Poetics. Aristotle. Thomas Twining (Translator). London, UK. 1789.
Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.
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.
1. mvp-aristotle-comment-797
1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-798
18
λέξεως:
6, 1450 b 13
λέγω δὲ ... λέξιν εἶναι τὴν διὰ τῆς ὀνομασίας ἑρμηνείαν. In this chapter
Aristotle does not deal with style in general, but only with the portion of it which relates to the choice of words, the
ἐκλογὴ ὀνομάτων of the grammarians; his aim is to describe the poetic vocabulary, and determine the limits to the use of exceptional words and expressions in poetry. This chapter is referred to in
Rhet. 3. 1, 1404 a 28
, where the language of oratory is contrasted with that of poetry :
ἑτέρα λόγου καὶ ποιήσεως λέξις ἐστίν.
δηλοῖ δὲ τὸ συμβαῖνον· οὐδὲ γὰρ οἱ τὰς τραγῳδίας ποιοῦντες ἔτι χρῶνται τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον, ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ καὶ ἐκ τῶν τετραμέτρων εἰς τὸ ἰαμβεῖον μετέβησαν διὰ τὸ τῷ λόγῳ τοῦτο τῶν μέτρων ὁμοιότατον εἶναι τῶν ἄλλων, οὕτω καὶ τῶν ὀνομάτων ἀφείκασιν ὅσα παρὰ τὴν διάλεκτόν ἐστιν, οἷς δ᾽ οἱ πρῶτον ἐκόσμουν, καὶ ἔτι νῦν οἱ τὰ ἑξάμετρα ποιοῦντες, ἀφείκασιν· διὸ γελοῖον μιμεῖσθαι τούτους οἱ αὐτοὶ οὐκέτι χρῶνται ἐκείνῳ τῷ τρόπῳ.
ὥστε φανερὸν ὅτι οὐχ ἅπαντα ὅσα περὶ λέξεως ἔστιν εἰπεῖν, ἀκριβολογητέον ἡμῖν, ἀλλ᾽ ὅσα περὶ τοιαύτης οἷας λέγομεν.
περὶ δ᾽ ἐκείνης εἴρηται ἐν τοῖς περὶ ποιητικῆς.
1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-799
a 20
λέξεως ἀρετὴ κτέ.:
Rhet. 3. 2, 1404 b 1
ὡρίσθω λέξεως ἀρετὴ σαφῆ εἶναι (σημεῖον γὰρ ὅτι ὁ λόγος, ἐὰν μὴ δηλοῖ, οὐ ποιήσει τὸ ἑαυτοῦ ἔργον), καὶ μήτε ταπεινὴν μήτε ὑπὲρ τὸ ἀξίωμα ἀλλὰ πρέπουσαν· ἡ γὰρ ποιητικὴ ἴσως οὐ ταπεινή, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ πρέπουσα λόγῳ.
τῶν δ᾽ ὀνομάτων καὶ ῥημάτων σαφὴ μὲν ποιεῖ τὰ κύρια, μὴ ταπεινὴν δὲ ἀλλὰ κεκοσμημένην τάλλα ὀνόματα ὅσα εἴρηται ἐν τοῖς περὶ ποιητικῆς· τὸ γὰρ ἐξαλλάξαι ποιεῖ φαίνεσθαι σεμνοτέραν.
1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-800
ταπεινή.
For
ταπεινή as the opposite of
σεμνή (
a 21
) comp.
Rhet. 3. 2, 1404 b 3, 8
,
Isocrates 35 c
, and the antithesis between
τὸ ταπεινόν and
τὸ μεγαλοπρεπές in
Rhet. ad Alex. 3, 1423 a 31
.
Dionysius Hal. 5 p. 15 R. finds an instance of meanness of diction even in
Homer, in the language in
Od. 16. 1-16
:
διὰ γὰρ τῶν εὐτελεστάτων τε καὶ ταπεινοτάτων ὀνομάτων πέπλεκται πᾶσα ἡ λέξις, οἷς ἂν καὶ γεωργὸς καὶ θαλαττουργὸς καὶ χειροτέχνης καὶ πᾶς ὁ μηδεμίαν ὥραν τοῦ λέγειν εὖ ποιούμενος ἐξ ἑτοίμου λαβὼν ἐχρήσατο. λυθέντος γοῦν τοῦ μέτρου φαῦλα φανήσεται τὰ αὐτὰ ταῦτα καὶ ἄζηλα οὔτε γὰρ μεταφοραί τινες ἐν αὐτοῖς εὐγενεῖς ἔνεισιν οὔτε ὑπαλλαγαὶ
οὔτε καταχρήσεις οὔτε ἄλλη τροπικὴ διάλεκτος οὐδεμία, οὐδὲ δὴ γλῶτται πολλαί τινες οὐδὲ ξένα ἢ πεποιημένα ὀνόματα.
2.
mvp-aristotle-comment-801
Κλεοφῶντος:
see on 2,
1448 a 12
.
2.
mvp-aristotle-comment-802
21
Σθενέλου.
This
Sthenelus is presumably the tragic poet mentioned more than once by
Aristophanes (
Vesp. 1313
and
fr. 151
Kock
). It is doubtful whether a single line of his has come down to us (
Nauck,
TGF. p. 762).
3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-803
ἐξαλλάττουσα τὸ ἰδιωτικὸν:
Rhet. 3. 3, 1406 a 15
ἐξαλλάττει γὰρ τὸ εἰωθός [scil.
τὰ ἐπίθετα],
καὶ ξενικὴν ποιεῖ τὴν λέξιν. It will be observed that
Aristotle is now using
ἐξαλλάττειν in a large sense, to denote all possible deviations from the ordinary forms of expression (
πᾶν τὸ παρὰ τὸ κύριον,
a 23
), instead of restricting it to the kind of deviation presented in the
ἐξηλλαγμένον ὄνομα (
21, 1458 a 6
).
τὸ ἰδιωτικόν =
τὸ εἰωθός or
τὸ κύριον; but the point of view is not quite the same.
τὸ ἰδιωτικόν is the language of the ordinary man, the prosaic as opposed to the poetic mode of expression; the antithesis of
ἰδιώτης and
ποιητής is already in
Plato (
Phaedr. 258 D
,
Symp. 178 B
,
Laws 890 A
).
Isocrates 203 D has
ἰδιωτικὰ ὀνόματα, but in a different sense.
3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-804
22
ξενικοῖς.
In
Plato (e. g. in
Crat. 401 B, 417 C
) a
ξενικὸν ὄνομα is a non-Attic word or form, what
Aristotle calls a
γλώττα (see on 21,
1457 b 4
);
Isocrates 190 D
(quoted above on 21,
1457 b 1
) uses
ξένα ὀνόματα in the same sense.
Aristotle's
ξενικὰ ὀνόματα, however, is a wider term; it comprises all the various deviations from the usual form of expression (
πᾶν τὸ παρὰ τὸ κύριον
a 23
)—the
μεταφορά, the
ἐπεκτεταμένον ὄνομα, etc., as well as the
γλώττα. In the Rhetoric also
τὸ ξενικόν is the general opposite of
τὸ εἰωθός :
Rhet. 3. 3, 1406 a 15
ἐξαλλάττει τὸ εἰωθός, καὶ ξενικὴν ποιεῖ τὴν λέξιν.—
3. 12, 1414 a 26
τὸ εἰωθὸς καὶ ξενικόν. The attraction such unfamiliar words have for us is explained in
Rhet. 3. 2, 1404 b 8
:
τὸ ἐξαλλάξαι ποιεῖ φαίνεσθαι σεμνοτέραν [scil.
τὴν λέξιν]·
ὥσπερ γὰρ πρὸς τοὺς ξένους οἱ ἄνθρωποι καὶ πρὸς τοὺς πολίτας, τὸ αὐτὸ πάσχουσι καὶ πρὸς τὴν λέξιν. διὸ δεῖ ποιεῖν ξένην τὴν διάλεκτον· θαυμασταὶ γὰρ τῶν ἀπόντων εἰσίν, ἡδὺ δὲ τὸ θαυμαστόν.
24
4.
mvp-aristotle-comment-805
ἅπαντα τοιαῦτα
is an exaggeration, like
ἁπάντων in 1,
1447 b 22
. All that
Aristotle really means is that too much metaphor, or an undue proportion of strange words makes the sentence an enigma or a 'barbarism'.
τοιαῦτα =
ξενικά, or
ἐκ ξενικῶν. This passage is quoted in a fragment attributed to
Longinus (
Rhet. Gr. 1, 325
Spengel
):
ὅτι ὁ Ἀριστοτέλης τοὺς πάντα μεταφέροντας αἰνίγματα γράφειν ἔλεγεν.
4.
mvp-aristotle-comment-806
1458a25
μὲν οὖν
‘saepe usurpatur ubi notio modo pronunciata amplius explicatur’,
Bon.
Ind. 540 b 42
; comp.
14, 1453b 32
and
Vahlen’s note on the present passage.
4.
mvp-aristotle-comment-807
αἴνιγμα.
The puzzle in a riddle
Aristotle explains, as arising from the presence of metaphors, i. e. of words used in a transferred sense. The element of metaphors in riddles is noted again in
Rhet. 3. 2, 1405b 4
καὶ ὅλως ἐκ τῶν εὖ ᾐνιγμένων ἔστι μεταφορὰς λαβεῖν ἐπιεικεῖς (μεταφοραὶ γάρ αἰνίττονται), ὥστε δῆλον [δηλοῦν] ὅτι εὖ μετενήνεκται.—
3. 11, 1412a 24
καὶ τὰ εὖ ᾐνιγμένα διὰ τὸ αὐτὸ ἡδέα· μάθησις γάρ· καὶ λέγεται μεταφορά [μεταφορᾷ].
Quintilian also (8. 6, 14) speaks of the riddle-like effect of too much metaphor:
Ut modicus autem atque opportunus eius usus illustrat orationem, ita frequens et obscurat et taedio complet, continuus vero in allegorias et aenigmata exit.
26
τε γάρ
is practically no more than
γάρ in this and many other Aristotelian passages (comp.
Bon.
Ind. 750b 5
, and
Kühner,
Gr. Gr. 2. 2 p. 244
).
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-808
ἰδέα:
equivalent here to
οὐσία (see
Waitz,
Org. 2 p. 406
).
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-809
a 28
τῶν ὀνομάτων.
ὄνομα has been used before this as a generic term including the metaphor, etc., as well as what
Aristotle calls the
κύριον ὄνομα (see
21, 1457b 1
). When opposed, however, to the metaphor, as in the present passage, it may easily mean the name (as we say) for the thing, i. e. its proper name, its
κύριον ὄνομα. It recurs in this more specific sense in
22, 1458 b 2
and
b 16
. It is not so absolutely necessary, therefore, to adopt the emendation of
Heinsius,
τῶν (κυρίων) ὀνομάτων, or the reading which the Arabic Version is believed to imply,
τῶν (ἄλλων) ὀνομάτων. For other instances of the same use of general terms in a restricted sense see on
1, 1447a 29 (ἢ τοῖς μέτροις)
.
a 29
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-810
κατὰ δὲ τὴν μεταφορῶν,
scil.
σύνθεσιν. The correction
μεταφορῶν seems to be required not only by the form of the antithesis,
κατὰ τὴν τῶν ὀνομάτων σύνθεσιν, in the preceding line, but also by the meaning. It is the combination of metaphors that produces the sense of impossibility (comp.
ἀδύνατα συνάψαι a 27) which is of the essence of an
αἴνιγμα.
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-811
ἄνδρ᾽ εἶδον κτέ.:
a line traditionally ascribed to
Cleobulina, fr. 1
Bergk. The riddle is partially explained in
Rhet. 3. 2, 1405b 35
οὐ πόρρωθεν δεῖ ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τῶν συγγενῶν καὶ τῶν ὁμοειδῶν μεταφέρειν τὰ ἀνώνυμα [(ἐπὶ) τὰ ἀνώνυμα?] ὠνομασμένως, ὃ λεχθὲν δῆλόν ἐστιν ὅτι συγγενές, οἷον ἐν τῷ αἰνίγματι τῷ εὐδοκιμοῦντι “ἄνδρ᾽ εἶδον πυρὶ χαλκὸν ἐπ᾿ ἀνέρι κολλήσαντα”.
ἀνώνυμον γὰρ τὸ πάθος, ἔστι δ᾽ ἄμφω
πρόσθεσις τις· κόλλησιν τοίνυν εἶπε τὴν τῆς σικύας προσβολήν.
1458 a 29
χαλκός,
as a name for what we conventionally call a 'cupping-glass', is a metaphor derived from the material of which the instrument was often made in antiquity.
Celsus 2. 11 has a description of the brazen cupping-glass and its mode of action:
Aenea [scil. cucurbitula] altera parte patet, altera clausa est... in aeneam linamentum ardens conicitur, ac sic os eius corpori aptatur imprimiturque donec inhaereat... ubi inhaesit, si concisa ante scalpello cutis est, sanguinem extrahit; si integra est, spiritum (comp.
Aristot.
Probl. 9. 9-12, 890a 7-37
;
Mayor on
Juv. 14. 58
; and the monograph of
K. P. I. Lampros,
Περὶ σικυῶν καὶ σικυάσεως, Athens 1895).
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-812
κολλήσαντα:
a metaphor
ἀπ᾿ εἴδους ἐπὶ εἶδος (see
21, 1457b 13
). For the tense of the participle see
Goodwin,
Syntax of Greek Moods and Tenses § 148
.
6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-813
ἐκ τῶν γλωττῶν βαρβαρισμός:
a mere repetition of the
ἐὰν δὲ ἐκ γλωττῶν βαρβαρισμός in a 25, and brought in also without syntactical connexion with the context. The words may be the residue of a longer statement now lost, or a stop-gap to disguise a lacuna, or a rough note by
Aristotle himself to indicate a point to be worked out at length at some future time.
6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-814
βαρβαρισμός
is the opposite of
ἑλληνισμός.
ἑλληνίζειν in
Aristotle (v.
Bon.
Ind. 238b 53
) means to speak Greek like a native, i. e. correctly, and
βαρβαρίζειν to speak it like a foreigner, whether through the use of 'strange words' (
γλῶτται), or through that of strange or unauthorized forms of words. That
βαρβαρίζειν had this wide sense is clear from the explanation of
σολοικίζειν ('to speak incorrectly') in
Soph. el. 3, 165b 20
τέταρτον δὲ σολοικίζειν ποιεῖν, τοῦτο δ᾽ ἐστὶ τὸ ποιῆσαι τῇ λέξει βαρβαρίζειν, ἐκ τοῦ λόγου τὸν ἀποκρινόμενον (comp.
Bon.
Ind. 688b 54
). In later theory, however, 'barbarism' denotes more especially a faulty use of particular words, and 'solecism' a fault of construction or syntax:
Sextus Emp.
Adv. math. 1. 210
βαρβαρισμός ἐστι παράπτωσις ἐν ἁπλῇ λέξει παρὰ τὴν κοινὴν συνήθειαν, καὶ σολοικισμός ἐστι παράπτωσις ἀσυνήθης κατὰ τὴν ὅλην σύνταξιν καὶ ἀνακόλουθος (v.
Volkmann,
Rhetorik p. 396
).
Quintilian (1. 5, 8) distinguishes three senses of 'barbarismus' in Latin:
Barbarismum pluribus modis accipimus: unum gente [? genus], quale fit si quis Afrum vel Hispanum latinae orationi nomen inserat alterum genus barbarismi accipimus quod fit animi natura... tertium est illud vitium barbarismi cuius exempla vulgo sunt plurima, sibi etiam ... quisque fingere potest, ut verbo cui libebit adiciat litteram syllabamve vel detrahat, aut etiam aliam pro alia aut eandem alio quam rectum est loco ponat.
31
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-815
δεῖ ἄρα κεκρᾶσθαί πως τούτοις,
scil.
τὴν λέξιν; the language of poetry should have some admixture of unusual words or forms in it. Similarly in the
Rhetoric a certain combination of familiar and unfamiliar words is said to be an element of pleasure in a speech:
Rhet. 3. 12, 1414a 25
καὶ τὸ ἡδεῖαν [scil. τὴν λέξιν εἶναι] τὰ εἰρημένα ποιήσει ἂν εὖ μειχθῇ τὸ εἰωθὸς καὶ ξενικόν. In the text
τούτοις refers back to the
ξενικά in a 22; all from
ἀλλ᾽ ἄν τις in a 23 to
βαρβαρισμός in a 31 is digression. For the qualifying
πως in this connexion comp.
Probl. 30. 1, 954a 27
ἐὰν δέ πως κραθῶσι.
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-816
τὸ μὲν γὰρ μὴ ἰδιωτικὸν ποιήσει,
scil.
ταῦτα, i. e.
τὰ ξενικά. The
οἷον prefixed to the list of
ξενικά which follows is the appositional and explanatory
οἷον, nempe or scilicet (comp.
Bon.
Ind. 502a 7
). There is a reference to this place in
Rhet. 3. 2, 1404b 5
:
τῶν δ᾽ ὀνομάτων καὶ ῥημάτων σαφῆ μὲν ποιεῖ τὰ κύρια, μὴ ταπεινὴν δὲ ἀλλὰ κεκοσμημένην τάλλα ὀνόματα ὅσα εἴρηται ἐν τοῖς περὶ ποιητικῆς.
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-817
34
εἴδη,
scil.
ὀνομάτων.
8.
mvp-aristotle-comment-818
οὐκ ἐλάχιστον δὲ μέρος συμβάλλεται:
Isocrates 156 B
οὐ γὰρ ἐλάχιστον μέρος τὰ γένη ταῦτα συμβάλλεται πρὸς εὐδαιμονίαν. —
Hippocrates 1 p. 525 K.
οὐκ ἐλάχιστον μέρος συμβάλλεται ἀστρονομίη ἐς ἰητρικήν.
8.
mvp-aristotle-comment-819
συμβάλλεται.
The singular verb may be explained by supposing the real subject to be
τὰ ἐπεκτεταμένα καὶ ἀποκεκομμένα καὶ ἐξηλλαγμένα ὀνόματα rather than the various processes they exemplify. Other instances of a singular verb with several subjects in the plural will be found in
Kühner,
Gr. Gr. 2. 1 p. 81
. The anomaly in the present instance is not so harsh as it might have been, as the verb precedes its subjects, and is also at some distance from them: it may be illustrated also by the common use of
ἔστι,
ἦν, and
γίγνεται followed by a plural subject (see
Kühner,
Gr. Gr. 2. 1 p. 68
).
Vahlen quotes a similar construction with
δοκεῖ in
H. A. 4. 9, 536a 17
δοκεῖ δὲ . . . ὥσπερ λύχνοι φαίνεσθαι οἱ ὀφθαλμοί.
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-820
7
35
ὥστε οὐκ ὀρθῶς ψέγουσιν κτέ.
In this long digression, which extends to
ἐκεῖνος δὲ τοῦτο ἠγνόει in 1459a 4,
Aristotle insists on the literary value and effect of the various poetical forms of expression, and defends their use by the poets. He first answers the critics of the epic (b 7–31), and then those of the tragic diction (b 31–1459a 4).
b 7
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-821
τὸν ποιητήν,
the poet, whoever he may be. It is evident, however, that
Aristotle is mainly concerned with
Homer (comp.
Bon.
Ind. 609b 57
); the licences he considers are all epic licences; and the instances quoted in b 9–10 were presumably meant to caricature the Homeric hexameter. It was generally admitted that
Homer was ready enough
metri gratia to take great liberties with language (see
Ludwich,
Aristarchs Homerische Textkritik 2 p. 127
;
Schulze,
Qu. epicae p. 3
). Throughout this chapter
Aristotle is thinking quite as much of the epic poet as of the tragedian, though his theory of the Epic is still to come (in 23–24).
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-822
Εὐκλείδης ὁ ἀρχαῖος.
Nothing further is known of him. As a surmise, which must be taken for what it is worth, I would suggest that he may possibly be the
Euclid who was Archon in the year 403, when the reformed alphabet was officially adopted at Athens. At that moment considerable attention seems to have been devoted to questions of phonetics (see on
20, 1456 b 31
); and the anomalies and licences of Homeric metre may very well have been one of the facts to which the reforming party pointed in proof of the need of a fuller alphabet.
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-823
ὡς ῥᾳδιον ποιεῖν
=
ὡς ῥᾳδιον ὂν ποιεῖν. For the omission of
ὄν see
Goodwin,
Syntax of Greek Moods and Tenses § 75. 1
.
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-824
b 8
ἐκτείνειν.
From the definition of the
ἐπεκτεταμένον ὄνομα in
21, 1457b 35
it is clear that
Aristotle is referring not only to the lengthening of a short vowel but also to the insertion of an extra syllable in a word.
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-825
b 9
ἰαμβοποιήσας ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ λέξει.
The sense of these words and their connexion with the lines which follow have been a difficulty with the interpreters from the days of
Victorius, who gives up the passage in despair.
Goulston renders them by 'qui etiam in ipsa oratione soluta iambica confecit';
Tyrwhitt by 'in ipsa oratione soluta cavillo facto';
M. Schmidt by 'ihr Verfahren in seinem eignen Ausdruck persiflirte';
Ueberweg by 'er legt den Spott in die Redeform selbst (durch Sylbenverlängerung) hinein'.
Vahlen’s interpretation (which is practically the same as
Tyrwhitt’s) is 'iambum sive carmen probrosum et cavillatorium faciens mero sermone pedestri (in purer prosa)'. It is not so easy to see how
ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ λέξει can mean the same thing as
ἐν ψιλῇ λέξει; nor is
ἰαμβοποιήσας quite the same thing as
ἴαμβον ποιήσας. Perhaps the simplest solution of the difficulty is to transpose
ἰαμβοποιήσας, placing it after
ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ λέξει, and then take the two lines of parody which follow as its object.
ἰαμβοποιεῖν τι may very well mean to 'write, or say, something as an
ἰαμβοποιός (i. e. as a caricaturist), just in the same way as
δραματοποιεῖν τι means to 'describe as a
δραματοποιός (48 b 37), and
λογοποιεῖν τι to describe as a
λογοποιός.
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-826
Ἐπιχάρην κτέ.
This and the next quotation are given as specimens of prose which by a liberal use of epic licences may be made to read as verse. By the artifice of lengthening two short syllables
Ἐπιχάρην εἶδον κτέ. becomes an hexameter—the lengthening required with
Ἐπιχάρην being like that in
ἐπίτονος in
Od. 12. 423.
βαδίζειν, it may be observed, is not an epic word. How the second instance was to be read as a verse is not equally clear, the text here being obviously corrupt. If we may suppose
ἐλλέβορον to be a scribal error for
ἐλλεβόρου, the parodist may have proposed to read this as
ἐλλεβόροιο.
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-827
Μαραθῶνάδε.
The accentuation in A
c (
Μαραθῶνα δὲ) is in accordance with the rule of
Apollonius and
Herodian (
La Roche,
Homerische Textkritik p. 221
).
11
10.
mvp-aristotle-comment-828
φαίνεσθαί πως χρώμενον:
De gen. et corr. 1. 10, 328b 10
φαίνεται γάρ πως καὶ μικτὰ ἠρέμα. A visible use of these artifices is one thing and a discreet use of them (
τὸ μέτριον, b 12) another. For the antithesis comp.
Pol. 5. 11, 1314a 28
περί τε τὰς ἀπολαύσεις τὰς σωματικὰς [scil. δεῖ] τοὐναντίον ποιεῖν ἢ νῦν τινὲς τῶν τυράννων ποιοῦσιν· οὐ γὰρ μόνον εὐθὺς ἕωθεν τοῦτο δρῶσιν καὶ συνεχῶς πολλὰς ἡμέρας, ἀλλὰ καὶ φαίνεσθαι τοῖς ἄλλοις βούλονται τοῦτο πράττοντες, ἵν᾿ ὡς εὐδαίμονας καὶ μακαρίους θαυμάσωσιν· ἀλλὰ μάλιστα μὲν μετριάζειν τοῖς τοιούτοις, εἰ δὲ μή, τό γε φαίνεσθαι τοῖς ἄλλοις διαφεύγειν. In the
Rhetoric
Aristotle lays down the same rule for oratory: the orator must use all the arts of language, but with discretion, so as not to allow his use of them to become too apparent:
Rhet. 3. 2, 1404b 18
διὸ δεῖ λανθάνειν ποιοῦντας, καὶ μὴ δοκεῖν λέγειν πεπλασμένως ἀλλὰ πεφυκότως (comp. also
3. 7, 1408b 4
).
10.
mvp-aristotle-comment-829
τούτῳ τῷ τρόπῳ,
scil.
τῆς διαλέκτου; comp.
οἱ ἐπιτιμῶντες τῷ τοιούτῳ τρόπῳ τῆς διαλέκτου in b 6, and
τῷ τρόπῳ τούτῳ τῆς μεταφορᾶς χρῆσθαι in
21, 1457 b 30
.
Vahlen, who supplies
ἐπεκτάσεσι after
χρώμενον, takes
τούτῳ τῷ τρόπῳ as equivalent to
τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον.
10.
mvp-aristotle-comment-830
12
τὸ δὲ μέτριον.
If the traditional reading,
τὸ δὲ μέτρον, be retained, we have to understand
μέτρον in the sense of 'measure' or 'limit'. The objection to this interpretation is that
μέτρον has the sense of 'metre' in the immediate context (b 16), and that any other sense would be somewhat confusing in a passage dealing with 'metrical' licences.
τὸ μέτριον, on the other hand, is certified by more than one parallel in the
Rhetoric:
Rhet. 3. 2, 1405a 32
εὐλαβεῖσθαι δὲ δεῖ καὶ παρατηρεῖν ἐν ἀμφοῖν τὸ μέτριον. —
3. 3, 1406a 16
ἀλλὰ δεῖ στοχάζεσθαι τοῦ μετρίου, ἐπεὶ μεῖζον ποιεῖ κακὸν τοῦ εἰκῇ λέγειν· ἡ μὲν γὰρ οὐκ ἔχει τὸ εὖ, ἡ δὲ τὸ κακῶς, διὸ τὰ Ἀλκιδάμαντος ψυχρὰ φαίνεται· οὐ γὰρ ἡδύσματι χρῆται ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἐδέσματι τοῖς ἐπιθέτοις, οὕτω πυκνοῖς καὶ μείζοσι καὶ ἐπιδήλοις. In another passage,
Rhet. 2. 14, 1390b 8
ὅσα δ᾽ ὑπερβάλλουσιν ἢ ἐλλειπουσι, τούτων τὸ μέτριον καὶ τὸ ἁρμόττον, we find
Aristotle passing from the idea of
τὸ μέτριον to that of
τὸ ἁρμόττον just as he does here in the context (b 15).
10.
mvp-aristotle-comment-831
κοινὸν ἁπάντων ἐστὶ τῶν μερῶν:
Rhet. 3. 7, 1408a 36
τὸ δ᾽ εὐκαίρως ἢ μὴ εὐκαίρως χρῆσθαι κοινὸν ἁπάντων τῶν εἰδῶν ἐστιν.
b 14
11.
mvp-aristotle-comment-832
ἀπρεπῶς.
In the
Rhetoric an unsuitable metaphor is said to be one of the faults which make the style of an orator 'frigid':
Rhet. 3. 3, 1406b 5
τὸ ψυχρὸν ἐν ταῖς μεταφοραῖς γίνεται· εἰσὶ γὰρ καὶ μεταφοραὶ ἀπρεπεῖς αἱ μὲν διὰ τὸ γελοῖον (χρῶνται γὰρ καὶ οἱ κωμῳδοποιοὶ μεταφοραῖς) αἱ δὲ διὰ τὸ σεμνὸν ἄγαν καὶ τραγικόν.
11.
mvp-aristotle-comment-833
ἐπίτηδες ἐπὶ τὰ γελοῖα.
ἐπὶ τὰ γελοῖα, which has been bracketed (by
Gomperz), seems to be wanted to keep up the parallelism with what is said in b 5 sqq. on the subject of the epic licences, which
Euclid had parodied and turned to ridicule.
Aristotle's reply to
Euclid is that it is quite possible to misuse metaphors, etc., for the same purpose,
ἐπὶ τὰ γελοῖα (comp.
Rhet. 3. 3, 1406b 5
, quoted above). The comparative
ἐπὶ τὰ γελοιότερα would be more in accordance with usage (comp.
Stallb. on
Plato
Symp. 214 E
).
12.
mvp-aristotle-comment-834
15
τὸ δὲ ἁρμοττόντως.
This is considered (1) in reference to these epic licences (
ἐπέκτασις,
ἀποκοπή,
ἐξαλλαγή), and (2) in reference to the use of metaphor, etc. (b 17).
12.
mvp-aristotle-comment-835
ὅσον διαφέρει:
Isocrates 87 c
καίτοι μ᾿ οὐ λέληθεν ὅσον διαφέρουσι τῶν λόγων εἰς τὸ πείθειν οἱ λεγόμενοι τῶν ἀναγιγνωσκομένων.
16
12.
mvp-aristotle-comment-836
ἐπὶ τῶν ἐπῶν θεωρείσθω:
because these metrical licences are so marked a feature in the epic diction (see on b 7). The proof here is not unlike that by which
Isocrates 191 A
shows the literary value of metre:
οἱ μὲν μετὰ μέτρων καὶ ῥυθμῶν ἅπαντα ποιοῦσιν, οἱ δ' οὐδενὸς τούτων κοινωνοῦσιν· τοσαύτην ἔχει χάριν, ὥστ᾽ ἂν καὶ τῇ λέξει καὶ τοῖς ἐνθυμήμασιν ἔχῃ κακῶς, ὅμως αὐταῖς ταῖς εὐρυθμίαις καὶ ταῖς συμμετρίαις ψυχαγωγοῦσι τοὺς ἀκούοντας.
γνοίη δ᾽ ἄν τις ἐκεῖθεν τὴν δύναμιν αὐτῶν· ἣν γάρ τις τῶν ποιημάτων τῶν εὐδοκιμούντων τὰ μὲν ὀνόματα καὶ τὰς διανοίας καταλίπῃ, τὸ δὲ μέτρον διαλύσῃ, φανήσεται πολὺ καταδεέστερα τῆς δόξης ἧς νῦν ἔχομεν περὶ αὐτῶν.
12.
mvp-aristotle-comment-837
16
τῶν ὀνομάτων
; i. e. the normal words, the words themselves, as distinct from the
ἐπεκτάσεις, etc., of them (see above on 28).
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-838
20
18
ἰδεῶν.
For
ἰδέα =
εἶδος, 'species', see
Waitz,
Org. 2 p. 416
, and
Bon.
Ind. 338 b34.
. In
De caelo 1. 7
Aristotle says, within the space of a few lines,
πεπερασμένων εἰδῶν (274a32) and
ἰδέας πεπερασμένας (b2) without perceptible difference of meaning.
1458b
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-839
ἓν δὲ μόνον ὄνομα.
A verb taken by itself, i. e. apart from a subject, may be termed an
ὄνομα (see on 20, 1457 10).
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-840
21
κυρίου εἰωθότος.
Though
κύριον and
εἰωθὸς ὄνομα are often used as synonyms, there is a certain difference between them, as the
εἰωθὸς ὄνομα may be a metaphor.
ἐσθίει in the line of Aeschylus (b23) is the word in general use (
τὸ εἰωθός), but it is a metaphor, and therefore not a
κύριον ὄνομα (see on 21, 1457b1) in the stricter sense of the term. By comparison with
θοινᾶται, however, it is the
κύριον ὄνομα.
Aristotle gets out of the difficulty by terming it the
κύριον εἰωθός, the usual κύριον, because it has by custom and use come to be treated as a
κύριον ὄνομα, and is no longer felt to be a metaphor.
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-841
22
εὐτελές.
The epithet is applied to a certain kind of word in
Rhet. 3. 7, 1408a13
(see on
κόσμος, 21, 1457b2), and in the passage from Dionysius quoted above on 20.
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-842
Αἰσχύλος:
Nauck,
TGF. p. 81 and 618
.
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-843
24
θοινᾶται,
which is not uncommon in poetry, is regarded by
Aristotle as a
γλώττα (see on 21, 1457b4). It is explained in
Hesychius,
θοινᾶται· εὐωχεῖται.
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-844
25
$2
νῦν δὲ μ᾽ ἐὼν κτέ.:
Od. 9. 515
νῦν δέ μ᾽ ἐὼν ὀλίγος τε καὶ οὐτιδανὸς καὶ ἄκικυς.
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-845
ἀεικής.
The traditional text of the
Poetics has
ἀειδής, and that of
Homer
ἄκικυς—with an ancient variant, however,
ἀεικής. The restoration of
ἀεικής in the quotation, as the reading which
Aristotle must have had before him, is believed to be confirmed by the Arabic Version.
ἀειδής is open to two objections: (1) it is the word actually used in b27 in
Aristotle's metaphrasis of the Homeric line; (2) it is also a late word, and in the sense which it seems to bear here, that of 'unsightly' or 'ugly' (=
δυσειδής), not to be found in pre-Aristotelian Greek. On the other hand, if the old poetical word
ἀεικής had to be interpreted as an epithet of a person,
ἀειδής in its later sense might very well be chosen to represent it.
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-846
30
29
δίφρον ἀεικέλιον κτέ.:
Od. 20. 259
. Several of the manuscripts of the
Odyssey read
παραθείς in lieu of
καταθείς.
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-847
ἠιόνες βοόωσιν:
. 17. 265.
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-848
κράζουσιν:
comp.
Demosthenes 18. 132
βοῶν ὁ βάσκανος οὗτος καὶ κεκραγώς.
b31
14.
mvp-aristotle-comment-849
Ἀριφράδης
is perhaps the Ariphrades whose name occurs in
Aristophanes, and who is said to have been a
κιθαρῳδός by profession (
Bergk,
De rel. com. Att. p. 232
). It is not necessary to suppose him to have given expression to this criticism in a book.
14.
mvp-aristotle-comment-850
32
τοὺς τραγῳδοὺς:
i. e. the tragic actors, who are made responsible for what the poet puts into their mouth. It will be observed that the expressions singled out for censure are taken apparently from the dialogue of Tragedy; there would have been no point in saying that the language of the choral part was
παρὰ τὴν διάλεκτον. A similar use of the word
τραγῳδοί is found, a few years after
Aristotle's time, in
Diphilus, fr. 30 Kock
& τόνδ᾽ ἐποπτεύουσα καὶ κεκτημένη Βραυρώνος ἱεροῦ θεοφιλέστατον τόπον, Λητούς Διός τε τοξόδαμνε παρθένε, ὡ ς οἱ τραγῳδοί φασιν, οἷς ἐξουσία ἔστιν λέγειν ἅπαντα καὶ ποιεῖν μόνοις.
14.
mvp-aristotle-comment-851
τῇ διαλέκτῳ,
the spoken, as distinct from the written language.
διάλεκτος has the same sense in
4, 1449a 26
πλεῖστα γὰρ ἰαμβεῖα λέγομεν ἐν τῇ διαλέκτῳ τῇ πρὸς ἀλλήλους, and in
Rhet. 3. 1, 1404a 33
τῶν ὀνομάτων ἀφείκασιν ὅσα παρὰ τὴν διάλεκτόν ἐστιν. The ordinary meaning of the term in
Aristotle is either 'speech' (i. e. articulate language) or 'mode of speech'.
14.
mvp-aristotle-comment-852
4
34
ἐγὼ δέ νιν:
Sophocles
O. C. 986
. The rest of the instances in the text were no doubt taken from existing plays (v.
Nauck,
TGF. p. 856
).
1459a4
16.
mvp-aristotle-comment-853
ἑκάστῳ τῶν εἰρημένων:
the
ἐπεκτάσεις,
ἀποκοπαί, and
ἐξαλλαγαὶ τῶν ὀνομάτων mentioned in 1458 b a before the digression (1458b5 ἠγνόει 1459a4).
16.
mvp-aristotle-comment-854
5
καὶ διπλοῖς ὀνόμασι καὶ γλώτταις
is a sort of afterthought.
Aristotle remembers that, as artifices of poetic expression, these are in just the same position as the forms of language he has been considering, and admit of the same justification.
16.
mvp-aristotle-comment-855
πολὺ δὲ μέγιστον.
In the
Rhetoric metaphor is shown to hold an equally important place in the diction of oratory (
Rhet. 3. 2, 1404 b 32 sqq.
).
16.
mvp-aristotle-comment-856
6
μεταφορικὸν:
comp. the eulogy of
Empedocles as a master of poetic expression in fr. 70 (Teubn.) from the dialogue
περὶ ποιητῶν:
καὶ ῾Ομηρικὸς ὁ Ἐμπεδοκλῆς καὶ δεινὸς περὶ τὴν φράσιν γέγονε, μεταφορικός τ᾽ ὧν καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις τοῖς περὶ ποιητικὴν ἐπιτεύγμασι χρώμενος. With this use of
μεταφορικός, i. e. as applied to a person,
Vahlen compares that of
ἐνθυμηματικός in
Rhet. 1. 1, 1354 b 22
, etc., and of
συλλογιστικός in
Top. 8. 14, 163b 30
.
εὐφυΐας τε σημεῖον.
εὐφυία means a gift of nature, i. e. an aptitude not to be acquired by education or study; see on
17, 1455 a 32
, and comp.
Eth. N. 3. 7, 1114b 6
φῦναι δεῖ ὥσπερ ὄψιν ἔχοντα ᾗ κρινεῖ καλῶς καὶ τὸ κατ᾿ ἀλήθειαν ἀγαθὸν αἱρήσεται. καὶ ἔστιν εὐφυής, ᾧ τοῦτο καλῶς πέφυκεν. τὸ γὰρ μέγιστον καὶ κάλλιστον καὶ πα᾿ ἑτέρου μὴ οἷόν τε λαβεῖν μηδὲ μαθεῖν, ἀλλ᾽ οἷον ἔφυ τοιοῦτον ἕξει, καὶ τὸ εὖ καὶ τὸ καλῶς τοῦτο πεφυκέναι ἡ τελεία καὶ ἀληθινὴ ἂν εἴη εὐφυία. The originality shown in metaphor is noted also in
Rhet. 3. 2, 1405a 9
καὶ λαβεῖν οὐκ ἔστιν αὐτὴν πα᾿ ἄλλου. This power, according to
Aristotle, depends on a rapid and intuitive perception of similarity in difference, i. e. of the resemblances between things not obviously alike; comp.
Rhet. 3. 11, 1412 b 10
;
δεῖ δὲ μεταφέρειν ... ἀπὸ οἰκείων καὶ μὴ φανερῶν, οἷον καὶ ἐν φιλοσοφίᾳ τὸ (τὸ) ὅμοιον καὶ ἐν πολὺ διέχουσι θεωρεῖν εὐστόχου. For the kinds of similarity underlying metaphors see
21, 1457 b 7
.
17.
mvp-aristotle-comment-857
εὖ μεταφέρειν.
Aristotle is apparently setting aside far-fetched metaphors (
Rhet. 3. 2, 1405a 35
;
3. 3, 1406 b 8
), in which the underlying resemblance is not so real and clear as it should be.
17.
mvp-aristotle-comment-858
8
τὸ τὸ ὅμοιον θεωρεῖν.
For other instances of concurrence of identical forms of the article see
Soph. el. 13, 173 b 15
;
Meteor. 1. 3, 341a 30
;
De resp. 2, 471a 7
;
Metaph. Ν 2, 1089 a 14
.
18.
mvp-aristotle-comment-859
τῶν δ᾽ ὀνομάτων κτἑ.
A very similar distinction is made in
Rhet. 3. 3, 1406 a 1
:
χρησιμωτάτη ἡ διπλῆ λέξις τοῖς διθυραμβοποιοῖς· οὗτοι γὰρ ψοφώδεις· αἱ δὲ γλῶτται τοῖς ἐποποιοῖς· σεμνὸν γὰρ καὶ αὔθαδες· ἡ μεταφορὰ δὲ τοῖς ἰαμβείοις· τούτοις γὰρ νῦν χρῶνται.
18.
mvp-aristotle-comment-860
9
τοῖς διθυράμβοις:
comp. the fr. of
Philodemus published by
Gomperz (Vienna Academy,
Sitzungsberichte 123 p. 66):
τὸ μακροσύνθετον ἀνιᾶν μὲν ἐν τῇ τραγῳδίᾳ ἢ τοῖς ἔπεσι ... ἄλυπον δ᾽ ἐν τῷ διθυράμβῳ.—
Demetrius
De eloc. 91
ληπτέον δὲ καὶ τὰ σύνθετα ὀνόματα, οὐ τὰ διθυραμβικῶς συγκείμενα, οἷον θεοτεράτους πλάνας, οὐδὲ ἄστρων δορύπυρον στρατόν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐοικότα τοῖς ὑπὸ τῆς συνηθείας συγκειμένοις.
18.
mvp-aristotle-comment-861
10
τοῖς ἡρωικοῖς:
comp.
23, 1459 b 34
.
18.
mvp-aristotle-comment-862
12
τοῖς ἰαμβείοις:
i. e. the tragic dialogue (v.
4, 1449a 24
).
19.
mvp-aristotle-comment-863
λέξιν μιμεῖσθαι.
Instead of its usual sense of diction or language,
λέξις in this passage must mean (like
διάλεκτος in 1458b32) the spoken as distinct from the literary language. The present statement, therefore, is in harmony with that in
Rhet. 3. 1, 1404a 33
, where Tragedy is said to have learnt to reject words outside the ordinary spoken language (
ὅσα παρὰ τὴν διάλεκτόν ἐστιν). With this use of
λέξις we may compare that of
λέξις,
λεκτικὸν μέτρον, and
λεκτικὴ ἁρμονία in
4, 1449a 23–8
; and also that of
λόγος in
Rhet. 3. 1, 1404a 30
ἐκ τῶν τετραμέτρων εἰς τὸ ἰαμβεῖον μετέβησαν διὰ τὸ τῷ λόγῳ τοῦτο τῶν μέτρων ὁμοιότατον εἶναι τῶν ἄλλων.
Goulston renders
λέξις here by
vulgaris sermo;
Bonitz (
Ind. 427b 31
) by
sermo pedestris, on the assumption that it stands for
ψιλὴ λέξις, as it no doubt sometimes does. In
4, 1449a 23
λέξις is the opposite of 'song'.
19.
mvp-aristotle-comment-864
13
ἐν λόγοις
has been taken to mean 'in common speech, or conversation' ('in familiari colloquio',
Goulston), 'in prose' ('oratio pedestris',
Bon.
Ind. 433 b 20), and 'in speeches' ('in orationibus',
Tyrwhitt). Though it is not always possible to determine the exact meaning of a word like
λόγος (v. on 4, 1449a 17), the balance of probability is rather in favour of
Tyrwhitt's 'in orationibus'.
Aristotle's meaning would seem to be this, that the tragic dialogue (ἐν ἰαμβείοις) is limited to the same species of words as oratory (ἐν λόγοις)—those found in the language of common life (
λέξις), viz. the
κύριον, the
μεταφορά, and the
κόσμος. The appropriateness of the
κύριον and
μεταφορά for oratory is distinctly affirmed in the
Rhetoric, and for the same reason, that they are in common use:
Rhet. 3. 2, 1404b 31
τὸ δὲ κύριον καὶ τὸ οἰκεῖον καὶ μεταφορὰ μόναι χρήσιμοι πρὸς τὴν τῶν ψιλῶν λόγων λέξιν· σημεῖον δέ, ὅτι τούτοις μόνοις πάντες χρῶνται, πάντες γὰρ μεταφοραῖς διαλέγονται καὶ τοῖς οἰκείοις καὶ τοῖς κυρίοις (comp.
Isocrates 190 E
). The reference in the text to the language of 'speeches' may serve to remind us of the fact that even in
Aristotle's time the theory of literary prose was still studied mainly in connexion with oratory, and as part of the art of Rhetoric. According to the canon here laid down by
Aristotle, the highly-coloured diction of
Aeschylus would be inappropriate in Tragedy; and he tells us elsewhere that it was eschewed by the dramatists of his time:
Rhet. 3. 1, 1404a 33
τῶν ὀνομάτων ἀφείκασιν [i. e. the tragedians] ὅσα παρὰ τὴν διάλεκτόν ἐστιν, οἷς δ᾽ οἱ πρῶτον ἐκόσμουν ... ἀφείκασιν. From the days of
Euripides in fact (comp.
Aristoph.
Ran. 939
) the language of Tragedy had been approximating to that of ordinary life; and in
Aristotle's age there was probably no very serious difference between it and that of the Comedy of the period.
19.
mvp-aristotle-comment-865
14
κόσμος:
see on
21, 1457b2
. The parallel in the
Rhetoric (3. 2, 1404 b 31, quoted above) ignores the
κόσμος.
20.
mvp-aristotle-comment-866
15
τῆς ἐν τῷ πράττειν μιμήσεως.
A tragedy is something to be acted, an epic something to be recited or read. This makes a fundamental distinction between them, though
Aristotle admits that as a work of literature a tragedy is quite possible without performance on a stage
(6, 1450 b18; 26, 1462 a12, 17)
.
1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-511
22.1
1. L A vertu de l'expreſſion conſiſte dans la netteté & dans la nobleſſe. Celle qui eft compofée de mots propres est tres claire; mais elle est baffe.]
1
2.
mvp-aristotle-comment-512
3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-513
22.4
3. Mais si on n'employoit par tout que de ces fortes de termes, on feroit, ou des énigmes, ou des barbariſmes, les metaphores trop frequentes degenereroient en énigme.]
3
4.
mvp-aristotle-comment-514
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-515
22.5
5. Car l'Enigme conſiſte proprement à dire les choses de manière, que l'expreſſion les faſſe paroitre impoſſibles; & c'est ce qu'on ne peut faire par la fimple compoſition des mots, il n'y a que les metaphores qui ayent la vertu de faire l'Enigme.]
5
6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-516
22.5
6. Comme on le voit dans cet Enigme celebre, j'ay vû un homme qui avec du feu colloit de l'airain ſur un homme.]
6
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-517
22.8
7. Mais il y a un moyen tres ſeur de la rendre, & noble & claire, c'est de ſe ſervir de mots alongez, racourcis, ou changez.]
7
8.
mvp-aristotle-comment-518
22.9
8. C'est pourquoy ceux qui condamnent cette forte d'expreſſion, & qui blament Homere de s'en étre ſervi, le font ſans raiſon, comme l'ancien Euclide.]
8
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-519
10.
mvp-aristotle-comment-520
22.10
10. Mais de ſe ſervir toujours de ces façons de parler, c'est cette affectation qui fait le ridicule, & non pas la chose meme.]
10
11.
mvp-aristotle-comment-521
22.11
11. Car il y a une mesure qui est commune à toutes ces differentes especes, & qu'il ne faut jamais paſſer.]
11
12.
mvp-aristotle-comment-522
22.11
12. Cela eft fi vray, que si l'on ſe ſervoit de la mème maniére des metaphores, de mots étrangers, &c.]
12
13.
mvp-aristotle-comment-523
22.12
13. Pour étre convaincu de la beauté que donnent à la diction ces expreſſions figurées, pourvû qu'elles foient convenables, bien placées & avec meſure, il ne faut que prendre des vers d'un Poëme Epique, ou d'une Tragedie, & y changer les termes.]
13
14.
mvp-aristotle-comment-524
15.
mvp-aristotle-comment-525
22.13
15. Dans la plupart des vers d'Homere, ſi au lieu des termes recherchez & metaphoriques, on s'aviſoit de mettre les ter-mes propres, on détruiroit toute leur beauté.]
15
16.
mvp-aristotle-comment-526
17.
mvp-aristotle-comment-527
22.16
17. Il est fort beau & fort difficile de ſe ſervir convenable-ment & à propos de toutes les figures que nous venons d'expli-quer, comme des mots doubles, des mots étrangers, &c. mais il eft beaucoup plus beau & plus difficile d'employer heureusement la metaphore.]
17
18.
mvp-aristotle-comment-528
22.16
18. En effet c'eſt la ſeule choſe qu'on ne peut emprunter d'ailleurs, & qui marque un heureux naturel & un beau genie; car de bien faire ce tranſport d'une chose à l'autre, c'est voir d'un coup d'œil ce qu'il y a de ſemblable dans des ſujets tres differens.]
18
19.
mvp-aristotle-comment-529
20.
mvp-aristotle-comment-530
21.
mvp-aristotle-comment-531
22.20
21. Ce que nous venons de dire ſuffit pour la Tragedie, & pour l'imitation qui conſiſte dans l'action.]
21
192.
mvp-aristotle-comment-192
NOTE 192. P. 110.
22.1
THE EXCELLENCE OF DICTION CONSISTS IN BEING PERSPICUOUS, WITHOUT BEING MEAN
Λεξεως ἀρετη i. e. of diction, or language, in general; not,
"elocutionis Poeticae," as Goulston and others render it. For Aristotle gives the same definition of the excellence of oratorical diction, in his Rhetoric;
1
adding, only, with respect to the degree of elevation, such a restriction as his subject there required. Now had he intended here a definition of the language of Poetry, as discriminated from that of Prose, he would hardly have confined himself to two characters common to both; viz. that it should be perspicuous, and yet not mean, or low, like colloquial language, consisting only of common and proper words, without metaphors, or any of the other ornamental words which he enumerates; some of which he makes essential to the excellence (
ἀρετην) and proper elevation, even of prose elocution.
2
For, that this is the force of
ταπεινη, is clear from his own explanation.
Still, it is obvious to ask, why the philosopher, when his subject was the excellence of poetic diction, should thus set out with a general definition, instead of giving us, at once, the definition of the species. The reason, I suppose, was, that he conceived the poetic to differ from the rhetorical language, only in the degree of elevation above ordinary speech; and to define degrees is not easy. Nor, indeed, was even this difference common to all Poetry. If the diction of the Dithyrambic and other Lyric kinds, and the Heroic, with their pompous apparatus of compound epithets, foreign and antiquated words, and boldness of metaphor, rose far above the highest elevation of prose diction; on the other hand, that of Tragedy, we know, frequently descended, in its lowest parts, even below what Aristotle assigns as the proper level of rhetorical speech, to a style differing from common speech in no other circumstance but that of metre.
3
— Dacier, with the stiff and inflexible dignity of French Tragedy before his eyes, appears to have been shocked at the expression,
μη ταπεινη; for he translates, not the words only, but the ideas, of his author, into French:
"La vertu de l'expression consiste dans la netteté et dans LA NOBLESSE."
193.
mvp-aristotle-comment-193
NOTE 193. P. 110.
22.2
SUCH IS THE POETRY OF CLEOPHONSee NOTE 14. From what Aristotle says of this Poet in the Rhetoric, it appears, that he sometimes variegated his vulgarity with a dash of bombast.
4
He gave fine epithets to low words. The
ἐυτελες ὀνομα, there, agrees with what is said of him here. See the ch. of the Rhet. last referred to. What is there said of
Cleophon
,
La Motte
says of
HOMER himself.
"Homere emploie quelquefois les mots les plus vils, et il les releve aussitôt par des epithetes magnifiques."
5
It must, indeed, be confessed, that, after all the apologies of critics and commentators, Homer's
Διος ὑφορβος — "divine swineherd" — has not, to our ears, a much better effect than
ποτνια συκη. The only reasonable way of defending Homer, is, surely, to content ourselves with saying, in general, that the expression could not have the same incongruous appearance in Homer's time; as, in that case, he certainly would not have used it. At least, this would be a better apology, than to assert, with
Boileau
, that
συβωτης is one of the finest words in the Greek language.
6
194.
mvp-aristotle-comment-194
NOTE 194. P. 110.
22.2
AND THAT OF STHENELUS.This seems to explain a fragment of
Aristophanes
, in which the Poet, alluding probably to the flatness and insipidity of the diction of
Sthenelus
, as wanting the poetic seasoning of metaphor, &c. introduces some hungry fellow saying, that "he could make shift to eat even some of the words of Sthenelus, if they were but dipped in salt, or vinegar."
Και πως ἐγω Σθενελου φαγοιμ αν ῥημα τι / Εις όξος ἐμβαπτομενον ἢ λευκους άλας.
Athen. IX. init.
195.
mvp-aristotle-comment-195
NOTE 195. P. 110.
22.4
AN ENIGMA, IF COMPOSED OF METAPHORS.
"Ut modicus autem atque opportunus ejus usus illustrat orationem, ita, frequens et obscurat et tædio complet; continuus verò in allegoriam et ænigma exit." —
Quintil. VIII. 6.
196.
mvp-aristotle-comment-196
NOTE 196. P. 110.
22.5
THE ESSENCE OF AN ENIGMA CONSISTS, &c.I can neither assent to the emendation proposed by Mr. Winstanley, nor see the least want of any emendation. The passage appears to me perfectly clear and unexceptionable, as it is.
Τα ὑπαρχοντα must, by no means, be joined with
ἀδυνατα. It evidently means here, in a sense very usual, things that actually exist—i. e. are true. As,
Rhet. II. 25
,
λυεται δε και τα σημεια, κ᾿αν ὑπαρχοντα: where,
ὑπαρχοντα is synonymous with
ἀληθες, in
lib. i. cap. ii. p. 517
—
λυτον δε, κ᾿αν ΑΛΗΘΕΣ.
The passage is accurately and closely rendered by Piccolomini.
"La forma e l'effentia dell' enigma confifte in quefto, che nel dir cofe, che VERAMENTE SIANO, fi congiungbino infieme cofe ch appaiano impoffibili à ftar infieme."—And this is an exact definition of an ænigma—such an ænigma, at least, as Aristotle means. But in the other way of constructing the passage, which is that of Castelvetro, and some other interpreters, it is no definition at all. For if the essence of a riddle consists merely in "putting together things that are incompatible and impossible," —
τα ὑπαρχοντα ἀδυνατα συναψαι then the Italian Poet made a riddle, when he described a man fighting after he was cut in two:
del colpo non accorto, / Andava combattendo, ed era morto.
7
197.
mvp-aristotle-comment-197
NOTE 197. P. 110.
22.5
NOW THIS CANNOT BE EFFECTED BY THE MERE ARRANGEMENT OF THE WORDS, &C.
Κατα μεν ουν την των ὀνοματων συνθεσιν. — Heinsius
την των ΚΥΡΙΩΝ ὀνοματων. But the
κυριον όνομα, as I have already observed, is, throughout, opposed by Aristotle, not to
μεταφορα only, but to all the other words. He would hardly, therefore, have used it here in a different sense, as opposed to metaphor only.
8
If any emendation were necessary, I should think
ΑΛΛΩΝ ὀνοματων more probable. But perhaps no word is wanting. Aristotle had used the expression,
ἀδυνατα ΣΥΝΑΨΑΙ—"to put together things impossible." This might lead to suppose, that an ænigma might be made by the mere
συνθεσις ὀνοματων—by a certain arrangement or construction of the words only. Therefore he adds—"this cannot be done by the mere arrangement of the words; by the metaphorical use of them it may."
9
As this sense seems sufficiently clear, supposes no defect in the text, and, after all, coincides, in the main, with that of Heinsius, (for we must necessarily understand, an arrangement of words not metaphorical—) I have adopted it in my translation, after Dacier, and Batteux.
198.
mvp-aristotle-comment-198
NOTE 198. P. 110.
22.5
A MAN I ONCE BEHELD, &C.See
Rhet. III. 2, p. 586
, where this is called an approved, or admired, riddle:—
ἐν τῷ ἀινιγματι τῳ ευδοκιμουντι—. I wish it may
ευδοκιμειν with a modern reader. In Athenæus another line appears:
Ανδρ᾿ ἐιδον πυρι χαλκον ἐπ᾿ ἀνερι κολλησαντα, / Ουτω συγκολλως ὡστε συναιμα ποιειν.
Lib. ix. p. 452.
But Casaubon seems right in supposing this pentameter to have been a modern addition; for it is not found, I believe, in any more antient writer. Even in Plutarch, I observe, that the hexameter not only appears by itself, as in Aristotle, but is plainly given as the whole. See his
Symposium, p. 267, ed. H. St.
It appears from that passage to have been the production of a lady, Eumetis. I doubt whether, in these "degenerate days," it would have gained her a prize in the Lady's Diary. The Greeks were fond of these puzzles. The reader may find some curious specimens of this sort of wit in
Athenæus, X. 448, &c.
199.
mvp-aristotle-comment-199
NOTE 199. P. 111.
22.9
AS OLD EUCLID DID, OBJECTING, &C.Fontenelle talks in the same way.
"Du tems d'Homere c'étoit une grande merveille qu'un homme pût aſſujettir ſon diſcours à des meſures, à des fillabes longues et breves, & faire en même tems quelque choſe de raiſonnable. On donnoit donc aux Poetes des licences infinies, & on ſe tenoit encore trop heureux d'avoir des vers. Homère pouvoit parler dans un ſeul vers cinq langues differentes; prendre le dialecte Dorique quand l'Ionique ne l'accommodoit pas; au defaut de tous les deux, prendre l'Attique, l'Eolique, ou le commun; c'est-à-dire, parler en même tems, Picard, Gascon, Normand, Breton, & François commun. Il pouvoit allonger un mot s'il étoit trop court, l'accourcir s'il étoit trop long; personne n'y trouvoit à redire."
10
But, could this ingenious and sensible writer seriously suppose, that the language of Homer's poems had at all the same effect to a hearer, or reader, of his time, that an English poem would now have, if composed of all the provincial dialects of Great Britain? —We are always told, how Homer enriched his language by "visiting all the principal nations of Greece, and learning the peculiarities of their speech."
11
Just as if an English poet, because he had resided some time in Yorkshire, or Lancashire, might, in his next poem, put
neet for
night,
loise for
lose, or a
balliblash, a very well-sounding Lancashire word, for a
blaze.
This account makes the language of Homer no other than the
kainisma which Quintilian reprobates, among the
vitia orationis:
12
something worse than the "Babylonish dialect" of Hudibras;
"a party-colour'd dress / Of patch'd and piebald languages. / It had an odd promiscuous tone, / As if he'd talk'd three parts in one Which made some think, when he did gabble, / They had heard three labourers of Babel; / Or Cerberus himself pronounce / A leash of languages at once."
With such an idea of Homer's language, Fontenelle might well add—
"Cette étrange confusion de langues, cet assemblage bisarre de mots tout défigurés, etoit la langue des dieux; du moins il est bien ſûr que ce n'etoit pas celle des hommes."—And, indeed, I firmly believe with Lord Monboddo, that "fuch a mongrel dialect was never written by any man;" and that "Homer wrote, either the language that was ſpoken in the country where he was born and educated, or that was used by the poets that had written before him, and was the eſtabliſhed language of Poetry."
13
200.
mvp-aristotle-comment-200
NOTE 200. P. 111.
22.9
AND THEN GIVING A BURLESQUE EXAMPLE OF THAT SORT OF DICTION.
Ιαμβοποιησας ἐν ἀυτη τη λεξει. — Two senses have been given to the word
ἰαμβοποιησας; both of them, I think, far from satisfactory. Some render it—making Iambic verses:
"Iambis usus est." [Vict.] But, is it likely, that Euclid, meaning to ridicule Homer's hexameters, should do it in Iambic verse?—Besides that the lines themselves, such as we find them, have not the least air of Iambics, but fall easily enough, with a little help, into hexameters. In this I perfectly agree with Dacier; though I see no reason to suppose with him, that Euclid had composed—
"un ouvrage en vers heroiques." Others, and Madius in particular, understand the word to mean, satirizing, ridiculing, the Poet; —
"ſe moque de lui." [Dac.] A meaning that, undoubtedly, suits the passage better; whether it suits the word itself I much doubt, but will not venture to decide. As Aristotle uses
ἰαμβοποιος,
14
in the sense of a satiric Poet—a maker of the
ἰαμβος, or satiric poem, he may possibly have used the verb,
Ιαμβοποιειν, here, in the correspondent sense of making a satire upon, or burlesquing:—
ἰαμβοποἰησας ἐν ἀυτη τη λεξει—having ridiculed him "in that fort of diction," in the following manner, &c.
As this sense appears to me, on the whole, far more eligible than the other, I have followed it: for I see no third sense that can, with any shew of probability, be extracted from the present text. But that it is defective, and that
ἰαμβοποιησας is an error, I have very little doubt. If conjecture might be indulged, I should be inclined to suppose, that what Aristotle had said was this; "that it is an easy matter to versify, even in common speech, (
ἐν αυτη τη λεξει,)
15
if one may be allowed to extend syllables and words at pleasure, so as to convert, for instance, an Iambic foot, which is continually occurring in common conversation, into an Heroic or Spondee." And the examples that follow, were probably two prose sentences so converted, or convertible, into hexameters. But as to the manner in which Aristotle had expressed this in the text, I have no conjecture to offer that is satisfactory, even to myself. Of the mangled lines which follow, with their perplexing variety of indeterminable readings, I shall say with Victorius,
"veritate deſperatâ, nihil amplius curæ de hac re fufcipere volui." It is some comfort however, as M. Batteux has observed, that both the objection of Euclid, and Aristotle's answer, are clear enough, independently of the examples.
I ought to mention, that Castelvetro has explained this passage, without supposing the text wrong, in a manner different from any other interpreter, and which, in part, accords with my idea. By
ἰαμβοποιειν he understands neither satirizing, nor making Iambic verses; but, making Iambic feet instead of spondees, in hexameter verse. And the sense he gives the whole passage is this: "It would be a very easy thing to write heroic verse, if this liberty of extension were allowed; for then, a Poet might put Iambic feet in the room of Spondees, and commit no fault, because the short syllables might be lengthened at pleasure." And the lines that follow he supposes to be examples of such defective hexameters.
There is somewhat ingenious in this explanation, as there is in many others of this acute writer: but it has likewise the fault, which many of his explanations have; that of being by no means reconcileable with the original.—See his comment. p. 481.
201.
mvp-aristotle-comment-201
NOTE 201. P. 111.
22.10
WHEN THESE LICENCES APPEAR TO BE THUS PURPOSELY USED.
Το μεν ουν ΦΑΙΝΕΣΘΑΙ πως χρωμενον, κ. τ. ἀλ.—The force, both of
φαινεσθαι, which I understand to be emphatic here, and of
πως, seems perfectly well explained by Castelvetro.
"Non ſo perchè alcuni vogliano rimuovere di queſto teſto, πως, eſſendoci ſtato poſto per dimostrare, che allora il vitio ſi ſcopre, e'l riſo ſi muove, quando fi comincia in alcun modo a riconoſcere, che il poeta ha uſata a ſtudio, e ricercata queſta maniera di parole." p. 482. So, too, Piccolomini's translation—
"l'eſſer veduto---uſar coſi fatto modo di locutione." —For
πως, I once suspected we should read
ΑΠΡΈπως; as presently after—
χρωμενοι ἀπρεπως. But I believe
πως is right:—
aliquo modo.
202.
mvp-aristotle-comment-202
NOTE 202. P. 111.
22.12
HOW GREAT A DIFFERENCE IS MADE, &C.
Όσον διαφερει. Not
"quantum excellat," as Goulston and others translate; but, "what a difference the proper use of such words makes"—"how different the effect is." As, above, cap. x.
ΔΙΑΦΕΡΕΙ γαρ πολυ—"it makes a great difference:" and, cap. xviii.
τι ΔΙΑΦΕΡΕΙ.—Nothing more common than this use of the word. The difference here expressed, is, plainly, between the
ἁρμοττον, and the
ἀπρεπως, in the use of such words:
χρωμενα ΑΠΡΕΠΩΣ τα άυτα ἐν ἀπεργασαιτο ΤΟ ΔΕ ΑΡΜΟΤΤΟΝ όσον διαφερει κ. τ. λ.
203.
mvp-aristotle-comment-203
NOTE 203. P. 111.
22.12
AND TEMPERATE USE OF SUCH WORDS.
Εντιθεμενων των ὀνοματων ἐις το μετρον:—literally, "the words being put into the metre:" i. e. as Victorius and others explain it, "taking care, that, in changing the words, you do it
"falvo metro.""
16
A very unnecessary caution surely; besides that the Greek hardly says that, whatever it may mean. Let us try its meaning by the fairest test, that of strict and literal translation; for we can sometimes see nonsense in English, which we cannot see in Greek. "But what difference is made by a proper use of such words, may be observed in hexameter verse, when the words are put into (i. e. as it is explained, adapted to) the metre." — What words?— Metaphorical, foreign, extended, &c. of which he had just been speaking. Very well. But how put in, or adapted to, the metre?—for not a word has yet been said about changing the words. Goulston understands, putting in these poetical words instead of the proper and common words. I see nothing of this in the original.
In short, it appears to me, that nothing tolerable can be made of the phrase,
ἐις το μετρον, taken in this sense. If it might be taken, as some have taken it, adverbially, for
μετρίως—to a moderate degree—all would be well.
17
"Let it be considered in heroic verse, what a difference is made by such words, when properly used, and not inserted, or introduced, too frequently." But I cannot think that the expression will admit of this sense, though somewhat favoured, perhaps, by the circumstance of
μετρον having been just before used in the sense of moderation:
το δε μετρον, κοινον άπαντων, &c. If the article
το were omitted, the adverbial sense would be less improbable; but,
εις ΤΟ μετρον, can only, I think, mean into the metre. Still, however, I incline to think this was Aristotle's meaning, and that he probably wrote
ἐις το ΜΕΤΡΙΟΝ. A single letter makes all the difference. The word
μετριον, as far as that may add any probability to my conjecture, occurs in that part of the Rhetoric where he is treating of the very same subject—the proper and moderate use of metaphors, epithets, and other tropical and ornamental words, in oratory. Thus,
III. 2, p. 586
, speaking of epithets and diminutives, he says,
ευλαβείσθαι δε δει, και παρατηρειν ἐν ἀμφοιν ΤΟ ΜΕΤΡΙΟΝ. And again, of epithets—
δει στοχαζεσθαι ΤΟΥ ΜΕΤΡΙΟΥ. p. 587. As this was the only satisfactory sense I could make of the words, I have ventured to give it in my version.
204.
mvp-aristotle-comment-204
NOTE 204. P. 112.
22.13
FOR A COMMON AND USUAL WORD.
Κυριου ειωθοτος. As
κυριον, in Aristotle's sense, is common, the addition of
ειωθοτος, (
usual), seems, at first view, to be mere tautology. But the case, as it is very well explained by Victorius, appears to have been this. The word
ἐσθιει, which he here calls
κυριον ειωθοτος, was not strictly
κυριον,
18
but only a common metaphor; that is, a word which, though originally metaphorical, had acquired, by constant use as a chirurgical term, the effect of a proper word. [See NOTE 179.]
κυριον, therefore, in Aristotle's enumeration, was opposed
μεταφορα, as well as to
γλωττα, and the rest of the poetical words, the application of it here, to a word that was evidently metaphorical in its original use, might seem inconsistent: the word
ἐιωθοτος was therefore, probably, added, to obviate, in his short way, this objection.
I cannot guess what induced Dacier to render
γλωτταν, here, by
"mot metaphorique;" or Castelvetro to assert, that Aristotle calls
θοιναται a foreign word, only on account of the boldness of the metaphor. By
γλωττα, I think, we are to understand, any word that belongs either to another language, or another dialect of the same language, and that is not naturalized by common and popular
use. For foreign words, by long usage, become common and popular words; like
entire,
dame, and a great number of other French words in our language, which were
γλωτται when first introduced, and for a considerable time afterwards; but have now, for many years, ceased to be considered as foreign words. Such words in the Greek language Aristotle, I apprehend, did not com- prehend under the term
γλωτται, as not being strange, uncommon,
ξενικα. This is evident from a passage in his Rhetoric:
αι μεν ουν ΓΛΩΤΤΑΙ, ΑΓΝΩΤΕΣ· τα δε ΚΥΡΙΑ, ΙΣΜΕΝ.
19
There is, however, one sort of poetic words not distinctly provided for in Aristotle's enumeration; I mean, obsolete words. Yet these make so considerable a part of the privileged language of verse, that we can hardly suppose him to have overlooked them.
Γλωτται seems the only class to which they can possibly be referred: yet his definition of
γλωττα is, "a word,
ᾗ χρωνται ΕΤΕΡΟΙ;" which is not applicable to an obsolete word, used by nobody. Perhaps he did not think it worth while to distinguish between words belonging to another language, or dialect, and words that once belonged to the native language, but which, having long fallen into disuse, have, when occasionally revived, the effect of foreign words.
205.
mvp-aristotle-comment-205
NOTE 205. P. 112.
22.13
THE CANKEROUS WOUND THAT EATS MY FLESH.
Φαγεδαινα ἡ με σαρκας ἐσθιει ποδα. — We should read, probably, for the sake of the metre, either
φαγεδαινα γ' ἡ, as it is corrected in the Oxford Euripides, or, which seems still better,
φαγεδαινα δη, which is Du Pauw's emendation. And
σαρκας, for the same reason, must have been altered to
σαρκα, in the verse of Euripides, as, I see, it is given in the Oxford edition.
Had Aristotle told us no more about these two lines, than that one of them was of Æschylus, and the other of Euripides, what critic would not have confidently given the
θοιναται to Æschylus?
206.
mvp-aristotle-comment-206
NOTE 206. P. 112.
22.13
Νυν δε μ’ εων ΟΛΙΓΟΣ τε και ΟΥΤΙΔΑΝΟΣ και ΑΚΙΚΥΣ.
Od. IX. 515.
—In the altered line, thus:
Νυν δε μ’ εων ΜΙΚΡΟΣ τε και ΑΣΘΕΝΙΚΟΣ και ΑΕΙΔΗΣ.
Among these substituted terms, that
μικρὸς answers to
ὀλίγος is clear enough; but how
ἀειδὴς answers to
ἄκικυς, it is not easy to make out. This difficulty struck me, long before I had seen the comment of Victorius, who makes the same remark;
20
and I had accounted for the mistake in the same way that he does: for, if
ἄκικυς be the true reading, the commentators must, probably, have been misled by taking it for granted, that the substituted words must necessarily correspond, in order, as well as meaning, to the original words. But it is easy to see, that
ἀειδὴς,
ugly, or deformed, cannot answer to
ἄκικυς, which is
weak; and that
ἀσθενικὸς does exactly answer to it.
Ἀκικυς — ΑΣΘΕΝΗΣ, ἀδύνατος.
Hefych.
—But my difficulty goes still farther. I do not see how
ἀειδὴς can correspond, in meaning, to
ὀυτιδανὸς. I once thought it should be
ΑΕΙΚΗΣ.
Ουτιδανά — ὀυδενὸς ἄξια.
Hefych.
Αεικελίας — ἐυτελεῖς, ΟΥΔΕΝΟΣ ΑΞΙΟΥΣ: and,
ΑΕΙΚΕΣ — ΕΥΚΑΤΑΦΡΟΝΗΤΟΝ.
Id.
So
Suidas
;
Αεικελιος — ὁ ἐυκαταφρόνητος. But, notwithstanding the authority of lexicographers, and the common derivation of the two words,
εἰκής and
ἀεικέλιος, I question whether the former is ever used by Homer in the sense of
ὀυτιδανός,
contemptible, mean, &c. though
ἀεικέλιος is.
Ἀεικὴς seems always to mean,
indignus,
unworthy, sad, shocking, shameful, &c. It is a word of serious indignation.
Ἀεικέλιον seems to be used sometimes in that sense, and sometimes in the contemptuous sense, as in the line of Homer which Aristotle next produces. The only passages that I have found in Homer, where
ἀεικὴς will admit well of this sense, are
Od. Ν. 199
, and
Od. Ω. 249
, in the expressions,
ἀεικέα ἕσσο, and,
ἀεικέα ἕσσαι: yet even there, it is not necessary to render it
"meanly clad;" it may be, as in other places,
sadly, unbecomingly, indignè, &c.
21
With respect to the word
ὀυτιδανὸς, Hesychius gives
ἀσθενὴς as one of its meanings;
22
and
ἀσθενικὸς might well enough answer to it here, were it not for the stronger claim of the word
ἄκικυς;
23
which, however, after all, may possibly be a mistake. We know how variously Homer was read and quoted by the antients. Three Medicean manuscripts here give
ἀειδὴς, instead of
ἄκικυς;
24
and so, the ed. Ald. and the version of Valla. This reading is also mentioned by Eustathius. Perhaps, then,
ἀειδὴς might be the reading of Aristotle's copy—the precious copy
ἐκ νάρθηκος, of which we hear so much; and he might mean to exemplify his proposed experiment of substituting common, for poetical, expression, only in the two first words; repeating the last,
ἀειδὴς, merely to complete his verse. But whatever becomes of this conjecture, one thing I cannot help just observing—that this reading,
ἀειδὴς, is favoured by the preceding lines in Homer. Polyphemus says—
Ἀλλ’ ἀιεί τινα φῶτα ΜΕΓΑΝ καὶ ΚΑΛΟΝ ἐδέγμην Ἔνθαδ’ ἐλεύσεσθαι, μεγάλην ἐπιειμένον ΑΛΚΗΝ. Νῦν δέ μ’, ἐὼν ΟΛΙΓΟΣ τε καὶ ΟΥΤΙΔΑΝΟΣ καὶ ΑΚΙΚΥΣ, &c.
Od. IX. 513.
One would expect the three words in this last line to answer, as opposites, to
great,
handsome, and
strong, in the two first: which they will not do, if we read
ἄκικυς; for
ὀυτιδανὸς, though it may very well be opposed to
μεγάλην ἐπιειμένον ἀλκήν, cannot be, with any propriety, opposed to
καλὸν. Whereas, if
ἀειδὴς be substituted for
ἄκικυς, all will answer exactly;
ὀλίγος, to
μέγαν,
ὀυτιδανός, to
μεγάλην ἐπιειμένον ἀλκήν, and
ἀειδὴς, to
καλὸν.
In these examples, it is not always easy to ascertain the particular class, to which Aristotle would have referred the words which he changes. We learn, however, that all these Homeric words were
ξενικά,
uncommon, and poetical; and that all the substituted words were
κύρια—
words in common and familiar use.
207.
mvp-aristotle-comment-207
NOTE 207.
22.17
P. 113. FOR IT IS THIS ALONE, WHICH CANNOT BE ACQUIRED, &C.
Well translated, though very freely, by
M. Batteux
.
"C'est la seule chose qu'on ne puisse emprunter d'ailleurs. C'est la production du génie, le coup-d'œil d'un esprit qui voit les rapports." Compare
Rhet. III. 2, p. 585, D.
and
11, p. 595, E.
where it is observed, that,
καὶ ἐν φιλοσοφίᾳ, τὸ ΟΜΟΙΟΝ, ΚΑΙ ΕΝ ΠΟΛΥ ΔΙΕΧΟΥΣΙ, θεωρεῖν, ἐυστοχον.—See
Mr. Harris's Philol. Inq. p. 186, 187
, where all these passages are quoted and translated.
208.
mvp-aristotle-comment-208
NOTE 208.
22.18
P. 113. THE DOUBLE ARE BEST SUITED TO DITHYRAMBIC POETRY, &C.
—Χρησιμωτάτη ἡ διπλῆ λέξις τοῖς διθυράμβοις· ὁυτοι γὰρ ψοφώδεις· ἀι δὲ γλῶτται, τοῖς ἐποποιοῖς· σεμνὸν γὰρ καὶ ἀυθάδες· ἡ μεταφορὰ δὲ, τοῖς ἰαμβείοις.
Rhet. III. 3, p. 587.
209.
mvp-aristotle-comment-209
NOTE 209.
22.19
P. 113. BUT TO IAMBIC VERSE, WHICH, AS MUCH AS MAY BE, AN IMITATION OF COMMON SPEECH—.
This, as I have already observed, is the only passage in these three chapters concerning the diction, that strictly relates to the subject—the diction of Tragedy, as distinguished from that of the Epic, and other species.
25
It is a hint only; but a pregnant hint, and one that might furnish matter for a dissertation of some length. How frequently, even in the best Tragedies, do we see the Poet, as it were, through the actor; hear him indulging himself in his own language, instead of imitating that of his characters; substituting declamation for passion, describing when he should express; and, in the unrestrained and epic elevation of his diction, losing all sight of that natural language, of which, undoubtedly, the language of Tragedy should be, according to the precept here implied by Aristotle, only an improved imitation. This improvement, indeed, admits of more or less; but should, at least, bear always the same proportion to what we conceive would be the natural language
26
of the persons who speak, in the situation, whatever it may be, of the scene before us. For this last circumstance makes a great difference. Tragedy has its
ἀργὰ μέρη, its comparatively
"idle parts," as well as the Epic Poem;
27
and, considering how rare the talent is of true poetic fancy, and poetic expression, the critic, who would rigorously exclude them from every part of Tragedy, must be an Ariphrades, or a Euclid. The first speech of
Caractacus, in Mr. Mason's exquisite drama, is highly poetical. Possibly, a severe critic might wish it somewhat less so;—but we have so little of such Poetry! No Poet, however, knows better than Mr. Mason, when the simpler tone of nature and passion should take place. When
Caractacus is exhorted by the Druids to
"bethink him"—
—if ought on this vain earth Still holds too firm an union with his soul, Estranging it from peace— —he answers,
I had a Queen:— Bear with my weakness, Druid!—This tough breast Must heave a sigh—for she is unreveng'd. And can I taste true peace, she unreveng'd? —So chaste, so lov'd a queen!—ah, Evelina, Hang not thus weeping on the feeble arm That could not save thy mother.—
The reader will find some excellent observations on this subject in
Dr. Beattie's Essay on Poetry, &c. Part II. chap. i. Sect. 1, p. 224, &c.
and
Sect. 3, p. 267, 268
, where a charming example of simple Tragic language is given from
Othello. In his note, Dr. Beattie has
"translated it into the finical style." But we see plainly, that he is by much too good a Poet to succeed well in spoiling good Poetry.
With respect to the Greek Tragedy, its earliest language appears to have been of a low and burlesque kind—the
λέξις γελοἰα of its satyric origin, conveyed in the suitable vehicle of the dancing tetrameters.
28
When it was reformed and dignified, (
ἀπεσεμνώθη,) Homer was the model; and ÆSCHYLUS, with a conception naturally sublime, and the
Iliad before him, raised the tone of Tragedy above its proper pitch, not only to the pomp of the Epic, but even, frequently, to the wild, and tumid, and dark audacity of the Dithyrambic: so that, sometimes, as extremes will meet, the
λέξις γελοἰα, which he took so much pains to avoid, came round and met him, in the shape of bombast, at the very moment when he thought himself at the greatest distance from it. There could not well be any thing in the theatrical cart of Thespis more laughable, than to call smoke
"the brother of fire," and dust, the
"brother of mud."
29
SOPHOCLES reduced the general language of his dialogue to a more equable and sober dignity, but still, Homer, we know, was his great model;
30
and of his diction it may, perhaps, be said, that it is often Epic, though his measure is Iambic. Most modern readers, however, will, I believe, think it, (as we are told many antient readers did,) more adapted to the genius of Tragedy than that of EURIPIDES;
31
who seems to have been regarded by the antients as the first who brought down the language of Tragedy into unison with the measure, so that the one bore the same degree of resemblance to common speech in its expressions, as the other did in its rhythm. At least, this appears to have been Aristotle's opinion, from a passage in his
Rhetoric
, where, after having explained the difference between the diction of Oratory and that of Poetry, and the foundation of that difference, he observes, that such a degree of embellishment as forces on the hearer the idea of art, and labour, and preparation, is to be avoided, not only by the Orator, but even by the Poet, if he would be natural and affecting: and he compares such evidently artificial language to the voices of the generality of actors, as opposed to the voice of Theodorus, which always appeared to be the real voice of the character he personated; whereas their voices were evidently feigned.
32
He then adds
"The best way to conceal artifice, and make your language appear easy and natural, is, by forming it, chiefly, of the words and phrases of customary speech, properly selected; as EURIPIDES does, who first set the example."
33
A passage, that precedes this, deserves to be given entire, from its close connection with the subject of this part of the treatise on Poetry, and the curious, though short, sketch it contains of the history of Tragic diction.
"As the Poets appeared to owe their reputation to their language, which never failed to be admired, however foolish and absurd the matter it conveyed; on this account, even prose diction was, at first, poetical, like that of Gorgias. And even now, they, who use such language, are looked upon, by illiterate people, as the finest speakers; which is far from being true; for oratorical diction, and poetical diction, are different things. And as a proof of this, we see what has actually happened: for now, even among the Poets themselves, those who write Tragedy no longer make use of that sort of language; but, as they had exchanged the Trochaic verse for the Iambic, because this, of all metres, approaches the nearest to common speech; so now, they have also discarded all those words and phrases, so remote from common speech, with which the earlier Tragic Poets used to embellish their diction, and which are still employed by those who write Hexameters. It would be ridiculous, therefore, to imitate the Poets in a language, which they themselves have abandoned as improper."
34
The Abbé Batteux, by understanding
ἰαμβείοις here to mean Iambic, or satirical, Poems, has, unluckily, thrown away the only passage in these three chapters, that was strictly to Aristotle's purpose. He has, also, with Dacier, misrepresented his meaning, by rendering—
"ne peut recevoir que ce qui est employé dans la conversation." We are, undoubtedly, to understand,
ΜΑΛΙΣΤΑ ἁρμόττει, as before: for that Aristotle did not mean absolutely to exclude the other Poetic words—the double, the foreign, &c. from every part of the Tragic dialogue, is plain from his allowing the occasional use of them even in prose.
Rhet. III. 2, p. 585, C.
7, p. 590, E.
591, A.
22.1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-88
22.2
LANGUAGE WILL HAVE MORE DIGNITY AND BE FURTHER RE- MOVED FROM THE VULGAR IDIOM, BY THE USE OF UNCOM- MON WORDS.
THE truth of this, as applicable to the Italian language, is very well illustrated by M. Maffei, in his defence of his tragedy of Merope against the criticisms of Voltaire, in which he shews the poverty of the French language in this respect. Voltaire had objected to Maffei, that in his tragedy, Merope to poftpone the nuptials which were haftened by the tyrant, orders a servant to inform him, that the queen had had a fever all night.* Maffei adds, To shew how fuch passages would displease at Paris, he ⚫ translates this into French; and in truth so tranflated, they have not a good effect: but this mode of confronting the tragedies deserves to be • confidered. The Italian says, ، [A] "Tis useless to disguise the mournful truth, "A fcorching fever wars against her life." But the Frenchman says only, (B) " It is impossible to conceal from you that the queen has a fever." We may see here the difference between the verse of a nation which besides the language of prose pof- [A] ' Diffimulato in vano soffre di febro afsalto.' [B] ' On ne peut vous cacher que la reine a la fievre.' • seffes
POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. • sesses also a poetical language. In ours even trivial and domeftic • circumstances may be mentioned with dignity and poetically, but turn ⚫ them into prose and they instantly become common. Your verse has • exactly the same force as if I faid in Italian, "The queen has a fever," ⚫ and a verse that began so would certainly occafion much laughter; but • when the sense is expressed as in the Italian, the transposition of the ⚫ words and the metaphor create poetry, and render the language noble to our ears, because it is very remote from vulgar speech and yet not extravagant; and by these means we are able to give ornament to every thing.' Our Shakespear has been criticized with exactly the same candour that Maffei complains of.
22.2.
mvp-aristotle-comment-89
22.4
THE ELDER EUCLIDES.
MOST likely called so by Aristotle to distinguish him from a perfon of the fame name, who was a follower of Socrates and head of a fect of philosophers [c]. It is surprizing that the English translators should have rendered Ευκλείδης ὁ αρχᾶιος, Euclides ille antiquus, 'Old Euclid.' In the first place 'old,' applied to a man, signifies age, not antiquity; and without the article, as indeed is the fact with most adjectives except in the vocative cafe, conveys the idea of jocular familiarity. Who for the elder Brutus [c] See Fabricius. would
CHAP. XXIT. would fay, Old Brutus? Were we to express the father of the Horatii by the name of Old Horace, we should immediately think of the Roman poet. We know the French, from the partiality they have for their own language, mutilate all the harmonious names of antiquity, a practice which we at first adopted but have now totally laid aside. In consequence however of its having been once adopted by us, the most familiar of the Roman names, and some few of the Greek names, have among us this pronunciation. But these are confined to the perfons themselves, and not given to others of a fimilar name. We call none of the Horatii Horace but the poet, and none of the Tullii Tully except the orator. Aristotle and Euclid are two of the most early familiar Greek names, and in consequence of it retain this disgraceful distinction; and when we meet them thus mutilated we expect to find the fathers of logic and the mathematics. As all affectation is ridiculous, I should think it pedantic to call this work a translation of the Poetic of Ariftoteles; but in a tranflation of Pindar's fifth Pythian Ode, I would not translate the Αρισοζέλης mentioned there, by the Anglo-Greek name of Aristotle. There is something so completely merry-andrewish in the appellation we give to the celebrated triumvir, especially when mixed with Roman names, that were I writing history I should be induced to reftore him to the name of Marcus Antonius. In this work I have been obliged to retain those CHRISTIAN NAMES by which Shakespear and Dryden have mentioned him. NOTE
22.3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-90
22.5
MAKING IAMBIC VERSE EVEN IN COMMON DISCOURSE.
I CANNOT think the word ἰαμβοποιήσας can by any means be twisted into the general sense of, ridiculing, which many of the translators give it. For the reason which induced me to render it as I have, I refer to the note on the tranflation. I however must confess the examples are, by a little vitiation of quantity, much more easily susceptible of the cadence of hexameters than of iambics. Indeed they very much resemble the barbarous attempts at heroic verse, by Commodianus at the decline Of Roman poetry, quoted by Mr. Harris in his Philological Enquiries, Part 11. Chap. 11. Tōt rěŭm criminibus părricīdūm quoque fŭtūrum Ex aŭctorītātē vēstrā contulīstis in illum. The profodical marks shew what Mr. Harris imagined to be the intended quantities. But I rather think the writer's ear was directed by the [D] accentual cadence without any regard to quantity at all. Perhaps Aristotle had no iambic examples to quote, and the others being familiar, the διον may imply, • as in these spurious hexameters.' [D] See Note II. Chap. xx. NOTE
22.4.
mvp-aristotle-comment-91
22.6
AN ABSURD AND RIDICULOUS USE OF METAPHORS, FOREIGN WORDS, AND OTHER FORMS, WOULD HAVE THE SAME EFFECT.
THE obfervation of Aristotle as to the effect of all these ornamented expreffions, and how much the propriety of the most elevated style depends on a temperate use of them, is obviously just and perfectly capable of illustration from our own writers of every description. There is no part of elocution which requires greater skill in the poet than the proper management of figures, and to steer between too ornamented and too simple a style; chusing one that shall be perfpicuous without meanness, and elevated without being either turgid or obscure. Nor can any criterion be found for this, except the judgement and taste of the writer, fince what in one species of writing would be simple might be mean in another; and that dignity of expression which may be only adequate to one fubject might be truly ridiculous when applied to a different one [E]. It must be remembered that two sources of the burlesque arise from this impropriety carried to excess, either by making heroes and demi-gods talk in the language of common life, or making mean persons talk in the language of heroes and demi-gods. [E] The modern writers of Latin run strongly into this. If a phrase is classical they are apt to think it fufficient without at all regarding its application to the subject, and will criticise a grammatical passage in all the flowers of eloquence. A curious instance of this occurs in Leusden's Philologus Hebræo-Græcus. Speaking of the scarceness of the copies of the Hebrew New Testament, he says, Vix caressimo pretio comparari poffunt num plerumque in nuper incendio Londiniensi sunt Vulcano tradita.' To
POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. To know whether a word is proper for an elevated style, I believe verfification the best criterion, and Aristotle seems to think so from the experiment he proposes. The expression quoted by [F] Dr. Beattie from our tranflation of the Bible, 'Sweeping with the besom of destruction,' would hardly bear this teft. It must be observed that in some cases, especially in scenes of horror, the effect is often heightened by chusing a common instead of an unusual word. In the following lines from Macbeth : • Who should against his murderer shut the door, ' Not bear the knife myself.' The effect, contrary to the rule of Aristotle, would I think be much inferior if afsassin could be substituted for murderer, and dagger for knife [G]. [F] Illustrations on Sublimity, p. 638. NOTE [G] Mr. Stevens, on the occasion of Shakespear's use of the words BARE BODKIN, is at some trouble to shew us that bodkin was an old word for dagger. It may be fo. But I think Shakespear did not use it here in this sense. His context seems to imply, Why should a man suffer misery here, when the most inconfiderable, and generally, harmless instrument, will set him free. What Shakespear observes here of misery he applies to guilt in K. John. 'Do but despair, • And if thou want'st a cord the smallest thread < That ever spider twisted from her womb • Will serve to strangle thee, a rush will be A beam to hang thee on; or would'st thou drown thyself, • Put but a little water in a spoon And it shall be as all the ocean Enough to stifle such a villain up.' And
22.5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-92
22.11
BY PUTTING THE WORDS INTO VERSE.
I Do not fee any objection to the literal tranflation I have given of this passage, or why τὸ μέτρον may not retain the sense it seems obviously to have [H]. I have observed in the last note, that verfification is no bad touchstone of proper elevation of style. Ariftotle seems to be aware that it may be objected to him, that the language of poetry, verse, is sufficiently removed from common speech, to give it elevation without the afsistance of figures. In consequence of this, anticipating the objection, he answers. Even in heroic verse, whose cadence is much more elevated than iambic verse, you will find an essential difference from the change of figurative, for common language; and then referring the objector to his own experience, he defires him, to put the words into verse, previoufly to the experiment, that the alteration may be shewn to arise from the change of the words, and not from the structure of the verse. He then naturally enough returns to that kind of verse with which he is more immediately concerned, and shews an instance of the dignity of a dramatic line depending entirely on the change of a single word. And Cowley says afterwards in his Ode on Anacreon, ' In death's hand a grape-ftone proves • As strong as thunder does in Jove's.' This passage in Shakespear may perhaps remind the learned reader of the instrument Edipus employed to deprive himself of fight. [H] See Mr. Twining's note. NOTE
22.6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-93
22.14
ARIPHRADES ALSO RIDICULES THE TRAGIC POETS FOR EMPLOY- ING FORMS OF LANGUAGE THAT ARE NOT USED IN COMMON CONVERSATION, AND INVERTING THE ORDER OF THE WORDS, THOUGH THEIR DIFFERING FROM COMMON USE IS THE VERY CIRCUMSTANCE THAT ELEVATES THE STYLE.
MUCH depends on the judgement of the poet in the proper regulation of this inversion of language. When judicioufly managed it poffefses in a high degree the requisite mentioned by Aristotle, of rendering the style elevated and yet perfpicuous, provided the perfpicuity is not injured by too bold a deviation from the usual forms of speech, which in the [1] modern languages, where the connection of the words in a fentence [1] For a comparison between the French and Italian in this respect, see the defence of Maffei quoted in Note 1. of this Chapter. Indeed the Italian is superior to all modern languages in this. For an instance in the translation of a passage in Horace by Metastasio, see Note v. Chap. xxvI. The arrangement of the words in the following stanza of Tasso cannot be imitated in any other modern European language. " Dio messagier mi manda; io ti rivelo " La sua mente in suo nome; ò quanta spene " Haver d'alta vittoria, ò quanto zelo "De l'hofte a te commessa hor ti conviene." Tacque, e sparito rivolò del cielo ' A le parti più eccelse, e più serene. • Resta Goffredo à i detti, à lo splendore ‹ D'occhi abbagliato, attonito di core.' GIERUS. DELIB. Canto I. Stanza XVII. depends
depends so much on juxta-position and where there is no distinction of case except in the pronouns, will often unavoidably create obscurity. Mr. Jackson of Exeter [K] objects to such transpositions as 'thunders 'the sky,' ' shakes the ground;' for 'the sky thunders,' ' the ground Thakes;' in these cases he says, ' we are inclined to refer to some antecedent nominative.' I think for this reason the impropriety or propriety of fuch expreffion is clearly marked by the examples produced. When, as in the first instance, the verb is strictly neuter the deviation can occafion no ambiguity and is therefore allowable; but in the second instance where the verb has also a transitive sense, the inconvenience and ambiguity mentioned by Mr. Jackson will certainly arife. In the use of this license, narrative poetry has a greater latitude than dramatic; but even there obfcurity and doubt should be avoided. The effect of this arrangement of words in a verfe may be seen in a line of Prior's Henry and Emma, where, without altering the essential cadence, the words may be placed in three different ways, two of which will have different meanings, and the third, which Prior has chosen, may be applied to either, and depends folely on the context and the stops [L] for precifion. The line in question is, ، For feldom, archers say, thy arrows err; remove the first comma and it may mean, • For archers seldom say, thy arrows err;' and may be applied rather to the partiality of his companions than his skill. But the following arrangement puts the meaning of the poet beyond the reach of doubt, [K] Letter III. [L] See Note Ix. Chap. xxv. For
POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. • For archers say, thy arrows feldom err.' In dramatic poetry, and all other poetry that is recited, if juxtaposition is too much violated, though the sense will be sufficiently obvious, it will be impossible to mark it well by the voice. The following passage of Shakespear will defy the powers of elocution to give it proper force. • Foul deeds will rise, Tho' all the earth o'erwhelm them, to men's eyes.' For this reason Latin verse, however clear the whole fentence may be from the place of every word being clearly marked by the construction, can never be pronounced, by us at least, with energy; this occafions that monotony which the best reciters of it always fall into. How often does the whole force of a sentence depend on the connection of two words that relate to each other; but how can this be marked by the voice when they are in different parts of the sentence? as in this instance: • Pan etiam Arcadia mecum fi judice certet.' • Pan etiam Arcadia dicat se judice victum.' Here certainly the force of the boast which arises from the poet's challenging the god to a contest before judges the most partial in his favor, requires the connexion between ARCADIA and JUDICE to be particularly marked, which it is impossible for the voice to execute clearly, or to hinder the hearer of the last line from connecting se and JUDICE in his mind, till he has perfectly convinced himself the speaker had been correct in the last vowel of Arcadia.. Greek verse though poffeffing the same powers, by no means exerts them in the fame arbitrary manner. Virgil also, in the dramatic parts of
of his Æneid, has avoided this. In the speeches of Drances and Turnus all the emphatic epithets are closely connected with their substantives.
22.7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-94
22.17
BUT THE GREATEST ART IS TO BE HAPPY IN FORMING META- PHORS, FOR THAT ALONE CANNOT BE ACQUIRED FROM OTHERS, BUT IS ITSELF A PROOF OF A GOOD NATURAL GENIUS.
THIS distinction of metaphor from the other forms is perfectly just. No particular praise will be given to the poet for the invention of any of the other modes of ornamenting language; it will be quite sufficient if he makes a judicious use of those already invented. But in regard to metaphors the same conduct will subject him to the imputation of plagiarifm. For there is nothing that distinguishes original genius so much as the use of new and just metaphors, as there is nothing that betrays a want of it more than trite and common ones [L]. Many instances have been produced by the critics of confused metaphors where the relation is not kept up compleatly, as in the line of Horace, where he talks of bringing ILL TURNED verses to the ANVIL again [M]. [L] See Mr. Twining's note. [M] Et male tornatos incudi reddere versus.' For other instances of this fort, see Elements of Criticism, Chap. xx. Sect. vi. Befides
POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. ، Befides this obvious fault there are many other improprieties that may follow from an injudicious use of this figure. The image may be ridiculous by being unfit for the subject. As in Addison's Essay on the Georgics, where while he is very justly praising the art of the poet in elevating his subject, he attempts, perhaps in imitation of Longinus, to copy the figurative style he is criticising, and fays • he breaks the clods, and tosses the dung about, with an air of gracefulness.' Now one of the most ridiculous of all poffible objects would be a man's really doing this. A metaphor pursued too far has also a very ridiculous effect; indeed this almost falls under the article of allegory, a species of writing which some people are very fond of, but which appears to me only a more laborious kind of riddle. Such is the allegorical description of the human body in the Timæus of Plato, drawn out to a length that is both tedious and disgusting: the hyperbolical praise of which by Longinus, and the imitation of it by Spenser, does no honor to the taste either of the [N] critic or the poet. Sometimes a metaphor is perfectly incongruous and absurd, as in Cowley's Davideis, L. 111. Goliah is described as large as the hill he is coming down. • Vast as the hill down which he march'd he appear'd.' This reminds one of the story in the Connoiffeur, of the citizen, who shewing a map of London to a stranger, to enhance the grandeur of the [N] See Longinus, Sect. xxxII. Fairy Queen, Book II. Canto IX.. metropolis,
metropolis, exclaims, • Don't you fee it is bigger than the map of England ?' < A metaphor also may be too near the truth, as in the line of Dryden. • Men are but children of a larger growth.' This falls under that figure which is now distinguished by the appellation of TRUEISM. A metaphor also may possess properties that tend to make it directly contrary to the sense in which it is meant to be taken, as when King James I. advising the country gentlemen to live on their estates said, 'that in the country they were like ships in a river, and seemed large things, but in town they were like ships at sea, and made no figure at all [o].' Now though in this one point the resemblance holds, in every other circumstance it is exactly the reverse. Mr. Locke observes, ' that as ، [P] wit is chiefly conversant in tracing resemblances, judgment is rather employed in finding differences.' I cannot say the truth of this Arikes me. It feems equally the province of genius to find differences in things generally alike, and likeness in things generally different, and that it is the office of judgment to correct the errors or misrepresentations of fancy in both cafes. [o] This is rather a fimile than a metaphor, but the propriety of each is derived from the fame principles. [P] Locke uses wit for genius here; in the subsequent quotation from Dr. Beattie it is taken in the more confined sense, which is now given it. If,
POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. If, as Dr. Beattie says, 'Wit arises from the discovery of minute • relations and likenesses that had escaped the notice of others, and there- 'fore a talent for it implies a habit of minute attention to circumstances and words, whereas a fublime genius directs his view chiefly to the great and more important phenomena of art and nature.' According to the definition of Aristotle we may call a metaphor a fublime piece of wit.
22.8.
mvp-aristotle-comment-95
22.18
COMPOUNDED WORDS SUIT BEST WITH DITHYRAMBIC, FOREIGN WORDS WITH HEROIC, AND METAPHORS WITH IAMBIC VERSE.
OF the almost exclusive claim that the lyric poet lays to compounded epithets, every English reader must be sufficiently apprized. The dithyrambic poets of Greece feem to have made an ample use of this privilege, which it appears they carried sometimes to a ridiculous excess [2]. Of the peculiar language of the epopee more will be said in the two next chapters. As for the language of the drama, the empaffioned parts of it will hardly admit of any other ornament but the metaphor. This figure is almost inseparable from expreffion of violent feeling. So Lear, in the frenzy of his rage cries out, ، 'Tremble thou wretch • That haft within thee undivulged crimes Unwhipp'd of justice; hide thee thou bloody hand, Close pent up guilt,
• Rive your concealing continents, and cry • These dreadful fummoners grace.' [Q] See Note 1. Chap. xxx. 3 K It
It would be endless to cite examples which every page of any good dramatic writer will afford us, as well as the natural language either of forrow or rage, especially among the common people, who are most likely to speak the genuine language of nature. What are such words as my little jewel,' ' you beaft, &c. but metaphors? Aristotle, in Chap. xxiv. objects to an ornamented style as injuring the effect of the empaffioned parts even of the epopee [R]; but in the less interesting parts he recommends a splendid language. In this the dramatic poet is more confined. In the uninteresting parts he may indeed polish his versification, but he must not give his diction too much ornament, for such parts are only the common discourse of the characters, but in the epopee they are confidered as the language of the poet, or if you will, of the muse. But though fimplicity of style, and precision of meaning, are peculiarly requifite to the dramatic muse, they are by no means to be neglected by her fisters. It is impossible that there can be any merit in writing or speaking so as not to be understood [s]. I do not make an exception even in favor of the lyric poet. The words of Pindar [T], [R] See Note VIII. Chap. xxiv. [9] 'To write obscurely requires no other talent or skill than to express one's meaning • imperfectly; or if that is not enough to write without any meaning at all.' ARMSTRONG. [1] Φωνᾶντα συνετοῖσιν, ἐς Δὲ τὸ πᾶν ἐρμηνέων Χατίζει. • Whose meaning to the wife alone reveal'd • Lie from the vulgar herd in mystic words conceal'd.' adopted
POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. adopted as a motto to one of his odes by Gray, though I believe perfectly understood by him, have been in general mistaken by his readers; and the sense they have been supposed to convey has mifled many a modern Icarus who has tried to emulate the flight of the Theban fwan. But they cannot certainly allude to defective construction, or ambiguous phrafe, for who in that case would be the συνεται, the 'intelligent; to whom such a composition would be particularly clear ? Not the elegant and correct reader surely. Who is proverbially fo good an interpreter of an ungrammatical or an ill spelt letter as the person who writes in the same way himself? By those parts which speaking only to the intelligent escape the grosser sense of the ignorant and are not to be comprehended by the common herd of readers without explanation, the poet must mean the nice touches, sudden transitions, and frequent allufions to the various fables contained in the mythology and early history of Greece, that so frequently occur in the odes of Pindar, which however striking to the informed reader, must be totally incomprehensible to the ignorant and uninformed, and the dificulty that may at first attend the developement of these passages will excite that fort of pleasure arifing from a confciousness of acquiring a fort of knowledge, which Ariftotle mentions in his fourth chapter. Mr. Gray's incomparable Ode on the Destruction of the Welsh Bards will compleatly illustrate this to the English reader, and leave him neithet in this or any other cafe to regret his inability to confult his Grecian archetype. This composition, though full of allusions that relate to the annals of England only, Mr. Gray found so unintelligible to the many, so ' much caviare to the million,' that he was obliged to step forth as his own interpreter, and print it with explanatory notes; and yet as Dr. Beattie 3 K 2 obferves
observes [u], ' It is in the allufions only, and not in the words or ، ، images, (for these are most emphatical and picturesque) that the poem partakes of obfcurity, and even its allusions will hardly seem obfcure to those who are acquainted with the history of England. To mark more strongly what I mean by obfcurity of construction I will cite a passage from another, the most popular of Gray's works, his Elegy. Far from the madding crouds ignoble strife Their fober wishes never learn'd to stray.' The obvious conftruction of the words conveys a sense diametrically oppofite to that which, from the general tenor of the poem, and from that only, we difcover to be intended by the poet. The odes of Pindar must lose more than half their beauty even to the most accurate Greek scholar, for no modern can be so conversant with the numerous fables of Greece as not in many cafes to be one of the ἀσυνετὸι. [u] Effay on Poetry and Music, Part 11. Chap. 1. Sect. III. See also his Effay on Ima gination, page 167. A
CHAP.
1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-159
Ritter, cap. 22 § 1
Poeticae dictionis virtus et vitium. Quae hoc capite breviter quidem sed peracute docteque de vitiis et virtutibus poeticae dictionis explicata legimus, ea respexit Aristoleles in Rhetoricis III, 1 extr. et 2 init. his verbis:
περὶ δ' ἐκείνης (de dictione poetica)
εἴρηται ἐν τοῖς περὶ ποιητικῆς.
ἔστω οὖν ἐκεῖνα τεθεωρημένα,
καὶ ὡρίσθω λέξεως ἀρετὴ σαφῆ εἶναι. quibus locis omnem de hac disputatione dubitationem amoveri liquet.
σαφεστάτη μὲν οὖν ἐστὶν ἡ ἐκ τῶν κυρίων ὀνομάτων: per
ὀνόματα hic tam
ὀνόματa quae proprie dicuntur quam
ῥήματα complectitur, et idem constanter facit per caput hoc 22 et antecedens 21, quod ipsum signum est haec non esse illius qui c. 20 intertexuit. eadem quae22. §. 1. 237 hic sententia profertur Rhetor. III, 2 sub initium:
τῶν δ᾽ ὀνομάτων καὶ ῥημάτων σαφῆ μὲν ποιεῖ τὰ κύρια. pro exemplo humilis dictionis Cleophontis poesis et Stheneli affertur. de Chleophonte dictum ad c. 2, 3. Sthenelus tragicus erat temporibus Aristophanis, abs quo irrisus est in Gerytade, ut ex Athenaeo (collato scholiasta ad Aristoph. Vesp. 1303) IX. p. 367 B discimus, in hunc modum:
καὶ πῶς ἐγὼ Σθενέλου φάγοιμ᾽ ἂν ῥήματα;
εἰς ὅξος ἐμβαπτόμενος ἢ λεπτοὺς ἅλας. alterum versum etiam Pollux VI, 65. laudavit. cf. Harpocratio s. v.
Σθένελος. Athenaeus unum Stheneli fragmentum servavit X. p. 428
Α,
Σθένελός τε ὁ ποιητὴς οὐ κακῶς εἴρηκεν οἶνος καὶ φρονέοντας ἐς ἀφροσύνας ἀναβάλλει.
σεμνὴ δὲ καὶ ἐξαλλάττουσα τὸ ἰδιωτικὸν ἡ τοῖς ξενικοῖς κεχρημένη: quidquid contrarium est
τῷ κυρίῳ, una voce
τοῦ ξενικοῦ significavit. causam cur peregrinis admixtis splendida dictio fiat exposuit in Rhetoricis III, 2 sub initium.
2.
mvp-aristotle-comment-160
Ritter, cap. 22 § 2
ἂν μὲν οὖν ἐκ μεταφορῶν,
αἴνιγμα: dictio ex meris metaphoris conflata nonnisi ab eo potest intelligi, qui et translate dici scit neque ignorat quomodo translatio instituta sit.
ἐὰν δὲ ἐκ γλωττῶν,
βαρβαρισμός: peregrina dictio fit, si unis glossis composita est. hoc fieri tam manifestum est, ut explicatione non egeat: nam quae paulo post interponuntur,
ἐκ τῶν γλωττῶν βαρβαρισμός, ea ab interpolatore quodam ex his ipsis hausta illic inertissime repetuntur, et ab editoribus, ut saltem aliqua iunctura prodiret, in hunc modum interpolata vulgo exhibentur :
ἐκ δὲ τῶν γλωττῶν ὁ βαρβαρισμός. sed alterum illud, aenigma fieri si quis nonnisi translationibus utatur, cum minus manifestum videatur, hoc aenigmatis definitione declaratur.
κατὰ μὲν οὖν τὴν τῶν ὀνομάτων σύνθεσιν οὐχ οἷόν τε τοῦτο ποιῆσαι: per
ὀνόματa hic quoque nomina et verba significantur. secundum unam verborum copulationem fieri non potest, ut simul quae sunt (
τὰ ὑπάρχον-
τα) et simul quae non possunt esse (
τὰ ἀδύνατα) exprimantur, sed id per metaphoram fieri potest, cum verba proprie intellecta significant quae fieri nequeunt, contra improprie accepta id indicant quod fieri potest.
οἷον “
ἄνδρ᾽ - κολλήσαντα": igne aera viro adglutinare refertur in
ἀδυνάτοις: sed qui resciverit
χαλκὸν translate dictum esse (
ἀπὸ γένους ἐπ᾿ εἶδος c. 21, 5) pro cucurbitula (Schröpfkopf), statim intelligit dici quae fieri possunt. Aristoteles Rhetor. III, 2. p. 1405 b 1. posito eodem aenigmate scribit
κόλλησιν τοίνυν εἶπε τὴν τῆς σικύας προσβολήν. Athenaeus X. p. 452 C.
πολλοὶ δὲ γρίφων καὶ τοιαῦ τοί τινές εἰσιν οἷον ἄνδρ᾽ εἶδον πυρὶ χαλκὸν ἐπ᾿ ἀνέρι κολλήσαντα οὕτω συνκόλλως ὥστε σύναιμα ποιεῖν. veterum cucurbitularum genera et formas descripsit Celsus de Medicina II, 11. cucurbitularum vero duo genera sunt, aeneum et corneum, aenea altera parte patet, altera clausa est: in aeneam linamentum ardens coniicitur, ac sic os eius corpori aptatur imprimiturque donec inhaereat. conf. Pollux X, 149.
3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-161
Ritter, cap. 22 § 3
δεῖ ἄρα κεκρᾶσθαί πως τούτοις: subintellige
τὴν λέξιν. de scriptura verbi
κεκρᾶσθαι in notis criticis dictum.
τούτοις est
τῷ ξενικῷ καὶ τῷ κυρίῳ. qui intertexuit
ἐκ τῶν γλωττῶν βαρβαρισμός, is videtur subintellexisse
τῷ αἰνίγματι καὶ βαρβαρισμῷ.
καὶ ὁ κόσμος: ipsa metaphora et glossa et cetera nominum genera ante memorata ad ornatum dictionis pertinent eumque efficiunt. xó-
σμος igitur loco inepto et ab aliena manu infertur. vide quae diximus ad c. 21, 2.
4.
mvp-aristotle-comment-162
Ritter, cap. 22 § 4
τὸ παρὰ τὸ εἰωθὸς γιγνόμενον τὸ μὴ ἰδιωτικὸν ποιήσει: id quod contra consuetum fit sive admissum est facit ne vulgare assit. primum
τὸ et codicibus deest et editionibus, sed a sententia, ut mihi videtur, efflagitatur. subiectum enim est
τὸ παρὰ τὸ εἰωθὸς γιγνόμενον, idque sine articulo non potest consistere. intercidit eo quod continuo duplex
τὸ subsequitur.•
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-163
Ritter, cap. 22 § 5
οἷον Εὐκλείδης ὁ ἀρχαῖος: quis sit incertum est; eius versus scriptorem parodiarum sapiunt.
αὐτῇ λέξει, h. e. ipsa dictione ita conformata, ut eius reprehensioni responderet. -
ἤτοι ῎Αρην: codices
ἠτίχαριν, utrumque vitium ex itacismo natum est, si vere emendavi. Hermannus scripsit
ἤτοι Χάριν, Graefenhanius
ἢ τάχ' "
Αρην.
ἐπέκτασις in hoc versu admissa vitiosa illa est pronuntiatio
βαδδίζοντα.
καὶ “
οὐκ ἄν γ' ἐράμενος τὸν ἐκείνου ἐλλέβορον:” versus sic dispositos puto fuisse -
νν ἐλλέβορον νυ οὐκ ἄν γ' ἐράμενος τὸν ἐκείνου ...
ἔκτασιν vitiose admissam coniicio in prima syllaba verbi
ἐράμενος (
ἐρράμενος). hoc ipsum cum infinitivo quodam, unde aptus fuerit accusativus
τὸν ἐλλέβορον, iunctum fuisse coniicio, ut apud Sophocl. Oed. Col. 512.
ὅμως δ᾽ ἔραμαι πυθέσθαι, nisi scribere mavis
τοῦ ἐκείνου ἐλλεβόρου, quod per versum licet. particularum av et y' coniunctio in exemplo vitiosae locutionis offendere non debet.
6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-164
Ritter, cap. 22 § 6
τὸ μὲν οὖν φαίνεσθαί πως χρώμενον τούτῳ τῷ τρόπῳ γελοῖον: ac deprehendi quodammodo utentem hoc genere ridiculum est.
φαίνεσθαί πως χρώμενον τούτῳ τῷ τρόπῳ est ita his uti orationis ornamentis ut deprehendaris, h. e. ut dedita opera te fecisse appareat. conf. Rhetor. III, 2 sub init. ibi oratoribus, quos illis ornamentis etiam parcius quam poetas uti convenit, praecepit
διὸ δεῖ λανθάνειν ποιοῦντας,
καὶ μὴ δοκεῖν λέγειν πεπλασμένως cet.
τὸ δὲ μέτρον κοινὸν ἁπάντων ἐστὶ τῶν με - ρῶν: metrum autem commune est omnium partium. quomodo aliis haec placeant nescio: mihi displicere scio. hoc certum est,
τὸ μέτρον intelligi non posse iustum modum: is enim si intelligeretur,
μέτρον ΤΙ scribi debuit, non
ΤΟ μέτρον, et
μέτρον τι γὰρ poni debuit vel
ἀλλὰ μέτρον τι, non
μέτρον δὲ, porro
κοινὸν δεῖ εἶναι, non
κοινόν ἐστι, postremo
ἁπασῶν ἰδεῶν, non
ἁπάντων μερῶν. hisce alienis autem sublatis, optime procedit sententia: ridiculum esse deprehendi
τὸ μὲν aliquem consectantem extensiones. tum quasi per parenthesin monetur etiam in ceteris illis formis nimium earum usum ridiculum videri ¹); tandem sequitur id pronuntiatum -
τὸ δὲ ἁρμόττον ὅσον διαφέρει -, quod priori illi
οὖν φαίνεσθαί πως χρώμενον τούτῳ τῷ τρόπῳ γελοῖον contrarium positum est. sed unde suppositicia orta sunt ? ex glossa marginali, quemadmodum docebo ad §. 7.
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-165
Ritter, cap. 22 § 7
τὸ δὲ ἁρμόττον ὅσον διαφέρει,
ἐπὶ τῶν ἐπῶν θεωρείσθω,
ἐντιθεμένων τῶν ὀνομάτων εἰς τὸ μέτρον: iustus extensionum modus significatur per
τὸ δὲ ἁρμόττον. in epicis carminibus extensiones potissimum adhibentur; quae causa est cur dixerit, hoc considerandum esse
ἐπὶ τῶν ἐπῶν. pergit
ἐντιθεμένων τῶν ὀνομάτων εἰς τὸ μέτρον, nominibus metro includendis:
ὀνόματα dicuntur ut
ταῖς ἐκτάσεσιν opponantur. suadet Aristoteles ut quis in versibus epicorum pro extentis formis vulgares numero iuste adstringat, si velit intelligere quantum iustus extensionum modus valeat. contra haec
ἐντιθεμένων τῶν ὀνομάτων εἰς τὸ μέτρον in margine a sciolo quodam posita existimo illa quae modo ex Aristoteliis sublevavi,
τὸ δὲ μέτρον κοινὸν ἁπάντων ἐστὶ τῶν μερῶν. nimirum nasutulus iste cogitavit: "quid tandem nomina metro includamus, cum sermo sit de poetica dictione, cum omnes quae enumerantur formae, et extensiones et metaphorae cet., versibus iam adstrictae a nobis inveniantur ?"
Αἰσχύλος μὲν γὰρ ἐν τῷ Φιλοκτήτῃ : de Aeschyli Philocteta nobis perdito praeclare disputatum est ab Hermanno in Opuscul. III. p. 119 sqq. fragmenta Euripidei Philoctetae Augustus Matthiae et Dindorfius collecta exhibent. tres trium tragoediae Graecae principum Philoctetas inter se comparare instituit Gruppius in Ariadna p. 417-452. —
φαγέδαινα ή: quamvis versus vitium optime et facil- 1)
τὸ αὐτὸ ἀπεργάσοιτο: is idem efficeret, h. e. ut irrideretur faceret.lime ab Hermanno
φαγέδαιναν scribente sublatum videatur, ego tamen non imitabor. nam in versu Aeschylio particula quaedam post
φαγέδαινα inserta esse potuit (ex. gr. r' vel d'), quam Aristoteles prudens omittere voluit. idem, si re vera apud Aeschylum
φαγέδαιναν legebat, tamen suo verborum contextui nominativum magis convenire ratus hoc immutare potuit, ut saltem Aristotelis editori non liceat codicibus nou iuvantibus quidquam mutare.
ὁ δὲ ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐσθίει τὸ θοινᾶται μετέθηκεν: Euripides metaphoram captavit, ubi abstinere ab ea debuit.
θοινᾶται est species,
ἐσθίει genus. Euripidis metaphora secunda est ex iis quae c. 21, 4. enumeratae sunt.
νῦν δέ μ᾽ ἐὼν ὀλίγος: est versus Homeri Odyss. I. 515. qui subsequitur ab Aristotele factus est.
ὀλίγος pro
μικρὸς species est 2) pro specie,
οὐτιδανὸς pro
ἀειδὴς genus est pro specie,
ἄκικυς pro
ἀσθενικὸς glossa est. conf. c. 21, 3-5.
ἄκικους iterum legitur in Odyss.
Φ. 131.
δίφρον ἀεικέλιον: est versus Homericus ex Odyss. T. 259.
αεικέλιος pro
μοχθηρός species est pro genere. vid. c. 21, 5. in nostris Homeri exemplaribus
παραθεὶς legimus, non
καταθείς. hoc aut memoriae Aristotelis aut diversitati scripturae, quae eius Homericae Odysseae exemplari inerat, tribuendum erit. -
ἠϊόνες βοόωσιν: sumptum est ex Homeri Iliade P. 265.
βοᾶν cum proprie de mugitu boum et
κράζειν item atque
κρώζειν de clamore corvorum dicatur,
ἠϊόνες κράζουσιν humile atque ridiculum,
ἠϊόνες βοόωσιν dignum apparet.
κράζειν est kreischen, quo verbo in nonnullis Germaniae regionibus clamorem inaequalem et minus gravem, praecipue infantilem, exprimunt. itaque crociunt quod in versione mea Latina posui non omnino respondet: sed alia verba Latina sonum denotantia magis etiam a Graeco recedunt.
8.
mvp-aristotle-comment-166
Ritter, cap. 22 § 8
ἔτι δὲ ᾿Αρειφράδης - ἐκεῖνος δὲ τοῦτο 2) Bene Ammonius de Differentia affin. vocab.
τὸ μὲν γὰρ ὀλίγον ἐπ᾿ ἀριθμοῦ τὸ δὲ μικρὸν ἐπὶ μεγέθους τάσσεται,
ἠγνόει: quid attinebat obscurissimi hominis ineptissimam reprehensionem ex secreto secessu excitare? nihil nisi ut curiosi ineptique grammatici doctrina ostentaretur. nam quid ineptius excogitari potest quam tragicis poetis vitio dari (ex. gr. anastropham praepositionum) id quod omnium poetarum commune et ne a vulgari quidem locutione alienum est ? advertas etiam velim quam perturbate exempla afferantur: primum enim ponitur anastropha praepositionis
δομάτων ἄπο, tum tamquam singularia
σέθεν et viv, deinde quarto loco rursus anastrophae exemplum recurrit. advertas putidam diligentiam
δομάτων ἄπο ἀλλὰ μὴ ἀπὸ δομάτων, et rursus
᾿Αχιλλέως πέρι ἀλλὰ μὴ περὶ ᾿Αχιλλέως. tertium exemplum (viv) mire ita producitur, ut particula versus Sophoclei (Oed. Colon. 987) afferatur, sic
ἐγὼ δένιν ἄκων ἔγημα φθέγγομαί τ' ἄκων τάδε. quod equidem defendere nolim exemplo illo simili c. 21, 10.
μία γίνεται ἀμφοτέρων ὄψ. vide etiam quanto cum fastu doctus magistellus sententiam suam concludat:
ἐκεῖνος δὲ τοῦτο ἠγνόει. restat aliud. tragoediarum scriptores iste appellat
τραγῳδούς, sua sibi loquendi consuetudine, non Aristotelia. serioris aetatis scriptores minus accurate loquentes interdum haec nomina commiscent, ut Athenaeus qui II. p. 35 D. Chaeremonem tragicum poetam
τραγῳδὸν appellavit. -
᾿Αρειφράδης quis tandem sit nescimus. Aristophanes pluribus locis (Equit. 1281 sqq. Vesp. 1280 sqq. cf. Suidas s. v.)
᾿Αριφράδην Arignoti fratrem citharoedum insectatur, quippe qui nefandam linguam infandis locis turpiter admoverit, sed hic potius obscurus quidam grammaticus intelligitur. neque vero id diligentem lectorem effugiet, veram et dignam Aristotele disputationem his illatis non solum non iuvari sed importune interrumpi.
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-167
Ritter, cap. 22 § 9
μόνον γὰρ τοῦτο - θεωρεῖν ἐστίν: brevissime haec et tamen perdilucide et luculente disputata sunt. ex talibus verum Aristotelem agnoscas, ut falsum deprehendere discas.
10.
mvp-aristotle-comment-168
Ritter, cap. 22 § 10
τῶν δ᾽ ὀνομάτων τὰ μὲν διπλᾶ - τοῖς ἰαμβείοις: his simillima leguntur in Rhetoricis III, 3. p. 1406 b 1.
διὸ χρησιμωτάτη ἡ διπλῆ λέξις τοῖς διθυραμβοποιοῖς·
οὗτοι γὰρ ψοφώδεις·
αἱ δὲ γλῶτται τοῖς ἐποποιοῖς·
σεμνὸν γὰρ καὶ αὔθαδες·
ἡ μεταφορὰ δὲ τοῖς ἰαμβείοις.
ὅσοις κἂν ἐν λόγοις τις χρήσαιτο:
ἐν λόγοις est in orationibus ab oratore habendis. conf. Rhetor. III, 2. p. 1404 b 31.
τὸ δὲ κύριον καὶ τὸ οἰκεῖον καὶ μεταφορὰ μόναι χρήσιμοι πρὸς τὴν τῶν ψιλῶν λόγων λέξιν, quos
ψιλοὺς λόγους poesin respiciens appellat, eos ibidem paulo post nude
λόγους et
λόγον nominat.
ἔστι δὲ τὰ τοιαῦτα τὸ κύριον καὶ μεταφορά [
καὶ κόσμος]: si haec postrema (dico voces
καὶ κόσμος) Aristoteles scripsisset, mirum quantum ipse sibi repugnaret. nam ad
κόσμον pertinent eumque efficiunt omnes illae praeter
τὸ κύριον nominum species: omnibus illis igitur utendum esset et in orationibus et in poematis quae iambicis versibus includuntur (h. e. in iambis et in dialogis fabularum), id quod praefracte negat Aristoteles in iis Rhetoricorum locis, quos ex III, 2 et 3. paulo ante transcripsimus. conferenda sunt quae dixi ad c. 21, 2.