View:
By Chapter
Poetics. Aristotle. ed. Henry James Pye. London. 1792.
Table of Contents
Search the Perseus Catalog for:
Search the Perseus Catalog for:
Current edition Experimental
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.
Editions (4)
Περὶ ποιητικῆς (OCR draft) (Aristotle, Poetics. Immanuel Bekker, editor, Aristotelis Opera, volume 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1837.) — 18 focus
Ἔστι δὲ πάσης τραγῳδίας τὸ μὲν δέσις τὸ δὲ λύσις, τὰ μὲν ἔξωθεν καὶ ἔνια τῶν ἔσωθεν πολλάκις ἡ δέσις, τὸ δὲ λοιπὸν ἡ λύσις.
Λέγω δὲ δέσιν μὲν εἶναι τὴν ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς μέχρι τούτου τοῦ μέρους ὃ ἔσχατόν ἐστιν, ἐξ οὗ μεταβαίνει εἰς εὐτυχίαν, λύσιν δὲ τὴν ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆς τῆς μεταβάσεως μέχρι τέλους,
ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ Λυγκεῖ τῷ Θεοδέκτου δέσις μὲν τά τε προπεπραγμένα καὶ ἡ τοῦ παιδίου λῆψις, λύσις δ᾿ ἡ ἀπὸ τῆς αἰτιάσεως τοῦ θανάτου μέχρι τοῦ τέλους.
Τραγῳδίας δὲ εἴδη εἰσὶ τέσσαρα· τοσαῦτα γὰρ καὶ τὰ μέρη ἐλέχθη.
Ἡ μὲν πεπλεγμένη, ἧς τὸ ὅλον ἐστὶ περιπέτεια καὶ ἀναγνώρισις·
ἡ δὲ παθητική, οἷον οἵ τε Αἴαντες καὶ οἱ Ἰξίονες·
ἡ δὲ ἠθική, οἷον αἱ Φθιώτιδες καὶ ὁ Πηλεύς·
τὸ δὲ τέταρτον, οἷον αἵ τε Φορκίδες καὶ Προμηθεὺς καὶ ὅσα ἐν ᾅδου.
Μάλιστα μὲν οὖν ἅπαντα δεῖ πειρᾶσθαι ἔχειν, εἰ δὲ μή, τὰ μέγιστα καὶ πλεῖστα, ἄλλως τε καὶ ὡς νῦν συκοφαντοῦσι τοὺς ποιητάς· γεγονότων γὰρ καθ᾿ ἕκαστον μέρος ἀγαθῶν ποιητῶν, ἕκαστον τοῦ ἰδίου ἀγαθοῦ ἀξιοῦσι τὸν ἕνα ὑπερβάλλειν.
Δίκαιον δὲ καὶ τραγῳδίαν ἄλλην καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν λέγειν οὐδὲν ἴσως τῷ μύθῳ. Τοῦτο δέ, ὧν ἡ αὐτὴ πλοκὴ καὶ λύσις.
Πολλοὶ δὲ πλέξαντες εὖ λύουσι κακῶς·
δεῖ δὲ ἄμφω ἀεὶ κροτεῖσθαι.
Χρὴ δέ, ὅπερ εἴρηται πολλάκις, μεμνῆσθαι καὶ μὴ ποιεῖν ἐποποιικὸν σύστημα τραγῳδίαν. Ἐποποιικὸν δὲ λέγω τὸ πολύμυθον, οἷον εἴ τις τὸν τῆς Ἰλιάδος ὅλον ποιοῖ μῦθον.
Ἐκεῖ μὲν γὰρ διὰ τὸ μῆκος λαμβάνει τὰ μέρη τὸ πρέπον μέγεθος, ἐν δὲ τοῖς δράμασι πολὺ παρὰ τὴν ὑπόληψιν ἀποβαίνει.
Σημεῖον δέ, ὅσοι πέρσιν Ἰλίου ὅλην ἐποίησαν καὶ μὴ κατὰ μέρος, ὥσπερ Εὐριπίδης Νιόβην, καὶ μὴ ὥσπερ Αἰσχύλος, ἢ ἐκπίπτουσιν ἢ κακῶς ἀγωνίζονται, ἐπεὶ καὶ Ἀγάθων ἐξέπεσεν ἐν τούτῳ μόνῳ.
Ἐν δὲ ταῖς περιπετείαις καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἁπλοῖς πράγμασι στοχάζονται ὧν βούλονται θαυμαστῶς· τραγικὸν γὰρ τοῦτο καὶ φιλάνθρωπον.
Ἔστι δὲ τοῦτο, ὅταν ὁ σοφὸς μὲν μετὰ πονηρίας δὲ ἐξαπατηθῇ, ὥσπερ Σίσυφος, καὶ ὁ ἀνδρεῖος μὲν ἄδικος δὲ ἡττηθῇ.
Ἔστι δὲ τοῦτο εἰκός, ὥσπερ Ἀγάθων λέγει· εἰκὸς γὰρ γίνεσθαι πολλὰ καὶ παρὰ τὸ εἰκός.
Καὶ τὸν χορὸν δὲ ἕνα δεῖ ὑπολαβεῖν τῶν ὑποκριτῶν, καὶ μόριον εἶναι τοῦ ὅλου, καὶ συναγωνίζεσθαι μὴ ὥσπερ παρ᾿ Εὐριπίδῃ ἀλλ᾿ ὥσπερ παρὰ Σοφοκλεῖ.
Τοῖς δὲ λοιποῖς τὰ διδόμενα μᾶλλον τοῦ μύθου ἢ ἄλλης τραγῳδίας ἐστίν· διὸ ἐμβόλιμα ᾄδουσιν, πρώτου ἄρξαντος Ἀγάθωνος τοῦ τοιούτου. Καίτοι τί διαφέρει ἢ ἐμβόλιμα ᾄδειν ἢ ῥῆσιν ἐξ ἄλλου εἰς ἄλλο ἁρμόττειν ἢ ἐπεισόδιον ὅλον;
Περὶ ποιητικῆς (OCR draft) Perseus (Aristotle, De arte poetica liber. Rudolf Kassel, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965. Reference edition for passage alignment.) — 18 focus
ἔστι δὲ πάσης τραγῳδίας τὸ μὲν δέσις τὸ δὲ λύσις,
25
τὰ μὲν ἔξωθεν καὶ ἔνια τῶν ἔσωθεν πολλάκις ἡ δέσις, τὸ δὲ λοιπὸν ἡ λύσις·
λέγω δὲ δέσιν μὲν εἶναι τὴν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς μέχρι τούτου τοῦ μέρους ὃ ἔσχατόν ἐστιν ἐξ οὗ μεταβαίνει εἰς εὐτυχίαν ἢ εἰς ἀτυχίαν, λύσιν δὲ τὴν ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆς τῆς μεταβάσεως μέχρι τέλους·
ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ Λυγκεῖ τῷ Θεοδέκτου
30
δέσις μὲν τά τε προπεπραγμένα καὶ ἡ τοῦ παιδίου λῆψις καὶ πάλιν ἡ αὐτῶν
λύσις δ’ ἡ ἀπὸ τῆς αἰτιάσεως τοῦ θανάτου μέχρι τοῦ τέλους.
τραγῳδίας δὲ εἴδη εἰσὶ τέσσαρα (τοσαῦτα γὰρ καὶ τὰ μέρη ἐλέχθη),
ἡ μὲν πεπλεγμένη, ἧς τὸ ὅλον ἐστὶν περιπέτεια καὶ ἀναγνώρισις,
ἡ δὲ παθητική, οἷον οἵ τε
1456a
1
Αἴαντες καὶ οἱ Ἰξίονες,
ἡ δὲ ἠθική, οἷον αἱ Φθιώτιδες καὶ ὁ Πηλεύς·
τὸ δὲ τέταρτον † οης †, οἷον αἵ τε Φορκίδες καὶ ὁ Προμηθεὺς καὶ ὅσα ἐν ᾅδου.
μάλιστα μὲν οὖν ἅπαντα δεῖ πειρᾶσθαι ἔχειν, εἰ δὲ μή, τὰ μέγιστα καὶ πλεῖστα, ἄλλως τε
5
καὶ ὡς νῦν συκοφαντοῦσιν τοὺς ποιητάς· γεγονότων γὰρ καθ’ ἕκαστον μέρος ἀγαθῶν ποιητῶν, ἑκάστου τοῦ ἰδίου ἀγαθοῦ ἀξιοῦσι τὸν ἕνα ὑπερβάλλειν.
δίκαιον δὲ καὶ τραγῳδίαν ἄλλην καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν λέγειν οὐδενὶ ὡς τῷ μύθῳ· τοῦτο δέ, ὧν ἡ αὐτὴ πλοκὴ καὶ λύσις.
πολλοὶ δὲ πλέξαντες εὖ
10
λύουσι κακῶς·
δεῖ δὲ ἀμφότερα ἀρτικροτεῖσθαι.
χρὴ δὲ ὅπερ εἴρηται πολλάκις μεμνῆσθαι καὶ μὴ ποιεῖν ἐποποιικὸν σύστημα τραγῳδίαν—ἐποποιικὸν δὲ λέγω τὸ πολύμυθον— οἷον εἴ τις τὸν τῆς Ἰλιάδος ὅλον ποιοῖ μῦθον.
ἐκεῖ μὲν γὰρ διὰ τὸ μῆκος λαμβάνει τὰ μέρη τὸ πρέπον μέγεθος, ἐν
15
δὲ τοῖς δράμασι πολὺ παρὰ τὴν ὑπόληψιν ἀποβαίνει.
σημεῖον δέ, ὅσοι πέρσιν Ἰλίου ὅλην ἐποίησαν καὶ μὴ κατὰ μέρος ὥσπερ Εὐριπίδης,
ἢ Νιόβην καὶ μὴ ὥσπερ Αἰσχύλος, ἢ ἐκπίπτουσιν ἢ κακῶς ἀγωνίζονται, ἐπεὶ καὶ Ἀγάθων ἐξέπεσεν ἐν τούτῳ μόνῳ.
ἐν δὲ ταῖς περιπετείαις καὶ ἐν τοῖς
20
ἁπλοῖς πράγμασι στοχάζονται ὧν βούλονται θαυμαστῶς· τραγικὸν γὰρ τοῦτο καὶ φιλάνθρωπον.
ἔστιν δὲ τοῦτο, ὅταν ὁ σοφὸς μὲν μετὰ πονηρίας
δ’ ἐξαπατηθῇ, ὥσπερ Σίσυφος, καὶ ὁ ἀνδρεῖος μὲν ἄδικος δὲ ἡττηθῇ.
ἔστιν δὲ τοῦτο καὶ εἰκὸς ὥσπερ Ἀγάθων λέγει, εἰκὸς γὰρ γίνεσθαι πολλὰ
25
καὶ παρὰ τὸ εἰκός.
καὶ τὸν χορὸν δὲ ἕνα δεῖ ὑπολαμβάνειν τῶν ὑποκριτῶν, καὶ μόριον εἶναι τοῦ ὅλου καὶ συναγωνίζεσθαι μὴ ὥσπερ Εὐριπίδῃ ἀλλ’ ὥσπερ Σοφοκλεῖ.
τοῖς δὲ λοιποῖς τὰ ᾀδόμενα οὐδὲν μᾶλλον τοῦ μύθου ἢ ἄλλης τραγῳδίας ἐστίν· διὸ ἐμβόλιμα ᾄδουσιν πρώτου ἄρξαντος
30
Ἀγάθωνος τοῦ τοιούτου. καίτοι τί διαφέρει ἢ ἐμβόλιμα ᾄδειν ἢ εἰ ῥῆσιν ἐξ ἄλλου εἰς ἄλλο ἁρμόττοι ἢ ἐπεισόδιον ὅλον;
Poetics, Greek text (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's Greek text of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 18 focus
Ἔστι δὲ πάσης τραγῳδίας τὸ μὲν δέσις τὸ δὲ λύσις, τὰ
μὲν ἔξωθεν καὶ ἔνια τῶν ἔσωθεν πολλάκις ἡ δέσις, τὸ δὲ
λοιπὸν ἡ λύσις—
λέγω δὲ δέσιν μὲν εἶναι τὴν ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς
μέχρι τούτου τοῦ μέρους ὃ ἔσχατόν ἐστιν ἐξ οὗ μεταβαίνει
εἰς εὐτυχίαν, λύσιν δὲ τὴν ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆς τῆς μεταβάσεως
μέχρι τέλους·
μέχρι τούτου τοῦ μέρους ὃ ἔσχατόν ἐστιν ἐξ οὗ μεταβαίνει
εἰς εὐτυχίαν, λύσιν δὲ τὴν ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆς τῆς μεταβάσεως
μέχρι τέλους·
ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ Λυγκεῖ τῷ Θεοδέκτου
δέσις μὲν τά τε προπεπραγμένα καὶ ἡ τοῦ παιδίου λῆψις καὶ
πάλιν ἡ αὐτῶν, λύσις δ᾽ ἡ ἀπὸ τῆς αἰτιάσεως τοῦ θανάτου
μέχρι τοῦ τέλους.
δέσις μὲν τά τε προπεπραγμένα καὶ ἡ τοῦ παιδίου λῆψις καὶ
πάλιν ἡ αὐτῶν, λύσις δ᾽ ἡ ἀπὸ τῆς αἰτιάσεως τοῦ θανάτου
μέχρι τοῦ τέλους.
τραγῳδίας δὲ εἴδη εἰσὶ τέσσαρα (τοσαῦτα
γὰρ καὶ τὰ μέρη ἐλέχθη),
γὰρ καὶ τὰ μέρη ἐλέχθη),
ἡ μὲν πεπλεγμένη, ἧς τὸ ὅλον
ἐστὶν περιπέτεια καὶ ἀναγνώρισις,
ἐστὶν περιπέτεια καὶ ἀναγνώρισις,
ἡ δὲ παθητική, οἷον οἵ τε
Αἴαντες καὶ οἱ Ἰξίονες,
Αἴαντες καὶ οἱ Ἰξίονες,
ἡ δὲ ἠθική, οἷον αἱ Φθιώτιδες καὶ ὁ
Πηλεύς·
Πηλεύς·
τὸ δὲ τέταρτον ὄψις, οἷον αἵ τε Φορκίδες καὶ Προμηθεὺς
καὶ ὅσα ἐν ᾅδου.
καὶ ὅσα ἐν ᾅδου.
μάλιστα μὲν οὖν ἅπαντα δεῖ πειρᾶσθαι
ἔχειν, εἰ δὲ μή, τὰ μέγιστα καὶ πλεῖστα, ἄλλως τε
καὶ ὡς νῦν συκοφαντοῦσιν τοὺς ποιητάς· γεγονότων γὰρ καθ᾽
ἕκαστον μέρος ἀγαθῶν ποιητῶν, ἑκάστου τοῦ ἰδίου ἀγαθοῦ
ἀξιοῦσι τὸν ἕνα ὑπερβάλλειν.
ἔχειν, εἰ δὲ μή, τὰ μέγιστα καὶ πλεῖστα, ἄλλως τε
καὶ ὡς νῦν συκοφαντοῦσιν τοὺς ποιητάς· γεγονότων γὰρ καθ᾽
ἕκαστον μέρος ἀγαθῶν ποιητῶν, ἑκάστου τοῦ ἰδίου ἀγαθοῦ
ἀξιοῦσι τὸν ἕνα ὑπερβάλλειν.
δίκαιον δὲ καὶ τραγῳδίαν
ἄλλην καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν λέγειν οὐδενὶ ἴσως τῷ μύθῳ· τοῦτο
δέ, ὧν ἡ αὐτὴ πλοκὴ καὶ λύσις.
πολλοὶ δὲ πλέξαντες εὖ
λύουσι κακῶς·
λύουσι κακῶς·
δεῖ δὲ ἄμφω ἀεὶ κρατεῖσθαι.
χρὴ δὲ ὅπερ
εἴρηται πολλάκις μεμνῆσθαι καὶ μὴ ποιεῖν ἐποποιικὸν σύστημα
τραγῳδίαν—ἐποποιικὸν δὲ λέγω τὸ πολύμυθον—
οἷον εἴ τις τὸν τῆς Ἰλιάδος ὅλον ποιοῖ μῦθον.
εἴρηται πολλάκις μεμνῆσθαι καὶ μὴ ποιεῖν ἐποποιικὸν σύστημα
τραγῳδίαν—ἐποποιικὸν δὲ λέγω τὸ πολύμυθον—
οἷον εἴ τις τὸν τῆς Ἰλιάδος ὅλον ποιοῖ μῦθον.
ἐκεῖ μὲν γὰρ
διὰ τὸ μῆκος λαμβάνει τὰ μέρη τὸ πρέπον μέγεθος, ἐν
δὲ τοῖς δράμασι πολὺ παρὰ τὴν ὑπόληψιν ἀποβαίνει.
διὰ τὸ μῆκος λαμβάνει τὰ μέρη τὸ πρέπον μέγεθος, ἐν
δὲ τοῖς δράμασι πολὺ παρὰ τὴν ὑπόληψιν ἀποβαίνει.
σημεῖον
δέ, ὅσοι πέρσιν Ἰλίου ὅλην ἐποίησαν καὶ μὴ κατὰ
μέρος ὥσπερ Εὐριπίδης, ἢ Νιόβην καὶ μὴ ὥσπερ Αἰσχύλος,
ἢ ἐκπίπτουσιν ἢ κακῶς ἀγωνίζονται, ἐπεὶ καὶ Ἀγάθων ἐξέπεσεν
ἐν τούτῳ μόνῳ·
δέ, ὅσοι πέρσιν Ἰλίου ὅλην ἐποίησαν καὶ μὴ κατὰ
μέρος ὥσπερ Εὐριπίδης, ἢ Νιόβην καὶ μὴ ὥσπερ Αἰσχύλος,
ἢ ἐκπίπτουσιν ἢ κακῶς ἀγωνίζονται, ἐπεὶ καὶ Ἀγάθων ἐξέπεσεν
ἐν τούτῳ μόνῳ·
ἐν δὲ ταῖς περιπετείαις καὶ ἐν τοῖς
ἁπλοῖς πράγμασι στοχάζονται ὧν βούλονται θαυμαστῶς·
τραγικὸν γὰρ τοῦτο καὶ φιλάνθρωπον.
ἔστιν δὲ τοῦτο, ὅταν
ὁ σοφὸς μὲν μετὰ πονηρίας δ᾽ ἐξαπατηθῇ, ὥσπερ Σίσυφος,
καὶ ὁ ἀνδρεῖος μὲν ἄδικος δὲ ἡττηθῇ·
ὁ σοφὸς μὲν μετὰ πονηρίας δ᾽ ἐξαπατηθῇ, ὥσπερ Σίσυφος,
καὶ ὁ ἀνδρεῖος μὲν ἄδικος δὲ ἡττηθῇ·
ἔστιν δὲ τοῦτο
εἰκὸς ὥσπερ Ἀγάθων λέγει, εἰκὸς γὰρ γίνεσθαι πολλὰ
καὶ παρὰ τὸ εἰκός.
εἰκὸς ὥσπερ Ἀγάθων λέγει, εἰκὸς γὰρ γίνεσθαι πολλὰ
καὶ παρὰ τὸ εἰκός.
καὶ τὸν χορὸν δὲ ἕνα δεῖ ὑπολαβεῖν
τῶν ὑποκριτῶν, καὶ μόριον εἶναι τοῦ ὅλου καὶ συναγωνίζεσθαι
μὴ ὥσπερ Εὐριπίδῃ ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ Σοφοκλεῖ.
τῶν ὑποκριτῶν, καὶ μόριον εἶναι τοῦ ὅλου καὶ συναγωνίζεσθαι
μὴ ὥσπερ Εὐριπίδῃ ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ Σοφοκλεῖ.
τοῖς
δὲ λοιποῖς τὰ ᾀδόμενα οὐδὲν μᾶλλον τοῦ μύθου ἢ ἄλλης
τραγῳδίας ἐστίν· διὸ ἐμβόλιμα ᾄδουσιν πρώτου ἄρξαντος
Ἀγάθωνος τοῦ τοιούτου. καίτοι τί διαφέρει ἢ ἐμβόλιμα
ᾄδειν ἢ εἰ ῥῆσιν ἐξ ἄλλου εἰς ἄλλο ἁρμόττοι ἢ ἐπεισόδιον
ὅλον;
δὲ λοιποῖς τὰ ᾀδόμενα οὐδὲν μᾶλλον τοῦ μύθου ἢ ἄλλης
τραγῳδίας ἐστίν· διὸ ἐμβόλιμα ᾄδουσιν πρώτου ἄρξαντος
Ἀγάθωνος τοῦ τοιούτου. καίτοι τί διαφέρει ἢ ἐμβόλιμα
ᾄδειν ἢ εἰ ῥῆσιν ἐξ ἄλλου εἰς ἄλλο ἁρμόττοι ἢ ἐπεισόδιον
ὅλον;
Poetics, Greek text (Franz Ritter, 1839) (OCR draft) Experimental (Franz Ritter's 1839 Greek edition, corrected against OCR of the represented copy and aligned to the conventional Perseus chapter-and-subchapter sequence.) — 18 focus
Ἔστι δὲ πάσης τραγῳδίας τὸ μέν δέσις τὸ δὲ λύσις, τὰ μὲν ἔξωθεν καὶ ἔνια τῶν ἔσωθεν πολλάκις ἡ δέσις, τὸ δὲ λοιπὸν ἡ λύσις.
λέγω δὲ δέσιν μὲν εἶναι τὴν ἀπ' ἀρχῆς μέχρι τούτου τοῦ μέρους ὃ ἔσχατόν ἐστιν, ἐξ οὗ μεταβαίνει εἰς εὐτυχίαν, λύσιν δὲ τὴν ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆς τῆς μεταβάσεως μέχρι τέλους,
ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ Λυγκεῖ τῷ Θεοδέκτου δέσις μὲν τά τε προπεπραγμένα καὶ ἡ τοῦ παιδίου λῆψις, λύσις δ᾽ ἡ ἀπὸ τῆς αἰτιάσεως τοῦ θανάτου μέχρι τοῦ τέλους.] [
Τραγῳδίας δὲ εἴδη εἰσὶ τέσσαρα· τοσαῦτα γὰρ καὶ τὰ μέρη ἐλέχθη.
ἡ μὲν πεπλεγμένη, ἧς τὸ ὅλον ἐστὶ περιπέτεια καὶ ἀναγνώρισις·
ἡ δὲ παθητική, οἷον οἵ τε Αἴαντες καὶ οἱ Ἰξίονες·
ἡ δὲ ἠθική, οἷον αἱ Φθιώτιδες καὶ ὁ Πηλεύς·
τὸ δὲ τέταρτον, οἷον αἵ τε Φορκίδες καὶ Προμηθεὺς καὶ ὅσα ἐν
1
Αιδου.
μάλιστα μὲν οὖν ἅπαντα δεῖ πειρᾶσθαι ἔχειν, εἰ δὲ μή, τὰ μέγιστα καὶ πλεῖστα, ἄλλως τε καὶ ὡς νῦν συκοφαντοῦσι τοὺς ποιητάς· γεγονότων γὰρ καθ᾽ ἕκαστον μέρος ἀγαθῶν ποιητῶν, ἕκαστον τοῦ ἰδίου ἀγαθοῦ ἀξιοῦσι τὸν ἕνα ὑπερβάλλειν.
δίκαιον δὲ καὶ τραγῳδίαν ἄλλην καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν λέγειν οὐδὲν ἴσως τῷ μύθῳ· τοῦτο δέ, ὧν ἡ αὐτὴ πλοκὴ καὶ λύσις.
πολλοὶ δὲ πλέξαντες εὖ λύουσι κακῶς·
δεῖ δὲ ἄμφω ἀεὶ κροτεῖσθαι.]
Χρὴ δέ, ὅπερ εἴρηται πολλάκις, μεμνῆσθαι καὶ μὴ ποιεῖν ἐποποιικὸν σύστημα τραγῳδίαν. ἐποποιικὸν δὲ λέγω τὸ πολύμυθον, οἷον εἴ τις τὸν τῆς Ἰλιάδος ὅλον ποιοῖ μῦθον.
ἐκεῖ μὲν γὰρ διὰ τὸ μῆκος λαμβάνει τὰ μέρη τὸ πρέπον μέγεθος, ἐν δὲ τοῖς δράμασι πολὺ παρὰ τὴν ὑπόληψιν ἀποβαίνει.
σημεῖον δέ, ὅσοι πέρσιν Ἰλίου ὅλην ἐποίησαν καὶ μὴ κατὰ μέρος [, ὥσπερ Εὐριπίδης Νιόβην, καὶ μὴ ὥσπερ Αἰσχύλος], ἢ ἐκπίπτουσιν ἢ κακῶς ἀγωνίζονται, ἐπεὶ καὶ
2
Ἀγάθων ἐξέπεσεν ἐν τούτῳ μόνῳ.
ἐν δὲ ταῖς περιπετείαις καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἁπλοῖς πράγμασι στοχάζονται ὧν βούλονται θαυμαστῶς· τραγικὸν γὰρ τοῦτο καὶ φιλάνθρωπον.
ἔστι δὲ τοῦτο, ὅταν ὁ σοφὸς μὲν μετὰ πονηρίας δὲ ἐξαπατηθῇ, ὥσπερ Σίσυφος, καὶ ὁ ἀνδρεῖος μὲν ἄδικος δὲ ἡττηθῇ.
ἔστι δὲ τοῦτο εἰκός, ὥσπερ Ἀγάθων λέγει· εἰκὸς γὰρ γινεσθαι πολλὰ καὶ παρὰ τὸ εἰκός.
καὶ τὸν χορὸν δὲ ἕνα δεῖ ὑπολαβεῖν τῶν ὑποκριτῶν, καὶ μόριον εἶναι τοῦ ὅλου, καὶ συναγωνίζεσθαι μὴ ὡς παρ' Εὐριπίδῃ ἀλλ᾽ ὡς παρὰ Σοφοκλεῖ.
τοῖς δὲ λοιποῖς τὰ ᾠδόμενα οὐ μᾶλλον τοῦ μύθου ἢ ἄλλης τραγῳδίας ἐστίν· διὸ ἐμβόλιμα ᾄδουσιν, πρώτου ἄρξαντος Ἀγάθωνος τοῦ τοιούτου. καίτοι τί διαφέρει ἢ ἐμβόλιμα ᾄδειν ἢ ῥῆσιν ἐξ ἄλλου εἰς ἄλλο ἁρμόττειν ἢ ἐπεισόδιον ὅλον;
Translations (13)
Poetics (W. H. Fyfe) (OCR draft) Perseus (William Hamilton Fyfe's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, Loeb Classical Library, 1939 printing.) — 18 focus
In every tragedy there is a complication and a denouement.
1
The incidents outside the plot and some of those in it usually form the complication, the rest is the denouement.
I mean this, that the complication is the part from the beginning up to the point which immediately precedes the occurrence of a change from bad to good fortune or from good fortune to bad; the denouement is from the beginning of the change down to the end.
For instance, in the
Lynceus of Theodectes the complication is the preceding events, and the seizure of the boy, and then their own seizure; and the denouement is from the capital charge to the end.
2
Tragedies should properly be classed as the same or different mainly in virtue of the plot, that is to say those that have the same entanglement and denouement. Many who entangle well are bad at the denouement. Both should always be mastered.
There are four varieties of tragedy—the same as the number given for the
elements
3
—
first the complex kind, which all turns on reversal and discovery;
the
calamity play like the stories of Ajax and Ixion;
1456a
1
The fourth element is spectacle, like the
Phorcides
6
and
Prometheus, and all scenes laid in Hades.
One should ideally try to include all these elements or, failing that, the most important and as many as possible, especially since it is the modern fashion to carp at poets, and, because there have been good poets in each style, to demand that a single author should surpass the peculiar merits of each.
One must remember, as we have often said, not to make a tragedy an epic structure:
by epic I mean made up of many stories—suppose, for instance, one were to dramatize the
IIiad as a whole.
The length of the
IIiad allows to the parts their proper size, but in plays the result is full of disappointment.
And the proof is that all who have dramatized the Sack of
Troy
as a whole, and not, like Euripides, piecemeal, or the Niobe story as a whole and not like Aeschylus, either fail or fare badly in competition. Indeed even Agathon failed in this point alone.
In
reversals, however, and in
simple stories
7
too,
20
they admirably achieve their end, which is a tragic effect that also satisfies your feelings.
This is achieved when the wise man, who is, however, unscrupulous, is deceived—like Sisyphus—and the man who is brave but wicked is worsted.
And this, as Agathon says, is a likely result, since it is likely that many quite unlikely things should happen.
The chorus too must be regarded as one of the actors. It must be part of the whole and share in the action, not as in Euripides but as in Sophocles.
In the others the choral odes have no more to do with the plot than with any other tragedy. And so they sing interludes, a practice begun by Agathon. And yet to sing interludes is quite as bad as transferring a whole speech or scene from one play to another.
Arabic Poetics (Badawī edition, 1953) (OCR draft) (The ancient Arabic translation of Aristotle's Poetics in ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Badawī's 1953 edition.) — 18 focus
〈العقدة والحل؛ أنواع المأساة؛ مدى الخرافة والمأساة〉
وكل مديح فشىء منها حل، وشىء ما رباط؛ أما أشياء التى من خارج والأفراد من داخل فى بعض الأوقات فالرباطات التى من الابتداء إلى هذا الجزء، وهى تلك التى هى أقلية، ومنها يكون العبور إما 〈إلى〉 النجاح والفلاح، وإما إلى لا نجاح ولا فلاح. وأما الانحلال فهو كان من أول العبور إلى آخره، كحال رباط ثاوداقطس فى لونقى. أما الارتباط فالتى تقدمت فكتبت وأخذ الطفل وأيضاً والتى عليها؛ وأما الانحلال فذاك الذى هو من لونقى إلى الموت وإلى الانقضاء.
وأنواع المدائح أربعة أنواع (وهذا كله قيل إنه أجزاء أيضاً): فأحدها مقترن مؤلف؛ والآخر الإدارة والتقليب الذى فى الكل والاستدلال؛ والآخر هى انفعالية، بمنزلة أفثوطيدس وفيلوس أيضاً، والرابع فأمور فو〈ر〉 قيداس وأفرومثيوس، وما قيل لهما وهو أن التى فى الجحيم هى ممتحنة محزنة فى كل شىء.
وإن لم يكن هكذا فهى لا محالة فى أشياء عظام وكثيرة، وإنهم يهتمون ويقسمون الشعراء على جهة أخرى كما الآن؛ وذلك أنه لما كان فى كل جزء وحيد شعراء جياد حذاق، هم يؤهلون كل إنسان لخيره الخاص. وقد ينبغى ألا يكون هم يؤهلون كل إنسان للخيرالخاص به.
وقد كان يجب ألا يكون لا مديح آخر، وهذا أن يقال للخرافة. وهذا إذا كان موجوداً فتأليفته وحله هما بأعيانهما. وكثيرين عندما ألفوا وأقرنوا يحلون حلا حسناً، وإما على جهة رديئة إن أمسكا كليهما بالتبديل.
وقد يجب أن يتذكر مما قد قيل مرات كثيرة ولا يفعل تركيب المديح المسمى افوفيوايقون — وأعنى بايفوفيايقون الوزن الكثير الخرافات — مثل أن يعمل إنسان الخرافة التى من «إيليادا» كلها. وذلك أن الأجزاء هنالك تأخذ بسبب الطول العظم اللائق والأولى. وأما فى العياب فيكون النظير خارجاً عن الشىء كثيراً. والدليل هو هذا وهو أن بمبلغ الزيادة التى لا يليون عملوها بجملتها لا بالأجزاء، كما عمل أوريفيدس بناوبى وليس كما عمل اسكيولوس من أنهم إما أن يقعون وإما أن يجاهدون جهاداً رديئاً، من قبل أن هذا من الخيرات وقع.
فى الإدارات وفى الأمور البسيطة يستدلون ويتعرفون حقيقة هذه التى يريدون ويحبون على طريق الزهو، من قبل أن هذا هو مديحى ومن شأن محبة الانسان. وهذا موجود متى انخدع حكيم، بمنزلة سيوسيفوس مع الرذيلة وغلب الشجاع من الجائر. وهذه هى بالحقيقة أيضاً كما يقول فى الخير أيضاً بالحقيقة: وقد تكون كثيرة خارجة عن الحق.
وللصف الذى فى الجحيم من هؤلاء المنافقين، وأن يكون جزءاً للقول، وأن يجاهده مع لا على أنه مع أوريفيدس، لكن كما يجاذب مع سوفقلس. وكثير من التى تتغنى ليس فيها شىء آخر أكبر من الخرافة أو من المدح؛ ولذلك إنما تتغنى الدخيلة، وأول من بدأ ذلك أغاثن الشاعر. على 〈أنه〉 لا فرق بين أن يتغنى بالدخيلات، وبين أن يؤلف قول من أخرى إلى أخرى.
Poetics (S. H. Butcher, 1911) (OCR draft) Experimental (S. H. Butcher's English translation from Aristotle's Theory of Poetry and Fine Art, fourth edition, 1911.) — 18 focus
Every tragedy falls into two parts, Complication
and Unravelling or Dénouement.
Incidents extraneous
to the action are frequently combined with a portion of
the action proper, to form the Complication; the rest is
the Unravelling. By the Complication I mean all that
extends from the beginning of the action to the part
which marks the turning-point to good or bad fortune.
The Unravelling is that which extends from the
beginning of the change to the end.
Thus, in the
Lynceus of Theodectes, the Complication consists of the
incidents presupposed in the drama, the seizure of the
child, and then again * *
from the accusation of murder to the end.
There are four kinds of Tragedy,
the Complex, depend-
ing entirely on Reversal of the Situation and Recognition;
the Pathetic (where the motive is passion), such as the
tragedies on Ajax and Ixion;
the Ethical (where the
motives are ethical), such as the Phthiotides and the
Peleus.
The fourth kind is the Simple.
exclude the purely spectacular element>, exemplified by
the Phorcides, the Prometheus, and scenes laid in Hades.
The poet should endeavour, if possible, to combine all
poetic elements; or failing that, the greatest number and
those the most important; the more so, in face of the
cavilling criticism of the day. For whereas there have
hitherto been good poets, each in his own branch, the
critics now expect one man to surpass all others in their
several lines of excellence.
In speaking of a tragedy as the same or different, the
best test to take is the plot. Identity exists where the
Complication and Unravelling are the same.
Many poets tie the knot well, but unravel it ill.
Both arts, however, should always be mastered.
Again, the poet should remember what has been often
said, and not make an Epic structure into a Tragedy—
by an Epic structure I mean one with a multiplicity of
plots—as if, for instance, you were to make a tragedy
out of the entire story of the Iliad.
In the Epic poem,
owing to its length, each part assumes its proper
magnitude. In the drama the result is far from
answering to the poet's expectation.
The proof is that
the poets who have dramatised the whole story of the
Fall of Troy, instead of selecting portions, like Euripides;
or who have taken the whole tale of Niobe, and not a
part of her story, like Aeschylus, either fail utterly or
meet with poor success on the stage. Even Agathon
has been known to fail from this one defect. In his
Reversals of the Situation, however, he shows a marvellous
skill in the effort to hit the popular taste, —to produce a
tragic effect that satisfies the moral sense.
This effect is
produced when the clever rogue, like Sisyphus, is out-
witted, or the brave villain defeated.
Such an event is
probable in Agathon's sense of the word: 'it is probable,'
he says, 'that many things should happen contrary to
probability.'
The Chorus too should be regarded as one of the
actors; it should be an integral part of the whole, and
share in the action, in the manner not of Euripides but
of Sophocles.
As for the later poets, their choral songs
pertain as little to the subject of the piece as to that of
any other tragedy. They are, therefore, sung as mere
interludes, a practice first begun by Agathon. Yet
what difference is there between introducing such choral
interludes, and transferring a speech, or even a whole act,
from one play to another?
Aristotle on the Art of Poetry (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 18 focus
(4) There is a further point
to be borne in mind. Every tragedy is in part Complication
and in part Dénouement; the incidents before the opening
scene, and often certain also of those within the play,
forming the Complication; and the rest the Dénouement.
By Complication I mean all from the beginning of the story
to the point just before the change in the hero's fortunes;
by Dénouement, all from the beginning of the change to
the end.
In the Lynceus of Theodectes, for instance, the
Complication includes, together with the presupposed inci-
dents, the seizure of the child and that in turn of the parents;
and the Dénouement all from the indictment for the murder
to the end.
(5) There are
four distinct species of Tragedy-that being the number of
the constituents also that have been mentioned:
first, the
complex Tragedy, which is all Peripety and Discovery;
second, the Tragedy of suffering, e. g. the Ajaxes and Ixions;
third, the Tragedy of character, e.g. The Phthiotides and
Peleus.
The fourth constituent is that of 'Spectacle,' ex-
emplified in The Phorcides, in Prometheus, and in all plays
with the scene laid in the nether world.
The poet's aim,
then, should be to combine every element of interest, if
possible, or else the more important and the major part
of them. This is now especially necessary owing to the
unfair criticism to which the poet is subjected in these days.
Just because there have been poets before him strong in
the several species of tragedy, the critics now expect
the one man to surpass that which was the strong point
of each one of his predecessors.
Now it is right, when one speaks of a tragedy
as the same or not the same as another, to do so on the
ground before all else of their Plot, i. e. as having the same
or not the same Complication and Dénouement.
Yet there
are many dramatists who, after a good Complication, fail in
the Dénouement.
But it is necessary for both points of
construction to be always duly mastered.
(6) One should also re-
member what has been said more than once, and not write
a tragedy on an epic body of incident (i.e. one with a plurality
of stories in it), by attempting to dramatize, for instance,
the entire story of the Iliad.
In the epic owing to its scale
every part is treated at proper length;
with a drama, how-
ever, on the same story the result is very disappointing.
This is shown by the fact that all who have dramatized
the fall of Ilium in its entirety, and not part by part, like
Euripides, or the whole of the Niobe story, instead of a
portion, like Aeschylus, either fail utterly or have but ill
success on the stage;
for that and that alone was enough
to ruin even a play by Agathon.
Yet in their Peripeties, as
also in their simple plots, the poets I mean show wonderful
skill in aiming at the kind of effect they desire-a tragic
situation that arouses the human feeling in one,
like the
clever villain (e. g. Sisyphus) deceived, or the brave wrong-
doer worsted.
clever villain (e. g. Sisyphus) deceived, or the brave wrong-
doer worsted.
This is probable, however, only in Agathon's
sense, when he speaks of the probability of even improbabilities
coming to pass.
(7) The Chorus too should be regarded as
one of the actors; it should be an integral part of the
whole, and take a share in the action-that which it has
in Sophocles rather than in Euripides.
With the later poets,
however, the songs in a play of theirs have no more to do
with the Plot of that than of any other tragedy. Hence
it is that they are now singing intercalary pieces, a practice
first introduced by Agathon. And yet what real difference is
there between singing such intercalary pieces, and attempting
to fit in a speech, or even a whole act, from one play into
another?
Poetics (Thomas Twining, 1789) (OCR draft) Experimental (Thomas Twining's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1789 and aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 18.20 focus
As for other Poets-their choral songs have no more connection with their subject, than with that of any other Tragedy: and hence, they are now become detached pieces, inserted at pleasure: a practice first introduced by Agatho
1
. Yet where is the difference, between this arbitrary insertion of an Ode, and the transposition of a speech, or even of a whole Episode, from one Tragedy to another?.
XXII.
The Poetic of Aristotle (Theodore Alois Buckley) (OCR draft) Experimental (Theodore Alois Buckley's English translation, first published in 1850 and represented from the Henry G. Bohn 1857 printing; corrected against a second OCR and aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 18.20 focus
or the whole episode ?
[1]
1
Poetica Latine conversa (Franciscus Ritter, 1839) (OCR draft) Experimental (Franz Ritter's Latin translation, corrected against OCR of the represented copy and aligned to the conventional Perseus chapter-and-subchapter sequence.) — 18 focus
[Est autem omnis tragoedia partim convinctio partim solutio, externa scilicet et quaedam ex internis saepe convinctio, quod autem relicuum solutio.
dico autem convinctionem esse quae a principio usque ad eam partem quae postrema est, ex qua transitus ad felicitatem,
solutionem autem quae a principio transitus usque ad finem, quemadmodum in Lynceo Theodectis convinctio quae ante acta sunt et pueri captio,
solutio autem quae ab accusatione capitis usque ad finem.] [Tragoediae autem species quattuor sunt: tot enim etiam partes dictae sunt.
alia implicata, cuius totum est peripetia et agnitio;
alia pathetica, ut Aiaces et Ixiones;
alia moralis, ut Phthiotides et Peleus ;
quartum autem, ut Phorcides et Prometheus et quot in Orco.
praecipue igitur enitendum est ut omnia habeas, sin minus, maxima et plurima, praesertim ut nunc calumniantur poetas: nam cum in unaquaque specie boni poetae exstiterint, unumquemque in eo quo ipse excellit ab uno superari postulant.
iustum vero etiam tragoediam aliam et eandem dicere non fortasse ob fabulam : immo hoc, quarum eadem convinctio et solutio.
multi autem convinctione bene facta male solvunt.
decet autem utrumque
semper cum plausu excipi.] Oportet autem, quod saepe dictum est, meminisse nec committere ut tragoedia epica fiat compositio. epicam autem dico quae multis fabulis constet, ut si quis Iliadis totam fabulam tractaret.
illic enim propter longitudinem partes aptam magnitudinem accipiunt, sed in scenicis fabulis multum praeter exspectationem discedunt.
signum autem, quot excidium Ilii totum tractaverunt, et non ex parte [, ut Euripides Niobam, ac non ut Aeschylus], aut non stant aut tur.
male certant, quandoquidem etiam Agatho in hoc uno non stetit, sed peripetiis et simplicibus factis quod volunt mirifice consectantur: tragicum enim hoc est et humanum sensum tangit.
est autem hoc, cum prudens quidem sed pravitate infectus decipitur, sicut Sisyphus, et fortis quidem sed iniustus vincitur.
est autem id verisimile, quemadmodum Agatho dicit: nam verisimile est fieri multa etiam praeter similitudinem yeri.
atque chorum existimare debet unum ex actoribus, et partem esse totius, et una agere non ut apud Euripidem sed ut apud Sophoclem.
apud relicuos autem quae canuntur non magis ad fabulam quam ad aliam tragoediam pertinent; quapropter exodia canunt, posteaquam primus haec fecit Agatho. quamquam quid interest utrum exodia canas an orationem ex alia fabula alii inseras vel episodium totum?
La poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) Experimental (André Dacier's French translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1692.) — 18.20 focus
Dans tous les autres Poëtes, c'eſt encore pis, car les Chœurs n'appartiennent pas plus aux ſujets qu'ils traittent, qu'à toute autre Tragedie. C'eſt pourquoy ils ne chantent plus que des chanſons inſerées ſans aucun raport. Agathon eſt le premier qui a introduit ce mauvais uſage. Cependant quelle difference peut-on mettre entre chanter des chanſons inſerées, & tranſporter de longs diſcours d'une piece dans une autre, ou un Epiſode entier ?
CHAPITRE VINGTIEME.
Des ſentimens, & en quoy ils conſiſtent. Les lieux, où les Poëtes doivent puiſer, comme les Orateurs. Difference entre les choſes que traitent les Orateurs & celles que traitent les Poëtes. De l'action qui comprend la prononciation & le geſte. A qui il appartient d'en traiter. Inepte Critique de Protagoras contre Homere.
1.
Poetica d'Aristotile (Bernardo Segni, 1549) (OCR draft) Experimental (Bernardo Segni's 1549 Florentine Italian translation, aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 18 focus
Vttala Tragedia conſiſte in due parti. Vna è, che fichiama Nodo. Et l'altra fi chiama. Scioglimen to.
1
Le coſe, che ſono fuori d'eſſa Tragedia, & parte di quelle, che le fono dentroj, moltevolte ſono cotenute ſotto la parte del nodo ; & tutto il reſto viene ſotto la parte dello ſcioglimento.
Io chiamo Nodo effer' quel la parte, che da principio dura infino à quel punto, doue fi fa il trapaſſamento nella felicità, o nella miferia.
Scioglimento dico eſſer quell'altra, che dura dal principio di queſto trapaſſamento infino alla fine;come ap parifce nel Linceo di Teodette, doue le coſe ſeguiteui, & la preſa del figliuolo vanno ſotto il Nodo:& l'ac cufa della morte infino all'ultimo della Fauola vanno ſotto lo Scioglimento.
SS Vattro fono le le forti della Tragedia, che tante anchora ſono ſtate chiamate le fue parti;
2
delle quali quella ſi chiama intrecciata, doue Pimportanza d'eſſa e la Peripetia, & la Ricognitione.
L'altra è ſtata chiamata Affettuofa, come è la Tragedia detta gli Aiaci, & la detta gli Ifsioni.
Laterza ela morale, com'è la Tiotide, & come è Peleo.La quarta, come le Forcide, & come Prometheo; & tutte le altre, che fono appreſſo agli inferi.
Di tutte queſte forti fi debbono sforzare i Poeti d'eſſete abbodanti, & fenon di tutte, almeno delle principali, & delle piu che ſi puo;&& maſsimamente ne' tempi noftri, che gli huomini ſon pronti à taſſare i Poeti come queglische hauen do conoſciuto gli antichi Poeti buoni in tutte queſte parti, paia loro ragioneuole, che in ciascuna d'effe diſperse i Poeti debbino effere hoggi eccellenti.
Ma pafſando ad unaltra coſa, forſe non è ragioneuole, che dal la Fauola ſia chiamata la Tragedia una medefima, ô di uerfa;
ma queſta differenza debbe pigliarſi dal nodo, & dallo ſcioglimento d'efla:che nel vero alcuni Poeti, fono, che fanno il nodo bene, & fciolgonlo male.
Ma e fi debbe dall'una, & dall'altra parte eſcitarſi fauo re;& guardarſi maſsimamente, che il ſuggetto del Poe ma Heroico noi non lo mettiamo in ſuggetto Tragicolo chiamo fuggetto da Poema Heroicoquello, che cofitiene affar Fatole, com come ſe vn metteſſe tutto quel 1o della Iliade in una Tragedia;
perché quiui per la lun ghezza d'eſſo Poema v'hanno le parti grandezza conueniente:& nelle Fauole elle vi riuſcirebbono più lun ghe, che non richiede quella impreſa.
Segno e dició, che tutti quegli, che hanno finto in vna Fauola tutto l'eccidio di Troia, & non qualche parte e'ello (& ciò fu offeruato da Euripide nella Niobe, & nella Medea;
& non da Eſchilo) queſti tali, dico, ô e' fono deriſi nel Ior Poema;ò eſsi gareggiano infelicemente. Che inue ro Agatone per queſta ſola coſa caſcò, auuenga che fimili Poeti fi nella Peripetie, ſi nelle Fauole ſcempie conſeguiſchino il fine, che e' ſi ſono propoſti, marauiglioſamente:
concioſia, che egli appariſca il ſuggetto loro & Tragico,& molto humano.
Et queſto interuie ne, quando vn'huomo ſaggio, ma cattiuo (come fù Sififo) reſta ingannato; & quando vn' huomo forte, ma ingiusto, reſta abbattuto:
perchè tal caſo ha del verifimile, nel modo che dice Agatone, cioè, che egli è ve rifimile molte cofe accadere, che non fieno verifimili.
Debbeſi ſtimare, che il Choro fia vno degli Iſtrioni, & che e' ſia vna particella del tutto, & debbe fare le fue at tioni non come vſa Euripide, ma come vſa Sofocle:& agli altri ſieno piutoſto concedute le coſe, che s'appartengono à quella Fauola, che à vnaltra Tragedia.Onde è vſato, che è cantino coſe anneſſe alla materia.
Il principio della qual coſa dette Agatone. Che egli è inuero qualche differenza à cantare coſe congiunte alla Fauola, ò paſſare d'una in altra materia conuenentemente;ò dire l'intero Epiſodio. Quanto alle altre parti adunche ſe n'è detto à baſtanza. Reſtaci à dire hora del la Locutione, & del Diſcorſo. LA BOETICA
De poetica (Antonio Riccobono, 1587) (OCR draft) Experimental (Antonio Riccobono's Latin translation, first published in 1587; text represented from Immanuel Bekker's 1831 edition.) — 18 focus
Est autem omnis tragoediae una quidem pars nexus, altera vero solutio.
ea quidem quae sunt extra, et aliqua eorum quae intra, saepenumero sunt nexus, reliquum vero est solutio.
dico
antem
autem nexum esse eum qui a principio est usque ad eam partem quae postrema est, ex qua transit in prosperam fortunam vel adversam,
solutionem vero, quae est a principio transitus usque ad finem, ut in Lynceo Theodectis nexus sunt ea quae gesta sunt et pueri
sum- ptio
sumptio, at solutio, quae est ab obiectione mortis usque ad finem.
tragoediae species sunt quattuor: tot enim etiam partes dictae sunt.
una quidem implexa, cuius totum est peripetia et agnitio;
altera vero affecta, ut Aiaces et Ixiones;
tertia morata, ut Phthiotides et Peleus; quarta, ut Phorcides et Prometheus, et quaecunque apud inferos.
ac omnia quidem maximopere conandum est ut habeantur: sin autem, maxima et plurima, praesertim ut nunc criminationem obiiciunt poetis. cum enim bonì fuerint secundum unamquanque partem poetae, unum superare singulos in proprio bono dignum existimant.
iustum autem est et tragoediam aliam et eandem dicere nihil fortasse ob fabulam.
hoc vero intelligitur in iis quarum eadem plicatio et solutio est. multi qui bene plicarunt, solvunt male.
ac ambo semper cum plausu excipi oportet. et oportet, quod dictum est, saepe in memoriam revocare, et non efficere ut tragoedia sit epopoeica constitutio. dico epopoeicam, quae multas fabulas continet, ut si quis totam fabulam Iliadis conficiat.
ibi enim propter longitudinem partes assumunt convenientem magnitudinem. in dramatibus vero multum praeter existimationem accidit.
signum vero est, quod quicunque expugnationem Ilii totam fecerunt et non secundum partem, ut Euripides Hecubam et non ut Aeschylus,
vel labuntur vel male certant, siquidem Agathon in hoc solo lapsus est. in peripetiis autem et in simplicibus rebus assequuntur quod volunt,
per admirabile: tragicum enim hoc et gratum hominibus.
est autem hoc, quando sapiens quidem sed cum improbitate deceptus fuerit, ut Sisyphus, et fortis quidem sed iniustus superatus sit.
atque hoc verisimile est, ut Agathon dicit: verisimile enim est multa fieri etiam praeter verisimile.
et existimandum est chorum esse unum de histrionibus et partem totius, ac simul contendere, non ut apud Euripidem, sed ut apud Sophoclem. quae vero conceduntur aliis, magis sunt fabulae et tragoediae alterius.
quamobrem embolima canunt, cum primus Agathon rem talem inceperit. atqui quid interest, si quis embolima canat, vel dictionem ex alio in aliud accommodet?
De arte poetica liber (William of Moerbeke, ca. 1277) (OCR draft) Experimental (William of Moerbeke's medieval Latin translation, represented by the 1953 Aristoteles Latinus edition.) — 18 focus
Est autem omnis tragodie hoc quidem colligatio hoc autem solutio, que quidem extrinsecus quedam eorum que intrinsecus sepe colligatio, quod autem reliquum solutio.
Dico autem colligationem quidem esse eam que a principio usque ad partem que extrema est ex qua transit in eufortunium, solutionem autem esse eam que a principio transitionis usque ad finem ;
sicut in Lykei Theodecti; colligatio anteacta et pueri sumptio et iterum que ipsorum utique ab accusatione mortis usque ad finem. —
Tragodie autem species sunt quatuor, tot enim et partes dicte sunt,
hec quidem complexa, cuius totum est peripeteia et anagnorisis,
hec autem passionalis, velut que Aiaces et Ixyones,
hec vero moralis, velut que Fthiotides et Pileus;
quarta autem , velut que Forkides et Prometheus et quecumque in Aido. —
Maxime quidem igitur omnes oportet temptare habere, si autem non, maximas et plurimas, aliterque et ut nunc calumpniantur poetas ; factis enim secundum unamquamque partem bonis poetis, unumquemque in proprio bono volunt unum superexcedere.
Iustum autem et tragodiam aliam et eandem dicere nichil minus fabula, hoc autem, quorum eadem complicatio et solutio.
Multi autem complectentes bene solvunt prave ;
oportet autem ambo semper coadiuvare. —
Oportet autem, ut dictum est sepe, memorari et non facere epopoiicam consistentiam tragodiam. Epopoiicam autem dico quod multarum fabularum, velut si quis eam que Iliadis totam facit fabulam.
Ibi quidem enim propter longitudinem sumunt partes decentem magnitudinem, in drama- tibus autem multum preter existimationem evenit.
Signum autem; quicumque quidem Sinili totam poetizaverunt et non secundum partem, sicut Euripedes Niobem, et non sicut Eschylus; aut excidunt aut prave agonizant; quoniam et Agathon decidit in hoc solo. —
In peripetiis autem et in simplicibus rebus coniecturant que volunt mirabiliter.
Tragicum enim hoc et philanthropon ; est autem hoc, quando sapiens quidem cum nequitia seductus fuerit, sicut Sisyfus, et Andreius quidem, iniustus autem victus est.
Est autem hoc verisimile sicut Agathon dicit; verisimile enim fieri multa et preter verisimilitudinem. —
Et chorum autem unum oportet suscipere ypocritas et partem esse totius et coagonizari, non sicut Euripidi, sed sicut Sophocleo.
Reliquis autem data magis fabule quam alterius tragodie sunt ; propter quod embolima ducunt ante incipientem Agathonem huius. Et quidem quid differt aut embolima canere aut sl seriem ex alio in aliud coaptet aut episodium totum ?
Arabic Poetics (Abū Bishr Mattā; Tkatsch edition) (OCR draft) Experimental (The Arabic translation attributed to Abū Bishr Mattā, edited by Jaroslaus Tkatsch in 1928 and aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 18 focus
وكل مديح فشى منها حل وشى ما رباط اما اشيا التى من خارج والافراد من داخل فى بعض الاوقات فالرباطات التى من الابتدا الى هذا الجزو
وهى تلك التى هى اقليه ومنها يكون العبور اما النجاح والفلاح واما الى لا نجاح ولا فلاح واما الانحلال فهو كان من اول العبور الى اخره
كحال رباط ثاوداقطس فى اوعى اما الارتباط فالتى تقدمت فكتبت واخذ الطفل وايضا فالتى علٮها واما الانحلال فذاك الذى هو من اوعى الى الموت والى الانقضى
وانواع المدايح اربعة انواع وهذا كله قيل انه احرايضا
فاحها مقترن مولف والاحر الاداره والتقليب الذى فى الكل والاستدلال
والاخر هى انفعالية بمنزلة
افثوطيدس وفيلوس ايضا
والرابع فامور فوقيداس وافروميثوس وما قيل لهما وهو ان التى فى الجحيم
هى ممتحنة مجربة فى كل شى وان لم يكن هكذى فهى لا محالة فى اشيا عظام وكٮيرة وانهم يتهمون وٮٯسمون الشعرا على جهة اخرى كما الان وذلك انه لما كان فى كل جزو وحيد شعرا جياد حداق هم يوهلون كل انسان لخيره الخاص
وقد ينبغى الا يكون هم يوهلون كل انسان للخير الخاص به وقد كان يجب الا يكون لا مديح اخر ولا هذا ان يقال للخرافة وهذا اذا كان موجودا ڡٮالٮڡيه وحله هما باعيانهما
وكثيرين عند ما الفوا واقرنوا يحلون حلا حسنا
واما على جهة ردية ان امسكا كليهما ٮالتسديد
وقد يجب ان نتذكر مما قد قيل مرات كثيرة ولا تفعل ٮركٮں المديح المسمى افوفيوايقون واعنى بايفوفيايقون الوزن الكثير الخرافات مثل ان يعمل انسان الخرافة التى من ايليادا كلها
وذلك ان الاجزاء هنالك تاخذ بسبب الطول العظم اللايق والاولى واما فى القٮاٮ فيكون الٮظير خارج عن الشى كثيرا
والدليل هو هذا وهو ان بمبلغ الزياده التى لايليون عملوها بجملتها لا بالاجزا كما عمل اوريفيدس ٮيارى وليس كما عمل اسكٮوٮوس من انهم اما ان يقعون واما ان يجاهدون جهادا رديا
من قبل ان هذا من الخيرات وقع فى الارادات وفى الامور البسيطة يستدلون ويتعرفون حقيقة هذه التى يريدون ويحبون على طريق الزمز من قبل ان هذا هو مديحى ومن شان محبة الانسان
وهذا موجود متى انخدع حكيم بمنزلة سيوسيفوس مع الرذيلة وغلب الشجاع من الحاير
وهذه هى بالحقيقة ايضا كما يقول فى الخير ايضا بالحقيقة وقد يكون كثيرة خارجة عن الحق
وللصف الذى فى الجحيم من هولا المنافقين ويكون جزو للقول وان يجاهده مع لا على انه مع اوريفيدس لكن كما محادن مع سوفقلس
وكثير من التى ٮٮڡٮا ليس فيها شى اخر اكثر من الخرافة او من المدح ولذلك انما ٮٮڡا الدخيلة واول من بدا بذلك اغاثن الشاعر على لا فرق بين ان ٮٮفيا بالدخيلات وبين ان يولف قول من اخرى الى اخرى
Arabic Poetics (Abū Bishr Mattā; Tkatsch edition, unaligned) (OCR draft) Experimental (Tkatsch's edition of the medieval Arabic translation in its original, unaligned segmentation.) — 18 focus
وكل مديح فشى منها حل وشى ما رباط اما اشيا التى من خارج والافراد من داخل فى بعض الاوقات فالرباطات التى من الابتدا الى هذا الجزو
وهى تلك التى هى اقليه ومنها يكون العبور اما النجاح والفلاح واما الى لا نجاح ولا فلاح واما الانحلال فهو كان من اول العبور الى اخره كحال رباط ثاوداقطس فى اوعى اما الارتباط فالتى تقدمت فكتبت واخذ الطفل وايضا فالتى علٮها واما الانحلال فذاك الذى هو من اوعى الى الموت والى الانقضى
وانواع المدايح اربعة انواع وهذا كله قيل انه احرايضا
فاحها مقترن مولف والاحر الاداره والتقليب الذى فى الكل والاستدلال والاخر هى انفعالية بمنزلة افثوطيدس وفيلوس ايضا والرابع فامور فوقيداس وافروميثوس وما قيل لهما وهو ان التى فى الجحيم
هى ممتحنة مجربة فى كل شى وان لم يكن هكذى فهى لا محالة فى اشيا عظام وكٮيرة وانهم يتهمون وٮٯسمون الشعرا على جهة اخرى كما الان وذلك انه لما كان فى كل جزو وحيد شعرا جياد حداق هم يوهلون كل انسان لخيره الخاص
وقد ينبغى الا يكون هم يوهلون كل انسان للخير الخاص به وقد كان يجب الا يكون لا مديح اخر ولا هذا ان يقال للخرافة
وهذا اذا كان موجودا ڡٮالٮڡيه وحله هما باعيانهما
وكثيرين عند ما الفوا واقرنوا يحلون حلا حسنا واما على جهة ردية ان امسكا كليهما ٮالتسديد
وقد يجب ان نتذكر مما قد قيل مرات كثيرة ولا تفعل ٮركٮں المديح المسمى افوفيوايقون
واعنى بايفوفيايقون الوزن الكثير الخرافات مثل ان يعمل انسان الخرافة التى من ايليادا كلها
وذلك ان الاجزاء هنالك تاخذ بسبب الطول العظم اللايق والاولى واما فى القٮاٮ فيكون الٮظير خارج عن الشى كثيرا
والدليل هو هذا وهو ان بمبلغ الزياده التى لايليون عملوها بجملتها لا بالاجزا كما عمل اوريفيدس ٮيارى وليس كما عمل اسكٮوٮوس من انهم اما ان يقعون واما ان يجاهدون جهادا رديا
من قبل ان هذا من الخيرات وقع فى الارادات وفى الامور البسيطة يستدلون ويتعرفون حقيقة هذه التى يريدون ويحبون على طريق الزمز من قبل ان هذا هو مديحى ومن شان محبة الانسان
وهذا موجود متى انخدع حكيم بمنزلة سيوسيفوس مع الرذيلة وغلب الشجاع من الحاير
وهذه هى بالحقيقة ايضا كما يقول فى الخير ايضا بالحقيقة وقد يكون كثيرة خارجة عن الحق
وللصف الذى فى الجحيم من هولا المنافقين ويكون جزو للقول وان يجاهده مع لا على انه مع اوريفيدس لكن كما محادن مع سوفقلس
وكثير من التى ٮٮڡٮا ليس فيها شى اخر اكثر من الخرافة او من المدح ولذلك انما ٮٮڡا الدخيلة واول من بدا بذلك اغاثن الشاعر
على لا فرق بين ان ٮٮفيا بالدخيلات وبين ان يولف قول من اخرى الى اخرى
Notes on the current edition
Poetics
1.
Here ὥσπερ and μὴ ὥσπερ are exactly opposed to each other, as in the passage taken notice of, note [G].
2.
Τὰ ἀδόμενα οὐ μᾶλλον κ. τ. λ.
3.
Εμβόλιμα. These, both from this account of Aristotle, and the correspondent passage in Horace, appear to have been pieces of music performed between the acts, that were foreign to the subject of the tragedy, probably to gratify the audience, by introducing some favorite composition or performer.
Commentary
Commentary on the Poetics (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) (Ingram Bywater's English commentary on Aristotle's Poetics.) focus
1. mvp-aristotle-comment-642
1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-643
24
Ἔστι δὲ πάσης τραγῳδίας κτέ.
The fourth of these supplementary rules.
The complication and dénouement are of such paramount importance, that two tragedies with the same sort of complication and dénouement should be regarded as substantially the same, however different they may be in other respects.
It is quite possible to succeed in the one point and fail in the other;
but they are both of equal moment, and require equal attention from the poet.
This view of the drift of the paragraph assumes that the sentence
δίκαιον ... κρατεῖσθαι in
1456
a 7
should follow after
μέχρι τοῦ τέλους in
1455
b 32
. A mere definition of
δέσις and
λῦσις would have no place in these chapters, unless it were made to lead up to some practical precept, such as we have in
δεῖ δὲ ἄμφω ἀεὶ κρατεῖσθαι in
1456
a 10
.
1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-644
δέσις ... λύσις:
see on
15, 1454
b 37
.
1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-645
ἔξωθεν:
see on
14, 1453
b 32
.
1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-646
ἔνια τῶν ἔσωθεν πολλάκις.
It is not necessary to transpose
πολλάκις and insert it after the preceding
τὰ μὲν ἔξωθεν. The
δέσις, says
Aristotle, comprises not only the presupposed part of the story (
τὰ ἔξωθεν, or
τὰ προπεπραγμένα), but also in many instances (
πολλάκις) some portion of the action within the play. In the
Iph. Taur. the
δέσις extends as far as l. 391. In the
O. T. on the other hand the entire
δέσις is presupposed, the
λῦσις beginning with the opening scene.
3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-647
Λυγκεῖ:
see on
11, 1452
a 27
. The
Lynceus is cited as an instance of a play with a
δέσις partly presupposed and partly within the limits of the action of the piece.
3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-648
τοῦ παιδίου,
Abas, the child of
Lynceus and
Danaus' daughter
Hypermnestra.
4.
mvp-aristotle-comment-649
τραγῳδίας δὲ εἴδη κτέ.
The fifth of the supplementary rules. There are four species of Tragedy—each arising apparently (like the species of Democracy in
Pol. 4. 12, 1296
b27
) through the prominence in it of some one of the several elements in a play.
Aristotle insists that for an ideally good tragedy all these elements of interest are wanted, and that in so critical an age none can be neglected with impunity (
μάλιστα μὲν οὖν ἅπαντα δεῖ πειρᾶσθαι ἔχειν κτέ.
1456
a 3
). The species he is now talking of, or at any rate three out of the number, were probably no discovery of his; terms like
πεπλεγμένη τραγῳδία,
παθητική τραγῳδία, and
ἠθική τραγῳδία may very well be supposed to have been already sanctioned and current in the technical language of the theatre (comp. on
9, 1451
b33
). If the
περιπέτεια and
ἀναγνώρισις are 'the whole thing' (as we say), the play is
πεπλεγμένη; if the element of
πάθος is especially prominent, it is
παθητική; if it is mainly a portraiture of character, it is
ἠθική; and if it depends largely on the 'spectacle', it is 'spectacular'. This last species
Aristotle recognizes as a fact, but as there was no derivative from
ὄψις corresponding to our 'spectacular', he has to change his form of expression and speak not of the fourth 'species', but of the fourth element (
τὸ δὲ τέταρτον ὄψις), with instances, however, (
αἵ τε Φορκίδες κτέ.) relating to the species of drama in which the element of
ὄψις was prominent (see
J. of Phil. 14 p. 50
). These four elements have been already considered, though not quite so directly as
Aristotle's language would imply. The
περιπέτεια and
ἀναγνώρισις, which are assumed to go together (comp.
11, 1452
a32
), and the
πάθος have been distinguished already as elements in the
μῦθος (comp.
11, 1452
b9
); and they are counted here as two parts of the play because each is the prominent factor in a distinct species of tragedy. Two other parts are mentioned, the
ἤθη and the
ὄψις, apparently for the same reason. If nothing is said of the remaining 'parts' of Tragedy, the reason is obvious; there was no existing species of Tragedy that could be described as consisting mainly of
διάνοια or
λέξις or
μελοποιία.
Vahlen and others assume a lacuna in
b 34
(after
ἀναγνώρισις), on the supposition that
Aristotle must have had something to say about the
ἁπλῆ τραγῳδία. The
ἁπλῆ τραγῳδία, however, is not a species in
Aristotle's present sense of the term; and if we are to find a place for it in the text, the same logic would require a recognition of the
ἀήθης τραγῳδία (
6, 1450
a25
), as being the logical opposite of the
ἠθικὴ τραγῳδία in the passage before us. The insertion too, which is due to a desire to bring the present statement into line with that in
24, 1459
b8
, makes it necessary to adopt a highly improbable correction,
τερατώδες, in the context (
1456
a2
).
4.
mvp-aristotle-comment-650
τοσαῦτα γὰρ καὶ τὰ μέρη ἐλέχθη.
In lieu of
τὰ μέρη
Tyrwhitt suggests
τὰ μύθων, and
Ueberweg
τὰ μύθου or
τοῦ μύθου—which would mean, if I understand
Tyrwhitt's note correctly, that the
ἠθικὴ τραγῳδία is based on an
ἠθικὸς μῦθος. This, however, can hardly be right, if one remembers the sharp distinction drawn between
ἦθος and
μῦθος in
6, 1450
a4
. The present passage, due allowance being made for the Aristotelian brevity of expression, is intelligible enough in itself; the difficulty is to bring it into harmony with what is said elsewhere in other parts of the book.
τοσαῦτα γὰρ καὶ τὰ μέρη ἐλέχθη, no doubt, implies a previous statement, which it is impossible to find in the earlier chapters; and the passage in
24, 1459
b9
implies that a
ἁπλῆ as well as
πεπλεγμένη τραγῳδία had been recognized among the four species of Tragedy in the passage before us. Difficulties of this kind it is better to acknowledge than to remove at the cost of reforming the text. The truth is that
Aristotle is more human than we commonly suppose—that his memory is sometimes at fault, and also that he sometimes writes down what occurs to him at the moment, without stopping to reflect whether it is quite reconcilable with what he has said elsewhere. Though there are chapters in the
Poetics, more especially in the early part, which are models of careful drafting, I think it clear that, as the work advances, the statement is not always equally admirable, and that it would require a great deal of revision to make it consistent throughout. The difficulty in the reference
τοσαῦτα γὰρ καὶ τὰ μέρη ἐλέχθη is not unlike that in
ὥσπερ πρότερον εἴρηται in
6, 1450a 13
, and
ὅπερ εἴρηται πολλάκις in
18, 1456
a10
.
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-651
ἡ μὲν πεπλεγμένη κτέ.,
appositional to the preceding
εἴδη τέσσαρα (comp.
16, 1454
b20
;
21, 1457
b31
).
6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-652
1
παθητική.
No definition is given, as though the term (as also
ἠθική in the next line) were sufficiently understood without one.
6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-653
1456a
Αἴαντες:
see
Nauck,
TGF. p. 963 for a list of plays entitled
Αἴας.
6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-654
Ἰξίονες:
see
Nauck p. 965.
Φθιώτιδες, a play by
Sophocles (
Nauck p. 282
).
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-655
Πηλεύς.
The reference is perhaps to the
Peleus of
Sophocles (
Nauck p. 239
) rather than that of
Euripides (
Nauck p. 554
).
8.
mvp-aristotle-comment-656
τὸ δὲ τέταρτον ὄψις
is closer to the MS. reading than
Schrader's
τὸ δὲ τερατῶδες, which has been so generally approved by recent editors. The unmeaning
σησ of the MS. here, and again in
21, 1458
a15
, is but one remove from
ὄψις as it might be written in an uncial MS.
(OHC=OΨIC)
1
The illustrations no doubt refer to the 'kind' instead of the 'part' brought into prominence in the kind. A certain formal incongruence, however, is not uncommon with instances introduced by
οἷον (comp.
16, 1454
b25
;
25, 1461
a24
;
Eth. N. 4. 4, 1122
a27
;
Rhet. 3. 3, 1405
a35
);
Aristotle is often content to note the fact, and leave us to see its logical relation to what precedes.
8.
mvp-aristotle-comment-657
Φορκίδες,
a satyric drama by
Aeschylus (
Nauck p. 83
).
8.
mvp-aristotle-comment-658
Προμηθεύς,
probably another satyric drama by
Aeschylus (
Nauck p. 62
). There is a good deal to be said, however, in favour of
Bergk's suggestion (
Kl. Schr. 2 p. 753
) that the plural
Προμηθεῖς should be restored in the text.
8.
mvp-aristotle-comment-659
ὅσα ἐν ᾅδου.
The reference may perhaps be to plays like the
Ψυχαγωγοί of
Aeschylus (
Nauck p. 87
). In these last instances, owing to the nature of the subject and situation, the
ὄψις, the make-up (see on
6, 1449
b33
) of the strange personages introduced, may well be supposed to have been a great feature in the play.
Aeschylus, who was an innovator in matters of stage-apparatus (
Sommerbrodt, Scaenica p. 183
), is said to have made large use of this device:
Vita Aeschyli (p. 2 Dind.)
ταῖς τε γὰρ ὄψεσι καὶ τοῖς μύθοις πρὸς ἔκπληξιν τερατώδη μᾶλλον ἢ πρὸς ἀπάτην κέχρηται.
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-660
μάλιστα μὲν οὖν κτἑ.
A reminiscence of
Aristotle's language here may be traced in
Polybius
16. 20. 2
:
διὸ δεῖ μάλιστα μὲν πειρᾶσθαι πάντων κρατεῖν τῶν τῆς ἱστορίας μερῶν· καλὸν γάρ· εἰ δὲ μὴ τοῦτο δυνατόν, τῶν ἀναγκαιοτάτων καὶ τῶν μεγίστων ἐν αὐτῇ πλείστην ποιεῖσθαι πρόνοιαν.
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-661
ἑκάστου
is masculine, 'each of his various predecessors'—the genitive being dependent on
ἰδίου as in
5, 1449
b16
,
13, 1452
b33
, and
19, 1456
b35
. For the hyperbaton see on
6, 1449
a23
.
10.
mvp-aristotle-comment-662
δίκαιον κτέ.
This and the next sentence (
πολλοί ... κρατεῖσθαι) are probably out of place (see above, on
18, 1455
b24
).
10.
mvp-aristotle-comment-663
ἄλλην καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν λέγειν.
The point here, the conditions under which two tragedies may be said to be the same or not, is very like that in
De anima2. 4, 416
a5
χρὴ τὰ ὄργανα λέγειν ἕτερα καὶ ταὐτὰ τοῖς ἔργοις, and in
Pol.3. 3, 1276
a18
πῶς ποτε χρὴ λέγειν τὴν πόλιν εἶναι τὴν αὐτὴν ἢ μὴ τὴν αὐτὴν ἀλλ᾽ ἑτέραν.
10.
mvp-aristotle-comment-664
οὐδενὶ ἴσως τῷ μύθῳ,
'ob nihil aeque ac ob fabulam' (
Tyrwhitt). The dative
οὐδενὶ is to be taken with
λέγειν in the sense of 'by reason of' or 'on account of'; comp.
De anima2. 4, 416
a5
(quoted above). —
De sensu7, 447
b24
φαίνεται γὰρ τὸ μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ἐν ἡ ψυχὴ οὐδενὶ ἑτέρῳ λέγειν ἀλλ᾽ ἢ τῷ ἅμα. —
Eth. N.3. 12, 1117
b32
τῷ dὴ τὰ λυπηρὰ ὑπομένειν ἀνδρεῖοι λέγονται. The construction in
ἴσως τῷ μύθῳ ('equally with the story') is normal (
Kühner, Gr. Gr. 2. 1 p. 411
); but I am not able to point out an exact parallel. It may be compared, however, with that in
Eth. N.1. 4, 1096
a23
τἀγαθὸν ἰσαχῶς λέγεται τῷ ὄντι, and in
Plato
Parm.150 e
ἐξ ἴσου τῷ ἑνὶ dι᾽ ὅλου αὐτοῦ τεταμένη; and with the use of
ὁμοίως in
Pol.3. 11, 1282
b8
ὁμοίως ταῖς πολιτείαις ἀνάγκη καὶ τοὺς νόμους φαύλους ἢ σπουdaίους εἶναι, and elsewhere.
ἴσως has the sense of 'equally' in
Pol.4. 14, 1298
b23
(
Bekker), in
Plato
Laws805 c
, and in
Demosth. 10. 74
(v.
Weil ad loc.).
10.
mvp-aristotle-comment-665
τοῦτο δέ
(=
τοῦτο δ᾽ ἐστί) introduces an explaining clause of similar form in
De gen. et corr.1. 6, 323
a17
οὐ γὰρ οἷόν τε πᾶν τὸ κινοῦν ποιεῖν, εἴπερ τὸ ποιοῦν ἀντιθήσομεν τῷ πάσχοντι τοῦτο δ᾽ οἷς ἡ κίνησις πάθος.
10.
mvp-aristotle-comment-666
ἡ αὐτὴ.
Aristotle, thinking only of the identity of the two tragedies, omits to recognize the possible alternative
ἢ ἄλλη (comp.
19, 1456
b4
).
12.
mvp-aristotle-comment-667
κρατεῖσθαι
=
'obtineri'.
Vahlen illustrates this use of the word from
Pol.7. 13, 1331
b37
δεῖ δ᾽ ἐν ταῖς τέχναις καὶ ἐπιστήμαις ταῦτα ἀμφότερα κρατεῖσθαι, τὸ τέλος καὶ τὰς εἰς τὸ τέλος πράξεις, and
Dion. Hal.
5. 556
τῆς δὲ σαφηνείας καὶ τῆς ἐναργείας ἀμφοτέρους κρατεῖν ἀπεφηνάμην. Comp. also
Polyb.
16, 20. 2
(quoted above on
a 3
).
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-668
χρὴ δὲ κτέ.
The sixth of
Aristotle's supplementary rules.
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-669
εἴρηται πολλάκις.
Though some hint of this may perhaps be discerned in
5, 1449
b12
and
17, 1455
b15
, the reference here is clearly one of
Aristotle's oversights (see on
18, 1455
b32
); it is not true that he has more than once laid down the rule
μὴ ποιεῖν ἐποποιικὸν σύστημα τραγῳδίαν.
πολλάκις, 'more than once', is the opposite of
ἅπαξ (comp.
Meteor. 2. 3, 356
b27
) as well as of
ὀλιγάκις, just as
πολλά is the opposite of
ἕν as well as of
ὀλίγα (
Metaph. I 6, 1056
b23
).
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-670
μεμνῆσθαι καὶ μὴ ποιεῖν.
For the conjunction
Vahlen quotes
Eth. N.1. 7, 1098
a26
μεμνήσθαι δὲ καὶ τῶν προειρημένων χρὴ καὶ τὴν ἀκρίβειαν μὴ ὁμοίως ἐν ἅπασιν ἐπιζητεῖν.
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-671
σύστημα,
scil. πραγμάτων. The
μῦθος or story has been repeatedly described as a
σύστασις πραγμάτων (v.
6, 1450
a15, 32, b 32, etc.
).
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-672
1456a12
ἐποποιικὸν δὲ λέγω τὸ πολύμυθον,
scil. σύστημα. The common punctuation (with a full stop before, and a comma after it) makes this clause the beginning of a new sentence. It is clear, I think, that it is a parenthesis, and that the illustration
οἷον εἴ τις κτέ. (comp.
26, 1462
b2
) refers back to the principal statement,
μὴ ποιεῖν ἐποποιικὸν σύστημα τραγῳδίαν in
a 11
. For other illustrations at some distance from the statements to which they relate see on
7, 1451
a2
.
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-673
1456a
πολύμυθον.
The assumption here is that the story in the
Iliad is a
πολύμυθον σύστημα, one with a plurality of stories in it (comp.
24, 1462 b 8
). It is not easy to reconcile this with what we are told in a later chapter (
23, 1459
a30
) where the unity of story in the
Iliad is emphasized.
15.
mvp-aristotle-comment-674
ὅσοι πέρσιν Ἰλίου ὅλην ἐποίησαν.
We do not know to whom
Aristotle is referring; it is just possible that
Agathon may have been one of the number. For the tragedies entitled
Ιλίου πέρσις (or simply
Πέρσις) see on
23, 1459
b6
.
15.
mvp-aristotle-comment-675
Ἀγάθων.
Aristotle's sense of the importance of
Agathon is shown by his many quotations from him (
Bon. Ind. 4
b5
), as well as by the present and other references in the
Poetics (
9, 1451
b 21
;
15, 1454
b14
). The context (-21) implies that the pathos in
Agathon's situations was not always of the most legitimate kind; and in the next paragraph (29) he is said to have set a bad precedent in the treatment of the Chorus. But whatever his artistic shortcomings may have been, we have evidence enough even in
Aristophanes of his success with his own generation. There is a good deal of point, therefore, in what
Aristotle is saying in support of his rule (
μὴ ποιεῖν ἐποποικὸν σύστημα τραγῳδίαν), that
‘even
Agathon failed’ when he neglected it.
15.
mvp-aristotle-comment-676
ἐν τούτῳ μόνῳ,
‘in this, and in this alone’—a pregnant use of
μόνος like that in
De somno2, 455
a27
διὸ καὶ πᾶσιν ὑπάρχει τοῖς ζώοις καὶ γὰρ ἡ ἁφὴ μόνη πᾶσιν.
16.
mvp-aristotle-comment-677
καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἁπλοῖς πράγμασι.
I cannot think it necessary to bracket these words (with
Susemihl). As
περιπέτεια, which is the mark of the
‘complex’ story (
10, 1452
a16
; comp.
11, 1452
a32
), is directly suggestive of it,
ἐν ταῖς περιπετείαις is practically equivalent to
ἐν τοῖς πεπλεγμένοις πράγμασι.
Aristotle adds
καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἁπλοῖς πράγμασι, in order to make his statement cover the whole ground by including both forms of plot. The failure of these unsuccessful poets, he says in effect, was really due not to any fault of execution, but to an initial mistake in their choice of subjects; they forgot the limitations of the Drama, and undertook to dramatize a story too long and too complex for the purposes of the stage.
16.
mvp-aristotle-comment-678
ὧν βούλονται,
‘the effects they desire’. The kind of effect, which is explained in the next clause (
τραγικὸν γὰρ τοῦτο καὶ φιλάνθρωπον), may not be of the best order; but it is that which, in their anxiety to please their public, they wish to produce.
16.
mvp-aristotle-comment-679
τραγικὸν γὰρ τοῦτο καὶ φιλάνθρωπον.
For the change of number in
τοῦτο comp.
19, 1456
; it is the converse of that in
17, 1455 33
(comp.
Bon. Ind. 490
b17
).
Aristotle's theory is that the tragic situation should be
ἐλεεινόν—which implies that the sufferer does not deserve his misfortunes (
13, 1453
a
); he incidentally admits, however, that it may be only
φιλάνθρωπον (see on
13, 1452
b38
), as it is, for instance, when the sufferings of the wicked are put before us in such a way as to arouse a certain commiseration or human feeling for the sufferers. The later Tragedy would seem to have affected this inferior form of tragic motive.
17.
mvp-aristotle-comment-680
ἔστιν δὲ τοῦτο κτέ.
The illustrations which follow were probably taken from actual plays. The tragedies
Aristotle has in mind must have involved a strong
περιπέτεια with all the interest and excitement attending it; they failed, however (we are told), in spite of this and other attractions (comp.
στοχάζονται ὧν βούλονται θαυμαστῶς), through an initial mistake in their subject, which was one more fitted for an epic than a play.
18.
mvp-aristotle-comment-681
ἔστιν δὲ τοῦτο εἰκὸς:
comp.
25, 1461
b15
. The reference is to the sophistical saying of
Agathon (
fr. 9
Nauck
),
τάχ᾿ ἄν τις εἰκὸς αὐτὸ τοῦτ᾽ εἶναι λέγοι, βροτοῖσι πολλὰ τυγχάνειν οὐκ εἰκότα, which
Aristotle has examined in
Rhet. 2. 24, 1402 a 10
. There is some variation of text here, as another reading,
ἔστιν δὲ τοῦτο (καὶ) εἰκός, is believed to underlie the Arabic Version. With the
και the clause adds a further point in favour of these unsuccessful plays: the kind of incident just mentioned is said to be
‘probable also’. Without the
καί the clause involves a criticism or condemnation, not unlike that in
13, 1453 a 35
ἔστιν δὲ οὐχ αὕτη κτέ.,
‘this is probable, however, only in Agathon's non-natural sense of the word’. A qualification of this kind (introduced by
ὥσπερ καθάπερ) is found more than once in this same chapter (17 and 27), and again in
21, 1457
b24
; comp. also
Metaph. B 2, 998 a 2
ἅπτεται γὰρ τοῦ κανόνος οὐ κατὰ στιγμὴν ὁ κύκλος ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ Πρωταγόρας ἔλεγεν ἐλέγχων τοὺς γεωμέτρας. —
Rhet. 1. 5, 1361 a 4
πολλοὶ γὰρ ὑγιαίνουσιν ὥσπερ Ἡρόδικος λέγεται.
19.
mvp-aristotle-comment-682
καὶ τὸν χορὸν κτέ.
The seventh and last of these practical rules. It reappears in the well-known precept of
Horace
A. P. 193
Actoris partes chorus officiumque virile defendat, neu quid medios intercinat actus, quod non proposito conducat et haereat apte.
19.
mvp-aristotle-comment-683
Εὐριπίδῃ.
For the dative (conventionally rendered by
apud) comp.
Pol. 8. 5, 1339b8
οὐ γὰρ ὁ Ζεὺς αὐτὸς ἄδει καὶ κιθαρίζει τοῖς ποιηταῖς. —
Plato
Rep. 389 Ε
οἷα καὶ Ὁμήρῳ Διομήδης λέγει. —
Laws 706 C
Ὀδυσσεὺς γὰρ αὐτῷ [scil. Ὁμήρῳ] λοιδορεῖ τὸν Ἀγαμέμνονα. The tacit assumption here is perhaps this, that the choral songs in
Euripides, though no mere
ἐμβόλιμα (like those in the later Drama), were not always very closely connected with the action of the piece. A tradition of this criticism survives in the grammarians. The chorus in
Phoen. 1019
the scholiast condemns as irrelevant:
πρὸς οὐδὲν ταῦτα· ἔδει γὰρ τὸν χορὸν οἰκτίσασθαι τὸν θάνατον τοῦ Μενοικέως ἢ ἀποδέχεσθαι τὴν εὐψυχίαν τοῦ νεανίσκου. ἀλλὰ περὶ Οἰδίπου καὶ τῆς Σφιγγὸς διηγεῖται τὰ πολλάκις εἰρημένα. A more general condemnation is found in the scholiast on
Aristoph.
Ach. 443
:
καὶ διὰ τούτων τὸν Εὐριπίδην διασύρει. οὗτος γὰρ εἰσάγει τοὺς χοροὺς οὔτε τὰ ἀκόλουθα φθεγγομένους τῇ ὑποθέσει, ἀλλ᾽ ἱστορίας τινὰς ἀπαγγέλλοντας, ὡς ἐν ταῖς Φοινίσσαις, οὔτε ἐμπαθῶς ἀντιλαμβανομένους τῶν ἀδικηθέντων ἀλλὰ μεταξὺ ἀντιπίπτοντας. The Roman poet
Accius also must have been of the same opinion, to judge from the mutilated fragment of his
Didascalica in
Nonius 178, 23
sed Euripidis, qui choros temerius in fabulis * * *.
20.
mvp-aristotle-comment-684
τὰ ᾀδόμενα:
the choral, as opposed to
τὰ λεγόμενα, the spoken parts of the play. In
[
Demosthenes] 60. 9
τοὺς τῶν ἀδομένων ποιητάς is a way of describing the lyric poets; comp. also
Plato
Rep. 398 C
οὐκοῦν ὅσον γε αὐτοῦ λόγος ἐστίν, οὐδὲν δήπου διαφέρει [scil. τὸ μέλος] τοῦ μὴ ἀδομένου λόγου.
20.
mvp-aristotle-comment-685
ἐμβόλιμα:
‘carmina intercalaria’ (
Budaeus). The word is usually a term of chronology, as in
Herod. 1. 32 and 2. 4
. With the grammarians it seems to have meant
‘interpolated’:
Hesychius
ἐμβόλιμα ἔπη τὰ ὑπὸ τῶν γραμματικῶν ὡς ἀλλότρια καὶ νόθα ἀθετούμενα.
Cicero has the very similar word
ἐμβόλιον in
Ep. ad Q. Fr. 3. 1, 24
, in the sense of an
‘insertion’ or
‘interlude’ (v.
Ernesti,
Lex. tech. gr. p. 118
).
Twining's note on this passage is well worth quoting:
‘It is curious to trace the gradual extinction of the Chorus. At first, it was all; then, relieved by the intermixture of dialogue, but still principal; then, subordinate to the dialogue; then digressive, and ill connected with the piece; then borrowed from other pieces at pleasure—and so on, to the fiddles and act-tunes, at which Dacier is so angry.’
Remarques sur la poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) (André Dacier's French commentary on Aristotle's Poetics.) focus
1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-426
18.1
TOutē Tragedie est composée d'un nœud & d'un de-noiement. Les Incidens qui arrivent du dehors, & tres ſouvent même une partie de ceux que le Poëte tire de ſon ſujet, font le nœud, le reste est le denoiement.]
1
2.
mvp-aristotle-comment-427
18.2
F'appelle le nœud toute cette partie de la Tragedie, de-puis le commencement jusqu'à l'endroit où les choses changent de face.]
2
3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-428
18.2
Et j'appelle le denoiement tout ce qui est depuis l'endroit, où ce changement a commencé, juſqu'à la fin.]
3
4.
mvp-aristotle-comment-429
18.3
Par exemple, dans le Lyncée de Theodecte, tout ce qui arrive juſqu'aprés la prise de ce jeune Prince, c'est le nœud, & le denoüement commence à l'endroit, où cet enfant fait des re-grets ſur ſa mort.]
4
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-430
6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-431
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-432
8.
mvp-aristotle-comment-433
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-434
10.
mvp-aristotle-comment-435
11.
mvp-aristotle-comment-436
18.9
Il faut tacher de réüſſir dans ces quatre eſpeces, ou au moins dans la plus grande partie & dans les plus importantes.]
11
12.
mvp-aristotle-comment-437
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-438
14.
mvp-aristotle-comment-439
18.10
14. Il me semble auſi qu'il n'est pas juste de prétendre qu'une piece eft la même qu'une autre, ou qu'elle est differente, lorſque le sujet est le même ou qu'il est different. Il est à mon avis plus raisonnable de dire cela des pieces qui ont le même nœud & le mème denoiement, où dont le nœud & le denoüement font tout autres.]
14
15.
mvp-aristotle-comment-440
18.11
15. La plupart des Poëtes après avoir fort bien fait le nœud de leurs pieces, font fort mal le denoüement; mais il faut reüſſir également dans l'un & dans l'autre.]
15
16.
mvp-aristotle-comment-441
18.13
16. Sur toutes things, il faut ſe ſouvenir, comme on l'a déja dit ſouvent, de ne pas faire de la Tragedie un Tiſſu Epique, j'appelle Tiſſu Epique, un Tiſſu de plusieurs fables, comme fi quelqu'un mettoit toute l'Iliade dans une ſeule Tragedie.]
16
17.
mvp-aristotle-comment-442
18.14
17. Dans l'Epopée chacune de ces parties reçoit sa juſte grandeur, à cause de l'étenduë de ce Poëme; mais dans la Tragedie il en arrive tout autrement qu'on n'avoit penſe.)
17
18.
mvp-aristotle-comment-443
18.15
18. Et l'on peut se convaincre de cette verité par le mauvais fuccez qu'ont eu tous ceux qui ont mis, par exemple, toute la ruine de Troye dans une seule piece, & qui n'ont pas traité ce fujet-là par parties.]
18
19.
mvp-aristotle-comment-444
20.
mvp-aristotle-comment-445
21.
mvp-aristotle-comment-446
22.
mvp-aristotle-comment-447
18.16
22. Car d'ailleurs tous ces Poëtes font merveilleux dans les peripeties & dans les denoüemens ſimples)
22
23.
mvp-aristotle-comment-448
24.
mvp-aristotle-comment-449
18.17
24. Car le Tragique & l'agreable se trouvent, lorſqu'on voit, par exemple, qu'un homme ſage, mais méchant, est trompé, comme un Siſyphe; ou qu'un vaillant homme, mais injuste, est vaincu.]
24
25.
mvp-aristotle-comment-450
26.
mvp-aristotle-comment-451
18.18
26. Car comme dit Agathon, il y a de la vray-ſemblance qu'il arrive pluſieurs choses contre la vray-femblance.]
26
27.
mvp-aristotle-comment-452
18.19
27. Il faut auſſi que le Chœur joüe le rôle d'un Acteur, qu'il faſſe une partie du tout, & qu'il contribuë au progrez de Paction.]
27
28.
mvp-aristotle-comment-453
29.
mvp-aristotle-comment-454
18.20
29. Dans tous les autres Poëtes, c'est encore pis; car les Chœurs n'appartiennent pas plus aux sujets qu'ils traitent qu'à toute autre Tragedie; c'est pourquoy ils ne chantent plus que des chansons inferees.]
29
30.
mvp-aristotle-comment-455
31.
mvp-aristotle-comment-456
18.20
31. Cependant quelle difference peut-on mettre entre chanter des chansons inferées, & tranſporter de longs recits d'une piece dans une autre, ou un Epiſode entier.]
31
Commentary on the Poetics (Thomas Twining, 1789) (OCR draft) (Thomas Twining's notes on Aristotle's Poetics, aligned to the Kassel reference edition.) focus
148.
mvp-aristotle-comment-148
NOTE 148. p. 100.
18.2
I CALL COMPLICATION, ALL THAT IS BETWEEN THE BEGINNING OF THE PIECE, AND THE LAST PART, &c.
Aristotle is here, as usual, very short and dry in the information he bestows upon us concerning this
δέσις and
λύσις. I wish he had given us a definition of their meanings, instead of a mere designation of their places. One would suspect, on the first view, from the mention of a change
εἰς εὐτυχίαν only, (in which reading all the MSS. I think, agree,) from his instance, (if it be the same Tragedy as he before cited, cap. xi.) and from the common acceptation of the word
λύσις itself, that he was speaking only of those Tragedies in which the principal characters are extricated from the difficulties they were involved in, and the end is happy.
And, indeed, the way in which Le Bossu, and others after him, explain this
nœud and
denouement, leads naturally to this idea, and seems hardly consistent with their allowing, as they do, that the denouement may be either calamitous or prosperous
1
. For they explain the
nœud, or
δέσις, by
"obstacles à vaincre"—
"efforts contraires— i. e. aux efforts du heros pour l'execution de son dessein."—
"Les obstacles présentés s'appellent nœuds, et la maniere dont on les force, se nomme, denouement."
—This will do very well for Æneas, or Ulysses. But when Oedipus finds himself guilty of parricide and incest, and, from a state of regal dignity and happiness, becomes a wretched, blind, and banished vagabond—this is but a strange way of surmounting obstacles.
The truth is, that the obstacles of the
δέσις, or the knot, are those which are presented to the mind of the spectator; the difficulty overcome is that of seeing how the piece will terminate. And thus, indeed, the Abbé Batteux more accurately expresses himself elsewhere:—
"Le nœud dans le Cinna est, de sçavoir si Cinna tuera Auguste," &c.
2
The
λύσις is, to the spectator, the solution of the problem, "How will all this end?" And we may add, the more difficult the problem, the greater the pleasure of the solution.
It may be objected, that this is applicable only to those Tragedies, the subjects of which are totally unknown to the spectator; and it may be asked, "Where is the problem to be solved, in those dramas, which we have repeatedly seen and read, and of which we are perfectly acquainted with the catastrophe, and every incident that leads to it?" To this I can only answer, that it is a fact, and certainly a curious fact, that it makes little difference, or none at all, in the sympathetic interest which a spectator feels during the course of the action, whether he knows, or does not know, beforehand, how the piece will end.
"Quelque prévenu que l'on soit de la maniere dont tout va se réfoudre, la marche de l'action en écarte la reminiscence: l'impression de ce que l'on voit empêche de réfléchir à ce que l'on sçait; et c'est par ce prestige que les spectateurs qui se laissent toucher, pleurent vingt fois au même spectacle."
The term
λύσις, therefore, is as applicable to the calamitous catastrophe of the Oedipus, as to the satisfactory conclusion of the Iphigenia in Tauris. For Aristotle expressly gives these parts, as parts of every Tragedy.
Ἔστι δὲ ΠΑΣΗΣ τραγῳδίας, τὸ μὲν, δέσις, τὸ δὲ, λύσις.
149.
mvp-aristotle-comment-149
NOTE 149. p. 100.
18.3
THE LYNCEUS OF THEODECTES
Castelvetro has guessed, with some ingenuity, the subject and plot of this Tragedy, from
Hyginus, Fab. 45
. See Goulston's supplemental version, which is taken from him. It seems, however, very improbable, that a Tragedy should be denominated from a person who had no other share in the action, than that it passed under his roof. Dacier understands this to be the Lynceus mentioned before, cap. xi. All I see is, that his application of the word,
παιδίον, to Lynceus the husband of Hypermestra, cannot be admitted. The diminutive
παιδίον, is, I believe, never used but to signify a child. In this respect, certainly, Castelvetro's conjecture has greatly the advantage; as it has, also, in the explanation of
αἰτιάσεως τοῦ θανάτου, which, in Dacier, is terribly forced. See his version.
150.
mvp-aristotle-comment-150
NOTE 150. P. 100.
18.4
THERE ARE FOUR KINDS OF TRAGEDY, DEDUCIBLE FROM SO MANY PARTS WHICH HAVE BEEN MENTIONED.
It is incumbent on a commentator to state, as clearly as he can, the difficulties of his author, whether he be able to remove them, or not. This has not been done with respect to this passage, in any of the comments that I have seen.
Aristotle says,
Τραγῳδιας δε ειδη εισι τεσσαρα τοσαυτα ΓΑΡ και τα μερη ελεχθη. "There are four species of Tragedy; for so many also are the parts which have been mentioned." This is saying, as expressly as words can say it, that the four different species of Tragedy correspond to, and, of course, arise from, four different parts already mentioned. Now what are those parts? Four parts of quantity have indeed been mentioned; (cap. xii.) but these are quite out of the question. If we have recourse to what are called the parts of quality, these are six; and if, with Dacier, we reduce them to four, by throwing out the decoration and the music, the four that remain, i. e. fable, manners, sentiments, and diction, will furnish out, among them, only one of the species of Tragedy enumerated—that which is denominated
ηθικη. These, then, cannot be the four parts pointed at as the foundation of the four species. There remain only the parts which Aristotle calls
μερη ΜΥΘΟΥ: the parts, not of Tragedy, but of one of the essential parts of Tragedy—the Fable. These he enumerated in the 11th chapter, and to these, the commentators, in general, are agreed in understanding Aristotle to allude.
But the difficulty here is, that he refers to four parts mentioned, and here are only three—i. e.
περιπετεια, αναγνωρισις, (which he expressly calls
δυο μυθα μερη,) and, thirdly,
παθος:
ΤΡΙΤΟΝ δὲ, παθός. There is no mention of
ηθος, to furnish his third species, the moral Tragedy; nor, indeed, was it, by any means, to be expected there, where he is professedly enumerating the parts of the Fable.
Παθη, in the sense in which the word is there used, may, unquestionably, be considered as parts of the Fable;
ηθη, or manners, cannot.
3
4
5
The Abbé Batteux thinks the ethic species is tacitly implied, as the opposite, or negative, of the pathetic. The three parts of the fable,
περιπετεια, αναγνωρισις, παθος, give, directly, only two species of Tragedy; the two first constituting, (one, or both of them,) the complicated, (
πεπλεγμενην,) and the third, the pathetic, or disastrous, Tragedy. The two other species are only the negatives of these. If the fable is without revolution or discovery, the Tragedy is simple, as opposed to complicated;
6
if, without
παθη, or disasters, it is
ηθικη, as opposed to
παθητικη.
7
—Such is the explanation of this ingenious writer; which seems to be much favoured by the manner in which these species are arranged afterwards, when applied to Epic Poetry in cap. xxiv.; where we have—
η γαρ ΑΠΛΗΝ η ΠΕΠΛΕΓΜΕΝΗΝ, η ΗΘΙΚΗΝ η ΠΑΘΗΤΙΚΗΝ, δει ειναι; and, also, by the frequent opposition of
παθος and
ηθος,
παθητικον and
ηθικον, in antient writers
8
. It may, indeed, be objected, that this cannot be reconciled to Aristotle's words
τοσαυτα γαρ και τα μερη ΕΛΕΧΘΗ; which seem to refer clearly to four parts that had been all expressly mentioned. But, if we should suppose Aristotle here to consider that as said, which was only implied, and as explained, which was only hinted, we should, perhaps, take no liberty that is not warranted by the magisterial and elliptic brevity of his general style, and even by similar instances in his writings
9
.
But even this will not entirely remove the difficulty, while, by the parts alluded to, we understand Aristotle to mean only the
μερη μυθου of the 11th chapter: because, as I before observed,
ηθος could be neither mentioned, nor implied, as a part of the fable. Perhaps, therefore, he meant to use the word
μερη in a general sense, as he clearly does use it, cap. xxiv.
και τα ΜΕΡΗ, εξω μελ. και οψεως, τ'αυτα και ΓΑΡ περιπετειων δει, κ. τ. αλ.—where the
και ΓΑΡ shews, that the parts he had just mentioned included both the six constituent parts of Tragedy, and the three parts of the fable which he enumerates. If we understand
μερη in this way, the meaning will only be, that so many different parts, (of one kind or other,) have been mentioned (
ελεχθη,) from which these species may be deduced: these are, the three
μερη μυθου, which furnish the complicated, the simple, and the pathetic, species; and the second of the essential parts of Tragedy,
ηθος, which, though indeed it be a part of every Tragedy, admits, according to Aristotle's own account, of more or less, and, when predominant, may be characteristic of another species, the ethic, or moral Tragedy, naturally enough opposed to the pathetic.
I confess I see no other possible consistent sense that can be given to this passage, as we now read it: for four parts are here mentioned and four parts cannot be made out, if we confine ourselves to the
μερη ΜΥΘΟΥ in cap. xi.
Dacier seems to have perceived this; and his explanation agrees so far with mine, that he, also, makes
"la peripetie, la reconnoifance, la paffion, et les mœurs," the four parts that produce the four forts of Tragedy. But when, in order to reduce the seven parts, (i. e. fable, manners, diction, sentiments, discovery, revolution, disasters,) to the four which he wants, he rejects three, i. e. fable, diction, and sentiments, because they are common to all Tragedy, he makes a distinction for which there seems to be no foundation; the manners being equally included by Aristotle among those parts which are expressly
ΠΑΣΗΣ τραγωδιας μερη.
10
11
But, though all these parts necessarily belong, in some degree or other, to every Tragedy, any one of them may be so predominant, as to characterize a Tragedy, and give it, if we please, a specific denomination. Thus, there may be, and there is, such a species as the sentimental Tragedy, of which, in the critic's language,
το ολον Διανοια:—another, of which the language may be the most striking character—
ης το ολον η Λεξις; and he himself speaks of a fort of Tragedy that might very well be denominated,
η Οπτικη,
12
of which examples are not wanting on the modern stage. The Italian opera is a Tragedy,
ης το ολον εστιν η Μελοποιϊα. But Aristotle's business was not to enumerate all the different species which want of taste or judgment might produce, but those only which were considered as legitimate, and such as sound criticism would approve. Hence, he has recourse, for the formation of the four regular and authorised species, only to the two first and most important of the six constituent parts of Tragedy—the FABLE, and the MANNERS.
13
But after all, when we have made the best we can of the text in this passage, we must allow, I believe, that it is more for the credit of Aristotle to suppose it faulty. And that it is so, I am the rather inclined to think, as one difficulty still remains. The expression—"there are four forts of Tragedy; FOR so many parts have been mentioned"—seems clearly to imply, not merely, that those four forts are deducible, in some way or other, from those parts, but, as I at first observed, that they, respectively, arise from those parts, each of which produces its correspondent species of Tragedy. But this, as we have seen, is by no means the case. Of the four parts, only
παθος, and
ηθος, produce directly their correspondent species, the
παθητικη, and the
ηθικη. The other two parts,
περιπετεια, and
αναγνωρισις, denominate one species from their presence, (the
πεπλεγμενη,) and another, (the
απλη,) from their absence.
151.
mvp-aristotle-comment-151
NOTE 151. P. 100.
18.7
ANOTHER, THE MORAL
Ηθικη.
"Videant studiosi hujus libri, an intelligi debeant, et tanquam
So Victorius; and the observation seems just and important.απο κοινου repeti, et hic et infra, verba illa quæ in explicatione fabulæ implexæ posuit: intelligo, inquam, hæc
ης το ολον εστι περιπετεια και αναγνωρισις: et quod præterea utroque loco convenit, inde sumptum, [
i. e. παθη η ηθη] ut, quemadmodum inquit in describendâ illâ perplexa—
ης το ολον εστι περιπετεια και αναγνωρισις,—ita, in pathetica,—
ης το ολον εστι παθη; et in moratâ,
ης το ολον εστιν ηθη."
By
ηθικη, I cannot think, that the mere absence of
παθη is meant, as M. Batteux supposes, or, as Dacier and others take it, the mere moral tendency of the example.
14
I understand the
τραγῳδια ηθικη to be, in the most obvious and usual sense of the word, that kind of Tragedy,
ης το ολον εστιν ηθη—of which the manners are the predominant part; which seems sufficiently to imply the absence of that violent perturbation, deep distress, and terrible catastrophe, which distinguish the pathetic species. This obvious sense of
ηθικη is confirmed by Aristotle's exemplification in cap. xxiv. For there, he plainly opposes it to the
παθητικον of the Iliad, and applies it to the Odyssey;
15
a poem eminently characterized as a picture of life and manners. The word is also used, evidently, in the same sense in the Rhetoric; where the two species of the drama,
ηθικον, and
παθητικον, are mentioned, as being, each of them, accommodated to action, and preferred, on that account, by the players, as peculiarly favourable to the display of their mimetic powers.
16
Now this would not be the case, if by
ηθικη nothing more than a moral lesson and a virtuous example were intended. Yet this idea is by no means excluded by the other; and Victorius seems to have rightly adjusted this matter.
"Animadvertendum autem Tragoediam illam vocari moratam, quæ non solùm accuratè mores exprimit, sed eos etiam inducit probos; quod ipse significavit suprà, ubi de moribus differuit; primum enim præcepit ut
17
χρηστα ηθη fingerentur."
If it be objected, that, the delineation of manners being the peculiar province of Comedy, this account of the
Τραγῳδια ηθικη confounds the limits of these two opposite species of the drama; we may answer, that the moral, or rather mannered Tragedy, (for we seem to want a word here,) though allowed by Aristotle, was certainly not that which he himself considered as the best, or the most Tragic: yet, that even this was sufficiently distinguished from Comedy by the kind of manners which it imitated. They were to be, if possible, good, (
χρηστα,)—at all events they were to be, on the whole, serious
σπουδαια: whereas the object of Comedy, with respect to manners, as to every thing else, was the ridiculous. We must remember too, that, as I have before observed, the two dramas were by no means, in Aristotle's time, so rigorously separated as they now are. There were, then, but two dramatic muses, the muse of Tragedy, and the muse of Farce. Yet there is something between a flood of tears and a broad laugh; and as Farce obstinately refused to put any degree of restraint upon her muscles, Tragedy, who, as we have seen, was so accommodating, as even, occasionally, to approach to the very laugh of Farce, frequently condescended to dry her tears, and to put on, without scruple, the intermediate smile, which Comedy should have supplied.
152.
mvp-aristotle-comment-152
NOTE 152. P. 100.
18.8
AND, FOURTHLY, THE SIMPLE, SUCH AS------ AND ALL THOSE TRAGEDIES, THE SCENE OF WHICH IS LAID IN THE INFERNAL REGIONS.
Το δε τεταρτον, οιον, αι τε Φορκιδες, και Προμηθευς, και οσα εν αδου. The enumeration of these species in cap. xxiv. leaves no room to doubt the omission of the word
ΑΠΛΟΥΝ here.
Το δε τεταρτον, απλουν, οιον, &c.
The commentators have been much puzzled to discover, why all those Tragedies, that have for their subject
τα εν αδου, should be of the simple construction, and I have, indeed, been sometimes strongly inclined to believe, that the words,
και οσα εν αδου, were out of their place, and belonged to the second species; thus:
η δε Παθητικη, οιον, οι τε Αιαντες, και οι Ιξιονες, και οσα εν αδου. Why such subjects should belong to the disastrous class, no one can want a reason; and the words follow naturally, and pertinently, in this view, after the instance of Ixion. I have been surprised not to find so obvious a conjecture in any of the comments. Piccolomini, indeed, glances at it:—
"Non sò vedere, perchè più tosto in essempio delle Tragedie pathetiche, che delle semplici, non le habbia poste; havendo riguardo in ciò alle punition, e supplicii dell' inferno." p. 255. And it is very singular, that Dacier's note (N° 10.) is exactly such, as if he had himself made this conjecture; of which, however, he says nothing. But, after all, it is obvious enough, as Beni has observed, that, in these infernal Tragedies, no
περιπετειαι, no sudden reverse of circumstances, could well have place.
The comment of that acute Italian upon this passage, is the best I have seen, and will, perhaps, satisfy the reader, that no such conjecture is wanted.
"Clausula hæc sit;—ex istiusmodi fabulis exemplum duxisse Aristotelem ad illustrandam simplicem fabulam, quòd cum illi [sc. Tantalus, Sisyphus, &c.] in eas pœnas atque tormenta, non à prosperitate, quemadmodum Oedipus et alii plerique, devolverentur, sed ab initio ad finem usque illis jactarentur, peripetia aberat quàm longissimè. Imò verò, non modò repentè fortunæ commutatio haud fiebat, quod est proprium peripetiæ, verum etiam mutatio in decursu toto fiebat levissima ac propè nulla; ita ut ab initio ad finem usque, mira simplicitate flueret fabula. Ex quo fiebat, ut commodiùs ex aliis, in quibus repentè vulnera, cruciatus, et cædes contingebant, patheticæ duceretur exemplum, quàm ex iis, quibus nullus repentè cruciatus infligebatur, et tamen simplicitas de quâ dicebam mirificè apparebat."—Benii Comment. P. 372.
As to the reading itself,
εν αδου, it seems to be sufficiently confirmed even by a collation of blunders; for the MSS. exhibit,
εν αιδοι—εν αιδ—εν αιδες—εν αδου. Victorius seems to doubt, I know not why, whether there existed any such Tragedies. The
Σισυφος Πετροκυλιστης of Æschylus must, clearly, have been of this kind; and probably his
Ψυχαγωγοι. His Prometheus may be conceived to come the nearest of any Greek Tragedy extant to a specimen of this kind of drama.—Dacier has very properly reminded us here of what Aristotle had said, cap. xiii. of the old Poets—that
τους τυχοντας μυθους απηριθμουν—i. e. they took, as we say, any subject that came uppermost.
153.
mvp-aristotle-comment-153
NOTE 153. P. 102.
18.14
BUT IN THE DRAMA, THE EFFECT OF SUCH A PLAN IS FAR DIFFERENT FROM WHAT IS EXPECTED.
Πολυ παρα την υποληψιν αποβαινει:—literally, "it turns out very differently from what was expected, or supposed, by the Poet." The
υποληψις, the view, and expectation of the Poet, when he crowds so many incidents into his piece, is, that he shall make it interesting and pleasing by its variety. But the contrary happens. The necessity of not exceeding the usual length, and time of representation, reduces the proposed variety to a confused and huddled mass of incidents, not long enough dwelt on, or sufficiently detailed, to be either interesting, or clear. His Poem will be
καταπεπλεγμενου τη ποικιλια, as the critic well expresses it in another passage that should be compared with this.
18
Thus, the Poet, in this ill-judged attempt, is disappointed in the same manner as the architect, who aims at a beautiful variety by a multitude of small and crowded ornaments, which spoil the general effect, and, at the same time, are too many, and too minute, to afford pleasure by separate inspection. And thus,
πολυ παρα την υποληψιν αποβαινει; or, as the ingenious author of the Analysis of Beauty has expressed the same idea, in a chapter which affords no bad illustration of this passage from a sister art, "variety, when overdone, is a check upon itself."
19
Such appears to me to be the meaning of this passage, which, I think, has not been fully seen by any of the commentators.
154.
mvp-aristotle-comment-154
NOTE 154. P. 102.
18.15
As EURIPIDES, BUT NOT ÆSCHYLUS, HAS DONE &c.
This passage affords a good specimen of the distressing ambiguity that prevails so remarkably throughout this work. It fairly admits of two different constructions, and two different senses. It may be thus:
οσοι περσιν Ιλιου ολην εποιησαν και μη κατα μερος, (ωσπερ Ευριπιδης Νιοβην, η Μηδειαν, και μη ωσπερ Αισχυλος,) εκπιπτουσιν κ. τ. αλ. Or thus:
οσοι περσιν Ιλιου ολην εποιησαν, και μη κατα μερος (ωσπερ Ευρ. Ν. η Μ. [sc. κατα μερος εποιησε,] και μη ωσπερ Αισχ. [sc. ολην εποιησε.]) εκπιπ. κ. τ. αλ.—In the first of these ways, the censure will fall on Euripides; in the other, on Æschylus. Victorius contends for the first, but his reasons, though plausible, seem not decisive. The whole, as he observes, turns upon this—whether the
ωσπερ refers to the whole sentence—
ολην εποιησαν και μη κατα μερος,—or, only to the words immediately preceding, i. e.
κατα μερος. On the whole, the last construction, I think, offers itself most naturally; and it seems rather favoured, too, by the similar application of
μη ωσπερ, to the Poet censured, presently after; where, speaking of the Chorus, he says it should
συναγωνιζεσθαι, ΜΗ ΩΣΠΕΡ παρ Ευριπιδη, αλλ' ΩΣΠΕΡ παρα Σοφοκλει.—But this, after all, is one of those passages, where the
"æquato examine lances" are so nicely balanced, that a commentator might continue in suspense for ever, if the necessity of going on did not oblige him to turn the scale by a touch of his own hand.
20
155.
mvp-aristotle-comment-155
NOTE 155. P. 102.
18.16
FOR, IN REVOLUTIONS, AND IN ACTIONS OF THE SIMPLE KIND, THESE POETS SUCCEED WONDERFULLY IN WHAT THEY AIM AT; AND THAT IS, THE UNION OF TRAGIC EFFECT WITH MORAL TENDENCY, &C.
Those annotators who make the words,
Εν δε ταις περιπετειαις—the beginning of a separate precept relative to the use of the wonderful, have the natural construction of the text, and the uniform reading of all the MSS. against them. The natural and obvious construction, surely, is,
εν τουτῳ μονῳ· εν ΔΕ ταις περ. κ. τ. αλ. And this is also confirmed by the mention of Agatho again, presently afterwards. All the MSS. too, it seems, give
θαυμαστως, which can never be forced into the sense of
"per admirabile."
21
The alteration proposed by Heinfius—
στοχαζεται, and
βουλεται—in order to make this refer exclusively to Agatho, seems unnecessary.
Στοχαζονται refers, very naturally, to Agatho in conjunction with the other Poets just mentioned, whose mistake, and whose failure, were the same.
I have ventured to render this passage in a manner somewhat different from any translator or commentator that I have seen.
Τραγικον γαρ τουτο, και φιλανθρωπον. The question is, to what
τουτο refers? The commentators are divided. It appears to me, that it refers to the purpose, at which these Poets are said to have aimed; and the
τουτο, which follows, explains the
τραγικον και φιλανθρωπον.—
τουτο ΓΑΡ—"for this (i. e. which they aim at,) is both Tragic and Moral." The reader will see how exactly what follows suits this sense; and how this passage helps to confirm the sense given to the word
φιλανθρωπον, in cap. xiii. [See NOTE 94.] where,
ελεεινον και φοβερον, is plainly equivalent to
τραγικον here. The difficulty was, to reconcile these two effects. Aristotle's expression,
στοχαζονται ΘΑΥΜΑΣΤΩΣ—"surprisingly well"—implies this difficulty, and, that he does not speak of the practice as perfectly agreeable to his own theory of the Tragic drama. In the subjects here instanced, there was the
φιλανθρωπον, because the
αδικια and
πονηρια were punished: and, at the same time, the
τραγικον, though not amounting to what the critic required, was not wanting, because there was the unexpected reverse of fortune, a calamitous event,
παθη, &c.
22
The persons suffering, too, were distinguished by eminent wisdom and courage; and though such characters are not what Aristotle recommends as the fittest for Tragic purposes,
23
yet, by the substitution of admirable and splendid, for moral and estimable, qualities, they are made to produce, in some degree, a similar effect upon the spectator.
24
This appears to me to be the sense of the passage; and it leads me strongly to suspect, that, instead of
εν τοις ΑΠΛΟΙΣ πραγμασι, we should read—
εν τοις ΔΙΠΛΟΙΣ πρ. How easily the mistake might happen, is obvious to the eye. My reasons are these: 1. The
φιλανθρωπον—moral tendency—poetical justice, &c. was the very characteristic of the double fable, (
διπλη συστασις) and the very reason, probably, why the Platonic critics, as well as the good-natured audiences, preferred it as the best plan. 2. The instances here given seem to accord exactly with this idea. They are plainly examples of the
διπλη συστασις, not of the simple fable—i. e. the fable without revolution or discovery. The expression,
τραγικον
γαρ τουτο και φιλανθρωπον, implies, that the Tragic and Moral were aimed at, and effected, by these Poets, both in the
περιπετειαι, and in the other actions mentioned, whatever they were—
εν τοις περιπ. και εν τοις πραγμασι: and, consequently, his subsequent examples of the
τραγικον και φιλανθρωπον must equally accord with both. But, if we read
απλοις, this will not be the case; for those examples are such as necessarily imply revolutions, and a sudden and unexpected turn of events, which suit very well with
ΔΙΠΛΟΙΣ πραγμασι, but are incompatible with
απλοις; the simple fable being defined by this very circumstance, that it is
ανευ περιπετειας, &c. (cap. x.)
25
156.
mvp-aristotle-comment-156
NOTE 156. P. 102.
18.18
SUCH EVENTS, AS AGATHO SAYS, &c.This alludes to these two lines of
Agatho
:—
Ταχ᾿ ἂν τις εικαι αυτο τετ᾿ είναι λεγοἰ, Βροτοισι πολλα τυγχανειν ἐκ ἐἰκ εικοτα.
Even this, it may be said, is probable, That many things improbable should happen, In human life.
See
Rhet. II. 24, p. 581, ed. Duval.
—And
Bayle’s Art. AGATHON, note [F]
, who mentions a similar maxim of
St. Bernard’s
:
"Ordinatissimum est, minus interdum ordinatè fieri."
"Il est tout à fait de l’ordre, que de tems en tems il se fasse quelque chose contre l’ordre."
This general, and, if I may call it so, possible sort of probability, may be termed, the probability of romance; and these lines of Agatho furnish a good apologetical motto for the novel writer. It might be prefixed, perhaps, without impropriety, even to the best productions of the kind—to a
CLARISSA, or a
CECILIA. Nothing is so commonly complained of in such works, as their improbability; and often, no doubt, the complaint is well founded: often, however, the criticism means nothing more, than that the events are uncommon, and proves nothing more, than the want of fancy, and an extended view of human life, in the reader. If the events were not uncommon, where would the book find readers?
Diderot, De la Poes. Dram.
at the end of his
Pere de Famille, p. 306.
"Si la nature ne combinoit jamais des evenemens d’une maniere extraordinaire, tout ce que le Poete imagineroit au-delà de la simple et froide uniformité des choses communes, seroit incroyable. Mais il n’en est pas ainsi. Que fait donc le Poete? —Ou il s’empare de ces combinaisons extraordinaires, ou il en imagine de semblables. Mais au lieu que la liaison des événemens nous échappe souvent dans la nature, et que, faute de connoitre l’ensemble des choses, nous ne voyons qu’une concomitance fatale dans les faits; le Poet veut lui qu’il regne dans toute la texture de son ouvrage une liaison apparente et sensible; en sorte qu’il est moins vrai, et plus vraisemblable que l’historien."
157.
mvp-aristotle-comment-157
NOTE 157. P. 102.
18.19
THE CHORUS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS ONE OF THE PERSONS IN THE DRAMA AND A SHARER IN THE ACTION.This is not, I think, contradicted, but only properly limited and explained, by what the author says elsewhere—that, to all, is,
ἐκ δίκειον χορῳ· ἐστι γαρ ὁ χορού ΚΗΔΕΥΤΗΣ ΑΠΡΑΚΤΟΣ· ἐννοιαν γαρ μονον παρέχεται δις παρεστι.
26
He is, there, comparing the Chorus with the persons of the drama. In that view, the Chorus might be said, comparatively, to have no share in the action. But here, he is comparing those Choruses whose songs are properly connected with the action, and who are interested in its event, with such as appear to have no concern with it, and to be, not merely inactive, but indifferent, spectators.
In this view, it was as natural to say—the Chorus should be regarded as a person of the drama, and a sharer in the action: a sharer, that is, not by the active part, but by the warm interest, which it takes, and expresses, in that action. However, the word
ἀπρακτα must not be taken in its strictest sense. We find the Chorus, in the Greek Tragedies, frequently contributing, in some little degree, to the progress of the action, by active offices of friendly attention and assistance; as, for example, in the
Philoctetes, and the
Ajax of
Sophocles
.
158.
mvp-aristotle-comment-158
NOTE 158. P. 103.
18.20
THEIR CHORAL SONGS, &C.There cannot, surely, be the least doubt, that, for
ΔΙΔΟΜΕΝΑ, we should read,
ΑΙΔΟΜΕΝΑ: an emendation so obvious, that it occurred to me the first time I ever read the passage. But I afterwards found, that it had occurred, long ago, to
Madius
; a circumstance, which, to my great astonishment, has been passed over in utter silence by all the subsequent commentators that I have seen.
The words of Madius are—
"Mendum igitur in verbis omnino esse censeo; ac primum in voce
—I can attribute it only to some inadvertence, or mistake, that
Mr. Winstanley
, in his note, p. 294, has omitted to take notice of this most material part of Madius's comment on the passage. The emendation is confirmed by the
διδομενα, quæ in locum vocis
ᾠδομενα irrepsit: nam verbum
δειν, quod paulò post ponitur, aperte indicat, locum, ut nos fecimus, castigandum."ᾠδεσι, and
ᾠδειν, which follow; by the extreme facility of the mistake, and by the difficulty of giving any reasonable explanation of the other reading.
Διδόμενα, says
Victorius
,
"quia magistratus eos (sc. choros) dabat." But he agrees that
μελη is understood; and though we read, often, of the magistrate's giving a Chorus, (
δεναι χορον,) that is, furnishing the expence of the choral dresses, &c. we no where read, I believe, of their giving the Choral Odes.
Commentary on the Poetics (Henry James Pye, 1792) (OCR draft) (Henry James Pye's 1792 English commentary, aligned to the Kassel reference edition.) focus
18.1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-68
18.3
PLOT AND ITS SOLUTION ARE INCIDENT TO EVERY TRAGEDY.
THE critic might have added, and to every kind of imitative fable. I found a confiderable difficulty in choosing proper terms to diftinguish these material, and indeed essential parts of tragedy. The word plot indeed was perfectly familiar to the writers on the drama half a Century ago, in consequence of which, though it is now out of use, I have adopted it. The word SOLUTION, though not usual, I preferred to borrowing the word DENOUMENT from our neighbours, or employing the harsh term UNRAVELLING, as it is certainly expressive of the meaning it is intended to convey. The plot then contains every part of the tale that is supposed to happen before the actual commencement of the drama, or the time supposed to be included in the epic poem itself, as also all that is comprehended in them, during which the spectator is in doubt as to the final issue of the story. The solution is the clearing up of that doubt, whether productive of happiness or misery. As all that is not solution is plot, (which comprehends every part of the play or poem, where the action does not stand still, except the catastrophe, and the circumstances from which it immediately arises,) it will be only necessary to specify the solution. That, in the Iliad is the cessation of the rage of Achilles; in the Odyssey the death of the suitors and the recognition of Ulysses by Penelope; in the Æneid the death of Turnus; in
POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. in the Paradise Lost the fall; in King Lear, as written by Shakespear, the death of Cordelia and Lear; in Tate's and Colman's alteration their deliverance; in Much Ado about Nothing the vindication of Hero's innocence; and in Tom Jones the discovery of his relation to Allworthy.
18.2.
mvp-aristotle-comment-69
18.5
THE PATHETIC.
THE examples given here of this species of tragedy, as the story of Ixion, and especially the tragedy of Ajax, confirm what has been faid of the idea of pathos and pathetic among the ancients, as also what Aristotle says of the Iliad afterwards, as distinguished from the Odyssey[A]. Of this kind of tragedy our old writers furnish innumerable examples. Shakespear, though by no means sparing of blood, is much more moderate than many of his cotemporaries in this respect, unless we rank Titus Andronicus and the Yorkshire tragedy among his compositions.
18.3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-70
18.6
THE SIMPLE.
THIS species of tragedy has been already noticed in the tenth chapter [B]. In this the solution rises from the incidents alone, the [A] See Ch. XI. Note (A) on the translation, and Note 1, of the commentary on Ch. XXIV. [B] See Note 1. Chap. x... plot
plot naturally unravels itself without any violent change. Venice Preserved is an instance of this kind.
18.4.
mvp-aristotle-comment-71
18.10
THE DIFFERENCE OR SAMENESS OF ONE TRAGEDY AND ANO- THER MUST NOT BE ESTIMATED BY THE FABLE, BUT BY THE PLOT AND SOLUTION.
THIS is illustrated by the observation in the last chapter as to the general formation of the fable, and subsequent application of names. The tragedies of the Regent and the Countess of Salisbury, as to the general plan, and the plot and solution are radically the fame, and both taken from the Odyssey. While the tragedy of Zenobia, written by Mr. Murphy, and Metastasio's opera of the same name, though both founded on the same historical event, related by Tacitus, from differing entirely as to the arrangement of the fable, and the plot and solution, are perfectly distinct dramas. A stronger instance yet may be drawn from Romeo and Juliet and Caius Marius, and the Sophonisba of Thomfon and Lee. Thus the poet has it in his power to transfer the same circumstances from a popular to an unpopular fubject. From whatever reason it arifes, the observation of Dr. Johnson that mythological fables do not fucceed on the English stage is founded on experience. The English like the Roman poets are fond of domestic story. • Vestigia
POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. Vestigia Græca ' Ausi deferere & celebrare domeftica facta [c].' On which lines there are some very judicious observations in Bishop Hurd's notes on the Epistle to the Pifos. I think the Odyssey as proper a fable for the drama as any I am acquainted with. But nothing would be so great an advantage as to follow the example of the [D] author of the Countess of Salisbury, and give the incidents an old English garb, which is so well fitted to them. How easily is the Trojan war changed to a crufade, Ulyffes made a feudal chief, ([E) which by the way he much more resembles than the pompous sovereign Pope has made him,) and concealed as a pilgrim instead of a beggar. [F] The happiest instance I know of a tranfition like this, is the Edward and Eleonora of Thomson, taken from the Alcestes of Euripides. [c] And boldly quitting Grecia's beaten ways, ' They twine for native chiefs, dramatic bays.' According to Le Pere Brumoy the French entirely differ from us in this respect. See DISCOURS SUR LE PARALLELE DES THEATRES. [D] I only speak as to the design; the execution of it is below mediocrity. Besides I believe the author never thought immediately of the Odyssey, but only copied it through the medium of the novel called Longsword, Earl of Salisbury. [E] See Note 1. Chap. xxiv. [F] This was attended with peculiar difficulty as the English poet was obliged to produce the solution by nature, which the Greek poet had effected by a machine. On this account an improbability is incurred in the English drama. We may allow Hercules, after the good office he has done, to play a little with the feelings of Admetus. But to suppose such characters as Selim, as Glocester, as Theald, and even as Eleonora herself, would keep Edward a moment
18.5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-72
18.11
THERE ARE MANY WHO FORM THE PLOT WELL, AND THE SOLUTION ILL.
THERE are two causes which chiefly lead to this fault. One is a weariness of the subject towards the end of the piece, and the consequent defire of precipitating the catastrophe: a fault sometimes found in Shakespear, in common with other dramatic writers of his time [G]. The other is when a writer has so involved his character in difficulties, that it is out of his power to extricate him by probable means; and not being able to untie the Gordian knot, he is forced to cut it [H]. This observation of Aristotle may be inverted: for there are poets who form the solution well and the plot ill. Such are those who, fixing on some striking event before-hand for the catastrophe of the piece, are afterwards at a loss for preparatory incidents to fill up, with fufficient interest, the long space of five acts [1]. a moment in suspense is highly improbable, especially as the result of Eleonora's concealment is a trial of the prince's constancy; a most indelicate circumstance, from which Alcestes is perfectly clear, as she is entirely passive in the business. There is some refemblance to this in the solution of Much Ado About Nothing; but Hero is a most insipid character; otherwise she would not have thought Claudio's ready acceptance of her supposed cousin a great compliment to her own memory. [G] See Note 1. Chap. VII. [H] See Note VII. Chap. XIII. [1] See Note II. Chap. XII. There
POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. There is an excellent observation of Marmontel on this subject. He says, A capital defect, of which the ancients set the example, and ' which the moderns have but too much imitated, is the languor of the 'solution. This defect arises from a faulty distribution of the fable in ' five acts; of which the first is devoted to the opening the subject to ' the spectators, the three that follow to the [K] complication of the intrigue, and the last to the solution. According to this division the greatest danger lies in the fourth act, and to fill the fifth act it becomes neceffary to [L] unravel the intrigue flowly and by degrees, which cannot fail to render the catastrophe tedious and cold. But the fuddenness • of the solution ought never to lessen its probability, nor its probability to lessen its uncertainty. Conditions eafily fulfilled separately, but very difficult to reconcile with each other. It happens very rarely at present, that one or other of these two • censures is not incurred: the solution either is deficient in point of preparation, or of suspense. We carry with us to our pathetic plays two principles directly opposite; feelings which wish to be interested, • and an understanding which dislikes to be deceived. Our pretenfions to judge of every thing cause us to enjoy nothing. (M) We wish at ⚫ the same time to foresee the situations and be affected by them; to • contrive with the author and feel with the people; to have our fenfes • deluded and not deluded. New pieces have particularly this disadvantage that we go to them less as spectators than as critics. There every • connoiffeur is as it were double, and his heart finds a very troublesome [K] ' Au nœud de l'intrigue.' [L] DENOUER. [M] The critic, as described here, is just in the situation of a man who wishes at the fame time to be deceived by the tricks of a juggler, and find out how they are done. 3 C neigh-
neighbour in his judgement. Therefore the poet who had formerly only to feduce the imagination, has now also to surprize the dictates of • cool reflexion. If the clue that leads to the solution escapes the view, ، we cry it is too weak; if it appears, we say it is too grofs. What then • is the poet to do? To work on the foul, and pay no regard to the • cold analysis of the understanding.' ENCYCLOPEDIE, ARTICLE DENOUEMENT.
18.6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-73
18.16
IN THE TRAGEDIES THAT DEPEND ON THE PERIPETÍA AND THOSE THAT HAVE A SINGLE ACTION, SUCH POETS OFTEN ATTAIN THEIR PURPOSE; WHICH IS TO PRODUCE TRAGIC EFFECT, AND AT THE SAME TIME GRATIFY OUR FEELINGS BY MEANS WHICH APPEAR WONDERFUL.
I HAVE in this edition adopted the general sense given to this paffage by Mr. Twining, as well as the division of the whole passage, which I think perfectly just (N). Aristotle has condemned Agatho for crouding too many incidents into his drama. He now specifies in what he, and writers of the fame kind excel [o]. As to the expreffion of the [N] See his note 155. [o] As it does not appear that this excellence has any relation to the above-mentioned defect, he appears only to point out this merit of Agatho as a kind of fet-off against the other fault. And when he classes other poets with him, as he does by the use of the plural verb σοχάζονται, he must mean, I think, poets of the fame class with him in this particular excellence. means
POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. means being wonderful, (P) I would grasp at the flightest shadow that could justify the meaning I have ventured to give it, after Goulstone, Riccoboni, and Mr. Winstanley. Surprize, wonder, even improbability, are clearly the attendants of the kind of arrangement Aristotle is speaking of; and that they so appeared to him is equally clear from the apology he immediately makes for Agatho, by a quotation from his works. As to his confining these kind of folutions to the tragedies depending on peripetía, and those of a fingle construction, I do not fee the leaft propriety as to the last. Απλόος is in Chap. XIII. used twice by Ariftotle, and each time in a different sense, once as opposed to complicated and once as opposed to double. (See Notes (A) and (c), on the tranflation of Chap. x111.) If it is taken in the first sense as oppofed to complicated, the two examples must take in every species of tragedy, for in the tenth chapter he mentions the distinction between the fimple and complicated tragedy to depend on the one's having peripetía and difcovery, and the other not having them. But every tragedy must either have or not have the peripetía and discovery. Neither does the other meaning of ἀπλόος (which of the two evils I have chofen) agree much better; fince the overthrow of vice, though supported by wisdom and strength, manifestly must produce a different catastrophe for the good [P] That θαυμαςῶς cannot have the sense of per admirabile, is obvious. Mr. Twining fays, ' it feems all the Mss. give θαυμασῷς.' The sense of the context appears to call so loudly for the other meaning, that if all the printed copies and translators agreed, I should be tempted, MEO PERICULO, not to fuffer one figma to stand in my way, but read θαυμασῷ. But besides the authority of the tranflators I have quoted, it appears from the Spanish edition of Flores, that θαυμασῷ was the most popular reading. Since, he says, ' SOME editors (Algunas editores,) read θαυμαςῶς instead of θαυμασῷ. 3 C2 and
A COMMENTARY ON THE CHAP. XVIII. and the bad, which he makes in Chap. XIII, the essential distinction between the double and the single story. ، But here a much more essential difficulty occurs. Aristotle in the thirteenth chapter expreffly declares, that ' a very bad man should not • be reprefented as falling from happiness to misery, for though such an arrangement might be agreeable to our feelings, it would excite neither pity nor terror;' and confequently, according to Aristotle's precife definition of the word, would not be tragical. Yet here he gives absolutely and in unequivocal terms to this very arrangement of fable, the particular merit which he has before expreffly denied it. ، I can folve this difficulty into no other cause than change of opinion. And as I must think such a change of opinion justifies the proverb, * Second thoughts are best;' I can impute it only to the triumph of feeling over hypothesis [2]. Of vicious wisdom deceived, Sir Giles Overreach and Shylock are instances, as is the death of Dionyfius by Euphrafia, of the unexpected overthrow of impious courage and power. [Q] See Chap. XIII. Note III and VII. NOTE
18.7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-74
18.17
AGATHO OBSERVES, IT IS PROBABLE FOR MANY THINGS TO HAPPEN WHICH SEEM IMPROBABLE.
THIS passage of Agatho is quoted by Aristotle in the fecond book of his Rhetoric, Chapter xxiv, where he treats largely of general and contingent probability, and the fallacious arguments that may be produced by confounding one with the other. The reason why Ariftotle uses this argument now, is to justify his approbation of an arrangement of fable which is obviously against the general rules of probability. But experience tells us, that events happen every day contrary to general expectation, and as we are told by the highest authority, 'The battle is not always to the strong nor the race to the swift.' The probabilities as opposed to each other are diftinguished into the [R] absolute and the contingent. Now the contingent probability is certainly credible; and the critic tells us afterwards that [s] impoffibility, if the poet can render it even by sophistry credible, is preferable to incredible possibility. By these means we may reconcile this with the strong inculcation of probability both as to incident and character, which we find in Chapters ix and xv. This contingent probability, as indeed every interesting tale can prove [r], is a proper foundation for a dramatic action or character. [R] Απλῶς ἐικὸς, καὶ τὶ εικὸς. RHET. L. II. C. XXIV.. [s] See Note VII. Chap. xxiv. [T] See Mr. Twining, Note 156.. But
But the events of the action, and the behaviour of the character as exhibited in the course of the drama, must follow according to the rules of general probability. To illustrate this by an example, there is a contingent though not a general probability, that an armed leader attended by foldiers, may fall by the hand of a woman; therefore the catastrophe of the Grecian Daughter is no improper dramatic incident. Such an event supposed, the general probability is that it must be performed on a fudden, and unperceived, yet there is a contingent probability that a woman may vanquish a man in fair combat; but such an event would not follow naturally, either from the incidents of the fable or the character of Euphrafia, who is represented as a delicate woman and not as an Amazon. The tragedy of the Fatal Marriage affords a stronger proof of the defect of this contingent probability. Nothing could be more probable than for fuch a villain as Carlos to seal his crimes by the murder of his brother, but that such an act should take effect exactly at the time it did when the characters are in the highest possible distress, is purely accidental, and is not the probable or even incidental consequence of the most truly tragic situation the characters are in. The escape of Iphigenia from the altar (incidentally probable according to the popular belief of Greece) was a very good incident on which to found a tragedy, but a very inartificial solution of plot [u]. [u] As in the Iphigenia in Aulis, and the Iphigenia in Tauris. NOTE
i POETIC OF ARISTOTLE.
18.8.
mvp-aristotle-comment-75
18.19
THE CHORUS OUGHT TO BE CONSIDERED AS ONE OF THE CHA- RACTERS OF THE DRAMA, AND BE DEEMED A PART OF THE WHOLE, AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE ACTION.
IT appears from this, that the dramatic writers, so early as the time of Aristotle, had found the chorus a dead weight, from which they wished to free themselves, and to render it a merely ornamental and adventitious part of the theatrical apparatus. (✗) However I do not wonder at this precept of Aristotle. As the prejudice of the times would not fuffer the total abolition of the chorus, or permit it to be entirely unconnected with the drama, every deviation from the custom of the best writers who made it an effential though fubordinate part of it had a tendency to restore the exploded form of tragedy in its original state, from which it appears to have been at first raised in opposition [Y] to general prejudice and superstition. [x] Mr. Colman, in one of his notes on the Epistle to the Pisos, makes the following judicious observation. ' Neither of these two critics (Aristotle and Horace) have taken up the • question (that is as to the intrinfic merit of the chorus) each of them giving directions for • the proper conduct of the chorus, confidered as an established and received part of tragedy.. [Y] See Note II. Chap. x11.. NOTE
A COMMENTARY ON THE CHAP. XVIII.
18.9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-76
18.20
INTRODUCING SONGS WHICH HAD NO CONNECTION WITH THE PIECE.
THESE extraneous fongs which Aristotle calls Embolima, by no means want their counter-part on the present theatre. It is not uncommon to fee it announced in the play-bills, that in fuch a part fuch a fong will be introduced. In the Italian opera (I mean as exhibited in this country) so little is the drama regarded that two acts only are often performed to give more time for the dances. A most ridiculous instance of these Embolima occurs in the English opera of Artaxerxes. The author, or rather the tranflator, took the opening chorus of Adriano in Siria, which happens to follow Artaserse in the works of Metastafio, for his finale, and consequently dressed a Perfian king in all the attributes of a Roman emperor. [z] [z] Adriano in Siria opens with this chorus, Vivi a noi vivi all impero Grande Augusto, e la tua fronte Su l'Oriente prigionero S' accostumi al facro allora. Of which, this tranflation is the finale of Artaxerxes. Live to us, to empire live Great Augustus, long may'st thou From the subject East receive Laurel wreaths to grace thy brow. See Andrews's Anecotes, Article Errors, page 108. CHAP.
... POETIC OF ARISTOTLE.
Commentarius in Aristotelis Poeticam (Franciscus Ritter, 1839) (OCR draft) (Ritter's Latin commentary, extracted from the 1839 volume, divided by Ritter's chapters and sections, and linked to the corresponding Perseus reference subsections.) focus
1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-123
Ritter, cap. 18 § 1
Partes tragoediae sunt convinctio et solutio; eiusdem species quattuor, una implexa, alia pathetica, alia moralis, quarta qualis Prometheus cet. ut tragici argumenti unitas conservetur, cavere decet complexum fabularum, neque choro tribuere licet nisi quae proposito conducant et apte cohaereant. -3.
ἔστι δὲ πάσης τραγῳδίας - δεῖ δὲ ἄμφω ἀεὶ κροτεῖσθαι: primum signum ac magnum quo haec ab Aristotelis explicatione segreganda esse colligo hoc est, quod quae in capitis 17. fine et inde a c. 18, 4. docentur his illatis mire divelluntur. nam extremo c. 17. cum expositum esset propter diversam argumenti condicionem poesin dramaticam brevibus episodiis distingui, epicam longioribus dilatari, iam consentaneum est ut tragoediarum scriptori commendetur, ne materiam epopoeiae aptam in tragoedia pertractare velit. id vero ipsum monetur demum c. 18, 4. quo facto praecipitur, ne chori cantica a fabulae argumento aliena sint, ac tum totum illud disputationis caput (c. 17 et 18, 4-7), in quo tragoedias scripturum respexit et praeceptis instruxit Aristoteles, finitur. num forte hisce illa c. 18, 1-3. apte inseri possunt? non possunt: quippe non solum aliena sunt, sed etiam futilia. nam quaedam inania de iis tragoediae partibus explicantur quas technici
δέσιν et
λύσιν appellant, deinde quattuor tragoediarum genera non explicantur sed nude enumerantur et ridiculo praecepto clauduntur. alterum signum hoc est, quod simpliciter ponit cuiusque tragoediae partim esse implicationem partim solutionem, porro tragoediae quattuor species, et hoc ita narrat ut nullo suo iudicio utatur sed totus ab exemplis pendeat. hoc vero indignum est Aristotelis ingenio. accedunt alia de quibus ad singulos locos disputabimus. esse §. 1.
τὰ μὲν ἔξωθεν καὶ ἔνια τῶν ἔσωθεν
πολλάκις ἡ δέσις,
τὸ δὲ λοιπὸν ἡ λύσις: praeclara vero et loquendi et definiendi ratio.
τὰ ἔξωθεν sunt quae c. 15, 7.
ἔξω τῆς τραγῳδίας vocantur; sed quae extra sunt nullam fabulae partem efficiunt; immo implicatio fit per eam actionem quae in tragoedia ostenditur, et haec ipsa ut tota sit ab initio proficisci debet. illud
πολλάκις adeo significare videtur interdum
ἔνια τῶν ἔσωθεν ne requiri quidem ad instituendam implicationem.
τὸ δὲ λοιπὸν ἡ λύσις quod relicuum solutio. nomine
λοιπὸς Graeci et relicuus Latini utuntur, cum quae restant certa sunt et definita; alioqui Latini cetera et Graeci
τὰ δὲ ἄλλα ponunt. at vero hic plane deest eiusmodi definitio, quoniam nonnisi vage dictum est ad
δέσιν pertinere
ἔνια τῶν ἔσωθεν πολλάκις, unde consequitur interdum totam fabulam solutione contineri, quod absurdum est falsumque.
λέγω δὲ δέσιν - εἰς εὐτυχίαν: cum modo
λύσιν ita descripsisset interpolator, ut
λύσει maior tragoediae pars contineri videretur, continuo tamen
δέσιν longe maximam esse pronuntiavit:
λέγω δὲ δέσιν μὲν εἶναι τὴν ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς μέχρι τούτου τοῦ μέρους ὁ ἔσχατόν ἐστιν cet. vide, non quid sit
δέσις vel quo modo instituatur exposuit, sed digitis pro norma usus quousque pertineat indicavit; eadem ratione
λύσιν statim definire voluit.
ἐξ οὗ μεταβαίνει εἰς εὐτυχίαν: quid est hoc? nihil est nisi vitium manifestum. qui haec scripsit tragoedias cogitavit, qualis est Sophoclis Philocteta, Euripidis Iphigenia utraque, etiam Medea eiusdem: nam ea tragoedia quamvis satis luctuosa sit et atrox, ipsa tamen Medea feliciter evasit, quod igitur in paucis tragoediis factum sciebat, id temere ad omnes transtulit. quapropter non bene fecerunt qui verborum contextu immutato hoc vitium tollere aut obscurare conati sunt. alii enim
ἀτυχίαν dederunt (Goulstonus), alii
εὐτυχίαν ἢ δυστυχίαν (Tyrwhittus), alii
δυστυχίαν ἢ εἰς εὐτυχίαν (Reizius), Graefenhanius denique persuasissimum sibi habet verbo
εὐτυχία breviter fortunae mutationes notatas esse.
λύσιν δὲ τὴν ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆς τῆς μεταβάσεως
μέχρι τέλους: quemadmodum
ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆς scripsit, ita
μέχρι τοῦ τέλους scribere debuit, quod ipsum paulo post subsequitur. non solum ex hac inconstantia agnoscas serioris aetatis scriptorem, sed etiam ex loquendi infantia quae perspicitur ex illis
μέχρι τούτου τοῦ μέρους,
μέχρι τέλους,
μέχρι τοῦ τέλους.
2.
mvp-aristotle-comment-124
Ritter, cap. 18 § 2
τραγῳδίας δὲ εἴδη εἰσὶ τέσσαρα·
τοσαῦτα γὰρ καὶ τὰ μέρη ἐλέχθη: tragoediae partes non quattuor a vero Aristotele descriptae sunt, sed sex, in quibus explicandis ille versatur inde a c. 6. usque ad c. 22., si quae ab interpolatore sinistre interposita sunt subtrahamus. personatus Aristoteles sane c. 12. quattuor tragoediae partes descripsit, unius quantitatis habita ratione, easque idem hoc loco respexit. monemus, ut lector utrumque locum diligenter collatum expendat, et observet quomodo interpolator sibimet nihil confisus totus ab exemplis pendeat, atque in iis ipsis digerendis ulna et digitis magis quam prudenti iudicio utatur. ne hoc quidem silentio praetereundum videtur, mire haec inferri,
τοσαῦτα γὰρ καὶ τὰ μέρη ἐλέχθη.
ἡ μὲν πεπλεγμένη,
ἧς τὸ ὅλον ἐστὶ περιπέ - τεια καὶ ἀναγνώρισις: tragoediam implicatam totam contineri peripetia et agnitione falsum est: immo peripetia et agnitio non magnam fabulae particulam efficiunt. ne opus quidem est, ut in quavis fabula implicata peripetia sit et agnitio, sed alterutra sufficit. male igitur interpolator c. 10. intellexit, quamquam inde haec sua sumpsit.
ἡ δὲ παθητική,
οἷον οἵ τε Αἴαντες καὶ οἱ Ιξίονες: hoc age, lector benivole. nimirum interpolatori haeret aqua, cum nihil ab ipso Aristotele de fabulis patheticis (motoriis) dictum invenisset. desperans igitur se ipsum definire posse quales sint, ad exempla quasi in portum confugit. si vulgarem illam
πάθους definitionem a falso auctore c. 11, 6. propositam (
πάθος δ' ἐστὶ πρᾶξις φθαρτικὴ ἤ ὀδυνηρά κτλ.) comparaverimus, facile intelligemus
παθητικὴν fabulam non dici eam quam nos vulgo intelligimus, h. e. perturbationum descriptione conspicuam, sed eam in qua quiscoram spectatoribus sese occidit aut occiditur, sese vulnerat vel vexat aut vulneratur vel vexatur, ein mit Leiden (non mit Leidenschaften) erfülltes Stück. Aiaces igitur huic homini tragoediae sunt
παθητικαί, quoniam Aiax Telamonius ipse se interficit, Locrensis a Minerva occiditur; item Ixiones, quoniam Ixion rotae adstrictus graves labores perfert. Ixionis fabulam tres tragoediae Graecae principes scripserunt. fragmenta nonnulla inde conservata sunt. conf. Dindorf. Poet. scen. Gr. in
ἀποσπασματίοις p. 8. 42. 95. comoedia
Ἰξίων Eubuli laudatur ab Athenaeo VIII. p. 347 D. Sophocles praeter Aiacem
μαστιγοφόρον vel Telamonium superstitem etiam Locrum (Oilei f.) composuit, cuius fragmenta vid. ap. Dindorf. p. 29.
ἡ δὲ ἠθική,
οἷον αἱ Φθιώτιδες καὶ ὁ Πηλεύς: pergit eodem tramite admodum plano ac facili ad incedendum. Phthiotidum Sophoclis fabulae pauca fragmenta lege apud Dindorf. p. 60. Peleum Sophocles et Euripides docuerunt. vid fragmenta apud Dindorf. p. 51. 106.
τὸ δὲ τέταρτον,
οἷον αἵ τε Φορκίδες καὶ Προ-·
μήθεὺς καὶ ὅσα ἐν ῞Αιδου: iam in aliud artum compulsus est nullius iudicii sterilisque ingenii scriptor, nimirum is quartam quandam tragoediarum speciem esse inaudivit, sed eam neque definitione illustrare neque nomine consignare potuit; itaque exempla nonnulla posuisse contentus est. Phorcides Aeschyli tragoedia erat, cuius fragmenta Dindorfius p. 19. dedit. de fabula cf. Apollodorus I, 2.6. p. 13. II, 4, 2. p. 137. et Heynii ad Apollodorum Observationes p. 118 sq. Welckerus in Trilogia Aeschylia p. 381 sqq. grammaticum
ἁπλῆν τραγῳδίαν significare voluisse statim videbimus: interim de loci scriptura dispiciamus. nam in voce o
ἷov scribenda multi codices aberrant. vid. not. crit. dubitari vix potest quin o
ἷov verum sit : nam
δης οἷον nihil est nisi librarii aberratio, quam cum alii non concoquerent neque tamen monstrum
δης repetere vellent, lacunam indicarunt. quod Victorius in uno codice invenit
τὸ δὲ τέταρτον ὁμαλὸν οἷον, interpositum
ὁμαλὸν recentiori cuidam correctori debetur, qui c.15, 4.
τέταρτον δὲ τὸ ὁμαλὸν huc traxit infelici coniectura ductus : nam
τὸ ὁμαλὸν morum (
τῶν ἠθῶν) est proprium, non tragoediae. nec vero
ὁμαλὸν pro
ἁπλοῦν dici Graece potest, ut Buhlius Victorium de
ὁμαλὸν non sine causa dubitantem reprehendens existimavit. qui locum capitis 24, 1. consideraverit,
ἁπλοῦν,
οἷον in ordinem redigere volet, sed exemplorum desiderium hunc hominem abripuit, ut nomen quarti generis ponere oblivisceretur.
3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-125
Ritter, cap. 18 § 3
μάλιστα μὲν οὖν ἅπαντα δεῖ πειρᾶσθαι ἔχειν,
εἰ δὲ μή,
τὰ μέγιστα καὶ πλεῖστα: divisionibus a se propositis duas adiungit admonitiones. earum prior spectat ad poetas tragoedias scripturos, altera lectoribus vel spectatoribus suadet, ut iuste leniterque de fabulis iudicare velint. itaque dum poetae commendat, ut is omnia habere (in tragoediis) conetur, sin minus, gravissima et plurima, ea admonitio ridicula est et inanis, ridicula propter nimiam benigni magistri facilitatem, inanis quod quae sint gravissima non explicatur. non minus mira, ne dicam inepta, est querela illa
ἄλλως τε καὶ ὡς νῦν συκοφαντοῦσι τοὺς ποιητάς, quasi tu dicas, zumal auch wie man jetzt hinter den armen Dichtern her ist. sed haec prodere mihi videntur disciplinae Peripateticae alumnum quendam ad Academicos (illi Platonis exemplo poetas in multis saepiusque iniuste et speciosius quam verius reprehendebant) maligne et invidiose respicientem.
δίκαιον δὲ καὶ κτλ. haec ad priorem illam divisionem, secundum quam tragoedia
δέσει et
λύσει continetur, spectant. moneo quam dure
τοῦτο δὲ - καὶ λύσις inferantur. iustum sermonis vinculum deest: membra singula mire adnectuntur:
δίκαιον δὲ τοῦτο δέ πολλοὶ δὲ δεῖ δὲ. quid denique volunt sibi
δεῖ δὲ ἄμφω ἀεὶ κροτεῖσθαι? hoc, bonam implicationem bonamque solutionem laudandam esse ? immo verba hanc offerunt sententiam, bonam implicationem et malam solutionem semper laudibus prosequendam esse. num
4.
mvp-aristotle-comment-126
Ritter, cap. 18 § 4
χρὴ δὲ - τραγῳδίαν: nunc demum revertimur ad verum Aristotelem. quam bene sequentia cum fine capitis 17. cohaereant, et unusquisque videt et a nobis paulo ante explicatum est. quod saepius dictum esse pronuntiat, respicit c. 5, 4. 7,5-7. 17,5. alii loci quibus idem monebatur fortasse interciderunt. epopoeiae unitas latioribus finibus circumscripta est, eaque cum multa episodia admittat, complexum mythorum proponere potest. itaque epicum carmen multis mythis (
πολύμυθον) distinctum apparet. trilogiae compositionem significari per
ἐποποιικὸν sive
πολύμυθον σύστημα existimavit Welckerus in Trilog. Aeschyl. p. 349. 444. 531. 601. et in Museo Rhenano philolog. V. p. 490. sed in verbis quae hic legimus nihil inest, unde illam sententiam probemus. nimirum hoc commendatur poetae tragico, ne mythicae materiae nimium uni tragoediae subiicere velit. conf. Commentar. in c. 7, 3. p. 145.
ἐκεῖ μὲν τὸ πρέπον μέγεθος: quae h. 1.
μέρη vocantur episodia sunt, quae quamvis ampla tamen propter epici carminis ambitum (
διὰ τὸ μῆκος) iustos fines non facile excedunt.
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-127
Ritter, cap. 18 § 5
ὅσοι πέρσιν Ἰλίου ὅλην ἐποίησαν: qui eversionem Iliacae urbis totam tragoediae argumentum fecerunt. varia illa quae acciderunt, cum Ilium devastaretur, una tragoedia comprehendi salva lege dramaticae unitatis non possunt, quam ob causam eae fabulae displicuerunt quae id praestare conarentur. ceterum de certo tragoediae cuiusdam nomine (
Πέρσις Ἰλίου) ne cogitemus, vel collocatio verborum (
πέρσις Ἰλίου) impedit. carmen illud epicum Arctini et Leschis (v. ad c. 23, 4) non
πέρσις Ἰλίου, sed
Ἰλίου πέρσις 1) vocatur, eodemque modo tragoedia appellanda erit, si quidem unquam eo titulo tragoedia exstitit, vid. Commentar. ad c. 23, 4.
καὶ μὴ κατὰ μέρος [,
ὥσπερ Εὐριπίδης Νιόβην,
καὶ μὴ ὥσπερ Αἰσχύλος]: haec est constans co- 1) Conf. c. 23, 4. Pausan. X, 25 et 27. Proculi Chrestom. excerpta apud Gaisfordium ad Hephaest. p. 483., alii,dicum scriptura, unde qui discessere huius loci auctorem et doctiorem et prudentiorem fecerunt quam re vera fuit. Aristotelem non scripsisse verba uncis circumdata plura sunt quae ostendant. Euripidi fabula tribuitur quam non conscripsit; eadem ad devastationem Ilii a vero auctore memoratam nihil pertinet; Euripides laudatur quod fabulam Niobiam
κατά μέρος tractaverit, Aeschylus reprehenditur quod eadem solertia non usus sit. haec ego ne antiquo quidem interpolatori tribuo, quippe in ipso verborum contextu nimis absurda sunt, sed ex nota marginali nata esse puto. scilicet cum in extremo codicis antiqui versu collocata essent verba illa
καὶ μὴ κατὰ μέρος, aliquis in margine adscripsit
ὥσπερ Εὐριπίδης Νιόβην, intelligens
κατὰ μέρος ἐποίησε, illisque
καὶ μὴ ὥσπερ Αἰσχύλος adiectis significavit Aeschylum Niobae fabulam deterius in rem suam convertisse. iam, si pro Euripidis nomine interim Sophoclis admiserimus, quae in ipso operis contextu et sensu carent et disputationis ordinem turbant, ea hanc si minus veram at tolerabilem sententiam offerunt, Sophoclem (Euripidem) in Nioba sua fabulae Niobiae particulam, Aeschylum eandem totam (in trilogia) pertractandam sibi sumpsisse. sed nihilo minus Euripidem de loco per scribentis errorem benigne concesso non movendum esse censeo. qui coniecturis hanc difficultatem tollere conati sunt, operam me iudice perdiderunt. Valla convertit Hecubam, non Niobam, unde Tyrwhittus
Εκάβην sumpsit, sed ne Hecuba quidem ad Ilii eversionem pertinet, sed ad illa quae secuta sunt eversionem, ut omittam sic iniuste laudari fabulam illam pessimam et duplice argumento vitiosam, neque adesse quo referantur
καὶ μὴ ὥσπερ Αἰσχύλος. Aldus ex coniectura vel sua vel alius dedit
νιόβην ἢ μήδειαν, quibus loci difficultas magis etiam augetur. alii alia tentaverunt.
ἢ ἐκπίπτουσιν ἢ κακῶς ἀγωνίζονται: aut exiguntur aut male certant, h. e. aut fabulam peragere non possunt aut ita certant ut nonnisi secundo tertiove loco nominentur. conf. c. 17, 1.
ἐπεὶ καὶ ᾿Αγάθων ἐξέ - πεσεν ἐν τούτῳ μόνῳ: Agatho in tragoedia quadam ase edita (
Ἰλίου πέρσιν inscriptam fuisse neque hinc neque alio indicio constat) totam excidii urbis Troiae historiam videtur comprehendisse, verbi causa illa quae Priamo indigna acciderunt, quae Cassandra et Astyanax aliique perpessi sunt, quae Ulixes et Aiax et Agamemno perpatraverunt. ex verbis
ἐξέπεσεν ἐν τούτῳ μόνῳ ne colligas Agathonem vicisse in ceteris suis fabulis omnibus: quippe potuit in nonnullis
κακῶς ἀγωνίζεσθαι.
ἐν δὲ ταῖς περιπετείαις - ὧν βούλονται θαν - μαστῶς: si rerum conversiones (
αἱ περιπέτειαι) sunt eiusmodi ut simplicibus factis (
ἁπλοῖς πράγμασιν) eveniant, quod fit ubi necessario vel probabiliter accidunt, poetae tragici propositum suum optime consequuntur. intelligit igitur eas
περιπετείας quae
ἁπλοῖς πράγμασι, non
συστήματι πολυμύθῳ, continentur, atque haec ipsa
ἁπλᾶ πράγματα non
μύθῳ πεπλεγμένῳ sed
συστήματι πολυμύθῳ opposita cogitari debent. noli igitur confundere
ἁπλᾶ πράγματα cum
ἁπλῇ πράξει sive
ἁπλῷ μύθῳ (vide c. 10 et 11) neque statuere Aristotelem contra loqui c. 13, 2., ubi pronuntiat pulcherrimae tragoediae fabulam (
μύθον) implexam esse, non simplicem. -
τραγικὸν γὰρ τοῦτο καὶ φιλάνθρωπον : tragicum hoc est, quia eiusmodi facta timorem miserationemque movent. nam simplicia cum naturae convenienter fieri soleant, similia cuivis accidere possunt. inde timor in nobis et simul aliorum miseratio nascitur; sin minus, certe sensus humanus tangitur.
6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-128
Ritter, cap. 18 § 6
ἔστι δὲ τοῦτο - ἄδικος δὲ ἡττηθῇ: haec nonnisi ad
τὸ φιλάνθρωπον pertinent. si prudens idemque pravus decipiatur, et fortis idemque iniustus vincatur, is miserationem nostram excitare nequit, cum innocentia ei desit (vid. c. 13, 2), sed animum humanum eiusmodi casus tangere et movere solet.
ἔστι δὲ τοῦτο εἰκός - παρὰ τὸ εἰκός: ut prudens decipiatur et fortis superetur, non saepe quidem evenit, sed per sese non pugnat contra probabilitatem. hoc breviter videtur monere voluisse, ne quis eiusmodi res peccare in leges
ὥσπερ ᾿Αγά- ab ipso c. 9. praescriptas existimaret.
θων λέγει: Agathonis sententiam plenam posuit in Rhetoricis II, 24. p. 1402 a 10.
τάχ᾽ ἄν τις εἰκὸς αὐτὸ τοῦτ᾽ εἶναι λέγοι,
βροτοῖσι πολλὰ τυγχάνειν οὐκ εἰκότα. brevitatis causa h. 1. illam Agathonis sententiam suis verbis significasse contentus est.
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-129
Ritter, cap. 18 § 7
καὶ τὸν χορὸν - παρά Σοφοκλεῖ: ut per tragoediam unum quoddam (
ἕν τι) et totum (
ὅλον) exprimatur, opus est ut chori cantica cum fabulae argumento cohaereant: alioquin unitas fabulae perit et cantica ista vana funduntur. qui chorum tamquam actoris partes sustinentem accipere iubetur, est is qui tragoediam scripturus est: hunc enim etiamnum Aristoteles respicit. quae chorus canit loquiturve, ea ex ipsa actione tragica ducta esse decet. praeclare Horatius in Arte poetica v. 193. actoris partes chorus officiumque virile defendat, neu quid medios intercinat actus, quod non proposito conducat et haereat apte. chorus Euripideus non raro officium suum deserit et intercinit quae a proposito aliena sunt. magis etiam in hoc praeceptum peccavit Agatho Euripidi aetate suppar, quo auctore
ἐμβόλιμα (exodia) in tragoediam recepta sunt, h. e. cantica ab argumento tragoediae aliena et pro arbitrio poetae inserta.
τὰ ἀδόμενα οὐ: codices
τὰ διδόμενα. vid. notae crit. qui
τὰ διδόμενα defendere et explicare tentarunt, ad inania et prava prolapsi videntur. quomodo
ἀδόμενα corrumpi potuerit in
διδόμενα comparanti AI
ΔOMENA et 1110- MENA liquet. negationem
οὐ praecedens vocalis absorpsit.
οἱ λοιποί sunt tragici Euripide posteriores quibus ad exodia facienda exemplum Agatho praeivit.