Poetics. Aristotle. ed. Henry James Pye. London. 1792.
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 (5)
Περὶ ποιητικῆς (OCR draft) (Aristotle, Poetics. Immanuel Bekker, editor, Aristotelis Opera, volume 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1837.) — 4 focus
Περὶ ποιητικῆς (OCR draft) Perseus (Aristotle, De arte poetica liber. Rudolf Kassel, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965. Reference edition for passage alignment.) — 4 focus
Poetics, Greek text (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's Greek text of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 4 focus
Ἐοίκασι δὲ γεννῆσαι μὲν ὅλως τὴν ποιητικὴν αἰτίαι
δύο τινὲς καὶ αὗται φυσικαί·
τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἐκ παίδων ἐστὶ καὶ τούτῳ διαφέρουσι
τῶν ἄλλων ζῴων ὅτι μιμητικώτατόν ἐστι καὶ τὰς μαθήσεις
ποιεῖται διὰ μιμήσεως τὰς πρώτας, καὶ τὸ χαίρειν
τοῖς μιμήμασι πάντας.
σημεῖον δὲ τούτου τὸ συμβαῖνον
ἐπὶ τῶν ἔργων· ἃ γὰρ αὐτὰ λυπηρῶς ὁρῶμεν, τούτων τὰς
εἰκόνας τὰς μάλιστα ἠκριβωμένας χαίρομεν θεωροῦντες, οἷον
θηρίων τε μορφὰς τῶν ἀτιμοτάτων καὶ νεκρῶν.
καὶ τοῦτο, ὅτι μανθάνειν οὐ μόνον τοῖς φιλοσόφοις ἥδιστον
ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ὁμοίως, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ βραχὺ κοινωνοῦσιν
αὐτοῦ.
διὰ γὰρ τοῦτο χαίρουσι τὰς εἰκόνας ὁρῶντες, ὅτι
συμβαίνει θεωροῦντας μανθάνειν καὶ συλλογίζεσθαι τί ἕκαστον,
οἷον ὅτι οὗτος ἐκεῖνος·
οὐχ ᾗ μίμημα ποιήσει τὴν ἡδονὴν ἀλλὰ διὰ τὴν ἀπεργασίαν
ἢ τὴν χροιὰν ἢ διὰ τοιαύτην τινὰ ἄλλην αἰτίαν.
κατὰ φύσιν δὲ ὄντος ἡμῖν τοῦ μιμεῖσθαι καὶ τῆς ἁρμονίας
καὶ τοῦ ῥυθμοῦ (τὰ γὰρ μέτρα ὅτι μόρια τῶν ῥυθμῶν ἐστι
φανερὸν) ἐξ ἀρχῆς οἱ πεφυκότες πρὸς αὐτὰ μάλιστα κατὰ
μικρὸν προάγοντες ἐγέννησαν τὴν ποίησιν ἐκ τῶν αὐτοσχεδιασμάτων.
διεσπάσθη δὲ κατὰ τὰ οἰκεῖα ἤθη ἡ ποίησις·
οἱ μὲν γὰρ σεμνότεροι τὰς καλὰς ἐμιμοῦντο πράξεις καὶ
τὰς τῶν τοιούτων, οἱ δὲ εὐτελέστεροι τὰς τῶν φαύλων,
πρῶτον ψόγους ποιοῦντες, ὥσπερ ἕτεροι ὕμνους καὶ ἐγκώμια.
τῶν μὲν οὖν πρὸ Ὁμήρου οὐδενὸς ἔχομεν εἰπεῖν τοιοῦτον
ποίημα, εἰκὸς δὲ εἶναι πολλούς,
ἔστιν, οἷον ἐκείνου ὁ Μαργίτης καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα. ἐν οἷς κατὰ
τὸ ἁρμόττον καὶ τὸ ἰαμβεῖον ἦλθε μέτρον—διὸ καὶ ἰαμβεῖον καλεῖται
νῦν, ὅτι ἐν τῷ μέτρῳ τούτῳ ἰάμβιζον ἀλλήλους.
καὶ
ἐγένοντο τῶν παλαιῶν οἱ μὲν ἡρωικῶν οἱ δὲ ἰάμβων ποιηταί.
ὥσπερ δὲ καὶ τὰ σπουδαῖα μάλιστα ποιητὴς Ὅμηρος
ἦν (μόνος γὰρ οὐχ ὅτι εὖ ἀλλὰ καὶ μιμήσεις δραματικὰς
ἐποίησεν), οὕτως καὶ τὸ τῆς κωμῳδίας σχῆμα
πρῶτος ὑπέδειξεν οὐ ψόγον ἀλλὰ τὸ γελοῖον δραματοποιήσας·
ὁ γὰρ Μαργίτης ἀνάλογον ἔχει, ὥσπερ Ἰλιὰς
καὶ ἡ Ὀδύσσεια πρὸς τὰς τραγῳδίας, οὕτω καὶ οὗτος πρὸς
τὰς κωμῳδίας.
παραφανείσης δὲ τῆς τραγῳδίας καὶ κωμῳδίας
οἱ ἐφ᾽ ἑκατέραν τὴν ποίησιν ὁρμῶντες κατὰ τὴν
οἰκείαν φύσιν οἱ μὲν ἀντὶ τῶν ἰάμβων κωμῳδοποιοὶ ἐγένοντο,
οἱ δὲ ἀντὶ τῶν ἐπῶν τραγῳδοδιδάσκαλοι, διὰ τὸ
μείζονα καὶ ἐντιμότερα τὰ σχήματα εἶναι ταῦτα ἐκείνων.
τὸ μὲν οὖν ἐπισκοπεῖν εἰ ἄρα ἔχει ἤδη ἡ τραγῳδία τοῖς
εἴδεσιν ἱκανῶς ἢ οὔ, αὐτό τε καθ᾽ αὑτὸ κρῖναι καὶ πρὸς
τὰ θέατρα, ἄλλος λόγος.
γενομένης δ᾽ οὖν ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς αὐτοσχεδιαστικῆς—καὶ
αὐτὴ καὶ ἡ κωμῳδία, καὶ ἡ μὲν ἀπὸ
τῶν ἐξαρχόντων τὸν διθύραμβον, ἡ δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν τὰ φαλλικά,
ἃ ἔτι καὶ νῦν ἐν πολλαῖς τῶν πόλεων διαμένει νομιζόμενα—κατὰ
μικρὸν ηὐξήθη προαγόντων ὅσον ἐγίγνετο
φανερὸν αὐτῆς·
τραγῳδία ἐπαύσατο, ἐπεὶ ἔσχε τὴν αὑτῆς φύσιν.
καὶ τό
τε τῶν ὑποκριτῶν πλῆθος ἐξ ἑνὸς εἰς δύο πρῶτος Αἰσχύλος
ἤγαγε καὶ τὰ τοῦ χοροῦ ἠλάττωσε καὶ τὸν λόγον
πρωταγωνιστὴν παρεσκεύασεν· τρεῖς δὲ καὶ σκηνογραφίαν
Σοφοκλῆς.
ἔτι δὲ τὸ μέγεθος· ἐκ μικρῶν μύθων καὶ λέξεως
γελοίας διὰ τὸ ἐκ σατυρικοῦ μεταβαλεῖν ὀψὲ ἀπεσεμνύνθη,
τό τε μέτρον ἐκ τετραμέτρου ἰαμβεῖον ἐγένετο.
τὸ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτον τετραμέτρῳ ἐχρῶντο διὰ τὸ σατυρικὴν
καὶ ὀρχηστικωτέραν εἶναι τὴν ποίησιν, λέξεως δὲ γενομένης
αὐτὴ ἡ φύσις τὸ οἰκεῖον μέτρον εὗρε· μάλιστα γὰρ λεκτι-
κὸν τῶν μέτρων τὸ ἰαμβεῖόν ἐστιν·
πλεῖστα γὰρ ἰαμβεῖα λέγομεν ἐν τῇ διαλέκτῳ τῇ πρὸς
ἀλλήλους, ἑξάμετρα δὲ ὀλιγάκις καὶ ἐκβαίνοντες τῆς λεκτικῆς
ἁρμονίας.
καὶ τὰ ἄλλ᾽ ὡς ἕκαστα κοσμηθῆναι λέγεται ἔστω ἡμῖν εἰρημένα·
πολὺ γὰρ ἂν ἴσως ἔργον εἴη διεξιέναι καθ᾽ ἕκαστον.
Poetics, Greek text (S. H. Butcher, 1911) (OCR draft) Experimental (S. H. Butcher's Greek text from Aristotle's Theory of Poetry and Fine Art, fourth edition, 1911.) — 4 focus
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.) — 4 focus
Translations (13)
Poetics (W. H. Fyfe) (OCR draft) Perseus (William Hamilton Fyfe's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, Loeb Classical Library, 1939 printing.) — 4 focus
Arabic Poetics (Badawī edition, 1953) (OCR draft) (The ancient Arabic translation of Aristotle's Poetics in ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Badawī's 1953 edition.) — 4 focus
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.) — 4 focus
Poetry in general seems to have sprung from two
causes, each of them lying deep in our nature.
First, the instinct of imitation is implanted in man
from childhood, one difference between him and other
animals being that he is the most imitative of living
creatures, and through imitation learns his earliest
lessons; and no less universal is the pleasure felt in things imitated.
We have evidence of this in the facts of experience.
Objects which in themselves we view with pain, we
delight to contemplate when reproduced with minute
fidelity: such as the forms of the most ignoble animals and of dead bodies.
The cause of this again is, that to
learn gives the liveliest pleasure, not only to philosophers
but to men in general; whose capacity, however, of
learning is more limited.
Thus the reason why men enjoy seeing a likeness is, that
in contemplating it they find themselves learning or
inferring, and saying perhaps, 'Ah, that is he.'
For if you happen not to have seen the original,
the pleasure will be due not to the imitation as
such, but to the execution, the colouring, or some such other cause.
Imitation, then, is one instinct of our nature. Next,
there is the instinct for 'harmony' and rhythm, metres
being manifestly sections of rhythm. Persons, therefore,
starting with this natural gift developed by degrees their
special aptitudes, till their rude improvisations gave birth to Poetry.
Poetry now diverged in two directions, according to
the individual character of the writers. The graver
spirits imitated noble actions, and the actions of
good men. The more trivial sort imitated the actions of meaner persons, at first composing satires, as the former did hymns to the gods and the praises of famous men.
A poem of the satirical kind cannot indeed be put down to
any author earlier than Homer; though many such writers probably there were.
But from Homer onward, instances
can be cited, his own Margites, for example, and other
similar compositions. The appropriate metre was also
here introduced; hence the measure is still called the iambic or lampooning measure, being that in which people lampooned one another.
Thus the older poets were distinguished as
writers of heroic or of iambic verse.
As, in the serious style, Homer is pre-eminent among
poets, for he alone combined dramatic form with
excellence of imitation, so he too first sketched out
the main lines of Comedy, by dramatising the ludicrous
instead of writing personal satire. His Margites bears
the same relation to Comedy that the Iliad and Odyssey
do to Tragedy.
But when Tragedy and Comedy came
to light, the two classes of poets still followed their
natural bent: the lampooners became writers of Comedy,
and the Epic poets were succeeded by Tragedians,
since the drama was a larger and higher form of art.
Whether Tragedy has as yet perfected its proper types
or not; and whether it is to be judged in itself, or
in relation also to the audience, this raises another question.
Be that as it may, Tragedy—as also Comedy—was at first
mere improvisation. The one originated with the
authors of the Dithyramb, the other with those of the
phallic songs, which are still in use in many of
our cities. Tragedy advanced by slow degrees; each
new element that showed itself was in turn developed.
Having passed through many changes, it found its natural form, and there it stopped.
Aeschylus first introduced a second actor; he
diminished the importance of the Chorus, and assigned
the leading part to the dialogue. Sophocles raised
the number of actors to three, and added scene-painting.
Moreover, it was not till late that the short plot was
discarded for one of greater compass, and the grotesque
diction of the earlier satyric form for the stately manner of Tragedy.
The iambic measure then replaced the trochaic
tetrameter, which was originally employed when the
poetry was of the satyric order, and had greater
affinities with dancing. Once dialogue had come in,
Nature herself discovered the appropriate measure.
For the iambic is, of all measures, the most colloquial:
we see it in the fact that conversational speech runs
into iambic lines more frequently than into any other kind of verse; while alexandrines are rare, and only occur when we depart from the natural tone of utterance.
The additions to the number of 'episodes'
or acts, and the other accessories of which tradition
tells, must be taken as already described;
for to go through the details of their introduction would,
doubtless, be a large undertaking.
Aristotle on the Art of Poetry (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 4 focus
It is clear that the general origin of poetry was due to
two causes, each of them part of human nature.
Imitation
is natural to man from childhood, one of his advantages over
the lower animals being this, that he is the most imitative
creature in the world, and learns at first by imitation. And it
is also natural for all to delight in works of imitation.
The truth of this second point is shown by experience: though
the objects themselves may be painful to see, we delight to
view the most realistic representations of them in art, the
forms for example of the lowest animals and of dead bodies.
The explanation is to be found in a further fact: to be
learning something is the greatest of pleasures not only to
the philosopher but also to the rest of mankind, however
small their capacity for it;
the reason of the delight in seeing
the picture is that one is at the same time learning—gathering
the meaning of things, e.g. that the man there is so-and-so;
for if one has not seen the thing before, one's pleasure will
not be in the picture as an imitation of it, but will be due to
the execution or colouring or some similar cause.
Imitation, then, being natural to us—as also the sense of harmony
and rhythm, the metres being obviously species of rhythms—
it was through their original aptitude, and by a series of
improvements for the most part gradual on their first efforts,
that they created poetry out of their improvisations.
Poetry, however, soon broke up into two kinds according to the
differences of character in the individual poets; for
the graver among them would represent noble actions, and
those of noble personages; and the meaner sort the actions
of the ignoble. The latter class produced invectives at first,
just as others did hymns and panegyrics.
We know of no
such poem by any of the pre-Homeric poets, though there
were probably many such writers among them;
instances,
however, may be found from Homer downwards, e.g. his
Margites, and the similar poems of others. In this poetry of
invective its natural fitness brought an iambic metre into use;
hence our present term 'iambic,' because it was the
metre of their 'iambs' or invectives against one another.
The result was that the old poets became some of them
writers of heroic and others of iambic verse.
Homer's
position, however, is peculiar: just as he was in the serious
style the poet of poets, standing alone not only through the
literary excellence, but also through the dramatic character
of his imitations, so too he was the first to outline for us the
general forms of Comedy by producing not a dramatic invec-
tive, but a dramatic picture of the Ridiculous; his Margites
in fact stands in the same relation to our comedies as the
Iliad and Odyssey to our tragedies.
As soon, however, as
Tragedy and Comedy appeared in the field, those naturally
drawn to the one line of poetry became writers of comedies
instead of iambs, and those naturally drawn to the other,
writers of tragedies instead of epics, because these new modes
of art were grander and of more esteem than the old.
If it be asked whether Tragedy is now all that it need be
in its formative elements, to consider that, and decide it
theoretically and in relation to the theatres, is a matter for
another inquiry.
also Comedy;
the one originating with
the authors of the Dithyramb, the other with those of the phallic
songs, which still survive as institutions in many of our cities.
And its advance after that was little by little, through their
improving on whatever they had before them at each stage.
And many
changes having been made, Tragedy stopped when it had
found its own nature.
increased to two by Aeschylus, who curtailed the business
of the Chorus, and made the dialogue, or spoken portion,
take the leading part in the play. A third actor and scenery
were due to Sophocles.
Further, there was the change in magnitude. From small plots
and ridiculous diction, because of its origin from satyr-drama,
it was only late that it became serious and attained dignity.
Its metre also changed from trochaic tetrameter to iambic.
The reason for their original use of the trochaic tetrameter
was that their poetry was satyric and more connected with
dancing than it now is.
As soon, however, as
a spoken part came in, nature herself found the appropriate
metre. The iambic, we know, is the most speakable of
metres,
in conversation, whereas we rarely talk hexameters, and only
when we depart from the speaking tone of voice.
Another
change was a plurality of episodes or acts. As for the remaining
matters, the superadded embellishments and the account of
their introduction, these must be taken as said.
It would
probably be a long piece of work to go through the details.
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.) — 4.18 focus
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.) — 4.18 focus
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.) — 4 focus
La poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) Experimental (André Dacier's French translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1692.) — 4.18 focus
Poetica d'Aristotile (Bernardo Segni, 1549) (OCR draft) Experimental (Bernardo Segni's 1549 Florentine Italian translation, aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 4 focus
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.) — 4 focus
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.) — 4 focus
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.) — 4 focus
Arabic Poetics (Abū Bishr Mattā; Tkatsch edition, unaligned) (OCR draft) Experimental (Tkatsch's edition of the medieval Arabic translation in its original, unaligned segmentation.) — 4 focus
Commentary
Commentary on the Poetics (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) (Ingram Bywater's English commentary on Aristotle's Poetics.) focus
18.
mvp-aristotle-comment-148
18.
mvp-aristotle-comment-149
18.
mvp-aristotle-comment-150
18.
mvp-aristotle-comment-151
Remarques sur la poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) (André Dacier's French commentary on Aristotle's Poetics.) focus
42.
mvp-aristotle-comment-112
Commentary on the Poetics (Thomas Twining, 1789) (OCR draft) (Thomas Twining's notes on Aristotle's Poetics, aligned to the Kassel reference edition.) focus
34.
mvp-aristotle-comment-34
NOTE 34.
Commentary on the Poetics (Henry James Pye, 1792) (OCR draft) (Henry James Pye's 1792 English commentary, aligned to the Kassel reference edition.) focus
4.4.
mvp-aristotle-comment-10
4.18
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
14.
mvp-aristotle-comment-30
Ritter, cap. 4 § 14