ἐπεισοδίων : see on 12, 1452 b 20 .

1449a30 ὡς ἕκαστα κοσμηθῆναι λέγεται is added to explain the main statement, τὰ ἄλλα . . . ἔστω εἰρημένα. For the general form of the sentence Vahlen compares Metaph. Γ 3, 1005 b 19

τὸ γὰρ αὐτὸ ἅμα ὑπάρχειν τε καὶ μὴ ὑπάρχειν ἀδύνατον τῷ αὐτῷ καὶ κατὰ τὸ αὐτό καὶ ὅσα ἄλλα προσδιορισαίμεθ᾿ ἄν, ἔστω προσδιωρισμένα

.

κοσμηθῆναι = ἐπικοσμηθῆναι. Certain elements in a play Aristotle dismisses as κόσμοι, decorative accessories rather than structural parts of the work. With this use of κοσμεῖν we may compare that of ἡδύνειν in 6, 1449 b 28 and 24, 1460 b 3 , to denote the addition of accessories designed to make the work agreeable to us.

4.20 Le nombre des Epiſodes s'augmenta auſſi avec le temps.] ¹

4.20 P. 73. THE EPISODES WERE MULTIPLIED.

The mistakes, into which some commentators have been led by annexing to the term , as applied by Aristotle to Tragedy, the modern and Epic idea of a digression, "hors-d'œuvre, intermede, morceau d'attache", have been well pointed out by Le Bossu, Tr. du Poeme Ep. liv. ii. ch. iv. v. vi. . But he appears to me to have gone too far, and to have fallen into the opposite error, by extending the word even to the most essential parts of the general action, to which he will not allow the to be, in any sense, added, united, &c.-but insists that they constitute that action, "comme les membres font la matiere des corps." With this idea, he had, indeed, some reason to call the word , "terme trompeur;" for, in this application of it, all sight of its etymological sense is lost. By all that I can gather from an attentive comparison of all the passages in which Aristotle uses the word, there appears to me no reason to suppose, that he any where meant to apply it indiscriminately to all the incidents of a fable; and it is for this reason that I have no where ventured to render it by the word incident, which would have been too general. Le Bossu's definition is," Les Episodes sont les parties necessaires de l'action etendues avec des circonstances vraisemblables." -The death of Cato, for example, in the Tragedy of Addison, answers to this definition. But would Aristotle have called that an Episode? I can scarce think it. The most I can conceive is, that he might have applied the term to the particular circumstances and detail of the action, which were the additions of the Poet's fancy. Le Bossu mentions, as an instance, the escape of Orestes by means of the ablution, in the Iphig. in Taur. of Euripides; which, he says, Aristotle calls an Episode. But, it is not the escape of Orestes, ( ) that Aristotle so denominates; this was an essential circumstance, and is expressly included by him in that general sketch of the plot, into which the were afterwards to be worked: and one of these Episodes was the detail of the manner in which the escape was effected, . - See NOTE 143 .

The word is, I think, used by Aristotle only in two senses: 1. The technical sense, in which it is clearly defined to mean, all that part, or, rather, those parts, of a Tragedy, that are included between entire choral odes. ¹ 2. It is evidently applied, in other passages, to the particular parts, subordinate actions, circumstances, or incidents, of the fable; but only, I think, to such, as were not essential parts of the Poet's plan or story, though they might be, and indeed ought to be, closely connected with it:-such, as, however important in the action, by contributing to promote the catastrophe, were yet no way necessitated by history, or popular tradition, or, in subjects of pure invention, by the Poet's general and determined plan, but depended on the invention or the choice of the Poet, who might, without any alteration in the , as Aristotle calls it, of his drama, have conducted the action to its catastrophe by different means.

The word , then, appears to me never to be used by Aristotle but in its proper and derivative sense, of something more or less adventitious or accessory-something inserted, superadded, introduced, at pleasure, by the Poet. But the Epic Poem, from its extent of plan, and the variety requisite to its purpose, admits, and requires, subordinate actions of greater length and slighter relation to the principal action of the fable, than is consistent with the shorter compass, closer unity, and different end, of Tragedy. As the Episodes of Epic Poetry, therefore, had more distinctness, entireness, and projection from the subject, if I may so express myself, than those of Tragedy, this, as it was the most obvious, became in time almost the only, application of the term; till, at length, from the frequent abuse of this Epic privilege of variety, and the , scarce any other idea was annexed to the word Episode, than that of digression, bors-d'œuvre, something foreign to the subject, or connected with it only by the slightest thread. Hence, too, in modern language, the word, I think, is applied only to entire actions of this additional, or digressive kind; not to the minuter circumstances or incidents which form the detail of an action. Thus, we call the whole story of Dido, in the Aneid, an Episode; but we should not give that name to any of the incidents by which the death of Turnus (an action essential to the fable,) is circumstantiated, though equally introduced and supplied by the Poet, and therefore equally, in Aristotle's sense, . And so much, as to his use of this term, in general. Whether these remarks are well or ill founded, will best appear, when we come to apply them to the particular passages in which the word occurs. In that now before us, it is used, I think, in the second of the two senses I mentioned; and its best comment seems to be another passage, cap. xxiv. where the critic observes the advantage which the Epic Poem has in the variety of its Episodes, and assigns the want of that variety, as one common cause of ill success in Tragic writing: – .

ἔτι δὲ τὸ μέγεθος ἐκ μικρῶν μύθων καὶ λέξεως γελοίας - ὀψὲ ἀπεσεμνύνθη: ἀποσεμνύνειν est ea magnificentiae specie circumdare, ut quidquid contrarium est amoveatur. sero id factum vere dicit Aristoteles, cum etiam in fabulis Aeschyli et Sophoclis nonnulla ridiculae dictionis vestigia compareant. plura haud dubie apud Thespin (eum enim potissimum hic videtur respicere) supererant, sed illud noli colligere ex his verbis, totam Thespidis dictionem ridiculam sive γελοίαν fuisse et omnes eius tragoedias ex fabulis perexiguis compositas esse. componitur enim h. 1. tragoedia plane exculta ( ἡ ἀποσεμνυνθεῖσα) et perfecta cum ea quae ex satyrorum ludicris mutaverat 8), et parvae fabulae ( μικροὶ μῦθοι) prae complexionibus rerum, quales in perfectis exhibentur tragoediis, dicuntur. haec igitur si de Thespide eiusque aequalibus intelligenda sunt, quod negari vix poterit, verba illa interiecta διὰ τὸ ἐκ σατυρικοῦ μεταβαλεῖν magni momenti sunt ad artis tragicae apud Athenienses primordia et incrementa accuratius definienda. inde enim cum appareat Thespidis fabulam ex satyrico genere ( ἐκ τοῦ σατυρικοῦ) iam mutasse ( μεταβαλεῖν), indidem censequitur ab eodem poeta satyrorum chorum ex tragoedia amandatum aliumque novo tragoediae generi magis convenientem substitutum esse, id quod aliis indiciis egregie confirmatur. conf. quae docte disputata sunt a Welckero in Appendice ad trilog. Aeschyl. p. 257-273. τό τε μέτρον ἐκ τετραμέτρου ἰαμβεῖον ἐγένετο: pergit tragoediam dramaticam inventore Thespide recens natam componere cum ea quam Aeschylus et Sophocles a se mire cultam praestiterunt. nimirum cum Thespis et qui 8) Id ipsum Thespide auctore factum esse ex aliis veterum locis colligitur. mutare οὐδετέρως positum esse neminem fugiet.aetate suppares plerumque in partibus cantu carentibus tetrametro trochaico uterentur, inde ab Aeschyli invento in eius locum senarius plerumque successit. si quis ex his verbis concludere vellet Thespidis aequaliumque tragoediis senarium omnino defuisse, is non minus erraret quam si quis hoc loco fretus diceret Aeschylum et Sophoclem tetrametrum e dialogo omnino removisse. neque vero id dicere vult philosophus, antiquissimam illam τραγικὴν ἀοιδὴν actore carentem tetrametris inclusam fuisse, a Thespidis autem aetate senarium successisse : nam si prisca τραγικὴ ἀοιδὴ tetrametris constaret et pro iis senarii succederent, ecce aderat tragoedia meris senariis composita, qualem nunquam exstitisse certum est. inde manifestum est non componi h. 1. tragoediam istam dithyrambicam et eam quam Thespis invenit, sed eam quae iam non tota canendo et saltando sed colloquiis etiam peragebatur (Thespidis), cum ea quae ad summum culturae gradum pervenerat. hoc ita se habere certius etiam collato ex Rhetoricis loco III, 1. pag. 1404 a 29. intelligitur: οὐδὲ γὰρ οἱ τὰς τραγῳδίας 9) ποιοῦντες ἔτι χρῶνται τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον, ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ καὶ ἐκ τῶν τετραμέτρων εἰς τὸ ἰαμβεῖον μετέβησαν διὰ τὸ τῷ λόγῳ τοῦτο τῶν μέτρων ὁμοιότατον εἶναι, οὕτω καὶ τῶν ὀνομάτων ἀφείκασιν ὅσα παρὰ τὴν διάλεκτόν ἐστιν. quae igitur ab uno Thespidis actore in narrationibus et in colloquiis cum choro habitis plerumque tetrametris adstricta pronuntiabantur, ea ab Aeschyli aetate duo illi actores versibus iambicis inclusa loquebantur, 9) Οἱ τὰς τραγῳδίας ποιοῦντες sunt earum tragoediarum scriptores quae vulgo vocantur, ut et tota sententia et ipsum verbum ποιεῖν monstrat. non recte me iudice Welckerus in Appendice ad trilog. Aeschyl. p. 239. statuit dithyrambum et iustam tragoediam uno τραγῳδίας nomine ab Aristotele comprehensam esse. locum ex Rhetoricis allatum cum ego aliter ac Welckerus intelligendum et pro certo duce habendum existimem, iis quoque quae idem vir ingeniosus in libro laudato p. 262 et 263. de hoc Poeticae loco exposuit, omni ex parte assentiri non possum.ita tamen ut hoc paulatim in consuetudinem converteretur : nam et in Aeschyli Persis (ea omnium quas etiamnum legimus tragoediarum antiquissima est) tetrametri sat multi in colloquiis admissi leguntur (vid. 155-245.703-758), neque a ceteris principum tragoediae scriptorum fabulis prorsus relegati sunt. verba igitur το τε μέτρον ἐκ τετραμέτρου ἰαμβεῖον ἐγένετο, item quae subsequuntur λέξεως δὲ γενομένης αὐτὴ ἡ φύσις τὸ οἰκεῖον μέτρον εὗρεν, non de mutatione subito facta accipere licet, sed de ea quae sensim sensimque et longo temporis intervallo invaluit. nam τὸ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτον τετραμέτρῳ ἐχρῶντο - τὴν ποίησιν: haec usque ad λεκτικῆς ἁρμονίας per parenthesin inseruntur, quod cum non vidissent priores editores, illi in subsequentibus ἔτι δὲ ἐπεισοδίων πλήθη verbum unde haec pendeant frustra circumspexerunt. dum scribit Aristoteles τὸ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτον - ποίησιν, non respicit priscam illam τραγικὴν ἀοιδὴν ex tempore fusam, cuius numerum fortasse ne ipse quidem satis cognitum habuit, sed eam dramaticae tragoediae formam quae non multo ante Aeschylum fuit. si totius loci habitum diligenter consideramus, hoc intelligimus, inde a §. 13. nonnisi de tragoedia dramatica (non etiam de lyrica ἀοιδῇ τραγικῇ quae fuit ante Thespin) loqui Aristotelem apparet, ita ut eam formam quae erat ante Aeschylum componat cum ea quae Aeschylo auctore et Sophocle effloruit. sed rursus cavendum ne illis διὰ τὸ σατυρικὴν εἶναι τὴν ποίησιν tantum tribuamus ut, aliis locis indiciisque quamvis repugnantibus, Thespidi et Choerilo Phrynichoque satyrorum chorum tribuamus: nam σατυρικὴν (motoriam levemque) quomodo intelligi velit adiecto καὶ ὀρχηστικωτέραν satis declaravit. de numero trochaico levioribus argumentis et saltatoriae poesi apto Aristoteles in Rhetoricis III, 8. p. 1408 b 36. haec exponit: ὁ δὲ τροχαῖος κορδακικώτερος· δηλοῖ δὲ τὰ τετράμετρα· ἔστι γὰρ τροχερός ῥυθμὸς τὰ τετράμετρα. λέξεως δὲ γενομένης: quamquam Thespidis tragoediae aliqua λέξις denegari nequit, unus tamen eius actor quasipro supplemento chori canentis saltantisque accipi potuit. id Aristoteles videtur fecisse, cum λέξιν eo nomine dignam Aeschyliae demum tragoediae duos actores inter sese colloquentes producenti concesserit. sed si quis λέξεως δὲ γενομένης de ipso Thespide dictum existimet, ego quidem non vehementer refragabor, sed vel sic non sequetur Thespidem illum esse qui tetrametris senarios substituerit: nam illa αὐτὴ ἡ φύσις τὸ οἰκεῖον μέτρον εὗρεν non ita intelligi necesse est, ut statim post λέξιν inductam numerus iambicus successerit, sed de hoc numero sensim sensimque in prisci locum recepto accipi possunt. - μάλιστα γὰρ λεκτικὸν -τὸ ἰαμβεῖόν ἐστιν: conf. Rhetor. III, 8. p. 1408 b 33. ὁ δὲ ἴαμβος αὐτὴ ἐστιν ἡ λέξις τῶν πολλῶν· διὸ μάλιστα πάντων τῶν μέτρων ἰαμβεῖα φθέγγονται λέγοντες. – καὶ ἐκβαίνοντες τῆς λεκτικῆς ἁρμονίας: nove sed apte communis sermonis habitum λεκτικὴν ἁρμονίαν appellavit. his repugnantia tradere videtur in Rhetoricis III, 8. p. 1408 b 32. ὁ μὲν ἠρῷος ( ῥυθμός) σεμνὸς καὶ λεκτικὸς καὶ ἁρμονίας δεόμενος, sed videtur tantum. nam eo loco ἁρμovía concentus est instrumentorum musicorum, quo carere hexameter ideoque nudo sermoni convenire ( λεκτικός) recte dicitur. itaque coniectura a Tyrwhitto ad Poeticam p. 136. proposita ( καὶ λεκτικῆς ἁρμονίας δεόμενος) et sane solerter excogitata carere poterimus. ἔτι δὲ ἐπεισοδίων πλήθη καὶ τὰ ἄλλα: verbum ἐγένετο ex initio §. 14. vel aliud cognatae significationis assumptum intelligendum est.