ŏf mȳ bōne, thou art, and from thy state

Mine never shall be parted.”

“Strāins hĭs yōung nērves and puts himself in posture.”—Cymbeline.

“Rāpture! bōld mān! who temp’st the wrath divine.”

Page 47. I am glad you have marked “Hīgh ŏvĕr-ārched” as a choriambus. It gives me an opportunity of writing down an anapæstic line of Stevens’s—

Fire artillery tīer ŏvĕr tīer

and of submitting to you whether you are not forced by the metre; your suprema lex; to treat over, the distinct dissyllable,—exactly as you have treated over,—the compounded; by taking away the accent. And if you take away the accent, which seems to me a most evident necessity, you are immediately reduced to another necessity quite as evident, that of recognizing English pyrrhics. I believe that English pyrrhics exist much in the same word that Latin unaccented words may be said to exist by the doctrine of atonics: and I am struck with a singular analogy between the two cases. There is, I concede, no English dissyllable, a pyrrhic per se; and, in Latin, according to Quinctillian “non est aliqua vox sine acuta.” But in Latin, according to Quinctillian, some words by juxtaposition with others lose their own accent, ex. gr: circum litora or ab óres and, in an analogous manner many English dissyllables either by incorporation with other words, as Hīgh ŏvĕr-ārched, or by juxtaposition with them, as tīer ōvĕr tīer, lose their own accent, in its modern sense. English pyrrhics made by these means seem to me sufficiently abundant: I shall put down a few exemplary lines: one from Anstey

The ladies you sēe vĕry jūstly remark

from Cowper

You spēak vĕry fīne and you lōok vĕry grāve.

And again Anstey’s

O’erflow all my hay, may my dōgs nĕvĕr hūnt

and Cowper

But the sound of the Chūrch-gŏĭng bell
These valleys and rōcks nĕvĕr hēard—
Nĕvĕr sīghed at the sound of a knell.

Page 50. “As far as I have observed the hexameter never begins with a dispondee.” There are several examples to militate against the “never”: one I shall take from Lucretius—

Immōrtāli sunt natura proedita certe

and a very expressive one from the Theogony—

Νικησαντες χερσιν ὑπερθυμους περ εοντας

Page 54. By laying our accent wherever the Romans laid theirs, and nowhere else, we have left them but one dissyllabic foot in the language. Should we not, even by the misapplied accentual rule, give the Romans one or two iambi? It appears so; if there be any correctness in a note attached to my edition of Foster, where I find an extract from Ælius Donatus (supported by Victorinus) who makes some exceptions to the general rule of the accent falling on the first of dissyllables “pro causa discretionis, ut in adverbio pone, ideo ne verbum putetur imperativi modi:—ut in ea particula quæ est ergo.” From which, it appears that our measure of absurdity is not yet filled up; that accent (or rather, as you would say, quantity, under its name) having turned so many iambi into trochees, has to do now; pro causa discretionis; the very different office of turning trochees into iambi; or else cry peccavi,—pro causa discretionis indeed! This is a case analogous to that you mentioned to Mr. Commeline, of Θοαι and diu, and which he tried to get rid of by the adoption of a monosyllabic pronunciation. But such a measure, could it be admitted in that case, is no panacea,—as is obvious from the present case of pone and ergo.

Page 81. You observe relatively to the first lines of Virgil, first eclogue, that if an advocate for the system gave a length to tu and nos for the sake of expression “he would do wrong in respect to his system and its rules,—one of which is that all unaccented syllables should be quickly passed over to the next accented one.” I will submit to you with deference whether you do not rather beg the question by calling tu and nos “unaccented syllables.” You are well aware of the old rule so simply and clearly stated by Franciscus Sanctius,—“accentum in se monosyllaba dictio ponit;” and tho’ the rule be, in practice, modified by the doctrine of atonics, yet I have some doubts,—and, a fortiori, an advocate of the system might possibly have,—whether such discriminating monosyllables should not in recitation be separated from the neighbouring words, on account of the expression; and so claim a length even on accentual principles. This is an impression which perhaps I should not have felt but for want of better information, and which I certainly should not communicate to you but in desire of it.

You have now the whole history of my doubts and difficulties; as I have reported them very faithfully in obedience to your desire. The obedience was at least a proof of my confidence in your kindness; and in that light I hope you will consider it; for I have run a great risk in passing such an Ægæan in such a scaphula. My general debt of information, to you, is put down among those singular debts which are pleasant to think of, and which the debtor can never be expected to repay, but I must be allowed to thank you in particular for that percussion vers le fin you give the Abbate Scopha. It is extremely forcible and entertaining,—and presents an example of your peculiar manner of amusing your readers—by convincing them. You have indeed made it abundantly clear that the Abbate for his system’s credit should have been muet as his French e. But, tho’ I have put off making the charge so long, my poetical conscience wont let me rest till I accuse you of committing heinous profanation in page 48; first by quoting Wīll ŏ thĕ Wīsp contemptuously as “a little phrase,” and secondly by introducing it to your readers in such company as Jāck ĭn ă bōx´ | Mōuse ĭn ă chēese´, Būg ĭn ă rūg´, &c. And should you really feel “some regret” if it became the fashion to say Wĭll ō thĕ Wĭsp—Bŭg īn ă rūg &c.? Our poets, from Milton upwards and downwards, who have sanctified the first of those “little phrases” in their melodious verses, would sympathize feelingly in your regret; and might beg you at the same time to disengage Will o’ the wisp from Bug in a rug forthwith. Could not rīddle mĕ rēe do your business as well, without sacrificing such an Iphigenia?

I have done reading your correspondence with Mr. Commeline; and with all your adversary’s ingenuity, am considerably confirmed in my convictions on your side. I thought it odd that an article of the Edinburgh Review should be referred to, on a philological subject; and, on looking into the one which Mr. Commeline calls the ‘Manual of his heresy,’ I was surprised to find us accused there of subverting the true metrical structure of Latin hexameters, even according to the accentual system “by not laying our accent on the long syllable, and by laying it on the short ones.” The Reviewer seems confused in his speculations: but that passage is so decidedly in favour of your position that I think you can hardly have seen the article or would have retorted Mr. Commeline’s own Manual on himself.

Papa was very glad to see you at Hereford, and I was very glad to hear from him, nomine mutato, exactly what you have since said of his good looks. We hope to have favorable accounts of you all; dear Miss Price in particular, and, with our best regards,

Believe me
Your grateful
E. B. BARRETT.[1]

1. Mrs. Browning’s name was Elizabeth Barrett Barrett before her marriage.

Of this letter twenty-five copies only have been privately printed by Clement Shorter for distribution among his friends.

London. December 1916.

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES

Page | Changed from | Changed to
4 | in English. You will, I think, admit c̄harătĕrīze—tēmpĕrămēnt—tēmpĕrăture,—if | in English. You will, I think, admit chārăctĕrīze—tēmpĕrămēnt—tēmpĕrăture,—if
5 | tetrasyllables as ōvĕrfătīgue—ōvĕr-dĕlīght—cŏnquerŏr-like sex. Nēvĕrthĕlēss | tetrasyllables as ōvĕrfătīgue—ōvĕr-dĕlīght—cōnquerŏr-like sex. Nēvĕrthĕlēss
6 | Jumping hīgh aĭr thĕ shrūbs ŏf thĕ rōugh grōund | Jumping hīgh ŏ’er thĕ shrūbs ŏf thĕ rōugh grōund
7 | Shoots ĭnvīsĭble vīrtue ē’en tō thĕ dēep | Shoots ĭnvīsĭble vīrtue ē’en tŏ thĕ dēep
9 | Quinctillian “non est aliqua vox sine acata.” But in Latin, according | Quinctillian “non est aliqua vox sine acuta.” But in Latin, according
9 | Immōrtāli sunt natura proedita cesti | Immōrtāli sunt natura proedita certe
9 | Νικηὀαντες χερσιν ὑπερθυμους περ εοντας | Νικησαντες χερσιν ὑπερθυμους περ εοντας
10 | verbum putelier imperativi modi:—ut in ea particula quæ est ergo | verbum putetur imperativi modi:—ut in ea particula quæ est ergo
10 | analogous to that you mentioned to Mr. Commeline, of θοαι and diu | analogous to that you mentioned to Mr. Commeline, of Θοαι and diu
11 | Wĭsp—Bŭg īn ă rŭg &c.? Our poets, from Milton upwards and downwards | Wĭsp—Bŭg īn ă rūg &c.? Our poets, from Milton upwards and downwards

- Fixed typos; non-standard spelling and dialect retained.

5

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ART OF SCANSION ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided that:

- • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

- • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

- • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.

- • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg

Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza #516, Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

Table of Contents

- THE ART OF SCANSION
- PREFACE
- INTRODUCTION

- THE ART OF SCANSION A Letter from Elizabeth Barrett, afterwards Mrs. Browning, to Uvedale Price, afterwards Sir Uvedale Price, Bart.

- THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE