Aristotle Poetics 9.2

ed. Henry James Pye

View: By Chapter
and the other in prose; for if the work of Herodotus were put into verse, it would be no less a species of history in verse than it is in prose. But the difference consists in this, that one relates what has actually been done, the other what may be done.

Poetics. Aristotle. ed. Henry James Pye. London. 1792.

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.) — 9 focus
Περὶ ποιητικῆς (OCR draft) Perseus (Aristotle, De arte poetica liber. Rudolf Kassel, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965. Reference edition for passage alignment.) — 9 focus
Poetics, Greek text (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's Greek text of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 9 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.) — 9 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.) — 9 focus
Arabic Poetics (Badawī edition, 1953) (OCR draft) (The ancient Arabic translation of Aristotle's Poetics in ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Badawī's 1953 edition.) — 9 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.) — 9 focus
Aristotle on the Art of Poetry (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 9 focus
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.) — 9.2 focus
For it is not by writing in verse, or prose, that the Historian and the Poet are distinguished: the work of Herodotus might be versified; but it would still be a species of history, no less with metre, than without. They are distinguished by this, that the one relates what has been, the other what might be.
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.) — 9.2 focus
for the history of Herodotus might be written in verse, and yet it would be no less a history 1 2 3 with metre, than without metre. But they differ in this, that the one speaks of things which have happened, and the other of such as might have happened. 4 5
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.) — 9 focus
La poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) Experimental (André Dacier's French translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1692.) — 9.2 focus
Car l'Hiſtorien & le Poëte ne different pas entr'eux, en ce que l'un écrit en profe, & l'autre en vers. En effet on pourroit fort bien mettre en vers, l'Histoire d'Herodote, & elle ne ſeroit pas moins une Hiſtoire en vers, qu'elle l'eſt en proſe; mais ils different en ce que l'Hiſtorien écrit ce qui eſt arrivé, & le Poëte ce qui a pû ou dû arriver.
Poetica d'Aristotile (Bernardo Segni, 1549) (OCR draft) Experimental (Bernardo Segni's 1549 Florentine Italian translation, aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 9 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.) — 9 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.) — 9 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.) — 9 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.) — 9 focus

Commentary

Commentary on the Poetics (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) (Ingram Bywater's English commentary on Aristotle's Poetics.) focus

2. mvp-aristotle-comment-345

οὐ τῷ ἢ ἔμμετρα λέγειν κτέ. see 1, 1447 b 17 , where it is shown that metre is only one of the accidents of poetry.

2. mvp-aristotle-comment-346

1451b4 διαφέρει scil. ὁ ἱστορικὸς τοῦ ποιητοῦ.
1451b5

Remarques sur la poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) (André Dacier's French commentary on Aristotle's Poetics.) focus

3. mvp-aristotle-comment-234

9.2 Car l'Historien & le Poëte ne different pas entr'eux, en ce que l'un écrit en profe, & l'autre en vers. 1

4. mvp-aristotle-comment-235

9.2 Mais ils different en ce que l'Hiſtorien écrit ce qui eft arrivé, & le Poëte ce qui a pû ou dû arriver. 2

Commentary on the Poetics (Thomas Twining, 1789) (OCR draft) (Thomas Twining's notes on Aristotle's Poetics, aligned to the Kassel reference edition.) focus

70. mvp-aristotle-comment-70

NOTE 70. P. 82.

9.2 A SPECIES OF HISTORY-
Ἱσορια ΤΙΣ
—"a sort of history." It is singular, that almost all the translators should have neglected a word so important as the pronoun
τις
in this passage. May we not infer from this expression, that if Aristotle had been asked, whether an Epic imitation in prose would be a Poem, or not, he would have allowed it to be,
ποιημα ΤΙ
, a kind of Poem, as having the essence of Poetry, invention and imitation? See NOTE V. P. 153.

Commentary on the Poetics (Henry James Pye, 1792) (OCR draft) (Henry James Pye's 1792 English commentary, aligned to the Kassel reference edition.) focus

9.1. mvp-aristotle-comment-22 9.2

IF THE WORK OF HERODOTUS WERE PUT INTO VERSE, IT WOULD BE NO LESS A SPECIES OF HISTORY IN VERSE THAN IT IS IN PROSE.

I ACKNOWLEDGE myself to have been one of the many translators, justly blamed by Mr. Twining, for neglecting the force of the expression Ἱςορία τις, a fort, or species of history, and which, in this edition, I have corrected from his observation, which I shall take the liberty of inserting. May we not infer from this expreffion [A], ' that if Ariftotle had been asked whether an epic compofition in profe, ' would be a poem or not, he would have allowed it to be wποίημα τι, a • kind of poem, as having the essence of poetry, invention and imitation ?' To this, however, he would probably have added, that it would only be an imperfect kind of poem, from wanting the ornament of verfification, as the work of Herodotus in verse would be only a spurious kind of history from possessing it. Metastasio has rendered this passage properly; (B) ' it would still ' continue, though in verse, a species of history, as it was in profe.' Yet in his observations, anxious to support the hypothefis he had [A] See Note III. Chap. 1. [B] ' Rimarreble come era in prosa, sempre una specie d'istoria, ancora in verfi.' advanced,
POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. advanced, that poetry was, in any sense, incompatible with prose, and yet finding it impossible to avoid feeing the contrary doctrine was in some measure supported by Aristotle's assertion that it is the conftruction of the fable, and not of the verse, that diftinguishes the poet from the hiftorian, he runs into an unjustifiable refinement on the words and sense of the critic, and says he only means, that a person who writes on unpoetical subjects in verse, is not a good poet: just as we call a man that is awkward, dirty, and cowardly, no foldier, though enlisted, and receiving pay, and really a foldier in the legal and political sense of the word. The fallacy of this argument must strike every one in a variety of instances; and it is, befides, in direct oppofition to the doctrine of Ariftotle, since, on this supposition, verse is the essential requifite of poetry, and imitation only a quality. The sum of Ariftotle's reasoning on the subject, which is directly contrary to the idea of Metaftafio, seems to be this; • Whoever forms a fable, imitative of human ، actions, is a poet, a maker, an inventor. If his fable is ill conducted, ⚫ he is a bad poet. If he writes it in prose, he errs as to the proper material, or means of imitation. But if he forms no imitative fable, ' he is no poet.'

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

2. mvp-aristotle-comment-64

Ritter, cap. 9 § 2

μετά μέτρου ἢ ἄνευ μέτρων: cum scribit μετὰ μέτρου, cogitat de uno aliquo metri genere, cui Herodoti historias includere quis posset, cum ἄνευ μέτρων, quodcumque genus metrorum ab illis abesse significat.