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.
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-904
b19
ὁ εἰρημένος,
in
7, 1451a
. The epic story must be
εὐσύνοπτος (comp.
23, 1459a33
), and not of a length which would make it impossible for the mind to take it in in its entirety; it must be a whole but not too long a whole. This condition,
Aristotle adds, will be fulfilled (
εἴη δ᾽ ἂν τοῦτο), if one's epic is of about the length of a trilogy, and thus considerably shorter than the
Iliad and
Odyssey. Here again he shows himself mindful of the practical purpose of his treatise; he evidently thinks that an epic on the old
Homeric scale of length would prove too great a strain on the memory and attention of the literary public of his own time.
Apollonius Rhodius may have been mindful of
Aristotle's view when he limited his
Argonautica to four Books.
20
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-905
εἴη δ᾽ ἂν τοῦτο:
Top. 8. 1, 156a9
εἴη δ᾽ ἂν τοῦτο, εἴ τις μὴ μόνον τὰς ἀναγκαίας [scil. προτάσεις] ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν πρὸς ταύτας χρησίμων τινὰ συλλογίζοιτο (comp. also
An. post. 2. 13, 97b3
;
Rhet. 3. 8, 1408 b 31
).
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-906
b 21
πρὸς δὲ τὸ πλῆθος τραγῳδιῶν κτέ.
Res ipsa unius poetae tragoedias una trilogy comprehensas intelligi postulat. Haec interpretatio quum mensurarum aptam comparationem continet, tum alia etiam ratione ad epicae poeseos naturam accommodata
est. Eo facilius enim tres unius poetae tragoediae coniungi potuerunt, quod his trilogiis saepe perpetuitas quaedam argumenti continebatur, cuius illustre exemplum in superstitibus fabulis habemus Aeschyli Oresteam, e deperditis novimus Philoclis Pandionidem...et Aeschyli Lycurgiam' (
Hermann). On this subject see
Haigh,
Attic Theatre p. 13.
8.
mvp-aristotle-comment-564
215.
mvp-aristotle-comment-215
NOTE 215
24.5
P. 117. IF THE EPIC POEM WERE REDUCED FROM ITS ANTIENT LENGTH, SO AS NOT TO EXCEED THAT OF SUCH A NUMBER OF TRAGEDIES AS ARE PERFORMED SUCCESSIVELY AT ONE HEARING.
If we knew certainly, how many Tragedies were performed at one hearing, (
ἐις μίαν ἀκρόασιν ,) we should know, with equal certainty, to what length Aristotle thought the Epic Poem ought to be reduced, in order to be perfectly, or sufficiently,
ευσύνοπτον . But, unfortunately, the premises here are not less obscure than the conclusion; the information to be picked up in antient authors, relative to the Tragic contests and the Tetralogia, being extremely imperfect and unsatisfactory. Let us however try, what little glimmering of light may be thrown upon this subject, from those authors, or from the nature of the thing itself.
The general principle, upon which Aristotle here fixes the length of an Epic Poem, is the same with that, upon which he fixes the length of a Tragedy: viz.
"that it should be such as to admit of our comprehending, at one view, the beginning and the end. And this," he goes on,
"would be the case, were it reduced from its antient length, so as not to exceed that of such a number of Tragedies, as are performed successively at one hearing." Here then is a rule, which, at the time he wrote it, was as clear and determinate, as if he had expressly said, that an Epic Poem ought not to exceed a certain number of verses. But, as an ingenious friend has suggested to me,
"he probably chose to put his rule in the way he has put it, rather than in this latter way, as wishing to convey an intimation, that the length of an Epic Poem should be such, as would admit of its being fairly recited, or read, in a single day."
It seems to have been a commonly received opinion, that the four dramas of each Poet, which composed the Tetralogia, were always performed at one hearing—in one day
1
. In this case, if one Poet only produced his Tetralogia, there could be but four Tragedies; if two, there must be eight; if three, twelve, and so on: there could be no intermediate numbers. In so obscure a subject, I certainly shall not take upon me to decide. The passage, however, commonly adduced, I believe, as the principal authority in this matter, from Diogenes Laertius, appears to me to be against this supposition. The words are these:
Ἐκείνοι [sc. Tragici] τέτρασι δράμασιν ἠγωνίζοντο, Διονυσίοις, Ληναίοις, Παναθηναίοις, Χύτροις, ὧν τὸ τέταρτον ἦν σατυρικόν· τὰ δὲ τέτταρα δράματα ἐκαλεῖτο Τετραλογία.
2
— Here are four festivals, and four dramas; and the most obvious meaning of the passage, surely, is, that each contending Poet produced, not his entire Tetralogia at the same festival, but one Tragedy only at each different festival. And so If. Casaubon appears to have understood it.
"Quot Athenis Liberalia agitabantur, tot fabulas di- versas a Tragicis Poetis doceri solitas legimus."
3
But it seems difficult to reconcile this account with what is generally, I think, said, and what Casaubon himself has elsewhere said, of the satyric piece;
4
viz. that it was played between, or after, the serious Tragedies, on each festival, by way of relaxation and relief. For, to say, that of the four dramas exhibited by each Poet on the four different festivals, the fourth was a satyric drama, (
ὧν τὸ ΤΕΤΑΡΤΟΝ ἦν σατυρικόν ), is to say, pretty plainly, that all the satyric pieces were performed together at the fourth and last festival, the
Χύτροι . And so indeed some commentators seem to have understood it
5
. Perhaps the matter might, not unreasonably, be compromised, by supposing the rule, in fact, to have been, that, of the different Poets contending on each day, one should always produce the satyric drama of his Tetralogia, and that drama always close the exhibition of the day. But I forbear to indulge conjecture farther upon this dark subject. Let us return to Aristotle and his rule.
Dacier tells us, very gravely, that twelve, and sometimes sixteen, Tragedies were performed in one day:
6
an account, which, upon the very face of it, exceeds all bounds of probability. It is rather difficult to conceive, that the representation of a single Tragedy could take up less time than three hours. If however we suppose it to have taken up only two, and also, what could hardly be the case, that Tragedy succeeded Tragedy without any intermission, just as scene succeeded scene in the same piece, the whole exhibition of the day, according to Dacier's lowest statement, would have taken up 24, and according to his highest, 32 hours. But is it conceivable, that any audience, however intemperate their fondness for this amusement, could sit so many hours together to hear Tragedies, and to hear them attentively, so as to judge of, and decide upon, their comparative merits? — This account, therefore, of Dacier, that the number of Tragedies performed
"at one hearing," and to the same audience, (for that is implied,) amounted to twelve, we may venture at once to reject as the most palpable impossibility. Shall we then suppose eight, the next lowest number possible, on the supposition, that the four dramas of the Tetralogia were exhibited in one day? The representation of eight Tragedies, we may venture to say, could not possibly take up less time than sixteen hours. Let any man conceive himself sitting in a Theatre, and hearing Tragedy after Tragedy, from six o'clock in the morning till ten at night, and then pronounce as to the probability of even this supposition. If we reject this number, and still adhere to the common notion of these exhibitions, we shall be reduced to a single Tetralogia; in which case there can have been no rival exhibition on the same day. It seems therefore impossible to adjust this matter in any reasonable way, without supposing, that the four dramas of the Tetralogia were exhibited on different festivals: a supposition, I think, fairly deducible from the passage of Diog. Laertius above quoted. A supposition too, which seems to be rendered more probable from the very nature of rival exhibitions; as each contending Poet would then produce his drama at the same hearing, each hearing would be a distinct day of contest, and there would be, at each contest, a sufficient ground of judgment upon the comparative merits of each performance. This idea will allow us to assign about twelve hours, as the utmost time taken up by the whole exhibition of the day; and the great difference of length, which we observe in the Greek Tra- gedies that are extant, will also allow us to conclude, that, occasionally, five, or possibly even six Tragedies, might be brought within that compass, or nearly so
7
. On this ground, then, it will appear, I believe, that the extent, to which Aristotle proposed to limit the Epic Poem, could hardly exceed that of about 7000 lines.
But, if we admit this, we must of course admit, that he meant to include the Poems of Homer in the number of those which he regarded as too long. And that he did so mean, however unwilling Dacier and other commentators are to allow it,
8
I have no doubt. For, 1. The actual length of those Poems seems sufficiently to prove this. The number of lines in the Iliad is nearly 15,000; in the Odyssey, nearly 12,000. Now whoever can believe it possible, that an audience could sit, and make a common practice of sitting, 22, or even 18 hours together, to hear Tragedies, (which, at the lowest allowance, of two hours only for the performance of each piece, must have been the case, if Homer's Poems fell within Aristotle's rule,) may believe, that he thought those Poems of a proper length. Dacier, indeed, tells us, that even the Iliad may be read through in a single day
9
. For a wager, indeed, I will not say what might be done, if we had reading races at Newmarket. But, 2. Had Aristotle meant to except Homer, why not expressly except him? Gladly as he appears to seize every opportunity of giving the Poet his just praise, would he not, here also, have opposed his conduct to that of other Poets, as he has done in so many other instances? Or why, indeed, refer us to the number of Tragedies successively performed in one day, when he might as well have referred at once to the Iliad, or the Odyssey? All this seems to leave no doubt, that he thought those Poems drawn out to too great a length. And this is also conformable to what he afterwards says, of the advantage which the Tragic has above the Epic Poem in this circumstance, that it effects its purpose
"in a shorter compass"—
ἐν ἐλάττονι μήκει .
10
I do not forget what he had said in the preceding chapter—that if Homer had taken the whole war for his subject, his Poem would not have been
ευσύνοπτον : which, it may be urged, implies, that he thought it
πως ευσύνοπτον as Homer had managed it, and therefore not too long. But the contradiction here is merely apparent. The
ευσύνοπτον admits of degrees; and all that Aristotle appears to mean, in the passage before us, is, that the Poems of Homer would have been more
ευσύνοπτα , and, in that respect, more perfect, had they been shorter.
But, to return once more to the dramatic exhibitions—the time of twelve hours seems to be the very utmost that can reasonably be allowed, and is more, I believe, than will readily be allowed, without considering the particular character of the Athenians, and the circumstances attending these theatrical exhibitions. The intemperate fondness of that people for these amusements is well known; and Aristotle himself gives us a pretty strong picture of it, when he says, though only in the way of hyperbolical supposition,
"if A HUNDRED Tragedies were to be exhibited in concurrence*."
11
We must, also, consider the variety of subjects in the different Tragedies performed, and, indeed, the variety resulting from the very nature of the Greek drama, with its choral troop, its odes, its accompaniments of music and dance: the relief, also, of the satyric drama, which closed the performance by way of Farce; the pleasure of comparing the rival Poets and actors, the zeal of party in favour of this, or that, particular Poet or performer, &c.—And we may add to all this a curious circumstance in the dramatic history of the Greeks; that the people never sate
ἄσιτοι θεωροῦντες , but eat, and drank, and regaled themselves with cakes, and nuts, and wine, during the performance, like an English audience at Sadler's Wells, or Bartholomew Fair.
12
In the whole theatrical system of the antients, and every thing relating to it, all seems to have been proportionably vast, extravagant, and gigantic. Their immense theatres, their colossal dresses, the stilts, buskins, or heroic pattens, on which the actor was mounted,
13
their masks that covered the whole head, their loud, chanting, and speaking-trumpet declamation
14
—all this is upon the same scale with the intemperate eagerness of the people for these amusements, the number of Tragedies exhibited in one day, and, we may add, the almost incredible number said to have been written even by their best Poets. Would not this last circumstance alone, supposing not a single drama to have been preserved, have furnished a reasonable proof,
à priori, or, at least, a strong presumption, that the Greek Tragedy must have been, in many respects, a simple, unequal, imperfect thing, just such as, in fact, and prejudice apart, we find it to be? SOPHOCLES, confessedly the most correct and polished of the three great Tragic Poets, is said to have written above an hundred Tragedies.
15
3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-175
Ritter, cap. 24 § 3
τοῦ μὲν οὖν μήκους ὅρος ἱκανὸς ὁ εἰρημένος: respicit ante a sese dicta c. 7,5 et 6 et c. 23, 3.
εἴη δ᾽ ἂν τοῦτο - παρήκοιεν: haec ab homine inepto stultoque addita sunt. nam ulna epici carminis mensura definitur prorsus contra consuetudinem Aristotelis, et ulna quidem admodum incerta. sane eiusmodi descriptio ambitus nimium absurda est, cum epopoeia quamvis paucis libris composita et ne unius quidem tragoediae mensuram aequans tamen ita facta esse possit, ut unitate plane careat, h. e. ut eius initium et finis mentis oculis comprehendi (
συνορᾶσθαι) non possit, cum rursus quae multis libris constet, nihilo minus ita composita esse possit, ut unitas eius servetur. considera porro quae subsequuntur,
εἰ τῶν μὲν ἀρχαίων ἐλάττους αἱ συστάσεις εἶεν, si antiquis minores poetarum compositiones (poemata epica) sint. num igitur omnium antiquorum poetarum carmina epica nimis magna fuere, etiam Homerica? sane personati Aristotelis ea sententia fuit, ut apparet ex c. 26, 5 et 6., non veri Aristotelis. sed lege quae iam sequuntur,
πρὸς δὲ τὸ πλῆθος τῶν τραγῳδιῶν τῶν εἰς μίαν ἀκρόασιν τιθεμένων παρήκοιεν, ut miram hanc mensurae definitionem perciperemus, ante tragoediarum quae hic respiciuntur ambitum acciperemus oporteret, acciperemus etiam necesse esset quot tragoediae in unam auditionem exponi solerent. utrumque incertum relinquitur. nonnulli ex interpretibus respici trilogias vel tetralogias opinati sunt, sed ea cogitatio prorsus amovenda est. nam primum linguae leges ne id statuamus obstant, cum legamus
εἰς μίαν ἀκρόασιν, non
εἰς μίαν ὄψιν, quorum prius de auditione accipiendum est, non de spectatione. tum si trilogias vel tetralogias admittere velimus, earum quoque plures uno die Athenis agebantur, ut inde carminum epicorum mensura etiam amplior evasura esset, quam in Graecis re vera fuit. sed haud dubie verba
εἰς μίαν ἀκρόασιν de recitatione tragoediarum accipienda sunt, ut igitur interpolator morem quendam praelectionum nobis ignotum, quo semper plures tragoediae ab acroamate recitabantur, respexerit. sed nonne vides quam vaga sit eiusmodi mensura? ille enim mos pro temporibus et locis haud dubie incertus nutavit. qui talia Aristoteli tribuere sustinet, nae is summi viri ingenium male aestimaverit. postremum et summum alieni emblematis indicium est,quod eo sublato tenor explicationis non modo non turbatur, sed egregie adiuvatur.