Last updated 09/07/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 January 2009
When Fielding fathered the modern English novel in 1742, he left his readers in no doubt about his intentions. The Preface to Joseph Andrews states clearly enough that his purpose was to ridicule affectation. The ancient Greek novelists were generally less explicit about their aims: of the five novels which survive complete, four are without any sort of preface, and we can only guess from the text what the authors were trying to do. Probably their sole object was to entertain. But the man who wrote the fifth, Daphnis and Chloe, was evidently a highly conscious artist with clear ideas about the purpose of his art, and he has left us a preface explaining them—or rather hinting at them, for the full meaning of his words is not immediately apparent. The aim of this article is to bring out the deeper implications of the preface, and to interpret the text in the light of them.
page 117 note 1 Proem, 2.
page 117 note 2 i. 22. The purely verbal echoes are άτερпέστερον/τερпνόν, κτῆμα ἐς όεί/κτῆμα пᾶσιν ἀνθρώпοις.
page 118 note 1 Preface to Shakespeare.
page 118 note 2 On the title-page of his translation.
page 118 note 3 Republic, 515a, 517a.
page 118 note 4 Proem, 2.
page 118 note 5 Idyll viiGoogle Scholar, Eclogues i, ix.Google Scholar The earliest prose allegory in Greek was the Choice of Herakles, by Prodikos, a contemporary of Sokrates.
page 118 note 6 ii. 7.
page 119 note 1 Ephesiaka, Book i.
page 119 note 2 Tintern Abbey, 96.Google Scholar
page 119 note 3 i. 10–II.
page 119 note 4 i. 15.
page 119 note 5 ii. 8.
page 119 note 6 ii. 9.
page 120 note 1 iv. 40.
page 120 note 2 i. 9–10.
page 121 note 1 i. 11–13.
page 121 note 2 i. 20.
page 121 note 3 iii. 15–19.
page 121 note 4 1. 30–31.
page 121 note 5 i. 29–30.
page 121 note 6 Marriage of Heaven and Hell.
page 121 note 7 iii. 19.
page 121 note 8 31. This Latin novel is generally thought to be an adaptation of a lost Greek original, possibly by Xenophon of Ephesos.
page 121 note 9 i. 32.
page 122 note 1 ii. 26–29.
page 122 note 2 ii. 2.
page 122 note 3 ii. 23.
page 122 note 4 ii. 2O.
page 122 note 5 ii. 34.
page 122 note 6 ii. 39.
page 122 note 7 iii. 20.
page 122 note 8 iii. 23.
page 122 note 9 Cf. ii. 34: ‘But she laughed at his love, and said she didn't want a lover who was neither one thing nor the other—neither a goat nor a man.’
page 122 note 10 iii. 34.
page 123 note 1 iv. 39.
