Poetics. Aristotle. ed. Henry James Pye. London. 1792.
The Poetic of Aristotle (Henry James Pye, revised 1792) (OCR draft) (English) (Henry James Pye's revised 1792 English translation, corrected against the 1788 first edition, aligned to the Kassel reference edition, and supplied with a selective apparatus of substantive 1788 readings.)
Provisional text from uncorrected OCR; expect errors.
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-33
1447a29
τοῖς λόγοις ψιλοῖς ἢ τοῖς μέτροις
=
τοῖς λόγοις ψιλοῖς ἢ τοῖς μέτροις ψιλοῖς: comp.
2, 1448 a 11
τοὺς λόγους καὶ τὴν ψιλομετρίαν.
ψιλοῖς, which in this connexion means
χωρίς ἁρμονίας, 'without melody' (v. Tyrwhitt ad loc. and Bon. Ind. 433b29), differentiates this group of imitative arts from the semi-musical arts considered later on, at the end of the chapter; comp.
Plato Phaedr. 278 C
ποίησιν ψιλὴν ἢ ἐν ᾠδῇ συντέθηκε, and
Laws 669 D
(quoted on 23).
λόγοις ψιλοῖς has been taken by several (including Bon. Ind. 862b31) to mean 'prose' in the present passage—a sense which
ψιλὸς λόγος has no doubt in a good many instances, e. g. in
Rhet. 3. 2, 1404 b 14, 33
. But there is nothing in the general meaning of the word to necessitate this interpretation here.
ψιλός means simply 'by itself', without some accessory, whatever the accessory thus excluded may happen to be (v. HSt. s. v.).
ἢ τοῖς μέτροις.
μέτρα has to be understood in the concrete sense of 'kinds of verse', i. e. as equivalent to
λόγοι ἔμμετροι or
λόγοι +
ῥυθμός. Aristotle remembers that the literary form of imitation is generally in verse, and accordingly adds
ἢ τοῖς μέτροις. The addition, however, has a sort of reflex influence on the general term
λόγοις which precedes it, and by the contrast it suggests gives the word for the moment the special sense of 'prose', as distinct from verse. Other instances of a general term with its meaning modified by what follows will be found in
22, 1458 a 28
and
25, 1460 b 11
. The logical scheme of the statement in 29—b 23 may be thus exhibited:—
Language without music
prose
verse
in some one kind of metre
in a plurality of metres Plato has the same division in
Laws 810 B
, where he is protesting against the divorce of poetry and literature from music:
πρὸς δὲ δὴ μαθήματα ἄλυρα ποιητῶν κείμενα ἐν γράμμασι, τοῖς μὲν μετὰ μέτρων τοῖς δ᾽ ἄνευ [ῥυθμῶν τμημάτων], δὴ συγγράμματα κατὰ λόγον εἰρημένα μόνον, τητώμενα ῥυθμοῦ τε καὶ ἁρμονίας, σφαλερὰ γράμμαθ ἡμῖν ἐστι παρά τινων καταλελειμμένα. Here
ἄλυρα corresponds to Aristotle's
ψιλοῖς,
τοῖς μὲν μετὰ μέτρων τοῖς δ᾽ ἄνευ to his
τοῖς λόγοις ἢ τοῖς μέτροις, and
κατὰ λόγον εἰρημένα μόνον τητώμενα ῥυθμοῦ τε καὶ ἁρμονίας to his
μόνον τοῖς λόγοις ψιλοῖς.
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-34
1447b09
ἀνώνυμος
:
Phys. 5. 2, 226 b 26
ἡ μὲν οὖν κατὰ τὸ ποιὸν κίνησις ἀλλοίωσις ἔστω τοῦτο γὰρ ἐπέζευκται κοινὸν ὄνομα . . . ἡ δὲ κατὰ τὸ ποσὸν τὸ μὲν κοινὸν ἀνώνυμον, καθ᾽ ἑκάτερον δ᾽ αὔξησις καὶ φθίσις. —
De anima 2. 7, 418 a 26
ὁρατὸν δ᾽ ἔστιν χρῶμά τε, καὶ λόγῳ μὲν ἔστιν εἰπεῖν, ἀνώνυμον δὲ τυγχάνει ὄν. —
H. A. 10. 40, 623 b 5
ἔστι δέ τι γένος τῶν ἐντόμων, ἑνὶ μὲν ὀνόματι ἀνώνυμόν ἐστιν. —
Pol. 3. 1, 1275 a 30
ἀνώνυμον τὸ κοινὸν ἐπὶ δικαστοῦ καὶ ἐκκλησιαστοῦ. For other instances see Bon. Ind. 69b2. Aristotle has often to speak of a class as being still without a name, because its existence has not yet been recognized by ordinary thought (comp. Bernays, Zwei Abhandl. p. 81).
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-35
1447b07
τυγχάνει οὖσα
. Similarly in
De sensu 5, 447 b 7
Thurot would restore
ὑπάρχει οὖσα for
υπάρχουσα.
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-5
NOTE 5.
1.7
P. 3. THE EPOPOEIA IMITATES BY WORDS ALONE, OR BY VERSE, &c.
In my translation of this perplexing passage, as far as the words—
ποιοιτο την μιμησιν—inclusively, I have given that sense which is now generally adopted, and in which almost all the commentators
1
are agreed. And it has certainly this advantage, that it seems to be the only consistent and intelligible version that can be given of the whole passage, as it now stands. But it appears to me, after the closest attention I have been able to give it, that, in the present condition of the text, no man can reasonably be confident of conveying the true meaning of Aristotle in any translation or explanation that he can give.
The passage sets out with an expression most unfortunately ambiguous, and demonstrated to be so, by the very confidence with which the ambiguity has been denied, by critics and commentators of great learning and sagacity, in favour of interpretations directly opposite to each other. Some, by the expression,
λογοις ψιλοις, have understood Aristotle to mean prose, and others, verse, without music.
—But this is far from being all the difficulty with which a translator has to struggle in this passage. In the words—
ἐιθ ἐνι τινι γενει ΧΡΩΜΕΝΗ των μετρων τυγχανεσα ΜΕΧΡΙ ΤΟΥ ΝΥΝ—there is, surely, something defective. All render this,
"or, making use of some one kind of metre, AS IT HAS DONE to this day."
2
And this, indeed, seems the only sense that can be given to the words as they stand. But it appears to me, that the original cannot, by any fair and warranted elliptical construction, be made to say this. Heinsius alone gives the fair and literal version;
"vel uno tantum genere utatur usque ad tempus nostrum" in plain English—
"whether mixing different metres together, or using some one kind of metre to this day." I am perfectly aware of the elliptical genius of the Greek language in general, and of Aristotle's style, in particular; yet to my ears, I confess, this English, nonsensical as it is, does not sound more strange than the Greek from which it is taken. Some word, or words, must, I should suppose, have been omitted between
τυγχανεσα, and,
μέχρι.
Again:—
οὐδεν γαρ ἂν ἐχοιμεν ΟΝΟΜΑΣΑΙ ΚΟΙΝΟΝ τες Σωφρονος και Ξεναρχε μιμες, &c.—I submit it to those who are versed in the Greek language, whether it seems probable, that, if Aristotle had meant to express the sense usually given to the words, (i. e.
"for we should otherwise have no common name to give to," &c.) he would have expressed it in that Greek? I can only say that I know of no similar example. But farther: the words are conditional—
οὐδεν γαρ ΑΝ ἐχοιμεν—and yet the condition is by no means clearly pointed out. The sense may be, and has been, variously supplied. It seems not improbable, that there is some omission between the words,
νυν, and
οὐδεν.—I am not able entirely to repel a suspicion—for I give it as nothing more—that the words,
μεχρι τε νων, may belong to this sentence, and the whole may originally have stood thus:—
ἐιτε μιγνυσα μετ᾿ ἀλληλων, ἐιθ ἐνι τινι γενα χρωμενη των μετρων τυγχανεσα. Μέχρι ΓΑΡ τε νων οὐδεν ΕΧΟΜΕΝ, &c. i. e.
"For we have hitherto no common appellation," &c.
3
So much, as to the condition of the text in this passage. The interpretation, which I have followed, has been very ably defended by several of the commentators, whose arguments I need not repeat; by none, I think, so powerfully as by
Paolo Beni
: but it requires considerable patience to follow him through the controversial zigzag of his captious and fatiguing logic.
The strongest support furnished by Aristotle himself to this extension of the term
Epopœia to all imitation, fiction, invention, &c. by words only, without music, whether in verse or prose, is, I think, to be found in
Sect. 6, Part I. [Original, cap. ix.]
For, if a history put into verse would, as he there asserts, be still a sort of history, we may infer, that an Epic Poem reduced to prose would, in his idea, have been still a sort, at least, of Poem. What he says in the conclusion of that section—that the Poet should be the
Ποιητης, or Maker, rather of his fable, than of his verse, has the same aspect. The same idea is also favoured by the extent which he has actually given to the term
Epopœia, in
Sect. 3, Part I. [Original, cap. ii.]
where it is expressly applied, not only to the serious Poetry of Homer, but to Poems of a comic, and even burlesque, character.
An Epic Poem without elevation is, nearly, as repugnant to modern ideas as a Poem without verse. It would not appear much more strange to give the title of Epic Poem to
Tom Jones, than to
Hudibras; to apply it to the
Telemaque, would, undoubtedly, appear much less strange.
It may be worth remarking, farther, that there is one circumstance, which, I think, would evidently tend to render this doctrine of Aristotle—if it was his doctrine—less extraordinary to the ancients, than it appears to us; and that is, that the difference between metre, and well-measured prose, though, no doubt, sufficient to make them readily distinguished by the ear, seems to have been less than it is with us. To what a degree of refinement they carried their rules for the application of the various poetical feet to their prose compositions, and with what fastidious delicacy of ear they discriminated one combination of syllables from another, is well known from the writings of
Cicero
,
Quintilian
,
Dion. Halicarnassensis
, &c. It would be thought a strange expression, were a modern writer to say, comparing the Orator and the Poet, that the latter was
"rather more confined by numbers:"
"numeris adstrictior paulo."
4
But, after all, the chief point of difficulty appears to me to lie, not in Aristotle's asserting, that Poetry, in his idea of the word, might subsist without verse, but in his giving the name of
Epopæia to such compositions as the Mimes of Sophron, and the Dialogues of Plato. But of this, in the next note.
In my translation of the words,
λογοις ψιλοις, I have ventured to depart from the common interpretation; but without any material change in the sense. They are generally understood to mean prose; and Dacier asserts positively, that,
"those two words are never joined by Aristotle or Plato in any other sense." If he meant, that, wherever
ψιλο is joined to
λογο, it is always used to exclude metre only, he is certainly mistaken. He had, himself, but just before, quoted a passage of Plato, in which the expression,
λόγοι ψίλοι, appears clearly to mean, words without melody. It is in his
second book De Legibus
, where, complaining, in his usual strain, of the separation of Poetry and Music, he says of the Poets, that they employ
ῥυθμον μεν και ῥηματα Μέλες χωρις, ΛΟΓΟΥΣ ΨΙΛΟΥΣ ΕΙΣ ΜΕΤΡΑ ΤΙΘΕΝΤΕΣ: μέλος δ'αν και ῥυθμες άνευ ῥηματων, ψιλη κιθαρισει τε και αυλησει προσχρωμενοι.
5
The words,
λογες ψιλες ἐις μετρα τιθεντες, Dacier translates, very strangely,
"mettant de la simple prose en vers." But what has turning prose into verse to do with Plato's complaint?—
ψιλοι, here, applied to
λογοι, answers evidently to
μελες χωρις, and excludes melody; just as, in
ψιλη κιθαρίσει και άυλησει, the same adjective answers to
άνευ ῥηματων, and excludes words. And this appears to me to be the obvious sense of
ψιλοις in the passage of Aristotle before us. By
λόγοις ψίλοις, I understand—not, words without metre, i. e. Prose—but, words without music.
6
It is, surely, most natural, and most to Aristotle's purpose, to apply the privative force of
ψιλος, here, to the two means of imitation, melody and rhythm; which are excluded in the
Epopœia, as words are, in the preceding instance of the flute and the lyre, and both words and music, in that of dance. And thus he has actually used the word, in the compound
ψιλομετρια, in the next chapter. The only difference is, that there he has joined the word
ψιλά to metre; here, to words in general. But in both places, the meaning is probably the same—i. e.
"without melody and rhythm."
The word
λογος is, plainly, used by Aristotle, in his first enumeration of the means of imitation, [
ἐν Ρυθμῳ και Λογῳ και Αρμονια.
cap. i.
] in the general sense, of language, discourse, or words, whether with, or without metre; as we say,
"the words of a song," &c. as opposed to the music
7
; and that, whether those words are verse, as in general they are, or prose, as in the songs of the
Messiah, and in the anthems of our church. And, that the word
λογά was purposely used by Aristotle in this latitude, is rendered highly probable by his varying the expression, where he speaks of Tragedy, Comedy, Dithyrambics, and Nomes, to which metre was essential, and substituting there, the word
Μετρῳ, for
Λογῳ.
8
It was natural, then, that he should say, when he came to speak of the Epic imitation, as distinguished from those he had before mentioned, that it imitates by words alone—i. e. without melody and rhythm, or, as we should say, without music. But he adds—
Μετροις—
"or verse." And why?—Probably, because he thought his expression would be neither clear, nor exact, without it: not clear, because the most usual meaning of
λογοι ψιλοι being prose, it might have been so taken here, and he might have appeared to say, at least, though no one could reasonably suppose he meant it, that the Epic imitates by prose only—
μονον τοις λόγοις ψιλοις —not exact, because, metre being, as he himself expressly says, a species, or part, of rhythm,
9
words, put into metre, were not, strictly speaking,
ψιλοι, that is,
χωρις Αρμονίας και ΡΥΘΜΟΥ. And this is exactly conformable to the expression of Plato in the passage above quoted, where he considers verse, even unaccompanied by music, as still consisting of rhythm and words, [
ΡΥΘΜΟΝ μεν και ῥηματα Μέλεις χωρις;]—plainly regarding metre as a species, or form, of rhythm.
I understand, therefore, the meaning of Aristotle, in this expression—
τοις λόγοις ψιλοις, ή τοις μετροις, to amount to this;—
"by words, without the other means of melody and rhythm, or at most, with so much of rhythm only, as is implied in the idea of metre without rhythm, in its musical sense of strict time." This sense of the words agrees perfectly with what follows—
οὐδεν γαρ ἂν ἐχοιμεν, &c. i. e.
"For otherwise—if we do not allow the Epopœia to imitate by words, in the general sense, whether prose or verse—we shall have no common name for Epic imitations in prose; and, if we do not allow it to imitate in either one or more species of metre, we shall have no common name for the same kind of imitation in Elegiac, or other verse."
The great advantage of this sense of
λόγοις ψιλοις is, that, while it leaves in full force that explanation of the whole passage, which I have followed, it removes, at the same time, or at least considerably weakens, what has always struck me as one of the strongest objections to it. Nothing appears to me more improbable, than, that Aristotle, advancing a doctrine so new, and so repugnant to the prevailing ideas of his own times, as, that a species of Poetry might subsist without verse, should chuse to present this novelty in the most offensive way, by beginning at once, and without any management, with the mention of prose: that he should say—
"The Epic Poem imitates by prose alone, or, by verse." If by
λόγοις ψιλοις he had meant prose, as Dacier and others contend, would he not naturally—one might say, unavoidably—have reserved those words for the last in the period? Would not the order, in short, have been this?—
"by verse alone; and that either of a single kind, or mixed—or even by prose." As I have rendered the words, prose is not mentioned at all, but implied only in the general expression of, words; as it is, equally, in his first enumeration of the means of imitation—
ἐν ῥυθμῳ και ΛΟΓΩΙ και άρμονια. At the worst, the idea of prose is not, as in the other version, presented before that of verse.
With respect to what I have said of the novelty of the philosopher's doctrine, and its remoteness from the common ideas of the ancients concerning the importance of metre to Poetry, I may refer even to his own way of speaking, in general, upon that subject. In his
Rhetoric
, for example, he says—
ῥυθμον δει ἐχειν του λογον, Μετρον δε, μη ΠΟΙΗΜΑ ΓΑΡ ΕΣΤΑΙ.—
"In prose-composition there should be rhythm, but not metre: for then it will be a POEM."
10
The reader may also be not displeased to see what Isocrates thought of the importance of verse, in a passage, which I have given in
NOTE 229
, respecting the privileges and advantages of Poetry.—Plato goes so far, as to compare Poetry, when reduced to prose, to a face, which, having no solid beauty of form and symmetry, has lost its only charm, when the bloom of youth, and delicacy of complexion, have deserted it.
11
But the zeal of Plato for depreciating Poetry is well known. He would, probably, have approved the indignation of one of the Fathers, who called it
"the Devil's wine." It must be confessed, however, that he has poured a great deal of this wine into his own writings; and were they to be reduced to plain prose, and stripped of that
άνθος—that bloom and colouring of poetic diction, and poetic fancy, by which they are so distinguished, I should be in some pain for the appearance they would make.
But, to return:—After all that is to be said in favour of that interpretation, which, on the whole, I have thought it best to follow, I must end this note, as I began it, by declaring my conviction of the imperfect condition of the original, and confessing my doubt, whether the true meaning of Aristotle, in this passage, has yet been, or ever will be, discovered.
6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-6
Ritter, cap. 1 § 6
ἡ δὲ ἐποποιία μόνον τοῖς λόγοις ψιλοῖς κτλ. nomine
ἐποποιία ita h. 1. usus est ut non tam quotidiani sermonis consuetudinem quam vocis originem respiceret, id quod paulo post excusavit. comprehendit enim eo nomine universam imitationem quae solis verbis (
ἔπεσι) peragitur (die Darstellung durch Worte oder Rede), sive fit illa pedestri oratione (
λόγοις ψιλοῖς), sive adstricta numeris (
τοῖς μέτροις), et rursus metris sive mixtis inter sese (
εἶτε μιγνῦσα μετ᾿ ἀλλήλων), sive eisdem
κατὰ στίχον repetitis (
εἴθ' ενί τινι γένει χρωμένη), quod adhuc (usque ad Aristotelis aetatem) factum est (
μέχρι τοῦ νῦν). ad hanc nostram interpretationem vindicandam primum dicemus quos intelligamus
λόγους ψιλούς. per eos orationem numeris adstrictam sed musica destitutam denotari cum temere a Buhlio pronuntiatum esset, cumque Hermannus prosam significari contra dixisset, Augustus Matthiae in diurn. Ienens. a. 1805. n. 223. p. 549. recte monuit nihil obstare, quo minus utrumque per sese
λόγοις ψιλοῖς exprimeretur. itaque ad litem dirimendam hoc quaeritur, particula
ἢ ante
τοῖς μέτροις utrum h. 1. explicandi (sive) an disiungendi (aut) vim habeat. disiunctivam esse tria commonstrant. primum quod additum est
μόνον ante
τοῖς λόγοις ψιλοῖς ἢ τοῖς μέτροις, id satis clare indicat epopoeiae nonnisi sermonem, non etiam saltationem et concentum competere, ut
ἐπεξήγησις qua id moneretur (
ἢ τοῖς μέτροις) sane inanis accederet; idem porroapparet ex verborum collocatione et structura: nam
τοῖς λόγοις ψιλοῖς est sermonibus qui nudi (sunt), ad quod cum accedat
ἢ τοῖς μέτροις articulo repetito (oder durch die Maasse), hoc ab eo quod praecedit diversum esse liquet, si quidem scripturus fuisset
τοῖς ψιλοῖς λόγοις ἢ μέτροις, si prius per alterum explicari voluisset. denique Sophronis commemoratio et Xenarchi atque Socraticorum dialogorum declarat, etiam prosae quasdam partes ad
ἐποποιίαν nove dictam referri.
λόγοι ψιλοὶ igitur hoc loco pedestrem denotant orationem, cui opponuntur
τὰ μέτρα, h. e. oratio numeris adstricta sed cantu destituta. conf. c. 6, 3. c. 9,9. Rhetor. III, 2. p. 1404 b 12. Problem. XIX, 31. numerum singularem eadem potestate praeditum infra posuit (§. 10.), sed ita ut excusatio ei licentiae fieret ex praecedentibus
ῥυθμῷ καὶ μέλει. Quae subsequuntur
καὶ τούτοις (intellige
μέτροις)
εἶτε μιγνῦσα κτλ., iis hoc pronuntiavit, per se quidem nihil obstare, quo minus in epopoeia quam dicit metris inter se mixtis quis utatur, sed id adhuc usu non venisse. verba
μέχρι τοῦ νῦν in hac disputatione quae
τὰ καθόλου consectatur melius abessent, sed indicium satis certum, quo haec ad interpolatorem remittantur, non adest, itaque cohibeo iudicium.