ἂν δὲ θῇ, scil. τοιοῦτον μῦθον ὁ ποιητής, or perhaps (as Bon. Ind. 751 a 25 suggests) τὸ ἄλογον ἐν τῇ συστάσει τοῦ μύθου. The usual punctuation of this passage is ἂν δὲ θῇ, καὶ φαίνηται εὐλογωτέρως, ἐνδέχεσθαι καὶ ἄτοπον, which Tyrwhitt, with the old reading εὐλογώτερον before him, supposes to mean 'sin constituat quis et rationi consentaneum magis videatur, admittere etiam aliquid absurdi' [scil. oportet]. Vahlen, who takes the same view, thinks that εὐλογωτέρως may stand for εὐλογωτέρως ἔχειν (comp. Bon. Ind. 306 b 16), that δεῖ may be supplied with ἐνδέχεσθαι from the context (34), and also that ἐνδέχεσθαι may mean 'admittere', like δέχεσθαι or ἀποδέχεσθαι. With the amended punctuation the following will be the general drift of the passage: having just declared a certain procedure to be wrong ( ἐξ ἀρχῆς οὐ δεῖ συνίστασθαι τοιούτους), Aristotle adds that in a certain case— ἂν δὲ θῇ καὶ φαίνηται εὐλογωτέρως ἐνδέχεσθαι—it is not only wrong but also absurd ( καὶ ἄτοπον). With ἐνδέχεσθαι we may supply θεῖναι, from ἂν δὲ θῇ; comp. 25, 1461 a 34

ποσαχῶς ἐνδέχεται

(where σημαίνειν is understood from the preceding ποσαχῶς ἂν σημαίνοι), and An. pr. 1. 15, 34 a 34

ὑπαρχέτω τὸ Α παντὶ τῷ Β, τὸ δὲ Β παντὶ τῷ Γ ἐνδεχέσθω

(where ἐνδεχέσθω = ἐνδεχέσθω ὑπάρχειν). For the use of ἄτοπον comp. De div. per somn. 1, 462 a 20

τό τε γὰρ θεὸν εἶναι τὸν πέμποντα [scil. τὰ ἐνύπνια], πρὸς τῇ ἄλλῃ ἀλογίᾳ, καὶ τὸ μὴ τοῖς βελτίστοις καὶ φρονιμωτάτοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς τυχοῦσι πέμπειν ἄτοπον

.

35 35 ἐν Ὀδυσσείᾳ. In Od. 13. 116 sqq. Ulysses is said to have slept on even when the Phaeacians were setting him ashore. Porphyry ad loc. (p. 115 Schrader) recognizes the difficulty in the story, and quotes the explanation of Heraclides Ponticus:

τὴν τῶν Φαιάκων ἀτοπίαν, καθ᾽ ἣν τὸν ᾿Ὀδυσσέα καθεύδοντα μὴ διυπνίσαντες εἰς τὴν γῆν κατέθεντο, τοῦ τε Ὀδυσσέως τὸν ἄκαιρον ὕπνον διαλύειν πειρώμενος ὁ Ποντικὸς Ἡρακλείδης φησὶν ἀτόπους εἶναι τοὺς ἐξ ὧν εἴρηκεν ὁ ποιητὴς μὴ στοχαζομένους περὶ τοῦ παντὸς τρόπου τῶν Φαιάκων κτέ.

1460b

24.21 35. De dire que cette exactitude va à détruire les fables, cela est risible; car dés le commencement il faut faire tous ses efforts pour dreſſer autrement le plan de ſon ſujet.] ¹

24.21 P. 120. IF, HOWEVER, ANY THING OF THIS KIND, &C.

I much doubt of the integrity of the text. The sense I have given seems to be the only one, which the passage, as it now stands, will reasonably bear. Dacier, after Victorius, understands— I do not well comprehend this: I am sure it is not what Aristotle has said. His words are, i. e. &c.

I suppose Aristotle meant to say, that, though improbabilities are certainly faults, and ought to be carefully avoided in the first choice and structure of a fable, yet, they might be so well managed by a Poet of genius, (especially in the Epic, which is here the subject,) as to appear rather probable— ; to pass with some shew of probability; and, in this case, should be admitted, or tolerated, even though pushed to the , or absurd. This sense accords perfectly with what immediately follows, which is precisely an instance of such management; of absurdity, or, at least, improbability, ( ) veiled by the charms of poetry, and finding almost as ready an admission into the imagination of the reader, under the passport of the beauties by which it is accompanied, as if it were, in itself, ever so consonant to nature and experience.

With respect to the words —it seems necessary to adopt one or the other of the two manuscript readings , or . The former of these verbs Mr. Winstanley takes in the sense of , upon the authority of Suidas . But in the very passage adduced by that lexicographer, the immediate sense of is, to receive. i. e. and by receiving them to keep them off from their bodies. Arcere, here, is only what we may call the consequential meaning of the word. I do not see, that it may not, in this place, very well bear the sense of receiving, admitting, or, rather, tolerating: but of this I would not be understood to speak positively. This seems, at least, to be the sense, which the purport of the passage requires; and it refers, I think, not to the Poet himself, as some understand it, but to the audience, or the reader. When Aristotle has just said, i. e. how can he be understood to add, Farther, the word , ( ), which, in the instance immediately subjoined, clearly relates to the hearer, or reader, seems sufficiently to fix the same reference of the correspondent word, , or , here. Mr. Harris, in his Philol. Inquiries, p. 220 , though he has not quoted, or translated, this particular passage, appears, pretty clearly, to allude to it, and to have understood the verb as here explained. He says, speaking of improbabilities in the drama— [ ]

The version of Piccolomini agrees with mine:— p. 392.

haec quoque proferuntur ad Homeri virtutem declarandam, quod magis apparebit, ubi insiticia secreta erunt. ἀδύνατα εἰκότα: sunt v. gr. illa quae paedagogus Sophocleus de Oreste in certamine Pythico interempto narrat: nam certamina Pythica nondum erant, cum aevum ageret Orestes. vid. Electr. v. 680-763. item ἀδύνατα εἰκότα illa sunt, quae Virgilius de Aenea Carthaginem delato refert: siquidem Carthago nondum erat, cum Aeneas patriam suam relinqueret. contra δυνατὰ ἀπίθανα illa sunt quae de Ulixe somno sopito et exposito in Ithacam ab Homero in Odysseae libro XIII narrantur; item talia admitteret qui Achillem occiso Patroclo amico nihilo minus irascentem Agamemnoni et a pugna abstinentem produceret. ἀλλὰ μάλιστα - Μυσίαν ἥκων: haec Aristoteles ipse non scripsit 3). nimirum ipse, dum scribit τους τε λόγους μὴ συνίστασθαι ἐκ μερῶν ἀλόγων, carminum epicorum argumenta intelligit et perapte pergit ὥστε τὸ λέγειν κτλ. sed auctor personatus hanc de argumentis epicis disputatio- 3) Idem hoc intellexit Gruppius in Ariadna p. 555 sq.nem importune interrumpens impotenter revolvitur ad tragoedias et exempla imperite et inepte prolata. primum ἀλογίας exemplum sumptum est ex Sophoclis Oedipo rege, et tota haec observatio additis nonnullis ex iis quae verus Aristoteles c. 15, 7. monuerat transcripta est. hoc excusat, ut Aristoteles ante excusaverat. sed idem homuncio in iis quae continuo ab ipso inventa sequuntur Sophoclem audet reprehendere, quod is in Electra (v. 680 sqq.) narrantem induxerit, quomodo Orestes in certamine Pythico vitam amiserit, cum ea aetate non essent Pythica certamina. itane vero hoc reprehendi potest? minime. verus Aristoteles sedulum interpolatorem veriora docere potuisset, scilicet quae de illo certamine proferuntur sunt ἀδύνατα εἰκότα, quae ab Ar. probantur. itaque personatus auctor non solum inique et absurde vituperavit summum poetam sed in ipsius Aristotelis praecepta offendit. ὁ ἄφωνος ἐκ Τεγέας εἰς τὴν Μυσίαν ἥκων: quis hic fuerit primus docte explicuit Tyrwhittus in adnotatione ad h. 1. scripta. Telephus erat, qui ob caedem cognatorum a se commissam loqui abstinuit antequam lustraretur. vid. Hygini fab. 244. Telephus Herculis filius (occidit) Hippothoum et Nerea aviae suae filios. Athenaeus VI. p. 224 E. X. p. 421 D. Tzetzes ad Lycophr. 206. Stephan. Byzant. s. v. Οἶος. tragoediam Μυσούς et Aeschylus et Sophocles docuerunt, et nonnulla utriusque fragmenta exstant. Aeschylia hic intelligi videtur, quamvis proxime duae Sophoclis fabulae commemoratae sint. Telephus intra fabulam talis qualem significat interpolator ostendi poterat, ut primum spectatoribus Tegeae versatus, deinde in Mysiam profectus repraesentaretur. duo alia restant indicia quibus haec pro falsis convincantur. primum est articuli omissio ( ἐν Ἠλέκτρᾳ, ἐν Μυσοῖς) grammaticorum propria, ab Aristotelis scribendi consuetudine aliena. conf. nota ad c. 23, 4. alterum indicium est quod haec ex parte c. 25, 17. repetuntur. interpolator enim opes suas adeo amavit, ut eas bis propinare ac venditare gestiret. ἂν δὲ θῇ: subintelligendum τὸ ἄτοπον ὁ ποιητής. ἐπεὶ καὶ τὰ ἐν Ὀδυσσείᾳ ἄλογα – ἡδύνων τὸ ἄτοπον: significat Odysseae N. 70-125, in hisce prudentissimi viri integrum iudicium quaeso agnoscas, articulus ante Ὀδυσσείᾳ hic recte abest: non enim indicare voluit quaecumque ἄλογα inessent Odysseae, sed singularia illa ad expositionem Ulixis pertinentia.