Aristotle Poetics 16.6

Thomas Twining (Translator)

View: By Part
Secondly-Discoveries invented, at pleasure, by the Poet, and, on that account, still inartificial. For example; in the Iphigenia, Orestes, after having discovered his sister, discovers himself to her. She, indeed, is discovered by the letter; but Orestes, by [verbal proofs:] and these are such, as the Poet chuses to make him produce, not such, as arise from the circumstances of the fable 1 . This kind of discovery, therefore, borders upon the fault of that first mentioned: for, some of the things from which those proofs are drawn, are even such, as might have been actually produced as visible signs.

Poetics. Aristotle. Thomas Twining (Translator). London, UK. 1789.

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Current edition Experimental

Poetics (Thomas Twining, 1789) (OCR draft) (English) (Thomas Twining's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1789 and aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.)

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.) — 16 focus
Περὶ ποιητικῆς (OCR draft) Perseus (Aristotle, De arte poetica liber. Rudolf Kassel, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965. Reference edition for passage alignment.) — 16 focus
Poetics, Greek text (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's Greek text of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 16 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.) — 16 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.) — 16 focus
Arabic Poetics (Badawī edition, 1953) (OCR draft) (The ancient Arabic translation of Aristotle's Poetics in ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Badawī's 1953 edition.) — 16 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.) — 16 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.) — 16 focus
The Poetic of Aristotle (Henry James Pye, revised 1792) (OCR draft) Experimental (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.) — 16.6 focus
but from saying what the poet chose to put in his mouth; therefore this borders on the error blamed in the first mentioned species, since some [G] of the things from which the proofs are drawn might have been introduced themselves as visible tokens. The same objection may be made to the discovery by the voice of the shuttle [H], in the Tereus 1 2 3 4
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.) — 16.6 focus
And those recognitions rank in the second place, which are invented by the poet, on which account they are inartificial. Thus Orestes in the " Iphigenia" discovers that he is Orestes6. For she indeed recognises her brother through a letter, but Orestes himself speaks what the poet designs, but not what the fable requires ; on which account it is near to the above-mentioned error; since he might have introduced some [of the real things as signs].
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.) — 16 focus
La poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) Experimental (André Dacier's French translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1692.) — 16.6 focus
La ſeconde eſpece de reconnoiſſance eſt celle qui eſt imaginée par le Poëte, voilà pourquoy elle eſt ſans art. C'eſt ainſi que dans l'Iphigenie d'Euripide, Oreſte ayant reconnu ſa fœur par le moyen d'une Lettre, eſt reconnu d'elle à certaines enſeignes qu'il luy donne; car c'eſt le Poëte qui dit alors tout ce qu'il veut; ce n'eſt pas ſon ſujet qui parle & qui s'explique. Auſſi cette reconnoiſſance tombe-t-elle preſque dans le même défaut, dont j'ay déja parlé, car le Poëte avoit la liberté de faire reconnoître Oreſte par Iphigenie à tels autres ſignes qu'il auroit voulu, & qu'Oreſte auroit pû porter.
Poetica d'Aristotile (Bernardo Segni, 1549) (OCR draft) Experimental (Bernardo Segni's 1549 Florentine Italian translation, aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 16 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.) — 16 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.) — 16 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.) — 16 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.) — 16 focus

Notes on the current edition

Poetics

1. See Mr. Potter's translation of the Iphigenia in Tauris, v. 884 to 910 .

Commentary

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

2. mvp-aristotle-comment-565

σύμφυτα: comp. H. A. 7. 5, 585 b 31 .

2. mvp-aristotle-comment-566

λόγχην κτέ. From some unknown play ( Nauck, TGF. p. 855 ); the allusion is to the mark said to have been visible on the Σπαρτοί of Thebes. The accusative λόγχην Aristotle seems to regard as an instance of attractio inversa, since he continues the construction by saying ἀστέρας instead of ἀστέρες.

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-391

16.2 Ces marques font, ou naturelles, comme la lance empreinte ſur le corps des Thebains.] 1

4. mvp-aristotle-comment-392

16.2 Et comme l'étoile dont Carcinus ſe'ſt ſervy dans ſon Thyeſte.] 2

5. mvp-aristotle-comment-393

16.2 Carcinus.] 3

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-111

Ritter, cap. 16 § 2

τούτων δὲ τὰ μὲν σύμφυτα - διὰ τῆς σκάφης: signorum duo genera enumerantur: alia enim corpori natura ( σύμφυτα) impressa sunt, alia post adquisita ( ἐπίκτητα). secundi generis duae sunt species, prout signa illa adquisita corpori aut inhaerescunt aut appensa sunt. vide putidam diligentiam. λόγχην ἣν φοροῦσι Γηγενεῖς: verba haec esse tragici cuiusquam poetae recte collegit Hermannus, primum ob casum nominis a verbo φοροῦσι aptum, quamquam ei argumento in hoc scriptore non multum tribuendum videtur, tum ob articulum nomini Γηγενεῖς non additum, denique ob hoc ipsum nomen nove pro Σπαρτοῖς positum. Γηγενεῖς h. 1. sunt terrigenae illi Thebani sive Sparti, quibus hastae insigne corpori a natura impressum fama dedit. conf. Plutarchus de sera numinis vindicta p. 563 A (vel tom. III. p. I. pag. 268. apud Wyttenb.), Dionis Chrysostom. Orat. IV. p. 62 (vel ap. Reisk. tom I. p. 149), Iuliani orat. II. p. 81 C. ed. Spanhem. φοροῦσι dictum est, non φέρουσι, quia signum illud utpote innatum semper secum tulerunt. ἢ ἀστέρας οἵους ἐν τῷ Θυέστῃ Καρκίνος: quid est hoc? num poeta Carcinus stellas in corpore suo gestavit? immo ἐποίησε intelligendum est. audio: sed hoc ἐποίησε unde sumemus? nihil adest, nihil unde nobissponte se offerat. est igitur vitium orationis homini negligenter scribenti relinquendum. grammaticum etiam inde agnoscimus, quod de re sibi satis nota tam obscure loquitur, ut verba eius nonnisi intelligere is possit, qui hanc rem strictim memoratam sive ex Carcini fabula sive aliunde edoctus est. intelligit enim insigne quoddam splendidum (eburneum), quod genti Pelopidarum (Pelopida Thyestes erat) in humeris impressum fuisse fama tulit. conf. Iulianus 1. c. μηδὲ εἰς Πελοπίδας ἐξῆν ἐγγράφεσθαι τοὺς μὴ φέροντας ἐπὶ τῶν ὤμων τοῦ γένους τὰ γνωρίσματα. Themistii Orat. VI. p. 92. ed. Dindorf. τοῖς Πελοπίδαις μὲν ἐξήρκει καὶ μόριόν τι περὶ τὸν ὦμον ἐξεικασμένον ἐλέφαντι (cf. Pindar. Olymp. I, 27) πρὸς ἀπόδειξιν τῆς συγγενείας. vid. quae idem tradit in Orat. XXI. p. 304. Gregorius Nanzianzenus Epist. CXXXIX, 3. Σπαρτιάτας ἡ λόγχη γνωρίζει, ὦμος τοὺς Πελοπίδας, hanc famam Carcinus in Thyesta suo ita videtur exornasse, ut splendidam illam Pelopidarum in humeris particulam stellam esse fingeret vel metaphora usus eo nomine designaret. de Carcino diligenter expositum est a Meinekio in Comment. miscell. fasc. I. p. 23 sqq. τὰ δὲ ἐκτός, τὰ περιδέραια, καὶ οἷον ἐν τῇ Τυροῖ διὰ τῆς σκάφης: etiam haec mire coniuncta sunt. cum dixisset nonnulla signa corpori non inhaerescere sed extra esse, non pergit οἷον περιδέραια, sed secure adiungit τὰ περιδέραια, ac tum demum etiam tardius sequuntur καὶ οἷον ἐν τῇ Τυροῖ διὰ τῆς σκάφης. hanc σκάφην ne intelligas veram cymbam qua gemini Tyrus a Neptuno compressae filii expositi sunt, sed crepundia sive monumenta in scaphae speciem conformata puerisque appensa. sermo enim est de indiciis quae quis gestare solet, et quibus quis ille sit agnoscitur. Tyrus nomine tragoediam Sophocles conscripsit, unde fragmenta nonnulla exstant. hanc ab interpolatore respici vix dubium videtur, sed vide mihi quantopere turbaverit in exemplis congerendis. primum enim attulit versus particulam nomine auctoris omisso, deinde meminit ignobilis tragici Thyesten, denique tragoediam Sophocliam laudavit suppresso nomine poetae.