Bywater I - Aristotle on the Art of Poetry [1909]

TRINITY COLLEGE

DURHAM

LIBRARY NORTH CAROLINA

:

I

ARISTOTLE’S POETICS

HENRY FROWDE,

M.A.

PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD

LONDON, EDINBURGH, NEW YORK TORONTO AND MELBOURNE

API2TOTEAOT2 HEPI nOIHTlKHS

ARISTOTLE

ON THE ART OF POETRY A REVISED TEXT

WITH CRITICAL INTRODUCTION, TRANSLATION AND COMMENTARY BY

INGRAM BYWATER HONORARY FELLOW OF EXETER AND QUEEN’s COLLEGES, OXFORD '

C

.;v

^

OXFORD AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 1909

OXFORD PRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESS BY HORACE HART, M.A. PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY

4

7

.

/

PREFACE The

Translation, which faces the text in the present

volume,

now

be

is

scription.

compliance with what seems to

in

The custom

breach

the

in

added

almost the rule with Greek texts of this de-

perhaps one more honoured

is

the observance

than

but

;

there

is

something to be said for it in the instance of the Poetics, because they are read by many whose study of Aristotle begins and ends with this one work of

And

his.

there are certainly difficulties of a special

kind throughout the book, which require a version or

even a paraphrase to explain them. of statement here

,

is

often

Aristotle’s

elliptical, allusive,

mode

and over-

charged with meaning; and he not unfrequently omits to indicate the connexion of ideas in his sentences and

j

\'

paragraphs, so that the logical relation between them I

is left

!

for us to perceive as best

we

can.

Under these

circumstances the freedom of a paraphrase

may be

at

times the only means of making his statement intelligible to the

modern

to adopt this

reader.

of the Politics, there in

one of a book

in i

I

to insert

Bernays thought

it

necessary

interpretation in a rendering

is still

more reason

like the Poetics.

not scrupled to recast

and also

If

method of

many

I

for its adoption

have accordingly

of Aristotle’s sentences,

here and there words or short clauses,

order to make the sense and sequence of ideas

clearer

—as

I

suppose he would have done himself,

if

PREFACE

VI

he had foreseen the modern reader, and the and obscurities he might find in his writings.

The Commentary

difficulties

has extended to a greater length

than was originally contemplated owing to the accumulation of

passages to be quoted from Aristotle or other

writers in illustration of the language and terminology

of the Poetics.

It

is

hoped

who approach

use to those

that they

may

prove of

the text without previous

study of Isocrates or the Rhetoric and other Aristotelian treatises.

venture to think, too, that some of the

I

quotations will be seen to settle the meaning of certain

passages which are not always rightly interpreted, and that others

may

serve to confirm the traditional text,

and vindicate it from some of the doubts and suspicions which have been so freely cast on it. If the language found from parallels elsewhere to be accordance with the usage of Aristotle or other

of a passage in

Greek

is

writers,

it

is

the assumption of

evident that corrections based on its

faultiness

may be

at

once put

out of court.

The

Introduction

is

mainly on the two questions

which divide the critics of

the text at the present

moment, the relation between the MS. known as A® and the Renaissance MSS., and the value of the Greek readings which are, or are believed to be, recoverable from the Arabic Version. I have endeavoured to show that the

quarter

new is

light

we

think to get from this Oriental

often that of a

the utmost caution ourselves to follow

is its

to

mere

ignis fatuus,

be used

guidance,

before

when

and that

we

allow

the Arabic text

diverges in any serious degree from that of our Greek authority. Aristotle’s theory of epic

before us in the Poetics,

is

and

tragic poetry, as put

presented with such ad-

PREFACE

VII

have not deemed it necessary to go over the ground in a preliminary survey of the contents of the book. Nor have I ventured on a discussion of the problem of his general theory of Poetry mirable brevity that

and Art, as

I

would require

it

a

volume by

itself to

deal with a matter of such extreme complexity, and

should be taken away at times in the course of the inquiry into regions of thought remote from the avowed

we

The

subject of the Poetics.

statements and hints in

the book would have to be eked out

by the

aid

of

others in other writings, wherever passages are to be

discovered which have, or seem to have, some sort of

import

aesthetic

and the data thus collected would

;

have to be made

to hold together as parts of a consis-

tent theory.

Aristotelian Theories of Art constructed

way

are not unlike the Aristotelian systems of

in this

Logic, of which Aristotle’s,

if

seen so

but the synthesis

our work, not that

we have

his.

And

surprised to find

how

some of

must not

his

always to some extent

to life again,

large a meaning

more

forget, too, that

the parts are

;

cannot repress a suspicion

I

he could come back

read into

is

many

he would be

we

are able to

incidental utterances.

the very idea of a

We

Theory

modern, and that our present use of this term 'Art’ does not go further back than the age of Winckelmann and Goethe. Aristotle recognizes various of Art

is

analogies between the plastic arts and certain forms of

poetr};"

and music

;

he sees in them, for instance,

common element, imitation by Which he generally means the portrayal of humanity and life, what men do

a

‘

’,

‘

— though the term has no doubt a wider sense

or suffer

’

in places

even

in the Poetics.

also in his writings

under Aesthetics.

And

there are other ideas

which we should regard as coming But they were most of them already

PREFACE

viii

and there is very little to show he had ever thought them out sufficiently to reduce them to system even in his own mind. current in his time

;

that

The book side-light

enough

taken as it is, with perhaps an occasional from some of his other works, is intelligible

he gives us in outline all that he has to say on the subject immediately before him, the technique of the Drama and the Epic. He tells

;

one

after a brief introduction

how to

in fact

epic, just as in the

a good speech. in

construct a good play and a good

Rhetoric he

And

in

formulating once for

dramatic

art,

all

tells

one how

this

he has succeeded

the great

first

make

to

principles of

the canons of dramatic logic which even

the most adventurous of at his peril forget It is

doing

modern dramatists can only

or set at naught.

but right to remember, however, that Tragedy,

as Aristotle himself conceives

it,

is still in

many

impor-

and characteristics the Greek form of that and that it is limited in various ways by the conditions and conventions of the Greek theatre, not only

tant points art,

in the accidents of its stage presentation, its

form and structure,

its

motives and

but also in its

subjects;

so that even as literature Aristotle’s ideal play would

have been an essentially Greek not mistaken, his theory has

play.

some

But

if

I

am

further limitations.

His ideal play would seem to be in many respects compromise between the play of the great era and that of his own day; he was writing for men of a

a

generation

living

some seventy years after the is the mark of the age

death of Euripides, and there

on a good deal of what his theory lays down or assumes. The diction of the tragic dialogue, he thinks, should approximate to that of conversation, the choice of words being

like that in the stylistic

prose of oratory

— as

we

PREFACE ma}' presume

was with Theodectes and some of

it

Though he

contemporaries.

known passage

IX

disapproves in a well-

of the intercalary chorica of the

of the time, this

is

his

Drama

a merely academical expression of

opinion and a counsel of perfection

he has practically come

it

;

is

of negligible quantity, and that that

is

Plot,

sort

the ultimate

explanation of his persistent silence about in his theory of the

clear that

Chorus as a

to regard the

it.

Even

which he has worked out

much thought, he is ready to make concessions weakness of the audiences in an age which had become too humanitarian to accept the strong situations allowed in the older Tragedy. I mention this because one with so to the

is

apt to forget that in the sevent}^ years before Aristotle

Tragedy must have undergone many changes, though perhaps not for the

better,

and that we cannot always

expect to reconcile the practice of the older poets with his rules, or his rules with the practice of the older If his theory of Comedy had come down to we should probably find it more applicable to the N ew Comedy than to that of Aristophanes. An editor in these days can hardly hope to do much

poets. us,

to

advance the interpretation of a book which has been

so carefully studied and re-studied by a long succession of editors and translators,

names

many

of

them among the

more

illustrious

And

apart from editions and translations,

in the history of classical learning.

we have now

an incalculable number of contributions to the criticism

and

illustration of the book, scattered

about partly

in

and monographs, and partly in other writings, which have often no direct or overt relation special articles

to

the

Poetics themselves.

The

references

in

the

Adnotatio Critica and Commentary will show the extent to

which

I

have been able

to

use this sporadic literature.

— ;

PREFACE

X

My

and chief debt is to Vahlen, whose Beitrdge mark, as all know, an epoch in the modern history of the Poetics, and whose edition has done so much to put the criticism of the text on its true basis, and to keep it within the limits of philological reason. If I have not always found it possible to accept his views on doubtful points or passages, it was assuredly not through any lack of regard for them, or in forgetfulness on my part of his very great services to Aristotelian learning. Speaking of predecessors, an English editor first

may be

permitted to render his tribute of recognition

to his English predecessors, Goulston, Tyrwhitt,

Twining.

and

Goulston’s paraphrase, with the marginal

commentary which accompanies it, is in a sense the most helpful of the earlier versions, since it is a definite attempt to explain the logical sequence of Aristotle’s ideas, and thus to deal with difficulties of a kind of which the sixteenth-century interpreters would seem to have been unconscious. Tyrwhitt needs no eulogy

his Poetics, both in the translation

and

in the notes

—

few show a combination of originality and scholarship which puts him in the first rank among the scholars of the period between Bentley and Person. And as to Twining,

the one

fault of which

is

that they are so

whatever one may think of his translation, his commentary must always have a value as the work of a remarkably well-read man one familiar, as few are

—

now, with

all

the best literature, whether ancient or

modern. It is difficult for

me

to

to the kind assistance of late

Fellow of

New

to read the proofs

say

how much

this

book owes

my old friend, Mr. A.O. Prickard,

College,

gave

me

who

besides consenting

throughout on countless

doubtful points the benefit of his

own very

accurate

PREFACE

XI

knowledge and long study of the Poetics. In the Translation, I think, there is hardly a page to be found without amendments due to his insight and fine sense of language. I

have

much

to

thank Mr. R.

of this volume.

It

the present, like so a

little

W. Chapman

of Oriel for

timely help in the last stage of the preparation is

perhaps needless to add that

many

other Oxford books,

indebted to the attention

it

is

not

has received from

the vigilant Corrector of the Clarendon Press. I.

B.

;

INTRODUCTION I

The form and structure of

The more

text of the Poetics has

the existing Poetics.

been supposed

seriously than most prose

Greek

to

have suffered

texts in the process

and many scholars accordingly have allowed ; themselves a very free hand in dealing with its difficulties. One cannot help suspecting, however, that not a few of their of transmission

from a certain preconceived from the Middle Ages, of the general character of the Aristotelian writings— that the master of them that know could never for a moment forget his logic ; that his mind worked with all the sureness of a machine and that a treatise of his must not only have been written throughout on the straightest lines, but also have left his hands as free from oversights and inconsistencies as a modern published work is expected to be. The untenableness of these assumptions, as thus stated, is obvious, and no one, I imagine, would confess to them in so many words. But it is impossible to read much of the current criticism on the Poetics without seeing that its working hypothesis is in many instances what I have said. Aristotle, with all his scientific formalism, is even as a thinker much more human than we are apt to suppose his writing, too, is marked by great inequalities, passages of admirable lucidity and finish being often followed by a stretch of text in a style so curt and crabbed as to be the despair of his interpreters, ancient as well as modern. The Poetics begin fairly well, but as the work advances there doubts and suspicions start idea, inherited

‘

’

;

are

signs

becomes

of failing attention to form, and the statement

in places little better

than a series of notes.

The

continuity also of the exposition is frequently broken by

:

—

:

INTRODUCTION

XIV

parentheses, sometimes on matters of very minor importance for the immediate argument. The digression on the Wis chap. 15 is a clear instance of matter out of explain it psychologically, as arising by

dTTo /^rjxavrj'; in

We

place.

may

a natural association of ideas out of the preceding context (15, 1454 “33-6) ; but its logical place was assuredly not in a chapter devoted to the

Hermann went so far as to present setting, and insert it after riXovi in 1455*^32, not seeing that in thus removing one difficulty he was only creating another. take

it

out of

its

Judged by our modern standards of literary correctness Poetics are perpetually open to criticism; but the anomalies and informalities, if I may use the word, are too numerous to be removed by the ordinary emendatorial the

Among

artifices.

may

the following (i)

The

these anomalies of language or thought

be noted

:

anticipatory use of technical terms, which

defined afterwards ciuXovs fivdos

its

;

are

e. g,

meaning

is

assumed

in 9, 145

U 33

;

and

it

is

defined later on, in chap. 10. Xoyos- (as

a term of

grammar

or logic): defined in 20, 1457 ‘‘24; but same sense in 20, 1457 6.

the term had appeared before this in the Xv
1455

used without explanation in

and defined

in 18,

1450*34, and e.xplained

after-

15, 1454^^37,

^ 26.

TTepiKereia

wards

To

and

in chap.

avayva>pi(ns

used in

6,

1 1.

account for this kind of procedure

have suggested 164) that most of these and similar technical terms may have been already sufficiently recognized and established in the language of the period, and that Aristotle only defines them for a special elsewhere (Festschrift fur Th. Gomperz

I

p.

reason, in the interest of scholastic precision or clearness.

This postponement of explanation, however, is not peculiar We have an instance in the Nicomachean Ethics, where 7rpoaipeL
requiring explanation.

—

— INTRODUCTION

(2) Variations of terminology.

XV

Aristotle does not always

same terms even when dealing with the same Thus in chap, i he has two terms for the technical ideas. musical element in poetry, /xeAos and ap/Movta; and two for In the same way the literary element also, fierpov and Adyos. in chap. 18 the intrigue in a play is termed SeVig in one place and ttAok-^ in another. adhere

(3)

to the

Inconsistency in the use of terms.

some of the instances of it arrKovs pvdos

and

following are

the opposite of the

TreTrXfy^et'oi-

pvBos in 10, 145^ ^ ^2,

that of the SittXovs pvdos in 13, 1453 ^ 13.

eVeio-dStov

in 13,

pipe'urBai

sometimes a dramatic

:

in

eVtetKijy;

and

:

The

:

15,

is

‘

act

sometimes an

‘

insertion

said that the tragic hero should be,

in 3,

:

opoios, said of a 1

it

34 that he should not be, eVisiKijr. 1448 ^ 20 and elsewhere it includes the narrative

1452

form of imitation; another in

1454 '’13

in 24, 1460^8 it excludes it. dramatic personage, has one sense in

1454

5,

^

2,

1448 ^ 6 and

24, ^ 10.

though generally used in the theatrical sense defined in ii, 1452'^ II, has in two passages (17, 1455 ^31 38) another 19, 1456 sense, that of feeling or emotion ’. a-vXKn^r]: its use in 21, 1458 “2, though recognized in common parlance, is not in accordance with the definition in 20, 1456 '^35. Trddos,

;

‘

’

‘

These and similar inconsistencies of language are obviously mere accidents of expression, which mislead no one and it would have been easy to remove them on revision, if the Poetics had ever undergone that process. But, if I am not mistaken, there is evidence, at any rate here and there, of a more serious kind of inconsistency, actual inconsistency ;

of thought. (4)

Inconsistency of thought.

instances of this

In

2,

1448

a

4

The

following

seem

to

be

:

we

are told that the tragic personage

is

not

but yScArtW ^ Kad’ ^p.o.%, and in 13, 1453 ^ 5 that he must be op.oio';, one like ourselves. The discrepancy is not difficult o/zoios

of explanation. distinction

In chap.

2

Aristotle

is

thinking only of the

between Tragedy and Comedy.

In chap.

13,

on the other hand, where the question before him is the emotional effect of Tragedy, he has come to see that, if we

INTRODUCTION

XVI are to

'

fear

’

he must be o/aoios, more or being the condition of our human

for the tragic hero,

less like ourselves

— that

sympathy with him, Aristotle appears to have been not unconscious of the change of view, since in the summary in 13, 1453®’ 16

he modifies his second formula, and writes

^ otou iiprjraL [i. e. o/xotos] the alternative ^ /JeAnWos

statement into

line,

rj

is

/SeXTLOvo? fiaXXov

rj

where

)(€Lpovos,

obviously intended to bring the

as far as can be, with that in chap.

2.

1453^22 he approves of a drama with an unhappy ending even when kinsmen are concerned, and declares it to be the theoretically best form of tragedy, ^ Kara r^v rex^w KaXXiaTT] rpayw8ca. But in the following chapter (14, 1454^4) he tells us that there is something better than this when kinsmen are concerned it is best for the unhappy ending to be evaded by means of a timely Discovery. It is clear that he has become aware of there being something p.iap6v in the ordinary tragic situations, and feels that it is to be avoided or reduced to a minimum. In 23, 1459 I the superior Unity in the two Homeric poems as compared with the later epics is distinctly asserted on the ground that the action in the latter is at best only In

13,

:

pLia Trpa^is ’KoXvp.eprj’;. In 26, 1462 8, however, a different view is taken of the Iliad and Odyssey, which are said to be each made up of several actions or parts in other words, the action in them is conceived as being what Aristotle had

a

;

/xta -n-pa^Ls 7roXvp.ep7j^. The exigencies of the argument in chap. 26 have betrayed him into a state-

previously described as a

ment to

at variance

with that in chap. 23

;

and he has omitted

bring them into formal concordance by modifying one

or the other.

In 24, 1459 8 in his desire to find points of agreement between epic poetry and Tragedy he tells us that the species of the Epic correspond with those of Tragedy,

i.

e.

with

But with the text as it 18, 1455^32. correspondence cannot be made tradition the in the stands The only possible way of bringing the two statements out. into harmony is that adopted by Vahlen, who has to assume a lacuna in 18, 1455^34 and also to accept a very arbitrary and improbable conjecture, rcparoiSes, in 18, 1456® 2. those enumerated

in

—

—

— INTRODUCTION

(5)

That

Lapses of memory.

at fault is the

his

XVII

memory was sometimes

only explanation of his misleading account of

the Peripety of the

Oedipus

ii,

in

1452*^24, and of his

But there are misquotations from the Iliad in 25, 1461 '>•16. also, I think, signs of haste and inexactitude even in some of his references to matters within the Poetics themselves at

any rate 6,

6,

in the following instances

1450

1449

1)

13

34

mcrirep

irportpov

:

ecpyjTai,

The

—where a different definition 32 TO
18 , 1455

is

reference

is

to

given.

p-ipr] IkiyOrj.

18, 1456®' II OTrep TToXXaKi^ eiprjTai.

The second and

third of these three references are clearly

and have even created a doubt as to the soundness of the text. At the same time one cannot but see that the first reference, that in 1450^113, is equally open to criticism, though no one seems to have thought it necessary to suggest an alteration of text in that passage. Difficulties and anomalies of this description, i. e. in isolated inexact,

passages, are not peculiar to the Poetics to

;

they are certainly

be found from time to time in other Aristotelian writings,

e. g.

De Anima,

in the

Nicomachean

Ethics.

I

the Rhetoric, and perhaps even the

may now

leave them, and pass on to

a larger question, the difficulties in the general plan and structure of the whole. is

The scheme

admirably simple and

or sections

logical,

of the

work

comprising

five

as a whole main parts

:

1. A preliminary discourse on Tragedy, epic poetry, and Comedy, as the chief forms of imitative poetry, and the

subject of the inquiry that 2.

is to

follow (chaps. 1-5).

Definition of a tragedy, and the rules for

its

construction

(chaps. 6-22).

Rules for the construction of an epic (chaps. 23-4), Enumeration of the criticisms to which an epic or tragedy may be subjected, and of the various possible replies 3.

4.

to

them 5.

A

(chap. 25).

comparison of epic poetry and Tragedy, showing the

artistic superiority POETICS

of the latter (chap. 26).

b

— INTRODUCTION

xviii

The

chief difficulties usually found in the book are in the

contents and arrangement of the second section, that dealing

with the rules for the construction of a tragedy. stands, with in

it

may

its

Read

as

it

matter in the traditional order, the main points

be said to be in brief as follows

Definition of a tragedy

:

(6, 1449 Analysis of a tragedy into its qualitative parts,

1.

2.

24).

the two last being oi//'ts coming within an Art of Poetry (chap. 6).

^0os, Bidvoia, Ae^ts, /xeAoTrotta,

as not

The

3.

fjLWo <;

;

the general rules for the construction of

:

and the Unity of action required

a

(chaps. 7-1

A

4.

note or postscript

The

every form of

in

it

1).

tragedy (chap. 5.

set aside

on the quantitative parts of a

12).

special rules for the tragic /xv^os viewed as a

of producing the emotional effect of

Tragedy

means

(chaps. 13-14).

Rules for the yOos of the tragic personages, with a parenon the use of the /xr/yav?; in Drama (chap. 15).

6.

thetic note

Appendix

7.

Discovery;

ii.

to

the foregoing

the various forms of

i.

:

certain additional rules to be

remembered

in

practice in the construction of a play (chaps. 16-18).

The The

8.

9.

language

Bidvoia

of the tragic personages (chap.

Ae'As in ii.

;

Tragedy:

i.

19).

the ultimate constituents of

the different kinds of terms

;

iii.

the character-

of the language of poetry, and the limits to be observed

istics

in the

use of poetical words and forms (chaps. 20-22).

The above is a synopsis of this section as it might be read by any one prepared to accept the text in the form in which it has come down to us. The doubts which have been thrown on it are of two kinds (i) the genuineness of certain chapters is questioned; and (2) the order in which the materials now appear is thought to deviate more or less :

from that of Aristotle himself. I.

The

chapters which so

many

other side

and

I

must reserve

for the

1456 1^20), as the question with in an Introduction. 20,

scholars reject as inter-

The argument on Commentary (on 12, 1452

polations are chap. 12 and chap. 20.

is

the 14

too complex to be dealt

— INTRODUCTION

XIX

2. The difficulties in the traditional order of the matter have been met by a free use of transposition. Hermann, for instance, transfers the paragraph on the AiVts ano fjLrjxavrjs

from chap. 15 (1454

^

37-^^ 8) to chap.

18, inserting

it

there

Susemihl goes further he lifts the whole of chap. 15 out of its place, in order to make They were both only it come immediately after chap. 18. after

tcAovs in 1455 '’32.

iJ.exP'-

following

baud passibtis aeqiiis

who went

to

much

:

in the steps of

Daniel Heinsius,

may

following comparative table

give an idea of the liberties

Heinsius took in his rearrangement of the text Heinsius, ,,

The

greater lengths in this direction.

c. vii

=

chap. 12.

c. xiii

==

chap.

„

c.

xiv

,,

c.

XV

,,

c.

xvi

,,

c.

xvii

„

c.

xviii

:

16.

= II, 452 b9-i3+ 13, 452 'J30sqq. = chap. 14. = 13, 1452 28-30 + chap. 17. = chap. 18. = chap. 15. i

I

The changes Heinsius adventured were never wholly motiveless,

but the section

almost a reductio

as thus

ad absurdmn of

reformed this

by him

mode

is

of critical

The underlying assumption is that Aristotle, having planned out his work from beginning to end with careful prevision and in accordance with a severely logical procedure.

scheme, must have thought of everything he had in

its

predestined

logical

saying anything except in right to

assume

place, its

and

was

logical place.

this of Aristotle

;

to

incapable

We

say of

have no

he was not writing,

like

Isocrates, for the great world, or with the responsibilities of

publication ever before his eyes.

But the chief objection to is that no vera causa

the procedure of the transpositionists

can be assigned for the structural disorder it presupposes. Our ordinary experience of MSS. and the textual faults they

sometimes present supplies nothing analogous, nothing that phenomena. The only conceivable

will serve to explain the

hypothesis

is

that the Aristotelian materials survived at first

tablets, or sheets, as we should say that each one of these contained a definite piece of text of varying

simply on loose

;

b 2

INTRODUCTION

XX

length, sometimes that of a chapter,

and sometimes that of one of the sections or paragraphs of a modern edition ; and that the whole was put into its present shape by an early editor. All this, however, is mere surmise. And if there ever was an early editor with a free hand to arrange the materials as he thought fit, the presumption is that his logical instinct would have led him to the same view of the position of chap.

15, for instance,

and others have taken

in

modern

as Heinsius, Susemihl,

times.

II

The Victorius was the (

Second Book.

lost

see that the treatise

first to

now known

as the Poetics is only the surviving portion of a larger work.

The

fact is sufficiently

assured by the note in the index of

Aristotelian writings in Diogenes Laertius scribes the

work

as being in two

Books

(5, 21),

who

de-

:

TTpay/xarelas Ti)(yrjs TroirjTLKijs d

jS.

We

have no further direct testimony to the existence of The additional evidence which is sometimes quoted, that of the Arabic version of the index ascribed to Ptolemaeus ‘the Philosopher’ (v. Berlin Aristotle 1470 may be set aside without discussion, as having little or nothing to do with our present Poetics (Rose, Aristotelis a Second Book.

Fragmenta

ed.

Teubn. p.20

;

Littig,

Andronikos von Rhodos

i

P- 38).

Our

present Poetics,

if

we may

value, as a fairly complete it

goes,

may be regarded

take the work at its face and consecutive whole so far as

as Bk. I of the original treatise.

There are certainly indications of there being more to follow and its concluding paragraph also is in form exactly like the summaries which Aristotle so constantly introduces in other writings, to mark a transition from one section of That there was even in his general subject to another. the latest Aristotelian schools some faint tradition of another ;

INTRODUCTION Book

is

shown by the reference

XXI

in Eustratius

on the Ethics

(p. 320 Heylbut) to Poet. 4, 1448^30, who speaks of the passage as being iv tw TrpuiTm Trepl TroirjTiKrj'; [i. e. ev Tw d Trepl

As

Troirp-LKTjs],

was wanting

II,

one thing

common

We

Greek MS. is

cannot

quite clear, that

is

archetype of 2 the ,

and

eighth century Syriac translator,

the

it

for Bk.

in the

fix

the date of

practically certain, however,

its

A^,

MS.

it

before

our oldest

disappearance;

the loss must have

that

occurred during the papyrus period of the

when Bk.

text,

II

on a separate roll, so as to be easily detached from Bk. I, which was on another roll. The view of Bernays (Zwei Abhandlungen p. 48) is that it survived into the fifth century, and that the statement in Proclus [v. Fr. V note] of the Aristotelian Catharsis theory was based on a first-hand knowledge of Aristotle’s text. The actual words of Proclus

was

still

hardly justify such a conclusion TOVTO

S’

ovv

TTokkrjv

Kol

tQ

:

—

Kat Tois VTrlp tCjv Troijycrewv tovtojv

nAdrwva

Aoyoav

It will

.

.

Trapacr^oy

’ApLCTTOTeXei

d^op/iijv

alridcrew

dywvt
.

be observed that Proclus refers not only to Aristotle

Drama;

but also to other apologists for the

than Aristotle

it

is

quite

was from one of the latter rather himself that he derived his knowledge of the

possible, therefore, that

it

Aristotelian idea of catharsis.

And

in the context in place

synonyms

of the Aristotelian term he substitutes as

d
— neither of these words being found either in this

and

aTrepacrts

or in any other sense in the extant writings of Aristotle. In Byzantine times Bk. II

was

so completely forgotten

that the inscription of the existing Poetics in A.° is simply

n«pt

TTonip-LKrj?,

been

if

the

and not

memory

Ilept

TToirp-iKT]';

as

a,

of Bk. II had survived.

it

would have There is no

evidence to show that the later Grammarians

knew of Bk. II, Comedy which must have formed part evidence showing it to have been unknown

or of the theory of of to

it.

But there

The

them.

CG

F.

I

p.

is

so-called

Tractatus

Coislinianus

(Kaibel,

50-3) preserves a definition of Comedy, which

has no doubt a certain Aristotelian look

;

however, by simple inspection that

nothing more than

it

is

any one can

see,

—

—

INTRODUCTION

xxn

an adaptation, or rather, as Bernays the well-known definition of

calls

Tragedy

1449^)24):—

(6,

Tract. Coisl. KW/iwSta

Aristotle. wpa^etos

ecTTt ix(ixr](Ti';

Xeiov

fKaarov

;;(copts

tC)v

Trpd^ews

Xuipli;

anayyeXia^, Si ^Sovy? Kal ye'Xw-

p.ip.ycri';

TtXtias

Koii

Xoyw

ySvcrp-tvw

tKacTTOv [so A°]

twv elSwv

iv rots /iopidts, SpdvTiuv Kal ov Si’

Trepawovo'a ryv tCjv tolovtiov

TraOrjpaTiDV

(TTTOvSaias

p.tytOo'; t)(pv(Tr}%,

fj-opLwv

tv rots tiBea-L, SpolvTiov Kal

TO
TpaywSia

ovv

iiTTLV

yeXoLov Ka\ afioipov /xeye^ovs t£-

81

a travesty, of

it,

in the existing Poetics

aTrayyeAias, 81 ’ iXiov Kal

KdOapcriv,

Trepaivovira

Ttuv

rrjv

(j)6/3ov

toiovtojv

7ra0rjpdTwv KaOapcnv. It

is

evident that neither the compiler of the Tractatus

nor the older writer from whom he may have been borrowing had the genuine Aristotelian definition of Comedy before him, and that the gap in knowledge had to be filled up by means of the above sorr}’ fabrication. The same marks of origin are observable in what the Tractatus says of the ‘

matter

’

of

Ko)/x(j)8ias

Comedy

vXt),

pvOo^

:

y9o<; Sidi'oia AeTis /xeAos

oi/iis

(comp. Poet.

a

1450 9); and of the parts into which 6,

Comedy

is

divided

:

p-tpy r^s K(op,(i)8ias rtacrapa, TrpoAoyos ^opiKov eTreicrdStov e^oSos.

Kw/xwSias to

TrpoAoyos ecrriv p.6pLov

TO

XopiKOv

icTTL

iKavov.

eTreicrdSiov

TO

iirl

ecrt to p.tra^ Svo p^opiKwv ptXuiv.

TtXei Xtyoptvov tov x^^pov

The

tlcrdSov

p-eXP‘-

rod

(comp. Poet,

i

e^oSos

to

that of

its

‘source’

hazarded, as the same enumeration of the

appears in Tzetzes (Kaibel,

who quotes

it

C G F.

i

p.

‘

;

may perhaps parts

’

21; comp. p.

as that of a certain Euclides

—a

believe

be

28),

grammarian It

therefore, that even at the time of this Euclides

Bk. II of the Poetics was lost or inaccessible. to

but

of Corned}'

of doubtful date but apparently of the classical period.

would seem,

tan

2).

date of this rechauffe cannot be determined

an approximation

^^opoS.

Tov ^opoii p,£Aos aSoptvov dray txy p.tyt6o<;

VTro

that,

treatise, Aristotle

in

the

It is difficult

course of a comparatively short

repeated himself in the purely mechanical

fashion of these later compilations on

Comedy.

INTRODUCTION

xxiii

now lost, there are indications in may give us some idea of the It may be taken to have ground it must have covered. comprised (i) the discussion on Comedy promised in Poet. 6, Although Bk.

Aristotle

II

is

himself which

1449 ^21, and (2) the Catharsis theory to which reference is in Pol. 8. 7, 1341 32 (v. Fr. V). What we are told in more than one passage in the Rhetoric (v. Fr. Ill) is enough

made

show that ra yeXoia, the appointed subject of Comedy, must have been considered and examined with the same analytical

to

care as

in

the treatment

of

surviving theory of Tragedy.

to.

^o/Jepa

And

if

km.

ikaiva in

his theory of

the

Comedy

was on much the same lines as that of Tragedy, Aristotle must have had something to say on the ixvBol of Comedy, and also on the f/^os and Ae'As of the comic personages. The strange expression in Fr. IV, to

perhaps have been possibilities in

the

way

KwroraTov,

Se Travrojv

in its original setting

of diction in Comedy.

Catharsis theor}', the only place

may

an illustration of the

we can imagine

As

for the

would Vahlen (Aristotelische Aufsatze 3 p. 10) has seen, at In such a position it would come in the end of Bk. II. naturally enough, as a final word on the whole subject of the Drama, justifying the existence of both Tragedy and Comedy for

it

be, as

reply to the polemic of Plato

the

Republic.

discussion itself can hardly have been a

brief one.

in

in

was too large and too controversial some one or two short chapters.

subject in

to

The The

be disposed of

Ill

History of the Poetics.

The history of the book in the classical period is obscure. Much of its teaching and terminology survives in the later literature of compilation, but the book itself seems to have been after a time either ignored or but little studied. There are no traces of an ancient commentary on it, and comparatively few citations, acknowledged or unacknowledged, in

ancient writers..

Several of the citations, too, are manifestly

— INTRODUCTION

XXIV second-hand.

This ma}' be said also even of the remini-

scences of Aristotelian ideas in Polybius, and in the Ars Poetica of Horace for there is reason to think that Polybius was only following Eratosthenes, and Horace his Greek authority, Neoptolemus of Parium. The more important of the Testimonia are noted in their place in the Commentary. Many other more latent references are to be found in the Grammarians, as may be seen from the texts collected in the following monographs Trendelenburg Grammaticorum graecorum de arte tragica iudiciorum reliquiae (Bonn 1867). Westphal Prolegomena zu Aeschylus Tragbdien (Leipz. ;

’

‘

:

;

;

1869).

Kaibel

Die Prolegomena IIEPI KfiMfilAIAS (Berl. 1898).

;

Adam; Die Aristotelische Theorievom Epos (Wiesb. Carroll

:

Aristotle’s

Poetics,

Homeric Scholia (Baltimore

c.

xxv,

in

the light

1889).

of the

1895).

Apart from the fact of our oldest Greek MS. (A^) having been written somewhere about the year rooo, there is little or no indication of any interest in the book among the Greeks of the Middle Ages. It is clear, however, that it found readers in the East, as it was translated into Syriac in the eighth century, and from the Syriac into Arabic in the

The Commentary of Averroes, which was based on this Arabic version, was rendered before long into Hebrew, and also, under the title of Aristotelis Poetria (Jourdain, Recherches Critiques^ p. 141), by Hermannus Alemannus eleventh.

Roger Bacon (Op. Mai. p. 10 1 Bridges) knew work of Hermannus, but not the Greek Poetics or any

into Latin.

the

Latin version

i

made

directly

from the Greek.

The

Poetics

were not among the many Aristotelian and other philosophic Greek books which found translators in the thirteenth century, when the Latin occupation opened up the Byzantine world to the Westerns. The Rhetoric was translated at this time, but its fellow treatise was left out in the cold. The modern history of the book begins in the second half of the fifteenth century. The Greek text itself now became known among the learned in Italy; and at the end of the century (1498) the first translation from it, that by

— ;

INTRODUCTION G; Valla, was given to the world.

XXV difficult to

is

It

see

why

the Poetics were not included in the great Aldine Aristotle of

The many Renaissance MSS. which we show that the book must have been

1495-8.

are enough to

and

hands of not a few of the

the

in

MS.

Valla certainly had a

to

work

on.

still

have

accessible

earlier humanists.

Politian is

known

to

have been a former possessor of one of the Laurentian MSS. (LX. 14); and his acquaintance with the book is proved by his reference to a well-known passage (Poet, i, 1447^^ 21) in his Panepistemon (1483); Turn ilia obscuriora poematum genera, ithyphallicum, manerus [i. e. maneros] borimus, lytierces [from Athenaeus]. Et item qualis centaurus ilk Chaeremonis : quae

communi vocabulo poemata

The

dicuntur.

princeps of the Greek text appeared at length in

editio

1508 in what

usually reckoned as Vol.

is

Rhetores Graeci.

It

was no

little

I

of the Aldine

misfortune to learning

instead of following one of the better apographs, the

that,

Demetrius Ducas, sent the text forth in a form which an almost ideal instance of what a first edition should not

editor, is

Who was

be.

we

the Aldine

responsible for the systematic corruptions in

cannot

that the chief offender

more

now say

one may suspect, however,

;

was no other than Ducas himself

especially as he claims credit in his preface for the

pains he had taken in the correction of the texts in the

volume

:

ravTry

Ixo^OT^a-avre'S

erri

rots

The

ZimpOilia-a^ev.

will

it

dvTiypd^ots

says, ots

TroXka TTOVT^fravTCS

evervyofiev

toIs

new Kal

^tXoAdyot?

general characteristics of this Aldine text

be examined further on.

that the prestige of for

he

TTjv

Here

it

may be enough

an Aldine caused

it

to hold its

to note

ground

more than three centuries as a sort of textus receptus fact, with some few minor improvements, accepted

was, in

after editor, and scholar after scholar. In 1555 an was made to dislodge it from this position by Gu. Morel, whose recension was based on the MS. now known as

by editor effort

Parisinus 2040, a fairly faithful apograph of A®.

Morel’s

however, notwithstanding his great name among his contemporaries, left little or no mark on the general criticism edition,

of the book lectiones in

;

its

readings are

all

but ignored in the Variae

Sylburg’s edition (1584).

Several of the sixteenth

.

INTRODUCTION

XXVI century editors

(Pacciiis,

Madius,

Robortellus,

Victorius)

had access to MSS.; but they did little more than turn to them from time to time for a new reading in some particular passage it does not seem to have occurred to them to raise the larger question of the value and credentials of the Aldine Even Victorius, who had had text. in his hands before it left Florence, and was fully aware of its great antiquity, failed to see its superiority as a basis for the text to the Aldine vulgate. Writing in 1560 he says: Videram ipse olim ac dihgenter tractaram volumcn quoddam antiqiiissimiim in quo ;

.

hie etiam liher esset, nihilo melior

pei-vulgatus aliqiiid

qiiilibet

illic

ilk mtdtis locis

Onare desperavi

typisqne exensns erat.

And

honi hide posse expectari.

with a fairly complete collation of

.

qiiam

as late as 1831 Bekker,

A^-'

before him, retained

few of the Aldine emblemata. This illusory idea of the value of the Aldine lasted on until 1839, nevertheless

when

not

a

Ritter at last raised his voice against

as based on a

MS. 'non solum

multis

vitiis

it,

and

set

it

aside

librariorum culpa

depravatum, sed etiam ab Aldo aliisque eruditis Italiae modo correctum modo interpolatum et corruptum.’

viris It

Spengel (1865-6) and Vahlen (1867) to carry Ritter’s theory a step further by recognizing the unique authority of A'= as the one record of the Greek textual tradition, and the ultimate parent of all our Renaissance texts. There is no doubt a tendency just at present to question this conclusion owing to the effect on opinion of the recently published Arabic Version, which is found to confirm some of the better readings in the Renaissance MSS.; the fact is supposed to imply the survival into Renaissance times of some memory of a text independent of that in A®. The

remained

for

point will have to be considered at length in a later section

of this Introduction.

IV The existing data for If

we may

the constitution

disregard for the present the testimony of the

Renaissance MSS., as being

MS. known

of the Text.

all

of them apographs of the

as A^, our authorities for the textual tradition

INTRODUCTION

xxvn

(i) A<=, and (2) in a less and indications of another Greek text recoverable from the Arabic Version and the surviving fragment of the lost Syriac Version.

of the Poetics are reduced to two, definite way, the traces

A°. A<=,

i.

e.

Parisinus 1741,

is

part of a

volume which contains

not only the Poetics but also the Rhetoric and several post-

works on Rhetoric. In the sixteenth century it was examined by Victorius, while it was still in Florence.

Aristotelian

Since then

it

has been repeatedly collated

;

first

by an un-

named friend of Burgess (perhaps Cora}^) for the critical Appendix to Tyrwhitt’s edition (1794); then by Bekker for the Berlin Aristotle (1831); and lastly by Vahlen and others. description of it, with a full account of its history, will

A

be found

in

M. H. Omont’s Introduction to the facsimile by M. F. Allegre. The

edition of the text published in 1891

date of this fine specimen of Byzantine calligraphy

is

saec.

x-xi. It is

texts

hardly possible to overrate the

in

preserved

in

it it

is

our

first, if

In the case of Demetrius to

critical

value of the

For the non- Aristotelian writings

the volume.

not our only, textual authority.

Ilepi

it

is

acknowledged

be the archetype of the later MSS., which ‘are

from

P.

1741,

the

derived

all

better readings they present

pointing

rather to individual emendation than to difference of descent’

(Rhys Roberts, after Usener). Usener recognizes it as our one great authority for the text of the various treatises of Dionysius included in the volume, and puts aside the later MSS. as being all of them ‘apographa exempli Parisini Though it cannot be shown to be of such unique importance for Aristotle’s Rhetoric,

the text, and a

more

it

is

confessedly our best source for

faithful representative of the

archetype than any of the later

MSS.

common

or the version of

William of Morbeka (v. Roemer, Praef. p. xxv). In the Poetics A^ must always claim the premier place, even if the Arabic Version now and then supplies a better reading or corrects

some of its more patent

scribal errors.

Its

general

—

—

INTRODUCTION

xxviii

credibility as a fairly faithful record of sufficiently obvious,

(i)

It

the uncial stage of the text

e. g.

;

older text

is

which go back

to

AiSo/^eva for ’AiSo/Acva in

28, tAiafr for lAids in 1462 ^3, Ma^r^/^drcov for HaOrjfJLaTuyv

1456 in

much

,a

retains errors

I’

1449

28. '

spelling*

(2)

an antique

retains in places traces of

It

e. g. irav fiiKpov

and

Trav/Acye^es in

1450

ev)(ea in

37—9,

Although the text of the ancient archetype was constantly misunderstood by the scribe responsible for accents and breathings, there are but few signs of an attempt to alter the actual letter of the original scriptura continua in order to accommodate it to his misconceptions of its meaning. 1461

S'

TrXioi

2,

The

in

1461 “26.

(3)

following synopsis of errors in

A° may

incidentally

serve to indicate the kinds of assumption on which the more

An

convincing corrections of the text are based.

asterisk

added when the amended reading is known to be confirmed by the Arabic Version or the Syriac fragment.

is

Confusions through similarity of letters

1.

:

28 lAla
= ’AiB6fjLfva*

lAids 1462 **3

;

A€iXtai/=’Afi, Xtai/ 1461

and

and

fXTjyvvr]

must

suffice

:

Tatars I454*’4, 1458^28;

at:

er/cfTrraiai

1459

o

ei

— '^^XV

1448 ’’18;

riXe/Jiaxov

1461^

**

25.

—

K€

=

Kai'

— (TaXapivT] 1459*25;

— dv^ei* 1455*27; eidfi = pS€i 1460*^31. — — 1460 16 (etc.). 23 ^ or ^ = = elVot 1458*' 32 pr)yvvrj = piyvioi Tri(T = Toh 1455 ^ dv

01:

etrj

*

et

;

I

j

ein-Tjt

;

* 2. ft:

* 13

and

ovTU)

oj

irtiOavov (passim); flBtav 1456*’ 3,

1458

18.

—

o\k
= oi/Aeif

lap^lov (passim).

;

:

= ov

fVeri/AOTO

*

:

1460

8,

and

1450

—

*>

and

1460 i

i: ovx'i

1461

1460*2.

and

r]

r)

;

!

1457*' 14; (paydSeva I458*’23. t]

*"

= Tla6rjfmTa>v*

Confusions through similarity of pronunciation; a few

2.

typical instances e

1456^28;

Ma6r]iJidTu

to=tib (passim); To 5 To = rouru 1451*^4; yXorrSv 1458*26. TCI*

1455

1451*36;

Comp. Meisterhans,

Herculanensis

X‘^P°^

—

X°P°^

1452 '*19;

iniTijid

ran

=

^ 26.

p. 57.

Gr.® p. 112,

and Crdnert, Memoria graeca

—— —

.

—— —

—

INTRODUCTION Omission of

3.

only in rpay^Sta,

= Koivrj

K.oiv!]

1454^20;

=

apeTrj

= ovv

N

NiVrpcov 1460 ®'26;

= 6 pS)VT

6 pS)VTa

“

1447 '’28, 1461

I

olvo)(oeve.i

av 1455

*'

= aptTfi

= a\oyop

1460® 13

27


= a\Xo

= Iv

Kij'r;(7 Ja-

=

1460^23

TOVTOV ovtos

fie

;

:

I459

I457

avaXoyov

j

!

:

tS ovopaTOcr

iv

tovtov ovtoct

fie

ovTav twv apidpibv = Tpia>v optcop

Tpiatv

;

29 oXXov ;

1457^33

37

^ 17.

9.

Errors in accents and breathings, these being often added

piy€dov(T 1451®' 15;

1461 ^25;

1450'^!

1451 pevop

= t6t

23

;

kvkXw ;

ttos

(

—

to rule or

1452^33; 1454

MepoTT/;

= KvKXanTas)

(

= aXX(BS

5

!

era

j

ovSfpa

qdr]

(

^4

= oifieV

!

drjdt])

{

tov

(

pev opti

1460“'' II

454

I

Ae/\|/eie

oicr

acfirjpt]

;

= dp(pi^o\iq)

'Ayaddip

’’^

1448^15

re) 145 ^

sense

dp(j)i^ 6 \ia

nap piKpbp (==nappiKpov) 1450*^37;

aXX’ wcr ye

1458^3!

TL

ntpineTfiai

dolvaTai 14^8 ^ 24.

KVKXcoTraa-, i.e.

.

1462

(rvvdtffpcp

TrX.ei 6 v
on mechanically and without regard

8

j

=

= /iip4(Tts

= a.vayva>(T(i

ovopari (Trjpaivovros*

rc3

TOP apiBpop 1460

(

1455 I v'nrTpa> = avT 6 av rov 1453®' I

Errors through assimilation of terminations

6.

TrXfiovav a'vv 8 eapcov

nXeiarp

'

avayv(opi
;

=p

= iTr€i
e 7reLcrobiov

— olvoxoeveiv 1461 “ 30;

Confusions through general resemblance

5.

yj/eie)

Tr\(i(TTr)

4

:

;

craTvpiaKov^iTaTvpiKov 1449^ 20

7.

1448^3;

1456^23.

r)TTr]6fi

Omission of final

4.

ol

but also in the inflexions

:

1447 '^15;

riTr^6rj

mutum, a frequent phenomenon not

Iwra

Kio/noiSta, aSeiv, etc.,

of nouns and verbs

XXIX

;

(

popl^op

Tore

;

’’I 4

= eVaXei= S>
ipopi^op) 1461 ^ 3 -

Haplographia

npocrrjpaipei

1457

:

^ 17

o'l'pjSdXerai

)

1458*^

I

;

1458^ 15

xdpt

;

nav\jx<-oi

1461 ^ 17. 9.

Omission of

letters or syllables

(^iK)nXr)^ea>
(^oiybinovp

(^q^papTriaBai I460'’ 28

1462^2;

Au^y^xei* 1455 ^ ^9 I ( = qdiop fj) 1 462 10.

>

1448'^ 34! tl(p^ 6pop

;

Omission of words

ToinvTai* 1447 ^ 25

1456 ^ 21

;

;

ots

Ti

;

(

= oti)

(

= ot

1461

1452

re)

KiPovPTa(^i) 1461

30

;

I

12

;

;

jjSopq

:

dpuipvpos* 1447

9 ovor ovno)* 1450^ 30, 1455 17 1451^6; TO I456'^26; toC 1461®’ 19; KOI 2 * 1458 ^9; q p>) 1460 27. 1461 ^ 9

:

>

',

;

Xvcris* 145 s

31

1456 i462'‘3;

28

oufieK* ol

koi

)

;

V

1460

*^11,

6

1448

® 12,

01448^25;

—

—

Transposition, more especially of

11.

omission Tiji'

= Kara

KaTa

1447

riji/

Tai^r;o'

TovTOV(r = TOvs

1459'’ 7

;

6 eir)

I462

0 TII 448

’’

35

to KaTa

;

Kot

145

= Kara to 32

1

av

;

1457

= ot

o!

’>

9

;

= fiia

t)fiia

1453

^ 37.

Tn

£ 7r«iTa

=

e 7ret

1460^14;

to

eVi

be

eVt

:

“ 12,

body of the

in the

The

text.

=-

oaota

;

following would

be instances of the intrusion of such adscripts

enonoua I447

“

28

wevre 1450'^ 16; 7rnpd5fty/xa (TK\r)p 6 Tr]TO(T 1454

;

Tov KadoXov 145 s

'*

14

!

7-

Double readings

15.

I

ai/

2.

;

Marginalia to

liable to

6e 1456 1462 l 1458 24, 1460 1460 ''28; ovre 1460^36; eVtI 1462^7.

ai»

;

1459^13! 4.

words

:

1455^34;

Beir]

5

Repetition of words from the context

13.

seem

I

= Tai;T?7r

Dittographia

12.

little

:

1462 '’3; KOI

1

——

INTRODUCTION

XXX

17

—

7

in the text: i]vai

1449^8 i.

Kpiverai 7

and

e. Kpiverai

vail

Kpr^vai

{

may be supposed

it

to represent Kpiverai,

= Kplvai). WiKa

1449 ^ II (f)av\\iKa —
KOI

paXiara

Ka'i

i.

e. (f)av\a

paWov,

i.

e.

(which

is

implied

in the

Arabic

and paWov.

paXiarra

e

14 depvcra(T

1457

= apvaaf,

i.

e. dpvcras

and

epvaar.

6

1461 ‘’33 at]paivoLe = (T)]paivoi,

e. arjpaivoi

i.

and

Errors due to an attempt to emend

16.

1450'’ 39 rrappeyedes] ndv peyedocr misread as two words.

1451^28

oinv Tieyopev] oiav

having been misread as oV

1455^2

drroXdya)] diro

arjpaivei. :

Ac — the compound having been

'Keyoipev

A°

— apparently through

01 AN

dv.

\ 6 yav

A°

— another

instance of a misunder-

stood compound. 16

1455

TTOitjaai

TTOpaXoytcrpdy*] yroitjaai rrapaXoyiapdv A®.

1455

“

1457

^ 17 TO be jSaSi'Cei] to be fiabi^etv A°.

26

eTreripdro]

1457^22 ceding 1457 146

emripd ran A®.

el3dbL(ev

A°— to make

it

harmonize with the pre-

e^dbierev. *

27

D2

T
0 abi^eiv

eipr^KOToy] eiprjKOTea

KaTa'^i](f)itrapevoi,

A®

A^^.

— to accommodate

it

to the

preceding

— INTRODUCTION

xxxi

This last kind of error is assuredly a very serious one, because it implies a corrector who, instead of emending the But corruptions like text, left it worse than he found it. impression the general numerous the are not above the MS. must produce is that it is a faithful record of a genuine textual tradition. A large proportion even of its mistakes have the stamp of antiquity upon them, since they often carry one ;

back to the papyrus period of the text, before the accents and breathings were superimposed on the uncial scriptura continua. One of its more obvious faults is its tendency which it shares with its fellow MS. of the Rhetoric to omit words or little groups of words. The Arabic Version, which occasionally supplies the missing word or words, shows that the fault must have been in certain passages

—

of comparatively

however, to

in

late

Which

origin.

There are other passages, seems in which case the common

the text underlying the Version

have been equally defective

;

omissions point to omissions in the

common

archetype.

The Arabic Version.

Though the Arabic Version (A. V.) seems to have been known to the French Orientalists, it was reserved for one of our own countrymen. Dr. D. S. Margoliouth, to face long

the manifold difficulties of the Arabic text, and give

it

to

world in a printed form in his 'Analecta Orientalia All students of the ad Poeticam Aristoteleam in 1887. Poetics owe him a debt of gratitude for making the chief results of the Version accessible to them from the first by translating a series of select extracts into Latin, and by the

’

the use that may be made of the Arabic renderings for the confirmation or criticism of the indicating in his notes

Greek

text.

In the absence of a complete translation our estimate of the A. V,

must be based on Dr. Margoliouth’s notes and

we may, however, supplement them to some extent from an article in Philologus LV. by O. Immisch, who had before him a German translation (by Socin) of a longer

extracts

;

and more consecutive specimen (i449'i9-3i) of the Arabic Version. The interpretation of the text (which survives in

INTRODUCTION

XXXll a single MS.)

understand, beset with

is, I

in the thirteenth

by Hermannus the Arabic,

who

century

was

difficulties.

Even

be no easy matter Alemannus, an experienced translator from gave the following as his excuse for evading it

to

felt

work of translation Postquam cum non modico labore consummaveram translationem rhetoricae Aristotelis ex Arabico in Latinum, volens manum mittere ad eius poetriam tantam invent difficidtatem propter dtsconvenientiam modi metrificandi in Graeco cum modo metrificandi in Arabico et propter vocathe

:

bulorum obscuritatem confisus

me

studiis tradere

The

plures alias causas,

et

posse sane

et

Latinorum

integre

illius

(Aristot. Rhet. lat.

use of the A, V. for us

is

that

quod non sum

operis

we

translationem

Ven. 1481

f.

i).

are often able to

look beyond it, so as to recover the readings of a Greek MS. which was at least three centuries anterior to Ac. But it must always be remembered that it was not made directly from the Greek, but from a now lost Syriac translation of the Greek ; it is, therefore, the version of a version, and we have thus to discern the original text as best we can, through the distorting medium of two Oriental translations. In such a work, too, one must not always expect the close literalness we find in medieval Latin translations of Greek writings; nor need we assume a very exact knowledge of Greek on

And

the part of the Syriac interpreter. the

Poetics

some allowance has

to

be

in the instance of

made

for the mis-

conceptions of an Oriental without an idea of the nature of the subject-matter of the treatise.

The

possibilities of

may

be seen writ large in the Paraphrase of Averroes, which was based on the A. V. Averroes is Oriental ignorance

fairly at

home

the

in

more philosophical and grammatical

its meaning, as a theory of Greek Tragedy, was from first to last a hopeless enigma to the great Aristotelian of Cordova. A word or two must be said here on one of the more marked characteristics of the A. V., its tendency to amplify

parts of the book

;

but

Thus in 1449 ''16 vTroKpirwv represented by ‘the hypocrites and dissemblers ’ (‘Heuchler

the text by alternative renderings. is

und

Versteller’, Socin),

'chori et cordacis

’

and

(Margoliouth), or

fhe following line by ‘the

dance and the

INTRODUCTION

xxxiii

In 1449^19 to /xeyc^os ck fiLKpCyv p.vOwv roundel’ (Socin). becomes 'primus creavit ex parvis fabulis magnitudinem sermonis et vociferationem et tumultum in sermone i. e. with three alternative renderings for /xeye^os. Again in 1453'’ 36 yap irpa^at dvdyKrj ^ p.r] Kal elSora? 7) p.r] etSdras is expanded into 'necesse est enim aut faciat aut non faciat, cum faciat

autem

ut faciat sciens aut inscius sed scire destinans, prae-

aut insciis

terea aut scientibus

’ ;

plethora of words

this

being primarily due to the translator’s inability to

mind about the accusatives «8dras ^ they were to be taken as appositional his

as the object, of

It is

-n-pdiai.

yaij

to

eiS6ra<;

make up

— whether

the subject, or

clear that amplifications like

these

may be

more

especially as such alternative renderings are said to

be not

down

uncommon

Ryssel,

(v.

put

to the Syrian, the original translator-

in

Ueber den

Syriac translations from the Greek textkritischen

Wert der

syrischen

Uebersetzungen griechischer Klassiker, II. p. 49). In any use we may make of the A. V., two facts must always be borne in mind: (i) that the existing text, as it stands in the one MS. which preserves it, is disfigured by corruptions and (2) that the Arabic translator was not incapable of misunderstanding the Syriac original. This Syriac original is no longer extant, but we need not suppose it to have been free from faults of its own it is quite possible ;

;

that

its

himself

was

text

may have

at

times faulty, as also that the Syrian

either misread or misinterpreted the

Greek

This last suspicion seems to be confirmed by the one fragment that survives of the Syriac Version, an excerpt from Poet. 6, 1449 24-1450 9. I give it as rendered into Latin by Dr. Margoliouth (A. O. p. 54), with text before him.

the Greek of

A^ en regard

for

purposes of comparison.

Tragoedia est imitatio actionis eximiae perfectae cui est mag-

Ecrtv o’v Trpd^etus

rpaycijSia

crTrovSaias

p.ip.rja'L^

Kal

reAetas

nitudo sermone iucundo absque p-eyeSos ixovar]?, ri8v(rp.evai Adyoi

una quaque specierum quae in partibus agunt neque per pollicitationem sed per misericordiam et metum temperans pas-

^oJpls

eKacrrov

rwy

elSuiy

ev rot?

;

POETICS

popLOLs, SpmvTOiV Kal ov 8 i ycAt’as,

C

Sf kXiov Kal (po^ov

diray- 5 irepaL-

;

INTRODUCTION

XXXIV

siones et faciens purgationem

j'ovcra

TTjv

eorum qui patiuntur. Facitque hoc quidem sermo iucundus cui

/xaTcov

KaSapaiv.

magnitudo [/. rhythmus] et harmonia et melos illud vero quod sine speciebus quod propter metra perficiuntur partes nonnullae rursus alias quod per melos dum recitant, effiest

tSv ToiovTwy

Xoyov tov ep^ovra pv-

(Tfievov fih'

6p.ov

jxaOrj-

Xeycu 8e rjSv-

Kai app,0VLav koI

to lo

p.e\o<;,

;

;

imitationem actionum. Necessario erit pars tragoediae decor personae turn inter haec ciunt

;

opus musicum et elocutio his enim faciunt imitationem. Dico autem elocutionem quidem ipsam compositionem metrorum opus musicum vim apertam ;

8e

TO Bia

ciSco-t

p.eTp(j>v

evia p.6vov Trepaivea-Oai Kal TrdXiv

erepa 8ia peXovg.

Se TTpclr-

eTrel

Tovres TTOtowrai rrjy p,Lp,y(ny, Trpw-

Toy p.h' e^ aydyKyg dv TpayioSias

t^s

6

ett]

ti p,6pLoy

oi/f€ws

yap

5

^ tov-

elra peXoTroua Kal Tots

1

koo'/xos,

TToiovyrai ryy

pLip-rja-iy.

Xeyoj Se Xe^LV p.ey avrrjy rrjy

Twy

:

quam

Quoniam

tota possidet.

actionum est, agitur vero ab hominibus agentibus iis quos necessitas cogat ut quales homines sint consuetudinibus suis et ingeniis; per enim haec etiam narrationes esse dicimus quales [et] natura aptae quae existant duae causae ipsarum narrationum, ingenium et consuetude sunt; secundum enim haec eae quoque inveniun-

peXovouay

p-eTpayy cnjy0ea'Ly,

Se o 20

ryy Svvapiy (ftavepay ex^t Trdaay,

imitatio

ewel

Trpd^ews

Se

eari

pipycns,

irpdjTeTai 8e vtto TiyCyy TrpaTTOVTU)V,

oSs dydyKT) Trotovs Ttvas etvat

Kard re to yOos Kal ryy Sidyoiay, 25 Sid

yap Tovroyy Kal Tas

Trpd^eis

;

tur

scopum

attingentes

qui narrant

sit et

Trpd^eioy etvat, Sid-

Kai Tvyxdyova-i Kal aTrorvyxdyoviri 30

eariy Se rijs pey Trpd^ecos

TrdvTes.

;

Twy

yoiay Kal yOo?, Kal Kara ravrag

omnes

per haec et a scope aberrantes. Est autem fabula narrationis Dico autem fabulam imitatio. compositionem actionum consuetudines vero, qualis quisque

eorum

elyai (fyapey TTOtds Tivas, TrecfiVKev

aiTia Svo

6

pvOos y

TTpayparmy, Troiovs

Ttvas

Xeyoj

yap

ai'y0ecriy

tiov

pipycri?'

pvOoy TOVToy, ryy

rd

Se

etvat

yOy,

KaO’

efyapey

dicatur

qui se tales esse ostendunt in-

XeyovTCS dwoSeiKydacriy ri y

nionem suam apparet. Necesse

(XTro^atvovTat

diae

partes

diximus

;

sex,

quas

yydtpyy,

e^,

Ka$'

rpayitiSia,

o

TTOid

Tts

/cat

dydyKy

ovy Trdcry^ Tpayo/Sias p^py

supra

secundum vim ipsam

Tragoediae.

tovs 35

TrpctTTOVTas, Sidyoiay Se, ev ocrois

geniis suis, et talem esse opiest ergo ut sint unicuique tragoe-

o

etvat

ecTTtv

y 40

— INTRODUCTION be seen that

will

It

in

1

7

.

XXXV

the difficult

word

roioihcov

is

5 the translator must have misconstrued the He reprepassage, taking Spwvrcov with the preceding elSwv.

In

ignored.

1.

sents TTparrovres in ‘

narrationes

’

;

13

1.

and

by

dum

‘

recitant’; Trpa^ets in

tovs TrpdTTovras in

He

1.

1.

26 by

35 by ‘qui narrant’. et dicatur’; in 1 14

expands elrai (^ap.ev in 1 35 into ‘sit he adds ‘actionum’, and in 1 40 ‘quas supra diximus’. And in 1, 20, and again in 11. 36-8, his translation is obviously very wide of the mark. If the above, therefore, is a fair specimen of it, the Syriac Version cannot have been an accurate piece of work. This criticism, however, only applies Our problem is to look to the translation as a translation. beyond all this, so as to recover the Greek text— we may for short call it 2 which the Syriac renderings would seem to presuppose. The following S readings recovered in this way .

.

.

—

deserve especial attention 1.

4.

1.

5-

fKaa-Tou t5)v

ov 81 ’ aTrayyfXins-,

el 8 S>v

:

2,

as also A®. ov

St’ c’Xeou]

St’

eTrayyeXt'as

anticipating thus the twofold corruption in

dXXa

St’

e’Xeoa

2

—

(Parisinus 2038) and

the Aldine. 1.

TTadrjparav 2

7.

— confirming

the corrector’s reading in P^ against

A®’s padrjpaTOJV, 1

.

II. xatpli To'is eiSecrt]

rail/

eldZv 2

— anticipating the corruption

P^ Aldine.

in

1.

29

(cat

.

If the

put on

it

Kara ravras] Kara yap ravra

Ka'i

aSrai 2.

language of the fragment will bear the pressure thus as a means of recovering the 2 readings, it is clear

2 text must have been at times faulty enough and by corruptions of a kind from which is comThe 2 readings, therefore, so paratively speaking exempt. far as they can be ascertained, must be considered on their individual merits, without any general assumption of their that the

vitiated

antecedent superiority to those of A°.

The

greater antiquity

no decisive mark of superiority. In Plato an editor may have to follow an eleventh century MS. (T) in preference to the Clarkianus. For Strabo the eighth century Grotta Ferrata palimpsest is ‘nullius pretii’ according to Cobet (Misc. Crit. p. 87) by comparison with the Paris MS. of the of

2

is

eleventh century.

INTRODUCTION

XXXVl

The

however, of the 2 text may be seen on some of the readings recovered from the

fallibility,

a larger scale in

A.V. The following instances will show that 2 must have had errors of its own, and in many passages errors of a very arbitrary description, which would sadly mislead us, or defy emendation, if we had not A° to set things right. 1447 ®'27

1448

—

Syriac

— —

®

opxrjarpcov 2. Trapufii'as]

13

^21 aTTayyeWovTa] eVayyAXoi/Ta 2 '’19

;)(poiai']

^27

&)(T 7rfp

as the reading of 2

—

and

'’16

—

The A. V.

e’yKtopia]

The A® reading ^auXXtxd

aTramv ri]

‘

4 ire(nv

KadoTL 2

2

^

31

2

a conflation

and 1453^

ll).

.

26

dXi'yois

tiv drj

2

.

yvapipa om. 2, through the homoeoteleuton.

8 dvSptdt] ’AvBptas 2.

^4

2

erepov] (Tcupov

.

’’34 Sfl] del 2 (also elsewhere).

14 ovv] ov 2.

145s ^2 aTToXdyw] and Xoycov 2 (with A®). “33 evTrXaoToj] The rendering in A.

—

an\a(TToi in 2

minuscule

XoiTTOi/

—

rjdiKfj

—

Setrii'

om.

2,

1456^25

eva del] ev adrj 2.

1459^ 23

iSiov] 'hXto:/ 2.

A® was perhaps n,

—

®

assuetam

which 1 ’

‘

simplices,’

implies

script.

^ 25 TO Se ^ 34 olov

and

V.,

— an instance of the confusion of a and ev common in the

1460=^2 piyvvoi]

01

is

° f/curdv] CKaffTov

1453

— —

postea pane-

— a conflation of two readings.

^ 21 €V tS 'Ayddavos ’A>/AI] (v to dyaBdv 6y ’’

‘

.

’’34 eWi] fVi 2 (and again in 1451

1452

— —

Ka'i

implies va-repou irepcov vpvovs koi iyKapia

(fiaWiKu.

en-eo-ij']

1451 ^7

— —

’

.

1450^ 12 KadoXov

—

tlie

2.

(jiaWiKo] ^aii'Xa 2.

1 1

of
x^pav

erepoi vpvovs

laudem aliorum

et

“

Similarly in 1449'^ 26

.

supra) presupposes eVay-yeX/af, not njrayyeXiar.

(v.

gyricum 1449

rpaycobias 2.

1

pr) yvoir] 2.

pr)yvvoi

is

;

om.

2.

through the homoeoteleuton.

The reading

of the archetype of 2

and

the 2 reading arose through a confusion of

of comparatively late date.

ovBev dj) 6 j)] The A.V. rendering non introducens rem non seems to imply oibev arjdes which would anticipate the

corruption in

‘

—

P‘‘

Aldine.

— INTRODUCTION 1460

^ 13 aXo'yol']

dvaXoycv 2 (with

A*^).

adpoludev 2

— an

1461 ^ iS ddp^creiev] of

T]

and

which points

01,

XXXVll

instance

of

the confusion

to the Byzantine period.

from the above series of readings recovered from V,, the S text was not free from corruptions, A. that the It is clear,

and also that some of

its

errors were of recent date, of the

There are a

Byzantine rather than the classical period. few instances, too, of glosses intruded into the 14548' 31 %KvXXrj is represented

in

inantinia’,

And

eitis'.

and

in

Thus

text.

the A. V. by ‘Scylla

in

1454 h 27 ovX^s by ‘pustula quaefuit in pede

in 1461 ^ 17

we

2 adding L-mroKopya-Tai, to make Homer. 2 text, as known from the A.V.,

find

the quotation agree with the passage in

These indications of the be combined with those already observed

may

Fragment, as leading

2 were before us

to the

in the Syriac

general conclusion

be considered one by one on their merits.

to

that,

would

in its integrity, its readings

even if have

still

Its antiquity,

would be only one element in the critical situation we should still have to submit its readings to the usual tests; to judge of each by reference to the sense, the context, and the various criteria, internal and external, of philological probability. And we must never for as dating from the eighth century, ;

an instant lose sight of the the

same thing

fact that after all

2

Greek MS.

A

as an actual

is

not quite

Greek

text

recovered by art and inference from a version of a version

each of them in an Oriental language to

—

is exposed at times doubts and suspicions of a kind from which that of Ac

is free.

Now

that the first surprise of discovery

view the

new

readings, which

A. V., with equanimity. as of positive critical either

seem

to

is

over,

the

;

text,

or so illusive

or misleading as to be almost a libel on the

The

in

Only a few of them need be accepted value many of them are obviously

no improvement on the traditional

Aristotle.

we may

be implied

memory

of

chief result of the A.V., in our present state

of knowledge of

it,

is

that

it

is

seen to confirm a certain

number of the emendations already suggested by Renaissance or modern scholars. It gives the sanction of tradition to 4>v(tlk 6 v (for

pLovcriKov) in

I447'^l6; to

aTroTrXovv

or dvaTrXovv (for

INTRODUCTION

xxxviii aTrAow) in 1454 ^ in

1456 “10;

2

;

to irapaXoyL(Tfi 6 % in

KeKpaaSai

to

in

I455“i6;

1458®' 31.

to Kpareia-Oai

confirms the

It

excision of

iiro-n-oda in 1447^28; of on in 1448 1*35; and of 1450^ 16. It confirms some of the additions also that have been made in the Ac text; e.g, that of a negative in 1450 a 30 and 1455 that of rotavrat in 1447 a 25 that 17

irivTt

in

;

of

avtavvp.o
in

a

1447

2 in 1458 g ; valent) in 1461

and ^3

2

;

;

that of Averts in 1455 ^ 31

that of Kat

12.

And

el

dSvvaTov (or

besides

all this it

;

that of koX

something equi-

preserves in two

instances traces of an orthography which, whether Aristotle’s

or not,

was

Mei/eAeeos in

The

certainly antique, KXvraipirja-Tpa in 1453

1454

a

23,

and

29.

and more convincing of the readings recovered from the A. V. have all one noteworthy characteristic in better

common

they fall quite naturally into their place in the A® and imply directly or indirectly the existing context so that the area of disturbance in each instance is of the most limited extent. I am aware that the A.V. is often supposed :

text,

;

to

places indications of

reveal in

more extensive

textual

divergences, and to throw doubt on the soundness of larger

portions of our existing Greek text. that the evidence, such as

it

is,

The

of the A.V.

only answer

may

is

be taken

sometimes too seriously. One must never forget that its text is not always certain that it is the version of a version that the Arabian may have misunderstood the Syriac, and the Syrian the Greek text; and lastly, that they were both working in the dark, and dealing with matters wholly outside ;

;

their

own

literary experience.

the fact itself

is

'

However we may

explain

indisputable, that in a considerable

it,

number

of passages, in which the existing Greek text is perfectly sound and satisfactory, the renderings in the A.V. have little Many of these renderings or no recognizable relation to it. we may safely disregard, as representing not a different form of Greek text, but the aberrations of one or other of the two Orientals.

In cases of doubt,

the antecedent probability

The must always be on the side of the readings of A®. minor certain number of and V. confirms A. suggests or a any for the present at but that is occasional improvements ; beyond anything service. For the practical limit of its rate

INTRODUCTION 2

text,

—

not clear enough to enable and not certain enough to justify

that its evidence is insufficient

us to reconstruct the

XXXIX

any considerable departure from that

in A^.

V The Apographa.

The Renaissance MSS. of the Greek text, now usually known as the ‘Apographa’, require discussion because the whole question of their value and position has been recently reopened. Instead of acquiescing in Spengel and Vahlen’s view of the unique importance of A^ as the ultimate source of the texts of the ‘Apographa’, many seem more than half inclined to think that some at any rate of the better readings in them, more especially those confirmed by the Arabic Version, point to the survival in the fifteenth century of

now lost Greek MS. independent and free from certain of its errors. The evidence, however, in favour of this remote possibility is as nothing compared with that which tells against it. Our knowledge of these MSS. is not so complete as one For Urbinas 47 (B°) we have a collation in could wish. Bekker’s Aristotle, and for Riccardianus 46 one by Landi in the Studi Italiani 3 p. 68 ; I have also collations of my own of two Paris MSS., Parisinus 2038 (P^) and Parisinus 2040 (Pb). But for the rest we have still to rely on the Variae lectiones at the end of Tyrwhitt and in Susemihl, and another textual authority, a

of

the occasional record of the readings of individual in

Apographa

Vahlen’s notes.

The

first

Apographa of them the

and most obvious is

fact

to

their textual divergence.

be noticed in the

Whereas

in

some

one remove from that in A^, in others it is seen to be constantly deviating from that, and moreover in a very marked degree. But there is one thing that must be said of them all, that their deviations from A° are manifestly due in a large proportion of instances to a desire to amend the older text, or present it in an easier form. Many text is but

of the simpler

among

the

amended readings we may put

INTRODUCTION

xl

down

to

copyists

of the

MS. was

a Renaissance

better

class,

since the

scribe of

by profession and quite capable of improvising a simple correction of an ordinary clerical error. But this was certainly not the only cause of the appearance of amended readings in the MSS. of this period. As the Renaissance scholar annotated his books just as we do, one may well suppose that some of the textual suggestions thus made on the Poetics have survived and found a place in the text of later transcripts. The sporadic origin of many of the improved readings scattered up and down the long series of Renaissance MSS. Several of them are not an original part is easily shown. of the text of any known MS.; e.g. TraOrjfiarwv in 1449 ^’28, in which the tt is due to correction in and Laurentianus LX. 21; and €7rm/i,aro in 1455*^26, and Alyel in 1461 '’21, which are both of them from the margin, not the text, of Riccardianus 16. Others again are found in the text of only one or at most two MSS. e. g. often a scholar

;

1448 ’^35 dXXa Riccard. 46.

Riccard. 46.

Kal “

1455

bytanus (and marg. 1457 a 22 KaiSadd. Riccard. 46.

17 rw h'l Guelferbytanus

— “27 dv^ei

and

Guelfer-

— — — ^31 KeKpaadai Riccard. 46. — 1’25 denoj? Riccard. — Riccard. Riccard. 46.

pi’).

16.

1451

id TrapnXoytcr/ids Riccard. 46.

—

34 eKcrraTi/cot Riccard. 46. 19 eVt Riccard. Riccard. 16. 29 o-wSeVpM Riccard. 16. 1458^^9

16.

1460 “30 Amos

16.

i*

I

noi^creie

The Apographa, as I have said, fall into two main classes, according as they deviate but slightly, or in a more marked degree, from the text in A®.

It

may

be shown of each,

with such probability at any rate as this kind of matter allows, that their texts presuppose that in A°,

and

that the

better lections they occasionally supply were originally due to conjecture.

In order to simplify the inquiry, one

may

take Be (Urbinas 47) and Pi^ (Parisinus 2040) as types of the first class, and P*^ (Parisinus 2038) and the Aldine as

types of the second, (i) Be Pb supply a certain number of very simple and necessary corrections of the Ae text ; e, g.

14471^28 1455

1'

I

ovv, for ov.

fTTfuroSioCr,

for

1448

I"

38

6,

enficrobiov.

for to.

1453

1456^12

I’

22 8pa, for dpdv.

Xeyco,

for

Xsyo)

6e,

— INTRODUCTION 1459 t]

''

for

37

1461 ^ 19

(sic).

rj

1460^ 14

K->-vt](ns.

^roO).

dvr'i

eVe), for en-eira.—'^

“86

1462

xli

These readings, however, do not stand alone

number

only a few out of a large

32

r)

ei,

for

orrovvTtos, for 6 ttovvtios.

;

they are

of alterations, the general

and character of which may be inferred from the following specimens quality

:

144S

“

1455

{ 6)y).

dpafiariKas, for Spa^ariKoy.

10 nacras, for rauray.— ^35

vTrrjp^ev, for vnedei^ev. '’

1451 ^ 8 KXeyj/vdpav, for

3 '^ Sfj for

1456^17

—

KXe\{fv 8 paf.

(^ttouIv}.

pq dppoTTei. “ ig crrjpaivovcra, for 1460'’ 17 avr)j, for avrijs. Xeyopevov, foT yiyvopevov. appoTTT], for

or (i.

for A'^S (odir^as

d>8iK5)s^, e. Ai’yel

fj

iSi ^

(i.e.

a>s ).

—

21

— “ 35 1457

® 3

(Ttjpali’ov,

I

alytvrjTt],

— '’37

dTrlSrjXov

ph 458’’4

1461 “ 34 uiSiKas for A®’s alyeifjTtj

Trj).

one compares the two sets of readings, one cannot all on the same lines, and inspired apparently by the same motive the only visible difference between them is that the first group represents the successes, and the second the failures of a Renaissance corrector. pt> from the But after all the deviations in text are few and far between, and of no great moment. The two If

but see that they are

;

MSS.

are as a whole faithful reproductions of the A<= text,

it even in its accidental faults and errors with an exactness which admits of but one explanation, namely

following

they are really and truly Apographa, copies of the

that

text of the older

MS.

itself

The

MS. we

still

have,

made

or from some direct transcript of

either from the it.

by P“ Aldine reveals more pronounced form, as the corrector here has allowed himself to go to far greater (2)

the

type of text represented

same tendencies

in

a

It is to be observed that in several places the P“ text was, as originally written, in agreement with A^, and that it was then altered (apparently by the same hand)

lengths.

bring

to

it

into closer conformity with that

by the Aldine.

As an explanation

now represented may perhaps

of this one

suppose that the Aldine additions appeared ^

This portentous corruption originated

text of A'=, the tenth century 7 Pal. p. 716).

in

at first as

mar-

a mere misreading of the

being read as a

k

(comp. Bast,

Comm.

—

—

INTRODUCTION

xlii

and were thus neglected by the scribe of work them in afterwards, when he came to

who had

ginalia, to

revise his

transcript. This point of difference, however, need not be taken into account, since the general agreement between

the two texts

marked

so

is

One

thing

the P“ Aldine

Be

to

1449 ^2 1456

A®

distinct textual affinity

show

—

KcofKobias

:

om. P® Aid. with

a lacuna here in B® P^ and in P^

:

—

1457 “ 33

immediate basis of

the

that

clear,

a(T<]p.ov

:

well serve

recension.

following omissions will

Trapa
® 2 6 t]a

same

was an Apograph with a

The

pi'.

quite

is

may very

that they

as representatives of one and the

om. P^ Aid. with B®

this

:

P’’. :

om. Aid.

P’’.

Several of the actual readings also in P^ Aldine point to same conclusion

the

:

1451 ®'6 Tov A®

37 ^Vot

1454

1456 “ 31

1458^ 10 pa Aid. 1460

a

ft

17

ToC be P® Aid. with B®

:

A®

Trji

A®

Tpirri 7

;

P’’.

P® Aid. with

P'’.

7 P®' Aid. with P*>.

:

a®:

eK toCtov

1 1

ovbev'

33

crrjpaivoie

drjOri]

eK tovtov acftavav

ovbeva

fjdrj

A®

:

ovbev

B®

eV tov twv dcfxovcov

:

B®

arj6r]

P'^

I

ovbev dr]6(S

pa Aid. 1461

a

—

A®:

A®

34

The above

:

(rtjpaiveie

Aid. with B®

uStKcoy (or wbiKws)

B® P^

instances of agreement

P*’ :

may

:

pa.

(rrjprjveie

mSi ttws

pa Aid.

suffice as a

proof

of the dependence of the Pa Aldine text on that represented

by

B°

Ph;

I

pass

on,

therefore,

ferences between the two texts. text is

page of

its it

The

to consider the difnote of the Pa Aldine

Every

utter disregard of the textual tradition.

betrays the hand of a reviser;

we can

almost

see him at work, adding or omitting words, altering forms,

and often rewriting clauses or sentences, so as

away every

sign of difficulty in the

older text.

to

smooth All

this

was said long ago by Ritter, but for reasons already mentioned one cannot even now take the point for granted. The modern apparatus criticus, which gives only the better lections of the Apographa, is often a snare to the unwary reader, who sees their successes, and does not see their failures.

It

may

be worth while, therefore, to look into the

INTRODUCTION

xliii

P“ Aldine text more closely, in order to realize what sort of it is, and how it has come to be what it is.

thing

Aid. add words freely;

(1)

1447*25

—

I*

22

(^ovK

1448 *25

(^Ka'i

1449 *3

01

Km Troitjrrjv. &.

a}

KOI

{Se}, to disguise the omission (with

clause napacjyapelcrqs

1449 * 29

—

e. g.

ovcrac (roiavrai).

—

(^rrepl piev

'’27 (dXXay

ovv tovtoiv Toaavray

81’

P’^)

of the preceding

KiOfiwdias.

to

c(Tt
fill

up a lacuna

in P'^.

eXeov.

* 30 (ov) noirjaet. 1452 *3 Km /iaXiorn] paXiirra {roiavra).

1450

1453^ 18 1454* 19

—

34

fieXXcoi' (^8ei
npoalptcrlv riva (^(pavXnv pev edv (pavXrjvy.

A

lacuna after

tKeivos 8e,

and then

(^raCra

ow)

nvros Xeyei.

1455 ^30 (TvvaTTtpya^opevov (notelvy.

—

^13

eTTetaodia (^(TKonetvy.

9 7radi;rtK^v (Set tivai). 1460'’ 21 oTio'uiv ovv A°] ^rafr’ ovvy onoia av

1459

1461 *34 (to

—

'’13

§0

>/.

n’ocra^ois'.

dXXa (Km

TTpos to)

^fXrwv.

1462 '^6 (dvdyKrjy ^ ^paxeas. '^7 (ddv 8e TrXetovr) Xeyco.

— —

8 crvyKeipevr] (ov piav, or ov pdiy.

Some

few of these insertions we

real defects in that,

they appear

as

may

the traditional text. in

up must be seen

accept, as filling

But

it

P* Aid., they are only part of

may be presumed to have had a similar origin and motive. The fact of the reviser having been able to supply the missing word in some three or four instances is no proof that he must have found it a series of similar additions, and

in a

(2)

then existing

MS.

Here and there

the

portion of the original text.

words thus added dispossess a Thus in 1448 * 5, where dvdyK-q

added, the preceding ^ koI tolovtov; is omitted. thing has happened in 1455 31, where the added Aiio-ts has usurped the place of Kal naXw q avrwv. The

pifi-ua-Oai

is

The same

word phenomenon

is

easily explained if

we may suppose

a scribe,

with a revised text before him, to have taken some of the reviser’s marginal or interlinear additions not as

but as corrections of the text.

addenda

—

6

;

INTRODUCTION

xliv

Aid. are apt to ignore words in cases of difficulty.

(3)

Thus they omit

wras in 1454'’ 13, WO" pyToc (i. e. os p and SetAtW (i. e. d«, AtW) in 1461 28. In ^ this way the reviser has also removed most of the dittographies which disfigure the Ac text. 1461

Toi) in

‘"i

roiovrors

12,

The

(4)

Aid. text embodies a long array of textual

The

depravations.

some

following specimens

may perhaps

idea of their general character and motive

1449

^

28

€rr(iiTo8icov rrX^drj Ka'i

cos

exacrra] eneia’o8ia)v irXfjdei

Xtt'pis' ’“‘S'

fiSecri] xv

dboov P”- Aid.

^ 17 KaKoSaipovia] evdaipovia P®'

Aid. AXKpaiav 6 AaruddpavTos] 6 aXKpaiavocr dcrTvbdpavToa d A\Kpnia>vos AarvBapaf P'^Ald.

1450

Ka'i

Aid.

Tols (IXXoLS (KaCTTa

1449 ’^29

ra nXA’

give

;

1453

c

33

’

:

'

'

1454 '^13 Tiapddeiypa

1460^

^TT’KtKfla' TTOteiv rj

Trapddeiypa aKXrjporrjTocr

UKXrjpoTriTos See

A®; imeiKelas

iroulv

P® Aid.

II ovbfv arjOrj] ovbeva

fjdr]

A®

olibep

:

d^6

rj

B® P^

:

ovdep arjdes

Aid.

In

we

some

instances

P®''

Aid. no doubt supply readings which

accept as improvements on those in A®;

1452

l'

28

j

{eK) 7rA 7;^eo)S in 1435

for 8 ’^ in 1456 all told,

*>

4

Readings of

.

constitute a tithe is

except the

fact that

wv for ws in Bey

J

however, do not, of the peculiar readings in P* Aid. this kind,

nothing to mark them

and there

e. g.

eKaaTOV in 1456®'

“

off

from

they happen to be successes.

the

rest

As

the

whoever he may have been, was evidently a man of some learning, and also of no little ingenuity of a certain rough-and-ready order, one need not be surprised to find in the multitude of his conjectures at any rate some few that have hit the mark. Looking, therefore, at the actual texts of the Apographa, as seen in these typical instances, and the tendencies which reviser,

they reveal, jectural

I

origin

manuscripts.

think the facts point very clearly to the con-

of

all

the improved readings in the later

The doubt now thrown upon

this

view

is

some at any rate of too good and too un-

largely resolvable into a feeling that

these

textual

improvements

are

expected to be regarded as the suggestions of Renaissance scholars. The underlying assumption here is an injustice

;

INTRODUCTION

xlv

Their weakness in dealing with critical caution and method apart from want of texts was gifts required for the work the had many of they that often men of great They were emendation. textual of natural ability, of surprising learning, and if anything, more completely at home in the classical languages than to these early scholars.

;

moderns. We all know that in Latin the Itali have left a permanent mark on many of our Latin texts. But there is no reason to suppose that the learned Greeks of that age, or their Italian pupils and followers, were as ’

the

‘

scholars on a

much lower

level,

or that in the correction

of Greek texts their limit was reached

more patent

clerical

errors

when some

of the

them were cleared away.

in

One

has only to reflect what Chalcondyles did for the Homeric Hymns (v. Allen and Sikes, Introd. p. xxxiii) and In the case of the Poetics, Musurus for Hesychius. however, the work of revision cannot be connected with any one name. The book was even in the fifteenth century in the hands of many; so that the more striking of the amended readings, which we now gather up from various Apographa a few from one, and a few from another may

—

—

very well have been the happier efforts various acute and scholarly readers in

emendation of the early Renaissance at

period of the study of the text.

The doubt

as to the truth of Spengel and Vahlen’s view

of the Apographa has had

new

life

put into

it

through the

publication of the readings implied in the Arabic Version,

which

is

found to confirm a certain proportion of the better

readings in these manuscripts.

A

suspicion, accordingly, has

some of these better readings may perhaps have survived in some now lost Greek MS., independent of A*, and have found their way into the Renaissance manuscripts arisen that

from that source. All that a coincidence, however, of this kind can be said to prove is the goodness of the readings for it is no uncommon thing for a good conjecture to be confirmed by a newly-discovered document. In the Poetics the Arabic Version confirms several of Vahlen’s emendations, as also

many

that

were made

Victorius Heinsius, and others.

in earlier It

days by Madius,

confirms the (ov)

fj.aKp6<;

INTRODUCTION

xlvi

of Vulcanius in 1455 ^ 17 just as much as the -n-oiijcrei of Aid. in 1450 30. And in the latter instance the insertion

of the negative would be no great

remember the epyov (3,

parallel in the 1

1404

2,

’

its

Another

3).

the Arabic Version

one happened

P®'

Trotyjo-ei

to

to eavrov

Aid. reading confirmed by

ovaai (roiavTai) in 1447 « 25, but

is

when one

significance

feat, if

Rhetoric, ov

sees the reviser restoring

loses

it

(jiaXia-ra

(rotavTa) in 1452^^, and observes his predilection for such

stop-gaps. In 1454 ^

where A^ has

2,

ing in the Arabic Version

is

-n-epl

tov airkow, the render-

de conversione navium, which

supports in equal measure both the dvaTrAow of

Which

anoTrXovv of Riccardianus 16.

P'1

and the

of the two, then,

is to

be supposed to have got into the text from the hypothetic lost Greek MS. ? The question may be dismissed at once,

when one occur to

reflects how easily aTro-n-Xovv or dvankow might any one familiar with the Second Book of the

Iliad.

The truth is that not a few of the more striking of the Apograph readings may be accounted for without difficulty, if one is at liberty to assume some critical ingenuity and a fair acquaintance with literature on the part of the early 1460*1 30 implies nothing

Adios, for instance, in

correctors.

more than a knowledge of the Oedipus Tyrannus

and Alyet by a reader who remembered the story of the Medea. o-wSecr/^o) els in 1457^30 is immediately suggested, not only by the context, but also by several parallels in other Aristotelian writings. direipa r<3 evl (for yevei)
happens Physics.

have

to

mind the

in

jraOrjp.a.TQiv

direipa

1449^)28

in

one

stares

by

that in the

Problems

Homeric

many

covered

;

and

readings, no doubt,

insight;

e.g.

1455

p.ip.rj(rts

16,

(for

well have been

1458

25 by the passage

was independently

in

dvrjeL

is

in

to

14553

27,

1459 37. be noted. 'i

Some

dis-

of the

show a higher degree of critical

(for eySdSi^ev)

Kivrja-is)

five instances

it

one

of the

iKaraTiKol in 1455 ^ 34

years afterwards by Gu. Morel.

amended in

deiK-qs in

Scholia, in which

evl avp-^air]

may very ;

In 1451*117

in the face, if

yap dv tw

suggested by the parallel in the Politics in the

;

21 could hardly be missed

in 1461

in 14573’ 22, TrapaXoyia-pos dpvaras

in

1457^1 14,

and

The provenance of these The first is from Riccar-

INTRODUCTION dianus i6

;

xlvii

the second from the margin of the Giielferbytanus

the third from Riccardianus 46 (and marg.

Pi*);

;

the fourth

from the Leidensis and ex emendatione Vaticanus 1400; and If they had ever existed together in the fifth from the text of some one older and better MS., it is difficult to imagine how they came to be preserved in this separate way, one in one MS. and another in another.

API2TOTEAOYS nEPI

nOIHTIKHS

SIGLA

*

Ar.

= cod. Parisinus 1741 = littera in codice deleta = interpretatio Arabica, vel ex scriptura

apogr.

POETICS

=

ea eruta

Graeca

apographa quaedam

B

API^TOTEAOTS HEPI HOIHTIKHX rifjOt

€Ka(TTov

hvvajXLV lo el

TTOii]TLKr]s

avTrjs T€

earl ixop'mv, ojxoLws be kul

avrijs

eart

duo

Tov

TTOtpats

00(701

p yap

Kal

TiXeiaTp

pippaets to avvoXov' Tip

yevei

eTepots

pws Kal pp Tov avTov Kal 20 bid

Tpv p

iroXXo.

(ryfjpacTi

reyyrjj

007(0

Kal

Kcopcpbia

8e

ert

i^avXpTLKps p

ol

Kav

Tals

pippaiv

)((o/)ts

ev

pvdpip

TpoTTOV.

p re

Kal

p rps Tpaytpbtas

Kal

Tracat

rps

Kal

Tvy)(dyoi;(rtD

tw eTepa p rw

p

yap

utaTrep

eTepoi

Tey^vais

Xdy
Kal

aTreiKaCovTes

Tives

be

cnracrai

Kal

bid

pev

{ol

Tps (pwvps,

pev

appovia,

ere-

y^pwpaat

iroiovvTai

tovtois

b'

oiov dppovia pev Kal pvdpip XP^~

avXpTiKp Kal p KiOapiaTiKp Kav

ei

25 eTepai Tvyydvovcriv ovaai {roiamai) Tpv bvvapiv, diov p

avpiyyiav

TrpS)-

btaepepovat 8e dXXpXcov Tpta-tv,

pip-etadai

elpppevan

ocra rrjs

(f)V(Tiv

btdvpap^onotpTiKp

a-vvpdeias),

p pepiypevois'

pevai povov

p

kul

ttoVwi;

Kara

Ktdapta-TtKps

pipovvTai

bid

be

bp

eTtOTTOtta

eK

tmv akkwv

iiepl

ap^dp-evot

XeyoDptev

TrptoTwv.

TU)V

be

ert

•notricrt'i,

rj

77010)1’

jxedobov,

Ttva

rjv

Kal ttws bet (rvvtaTaeyOat tovs ixvdovs

e)(et,

KaAwy e^etv

/xeAAet

Kol tS)v flbStv avTrjsy

ao'5 8e rw pvdpip pipovinai

yiapls

Tives

tuv

dppovias ai

13 1447^ 12 Xeyopev A“ (utramque scripturam agnoscit Ar.) Tpayiobiaa- A® (in 1449 37 Tpaymbiaa. ceteris in locis IStTa mutum deest in hoc similibusque vocabulis) 17 yevei] ev Forchhammer roiavrai xai A“ 21 Kav Parisinus 2038 25 Tvyxdvcoa-iv A® ol A®: ol (n-oXXoi) add. apogr. (confirm. Ar.) 26 al Reiz ®'

:

:

Heinsius

;

ARISTOTLE’S POETICS Our

subject being Poetry,

the art in general but also of capacities

*^0f the

'

I

propose to speak not only of

its

species and their respective

of the structure of plot required for a good

number and nature

i

poem

;

poem

;

of the constituent parts of a

and likewise of any other matters

in the

same

line of inquiry.

Let us follow the natural order and begin with the primary facts.

Epic poetry and Tragedy, as also Comedy, Dithyrambic poetry, and

most

viewed as a whole,

flute-playing

mo des

and

lyre-playing,

But

of imitation.

are

all,

same

at the

time they differ from one another in three ways, 'either by a difference of kind in the objects, 'dr in the I.

their

means, or by differences in

manner of

their imitations.

Just as form and colour are used as means by some, yi-

who (whether by

many

art or constant practice) imitate

things by their aid, and the voice

so also in the above-mentioned group

is

and portray

used by others

of

arts,

the

with them as a whole are rhythm, language, and

— used,

;

means

harmony

however, either singly or in certain combinations.

A combination flute-playing

of rhythm and

harmony alone

and lyre-playing, and any other

is

the

arts there

be of the same description, e.g. imitative piping. alone, without

harmony,

is

the

means

means

in

may

Rhythm

in the dancer’s imita-

B 2

1447^ 27—1447’’ 29

I.

4

t 5)V 6 p^r](TT
Kal

Kal

7]0rj

povov roTs Adyois 1447*^ piyvv(Ta per

ovopdcrat

1

ckeyiLbov

plp’po’iv

—

akkcuv

tS>v

rj

vki^v

rivStv

eAeyetoTTOtows tovs 6 e

TToteii'

ayopfVOVTiS' peTpoov

eaTLV

yap

Kal

opolws

Kdv

be

TTpocrayopevTeov.

rjTTfv

TOVTov TOV TpoTTOv, keyo)

35 pevots, ij

re

apa

TTaa-LV

bia(f)opds

at

Tutv

ovbev be

eltodaaiv'

t&v

bid

tl

(fiVCTLKov

»;

Kal

ra

'Kaipripoiv

pev

pvOpld

rj

koivov

pepos.

Teyv 5>v ev

ols

KeWanKal

ovv

tovtcov

bicoptaOco

rj

TavTas 'noiovvTai

ttol-

\p 5>VTai rois Kal

vopcov

be

pev ti]v

on

ovv

eip?j-

&a"nep

peTpca,

tS>v

biacfyepovcL

rvyxdvec oScra

(confirm. Ar.)

piyvvwv

eTTOcrjire

peTpcvv,

Kal

TToC'qcns

ttoctj-

rj

p.eTpa

T
pekei

Kal

K(op
Kara

8e

(pvaLokoyov pdkkov d-navTa

dirdvTTvv irepl

oXov

be

8e

28 enoiroua seclusit Ueberweg (om. Ar.)

Bemays

to peTpov irpocr-

koivi] koto,

elal be Ttves at irdaL

T&v biSypaplSiKuiv

Tpayepbia

re

rw

ti]v

w?

rts

el

e^

pa^ipbCav

pov piKTr]V

ttololto

(ttottolovs ovopd^ovcnv, ovy^

Kaddirep

pCpr]a-iv

TT/v

bid rpipirpoiv

to

laTpiKov

Kakelv, tov

biKaiov

TTOLOiTO

rts

Kal 'EpireboKkel ttAt^ to peTpov, bid tov pev

'OjU,77p(p

ao TrjV.

’E.ivdpypv pi-

a-vvdTTTOVT€S

Kakuv

ovtoj

€K(f)dp(oaLV,

TiOLr]TT)v

dv

et

koX

/ueVpco

dkkd

15 KaTO. TTjv pip’qaiv TTOLriTas

etre

ovbiv yap dv

toiovtwv

tG>v

ye

dvOpctiiToC

ol

tovtois

vvv.

2 w<^poi>os

povs Kal Tovs ^(niKpariKovs Koyovs ovbe rj

Kal

yivei \pu)p€vr] rStv pi-

ovaa piypi rod

koivov rows

[eTioTroua]

fj

pirpots

rivi

(Vt

pv 9 p&v

(T)(r)paTL(pp.iv(iiV

Trpafety.

rois

]

eW'

Tptov {dvdvvpos) Tvyyav^L 10 €\oip€V

Kal

irddri

\/fi\ois

dXXrjKcav

t&v

Kal at

ij

pev

keyw ray

pippaiv.

1447’’ 9 dvdot/vpos add. rvy^dvovcra A^'

Suckow

:

KOLvfj A® A® 16 (f)v(n22 koi] kcii tovtov vel fiovaiKov A® Kov Heinsius (confirm. Ar.) ovK fjdr; Kal apogr, KaiToi Gomperz, Rassow 24 at Aldina 1536: ot A® 28 ovv apogr. (confirm. Ar.) ou A® al Riccardianus 16 29 oir Victorius ala A®

15 Kara

rf/v

Guelferbytanus

:

rfjv

Kara

:

;

:

:

:

1447^ 27-1447'’ 29

I.

tions

even

for

;

5

by the rhythms of his

he,

attitudes,

may

represent men’s characters, as well as what they do and

There

suffer.

is

further an art which imitates

alone, without harmony, in prose or in verse, either in

some one or

imitation

common name

mime

for a

if

;

if in

verse,

This form of

We

day without a name.

a Socratic Conversation

even

and

in a plurality of metres.

this

to

is

by language

have no

of Sophron or Xenarchus and

and we should

still

be without one

the imitation in the two instances were in trimeters

or elegiacs or some other kind of verse

—though

with people to tack on 'poet’ to the

name of a

talk of elegiac -poets

it is

the

way

metre, and

and epic-poets, thinking that they

them poets not by reason of the

call

imitative nature of their

work, but indiscriminately by reason of the metre they write in.

Even

if

a theory of medicine or physical philosophy be

put forth in a metrical form, in this

way

nothing in

one

is

it

is

usual to describe the writer

Homer and Empedocles,

;

common

however, have really

apart from their metre; so that,

be called a poet, the other should be termed a

to

We

physicist rather than a poet.

position also,

if

should be in the same

the imitation in these instances were in

the metres, like the Centaur (a rhapsody in a

metres) of

Chaeremon

;

certain

other

medley of

and Chaeremon one has

So much, then, as

as a poet. lastly,

the

if

arts,

to

enumerated, rhythm, melody, and verse, e.g.

and Nomic poetry, Tragedy and Comedy

;

the

all

all

recognize

There

to these arts.

which combine

all

are,

means

Dithyrambic

with this difference,

however, that the three kinds of means are in some of them all

one

employed together, and after

above arts

the other. I

in others

T hese

brought

in separately,

ele ments, of difference in the

term the means of their imitation.

6

2 . 1448 ® 1—3- 1448 ^ 23

1448®

8e

’EttcI

ol

ixijxovvrai

8e TOVTOvs ^ (TTTOvbaLOVi

aKoXovOet

TOVTOLS

aei

bLa
^

KpiLTTOvs,

oTi

ray

ravras

Kol

Kat

8ta<|)opay

Ao'youy

roi/y

Trept

KAeo^wzz de

/SeAriouy,

TropwStay

XetpoDy i^vopiovs,

o/xotcoy

p.ip.TpaaiTO

dv

bia TTpoy rr)y

7)

yap

pieit

/atjaT/aewy

rw erepa

avXi^aei

Kal

Kat

rw

otov ''Opir/poy

piez'

Kat

az/op,otoV7/ray,

tcls

optotooy, 'HyT/piwi; 8e 0

NtKo^apT/y

Kat

efet

/at/xetaflat

ray

©ticrtoy (6)

o

rT^/y

AetAtaSa

Kat Trept roi/y bidvpdpLj^ovs Kat rrept rovy

8e

* *

070-7rep

rjpias

op)(7/cret

\jnXop.eTp't,av,

rT/z;

Trpwroy

TrotT/o-ay

ey

ravras

Kat

8e

ra /(etpoitas

noATJyt'wros

erepa

ecrrai

yap

Kat

yeviaQai

eari

(ryeboi’

ijOrj

aperi]

kKamy}

XeyOeiaStv

tS>v

TOVTOV Tov rpoTTOv. 10 Kidapiaei

kuO'

7)

ypat^ets'

avayKt] 2

ycipovs, Aiovvaios 8e 6p.oCovs ctKa^er.

6e

riaT^o'a;!'

be

bijXov

fSeKriovas oi

yap

(ra

yap Kai

KaKia

jxovois,

wcriT^p

irpaTTOVTas,


rj

7/rot

Trai^rej),

TOtovTovs,

Kat

jjuixovfjLevoi

yay, KtzKAwTray Tt/xo0eoy ravry]

ey

rty.

Kcop,(pbCav

be

tt}

biecTipKev’

7/

Kat tAo^ei7oy,

btacpopa Kal ^ /xey

Tpay(p-

yap yeipovs

7/

8e

/SeArtovy pap-eXadai ^ovkeTai. r5>v vvv. “'Ert

20 pLLpL7]craLTO /xt/xet(r0at

p,evov

8e

tovtwv

dv

1448 ^ 3 litura A‘

roty

ey

wy eKaara tovtmv 3

to

avroty

Kat

ra

ayra

eVrty ore piey dnayyeKkovTa t ^ t drepov rt ytyyo'-

warrep "O/tr/poy

^dkkovra,

yap

Kat

rty.

biacjiopa

Tpirr]

rrotet,

wy TtpaTTOvras

Trayra

rj

KaKia yap xal dperr/

rw

scripsi

Pansinus 2038

wy roy avTov Kal

r)

:

A“ A'

to

:

Kal

evepyovvras

8 ri] to A“ lo om. Parisinus 2038

13 beiktdba A“

(

1

/

pi 7 /

superscripsit

m.

ecrrt]

p-era-

royy

-an

in

120 add.

rec.)

15

Kal

aanep 2038

yaa KVKkanrda A® losnepyas KVKXawas Parisinus nepaas Kat KvK:\a>Tras Codex Robortelli Sianep ’Apyar (!)s KoKXcojraf Castelvetrus wanep deovs ’Apyay, KoKXuTray Vahlen ( 1874 ^ wajrep yap KiKkcovas Vahlen ( 1897 ). plura deesse existimo 16 ravTTj Casaubonus otc Zeller 21 air!} A® p] ore de Reiz 22 TOV secluseram 23 wavra Casaubonus Trdvraa A® [in fine versus]

;

:

:

:

:

:

:

^

;

2.

1448^

1

- 3

1448^ 23

-

7

The objects the imitator represents are actions with agents who are necessarily either good men or bad — the diversities of human character being nearly always derivative II.

from

,

this

and vice

primary distinction, since the

our own level of goodness, or beneath in the

;

between virtue

one dividing the whole of mankind.

is

therefore, that the agents represented

are

line

same way

as,

^

we

or just such as

with the painters, the personages of

Polygnotus are better than

we

and those of Dionysius just

are, those of

Pauson worse,

ourselves.

like

It

is

clear

above-mentioned arts will admit of these

that each of the differences,

follows

It

must be either above it,

a

and

that

become a separate

will

it

representing objects with this point of difference.

art

by

Even

in

dancing, flute-playing, and lyre-playing such diversities are possible

;

and they are also possible

in the

nameless

uses language, prose or verse without harmony, as

Homer’s personages, Cleophon’s are on our Thasos, the

means

own

level

and those of

;

writer of parodies, and Nicochares, the

first

Dithyramb and the

Nome

:

it.

The same

is true of

may be

the personages

presented in them with the difference exemplified in the of

.

.

.

and Argas, and

Philoxenus.

and the other HI.

A

in the

This difference

and Comedy also

;

better, than the

that distinguishes

men

is

rep resented.-

or

the

Tragedy

manner n 3 i

Given both the

object for imitation, one

speak at one moment in narrative and

another in an assumed character, as

may remain

Homer

does

;

or

(2)

at

one

same throughout, without any such change

(3) the imitators

.

of the present day.

same means and the same kind of (i)

.

Cyclopses of Timotheus and

it is

third difference in these arts is in the

either

.

the one would make_its personages worse,

whic h each kind of object

may

;

we are Hegemon of

for instance, are better than

author of the Diliad, are beneath the

art that

its

;

may represent the whole story dramatically,

as though they were actually doing the things described,

—

'

i

8

iv Tpial

fxi.fxov[X(vovs.

35 ws

(iTTop-fv

o

yap

ap.
(rdaC

av

avra

Tiv(S

ODV

T&u iv

1448

K(ipas

b-qpovs,

aAAa <^<^1

avTols

rjj

rpayipbCas

rljs


TrXdvji

pev

Ttepl

be

ovv

t&v

dvOpdaTTOlS

(K

TTOLeXTai

pipripaaL t 5>v epywv'

bta^opS>v

pev dXcos

rds

pipi^aecos

TOVTO)

Kal

rds

Trpcoras,

Kal

to

be tovtov

XvirripSis

32

avToj Parisinus

2038

:

avToi

A®

a.

A®

A®

36

:

to

paO^yaipeiv

avp^aivov

OeoopovvTe?, oXov

Sijpo/cparciay

;j((bviSod

Spengel ovroi A® in minore ed. Oxon.

airiai

op&pev, tovtmv rds

eiKovas rds pdlviaTa -^Kpi^iopevas

:

Kal

bia^epovcTL

eaTi


a yap avTa

25 KOI a add. apogr. Robortellus (confirm. Ar.)

irdcraL

'KOLrjTLKr]v

Trjv

Kol

eCTTl

pip.riTiKU>TaT6v

TTdvTas,

Kal

to re yap pipei
TTaCbcOV

oTt

bid


ro6S

avTo'i

'Adr]va'iovs

ravTa,

elp^adco

yevvrj(rai,

Twv d\\u)V ^da>v

35

avTol

artpa^opivovs eK tov acrrews*

bvo Tives Kal avrai (pvaiKai'

Anonymus

a-rjpfiov'

fvioi

Kuipd^nv Ae^^eVras

tov

dirb

26-

ttoAAm wpo-

TTOLrjTrjs

KaXeiv

ex

ol

avTol pkv bpdv, 'Adr]va[ovs be Trpdrrety 'npoa-

TioifLV

’EotKaa-6

10 (ttI

Kal

ra ovop-ara

TrepioiKibas

Kal

Aco-

ol

re evravOa ws

01

yevop,evr]s

MdyvqTOS’ Kal

KaXeibio

Kwp,(pbCas

Trjs

Meyapets

ol

ws Kwpipbovs ovk

rCves rrjs pipi](re(os

Tols

bp&vras.

p.ip.ovvTai

TTOtovp.€Vot

ras

Trj

pi,ip.ovvTai,

bpap-ara

Kal

'^niyapp.os 6

i]v

Kara Kdpas

ayopevftv.

5

on

br}p.0KpaTLas

Kal

'Kioivibov

odev

ap.(f)co.

Kcopiipbias

rieXoTTOvvrjcrip)

pfv yap 5e

yap

p.ei'

ware

Kal &s.

’Aptcro^avet, irpATTOVTas yap

6e

rpaywStas Kal

re

fKeWfv yap

K(\[as,

repos

rrj

iariv,

p.ip.r](r[s

i]

2 o(^okA?}s,

'Opijjpw

ixipLr]Ti]s

cpacriv,

rrjs

Trap’

T7]s

(ttI

eir]

bpS>VTas

Kal

{rrjs

ravraLs biacpopats

brj

airovbaLOvs,

30 avTiTTOiovv'rai piets

II

Kar' ap^as, fv ois re {Kal h)

avTos

p.iv

pLpLovvTaL

35

1448^ 24—4. 1448’’

3.

'Adrivalovs

1760)

34 fort,

:

Xia>vi 8 ov

rpayabias {d’}

Spengel (occupavit

dOtjpaloi

6 tovto)* A®

A®

i

448

'>

5

4

As we

said at the beginning, therefore, the differences in

come under three heads,

the imitation of these arts

their

means, their objects, and their manner.

So to

that as an imitator

Sophocles

be on one side akin

will

Homer, both portraying good men

and on another

;

to

Aristophanes, since both present their personages as acting

and doing.

This

in fact,

accordingTo some,

is

the reason for

plajs being termed dramas, because in a play the personages

Hence

act the story.

too both

claimed by the Qpiians as their discoveries

Megarians

P

Tragedy and Comedy are^^

Comedy by

;

the

— by those in Greece as having arisen when Megara

became a democracy, and by the

Sicilian

Megarians on the

ground that the poet Epicharmus was of their country, and a good deal earlier than Chionides and also

is

Magnes; even Tragedy

claimed by certain of the Peloponnesian Dorians.

support of this claim they point to the words ‘

drama.’

Their word

comedy

’

In

and

for the outlying hamlets, they say, is

comae, whereas Athenians that

‘

call

them

denies

— thus

assuming

comedians got the name not from their comoe or

revels,

but from their strolling from hamlet to hamlet, lack of appreciation

keeping them out of the

act,’

they say,

So much,

is

Their word also for

city.

then, as to the

number and nature of

the points

arts.

clear that the general origin of poetry

was due

two causes, each of them part of human nature. is

natural to

man from

to

4

Imitation^

childhood, one of his advantages over

the lower animals being this, that he

creature in the world, and learns at is

to

dran, whereas Athenians use prattein.

of difference in the imitation of these It is

‘

also natural for all to delight in

truth of this second point is

first

is

the most imitative

by

And it / imitation. The

imitation.

works of

shown by experience

the objects themselves

may

view the most

representations of them in

realistic

be painful to see,

we

:

though

delight to art,

the

lO T€

OrjpLOiv

KOL

t&v

ixop(f)as

TOVTO,

aXKa

Kal

aAAoty

tois

dAA’

op.oCcos,

dfwpovvTas pavOdveiv koI

(TTOV, oXoV

on

yaaiav 20 KaTCL

OVTOS €K€lVOS’

pLpr]pa

fi

ypoiav

{to.

Kal

irpioTOV

\lr

TTOippa,

ovv

Trpb

'Opijpov

lapjSeiov

on

keiTai vvv,

eyevovTO t&v

Kal

emirja-ev),

TrpwToy

virebei^ev

TTOtTjo-ay

6

yap

:

ovx'i

:

rdy

7;

KaTo.

avToayiTroiTjcny’

irpd^eis tu>v

dXX’ ort A°

peTpov

\j/

ev Kal

6yov

MapytTr/y

1

A“ 36

—

Kal


bib

Kal

oi

Kal

Tijs

dkka dvdkoyov

to

tolovtov

dp^ap.evois

'O/ixr/pou

ev ols KOTa iapjSeiov

dkkpkovs.

idpjBi^ov

dkka to.

elireiv

ToiavTa.

pev fjpcoiKwv

on

ov

to.

amvbaia pdkiaTa

ovtcos

31 lap^lov (bis) Ar.)

oi

to.

ov\

12 dripaTaTUiv A'

Hermann

ijkde

TiakaiuiV

yap

{pdvos

TiKas

I’jdy]

eyppev

ovbevbs

ev rw peTpiu tovtu)

&aTTep be

W

tu>v

ipipovvTO

nokkovs, dub be

be elvai

elKos

appoTTOv

rat.

olK€ia

Kakas

30 eaTLV, olov eKeivov 6 MapybTr]s Kal

TO

€k

Tioipcnv

evTekeaTepoi

be

01

dppoviai

pvdp&v eort

pdkia-Ta

avTo,

to.

Trjs

6 yovs iroiovvTes, &a"nep eTepoi vpvovs Kal eyKiopia.

pev

TU)V

Tas

a-fpvoTepoi

toiovtoov,

ro)i»

KaTo.

b\

biea'nda'Qr]

ti]v

Kal

direp-

tI]V

aKKpv ahCav.

Tiva

tS>v

Tre^wKoVey

yap

psv

rdy

bia

pipeiaOai

piKpov TTpodyovTfs iyewpaav

35 01

dAAd

€Ka-

tL

TrpoewpoKwy,

T"dyrj

yap piTpa on popia

(pavepbv)

biaapaTOiv.

dKovas opwvTes, ort

pi]

ToiavTpv

bia

rj

^paxp

avWoyi^eaOai

fCLV

rjbovyp

ovtos i]piv tov

be

cfivaiv

TOV pvdpov

Kal

fTTfl

Tpv

Troirjo-et

ttjv

rj

v^KpSti

iirl

bia yap tovto yaipovai tcls

avpjBaivei

ovy^

35

Kal

aTip.OTa.TUiv

pavdcLVHV ov povov Tols cfukoao^

oTi

15 uiv avTov.

,

12-38

4. 1448’’

be

IdpfBcov

TTOipTps

KaKal

irotr;-

"Oprjpos

bpapa-

pip'qaeis

Kiapcubias

ayjipaTa

yekoiov

bpapaTO-

ex^i,

uxnrep

’lAtdy

1 8 ovy^ 7/ 3 tovtov vel Toiraiv apogr. 30 papyeirria A' 27 artpoi Spengel

35 dXXd Riccardianus 46, Bonitz (confirm. fort. (17) ’iXids apogr. 38 6] to A'

oSrto

— 4

*

1448° 12-38

II

forms for example of the lowest animals and of dead bodies.

The

explanation

be found in a further

to

is

learning something

is

fact

the philosopher but also to the rest of mankind,

small their capacity for the picture

is

that

meaning of

the

for if

one

it

to be

however

the reason of the delight in seeing

;

is at

things,

:

the greatest of pleasures not only to

the

e. g.

— gathering

same time learning

man

that the

there

is

so-and-so

one has not seen the thing before, one’s pleasure

not be~lirthe picture as an imitation of

it,

;

will

but will be due to

tb^xecution or colouring or some similar cause. Imitation, then, being natural to us as also ^e.. sense of harmony and rhythm, the metres being obviously species of rhythms it was through their original aptitude, and by a series of

—

improvements for the most part gradual on their

first efforts,

that they created poetry out of their improvisations.

Poetry, however, soon broke up into two kinds according to the differences of character in the individual poets

the graver

among them would

those of noble personages of the ignoble. just as others

;

;

for

represent noble actions, and

and the meaner sort the actions

The latter class produced did hymns and panegyrics.

invectives at

We

first, j

know

of no

such poem by any of the pre- Homeric poets, though there

were probably many such writers among them

;

instances,

Margites,

may be found from Homer downwards, e. g. his and the similar poems of others. In this poetry of

invective

its

however,

use

;

natural fitness brought an iambic

hence our present term

‘

metre into

iambic,’ because

it

was the

metre of their 'iambs’ or invectives against one another.

The

result

was

that the old poets

writers of heroic

became some of them

and others of iambic verse.

position, however, is peculiar

:

just as

he was

style the poet of poets, standing alone not only

literary excellence, but also

tive,

through the

through the dramatic character

of his imitations, so too he was the

general forms of

Homer’s

in the serious

first to

Comedy by producing

outline for us the

not a dramatic invec-

buta_dramaticL picture of the-Ridiculous

;

his Margites

12

1449

Kol

’Odva
T]

ray

5

ju
ot

olK(iav

<^v(nv

vovTo,

(KaT(pav

((f)'

ol

b(

OL

p.(L^ova

Kal

TO p.€V

ovv

t&v

dvrl

(TTKTKOTrdv

—

Kal

AtKa

vvv (v

a (Ti

p.iC<)p-(va

— Kara


tS)V

Aoy

Kal

20 ^ewy

ert

yeAotay

a(p.vvv6r],

to

8e

re

6pyr](TTLKV)T(pav

avTT}

25 KOV

fj

^vais TO

tS)V

TrAeiara

pi.(TpOi)V

yap

e'xfi

:

^

koI

to

Kpiverai

Xoyov

tov

Kat

(TKr]Voypa^Lav

p.iKpwv p.v6o)v

Kal

Ae-

d^( dm-

jaera^aAeiz^

lap-^dov

iypwvTO

Atayy-

TTpSiTOs

Kat

rerpayaeV/Jov

p.(Tpov

(ylyvero

(y(V(TO.

to craTvpLK^v

bid

8e

y(vop.(vr]s

(vp('

p.dKL(TTa

yap AeKrt-

((TTIV

(Tr\p.(ZoV

b(

(v

Tfj

bia\(KT(o

TOVTOV, irpos

tj]

Vahlen: nnpex(L A*^: puCov A® 7 °p’ 8 Kplmi apa e;^fi Riccardianus 46 Jj

:

vai

:

A®

(k

K(yopL(v

Riccardianus 46, Bekker A® (f)avKa (ut videtur) Ar. avTrja

(k

0 aA-

biap-dvd vo-

(pijcriv.

bvo

8e

ra

daov

TjAarrwcre rpety

(raTvpiKov

lap-^dov

TO

lap-^da

:

ety

dm

jaera^QaAoSaa

(Tvac TrjV TTOLr]
Parisinus 2038

F orchhammer

yopov

T(TpapL(Tp(a

oIk(lov

1449*^ 6 fid^ova apogr.

apa

(k

p.(Tpov

TO p.(v yap TTpStTov Kal

e^ (vbs

p.(y(6os'

to

8ta

TO

tov

tcl

avrrjs

t7]v

irpos

p.(V

f]

'n6K(0)v

/aera/3 oAay

mp«TK(va(T(v'

TTp(OTay(i)VL(TT7]v

iSo<^OKA^y.

Trkyjdos

t5)v

roiy

Kal

tQ>v

TrpoayovTcov

r]v^7]dr]

(ml eV^e

€Trav(raTO,

7jyay(

mWali

rb

bio.

dpyrjs avTO-

cltt'

Kal

dm

8e

^

iyi-

(K(lvooi>,

Kpivai

KcopLi^bia

7]

TroAAay

Kal

vmKpLTuiv

mO' avrb

re

bLdvpap.^ov,

pLiKpbv

avTrjs'

Tpayivbia re

Kal

Tr]v

Tpaycobia

r/

y(VopL(vr]s (§’) ovv

rbv

Kara

ravTa

(IvaL ijbri

Kal

avrr]

t 5)V (^apyovTiav

(1

dp'

6(aTpa, aAAoy Aoyoy.

TO.

kw-

KMp.ioboTtoLol

ldp.j3o)V

(ryjip-ara

avTO

ov,

rj

6pp.(avT€s

tt/oos

nal

TpaycobobibaaKaXoL,

(tto^v

ra

ovtos

koX

rpayipbias

r?/y

iroCrjcnv

rwv

avrl

p.(v

8e

ti]v

ivTip,6T€pa

tsai^wy

10 axibiaLTTLKrjs

5

Trapacpavfia-qs

K(ap.
(cbeaLV

J

1449^ 1-26

4-

20 (XaTvptaKOv A®

A®

9 ywopev-q apogr.

12 btapevav A® 21 et 25

lafi/Sioi'

1

A®

S’

add.

ii ^aiiXXiKa

aSroo-xeStauriKi) apogr. 5

tavT^s apogr.

26 lap^ia A®

:

;

4in fact stands in the

and Odyssey

Iliad

to

1449^ 1-26

same

13

relation to our

As

our tragedies.

comedies as the

soon, however, as

Tragedy and Comedy appeared

in the field, those naturally

drawn

became writers of comedies

one

to the

line of poetry

drawn

instead of iambs, and those naturally

to the other,

new modes

writers of tragedies instead of epics, because these

of art If in

were grander and of more esteem than the

it

its

be asked whether Tragedy formative elements,

and

theoretically

to

now

is

old.

that

all

need be

it

consider that, and decide

in relation to the theatres, is a

it

matter for

another inquiry. It

certainly began in improvisations

— as did

also Corned}'

the one originating with the authors of the Dithyramb, the

other with those of the phallic songs, which institutions in

was

by

little

many

little,

had before them

of our

cities.

And

stopped on

each stage.

attaining to

its

survive as after that

through their improving on whatever they at

It

was

in

natural form,

its

fact

movement

a long series of changes that the

of actors was

still

advance

its

(i)

only after

Tragedy

of

The number who

increased to two by Aeschylus,

first

and made the dialogue,

curtailed the business of the Chorus,

or spoken portion, take the leading part in the play.

A third actor and scenery were due to Sophocles. acquired also

a ludicrous diction, through stage,

it

assumed, though only

a tone of dignity to iambic.

tetrameter

;

and

its

The reason was

The

metres, as

is

in,

iambic,

shown by

passing out of

its

satyric

at a late point in its progress,

metre changed then from trochaic

it

now

was is.

satyric

As

and more con-

soon, however, as

nature herself found the appropriate

we know,

is

the fact that

the

most speakable of

we very

often

^ j

for their original use of the trochaic

nected with dancing than

metre.

its

that their poetry

a spoken part came

(2)

Tragedy

Discarding short stories and

magnitude.

its

(3)

fall

into

it

/

4

4 1449 ® 27

14

-

aX\')]Xovs,

28 KTiKTjs

30

d>s

f^dfieTpa

dpixovias.

(Kaara

yap dv

ov

alcry^pov eart to Ti

evdvs

TO

avev

Kal

3)V

dvwbvvov

p.vdovs.

p.ev

yj

Tip

be

8e

ddpiaTos

28 dXXa

ojy

A®

eTtonoda

tw

TTOirjTal

irpoXdyovs

rj

to

be

rj

p,v-

Xdyovs

peypi

Kal

pev tov

cnrovbaiwv y)KoXovdr](rev

eyeiv Kal dirayyeXiav eXvai, TavTij pijKei

—p

ypdvip

piKpbv

rj

—

Ar.)

pev oti pdXiaTa TreipaTai

:

Kal

aXXona

Kiopaba scripseram

e^aXXdTTeiv,

TovTip

:

be

bia^epei,

KaiTOi

34

yeXoiov

A°

Kcoptpdois coni.

Susemihl

rj

Bernhardy 7 lacunam

intercidisse videntur rjuav ydp 'Enlyappos koi ^oppis cKeWev

;

9 pev tov Tyrwhitt

8 eldeacr A®

U eberweg TovTO pr.

be

i]br\

avTrjs

iroieiv

Tpayivbia

Tfj

etvai

6 ’Enlyappos Kai 96ppis seclusit indicavi

to

KadoXov

Ibeas

(confirm. I

KO)p.(pbS)V

i](xav.

rrp&Tos yp^ev

Tip

apogr.

1449’’

pi^

tS>v be ’Ad/jvrja-iv Koarrjs

piav rrepiobov yjXiov elvai

eiroTToda

(bis)

en

to

bid

e^ dpyrjs eK

TO peTpov cLTiXovv

biaepepoviTiv' VITO

ovv

Kal

-ijyvdrjTai,

^dpixis]

peydXov piprjais

10 (bid) peTpov

pLeTa^dcreis

piev

Kal

lap^j^iKijs

Ttjs

d(f)ep.evos

dnebiOKev

dtov

hie(rTpa]xp.evov

Xeyop-evoi

ol

baa TOiavTa,

Kal

^iKeXias rjX6e *

edeXovTol

TTpocrwira

[^FiTTiyappos

TTOieiv

A®

1 1

tu] to

A®

$

rov

cpdapTiKov,

yap yopov

Kal

aAA’

eyovcr'i]s

8e

tis

dXXd

KcojuwSia

Se

rj

eXadev'

ebioKev,


/xt//.j;crts

Kal

ti

Tpayiybia^

Trjs

XeX’^daaiv,

dpyiji

VTioKpiTutv

5 TrXijOr]

60VS

ov

avTtjs

pvrjpiovevovTai.

ovv

piev

e

KaKiav,

ov

Kal

alcrypov

TTpoa-wTrov

e$

Tiva

(Tyr]p.aTd

ttoXv

to yap yeXoiov ecTTiv ap,dp-

p. 6ptov.

apyivv

6

aAA’

to.

elprjpLeva"

eXirop-ev

irda-av

yeXoiov

eyevovTo

TTore

rjpuv

Xe-

Trjs

Kal

7TXi']dr].

wcrirep

atay^os

ai

1449'’ (TTTovbdCeadai 6\j/e

eKjSaivovTfS '

eVrco

Kara

pcevTot

yeXoiov

dbvvrjs.

hi

earlv

Ku>p,(pbta

fxev,

35 TTqp-d

Kal

eTretcrobiiav

Aeyerat

H

'’

epyov eh] hie^ievai Kad' eKaarov.

de

XoTepoiv

8e

K0(Tpi.i]6i]vaL

Lo-ws

H

1449

-

oXiyuKis

de

eVt

—5

:

povov A®

lo bid add.

12 pev] pev ydp apogr.

1

^

;

4

-

1449 ^ 27

—5

.

1449

’’

H

15

whereas we rarely talk hexameters, and only the speaking tone of voice. (4) Another

in conversation,

when we depart from

change was a plurality of episodes or acts. As for the remaining matters, the superadded embellishments and the account of their introduction, these must be taken as said, as it would probably be a long piece of work to go through the details.

As for Comedy, it is (as has been observed) an imitation of 5 men worse than the average worse, however, not as regards ;

any and every

sort of fault, but only as regards

kind, the Ridiculous,

may

Ridiculous

which

is

one particular

a species of the Ugly,

The

be defined as a mistake or deformity not

productive of pain or harm to others that excites laughter,

is

the mask, for instance, something ugly and distorted without ;

causing pain.

Though

Tragedy and their same of Comedy its early stages passed unnoticed, because it was not as yet taken up in a serious way. It was only at a late point in its progress that a chorus of comedians was officially granted by the archon they used to be mere volunteers. It had also successive changes in

the

authors are not unknown,

we cannot say

the

;

already certain definite forms at the time those termed comic poets begins. it

Who

when it

the record of

was who supplied

with masks, or prologues, or a plurality of actors and the

like,

has remained unknown.

The

invented Fable, or Plot,

however, originated in Sicily, with Epicharmus and Phormis of Athenian poets Crates was the first to drop the Comedy of invective and frame stories

a general and non-personal F cu.cs or Plots. has been seen to agree with Tragedy to

nature, in other words,

Epic poetry, then,

extent, that of being an imitation of serious subjects grand kind of verse. It differs from it, however, (i) in that it is in one kind of verse and in narrative form ; and which is due to its action having no fixed (2) in its length limit of time, where as Traged y endeavours to keep as far as_^ possible within asmgle circuit^ the .sun, or sometEingTi^r_ ThrsT-T-sayTTs'’ anothelF point of difference between this

|

in a

—

—

them, though at

first

the practice in this respect

was

just the

i6 15

5

15—6. 1450^ 2

1449

-

TO TTpUtTOV OfMOMS €V Tals Tpay(pb(aLS TOVTO fTTOtOVV KOI iv roLS

Tpayipbias Kal

—

bioTtep

ocrris

Kal

oT8e

(pavkrjs,

vnapy^i

e)(e£,

ra

eori

8’

€Tre(riv.

rf]

a

iTTuiv.

h

rpayipbia,

be

8e

to.

rpayipbCas

Trept

Trepl

Tavra.,

piev

yap

piev

ov

rijs

amvbaCas

otSe

avTrf,

t8ta

eTroiroiia

irdvra

ev

tt)

20 fTTOTToda,

t 5)V


yekias,

p.eyedos

eibOiV

iTadr]p.dToiv

Kal

(fyojSov

Kddapmv.

keyor

Kal

pv 9 p.bv

ey^ovTa

p. 6

ind

bia piekovs.

Tov

d\jre(ios

Koapios,

iroiovvTaL Tr)V 35

Te

1450^

Kal

elvai

•jrpd^ecvv

p,ekos,

jadpiov

tl

eh)

Kal

pLekoiroiia

8e

elvai,

16 raCra A® aiToka^ovrea-

A®

tijv

(jrapLev

bpov

p.ev

to

be

bi'

eKadiray-

toiovtwv

kdyov tov tols

xcvpls

vov irepaiveadaL Kal irdkiv eTepa

Tpayipblas

ke^LS’

Trpw-

p.CpLr]a-iv,

ev

6

tijs

yap

tovtols

t&v

keyo) be ke^LV jxev TavTr)v, Tr]v

nekoiroiiav

eirel

rjOos

TTpd^ets

ov tSiv

be

0

ttjv

TrpaAws eort

bidvoiav, irotas

bidvoiav

Kal

bid

Tivas, i)

0 os,

21 p€v add. apogr. 25 eKaarw Reiz

A®

bvvapnv

p.Lp.r]
TrpaTTOVTwv, ovs dvdyki) iroiovs

TivSrv

TO

dv

pLLpLr)a-LV,

eyeL Trdo'av. VTrb

elTa

(TVvQecTLV,

jj-eTpuiv

Kal

be irpdTTOVTes iroiovvTaL ti]v

e^ dvdyKips

p.ev

\eyciipt.ev

ywpls

ti]v

r]bva-p.evov

Kal

ire pi

yivopLevov

kdy(i>

bpdvTwv

be

Kal

irpd^eors (xirovbalas

^bvcrpi,evu>

irepaCvovao.

dppLovCav

30 eibeaL to bid pLeTpcov evia

tov

p.ip.r](ns

ev tols pLOpLois,

ekeov

bi

Tpay(pbias

elp'qpievaiv

eypva'r]^,

ptp»;riKr/s

be

irepl

t&v

ovv rpayipbia

ecrriv

rekeCas

25 Kal

eK

avrijs

ovaias,

k^apLerpots

ev

Trjs

epovp.ev

vcrrepov

KwpLiabCas

dvakalBovres Trjs

ovv

{pdv)

riept

ydp

Tivas

elvai

be

KaTd

tovtwv

Kal

ra?

aiTia

bvo

rw’-

irecfrvKev

Kal

rpOLVepdv

irpdTTeTai

KaTd

TavTas

k

23 dt'nXa^oVrfy Bernays (occupavit versio Paccii)

:

:

28 naOripaTcov corr. apogr. (perturbatiorium Pacconfirm. Syriaca interpretatio ap. Margoliouth A. O. p. 55): cius paOrjpaToiv A® 36 nacrw Madiu'' 34 rairtjv scripsi avTTjv A® 2 raCra Reiz 1450^ I 77e<^i'K€ be ttiTia Parisinus 2938 (Koa-Tov ;

:

;

15—6. 1450^ 2

5. 1449'’

same

some being common

Tragedy

peculiar to

Tragedy

^

is

—hence

a judge of

differ also (3) in

both and others

to

good and bad

a judge of that in epic poetry also.

an epic are included

are not

They

poems.

in tragedies as in epic

their constituents,

17

|

Trag^y

I

consideration

6

Tragedy; but those of

in

in

All the parts

of th em to be found in_the--Epic.

all

Comedy for

Reserving hexameter poetry and

now

hereafter, let us proceed

we must

before doing so, however, resulting from

what has been

imitation of an action that

magnitude, complete in

to the discussion of

gather up the definition

A

said.

tragedy, then,

serious and

is

Tragedy

also, as

is

the

a

having

language with pleasurable

itself; in

accessories, each kind brought in separately in the parts of

i

'ire

the

work

in

;

a dramatic, not

a narrative form

in

pleasurable

accessories

’

mean

I

harmony or song superadded I

mean

that

Here by

suenemotions.

catharsis of

that

‘

language with

rhythm and

with

and by ‘the kinds separately’

;

some portions are worked out with verse

only,

and others in turn with song. I.

As they

act the stories,

it

follows that in the

first

place

the Spectacle (or stage-appearance of the actors) must be

some

part of the whole

Diction,

Here by

these ‘

two

Diction

’

;

being I

and

Melody and

the second

in

means of

the

mean merely

this,

the verses; and by ‘Melody,’ what

is

their

too completely un-

derstood to require explanation.

But further

represented also

and the action

agents,

who must

is

an action

;

imitation.

the composition of

:

the subject

involves

necessarily have their distinctive qualities

both of character and thought, since

it is

ascribe certain qualities to their actions.

from these that we

There are

in the

natural order of things, therefore, two causes. Character and POETICS

)

actompnsn

incidents arousing nity and fear, wherewith to its

with

;

c

/

/

i8

Tpa^ecos

eivai

fjLvdos

6

t 5>v

5 (rvvd€
cnTOTvyyavovcn

Kal

Tvyx^avovcri

d'KobeiKvvaaLv ri

ovv

Trao-?;?

ravra

Kal

earl

b'

eariv, ws

^Oos

pvdov

Kal

ev

rrpd^ei

30 npd^eis

Kal

be Kara

ras

rrjs

rpayipbCas,

rb

pev TTpd^eois ovk 25 voir

dv.

ai


Zev^is irpos

3 eariv

rd

bf)

i]dy]

i),

12

A® Vahlen

Spengel

oyf^ia-

fj

oxrav-

a-vcrracn^'

npd-

dkkci

KaKobaipovia

rj

ns

ovkovv i]dr]

rekos peyicrrov

r5)v

Kal

Kal

ov

eariv,

rroi-

noioL rives, Kara be rds

rrpdypara

TTokkol

ndv

eyei

dvdpd>T:(vv

* *

rd

rd

i]6oypd(l)os,

conieceram

be evbaipovia coni.

pipovvrai,

bidvoiav

Kal

Trpa^is

Tlokvyvcorov

13

yap

dij/eis

av yevoiro rpayivbia,

dyaObs

collocandum tanus (m.

dkkd

ydp r&v veiov

Kal

kvyvcoros

be

dkivs rroirjral

elaiv,

Kal

ke^is

Kal

ijOr]

yap

ovk

rekos

pev

uxrre

rrpd^eis'

dvdyKr] rtj ecrrti;

iroid

r&v rrpaypdrcov

rj

eariv

rb

npdrrovtnv,

bid

rivas

ttolovs

yvu)p.r]v.

pev

pekos

Kal

evbaCpoves ^ rovvavriov.

priauivrai

ttjv

a be pipovvrai, rpia,

ev,

Kal

evbaipovias

Kal

eariv,

eialv

oTJjs*

f]

ke^iv

pipr](Tis

^iov

Kal

Kal

fiev

rovrois pev ovv ovk oktyoi avr&v ws

peyicrov be rovrivv earlv

yap rpayipbCa

o

rrjs

ev oaoLS keyov-

be,

ots

8e pipovvrai,

Kal

fivdov

tovtov,

KaO' b

e^,

p,v 9 os

Kexprfvrai rois eibeaiv'

rm. 7}

bidvoiav

p-eko-noda.

Kal Tiapa ravra ovbev. elrreiv

8e

KaO'

yjdrj,

eivai

p-^pi]

Kal

o\}ns

4
koX cnroepaCvovTai

rj

rpaycpbCas

Tpay
bvo pepr)

ra be

TTpayp-droiv,

tovs TTparTOvras,

(pap,ev

10 bidvoia

irdvres.

Aeyw yap

rj

res

T]

15

1450^ 3-28

6.

ra

ottcos

ijOr]

pi-

avp-nepikapfidvovaiv Kal

pvdos

6

dirdvriav.

dvev be

TTkeCaroiv d'qdeis

rekos

eri

dvev

r]d5)V

ye-

rpayipbiai

roiovroi, oXov

Kal

ru>v

ypa,-

rreirovdev'

pev ydp

FIo-

8e

<»s elirelv

6

Zev^ibos

ypaipr]

fortasse post

ovbev

o\|/'ety

ttov

17 intercidisse kcu KOKobaipovias,

21 (TvpTrnpaXap^dvovcn Guelferby-

27 wo\vyv
;

6.

1450

3-28

^

19

Thought, of their actions, and consequently of their success

Now

or failure in their lives.

done)

is

the action (that which was

our present sense of the term,

is

simply

combination of the incidents, or things done

whereas Character

when proving a

and Thought

;

There are

every tragedy, as a whole, that viz.

a Fable or Plot

and M£lQdy the manner, imitation

;

;

Ch aract ers,

.

is

particular point or,

ating a general truth.

^

the

in the story

shown

in all they

may

be, enunci-

it

six parts consequently of

is,

of such or such quality,

Diction

T hough S pectacle t,

,

two of them arising from the means, one from

and three from the objects of the dramatic

and there

nothing else besides these

is

Of

six.

few of the drama-

these, its formative elements, then, not a

have made due use, as every play, one

tists

this,

what makes us ascribe certain moral

is

qualities to the agents

say

The

represented in the play by the Fable or Plot.

Fable, in

may say,

admits of

Spectacle, Character, Fable, Diction, Melody, and Thought.

The most important

of the six

the incidents of the story.

Tragedy

II.

and misery. of action

;

human happiness end for which we

All the

activity, not a quality.

in

is

our actio ns

the sake its

life,

—what

of happiness

or misery takes the form live is

a certain kind of

^Charac ter gives us

portray the Characters

e.

essentially an imita-

qualities, but

we do^^^tEat~l^ ~afe

of the

they include the Characters for

;

So

action.

Fable or Plot, that

is

that

it

is

the

action

a tra gedy

is

moderns are characterless all

kinds, and with

as compared

with

its

The

—a

may

tragedies oT most of the

defect

common among

poets

counterpart in painting in Zeuxis

Polygnotus

strong in character, the

it,

Besides

impossible without action, but there

be one without Character.

of

in

the end and purpose of the

tragedy ; and_th.e end is_eyeiywhere the chief thing. this,

it

Ifappy-or-tRF

In a play accordingly they do not act in order to

reverse.

i.

the combination of

is is

not of persons but of action and

tion

;

for

whereas the

work of Zeuxis

'

is

devoid of

latter it.

C 2

is

And

C

h

O'fCK c

20

1450^ 29—1450'’ 15

6.

ev

yp-droiv.

€TL

35 yva)pi(T(is.

bn

Ae^ei

tij

irpdypara a-vvia-raadaL, diravres.

1450

T7]s

CTTt

5

eanv

to

birep

e-nl

eartv

Tr]v

peiTai 10 ols

bXws

prjb^

btdvoea be 7]

KaddXov

bed 15 eirl

—

ois

tls

e)(ft

pr]ropiKr]S

A®

add. Ar.

:

Vahlen

ev

epyov

Ae^eia

Xo'yG) scripsi

ei/OTjrat,

Kal

X 6 ya>v

Xe^iv

A® A® A® ^

Xdywv

ev

Xeycov

6

ev

—

Aoyw

etvae

8e

7/

t7]v

eppeTpevv

t&v

Kal biavoiaa

/xev

7]

Trpoai-

ws ovk eaTiv

Ta>v

tS>v

eiii

bvvaptv,

31 :

8e

rj

t 5)V

(pevyee

rj

TeTapTov

avTrjv

01

pev to tolovtov o br]Xot

exovaiv ydos

ov add. apogr.

12 eV

app-OTTovra,

ovk eari bfjXov

ols

TipoTepov

:

be

TToXenK&s enoiovv XeyovTas, b^ ^]9os

b tl npoaipetTaL

T7]v

tovto

bidvoia’

7;

dirobeLKVVOva-t tl d)s eaTiv

waiTep

Kal biavoiq

(ni fallor)

be

Kal

diTOLpalvovTai. be,

XevKO-

Kal

7roAtrtK?/s

ovk

btonep

ecTTiv

XdyoDV

Tidv

TKT

TL

Kal

KaAAitrrois

rots

ra

dvopaatas eppriveeav, o

Trjs

29 A(^et Tt]

ev

Xeyw

Aefiy

oiroid

(jievyee

?)

rpa-

rrjs

eanv

ydp

Kal

Tijs

eanv

pr)TopeKS>s.

-npoaipeaiv,

^ p^vdos

(r^e8oy

ra evovra

pen ydp dpxcuoe

ol

vvv

8e

TpCrov

bvvaa-dat

X6y(ov

tS>v

TTOtrjTal

ra

r)

ecrnv re pLp.r](ns TTpd^ecos Kal bed ravTrjv

elKova)'

Xeyeiv

irpOtroi

evcppdveiev

6p.oCws

dva-

koX

aKpi^ovv

iva\et\freie

?;

ttokiv Ttpd-

ijOeatv

^XV

Trpa-

yj/vx^aywyei

77e/)t7reretat

{napaTrXrja-Lov

ns

tQv TTparTovnov.

p-dkiaTa

ol

olov

ijdrj

av

ovk


tois

koI

oXov

ydp

(I

ypa(f)LK7]S‘

ypa<\)ri(Tas

Kal

ra

be

at re

ois

Kal oi iyyfipovvres

piv ovv Kal

dpyi]

bevrepov

y(pbias,

p.eyt(TTa

tcl

tovtois

ava-Taaiv

Kal

p.vdov

icrriv,

p-epr]


bvvavrai

T(pov

tovtois

p.v0ov

rpayu)-

tjv rrjs

KarabeeaTipoLS

rj

8e

e)(ov(ra

8e

irpos

rpayipbia tov

TTonja-ei b

(ovTrco)

Ae^ec

Kal

rjOiKas

6^

p.d\\ov

ttoKv

Tpay(pbCa,

K€\pr]p.4i’r]

€
TreTTOirjij.evas,

dKXd

ipyov,

bias

(dv Tts

eVi

rjOos.

30 Kul btavoia

Kal

Xoltt&v

3°

ovtto)

1450’’

1

°

—

1450^ 29—1450*' 15

6.

again

21

one may string together a series of characteristic

:

speeches of the utmost finish as regards Diction and Thought,

and yet

much

produce the true tragic

to

fail

effect

better success with a tragedy which,

but one will have

;

however

inferior in

these respects, has a Plot, a combination of incidents, in

it.

And

in

again

the most powerful elements

:

of attraction

Tragedy, the Peripeties and Discove ries, are parts of the_t^ ^

A

PlflL-

further proof

is in

earlier with the Diction

and the same may be

struction of a story;

essential^he

first

the Plot

is

We

the early ch^matists.

all

and

;

life

said of nearly

maintain, therefore, that the

^aad soul, so to speak, of Tragedy

the^haracters come second

that

where the most

the parallel in painting, laid

the fact that beginners succeed

and Characters than with the con-

on without order

one the same pleasure

will not give

We

as a simple black-and-white sketch of a portrait. tain that

Tragedy

i

s

main-

p ri marily an imitation of action, and

foc^e s ake

that it is mainly

— compare

beautiful colours

of the a ction

t

hat

it_

i

mitate s

the4)erson al age nts. *^hird comes the element of Thought, i.

e.

the power of saying whatever can be said, or what

This

appropriate to the occasion. in

Tragedy,

is

under the arts of

falls

for the older poets

make

their

Politics

and Rhetoric;

personages discourse like

One must

statesmen, and the moderns like rhetoricians.

not confuse

it

with Character.

Character in a play

which reveals the moral purpose of the agents, of thing they seek or avoid, where

hence there

is

no room

indifferent.jubject. in all

they

is

what, in the speeches

that

for Character in a

is

i.

e.

is

that

the sort

not obvious

speech on

Thought, on the other hand,

say when proving or disproving some

a,

is

purely

shown

particular

point,

or enunciating some universal proposition.^Fourth

among

the literary elements

i.

e.

is

the Diction of the personages,

as before explained, the expression of their thoughts

in words,

which

with prose.

As

is

practically the

for the

same thing with ^rse as

two remaining

parts,

the^elody

22

6. [T7

fWe]

/xeAoTToiia

r)

\lrv\ay
fxiv,

TTOLrjTiKrjs'

yap

j?

T&v

0\l/€0)V

bft

be

K al

Kal

'np5>T0V

8f

to e^ov dpy^v Kal b

dpxh

akXo eariv, per eKeivo

30 e£ dvdyKqs

pecov

8e

dpa

6et

ws

rj

o

apxio-dai pqd' ottov

elpqpevais 35

npdypa

b

Ibeais.

akko

peT

e/c

TivStv

Ti

TOV

dpa /cat

oAoy

ro

dk)C

yiverai

decopia

rj

eK

olov

16 nevTe induxit Spengel (om. Ar.) TOTov

elvai

rj

apogr.

A®

eTepov.

pqd'

onodev

erux^v

:

KexpwOai

rats

to

prj

bib

tvxov'

to

ovTe rrappiKpov rj

eyyvs

Oeiopia

el

irepirTov

Oeiopovcri

pvpicvv

apogr.

Meiser

ro

arabioiv

17

ey eiq

djrepfyo)-

23 8/7 scripsi 6’ A® 37 irapjUKpov Riccardianus 16 34 (Ibeaia A® (perexiguiini Averroes) rdv piKpop A® 39 nappeyedes Riccardi18

17

:

anus 16

:

Trap

peyfdoa

A®

:

wcr

:

-i

C^ov Kal dirav

/cat

tois

oix^Tai

decopias)

Trjs

yivecrdaL'

rj

TvappeyeOes (ov yap

xP^you yivopevq) ovTe

dvaia-6-qTov

rep-er

eKeivo

yap

Kakbv C^ov (ai/yxetrat

yevoLTO

Kal

ov povov TavTa TeTaypeva

VTrdpxeiv

yap Kakbv ev peyeOei Kal Ta^ei eaTiv, dv

eyov

peT

to Kakbv

eTret

peyedos

Kal

p.i-

dvdyKqs

7re(f)VKev

dkkd

TekevTav,

8’

ert

Kal

pvOovs

eS

eTVx^

orvveaTqKev

dkkd

bei

br]

to TTokv, peTa be tovto akko ovbev

errl

crvveaT&Ta^

tovs

akko

avrb per

b

aiiTo

/cat

p.e(rov

e^

p.r]

8 ’ erepov TrecpVKev elvai.

rovvavriov

Se

TekevTT)

p.ev

etyat

Kal p.r]b€V

ia-riv

avTo

Keirat

Trpa^ews

ecrty yap oKov

tovto

(Treibr]

ia-riv.

e(TTLV

bkov be

p.iye6oi, kevT-qv.

Tavra -noiav 7

ju.era

oArj?

^

direpyacriav

ttjv

irpaypaTCDV,

Kal

rrjs

dySivos

TTOtTJT&V icTTLV.

TpaytpbCas

rijs

/xeye0os*

25 prfdLV

T&V

6\j/L9

oIkslov

dv€v

Kal

Trepl

8e

tj

rjKiara

X.dy(»p.ev

tS)V

eivai.

reAeias

Tpay
TTjv

y]pxv

TTjs

TovToiv,

p.iyL(TTOV

kuI

bvvap.LS

Kvpmrepa

bk

(TvaTaatv

TtjV

fjbvcrixdTOiv,

de

rpayipbias

TOV (TK€V0TT010V

7]

1451^ 2

-

t5>v

dreyroraTOP rrjs

ALu>pL(rp.iv(tiv

TLvd

ixiyKTTOv

(ariv, €tl

Kal VTiOKpirStv 30

16— 7

1450

icrtoy

:

<

4

i6— 7

6 1450'’ .

is

-

1451^ 2

23

the greatest of the pleasurable accessories of Tragedy.

© The

Spectacle, though an attraction,

is

the least artistic of all

the parts, and has least to do with the art of poetry.

The

4

tragic effect is quite possible without a public

and actors

performance

and besides, the getting-up of the Spectacle

;

more a matter

for the costumier than the poet.

Having thus distinguished the

now

us

parts, let

consider 7

the proper constnjctifln of the .Fable or Plot, as that

once the

first

and the most important thing

We

laid

it

have

action that

down

A

a whole

beginning

anything

either as

that

is

that

is

of.

which

not itself necessarily after

is

else after

naturally after something

is

itself,

necessary or usual consequent, and with nothing

its

and a middle, that which

Plot, therefore,

Again

every whole

after

it.

is

by nature

A

well-constructed

after

cannot either begin or end at any point one

beginning and end

described.

some magni-

of no magnitude to speak

one thing and has also another

;

Tragedy.

which h as beginning, middle, a n d end.

which

that

is at

an imitation of an

and which has naturally something

else after it;

likes

in

as a whole of

itself,

may be

is

else,

an end

it;

that a tragedy is

complete in

is

tude ; for a whole

Now

is

:

to

must be of the forms just

it

be beautiful, a living creature, and

made up of

certain order in its

in

parts,

must not only present a

arrangement of

parts,

Beauty

a certain definite magnitude.

is

but also be of

a matter of size

and order, and therefore impossible either

(i)

in

a very

minute creature, since our perception becomes indistinct as it

approaches instantaneity

size

— one,

say,

;

or

1000 miles long

(2)

—as

in

a creature of vast

in that case, instead of

V-

24

1451^ 3—8- 1451^ 29

7-

((iov

wore

C(^v

'dx'Eiv

5 Kal

tSiv

iirl

T&v pvdoiv eyeiv pev

iirl

Kal

(TvcrrrjiidTUiv

tovto 8e

pijKos,

tmi'

cttl

ovrco

elvai,

^vpvrjpovfv-

Tov pi]Kovs opos (6) pkv TTpbs Tovs dyS)pas Kal

Tov

iXvai,

T 7]v

aLaO-qaiv

Tpaya-iTep

KaOdirep

Sei

piv peyedos, tovto 8e evavvoiTTOv

ov

Tiyvrjs

Tijs

dyooviCea-Qai,

aAAore

Kal

TTore

iaTtv’

yap e8ei

el

dv

Kkexlrvbpas

irpos

o

KaT

8e

eKaTov

iiyoivi^ovTO,

avTi]v

Trp’

10 (pvaiv TOV TrpdypaTos opos, del pev 6 pei^oiv peypi tov awbrj-

Aos

KakkCcDV

eXvat

hiopioravTas

dvayKaiov

ee^rjs

Tvy^ias

e^

rj

eva

TTepl

evmv

8’

eaTlv

ev

ovbev ecTtv

oaoL

ov\

els

8e

ctTrAws

elKOS

peTa/BaKKeiv,

to

?)

iKavbs

Kokws yap

irkrjyrjvai,

T
€iKos

Keyopev

Kal

ovK

to.

irdvTes

yap,

otovTai.

eoiKaaiv

Teyvrjv

Kal

bLa(pipei.

^

8ia

els

eirel

tovt'

’

6

8

eoiKev

’Obvaaeiav

(jyvaiv

baa avTM

diravTa

Kal

&r](Tr)lba

avve/dri,

olov

pev ev rw Ylapvaaalb, pavijvai be TrpoaTTOiriaaaOai dyepplb,

lav

Odrepov tt}v

yeveadai,

(confirm. Ar.)

dkkd

dvayKaiov

yevopevov

OaTepov

ovbe

irepl

pCav

irpa^iv

’Obvaaeiav avveaTrjaev, opolcos be Kal

9 nXXoTe (^aotV A®

A®

aAAa

eTTolrjaev

1451®’ 3 avarr/pdrcav scripsi

oiStv

bib

'HpaKkrjlba

TreTTOtrjKaaiv

bia

i]Toi

Ibeiv,

evbs TroAAat elaiv,

eva Kal Tbv pvOov elvac TrpoarjKeiv.

&(nrep

TTOL&v

edv 8

olovTai

TLves

it panels

irpa^is.

nonpTSyv

TOLavTa TTOiripaTa

"Oprjpos

wairep

ovtcos be Kal

tS>v

6 'HpaKkrjs,

rj

to

TroAAa yap Kal direipa rw evl (Tvpjdalvei, e^ <3 r

j7"

20 dpapTaveiv TO.

KaTa

bvaTvylav

els

3>v pCa ovbepCa yiveTai

e^

ws

peyeOos’

to

peyedec

ytyvopevcov avp^aivei els evTvyiav eK bva-

evToylas

MS 0 OS

ev

otrw

eaTlv TOV peyedovs.

150/30?

25

KaTa

ea-Tl

ev

elireiv,

:

28

yevei r/

:

acopdrcov

a'AAor’ fZci^oo'ii'

A®

Spengel

A®

M. Schmidt

18 ovtoi apogr. ;

Ijv

A®

;

fj

apogr.

6

tijv

oiav ’lAta-

add. Bursian

6

17 ew apogr.

27 ovbe scrips:

:

29 Xlyoipev A®

\

1451^ 3-8. 1451^ 29

7-

the object being seen

of

it

all at

once, the unity and wholeness

Just in the same way, then,

the beholder.

is lost to

25

made up of parts, or a beautiful living creature, must be of some size, a size to be taken in by the eye, so a story or Plot must be of some length, but of a length to be taken in by the memory. As for the limit as a beautiful whole

of

its

length, so far as that

and spectators,

had

If they

to

it

is

does not

one period

of the thing its

t.

The

is this

t

as they are said to have been

however, set by the actual nature

limit,

the longer the story, consistently with

:

being comprehensible as a whole,

reason of

its

performances

within the theory of poetry.

perform a hundred tragedies, they would

be timed by water-clocks, at

relative to public

fall

As

magnitude.

length which allows of the

the

finer

it

by

is

a rough general formula,

‘

hero passing by a series

a

ot

probable or necessary stages from misfortune to happiness,

may

or from happiness to misfortune,’

suffice as a limit for

the magnitude of the story.

The Unity in its

of a Plot does not consist, as

having one

befall that

man

as

its

An

subject.

one man, some of which

infinity of things

impossible to reduce

is

it

some suppose,

manner there are many actions of one man which cannot be made to form one action. One sees, to unity

;

and

in like

therefore, the mistake

of

all

the poets

a Heracleid, a Theseid, or similar

poems

;

who have

written

they suppose that,

because Heracles was one man, the story also of Heracles

must be one

Homer, however, evidently understood

story,

this point quite well,

whether by

same way as he excels the

writing an Odyssey, he did not

ever befell his hero

—

it

on Parnassus and also to arms, but the

art or instinct, just in the

rest in every other respect.

make

the

In

poem cover all that wounded

befell him, for instance, to get

to feign

madness

at the

time of the

call

two incidents had no probable or necessary

connexion with one another

— instead

an action with a Unity of the kind

we

of doing that, he took are describing as the

subject of the Odyssey, as also of the Iliad.

The

truth

is

8

26 30 Sa.

€v6s

ftrn, /xtas

i?

rdv pvOov,

fCTTiv, ovtco Kal

re elvai ravrrjs

1451

rais akkats ptfiriTtKais

Kal iv

XPV

IJL^UrjaLS

30-9.

1451^

8.

Trpa^ews

irrel

ra

Kai

oAt;?,

/cat

rj

pia

jutju.7](ris

a-vveara-

fxepr)

vai tS>v TTpayparuiv ovtcos cSore p-iTaTidepivov tlvos pipovs

CKpaipovpevov bLacpspeadaL Kal KiViladai to bkov'

yap

o

7)

Tipocrbv

TTpoabv ppbev ttoui iTrlbrjkov, ovbev popiov rov okov iartv.

35 V

(K

b(

av€pbv

pfva keyeiv, tovto Kal

bwara

TO.

biacpipovcnv Kal ovbev

ota

(TnovbaLOTepov

pakkov

av

ov Tw

8’

pera pirpov

Kal

bib

la-Topla

to.

Trotw

ra

keyeiv ^ irpaTTeiv KaTa ro

et/coj

rj

KaOokov

be

pev,

irota

^ rt enraOev.

pvOov Oeaa-LV,

bia /cat

15 TTOiovaiv.

tS)V

elKOToyv

oox

cocrTrep

ovv

pr]

be

eirl

yevopeva

32 ravrrjs

/cat

(confirm. Ar.)

b’

:

ovrto

(ed.

A°

:

/cat

A®

16 rreiOavov

13 ovTO)]

-rrepl

cttoe/ca-

yap

ovopaTa Tbv

Tbv

vtiotl-

KaO' eKaaTOv

bvvaTa,

A®

to.

to,

pev

8e

ye-

36 ov ro apogr. :

yivopeva

t^] to Spengel

Ar.

Trjs

yevopevcvv ovopdTwv

eXvat

TavTrja-

OVTTO) (ni fallor)

ov Kad'

pev ovv

eirl

yevopeva Riccardianus 16

1451^ 4 TOVTO A®, Spengel Tov

be

eaTL ro bvvaTov'

maTevopev

I )

avp^aivet

avaT-qa-avTes

t 5)V

-nidavov

otl

arra

ro

TvyovTa

to,

lapjBoiTotol

Tpayorbias

ovtto)

Susemihl

ovtco

ot

Trjs

oItiov

avTeypvTai.

yeyovev

tovto brjkov

i]br)

/cat

'noCrjais

ro avayKoiov,

aroi’, rt ’AA/ct^ta87js eirpa^ev

Ktopipblas

yap

eKaaTov keyei.

Kad'

eircTtOepevr]'

10 ^(tferat

yevopeva Ae-

to.

pev

rj

ovopaTa

TroiTjats

rj

avev pi-

17

(f)ikoa-o(f)(VTepov

ecTiv'

rw

eaTiv

yap

6

pirpa TfOrjvai

ets

rw Tbv pev

iaTopCas rj

9

ipperpa keyeiv ^ ap^rpa

rj

{(rropia tls

yevoiro.

tiv

Trotrjcrt?

avayKoiov.

ro

?/

'Hpoborov

bia<^epei,

Kadokov,

TO.

et/coj

av ra

eXr\

TOVTO)

Tbv be

5 yeiv,

yap

7]Ttov

akka

Tpoiv)'

rb

TTotTjr^s

{e’ip

yevo-

to.

fpyov iarCv, akk' ola av yivoLTO

TTOtrjroS

Kara

Kat 6

1451*^ IcTTO/jiKos

elpppevcov Kal ort ov to

tS)V

14

rrepi tS)v

A°

10 to] apogr.

A®


1451^ 30—9*

8. that, just as in the

1451*’

i?

27

other imitative arts one imitation

is

always

of one thing, so in poetry the story, as an imitation of action,

must represent -one action, a complete whole, with

several

its

incidents so closely connected that the transposal or with-

drawal of any one of them will disjoin and dislocate the

For that which makes no perceptible difference by

whole. its

presence or absence

From what we function

is

no

have said

real part of the whole. it

be seen that the poet’s 9

will

to describe, not the thing that has

is

a kind of thing that might happen,

The

being probable or necessary.

and poet

torian

other verse— you verse,

and

is

e.

what

still

be a species of history

;

its

Hence poetry

statemen ts a re of the natu re rather of

whereas those of history are singulars.

universals,

universal statement

a kind of

man

will

I

mean one

;

it

Alcibiades did or had done to him. clear

already

made up of probable

by

this

time

;

it

is

In

only

Comedy

when

may

this

reason

:

has

their plot is

incidents that they give

it

names

occur to them, instead of writing like the old

iambic poets about particular persons. ever, they

to the

to what, say,

a basis of proper names, choosing for the purpose any that

a

do— which

proper names

affixes

by a singular statement, one as

become

By

as to what such or such

probably or necessarily say or

the aim of poetry, though

characters

still

^

consists

it

some thing more philosophic and of grave r impo rt than

h istory, since

is

his-

one describes the thing that has been,

and the other a kind of thing that might be. is

between

not in the one writing prose and the

really in this, that the

"ilL,

possible as

is

might put the work of Herodotus into

would

it

i.

distinction

happened, but

In Tragedy, how-

adhere to the historic names; and for this

what convinces

is

the possible

;

now whereas we

are

not yet sure as to the possibility of that which has not hap-

!

I

/

28

18—1452^ 6

9. 1451

vo^eva (pavcpbv

bn hwara

vara.

dAAa

ao V

ov

p.i]v

koI

yap ev rovra rd re 'npdyp.ara

rd ovop-ara

Kal

av

&(tt' ov iravTuis

ev

TreTrotrj-

tm ^Ayad
p.eva, ev kviais 8e ovOev, olov ev

Kai ovbev i]ttov evi^paivei,

piev

ra be dAAa

ovopLarcov,

abv-

i]v

et

rpaywStats ivCais

iv rals

eorly

yvcopipLcov

^^0

ov yap av iyivero,

'

d/xoiws

TTeirotrjTai,

^jTrjTeov

etrj

tS>v Trapabebopivuiv pv$oov, Trepl ovs ai rpayipbiai elcriv, dvri-

yap yeXoiov tovto

Kal

35 xecrOai,

pipa oXCyoLS yvapipd ovv

brjXov

bn

etvat

SK

ovbev

bward

be

per

vtto

Kal

8

ovr’

’

5

yevrjTac

paardv

19

odreos

Tvy^qs,

eviais]

avdei eivai

A® A®

ovt

rods

Kal

23 wuT

bb^av

rr]V

pdXXov

tmv

ev evlais apogr.

33

dvdyKr]

38 Trapareivovret apogr.

avTovs,

virb

yap

dywvccrpaTa

7)

drrd

dAAd

rd)(7/s

yap

OavKal

davpaa-cevTara

Welcker

:

M. Schmidt

:

’Av 6 ei

av

Tyrwhitt

1452^

ravra

A®

A®

pdXXov]

[/cat

to

ov

^ol3 epS)V

avropdrov

rod

d-Tro

'

Kal

aXXrjXa’

be

be

eirel

paXcerra

Kal

21 ov 6 ev

dX\(ai/

eepe^s.

rd

et

od] axr rot

dTrXaji/]

be

eTreia-

roiavrac

etvai.

TTOcr]TS>v

pCprja-is

fj

ravra be ycverac

e^ei

pvQov ev w rd

vTTOKpiTas'

dvayKa^ovrai

-napd

eTrecaobKobeis

al

bvvapcv iraparecvavres pvdov ttoA-

irapd n]v

eTret

Trpd^ewv

Kal

et/co?

bid

bia(TTpe(l>eiv

eXeeevSiv,

rrji

yap yevopevcov

tcHv

av ecKos yeveadac Kal

eT7eta'o8tw8rj

pbvov reAetas eart TTpa^eevs

brav

Kav apa crvp^f] yevo-

oca

pev twv (fyavXwv

dyaO&v

TroLovvTes

1452^ AaKis

Xeycv

dAArjAa

t 5)V

Kal

Ttavras.

Kara rrp pi-

7rotr;r 7 /s

eart*

eivac

pvOcvv

airkacv

8e

TTOcovvTac

be

daw

Troirjrr/?

KcoXvet roiavra

evcppaLvei

pdXKov t&v pvOoov

'novqr^v

t5)v perpMV,

t)

ovdev rjTTOv

yeipiaTac'

35 bbia

rbv

rd yvco-

Kat

eTret

djutos

yeveadac, Kad’ b eKecvos avr&v TXOcqT-qs eanv.

tSiv

elaly

^rjTeiv,

dXX'

pipnrai 8e rds Trpd^ns.

TTOteiv,

evta

bn

rovTcov

ttoltit^v

priaLv earnv, 30 peva

kanv,

e'ir]

37 KpiTas apogr.

3 koi juaXXoi/ induxit

Spenge

9

18-1452 ^ 6

1451'’

-

pened, that which has happened it

would not have come

to

29

is

manifestly possible, else

pass.

Nevertheless even in

Tragedy there are some plays with but one or two known

names

in

and there are

them, the rest being inventions;

some without

a single

known name,

e. g.

Ag&thon’s Antheus,

in

which both incidents and names are of the poet’s invention;

and

is

it

no

less delightful

must not aim

at a rigid

do

so, as

even the

that

known

It

would be absurd,

known

stories are only

though they are a delight none the

less to

in fact,

to a few,

all.

more

evident from the above that the poet must be

It is

one

adherence to the traditional stories

on which tragedies are based. to

So

on that account.

the poet of his stories jor Plots than of his verses, inasmuch as he

and

is

it

a poet

is

by virtue of the imitative element

And

actions that he imitates.

to take a subject

a poet for that

;

from actual history, he

some

since

in his

none the

is

in that aspect of

Of simple I

them

that he

;

and

their poet.

Plots and actions the episodic are the worst.

when

call a Plot episodic

there

necessity in the sequence of sort

is

less

may very

historic occurrences

well be in the probable and possible order of things it is

work,

he should come

if

its

is

neither probability nor

episodes.

bad poets construct through their own

ones on account of the players.

Actions of this fault,

His work being

and good for public

performance, a good poet often stretches out a Plot beyond its

and

capabilities,

is

thus obliged to twist the sequence

of incident.

Tragedy, however,

is

an imitation not only of a

als^ oTThcidents arousing pity

,

and

c omplet^/-^

fear.

inciSents have the very greatest effect on the mind

Such

/

when

they occur unexpectedly and at the same time in consequence of one another;

then than E^ven

if

there

is

more of the marvellous

in

themj

they happened of themselves or by mere chance,

matters

of chance^ seem, most-marvellous

if

I

there

l

is_

30 boK€L

wo-Trep

6(ra

OavaTov rw 10

ovK

(iKrj

iv "Apyei

ws 6

olov

tov alrtov tov

aTT€KT€ivev

lotKe yap

decopovvri (pLireadv

MtriJt,

33

yeyovivai,

(paiverai

CTrtrrjSey

avbpias 6 Tov Mirvos

H52^

7—

1452^

9-

rotavra

to.

wcrre av6.yKi) tovs toiovtovs eivai Ka\k(ovs

yevea-Oat’

pLvdovs.

(Tiv

ai

Tj

keyoi

Kara

e^ avdyK-qs q

peTa^okq

Topevoiv

to

KaTct

ekdoiiv

to

eiKos

KaOdirep elKos

(j)

pnas avev irepme-

Kal

yiverai,

neirkeyp.evri

^

ap,(f)Oiv

yiveaOai e^ avrijs

tt]S

r]

av-

rw AvyKei

biacfyepei

peTa^okq, q bva-TvxloiV TreptTreVetat

reponendum

els

dvayKoiov,

Siorirep

uxnrep

8e

rw

ev

Ot8i'-

ws aTroOavovpevos, 6 be

tov

be e’ariv e$ qs

e^ dyvoias

exet

8e

dvayvcopiais yv&ariv

els

q

dvayvwpLo-is,

ev

r£

17 8e

Vahlen

:

b'

i

OTav apa

Olbiirobi.

Susemihl

elalv

Riccar-

Xe'^ir] Se

ea-Tiv qs

:

fortasse

20 Tnvra] rdvavria Bonitz

Ttenkeypevqv be keyco qs oiav scripsi

tS>v

ex^pav, tmv irpos evTvxlav q

els

KakkCa-Tq oiav

eK

(rvvejSq

acaOqvai.

be

a-qpalvei,

(pikCav q

yivmvTai,

tov pev

aTTOKTevav,

o)piapeva)V'

33 y^vopTai A^

tovto

Kal

eipqTai,

13 vTtapxovai A'^ :

to evavTiov t 5>v irpaT-

els

pev dydpevos

6

Tovvopa

Kal

wa-rrep

q

d'noOave'iv,

ireTTpaypevcov

9 prjTvi A’^ dianus 16

ytyveaOai rawra*

6 j3 ov, bqkuxras os qv, TOvvavTiov eToiqaev

Aavaos aKokovdiav ws

30 be,

rjs

eiKppavQv tov OlbiTTOVV koI dirakka^cDV tov

d)s

pbs Tqv pqTepa

Kal ev

rtpa^LV

piev

TrepiTrereias

?)

"EaTi be TrepmeTeia pev q

TT

a-nkrjv

lO

virapyov-

TO yiyvecrOai ra8e 8ta raSe q peTa Tabe.

TToki)

keyopev

Tif'nkeyp.ivoi-

elatv

tov pvdov, wore ex tu)v TTpoyeyevr]pev(ov avp^aiveiv

crracecos

25 TToSt

be

pLeTa^aais

bet

8e

oi

p.v 6 ot

ot

avvexovs

rj

ravra be

p-era^aaLs eariv.

a-nkoL

p.ev

avayv(iopi.apLov

MCT-a

yap

oi

/xt/ixrj(reis

&piaTai

avayvMpKrpLov

be

2017

&v

Toiavrai.

&cnrep

J5 ywop.evr}s

p,vda)v

Trpa^eis

ovcrai

(vdiis

Teias

rav

8e

Ettrt

yap

Kai

otov

A®

H

7—

9. 1452 ^

an appearance of design as

spectacle

were

it

Argos

the statue of Mitys at

death by falling

1452 ^ 33

A

a meaning.

them

;

as for instance

killed the author of Mitys’

down on him when a looker-on

we

for incidents like that

;

in

3i

think to be not without

of this sort

therefore,

Plot,

at a public

is

necessarily

finer than others.

Plots are either simple or complex, since the actions they lo

The

represent are naturally of this twofold description.

proceeding

action,

whole,

I

way

the

in

call simple,

when

takes place without'^enpety"'^

wHenTtTnvolves one or the each of them

one continuous

defined, as

the change in the hero’s fortunes

Discd^fy

;

other, or both.

and complex, These should

arise out of the structure of the Plot

)

^

)

itself,

so as to be the consequence, necessary or probable, of the

There

antecedents.

a great difference between a thing

is

happening propter hoc and post Perip ety the play to in

the

is

its

way we

are saying, in the probable or necessary is

it

the opposite state of things to

for instance in Oedipus-,

is

gladden Oedipus and

:

Danaus

just as

is

at his side to

ceding this bring to death.

he

A

it

to

remove his

fears

And

in

being led off for execution, with

put him to death, the incidents pre-

about that he

Discovery

here

produced by the Messenger,

as to his mother, reveals the secret of his birth.

Lynceus

is,

saved and Danaus put

is

as the very

word

implies, a

change

j

1

from ignorance to knowledge, and thus to either love or hate,

Tiff the personages finest

that

ii

opposite of the kind described, and that too

sequence of events; .as

who, coming

hoc.

the change from one state of things within

marked

form of Discovery

is

for

good or

evil

one attended by

which goes with the Discovery

fortune.

The

Peripeties, like

in Oedipus.

There are

_

,

:

32

1452^ 34—12. 1452*’ 22

II.

ovv

jxev

rv^wra

35 ra

irpayi

ns

Atora

Tov

ia-TLV

1452** 'in

]

j)

p.iv

5 tCs

/jtaAtara

r/

arv^eiv

inn

to

Kal

lAeoy

?/

viroKetTar

p.ip,r}(ns

€vrv)((ii'

p.a-,

rj

elprjpLivr]

rj

TreptTreVeta

rpaywSia

77e-

et

akX.'

Trpd^ecos

rrjs

Kal

a^lrv^o.

Kal

avayvMpicraL,

TTpd^ecov y

oX(ov

76

Kat

tmv toiovtmv

i-jrl

by y dvayvu>pL(ns nv5>v icrnv dvayvMpi(Tt.s,

daripov npos tov eTepov p.6vov, OTav y bykos dnepos ore

iarTLV,

dpLCpoTepovs

6e

rw 'OpiaTy

’l^tyeyeta

pikv

Kal

p.vdov

(rvp,^r]a-€Tat.

al

eanv

irpos

crvp.^aiv(i,

etpjjrat

o-rrep

Treirpayev

p.7i

(t>dl3ov,

8e

ms

e'(rrii>

yap

Kal

yap ToiavTp dvayvMpiaLS Kal

7

V

aWai avayvwpiam'

Kal

(KHVov be

Tys iTTKTTokys,

dvayvoopiaai,

Set

dveyvoDpiady

Tyv

77/30?

iK

olov

Tys

dkkys

'I(f)iyiv€iav

y

Tre/tn/^'etos'

eSet

avayviopiaews. bvo pL(v ovv TOV p.v6ov p-ipy nepl raor’ ecrt,

tovtwv

dvayvMpLcns’ Tpirov 8 e nddos.

10 Kat

dvayvMpKns

Kal

dbvvypd,

dlov

re

8 e 7Te/3t77ereta p.ev

ndOos be eaTL npa^is

et/or/rat,

ol

rw

ev

OdvaToi

(jiavepM

77 e/3 t 7reVeta

(f)dapTLKy

Kal

y

nepno-

at

bvvtai Kal Tpcoaeis Kal bora rotaSra.

Mepy 15

npoTepov

dndvTMV

TavTa,

20 napobov,

b

ovK

jf oTTtp

fTtpoa

iSta

eneLo-dbiov

xopiKMV

ok(i)V

<5

be

to

nocrov

npokoyos

eaTlv,

etSetrt

Kal

y^pyaQai 12

Set

els

h

eneiadbiov

biaipetTai.

e^obos

X®"

Se

and Tys (TKyvys Kal

rd

Koppoi.

npokoyos pev pepos okov TpayMbCas to npo yopov

be

ea-Tiv

35

KaTO.

rdSe

w?

pev

ois

Kal TOVTOV TO pev ndpobos to be aTdcrLpov, Koivd pev

piKov,

A®

Tpayeobias

e’lTTopev,

KeyMpurpeva

pe6'

be

be

pekS>v,

yopov

ecTTi

Spengel

:

pepos

okov

e^obos

be

pekos'

yopLKOV

axmep A®

3 eVf t by Parisinus 2038

A®

Riccardianus 46

7

(Kelvov

$6 :

scripsi

12 o? re] ore

pepos

»/] el

ineibr] :

A®

Tpayipbias

be

A®

A®

e’/ctiVo)

okov

to

peTa^v

Tpay^bCas

ndpobos pev y 1452^

i

olov

4 arepos apogr.

A®

9 nepl om.

19 npoyatpov

A®

II.

1452 ^ 34~i2. 1452’' 22

no doubt other forms of in a

way

in reference

kind

very casual

a

it

what we have said may happen

;

inanimate things, even things of

to

and

;

33

it

discover

possible to

also

is

But

whether some one has done or not done something.

the form most directly connected with the Plot and the

of the piece

action

is

This, with

the first-mentioned.

Peripety, will arouse either pity or fear

nature being what Tragedy

is

assumed

— actions

a

of that

to represent

;

and

it

will also serve to bring about the happy or unhappy ending.

may be

that of

party only to the other, the latter being already

known

The

Discovery, then, being of persons,

both the parties for

instance,

may have

it

to

or

;

Orestes by sending the

and another Discovery was required

letter;

v/

!

Iphigenia,

to discover themselves.

was discovered

one

to reveal

him

to Iphigenia. dL

Two

parts of the Plot, then, Peripe

^

,

I

and Discovery, are

s j

on matters of

we may

define as

The

like.

parts of

third part

The

is

Suffering

stage, tortures,

woundings,

to

be treated as formative elements

the whole were mentioned in a previous Chapter.

however,

sections into which parts:

P rolog ue,

_

it

is

of

quantity,

its

the separate

;

these two are

The Prologue ;

after the last choral song. first

Episode

an

between two whole choral songs

the whole

the

dis-

common

whereas songs from the stage and Conimoe

are only found in some.

POETICS

e.

Episoj^, Exode, and a choral portion,

the Parode of the chorus

is

i.

From

in 12

divided, a tragedy has the following

tinguished into Parode and Stasimon to all tragedies,

which

other two have been already explained.

Tragedy

point of view,

;

of a destructive or painful

an action

murders on the

nature, such as

and the

A

this sort.

;

the

that precedes

is all

all

Exode

that

comes

all that

in

follows

In the choral portion the Parode

statement of the chorus

;

a

Stasimon,

D

oh] xopov,

TTpart]

n

23—13- 1453^

12. 1452*’

34

dvev

be p,eKos

a-rda-cpov

dvaTTaiuTov Kal rpoxaiov, KoppLos 8e dprjvos koivos 35 OTTO

a-Ki]VT]S.

TrpoTepov

XP^fydcLL

eiirapev,

bei

a-ToxdCeo-dai

crrdvTas rovs jJLvBovs

Set

e(f)e^rjs

tStozz

bei

h

els

evkajSeio-Oat

Set

to

ecrrat

TavTrjv

Kal

yap

(tovto

pipr}TLKr]v

km

Trjs

Trjs

a-n\rjv

pr)

piprjaecos

ToiavTrjs

ovv

eiretS?;

ekeeivoiv

kuI

cf)oj3ep5)V


Tpaycobias ep-

r^s KaWCa-Trjs Tpaycobias

etz/at

TTeTrkeypevqv

eibe(n)

TTO
XeKTeov rots vvv elprjpevois.

elt]

(rvv6e
Ti]v

dWd

dv

a

/cat

mdev

/cat

to

8e

(ws

eariv.

/

be

'Slv

pev

oTs

Kara

Kexwptcr ixez'a tovt

biaipeirai

30 yov,

Tpayipbias

Sf

p-^pf]

elvat

eorty),

TTp&TOV pev brjkov ort ot/re tovs emetKeis avbpas Set peTa35

^akkovTas

ef

(fralvecrdat

evTvxMS

SuoroxtW,

els

(j)oj5epbv

ovbe ekeeivov tovto dkka ptapov ecTiv

X^Tlpovs

e£

aTpaycoboTaTov yap

evTvxlav,

ets

dri/xtots

&v

eoTt TrdvTurv, ovbev yap e^ft

yap

ov

ovTe tovs poroSr’

ovTe yap (fnkdvOpcoTrov

bei,

1453 ^ ovTe ekeeivbv ovTe (pofSepov ecTiv ovb' av vbv acpobpa iTovr]pbv evTvxlas

dvOpcoTTOv e^ot

pev yap

Tbv

opoiov,

dpeTrj

pT]Te

poxdrjpiav

Kal

dpapTiav olov

23

Tivd

OtStrrovs

oXt)

28

dkk' ovTe ^keov ovTe

crdaracrts

pev

ekeos

Tbv

irepl

dvd^iov,

t&v

Parisinus 2038

:

bin-ova-

A®

;

:

:

avro

els

/cat

ovtwv

bd^r] ot

e/c

t5)V

25

KaKiav

bid

dkka

Kal

bi

evTvxi
toiovtmv yevm’

a>s elbea-i

Set] -et in litura 1 1

eVrat ro

be toiovtos

bvaTvx^oiv

ti]V

0X00

A° A®

wcr

prjTe

biKaiocrvvr]

peydkrj

ev

©weVrrjs

Susemihl, Westphal

S)v

/cat

ecrTi

be


(fro/iepbv

dpa tovtotv konrds.

peTa^dkkorv

/cat

cpik-

Tbv dvd^idv eaTiv bvaTvxovvTa, 6 be

rrepl

biacpepcoi’

av Tou Parisinus 2038 Ar.)

roiavTr]

0 peTa^ii

(Tvp^aivov. 6

r]

yap

pev

Tb

peTairCiTTeiv

Tbv opoiov, ojore ovTe ekeeivbv ovTe

TTepl

I

dv

(frd^ov, 6 5 TTepl

10

bvcrTVxlav

els

A®

add. apogr. I

453 *

i

olSinovs apogr. (confirm.

n

23—13- 1453^

12. 1452*’

a song of the chorus without

35

anapaests or trochees

Commos, a lamentation sung by chorus and actor

The

parts of

the whole

Tragedy

to

be used as formative elements in

we have already mentioned

parts from the point of view of sections into

The next these

:

(i)

which

it

is

its

avoid, in constructing

its

quantity, or the separate

we have

the poet to aim

is

the above are

;

divided.

points after what

What

a

;

in concert.

and what

and

Plots ?

his

said above will be 13

at,

(2)

is

What

he

to

are the

conditions on which the tragic effect depends?

We nPlot

assume

for

that,

the

finest

form of Tragedy,

jnust be not simple but complex

must imitate actions arousing pity and distinctive

;

fear, since that is

of this kind of imitation.

function

the

a nd further, that

it

the

follows,

It

therefore, that there are three forms of Plot to be avoided.

(|^jA good man must not be seen passing from happiness to misery,

ov^ a bad

situation

first

odious to us. be;

it

is

man from misery

not fear-inspiring or piteous, but simply

The second

the most untragic that can

is

has no one of the requisites of Tragedy;

human

not appeal either to the

does

it

feeling in us, or to our

Nor on the other hand should ^j^an man be seen falling from happiness into Such a story may arouse the human feeling in it will not move us to either pity or fear pjty is

pity, or to

our

rf

The

to happiness.

fears.

^

(

;

extremely bad misery. us,

but

;

occasioned by un deserved misfortime, and fear by that of

one

like ourselves

;

so that there will be

piteous or fear-inspiring in the situation. the intermediate kind of personage, a

virtuous and just,

nothing either

There remains,

man

then,

not pre-eminently

whose misfortune, however,

is

brought

upon him not by vice and depravity but by some error of judgement, of the number of those reputation and prosperity

men

;

e. g.

of note of similar families.

in the

enjoyment of great

Oedipus, Thyestes, and the

The perfect

Plot accordingly, ,

D 2

;

I

g

36

1453^ 12-39

13.

avbpes,

aTrXovv

pLaWov

etvai

TajidKXfcv

ovk

€VTv\Las

15

Xeipovos.

rods

oiKias

dX'iyas

&ve(TTr]v

Kal

beivd

iradeiv

?)

p,v 6 ovs

KdXXia-rai

T jAe ?

< ()

oi

*5

F.vpi'nibri

bpa

ev

rais

ixeyicTOv

be

Kcorarai

TpayiobCan

koI

noXXal

ydp twv

ye

dXXa

ra

Kat

35

eyovaa

Kaddirep


6 os,

Teyvr\v

Trfv

bid Kal

on

eh

bva-TvxCav

ava-Taa-is,

'Obva-aeia

rj

yeLpoaiv.

ijbovij

dXXd pdXXov

(f)iXoi

ev

Syiriv

yevojjievoi

eirl

dXXd

ohovopiei,

bevTepa rj

b’

bmXrjv re

Kal

TpaTrpwTrj

TXjV crvaTa-

TeXevTotcra

boKei be

rj

o

Kal

eivai

e^ evavirpeoTij

ol iroirjTal

bid

kot

ecTiv be ovy avTrj dud rpaywKiap-ipbias

Trjs

rw


KaTopdoiSSxnv,

ev

tovto

tQv dydvuiv Tpayi-

koX

deaTpwv dadeveiav aKoXovdovai ydp

dv eyQiarToi

ol

a-vp.j3 €j3 r]Kev

Kara

avrov

hv

/x^

ivy^v TTOiovvTes Toh OeaTais. 8 tas

dXXois

noirjTQv (PaiveTai.

tS>v

Tias rots jSeXTioai Kal tS>v

otov

dp.aprdvovo'iv

v

(f)aivovTaL,

Xeyop.evrj vird tlvmv ecTiv

TTjv

awTidevrai,

ava-raaedos ecrn.

airb

ei

E^/)t7rt67]s,


rrjs

[ro]

e-nl

al

30 ytKwraros

Ttepl

ovv

piev

iyKaXovvres

TOiavTai

yap

vvv 8e

tovto ydp eaTiv uxnrep etprjTai dpddv

reXevT&cnv.

rj

’OpeaTTjv Kal MeXeaypov

daois

7/

bi

irpidTOV piev

dTrt]pidp.ovv,

Kal

Kal

»

KaXXiaTr] rpayiabia ex TavTr]s 01

dXXd p.dXXov

j

TTOirja-ai.

?;

p-oyOppiav jSeXTiovos

rpayi^biai

Kal OibiTTOvv

Kal

r)

to yiyvdpevov

TV\ 6 vTas al

'AXKpieiova

20 Tiepl

bid

eiprjTai

Kal

be

Kal /xe-

cf)a(n,

bvarv^tas dXKd rovvavriov

p.r]

oiov

r)

p.vdov

e^oi^ra

TLves

ajcnrep

€K

bv(TTvyJ.av

eis

(ri]p.iiov

TTOirjral

ol

^VTv\Lav

els

peydXpv

dpiapTiav

biTTkovv,

r)

KaX&s

dpa tov

avdyKt]

pivdio,

oheia'

oiov ’Opea-Trjs

TeXevTrjs

e^epyovTai,

eKei

Kal Kal

ydp A’iyi-

arro-

dvrjiTKei ovbels ott’ ovbevds.

20 'AXKptuva scripsi

A® 35

33 0 t\Ticoai tVri’'

A®

:

dXKpaiuva

Kat xfipo^aiv

37

Ol

A® A®

tw Bonitz

:

24 TO seclusi 31 ^ 34 ^tarSiv Riccardianus 16 av

ol

A®

39

dnodvfjiTKfi

A®

;

13.

must have a

single,

1453^ 12-39

and not

(as

som e

37 double issue

us) a

tell

the change in the hero’s fortunes must be not from misery to happiness, but

on the contrary from happiness

to

f

misery ;

and the cause of

it

some great error on

we have

such as

must

|

not in any depravity, but in

lie

man

his part; the

himself being either

described, or better, not worse, than that. I

Though

Fact also confirms our theory.

by accepting any tragic story that came

began

the poets

hand, in these

to

days the finest tragedies are always on the story of some few houses, on that of Alcmeon, Oedipus, Orestes, Meleager,

may have been

Thyestes, Telephus, or any others that volved, as either agents or sufferers, in

The tion.

some deed

in-

of horror.

theoretically best tragedy, then, has a Plot of this descrip-

The

critics, therefore,

are wrong,

for taking this line in his tragedies,

an unhappy ending.

The

to take.

It is,

best proof

is

as

who blame

and giving many of them

we have

this

:

said, the right line

on the stage, and

public performances, such plays, properly

seen to be the most truly tragic

;

worked

in

is

if

his

seen to be never-

most tragic certainly of the dramatists.

this comes the construction of Plot which

the

out, are

and Euripides, even

execution be faulty in every other point, theless the

Euripides

After

some rank

first,

one with a double story (like the Odyssey) and an opposite issue for the

as

first

good and the bad personages.

is

ranked

only through the weakness of the audiences

poets merely follow their public, writing as

But the pleasure here rather to (e. g.

It

is

its

not that of Traged}'.

Comedy, where the

bitterest

;

the

wishes dictate.

enemies

It

belongs

in the piece

Orestes and Aegisthus) walk off good friends at the

end, with no slaying of any one by any one.

38

14

^453

"EoTtz;

1-27

1453

.

ovv TO (po^epov Kal eXeeivov

fj.€V

yCyvicrOai, eoriz;

koX

8e

avrrjs

rav

a-va-Taa-ecos

Trjs

(K

opav

avev tov

Kal

aKovovra

Twv

ra

(Jvp.^aiv 6 vT(siV‘

O lbiTTOV

TO

p.v 6 ov.

(eiv OLTeyvoTepov

pojiepbv

TT]V

eXeov

airb

tov

(TKevd^eiv (Tiv

75

yap

Sta-re

rov

ovTe

ppbeTepais 20 TidOp, vlbv

ovK

vovaav 25 (vvos,

beivd

eydpds

^

oTav

8’

ev

Tais

dbekcpbv

p

to

eirel

bel

be

napa-

tois

-npaypa-

olKTpd

cjiaiveTai

ev

bp

(piKcov

p

eXvai

iydp&v p ppbe-

p

avTO

pi]

irapa-

rjbovrjv

ovbev

eyOpov,

KaT

Tikpv

bei

7701a

Trpd^eis

dbekepos

TO

ovb’

dv

eyyevpTai

vd

irdOos'

(pikiais

TraTepa

vlbs

ovTe

ekeeivdv

p-pTpp

p

tovs pev ovv rrapeikpppevovs pvdovs

^pTpTeov. ea-Tiv,

vtto

keyui

be oiov

Tpv KkvTaipvpa-Tpav diroda-

tov 'OpeaTov koX Tpv ^Epiefivkpv

avTbv be

adai Kak&s. eiTTi

ovv

oiKeiav.

ws tovto

(pavepdv

oi be

povov

p vlbs ppTepa diroKTeivp p pekkp p ti dkko tolovtov

bpa, TavTa

kveiv

TiapaaKevd-

ydp Tidaav

ov

pipi^a-ecos

ToiavTas

pekkwv,

p

bid

dvdyKH]

ovv

eyovTes'

oXov

tovto

ttjv

KdjSuipev.

ra?

pev

dv

TTOL&v

aKovwv tov tov

o\j/€MS

dXXd

eAeeiy

Kal

cPpCrreiv

akXd to TepaTuibes

6l3ov

iroia

dWpKovs

Tepwv.

(j)

TTOir]Ti]v,

avpiinTTovTutv,

77/009

p.vOov

Tradoi

Ttji

bed.

Tpaycpbias

Kal

epiTOLr]Teov.

tQv

be

Kal

TpaycobCa Koivwvovartv

otto

7]bovr]v

hv

direp

oil/eois

10 aKevd^ovTes ovbev

ClTetv

yivopLeva

Kal yop-pyias beop-evov eaTiv.

ti]s

bid.

(

avveardvai t 6 v

ovtco

Trpdyp.aTa

Tipa-

8et

ypLUTUiv, oTTep fo-Ti -npoTfpov Kal TTOirjTov apifCvovos.

6

o^ecos 14

rrjs

e/c

evpiaKeiv bei

Kal

tov 'AkKpe-

irapabebopevois XPV'

Tb be Kak&s ti keyopev, eiTToipev (raefieaTepov.

pev ydp ovtco yiveadai Tpv

1453'^ 8 arexv^Tcpov

Sylburgius

tois

inrb

A®

15

21 dnoKTcivci

KXvTaiprj(XTpav At,

rj

brj

-npa^iv,

Spengel

pfKkci

24 dkKpaicova A°

:

&a”nep 01

8f

A®

22 bpav

Trakaiol

20

A^

26 evnopev

A'*

oiov cl

23

;

14 - 1453

"

1-27

39

and pity may be aroused by the Spectacle by the very structure and incidents of the play which is the better way and shows The Plot in fact should be so framed the better poet. that, even without seeing the things take place, he who simply hears the account of them shall be filled with horror and pity at the incidents which is just the effect that the mere recital of the story in Oedipus would have on one.

The

tragic fear

but they

may

;

also be aroused

—

;

To produce less artistic,

who make

this same effect by means of the Spectacle is and requires extraneous aid. Those, however,

use of the

put

Spectacle to

before

us

that

which is merely monstrous and not productive of fear, are wholly out of touch with Tragedy; not every kind of pleasure should be required of a tragedy, but only proper pleasure.

The

its

own

and fear, and the poet by a work of imitation it is clear, therefore, that the cause^hoiild be included in the incidents of his story. Let us see, then, what kinds of incident strike one as horrible, or rather as piteous. In a deed of this description the parties must necessarily be either friends, or enemies, or indifferent to one another. Now when enemy does it on enemy, there is nothing to move us to pity either in tragic pleasure is that of pity

has to produce

his

it

;

doing or in his meditating the deed, except so

far as

and the same is true when the parties are indifferent to one another. Whenever the tragic deed, however, is done within the family when murder or the like is done or meditated by brother on brother, by son on father, by mother on son, or son on mother these are the situations the poet should seek after. The traditional stories, accordingly, must be kept as they are, e. g. the murder of Clytaemnestra by Orestes and of Eriphyle by Alcmeon. At the same time even with these there is something left to the poet himself it is for him to devise the right way of treating them. Let us explain more clearly what we mean by ‘the right way.’ The deed of horror may be done by the doer knowingly and consciously, as in the old poets, and in Medea’s murder the actual pain of the sufferer

—

—

is

concerned

;

14

40

14-

inoiovv

(Iboras

yiyrda-Kovras,

Kal

aiTOKTelvova-av Tovi

eTTOipiTiv

30 TTpa^ai

28—15. 1454^ i6

1453

ayvoovvras

p,iv,

KadaTiep

TraiSas

to

irpa^aL

be

Evpnribps

Kal

MTjSeiav

Tijv

lorii'

eW

beivov,

avayvcopleraL rpv (pi^iav, &(nTep 6 ^oefiOKkeovs Olbiirovs'

tov bpaparos, ev

To p.ev ovv 6

'AkKpLecov

’

6

AarvbdpavTos

rpavp-aria ’Obvacrei. 35 ra

dvdyKT]

?)

elboTas

Kol

pi]

)

piapov exet>

opoms,

TTOtei

0 Aipwv.

pev

ov TpayiKov'

Koit

pi]

el

Ttpd^avTa

TO TekevTalov,

pekXei

TOV

ev

"Ekkr]

Ti]

piaev, to yevi]

dAA’

bia

OTTO

oaais

ev 6

vlbs

TO,

ev

TOiavTa

ti]v

evpov

to ovv

KpaTLo-Tov be

8e

dbekefii]

p

dAA’

ov,

tov

MepoTr?)

r]

dveKal

dbekejiov,

ppTepa eKbibbvai pekkoiv dveyvdi-

birep

elalv.

yap piapbv

tc

tw KpeaepovTi]

irdkai

eipprat,

toiovtov eirl

tols

irepl

Te^v^s

dirb

ev

olKias

pev ovv

elvai

irokka

irepl

TtapaaKevd^eLV

TavTas

a-vpl3ef3i]Ke irdOi].

ov

yap ovk

^pTovvTes

irpaypaTCov (TvaTaaeois Kal irolovs Ttvas 15

to

diroKTelvet

’Icfnyeveiq.

yap tovto,

Tvxrjs

(BekTiov 8e to dyi'ooiJrTa

dvayvoiplaai'

olov

8e

dvayKaCovTaL

pvdoLS'

be

aTTOKTeCvetv, Trj

Tpayuiblai

al

ovbeh

bioirep

dvayvdipLens eK-nkpKTiKOV,

keyco

VLOV

Kal

yviaptcre,

i]

yap,

to re yap

okiyaKis, olov ev 'AvTiyovij tov Kpeorra

TO 8e TTpa^at bevTepov.

TTpd^ai,

ov 'npoaeaTiv Kal 5

dnaOe^

irplv

yap irpa^ai

yeipicTov

irpa^ai

pi]

7)

rw

ev

tovtwv be to pev

eiboTas.

pi]

1

yiv^dKOVTa pekkijcraL Kal

o

to pekkov-

dvayv(opiaai

Kal irapa TavTa ovk ecTTiv dkktos.

TTOirj(Tai.

1454 ®

TrjAeyoi^oy

Trapa ravra

dyvoiav

bi

rov-

rpay
Trj

avrf] 6

^

rpirov

eri be

dvqKea-Toov

tSiv

ri

TTOieiv

8’

8e

va-repov

861

tois

diravTav Tijs

tmv

tovs pv-

dovs elpr]Tai iKavm. riept 8 e

TO.

ijdi]

TeTTapd eaTiv &v bel aTO^d^ecrdai, ev 15

33 'AkKpaimv 6 Victorius : dXKpalwvoa 1454^ 6 dveyvoipKTe* A®

A°

34 to Bonitz

:

tov

<

14. 1453*’

of her children

28—15. 1454^ ^6

Or he may do

Euripides.

in

41 but

it,

in

I

ignorance of his relationship, and discover that afterwards,

Here

as does the Oedipus in Sophocles.

the play

;

but

may

it

be within

the deed

like the act of the

it,

is

outside

j

!

Alcmeon ^

in

Astydamas, or that of the Telegonus

A

in Ulysses

Wounded.

injury to another, in ignorance of his

some deadly relationship, to make

time to draw back.

These exhaust the

possibility

third

the discovery in

for

is

one

meditating

deed must necessarily be either done

possibilities, since the

or not done, and either knowingly or unknowingly.

The

worst situation

is

when

the personage

is

with

full

knowledge on the point of doing the deed, and leaves undone.

It

odious and

is

act thus except in

the absence of

is made to some few instances, e. g. Haemon and Next after this comes the actual perAntigone.

suffering) untragic

Creon

also (through

it

hence

;

is

it

that

no one

in

A

petration of the deed meditated.

better situation than j

however,

that,

is

deed

the

for

be done in ignorance,

to

and the relationship discovered afterwards, since there nothing odious in

Cresphontes,

Discovery

the

But the best of

astound us. in

and

it,

all

is

the last

Helle,

sister

example, where Merope, on the point

for

and brother are

up

point of giving her

we

will

said just

explain

now)

to

to her

why our

subjects to

are

families in

On

the

embody

still

;

in Iphigenia,

a like position his mother,

;

and in

when on

the

enemy. tragedies

are

restricted (as

such a small number of families.

was accident rather than

They

in

where the son recognizes

This

is

to

what we have

;

of slaying her son, recognizes him in time

where

serve

will

^

\

this

art that led the poets in quest

kind of incident in their

It

of

Plots.

obliged, accordingly, to have recourse to the

which such horrors have occurred. construction of the

Plot,

required for Tragedy, enough has

and the kind of Plot

now been

said.

V, U

:

42

1454^ 17—1454*’ 4

15fxfv

eAe\ 0 ?j

wcnrep peaCv

Tiva

20 eKa(TT
ye

TO

rovToiv

dAA’

Tjdos,

TO

1)60$

TeTapTOv

be

to

TTpa^LS

xp’par'pv.

eartv

ea-Tiv

to

tolovtov

kul

?]


yap avbpeiov

ecrTiv

avbpecav

j)

tovto yap eTepov too

TTOLrja-ai

&a-rTep

yap avcapakos

ko.v

ev

be

SoCAos,

oAcoj

be

yumt/cetw to

bp.oLov.

appoTTov

Kal

to

irpoai-

/cat

xprja-Tr]

\eipov,

p.ev

app.6TT0v

8e

opakov.

TTapeyjMV

Aws avdpakov i]6ovs p^]

to

ovy^

Tp'iTov

*5 XPP^J^Tov

pCprjo-iv

eav

yvvp

iav

p,(v

^

rj

bevTepov be to appoTTOVTa'

elvaL.

beLvrjv

yap

Aoyos

p6os

8e

e^et

?].

6

be

xprja-Tov /cat

ttrcos

Kov eaTLv.

xpi](rra

(pavepov

TTOifj

[t/],

yei’ei'

KaaoL

p.ev

OTTws

TtpStTov,

KttL

0 os

e’tpi]TaL,

Tis

6

17

Trjv

opws bpa-

vnoTiOeis,

ecrty 8e Trapabetypa irov^pCas pev

Set etz/at.

avayKaiov olov 6 Mevekaos 6 ev rw ’OpeVrrj, tov

30 8e UTTpeTTOvs Kal p7] appoTTOvTos 0 re Oprjvos (d tov) ’OSt/acetos

ev 57

TT)

'^Kvkkij

ev

Avkibi ’l(piyeveia'

vaTepq.

/cat

be

yp)]

TrpaypaTwv

eiKos Kal

yap eoiKev

ovbh> rot?

ev

/cat

det

crocrraa-et

35 doare tov tolovtov 7]

TT/i MekavLTTTTTjs p7]ais,

7}

Xavrjs Kal XO'Vfi

rj

TOVTO peTO. TOVTO yivea-Qai

Kal

a-vpj3aiveiv,

ev

’lAtdSt

tt}

xpriaTeov

yeyovev a ody

errl

rd

olov

re

A°

iKeTevovaa

^pTeiv p to avayKaiov

warrep

prj

rd

irpaTTeiv r)

Trept

rj

ev

tt}

rj

Mrjbeiq

tov aTroirkovv.

elbevai,

dvdput'nov

tQv

et/cd?,

et/co'?.

bei tov

dirb

pTj-

dkka

prj-

irpo

tov

baa

^

tt}

avayKaiov

avayKaiov

tov bpdpaTOS,

e^co

to

rj

tmv pvdcov e^ avTov

(pavepbv ovv drt Kal rd? kvaeis

1454 *’ pvOov

57

wa-irep Kal ev Trj

7]6ea-iv

rotadra keyeiv

to.

TOV be dvcopdkov

q baa vaTepov

'a

om. Parisinus 2038

22 rd 23 ywaiKeta to scrips) yvvaiKi to apogr. yvvaiKL**Ta>i A® 29 avayKaiov Marcianus 215 addidi pev ekeos (i.e. Mevekems) Ar. 3*^ ® avayKaiov A® 1454'’ 2 aTroTrkow Riccardianus 36 § avayKaiov Hermann 35 18 TToi^]

-rji

in litura

Riccardianus 46, Vahlen

ig

(ed. i)

:

tj

rd

A®

1

16

A®

:

avan-kovv Parisinus 2038 (Ar. de conversione

3

eiii Til

apogr. (confirm. Ar.)

:

eVcira

A®

navium ) 4

:

olovrai

imkovv'

A®

15.

1454^ 17—1454'’ 4

43

the Characters the re are four points to aim

In

There

and foremost, that they shall b e good.

First 15

at.

vl'

,

be an

will

element of character in the play,

if (as has been observed) what a personage says or does reveals a certain moral

purpose; and a good element of character, so revealed

is

Such goodness

good.

woman

type of personage, even in a

one

is

perhaps an

inferior,

Character before us

may

or a slave, though the

and the other a wholly worthless

T^he se c ond poi nt js to

being.

make them

be, say,

manly

but

;

make them

is to

like the reality,

The

appropriate.

priate in a female Character to be manly, third

the purpose

if

possible in every

is

which

it

-

not appro-

is

or clever.

The

not the

same

is

2

3

as their being good and appropriate, in our sense of the

The

term.

throughout

one

fourth ;

even

m ake hem

is to if

for imitation as presenting that

should

still

and the same

consistent

t

man

inconsistency be part of the

before

form of character, he

We

be consistently inconsistent.

have an

in-

stance of baseness of character, not required for the story, in

the Menelaus

befitting

in

in

of the incongruous and

Orestes',

the lamentation

of

in

and of inconsistency

in

the (clever) speech of Melanippe

;

Iphigenia at Aulis, where Iphigenia the suppliant

The

unlike the later Iphigenia. in

un-

Ulysses in Scylla, and

right

thing,

is

utterly

however,

the Characters just as in the incidents of the play

endeavour always

after the necessary or the

probable

;

is. to!

so that

whenever such-and-such a personage says or does suchand-such a thing,

outcome

of his

follows on

that,

it

sh all be the probable oy necessary

character it

'shall be

probable consequence of for a

moment)

of the plot

that the

itself,

and whenever

;

it.

either

From

the

this

Denouement

this

incident

necessary or the

one sees

(to

digress

also should arise out

and not depend on a

stage-artifice, as in

Medea, or in the story of the (arrested) departure of the

Greeks

in

the

Iliad.

The

matters outside the play

knowledge,

artifice

— for

or events yet

to

must be reserved

past events beyond

come,

which

for

human

require to be

~

^

-

15

44 5

1454

-

ivpoayopeva-ews

deiron

'’

OlboTTobc

Tw ^o(pOKkeovs.

Kal yap eKelvoi

e^ovras

ravra

dvdyKqs

e^

yap

Kal

ev

ovras

dvayvMpl(Tews,

yp&vrai crvp(f)VTa,

TM

ev

OLOVs

rd pev

ev

oiov ev

TOVTOis ypr^crOai rljs

ovki]S

virb

T(dv

30 rrep

r]

avjSoTStv

ev

rf]

Tvpoi bid

jdekriov

r)

ai

roiavrai

nkeia-rp

?|

rovroiv be ra pev

”

be

darepas

^

Kal rovrayv

eKTos,

rd

rrepi-

yeipov, oiov ( 6 ) ^Obvacrevs

bid

rrda'ai,

rois NiTrrpoty,

Kal

Kal

ydp

elal

elbrj l 6

ecrriv 8 e

dkk(os dveyvioplirOr]

Kal

repai,

r)

eipprai

-nporepov'

e'TriKTrjra,

rd

ovkai,

oiov

a-iapari,

be

'noir]TLKfp

iKavios.

Tpyeveis

d^opovai

Kal

ra Trapa

rrj

dreyvordTp

»/

KapKivos, rd

Qvea-Tr] rip

35 bepaia Kal

etpjjrai

bid tS>v a-rjpeiwv.

7;

iroielv

rtokkdKis'

pev eariv,

“ kdyyrjv ^v

oiov

al(rdr]areLi

kdyois

pev

roiavra

to.

rovrois

eKbebopevocs

ri

opolovi

emeiKels

irphs

dpaprdveiv

eariv

Trpwrrj

diropLav,

bi

koI

aKokovOovaas

rots

rpayip-

rj

rbv 'Ay^ikkea 'AydOwv

biarppeiv,

’AvayveipicLs be 30 8e

rdkka

roiovrovs otov

rip

Kal rbv TTOiprrjv pi.pov-

ovrco

i]dS>v

avrds

Kar avrOiv

rrepl

ev

ayaOovs elKovoypd-

roi/s

Kal

bi]

to

oiov

ti]v Iblav pop(f)r]v

paOvpovs

crKkpporrjTos],

5 "Opr]pos.

ras

r 5>v

errl

[rrapabeLypa

8e

pipeicrSai

Kal

opyCkovs

Kal

eivai ev tols irpa-

be plppa-LS eariv

ambibovres

ambC-

yap

airavTa

p.rjbev

Tpay(pbCas,

rrjs

ypa^ovaiv

TTOLOvvres Kakklovs

pevov

ayyeAtas’

eirel

fiekrtovcov, 'ppas bei

10 (f)ovs'

^

e^w

el

bia

1454*’ 30

aXoyov 8e

yp-aaiv,

p/],

—

Kai

bopev TOLS dfOLS opav. be

5

(TKd(pr]s.

rijs

virb

ai

rijs

pev

ai

jBekrlovs.

be

Tpo(f)Ov

•nlo-Teois e/c

Kal

dkku>s

eveKa dreyvd-

TrepiTrerelas,

bevrepai

be

ai

dlxr-

rrenoi-

A®

14 napabeiypa aKkifporijras seclusit Ritter 15’ brf A® bei vel 817 Set apogr. ayaBau A® 20 17 ra Trapa rds vel rds trapa ra apogr. : racr irapd rda A® 22 (f)opovaip A® trktirTTr) A® 24 irepibepaia Parisinus 2038 26 o trepibeppea A® 25 oiov apogr. (confirm. Ar,) ; 01 A® 7 to]

TO)

pr.

’Ayddayu apogr.

:

:

:

addidi

5—

15- 1454'’

1454” 30

45

Gods know everything. There should be nothing improbable amo^tlie actuals incidents. If it be unavoidable, however, announced

foretold or

;

since

it

is

the privilege of the

to

it

should be outside the tragedy, like the improbability in

But to return

the Oedipus of Sophocles.

As Tragedy

is

we

ordinary man,

good

to the Characters.

an imitation of personages better than the in

portrait-painters,

of a man, and at the

our way should follow the example of

who reproduce same

the distinctive features

time, without losing the likeness,

make him handsomer than he is. The poet in portraying men quick or slow to anger, infirmities of character, must know how to as such, and at the

Homer have

and

in like

manner,

or with similar

represent them

same time as good men,

as

Agathon

represented Achilles.

mind throughout, and

All these rules one must keep in

further, those also for such points of stage-effect as directly

depend on the

make

often

art of the poet, since in these too

mistakes.

one may

Enough, however, has been said on

the subject in one of our published writings.

As

Discovery in general has been explained already. for the species of Discov^cv^^e least artistic

form of

it,

first to

be noted

of which the poets

is (i)

the

make most use

through mere lack of invention. Discovery by signs or marks.

Of

these signs

some are

congenital,

like

which the Earth-born have on them,’ or

16

the

1

‘lance-head

‘stars,’

such as

Carcinus brings in in his Thyestes ; others acquired after birth

—these latter being either marks

on the body,

e. g. scars,

or

external tokens, like necklaces, or to take another sort of instance, the ark in the

however,

scar of Ulysses it

is

made

in

is

in

is

an instance

Even

these,

the

Discovery using signs as a means of assu-

whereas one bringing them is

;

;

less artistic, as indeed are all

Bath-story,

Tyro.

the Discovery of him through one way by the nurse and in another by the

A

swineherds. ranee

Discovery

admit of two uses, a better and a worse

in

of a better order.

all

such as imply reflexion

of a sudden, as

Next

after

in

these are

;

the (2)

i

j

4

i6. 1454'’

46 tov

r^ixivai VTTO

iroiiqTov, hio

€TncrTo\rjs, €K(lvos

35 ovy^ 6 pvdos'

8e

n

dio

avTos

Xiyn h

eyyvs

Trjs

1455 ^

piadyaav. 5

bn

ns

bpoLos

QeobkKTOv 10 Awrat.

’AA/cti/ov

Kal y lloAutSoT; tov aocpLCTTOv irepl Tys

avT^

koI

a-vpjBalvei

Tyv etpappkvyv

ibova-ai

TO

15 ku)p6,KeL,

kv roorw

ort

ws

by

avT&v

1455^ (iTTo

TTpaypaTOiv

I

Tyrwhitt ividai(r

Bedrpov

:

yvdcreaOai 0

oo)(

roorou

bia

ytyvopkvys

:

4

bi

eiKo-

:

wokvtidova

A® A®

A®

13

TroXvet'Sov

:

:

:

fit’

:

A®

xkoycj) 6 poi(T

apogr.

A°

6

noXnific/o

10 iiveibms Reiz

:

Hermanno)

:

Bursian (praeeunte

Barepov

to pev] 6 piv apogr.

1

15 by Tyrwhitt

:

Xoy(f>6pots Victorias

Vahlen (confirm. Ar.) 2038 nky^ttocr A® :

avv-

;

A®

Xoyaiv

kfpy

/cat

’Obvaaei rw

fit’ drt kyyva- A® fito eyyi'y 35 bi6 rt kyyiis scripsi a'icrOeadal A^ 37 y rplry Spengel : yroi ryi 2 dnokuyco Parisinus 2038 rots Mardanus 200 rya A“

addicii

Vahlen

Tip

bk /SeArto-rrj avayva>pL(TLs y k^

Ttacribv

Tys kKirky^ews

tS>v

kv

airoBavdi’

bk rts

avayvoypiovvTos

kKslvov

TTOiyaai -napakoyiapos.

Tt

etpapTO

etrrti/

to pkv yap [ro] to^ov bk

Kal

yap tov totiov avve-

Trapakoyia-pov tov OaTepov, olov kv Tip

\l/(vbayyek(p‘

316

dveadai.

ort y r’

kk6wv ws (vpya-wv vlbv avTos airok-

ort

Kat y kv rots i>iV€ibais’

e/c

aveyvcu-

oOev

kba.Kpva-€v,

avTats, Kal yap k^sTkOyaav kvTavda.

OeTy

anoAoycp, clkovwv

yap tov 'OpkaTyv avkXoyiaaaOaL

et/cos

Ti/ 6 et,

koyicravTO

AiKaioykvovs, IbAv yap

kXykvdev, bpoios 8 e ovOels aAA’ y 6 'Opkarys,

kTvdy

abekcjyy

rj

aladicrdai

tu>

8 e y kK (rvWoyia-pov, olov kv Xorjt^o'poty,

ovTos apa kKykvOev. ’l(f>iy€veCas‘

pvyprjs,

8 ta

pvyadels

Kal

nrapry

rw 2 o<^OKAeovs Typei

iv

/cat

rptrrj

Tyv ypacpyv enKava-ev, Kal y kv

yap TOV KLdapKTTov

rr}

r>}?

^SovAerai o Trot^/n/s aAA’

Kvirpiois rots

kv

y

kKnvij pev yap bia

dpppivps apaprias earLv,

rijs

y

(f)wv)],

rt IbovTa, ojcrTrep

17

oiov ( 6 ) ’OpeVrj/s iv

'Opea-rrjs-

yap av ^via Ka\ (veyKelv. KepKibos

are^vot,

on

avsyvdpiaev

'l(f)iy€Vfiq

31—1455^

to alterum

om. apogr.

16 irapakoyicrpoi Riccardianus 46, A® 17 e’/c/rX/j^etoi Parisinus

n-apaXoyto-ftdy tiKovroiv

A®

;

1454^ 31-1455^ 17

i6.

made

Discoveries

for that very reason

Iphigenia

Orestes

made

is

This, therefore,

EMscovery

she

by the

is

mem ory,

through

A

(3)

from

is

the ‘shuttle’s

third

of

man

the

;

burst into

tears

and

;

One

the Discovery of

like

me

is

here

;

Thus

The

in

reminded of the past and

is

them being the

there

is

result.

e.g. in

;

no one

like

(4)

A

fourth

here.’

Or

Sophist suggested for Iphigenia to reflect

‘My

:

be sacrificed like her.’

me

but Orestes

'

I

came

to find a son,

The Phinidae fate,

:

that they

exposed there.

(5)

is,

and

too,

I

for

am

to

Tydeus of Theodectes

women

to die there, since

There

was natural

Or

to die myself.’

on seeing the place the

were

it

sacrificed,

that in the

and am

which Polyidus the

since

was

sister

Or

;

that

:

that in

inferred their

they had also been

a composite

Discovery

arising from

bad reasoning on the side of the other party.

An

of

instance

said he should

it

is

know

in

the

Ulysses the False Messenger-,

bow — which he had

but to suppose from that that he would

though he had once seen

it)

‘Z

The Choephoroe ;

must be

he, therefore,

Orestes

^

Tale of Alcinous,

the

in

kincTi s^iscovery through reasoning ‘

is

Dicaeogenes, the sight of the picture makes

hearing the harper Ulysses

weeps

species

man’s consciousness

a

being awakened by something seen or heard. Cyprioe

letter,

not far removed

is

Another instance

Tercus of Sophocles.

in the

2_-

since he might have presented

fault,

certain tokens as well.

voice

who

sister reveals

from the first-mentioned

’

inartistic

say himself what the poet rather than

to

story demands.

the

which are

;

Orestes’ Discovery of himself in

e. g.

;

whereas his

:

by the poet

directly

47

know

it

was bad reasoning.

he

not seen again (as (6)

best of all Discoveries, hpwever, is that arising from

The the

^

:

48

1455^ 18—17. 1455*’ 6

i6.

rw ^o
dlov TO fv

Tcoi>,

yap iSovXfcrdaL

6tKoj

Kal

ypappara.

kirideivai

*0 povai avev t5>v -nivoippivm!

Oi8i77o8t

^l(f>Ly€ve[a’

TT}

yap Toiamai

al

(rppemv Kal bepaCwv.

bevrepai

8e at EK (Tv\Xoyi(Tp.ov.

Aet 8e rows p,v0ovs

bn

ya^Ecrdai

juaAtora

av EvapyicTTara 25 TTpaTTOpEVOlS

30

iXavdavEV,

vdvT(ov

TOVTO TOiV

EKCTTaTlKOl Sfi

paviKov’

?/

TOVS

eIcLV.

tov

hva-yEpa-

Kal rots drro

Trjs

avTijs

Kal \EipaivEL 6 )(^Etpa^6pEl’0'S

dArj^twcorara.

TOVTwv yap TE

e^etteo-ev

yap

-mdavutTaToi, eIcTIV,

av

opiavT

ju.rj

bvvaTov

8e

kavdaVOl

ttV

eTrert/xaro Kapjctwo).

(TKrjVTjs

b(ra

yap

ovtco

yLyvopEVos rots

l]KL(TTa

o

avr]Ei,

rijs

opyi^opEVos

koyOVS

Evipvovs

bib

pEV EvirkacTToi

ot

f]

ol 8e

rows TTETTOippEVOVS

Kal

Kat avTov TTOiovvTa EKTidEudai KaQokov, eW’ owrtos ettekt-

obiovv Kal 'napaTELVEiv bkov,

dlov

ydypav, ev T1]V

r?5s

f]

kiyw

.

’I^tyewetas"

d8rjAws

via-dELcrps 5

8e

ettI

dEUTm'.

o

TToirjTiKri EiTTiv

*455

Upov

e^

EV rOtS TTa^ffTtW

\a\E7TaivEi

Kal

Kal

TTpETTOV

(TwaTTEpya^opEvov

cfiVCTEMS ol

tlOepevov

appEiov 8e rowrou o

dsaTpv

pacnv

TO

EVpiCTKOl

yap 'Aptpiapaos

o

bpipanov

Trpb

Ke^el avvaTiEp- 17

Trj

bpSiv wcniEp Trap’ awrots

[6]

ra vnEvavTia.

[ro]

Kal

crvvL
rots

vopos

i)v

lEpOiaVVpV

bE owrcos av OEcopEiadai ro KaO-

rw^etVrjs rtwds

dva-anv,

Koprjs

IbpvvdEia-ps

tovs ^evovs 6veiv

8e

Kal

dcpa-

dkkpv

ets

0ew, TavTpv ecrye

Trj

eXBeiv

VlTTEpOV T(b dbEk(l)(b avvElSp

20 bipEcov A® rrEpibepamv apogr. 24 om. Parisinus 2038 25 kavdtivoi to A®: 'KavdavoiTO apographa plura (ro Vahleno teste deletum est in nonnullis) 26 ewfTifiaTo marg. Riccardiani 16 (confirm. Ar.) (niTipa rai A® 18 ro scrips!

fvepytarara

:

6

A®

A®

:

o

:

27

di/^ft

Guelferbytanus (confirm. Ar.)

Vahlen: opuira A® Riccardianus 46 e^EToa-TiKol

cnfKTobiov

A® A®

(et

:

dir]

A®

opwvr dv

A®

31

Paccius in versione

TOVS Tf Parisinus 2038 2 nnpaTfiveiv

dv

:

;

34 EKuraTiKoi

confirmare videtur Ar.) tovtovo- re

Riccardianus 46

:

A®

1455

TTEpiTtivtiv

A®

**

l

:

1455^ 18 -17. 1455'’ 6

i6.

when

incidents themselves,

the great surprise comes about

through a probable incident,

Sophocles

and also

;

49

that

like

in Iphigenia

for

;

it

Oedipus of

the

in

was not improbable home. These

that she should wish to have a letter taken

are

last

only Discoveries independent of the

the

Next

of signs and necklaces.

artifice

them come Discoveries

after

through reasoning.

At the time when he gaged on the Diction

remember

poet should

constructing his Plots, and en- 17 out, the

is

which they are worked

in

to_put the actual _scenes as far_

(i)

In this way, seeing everything

^^losaible before his eyes. with the vividness of an devise what

is

eye-witness as

were, he will

it

appropriate, and be least likely to overlook

This

incongruities.

is

shown by what was censured

Carcinus, the return of Amphiaraus from the sanctuary;

would have passed unnoticed, seen by the audience

;

if

may

but on the stage his play failed, the

be, too, the poet should

even act

be

will

the

he who

most

instance, are portrayed

them

at

the moment.

a marLwithh ^ special

madness in him mood, and the emotion. his

(3)

;

gift for

it,

and anger,

distress

;

truthfully

Hence

may

it

by one who that

is

feeling

poetry demands

or else one with a touch of

story, again,

whether already made or of

first

simplify

and reduce

universal form, before proceeding to lengthen

of episodes.

The

following will

universal element in Iphigenia, for instance,

A certain

is

for

be actually beside himself with

own making, he should

insertion

As

the former can easily assume the required

latter

His

most

(2)

story wit h

emotions to be described

feels the

convincing

^s

Given the same natural

the very gestu res of his perso nages. qualifications,

it

had not been actually

it

incongruity of the incident offending the spectators. far as

in

maiden having been offered

it

to a

out by the

show how

may

in sacrifice,

the

be viewed

and

spirited

away from her sacrificers into another land, where the custom was to sacrifice all strangers to the Goddess, she was made there the priestess of this POETICS

rite.

Long

after that the brother

£

50 Trjs

on

Upetas, to be

10 TrCbrjs

evTevOev

Kai

ovopaTa

eireKTobiovv'

olov

rw

ev

TypCa

Tys

bid

pavia

y

KaOdpcreios.

eTTeiaobia crvvTopa, y

eorat

8e

ottods

’Opeor?/

8’ eTTOTTotia

eXyepOy

TToAAd

eTy

Kat

30

paTa

VITO

TTapa(f)v\aTTopevov

rwv

ert 8 e

keveadai, avTos

frtmsf avTos

be

e^
AotTrdr

y

evia

Awts

nocret8(32'os

Kat

tov

vibv

Kai

eaiady

Kat

ware rd xpyeTTijSov-

drayrwptcras

rods 8 ’ exOpovs

8e

pepovs

becriv

d

pev

Tekovs

—

8eVts, rd

Tyv

elvai

eaTiv

eaxo-Tov

* *, kvaiv 8e Tyv

veiv els evTvxiav pdxP<-

eawdev iroWaKis y

tS>v

—Aeyw

pexpi TovTov TOV

j^daecos

Tys yap

pev 8eVts rd 8e Avats, rd 18

rpay(i)8tas rd

’'Ecrrt 8e Trdarjs

pev

rd

rd pev ovv Ibiov tovto, Ta 8 ’ dAAa eTreicrdbia.

bie(f)6eipe.

25

tov

inro

eTTiOepevos avTos pev

(tm-

y

diTobypovvToi tivos

xeipaadeis,

defyiKveiTai

to.

bpdpacnv

tois

oikoi ovtios eyovTU>v

dvakiaKeadai

pvyoTTypuiv

otc

eireicrobta,

Kai

tovtois pyKVveTai.

’Obvaaeias {ov) paKpbs d Adyos ecTiv'

povov dvTos,

eiTTwr

rd

o'lKeia

pev ovv

ev

Evpi-

ws'

eiQ' e'lKOi

yh] viroOevTa

8e

ys

bi

ekddiv

avTov ebei Tvdpvai,

Kat

raCra

peTO.

(TOiTrjpia.

[efw tov

alr'iav

tov pvdov

l^o)

Kara to

dAAa

dbebippv

Ti]v

p

nva

dveyvidpiirev,

emipa-ev,

IToAi^tSos

ovK dpa povov

8e

0 rt

e<^’

Ovecrdai pieKkcov

ws

ei6^

1455” 30

aveiKev 6 debs bid

Ka^oAow] eKdeiv eKei koI be Kai XpefiOels

15

7—

17- 1455’’

dir'

dpxys

e^ ov peTajSai-

dirb rf/s dp^T/s r?)s

wcnrep ev rw

8e

peTa-

AvyKei rw SeobeKTOv

30 8eVts pev Td re irpoTveirpaypeva Kai y tov iraibiov ky\j/ii Kai

10 rroXieibocr 15 7 €^a> TOV KaOoXov seclusit Duentzer bpdpaa-i apogr. : appaa-iv A° 17 ov add. Vulcanius (confirm. piKpos

Ar.) Ar.)

;

fTTU

(jTvp^aivei bvcTTVxias

apogr.

A° rj

19

22 rtydr] els

bvarvxlavy

(Tvp^aivei

y

e^

apogr. (confirm. Ar.)

:

(ut

XvKel

els

A°

Riccardianus 16 (confirm, 28 els evrvxlnu

on

videtur)

evrvxlos

^els SvaTVxlov avp^aivei

ert

fort,

els

evrvxlnv

Ar.

:

els

Svarvxlai/y

Gomperz

evTvxiav coni.

Vahlen

:

29 XvyKel

;

17.

H55”

7—

1455”

come

of the priestess happened to

3°

the

;

51

fact,

and

On

his object in going, are outside the

his

sister

‘

So

am doomed

too

I

was’; and the disclosure led

as a basis for the story, is to

his arrest,

to

salvation.

work

my

This

to his salvation.

names have been

,

fixed

in episodes or accessory

One must mind, however,

appropriate, like the

Euripides puts

as

to be sacrificed, as

done, the next thing, after the proper

incidents.

to be sacrificed,

Polyidus) by the not improbable

or (as suggested by

it,

exclamation,

thither,

Plot of the play.

coming he was arrested, and about

when he revealed who he was— either

however, of

him go

the oracle having for a certain reason bidden

that the episodes are

of madness in Orestes, which led

fit

and the purifying, which brought about his

In plays, then, the episodes are short; in epic

The argucertain man has

poetry they serve to lengthen out the poem.

ment of the Odyssey

many

been abroad for

him, and he

come

to

this,

years

is

A

not a long one.

is

all

Poseidon

;

alone.

is

ever on the watch

home

Matters at

too have

and his

that his substance is being wasted

Then he

son’s death plotted by suitors to his wife.

arrives

there himself after his grievous sufferings

;

and

his salvation

falls

on his enemies

their death.

to

it is

be borne in mind.

and

in part

scene,

;

This being

everything else in

and the end

(4)

There

Every tragedy

Denoupment

reveals himself,

proper

all that is

episode.

is

is in

is

and

to the Odyssey,

a further point

and often certain also of those within the play,

forming the Complication

By Complication

I

mean

;

all

to the point just before the

by Denouement, the end.

all

arid

3

part Complication

the incidents before the opening

;

i

the rest the Denouement.

from the beginning of the story

change in the hero’s fortunes

from the beginning of the change

to

In the Lynceus of Theodectes, for instance, the

Complication includes, together with the presupposed E 2

inci-

A

:

52

31—1456^

I8. 1455’’

Tiakiv

avrOiV, (Averts) 8’

r]

yap

ra

Kal

eAe)(0r;),

p.ipr]

^

Kal ol 'l^loves,

baa ev

Kal

paaOai exeiv, 5 Kat

Kal

3>v

TTkoKr]

Trotrjrwv,

keyeiv Kal

8e

taws rw p.v6w

ovbevl

ttoAAoI

Averts.

8e

det

KpaTetadai.]

Kal

p-rj

—

noietv

TO

prjKos

rots

15 8e

petov

baot

pepos wairep

7)

bkrjv

M.

ev be Tats

Schmielt

(airayayr], Averts S’

brj

q')

av-

cnzo^aivei,

eiroLrjaav

Kal

eirel

Averts

coni.

Vahlen

—

KaTa

pr]

Alayvkos,

koI

e^e-

ev rots

be ^ Parisinus :

ev arj-

Kal ’Ayddcov

izepiireTetais

—

yap

CKet pev

TTpemv peyeOos,

VTTokrjTj/LV

KaKws dywvtCovTai,

31 Tvakiv obelo notat bq A®:

ttjv

’lAtov

Treaev ev tovtw pdvw'

oirep

eTTOiTOUKOv

EvpLTztbrjs, (?)) NLofSrjv Kal pr] wairep

eKTTtTTTovaiv

7)

Tzepaiv

to

pepr]

to.

bpdpaai ttoAv Tzapa

be,

be

xpl]

be keyco [8e] rd irokvpvdov

eTTOirouKov

kapjidveL

tovto

TrAe^avres ev

otov et rts tov ttjs ’lAtexSos okov noiot pvdov.

bia

Tpayiobtav

Kat

ajae^eo

8e

Tpaywbiav

aT-pp.a

eKaarov tov ibtov ayadov [8t/catov

p-ep-vyjadai

bet

TiokkaKLS

irei-

yeyovorcov yap Kad'

TrotTjras'

vireplSakkeiv. avTi]v

rr/v

KttKws'

etprjTai

0

teat

ra p-eyiara Kal -nketara, aAAcos re

p,r],

dya6S>v

eva

avTT]

7]

10 kvovai

otov at 4>0t&)rt8es

p-dkiara piev ovv airavra bet

qbov,

be

el

p.epos

TOV

d^Lovai dkki]v

be TraOrjTLKrj, otov ol re

fj

ridiKi],

ws vvv avKO(f)avTovaLV tovs

eKaarov

be,

be

^s ro dXov

Tie'nk.^yp.ivr],

to be reraprov o\}ns, otov at re
rirjAevs* p.r]6evs

r)

rea-crapa {roaavTa

etSrj etert

pLev

iarlv TreptireVeta Kal dvayvatpia-LS,

1456^ Aiavres

tov davarov

airb rrjs alrida-fws

r]

* * rpayt^hias 8e

reAovs.

’’0^

19

2038

bqiktaais, kvais

:

b' fj^

33 excieiisse 1456® 7-10 {biKoiov KparelaBai) vieiit Susemihl 1456^ 2 Teraprou oe/rts scripsi (cf. aei 33 Kai rd] Kara Tucker 1458^ 5): Teraprov bqa A®: Teparoabes SchraeJer 4 aKkas re 6 eTeicrrov Parisinus 2038 apegr. (confirm. Ar.) : dAX’ S>a ye A® Christ

:

A® A®

eKaarov olbev

8 ovSev't Tyrwhitt (in versione) 7 v. aei 1455*’ 32 10 Kpareiadai Vahlen (confirm. Ar.) : KporetaBai A®

12 be alterum om. apogr.

A®

17

r)

aeld.

Vahlen

18 dyadwv pr.

(et Ar.)

¥

i8.

31-1456 ^ 19

1455

dents, the seizure of the child

and the Denouement

I^ow

and that

53

in turn of the

parents

;

from the indictment for the murder

all

when one speaks of a tragedy as the same or not the same as another, to do so on the ground before all else of their Plot, e. as having the same or not the same Complication and Denouement. Yet there are many dramatists who, after a good Complication, fail in to the end.

is right,

it

i.

But

Denouement.

the

necessary for both points o f

is

it

construction to be always duly mastered!^rl5)^There~are

Tragedy

four distinct species of

— that

being the number of

the constituents also that have been mentioned-:^_firat,_the

complex Tragedy, which

is

Peripety and

^11

second, the Tragedy of suffering,

Tragedy of character,

third, the

Peleus.

e. g.

The

fourth constituent

Disco very

;

the Ajaxes and Ixions

;

The Phthiotides and

e. g.

that of

is

'

Spectacle,’ ex-

emplified in The Phorcides, in Prometheus, and in

with the scene laid in the nether world. then,

T he

all

plays

p oet’s aim.

should b e to combine every element of inte rest,

po ssibleT^ or else, the q{_Jhex»r This

is

if

more important and the mai o^jpart

now

especially necessary

unfair criticism to which the poet

is

owing

to

the

subjected in these days.

Just because there have been poets before him strong in the

several

the one

man

species

of

tragedy,

the

of each one of his predecessors.

member what has been

said

it),

by attempting

the entire story of the Ib’ad.

every part

is

on the same story the result is

of Ilium in

fact that

Euripides, or the whole of the

success on the stage

;

also

for instance,

either

for that

all

;

is

scale

very disappointing.

who have dramatized

Niobe fail

its

with a drama, how-

and not part by

its entirety,

portion, like Aeschylus,

expect

one with a plurality

In the epic owing to

This

fall

(i.e.

to dramatize,

ever,

the

One should

(6)

treated at proper length

shown by the

now

more than once, and not write

a tragedy on an epic body of incident

of stories in

critics

which was the strong point

to surpass that

story,

utterly or

part, like

instead of a

have but

ill

and that alone was enough

tlLui, f

;

1456® 20—19. 1456” 6

i8.

54 30 ctTrAois

&v

crroya^ovTaL

TTpdyjjLaai

^ovKovrai

TpayiKOV yap tovto Kal (^iXavOpoiirov. 6

a-o(f)6s

Kal

(Pos,

6

vi^ecrdai

euTiv

rpaywStas 30 'AydOoivos

eiKos

yap

yCvecrOat

eva

8e

tovto

8e

ttoXXo.

VTToka-

Set

Kal p.6pLov eXvai tov oKov Kal avvayu)-

dAA’

EvptTrtSj;

tov

ep^okipa

bid

tolovtov.

&aTTep

rots

'^ocpoKkel.

biaipepei

rt

akko appoTTOi

els

akkrjs

ap^avTos

Trpwrou

abovcriv

kuCtoi

e^ akkov

pfjo-iv

el

7]

ea-TLV

rd abopeva {ovbev) pakkov tov pvdov ^

AotTTOts

abeiv

&a-nep

p.r]

TjTTr]9fj'

yopbv

^lav-

cocTrep

be

tov

Kal

eiKos.

tS)v vTTOKpLT&v,

l3eXv

\eyei,

*

tovtu, brav

ea-riv be

i^aTraTrjOrj,

(S’)

abcKOS

p.ev

'AyaOonv

to

Ttapa

35 Kal

Se

avbpe'LOS

&aTrep

elKos

irovqpias

p.fTa

p.ev

davpaarios

ep^okipa

rj

eTTeicrobiov

rj

bkov riept

Ae^ecos

teat

pev ovv Tutv dkkwv

iibr]

biavolas

pev ovv

elirelv,

to.

peOobov.

eVrt

Kara

Se

1456

ekeov

7)

Kal

to

epdfSov

^

piKpoTpTa.

Kal

avTidv

tS)V

peydka

rj

ort

5 (pepei,

kveiv

brjkov

Ibewv

Set

elKdra

bep

rd

22 be add. Riccardianus 16 eiKos Sxrnep

Riccardianus 46

Madius (confirm. Ar.) (confirm.

34

KOI

Parisinus 2038

4

bej]

33 (et

fort. :

8’

Ar.) ^

:

A®

:

^

piKpoTtjTaa

beivci

Toaovrov

bibacrKakias,

A®

Kal

rj

bia-

rd

Se

rrapd

24 (koI) 28 abopem

Ar. ovbev

:

dno

’npdypaaiv

ekeeivd

rjTTrjdt]

A® A® ^ A®

rjb'

(confirm. Ar.)

Paiisinus 2038

avev

{oXov

peyeQos

ert

TrapaaKevd^ecQai

23

^'84]

rots

Trkijv

et (ut videtur)

StSo/ieva

:

Ar.)

Hermann

rj

rrapaa-KevdCeiv

rw Ao'yw vno tov keyovTOS

ev

ev

Kat

(paCveirOai

TiapacKevd^eiv

rotaora) Kat

OTav

Set

p.ev

ort

be

irdOr]

oo'a

kuI

vtto

Se tovtwv to re aTro-

ptep»j

to

Kal

opyrjv

oVa

raora,

bidvoiav

ttjv

TOV kdyov Set TrapaaKevaa-Ofjvai. beiKvvvai

bidvoiav ev

Trjv

rrepl

rrepl

tovto yap ibiov pdkkov eKelvrjs

35 rots Tiepl prjTopiKijs Ke'iaOiv T7]s

konrov be

eXprjTai,

elbSiv

(ut

add. Vahlen videtur)

Ar.

1456** 2 o-piKporrjTa

A®

3

elbeS>v

A®

ig

^

6

1456^ 20—19. 1456

i8. to ruin

Yet

even a play by Agathon.

also in their simple plots, the poets skill in

aiming

(e.

human

feeling

g. Sis3’phus) deceived, or

This

doer worsted.

in their Peripeties, as

mean show wonderful

kind of effect they desire

at the

situation that arouses the

clever villain

I

55

in

—a

tragic

one, like the

the brave wrong-

probable, however, only in Agathon’s

is

when he speaks of the probability of even improbabilities to pass. (7) The Chorus too should be regarded as

sense,

coming

one of the actors

;

should be an integral part of the

it

whole, and take a share in the action— that which in

Sophocles rather than in Euripides.

With

it

has

the later poets,

however, the songs in a play of theirs have no more to do

Hence

with the Plot of that than of any other tragedy. it

that they are

is

first

now

singing intercalary’ pieces, a practice

And

introduced by Agathon.

yet what real difference

is

there between singing such intercalary pieces, and attempting to

fit

in a speech, or

even a whole

act,

from one play into

another ?

The

Plot and Characters having been discussed,

to consider the Diction and Thought.

we may assume what as

it

is

said of

it

in

As

for the

it

remains 19

Thought,

our Art of Rhetoric,

belongs more properly to that department of inquiry.

The Thought

of the personages

be effected by their language

shown

is

—in

in

everything to

every effort to prove or

disprove, to arouse emotion (pity, fear, anger, and the

or to maximize or minimize things. their mental

It

is

procedure must be on the same lines in their

actions likewise,

whenever

they’

wish them

to

arouse pity-

or horror, or have a look of importance or probability’.

only difference

is

The

that with the act the impression has to

be made without explanation it

like),

clear, also, that

;

whereas with the spoken word

has to be produced by the speaker, and result from his

language.

What, indeed would be the good of the speaker,

;

Tov koyov yiyvecrdaL.

rC

(^aivoiTO

bia rbv koyov;

ev

^LV

TO

7—20. 1456

ig. 1456’'

56

fi

beoL koI

pev

e(TTLV

a eariv elbevat ros

eiBo?

Kal

yap av

eTTiTiprjpa

be 6ed ”

ro yap Kekevaai,

;

bib

ecTTLV.

Kal

Kal

evyi]

rt

ws

irapela-dco

CTrtrarret

dkkTjs

o-ttov-

h

Upcdrayopai

elircov

“ prjviv aet-

iroLeiv

rt

ov

Kal

rt

ei

a^iov

Kal

ripapTija-dai

cji-paCv,

Kal

81?/-

ayvoiav ovbev

7]

6 rt

eyov-

Kal

a.TTOKpi.a-LS

(f)epeTai

inTokdjSoi

rts

r?)s

kul tov ttjv roiavT-qv

epdr-paris

ort evyeadai olopevos

eTTiTipa,

ay^para

ra

evrokij

tl

el

tS>v 8 e irepl rpv ke-

-napa yap ttjv tovtcov yvSxriv

'7T0Lr]TLK7]v

rt

15 bijs.

Kal

aTTeikr]

aAAo TOLOVTOV. TTjv

olov

tov kiyovTOi epyov,

eir)

Oecopias

inroKpLTiKrjs

rrjs

apyiTeKTOvLKpv,

yrja-is

eh

pp

yap av

32

**

eiriTa^h

jut)

7]

T7]S

TrotrjrtK?/?

oit

OedpTjpa.

T^s

20

Ae^etos

a-ndcnqs

aokka/dT]

crvvbeapos

dpOpov

aroiyeTov

pev

dkk'

e^

6-qplwv ic^yeiov.

8e

7]s

•7Te(f)VKe

ravTTjs be

eariv

dKov(TT7]v,

(jxxivpv

aK0va'T7)V,

T&v eyovTOiv riva ro

A.

ro'TTOt?

olov rb

8 (paivoiTo Carolus

S

Bigg

Kal

pera

ro

8e

Kat ro

P,

:

(ryjipaaiv xj/ikoTTjri

epavoiro

A°

re Kal

r'j

row

Castelvetrus

eyov

pera

be

F

Kat

cTToparos

pTjKei

Kal

Kal

[dpayv-

Vahlen (ed. 2) A°: in codice post

biOL

positum hue transtulit Spengel (confirm. Ar.) 26 ro add. Reiz (et Ar.)

apogr.

ijbr]

Kal

rb pera

be

(poov^v,

pripa

:

crrot-

rjpLTpaivov

aefxvvov

A°

Ar.)

keyoi

TrpoajSokTjs

Tjbea

(et

be

yap r&v

yivopevov aKovarov, olov rb

biaefiepei

baavTTjTi

ro

Kal

Trdaa

Kal

cpcovri’

pev ovbepiav eypv

<^(VV7]V

ov

ovbepiav

(pcovijev

koyos.

pev (ro) dvev irpocr^okijs ^yov

(f)Ctivf]ev

ravra be Kal

&v

(TTOLyeiov

TtreocrLS

abiaCpeTos,

(jxovaC,

re

pepT],

pf]pa

yLyveaQai

rjpCejxvvov

avrb

Kad'

ovopa

ejicovl]

pepr] to

be

^07V7]V

Trpocr(3okrjs

eariv avveri]

dbLaCpeToi

elcrlv

d(f)(j)vov.

30

ovv

ra

earl

rdb’

21 (Wpov

23

a-vvOerrj

20

; ;

7—20.

ig. 1456’’ if

appeared

things

As regards head

e. g.

57

the required light even apart from

in

he says?

anj'thing

this

1456'’ 32

is

the

one subject

Diction,

inquiry under

for

when spoken

the turns given to the language

command and

the difference between

prayer, simple

statement and threat, question and answer, and so forth.

The theory

of such matters, however, belongs to Elocution

and the professors of that

Whether

art.

these things or not, his art as a poet

What

cized on that account. '

Sing of the wrath, Goddess

cized as being a to bid

do,

then,

this,

?

fault

he

the poet

knows

never seriously

criti-

can one see in Homer’s

—which

command where

one do or not

pass over

’

is

Protagoras has

criti-

a prayer was meant, since

tells us, is a

as appertaining

command. another

to

Let us

and

art,

not to that of poetry.

The parts

Diction viewed as a whole the

:

is

made up

of the following 20

Letter (or ultimate element), the Syllable, the

Conjunction, the Article, the Noun, the Verb, the Case, and

The

the Speech.

Letter

is

an indivisible sound of a par-

one that may become a factor

ticular kind,

Indivisible sounds are uttered

sound.

but no one of these

is

A vowel

is

intelligible also,

a Letter in our sense of the term.

These elementary sounds are mutes.

an

in

by the brutes

either vowels, semivowels, or

a Letter having an audible sound without

A

the addition of another Letter.

semivowel, one having

an audible sound by the addition of another Letter ;

S and R.

A

mute, one having no sound

at

all

by

e. g.

itself,

but becoming audible by an addition, that of one of the Letters which have a sound of ,

e. g.

D

and G.

The

Letters

some

differ

in

sort

of their

own

various ways:

as

produced by different conformations or in different regions of the

mouth

;

as aspirated, not aspirated, or sometimes one

L

33— H57^

20. 1456’^

58 8e

eVt

r?)rt

Kal

o^vrrjrc

rw

kuI

fiapvT'ijTi

i8 jueVo)'

KaO' eKaarov [ey] rots /xerptKOts iTpoaj^KeL ^ecopetv. 35 de

^wr?j a(rpp.os

i(TTLv

FPA.

A, dtov TO

avvbeapos

Trotet

peaov],

dtov pev

Toi be'

b-q

ywv pias a-qpavTiKMV (fxjovrjv,

reAos

ra aXXa.

aKpoiv

T
Kal

aqpavTiKq

crvvOeTq

TrecjxvKev

TTOietv

ecrt ejxovq aaqpos

avTO ov 15

avTO

Kad’

ro

apcjxL

KcoXvei

Xoyov apyijv

koI

to

dvopa be

ov

(jxonvqv

Kal

ecrTi

efxovq

e
KaO'

ws Kal

\pd)peda

tm 0eob(6p(p ro b&pov

ev

peTO,

XP^'

qs ovbev pepos orqpatveL KaO' avTO, uxnrep Kal enl tSv

ovopaTwv -n-o're,

ro

TO be

pev yap avOpunros q XevKov ov a-qpatvei ro q jSe^dbiKev TTpoa-a-qpatvet ro pev tov

^abtCei.

TxapeXqXvOoTa.

apovTa XP°^^^

34 tv seclusit Spengel

A®

ptvj pev.

(rqpavTiKoiv

1457 rot scripsi

817

Robortellus

:

:

*^

2-3

qroi.

Kal

TO irepi Kal ra

dXXa

Hartung:

p.

^<^fi^fft :

<^.

l.

7“9

A®

nepi]

apogr. (confirm. Ar.)

irpoappaivei

A®

;

to

dp(j)i

jr.

7. p.

^abi^eiv

b'

eadiv

— pia-ov seclusi

A®

aqpavuKov A®

TTraJcts

8e]

fit.

4

A°

5

6 lacunam indicavi, hue

transferenda esse suspicatus ea quae infra leguntur, otov ro

2038

?)

Kal

irepi

ovTe iroiet

awderq aqpavTiKq

(fxwvq


a-qpavTLKqv

p'lav i)

pepos ovbev

qs

8t7rAots

dtov

(rqpaivov,

tov

TreefxvKVLa TtOecrdaL

tov peaov.

ypovov

yap rots

ev

pqpa be

(rqpatvei.

vov

TT

eirl

avev

avTO (TqpavTiKOV'

eK TTXeiovwv pev

i)

ptav aqpavTLKqv eK TrXeiovcov ejxwvm’] 10 eirl

em

Xbyov Tidevai KaO' avTov,

aaqpos q ovve

(pcovq

q

ov-

-p

-nXeiovMV

e/c

r
e77t

acrqpos

bqXot [otoy

bi.opi,(Tpov

?)

be

8’

bt,a(f)opas

aarjpoi

(fycovi]

tov

p-era

ras

deuippa-at.

be eaTiv

ap\f^

(ovq

?)

* * apdpov

ev

Kal

pLav appavTiKJ]v

(pcovrjv

pp appoTTei

r}V

(TvXXajSx]

tovtcov

koll

avXXa^p

acptovov Kal (jxwvijv exoy-

A

row

TTe
cf)(ov(ai'

5

ovre

KuxXvet

av€v

aXXa

rps p-erpiKps kariv.

1457® re

(twO^tx]

FP

yap to

Kat

ros’

&v

Trept

—

vS>v

1. A® A®

seclusi

dp(f)i

kuI

7 dpe^L

17 Trore Spengel irpocraqpaivei Parisinus

33—1457^ i8

20. 1456’^

and sometimes the other

as

;

59 or of variable

short,

long,

quantity; and further as having an acute, grave, or inter-

The

mediate accent. to the metricians.

(a

A Syllable is a non-significant composite

(2)

made up of

sound,

mute and a Letter having a sound

a

GR,

vowel or semivowel); for

much

a Syllable as

must leave

details of these matters vve

GRA,

without an A,

The

with an A.

is

various forms

of the Syllable also belong to the theory of metre.

Conjunction

sound

significant

a non-significant sound which,

is («)

is

just as

(3)

A

when one

formable out of several, neither hinders

nor aids the union, and which,

if

the Speech thus formed

stands by itself (apart from other Speeches) must not be inserted at the beginning of

it

e. g. ixev,

;

Sy, tol, 8e.

Or

(b)

a non-significant sound capable of combining two or more

sounds into one

significant

Article

is

e. g.

;

irepl,

idea

An

natural place being

its

either at the extremities or in the middle. is

(4)

a non-significant sound marking the beginning,

end, or dividing-point of a Speech,

name

etc.

a composite significant sound parts which

of time, with

A Noun

(5)

or

not involving the

have no significance by

remembered

in

a com-

pound we do not think of the parts as having a

signifi-

themselves in

It is

it.

to be

cance also by themselves instance,

the

Sio/ooi/

;

in

name

the

means nothing

to

us.

‘

that

Theodorus,’ for

A

(6)

Verb

is

a composite significant sound involving the idea of time, with parts which (just as in the Noun) have no significance

by themselves

in

it.

does not imply when, addition to

the

Whereas ‘

walks

’

word ‘man’ or ‘white’

the

and

‘

has walked

idea of walking that

’

involve in

of time present or

:

6o

20. 1457^ 19—21. 1457’’ 4 ovoixaros

pyixaros

y

Kal

20 p-OLVov

y

eiTiTa^LV'

paTos KaTO. TavTa aypavTLKy

to yap e^dbLaev

25 airas

Xoyos

Tov

dvOpdiTTOV

etby

to,

pepy

evia

ys

Kal

dW’

opLcpos,

Kkeeov 6 KXewv.

a-ypalvcov,

20 avvbea-pip

avTO.

ovopaTcov

yap

{ov

olov

(TuyKeLTai,

dvev pypaTwv

e^ei) olov

be ecTi Xoyos

rw

ev

6

elvat j3abl-

biy^s, y yap 6 ev

awbeapep, olov

y

’lAtds

pev

tov dvOpwirov rw ev aypalveiv.

be

6

n

a-ypaivei

evbex^eTai.

nXeLovotv

eK

6

y els,

els

kut'

otov

/3d8t{e tttSxtls py-

y

;

Xoyov, pepos pevToi del tl aypaivov Cei

(ry-

Koyos be (pwvy awdeTy

(cttiv.

Kad'

pypaTcov

eK

ra vTroKpiTiKa,

Kara

8e

avOpcoiros, y

avdpcoTTOt,

epaTycTLV

rovrcp

y be Kara to kvl y ttoWois, olov

Toiavra,

ocra

Kara to tovtov y

pikv

y

’OvopaTos be elby to pev airXovv, duXovv be Xeyco b 21

py eK aypatvovTcov be

TO

ovopaTi

pev

(TvyKeiTai. 2g

eK

aypalvovTOs

(xypalvovTos ely 8’

TroXXairXovv,

olov

Ko^avdos * *.

Kal

tovtov

olov yy, to be biTrXovv'

cdy/cetrat,

Kal

daypov,

irXyv

to

eK

dcrypov,

be

ovk

ev

t5

aypawovTOiV

dv Kal TpnrXovv Kal TeTpairkovv ovopa Kal to.

ttoXXo.

peyaXeicoT&v,

tS>v

ovopa eaTiv

dirav be

'EppoKa’i-

yAwrra y

Kvpiov y

i)

peTacpopd y Koapos y nenoiypevov y eireKTeTapevov y v^y-

pypevov

7

e^yXXaypevov,

eKaaTOL, yXcoTTav be

w

Xeycv

eTepoL'

be

tocrre

Kvpiov

pev w

(pavepbv

y^pStvTai.

Kal

oti.

yAwr-

22 e’/SdSio-ey ;] notam interrogaA® i^dSiCev A° 0 dbi^€ Riccardianus 16 ^abi^eiv A® 27 3 a 8 tfet Parisinus 2038 (confirm. Ar.) 29 awbecrpccv A® (Tvvbecrpa Riccardianus 16 30 T
tionis

:

:

/

:

:

:

:

:

lacunam indicavi addit Ar. qui siipplicabatur doviinuin caelorum nescio an (vel lovem), unde iirev^dpevos Ail -iroTpi restituit Diels 2 dcprjprjpcvov Spengel exemplum lateat nominis quadruplicis ;

20. 1457^ 19—21. 1457” 4 time past. ‘

means

many

‘

(e. g.

in the

A

(7)

of’ or

'

Case of a Noun or Verb

man

mode

and

’

and so

a thing,

’

to

'

men ’)

of utterance,

or

;

e. g.

6i

is

may

it

when

A

in question,

(8)

Speech

merely

consist

command,

‘Walked?’ and ‘Walk!’ are Cases of the verb of this last kind.

word

the

or for one or

forth,

‘to

etc.

walk’

a composi'^e significant

is

sound, some of the parts of which have a certain significance

by themselves.

may be

It

observed that a Speech

Noun and Verb;

always made up of

a Verb, like the definition of

some

man

but

;

by

part with a certain significance

may

it

itself.

not

always have

will

it

is

be without

In the Speech

‘Cleon walks,’ ‘Cleon’ is an instance of such a part.

Speech

is

one

said to be

in

A

two ways, either as signifying

one thing, or as a union of several Speeches made into one by conjunction.

Thus

the Ih'ad

one Speech by con-

is

junction of several; and the definition of its

man

signifying one thing.

Nouns are of two

kinds, either

non-significant parts, like the latter case the

(i)

word

simple,

yrj,

or

word may be made up

and a non-significant pai4

have

triple,

i.

made up of 21

e.

double

(2)

in the

;

either of a significant

(a distinction

which disappears

the compound), or of two significant parts. to

one through

is

It is

possible also

quadruple or higher compounds, like most of

our amplified names; e.g. ‘HermocaYcoxanthus’ and the

Whatever (i)

or

its

the ordinary (3)

structure, a

word

a metaphor, or

word, or altered

(6)

in

in

Noun must always be

an ornamental word, or

a word lengthened out, or

form.

By

either

for the thing, or (2) a strange

(4)

the ordinary

(7)

word

(5)

like.

word,

a coined

curtailed, or (8) I

mean

that

in

general use in a country; and by a strange word, one in

use elsewhere.

So

that the

same word may obviously be

:

62 5

21 . 1457

rav

rd yap (rCyvvov

raipopa

eariv

be

10

eiTi

ecTavai

tov elbovi

elbovs

ott’

ti.

ea-dka eopyev”

rjb^

be

^vy^v apvaas ”

ap(f>(o

opoLcos

a(f)ekeiv

eyr]

to

air’

kcu

ti

elbovs

epei

irpbs

30 ov keyei Trpbs b ecrrt.

Aiovvcrov Kal

Aiovv(tov I^LOV, Kal

eirKpopa

p.e-

tov

otto

p

ei-

to yap 6pp.elv ecTTiv 8^

p-vpi'

be

eirl

Tapelv

be

rw

8e

to

irp&Tov

clvtI

olov

“\akK^

\akK^”

evTavda

apva-ai

eXprjKev

elbos

aTeipei

'Obvcr-

vvv

(S

avakoyov keyw, oTav TeTapTov

to

Kal

f/

Kal evioTe TTpoa-TiOeaciv avd'

keyo) 8 e olov opoicos eyet (pLakr} irpos

aa-nCba

TTjv

be y\&TTa.

yap avTi tov bevTepov to TeTapTov

epel tolvvv Tpv
aa-rrls TTpos^Apr]’

Kal

8 e'

keyoi 8 e airb yevovs p.ev

” Tep-wv

tov TeTapTov to bevTepov.

civtI

avrots

rots

to yevos ^ airb tov

eTrl

yevos

eirl

ecrTiv.

bevTepov

TpiTov

TTpbs TO

fjpLV

ecTTpKev'”

yap TO pev apvo’aL Tapeiv, to yap

fxi]

r 8 yap pvpiov irokv ea-Tiv,

TOV TTokkov Keyp'pTai,

15

Kvpiov,

akkorpCov

ovop-aros cltt6

etbos olov “vr^vs be p.ot

aTTo

avTO,

eibos ^ KaTO, to avakoyov.

eirl

crevs

to

KvTrptots p€V

yevovi enl elbos ^ bovs

bvvarov

Kvpiov (Ivai

Kal

5-29

<\)Lakr\v

ecnrepa TTpos rjpepav'

"Apecos.

epei

rj

6 yrjpas

Trpbs

tolvvv ti]V ea-irepav yrj-

pas Tjpepas ^ axnrep 'EpTreboKkrjs, Kal to yrjpas emrepav /3tou 35 ^ bva-pas ^iov.

koyov,

dkk'

Kapnov

pev

TfkLov

ovopa Keipevov

evLois b' ovk ecTTiv

ovbev rjTTOv arpLevai

opoCats

be

Trjv

6

10 opplv

fort, criyvvos

(Ttva

A®

Tyrwhitt

LX

21):

arrjpH OTTO

A®

12 pvpiov

{-Iv in litura)

A°

dfpvo’ao'Ke

A®

(et Ar.)

A®

16 Tu scripsi

A°

il

Vaticanus 1400,

repatv :

to

A®:

A®

em

tov

rjkLov

Kal

“ a-neiporv OeoKTiaTav

lySfj

pvpiobva--

14 dpvcras xal

13 fort. TToXXd

{dpia-as Leidensis et corr.

tov

(frkoya

dvavvpov' dkk' dpoLurs eyei tovto irpos tov

TO (TireipeLV irpos tov Kapirov, bib eiprjTai

to

olov

key6'q
to

cnreLpeiv,

tS>v avd-

kq'i

Laurentianus

Bekker (ed. 3) 27 fV! M. Schmidt

raposu

;

’

21.

1457” 5-29

63

once strange and ordinary, though not in reference to the same people a-iyvvos, for instance, is an ordinary word in Metaphor consists Cyprus, and a strange word with us.

at

;

in giving the thing a

name

that belongs to

something else

the transference' Bem^ effher from genus to species, or from species to genus, or from species to species, or on grounds

That from genus to species is exemplified ‘Here stands my ship’; for lying at anchor is the standing That from of a particular kind of thing.

of analogy. in ‘

’

thousand good deeds has

species to genus in ‘Truly ten

Ulysses wrought,’ where ‘ten thousand,’ which is a particular large number, is put in place of the generic a large ‘

That from species to species in Drawing the life with the bronze,’ and in Severing with the enduring bronze ; where the poet uses draw in the sense of sever and sever in that of ' draw,’ both words meaning to take away something. That from analogy is possible whenever there are four terms so related that the second (B) is to the first (A), as the fourth (D) to the third (C) for one may then metaphorically put B in lieu of D, and D in lieu of B. Now and then, too, they qualify the metaphor by adding on to it that to which the word it supplants is relative. Thus a cup (B) is in relation to Dionysus (A) what a shield (D) is to Ares (C). The cup accordingly will be metaphorically described as the ‘shield of Dionysus’ (D-fA), and the shield as the ‘cup of Ares' (B-fC). Or to take another instance As old age (D) is to life (C), so is evening (B) to day (A), number.’

‘

‘

’

’

‘

’

‘

’

‘

‘

’

;

:

One of the

will accordingly describe

day' (D-fA)

— or by the

evening (B) as the ‘old age

Empedoclean equivalent; and

old age (D) as the ‘evening’ or

may be

that

‘

sunset

some of the terms thus

name of their own, but described in just the

q/"

(B-fC).

related have

It

no special

for all that they will be metaphorically

same way.

Thus

to

cast forth seed-

sowing ’ ; but to cast forth its flame, as said of the sun, has no special name. This nameless act (B), however, stands in just the same relation to its object, sunlight (A), as sowing (D) to the seed-corn (C). Hence the expression in the poet, ‘sowing around a god-created corn

is

called

‘

21.

64 30

(f)\

6 ya”

aWcos,

Kal

oIk€lu)V

olov

tl,

* *

aoLvov.

e(TTiv

TideraL

6

ttoitjtijs,

to

tov oiKelov

r)

tl

TO

Kal

Xayp.evov

‘‘

Kal

tu>v

"Apews dAA’

Kakovp.evov inrb

p.r}

yap evta

elvai TOiavra)

eTreKTeTap,evov

apr}rr]pa.

eav

ylveTai

pLia

/xa/cporepw

(fxovi^evTL

8e av

to TroAecos

olov

ecTlv oTav tov 6 vop.aCop.evov to pev KaTaXeiifp

to.

t5>v (pcovrjevTwv eis

els

baa

(rw S) radrd eaTiv.

^payy.

15 ovbe els cfxovrjev els

TTeiTepL.

T

be to

(xat

Kal H), 6i]Xea

I

els

H H

ovbev bvopa TeXevTa, Tpia pbvov, peXi Koppi

be

to.

S) Kal

to yap 'P Kal to

6r']Xea'

rd

els be

irevTe.

P

to.

ware laa avpjSaLVet

A-

els

be a(f)(ovov

els

Kal

beCiov.

8e OrjXea

rd det paKpd, olov

re

appeva Kal rd

to.

N

els to

to.

8’ ecrTlv bvo, 'P

T&v eiTeKTeivope'vMV

Kal

paCov” ovtI tov

pev appeva

baa TeXevTa

10 bora eK TOVTOV (TvyKeiTai (rawra

baa eK

to

e^A-

oxj/,”

dp,(f)OTepcov

olov TO “ beCiTepov KaTo.

8e peTa^v, appeva pev

N

p.i]

(TvXXajSi] ep.^ejiXy]p.evTp, to

rj

avTibv be T(bv ovopaTcov

nXrjOr]

0 oAcos

avTov, eireKTeTap^evov p.ev

1)

8(S

b'

TTOtTj,

Kal

^i.aXr]v

{boKel

p.ev

aTTO^T/cat

Kal to UriXeCbov Ilr]Xr}Ldbeo), d(f)r]pr]pLevov 6e olov

iroXrjos

be

ixeTa(f)opas xprjcrOai

rijs

aa-Trlba elnoi

a(l)pprip.evov

a(l)ppy]pLevov

TO be

rpv

el

17

aWoTpiov

to

Tie'noiijp.evov 8’ ecrrlv

i)

KexpTiP-evov

5 Kpi

rovrca

rpoTTO)

Kepara epvvyas Kal tov lepea

35 OLOV TO,

be

rio

TTpocrayopeva-avra

TLvSiV avTos

1458^

de

ecTTi

30—1458^

1457

peTa^v

els

TavTa

Kal

^Kal P) Kal 2.

32 dXA’

lioivov

Victorius

:

dXXd oLvov A“

(et Ar.) 33 definitionem 35 epvvyas Victorius : ipvvras

Koapov hie deesse vidit Madius

1458^

Aldina 1536 3

a(j))]pr]

2038:

pev bvTi

TTrfKeoa

e^r]Xaypevov

II alel

A® A®

A®

ap.

Tyrwhittiim

Kopi

A®

:

rj

2

,7]

rj

avWa^q

A®

noXeoa A®

A®

o\p-

5

4

Victorius

:

ip^e^\r)pevri

TrrjXelbov

orja

(i.e.

A®

Parisinus

0^12) A®

9 Kal 2 add. Riccardianus 16 (confirm. Ar.) 13 TrXijdet apogr. 14 t
2 Reiz

16 Tavra ^Kal

A)

15 noppi Riccardianus xa'i

N

(kol

P)

Kal

16:

2 coni. Morelius

;

flame' (D + A).

There

another form of qualified

a negative addition deny of

naturally associated with

would be

this

also

is

its

coined word

name

a

is

which, being quite

words that seem

to

for

aprjrtjp

it

instance of

of Ares' as *

A

unknown among

e.g. (for there are

;

*

some

be of this origin) epvuyes for horns, and

A

priest.

word

is

said to be lengthened out,

for ttoAco)?, TlrjXrjidSeu) for UrjXelSov.

e. g. ttoXtjos

said to be curtailed, in

6\j/

*

has a short vowel made long, or an extra syllable

inserted

when

An

to call the shield not the ‘cup

by the poet himself

and

one of the attributes

it

new name.

a people, is given

is

name, one

alien

former case, but a ‘cup that holds no wine'

in the

when

65

17

Having given the thing the

metaphor.

may by

30— 1458^

1457'’

21.

part

p.la

yiVerat

is left

e. g. Se^LTepov

as

when

it

dp.cl>oT€p
has lost a part

was and part

it

It

oij/.

is

e. g. Kp7,

;

It

Su,

an altered word,

is

of the poet’s making

for Senior, in Se^irepov Kara p.a^6v.

The Nouns themselves

(to

whatever class they may belong)

are either masculines, feminines, or intermediates (neuter). All ending in N, P, 2, or in the two

and S, are masculines.

H

vowels,

and

fi,

and

in

So

long, are feminines.

compounds of

A among

the vowels that

that there is an equal

masculine and feminine terminations, as

same

as 2,

this last,

All ending in the invariably long

and need not be counted.

^

may

be

number of

and E are the

There

is

no Noun,

however, ending in a mute or in either of the two short

E and

vowels, I,

and

five in Y.

O.

Only three

The

(jieXi,

Kop-p-i,

ireVcpi)

end

intermediates, or neuters, end in the

variable vowels or in N, P, 2. POETICS

in

F

66

1458® 18—1458^ 8

22.

Ae^ews 8e

Trapabaypa

SflereAov.

ns

eTTeKTaenv

Kal

(f)opdv

Kal

duavTa TOiavTa

[077]

dv

25 pia-pos'

pev

ovv

XeyovTa

Trjv tS)V

ttclv

pr]

Kal

7}

eibr],

dbvvaTa

Kokk-rjcravTa”

lbLWTi.Kdv

els

6

bid

to

pev yap

K(op(pbovvTes

di"

TOV

TToieiv,

el

om. apogr.

Aeyovra] \eyov to

be

eK

ecrTi,

pev

Kal

ovv

rts

bcoarei

woiijcrai

A®

olov

TTOufjo-ei.,

'napa

bid Se ro kol-

biakeKTov Kal bia-

Trjs

eKTelveiv

A°

KCKpiirBaL

ovopA-

Kvptov

werre ovk 6 p 6 Sis \j/eyov-

e

0

’

6

dp-yalos,

ws

^ovkeTai

6 tt 6 (tov

26 ^koTToiv A®

28 tZv

:

IbicvTiKov

tS>v

^ ws to

EvKkelbr]s

27

ovopdrav (ut videtur) Ar.

A® 29 peracpopZv scripsi xdkKov Victorias : TrvpixakKov A®

dianus 46 (confirm. Ar.) A® : avp^dXKovrai apogr.

yAwrra elprjpeva

p^

e^akkayal

e)(eti'

rotovrw rpoTTw

Tip

TTOLifjT'qv,

pev

to

rd

kal

Ae^ecos

Kal

dAAcos

yAojrrwv

p

olov

raAAa

yakKov

ovk ekd\L(TTOv 8e pepos

rTjj

diroKOiral

to

irvpl

tovtocs"

Taireivov,

prjbe

Koapos

ohxoiovTai nvp'i

^ap^a-

rj

eav

eK Tutv

ttw?

Tov elcoOoTOs to tra^ej earat.


24

pera-

dAA’ dv

— Kara

ToiavTa.

TO el(o6bs yiyvopevov to p^ IbiMTLKOv

pabiov

7/

tois

7;

Kal

aXviypa,

“dvbp elbov

olov

to.

craves

Kal

eTreKTacrets

S Vivvelv

yAwrrai/

a-vvdxj/ai

KeKpaadal

TroiTjcet

Kal

—

Kal

apa

Set

peTa(f)opd

1458'^ crvplSdkkeTaL at

Kal

notrja-LS

IbuoTLKOv

^ atviypa ecTTai

TO be Kvpiov ti]v (Ta<^'qveiav.

Tiov'

dWd

alviypaTos re yap Ibea avTt]

v'ndpyovTa

^ap^apiapos.

yap

ovopdreov,

22

ovopaTcov avvdeenv ovy^ dtov re roCro TOLrjaai, KaTO.

dvepi

eir'

era-

to irapd to Kvpiov.

peTacfioplov,

e/c

8e Tr]v peTa(f)opdiv evbey^eTai 30

Aeyco

8e

TroL’qarrj,

yK(VTT&v, ^ap^apiarpos.

TO

KX.eo(f)S)VTOs

77

^evtKov

Keyprjpevr]'

Kvpioiv

i^aWaTTOvaa to

Kal

eivuL.

ra-ireivrjv

t 5>v

ex

f/

8e

be

aepvr]

Ka\

a-a(f)rj

kemv

p^v ovv

(paTTaTi]

20 TaTtavr]'

^eviKols

aperri

A®

:

pfTafpopdv

A®

iSov

A®

31 KCKpaa-dai Riccar-

1458^

6 eniTtpovvTfo- A®

I

a-vpQdKeTiu

I

;

1458^ l8

22.

The

perfection of Diction

The

and not mean. the ordinary

words

—1458’’ for

is

for things, but

once clear sa

made up of

that

is

mean, as

is

it

67

to be at

it

indeed

clearest

8

On

by the poetry of Cleophon and Sthenelus.

is

shown

/

the other

hand the Diction becomes distinguished and non-prosaic by the use of unfamiliar terms,

e.

i.

strange words, metaphors,

lengthened forms, and everything that deviates from the ordinary modes of speech,

terms

— But

up of metaphors, a barbarism,

The very fact in

a whole statement in such

be either a riddle or a barbarism, a riddle,

will

if

made up of

nature indeed of a riddle

made

strange words. to describe a

this,

is

if

an impossible combination of words (which cannot

be done with the real names for things, but can be with their metaphorical substitutes)

on another with

;

e. g.

and the

fire,’

‘

I

saw a man glue brass

The corresponding

like.

use of strange words results in a barbarism. of unfamiliar terms

admixture, accordingly,

These,

—A

is

necessary.

strange word, the metaphor, the ornamental

the

equivalent, etc,, will save the language from

and prosaic, while the ordinary words requisite clearness.

What

in

it

seeming mean will secure the

helps most, however, to render

the Diction at once clear and non-prosaic

is

the use of the

lengthened, curtailed, and altered forms of words. deviation from the ordinary

guage unlike appearance

words It

is

;

that

in

words

will,

and their having much

in general

use will give

not right, then, to

it

Their

by making the

general use, give

it

lan-

a non-prosaic

common

in

with the

the quality of clearness^^

condemn these modes of speech,

and

ridicule the poet for using them, as

e. g,

the elder Euclid,

if

certain

who

said

it

some have done

was easy to

make poetry

one were to be allowed to lengthen the words in the

statement

itself

as

much

as one

likes

—a

procedure he F 2

0

8

68

9~30

22. 1458'’

t

taju/3o7roi^(ras cv avrfj tj]

10 vdde

l3 ab[(ovTa”

Ae^opoi'f.”

ftSecrt

15 a^7o

T wi;

im

roj,

on

pie-

p.^Tav

Kal

e-jil

em tmv

Kat

dv rts ra

pL^TaTiOels

to avTo

olov

(payibaiva

pov adpKas

pt’

•noi.rja'avTOs

lajji.-

ez/

tjl/atWrat

piev

rw

Kakbv

^ikoKT-qTjj eTroizjo-e

ecr^tet 7:0809,

kaOUi to doivaTai

6 8e dvTl Tov 8e

rj

ydp

ptez/

Kvpia ovoixaTa

p. 6vov ovojjia pierart^et'-

duiOoTOS ykSiTTav, to Aia-yykos

(VTfkis.

et rt?

ra

to

kiyop.ev‘

dkrjdii

Kvpiov

z/uz/

dkkoLS

tols

to

eirCTribes

ykwTTrji 8e

Trjs

(TTi

di/rt

25

kuI

ctti

Kal

Alaryvkov Kal EvptTrtSou, €V 8e

8’

TO

ykcoTTais

Kat

pie-

yekola

T&v dkkcov Ibe&v

KaTiboL

rwr

dewpiCaOo} ivTi 6 €p,€Vwv tu>v 6 vop.dTwv ets

Kal

20 /3 etoz;

froy iKsCvov eA*

epdixevos

to 8e app-OTTovTUis oaov 5 ta<^epet

dTrpeir&s

dTT€pyd(TaLTo,

eTTwi/

Tpov.

Mapa^w-

ovv ^atre
piera^opats

xpcupiez/os az/

ftSoi'

to 8e p.iTpiov kolvov airdvTOiV ecrrt

yap

/cat

Ae^etf “’ETTix^apW

nal ‘‘ovk dv y

fjikv

yekoiov

rpoTTO)

pwy

TO

9

5

Kal

pLeTsdrjKev.

ewzz (zAtyos re Kat ovTibavds Kal deiKiji,

Aeyot rd Kz/pta p-iTaTiOds vvv 8e

pt’

ewz/ pitKpoy re Kat dcrOeviKos Kal detSzjs’

Kal

Karapets dkiyqv re Tpd-rre^av,

b(cf>pov [re] deiKe'Atoz/

30

KaTadeh pnKpdv re Tpdire^av

b(
9 fortasse mutato ordine eV

Bursian

:

rjTti

av ytpapevoa rd] ETretra

xdpiv

A®

A® A^

appoTTOVToa

A® A®:

avr/; tjJ Xe^tt, lap^oTroiTjaas

A®

tfiov

papa6a>va Se

12 perpiov Spengel

yeXotorepa

fort. :

Hermann

1

ptKpba be

(nisi forte rat fuerat)

A®

:

A®

10 I4

eVt

dppoTTOVras Tucker

etSfcoi'

A®

1

:

lap^iov

23 (^ayeSait'a apogr. (fiaydBeva detKij? Riccardianus :

,

:

'EnLxdpr]v

A°

2 S 8 eped)yA°

46 Morelius (confirmare videtur Ar.) piKpos re apogr.

pirpov

:

1

dppdrroi/ apogr.

20 peraOevTOS apogr. (^ayeSatfay

A°

A®

;

deidrja- A® 27 fie jued/y A® 29 re prius om. apogr. re*

r aiKeAiov reposuit Vahlen

:

22. 1458*’

9-3°

69

caricatured by reading ’ETnxdprjv elSov MapaOmvdSe /SaSi^ovra,

and

ovK dv

ipdp.evos tov eKcivov

y

A

iWe/Sopov as verses.

too

apparent use of these licences has certainly a ludicrous effect,

but they are not alone in that

applies to

;

the rule of moderation

the constituents of the poetic vocabulary

all

;

even

with metaphors, strange words, and the rest, the effect will

be the same, to

one uses them improperly and with a view

if

The proper use

provoking laughter.

To

different thing.

realize the difference

an epic verse and see

how

it

reads

when

them

and the

the metaphor,

is

a very

one should take

the normal words

The same should be done

are introduced.

strange word,

of

rest

too with the for

;

one has

only to put the ordinary words in their place to see the

is

The same

what we are saying.

truth of

found

in

the former

iambic, for instance,

Aeschylus and Euripides, and as is

it

a poor line

;

it

stands in

whereas Euripides, by the

change of a single word, the substitution of a strange for

what one.

is

by usage the ordinary word, has made

Aeschylus having said ^ayeSatva ^

in his Philoctetes

it

seem a

fine

:

p.ov (ydpKas IctOUl ttoSos,

Euripides has merely altered the ka-Oiu here into dowdrat.

Or suppose vvv Be to

p.

etjiv

oAtyos re koX ovrcSavos

be altered by the substitution of the ordinary words into vvv Be p! ewv piKpos re Kal dcrOeviKOS Kai

Or

deiBrj^.

the line Bipov

aeLKeXiov KuraOels 6X.iyr]v re Tpaire^av

Biejipov

po\6'qpov KaraOel? piKpdv re TpdTre^av,

into

31—23- 1459^ 2i

22. 1458’’

70

en

Kal TO ‘'-qioves ^o6(o(riv” yjLoves Kpa^ovaiv,

Tovs Tpayipbovs

eKtojoi 'bei,

XeKTip

xpS>VTai,

TOVTOif

Toiavra.

5

ev

ke^ei airavTa

Tjj

ev

eTvai

p,7]

be

Kvpiois

rois

ToiavTa’

to,

bvopaai

brnkoLS

Kal

y^pTjaOaL,

peyiaTov to peTaejiopiKov

akkov eaTL kajSelv

TOts

re

ev(f)vCas

ar]pel6v

8ta

taja/Setots

poTTei T(bv

ecrf

8et

to.

be ykS>T-

al

Kal

ev

be TOts

elpr]peva, ev

pakiaTa ke^iv pipelaQai TavTa ap[oVots]

Tts

Ao'yots

XP^"

tw

ev

Trjs

-npaTTeiv pip7]aeoi)S

elpr]peva.

tcl

pipr]TLKrjs,

Tovs pvdovs KaOdirep ev tois TpaywStats

awtaTavai

TTjv

Trjs

Kal

A®

pCav

peaa Kal

Kal

olKeCav

^bovrjv,

1459®' 4 to]

A®

’larvea tS>i

irpa^LV

bijkov,

A®

ev

okr]v

tV

TeAos,

6

TT,

ns apogr.

okov (^ovy

21 :

TTOiel

A®

Iaropiais ras

Tekeiav eyovev

C^ov

bkov

p^ bpoias laTopias Tas

Kal

dpen^pdSijcr ap

a®

Kal

Sairep

A®

32

akkov A®

13 Kav Riccardianus

om. apogr.

Riccardianus 46

Kal

bLrjyqpaTLKrjs

Trepl

31 TO larvfa ^oataiv ^

oaois

ovopaTwv

peTptp

8e

aav dpxrjv

lap^loicr

ev

TOiavTa to Kvpiov Kal peTacpopa Kal Koapos.

to.

iKava

rjpLV

bpapaTLKoiis

TTOLij

oTt

be

Trap'

yap

to

tS>v 8’

to,

ovopaTwv baois Kav ev

eaTL be

Dept

30

to

pev ovv TpayLpbCas Kal

eaT(o

OTt

airavTa xpy]aLpa

rjpuiiKois

irokv

8e peTacpopal tois lapj3e(ocs.

al

rjpcoiKOis,

pev Tots

15 Ttepl

p-r]

tovto

be

ykwTTais,

Kal

pev biirka pakiaTa appoTTeL tois bi6vpapl3ois,

aaiTO'

to

Troiei

povov yap rooro ovTe

eXvai,

peTa(f)epeLV to to bpoiov decopetv eaTiv.

lo Tat

to

akka

baa

eKelvos

p,if

Kal

viv

Kal

'Ay^ikkecos,

bia-

rf}

dAXa

otto

eyw

to

Kal

nepl

pi,r)

ei^

eaTLV be peya pev to eKaaT(p tS>v eiprjpevuiv TTpeirov-

Tiyvoeu

Tcos

yap to

bia

IbiMTiKov

akka

-nepi

Se ’Apt<^/3o8»js

etTrot

az/

bcopaTwv

to

dtov

aiOev

to

Kal

bcapaTOJV,

airb

1459 ^ ’A^tAAeco?

h ovSets

ort

46,

A®

earrji

10 et 12

Harles

:

koi

A®

20

fort.

iaropiais ras avvd^aeis

[sic]

:

ri

awBeaeis Dacier

23

1458” 31—23. 1459^ 21

22.

Or

into

(3o6u)cnv

rjiovi'i

Ariphrades used

Add

Kpa^ovcriv.

that

this

to

to ridicule the tragedians for introducing ex-

unknown

pressions

rjiove's

language of

in the

common

life, Sw/j-droji/

diro (for (XTro Soj/xarcDv), (redev, eyo) Se viv, ’A)(iX\e
and the

’AxiXXew?),

like.

The mere

fact_of

thdr not being

in

ordinary speech gives the Diction a non-prosaic character; but Ariphrades

also of

was unaware of

make

indeed, to

that.

a great thing,

is

It

a proper use of these poetical forms, as

compounds and strange words.

But the greatest

thing by far-is-to be a master of metaphor. thing that cannot be

learnt

from others

and

;

one

It is the is

it

also

a sign of genius, since a good metaphor implies an intuitive

perception of the similarity in dissimilars.

Of

the kinds of

words we have enumerated

may be

it

observed that compounds are most in place in the dithyramb, strange words in heroic, and metaphors in iambic poetry.

Heroic poetry, indeed,

may

avail itself of

them

But

all.

in

iambic verse, which models itself as far as possible on the

spoken language, only those kinds of words are which are allowable also in an oration,

i.

e.

in

place

the ordinary

word, the metaphor, and the ornamental equivalent.

Let

this,

imitating

As

for the poetry

means of that I.

then, suffice as an account of Tragedy, the art

by means of action on the

it

which merely narrates, or imitates by 23

versified language (without action),

has several points in

The

stage.

construction of

common

its

is

it

stories should clearly be like

that in a

drama; they should be based on a single

one that

is

a complete whole in

itself,

middle, and end, so as to enable the

own proper pleasure with

all

evident

with Tragedy.

action,

with a beginning,

work

to

produce

its

the organic unity of a living

72 (Tvvrjdeis

O^ivat, iv ats

h'qkoxTLV

dAA.’

^ 25

1459^ 22—24. 1459'’ lo

23*

&v

TrXeCovs,

oaa

kv

iKacrrov as eru^ei’

Kal

mvpLaxici

30 bpaai.

ayebov bk

acnrep

bcb

Odrepov

ylv(Tai

kvLOTC

ovbkv ytverac rkkos.

etiropev

(f)av€Lr]

"Oprjpos Trapa

tovs

KaiTTep

kyovra dpyrjv

Kal

yap dv pkyas

kCav rj

ra

35 vvv

b'

pkpos

kv

TTepl

’IAtd8os

bvo

’IAtd8os

Kol

22

k^co

prjbk

k-niyupyiaai

Kal 8’

ol

dkkois dkkoi

tovto

tov

dv

TTokepov

ttokiv

rfj

bkov'

’kcreaQai,

noiKikia.

avrav

kiretaobCois

nepl

kv

Oea-irkaios

Kkypr]TaL

kireiaobloLS

Karakdya

&v

kpekkev

(vctvvotttos

k
k^

TTOLrjTav

Karartenkeypkvov

TTOiTjcnv.

kva

[8is]

iroiovcn

8e

Ydvnpiav

Kal

nrayeia,

'Siivccv

be'i

kyeiv

ne'nkeypkvpv

pekoTTodas Kal

6 elvai scrips!

:

uvai

Kal

rpv rj

A®

25

Kal

Kpiais,

AdKaivai,

kn

Tpadbes. kno-aodav

rjOiKjjv

oyjrecos

TTOieirai

irokkal

onkav

dtov

EdpvTrrjAos,

roiyapovv

rpayabCa

pia

OKrd,

ravra rj

r^v piKpdv ’IA6d8a.

Kal

kK

Trkkov

yap dnkrjv 10 pkpr]

rav

ravrp

rkkos

'Obvaaeias

povai,

arTonkovs, elbrj

Odrepov,

tw

ovbkv

p-ayy]

kv tols

kva ypovov Kal piav rrpd^Lv Trokvpeprj, olov 0 rd

NeoTirdAejuos,

Kal

Kal

ol irokkol

diTokalSav

r^v

Kv-npia 'noiTjaas

rd

iyevero

7/877

ovk

Kal

veav

otov

biakapjSdveL

77

^akapuvi

p-era

dkkovs,

p^rpidCpvTa

peykOei,

TTokkois,

1459'’ KoX

aaTrep

Kapxpbovlav

^iKekCq

kva

Ttepl

vpas akkpka.

TO avTO avvTeCvovaat rkkos, ovrco

XpovoLS

avvijir)

V

kv

r)

rovro)

e)(et

yap Kara rovs avrovs

irpos

?

avayKi) ovyX fxias Trpa^ewy TioieicrOai

kvos yjpovov,

rf]

rrjs

pkv

ptKpds

^ikoKr'qrrjs,

'Ikkov

be

nkpai.s

[en

rpayabia,

TraOrjriKriv'

77

e/c

kKarkpas

Kal

8e] rj

rd

Kal ydp rrepmereiav

ravrd'

a-akaplvr]

A®

26 vavpayoa

31 tu 28 ptra Bdrepov Parisinus 2038: /xcto darepov A® Riccardianus 16: to A® 36 Sto- deletum in A®: 33 pkya pr. A® Ol? Riccardianus 16 1459'’ 2 Kun-pia Reiz KvrrpiKa A® 4 povaa

A®

:

pr.

A®

7 Tpainbeo' pr.

A®

€Tt Be bis

A®

8 8 et] 8 ^

A®

24

23creature.

them

like

1459^ 22—24. 1459*’ lo

Nor should one suppose

that there is anything

A

history has to deal not

in

our usual

histories.

with one action, but with one period and

happened

that

all

one or more persons, however disconnected the

in that to

may have

several events

take place at the

and the

73

battle

same

may

Just as two events

been.

time,

the sea-fight off Salamis

e. g.

with the Carthaginians in

without

Sicily,

converging to the same end, so too of two consecutive

may sometimes come after the other with no their common issue. Nevertheless most of our epic poets, one may say, ignore the distinction. Herein, then, to repeat what we have said before, we have events one

one end as

a further proof of Homer’s marvellous superiority to the rest.

He

did not attempt to deal even with the Trojan

in its entirety,

and end

though

—through

it

was a whole with a

definite

a feeling apparently that

a story to be taken in in one view, or

it

if

complicated from the variety of incident in

war

beginning

was too long not that, too it.

As

it

is,

he has singled out one section of the whole; many of the other incidents, however, he brings in as episodes, using

S hips,

'Sthe Cat^_gu_e of the

for instance,

and other episodes

As

to relieve the uniformity of his narrative.

epic poets, they treat of

of an action parts in

and

This

it.

Little Iliad

one man, or one period

although

which, last

for the other

one,

;

or else

has a multiplicity of

what the authors of the Cypria

is

And

have done.

the result

is that,

whereas

the Iliad or Odyssey supplies materials for only one, or at

most two tragedies, the Cypria does that for several, and

an Adjudgment of

the Little Iliad for

more than

Arms, a

a Neoptolemus, a Eurypylus, a Ulysses as

Philoctetes,

eight

:

for

Beggar, a Laconian Women, a Fall of Ilium, and a Departure of the

Fleet',

as also a Sinon, and a

H. Besides species' as

this.

Women

of Troy.

Epic poetry must divide into the same

Tragedy;

it

must be either simple or complex,

a story of character or one of suffering.

.

''

%

V' ‘

f

Its parts,

too,

1

:

”

24 1459

74

-

Kul

8et

avayvu)pi
TTpuTos

Tfpov

Kal

avvi(TTr]Kiv

Kara

8e

re

fHOTToua Kal to p.eTpov.

20 reAoj.

8’

etrj

al

ava-Tacreis

els

p.iav

to

ovTUiv

e'xfi

TO ayadov

30 aKovovTa bp.oi.ov

Kal

Tayy

peTpov TO

els

aTTperres

dv

ap.a

biryyrjpaTiKrjv

Se

TroLelv

to bia

ibiov

upaTTop-eva

ap.a

Trjs

t&v

irpos

Kal

aKrjvrjs

r^ eiTOTTOua bia to

dvop.oCoLS Troiei

ireCpas

tS>v

bvpyrja-LV

-nepaivop.eva,

icpi’

ware

oyKOS,

&v

roCr’

yap rjpuaKov

to

—

bib

iKavba-

A®

peTporv eaTtv

:

i}6ik6v

fort, [ro]

coit. rec.

to 8e

ras TpayipbCas.

rjppoKev.

el

yap ns ev

^ ev ttoAAois,

(TTaaLputTaTov

Kal

ykwTTas

Trovr^pdrcov

A®

yap

to

eireiaoblois'

pCprjcrLV ttoloito

bir]yy]TiKr]V

ndvras apogr.

29 apogr.

e-nl

ekaTTOvs

Tpay(pbiS>v

eTTOTToUa

rj

6 tov irot'pp.aTOs

13 iKavSis apogr. (confirm. Ar.)

apogr.

be

aTTO Trjs

dvayvcoptaus Christ

npoade A®

tl

Kal to

ap)(r]v

exet

evbey^ea-dat

eKTri-nTeiv

ejralvoiTO’

35 oV'^orbea-TaTov t 5>v

f]

pLeyakoirpeTreiav Kal to p.eTa^dkkeiv tov

irkripovv

akk(p TLvl peTpep

irap'qKoiev,

p.i]

e-neiaobLovv

fipcoLKov

pirjKoi

apyaioiv

ttA^^os

irokv

ev

p.epr]

aij^eTai

to

rrjr

piev

to

akka to

p. 6 vov‘

irokka

T(bv

el

8e

Ttpo?

p.eyeQos

p.epos

e(TTL

olKeCcciv

tovto,

pLipLeia-Oat

pLepr]

vTTOKpLTUtv elvai.

avvopaaQai

Set

Tpay
TT}

tjSiktj*

i57re/3/3e/3A»jKei'.

a-va-Taa-ecus

tt/s

aKpoacnv TiOep-evoiV

p.ev

25 TTokka

av elev,

eireKTeivecrOaL

ev

Iko-

tov pLev ovv p-riKOVS opos iKavbs 6

bvvaadai yap

dprjpLivos'

Kal

Kixprjrai

'noi-qp.aroiiv

airKovv Kal TradrjTLKov, ^ 8e

yap tovtqis Ae^et koX biavoCa iravTa Aia<^epet

TO

t&v

Kal

imrKiyp.ivov {avayvu)pi(ns yap biokov) Kal

15 ’OSvfrcreta irpos

yap

’lAta?

pi.€v

^

biavoias Ka\

airaaiv "'Op.rjpos

ols

Kal

lKavS)s.

eri ras

iraOruxaroiV'

kcli

Ka\S)S.

Ti]v

11-35

Kal

A®

Kal

pe-

15

16 yap A®: be

21 rrpbs be apogr. (confirm. Ar.) dya^ov

32

rjppoiKev

A®

33

24

must be good

it

in

Homer

11-35

75

Spectacle, must be the

requires Peripeties, Discoveries, and scenes of

it

suffering just like Tragedy. in

’’

Song and

with the exception of

same, as

1459

-

Lastly, the

All these elements appear

way.

in their

Thought and Diction

and he has made due use of them.

first;

His

two poems are each examples of construction, the Iliad simple and a story of suffering, the Odyssey complex (there is

Discovery throughout

they are more than

they surpass

There

is,

all

And

and a story of character.

it)

Thought too

since in Diction and

this,

other poems.

however, a difference in the Epic as compared

with Tragedy,

to its length, the limit

and

length,

(i) in its

metre,

(2) in its

already suggested will suffice

(i)

:

it

As

must

be possible for the beginning and end of the work to be

view— a

taken in in one if

the

poem be

which

condition

long as the series of tragedies offered

For the extension of advantage, of which

be

fulfilled

about as

one hearing.

for

length epic poetry has a special

its

makes

it

will

the old epics, and

shorter than

In a play one

large use.

cannot represent an action with a number of parts going

on simultaneously; one

is

and connected with the the narrative form

Whereas

makes

it

;

a gain to the Epic, tending to give

and room

on the stage.

heroic has been assigned to attempt a narrative

it

poem

epic

poetry

these, if

it

germane

This then

grandeur, and also

for episodes of diverse kinds.

Uniformity of incident by the satiety to ruin tragedies

and

body of the poem.

to the subject, increase the

variety of interest

in

possible for one to describe

a number of simultaneous incidents

is

on the stage

limited to the part

actors.

(2)

it

As

soon creates

from experience in

some

is

for its metre, ;

apt the

were any one

one, or in several, of

the other metres, the incongruity of the thing would be apparent.

The

heroic in fact

is

the gravest and weightiest

h

;

76

36—1460^ 20

24* 1459 Ta(()opas bi\(Tai ixdkLaTa' TiKT)

to

akkcov.

tS>v

p.ip.r]
iKptTTr)

8e

yap

/cat

* *

^ bipyqp^a-

/cat

rerpapeTpov

lapjSeiov

1460 ^ KivrjTLKa Kal rb ph^ opyriaTiKOV rb Se irpaKTiKov. irarepov

piyvvoL tis avra, utairep

el

paKpav avcTTaaiv ev akk
on povos

Kal

paardv,

15 r^i/ "E/cropos

pev

ecrrwres

ydp

ao

els

ean

Se

"Opqpos

tovto

Trapakoyiapos.

fin.

dvaveviov,

oiovrai

avTT)

A®

5

A®

:

pq

yvo'irj

A®

Parisians 2038

20

:

An

fito

fort. dvOputnoL

A®

rots

crqpeiov be, irdvres beb'ibayev

keyeiv

ws

Set.

ydp dvOpa-noi, orav

Twining ad loc.) 37 A® 1460 ^ i KivrjTiKa /ctv/jTi/cal A® 2 myvvoi

14

pqyvvr) (fuit pq yvir]

:

4 avTrj] 3 ra] to A® biaipeladai A® (confirm. Ar.) :

ovdem

13 aXoyov Victorius :

be

ev

ot

lap^iov

Bonitz

alpela-dai

II. ouSeV drjdq Victorius

Trept

TavTj] (cf.

:

in litura)

rd

eirel

as yapi^opevoi.

:

Parisians 2038

fjdri

be

corn Riccardianus 46, Vahlen piyvvei apographa pleraque

Koi

ev

evSexerai

S’

tovs dkkovs ’^evbq

plfiTjo-is

-ij

6

biioKovres,

36 excidisse videtur Tavrais vel apogr. : kIv^o-kt A®

n

dkko

ovra yekoia av ^ave'iq,

(TK-qv^s

Kal

dkiya

be

rj

pev ovv ev rats

Set

rjdr].

rbv TTpdrTOVTa'

TtpocTTiQevTes dirayyekkovcnv

be pdkicTTa

?/

okov

St’

avp^aivei pdkiara ro Qav-

o

St’

6

yvvaiKa

ro Se Oavpaarbv qbv'

eireaiv kavOdvei.

ydp eort

ov

okiydKis'

Oavpaardv, pdkkov

bpdv

ov

dvbpa

dkk’ eyovra

bioo^iv eirl /cat

okiya Kal

Se

dkoyov,

ro

ro pr]

bid

ekd^KTra keyeiv

eladyei

rb

iroieiv

eTTOTToUa

TTj

evdvs

Kal ovbev’ dpdr]

rpaywStats

avTrj

e-naiveiaQai Kal

pev ovv dAAot avrol pev

ot

pipovvrai

dycovL^ovrai,

ijOos,

akka re TTokkd d^ios

TToiTjrrjv

pip-qTrjs.

10
w
appoTTOV

rb

bibda-Kei

dAA’

ripipip,

t 5)V TTOiprSiv ovk dyvoet b Set TTOieiv avTOV.

avrbv yap Set rbv

Kara ravra

^ rw

ovbels

bib

'K.aiprjpoav.

TreTrot/j/cei/

(pvais

fj

"Opppos be

5 alpeiadai. br]

avrr]

eiTTopev

Trep

ert 8 e aro-

:

dijd/j

Riccardianus 46: oideva

dvaXoyov cn-el

A®

apogr.

:

(ct

An)

en-etra

fit’

A®

(et

o

An)

— 1460® 20

24- 1459'’ 3^ of metres

—which

what makes

is

more

it

77

tolerant than the

rest of strange words and metaphors, that also being a point in

which the narrative form of poetry goes beyond

The iambic and

movement, the one representing that of other that of the dance. appear, as

one were

if

Chaeremon

to write

life

and

action, the it

an epic in a medley of metres,

it is

no one has ever written

that

a long story in any but heroic verse

have

others.

more unnatural would

Still

Hence

did.

all

on the other hand, are metres of

trochaic,

;

we

nature herself, as

us to select the metre appropriate to such

said, teaches

a story.

Homer, admirable as he

is

in

especially so in this, that he alone

unaware of the part

The

the poem. as he

is

to

every other respect,

among

epic poets

is

not

be played by the poet himself

poet should say very

no imitator when doing

little in

that.

is

in

propria persona,

Whereas

the other

poets are perpetually coming forward in person, and say but little,

and

that only here

and

other Character

— no

Homer

there, as imitators,

a brief preface brings in forthwith a

after

^

man, a woman, or some

one of them characterless, but each

with distinctive characteristics.

The marvellous

is

certainly required in Tragedy.

Epic, however, affords

more opening

for the

the chief factor in the marvellous, because in

The scene

are not visibly before one.

Hector would be ridiculous on the stage

The

improbable. it

the agents

— the Greeks

halting ^

instead of pursuing him, and Achilles shaking his head to stop

The

them; but

in

the

poem

marvellous, however,

is

the absurdity

is

overlooked.

a cause of pleasure, as

is

shown

that we a story with additions, in the we are doing our hearers a pleasure. Homer more than any other has taught the rest of us the art of framing lies in the right way. I mean the use of

by the

fact

belief that

all

tell

.

of the pursuit of

78

1460^ 21

24rov8t ovTos robl

17

av TO

bel,

?)

pdbeiyp.a

rjpiStv

tovto

be

eK


8ei^

aXoyov,

ex^i-v

TO

30 OlbiTTovs Tib

p?/

be

&(rTe TO keyeiv

yap ov

pirj,

ort

dvripipTO

aeia akoya ra el

Tr]v

(fyavkos

p-rjTe

biavorjTiKoXs'

ITept

8e

vel

dirayyekkovijKcov.

av be

(jiaivpTat

Kal

6fj

Kal

eiret

to.

TroirjT^s

ev ’Odvd-

vvv be

7rotr;
rjbvvcDV to otottov.

apyoh

pepeo-tj;

rois rf;

8e

Kat pzyre pOiKoh

yap irdkiv ^

kCav

Kal

kvaeiov, eK

kap.7rpa

ro8i § ^ apogr. ri

in textu

:

A°

to bi

23

re

Trdcnov

wS’ av decopovaiv yevoiT

A° ft]

fji)

ev

Tas biavolas.

TTOiiov [azz] elbdiv eaTiV,

Tj,

pi;

e^ dpxys

airoKpoTTret

Kal

TTpojSkrjpidTiav

21 TOO biovTocr pr.

dkka

MvaCav

ttjv

p.)/-

dtaTrep

av 6 pivdos yekolov

TTOit]Tr]s d
bel bia-novelv ev rots

ijOt]

piev

eKdecnv ws ovk av ^v dveKTa brjkov

irept

ke^ei

ra re

8et

tovs re Abyovs piaAicrra

Tlv0ia

to,

TOiovTovs,

avTo,

aAAots dyaOoh 0

5 Ae'^ts

ol

re

p.vdevp.aTOs,

Teyeaj eh

evheyecOai, Kal Ixtottov

35 evkoyiOTepcos

1460 '’az; yevoiTO,

e^w tov

ev ’HAe/crpa

avvicrTacrOai

bei

dWa

dkbycov,

-na-

irpoaipeia-Oai

bvvaTa diTiOava’

?)

ev Mi^crots o difxovos ex

res ^

eibevai aXrjdes

eibevai irms 6 Acaos d’neOavev,

bpdp.aTi, utcTTep

TO SI

NiTrrpwy.

T
el

8e tovtov ovtos avayKf] elvai

^vyrj Kal to uploTov w? ov.

piepStv

e/c

bib

ecrrt '^evbos,

bia yap to tovto

rj

dbvvaTa eiKOTa pidXkov p,r]

aWo

irpocrOeivai'

25 6v TTapaKoyL^eTOL

to vcrrepov eariv,

tovto be

yivecrOat'

TTpStTov \j/evbos,

yevecrOai

1460’’ 7

yivofjidvov yCvrjrm, el

?;

Kal TO TrpoTepov eTvai

rj

—25.

fjv

Kat

av ^arepoV.

pr.

A®

(corr.

Riccardianus 46, akkov A® (dXX’ ov-

Set

«XXo codices Robortelli A® 25 ov m. rec. in litura A® 24 s Jortin oiVrpd) A® 26 TOVTOV codex Robortelli 27 dmiSava A® 30 Aaios Riccardianus 16 VoXaoo’ A® fort, (^dy Olbinovs 33 oare Bonitz

:

S^

A®

:

corr.)

:

i;

:

pr.

A®

dvr)ptiTO

A®

A® A®

1460 ^

yikoiov

Riccardianus 46, Heinsius 7 av ante elbav om. apogr. :

TroiTjo-ei

5

I

Troifjo-tie

rd re] to be

A®

25

Whenever,

paralogism. is

A

if

or happens, men’s notion

— but that but there

is

is

— 25-

1460® 21

24-

is

truth follows as

79

or happens, a consequent, B,

is that, if

B

the

else, B, that

the

is,

Accordingly,

a false conclusion.

something

1460’’ 7

if

A

is

also

is

untrue,

on the assumption of

consequent, the right thing then

its

A

is to

its

add

we know the truth of the consequent, we are in our own minds led on to the erroneous inference of the truth of the antecedent. Here is an instance, on the B.

Just because

from the Bath-story

A

in the Odyssey.

likely impossibility is

The

vincing possibility.

always preferable to an uncon-

story should never be

made up

of j

improbable incidents in

it.

If,

there should be nothing of the sort

;

however, such incidents are unavoidable, they

should be outside the piece,

hero’s ignorance in

like' the

Oedipus of the circumstances of Laius’ death like the report of the

not within

;

it,

Pythian games in Electra, or the man’s

having come to Mysia from Tegea without uttering a word

on the way,

in

it

is

So

The Mysians.

that one’s Plot

would have been

fundamentally wrong to

that

it

ridiculous to say

is

spoilt without them, since

make up such

If the

Plots.

poet has taken such a Plot, however, and one sees that he

might have put

it

in a

more probable form, he

Even

absurdity as well as a fault of art.

in

is

the improbabilities in the setting-ashore of Ulysses clearly intolerable in the is,

hands of an

the poet conceals them,

their

absurdity.

Elaborate

only in places where there or Thought to be revealed.

his

no

would be

inferior poet.

As

it

other excellences veiling

Diction, is

guilty of

the Odyssey

however,

action,

Where

is

required

and no Character

there

is

Character or

Thought, on the other hand, an over-ornate Diction tends

to

obscure them.

As regards Problems and their Solutions, one may see 25 the number and nature of the assumptions on which they

8o

1460

25.

yap eort

eirei

a\Aos

(Ikovottolos, avayKt]

ola

(ji)

ravra

bei.

yAcorrais Kal p€Ta(j)opaLS’

bibop^v yap ravra rols 6pd6rr]s

ecrrlv

rrjs

7]

TTpoelXero

Tw

8e

be^id

oTToi’

to

rj

larpiKr]V

dAAd rov

/ca 0

’

&are

bei

r/

rexvipv

d

(et)

r^v

rrepl

rexvrjv

apdprr]pa TTeTTo(r]rai

np&rov pev ra

dbvvara

rreTTolrjrai,

fipdprrjrai’

rov "EKropos

rj

pr])

rjrrov

avrb ^ aXXo

blco^is-

el

rroiel

pevrot,

oXoos

r&v

50 dpdprrjpa,

^ et pr. A° 16

apogr.

prjbapfj

Kara

en mrepcov

rjpapr^adai.

rrjv

rexvrjv

Kar

^

to

vTrdpx^tv Kal Kara

evebe'xero

rovrorv rexvrjv, [rjpaprrjcTBai] ovk 6pOS)S' bei yap

evbe'x^rai

8

{rj

rd

rvyxdvei rov reXovs rov avrrjs, (to yap

rrapabeiypa

tIAos ^ pdXXov

dpejxo

el

ra emripripara ev rols

25 tIAos elpTjrai) el ovrcos eKTrXrjKrcKcljrepov ^

pepos.

apaprla'

r)

dbvvara

TTpoj3\'ppaa-Lv Ik rovrcav eriKTKonovvra Xvetv. rrjv

pev yap

el

imrov

eKaa-rrjv

^ akXrjv reyvr]v)

hv ovv, ov KaO’ eavrrjv,

dAA’ 6p9Qs exet>

ovbi dAArjs

a-vp^e^rjKos,

dbvvapiav, avrrjs

opO&s,

pr]

TTpojSe^KrjKora,

TTpbs avrrjv

koI

rj

Ae'^ecos iari,

TrotrjnKi/s

rijs

8e Kara

rj

* *

pipriaao-Oai

20 {plov TO Kar

Ae^et

ttjs

avrrjs 8e rrjs rroi-qriKrjs birrr] apaprta,

avrrfv,

rrpoeXecrOaL

TtaOr]

Trpds 8e rovroLS ovy^ p avrr]

Kal

TToXirLKrjs

ns

Kal boKel,

(l)a(rLV

e^ayyeAAerat

Kal TToAAd

TToirjrais,

15 rixvTls Kal Trotrjn/c^s.

pkv yap KaO'

eariv, ^ old

rj

8’

?/

rpiQv ovtcov tov apiO-

p.ip.iiaOai

^ yap ola pv

tlvai

wa-rrepavd (cnypacfios

0 TToirjTijs

pLLprjTijs

10 p-^v €V TL del,

8-30

dXXo

el

earl to

avp^e^rj-

1 1 5 add. 9 rov dpidpov apogr. riov dpiBpZv A® el 17 exciderunt fort. fjpnpTf Se di' 17 pr. A® :

E(]

Riccardianus 16, corn Parisinus 2038 : ro A® 20 ij dbimra :

Parisinus 2038

21 SnoV av ovu scripsi

:

orroiav ovv

A®:

rm corr.

18

fj

TrerroirjTai

induxit Duentzer

orroiavovv vulg.

:

orroiaovv

el

Winstanley

m.

rec.)

apogr. apogr.

:

fort.

iTnnprjpara (rd)

22 ra] rd

(ft

superscr.

24 avrrjs 23 « add. Parisinus 2038, Vahlen airier A® 27 ^ pf] add. Ueberweg : f] add. corr. A®, 28 fjpaprrjadai {paprrjaOai pr. A®) seclusi

A®

25. 1460'’

8-30

8i

proceed by viewing the matter in the following way.

The maker

(i)

poet being an imitator just like the painter or other of likenesses, he must necessarily in

all

instances represent

things in one or other of three aspects, either as they were

or are, or as they are said or thought to be or to have

ought to be.

as they

been, or

language, with an admixture,

All

(2)

may

it

he does

this

in

words

be, of strange

and metaphors, as also of the various modified forms of words, since the use of these is

remembered,

to be

is

conceded

of correctness in poetry as in politics,

There

art.

kinds of error,

the one

other only accidentally connected with the

power of expression, his art was through his having meant

lack of if it

incorrect

both

way

(e. g.

to

make

If the poet

failed

(one in a matter

it

But

some

in

movement have

of,

say,

medicine or some other special

or impossibilities of whatever kind they

science),

through

itself is at fault.

to describe

the horse in

the

thrown forward) that the technical error

legs

right

It

itself

directly,

art.

and

describe the thing correctly,

to

(3)

same kind or indeed any other

however, within the limits of poetry

is,

a possibility of two

meant

in poetry.

too, that there is not the

have got into his description, his error in the essentials

of the poetic

may

be,

in that case is not

These, therefore, must

art.

be the premisses of the Solutions in answer to the criticisms involved in the Problems. I.

Any

As

to the criticisms relating

impossibilities there

are faults. if

may

to

the poet’s

But from another point of view they are

they serve the end of poetry itself— if

have said of that end) they make the

work more astounding.

of the

an instance

in

point.

If,

art

itself.

be in his descriptions of things

The

(to

justifiable,

assume what we

effect of

some portion

Pursuit of Hector

is

however, the poetic ^end might

have been as well or better attained without sacrifice of technical correctness

in

such matters, the impossibility

not to be justified, since the description should be, entirely free from error.

error

is

POETICS

in a

One may

ask, too,

if it

is

can,

whether the

matter directly or only accidentally connected

G

ft

^

82

25. 1460'’ 3i /cos

eKarrov yap

;

ovK

€)(et

on

eTTtrtjuarat

avTos

ecpi]

dAA’

p.ev,

8e

5

oorcos

op9'

(Tc^iv

ireirpaypievov

dkka

kov,

ore

7]

(t))

Tov’ "

ov TO

15

Tepov

ot

etSft pr.

31

(corr.

Kp^res (rd)

be

KaTO.

A®

olov

dkka

cnrovbaiov

el

keyovTa

7

)

?)

vel ^evo(f)dvr]s

<5)0-

Kakovar ws

aKpaTov

rd

p.eTa(popdv

r]

pr.

A®

ye-

irpbs

t7]V

plkv

irpcb-

apogr.

A®

A®

6

:

et]

(paai Tj

A®

15 Kepai eov pr.

p) A®

A®

yap

m.

rec.

marg. A®

i

ovv Tyrwhitt

A®

2 ev;^ea

8 ov

el

to prev

dpiprjTOxr

rj

in

1461^

A® rdSe. A®

i'rjv]

dkka

“ dkkoi

36 ovre alterum om.

eve/cev]

9 4 add. corr. A®, apogr. (corr. rec.

olov

dpipriTOOs]

et

oiovs

^evocpdvrj

:

kokos,"^

rd “ ^(vpo-

Kal

olvocpkv^iv

etprjTaL,

to-cos]

rd de Spengel

prjToi

?;

iva

rd irpoaoiirov alcry^pov, rd

:

vopi^ov pr.

be

to.

“ ovprjas

(pad-

bv

irpbs

rot etSos pLev e 7 ]v

rj

33 evpnrldria- A® 34 'Evpimbijv Heinsius Parisinus 2038: ovtoj Riccardianus 16

apogr.

KaAws

?)

dyaOov,

p-el^ovos

evirpoacoirov

32

KapiprjTaa)

(pacrl.

ev6p.i.^ov, p.i]

i]

ov piovov (iKeiTTeov eis avTo to

Aokayva, “ os p

davpLpLeTpov

rd

OaTTOV.

“ ey)(ea

tot'

KaAws

KaKov, Lva diroyevriTaL.

Kepaie " ov

6e

^eknov

ov

oT^kcov,

yap

be rod

dAA’ ervy^^’

yap ov rods ^p.i6vovs keyei dkka rods ^vka-

TOV

(TutpLa

eveibes

"EocpoKkii^

to-cos

tQ>v

ovToi

irpaTTOVTa

eveKev,

pLet^ovos

Lcrcos

Kal

Kas'

7]

tov

els

ov

”

dpQvia bei btakveLV, olov ykeoTirj

10 ke^LV

kul

akyjOi},

rd Se

jikeirovTa

elpr]p.evov

Kal

ovr

irepl

to.

irepl

ireirpaKTai,

7]

rj

0T(t7

v7]TaL,

iav

tovtois

olov ra irepl 6 eS>v

(j^aa-Cv,

(f)aa-t,

a-avpiorijpos'

eiTL

tivl

eLprjTal

7)

ovrco

olov

elyev,

vvv ’lAAoptot.

Kal

uxTTTep

bei, olov

tcrcos

[oore] keyeiv

dkX’ ovv

E,evo(j)dveL'

tocTTrep

on

be p.r]beTepoDS,

el

yap ovre jSeXnov

lacDS

dAA’

a\r]d^],

Kipara

d-qKsLa

be

irpos

eypayfrev.

p.ev otovs bei TTOtelv, EvpLuibrjv be olot elcriv, Tavrij

35 XvTeov.

1461 ^

ovk

16

€\a(pos

otl

fjbn

p.i]

ap.i,p,-qTM9

el

^

ei

— 1461^

bvv exev

12 os

p’ 7

A®

16 rd Spengel

:

^evorpavei :

oil

A®

3 rdre

A® rot

17]

el

Yahlen

:

14 rd addidi rd

A®

31—1461^ i6

25- 1460*’

with the poetic art; since

it

is

83

a lesser error in an artist

not to know, for instance, that the hind has no horns, than to

produce an unrecognizable picture of one. be criticized as not true to

If the poet’s description

II.

one may urge perhaps that the object ought

fact,

to

be as

described

—an

answer

he drew

men

as they ought to be, and Euripides as they

were.

like that of

may be

instance,

said that

ought to be, the answer must be then, that

it

The

accordance with opinion.

in

who

however, be neither true nor of the

If the description,

thing as

Sophocles,

wrong

as

as

Xenophanes

is

it

about Gods,

tales

for

thinks, neither

true nor the better thing to say; but they are certainly in

Of

accordance with opinion.

other statements in poetry

one may perhaps say, not that they are better than the

was so

truth, but that the fact

arms

tion of the

the ground

as

’

;

‘ :

something said or done in dealing

time

was the usual way of

for that

with the Illyrians.

it is still

at the

e. g.

;

the descrip-

in a

fixing

them

says or does

it,

word or deed, but

the person to

whom

who

also the person

he says or does

the time, the means, and the motive of the agent it

then,

As for the question whether poem is morally right or not,

with that one should consider not only the intrinsic

quality of the actual

he does

upon

their spears stood upright, butt-end

it,

—whether

to attain a greater good, or to avoid a greater

evil.

III.

Other criticisms one must meet by considering the

language of the poet

word

in a

passage like

Homer may in saying of

perhaps,

Dolon,

may perhaps that

his

face

os p

handsome-faced.

ugly,

where by

ovprjoM

not mules but sentinels.

And

ovjo^as /^ev

mean

irpCjTov,

^ rot etSos p.ev irjv kokos, his

be, not that

was

by the assumption of a strange

(i)

:

meaning

Dolon’s body was deformed, but as

eoetSTjs

is

word

for

may mean

not

the Cretan

So, too, ^wporepov Se Kcpate

‘mix the wine stronger,’ as though for topers, but ‘mix quicker.’

(2)

Other expressions

as metaphorical

;

e. g.

in

Homer may be

it

explained

in aAAot p-ev pa deot re Kal dvepes

G 2

eSSoi'

84

25

-

1461® 17

—1461’’

pa deoi re Kal avepes evbov

“ y TOi OT

apa

Travvv)(^LOi.”

is TTediov TO TpcoiKov

8e

(f)i](rtv

avKcav crvpiyyMV

adpy](r(i€v,

to yap irdvres avrl (rod) ttoAAoi Kara p.(Ta-

fre opLabovif”

20 cj)opav eiprjrai, to yap irav ttoKv

pos ” Kara

2

to yap yviopip-aTaTov

p,€Ta
d'e

TTpocipbiav, wcnrep

8e

ol ” Kat

“ ro

“

Kal to

tl.

'iTTTrtas

p.6vov.

koto.

eXvev 6 ©acios, ro “

SiSojuei’

p.€V ov KaTairvdfTai opLjBpio”

“

aei, olov 'Ep, 7teboKA.rjs

ap.p.o-

d’

oirj

aT\{/a be

biaipe-

be

to.

ecpvovTo,

6vy]T

irplv p.d-

to,

dddvaTa ((opd re irplv KeKprjTo” ra 8e dp.(pi.j3 oKta, “ -napipXTlKev be rrAe'to vv^” ro yap TrAetw a/a^i/3oAoV eaTir.

25 60V

to

edos

Ke^ews.

be

KaTCL

(pacrtv

eivai,

poLo”

Kal y^aXKeas tovs tov

TO.

bdev

30 prjTai 6 ravvp.rjbr]S 8

av

’

ye

TOVTO


Au

TOVTO ev rw

KeKpap.evov

veoTevKTOv

bOev

etprj/xei'w,

ov ttlv6vtu)v oTvov. be

bei

a-r]p.aiveiv,

ws jaaAtar’ av ns

1461

ws rAavKtoi' avTol

Aeyet,

on

i57roAd/3ot

ei'ta

KaTa\lvr](f)L(Tdp,evoi

ovop.d

av

TToo-ay^Sys

p' eayeTO

otov rfi “tt]

el-

eh]

oTav

Kal

eiria- KOTteiv

Keov iyxos ” ro TavTrj KwXvdfjvai TTO(TaxS>s ev8exerat 3P (w8t)

oXvov

Karratre-

aLbrjpov epya^op.evovs,

p,eTa(f>opdv,

boKrj

tov

“ KvqpXs

olvox^oeveiv,

KaTO. TL

VTTevavTLwpi.d

Tl

Trjs

TreTTOtrjrat

—

xdk&)8i

?)

Kara njr KaTavTiKpv

dXbyws TrpovTToXap.^dvov(nv Kal

(rvkXoyiCovTai,

ws

!)

Kal b

elprjKOTOS

navvxi-oi pr. A*-' 17 post eSSov intercidisse suspicor anavres 6' opabov Sylburgius baud scio an integer versus 19 re ojuaSoj'] ;

(II.

10. 13), avkS>v (rvpiyycov r

Morelius

ftopd

:

A“ CS>d A®

:

A®

KtKprjTo

(fuit -la-) boKft

vnevaPTiapari (Ttjpalpoie 6)Si

A®

;

(Trjprjpeiep

A®

apogr.

(i

33 oiop

:

resti-

rap KeKpapepav

A®

crrjpalpoi

opdpnn

31

Vahlen

ra scripsi

1461'’ add. Riccardianus 46, Vahlen 2 elprjKdros Riccardianus 46

(inarg. m. rec. on)

Sit

rec.)

(eti/ai)

neipoprav pr.

A®

m.

24 Riccardianus 46 superscr. m. rec.) A® (ol'j;

27 TOP KeKpapepov apOgr.

30 olpo\oevei A®

A®

opabov r dv6pa>na>v, 007 pr.

25 dddvar

dvrjra

Victorius

dp(pi^6Xia pr.

35

20

roC add. apogr.

tuendus 6pf]7'

evorrrjv

;

(ed. l)

oioi'

;

i

on]

rd rl

elprjKOTecr

:

A® A® A®

;

1461^ 17—1461*’ 2

25-

Compared with what he

{awavTis) Travvvxioi, as

same

^ toi St

time,

word

put for ‘many,’ since ‘all’ his

017)

‘alone.’

A

is

TpwiKov

TO

OvT^

Or

iffivovTO,

appeal ‘

wine

vvi,

and

’

;

speaks of a

KVTjpXs

A

wrought

and

is

it

on the

scribed as the

‘

in

;

e. g. in

is

worker

in

’

latter,

we

iron

it

is

that

however,

‘

rrj

p

in the

in this sense or in that

of which Glaucon speaks

presumption

;

:

a

call

‘

Ganymede

to

’

de-

is

Gods do

instance of

imply some

passage in question

there ;

e. g.

should consider

one

‘They

brazier

how many ways

^aAKeov

ia-x^To

Homer

greave of new-

may be an

the possible senses of ‘was stopped it

a

of Zeus, though the

necessary to reflect it

by an

(6)

Wine-and-water we

Kacra-iTepoio,

same principle

This

in Trapw-

on the same principle that

yeorewrov

aii/^a

KcVpijTO.

irplv

Or

equivocal.

of language.

of understanding

Homer’s

taking

Empedocles,

dOdvara ^(opd re

is

may

difficulties

But whenever also a word seems

contradiction,

may be

it

TrAeo)

ww^-server

not drink wine.

metaphor.

where

custom

the

to

mode

SiSop-ev Se ol,

by the assumption of an equivocal term, as

(5)

Se TrAew

call

p-dOov

TTplv

TO.

Other

(4)

also

known standing

change, as Hippias suggested, in the

be solved by another punctuation Se

So

a species of ‘many.’

ov Kara-TTvOeTai op-^pw.

p.ev

avXwv

metaphorically

duravres, ‘all,’ is

of reading a word will solve the difficulty in

and

us at the

tells

dOpi^creiev,

metaphorical, the best

dp.p.opos is

(3)

to

ttcSiov

is

a-vpiyymv tre 6/xaSwt, the

8’

85

there’

—whether

by

will best avoid the fault

start

and having so decreed

with some improbable it

themselves, proceed

86

25

p.rj

AaK€haLp.ova ekOovra.

to

(paai'

'nap'

Kal

(Tvai

'iKabiov

'

npojBkrip.a etKoj

10 TTOiria-LV

Trjv

ku'l

eypa(f)€V,

dkka a

"npbs

laws

ovk 'iKapiov

fiikTiov

?)

-npbs

s):

ekeyypi

yap

dp 6 i]

?)

e'n IT [piTja IS

b'

20 Krj? oiKT-qs

Atyet,

Trpo?

^

p.r]

-npbs

kcli

et/cos

7

v-nepe-

Trore ovk

dko-

to, b' v-ne-

rot?

kv

oi

Ao'yot?

aoro Kal waavTws, waTe 6

)

oTav

tw dkoyw, wanep

wa-nep ev ’OpeVrr;

vnodiiTai.

eppovipios

h.v

Kal dkoyCa Kal pioydrjpia,

6 ev \p'^(Tr]TaL

ZeS£t?

Set

yiveadai.

wa'nep

rj

oious

napdbeiyp.a

Tb

h aoro? Aeyet

irovripiq,

rrj

etvai

Takoya' ovtw re Kal otl

ovtw cKOTteiv

aoro

ro

el

Kal avTbv

to

p.ev 'npbs t7]v

bo^av bei dvdyeiv.

T7]v

tolovtovs

>):

ro

jdikTiov'

€lpr]pLiva

be

ap.dpTr]p.a

bi

ei?

alpsTWTepov iridavbv dbvvaTov

'noiTjatv

(fyaaiv

avT(p

Ket^aAA^-

oi

tov 'Odvcraea

kiyovai

yrjp.ai

yov icTiv eiKos yap Kal 'napa Tb vavTiws

wa-rrep

e-y^ei

bkws be to abvvaTov

bvvaTov

a'nidavov

Xeti'.

akk'

Tb

8’

tov-

oiTjaei.

ivTvx^s^v tov 'TipKip-ayov

yap

Icttlv,

Trpbs

rj

re yap

TTpos

15

avTwv

vis

airdv

tt}

olovtul yap avrbv AaKiava

irepl ^iKapiov.

ovv to

aroTTOv

5 etvai"

3-23

av virevavTiov y

rt fioKet eTnTijxSxTiv,

To 8e iriTTOvde ra

1461’’

.

dvdy-

pirj

Evpi'nibris

tw

roS MefeAdov,

(r?;)

yap w?

rd ph} ovv

eTTiTipj'jpaTa eK

dbvvaTa

w? akoya ^ ws iSkafSepa ^ ws inrevavTia ^ ws

rj

3 eneiTipatoiv pr.

nenovOe*

A°

A®

avrav Parisinus 2038

A°

wep iKapiov

A° Madius

Tyrvvhitt: Ke(pakrjvea-

8 eticdr el

St’

apdpTrjpa

Hermann

7 aui-mj/ pr.

{errore Valla)

:

olov

coni.

A°

18 (ppovipos apogr.

dXoyia Kal poxOrjpia Vahlen

margo Riccardiani Vahlen Tfj

5 Ti\epax°’'

II neiOavov

abwarov intercidisse

Parisinus 2038

A®

-nevTe eibwv cjiepovaiv

16

:

:

;

:

A°

:

J)

alrwv A®

4 6 KecpaWrives

A®

Vaticanus 1400 biapdpr-qpa

avrS>v

:

A®

A°

9 (eivai)

12 dneidavov A'^

Kal

otoos Vahlen (confirm. Ar.) 15 orrerai'rtoos Twining; vnevavria wa
dkoyla Kal poxSr)pla alyei^rt]

A®

A® rp

A®

19

21 Alyel

addendum

rj

coni.

;

25. 1461’^ to

draw

3-23

87

and censure the poet as though he

inferences,

had actually said whatever they happen statement conflicts with their is

how Homer’s

silence

own

about

to believe,

his

if

This

notion of things.’

has been treated.

Icarius

Starting with the notion of his having been a Lacedaemonian, the critics think

strange for Telemachus not to have met

it

him when he went

to

Whereas

Lacedaemon.

may

the fact

have been as the Cephallenians say, that the wife of Ulysses

was of was

a Cephallenian family,

Icadius, not Icarius.

So

and that

name

that her father’s is

it

probably a mistake

of the critics that has given rise to the Problem.

Speaking generally, one has by reference

to the

impossibility is preferable to

and

if

men such

answer

is

that

an unconvincing possibility

as Zeuxis depicted be impossible,

one has

to justify either

by showing

with opinion,

or by urging

probable

there

;

for

the

better they should be like that, as the

is

it

ought to improve on his model.

artist

Impossible

For the purposes of poetry a convincing

opinion.

or to

to justify (i) the

requirements of poetry, or to the better,

it

at

to

The Improbable be

times

in it

accordance

(3)

The

one should

not

is

a probability of things

is

also against probability.

the poet’s language

that

(2)

im-

happening

contradictions found in test

first

as

one

does

an opponent’s confutation in a dialectical argument, so as to see tion,

whether he means the same thing,

and

in

the

same

in the

same

sense, before admitting that

rela-

he has

contradicted either something he has said himself or what a

man

of sound sense assumes as true.

But there

is

no

possible apology for improbability of Plot or depravity of character,

when they

are not necessary and no use

of them, like the improbability in the appearance of in

Medea and the baseness of Menelaus

The

objections,

then,

is

made

Aegeus

in Orestes.

of critics start with faults of five

88

25. 1461'’

24

— 26.

Ttapa Tr]v opdoTrjra ti]v Kara

1462® 12 tS>v

€k

8e Avcrets

ai

T€')(vr]v.

35 dpr]p.svu}v apidp&v (TKCTrreat, il
Tlorepov he ^eX.Tmv hiaTTop'qcreLev 8’

Trj

av

i]ttov (fyopTiKrj

f]

3 ekTLovs Beards ecrriv

irpos

j]

yap

el

tis.

eTTOirouKi] p.ipr}(ns

ij

avrbs

p.i]

rrpoa-di], TToXkrjv Klvrjaiv

Kvki 6p,evoL

avkrjral

ws Kal

KakkLmrihrjv

1462 ^ hdpov nphs

ws 8

TjV'

’

ovToi

[

rotavrr]

irpbs cfravkovs’

eyei,

5 TipStTOV Krjs,

pev ov

pev ovv

Tr]V

r&v

prjh'

ert

del,

apogr.

A®

:

A°

Kivovvra

Hermann apogr.

rpayiphia

:

:

rj

rpv he rpayL-

dkkd

Karriyopia

re^vr]

dkr]

bn

dv

etrj,

rfjs vttokplti.-

hiahovra,

enoieL

birep

Mvaai-

rj

(pavkwv,

Kal KakkimrChr]

birep

ws ovk ekevBepas ywaiKas pipovavev

Kal

noiei rb avrrjs,

KLvrja-ears

hid yap rov dvayivdaKecv (pavepd

hdXlav

A® A®

A®

1462

i

28

S’

t)

apogr.

orroia

:

Sij

A°

30 klvovvtm 29 npos addidi S’ alterum om. apogr. avrovs

avrova

axripd

ax^jparcov rr/v 3 ot add. Victorias ra avrfjv (ra av m. rec. in loco macula deformato)

\

4 ei] A® induxit Duentzer

A®

f]

Dii/-

rrepl

dearas emeiKels

irpbs

cryr]pdTViv,

26 ^ekriov A®

Vahlen

Xiav :

rj

errortoda'

rj

aAA’

Kal vvv aAAots

(TKcnra'iai

25

Kal

MvvvC(tkos

eZra ovhe KLvrja-is drraa-a artohoKipaaTea,

op^r/crty,

10 eireripdro

pevuiv,

ho^a

(poprtKij, \eipcov hrjkov

rrjs TTOLrjTLKrjs

deos 6 'OrrovvTLos.

Sicnrep

ovv

Saxrto-rparoy, Kal

[ecrrt]

eXrrep

he

6

TrldrjKov

eari ’nepiepya^eaQai rois rr-qpeLois Kal pa\f/(phovvTa,

errel

onep

el

ekKovres

pev ovv rpayiphLa

r]

eyovai Trpbs avrovs,

8 ’]

(^aaiv etvai (ot) ovhev heovrai Kr]v

Kal

pipet(rdat,

(pavkoi

ol

nporepov rovs vcrrepovs avrciv (Sovro

ol

eKaket,

enonodav

Tr]v

her]

ws ktav yap virep^akkovra

VTTOKpLTas’ 35 TOV

hiaKov

MvodvraL, olov

dv ^Kvkkav avk&aLV.

Tov Kopvefraiov Toiavry] earCv,

dv

3 eArtcoy, roLav/

ws yap ovk aladavopevoiv

(irphs) arravra pip.ovpevr] (f)opTLKi]‘

30 dv

rpayLKi'],

f)

kCav hrjkov ort ^

del,

j

?)

5 ps*' (^ovuy Parisinus

Tj

SidSovra apogr.

10 imriparo pr.

A®

1 1

:

hiahovra avrrja-

A®

2038

A®

7 ^ar'i

8 o ttovvtioit

26

;

24—26. 1462^

25. 1461

kinds

:

(5)

89

the allegation is always that something

impossible,

or

12

improbable,

(2)

(3)

corrupting,

either (i)

is

contradictory,

(4)

The answers

against technical correctness.

to these

objections must be sought under one or other of the above-

mentioned heads, which are twelve

The i s.

question

may

the higherTbrffl-of-httitatton.

the less vulgar that

in

number.

be raised whether the epic or

the higher, and the less vulgar

is

which addresses the better

any and every one

public,

an

is

that, if

always

addressing

art

of a very vulgar order.

is

tragic, 26

tlte

may be argued

It

a belief

It is

add

that their public cannot see the meaning, unless they

something themselves, that causes the perpetual movements of the performers about,

if

— bad

quoit-throwing

the conductor,

if

Scylla

flute-players,

what the

later actors

were

Mynniscus used

and

—to

rolling

pulling at

Tragedy,

the subject of the piece.

then, is said to be an art of this order

for

instance,

to be represented,

is

is

for

be in

fact just

eyes of their predecessors

in the

Callippides ‘the ape,’ because

to call

he thought he so overacted his parts; and a similar view

was taken of Pindarus to

All Tragedy, however,

also.

is

said

stand to the Epic as the newer to the older school of

The

actors.

one, accordingly,

is

said to address a cultivated

audience, which does not need the accompaniment of gesture; the other, an uncultivated one.

a vulgar

art,

it

If,

therefore.

The answer to may urge (i) that

recital,

In the

this is twofold.

to

one

place,

first

overdo

the

;

for

it

is

gesturing even in an epic

as did Sosistratus, and in a singing contest, as did

Mnasitheus of Opus. all

is

the censure does not touch the art of the

dramatic poet, but only that of his interpreter quite possible

Tragedy

must clearly be lower than the Epic.

(2)

That one should not condemn

movement, unless one means

but only that

to

people

of ignoble

condemn even

—

which

the criticism passed

on Callippides and

on others, that their

women

That Tragedy may produce or action in just the

is

the

the dance,

point

of

in the present

day

are not like gentlewomen.

(3)

its effect

even without movement

same way as Epic poetry;

for

from

»

J

:

26. 1462^ 13—1462'’ 19

90 rts iCTTLV

ovv eort

et

to.

Koiov avrfj vnapy^w.

yap rw

15 TToUa (xat

aWa

y

Kal

crei

TM

p.ivov

ypbvip,

5

yap adpodrepov 8’

Aeyco

TTOiSxTiv,

oloy

e;(et

10 e^et

kK

ei

aptcrra

15

(rvyKeipkvy],

Kal

t 5>v

f.lb

/cat

TOV

eS

5>v Kal rav pepcbv,

koI

TLves

prj

14 aiirf] pr. A® avayvapiaei A®

1

1462

Riccardianus 16

:

Bfir]


9 post :

/cat

sj:

I ijfStoi'

ert

’lAias,'

eavra

Kad’

Kal

rw

kv-

d>s

//t/XTjcrts)

Trjs

re'xvrjs

noiHV avras dXXa

pdXXov tov

eirj

bis

:

A®

avT&v

kox

§ta^epet,

rt

Kat

eTrtrt^Tjcrecov

rrepl

* Madius

7

Madius

A®

3

A® pvovpov A®

’OSocrcreia a‘dd.

roiavr otto

Kal

iroa-a

(fuit Idlaa)

6 peLovpov Parisinus 2038

Bernays

olov

8e rj

e7707rottas,

ert to coni. Jortin,

’’

A® ^

Kal

Kat

atrtat,

clvayixicret

7

18

2 TOV biTTovv pr.

TO apogr.

pt,as

-nacrtv

koX

A®

eva

kiroirouas.

rrjs

ovv

Aeyco

Trpcx^ecos

bn KpnTTWv dv

Xvcrewv, elp-qa-Qw ToaavTa.

eXorrcovt

pkv

kav

Troirjpara a-vvkaTrjKiv

to.

rpaycoStas

^

r/

b-noLaaovv

wa-irep

’Obva-aeia,

rj

rvyovcrav rjbovrjv

(jravepbv

pkv

Kal

bM^kpei

rrjv

reAous nyy^dvova-a irepl

yap

cScrre

vbaprj'

prjK^i

on paXiara

Kal

yap ov

clprjpkvrjv),

pia

fj

ravra

{Kalrot.

ovv TOVTOLS re

epycp (Set Trjv

TTpa^ecov

TToXXa TOiavra pkprj

pkyeOos

deCp

OlbCirovv

ert T]ttov

ck

bk,

yivovTat),

pkrpov

tov

TiXeiovoiV

biy^iTai

—

rpayabiaL

^ ttoAAw K€Kpa-

toi>

’lAtas)’

{(xrjpeLov

ro reAos

p.r]KiL

rjbLOV

n?

ei fj

avayvio-

rrj

jSpay^kws beiKvvpevov piiovpov (paiviadai, ^

rj

t5

CLKoXovOovvTa

kav

eTTOTTOtwi;

Tikeiovs

pi,pk](r€ 0)s

pvOov

tG>v

)]

ai rjboval (TVvCaTav-

jjs

rb kv kXaTTOvi

eri,

rbv ^o(f)OKX.iovs iv (Treaiv baois pLpr](ri9

bi

oi//'ets,

ctto-

?/

Kal ert ov pnKpbv

eira Kal rb ivapy^s e)(et Kal €v

^Xvat {rb

/;itju7/o-ea>y

1462

e)(et oa-aTrep

yjpT](T 6 aC),

e^ecTTL

p-irpcp

tZv epycov

eirl

bion -navT

eireLra

ptepos Tr]v p.ova-LKi]v kuI ras

TaL ivapyia-rara'

KpeiTTMV, tovto ye ovk avay-

(e

ert roit

:

(confirm. Ar.)

:

rjbovrj

/ti'a

A® A®

iXiciy

’"o*'] 17

Spengel

:

b

A®

7 rou /rerpou] crvppfTpCj)

d apogr.

18

codd. quibusdain)

Winstanley

et

A®

lo

/cairoi

ravra

26. 1462^ 13—1462’’ ig the

mere reading of a play

that,

be superior

if it

inferiority is

quality

its

91

may be

So

seen.

other respects, this element of

in all

no necessary part of

it.

remember

In the second place, one must

Tragedy

that

(i)

has everything that the Epic has (even the epic metre being admissible), together with a not inconsiderable addition in

the shape of the Music (a very real factor in the pleasure

drama) and the Spectacle.

of the

presentation

is

in the

felt

play as acted.

That the

(3)

it

— consider

and the

{4)

That there

the epic poets, as

is

effect

is

is

number of

into the

it

curt

that, if

when

proved by the

fact that

they take what

briefly told,

is

an

many such

mean an same way as

parts, each

lines of

any one work the result

In saying that there

made up of

epic

the Iliad and Odyssey have

one of them

and the action

possible one action. respects,

is

a plurality

in itself of

some magni-

tude; yet the structure of the two Homeric poems perfect as can be,

to

and thin and waterish when on the

epic, I

of actions, in the

more

really a single story, itTseemS

scale of length usual with their verse. less unity in

great

less unity in the imitation of

of theirs supplies matter for several tragedies;

being

a is

the Oedipus of Sophocles, for instance,

of expanding

effect

the Iliad.

which

;

one with a large admixture of time

pleasurable than dilute

end

its

more concentrated

the

since

reality of

its

tragic imitation requires less

space for the attainment of advantage,

That

(2)

play as read, as well as in the

is

as

them is as nearly as If,UTen, Tragedy is superior in these

and also besides these,

in

in

its

poetic effect (since

the two forms of poetry should give us, not any or every pleasure, but the very special kind is

we have

mentioned),

it

clear that, as attaining the poetic effect better than the

Epic,

it

win he the higher for m of art

So much

_

_

—

Tragedy and Epic poetry for these two arts in general and their species the number and nature of their constituent parts the causes of success and failure in them the Objections of the critics, and the Solutions in answer for

;

;

to

them.

;

FRAGMENTA I.

Aristoteles Rhet. 3. fjikv

rw

1404^ 37

2,

(ro(pi(rTfi ofJiODVViJiCaL xp’qo'ijJ.OL TTOir]Tfj

(Trapa ravras

rt juev

i(TTi Kal TTOCTa dbr] p.€Tacj)Opas Kal

Kal iv

TTOtT/tret

(Tvvu)vvp,a

ovv tovtwv

otl tovto

eKaaTov

’nkuaTov bvvaTai

Trep't TroirjriKTjs.

Simplicius in Categ. 36. 13 Kalbfleisch 6 ’Apt(TroreAr]s iv Tip TrAetco p,€v

yap Kanaypyei), (cat

Kal kv Aoyotj, al p.€Ta<\)opat, etprjrai KaOdirep

eXiyopLiv iv tois

&v

t£

tovtu yap ap-cpoTepa Kal

OLOV TO TTopeveadai kuI to ^abC^eiv aXkrjXois.

dvondrcav

h'

Aeyco 8e Kvpia re

8e avvinvvp.iaL.

Kvpta Kal avv(ovvp,a

t&v

:

to.

Trept

:

Kal

yap Kal


TTOtrjTiKrjs

ovopaTa Adyoy 8e 6 avTos, 61a

brj

ecrt rd

iroXvdvvpa, to re Xioinov koI IpaTLOv Kal to (pdpoi.

II.

Aristoteles

Poet.

6,

1449’^

21

:

Trept

kco pip

bias

vcTepov ipovpiv.

III.

Aristoteles Rhet. rj

i.

ii, 1371*^

33:

naibia tS)v pbiwv Kal Tracra dvecris

/cat

opoiias 8e Kal

inel

6 yeAcos tSiv rjbimv.

:

FRAGMENTA avdpdmvs

avayKT] Kal ra yiXola fjbea etmt, Kal

fpya-

Kal

8c

Stco/Dtorat

93

yfkoCcDV

ircpt

kul

ev

Xbyovs

rois

irepl

TTOirjTLKrjs.

Idem Rhet. CTTCtS?/

nji'

Tov

ycAwra

be

ea-Tiv

ekev6ep(p

to

8’

ov*

b'

Trepl

to

.

.

.

et

&v to

77iiseros

p.ev

apptorrci

avT^

kr]\p^eTai.

ekevdepiuiTepov

o

pi.ev

:

ridentur vel sola vel inaxime, quae

hmcta nec rursus

scelere

etbrj

Locus autem et regio quasi 2. 58 turpitudine et deformitate quadajn contmeUir; haec

turpitudinein aliquatu no7i turpiter

facmerosos

€(f)r]

ro yekoLov, 6 be fSoupLokoy^os eTepov.

Cicero de Oratore

Conf.

Txoaa

eiprjTai

appLOTTov

jScopLokoy^ias

Trjs

Trotct

iroLrjTiKTjs,

ovv

ottcoj

elpcoveia

fj

keywv,

opOSis

cnrovbT}

ev TOis

yap avTov eveKa

enitn

bdv

ivavrCwv ycAcort

rOiV

bta(j)deLpeLV

a-rrovbrjv

piev

yekoLMV

ridiculi

ycAotW,

t&v

8e

ircpt

:

TLva 8oKct yprja-iv ^€i.v kv rois ay&(TL, Kal

Fopytas

eaTL

2

1419'’

18,

3.

7iolu7tt,

.

.

et designant msignis miprobitas

7iotaJtt

7tec

msigTiis

7/iiseria

vi qua77t ridiculi

7>iaiore q7iada7ii

inludi

.

7>iaxime est caritati ho7ni7iu)7i,

7ie

temere

haec igitur adhibe7ida est pri77m7}i

vohmt j

iacta7itj parceTtdiau aute7/i

se forte

Ttisi

ridetur

agitata vul7iera7-i

m

i7i

eos dicas qui diligUTitur.

iocaTido 77ioderatio ; itaque

ea facilli7>ie ludtmtur qitae 7ieque odio magTio neqjte 7}usericordia 7naxi7>ia dig7ia su7it j est

i7i

Us

cala77iitosoru7n

neque

videniur; eaqiie

qua7>i ob re77t 77iateries

077tiiis

ridiculoru77i

homimmi neque carorum neque qui ob facinus ad suppliciwn I'apiendi

stmt in vita

vitiis qitae

eoriiin

belle agitata ridentur.

IV. Antiatticista

TaTOV

:

in

Anecdotis

’Apia-TOTekris Ttepl

Bekkeri loi. 32

:

kvvto-

to be TtdvTwv kvvto-

'novr]TiKrjS

TOTOV.

V. Aristoteles Pol. 8. aTtobeyop-eQa t&v pLek&v TO. p.ev

t)

6 iKa

to.

32

7,

1341'’

ws

biatpova-C Tives

be irpaKTiKa ra

8’

:

e-rrel

be

t&v

ti]v

biaipecnv

ev t^ikocrocpia,

evOovaiatTTLKa TidevTes, Kal

FRAGMENTA

94 t5>v apixoviSiv Ti]V

aWo

TTpbs

npos eKacTTa tovtwv OLKStav aKXrjv

p,€pos Tt0ea(rt, cpap-ev 8’ ov

^pricQai

p.ovo’LKy

(f)vaiv

aXka

belv

kul

mibcias €V€K€V kuI KaOdpaeoiS

—

iveKa ox^eAetas

p.i.as

yapiv

irkeLovcov

Trj

yap

{koX

KaOapcriv,

tl be kiyopLev rrjv

p.ev a-nk&s, -irdkiv b’ ev rots irepX TTOi-qTLKrjs epovp.ev aa(f)e-

vvv

arepov TTjv

—rpiTOV

Trjs

Xp-qa-reov,

dkka

be aKpoaatv

rw pdkkov,

Kal

ort

avrbv

\pri<7Teov

rpoTTOv

8e

erepcov yeipovpyovvroiv Kal o

iaxvpas tovto ev

\frvxas

rbv

ov

aveaCv re Kal irpbs

TTpbs

(jravepbv

piev

Tracrats

Trpbs p-ev rrjv iraibeiav raty rjOiKTOTarais, irpbs

evdovaiaa-TiKais.

Tais

biaycoyrjv,

dvdTTav(Ti.v),

appLOvCais,

rais

TTacrais

be itpos

(TVVTOvCas

olov

yap

Kal

avp^aCvei

evias

irepl

TidcraLS virdpxet,

ekeos

rals irpaKTiKais

rw

irddos

6 e rjTTOv biarpepei 8’

Irt

cfiojSos,

Kal

evdovaiaapos’

Kal yap virb ravrrjy rrjs KLvrja-eois KaTOKtoxipoL rives eWiv, eK be

rStv

lepZv pek&v bpStpev

orav xpTjo-wi^rat roty

rovrovs,

e^opyidCovcTi rljv \lfvxrjv pekeai, KaOicrrapevovs &(nrep larpeias

ravrb

Tv^dvras Kal KaOdpcrews.

rovro dvayKoiov irda-xeiv

8r/

Kal Tovs eket^povas Kal rovs (poj3r]TiKovs Kal roiis oAcoy iradr]TiKOVs,

8’

TOVS

aAAowy Ka0’ ocov eTnl3dkkei

Traci

eKaarip, Kal

yiyvecrOai riva

opoms

peO' ^bovrjs.

Kadapcriv

8e Kal rd pekr]

roiovrwv

reiv

Kal

Kovefri^ea-Oai

rd KaOapriKd irapexei

Xapdv d^kal^rj rois dvdpwTTOis. Conf. Aristoteles Pol. 8. bdiKov

dXXa paXkop

ypyjareop ip ois

fj

decopia KaOapcriv

Proclus in Plat. bijiroTS

Plato]

6,

1341®' 21

:

tn

b'

tanv

ovk

Remp.

i

paWop

bvparai

p. 42 Kroll

:

f/

elrrelp

6 aikbs

airm Kaipovs

opyiacrriKov, oxrrf irpos roi/s toiovtovs

pddrjcnv.

xpb

•

•

•

bevrepop, ri

paKicrra rqp Tpaytfbiap Kal rfjp KiopiKqp ov irapabix^Tai Kal

ravra a-vprekovcras npos

dcfyoaiaaip

twp

rraOStP,

a

[soil.

pr/re

TvaPTUTvaaip aTTOKXlptiP bvparop prjre ipnipirkapai iraXip aacpaXes, beo-

peva bi tipos (p Kaipa Kiprjaeas,

fjp

ip rals tovtiop aKpodaeaip iKrrXr]-

povpivrjP dp6P0)^^T0vs rjpas an' avrap ip p.

49

:

TO bi bevrepop

[soil.

ra Xoinu XP°^V

npo^Xrjpa]— tovto

b' r/p

to

ti)P

rroiiip

,

.

.

Tpaycobiap

iK^dXXeadai Kal Kiopabiap aTonoas, tlnep bia tovt(op bvpaTop ippeTpois

dnonipnXdpai

tcl

nddrj Kal dnonXrjtrapTas evepyd npbs TtjP naibeiap

.

FRAGMENTA TO ne7rovr]K.6s avTwv Bepamvcravras

— tovto

95

6 ’ oiv

noWfjv

Kai

tm 'Apiaro-

TeXfi Trapav TTOcrjaeayv tovtcov dyaivccTTals

Twv

nXarcot'a \oyu>v ovTaxri

Trpoff

epTrpocrOev BiaXicropev

.

.

.

p.

50

ircos

ripels

enopevoi

ovx wore Taj

Tivas t5)v TraOcov tovtcov direpdaeis koI ^peis (p^cropev, dKX' Trep'i

rds rfi

avrd TTpocTnadecas KLvr)(TeLs

crvvTeLVfiv,

Toivavriov pev ovv aScre

avrcdv ippeXais dvacneXXeiv' eKeivas Se dpa rds

TToiKiXLq KOI TO

rocs

Selu pev oiv tov ttoXctikov StaprjxavdaSac

:

aperpov exovaas ev

TToXXoi 8(cv els dcpocTcaxTCV eivai

p^aXii'ovi' ko'c Tiocrjcrfis irpos

ra'cs tS>v TTa6S)v

tovtcov TrpoKX^crea'i

yap

dcpocridiaeis ovk ev

;^p 7;a'ipouj.

al

vnepjBoXals elaiv aXX' ev (Tvve<7Ta\pevais evepyeiais, (rpiKpav dpoidrrjTa

vpos eKeiva exoicrais

iov eicriv aefoocridicTeis,

lamblichus de Myst.

Twv ev Se

fjp'cv

TrdvTT)

/3pa;^eiai'

npoaydpevai

[ita

I.

II

Bernays

;

;^aipov(Ti perpicos

daipopevai

:

at

dwdpeis

tS>v dvBpconLvaiv Tradrjpdrcov

pev elpydpevai KadiaravTai (TCpobpoTepac,

TrecBoi Kai

els

evepyecav

^pax^ls vulg.] Kai dxpi tov crvppeTpov Kai airoTvXrjpovvTai, Kai evrevOev

ov irpos ^lav avairavovrai.

arroKa-

8id dq tovto ev re

oXXoTpia irddq decopovvres la'Tapev rd olKela irddq

Kcopcpdlq Kai Tpaycpblq

dnepya^dpeda Kai diroKad ac po pev

Kai perpcdoTepa

VI. Philopoiius

Hayduck

:

in

8td tovto

Aristot. (prjo't.v

de Anima 6tl

to

ov

reAo?, btTTOv eori, ro pev ov evsKa, to 8 e riotTjrtKT/ Kai

ev

Trj

Ilept yeveaecos etirev.

p.

269,

28 ed.

evsKa, tovt^cttl

to

2, oirep Kai ev tj]

<

—

:

COMMENTARY Tuv

The

elSwi' aurris.

Comedy,

as

meant are epic poetry, Tragedy, and I 447 ^ 8 1449 21, where the main subjects for

eiSr]

from

clear

is

6,

consideration in the Poetics are enumerated.

Lyric poetry, apart

from an occasional reference to the Dithyramb and Nome, or the chorica in Tragedy, is ignored in the existing Poetics ; and there been discussed in is little or no reason to suppose it to have

The

the lost portion of the book.

importance of

musical

its

probability

element,

from the

that,

is

belonged

it

Aristotle's

in

classification of the arts to the theory of fjLeXoiroua rather than to

The work

that of poetry proper.

and Timotheus

is

of the two lyric poets Phrynis

put under the head of /MeXorroua in Metaph. a

i,

in the Problems, where Phrynichus is said to have 993 13 been a yu,eXo7rotos rather than a tragedian (Probl. 18. 31, 9208' ii j

Ata

is

^pvvi^oy ycray p.aXXov

TL ol irepi

Tore ra

(Tia etvat

p.eXoTroioi

^ Bia to TroXXaTrXdthe same view

;

p.iXr] iv rats rpayoiStats Tolv p-irptiiv ;),

implied of the lyric parts of Tragedy.

It

to

is

be remembered

Ran. 1250 makes Euripides begin his chorica in Aeschylus by calling him a kukos

too that Aristophanes in of

criticism /

the

icXoTTOtds.

For the rwv elB&v

Top.

ovo/AaTcov], oTttv

I.

15) 106 ^ 37

qi'

5. 2,

22

Ttm

Kal

Sut'afiiv

ttwctis,

rj

eKaerroi' exei

(T^eSov ecTL <^avep6v

capacities,

cTTacrcws.

which enable

or cannot

all

el

rf

rwv dXXuiv

Trrojcris

Kal avro.

— Eth.

=d

Tt

Bwarai

’

.

Each it

to

do so well and

.

.

BrjXov Be Kal

rj

Tipr] Kal tl

species of poetry

do what the

has

will

1460 POETICS

7-

1 5)

be found in Bon. Ind. 206

^ 28.

That

it is

1462

its

BvvaraL special

cannot do

rest either

effectively.

aut-ioraffOai is a passive in 26,

24,

E.

[scil.

avTOv

COmp. Pol.

eKacrrov

Other Aristotelian

stances of Bvvapv; with a sense approximating to our ‘effect

dir

17

g rovTcov Be v^pi'; piev Kal KepBo^ Tiva e^^ovcn Bvvap.Lv Kal

ama

Trios

Kal

16 koI airQv Kal

Be Kal ivl

BiKaiocrvvrj Kal airr] Kal al Trpdfcts.

1302

TTcos aiTLa,

op.oiui<;

avTO TrA-eova^ois XeyrjraL, Kal

TrXeovaxdii pr/ffijaerat,

1248

comp. 26, 1462

antithesis in the text

.

‘

function

at

in’

or

29. ^ 16,

and probably

a passive in the present passage

is

also in ®

shown

H

9

—

COMMENTARY

98 1447 ^ 9 by the ® 10

KaXws Tas

e^€H'

may be

which

in

13,

:

360

—

said to be KaXov, so anything that is

said to

1459

24,

As anything good of

/caAtos.

ought to be

it

'’4.

1453

12 tov KaXtos

1453

Siavoi'as kuI tyjv kt$Lv

kind

1450^32, and

parallels, Tovs o'vvea'TwTas tv jxvOovs in

ovTU) (TwecTTavaL rbv fjLvdov in 14,

KaXm

txti-v

its

in the condition

is

(comp. Bon. Ind.

38).

iroiw

cTi Se tK iTocrwi/ Kai

eo-rl jj.optwt', scil.

rj

Many

7toir)cn?.

of

the translators, however, suppose the subject to be tKaa-rov tiSo^ (‘

ex quot

The and ^ II

et

cujusmodi partibus constent singulae

question

aWwv

twv

in reference to epic poetry.

oaa

ttjs aurtjs

com pe068ou

StSyXcvrai 8 t Kal irtpl twj/ aXXiov ocra co-Ttv.

The meaning

has been discussed

449

:

Soph.

el.

183 ^12

33,

avTrj? fieOoSov Ttov Aoytov

rrj'i

of fitOoSos, a favourite word with Aristotle,

by Wailz, Org.

2

p.

297 (comp. Bon. Ind.

*’43)-

‘‘12

dp^dpei'oi

Soph.

el.

I,

tfiva-Lv

part. an. i. 5,

Rhet.

I.

13,

The language

ktL

164”' 20

ap$dp.€voi Kara

De

species,' Goulston).

considered in chap. 6 in reference to Tragedy,

1450 ^ 10

in 24,

rrepl

is

646

TTtpl

dno twv "•

3

1373'’!).

;

here

is

very like that in

Se Tibv aroia'rLKwv tXtyx}vv

TrpwTiov

2. 10,

In

(comp.

655 ^ 28

order

to

De

.

sensu

Eih. E.

i. 7,

determine

the

;

.

.

Xtyu)p,tv

436 6 1217 « 18

I,

starts with the

;

definition

of poetry, or rather of Tragedy as the highest form of the Aristotle

;

art,

assumption that Tragedy, together with

comes under the general head of p.Lp.7}cn^, and then proceeds by successive divisions of this genus to note one by one the various points which differentiate it from the rest, (i) Tragedy has language, metre, and music as its means of imitation the music in it, however, comes in only from time to time, in the choral parts which distinguishes it from the Nome and the Dithyramb. (2) It represents noble personages which distinguishes it from Comedy. (3) It has a dramatic form which distinguishes it from the Epic. These with other differentiae less clearly accounted for are combined in the definition of Tragedy at the opening of chap. 6. The logical order here exemplified is

certain other allied arts, ‘

imitation,’

;

—

what

Aristotle regards as the

I.

189^31

7)

tern

yap Kara

natural order of procedure

:

Phys.

(f>vcnv to, koivo. irpHtrov eiirovras ovtcj to.

Trepl tKaerrov iSia Otwptiv.

13

e-TToiroua ktI.

This enumeration of imitative

arts

comprises the

four great species of poetry distinguished by Plato in Rep. 394

c,

together with two purely musical arts, avXrjnKi] and KiOapurnKv

— 1447 ^ 9-15

I.

These

last

99

be supposed to be added partly on account of the 1447 ® 13

may

manifest analogy between them and poetry, both being imitative arts appealing to the ear,

and

on account of

partly also

De

connexion of poetry with music (comp. Cicero

cal

quondam idem

musici, qui erant

Even

poelae').

the histori-

Orat.

3,

174

Plato occasionally

merges the one in the other. In the Republic f^ova-tK-q includes poetry, and in Symp. 205 c poetry includes to -n-epl Tt]v ixovcriK-qv. TpayuSias

Tfjs

1]

ttoitjcis

Plato Gorg. 501 E StaS

17

^

:

26 q

—

$02 B

TTOtr]aL <;.

rpayw-

r/

^ Plato cites the Dithyramb as an instance of 14

the non-imitative type of poetry p.€v Slo. p.ip. 7j(T€^

§€

Si’

Rep. 394 c t^s Trotijcrcfajs ... 17 rpaywBia T€ Kal Kwp-ioBta,

:

0X7) icTTiv, (ucTTrep CTv Acycis,

airay-yeXias avrov too iroLYjTOv

TTov

iv SiOvpdp.^01?.

(as

also

‘

.

TTOLTjO'LS.

Si0upafjiPoiroiT)TiKTi.

rj

SL 6 vpafi/3 iKu)v

t
rolv Si 6 vpdp.^(av Troiqari'i

the

imitative

’

By

— copois

Aristotle’s time,

Nome) had

lost

its

S’

av avrrjv

p-aXtcrra.

however, the Dithyramb

original

and become

form,

or semi-dramatic, a sort of musical counterpart of the

Drama, dealing with the same kinds of subject as Tragedy, and with solos by professional singers corresponding to the speeches of

This change

the tragic actors. is

noted in Probl. 19. 15,

in the character of the

918^

18

ol Si^opa/iySoi,

Dithyramb p.tp.rjTLKOL

tTreiS-^

iyevovTO, ovkstl e^ovcriy dyTC(rTp 6 (^ovi, TrpoTepov Se el)(OV alriov Se oti

TO TToAaiov ot eXevOepot

^aXenov

aSeiv

qv,

i)( 6p€Vov

(Lcrre

ttoXAgIis ovv

avTOt'

evapp. 6via

p-eXq

ivfjSov

dyiovicrTt/ciijs

p.eTa^dXXeiv yap

pqov q rots ttgAAois, Kal to) dywycarq (comp. Bergk, Gr. Litt. 2 p. 529, and q Wilamowitz, Euripides Herakles* i p. 79). In this mention of the /x£Ta/3 oAds

TToAAas

evi

T(j>

TOLi TO q 0 o<; (pvXdTTova-Lv

Dithyramb, therefore, Aristotle does not poetry in general (as

is

cite

it

as a type of lyric

often supposed), but as representing an

—

form of lyric a lyrical p.ip.qa-Ls or picture of and manners. A certain approximation to this later form of Dithyramb is to be seen in Bacchylides (Comparetti, Melanges

imitative or dramatic life

Weil

p. 30).

Tijs

T^s

The

auXiiTiKTjs 4

Trepl

irXeiaTTj

l(TTopia<;

:

De

Caelo

3. I,

2gS^

2

(comp. Kiihner, Gr. Gr.^

Tqv TrXua-Tqv 2.

i

p. 279).

avAds was the accompaniment of the Dithyramb and the KiOdpa

of the

Nome.

to them, as

it

That, however, is

clear

music without words, avXqcTLs

and

from i.e.

is

not the reason for this reference

»

23 that Aristotle is thinking rather of of that which was termed in antiquity ij/iXq

ij/iXq KiOdpia-L'i.

Plato in the

Laws (669

against this purely instrumental music, which

e) sets his face

had evidently attained H

2

:

COMMENTARY

lOO 1447

on

15 to a high degree of perfection in his time,

ends a

mere display of

in a

brutish

‘

noise

OrjpiwSov;

(^ojv^s

’

language in Pol.

8. 6,

a vvv eX.7]Xv6€v eh

roiis dytovas,

view some

in

truth

® 11

1341

Plato’s

ra

seems

In

rj

twv tpyoiv

or

avXrjTLKi^,

avXrp-LKrj rracra,

r/

avAi/riK^s

his

passage

present

the

it

and

imply that there was in

to

criticism.

accordingly, instead of saying

order to show that he

that

Aristotle’s

<^tAov).

cr6Spa

6avp.a.
adopts the qualified form of expression, in

ground

the

technical execution {davfjLarovpyia)

he

vXeia-Trj,

rj

not unaware of there being exceptions

is

to the rule.

^ 16

The general meaning of p.Lp.eL
The

sort.

the pupLo^,’

another

word must have been

primitive sense of the

reproduce

to

—a

play

to

‘

language, tones, gestures,

the

of

etc,,

sense which survives in the use of the term for the

of persons by actors on the stage. In actual use word is wide enough to include the counterfeiting of movement and attitude by the dancer, that of voice and sound by the singer and musician, that of the forms and colours of things by the sculptor and painter, and even the representation of things in words, as in speech and literature. A noteworthy variation, however, is to be observed in the application of the word to a work of imitation

the

Owing

literature.

Plato it

to the dramatic

himself, as

orav ye riva Xeyr]

epowra ; (fxvvTjv

’Ev

BLTjyrjaLS p.ev ecrri koX

prjCTiV

p-aXiara

^ Kara (T)(^p.a Tw TOtovTo),

ws

rrjv

yap

^rj(Top.ev Tt

Tis

rwv

dAAos

Ovkovv to ye

;

(Ls

eot/ccv,

ovtos

eavrbv a-iroKpvrrroLTO 6

TrotijTT/s, rrdcra

r]

yttev

yeyovvia

Std r]

p.ip.r](T ear's

he

hi’

fiaXicrra ttov ev erroiv

irovqa’ei,

eit].

bXr]

;

eariv,

arcrnep

—

r]

8

ov

av

TroAAa^oS he Kal dXXoOi,

dv

dv

ns

TTpoeirryj

jj.ev

crii

/at/xijorews

u)S

Kara

Tt /e^v;

;

hia

p,r]hap,ov

r]

TroiTjcts

re Kal p.v6oXoyia
Ae'yets,

—

r]

rroirp-al

Et he ye

ovv.

rroii^creds

hi

op. 0101

kox ol aXXoi

drrayyeXias airov rov TrotT/ToO hiOvpdp.^oi's

avrbv

ap’ ov Tore 6p,oiovv

dv avrev dvev

— 394 B t^s

e/cdcTOTC Xeyr/

yap ov ; ’AAA

Iluis

op-oiovv eavrbv aXX(o

re

Udvv

iroiovvTau

Kwp.
tov,

piycrcts

avrov Xe^iv eKacTw

/xt/ATjcretos Tr]v 8n]yr]a'iv

hiriyr]
otuv ras prjcrewy

ixip-elcrOaL ecrrtv eKeivov (5

hr]

T€ Kal

it

restricting

of statement, in which the speaker effaces

Kal orav ra p-era^v

[scil. "Op-rjpos^

OTL

mode

to narrative,

p.ip.rjcn^

were, and identifies himself with his personages

it

Rep. 393 B ovKow

t^rj(Top,ev

connected with

to the traditional associations

Republic opposes

the

in

rpaytohia re Kai

evpoi'S h’

apiefroreparv

dv avrr]v

ev re

In his use of

rg

rarv

pupieicrdai in

;

1447^ 15-17

I.

lOI

the Poetics Aristotle has fallen into a grave inconsistency, as he 1447 ^ 16 distinctly makes it in one place {3, 1448 21) include narrative,

and

1460

in another (24,

TO (TuVoXov qualifies

exclude

«'9)

what

-n-aa-ai,

is

it.

whole

said of the class as a

being opposed to the specific differences which reveal themselves in

it

on

ivvSpov

comp. Plato Soph. 220 b SE. ToD

closer examination; [scil.

cr^^eSov

17

to ctvvoXov oXuvtik-^

;

Forchhammer’s correction «v supposed to be confirmed by the use of the preposition 22 and b 29, and the means or vehicle of imitation in Y*vci ^Te'pois.

T
where

8k

@EAI. Nat.

;

Tavrrjv av rrjv 6-qpav ap’ ovk av Kara p-kyicrra /iepi? Svo

HE. Tt Se; SieXoip-rjy

yo'ovs

(3,

1448^20

The

etc.).

however,

sense,

expressed by the simple dative, as

is

it

erepots

to denote

also else-

well

just as

is

is

for instahce in the

imme-

and “ 26 and as the means under consideraand pv^/xds, differ in kind, they are rightly described as yeVet erepa. There is no need to restore (tw) yeVet Aristotle not unfrequently omits the article in this and cognate diate context in “ 18 tion, Xdyos,

;

dppLovia,

Top.

formulas, e.g. in

497^59 and Metaph.

i.

103^13

7,

1059

10,

I

yevei ravra,

yem

14

H. A.

in

2.

i,

In An. post.

erepa.

98^26-28 we find him saying toj yeVei and yeVet, and in Eth. N. 10. 5, 1175^25 T(S etSet and etSet without perceptible difference of meaning. The distinction in fact between yeVet erepa 2. 15,

and T& yevet erepa is not greater than that between different in and different in their kind in English. A confirmation of ‘

kind

’

’

‘

Forchhammer's 8,

reading

1451® 17 Ac has

been

has

yeVet

T(d

seen

in

the

fact

that

instead of the true reading rep

in evt.

The two cases, however, are not quite parallel. TOrENEI = TftlENI assumes only a very familiar kind of corruption, whereas TnrENEI=TOIEN leaves an important part of the word (the termination) unexplained.

parison in the next

presuppose yeVet

It is also to

line,

werTrep

as )(p(Lp.ara Kat

kTepoL<;,

be observed that the com-

yap Kat

)(pmp.acrL KTe.,


and

seems to which

efoovT^,

appeal to different senses, are marked instances of things yeVet Irepa

(comp. An.

post.

r£

certain inelegance in

than that in Phys. airois, or that

in

I

.

2.

13,

97^^34).

There

is

yevei erepois p.ip.et(rOai, but ‘J,

Plato

191’’'!

Bid

to

no doubt a

it is

not greater

erepov vTrdp^^etv rd eivai

Rep. 534 B StaXcKn/cdv

/caAets

rdv Xdyov

fKacTTOV Xapt^dvovTa r^s oiertas. T) Tu Irepa 4 T

^ 17

:

COMMENTARY

102

1447^18

KOI

Tw

fit)

1448*22,

1449

6,

woTTcp yap KT€.

group of

The

imitative arts.

means

in

a larger

between the

arts that

to the difference of

distinction

address the eye and those that address the ear

by Plato oi

Rep. 373 b

in similar terms, e. g. in

TO

TTCpi

pa{j/(p 8 oi

3.

1118*3;

13,

special reason for saying erepoi he Sid

Rhet. 3*

1404*21

I)

rwv pLopiMV Yjpuv

many

iroXAa

2.

(comp. also in

97

13,

35

;

Aristotle has a

because the great

rrj^

what renders language and poetry

of the arts subsidiary to the he Kal

rf

latter

irdvruiv p.ip.r]riKt!)rarov

(f>u>vr]

re paij/wSia Kal

r]

The

;

character and feeling)

The

10, i).

art of the

vtto-

17

painter or sculptor has

can represent many things

it

directly express 3.

assumed

is

An. post.

in

Sio Kai al re^yai trvveo'rrjaav,

not otiose.

is

certain limits (e.g.

vTrrjp^e

It

dXXai ye.

KpiriKrj Kai

^ 19

is

e).

1340*34).

Pol- 8. 5,

imitative capacity of the voice possible, together with

o" re /xi/Aijrai, ttoXXoI

VTroKpLrai )(opevral Kre.

Rep. 603 b; Crat. 423 d; Gorg. 474 a number of Aristotelian passages (e. g. Eth. N.

frequently noted

is

re koX ^pw/xara, ttoAAoi Sc ol Trepl piovcnKrjv,

a')(rjfiaTd

Kal rovruiv VTrrjperai,

TTOirjrai re

means

Aristotle prepares us for the difference of

by pointing

in these arts

pXv

1454*30,

'>26, 15,

* 16.

1460

24,

parallel! smus anti-

Other instances of

ouTot' Tp6iro>’.

theticus will be found in 3,

(Pol. 8. 5,

that

it

;

but there are some

can only imperfectly or

in-

1340*32; comp. Xenophon Mem.

theory in Lessing's Laocoon

is

based on an idea

already in Aristotle. pipouvrai Sid Tcov ot

direiKdJov'Tes

Tii/€s

)(po)p,dr(i}v

pev 8id

As opposed

remark to

as epnreipia, with which Sei Se Kal epnreipiav

1181*9

8id

ol 8e

like the very similar ej>va-iv.

:

Xenophon

IMein. 3. 10,

it

(Tui'tjOctas is

ampara

rexvr], is

thrown in parenthetically,

1451*24, ^roi Sid 7} Sid avv^Oeia means much the same

in 8,

coupled in Eth. N.

ov pr]v p-iKpov ye eoiKev

skill

8.

1158*14

7,

Xa^eiv Kal ev avvqOeia yevecr^at, and in 10. lO, rj

ep.Treipia

avpi^dXXecrOai' ovSe ydp

eyivovr dv Sid r^s ttoAitik^s avvrjOeia^ KoXiriKoi.

between the

i

aTreiKa^ovres eKpup-eicrOe.

The

Contrast

is

depending on mere practice or habitude, and

by a consciousness of the rules and principles of the which deals with the particular subject. On this distinction see Metaph, A i, 980^28, and Mill’s Logic Bk. 11. ch. 3 (i,

that directed art

p.

®20

214, ed.

4).

cTcpoi 8e corresponds

1094^ 18

rjSr^

ydp

to

a foregoing

rtves

in Eth.

N.

i.

i,

rives aTridXovro Sid ttXovtov, erepoi Se 81 dvSpeiav.

:

1447^ 18-22

I.

Compare 8ia

Rep. 349 D

also Plato

aixovaov ;

~

Ttjs

103 nva

fiova-tKov 8e

has

Aristotle

(fxiyv^.

Aeyei?, ’irepov

allowed himself to

The

repeat the prepositional construction used in the parenthesis.

emendation of IMadius, 8ia

making too much

besides

4‘V(TeQ)<;,

§€1447^20

of a merely incidental remark in a parenthesis, leaves xpiap-aa-t koX

without an antithesis

(Txnp-o-cn

The

means, Xdyos,

diversity of

imitative arts

ignores in fact the whole point of

it

;

the analogy to which attention

drawn, the diversity of means.

is

and

pv9p.6^,

under consideration

means, ^^poi/xara Kai (T^^ij/xara and group of imitative arts. in

choral in Rep. re

Kai

same sense

the

398 n to

/xeAos

pv6p.ov

Kat

dp/iovtds

terminology, however,

Plato’s

in

analysis of the song or eori crvyKet/xevov, Adyov

Laws 661

60 r a) in

Aristotle also,

(r,

t447 t'25;

lieu of

b

;

669

r

Gorg. 502

7 d,

31),

His

d).

he some-

;

or perpov

c)

pvOpos; and pieAo?, ‘melody’ or

400 a, Gorg. 502 more than one passage

in

1449

6,

c

not always quite the same

is

‘tune’, in lieu of appovia (Rep. etc.).

had already ^ 22

three terms

rptdjv

e/c

(comp.

times says pv6p.6s Kal p-erpov (Phil, Kal pvOpo'i (Rep.

in a larger

observable

The

Kai Adyu Kal dpixoria.

^u0|i(3

el'

appeared

group of

app-ovia, in the

said to be like the diversity of

is

Laws 656

c.

in

has put /xeAos in place of

c,

Poetics

the

dp/xoi'id;

and in one instance (6, T449b29) he combines the two terms It is clear, therefore, that in its present application as synonyms. melody or tune ’. appovia means no more than pvOpo? is ’

‘

properly

‘

lime

or

’

‘

pace

It

’.

is

‘

a very general word, since

comp. Plato Laws 665 a

of the dance, as well as that in music; TT)

8

Sr]

Trjs

av r^s

Kiv^crews To^ei [scil.

^lov^s,

rov

re d^eos

eirropev ws]

apa

Kal

pv9po<;

j3apeo<;

ovopa

OXr] ptv TTOV )(opeia oXrj rraiSevais

eir],

Trj

o’vyKepavvvpevorv,

appovia ovopa rrpocrayopevotTO, )(opeia Se to iwapifrorepov

672 E

it

movements

includes the element of rhythm in language and in the

KXrjOeLr].

yv ypiv, tovtov

8

—

av

TO pkv pvOpot re Kai appoviai, to koto. Tyv (fxovyv ... to Se ye Kara

Tyv Tov Kivycret,

also

o'OJ/xaTos

(T)(ypa 8

Kivyoiv iSiov.

pvOpov pev eKei

koivov

Se peXos y

Trj';

Trj

Tys

(fxovy';

(jrarvys

Kivyom (see

b and Phil. 17 c). The various applications of summarized in Aristoxenus (p. 41 1, 8 Marquard)

Symp. 187

pv6p6<; are thus

eoTL Se Ta pvOpi^opeva Tpia- Xe$i?, peXo';, Kivyou; owpaTiKy.

view as to the great imitative capacities of rhythm and

and music generally may be seen 668 A sqq., and more briefly put,

in

in

Rep. 399 a sqq., Laws 798 n rd,

Plato’s

harmony in Laws rrepl

tous

COMMENTARY

104 22

pvOfxovg Kal Tracrav p.ov(riKijv ecTTt rpoiruiv yai/^ij/xara /JeXrtovwi/ Kai

The

XeipoVtov avOpMTr(Dv.

by

Aristotle

Pol. 8.

in

point

5

recognized with equal clearness

is

1340*^^8, eort

>

Trapa ras a\r) 9 iva‘; (pvaei^ iv to?s pv0 p.OL<; 8’

Kal irpaorrjTO’;, eri

TO,

pLiixrjpiaTa

TTC/ai

tCiv

rj

6 wv

Tous pv 6p.ovv Kal tovtojv

KLvrjriKov,

puaXurra 6pyrj<;

dvSpeias Kal (rw^pocrvvTys Kal Trdvrwv Tuiv ivavTimv

TOVTOts Kai Toiv akXiov rjOiKuiV ecTTi

op-oiwixara

S’

Kal rots fiiXecriv

,

ol ol

.

.

.

fi€V

.

^7

.

ev 8e Tois p^ekeaiv airois

("38) )

yap

Tov avTov ydp rpowov

r/Oo^

t^ova-t

(fyopriKiOTepas

fx.lv

t)(it

Kal

e^ovcL (TTaaip.
rds

ol

Kivtfcreis

Be ekevOepimrepa';.

23

Tj

x'^p'is

11

lACfiiYp^rois

Laws 669 n

a reminiscence of Plato

:

Btaenrutaw ol voirfrax pvOfxov fxev Kal crx^fiara fxekovs xl/ikov<; €ts

Xdyovs

)(uipL';,

fxerpa riOevre^, fxekos 8 ’ av Kal pvOfxdv avev prjfxaTuiv, ij/tky

KiOapiaei, re Kal avkijerei Trpo(rxpu>fxevoi.

Xpu^ci'ai,

25

I, p.

Mr.

35.

TTOiovvrai rrjv fxifxrfaiv.

scil.

Tuyxdroocrii'.

On the Newman

construction with in a note

on

/cdv el see

Pol. 2.

i,

Vahlen, Beitr.

1260^31 seems

doubt the necessity of restoring the indicative similar places in Aristotelian texts. fj

not

735

The

Tuv crupiyyuv. re)(yrf,

39

as "1

is

Platonic

-

a true parallel.

For a

De 26

w'ord to be supplied

assumed

salt. 64 ^ fxifxrjcn? auTu Se t <3 pu0p.(d

17

in

is

s.v.

tSv Xoytov

is

apparently

and

avpiyi,

re^vT/ in

similar genitive after

in

fxifxrfo-i'i

Phaedr. 260 n

p.'ifxrjcri'i

—

Bon. Ind. is

not

comp. Lucian

op^iyrrcws.

an unnecessary clause, as

Kre. is

not one of the arts in the that there

HSt.

to

and other

in this

list

in *113;

it

a change in the form of expression,

of ypoifxevai

w'ith TroLovvrai

would seem

to have

supposed

imply a consciousness of

rrjv

fx(fxrj(Tiv

op^rferriKy is

be observed too

will

fxifxovvrai,

understood.

The

instead clause

been originally an afterthought, worked in by Aristotle as soon as he saw that there was an art that used rhythm His giving a reason for this mention of opxi7a"rtKi7 may be alone. to

its

being a new point, and

one requiring demonstration. al Tbjv opxilcrTwi'.

The

traditional reading ol

rwv op^crjaTmv has

been corrected into evioi rtov opxw’’’^^ by Twining into ol {irokkol) tojv opxrfrrCyv by rmv opxrjcTTuv by Heinsius and into ol Zeller. It is assumed that Aristotle may have wished to recognize the fact, of which Plato had spoken in Laws 795 e, that dancing is sometimes a mere exercise of the body and without dramatic ;

;

meaning, with

A much

fxifxyerecs

simpler correction, however,

(rather than rexvai) understood

is

al tu>v opxrfo-ri^v,

from the context.

I.

Aristotle

is

1447^ 22-28

105

thinking of the professional dancers,

who

told a story in

pantomime, by the mere movements and attitudes of (comp.

Sittl,

1447

their bodies

u. Rom. p. 244). the rhythms in their movements, in the ^ 27

Die Gebarden der Gr. puOiAwi/

(TxtifAaTito/i.eVwi'

;

succession of their crxqfJMra, their gestures or attitudes (see on 26,

1462®'

The emphasis

3).

is

on pvOfiwv;

that the attitudes of the

what men do or have Aristotle is them w'as too obvious to require saying. insisting on the ethical significance which rhythm imparts to the dance. On rhythm as expressive of character and temperament see Pol. 8. 5, 1340® 18 and the Platonic passages referred to on ® 22. the character and temperament of the personages repre- ^ 28 sented, as distinct from their trdOr} Kal n-pdieis, what they do or have done to them The meaning of Trd0 Kal -n-pdfeis is sufficiently shown by 9, 1451^11 Ti’AXKi/SidSrjs e-n-pa^tv rj ri eTraOev, and 13, 1453 ® 22 TraOelv Seivd ^ Trot^crai (see also on 1 1, 1452 I* li). irdOr] is generally assumed (e. g. in Bon. Ind. 557® 49) to denote dancer might be dramatic, and represent

done

to

‘

’,

’

‘

:

‘

’.

in

passage

this

trpdifis

1450®

rj6r]

feelings

’

or

‘

emotions

The

w'ords irdOr] koI

cover the w'hole ground of the story in the dance

he had cared to anticipate the term used

Aristotle, if 6,

‘

T]

;

so that

later

on

in

might have said here, without difference of meaning,

4,

Kal p-vOoVi,

8e [eTToiroiia] ktc.

Suckow’s correction, rvyxdvei

ovcra, is to

be

Form

der Platonischen Schriften p. 53. With it, and the readings implied in the Arabic Version, the whole passage

found in

his

harmony with the context. We were means of imitation, pv0p6<;, Xoyos, and dppovia, may be employed either singly or in certain Having just spoken (i) of imitation iv dppovta Kal combinations. pv6p
intelligible

and

in

told at the outset in ® 22 that the three

(3) to imitation iv Xdyo)

rhythm or metre, and Kal Adyct).

—whether

alone, or in combination with

dppovia Kal pvOpm

finally (4) to imitation iv

This exhausts the

possibilities, since

it

is

evident that

dppovia alone, and the combination dppiovia 4- Adyo?, need not be

The third of his four heads Aristotle divides, taken into account. and recognizes three possible forms of means, (i) Adyos alone, (2) Adyos + some one kind of metre, and (3) Adyos + a plurality of metres. In other words he distinguishes between (i) imitations in prose, (2) imitations in

and

some one metre (hexameters,

(3) imitations in a plurality of metres.

Of

trimeters, etc.),

this large

and

well-

^

26

COMMENTARY

io6

1447 ® 28 marked class of imitative ‘ imaginary conversations Centaur, Aristotle

fact

that

is,

he says, equally

has

it

remained to

‘

this

day

The common fact here is /At;u,r;o-is Iv no one common name connoting the

name

and

Xdyw, but there

common

of Socrates, the Epic, and Chaeremon’s

observes

without a distinctive

which includes the Mime, the

literature, ’

applicable

to

kinds

the

all

within

the class.

Those who

retain iiroTroua, with the addition of dvwwfiog at the

end of the sentence, suppose it to mean word-poetry ( Wortdichtung, Bernays, Zwei Abhandl. p. 81). Such a special and unique sense, however, for a term like fVoTroua is highly improbable, and ‘

also against the analogy of fivOoTToua,

fj-ekoTTOua,

all

the similar in

dvoju.aT 07roita),

’

compounds (e.g.

simply the making of something, just as oSoTToua, TraiSoTToita

new meaning,

its

it

and

And

the like.

even

much

as in dfyroTroua,

the

word could bear as the Mime and

if

would be inappropriate here, were prose imitations

Conversation

— not

the

‘

To

a Greek of Aristotle’s time the idea of a prose

Socratic

Xoyoiroda,

which the -Troua means

’

poems.

poem

M’ould

have seemed a contradiction in terms. ®

2g

TOis Xdyois


comp.

rj

toIs fierpois

= rots Adyois

^ tois /AeVpots

ij/iXois

1448 1 1 tovs Xdyovs ral rrjv i/'iXo/AerptW. i//iXots, which in this connexion means )(wph dpp.ovia';, without melody (v. Tyrwhitt ad loc. and Bon. Ind. 433^29), differentiates this group of imitative arts from the semi-musical arts considered later on, at the end of the chapter; comp. Plato Phaedr. 278 c i/fiXois

:

2,

’

‘

TTOLTjaiv xf/tXrjv

Xdyots

862l’3i) i^iXds 3. 2,

to

iv wBrj (TvvriOrjKe,

rj

has been

i/'tXois

mean

and Laws 669 D (quoted on

23).

(including Bon.

Ind.

taken by

several

'prose’ in the present passage

Adyos has no doubt in a good

1404 b

14, 33.

But there

many

—a

instances,

itself’,

thus excluded

may happen

perpois.

rots

T]

some

without

sense of ‘kinds of verse’,

i.

e.

ipiXos

means

accessory, whatever the accessory

to be (v.

/xerpa has

Rhet.

nothing in the general meaning

is

of the word to necessitate this interpretation here.

simply ‘by

sense which

e. g. in

to

HSt.

s. v.).

be understood in the concrete

as equivalent to Adyor e/x/xerpot or

remembers that the literary form of + imitation is generally in verse, and accordingly adds ^ tols p.£Tpots. The addition, however, has a sort of reflex influence on the general term Adyow which precedes it, and by the contrast it suggests gives Adyot

the

pv6p.6s.

word

from

for the

verse.

Aristotle

moment

the special sense of

‘

prose

Other instances of a general term with

’,

as distinct

its

meaning

—

—

:

1447^ 28—1447'’ 10

I.

107

modified by what follows will be found in 22, 1458*128 and 25,1447^-29

1460

ti

The

1 1.

scheme of the statement

logical

be thus exhibited

Language music

same

Plato has the

8’

in

some one kind

in

a plurality of metres

of metre

aXvpa

Laws 810

division in

where he

b,

avev [pvOpwv Tprjpdrwv

d

‘],

pvBpov re Kal appovCa^, KaraXeXeippeva.

.

.

.

and Kara Xoyov

Tot9 pirpoi?,

dt'ut'Ufxo;

8’

dvev to his tois

Phys. 5 2, 226"- 26 r/ plv ovv Kara to TOVTO yap iire^evKTaL kolvov ovopa -

2.

/civT^fTts

8k

Kara to

eiTTfiv,

S f TL yevog

ov.—H. A.

dvLovvpov Se Tvy^dvec

T
re, Kal o

lO. 40,

1275®' 30 dvwvvpov TO KOLVOV of a class as being

still

Xoyoj /lev

623^3

evTopwv, b ivl pev ovopaTL dvuivvpov eanv.

—

ccttl

Pol. 3. I,

SLKaaTOV Kal iKKXr/LTLaCTTOV.

€7rt

other instances see Bon. Ind. 69

9

av^r/cn
tcmv )(pmpd

418** 26 oparov 8

'j,

pvOpov

ttoiov

f-CTTii)'

De anima

ypa/xpad

crcfraXepd

i/'iAoi?.

TO pkv KOLVOV dvwvvpov, KaO eKarepov 8

TTOcrot'

IfTTiv

:

p,€Tp(i)v

elprjpeva povov rr/rmpeva

T€ Kal dppovi'as tO his povov rots Aoyots

dAAot
irpos 8e

Here dXvpa corresponds

plv pera pirputv rots

rots

to Aristotle’s

:

crvyypdppaTa Kara Xoyov

Sr/

elpr/piva povov, rr/rwpeva

-9

protesting

pkv p-era

n-ovrjTwv Kelpeva ev ypaiMfiacTL, tols

r/piv ecTTt Trapd Tivwv

Xoyoi’i

is

of poetry and literature from music

against the divorce

TOis

may

verse (

fiaOrffiara

29-^ 23

**

prose

without

8r]

in

:

For

Aristotle has often to speak

2.

without a name, because

its

existence has

not yet been recognized by ordinary thought (comp, Bernays, Zwei

Abhandl.

p. 81).

De

Similarly in

TUYX«*'ci ouo-a.

sensu

5,

447

Thurot would

7

restore virdp/^eL ovcra for inrap^ova-a. di'op.daai koii'o>'

K€LTaL

ovopa

scil.

KOLVOV.

ovopa',

— H.

A.

4.

comp. IMeteor. 7,

t.

531

22

4. 9,

387^2

ov ydp ^ 10

ovK eTTe^evKTaL kolvov

ovopa ovSev. Tous

Iwpo>'os

CGF,

Kcii

Eei'dpxou

The

|ii'fAou9.

surviving

fragments

and 182) show that the mimes of Sophron and Xenarchus were in prose (comp. Bernhardy,

(Kaibel,

Gr. Litt.^ plpr/a-L?,

2. 2 p.

i

152

pp.

And

533).

Aristotle points

to

as their very

them

prose-imitation, pLpr/a-Ls iv Aoyo) similar view

of them

TroLT/Twv

Teubn.):

^

(72

is

x**’P*5

implied in

ovkovv

These two words seem

as

ovSe

name

is

suggestive of

an indisputable example of

A

very

dialogue

mpl

dppovia^ Kal pvOpov. a

fr.

of the

ipperpov;

to represent a gloss,

tovs

KaXovpivov;

pvBpwv Tt/rwpeva.

—

COMMENTARY

io8 1447

10

2 (povos

Aoyous Kai

iiCfiov;

/XT]

(jioafiev

eivai

tov

TrjLOv

rov?

tt/dwtovs

AXe^afievov

iMfi-q(reL<;,

ypa^eVTas twv

(v. Bernays, Zwei Abhandl. p. 82; Kaibel c., p. 152). makes it clear that Aristotle saw a certain affinity between Mime and the Socratic Conversations of Alexamenus and

SiaXoyojv

The the

tovs

rj

%(DKpaTiK(i)v

1

.

fr.

‘

’

;

with

before us,

it

not

is

it

difficult

Mime and

juxtaposition of the

passage of the Poetics

the SooKpartKos Adyos in the present

the two things differed in name, but at

;

same time they had an

the

reason for the

to divine the

of being prose-imitations,

common,

element in

essential

/xi/x^o-ets

and not

iv Adycp,

that

(like poetry)

€V fjLtrpw.

As used

Tous ZwKpaTiKous Xdyoug.

11

here and in Rhet.

16,

3.

1417 20, the term ^wKparLKol Adyot must be taken to cover the ground of the whole of this species of literature, the Socratic ‘

Conversations’ not only of Alexamenus, but also of Plato, Aeschines

and the

(comp. Joel, Archiv f. Gesch. der Phil. 8, 468). A between the Platonic Dialogue and the Mime

rest

certain resemblance

presupposed in the story (Duris fr. 45 in Muller, FHG. 2 p. 480) of Plato having been a zealous student and imitator of Sophron.

is

It

difficult,

is

therefore,

and

insist

ou8e

eav ^

on

dAT^^ijs.

—

Teichmiiller’s view, that

Mime and

between them. II, 20^^25 ovSk yap

interpr,

14,

Soph.

KaTd
to contrast the

the Dialogue,

the difference

De

el:

agree with

to

was

Aristotle’s intention

24® 3 el.

ovSky

II,

ovS' ay

Stoicrei

171^^ 12

to.

yap

rj

epuiTrjcns p-ia

ov8’

KaOokov TiOmpay i/^ev8oypa(^jjp,aTa

ov 8 i y ei Tt ecri ij/€v 8 oypd
ipLcrriKa

.

.

in order to

rrjy

ovk

.

minimize the importance of the element of metre

Even

the imitative forms of literature.

were both written

in

several kinds of metre

name connoting of agreement.

the

verse, ('^

20), they

/xt/iryo-is

The

either in

in

would

if

a

mime and

some one still

them, which

a dialogue

11-12) or in

common

be without a is

their essential point

writer of such a versified

might no doubt be described

(^

i)

in

mime

in ordinary parlance as

or dialogue

an

eVoTrotds

some similar name indicating the kind of work happens to be written. Names of this

or eAeyetoTTotds, or by verse in which his

kind, however, are misleading,

rather

than the

p,tp.rj(ri<;

since they imply

embodied

in

it

is

that

the verse

the essence of the

Metre, in Aristotle’s view, is only form of imitation. one of the accidents of poetry; and the use of it does not make a writer like Empedocles a poet in any true sense of the word. literary

—

;

1447’’ 10-20

I.

There

AcY^ioTToious Tous 8e eTTOTToious. less

still

109 is

no need

to understand,

1447

tovs /xev before eAeyetoTrotovs (v. Kiihner, Gr. Gr.®

insert,

2. 2 p. 265); comp, the instances cited by Vahlen (ad loc.); to which may be added Soph. el. 21, 178 ^ 3, Metaph. A 28, 1024 » 33. For the ou)( (Ls Kara tt)|' 019 ov Kara rrjv jjiijj.-qcn.v.

=

comp. Plato Phaed. 77 e

position of the negative Tretpco civaTref^etv, fjLaXXov

Be

SeStorcov

cos

.

.

.

BeBiormv, dAA.’ «rcos evi rts Kal

[xr] cos i^/acov

ev ^/uv Trats, octtcs to. roiavra ^OySeiTat.

he

TTotrjTcov

Trepi

is

declared

resources of epic language TTjv cj>pdcriv yeyove,

(fr.

a poet in his form, he

not

is

termed

didascalice,

That Empedocles was not E

152

/cat

in

a picture of

any

Ilap/xcvtSov ^pejiepeaBuTV, IIparTaydpas re kA-^S, Kal Ttuv TTOirp-wv ot

observed,

him

is

is

more

^iKavBpov

/cat

e^S

ot

croc^ot TrXrjv

'HpaKAetros

/cat ’Ep,7re8o-

cKarcpas, KioptaSias p.ev

irotr^cretvs

— where

Empedocles,

E/xTreSo/cAeovs

Kal IlappievtSoi;

eirr)

Kal yvwptoAoytat ©edyvtSos

Adyot

will

it

De

Kal

aud.

OrjpiaKa

Trapd

Ke)(prjpevoi

ctcrt

be

This view of

clearly stated in later waiters, e.g. in Plutarch,

uxTirep o^^rjpa to p-irpov /cat

TroLTp-LKrjs

and manners.

put into distinct contrast with Homer.

ra B

16 C

poet.

aKpot r^s

rpaycaStas Be "Oprjpo'i

’E7rt;^app,os,

instruct, rather

life

real sense a poet is implied in

tovtov irdvre?

irepl

A

head of what the ancients

the

pLp.-qa-i<;,

the

though Empedocles

purpose being to teach or

its

than to interest us in a Plato Theaet.

that,

is

Troirj-

inconsistent with

not a poet in his matter.

is

poem comes under

philosophic

rots dAAots rots Trepi

/cat

This

present passage; Aristotle’s meaning

may be

18

'O/xT^piKos 6 ’E/attcSokA-^s /cat Seivds Trepi

:

/xera^opt/cds t tov

^wpevos.

eTTLTevypacn

TLKT]v

70 Teubn.) of the dialogue to have been a master of all the

In a fragment

’EfjnreSoKXei.

tov dyKov, iva to ire^bv

Biaefrv-

yct/crtv.

Schol. Dionys. Thr. p. 166. 13 Hilgard ovk ecrn irovqT^’;

6 perpia

p6 v(p

xpdpevos' ovBe yap

’Ep.TreSo/cA'^S 6 to.

(fiver ikcl

ypdif/as,

ovBe ot Trepi da-rpoXoyLas elirdvrei, ovBe o Ild^tos epperpms XprjcrpeoBuiv.

The

iroiT|TT)i'.

poet

is tacitly

(comp. 24, 1460 “7; 25, 14601'

assumed

to be a

pip-ij-rr]';

recalls the idea of the original assertion in

djioi'us

ey^oipev ovopacrai Kotvov rovs %d)povo^ /cat Hevdp^^oo

S oj/cpart/covs

Ao'yoos.

OTt Ttov dpto-Ttov

where ovk eanv

OVK

Vahlen quotes Eth. N. ecTTiv CTTatvos

eiraivo^ is to

I-

33

14,

287

a

19

;

^

12

;

I.

De anima

.

.

.

sentence

38,

49^22

i. i,

402 ^

;

8).

i.

12,

9,

ptpovs

ovBev dv ^ /cat

tovs

iioil>2i B^Xov

opoLois Be Kal tCiv dyaOuiv

be understood.

the apodosis of a conditional

iv peTpoLs ^ jg

8).

(v.

—

6/xotws often represents

An.

pr, i. 9,

30

i

De caelo i. 4, 271 a 13 2. 4, The equivalent rbv avrov rpoirov ;

20

^4

COMMENTARY

no 1447 '’20

is

used in just the same way

TpoTTOv KOLv

€L

Sia ttAciovcov t(ov

Xaipujfiwt'.

For the

Nauck, TGF.’

p. 784.

21

little

of

it

it

it

coming under

as

that head.

If

1460^2 he

it

still

Athenaeus 608 e speaks

as a Spap.a iroXyp-erpov, the explanation

experiment

Ktvravpoi see

a pai/^wSta as though

it

clear that in 24,

is

avToy Se

ttiVtis yiVOLTO.

remains of his

that

tw

pr. 2. 24, 69'^ ii Y]

Aristotle terms

were a sort of epic; and regards

An.

in

bjxoCiiiv

is

that such a bizarre

might very well be placed in more than was no doubt taken from its subject; not

in literature

one class. The title from its monstrous combination of metres, as Welcker imagines (Nachtrag zu der Schrift fiber die Aeschylische Trilogie p. 71). There were several comedies (Kock, CAF. 3 p. 698) and also an ode (by Lasus of Hermione) with

22

dirdvTwv twv n^puty

:

this

it

is

inconceivable that every kind of metre was repre-

sented in Chaeremon’s poem. are to be found in

1458 24 ad loc.). O'

Kal

{d-n-avTa),

iTotTiTr)t'

into (ovK (^TovTov')

28

and

in

18,

De anima

1455 ^ 33 (rd okov), in 22, 418 ® ii, 19 (v. Rodier

2. 6,

has been altered in some apographs

•n-poo-ayopeuT^ot'

TTOLrjTrjv

StKattos

e. g.

and

in Others into koI

Various other corrections have

TTpocrayopevreov.

been recently suggested,

Kara ^toSto) Trovqr^v Trpoaayoptvriov

TroirjTrjv

TTpocrayopevreoy (Ueberweg), KaiTOL

npocrayopeyTeov (Rassow and Gomperz).

TroirfTrjv

the

Similar instances of overstatement

(TrSo-tv), in

Kal TrotrjTrjv TrpocrayopevTeoy

(M. Schmidt), clause

(with Vahlen, Beitr.

TTpocrayopeyriov

title.

airdvTwv must be an exaggera-

Aristotelische Aufsatze 2 p. 42). tion, since

or a very similar

to be taken with p.iKTr]v (comp. Vahlen,

by inserting

it

i

p.

Susemihl omits

38), but finds a place

for

after Troivyryv in ^ 20.

The clause (if we retain the reading of the MS.) seems to come much the same way as that in b 1 8, 8td t6v p.ev TroojT^v StVaiov

in in

Kaktlv,

Tov Be cfiycriokoyov p,dkkov

rj

TrovtqTrjV.

As an

illustration

of the third of his three possibilities (comp. Vahlen, Beitr. Aristotle cites

Chaeremon’s Centaur-, and

his

assumption

i

p. 4)

is that,

work of this description is a pLip.r)cris (comp. ^21 ttoioito rrjv and also in verse (^22 e$ ctTravTcov rtby /xcVpwv), the author is a p.ip.rjTTj'; iy /xerpois, and therefore rightly regarded as a poet, though popular language does not give him a special name of

as a

p-ip-rjo-Lv)

the type of those considered in the preceding section (^ 13-19).

The

argument, therefore,

will

come

to this;

If a

mime and

a

dialogue were written in a medley of metres, the writers would

have to be recognized as poets

;

but we should have no

common

;

1447'’

I.

name

Ill

two works themselves, notwithstanding

for the

in form

20-22

their similarity

Some such meaning seems

as well as nature.

demanded by the general logic of the argument, which to show that not only the prose forms of the literary but also the various poetic forms of

name

a general

only difficulty

brought

is

is

are

it

‘

Vahlen (ad

in.

apodosis implied in 6/xotws

apodosi sententiam (xat

loc.)

takes

— ‘adnecti

-n-otrjTyjv

directed

imitation

day

to this

9 dvtow^os Tvy;^dv€t ovcra to see how the clause Kal

is ‘

to be

’

without

fov vvv ).

The

TrpoaayopevTeov as following after the

it

non positae sed cogitatae

npocrayopevreov)

suspect that

I

was primarily meant to apply to Chaeremon, and that it is loosely subjoined to what is said of him in the context, as an it

assertion of his claim to be ranked

among

the poets in spite of

his metrical absurdities.

The

question

TToiT^njs

why

assumed

be asked

for

it

in

be

If

was possible

it

(like

eTroTroid?,

eAeyctoTrotds,

word

of the metrical form (comp. Rhet.

3.

etc.) 8,

7roir]p.a

as an equally

species of verse-

he

that

thought

too directly suggestive

1408*530), which he puts

aside as only one of the accidents even of the poetical

The term Poet

to give

chapter and elsewhere,

‘common name’ for all the various The answer may perhaps be this,

imitation? to

:

this

did not Aristotle recognize the

legitimate

it

may perhaps

the sense

‘

imitation

'.

by most of the ancients, is the subject of a valuable inquiry by H. Weil (Etudes sur I’antiquite grecque, P- 237), who shows that the nearest modern representative of it is ‘author’ or ‘composer’. Its primary meaning is the man who writes the words, or composes the music, in contradistinction ‘

as used

’,

to the rhapsodists, actors,

work

to the public

VTTTjpeTai,

viroKpirai,

paij/mSoi,

work which had

to

verse, the ‘poet’

was

fact

became

of the verb the

singers or musicians,

who

present the

(comp. Plato Rep. 373 b TrovqTai re koX tovtojv yppaiTai,

ktc.).

But as the

also a writer of verses.

The

idea of verse in

—

meaning of the word as also which often means to write or say in verse

part of the conventional iroieiv,

compounds,

literary

be thus recited or sung was by custom in

likewise,

eTroTroios,

eAeyeioTroios,

etc.,

all

denote

some kind of verse, iroieiv is thus opposed to Aeyetv, speak in prose, and the Trouynjs either to the avyypa^cus, who

writers of to

writes prose, or to the

iStcorr^s,

the ordinary

man who

speaks in

Another association attaching to the word had its origin the matter with which early Greek poetry was connected. The

prose. in

poet was distinguished from the historian or chronicler by the fact

1447

’’

22

—

COMMENTARY

II2 1447 ^ 22

he was so constantly dealing with a remote or legendary

that

past, in the treatment of

of imagination.

which there was ample room

for

play

subjects are classed by

All the great poetical

Plato under the general head of ‘myths' or fictions (Rep. 377 a and 3820; comp. Xenophanes fr. i, 21 Diels); and it was an

understood thing that a free use of

was one of the

fiction

privileges

—

29 Bergk n-oX.ka ij/evSovTaL doiSoi. Isocrates igg D Twv ye jraX.aiwv KaOoSuv avrai fj-dkiar eiSoKifiovcriv, as Trapa

of the poet; Solon

aKovopLep'

TTOuqTtnv

Tojv

KoAAtCTTas

in

make

Horace A.

poetry

P. 9).

yap ov

p.6vov

tCjv

yeyei/Tj/xeVoJv

ras

dAAa Kai Trap avraiv Kaivds ctvvtlThis recognition of an element of

perhaps the nearest approach the ancients

is

our idea of

to

ovToi

aTrayyeAXovcrtv,

7jp.iv

6 ia
fr.

‘

poetic creation

was

The

’.

that he

ordinary conception

in

antiquity of the poet

(v.

Poet. 15, 1454 9, and 25, 1460 8), an imitator, and that work was not so much a creation as a copy, more or less faithful,

his

was, just like the painter

of something already existing in legend or peket

25

= dppLovia in

(xcTp
scheme

the

in

life.

2 2.

which now takes the place of the original term Adyo)

“22, has the concrete sense of ‘verse’ or versified language,

i.

in e.

equivalent to Adyos epp-erpo'; or Adyos + pv6p6s (comp. 4, 1448 b 21). It is an ill-chosen word, therefore, as it says too much,

as

and,

if

understood

strictly,

would make the

pvOp.^, with

which the

enumeration begins, a superfluity.

28

at ftev fipa Tracriv at

As

Kara pepos.

8e

Teichmiiller

out, Trda-iv repeats the Trda-i in 8 24, xpHvTai having to

The the

antithesis latter

is

between dpa and Kara

Aristotle

Comp. Meteor.

I.

p.€po
;

points

be supplied.

so that in lieu of

might have said ovx dpa dAAa Kara p.ipo<;. 14, 3518-28 iKUVOi'; p,lv ov Kara jaipo? ravra

crvp.^aiv€i 7rdcr;^£iv, dAA* dp.a Trdv aKpd^ttv Kal cftdiveiv dvayKaiov.

Plato Theaet. 189 e

and 571^47).

ye ^ iv p.ipu (also Bon. Ind. 455 ^14 language would naturally imply that,

TjToi dp.a

Aristotle’s

whereas the three means of expression, language, metre, and music, are inseparable in the Dithyramb and Nome, they appear separately

and by turns in the Drama. This, however, is an overstatement on dtrdvTwv in ^22), as it is only the musical element that comes in intermittently, in the choral parts of the play (6, 1449 30). (see

1448*1

comp, i, 14478-28; 3, ^^ 29 This is to all 45 ; Rep. 396 c p-ipovappearance another reminiscence of Plato pupouvrat

1448827

ol

6,

pipoupievoi

14491536;

irpaTTOvras:

I45 o'^ 3)9;

^

-

:

ayaOov

Tov

fievo';

TrpaTTOVTa^,

”

1447

I.

22— 2.

re Kal

dcr<^aAcos

avOpdirov;

(f>ap.iv,

ii3

1448 ^ 5 irpaTTOvra

e/x.cjipovu)';

p.ip,itr
17

p.ip.’qriKrf

^laiovs

.

— 603 C 144 ®^^ eKovcria'S

tj

irpa^ei'i.

<^au\ous

(TTrouSaious

T]

aptTrj

Ktti

Aristotle adds,

is

man and man

;

the primary

nearly

:

De

(comp. 5

I

)

and most universal

449

®'

distinction

2

between

may

be

head.

646

part. an. 2. I,

^

This,

32 )-

other distinctions of character

all

common

classed under this one

dKoXouOel

explained by what follows, KaKia yap

Sia(f>€pov(n Trdvres

^6rj

TO.

is

'*

17 al 8 aXXai ’

Siacjiopal ravrats

^ 3

(XKoAov^ovcrtv.

KaKia Y^P Kal dpej^ itrojs

Pol. 5-

ktI.

2,

1303

I*

15

p.eyi
piv ovv

Stdoracris aperr] Kal po')(6y}p[a,

i]TOi

3 e\Tioms

.

|

.

toioutous,

.

have been prepared pipovvTai

ol

for

this

scil.

pipovvTai

distinction

We ^4

pipovpevoi.

ol

by the preceding

cTrel

pipovpevoL irpaTTOvras, avdyK-q Se rovrov: q (nrovSaiovs q but the third possibility, that the personages repre-

avXovs eivat;

sented a

new

may

be on the same level as ourselves (q Kal toiovtovs), is which is felt to require a word of proof. Aristotle

point,

accordingly reminds us of a similar fact in painting (“ 5) the of Dionysius are just like ourselves ;

personages in the works

The

(ojaotovs).

three possibilities being thus generally established,

by way of corollary [BqXov

Aristotle proceeds to say,

same

the

distinction

is

and dramatic poetry

be seen in the poetical

to

(* ii),

8k *7), that

arts, in epic, lyric,

and that it constitutes also the essential Tragedy and Comedy ('' 16). That

point of difference between

may be supplied from the protasis i) after q koX ToiovTovs in a 5 is assumed by all the older translators. Vahlen a illustrates the construction from Metaph. 13 tov yap 7, 1017 pipovvrai

A

Xkympev Kal tov

dvBpayTTOv orav p.ovuLKov

p,ov
q tov

XevKov pLOVcriKov q tovtov XevKov, to pkv (scil. Xeyopev) on apcfno tQ avTco (Tvp^elSqKaai kts. Other instances of a verb having to be

understood in the principal from a subordinate clause will be found in Kiihner, Gr. Gr.^

the construction in

only alternative

—

in

is

which case

2. 2,

p.

574; an exact

the present passage

is

parallel, still

however, to

The

wanting.

begin at S^Xov Se (a 7) be necessary to restore 8qXov 8q, and to

to

suppose the apodosis

it

will

to

take the words qroi /SeATtovas ktI. as appositional to the q cnrovSaiovs q (pavXov? etvat in “ 2. The clause, however, that follows, dxnrep ol y/aa<^eis KTe.

(scil.

— qroi fieXnovas

wairep 01 POETICS

Yptt€is.

•

pipowrai), seems to show that qroi /SeAriovas .

•

pip-owrai.,

Plutarch,

who

defines poetry as a ptp.qn.Kq ^ 5 I

COMMENTARY

114

1448^5

Kal

T€)(yy]

Svvafii^

commonly

avrL(rrpo(f>o^

with Wyttenbach’s note).

1450^26,

rectly elsewhere,

377 E, 597 Ypa 4>eis. Meteor.

E,

6

603

The

3. 2,

noXoyi'coTos

^

is

t)

The comparison, which 15, 1454^9; 25, 1460 1

;

poet.

8

and

,

of very frequent occurrence in Plato

B,

605 A

indi-

(v.

Rep.

3,

has survived in the text of

440

» 8.

14^0^2*].

6,

:

Pol. 8. 5 134° dAXa ra IIoXvyvtoTOu

riauawi':

ypar]?

and De sensu

372 7, comp.

1‘J V,

etc.).

Attic form O'

saying,

0 €yyop 4vrjv

reappears in

*

1

a

(De aud.

TTjv TroLrjcriv, 7roLrj(Tiv Se criywa-ay rr/y ^(i>ypa(f>tav

Poet. 6,

quotes

^ojypa^ia,

Trj

attributed to Simonides, ^mypatfiLav p-ev ehai

Set prj

>

ra UavcroDVOS

Oeuipeiv rovs

ns akkos Ttov ypa^etov rj to)v If he was the same as the Pauson dyakp-aroTTOLuiv icrriv rjOiKos. of Aristoph. Ach. 854, he must have had a certain sort of affinity to our modern caricaturists (comp. Hor. Ep. 2. i, 264; Aelian V. H. 4. 4); it will be seen also that Aristotle regards his work as the analogue of that of the parodists and comic poets viov<;,

kolv

et

in literature.

Aiorucios 8e

eiKaKeit.

ojlloious

(comp. TOiovTovs

means

in ® 5),

worse than the average man.

opiotovs, ‘

ct/cd^tti/

synonymous with

(

the

as

like ourselves

= to

context

shows

neither better nor

’,

produce an elKwv or

word ordiby Aristotle even of a painter. In i, 1447 19 he has the more precise expression, pipowrai aTreiKa^oyres. The Dionysius meant is Dionysius of Colophon. It is a disputed point portrait) is practically

pipna-Oai, the

narily used

=1

(Overbeck, Schriftquellen 1136) whether he is to be identified with whom Pliny N. H. 35. 113 says Conlra Dionysius

the painter of

:

quam homines pinxii, ob id anthropographos cognomiThe epithet dvOpoiiroypd^os would certainly seem peculiarly

nihil aliud

naius.

applicable to Aristotle’s Dionysius, as a realistic painter, whose like ordinary men. and explained by the rovroy roy rpovoy

gods and heroes were too ^8

erepa follows. scribed, as,

^9

qualified

is

The personages i.e.

represented differ in the

way

same

level

opgqcreais)

eL8rj

as being either better or worse than, or on the

the ordinary •

XPV vopl^eiy

man.

Plato eiyac,

For the neuter hepa see on

Laws 814 E rrjy

8vo pev avrrjs

(scil.

that

just de-

19.

pey rwy Kakkioywy (TwpdTOjy ewi to aepyby

rwy atcr^ioywy ctti to (f>avkoy (comp. also 655 C 798 d). For the kind of dancing Aristotle has in mind here see on I, 1447 27. ^ 5 auXijo-ei Kal KiOapio-et see on i, 1447

pipovpeyrjv, rrjy Se

:

-

;

1448 ^ 5-12

2.

Tw

ToOs Xoyous 8e Kai

irepl

group 1447® 29 as using

I,

fjL€Tpia

to?s Xdyots i/fiXots

which were described rofs p-erpois.

rj

— a term misunderstood by later writers

Briefe p. 116)

15

a general expression 144 ®

\j/‘Xo(i€Tpia>' is

of purely literary imitative arts,

for the

in

tt]

1'

1

'I'lXo-

Bernays, Heraklit.

(v.

—means verse without music

dpyaovtas

see

;

on

1447 ^29). The qualifying addition ‘without music’ might no but it is more doubt have been appended to tovs Xdyovs also wanted w’here it is, so as to distinguish the verse that was simply I,

;

recited

From

from the verse that was sung.

Aristotle ignores the prose imitations (the

and deals only with

poetry

‘

onward

this point

Mime and

the Dialogue),

the versified forms of imitative litera-

’,

On i, 1447 ^ 23). T(p Trept Tovs Xdyov5 = ev tu vepl tov<; Xdyovs, the preposition being understood from the preceding context (comp. Bon. Ind. 630 “ 40). The restoration of tQ for to in 25, 1461 ‘*33 admits of the same explanation. For to Trept ti in the sense of ‘the class comprising’ see Plato Soph. 221 b (wdth Campbell’s note), Symp. 205 c, ture

see

ev fierpois

Rep. 394

B.

In 22, 1458* 20 his diction is said to be Ta7retv>/. ® 12 Aristotle notes elsewhere the ludicrous effect his occasional attempts KXeo
at fine

language produced owing to the incongruity between the

expression and the matter he dealt wdth 8e TTpeVov e^et

1

)

Xe^t?, eav

y

•

.

.

Rhet.

:

1408* 10 to

3. 7,

TOts v7roK€tp,evots Trpdyp.ao’tv dvdXoyov.

TO 8 dvdXoyov ecTtv edv p,^T€ Trept evdy/cwv avTOKay88dXa)S Xeyr/Tat Trept evreXoiv (rep-vZ^, p.rjB pr),

rw

evreXet ovopaTi

ctti)

KwpwBia [‘a comic joke’, Casaubon on Ath. opotws ydp evta eXeye Kat

otov TTOtet KXeoqiuiv'

were

‘

man,

Kocrp-os,

3.

p.’^re et

8e

12] <^atveTat,

et etTretev

dv TroTVta

In the present passage we are told that his personages

(TVK^.

like

ourselves

’

(opotovs),

neither better than the

ordinary

Homer, nor worse, like those in a parody. -well as the company in which he is placed it

From

like those in

the context as that

ivi

he

is

to be

He

regarded as a sort of epic poet.

the representative

of the prosaic Epic

— the

is

is

plain

taken as

Epic of the common-

from the noble Epic of Homer and the debased Epic known as parody. His work being put under the head of place, as distinct

i/ftXopcTpttt, .

‘

verse without the

accompaniment of

have been in Aristotle’s view either a

(comp. Tyrwhitt ad

loc.).

1 dialogue entitled the

nterpretation of Soph. 'Hyijpwv:

el.

see Brandt,

The

song,’ he cannot

or a dramatic poet

notion that he was the writer of

Mandrobulus

‘

lyric

’

is

based on an erroneous

15, 174 ^ 19 (see

J.

Parodorum epicorum

of Phil. 12 p. 17). reliq.,

p.

37, I

2

and

^

:

COMMENTARY

ii6

Parody was an element in the humour of 1448 ® 12 Kock, CAF. I, p. 700. the Old Comedy, as also of Epicharmus and there were certainly ;

Hegemon who travestied Homer. What Aristotle means, however, is that Hegemon was the first to take up parody others before

I

Mus. N. F. Athenaeus 699 a (comp. 407 a) he was

as a special form of poetical literature (Schrader, Rh.

According

20, p. 186).

the

to present a

first

h.67}vaioi% iyiKYjcrev

®I3

A

TrapuSias.

mock

Kai Trap'

dAAais re TrapuSiais «at Ty TiyavTop.a)(^La.

TrapwSta,

in

poem on an

epic, a

in the poetical contests in the theatre

eh tovs dytovas tovs Ov/xekiKovs

TrptoTos ilvrjXOtv '

to

parody

sense of the word,

Aristotle’s

is

a

ignoble theme in epic language and

metre.

N iKoxdprjs

:

of the same

more of title.

^ 15

work, and there

AciAtds (which

says, the ‘

his

he may perhaps be name (Kock, CAF. i

’ ;

as the

We

p. 770).

comic poet

know nothing

some uncertainty even

as

to

its

assonant to ’IXids) would mean, as Twining

is

Poltroniad

‘

Tale of Delium

is

same

the

Ay^Xids, either the

’ ;

it is

‘Tale of Delos’, or the

practically impossible to say M’hich.

important to bear in mind that in Ao and that the yas stands at the beginning The better apographs have either ws TrepySs or ws of another. Ilepcras kuI Kv/cXcuTras was probably due The reading Trepyas. to a corrector who knew of the Ilcpo-at as a nome of Timotheus wairep

yas

*

ktc.

It

is

the wa-irep here ends a line,

m

;

it

may

be seen in the process of genesis In his latest edition (comp.

2038.

in the text of Parisinus

Hermes

12, p. 192)

Vahlen

puts a colon after v6 p.ov
—

be restored on the supposition (i) that Timotheus and Philoxenus may represent the ignoble Nome and Dithyramb, and (2) that instances of the opposite were not wanted, as the should

Nome

)

and Dithyramb were so generally associated with noble

However

subjects.

reading

fails

of the Paris in yds the

to

attractive

this

explanation

MS.

Castelvetro

was probably

If

be, Vahlen’s

yds

ma-n-ep

we

I

right in recognizing

second half of ’Apyds, the name of one notorious

antiquity as the writer of a debased kind of p. 388).

may

account for the accent in the traditional

nome (Meineke, FCG.

in

1

3,

in

accept Castelvetro’s suggestion, a question naturally

arises as to the extent of the lacuna before the yds of the

MS.

The original statement may have been something like what Vahlen formerly supposed, mcnrep <^eovs ’Ap-)yds but it is quite as likely that more than this has been lost, and that the text, when entire, gave the name of another writer of nomes, who ;

'll

— 1448 ^ 12

2.

—

1448

3.

®

II?

19

and also the name of a common 1448 ^ 15 by the two poets (wo-7rep ( Kal'Ap-} so that this clause may have said of the Nome what the yas) next (Kv/cAo)7ras Tt/xd^cos Kal 4>iAd^€vos) says of the Dithyramb. If it be objected that, on this hypothesis, Aristotle ought to have was put

in contrast with Argas,

subject differently treated ;

considered also, as a third possibility, the type of

Nome

and Dithyramb,

was of no

it

importance for

real

in «'i6, ‘

realistic

we

and when he comes

;

or intermediate

ever existed,

He

an intermediate or

which the chief personages were

in

simply

is

Drama between Tragedy the subject of the Drama

see that he omits to recognize

drama,

’

to

’

realistic

is that, if it

purpose.

his

preparing us for the distinction in the

and Comedy

‘

the reply

ojjLoioi,

like

the ordinary man.

Polyphemus must have been a stock-subject in dramas with the title KwAwi/f, dealing with him and his story, by Epicharmus, Aristias, and Antiphanes, KuKAwTras.

as there were

literature,

as well as the existing play of Euripides.

Duntzer points

For the

poems.

different

as treated in

Philoxenus see Bergk, LG."* 3

dithyrambum,

who had Philoxenus made

that

then,

plural

We

^ KaO'

RdKAwi/--

Takdreia of

rj

to

satire on we may suppose,

have been a covert

offended the poet

;

Cyclops an ignoble personage,

his

have no evidence even of

this indirect

kind as to the Polyphemus of Timotheus (see Bergk

Schmidt

1

.

but

102),

p.

c.

it

here, as

Polyphemus

609, and Schmidt’s Diatribe in

p.

seems

It

p. 54.

the elder Dionysius,

X€t/3a)v

The

out, denotes not several Cyclopses, but

a natural

is

Aristotle implies in the context, that he

inference

was not

c. p. 620; from what

1.

like the

Cyclops

of Philoxenus. ei'

Se

TauTTj

tt}

8ia<|)opa.

Se rrj Biacfiopa, taking

PouXerai there

may

Tuv

:

this is

it

to

Vahlen retains the

mean

‘

in ipsa

quam

traditional iv

dico differentia

avTrj^iS '.

tendency and Intention, though ^ 18

their general

be exceptions to the rule (comp. Bon. Ind. 140^41).

replaces the ^ kuO' -qp-ds in “ 4. Aristotle especially of the chief personages in Tragedy, I'ui'

more in most instances Probl. 19. 48,

to

the heroic age;

922^^17

from the chorus]

p.kv

yap

eVetvoi

[i.

the

e.

comp.

13,

is

thinking

who belong 1453 “20 and

tragic actors

as

distinct

rjpmuiv p.ip.rjTai, ol Be r)y€p.6ves tcov dp)^aL(DV

povoi yaav ^poies- ol Be Aaoi dvdpwTroi, wv ecrriv 6 xopds.

TouTwv

comp.

I,

words

to

8 ia({>opd.

rpiTT)

1447

^

rovTiov

= Ttov Ae^^eicrtov /xi/xijo-ewv in

29 Tas Biaefiopds tSiv

Te)(y!!)v.

mean harum quas recenseo ‘

®

7

J

Vahlen supposes the

differentiarum tertia

’.

^ 19

COMMENTARY

ii8 1448 ® 19

enavTa toutwi/

:

described in chap.

the objects with the possibilities of difference

Though

2.

the objects of the poetic imitations

are properly persons, the neuter

of designating them

;

and erepov ti("'2i), as well as auTcl

TO,

Tov

20)

formula (repeated from

in the

i,

”•17) €v 015 re KUL a Kal w? in ”-25.

1447

®20

used as a more general way

is

reappears in the context in ra avrd

it

The

fjiifi,€icr 0 ai.

fxifiovfjLevov,

and the

subject understood with

participles

which follow

/xi/reicr^ai

describe the differences of manner, are in apposition to that.

^23, however, where Aristotle there

In

dealing with the Drama, in which

a plurality of imitators, he has to put the participles in

is

the plural

TTpaTTovras),

(d)s

be supplied,

to

is

is

21-22, to

in

is

and the

subject, instead of being left

mentioned, and in the plural (tovs

definitely

Ixipov/Mevovs, " 24).

^21

6 t€

&iTayyiWovTa ktL

fret'

ore

fJLfv

in Goulston’s paraphrase,

‘

interdum ipse aliud quid,

i.

MS.

The amended

reading of this passage

dTrayy€X.XovTa ore Se erepov tl yiyv 6p.evov

may

has before hepoy

is

anticipated

aut ut interdum eas exponat poeta, et

persona,

alia

fiat.’

The ^ which

the

very well be supposed to have been

omitted (comp. 25, 1461a 9), and then re-inserted in the wrong place, as a correction of ore Se (comp, my Textual Criticism of ‘

the Nic. Ethics

p.

18).

nva (suggested by Plato’s Rep. 393 c) is the result of a curious oversight. As Aristotle began by speaking of the objects imitated in the Ulrici’s correction ertpov

Irepot' Tl.

ojs Tts

in

aAA,os

a

see on cKacrra tovtojv in i 9 he was to describe the imitator as identifying himself, not with

neuter (ra avrd

p-ip-eicrOai

bound some one ‘

The that

else ’, but with something else ’ (eVepw n). statement in the text in a 21-24 is on the same lines as ‘

Plato

in

Rep.

392D-394D;

reminiscence of Plato’s

;

and

it

very

its

terminology

would be a mere enigma

is

a

to us,

if we had not the key to it in the Republic. Plato distinguishes between three forms of Btpyrja-is: (i) simple narration, in which

speaks throughout in propria persona

the poet

;

(2) imitative or

it were, and and (3) the mixed manner, which we see in Homer. Aristotle’s

dramatic narration, in which he effaces himself as

speaks in the person of another; narrative

and dramatic by

turns,

aTrayyeAAovra recalls Plato’s

394

c);

and

(Rep. 393

Homer

c).

( 6 t£

Si

dTrayyeAtas avTOv tov TroirjTov (Rep.

dAAos

d>v

two manners

in

his erepov ri yiyvopievov the Platonic

piev

The combination

also

of the

aTrayyeWovra ore 8 e erepov

ojs

Tts

ri yiyvop.evov') is

a point

1

1448

3.

^

19-21

which Plato works out and explains TovTwv Tmv

KOCTfL^ope Xawy,’ Aeyct re airos 6

8v(x),

r^v BLavoiav aXXocre rpeVeiv,

ptTa Tavra wcnrep avTos poAtcTTa

TTOi^crat

for the

Homeric

length

/ae'xpt fj-ev

:

ov8 hnxeLpii

Tis 6 Xeyciiv

auTOS'

^

6 Xpiicrijs Aeyet Kal ireiparai

o/v

SoKety

’’Op.rjpov

p.r}

Toy

eiyai

rjp.a'i

8e

o tl

Xeyoyra dAAa roy

mixed mode of representation, ras

or

rjp.(x)v

ro.

Plato’s concluding formula

(Rep. 393 a ).

Trpea-^vrrjy oyra

lepea,

-rroirjTrjs /cal

aAAos

u)s

some

at

19

A)(aiovs, ArpeiSa Se fiuXicrra

eXtcrcrcTO Trai/ras

eTrSiv, ’kul

1

Si/jy^o-ets

pLpovpeyov? ra 8e pr/ (Rep. 394 d), is the all but exact equivalent of Aristotle’s pipeca-Oat ore pty aTrayyeXXovra

vouLcrOai

.

.

.

ra

p-ty

.

.

At

ore Se Irepov t6 yiyyopeyoy. that there

the two statements,

it

much wider

in a

sense (see

that of time;

on

The

order

different,

is

order of logic, but

the

in

restricted

is

(2)

are arranged,

Homer and

and begins with

pipila-Oai

1447*^16).

i,

possibilities

takes them, not

since Aristotle

must be admitted

whereas Aristotle uses

of representation;

which the three

in

also,

With Plato the term

(i)

mode

to the dramatic

it

noteworthy points of differences between

certain

are

.

Same time

the

the

in

Homeric manner.

And

23) to the third possibility, the purely (3) when he comes (in dramatic form of expression, he is apparently thinking more of

on « 23). comes under the head of narrative, as distinct from dramatic, imitation (5, 1449^1 Tw aTrayyeAtdv eimt comp. 6, 1449^26 SpojvTcov /cal ov 8 l drrayyeAt'as) ; and in his two chapters (23 and 24) specially dealing actors

the

than

of the

Aristotle’s general

.

.

dramatic

that

(v.

it

;

1459'’ 36)

1459

himself

is

.

with epic poetry the Epic in 24,

author

view in fact of the Epic

-fj

SirjyrjpaTLKr] piprjcri'; (23,

Drama being

17

(as

Plato had done before him)

form of poetry.

Every epic

is

1459®' ^7

him from recognizing as

a

quasi-dramatic

said to have a quasi-dramatic element

it to some extent {pipowrai 8 k oAtya, 24, 1460^9), and Homeric Epic has it in a very marked degree. Homer

in

said

to

reduce the element of narrative to a


24,

1460

every opportunity of

speak for a play 24,

way

in

is

(oAtya

^ *]), taking 9; comp. tAcixtcra Aeyeiv, his personages come forward and

themselves, just

1460®’ 10).

minimum

the

making

and on the stage

acknowledged

/

ey rul TTparrecy piprjcri'i (22,

This, however, does not prevent

15)-

the Epic

— the

as

though they were characters

(ti^vs

eladyei

dy 8 pa

The ‘mixed manner’

of

chap. 24, as clearly

and

>)

aAAo

Homer, in

tl

therefore,

much

the

in

ijOo'i,

is

same

as it seems to be in the words of the present passage (as amended), ore pkv dTrayyeAAovra ore 8e erepoy rt yiyyoptyoy.

1448 ^ 21

%

COMMENTARY

120

1448^21

the

If

others),

traditional

:

yap

/cal

puptifrOai ecTTiv ore p,ev airayyikkovTa ''Op.'qpo^ TTOiet,

7]

Ritter, Vahlen,

and

iv tol^ aurois Kal to.

avra

be retained (with

text

has to be read thus

it

ws Tov avTov Kal

—

erepov tl yiyvopavov wcnrep

rj

p-iTaj^aWovra

pJq

—

^ Trayras o/s According to this

TTparroyras Kal evepyovvras tovs pap-avpivows.

view the words otI ply airayyeWoyTa have to be taken as a general description

of the narrative

manner (wdvras

as

TTparrovTas

(Ls

opposed to the purely dramatic Kre.),

the parenthesis recognizing

the two possibilities within the sphere of narrative poetry.

my

interpretation of the passage (i) implies, to

divergence from the scheme in the Republic

This

mind, too wide a

and (2) it practically assumes that ore pey aTrayyeXXoyTa means no more than aTrayyeA.Xoyra or

rj

d-n-ayyeXXovTa

it

;

;

also involves (3)

what seems

to

me

hardly tenable interpretation of the concluding clause (see on ^

22

d/s TO/'

mus

auTov Kal

(ir)

p.eTaPdXXovTa

on

antitheticus (see

of that in

De

caelo

peyoi TO avTo.

is

another instance of parallelis-

6,

it is .

.

.

the converse in sense

dAAoioiTo Kal prj 8ia-

not necessary to bracket the article before

though the omission would certainly bring the present

avToy,

ment

It

2.

:

1447 18); 288*^31 cire

i,

a

23).

state-

393 a-d, and the antithesis to be between what the poet says in propria

into closer conformity with that in Plato Rep.

make

persotia (comp. 24,

1460

6,

ii) and what he says in an assumed

character.

® 23

rj

the

irdi/Ta cos TTpciTTOVTas Kal e/'cpyoC/'Tas

correction of

Casaubon (De

tous pipoupteVous.

Sat. Poesi p.

irayra,

82 Rambach), was

adopted by Goulston. It is in apposition to the to. avTo. “20, and serves to distinguish the Drama from the Epic, which tacitly

at best only partially dramatic.

If Travras be retained,

it

in is

has to be

taken with tovs pcpavpiyov? as the object after pipucrOat understood from “21.

pipelaOai, however,

is

already provided with an

and rd avra is much too important In logically to be ignored through a change of construction. chap. 2 Aristotle has shown how the subjects of the representaobject, viz. ra avra (“ 20);

tion

may

differ.

He

difference also in the

tells

us

mode

or

when the subjects are the manner are indicated by

now

that there are possibilities of

manner of the same (rd adrd) ;

the

circumstantial

clauses which follow rd avra pipelcrOaL eariy.

representation, even

these differences of participles It will

in

the

be observed

that in this third participial clause the participles are in the plural,

and that the grammatical subject, instead of being understood, as and also in the plural, tov? pipovit was in “ 20, is expressed,

1

3

The

ixivovs.

that

this,

21-27

I2I

number

explanation of the change of

Aristotle

than

rather

^

1448

.

thinking

is

of the poet

moment

the

for

There are

himself.

probably 1448 ^ 23

is

of the actors several

certainly

passages in the Poetics, very closely resembling that before us, in

which the reference must be to

the actors, a play being con-

ceived to be something Avhich ‘they act’, imitators concerned in TovTcs TTOiovvTai TTjv

it

comp.

:

1450®'

iJLtfxrj(jiv

reading Travras,

exprimuntur

imitatione

agentes

quasi

sugges-

clause, with the ‘

omnes

aut

qui ’

operantes

et

>

due to E. Muller,

is

The mean

p. 18.

2

generally supposed to

is

The

TTparrova-iv,

2

tion that tovs p.ip.ovp.evovs refers to the actors

Theorie der Kunst bei den Alten

with a plurality of

i.e.

26 Spcuvrcov; ^ 31 irpar-

1449

6,

imitari

(Tyrwhitt), rovs p.ip.ovp.evov; being taken as a passive in the sense

of the

personages imitated

‘

as a passive

no

clear

is

The

’.

use of the present of

not impossible, but there

instance

of

1454^26, where

it*;

he does not say 6

p.ip.eLcr 9 ai

am

as far as I

may be observed

it

Aristotle

is,

aware,

too that

wants a present passive of

in

15,

p.ip.ei(T6ai,

but has recourse to a periphrasis,

yui/xoii/xevos,

o TJjv p.ip.rjcnv 7rapf)((i)v,

Comp.

if rpicrl 8 t) raurais ktI.

Xo)v rpia-iv KTe.

The

I,

144^

which the poetic imitation works.

ravTai'i is the real subject of the proposition

and preparative

628),

p.

aWi]- ^ 24

preposition here (unlike that in the following

€v oh) denotes the sphere within

2. I

® 16 Si.aepov(ri Se

(comp. Kuhner, Gr. Gr.®

the enumeration

to

follows,

that

m

The (comp. De caelo 2. 2, 285^11). oh T€ Ktt'i & Kal whole statement, therefore, is practically the same thing as ravra iv

ev

to.

€(TTtv,

oh

re Kai a Kal

rpeh

(il?,

BiacfiopaL elcnv iy

or as Bon. Ind. 546 ® 57 P'lls

yiyverai, avTai

wore

TT] fjiev

rpeh ktL

etcrtv,

is

ev

oh

it,

ev

ah

ah

p-ipfqah

17

Siatfiopah ^

Brj

p.ip.rjO'L';

re Kal a Kal ws.

a sort of corollary to what was said in chap. 2 ^ 25

and the opening section of chap.

3.

Aristotle

is

now once more

viewing plays in their relation to the authors, and the actors are ignored.

In chap. 6 there are several instances of his passing

unconsciously from the one point of view to the other.

1449^26,

6,

31,

1450^10, 21,^11 the reference

as acted; w’hereas in 6,

is

1449^34, 1450^25-37,^7 work of the poet.

Thus

in

to the play it

is

to the

play as a literary production, the irpaTTovTas yap pipoOvTai.

The

dramatic poet, instead of giving ® 27

us a merely verbal description of the incidents, *

The passage

in

Plato Rep. 604 E

another interpretation.

(if pinovfitvov

makes

his

person-

be retained) admits of

COMMENTARY

122

1448 ^ 27 ages appear on the stage, and go through a semblance of action. The difference between Aristotle’s language here and in *^23 is to be noted

the dramatic poet fjujx^rai TTparrovTas

:

the actor

Tai (Ls irpaTTiDV.

^

28

This reminds Aristotle of a current explanation of

Spwi'Tas.

word drama, 6tl p-ip-owrai BpihvTas, and leads him off into a digression on the claim of the Dorians to the discovery of the Drama. This claim, he says, they support by an appeal to language they maintain that not only Kuyp-wSla but also the general term Spap.a are words of Dorian origin. The statement here being the

;

purpose,

quite sufficient for

its

Egger) a lacuna

in the

statements in

CGF.

is

clearly the ultimate source of the corresponding

grammarians

the

p. 6) T7]v

I

piv ort

iroAcwv

p-ijTTO}

dvOpwTTwv, ol Se dvTtX.iyovT€<;

dXAa Bypovs,

.

.

.

Anon. De Comoedia (Kaibel,

mpl

oucroiv

(= Kaibel,

486 P.

1.

c.

dAA’ iv

p.

vel

ULTrb

Kw/xais

oli
tCjv

Trap' AOrjvaLoi^

crret ev rails

oSois eKiipa^ov.

est conventicula

djro rdiv

rusiicoriim

Tov Kwpov, id est coinisatione, quia olim in eiusmodi

amantium

fabidis

rrjv

KaXelaOaL

57) Comoedia dicta

Kwpai enim appellaniur pagi, id

;

^ovcrapiojvos'

Kwpas irepaovres yBov Kal

pi] Koj/xas

aa-L

vtto

(j>o.(riv

ras

Kal KayptaBtav avryv KaXovcnv

—Diomedes Kbipuyy

:

KwfiLwBiav rjvprjcrOai

Se ovopiao’tav e^^eiy ol

fTreBfiKVWTO,

not necessary to suppose (with

on the assumption that a Dorian The must have been mentioned.

etymology of rpayaiSia also present passage

it is

text,

inventim

canehantur

KoypoL

Reifferscheid,

(v.

Suetonii Reliq. p. 7).

a

ot

gi

On

Meyapeis.

The

the Megarian

Comedy

see Meineke,

FCG.

i

Wilamowitz (Herm. 9 p. 319) have been examined by Gomperz (Vienna Academy, Sitzungsb. 1888 p. 12) and Zielinski (Gliederung der altattischen Komodie p. 243). The Megarian claim to Comedy is noted by the anonymous commentator on Eth. N. 4. 6, 1123 “24 (p. 186 p.

18.

Heylb.)

BiaavpovTai yap

;

TTOiovyrai avrrjs pt(i)v

doubts about


KaTapias

6

ol

it

raised by

Mcyapeis iv

KuipwBLas

Meyapciis

^v)

ktI.

,'

his

no independent obviously only an amplification of the words in the recognition

of

it,

(cTret

/cto/xcpSta

Trap’ avrois irpaiTov evpeOeLcrT]?, et

however, has

Kai dvri-

ye Kal Sovo'aparenthetical

value, text.

as

it

is

It will

be

observed that Aristotle says nothing about Susarion either here or in chap. 5

Comedy ^32

t{)s

—where

is

he expressly

Trap’ auTots BrjpoKparlas.

the tyrant

tells

us that the earlier history of

not known.

Theagenes about

b. c.

Megara 600.

is

said to have expelled

— 3

1448 ^ 27-34

.

Megara Hyblaea

CK IiKcXias, the jMegarians of

ol

‘

INIegarians

comp.

Pol.

on

In

’Em'xap/ios. first

this point

^

1341

8. 7,

28

—

the

literally,

1448 ^ 32

of the preposition

this use

‘those on the philo-

ol eK (f)i\ocroi'ag,

’.

sophic side

been the

For

the Sicilian side

123

1449

5,

to discard the

he and Phormis are said to have

1*6

Comedy

of personalities

New Comedy,

of view he was the forerunner of the

^33

so that from

;

i.

e.

Comedy proper. Plato had already premier place in Comedy: Theaet. 152 e twv

of what Aristotle regards as given

him

the

eKaTtpas,

TTOLTjTwv ol oKpoL TT]^ TTOiTjcTews

rpaycpStas

asserted

SI

The

"OfjLujpo';.

Sicilian

KtoptcpSicts

by post-Aristotelian writers: Theocritus Ep.

KwpLwSiav evpojv

— Solinus 5 — Themistius

’^TrL)(app.o
primum

inventa

Kco/xojSia

TO vaXaLov Tjp^aro

comoedia.

—

Prol.

otto

p.€v

on

’Eim)(app.6s re Kal ^opp.i's [see (rvvT]v$rj 6 r].

5;

^’6]'

1449

406

27,

Suidas


The whole

dp.a ^6pp.w. I p.

’Eirixo-pp-o';

from the allusion

6 rai/

Stciha\

Bind,

kox

i p. 7 ’ETTixapp.os'

iroWd

Trpocr-

evpe rrjv Kto/AwSiav iv ^vpaKov
question has been discussed by Bentley,

From

MdY>'r)Tos.

Ktti

often

i

KoiXXiou Se 'Kdrjva^e

CGF.

251 Dyce, and by Welcker, Kl. Schr.

XiwkSou also

:

m

is

eKeWev yap ^(rrqv

2t/ceXias’

de Comoedia 3=:Kaibel

17.

[scil.

13 Or.

-

OVT09 TrpiLTOs T7}v KojpKpStav SL€ppip.p,evr]v dveKTyjaaTO

Wks.

’E7rtxap/4os,

fJ.h'

Comedy

of

origin

them further on,

to

i p.

273.

mention of them here, as ® 34

this

in

5,

1449^)3,

it

is

knows of no Attic writers of Comedy earlier than Chionides and Magnes and even these apparently are mere names to him (see on 5, 1449*’ 4). The comedies usually ascribed to them(Kock, CAF. i pp. 4-9) were no doubt the work of a much clear that Aristotle

;

later

age (comp. Wilamowitz,

B. c.

As

335)-

regards Chionides,

487 on the strength of the statement in Suidas:

'AOrjvalo^,

Kayp-tKos

TTpb

Twv

dpxo-MS

Hepa-iKiov.

(694 Dittenberger

ap^aia?

rrjs

ywvKTTrjv yevecrOai

INIagnes,

Kto/AwStds'

Ka)/4(i)8tas,

who

is

logy of the

:

eTrtjSdAAet

life

XtojviSr;?,

Kal Aeyovcrt

StSdcTKCtv

inscription

b. c.

464

(v.

8’

Bergk, Kl. Schr. 2

Syracuse

(b. c.

of Epicharmus

city

475),

much younger man than The chrono-

is

beset with difficulties.

He and

is

to

time of Gelo and Hiero, the tyrants of

at the

485-467)

p.

’ETrtxdpp-^ veos Trpea^vTrj.

said to have lived to a very great age (90, or even 97),

have ‘flourished’

Trpwra-

8e Iretrtv oktu)

known from an

expressly described by Suidas as a

Epicharmus

ov

have been exhibiting a play at the

to

Dionysia in or shortly after is

c. p.

1.

appearance as a comic poet has been placed as early as

his

;

we may very

well suppose him, however.

—

:

COMMENTARY

124

1448*^34 to have written comedies before this period, as also to have lived beyond its limits. Suidas’ statement that he was producing comedies at

Syracuse six years before the Persian war

comp. Clinton FH. performing

v/ere

at

Athens

’

of

rwv HepaiKuiv

{^v Se irpo

ev SiipuKovcrais’ iv Se ’A^^rats e-TreSeiKvvvTo), is

e.

(i.

in b.

485:

c.

when ‘Euetes, Euxenides, and Myllus

2® p. 31),

Everrjs

some importance,

SiSdcrKojv

err]

Kal

as

MdAAos

koI

showing

that

Epicharmus

was conceived to be coeval with a generation at Athens anterior to Chionides and the regular drama which began with him (comp. Usener, Rh. Mus. 28 p. 423). There is no very serious difference, therefore, between Suidas and Aristotle as to the priority of Epicharmus. Kttl

=

TpayuSi'as

Trjs

TpayojStas.

Se

change of construction

by

Soph.

ii,

el.

Vahlen illustrates the i7il>8 cruAAoyto-yxos

epicTTiKos Kttl o’o^io'TtKos icTTiv £is p.€V 6 (f)aivop.evo
6vt(s KTe

Kttl ocrot pii]

where

.

seems

Kal oVot

oa-ot; comp, also Hartung, Lehre v. d. Partikeln 2 would be a very simple alteration, and an improvement

to read Kal eVioi,

rpaywStas (S’)

Sicyonians

the

i.e.

'SiLKVwvioi irip^div

ei/tot

Tov " ASpYjaTOV Kal

Sr]

•

.

p.

410.

It

to the sense,

of Phil. 10 p. 67).

(J.

Herod.

;

.

to stand for erepoi Se

67 rd re

5.

Trpos to. rraOea

Brj

dAAa

ot

airov TpayiKoicrt

^opotcrt iyipaipov, tov p.lv Atdvvcrov ov Ttp-covrf?, rdv Se ‘'ASpycrrov.

—

Themistius Or. 27, 406 Dind. Kal rpaywStas evperal pXv ^ikvwvioi, reXecriovpyol Se AttlkoI TrotrjraL Suidas; ©eVTrts, iKapiov TroAeous

—

’Attik'^?,

TpayiKos eKKaiSsKaTOS

SiOTTOtov ’ ETTtyeVovs

Wks.

^36

I

s.v.

p.

OiSev

Pol.

:

Trpos tov

6

5,

.

Trpos rds TreptotKiSas

Athens the term the

Trpiurov

Awwaov)

yevop-ivov rpaym-

Se rive?, Sevrepos p-erd


On

.

286 Dyce, and Bernhardy, Gr.

TrepioiKiSa; S-^pov

tov

d'AAot Se airov irpwTOV rpayiKov yevecr^ai

’ETTcyevrjv'

also Suid.

drru

ToO 2iKvo)yi'ov TiOipievo?,

Kidpr]

1320^6

Litt.

meant a quarter of

— IsOCrateS

Plato

149 a

£K7re'p.7rovTes

As understood

® 37

KwpwSous

s.v. with the .

.

.

tov at

the city, as distinct from

Laws 746 n

SteAdp,evot rrjv


pev ttoAiv Kara

Koypas TTjv Se p^dpav Kara Sypov^ (v. also Photius Lex.

and Suidas

(comp.

p. 430.

yap rtvas

ttoiovctlv evTrdpovs.

outlying townships {S^poi):

S^ptovs Kal Kwpias.

del

(fiaa-lv

Epigenes see Bentley,

S. V. Kiiprjv,

commentators).

The connexion

duo Tou Kupd^eiv.

is

indirectly

implied in the juxtaposition of the tw'o words in the law cited (or interpolated) in Kto/xos

^

I

Demosthenes

21.

10

1)

-iroprrr]

Kal oi rratSes Kal 6

Kal OL KoypwSol Kal ol rpayuSof.

Kal TO TToieiv KTe.

The argument comes

practically

to

this

y

1448 ^ 34—4- 1448

3.

125

7

Plays confessedly represent actions now if they had been originally 1448 an Athenian invention, one would expect them to have been called ‘

:

than

rather

n-payfiara

Athenian word for

Spap-ara

view of Spav and TTparreiv

He

the words.

is

Tragedy

shown by

by

oTTOcra icTTi tov

chap.

(6,

natural oXojs)

dptOpov

rrj
The

causes.

instinct in

will

it

;

(®'

to )(aipcLv tois piprjpacri

5)

regards as two distinguishable facts in

Aristotle

imme-

causes are those mentioned in the

diate context, TO pLpeicrOaL

is

and differences of character

^ 24).

in the individual poets (ra ot/ceta

nature

^24), of

the ultimate developments,

attributable to the personal tendencies

The two

pkv

The

men. Se

in

to large

(yevvrjaraL

all

of poetry {hua-n-dcrOri

Comedy were

which Tragedy and

aiTiai 8uo.

illus-

raised

was due

of poetry generally

imitative

the

origin of the two great kinds

These

questions

antiquarian

the

origin

to

attributable

is

Vahlen

8 ).

human

be observed too that he proves the second point

by a formal argument, which he has not thought necessary to do to yatpuv tois piprjpacn, instead of coming in the case of the first, in as a mere afterthought after to pipua-Oai, involves a different idea, in

and

relates to a different class of

works of

Aristotle

who produce them. aware that the cultivation of an art implies but also a public to accept and reward their work

artists

(comp. Teichmiiller, Aristot. Forsch. |iip,T)TiK«5 TaToi'

pdXKov

rj

:

Probl. 30. 6,

dXX(o

Vahlen

Sid TovTo.

De somn.

— the public interested

perfectly

is

not only

persons

as distinct from the artists

art,

.

rj

on

illustrates

2 p. 203).

956

*’•14 Ato. Tt

pip-qnKixiTaTOV

;

dvOpwvip

TretcrTeov

pavddvciv yap Swarai

use of the neuter singular by

this

^ 24 KaTaTrurrovcn 3, 457

.

.

.

ol dvdponroi,

povov ydp opOov

rdWa ^ida tois 1253 dvOpmroii iSiov, to povov dya 6 ov Kal KaKov aiaOrjaiv ex^*'*'* |ia 0 i^(T£is Quintilian 10. 2, i Neque enini dubitari potest quin artis pars magna coyitmeatur imitatione. nam ut invenire primuni

Tmv ^<^v, and Pol.

3

(jxov^s.

aside

Aristotle asserts that the birth of poetry

3,

use of

Plato, Phil. 17 c iTreiSav Xd^r]<; rd Siaa-T^para

Setting

eoiKacri.

own

his

27) vpaTTovTa? Kal SpwvTa?, and 1449 26) his word is Spwvrwv,

though he might easily have said TrpaTroWwv. TTjs |Aifjiiij<7e(i)9 is the genitive after twv Stac/ioptov. trates the order

ordinary

the

Aristotle does not accept this

indirectly

has just said

in his definition of

being

irparTtiv

;

That

act.’

to

I.

S'

2,

16 toCto ydp irpd^ .

,

.

:

fuit estque praecipuum,

sic

ea quae

atque omnis vitae ratio sic constat,

tit

beJie

inventa sunt utile sequi.

quae probamus

iti

aliis

facere

4

i

—

—

;

COMMENTARY

126

^ 48’’7 ipsi

velimus.

sequuntur ;

sic

litterarum ductus,

musici vocem

sic

ut scribendi fiat

probatam experimento culturam

rustici

omnis denique disciplinae

pueri

exemplum intuentur

in

ad propositum

initia

usus,

opera priorum,

docentium, pictores

sibi praescriptum

formari videmus.

9

A

o-Tjfieloi'.

tion

an

;

arjfjieiov is

which proves or confirms a proposi-

that

something that explains or gives a reason

oItlov,

An.

Aristotle defines a arj/juTov in

70

pr. 2. 27,

Xerai eivai Trporacns aTToBeiKTiKr] avayKaia

rj

a

7

for

it.

8 e (3 ov-

(rrjij.eI:ov

ov yap ovtos

IvSo^os"

^ ov yevop-ivov irpoTcpov rj vcrrepov yeyove to irpaypa, tovto arjpetov (ctti tov ycyoveVai ^ eivai (comp. Bon. Ind. 677 ^ i). €(TTiv

10

em

Twv Ipyui':

‘re ipsa’ (Tyrwhitt

A

Schwegler on Metaph. rendered by

‘

works of

art

984

3, (‘

’

T^Si)

Bon. Ind. 286^43 and

twv epyuv here

in operibus opificum

a yap aura Xuwrjpus opcopev p.av 66.viw T£

v.

;

“ 12).

:

Rhet.

II,

I.

often

is

Victorius).

1371 ^^4

Se to

iirel

Kal to 6 avpd^eiv, rai to roidSe dvdyKy ySea dual

Vei S.],

olov TO T£ p.€p.ipyp(vov [//.t/xT^TtKov Vet.

wcTTrcp ypaiKy

duSpiavTOTTOua Kal iroiyTiKy, Kal rrav o du ev pcpipypivov y, Kav

im

ySv avTo TO p.epipypivov ov yap

on

ecrnu

tovto €K€iuo, uxttc pavOdveiv

5 » 645*^

avTwv

dWd

tovtiv ^aipei,

n

(Tvpj^acvn

Tca-pdXoyov Kal aToirov,

^wivu

[i.e. Ta)V

twu py

Kal

py

croXAoyio'p.os

De

.

et

fj

part. an.

Tas plv eiKouas

K€)pipiarp€vu>v^ OewpovvTe^ j(aipopev otl

T yv 8 ypiovpyy
dvvdpcuoL y£ Tas aiTtas KaOopdv.

TratStKcus

Tyv

iwmv

rrepl Ttov dTipoTepivv

aud. poet. 18 a

;

Qu. conv.

5. i,

Sid Sei

Svaj^epaiveiv

py

Plutarch also (De

hricTKfxpiv.

674 a) has a good deal

to say

on

this point.

12

dTipOTaTWV [i.e.

pois.

*^13

vow]

:

De anima

—De

404 ^3

£V arracn

yap vrcdp^eiv avTov

645 “ 15 (see on ^ 10). For the conjunction comp. 13, 1453

part. an. i. 5,

Kal toOto.

Kal TO yiyopevov. vTTvojTLKd.

I. 2,

Tois ^
—De somno 3

— Meteor.

2.

8,

i

»

17 aypdov Se

45 ^ ^ 28 crypdov 81 tovtwv Kal

367®'!! TeKpypiov

8’

ian

.

.

.

to.

Kal to

Xenoph. An. i. 9. 29 TCKpypiov Se tovtov Kal ToSe. OEwpoCkTas pavOdveiv: comp. Rhet. 1 c., and Plato Rep. 475 D

yiyvopevov *’16

.

.

ot

.

.

.

(jiiXoOidpovei 7rdvT£S epoiye SoKovcri T(S KOTapavOdveiv

ToiovToi dual.

Belger (De Aristotele etiam

ponenda Platonis discipulo

p.

yaipovTa

Arte Poetica com-

45) finds some further traces of

Plato in this portion of the Poetics. plation of a picture or other

in

work of

Our

pleasure in the contem-

imitative art

is

explained here

:

7~22

1448

4-

an

to be the natural concomitant of

oux

and

D

Kara

1448

the picture (comp.

3).

a ovx} for ovx y is found in Kt> in Eth. N. 8. 12, ii6i 8. (the Marcianus) in An. post. i. 23, 84

T).

in

918

5,

intellectual act, the discovery

meaning of

or recognition on our part of the Probl. 19.

127

This has been supposed

toG ^ip. 6 ia 9 ai.

8 e owtos

i,

^>18

20

somewhat loosely for the two things previously mentioned, but a little reflexion Tots fiLfiyfiacri TO fiifietcrOai and to will show that Aristotle has not fallen into any such inexactness to stand

What he

of language. poet

the

poet

and he

;

now

is

the evolution of

is

of the

aptitude

imitative

only a higher and more developed form of that natural

is

aptitude for imitation which

is

no reason why he should

is

considering

us that the

tells

common

There

mankind.

to all

remind us at this point of the we derive from poetry and other

also

naturalness of the pleasure that

kinds of imitation.

seem

Kal rfjg dp^oi/ias Kai toG puOpoG

to

be added as an after-

thought, in recognition of the historical connexion between music

Except in its lyric forms, however, poetry was now no longer combined with music; in Aristotle’s view, also, even metre is at the most only one of its accidents (i, 1447 A very different view has been taken of these words by Tyrwhitt and Vahlen and long before their time by Averroes and Sigonius (Emend, p. 152) who suppose harmony and rhythm to be the and poetry.

—

—

(f>va-iKat mentioned There are two objections

second of the ahiai Svo the chapter (^ 5). (i)

it

ignores the significance of the distinction between to

and TO

;(aip€tv tois pit/iijptacrt (v.

Kal Tov pvOfxov are to

bear

some in

not

^ 4)

;

and

(2)

Aristotle’s

show

stop to

that

our

how

Rhet.

8,

3.

1408^28,

it

6

of

sense

has

Metre

pvOfjLos icTTLV, o5 Kal TO, p.irpa

As

them.

come

eS dpxtjs is 10).

If

the matter

is

harmony and rhythm to be natural to us

said to be a

mode

of

8e toG (rxyjxaT0<;

Tp-yrd

[?

rpypara^.

is

(comp.

rhythm dpi^/xos

On

between them see Cicero Orator 67, Quintilian Schol. Hephaest. p. 144 Gaisf.

3

fufieta-Oai,

rys dpptovtas

opinion of such secondary importance, he does

Probl. 19. 38, 920^^29).

p.

if

emphasis, one would expect them

sort to justify the position ascribed to

natural, or to explain

in

this

on

be brought in in a less incidental way, and with a reason of

to

is

early part of

the

in

to this interpretation

the difference 9.

4,

45,

and

much the same thing as iv dpxfi (Eucken, Sprachgebr. may be taken not with iyiwya-av but with the

it

22

16

COMMENTARY

128 144^

22

between

participle, the antithesis

^pxv'> ‘^i 4‘'VK 6Te?

be not unlike that in Metaph.

will

rwv dTropwv

7rpo;^£tpa

A

and Trpoayovres

982 '’13

2,

apxrj's p.h' to.

Kara pnKpov ovrw Trpoiovres

6avpdcravT€
KOI Trepi TU)V p.€L^6v
auTo

used

loosely

:

what

anticipates irpodyeiv

is

for

termed

is

(= Trpo'Uvai)

passages

in

word

in the present context is to

parallel in Soph.

‘

performances

eipovTCS TravreXms TvapaXa/Sovres

difficulty

of

‘advance’, or ‘carry a stage

may

be seen from

the

which the gradual progress or

arts is described

ttoAAwv

irapd

it

;

The meaning

olov

ek

ydp ras

ol p.\v

;

p^iKpov ri Trpojjyayov

ctti

’

their improvisations

'^10).

262c), as

33, 183^5, in

el.

advance of Rhetoric and other

p.ovvTe<;

‘

an object can generally be supplied without

further’ (comp. Plato Polit.

dpxd.';

or

4, 1449 13) a transitive verb; in which it seems to be intransitive

from the context (comp. Bon. Ind. 633 the

’

in the next line

here (and again in

the Aristotelian

work

their

‘

ol Se

vvv evSoKi-

SiaBox^S Kara pipoi

TrpoayayovToyv ovto)S rji^T^Kacriv.

23

Kovpoi

KpoviSrjv

of poetry imperilo

The

gr. s.v.

Hermes 54

rjvre

0 eos

S’

MatdSa

pLOVcra

initio

A

Kepropieovcnv,

dp.(l>l

Ata

similar view of the origin

Kal

avSpZv,

i

p.

germ

250 Dyce). of

.

4,

TjOr)

:

el

Se

rj

The

in

4,

Srjp-ov^

1449®'

phallic-song, in

piev oAojs in

as

4.

c sqq.

As

7rpd§€is xal rds twv toioutwv.

9,

which

Comedy, was sometimes described 1449® 12).

comp. Plato Rep. 396

eo

p.ev TraAata

Kara

epydrai

yrjs

similiter

mox

gejieratum,

corresponds with the yewrjcrai

Kard rd oiKeia .

esse

aap-ara aSovres avrocrxl^io- (comp. on

SieairdaBu] 8e

.

aurium mensura

Tyr. 37. 4 ’AOrjvalois

avToaxeSio? (see on

xds KttXds

et

observatione

ytrav

TraiSojv .

.

Aristotle finds the

25

Hymn

avToa-xeBLrj^ Trctpciyacvos,

Trapai/SoXa

fusum

—Maximus

and Bentley, Wks. wSr]

speak

to

‘

see Ernesti,

described in the Homeric

KaXbv deiSev,

KaAAiTreStAov.

spatiorn 7n

repertos pedes.

an

=

avrocrp^eStd^fiv

implied in Quintilian 9.4, 114 poema nemo duhitaverit

is

quodam

.

fact is

vtto

OaXiTjai

y/Syrat

Ktti

decurrentium

lcrrdp.evoL

verb

the

without premeditation or previous study’

Lex. techn. to

24

On

auTocrxeSiafffJidTwi',

off-hand,

Diintzer (Rettung

der aristotelischen Poetik p. 129) and Bernays (Zwei Abh. p. 28) have shown, this is not a tautology, as the actions of those who are /caAol (tcuv tolovtwv) are not always KaXal

Rep. 396 c pdAicrra epiff)p6vs

piev

p.ipovp.(vo<;

TrpdTTOvra, cAarro) Se Kal rjTTOv

ecr
rj

Kal virb pedrj^

rj

lepd^ei’s

;

comp. Plato

rdv dyaObv dcr^aAcos re rj

virb vocrcov

tivos dXXrj^ ^vp.ejjopd';.

koX

^ vTrd ipwTcsv

:

22-30

4 1448 .

has the same concrete sense of

ilfOYous

Laws 829

c eyKci/xta re

‘

invectives

The

if/oyov; Trotetv.

/cat

most eminent representative of

as the

129

this

kind of

Plato Rep. 607 A vp,vovs Oeoi^

:

Gud.

s.

v.

vp.vos'

Oeov Aeyerat to Be

p-h/ vp.vos €7rt

"Yp-voi;

Bergk, Gr.

423.

Litt. i p.

eiKos Be etmt iroWous,

autem

says

scil.

qui

est,

tolovtovs

tyKtSpita Stac/zepet

extitisse

^26) were probably

in a majority;

he has no romantic illusions as to the superiority of the of an earlier age (Pol.

whom

to

2.

8,

Aristotle refers,

Kal Movcratov I® p.

308.

dAAovs

/cat

dp^aioraros etvat "Oprjpo'i'

^dvot?

rots

TrporjKeLV

men

1269 5). On the pre-Homeric poets, comp. Sextus Emp. Adv. math. i. 204

vTTo TravTwv oyttoAoyetrat TroiTjTT]^

yap Ho'toSov

29

version,

multos.’

because he thinks that even in those days

this

the baser sort (ot evrekeaTepot

ovx

On

Greek poetry see

comp. Goulston’s

condiderint,

talia

/cat

avOpwTrov.

£y/ccip.tov €7rt

as very primitive forms of

Aristotle

was

Triati/o/tevos

iyKo)p.Lov

hymns and encomia

‘verisimile

as well

100).

—Etym.

TOts ayaOois.

KaOo 6

2.

Kal eyKUfJiia

ufjti/ous

Plato 1448

in

literature,

Archilochus, the i//oyepos ’ Ap-^tkoxos /?apvAoyots Ix^ecrtv of Pindar (Pyth.

’

earliest,

TrapTrXrjOeis

evtot

AtVov re Kal ’Opcjiea

Xeyovcriv,

See also Bernhardy Gr. Litt.

however, was quite aware that the writings

Aristotle,

which bore the names of these legendary poets were not really by

them (H. A.

6. 6,

“

563

eKcivou 6 MapyiTYjs

Heylb.)

Trapdyet

Op'qpov.

.

.

;

see Bernays, Dialoge d. Aristot. p. 95).

Eustratius .

rtva

/cat

pvrjpovevet 8

Ilept TTOtrjTLKrjs

TrptoTO)

18

:

avT7]<;

dAAa

on Eth. N.

6. 7,

1

141

Mapyirr^v

iTOLrjcriv

ov povov avrds

Kat ’Ap^tAo^os

/cat

14

(p.

320

ovopa^opevtjv

AptcrroTeAijs ev t <3

Kpartvos

/cat

KaAAt-

tQ eTriypdppaTL Kal papTvpovcnv etvat 'Op.ijpov to Troirjpa. the Margites, which Aristotle thus attributes to Homer, see

pa;(OS ev

On

Kinkel,

EGF.

p.

This statement in the Poetics does not question of the original form of the

64.

throw any light on the

it were a primitive part of poem, or subsequently added by Pigres (see Goettling, Op. Acad. p. 167, and Hiller, N, Jahrb. f. Phil. 1887 p. 13 for a discussion of it); it stands in a parenthesis, and must not be taken in any direct connexion with the ev ots lap/Selov rjXOe perpov

Margites, whether the iambic lines in

the

.

,

.

.

that follows. Kttl

Ttt

more or less like the Margites minor poems of a light order as Bergk (Gr. Litt. i p. 775)

ToiauTa refers to writings

by post-Homeric poets attributable

to

—not

Homer

to other

himself,

suggests. POETICS

K

’’

30

27

— COMMENTARY

130 1448

30

=

ols

a

8

new

€v 8 e TovTois, scil.

253^)12

ovs

Trpds

1046

t>

wv

Tis ^(opiVas

ei

as

sentence,

33 oh

.

,

ov

.

the relative beginning

rots i/'dyots,

1459^)12

in 24,

xaXiTrbv

ols

8.

(TUft/SaivovTa aroTra ov ^(aAeTrdv tSeiv.

TO.

avTo kd^oi /xovov to irpwTOV.

Kara to dpiAOTTOv:

3, 3,

8,

I. I, 17, 1455*^10 Kara to etKos. 1367 b 12 KaTO. TO TTpocrrjKov (opposed to Trapd to Eth. N. 4. 6, I123 20 Trapd to Scov. The reading of irpocrriKov). the Aldine (and of Parisinus 2038), kuI to appLorrov, has been accepted by Bon. Ind. 357 t> 48. the verb has the same sense in Eth. N. 5. 8, 1133 a 20 e^’ TiXOe

1355^22 and

9,

—

'’si

— Phys. — Metaph. ® —A 1074'’ — Rhet.

avrao-iv.

aTravrijcrai.

:

o

TO

laix^eioi'

KaXeiTai 8’

6

I.

iap,l3 i^€iv

lap-^os TO p-ev

TraXaibv

eirl

twv eh

ij/oyov

trrXtovaaav vppil^tiv virb

—

182 Gaisf.

Hephaest.

6,

Trapovop,d^tTaL

p.

lapi/3 iKoy,

.

Trj';

TraXaiol to v/3ptC tiv .

.

.

,

— Suetonii

.

St lapySos, vfipi^tiv

01

eoiKe Se 6

ypa^opevwv

Reliq. p. 19 Reiff.

to

crvvqOttas tKtrta-tiv,

Kal

d'

ov to

XoiSoptiv

yap tXtyov

Ttvds ^ovXop-tvoL TOVTO) i)(p(t)VTO T
makduum

t'^s

rah KaxoAoyiats

ty

tKX'qOrj

tnuirtp

.

Kal erratvov

fh TO

St

XeyecrOaL' eTrel

Schol.

ctSos

AotSopids to vaXaiov' Kal yap

Kara riva yXmcTcrav XotBopeiv eAeyov

Ttves

p-tTpov

irtpov

—

iirt

p.tTpov, tKtlOtv TO lap,pLl^tw

dpot(i)S

6 to

Strabo 422 Cas, 6 p,kv (scil. d SciktvAos) vp,vots KaKi(rp,oi ?. Proclus Chrestom. 7) P- 34^

;

tap,/?os

Gaisf. Tov lapi^ov raTTea-OaL p.lv

Kai TO

1258®

9,

tovt eXrjXvOev.

Xprjp.aTiCTTLKrj^ Sia

eo-Tiv oiKctos

Pol.

eX'qXvOe .

vdp.io'p.a

Iambus

est

ol

carmen

appellatum est autem Trapd to lap.(3 i^tiv, quod est

maledicere.

'’33

The

is apparently to Homer and and greatest representatives of the two great directions in poetry; comp. Velleius Paterc. i. 5 Neque quenquam alium, cuius operis primus auctor fuerit, in eo perfectissimum praeter Homerum et Archilochum reperiemus. Dio Chrysost.

Twv

iraXaiwv.

Archilochus, as the

reference

first

—

Or. 33, p. 5 R- Svo ydp irocqrutv ytyovoTOiv t^ arravTOS tov atdivos, ois ovStva T(by dXXwv crvp.j8 dXXtiy d^ioy, Op, 7jpov Tt Kai ’Ap^t-Xo^ov, TOVToyy "Oprqpos pitv TTjv

(7_j(e8dv

TrdvTa ivtKivp.lao’t

ivavTiav rjKt [fort, y^t], to

in the juxtaposition of the

\j/tytiv.

.

.

.

’Ap;^iAo;(os 8c

Their pre-eminence

is

ctti

implied

two names in Heraclitus

Diels), TOV T£ ’'Op.rjpov ttfiacrKtv d^iov tK Ttov

fr. 119 (42 dydymv tK^dXXtcrOaL Kal

paTTi^ccr^at Kai ’Ap)(iXoxov op.olm'i.

34

Td

ffirooSaia

.

.

.

ttoitittis

:

comp. Plato Apol.

1

8 b Td p.tTtmpa

(j)pOVTL(TTy?.

35

^Troirjorty.

Homer

‘

wrote well

as a master of

——

1;

30-38

4 1448 -

13

the art of poetic expression (comp. 24, 1459

poems

are

human

or pictures of

imitations

‘

16; 1460151); his 1448'’ 35 life, which distin-

those of Empedocles and others (comp, i, and they are moreover dramatic imitations’, e. not In this way, then, unlike those in the Drama (comp. 24, 1460 « 5). not only dealt with the same kind Homer intimates that Aristotle

guishes them from ^5

1447

ig)

‘

•

Tragedy

subject as

of

(to.

i.

but also anticipated

cnrovSala),

the

dramatic manner.

marked out for us the great outlines of in same sense in 5, 1449^3, For the use Plato Laws 5, 737 ^
.

.

Comedy’.

uireSeilet',

.

Ath. Pol. 41 ’ApurreiSr)? Isocrates 268

eircTeAeo’ev.

36

the

trxw®

vTreSeiie TrpwTo ?. 8’

‘

p.ev vTreSei^ev, ’E<^idATr;s

a ravra wpctTTovTes

dAAots

rots

/cat

VTToSeiKVVOVTe?.

00

dWA

(l/oyof

The

TO yeXoiot/ 8pap.aToiT'oii]0'as.

sense

is

that,

37

when Homer passed from o-n-ovSaia to ^aCAa, his treatment of the latter was more akin to that in the comic poets than to that in the Margites with him was only ridiculous— not vicious or lap./3 otroLOL ;

held up to obloquy as vicious, as a writer of

made

A

him.

dwells

i//dyos

on some

whereas Comedy, as Aristotle conceives lesser faults

xf/oyoi

would have

serious vice of character

deals only with those

it,

which we are able to laugh

on

at (see

5,

1449®' 33).

This view of the Margites is not quite in harmony with that in 4, 1448^30, where it is regarded as a i//dyos, the first known instance of the kind.

With ov

BpapxiToirouiv,

22,

Vahlen supplies

xf/oyoy

that follows.

1458^9)

This ‘

just as applicable to i//6yoy as

matice exprimens

/Ai/arjcreis

SpayaaTtKas

i)

1414^13 yrjcris,

TTacriv

6opa Icrrai

ovv

.

.

.

it

would

is

’

(see

on

to to ycAotov

Aristotle attaches to

eTTOtTycrev

4 ’OSuaceio. the article before ’OSvaa-eia by Tos Kal

8pap,aToiro«)cras

non vituperium sed ridiculum dra-

‘

The meaning

’).

utrtrep ’iXids xal

4

from the

to write, or describe, as a dramatist

is

(comp. Tyrwhitt’s rendering seen from

3roi?jcra?

legitimate enough, but hardly necessary, as

is

Vahlen

De

^5

in

35

478

aTcAccriv,

p-r/

ad

it

may

be

loc.).

illustrates this insertion of

resp. 17,

op-OLws Tois

(v.

Sirjyrjcns CTcpov Kal

17

28

ecrTr 8c

0dya-

and Rhet.

3. 13,

e7rt8t>yy/yo’ts

Kal

TrpoSt-^-

and a number of other passages in Aristotle (comp, also Idioms § 240 g). On the other hand Spengel

Riddell, Digest of

would restore the

article before ’lAias

in the parallel in 26,

1462^8

wcnrep

on account of rj

’lAias c^ct

its

appearance

ToAAa roiavra K

2

38

— 4

COMMENTARY

132 38

1448

xo-'i'

H-^PV

There

He

.

is

apt to omit

MS. (comp. Apollonius

of a

.

Synt.

article with

the

titles

it

26), after the preposition

i,

of

Athenaeus does, when the would have as the heading

just as

it,

given in the actual form which

title is

.

is

usage in reference to the

in Aristotle’s

books.

(comp, also 24, 1459 ^ *4 ^7 ’lAtas ^ Se as a rule nothing exceptional or anomalous

’OBv(r(T€ia

17

'OBvaa-eca).

iv.

The Poetics supply a number of examples of this usage, e.g. 16, 1455*2 iv 'AXkCvov a-rrokoyia. 24, 1460 *’35 tol iv ’OSucrcreia

—

dkoya.

—

14, 1454“' I

1460®' 31

ev ’AvTiyovfj.

’HAcKTpa.

—

—

16,

1455*^4

lLor](f> 6poi ';.

ev

—

2i iv 32 cv Mvcrois. 25, 1461 In 24, 1460^30, however, the traditional text omits the ’Opia-T]]. article with a title in the nominative ; for it is clear that OiSnrovs in 24,

®

means the Oedipus Tyrannus, in the same way as with Hamlet may mean the play, not the person. In many places

this place

us in

‘

’

which the

article is omitted, the title is

common noun; thus means ‘give me an Iliad

as a

this in the Poetics are 8, cleid,

a Theseid’.

—

®

Soph.

in ’

(i.e.

1451

el.

®

KvTrpiW,

‘

‘

was

21 80s

p.01

’IkidSa

Instances of

@770-77180,

‘an Odyssey’.

08 vcra-€tas, a poem like a poem like the KvVpia

therefore, that Spengel

180®

20 'RpaKkr/LSa

’OBvcra-eiav,

24

used in a general sense

a copy of the Iliad).

'

’l\td8os KOI

24,

—

‘a Hera-

23,

1459^3

the Iliad or Odyssey’. ’.

am

I

inclined to

—

think,

right in suggesting wa-n-tp (77) ’lAtds

passage; and also that in 24, 1460® 30 the true reading must be Sxnrfp
11-49 ^ 3

eKarepav ttjv iroiTjoii' recalls the distinction drawn in 4, 1448 24 between the two great forms of poetry, the higher and the lower.

Kara ^

4

ttjv oiKCiav

dvTi Tuv

iduPuv

part. an. 2. 13,

^OakpA ^

7

cx€i

.

i(TTiv, .

.

^vaiv:

4,

1448

KwfKoSoiroiol

657^34

and Herod.

ravrys t^s ’J,

^Orj.

Vahlen compares De vkaK^'s Trdvra

aKkrjpo-

pLtTpr}(j>6poL ^(rav.

For the dative comp. Meteor, i. 3, De anima 2. 3, 414^^33 tw

rd^ci irpos rdkXa.

339

24 Kara ra olKeia

eYeVovTO.

62 dvrl twv mkoyv

Tots eiScffiv iKavws.

5 ’’^5 ifjie^'i ovTws

I*

—

e^ov(rc.

For the sense of «'8eoriv in this passage, Vahlen (Beitr. i p. 22) compares that of a-xrjpara in the account of Comedy in 4, 1448 ^ 36 and 5, 1449 ^ 3. €*877 seems to mean the formative constituents of Tragedy, the forms it must embody in order to realize its nature in Aristotle assumes that Tragedy has by this time its completeness. attained to

its

natural form (® 15

rrjv

avr^s

declines to consider the question whether there

is

v
still

but he

a possibility

1

of improvement

The

stituents.

as the

due

the treatment of

in

suggestion that the

Madius.

133

9

various formative con- 1449^-7

here meant are the same

eiSr)

the sense of a

in

ctSos

is

formative constituent

perhaps unique in Aristotle, but there are certainly a few

is

of

instances

in Plato

it

where the three c'St?

D,

(434

439

440

E,

b)

is

32),

and sometimes as

the

The

7.

(442

On

al(r6r](r€(i)s

explanatory of the

inroXrjiJ/is,

3,

Kpivai has

first.

see,

(comp.

first

427^15

an

p.vpp.r]K(jiv

infinitive

6.

yap

^avTao-ta

alcrO-jcreo}';,

been taken as an 38,

9.

infinitive

622^20

roiv

of 8’

(j^tSov Se koX Trpos Ta\A.a crvyKpi-

ecrrt’,

vecOai Travra, to re tS)v

can

5^8

the second clause {avT'q re ktc.)

by Vahlen, who quotes H. A.

€vr 6p.mv IpyariKijiTaTQV

far as I

3.

kuI Stavotas’ avnj re ov ytyverai dvev

Kal dvev ravTTys ovk ecrriv

limitation

1450“ 13

dealing.

is

the reading here see J. of Phil.

De anima

Similarly in

€T€pov Kal

(comp. 18, 6,

conjunction serves to connect Kplvai with ima-KOTreLv,

second clause being complementary to the

1450^3).

The

b, c).

in itself

with which the chapter

p.€prj

auTo T6 Ka0’ auTo Kpwai. 1

fiepr)

in the logical sense of

to take

is

p. 298),

2

sometimes described as

hardly reconcileable with the use of uSrj in

as a designation for the

p.

Campbell,

(comp,

iv

This view, though not improbable

‘species’.

1455 ^

Rep.

faculties in the soul are

interpretation

alternative

is

its

^

distinguished in chap. 6, from another point of view,

fieprj

to

38-1449

1448

4-

As

yevos Kal to tSv p-eXiTTwy.

of limitation would not be quite in

place in a passage like the present.

For the Top.

5- Ij

eTtpov Kal ttotL rj

p-LKpov,

KpiviLv

between KaO' avTo and

antithesis

128

16 aTToStSorai 81 to

— Cat.

aXXa t (2

Trpos erepov avatfrepecrOai

TTcIis

XPV

OiaTpa comp.

Staveip-at

Y€»'0(iEn]s S’ ouv dir’ dpxris

dp)(^s avToa')(e8iacrTiKrj.

.

.

.

it

Trpos

(comp. Bon. Ind. 2I2®'2).

in

k^icrTio

Metaph.

A

auTOOxeSiao-TtKijs

Having begun with

Comedy, and adds a parenthesis

to

31

984

4,

KpCvuv vcrrcpov.

= yevopivrj yevopevrjs

(r^€8taoTtKi7s, scil. Trjs rpayuSias, Aristotle sees that the

of

rj

16 ovSev yap avro KaO’ avTO p.eya XiyeTai

6,

has an indirect question after

TOVTOv; plv ovv

irpo? to.

^ KaO’ avTo. Kal ael

ISiov

show

that;

8’

.

.

ow .

air

avTo-

same is true which he

after

though yevop.ivrj avTorTXtZtaa-TLKr'i For another instance of a gen. abs. in lieu of a nominative see 17, 1455 ^>3 (comp. Bon. Ind. 149 26 and

says in

13

-qv^rjOrj,

had begun the

Kiihner, Gr. Gr.^ similar form

just as

.

.

.

clause.

2.

2 p.

found in

no).

A

parenthetical addition of very

1449 ^12, and also (with Christ’s punctuation) in Metaph. © 10, 1051 ^11, dir dpxrj^ is used adverbially (comp. Pol. 7. 16, 1334 b 29, and Plato Criti. 112 e) in the same is

5,

^

9

— COMMENTARY

134

1449^9

sense as ii

Several of the recent editors and translators,

however, accepting the reading apx^? and

of certain apographs, take

yevofj.evr]

meaning an improvisational

avToa-xeSiaa-TLK^s together as

‘

This certainly simplifies matters, but it may be doubted whether apx^ avTocrxe^MaTiKrj would naturally bear that meaning. beginning’.

^ II

TUI'

‘

e|ap)(o>’T(oi'.

rov

i^dpxciv

St6vpap,/3ov,

r]

dicebantur qui choro utrivis canendo praeiverunt est,

ab

(fr.

77 Bergk) ws

initio

poetae

papjBov.

By

of the

chorus

ipsi fuerunt’,

;

(ftaWiKa,

ii

says Tyrwhitt, quoting Archilochus

avaxTos Ka\bv i^dp^ai

Aiui'vcrot’

ra

qui, ut verisimile

diBa Bi6v-

p,€Xo<;

means the poet-composer, who supplied both words and air, and taught them to the chorus not as is sometimes supposed, the Kopvaio^, who was only one BiOvpapfiov

is

the

e^dpxw

(comp.

Hiller,

us as

little

is

iidpxetv

325).

own mind

as possible about

it

—

to give us a theory of the

a general view

Greek poetry, but he fact no more than is

of early in

absolutely necessary for present purposes.

Poetics

p.

23.

i.

development

historical

39

for StSdcr/ceiv Bidvpap.fiov, the

Aristotle has in his

It is clear that

tells

Rh. Mus.

synonym

practically a

expression in Herodotus

of the

here Aristotle

The

intention of the

Epic and of the Drama (see

1447 “8), not a treatise on the history and archaeology The Epic having been traced to its origin (4, 1448^^23-33), Aristotle turns to the question of the rise and

on

I,

of the Drama.

Both forms of Drama, he thinks, arose Tragedy began when the author

progress of the Drama.

out of lyric or choral poetry. of the dithyramb

came forward with an

‘

improvisation

’,

i.

e.

with

a p^crts or spoken statement, which he improvised in the interval

between the two halves of the song of the chorus

—

that being

the origin of the two great constituents of a Greek drama, a spoken

and a chorus. This is a sufficient and there was no need for Aristotle to go His a multiplicity of historical or antiquarian details.

part and a sung part, an actor

account of the facts into

off

silence

;

on such points

no proof of

is

The

history of Attic Tragedy. text in

is

probably to Thespis,

ignorance of the legendary

whom

he

is

known

a fragment (probably of the dialogue nepl

by Themistius Or. 26, 382 Dind. TO

his

allusion in rSiv i^apxovTcav in the

p.\v TrptoTov 6 x'^po’i ctctojv

re Kal prjaiv e$evpev d. Aristot. p. 139).

the

have mentioned,

iroiriTwv)

ov TTpoa-exop-iv

:

’

preserved

ApLVTorriXa

on

Tovs 0 EOVS, ©t^TTis Be TTpoXoyov

€ts

(comp. Heitz, Fr.

Here

to

‘hymn

Arist. 19

and Bernays,

Dial,

to the gods’ corresponds with

— ^

4 1449 -

the

Dithyramb

Thespis

may

and

;

the

9-15

135

prologue and speech

‘

introduced by 1449 ®

’

be identified with the improvisations of the actor-

which transformed the Dithyramb into Tragedy,

poet,

from

he actually

tells

serious lacuna in (|>ak\iKd

it

aXXQ dSo/xeyov.

It is clear

Comedy

to

in

5,

of the history of

Photius Lex. aAAi/cdv

:

as

Tragedy than is not aware of there being any (comp. Hiller, Rh. Mus. 39 p. 320).

knows more us, and that he

that he

1449 “'37

ignorance

of

confession

Aristotle’s

— Hesychius em

dXXoi wSr)v avTocrx^eSioy

t <3 (jtaXX^

which were a widespread

avrocr^fSiov

Troir/fia

aXXiKdv

6p)(r)fj.d

ol

tl‘

e-Trl

Se

tQ

fiiXoi'

In these phallus-

aZofx,ivyjv,

Greece (comp. and Herodotus 2, 48), Aristotle sees the origin of Comedy it arose, he thinks, through the author of the song improvising some scurrilous tale no doubt in the interval between the parts of the song and becoming in this way the forerunner of the single actor of the earliest form of Comedy. It will be observed that he supposes Tragedy and Comedy to have developed on exactly the same lines. A coarse and irregular Comedy, not unlike what Aristotle seems to be assuming, is known songs,

Heraclitus

institution

127,

fr.

;

‘

in

—

’

—

to have survived in certain parts of

Greece even

in post-Aristotelian

times (Athenaeus 621 e sqq.). TrpoaYot'Twi'

fX€Ta^oXds

:

:

TpaywSia.

somewhat

see

on

1449

5,

4,

“

37 ol

The word

rpayuiStas fieTa/3 da€i';.

rr}';

Comedy

repeated, because

is

different position (5,

eirauffaTo.

® 13 ® 14

1448^22. in a

is

1449 “38).

For the tense of the

(misunderstood by ^ 15

participle

Elmsley on Eurip. Heracl. 721) comp. An. post. 2. i, 89^^27 Meteor. I. 3, 339*^32 Oewprjevpovres yap on e/cAeiVet 7r£7rai;/A€^a,

—

cravTcs

dv rd vvv SfiKvup-eva

De mem.

TratSiK-^s Soirjs .

2,

.

.

.

ay

icrwi

453“24

eTravcrayTO ravTiys rijs

ov yap paStws Traderat Kivq-

Oeia-a. (|>ucrii'

:

Pol.

CKacTToy ccTTt fiyai

kKacrrov,

I.

2,

1252^32

ycveVeojs wcrirep

r]

Se

^vcrts reXos

reXco'^etb'ijs,

dyOpwrov

ittttov

ravTrjy

icrriy

(j>ap.kv

On

OLKia's.

oioy rrjy

^vo'is

yap

(pvaiy

in

the

sense of the natural form of a thing see Bon. Ind. Kal TO re rSiy uiroKpiTuv

a lacuna here

(with

began with a single actor introduction of a second,

increasing

Tr\'fi0o9,

Ueberweg).

prominence

(“ 1 1

and

of the

significant fact in the evolution

),

838 “ 41. There is no need to assume Having shown how Tragedy

Aristotle proceeds to

after that,

actor

of the

is

note the

of a third actor. in

his

Drama;

The

view the most the other points

ii

I!

COMMENTARY

136

1449 ® 15 mentioned are either of minor importance or the direct consequence of the change in the number of actors. A difficulty may perhaps be found in the language in the text, as the xat, with which the statement begins, cannot be taken as connecting ^yaye the (TravcraTo Or the tcrx^

The is

disappears

difficulty

on the

1449^2

one observes

if

TroAXas

participial

i]Sr]

ttjv avrijs (jtvo’Lv in

idea of the Kara /xixpov

emphasis there

that the

(comp.

/xcraySoXas /xeTa^akova-a

Sk
avTrji

5)

i)(ovcrrjs),

which repeats the

The

Kat in fact is ex-

in '’13.

rjvirjOt]

with

etc.

the preceding sentence.

introducing a series of statements in support of the

planatory,

Tragedy underwent many changes before

original assertion that

attaining to

ultimate form.

its

The

u-iroKpiTwt'.

actor

called a woKptrr;? not (as

is

is

so often

because he answered the chorus, but because he was the

said)

poet’s

spokesman, who interpreted

Heimsoeth,

De

The term must have

289).

his

text

to

public

the

voce vvoKpiT-^^, and Sommerbrodt, Scaenica acquired

when, by a division of labour, the poet

sense

this left

at

(see

259, the time p.

the acting to others,

instead of being himself the performer of his pieces, as he originally

was according

to Rhet.

i,

3.

1403^^23 vTreKpivovro yap avrol

The

Tpaya>8tas ot Troirjral to Trpwrov.

was analogous

in fact

to that of the

of them intermediaries, the public.

It

they were both

pai/^wSos;

interpreted the words of a poet to

to be noted that in describing

is

Ion Plato

who

rets

position of the vTroKpirrjs

the rhapsodist

one place terms him a ippLrjvtv^ and in another Ion a vTroKptrrj^, apparently without any difference of meaning 530 C Tov yap pai/^a)8ov kpp.-qvia 861 tov TroirjTov rrj^ 8tavoias ytyveaQai Tots aKovovcri, and 535 ® oStos icrriv 6 Oeartjs rQy 8aKTvXiwv 6

in the

in

:

€(r\aT09 6

1456 ^ 16

.

.

.

6 Sk

o

paij/(^ 86 s

Ka\ VTroKpLTij^, 6 Sk irpwTOS avros

derivative vTroKpiTtKrj see

on

19,

10.

AiffxvXos

the

p. 4 cros erv

For the sense of the

TToi-pT-q^.

Drama

‘jrpo
comp, the

:

in

survey

Aristotelian

Themistius Or. 26

progress

of the

382 Dind.

p.

(v.

on

of

S’!!): oi

’AptcTTOTeXct ort to pikv Trpwrov 6 ^opos eicriwy fjBey els

Tovs Oeovs, ©ccTTTis 8e irpokoyoy re Kai rptToy VTTOKpiTYjy aTTekav(rap.€y

Kal

Kal

oKpi/Sayras,

Evpt7rt8oi;

j

ra

There

Sk is

prjerLy

TrXeiw

i^evpey, Al(T)(yXos 8£

Tovrwy

'S,oOKkeovs

no doubt a discrepancy

between this and the statement in the text about Aeschylus, but it need not disturb us, unless we assume Aristotle to have been incapable of a change of opinion even on a small matter of learned research. Ancient opinion was divided on the point Vita Aeschyli :

^

4 1449 -

15-19

137

(Dindorf, Poet, seen.® prol. p. 3) e)(p'^(raTo 8 viroKpurfi tt/dcoto) fiXy K.X(dv8pw, eTreira kol rov Sevrepov avT(S Trpocrrjif/e M.vvvio'kov tov ’

:

X oAKiSea'

TOV 8e t/diVov {nroKpirrjv avTog e^evpev,

1449 ® 16

8e AiKalap^o^ 6

(I)S

Meacr^vto?, 2o^okAijsTOV Xoyov

:

opposed to rd ^ 17

portion recited or spoken, as

the

t^he portion sung (tA a86p.eva in 18, 14568’ 28); comp, TOV the use of Aoyot in 6, 1450 I’d, 9 in the sense of the speeches or Ao-yos is a word with a Protean variety of prja-eis in a play.

meanings even

In

in the Poetics.

1447822

i,

‘language’, as opposed to metre and ‘prose’, as distinct from verse

opposed to a poem; the

‘

I7»

language

in

music;

(etc.)

in

it

means

1450^15

6,

in 22, 1459813 an ‘oration’, as 1454818 (comp. 19, 1456837, bg),

15,

;

as distinct from the action, of the personages

’,

1455 ^17 (comp,

a

34;

b 8; 24,

1449

5,

1460

a

;

in

27), the ‘story’,

poem. And in 20, 1457 a 23 one of the technical terms of Aristotelian logic or grammar. TrpwTaY(i)vicrTT)v TrapecrKeJacrev, made it assume the leading part ^ 18 the play’. For this metaphorical use of TrpwTaywvio-rvs comp,

as distinct from

its

setting in the actual

it is

‘

in

1338 b 29

that of the derivative 7rpcuTaycovicrT€tv in Pol. 8. 4,

wa-re

TO koAov dAA’ ov TO OrjpiwBe'i Set TrpojraywvtO'Tetv’ ov yap Avkos ovSe Ttiiv

dAAtov 6 r]pimv tl dyojvtcratTO

/xSAAov

(which S.v.

dya^ds.

dvrjp

common enough

is

and

TrpwraymvLcrTT^^

KaXov

dv ovOeva

of

Instances in later

this

Greek)

TrpojTayiovtcrTe'w.

will

dAAd

KtVSvvov,

of meaning

extension

be found

Aristotle

HSt.

in

apt to use

is

technical terms of theatrical origin in their popular sense (see

on

1453 ^ 8 yppriyia^) even in a book like the Poetics. trKT)voYpaiav i. e. Sophocles was the first to have the screen

14,

:

behind the actors painted to represent the fa9ade of a palace or a temple, or whatever else the play required as

The improvement

buted to Aeschylus (Sommerbrodt, Scaenica Th.®

background.

p.

attri-

142; Haigh, Attic

p. 181).

eTi 8 e TO is

its

here ascribed to Sophocles was sometimes

p^Y^Oos

:

comp.

8

28

There are some

inventory.

to /leye^os ^ 19

£ti Sk eTrcicroStwv ttA’^^t^.

apparently a nominative ex/ra structuram, like fairly

an item

in

an

well-established instances of this

anomalous use of the nominative (Bon. Ind. 46 b 41 ; Meisterhans, Gr.® p. 203 Kuhner, Gr. Gr.® 2. i p. 45). to p,£y€ 0os=its magni;

tude, or extent,

i.

e.

the length

however,

is

p.iKporrj'i

(comp, the Ik p.iKpwv

well

mean

now

usual in Tragedy.

not always a purely neutral term

a

‘

;

p.v9o}v in the context),

considerable length

’

(or

‘

size

’),

The word,

as the opposite of it

may

very

so as to suggest an

— COMMENTARY

138 1449 ® 19 idea of

the importance or dignity of the object

1122^32

/reyc^os

be

at

comp. Eth. N.

;

Pol. 5) lOj

4. 4,

™

)U,«y€^os 31 3 7 aTre(rifjL.vvv 07) in the next line shows

The

Kal TO d^tw/xa rijs dp^^sthis to

—

d^t(D/xa.

^

any rate by implication the sense of

/xeye^os in the

present passage.

had

Aristotle evidently

in

own mind

his

a clear and precise

conception of the origin of Tragedy, though

more than fragments of

to recover

difficult

is

it

for us

from a statement so brief

it

and allusive as that in the text. He merely tells us (i) that the most primitive tragedies dealt with short stories; (2) that the language of the primitive actor, instead of being serious and solemn, was sportive or jocose, and (3) in trochaics, not in iambics. By

way of explanation of this was originally akin to the primitive tragic actor had dance about

it.

drama, the language of the

satyric

something of the rhythm of the

still

was made up

Wilamowitz, Eurip. Herakles’

p. 87).

characteristic of the

seems

to imply

i.

stage-satyr,

another,

p.iKpwi'

|Au0wi'

ii.

For the asyndeton comp.

single act.

426t'24; De sensu

440^8

3,

The

dneaeixi'ui'Or].

Tril. p. 337).

for

instance, in a

12

De anima

told,

iviore

ol

;

yparj<;

e7raAet(/)ovcr(.v)

time meant

is

language, and

movements (comp.

1449

5,

(olov

kripav )(p6av i(ji erepav ivapyecrTepav 1051 b II (ed. Christ). o'I'e

certainly mentions

jesting

Aesch.

d.

such as might be

:

as a satyr (comp.

He

his

dance-like

his

viz.

Welcker, Nachtrag zu der Schrift 6K

may

Aristotle’s idea of the original tragic actor

possibly have been that he also

one

®20

he adds that, as Tragedy

last point,

3. 2,

TroLOvaiv'

Metaph. @10,

;

presumably the age of

Phrynichus.

^21

eK TeTpapApou lap^etov ey^i'ero TpaywSi'ai voiowreg

.

.

6px'»)OTiK
KivrjTiKa

to

Kal

1408^32

:

24,

plv

1459

S’

Rhet.

37

6p)(r]a'riKov

Ttov Sk pv6pu)v 6

Seopevog, 6

;

twv Tirpap,irpw

twv p-irpm/ opoioTarov

Sid TO T
^23

e/c

.

plv

to

rjpioog

lap/So? avT-q ecTiv

17

Se

3. elg

elvai

yevfo-Oai Kal iKO-njcrai,

41.

I

ecTTi

piKponoiovv

crpevo'g

Xoyov Kal

S'

rwv aAXwv. Kal Terpaperpov

vpaKTiKov

.

Rhet.

3.

8,

aepyos Kal Ksktik^s dppoviag

AeTtS

Tpo^^atos

ovSkv ovtios iv Tots

crecrolSrjpivog,

rag

lap/Seiov

r)

tS)v TroAAtov'

Ta TeTpdpeTpa. vij/iqXoig

Sid paXuTTo.

Set Sk crepvoTrjTa

6 Sk Tpoxaios KopSaKiKu)Tepog'

yap pvOpds

ot

ta/xySeiov p.eTe/SrjO'av

irdvTov Twv peTpiov lap/Seia (pdkyyovTai AcyovTcs.

TCTpapeTpa'

1404®' 30

i,

to

dig

SrjXoi Sk

pvOpd'S K€KXa-

oiov Sy Trvppi^poi Kal Tpo)(aioi

Sixppeioi, TeAeov ets op-^ycTTiKov (Tvv(.KiriirTOVTe;.

Ta

—Longinus /cat

op^ycrTiKog in this

—

:

4-

connexion means practically

on

the Poetics (see

and

‘

\iieus, aoTT]

19-30

139 just as rfOmo^ in

fjufirjriKos

means

1450®' 29)

6,

A€KTlKOS=/ai/4>/TtKOS AtlcWS TiKos Trpd^ews,

^

1449

/tt/ATyri/cos

(comp. 21, 1459^12), !rpaKTlK6s= fXLfirj-

TraOrjTiKO?

=

jUt/XT^Ti/cds

TrdOov^.

speech’ as opposed to song (comp, on 21, 1459

24,1460^4

4

— De

1449^ 23

Similarly

^ 6 ov<;.

avTTi

® 12).

SiSdaKei to dpfioTTOv ^

cjivcris

rj

2^

306 15 eoiKev y (f>v
alpeicrOai,

caelo

3. 8,

-

Kal ov padovcra rd Seovra

21

XcKTlKOt';

,

1459®

Xf^iv pipficrOai Tavra

Comp, and

also Rhet. 3.

lap/Seia

Xfyopev ev

SiaX^KTu, Trdcrd icTTiv

Rhet.

3.

8,

talk

‘

Trj ‘

TO OTl pdXuTTa

lap/SflOl'i Sid

dppoTTfi

i,

The term

® 23).

Troieet.

II

1404®

1408 32 (quoted on ®2i explained by ® 26 TrAeio-Ta ydp

30, 3. 8,

is sufficiently

SiaXeKTO)

Kav ev Aoyots tis XpricraiTO.

d
Ty

converse

rrpdi

dXXyXov 9

as in Plato

y opiXia Kal y SidXfKTOS

Oeoi
.

Symp. 203 a

Sid tovtov

^26

COmp.

Trpds dvOpwTrovi

1408^^34 pdXuTTa TrdvTOiV twv pfTpoiv lapfSeia 0iyand 3. 2, 1404^34 Travres ydp /Aera^opats SiaFor the general meaning of SidAeKTos see on 22,

yovTai XfyovTfs, Aeyovrat.

Horace’s alternis apius sermonibus (A. P. 81) is a 1458 '>32. echo of this statement of Aristotle’s. Cicero also observes

distant

that ordinary speech

constantly

partem ex iambis nostra constat

magnam enim

as in Rhet.

music

3.

ovopacriv (p.

tl

1403

'’31

(v.

mean

‘

pitch

’

(rdvos) ®

27

Monro, Modes of ancient Greek

Aristoxenus recognizes a similar distinction between

p. 15).

and the conversational

the musical

AoySSes

i,

oratio.

dppovia here seems to

XcKTiKijs dpfxoi'ias.

Orator 189

into iambics:

falls

senarios vero et Hipponacteos effugere vix possujiius ;

piXo?,

(pviriKov

to

orvyKeipevov eK

/acAos

:

Acyerat ydp

twv wpoo-wStojv twv

ydp to Ittituvuv Kal

dvifvai

ev t 5

8y

Kal

ev tois

SiaXeyeirOai

24 Marquard).

eireiaoSiwi'

:

see

on

12,

1

^28

452^1 20.

added to explain the main ® 30 statement, ra dXXa ecrTw elpypeva (comp. Kiihner, Gr. Gr.^ 2. 2 For the general form of the sentence Vahlen compares p. 495). Metaph. P 3, 1005 ^ 19 to ydp avTo dpa indp^eiv Te Kal py vndpois

cKaoTa

KO(T)AT]0i]i'ai .

X«v dSvvaTov

.

XeyeTot

is

.

T
kotol to avro'

Kal ocra

dXXa

irpocrSiopi-

(TaipeO dv, ecTTQ) TrpocrSiwpKTpeva. K0fffiif|6Tji/ai

= eTTLKocrpyOyvai.

Certain elements in a play Aris-

COMMENTARY

140 30

dismisses

totle

as

decorative

Koa-fjLoi,

With

structural parts of the work.

compare

that of ^Bvvei.v in 6,

accessories

use of

this

28 and 24, 1460

1449

make

the addition of accessories designed to

than

rather

Koa-jx-uv

we may to denote

2,

work agreeable

the

to us.

32

8e

14

KwfjiwSia

sketched,

the

Comedy

(“37-'’

The

KTf.

next point

The

8).

of Tragedy

progress

be considered

to

statement

having been progress of

the

is

introduced by a definition

is

(a

32-37) based on hints already given in preceding chapters as to In 2, 1448 16 Comedy was said to deal with personages worse than the average man = (f>avX6repoi in the present passage); and in 4, 14481* 36 its subject was assumed to be to yeAorov. These two points Aristotle reconciles the nature of Corned)'.

and combines ad

loc.),

rough provisional

in a

proceeding to the

before

Comedy.

before him, that of the fieTa/Sda-eis of therefore, to

this defining clause to

experiment of transferring

w’e try the it

suppose

it

little

or nothing

gained by

is

this

more immediately

i

It is

not necessary,

be out of place.

to another place,

for instance after Aoyovs Kal p-vdov; in

eTTcmoua in ^ 20 (with Vahlen, Beitr.

(comp. Tyrwhitt

definition

question

I*

If

by putting

8 (with Thurot), or after

p. 48),

it

will

be found that

disturbance of the traditional

order (comp. Teichmiiller, Aristot. Forsch.

i

p. 34).

1448 » 17 and 4, 1448 37. iracrov KaKiav Plato Rep. 490 D opav avrwp tovs pev axpija-rovg, 33 Demosthenes 18, 279 ro Se Tovs Se ttoAAovs kukov? -rracrav KaKiav. Kal Tovs Trpos tp avTov dySvas idcravra vvv eirl tovB ^k£iv Kai <

3
;

in 2,

'*

:

—

7ra(Tav £)(€t KaKiav.

dXXd Tou

atcrxpou ecrri to yeXoiov p.dpioi'

equivalent to

practically

Tov yap ala')(pov

€crT6

;

dAAd

aTrAois

to ycAotov popiov.

a compressed Statement, KaO” ev

n

cTSos KaKias'

The personages

in

Comedy

are worse than most men, but only in one particular respect, as

presenting a certain harmless deformity or ugliness of character,

which makes aversion.

them

34

that

them

ridiculous

It is, in Aristotle’s

makes them

fit

TO ydp yeXoiov ktc.

only

— not

objects

for

blame or

view, the harmlessness of the evil in

objects of laughter.

Tw'O kinds of possible objects of laughter

are implied in the text,

(i)

An

act is ytAoiov

when

it

is

of the

nature of a harmless mistake or blunder {apdprqpa dvwSvvov)

;

and

(2) a person is yeAotos when he presents some moral or physical The deformity of the same harmless kind (aTo-xos dvdSwov).

negative element here

Plato also,

who

is

a very essential part of the definition.

thinks that the spectacle of

human

ignorance

is

the

4

1449 ^ 30

-

-5

” I

1449

-

Comedy, explains

true object of laughter in

141

that, to

be laughable, 1449 * 34

the ignorance must be harmless {a/3 Xa^rj? tol^ aAAois Phil. 49 e). As yeXoia are the basis of all Comedy, Aristotle must be assumed

have devoted a section of

to

theory of

his

Comedy

(in the lost

Second Book) to the causes and conditions of laughter, in the same way as we find him analysing to o^ep 6 v Kal iXeeivov in chaps. 13-14 of the existing Poetics.

It

not impossible that

is

several traces of his theory survive in Cicero’s discussion of the

Ridiculous

‘

’

De Oratore

in

58-59, which seems to be on has been quoted under it

2,

Part of

Aristotelian lines.

distinctly

Fr. III. dfxdpTt]^a

see

;

on

13,

a 16.

1453

aitrxos (like the adj. atVxpds) includes

Though

deformity.

the illustration

in

moral as well as physical ^ 35 a ^6 relates to physical

ugliness, Aris'totte'TS “really thinking of the

in the personages of

X«povs their

1448

tS)v vvv (2,

oi/^ts

(see

on

6,

ugliness of character

Comedy, who have been described a I y).

Their

1449 ^ 33), which

as being

visible ugliness is part lies

of

outside the limits of the

art of the poet himself. dt'uSut'ov

comp, a^y avev

:

oBvvrj is a

oSvvrj';.

419c oSvvrj 8 k avo rrjs The Stoic definition (Diog.

strongly: Plato Crat. K^KX-qiiivy eoiKfv.

Xwrq

oSvvTj

cTrnrovos, translated

pain that one feels iySva-ecos rijs XvTrrj?

Laert.

by Cicero (Tusc.

4. 8)

112) was by aerwnna

7.

aegriiudo laboriosa. eu0us: ‘to take the

means

it

TO

stiapte

yeXoIoi'

irpoowTrov.

143, and Haigh,

4,

ataxpdv

first

instance that occurs’; in 10,

naiura (Bon. Ind. 296

rvcjiXd re

TC Kai KaXd

i452ai4

13).

For the masks

in

Comedy

Pollux

see

Att. Th.^ p. 242.

Tt Kol Siea'Tpappet'ov

OedcracrOai,

a

:

Plato Rep. 506 C /SovXei ovv at
Kal cTKoXid,

i^ov izap

dXXu>v aKOveiv (f>avd

;

The correction Kwp.(oS(o, which I have now relegated was suggested by Tyrwhitt’s interpretation of iOeXovrai, word being intended to bear the sense of the comic ac/or,

KwpuSwv. to a note,

the i.

the actor-poet, since Aristotle

e.

is

referring to the time

when

was the poet himself (comp. Rhet. 3. i, 1403 23). This sense of the word in the Greek of Aristotle’s period has been contested by Mr. H. P. Richards (Class. Rev. 14 p. 201); but I think

the actor

he has carried his negation too '

p.

1

Prof. E. 1

7)

is

Capps

also (Trans, of

far',

more

especially as

we

find

the'American Philological Association 31

unable to accept Mr. Richards’ view.

i

A

COMMENTARY

142 1449

word rpayuSot

the corresponding

I

in Poet.

1458'’ 32

22,

grammarians was

the

that

86 Valck.

to

may

K(j}p.iaSot

The

traditional doctrine of

was used

the actors as

for

Comedy

the chorus in

Ammonius

:

TpaywSos Xeyerat

Kto/toiSos noX

Kai vTroKpLTri<; (v. also p.

That

in the sense of the tragic actors

loc.).

kw/awSoi

members of

well as for the Xi^. p.

ad

(v.

tt.

6 )(optvTrji

138; comp. Rohde, Kl. Schr. 2 p. 408). even in strict Attic seems

refer to the actors

be shown by Plato Phaedr. 236

c Zva

p,r]

to tZov kw/awSoiv (f>opTLKov

Trpayp.a avayKa^wp-fOa iroieiv, dvraTroSiSovres aXXrjXoi';, in illustration

W. H. Thompson

of which

For

361 sqq.

quotes Aristoph. Eq. 286 sqq. and

however, the use seems to be

time,

Aristotle’s

by the language of

pretty clearly established

Chares of Mytilene (ap. Ath. 538 @ccr(raXos Kai ^opp,L(Dv

Kai

6 r)v 68 (jipo<;

’

:

period

(Dittenberger,

SylL*

proved by inscriptions

is

517,

p.

519;

dionysischen Kiinstler p. 187-97), which the are expressly distinguished from the xopfvrai the

taken

The

place

/cat

century after Aristotle this

half a

was the normal sense of the term, as of the

contemporary.

his

vTreKpZdricrav Sk rpayojSoi p.kv

’ApurTOKpiTOs, KwpnoSol 8e Avkcov

/cat

And

’AptcTTwv.

f)

Liiders,

Die

or actors

/cio/to/Sot

who had

Kw/tiKoi,

occupied by the chorus in the older Comedy.

history of the word,

therefore,

runs parallel with

that

of

comic chorus. Whether the comic chorus in its original form was actually extinct or only verging on extinction at the the

when

time

was writing the

Aristotle

say (comp. E. Capps, American

J.

Poetics,

it

is

of Archaeology x

impossible to p.

319); but

form may have been, it was no longer a very important part of a comedy. And if that was the fact, the gradual restriction of the term ko/awSos to the actor

there

is

evidence that, whatever

would be the natural 2

dv|/€

mind.

Aristotle

TroT€.

He

result of the

Comedy

of the chorus in the

its

absence or diminished importance

of the period.

seems

to have

had a

conceives the history of Attic

definite date

Comedy

in

his

to begin with

who is said to have exhibited as early as b. c. 487 on 4, 1448 34); but the formal recognition of it by the state must have come later, probably about b. c. 465 (Wilamowitz, comp. Bergk, Kl. Schr. 2 p. 503). Eurip. Herakles^ i p. 51 Chionides,

a'

(see

;

^OeXovTal ^o-av.

secundum

ilia

Eustathius ad fKaXovvTO Sf p,y

‘

Intelligi potest

de Choro, sed etiam de poetis,

quae ex Aelio Dionysio II.

Kai

Aa/3 u)v )(op 6 v

K

V.

230.

[fr.

150 Schwabe]

iOeXovral SiSdcrKaXoc, Spapiarwy p. 7jS€

protulit

’EAAoft~^s 6 av^at/aero/s Tt iroiwv

xoprjyrjrrjv

cxoiv

eavrlo

SrjXaSy,

ra Trdvra

ore

Tts

Trapeixe-

1-6

1449

5.

143

Hinc enim poetarum, nascente Comoedia, 1449 apparet, quod non modo Chorum docere sed etiam conducere, nutrire, vestibus alioque omni apparatu A somewhat similar use instruere necesse haberent’ (Tyrwhitt). of the term seems to have survived at Thebes, where iOeXovTrj?

Et

sic fortasse rectius.

conditio

have been the name for the actor in a rude species 621D) presumably because the

said to

is

maxime

difficilis

—

of burlesque (Sosibius ap. Ath.

performance was Tyrwhitt’s

to

either

own

at his

interpretation

charge and to

is

alternative

the reference to

volunteer ^(opyjyoi (comp. Demosth.

to

The

risk.

suppose

be

21.

13 weo'xoV’Jv \oprjyq(reiv e^cXovTiys, and Hesych. e^cXovras* tovs ^ovXop.evov;

eyo)

Usener (Rh. Mus. 28

V

p.

424) has suggested, to

volunteer actors and chorus-singers. oxTifiara

comp.

:

ot XcYoiiei/ot

36 and Bon. Ind. 740 “ 24. It has been thought Koj/AwStas.

1448

4,

auTrjs,

scil.

form of expression here

that the

name

may imply some

3

slowness to grant

comedian (Neil on Aristoph. Eq. 507). (in^fjioi'euoi'Tai. As soon as Comedy became a state institution, b ^ an official record of the successful poets must have been kept the

ttoit/tt/s

in

the public

set

up a

to a

archives

the

;

on

similar record

successful

their

1341 ’‘351 comp. Bernhardy, Gr. direSwKEV eKacrrov

tSv

De

:

sensu

2,

•xopiqyot

own account

sometimes

also

in temples (Pol. 8. 6,

Litt.® 2. 2 p. 152).

438^17

airoBiSovat

al(r0r]T7]pLOiv evt rSiV a-Toi)(€i(tiV.

Kal

irpoa’dimiv

In Plato Laws

669

2,

C

dwoSovvai and TTpocrapp-oTTeiv are treated as synonyms. n-poXdyous.

The term

is

defined in 12, 1452'’ 19.

The

intro-

duction of a ‘prologue’ in Tragedy was sometimes said to have

been due to Thespis

:

in the history of the

p. 382 Dind. ©eWis 8e was obviously a significant moment

Themist. Or. 26

irpoXoyov koX prjcnv i^evpev.

It

Drama when

the play, instead of beginning

with a choral song, opened with a statement spoken by irXiq0T)

The

:

comp, the use of vX-jOrj

plural is in

in 4,

1449

“

an

actor.

28 and 21, 1458

“ 13.

g

keeping with that in irpoXoyovs and p.vdovi in the

context. |xu6ous

;

see

on

’Eirixappos Kal

^ 9. dpfxi;.

by Susemihl (Rh, Mus. 18

These words, which were p. 376),

first

bracketed

cannot be retained where they

No appropriate verb can be supplied with them ; for though Aristotle might have said p.v6ov<; dTreSuKe, he could hardly have meant to say p.vOov
6

2

COMMENTARY

144 1449

6

which on

apxi??.

apxv^, as

assumption should surely be to

this

(ow) From

/a«v

actually read in certain of the apographs.

is

the reminiscence of this passage (comp. Welcker, Kl. Scr.

Themistius Or. 27

i

p.

330)

406 Dind. Kai Kon/xioSta to TraXaiov ^p^aro pkv tK StKcXias (eKeidev yap T](TTrjv ’^Trixapp.o'; tc Kal 4>dp/i,os), KaXXiov ’AOriva^e (Tvvqv^-qO'q, it WOUld seem that the words ’E 7rt;)^ap/xos /cat dp/xts were originally part of a clause which came in after e/c St/ceXtas ^XOev, and that what Aristotle wrote was something in

like

this

(yi
p.

to 8 e p,v9ov^

:

of Phil. 5

KT£. (v. J.

TO /aev

Trotetv

yap Emxapp.o<; Kal p. 1

1

iStKcXtas rjXOev

^PXV^

4>dpjats e/cet^cv), Tclv Se 'AdTQvrjaiv

dpfxis, sometimes called in later writers ^oppos.

name

forms of the p.

All that

502.

his

;

is

8

p.

76 (comp. Bernhardy, Gr.

Litt.®

2.

2

CGF. i p. 148). floruit may be put about b. c. 450. For the comedies see Kock, CAF. i p. 130 Meineke, FCG. ’

‘

fragments of his I

the two

520, and Kaibel, KpdTt)s

7

On

Lobeck Pathol, serm. gr. prolegomena known of him will be found in Grysar, De see

Doriensium comoedia p.

KpaTiys

8).

;

p. 58. dcf/ep-ekos Trjs iap.piKTjs

voluisse

significare

comici

iSeas.

quosdam

certos

‘

Ac

cum

videtur,

mihi quidem hoc Aristoteles

Cratinus

homines

in

ceterique

fabulis

suis

antiquiores

exagitassent

populoque ridendos propinassent, Cratetem primum apud Athenien-

exemplo comicae poesios materiam ad generates morum notationes Quod autem lacessendi rerumque descriptiones traduceret. consuetudinem omisisse Crates ab Aristotele dicitur, id plane ses

qui Epicharmi

extitisse

a singulorum

hominum

irrisione

.

fragmenta fabularum confirmant,

quosdam

ex quo certos

quibus

in

homines

.

eum

nihil

prorsus reperias

carpsisse

intellegatur

’

The iambic form of Comedy is the Old (Meineke c. p. 59). Comedy, which, from the personal nature of its satire, was only one remove from the invective of Archilochus and the lamboIt is thus characterized in Horace Sat. i. graphers (4, 1449 '‘4). 1

’

‘

.

’

‘

4. I

:

Eupolis aique Cratinus Arisiophanesque poetae Atque

alii,

quorum comoedia prisca virorum est. Si quis erat dignus describi, quod malus aut fur. Quod moechus forel aut sicarius aut alioqui Famosus, mulia cum libertate notabant. KaOdXou iroiHv

(see

TTOieii'

9,

Xdyous

is

1451^14).

the opposite of Trepi tov raB' eKaa-Tov

The

implied

a story about some particular person,

about (for instance)

‘

a

man

or

‘

a

man

e. g.

antithesis

is

Alcibiades,

between and one

of such and such a type

’

:

5 I.

1356^30),

2,

coherent group

a

6-9

’’

145

we should

as

e.

i.

disengaged from

of qualities

accidents which coexist with

whereas the individual as such

to several,

of poetry, are

‘

men

not real

How

is

that the personages in Crates, as in

is

characters as

’,

i.

e.

‘

say,

more or

human

these abstracts of

it

;

is

and

attributable

unique.

Aristotle’s

the higher forms

all

less idealized

personality

’

various

the

personages,

Comedy.

History, the ^oyos, and the Old

in

‘a 1449 '’8

character

the concrete individual

in

it

therefore in the nature of things something general

view

A

the representative of a possible class.

character is

Rhet.

Toioo-Se,

(6

1449

-

come

get proper

to

names attached to them in the Drama is a point which Aristotle (comp. 17, considers at some length in 9, 1451 ^ 13-22 1455^12). |xu6ous

A

i.

:

were as imaginary as

stories

his

e.

his

personages.

according to Plato Rep. 377 a is a Adyos i/zevSys (either taken from legend or invented by the poet himself), though there fjLv&o^

may 4

be some element of truth in

At

ouv eiroiroiia kt€.

/lev

it.

this point, the evolution

of the

Drama

having been sketched, Aristotle inserts a provisional note on the points of agreement

and difference between Tragedy and epic

poetry, which anticipates to a certain extent the longer statement

intimated, the

first in 4, •

P'®*'

Top.

8.

•

swai

•

:

7,

1451

^

30

rj

crK€i//'6s.

i.

5,

xal

Ta>v

comp. Bon. Ind. 26

the preposition is

aXXcvv

23).

that

it

following the Epic

limit

of time, whereas the I.

imply that

TrXelcrTOL

—where

also

the opposite of Siatfiepeiv

In these and similar instances

p. 17).

would be more natural

ToO.

to

A

speak of Tragedy

than of the Epic following Tragedy.

mean

word may very

well

to

‘

follow after

mean

‘

go with

This

in order

’

’

(comp.

1362 “29), i.e. ‘agree with’. The aorist seems to the fact has been already recognized. With the traditional reading p.6vov (retained by Vahlen)

6,

the infinitive etvai POETICS

ol

(comp. Eucken, Sprachgebr.

view assumes that aKoXovOeiv must

fjitv

is

has been found in ^KoXovdrja-ev (by Thurot and Spengel),

on the ground

Rhet.

—

understood as inclusive of that which

p-ixP'-

mentioned as the

difficulty

€iva6.

The construction crvva188^26 pUxP'tovtov

SiaXeKTLKov

a-vyrjKoXov0->jKa
a 20.

1449

Tov ctwSt^Aos

occurs in Phys.

(rwaKoXovOfiv, just like aKoXovOeiv here,

(188

the second in 5,

10

ovv TOV tvpelv tov tottov op-oiw: tov

fih'

Kal TOV

KoXovOeiv

points of agreement had been already

1448^34, and

155^7

I,

LXo(TO(f)ov

a-^fSov

The two

23-24.

in chaps.

which follows

is

out of construction.

L

9

6

;

COMMENTARY

146

1449

For the preposition comp,

(Std) jicTpou peyiKou.

10

Twy

Sia

IJL€Tp(ov,

a^rj/j.aTi^o/j,€y(i)y pvOfiHiv .

—

mean

to

;

(comp.

4,

30

1449

6,

—

II 8id rpijaAptoi'.

As

8td p.€Tpwv.

kind of verse, one

1449

pti^ova (TX)']paTa).

reading

magnum

stories,

and the gravity of

Vahlen, retaining the manu-

perpov peydXov, takes pirpoy ptya to

fj-oyov

pi-XP'-

spatium

‘

subject

view of the tragic iambic as

the tragic diction (comp. 4, 1449819). script

a large

for

fitted

The hexameter is a metre and Aristotle may be presumed,

corresponding to the pey^Oos of the tragic

mean

1447*^27

^ 16 8td rmv

here used, p-irpov /xeya seems

a large

of this description (24, 14608' 3); I think, to have taken the same

i,

—

ampli

sive ’^nes

however,

this,

’

hardly probable with to pirpoy in the sense of

metre

is

in the

very

Zu Aristoteles’ Poetik i p. 25). some of the attempts at emending

this

‘

’

next line (comp. Gomperz,

The

following

are

p^xP^ poyov perpov pera Xoyov (the Aldine, and corr. Parisinus 2038'); p^xP'- P-^^ perptv [/xerd \oyov] (Tyrwhitt)

passage

:

ptXP^ poyov Tov Sid Xdyov eppirpov peyaXov (Ueberweg); pey TOV [^pirpov /xeydXovJ (Christ).

p^XP^

airouSaiwi' as was said in 4, 1448634. (nrovSaiivy presumably neuter (comp. 4, 1448634, and the note on 3, .

.

is

14488 6

.

;

19).

Tw Be TO perpoy

dirXoCt'

aTrXovy

irroTrouay.

cx®'''')

is

the

opposite of TTOLKiXoy (comp. Bon. Ind.

76612); the contrast is Epic (v. 24,1459632) and the

between the one metre of the Tragedy.

variety of metres in TauTT). **'

^459 .

.

.

3®

In illustration of the construction Vahlen quotes 23, OeaTreaios

Tavry]

iirix^iprjcrai rroieiy

povai Twy dXXwy, t <3 roLovToy opiXeiy

12

.

«Ti 8e t
.

:

.

oAov.

dv

ayeiT]

— Pol.

prj yopi^eiy.

7-

.

.

,

tov rroXepoy

T
15 *334®' 4* ov ravry

— Plato

)

Siaijie-

Rep. 605 A

to) irpos

irtpoy

Having

laid this

down,

ravrr) wpouvrai.

scil. Siacfiepei

rj

eTroTrotid.

however, Aristotle remembers that the difference did not always exist tive

;

he accordingly repeats his original proposition by a resump-

Kal TovTw Sia(f)€p€i

(comp. Kiihner, Gr. Gr.®

2.

i

p.

660), in

The

order to introduce a qualifying clause, kuitoi to n-puiroy ktI.

marked

as a parenthesis is equivalent to ^ pky yap ktL (actually found in some apographs), and is similar in form to that clause

in 4, 1449®' 19 (v. ‘

ad

loc.).

Perhaps also the Arabic translation (Margoliouth, A. O. p. 54) it is metrico sermone of Averroes (p. 359 ;

certainly implied in the paraphrase

Heidenhain).

‘

’

5. ti3

an

”

1449

10-12

147

Aristotle is thinking of a very obvious fact, viz. that

(jiTiKei.

whereas a tragedy rarely exceeds some 1,600.

lines,

he notes

ence he never loses sight of;

in

it

Kara re

Trjs crvo'Tao'ews

returns to

in his

it

to

/a'^kos

This

1455

1459^17

a context just like the present) in 24,

(in

17,

concluding chapter (26, 1462

differ-

and

'’16,

{8t.a
iiroTTOua Kal to p-tTpov) ;

17

18),

1449

thousand

epic (the Iliad or Odyssey, for instance) runs to several

8e

and he

where the

comparative merits of the two forms of poetry are under discusTeichmiiller has seen, are enough to must denote here not the ambitus aciionis, the imaginary duration of the action of the poem, as is often supposed, but rather the real length of the work itself, a length to be measured by the number of lines the work would take up in a book, or

These

sion.

show

the hours a

1451

7,

parallels, as

that prjKo'i

it

would need

one quite

length,

for recitation.

6 and in 24, 1459

parenthesis,

1

)

A

18.

It

sufficient for Aristotle’s

pkv

on

He

paXicrra kt «.

has the same sense in

reason for this difference of purpose, regards

consequence of another kind of difference,

Greek tragedy

action in a

is

viz.

it

is

given in the

as the natural

the fact that the

some

as a rule kept within a limit of

24 hours, whereas that in an epic may extend over weeks, or even There being this difference, therefore, in the extent of the years.

quantum of matter

action, the

natural

that there

to

be included in the story,

it is

should be a corresponding difference

in

only the

length of the literary statement in the two instances, and that an epic

A

poem

accordingly should be of greater length than a tragedy.

between the length and the quantum of

certain correspondence

matter in a

poem

is

recognized in 26, 1462

2.

Assuming

this

correspondence, Aristotle explains the great length of an epic, as

compared with a tragedy, as due which the epic action extends. the idea

of the actual length, the actual time required for the

recitation, to that of the

the

poem

to the great length of time over

In other words, he passes from

;

and he does

imaginary time covered by the action of this

on

the tacit assumption that the two

one may serve to explain Ueberweg, Aristoteles fiber Dichtkunst p. 57).

things are so closely connected that the

the other (comp.

Teichmiiller’s theory, that Aristotle to the

^

is

referring in the parenthesis

time of the actual recitation or performance S and thinking

The

idea of

some of the older dramatic

critics,

that in a perfect

drama the

actual time of the performance

would

coincide,

is

and the supposed time of the action of the piece not unlike that which Teichmiiller reads into the text of

Aristotle.

L

2

I2

COMMENTARY

148 1449

^

12 of the series of dramas (a trilogy or tetralogy) presented on the stage

a

in

may be

day,

single

sense for

The same and ^

means much

same thing

the

1448 “18.

2,

be seen in on fiaXia-ra

to

is

cannot be, as Teichmiiller imagines, a way

TrepioSov r{Xlou

of describing the natural day of

1

chosen

to

deliberately

day of 24 hours but

circuit,

order

in

A

meant.

is

its circuit,

an assumed

hours or so

make

takes to

it

For other

starting-point.

was often quoted

that the so-called

Drama.

‘

;

the periphrasis

clear

it

the

that

TepioSos of the sun

the time

e.

i.

2

sense of the word see Bon. Ind. 582

the

as fiovXiTai in

anxiety to avoid overstatement

fiLKpov e^aXXaTTeiv in the context.

(liar

text

assumes an impossible

it

virb fj-iav irtpioZov r/Xlov.

-ireipaTai

13

not only on

set aside at once,

archaeological grounds, but also because

is

not

its

The

29.

statement in the

‘Unity of Time’ was one of Aristotle’s rules for

The

stage

’,

says Sydney in his Apology for Poetry

and the

common

in

‘

one

sense, but

1459^25.

24,

’,

which was believed

The ‘Unity

piKpov ^^aXXdrreii'

=

‘

to

TO TTpwTov.

Time was poetry.

In the

true also of

is

to be implied as a rule

and elsewhere. vary, or depart, from little’.

The

is

very em-

that only a

reference

beyond

drama, says

earliest

little

’,

not to

is

it.

Aristotle, the

not observed with strictness, any more than

Unity of

it is

in epic

This passage has been discussed by M. Maurice Croiset

(Rev. des £tudes grecques diae graecae trilogiis p.

i

p.

iv),

373

who

referring to the period anterior

a long

tragedies,

The same

of Action’, however,

‘to exceed that limit only a

when

Aristotle actually

1

variation within the limit, but to variation *’15

What

day.’

of the theatre in his age.

Unity of Place

phatically asserted in chaps. 8-1

i.e.

should be, both by Aristotle’s

it

not a precept, but only an incidental recognition of a fact

is

in the practice

the

to

Aristotelian instances of this

former times as evidence for the assertion

in

uttermost time presupposed in

says

half-

come round again

(p. 63 Arber), ‘should always represent but one place;

precept and

is

solar

may

;

comp. Heimsoeth,

De

suggests that Aristotle

tragoe-

may be

to the institution of the trilogy,

tragic story, instead of being dealt with in

be supposed to have been told in one.

three

It is clear

would be very like that of an epic, and cover a longer time than 24 hours. One may ask how in the

that the action in such a play

absence of some device

like the

between act and act could be also

ask whether

there

was

modern

curtain the lapse of time

and one may same chorus throughout the

sufficiently indicated

the

;

—

;

;

These are

performance.

12—6. 1449

*’

1449

5-

24

149

which we have now no means 1449

difficulties

of answering.

The

TpaywSiais.

Tttis

shows

preposition

that Aristotle

is

thinking not of the time of the performance, but of something within the play, the imaginary time of the action in

Rh. Mus. 24, 135); comp. 13, 1453^25 tovto

(Ribbeck,

it

8 pa ev rais rpayo)-

Stat?. (i^pT)

‘

enumerated and distinguished in 6, Tragedy are melody and

16

in chaps. 23-24, before explaining the between epic poetry and Tragedy, Aristotle is at some

i?

the constituents

i.e.

:

1449^31

The

sqq.

spectacle

10).

Similarly

Sioirep KT€.

differences

1459

(24,

’

parts peculiar to

much the same structure most respects the same canons of

pains to show that a good epic will have as a

good tragedy, and

that in

construction are applicable to corollary ends at

support of the main statement irepl

.

.

wepl KcopuSi'as

—

d^aXa^tikTCS

Top.

:

I. 8,

345^31

rjpXv.

(l*

(a

I.

yap ktL )

is

a reason in

'’si

23—24.

in chaps.

:

Second Book of the

Poetics.

up’qpiivov opov dvaXajSelv. '’23

ow

d.vaXa/Sovre's

— Rhet.

fj.h’

16).

fJii|XT]TiKTjs

ivpicis

rds

Reacts

o-PXV'^

8c Xtyutp-ev dvaXa/Sovre; rrjv

13,

The

1459“ 17-24, ^17).

(23,

151^19 KaXws

6, 14,

339 "33

dpy^v

p.ivriv

in the lost

:

i. 3,

IMeteor.

Xtywptev.

l|ap^Tpois

-riis i*'

.

it

what follows

i-n-iLv

1373^^7

.

.

.

mroKu-

dvaXa^6vT€<; ri iari to

aBiKelaOai Xcyw/xcK cK TWk

Toi'

clpT]pi^»'(ui'

Y''V8|yiet'Oi'

= rov

For the hyperbaton comp. Metaph.

@

yivo/ncvov ck 3,

twv

1047® 12 to

€lprjp.€vwv.

d8waTov

8’

—

yeveaOai 6 Xiywv ^ etvat ^ ccrccrOai i/ccvcrcTat. Eth. N. 8. 16, 1163*^18 els Svvap.iv 8 k o OepaTrevwv ctticik^s etvai Sokcl (also Kiihner, Gr. Gr.®

2.

p.

I

opov

TTjs

6i6)b ouoias

comp. Metaph. Z puovov

etvat

the definition of

;

13,

ovcrias

1039® 19

opov

opifTavdai rrjv oitrtav.

—

its

paXarra

17

4* 5

i

essence, or essential nature

8 ok€i yc Tract Kal IXiy^Qrj iraXai ^ .

—De

^ 7 ® " 34

‘’‘V

part. an.

Xoyoj

.

.

.

i.

TtS

i,

6428-26

opL^ovn

rrjv

ov(nav avTtov.

e
There

differentias,

it

and

The

definition,

which

professes to be a in

its

principal

is

in logical form,

summary elements

of points it

is

that.

no hyperbaton in An. post. l. 34, 89'’ 14 irdvra ydp id atna id id dxpa iyvuptirev, which has been cited as an instance of it. The

is

shows that 6 Idwv

before

ktc.

established;

fiiaa 0 iSdiv

sense

et

is

to be taken with id dvpa, and that the accusatives

are the object of lyvapiatv.

^

24

15

COMMENTARY

150 1449’’ 24 (i) That Tragedy it

is

is

a

a

fiifirjo-i'i

was

said in

implied in

is

I,

i,

1447

1447

which differentiates Tragedy from Comedy, 34 —

1448

4,

4,

13

and

;

that

(2) o-TrovSaias,

recalls chap. 2

KoX reXctas p.iyeOo'i k^ovcrr)^ being

nition apparently of the point indicated in

a

^ 28.

added

and

in recog-

1449°' 19.

The

(3)

Tragedy were noted in i, 1447 24-8; and (4) the dramatic manner of its imitation in 3,1448823-28. But for the concluding clause, on the effect of Tragedy on the emotions,

means

in

we have

not been prepared by anything in the earlier chapters.

Aristotle

no doubt regarded one

self-evident, but the rest

worked out

at length

part of

tXiov Kal (po/Sov, as

it, St’

presumably an anticipation of a point the lost Second Book of the Poetics.

is

in

In just the same way we find him using the term -n-poaiptriK-q in the definition of virtue in Eth. N. 2. 6, iio6l>36, and reserving the

formal

explanation

concluding clause

of Trpoatpeo-ts for

3.

an integral part of the

is

mil’

4,

This

4.

since the

definition,

end of the thing to be defined cannot be ignored in any logically complete statement of its nature (De anima 1. 1, 403 “ 25 Metaph. H 2, 1043814). ;

25

The

TcXei'os fi^yeOos

(7,

point

considered in chap.

is

7,

completeness is said to imply a whole of some magnitude i45ol’24). We have not yet been told that the action in

where

‘

'

Tragedy must be a rcXcta irpa^i?, but from the explanatory would seem to regard the point as the

exov(rr]s Aristotle

consequence of the

p.iyedo's

mentioned already

one of the characteristics of Tragedy proper. term distinguishes Tragedy proper with contained stories from the rudimentary :

Plato Rep. 607 a

84$^ iv p.i\((Tiv ^ o-tTov.

4428

£7r€crtv,

tl

Sk

its

Drama

in

4,

natural

1449815

as

In that case the

complete and

self-

of an earlier period.

7)^v
rrjv

pLeyeOo^

p,ov(rav

vapa-

rjhovq cot KaX \virq tv rfj ttoXci jSacriXtv-

The word is taken from cookery (comp. De sensu 4, The nature of the metaphor may be seen, in the case

10),

of the substantive

Alcidamas

ijSva-pia,

eSea-puTi rots tmOerot^

language

(‘

from Aristotle’s criticism of the

style of

14068 19

ov yap ^Svcrp-art XPV™'-
in Rhet. 3. 3,

^Sva-p.tvo^ implies the accession of

something (here metre

and music) to make it agreeable, just as Koa-p-rjO^vaL in 4, 1449 meant the accession of something to make the work beautiful. echo of nized in

passage (comp.

1450 Plutarch Erot. 769 c Xoyw

this

6,

KaX perpa KaX pvOpov? ttpappocracra,

l’

ii)

may

An

perhaps be recog-

ttou/o-is f)8v(rp.aTa

and

8 29

also in Strabo

(^ra) ptXrj

818 Cas.

— 6. (^Avapovo’iv wcnr€p fieXo^

Tetav

Hamlet make

I remember

2. 2

17

1

24-27

1449 pvOfxov

[-^J

The metaphor

7rpoo-<^epovT€s.

— 15

•^Svcr/^a tl T(S

reappears

in

Aoyu) rijv repa-

1449

Shakespeare,

one said there were no sallets in the lines to

the matter savoury,

rw

eKooTo)

etScliv'

scil. Ttuv rjBvcrpLaTOiv,

:

190 d dAAa ra

Similarly in Isocrates T(Tayp.€voi? ovo/xacrtv, (fiopai^,

may

one

p-h/

dAAa

Kal prjBhf TrapaXnreiv

voirjcnv

Trepl

understood from

tovtwv SrjXaxrai ifvoi? ra Se

supply rmv ovopdruiv with

29) cKaVro) Ttov eiSulv

Katvois ra Se pera-

eiSeci.

For another In what

22.

replaced by rots eiScci

is

8 vcrp. 4 v(p.

Traci Tois ctSecrt SiaTroi/ciAai tt/v

instance of this allusive use of cTSos see 25, 1461 follows

r)

p.6vov rol<;

pJq

;

the read-

ing of the MS., eKaa-Tov, seems to have arisen through xiopis having

been mistaken cKacTio

The

for a preposition.

juxtaposition of

^.nd

like that in Pol. 7 'iji 323 ^ 4 i kuI x^P'-^ e/cdcrrw Kai

is just

(comp. x^P^s l/cacrrov in De caelo 2. 12, 292 * ig) implied antithesis in the present passage is between

Koivjj Tais TToAecriv

The

^27).

‘all together, and at once’ (dpa: 322 “13, and Metaph. E 4, 1027 ^ 23). Tragedy (unlike the Dithyramb etc.) has the TjSva-pa of metre in the dialogue, and that of melody only in the choral parts (see on

‘each separately’ (xupis), and

comp. De gen.

et corr. i. 5,

I, 1447 b 28). €/cdcrT(i), therefore, is loosely put for iKarlpw (comp. Pol. 3. 12, 1282 b 38, and HSt. s. v.).

SpiivTwi'

in

O'

13,

:

pipovpivwv, the subject being omitted as

scil. rS>v

b 31,

^

1450

10,

*>

and

21,

26, 1461 b 29.

it

is

b

26

Other Aristotelian

instances of this ellipse with a gen. absolutel'may be seen in Bon. Tyrwhitt, with less probability, as it seems to me, Ind. 149 b 29.

wth

supplies plpr](Tis

Spwyroiv,

comparing

1448 *’29 pipovvTai

3,

BpSyvra^,

ou

81’

diraYYcXias

piteous

means

practically Sl iXeeivQiv Kal t^ofiepaiv,

and alarming scenes

misericordiam

metumque

form of expression ToiovT(ov

pipovpevmv,

scil.

:

81’ ^Xe'ou Kttl (jjopou

is

Tra&Yfpdrwy.

’

comp. Goulston’s paraphrase, per expressum ’. The more abstract

adopted in order to prepare the way the

use

connexion comp, b 30 Sia plrpoiv

666 b jg TrepaiVovrai [scil. ai Plato Gorg. 450 D Sid Adyov repwv irepaivovcriv

(v.

ment of

fear

pity

Tragedy, but

and it

is

of

irepalvea-Oai

KiVT/creis]

as far as the poet

KadapcTL? of such emotions.

.

De

Sid tov lA/ceiv

ttSv Trepaivovcri.

in truth only a

preposition

the

means

is

p. 85).

for

in

rmv this

part. an. 3. 4, /cat

— Rep. 392 D

Bernays, Zwei Abhandl. is,

by b 27

‘

;

factis

For

‘

dvieVat. St’

dpo-

This excite-

concerned, the end of

to its ultimate end, its

?5

COMMENTARY

152 1449

**

27

TOiouTWM

Twi'

T?)V

emotions

means

to

‘

make

produce

‘to

2. I p.

Tra 0 T]|x(iTW('

just as Troiua-dai rrjv

t/s

one of the preliminary

;

difficulties

that a

so that the text

passage in Pol.

a catharsis of

‘

well as a catharsis of pity is

is ’

such

1449^31)

6,

1448^^1 8),

-fjBovT^v

1448 ^

and Kiihner, Gr. Gr.*

in

7,

(4,

not so otiose as

is

this

is

usually

removes more than

article

much

cathartic effect

(v.

8. 7

enthusiasm

of

catharsis

ils

1447 “22;

debated passage, not

is

peculiar to

seen at once to stand in close relation

is

several forms of catharsis

‘

irouiv rrjv

4,

in fact,

article,

the implication being

to the

and

imitation,

This interpretation of the

supposed.

Tragedy

fj-lfiTjaiv (i,

pleasure’ (comp.

The

593).

Kddapo’ii',

Fr. V), in

affirmed.

by

effected

and

which the existence of

Aristotle recognizes there certain kinds of music, as

fear effected

by Tragedy; and there

reason to think that a catharsis of laughter also must have been

and ultimate justification of Comedy Second Book of the Poetics, rtov roiovrwv TraOrj/MTOiv,

similarly posited as the effect in the lost

therefore,

is

a general expression for this whole group of disturbing

emotions (enthusiasm,

pity, fear,

etc.),

which appear

in

the context,

or

instead of being, as

two emotions

often thought, either limited to the

(pity

applying to the

and

is

so

fear)

emotions in

general.

The

great difficulty, however, in this formula

pretation of Kadapa-i?.

as to the inter-

is

term to be understood as a physio-

Is the

logical metaphor, in the sense of' purging’, or ‘clearing

metaphor from the

as a

‘purification’? is

to

my mind

The

away’; or

religious rite of lustration, in the sense of

ancient evidence, in Aristotle and elsewhere,

very decidedly in favour of the

first

interpretation.

I.

This, the pathological interpretation, as

generally associated with the (1857), sion*.

who each independently arrived at all its is in reality much older

It

;

are to be found in Tyrwhitt’s note his

quae de Musica dicuntur

opinor, Aristotelem similem ‘

it

may be

called, is

now

names of Weil (1848) and Bernays

[i.e.

quandam

a very similar concluessential points in fact

on the present passage: ‘Ex in

Pol. 8. 7],

colligere

licet,

ratiocinationem de poesi etiam

See H. Weil, Ueber die Wirkung der Tragbdie nach Aristoteles, Verhandl.

der zehnten Versatnmlung deutscher Philologen zu Basel, p. 140 (comp, his Etudes sur le drame antique, p. 1 58) ; the article of Bernays is reprinted in his

Zwei Abhandlungen

p. i.

I

have shown elsewhere

that the pathological interpretation of naSapais sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.

(J.

of Phil. 27 p. 267) in Italy in the

was not unknown

6.

qua

tragica instituisse,

validiores

et

levari et exhauriri

proprium

esse

scilicet

*’

27

153

probaret affectus misericordiae et 1449

tragoediis vehementissime

metus, qui in nutriri

1449

effici,

quod Plato criminabatur, sed contra

proinde affectuum

et

;

horum purgationem opus

cum

finem Tragoediae;

et quasi

non ex eo

excitantur,

caeterae Poesis

species vel ad doctrinam, vel ad delectationem magis aptae

To

sint.’

understand Aristotle’s position we have to go back to Plato’s

condemnation of the Drama

One

of Plato’s points

in the

that the

is,

Tenth Book of the Republic. appeals mainly to two of

Drama

the inferior elements in the soul, our faculty for grief (to OprjvwSe's,

TO eX€€ivdv) and our faculty for laughter

;

and that

effect is to

its

expense of the reason, and ultimately

gratify these at the

to

weaken

or nullify the self-control prescribed by reason (Rep. 605 c-606

As a view

c).

supported by so great a name, could hardly be

like this,

ignored by Aristotle in an Art of Poetry based throughout on the

assumption of the legitimacy of the Drama, and of the emotioiial effects

aims

it

at, his

catharsis theory

may- very well be supposed

have been intended as his answer to the Platonic indictment.

to

Though in the

the formal exposition of the theory, as

complete Poetics,

some

recover

on the 1341

cathartic

‘

® 21, as

making

of

idea of

instead of having

{
is

a

‘

and

an

‘

In Pol. 8.6,

effect,

'

when

is

simply

the hearing

rather than a form of instruction

’

6 avXog tjOlkov oAAd,

possible to

the Politics

in

Aristotle explains

all,

ethical

to be kept for the times

catharsis

to be read

still

flute to professionals, instead

part of a liberal education for

it

was

of certain kinds of music.

effect

orgiastic or exciting,

of music

it

a reason for leaving the

the flute,

that

’

it

no longer before us, it is from the two statements

is

fiaWov opyiaariKov,

Tovs avT
rj

:

ovk

wcrre Trpds tovs toiov-

Oempia KaOapaiv p.aXXov Svvarai

^ pAOrjfTiv. It will be seen that a sharp distinction is drawn here between the emotional effect of the flute, and the ethical effect of ’

‘

music; and that KaOapa-i^

certain other kinds of

in Aristotle’s

is

view connected with the former rather than with the

much more important 1341

32,

which

will

be found in extenso

of the Poetics (Fr. V).

of airs ’ into ‘

The

passage, however,

It

is

that

among

in

latter.

Pol.

8.

A 7,

the Fragments

begins by assuming a current division

r/OiKa, irpaKTiKd,

and

evOova-Laa-TiKo. p-iX-q

’,

and a

similar

between (i) the music that imitates character, and has thus a reflex influence on the character of the hearer (comp. Pol. 8. 5, 1340 ‘6) (2) that which imitates action (comp. Plato Rep. 399 A), and moves us to it and (3) that which imitates, and so arouses in ns, the orgy of emotion termed by the Greeks enthusiasm’. ^

distinction

here

;

;

‘

is

27

;;

:

COMMENTARY

154 1449 ’’27

or modes. The most ‘ethical’ harmonies may be practised by all, as a regular part of their lives whereas the other two kinds are to be left to professionals. This enthusiastic harmonies in a well-ordered state tolerance of the Aristotle justifies by showing that they stand in much the same classification of

harmonies

‘

’

’

‘

There are certain emotions, he some degree in every man’s soul, and in a

position as Tragedy.

which

arise in

us,

tells

disquiet-

us, e.g. pity and fear. Enthuone of these disturbing emotions. Experience, however, shows that the enthusiastic music (that of the hymns of Olympus,

ing degree (Icrxypws) in certain of

siasm

is

a salutary effect on

for instance) has

those subject to accesses

them to a normal condition of calm and peace {KaOLa-Tap-evov: comp. Bon. Ind. 356 “ 35 and 375 8), just as though they had undergone a cure or catharsis at

{KaTOKwxipMi) of enthusiasm, restoring

the hands of a physician

The same

tarpetas Tv;^dvTas koX KaOdp(reu}
(cocrTrep

sort of treatment {-n-dcrxcLv)

is

required by other emotional

natures also, e.g. by those liable to accesses of pity and fear, and

by the

rest of

mankind

in these feelings {Kov(f)i^e
all

;

likewise, in so far as they have a share

want a certain

from emotion.

And

catharsis, a pleasurable relief

it is

in just the

same way

(i.e.

by

the relief they bring) that the cathartic airs give a harmless delight to mankind. The sense of Kd6apcn<; in the Politics is well explained by Sepulveda in his note on 8. 6, i34i“23: Purgatio intelligitur expulsio cuiuspiam affectus’; and again in that on 8. 7, 1342*6 ‘

(t <3 Se rjrTov 8 ia
omnes moventur

affectibus, a quibus

quodam The term in

quasi medicamento

et

Phil. 27 p. *

To

t (3 p,aX\ov)

269)^

‘ :

Itaque plus et minus, tamen

iucunde per musicam sanantur

adhibito purgantur

’

(comp.

J.

of

metaphor from medicine,

fact is a

the passages in Italian writers quoted in this article I

may add one

Minturnus (1559), De Poeta p. 64 Quamobrem cum miserabiles horribilesque eventus Tragoedia spectandos ad perturbationum vacuitatem in

from A.

S.

:

‘

proferat, non est profecto, si miserationem] commovet pavoremque quod morbos animi alere atque augere videatur. An Platoni, nedum Aristoteli Musica probatur, quae nisi motus in animo cieret, nunquam sane eum Nam afflatu furoris qui essent concitati, cum modis ac nnmeris purgaret.

medium

infert,

canticisque sacris, qui ad animi expiationera adhiberi solebant, uterentur, his

qnidem ita expiabantnr, ac si aliqua potione purgarentur Homerica poesis, quod vim mentis et ad miserandum et ad timendum permoveat, improbanda Scilicet ad depellendam aegrotationem, quae veneni instar habet, vis est ? ;

ciens in corpore motiones medicina vehementis noxiaeque naturae excitatur The parallel ad morborum expiationem animus commoveri non debet ?’ ‘Ne piu forza haura il Physico di statement in his Arte Poetica p. 77 is :

spengere

il

fervido veleno della infermita, che’l corpo afilige, con la velenosa

medicina; che

’1

Tragico di purgar I’animo delle impetuose perturbationi.’

— 6. as Aristotle intimates by larpetas n'^dvras

whole

making

very

a

is

general

removal by

the

155

synonym

larpua

for

may

have, a medical

allowed

to remain,

In Greek physiology and pathology

term for a physical clearance or art

or an effort

it),

which,

would cause discomfort or harm.

The

emotions

certain

to

some

of nature of

KdOapa-i^ of the soul as described in the Politics in reference

KaOicrra-

KaroKa>)(ip,ot,

bodily product (some 7reptTTwp.a, as Aristotle would call if

(wo-Trep

a context too which presents a

KLvrjcri?,

pevovs, KovcfiL^ea-Oai, KaOapTiKo.) h

discharge,

a

it

KaOdpcretas), in

Trdcr^etv,

(ttolOo?,

KdOapa-f;

27

words which either have, or

series of

meaning

/cat

”

1449

is

the

{ndOrj )

a similar process tacit

assumption

being apparently that the emotions in question are analogous to

humours in the body which, according to the ancient humoral theory of medicine, have to be expelled from the system by the appropriate KdOapai'i. With some adaptation of the statements and hints in Pol. 8. 7, as thus interpreted, it is not difficult to those peccant

recover the outlines at any rate of the Aristotelian theory of the

Tragedy: Pity and

cathartic effect of

nature,

and

in

some men

are present in a disquieting degree tragic 'excitement

is

in a certain sense

fear are elements in

producing a catharsis

for to

all.

It

and

lighten

wanted, there relief.

is

;

.

but

latter the

also

is

it

serves as a sort of medicine, relieve

of the accumulated emotion within

of

With these

(i/rxvpojs).

a necessity (dmy/caiov 7rdcrx«v)

good

human

(tovs iXe-^povas Kal rovs (fio^rjTLKovs) they

it

;

soul

(/cov
and as the

relief is

the

always a harmless pleasure attending the process

This, thenj_may be taken as Aristotle’s answer to the

Platonic argument in the Republic it shows that the pleasure we defi^ from the moving scenes in Tragedy is not, as Plato had maintained, a demoralizing, but on the contrary a harmless pleasure The legitimacy of this pleasure is assumed (^apa' d/3 Xa^i)s}. -

j

throughout the Poetics (see especially 14,14531^11), but its precise nature is not explained, either in the existing book or elsewhere, by Aristotle.

It falls naturally

enough, however, into

place in the classification of pleasures in the

Nicomachean

its

Ethics,

which recognizes the existence of a class of things as pleasurable not directly and in themselves, but through their effect, as being of the nature of cures or remedies (tarpctat) to *

Nearly

Foes ’

;

all these

(TTtOviiftv

the disquietude

terms are to be found in the Oeconomia Hippocratis of

see Boring’s Kunstlehre des Aristoteles p.

Comp.

remove

319

for a discussion of

them.

Probl. 4. 30, 880*31 ofs ovv iroKii to toiovtov, dvayKr] iroWiKit TOVTOVi drroKaOa'tptaOcu' Kovcpi^ovrai yap.

1449

27

— COMMENTARY

156 1449

*’

27 arising from an unsatisfied want, and restore us to a normal condition of body or mind (Eth, N. 7. 13, 1152 ^ 34 7. 15, 1154^ 17). The tragic excitement, which in the language of the Politics, acts as an larpua or Ka.Oapa-i'i, is clearly a pleasure of this kind, one ;

of those described by Aristotle as larpevovra in his idea of KdOapa-f;

any

by

rate

may perhaps be

his use of the

A

the mind.

term to express the

catharsis in

A

rjSia.

further point

noticed, as suggested at effect of

Tragedy on

medical sense of the word

the

is

an

and its analogue, the TraOrjpAtwv Kadapa-is, may very well be presumed to resemble it in this In assuming Tragedy, therefore, to have a cathartic respect*. rather than a permanent moral effect, Aristotle would seem to have and only

larpcla,

for occasional use

;

been mindful of the position of the Drama in Greek life, and to have seen that the dramatic performances in the theatre were not sufficiently frequent or continuous to generate a moral habit, or make a lasting impression for good or evil on character a po int

—

overlooked not only by Plato but also by Lessing and most of the

modern

interpreters of the Aristotelian theory of

E. Muller, Theorie der Kunst bei den Alten 2

Tragedy (comp.

378).

p.

In the phrase iraO-qpATwv rdOapcn’i the genitive denoting the object purged away or removed, not

uncommon

354

^ 22);

104 K.

p.

jdp.aTO's

(

49

2.

.

is

found also

502

p.

Ttuv

a.TTOKa&dpa'ei^ xoXrjs ,

— Polybius tion

it

TTTveAojv KaOapacL^.

—3

is

—

diro

i

654 KoBaparw: rov Ocppav Ik tov Thucydides ttAcv/xovcov KaOdpcrwi p.

.

— Demosthenes

found with KdOapai';

Bon. Ind.

Hippocrates

in other authors, e.g.

(etc.) in its

—

KaOapm^ aipLaro?. The same construc-

64. 12

100. 6 dvaKdOapcri? Trrdp.aTo^.

5.

a construction

in Aristotle’s physiological writings (v.

and

KdOapcn^,

after

is

metaphorical application to

mind Plato Phaed. 69 b KdOapcris ns a purging away of all such things (Jowett), Ttov ToiouTwv TravTwv®, where the object purged away or removed is shown by the context the analogous process in the

:

‘

'

to be certain affections of the soul (lySovoiv Kal Trdvrojv TraOiav

De

Twv tolovtwv ). tovtwv

myst.

i.

(Needham)

17

rrjs olrjcrems >

'

‘Koiovp.tvo'i els

rihv kvp.aivop.ev(i)v

p.

Comp, what

is

— Hierocles

vaOwv

.

in Aur.

eKKdOapcris-

—

rwv dW(t)v

utilit.

tovs e^Opovs aTTOKaOdpcreis

12 KdOapcns iraOdiv.

1

Kal

cjiojSdiv

— Plutarch De cap. ex inimicis

p.

91 f twv

—lamblichus carm. p. 124

134 KdOapcns

94 diroKdOapcns veiKovs. said of the

flute

and

its

cathartic music in Pol. 8. 6,

I34i»2i. *

Aristotle’s

rf/v

tuiv

toiovtuv naBtjpciTaiv

unconscious reminiscence of the phrase in Plato.

KaOapaiv

may

perhaps be an

,

—

— 6.

—

1449

27

157

idea of KdOapcns, in the sense of a working-off of emotion

The

brought about by something that excites emotion, was not unknown in late Greek literature ; it is recognized in reference to music by

Drama

Plutarch and Aristides Quintilianus, and in reference to the

The

by these are clearly of Peripatetic origin, and on exactly the same the Aristotelian justification of the emotional forms of music

by lamblichus and Proclus. writers lines as

and of the Drama

in the brief statement in the Politics.

(1) In his very curious chapter

wine

is

said

theories reproduced

on

have a sedative

to

Plutarch

whom

on

the aKpodwpaKes,

effect,

the

illustrates

3. 8, 657 a) by a parallel instance, that of the sad airs at funerals, which, while exciting the grief of the mourners,

paradox (Qu. conv.

same time work

at the

SxTTTep

yap

ij

sorrow

off their

6pr)vwhia Ka\ 6

fniKr)8(ios

:

av\6s (v ap)(^ nddos Kivfi Kai

SaKpvov A/3aXXft [f/CKnXfi Emperius], irpodyccv Se ovro) Kara

&v

opoiays Xbois

top

koi

aKpawp

Kai

didpotap

as noppa>T(pa>

Stop

oIpop,

[?

us

rrjv

dvaXLcTKU to

Ka\

rapd^rj

a(f)68pa

6vpou8es, avdis KaToSiioi/ra

KaraXvovra],

Kal /cal

oiktov

XvTrrjTiKOV'

napo^vprj to

KaBia-Tdpra rrjp

ptdr]s TTpoiov
The language

(2) (p.

Bernays]

e^aipti

piicpop

in Aristides

Quintilianus

De Musica

25

3.

r3 Jahn), on the cathartic effect of the music and dancing in

and other mysteries, has a more

the Bacchic

imprint on

it

Ka\ Tos

did


Bok^kos reXfrar orras dp

t)

/cal

/cal

dp)(^(T(up

There are two passages

(3)

ocrai

tup dpaBecrrepup

TUP fp TavTais pfXudiup Tt

illustrate

distinctly Aristotelian

:

TavTats TrapaTrXija'ioi Xdyov tipos TrroiT)(ris

dpa

did

Traidials

in lamblichus,

the Aristotelian idea of KaBapa-is.

/3toi/

which

In

^ tvx^p vtto

(KKaOaiprjrai.

De

may

myst.

serve to

9 (ed. Parthey), writing as a Neoplatonic occultist against the naturalistic

explanation of enthusiasm, he insists that the a

effect

mere

of the enthusiastic music

dTro/cd^apcrts,

antpacTip d(

/cal

Bela

t)

There

is

an error

t(

ovdapus avTO

nXeopao'pdp ^ Tvep'iTTupa npuTus ip

airov aw/orarat

fit

is

fj

ndo'a apuBtP dp\r]

/cal

some

/cXiyreb/'.

ovdf

Tjpip ip(j)v€Tai,

Kora^oXfi,

reason to think that the theory thus set aside was that

of Theophrastus, and, through him, of Aristotle.

seen

to regard

being of the nature of

:

diroKdBapirip laTpeiap ti

it

a working-off or evacuation (aTrepacrts) of

morbid product within the soul

yap KaTa poarjpd

as

3.

how completely

the language

And

it

will

of the above passage

be

har-

I

449

27

— COMMENTARY

158 1449

^

27 monizes with the pathological interpretation of the formula,

The second

iarpetas TV)(6vTas Kal Kadapcreu)? in the Politics. is in

De

myst.

al Bwdp.ei
ii

i.

rwv

:

dvOpttiirivwv

7ra6r]p.dTu>v

eipyd/xevat

KaOiarravTaL a-(f)oBp6Tepai,

Bernays

(Spaxei's

;

vulg.]

Kal

ets

dyfii

rOiv iv r^plv

Trdvrrj

p.€v

evipyeiav Be ^pa^etav

[so

toO

a-vp.p.eTpov

^aipovcrt p.eTpiui% koX a.TroTrX'qpovvTai, Kal evrevOey TreiOoL Kal

ov Trpds

wa-n-ep

passage

jSi'ay

irpoayop.evoi

diroKaOaipo p.evai

Bid By rovro ey re KU)p.ioBia

dyaTravoyrai.

Kal TpaywSta dXXorpia rrdOy Oewpovyres icrrapiey rd o'lKeia ivddy Kal

diroKa6aipop.ey.

p-erpiidrepa aTrepya^op-eOa Kal

The

theory lamblichus

moment

accepting for the

is

is

that the

passions cannot be suppressed for any length of time with im-

punity;

in the

an occasional outlet (comp. diroKadaiand that the secret of our interest serves to work off emotion (rd ot/ceia irdOy clear that lamblichus must have had a

that they require

p6p.eyai) to

keep them quiet

Drama

is

that

diroKadaipop-ey).

It

it

is

;

pathological explanation of the effect of the

Drama

before him.

But he has taken the edge off the Aristotelian theory by giving it an ethical turn ; it will be seen that he makes the catharsis of passions mean the same thing as the moderation of them (p,€Tpici-

many

repa airepya^6p.e6a Kal aTroKaSaipop-ey), thus anticipating by centuries the

associated with the

The

(4)

names of Heinsius and

cathartic effect of the

versial points discussed

Republic. Fr. V. that the

of KaOyp.drmy

interpretation

The

Drama

by Proclus

it

now

usually

Lessing.

one of the many contro-

is

commentary on

in his

passages bearing on

KaOapa-i';

will

Plato’s

be found quoted under

According to Proclus the Aristotelian answer to Plato was Drama serves a useful purpose as an outlet for emotions

which would disturb the peace of the soul, if their just claims were not recognized and from time to time duly satisfied by means of

some such

gratification as

of the effect of the

is

Drama

supplied in the theatre.

reference, however, to other apologists for the

one

now

This view

Proclus attributes to Aristotle

believe him to have found it for himself Second Book of the Poetics. The statement

hesitate to lost

existing

his

;

Drama may make in the

in

its

form seems rather to have been taken from some follower of

Aristotle, possibly

from Theophrastus,

the sense rather than the

Disengaged from

its

its

phraseology representing

words of the Aristotelian

original.

Neoplatonic surroundings in lamblichus

and Proclus, the catharsis theory before them

may be

thus

—

',)

6. reconstructed in outline:

Proclus TO

ireTTovrjKO';

27

1449

159

The Drama

has a therapeutic (comp. 1449

avrwv OepaTrevcravras) rather than a directly!

moral effect; and the excitement

supplies

it

is

required by us at|

times (comp. Proclus Beop-eva Si rtvos iv Kaipio KivT^aem) to carry

(comp. TraOwv

(XTrepao-eis

away (comp. lamblichus and

relieve

irdOr]

.

.

.

d-n-oKadaipopai) certain emotions.

the soul of the disquietude they

Proclus dv€vo;(A.7^ovs

‘^pd<;

avrwv

dir’

.

ttoulv),

.

.

would cause (comp..^ if

defrauded of

the satisfaction naturally due to them (comp. Proclus irpds

rmv

The whole

Tra^ujv).

theory in fact

simply a

is

fuller

d
d.iroKa.OapcTL's

term,

have

still

brief in the Politics,

in

Or direpao-ts in place of the primitive Aristotelian

/cd^apcrt?.

II.

Notwithstanding the arguments of Weil and Bernays, the old interpretation of TraOrjpdrwv ‘

i

and more ^

complete version of that we with

off)

lamblichus and Proclus) or purge|

in both

purification

own

'

KdOapcri^,

of certain passions,

which makes it mean the from being extinct even

far

is

to be a metaphor from whereby the hand or soul was Understood in cleansed from some pollution or stain of sin. this sense, therefore, the term would naturally imply that certain passions require purification from something, i. e. from something more or less of the nature of an impurity. What this element of

in our

KdOapais

day.

is

supposed

the religious rite of purification,

’

‘

impurity

is,

supposed to slight

and

in

become

what sense the emotions in question are pure ’, are points on which there is no ‘

divergence of opinion

pretation of KdOapais.

been propounded follows^ (1)

The

may be

among

the upholders of this inter-

principal

explanations which have

roughly distinguished and classified as

:

Tragedy

is

said to purify pity

and

fear,

because the frequent

excitement of these emotions in the theatre has a tendency to

weaken

their force,

and thus moderate and reduce them

measure (Heinsius, Milton, Lessing, (2)

The

lessons

and moderating

to just

etc.).

and examples in Tragedy have a purifying on pity, fear, and other evil passions

effect

(Victorius, etc.).

(3)

The

tragic

pity

and

fear

are

regarded as pure, because

they are aroused not by real suffering, but only by the imaginary

Comp. Twining’

2 p. 3,

and Weil

1. c.

p. 135.

^

27

COMMENTARY

i6o 1449

27 woes of the (Batteux,

theatre

They

(4)

;

so that there

is

no admixture of pain

in

them

etc.).

are regarded as pure, because, as aroused

by Tragedy,

they are disinterested emotions, with no self-regarding element in

them (Brandis, Susemihl). (5) They are pure, because the sublimity of Tragedy exalts pity and fear into high and noble forms of feeling (Hermann).

The

first

of these, the only view that calls for serious considera-

has an especial interest for us owing to the fact that in the

tion,

eighteenth Lessing.

it found a very distinguished exponent in must be admitted, however, that Lessing himself did

century It

more than expand

little

the old idea of

‘

moderating

’

the passions^

and translate it back into the language of the Nicomachean Ethics. ‘The tragic purification of the passions,’ he says, consists merely in the conversion of pity and fear into virtuous habits of mind. But as with every virtue, according to Aristotle, there are on either side of it extremes of excess and defect, between which it stands as a mean. Tragedy, if it is to turn pity into virtue, must be able to purify us from both extremes of pity and it must do the same thing with fear likewise.’ * The whole theory, as stated even by Lessing, is open to many and very grave objections, (i) It confuses two distinct things, the purification of a feeling and the purification of the soul from a feeling. (2) It confuses the ideas of pure and moderate ’, though there is no direct logical or other relation between them excess or defect in certain matters ‘

;

’

‘

‘

;

may be social ‘

fault,

on a

rests

1

a

life

Da

false

but they cannot be termed

‘

impurities

’.

(3) It

hypothesis as to the position of Tragedy in the

of ancient Greece; the performance of Tragedy was too

namlich, es kurz zu sagen, diese Reinigung in nichts anderm beruht,

Verwandlung der Leidenschaften in tugendhafte Fertigkeiten, bei Tugend aber, nach unserm Philosophen, sich diesseits und jenseits ein Extrem findet, zwischen welchem sie inne steht so muss die Tragbdie, wenn sie unser Mitleid in Tugend verwandeln soli, uns von beiden Extremen des Mitleids zu reinigen vermdgend sein welches auch von der Furcht zu verstehen. Das tragische Mitleid muss nicht allein, in Ansehung des Mitleids, die Seele als in der

jeder

:

;

ffihlet, sondern auch desjenigen, Die tragische Furcht muss nicht allein, in Ansehung der Furcht, die Seele desjenigen reinigen, welcher sich ganz und

desjenigen reinigen, welcher zu viel Mitleid

welcher zu wenig empfindet.

befiirchtet, sondern auch desjenigen, den ein jedesUngliick, auch das entfeiuteste, auch das unwahrscheinlichste, in Angst setzt’ (Hamb. Dram. St. 78). As Heinsius had said something very like this long before

gar keines Ungliicks

him

(v. Zerbst,

Ein Vorlaufer Lessing’s in der Aristotelesinterpretation

Lessing’s originality here

is

not so marked as his power of statement.

p. 29),

6. occasional

27-30

1449

i6i

have a marked and abiding effect on the moral 1449

to

character of the hearers

supra, p. 176).

(v.

Even

(4)

if

the tragic

excitement of emotion be supposed to have been sufficiently

quent to produce a habit,

would be one of moderation

matter of feeling

in the

;

we have no emotion

right to suppose that the habitual indulgence of strong

pity

(e. g.

and

fear) will

weaken

force or reduce

its

it

activities,

103 ^ 2l). should expect, therefore, that the strong emotion aroused by

Twv ofwimv ivepyfiwv

We

measure.

to just

Habits according to Aristotle arise from corresponding €K

fre-

does not follow that the resulting habit

it

Tragedy would,

at e^eis yivovrai (Eth.

N.

end

habitualized by repetition,

if

2. I p. 1

in a habit of

strong emotion, not in a habit of subdued or moderate emotion,

mean state of feeling which Aristotle identifies with The primary error, however, in this and similar interpre-

not in that virtue.

of TraOrjfmTiDv KaOapcris

tations

meaning

into the term, as

tragic poet a

the

Aristotle’s theory

;

that

is

it

reads a directly moral

though the theatre were a school, and That,

of morality.

teacher,

however,

is

not

the great function of the tragic poet, he thinks,

to excite certain emotions, and procure us the pleasure that must accompany such excitement (Poet. 14, 1453 '’ii). This pleasurable excitement of emotion, in fact, is with him the end is

and aim of Tragedy, so

far as the poet

human

statesman, however, viewing is

able to look

beyond

this,

all

of the existence of Tragedy.

himself

is

and see the ultimate

In the

justification

Politics, accordingly, Aristotle

recognizes the usefulness of Tragedy, explaining that

it

supplies

a natural want, as a sort of catharsis of emotion, which as tional creatures

men

The

concerned.

nature and society as a whole,

emo-

require from time to time to keep their souls

and quietude. This is a reasonable apology for Tragedy, answer to Plato’s criticism. One may perhaps also say of it, that it is more consonant with fact and experience than the moral or disciplinary purpose which many still profess

in health

and a

sufficient

to regard as the true raisort d’etre of the theatre.

The

&p\Loviav KOI

as a

synonym

8i4

frerpui'

9208-12 Twv

Sto,

p€Tp(j)v.

rat

is

explanatory, ^eXos being added

to explain appavia (v. is

opposed

Sia

to

TO TToXAaTrXacrta

eti/a6

— Plato Symp. 187 n

on

1447 22). yoeAovs: comp. Probl.

Tore

to.

19. 3 i,t5

piXy] iv rats rpa-ycoStats

pikecri re ral piTpots.

ov Ti Ttov pirpoiv BiopaL aKovcrai oiSe piXos.

—

— Lysis 205 a

Isocrates 19 1 B rais

(^ais Kal rots /xerpots. POETICS

2g

i,

M

3o

’’

27

;

COMMENTARY

i62 1449

TrpdrToi'Tes TroiouMTai

^ 31

by acting

on the stage

it

Aristotle

pipYjaii', scil. ol /xt/iov/xevoi.

tt)!/

who

thinking not of the poet but of the performers,

on

(v.

1448®’ 23).

3,

is

the story

tell

TrpdrTorres recalls

the idea of the Spcovruv in the preceding definition of Tragedy. b

33

6 TT)s o<|/ews

KocTfios.

di/'is

it

comprehends

the

‘

en

scenery, dresses

This explanation

theatre

merely to the

rendered by

is usually

‘apparatus,’ ‘scenery,’ or mtse

— the

whole

Twining

apparatus of

visible

too wide

is

spectaculum,’

‘

according to

schie)

reference

the

;

is

appearance of the actors when got up in

visible

character by the o-KcvoTroids or costumier (see on 6, 1450^20). Aristotle accordingly

more than once uses

word

the

in

a concrete

sense in the plural, because each of the characters would require

a special and distinctive make-up.

The formula

6 t^s

dt/fcojs

Koa/j-os

make-up of the actors is of the nature of a decorative adjunct (v. on 4, 1449 ® 29), a mere accessory to the poet’s work (v. 6, 1450'’ 16), on which he, as an artist, has no implies that the visible

right to rely for his effects (v. 14,

many

1453

term ofis

7)-

like

other technical words in the Poetics was probably already

familiar

in

sense

this

in

the

language of the theatre (comp.

Theodor Gomperz dargebracht p. 166). peXoTToua (properly the making of replaces the original term p,eAos as a synonym for it; comp. 6, 1450 ^ 16, and Pol. 8. Festschrift

7,

’^34

1341 23 rrjv fx.ov
TovTov in Xe^ts

is

6,

1450

"•4 (v.

ad

loc.).

A

definition

a term with several meanings

present definition describes the

(v.

Xe'^is in

on

is

given because

21, 1459“' 12).

The

a play in reference to the

which comes

poet, as the ‘composition of the verses’; that

later

13, views it rather from the side of the dramatic personages, as the expression of their thought in words ’.

on, in 6, 1450

‘

'’35

has the concrete sense of verses ‘

fidrpui’ I,

‘’36

29 (comp, on

1447 iraaai'.

iracriv,

to be supported avOpuiTTO's ecrriv o

whole nature errel

is

6ij/is,

Xe^ts

and

enough

it

to say that

too obvious to require explanation.

8e irpd^eu; eori

ceding definition.

in

the emendation of Madius, may perhaps seem by the fragment of Democritus (fr. 165 Diels), But no change is really wanted Trdvres icTp-ev.

instead of defining /xcXoTroua Aristotle thinks its

like tois /AeVpocs

’,

30).

ktL

Comp.

Having spoken of

p.ip.rjO'L’s

p-eXo-n-oua, Aristotle passes

kind, those which constitute

its

Trpd^eu)'; in

the pre-

the externals of a tragedy,

on

to

its

elements of another

internal content.

The

subject in a

— 6. tragedy

The

/xvdos, the fable

action as such

4

163

the

;

Oedipus, for instance, of qualities,

poem

in a

is

moral and

personality of the agents.

only a

name

which

intellectual,

Kara t£ to

Tj0os

Kal

ttji'

group and the

for a certain

actions

his

language put into his mouth reveal to us (comp. TToious Tivos eivai

1451

9,

^>7).

further on, however, in

little

though

TToiovs Tivas as

comp. Pol.

between

antithesis

37

29).

uses the term

rjOas

or

and

Sidyoia

ovSe (jiavepbv Trorepov Trpos Trjv Stdvotav

8. I,

p.d\\ov

5, Aristotle

8'^

naturally referred rather to the

For the

moral character. TrpeVet

it

1450 a

^

Intellectual

Sidvoiai'.

as well as moral slates are included under iroLOTrjTes (Cat. 8,

A

rj

irpos

^Oo?, and the t^s Nicomachean Ethics and

to

assumed throughout the between the rjOiKaL and the

Siavorp'iKal

distinction

elsewhere

aperaL

There are thus in the natural 145° order of things, says Aristotle, two distinguishable factors in the action of the individual agent, his ^ 6os and his Sidvoia; these are the inner causes of men’s actions, and of the success or failure of their begins the apodosis.

irt^oKci'

TTicfivKev is, like

lives.

impersonal. ovT€

Tr€vKe

7r€VK€v

Vahlen

the Platonic

illustrates this

puav ovtws fivac

etvai Srjp. 0 KpaTiav,

(Rep. 473

(f>v(n.v

usage from Pol.

rrjv ttoXiv.

1296

4. 12,

and Demosthenes

1

4,

30 rds

489 1261

a,

2. 2,

b),

26 evravOa Kpijvas Kal

TO, cjjpeaTa cirtActVeiv TriVKev.

Kara rauras €vSa/pu)v€S

rj

= Kara

toj;

Comp.

wpa^ets

Kara Se

1

rets Trpd^ets

^ 2

TOvvavTLOV.

pev irpd^ews o pu6os 4 To complete the statement ^ 3 Aristotle might very well have added a clause like tSv Se TTparroVrfjs

Kal al Stdrotai j and it has been suggested (J. of Phil. 5 TO. 19) that these words or something equivalent must have dropped out. In a context like the present, however, this second point may

TWV p. 1

have been

left

Vahlen ad

j

loc.),

enough

to suggest

and Waitz ad

loc.).

For

5,

and Waitz on An.

TouTov (=TovTo) ,

.

be mentally supplied by the reader (comp.

to

as the emphatic mention of the

irpalcdjs KTc.) is

1462

n-paypaTwv. Dlock to

36

1449

Sidvoia manifested in the language of

and

rjOo's

as

or plot of the play, represents the

dramatis personae represent the

the

^

7

an action with the personages concerned therein

is

agents.

31—1450

1449

9

The

is

this

it

(comp.

use of

pr. 2. ii,

61^

De

first

point

30,

ig.

preparative and explained by

others,

23

solitarium comp. 26,

ttjv crvvdea-iv

assimilation of gender has been a

Madius and

(rijs p.h’

interpr. 14,

twp

stumbling-

though found again in 22, 1458

M

2

®

26

^

4

^

^

COMMENTARY

164

1450^4

atvty/xaros rc ovvdij/aL

^

6

yap

Ibia

avrr)

Sidi'oiai',

scil.

eivat

i

2,

p. 74).

Instead of attempting a definition,

Ae'yto.

Aristotle evades the difficulty

by saying that

Stdvoia

is

manifested

argumentative and reflective utterances of the dramatis

the

in

to Xiyavra VTrdp)(ovTa dBvvara

icrri,

(comp. Kiihner, Gr. Gr.^

The statement here is merely proone may see by comparing the fuller exposition in where we are told among other things that 19, 1456^34-^8 the Sidvoia of a personage may be shown in his actions as well as personae (comp, infra '’ii). visional, as

—

in his words.

Aidvoia in the sense

an element

yffos,

it

bears in the Poetics

is,

in the personality of the dramatis personae.

their intellectual capacity, as evinced in their

and

be, in their actions),

it

language (or

may

it

whenever they argue or

to be seen

is

like It is

make an appeal to the feelings of their hearers, in other words, when they reason or plead with one of the other dramatis personae in the same sort of way as a rhetor might do. Hence it is that the general theory of the Stdvota in a play

said (19, 1456 34) and a speech with a speech (v. on t* 6). The

to belong to Rhetoric rather than Poetry

great display of Sidvoia in

term answering to ‘

arguments

... a e)(r)

it is

a rhetorical

Sidvoia in Isocrates

Aristotle’s

Isocr.

is

;

191 a jacra

is

h/6vp.rip.aTa,

p-irpiDV Kai pvOpiwv diravTa ttoiovctiv

dv Kai ry Xf^ei Kai rois evOvpLypiacriv

ToaravTrjv t)(ei ^(dpiv, wctt

KaKu)S, op-w^ airais rais evpv6piiais Kai rats
aKovovrai.

yovcri Tovs

—

3 1 9 D Kai

yap ry ke^ei

ij/v)(ay
-TroiyriKioTipa

Kai

TTOiKikwrepa ras Trydieis SyXovcri, koX rots h'Ovp.yp.ao’iv oyKuSea-ripois Kai Kaivorepois -xpya-Qai ^yrovcriv.

Xeyovres

Aeyovras. a tragedy, tive,

^ 7

:

twv Xoywv, and ^7 ttoXitikws hroiovv more immediately of the pi)o-ets in

comp.

6

ctti

Aristotle

is

thinking

and of the

capacity they

dTroSeiKVuaaiv Ti

intellectual,

may ;

i.

e.

the rhetorical or argumenta-

reveal in the personages.

1 1 aTToSeiKvvovcri ti

ws

eiTTiv

—

y

tos

ovk ecmv.

—

Rhet. I. I, 1355 ^5 19, 1456 37 TO T€ aTToSeiKvvvai Kai to Xveiv. yap Trtcrrcvo^ev /tidAtcra orav diroSearroSeiiis Tore TTtVrts ns* Se y ^

Sdi\6ai vTToXd^oypev. T]

Kai

dirotjjait'ot'Tai

The

yt'wfjtT)!'.

equivalent in b 12

is

the

more

general expression, y koMXov ti dTrotjbatVovrat, but it is hardly worth while to bring the two passages into unison by restoring here (with f

Bernays, Zwei Abhandl. p. 155) ^ Ka^dAov airoi^aivovTai, on thej assumption that yvdp.yv may have come in as a gloss. A yvwpy as :

defined in the Rhetoric to the

conduct of

life:

is

a maxim, or general proposition relating

Rhet.

2.

21,

1394

^ 21

ecrri

8e

yvwpy dvo-

— 1450 ^4-13

6. oi fievroi

<^avcris,

dAAa KaOoXov

ian

Trepl

nomen

ex

on

l(f>LKpa.T-q<;,

to

evOv

I450 ® 7

rto

Kal alpera

etcri,

The corresponding

rj

Latin term was .

quod similes sunt

acceperiait,

eo

Trpd^ets

at

do'ojv

otov

3 Antiquissimae sunt quae proprie . Graeci yvoj/ias appellant: utrumque

8. 5.

quas

vocantur,

senientiae

€Ka
TrdvTW KaOoXov,

Trepl

irpos to TTparreiv.

Quintilian

sententia-.

autem

ov

dAAa

evavTiov,

Kap.TrvX(o tfrevKTa

KaO

irepl tu)v

Kal

1^5

consiliis

.

aut

decretis.

An

eli'ai

fie'pT)

I447®'IO€/c o

Ka0’

TTOfftov

iroid

answer

question announced in

the

to

i,

^ 8

Kal TTOttov icrrl ptopimv.

Tis

eoTii'

The word

rpayuSia.

4

piepos

being

ambiguous (Metaph. A 25, 10231' 12; Z 10, 1034 *5 32), this clause had to be added to mark the distinction between the parts ’

‘

under consideration and those

at present after

in

chap.

The

12.

constituents of a tragedy;

whereas

are the sections into which

good or bad,

as

or whatever else its

may

it

be enumerated here-

as

defined

those

divided.

is

it

we

various formative constituents that as TTOta Tts

to

parts here described are the formative

It

chap.

in

12

through these

is

are able to speak of a tragedy

rjOiKri

be said to be,

or

or

ireirXeyp.evTq

when we come

TraOrjTiKiq,

to

judge of

quality.

= ovk

ouK dXiyoi auTwi'

The

oAtyoi Ttav Trotrp-wv.

ws

ehre'iv

which ^ 12

and inserted after irdv in the next line. Of the many emendations that have been propounded the simplest certainly is that of Bursian, ovk oXlyot avroiv (dAAa irdvres). On which that formerly suggested by myself, oXtyov avruiv follows should perhaps be transposed

(dTravTfs)- (J. of Phil. ever, has to

be

on

this

:

it

14

p. 44),

was based,

ovk oXlyot avrmv, how'-

a certain stamp of genuineness.

The

parts are in

six

The

sense seems

the nature of things possible

and due use has been made statement may be compared with those in ''15, ^^ 6 and 18, 1456®' 3, where the existence is recognized of plays weak or deficient in some of the parts. For the sense of €x« in this passage ( = admits of’, has in it the elements in every tragedy, so to say

of them by not a few of the poets.

;

The

,

‘

‘

possibility of’) it

TT)

and

eTTia'TTjptrj .

ovBev

comp.

Ke)(py]VTai,

— 1147

K(j)Xvei

eiScai: see oij/cis

;

on

7. 4)

7

;

irapa

Trj

Kara

4,

1449

see on 6, 1449

piepos ® 7. t*

33.

and

1146 ^ 32

^ €)(OVTa piev

TrpaTTeiv

KaOoXov dXXa pty

1448®

2,

Eth. N.

for the distinction 6

e^wv

ap.tpoTepa'S i-irtarqp.riv,

ptht

ov

[scil.

rds irpoTacreis]

)(pdp.evov

(comp. Bon. Ind. 854

between

xpd)/i,€vos Be

p.evTOt

ry

37).

^13

COMMENTARY

1 66

1450^13

every play

irdK, i.e.

ulXXov

^15 by

comp.

12,

18 dTrdvTwv.

1452

—

1456

18,

<131

Aristotle proceeds at this point to arrange the six

ktL

elements

;

aWo.

els

and he begins ; an abundance of reasons which seems to imply was a subject of controversy at the time, the supreme order of their relative importances

in the

asserting, with

that

it

importance of the

As

/jlvOos.

is

it

the

duty of a tragedy to

first

represent an action, the fivOos or story of action in

and most

first

essential element in

its

it

must be the

The

construction.

characters,

work out

the personal agents, are mainly required in order to

i.e.

and

the story,

means

as

to that

end; so that

deemed of secondary and subordinate with the

fjLvOos.

element

this

significance as

to

is

be

compared

The paramount importance of plot in Drama has in our own time by an eminent The idea, the plot, always comes first. The plot,

been re-asserted with equal emphasis living dramatist in a sense,

34

it

nine-tenths of a play’ (H. A. Jones, Strand Magazine

is

Twv TTpayiAaTwi'

a whole of

from

= 6 fxvOos.

Laws 817

Plato

;

6, 1449^25), embodied in it.

19;

incidents

and Odyssey

in 17,

^vvecTTTjKe

apev rjpets

in Leocr.

p[prj
[?

seen

2 sqq.

yovv]

Kara

rjp.LV

rj

tov KaXXL
y£ ovtcos eXvai rpaywBiav

102

may be 1455

ec/^ev rpaywStas avrol TrouqTcu.

B

OTL KaWta-Tyjs afia Kal apca-TrjS' TrScra ovv

TToXiTeia

ol TroirjTal pLpuovpevoL

Trjv

aXrjOeerTaTrpf.

tov avOptlirruvov

— LycurgUS Alcida-

/3lov,

described the Odyssey as a KaXov avOptumvov ^lov KaTompov

Of Menander

(Aristot. Rhet. 3. 3, 1406'’ 12). ’fi

the action in a tragedy

1449

4,

means by a combination of

Aristotle

Ptou

As

plurality of incidents {irpayf^aTa)

his synopses of the Iphigenia

Bwafj.iv

mas

aufftacris

some magnitude (comp.

must have a

What ®i7

‘

379 )-

Prj

is

:

MeVavSpe

/cat ySte,

rrorepos ap

vpwv

also

it

iroTepov arrepLp'qcraTO

was said: ;

(Nauck,

Aristophanis Byz. Fragm. p. 249). Kal euSaifiovias pipetrai

rj

ev olopevovs

^18

17

Plato Rep. 603 c irpaTTOvras, 4>‘^pe.v, avOpixirrovs ^ eKovcrcas Trpd^eLS /cat ck tov irpaTTeiv rj

is

Ka/cws Treirpayevai.

According

iv -n-pd^et.

happiness

:

piprjTLKrj yStaiovs

Comp. Phys.

2. 6,

197^4 ^

— Pol. 7-3A325'''32 I. 8,

1098 b 21

TO Te'Xos

:

to the definition in Eth.

a certain kind of

;

Rhet.

Eth. N.

ivepyeiai to TeXos.

a

L{rvj(^s

N.

i. 6,

1098

®

16

evepyeia Kar aperfjv.

Se evBaipovia rrpd^LS TiS'

evirpa^la yap.

eiBaipovia irpa^ts ecrriv (also Eth. N.

V I. 5, I.

activity,

8,

1360 ^ 14). 1098 18 irpa^ets

TLves

Xeyovrai

kcu

—

—

ou itoi6tt|S

Elh. N. 10.

:

yeiai TroLOTrjres irpaTTouo’i

(see

on

ov 8

el
13-26 14 ovBk yap al

1173

2,

167

The

reference

3.

iv

scil.

‘

rrj

Greek

HSt.

(v.

s. v.).

It

in

the

not infrequent

is

hardly necessary, therefore, to

is

reading of one of the apographs, a-vp-TrapaXap.-

for the

it

21

to the actors

is

they include

p.ip.-q(r€i,

representation’; (rvp.TrepiXap./3 dveiv in this sense

reject

1450 ^ 18

1448®' 23) rather than the poets.

o’Uji.irepiXafi^di'ouaii',

in later

rrj? dp€Trj‘; Ivip-

eiSaipovia.

p.ipovp.evoi.

ol

scil.

:

rj

®

1450

6.

^dvovaiv, though

no doubt

is

it

quite true that manuscripts are

apt to confuse the two prepositions. 8id

Tois irpdleis

Kal 6

T^os

Rep. 377 A Soph.

KaC

is

TravTos

.

with a view ^ 22

‘

89. 4 Sid rrjv a-t^eripav So^av.

explanatory,

peyicrroi' dirdt'Tut'

dp)(ri

2.

‘

that

to say

is

’.

modelled on the proverb in Plato ^ 23

:

epyov piyurrov, which reappears in Aris-

33, 183^22 peyicTTOv yap i(T(i>^ ^PXV Probl. 10. 13, 892*29 r/ pev yap dp)(^

totle

Xiyerai

The

p.u 0 os.

TO 8e

connexion must mean

Sid in this

:

sake of’, as in Thuc.

to’, ‘for the

el.

^ravros, Uicnrf.p

Travrds

epyov

peyia-Tov ripurv ydp.

As

juv viw. classed

among

it is

1453 8 28 that Euripides

clear from 14,

the old poets (ol TroAaiot ), ol veot,

‘

on

not ^ 25

the moderns,’

must mean the poets from Euripides downwards.

when

is

It

is

to

be

in this chapter

observed also

that,

distinguishes

betw'een ol dp^aioi and ol vw, the point noted as

Aristotle a

little

further

moderns (pTyroptKcus ttoiovo'i Xeyovras) is and w'as recognized as true of him by the ancients themselves (see on prjTopiKm<;, 8). of

characteristic

the

‘

’

manifestly true of Euripides,

djjdrji is, 24, 1460*11 ovSev drjOrj dAA’ e)(OVTa rjOrj. compounds of a privativum (De anima 2. 10, 422 *26; Metaph. A 22, 1022^32), an ambiguous word, as it may mean

drjOets

:

like other

either ‘destitute of character’, or

Aristotle

must be using

it

in

merely ‘deficient in character’.

this latter sense, since

personages wholly destitute of character

The language £x«

^Oo's, is

just

like

that

characters at TOiouToi oloi'

^(ocov

.

.

.

an instance of a

in

T]

saying

follows

from painting,

common form

of exaggeration,

of

Pope,

JHosi

women have no ^

e. d-jOei?.

iTeirov'0£»'

;

a paXaKTjV pev

SaavTToSivy Trpds to otov

the

a play with

hardly conceivable.

all.

i.

:

the illustration which

in

ovSev

is

®€oSd>pov

gen. an. 5. ttjv

Ttiiv

(fxijyr)

De

Tpi’^a

3,

783*6

^ttov Se

irpo^drivy 7reiroy6ey

TreiroyOe Trpds rrjy

.

lori

XeTrrrjy,

Rhet.

S'

evia rtov

oiov to tojv

3. 2,

1404^

rZy dXXivv VTTOKpiTwy.

2 2

26

— COMMENTARY

i68 1450 ^ 26

For other illustrations from painting see on 2. 1448 “ 5. 7'he same view of him, as one who knew how to

Ypa<})^wi'.

^27

;

noXuyKWTot'.

indicate character in painting, Ttt

IIoXvyvcoTOv Kav

implied in Pol.

is

aXXos

el Tis

Ttov ypa(f>e(MV

rj

8. 5, 1340®' 37 rwv ayaXfxaTo-TTOiwv

ecTTiy yOiKos.

^28

This taken

Z€u|i8os.

later on, in 25,

connexion with what

in

1461 ^12, would seem to show

said of

is

him

that, in Aristotle’s

view, Zeuxis sacrificed expression to beauty. ®

pTjaeis

29 in

e.

i.

:

1454® 31;

15,

word had been already used and Aristophanes.

the personages

1456®

18,

Adyos

r/OiKos

The

31).

by both Plato

in this technical sense

In the Rhetoric the

TjOiKds.

mouths of

the speeches put into the

poem (comp.

a play or

one designed to

is

create a favourable idea of the speaker’s ^0os, in contradistinction the n-aOrjTt.Kos Adyos,

to

In matters of imitative is

315'’ 21)

‘

y] 6 ov<;,

fiifjLTjTiKos

—which

which addresses the

is

art,

of character

character in

23,

because

’,

’

(comp. Bon. Ind.

word has in the present and Thus in 18, 1456®! a certain

the sense the

termed the

is

his audience.

however, the usual meaning of ^OiKoi

expressive

other passages in the Poetics.

kind of tragedy

and the

feelings,

which addresses the reason of

aTToSct/cTtKos Adyos,

its

main

‘

rpayw^la,

r^BiKr]

the tragedy of

interest is as a portraiture of character

1459'’ 16 the Odyssey

is

described as

because

rjOiK-^,

it

is

portraiture of character than the Iliad; in 24, i46ot'3

more of a

certain passages in a

poem

are termed

p-ep-q,

as serving to

bring out the qOo? of the personages in the story. \e|€i Kai Siat'oia cu

made The same use

in ®

36

Bei

BiaTToveiv

‘

ireTromjpei'as,

of language and thought’.

\e$€i Kal rots 'qOea'iv aKpi/Sovv

T]7

and

in

Alcidamas

De

.

matter

perfect in the

of the dative

— 24,

soph.

1460 ^ 12

ol

2

is

rrj

found

Be Xe^ei

ovop-aeriv

tois

aKpi^S)^ eieipyaap^evoL [scil. Adyot].

®

30

{ouTTw)

iroii^a-ei

o

ti]?

d Adyos, eav p.q Br/Xol, ov

version seems to suggest

For the aBiKov

fut.

p.ev

1144 ^ 35 fect in

already

ovttui (see

a.BlK'qp.a

Be

Ty
settled

oviro),

qBq

eav

:

Rhet.

on

9,

1451

5. 10,

p.r)

to

1135

1404^2 The Arabic

3. 2,

to eavrov epyov.

with owrw comp. Elh. N.

mcrre Tr]v p.ev

o yv

rpayuSias epyov Troiyjrreb

13) rather than ov. ® 22 wa-re ecrrai ri

eKovaiov

Trpo
rrjv B’ ovirw elXrjejim'; ecrai.

T.

6.

13,

he imper-

rpaywStas epyov implies that the point has been in

the

preceding

discussion

754® 40), the reference being presumably Tragedy is said to be a p.Lp.yai
(comp. Bon. Ind.

to 6,

1449

1*36,

where

dXXd yap

el

®

1450

6.

26-37

169 N.

TToXu jiaXXot', scil. vonjaei, as in Eth.

on ra

elBeirj

dyvooi, ov

on rd

vyleiav, oAA’ 6 eiSoJS

n-oirjO’eL

6.

1141^18 1450^31

8,

Kpia Ka\ vyieivd, irota Se

KOva evTreTrra

opviOeia

Kovefta

xaij

\^K 0 V(f)a

For the form of antithesis comp. De caelo 8’ ov)(^ ovna rw tottio, ttoXv Se pdkXov t
.

and Schwab (Schanz’s Beitrage back to the pT^cren

loc.)

TouTois refers ireTTovripevaL

of

29.

4. i, p. 66).

Kal ke^et Kal Siavota ev

rjOiKol

Aristotle’s point

that the dramatic effec-

is,

tiveness of a tragedy depends before

no

,

,

all

and that weak plot. Said of a work of art the ^ 33 on

else

make up

literary or rhetorical brilliancy will

its plot,

for a

comp. ^ 1 7 i/n;;(aya)ytKov. iJ/oxaYwy®^ word means no more than to move or rivet the attention and is thus the equivalent of our word attract or (as people now •

’

‘

‘

’

‘

sometimes say)

‘

This sense of i/^v^aywyeiv

fascinate

Xenophon: Mem.

3.

10, 6 o 8e pAkicrra

rods dvOpwTTovs, to ^(dtikov (Tiv ;

It is

(f)aivecrOai, ttcos

found more than once

vp^ovkeveiv

(T

— 19

A Toa-avrrjv exn

1

24 d SeSeiKrai tols

in Isocrates:

on

too ph' vovOerelv kox

roiavra keKreov ois opwcn rods o^Xovs

defieKTeov. to, Se

xo-tpovras-

oi/^ecos

rrj's

tovto evepya^rj rots dvSpid-

eTnOvpx}v(n rovs aKpocop^ovs ij/v^aymyeiv

pAkuTTa

as old as

is

Std

(//^v^^aytoyc?

X'^P^^> ojo-t’

dv Kal

rr}

keiet

Kal Tois ev 6vpripa(nv exu /ca/cws, opo)? avroLS rais evpvOpiav; Kal Tais

Later writers also often

ouppeTpiais ijrvxayutyovcn tov? aKovovra?.

use the word in the sense of to

attract

‘

Anecdota 116 Bonn. p. 168.

the Antiatticista in Bekker’s

and Vahlen, Symb.

Phil.

in chap.

ii.

It

or

please

‘

:

comp,

’

;

to repireiv,

These are considered

01 re TrepiireTeiat Kal dvayveopioreis.

on

’

ij/vxayiDyeiv

later ^

34

be observed that Aristotle uses the two

will

terms without explanation, as though they were already part of the established language of the theatre.

comes

in as

an afterthought,

at

(comp. Kiihner, Gr. Gr.®

illustrates

The

appositional clause

some distance from 2. i p.

the words

it

282).

apparently a middle in 24, 1460A34 also (v. ad loc.). ^ 37 introduces not an instance but a parallel from a different

ao»'faToo-0ai is oioi' Kttl

class of things just like dia-n-ep Kal,

distinguishable in sense (comp.

1164*^15; Rhet.

mem.

450^ 20 and

i,

1412^11;

II,

3.

in Plato

from which

Top.

6. 9, 3.

1460^33

Poet. 25, Sxnrep

.

.

.

ovtojs.

oiov

.

.

.

148^4;

12,

as

often hardly

Eth. N.

i4i3t>25).

Phaedr. 255 c otov

equivalent to Qxrirep as to have a ovrws

is

it

its

is

i,

De

so completely

antecedent.

TavTTj is practically the

9.

In

In

same thing as

—

A

"ipxV

little

T^ s TpaywStas

before this the yaS^os was said to be the tc'Xos

From one

22).

point of view

being the necessary basis of every tragedy TeAos, because

as a

60.

— 261 C

it is

the

than the characters that Tragedy

ydp ^V)(^ iroAews ovSev erepoy rj [Demosthenes ttoAcws i(TTiv

tart

C

Twv ayBpCiv

—Martianus Capella

anima

;

the dpx^.

is

it

from another

has to represent.

142

Tracra iroXtreta

riovBe

23

flireiv

much more

this

Isocrates

•

iroXtTtia.

39

it is

fiiji/qa’i’s 7rpdi((i)s

<|>ux^

*

:

COMMENTARY

170

1450*38

j

.

fd.XrjOk^ EAAdSos 268 Esi accentus, tdqiddam putavermit,

dperrj Trj^

3,

vocis.

irapoirAi^aiot'

This clause Castelvetro and others would

ktL

transpose and insert after

however, naturally enough where

to

illustrate

in a play.

comes

It

stands, as an afterthought

it

the secondary position (SevVepov

element of character

*33.

Trpayp.dTiov in

(rva-Taa-iv

in,

of the

rd

Bk

So

also in the sister art of paint-

is

of subordinate importance in

ing, says Aristotle, the colouring

comparison with the design which makes the work to mean something and be like something ; a portrait is a portrait, and will give us the pleasure of one, even though executed in mere whites and greys

whereas a medley of much more beautiful colours without

;

a design to give them meaning

because we cannot see that the pleasure found in a b 13. 4, 1448 I

el ‘

ydp

Tis i>'aXeii|/eie

illeverit

delinearet certam

stitutione

rerum minus valent

‘

object

panel

’

or

left to ‘

as

’,

colour.

kvaXufpiiv,

De

it

is

is

thus given

it

in

by Goulston

oblectet, ac

si,

albo

licet colore,

modo in tragoediis absque conmores quam morum expers fabula.’

:

say

cVaAet'i/fere is ;

in the sense

dXdffieiv

rdv irCvaKa, the

and

cTraAei^eiv are

of covering a surface with

to be observed, has apparently a different

gen. an.^.

6,

743 b 23

ol ypac^ets inroypdi/^avTcs

Tats ypap,p,ats ovrws evaAei^ovcrt rots first

nature of

pari

we should

used in just the same way,

The

was explained

pulcherrimis, temere fusimque

be understood with

canvas

kind of object in

sense

licet

non perinde spectantem

;

not produce the same pleasure,

of imitative art

The

ktL

imaginem

The

will

represents anything.

work

tabulam, pigmentis

quis

si

it

C
sketch the outline of the figure before proceeding to work

out in colour’).

x^^V''

means ‘without system

or order’,

without a design to give form and sense to the whole.

The

i.e.

direct

opposite of this unmeaning medley of the most beautiful colours (ci Tts

KaAAtWots ^app,dKots X^^V^) ^ portrait in and greys (AevKoypa^rja-as etKova); in what follows,

ivaXei\]/(i€ rots

plain whites

3

6.

Bonn.

Phil.

’’4

171 (comp. Vahlen, X450

an antithesis to

therefore, elKova serves as

Symb.

38—1450

^

1450

166) and A.€DKoypa^i;cras to rots KoAXto-rots

p.

from AcvKoypa<^os (a word monochromes in white i.e. in shades of white and grey (it would seem) on a dark ground. Zeuxis, whom Aristotle has just mentioned in 27, was among other things a painter of monochromes in white pinxii et monochromaia ex albo (Pliny N. H. 35. 64 ; comp. Brunn, Gr. Kunstler^a A portrait, however, even though it be a mere monochrome p. 55). in whites (comp. \(vKoyparj(ra'; iiKova), will have a meaning, and give the mind the intellectual pleasure which accompanies the recognition of the meaning (comp. 4, 1448^15); whereas a medley of beautiful colours has no meaning, and the pleasure it gives the beholder is of a wholly different order (comp. 4, 1448 ^18 \evKoypa(j>eiv, as a derivative

^ap/xaKots.

no longer

be found),

to

is

to

‘

paint

’,

«-

—

V

dXXa. 8 ia

TTovqcTtL Tr]v rjSovrjv

p-bp-y}p.a.

antithesis, therefore, is

.

.

tiKw, and an et/cw without any beauty of colour.

of the import of these words that

may

\evKoypa
v 7roypd(f)eLv

which

comes

to be finished

two stages

denote

afterwards

is

somewhat

is

;

in the process

dure in Tragedy, where the /xv^os

evaXeti/tete

ev^poEveiev

/cat

me

De

the picture

taken to describe

KaWiarois

Aev/coypa(^i7cras

cl/cova,

and

to illustrate the order of proce-

said to

is :

(like

gen. an.) in

when

may be

thinks

‘

come first, formam

et

sic accipio,

ovk


et/cova

as the dpxr]

orationis

h'aXeiij/eie

ay

o/xottos

Ut

cjiappLaKOLs',

nulla ante delineatione facta, et XevKoypacp'^aas etKova

XySrjv, h. e.

inter se

rots

He sketch

of painting, (i) XevKoypa^ctv

and serves

njs rpayuStas, and the ^Orj second Tts

preliminary

with colour,

filled in

so that the clause

(2) €vaXei(ji€Lv (j>appAKoi9,

et

the

Vahlen’s view

different.

above-quoted passage in the

white,

The

rr)v -^oiav).

.

simply between beautiful colours without an

opponantur’.

to read

more

This very subtle interpretation seems to

words than

into Aristotle’s

is

required for the

argument. eoTif T€

fAifir)
irp
supports the statement (^38-39)’’

before the parenthesis by recalling the general fact is

based

(v. a

TpiToi/ 8e

11

Stdt'oia.

As

made

to say, Sidvoia

provisionally explained (see on 6) as a power of best of one’s case or of saying the right thing. is

Aristotle

it

the intellectual quality of the dramatis

personae comes out mainly in what they are

^

on which

20-23).

would perhaps have

said

;

ovk av

~fpa
o/coiojf

making

txKppavtn koi

ei

the

Acu/to-

4

*

COMMENTARY

172 1450

Ta

5

ey tols irpayfiacnv, as in Isocr.

scil.

et'dt'Ttt,

292 E

vnL
roiovTovs pijropas tov? crvyovra^ ttol-^ctcw wcrre firjSkv twv ivovTtav

The ev rots Trpdy/jLaa-i TrapaXureLv (comp. Bon. Ind. 250^56). whole expression rd evovra Kal rd app-oTTovra. covers the same ground as that in Rhet. 2. 22, 1396*^51 tvSc^dpicva KaX rd

^

emKaipoTaTa.

6

eirl

-ySiv

and

(Paccius),

has been

\6ytjiv ‘

in orationibus

i-n-OLOvv

Xeyovras

Aristotle has in

mind

oratione

in soluta

‘

in eloquentia

‘

’

bei der

‘

explanation, however, in the con-

enough

is

7),

mean

to

(Valla) or

’

The

Beredsamkeit’ (Vahlen). text,

taken

show

to

are the Adyoi in a play,

the

that

e.

i.

Xoyoi

the p-qcni^ put

mouths of the personages. This is apparently the sense word bears in the next sentence also, rSv Xoymv iv ols p-rj^’ oAws

into the the

€
ing of what tragic

is

hero),

^

Xeyojy

(ftevyet 6

Kal pTjTopiKTjs

9 )' Aristotle

epyoi'.

and of the kind of

to

to

be think(e. g.

the

capacity (Stdvoia)

intellectual

One has

revealed in their statements.

seems

by the chief personages

said in a play

remember

that the chief

personages in ancient Tragedy are not ordinary men, and that the tragic hero to

be always

lineage.

expressly said by Aristotle (13, 1453 '‘10—21) best tragedies a man of great position and

is

in the

In a play, therefore, such personages might very well

be made to speak statesmanlike

‘

TroXirtKwg,

before them (rd apporroyra).

make them speak

prjToptKwg,

I. 2,

on

;

would

it

’,

is

6. 8, 1

with

141

(rd,

him

23),

cvdvra,

also be

1356 *33), or a Svyapig

irepl

1355

Aristotle

the later dramatists (ot

may

possible to

rd eySexdpeya).

i.e.

(Rhet.

a very real one

pyjTopiKrj

-n-opia-ai

iKaa-Tov rov

There

is

perhaps have

vw) was too

is

ttoXitik-^

the practical w'isdom of the

and

— a Swa/tis tov b 26).

show a

the various possible points that

the art of argumentation

TTiOayoy (Rhet. I. 2,

to

with something of the

between them

distinction

ttoXitik-^

statesman (Eth. N.

in chap. 19.

and

stands in a certain relation to

1356^27), the

with Aristotle

’,

appropriate to the situation

like rhetors

urged on the occasion prjTopiK-q

is

But

‘

rhetor’s cleverness in seizing

may be Though

statesmen

like

power of saying what

only a form of

Xoyovs (Rhet. 1.2,

Oeoiprja-ai

to

evScp^d/tevov

no reference felt

to ttoXltikt^

that the practice of

firmly established to admit of

change, and that the tragic personages accordingly must

still

be

allowed to speak pyjTopiKwg, as they did in the Tragedy of his time, b

y

dpxatoi

:

1450^25).

the

dramatists

anterior

to

Euripides

(see

on

6,

— 6. iroXiTiKus

centes

is

like

life

.

mean

often taken to

‘

on ‘

civiliter di-

1450 ^ 7

ordinary citizens, as distinct from the professional orator.

something of

(m

befitting

’

TToXiTtKois

to

mean

to say that

which

would seem rather

any ostentation of rhetorical Vahlen (Symb. phil. Bonn,

apfioTTovra) without s. v.

Newman

speaker (comp.

—the statesman being assumed

cleverness (comp. HSt.

speak ttoXitik^

to

ability

the

in

ttoXitlk-^

1273^12),

Pol. 2. II,

like a ttoXitikos

is

‘

to speak the language of civil

But as the context shows that the implies

173

which Valla rendered by

Xeyoi'Tas,

•

.

5-8

1450

ttoAitikos).

175) supposes the expression to coincide in sense with the Xeyeiv of Rhet. 3. 1 7, I4i8 8'38, which means otto irpoai-

p.

rj6iKw^

peVeojs

X 4y€iv, as opposed

The

1417^23). Aristotle

is

to all

to

Aeyetv

3.

1 6,

twofold,

(i)

it

may assume

in the

dramatic

Xeyeiv can hardly be identical with ^OikC)^

(2) TToXtTiKois ;

is

appearance not contrasting Stdvoia with ^6os, but

distinguishing between the two forms pTq(Tu<;.

XiyeLV (Rhet.

Siavoiai

dvro

objection to this interpretation

Comedy speak

the personages in

tjOikOis,

but

it

would be

a paradox to say of them that they speak -n-oXiTiKm, in the sense of there being something of ttoXitik-^ in their utterances.

Euripides

prjToptKws.

is

termed by Aristophanes (Pax 534) a Quintilian also (10.

68) thinks the study of his plays one of the best preparations for the bar; TTOLrjrr]';

p-qpuaTLOiv

SiKaviKuiv.

I/Iud quidem ne?no 7ton fateaiur necesse

comparant uiiliorem .

.

lo7ige

magis accedit oratorio geiieri

.

a sapientibus tradita cuilibet

eorum quifuertint in foro

A

rjGos.

statement

is

na7nque densus

ei sententiis

par,

su7it pae7ie ipsis

qui se

iis

est,

fore Euripide7n.

et

i,

ad agendum is

et

et in

sermone iis

quae

dicendo ac respondendo

diserti compara7idus.

said to have ^6o
it

when

it

reveals the

moral purpose of the speaker, the kind of thing that he purposes to do or not to do.

that in Rhet. 2. 21, TrpooLpecrvi'

Tov

8

’

e^ovcriv ol Xoyot iv ocrois S-qXr]

KaOoXov

rrepl

twv

81a.

to aTTOcfiaivecrdai

Trpoaiperiov, uxjt

dv

al yvwpML, Kat -gp-rjaTorjOri (^atVecr^at Troiovcrt tov Aeyovra.

1417^16 Ti

1395^ 13

al Se yvoi/xat Trao'ai touto ttolovctl

TTjv yvmp.rjv XiyovTO.

(ucriv

in oratory also, as the credibility

depends on the impression one forms of The language in the text may be compared with

often

his characterr

7)

an element

rj9o<; is

the orator

of

^6os

yjdLKTiv Se

ol p.a6r]pM.TiKol

e^ovo'iv.

dAA

ecrrai Se

tovto dv

a/ p.€v 8rj to Trpoatpecrtv 8r]Xovv, Trotdv Se to

TTOiei.

TTOidv Tavrrjv

rrjv StTyyTjo'iv eivat.

Se Trpoatpecrts Troid t
rj

Adyot ol

r]6r],

OTi ovSe Trpoatpeo'tv

^(oKpaTtKor

irepl toiovtojv

)(pr](TTal

3.

1

6,

eiSoi/aev

^Ooi

T(p

Std tovto ovk e^ovcriy

to yap ou eveKa ovk

yap Xeyovcnv.

8

COMMENTARY

174 1450

This (the reading of A®)

oTToid ns.

9

Vahlen,

who

is very rightly retained by by ‘quod aperiat voluntatem,

translates the clause

non

qualia quis in quibus apertum

est aut appetat aut fugiat

the

added to show that Trpoaipeo-ts is to be taken in a wide sense, which may include aversion as well as desire. For an explanatory clause of this form comp. 16, 1455® 10 a-vveXoyi'a-avro explanation

is

on

TTjv elfiapfxevrjv p.(p,vrjarai

iv ols

ouK

eon

and Plato Rep. 535 ^

iv tovtcj) djxapTo a-rroOaviiv,

ouv rrjv irporipav €K\oyrjv twv 8tjXo>'

is

ap)(6vr(t)v, otovs iieXeiapLev

added because there are

which the moral purpose of the agent

too obvious to require to

is

be revealed in an ‘ethical’ speech; see 19, 1456^7 statement on the subject of Stavoia.

Though

-irpoaipeiTai.

verb

for a parallel

the usual opposite of (fievyuv

(Bon. Ind. 18

oXpiio-Oai

3), there

;

situations in

is

is

the simple

a certain propriety in

The word is ii72'^25Ta pXv yap

irpoaipuTai in a clause explanatory of Trpoatpecris.

found

r]Sea TrpoaipovvTai,

9*

N. 10.

in a similar antithesis in Eth.

ra Se \v 7rrjpa

i,

evyov(nv,

In the Rhetoric we are told that a mathematical

Sioirep KTe.

argument does not admit of any colouring of character, because not objects of the facts with which it deals are indifferent to us

—

either desire i)( 0 vcriv

Rhet.

or aversion:

Xoyoi

ot p,a6rjpMTiKoi

In

evcKa OVK exovcriv.

on

rjOrj,

manner

like

16,

3.

1417®' 19 Sia tovto ovk

oiSi irpoaipecnv to yap ov

a speech in a play

may

be on

a subject wholly indifferent to the speaker, and in that case there is

no room Ka66\ou

12 (v.

ad

for Ti

any infusion of ^Ooi into

dTro4>aii'ot'TOi

his statement.

replaces the arrotjiaivovTai

TtrapToi' 8e

Twi'

et'

Xoyw

On

kte.

the reading which I have

ventured to introduce into the text see the It is

and

yvtu/rijv in ® 7

loc.).

of Phil. 5 p. 119*.

J.

clear that the four elements in a tragedy, the p.v 6 o<;

work

and

rjO-q

Sidvoia

music and spectacle ' are accessories, which attach to it only when it comes to be acted on the stage. Apart from these accessories, a tragedy is, like an epic (comp. 23, 1459 ^ 10), a pj.p.rja-vi iv Xoym (see on i, 1447 “29), and all the elements which constitute it are Xc^ts,

belong to

as a

it

of literature,

that the

‘

iv

Aoyw.

TO.

iv Xoyat, therefore, is a

comprehensive designation

for

the four literary elements, as distinct from the non-literary elements

(tSv Se XoiTTwv

1 5),

the music

enumeration concludes. * Comp. Markland’s iarcv and Canter’s d«o^ iv rjiuv for

and

If twv p.iv

‘

spectacle

X 6 yo)v be

tv viroXiyq) for

ean ^iv vnb

jAv

Clem. Al.

d/to^

rpiTv in

’,

with which the

retained, the genitive X6yo) in Lysias 4. 18, Str. 7. 36,

852 P.

9-i6

”

1450

6.

175 Valla renders the 1450 '’m

has to be taken as an objective gen. after

words by

orationum

‘

Goulston by however,

is

Paccius by

dictio

sermonum

and

dictio

The main difficulty, ipsarum orationum elocutio in the particle, which has never been satisfactorily ‘

Vahlen formerly (Symb.

explained.

‘

Phil.

Bonn.

p.

181) connected

the clause with that which follows in ^ 15 toIv Se koivmv Kxe., sup-

posing the sense to be

Form

sprachliche

His

first

to

viertens

is

die Dialoge (twv Adycov) die

filr

das iibrige (tSv AoittSv) die Melopbie

fiir

;

view (1885)

later

instance of

‘

that the

and

/xtV solitarium,

append something about

a division of the fourth part,

the jxiXr] (twv 8c /tcAuiv

seems

it

Adywv may be an may have meant at

in tSv ixkv

/j-ev

that Aristotle

me,

to

with the general scheme of the six parts, which

chapter

.

.

Such

.).

wholly inconsistent

is

throughout

this

so clearly before Aristotle’s mind, as well as with

the

express mention of the /AcAoTroaa in

is

proper place in the next

its

sentence. woTTcp irpoTcpoi' eipijrai.

the Acfts

defined as

is

17

If the reference

tSv /tcVpwv

to 6,

is

forgotten the exact terms of his previous

however,

same

practically the

is

understood in the sense of

‘

1449^34, where must have

formula.

in both instances

diction

’

or

‘

;

The Ae^ts

is

point,

to be

expression in language

’,

and not in any of the other senses which the word might bear (see on 23, 1459 “ 12). Sia -rijs ©'op.affi'as Sea twv ovofidrojv, i. e. by means of the words or language of the speaker. As the ovopea, which includes the verb and the adverb as well as' the noun, is the directly significant

=

means

part of all language, dvo/^ao-ta

13

Aristotle

crdv^co-is,

practically the

same thing

14

as

vocabulary or language. ep)iT)V€iax,

for

it

is

‘

communication

‘

’,

expression

After kp^yjvuav

interpretaiio.

the Latin equivalent

’

;

we may supply tSv

ev

rj}

word being the outward sign or expression of a thought in the mind De interpr. i, 16^3 co-rt peiv ovv to. cV TQ <})(j}vrj tSv cv tt) On the meaning of TraOrjfjMTeav
Siavoia,

:

Gesch. der Sprachwissenschaft^ exei

Tf]i'

thing’ (see [•n-en-e].

in Rhet.

i.

235. ’’15

Similar instances of an intrusive numeral will be found

16

on

2,

i,

SuVapii'

1447

1356

Svvarai, ‘is practically the

^ g).

21,

and

Vahlen accepts the correction ‘

i p.

= ravro

same

auTT)!/

reliquarum autem partium

i.

13,

1373 ^ 3

(v.

Trip-nrov, in the (h. e.

quae post

Roemer ad

loc.).

sense of gutnio loco illas

:

quattuor iam

— COMMENTARY

176 1450

16 reliquae sunt duae) quinto loco fieXonoua gravissimum est condimentum, oi/^ts autem ad poeticam artem omnino non pertinet TUI'

ficYioTToi'

8 ovrji fiere^^eiv

KOivrjs

ri

yap

fiova-LKT]

^ 6 i
see

:

ruv

Trdvres eivat

fjiov(riKrjv

7)

i^Sufffi.dTui'

on

1449

6,

given by music comp. Pol.

the pleasure

rrjv

eo-rt TTpoarffriXi^';.

—^

1

[.^

T^Sver/AotTuv]

2 Set

®'

Trdcrats

r)\iKLav dvjJSwTov ovSev vrrofifvovcnv CKOvres, 7] 8 v(Tp.ev(i)v

13391520

T^Xt/ctats

Anonymus De Comoedia

8e fiovaiKT)

/AovtTtK^s etrrtv tStov, o^ev


17

>l/oxaY‘‘5Y'''^°‘'

Arexi'draToi'

out after

13,

I453'^7™^^

oi/teus

ovOhf yap airtos o Aeyuv tuv

opposite of *’18

in this sense

it

toSto TrapacrKcvd^eiv

dTe;(i/os is

depending on means outside the

‘

I4 i 6'5 18 crdyKciTat yap

3. 16,

aopp.ds Seijcrei

riBvcrp-drorv.

dTe)(y6Tepov Kat )(opr)yias Stofitvov ecrriv.

Rhet.

like that

® 33-

•

:

in the sense of

twv

p. 1.57)

p. 52), /teAos t^s

i

rds avToreXeis

ckciVt/s

ixTr’

may have dropped

Xap.^dviiv,

CGF.

(Kaibel,

Tracriv

7“P

5 17

/cat

supposed that a further statement on the subject of music, in the

8<

fiovov t^s

fir)

Bernays (Zwei Abhandl.

ecTTtV.

For

rrdvTes aicr 6 rj(riv

€^ov(tl

avrrj^,

drr

(i^Svcr/xeVu).

5,

— 1340

rjBovrjv v(nKT^v, Sto

avT^s

r)

rjBiaTtov .

25

8.

is

t)((Dv

to

rr pd^etx)V,

frequently used

comp.

art itself’;

6 Xoyos to fitv dre^vov, S’

(k

The

Trj's •Ti)(yr]s.

tyre^vos (Bon. Ind. 119

4).

ij Y^p ttJs TpaYuStas Suvapis ktL The tragic effect may be produced by a good tragedy even without any actual performance of it on a stage, i. e. as a mere work of literature (comp. 14, 1453^54,

and

» ii).

26,

1462

Vahlen,

who

assumption that in Eth. [scil.

reading of Ac here, us yap,

The

translates

the

it

apodosis

N. 8 6 1157 ^3 .

cfriXoL

,

flcTLv ].

rrXftov Siafievovcnv' [scil. Sta/i.evovcrti'],

8.

by ^uta

10,

enirn

omitted in the

is

dya^ot

1159

I5

St’

10

avTous

and certain more or

defended by

rjSova's

same way as

0 tXof

'xp'qa'ifioL

eus yap dv rropL^urenv

is

(wenn namlick), on the

r)

Se

17

yap dyaOoC

koI

i^Sets

eirt

uf^eXetas dXXi^Xois

less similar passages.

present passage (with the reading us yap) does not seem to

The

me

to

be a genuine parallel. On behalf of the amended reading (17 ydp) it has to be remembered that a confusion between 17 and the com-

pendium at'eu

test it

’,

for

us

is

not so

uncommon

in

MSS.

of a certain date

Comm.

(Bast,

Palaeogr. p. 780). dyui'os. dyuv is generally rendered by certamen or ‘con-

but

it

is

not clear that that

is

the sense Aristotle attaches to

and other places (7, 1451 ad; 13, 1453 *^27) It seems to mean rather little more than a public Similarly dyuvf^eo-^at in 7, 1451 8 and 24, 1460*9

in the present

of the Poetics.

performance

’.

‘

=5

—

—

means apparently 26

25

-

perform in public

to

‘

i6— 7 1450

”

1450

6.

177

crvvaywilia-OaL in

1456 9, 14511537 a ‘work

be

to

performed

in

1

8,

and

dytuvicr/xa in

public’.

The word

to take part in such a performance’;

‘

1450

dywtan^s, likewise, in Pol. 8. 7, 1342 “18 and Probl. 19. 15, 918I528, means no more than a ‘public’ or ‘professional per(comp.

former’

TrpwTaywviorrjs

means

dywvto-TiK^

from the ypatfuK^

distinct

12,

3.

1413154

style required for

idea of contest or competition, there-

not always a recognizable element in the meaning of this

fore, is

group of words (comp. Nitzsch, De dyui'os

uiTOKpiTwt'

Kttl

dyolvtov. —Probl. 19. 15,

Rhet.

more formal

the

The

a purely literary work.

In Rhet.

etc.).

the style allowable in public speaking, as

1413I58

3. 12,

aybiVLOTiKT]

that the

Bk

d'/'t?

rj

is

13,

:

918

15

Se

ecTTi

historia

Homeri

2 p.

1 1 3).

1453 ‘’27 e7ri rZv CTKiqvwv /cat twv 28 6 yap VTTOKpLTrjs dywiO'T'^?. Ae^ts

{I’rroKpiTiKwraTT]

rjKUTTa ot/cetov

p.h'

ypa(f>LKrf

The

KTe.

d/cpiySeo'TctTr;,

rj

present clause shows

TroirjriK^s

the next, that

;

it

is

arexyoTaTOV. oi|/eui/

on

for the plural see

:

o-Keuo-iroioo,

6,

1449

1*

the theatrical costumier,

20

33.

who enabled

the actors to

appear in character by supplying the masks, dresses, and other paraphernalia of their make-up; comp. Aristophanes Eq. 230 Kat p.rj

ov yap

BeBiO'"

kcrriv e^yKaap-evo'S.

yOeXe rwy crKevovoLuyv (xKaaat

Pollux

1

4.

airov

kirXaaav

(TKevoTTOioi

ot

15

pkv

(TKevy

Sc o TTpocrojiroTTOtos.

2

.

47

r}

d)?

rwv

rj

in the sense of the

—

pAXtcrra

drt

e^ct/cdtravres.

VTroKptrtbv crroXy

Bk vea

/cto/Ao/Sta

make-up

.

FCG.

1021

1023 all

I5

I5

12)

Phys.

:

Xap^dvovaiv

ttoctov

Tragedy

in 6,

23

speaking a certain

24

.

.

.

(reXcios v.

:

v.

Metaph.

Metaph.

A

A 26,

be 207 ^ 7 d-n-ttpov pkv ow icmv ov Xa^civ eariv c^cu. ov Bk pyBkv k^o), in sense as to

3. 6,

atet tl

toSt’ ccTTt TcXctov Kal oXov' aTTfcrriv

’

and that of ‘whole’ (dXos: two terms are so closely allied

but synonymous

Kara

strictly

between the idea of ‘complete

26), the

For

4 p. 680).

:

14491525 (comp. Bon. Ind. 380I543). TcXeias Kal oXtjs. Although there is 16,

—

cr/c€i/o7rotds

.

of actors see Eurip. Suppl. 1054,

Aristoph. Ran. 108, Plato Rep. 577 b. Kctrai as has been stated in the definition of

distinction

.

Kat TTpocrwiromtov eiprjKev

Meineke,

ov y dpxoaa crKevoTroLov c/cdXct (v. a-Kevrj

vvo rov Seous yap avrbv oiSets Aelian V. H. 2. 13

Schol. ad loc.).

(v.

ovTiv

oXov Bk Kal reXeiov

yap opi^opeOa to oXov, ov pySkv rj

to avTO Trdprrav y (ruveyyv^ Tyv

(j)va-LV IcTTiv.

eXOuo-Tis Tl POETICS

peyeGos

:

see

on

4,

1449 “19

6,

1449

I5

'’25

25.

N

18

— COMMENTARY

178 1450

25

fieycOos,

exot"

(iTiSet'

thing as Tra/x/xiKpov in 54), just as in 6,

I p. ‘

27

has but very

little

‘

of no

as

size,’

we

means

say,

same

the

37 (Sauppe ap. Teichmiiller, Aristot. Forsch.

1450*^28 oiScv

character

’

in

means

txct

practically

it.

dt'dyKTjs. By a beginning Aristotle does not mean fAT) something without antecedents, but only something that may be ’

‘

detached as

them

were from

it

its

antecedents, and viewed apart from

new

as the first term in a

series of events.

iv TOVTOJ icTTLV, iSeais.

34

explain

will It

‘

or

sort,’

kind,’

‘

5,

1449 ^

8, in 19,

1456

3,

a favourite term with Isocrates also

ISeais ravrais KarexpijcravTO.

iv rais avTols tSeats aTrdcras,

36 A

dXXd

frequently used, just

:

and

in 22,

xprj Se SoKL/xd^eiv

183 Tas ISeas

aTrdcras, ais 6

18.

rds dptras ovk

ktL

— 319 D

rats dXAais iSeais

Kal TrAeiocriv oAov rdv Adyov SiotKovcriy.

iTrttpavea-Tepais

1458 ^

24 c d/Ac^orcpats rais

ttjv p,h' SiKaiocrvytjv ey rais aTToptais,

TTjv Se (T(j)4)po(Tvyr}y ey Tats Svyacrreiais

§

is

Instances of this allusive, or rather evasive, use

it.

be found in

is

form,’

which has much the same sense, without any genitive

like eiSos,

to

‘

IBia,

Adyos Tuy)(ayeL

—De

perm.

-xpmpteyos, 8 u^ep)(oyTai

For instances from other authors see Campbell’s Essay on Plato’s use of language. Rep. of Plato 2 p. 301.

rots paOrjTois.

Having

TO KaXdi' ktL

just laid

down

it

a complete whole, Aristotle assumes that

it

whole, and proceeds to show that,

is

if it

that the ptvOos

must

to be that,

it

of a certain magnitude, neither too long nor too short.

he says, depends on two conditions

:

must be

also be a beautiful

must be Beauty,

the beautiful object must be

enough to allow of our seeing the orderly arrangement of and (2) not so large as to be incapable of being taken in as a whole in one coup d'oeil. With this we may compare Metaph. 36 TO? Se Kakov pteyicTTa eiSrj rd^is koI 3, 1078 (i) large

parts,

its

M

(Tvp.p.eTpia Kal

and TO

to wpiap-eyoy

dpi
Kal epvrd. 466 26 to. p,eydka koI 23, 1459®' 20 iv’ wairep ^woy ey okoy Troifj Trjy The analogy between a literary whole and a

long, vitae 5

^uoi'

:

rjSovTjy.

organism

rd^ts corresponds with the

is

first,

For the form of the opening statement comp.

present passage.

De

—where

with the second of the two conditions in the

,

ot/cetav

postulated in Plato Phaedr. 264 c dAAd rdSe ye

living olpjat

—

— 7

fiecra re

e;(etv

179

aWi^Xois Kal tw oAo)

W. H. Thompson ad

381 R.); and also

5, p.

25-37

Kal aKpa, irpeTrovT

(comp. Hermias and Hal.

1450

.

in

Rhet.

1415

3. 14,

b

ye.ypap.piiva

145O

and Dionysius

loc.,

7 av

tolovto<;

pir]

6 aKpoar-qs], ovOev Set irpooip-lov, aX)C ^ ocroy to irpa.yp.a ctTreti/ ^ where K€aXatS(o<;, iva e^!) wcnrep o'wyu.a Ke(f>aXTqv [scil. o Xoyos] [scil.

—

the exordium of a speech

The

likened to the head of a bodj'.

is

same assumption underlies many of the terms of early grammar or rhetoric, e. g. kSAov, apOpov, (rvv 8 €a-pLo<; (see on 20, 1456 '^38), I am unable, aKe
—

certainly has that sense in a passage not very unlike this in form, in Plato Polit, pL(v

277 B aT€;^tos

Aoyo? qpHv

O

seems

a living, as distinct from an

artificial,

Top.

in another Aristotelian passage. pLiV

im

Tov ^(uov TO aicrxpov

Aristotle

TivIXv

enough

ment

;

8'

20 tw KaXiX t <3

iirl

olKias to

rrj';

living

wholes called

to

a

made up of parts a formula wide creations of human art as well as those

everything

‘

to include the

This addition

of nature.

15,

does

clearly

it

»

Kal airav 7rpay/xa o crvviaTrjKev Ik

from the

passes

large kind of whole,

106

mean here

to

whole, as

[scil. ivavTiovj, to)

In saying Kal

p.o)( 0 r]p 6 v.

i.

e^w&ev

rrjv

wa-Trep

iotKev Ikuvws

Trepiypacfirjv

of

is

’,

some importance

for

the argu-

prepares us for the application of the general law to the

it

case of the p-vOos, which, as a crvaTrip-a or cnio'Tao'ts TrpaypaTutv

(comp.

1450

6,

^ 15)- is

a vpaypa o

(rvvia-TrjKev €k Ttvtov.

that the conjunctions in Aristotle’s statement .

.

.

seem

luni)

to

imply that the

(/cai

stress is really

.

.

I .

may add

Kat

=

cum

on the second of

the two points.

‘thing’: Top.

TTpayfra, a

pev TO Tt qy

OLOv i8ioy dyOpixtTTOv to

432

I.

5 j 102 ® 18 i 8 iov 8 early o p-q SqXoi dvTiKarqyopevTaL Tov irpayparos, '

ypappariKqs

Trpdypa ovdev iari irapa

® 3

K€)(wpiapeyoy vaei TO.

TauTO

35

eiyai, poyo) 8’ VTrdp)(et Kal

.

Plato

oyopara

De anima

etyai 8eKTiK6y .

390 D KpaniAos aXqdrj

Crat.

3. 8,

peyeOq, ws 8oKei, ra alaOqTO,

to.

Xeyei

Xeycjy

eTyai Tois irpaypaaiy.

= Ta pepq, implied

lieyeOos uirdpxeiv

p.T)

Tt TrSai Tots ^uiots Trepas

Kat TToXeai peyeOov;

in ovyearrjKey eK TiyIXy.

to tuxov

:

De

toD peyeOovs

perpoy,

gen. an. .

— Pol.

waTrep Kal rwy

7

2. 6,

4

-

>

745

® 5 eari

1326^35

dXXwy

yap ^ gS

eari Tt

Trdyrwy,

^tpcDV

f^vTwy opydvwv.

Eth. N. 4. 7 Ii 23 t'6 iy peyeOei yap rj p,eyaAoi/tvx‘®> Kat to koAAos ev peydXm adipari, ot piKpol 8 dareioi Kat

peycdEt loairep

:

)

N

2

37

34

;

COMMENTARY

i8o 1450

37

Kakol

a-vfifj-eTpoi,

8’

Similarly in Pol.

ov.

of the size of the KaWia-rr]

^

1326

7. 4,

33, speaking

explains that to KaXbv

ttoXis, Aristotle

iv TrXrjOu Kal p-eyeOeL etwOe yivecrdai,

According to Top.

rdiei.

116^21, beauty

3. i,

peXw

consist in a-yppeTpia (to Se kciAAos tSv

and according

etmi);

Metaph.

to

there

no room

is

proportion which

38

is

The

ffuyxeirai.

minute creature

its

A

in

Ta^ts Kat

pvdo<;,

however,

well-constructed

incidents and a limit of length

one element

in the beauty of a living creature.

reason for our not seeing any beauty in a very that

is

=

crrry;^€rTat

36

corresponding to the symmetry or

it

we

perceive

becomes blurred,

‘

as a whole too quickly to

it

discern the parts and the order and

them.

thought to

directly

nothing in

is

a

1078

3,

for the idea of a-ypperpia.

story involves a certain order in

but there

M

In the beauty of a

ovpptTpia Kal TO wpicrpivov.

is

Tts (TvppiTpia SoKet

symmetry there may be in or indistinct as in H. A. 7. 5, ’,

34 o-vyKc^vpivov peXav, and the other passages noted

585

Ind. 709

ti

Bon.

in

43.

(comp. Bon. Ind. 329 “^31). There is no necessity to bracket xpovov

6e«pia, ‘sight’ or ‘view’

dmiaOi^Tou xpovoo.

'’Sg

(with

The time

Bonitz).

may

‘instantaneous’

Phys.

in

it

4.

oiov et T6S

8’

IBiiiv

oTt

creX-^vr)

17

all this is

longer the time fSapios,

to

‘

sudden

ao-KcjTTos

is

iv

872 ^

9)-

An. post.

:

or

to

c|at^vi;s

S’

’

i.

34,

dyx^votd icTiv evcTTOx^cL Tis iv do'KcTrTo) ypovio rov piaov,

to Xap-Trpbv

ivevoTjcre Sid tL tovto, oti 8id

verse of

222^15

13,

equivalent in the Analytics

10 9

This expression,

duration.

its

piKporrjra iKcrrav (comp. Probl. 3* lO,

dvaicrOi^tp

t>

be of

in the latter case

appears in the definition of the

avaiaOrjTOi

89

;

and

very well be described as an dvaia 6 r]TO's xpovos, a time too

short for one to be conscious of

The

may

a thing takes to be seen

perceptible or of imperceptible duration

ovTos

is,

psychology of the

ex^t TTpbs tov yXiov,

Taxv

The

con-

rjXiov,

the assertion in Probl. 19. 21, 9i9®'32, that the the

more

pdXXov

Se

dd

to Xapirnv dird tov

De

perceptible

sensu

(7,

it

is

:

nXemv

According

alcrOrjTos.

448®

24) there

6 xpovos o toO

to is

the

stricter

no such

thing

as a xpovos dvaicrOrjTOS. ouT€ irafAf«.eYc6€s 1302 b

Pol. 5. 2,

1451 ^ 2

oiot'

el

illustration

:

comp, the rule a 7. 4, 1326

35 and

for the size of the

ktL refers back to TrappiyeOa. with oTov

(=

statement will be found

e. g.)

in

at

18,

ttoAis

in

35.

Other instances of an the main

some distance from 1456^13; 19, 1456

bn;

20,

'

;

1457

a

/cat

(rr]p.awop,ev, cvto/v

1458

22,

2y;

180*20

yap to

37—1451

1450

7. “

29;

otov to p.^viv

tov

eiirovres

i8i

3

Comp. Soph.

1462^7.

26,

rjp.icrv

^

Sos

Itoi/s

^ea; and Eth. N.

actSe

el.

i.

24,

1451*3

’lAiaSa

p.01

1099^2

9,

Se TT/Tcu/Aevot pviraivovcri to p.aKapiov, oiov evy^vua%, evreKvia^,

KaWovs. wore marks the apodosis (comp.

1452*10 and Bon.

9,

Ind.

873*31). KaddTrep

tui/

The argument

auaT4|A(lTwi'.

proceeds on the

assumption of an analogy between a beautiful whole that addresses the eye,

and one that addresses the mind and the conclusion is one is evcrwoTTTov, so the other must be evpvrjpovevTov. ;

that as the

At

changes his construction, repeating his (1450 34) in the form required for an argument ovro) from analogy, KaOdnep iirl tCjv a~u(TTr)p.dT(j)v Kal i-n-l rmv this

point Aristotle

original statement

.

.

.

Kal ivl Tu>v pvOitiv, with crvcrTrjpxlTiov as a short equivalent for the

foregoing uTrav irpayp-a 6 avveo’Trj Kev a

product of combination,

through a union, natural or a state, for instance,

is

a

ax<(TTrjp.a

comes

that

of

artificial,

A

tivcov.

e/c

something

parts

(Eth. N. 9.

vv
into

8,

being

into

a whole

1168^32)

being due to a combination of classes or individuals, and a a (Tva-rrjpa (De gen. an.

whole of restricted

The

parts.

sense of

2.

is

made, as

it is.

distinct

from an organic

This or some similar sense

suggested by the passage also in Eth. N.

Se Kai iroAts to KvpidraTOV p-dXuTT

—where

were properly

as though the term

applicable only to a whole that

ovTO) Kal av^pwTTos

more

present passage, however, implies a

whole, which grows to be what is

is

740*20), as being an organized

4,

a-va-rrjpa,

as

9. 8,

1168 ^ 32 wo-s-ep dXko (rvcrrTijp,a,

etvat SoKet kol irdv

the implication

is

that a

(nxrrqpa proper, though his composite nature gives

man

is

him a

not a

certain

resemblance to one.

The difficulty in the manuscript reading o-copaTo/v is that the word would have to be understood in one of two senses, either in that of •'material substances’,

or in

that

of ‘living bodies’.

The

first

interpretation is out of the question, since beauty is in the Ta^is or uvp,p.tTpla

of things.

Twv

pcpwi/, and, therefore, in the

The

second, which

makes

lirl

form, not in the matter,

tSw (TmpATmv and

tTrl

tQ>v

Idmv mere synonyms, leaves us without any equivalent for the aTrav

Trpaypa

o


e/c

Ttvtov

of his

Original

statement

(1450^34), which was, if I am not mistaken, far too important for Aristotle’s argument to be ignored in any resim^ of it (comp. J.

of Phil. 5 p. 120).

^3

;

COMMENTARY

182

1451^3 ®

Twi'

eir'i

to

see on

:

evfj-vrjfiovevTov

The

'^36.

whole by the eye as opposed whole by the memory’.

5),

eu/xvry/AovevTos in

easily taken in as a

‘

however,

word,

1450

easily taken in as a

‘

euo’ui'OTTToi',

4

metaphorically

is

i459"'33)

23,

txavaav

Xeyo) Se TrepioSov Kai pLeyeOo
used as

equivalent

to

1409*''

35

also in Rhet. 3.

koI reXevTrjv avrrjv KaO' avrrjv

dp)(r]v

rjBela S’

9,

TOiavTrj Kal evp.aOrjs

rj

.

.


.

8e oTi €vp.yrjp.6yevTOi.

^

opos (6)

6

dyw^as

irpos tou 9

fAei'

the limit in practice, in contra-

:

distinction to the theoretic limit of length, 6 kut

Tov 7rpayp,aTos opos (“ is

in

determined by the conditions of the public performances (dySvcs) which it will be presented on the stage the time it is to occupy ;

custom and convention rather than theory. TTiv atff0T)(Ti(', scil. Tojv Oearwv (see on 15, 1454^ r 5); COmp. The language here, though quite 8 TTpos rd Oiarpa. 1 449

there

^ J

av-njy r^y (pva-iv

In actual practice the length of the play

9).

is

fixed by

O'

4,

general, seems to refer

more

power of

especially to the

attention

in the audiences.

rpayuSias

cKaroi' p.vpc(t)y

pressed,

cTTaSiwy

dyut'ij^eaGai.

would be

‘

an extreme instance

:

The

in o 2.

^(3ov

the performers

dycDvi^ea^at

’,

being synonymous with iwoKpiyea-Ou TOVTO Se TO Spdpxi

.

.

.

MdAwv

n

^ywvt^ero.

—

n

d

ex-

if

in stage matters

comp. Demosth.

— 250

the

like

subject of dyoyyi^ecrOai,

19,

246

-yywvtcro) Kai aKpi-

ypyrnyll^iTO (see on 6, r 4501* 18). 337 rd ©veo-Ton In the sense of contend ’, as said of the dramatic poet, it would

ySuls iirjTTccrTacro .

.

.

.

‘

require an instrumental dative (rpaywSiats) after fication implied in Tyrwhitt’s rendering,

theatro certare oporteret’,

(I

is

‘

si

The

it.

"fpos

it

certainly

is.

KXet|iu8pas.

For the preposition comp.

fr.

468 Teubn.

p-irpoy ri ea-riy dSaros Trpos p.ip.cTp-qp.€yov -ypicpas StAijTrjpM. peov Trpos Srj TOVTO

^

9

yywvt^ovTO

ot

wairep iroTe Kal dXXori

been

at

in

think) questionable in Aristotle.

Goulston takes dywn^ecr^at as a passive {^=agi), as

sometimes

personi-

centum tragoedias

some

peyiaToi Ka\ <|)a(ri('.

date or other timed

highly improbable, and there

7'he language also here

is

is

no

Trepl Tvyy p-cytcrrcov

The

idea of tragedies

by the clepsydra

is

to

, , ,

dywves.

having

my mind

hint of such a thing elsewhere.

not free from difficulties.

Tyrwhitt

by quemadmodum aliquando alias etiam factum esse perhibent’; and Vahlen (Berlin Academy, Sitzungsberichte 1897 p. 639) by wie man sagt, dass sie auch sonst gespielt haben To get this out of the words, and make them relate to Tragedy,. translates

it

‘

‘

’.

t

2

7 * 1451 ^ 3-12 or rather the past history of Tragedy,

supply (with Vahlen) an aorist

preceding imperfect

rjytisvLtfiVTo,

mean

’

183 becomes necessary to 1451 ^ 9 from the

it

infinitive,

and

ayoiVLo-aa-Oai,

make

also to

aXXore

Trore koI

meaning would be ‘at a certain other time’. Two instances have been Xenophon Anab. 6. 4. 1 pointed out of Trore koI aXkore simply

once

‘

or

formerly

‘

though

’,

natural

its

:

ws

Set irapacTKevd^ecrOaL

et irore

iJ.a)(QVfjievov^

Kal

dXXore

[

=:

‘

un-

si

Lucian Hermot. 24 ^Sr] ydp Trore Kal dXXore quam alias ’] [=‘ alias quondam ’] Trperrjivrov dvSpos ^Kovcra Sie^iovro?. These, j

however, are not enough to show that refer to

may

an

very

sense of

indefinite past or future

at certain other

times

Trore kuI

dXXore can only

with a verb in the present

refer to the indefinite

w'ell

‘

;

same way

the

just in

with a present, means ‘at certain times’ in Soph. avp-^aivei familiar

KaOdirep

Trore

Se

of Trore

antithesis

‘as

sense,

i.e.

by another

As

a variation on

.

.

.

is

to

it,

dXXoi

opos

fabula

M. Schmidt’s

the

in

correction,

regularly

done

certain

at

other times’,

make

the sense clearer, I would suggest

appositional to what follows.

is

comp. Tyrwhitt’s rendering

‘

quo maior

est

(ruV8T]\os

explained in the reference to this passage in 24,

is

ovv p.tjKov; dpos iKavbs 6

ptev

Bei crvvopda-OaL rrjv dp)(^v Kal

oat) peyeOei

Kre.

A

elprjp.evo?‘

SvvacrOaL

ydp

to reXog.

reminiscence apparently of the language ^ 12

of Plato Rep. 423 B Ovkovv,

S’

eym, 0VT05 dv eiy Kal KdXXcaroi

opos rots ^pcTcpois dp-^oviTiv, oarjv Set to p.eyeOo
.

.

^10

’.

1459 ^ 18 rov ii'

and

Staypdp.p.a
eidyOarriv.

scil. p.v 6 o^]

6

dei.

as Trore,

16, 175®' 27

class of dyoivurrai, the pleaders in the law-courts.

uxTTrep Trore koI

6 8e

tois

el.

though perhaps too bold, yields an unim-

eld)6a
peachable

ev

and

it

present also, and have the

Tts,

€<^>7,

opos

av^avop-A-q eivai KaTO, TO

eiKos

on

ypAroyv {see

Otp,at p.ev,

pLia, p.e)(pi rj

6,

S’ eyd>,

to dvaykalov

1449

TovSe’ p-e)(pi ov dv eOeXrj

rovrov avieiv, Trepa Se

'>26).

prq.

YiYvopieVwv, Scil. Ttuv

The consequents must

the natural or necessary effect of the antecedents. structed pLvOo?

dents which

is

A

irpa-

be always well-con-

a consecutive whole, not a mere series of inci-

happen

one after the other in actual order of and it is this that differentiates it from

to follow

time (comp. 10, 1452

19);

a history or a biography (comp. 9, 1451 “ 36),

which records every-

thing that

may

ever loose

and separate the various incidents were

have befallen a community or an individual, howin themselves

;

COMMENTARY

184

The poetic story in fact must satisfy our 1451 ^ 12 (comp. 23, 1459^23). sense of logic, incident following after incident as its necessary and

inevitable, or as

may

be

yiv 6 p.fvov, ^ uv ^

TO

17

evri

tovs cpco/Acvovs.

^to) is

2.

70^4

27,

F

5

— Rhet.

1010^28

)

^

aAAojs Kat aAAojs

5

)

to

to

i. 2,

...

tovs

yatcrctv

**'34

1357 to

cVti

cikos

/xiv

to ttoXv laacriv ovtw yivopevov

to ttoXv yivop-evov

ctti

—Metaph.

aAAws

post.

6V, tout’ ecrrly cikos, oiov

pLrj

(fiiXelv

sIkos ecTTLy

terms cikos and avayKoiov in Aristotle

yap is

cvSo^os' o

The

probable and natural consequence.

the

from An.

seen

TTpoTacts

Tas

its

meaning of

technical

to

(f>

p,r]

rj

0 ovovv~

p-ev

yap

ev8 e)( 6 p,eva

ttcjoi tci

to avayKaiov ovk cvSe^CTai €yS(\ 6 p.evov dXXws

1015 “'34 to

The

between the two terms had been already recognized by Plato: Theaet. 149c Tim. 40 E dyev tc cikotcov Kal dyaynaimy CIKOS Tc Kttt ayayKaioy. They were, it would seem, already estabaTToSeiiewy Xiyov
cxeti/

distinction

—

lished in the rhetorical terminology of the sophists (Stallbaum

Tim. 40 ^ 13

This

euTuxiav ktc.

els

on

e). is

obviously meant to apply only to the

tragic hero, not to the secondary personages in the play, about

whom the

Aristotle has very

legitimacy of a

dramatic motive the

will

it

—he does not

(comp. 17,

think

it

to misery (13,

1453

a

the motive in

is

it

1455'’ 12

Kal

tyrevOey

yj

so distinctively tragic or so effective transition, that

from happiness

14 sqq.).

The synonym for this in 13, 1453*2 is peraThe implied subject of pera^dXXeiy is the tragic hero comp. 13, 1452^34 ovTC TOVS CTTictKcis dySpas Set pera^dXXoyTa's pera^dWeiv.

‘

TTtTTTctv.



a

he acknowledges

from misery to happiness as a

Tragedy as the opposite kind of

in

Though

to say.

be remembered that

Tauris

Iphigenia in

(xwT-qp'io)

aj^

—

little

transition

68pa TToyrjpby

fJiOOos 8’ eo-Tiv CIS ktc.

16

wo-iTcp

Tives

oiovrat

theory apparently a ly

TToXXd

Kttl

Svarv^Lay,

cts

cvTVXtas

De

:

aTTCtpa. rj

— Tim. 31 A

See Schoemann, Opusc. Acad. 3 p. 31. e. certain post-Homeric poets, whose

from

caelo

l.

their practice 9,

Vahlen (Rh. Mus. 28

159 a eXeyopey is TroTcpov

aTTCtpa

cvl

:

Phys.

yap ay

2.

5

t
)

(comp.

278*19 opwpey ttoXXo.

ow opOw

196^28 (Tvp^airj.

pky

.

p.

elr] to.

.

* 21). .

TrActw Kat

184) quotes iroiowTa Kal

eya ovpayby TrpoaupiQKapty,

ttoAAovs Kal dveipovs Xeyeiy ^y dpBoTcpoy T(p

1453“'! ov 8 av Toy

i.

aTTCtpa dvTa to. opaLoeiSr].

also Plato Theaet.

14,

cts SvcTTV^i'ay /xcTaTriTrTCtv.

inferred

is

aTTCipa

:

and

’

;

to Sc koto, (Tvp/Be/SrjKbs dopKTToy

On

the Strength of this parallel

1451 ^

7.

Tw

12—8. 1451

the present passage

eye in

is

the

cadunt

This interpretation,

clause

— the distinction Aristotle That

18).

tw

evl cru/t/Satvei), i.e.

evi

t(3

The

14508’ 12).

as

like

sense

individual

the

many] which

rest, is

rj

a

18),

and

is

shown not

Sera avreS (rvve^r)

TrXetovs.

uncommon

it

In the

is;

the

in

in

course of his

Odrepov,

has been rendered by

evCoiv

6,

some

are

there

life

The

‘

eov

evtW

qualifying

14598' 27 ovreo kcu ev tois

23,

an ^18

is

on

variety of things that

infinite

of one connected whole.

parts eveore

in Aristotle (see

impossible to bring into relation with the

is

h'lore yLverai Odrepov pLeTo.

wv

(®'

which has been questioned by Spengel and others,

understatement of a kind not so

[i. e.

masculine here

is

but also by the parallel in 23, 1459 “23,

ocra ev tovto) avve^r} irepi eva

befall

that he suffers or

things that he does (Trpd^ets evds

eva (* 17), Trpd^as evds

-n-epl

(“ 25) in the context,

iyiuy,

seems to me, misses the point

it

many

has done to him, and the ela-Lv

who 1451^17 unam rem innumera

assumes between the many things that

befall the individual (ttoXXol

only by

185

25

taken as a neuter' by Vahlen,

accordingly by ‘in

translates

iroWai

^

e(f)e$tj‘;

^dvois

ovSev ytverat reXoi.

ev

ex quorum aliquibus (Tyrwhitt), ’

quorum ex quibusdam (Hermann). In the parallel, however, in Dem. 18. 12 -n-epl «Lv evtW both Well and Goodwin regard as appositional ; and the same view has been taken of the word in Dem. 19. 260 (rd? d/cpoTToAeis avrwv eviW), and in Xen. Anab. 6. 6. 34 {-rrepl vp.wv evtW). Another instance of this same ambiguity is in IMeteor. i. 3, 339 ^9 ^roXv /cal tu/v da-rpoiv evto/v eXaTTcov ea-riv or

’

‘

mW

(comp. L. Dindorf in HSt.

^ '^“^5

145' ^19

9,

s.

use of

of the appositional

EGF.

I

1379 ^

:

eTToiTio-ev

for the

The

case,

in

Poet.

^19 37. ^ 20 antiquity (Kinkel, in

1459829,

knowm

‘

ought to be

according to the fitness of ® 22

’

absence of the

i. 5,

article see

on

airavra oo-a auru cruyePij: i.e. his

whole ground of the

to cover the

same

23,

i. 3, 340 8 26, De anima and Plato Rep. 362 c.

a selected section ‘

comp.

Meteor, 3,

’oSufftreiav

the

:

Several ’RpdKXeiai were

= ‘must be

things, as in

made

a clear instance

249, 254). Kinkel, i p. 217.

:

7rpooT)Ketv

ouK

is

different

p. 212,

©Tjo-rjiSa

2. 2,

a

in

Tpa-ymSeai? evidts pehf ktc.

irdvTES eo'iKacrey apapraveiv ‘HpaKXrji'Sa.

There

v. evtos).

Ivtot,

of

it,

4,

1

^ 15, Rhet.

1448

38.

poem was

not

of Ulysses, but only

a limited group of incidents sufficiently

version in the Paraphrase of Averroes, interpretation.

life

41

?///?

multa accidunt, implies

^24 ^25

COMMENTARY

i86

1451 ^ 25 coherent and connected to form a single action of the requisite kind (yu.tW irpa^Lv olav \iyop.ev The unity in the story of 28). the Odyssey, as Aristotle conceives

poem

of the

in

1455'’ 17.

17,

airavTa in the text

may be

it, may be seen from his survey The sense of the ovk eVotr/o-cv

illustrated

by the very similar expressions

in 18, 1456’’' 13 Tov Trjs ’lAiaSos oAov ttouiv fivOov, “ 16 Trepcriv ’IXlov

and

oXrjv TTOieiv,

1459 ‘’32 tov iroXepov woielv oAov, scil. avT

oiov irXTjyrivai

dent, /xavyvai Se

fjiev,

of two disconnected events in the y€vop.ivov avayKolov particles

(^Xyjyrjvai)

—a

8e)

{p.iv,

of Ulysses {&v ovSk Oarepov

life

The

ctKos Odrepov yeveaOai, ®'2 7 )-

•9

imply

a

between them;

difference

antithetic

the

one

a Traces, and the other (yxav^vai TrpocnroL'^aacrOai) a Trpa^ts

is

which the preceding context (see on ^ 17) shows in Aristotle’s mind. I have ventured

distinction

have been already present

to

to

two reasons, partly because with seems to have two subjects {ovSkv and

restore oi8e in place of ovSev for

ovSev the verb {yevia-Oai)

Odrepov), and partly because the &v being followed by Oaripov and Odrepov naturally refers to the two incidents just mentioned. It has been urged, as one of the difficulties in this statement, that the wounding of Ulysses is actually part of the Odyssey, being

described at considerable length in the

story

of the Discovery

The Discovery is certainly part of the 392-466. action of the Odyssey (v. 17, 1455^21), but the incident on Od.

in

19,

Parnassus (v.

in a very different position

is

1455

17,

The

form the action of the poem. marized

weeks

in 17,

;

it

comes

in as

an episode

not as one of the series of incidents which

23),

1455^17

action in the

Odyssey (sumsome six

sqq.) extends over a space of

but the encounter of the boy Ulysses with the boar belonged

;

to a period of his incident,

life

feigned

his

not covered by the Odyssey.

madness,

is

said

to

have

The second been part of

EOF. p. 18). Bergk (Gr. Litt. i may have been some epic in which both inciwere included. The superior unity of the Homeric Epic

the story in the Cypria (Kinkel, p.

71

1 )

dents is

thinks there

emphatically reasserted in 23, 1459 ”30. wv dAAa TovTcov.

=

^

5*8

jAtav

whole.

oiav

irpa^iv

describing

’,

i.

The

e.

one

Xeyopev, that

opposite of this

inferior epics (23, 1459^)1).

may have for

ot’

dV.

arisen through

‘a single action of the kind

we

are

forms a coherent and closely connected is

the p.ia Trpa^ts TroXv/xcpijs of the

The

OIAN

reading of A^, oiav \eyoip-ev,

being misread, and taken to stand

8.

1451 ^

25-9.

1451 ^ 36

187

has been rendered in various ways

Kti'eiaOai

— 1451 ^ 34

by dissolvatur moveatur (Tyrwhitt). The general sense is clear when a part in a whole is removed, by being transferred to another place or withdrawn altogether, the Both 8 iaipe(r 0ai continuity of the whole is broken at that point. and Kiveia-OaL seem to be (as Heinsius must have seen) metaphors by

'

diversum reddatur vel moveatur

et luxetur

(Heinsius),

’

and by

‘

(Victorias),

’

‘

differatur et

’

:

from surgery.

may be regarded

Siacfiepea-OaL

synonym

as a

Greek

the term in use in medical

Su'oTacrffai,

for

for the diastasis of

a limb as distinct from a complete lu.xation (e^to-rao-^at or oXcadd-

comp. Hippocrates 3

veiv);

If this view

6 kt
mean

KLvrjpa in the sense

(comp. 3

81 K.

p.

irpocroi'

‘

’

A

10,

erepa [scil. ovcrta] rp irepa crvp.fSdXX€Tai ovara

Rep. 449 D p-eya yap

will

and

for diastasis

)(wpr]s).

comp. Metaph.

:

Kiveia-Oai

an equivalent

as

Se Ti KivrjOrj Ik

TTpoo’ot'

p,Tj

T]

of displacement

rjv

which follows

Hippocrates often has

be ‘dislocated’.

to

132 K. OKocra Sua-rarai koi oKocra

p.

correct, the KweLa-Oai

is

tl oi6p.e0a (ftepeiv koI

1076^2 p.r]

rj

oXov

ovOkv yap

ovcra,

TzoXiTuav

eis

r/

and Plato 6p0u)<;

rj

For this use of the participle see Goodwin, Syntax of Gk. moods and tenses § 829 {l>). yiyvopevov.

pjq 6p6S)s

popioi'

ouSei'

;

addition to it;

it

is

not a part of the whole, but an accident or ^ 35 an. i. 4, 717®' 34 ovOiv yap ela-i

comp. De gen.

popiov tQiv TToputv 01

dXXd

op)(£i^,

ovTOS

[scil.

fCTTiv,

the

phrase

with

just

like

’,

6 Trepi r/pas tottos]

means

KaOdwip

TcpoaKeiVTai

In IVIetaph.

Trpoa-dTTTOvcriv al v(paivovcrai rots lOTots.

ovOev


practically

‘

ovSev pApos in Isocrates

T

5,

To.^

Aatas

I0I0®'30

popiov tov TravTOS

eiTretv

as

nothing compared

9® ^

dOp-jaeu Kai

is

(TK&^airo Tas tcuv EAAt/vwv avpcfjopds, ovSkv av pepos ovcrat (pavetev

Twv

.

•

'^piv

.

<})ai'cp6i'

yeyevrjpevw.

8e Kri.

In Aristotle’s view a history

of events taken just as

register,

they

however separate and disconnected they

The

selves (23, 1459®' 21).

came

is

in

a chronicle, or

order of time,

may have been

in

present distinction between a

them-

histor}',

and a poetic story is a corollary to what 7-8 on the unity and logical coherence of

in this sense of the term,

he lays

down

in chaps.

the parts in a well-constructed story. is

a Trpa^ts pua koX oXt] (® 32),

and end that

(7,

1450

goes before

it,

26);

and

i.

e.

The

action in such a story

a whole with a beginning, middle,

each incident resulting from something the entire series

from the

state of things

presupposed, as the dp^rj of the whole, at the opening.

Given

a personage of a certain character and in a certain position as the

^36

;

COMMENTARY

i88 145* ^

36 beginning of

the story,

consequence of

the rest

all

must be the natural or necessary

Hence

this initial situation.

follows that the

it

incidents in the poetic story are not only possible but also always possible, because they are

and poetry:

whereas the former

(i)

happen

or must

any

at

the circumstances are found together.

two great points of contrast between

Aristotle accordingly notes

history

may

such as

man and

whenever the

lime,

a record of actual

is

events (ra yev 6fx,cva), the latter describes rather possible incidents

of another kind, ra SwaTo. Kara to cikos

to dvayKaiov

(**'

38)

(2) whereas the one tells us what is true only of some particular person (or persons) at a particular time, the other tells us some-

thing universally true (rd KaOoXov

good

something that

*’7),

same type

at all times of all persons of the

will

hold

in a similar set of

circumstances. a

38

Suvard,

Tcl

eiKos

rj

These

fxeva.

yevicrOai

scil.

The

(comp. *^32).

qualifying Kara to

TO avayKoiov excludes the third kind of Sward,

*3) 23

also are obviously possible (see '’17

rd yevo-

viz.

and De

interpr.

but as mere ycuoficva they belong to history rather than

7))

A little further on, however (^ 29), Aristotle explains that under certain conditions even historic incidents may be a legitimate poetry.

subject for poetry. ou Tu

’’l

T]

^

d^ios o-TTovS^?,

1448

trivial

‘

’

s.v.)

of serious value or interest ((jiadXos)

or

‘

ludicrous

as

implies

may truth

;

it

tells

us in effect what

(yeXoios

it,

is

is

shown

Plato also

:

opposite of see

on

4,

more

philosophic’,

human

nature which

‘

of a certain character

or must do in a certain set of circumstances, whereas historic is

limited to particular times

rhetoric, Diderot, has enlarged

in

men

all

the

’

because of the large and generalized view of it

it

to things in the sense of

applied

is

Poetry, as Aristotle conceives

34).

In

opposite of ^avAdrepov.

the

cnrovSaio? (v. Ast, Lex.

‘

where

**>

laTopiKos tov TroirjTov.

o-TTouSaioTepov is

either

1447 ^

I,

only one of the accidents of poetry.

is

8iatj>ep€i, scil. o

4 6

ktL: see

IfijAerpa Xeyeii'

that metre

his

on

£loge de Richardson (CEuvres

Richardson

que

I’histoire

que ton roman

est plein

j’oserai dire !

mensonges,

et

quelques individus

;

portion

de

la

il

I’a dit

et fait

durde, qu’un point

:

‘O

18 ed. 1821):

t.

3 p.

plus vraie est pleine de

de

L’histoire peint

vdritds.

I’histoire attribue

:

dit, ni fait

I’histoire

de

great master of

well-known passage

la

humaine

tu peins I’esp^ce

d quelques individus ce qu’ils n’ont ni attribues A I’homme,

A

and persons. this text in a

la

;

tout ce

que

tu

n’embrasse qu’une

surface

du globe

;

tu

;

9 1451 .

^

36-1451

'’7

189

Le

as embrass^ tous les lieux et tous les temps.

meme,

cceur humain, 1451

module d’apres Si Ton appliquait au meilleur historien une lequel tu copies. Sous critique sevbre, y en a-t-il aucun qui la soutint comme toi ? ce point de vue, j’oserai dire que souvent I’histoire est un mauvais qui a

roman

O

;

et

est

et

que

le

sera toujours le

roman,

peintre de la nature

comme tu

I’as fait, est

fiaWov implies a

fiaWot' Ta Ka 06Xou.

une bonne

histoire.

ne mens jamais.’

c’est toi qui

!

est le

which

qualification,

re-

appears in another form in ^ 9 ov a-Toxa^eraL r/ Troi^crts ovofiara rather than actual Poetry deals with characters itnTL 6 eiJ.evrj. ’

‘

Its and with universal rather than particular truth. universality, however, is somewhat disguised by the proper names it attaches to its characters, which acquire in this way a certain

individuals,

resemblance to the real personages of history.

Tragedy of

retention in

traditional

names

is

A

reason for the

given further on,

in I>i5.

rd KttOdXou terms

may

Se Ka 66 Xjov

o

jx-q,

.

o

fi-iv

eKacrrov, olov

I. 2,

larpiKr]

q

rwv KaOoXov, KaXXtds Se

tI t
1356 {ov)

eKaarov

Tre(pvK€ KaTtjyopeio'OaL, kuO'

cttI Tr\ei 6 vo)v

oioy avOpmTTos p.h'

comp, also Rhet.

aXka

The present explanation of the De interpr. 7. 17 39 Xeyw

rd Ka 0 iKaorov. ’

.

.

be compared with that in

28

ovSep-ia 8 k rixyrj crKoireL to Kad'

Tt Soj/cpdret

roii TOioicrSe.

—

rtov kuO’ eKacrrov:

2 . 4,

to vyieivov iariv

1382

rj

KaXXta,

p.kv opyr) del •irepl

*'

4 17 ^ Ka6 (Kacrra, olov KaXXta y ^(DKparcL, ro 8 k p-icroi Kal Trpds ra yevT]. For a similar use of KaOoXov see 17, 1455^1. The element of

TO.

'

‘universality’ in

no more than

poem and it is

it

was

and

distinction

it,

means

between a

no wise peculiar to Tragedy. 1 1) Comedy^of his time same way in the modern novel even in it

is

in

to be seen in the

found in just the

the historical

Aristotle understands

indicated in his present

a history; and

Aristotle tells us

and

Greek Tragedy, as

is

—

in the so-called realistic novel.

of imaginative literature the personages are, as

made

we

In

all

say,

‘

these forms

characters

’,

and speak in accordance with the law of character which the author has assumed for each. The novel, however (owing in some degree to its length), admits of characters of a subtlety and complexity which would have been simply impossible in the ancient Drama. The Greek dramatist was practically restricted to the larger and more obvious types of character, which did not require much explanation to make them intelligible to his public in the brief space of time

in

other words, ideal

allotted to his

work.

personalities,

to act

7

**

6

;

COMMENTARY

190 1451*^10

okOfiiaTa

1461 ‘

;

universals

that

=

eiriTiOe/AeVr)

30 ov TTivovTwv e.

i.

rendering of ovofiara

means them names it attaches ‘

iTriTLSe/jL^vr),

(‘dum nomina imponit’,

some extent of

TvxovTa

to be, notwithstanding the

The

to them.

in giving

names

to its

alternative

personages

Heinsius), would imply that the

’

names

This would be Comedy (see infra on '’13 ra

chosen as significant of character.

definitely

true to

2^,

are

really

individualizing proper

were

Comp.

Drama

ovofiara

types of character rather than actual individuals

what poetry

is

iTriTLdefiivrj

Tlic charactcrs in the

KttiVep

olvov.

those in

As

but not of those in Tragedy.

ovofjLara),

abstracts of

character the personages ought to have general names, like those

Theophrastus, instead of the individualizing proper names given them in Drama. For the use of the middle verb in this connexion comp. 21, 1457 '’34 and Homer Od. 8. 552 ov fjLev yap ns Trap/irav oo'wvvp.os dA.A’ ctti Tracri rf^evTat, ivei /ce TiKmcri, roKrjes. €
.

12

ijSr]

Old

i.

:

(see

e.

on

.

now

.

.

that the

has taken the place of the

1449^8), Comedy instead of

5,

Cleon or Socrates)

(like

New Comedy tells

satirizing individuals

imaginary stories of imaginary per-

sonages labelled with imaginary names. 13

The same

81A Twv eiKOTwv. 26,

1462

^

16

81’

chief ingredient in a

compound, as

in expressions like to

e. g.

use of the preposition

^s at rjSoval auvtaTavTai,

St’

it

It

found

is

in

denotes the basis or

often does in later Greek,

dXoi^s, to Std

koXokwOlSo?,

etc. in the

medical writers; comp, also Dionysius Hal. 5 p. 14 R. Std yap twv evreXearaTwy re koI TaTretvoTaTcov ovop-arviv TritvXiKTai Tracra t) Xe^ts. ouTw, the reading of A®,

(comp. Bon. Ind. 546 ^

is

too idiomatic to be lightly surrendered

13).

The

Arabic version

is

said to imply

same Arabic word, however, which Dr. Margoliouth renders by nequaquam, would seem to occur also in the not ovTOi but ov

;

Arabic text in

6,

One may

ovTTw.

the Syriac

the

1450®' 30, where

it

may be

taken to represent

Greek reading before the present passage was outtw, a mere

suspect, therefore, that the

translator in

corruption of ovtw. Tcl

ToxSvTa

d>'OfiaTa.

the characters in the

Ritter has a note here

New Comedy.

on the names of

Aristotle’s point

is

this.

In

Old Comedy the names of the chief characters were already fixed and prescribed for the poet, because actually borne by the

the

persons

whom

he wished to

satirize.

Socrates, Cleon, Agathon,

Euripides are instances of such names in Aristophanes. the

New Comedy

the

names were not thus

fixed.

But

in

In calling a

;:

10-21

9 1451 -

soldier

mean

Thraso or Pyrgopolinices,

to satirize

some

191

for instance, the poet did not 1451 ’’13

actual person of that

a matter of choice or accident

—invented

name

it

the

;

may

name was

be by the poet

borrowed by him from his predecessors or from life. Such names may no doubt be stock-names, or have a certain conven-

himself, or

tional or etymological appropriateness as suggestive of certain types

of character (comp. Dieterich, Pulcinella p. 45) ; but they obviously stand on quite a different footing from the real names in Aristo-

Names Comedy

phanes.

were in

also like

Phormio, Chremes, Menedemus,

etc.,

Comedy

they

names, though outside

fictitious

may have been borne by real persons (comp, on 21). lay down as a foundation,’ so that the uiTOTiOeWiv, ‘

look like one founded on fact (comp. 17, 1455 iafiPo-iroioi

on

see

:

Tuv ycvofievuv ovopaTuv dvrexovToi 4, 2 (Kaibel,

CGF.

r

p. 66)

:

^ 8. 5, 1449 comp. Evanthius De Comoedia

omnis comoedia de fictis

iragoedia saepe ab historica fide petitur.

been questioned, but ycvd/ieva dvo/rara

TO,

(as

seems

it

name (comp,

invented

whether new or not,

to

The

is

esl

15

argumentis

sufficient reason.

names, as fixed

in

20), in contradistinction to a newly-

rd dvd/xara

TrcTrotrjTai

^22), or one which,

arbitrarily assigned to a character

poet (rd Tvxbvra dvd/xara ^

*’14

reading yevo/ACT'wv has

me) without

are the already existing

history or legend (yi/wpt/xa

may

27 and

1448

4,

story

12).

by the

3) at the time of writing. iriOavov (comp. TruTTevofiev in the next line) is the Greek equivalent

of our modern term etKos

(comp.

24,

1

16

and practically synonymous with 1460*^27) and eySoiov (Bon. Ind. 593^45). ‘

convincing

’,

The word was sufficiently established to be applied even by Xenophon to a work of art which has a look of life and reality Mem. 3. 10, 7 bfWLOTepd re rots aXy] 9 ivdi% Kal 6 avwTepa Trotets Tri,

In 17, 1455®' 30 Tri^avds is said of a person, the poet who writes ‘ convincingly ’. The adv. has the same sense (pcuvea-OaL.

in

Aristophanes Thesm. 266

XaXy?

eiSos' rjv

the

woman

evi'ais

:

S’, OTTOJS

well

see

on

rw

dvrjp p.h' rjpXv ovroai Kal Stj yvvri to y’

and convincingly 8,

1451

®

ywatKteis cv koI m^avois ('play

’).

18 for this appositional use of the word.

**

somewhat tentatively, by Welcker in ^ his Gr. Tragbdien p. 995. ‘The Flower’ would certainly be a very strange title for a Greek tragedy. The play being on a purely fictitious story, the names also of the characters, instead of being taken over from legend or history, were fictions, and due ’AvOei

was

first

suggested,

to the choice of the

poet himself.

But they need not be supposed

19 21

— COMMENTARY

192 1451

^

new

21 to have been

seems

or newly-coined names.

’Ay&evs, for instance,

have been known already in mythical history as the name

to

legendary

of certain

Agathon’s time

it

personages

was

and not so very long after by an Athenian citizen

;

borne

actually

(Kirchner, Prosopographia Attica 953).

In this respect, therefore,

was in just the same position as so many of the names Comedy, Chremes, Menedemus, Phormio, and the like,

in

it

b

23

€U(})pat('€i

an incidental recognition of pleasure as the immediate

:

end of Tragedy (see

14,

Aristoteles p.

ci^patVeiv serves as a transitive to

Top.

104).

II 2

2. 6,

'^

1453

2 I eri Kai el

^nd Dbring, Kunstlehre des

12,

avTo avT <2 crvfji^e^rjKOS eOrjKev

:

(Ls

erepov

Sia TO erepov elvai ovop.a, KaOaTrep UpoBcKos SirjpelTO ras i^Sovas elg

^apav Kol

koI

Tepif/iv

1231

Twv

‘*'6

el

that

1339

b 24),

eivai

MS.

of the

of result with the verb

€14

E.

3.

2,

1450^2), of music

6,

1.

c,

ov,

which

Rhet.

;

(Pol. 8. 5, 1407 a 10).

3. 4,

Spengel suggested that the

S'»iTT|Teo»'.

In these negative statements

should be bracketed. dxrre

— Eth.

Kara irvp^e^rjKos exxppai-

describe the pleasurable effect of anything,

and of odours (Eth. E.

war’ ou TrdvTws

rrj<;

ev(f>pa(ve(76 ai (prja-ei

irvp/Se^rjKevai.

(pair]

of a painting (Poet.

e. g.

to )(aLpeLV t(3

oarpuiv ravrais yaipovuiv ocrai

The word may

vova-iv.

ns

ovv

av avT(S

avTO

crvp^e/3r)Kevat,

ravra yap Travra rov avrov,

evpo
rjBov^^, ovop-ard ea-riv.

are

common

so

Aristotle,

in

usually either in the indicative, (i) expressed or (2)

is

understood, or (3) in the potential optative, as the following passages

from the Organon may ravT

suffice to

elvai

pr. I. 32,

show:

A B. — Top.

47

®'

dvdyeiv ev6vs.

35

ojo-t’

— Top.

ovk

6, 5,

ei

77bi2

post. I.12,

wcrr

one

mcrr ovk dv

.

el.

eir]

®

pr. i. 16,

evBe)(Oir

for dv

48^36

eirj

6

A

Srerre

149 b

b

4 dxrr

6,

Kara avp^e/SiijKos ekey^os-

of Plato (Tim.

Nicomachean Ethics (8.

MSS. 1

12,

ovBevi

6. 12,

are to be found in

in Par.

ovBe rrpos rov avrov del 6

Z

1038

® 12].

(3) An.

ev dyeioperpyrois rrepi yeorperpias

eirj

— An. 36 14 Top. dv vTrdpxuv 168 pepiypevov. — Soph.

BiakeKTeov.

ns, OVK dv

pr. i. 36,

8. ii,

ri (Tvpfiaivei reOevTivv nviuv, rreipareov

142^4

avTos opicrpos d7ro8oT£OS,[comp. Metaph.

TTvpi

An.

(i)

131 3 ® oicrre ov rco yiverai 6 crvXXoyKrpos [comp. Poet. 22, I458b5j. (2) An.

ovK eorai pecrov rov

(Scrrc

y ov

rravri

uxtt ovk dv

2 el

tw P to

B

eirj

6 ekey^os (Tvkkoyiarpos

Two

instances of elvai

of great antiquity and value,

7 b),

b 20).

in Kb of the may have arisen

and the other

The

error

155 from the omission of dv, a word very apt to be lost in MSS., or through wa-r ov being misread and turned into a>s to? (as it has either

been

in fact in A°).

2, 1

9. 1451 ” Ta

21-29

Yt'wpifAa oXiyois yi'upind iariy.

Antiphanes,

who belonged

may

It

be observed here that 1451

to the generation before Aristotle,

not of the same opinion on this point SijXoi'

193

ouf Ik TouTUk’ refers

(v. fr.

was

191 Kock).

back to the distinction drawn

in the

27

of the chap. (1451'’ 1-5) between a poetic story and a history was said to be still a history even if put into

earlier part

a history

;

From

a metrical form.

this Aristotle

draws the conclusion that the story a

poem than

once more

1447^

(v. i.

a more essential part of

is

the language or versification.

added as a further reason for regarding the and essential thing in might have been more clearly argument, which poem. The a stated, tacitly assumes what we have been told of the fivffos and its offw iroiTiTTjs KT€. is

28

story (rather than the verse) as the great

pre-eminent importance

in chap.

he imitates

that is

what

the

rrjv

ras Trpa^ets)

{fiLfiuTai 81

represents

The

6.

Kara

Aristotle, is to imitate

action

poet’s function, says

fxiiJbrj(riv),

but the

:

and

Trpd^eo)?

yaev

it is

actions

in a

fjivOos

6

poem

/xS^os

17

1450 “ 4); the fiv&os therefore is the poet’s first business, and he must be accordingly a TrotriTrjs twv fjLvOoyv fidXXov rj ruiv

jjLi/jirjcris,

6,

fJi€TpmV,

Kara, tiji' /xi)xr)<7it' i, 1447 ^15 ov)( is Kara rrjv /xi^xT/crcv dXXd KOivy Kara to jiirpov TrpoaayopevovTes. Vahlen, in the discussion on this chapter in his Beitrage, maintains that ju/j.-qa-i'i iTOtT|TT)s

:

TOtr/rds

may

involve the idea of a poetic reconstruction of the traditional

materials

‘ :

Also die nach

dem

Gesetz der Wahi'scheinlichkeit und

Nothwendigkeit vollzogene dichterische Umbildung

(/xi/xiyo-ts)

des

gegebenen, von Sage oder Geschichte iiberlieferten Stoffes macht

den dramatischen Dichter aus can hardly be ascribed to

’

(Beitr. i p. 29).

(see

fufirjcri^

rather part of the general idea of

on

n-oirja-i's

i,

(see

Such a meaning 1447*116);

on

it

is

14471123),

i,

which in the case of a traditional story implies a certain free handling of the materials to adapt them to the purposes of poetry (comp. 14, 1453 b 25). kSi' dpa yei'ojjiei'a iroieii'. Up to this point the subject of b 29 a poem has been assumed to be always a /xD^os, a fictitious story (see

on

5,

or adapted

there

1449 b 9), either invented by the poet himself (b 12, b 21) from legend. Aristotle, however, now remembers that

may be such

a thing as an historical play, one with incidents

taken from actual history (yevo/xem).

Such

are legitimate subjects for poetry, if they as probable POETICS

and

incidents,

he explains,

admit of being exhibited

natural, as well as actual occurrences.

It is

o

only

25

COMMENTARY

194 1451

*’

29

ill

;

as so

history,

tion

*’33

and on

this aspect,

poetry

is

Tali'

kolv

this condition, that they are admissible in

many mere

apa

=

they belong to the domain of

facts

koX iav apa, the apa implying that the supposi-

not very probable (Kiihner, Gr. Gr.® 8e dirXwt'

fj.uOoji'

An

ktL

2. 2 p.

324).

episodic Story, as here defined,

offends against the rule of unity and consecutiveness of incident laid

down

Aristotle’s theory is that in a well-constructed

in chap. 8.

story every incident

is

wanted

(8,

1451

32); so that a plot with

S'

incidents violates a fundamental principle of dramatic

irrelevant

Plots of this faulty kind, he adds, are sometimes produced even by good poets through the practical exigencies of

construction.

the theatre

as a play

;

story proves too short,

expected to be of a certain length,

is it

may

have to be

artificially

the

if

lengthened out

by the insertion of superfluous episodes. Tyrwhitt points to the Prometheus as an instance of this Fabulae eVeto-oStwSovs luculentum satis exemplum habemus Promethea Aeschyli. Episodia enim Oceani, 284-396. et Ifis, 563-885. nec inter se, neque cum fabula principali ullam habent connexionem aut necessariam aut verisimilem Satis manifestum est et lo et Oceanum, et ipsas etiam Oceanidas, quae chorum constituunt, in id tantum sine ulla verisimilitudine induci, ut argumentum tenue in iustam Tragoediae magnitudinem extendant.’ The episodic plot is mentioned here because of its resemblance to a history, since its incidents have no more necessary interconnexion than those in a chronicle. The :

.

.

‘

.

paragraph, therefore,

is

a very natural sequel

to

the preceding

and

(t>

it is in its right place where it stands. 1-32) Those who wish to find another place for it do so mainly on the

discussion

;

ground that the text presupposes the distinction between the and the iretrXeyp.fvo? pivOo? explained in the next chapter. anticipatory use of a technical term, however, in Aristotle.

1449^28

Thus

—we

avayv(j)pL(rp. 6 %

in

find 6,

—

to say

him

is

not so

dTrXovs

This

uncommon

nothing of his use of Kadapa-i? in

talking of TrepnreretAi

14503-34 and

10,

and

1452®' 16,

explanation of them afterwards in chap.

n.

6,

dvayi'wpwrts or

and giving an

Besides this

it

has

remembered that the expression aTr\ov
;

— 29-37

9 1451 .

The

confirm.

traditional reading

195

rwv Se aTrXwv

is

fivOtiiv

supposed I 45 ^

to restrict the fault in question to the ottAovs yuv^os, whereas the

same

fault

also.

No

was no doubt quite possible such

that Aristotle implies here

of the d:rAoi}s

however,

restriction,

and the worst form of the

fJivOo's

worst fault in the one

other

no doubt the dvayvwysto-is condemned in 16, 1454'’ 20

An

it

A

Metaph.

in

N

3,

p.o)( 6

t8,

a plot in which the

is

shown by

That

the term

was

the metaphorical use of

tov Travrds ovcriav .

S’

.

of the

.

of the term see on 12, 1452^20. '’34

e7ret(ro8t(oS»ys

‘an episode

play, the

‘

acts

’,

as

is

that

all

and

we should

1449*28

comes

in

in in the interspace

In other words the

cTreto-dSia

eioSos are the acted parts of the

The

say.

more general meaning of an

it

oAov ryaaytpStas to p.eTa$v oAwv

between two entire choral songs’. together with the jryodAoyos

as also in 4,

yttv^os,

has the technical sense given

cTretcrdStoi/

iireicToSiov Se p.epo<;

XopiKcov ytteAwv,

the

6 os

eTreia-oSiwBr] rrjv

r

for the origin

:

1456*31,

1452 ^20

12,

fj.v

irepa crv//.ySdAAeTat ov
iripa eoi/cc

is

in the

ypa rpaywSia.

this definition

and

rj

1090^119 ovK

rd eireiadSia In

ro^h

ro,

yap

That

so emphati-

is

as the least artistic of Discoveries.

not maintained.

is

fairly established in this sense

TToioSatv’ ovOev

which

8id o-iyyiteiW,

eTratroStwSiys

continuity of the action

All

ircTrAcy/AeVos

the irrelevant episode.

is

is

eireKToSiuSeis.

in the TrevXeyfiivos /mvOos

involved in the text.

a distinction between the worst form

is

The cally

is

‘

term, however, often has

insertion

us back to the early days of the Drama,

’

;

a sense which takes

when Tragedy was

still

and the episode, or acted part, was only a sort the singing. There are several instances even in

essentially choral,

of interlude in

of this sense of the word. In 17, 1455^^13 the worked into the story are termed episodes the process of working them in being eVeto-oStow (v. 17, 1455'^ i; 24, i459'’3o); and in 23, 1459*36 the Catalogue of the Ships is said to be the Poetics accessories

one of the ‘episodes’ in the present context involves the is

’

‘

Iliad.

The

same notion

—

adj. eneiaoSKjjSys in the ;

the i7reiaoStu)Sys

one with acts or incidents inserted into

it,

i.

e.

p.v6o
only loosely

connected with the main course of the story. uiroKpirds.

an

air

Kpird?, the

reading of certain of the apographs, has ^ 37

of plausibility, but

it

is

difificult

to see

how

the judges,

whatever their weaknesses, could be responsible for the particular fault

under consideration, the undue lengthening out of the story

through the insertion of irrelevant episodes.

The

statement in

33

.

COMMENTARY

196 145^'’ 37

text has to be read in the light of that in 7,

draws a distinction between

Aristotle

practical limit of length,

and explains

the

^ 6 ,

where and the depends on

1451

theoretical

that the latter

conditions imposed by the public performances (Trpos tovs dytuvas

As every

Kai TTjv aia- 6 r](nv).

poet, rr/v

by

hvvapuiv 7ra/DaT€tVavT£s)

which

1452

may

his story proves too short,

if

will

Std Toils vTTo/cpiTds,

viroKpia-iv,

(comp. Ueberweg ad

loc.)

;

expression makes an antithesis to the less

‘

out {napa

to put pressure

on

may

be

because the play has to

more concrete form of A much 36.

the

avTovs in

St’

probable interpretation of these words

assumed

it

with a view to the actors,’

‘

taken as equivalent to Sid t^v ’

have to spin

the insertion of additional incidents,

break the sequence of the story (Siao-rpe^eiv to

a 1).

be acted

an acting play (comp, aywvi-

play, as

has by custom to be of a certain length, the

a-fiara in the context),

that the actors are

is

make him

the poet to

provide them

with parts of sufficient importance. dYWKafjiaTa

88 w k\€ivov

Ta yap

yiVcTat’

fKTfTarai rel. p.

it

rj

:

Trj<;

1450 '’18; comp. Schol. Eurip. Phoen.

6,

Tov Spa/AOTOS Std^ecrts ivravOa dywvto'Ti/cwTepa

’loKacrTT^s TrapeXKop-evd

Trendelenburg,

(v.

Gramm,

gr.

teat

fieri'

fvfKa rov Ofdrpov

de arte tragica iudiciorum

91).

The

irapaTeiVai'Tes.

38

on

see

:

oiKOts

were, to

make

it fill

story being too short, they stretch

up the

time.

out, as

it

This can only be done

in

two

by a diffuse treatment of the incidents (comp. 26, 1462 2-7), or by the insertion of additional incidents not wanted A similar combination of a for the main purpose of the story. present and an aorist participle is found in 16, 1455 “ 2 aKovmv p.frariOh'Tos. Kal p.vrjcrOfL's, and in 22, I458t>i9 vroiyerai/ros

w’ays,

either

.

.

1452^1

8iaaTpe<}>eiv ... to £({>€$49;

TO wpoerOev ov is

comp. Aeschylus Suppl. 1017

SiacrTpfi/io) pfv 6 ?.

The

sense

is

i^vos

that a side incident

— not

in line

rest.

They do

dmyKd^oi'Tai.

SO because they cannot help

the inferior order of poets, through their

own

fault

{

it,

8l

not

like

avTovg).

For another instance of dvayKd^fadai see 14, 1454®' 12. The Kai emphasizes pAXierra (comp. De sensu KOI (idXioTa. 440'’ 12;

Idioms

.

.

introduced, one not in the natural course of the story

with the

®3

.

De

part.

§ 133).

of interest in

At

an.

i.

5,

643^24;

this point Aristotle recognizes a

T ragedy, the element of surprise, but

in order to bring

it

3,

also Riddell, Digest of

new element

only incidentally,

under the canon of construction

laid

down

in

j

chap.

The

7.

^

37—10- 1452

9- 1451

15

197

Tragedy, he says, have the 1452^3

(f>o^epa Kal iXeeivd of

when they come

very greatest effect on the mind,

in unexpectedly,

but at the same time as the natural or necessary consequence of incidents within the play itself (Sc dWrjXa).

TO OaufAaoTok', the element of the marvellous,

recognized as ^ 4

is

Tragedy in 24, 1460^^12. Teichmiiller has a lengthy discussion on it (Aristotelische Forschungen 2 p. 282 sqq.). source

a legitimate

ouTws,

i.

e. if

of

in

interest

come about

they

dXXtjXa, through incidents in ^

Sc

5

the preceding part of the play. Aristotle treats the

diTo TOO auTojjidTou Kal tt^s Tuxtjs.

here as synonymous, though a distinction

Phys.

2.

4-6 (Bon. Ind. 780

uairep eTTiTiqSes iTTLTrjSe'S acjxXeci'

caelo

irdvra 81

di-Spids d TOO

De

De

:

33

(Sv

is

two terms

drawn between them

comp.Torstrik, Hermes 9

;

2. 8,

290

^

rj

^ucrt?

.

.

.

in

p. 425).

toi/cev

Sxnrcp ^ 7

iveSe^ero TTpocivac KaO' aird.

Excerpted by the compiler of the ^ 8

Mi'tuos ktI.

mirab. ausc. 156, 846 ^22.

The same

from another source, by Plutarch,

De

story

is told,

num.

sera

vind.

apparently

553 d

Kal

TO MtVoos TOO ’Apyecov Kara ardcrcu dvaipeOevTO^ dvSpcdvTa )(aXKovv iv

A

dyopa

6ea<; ova-f]S

T (2 Krecvayri rbv MiVoi/ Kal dveAetv.

ep-ireaecv

Argos

certain Mitys of

is

mentioned

in

[Demosthenes] 59, 33

connexion with an occurrence which took place in OewpooKTi

is

usually understood to

mean

‘

in

374. he was looking ^ g b. c.

when

comp. Bon. Ind. 328 5). But as the parallel in Plutarch has 6ias ova-r)';, Dacier would seem to be right in translating it by au milieu d’ une grande fete ’, taking at it’

(‘spectanti incidens,’ T)'rwhitt;


‘

it

in the sense of

ware: see on

‘

being present at a Oewpca, or public spectacle

7,

’.

1451^3.

®io

Chap. 10

etai Se tu>’ piiOui' ktI.

is

a sequel to

1452

9.

i-ii, ^12

and an application of its results. The real point is not in the formalistic distinction between the two kinds of pcvOoi, with which it

opens

(^

12-18), but in the assertion that follows,

viz. that

even

comes under the general canon of construction laid down in chap. 7, and that the element of surprise (the dvayvwpicrts and irtpiiriTua) must be, like everything else in a play, the complex story

part of the unity of the whole, the natural or necessary

of something before su6ds: see

on

wcrirep <3 pi
4

5, i.

it

(ck

twv

consequence

irpoyeycvrjpi.ivmv ® 1 9).

aj^

1449^36. e. in

a

chaps. 7-8.

dt'ayi'upicriioO

;

see

are explained in the next chapter.

on

6,

1450*^34.

Both terms

jg

COMMENTARY

198 1452^17

The

Se

reading St

Susemihl

S’ to-riv

have written

may ^ 18

generally acquiesce

editors in

17s,

may

have suggested that Aristotle

I

^s.

corrected

the

in

of which Vahlen has St to-nv f|

lieu

on the supposition

Xtyw

St

TrtTrXty/xtVr^v

be taken to represent

and possibly

that At^ts

Atyr^s.

dvayvcopicyaos and TrtptTrtTtta. any correction is wanted, aird or ra /xtr avrd is perhaps simpler than either rd va-repa (Gomperz) or rdmvTta (Bonitz) though this last has certainly the great advantage of supplying an easy explanation of the KaOd-n-ep etprjrai in 1 1, 1452 a23.

xauTa,

^20

e.

i.

If

TauTtt.

—

The

objection to raSra

It is

not

more

diately precedes

ravra)

and

;

(ravra Se Set ytVecr^at

it

apparent superfluity

its

demonstratives in Greek TO

Sta4>^pei

supposed inelegance and

is its

(v.

Td8e

yiyveffOai

the present passage,

The

15

)

[comp. Poet.

(i)

1375^2°

An.

2. i p.

I

18,

;

,

,

imme-

yiyvecrffai

with

660).

xdSe.

|Ji€xd

disjunctive

is

Aristotle’s

sometimes doubled:

ovSev Sia^epet y pd] Keia’Oai

1451 ^

9,

,

common phenomenon

a

xdSe

Sid.

wcrre

.

not always quite the same as that in

is

I.

is

.

.

Kiihner, Gr, Gr.®

construction after Sta^e'pet

Rhet.

superfluity.

inelegant, however, than the yiyveaOai that

1456

“ 30].

(2) It

rj

may

py

^ijcr^at

be replaced

pivov ovSkv Sta^epet eivai 77^^3 Soph. el. 18, 177 “6 Stac^epet xe km Se irXeicrToy epoyrdpevov xe km py Xveiv Adyov. (3) A clause also De interpr. with et may take the place of one with the infinitive

by a KoX

Kttt

py

:

post.

etvai Xa/3fiv

ir,

i.

— or by

:

:

18 '’36 ovSe TOVTO

9,

evTTOV.

Kxe.

^ 22

— Soph.

el.

[comp. Poet.

1

Siacjyepei 1

7)

18,

76

“'6

et

ryv

cittov

Tive<;

ovSev ydp tovto

1456^30]. seems

irepiirAcia, as a Stage-term,

to

mean

dvxti^acriv

Siaefyepei

y

el

y py ypero

a complete change or

reversal of situation within the limits of a single scene or act [v. '

Festschrift

the stage I. 1 1,

it

Theodor Gomperz dargebracht

1371 1 10,

Oavpaard ravra

H. A.

and

;

8. 2,

reversal of fortune

20 vrepnrerea re

8.

‘

Apart from

Kai at TrepiTTCTctat \repentinae mutationes,

Kat TO Trapd piKpov (rd^eerOM eK rdv KivSvviov

things in

p. 168].

has the sense of a sudden change of fortune in Rhet.

is

that of a reversal of the

a digression. fitydKuv Ix^vay

The

eiroiycravro

erejyten

is

avrolaL rd

it

p-^para, and

passage requires to be amended,

nai xis cvpffalvet in

clause that precedes

12),

natural order of

This same idea of an unforeseen 13 h implied also in the adj. Trepnrerys in Herod.

590

Bekker’s punctuation of this

whole statement from

Goulston] Trdvra ydp

[scil.

**

it,

as

in the

20 is 13 to aapKo
answered by vepovrai

•'

S’ ol

Kopa^oi rd IxdvSta in

’’

20.

—— lo. 1452 ® Eurip. Andr. 982

17— II.

1452 ^ 22

199

$vfj.0pav rrjvS' ianecrova-'

TrcpiTrereis

Every tragedy, according to Aristotle

dpTjxams.

(7,

describes a transition from happiness to misery or vice versa the

‘

complex story

’

the change, however gradual

come upon him

to the hero to

of the state of things

;

at once,

all

it

«

1451

may

be,

13),

but in

;

seems

by a sudden reversal

man

he thinks himself a happy

us say)

(let

and a miserable man at the end of it. It has been argued, however, by Vahlen (Beitr. 2 p. 6), and more recently by Dr. Lock (Class. Rev. 9, 251)*, that a TreptTrereia in Aristotle’s sense of the term is something different from this at the

that

it

beginning of an

conceived as arising

is

p.4vwv) are

found

to

such a very

justifies

TrepiTTtTeLa,

when

a man’s actions

irpaTTo-

(rail/

have consequences the direct opposite of what

meant or expected.

the agent

hardly

act,

The language

in

^25

(v.

ad

loc.)

of a word like

artificial interpretation

which must be presumed to have been already an

established and well-understood term of dramatic technique (see

1450*34, and comp. 10, 1452 “15). If w’e refrain from on isolated points, the general sense and connexion of ideas in Aristotle's statement is sufficiently clear. He begins by on

6,

putting pressure

assuming T(x>v

(i) a

working

TTpaTTop-hfiov

definition of TrcpiTrirua

p.€Ta^oXr)

KaOdvep

eiprjTai),

remind us (2) that even an incident a well-constructed play Kara to eiKo?

(17

cis

to evavnov

with an addition to

like this {koa. tovto 8e) is in

to wayKoiov, i. e. the natural or necessary consequence of antecedents in the story (10, 1452 * 18i)

20), as it is for instance (3) in the Oedipus Tyrannus 24-26), and (4) in the Lynceus 27-29). In the O. T. the sudden fall of Oedipus is the consequence of the revelation of his parentage {Br]\w(ra^ os rjv ® 26), and the revelation of his parentage the consequence of the presence of the messenger from Corinth (eA, 0 d>v 2 5).

Similarly in salvation of

—

the Lynceus the sudden change of situation the Lynceus and death of his enemy (a 29) is the con-

—

sequence of certain incidents in a previous act

{cruve^r]

(k tC>v

—which seems may be a turn — too

This second instance

to be added as a reminder that the TrepiTrireia for good (comp. Tov Se (TwOrivai ^ 29) as well as a turn for evil is clearly described to leave any opening for any subtleties of interpretation. Aristotle’s language puts before us an act or scene, which begins

Treirpayp.€v<»v

28).

with Lynceus being led off for execution (wg d.Tro&avovp.€vo<;

and ends with his salvation

(crw^-^vat “ 29).

This was the

the €ts TO (vavTLov Twv TTpaTTopifvbiv puTa^oXr) (® 22) ‘

Pye anticipated

this suggestion in his

27)

TrepiTreVeta

— of the Lynceus

Commentary on

;

the present passage.

145 ® ^ 22

COMMENTARY

200 1452 ® 22 and as

came about according

it

to Aristotle through incidents in

the preceding portion of the play

was

it

in the

^23

in conformity with the great

ck twv Trer-pay/^ieVojv

law of construction

28),

down

laid

preceding chapter and elsewhere.

may

KuOdirep eiprjTai rpoTrovs,

eipr/fjievovi

7,

[a-vve/ir]

1451

13,

and

i.

be taken (with Vahlen)

e. eis

eiTV)(fav

^

assumed

tacitly

ets

as

=

BvaTv^iav, as

1450a'

in 6,

Kara

was

a jy.

3,

roi's

said in if ^ye

accept Bonitz’s correction in 10, 1452 a 20, the reference to that passage.

will

be

Kal TouTo 8e KTe. By omitting the stop before these words Vahlen makes them part of the definition of •n-epiTreVeta. But it is much more natural to take them as an additional clause, like that in

not of

—

I452ai8

10,

rallra Se Sei yiveaOai ktL in which case the from the O. T. and Lynceus are given as instances

illustrations

in general, but of the kind of TrepiTrireta

Trept-TreVeta

which

accords with Aristotelian principles of construction. ua-nep Xeyoixev

:

‘

in the

of chap. 10 y t (3 OtSi'iroSi

24

mentioned ^ 25

eX0d)('

are saying

reference

’,

what follows being end

to the formula at the

is

^ Kara to cikos yiyvecr^ai ravra. Soph. O. T. 924. The Oedipus Coloneus avdyKrj'i

,

a

way we

The

the explanation of this.

:

is

never

in the Poetics or elsewhere in Aristotle. ‘

KTe.

Bene factum

nam

superstitem habemus,

est

quod ipsam tragoediam adhuc ex Aristotelis verbis

alioqui

credere

deberemus Nuntium eo consilio venisse ut Oedipum a metu circa matrem liberaret’ (Tyrwhitt). It is to be remembered that the Messenger in the O. T. arrives in the scene (911-1085) preceding the peripety (i 110-1185). Even after the announcement of the death of Polybus Oedipus as

Merope,

quietude

on

his

not quite freed from his old anxieties,

is

supposed mother,

is

still

living

;

all

Messenger seeks to

that account the

further

dis-

by

allay

his

assurance that Oedipus was no son of Merope but a foundling,

whom

he had himself received from one of the servants of Laius.

is enough for locasta (1056); but neither Oedipus nor the chorus has as yet any suspicion of its import. It is only

This disclosure in the

thus is

next scene (1110-1185)

falls, all at

once as

it

l^hat

he learns the whole

in brief the peripety in the

O. T.

;

and

it is,

natural result of the arrival of the Messenger

d)s

€vpavC)v

.

.

.

TovvavTLov

contention, that a peripety

is

eTToitjcrev,

and

This

as Aristotle says, the

and

Vahlen and others point

the preceding scene.

truth,

were, from happiness into misery.

his disclosure in to this

passage,

as evidence for their

said to take place

when something

3

1452 ^ 22-33

II.

done by a

man

201

with a certain end in view has consequences of a 1452 ® 25

directly opposite kind.

were the meaning, the peripety

If that

the O. T. would surely be a fact in the

in

of the Messenger,

life

not the turning-point in that of Oedipus. cupat'uv'

O. T. 934 sqq. O. T. 989 sqq.

:

diraWdlui' ktc. SrjXojaas os

:

1016 sqq.

O. T.

:

It

this that leads

is

to

the

is

the

examination of the Servant in the following scene, which

^26

immediate cause of the catastrophe. Toumm'ot'

changed

:

The meaning

of TO ivavriov in the Auyicei

man

not the opposite of what the

situation.

is

sufficiently

intended, but the

shown by

the use

of the chapter.

first line

and ^27

the Lynceus of Theodectes; comp. 18, T455 l^29

:

Nauck, TGF.^ p. 8or. It is clear from Aristotle’s account that it must have been a play with a double plot (v. 13, 1453 30). Tov pev ctuvcPt) /ere. The construction is changed in order to ^ 28 show that the new situation was the result of something that had ‘

gone before

some

it,

’

incident in a preceding scene ((rwe/Sy

rmv

e/<

TreTrpay/A^eov).

Tuy ireTrpayfievwv

:

fievwv crv/ji^cuveiv ktL,

y toD

p.eva Kal

comp. lO, T 452 ®I9 ware e/c tojv Trpoyeyevr)and 18, 1455 3® Seo-ts fj.ev rd re irpoTreirpay-

TraiSiov

Aristotle has already laid

di'ayi'wpio-is.

it

down

in 10,

1452“ 18 ^2Q

that the Discovery should arise e^ avrys t^s crvcrTd(rews rov p.v&ov,

and he does not repeat his rule in the present chapter. He assumes that in p.dXi
which

16,

esp. 16,

euTuxiav

irpos

a

is

appendix

sort of

to

this

discussion

(see

1455^16).

(TGF.^

p.

424)

.

.

.

ev

(opiapeVwi' (f>ev,

:

comp. Eurip.

TO SovAov

d/s

fr.

dTravTa’xrj

2r8 ed. Nauck ^31 yevos Trpds rr]v

iXacra-w pxilpav wpicrev Oeog. irepnreTeioi.

r456®i9, 24, irepiTrereia,

number

Twv.

rj

plural

r459bio,

is

to

used, just as in 6,

denote the

as actual incidents in plays.

is

1450^34, 18,^33

concrete instances

The

in the juxtaposition of avayvdpurvi

present passage

pArpov

The

and

TrepnrereiaL in the

certainly not greater than that in 9,

dvev pLerpwv, or

Thuc.

2. 4. 2 \i6oi
of

formal incongruity of

1451

re Kal Kepdp.w

See also the instances quoted on 19, 1456

^>1

p.eTd /3

aAAdv-

{p.eyeOo^ koX

piKporrjTo). oiav.

mor.

\

Bon. Ind. 50

2. 8,

1207

18.

^

Magna MS. reading

26 would restore otav for olov in

If (with Vahlen)

we

retain the

COMMENTARY

202 33

(=

otox/

e. g.),

it

becomes necessary

understand

to

Tre/jiTrAetav

after "q

ex'

t (3 OtSiiroSi,

irpos a«|/oxa teal

34 ‘

and

as

scil. avayvtoptcrts.

assumed by the

often

is

The

xa xuxot'xo.

Kat here

means

‘even’, not

Aristotle distin-

interpreters.

guishes between three possible forms of Discovery, according as

it

In dealing

relates to (i) persons, (2) things, or (3) acts or deeds.

may be

with the second form he adds that the things recognized

—

even of a very casual kind, koX ra rvxovra thinking perhaps of objects like certain of the a-qfjieia mentioned in 16, 1454 '’21 sqq. cffTiv ws oirep ciprjxai aupjSait'ci. If we adopt Vahlen’s sugges35 tion, icrriv, ^oo"’) wanep tlprjTai cryp-^aivei, we have to dissever ra Tvxovra from

‘

some

come about

sort or other,

(fiiXiav

q

€ts

a pera/SoXrj

this

paragraph, e$ dyvotas

As

€xOpav. els (/)iAiW

’

or

Spengel’s reading

things

‘

at best

Aristotle throws in the qualifying ecrriv ws

— an

con-

i.e.

happen

yvSxnv perafSoX-q, q

cis

this recognition of

eh exOpav, but

17

‘

of dvayveiptets as defined at the

oirep etprjrai aptly recalls the idea

beginning of

rvxovxa,

can be said to

{a-up^aivei) in a particular way.

’

crvp^awei as an

(Lprjrai

how ra

not easy to see

It is

it.

things of

crete

and take oa uxnrcp

onj/vxa,

explanation of

(‘

’

however

is

only a means to

in a

way

‘

in a

ets

not

that,

sense

’)

expression that always implies some reserve or limitation;

comp. Phys.

2.

— De

l97‘’'iO

5,

to-rtv

ws ovBh' arro rvxq^ Sd^eiev av

425 ^22 Koi to opwv ecrriv ws (ce^pw/^dTtexat.— De mem. I. 450 20 q ecrriv ws evSexcTai kou (rvp/3aivei xoJxo Eth. N. 5. 12, 11361^30 Kai ecrriv ws xd aij/yxo- Kreivei. yiyveerOaL.

;

The

anima

3.

2,

—

construction Trpds

parallel in Pol. 7- 17 ;

axj/vxa.

crvp^aivei

^336^ 31

is

sufficiently assured

ras xwv avOpamcjiv opiXias kcu Trpds xds rwv irpaypcxTiDV

—where ravro

rovro recalls a previous statement just in the same oirep J.

36

amended

eipqrai in the

way

text of the present passage

as the

(comp.

of Phil. 14 p. 45). Treirpaye is transitive, as often in Aristotle, if

are to be trusted (comp. di'aYt'wpio'ai

37

by the

crvp^aivei Se ravro rovro kui irpos

:

pdAiaxa xoC o-vo-rdo-ews

see

on

p.u 6 ou

;

rov pvOov.

Bon. Ind. 632

our existing

texts

» 17).

5.

comp. 10 1452®' 18 ,

As

yivecrOai e^ avrrjs rrjs

the relationship between the parties

presupposed, the discovery of

it

in

the

course of the play

is

is

a

very natural kind of incident. fidXiaxa xi]s irpd^ews dvayvivpicris Kre.

is

explained by what follows, q yap roiavrq

1452

II.

f.\eov

T]

Ktt'i

£§€1

bciug

Discovery

overlooked

produce

will

suggest the coming of

it

203

5

on

(see

when

pity,

or anguish of the hero, as

to

33—1452

The grammatical

4)oPo*'-

1]

TTEpiTTETeta

^

subject

1452 ® 38

The

« 16).

synchronizes with the wdOo^

it

does in the O. T.

evil, in

avayviopia-Ls,

is

1462

26,

which case

may

but

;

arouse

will

it

also only

fear.

It is

be remembered that pity arises through the spectacle of suffering

and before us whereas (see on 13, 1452^' 32).

actually present evil still to

In

Se

Kftl

TO dTuxelv Kal to euTuxeiv ktI.

saying that the discovery of relationships

is

happy ending,

If the play has a

(® 37).

fear

;

come

apprehension of

is

a further reason for

is

Lynceus

like the

(‘‘27)

or the Iphigenia in Tauris for instance, such

a Discovery will

be a very natural way of bringing that about

and

Tii'ut'

;

equally

is

it

and other plays with an unhappy ending.

natural in the O. T.

definite

2

/rdAio-Ta t^s Trpdiews

rj

eo'Tii' dt'ayi'wpiais. For the emphatic position of the inpronoun comp. Soph. el. 13, 173 ^ 3 y re nvds dpe^ts

3

Kol 7} liTLOvixia Ttvds iTTiOvfua Kal to SiTrAdcriov Tivds SnrXda-iov.

dmyv'wpi'aai,

scil.

known’

selves

The

nves

ea-Tiv),

be supplied from the preceding ’’5

(to

etcrtV ‘

S^Aos aTcpos ns

to reveal

who

they are

— not asTyrwhitt renders

‘

it,

’,

to

‘

make them-

se invicem agnoscere

simple verb yvojpi^eiv has (just like our English

two meanings,

that of ‘to learn’

make known’ {=

yvwpip.ov

reappears in certain of the

and the second recalls

(=

yiyvwo-Keiv)

and

SrjXovv).

The

or

ttoulv

compounds

yi/wpt^eiv,

and sometimes ‘to reveal’,

sense

first

{TrpoyviopL^eiv, crvyyvuipL^eiv),

sometimes meaning

(i) It

’.

’)

that of ‘to

in others (Stayvwpt^etv, iTnyvwpi^civ).

both senses of

discover

‘

means

‘

avayviopl^eiv to recognize

to ‘recognize’ in

’,

14,

453 ^ 3 ^ dvayvojptcrat tt/v (piXtav, and (with cjuXiav Or some such word understood) in 14, 1453 ’’35, 1454*^3, 6, 8. This is the sense of dvayvoypiovvTos also in 16, 1455®' 15 where to to^ov is ^

—

understood, as the context (to roiov yvwa-etrOai) will show of dmyvcoptVat in dvayvojptcrat,

‘

utrum

Another instance 16,

1454'’ 27.

‘reveal’ in fecit se

where

esse

II,

fecerit aliquis

is

(2)

el

pays

tt err

an non

fecerit

^ p-i] agnoscere

On

other hand

the

the

wo

;

and

TriiTpayev

Tts

in the passive, dvcyvojpto'^Tj

’

(Ritter).

t'^s rpoefiov,

in

word must mean

16, 1454 1*32 dveyvciptcrev otl ’Opicrriq^, ‘manifestum Orestem’ (Ritter), and in the parallel in 17, 1455'’ 9,

dri ’OpccrTTjs or

dv£yv(optcrev

1452^35

some equivalent has

(comp. 17, 1455

I’

21).

the passive in the present context (^ 6),

which means

‘

to be understood after

The same

was revealed to Orestes

’,

sense

tw ’Opearr} rather than

is

found in

dveyvinplcrOy], ‘

was recog-

^

—

:

COMMENTARY

204 5 nized

1452

’

by him

and also

;

am

(if I

not mistaken) in aveyvMpia-O-qa-av

1455 “3. A third sense has been found for dvayvwpicras in i7> 1455 21, on which see note. *^6 ’l'€t.a comp. 16, 1454 32. The reference is to Eurip. in 16,

;

Iph. Taur. 727 sqq.

t (3 ’Opdarri

is

probably not a dative of the agent but equivalent to

Trpos Tov 'Opecrrrjv. cKeii'ou

7

be taken as a genitive

to

is

8 (comp. tivZv

after the di/ayvooptcretos that

and Oarepov 4). For a genitive depending on a following genitive compare dKaa-rov in 18, 1456 (v. ad loc.), and Plato Rep. ovcrtas 534 b Adyov eKdcrrov [comp. Campbell, Rep. of Plato 2 p. 185]. 1)

follows in

3,

.

^

There

irepl Taur’ ivTi.

9

The

being a

p.vOos

parts of the

is

p.ip.r]ais

piv6o
no reason and

relate to certain portions of the TrpS^ts,

i.

.

to delete the preposition.

Trpd^&Ds (comp. esp. 10,

(the irepurdrua

.

1452

e.

The

because the

Trpd^L
It

in

pLvOos

which

it

fact

has a

represents

and

TrepiTreVeta is

to

to the kind of incidents

already considered in the preceding statement (10, 1452

1452*^8).

two

13),

dvayvalpwris) are said

12

—

ii,

dmyvdlptcrts

conceived as having them.

be observed that the ‘simple plot’ of 10, 1452 12 is tacitly set aside, no doubt on account of its inferior dramatic

will

now value

(v.

13,

1452

31).

‘has been already described, or explained’; comp. 25,

€ipr)Tat,

1460 ^ 24

TO yap riXo^ etprjrai.

ev CTepois fiprja’erai

.

—De anima

Elh. N. 4.

2. 8,

420 ^21 to

8’

amov

1127*'' 18 ot p-kv irpbs rfiovi}v

Kal XvTrrjv 6p,iXovvT€9 eipy^Tai.

The term

irdOos 8’ cotI irpa^is ktI.

requires definition

Trd^os

because of the variety of senses attaching to

language

In ordinary

it.

often involves the idea of great suffering,

it

and has

the

concrete sense of a great trouble or affliction of body or mind

Metaph.

A

21, 102

a-vp(f)opwv Kal

The

2^19

irdOos Xiyerai

pAXana

Kal KivyjafUi, Kal

XvTrrjpStv

...

at ^Xa/Sepal dXXotwo'ei's

at XvwTjpal ySActySat.

Trddrj

Tra^os

just

is,

like

the

the incidents of the play Aristotle

defines

ffpS^ts (fiOapTiKT]

5. 7,

to.

p,tyi6rj ®'

Ttbv

2 fi)-

sense the present definition gives the word was probably one

already established in theatrical usage (see on

and

?Tt

Xeyerai (comp. Bon. Ind. 557

rf

it

dmyviupto'ts

a

9).

6,

1450

The

“ 34).

TreptTreVcta,

and as such part of the TrpSAs or

one of action.

accordingly as a TrpS^ts of a certain kind, a

68vvr)pd.

Apart from the theatre the terms

7rpa|ts are natural opposites

1132

and the

(comp,

i,

n-dOoi

i447®'28 and Eth. N.

;

1452 ^ 5—12. 1452

II.

4)0apTiKT|

77 pa|is

T]

oSui/ripa

ktL

Xmrqpwv Kal /cat 6(T(t)V /cat

(j>

oSvvrjpthv (ftOapriKa,

compare the enumeration of 1452 1386*^4 ocra re yap rZv

:

‘things piteous’ (eXeeiva) in Rhet.

2. 8,

Trdvra iXeeiva,

0 apTiKa OdvaToi koX

ocra dvaiperiKa,

/cat

TvxiJ aiTta /caKu/v pieye^os ixovTiov.

17

205

14

ecrrt

8

oBvvrjpa piv

awparuiv Kal KaKuxret? Kal yijpas Kat

ai/ctat

Tpo 4>rjs ^Seia kt€.

vocroi Kal

iy t (3 (l/arepcp ectroToi

on the stage, before the condemns in A. P. 185 (comp. Affecte hlitleid und Furcht nach Aristo-

12

violent deaths

i.e.

:

eyes of the spectators, such as Horace

Tumlirz, Die tragischen teles, p. 16).

a

vovTtDV, 81 ocra

bodily

signifies

irepio/Suriai

comp. Eth. E.

I.

5,

1215^18

TT/x/tevrat

ro

^rjv,

agonies,

TToAAa yap

as

context

the

raiavra rwy

ecrrt

shows cxTroySat-

otov voo'ot/s TrepitoSwtas \etjatovas.

ToiaCra serves to include the less physical forms of pain.

model of a tragedy, the

as the perfect

of Oedipus

13

the mental anguish

rrot^os is

1317 sqq.) much

(O. T.

**

up

In the Oedipus Tyrannus, which Aristotle so constantly holds

more than

the physical

horror of his self-inflicted blindness. 2® p. 167) and Bernhardy (Gr. Litt. 2. most of the recent editors of the Poetics, agree The rejecting chapter 12 as an interpolation.

Bernays (Zwei Abhandl. p. 236), as well as

with Ritter in

reasons advanced by it

breaks

against

Ritter

of

continuity

the

the

it

are

threefold:

main discussion

;

—

(2)

(i)

that

that

it

names and definitions of the external accidents of Tragedy, which it was not at all necessary for Aristotle’s purposes non nisi nuda nomina exhibentur, quorum descriptio to consider non ex fine tragoediae proposito, non ex interna eius forma et constitutione, id quod deceret philosophum, sed ex habitu illius extemo petitur’; (3) that the form of the conclusion, a mere repetition of the opening sentence, betrays the hand of an interpoThese arguments, however, which are hardly so conclusive lator. as has been supposed, ignore a good many points which have to gives us a string of

—

‘

be taken into account (1)

There a

Kal els

is

the

mark

(2) Aristotle

parts

’

silence o-oStov)

may

;

of probabilities.

and the brevity of

can hardly be said to be un-Aristotelian.

very well be

conceived

to

have

felt

that the

were not only of great technical importance too obvious and too recognized to be passed over in and further that, as certain of them {-TrpoXoyos and eVei-

Kara to

but also

the general balance

Statpelrat Ke)(mpuTpfva is Aristotelian,

these clear-cut definitions

‘

in

of style; the terminology in Kara to ttoo-ov

-ttoo-ov

had been already mentioned

in

the book, a short note

'’14

ii

COMMENTARY

2o6 1452

14 explaining what they were might be expected. this, it has to be borne in mind that the very term

‘

(3) Besides parts in the

present sense of the word, had actually appeared in the definition of

Tragedy

iKacrTta tcov etSwv 25 rjSvcrfxevio Xoyo) In the analysis also of Tragedy in 6, 1450^7

in 6, 1449^^

/Aoptois.

iv rots

avdyKT) ovv

rpaywStas

Trdcrr}?

TjoaywSta, the only icTTiv

TpayipBia

rj

from another TT oo-ov

f^ept]

KaO o

eivat e^,

ns

Trotd

etrni/

distinguish the parts under consideration

to

is

kind

series of parts of a different

of the present chapter.

— the

Kara to

p.€prj

It is clear that Aristotle

was already

and the clause added prepares ; more formal recognition of them.

thinking of these latter it

were, for a

The doubt posed its

to

as to the genuineness of this chapter

be confirmed by the

definitions

with the

known

facts

often sup-

is

Drama

of the

as

seen

If we look works of the three great tragedians. structure of our surviving Greek tragedies, certain of these

tions are either inadequate or untrue. is

‘It

occur not uncommonly

.

defini-

from being universal

Anapaests are

.

in

the

distinguished from the parodus by the absence of

in the parodus, while they .

at

not true to say that

is

anapaests and trochaics.

of stasima

us, as

one or two of

difficulty of reconciling

the

the stasimon

rj

mid ns

motive for the qualifying clause KaO’ o

and

in the

is

anapaestic throughout.

is

frequently

Medea one

far

at the

Again, the ordinary

found in stasima,

beginning

of the stasima (1081-1115)

while

trochaic

trochaic

metre

tetrameters

are

unknown both to the stasima and the parodi of tragedy (Haigh, Tragic Drama of the Greeks p. 356; comp. Westphal, Prolegomena zu Aeschylus Tragodien p. 57). The question, however, on which so much ingenuity has been expended, admits

’

equally

of another answer

His work

is,

if

one remembers Aristotle’s purpose

in intention at

any

Poetry, not a record of learned research; and

the benefit of the

men

of his

theatrical conditions of the

certain

particulars

in writing.

an Ari of was written for

rate, a practical treatise,

own time.

day,

it

and with reference

to the

Although he thinks that

the existing practice of the

stage

in

should be

reformed by a return to that of the older dramatists, the general

assumption in the Poetics of the Fourth Century. the older

Drama

is

One

the theatre as

of the chief

finds in this chapter

is

it

was

in the middle

difficulties

a student of

in a point relating to the

We do not know much of the economy of the later Tragedy; but one thing is fairly ascertained, that the chorus was no longer what it had been in the age of Sophocles and Euripides. Chorus.

t

:

207

14

1456a 28)

Aristotle himself tells us {i8,

forming a more or

’’

1452

12.

that

its

songs, instead of 1452 ’’14

of the play, had degenerated

less integral part

This, however, can had undergone. The probability is that the dramatic dance also had been curtailed, and that, when once in its place in the orchestra, the chorus simply sang its What the comic poet pieces without any accompanying dance. Plato (fr, 130 Kock) said of the choruses of his day

mere

into

lyrical

intermezzi

(e//,(86Xt/Aa).

hardly have been the only change

war oAX

Tis

opxoiT

Biap

ev,

it

rjp’

vvv

bpwatv ovhtv,

Se

iarwres wpvoprai,

woTrep aTr6n\rjKToi

was presumably as true of those of Tragedy as of the rest in If it was true of Tragedy, however, the new state of things would naturally imply a new technique in the treatment of the Aristotle’s age.

XopiKd; the so-called a-rdcripLa suggests, stationary songs, as

songs in a

;

The

paradoxical as

we

seems

in fact

them

in

for verses

definition of the a-rdaipLov, there-

dvev dvaTraicrrov Kal Tpo\aiov

it

name

their

to the -n-dpoSoL or entrance-

and there would accordingly be no place

metre of movement.

fore, as a pLeXos

The

would be what

opposed

at first sight

may

not be quite SO

(comp. Westphal

1

c. p.

.

64).

seems to be really due to the grammarians having transferred the word arda-ip-ov from the later (as to the earlier Tragedy, where the position of the ‘ sung parts Aristotle calls them) was the same, though their structure and difficulty

find in this instance

’

dramatic importance

confirmed by the

way

The explanations of (to

were not the in

This

same.

1

.

grammarians and elsewhere) reproduce the defini-

c.

tions in the text, but with modifications manifestly

Drama,

and Euripides.

‘

cum baud quaquam ad omnes

eorum qui postea

notionibus

due

to a desire

into conformity with the actual facts of the great

that of Sophocles

cumscriptio pars

them

is

this chapter.

TrdpoSog, crrdaifiov, etc., in the

be seen in Westphal

to re-shape

conclusion

which the ancients dealt with

amplificare,

Duodecimi

genus tractarunt earn

id

pars

earn

vocibus

capitis cir-

tragoedias quadraret, additis

accuratius

aliis

terminatis

modo

varietati rerum quae apud poetas unde baud paucae dissensiones (L. Schmidt, De parodi et stasimi nominibus p. viii).

emendare, pars earn aliquo

obversatur adaptare studuerunt,

manarunt This

’

may perhaps be taken

the definitions in this chapter

as evidence not only for the antiquity of

(comp. Consbruch,

Comm,

in

honorem

Gu. Studemundp. 223), but also for their having made their appearance in a work of considerable authority at the time.

;

COMMENTARY

2o8 1452

nporepof

15

eis

in chap. 6.

:

& Siaipetrai

A

Metaph.

:

25, 1023'’ 12

Xeytrai eva

fx.ipo^

p-lv

rpoTTOv CIS o SiaipeOeirj av to ttoctov ottwctoiJv.

^ 18

The

&T7
sense of this sentence seems to be rightly under-

stood by Tyrwhitt (who

is

here only following Goulston)

hae quidem communes sunt tragoediarum

quarundam sunt

e scena cantus et

Hermann

18, 1456®- 31.

Tragedy

as

Taura.

of the Greeks

Comedy

as well

be meant.

to

not clear whether

It is

tioned, or only to the

tw'O

men-

this refers to all the parts

chorica, the TrdpoSos

and

ardcnpuov.

the second alternative, notwithstanding the arguments

I incline to

have been urged against

that

Drama

Others, understanding SpapdTtDv, imagine

p. 361).

For the SXXo in

cis

with less probability supposes xop^^wv

(comp. Haigh, Tragic

be understood

;

aXXov

^3

,

Atque

‘

:

propriae vero

ko/a/aoi, sive planctus.’

neuter aTravroiv comp. ttSv in 6 145®

to

omnium

De

(Klein,

it

partibus formisque

quibus tragoediam constare voluerit Aristoteles

Aristotle

p. 5).

is

and by a very natural ; association of ideas he passes from the parts sung by the chorus first to the lyrical passages sung by an actor (or actors), and then to the dirges sung by an actor (or actors) and the chorus in sung

thinking primarily of the parts

conjunction. Tct

and trios sung by These dramatic lyrics are recognized 918^26, and contrasted with the songs of the

diro Ttjs oTKTji^s, the solos (/iovwStdt), duets,

on the

the characters

Probl. 19. 15,

in

chorus

rd pXv

:

avTicTTpofjia'

yrrov

stage.

dtro

6 p.ev

(see

p.ip.eiTaL

tr/ojv^s

ydp

also

Comp. Suidas MovwSta' p.ov(pBeLV

KoX

ovx

TO

Opyjvelv.

ravTo

T^s

19.

30,

92088

p.rj

—

^opov

o Be xopos

p.ip.yyrq^,

922

48,

16).

ev rots Bpapuen.

(TKrjvrj's

pavmBia keyerai oray

els p.ovo'i keyrj

Koi
-nfv

The term, which appears several times in Aristophanes,

3.

14,

BvvaraL

irpooip-ia

20

Probl. d.7rd

4,

and

BiKaviKov irpoolp-La Bel ka/3elv

on

used in the sense the present definition gives

in Rhet.

^

rj

Kal

dytt)VL(TTrjs

opiov 6 xppo'5-

TrpdXoyos. is

ovk avTicrTpo(j>a, rd Be tov

viroKpiTvjs

...

(^

1415® 8 rd tov

oirep

Tuyv

Spa/xaTcvv

ol

it

Trpokoyoi

18) KoX ol rpayiKol Brjkova-i

Trepl

in 5,

1449 ^

Kai rlov

(ov^ to

eTTwy rd

Bpdp,a, Kav

evOv^ uxnrep EvpiTTiSi^s, dAA’ ev t
may be compared

with e^dStov (from e^oSo?)

to be derived from eTreiaoBoi, in the sense the

O. C. 729 e-n-euroBov (‘

op(d Tiv

vp,ds 6pLp.dT(i)V

my coming

in

elk't]ff> 6

upon you ’).

Tas

word has
it

seems

in Sophocles

6^ov vedpyj r^s

This seems to

me

a more

12.

’’

1452

209

15-23

probable explanation than those noted by Haigh, Tragic of the Greeks p. 353. irdpoSos. For the definitions of J.

grammarians see ^ 22

the

in

it

Drama 1452

Aschauer, Ueber die Parodos und Epiparodos in der griech-

ischen Tragbdie p.

As

5.

the negative part of the definition of

must be supposed tO seems clear that in the view of the writer of this chapter anapaestic and trochaic passages were not out of place in the parodus. In the existing Greek tragedies, dvev

(rrd
differentiate

dvairaiaTov

Kal

rpo^^atov,

from the parodus,

it

however, trochaic passages are

though they are

common enough

it

all

in

but unknown in the parodi, Comedy there is no instance :

of them in Sophocles or Euripides, and apparently only one in

Aeschylus (Persae 155).

Westphal is

c. p.

1.

thinking

of,

64) that

and

All this points to the conclusion (comp. it is

a later form of Tragedy that Aristotle

that the practice of the tragedians in this matter

For the actual use of

had changed since the time of Euripides. trochaics in the tragic parodi there

some

is

evidence in Schol.

faint

Aristoph, Ach. 204 yeypairrat 8k to jjiirpov Tpo)(aiKov irp6a-<^opov ry

ravra 8k ttouiv flw^acriv

tZv Biwkovtwv
Kwp.iKol

rpaymoi,

/cat

hreiBdv

oi

8pop.aims

tcov Bpap-droiv

tovs

€tcrdya)(Tt

^opov^, iva 6 Xdyos (TWTpkyri to/ 8pdp.aTi,

Ever since Twining’s time there has been a tendency Xe^tg, and distinguish it from p.kXo's (comp.

\iiis oXt].

to press the

meaning of

i p. 510); it is supposed be a general term including recitative

K. O. Muller, Kleine deutsche Schriften to stand for recitative, or to

This interpretation

and song.

is

hardly reconcileable with the

language of the adjacent definitions, as

ardcrt/xov,

a

dvev

p.kXo's

dvaTraia-rov

yxeXtov, will

not apply to the

precedes

is

p. 58).

it

Xe^is

oXy

have had very

is

to be

is

little

POETICS

)(opLK
the parodus which

compared with

of TrpdXoyos,

1.

c.

the /xepos dXov in the

cTrcicrdStov

and

The

t^oSos.

and individual xopevrai, which would probably meaning in Aristotle’s day, when the chorus had

For

ev^dS’,

word

the origin of this technical sense of the

usual to refer

crravTas

pcra^v oXwv

ceased to take a serious part in the action of the play.

o-Tdoniioi/. it

is

first (ttuo-oBiov, if

reading Xe^is oXov xopov involves a distinction between

the entire chorus

practically

and trochaics; (2) the

which

not to be regarded as a /xeXos (comp. Westphal

preceding definitions traditional

definition of the

Kal Tpo)(aiov, presupposes

the possibility of a p-eXos with anapaests definition also of iirucroBtav, as that

The

(i)

to

wvBpei,

Aristophanes Vesp. 270 aSovrag

airdv e/cKoXeiv,

dXXd pot as showing P

Bokci

that

23

20

COMMENTARY

^id 1452

song sung when the chorus had taken up

a-Taa-ifim hleaht the

23

its

and to Ran. 1280 npiv y av aKovcrys where the Scholiast explains crrda-iv p.eXu)v

position in the orchestra; )(aTepav crTaatv pieXmv

by

(xTa
however, of

tation,

o-Ttto-is p.€ku>v

The ‘

may

—

aSovcrw

very well

mean

general sense of the adj.

action

’

(=

dKtvi^Tos),

The

interpre-

by no means

clear, as

lardp-eyoi, ol \opfvTai.

second passage

this

a

set

‘

‘

of songs is

‘

steady

’,

a-Tda-Lp-os

and hence

is

’,

a

(rva-Tr]p.a pLcXfov.

movement

without ‘

stable

’,

‘

’

or

The

quiet

should be the stationary song as distinct from the TrdpoSos, a song of movement. This is exactly what Plato Comicus implies in his description of the chorus of his time (see above); and it is in accordance with the statements of the o-TdcnpiOv, accordingly,

grammarians,

e. g.

and

yap

p.eXo<;

6 )(opo'i p-erd rrjv TrdpoSov Xiyrj ti piXo<;

dv^Kov dKivrjros pevwv, ardcripov Aeyerat to ac/xa,

216 to peXi 8 dpiov ovk ean ardaipov may suppose that in Aristotle’s

that in Schol. Soph. Trach.

dAA’ vTTo T^s

’,

Schol. Eurip. Phoen. 202 tovto to

that in

(TTda-LpMV XeyeraL' orav TTpos Tr]v VTTodecriv

‘

If we

rjSovrjs 6p)(ovvTai.

time the chorus after the TrdpoSos stood motionless in

its

place in the

would be rightly termed and the absence of anapaests and trochaics would be ardaipa a good formal mark of distinction between them and the -n-dpoSoi. orchestra, the songs in this part of a tragedy ;

di'airaioTou

24

up of

Tpoxaiou often

:

not the foot

itself,

but the verse or verses

is

The

verse. that,

one of the

as

Tois vuv eiprjfieVois,

i.

e.

4,

1449

pirpa,

and

its

it

has

'‘21).

unity of structure.

1,

which

Aristotle

turns to the question of the particular form of pv6o? required

effect of Tragedy (pity and fear). dXXd n-eirXcypeVTii' see the explanation of these terms in 10, 1452 ^ 12-18. The finest kind of tragedy involves a complex plot, because the element of surprise (comp. 9, 1452^4, and 14, 1454^^4) in the complex plot accentuates the tragic impression (comp. 6, 1450^33 and 9, 1452 ‘‘4). It may be observed, as an

to

31

KLvrjriKa

in the discussion in chaps. 7-1

dealt with the pvOos in general

tap/3 o^

reason for the exclusion of the

a special fitness for the dance (see on Poet.

now

same way as

trochaic verse or verses, in the

;

means an iambic

trochaic tetrameter

’’30

made

it.

produce the emotional

pT) dirXtji'

:

instance of Aristotle’s inconsistency in matters of language, that in 13,

1453

a

13 the “ttAovs pyOoi

is

the opposite of the SittAovs, not

(as here) of the ireTrXeypevo? pvOos.

32

<|)o|3epw('

Kttl

definition of

eXeeti'wi'

Tragedy

(6,

elt'ai

piprjTtK^t'

:

as

was assumed in the 9, 1452 “2 and

14491*27), and again in

;

12. II,

1452*38.

1452 ^ 23—13. 1452

^o/Jcpa Kal iXeeivd

"

2 II

32

TTpay/iara)

(scil.

is

a compre - 1452

hensive designation for the incidents distinctive of Tragedy, just as

A

Comedy.

yeAoia describes those of

‘alarming’, suggestive of

(f>o/3 €p 6 v,

may be

tragic scene

coming

either

or danger to the

evil

and

hero, or eXeeivov, ‘piteous’, a representation of his anguish

Fear (the opposite of hope) relates to the future

suflfering.

pity

;

and before us. In Aristotle’s was expectation of coming evil ’, irpoa--

to evil or suffering actually present

time the definition of fear

Bokm kukov (Eth. N. 3. (Plato Laches 1983); XvTrrj

Tis

rapa^^r)

rj

9,

‘

5 * 9), or TrpocrSoKta /leAAovTos KaKov he puts it in Rhet. 2. 5, 1382*21,

1 1 1

or, as

iK

being possible and prospective,

were

Rhet.

:

2. 8,

KttKw (fiOapriKw

rj

evil

actual

is

kukov

/xeAAovros

(^avracrtas

In pity on the other hand the

XvTrqpov.

and before our eyes as

und Furcht nach Aristoteles p. 15). The tween the ^o/Jepd and eAeetm in a play may be seen which we are gradually prepared

in

incidents of the catastrophe evil in

made

^ it

1385 ^13 Iotw hr] lAeos Avttt; tis ctti ^atvopiAw Xvirqp!^ (comp. Tumlirz, Die tragischen Affecte

Mitleid

Tyrannus,

(^OapriKov

or suffering, instead of

by a

Oedipus

for the

piteous

premonitions of coming

series of

The

the earlier scenes.

distinction bein the

we

sympathetic interest

are thus

to take in the fortunes of the tragic hero depends, according

to Aristotle, (o/Liotos),

i.

on one condition,

This ethical similarity with us, as opaiav

his

being more or less

is

like ourselves

good nor exceptionally wicked.

neither exceptionally

e.

what renders

fear for another possible

we

are told in the context, 13, 1453 “ 5 and in the Rhetoric the same is said of pity

irepi :

Rhet.

rbv

2. 8,

Kara. rjOr]. It would be easy, if 1386 * 24 Toil's opoLovs cAeoCcrt it were worth while, to amplify the present statement by further illustrations from the corresponding chapters of the Rhetoric (2. 5 .

and

The

2. 8).

cussions the pity

is

.

general point of view, however, in the two dis-

The

not the same.

and

.

fear of the judges

pity

whom

may

and

fear of the Rhetoric are

the rhetor

on

is

addressing

;

it

and deter them from an adverse decision by showing how injurious its consequences may be to them and theirs. But the apprehension the tragic poet is

part of his art to work,

arouses in us

is

it

be,

not of this personal description

fear for another, the

danger that arouses

not that of the audience in the theatre. it

is

their fears,

it

The

;

it is

a disinterested

being that of the hero, point being so obvious,

strange to see a diametrically opposite view taken

of such distinction as Lessing.

by a

critic

‘Aristotle’s fear (he tells us)

is

not the fear which the impending evil of another arouses in us for

3^

A

COMMENTARY

212 1452 '’32 that other;

the fear that arises for ourselves from our likeness

is

it

to the sufferer

is

it

;

become

ourselves

we see we may The 75).

the fear that the misfortunes, Avhich

may

hanging over him,

befall ourselves

lying confusion of thought

;

the fear that

(Hamb. Dram.

the pitied object’

may

rhetoric of Lessing’s statement

is

it

St.

perhaps conceal the under-

he has confused our fear that some-

;

happen with our recognition of the possibility that something may happen to us. This latter is the general condition of all sensibility to pity and fear but it is not a Trd^os, and cannot, thing

will

;

therefore,

be identical with either of these emotions (comp. Tumlirz

l.c. p. 7

Zeller, Phil. d. Gr. 2. 2^ p. 783).

;

Lessing has an equally

am He

paradoxical view of the Aristotelian lAeos— one inspired, if I not mistaken, by Hobbes rather than by Aristotle himself. thinks that according to Aristotle

without fear for ourselves

(Hamb. Dram.

.

.

fear

.

the feeling of pity

‘

verkappte Furcht’,

eine

by the

Doring,

’

Kunstlehre

in the Rhetoric

texts

’

‘

des

This rapprochement of the two feelings

p. 310).

impossible

77); one of his modern followers even goes so is only a disguised fear

St.

far as to assert that the Aristotelian pity (‘

is

a necessary ingredient in pity

is

is

Aristoteles

not warranted

between them

distinction

is

implied not only in the present, but also in other passages of the

comp. IXcos Kal (jio^o's (6, 1449 27; 14, 1453^12), y 6^ov (ii, 1452 38), ovre eAeov ovre ^d/8ov (scil.

Poetics;

9 tXfov e^oi

dv,

1452 *

e^ei

The

14,

;

^o^ipov

1453°' 3))

13,

32

1453

Kal

summed up

in a brief formula,

iripaiv yivSpieva

rj


—

that all evils are fearful, which arouse pity befall others

’.

On

‘

die

klarung der Tragddie nachst

:

dem

.

.

sondem

(pofitpd

when they

tpo^epa

eariv offa

i
may

say

befall or are about to

‘

Mitleiden, nur die einzige Furcht nannte.

weil,

die Furcht nothwendig einschliesst

;

(e. g.

of fear and in another of pity feelings,

is

Mitleiden unabhangige dieses

weil nichts unser Mitleid erregt, als was ’

(Hamb. Dram.

a painful death)

is

But the fact one relation a cause

St. 75).

in

|0

not enough to show the substantial identity

or to prove

Aristotle’s
dem

nach seiner Erklarung des Mitleids,

zugleich unsere Furcht erwecken kann that a particular kind of evil

tpdfioi,

be seen from

speaking generally, one

Nicht als ob diese Furcht hier eine besondere von

of the two

elntiv,

® I,

So dachte Aristoteles von dem Mitleiden, wahre Ursache begreiflich, warum er in der Er-

necessarily involves a feeling of fear

.

may

13,

1453

the strength of this Lessing tells us that with Aristotle pity

und nur hieraus wird

Leidenschaft sey

(13,

where the enumeration of

S’ dir\uis

iitWovra i\((tvd iariv

1452“ 2;

(9,


logical weakness of Lessing’s reasoning at times

his interpretation of Rhet. 2. 5, 1382 '’26, is

iXeeivov

ovTe eXectvw ovre

l))

that

iariv

one is

of them

includes the

other.

not an analysis of the feelingcf

but merely an attempt to determine the kind of facts to which

it relates,

,

13 6).

It will

sponding formula

may perhaps be

coming

whereas in the corre-

first,

The

often precedes iXeeivd.

human

suffering {ndOos:)

explanation

assumes a tragedy

that Aristotle (like Plato)

this,

so that the excitement

;

primary and essential purpose, the element of fear

its

secondary matter, to quicken our sympathy

in as a sort of

hero,

tragic

the

with

comes

pity

fear’, ff>o/3 epd

to be a picture of is

213

32-34

be seen from the instances just quoted that in the 1452 **32

formula ‘pity and

of pity

1452

-

and prepare us

In a

for a catastrophe.

play like the Oedipus Tyrannus, for instance, which Aristotle has so constantly in mind, the
them

but the great tragic interest

;

is

Oedipus becomes an object of pity. irpwTot' fAci/ is answered by ovB’ av

Symp. 219 E

Laws 935

:

general rule that,

if

main points

the

1453

(comp. Plato *’34

S'!

a tragedy

man

is

in the discussion in this

down

After laying

as follows.

is

hero must be a

tragic

in

which

a).

The connexion between and the next chapter

and lead up

in the later scenes, in

and

to arouse pity

(i) the

fear in us, the

of a certain type of character (13,

adds (2) that the tragic effect is enhanced by the play having an unhappy ending (13, 1453 ® 12), and (3) weakened by a double plot ’, in which the unhappiness of certain of the 34), Aristotle

1452

‘

is balanced by the happiness of others (13, 1453 30); and (4) that stories of horror in which kinsmen are involved have an especial tragic interest and value (14, 1453 b 14). This last leads him off (5) into a discussion on Discovery and its place in

personages

®'

a play (14, 1453

men

**

26)

are concerned,

;

the conclusion being (6) that, where kins-

the best form

of tragedy

is

one

in

which

a timely Discovery prevents the actual perpetration of the contemplated deed of horror (14, eiriciKets, the

eVieiKjjs is

often

1454

4).

opposite of fioxOrjpovs in

synonymous with

1454^13), and opposed

to

<^avXos

similar terms (Bon. Ind. 271 b 36). to the it

term in

in 13,

that a

1453

man

this

passage

of pity. tells

(comp.

The

of great worth and virtue

an overpowering

of

sense

a'

we are

is

the

to attach

that replaces

Aristotle tells us

not sufficiently

like our-

purposes of Tragedy, because his sufferings

It is difficult to

use

usage

(comp. 15, 26, 1462 2) and

shown by the equivalent

feeling of indignation or disgust instead

reconcile his present view with what he

us elsewhere of the tragic hero (see

present

in ordinary

Kal ZiKaiodvvrj.

selves (o/ioios) for the will create

is

*’’8

*36;

a-TrovSaio? or xp'>7
term

iineiKrjs

on

13,

1453^

with that in

15,

^is

1454 b

13.

— COMMENTARY

214 1452

34 Besides

who

this,

is

according to the Rhetoric

oiwvrai Tivas eiyai rwy fTTieiKwy

KOLV

perhaps show that

it

quite possible for one

is

be an object of pity: Rhet.

to

«7ri£tK7;s

consistency of language

strict

2.

1385 b 34

8,

may

All this

(scil. iXeovcriv).

not always to be

is

expected even in Aristotle. (iiapot'

36 b

as an offence to our moral or religious feelings

:

The

4)A
38

comp.

;

1453^39, 1454 “3-

14,

appeal to our

‘

having no

situation

spective, does not arouse

any kind of

philanthropy

ira^os,

actual or pro-

emotion

tragic

does not

it

;

or our pity, or our fears.

’,

It

is

assumed here that to o^ep6v. to ^iXAvOpwirov is that which appeals to the (fuXavOpunroi. The iXdv9pwTro';, or tenderhearted man, is able to feel a certain commiseration even for the wicked in misfortune ; this feeling, however, is not pity proper, since it lacks the moral basis of all pity, the belief that the misfortune

is

This

not deserved.

of to (juXdvOpwTrov

interpretation

accords with the use of the term in the context (1453*^3; comp. 18, 1456 21), as well as with the ordinary Greek conception of iXav 6p(OTrca,

‘

fellow-feeling

’,

‘

kindliness

(comp. L. Schmidt, Ethik der Gr.

between

and

(jaXavOpw-Tria

pity

‘

tender-heartedness

A

2 p. 277).

is

recognized

certain

Rhet.

in

’

affinity 2.

13,

1390 “19, where the tender-heartedness of the young is said to make them easily moved to pity iXerjTiKol Se Kal ol yepovrh ela-iv dAX’ :

Sia ravTo tois veots'

ov

da-9€V€iav

(comp. Tumlirz

been attached

to the

at the

Sid.

A

word by

the situation described as

of poetical

yap

l.c. p. 13).

01

p.tv

T wining and others, who

(f>iXdv 9p(i}Trov is

justice, a true lover of

punishment of

(j>iXav9pmmav, ol

evil-doers.

Sk

Si

very different sense has

one that

suppose that

satisfies

our sense

mankind being bound to rejoice Any one who remembers what

meant to a Greek, will at once see the improbability somewhat artificial rendering of to iXdv9piiiwov in Aristotle.


of this

1453^^2

fjiCTaiTtTrTcii'

:

comp, the use of p-era^dXXeiv

(and passim), and that of

^4

ircpl Tot' tlie

di'd^iov'.

7rcpt

p-era/Saiveiv in 18,

= ‘in

For

this

el Tts v/Spiv Trepl iraiSa’S

rj

use of

(j>6/3os

Tovs Gish'

e)( 0 VTas

e.

as

we

and IXeos

say, ‘for’; in the

Trepi

.

yiyvTjrai 6 eXeos ovtos Trepl tovs rpiaKovTovra'; irepl

i.

same comp. Eth. N. 3. 9, 1115*^ 22 Plato Rep. 539 ^ yvvaiKa
preposition enables Aristotle to join

construction.

1455

the case of’,

1451'^ 14

in *>27.

eroi.

—Lysias

kokov eXer)px)ve(TraTOi SoKOwres

elvai.

168, 39

H 13 - 1452 di'd^ioi'

Rhet.

:

34

—

1385 ^13

2. 8,

TrpocrSoKTjcreiey

dy iraOelv

lo

215

eXcos Xvtty] tis

iirl atvo-

1453

rvy^dveiv, o Kay avTos

avTOv riyd, Kal tovto oray

rCiy

rj

*

dya^iov

KaK(o (f>6apTiK(u ^ Xvtrrjp^ tov

ua'O)

53

ttX'jjctiov

f^aiy-qrai.

for the participle see Goodwin, Synt. of Gr. Moods SuoTuxoui'Ta and Tenses 829 (b). Another instance of the construction will be found in 14, 1453 1*23. This disinterested fear, which rests, just like *5 irepl Toi' ofioiov’. :

on a basis of sympathy, is not recognized in the Rhetoric, where the point of view from which the emotions are considered The antithesis in the text, is different (see on 13, 1452^32). pity,

6

Trepl

fi.h/

1386^24

ecrriv 6 Se Trepl

TOV dvo^^idv

since pity also

roy

Trepl

is

Kal Tovs

81’

dfxapTiav Tivd

1

:

Lat.),

{erratum).

In the or

vTreXa/3 e

ev€Ka

TovToy

Tj

in 5.

10,

ov

p-tjTe

yeyrjrat, dTv)(r]pM,

(comp. Rhet.

i.

iorjOiq

oray 8 e

pit}

.

.

oray

.

p.h'

1135

rj

12 to

d /xT/re

<0

tootw

ov

ovy TrapaXoyws

rj

/xev /x'^Te

ov

^Xd^rj

TrapoXdyojs dyev 8 e KaKias, dpApfTr]p.a

This ignorance,

1374^6).

13,

p-rjre

^ yap ov /SdXXeiy

Trpd^rj'

ov TOVTOV IvcKa

ignorance of some

but

dyyoias dpLaprqpxiTd ecrny oray

per

consequence of it is an an dpidpTrjp,a is said to

Eth. N.

depravity

in

or circumstance:

vice

in

Ethics

material

ov

a mistake or error of judgement

is

originate not fact

2. 8,

Kara

dpuapria in the ^ 10

dp-apriay p.eyaXrjy.

8t’

and the deed done

{error in

rj^rj,

ye\rq.

6

Aristotelian sense of the term

dpApr-qp-a

tOO Strongly put,

is

iXeovai Kara iJXiKia?, Kara

o/xotoos

Kara d^imp-ara, Kara

e^ets,

tov o/xoiov,

one may see from Rhet.

as

d/xoiov,

w'e are

told in

another passage, takes the deed out of the class of voluntary acts,

and enables one 2,

1110^31

dXXd T^s dXX’

rj

or

to forgive

ov yap

rj

even pity the doer

po^Orjpta^, ovS

KaOoXov

rj

{xj/eyoyrai

KaO’ eKacrra, ey ois Kal irepl a

eXeos Kal irvyyywjirj

:

Eth. N. 3.

ey rfj TrpoaipeaeL dyyoia alria rov dKOvcriov

(comp. Thuc.

I.

rj

yap

Trpa^ts’

32. 5).

Sid ye ravrrjv),

ey tovtois

yap Kal

In thus making the

story turn on an dpxipria Aristotle is probably thinking more immediately of the Oedipus Tyrannus (comp. 14, 1453 ^ 29). It is strange that the d/xaprta or dpiapna pieydXrj, of which Aristotle is speaking, should have been taken by Tumlirz c. p. 25) and ( others to mean not an error of judgement, but some ethical fault tragic

1.

or infirmity of character,

The Sophoclean Oedipus 807), but his d/xaprta

he made,

like is

a

was not

when he became

those indicated in

man

15, 14541' 12.

of hasty temper (comp. O. T.

in that, but in the ‘great mistake’

unwittingly the slayer of his

own

father.

^4

COMMENTARY

2i6 12

apa ktL

dt'ayKrj

a corollary to what has just been said on

is

two other forms of Tragedy, which had often been adopted by poets, are pronounced to be of inferior tragic quality and value.

the construction of the KaXkia-rq rpaywSia;

KaXois exoi'Ta

Tov'

T^v


(aGOoi/

Tpayu)8ia (13,

TYjv rexyrjv Ka\X.i(TT7}

dirXouk'

13

.

.

connexion

8i7rXovs in this Yj

jBeXrtoi'os

on

see

SiirXoCi':

.

comp, the expressions

:

is

13,

being

The meaning

^>31.

No

reason it

given for

is

enough

clear

is

is

bring the present conception of the tragic hero as ourselves, of only average character

o/Aotos, like

this chapter, in fact, the

that the

this it

;

and

virtue,

Apart

into line with that in certain other statements about him.

from

of

explained later on, in ® 31.

p.fiXXoi'

to

'<“70,

V

3 *)>

22).

1453 1452 **'

significant addition, but the intention of

an attempt

in the context,

KaWiarr}'; Tpaya)8ias (13, 145 ^

Trj'S

general assumption in the Poetics

is

hero should be not like the average man, but

tragic

than that

—

^ KaO’ r/fia^ (2, 1448 *>4, 18; 16, 1460^34). For the purposes of the present chapter, however, which deals with the emotional effect of Tragedy and its conditions another and a somewhat different conception of the tragic hero is required if we are to pity him and fear for him, he must be, like Oedipus and the pathetic characters in Euripides, a personage of a very human type, one like what we are ourselves. It would take some discussion to reconcile the two views, and explain away the inconsistency of language into which Aristotle has drifted. TO yiyi'djjiet'oi' Meteor, i. 14, 352t>i9 Srjkoi 8 € to yiyvd/Acvov. 17 better

1454^9; comp.

25,

;

—

;

2. 8,

367*11

vijcovs.

—De

ecTTi

Kal to ytyvd/xevov irepl ravras Tas

.

.

.

480^ 26

resp. 21,

ravra Kakws

Erfahrung 18

8

’ :

— —Xenophon Hiero

pMprvpei to yivop-evov.

5 P'O-prvpet ra yiyv 6p,eva tois Xdyots.

1334 d)S

TeK/ji'qpiov

/J^o-pTvpei

ra yiyrop.eva

Sauppe, Lexil. Xenoph.

(

—

‘

Pol. 7* I4)

quod vere

9. 3

die

fit,

p. 25).

perhaps a metaphor from the counting of money, which each coin has to be accepted and allowed to pass as good. aTrapi 6p,uv nova significatione dicit est ergo a.napi 6p.€iv recevoir, dirr]pi0fji,out'

:

in ‘

.

mettre en

cotiie,

conspectus Liddell

20

i p.

ei

and Scott by

’AXKfji^wi'a.

In HSt.

28.)

On

‘

recount

.

.

(Casaubon,

approuver’. it

is

Musei Oxon.

in

rendered by

‘

narrare

litt.

and

in

’.

this (the Attic)

and Meisterhans, Grp p. 35. 1397 b 3 and it is implied in mic always has in the Ath. Pol.

It ’

form of the name see HSt. survives in

A^

AXKfieiovCSrjs, the

in

Rhet.

s. v.

2. 23,

form the patrony-

1453 ^ 12-29

13-

form of Tragedy 1453 ^ 24 good word for Euripides, who had been the unhappy ending of many of his plays.

Aristotle’s conclusion as to the best

EupnrtSr).

enables him to say a

blamed by

He

217

critics for

insists that the

procedure of Euripides

is

and points

right,

in

confirmation to the eminent success of his plays on the stage,

where in spite of all his faults Euripides is acknowledged to be With the most moving and the most tragic of the tragedians. this we may compare the estimate of Euripides in Quintilian 10. i. 68 hi ad/eciibus vero cum omnibus mirus, ium in it's qui in misera-

There

iione constant facile praecipuus.

a long discussion of this

is

passage by Neidhardt, Diss. Halenses 3 p. 279. auTo the object after ey/coAoiJvTes, and preparative to :

For the construction comp. Eth. N.

Bpq.

ovTK

Tvyj! oTL ol /AoAiCTTa

TT]

vyKaXovcri

Sr/

toCto Spa:

avT& olov

tovto

^Kio’Ta ttAovtovctiv.

—

9'

1 1

68

32

a
ori ovSep

comp. 23, 1459 * 29 and Bon. Ind. 205 on 6, 1450 '’18.

® 42.

^27

see

dyoSi'ui':

TpayiKUTarai

i.e.

:

as arousing most directly the two distinctively

emotions of pity and fear (comp. 13, 1452*533 tovto yap

tragic

iSiov Trj^ ToiavTrj'; p.ip.-qo'em's

Euripides

Similarly in the context

icTTiv),

termed TpayiKwTaTo?

is

rtov

TroirjTwv,

greatest master of the art of arousing these

Neidhardt

1

.

c. p.

al TOiauTai di'

on

17 eyKoActTai

4. i,

is

often

the

same emotions (comp.

els SvcrTv)(iav

The

supposed

® 28

TeXevrwa-ai.

proper management Aristotle has in to

be that of the actors, stage-mana-

gers, etc., responsible for the execution of the piece.

pretation, as

29)

(*’

is

281).

= ai

KaTop0w0oj(rn'.

mind

because he

This

inter-

was long ago pointed out by Diintzer (Rettung

d.

Poetik p. 159), makes the clause a superfluity, since it is obvious that, to succeed on the stage, every play requires fairly

aristot.

good acting and an adequate presentation.

we have

to

supply

i-n-o

tov

Euripides, in the next line);

iroirjTov

the sense

After dv KaTopOwOSxriv

(comp, is

chosen a good tragic subject, must handle

it

care to secure a satisfactory result (comp. 14, practically

is

replaces

it

rd aXXa.

synonymous with

in the

An

eu

ev

olKovop.ei,

that the

with

all

scil.

poet, having

due

skill

and

1453 25). KOTopOow term which oiKovop-eiv, the *>

context (® 29).

admission that Euripides, though a master of ^ 29 is not always equally admirable in

emotional effect (jpayiKwraTos), his

treatment of the

other

points

in

His His plots are

a tragedy.

shortcomings are often noted in the Poetics.

artistic

directly

5

COMMENTARY

2i8

1453^29

or indirectly criticized in

^5 i454*’i> and 28, 14, 1453 28-32, and in 1454 l’ 31; his characters in 15, 1454 1461 20 and his choruses in 18, 1456 “ 27. olKoi'o/iei, This seems to be the first instance of the use of >

16,

in 25,

;

word

in

the

In the grammarians and writers on

criticism.

literary

style olKovo/xia (otKovo/xetv, oIkovo/j-ikos, etc.) is the regular technical

word

and management of the HSt. s. v., and Trende-

for the disposition of the materials

poem

various points in an oration or a

Gramm,

lenburg,

(v.

de arte poetica iudiciorum

gr.

rel.

91 and

p.

p. 149).

^ 31

A

3 iro Ti>'wi'.

reference perhaps to the critics

have disapproved of the sad ending of so Euripides (supra auoraais

who

are said to

of the tragedies of

24).

SiirXTji'

14

many

t€

Aristotle has to use

o'uaTao-ii'

tt)I'

the periphrasis crvcrTacrtv e^^ovcra instead of the simple crvvecrTuxra, since

SnrXfj

would

o-weo-Two-a

Though

required.

there

have

not

conveyed

the

sense

a certain inelegance in this juxtaposi-

is

and a-va-Taa-iv, the reading is sufficiently certified by the very similar repetition of ^vo-is in several Aristotelian passages De part. an. 2. 8, 653^^33 7 twv octtwv a-Kkr/pa De gen. an. 5. 5, 785®' 23 (fever u kevKorepav avrwv rrjv (fivaiv ovaa Eth. N. 7* 1 *^ 54 ^ 20 cfeverei 8 TjSfa, elvat TTjv Twv TTTcpipv (feveriv. a TToiii irpa^iv Trj<; ToiaaSe (feverews, and in the Platonic Epinomis tion of o-vo-Toa-ts

.

:

.

990 B ovK av

—

—

cited

a

(feveris

yevoiTO

iKavrj

OeoiprjcraL

p.ri

(comp. Lobeck On Sophocles Aj. 277,

(fevereu)?

by Vahlen). ’oSuffaeia

KaOd-n-ep

22

’

)

paStcos ttotc Tracra

6 a.vp.a
.

.

;

see

the synopsis of the Odyssey in

1 7,

1455^16-23. Kal TeXeuTwaa ktL explains 8t:rX^v ttjv (Tverraeriv €xovo-a, as is sometimes the case with the second of two words or clauses

coupled by re koI

(v.

Ast, Lex. Plat. 3 p. 365,

anima i. 2, 405 a 27). Qedrpw. comp. 4, 1449 34 rd Oearpa e$

d
632 B rd Oearpa audience

show ‘

’,

too

weak

’.

eyevovTo.

The

.

700 E Ath.

Oearpov, in the sense of ‘the

in the plural also, in the sense of

audiences in these days, says Aristotle, are

to like the strong situations of the great

^ 35

ap.

enough, but the above quoted passages

word may be used

the audiences

—Plato Laws —Aristoxenus

9 Trpos rd Oearpa

eKfeSe/Sap^dpoirai.

common

is

that the

a

(feevvi^evr

and Torstrik on De

iroiout'Tes toIs

Oearais

:

Tragedy.

Plato Gorg. 502 a )(ap[^e
rois Oearais.

t

^

— 1453 “ 29-14. 1453

13-

Baumlein, Gr. Partikeln

not the proximate word, avTrj. (followed by Kiihner, Gr. Gr.*

passage from Isocrates

4,

219

5

here negatives the proposition, and I 453 ^ 35

The ov^

loTH' Se oux auTT).

’’

130

ecrri

p,

308

179), quotes a very similar

2. 2 p.

ovx

S

ol6 v r

airoTpiiruv,

and

explains the position of the negative as due to a desire to avoid the collocation ovS’

with

its

1450

a

av-nq (=toi)to) is the subject

ov 8e eo-n).

Icrri (i. e.

gender assimilated to

that of the predicate

TpaywSias

diro

on

6,

preposition comp. Top.

Eth. N. 10.

i.

1173^28

2,

582 B T^s dirb TOV eiSevai Bon. Ind. 546 ^ 51.

106

15, al

For

gr.

The

KaXCyv qSovai.

—

-ySovr].

Plato Rep.

conclusions of the Orestes and Alcestis ^

reference

some other comedy on

Alexis or

we should use of the

the absence of the article see

Comedy

de arte poetica iudiciorum

ydp ktL

€K6i

as

ry airo tov Trimv

‘’•37

of Euripides were said to verge on

Gramm,

For

p. 336).

OTTO rC>v

qSovrjs.

The

Kw/ioiSias oiKeia.

2. i

this

^Tragedy’,

‘the pleasure

:

say (comp. Kiihner, Gr. Gr.*

CAF.

(v.

4).

rel.

(v.

p. 36).

probably to the

is

the

36

Trendelenburg, Orestes of

same subject (comp. Kock,

2 p. 358).

"Eotiv

p.ei'

ouv ktL

Aristotle

two points announced

at the

T^S TpaycpSids epyov (l 3

on

see

oiJ/€ws:

now

145 ^ 29). i449t'33.

6,

passes on to the second of the

beginning of chap. 13, iroOev

i

ecrrai to

)

We may

suppose him to be

thinking of such theatrical artifices as the fearful appearance of the

Furies in the Eumenides, and the rags

and

tatters of certain

of

the heroes of Euripides.

‘naturally prior’,

irpoTepot',

and Plato Each. 183

14^6

Cat. 12,

i.

e.

better, as in Aristoph.

This sense of irpoTtpov

b.

is

Ran. 76

elwOaari Se koI ol ttoAAoi tovs ivTipLoripovs koI p,dX\ov

dya7ro)p,Aovs vtt avTiov Trporepovs (jidcTKeiv Trap' avrois eivai.

pare also the use of TrpwTq in “ 30

As

TroiT)Tou dpeivovos.

a

effect

has to

on

the poet

and is

Com-

33.

an imitative

artist in

language,

1447 28), it follows that the poetic be produced by language, and not by means other

h' Xoyo)

pip.qrr]';

3

recognized in

(v.

I,

than language. opav

e.

1.

:

(fipiTTeii'

4

opav ra Trpay/xara ytvo/xcva.

denotes the cold shudder {<^piKq

:

v.

W. H. Thompson

on Plato Phaedr. 251 a) experienced in moments of intense fear or This may arise even from the mere thought of something

horror.

horrible

:

De motu

an. 7, ’joi ^ 22 Si 6 Kal piTTovcn koX ffto^ovvrai

5

—

:

COMMENTARY

220

H 53

5 vo^o-avTcs

And

fjiovov.

Aeschylus Ag. 1242 Kal TriffjpLKa

often said to arise from

it is

what one hears

©vicrrov Saira TraiSetW Kpeuiv ivvrjKa

Trjv

Sophocles

1408 ^kovct avqKOVo^epd airo^XrjTea, Kwkvtovs te piiai.

Kal

.

—Trach.

—

m

Srdyas Kal evepov? Kal dXtySavTas Kal dXXa

ovopa^opeya ’’8

1044

El.

kXvovct’ ecjipi^a.

dcra tovtov tov tuttov

Trdvras tovs aKovoyra^.

t oicrai t

(fepiTTfiv Srj iroitt uis

drext'OTepoi' see on 6, 1450 17. In such instances the effect depends too much on the o-Kcvoiroids (or costumier), and too little on the poet himself. :

’

The word

XopTiytas.

‘impendium’ (Paccius),

(Valla),

(Heinsius),

suppeditatio

‘

ratus’ (Twining,

aliena’

Hermann),

p.

This

Tyrwhitt’s, the

is

last

probably

right.

means supplied by and have

outside his art in

which

the to

is

adminiculum

S.),

after

and

Unter-

Beitr. 2

same

It aptly points the contrast

poet himself, and

appa‘

Vahlen,

practically the

;

and

as

between

those which

be furnished by others

’

sumptus’

et

‘expensive

(Tyrwhitt),

(Ueberweg,

’

rendering,

‘

opera

choragi

‘

apparatus’ (L. and

‘

stiitzung durch aussere Mittel

20).

mean

has been taken to

it

is

are also

the accordance with Aristotle’s use of xop>?yta and xop^y«v Thus in Eth. (v. Bon. Ind. 852'’ 52 and 60).

Ethics and Politics

N.

10. 8,

fiXarrov

(comp.

1178 BeiTai

24 he says (scil.

i)

toI;

rijs

fKTO^ )(oprjyia?

yov aptrrj), and

iirl

in

I.

piKpby

rj

IIOI

ii,

ett

15

iyepyovyra koX tois 1) TOV Kar dper^y teXeiW EKTos dya^ois tKavcos Kf^opyjyrfph'oy. More than one, however, of 10. 9,

1179

1

the recent interpreters of the Poetics

seem

to have

assumed

be supposed to retain

its

theatrical

original

The answer

service of a choregus.

(with

™ust

Heinsius) that in a discussion on matters theatrical

sense, that of the

to this is that

we

constantly

find Aristotle even in the Poetics using the technical terms of the

theatre in the

more general sense they had or had acquired

in

ordinary language.

Instances of this are dywvt^Eo-^ai (24, 1460*^9),

crwaywvt^Eo-^at (18,

1456“

1455

26), TrpwraywviCTTys (4) 1449'*'

I 455 ^i)i cTTEto-oSiwSrys (9, 1454^2), ek TrepiTrerelas (l6, It scoms to be agreed 1454 29), vTTOKpLTiKa (20, 1457 ^21). too that the duties of the choregus were mainly, if not entirely, with the chorus, and that he had nothing to do with the make-up

o-dSiov (17,

1461

^9

34))

d-n-b

'^23),

ETTEio-oSiow (i 7

prjxay^'i

)

(15,

of the actors (A. Muller, Gr. Buhnenalterthiimer p. 336). TO TepaTwSEg. The reference here is to the appearance of certain

of the more monstrous

creations

of

Greek mythology.

Such

t

— 14-

221

5-14

1453

abnormal personages required on the stage a peculiar make-up 1453 and special masks: Pollux 4. 141 ra 8e cko-kcw irponoiTva ’AKTamv iarl Kepa
.

.

^ *Apyos

.

Tro\v6(f>6(iXp.os,

EitTTTn;

rj

Xetpwvos

In existing plays we have a clear instance of a

nica p. 204).

personage of

rj

(comp, Sommerbrodt, Scae-

vTraXXarTop.€vr} els ittwov irap EvpnriSrj

kind in the ^ovKcptDS napOevos, lo, in Prom. 588

this

-(comp. 674), and in the Furies in the Eumenides, who are said to look more like Gorgons than women (Eum. 48). The prominence of such figures ancients

2

Dind.) rats re yap

p.v6ois irpos eK7rXrj$iv TcpaTwSr] pLaXXov

on

TO TepaTwSes

may

the stage

When

Ses p.6vov),

however,

it

gives us

does not serve

it

7)

— of producing a

this

excitement of pity and fear

and on that alone.

(

t^v arr IXiov Kal
in TO TepaTwBes, but

'’12),

easy to supply the omission,

it is

is

if

one remem-

marvellous {6avp.a
;

28 and Plato Hipp. mai. 283 c), and that the recognized by Aristotle (to Oavp-aarov r/Bv, 24,

comp. Herodotus is

4.

1460*1 17) as one of the great causes of

1452

-^Sov-qv

Aristotle does not stop to explain our pleasure

bers that anything of the nature of a repas

9,

tragic effect

dramatic purpose (to reparu)-

not the true tragic pleasure, which depends on the

is

marvellous

Kal tols

oij/eai.

rrpos arrarr^v Ke)(p7]Tai,

out of place in Tragedy, since the pleasure

is

it

rj

be ^oj^epov, and thus a means

though an illegitimate one (supra ^ (^dySos).

was noted by the

the dramas of Aeschylus

in

Vita Aeschyli (p.

:

human

pleasure (see on

4)-

(coii'wt'oCo-K'

= Koivbv

e)(ov(riv

The argument


(Bon. Ind. 400

here

may

*1

^

39).

be thus restated

:

A

play

is

lO 13

1449 ^ 36 and passim); if it is to arouse pity and fear, therefore, it must do that through the iXeuva Kal o/3 epa in its irpaiis (o' Tots Trpdyp.acnv), not through merely material accessories supplied a 5 extra by others (comp, supra t 7). TouTo: i.e. to eAecivdv Kal rfro^epov. For similar instances of this

essentially a

pLip-rja-is

allusive use of the

in

neuter of the demonstrative, which

Greek (Kiihner,

all

1455

Trpd^ews (6,

a

26

;

24,

1460

ouv Seika

Ttola

TToh. Beivd

by the

t)

Gr.. Gr.® 2. i p. 35), see 13,

is

common

so

1453

**

24

;

17,

a 8. irola otKTpd.

amends

Aristotle

alternative Trota olKrpd.

The

his question ^ 14

tragic poet is not

concerned with Beivd in general, but only with those calculated to arouse pity (ol/cTpd).
ad

loc.

17

atcrOrjiris

rj

= vel poiius,

Kaff avrd

r)

as in

De anima

to. ooi/xySeySi/KOTa

2. 5,

417

a

5

tovtois (v. Pacius

and Kiihner, Gr. Gr.^ 2. 2 p. 297). As Aristotle proceeds deed of horror (to Beivov) may be either actual or only

to show, the

9

COMMENTARY

222 1453*’ 14 contemplated; and

and

if actual,

may be

it

either within the play

itself,

1452 ^ ii), or anterior to the from the ndOos- In the Oedipus

identical with the Traces (v. ii,

action of the play, and distinct

Tyrannus,

deed of horror, the slaying of Laius,

for instance, the

takes place before the opening of the play, the action of which

made up

and and remorse of Oedipus to the catastrophe,

16

xds Toiadras irpd^ets

(2) a ndOo?,

which consists

on

13).

(see

= rds

there are three possibilities

(3) indifferent

something

8 (iv 6 v, but

in

therefore at once

is

it

;

ouf exOpds exOpdi',

fxet'

preceding

dlvai

the ellipse

.

Toiavra

Toiadras

d

tSia Kal

that

Troifj,

p.r] 8

to

there

is

be especially

understood from the

in Rhet.

e. g.

pirjSeis,

many

In

Trpd^eis.

i. 6,

Kal rd TrepiTra.

instances a’

1363

— Rhet.

27

2. 23,

'

20 Kal

oTi el

Ghjerevs ySiKijcrev, ov 8

p,rjSe

’AXc^avSpos, Kal

el

^

’

’

situations

is felt

and oUrpov, and thus emiTragedy {ravra (rjrrjTeov 22).

not so easily supplied,

is

{ayaOd ecTt) Kal rd

1397

scil.

rds

.

.

three

all first

Setvdi/

nently adapted for the purposes of 17

actions

either (i) friends, or (2) enemies, or

only the

is

it

in

With such

Seivds irpaiu';.

each other;

to

1452

ii,

the parties concerned (the slayer and

:

may be

the slain, for instance)

piteous

is

up the agony

(i) of a series of (f>o^epd (alarming incidents) leading

'

TvvSapiSai, ov 8

ol

’AXe^avSpos, Kal

el

ndrpoKXov

"EiKTotp,

Kal

'AxidXea ’A\eiav 8po? (comp. Vahlen on the present passage). J

odScK

call forth pity either for the

may sometimes

the deed it

is

There

cXeeii'dt', scil. Troiei.

from

clear

Oedipus,

etc.

the is

it

;

doer or the

p.eWwt',

(comp.

scil.

sufferer. is

deed then

in the

That

to

the doer of

1

not distinctly said, but

which follow, Orestes, Medea,

instances

incidentally recognized also in the analysis of

eTraivwv Kal ij/oyoyv yuvop-evoiv, 8 e Kal ekeov

nothing

claim our pity,

‘the involuntary’ in Eth. N.

18

is

3. 2,

1109^31

3. i, etrl

iiliai).

621

just as in

iroieiv,

enl p.ev tois eKovertbts

Se rots aKovcrtois (Tvyyvmp.'qs, eviore

pbeXXrj

= p.eXXrj

aTroKreiveiv.

added because pity may be aroused by the spectacle of impending, as well as by that of actually

The

alternative ovre p.eXXo>v is

present anguish: Rhet.

2. 8,

8id ra^euyy eXeeivorepa (comp. Kax’ auxo xo irdflos

7r\T)i’

case (ov 8 ' dv

p.r) 8

arouse a certain

(see

on ‘

13,

1452

piteous

’,

rj

p-eXXovra

)

i.

e. in

this,

as also in the following

eTepws exovxcs), the spectacle of suffering humanity

may term,

:

1386 ^ l ra yeyovora dpri 1382 ^26). 2. 5

human

*^38), but

feeling (akin to pity) for the sufferer it

is

not, in the proper sense of the

since the moral condition of pity

cannot say that the

man

ought not to

suffer

is

wanting

;

(comp. 13, 1453®'

we 4).

l«i

—

223

14-35

the parties, however, are related to

which

was not

it

to

Trpoa-rjKev

be expected, and the situation

comp. Rhet.

well as horrible;

dyaOov

Vahlen] kukov

is

‘

piteous

1453 ” 18

'

as

tl (rvp./3 rjvai.

means cognatio

here practically

‘

(comp.

’

ig

10).

As

oXXo ToiouTov.

Tl

8 ’ ev

1386®' ii (eAeetvw eo-n) to oOev

2. 8,

Ti Trpa^ai [vTrdp^ai

iv rats

Bon. Ind. 818 b

one another {orav

comes from a quarter from

iyyevrjrai to. TrdOrj), the evil

Tttis <^tXtais

T]

''

1453

14.

When

1

1452^11 vdOos

defined in ii,

includes 1*21

other forms of suffering besides violent deaths. dTroOavouo-av, ‘the slaying of Clytaemnestra.’

KXuTaifii'Tiirrpai’

TT)v

On

use of the participle see on 13, 1453 “4 (8vo-Tv;;^owTa). the alternative spelling KAvratyur/o-Tpa see Roscher’s Lex. s. v.

and

Vitelli,

For

i*

23

i>

25

this

in the

Studi Italiani

MSS.

There

239.

i p.

Homer

of

is

Wilamowitz, Commentariolum grammaticum auTov

:

emphatic as in

eupio-Keiv is

hardly a trace of

(Ludwich, Homerica I-V

IV

p. 5

;

p. ii).

1451 36 21, 1457 1*34; 24, 1460 followed by an infinitive in 14, 1454 ii evpov

and

TrapaaKcvd^eiv,

9,

;

middle) in Eurip. Med. 195 ovSets

(in the

it

comp. ® 6. .

.

.

Xvira<;

rjvpero pLOVcrr) Kal iroXvxopSoi's (dSais Traveiv.

elSdras Kal YiYviocrKovTas, irpd^iv

yCvccrOai rrjy

ctrTi

Instead of saying ^ 28

TrpaTTovTas.

scil.

elSorwy

vtt

Kal

yiyyaiaKoyrcoy,

Aristotle

introduces the qualification in the clause with wa-wep, which thus

becomes a substantive part of the statement (comp, ii, i452®'23; 18, i 456<‘27; 21, I457b24). YiYVuoKOvras

Rhet.

:

2.

1378® 14

I,

Demosth.

crupt^ovAcrciv yiyi/ciaKovTas.

avrw

ciSora Kal yiyyaicrKoyra Trap

iySextrai

pirj

rd /SeXTicrra

10. 17 ravra roiyvy fKacrroy

Kre.

on 6, 1450 ® 25. M^Seiov Eurip. Med. 1236. 6 Io+okXcous OISi'ttous comp. 15, 1454 1 8 Sophocles is named because there were others who had dramatized the Oedipus EupiiTi8T)s

:

see

:

*

.

:

stor)'

(Nauck, TGF.*

pev ouv

:

see

on

ejw ToO Spdparos €^(o

Tov p.vOov.

—

p.

22, :

24,

15,

*^32

® 25.

454

1

1 *

1460*29

IIOI* 32 Ta irapdyopa Kal

t^S rpaytoBias

7 £^0)

:

dKay0o7r\y$ of Sophocles dvaYvwpiaat,

.

Tov p-vOevpiaTos-

—

7,

1455 ^8

There is a Eth. N. i. ir,

Seiyd TrpovTrdp^fiy iy rais TpayaiStats.

’AXkp^wv 6 ’AoToSdpavTos

Tu TpoupaTia ’oSoffffet

29 31

967) as well as Sophocles.

1458

reference to this form of dramatic construction in

6

^

:

Nauck,

(Nauck

scil. Tfjy (ftiXlay,

TGF.

““

p.

name perhaps

another 1.

c. p.

777 and 964.

i’33

for the ’OSvo-o-evs

230).

as in 8 31 (see

on

16,

1454

32).

35

:

COMMENTARY

224 1453

38

TO xe yap (iiapot' kt£. i. e. it offends our moral sensibilities (see on 13, 1452 ^36) as a sin against the laws of natural affection; and it is untragic also, through the absence of the element of :

suffering.

^454 ^

I

said of a dramatic personage, recalls the idea of

iroiel opoiws,

yivw
irpa^ai in

/jlt]

6

Kp£0>'Ta

Toi'

Aipwi',

38.

tovto tvoiu,

SCil.

diroKTuvii 8 e ov (comp. “ 6), as ‘

1453

Soph. Ant. 1231.

ei'

is

i.

fiiWu

e.

Creontem patrem Haemon sciens perimere conatus

fecit

The

tamen.’

dTroKTeiveiv

implied in Goulston’s paraphrase,

nec per-

est,

ellipse is not unlike that in av fiey

ow

ix^pos ixOpov in 1453 b 17. ^ 2 PeXxiot', scil. ToO yLvma-KOVTa Trpd$ai, ^ 4 eKTrXrjKTiKOK. eKTrXrj^is is a very general term for the loss of self-

may

possession that it

from a mental shock.

result

In use, however,

has the more special sense

often

definition of /3 dXXov
Top.

in fact in

it

4. 5,

of extreme surprise ; the 126 b 17 is OavpLaa-LOTrjs virep-

The Discovery

admiratio exsuperans (Pacius). ’

‘

is

said

both here and in 16, 1455 "•17 to be ‘astounding’, just in the same way as a Trepnrheia which in a play is so intimately con-

—

nected with

Discovery

the

be Oavp-aarov.

to

and

Oavp-aa-Tov

describes the Oavp-acTTov

1460 b Miileid

is

The

—

is

said

of

affinity

indirectly

shown by

pursuit of Hector

‘

Rhet.

in

sense

’

the

in the

i.

ir,

between fact

Iliad

1371 bio

iKirXrjKTiKov

that

Aristotle

one place

in

as

1460'^ 14), and in another as iKTrXrjKTiKov (25, I cannot agree with Tumlirz (Die tragischen Affecte

(24,

25).

und Furcht nach

who

Aristoteles p. 34),

supposes

that, as

used in the Poetics, the terms tKnXrjiii and iKirXtjKTiKov denote the excitement or tension with which the audience awaits the Discovery. KpdTKTTov

= potissimuvi.

Aristotle’s

exemplified in the Iphigenia in Tauris full effect

of Tragedy

is

is

view of the construction

presumably

this, that the

attained in the most artistic way, without

and with the minimum of offence His ultimate preference for this conand we have been enough in itself

the adjunct of physical suffering, to

our moral

struction

is

prepared for

sensibilities.

intelligible it

to

;

some extent by

his recognition throughout this

chapter of the legitimacy of a situation like that in the Iphigenia, in

which the deed of horror, though contemplated,

carried out (comp. /xeXXwv

The

criterion

1453

is

not actually

b 18 /acXXt; ^ 21, p.iXXovra b34). ,

which now determines the

relative

value of these

t

—

Tragedy

possible situations in

on

the emotions, but

sive’

is

225

10

a moral one, their effect not on

set aside as /xtapoV,

is

second (to yivwa-KOVTa

(1453^3^)1

‘morally offen-

irpa^ai',

is

done

ignorance;

in

on

see

also is fjLtapov; the third just avoids being that (1454®' 3),

the unholy deed

1454^4

The

the moral sensibility of the audience.

of the four situations

first

^

38-1454

H- 1453

^ 2

)

because

however, in

the fourth,

which a timely Discovery saves us from the rude shock to our moral feelings which is inevitable even with the third kind of plot,

pronounced

is

to be Kpancnov.

This seems to be the rationale

of the present classification, and the explanation of the discrepancy

In in the text and that in 13, 1453® 24. was thinking only of the emotional effect of here he comes tragedy as produced by the most obvious means to see that the same effect may be produced in a finer form without It is his somewhat tardy recognition of the necessity of their aid. avoiding to p.iap6v that has caused this change of view. cv Tu Kpea<|)6i/TT) a play of Euripides (Nauck, TGF.^ p. 497). ^5 It is referred to in Eth. N. 3. 2, 1 1 1 1 ® 1 1 olrjdeiri 8’ dv tls Kal t6v

between the statement chap. 13 Aristotle

;

:

vlov TToXe/xiov elvai wcnrep iy

Ttj

eV

’l

"eWt).

Ttj

(Nauck

4)iY€i'eia

17

Wepo-n-rj.

comp. 17, 1455'’ 9. Nothing more seems :

be

to

known

of the play ® 8

p. 837).

8id Y«p touto reverts to what was said as far back as 1453 22; the whole of the intervening statement (1453 22 tov? p.kv

ow

— 1454® 8

aveyvwpta-ev)

in chap. 9 (see

and

in chap.

irdXai

:

3

97 ^

i

Pol.

in

1281®

1262

15 (see

on on

i,

1447^x1),

15, 1454118),

may

Aristotelian instances

be seen in An. post.

2.

of xrdAax in a

19, 100® 14 a 32 and ^

254 ® 16 (comp. 253 (comp. 1262 a 26), and 3. ii, 1282 29

Phys.

8. 3,

a

(comp, 10),

in

15 (comp.

42).

comp. Metaph. @ 6, 1048 a 30 Sto ^t^towtcs km vepl ^ lO SurjXOopLev Xenophanes Fr. 18 (Diels) ovtol d-rr dp)(^';

|^»)TOuvTes

TovTiov TToivTa

27), in chap.

1453319.

13,

7). in

2. 4,

9,

1451

(see

22 (see on 22, 1458® 31).

back-reference I

on

i

9

Other digressions of

a digression.

is

considerable length are found in chap,

^

:

.

dXXd

6eol OvrjTOts VTreSet^av,

dpuvov.

-^6v(a

^rjTovvre';

Kovaiv

iff) ev pier

Quintilian (5. 10. 120) has a very similar observation

the discovery of the various

enim artibus

forms of argument

editis factum est ut

omnia antequam praeciperentur

,

in oratory

:

on Neque

argumenta invem'remus, sed dicta sunt

mox

ea scriptores observata et coUecta

ediderunt. POETICS

Q

COMMENTARY

226 dkayitdl^ot'Tai

comp.

:

well-known

to these

have not the

They

1452^1.

9,

are obliged to keep

(comp.

23), because they 9, 1451 to discover or invent new ones equally fitted for

art

stories

the purposes of Tragedy.

^13

rd ToiaOra

® 17

XP’I®"'’'®-

may be the

common

(3o"ir€p

TO

e\ex0T)

pet'

us in the context

kind,

is

(®'2o),

replaced in 2,

*5

1448

13 2,

n-ovqpo’;.

in 6, 1450*^8.

;

Pol-

•

I-

1254^^ 13 TO appev tt/dos to Orjkv cf>v(T€i 9. I, 608*5 8 Siovep ywi] dvSpds

5)

)(eLpov.

— H. A.

e\er)p.ove
p.aWov,

p-OLpoTipov

its

opposite of both being (^avXos or

TO 81

p.kv KpecTTOv

TO

tells

equivalent to o-TrouSaios as used in

is

it

;

19-22.

see 14, 1453

:

applied to anything good of

cTTtetKr^s

21

ttcIGti

.

.

which, as Aristotle

by

^18

.

trt

8k
p^epLij/L-

Kal cj)iXo\oi8opov p.aX\ov Kal TrXrjKTLKWTepov' ecrri 8k Kal

8v
In the Politics we are told that owing to the ktL weakness of the rational faculty in them, the virtue of which women i//ev8ka-Tepoy

are capable

Rhet.

I.

6r}XeLO)v

1361

5,

man

not so high as that of a

is

‘‘6

apcT^ coj/xaTos

(Pol.

i.

1260

13,

summarizes the Greek idea on p.kv

koiAAos Kal p.eyeOo'S,

20).

this point:

8k (Tm(l>po
Kal (fnXepyia avev aveXevOepia';.

oXws

In the

<|)aG\o>'.

Politics,

where the slave

is

viewed as a

being of the very lowest intellectual and moral capacity, Aristotle

him only the bare modicum of virtue required to enable him do his work apeT^<; Setrai pnKpas Kal rocravTTys ottojs 81 aKoXamav p.rjTi Sid 8eiXiav ekkeLif/rj rtov epycov (Pol. I. 13, 1 260 35). ^ 22 TO dpixoTTOiiTa, scil. rd ^Orj Troi^o-ai (see on 24 rpiVov to d/xoiov). In the individual character there must be nothing at variance with that of the class to which the individual belongs ; in a woman, for allows to

:

*’

instance, there should be nothing

30

app-oTTov in

term El.

airpenks Kal

p.rj

‘

126 TO

‘

^23

€i

p.01

scil. rjOr].

Oep.L<;

rjOu',

The

unwomanly

opposite of

This same use of

appLOTTov.

occasionally found in later criticism,

is

SovAeia

is

e. g.

the

in Schol. Soph.

TaS’ avSav’ Xiav tjOlkov Kal appLo^ov yvyai^iy.

comp. Plato Laws ‘jgo a yvyacKud t€ Kal connexion practically means a character

^do's in this

‘

e. one of the personages, just as it does again further on in 24, 1460“ II. An approximation to this sense is found in Plato, who

i.

uses the

word now and then

for a

man

character: Phaed. 81 E evSowTai 8i CIS

TOiavTa

TjOy],

or other creature possessing

[scil.

ai \j/v)(aQ, wcnrep

cIko';,

oiroT aTT dv Kal piepieXeTTjKVLaL Tv^wcriy iy r
oloy Tovs p,ky yacTTpi/xapyias

.

.

.

pte/xeAerryKOTas

...

els to,

twv oywy

1

14Kol

yivf]

1454

12-15* 1454

^

26

227

6r}ptwv eiKos ivSvecrffai [v. Stallb.

TOiovT(t)y

T(jjv

^

.

—

Tavra

On

di'Speiai'.

women

the avSpua of

ad

loc.J.

— 1454

C ra ^e^ata

Rep. 496 B ym'aiov kuI 503 ^6rj (comp. Festschrift Th. Gomperz dargebracht ev TeOpafifievov ^do'i

see Pol.

i.

p. 165).

1260®' 22

13,

In the present passage, however, Aristotle finds a certain incongruity in the idea of an dvSpeia yvvrj, as though the affinity of dvSpeto? with dvSpes were still felt.

and

21.

1277

3. 4,

has been rightly explained by Gunther (Grundziige der ® 24 Kunst p. 280) as meaning ‘clever’, i.e. ‘clever in speech tiichtig im Reden’, ‘beredt’) and argument’ a quality which according to Greek notions was quite out of place in a woman That this rather than (Pol. I. 13, 1260^30; 3. 4, 1277 ^>23). Seiv'Tji'

trag.

—

terrible

‘

in ® 31,

’

is

meaning of

the

T^s

ly

MeAavtTTTnys

or rhetorical

SeivoTTjs

cleverness

‘

is shown by the illustration where the reference is to the

here prjcns, ’

of the speech put into the mouth

of IMelanippe by Euripides. TO

ofioioi', scil.

TO y&os

TToirja-ai,

as

yap erepoy tov

terpretation, TovTo

is

implied in the clause of in-

y^p-qa-rov

to

^^os koX dppoTTOV

Instead of saying opoia, to correspond with appoTTovra

TToiqcrai.

lapses into the singular dpoiov, through the influ-

ins’ 22, Aristotle

would seem, of the singular in dySpeioy pev to rjOo^ in In the absence of an example in a 28 sqq. to illusthe context. trate the neglect of this canon, the meaning of opoiov is not very ence, as

it

clear; but a hint of

it

may be

gathered from the language in the

analogy in 1454^ 10 d/xoiovs ttoiowtcs KaXXiovs ypdcfyovcnv, where opiotovs (said

of a portrait)

means

portrait

produced by the poet should be

what the personage in question

1454

12).

sense

in

The

fact

1448

2,

of

S'

6,

d/xotos

12

This

‘like the original’.

very well be the sense of dpoiov in the present passage

is

‘

;

may

the literary

like the original

’,

i.e. like

in history or legend (comp.

being used in a somewhat different

and

1453 “5

13,

how

only shows

inattentive Aristotle is at times to uniformity of language.

^(nrep eipr)Tai,

opaXdv:

i.e.

‘

in the present sense of this

term {dppoTTov)

out change or modification in the course of the play.

reappears in

’.

the character should always remain the same, with-

Horace A.P. 126

may

ad imtm \sc\d. persona^ qualis The logical scheme of these

servetitr

ah incepto processerit, et sibi constet. four canons of character

The canon

be presented thus

:

the qOo's of the

dramatic personage should be (1) xp^o-tov, not inconsistent with

goodness of disposition; (2) dppoTTov, not inconsistent with the 5^os of the class to which the personage belongs; (3) dpoiov, not Q 2

I

“ 25

^26

*

^3

COMMENTARY

228

1454 ^ 26 inconsistent with the received idea of the particular personage; (4) o/xaAoi/, not inconsistent with

d^wfiaXos Tis.

Aristotle

character subject

changes of mood;

sudden

to

itself.

perhaps thinking of Achilles, as a

is

comp.

168

fr.

’

(Teubn.) ApL(TTOT4\rjs Eustathius on

1884 6

6 u
p.

II.

569

24,

and

avu)iJ.aXov etvai to ’A^tAXetos ^Oos,


Roemer, Bavarian Academy, Sitzungsb.

(v.

297). Trapexoji',

TT)i/ jj.ifirjcru'

shows,

means

as the explanatory xai rotourov y&os vttotl -

the original of the dramatic portrait, the person-

known from history or legend. amyKaiou not required for the purposes of the story ’. The 29 gratuitous Trovrjpia of Menelaus in the Orestes is noted again in 25, age as

^

pr)

‘

:

1461^20;

Scholiast also

the

draws attention KaKorjOa

yvwpLTji).

Ttj's

14 p. 46.

to the

am

I

the Orestes

more than once

nature Euripides has given him (to

On

the reading avayKaCov see J. of Phil.

not able to quote an Aristotelian instance of

dvayKoios as a feminine, but

enough

on

evil

Though

in Plato.

it is

Attic,

and common

tendency was

to treat such

good

certainly

Aristotle’s

adjectives as of three terminations, his practice varied in the case of several (e. g. 8 e/3 atos, cKOucrio?, eAev^eptos, y

tStos,

TcAetos),

Our

if

existing texts are to be trusted.


30

article

:

comp.

rijs

MeAanVTrr^s in the next

line.

The

has to be restored in like manner before ’OSvo-o-ews in

16,

1454 ^ 26 and ’Opeo-Tv^s in 16, 1454 ^ 31. In all other passages in the Poetics and they are very numerous the rule laid down by

—

—

Fitzgerald (Selections from the

Nicomachean Ethics of

^

Aristotle,

163) as to the use of the article in Aristotle with the names of dramatis personae is duly observed. The same is true of the

p.

Nicomachean Ethics p. 52), and Politics. the

for 6

Socrates

'Api(TTo4>dvr]<;

The

my

Textual criticism of the Nic. Ethics

In the Politics 6 Plato’s

in

means

rule in fact

and ignored

(see

SajKpd-ri/s is regularly used

and

dialogues,

the Aristophanes

in

in

2.

Plato’s

4,

1262

observed in twenty passages in the

is

two only, in restore (6) ’OSvo-o-eA, and in in

8.

7,

Politics,

— where we 1342^23 — where

1338 *•28

3,

8.

'’ii

Symposium,

may

the true

probably haiKparei. Similarly in the Rhetoric there are at least eighteen instances of the observance of the rule and reading

is

but two exceptions,

viz.

’ 08 vo-oreA (comp.

2.

3. 15,

-—where the correction (o> in

I. 9,

1367

^ 8.

23,

1400

1416^

I

''2 7

— where

andb

StoKpaTi/s

is

12),

we may restore and 3. 14, 1415^30

confirmed by the

parallel

^

iv

Iku'Wt)

rfj

comp.

;

mind has been

""

1454

15.

26,

26-1454

1461

I*

The

32.

229

i

Scylia Aristotle has in

I

454

But

often supposed to be a tragedy of Euripides.

is apparently no mention elsewhere of a tragedy with this by Euripides (comp. Wilamowitz, Analecta Eurip. p. 159), and the language in 26, 1461 I' 32 seems to point rather to a dithyramb.

there

title

All discussion has been set at rest by Gomperz’s recovery

among

Vienna papyri of a fragment of some ancient critical treatise, which mentions the Oprjvo'; of Ulysses (i.e. a portion of the Scylia) as the

the

work of

fjih'

Timotheus

the dithyrambic poet

01

oy et

elcnv 8 e

Tvyxo-voiev evep^ovres eVvoiav Kai TrapdSety/ra Trap

tw

Kal Tei/rd6eos hf

Op’^vtn

toD

’GSricrtrecos

el

p,ev

nves

Kal tovtov KaXm';,

:

ov ixeLjxovvrai [8e], aAAov Se

TrpoTi^evrat

aurots, wcnrep

rip^eiv

rtva p.up.evTaL Kai to

Gomperz, Vienna Academy hist. Classe 1886, v; comp. Wilamowitz, Timotheos this Aristotle appends a second instance, one from

opLOLov TtvL olSev, dAA’ ov Tio’OSvcrcreL (v.

Anz. der

phil.

p. III).

To

a tragedy, as though conscious of the

first

being not quite to the

point.

MeAavtWr/ rj cro(f)i] of Euripides argument put into her mouth against the popular idea of monsters {repara) was in Aristotle’s view (see on Setvryv “24) an exhibition of cleverness out MeXaviVinijs

Trjs

(Nauck, TGF.“

of place in a

8e

The

rationalistic

woman.

iv AuXi'Si Xpi)

in the

prjcris,

p. 509).

:

Kal ev Tois

^32 1 1 sqq. and 1368 sqq. There should be a unity of ^ 33

Iph. Aul. 12

rjeea-iK

ktI.

character just as there should be a unity of action in every play. .

This incidental reference to the action reminds Aristotle of a point (the use of the p.r]xavr]) which

had not been considered

in

his

general theory of the plot in chaps. 8-ti. TO amyKaioi'

1452 i)

tj

to eIkos

:

comp,

especially 9, 1451

38 and

10, ^

on

24, ^

24. drayKatoi'

1459

1)

eiKos,

scil.

eivai

(Bon. Ind. 239

22

;

see

18, 1455 '‘24, 1456 *9, where the Ado-is (the un- ^ 37 denouement) is distinguished from the SeVtg or ttAok^ knotting, or intrigue). This is the first appearance of these

XuVeis

:

see

ravelling, or (

the

terms in this sense, though they

^

already well established in see

on

ei' TT)

10,

ther

I

1452

MijSei'a

p.Tjxat'tjs.

>

35

9 )-

:

On

may be presumed

to

have been

the technical language of the theatre

15).

Eurip.

Med. 1317.

the mechanical contrivance,

personage was suddenly

brought on,

whereby a god or or removed from

^ 3i

;

COMMENTARY

230

M54*’ithe stage, see Haigh, Attic Theatre® a denouement effected by such means

Aristotle regards

209.

p.

as an inartistic

way out

of

the difficulty, or else allowable only in certain exceptional cases (Ij

A

3-6).

425 D

similar view of the firjxavq

ol rpaywSoTroioi,

Oeovs

fjievyovcn

From

atpovTi's.

when a

stage,

artifice

Thus even

matters

to

Kara-

//.r^^avas

the term

use

is

from the

apart

means which savour too much

solved by

difficulty is

or miracle.

ras

ctti

theatrical

this

sometimes metaphorically extended of

implied in Plato Crat.

is

eTretSav ri a7ropio
in the present context

2) the

sudden appearance of Athene in II. 2. 166 is said to be avo and in Metaph. A 5, 985 18 reason is said to come in pi.rjxavrj'; as a deus ex machina in the cosmogony of Anaxagoras 'Ava^a:

yopa? re yap pyjxavy xprjTai tu airoprjcrrj

^2

ra

avayK7]<; Icttl, tots Trape^KCL airov.

irepl toi' aTroirXoui/

Schrader:

26

p.

Sia riv alriav

Townl.]

II. 2.

:

'AOrjva

rj

t^v KOcrpLOTrouav, Kal orav

tt/jos

155

;

comp. Porphyry on

Trapayiverat

awo

144,

[so

Cod.

His note on

KaOevSovra tov ’OSvcrcrea eyeipovcra.

wcTTrcp

II. 2.

p-r/xo-v^^

II. 2. 73 (where Agamemnon tries the feeling of his army) is worth quoting as a typical attempt to reconcile Homeric practice and

Aristotelian theory

Sto.

:

n

ofVws eTrpaiev Mcrre oXiyov

dm

KmXvpa

pjrjxo-viJ'S'

17

6 ’Aya/xe/ivwv aTreTreipaTo to.

ivavTia avp-f^^vai

yap AOrjvd

e/coAvcrev’

rj

twv 'Axaiwv,

i/SovkeveTO eo'Ti

Kal

Kal to

;

St dmCrjTov to

dXXms el pjt] ei avTOv tov pvdov. (jiTjcl St o ’Apio’ToTfXr^S (Fr. 142 Teubn.) TTOtTjTiKOV pev eTvai TO pipelcrOai, to, elwOoTa yivecrOai Kal mirjTiov^ pdXXov to klvSvvovs mpeia-dyeiv ttKos St Kal lxr]xdvYjp.a Xveiv

fK Xoipov 7remvr]pevov? Kal

ev6v? TvapaKaXilv

ovTWs t^ovcriv

Trjv

eirl

...

i)

tw pyKei tov xpo^ov diravhr](TavTa<: dAXa mLpaOrjvai ^y-rjeraerOai

.

t^oSov

St Xv
dm

.

,

Stir

prj fi

pyjxav^s' oTav yap Sia tSv

elKOTWv yiyv7]Tat, ov p-qx’^^V '''Ovt fcrriv, dp [.? dXX’] oTt irpofTKeiTai 0 tos' dXXa TovT tiwcbv o tiKos rjv avTois yCvecrOai tis 6eov dveOrjKe tov ’OSvcrcTfa Siax'orjO^vai

ravTa Spdv a Trpa^ai dv tiKos fcrnr

(p.

24-25

Schrader).

dXXd

fXTjxtirrj

(Ritter).

in ^

I

is

6)

ktI.

:

‘

prjxavrj breviter dicit

dm

a digression within a digression

;

Aristotle

prjxav^i 6eois

opav

remembers

Instead of Kal voir)Tuiv (for which various corrections have been proposed)

would

as a rule

The sense is: ‘ Though jC" restore Ka-no'irjTov (v. J. of Phil. 28 p. 252 ). it is artistic to represent what is usual, and inartistic (dvoirjTov) to

introduce hazardous situations (kivSvvovs), is

pro 6 e(d

This clause (which ends apparently with

I

still

under the circumstances

a certain propriety and probability (eiVds Si) in the

Homeric

story.’

from Aristotle’s ’Arrop. 'O/i. does not end words KivSvvovs napeiadyeiv, as is supposed by Rose and Heitz. view

is

correct, the quotation

there

If this at the

15 . 1454 ^ 1-9

231

may

appearance of a god on the stage

that the

be necessary for 1454 '’2

a certain purpose, to reveal matters of interest which

outside

lie

the play itself as being either anterior or subsequent to the action

of the piece.

may be taken as who opens several

a tacit apology for the proce-

This

dure of Euripides,

of his plays wdth a prologue

by a god to explain the historical antecedents of the situation, and concludes others with a sort of epilogue, in which a god announces the future fortunes of the personages (see Haigh, delivered

Drama

Tragic

A

246-7).

p.

ment may be recognized

deus inter sit nisi dignus vindice aXoyoi'

distorted reminiscence of this state-

in the

Horatian precept, A. P. 19

ftodtis

nec

1

mciderit.

a general term for that which cannot be seen to be

is

6

above 1454 36 avayKOLov 17 eiKos), in other words for that which does not admit of explanation, that either necessary or probable (see

which we find unaccountable. 1461

No

The

14).

It is

of frequent occurrence in the

28 and 25, clause continues the statement in 1454 s 37-t> 2.

of the

chapters

later

Poetics

(see

esp.

1460

24,

S'

improbability can be allowed within the story (ev

toIs n-pa-

happens to be in the part only presupposed and not actually presented on the stage (e'lw rpaywBonitz (Ind. 343^32) seems to take a different view of 8tas).

yp-aa-iv)

of the play, unless

the clause, connecting xprjo-riov

P-rjxo-vfj

efu TO

6 r),

T
€1/

8e

OiSiiroSi

At

ktL

:

understood from see

on

see 24,

:

)^-q(TT6v

may

and

is

s

37.

and

6/xaAd,

arise as to the possibility of

He

6p.oLov.

shows

that the

there

is

of the

8

art, that

17-26) should be at in order to meet any an

r/Oo's

being at once

corresponding

difficulty

of the portrait-painter,

who

makes a man look handsomer than

(o/rotoDs TTotowTcs (caAAtovs ypa<^ovcnv)', this,

’’7

1453 32. 1460 s 29.

without sacrificing the likeness

can do

it,

repeated in very

his theory (1454'^

has been solved in a sister

he

is

14,

app.6rTovra, op.oia,

doubt that

text

this point Aristotle returns to the subject

which according to

once

rule in the

1460^27.

scil. Sei,

TpaywSi'as

xiis

iirel T^

eimi,

with that which immediately precedes

The

ktL

similar terms in 24, IxTjSei'

it

it

no reason why the

SO that,

if

the painter

literary artist also

should

not be able to represent a tragic personage truthfully, with any infirmities

of character which form part of the received idea of him

(dpytAovs KoX pa6vp.ovi Kal 1 12),

and

at the

PeXriot'wv'

:

see

same time 2,

1448®'

rdAAa ra roiavra as a good man (eTrtetKcts 4, ii, 18.

ctti

twv

rjdtov

13).

9

— COMMENTARY

232 1454

4|Aas,

9

T ov

‘

we poels

and studying the whatever

in fact,

is

shown by what

follows in

though

may

km

oiVaj

1 1

hearers were poets,

his

art of poetry for practical purposes.

else they

The

Poetics

on Poetry learn from them

be, are a practical treatise

;

and the assumption throughout is that one is to how to write a good poem. Similarly in Rhet. i. 8, 1366 » 12 i^/xas means we orators (Seoi av ra tu>v TroXireiwv eKacrrrj'; r/ixas:). Kal yap cKelvoi. Aristotle might no doubt have said Sxnrep yap 10 Vahlen illustrates the construction from Soph. el. 16, eKetvoi. ‘

^

as

Aristotle speaks as

TTOirjTrjv.

I 7

5

’

KaOdwep

2 7 cryp-fBaCveL 8e vrore

Kal yap

ev rots 8 Laypdp.p,acrw

eK€L dvaA.vcravT€s kvLore. crvv&eh'ai Tj-dkiv

d 8 vvaTovp.ev‘ ovtu) Kal iu rois

iXeyXOLS elSores Trap’ o 6 Adyos o’vp.fBaivu crvvdipaL SiaXvaai tov Adyov dTTopovp.€v,

and Other

contrast

1240^1

dvopoLov;

pa^d/xois.

include

that

like

is

‘

too quick or too slow to anger

between d|ds and pdOopo? oiov

7(atpovcr(,v,

rSAXa

Kttl

all

Bon. Ind. 546

parallels in Aristotle (v.

opyiAous Kal paOufjLous,

12

to.

Toiaura

in

e'xovTas i.

e.

is

'

the

;

Eth. E. 8.

avaTTjpol evrpaTreXoLS

similar defects of character,

^ 25).

Kal

5,

o^eis

added in order to which are not

defects

incompatible with a general goodness of disposition. [irapaSeiypa

14

two w'ords see ‘

o-kXtjpottjtos]^ J.

they

adscript

of Phil. 14

may

For the reason

for bracketing the

If they are

p. 47.

not an ordinary

by

possibly represent a marginal note

totle himself to indicate that

a second instance, one of

[obstinacy?], was to be added.

According

879-80 K.) notes of a very similar embedded in the text of Hippocrates. p.

to

Galen

1

Aris-

j

a-KX-pporris (t.

18.

2

description were to be found

'

’AYd 0 wv: perhaps, as Tyrwhitt suggests, in his Telephus (Nauck,

TGF.^

p. 764).

SiaTTjpelv.

15

This quasi-imperatival use of the

infinitive (without

or x/oy) is common enough in Aristotle (Bon7 Ind. 343^22). For the compound hiaTrjpuv comp, Eth. N. 10, 8, 1178® 13 Starr;Se?

povvrei TO TTperrov eKdcrTw.

—AeschineS

in Ctes. 6 oTav 8 iaTrjprj 6 (i)cn.v

Philemon 94. 6 Kock os ye ravra Trdvra StaTrjpel. At 01 vopoi this point Aristotle sums up by saying that the rules laid down for the pvOo'; and rjOrj in a play must be observed throughout by the .

But besides these general principles of construction,

poet.

necessary in practice

to consider the

it

is

spectators (comp. Teich-

|j-

Forsch. 2 p. 204) and the impression {alcr 6 rja-ei^) likely to make on them when presented on the stage,

miiller, Aristot.

the

as

work it

is

is

easy to produce a bad impression through some

practical stage-craft.

This seems

fault

of

to be the sense of the present

!

1

*

15*

passage

however, avoids

Aristotle,

;

9- i 6.

*’

1454

1454

20

233

details,

and

refers to another

The

writing of his for a fuller explanation of his precept.

mentioned

may

26

in 17, 1455®'

1454

incident

perhaps be taken as an instance

of the kind of fault he has in mind. irapd rds

TCI

di'dyKTjs

on the

aKoXovOova-as

Tr)

qualification,

and the

like

—

the im-

however, rds

avajK-qs

his

poet to

own

art

depends on that of others

it it

in

and

should say, the

which directly depends on SO far as

(a.KoXovOova'a's rfj TroirjTiKrj )

actors, costumiers,

we

limits the responsibility of the

TrovqriKrj,

that part of the stage-efl'ect

—

means

ala-Orja-us

spectators, i.e. as

The

of a play.

stage-effect

irapa.

see Bon. Ind. 562 ® 10

Bernays, Dialoge des Aristot. p. 138. pression produced

For

dKo\ou0ou<7as aicrOiiaeis.

a sense approximating to that of

is

not within his province

(6,1450^17). This interpretation, which is as old as Victorius, is much more probable than that of Bernays and others, who suppose the reference in the text to be to the business of the costumier and stage-manager. resolutely ignores

proper;

and

it

is

Throughout the Poetics

such matters as outside the

all

inconceivable that he should have given them

any special attention in a work

1450®

13,

the dialogue

like

For the

(ev Tots e/cSeSo/Lt^ots Adyots).

in 6,

Aristotle

of poetry

art

plural

and Kiihner, Gr. Gr.^

20,

ev Tols EKSeSopeVois Xdyois

:

i.

e.

Trepl

atcr^T^crets 2. i p.

TTOLrjTuyv

comp,

oij/eis

17.

in the now’ lost dialogue Trepl

’’

18

Bernays following Victorius has shown (Dialoge des

-oirjTwv, as

The reference must 27 ; comp. Bon. Ind. 226^35). be to a w’ork (i) by Aristotle himself, (2) published and written Aristot. p.

and (3) on a kindred subject. next two chapters form a sort of Appendix ; they discuss a series of special points and rules of construction which for publication,

This and the

had been omitted in the sketch of the general theory of the If these

afterthoughts

bered that there in 15, is

14-

Tt]v

irXeicrrif)

An

/xC^os.

be remem-

excursus on the different forms of Discovery

:

xP'l'VTai

ii, :

it

plays in

1452829.

Pol. 7

.

—Hippocrates

(TTotai T€ Kal alel )(prj(r 9 ai.

i

to

an even stronger instance of matter out of place

-

llj

Trpds to o’top.a koI TrAetcrraKis,

vyUtav

is

30-

eIpT]Tai irpoTepoi'

p.e 9 a

it

1450833), but also by the important part

(6,

1453^

i)

here,

not only by the great dramatic interest of the Dis-

justified

covery

is

1454837.

seem out of place

19

I p.

133° ^ ravra

40 K.

ots

H

ols

yap

nXeLcrTois

XP^~

ttXcicttov (TvpijSaXXeTai Trpds

sWurraL 6 avOpwwos

ttAci-

20

^

15

— COMMENTARY

234 1454*’ 22

uTa

comp. H. A.

:

the allusion

mark

to the

is

The

of Thebes.

585 ^31.

7. 3,

From some unknown

X6yx4‘’ ktL

play (Nauck, TGF.** p. 855); on the %TTapToi

said to have been visible

accusative Xoyxqv Aristotle seems to regard as an

instance of atiractio inversa, since he continues the construction by

saying ’’23

acrrepa's instead of daTepe^.

KapKivos

:

see

{iiroLYja-e)

iTriKT*]Ta

:

Nauck, TGF.“ p. 797. on 14, 1453 I* 17.

For the

De

29 oi ydp /rovov rd

gen. an.

i.

721

17.

7rpocreoiKOT£S

yivovrai toTs yovevcrtv ol TraiScs

ovXds re ydp

i)(0VTiDV

TOTTOis

/S paxion

24

rwv yewrjadvTmv ^ 8r)

Twv e/cyovwv rdv tvttov t^s

ovXai

Tov Trarpds

392 and Eurip.

The term

in the

rives ecr^ov ev rois airois

we have

understand

to

17

^

ep^ovros

crTiyp,a .

.

.

tw

rd ypdp,pa.

El. 573.

New Comedy

for

kind was yvwpio-piaTa (see on 17, 1455 20). '’25 ^vr^Tupot: a play of Sophocles (Nauck, TGF.’ oiov

(jvp,(j>vTa

rd imKTrjra'

km.

iv XaXKrjSovi T (3 reVvo)

iTr€(Tr]p.r]vev

as in Od. 19.

:

ra Se ^kt(5 s.

dXAa

km

ovAijs,

of the verb

ellipse

dvayvwpio-is yiVerai

—

tokens of

this

With

p. 272).

the construction

changing, as sometimes happens when a second instance of not

same order

quite the

422 8 p.rff.

- arjp.uov Se

is

Kard^pov

Xiav vypdv avrq ydp

ns

Trpoyevpiario'as

De anima

introduced by otov; comp.

rd /r^re

oapr]

ovcrav rrjv

yiverat rod TrpdiTOV vypov, dxnrep OTav

la')(ypov )(yp.ov

yevrjTM irepov,

km

oiov rois Kdp.vovcn

TTiKpd TrdvTa (jiMverM Sid to rrj yXdiTTr) TrAiypet TOiavrrjs

ahrOdveaOM p.T]

Rhet.

.

3. 2,

14048 18

SoKeiv Aeyeiv TreTrXacrp.ivoi'S

cKeivo 8e TOvvavTLOV

TreTTOvOe

ydp

Trei^vKonus’ tovto

eoiKev eivai, al

8’

ydp

»cai

iriOavov,

Trpds cTriySovAevovra Sia/3dXXovTM, KaOd-

km

rwv dAAojv VTroKpirmv

'rpo? rrjv

oiov piev

rj

rj

&€oSd>pov

cfjwvr]

ydp rod Aeyovros

dAAdrpiai.

8 27

UTTO TT^s rpoijiou

828

vird

finds

d)s

dAAd

vypoTrjTO'S

XavOdveiv Troiowras,

8id Sei

rods oivovs rods p.ep.iyp.evov;,

Trep Trpds

2. 10,

yXwrrav alcrOdv€(rOM

:

Od.

19.

Twv auPoTOJv: Od.

386-475.

2 1.

The

205--225.

between the two instances

is

this

:

distinction Aristotle

whereas the scar

is

seen

by Euryclia by accident and in the natural course of things, with the herdsmen Ulysses directly points to it Trio-reios evexa, in order to convince them of the truth of his disclosure: Od. 21 217 km adjpa .

dpi(^pa8£S oiiXiqv,

dAAo

Trjv

Ti 8ei^o), oippa pi

iv yvioTov iniTTiiiOrjTov t

TTore pie crds ^Aacre XevKid oSovti,

evi

9vpQ,

In one of hiS

lost

writings, perhaps the ’ATropT/piara 'Opn^piKa, Aristotle criticized this

Discovery as resting on an error of logic

imXapi^dveTM rod toiovtov

dvayvwpicrpiod,

:

’Apio-TOTe'Ar;; Si,


Aeyiov ws dpa Kara tov

^

—

—

;

\ 6 y
TToirp^v T(o ToiovTw

ttSs ovXrjv

’OSvcrcrevs e(TTiv

e)((x)v

(fr.

208 1454

Heitz; Porph. in Od. p. 126 Schrader).

^wf^evai rots

TTicnrews e^’eKa, scil.

CK

irepiireTeias

Polyb. 32, 22 ov

dAXa

T£ia5,

Sia

ot;/x,€6ois-

quodam casu

repentino

‘

:

The

dy^tvoi’as koI f^i\.oTrovia<;.

rrj';

refer

it

assumes the Discovery Peripety, whereas

remembered

on

(Tyrwhitt),

’

the

in

story,

in the

is

not always a term of the theatre

ii,

speech (see on 14, 1453

8

Od. 19, 392 (comp. 26, 1460^26). On this, ’’30 mode of citing Homer, see Bergk, Gr. Litteratur-

Tois Ni'irTpots:

et'

the

turn

1451 “ 22); and (2) that even in the Poetics use such terms in the sense they bore in ordinary

very apt to

is

or

TrepiTreVeta

(i) that TrepiTreVeta

in Aristotle (see

he

is

it

earliest

geschichte

i

p. 496. oTi ’Opeo-TTis

di'6Y>'(ipi
(Ritter), as the

manifestum

‘ :

se

fecit

context shows, iKuvrj plv yap Sta

8 e aiTos Xiyei kts.

exetJ'os

peWwv

dveyvwpLaev

.

.

8td Trjs ^TTiaToXfjs,

COmp. the

;

on

scil.

ii,

parallel in 17,

For

ktL

e'nrwv otl

.

pi^uv in the Poetics see

1452

esse

Orestem

ri)?

cTruTToAi}?,

1455 ^ 9

’

32

OvecrOai

the senses of dvayvco-

5.

aveyvmpicrev

on

The

’Iffiiyofeia.

reference

Taur. 727 sqq. auTos Xeyei Iph. Taur. 800 sqq. In Aristotle’s view this latter Discovery is very like that in Od. 21. 205; just as Ulysses points to his scar to convince the herdsmen, so Orestes, to convince his

is

29

and Odyssey to be consequent on the It is to be rather one of the means to it.

the

to

in

TrepiTre-

e/c

ordinary inter-

pretation of al £K 7rept7reT€tds, ‘quae ex peripetia oriuntur

makes

as

(Victorius),

’

TO TrXeiov crvvepyw )(pu)ixevos ovB

Tv)(ri

to Iph.

:

(comp. 808

sister

showing

rdivSe poL rcKp-^piov

34

makes a statement and the old home

;),

his familiarity with their family history

Argos (comp. 822 d S’ elSov avros, TctSe ippdcro} TCKp-qpLa'). Vahlen restores 810 eyyvs t(, which is no doubt the more usual order when tl is connected with an adverb. But there in

810 Ti eYY“5’

are certainly 7.

Tl

57

'

^

Toi's

rjrTov

some

instances of the order in the text,

ov /card Blktjv ti pdXXov

Tvpdwov? yScov

TOVTO

dlvai

al<7

.

\p 6v

.

.

.

lovras

— Plato

Xen. Hiero

— Cyr.

I.

6

Prot. 327 B

.

r.

21

II oiei

e. g. rj

35

Thuc.

ovv opas

oiet

Tl,

dv

ti,

paXkov ktL Trjpei: in

Nauck, TGF.“

would seem) TrrjVLapaTa,

is

36

p. 257.

the actual expression of Sophocles (as

t^s KepKi'809 to

it

be compared with the Euripidean la-TOTova

KepKiSos doiSov /leAeVas in Aristophanes

Ran. 1315

37

COMMENTARY

236 1454

3y

where the allusion

humming-sound of

to the

is

passage to and fro (comp. Diet, of Antiq.^

however, there

2

avrrjv [scil.

a

JlpoKvrjv']

its

kc/3ki8os

B 1 y^P

Z-

yap

evprjKe (pwvpv' v<^atvei.

crtcoTTOJcrav

In

a suggestion that the shuttle told Philo-

is

mela’s story for her; comp. Achilles Tatius Ti'Xyf)

the shuttle in

767).

p.

ttettAov

.

view a disclosure by such means as these

is

.

.

koX Trpos

In Aristotle’s

Triirovdi Trj KepKiBi AaXei.

quite as inartistic as

that of Orestes in the Iphigenia (800).

8ia

TL

aicr 0 e'a 9 ai

T(o

comma) supposes

and explains

ISovra,

percipmido

quae

possit, ut

thus

it

quam

significat

‘ :

8ta

(omitting

.

tw

mean when ‘

feeling’ (Butcher), or

ala-Oicrdai

the sight of

‘indem ein Anblick

schmerzliche Empfindungen wachruft’ (Gomperz). natural, however, to

tarn

quod sensibus percipi

in exemplis dicuntur KXavcrai, haKpvcraL.’

some object awakens a

non

•

.

the

alaOia-Oai

p.vrjp.r]
alaOia-Oai

rui

offerendo obiiciendo

accordingly has been taken to

TL iSovra

Vahlen

iSokra.

ti

be the same as

this to

It is

more

take tw ala-Oea-Oai in the sense of ‘by be-

coming conscious of’ (comp. Bon. Ind. 754 43 for the aorist), and as an equivalent for t
rij

Metope? to iraBos tovto

p-vripyj

[i.

impression

the

e.

left

by experience] Kai ala-Odverai tovtov. In default of a word corresponding to our consciousness ’, Aristotle has to use ata-Orja-L': and alcrOdvea-Oai in lieu of it (Bon. Ind. 21 i comp, my Textual ‘

;

In the illustrations which follow

Criticism of the Nic. Ethics p. 65). the emphasis

is

on the

participles tSwv

and

olkovldv

.

.

.

Kal

p.vrjcrOei';,

not on eKXava-ev and iSaKpva-ev; the actual manifestations of the

awakened memories

{eKXavcrev, iSaKpva-ev) are only the accidents,

which happen to be found ISovra

is

a circumstantial

in the instances

participle

It is loosely put 1449“' 14). Kiihner, Gr. Gr.® 2. 2. p. 570).

1455^1

ev

Ku-n-piois

Nauck, TGF.^

:

for

p.

under consideration.

(comp. pLeTa/SaXova-a

‘seeing

775.

in

4,

or hearing’ (comp.

Nothing more

is

known

of the play.

^2

^1,

Rhet.

’aXkii'ou diroXoyu; S'

Od. the

8.

521 sqq. (comp.

designation

covers

8.

83

the

sqq.).

In

ground of

1417 13 See on 1454 ^>30 for this mode of citing Homer. Aesch. Choeph. 168-234 (comp. Eurip. El. 520). XoTi 4)opois 3.

16,

Od. 9-12. a

4

et'

Electra reflects

brother Orestes

:

on what she

sees,

who has come home.

and concludes that it It will be observed

is

her

that in

i6.

37-1455

1454

13

237

the other instances of dvayi'oipto-is ek crvXXoyia-iJLov the discovery

made by

who

the party

For the

6 ’Opeorr)?.

rov ’OpeVrea rioXui'Sou.

(Kock, CAF.

agreed that

I

508

p.

;

68 a-wejSdXXeTo ^ 5

i.

was

this

form of the name ^ 6 in). As literary

the Attic

Schulze, Qu. Epicae p.

the business of a sophist, the probability is

that this suggestion of the

some

Sophist Polyidus

^

was propounded

’

discussion on the technique of the dramatists;

critical

1455^4

eivai.

It is

was part of

criticism

compare Herod,

article

tovtov

.

.

.

is

overhears the reflexion of the other.

him

quite unnecessary to suppose

it

in is

been also a dramatic

to have

Welcker, Gr. Trag. 1043), or to identify him with same name (with Bernhardy,

poet (with

a certain dithyrambic poet of the

Gr.

Litt.® 2

Aristotle

756).

p.

TuSei: Nauck,

TGF."

of this or of the other p.

reverts

to

suggestion in 17,

this

10-

1435

841) and to say

’OSvcra-ei’s

who

sible

Ik irapaXoyia’p.ou

:

Nothing more

is

known

either ^

^

personage here referred to was

(comp.

27).

comp.

connects this directly with

''4

ck

crvvOeTr),

crvXXoyicrjLLov.

Vahlen,

who

supposes the two factors in the

o-vAAoytcr/i.os on the side of the one, and a on the side of the other of the two parties quae

Discovery to be a irapaAoytcrpio? [scil.

:

dvayvojpto-is]

‘

ut ex simplici unius ratiocinatione prodire, ita

composita esse potest alterius ex syllogismo, paralogismo alterius (comp,

the

also

discussion

The

Schriften’ p. 16). i/fcu8dyyeAos

in

his

illustration,

‘

Zur Kritik

’

Aristotelischer

however, from the ’OSucro-evs

does not seem to imply anything more than an erro-

neous inference by one party (TrapaAoytor/xos o Qaripov) from some

made by

statement

the other.

The

reasoning in

this

instance

Aristotle appears to regard as the illogical parallel to that in the

Choephoroe

:

just as the recognition of Orestes

about through a (rvAAoytcr/Aos on her part, so

two personages in the ’OSvo-o-evs ij/evSdyyeXos,

by Electra came of A by B, the

that' is

supposed to come

about through a n-apaXoyicrfj.os on the part of the fallacy to

be found there

A

may

latter.

The

have arisen from the ambiguity of the

know the bow’, B may would know it again (dvayvwwhich was not true (comp, o ov-^ ku>pdK€L). ptowTos) In our ignorance of the play and its plot it is idle to speculate further as to the way in which the actual Discovery may have been worked word ‘know’.

have taken this to

—

9

two plays mentioned, the ^LvelSai (Nauck ij/evSdyyeXo'; (Nauck p. 839). It is impos-

the

Tyrwhitt on ii, 1452

803.

p.

having

mean

said ‘I shall

that he

‘

’

® 13

COMMENTARY

238 1455® 13 out

in

The

it.

present

one of many passages showing

is

poetry (see on 16, 1454 ^ 28). Oarepou comp. ii, 1452 >^4.

The

:

{diarpov)

Laws 659 A ® 15

Both text and interpretation here are

an object-clause

after

for

Troirjaai;

in the highest

use of the gen.

this

Goodwin, Synt.

absol. with is see Ktihner, Gr. Gr.® 2. 2 p. 93, or

After

of Plato’s

ws 8 r] Ikcwov dvayvojpioOvros seems to be prac-

degree doubtful,

of Gk.

Moods and Tenses § 917 (comp. Lobeck on Soph. avayvwpiovvTos we may understand to rd^ov, from preceding

—

Aj. 281).

to to^ov

distinction

between

and dvayvwptowTos being like that between in De mem. 2. 45 ^^ 20 ovre yap p.v'qp.rp; ectiv

avaXrpl/Ls

yvmcreaOai

the

in

line

the

and

yvwcrea-Oai dvdAiyi/'is

ovre

a.va.p.vrj(Ti^

rj

Ac

of

the text

MSS.

(OaTipov for Oearpov),

ws 8 t) ktL

tically

error in

the converse of that in the inferior

is

Aristotle’s

forms of logic even when dealing with matters of

affection for the

8id TouTou

‘

here

iroLrjfTai

TToi-fjorai.

of ‘suppose’ or

assume

may

perhaps have the sense

(comp. Herod.

'

184; Xenoph. An.

7.

The comma usually placed 9; Ast, Lex. Plat. 3 p. 136). after tovtov has been removed in order that Sia tovtov may be 5. 7.

connected with

Trot^o-at,

so as to

mean through ‘

or

'

‘

6 crtiAAoyto’p.ds

e/c

tlvZv

reOevTOiV

ecrri

dvdyKTjs Tcov KEt/iEvcov Std Tthv

KeLp.evix)v,

mean

dvayvoDptowTos Sid tovtoo must

by

this’ (see

on

ii,

1452^

5),

Butcher, keeping TrapaXoyia-p.6v,

Aldine ‘

instead

ettoiijo-e

of

el.

comma

If the

165”

i,

crepov is

i

Tt

retained,

would reveal himself or ‘would recognize him by this’. and reading with Bekker and the either

irot ^ aat ,

‘

translates

the

clause

thus

:

This remark led Odysseus to imagine that the other would recog-

nize

® 18

him through

the bow, thus suggesting a false inference.’

otov TO iv t (3 Ioi}>oKAeous OlSiiroSi iv Tu) OiSiTToSi is

— where a

:

comp.

said to be dAoyov, just as here another

{SrjXdxras os

ettio-teAAei),

The

to

is

That

said to be eikos.

is

probable was shown in ii, 1452

"

26

^i').

TTj ’lifaYEi'eia

eiriOEimi

1454^7

15,

certain incident in the story of the O. T.

the Discovery in the O. T.

“19

Aeyetv

icTTe

consequence

in

of this statement’; comp, the use of Sid in Soph.

;

Iph. Taur. 582.

ypappara

is

‘dare epistolam

dative of the person /o

’

(comp. Iph. Taur. 770 addere epistolam’.

281^44 says, whom is omitted,

not as Bon. Ind.

‘

a reader of the play will easily understand. the sake of brevity in Herod.

3.

43

for

It is

ypdi/ias Se es

reasons which

omitted also for

AiywTov

ette^j/ke

— i6. 1455 ^ (scil.

as follows

The

kt€.

|Jlo^'at

haec quidem

sic

of the

first

species

TreTroir/p.o'wv

real crux of the passage, however,

of Discovery

term denotes a

2i), the

1454

to

per

attinebat singillatim

this

and best

fifth

—

Discovery

twv

Std

(17

visible

but the absence of a cnjfieLov of that description peculiar

quae

dvayvooptb-ets

extrinsecus adminiculis ascitis,

illis

The

is

is

as used at the beginning of the chapter, in the

in oT/peiW;

avayvdipicris,

hae

:

quoniam ea nunc non

per suas species referre.’

account

1455 ® 19

a Spengelio prave

universe significantur verbis rSv

KoX TreptSepatcov,

clause

this

voluit illas agnitiones unicas esse

sine

(constant)

in

quamquam

haec planissima sunt

neque enim hoc

se solae sunt

crqixiliDv

tradidit

‘

Vahlen’s explanation

careant indiciis et monilibus, sed hoc dicit

is

meaning

difficulty

has long been recognized,

it '

:

intellecta.

239

Aegyptum perferendam

yap Toiaurai

obvious, and

et

22

TO l3 v/3 Xiov), which Valckenaer explains as

epistolam in at

^

13—17 1455

—

atjiJLeCmv

mark or token; is

obviously not

airwv

17

twv

Twining plausibly suggests that Aristotle may be using (Tr]p.diiiv in a more general sense, and that it denotes here anything that serves as a sign in the as it might very well do irpayparoiv.

—

statement

of

Orestes

actually described as a re/cp.-^ptov (see

may be

As

from the instances,

for the fourth it

Aesch. Choeph. 205),

O. T. or Iphigenia,

the

in

Euripides

it

is

The same

on 14541*34).

and thus of

Ik (rvX\oyiarp.ov),

to

judge

In comparison however with that these forms of Discovery are in

all

judgment more or

Aristotle’s

(17

may depend on a sign (comp. T€Kp.-qpiov, or it may result from a reflexion overheard,

which thus serves as a sign. in

;

second of these the

said of the tears (iKkava-ev, iSaKpvcrev) in the third species

of Discovery. ’

in the

a sort of (rqp.uov

is

’

‘

Thus

forms of Discovery.

less artistic

less artificial

(comp.

7r€7roLr)p.4vwv),

inferior artistic value.

—

® 20 Scpaiuv comp. Eurip. Ion 1431 Sepata TraiSt veoyovo) (pipeiv. Menander (Lefebvre, Fragments d’un MS. de IM.) ’ETrirpeVovres 28 :

Ka.KKup.evov iraiBapiov evpov Kocrpov.

3

— 86 63

-

vrjTTLOV

^xov Bepata Kal

tolovtovl

Sds poi, yvvai, ra Bepaia Kal yvu)pto-p,aTa. piTo.

TU)V

cTTrapydvwv

Bepaid

nva

Kal

nva

Alciphron yvcopiapaTa

TTcpi^etcrai,

This begins a

Set Se Tous p.u 0 ous ktI.

^

rules for the

writing his play in the study

I

as

supplementary ^ 22

When

he must (i) see the various incidents

were, so as to anticipate the impression they are likely

in

it

to

produce on the stage

it

series of

guidance of the dramatic poet in practice.

;

and

also (2) feel to

some extent

the

— ;

:

:

COMMENTARY

240

1455 ® 22 various emotions of his personages, if his picture of emotion is to be convincing (1455 “ 23-34). After these five further rules are added in the course of this and the following chapter. o’ui'aTr€pY(i^e
1386

oAtos rfj

comp.

30

same

crvvTeketv to

and Rhet.

cruvaTrepya^d/xet'ov,

cruv'aTrepya^o/xeVovs

ikeeivorepov^ eivat.

viroKp'icret.

stands in the

off’,

and

:

dvdyKTf] Tovs

'‘•31

2. 8,

koI icrOrjTL Kol

crp^rJ/Aacri

‘

(TwaTreprydl^icrdai.,

to finish

relation to direpya^fa-Oai as (Tvp.TrX.r]povv

and

irXrjpovv

It

TeXeii^.

be remembered

to

is

that in Aristotle’s view (6, 1450“'

36; 9, 14511*28) the language is but a secondary matter by comparison with the p-vOos. Plutarch’s story of Menander’s mode of working may be worth quoting

De

gloria Ath. 4, 34*7 E keyerai. Se Kal

Eyyvs

eiTTfiv'

TreTTOtr^Kas

;

ovy, MeyaySpe,

MevdvSpw twv

rd Aioyvcria, Kal

avvijOaiv tis

KmpwBcay

rrjy

crv

tov Se diroKplyaa-Oai, N-^ tous ^eovs eywye TmroLrjKa

KwpwSiav wKovoprjTai yap

[=

Sta^ecrts

rj

‘the plan’]' Sei

8’

ov Trjy

avTrj rd

CTtp^tSta hracrat.

“23

irpo oppdTui* TiOe'peroi'

De mem.

:

Tt^erai Trpd opparcay vocroy, yoei 8

957

*'’2

2

TO re eyvvryioy

ecrriy

TiOepiyoy; ottvos tTrlkBy (comp.

ouTW repeats the idea of

eyapyearara dpmy opwi'.

ktc., is

Vahlen

hyperbaton

26

6 voCoy, kolv prj

trocrov

irpo

opparwy

what

follows,

oray BiayoovpeyoL<; Kal

opparoiy rtOepeyoy

Trpd

;

and may

The

^ 23.

1449

and supposes an

article,

however,

is

known

play referred to

of

is

assumed on the strength

than what Aristotle here

it

is cer-

be explained as a dittographia.

easily

statement to have been entitled the Amphiaraus.

more

-n-oa-oy

Probl. 40. 14,

.

Bon. Ind. 509 ^ 30).

retains the article before 6 p!dy,

The

KapKiku. this

y

added as an explanation.

like that in 6,

tainly not wanted,

®

450*4

r.

yorj,

incongruity of a certain incident in

tells

of

Nothing

us, that the

was observed and resented

it

by the audience. ^ 27

dv^ei

lepoC

(Victorius),

‘

(Twining), the temple

‘

’

‘

:

templo exibat

e

e templo ascenderat

(Paccius),

(Tyrwhitt),

‘

had

‘

e

left

fano

’

exiit

the temple’

‘was on his way from hatte das Heiligtum bereits verlassen

ex delubro redibat (Butcher),

’

’

(Ritter),

’

’

‘

(Gomperz). o

prj

opwi'T’

had not been

di*

Tov 0 €aTT)v ktI.

The

sense

is

:

If the incident

them, as part of the action of

visibly before

the

I

piece (rd irpaTTopeva), the incongruity would not have been noticed

by the audience (rdv Bearyy not help observing* stage.

To

it

see

when

guard against

on

26, 1461

28)

but they could

actually put before their eyes

this

i

on

the

kind of mistake, therefore, the poet

:

i

:

1455 ^ 22-30

17-

24 i

should in his mind’s eye see his various incidents beforehand, so as 1455 ^ 27 In the to anticipate the impression they will make in the theatre.

same way we are

told in another place (24,

absurdity in the Pursuit of Hector in the Iliad

on the

stage,

oaa 8e

though

Sui/arok’

S'

and gestures in which great emotion The meaning here is apparently this If the

finds expression.

:

emotion convincingly, he must

to portray great

is

himself ; and

if

^

23 ort yadAtora.

the attitudes

Tois crxrifiaan'

poet

passes unnoticed in the poem.

it

comp.

:

1460®' 15) that the would be observed

he feels

in gesture as well as in

it,

he cannot but express

word.

it

to

feel

it

some extent

does not agree

Aristotle, therefore,

with the theory that the poet should write in cold blood, and that poetry

is

a matter of pure art and intellect

;

his

view rather

is

that

some emotional excitement is one of the conditions required for With this we may a strong and convincing picture of passion. compare the Horatian maxim, Siv/s vie flere, dolenduvi est primum He ipsi tibi (A. P. 102), and that of Pope (Eloisa to Abelard 366), ‘

’em

best can paint

Lyrical Ballads), feelings

‘

’em most’; or to

(Pref.

be the wish of the Poet to bring his

will

It

feel

of Wordsworth

even weightier dictum

perhaps

the

woes] who can

[i.e. their

near to those of the persons whose feelings he describes,

an

nay, for short spaces of time, perhaps, to let himself slip into entire

How

with theirs.’ of

many

cited

and even confound and

delusion,

consonant

be seen from the evidence

In the Carpentariana

of Domenichino as showing that the not

feelings

by Biese, Das IMetaphorische in der dichterischen Phantasie

24 (Berl. 1889).

p.

may

own

with the actual experience

all this is

great imaginative writers

identify his

unknown even among

de jouer, pour ainsi dire, representer donnoit,

&

;

painters le

:

‘

p.

193 a story

same emotional Le Dominiquin

avoit

inspirer.

told is

coutume

role de toutes les figures qu’il vouloit

de dire tout haut ce que la passion

pouvoit

is

excitability

peignoit

Lorsqu’il

le

qu’il

leur

IMartyre

de

comme il etoit en colere, parlant I’une voix terrible & mena9ante & il travailloit pour lors a un soldat qui menace le Saint. A pres que enthousiasme fut passe, 2 Carache courut I’embrasser, & lui avoua qu’il avoit dtd ce jour-la on Maitre & qu’il venoit d’apprendre de lui, la veritable maniere

3 Andre, le .

Carache

le

surprit

;

1

,3

’

;

e r^ussir

dans

mOai'UTaTOi lae

les expressions.’ .

verisimilia

.

.

itiuntur affeciibus. POETICS

ol

esse

iv rots n-dOeaiv

volemus,

simus

In the next clause

;

Quintilian 6. 2. 27

.

In

eorum qui vere

ipsi similes .

.

Koi ^aAeTratVet

R

29

— Commentary

^42 1455 ^ 30

of

explains TriOavuiTaToi, and 6

aX. 7] 0 LvwTaTa

.

•

corresponds with

dpyi^dyoievos

on

TTiffavos see

9,

1451

4.

II22bi3

4,

XoTTpewecTTepov.

Twv

rys

(XTrd

— Meteor.

Kai

.

o

.

.

For the meaning

16.

The same

dird TT]? auTT)s
N.

^£ijLia^d/i,ei/os

ol iv rots u-dOea-iv.

found in Eth.

is

epyov

rd TrXoia

7 dicrre

359

2. 3,

use of dvro

Sa7rdv>ys to

tcrrys

Troirjo'ei,

fieya-

diro tov

avrov

dyojyi/xcov ySdpous ey p.h' tols Trora/Aois dA.tyoii Kara^vveLV, iu Se rrj

OaXaTTY] perpiios

Mech.

e)(€iy .

TOV vTrop.o)(XLOV 6

854^7

22.

paov

/xop(Aos,

yap dv

ocrw

wAetov

Kivei Kac

d. 7ro

TrAeiov

d 7re)(jp

Tiys i(r)(yos

r^S

avrrjg.

^ 31

T0T9

Cl’

rds

irdGeo'ii'

SeiAds ev

t^dySo), o 8’ epoirtKos

Xeijiaifci

.

.

460 b 3 paStws dwarvip-eOa

2,

Trd^ccrtv

rots

iv

alcrOy^areis

De insomn.

:

dXXoi

dvres,

dAAois,

ei*

nepi

oTov

6

ev epwrt,

xaAcTraii’ei are intransitive

.

8’

(comp. HSt.

s.v. -^eipaivd)).

The usual interpretation is that of Victorius, who makes them mean fluctuare facit alium (or excitat fluctus in animis auditorum ’) and As far, however, as the ad iram commovet ‘

‘

’

‘

'.

present passage

is

of the audience

is

them angi y (for

concerned, any such reference to the feelings out of place

which they can accept as

The

clause in fact

is

iv rots TrdOea-lv eicrtv Xei)Aa]^d(ji€i'os is

similarly

:

sufficiently like

which precedes infra b 2

comp,

is

The

^^iLp.ao-Oev;.

1

'ss

emphatic, as

FCG.

its

p.

subst.

or agitation in Epicurus, p. 62,

ttSs 6 Trj% \j/v^% )(fip.(uv,

which

dXTjGivwTara,

ol

it.

where

it

drapaita (comp. Lobeck, Phryn.

Tiys

Index to Meineke’s ® 32

not supposed to make them a picture of anger reality (see on 19, 1456 bj).

the poet

only an amplification of the inOavdTaToi

used of menta'oL.

18 Usener, Aderat of

;

instance), but to put before

the opposite

is

p.

387, and the

1148).

qualifies xc^/xaiVec as well

position shows.

It is

as x^^cTrafvei,

is

stronger than TriOavwTara, ^

the

word which

ktL

Sid eu 4)uoGs

some

little

Aristotle

for the time

and

art,

allusive statement needs’

power of

It

may

perhaps'

identifying oneself

but of nature and temperament;

it

is

a

requires

This natural ;

and the

gift

consists in a certain impression

illusions of

madness

arise

from a

distero

pered form of the same quality, €U(|)iious.

j

or else a touch of madness in the poet’s mentafi

gift

constitution.

of soul

the imaginative

this context,

with one’s personages, which poetry demands,

matter not of

ability

Aristotle’s curt

expansion to bring out his meaning.

be rewritten thus:

a natural

might very well have used in

(moi'e fully eu^vrys npoi ri)

is

a general ten

1455 ® 30-33

17-

one with a natural

for

from one

who

1459*’' 7,

and Top.

eimi

gift

and aptitude

243

for something, as distinct

and

well as in Aristotle,

of frequent occurrence in Plato, as

is

occasionally found in Isocrates also.

is

it

In the present passage the poetic imagination

and

to be a matter of nature,

native ev 4)vovs

The

where the connexion between ‘great wit’ (as Dryden

and madness

Aristotle’s

immediate followers, as

common

physiological

‘melancholic temperament’ underlies

more or

that a

morbid form of

less

ecstasy

’

;

comp.

vocyqpxKTtv dXtcrKOVTa.1 fx-aviKoTs

afielvuiv

TroirjTi^';,

madness

genius and

the

that

is

to be seen in madness,

enthusiasm

e. g.

34 rroWol Be Kal

954

i,

.

•

MapaKos

.

A

eKCTTact].

.

.

.

Be 6 ^vpaKovcrtos

between

close relation

implied also in Rhet.

is

—

exceptional ability, and

2.

15,

1390^26

Kal

dv ^ aya6bv to yAos, eyyivovTai Blol tivos xpovov dvBpes irepiTTOi, Kaireira ttoXiv dvaBiBwcriv' e^LaraTat 81 to, p.h' evcfivd [‘ clever ’,

eviore

-

‘

quick-witted

‘

painstaking

^

^

or

would seem)

ivOovcTtacrTLKOLS, o6ev St’ySvAXat Kal

17

BciKtSes Kal ol h/6eoL yivovrai Trdvres Kal

it

all

it

esp. Probl. 30.

calls

writer of the

basis

of mind akin to madness,

in certain states ‘

The

considered at length.

is

shows that they have a

and

alter-

paviKov might be largely illustrated from Probl.

rj

Problem (one of

and

assumed

tacitly

is

be the outcome in some instances

to

of a healthy, and in others, of an unhealthy nature.

€vct>vLa)

455 ^ 32

iiS®’ 22 ^tXoTrovetv dpvovfieOa, iva

3. 2,

The word

So^coynev.

30. I,

I

acquires a power by training or study; comp. 22,

y^rj els

els

p.aviKWTepa

moment

being

hn ;

Ovpas

TroirjTLKas

’

in Phaedr.

(ToxjrpovovvTos rjavL(x6ri

;(comp. Apol. 22

ol

^

;

and he returns

I

and

’

inspired

‘

Texyrjs iKavos Trotrjrrys

t^s twv p.aLvop,eviov to

it

in

Ion 533 e sqq.. Laws 719

c,

rov

rj

other dialogues

For

c).

W, H. Thompson’s

on Phaedr. 245 a. ol Si The singulars which precede are practically .

.

.

equivalent to plurals, evi^vmv !.

’

dv dveu puavtas Movcrdiv

dpa eK

Trot^crts vtto

17

Meno 99

8’

os

of the notion in later literature see

the survival

note

B,

245 a

diKi]Tai, TreLcrOels (us

kdopevos, dreXris avTos re koI

possessed

‘

Plato plays on this idea in his

of poetic creation.

madness

‘praise of

Steady

Be crTdcrtp,a

to.

alternative he.>- .. a rationalistic recognition ^

of the ancient idea of the poet at the

.

d^eXrepcav koX

The

fianKou.

t)

,

’]

’]

.

.

paviKwv (comp. Kiihner, Gr. Gr.^

.

p. 86).

euirXao-Toi,

hould say, TraXij

‘

ij/v)(rj

‘

capable of assuming a variety of

impressionable in Phaedr.

’

or

245 a

‘

emotional

rpirr]

S’

diro

’ ;

moods

’,

i.

e.

as

we

comp, the Platonic

MovcrlDv KaroKw;^?) re

R 2

33

— COMMENTARY

244 ^

33

/Jiavia,

Ko-'i'

—

Xa/3 ova'a drrakrjv koI aySarov

and the explanation

ij/v)(T^v,

of Hermias (p. 98 Couvreur) dTraXrjv Se Aeyei evTraO(!}
Tr]v

cvTrXacTTOV Ka\

The word

e^ovcrav Trpos v 7roSo)(^v tov 6uov.

properly

is

used of material substances which, instead of being hard and

made

rigid, are easily

to take various shapes

;

comp. De gen.

an.

76 i ®'32 TToXvfiofxpa TO. iv Tw vypZ fjidXXov ecTt rmv ev rrj yfj' TO re yap vypov evTrXaa-Torepav e^ct (fiva-w riys y^S (also Plato 3. II,

Rep. 588

a

d).

that in the text, yyjpitis

Kol

metaphorical extension of meaning, not unlike

found

is

in Plato

Laws 666

b l-TrUovpov

av(TTiqp6T-qTO% eScopiycraro tov oTvov (^app.aKov,

ytyvecr^ai, yxaXaKwrepov

Sv
ij/vx^i; rj6o
KaOdirep

evTrXaa-TOTepov

cis Trvp aiSrjpov

rjp.d'i

t €k
evre^Ara, yiyvd/rcvov, Kai ovtws

may be

explained on the principles

where the melancholic temperament

i,

toC

-nys

dvrjfidv

This impressionability of soul, which marks

etvat.

the poetic genius (ev^vys), forth in Probl. 30.

ware

set

said

is

j

to

show

a certain variability of

itself in

mood

emv

(avw/raXoi

ol J

yxcXayxoXiKot),

SyXy

and a general capacity

for strong feeling (y ^va-ts

!

Ta irdOy).

psTTOvcra Trpds

j

‘

cKaTaTiKoi describes the extreme form of the emotionalism of

34

[

temperament some of the melancholic are apt to be so completely carried away by their feelings as to be actually beside themselves for the time. According to Probl. 30. i a tendency to this description of melancholy ’ was observable in most the melancholic

’

‘

;

|

j

j

‘

|

of the poets (twv vepl ryv

—

953 28); a certain our own Christopher Smart and others

Trocycriv

ol TrXeto-Toi,

1

Maracus of Syracuse like was said to have been at his best in moments of derangement, MapaKos 6 SvpaKOvcrtos Kal dp,uviov yv ‘TroiyTy's, or eKcrratiy ( 954 38 )' Among Aristotelian instances of iiia-Taa-Oai,, eKdTacris, and eKcrraTtKos,

.

*'

as terms of mental pathology, the following

may be

noted

:

De

'

|

gen. j

et COrr. I. 8 , ojcrre

325^ 19

ovSeya yap twv yxaivo/xevwv iieaTdyat toctovtov

to irvp €V etvai 8oK€tv Kal tov KpvdTaXXov.

i^cdTaTac Kal paiveTat.

opyy Kal

to.

opylXoi Tc cKo-Tao-ts

—

TOiavTa /cai

Cat. 8,

—

Probl. 30.

ttoioI I)

— H.A. 6

.

22 577 '’'*^ ,

j

t£ pi,aviKy eKCTaats Kal y

yap KaTa TavTas

i

XeyovTai, j

953®'^7 1

TraiSas

;

Hercules slaying his children in his madness]. |

*>'2

2 6 p,ey

[i.

e.

Ajax]

eKUTaTtKOS iyeveTO

p,eXayxoXiKtt)v ocroi eKcrTaTiKOL.

tKo-TaTiKos Se Ttvcs

Tw

9^36 y

[scil. TroioTiyTfs]'

p,aviKo[.

[said of

—

[

in

the

active

TWV yXvKeiwv

[scil.

(TKoXvp.(a TTfpl Teyeav,

epya^dyacvos €V

Tw Upw

^14

TravTcXcov.

Theophrastus H. P.

sense of producing

9.

13, 4

eKo-Taa-is

’

ytvoi>Tat|

pi^wv] at yxcv iKdTaTiKal KaOdirep y '^v

i^icrry'

Kal IldvSetos o avSptavTOTrotds al Si

6 avaTy
Twvf

This

opx)ia^

0 ay(oi|

technical

..A

17 use of these words

H55 ^ 33—1455 ” 7

-

245

perh^s another proof of the influence of (v. Foes, Oeconomia Hippocratis

is

language of Hippocrates eKoraa-Ls)

on

that of Aristotle

to exercise one’s

e.

his school. is

surely impossible in a con-

eierd^eiv denotes to

text like the present, i.

and

reading of the IMS.,

eieraa-TiKoi, the

critical

the 1455 ® s.v.

‘

scrutinize

’

or

on something. i must see, that

faculty

however, as any reader of Probl. 30,

‘

examine

It

clear,

is

Aristotle

is

power of the poet, and that he wishes to distinguish two forms of it, one springing from a healthy, and the other from a more or less not thinking here of the critical but of the imaginative

morbid

state of

into iicraa-TiKos

An

mind.

found

is

instance of the corruption of e/co-TaTtKos

MSS.

in the

of Aspasius’

me

pointed out to

commentary on

Mr. A. O. Prickard has

the Nic. Ethics, p. 136. 3 ed. Heylbut.

a similar corruption in Longinus 38. 5 (e^erda-ews

for eKCTTctcrews). Tou's T€

the

in

same way

in

1460

24,

26

new

point

is

introduced

and in Nicomachean Ethics

(irpoaipetcr^ac re

Books of

places in the later

several

A

Xdyous; comp. 24, 1460 ^ 27.

the

Bu),

1155 ® II, 16 ; 9. 1, 1164 1 1, etc.). This is the third of supplementary rules (see on 22). It will be observed he now changes his construction, infinitives taking the place

(e. g. 8. 1,

Aristotle’s

that

of the preceding participles, just as Set

8e Toiis

fidXioTa irpo

o/tjuaTO)!/

nOea-Oat

though he had begun by saying

Kal ry Xe^ei (TvvaTrefyyalofjLevov


fjLvOov^

.

.

.

on

Kal rots cr^^/xacrtv crwaTrepyd-

For Adyos in the sense of the argument in a play or poem comp. 17, 1455^^17 and 24, 1460“ 27 (also Aristoph. Pax ^ecr&ai.

148,

and Hesychius Adyos’ y tov

innOeadai naOoXou

;

i.

to its simplest

terms by ignoring

accessories.

On

Aristotle see p.

Spd/j.aTOS vTro&ecns),

to set out in a general form, to

e.

its

accidents,

e-Traivois.

incidents (cTreto-dSta

06 3 (

;

see

on

It

means

9,

di'etXei'

to

1451^33) is

work

142).

1418

33

in the

6 0 eds

.

.

.

6X0eii' eKei.

The

nvos

tov

whom

merely reproducing in his

Iphigenia

5

Koprj^ ^ 3) at Aulis.

reading here was practically

long ago by Diintzer (Rettung d. Aristot. Poetik

Vristotle is

Set

accessory

into the story as out-

Artemis, to

lad been offered in sacrifice (m^eccrys

ettled

i

preliminary sketch.

The goddess meant

.

2. 2 p.

tovs Adyous,. as in Rhet. 3. 17,

Xoyov eTreuroStovv

ttJ

it

83 and Poste’s Sophistic! Elenchi

2 p.

153 (comp. Maier, Syllogistik des Aristoteles

lined in the

reduce

personal and other

the logical or philosophic use of eKrtOea-Oai in

Vahlen, Beitr.

eireiffoSioOi', scil.

1

its

own form

p.

180).

the statement in

7

34

;

COMMENTARY

246

1455*’? Iph. Taur. 82, where Orestes, say

eA^cbv Se a'

:

TTovtov t’ ip.C)V

)(6ov6s [

T

an address to Apollo,

in

is

made

to

TjpitiTTjcra

ttSs rpo)(rj\.aTOV p.avias av tXOoip.’ is reXos

(TV S' (liras

[=dv£iX€»' 6 0 eds] iXOelv TavpLK^s p! opovs

= A0£tv CKCi],

ayaXpa deas

,

.

Aprepiis

ivO'

S

XafSovTa

,

.

ivyyovos /Soipovs

err)

,

9 ovl )(

'A6r]vaL0iv

incident in the previous history of Orestes story or plot of the Iphigenia {iim tov essential for the dramatic situation is that

t^et, Xafielv

This

Sovvai.

outside the actual

is

pv 6oi) all that is really tw dSeA^ol (rwi^i} iXBuv

lepuas.

Trjs

Tou

8

which seems

)j.u0ou,

have been explained by

to

the

adscript l^co rov KaOoXov, is equivalent to e^oj rov SpdpaTos (see on b 14, 1453 32), outside the action of the piece.

= (TvXXrjcfiBus (comp. Bremi

Xr]4>0€is

9

di'CYi'wpiae*', scil.

on

’Opiarijs (see

’’10

DoXuiSos: see on 16, 1455

'’12

u'7ro 0 ei'Ta

to.

di'd|i,aTa

9,

:

The proper names

Biarriv.

and impart

story,

all,

to

in Eratosth. § 16).

^ 5).

6.

1451^13

Tu^dvra oropara

'rd

viroTi-

are required to serve as a basis for the

an appearance of

it

moment

speak for the

to

on Lysias on ii, 1452

Aristotle seems

reality.

as though the whole story,

were of the poet’s creation, as

it

was

in the

names and

New Comedy

and

tragedies (9, 1451 iJii, 19). If the stories, however, were traditional, the chief names were generally part of the tradi-

in certain

and taken over from

tion,

it

names

of historic

retention

by the dramatist.

A

reason for

Tragedy has been given

in

the

in

9,

1451I515. 13

eireicroSioui'

;

COmp.

l

iireicroSiovv Kai irapareivav.

Another, perhaps the only other Aristotelian

oirws Se ecrrai.

instance of this quasi-imperative, ovv TO dppoTTov avT(X

on

(see

Xrjij/eTaL.

1454^9),

15,

is

appropriate to the person.

:

the Iphigenia

murder of naturally

1031 '’14 '’is

18

his

3),

and exhorts them

The madness

1^6 ottws

audience

to bear

of Orestes

a return of that which seized him just

is

in

after the

mother (Iph. Taur. 83); his purification also is by his guilt as a matricide (Iph. Taur.

suggested

‘

:

Iph. Taur. 281 sqq.

Ka 0 dpCTe(»s

:

Iph. Taur.

irapaejjuXaTTopei'ou

670

1419

sqq.).

fjiai'ia

Trjs

his

3. 18,

addresses

as he does in the concluding paragraph

of the Sophistici Elenchi (33, 184 in mind the rule he is pointing out. oiKcia

Rhet.

in

Aristotle

:

1 163 sqq. comp, the use of ^vAarrerv

6 (j)pa piv avTov iovra Xo^rjeropaL

^

in

Horn. Od.

(pvXd^u) iv iropOpm.

.j

t

4

m

auTos Si

7-23

1455

17 -

247

In Aristotle, just as in other writers, a Se

is

occasion- 1455 '’21

used after a participial clause to mark a contrast between the

ally

two parts of the sentence (see

my

Textual Criticism of the Nic.

Ethics p. 34). X€ifAa(T0ci's

:

comp.

17,

31.

1455

On

dt'ayt'wpioras tTn'dst auTos.

(oTt instead of rivds)

has

of on.

instead

Tc

amended reading 1461 t>i Ac

behalf of the

may be noted The language

it

that in 25,

here

a

is

reminiscence

of that in

Od. 21. 207, where Ulysses reveals himself

herdsmen

eySoy

^Xv 6oy

:

— the

by Aristotle

by

Homeric S

08 ’

Sy

fiey

kokoi

voWa

KaKa

eyu)

ttoXXo,

being

/xoyrjcras

the

to

jxoyriara<;

represented

and oS’ avro'; iyiii Twining (followed by Vahlen, Beitr. 2

^Xv6oy by

X^L/J.aa-Oei's,

dvayvcopto-as ort avros.

.

avros

afftiKyeirai,

86; comp. Berlin Academy, Sitzungsberichte 1898,

266’)

p.

adopts a suggestion of Castelvetro’s, that dvayvcopto’as nvds (the traditional reading)

some of

to

may be taken to mean making himself known The interpretation, besides being against ‘

his people

Aristotelian usage (see

on

with £7n0€/ievos, and gives

1454 '’32), requires us to take avro's an undue degree of emphasis. There

16, it

no point in saying that Ulysses attacked the suitors ‘himself’; by himself’ or ‘alone it was not true that he attacked them This difficulty was not felt by (comp. Aristot. fr. 176 Teubn.).

is

’

and

‘

either Castelvetro or

Twining, as the reading

in the texts of their

time was not avros but airots. eff«56 ri

comp, the use of auynjpLa

:

in

^12,

14.

The

double

22

ending of the Odyssey has been formally recognized already, in 13.

iSioi'

distinct ’

32-

1453

TO

the peculiar or characteristic part of the Odyssey, as

;

from the

Vahlen

‘

(in this

episodes paper

’,

or accessories.

in the Sitzungsberichte) points to

an instance of

avayvupi^dv riva, in the sense of cause some one to recognize ’ in Diodorus Sic. 4. 59. 6 KaropOujaas 5 e rd irpoeiprjpifva [scil. Theseus] KaTrjvT-qaev cis ras ‘

Toy Aiyia

'ABrivas Ka'i

however, occurring as

which the

is

Sid.

it

ruiv avpiffoAojv civeyvwpiafv.

This solitary instance,

does in an author like Diodorus, and in a passage

certainly not free from difficulties,

is

hardly sufficient to show that

word may have had the same sense and construction

sense given

it

is

in Aristotle

too abnormal, too unlike the Aristotelian use of the

;

the

word

passages in the Poetics and elsewhere, to be accepted as probable. Vahlen thinks the simple yvojpl^etv also is used in the same way in Plutarch

in other

Theseus eyviipi^ev,

12

rov Se

ifSiais

vlov

dvanpivas

Sexopevovs

fiOird^eTO

8), and that eyvwpi^ev means either Max. 21) or ‘acknowledged him’.

ffvyayaydv

tovs

TroXtras

seems to me that the tov vlov (comp. Meursius, Theseus

object after eyvupi^ev in this passage is

.

isal

Sid tjjv dySpayaOiav.

‘

It

introduced him

’

(comp. Pint. Fab.

23

COMMENTARY

248 ^455 *^24

8e

’'Eo'ti

The

TpaywSi'as ktI.

irdcrrjs

The

rules.

fourth of these supplementary

complication and denouement are of such paramount

importance, that two tragedies with the same sort of complication

and denouement should be regarded as however

may

they

different

substantially the same,

be in other respects.

possible to succeed in the one point and

fail

It

quite

is

in the other

;

but

they are both of equal moment, and require equal attention from

This view of the

the poet.

sentence StKaiov

.

.

drift

of the paragraph assumes that the

1456^ 7-10 should follow after mere definition of Seo-ts and these chapters, unless it were made

KpareKrOai. in

Tov TeXovs in 1455

/Ae'xpi Xvcri's

.

A

32.

would have no place in up to some practical precept, such as we have

to lead

det KpaTeicrOai. in Se'ffis

*^25

.

.

Xuais

.

:

see

1456

lO-

on

1454^37.

15,

in Set 8e

e|w0ev: see on 14, 1453^^32. ei'ia

ActKts

Twv eacaOey iroWaKis.

and

insert

it

It is

after the

says Aristotle, comprises

not necessary to transpose

preceding rd

some portion of

Taur. the

SeW

other

hand the

many

Secris

1

.

391.

In the O. T. on the

presupposed, the

is

instances

In the Iph.

the action within the play.

extends as far as entire

ttoX-

SeVis,

not only the presupposed part of the

story (rd e^oj^ev, or rd Tvpoimrpayp.fva), but also in (TToXXaKts)

The

p,h^ e^w^ev.

Averts

beginning

with the opening scene.

^29

see on ii, 1452

AuyKet:

instance of a play with a

The Lynceus

27.

SeW

is

cited as an

partly presupposed

and

partly

within the limits of the action of the piece. ^

30

Tou iraiSiou, Abas, the child of

Lynceus and Danaus’ daughter

Hypermnestra.

32

TpaywSias 8e

ei8t]

ktL

The

fifth

of the supplementary

rules.

—

There are four species of Tragedy each arising apparently (like the species of Democracy in Pol. 4. 12, 1296 27) through the prominence in it of some one of the several elements in a play. Aristotle insists that for an ideally good tragedy all these elements of interest are wanted, and that in so critical an age none can be neglected with e'xeiv

ktI.

1456

impunity (pidAtora a 3).

The

p.ev

species he

is

ovv uTravra Sei TreipacrOai

now

talking

of,

or

at

any

number, were probably no discovery of his; rjOiKyj TTe.nXiyp.ivr) rpaywSia, TraOrjTLKr) TpayojSta, and

rate three out of the

terms

like

TpaywSta

may

very

M'ell

be supposed

to

have

been

^

already

sanctioned and current in the technical language of the theatre

(comp, on

9,

1451 ^33)'

R

ihe Trepiirereia

and

dvayvwptcrts are

.

t

;;

i8. '

whole thing

the

24-32

the

(as we' say),

’

element of Traces

”

1455

mainly a portraiture of character, largely

on

the

spectacle

‘

249

play

especially prominent,

is

is

it

’,

is

is

it

TreirXeyfievr]

is it

iraOrjTLK-q

and

;

the 1455

if

if it

is

depends

if it

This

spectacular

‘

;

last

species

was no derivative from he has to change his form

Aristotle recognizes as a fact, but as there

corresponding to our

oi/^ts

spectacular

‘

’,

of expression and speak not of the fourth

element

fourth

was prominent

ot/tis

but of the

’,

however,

instances,

species of

(at T€ 4>o/3/ct8es KT€.) relating to the

element of

species

with

riTaprov

(to

‘

drama

which the These 50).

in

(see J. of Phil. 14 p.

four elements have been already considered, though not quite so

which

assumed

are

1452®' 32), and the

elements in the

The

language w'ould imply.

directly as Aristotle’s

dmyvtopto-t?,

go

TreptTreVeta

and

(comp,

ii,

together

been distinguished already as

have

Trd^os

to

(comp, ii, 1452^9); and they are counted is the prominent factor

p.vOo';

here as tw’O parts of the play because each in a distinct species

is

remaining

‘

parts

was no existing species

there

other parts are mentioned,

apparently for the same reason.

7

said of the

T wo

of tragedy.

6r] and the ]

the

If

nothing

T ragedy, the reason is obvious of T ragedy that could be described ’

of

Vahlen and assume a lacuna in 34 (after dvayvtopto-ts), on the supposithat Aristotle must have had something to say about the

as consisting mainly of Sidvota or Ae^ts or pekoiroua.

others tion

The

airXrj T/aaywStd.

aTrA^ rpaywSia, however,

Aristotle’s present sense

for

it

in the text, the

same

logic

and

;

if

is

not a species in

are to find a place

would require a recognition of the

the -^OiKy TpayojSta in the passage before us. w'hich

is

we

i45o®'25), as being the logical opposite of

( 6,

rpayioSia

of the term

The

insertion too,

due to a desire to bring the present statement into

with that in 24, 1459

makes

8,

line

necessary to adopt a highly

it

improbable correction, reparaiSes, in the context (i456®'2). Tocaura yap Kal

to,

would mean, rjOiKT]

TpaywStd

between

rj6os

intelligible

mony

—w'hich

This, however, can -^Oikos pvOosone remembers the sharp distinction drawn

if

p.vOo's in 6,

made

enough

with w’hat

Tyrwhitt

based on an

is

and

allowance being

p.epr]

p,v6ov or tov p,vOov

understand Tyrwhitt’s note correctly, that the

if I

hardly be right,

In lieu of rd

iXexOrj,

pieprj

and Ueberw'eg rd

suggests rd p.v6u)v,

in itself

is

Toa-avra yap Kal rd

1450®-

4.

The

present passage, due

for the Aristotelian brevity

said p.ep'q

;

the difficulty

is

elsew'here in other IXe^O-Q,

of expression,

to bring

it

is

into har-

parts of the book.

no doubt, implies a previous

32

COMMENTARY

250 1455

32 statement, which and the passage a

impossible to find in the earlier chapters;

is

it

1459 9 implies that a a-n-X^ as well as rpaywSta had been recognized among the four species

TrcTrXey/AeViy

in

t>

24,

Tragedy in the passage before us. acknowledge than to remove

of

Difficulties of this

kind

it

is

reforming the

at the cost of

better to

The truth is that Aristotle is more human than we commonly suppose that his memory is sometimes at fault, and also that he sometimes writes down what occurs to him at the moment, text.

—

stopping to reflect whether

w'ithout

what he has

more

Poetics,

clear that, as the w'ork advances, the

it

ahvays equally admirable, and that

not

is

make

require a great deal of revision to

The

there are chapters in the

especially in the early part, which are models of

careful drafting, I think

statement

quite reconcilable with

is

it

Though

said elsewhere.

it

yap Kal

difficulty in the reference Tocravra

not unlike that in wairep Trporepov uprjTai in €LprjTai TToXAd/cis in 18,

*^33

JreirXeyfieVT)

'1

(comp. 16,

No

Tra0T)TtKii.

34 ri

6,

to.

p-ipyj

1450

and

;

OTrep

“•10.

1456 21,

would

iX€)^ 07] is

ig,

ktL, appositional to the preceding

454^)20

1

it

consistent throughout.

1457

a

recrcrapa

31).

definition is given, as

though the term

(as also

6 iK-j in the next line) were sufficiently understood without one.

1456^1

Aiavres

see Nauck,

:

TGF.^

p.

for a

963

list

of plays entitled

Alas. ’l^ioves

see

:

® 2

The

riTjXeu's.

(Nauck

Nauck

p.

p.

965.

(Nauck

a play by Sophocles

«l>0io5Ti8es,

reference

is

p. 282).

perhaps to the Peleus of Sophocles

239) rather than that of Euripides (Nauck p. 554). oi|/is is closer to the MS. reading than Schrader’s

TO 8e TAapToii

TO 8e repaTwSes, which has been SO generally approved by recent

The unmeaning

editors.

21, 1458*1

5^

an uncial MS.

in

refer to the

kind.

the

in

‘

o-qa-

kind

’

A

(OHC

=

MS.

of the

but one remove from

is

di/as

The

0+IC).

instead of the certain formal

‘

part

’

as

here, it

and again

in

might be written

illustrations

no doubt

brought into prominence

incongruence, however,

is

not

uncommon

with instances introduced by oiov (comp. 16, 1454 25; 25, I46ia24; Eth N. 4. 4, 1122** 27; Rhet. 3. 3, 1405^35); ^

See

J.

of Phil. 14 p. 50.

The

o-qa

been supposed to represent 0112 and ,

may appear p.

612)

;

as


or

MS. in way o^p.

of the

in this

In early inscriptions

ip

(Meisterhans, Gr.^ p. 3; Ploffmann, Gr. Dialekte 3 am aware, there is no trace of this mode of writing

ira

but, as far as I

the second instance has

in the manuscript tradition of a classical author.

—

;

i8.

^

32—1456

1455

8

251

and leave us to see its 1456 ^ 2 what precedes. opKiSes, a satyric drama by Aeschylus (Nauck p. 83). npo)jiT) 0 eus, probably another satyric drama by Aeschylus (Nauck

Aristotle

is

often content to note the fact,

logical relation to

There

p. 62).

a good deal to be said, however, in favour of

is

Bergk’s suggestion (Kl. Schr. 2 p. 753) that the plural npopiij^ets should be restored in the text. oo-a

reference

on

(see

duced,

may

and

play.

Aeschylus,

situation,

the

the

oij/is,

of the strange personages intro-

1449^33)

6,

In these last instances,

p. 87).

to the nature of the subject

make-up

be to plays like the ^ 3

may perhaps

Aeschylus (Nauck

'ifvxayojyoL of

owing

The

a8ou.

et'

well be supposed to have been a great feature in the

who was an

innovator

matters

in

of stage-

apparatus (Sommerbrodt, Scaenica p. 183), is said to have made large use of this device Vita Aeschyli (p. 2 Dind.) rat? re yap :

Kal rots p.vOoL'; Trpo? eKTrktj^iv repariLSr]

oif/eai

p-aWov

'q

Trpos aTrarrjv

Kexprjrau

paXiara here

may

oui'

p.ei'

A

/ere.

twv

ireipacrOaL TrdvTmv Kpareiv prj

reminiscence of Aristotle’s language

be traced in Polybius 16. 20. 2:

TOVTO Bvvarov, twv

810 Set pidAicrra p.ev

KaXov ydp-

i(TTopLa<; p-epiov

dvayKaioraTwv

twv

Kai

p.eyL
Se

el

avTrj

ev

TrXeia-rqv TroieicrOai irpovotav.

cKdoTou

is

masculine,

genitive being

and 19, 1456

each of

‘

in 5,

1449 For the hyperbaton see on

35.

probably out of place (see above, on 18, 1455 aW-qv' Kal

TT)i'

auTT|i'

very like that in

may

De anima

Kal TavTo. rots epyots,

and

TTjv TToXiv eivaL 7TJV avTTjv

ouSeFi

laws

The

6,

t (3

‘

jiuOa),

dative

p.r]

ob

sense of ‘by reason of’ or

‘

nihil

Si)

The

tw pv 6w

*’•

construction in

to-ojs

normal (Kiihner, Gr. Gr.*

sensu

ovSevl

2.

point out an exact parallel.

KpaTeicrOat) are ^ ^

24).

^

18

taken

7,

cTepw

is

dpyava Xiyew eVepa ttoIs ttotc

xP^ Xeyeiv

dAX’ eTepav.

on account

—De

a'

of’

with

(T3Tthe

comp. De anima

447 b 24 Xeyeiv

’

Xeyeiv in

(jiatVerat

dXX’

r/

2.

yap to

tw dpa

.

rd XvTTTjpa vTropeveiv avBpeioi XeyovTai.

i

It

(‘

equally with the story

’)

is

411); but I am not able to may be compared, however, with p.

6

33,

1449^23.

—

aeque ac ob fabulam be

to

416 5 (quoted above). pev Tw dpi6pw ev r) ’j'^XV Eth. N. 3. 12, 1117 32 t <2 4,

1276

ttjv avTYjv

oiSevi is

1452

the ®

be said to be the same or not,

416^5 XPV

2. 4,

in Pol. 3. 3, rj

—

point here, the conditions ^ 8

The

\iyeiv.

under which two tragedies

whitt).

b 16, 13,

This and the next sentence (ttoAXoi

SiKttioi' KTe.

’

various predecessors

his

dependent on ISmv as

;

.

COMMENTARY

252

1456^8

N. I. 4, 1096 23 rdya^ov tcrap^uis Xeyerai tQ ovti, and in Plato Paim. 150 a laov rto ivl Si oXov avrov TeraiJiivr] and with the use of o/aoicos in Pol. 3. ii, 1282 8 6/xotojs rats that in Eth.

iroXireiaig dvdyKtj

elsewhere,

koI

Laws 805

(Bekker), in Plato

ad

8e

TO KLVOVV ois

17

{

form

similar

and

in

Demosth.

10.

and

1298

74

(v.

23

Weil

(comp.

S’

i. 6,

thinking only

Aristotle,

19,

introduccs an explaining clause of

kcTTi)

gen. et corr.

323

^

17 ov yap

UTTep TO TTOLOVV dvTlO'QO'Op.eV

omits

=

‘

recognize

to

1456

KpaT€to- 0 ai

from Pol.

De

TW

S'

possible

alternative

rrjg

rj

two dXXrj

4).

obtineri’.

Vahlen

illustrates this

use of the word

re^vaii kuI fTricrrypai^ ravra

^ 37

7" I3>

556

5.

TOVTO

of the identity of the

the

dpcfyoTcpa KpaTiicrOai, to reXog koI tos eis to reXos Trpd^ets,

Hal.

re ttSv

oi 6 v

TrdcTXOVTl'

Trd^os.

Kivr)
auTT).

^

= TovTo in

TTOieiV,

tragedies,

® 10

a,

a-TTOvSaiov? eivai,

yj

in Pol. 4, 14,

’

loc.).

TouTo

^9

tovs vd/xovis ijiavXovg

has the sense of' equally

tcrojs

and Dion.

Se aacjirjveia'; Kal t^s evapyeias dpcfiOTepovs Kparciv

Comp, also Polyb. i6, 20. 2 (quoted above on 3). The sixth of Aristotle’s supplementary rules. ^ll Though some hint of this may perhaps be eipriTai iroXXcxKis. discerned in 5, 1449^12 and 17, 1455'’ 15, the reference here is clearly one of Aristotle’s oversights (see on 18, 1455’^ 32); it is not true that he has more than once laid down the rule p.r] n-oieiv is the ttoAXcikis, more than once liroTTOiiKov ava’Trjp.a rpayioSiav. d-ire
Xpi)

8e ktI.

‘

opposite of dTra$ (comp. Meteor.

2.

’,

3561^27) as well as of

3,

dXiyaKis, just as iroXXd is the opposite of ev as well as of dXtya

(Metaph.

I

6,

pepiKiiaGat

Eth. N. Tr]v

I. 7,

1056

Kal

p.T)

23).

i098®''26

p,ep,vy(r 8 ai

Se Kal ran' irpoeiprfp.evwv

adaTT)pia, scil. TTpayp-druiv. crdo-Tacrts

The

p.v6o^ Or Story has

Trpaypdraiv (v. 6,

1450

punctuation (with a

full

stop before, and a

this clause the beginning of a it

is

new

comma

sentence.

been repeatedly

15, 32,

eTTOTTOUKOi' Sc Xe'yw to TroXupuGor, scil. avcrrrjpia.

that

XPV

dKpi/3 eiav po] o/xota)S ev aTracrtv km^riTW.

described as a ^ 12

For the conjunction Vahlen quotes

ttoiciv.

^32,

etc.).

The common after

it)

makes

It is clear, 1 think,

a parenthesis, and that the illustration olov

ei

tis kt£.

back to the principal statement, pyj ii. For Other illustrations TTOieiv iTTOTTOuKov (TvcTTTqpa TpayipSiav in at some distance from the statements to which they relate see on (comp. 26, 1462

7,

1451

2.

tj

2) refers

The assumption

ITo\u|xu 0 o^’. is

8-21

1456

i8.

here

253

that the story in the Iliad

is

a iroXvp.vOov ava-njfia, one with a plurality of stories in

24,

1462^8).

not easy to reconcile

It is

told in a later chapter (23, 1459'"^ 3°)

we

with what

this

1456 ^ 12

(comp.

it

where the unity of story

are

in the

emphasized.

Iliad is

ocroi irepaiK ’iXiou

;

For

been one of the number.

on

(or simply Ilepcrts) see ’AyaQui'.

to

whom

^ 16

Agathon may have

the tragedies entitled ’IXtbv

Trepo-ts

1459

23,

importance of Agathon

sense of the

Aristotle’s

do not know

possible that

is just

it

We

e^o^T)
oXtji'

Aristotle is referring

is

^ 18

^

shown by his many quotations from him (Bon. Ind. 4 5), as well as by the present and other references in the Poetics (9, 21;

1451

The

1454^14).

15,

context (“•21) implies that the

pathos in Agathon’s situations was not always of the most legitimate

and in the next paragraph ; 29) he is said to have set a bad precedent in the treatment of the Chorus. But whatever his artistic kind

shortcomings

may

have been, we have evidence enough even

in

own

is

Aristophanes of his success with his a good

deal

of point, therefore, in what Aristotle

support of his rule ‘

TouTu

po>'w,

‘

.

.

.

Kai

in this,

and

De somno

povos like that in ^(uois

when he

’

yap

17

d
neglected

^

455

2,

is

I

order to

make

by including both forms of poets,

he says in

effect,

pregnant use of ^ 19

-iraa-Lv vTrdp)(€i

cannot think

As

tois

was

necessary to

it

which

irepiTrireia,

directly suggestive of it, ev rats TrepiTrereiais

;

is

comp,

is

the

ii, 1452®' 32),

practically equivalent

Aristotle adds Kal iv tois aTrAois

to O' rots TTCTrAtypAois 7rpd.yp.acn. TcpdypxicTi, in

—a

27 810 k
story (10, 1452 a 16

’

’

p.ovrj Tracriv.

Kal ev Tots dirXots TTpayfiao-i.

‘

saying in

it.

in this alone

bracket these words (with Susemihl).

mark of the complex

is

There

ttoluv cTroTrotiKov crvcrTrjfia rpayoiStav), that

{firj

even Agathon failed Iv

generation.

his statement cover the

The

plot.

really

whole ground

failure of these unsuccessful

due not to any

of execution,

fault

but to an initial mistake in their choice of subjects

;

they forgot

Drama, and undertook to dramatize a story long and too complex for the purposes of the stage.

the limitations of the

too

w is

PouXoi^at,

‘

the effects they desire

’.

The kind

of effect, which ®

explained in the next clause (rpayt/cov ydp tovto Kal

may not be of the

best order

to please their public,

TpayiKoi' in TOVTO

;

but

it

is

19,

that which, in their anxiety

they wish to produce.

Y®P touto Kai ^iX^Opwirov.

comp.

20

cfnXdvOpoiTrov'),

1456^35;

it

is

For the change of number ® 21 the converse of that in

17,

— COMMENTARY

254

1456^21 1455®' 33 (comp. Bon. the

tragic

situation

Ind. 49ot>i'7).

Aristotle’s theory is that

should be Aecivov

—which

dentally admits, however, that 13,

1452^38),

as

it

would seem eoTii'

be only

human

in

to have affected this inferior

The

8e TouTo ktc.

The

must have involved a strong it

The

they

;

form of

more

through an

^ 23

fitted for

failed,

initial

:

the sophistical saying of

avTo TovT

on

of the certain

Tragedy

tragic motive.

with

mind and

the interest

all

however (we are S)v

told), in spite

/SovKovrai 6av~

mistake in their subject, which was one

an epic than a play.

TOUTO eiKos

ecTTiv Be

(see

tragedies Aristotle has in

TrepiTreVeta

of this and other attractions (comp. crTo^d^ovrat /xacTTuis),

later

inci-

which follow were probably

illustrations

taken from actual plays. e.xcitement attending


when the sufferings such a way as to arouse a

feeling for the sufferers.

the

that

for instance,

is,

wicked are put before us commiseration or

may

it

implies

1453*14); he

sufferer does not deserve his misfortunes (13,

comp. 25, 1461 I* 15. The reference Agathon (fr. 9 Nauck’^), rdx dv rts

etvat Xeyot, fipoTotcn ttoXXo, TvyxdveLV ovk elKora,

examined

is

to

eiKos

which

is

some

variation of text here, as another reading, eo-riv Se tovto (/cat)

ei/co's,

Aristotle has

is

1402

in Rhet. 2. 24,

*>

10.

There

With the

believed to underlie the Arabic Version.

Kat the clause

adds a further point in favour of these unsuccessful plays of incident just mentioned

is

said to be ‘probable also’.

:

the kind

Without

the Kat the clause involves a criticism or condemnation, not unlike in 13, 1453 35 (lo-Ttv 8e ov^ avry] ktI.), this is probable, however, only in Agathon’s non-natural sense of the word’. A

that

**

‘

qualification of this kind (introduced

by

wa-n-ep or KaOd-n-ep) is

found

more than once in this same chapter (*''17 and 27), and again in 21, 14571*24; comp, also Metaph. B 2, 998*^2 d-rmrai yap toC Kavovos ov Kara (rrLypirjv 6 kvkXos dAA mairep Upoirayopa? eXeycv **•

eXcy^^tov Tous yeu>p,eTpas.

— Rhet.

I. 5,

1361 ^ 4 ttoXXol yap

vytatVoucrtv

wcTrep HjOoStKos Xeyerai.

^25

The

Kat TOK xopo** ktL

seventh

and

last

of these practical

reappears in the well-known precept of Horace A. P. 193 Acioris partes chorus officiuinque virile defendat, mu quid medios inlerrules.

It

cinat actus, quod non proposito conducat et haereat apte.

^

27

Euptirt'S^.

comp.

TTotijTats.

706 D

The

For the

Pol. 8. 5,

—

(conventionally rendered by apud)

ov yap 6 Zeus auTos aSet Kat KiOapl^ei toos

Plato Rep. 389 E ota Kat ‘Opjqpiv

’OSutrcreiis

tacit

dative

1339^8 yap

avriS [scil.

assumption here

is

'O/xrjptj)]

perhaps

this,

Ato/r.'^Sijs Xeyet.

Laws

XotSopet tov ’Ayap.ep,vova,

that the choral songs in

1

no mere

Euripides, though

^

1456

i8.

21—19. 1456

^

36

255

^ those in the later Drama), 145^ 27

ijx/SoXiiJLa (like

were not always very closely connected with the action of the piece. The tradition of this criticism survives in the grammarians.

A

chorus in Phoen. 1019 the scholiast condemns as irrelevant

irpo?

:

ovSo' ravra' eSet yap rbv )(opbv otKTtcracr^ai tov Odvarov rov MevotKccos

^

dTro 8 €)(ea- 6 at rrjv

demnation

Aovras,

(Ls

oXAa nepl OIBlttov kol A more general con-

veavtcr/cov.

Kal found in the scholiast on Aristoph. Ach. 443 ovt€ ovtos yap eicrdyet tovs

is

:

aKoXovOa (fiOeyyop.evov;

TO.

tov

TroAAaKts elprjp.o'a.

to.

tov ^vpnrihnrjv Biacrvpei.

tovt(i)v

Slo.

evij/v)(^Lav

2<^ty7os SirjyeLTaL

Tj/s

VTVodicu, dAA’ tcrroptas Tivds aTrayyeA-

Trj

hf tols $otvtcrcrat?, cure

dXXa

aBcKrjOivTuiv

twv

ep.waOw'; avTiXapL/Savop-evov;

The Roman

pLCTa^v dvrtTrtTTTovTas.

poet Accius

must have been of the same opinion, to judge from the fragment of his Didascalica in Nonius 178, 23, sed

also

mutilated

Eiiripidis,

TO

qui choros iemerhis

aSdfiei'a

parts of the TroLfjTas is

a

iti

fabulis

the choral, as opposed to

:

way

,

ia-Tiv,

;

comp,

‘

efipdXifjia:

carmina intercalaria

grammarians

ep^oXipa

ov8h' Brjirov Sta^epet

eirq'

it

seems

to. vtto

to have

The word

(Budaeus).

’

Herod. 1.32 and

meant interpolated ‘

tZv ypap.p.aTiKwv

3. I, 24, in

the sense of

Lex. tech. gr. p.

T wining’s all

Hesychius

’ :

1

an ‘insertion’ or ‘interlude’

(v. Ernesti,

18).

note on this passage

is

well worth quoting

then, subordinate to the dialogue

connected with the piece

pleasure

‘ :

At

—and so

;

It

is

first, it

then, relieved by the intermixture of dialogue, but

;

principal-,

is

^29

dXXoTpia Kal v66a aOeTov-

(Ls

curious to trace the gradual extinction of the Chorus.

ill

is

With

2. 4.

Cicero has the very similar word ip/SoXiov in Ep. ad Q. Fr.

peva.

was

q8op.iv(i)v

also Plato

TO /4eAos] TOV pd] qBopevov Xoyov.

usually a term of chronology, as in the

Xeyopava the spoken ^ 28

of describing the lyric poets

Rep. 398 D ovKovv ocrov ye avrov Adyos [scil.

to.

In [Demosthenes] 60. 9 tovs twv

play.

still

then digressive, and

then borrowed from other pieces at

;

on, to the fiddles

and

act-tunes, at

which Dacier

so angry.’ Xe'leus

Kal Siaroias.

This

is

the usual order of the two terms in

34

The only 29 and 24, 1459^ 16). instance of the reverse order, which is that of their logical importhe Poetics (v. 6, 1450®' 9, 14,

tance (6,

1450^112; comp. Rhet.

2.

Kara

TTjt'

Sidt'oiai'

:

comp. Phys.

4.

1403®

26,

459 ^2 cTi Ttts Stavotas Kal t-^v Xeiiv meaning of Bidvoia see on 6, 1450® 6. 1

14

)

e^eiv

36),

KaASs.

222 ^3^

'ro

is

in

24,

For the OcIttov Kal

"36

—

;

COMMENTARY

256 1456 ^36 /3pa8vT€pov Kara vaa-dv

In Bon. Ind. 369 *^28 Kara

i
explained as equivalent to SiavorjTiKd.

TTjv Stdvotav is

\6you

oo-a uird toO

In the Rhetoric three kinds of speech

ktI.

aim of the speaker

are recognized, according as the

(i) to gain

is

the confidence of his audience by creating in their minds a favourable

and

idea of himself

Se iv

his general credibility

or (3) to convince their reason 8 id Tov Xoyov Tropc^opLeviDv Tricrewi/ rpia

feelings

;

Tw TOV AcyovTOS, al avrQ t 5 Adyci) Std rov

Se ev

work on 1356^

or (2) to

;

Rhet.

:

i.

etSrj i
tw tov aKpoaTrjv

their

ydp

al p.€V

twv

i

2,

elcriv

StaOelvai ttws, ai Se

^ ejiaLveaOai SeiKvvvai ktI. The present summary notes the second and third of these three eiSrp ev

but ignores the

first,

that sort of speech

^

The

irdOrj.

38

up

though there

certainly nothing to exclude

is

from the rhetoric of Tragedy.

instances otov eXcov y ^d/?ov ktI are added, because meant suffering or ‘ calamity’

to this point ird^os has usually

(ii, *’1

SeiKvvvai

’

‘

1452 bii).

eXeov

T]

(|>

6 3 ov

t]

|

6py?)v

fj

oaa Toiaura.

According

Tumlirz

to

(Die tragischen Affecte Mitleid und Furcht nach Aristoteles

p.

28)

shows that Aristotle supposes Tragedy to arouse anger and other emotions as well as pity and fear in the mind of the spectathe tors. There is no such reference here to the spectators this

;

on the hearer on the stage. One might just as well say that the arguments put into the mouth of a personage (to re aTToSeiKvvvat ktL) are addressed to the spectators, and not to effect

meant

some

other personage in the play.

a tragedy

in i.

to

e.

The

rhetoric of the speaker

dramatically directed to the hearer on the stage,

eiricrTaTai

efio/Bepois

him

is

When

another of the dramatis personae.

Euripides av

that

is

.

.

.

prjaeis

.

.

voieiv

Kal aTreiXT/TiKas (Phaedr.

to threaten the hearers

(leyeGos Kal

(xiKpoTTjTa,

afterthought, as Kal TO XveLv.

•

its

268

Plato says of

.

oiKTpas Kat tovvovtlov

c),

he does not suppose

.

.

of his pieces. TrapaaKevd^eiv-

scil.

logical place

would be

The corresponding

The

clause

formula in Isocrates 42 c

:

Rhet.

2.

26,

1403

20 to

Ta

is

and

re p,eydXa TaTreiva TvoLyerai Kal rols p.iKpols p.eye 6 os TrepiOeivai

the Rhetoric av^eiv Kal p-eiovv

an

is

after to re aTroSeLKvvvai

S'

in

av^ew

on p.eya y paKpov, wairep The reading pnKpoTyra^ Kal on dyaOov y kokov y SiKaiov y dSiKov. is retained by Vahlen, who defends the change of number by quoting (among other instances) De part. an. 4. 5, 679 37 Kal p.eiovv eo'Tiv evOvp.yp.ara Trpos to Sel^ai

Sia(f}epeL

rrj

rals oAeais.

OecreL

Kal

rots

p.eyeOecnv

—Plato Laws 734 ^

.

—

6 80 ‘’29 ev rip

if/v^ei

p.eyeOei Kal irXyOeL Kal TrvKvoryenv

Kal ,

— 1456

ig.

779 B

36—1456

®

/xeye^os

The

so technical as the present.

obscure, as

it

vkyOei.

and

Kai ev TOis irpdy}i.a(riv

The

a rhetoric of words.

or

is

is

in a formula

1454

18 6 Aoyos

2. i p. 17.

rj 77

Trpa^ts.

etc.,

not true,

is

**

2

a rhetoric of action as well as

may do

with a view to exciting pity, fear, idea that something

and

Sidvota of the dramatis personae

they

;

I456

under any of the heads

fall

15,

quite aware that there

be shown in their acts

/xcye^ecrtv'.

62 or Kiihner, Gr. Gr.®

p.

comp,

:

/At/cporr/s,

/cat

number with two

sense also of the plural fiiKpoTTjra^

does not seem to

recognized by Bernhardy, Synt.

is

257

however, to explain the change of

words so closely related as

Aristotle

8

860 B

o/xaAo'D/Ti T€ Kcu ofjLOioTrjcriv .

It is difficult,

is

I

may

things, just as they say things,

or with a view to creating an etc.

;

and whichever mode of

expression be used, they have to follow, according to Aristotle, the

same method and principles. arro

tuv auTuv iSewv 8el

Stavotas oLTTo

scil.

For the meaning of

fjiipea-Lv.

or tois r^s

Siavoia,

rrj

I8ia see

on

7,

1450

3

34.

denotes here the logical starting-point.

(icydXa fully

Aristotle

eiKora.

tj

by saying pteyaXa

might have expressed himself more ^ 4 yj elKora ^ dyriOava (comp. on 18,

p.LKpa

rj

1456^9). av€u SiSao-KaXi'as it

is

= dvev

Xoyov,

‘

sine docentis opera’ (Tyrwhitt)

explained by what follows, tl yap dv

eirj

tov XiyovTos epyov

5 ;

The party instructed or informed here is one of the dramatis who learns the mind of another either through some act of his, or through some statement by him in words. personae,

TCI

Tu

8 « ev

irapci

•

XdytJ, SCil. eXeetvd, Seivd, p.eydXa

TOV

1454’' 15

Xoyov.

For the

preposition

ktL

comp.

<513

and

1

5,

6

-

el <}>owoiTo

>]

8e'oc.

The

traditional

el

c^avotTo (which

would have

7

to be taken as equivalent to el p.eXXoi t^aivea-Oai) is against the rule

down by Madvig, Gr. Synt. p. 119 Eng. tr. There is not much to choose betw'een Vahlen's fj Seat and Castelvetro’s ySy. 5 Scot, however, is somewhat nearer the manuscript reading ySea, and much more probable than either Tyrwhitt’s a Sel or Spengel’s It means ‘in the required light’, i.e. as iXeeivd, or 7 Stdvoia. laid

If

ieivd, etc.

things appear of themselves in

this

light,

he aid of the rhetorical art of the speaker, the speaker vanted. I,

The

1450 ^ 8

O' ots ovK ecTTi

Twv 8e irepl le intellectual POETICS

%

present remark

S^Xov

may

without is

not

be compared with that in

KTe.

Having briefly considered the Sidvoia, or rhetorical power revealed in the speeches of the

tt)v Xe'^iv.

s

^ 8

COMMENTARY

•

258

8 dramatic personages, Aristotle passes on to their

1456

or language in which they are

made

point he investigates under three heads: stituents of the diction as a

in

it

;

Ae^is, the diction

to express themselves.

—

This

(i) the parts or con-

whole; (2) the various kinds of names

(3) the limits within which unusual names or forms of are admissible in poetry. Before entering on this line of

and

names

which might perhaps

discussion, however, he sets aside a matter

seem germane to his subject, the elocutionary element in the spoken language. The word ySaSt^et, for instance, according to one’s tone in uttering

it,

may mean

‘

he walks

or

’,

‘

does he walk

?’;

and aaSc may be uttered as a command (‘ sing !’) or as a prayer. These and similar distinctions, in Aristotle’s view, belong to the language as spoken rather than to the language as written, and thus

come

within the province of elocution {yiroKpLTiKrj) rather than

that of poetry or literature proper. **

9

means literally the different attitudes or meaning given to the language when it comes to be spoken. The same idea underlies the expression a-xqp-o-ra

TCI
’

‘

turns of actually

Xt^em of

collocaiioneni

gestus

aliquos

= 8

1447

I,

‘

illuminat

its

see from Cicero Orator 83 himmibus qtiae Graeci quasi

orationis (rgyip.axa appellant

habitus quidatn (Txt]iJ.a

may

the grammarians, as one

Verbonan

quasi gestus sic

et

gestus

’

them, of purposes of

quaedam (9. I. 4),

9. r.

13 Si

appellandi sunt.

occurs in 17, 1455 “ 29 and 26, 1462

3 (comp.

must not be figures of speech ’, as we

later

A

writers.

‘

‘

figure

of speech

a deviation from the simple and usual

artifice,

for

— Quintilian

Aristotle’s axqp-aTa t^s Xe^ews, however,

27).

identified with the a-xvg^a-ra Ae^ecos or call

.

[scil. crx^j/cara]

literary effect

mode

Quintilian defines

;

a communi

orationis remota

et

’

a

literary

as a conformatio

it

primuni

is

of expression

se offerente rations

or as an oratio a simplici rectoque loquendi genere dcflexa

comp. Ernesti, Lex. techn. gr. p. 338). In a figure of form of expression as compared with the simple (e. g. ‘Macedonia’s madman’ and ‘Alexander’), we have a difference of words without any difference of sense whereas in

(9' 3- 3

speech

‘

>

’,

;

the Aristotelian crx>?/caTa a different sense

of some kind *’10

or ‘elocution’. ‘

AcTews

we have

the

same words and

the difference of sense resulting from a difference

in the

uTTOKpiTiKTis.

guished, the

—

rijs

mode of

vTTOKpLo-L's,

enunciation.

the Latin pronunciatio,

means

‘delivery’

In the Rhetoric two styles of oratory are

graphic

’

style in

which the sense

by the actual language, and the

‘

hypocritic

’

distin-

is

fully expressed

style,

which requires

ig.

8-13

1456

259

certain artifices of elocution to bring out the

I4I3*’17Ta avTwv avTO

^

inroKpiTiKo.

meaning

:

Rhet.

3. 12,

epryov <^aiV€Tat evT^Orj, olov to, re daijvSeTa /cat to TroAAa/cts

Kal

CTTLKy

Tp ypacfiiKy opOws

iv

eiTretv

prjropes

oi

d.TroSoKip.d^eTai, ev Se ^Trj}

to

dywvi-

yap viroKpinKO, (comp.

tern

)(pCi)VTai'

1456 '’10

viroKpLa-aas ov Troiovvra to

Trj
acji'pprjfjLhnf]';

3. 12,

I4i4‘'5)-

The

dpx'’T€KToi'iKiii'.

who knows

dpxiTtKTwv

properly the master-builder,

is

ii

scheme of the whole work and directs the artisans Plato Polit. 259 e dpxeriKnDv ye ttSs ovk and others under him rrapexop-evo'; ye ttov yvuxnv avTos epyaTiKos dAX epyarwv dpx<>iv the

;

•

other

even

arts,

•

•

Aristotle recognizes a similar distinction in

ov x«povpytai/.

dXA.’

medicine:

in

Pol.

3.

The

S7jp.iovpy6s Kal 6 dpxertKToviKO's,

‘

1282 “3 tarpds d tc form of vtto-

ii,

architectonic

’

and general principles, as distinct from the empiric knowledge possessed by rhapsodists, actors, orators, and other practicians. a knowledge of

KpiTiKrj involves

oiov Ti ei'ToXt) KTt. refers

(comp, on

7,

who

with Protagoras,

seven) fundamental

back

The

a 2).

1451

rationale

its

to rd o’x^p.ara t^s Ae^eo/s in

9

classification in the text originated

said to have distinguished four (or perhaps

is

differences

in

our

mode of speech

Diog.

:

Laert. 9. 53 SieiXe re Tov Xoyov TrpojTos els TtTTapa, ev^wA-^v ipd>Tr](riv diroKpuTiv

kvToXrjv

—

Se

ot

^

€ts

—Quintilian

^

Si^rycrtv

eirra,

h/ToXrjv dirayyeXiav evx
—

eptaTqcnv

ovs Kat Trv6p.^a<;

,

diroKpto'CV

eXire

Adycov.

10 Proiagoram transeo, qui inierrogandi respon-

3. 4.

dendi viandandi precandi, quod evxfvXqv dixit, partes solas putat. ;

either a

'

command

or a prayer, another either a simple statement or

answer, and so forth

a threat, another either a question or an with the rest.

Un Dion.

Aristotle’s instances

Hal.

rd

4^

5-

Trwdavopevoi, rd S

'

'

SittTropowTeSj

irapd

'

rd

ws

S’ tbs

ydp rqv

p.h'

them

;

oi

8«

=

tbs

rd

ktc.

S’ 8’

d)S

dAAcos

tto/s crxvp-aTL^ovTe'i.

The argument

here comes*’ 13

these axqp-aTa t^s Ae^etos are something is

shown by

the fact that ignorance

Protagoras’ criticism on the

may be dismissed '

u/s

S’

rd

not one of the usual charges brought by hostile critics

is

against a poet

I

S’

V7ron6ep.evoi,

outside the art of Poetry itself

m of

with those

iwiraTToyTes, rd

evxdp-evoi,

That

may be compared

ws dTro(paw6p.evoL Xeyop.ev, rd

toutwi/

practically to this:

•

It

be seen that Aristotle has arranged the a-xqi^ara in pairs one kind of speech may be made by a difference of intonation to mean

will

'

01*

Se

first line

of the Iliad

as too trivial to deserve attention.


‘

according to others

’,

as

it

so

often

does in the

grammarians. S 2

COMMENTARY

26 o 1456

14

eirmjiTifjia

Kai a^iok

Riddell, **

16

‘

see

:

on

Pol.

:

25, 1460

Digest of Idioms

The

aeiSe.

6.

1272

il,

2.

imperative

(eTTiraTTciv

Kal

may

turn

comp. Schmidt, Handbuch der

;

aitov ctTretv (comp.

merely expresses a

such

as

but a tone of authority

(Kekeveiv),

n

32 o

§ 132).

’

into

it

lat.

u. gr.

bidding

command

a

Synonymik

Protagoras professed to understand Homer’s aftSe in this dictatorial sense of the imperative, on the assumption that it was to p. 51).

be read as'aetSe!’ sense,

on

where

II. I. I,

aSeiav

rj

the optative

Xafi/3dvei

crvv'qOeiav

that

aaSc gets

if

to Protagoras survives in Schol.

aei8e is said to be

of the imperative for

is

this

An

not of the poet but of the reciter.

fault

echo of the criticism ascribed

A

answer

Aristotle’s

through the

it is

[i.

e.

Yen.

an instance of the poetic use

on Kara rrjv irovqnK^v Homer] to, irpofTTaKTiKO.

:

r/Toi

dm

tVKTlKWV.

20

TTis

This whole chapter has been condemned by and others as an interpolation and it must be admitted

8e Xe'^eus ktL

Ritter that,

;

according to our notions of the divisions of knowledge, the

matter in

belongs to

it

same

the

sounds is

in

enough

grammar and

philology rather than to an

Aristotle’s divisions, however, are not always quite

Art of Poetry.

as ours, as his relegation of the theory of the simple

language to to

‘

metric

The

prove.

in the

’

De

Partibus

(2. 16,

660 7) same

writer of the chapter takes the

view of the simple sounds, and

us

tells

that they

need not be ^

The main

discussed at any length in a book like the Poetics. difficulty,

accordingly,

is

He may

on poetry.

assumption that

in his

other the other ‘parts of speech

come

’

in

some way

or

within the scope of a work

perhaps have thought that some analysis of

language in general was logically required as a preparation

for the

theory of poetical language in the next two chapters, which are

And remember the historical connexion between grammar and poetry in Greek antiquity. Grammar* unquestionably germane to the main subject of the book.

apart from this one has

seems

to

to have originated in

Greece

in the criticism

and

interpreta-

s’

iiiil

was felt and acknowledged-, even in the time of Dionysius Thrax, who begins his treatise with the definition, ypap.p.anK-q icrnv e/xTrctpta rwv vapd -TroLrjToii tion of poetry;

its

relation to poetry

'

T£

Kal

That

a~vyypa(f)evaiv

certain

of poetry

is

a distinction

di
matters of

implied is

Ittl

to

ttoAv

X.eyop.ev(x)v

grammar come under

apparently in

made between

De

interpr.

(p.

the 4,

jj,

mi

5 Uhlig).'^, cognizance '

17*

when

the logical and the extra-logipl

2

forms of statement

yap

prjTopiK^s

ad

ol

:

loc.).

itself,

aXAot

[scil.

OLKeiorepa

Aoyot]

might seem

it

rj

atfieLcrOoia-av

(comp.

crKeij/Ls

y The a priori objection, therefore, to

quite so conclusive as

,

ow

fj.ev

TTOitjTiK^';

Pacius

chapter

this

The

at first sight.

is

not

chapter

whether an original part of the Poetics or not, has more than

one mark of date about retains

apOpov and TTrSms have not yet

it.

sense

acquired their usual

of

‘

article

and

’

case

‘

Adyos

’ ;

still

and the definitions of have been framed with

peculiarly Aristotelian meaning,

its

pr]p.a seem to on 1457 10); the general terminology and logical forms throughout the chapter are Aristotelian and there are also several isolated points and allusions M’hich would be wholly unintelligible if it were not for the parallels and illus-

apdpov,

ovo/ia

crvvSecrp.o';,

conscious reference to

it

and

(see

;

trations

we

able

are

to

find

unquestioned writings of

the

in

Aristotle. dird(TT)s, it

as opposed to the parts into which ', comp. Meteor. 4. i, 379'’ 5 y OdXaaa-a Kara

taken as a whole

‘

may be

divided;

p.ipos p-hf Siaipayphn)

Ta.)^a.

— Plato Theaet. — Gorg. g02 C ns — Laws 737 ®

arprirai,

d-Tracra

8’

ov

.

147 E Tov dptdpov TTavra Sc\a SuXd^opev. XoLTO T^s 7rof)jcrE(os nda-rjs to re /aeAos ktL

'

The

TravTos apiOpov.

'•

Caesar B. G.

used in just the same way

’

;

but the term covers

an anticipation of our

more ground

which words are analyzable

{a-TOLxeiov

and

— the

1

all

•

actual Ae|is being a series of Aoyoi.

the

above heads,

deals with the cited

'

his

of

list

(3)

‘

i.e.

It is

the Aoyos

includes, therefore,

It

the elements of language in every stage of analysis,

simplest sounds to the proposition. ;

;

crvAAa/?^); (2) the

various kinds of words {avvBea-pos, dpOpov, etc.); and

‘

in

ires.

comprises three distinct kinds of ‘parts’: (i) the elements

into

i

is

Gallia est omnis divisa in partes

i

parts of speech

pepr]

’

Latin omnis

t^^PV

Aristotle’s pe'py rrj? Xeiecos is

pdprj.

TCI ‘

i.

Trepu-

et

from the

only under the second of

in his classification of words, that Aristotle

parts of speech

by Ammonius on

the

’

of later grammar.

De

Interpretatione

:

This passage

is

Xoyov pkv ravra

'

[i. e. '

articles,

Aoyos airos

conjunctions, etc.] ov pdpo], Ae^ecos Se pdpoj, pepo's,

JBusse); and there

^the same book

:

raOd-rrep ev tois is

more than one

IlEpt 7roir;TtK^S

reference to

it

eipijrai

/cat

(p.

in Boethius

6

1

on

Aristoteles in libris quos de poetic a scripsit locutionis

paries esse syllahas vel etiam coniunciiones tradidit (2, p. 6 Meiser). In opere vero de poetica non eodem modo dividii loculione 7n, sed

—

omnes omnino locutionis partes adposuit, confirmans esse locutionis partes elementa syllabas coniunciiones articulos

nomina casus verba

1456''

COMMENTARY

262 1456

**

20

oraiioncs.

namque non

locutio

in solis significaiivis vocibus constat,

ad

sed supergradiens significatioiies voctm

articulatos sonos usque

consistit (2, p. 8).

The

us which

before

classification

as the

into

an advance on

TTTwcrets, is

work known

that in the lost Aristotelian

words

distinguishes

apOpa, ovd/xara, p-qp-ara and

(TvySea/j-oi,

t^s ©coScktov

t£x>'??s

127 Teubn.), w'hich recognized only three kinds of words, ovop-ara, prjpaTa, and a-vvSecrpoL. This lost book is mentioned by Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Quintilian in their 7vvay(x)yq

(fr.

<

sketches of the history of the ‘parts of speech’; but they both

The

ignore the present chapter of the Poetics.

omission, instead

of justifying Ritter’s athetesis of the chapter, merely shows that Poetics were but

That

apOpov.

21

the

word has

position of the explanation

(1457

22

cTOixetov

:

comp. Metaph.

ccrgaTa,

eKeiva

Sw

Se prjKeri

Eudemus

A

26

1014

3,

crvyKeirai

dXkas

els

was properly a

(TToixeiov

‘

element

’,

it

i

which

ou

dXXo

eiSor

Kai

eis

a BiaipuraL

Tw

eiSet

alphabet;

13 Diels)

p. 7-

Xeyerai

eis

irepas

(j>u>vr]

rj

<^coi'ds

Plato

who gave

so often has in

it

avrm,

was

it

it

the

Aristotle.

word

;

a a-ToixUov

defined as

is

indivisible voice-sound capable of serving as a constituent, or

element, in an intelligible voice-sound describing

it

ypdppa,

the

as a

or

(comp. Metaph. far

‘

sound written

’

B

4,

Crat.

p. 33).

426

{crvveTr]

In thus

(jxovq).

Aristotle implicitly distinguishes

symbol which

1000*^2);

The two terms

stands

for

are

it

from

sound

the

the distinction, however,

from being generally observed

tum

is

very

in Aristotle (see Diels, Elemen-

treated

as synonyms in

Plato

D.

The

alternative reading a-vvOer^ -has

been accepted

by

g

by Steinthal (Gesch. d. Sprachwissenschafl' The main argument ir 253) and Diels (Elementum p. 33).

«

cruveTT).

23

the

present definition shows the influence of the philosophical

associations connected with the

^


of the

letter

ap. Simplic. in Phys.

philosophical sense of

an

shown by

is

the following statement about

evvTrdpgovTos dSiaiperov

oiov wyys CTTOi^eia

The

be transposed

to

in

6).

(TvyKciTai TrpuiTov

(v.

the

read in certain periods of antiquity.

little

several editors, as also I

p.

favour of (rvvOert] a-vvOcT-Q,

is

that, as

and that the

defined in ^ 34, the syllable

syllable

is

viewed in sundry

is

a

ejiwvi

Aristoteliar

passages (Bon. Ind. 702 ^ 39) as a synthesis of o-roixeta. This But it has to be remembered on the other side tha true enough.

i:

Aristotle often speaks of the a-roixiia as o-roixeta

tfjwvrjs

(Bon.

Inc

m

:»

ilj

iS,

|«ii

(lii

— 20. 1456

;

2^3

20-25

—

where (f)wvq means the same thing as the a vyerr)
I*

-

original reading, the excepting clause (ov iraa-a Se ktL),

the

indivisible

‘

like

this

argument here seems to be something are indivisible

In the utterances of the brutes there

:

which puts

of the brutes into a different category,

’

Aristotle’s

irrelevant.

is

sounds

but these ‘noises’ of theirs are directly significant in

sounds,

themselves (De interpr.

they are not o-rot^eia

2,

because they do not combine as elements to form a

a-weTrj.

on the other hand, in human speech exist as elements in speech, and they have no meaning in themselves the meaning in human speech is in the words and propositions not in the elements which analysis reveals in them (comp.

The

indivisible sounds,

—

’

‘

Vahlen, Beitr. 3 p. 220). (oyr} crvyery is perhaps the nearest Aristotelian equivalent for our term word ’. It may be taken as ‘

including not only the

something, but also the Be, etc.

da-rjfjLO ';

dpOpa and

(Aristotle’s

word

the

a-rffiayriKij,

(fxoyr/

—words

arvyBea-p-oC),

that stands for

like d/4<^t,

-n-epi,

by themselves, though they have a certain significance in place in intelligible TttUTTjS

fAcpi)

human

ktI.

:

Kal rd

Plato Crat. 424 C dp ovy Kal

yap

Kal dcfiOoyya' ovruxrl

av ejxay^eyTa pey

eTreiBrj (jioiyrjy

ttov

rmy

Xeyovcrw

ov peyrot

ov,

erepoiv

ye

•^p.d’s

Kara

erepa

direLpia Karevorjcrey

phf

(fjtvvrjs

tovtwv

Phil.

’,

rd tc 18 B

direipoy Kareyorja-ey elre Tts ^eos etre Kal Oeio<; dvOpwTros,

tQ

(fxvyijeyra ev

ovtu) Set

eiBr]

ol Beiyol Trepl

dOoyya

Xdyos ev AtyvTrrco @ev0 Ttya rovToy yevecrdai Xeywy, os

(OS

their

speech.

TrpwToy pey rd cfxDyqeyTa BieXecrOai, eneira d
p.iv,

which stand for nothing

ov^ ey oyra dXXd

ov, ej>06yyov Be perey^pyrd Tiyos,

tt/dcotos to,

TrAeito,

Kal TrdXiy

dpiOpdy Be Tiya Kal

TovTwy eiyar rpiToy Be eiSos ypappartoy Biecrrya-aTO rd yvy Xeyopeya a
rjpLy to

evos eKdo'Tov, Kal

perd tovto Btypei rd re d9oyya Kal

dpiOpoy avTwv Xa/Sdy evt re paa-ey.

the

eKcicrTcp

rporroy, eu>s

Kal idpTraai (rTOi)(eioy eTrcovS-

Here Plato’s pecra are Aristotle’s r/ptcfnoya. In later theory and dcfxvya of Aristotle come under the more general

-^pccfiivya

designation of ‘consonants

100

do}ya pe)(jii

rd ^(oyyeyra Kal rd pecra Kard rdy avrdy

Tct

rd Be

ph/ ydp avTwv crvp(j}ya,

Kal

’,

crvpcfiwya:

Sextus

cfxvvdevTa

ph'

Emp. Adv. math.

i.

cfxovdeyra irpocrayopevovcri

[scil. rtov CTTOt^eioiv]

ercrd,

aeyj lovca,

ra Xonrd ... 102 twv Se avpcfxvyiuy rd pey -^picfxvyd

crvpcfitaya

ecrri

Bk

Kar avrovs

rd Be dcjywya. (JxoiTiei'.

ed.

Nauck*

The word had been dcfxvva (fuayT^eyra

already used by Euripides,

crvXXa/Sds

riOels

e^vpoy

fr.

578

dv^pcoTrottrt

25

*’

23

;

COMMENTARY

264 1456

25

It may be observed that botli Plato (Theaet. ilBtvai. 203 b) and Aristotle (Metaph. N 6, 1093 13) recognize the vowels as being seven in number.

ypayot/y-ar

**26

a^eu Trpoa(3 oXris

The latter

the opposite of fiera

:

imply a certain

irpoa-fSoXT^ is

audible.

The

clear.

has been taken to

word

sense of the

ictus (Victorius), percussio

Castelvetro,

who

know what

it

term refers

in

speech

some

it

literally

is

far

from

and

allisus

(Goulston)

percossa, confesses that he does not

idea of most interpreters

is

that the

mechanism of instance, on the parts sort. Twining, who

v'ay or other to the physical

to the impact of the tongue, for

;

translates ‘

The

means.

the vowels

used

addiiio (Valla), adiectio (Paccius),

(Robortello),

by

it

the mouth, or something

within

is

renders

make

required to

Trpoa-^oXrj as here

mean

that the

is

the condition of their becoming

7rpoo-/3oXr; as

no such

audible, whereas

It

the next line.

irpoa-ISoXTi'; in

between the vowels and consonants

difference

of that

by ariiculaiicn (with Batteux), percussion

i.

:

e.

tells

us in a note that

of the tongue against the palate

it

or

teeth, the lips against the teeth or against each other, and all other modes of consonant articulation ’. In support of this physiological interpretation Vahlen (Beitr. 3 p. 224) quotes De part. an. 2. 16, 660 ^ 2 6 Adyos d Bib. TTjs (fxovrjs ck tCiv ypap.p,a.Ttav crvyKenai, rrjs

Be yAojTnys

p,rj

(jsOeyyecrOai

ra n-Aetcra

ei(Ti

roiavrrj? ovcrrjs

7rpo(ry8oAat,

that Trpoa/SoXyj

rd 8e

the

De

yXwTTrj<;,

(2)

is

hard to see how,

open in

to

yAwTTTys, of

more than one

the absence of some

can stand

for

wpocrjioX^

to the physiology of articulation ;

articulation are a separate

(t>

3

1

first

ravra Be

show

to

or can be taken to include the notion of a-vp-lioX^

apparently for the

I

is

the context, n-poa/SoXi/j

Such a reference

chapter

",

rjv

yXmTTrjs

here in a sense wide enough to include

out of place in the definition of

twv p^eiAwr

yap t^s and argues

pier

to,

Adiv, as well as the wpocr/^oA-^

(i) It

explanation in

Twv ^eiAwv vypSiv ovk dr

This view, however,

Partibus.

objection,


may be used

the a-vp.^oXr] TWV

p,r]Be

Ttov ypa/x/xarwr"

the differences in the point,

)(eiXtov.

would

be

mechanism

which Aristotle recognizes

time in another section further on

in

the

Biaipepei cr^ij/xacrt re rov crrop-aTos Kal tottois).

think that Valla was probably right in taking

sense of addiiio or adiectio,

i.

e.

Trpoa-/3 oX-Q in

as equivalent to TTpocrO-^Kr]

—

the the

by Lucian in a very similar context to mark the distinction between the vowels and semivowels (lud. Voc. It may be observed, too, that Trpoo-^SdAAav and irpoan5, 88 R.). The general Bevai are synonyms in Antiphanes fr. 206 Kock.

word

actually used

— 20. 1456

^

25-28

265

sense, then, according to this view of TrpocrPoXrj, will be that the

vowels are audible by themselves {avev

TrpocrfSoXrj';)

145®

whereas the

;

semivowels and mutes (the consonants) require the support or addition of a vowel {p.eTa

was

Uhlig

1 1

p.

ovK

7rpo(r/3 oX^s)

certainly the distinction in later

e)^ei,

a~vp.
Be

a~vveK(f)(!ovovp.eva..

.

P- Tnutae dictac

qp.iefiwva

TrapairXri
.

quod

pet' se

non possunt enuntiari.

— Dionysius Thrax 12 — SextUS Emp. Adv. math.

Diomedes 416

p.

Xeyerai [on] irapocrov rjTTOv twv ejimvTjevrmv

pev ocra Bi avTwv pdi^ov

r})(ov

—

pera twv

Aristoxenus (quoted below).

:

qp.tffjmva 8e

102

.

efxjovrjv

aTroreXeZ

efxiyvrjv

102 a(/)wm Be ia-n ra

KaOeo’TiqKev ev re rots /xiry/xots Kai criypoi?. I.

eavra

Ka6’

p.ev

(fxDvrjo^Twv

—Diomedes 418

sine adniiniculo vocalium %i'<})u('oi'

i.

;

on avra

tZv

crvvTa(r
Emp. Adv. math.

Sextus oAAojv

Uhlig

Xeyovrat

make them audible. This grammar Dionysius Thrax

to

Kara

ttjv

rj

criypov

rj

diroreXeiv

eKtfxiivqcriv

27

ev(f)(Dva

pvypov

rj

riva

trefftvKOTa

.

P. Seinivocales dictae quod dimidium eius poiestatis

hdbeni: etenini per se enuntianiur, sed per se nec syllabatn nec plenam

vocem faciuni.

Plato only supra on b 24).

(v.

exov

knows

semivowels as

the

ra

pea-a.

Apart from the vowels the semivowels

dKouaTi)!'.

have some sort of sound as noises, not a distinctly audible voice-

sound (<^wv^ oLKova-T-q) like the vowels this it is that distinguishes them from the mutes, which have no sound at all by themselves. ;

Comp. Plato Theaet. 203 B to re cnypa twv a(x)VU)V ecTTt, i/^oc^os ns povov oXov crupiTTOvcrq's Trjs yAojTTTjs' too S’ av /Srjra ovre vr] ovre

nvas

87^

(XTroTeAetv TreejiVKe, pdt^ov

dXX(i)v

Br]X(i)TiKov<;,

Kal ovx

—AristOxenus

ovBe rwv TrXetcrTwv crToi^eicDy.

ij/6(f)OS,

Hal. 5 p. 72 R. Ttuv prf (fxovrj^rwv a per i)

a Be eortv

ko.6’

ap. Dion.

ij/6
orrotovs

^ p.vypov ^ roiovrotv rivwv

criypov aTrdcTTjs

Old re qx^Zo'^ai raO’ eavra' Bio

eavra

dpoipa

cfim'rjs

ral

\\/6ov,

ravra pev difxvvd nves

Br]

exdXeo'av, Odrepa Be rjpiefxvva.

In the definition perd

a^xji'oi'.

a

rrpocr/SoXrj';

serves to distinguish

mute from the vowel the idea of it, however, is repeated in more explicit form in perd ridv ixovrivv rivd iavi]v. The ex-

the

;

pression Tcov exdvroiv rivd

(jiivvqv

semivowels as well as the vowels.

is

wide enough to include the

The semivowels

are audible by

themselves, though only as noises (comp. Plato Phileb. 18 c erepa (jjiovTjs

ph'

ov,

sufficient to

as a in

(jiivvrj

(f>66yyov Be pere^ovrd nvos)

make a mute

aKovarr).

;

and a semivowel

audible, though only as a noise

is

—not

Aristotle carefully chooses his M'ords, therefore,

saying yivopevov aKovarov

;

since e^ov

cjxuvrjv

dKovcmqv,

‘

with

28

26

i

COMMENTARY

266 1456

**

28 an audible voice-sound would have been true only of the combination of a mute and a vowel. TauTo 8e 8ia<|>epei. Of the five differences here noted the first 31 and second relate to the physiological mechanism of speech; the remainder come under the head of Trpoo-wSta

on

—

a term which with and accent, as well as quantity (see

the ancients included breathing 25, 1461 ® 22).

Plato (Tim. 75 d) is aware in the formation of

axiifiaaii' re toG ffTojxaTos Kal Toirots.

of the function of the teeth,

lips,

and tongue

speech, and has also described (Crat. 426 e) the various

of the tongue in the utterance of certain letters (comp.

movements Xenophon

From Alexander’s comment on Metaph. N 6, 883 Hayduck) we learn that these points in the physiology of speech had long before this engaged the attention

Mem.

I.

4,

1093 “23

12).

(p.

whom

of Archinus, the statesman to

Athens owed the introduction

of the Ionic alphabet in 403 (see Usener, Rh. Mus. 25

For the

tov

crx^ixara

comp.

crTOfiaro';

De

p. 591).

800 “16

audib.

avaTTveofiev 8e tov fiev aepa Trdvrcs Tov avrov, to 8e Trvevpa Kal Tas

dAAotds Std Tas twv vvoKeL/xivoiv dyyeuuv Sta^opds

(])U)vas eKTrefjLTro/J.ev .

.

TO

ravra Se

.

ecrriv

y re apTrjpia [i. e. wind-pipe] Kal 6 Trv€vp,
Trkua-TTjv p.ev ovv

(TTop^a.

TOV dipo<; TrXrjyal Kat oi too cTop.aTOS

(T')(rjp,aTi
For the to^oi toG a-T6p.aTos as factors in articulation see more especially H. A. 4. 9, 535 3. i, 28 ; De part. an. 2. 16, 660 661 14 and Metaph. N 6, 1093 23 (with Alexander’s note). 8aaurr)Tt Kal ({/iXottjti Kal t (3 peo-u. The Kal tw p-eo-o) in 32 S'

;

;

.

.

,

the next line belongs equally to each of the three pairs of opposites,

and not merely to the last of them. The meaning of Saa-vT-q^ and if/iXoTrj';

De

audib.

804 ^ 8

Sao-eiai 8’

cto-t

evOiws avviK^dXXopiev p,€Ta Ttov ytvovTai )(Mpl?

TTj'i

P.85R. TavTa

[i.

TO.

8e

Sacria Kal

addition’ (see aspiration

’.

TO

ttjv

The

in

speech

(fnovCtv oo'ats

1,

,

\j/iXa^

pev yap

tov TrrEopaTOS

1447

^

may

29),

TOvvavTiov Scat

and from Dion. Hal. 8wapiv

ttjv eavTiov TrpocrO-qKrjv.

means

be seen from

tcrwOev to irvevp.a

(fiOoyyai', \j/iXal 8’ elcrl

TOV TTveopaTos eK^oXrjs

e.

on

twv

in this

5

p.6vr]v, ‘

without

‘

without

.\f/iX6s,

connexion

threefold distinction in the text, as applied to the

mutes, passed on to the grammarians, and became an accepted part of

grammar (comp. Dion. Thrax

ij/tXa

p-icra

tovtwv

p. 12

8e

ij/iXoTepa,

etprjTai oTi

Ttov

pev

and Priscian 549

i/tiXtov

P.);

and

[scil.

tSv d^covwv]

p.i
plv Tpta, KTTT, Sacria Se Tpia, 0 earTt it

SacrvTepa, Ttov

still

/3yS’

Se Saaecov

appears in our familiar

— 20. 1456 mutes into aspiralae,

division of

The

PpaxuTiiTi.

Kttl

fiaKpa

rva-TeWerai

(

.

tort

/J-ev

a

rpia,

§€

Sixpova

o, p.

Sextus

I

v-

8vo,

Xaveiv, TO

Kai

ij

— where

Bixpova

dlv,

the

10

Se

Svo,

t
Xeyerai, inei eKTewerai

Be

100 twv

i.

yap avrwv

1456

km

8e cftwvrjevTwv

?•

Tpta Be Koiva

o,

vypa Kal

dp.(l>i/3oXa Kat

ore ptev eKTelvecrOat

TreVKev

(comp. Dion. Hal. 5

8e

Kat

piaKpa Xeyovcri rvy-

(jivaeL

airep Bixpova Kat

eTa^oXiKa KoAovo’tv Ikocttov yap avTwv crv(TTeXXe
p.

cu,

Kal to m, IcrapiOpLa Be I3pa)(ea, to e Kat to

p-T^KOv; T€ Kat jSpaxvTTjTos,

ore Be

Thrax

v: Dion.

1,

Emp. Adv. math.

rpels Aeyovcrt Sia^opas’ Bvo p.ev T]

tenues

intermediates {fieaa) in quantity are

the three dichronous vowels a, (Dvr]ivTu>v

and

niediae,

of the Greeks.*

tenues represent the fArjKei

267

28-33

Aulus

74

Gellius 16. 18. 5). 6|uttjti

Kttl

A

3 apo'TT]Ti.

|

third kind of difference

to

is

Accent with Aristotle

in the differences of accent.

is

be seen

a part of

on '’31), but he has no special name for it ; the word ToVos in Rhet. 3. i, 1403 29 relates to the tone or key in which something may be said, and not, as is sometimes supposed Aristotle’s (e. g, by Cope), to the syllabic accent in words, intermediate accent is clearly that conventionally indicated by a circumflex, as standing between the acute and grave, and having thus something of the nature of both. This was the received view of the phonetic value of the circumflex in antiquity, though the names by which it was known referred to the form of the mark rather than the nature of the accent itself; comp, the pseudoSergius, 4 p. 531 Keil Ammonius Alexandrius qui Arts tarchi scholae successit Biv^apw vocat, Ephorus aute 7n Cymaeus TrepiWao-tv, irpoa-wBia (see

’

‘

Diojiysius Olympius [read crvptTrXeKTov,

omnibus

Olynthius^ Birovov, Hermocrates lasius

:

Epicharmus Syracusius

Trepta-iroip.evri

erecta rursus in

KeKXacrp.ev'qv

;

verum ea nunc ab

Graece vocatur, apud nos flexa, quoniam primo

gravem

jlectitur.

For further

illustrations of the

notion of the circumflex in antiquity see Nauck, Aristophanis Byz.

fragmenta p. 13, and Wilmanns, De Varronis libris grammaticis It is to be observed that (like Plato Crat. 399 a) Aristotle p. 187. ignores the circumflex in the passage in Soph. TTapa ‘TrpoartaBtav oieiav [scil. 6 Xoyos ecTTt],

‘

This technical use of tenuis

rj

may be traced back

el.

23,

i79<'''

14

el

fdapeia TrpocrtaBia Xvaoi,

to Lascaris,

who

naturalized

among the modems but it is not easy to see how Lascaris came by it. He may possibly have remembered the language of the pseudo-Sergius 4 p. 526 it

Keil

;

:

Crassitudo

[i. e.

Saavrrjs']

in spiritu

est

.

.

.

nam omnes

voces

aspirando facimus pinguiores aut sine aspirata pronuntiando tenuioresi]

atu

’’

33

3^

— COMMENTARY

268 1456

33

£t

Be Trapa (Sapeiav,

and speaks as though the only subwere that between acute and grave.

6$eia,

rj

stantial difference in accent

His view of

was probably very

in fact

it

Peripatetic Athenodorus

Aihenodortcs duas esse

flexam aidem

superiorem;

vocamus) nihil aliud '"34

comp,

:

be bracketed, as there

by

contemplated,

He

p. 753).

the parallel TO.

{11am

Aristotle

De

or phonology.

preposition has to actual or

himself (comp. Bergk, Kl. Schr.

2

he does

in

part. an.

The many

p-erpiKwr.

cognizance of

TreptcrTrw/xcVr^v

book on metre,

hint of a

leaves the subject to the

in

lingua

The

infra ^ 38.

no

is

2.

/xerpi/cot,

660^^7

16,

just as

Trotas

ravra

Be

theory of metre, in

its

primitive form, took

matters which we should relegate to started,

It

[scil.

Sia^opds, Bel TrvvOdvecrOaL napa

ypdp,p,aTa] Kal Trdcras ral rtVas

Twv

nostra

ita

qiiam has duas in una syllaba.

esse

[^v] Tois fACTpiKoIs

like that ascribed to the

pseudo-Sergius, 4 p. 529 Keil prosodias putavit, tinam infer iorem, alteram the

in

grammar, with the

like

grammar

a-Toixela

or

elementary sounds in language (Longinus Prol. in Hephaest. p. 142 Gaisf. Tov TTept pLerp
]

and, as the passage in the

De

Partibus

intimates (comp. Dion. Hal. 5 p. 74 R.), it dealt with the whole question of the number and nature of these elements.

As

o-uX\a(3 ii.

and a

letter

‘

here defined a avXXa^iq

with a sound

’,

i.

e.

is

a combination of a mute

either a

vowel or a semivowel

mute audible. An instance of the first combination is BA (see Metaph. Z 17, 1041 t* 13); of the second rP (comp. Metaph. N 6, 1093 ^ 22), where the P becomes audible In the further combinaat any rate as part of a complex noise tion PPA we have an articulate, as well as an audible, sound a
on

^ 28), to

make

the

‘

in the Aristotelian definition

of the term: Dionysius a’vXXrpj/is

apparently the proper technical sense p.

16 Uhlig crvXXa^^ ea-n Kvplm

avpLcjiwvwv /xcrd efxovqevTos

KaTaxpr](rTiK(tiS Be koX 2 P.,

is

Thrax

rj

^

cj>wvr]evT(x)v,

e$ €vds (fxjivqevTOS, otov d,

rj

oiov rap, ^ovs'

(see-also Charisius

and Marius Victorinus 2470-5 P.). In ordinary speech, howterm was often used to denote the units of sound or

ever, the ‘

syllables

divisible.

’

(as

we

say) into which a word, a foot, or a verse

Plato, for intance, speaks of

as the

‘

first

is

syllable

’

203 c), and of words as ‘made up of syllables’ 424 E
(Crat.

;

— 20. 1456 be disyllables,

269

33-38

Aristotle has lapsed into this use

trisyllables, etc.

of the term even in the Poetics, in 21, 1458 UrjkrjLaSeu) is

passage) writings

regarded as a

and

;

see Cat. 6, 4^’ 33

;

722 32; Metaph. (comp. Bon. Ind. 710 45 I.

De

;

N

18,

;

1093^1;

6,

and

diphthongs;

called

other Aristotelian

31

Rhet.

Aussprache®

for

2,

gen. an.

1405

for the general history of the

view

ancient

the

De

;

3.

p.

of

31 term

126).

be observed that Aristotle ignores the

to

is

in

interpr. 4, 16

Schmidt, Beitrage zur Gesch. der Grammatik It

where the a in (see note on the

cruAAaySr; ifj.p€^X7j[jL€vri

by no means uncommon

is

it

(jiwvai

avvOerat

them see

Blass,

p. 20.

IxoeTos includes the semivowel as well as the vowel (see

on

>3

Kttl

yap TO rP perpiKYjs

tou A

ai'eu

on

see

:

= to yap As

34.

PP

the foot

Aristides

perpiKT]^

6

Quintil.

irepl

i.

20,

p.

is

made up

o Trepl TToSoiv, eiO’ ovto)^ 6 irepl p.eTpo)v

142 Gaisf. TOV 8e

pev

oLTrb

(TTOixeidiv,

Trepl a)s

HAtdSojpos, r/pet^ Se

By

apidpevoi.

Longinus

.

of syllables, ^ 38

much

as to

28 Jahn apxr] p-h ovv

Aoyos, eW’ 6 Trepl

orToixettov

36

Kal avev tov A.

the theory of the a-vXXa/3-j belonged to metre just as

grammar:

p.

crvXXa^rj';,

Prol. in

yj

eW'

Heph.

perpoiv Xoyov iroXXol TroXXa)(w'> rjp^avTO, ol tAd^evos,

ol

Se utto tov perpatv opov,

(Ls

KaraKoXovOrja-opev arro o'vAAaySijs

H<^atcrTta)V6

tovtojv tos Sta^opds Aristotle

probably meant not

only the familiar distinction of syllables into long and short, but also the finer differences the ancient theory of rhythmic recognized in

times of syllables,

the

consonants in them

is

when

the

time of the consonant or

taken into account

(v.

Kiihner, Gr. Gr.®

i.

i

p. 300).

The

ffuVSeapos. (that

on the dpOpov)

deal of

traditional text of this

unintelligible

it

and the following section Twining finds a good

confessedly corrupt.

is

(comp. Steinthal, Gesch. der Sprachwissen-

—

263) and Vahlen, besides bracketing ^ ef>wvr] pea-ov in i457a8-io, has to assume two lacunas, one after a-wTiOea-Oat in schaft

^

1457 At

this

I

2,

(letters

p.

;

3.nd another alfter Sr^Aot in

and

erqpavTLKai

syllables) to actual

]

:

some words

7.

words

these latter being the

uttered by themselves.

are said to be ^wvai

dcrrjpot,

;

and he begins by noting and others efxoval

are (^wvai da-rjpoi,

which have a meaning of their

when

1457

point Aristotle passes from the constituents of words

this distinction

i

35

28).

Tfjs

r^S

1456

“ 2,

;

nouns and verbs

in language,

own and stand for something even The a-vvheerpoL and dpOpa, however, e, they convey no meaning when i.

^

34

COMMENTARY

270 1456 *’38 uttered by themselves. represent in

some way

we may

If

the

them

provisionally take

connexive words

little

in

to

language, the

question arises as to the nature of the two kinds of connexives

and the

distinction Aristotle wished to

draw between them.

It will

be observed that he describes them by reference to their position

and function in the complex (jxDvr] arj/xavTiKij, called a Aoyos a little further on in the chapter (1457 It is necessary, therefore, to 23). go back to his idea of Aoyos, and consider the various forms of Aoyo6 which he either recognizes or may be presumed to have recognized. Aoyos in the present sense of the term has no exact English equivalent, though

‘

speech

‘

’,

discourse

sometimes conventionally made to stand

for

or

’,

‘

phrase

According

it.

’

is

to the

1457 23 it is a significant combination of significant of two (or more) nouns, or verbs (including what Aristotle would call their TTTcio-cis), or of a verb and a noun, or of a noun and a vei’b. A Adyos, in Aristotle’s sense of the term, definition in

words,

e. g.

The

does not necessarily involve predication.

‘

—

e.g.

equivalent to

is

instance he gives in

25 of a non-predicative Adyos is a definition, that of man ’, Tre^dv Slttovv where the combination of the three nouns

1457

a proposition. post.

2.

10,

‘

man

’,

and may replace

This form of Adyos

93^31.

Under

is

as

one of the terms of

same head we may include

this

certain other forms of expression,

it

the Adyos dvo/xaTioSr^s of An.

combina-

e. g.

two verbs), and oIkovo-i vrjcrov (a verb 4- a noun). A more complex instance of the same type would be a combination like ol 'Pi.dr]vaioi Kal AaKiSai/jiovioi, where the terms are combined into one tion of

by the copulative, and oIkovo-l Trepl Sva-fid's, where the terms are hyphened together by the preposition ^ (comp. Hartung, Lehren der

The

Alien iiber die Dichtkunst p. 284). that

De

which involves predication Interpretatione (4.

De

in

17^2

— the

other form of Adyos

If we may work out the we may divide the Adyot of

seqq.).

Interpretatione 5, 17 *^20,

is

Adyos d7ro<^av7tKds of the hint this

description into two kinds, the simple and the composite, and take

the example in 1457 “izS, predicational Adyos.

It is

KAeW

ySaSt^ct, as the

of the composite predicational Adyos

general terms in the passage in the of two or 1

With

more simple

;

but

De

its

nature

is

Interpretatione

predicational Adyot

combined

in

indicated in :

it

consists

some way or

the Stoic grammarians the prepositions were classed originally under

the avvSeapoi, and avvZiapoi,

type of the simple

not so easy to find an Aristotelian instance

afterwards distinguished from

the

others as

wpoOeriKol

— 20 1456

”

.

How,

other into one single Xoyos.

kinds of words

We may

tione ignores this question.

members

structure of

the

relations of the

different

In some instances the simple Xoyot

to the whole.

merely co-ordinated, and held together by copu-

a-TTo^avTiKoi are

KXcW

lative or similar conjunctions, as in

KaOrjTai,

Interpreta-

perhaps supply the omis-

complex sentences and observing the parts or

The De

?

moment on

however, by reflecting for a

sion,

and by means of what 1456

then,

combination effected

this

is

271

38

KXewv

ySaSt^et

(jlIv

^wKpdrt]?

^SaSt^ei koI

KAewv

Se KaOrjTai,

^(jOKparq'S

/JaSi^ei

Others 1457 3°)! they are subordinated to one another, and form a sort of organic whole knit into one by words which indicate relation and interdependence. This last point in the theory of the Xoyos would

dXXa

%
(comp.

in


have to be recognized in any grammatical analysis of the sentence and its construction. I venture to suggest that it may have been actually present in Aristotle’s mind at the time of framing his

and dpOpov, and

definitions of (rvvSe(rp.os

the text, this

if it

be permissible

to restore

be found in

to

is

it

some such way

in

it

as

:

[koI

£774

ecm

Be

(TwSea'p.o';
d(Tr]p.os,

vrj

mi

tSiv dtepaiv

5 irXeioy
p-hf

crypavTLKyy

dpOpoy

tni tov p.ecov'],

B'

ecrn

irocei

The words

aKpoiy Kal

errl

Be

and the clause y

tol

ete

—

y ck

jreffiVKe

piav

ra dXXa^.

Kal

d\Ka.

(pwvfj darjpos

fj

ovre KwXvei

fj

irketdvuv (paivaiyl, TrecjrvKVM TiOeo'Oal

tov pecrov.

wrong place of

tfxoyy

Troieiy

Kal to Trept

bracketed after crvvTidea6ai in

a repetition in the

dcrripios

(f>u>v7]

Xoyov dp-^y y reXos y Biopicrpby

rj

mi to nept mi arjpavTiK^jv

rj

crrjpayTiKwy dpcfti

dp^y Xoyov

dp/xoTTet ev

pftj

Tot, 8e.

Srj,

^oioy to

cfxjyyy dcrrjpo^,

dp/pi

TToiei (pojvbv piety

Kttt irrl Ttjjy

pid
efxiyywy


ByXol [ohv TO ovre

KwXvei ovre

^ ovre

pLLav (rr]p.avTiKr)v €K TrXeiovmv (ftwCyv irecjiVKvZav cruvTiOecrOaL

TidevaL Kaff avroy, otoy p.ey,

10

that

(ftojytbv

in

11.

1.

2

suppose to be

I

those after TtOea-Oai in

8-9

to have

come

in

1.

a repetition of the beginning of the definition of crvyBea-pos in

(comp. Diintzer, Rettung

d. aristotelischen

Poetik

be seen also that the illustration olov to dp^t

—

to.

dXXa

be out of place where

to

form part of the second definition of o-wSeo-pos

it

stands,

is

is

transferred to

—a

1.

1.

i

assumed 6,

so as

view which

by Hartung. Two kinds of avyBea-poi, then, amended. The first is said to consist connexive words whose presence in a Xdyos does not affect

has been anticipated

are recognized in the text as

of the

and

;

It will

p. 194).

to

9

through

38

COMMENTARY

272

1456 ”38 the coherence of the terms. this point

bination

if

;

KAeW

them

of

There

and the

in

no

is

difficulty in illustrating

are combinable terms, the

KXeW

proposition

hindered nor helped by the insertion after the a

Se,

a

or a rot.

8?;,

grammarians

Little

called

‘

words of

/?aSt^€i

word of a

first

Though

they

stand

it

the

at

beginning of the Aoyos, they are not an integral part of

belong to

/xeV,

what the

this description are

expletives

com-

neither

is

it

they

;

not per se {raO' avrov), but per accidens, and only serve

to indicate a relation to

some other Xoyos before or

after

In

it.

contradistinction to these Aristotle recognizes a second species of o-w8€o-/xo9

(

which

into

1 .

it

4),

one that

is

a real and constitutive part of the Aoyos

This function, as

enters.

have endeavoured

1

show

to

above, in the general survey of the possible forms of Aoyoi,

by the prepositions

fulfilled

and

copulative

the

Aristotle’s o-wSecr/xos, therefore, whatever else

it

is

conjunctions.

may

may

signify,

be taken to include the preposition, the copulative conjunction,

and

The

is

more

determine owing to the absence of examples to

illus-

also certain particles.

difficult to

trate

The term must

meaning.

its

sense of the word apOpov

clearly denote

a particular

The

kind of connexive required for a particular kind of Aoyos.

may

kind of Aoyos Aristotle had in mind

from the

fact that the

ning, or end,

apOpov in

is

it

or dividing-point

in

perhaps be

inferred

said to indicate the begin-

its

Such a Aoyos

structure.

may

be assumed to be a composite proposition, and moreover one

of a

more complex form than

KaOrjTUL

and the

either intimately

one

like.

that in

The two

KAeW

(SaSi^a Kal ^rnKparyj^

constituent propositions in

connected by being related

in

it

are

such a way that the

and the other the end of the whole or they some way divided or separated one from the other. With we may compare the definition of the period in Rhet. 3. 9, is

the beginning

;

are in this

‘

1409®' 35 Aeyo) 8 e TrepioSov

e^ovcray dp^rjy Kal reXevrrjV avrrjv

KaO' avT7]v Kal p.eyeOo'; evavvoTrTov.

of this statement

it

may be

’

As a

conjectural interpretation

suggested (i) that the dpOpa which

mark the beginning of the proposition represent the conditional and causal conjunctions, together with the relative pronouns and adverbs; (2) that those marking the end are the final and illative conjunctions; and (3) those marking the separation or division in

the proposition, the disjunctives.

The

kinds of proposition

which involve the use of such words as these are ignored in Aristotle’s logical writings, but it seems to me that he may very well have

had something

to say of

them

in

an analysis

like that

^

38—1457

20. 1456 in the present chapter of the

speech.

am

I

^

273

7

forms and constituents of ordinary 1456 may be found in

interpretation of the Aristotelian dpOpov.

this

what

for

is

it

38

not unaware of the lacunas that

many

worth, and with

recover the rough draft of an

must be taken

It

allowances, as an attemjrt to

but lost chapter of early grammar.

all

For a discussion of the textual and other

these

in

difficulties

two sections I may refer to Vahlen’s Beitrage, 3 p. 229 and 306, and Schomann’s Animadversiones ad veterum grammaticorum doctrinam de articulo (Jahrb.

Suppl.-Bd.

class. Philol.

f.

V

p. 5).

Both o-w8ecr/4os and dpOpov were terms taken by grammar from anatomy (see on 7, 1450^34)- the former is properly a ‘ligament and the latter a joint ’. The language in the text as to the function ‘

of the dpOpov or joint- word,

SijAoi, recalls Adyou dpx^v V rcAos 2 1, which describes the 3. 10, 433

rj

.

that in the passage in

De anima

physical joint as the

means of locomotion

KLvovv opyaviKw';, ottov

dp)^r]

pev

the animal: to 8e

in

Kal reXiVT^ to avro,

evTavOa yap to Kvprov Kal koXXov to

.

.

p,kv TeXevTr]

oiov 6 yiyyXvp.os'

to

8’

dp)^ 8’

pkv eTepa ovTa p^ykOei.

rjpepei to 8€ KiveiTat), Adyo)

(810 to

d)(wpi
The joint-word in grammar, thereJ. of Phil. 1 7 p. 64). would naturally imply a more structural and organic connexion than is to be found when the Adyot are simply strung together by avvSea-poi. I should add that the instances of a-vvSecrpot in (comp.

fore,

Rhet.

1407

3. 5,

apparently the text

a

iirec

[.'*

20 are piv and cti

and

;

]

877,

together with ydp,

ts, koi,

and

that a distinction not unlike that in

betwen the two kinds of

implied in Probl. i6.

a-vvSea-poi is

20,

919^22

Tois

pev avayKaiov eivai )(pya'Oai TToXXaKis,

Toiv Aoyojv ivaov iiatpiOevTwv crvvSko'pwv

ovk eo'Tiv 6 Aoyos EXXrjviKos, oiov to ts Kat to Kai, eViot 8€ ovOkv Xvttovo'I Sid to e/c

el

ecrrai Adyos, Tots 8e

py,

a

KwXu'ei, scil. TToieicrOai.

ag

i.e. (fxavwv crr)pavTiK(i)V.

Adyou,

The term

is

explained in a 23.

without explanation, as though

stood word.
it

Just before this (in

pia (T-qpavTiK^ in lieu of

Aristotle

is

using

it® 3

were a familiar and well-undera he employed the periphrasis

it.

Ka0’ auToi/ is to

be taken with Adyou (comp. Top. 8. ii, 161 ^ 19). The Adyos as such is tacitly distinguished from the Adyos as brought into relation is

no

u ith some other Adyos by the insertion of a word which

integral part of

iTepov or

KaTa

Siopifffids POETICS

it

per

o-vpfSe/irjKos

seems

to

se.

raO' avTo

(Bon. Ind.

mean

here

‘

2

1

is

the opposite of

tt/oos

2 a 3J.

separation

’

or

‘

disjunction

_

a

7

j

COMMENTARY

274

1457 ^ 7 metaphorical extension of the sense

672^ 14

3. 10, TTtp'l

9

Tov SiopLcr/xov xapiv

has in the

it

De

Partibus;

to 8id^u>p.a) rov t€

(scil.

ecrrt

KOlXiaV TOTTOV Kal TOV TTSpi TTjV Kap^MV.

TTjV

Kal

7r€(|>UKUia Ti 0 ecr 0 ai

necessarily

Kal

^ttI Tali' aKpoii'

mean any more

than

eirl

too (Jieaou does not

some

this, that

of the dpOpa have

one and others another of these three possible places in complex form of Xdyos. Tre^vKVia Tt^ecr^at implies that the is general and not always observed in practice. ^

10

In this definition crwOeT-p differentiates the dvo/xa from

ovofjia.

the cTTot^ctov,

from the

and what remains

happen

to have a

meanings

De

gift:

interpr.

wcnrep iy

The

Bittovv,

fact all the declinable parts

may have been

an ovopa, as

yap

icrri

(fxovr]

oiSky avrb KaO' kavTO

ittttos.

1461

‘'’

it

31;

is

article as

among

mere name

for instance in

comp. De

Xeyopeva ovopard

and demonstrative

a kind of pronoun

of speech except perhaps the

classed

apart from a subject, as a

25,

the

general term oyopa must be taken to include not only the

pronouns, and possibly even the

kavTo,

if

prjSkv pepos ecrl arjpayriKov

rjs

nouns, but also the adjectives, the personal

which

the

/?aSt^€i)

lost in the

16 '‘19 ovopa plv ovv

Adyoi t<3 KaAds

toi

from

KXeoiv

or

whereas in an ovopa,

;

is

tw KdAAtTTTTos to

Ke^dipicrpeyny ev yap crrjpaLyeL,

2,

it

Kara crw0yKrjv dyev xpbyov,

crrjpavTiKT]

dvev xpovov

word into which instance denotes a certain man, not a

meaning,

they enter; ©edSaipos for

kind of

o-di'Seo'/xos,

(^s p-epo? ovSlv ktL)

ire^bv

(e. g.

the parts retain their several parts

and

fi'om the dpOpov

(T'qp.avTLK'p

p^p.a,

In a Xdyos

Xdyos.

the rule

A 22,

called

1458^20;

16 1^19 avra pkv

3,

ow

KaO'

icrri [scil. to, pjj/xaTa] Kal (TrjpavycL ri {'LtrTrjin

6 Xiyuiy rrjv 8 idvoiav Kal 6 UKovcras rjpip-qcfv), dAA’ et ecTTtv ^

ovTTw (T-qpalvu.

It

a prjpa proper only

is

in

verb also

an action, may be

1457^25;

21,

interpr.

the dpOpa.

for

—

relatives,

when

p^

actually said of

a subject, as the predicate of a proposition. ® 12

ou xpw^e0a vovTos.

The

:

comp.

21, 1457 '"'33 ’rA'^v ovk tv tw

may

construction in the clause

ovopan

(rrjpai-

be seen from Vahlen’s

paraphrase, ev tois SlttXols ov xpdtptOa rZ peptL r/yodpevoi Kai avTO

The

KaO' avTo crripaivuy. is

^ 13

an acc. absolute T(o

‘the

OeoSwpij)

:

participial

like those in 3,

i.e.

word KAeW’.

‘

the

word ©edSwpos

—Plato

Kal avro KaO avro a-rjpaivov

dis

^

1448 ’

;

2,

193.

In the

name Wilkins on Cicero De

Crat. 392 n tov 'Aa-rvdvaKTa, ‘the

Astyanax’; for the similar Latin usage Oratore

37 and 26, 1462 10. comp, infra » 28 6 KAeW,

De

interpr.

v.

we have

form of expression with a nominative,

iv

the

more

tw KdAAiTTTros.

scholastic

1^

— 20. 1457 ^ 7-18 TO Swpol'

De

parallel in the

interpr.

KaO' iavTo arjpaivei,

SC^pov

iv t
is

cases, however, as Diintzer

reminds

and there would therefore be no point

without meaning {ov pTj|jia

De

:

16^6

interpr. 3,

rj

it is

yap to

dXXd

vw

De

^

14

vyUia pev ovopa, to

v-wap)(eiv ... 1 6 to vyiavev Staefiipet Se

TTrcoaeis prjparos’

ph/ TOV napovTa TrpoacrrjpaiveL

)(p 6 vov,

tUv KaO erepov Xeyopevuiv

koX eo'Ttv del

)(wpL<;,

Aeyti) S’ ort irpoa-a-rjpaivei xP<^vov, olov

TO vyiavei ov prjpa

that

it

p^p.a Si icrn to Trpocrcnjp.a'ivov

Se vyiaivei prjpa' irpoacrrjpaLvei

OTL TO

in saying of

IWos

crrjpiatVec).

ov pipos Gish' (rqpaivei (xrjpe'tov.

not

us, are

quite similar, since Swpos does not exist as a separate word, as

does,

the 1457 ^ ^3

As

implied in ©edSwpos.

has been proposed to restore here to Swpos for

it

The two

TO Scdpov.

word

the

e.

i.

:

275

tov pyparos,

In

)(p6vov, to. Se tov Trepif.

this

13) the past and future tenses of the verb are set aside as TTTwcrets, the verb in the logical

passage (though not in

interpr. 10, 19

theory of predication being always in the present (comp. Mansel,

Prolegomena Logica

p.

assumed

is tacitly

noted that in these

to be

person singular of the

name

that a proper

is

be

to

is

in the third

is

present; the reason for this Kopto-Kos

It

273).

instances of verbs, the verb

its

subject.

With

KAeW

like

Plato,

it

or

may be

observed, the prjpa includes the predicative adjective as well as the

verb

(v.

Crat.

399

iTpo(roT]p.aiV6t.

translates this

by

word

the later

a).

Boethius, In Aristot. de Interpr. cojisignificat,

thus identifying

its

66 Meiser, ^ 17

2 p.

sense with that of

crvacrrjpaiveiv.

grammar, has not yet acquired the special sense of case which it has in the grammarians and there is no equivalent for it in our modern terminology. We may perhaps translate it by modification or mode Given a word, a noun or a verb, with a certain meaning, a tttcoo-is of it embodies that meaning with some secondary idea superadded. It does not necessarily irTwcris,

as a term of

‘

’

;

’

involve a difference of form the affirmative fiaSi^ei,

‘

;

’.

‘

‘

/SaSi^ei.;

as a question,

is

a iTTwcns of

he walks’, and SUpov as an accusative a In most instances, however, a

of Siopov as a nominative.

TTTwo-ts

tttSo-is is

noun or verb by some difference by a difference of termination. Under the general

distinguished from the original

of form,

^

head of

e.

g.

TTTwo-eis Aristotle

(i) the oblique e.

g. ^lAiovos

cases of

etc.

nominative also of of

number which

includes the following species of words

all

from 4>iAwv (De common nouns ; it

:

nouns, as compared with the nominative,

suggests:

interpr. it is

a

2,

16 ‘>33).

TTTtua-is

thus dvOpwTroi

(2)

The

through the idea is

‘a man’, and

^8

COMMENTARY

276

1457 ^ 18 avOpwiTOL ^several men’. of gender,

173

b

oSros,

e. g.

The forms

(3)

involving a distinction

and the

tovto

av-rr),

(Soph.

like

el.

14,

(4) The paronymous adjectives, e. g. ^o-Xkovs from (Rhet. 3. 9, 1410 “32), dvSpeios as compared with the sub-

2^).

XaXws

stantive avSpia (Rhet.

I.

7

36; Cat.

1364

,

i“i4).

i,

The

(5)

comparatives and superlatives as compared with the positive adjec-

from dya^ds (Top.

tives, e. g. /SeArtcrros

5. 7,

136^30).

adverbs as compared with the corresponding adjectives,

The

(6)

e. g.

SiKatws

StKatos (Top. I. 15, 106 ^ 29 ; 5. 7, 136 1 15). (7) The past and future tenses of the verb (De interpr. 3, 16^16); and presumably also the forms embodying distinctions of person, number, voice, etc. To these must be added (8) to viroKpiTiKa, the modifications of sense words may acquire through differences in the mode of enunciation. This synopsis of the different uses of

from

,

the term in Aristotle

may

be

sufficient to

in certain of its applications that

or inflexion or derivation.

that

with him

tj-tCxtis

idea of this latter TTTojcrts

means

it,

-irTwa-ts

takes

‘possessing ypap-gaTiK-rj'

‘

—both

of ^tAtov

’,

give of the

and

ypa/x/AariKos

being accordingly

we may compare Varro’s

TTroio-ts

instances of

‘

declinatio

homine hoimmculus

pugnando ^21

:

With

mamma

a

Phys.

:

3.

et

eqiio equiso,

ab

mammosae, a prudentia prudens, a cur sores (L. L.

207^8

7)

irTwa-u^,

Aristotle’s

equally heterogeneous

a lereniius lerenti, ab

currendo pugiles

et

a(' 0 p(oTros

,

’

the

we

the one of ^tAwv and the other of ypap.p,anKr).

use of

meaning,

its

from the primary word; and

means

4>tAwvos for instance

;

a

;

involved in any explanation

is

only

sense rather than the word

It is the

the fundamental part of

e.

it is

corresponds to our declension

it

conceived as derivative

itself that is i.

show

a logical rather than a philological conception, and that

is

av^pwTros

8, 14). eis

avOptowos

koX

ov

iroAAoi. TCI uTroKpiTiKci

^22

eTriTo^iv:

® 23

Adyos.

pdSlie

:

6vop.a; see Se iari ccrri

see

to

:

see

on

on

19,

be read as

The

^ 10.

1,

above on

»


77s

/caTct
as a dictatorial imperative.

o’vvOrjKrjv, rj^ to)V

^

p.tpwv ti arjpMVTiKov

dAA’ ovx ws Karatfiacn';

Aeyo) de, olov dvOpunros cnqp.aivei p.iv

dAA’ ecTai

e.

is

Kara

ffxovrj (Tr]p.avTiK7j

d)S

i.

framed to distinguish a Adyos from an 10, and comp. De interpr. 4, 16^26 Adyos

definition

K€)(y)pi
1456

19, I456t>i6.

d5rd
eVia p-epr) KaO' avTo. cnrip,aiv€i

ti.

ri,

rj

dAA’ ovg^ otl ecrriv

edv

ti npocTTeOfj.

refers to the

(with their TiTmcrm) as the significant parts of

all

rj

d7rd
ovk

The

nouns and

Adyoi

;

fcrnv'

clause

verbs

the crwSeo-poi

j

20. 1457 “ i8-26

and dpOpa are

For the meaning of Aoyos and the 1457 ^23 1456^38 (also Bon. Ind.

(fimval darjp.oi.

forms of Aoyot see on 20,

various

433

277

'’48).

yap

ou

airas,

An

ktL

who

indirect reproof, perhaps, to Plato,

® 24

seems to speak as though a Aoyos were always in the form of a proposition: Soph, 262 a ovkovv ii ovop-artov p.kv p-ovinv (rvv€)(w<; \eyop.€V(j)v

av

earn ttotI Aoyos, ov8’

ol'K

pr]p.dTO)v

ovop-droiv

X'^pis

\€)(6eVT(x>V.

Tou

6

103

**

2.

—a

93831

10,

an equivalent

be a more or a

De

23 y\dyos 8e

without predication) signifies

and stands

way

name may

as a

;

may

may

It

what

is

1030 ^ 14).

4,

Aoyos, in spite of

is tacitly

it

assumed

composite ^ 28

its

in the definition

This unity, as the text implies,

ktL

ovvOeTr)

tfxDvr]

same order

not of the

is

the Aoyos dvopiaTtoSr^s

the most exact

Metaph. Z

That a

Six^S-

is

interpr. ii, 21 ^2g).

exact equivalent

nature, has a certain unity in in

This

7>^26

I.

8).

combination of words that

Aristotle calls a definition (comp.

e
130^

5- 2,

name, and take the place of one as

for a

less

StWow (Top.

ire^ov

(Top.

Scktikov

a term in a proposition (comp.

ets 8e

^wov

e.g.

:

eTrto-TJj/xrys

a^eu pTjpaTui/ eimi Adyov.

et'Se'xeTai

of An. post. serve as

opicpds

dt'Opu'irou

27) or ^wov

in all kinds of Ao'yot.

A

definition (a Aoyos

one, because the combination of terms in

is

one thing

for

The

do.

proposition also,

it

same

(ev oTjpiatVei), just in the

KAeW

e. g.

one because the combination of terms describes a single act

is

or fact (comp.

De

int^pr,

17^160 ev SrjXCjv Xdyos), and admits On the other hand in a composite

5,

of only one assertion or denial.

more propositions with copulative or to connect them together, the

Aoyos consisting of two or

other coordinating conjunctions

formal unity of the whole

due to

is

the several propositions which

these

two kinds of

conjunction of the parts,

The

it.

Adyot,

Se els TT/acoTos

aTTO^acts' ol .

.

.

ecTTL

S’

[.^

dAAot

Se ets Xdyos

ttoAAoi 8« ot TToXXa Kal

Xdyos

S’ els

^ dpia-pds etvai

TrptoTws] [scil.

Aoyos

De

Kara

Xdyos eariv

els

h'

^

rj

d ev SyjXQtv

ol aaiJvSeTOi.

5,

17*^8 etra

o’vp/Se^rjKds.

4,

1030

rj

— Metaph. H 9).

rj

ets

d (TvvSecrp.
— An. ^post.

ov auvSeapia KaOdrrep

(comp, also Metaph. Z

by

noticed

interpr.

OTro^avTiKos Kard^acts,

earn Si^ws, d p.ev cwSeV/xcu, warrep

SrjXovv pr]

an extreme in the unity

Adyot aTroc^avTi/cof] Trdvres crvySea-p,m

d-770 (f>avTiK 6 s p.r]

is

more than once

is

Aristotle elsewhere in very similar terms: IcTTt

Iliad

This point, the difference

instance of such a Aoyos. in

this

compose

2.

lO,

93835

’lAtds, o Se tcS ev 6,

’lAtds,

1045®'

I 2

dAAa rm

o

S’

evds

;

COMMENTARY 1457 ^ 29

eK

^31

TrXeiii'wi', scil. Xoyoji',

d-n-XoCi/

,

.

SnrXoCt'

.

see 20, 1457

;

and De

12,

(quoted above on 20, 1457”' lo)16 23) the general term for a compound

interpr. 2, 16

19

Interpretatione (2, on^/xTreTrXcy/A^ov ovo/xa.

is

The

Rhetoric has more than one reference to this chapter on the species of names: Rhet. 3. i, 1404s' 36 oix airavra Ba-a vepl

Baa

Ac^eojs ecTTtv e'nreiv aKpi^oXoyrjTiov rjpuv, dAA’

Acyo/icv. Trepl tBiv

—

*’

KeKoaprjpevYjv

26 OVTOJV

tC)v

raAAa ovopara Baa

tovtwv yAcirrats pev Kal

peTaejiopa povat

Kal

pounded of a noun or verb position,

which

peyaXeKOTwi'

35

is is

TreTroirjpevoi<;

to Se Kvpiov Kal to olKeiov Kal Aoya)v Xe$iv.

xj/ikmv

Aristotle

dffi]|iou.

ovBpaai Kal

SittAois .

.

t^v twv

p^pj^o't/xot Trpos

cni)|xait'oi'T09

.

reffewp^jrai iv tols Trepl

probably thinking here

is

of words like d/x<^tAoyos, Trepi^keTreiv, avvSiKos,

^

I404'’5

o Aoyos avvearrjKev,

(hv

Baa

e;(ovTojv eiSrj

oAtyciKts Koi oAtya;;(oC xprjareov

cK

3. 2,

eLprjrai ey tois Trepl TroirjTiKrj^.

ovopaTwv Kal prjpaTwv ii

S’

ovopaTdJV ToaavT

S’

Troiyaeo}';,

^33

—

ovo/xaTCJV Kal pr]p,aTii}v aacfty p.ev Trotei to. Kvpia, pj] Ta 7reivr]v Se

S’

dAAa

ToiavTr]^ oia?

Trepl

eKeiv 7]<; eiprjTai iv Tois irepl ttoltjtik^';.

S’

vttotttos. etc.,

in his classification a

com-

same) and a pre-

(or a -n-TwaL? of the

mvr] aar)po<;.

but identical with the reading in Ac, peya-

all

and simpler than Tyrwhitt’s peyaketiov ws or Vahlen’s A peyakenoTov ovopa would be a name that has S>v. been made grand an exaggerated or amplified name. Though a verb peyakeiovv is not found in extant literature, it is a legitimate derivative from /xeyaAaos, which is sometimes used of words (e. g.

knoTwv,

peyakeitDv ‘

Xenophon INIem. 2. i. 34) and it is presupposed in the LXX. word peyakempa. After peyakenoTihv we may supply oiov^e.g. For similar instances of the omission of otov see 25, 1461”' 26; An. pr. I. 4, 26^8; De gen. et corr. 2. 5, 332 '^14; Eth. N. in

;

5. 8, 1

In

133

lieu

7

;

Rhet.

3. 5,

1407

of /xeyaAtcorcuv (or

said to imply Macro-aAttoToii'

a

38

;

1408

3. 6,

—a

however,

is

An

expression like rd TroAAd

certainly not free

seems to be that it SO MaaaakiwTiKwv

from

that

Aristotle

to

p. 53) as MaaaakiuiTwv,

The

difficulty.

is

1888

tB>v

practically equivalent

is

is

reading which has met with the

approval of Diels (Berlin Academy, Sitzungsb. well as others.

^ 6 (etc.).

Arabic version

peyakeioiTeov) the

to

general view

rd Trokka twv

be credited with

the

statement that the majority (rd TroAAd) of the proper or other

names

in use at Massilia

in the text.

There

is,

were of the abnormal type described

as far as

the kind in any ancient writer

;

I

and

know, no it

is

to

hint of anything of

my

thinking too im-

;

20. 1457 ® 29—21. 1457

''

279

I

The

probable to be believed without very distinct evidence.

who

translators,

new

accept the

culty, as

they tone

TO iroAAd,

making

down

the

mean

the clause

expressions’

(Butcher),

(Gomperz).

It

or

recent 1457 ^ 35

must have felt the diffiexpression by a free rendering of reading,

‘wie

many

Massilian

massaliotischen

Namen’

either

jene

like so

‘

has to be remembered also that

was hardly

it

necessary for Aristotle to go as far as Marseilles for instances

unknown

in Athens and to judge from their appearance in Plautus, they must have been common enough in the later Attic Comedy. a compound of three river-names, Hermus, 'EpfioKaiK 6 ^a>' 0 os

They were

of such names.

not

certainly

(Wilamowitz, Aristoteles und Aihen

29)

2 p.

;

:

Caicus, and Xanthus (comp. Dindorf in HSt.

s.v.,

and Letronne,

£tude des noms propres grecs p. 62). After this the Greek text must have lost something, as the Arabic version, as translated by Margoliouth, renders the passage by Ermocaicon Xanihus qtd sitpplicabaitir Dominuin caelorum (or lovem), which Diels supposes to represent an hexameter line, ‘EpfioKdiKoiavOo';, cTrev^d^evos Ati I hesitate to adopt this very attractive conjecture, though •n-arpi. it

has been accepted by both Butcher and Gomperz, because the

me

context seems to

same kind of word, a

compound would

to suggest rather a

as i-n-eviiOewvai,

represent

if

second instance of the

some

rerpa-n-Xovv 6vop.a of

one may venture

the general

of the

sense

Some such

sort.

to invent the word,

As

Arabic.

these

abnormal compounds were characteristic of the Dithyramb (see on 22,

1459

why

not

3.nd

'‘9),

uncommon

Comedy,

in

difficult

is

it

to

had recourse to what would seem to be an epic or a mock epic for an instance of a rpnrXovv 6 vop.a. a-n-ai' 8e ot'opa ktL The present survey of the vocabulary of poetry may be compared with that in Isocrates 190 d rots p.€v yap see

TroirjTai'i

Aristotle should have

-jroXXa SeSoprai Koo'p.of

pt] px>vov rots TCTay/tevots

rd Se p€Ta(f>opats,

/cat

/cat

yap

.

ovopacnv, aXXa

prj^lv TrapaXitruv

.

otdv r avrots

.

to.

pev

aXXa

^eVot?,

.

.

.

SrjXuxrai

rd Se Katvois,

Tract Tots etSecrt StaTrot-

/ctAat TTjv iroLTjO’w.

The

Kupio/'.

Kvpiov ovopa

is

the established

and

familiar term for

a thing, as distinct from the yXiorra, the p€Ta(f>opd and the other ieviKa ovopara (see the Kvpiov

the

ovopa

metaphor

much

the

is

is

on 22, 1458 22). In actual usage, however, more especially opposed to the metaphor. As

an oXXorptov ovopa

same thing

comp. Rhet.

a.

3. 2,

as the ot/cetov or

1404^31

7-0

(infra ^7)1 the Kvpiov ‘

proper

8 e Kvpiov

/cat

’

name to

ovopa

is

for the thing

ot/cetov

[=

i.

e.

to

^

;

COMMENTARY

28 o 1457

I ot/cetov]

Hence

Kal fjLeTa
)(piQ(TiiJLOi

Trpos

T^v

Tcov i/^iXwv

propria Jioniina the Kvpia 6v6p.ara of Greek writers.

an attempt

at a

234

more

salyrorum

common

verhaque,

190 d-e

Isocrates

the

use, in contradistinction to

belonging more especially to poetry,

ra rcraypiva or

is

TToXtTiKa ovop.aTa.

Ttt

^2

In

amabo.

scriptor

and

Horace has

dominantia nomina solum

et

designation for the words in those

Xe^iv.

of the latter term in A. P.

literal translation

tnornaia

ego

Pisones,

Xoywv

that in Latin proprie often represents the Kvptm,

is

The term

Koo-fios.

explanation to

is lost

on b

Aristotle’s

33), the technical sense to be attached

d

In Isocrates 190

a matter of conjecture.

it is

As

reappears in 22, 1458®' 33.

(see

(see above on

and the coined word are grouped together under the general head of Koa-p-oL and Aristotle himself in the Rhetoric (3. 2, 1404 5 and 1405*114) uses the i)

the metaphor, the strange word,

verb Koa-peiv in an equally wide sense, to denote the embellishment of style by

Koc/xos

means of metaphor and

etc.,

said

is

it

expressly distinguished and

is

The

from them.

to stand apart

in the Poetics of the sense it

clear that the term

it is

must have a special meaning, since instead of including

the yXcoTTa, the p€raopd,

made

other unusual forms of ex-

In the present passage, however,

pression.

only positive hint

of the term

22, 1459**

is in

T ragedy

:

Xdyot? Tts XP'qcraiTO' Aristotle

epitheton ornans

)

is

eo’Ti

8e

rmv ovo/xdrwv

generally supposed to be referring to the

which interpretation Tyrwhitt and

in support of

TTOtei

euTcXet ovopari

KXeo<^a>v

o/AOtiws

Koa-pos'

eTrfj

yap

el

1408** 13

7,

prjB'

8e pyj, Kto/iwStd aiveTai, otov

evia eXcye Kal el eLTretev dv iroTVia crvKrj.

This passage in the Rhetoric, however, does not TTOTvia is

ocroi<;

Ta roiavra to Kvpiov Kal peTa
others point to the use of Koa-po's in Rhet. 3. tTTt

in

ev Se tois ta/tySetbi?

8id TO oTt paX-icrra Xi^uv pipdtcrOaL ravra apporrei

Kal Koa-po?.

where

be allowable not only in epic poetry, but also

to

oratory and in the iambic parts of

KOiV €V

we have

regarded there as a

kind of epithet, but because

Koa-po';,

it is

justify this view.

not because

a yXCyrra

(v.

one of the unusual words which according

on

it

h 4),

is

and

a certain therefore

to the Rhetoric (3.

2,

1404 5) serve to embellish the style. An epitheto7t ornans need not be of this kind; in ydXa XevKov, for instance, the epithet is a Kvpiov ovopa. the text,

is

As

the Koa-po's, according to the classification in

a special kind of word, distinguished from the Kvpiov

ovopa on the one side and the yXoma, peraefiopa,

we may perhaps suppose

it

to be the ornamental

on the other, synonym, a word,

etc.,

t

21.

^

1457

1-6

281

for Achilles, "H^aicrTos for fire, oXeSpo?

for

example,

for

one who causes destruction

like

— the

1457

kind of word which in

came under the heads of synecmetonymia (comp. Volkmann, Rhetorik

the ancient classification of -tropes

doche, antonomasia, and

If Aristotle’s Koo-jaos does not include u. R6m.“ p. 421-5). such synonyms, he has ignored what he elsewhere (Rhet. 3. 2,

der Gr.

1404^39) knows ‘

coined

the ‘

‘

’

be an

to

Oratore

word, factum

verhim

transferred

Poetics.

We

as being

more

KoXwy

must not

sound or

TreTroirjp-evov

ovopa),

p.€Ta
and the

(i. e.

koo-/4os

forget that Aristotle recognizes

\j/6cf>0L';

Rhet.

:

3. 2,

of the

some words 6 Kai diro

1405

KaXXo's Se ovo/xaros to po', uxrTrep

p,fTa<^epecy]'

AiKvpvios Xeyei, iv tols

poetic

ornandi causa proprium proprio comniu-

',

beautiful than others

Sei

[scil.

(Aristotle’s

being apparently identical with the

this last

;

the

167 distinguishes between the

3.

word, iranslaiuvi verbim

’

ornamental equivalent

tatum

element in

important

De

Cicero

vocabulary.

(rqpaivophap

rto

rj

[i. e.

in its associations], Kai alaxos 8 e wo-avrws

either in

—with

we may compare

the definition of Theophrastus (ap. Demetr.

eloc. 173)) KaXXo's

ovoparos

TjSv

rj

TO

Siavota evripov (v.

Trj

to irpos rrjv aKorjv ^ vpos rrjv

€(ttl

De

Rabe,

Theophrasti

its

which

libris

De

o\j/iv

irepl

would be strange if this very obvious artifice of poetical expression were overlooked by Aristotle in a book like the It

Xeieois p. 44).

Poetics.

The term

yXSiTTav. dialectical,

sufficiently general

is

and also obsolete words

—

all

to include foreign,

words (or senses)

which require explanation, because outside the Attic [i.

Greek (conap. Rhet.

e. the

be found in Rhet.

1458^ 1406

3. 3,

where the use of yXuTrai

7,

XprfcrBaL yXwTrais, oToy AvKoifiptay

dyqp, Kai ’AXKiBdpas

d
For instances

fcrriy).

21 and 25, 1461 » 10; others are to

said to be a frigid affectation

(Tivyis

limits of ordinary

ovopdrwy

tCiv

tragedians] ocra Trapd rrjy SidXfKToy

in the Poetics see 22,

is

1404®' 33

3. r,

4

in fact

:

pia Se

'Bep^y

dOvppa

in prose

{j/vxpoTtjTos] rb

[scil. airi'a

iriXtopoy aySpa, Kai ^Ktptay

rfj Troiya-ei,

Kai rrjy rrjs (fivcrews

dracrOaXiav, Kai aKpdrip t^s Stavotas bpyfj reOrjypevoy. |AT]

TOIS auTOts 8e

^(.popcyoy

TO avTO

rj

:

De

caelo

l.

KdTOi

^ avto

The

gloss in Hesychius

i)

3,

269^526

dydyKrj Se irdy to ^ 5

^ ^dpos ^

KOVffjoTTjT

dp(f>o}, prj

irpbs

Be.

(TiYurov.

is

crlyvyov

to.

$ua-Ta BopaTa,

^

aKoyTas (comp. Schol. Plat. Amat. p. 87 R. and The word exists in a variety of forms (HSt. 99).

Tot's bXoa-iBrjpovs

Apoll. Rh. 2. s. V. a-i^vyrj).

That

it

belonged

to the

Cyprian dialect

is

said also

6

**

^

;

COMMENTARY

282 1457 '’6

by Herodotus KvTrptot 8e

5.

9 o-iywvas

Sopara,

TO.

Sv KaXeovcrL Atyvcs

S’

and by Schol. Apoll. Rh.

KaXovcriv ol KvTrptot to. aKovna,

Herwerden

a neuter form.

.

rovs Kair-^Xov;,

.

99 aiyvwovq Sc suspect we should restore o-iyuvos

I

seems

in the present passage, as there

.

2.

be no trace elsewhere of

to

also (Lex. gr. suppl.) tacitly assumes

(Ttywvos as the nominative in Aristotle. fieTa<|)opa. its

means

said of a word,

p.eTa
proper object to another more or less

and Bon. Ind. 462

The

« i).

substantive

passage, and infra

(e. g. in

it

from

1459 has

/xcra^opa

meanings, (i) the abstract sense of transference

its

to transfer

like that (v. 22,

two

the present

and (2) the concrete sense of the word

30),

transferred or metaphorical application (e. g.

in

supra 1*1; 22,

22, 25, 33, etc.).

Metaphor, according

to Aristotle, consists in transferring a

from the object to which

more or 17

less like it;

it is

word

appropriate to another kind of object

comp. 22,1459*^8, and Top.

140^9

6. 2,

p.€Ta(f>opa TToiei ttcds yv(i>pLp.ov to
yap ol peraepovre<; Kara riva opoiorrjra peTatfrepovcTiv. Four kinds of similarity are noted in the text, that between genus and species, that between species and genus, that between species and species, and that between a thing and its analogue— where

Travres

there

O)

o

eardmi

assumed

is

Od.

:

ti

:

in Rhet. 3. 2,

em^opav, or

scil.

vTjus ktI.

^ II

I,

comp.

same way

16

infra

n

the subject as tovto rrecfrvKevai

]\Ietaph.

@

dSwaTov

Se.

4,

rj

and

3

1410

3. 10,

36.

a<{>e\eiv

n.

In the present passage,

the subject of the infinitive, in the

is

peTa/3aXXeiv (mtT.), and in Rhet.

much

*i

peraejropav.

instance as in Phys.

for

present classification of

1405

185 and 24, 308.

however, the indefinite

TOVTO

The

a similarity of relations.

is

metaphors Xeyw 8e,

is

5.

224

i,

1386 Eth. N. 3.

2.

in

8,

*'

*'•23

tw tovtov

7,

1 1

14 ^

to KaAws

1 1

Compare

reXeta Kal aXrjOivrj dv ^fj ev<^vta.

n

It is just as

12, 13.

1047^13 TO yap ere IcrTavai vvv i/^eSSos The traditional rendering of icrravai ti is

pev,

also

ovk

a kind of

‘

standing’ (s/are altquod, or sta 7 'e quoddani in the old versions), but it

has not the sanction of Tyrwhitt and Hermann,

insensible qualify

9 13

8t)

dir’

ctSovs

an

to

the grammatical

infinitive.

:

Rhet.

3. II,

:

II.

that

objection against

See infra on ^ 16

fAup" ’OSuacreus kt€.

eiSous err

which shows

simply by stare

€o-Tdmt TL

2,

who

they

translate

were not

making

the ti

{aeXeiv ti).

272.

1413® 14

etSds elcriv olov av Ttv d)S

Kal at Trapoipttat peraefropal

ayaBov

dir

TTeieropevo^ avTO? eiraya-

^

21. eTra /SXa^rj,

yrjrai

See Rhet.

elpr]p.evov TrcirovOacriv.

^

6 -i6

283

tov Aayto. dfjLcfxi) yap to 1457 10, 1410'^ 14 and II, 1411 ^ 26

KapirdOio?

6

u>s

1457

(f>r](n

3.

for other instances of this description.

The two

quotations in the text, which have been supposed to be

EGF.

fragments either of some epic poet (Kinkel, a parodist (Brandt, Parod. gr.

The

of them from the KaOapp,oL of Empedocles. dreipei

Vahlen has pointed

as

is,

p.

72) or of

were probably both

p. 112),

rel.

second, rep-wv

out, identical with part of

(fr. 143 Diels), preserved by Theo Smyr20 Gelder (=p. 15 Hiller) rj ruiv ttoXltlkwv [nAarcoviKoiv Hiller] AoycDV TrapaSoo'is to pkv irpuiTOV ex^i KaOappov

Empedoclean

the

naeus

;

Arithm.

line

p.

dvipwvTa

Ttva ... 6 pev yap ’EpTre^0KXy
^oAkw

dreLpei Seiv

is

IIAaTwr

The

KaOapcriv.

TroidicrOai ttjv

Empedocles that

Seiv aTroppvTTTecr&at, 6 Se

by Aristotle (comp.

(f>y]aiv

Treyre paOrjpaTOiv

exact form of the verse of

perhaps irrecoverable, but

Theo’s dvLpmvra

d-TTO

it

not

is

difficult to

see

a prosaic substitute for the repiyy preserved

is

Hermes 15,173).

Diels,

dreip^'i

—

—

a favourite

Empedocles (v. Diels, Index p. 232) is a reminiscence of Homer. The same may be said also of xa^^os, if it meant, as it probably did in Empedocles (v. Bullialdus ad loc. p. 128 ed. Gelder), a brazen urn, such as was used in certain rites. Aristotle elsewhere refers to Empedocles in a way which implies that his poems might be assumed to be familiar to every one (v. on As he regards him as a master of metaphor 24). {p€Ta
Empedocles.

d^eXew

mean

this to

a very

The

Tt. ‘

recent interpreters seem to agree in supposing

a kind of

view

different

Goulston, Tyrwhitt,

removing {ati/erre aliqiiod in Lat.), though was taken of it by Victorius, Heinsius, ’

Hermann, and

auferre aliqidd ox aiiferr e quiddam. implies that the infinitive the

is

of this construction

The now

represent

usual

it

by

rendering

treated as an ordinary substantive, with

pronoun attached yeveo-ts Tts, and the like.

indefinite

T]^ovy\ Tts,

who

Ritter,

to

it

Greek.

in classical

same way as in no recorded instance

the

in

There

is

In the parallels in the

Sophistici Elenchi (22,

178

and

assuredly (as Pacius saw) the object after

these

alarOdvea-Oai

verbs.

supplanted by to

a special

Tt is

Aristotle’s

a

kind

^

12 sqq.) the

assumption

specific

that

a generic

when it comes to be Thus ia-Tavai, said of a

term,

of object.

is

Tt in Trotav ti, Trdcrxctv Tt,

may be applied ship,

is

*6

b

J3

— COMMENTARY

284

16 supplanted by opjxuv, and

1457

of water, by

dc^eXeiv, said

cited in ^ 2 7 before

had had the instance

—

well have said to (nreipeiv a^Uvat tL

icrri

dpva-at.

If he

him here, he might very where the rt would have

represented the accusative, t6v Kapirov, of the later passage. t (3 Se dvriXcYov (comp.

TO dvdXoyov in

proportion

is

ecTTi

IcroTY]?

I*

9,

Metaph.

1070

I 4,

thus defined in Eth. N.

Xdywv

'’17) replaces the Kara

Analogy or

lirn^opav being again understood.

Kai iv

1131 “31, ^ dvaXoyta reTTapcriv iXa)(icrTot?. In the Statement in 5. 5.

B A

the text the general form of analogy,

::

:

D

:

C,

is

illustrated

by

an example Aiwvcros (A) do-Tris (D) (fudXy] (B) "Apyjs (C). Metaphor consists in giving the (fudkr) (B) the name belonging to its analogue (D), viz. da-n-k, or vice versa. This transference of a name, as Aristotle proceeds to tell us {km iviore irpoo-Tt^cWtv, 19), is sometimes softened by an explanatory addition to the word in its ;

new

::

:

:

The addition may be either (i) positive or Thus instead of simply speaking of the shield (D) we may (i) add the term to which the shield is

application.

(2) negative. as a cup (B),

i. e. Ares, and thus call the shield the cup (B Ares’ or we may add C); a negative epithet, to show + of (2) that the word is used in a non-natural sense, and describe the A string of shield as a cup //la/ holds no wine {(jiidXr} doivos).

properly related (C),

‘

‘

’

metaphors from analogy p,iTaopmv TCTTapwj/

The

quoted

ov(rv

(ScTTrep rTepiKAijs

T^^ avtiT^at

is

ev 8 oKip.ov(TL

II

ei Tts

comp.

J

esp. 3.

1 1,

Kal “ iirraT dio'Tos irdcTL

.

yap tovtois

dvato';(WTerv

yap Kal

14 1

1

tw

7roXep,a) ovtojs

to tap tK rov eviavrov iitXoi ktI.

is

life

to

considered at length in Rhet.

32 iv

“avns im

8e

at Kar dmAoytav,

use of such metaphors, as serving for instance to give

tvSoKip,tX olov ivToiaSt,

iv

pidkicrra

rrjv veoTiyra rrjv aTroXopivrjv ev

ttoAcws Hxnrep

e/c

a description of things inanimate, 3.

1410 ^ 36 twv

in Rhet. 3. 10,

TTOLcri

Se t5

ivipytiav

Troitiv

ddyrtSovSt KvXivStTO Xaas dvaiSiys”,

Kal “ alxpd] St a-Ttpvoio SiicrcrvTO p,aip,d)wcra”.

Sia to

ip.ij/v)(a

p.aip,dv Kal to.

Sid T-^s Kar dvaXoyiav p.€Ta^opas‘

d)S

ivtpyovvra ffyalverao

tlvai

dXXa

ivepytia.

yap

ravra Si

to

TTpoa^ij/t

6 Xl&o? irpos tov Stcrv^or,

6 dvaior^vvTwv wpos TOV dvatcr^wTovpevov.

b

18

epet

:

comp,

infra ^ 21, 23,

The

and

tiprjKtv

and Acyei

in the context

one must be supplied, is ‘the poet’, just as in the parallels in the Topics it would be ‘the disputant’. k b irpo
subject, if

’

by the metaphor

(i. e.

shield) supplanted

The

shield being relative to Ares, the

cup),

is

relative.

metaphor may be

softened

(i.

e.

^

;;

21.

i6-24

1457

285

In the Greek here dvO’ ov 1457 by describing it as the cup 0/ Ares ‘the original term supplanted Aeyet Trjv fj,eTa(f>opd.v, A.^€t=T6 dv 6 ov and it has to be taken as the subject of the by the metaphor eo-Tt in Trpos o ecrri; the clause, therefore, might have been thus ‘

'

’

;

given

to wpos o icrn to dv6 ov \eyei '

Trpo(TTiOia
:

ttjv p-eraefsopav

comp. Castelvetro’s rendering (in his Basel edition), aggiungono la cosa a che ha riguardo quello, in iscambio di che dice’; and adjiciunt illud, ad quod relativum est id, pro quo Tyrwhitt’s, The distinction here described, between the translatum dicit.’ ‘

‘

metaphor with a qualifying addition (positive or negative) and the metaphor without it, is recognized in Rhet. 3. ii, 1412 32 elroves

ai

.

.

rpoTrov rivd pcra^opai-

.

yap

del

8volv X^ovrai,

c/c

^ dvdXoyov p,eTa<^opd‘ oXov Kal ^To) Toiov 6 pp-iyi d)(op 8 o';,

ovto) p.ev ovv Xeyovaiv

TO 8

t7}v dcnri8 a

djCTTrep

(f>

’

elrreiv

to rdiov

singular Xeyei

the

number

in

Eth. N. 8 oKei

6pp,Lyya

1132^34

elvat, el

:

opLoyevwv

oiov

XeyeoOai

Vahlen on

T]

p-ij,

3. 4, 1407 ^4 (Roemer) del 8 e 8 el ttjv dvdXoyov dvTaTroStSdvai Kal IttI OaTepa [Kat ctti]

el

(piaXr)

rj

The

Kal

Aiovvcrov,

dovn';

"Apems.

(^idX-qv

hand

and the

ejiiaX-q

Trjv

was

(judXri ’’Apeios (fr.

idea was doubtless suggested

;

bold

the similarity

which Dionysus some-

The

actual words of Empedocles, which

supposes us to know, are not to be found

extant fragments

doirCda

the

Bergk=2 2

16

by

that

all

can be said of them

is

among

that they

his

must

have been something like yrjpas ripepas but different from that in point

of

had

in

17,

allusive

way of

to the reader

Emped.

d)S

ionepav p£ou

Em^^ap/ios

not

EvptTriST/s),

25,

:

Alexis

fr.

,

20. 5 Diels,

be what Aristotle

referring to something sup-

is

comp. Metaph. r 5

eiTretv 7 (xxnrep ;

dyet.

This

known

I455'’9

aevoejidveL)]

in

3 to 6 o, is not sufficiently like this to /

mind.

posed to be see

The metaphor

phraseology.

Trepl ptjyplvL

21

in ancient art.

uoirep ’EfiireSoKXTjs.

Aristotle

8 ovXeia

1461 ^30, and

87).

of shape between a shield

times had in his

el

26,

metaphor of the dithyrambic poet Timotheus Wilamowitz).

dirXow.

Rhet.

peTaejsopav ttjv eK tov

dppoTTet

ov^ aTrXovv,

For For the difference of 17; 26, 1461 ^ 30; (fiidXrjv

comp, 4, 1448 yap TO KaKws ^TjTOvcnv

t)

2, i p.

ipel Tolyuy KTe.

18.

ipei,

dvTnron/jaei (see

p.r]

Kiihner, Gr. Gr.®

TU)V

supra on

v.

irpoa-TiOeacnv

5. 8,

rf

dairis, efiapLev, earl (fudXrj ’’Apecos

r]

I0I0‘^5

uncommon in Aristotle 1460^36 (eVvp^ei/ ILoirep ovtoj

yap

dpp-OTTei p.dXXov

els 'Sevocfsdvrjv.

228 Kock

r}

8y

yap 6

/Jtos ovpLOS eoirepav

24

^9

;

;

COMMENTARY

286 1457

^

Suafids Pi'ou

25

Laws 6, 770 a ev 8v(TfjiaL
Plato

:

oi/o/jia Kcifi.et'oi',

140^3 tn TOV

ei

6(f>daXjj.6v,

TTOLV

yap

TO (ftaXdyyiov

r]

to

da-a(f)ks

ctco^ds

p.7j

StTTai [scil. Kai d/rapTtat], K€ip.£vriv

Xi^iv

ol rots

.

.

,

COmp.

tw

-9

6.

2,

6(f>pv6(TKLOv

tov /xueAdv ocrTtoyevii-

17

109“ 28

eicrl

^ tQ vapafiaLvuv

ttjv

Top.

also

\f/evSecrOai

dXXoTpiov; ovop-aai

irXaTavov dvOpoynov,

pevovTes, olov ttjv ovop^aa-iav

arjij/iSaKis, J

nXdrwv

olov

ovojx.ao'L ^(prjTai,

KtifJiivoiS

ftr]

2. I,

Tr/ody/xara irpocrayo-

to.

Trapa^aivovo'L Trjv

Ktipivrjv

(comp. Bon. Ind. 380^31),

Metaphor

is

way

often a

language (Meteor.

4.

of supplying the deficiencies of ordinary

380

3,

Rhet.

28

18,

3.

2,

i405'^36;

Quintilian 8. 6, 5, 18). In the present passage Aristotle reminds us that, if one of the terms in an analogy has no special name of

own,

its

it

preceding

may

be described in just the same way as in the

still

instances

Xe^Orja-eTai.),

(d/xotlos

i.

e.

by

metaphor

a

softened or explained by the mention of that to which the name-

Thus

less thing or act is relative.

the

husbandman

part of the

abroad of

light or flame

no special name sowing (B), and then qualify ’

which the act the

sun as

on

;

This act of

we may metaphorically

’

I’

’

—

metaphor on exactly the same

i6)

the only difference

is

lines as cjudXr]

that in the

one case

an ovop,a Keflevov for the thing meant (viz. dcrn-ts), whereas other such a name does not exist in actual language. Tou i^Xiou avuvuiiov

eirl 1

2

75

3°

*’'

Aristotle’s

it

the

is

27

call

metaphor by adding the term to (D) itself is relative, viz. flame (C), and speak of sowing flame cnrupuiv cjyXoya (B -p C). (rmipoiv

(fyXoya is a qualified

"Apeojs (see

but

‘

‘

the scattering (D)

to

(C) on the part of the sun.

the sun has ‘

the sowing (B) of seed (A) on

analogous

is

dvd>vvp.ov

:

TO

the

for

KOLvdv

cTTt

preposition,

SiKaaTOv

there in the

comp. Pol. Kal

3.

i,

eKKXrjcriacrTOv,

use of dvdvvp.os has been already considered (on

i,

1447^9).

28

Aristotle, unconsciously passing

irpds TOV rjXiov.

of ^Aios to another, for the

word

(f)X6$ in the

in the sense of

Herodotus

8.

now

using

it

as

from one sense

the prosaic equivalent

poetical quotation in the next line,

sunshine or sunlight, the meaning ^Xtos has

23 dp.a tjXm

'

iwl TO kpTtp-iaiov,

^ 2 g

is

and

irpos TOV KapTTov.

crKtSm/xeVo) wdcra

in several

rj

i.

e.

in

aTpaTtr] evreVAce dXrjs

well-known expressions.

Castelvetro’s Trpos tov (^dUvTa tov) KapTroV,

which has been accepted by several editors, rests on the assumption that the analogy in Aristotle’s mind was simply that between sowing (B) on the part of the husbandman (A), and the nameless

—

9

21.

act,

on

the emission of light (D),

287

25-35

1457

the part

of the sun (C).

In 1457

must be taken

that case the epithet OeoKTia-rav in the quotation

to

represent the addition required to soften the metaphor. 810

eiptiTai

comp. oOev

:

and oOev

TreTroLTjrai

Quotations similarly introduced

1461®' 28, 29.

in

^IptqTai

25,

be found in

will

Rhet. 2. 9, 1387 '‘33, and in 2.10, 1388*^7, 15. That was perhaps from a tragedy (Nauck, TGF.- p. 856). See above on 8 16. eoTi 8e Tiji TpoTTOJ TouTu KT€.

in the te-xt

30

I

1293

'’'39

TrifiTTTr]

K otj'ov ovopia

dWorpioi',

to

irpoaaYopeuffat'Ta

The more

Ttaa-^v.

is Trpocrayopev'etv

tl

in

Pol.

4.

7)

31

usual construction in Aristotle

In saying TTpocrayopevcravTa to dWorpiov

ovopan.

tZv oikciW

d-rro^i^crai

as

^ irpocrayopevcraL to

TroXireta]

[scil.

icTTiv

S’

ovofxa,

scil.

he seems to have

fallen into

a false

dWorpiov in relation to the shield, and doivos negatives something oIkcmv in relation to Words like dotvos come under the general designation a cup. The free use of them in the of (TTep-qa-m (Bon. Ind. 699 42). metaphors of poetry is noted in Rhet. 3. 6, 1408*^6 ddcv koX rd antithesis.

ovopara


in

the illustration,

ol TroLijrai cfiipovari,

(TTept^cremv

yap

to d^opSov Kal to dXvpov pekos'

The

a

e/c

tuv

evSoKtpeX yap tovto Iv tols peracfiopais

€Tn
keyopevov rats dvdkoyov, oiov to dkvpov.

is

instance in Rhet.

dvai

rrjv

crdkyriyya

ir, i4i3'ii

3.

is

eiuai

pikos

(ftoppiyi axopSos,

way of describing a bow.

A

ir6'iToi'r))jieVoi'.

ovopa

TreTroLrjph'ov

is

a

word coined by

the

33

poet for the occasion, and in this respect unlike the words hitherto

considered (the Kvpiov ovopa, the yAoiTTa, and the pira^opa), which are parts of

an already existing vocabulary.

Such coining of new

words was termed ovoparoTroua (Volkmann, Rhetorik“

comp. 21, 1458''' 6 ovopa^opivov. Ti' 0 €Tai. For the middle comp. H.A. 7. 12, 588 ovopara Tore Ti&evTai,
Rhet.

13,

3.

p. 425).

:

1414815;

rd ''34

Bio koI

cTWTrjpla

8e elSds tl keyovTa Kal Biacfiopdv

.

ovopa

TiOtLrdaL.

SoKcI ydp

ei'ia

the instances that

on Eih. N.

5. I,

eii'ai

ToiavTa

is

a parenthesis giving a reason for

come after it comp. 25, 1460 8 24, and the note 11293 29 in my Textual Criticism of the Nic. ;

Ethics p. 43; also Kuhner, Gr. Gr.° 2 p. 853. ept'uyas, scil. Koku or Aeyet, to be understood from TiOiTai in the

preceding line; comp. Top. 3. 3,

14033 (quoted on 825), Rhet. 140637 (quoted on 84), and Eth. N. 6. 7, 114139 rrjv Be

a-oLav

€v

T£

Taos

T£;(i/ais

6.

2,

rots aKpi/SecTTctTOts

rds

Te;;^vas

aTroSt-

35

29

;

COMMENTARY

288 ^457

**

35

olov $€t8tav XiOovpyov crot^ov Koi IIoXvKXetTOV avSpLavTowoLov

8o|u,£v,

[scil. Xeyo/xev].

We do not know where Aristotle found the word, and there no evidence for the form of the nom. sing the correction

is

of

.

assumes

Victorius, epwyas, it is

just as likely that

survives in Hesychius

form

epwras

as the acc. pi. of a Cretan

word

however,

that

is

word would be;

it

is

it

is

but

,*

The

been defended by

(=

epvvs

name

M. Schmidt’s

(see note in

s. v.

avrv^

like

explanation of the word

[sic]- epvr). /JXao-nj/xara. KXdSoi.

be implied in ’ETripvurtos, a Cretan

Hesychius it,

An

Ipvvyrj.

in Hesychius, with a t instead of a y, has

Meineke to

:

been epw^,

to have

it

was

it

for

epvos)

supposed

Zeus according

to

Aristotle’s view of

ed.).

a coined word, not a yXwTTa as a Cretan

be remembered

to

he shows

that

too

himself elsewhere (25, 1461 '>14) not wholly unfamiliar with the

Cretan

dialect.

dprjTrjpa. I.

II.

The

reference

is

no doubt

same explanation

The

kinds

three

word remaining for As they are substan-

of

consideration are abnormal only in form. tially

to

all

the

same as

(22,

in

Hesychius has the

dprjrrjpa' lepia.

;

ktL

eiTeKT€Tap,^('ov

word

to the use of the

II ovyeKa rov Xpvcrrjv rjTipacrev dpr]Trjpa,

the usual words, they are said to be intelligible

1458^4),

i.

The

yXuTTa might do.

e.

they do not require explanation as a

kirf.KTiTap.ivov

ovopa

is

the ordinary word

lengthened out in one or other of two ways, either through the lengthening of a syllable normally short, or through the insertion

of an extra TTok-qo^ for

has

this

Xeyoi TO

1458^4

same sense in Metaph. A V (in the word (^vcris).

nrjXeiSou.

who marks

The

reading of Ac,

assumed gap by the following suppose

UrjXrjLdSew.

Ilr/Xeos to

TTo'Xews (or TToXeos,

1014^

IIt/Xcos,

is

d' rts

17

retained

M. Schmidt

restoration It

is

quite

:

i-n-tKrdvcLv

TroXecos.

to

by Vahlen, up the

fills

IIt^Xcos

as easy,

eTre/cTetVas

{Ilr^Xijos

however,

to

have got in by assimilation to the preceding as it is in A®) ; and it must be admitted that

a second instance of

As

4,

a lacuna after the word.

Kai TO UrjXetSov}

he regards

Aristotle’s standard being Attic,

syllable.

instance as a lengthened form of

this

sort

of lengthening

is

hardly wanted.

regards nvyXi^idSew for UrjXelSov, Aristotle’s view apparently

that the -d- in

it

is

epenthetic, a avXXa/Sr] ip/Se^Xrjpivri

(v.

on

1456 34). Its other deviations from the normal word {-rji- = and -£w = -ov) would be, according to ancient theory, instances

is

20,

of

— 21.

‘

Siacpeo-ts,

1457

35—1458 ^8

’’

289

with a lengthening of vowels in the resolved 1458 ^ 4

resolution

diphthongs.

As

d4>'nP4f<'Et'oi'.

fiivov

the

the opposite of the iireKTera-

a
we may

^ i),

supra

(v.

ovofjLa

take

word with a shortened vowel, and

(i) a

term

the

include

to

a word shortened by

2)

whether in the beginning, middle,

of a syllable,

the omission

(

end of it, i. e. a word which in the terminology of the grammarians has suffered d<^aijO€(ns, (TvyKoirrj, or anoKoirq. Aristotle’s or

examples, however,

.

II. .

are

oi/^,

,

instances of airoKoirq

all

—

this class of words comp. Strabo’s (364 Cas.) explanation of MeWr;

term he himself uses with reference to

the

in 22 , in

85

Kpi,

1458 2 582 .

2

;

mot

;

Se

teat

kut

Sixovrai rrjv M.e(Tcn^vr]v

aTroKOTrrjv

irapa^iCyp-acTL 8e ')(pwvTaL tov p.ev TTOLrjTov t 5 KpX Kal

.

Kal €Tt

8’

^pojs

‘

AiTop.e8(DV re Kal ’’AAtet/tos

wap ’Ep-weSoKkci 8e

p.ia ytVcTat

‘

’

85

/cat p-dij/,

dvrl rov 'AkKipLiSwv

dp.OTepo}V

oi/t

’,

rj

.

.

.

It is clear

oi/tts.

ground than the must include their

that Aristotle’s ar]prjp.a/ov ovop.a covers a wider dt^aipeo-ts

of the

grammarians, and that

In the preliminary statement in 21, 1457^2

dTTOKOTn^and crvyKowi]. the shortened

word

termed the

is

not the

v(l>r]prjp. 4vov,

In the interests of uniformity

ovop.a.

it

— which

d
one can hardly

suppose Aristotle to have ignored in a matter so technical as

one must either read restore

vr)pr]p.4vov

grammarians seem dropping of a (iia

of

have used

to

MS.

vefyaLpea-Ls

HSt.

(v.

orja-

o<|/

:

(see

Empedocles on 18, 1456

88

fr. S'

The changed word

e|T|X\aYp,eVoi'.

part of

it

’

‘

677

D,

Kara

hese

coined

fitted k

:

II.

5.

and Athenaeus 423

auTut' 8e Twi' dt'Ojj.dxwv' ktc.

dewed

Some s. v.)

of the

for the

2)

’

The

Diels.

on

in regard to

» 4).

some one

that extent, therefore,

it

word, the wewoLrjp.€vov ovop.a

393 (comp. Plutarch Qu. conv. 5.^7 e).

Up

in reference to their origin,

aspects,

however, they

may

to this point

names have been ^ 8

sense, or form. also

be

Apart from

classified

according

and distinguished as masculine, feminine, and leuter. This classification of names according to gender will be een to be founded on the terminations of the nominatives in Attic. "he primary distinction between masculine and feminine termi-

0 their

POETICS

^ 5

'’33)-

Se^iTcpoi' 4, p.

‘

is

To

the invention of the poet.

has a certain affinity with the

1437

this

Spengel), or

must’' represent

a gloss on 6 \j/ (comp. Strabo 364, quoted above

oi/^ts,

(21,

2 (with

middle of a word.

dfi^orepwi'

the

1457 ^

21,

throughout the present section.

letter in the

Y^^'^'rai

reading

a(f>r]pr]pih/ov in

gender,

U

COMMENTARY

290 1458 ^ 8 nations seems in which there

have been generalized from the names of objects

to

a visible distinction of sex, and

is

more

especially

from the names of men and women (comp. Aristoph. Nub. 682). Thus nouns ending in the consonants N, P, 2 H are regarded ,

names

as normally masculine, because

like

AiW,

Neo-Twp, Eapis,

HeXoxf/,

K6pa$, are names of males; those ending in the vowels

H,

and

fi,

A

‘EXfvrj, KAeici,

are

(long or short)

"Hpa, Mov(ra are

sexless things (the neuters, as

normally

feminine,

because

names of females. The names of we call them) Aristotle terms ra

because as a class these words occupy an ambiguous

fjLCTa^v,

sometimes those of the masculines and sometimes those of the feminines. Thus SivSpov, ^Top, ret^os, as ending in the consonants N, P, 2 have what Aristotle regards as position, their final letters being

,

masculine terminations

ones

the

;

show a

doubt

both

whereas Kapa,

neuters

other

vowels,

;

also,

have feminine

Tepp.a, etc.,

yow,

p.fki,

etc.,

as

ending

in

This seems to be the rationale of the present scheme of genders; and it is in essentials the same as that of the grammarians, though theirs no is

certain affinity with the feminines.

fuller

and more systematic, and leaves fewer

facts to

be treated as anomalies or exceptions (comp. Dionysius Thrax p. 1 5

Uhlig).

goras,

who

(Rhet.

3.

Aristotle’s classification

5

1407^7

)

IIpwTayopas to

dppeva Kal BrjXia Kal aKevT])

with him not Aristotle, in

appevos

‘

’

but

el.

14,

things

Soph.

In Soph.

Kkrja-Lv.

goras said

— ‘

based on that of Prota-

terminations, just as ridicules this

new

yevrj

el.

tujv

6vop.dT0)v

o-Kcvr/ Birjpei,

the last of the three terms meaning

173^39

was a solecism

it

.

names of things

evidently because he thought

Stilpo

is

distinguished nouns into masculine, feminine, and

14,

173

to

make

2 and H

Aristotle

does.

’,

as

twv

19

we

p.rjvis

to

it

does also

are told that Prota-

and

ir-qk-q^

feminine,

be normally masculine

Aristophanes,

Nub.

658, '

opOoiirua of Protagoras in the matter of gender.

said to have disputed the propriety of speaking of Athene

is

as a ^£05

:

«.«

yap

etvai

avrhv Oeov dAA,a 6edv‘ Oeovs 8e

eiyai Tois

overstatement, as there are neuters which have these endings ^ 17).

The

neuters

:

liar

explanation

is

(set ^

to be found in Aristotle’s view of th

he does not conceive them as having terminations pecu

to themselves, but as holding

the two

in

Orjkeojv 6vop.d.T0}V

main

classes,

an intermediate position betwee

some of them having a masculine and

a feminine termination.

othei

ej

k

.'tut

1458 ^ 8-16

21.

cK Twi'

equivalent to a

is


291 (comp. 1458 ® ii

genitive

partitive

1302 a 4; Rhet. I. 9, 1367 ‘'‘36; 10, 1369^)7). Van Index Antiphonteus p. 58, has noted several instances of this

Pol. 5. I, Cleef,

use of iK in Antiphon. Twv

€TreKT€i»'Ofi.eVwv

The remaining dichronous vowels

being lengthened

1456

32), I

the vowels capable of ^ 12

A among

A, ‘in

eis

and Y, are

said a

further

little

on

to be

on

(see

found

20,

in the

terminations of neuters (“ 15). ifftt

.

TrX-^Or)

irXiiOTi.

.

.

nimerus or stimna.

It

numbers

‘

is

as the plural of

-irXrjOo';,

hardly necessary, therefore, to restore

is

from certain of the apographs.

TrX-qOei

ouSe els

Greek noun ending

in

be remembered that there

It is to

Ppaxu.

<|)wi'Tjev

E

A

or O.

is

no ® 15

neuter pronoun, like tovto

or TotovTo (comp. Herodian 2 p. 764 Lentz), would be in Aristotle’s classification

No

rpi'a.

Tim. 60

1457 “-18)

20,

ovo/^a

mention

sufl5 ciently

made

here of

which Plato had used

kcki,

in

288)

p.

may perhaps have been

after -n-evre.

old

some few of

(with

editions

The nouns ending

number (comp. Herodian

i

Y are

in

view

SaKpv,

p.e 6 v,

p.u>Xv,

cjiirv

apographs) ^ 16

the

yow

certainly

354 Lentz).

p.

pose Aristotle to have arrived at this yAd(^v,

in Aristotle’s

naturalized to require recognition.

The

irivre.

is

explain this by adding to ttwv to vuttv to

like

proper but a

This and sundry other words of the same order (see

A.

Lobeck, Phryn. not

on

(see

ovofJLaros-

TTTtticris

to 86 pv to aa-rv

more than

five in

We may perhaps

sup-

number by ignoring words as antiquated, and taking

account only of those which formed part of the existing Attic vocabulary. i

Ttt

1

8e

peTalu

Our word

on ^8.

see above

:

‘neuters’, which

represents the ovSerepa of the grammarians, points to the difference

1

between the neuters and the masculines and feminines

;

Ttt

peraiv to their resemblance

mediate

j

position,

because in

;

terminations

their

some of them

resemble the masculine and others the feminine nouns

j

in fact €is

no

distinctive terminations of their

TauTa

Kttl

N (Kal P) Kal

says

Kapa, etc.).

It

ravTtt,

lian 2

nothing of those

P

text, as

(f'Scop,

646 Lentz reXiKa

list

they have

ending in

thus amended,

but

^7rap, etc.);

A

{mp-a,

has been proposed accordingly to insert

so as to complete the p.

in

;

own.

The

Z.

^acknowledges the neuters ending apparently

Aristotle’s

they are said to occupy an inter-

;

A

/cat

[

1

;

after

of neuter endings (comp. Hero-

ovSerepiov 6vop.a.TU)V e^, d,

t,

v,

"p,

u

•

it

TroLiqp.a,

2

?, v).

COMMENTARY

292

H58

^ 16

possible to keep to the traditional text here, by supposing

It is just

was meant

that in a statement so loosely drafted as this raiiTa

two vowels

recall not only the

which has been described

(I

in the

and Y)

to

just considered, but also A,

preceding context

12) as one of In that case ravra will

the iir€KT€iv 6 fjL(va or dichronous vowels.

A

stand allusively for ra eVeKTeivo/aeva, and include

as well as

I

and Y, ^ 18

Xe'lews

6,1450^13

;

In

epfjL 7}V€iav.

Xeyoj

.

.

.

Xe^iv eivat rrjv Bia rijs ovo/xaaias

chapter Aristotle does not deal with style

this

general, but only with the portion of

it

which

in

relates to the choice

of words, the iKkoyr) oi/o/xdrwv of the grammarians

aim

his

;

is

to

describe the poetic vocabulary, and determine the limits to the use

of exceptional words and expressions in poetry. referred to in Rhet. is

3. i,

contrasted with that of poetry

\p(oyTai Toy avToy rponoy,

irepa Xoyov Kal voL-^a-em

:

dAX oicnrep Kal ck Xoyw tovto tcov

lap-Peioy p.eTe^7)cray Bia to tiL

Twy

ecTTiy, ois

yeXoioy

Bio

rpoTTW.

eKeiyio

t
ecTTiy

ehreiy,

X^lews dpcTT)

KTe,

eavTOV epyoy), Kal

B

yap

rf

yap

piijre

tovtovs 01

avTol ovKeTi

ov)( diravTa dcra

otl

dXX

dcra

3.

2,

•Trepl

14041^1 mpiaOm

ori o Xdyos, edv Tarreiyrjy p.rjTe

ov

tcrws

TTOirjTiKT]

KeKocrp.'qp.eyrjy

TTOirjTiKrjs’ TO

^20

elyai

a(f)eLKa(Tiy dcra Trapa Trjy BidXeKTov

rjply,

Rhet.

:

oyopLaTOiy Kal prjpidToyy

dXXd

Be

p-eTpmy opLOiOTaTOV

)(pwyTai

vepl Xe^cws

TOiavTTji

Ola's

eKeiyyj^ eiprjTai ey rots rrepl TroirjTiKrj';.

eiyai (irypieioy

Trov
p.ip.e'icrdai

ojcttc (f)ayepoy

dKpi/SoXoyrjTeoy

Trepl B

Xeyopiey.

(rar}

eh to

rcoy Terpap-erpuiy

B ol TrpwToy eKocrp^ovy, Kal ext yvy oi to. eidp,eTpa ttoioIvtcs,

a(j)eiKa(TLy‘

Tmy

oyop-aTwy

dXX(i)v, ovTo) Kal To)y

is

ovBe yap ol ras rpaywBias Troiovyres en

SrjXoi Be to o-vp.j3aiyov

ecTTtV.

This chapter

i404«'28, where the language of oratory

raXXa

yap eiaXXd^ai

pXy

6y6p.aTa

BrjXoi,

virep to

Tarreiyr),

craefyrj

p,r)

d^iiopia

dXX ov

Troiei

ocra

Xe^eoys

ov

dpeTT]

Troiyjcrei

dXXa

to

irpe-

TrpeVovcra Xdyo).

rd Kvpia,

p.rj

elprjTai ey

TaTreivrjv

rots

Trepl

Troiei efyaiyea-Oai (rep.yoTepay.

2l) COmp. For Tarreiy-q as the opposite of aep-yi^ 1404 b 3, 8, Isocrates 35 c, and the antithesis between TO Tarreiyoy and rd p.eyaXoTrpeTres in Rhet. ad Alex. 3, 1423*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 Bid ydp TaireifTi.

Rhet.

3. 2,

:

Twy Tioy

evTeXecTTdToyy Te evTeXea-TaToyy

7] Xe^ts, ots

Kal Kai

raTreivorartov TaireiyoTaTioy

dvo/xartov oyop.aTo)v

TrhrXeKTai TreirXeKTai

ay Kal yetopyds Kal OaXaTTOvpyds Kal ^^eipoTexyr)? Kal

d p.y]Bep.iay dypay tov Xeyeiy ev Troiovp,eyo% e^ eTOipiov

Xa^my

,

TraaatJ Traaa^ ttSs

I

'I'lsil

e)(p'q
Xv^eVros yovy tov jieTpov (jyavXa ^avijo'crai rd avrd raCra Kat

d^-qka'

ovTe ydp pieTaefyopai rtvcs ev avTois evyeyeis eveicrtv ovre viraXXayai

M.

::

1458 ® 16—22. 1458 ® 24

21.

293

ovre Karaxpijcreis ovre dXXrj TpoiriKt] Sid\(KTOut'Tos

:

on

see

2,

ireTroLrj/jieva

^ 1448

yXwT- 1458 ^ 20

8rj

ovofnara,

12.

This Sthenelus is presumably the tragic poet menmore than once by Aristophanes (Vesp. 1313 and fr. 151 Kock). It is doubtful whether a single line of his has come down iQevekou

I

.

® 21

tioned

to us

(Nauck, TGF.**

elaWdiTOUira to TO £10)005

[scil.

Ta

all

1406“ 15 eiaWarrei yap

3. 3,

It will

be

now

using iiakkarreiv in a large sense, to

possible deviations

from the ordinary forms of expression

is

Kvpiov, ^ 23), instead of restricting

vapa to

{irdv TO

Rhet.

:

e7rt0€Ta], Kat ieviKrjv Troiei rrjv keiiv.

observed that Aristotle

denote

762).

p.

IStuTiKot'

it

to the kind of

deviation presented in the etqXXaypievov ovopia (21, 1458 ^ 6). TO i8iwtik6)'=to quite the same,

but thc point of view

Or TO Kvpiov

£ 10)005

to IBkidtikov

is

not

man,

the language of the ordinary

is

opposed to the poetic mode of expression ; the and iroirj-rqs is already in Plato (Phaedr. 258 d, Laws 890 a). Isocrates 203 n has ISuotikoi ovopiara,

the prosaic as

antithesis of ISiwrrjs

Symp. 178

B,

but in a different sense.

In Plato (e. g. in Crat. 401 b 417 c ) a ieviKov ovopia is ^22 word or form, what Aristotle calls a yAoiTTa (see on 4); Isocrates 190 n (quoted above on 21, i457t'i) uses

^ei'iKots.

,

a non-Attic 21,

1457

ieva ovopLara in the ever,

is

a wider term

;

it

sense.

Aristotle’s ^eviKo. ovop-ara,

comprises

form of expression

the usual .

Same

all

how-

the various deviations from

(ttSv to Trapa

to Kvpiov

23)

— the

perae^opd, the eTreKTerapevov ovopa, etc., aS well as the yAtorra. the Rhetoric also to ^eviKov

Rhet. Xeiiv.

3.

—

3,

1406® 15 e^aWarrei

3. 12,

I4i4a26

to elwOos,

Kal

TO elwOos Kal ieviKov.

unfamiliar words have for us

is

ieviKrjv

The

explained in Rhet.

T 0V 5 ievovs

oi dvQpiDiroi Kal

Kai Trpos rrjv Xe^iv.

yap

816

8ei

TOi’5 TroAtVav,

ievrjv

an exaggeration,

All that Aristotle really

ttjv

3. 2,

1404

8

mavrep yap

to avTO

Tva(T)(ova’i

t^v BidXeKTov davpacTToX

to QavpacrTov.

Ttuv diTovTaiV elcriv, '^8v Se

airot^a TOiaura is

7rpo 5

rroieiv

Troiei

attraction such

TO i^aXXd^ai Troiei (f>aivecr6ai aepvorepav [scil. rrjv Ae^iv]' Trpos

In

the general opposite of to emOos

is

means

is

like d-n-dvroiv in i,

that too

1447

much metaphor,

22.

or an

undue proportion of strange words makes the sentence an enigma or a

‘barbarism’,

This passage Rhet. Gr. liepovTas

=f

I

i,

is

roiavra^ ^eviKd, or ek ^eviKwv. quoted in a fragment attributed

325 Spengel)

:

on

alviypara ypdcfteiv eXeyev.

to

Longinus

6 ’Apia-TOTeXrjs tov5 irdvra pera-

^24

:

COMMENTARY

294 25

‘

oui'

fiei/

modo

saepe usui patur ubi notio

explicatur’, Bon. Ind.

540 ^ 42

comp.

;

pronunciata amplius

1453

14,

^ 32,

and Vahlen’s

note on the present passage.

The

atnyjia.

puzzle in a riddle Aristotle explains as arising

from the presence of metaphors,

The element

sense.

Rhet.

3.

1405 ^ 4

2,

oAojs ex

yap

XaySetv tTruiKtis {p.€Ta(f>opai

on

tv pitrtvrjvtKTai.

TjSta'

pLixOrjcri':

i.

—

of words used in a transferred

e.

of metaphors in riddles

^

noted again

is

tan

ev Tjycy/xfi'wy

ware

alviTTOvrai),

1412

3. ll,

Twv

24 koX

to.

yap- Kal Xiytrai p.tTa
[? SryXovj']

tv yvLypLtva Sia to avro

:

iiem,

ita

Ul

inodiciis aiitein aiqiie

frequens

el

Quintilian

[? p.tTat^opa^.

much

also (8. 6, 14) speaks of the riddle-like effect of too

phor

in

fj-tratfiopo.':

meta-

opporiunus ehis usus illusirat oratio-

obsctirai et

coiUmuus vero

taedio compJei,

in

allegorias el aenigmala exit. Te

26

y&p

is

practically

no more than ydp

in this

Aristotelian passages (comp. Bon. Ind. 750^^5,

Gr.*

2. 2 p.

tSea

244).

equivalent here to ovaia (see Waitz, Org. 2 p. 406).

:

ovopia has

ovofiaTwr.

28

including the metaphor, KvpLov

(see

ovofjLa

been used before

etc.,

When

1457^1).

21,

(as It

6vop.a.

^16.

It

we

say) for the thing,

recurs in this is

more

i.

e. its

this as a generic

what

as well as

it

may

however,

easily

proper name,

specific sense

term

Aristotle calls the

opposed,

the metaphor, as in the present passage,

name

and many other and Kiihner, Gr.

in

to

mean Ik its

xi'pioi'

22,1458^2

and

not so absolutely necessary, therefore, to adopt

emendation of Heinsius,

toiv

(xuptW)

dro/raTcov,

the

or the reading

which the Arabic Version

is believed to imply, twv (dAXwv) 6voFor other instances of the same use of general terms a restricted sense see on i, 1447 29 {rj tois p.irpoL';).

pLanov. in

Kara Se

29

tt)>' (AeTa
The

avvOtcnv.

correction p.tTa^opmv

seems to be required not only by the form of the Twv oyofidrwv It

is

crvyOtaiy, in the

preceding

the combination of metaphors

line,

that

antithesis, Kara njv

but also by the meaning.

produces the sense

impossibility (comp. dBvyara avydxpaL '‘27) which

of an

is

of

of the essence

atyiyp-a.

avSp’ ciSor KTt.

The

Bergk.

a line traditionally ascribed to Cleobulina,

riddle

is

partially explained in Rhet. 3. 2,

ov leopputOty Set dXX’ ex tcuv crvyytywy Kal Twy d/xoetSalv

dywyvfia

tTT

fr.

i

35

p,tTa(j)tptLV ra

wyop.aap.iyu)';, d XtgOtv SyXoy terny on .^J alytygan tw tvSoKip.ovyn “ dvSp’ tlBov irvpi

ra dywyvga

avyytye^, oTov ty ^aXxdi'

1405

aytpi KoXXrjaai'Ta

dyioyvp.oy

yap to

TedOos,

tan

8

p

^25-30

22. 1458 TTpocrOecTLi

name

as a

XoAko's,

glass’,

is

TOivvv

KoWrjcriv

rts’

a metaphor derived from

made

Aenea

[scil.

park

cucurbi'iula\ altera

aeneam linamentum ardens

in

.

.

‘

145® ^ 29

cupping-

its

2.

has a

1 1

mode of

action:

patet, allera clausa est

coniciitir,

imprimiiurqne donee inhaereat

Celsus

and

description of the brazen cupping-glass

*

a

call

material of which the

the

antiquity.

in

vpocrjSoXyy.

(riKvag

what we conventionally

for

instrument was often

ry?

rrjv

etTre

295

.

.

,

ac sic os eius corpori aptahir

ubi inhaesit, si concisa ante seal-

.

sanguinem extrahit ; si integra est, spiritum (comp. Aristot. Probl. 9. 9-12, 890^7-37; Mayor on Juv. 14. 58; and the monograph of K. P. I. Lampros, Ilept a-ticvwv Kal crcKvdcrewi,

pello entis est,

Athens 1895). KoXXr]ffavTa: a metaphor aTr’ ctSovs iirl elSos (see 21, 1457 13). For the tense of the participle see Goodwin, Syntax of Greek Moods and Tenses § 148. Ik Tuy yXuTToiy PapPapicrfAos a mere repetition of the lav Se Ik yXwTTwv /3apPapi(Tp.6s in 25, and brought in also without syntac:

tical

The words may

connexion with the context.

now

of a longer statement

lost,

be the residue

or a stop-gap to disguise a lacuna,

or a rough note by Aristotle himself to indicate a point worked out at length at some future time.

opposite of €XXyvicrp. 6 s‘

fiap/SapLcrp-os is the

to be

eXXyvi^eiv in AriS'

Bon. Ind. 238 ^ 53) means to speak Greek like a native, correctly, and /Sap/Sapi^eiv to speak it like a foreigner, whether

totle (v. i.

e.

through the use of

‘

strange words

’

(yAwTrat), or through that of

That /3 ap/3api^av had from the explanation of a-oXoiKt^eiv (‘ to Soph. el. 3, i 65 t>20 riraffrov 81 o-oXolkl-

strange or unauthorized forms of words.

wide sense

this

is

clear

speak incorrectly’) in ^€LV TVOLUV,

8’

rovTO

TO

IcTTt

Trj Al^ct 8 ap/3apt^€tv, I/C TOV Bon. Ind. 688 54). In later

TTOiTjCTai

Xoyov TOV aTTOKpivop-evov (comp. theory, however,

‘

barbarism

of particular words,

TTToxns Iv dn-Xy

(v.

^

Trapdirra/a’ts

Xe$ei

three

denotes more especially a faulty use

solecism

irapa t-^v

i.

senses of

pluribus modis accipimus

p. ‘

:

’

a

fault

of construction

210 /Sap^apurpios

co-Tt

or

vapd-

Koivyv cnivyOnav, Kal croXoLKurp-oi

d(rvvy6y
Volkmann, Rhetorik^

guishes

’

Emp. Adv. math.

syntax: Sextus

((TTi

and

‘

y

396).

dXyv crvvTa^iv Kal dvaKoXovOo's Quintilian

barbarismus uniini gente

Afruni vel Hispajium latinae orationi

’

in [i

Latin

(i.

genus^ quale

7i07nen

8)

5,

distin-

Barbarisnium

:

inserat

.

fit si quis .

.

alterum

genus barbarismi accipimus quod fit animi natura tertium est illtid vitium barbarismi cuius exempla vulgo sunt plurima, sibi etiam .

4

.

.

^30

:

COMMENTARY

296

1458 ^30 quisque fingere potest, ut verho cui

libehit adiciat Utter

vel detrahat, aut etiam aliam pro alia ant

eandem

am

syllabamve

alio qiiam rectum

est loco ponat.

^ 31

apa K€Kpaa 0 ai

Sei

it.

ttws TOUTO19, scil.

Xeiiv

the language of

;

some admixture of unusual words

poetry should have

or forms in

Similarly in the Rhetoric a certain combination of familiar and

unfamiliar words

Rhet.

said to be an element of pleasure in a speech

is

25 Kai TO

1414

3. 12,

av cv

TTOLrjCTei

back to the ievird

refers

rjSeiav [scil.

T7]v \ 4$lv

/Sap^apLo-fjLo'; in »

31

in

22

;

digression.

is

eii/at]

from dX\' dv ns

all

ra

eiprjiJieva

In the text tovtok

to eico^os ral ^eviKov.

For the qualifying

“23

in

connexion comp. Probl. 30. i, 954 b 27 idv Se ttios KpaOwai. TO /Aev yap fir) ISiwtikov iroiiiaei, scil. ravra, i.e. to. ievird. olov prefixed to the

list

of ieviKd which follows

to

ttws in this

The

the appositional

is

and explanatory oior, nempe or scilicet (comp. Bon. Ind. 502 7). There is a reference to this place in Rhet. 3. 2, 1404 b 5 tSv 8’ ;

ovo/AaTcov KOI prjpArixtv

rdWa

K€KOcrprjp 4vr)v

^

oCk

ovopara

ph/

iroiei

rd Kvpia,

prj

rairew^v

eXd)(i
8e p.ipo$ aufiPdXXerai

:

Isocrates

1

56 B ou yap

p(i(TTOV

pipo^ rd yivr] ravra (rvp^dXXerai. wpos evBaipovlav.

crates

1

p.

aWd

ocra eiprjrat ev rots Trepl TroiyriKys.

ovopdruiv.

scil.

34

a-arj

eXd-

— Hippo-

525 K" ovK fXd^Krrov pipo? crvp/SdXXerai darpovopcq

es

i

vqrpLKrp'.

^

I

o-ufjiPdXXeTai.

The

singular verb

may be

explained by supposing

the real subject to be rd iTreKrerapeva koX aTroKCKoppeva Kal i^XXay-

piva ovopara rather than the various processes they exemplify.

Other instances of a singular verb with several subjects in the The anomaly plural will be found in Kiihner, Gr. Gr.® 2. i p. 81. in the present instance is not so

the verb precedes

its

harsh as

it

might have been,

as

and is also at some distance from also by the common use of ea-n, ^v,

subjects,

it [may be illustrated and yCyverai followed by a plural subject (see Kiihner, Gr. Gr.® 2. i Vahlen quotes a similar construction with Bordi in H. A. 4. p. 68). 536 17 SoKti Be .. wcTTrep X-vgroi ^aivecrOaL el o(f) 6 aXpoL 9,

them’:

®'

5

wffTc

.

ouK opOus

'J/eyouffit'

ktI.

In this long digression, which

tovto rjyvoei in 1459 4 > Aristotle insists on the literary value and effect of the various poetical forms of expression,

extends to

eKecvo's 8c

by the poets. He first answers the critics ot the epic (b7-3i), and then those of the tragic diction (b3i-

and defends 1459 **

7

Tov

'‘

their use

4 )Troiir)Ti)v',

the poet, whoever he

may

be.

It is evident,

how-

t

7

30—1458

22. 1458 ^

^

297

9

mainly concerned with Homer (comp. Bon. 1458 609 ^ 57); the licences he considers are all epic licences ; and the instances quoted in ^ 9-10 were presumably meant to caricaIt was generally admitted that ture the Homeric hexameter. Homer was ready enough metri gratia to take great liberties with language (see Ludwich, Aristarchs Homerische Textkritik 2 p. 127; Throughout this chapter Aristotle is Schulze, Qu. epicae p. 3). ever, that Aristotle is

Ind.

much

thinking quite as

Epic

his theory of the

of the epic poet as of the tragedian, though

is still

to

come

(in

23-24).

Nothing further

EuK\ei8i]s 6 dpxatos.

is

which must be taken for what

a surmise,

suggest that he

may

possibly be the Euclid

known is

it

As

of him.

worth,

would

I

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

see

=

fuller alphabet.

For the omission of dv pdStov ov iroteiv. Goodwin, Syntax of Greek Moods and Tenses 875. i.

us

paSiot' Trotei»'

From

eKTeiVei>'.

1457^35

the definition of the eTreKTerap-Aov 6 vo[j.a in 21, ^ 8

clear

is

it

u)s

that Aristotle

referring not only to the

is

lengthening of a short vowel but also to the insertion of an extra syllable in a

word.

lapPoTroii^cras their

ei'

aurj)

-rfj

connexion with the

The

\e|€i.

lines

sense of these words and

which follow have been a

who

with the interpreters from the days of Victorius, the passage in ipsa

Goulston renders them by

in despair.

seinem eignen Ausdruck Spott in die

Redeform

persiflirte

‘

iambum

sive

sermone pedestri ev avrrj rf) Ac^ct la/A^oTTotiyo-as

’

is

Ueberweg by

practically the

carmen probrosum {in

;

‘ihr

‘in ipsa

Verfahren in ‘

er legt

den

selbst (durch Sylbenverlangerung) hinein

Vahlen’s interpretation (which is

M. Schmidt by

up

gives

qui etiam

‘

by

oratione soluta iambica confecit’; Tyrwhitt

oratione soluta cavillo facto’;

difficulty

purer prosa)

et

It is

same thing as

as Tyrwhitt’s)

cavillatorium faciens

not so easy to see

can mean the same thing as

quite the

same

ev

ij/iXrj

’.

Ae^ct

;

mero

how

nor

is

Perhaps

tafi/Sov Troi-^o-as.

the simplest solution of the difficulty is to transpose lafr/SoTroirja-as,

placing

after t' avrfi rfj

it

parody which follow as

mean

to

‘

write, or

say,

its

Ae^et,

and then take the two

object.

lafi/SoTroieiv

something as an

n may

iap.^o7rotds

(i. '

lines of

very well e.

as a

**

9

•

COMMENTARY

298 1458

'’9 caricaturist), just

‘describe ‘

same way

in the

as a Spa/xaroTroids

’

as

means

Spa/xaroiroteiv tl

1448^37), and

(4,

to

AoyoTroteiv tl to

describe as a AoyoTrotds ’Ein.x(lpT)i'

This and the next

ktI.

specimens of prose which by a

be made

By

to read as verse.

quotation

given

are

the artifice of lengthening two

short syllables ’ETrixapijv cTSov ktI.

becomes an hexameter

lengthening required with

being like that in

Od.

12.

How

ySaSt^civ,

423.

may

it

be observed,

was

the second instance

to

is

not equally

we may suppose

If

may have

cAAeySopov to be a scribal error for iX\e/36pov, the parodist

proposed to read

— the

Ittltovo<; in

not an epic word.

is

be read as a verse

being obviously corrupt.

clear, the text here

as

may

liberal use of epic licences

this as iWe/Sopoio.

The

Mapa 0 wvd 8 €.

accentuation

A° (Mapa^wva

in

Se)

in

is

accordance with the rule of Apollonius and Herodian (La Roche,

Homerische Textkritik ’’

<|>aw€a0 ai

II

(f>aivcTai

yap

ttws

p. 221).

corr.

xP"/*®*'®*'

A

ttws Kal paKra rjpifia,

visible

i.

328'’io

10,

use of these

artifices

one thing and a discreet use of them (to p,iTpiov, 12) another. For the antithesis comp. Pol. 3. II, 1314 ^ 28 -n-epc re ras aTroAav-

is

cw/xaTiKas

ras

ceis

rvpdvvwv

cwex^s

TToAAas

yap

Lv

same

twv

Kal (paLvecrOai rots dAAot5 /SovXovraL

rule for oratory

tolovtols,

Se p/q, to ye (jiaivecrOaL

el

down

In the Rhetoric Aristotle lays

dAAois Sta^cdyetv.

Tois

Ttves

Spwcnv Kal

tovto

ws {vSaip,ovag Kal p^aKapLOvs OavpAaoicnv aXXa

pLiTpid^eLV tols

p.dXLo'Ta p.h'

emOev

€v0vs

p.6vov

dXka

7]p.lpa<;,

TOVTO TrpaTTOVTCs,

Sa] rovvavTiov tvoluv ^ vvv

[scil.

ov

TTOLOvaiv’

:

the orator

must use

guage, but with discretion, so as not to allow his use of them

become too apparent: TTOiowTas, Kal also 3. 7,

TOUTU

scil.

1404^18

T^S SlttAcKTOV

ToiovTo) TpoTTLo T^s SiaXeKTOv in opds

2,

dXXd

Sid

to

Xav6dveiv

Sei

Tre^vKOTius

(comp.

4).

TpOTTO),

tS>

3.

SoKeiv Xeyeiv ireTrXacrp.evw;

p-rj

1408

Rhet.

the

the arts of lan-

all

xp^o-^ai in 21,

I*

6,

and

COmp.

;

to

)

ol

eiVLTLpdlVTeS

t5

TpoTrw tovtw t^s peTa-

1457 ^ 30. Vahlen, who supplies i-n-eKTdcrecrL tQ TpoTro) as equivalent to tovtov t6v Tponov,

after xpidp-evov, takes tovtlo

TO

12

8e

perpiov.

we have limit The

retained,

or

‘

the sense of

‘

If to

the traditional

reading,

’

Se

peTpov,

be ’

‘

objection to this interpretation

metre

to

understand peTpov in the sense of measure in the

immediate context

is

('^ 1

that peTpov has

6),

and

that any

other sense would be somewhat confusing in a passage dealing

with

‘

metrical

’

licences,

to peTpiov,

on

the other hand,

is certified

:

^

22. 1458

Set (rTO)(d^€a-0ai

Aeyetv

eLK'p

’AA/ciSa/eavTOS

piv yap ovk

r;

(^atVeTof

{l/v)(pa

eSeV/xaTt toi?

irapaTrjpiiv

Kal

Sel

aXka

1406''’ 16

rov

Se

299

iv

Rhet<

tov pLerpiov, to

eji(ei

1390^

14.

2.

—

8e to Ka/eco?.

ev,

3,

kukov

p-ei^ov Trotet

CTret

3.

ra

Sto

yap rjBvcrpan ^(p^Tat dAA

ov

8

oo-a

ws In

i'TnB-^Xoi.s-

vTrep/SdXXovcnv

S’

dppoTTOV,

pirpiov Kal to

TovTtov to

1405^32 1458

3. 2,

to p-erpiov.

ap.(f)Otv

ovtw TrvKvois Kal peL^ocri Kal

eTrt^eVots,

another passage, Rhet. iXXeiTTOvcri,

9-16

parallel in the Rhetoric:

by more than one €vXa^€i(r 6 aL

:

we

^

find Aristotle

passing from the idea of to piTpiov to that of to dppoTTov just as

he does here in the context Koit'oi'

ct’KatpcDS

y

15).

Rhet.

pepui'

3.

1408

7>

‘‘‘36

to

S’

pr] evKatpoi'; ^(pycrdai kolvov aTrdvTojv Ttov etScov ia-Tiv.

In the Rhetoric an unsuitable metaphor

dirpe-n-ws.

one of the Rhet.

eorl tuv

dirdi'Twi'

faults

which make the

14061)5 TO

3. 3,

style

Std to yeXotov {)(^pa)VTai

KOipwSoTTOiol peTa^opats) at Se Std to (repvov

rd yeXoia.

ini

‘

iv Tats peTa(f)opals ytVeTaf

ijn')(p 6v

Kal peTa(j>opal aTrpeTrets at ph'

eTTiTTjSes eiTi

said to be

is

of an orator

to.

frigid

14

’

yap

elcrl

yap Kal

ol

dyav Kal TpayiKov.

yeAota, which has been bracketed

(by Gomperz), seems to be wanted to keep up the parallelism with

what

said

is

6 g

in

on

sqq.

the

subject

which Euclid had parodied and turned to reply to Euclid the

etc., for

is

The

quoted above). in

that

is

it

same purpose,

€7rt

of the

epic

ridicule.

licences, Aristotle’s

quite possible to misuse metaphors,

Td yeAota (comp. Rhet.

comparative ini

1406

3. 3,

5,

more

yeAotoTepa would be

to.

accordance with usage (comp. Stallb. on Plato Symp. 214 e). This is considered (i) in reference to these '’15

TO Se dpfjLOTTot'Tws.

epic licences {iniKTacris, dnoKony, iiaXXayy), to the use of

oaor Tuiv

SiacjiEpei

X 6y
eiri

Twi'

marked a is

metaphor,

ets

:

etc.

:

0ewpetff0«

:

because these metrical licences are so

feature in the epic diction (see

Xe^ei Kal TOis ivOvpypacnv

Tats

iKeidev

1

on ^ 7). a shows

The proof here the literary value

piv pcTo. pinputv Kal pvOpwv dnavTa noiovaiv,

ouSevds TOVTOJV Koiviovovaiv a ToaavTrjv

/cat

ov XiXyOev dVov Sta^epouat

p

to netdeLv ol Xeyopevoi twv dvayiyvaxTKopivijJV.

eirdii'

ot

(2) in reference

17).

Isocrates 87 c KatVot

not unlike that by which Isocrates 19

of metre

and

crvpp€Tptats

e)(r]

Ka/ctos,

i//i’;^aya)yovcrt

i)(€i -)(apiv,

dptos

uxtt

ol S’

dv Kal

Trj

avTais Tats €vpv6piais

tovs aKovovTas-

yvoirj

S

dv Tts

Tyv Svvapiv avrwv yv yap Tts twv noiypaTwv twv cvSoKt-

povvTwv Ta phf ovopaTa Kai tAs Stavotas KaTaXCny, to Se peTpov SiaXva-y, (^avycreTai

avTwv.

1

noXv KaTaSeecrTepa Tps B6$ys

y
vvv i)(op€v nepl

’’

16

12

COMMENTARY

300 ’’16

Tuy

oi/ojxtiTwk

distinct

For

iSewv.

18

i.

:

from the

the normal words, the words themselves, as

e.

itreKTacrei's, etc.,

tSea

= etSos,

and Bon. Ind. 338^34. the

space of

few

a

Se

[Aovov

21

Kupiou

synonyms, there

as

etoj^os ovo/itt

(y 23)

the

is

A

ot'Ojxa.

on

(see above

» 28).

see Waitz, Org.

’,

caelo

r. 7

2

416,

p.

Aristotle says, within

(274 «'32) and meaning.

elSwv

TreTrepa(Tf/. 4 vu)v

verb taken by

may be termed an Though elwOoTos.

a subject,

De

In

lines,

them

of

species

2) without perceptible difference of

tSeas TreTrepaa-fiiva';

20

‘

word

on

and

Kvpiov

itself,

20,

e.

i.

apart from

“ 10).

1457

used

ctco^os ovop.a are often

a certain difference between them, as the

is

may be

ovop.a (see

a metaphor.

ia-OUt in the line of Aeschylus

in general use (to €tw^os), but

it is

a metaphor,

and therefore not a Kvpiov wo/xa (see on 21, 14571^1) in the By comparison with Ooivarai, however, stricter sense of the term. it is the Kvpiov 6 vop.a. Aristotle gets out of the difficulty by terming it the Kvpiov Eiu^o's, the usual Kvpiov, because it has by custom and use to

^

22

come

be treated as a Kvpiov

to

ovofia,

and

The

euxeX^s.

epithet

Al
Nauck, TGF.^

:

Ooimrai, which

not

is

Hesychius, ffoiydrar vuv Be

p iwy ktL

:

'’2),

and

in the

and 618.

p. 81

uncommon

poetry,

in

yXZrTa (see on 21, 1457^)4).

Aristotle as a

25

felt

applied to a certain kind of word in

is

3. 7, 1408®' 13 (see on Koa-pLos, 21, 1457 passage from Dionysius quoted above on 20.

Rhet.

24

no longer

is

be a metaphor.

It

is is

by

regarded

explained in

evcj^eiTat.

Od.

9.

oAiyos t£ Kal ovTiSavoi

5^5

Kai aKiKV^.

The

deiKijs.

of

Homer

traditional text of the Poetics has detSTjs,

aKiKVi

of

restoration

— with

detKijs

an ancient variant, however, in

by the Arabic Version. is the word actually used

Homeric it

seems

the

quotation,

must have had before him,

Aristotle

line ;

(2)

it

is

detSjjs is

in

^27

is

open

a person,

to

two objections:

also a late word,

deiKijs

detSijs in its later

had

(i)

it

and

in the sense

to

On

(=

which

Svo-ctS^s),

the other hand,

if

be interpreted as an epithet of

sense might very well be chosen to

it.

deiKeXiov kte. Od. 20. 259. Several of the manuscripts Odyssey read TrapaOus in lieu of Karapets.

8i(|>pov

of the

word

which

in Aristotle’s metaphrasis of the

to bear here, that of ‘unsightly’ or ‘ugly’

the old poetical

'’29

the reading

that

The

believed to be confirmed

not to be found in pre-Aristotelian Greek.

represent

as

and

detK^s.

:

poouaiy

Tjiot'cs

Kpa^ouaiK

II.

:

6

301

17. 265.

145®

comp. Demosthenes

:

^

16—1459

22. 1458

18.

31

132 ^owv 6 /Sdo'Kavo^ oStos

Kal KeKpayws.

who

De

fession (Bergk,

com.

rel.

Tous xpaYwSous

i.

:

e.

occurs in

said to have been a Kt^apuSos

is

Att. p. 232).

suppose him to have given expression to

for

name

perhaps the Ariphrades whose

is

’Api
Aristophanes, and

the tragic actors,

what the poet puts into

by pro-

not necessary to

is

this criticism in a

who

mouth.

their

It

made

are

book.

responsible

32

be observed that

It will

the expressions singled out for censure are taken apparently from

the dialogue of

Tragedy

there

;

would have been no point

saying that the language of the choral part was Trapa

A

similar use of the

word rpaywSoi

Aristotle’s

time, in Diphilus,

KeKrqiaivr]

Bpavpoivos lepov

ToioSapLve TrapOeve,

<1)5

ol

fr.

is

found,

a few years after

30 Kock S tw8’

O^acjuXia-TaTOV

rpaymSoi

<^acrtv,

tottov, ots

in

Trjv SidAe/croi/.

eTroTTrevovcra Kal

Aids re

ArjTOV'S

i^ovcria ecrriv Xiyeiv

diravTa Kal Troietv p,ovots. 8iaXeKT(o, the

StdAexTOS has the

^

Aeyopev

spoken, as distinct from the written language.

same sense

rp StaAeKTcp

in 4, 1449®' 26 TrXucrra Trpds

Trj

(xAATyAovs,

and

in

yap

lapL/Seia

Rhet.

3. i,

1404^33 Tcov ovop-dratv afftetKacriv dcra Trapa rrjv SiaXeKTov icrriv. The ordinary meaning of the term in Aristotle is either speech (i. e. articulate language) or mode of speech eyw 8e j-id Sophocles O. C. 986. The rest of the instances in ‘

’

‘

:

the text p.

were no doubt taken from existing plays

(v.

34

Nauck, TGF.'*

856).

the €7r€KT(x(rets, dvoKOTrai, and e^aAAayai 1459 ^ 4 eKd
— ^yvdet 1459 ®4). Kal

SiirXois

di'dfjiaffi

Kal

y^^^Trais

is

a

sort

of

afterthought. ® 5

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. TToXu Se fieYioTO)). In the Rhetoric metaphor is shown to hold Aristotle

an equally important place in the diction of oratory (Rhet.

14041332

3. 2,

sqq.).

(ji£Ta<|)opiK6)'

:

comp, the eulogy of Empedocles as a master of fr. 70 (Teubn.) from the dialogue Trepl iroirjTwv

poetic expression in

:

Kal 'Op,TypiKds 6 Ep-TreSoKAijs Kal Seti/ds Trepl t^v (j>pd(nv yeyove, pera(ftopiKos t’

wv Kal Tols dAAois rots

Trepl TroirjTCKrjv eTrtrevypacrt ;!^())pevo5.

6

—

:

COMMENTARY

302 ^6 With

this

use of

compares

that of

of (Ti'kXoyiaTLKo? in Top. ^

T£

eu(J)ui'as

7

in Rhet.

ex'OvjjLijiJLaTiKo^

1354'’ 22,

i,

i.

means a

of nature,

gift

be acquired by education or study;

i.

an apti-

e.

on

see

17,

145.5" 32, and comp. Eth. N. 3. 7, it 14 ^ 6 (pvvai. Bel wa-irep t)(OVTa yj KpLvei KaXCis kul to kut aXyOeiav ayaOov alpycreTai. TOVTO KaXws vefjiVKev.

€(TTiv ev(j>vr]?, (S

Kal o Trap' eripov

ely

p.7] oToi'

Kal TO fv Kal to

e^fi,

The

evcf>vLa.

Rhet.

Xa^av

KaXwg tovto

to yap

dA/V otov

rotovrov

€(j>v

y TeXua Kal aXyOwy metaphor is noted also

in

difference,

between things not obviously .

.

.

alike

intuitive

ii,i4i2®'io;

3.

aTTo oi/cettov Kal p,y (fiavepiov, oiov Kal iv cj>iXo(T 0 -

For the

TO (to) op.oiov Kol ey ttoXv Sif^ov(ri Oeutpeiy cvctto^ov.

(f)La

in

of the resemblances

i.e.

comp. Rhet.

;

dr*

This

Kal Xa/Seiv ovk ecTTiy avTTjv Trap aXXov,

of similarity in

Sfi Se p.€Ta(j>€p€iv

Kal

7re(f>vKivaL

power, according to Aristotle, depends on a rapid and perception

otj/tv

Kal KaXXicrTou

/xeytcTTOi'

p.r]8k p.a6eiv,

shown

originality

1405 “9

3. 2,

re

and

etc.,

14, 163^’ 30.

8.

fvcf>vLa

o-tjfxeioi',

tude not to

Vahlen

as applied to a person,

iJ.€Ta(f)opiK6';, i.e.

kinds of similarity underlying metaphors see 21, 1457 7. Aristotle is apparently setting aside far-fetched eu (ieTa^p£ii'.

metaphors (Rhet.

3.

^8

1405 '‘35;

2,

underlying resemblance

is

341

S'

30 8’

Twr

forms of the

De

article see

resp. 2,

471

orofidruv kte.

A

;

1406

1406^18), in which the

3,

should be.

it

For other instances of concurrence of

TO TO ofioiov Oeupely. identical

3.

not so real and clear as

“ 7

Soph.

;

el.

173

13,

Metaph.

N

15

very similar distinction

;

Meteor,

i. 3,

s 14.

1089

2,

is

made

in Rhet.

'^pymp.uiTaTy y BnrXy Af^is tois Si9vpap.fioTroioii’ ovTOL yap i//o0coS£ts‘ at Se yAcoTTat TOts £7ro7rototS' (Tep.y6y yap Kal 3.

3,

avffaSes'

9

Tois

I

:

y p.€Ta
Gomperz (Vienna Academy,

Sitzungsberichte 123 p. 66)

orvyOeTov ayiay p.ky iy Trj TpaytoSta y Tots tTrem . . Demetrius De eloc. 91 XyirTeoy 8k 8i6vpdp.l3w .

ov

6y6p.aTa,

to.

St^vpaytt^tKws crvyKeip.eya,

ov8k dcTTpwv Bopvirvpoy crTpaTov,

otoy

dXX eoiKOTa

:

to p,aKpo-

aXvTTOV

.

Kal to,

8'

ey

tw

a~vyOeTa

OeoTepaTOvg TrAdras,

TOts vtrb Trjs a~uyy6eias

(rvyKeip,eyoL<;.

10

Tois ^pwiKois: Tois lapPeiois

12

comp. i.

p,ip,£io- 0 ai.

language,

Ae|ts

1458^32) The present

the

in

23,

1459^

e. the tragic

Instead this

of

34-

dialogue

usual

its

passage must

spoken as

distinct

statement, therefore,

(v. 4,

sense

mean

from the is

in

1449 (like

s

24).

of

diction

or

SioEAektos

in

literary

harmony with

language. that

in

22. Rhet.

3.

reject

words

I,

6-14

303

1404*^33, where Tragedy is said to have learnt to 1459 outside the ordinary spoken language (o
SidkcKTov

Trpf

^

1459

With

ia-Tiv).

we may compare

this use of Xe|ts

that

of Xc^ts, XeKTiKov p-erpov, and XeKTiKr} appovia in 4, 1449^23—8; and also that of Xayos in Rhet. 3. i, 1404^ 30 ex rcov rerpapirpiDV els

TO lap^eiov pere^rjcav 8ta to t£ Xoyo) tovto

In

stands for

it

the assumpno doubt sometimes does. the opposite of song Xefts, as it

i/^tX-^

^

23 Xe^is is Xdyois has been taken to

1449

4, ei'

versation

(‘

’

perpoiv bpoiora-

427^31) by sermo pedeslris, on

sermo] Bonitz (Ind. tion that

Ttiiv

Goulston renders XeEis here by vulgaris

Tov etvat Twv oXXeov.

‘

mean

in

‘

common

Goulston),

in familiari colloquio

‘

speech, or con- ^ 13

in prose

(‘

’

oratio

Bon. Ind. 433 ^ 20), and in speeches ' (‘ in orationibus ’, Though it is not always possible to determine the Tyrwhitt). pedestris

‘

’,

exact meaning of a word like Xdyos of probability

meaning would seem

Aristotle’s

the

(ev lapjSeLOLs) is limited to

—

(ev Xdyois)

4,

the Rhetoric,

Rhet.

:

® 17), the

to

be

this, that

balance

the tragic dialogue

same species of words

as oratory

common life (Xe|ts), The appropriateKoapos-

and the

ness of the KvpLov and peraipopd for oratory

use

1449

those found in the language of

the Kvpiov, the peracfiopd,

viz.

on

(v.

favour of Tyrwhiit’s ‘in orationibus’.

rather in

is

and

3. 2,

same reason,

for the

1404 ^31 to

povat )(p'^cnpoL Trpos

rrjv

Tots oiKeioLs Kal TOLs KvpLois

in the text to the

distinctly affirmed in

common

Sc Kvpiov koX to oIkclov kuI peraejiopd

twv

TOVTOLS povoLS TTOVTCS yfiwvTaL,

is

that they are in

Xoywv Xe^iv

il/iXwv

(TYjpeiov

Be,

ori

jo-p peTacjiopais BcaXeyovrai Kal

77 cEvTcs

(comp. Isocrates 190

language of speeches

’

‘

may

The

e).

serve to

reference

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

According to the canon here laid down by Aeschylus would be inapTragedy; and he tells us elsewhere that it was

the art of Rhetoric.

Aristotle, the highly-coloured diction of

in

propriate

eschewed by the dramatists of Tolv

ovopdrwv S

ecTTtv, ols

d(l>eiKacnv

ot TrptoTov

[i.

e,

his time:

Rhet.

3.

i,

1404*33

the tragedians] ocra Trapa Trp/ BidXeKTov

eKocrpow

,

.

.

dt^eiKacriv.

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 that of the Ko<7|jios

1404

t

:

Comedy see

on

it

and

of the period.

21,

1457

2.

The

parallel in the Rhetoric (3. 2, * 14

21^ quoted above) ignores the KQo-pos.

12

COMMENTARY

304 1459 ^ 15

Tu TTparreiy fiiixi^aeus. A tragedy is something to be an epic something to be recited or read. This makes a fundamental distinction between them, though Aristotle admits «•'

acted,

work of

that as a

“17

8e

TTcpl

Tijs

a tragedy

literature

performance on a stage

1450 ^ 18

(6,

SiTjYii(*aTiKfjs

;

1462

The

KTe.

quite possible

is

26,

without

12, 17).

natural

division

in

the

matter of this and the next chapter would be at 24, 1459 17, so as to make 8 ia 4)€pu Se the beginning of the second half of the

Throughout these two chapters

discussion.

constantly in view

show

their

if

;

inferiority

artistic

the

to

under the rules of construction

down

laid

it

is

only to

and Odysse}'.

Iliad

general intention of the present statement

Homer

Aristotle has

he mentions other epic writings,

for

The

to bring the

is

Epic

Though

Tragedy.

the enumeration of the points of agreement and difference between the two is so much longer than that in 5, 1449^9-20, it ignores one characteristic of the Epic, its being a /x6/Aijo-ts o-TrovSaiW on which no little stress was laid in the earlier chapters (3, 1448 26 Taking this for granted, it would seem, 4, 1448 '’38 sqq.).

—

;

good epic must conform

Aristotle proceeds to insist (i) that a

i8-l>

the tragic rule of Unity of story (1459

poetry divides into the same

and (3)

that

involves the

it

Tragedy

species as

same

7);

literary

to

(2) that epic (1459 ^ 8-10);

elements (1459

10-

on to its points of difference, its length 31-1460 '>4), its form (®'5-ii), and its

After this he passes

17). (b 17-31), its metre

(b

greater tolerance of aXoya

Opuscula (3

i

i-b

Epic

A

5).

valuable discussion on

in Schoemann’s For traces of Aristotelian ideas in later see Adam, Die Aristotelische Theorie vom Epos

theory of the

Aristotle’s

found

be

will

30).

p.

Greek writers (Wiesbaden 1889). irepl

8e

Metaph.

tt]s 8iT)YT)paTiKTjs.

H

6,

1045

8irjYi1FaTiKris,

7r£pt=‘ as for

’,

Or

‘

as regards

scil.

/x6/tYo-ca)s,

that follows

is

(comp.

understood from ®i5 (comp. 24,

1459 bss, and the note on 1,1447®' 27 Kttt

’

“ 7).

the appositional

km

(

=

The common

op)(r](TT
e.),

which

is

so

in Aristotle. Iv

pETpu

e^apbirpois is

p.ip,r)TiKrjs piip.riTiKrjs.

may be compared ev

p-irpu),

with

‘in verse

(

6,

= 0'

1

449 bar Ad-yw

ev

ip.p.eTp(a),

the opposite of ev tw irpaTTuv, just as in the definition of Tragedy

in 6,

1449

b 26

8t’

aTrayyeAtas

(scil.

p.ip.ovp.ivwv) is the

opposite of

SplOVTlOV.

^ 18

auvKTTdvai SpapariKous.

A

predicative adjective after a-wurTavu

8

22

1459

.

^

15—23- 1459

^

21

305

found also in 24, 1459^14, 1460^34, and in Plato Phaedr. 1459 ^ 18

is

268 D

TOVToiv

Ti]v

comp.

1451 *’28

8,

which means properly

quired for a drama’ (comp.

4,

1448^35),

the Unity of the dramatic story. laid

down

has

already

1451

“

Epic the rule of Unity however,

applicability,

digression

on the Epic

woirep iiov

et'

oXov.

the expression will

in 8, If

for

such as

more

now

Aristotle

‘

especially to

definitely applies

Tragedy in chaps. 7-8 assumed in the ;

been

19-29.

(w)

permissible to restore 6 Xov

it is

be equivalent to ova-a

p. 337, and Riddell, Digest of Idioms Eor the meaning of ^^ov see on 7, 1450 34.

KOI

ofioias

fXT)

precept in ^

Set tovs p.vOovs

1

tion being BrjXov opiotas

pr/

(cat

Set

them

’

.

.

.

the

crwicrTcxvat Spap,aTiKovs

440*^ 14

3,

ravryv

SrjXov, Kal

may

o/xotas ^etvat

(comp. Bon. Ind. 761

on

rrjv

,

.

dvdyKrj ptyvvpevoiv

alnav

etvat tcuptav

mean

very well

According

27).

.

For the

ras crvvjOeis deivai.

tcrroptas

of the text, the general sense of the passage

‘

view

to this

shortly this

is

tov

to regard

:

Epic

should be in structure like those of Tragedy (Spa/xartKovs),

stories

and not, as like

b).

crwurTavai SpapariKovs, the construc-

comp. De sensu

)(p 6 a^.

202

§

complement of

the negative

Tovs p.v 6 ovs

avrois]

xpoas plywcrOai,

iroXXas etvat as like

on

[scil.

position of B^Xov Kat ras

;

is

is

21 and

so often supposed (see 8, 1451

This

records of ordinary history.

the

ever, Aristotle puts in a

somewhat

latter

different form,

assume our ordinary histories to be

like

them

‘

’

;

9,

1451^4),

how-

point,

One must

not

he inverts the

order of the terms, in fact, as he sometimes does in comparisons

introduced by op,oios (see Vahlen ad

cism of the Nic. Ethics p. 63). altered

into

^etvat'

The

loc.,

of

the

historians

correctors

was

felt

POETICS

t I

I

The same

correction

is

Criti-

I

have

represents

to

be

something in the set

The

right.

by one of the Renaissance

and by Dacier ; but the correction they proposed,

opotas la-TopiaLs ras a-vvOtaeis etvat, ^

which

histories should not

he wished

that

Textual

EINAI

(on the assumption that

absurdity of such a notion

i

etvat,

tragedies or epics, as though there were

practice

^

my

and

reading

@INAI), makes him say that our ordinary like

to

20

another instance of ^ 2I

iffTopias Tas ffui^Oeis Oeivai is it

here, ^

tv oXov Sxnrep C<^ov (see

Bernhardy, Syntax

parallelismus antitheticus

re-

is

explained by what

is

follows (xat Trepl p.Lav irpa^tv ktL) as referring

to the

oA
Trpd^iv

p.iav

irpa^iv olav Xeyop.ev rrjv ’OSvcrcreiav

p.iav

Trepl

Spap.ariKov';,

(TL’vea-Trjarfv.

its

koX

aX\'qXoL<; re

irpiTrovcrav

(Tuaracrcv

For the construction cwtcrravac vepl

arvviaTafjLevrjv,

my mind

was made by Francken

too

Kat pr/

artificial,

in Lysias 10. 18.

and

COMMENTARY

306

1459 ^21 too great a departure from the reading a place

the

in

In saying

text.

MS.,

of the

lo-roptas

to deserve

ras

Aristotle

seems to be aware of there being exceptions to the rule. We have been told in 9, 1451 ^30 that a poetical subject may sometimes be found ®

23

in history.

ei/6s

xporou

a history

is

recording

all

comp.

:

that

it

i

Aristotle’s conception of

nep\ eva xpovov.

a sort of chronicle (see on

is

9,

1451 "•36)

the various occurrences within a certain period of

however loose and separate they may have been in themAs an instance of such a disconnected event he cites Gelo’s defeat of the Carthaginians in 480 ; it happened about the same time Herodotus 7, 166 says on the same day as the Battle of Salamis, but it obviously had no connexion with that battle, or with the issue of the Persian War. And the same would have to be said, if it had taken place just before or after Salamis (eV toTs In this way Aristotle reasserts the point on xpovois ^27). which he has insisted in the earlier chapters (8,1451*^27; 10,

time,

selves.

—

1452

**

—

20), that

two events may come

in succession without form-

ing part of one single action.

^25

ISakajAcvi

Rhet.

:

Comp. Thuc.

I,

2.

22, 1396®' 12 rrjv iv ^aXafxivi vavjxa)(lav.

57, Isocr. 112 a, Aeschines in Ctes.

222

for this

use of the preposition. ^

29

iiSt):

®

cuauroTTTOs

33

^34

= 6/^otas

TOUTO 8p(o(n

^30

1451® 23 sqq. see on 7, 1451

8,

:

ras

rjv ftyai

to

clause.

V. 7,

j

Vahlen supposes

26); but

1450

(to) jxeyeOei /xerptd^ovTa),

grammatical

too

T€Aos

1451

7,

**5),

like the clause of

Ind. 463 b 23).

is

explanation in

3,

intransitive, as

it

For the

or

in

its

= dAoj'; entirety

was too long if

for

not too long

The

explanation of the

perhaps be that Aristotle has lapsed

Aiav yap av /xeyas ktI.

obliqua oratio.

perpidtoi'Ta

may

it

it

of matter through the variety of

full

{KaraTreTrXeyfjLa/ovrrj ttoikiXm). difficulty

or avayKolov

enough: The Trojan

declined to deal with

comp.

purpose (AtW fieyas;

it

clear

through a feeling apparently that

{voieiv 6 \ov),

incident in

is

(l^ovra

itself

Homer

eSei

iaeaOaL in the preceding

sense of the passage

a real whole in

(v. ® 21).

0 eLS nOiacn

be understood from the

The

War was

crvi' 7

® 4.

T
T)

his

icrro/aias

1448

is virtually

® 33.

generally

dative with

it

into

oratio obliqua,

comp.

jt-

is

in Aristotle (Bon.

Pol. 5. ii, 1314'^ 33

p.iTpid^€LV rots TOtOVTOlS.

^35

ev pepos

diroAaPut'

:

comp. Bon. Ind. 82^149, and Plato Rep.

c

^

23 392 E ov Kara oAov

307 1459^35

d/\X’ drroXa/Swv fiipos ti Treipdcrop-ai croi iv rovTio

By

^ovXopaL.

drjXCxrai o

21-37

^

1459

-

War Aristotle means c. p. 43. see Adam

the

of the Trojan

this €v p.(pos in the history ‘

Wrath of

and

Achilles’

consequences

its

;

1.

=

twv

iv

such as

we

ainuv (Tvvea-Lv

tQ

23, 1459“’ 29,

and Kiihner, Gr. Gr.^

Elh. N. 4.

20

(f>Oopd, u)S

I, 1 1

Tov

2. i, p.

2 SoKEt 8’ arrojAetd Tt 5

[=

SidrovTwv

^rjv

Kara

construction

a

TTpayparuiv,

ttoAc/xu)

often find with pronouns (comp. 13, 1453'"^ 24,

Vahlen quotes

54).

avTov eivai Kal

rijs oicrta?

rj

implied in

Tcov )(pr)pdTwv,

Tiys oucrtas]

OVTO'S.

8iaXa)jipdi'£t

/SdvecrOai

rrjv

comp. Dionysius Hal. 5

:

op-oeiSeiav

of the word

The proper meaning

a thing, as in Phys. 4. 6, /Sdvet TO Trav (Tthp-a uio'Te

that of to

to

allied

elmt

this

8i€iA^<^^at

of’,

no

By!}

the

sense in Pol.

is

•

.

^ivois

eTretcroSrois.

‘break the continuity of’ SidcrTrjp.a

.

,

.

o SiaXap.-

present meaning,

Its

or ‘diversify’,

)(pwpxicn

.

Kal iropyots

(f>vXaKTr]pioi^

Kal

p.^ crov€;(€S.

‘break the uniformity

Plato Phaed.

in

to

is

32 ovk iart

213

BiuXap.- ®

543 R. to

p.

p.eTaj3o\aLS

lBiaL
is

found also Closely

Siei\r]p.p 4vr].

1331 » 20 rd Se ruxq where it denotes to break

7. 12,

—

‘

the line of’ the walls, not the walls themselves.

The

use of episodes as giving an element of variety in the Epic

An

noted again in 24, 14591*30.

is

of

Homer’s episodes survives

20 R.

ovTwi

:

evprj^dv(t>'i ''Op.yjpo?

Tas

tcTopfas ETTEio'oStd^Ei Tp TTOojo'Et Kal

Twv

acf>r]YQ(rc(i}v,

OVK i^ova-Tjs ii Kal

hirdp/T-qv

and

on

II.

3.

on Od.

I.

230,

409,

p.

toD vvv Kaipov

c^co te [? e^oj^ev]

Tttts /AE^oSois

in the Schol.

aVTTJV KaTaiTOLKlXXet

284:

tijs ’OSvcrcreias

irotKiXiav iKavrjv tov TrjXepa^^ov e^eA^eiv

atn-iys

HvXov

echo of Aristotle’s approval

in Eustathius

ottojs

ttoiei,

dv rdiv ’IXtaKwv iv

eis

TrapE/c/Jdo'EO't

TToAAd Xe)(0ei7] Bid te tov NscrTopos Kal tov Mei/eAcIov (comp. the

second Schol. ad pd)(ov] pt]

loc.

{nroOecriv

:

TTETTOtTy/cEV o TTOtT/T^s

avT^v

TTOLKiXias

rrjv aTroBrjpiav TrjXe-

[scil.

Xoywv Kal E^aAAtty^s

iBetvv, iva

povoTpowo’i y Trjs Tro/rjcTEius 6 Tporros). ircpl iva iroioCo-i kte. i. e. they write just like chroniclers :

^

23) or biographers (comp. 8, 1451

epics,

but

however, there

it is

is,

21).

says Aristotle, a certain Unify^'Of story;

not of the right kind (comp.

8,

1451

S'

oiav Xiyopev), as the action there consists of {TroXvpeprj),

work.

not

28

Trepl

piav Trpdiiv

a plurality of parts

each of them easily detached from the rest of the

The consequence

is

that several tragedies

out of a single epic of this type

does

(comp.

In some of the inferior

supply materials

for

;

whereas the

may

Iliad or

be

made

Odyssey

more than one or two. X 2

This

37

—

)

;

COMMENTARY

308 1459 ^ 37 emphatic and of its

mony

assertion of the Unity of action in affinity in this respect

Tragedy,

to

is

said to be a TroXvfj.v 6ov

epic,

not quite in har-

with what we read elsewhere in the Poetics.

the story of the Iliad

Homeric

the is

In

1 8,

a-va-TrjfjLa,

1

456 ”13 one with

and therefore incapable of being successAnd in 26, 1462^^8 we are expressly told that the action in the Iliad and Odyssey is made up of several actions (« TrXetoviov irpd^eiuv) and of many parts {^x^i a plurality of stories in

iroXXa TOiavra

assumed

in Other words,

p-eprj)

TT/aafts TroXvpeprj<;,

and not SO Unlike

= Trepi

piav irpa^iv (comp.

6 Ta Kuirpia ironiaas

ian

KuTrpia cTred

=

The book

*548).

and

(3. 26, 7

quote from

3

’iXidSos,

4

T]

8,

117

451

1

28).

on

^iqXoi

ovk ’Op-^pov

Athenaeus 334 B Sracrtvos ^ dcrris

rj

to.

6 rd KuTrpia

Sry

Trore ^atpet

p. .279

i

(comp. Wilamowitz,

Phil.

7 p. 337).

piKpav ’iXidSa

TT)i'

109

is

the ancient ideas as to the authorship of the

KvTTpia see Welcker, Ep. Cycl.

Untersuch.

2.

.

KdTrpids rts ecrrtv

For

ovopa^opevos.

Herodotus

:

dAA’ dXXov nvos

TTOti^o'as tTTTy, etVe

2

conceived to be a pia

is

it

that of the inferior epics as

in the present passage.

[iiav TTpa^iv

1

it,

dramatized in one single tragedy.

fully

6

10. 26, 2)

a

(comp. Bon. Ind.

piKpav ’lAidSa

TYjv

treated as anonj

and by

mous even by Pausanias

several of the

(comp. Wilamowitz

it ‘

is

l.c.

poem like the Iliad The reference

’

8uo pdrai.

on

(see

here

grammarians who

341).

p.

4,

1448

^ 38). ,

apparently rather to the

is

i

Odyssey with its SnrXrj avaraa-ig (13, 1453'^ 3 i)i t^e double story would supply a subject for two tragedies, one dealing more especially with the fortunes of Ulysses, and the other with those of the

j

Suitors.

cK 8e

Kuirpi'a)>'

Welcker, Gr. Trag.

•n’oXXat.

on

of the plays supposed to be based

p.

873, gives a

list ,

An

stories in the Kv-n-pca.

1

C

abstract

of the

(Kinkel,

EGF.

Tijs

poem

survives

Chrestomathy of Proclus

in the

|

f

i

’

p. 16).

piKpas ’lXid8os

irXe'ov oktio.

The names

in Aristotle’s

list

of |

possible tragedies are sufficient indication of .the ground covered

by the MiKpd

’lAtds as

he knew

it ;

it

have taken up the story of the war

is

clear that the

at the

poem

i

must

i

death of Achilles, and

;

:;3

carried

Troy. last

down to the departure of the Greeks after the sack of The Fragments also show that it must have included the

it

scenes

difficulty

of the war and the division

may

perhaps be

Proclus (Kinkel

1.

c.

p.

felt

from the

of the spoils.

Some

fact that the abstract in

;

36) makes the Little Iliad end somewhat-^

I

23

-

1459 ^ 37—1459

6

309

Wooden Horse within the walls, 1459 and that, to complete the record of the war, he subjoins an abstract of what he regards as a distinct poem, an ’lAiov Trcpo-is sometimes In all probability this ’IXiov Trepcrts was ascribed to Arctinus. only the concluding part of the Little Iliad under another name abruptly with the admission of the

(comp. Wilamowitz 1 c. p. 350). Kpicri? Proclus 1. C. y twv ottXcov Kpicris yiverat Kai oirXcoi' ’OSt'crcrevs Kara jBovXycriv ’AGyvas kafjL^dvei, Aias S ifJLfji.avr]<; yevoptevos .

:

Besides the

ryv re Xeiav twv ’A^aiiov Xv/xaiVerat Kal iavroy draipet. existing

Ajax of Sophocles, there was a

by Aeschylus

ottAcov Kpto-is

(Nauck, TGF.® p. 57), based presumably on

5

this section

of the

Little Iliad. 4iXoKTijTif)S

:

Proclus

1 .

yuera raijra OSva-crei'S Ao;^7jcras '^EAcvov

C.

Xapl^dveL, KOL )(py
’AXeidvSpw title still

1.

968

c. p.

Welcker,. Kl. Schr. 4, p. 180)

;

Ski'pov dyayldv

to,

:

Proclus

oTrAa

Ei’pvTri'Aos

Kal

dpicrTevovra

Trapayiverai,

NeoTTroAepos

is

mentioned

1

.

Se 6

and we

NeoTTroAepiov ’OSucraevs irarpos'

Kal ’A^tAAei’S

TyXecfiov iiriKovpos rots

avrov

in Suidas’

c. /cat

ra tov

StStocrt

avT
(v.

;

have the Philoctetes of Sophocles.

NeoTrTdXepos, EupuTruXos i<

tovtov AiopiySys €k Aypivov

Several lost plays are recorded as bearing this

KT€i'i'€i.

(Nauck

dAoj(Tea)S

Trj<;

laOeis Se ovtos vtto Ma;^dovos Kal p.ovop.a^yo'as

^iXoKTrjTrjv dvdyet-

diroKTUvei

list

Tptocrt

NeoTrroAeptos.

A

of the plays of Nicomachus

p. 1015, and Kayser, Hist. Trag. Gr. p. 316). no record of Eipti/rvAos as the title of a tragedy. itTbiyela, AaKawai Proclus C. ’OSvo-o-evs re atKtcrdpievos iavTov

Welcker, Gr. Trag.

There

is

1

:

.

Kardtr/co^os et? lAiov TrapayiVerat Kal dvayvu>pia'6els ttJ?

EAevr/s Trepl

vcji

dAtocetos T^S TToAetus (rvvTiOeTai, /cretVas re Ttva? rtov Tpcocov

Kal pterd ravra

Tas vat'S defiiKveiTau eKKop-L^ei CK

T^s TAtov.

guise of a beggar

is

The

(riv Aiop-ySei

Story of Ulysses entering

briefly told in

Od.

4.

247 dAAo)

Ko.TaKpvmuiv yicrKe 8eKTrj, os ovSev

TOio<;

iKeXo? KareSv Tpcotov TrdAtv Kre.

and referred

503 ySy

8’

dyvprrjs TrTuy^LKyy

j

e)(uiy

eyv

eirl

eirl

to HaXXdSiov

Troy

8’

in the

aurdv

///tort

vyvalv A^aid>y. to in Eurip.

rip

Rhes.

crroXyy elcrrjXOe Trvpyovi (comp.

There is no tradition of TrTwxeia as the title of a tragedy. Ad/catvat was the name of a play of Sophocles (Nauck, TGF.^ p. 210), turning apparently on the carrying off of the Palladium, with which Helen seems to have been associated in some form of the legend (v. Roscher's Lexicon i, 1944); the title was no doubt taken from the chorus of Laconian women, whom we may suppose to have been brought in as Helen’s Plautus Bacch. 936).

handmaids.

6

4

— '

COMMENTARY

310 1459'’ 6

’iXiou Tre'pais

one play certainly

:

the ’IXtbv

title,

UoXv^fvr) attributed to

Cleophon (comp, Meineke, b

may

diroirXous

7

mentioned as having

is

this

There was also a Ilepo-is rj Nicomachus, and a Ilepcrts attributed to

of lophon.

Trepa-ts

Hist.

Com.

Gr. p. 497). title of a play, but

very well have been the

come down

was, no record has

to

us of one so named.

if

it

The

closing scene of the war, the division of the spoils and the

fate

of the Trojan captives, was naturally fitted for Tragedy, as one

may

from the abstract

see

IXiov

TTepcris

:

Tov Tov A^tXXeojs

cTTi

'SeoTTToXefjLOS fr. 1

8]-

AWpav

Kai

in Proclus of the final section of the

eTretra eyaTrprycravTCS rrjv ttoXiv

’Av8poiJLd)(^v

TO. XoLirh.

yepa's

Xap-f^dvii

[comp.

MtKpd

pS' iavrwv [comp.

’lA.

’AKapas

Ar;/i,o<^wv Se Kal

Xd(f>vpa Siave/xovrai.

f.vpovTi'i dyovcrt

UoXv^eViyv cr^aytd^ovo'ii'

Kal 08vcro-«a)S 'Aa-rvdvaKTa dveXdvTos

Td(f>ov,

MiKpo. ’IA.fr. 17].

tirtna

Welcker (Gr. Trag. p. 179 ) suggests may possibly have been an alternative title for the

aTTOTrXeova-iv 01 '’EAAi^ves.

that aTTOTrAovs

Polj'xena of Sophocles (Nauck, as

we know from Strabo

(10,

TGF.®

p.

245), the scene of which,

470 2o(^okA^s

Troojo-as

tov MeveAaov

was placed at the time of the departure of the Greek host. Whether we accept this suggestion or not, it seems pretty clear from the position of the title in Aristotle’s list that the dTroTrAovs must have related to the concluding act of the war, and not (as Vahlen thinks) to the withdrawal of the Greek fleet to Tenedos before the treachery of Sinon. Kal Iivuv Kal TpudSes. Having thus run over the eight sections of the MiKpd ’lAtds and mentioned a tragedy, actual or possible, in connexion with each, Aristotle appends two additional names to show how easily the list might be enlarged. The first is a Stvwv CK r^s Tpotas aTraipeiv (TTrevSovTa ev

the

name

of a play of Sophocles (Nauck,

second a TpwdScs— the name of a

A

Trj TloXv^evrj),

still

TGF.“

p.

251);

^

,

the

extant play of Euripides.

Stvwv proves the possibility of more than one tragedy on the

poem and a TpiodSes proves the same of One can hardly doubt that Aristotle means the

seventh section of the the

eighth.

existing play of Euripides, the scene of which

is

placed at the time

of the aTroTrXov? or departure from Troy (comp. Troad. 18 8c xpvcrds

‘

;

^pvyid tc (TKvXevpara

;

ttoAvs

Trpos vaSs A)(aiwv 7rcp,7rcTai' pevovaL

8c TrpvpvrjOev ovpov, dis 8cKacr7rdpa)

xpovw

dAd;)^ovs tc /cal tc/cv elcrLSu)-

|e

criv dcr/ACVOt).

en

8c

Toi

I

eiSi)

ktc.

As

a further point of resemblance Aristotle

observes that epic poetry divides into the same species as Tragedy;

and he

illustrates this in

14 by noting the difference between

the

!

Iliad

311

This statement about the four species

and Odyssey.

quite consistent with there

n

6—24. 1459

“

23- 1459

that in

’

the parallelism

The

not 1459

1455

was no such thing as a by recognizing the ‘

is

32 (where see note); as spectacular epic, Aristotle makes out 18,

aTrkrj

a distinct

as

i-n-oTroua

yap 1455 ^32 (where see note); we have to admit that Aristotle has been carried away for the moment by his desire to find coincidences and correspondences. must necessarily have in the nature of things has Set exciv, species of epic.

iXix^rj in

pepr}

/cat Ttt

here

difficulty

‘

‘

1450®' 13);

t)i2 (comp. 6,

d-irXiii',

in roa-avra

8

stands in a certain antithesis to Kexprjrai in

involves

possibilities

that

1 8,

‘

or

is like

and they are

;

epic poetry has in

all

Set is easily

scil. Set etvat.

these various

it

Homer.

to be seen in actual use in

supplied from what precedes,

9

and in Rhet. (where e/cSo comp. Bon. Ind. vat=Set e/cSowai: 1414^26 3, 14, 146 50). The ellipse of etvat may perhaps seem more difficult to

just as

it is

in 15,

1454

(where Trot€tv=Set

’^13

Trotetv),

55

explain

;

it

is,

however, occasionally found in Aristotle not only

(comp. 23, 1460 b 34, and Bon. Ind. 239 16), but also in other constructions, as Vahlen shows in his note on this passage. after Set

A 7

very strong instance of the omission of cTvat 14,

.

1133^2

pev yap aTrAto? KaKov,

r)

17

that in Eth.

is

Se to/ nrj

N.

e/XTToStcTTt/cr;

[scil. etvat].

This has been assumed from the

Kal rd peprj ktL

1449^16), and avails

first

(see 3,

no demonstration. Aristotle, however, himself of the opportunity to add that a good epic, just as needs

much

as a tragedy, requires not only a story but also a powerful

story,

one with elements of surprise and suffering

the language

and thought

Tragedy. After

this,

it

demand

also

the

in it and that same care as in ;

reverting to the four pip-q indicated in

reminds us that they are (ots a.Traa'iv

in

all

to

be found

"Oprjpo? Kexp'qrai, ^12):

(i) as regards the

Iliad is a story of suffering {vaOrjriKov),

10,

he

Homer

in perfection in

pv 6 o
and the Odyssey a story

of

surprises {ve-n-Xeypevov); (2) as regards the element of ^ 6 o<;, the Odyssey is full of character [rjOLK-q); while as regards (3) the Ae^ts

and

(4) the Stdvota,

Homer’s two poems confessedly surpass every-

thing of the kind in these matters. Kal the

yap

ircpiireTeiwr Set

complex tragedy (comp.

Kal dvayvo/picreui', as 10,

1432

Iti rds Stavoias Kal ttjv Xe|iv exeiv

afterthought (cn) that a story, but also effective

16

;

KaXws.

13,

is

the case with

1432

'’31).

Aristotle adds as

good epic requires not only an language.

In the speeches

lO

in

an

effective

an epic the

ii

’

7

—

COMMENTARY

312 1459

II

—

‘

same rhetorical art is wanted as in a play (ras Siavotas ex^iv Ka\m); and the diction, both in the speeches and elsewhere (comp. 24, 1460 b 3),. demands the same care and elaboration (t^v Xeitv exw It may perhaps be thought that Aristotle was logically /caAws). bound to recognize the element of y0o9 also, so as to remind us in some way or other of the rules laid down in chap. 15 as equally applicable to the yOy in a good epic. To supply the supposed omission Bursian wished to restore in the text In (ra y9y Kal) KaXw^. The difficulty arises from a Kal ryv Xi^iv misconception of the clause beginning Kal yap -n-epiireTumv Set Kal

TOLs Siavoiag

four ptepy

of the

needed demonstration (see the clause

is

which is taken as a proof of the an epic— a point which hardly

Kal va9yp,aru>v,

avayvwptcreoiv

existence

make

to

iraOyrtKy eiroTroua, as

in

1449

5,

The

16).

us see the possibility of a

assumed

in

A

9.

purpose of

real

-n-e-n-Xeypevy

and a

similar explanation of

is not equally necessary (see on 18, 1455^^ 34); and if it were, it would require a fuller statement than is supplied by Bursian’s insertion. For the combination of adj. and adv. comp. TTpwTos Kttl iKarus. 13 Eth. N. 8. I, 1155 8 paXicrra Kal 24, 1460®' 9 oXtya Kal oAiyd/rts. Hippocrates I p. 557 K* dAtyawg Kal atrOevea e-n-aiveTtuTaTy

the yOiKy eiTOTToua

—

.

.

Isocrates 36 D eKovrag Kal Kal yap Kal twi'

Trpo^ti/xcos.

iroiii]|j.dT(oi'

iKaTepoK

:

a reminiscence perhaps of

Plato Hipp. min. 363 b eKarepov yap tSv voiyparwv to pev eZs It will be observed ’OSvtraea ey TreTrotycrOaL to 8’ el% A^tAAca.

one poem

that Aristotle does not find every perfection in

view the Iliad yOtKov,

is

and the Odyssey

especially iraByrtKov.

15

dvayvoSpicris

;

in his

TradyrtKov, without being ire-n-Xeypevov or especially

yap

Kal

8i6\ou.

a Menelao, ab Helena.

and

TreirXeypevov

yOiKov, without being

yap Kai= etenim

’.

et

‘Agnoscitur Telemachus ab Nestore,

Agnoscitur Ulysses a Cyclope, a Phaeaci-

bus, ab Euryclea, a subulcis, a

Telemacho, a

procis, a Penelope,

denique a patre’ (Hermann). -f)

0 iKi)

peterOut

Tov

a characteristic noted by Longinus

:

Odyssey

to

have been the work of Homer’s

ra Kara ryv GSvcrcetav,

TrdOovg

eKXverat,

iv rots

peydXots

roiavra ydp ttov

ottcos

y

to, Trepl

the change of gender [-n-aByTiKov

y

S’

Tois av9ptoTroi%.

yvoiptpov

ervyypa^evcrt

ryv tov

jBioXoyovpeva oiKiav, olovel KmpwSta Tts

1121^13

trot

.

.

dveXevBepia avtaTos t

.

Kal

:

d)S

Troit^Tais

Trpoo-io-To-

y aTraKpy eis

yOo'S

OSvco'ltos yOiKws avrlo

Icttiv

yOoXoyovpevy.

comp. Eth. N.

yOiKy) iarlv

15 as showing the

9.

later years

.

,

.

For 4.

3,

Kal crvp(f>vea'Tepov

irpos

ktL

tou'tois

Y“P

struction (comp.

now

Aristotle

14

We

two Homeric poems.

should expect here Kal

to correspond with the preceding

clause

passes on from the con- 1459 execution of the

(rvvearrjKev) to the literary

twv

Kai

trpo^ tovtois ktI.,

The

ktL

irot-qp-aTtav

apparently a reason for something which, though unsaid,

is

—

was present in Aristotle’s mind something like /cat SXXa txei aya 6 d. Another instance of the same type is in 24, 1460^4 (comp. Bon. Ind. 146

is

and Waitz, Org.

2 p. 470). graphic vigour of Homer’s metaphors, for instance,

15,

The

Xe'lei.

recognized in Rhet. KOI

refers

Siai'oi'a

3. ii,

more

Homer.

speeches in

Cicero says of him that he (Brutus

ac plane orator

dicendo

eulogizes his mastery over jrdiTa uirepPepXrjKet'

assumed) but eKarepov in

‘

:

40); Quintilian the arts of rhetoric.

all

the subject

poems

these two

There

14.

1411 ^ 31.

especially to the rhetorical skill in the

is

’,

is

‘Homer’

not

oniaiiis in

is

also

(as

is

understood from twv

no need,

(10.

46)

generally

TTOLrjfj.d.Tw

therefore, to restore -n-dvras

(from sundry apographs), or to take Travra as practically equivalent to Trdvras. 8ia(^ep€i

comp,

;

aucrraaews,

II. 5, 1449 twv Trpay/idrwv.

scil.

The epic Story must be evo-vvotttos * 3and not of a length which would make it the mind to take it in in its entirety; it must be

6 etprjpevos, in 7,

(comp. 23, 1459 impossible for

1431

a whole but not too long a whole. will

be

'’19

‘'^33),

fulfilled {eirj 8’

dv toito),

if

This condition, Aristotle adds, one’s epic

is

of about the length

and thus considerably shorter than the Iliad and Here again he shows himself mindful of the practical Odyssey. purpose of his treatise; he evidently thinks that an epic on the old Homeric scale of length would prove too great a strain on of a trilogy,

the

memory and

attention of the literary public of his

Apollonius Rhodius

when he €*r]

8’

may

have been

own

time.

mindful of Aristotle’s view

limited his Argonautica to four Books. fi,v

TOUTO

rds dvay/catas

:

Top.

8. l,

[scil. TTpordcrets]

TLva (TvXXoyl^oiTo

156 9 elt] S’ dv toito, ei tis p-rj povov dAAd Kal twv Trpds ravras xprjaipwv

(comp, also An. post.

2. 13,

97

b

33

;

Rhet.

20

3. 8,

1408 b 31). irpos

8e

tragoedias

TO

una

interpretatio

irXT)0os

trilogia

ktL comprehensas

TpaYw8iwv

‘

Res

unius

poetae

postulat.

Haec

ipsa

intelligi

quum mensurarum aptam comparationem

turn alia etiam ralione

continet,

ad epicae poeseos naluram accommodata

21

COMMENTARY

314 1459

^

21

Eo

est.

enim

facilius

potuerunt, quod his

unius

tres

trilogiis

poetae

tragoediae

coniungi

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.

TO

25

em

Ttjs

An

ktI.

o’K'tji'Tis

indirect recognition of the Unity of

Place as a fact in normal Greek Tragedy. story, that

Only one part of

the

immediately connected with one single place (repre-

sented by the stage) and one set of persons (represented by the

can be

actors),

whereas an epic may include ; and the same time in other places and

a play

in

told

incidents occurring at one in

27

connexion with other personages. ecTi iroXXa

.

.

oyKos

28

7repaiv’ 6 |ji€m

afia woieii'

corresponds with

8 ta to

ktL in ^23.

= weight,

as suggestive of dignity or importance (comp, on

A little further on (^ 35) the adj. 6yK 8rj^ applied to the hexameter, as a weighty or impressive metre. In

lj.eye$o<;,

is

ftepr)

ivSfxecrOal

fi.y]

,

4,

Rhet. 3.6,

1449*^ 19).

1407^26

a discussion on

Aristotle

weightiness

‘

’

—without

kind of language which produces that

ware tout ex^i to dyaOoi' length gives the Epic

its

grandeur of

and

scale,

bracket the article before in Rhet. 2. 20,

The

ktL

over Tragedy

twofold,

(2) greater

is

variety

of

incident.

evpeLV opLOta yeyevy)p.eva )(a\eTr 6 v, Xoyous 8e paov.

dya&ov to

we

If

dyaOov tovto, otl irpayixara

sense of ‘an advantage’ occurs in Rhet. e^et

advantage

(i) greater

dya 66v becomes a quasi-predicate,

2 /cal ’ixovcriv

1394

—has

effect.

cis iieyaXoirpiireiai'

it,

term

defining the

of style (oyKos t^s Xe^ews) and the

i. 2,

dyaffov in the

1356

18 cKixTepor

For the preposition comp.

eiSos t^s pr]TopLKrj<;.

Plato Rep. 462 A TO p.iyL(TTov dyaOov ...

els TroXea/s KaTacrKivrjV

Xenophon

p.rj

Cyr.

2. i.

TO p.eTajBdXXeii'

29 by

eVeto-oStouv, is

or

mood

953

^

in

hearer, as

the

it

is

d)s /xeTttySdXXct

jtxeTa/?dXXo/xev

rhythms and

—

‘

to produce a

for

change of mind

instance in Probl. 30.

i,

TravToSaTTOus aTrepyd^eTat [scil. 6 oTros],

airs]

The

tous TrtvovTas.

the use of the verb in Pol. 8. 5,

tive),

.

rapaTTea-Oai.

/xeTa/JdXXetv. p-erafSaWeLV, being followed

probably transitive,

39

Oeoypwv

by

'

27 dyaOov ... eh to

= els to

as

fxkv

rrjv

—which

xl/v)(rjv

is

1340

sense

may

22 (where

be it

dKpowp.evoL toiovtcov

explained by what follows

dpp.ovidyv diecmqKe civets werTe d/couovTas

avrov e^eiv rponov

a'

Trpos eKacrTtjv

avTwv,

illustrated

is

intransi-

[i. e.

(a

certain

40), rjrtav

dXXws SiarWeaOai Kal

p-rj

rov

2

24. 1459 ” 21-36 eireiaoStoui', scil. rrjv iroirjo-iv;

1455

17.

comp.

23,

3^5 1459

and note on 1459'’ 30

“

'’I-

The

di'ofioi'ois eireiffiSiois.

episodes supply an element of variety

breaking the monotony of the story,

dvofioiots

means

dissimilar

‘

‘unlike one another’, as in the formula ttoAXo, Kal dvd/^oia in

dvofioiov TO

8’

el

12 (comp. Plato Tim. 83

523

4. I,

dvofioiiov

TO

ol

and

TOTTOl.

The

ktI.

I.

II,

Ka6e
De

also Cicero oporlebii ;

Inv.

dTreSoKipdcrOrj

The

telian little

explained in

(v.

7rot€t

t^s

Comp, magno opei'e

said to have

is

same way

become

32

=>24).

(see

;

8id Trjs Treipas avTrjs, /SeXriov Svva-

koj,

to pr} irpos dperyjv (rvvTeLvov,

editors prefer the reading of sundry apographs,

There

-

yap yiverau

VTrepj3oXr]v

1449 4, 37 experience is said to have led to as part of a liberal education va-repov 8’

is

no reason, however, why

SnjyrjriKr] piprjcns,

word

del

is

els (fivcriv

the form which appears in the context,

hi-qy-qpariKrjv,

7

the

avATjcrts]

[scil.

8iT)YT]TiKTH'.

r/Sv'

The iambic

in

pevutv Kpiveiv to irpos dperrjv

1

5

1341

the rejection of the flute

1459“

19

77

hi rebus similiiudo est saiietaiis mater.

Tragedy

in

Similarly in Pol. 8. 6,

23,

1

4,

Variare aule7n oraiionem

41

i.

OTTO Tfjs irei'pas '^ppoKep'.

not say

3.

oOev etprjraL “ pera^oX^ TrdvToJv yXvKv

nam omnibus

established

Pol.

necessity of change

1371 ‘’25: TO fiera^dWeiv pera^dXXeLV to yap avTO [= to o/aoiov] Rhet.

H. A.

in Phys. 3. 5, 205=1

7roA(5.

7]

opoioi/

Y“P

dvOflOlOL KoX

TTtXV,

c),

Eth. N.

as SirjyrjriKos

3. 13,

is

1117 ^34).

36,

and

33

in

Aristotle should

certainly a

good

He shows

perhaps too

Aristo-

Thus we find him and a few lines further on and in the Rhetoric ^evos and

regard for uniformity in such matters.

speaking in 1^34 of

the

r/poiLKov,

(1460=13) of the rjpwov perpov, ievLKos are both used of language without perceptible difference of meaning

(v.

Bon. Ind. 493 comp. Pol.

o-TaffipwTaToi/

and

8.

7>

:

1342^13

OTaa-ipwTdrrjs

irepl

=>

24),

45,

13401' 9 (quoted on 1460=

8. 5,

8e t^s

BuipkttI

Y^p Kal * *

BirjyrjpaTiKr]

:

comp.

22,

8nr|YT]p.aTiKT) pipTjcns t&jv'

some such word

1

459

aXXwi'.

=>^9.

is

this,

that epic goes

beyond

already shown, in the matter of length, but also in the admission of

and perac^opat; the clause, therefore, as emended, comes enough to confirm the preceding statement, yXoWas

in naturally

35

Before "^36

other kinds of poetry (vepirTr] tSv dXXoiv) not only, as has been

yXolTTat

’’34

ws

as Tavrp or TavTais seems to have

dropped out; the point apparently all

i),

ovcrrjs.

yXoSTTas Kal p.€Ta(j)opas Se'xeTai p,d\iffTa irepiTTT]

dpoXoyovcriv

irdvres

— COMMENTARY

316 1459

3 ® xal

aliud

Vahlen acquiesces

Sep^erat /xaXicrTa.

iJi,€Ta(f>opa?

and explains

tional text,

thus

it

‘

:

non

the tradi-

in

recipit SirjyrjfiaTLKr]

/xi/xryo-ts

metrum quam heroicum nam heroicutn est metrum gravissiac ponderosum maxime, eximia autem eliam narrativa :

mum

prae

imitatio

ceteris’.

besides assuming

to the

p. 391),

Hiero

i.

seems to

It

-n-epiTTr]

justice to the Kat before

due

—

that

explanation,

this

for irepiTTrj Be, hardly does

Sir]yr]p.aTiKyj.

For the gen. twv aWwv,

17

comparative sense of

comp. Xenophon Cyr. irepLTTa Ttuv iKaywy

19

me

yap to stand

irepiTT-^ 8. 2.

Kiihner, Gr. Gr.®

(v.

Antiphon Tetral

.

2. i,

21 riov apKovvTwv irepiTTa 2. 4.

.

6 Trepiacrov

TOVTWV.

1460 ^

KiwrjTiKti,

I

to

be

as opposed to the hexameter, which has just been said

The

(TTa(TLp.wTarov.

1340 ^ 9

01 p.ev

yap

[scil.

antithesis

twv

pvOp.C}v^

is

that

like

rjOa e)(ov(n

KLvrjTLKOv, Kal TOVTtov ol /XEV ^o/DTiKojTfpas e)(ovcri

Pol. 8.

in

5,

crrao-t/xulrcpov ot 8e

ras Kiv^ereis

ol 8e

eXev6epL(i)Tepa<;.

on

see

1449 23. what Horace meant when speaking of the iambic as tialum rebus agendis (A. P. 82). The word has the same opxrjo'TiKoi'

:

This

TrpaKTiKoi'.

4,

is

sense in the classification of tunes in Pol.

twp

Biaipecrw a.TroBegop.eOa

Ta

p,ev rjOiKa

meaning of

ra Se irpaKTLKa

TrpaKTtKos in this

1459

34

:

see

wcrirep eiTTopei'

^5

auTT)

7,

1341'^ 32: t^v

For

kvOovcnacTTiKa Tiffevres. 4,

1449*'’'

airpeTre<;

the

23.

dv ^atVotro in

-

Xaipijpiut'

®4

to. 8’

connexion see on

on the idea of

€Ti 8 e dxoirojTepoi' carries '’

8.

pLeXi^v d)s 8taipovcrt Ttves tujv ev (jsiXocroejiM,

:

on

I,

1447

21.

in 4,

1449

“ 24.

= p.aKpa (rvarda-ei.

In 5, 1449^11 and 6, 14494)26 the narrative form was noted as one of differences between the Epic and Tragedy and it has been also assumed in this discussion on the Epic, in 23, 1459 Aristotle now passes on to this, but with17. out any formal introduction pr hint as to the connexion in his statement. His aim apparently is to show that, although narrative "Oprjpos.

(aTrayyeXia) ;

is

an element

Epic, that of

in every epic,

Homer

serious as might

;

so

it

is

reduced to a

that this

be supposed.

minimum

in the best

point of difference

The

is

not so

semi-dramatic character of

Homer’s mode of statement is directly or indirectly recognized 21, and in 4, 14484*37 (see note on the passage). 3, 1448

in

'''

In his reference to the practice of the ‘other poets’

{ol p-'ev

ow

—

7

36-1460

24- 1459

must be supposed

“ 8) Aristotle

tty\Aot,

recent epic writers, like Antimachus

^

13

mean

to

317 not only the more 1460 ® 5

‘

and Choerilus, but

immediate continuators of Homer, the Cyclic poets Lilt.

830).

I p.

o 8ei

also the

(Bergk, Gr.

’

7reipaT€ov

iirl

avrov

auTo>'.

TTOieli'

emphatic, as in Top.

is

8. 2,

157^29^5

irdvriov raiv tolovto)V ovo/xaTOTrot^tv a^'TO]^ —Pol. 8. 5,

1339 “42 ravra yap tl Sei p,av6dveiv avrovs dYun'i^oi'Tai see on 6, 1450 ^18. jujxouMTai see on i, 1447 16.

;

®

:

9

;

oXiya Kal oXiyciKis a~i'p./3 atveL.

oXiyaKis 7.

1151^30

II,

—

De

:

gen. an.

3. 5 j T 5 ^

^

r.

oXtyd/cts.

37

same kind see on

instances of other combinations of the

N. )-

For

Kal dXtyas.

(f)vecr6ai

kuI

—Eth.

Bon. Ind. 5 ^ 3

iv oXtyois Kal dXiydKLs (v.

Plato Rep. 491 B oXiyaKis iv avOpdiroL^

1459^

727^^28 oXtyats

19,

oXtya 8e Kal

1

24,

13-

eladyei

may be

a metaphor from the stage, as

:

Platonic use

of the word

1417^7 and

Lex.

it

seen from the ® 10

s. v.).

In Rhet. 3. 16,

denotes the

introduction of a

Ast,

1418*^32

17,

3.

(v.

person into a speech. 40os: see on 15, 1454" 23. ouSeV’ 0,1364 dXX’ exovTo 4613

^ii

an instance of parallelismus

;

theticus not unlike that in Plato Phaedr.

With e^ovTa

dXX’ txor'rfS cnrepp.a.

supplied (comp. Kiihner, Gr. Gr.® in

the

character

as

’,

an

of

plural

we

say,

2. 2 p.

characteristics

’.

Kal iv T(a eiSei d/AoXoyoSvra iKeivoLS 8ev

|xei'

ovv

p.iv

oui/.

540 with Tragedy

A

8 58).

marks a

.

•

‘

It rfj

’

‘

has the same sense in rjOr)

ivovra

KaWiarov

$eap.a.

'^orXd

d^vxV

tovt dv

eirj

new

transition to a

point (Bon.

fourth difference in epic poetry as great tolerance of dXoya;

its

is

.

4^4, as used here points traits of or

567).

means

Plato Rep. 402 D OTOV av ^vp-TrLiny] iv re

Ind.

aKap-n-oi.

the affirmative eKacrrov has to be

individual, ‘

277 a Kal ovxl

anti-

it

compared

can admit im-

probabilities which on the stage, where everything is actually seen, would ruin the success of a tragedy. This gives it a distinct advantage over Tragedy, as the improbable is an element in the marvellous (to Oavp-auTov), and the marvellous is a cause of It will be observed that pleasure is once pleasure to us (48^). ’

‘

‘

’

more posited as ev Tttls

1454^

the immediate end of poetry.

TpaywSiais

:

as has been

4-

TO OaufxaffToi'

TO dXoyot'

:

:

see

see

on

on

15,

9,

1452

1454

^ 6.

4.

assumed

in 9,

14523^4 and 14,

— COMMENTARY

318 TO

Sict

14

Toi

opat'

|ji,T)

ircpl

statement

the

1455

17,

8iw|i('

27.

explained by the participial clause

is

(comp. Bernhardy, Syntax

in apposition to

comp.

:

"EKTopos

TT)t'

in

ea

ovB’

205

22.

II.

iwl '^E/cropi

Upievac

p.

Aaotcriv

472); the reference is dv^tue KapT^an 8105

8’

iriKpa

Aristotle

(iiXip,va.

1460^26, where he suggests an explanation to save the credit of Homer. An echo of the criticism in the text survives in Schol. Yen. B on II. 22. 205, MeyaKAetSrjs [v. Schrader, Porphyr. Q. H. in II. p. 414] TrXaa-p.a eXvat iprjcn tovto reverts

TO

to

incident in

this

p.ovop.a)(Lov

a-n-eaTpecfiev

yap

TTois

rocravra^

pivptd8as

’A^iAAevs

vevp,aTi

;

TO 8 e 0 aupao’To>’ iqSu

17

25,

Rhet.

;

SidXeKTOV 9avp.a(TTa\ yap

A

8k TO 6avp.aa-r6v.

3. 2,

[scil. ot

reason

1404 ^ 10

given in Rhet.

is

TO p.av6dvcw Kal to Oavp.d^€LV

r]8v

8to 8ct ttouiv ^ivrjv rrjv

dv^pwTroi] TOiv dirovTiMV


ctti

i.

ii,

1371

to ttoXv' iv

t] 8

elcriv,

*•31

p-kv

v

Kal

:

yap

tuI

Oavpid^eiv to hri.6vp.div p.a6div 1 (jtlv, wcttc to 6avp.a p.av6dvuv eis to KaTo. (jivcnv KaOlcrTacrOai,

irpoaTiOeVTEs,

18

word

found

is

SeSiSaxet'

to

the

same absolute use of the

1461 30 (Trpoo-^rJ). Another of Homer’s merits

in 26,

ktI.

mastery of the

added

with additions’;

‘

make

artistic

lie

seem

it

— one

that

said

is

to

be

his

has something true super-

In illustration of this Aristotle

credible.

points to the story in Od. 19.

164-248; where Ulysses astutely (203-248), which Penelope knows to be

adds certain particulars true,

and which beguile her

story as

true.

into accepting

The connexion between

the

first

part of his

and the preceding is certainly far from

this

left unexplained, and it one may imagine the association of ideas in Aristotle’s mind, it may perhaps have been something like this, that TO Oavp.ao'Tov is a truth with a TTpoaOeais of falsehood, and

section

(‘^

11-18)

being obvious.

the

lie artistic {ij/ev8yi

truth

20

is

If

;

effTi

Xeyuv

so that the one

is

as

tbs

8 ei) a falsehood with a Trpocr^ecris of

were the converse of the other.

it

8 e TOUTO Trapakoyicrpos,

‘

i.

e.

the use of paralogism

’.

-rrapa-

on » 25) an ambiguous it term may mean either a fallacious argument (i/tev8^s a-vXXoyitr/xos) or a deception caused by such an argument [aTrdTT] Bid XoyL(rp. 6 s is like irapaXoyL^ea-Oai (v. infra ;

ij/eySov?

avXXoyicrpov )

this latter

present passage, where

The

distinction,

Aristotle himself. is

that

it

however,

The

an argument

is

comes is

being apparently in to explain

its

ij/ev8rj

sense in the Xeyeiv

probably clearer to us than

it

(bs 8€t.

was

to

general assumption in his logical writings

addressed to some one

—

to a hearer

who

1460

24.

^

14-25

319

has to be convinced or refuted; a fallacious argument

not only

is

fails

to see the fallacy in

1460^20

who

logically incorrect but also calculated to mislead the hearer it.

Y^P at'Opwiroi. The artifice depends for its success on a natural weakness of the human intellect, our readiness to infer the presence of the thing from the presence of a sign of it, or oiot'Ttti

’

‘

The

the truth of the antecedent from the truth of the consequent. ‘fallacia

consequentis

167 ^

6 Se Trapa to

I

:

considered at

peXi viriXafiov Std to €Tr€
y^v vaavTos

(rqp.tZov aTroSef^ets tK

tw

)(p(i}p.a

5,

rj,

Kal rovSe

yap

rrjv

ti]v X'^Xrjv

p-eXiTf Kal ewel

t(L

kolv

y

8idj3poxp<;,

tv Tt rots prjTopLKOLS al

eirop.tvoyv

tXa^ov

el.

o$ev Kal at Trepl

yivea-OaL Sid/3po)(ov,

Sei^ai OTi p.0L)(0s, TO iirop-evov

Soph.

ocecrffai dvTi(rTpecf>eLv

ttgAAcikis

vTToXap.^dvop.ev vcrar to 8’ ovk dvayKaiov,

Kara to

in

dvdyKrjs toSI

dvdyK-qs'

awdrai ylvovrau

alcrOijcrems

crvpjiaivu TTjv

length

eXey^os Sia to

€ 7rd/xevov

Odrepov eivai

dvTOS OLOvraL Kal ttjs

is

orav yap rovSe wros

rrjv dKoXov6r](riv.

S6$ay eK

’

^ovX6p.evoL yap

tlaiv.

otl /caAAojTTtcTT'^S

17

vvKTmp

oti

ttoAAois Se TavTa p.tv VTrdp^^ei, to Se KaTr/yopov-

opaTai vXavd>p.evo
pevov ovx wdpxei.

It is

1392 ^

recognized as one of the arts of rhetoric

and more fully in 2. 24, 1401 9, 20. seems to be required here comp, the parallels in i, 1447 13; Phys. 4. 6, 213^23, 27; Metaph. A 2, Rhet. i. i, 1355 15, and 3. 2, 1404 9. 982 1 12 touto 8e eoTt 4^u8os. tovto has been taken to refer to to irpoTtpov, ^ 22 the antecedent, which, though not true, we imagine to be true. But false it probably refers rather to the mode of argument, which is in

Rhet.

2. 19,

16,

dvOptairoL or (01) dvOpwirot

;

®'

;

‘

i.e.

logically incorrect;

Rhet.

1400

2. 23,

comp. An.

pr. i. 17,

37 “

2

;

i.

= irpoTtpov.

ii9®'22.

irpoo-Setmi,

scil.

28

;

2.

Vahlen illustrates this from Top. For instances in other writers see Sauppe’s Xenophont. p. 112 and HSt. s. v. TtpSiTov

’,

46, 52

tovto tw

i/^evSct,

i.

e.

to provide

the

3.

5,^23

Lexil.

lie

with ^ 24

a Trpdo-^eorts of truth, in order to beguile the hearer into accepting it

as true. •n-apaAoYil^eTai

to

draw the

iqp.wi'

4

>|/ux4

false inference,

:

i.

e.

we on our

side are quite ready

which a lie of this kind is calculated noteworthy diversity of senses

suggest.

TrapaXoyi^tcrOat has a

Aristotle,

sometimes meaning to draw a

false inference,

(with an acc. pers.) to deceive or beguile by a fallacy,

to in

sometimes and some-

times (as a passive) to be so deceived or beguiled (comp. Bon. Ind.

565

a ii);

and

it

is

not always easy to see the sense intended.

In

^ 25

;

COMMENTARY

320 1460 ^ 25

word must have the first of these three on the pronoun in 7] ^vxq points to we ourselves are supposed to do we on our side,

the present passage the

senses, as the emphasis

something that

knowing the

:

truth of the consequent (8ta to tovto elBevai akyjOh 6 v),

owing

are ready enough,

to a natural

infirmity of the

mind, to infer the truth of the antecedent;

26

human

what the

is

deceiver wants us to do.

skilful

^

which

irapaSciyiJia 8e touto ck Twt' NiiTTpwv is a

note more

fitted for

the

rough draft of a lecture than for a book (see on 15, 1454 ^ 14 and The quotation or explanation is left to be sup22, 1458^30). plied afterwards. How it might have come in may be seen from the parallels in Rhet.

ToS

©eoSArov

(l)v

rj

ttoAis

TO CK T^s

TSKvwv

2.

vop,t^€t

”

;

i399

^ 7 TrapdSeiy/xa €« toC StoKparovs

and Rhet.

on fiaWov

AvTiyovrj';,

TO. jxev

23,

“eis ttolov lepbv ^cre^rjKev

yap ay yevecrOai

rrarpos ^e/SrjKoroiV ovk

19.

Penelope was the victim of a

“

p.rjTpo'i

8’

fallacia

on

(see

16,

consequentis

TerifJirjKev

TrapdSeiypta rj

dvSpds ^

ev ” Kl^ov Kal

ocrns dv ^kdaroi, rrore

164-260 ‘

1417”' 29

too dSeA^ou eKrjSero

arrokojjifva,

Ictt’ aSeX(f>bs

Od.

in Tuy Niirrpui':

rtVas OeC>v ov

16,

3.

”,

1454630). as her only

reason for accepting Ulysses’ statement in 164-200 as true was her recognition of the truth of that in 220-248. 'irpoaipeiaOai Te Set kt€.

and

its

Aristotle returns to to dkoyov (“ 13—17)

The

general inadmissibility in the Drama.

*130-32 show him to be

now

illustrations in

thinking only of Tragedy; the rule

down is a restatement of one already formulated and the distinction between €^<0 (15, 145466);

here laid

Tragedy

jx.v&€v/jLaTos

and

no immediate

8 pdpt,an has

ey rio

for

tov

relation to the

technique of the Epic.

^27

According to

dSuVara eiKora ktL

9,

**'38

1451

story should be something that

the poetic

is

the subject of

possible as being

either probable or necessary, to. 8waTd. Kara to cIkos ^ to dyayKawy, In the present passage Aristotle considers two inferior kinds of

subject,

one that

and one

that

former,

he

is

is

cIkos without

says,

demands not so much Xdyous

**•

29,

on is

:

4,

i.

e.

truth

to the

The poetry

as a passable semblance of truth

embodied

tovs Adyovs, which

17).

is

in the play or

in

*‘

34 (comp.

6,

1450

**•

poem

the subject of ex^iv in

apparently the subject of a-vyia-TacrOai also.

though a middle

latter;

ii).

the jxvOoi or stories

1449

ctKora),

cIkos {Svyara arriffaya).

preferable

poetically

is

(comp. 25, 1461 6 (see

being 8uvaTov (d8waTa

Swotov without being

37),

a-wLo-Tacrdai,

must be a passive

— 1460

24.

^

25-34

321

1462 a 16 (see on same rule has already appeared in a slightly here, as

15.

certainly

it

Tou

p.u 06 u 4LaTOS

The

OiSi'iTous.

name

(see

in the

preceding

TO

see

:

article

on

on 4,1448^38).

a 3,*^ 10),

form

in

®

ex^c has to be supplied

the

29

from the

1455

®

19 ^ovXearOaL

names being understood from

In some instances, however (16, 1455^1,

the personages referred to are not indicated even in this

The

way.

fact of

Oedipus remaining

rance of the circumstances of the death of Laius

O. T.

but in Aristotle’s view

;

might seem, since play

The 1460® 27

9).

different

1453^32.

14,

Tr]v ’l
the titles of the plays.

in the

a

line.

means ^ovXccrOai

indirect

1447

seems to have dropped out before the ®30

ciSeVai, Scil.Tov OiSittow, just as in 16,

fAT)

i,

'’6.

1454

e^oi

in 26,

is

is

it

all

it

is

for years in igno-

an improbability

is

not so serious a fault as

it

and outside the

anterior to the action,

itself.

ev ’HXeKTpa

Sophocles

;

660

El.

The

sqq.

precise fault Aris- ^ 3 i

saw in the story is not quite clear ; as the stress, however, seems to be on to Ilv^ia, the probability is that it was the anachronism in the reference to the Pythian games ; the fault by the Scholiast on El. 682 (ovttw i-rrl ’Opearov is noted 6 UvOlko? dyu>v: comp. Schol. on El. 47,49), who may be assumed

totle

,

The

be reproducing a traditional criticism.

to

alternative

to

is

suppose the absurdity to consist in Clytaemnestra having to learn

an credibile est news for the first time from the TratSaywyos nullum Argivum hominem ludis interfuisse, qui spectare Orestae the

‘

:

exitium posset

;

cum

ex universa Graecia eo

fieret

concursus

’

?

(Robortello). iv Muo-ois:

probably in the Mvcrot of Aeschylus (Nauck, TGF.’‘®32

The personage

p. 47).

Muo-tav jjKwv

was

Tragedy (comp.

13,

described as a^covos

was an element of improbability in the later irpStTov

Comedy Amphis /cat St/cattos

—Alexis

fr.

aoi'io-TaaOat,

0^,

75^^ ^

8e

which seems

01], scil.

Tr]v

passed into a proverb

Kock

iKvi/^ev wa-n-ep T?jX€<^os

30, 6

Sen-vet

S’

a^o/vos

TijAec/zos,

elcrtv

vevwv

Tt.

to

have the same subject as

ToiovTov pvOov 6

25 suggests) TO dXoyov iv

POETICS

eis

in the play,

must be a middle here (see on

&»' I

Teyeas

tovto ye' diravres dv8po(f}6voi yap

178 K.

povov Trpos Tovs eTrepoiTtovTas

5

fr.

:

(TtoJTTTj

Xoyw.

tvl

e/c

no doubt Telephus, a favourite subject for 1453®' 21). His long-maintained silence, which

6rj

in dv Se ®

® 27). voiTjTTQ?,

Or perhaps (as Bon. Ind.

rf/ (Tva-Tdcrei

tov pvOov.

The Y

usual

34

'

COMMENTARY

322 1460

®

.

34 punctuation of

this

passage

is

uv Se

Ofj,

ku'l
evKoymripw^,

ivSexecrOai Kai aroTrov, wliich Tyrwhitt, with the old reading evAoyw-

repov before him, supposes to

mean

‘

sin constituat quis et rationi

consentaneum magis videatur, admittere etiam aliquid absurd! [jcf/. oportet]. Vahlen, who takes the same view, thinks that (comp. Bon. Ind. evXoyojTepcos may stand for evXoywrepws 306®' 16), that Set may be supplied with evSe^eo-^at from the context (^34), and also that ivS^x'^a-Oai may mean ‘admittere’,

With the amended punctuation

like Bix^crOai or aTroSe^ea-^at.

following will be the general

drift

declared a certain procedure to be a-Oai TotovTovs), Aristotle (fiaivrjTai

evAcytoreptos

of the passage

wrong

—

it

having

the just

(e| d/)x^s ov Set awto-ra-

adds that in a certain case

^Sexftr^at

:

—dv

Se Ofj koX

not only wrong but also

is

With eVSe'^co-^at we may supply Oiivai, from aToirov). comp. 25, 1461 34 TTOcraxdiS A'Sextrat (where a"qp.awciv is understood from the preceding Troo-axws dv crrip.aivoL), and An. pr. 1.15, 34*^34 vTvapxiTii) to A ;ravTt to) B, to Se B TravTt tw B For the use eySexea-Ou) (where ivBexeo'Oo) = evSexeV^w virapx'^w). of droTTov comp. De div. per somn. i, 462 ^ 20 to Te ydp Oiov etvat

absurd (Kat dv Se

Ofj]

Tov Trip-irovTa

[scil. to, evvTTVta], Trpds rfj

dAAij dAoyta, Kat to

j

p.r]

Tots j

PeXTLa-TOL<; Kat ^povt/xtovaTots

^35

on even when

dAAd

Tots roxovaL vepureiv aroTrov.

In Od. 13. 116 sqq. Ulysses

er ’OSuaaeia.

said to have slept

is

him ashore.

the Phaeacians were setting

Porphyry

1

15 Schrader) recognizes the difficulty in the story, and quotes the explanation of Heraclides Ponticus t^v twv ^aiaKwv

ad

loc. (p.

1

:

StvTrvdravTes ets t^v y^r

i

KoreOevTO, rov re OSucro'eoJS tov aKaipov vttvov BiaXveiy Tretptoyaevos

|

rov OBvcrcrea KaOevBovra

droTTiav, KaO'

pit]

6 novTtKOS HpaKAetST^s (pyjcnv dro-Trovg elvai rovs ii /XTJ

2

CTOxa^o/teVovs d<|)at'i^ei

Trept

upr)K(.v 0 Troti^Trys

toC TravTos rpoirov Ttov ^ataKtuv ktI.

see Bon. Ind. 127

:

'

(I)V

i.

The

sense

is

that the attractive-

1449

25) disguises the

,

j

ness of the accessories {rjBvvmv] see on

6,

inherent absurdity of the situation. ’’3

iv Tots

apyois pepeai.

The meaning

i'^

j*

•

of these words has been

supposed to be explained by what follows, Kat

pijre yOtKoi? pyre

comp. Goulston’s version of the clause, ‘in partibus i|ij fabulae ignavis, iis scilicet quae neque moratae sunt neque senten- fj The sense, however, may very well be, ‘ in tiis munitae ’. parts in which there is no movement, and no ethical or rhetorical r interest,’ i. e. in the purely descriptive parts. For the form of the jA; statement comp. Rhet. 3. 2, 1 404'-’ 2 cra^y raTravrjv pyre: Kat BiavorjTLKo 7s

;

:

.

VTrep TO d^ttopa.

.

.

| 1

<

it

^

1460

24-

Carrol,

‘

34—25. 1460

On

8e irpojSXTjfidTwt' Kri.

riepi i\I.

^

Aristotle’s Poetics

c.

the

8

323

matter in this chapter see 1460

Homeric

xxv. in the light of the

added as a sort of Appendix, in poem, when once before the world, criticism. A Problem was originally a

Scholia’ (Baltimore 1895).

It is

recognition of the fact that a

may

exposed

be

to

’

‘

question propounded

for

discussion,

whether in schools or in

The

such as Plato supposes in his dialogues.

social gatherings

examined and reduced to formula in the Topics; but Aristotle takes no account in the Topics of the particular kind of Problem with which he is now dealing, the literary or critical Problem. This kind of question turns on some difficulty in a poem, which an adverse critic will censure as a mistake. By an analysis of the postulates and conditions of poetry Aristotle is able to determine and classify not only

general

logic

of such discussions

the various possible

is

grounds of censure

(e7riTt/ir;o-ts),

but also the

by indicating the solution

various possible lines of defence,

or solutions applicable to each kind of objection.

(Avo-ts)

In illustrating

methods of defence he takes his instances mainly froin the Homeric poems. Homer had long been a mark for criticism. Every kind of defect had been discovered in his two poems, offences against morality, absurdities, contradictions and other faults of construction, and even errors of language the result being that Aristotle’s

the

;

contemporary Zoilus, the

Homeromastix

’,

(of considerable magnitude,

regular treatise r^s Tov 'OfjLrjpov

‘

Troiijo-eojs,

on the manifold

was able to write a it would seem) Kara

Homer.

faults in

The

on and an opponent of the kind of criticism represented by Zoilus. He is ready to meet the critics on their own ground with an answer of some sort or description for almost every difficulty they can start. The fragments of his airoprjfjLaTa ‘OprjpiKd, a systematic work on this subject (fr. 142178 Teubn.), exhibit the same tendency, and reveal him as a

position of Aristotle himself in this controversy

is

clear

:

he

is

the side of the apologists,

master of w8’

all

the arts of critical casuistry.

6ewpouai

dv (^avepov.

stances of this repetition of dv see

For Other Aristotelian

Bon. Ind. 41

in- ^ 7

® 60.

ydp eari Krk. Aristotle prepares us for the various kinds of by laying down a series of postulates, which may supply the lefence with arguments to meet the attacks of the critics. In he first place, he tells us, as the poet is an imitator in much the same errei

-^Avcreis

yay as a painter ricture (

i

of things

is

that,

may be

one must remember that

his imitation or

either of things as they are (or were), or

Y 2

8

’’

6

8

COMMENTARY

324 1460

of things as they should be. or of things as they are said or

supposed

Secondly, as an imitator in language, the poet

to be.

has by custom more liberty in the use of words than to a prose writer.

Thirdly,

description of a thing poetry, as a distinct right in poetry

is

is

if

questioned,

its

remembered

not the same thing as the right in other arts or

At

the

same

time, as the matter

and

into relation with other arts

it

however, against their rule of correctness

to

in certain cases

it

even admits of

conduce to the poetical ^(dYpd4)09

term

dXXos

Tis

T]

that

own, and that the

sciences, their

An

standard of correctness cannot be ignored in poetry.

and

allowed

is

correctness of his

to be

is

it

has a correctness of

art,

sciences, in politics for instance.

of poetry brings

technical

the

may

offence,

often be condoned

justification

24),

if it is

effect.

eiKoi'oiToids

:

on

see

2,

1448^5.

I he

comprises the sculptor as well as the painter

ctKovoTrotd?

;

seen

of

portraits.

*’10

oia

^1'

In chap.

eo-Tiv.

T]

2 Aristotle

was speaking of persons

In the present passage he uses the neuter

only.

order

in

The

include the poetic descriptions of things and acts.

to

order of

the words yv y ta-nv is intentional, stories of the past being regarded as the normal subjects of both epic poetry and Tragedy (see

on

1448®' 18).

2,

may be

It

observed that

in

1461®

'

2

^

Aristotle avails himself of the distinction implied in ola yv y ta-nv, and suggests that a certain incident, which had been criticized in

Homer, may have been probable enough Old


yy and

Homeric

SoKct, scil. elvai (which covers the

(tal

The

ea-Tiy).

in

ij

times.

ground of both

ij .

between the two things (old (fiaa-iv, between rd Aeyo'/iem

HfD

people usually say’, and ‘what people

l(i)a

difference

dc

oia SoKec), so far as there is one, is like that

and ra SoKovyra

— ‘what

usually think, or suppose’.

-•« ^

oia etyat Set: comp. ^34.

*’11

ktI Xe^ts is properly a generic term, X^iei y Kal Here, however, including the metaphor, the strange word, etc. Aristotle

adds

17

kuI yXioTrats

fact that these various

part of the poetic vocabulary. is

to

modify the sense of

just as in i,

1447

^

29

ktI, in order to remind us of the

unusual forms of expression are a recognized

(v.

Aeiei,

ad

The

moment

likewise

is

do),

•hntjj

practical effect of the addition

and make

it

stand for Kvpia

loc.) the addition of

y

to the sense of ‘prose’.

The

h

tol^ fiirpois

a reflex influence on the preceding word Xdyots, limiting the

nlififl/

(*p,J

generic W’ord

occasionally used in a context which gives

it

the

it

iiiij

hasfifiiiioile

for

a;

oiiisedj

dro/rol

inor(|;BiiFlialii

1460

25.

on

specific sense of Kvpiov ovo/xa (see

necessary, therefore,

to

restore

8-14

325

22,

1458

{Kvpia)

\iiei.

Kvpiay with Twining, or Xeiei

Xi^a

hardly

It is

28).

1460

with Heinsius, or

Kvpwis

with

ovop.ao'iv')

Vahlen. rfis

irdSyi

p.o'ov the

Xe'^ews

e.

i.

:

12

modifications seen in the eTreKrtra-

the

and the

v(f>rjprjp.ei'ov,

eirjXXayp.o'ov ovop.a (21, 1458®' i),

which, though substantially identical with the ordinary words (22,

them through some deviation this same sense by Theo-

distinguished from

1458^4),

are

of form.

The term

-n-d^os

used in

is

De Theophrasti

phrastus in a fragment of his llcpi Ae'^ews (Rabe, libris Trepl Ae^ecos p-

Tiva

TO. TTixOy) avTT}?,

SiSofiev ya.p

6)

rts

:

TaOra

1458

The

own

moderns

we know

;

that a picture,

first

In Aristotle’s view technical

desirable (b 27),

thing needful in a poem.

is

neither

Poetry,

the

as a

has an end, a procedure, and a correctness of is

it

13

censured for errors of anatomy, and a novel

of history or archaeology.

art,

and

;

known

'‘34).

accuracy in such points, though

one thing nor the

Kal

;

;

kind of criticism Aristotle has in mind

sufficiently familiar to us

for instance, is often

distinct

pLeracfiopiKi^

has already shown their use and

Aristotle

irpos 8e TouTois ktI.

for errors

S’ r]

a recognition of what were afterguards

:

legitimacy in poetry (22,

one

Kvpla Ae^i?, rts

olov TL aTTOKOTT-q, Tt cTvyKOTrrj, Tt dc^aipecris

as poetic licences.

is

rj

thus quite possible for a description in a

be poetically right, even though

it

may

its

poem

to

be wrong in some technical

detail. Tiis iroXiTiKTjs.

IloAtTtK?;, as the art

and conduct, might easily seem to poetry,

life

human

to depict

life

and conduct (comp.

and as a matter of history the connexion between the two arts was posited in the common notion of the older poets being authorities on all questions of TToXiTiK-q, and the great teachers of moral and political wisdom 1450®' 16

6,

I

which has

which deals with human

to stand in a very intimate relation

p.tp.qa-i'i

TTpd^ews Kal /?tov);

(comp. Plato Rep. 5980, 606 e; also Diimmler, Kl. Schriften i It is not without reason, therefore, that Aristotle takes p. 30).

and emphasizes the distinction between and the poetical standard of right.

TToXiTiKq as his instance here,

the

‘

It

political

'

may perhaps

‘

’

be thought that in affirming

Aristotle anticipates the idea of

as raised

with

-3

Art for Art

above the limitations imposed on

by social or moral law. what we read elsewhere in

activities

‘

this

all

ordinary

Such a notion would the Poetics.

distinction

and regards poetry

ill

human accord

In Aristotle’s view

*’

14

’’ii

COMMENTARY

326 1460

*’

14 a deviation in poetry from the ethically right

from probability or

condoned only when his

in

it

The

poetical effect.

just

is,

like

an exceptional procedure, and

truth,

seen to be necessary for the ultimate

is

tragic hero,

misfortunes, should be a

one

if

is

good man

to feel pity for

—

The

secondary

personages too should be each good in their way, unless the to require a character of a

his baseness should be

no more than

Even Comedy,

the story.

lower type; is

wanted

him

either better than,

or at least as good as, the average of mankind.

happens

one

to be

plot

which case

in

for the evolution of

as Aristotle conceives

has

it,

its

ethical

comic personage, though by hypothesis worse than the average man, is worse only up to a certain point; his limitations:

the

faults of character or

conduct being such as

may be

laughed

at, i.e.

they do not excite anger or abhorrence in the normally minded

The

spectator in the theatre.

Poetics

lose will

tacit

public

assumption throughout is

the

on the whole normal

in

and sympathies, and that the poet should never sight of the fact. Readers of the Nicomachean Ethics remember that in the Aristotelian hierarchy of arts all the

moral

its

that the theatrical

is

instincts

iroXiTiKrj, the supreme which deals with the whole social and moral order of the State, and that there is no hint of the so-called ‘aesthetic’ arts being outside its purview and control. The argument may be aoTrjs Ttjs TroiYjTiKrjs Sittt) d|xapna. 15 thus restated There is always a twofold possibility of error in

other arts are regarded as subordinate to art,

:

the poet’s

or description of things,

fXLfirjo-is

(i) Starting with a

correct idea of the object to be described, he his

own meaning

at fault,

and

incapacity.

;

in

On

(2)

fail

to express is

the other

hand

the error

may

an erroneous idea of the object

from lack of descriptive power on

arises not

insufficient

may

his art as a poet (or

his faulty description is a sign of artistic or literary

to his starting with it

which case

be simply due ;

in

which case

his part, but from

knowledge of something outside poetry, and

it

in the accidents rather than the essentials of the poetic art.

quotes Soph. crvXXoyia-fioi';

33, 182 ^ 33 aivopla

el. .

.

.

not wanted before

dSumpiav

'17

:

S'

rj

S’

ev rots epicrriKOt?, to

la-rX

Simj.

show

that

r}

is

1

thus

i

Vahlen

pXv iv

tois j

an

article

is |

a/j-apria.

comp.

16,

practically equivalent to Si

1454^21

81’

airopLov.

drexviav, through lack of

Si

dSwa/wW is power—

j

artistic

j

art

being with Aristotle a kind of Swa/xis or power

(v.

Bon.

Ind.

1

*

207^5 6).

— 258e

et

irpoeXeaGai ktI.

T(j

^

1460 I

14-18

327

have not been able to follow Vahlen 1460 which in his edition reads thus

in his general view of this passage, Be TO irpoeXecrOai

€t

fitj

:

opOws dAAa tov ittvov

d/x^cj to, Se^td.

^ to koO' eKacmjv TejQ'rjv dp,dpTr]p.a olov to kot dXXrjv T€)(vr]v [^ dBvvaTa TreiroirjTat] oiroiavovv, ov KaO'

Trpo/Se^XrjKora laTpiKTjv

rj

eavrqv.

This reading requires us to take

dAAd TOV

opOC)? eTx^>

ktL

irpoeiXeTO /xip.i^crcur^at otov tov ittttov

simpler to suppose that take dAAd tov v^ttov ktI.

/x-^

The

picture

of the participle

tense

the

and the

;

in

fault

the

is

and

to

also of d/xa

insertion

unnecessary

enough

is

much

however,

is,

piprjcracrOai,

(t>?

as a concrete instance of

(scil. pip-fjcracrdaC)

before d/x0(o Td Be^ia TTpofie/SXrjKOTa (as

way of saying dAAd

It

= pd] 6p 9

6 p 6 u>s

of 6p 6 m<; pip-qaacrOaL.

the opposite

opOw'; as standing for /x^

p.r]

as a short

iTrTrov ktI.

to

;

these words

show) suggest a

consists in the horse in

picture

motion being depicted with both right legs thrown forward, instead

As regards the clause ^ dSwaTa TreTroi'yTai, of only one of them. which Vahlen (after Diintzer) excises as a dittographia of the dSwaTa wanted

^ 23,

veTTOLTyrai in

it

two reasons, (i)

for

seems

TO Kaff eKdcrTy]v Texyrjv dpdpTTjpa, requisite breadth.

(comp.

TreTTotrjTaL)

me

to

and

but

The error in the poet’s picture or description may be in matters which come under the cogni-

may

it

to include

context

this

26)

offence against

common

in natural history,

i.

therefore,

real one, at

any

iTTTrov

Aristotle’s

The

Toi

in order in the

it

15), or rather the

Hector is

in the

a mistake

on

(v.

25, 1461

Se|ia irpoPepXTjKOTa,

mistake

in

laid

down

scil.

is

The a very

24).

pLprjcracrOai.

Tcov

epTrpoo'Oev

Twv

In

natural history,

and inconsistent

movement

of the legs of

in the

De

incessu an. 14, 7 1 2

24 yap to

Se to. OTriir^ta Trpos to. epirpocrOev koto. SidpeTpov' peTo.

apicTTepov

to dpicTTepbv tcov

OTrtcr^ev

epTrpoo'Oev, peTO. Be tovto to Be^tov

Be TOis BeiiOis dp(f)OTepoi? TrpcuTOts [scil.

i

1460

between the two kinds of error

this is a

quadrupeds walking as

Be^iov

instance of

in a matter of technical knowledge.

e.

with the general law of the diagonal

/ctveirat

ovoV dv ow

sense, in the Pursuit of

rate in controversy

d|xb)

view

TreTrot^Tai

31 of the other form of error

in

distinction,

TOV

dSuvaTa

the absurdity (comp. 24,

That given

Iliad.

rj

kind of error.

latter

is

dpdp-

iKdo'Trjv TexyTjv

also be in matters of a less distinctly technical

Aristotle adds

nature.

after

n-e-KOiTjTo.t

(2) to give the Statement the

zance of some special art or science (to koO' Trjpa),

words are

the

that

to enable us to supply

klvovctiv,

Tmv

:

ctTa to

OTricr^ev

...

el

etroiovvTO tijv KLVrjcnv], e^o)

18

— COMMENTARY

328

He was apparently epeicriJLdTmv Ka\ Ittitttov av. unaware of the fact that the legs of the horse are actually in the position assumed to be impossible in certain stages of the amble and the rack. A horse with legs in this position is to be seen in modern art in INIeissonier’s Cavaliers en marche {Exposition Paris 1893). Meissonier, No. 114 Illustrations from the life will be found in E. Muybridge’s ‘Animal Locomotion’ Philadelphia

18 av eytyi'ovTO twv

1460

‘

’

—

—

1872-93. ^

21

oTroi’

oSi^, scil.

verb comp. Soph. Eth. N.

3. 10.

^ or

el.

For the omission of

Tmroiyjp.a'a

I75 ^ 27

17,

1115^19

d)s

OTroTepo)

av 6 Aoyos.

yap av Gish'

1318

Pol. 6. 3,

the

Siafjiipei.

—

on

22

We

Riddell, Digest of Idioms § 255). should expect simply oTrotaovv, the formula ordinarily used by Aristotle in

av

ol

oXiyoL (also

passages like the present. ou Ka6’ eauTiQv

(scil.

dp.apTta

TroLrjTiKrj^) is

the opposite of that in the preceding clause

The is

(t>

the apodosis, and

17), avr^s

general sense of the passage (with the reading

briefly this

If

:

it

was through a mistake

17

djmpria.

toJ -n-poeXia-Oai)

in his original

concep-

tion of the thing that either the technical error, or impossibilities

of whatever kind they

may

be, have got into his description, the

error in that case does not belong to the art of the poet per

se,

but

only per accidens.

ware Set of the term

imTip,r)ixaTa

tcI

A

ktL

of a question being raised in

fact

Problem (v. on

in

only a kind of question

is

;

but the mere

reference to the poet’s work

involves the possibility of an answer unfavourable to him,

an

kirmp.'qp.a,

sense

Aristotle’s

^ 6)

i.

e.

of

a censure or condemnation of what he has said.

We

have had cTTm/xi^pa in this technical sense in 19, 1456^114, and the verb tTrirtp-av in 17, 1455 26, in 19, 1456 16, and in 22, 1458 6. The criticisms to which a poem is exposed Aristotle examines under the three heads indicated in the preceding statement (^7-21), but in reverse order: (i) the strictures passed on the poet’s descriptions of things

(t>

22-32); (2) those relating to 32-1461 9); and

the kind of subject he has chosen to depict (b

After that he (3) the faults found in his language (1461 » 9-31). shows in what way or ways each kind of criticism has to be

answered. ’’23

TOi

Trpos

auTTjv

tt]v

censures relating to the -(el)

dSwara

dSuvara

TEX*'rjt',

artistic

TreiroiTjTai.

irt-rroC-qrai

scil.

tov

TTOirjTov

emTip-T^pLara, the

execution in his imitations.

Ueberweg suggests

(without the insertion of

ei)

that the traditional

may be

a rhetorical

— 25-

way of putting

than once writes as

on

comp. Eth. E.

^/jLaprrjcrOaL,

and on 1461

^

l

I

1460

chapter Aristotle more

ow

Eth. N. 6

oAX’ ovv

22 'j^ 2 i eWt

e/ceivov irepaivovra

avTT) p.h'

^pMpTTjp.evr].

B'

IcTTiv opOoTT]?,

this

cf>acn),

opposite of the dp^Ss txei in the next ir,

2.

ra Be irpos

1160^30

12,

329

he were simply reporting a possible debate

if

4)jidpTr)Tat is the natural

line;

18-28

In the course of

dAA,’ icrws Sei,

33

^

the supposition, such as might be used in an actual

debate or discussion.

(v.

1460

.

[scil.

10

ovBe yap dp.apTLa.

Tj

dpxT^^

6p6r]

1142^10

,

—

2. 2, 1

rov

Be

(tkottov

ix-ev

—Eth. N.

6p6ws

(jiatverai,

8.

HepaiKT)

pXv yap ovk

eTTKTTrjp.'q^

104 ^ 32

rj

Trepi

rravra ravra

6 dyaOo? KOTopOaniKO'; ecrrtv o Be /caKOS dp.aprrjTiKO';.

TO yap TeXo 9 eiprjTai

on

;

a reason for the statement that follows

24

For the use of eip-qTai (which has been very unadvisedly questioned and altered into exp-qrai, alpeirai, eiXrjTTTai, or TTjpeiTai) see on II, 1452 ^ II. (see

61

21, 1457^134).

OUTUS eKirXtjKTiKWTepoi' KT6.

is

appositional to

Vahlen compares IMetaph.

reXovs TOV avTrjsp-rj

toCto, e^ dvdyKt]'; Travr earai,

pr]

Kara

o-vp/Se^rjKO'; atriov ri

el

E

el

Tvyxdrei tov

1027

3,

30

el

25

yap

rov yiyvoph>ov Kal (fiOeipopevov

dvdyKrj eivai.

— Plato Gorg. 522 C

el

S KaAAiKAeis, o crv TToAAaKts (hpoXoyrjcrag, Kre.', and Hyperides Euxen. 23, 24, Lysias

eKetvo ye ev aiTca {nrdpxoi, el

3,

^e^orjOrjKui?

avrtp

eiT]

The

38.

clause only gives an illustration,

not a complete

That surprise is one of the legitimate effects of poetry was definitely said, though the point is it has been assumed also nowhere demonstrated, in 24, 1460 ii For the in 9, 1452 « 4, in 14, 1454®' 4, and in 16, 1455®^ 17. meaning of eKTrXyjKTiKWTepov see on 14, 1454*14. Metaph. K 5 1062®' 25 Sd^ete Sc Kav ovx iinrov (t| pT)^ TjTTOi' account of the end of poetry.

;

;

eivai (fida-KOiv tov

)

dvOpatwov

rj

pdXXov ^ ovx yrrov

dXrjdeveiv

rj

27

ovk

dvOpmTTOv. 4paprfiff0ai here in the

Set

next line

yap

ktI.

seems to be a dittographia of the ypaprycrOai

of Phil. 14, p. 52). comp. the parallel statement as to the avoidance

(J. :

1460^28.

of dAoya in 24,

tions in poetry should

of correctness

some

sacrifice

;

The

general rule

is

that the descrip-

be in accordance with the technical standard

but at the same time there are cases in which

of technical accuracy

may

be requisite to produce

comp. 1461^11 Trpos ryv TTOL-qo-w), and in these the end justifies the means. This is the only direct answer to an objection of this kind. But if such an answer is the poetic effect

not possible,

it

('^

may

24

;

perhaps be urged,

in mitigation

of censure at

28

^

23

;

COMMENTARY

330 1460 *’28 any

rale, that the technical error is

**

en

29

TTOTepui' ecrrl to dpdpTTjfxa

ktL

attempt to minimize the offence.

minor matter (^31), and

in a

an imitative

as such, a venial fault in

art.

not a

is

but an

Xvo-ts proper,

Awis proper the point to which the opponent has taken exception is shown to have another aspect, and to be right {6p6u)s ex^i 24) when viewed in that other In a

aspect.

30

Kara

tS>v

TT)k re'xi'Tji'

matters belonging to his

in

:

art,

of poetry, as distinct from matters outside poetry, dentally

(Kara

attention

to

instead of tSv TTOTtpuiv

^31

eAa^os p-fv

change of construction,

For

/card. crv/x/SeyST/Kos.

comp. Eth. N. OrjXiia ovk exei.

appeves

I,

9.

OiiXcia Kepara

eXa
connected with

a-v/x/Bf^rjKos)

the

it.

to have often

poets

(v.

the art

dAXo

xar’

the appositional clause after

and Rhet. 3. 5, 1407 15. H. A. 4. ii, 538^18 Kepara

:

part. an. 3. I, 662®"

Ttov eAd^oji/ ot

I

The

Kepara, ai 8e 6'qXeiai ovk exovcnv.

seems

e.

® 22,

1164

ouk ex*i

—De

i.

and only acciVahlen draws

hind

been represented as having horns not only by Nauck, Aristophanis Byz. fr. p. 61), but also by artists;

comp, the Scholiast on Pindar 01

3,

.

52

£7rtp,eA(os

:

oi Troirjral rrjv

d-qXeiav eXatjiov Kepara exovcrav elerayovaiv, KaOairep Kal rrjv 6r]Xd^ova'av

rov TrjXecjiov ypd^ovcrt Kal TrXarrovcnv. *’32

dpipiiTws

is

the opposite of

opposite of

pitp-r/Tos

;

but

In Probl. 29. 10, 951 ^ 6

pip.rjriKw';.

(the only Aristotelian passage in

,

which

recurs) dptprjro^

uncommon

not

it is

it

the

is

with negative words

of this type to have two senses, an active as well as a passive dvaia-Orjro's, for

instance,

also of alaOrjriKO's.

The

is

the opposite not only of ala-Orjros but

negative idea in this and similar privative

terms must not be pressed too

means

dpuipT^w; eypaxj/ev Only

express the

artist’s

meaning,

understood by others.

A

on

far (see

d-qOeis

6,

i.

e.

pup.Tjr-^'i,

to

be 81

whose work must be

give us the pleasure of a p[p.iqpa 8e

irpds

TooTOis

Kre.

which come under the

The

8 sqq. picture

is

objector

(v. 4,

Aristotle first is

1448 ^

it

in

passes

on

a

on

intelligible, if

17), is it is

to

15).

to the

iinriprjpara

of the three heads in the survey in

supposed to urge either

not true to fact (comp, ola

not better than the reality (comp, ola is

way

of this kind, which arises

did not express

failure

dSvvapiav, through lack of artistic capacity (see above

inexcusable in a

1450® 25);

that the picture did not adequately

rj

eanv,

elvai

that the poetic

10), or that

it

is

8ei,^ii), or that

it

not in harmony with tradition or opinion (comp, old ^aariv koI

8oK€t

10).

The answers

to these criticisms

may

take the follow-

—

:

25 ing forms:

— is

it

28

true

neither-

if

331 perhaps better 1460

mention a fourth

1461 9), which almost any criticism. TTo'i-qcnv,

laws 8ei

= dAA’

8ei eivai

is,

not in

if

(3)

There are

fact.

Aristotle omits to

e7rtTi/r,7;//,aTa.

the plea of poetic necessity

Ario-ts,

32

nor better than the

to fact

perhaps true to

is

it

thus three AvVets for this class of

dXV

I

perhaps in accordance with opinion;

accordance with opinion,

=orovs

— 1461 ®

(1) If not true to fact, the picture is

than the reality; (2) reality,

^

1460

-

(tt/sos

t^v

wherever possible, a valid answer to

laws 8 ei

eivai,

just as in the next line olovs

(comp. Bon. Ind. 239 ^

The answer

16).

M

33

vividly

is

introduced by dAAd, the word the defender himself might use in an actual discussion. oiok Kttl

Zo<|)okXt]s

see

:

A

on 6,1450^37.

similar

remark

is

attributed to the poet Philoxenus, $iAo^evos 6 ttoiijt^s cittovtos tivos, Siari

^oifiOKXrjs

elTrev,

"On

fJ.h'

Trapeiadyei ras ofas Set eivai rds

ywaiKas avrbs Se
IMaximus Conf.

(S.

ela-iv

)(pfr]crTa';

So^OKAijs

TauTT)

2 p. 632 Combef.). Having introduced an illustration

Xureoi'.

(the saying of

34

Sophocles), Aristotle adds rav-n] Xvreov, repeating the sense of the

words preceding the comparisons, when

‘

.Aristotelian instances see

my

oTi

Xveiv

an instance of what

is

§ 209, terms the Binary structure with the fact illustrated is stated (perhaps only in

and re-stated

outline) before the illustration,

and

This

illustration.

Idioms

Riddell, Digest of

Textual Criticism of the Nic. Ethics

ouTW

on

= Xvreov


(‘to

refute

after

For other

it.’

Vahlen, Aristotelische Aufsatze

on ovrw ^aatv

by saying

that’)

eivai.

The

construction

found in Soph.

is

p. 6,

i

p. 27.

el.

—

35

24,

Rhet. 34 afiapravovcTi Kal oi Xvovres on aras apiOfibs oAiyos. 1402 ^34 ovKOvv iKavbv av Xvarj on ovk dvayKaiov, dAAd, Set on Xveiv on ovk etKOs. Fr. 166 (Teubn.) ean Se Xveiv I

79

2.

25,

—

.

.

.

TOiavra ^v. TO.

Trepl

6 eQv

i.

e.

the

poetic statements about Gods, though

neither true nor better than the truth,

may

perhaps be said to be

sanctioned by opinion, and to be what people are in the habit of repeating of the Gods. wairep reko^drei,

phanes’

(v.

scil.

eanV,

Kiihner, Gr. Gr.®

‘

as they are in the view of 2.

i,

instances of this use of the dative are

KpiTw 8e

Koci

gen. et corr. cji9opd Kal

17

I.

cnfiaipa

8

,

p. 421).

De

ws ywvia ns ovaa

nva

ws

^16

evKivrp-ov

^rjfio.

De

y evens kuI Xenophanes, we must remember.

325^^ 15 ’E/xTreSoKAci

dAAoiwais, ov 8^Aov.

caelo 3. 8, 307 rep-vei

Xeno- 1461 ® i

Other Aristotelian

rpoirov earat

COMMENTARY

332 1461

was the

1

to

first

up

lift

Homer and Hesiod, as the and immoral conception of the Gods

his voice against

great exponents of a false (see

fr.

10-12

dX\’ o 3

i'

Diels).

= ‘but

^2

'A-TTop^pLara 'OpLrjpiKa

elvaL

10.

152

here

is

II.

:

difficulty

Schrader), where

160;

p.

2

opO'

160 Teubn. = Porphyr.

(fr.

same

the

cr(f>iv

(xavpoyrrjpoi

iirl

thus stated in a fragment of the

solution

twv Soparwy iwl aavpm'njpa';

rj

2.

'’33).

KTc.

The

fX^Xaro.

any rate’ (Kiihner, Gr. Gr.®

at

comp. Bon. Ind. 33

is

in

II.

suggested Kal

CTacrts'

8r]

1

.

c.

p.

143

^avX-q SoKel

:

TravTa)(ov

Oopv^ov

’

vvKTwp

)]8r] TreTTOirjKe

T oiavTa det koI

oiaTrep

vvv iv toIs

A

^ap^dpwv.

’EKTO pa £iAk€

ttoXXol

barbarians,

267 Schr.)

:

TraXaia

^(pwvTai

ovt(jo

Homer, by

among

p.

,

8e

tCiv

reference to a

found in

is

fr.

’AxAAevs tov

8td tL o

tov Td(f>ov rov IlaTpoKAou irapd rd vevop.LO'piiva

Trepi

TOV vcKpov

virdp-^ovTa

24. 15

II.

8e roiavra to.

Tore,

surviving

still

166 (=Porphyr. in

TTOidiv ets

oia

/3ap/3dpoLS’

similar justification of

custom

primitive

Op.r]pos

ttoici

Xvei 8 ’AptcrTOTeAr^s Xiyo)V otl

tv p.6vov irecrov.

.

;

.

.

Sc Xveiv,

iCTTL


dvdjovTa Wrj, otl roiavra yv,

Apia'TOTeXr]^, Kal eis ras

(Trel

Kal vvv

iv

©erraXia

TrepteAxoucrt rrepl tovs rd(f>ovs.

® 3

If the

aaupwTTjpos. ‘Op.rjpiKd is to

form

the quotation

in

be trusted, Aristotle’s text of

in

the Airoprifiara '

Homer would seem

to

have had a-avpwr^pas, the reading of Aristophanes.

^4

KaXw9 Gr.®

1)

2. 2 p.

KaXws

(XT)

= TTOTepov

The

532).

KaAws

i)

p.r]

objection Aristotle

is

KaXtos (v. Kiihner, Gr.

now

considering

is

the

moral objection, the criticism that something said or done by a

personage

1460^

ii).

in

a

poem was

His point

an objection,

it

is

is that,

not morally

right

(oTov elvai

Set

before admitting the validity of such

proper to take the circumstances of the word

or deed into account,

(i) the person to

e. g.

whom

it

was

said or

done, (2) the moment, (3) the instrument used, and (4) the motive in the mind of the speaker or agent. Eth. N. 3, i, 1111*^4 contains a fuller statement of the circumstances that

may

modify the severity of our moral judgements (comp.

to

lead us fr.

174

Teubn.). irpos

ov

KTc.:

i.e.

ov

Trpos

.

.

.

irrpa^ev

r)

eXe^ev 6 rrpdrrwv ^

Xiyoiv.

^ 8

ore. II. 9.

Trpos

yap

Plutarch (De aud. poet. 26 f ) defends the four lines in

458-61, which Aristarchus is said to have excised, as being TOV Kaipov ; comp. Porphyr. in II. 9. 203, p. 135 Schr. ot p.lv

(XTro

t^s Ae^ews Xvavai

,

,

,

ol Se dvro

rov Kaipov,

on

vv^.

;;

25- 1461 ^ 1-13

dyaOou

An.

68

333

^

35 alpcTMTepov 8e to p-et^ov 1461 dyaOov Kal eXarroy kukov rj to eXarrou ayaOov Kal pet^ov KaKov Porphyr. in Od. 13. 119, p. 117 (comp. Rhet. i. 10, 1369625). fACij^oi/og

:

pr. 2. 22,

—

Schr. TroAAaKis yap rwv iv pia irpa^u Kal Svcr)(€peg VTrdp^ec ri Kal

ayadov, Kal pdXXov

8e irpos

TCI

coming under

difficulties

to.?

ktL

XeIii/

tt)i/

to kokov cfievKTOv

rj

TOtavTas Trpd^ets. Aristotle’s

this

the one point they have in

dyaOov

alperov to

icrriv

OVK aTToSoKipa^opev

SiOTrep

head

common

examples show that the ^ 9

are of every possible kind

on language,

that they turn

is

and may be met by the discovery or adoption of another interpretation of the language in the incriminated statement. SiaXueii'

HSt.

synonym

simply a

is

for Xvecv (Bon.

Ind.

i84^43;®lo

S.V.).

by taking some word in the passage as a yXwTTa For the instrumental dative, of which there are so many other instances in the context, comp. Soph. el. 24, 179638 yXwTT^

e.

i.

:

1457 6

(see 21,

o'lOL Se Kal T
ouptjas

why

1.

ovprja<;

on

(s. v.

made

ad loc. p. 4 which survives in

to suffer first (v. Porphyr.

and

oipEts

oip^ag),

is

condemned

(presumably from Aristonicus)

c.

84

:

dOeTetTai, otl avp-qatv ^ovXeTai

OVK eKpdTTicrev tov a-xtjpaTOS‘ ovpov yap Xiyei

ovk

Xiyuv twv d)s

A

Schol.Ven.

in

oVc

:

6p 6

tovs ^vXaKas’ di'TtSia
10.

II.

50 ovp^as ph' TrpwTov ettw^^eto koX Kvva<; found here was to understand

i.

Aristotle’s interpretation of cip^a?,

Hesychius II.

II.

:

difficulty the ancients

the mules were

Schrader).

on

StTTw Xvovcri tov? crvXXoyi(rpovi, TrpwToi'

p.ei'

The

dpyot's.

4).

m

tives

and again Kal

cf>vXdK(j)v,

Kovpov Toy
ovpia Se tov rjptoyoy, os

p’

q TOi EiSos

:

TToSwKTys.

The

Dolon,

ill-shaped,

if

Aristotle

is

II. I O.

3 1 6 os

Sij

that

koko?

How

:

could

The answer

have been swift of foot?

eTSos

dXXd ® 12

TOi eTSos pey er]v KaK 6 <:,

question raised was apparently this

may have meant

of

Homer

in

not

he suggests that normal sense of shape ’, but

Mil-shaped’, but simply ‘ugly’ or Mil-looking’; EiSos

may

a

in

have been used not in

strange

derivative

its

‘

sense (as a yXcoTTa) corresponding to that of the

eoeiS^s

in

the

Cretan

His explanation of

dialect.

word reappears in Schol. Bachm. on II. TTpocrdiTrov, and in Hesychius (s. v. etSrj) eTSos the

:

TO ydp eueiSes kte.

The

KpijTEs Evn-poo-coTTov KaXova-i

2. .

.

58 .

traditional reading to is

:

ctSos

oi/^is,

im

tov

Trpoo'unroy.

yap

evecSes

01^13

supposed to mean that the word

is applied by the Cretans to that which is iVTrpoaw-n-oy comp. Tyrwhitt’s rendering, Cretenses eveiSes vocant quod facie

evecSes

‘

® 8

— COMMENTARY

334 1461 ® 13 speciosum est

on

with

article

ambiguity.

The

appellant’.

tv-n-poa-wirov

of the

and Vahlen’s the

have accordingly ventured

I

A

1025

29,

cuetScs Cretes

est

absence

in the

is

which produces an intolerable

subject,

^Sttov) and in 6,

hletaph.

however

difficulty

to restore ( to ) eiiTTpoamwov

usage in the context (to aKparov

the analogy of Aristotelian

...TO

vocabulo quod

‘

1449^29,

also elsewhere,

as

ii to ;^(oAaiv£tv to

e. g.

in

Vahlen

Xtywv.

p.Lp.eicrOai

quotes a number of passages from other writers in defence of the but

vulgate,

as

any

may

rate

seems

it

me, they are

to

very well admit of another

more important of

anomaly may be removed second

sertion of a

® 14

TO

ktL

:

II.

9.

yap

errl KU)p,ov

Dindorf,

In two of them the

Demosthenes

202

ra yap

23, 33

Xenophon Mem.

t ^ KOrjvaiow ptet^ova

3.

Kprjrrjpa,

Sr]

in-

a-Trotva

14 7 eXeye .

yXf!)TTr] ( to ) ia-OuLV

Porphyry’s note on

KaOidTa, ^wporepov Se Kepaie. d)S

W.

once by the same expedient, the

article:

€V(i})(€icrOai iv

^updrepov

yap

to

The

interpretation.

Teubn.

ed.

Ixii

at

( tci ) )(pyp,ara covo/xa(ov ol TraXatot. (lis

quite

all

instances were discussed by

his

Preface to Demosthenes p.

Se KUL

not

those from Plato (Theaet. 190 a and Crat. 410c) at

the point;

koXoIto.

MevoiTiou

this is

:

vie,

aTrpeTrev

^kovctiv aKparorepov SiSoyai rrapaKeXeverai.

ol p.h'

XeAvJS Xyoveri' to yap ^orpoTepov eivai Ta^iov KTe. (p. 135

arrb

Plutarch Qu. conv.

Schrader).

many Homeric

one of the

5. 4,

6 ‘jt t

statements

tells

to

us that this was

which Zoilus took

exception.

® 15

The comparative

aKpaTov.

in

(lopoVepov

Homeric

the

aKpaTOTepov Scholia,

the usual equivalent for

is

and

in

the lexicographers

Apollonius Lex. p. 81 Bekk. (wpoTepov aKpaTOTepov aKpaTOTepov.

^utpoTepov’

however, Op,rjp(ir

6 epp. 6v

‘

.

Kepaipe

^ivpoTepov Se .

.

oli'd<|)Xu|ii'

Tpep-ovcTi, Kal

^16

piaXXov ktI.

eSSov

pa OeoiTC Kai

in the

revelry

o'rjpux.CveLV

5. 4,

ocrv) :

677 3. 5.

aKpaTov,

Se Kal to Trap’ ejraxriv,

dXXa

n).

871

*’'27

av aKpaTOTroTaxTLV

Sta ti ol olvoejrXvye^

;

i dXXot pLev napd vrpjo-lv dpicrT^es must be the passage Aristotle had in have mixed it up with that in II. 2. i dXXot II.

10.

to

dvepe
passage was

its

inconsistency with

and other signs of

TreStov TO

reading

Travvirj^iot

mind; but he seems p.ev

ovk aKpaTOv

comp. Probl.

:

aXXoi pev pa Ilava^^aiwv

The

Td)(LOV

by Ath. 423 e Ttvk

:

—Hesychius

dXXoi Se to evKpaTov, Sxnrep to Se^LTepov dvTL tov Se^tov

(comp. Plutarch Qu. conv. 0)9

Se

evLoi

sufficiently certified

is

.

TpwiKOV

life

among

II.

10.

The

difficulty

11-13 (on the

the Trojans), ^ Tot ot’ es

aOp-^aeie, 6 avp.a^ev rrvpa iroXXd, to. KaieTO ’IXid 06

25- 1461 ^

—p6

avAojv

,

solution,

mean

r

avpiyyiiiv

Aristotle’s 1461 ^ 16

dvOpdnrw.

t

ofiaBov

a/OTrrjv

335

may

be observed, consists in saying that Trdvres

will

it

13-20

practically

no more than ‘many’, and be an instance of the

metaphorical substitution of a specific in

of a generic term

lieu

1457 8). The word Trdvres, therefore, must have appeared somewhere or other in the text of the Aristotelian quotation (comp. Grafenhan found a place for it by writing Tynvhitt ad loc.). Trdrres instead of dAAot, and Tyrwhitt by restoring -n-dvrcs 6p,ov for (v.

21,

A

rrayvvxtot.

simpler expedient would perhaps be to suppose the

remembered

passage, as Aristotle

it,

pa OeoL re kuI dyepes evSoy ^aTravres^ Toi OT

T]

ktI.

TreSioi/

es

lo.

II.

:

to have run thus

omission of the line 6avp.a^ey Trvpa TToXXd, responsible

avXuy

^IS.,

Sylburg) have

made

must have known in

6p.aS6y

re

(Tvpiyyojy

that

may perhaps

The

in the

i.

however, to has

line

editors

to o/xaSos

of

it

')

he

;

was not

accentuation too of the to

e.

account

MS. may be

I think

for.

6p.a8oy with

an

enclitic

the wreckage

of an older reading, avAwv a-upiyyaw r i^yoTrr/y) opLuSoy (t TTwy), in other words, of the line as

the

in

(following

6p.a86y (or op.aBoy

O’

is difficult

represent op.aS6y,

the reading

so that

after it;

the

meaning thus given

in the manuscript {6p.aS6y) it

next

— which

accordance with Homeric usage.

word

The ^18 may

'IXioOi irpo

difficult,

is

the

into avAcov (rvpLyyow

that the

KaUro

TO.

it

;

the form

for

p.iv

|

11-13 (quoted above).

very well be due to Aristotle himself

hold him

dXXoi

:

Trayyvx^ioc,

dyOpo'y-

appears in the ordinary text

Homer. TO ydp irdi'Tes

{tou)

di'Ti

Porphyry on Od.

ttoXXoi.

12.

374 ^19

13 Schrader) records a similar interpretation of Trdvra in II. 3. ’ CT'ttVTtov TOVTO [scil. Od. 12. 374] TO) ’HeAio? 6 OS Trdyr 277 ec^opas Kal Trdyr’ iiraKOveis' defy eavrov yap i'xprjv eyytxiKeyaL

(p. 1

:

Toy Trdvra

i(f>opQ)yTa.

rd

ktL

TrAefcrra oiif)

8’

d|Ji)xopos

:

Xoerpwy ’flxeavoTo

Xvoiro

18.

489

29 Bekk.),

Schrader) TTcpi

:

(=

is

(v.

otr}

oiT]

8 ’ dp.p.op6? ecrrt®20

The

p.

by Porphyry ad

(Jlt]

8’

critics

loc. (p. 225 yap Kara rdv

dp.p.op6<; eerrt

KaOoXov yap Trdvra rd ev rw dpKTiK<2 is

astronomical

3 Gas. and Apollonius

dvicrdpTyrdv eerrt rovro* KariqyopovijL joky

solution (which to take

Strabo

thus stated

Trj^’'ApKrov Xoyoy (fydcTKoyro';

’fi/eeavoio'

-

which even led some of the Homeric

of antiquity to alter the text p.

ay ^ ry Ae^ec rd yap Trdvra StjXol

Od. 5 275) (said of the Great Bear). II.

difficulty in the line,

Lex.

8’

p,r]

Swetv.

Xoerpmv Aristotle’s

not mentioned in the Scholia or elsewhere)

as a generic in the place of a specific word,

i.

e.

is

as an

COMMENTARY

336

1461 ® 20 instance of a kind of metaphor already recognized (aTTO Tov yei'ovs

TO yap

^21

Y>'‘<'pi)J-wTaTO»'

SA

153'^ 35

1

for

otrj,

1457

Vahlen quotes Eth. N.

fjioi'o*'.

ow

TO /xwas

raoras

yvoipifiov; eivai

For the substitution of compare the use of K(oXv6rjvai in ^ 34

oiovrai eivau

fjiova^

in 21,

7

(ttl etSos).

14,

7.

ras ^Sovas]

[scil.

fiovov, as

a

to represent

synonym Homer’s

ecr^eTO,

KOTcl 8e Trpoo'uSi'ai', scil.

8a

equivalent of the instrumental dative (see

on

a 10) with

Xvew

means

we

—

mode

of writing were

accent as a form of a

find elsewhere in the context

said to bpo<;

and quan-

see Soph.

el.

crrjpaLVU erepov.

For

reader.

4, 166'’ i (v. infra

dAA’ ev

koku 8 r^Brj That quantity

may be

Trpoa-ipBia

to opos koX

p.kv TOt? yeypap.-

also

iroiovyrat,

was regarded by

ra 8€

Kal

j)

ov

cftOeyyop.eva

Aristotle as a part of

inferred from the position of p,^K€6 Kal /Spaxvrrjn

enumeration

Grammatik

Trapda’rjp.a

on

distinctly

is

ravTov 6vop.a, brav eK rwy avruiv crTOt^aajv yeypap.p.4vov

ravra.

in the

to

in the ancient

177^35; and 23, 179 “14. Breathing come under this head in Soph. el. 20, 177 ^3

tocravTws,

der

left

rrpocrcpBia

rfj Trpoo’tpSia

p.evot<;

word which be supplied by the

21,

23);

by

the

(or BiaXveiv).

the elements in the spoken

all

‘

is

it

;

Ilpoo-wSta with Aristotle comprises accent, breathing, tity

from

Xveiv (or StaAAtv), understood

Kara 9 Ta Se Trpos ryv Xi^iv bpuiVTa Set SiaXvecy. reference to’, as in Kara to effos Xe^ecos in ^ 2 “j

®

in 20,

p. 188).

1456 ^>32 (v. Schmidt, Beitr. zur Gesch. His idea of irpoa-tpSta, therefore, agreed

with that of Choeroboscus (Scholia in Dionys. Thracis

gramm.

art.

124 Hilgard), Icrreoy Se on ev Tais 7rpocr({)8tais rpia icrrlv eiSrp €crn yap twos, xpw°5, Trv€vp,a (comp. Egger, Apollonius Dyscole p.

p. 29,

^22

and Schmidt,

The

‘Irrmas. that

1.

c. p.

185).

view of Sengebusch (Horn. Diss. prior

he lived in the second half of the

fifth

century, and

206)

p.

is

may perhaps

be identified with the Hippias of Thasos mentioned by Lysias (13. 54 and 61) as one of the victims of the Thirty Tyrants.

Schrader (Porphyr. sufficient 8i8o/ji€>'

shows

in

II.

413) doubts whether there

p.

8e

The

01.

parallel in

Soph.

that 8i8op.ev 8e ol ev^os dpia-Qai

Homer

any

is

evidence for this date.

in

2.

II.

K^8e’ et^^TTTai

;

15,

166^1

where our existing vulgate has

(v.

on

It

is

clear that

S'

23)

in Aristotle’s Tpc6eo-o-6 8e

the reference too in the parenthesis, Sicrmp

'iTTTrfas

must have had the same reading we have in this instance at any rate

eAvev o ©dorios, shows that Hippias

before him.

el. 4,

was the reading

25. 1461 ® 20-23

337

a real variant, and not one of Aristotle’s misquotations. 8e Toi

dpeaffai occurs in

ei’xos

unlike that of

The

15.

2.

II.

SlSofjLev

1461 ® 22

21. 297, but in a context very

dream of Agamemnon in e, as making be a difficulty by several of the

deceptive

8 sqq. had been criticized by Plato Rep. 382

II. 2.

Zeus a deceiver and it was grammarians (v. Porphyr. in SlSofiev 84

II.

1.

23

c. p.

was doubtless the thought to remove by the but as

8t8o/x€v,

i.

artifice

AIAOMEN

of reading

as an

the half-line

Zeus with a

the

in

infinitive

imperative, so as to shift the actual falsehood

not as

sense of an

from Zeus himself

Dream-god (comp. Wolf, Prolegomena ad Horn.

to the

direct

which Aristotle and Hippias

difficulty

e.

As

Schr.).

eu^os dpicrOaL seems to credit

ot

this

8l8op.€v,

to

felt

;

lie,

II.

p.

128

ed.

Peppmiiller). TO t’

fjiev

ou KaTaTTuOeTai

opyvL VTrep

Our

o|x|3 p(o

8pvos

rj

'9

:

II.

327

23.

TrevKrjs'

Homer embodies

text of

The

atrys,

ecrrr/KC

^vXov avov ocrov

to p-iv ov KaraTTvOirai

op./3p
the suggestion of Hippias, ou for ou.

mode

of reading the word (ou) was was against scientific truth, oak and pine being held to be among the woods least liable to rot through moisture (Theophr. H. P. 5. 4, 3). objection to the older

probably

The view 4,

166 ^

I

the statement

this, that

of Hippias

given with greater fullness in Soph.

is

el.

Trapd 8e rrjv TrpocnoSiav ey p.h' tois dvev ypacf>rjs 8ia\.(KTi-

:

KOis ov pa8iov 7roiy(rai Xoyov, ev 8e rot's yeypap,p,eyoL<; Kal iroii^piacrt

pdXkov, oiov Kal Tov "Op.rjpov (I)S

“to

droTrios elprjKora

avTo rp

Xeyovres to

7r|0oo'(i)8ta

evtoi 8iop0ovvTai.

OY

o^repov.

TOV ’Aya/xe/xvovos, ort ovk auros 6 Zeus

dp4a6aL

dXXd

”,

Alexander, or

t
el.,

cisms on

is

ctTrev

“

8t8o/oiei/

On

8t8wat.

ei/CTeXXero

84 ot eup^os

passage

this

passage in the

not without interest for the history of the early

Homer

rtves ovv iKOKi^ov tov ’’Opjqpov,

:

yap

33 Wallies), has a

serving to explain the

besides

Xvovo'l

Kal to irepl to ivvTrviov

rather Michael Ephesius (p.

comment which, Soph,

evuTn/to)

wpo^ rous eXey^ovra's

ov KaraTTvOerai op.(3p(v”.

p.kv

criti-

7rept(r7rti>/.teVa)s

to

ou dvaytvwo'KOVTes koX Aeyovres oltottov tl aurov eiprjK4vat 8td tovtov, tus

X4yovTa

on

8ri6ev

ov KaTaxrrprcrai.’

el

tou ivXov

yap

pr]

e/cetvou

.

.

.

n

/xev

KaTacr^-mraL tI 84

koX tovto edTjAwo'ev ivapyCjs, to tI de ou

KaTaarpreTaL Aeyouo'tv dvTtfcpus 8r]Xov(T6ai, 8td tou elprjp4vov, tov “ ov TO pev KaTairvOeTai” .... iTn8iop0ovTai 84 toutous [ev '

TtK-^s],

ev

T(S

ws auTos Trepl

X.pL
IIotr^TtK^s]

(fnjcnv,

dvaywdxTKm/ to ou dAA’ tva

fi

TO Xeyopevov

POETICS

tus

r)

'iTTTTtas

dTro(f>aTiKw<;,

TrevKt]

T(3 Trepl IIotTj-

Vahlen,

ev rij ‘VrjTopiKjj [read with

6

©dctos

oirep

pr]

Trepi.(TTr
avToi oivTepov

eiprjKev,

to 84v8pov ov KaTairvOeTae 6pj3p(v Z

....

^23

;

COMMENTARY

338 1461 ^ 23 TO

S’

fTepov [scil. TrapoSetyyaa] to tTrayo/xevov, to irepl to ivvirviov rov

’Ayap.ip.vovo 5 , o

(fiTjai

T ov oveipov OTi

rov At'a fhviiv to “

SiSop.ei' 8e ol ev)(Os

apidOai”,

.... elcrlv ovv ra pr)p.aTa tov Aios tt/dos 3 as ravra eiTre tw 'Ayap.€pLVOVL OTi 8i8ofiev avrZ TravTes /

ov8ap.ov KeiraL ev

Trj

’IXiaSt

ovv ol ravra Xeyovreg ws evravffa dp-aprdvei

ot 6fol Tr]v VLKTjv,

cjiacrlv

6

rov Ata SiaAeyo/xevov ravra tQ oveipw Kal rpo-

ela-dycov

TTOirjrrjs

TTOV

rivd

a(rLV

8o&rjvai

dkkd

rip

tw

ov

tbs

ovk

OTrep

\j/ev86p.evov,

TOVTov

yap avros vo?s

6

aTraaOeir)

rj

ol

6

yovv tTTtSiop^ov/xevot ekeye

Zei's

to

eii^os

Kara rov ’Ayapepvovoi' dvayivwcrKOvcri

ovei/oo)

ovTws, “ 8i'8opev 8e oi ”, dvTt to? ij/ev8o?-

Oeov.

ea-ri

Ayap.ep.vovL

ecrri

croi,

ovecpw.

t
8e

ecrn 8e Kai rovro

Kav 6 tovos dva^L/SacrOeiT] Kav

Trepi-

wo? yo?v [? ovv] eariv rj dpapria ^ ovk TO “ 8l8opev” ... el yo?v [? pev ovv] to

dvTU)Vvp,ia

ot.

TO “ Se ot” ctAA’ CIS “ 8i8opev 8e ol ev^oi dpecrffat ” dvayvw Tts tov tovov 0 €ts £ts

,

TOV Atd

StSovat rrjv

TTOtet i/t€vSo/i,€vov, tbs VTTio-x^vovpevov

eh epyov e^dyovra

rrjv vwoo'xco’tv

Se ets to So tov tovov 0 ets

et

TO ef^s, Kat TOV Atot to? ^evdearOai ctTroAvVet, Kal (Terai ro

dveyKkrjrov,

StSoyttevat

i/tevSeTat, Kat

It will

noun

to? Atos AeyovTos

rip

el.

to

St,

Kal prj

dvay v5

rip 'Op’qpep trepLTroirj-

oveipw Kal eTrtTciTTovTOS

avTov rov oveipov ro ev^os tw ’Ayapepvovi Kal

Kal yovv 6 oveipos inrur^veirai rip

Atos.

Soph.

tbs

ets

vl'ktjv

prj

avrov rov

Ayapepvovi ro

£v;(os Kat

ov^ o Zevs avros.

be observed that in the explanation of the negative ov

is

II.

328 in the from the pro-

23.

said to be distinguished

by being pronounced Sivrepov, i. e. o^tovws. This takes when ov was oxytone wheresoever it occurs (comp. Kiihner, Gr. Gr. ® i. i p. 331), as it was held to be by more than one of the grammarians Herodian i p. 504 Lentz rd eh ov TrepKTTTwvrai, Travra^ov, dy)(^ov, Kal Tot Aotwa wA^v to? [? to] ov

us back to a time

:

.

.

.

iSov TO SetKTiKov, lov TO axerkiaariKOV, Kal ov rd dpvrjriKOV

rovro

Se Kal ev ry o'vveTreta d^vverai.

rd 8e SiaipeVei, ‘

punctuation

’

—

is

— a wider term

scil.

kvreov.

the

opposite of avvOea-is (comp.

Ataipeo'is

than our

Soph.

el.

^

4,

166^23), and includes every sort of break in reading, even one only just enough to keep words from being- taken together in

The kind

construction. applicable, elenchi, ecTTiv

iyw

may be cr

of difficulty to which this

seen from

the

instances

in

the

solution

is

Sophistici

WrjKa So?Aov ovt’ ekevOepov (4, 166®' 36), and dp where elvai; (20, 177^14)

dya^ov ovra aKvrea po)(6rjpdv

—

ambiguous and admit of being construed in two With this may be compared what Aristotle says different ways. in the Rhetoric (3. 5, 1407 14) on the ambiguities in Herathe words are

1

1

,c

25. 1461 • clitUS

TCI

:

yap

HpaKXeiTOv

rod

(Txryypap.p.aTO'i'

rja-l

yCyvovrai”.

avOpmiroL

On

Siaa-Tiiai.

see Schmidt,

tw

rj

to

Sia

aBrjXov

irporepov, olov ev Trj

yap “ rov \6yov

dec

Trpos

eivai

1461 ® 23

dpx^ avrov

tov8' coi'tos del

yap to

dSrjXov

339

epyov

StacrTtifat

tw varepov

voripta TrpocrKetTai,

23-24

d^veTOt

OTroTepo)

^Set)

the beginnings of formal punctuation in Greece

zur Gesch.

Beitrage

Grammatik

der

p.

506, and

Meisterhans, Grammatik^ p. ii.

TO.

-irpiv

here quoted appears in the editions ® 24

The passage

’EfjnreSoKXfjs.

of Empedocles in a

somewhat

p.dOov dOdvar

eivai,

different form,

^wpd Te

aTij/a

81

Ov^’

iffivovro,

vplv aKprjTa, StaAActfaKTa

to,

14-15 Diels); and it is known that Theophrastus adduced it to show that ^mporepov in Homer meant to K€Kpap,evovl Athenaeus 423 ^ ©ed^pao'Tos 8’ h' tw Trcpi KtXevOovs

read

it

(fr.

35,

thus, as he

This

pidrjs litipoTepov (firjcnv eivat to KiKpap.&/ov,

is

not the place

reading recognized by Theophrastus or his

to consider either the

and Impd. Aristotle has a different and any difficulty that may have he meets by simply affirming the possibility of

of ^wpoTcpov

interpretation

reading, ^topd tc irplv KeKprjTo;

been found in another

it

another

Statpecrt?,

way of construing

presumably was that ^(i}pd=dKpaTa

tion

He

his

does assump-

The

positive

the words.

not dispute the meaning which was assigned to ^(apd (v. ®'i5).

;

no longer existed in Attic but in Ionic the comparative ^(opoTcpov was to be found in Herodotus and Hippocrates, in the sense of having but a small admixture of water’: Herod. 6, 84 ^wpo's

;

‘

KA€op,Aea 8k Aeyovcrt (Tirjv

Trap avTtXv

.

.

.

riKovrcov

twv %KvOmv

eK re toctou,

d)S

jSovAojvrat TTULV, “ ima'KvOi.a'ov” Xkyovai

aKpaTOTTOTciv).

^(upoTepov

—Hippocrates

iraXaiov

kirX

2,

.

.

.

p.a6uv

rrjv dKprjTOTro-

avrol Xeyova-i, irreav ^wporepov

654 K.

(where ^uipoTepov

7rtVetv

=

dlvov, rjv prq Ti KwXvrj, TTLvetv

There

Tecrcrapa? qpipas.

is

one instance

in Attic prose, in Theophrastus Char. 4, 9 8uv6s (ftayeiv koI R. Meister). ^(oporepov ttuiv (‘ ungemischten Wein zu trinken of

it

does not say what the question was that had been by the critics ; it may be supposed, however (comp. Hermann ad loc.), to have turned on the TrptV before KeKprjTo, which owing to its ambiguous position may be construed with Aristotle

raised

either will

^wpd or

mean

‘

KiKp-qro.

If

one construes

case an objector might very well this

it

with KeKprjTo, the clause

things pure had been before that

and the statement

speaks of the

‘

mortal

mixed up together

’

mixed

’

;

but in that

urge the inconsistency between

in the preceding line, in

which Empedocles

forms as assumed by the elements only when

in the actual

world (comp.

Zeller, Ph. d. Gr.

z 2

COMMENTARY

340 1461^24

1“ p.

On

784).

sense

be

will

the other hand, if the vrpCv be taken with

were

before that pure

things

‘

together’ (for the tense of KeKprjro

Kiihner, Gr. Gr.®

v.

Goodwin, Synt. of Gk. Moods and Tenses

The

tion of the critic is answered.

Bergk

scholars of distinction.

gested ^wpa T€ ^u>pd T£ a

(i. e.

Trplv

TO.

re TO, Trplv eKprjro (on the ®

As

dOdvara.

25

hardly necessary to restore aOdvar (LvuL see Toi

on 24, 1459 ^

.

IttAv/to).

now

Aristotle

passes on to

through the presence of an ambiguous term.

and

said to be

is

ap.cf>i/3 okov («

26

;

comp. Rhet.

ap.^ij3oXia

effect is dp.
its

is

of

9.

another kind of ambiguous statement, one capable of two a term

it

For the omission

(etvai).

8e d(A4>iPoX£a, scil. Set SiaXvfiv.

pretations

469) ^wpa

Pc.)

so apt to curtail his quotations,

is

;

times by several

1

]

152

p.

Schriften 2 p. 86) has sug-

Gomperz (Hermes 31 and Diels (on Emped.

analogy of

Aristotle

recent

in

(Kl.

KeKprjTo

a) Trplv KiKpyjTo

O'

i. i

and the objec-

§ 52);

integrity of the text of the

been doubted

has

passage

present

the

found mixed up

is

3. 5,

here the

M'hat Aristotle often calls elsewhere 6 p.wvvp.ia.

It

inter-

Such

1407

32);

same thing

may be

as

noted, as

an instance of his

variations in the use of technical language, that in

Soph.

26

165

el. 4,

dp.
used to describe the ambiguity arising from

from

6p.wvvp.la,

and

some ambiguous

collocation of terms.

®

26

Se irXcw

Trap(iIxiQK€('

dverai, iyyvOt

Twv Svo p.oipdwv, TrXiw,

which

251 dXX’

iop.ev'

p.dXa yap vv^

Be Sy irpo/ii^yKe, Trapw)(WKev 8 e TrXiwv

TpiTarrj S' eri p.0Lpa XeXetTrrat.

some

survives in

still

10.

II.

:

darpa

S' r/ws,

of the

MSS.

of

The

reading

Homer, and

was a recognized variant in antiquity, has a certain interest as showing the affinity of Aristotle’s Homer with that of Zenodotus,

who

is

known

for yXvKLwv, p.

302

;

to

have admitted forms

and

Lobeck, Path. Elem.

The problem was

how,

if

tnore than two-thirds of the

still left.

According to Porphyry

147 Schr.) this was one of the earliest difficulties found twv TraXaiwv ^rjTypidTwv wp.oX 6yyraL eivai to tolovto, iv

ad

loc. (p.

in

Homer

ois

r^ymv “ d(TTpa

avTal T€ Kai TpiTys

yXvdw

(La Roche, Horn. Textkr.

2 p. 281).

to explain

night had gone, a third could be

:

like dp.tivw for dp.uvwv,

Kpeiacrw for Kpetcrcrwv

ert

p. 6 piov ;

.

.

.

XeXenrTai

tovtwv

”.

ttws ydp, el al Svo pLOtpat e^rjKOvmv

y TpiTdTy /xoipa XeXetTrTai, dXX ou^i Tys the many solutions he mentions is one from

TrXeov,

Among

the Aristotelian 'ATropyp.aTa 'Op.ypiKd

rys vvKTos al SwSeKa p.0Lpai

els

Svo

(fr.

161 Teubn.),

cTret

ovv Kal

'iaas p.epiSa
;

25. 1461 ^ ets ei,

-qv^Or] 8e

8vo Kal

a4iopil(tiv 6 TroirjTrjs

qv^Oq,

(Spats

^

oTt

341

TrXeov yeyovo? 0
/cat

(Spats (teat -yap p,ta teat

ytVeo-^at)'

24-27

rpiarl

Kal TrAetoertv

17

to dopiaTov tov TrActovos

on

iTrqyayei'

rpirarq

TrtJtrov

XeXenrrai,

p.o'ipa

1461 ® 26

Svvarai

avirjcri^

Kat

•^v

(Ss (jktoj

yevetr^at ras Trapot^^T/Kutas (Spas, KaTaXtima-Oat Se recrcrapas, aiirep

This highly

TOV oXov rpirov.

elcrl

makes

rtSv

ttAco)

St’o

‘

the greater part of two-

can hardly be what Aristotle has in mind, as

thirds of the night

he distinctly says that the solution of the

some

usual sense of ‘more’, but

was probably that of

‘

full

’,

i.

e.

.

Kal to TrXqpe'i,

.

ecnqKe, Kal iv

cos

irapioxqKe, rpirarq

S’

TrXetv-

9.

71); and

MqTp 68 o)po<;

vvv

ow

yap to

Kal

TrXeLOV

Se'vras

atel

to ttAcov dvTt

it

as dvrl tov

TrXeo)

irXqpq^ (Schol.

survives also in the gloss of Hesychius

irXqpqs-

TO I 0 OS rfjs

Vahlen quotes Soph.

Xe'lecos.

Tqv

Tpets TpoTTOi Tcov TTapo,

op.u>vvp.tav Kal

OTav q 6 Adyos q TOvvop.a Kvptcos (Tqp.awq ets Se OTav elwOoTe^ Sp.ev ovt(o Aeyetv, TOV K€Kpa)ieVov

here

8e

;

en

accepted this interpretation of II.

its

irXqpq? yap q yv^ rwy Svo p,oipwy yeyovvla TrepLXeXenrrai. Aristonicus seems to have

TOV TrA^pes elpqfrOaf

Ven. A.

ev T(o crov

TrAeiat toc ^^aA/cou KAicriat.

Tcji

not

mentioned by Porphyry ad

is

147) as the suggestion of a certain Metrodorus ovv TO TrAeiov Svo crqp.aCveLV (jtqcrl Trap 'Op.qpt^‘ ,

it

This other sense

loc. (p.

aijvq6e<;

be found in

in giving

different sense.

which

may

difficulty

recognizing irAew as an amphibolous word,

p.h'

which

artificial interpretation,

mean

pcoipamv

than

the

is

my mind

to

others

TrXeio),

much more

a

i66*>'

el. 4,

Tqv

14

elcrl

Se

dp,^i/3 oAiW, eis p.ev

oloy deTOS Kal

Kvwy

probable correction

have been suggested, to KeKpap.eyoy

that

(IMadius), ttSv KeKpap.eyoy (Bursian), {dtra) t(ov KeKpap.ey(t)y (Vahlen), T
^oloyovy) (Tucker),

same

tov Ke/cpapievov, with oTvov in

means

close proximity in the context,

There

tov KeKpap.eyoy olvov.

Eq. 1187 Trietv KeKpap.eyov Tpt’a Kat Svo (comp. Gildersleeve, Syntax of Class. Gk. 32); and it is ceris

the

tainly not

ellipse in Aristoph.

uncommon

with aKpaTo? (com.p. dKpaTOTr6Tq<;,

general sense then of the whole passage will be this

parlance a mixture of wine and water the

same

principle

Homer’s

‘

tin

’

is

may

said to be

‘

:

etc.).

wine

The

common

In ’

be an amalgam of

and on tin

and

some critic who took exception to the idea of the greaves being made of so soft a metal as tin, a point which modern archaeologists also have some difficulty in explaining (comp. Helbig, Das homerische Epos' another metal.

p. 196).

Aristotle

is

apparently replying to

^27

—

oTk'ot'

Plutarch Coni, praec. 140 f to Kpa/xa kultol vSaros peTt'xov

:

The

TrXei'oyos oivov KaXovfiev.

De

;

COMMENTARY

342 ^ 27

—

gen. et corn

oiov ort oTvos’ TTOtei

fact

321*^35

l. 5i

recognized and explained

is

(n-iKparow Xeyerai o'

’'o

rij

in

px^a,

yap to tov olvov epyov aXX' ov to tov vSaTOs to ^

avvoXov plyp.a. ® 28

I'COTeUKTOU KaffaiTCpOlO

Kl'Tjflls

^29

11.21.592.

I

Aristotle adduces this use of ^aAKeA,

language

234, on

to justify the

assumption that by a similar extension of meaning otvo^oeiW may be used for the serving out in

20.

II.

the

of nectar as well as that of wine. x'A.KeA and its cognates are often found in this more general sense in the literature after Homer Schol. Yen. B.

II.

apiXu

cri'Sypov.

Pollux 7

106

-

19.

283 iraXaia

xttA.KCi/€tv

Se

Kttt

On

two .passages

in these

a distant reminiscence of Aristotle’s words.

oivoxoedeiv

^30

ovopa^eiv tov

TO cnSrjp€V€iv eXeyov, Kai xa^/ceav

The language

Tous TOV aiSrjpov ipya^opivov?.

may be

rop

rj

Xtyop^v tov? tov criSypov ipya^opevov ?.

/cat

:

II.

20.

the other hand,

234 tov

we

Kai avypeLij/avTO 6 eol Att otvoxoevctv.

are told elsewhere

(II. 5.

341) that the gods

do not drink wine, ov vivovcr aWoira oXvov. For the infinitive actually found in the Homeric text comp. An. post. 2. 30, 97 6 TOVTO 8 etprjTaL p.rj Sta^tpctv. Top. 2. 3, no “33 ovt et TravTt ovt

—

et

piySevl VTrdpxetv tlprjTau

;

toCto ye Kara

® 31 to explain

Homer’s use of

would seem,

Aristotle apparently prefers

jX€Ta(}>opdv.

metaphor

otvo^oeveiv as a

;

referring,

it

to the pteTa^opa koto to dvdXoyov considered in 21,

1457 b 16 sqq. Set Se KTe. ^

4.

Just as

This

is

we have

a general

word of caution very

to consider

all

like that in

the attendant circumstances

condemning an act as wrong or immoral, so too, when on a word, we should consider its context and its possible meanings in the context before pronouncing it to be improper we must be quite sure of our interpretation before passing an adverse judgement on the poet. before

the question turns

;

®

33

oiov

Tw

preceding Tirj

p’

olov cv Tw, the preposition

ev t/S etpr/pevu)

p.€V

eyxos p^^f eXacrcre

Bid

on

(see

eax^TO x
d^pipov 8v(a

=

2,

1448

O'

10).

^O. 267 ovSe tot Atvciao 8ai(j)povo?

•

crdKO?' xpvcro? tttvxcis,

being understood from the

at

8’

yap epvKaKe, dp

€Ti

BCypa

Tpei? ijcrav,

TTTvxas yXaare kvXXottoBiwv, tu? Bvo x^dKeias, Bvo

8’

9eoio‘

dXXd

iirei

TrivTe

€v 8 o 0 t KaucriTi-

The diffiT^v 8€ plav xpva-irjv Ty p 'dirxeTO pietAivov culty found here may be seen from the note of Porphyry (p. 244

poio,

—

;

25. 1461 ^ Schr.)

t^s yap

:

TTm^os Sokouot^s

eh to

h'fKa TTjV xpva-rjv

reXevTaias ras Ka(r(rtTepiva
8vo re

ttcos

same

practically the

B

this, that

The

86pv

to

the plate of gold sufficed

its

loc.

Aristarchus also

is

A

269

Schol. Ven.

plausibility:

20.

II.

SoK'^ Avo'eojs rjTToprjKevai Kal Sta tovto rjOeTtjKevaL,

Xpya^S iTTV^^s

Kara rqv

Trpurrr^?

TTjs TrAetovos op/^iiys

This

plates of brass.

is

as the solution quoted from Autochthon in

and Eustathius ad

have acknowledged pr]

vtt

irTvxp?, Kal ey tt}

SieKOif/e

and indented the underlying

Schol. Ven.

evedrjKev,

course of the spear, though the spear-point actually

to stop the it

TrpdoTrjv

Svo ^aA/
answer of Aristotle was perhaps pierced

ye Koap-ov 1461 ^ 33

TrpcoTTjs cTvat, et

Kal SiaTprjOeLoyj ivea-x^Orj

ovay)

e$(i3

343

opwpevov

kul

e^ca

avTTjv Se crrepeoTTjTOs h'eKa ras

XP’^^ay)

27-35

said to iva Se

on

efyrjcrlv

eyKoir^v el\r] 4>ivai

KeKof^Oai pevTOL to o-d/cos ecos

[

= Aristotle’s

riys

Sopv

eTnefidveiav Keipeyr]<; voyreoy to

/ccoAn^^vat], Sia-

em

TpiTrj^ irTVX^'S, ov Tpoitov

t^s

MeveAdov Xeyet “ ^ ot -jrAetcrTOj/ epvTO, Sia wpd 8e etcraTO Kal Tyi”, KuXudtii'ai Metaph. A 23, 1023 17 €Tt to kcoAJov koto, ttjv avTov ^ 34

TTVx^'i

®'

:

oppyv

Ti KLveLcrBaL

y TTparreiv ex^i'V XeyeTae tovto avTO,

Pdpy, Kal

Ktoves TO. eTTiKeipeva

tbs ot TroiyToX

(rvpvea-ovT dv

ovpavov

(see

et'Se'xeTat, scil. (rypaiveiv

eirl

Tyv yyv.

on

24,

tov *ATAavTa

1460

oioy Kal ot ttoiovctl

tov

34).

= TTOTepoy

The clause, with mSl y cbSt (see on 4). the punctuation given in the text, is appositional to Troo-axtbs av d)8l

w8l

T]

on

a-ypaivoL (see

1460

25,

25).

46^28

For

tbSt

y

comp. An.

tbSt

—

Soph. dyvoetrat to iroTepov wSe y StSe txei. 31, Rhet. 3. I, 1404^10 177^^5 dvaipovvTe's y wSe y wSe. yap

Tt irpos to Sykaterat d)St

/idXior’

editors

may 989

—

place

after

be taken ^

Kara follows Kvpiov

ttjv

An.

245

7. 3,

post.

I.

— De caelo Xeyovaiy. — Meteor. A N.

6

;

Metaph. Z 16, 1040

8,

10).

The y

tvavTtds or evavTtws.

2.

2,

12,

tbs

which

285^25 348^12

similar construction 3. 13,

A

from 22, 14581^3 dAAtos ex^tv y tbs to 80^335 XyTTeai evavTttos y ws exoverw at

is

evavTtws ^
1118 ^ 23 pdXXov y ws

evta KTe. is explanatory of

Glaucon

1)

=

17,

I.

in Eth.

comp, Metaph.

",

illustrates

TTpordo-ets.

Xeyei.

which recent ® 35

(or colon)

viroXd/3 oL KaTa Adyov ov cKtivos ph' ov StypOpoicrev

KaravriKpu

Vahlen

.

The comma

have removed in order that pdXuTTa

I

with /card ryv KaTavTiKpv

30 pdXiCTT dv

ktL (also Phys.

this

18,

Si-aefiepet

tbSt ehveZv.

y

Tis uiroXdPot.

oi'

pr. i.

el.

ot

iroXXoL

ws TAavKoiv keyet,

and apparently a quotation.

‘

the

The

way

clause oTt

described by

COMMENTARY

344 1461

rXauKUM.

I

Aristotle

probably referring to the Glaucon men-

is

Homeric matters

tioned as an authority in

where the rhapsodist says of himself Xeyeiv

-n-epl

'Opii^pov, cos ovre

Ion 530

in Plato’s

kuI oXfxai ko-Wictt

:

MrjrpoSwpo? 6

d,

avOpoiTrwv

AaiJ.\paKrjvos ovre ^Trjo-ip.-

ySpoTos 6 ®dcrios ovre TXau/ctov ovre dX\o<; ovSels tcov Tranrore yevoctr^cv

p-evoiv

that the

Glaucon

is right,

we cannot

3. I,

ovto)

eiveLV

The absence

oa-ag iyu).

ttoAXois

km

KaXas Siavoias

Op,ypov

Trepl

of a local appellative here seems to imply

was an Athenian. him with the PXavKcov

in question

identify

If this inference 6 Tyios of Rhet.

26 or with Glaucus of Rhegium (comp. Hiller, Rh.

1403

Mus. 41 p. 398); he may perhaps be the same as the Glaucus or Glaucon (v. Diintzer, Rettung der aristot. Poetik p. 227) mentioned by Porphyry on II. ii. 636 (p. 168 Schr.) along with other early interpreters of

2

auTol

Homer.

KaTai)/'»](}>io'(£fJie('oi

\ap.f3dvov(TLv,

resumes the idea of

dXdyws

tvia

TrpovTro-

and anticipates that in rfj avrwv ol-qa-a. The common postquam ipsi condemnationis sententiam tulerint ’

rendering,

‘

(Tyrwhitt), gives KaTai/'r/^to-d/cevot a sense too near to that of the

The

cTTm/cSo-tv in the following line.

probability

seen (comp. Bon. Ind. 376 “56), that instance to decide ’, or to affirm or

(to reject

yap Kvpiov

Set Trotetv

iiravayecrdo) TrdXtv

4. 14,

to TrXij^os,

eirt

Tpap.p,€Vuig TTOtovcrtv ol

rovg ap^ovrag.

yap dXtyot

Se ov Kvpioi,

dXX

TOUTO Be

ireTTorGe

;

ev rots OpKfjLKOig eTrecrt

xd

4

Trepl ’iKdpioi'.

The

dTrot/^i^^i^d/cevov p.ev

yap rats

ets

p.r]

Kvpiov, dXX’

TroXtretats dvreo"-

pXv

Kvpioi, Kara-

rovg TrXeiaTOUS

1449

t)

atef.

26).

)

question which Aristotle regards as based

Schr.) Sid Tt 6 Tr]Xip.a)(og

elg

KaiTOL dXoyov iXOdvra

;

cv

6,

As

something.

’

dTroi/fiy^io'ct/cei'ot

on

Vahlen has the present

5 4loI>27 tovto Se TriirovOe koI 6 KaXovp.evotg Xoyog. i.

on a mere assumption, survives ’Iicaptcp

298^1 36

eTravdyerat

De anima

accept

KaTaxj/rj
eipriKOTog, scil. tov ttoitjtov (see

3

1

‘

in

opposite of dTroi/o^^t^ecr^at

Karaij/rjcjiilea-OM is the

a proposal): Pol.

ij/r](l3i(Tdp.evoL

’

‘

‘

a term of politics

as

is,

means

it

in

Porphyry on Od.

AaKeSat/cova eXOwv ovk

tQ

4.

i

(p.

everv^e

Trarpi ryg p-rjTpbg pd] evT.vxeiy,

40 t(o

and

i. 285 (comp. Schol. Od. 2. 52) -n-wg dg ^vrdprrjv awTvyxdvei ’I/capio) ; The assumption of the critics, that the father of Penelope (called in Homer Icarius) was a Lacedae-

in

Schol. Od.

iX&uiy ov

monian, Aristotle meets by quoting on the other side the Cephallenian

tradition

which made him a Cephallenian.

This same

solution of the difficulty reappears incidentally in Schol. Od. 15.16 OTi ’lOaKrjcnog 6 ’I/cdptos, ov %irapTidT'qg,

dStX^ds TwSdpew ... 6

Se

1-9

25. 1461 €K

’I/capios ’lOdicr)

iv

Hermes 30

p. 265).

TO

t^s KefjjaWrjviaK^^, ivei ov^ oparai iv 1461

Mecrcri^VTjs

dAA ouSe AaKow" o6ev ovSe

dvaa’rp€
Tr]\fp.a)(os

8’ iato9

rrj

AaKeSaipLOva

comp. An.

:

8. 28,

there

is

Meyer,

Soph.

;

the form KecfiaXrjvLa

el. i, 165 10. found in the text

is

**

6

doubt that Aristotle must

little

have written the word with a double ling in Attic

29

“•

iverv^ey avrQ

(comp. E.

d7ro8rjp.ia

post. i. 9, 76

Though 605^ 27,

Ke^a^Xtji'es.

of H. A.

cts

345

This

A.

the normal spel-

is

and

Inscriptions (Meisterhans, Gr.® p. 96),

also in

according to Eustathius on Dion. Perieg. 431, tovs Se

literature,

Ke
rrjv K.e
AA

rj

TraAaid. ^p'^crts diracra

«X«Trap’

310

auTui'

yap

For the preposition comp. Plato

yTjpai.

c yap.ov
Trap’ dv^pdjTTCov ttoAv

—

386 A

Isocrates

^ Kara

TrAetovos

rrjv

€yy]p.€V

avrwy

Polit.

^

7

2 ept
e/c

ttoAiv,

yg

iy^ero SwTraAts.

The name

’IxaSiot'.

presumably the same as

is

which see Fick, Gr. Personennamen^ p. 296. eUds e(m»', scil. eivai (see on 24, 1459 '’9). to

(i. e.

8

alternative is

9

meaning it is through an the objection), seems probable and

take the clause (with Madius) as

error that the question

The

on

Et/cdStos,

‘

reasonable

oXws Se ktL rate,

puts

the

This concluding paragraph, in intention main points in the preceding discussion

any

at

into a

more general form. The language in 23 is to be noticed dSwara is clearly used as the opposite of the oia rjv rj ecmv, dXoya of the Old (jraa-iv Kal SoKet, and /SXaf^epd of the oia elvai Set in 2 5 Some of the points in the previous statement are 1460 b 10. either passed over or only just hinted at. On the other hand two new points are introduced the plea of poetical necessity, instead ;

»

:

of being limited indirectly said

‘morally

to ‘impossibilities’ (comp. 25,

an

to be

excuse for the

offensive’ also (comp, b

besides this

we have

dAoyta Kal

excellent in substance,

is

in

The whole

a pendant to that in “31.

/Aev

1460^23), is and the pLoxOrjpLa); and

improbable

the dialectical rule of caution in

might very well have found a place

TO dSuvaToi'

‘

the

main

chapter in

’

15,

which

discussion, as fact,

however

hardly a model of logical arrangement.

irpos

tt]i/

ttoitjo-k'.

Vahlen takes these words

together in the sense of ‘the impossible in poetry’, and supposes

only two solutions to be recognized, those denoted by jSeArtov

1)

Trpos

8d|av.

The

tt/dos

chief objection to this view

is

to

that

4

— COMMENTARY

346 1461

9

seems

it

exclude the solution given in 25, 1460^24, where is said to justify even impossibilities The

to

‘

poetical necessity

reason that

follows, Trpds

necessary qualification,

made

guised and

A

aTOTTov.

ttjv

elKora,

second solution

ktL, adds a very

ttoltictiv

the impossibility has to be dis-

that

by

credible (niOavov)

dSwara

24, 1460®' 2^

yap

re

viz.

arts of expression

and 24, 1460^2 is by reference

;

comp.

d<^avi^£i ^8vv(ov to

—

to

Trpds

a point which Aristotle illustrates here from painting, and not as in 25,

A

460'’ 33 from poetry.

1

by showing that the and sanctioned by opinion (comp. and 1460 b 3g ovru) ^acriv). 86iav,

irpdg

ovTw;

e.

i.

TT)!'

elvuiy

TTOirjaii'

Trpds

TTOitjTLKOv),

d8waTa ’’12

eiKOTa p.dXXov

oious

Zeuxis

(6,

1450® 27)

e. that

Sward

rj

357

^

Trjv

10 old

26

to

c^acrtv koI

Soku,

Trpds voiTjo-iv filv

iKavois

(fivcriv

ov)( rj

riyv

been accepted

(17

yap

yap peraopa

i/cavois.

Fr.

tovtcdv

p.vrjprj.

147

something (comp. Bon. Ind.

that

:

24,

1460^26

We

the personages

of Zeuxis

he sacrificed expression to beauty.

in the present

passage

TTpoaipeiaGai re Set

aTriOava.

In 25, 1460^18 also the allusion is have been told in an earlier chapter

eypaei’.

apparently to a picture.

i.

1460

icrtos etprjKev

by reference

reference Trpds

® 37).

atpcTwrepoi' iriOavov dSumToi'

11

25,

2. 3,

yvcdvat

by

is

Trpds t'^v TroLtjcnv Trpd epyov

to explain

dt'dyeo',

42

TO

8k

(Teubn.) ov8k yap 10

Meteor.

:

Empedocles]

[scil.

third

impossibility has

is

that they are

‘

lacked character,

The

criticism implied

impossibilities

words, of an impossible beauty, not like real

’,

in other

men and women

(i.e. not ola yy y earir, 25, 1460 10). The answer to this is that they are, like the characters in Sophocles (25, 1460^33), better than the reality, what men and women ought to be. This justifi-

cation of Zeuxis, which recalls what has been said elsewhere of

Polygnotus

and of Homer (15, 1454^14), may own view of him and his work. It a common view of him in antiquity (comp. Maximus 1448®’

(2,

5),

very well represent Aristotle’s

was

certainly

Tyrius Diss. 32. ^

13

1454 ^ 9 ^ bue i

will

14

5).

dXXd PAtiov (scil. TOLovTovs eivai) is a vivid way of putting the respondent’s answer to the objection (see on 25, 1460^33). TO yap irapdSeiypa Set uirepexeiv. As Aristotle says in 15,

make

Trpds

fi


instead of keeping too closely to his model,

artist,

his portrait

more

TdXoya,

beautiful than the real

scil. Set

dvdyetv.

It will

man.

be seen that a Se

wanting, and also that the next clause (ovtu re kuI dVt

is

Trore ovk

25. 1461 '^9-15

347 This may perhaps 1461 '’14

aXoyov ia-nv) conies in without a conjunction.

be taken as another sign of the Poetics being

rough draft of a book (see on 22, 1458 30). easy on revision to make the text read thus :

in places only the

would have been

It

Trpos 8’

avdyovTas oitw re kvreov koI otl ttotc ovk aXoyov ellipse

comp.

The

TaXoya.

though

it

25, 14601' 35

appearance of the word in

first

and thus

For the

ovtco 4>aa-LV, scil. kvreov.

means

chapter,

this

has been used more than once in chap. 24.

said of a fact or statement, for,

on

a ^ao-t raXo-ya

ecrriy.

to dkoyov,

which we cannot account

that

find a difficulty in accepting as either true or possible

on 15, 1454'' 6). There is an obvious distinction between and to dSwaTov, that which is not and cannot be true, the one being only improbable and the other impossible The charge

(see it

‘

‘

of improbability according to Aristotle

one

may

may be met

two w'ays

in

;

urge (i) that the statement criticized has the sanction

of opinion (d ^ao-iv), or (2) that the incident w'as not so improbable, one remembers the time (mre) when it is supposed to have

if

These two solutions have already appeared in the main discussion in 1460 35-1461 4, but in answ'er to a somewhat different allegation, that of untruth {on ovk akrjOr] 1460^33). occurred.

A

third answ'er, the plea of poetical necessity,

in

is

indirectly suggested

19. oTi TTOTe ouK

crrorekr]^ to

oikoyov

:

rdkavrov ovre

Xpya-OaL oTaOnw,

For the emphatic

comp.

fr.

icrov

(prjcrl

164 (Teubn.) Avwv ovv rore Kat vvv ovre

6 ’Apt-

affimpicrfieveo

and the passages quoted above on 25, 1461 rrore comp. Top. 3. 2, 117 ® 36 al iJ.ev yap del

2. 7]

Top. 5- I) 128^ 20). eiKos Y“P See on 18, 1456®' 23 {ean Se rovro elKog The maxim being Agathon’s, it might be quoted for controversial purposes when better arguments were not to be had. Ttt uiremi'Ti'ws eiprjfieVa covers the ground of the group of diffiSe TTOTE

culties

')(prj(Tip.r]

(also

of the poem, and for the

The

The common

considered in 1461 ® 9-31.

that they turn primarily

may be met by

word or phrase

difficulties

clearly

is

finding another interpretation

to which the critic has taken exception.

themselves are very far from being

In the second (eTSos KaKos ® 12), fourth {dkkoi {alipa Se ® 24),

point in these

on the language rather than the matter

and eleventh

(otvoxoevetv ® 30) the

some inconsistency or

all

piev

of one kind.

supposed

self-contradiction

;

eighth

® 16),

in

fault

the

is

third

{^wporepov ® 14) and sixth {8iSop.ev ® 22), how'ever, it is an offence against morals; in the fifth (ot?y ® 20), seventh (08 ® 23), and ninth

—

8

7

COMMENTARY

348 1461

26) one against scientific or other truth ; and in the first 10) and tenth {Kaa-a-iripoto ^28) one against general

15 (TrAeo) {ovp^a's

The

probability.

formula, therefore, v-n-evavnws dprjp.eva, instead

of being restricted to logical incompatibilities, seems to include

words and phrases which

in the

view of the

That

with other standards of judgement.

wider sense

shown by

is

16

wCTTrep ot

verb

may

f)

1

).

ei'

toIs Xoyo^s eXcyxoi-

(o-KCTTTeot ?)

a avTOS Xeyct

irpos

The

3. ii,

The same

434®' 13, where Kivdrai

ma-n-ep

sort of ellipse

The

is

converse of

found in Metaph.

Kal

paXXov

I

an

this,

active

1053^ 14

2,

of Phil.

J.

1

understood from a passive, Sci yviDpipioTipuys \e)( 6 ^vaL

ttois

Xiyovcnv).

djcFTTcp ot Trepl (f>vcre(j)s (scil.

De

er^aipa in

probably to be supplied

is

from the Kivd which precedes the comparison (see p. 67).

o av
t)

sense shows that a passive

has to be understood.

be the explanation of the nominative

anima

variance

to bear this

the fuller formula in the context, wa-re

Kol avTov [scil. evavTioJS dprjKivai] VTToOrjraL

critic are at

was meant

it

The

Statement in

word of caution not unlike those we have already ®4 and ®3i. Aristotle reminds us that the difficulties of

the text

is

a

had in language pointed out by the that, before

and

critics are

not always real ones, and

they are admitted to be real, they should be scrutinized

same way

tested in just the

as in a dialectical discussion one

of one’s opponent

tests the contradiction or confutation

—which

is

sometimes a genuine confutation {eXeyxos dAy^tvos), and sometimes only the semblance of one (lAe-yx^? <^aivd/x€vos Ind. v. Bon. :

235

15

The main

42).

points to be considered are briefly indicated

in the context, el to avro Kal Trpds to avro Kal wcradrojs.

A

enumeration of the marks of a genuine eAeyxos is found el. 5, 167^23 eXcyxos p.ev yap avTLcjiaa-LS tov avrov Kal

in Soph,

dvd/xaros

dXXa

Trpdyp,aTOS,

Kal

ovop-aros

avTov, eK Tv)v SoOevTcoy, e^ dydyKy^, /card.

TavTO Kal

26, 181

®I

Tavro Kal

tt/dos

rots

Trapd Toy

pd]


orvyaptffp.ovp.d'ov

p.rj

vicravTtvs

dpLcrp-oy

Kal

ey

evds,

tov ey dpxp,

eXeyxov

dvTL
TO avro Kal KaTo. to avTO Kal irpos to avTO Kal

p.r]

dAAa tov

t <3 avriv xpoy
yiyop-eyotg rod

dirayTTjTeoy (TKOwovcn to (Tvp.Tepacrp.a Trpds

fuller

-

.

.

.

ecrat

(vcravTcvs Kal ey T(v auTiS

Xpoy
^18

wffT€ Kal auToi' KT€. Trpds

d avTos XeyeL

Beitr. 4 p. 384).

must be

first

rj

= coare

Kal tov

TroLTjTrjy vTrevavTttt)?

Trpds o dv ippoyip-o^

The

sense

is

:

elprjKeyaL

The word

or phrase in question

ascertained to be really inconsistent either with

actual statement in the

poem

itself,

ij

vnod^Tai (comp. Vahlen,

in the

some

context or elsewhere.

— 15-22

25. 1461

may be

or with what

reasonably assumed as true or probable.

good deal of

arbitrary assumptions which underlay a

^3

poetical criticism (see

l74t> 19 £Ti KadaTTcp

laid

iv Tol^ pr}TopiKOi's Kal h/ rots eXeyKTtKois

Ktti

ra h'avriwp.ara

Oediprjriov

wpos

rj

eavrov Xeyopeva

to.

In the note on

op-oXoyu KaAws Xiyeiv y wpaTreiv.

Trpos ovs

now

offering a

is

still

that he

is

8 ei rov ‘rronqTrjv

scil. (TKOTreiv

word of advice

—as

r/

this

mean

passage in his edition Vahlen supposes the clause to Kal avTov,

the current

The statement in the text may down for dialectic in Soph. el. 1 5,

sqq.).

be compared with the rule

he

In 1461

av ^povi/ios viroOrjTai Aristotle sets aside the hasty or

sa3’ing o

o/AOiws

349

ma-re

though Aristotle were

to the poets.

seems

It

me

to

that

thinking of the critics and apologists of poetry, and

merely

telling

them

and make quite sure they are

examine the supposed

to

These, to be

real ones.

virevavrCa real,

must

be like the evavnw/xara in a genuine confutation, and capable of

standing the same logical

The whole point in poem may

tests.

the incongruities found in the language of a

fact is that

turn out

on

examination to be imaginary, just as a confutation in argument be only a sham confutation.

may 281

i’

p,r]

and 875^53.

24,

dmYKTjs ouarjs

(AT)

For the datives see Bon. Ind. 166*^61, '’iQ

Kal jAoxOiipia.

dXoyi'a

:

15. 1454®'

28 7rapd§€ty/Aa

avayKaiov oioy 6 MeveAaos 6 ev tw

was

necessity

indirectly recognized

criticisms in 25,

1460^24, and before

1460 ^12. Alyel: Eurip. Med. 663.

irovrjpia’;

The

’Opi
pXv

plea of poetic

as a valid answer to certain that in 15,

1454^ 28

;

comp,

also 24,

Aristotle’s

given for

The appearance

of Aegeus

is

in

view (i) aXoyov, because no sufficient reason can be it,

and (2) unnecessary, because no use

The

the after-part of the play.

editors of Euripides are hardly

is

made

of

it

in

explanations of certain of the

an adequate answer

to Aristotle’s

criticism. iv ’OpeoTT)

:

see on 15, 1454®" 29 {p.^ avayKaiov).

The

cK ireVre eiSuv ^ipouaiv.

of

represent distinct ‘kinds’

something that that

is

it

1456

14

evcrracrts.

Rhet.

various heads under which the

poetry have been classified are termed

faults in

2.

cj>epov(nv.

it is

ySAaySepov

(etc.). (j>€p€Tai..

18,

It

post.

i.

14,

1391 824 Sd^ai

For

this

—An.

pr.

is

because they

one thing

to say of

and another use of ^epeiv comp. 19,

dSwarov, another that

i 7nTlp. 7]p.a

—An.

faults.

e’lSr],

it is

2.

aXoyov,

26,

cftepovaL

Kal TTpordceis

eicrtV,

69^*1 rds

lpeTai

r/

aTroSct^ets.

ii &v rds

Tricrrcts

22

18

— COMMENTARY

350 w9

23

ra

dSui'aTa, Scil. ovra

pXaPepd

elprjiJLeva.

The word may be

d ov 6'

dcria

yap

Toli ye aKovovai fSkafiepd' ttSs

ovTi, TreicrOels d)S

1460^11.

condemnation of

a reminiscence of Plato’s

certain legends in Rep. 391 fjLYjv

ehai Bel in 25,

the opposite of the ola

:

ravra ovr

dkrjOrj

.

.

eauTtp ^vyyvmp-yjv e^ei

dpa Toiavra TrpdrTOvarl re koI evparrov Kal “

koX

.

KaKm

ol Oeo)v

dy)(i(T7ropoi

uirerarTta

24

irapct

the vwevavTLUt'; elprqp,eva of

:

TT)i'

opSoTTjTtt

TT)i'

IS-

must

KttTci Tcx^yp'

refer,

as

Twining has

seen, to the technical inaccuracies of description considered in 25, 1

460

16 sqq.

It

clearly recognizes

be observed that the present statement

to

is

two kinds of

only incidentally

error,

distin-

guished in the early part of the chapter (25, 1460 '’20), the fault of impossibility and the fault of technical inaccuracy. The distinction

a very real one in controversy

is

instance, that

is

rexi'rjv is

rexv-qv in

25,

to say of a picture, for

not scientifically or historically correct

same thing

quite the

Kara

it

as saying that

not

is

represents an impossibility.

it

apparently used as an equivalent for the KaO' eKderrqv

1460

passage differently.

The

'’19.

older interpreters understand the

Goulston makes

a poeticae vel alterius artis

norma

it

mean

‘

tanquam ea quae

ac veritate discedunt’,

thus

giving Kara rexyqv a sense wide enough to include poetry as well

Heinsius (after Victorius) renders

as laTpLKq, TroXiTiKrj, etc. ‘

ut quae

the text

cum

ipsa artis poeticae pugnant natura

had

either Kara rqv Texyqv

is

sufficiently obvious.

poetically

wrong

chapter

and

which

;

it

is

by

it

though

Hermann wished

to

not one of the

eTriTLp.qp.aTa

considered in

this

cannot be met by any of the counter-arguments

Aristotle has suggested for the use of the apologist.

Ik Ttav €lpT)peVuv dpi6pwv.

from

—

just as

The objection to such interpreThe criticism that something is

restore) or nar avrqv rqv rexyqvtations

(which

’

numeris,

The

precise

Goulston’s paraphrase^

clear.

seu

specialibus

is

’

(Beitr. 4, 389).

sense of dpL9p.u)v Tyrwhitt quotes Isocrates dpiOpov?

TrepiKafimv

Plutarch

De

e^

S>v

dpicrT

dv

of this

is

far

and Vahlen’s ‘aus den

differentiis

genannten Zahlen oder Stiicken

meaning

‘ex antedictis formarum

tls

aud. 45 c to p.ev KaXbv

to.

To

illustrate the

224 d arravTas rovs kolvo.

StoiKijcretev.

Ik ttoXXSlv olov dpiOp-dw

eh

€va Kaipov qKOVTCov VTTO (Tvpp.eTpLas TLVOS Kai dppovias eTriTeXeiTai '

Goulston

may

possibly

have remembered the expression tous

eKOLOTov Tuiv voaqpaToiv in Hippocrates 2 p. 27

Hippocr.

p. 92.

K.

dptO/iovi

as interpreted by Foes, Oec.

25. 1461 °

23-24

comparing also the similar use of numeri Tyrwhitt’s quotations

351 in

Another of 1461’’ 24

Latin.

perhaps more directly to the purpose,

is

S’ apiOfios ov [
Eurip. Ion 1014 6 SevTepos

Spa

;

—to

apiOpLov

Aristotle

dpiOpQ irepas

oAAo

ecrx^v

y^e
17

gen. an.

‘

points enumerated

h

’

It

would seem from these instances the sense of an item or term in

If this

reference in ck rJiv elprifievwv api 6 p.wv

between the language

and

that in

iTTUTKOTTovvTa Xveiv,

Twv

in eK

dprjp-evtjiv

the next clause,

explain the

is

to the

list

may is

thus stand

possible, the

of assumptions in

in the text, al Avcreis Ik tCjv elprjpiivwv dpiOp-utv

1460 ^21

wcm Sa

The advantage aptOp-wv

ela-l

interpretation

ev rtp TpLTio

T wining draws attention to the parallelism

the opening of this chapter.

CTKenTiai,

76o«'33

ovSh/ yewwcriv,

a series, and that dpiOp-mv in the present passage for

3. 10,

dAA

S

may sometimes have

that dpidp-os

De

by Teichmiiller) in

(cited

avTOL p.h' yap yiyvovrai,

is

that

8e SwSeKa

to, iTrLTip-qp-aTa

it

simplifies the explanation of

dpiOpot).

(scil. oi

number by adding up

... Ik tovtwv

of this view of the reference

It

is

usual to

the various Avo-eis actually found

and described in the preceding discussion (1460 21-1461 and counting in statements like those in 1460 ^ 29 and 1461 (v.

ad

loc.),

though they are hardly AuVeis

on 1460'’

the term (see

begins by laying

The

first is that,

down

will

to the

be seen that Aristotle

a series of postulates concerning poetry.

as the poet

represent either ota

it

31

in the present sense of

we look back, however,

If

29).

opening paragraph in the chapter,

21), 4,

is

ecrriv

an imitator, the poetic picture may or old ^acn Kal SoKel or ola etvai

Set.

There are thus, if we separate the alternatives (as Aristotle himself has done in the course of the discussion), five possibilities, ota ^v, old eo'Ttv, old (ftacriv (etvat), ota SoKet (etvat), ola etvat Set and they are each of them available in reply to criticism if the critic, for J

;

instance, says that the picture valid

answer to reply that

eo-Ttv, etc.

quite the

The second same

it

postulate

*

11-13

;

is that,

as ordinary speech,

certain arts of interpretation.

1460

not of things ola etvat

is

represents ola

it

(v.

1461

Set, it is

as poetic language

may

a

2) or old is

not

have to be explained by

This point

is

merely indicated in

the statement there has to be supplemented from

The word seems

the Toiroi of p. 400.

same sense in [Dion. Hal.] Ars Rhet. p. 414 R. oh ttwoptv, rots t-md where dpiBpoh represents

to bear the

ylvtrai St tovto tv rots dpi6pots

—

COMMENTARY

352 1461 ’’24 that

1461 ^9-31, where we are told that

in

modes

six

of interpre-

tation of the written letter of poetry {yXuiTTrj, Kara iJL€Taopav, Kara TrpocrwSiav,

postulate

Kara to

ap-cja^oXia,

Statpecret,

and may be difficulties arising from

available,

the poet’s language

wanted.

is

The

third

that poetry, as a distinct art, has a correctness of

is

own, apart from that of every other as the next

may be

riys Xe^em) are whenever a Averts of

e^os

legitimately assumed,

art or science

(1460^23-29)

section

poetically right, even though

some

or offends against

—which

explains, that a description it

involves

some

impossibility,

The may

technical standard of correctness.

various assumptions, therefore, in

its

implies,

of postulates

series

this

and as a matter of some form or other in the

serve as major premisses for the apologist; fact

^

every one of them appears

specimen

Auo-eis in this chapter.

just 12 (5

+6

26

-}-

be seen,

too, that they are

interpretation of this chapter has

by Gomperz

at length

rounds

Aristotle

p. 71 sqq,

The

PeAriwi' ktI.

rioTepot' 8e

been considered

It will

number.

in

1)

in

Eranos Vindobonensis

in

theory of Tragedy and epic

off his

poetry with an appendix on a question which was, no doubt, often discussed in his time, that of the comparative value of the two

forms of

In the view of certain

art.

this

view are stated (1461

4-14)

inconclusive (1462

critics

Tragedy was

(comp. Plato Laws 658

inferior to epic poetry

f*

;

The

d).

artistically

reasons for

27-1462 4), and then shown to be after which four positive arguments

The

are adduced as turning the scale in favour of Tragedy.

case

Tragedy may be put into the form of an enthymeme €k The inferior art is one that addresses an inferior public a-qp.u(iiv

against

:

;

Tragedy addresses an inferior art.

The

inferior public

truth of the

;

it

must, therefore, be the

minor premiss

is

shown by

the evi-

dence, or rather the practice, of actors and other public performers,

who may be presumed measure of ^27

<})opTiKTi,

Pol. 8

.

its

‘common’

5 1340 ,

to

'’

I34i'’ll ov T^s avTov

aKOvovTwv KpCvop^ev

rjSovrj';,

eTvai rrjv

(Tvpi^aiveL

their public

and

to

have taken the

or ‘vulgar’ (comp. Twining ad

9 TOVTUIV

ol pikv
6,

know

intelligence,

[i.e.

TWV ^6oS

ras KtvycreLS ol Se eXev6epiU)Tepa<;. dper^s,

pLeraxetpi^eTat

Kal TavTjys

4>opTLKrj?.

BiOTrep

epyaertW dAAd OyjTLKoyrepav.

yiyvea-6af

loc.),

KlVrjTLKOV A)(6vT(liV

Trovrjpo'i

yap

—

dAAa

ov tC)v

as in

pv^ptw] Pol. 8

Trjs

.

rwv

eXevOeptav

Kal /Savavaovs

Br]

6 ctkottos Trpos ov Trotowrat to

yap ^ear^s opnKos wv p.€Ta(3dXXeLV elwOe

reAos.

6

Comp,

also Aristophanes Vesp. 66 Kw/roiSias Be

rrjV p.ov(TLKrjv.

(l>opTiKrji

o-o^mepov,

24

25- 1461

and the Platonic passages

Bernays, Zwei Abh.

iiberladen TotauT4,

i.

ySeArtoiv jxev

^TTov

e.

rj

KoX ySeATtwv av

29

Kara

or

'

some- 1461

is

overdone

‘

’

182).

p.

post. i. 24,

KaO' avro [scil. aTrdSet^is], roiavTrj -q

353

The word

s. v.

extravagant

‘

comp. An.

(f>opTLK-q

p.epos aTrdSet^iS

etrj

chapter of the Posterior Analytics

“

85

Kara

S’ rj

—where

29

el Brj

ix€po
.

.

,

roiavrrj recalls the

The form

which precedes.

idea of the KaO' avro this

1461

Lex.

in Ast,

here in the sense of

times taken (‘

— 26.

of argument in

very similar to that in the

is

present section of the Poetics.

The term

Beards.

is

sometimes used even of the audience of '’28

a purely musical performance (Pol.

1341

8. 7,

b

16; Plato Gorg.

502 a ). dyaOdjy TO p.ei^ov

word comp. Eth. N. i. 5, 1097 b ig Pol. 4. 14, 1298b 40 eTravdyerat alperwrepov deL

£15 Tot'S TrXeicrrovs

akt,

For

del.

the position of the

—

(Bon. Ind. 430 big). Ind. 173 b 31.

For

qualifies the following (fiopriKy

\Cai/

on comp. Bon.

the insertion of S^Xov

The

{irpos) airai'Ta.

which

traditional

reading,

diravra

i)

p.ip.ovp.evr],

explained as meaning ‘the imitation which extends to

is

motu et gestibus omnia argument in this passage, though it may perhaps seem to be confirmed by Plato Rep. 397 a The logic of the present argument requires not diravra but irpds

every circumstance’ (Twining), or ‘quae similat

(Vahlen), does not

’

into the

fit

.

The sense is that Tragedy is of Phil. 5 p. i2i). J. because, instead of appealing to a select public {irpds

diravra (v. ffiopriK-Q

1462

diravra,

iirieiKets,

a

diravra

(1462^3). (‘any one and every one’) comp. Top.

diravn

Be

further on,

little

el. 5,

ovBe

the

in

eXevOepos

p.h'

it

is

irpds

efiavXovs

irpds

theatres

ireiraiBevp.evos,

0

Be

cfiopnKds

Brjp-ov

;

.

.

vw

Toiovrov olov iraiBwv re

SovAwv Kal eXevOepwv (comp. ouK (see

dpa

rjp.e'ls

dp.ov

eK

6,

POKTICS

1449 b

(iavavrroiv

;

Gorg. 502 c [i.e.

those

r]vpr]Kap.ev prjropLKrjv riva irpds

Kal

yvvacKuiv Kal

dvBpwv,

Kal

Laws 658 d ).

aia6ai'o|XEV(i)i', scil. rd>v Oeartov,

on

the

Plato had an equally

the theatrical public of his day

.

8 oix

— Soph,

^ seen from 13, 453 *> 1342 18 6 Oearrjs Birros,

ovKovv irpds iroXvv o^Xov koX Brjp,ov ovroi Xeyovrai ol Adyot

of the tragedians]

use of

164b

8. 14,

be

Kal Orjrdv koX dXAujv roLovnov crvyKeip-evos.

mean opinion of

are told

this

Aristotle’s estimate of

may

distinction in Pol. 8. 7, koI

For

rdv rv^dvra yvp.vaareov.

iravrl OetjiprjcraL paBiov.

Oearrjs

and from the

34, 6

SiaXeKreov

167^10

average

“•2),

irpds

we

or as

Oeards

understood from

irpds diravra

26).

A a

bag

27

COMMENTARY

354 30

1461

irpoa0Tj

(comp.

used absolutely

;

24,

1460

1457 ,

adds something

’

change of number

see

on

Xiyei

in

21,

’"19-

,ot <})au\oi auXifjTal: i.e. indifferent flute-players, in their anxiety

to

make

the music intelligible,

mimic movement of

Wimmer) Sicily

accompany According

the body.

(f>r]uLV

by a

sort of panto-

Theophrastus

(fr.

92 in

"AvSpoiva rov Karavaioy avAiyrijv

Kal pv6fiovs iroi^crai t <3 crtop-art avXovvra {oOiv o'lKeXi^uv to

KAedAav rdv ®r]f3aiov. Other Die Gebarden der Gr. u.

6p)(eL(j6ai Traph. tois TraXaiois), p,eO' ov

references to

Rom.

it

to

combination of music and pantomime originated

this

©eo^pacrTos TTpoirdv

:

Kivrjcrets

31

‘

18).

the

for

Kii'out'Tai:

of

sense

the

in

p.

it

be found in

will

Sittl,

244.

seems

pipeicrOai

SfffKoi'

to

mean

‘

to imitate the act of throwing

a quoit’.

32

iKuWav

may be

auAuffu',

‘

play music descriptive of Scylla

but the probability

is

that he

=

In the Greek avXeiv nva

34

as opxeia-Oai Tiva

On

MuvviaKos.

=

Si

1454'^ 31; thinking rather of a purely instru-

is

mental piece of music (see on

way

Aristotle

’.

referring to the dithyramb mentioned in 15,

1447

i,

15) on the

same

Si avAijtreoJS p.Lp,eia 6 ai Tiva, in dp^^jjcrccos

subject.

the

same

in

some

p-ip-eiirOai riva.

Mynniscus of Chalcis (the protagonist

.

of the later plays of Aeschylus) and his younger contemporary, Callipides, see Volker, Diss. Halens. 4 pp. 153, 177.

In

calling

Mynniscus may have meant no more than this, that his acting was so exaggerated as to be ridiculous and a mere caricature, the ape being a sort of caricature of humanity (comp, Top. 3. 2, 117 ^^ 17 cTKOTreiv Se Kai el ein to yeXoiorepov eirj dp.otov, Callipides an

‘

ape

’

KaOdirep 6 ttiOtjkos T(u dvOpwirm),

^35

Nothing further

riivBdpou.

is

known

of this actor (Volker

l.c.

P- 155)-

1462

^

3

:

(see

on

i,

assumed by the dancer. In remembered, was a species of acting had the technical sense explained by

the attitudes or postures

the dance, which,

1447

it

is

to be

*^27), a-xyp-a

Plutarch, Qu. conv. 9. 15, 747 C— E 1) yap opxficris eK re Kiv^aeiov Kai crxea-eoiv avvea-rrjKev, tus to pieAos tcov (f>06yy(x>v Kai rCiv Siaarr]pidruiv Ta<;

ivTavOa

Kti'^crets

(fiepopievai

BaKxy^

S'

at piovat iripara

rwv

Kivrjcredv elui,

ifiopas

ovop.d^ova'i, crx^pictTa Se cxecrets Kat Sta^eVeis,

TeXevTwiriv at

a-x^P-o-

Kivi^creis,

Sta^evTes

im

tov

orav ' AiroXXiovos ^ ITavds crwp.aTO';

ypa^t/cois

TOts

p.fl'

ets

ovv

i

“S

rivoi etSetriv

^ ,

j

L

26. 1461 iirififvwa-L

.

.

,

iv 6p)(^cru to

,

iSea?, Kttt TToAtv

30

”

jjikv cr)(^ixa

(7il|j,€i'ois

19,

p.

355

HLfxqTiKov t)

icm

Kai

jiopf^rj'i

Trpa^eojs

I462 ^ 3

^ Swayuecos

216).

*^10.

1456

movements, of hand or head for a q may be accompanied (comp. 13 hlarquard, and Ath. 628 d; see also

by which the spoken word

instance,

Aristo.xenus

41

p.

Sommerbrodt

1.

1,

213).

c. p.

The

pa+uSoui'Ta.

on

vTTOKpirqs (see luffiffTpajos It is

12

the significant

i.e.

:

on

see

:

^

(jiopa TrdOov^ Tiros ip-tfiarTiKOV

r}

(comp. Sommerbrodt, Scaenica uTTOKpiTiKfjs

— 1462

.

.

5, .

paif/wSos is tacitly

1449“

assumed

be a kind of

to

ifi)-

Nothing further

Mv'aaiOeos.

known

is

of either. ^ 7

evident that the one was a rhapsodist and the other a profes-

sional singer.

As Tyrwhitt (quoting Theocritus

SiaSok'Ta.

SiaBeiv

‘certatim

is

certamine

in

sive

no doubt

IMnasitheus sang,

in Bekker’s

Anecdota 37,

The same

Tin.

The word

is

Gomperz

that in

i.e.

explained in the

found in

is

aptly

BiaOiiv,

compares the say-

ing ascribed to Diogenes the Cynic (Stob. FI. iXeye BiairaXaiovTas

implies

it

Biaa-aa-Oai to Biap.ikX'qa’a.a'Oai ev

idea of competition

BiaKoXaK€v€(T 6 ai, Biairiviiv, etc.

22) points out,

a KiOapmSos, in an dycov,

as

a public performance in the theatre.

Lexicon

5.

canere’;

4. 112), Aioyevrjs

ttoXXovs opdv Kal BiaTpe^orTas, BiaKaXoKaya-

p.kv

Oi^opi^ovs Bk ov. diToSoKipaffTea.

aTroBoKipid^uv,

of BoKip-d^tiv,

opposite

‘

to

‘

to reject as inadmissible

approve,

or

sanction

1342 *34; comp. Bon. Ind. 801^48). (Victorius) turpium personarum ’

‘

renders acting

it,

to

is

instance

‘

:

ineptorum

',

be rejected.

Callipides

in

we What

as

his

’,

(Pol.

’

— not

is

the ^ 8

8.

7,

Paccius ^ 9

as

hardly need to be told that bad Aristotle

means

is

from

his

heroines

of

clear

impersonations of the

Greek Tragedy, did not make them move and deport themselves The assumption here is that character comes out in like ladies. movement, and that some and others ignoble ; comp.

movement

Pol. 8. 5,

1340 ^

are naturally noble

7 tov avrov

yap Tpoirov

Tovs pv 9 p.ovs‘ 01 p.kv yoip y 6 os €)(ov(n a-Tacrip-wTepov Se KwqTiKov, Kai TOVTior 01 pikv iftopTiKoxTepas e)( 0 V(ri rds Kivrjcreis oi Kttt

01

sorts of

TO. TTep'i

Se iXevOepiioTepas.

8id -yap ToO TO

di'ayii'wo'Keii'

irapyks

1450'’ 18 Tuiv ea-Tir.

yap

oiroia rfs corn'

comp,

twv

infra “

and

1

7

Kat

er

Trjs

TpaywBias SvvapLis Kal dvfv dyivos Kat viroKpi-

Trj

dvayvoio-et

Kal

:

But though Aristotle draws a

ctti

line

tpyior,

6,

between a tragedy A a

2

® 12

;

COI\IMENTARY

356 1462 “12

and its stage presentation (comp. 14, 1453 '’2), he no idea of a reading as distinct from an acting tragedy a tragedy with him is essentially something to be acted. The notion of a reading play has been found in Rhet. 3. 12, 1413 ^12, in the use of the word dvayv’ojo-TiKoi of Chaeremon and others. as literature

has

The

term, however, merely denotes a fact of style; these writers

were

because their language could be read by any

dvayi'toortKot'

one, not requiring any special arts of elocution to bring out the

meaning (comp. Demetrius De ^ 14

eireira

same or an even greater >*. 2,

eloc. 193).

corresponds with the

1089

15, in Pol. 5. II,

There

-n-pwTov p.h> in ^ 5.

the

is

between the words in Metaph.

interval

14, in Aeschines in

1314

Tim. 161,

197 a, and in Alcidamas De Soph. 3. The answer to (i) that their reasoning is the opponents of Tragedy is twofold

in Isocrates

:

not quite conclusive facts

which

tell

and (2)

;

that they ignore a

whole

series of

j

The

in favour of Traged}’.

series begins with SioVt j

€^€i ocra—ep

Trai'T* i)

Tcov

last proposition.

To

tQ t^s T^'?ys epyw

(scil.

Irt

Irt

^ttov pLa ^

piprjo’i'; \

that follows as far as pipyja-i^ in

all

;

a justification of this a further point,

and ends with

e770~oiia,

yj

eTro-oiwv (^ 3)

formula which summarizes

this part

this,

however,

1 1 is

is

added

!

in the short

8ia4pei),

of the argument in ^ 12

,

i

oiv

el

j

tw

TOiTOts Biacjiipei 7ra(TU' Kai ert

a

15

Toi

epy(a.

rrjs

perpu: as for instance in Soph. Trach. 1009,

Phil. 840,

and

Eurip. Troad. 590 (Tyrwhitt). ou fiiKp6>'

^

16

81’

(

fie'pos, scil. e^ei-

refers to

which

pova-iKrp’,

the

is

The

more important of

the

two things (comp.

6,

the construction

not unlike that of koX TrepLirirua in ii, i452»38.

1450

16).

neglect of koX rds

oi/^eis

j

in j

is

|

Other instances to be explained on the same principle are Soph.

el. j

16, 175*^ 21 iSeiv Kal Xvcrai rrjv po)(0r]pLav

(i.

e. iSeiv

.

.

.

rrjv poyOrjj

piar),

and De anima

3. 7 j

43^

7

A-oytArat koX ^ovXeveraL ra piXj

A.ojTa Trpos

ra Traporra

(i.

e.

Xoyi^erai

.

.

.

ra piXXovra

Kre.). j

^18

TO

et'

eXdTTO>'i

.

.

.

ett'oi,

scil.

e^eL;

OtSiTTors (scil. Ixei) to prj elSh'ai. after

Xap^avuv

Toiv dp)(6rT(i)V

comp.

The same

24,

1460^30

construction

is

(6) found

j

i

225 a to prjBei’a rwv payCpiiw dvev t^s diroBqpuv ... In TO prjSeybs rwv dvayKaiuv

in Isocrates

yi'ilip'q
aTTopowras rwv KOirwv TTpocrraypaTiov Tc^vats Siarpi/SeLV,

aXXa

|

I

ap-eXeiv, prjS' IttI Tats dXXais

|

tois ottAois Kal rats CTTpaTttdts Trpocr^eiv tov

|

''

vovi', iKfi&ev I

aTrarra ravr

elX-q(j)a(nv.

TToXXw KCKpapieVot' t (3 Kal T-oXXaKLs dvaKepawvph'r).

•

Plato Critias

The

1

21

a ttoAAw t£

OvrjTm

lengthiness of the statement

[

is

I

;.

26. 1462 ^ 12

—1462

said to dilute the pleasure of the story

6

357

and make

The clause which follows (Xeyaj 7 v 8 ap^). illustration of this if the matter of the Oedipus :

and watery 1462 an Tyrannus (see on

it

thin

8’

otov ktL) is

24) were treated at great length, in a poem as long as the Iliad, for instance, it would be only a thin and diluted pleasure

1452

II,

that

4

we should

derive from

irXeious TpayuSitti edt'

fiev

li'a

fiei'

comp.

:

^

1459

23,

on

1450

6,

Ourj.

^ 3

3

*^5

2.

another instance of

iroiuaii', scil. oi i—o—oioL’,

/JlC6o^’

solitarium (see

in its amplified form,

it

understood from the preceding

’iXids, scil. /ceiTat,

[j.ev

In order to

^pafews).

provide an antithesis, the old editors, with certain of the apographs (e.g. Par.

2038), re-write the text after v 8 ap^ (^ 7) thus; (edv 8 k

—Xetovs.y

Xeyo)

edv

oiov

8k

Trpdfcojv

cnr/KeLiiivrj,

^

All that Aristotle has to show, however,

a lacuna after i 8 aprj. is

—Xeioyojv

sk

and both Vahlen and Gomperz assume

(ov fua}, wcr-ep ktL; that the epic pip-rjo-i?

is

in the nature of things ^ttov pla

and he

;

does this by an indirect argument, by insisting that an epic

always a

strictly obser\'ed in

MSS.

in the principal

whole

on

in

use in the writers on metre

existing

text

is

the spelling both here

of -Xristotle, the evidence

is

the

is

too

is

it.

Although pxovpov

peioupoi'.

where

dramatic rule of Unity of action

failure, if the

(v.

and

HSt.

but

his

s.

v.)

—

form pietoupos that Both spellings are found in the explanations (8 p. 524 and 9

in favour of the alternative

of Galen,

else-

509 K.) show that he connected the first syllable with p.uovv The so that p.uovpo'5 must have been the form he had before him. p.

proper sense of the word

pei'ov.

In Greek medicine

a tapering-off pulse (Tvypx>'S

Tov

TrXctovos /cat

yevecrOo).

ptetovpofs

rovvopa

^pa.)(y

aXXa Kal

p.

puKporepo?'

tovs toiovtov?

In

twv metre

through a metrical deficiency *

Eustathius on

II.

12

.

524 K.

eo-rw

6

ets

an

ofii

bupdoyyov,

ois

/cat

TeXevTwvrwv

the

208 recognizes both forms: ’Ey

el

meant

St

Seirrepos

8evTkpov

tovt

cr)(r]p.aTv

which

’ ‘

halts

Homeric Tpwcs tw “’Eppiyijcav

Sta Si^povov

rov koto.

(V t 2 Tt\ti irvppixiaOtVTO^ tov tj

a)(pL

pcLovpi^ovTwi re

hexameter

at the end, like

K al avaToXrjv iraBovros Kara ixvbs ovpdv, axpov.

tw taw,

vyp.ovs

oipiv" aTi)(Tjp6v idTi TTaBos, b Xiyerai Kal pvovpia

dpxfjv Kal piiiovpia Std

toivw 6 pkv

8k rpiTOS rov

6 rerapros tov TpLTOV

KoXovatv, aTrd

peTa
to i-l reAevr^? Xe-n-Two-

/letoupos (or pxovpos)

o'(^vyp,ds

Galen 8

:

TTpujTOv

TocrovTip TrdXiv,

said to be ‘contracted, or thinning

is

Etym. Magn. pxovpov

away, at the end

.

.

TTjV

utixov

Kara, fifiaiatv ovpaiov ijToi reXovs

6

i

COMMENTARY

358 1462

*’

6

8’

ippiyy](Tav,

a

(m3(os

194-6

6 (j)iv

12. 208), was termed comp. Schol. Hephaest.

(II.

(Athenaeus 632 e;

The

Gaisf.).

aiokov

i8ov

ottcos

p-eiovpos

Latin rendering of

in this sense

it

ecaudis.

is

word in a physical sense in two places of the De Partibus, 3. r, 662 24 and 4. 13, 696 '’34, where the carnivorous fishes are said to have an dveppwyos, and the non-carnivorous, a Aristotle has the

pvovpov

crropLa denotes a mouth one with an opening small by comparison

In both passages pMovpov

a’Top.a.

with a narrow orifice,

i.e.

with the interior cavity, just as aveppwybs

wide

p.vovpo'; is

to

In the Rhetoric, where

orifice.

means one with a

crrop-a

a term of literary criticism,

it is

applied to a clause or period which seems too short and

end abruptly: Rhet.

14 09 ^17 Su Be koI

3. 9,

to,

KtoXa koI rds

to pXv yap pnKpov

piuovpous etvai p.'^e p.aKpd';.

TrepioSovs

[

= to

p.vovpov^ TTpoairraieiv TroXXaKts Trout tov dKpoarrjv dvdyKH} ydp, orav

TO TToppui Kal TO pLeTpov, ov £^£t £v iavT(p opov, dyTicrTraaOrj

£Tt opp-wv £ 7rt

This

iravcrapievov, olov TrpocrTTTautv yiyvecrOai Sid ttjv dvTiKpovaiv.

apparently the sense of

the present passage also

p.eiovpo's in

is

— where

is usually rendered by curtus (Tyrwhitt), ‘truncatus’ (Hermann), ‘in extremo imminutus’ (Victorius), or the like. The

it

general meaning that

one

is

clear

is

in the strict

‘

’

enough

:

If the epic poet takes a story

dramatic sense of the term, and

tells

it

with befitting rapidity and without diffuseness, the result will be that

seem

will

it

an epic

1460^3). Tw TOO fierpou 7 only metre

p.rjKei

may

the length one

verse.

The

poem

(24,

uSapT] i(/v)(p 6 ^

:

Gesch.

(scil.

Aristotle describes

1459*517;

24,

6

‘53),

for

it

is

tw tov

possible that pieTpov oiKum

ordinarily associates with this description of

Gomperz, ‘wenn er der Lange des has met with the approval of ’,

d. Phil. 9 p.

Dionysius Hal. 5

ecTTiv

1460

be meant to stand

rendering of

f.

24,

In lieu of this Bernays suggested t <3 arvp-

epischen Versmasses entspricht Zeller (Arch.

1449*512;

5,

the hexameter, however, has been said to be the

for a long

fit

TOV pierpov

pi^Kei,

(comp.

/Ai^Kei.

As

pieTpip p.rjKu.

T(o

The assumption is that end up too soon. and is always expected to be, a work of

length

considerable

*5

to

naturally,

is

p.

as

ydp koX

vSaprj<; t«

Similarly in

Xoyos).

affection

539).

659 R.

Pol.

becoming a

2.

{tSap^s

da-Bevrj';

Kal

1262*515

4;

(fukia

when

spread over too large a circle of friends or relations.

Xeyw Se

oroyKeipei'T) illustrates the

oiov cav €K itXcioi'wv iTpd|ewv

principal statement, ^ttov p.la

rj

pLip-rjo-is

the position of the illustration see

on

17

6,

twv

1450

eiroivoitdv

34.

(*•

3); for

The main

6-t6

26. 1462

359

best epics, those of 1462 is proved by showing that even the Homer, are made up of a plurality of actions, each of them of some magnitude and importance by itself. ToiaCra jxepT) e. sections embodying so many distinguishable 9

point

i.

;

or stories.

Trpa^eis

KOI

eauTci

KttO’

usual to write here (a) nal Kad' iavTa

If 'S

with certain of the apographs

;

but a subject (ra

be supplied from the preceding Toiavra

easily

Gr. Gr.^

2.

i

p. 35,

and Riddell, Digest of Idioms

The

KaiTOi Taura rd ironjiraTa. TTOL-ppLara, is

fellow to that in

it

fieprj)

§ 234).

tomvt arra

error here in A®, Kal

in Rhet.

i.

2,

may

(comp. Kiihner,

fiipr]

’’

lO

16 Kai roCavTa

1358

(sic) for KaiTOL ravra. el

In

ouv TouTois Kri.

summing up

the series of reasons intro-

12

duced by Sion in 14 Aristotle changes his construction, treating them as a series of assumptions. Here also, at the last moment as it were, he recognizes another and an even more important

just the

and

in

An

epytp)-

same way

De

T(o Tfjs

in

De

part. an. 2. 10, Tc'xvT]9

superior

the

point of superiority,

(tw t^s

emotional

caelo

2.

656

9.

14,

effect

argument

additional

is

297 ^ 17, and

of

Tragedy

introduced in 3. 5,

3041^ 19,

In Aristotle’s view epic poetry has the

epY‘1’-

same end as Tragedy; and its immediate effect {epyov) is the same in kind, the pleasurable e.xcitement of the emotions of pity and fear. The affinity of the Homeric Epic and Tragedy in this respect was acknowledged in antiquity by the ancient commentators on Homer (Adam, Die aristotelische Theorie vom Epos Aristotle’s view is p. 33 sqq.) as well as by Plato (Rep. 605 c). that the difference between them is mainly one of manner; so that apart from that they are fundamentally alike with the same literary elements, the same canons of procedure, the same emotional effect, and the same ultimate end and justification.

—

Pol. 8. 5, 1339^*32 yap icrajs rjSovqv^^S dAA ov rrjv Tvyovo'av. The pleasure they give is auTcis i. e. Tragedy and epic poetry. essentially the same (see above on 12), though Tragedy gives it in a finer and more concentrated form. TT)»'

nva

TuxoGcrav

:

Kal to reAos, ;

tV Trepl

elpTjpeVTii' piev

:

13,

ouv ktL

of Tragedy and

1452 This

’’14 32 and 14, 1453 b 10. 16 list of points in the preceding theory

b

epic poetry

is

preparatory to a discussion

Comedy

on

1449 b 22). Summaries of the same type are constantly introduced by Aristotle

another matter, no doubt the theory of

(see 6,

7

COMMENTARY

360

1462'’ 16 as connecting links between one discussion and another; see more especially

De

De mem.

2,

gen. et corn

2. i,

453^8; H.

328 ^ 26

A.

3.

i,

;

Meteor,

509^^26;

i.

14,

353

Eth. N.

^ 7.

25

;

15,

1 Pol. 6. 1,1316^31; Rhet. 2.1, 1377'^! 5. To judge 154 32 from these parallels, the next paragraph must have opened with ;

irep't

Se

Ka>p,(i)8ias

Xoiirov etTretv or

some equivalent formula.

APPENDIX ADDITIONAL NOTE ON The clause

following 81

synopsis

iXiov Kal

KaOapcrLv

may

different

times in

(f)

tZv toiovtwv

T7jv

of the

idea

variations

iraOrjfidTbiV

of opinion at

The

regard to this much-debated passage.

understood to come from

extracts without references are to be

commentaries or

.

of versions and paraphrases of the

6/3 ov TTipaivovda

some

give

6 1449 "37

translations.

per misericordiam atque terrorem perturbationes 1527. Paccius huiusmodi purgans.’ per via ‘conducendo 1 espurgatione degli affetti 1549. Segni ‘

:

.

.

.

’

:

.

.

.

di misericordia et di timore,’

(De Poeta p. 63) : tragica poesis id sibi potissimum misericordia captanda incutiendoque terrore aniinum

1559. Minturnus

proponit,

ut

‘

Comp,

a perturbationibus expiet.’ 1560. Victorias:

‘

his

per misericordiam

Arte Poetica (1564) p. 77. metum conficiens huiuscemodi

et

perturbationum purgationem.’ ‘induca per misericordia e per ispavento purga1570. Castelvetro zione di cosi fatte passioiii.’ In his commentary he explains this as meaning that: ‘la tragedia con le predette passioni, spavento e misericordia, purga e scaccia dal cuore degli huomini quelle predette :

medesime

passioni.’

1572. Piccolomini: e

del

timore,

‘a fine che

...

purgliino gli animi

si

mezo

col

da

della

cosi fatte

compassione

lor passioni

&

perturbationi.’

‘per misericordiam 1587. Riccobonus perturbationum purgationem.’ :

1588. Denores (Poetica

f. 6'’)

&

che nasce dalla imitatione,

:

et

‘per purgar

metum inducens

talium

gli spettatori col diletto

dalla representatione dal terrore,

&

dalla

misericordia.’

1590.

Rossi (Discorsi

& con

21'):

f.

‘per purgare

gli

animi,

con

la

spavento da simili affetti.’ Pinciano (Philosophia antigua poetica p. 332) Tragedia 1 596. dixera yo que es imitacion activa de accion grave, hecha para limpiar los animos de perturbaciones, por medio de misericordia y miedo.’ compassione,

lo

‘

:

1610. Heinsius

:

‘ut

.

.

.

per misericordiam

et

metum

inducat

:

362

APPENDIX

similiuni perturbationum

expiationem.’

De

Tragoediae

metum peragens

talium per-

Comp,

constitutione p. 29 ed. 1611. 1613. Benius: ‘per misericordiam et

his

turbationum purgationem.’ 1621.

‘Id igitur

Gallutius (Virgilianae Vindicationes p. 252):

Aristoteles

Tragoediam agere ac

veluti finem intueri

corpora purgatis atque abstersis

:

ait

ut sicut affecta

curantur humoribus,

animum

ita

sanet ipsa, duobus affectibus nominatim, commiseratione ac metu purgatis,

hoc

ab ea

est,

liberatis exsuperantia, a

qua animi quaedam

aegrotatio promanabat.’ 1623. Goulston ‘per misericordiam metumque factis expressum eiusmodi vehementes animorum perturbationes undequaque purgans :

expiansque.’

Ordonez

1626.

‘conduciendo

:

expurgacion de

la

los afectos

.

.

.

por

via de misericordia y terror.’ 1633. Gonqalez de Salas (Nueva Idea de la Tragedia antigua p. ii)

‘de

modo

de modo sea su Repre[p. 17: a Lastima, y a Miedo, para que el animo

sea imitada la Accion

mueva

sentacion’], que

‘

se purgue de los atfectos semejantes.’ 1640. Mesnardi^re (Poetique p. 8) terreur et la pitid, et qui sert a

;

mesme

‘qui produit par elle

la

moderer ces deux mouvemens de

Tame.’

Samson

1671. Milton (Pref. to

by

Aristotle to be of power,

the of

Agonistes)

raising pity

:

and

‘Tragedy

mind of those and such-like passions.’ But per misericordiam et metum the words is :

.

.

.

said by

fear, or terror, to

‘

purge

Latin version perficiens talium

his

affectuum lustrationem.’

de la compassion et de la . par le moyen achdve de purger en nous ces sortes de passions et toutes les

1692. Dacier: ‘qui terreur,

.

.

autres semblables.’ 1705.

Anon.: ‘which ... by means of Compassion and Terror and whatever else is like

perfectly refines in us all sorts of Passions,

them.’

uns vermittelst des Schreckens und . 1753. Curtius: ‘welche Mitleidens von den Fehlern der vorgestellten Leidenschaften reiniget (comp. Bullinger, Metakritische Giinge p. 24). 1763. Moor (On the End of Tragedy p. 42): ‘And thus, says .

.

’

Tragedy, by calling in Musick to its aid in exciting Pity and charm away, out of human life. Such calamities as are exhibited in the Drama.’ ‘Die Tragodie 1768. Lessing (Hamburgische Dramaturgie St. 77) Aristotle,

Terror, proposes to

:

ist

die

Nachahmung

und der Furcht

einer Handlung, die

die Reinigung dieser

.

.

.

vermittelst des Mitleids

und dergleichen Leidenschaften

bewirkt.’

1771. Batteux

purgation de ces

;

‘pour opcrer

memes

.

passions.’

.

.

par la terreur et par la pitie la his paraphrase in the Mem.

Comp,

APPENDIX

363

de I’Academie des Inscriptions for 1771: ‘qui se fait par un spectacle de terreur et de pitie, pour nous faire ressentir ces deux passions purgees de ce qui les rend ddsagreables.’ with Terror and Pity, effectually purifying such like 1775. Anon.: .

.

.

‘

Passions.’

1789. Twining: ‘effecting through pity and terror the correction and refinement of such passions.’ 1792. Pye: ‘effecting through the means of pity and terror the

purgation of such passions.’

‘per misericordiam et metum hujusmodi affectuum 1794. Tyrwhitt purgationem efficiens.’ In his note he explains the meaning to be that ‘affectus misericordiae et metus, qui in tragoediis vehementissime excitantur, non ex eo nutriri et validiores effici, quod Plato criminabatur, sed contra levari et exhauriri’ (comp. Matthiae, Misc. Phil. :

2. I, p. 24).

‘umdurch

1798. Buhle:

Mitleid und Furcht die Veredlung gewisser

Leidenschaften zu bewirken.’ 1802.

Hermann:

‘miseratione

et terrore

harum

et

similium per-

turbationum purgationem perficiens.’ Sahl ut per misericordiam metumque velut lustrationem quandam talium calamitatum perficiat.’ 1811. Taylor: ‘through pity and fear effecting a purification from

—

:

‘

such like passions.’ In the Introd. to the ed. of 1818 the meaning is said to be that ‘the terror and pity excited by tragedy purify the spectator from those perturbations which form the catastrophe of the tragedy.’

durchgehends durch Mitleid und Furcht, die 1821. Grafenhan im Zuschauer erregt werden, die Reinigung eben solcher unwill:

kiihrlich

‘

entstehenden Gefiihle bewirkend.’

Weise ‘welche durch Mitleid und Furcht eine Reinigung dieser Gemiithsbewegungen bewirkt.’ nach die 1826. Goethe (Nachlese zu Aristoteles Poetik) einem Verlauf aber von Mitleid und Furcht mit Ausgleichung solcher Leidenschaften ihr Geschaft abschliesst’ (comp. Stisser, Norden Progr. 1824.

:

‘

:

.

.

.

1884).

1839. Ritter

‘

:

miseratione ac metu perficiens talium perturbationum

purgationem.’ 1848.

Weil (Verb, der zehnten Versammlung deutscher Philologen ‘Die Tragodie bewirkt durch Mitleid und Furcht

zu Basel p. 140):

die solchen Afifecten eigenthlimliche Reinigung.’ le

drame antique

p. 162)

thus in French:

In 1889 (Etudes sur est I'image

‘La tragedie

qui, par la pitie et la crainte, accomplit la catharsis propre aux emotions de cette nature.’ 1849. Egger (La Critique chez les Grecs p. 321): ‘employant la terreur et la pitie pour purger les passions de ce genre.’ ‘Die Tragodie bewirkt 1857. Bernays (Zwei Abhandlungen p. 21)

d’une action

.

.

.

:

APPENDIX

364

durch (Erregung von) Mitleid und Furcht die erleichternde Entladung solcher (mitleidigen und furchtsamen) Gemiithsafifectionen.’ ‘arrivant, tout en excitant la pitid et la terreur, 1858. Saint-Hilaire a purifier en nous ces deux sentiments.’ 1859. Stahr (Aristoteles und die Wirkung der Tragodie p, 32): welche durch Mitleid und Furcht (die beiden nothwendigen Elemente jeder solchen Handlung, welche keiner tragischen Dichtung fehlen diirfen) die reinigende Erleichterung von solchen Erleidnissen :

‘

zu

.

Wege

.

.

bringt.’

‘und dies Alles in einer Weise, dass diese Darund Mitleid eine Reinigung eben dieser Afifecte of 1874: ‘eine Reinigung von eben dieser Art von

1865. Susemihl:

stellung durch Furcht erzielt.’

Affecten

In his ed. erzielt.’

welche durch Erregung von Mitleid und Furcht zum Enderfolg hat.’ 1875. M. Schmidt: ‘so angelegt, dass sie durch Furcht und Mitleid eine von derartigen Afifecten reinigende Wirkung iibt.’ 1876. Barco: ‘la quale per via della pieta e del terrore libera 1869. Uebervveg

‘

:

die (zeitweilige) Befreiung von derartigen Gefiihlen

I’animo da

—

siffatti

sentimenti.’

Doering (Die Kunstlehre des Aristoteles p. 254) Durch Mitleid und Furcht, d. h. durch Erregung von Mitleid und Furcht, vollbringt die Tragodie die Katharsis der jenen gleichartigen Affekte.’ Manns (Emmerich Progr. p. 5) Die Tragodie bewirkt durch Mitleid und F urcht die solchen Affecten (oder. die solchen Mitteln) eigenthiimliche Reinigung (comp, his Lehre des Aristoteles von der tragischen Katharsis und Hamartia p. 25). 1878. Reinkens (Aristoteles fiber Kunst p. 158): ‘welche durch Mitleid und Furcht die Reinigung von solchen Affekten bewirkt.’ :

—

‘

‘

:

.

.

’

1

883. Ruelle

:

passions de la

‘

operant par la

meme

pitie et la terreur la

purgation des

nature.’

1885. Gunther (Grundzfige der tragischen Kunst p. 258): ‘Die Tragodie bewirkt durch Rfihrung und Erschiitterung die gerade auf derartige Seelenzustande sich erstreckende Gemfithsklarung.’ ‘welche die Kraft 1887. Baumgart (Handbuch der Poetik p. 424) besitzt, durch die Empfindungen des Mitleids und der Furcht die Lauterung der entsprechenden Gemiithsbewegungen zu vollenden.’ 1891. Wecklein (Ueber die Stofife und die Wirkung der griechischen Tragodie p. 35): ‘die Tragodie ist eine Nachahmung, welche durch Mitleid und Furcht die Erleichterung von dieser Art von Gemfithserregungen erzielt.’ 1892. Bosanquet (History of Aesthetic p. 64); ‘producing by (the stimulation of) pity and fear the alleviating discharge of emotions :

of that nature.’ 1894.

Bernardakis (Mon edition d’Euripide p. 60): ‘qui par la crainte mdne k sa fin I’expiation des faits de mal qui

pitid et la

causent cette

pitid et cette

crainte.’

:

APPENDIX 1895. Butcher

;

‘

365

through pity and fear effecting the proper purgation

of these emotions.’

1896. Laehr (Wirkung der Tragddie nach Aristoteles p. 65): Eine Nachahmung, welche durch Mitleid und Furcht die Reinigung vollbringt.’ derartiger Gefiihle Explained in p. 69 as meaning ‘die Tragddie vollbringt durch Mitleid und Furcht die Reinigung ‘

.

.

.

aller derartigen Gefiihle.’

1897.

Mitleid 1899.

Gomperz; ‘eine Darstellung, welche durch Erregung von und Furcht die Entladung dieser Afifecte herbeifiihrt.’ Hatzfeld et Dufour: ‘operant par la pitie et

la crainte

theatre) la purification des passions de ce genre (dans la rdalite).’

(au

2

1

1

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS The references are to Bekker's pages and titles as given in the margin of this edition of the text. The first two figures are omitted; so that Bekker's 1456

A

+

}f>,for instance, becomes here 56

after a reference

means that

the

36.

word recurs more than once

in

the context.

A 56'' 36 ; 58^12 470^05 50" 28 ; 54*’9; 56^6 opp.
—

2

aya 06 v 56''6; 59''29;

— opp.

Kaicbv

'AyaQaiy

60''

61^8

A'iyiaeos

53*37

Aipojv (Soph.) 54*2 atviypa 58*24 + alpetaOai

60*5

alperuirepov hi*"!! 56'‘l8, 24,

S4''I4;

aia6avopeva)v6i^2^

51*7 aTaxos 49*35 alaxpds 49*36 49 “34

alaOeaBai 54'’37 aiaBrjOets 54''l6

atadrjats

a 77 fAia 54 5 If ivus eh Svo 49*17 '>

^

ay (IV

dyeaOai

ws dnoOavovnevos 52*27 dyepfio)

U7>'0€rv

5

51*27 59*4 60*6

7)7^0470149*'

;

ayvoutv

opp.

5 3 ''30;

elduis

.

a7J'oia opp. 7V(icris 52

*30

;

56 '’13

Si

dyvoiav 53 *'35

;

airiacTts 5 5 *’3

—

aTipa

d7o;v 5 o''i8; 51*6; 53*27 dyojvl^eaOai ^1^8 60*9 ;

— eaews

56*18 56'' 16

61*24 48*3; 49''io; 52*28; 53“

d/foAoo0«ri'

If di'd7/(7;s 54*’ 16

opp.

59 ''30

;

0/7011

deovcrds 56'’ 27 + dKparov 61*15 d/f/)ij8o5i' 48 1 1 50*36 ; depaiv 57*2, 10 dA7/0i7S 60* 24, ''33,36

dKrjOfj

Aiyeiv

58 *>19 d\r)6ivwTaTa 55*32 ’AKiaPidBrji 51

7

deiKeXiov 58'’ 29 dfi« 7js 58 '’25

*'

II

'AXk'ivov diroKoyos

53* 20,

55*2

—

0

’AoTiiSd24 pavTos S3 *'33 dA\’ oSii 61*1 dAA0T6 51*9 dWorpiov ovopa 57 ''7i 31 dXoyia 61 19 dXoyov 54''6; 60*13, 29, 36; 61 ''14, peprj dXoya 60^ 28 dAd20, 23 ’AA/t/ilcuii

*'

*'

6o*II d-qOets dOavara 61*25 'AO'qvaToi 48*36, •’l 'AOTjVTjatv 49 *’7

rpaycpS'iai

61*18

50* 25

7
*'

I

28; 51*1; 52*32; 59*' 24, 27 dpaprdveix 51*20; 53*24: 54'’ '7

0/20 47*'

Tjpapr^aOai 56'' 15; 60'' 23 + dpdpTTjpa 49*34; 6o''I 9, 30; 6l'’8

'’I

Aro^Tts 56*1 Alyevs (Eurip.) 61

55*2

*’

—

dOpoitrepov 6 2

—

34;62''7

dicpdaffts 59*’ 22

dSwoToii triSavov TO dSvvaTov 61 *'9 dSvvara 5i''i8; 6o''2o, 6i'’ii elxora 60*27 23; 6 i''23 dSvvara avvdi//ai 58*27 dtiS^s 58 '’27

arjOrj

51 ''16

48 '’12

53‘’5. 6

d5)7Aois 55''4 ddiatperos 56^22, 24 dStKos 56*23 (V (fSov 56*3

dSvvaiita 60'’

amov 50*1;

dist. crjpieiov

d«017«ll'

dyaiviapara iroiovvTei 5 1 *’37 deiSe ddfiv 56*29, 31 qSSneva 56*28 dSe\
to aiaxpdv

Aioxi'^of 49“ 16; 56*17; 58''2 o, 22 omo 48''4, 19 55''7; 62'’i8

omos 52*8

54'‘2

dOprjaeiev

61*13

;

*’21

d/ia/7Ti'a54''35

;

6o''I 5, 17

—opp.

31

«

7

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS — opp. Upov 55*27

Kama 53'^ 10 53^16

fioyO'qpia

&ptTpa 5

dvrifi If

dvrex^^Bai 51 >16, 24

'’I

aptprjTWi 60’' 32

'kvTiyovt}

appopos 61 ^ 20 TO dp
dvTiiroiovvTat

54*1

48*30 49*35 dvdjpaXos 54*26 + dvuiSvvov a7(rxos

dptpt^oXla {Kveiv) 6l‘^25

di'dii'vptoj

61 “26 ai- repeated 60’' dvaydv irpos Ti 6l

dfios 56'’ 14 ; dfiooat 56*7

dp
**

10

—

19

dist.
51 ’'35

If

d^d7«j;s 49''32; 50^27, 30; 54'^i6

—

Kara to

52^20

*>9

47

;

57

'>2

ddpiffTos

49 *>14

dTrayyeXXttv 48*21 ; 60*18, 31 dirayytKia 49 '>11 5t’ dvayy(\ias opp. dpwvTts 49 *>26 d7ra6lls^53'>39

diraWaTTfiv 52*25 dnaVTav 54*12 d-nripiB povv pvBovs 53*18 drretKa^oVTes

47*19

djreiAij

56 '>12

dvayvwpt((iv i2'> 5 ; 53 '’ 35 54*3i 6/ ’ ‘^‘«>' 55 ‘‘i 5>^9 535 3 i OTi’Opiarrji TreTrpa^l Tis 52 “36 14, '>32 (comp. S3'>2l) dvayvip-

aireipa

51*17

piaBnvai 52'>6; 54'>27; 55^3 '’19; dvayvupiais 52*29+; 54*4, conj. 7rep(7r(T€(a 50*34 59'>I5 (comp. 52 *32); 52^10, iij55'>34; dvayvojptceaii eiSr] 54'' 20 59’>ll 0f\TiaTr] dvayvwptats 55*16 dvayvaipKTpds ^2°'16, 17

djrXovs pvBos Si'>33;

dist.

ci’/tor

—

—

!

—

diTtpya^taBat 58 *>15 d7r€p7aaia 48 •> 1 8 ; 50*’I9 aTTiBavov

62*17

61^12

(comp.

—

dvdyvojais

5 i*' 33

—

59'’ 14)

52*14

;

60* 33

— opp. fi’/cds6o*27 52*12

53*13

;

dirXTj

Trpafts

— owetotf 52''3l

rpayuih'ia, tTroTTOiia

OTrAa aTiXovv pirpov dnXuis

59 *>9

irpaypara 56*20 ovopa 49''ll

—

51*/ duofiaivii trapd t^i/

di'ppTjTO 0«oy 55*' 7 dvalaBrjTOS xpovo^ 5 ° *>39

di'elXti' 0

8

60*5

57 '>33

aoii/os

62^12 dvayKa^eaSat g2^i; 54“ 12 dvayKatov d>'a7KarosS4'‘29; 62^13 dist. e’lKos^l^Ii, 27,38/9; 52^^24; 54^34 + dvdyKT] 48^1; 49'’37; 5°'‘7; S^^'io; 53^12, ''15, 37: 59*22; 60^23, *>9;

dvaytvuiaKtiv

61''

367

dvopoiots ivtiaoSiois 59 ''30 dvopoioTTjTas 48*10

apeivaiv 53'’ 1

7

1

1

;

viroXijJf/iv

56*15

ditoyeviaBai opp. ytviaBai 61*9 dvoStiKVvvai 50*7, ’’II ; 56*37

dvaXafiSvTfS 49'' 23 dvaXioKtaBai 55 *>20

diroSijpovVTOs tivos 55 *> 1 dnodidoyat 49 ”>4 ; 54’>5, 10

to dvdXoyov dvdXoyov txci 48 *>38 Ta dj'dAo70J' 57'> 25 57'’9, 16

dnoSoKipaaria 62*8 diToBvyaKtiv 52*27, 29; 53*38, “>23;

60*16

55*11

dvd^ios 53*4, 5

diroKOTrat

dyavtiicov

dvaira'tCTOv 5 2 drS^tfo? 54*22, •>

24 23; 56*23

di'eu dvairaiarov

54*6,

—

52''23

xpoi'oo

— opp.

58*29 fTneiKTjs

53*12 'AvBfi 51 d>'0pa;7ros

’>2

28;

53’>2I,

29;

dnoXa^uiv pepos 59*35 d-noXXvrai dttoXdycp

dvrjKiaroJv rt 53’’ 35

—

8

^

.

57; II di'i^p

5

1*

dySptds 52*8

dvcKTa 60*36

60*30

ovopaTwv diroKpiais 56 *>12 dvoKpvnrti 60 4 dvOKTtLVtiv 52*8,

5

2 '>34

—

dvipes (Horn.) 61 1*

6o.*lo

7i/i')7

im
17

2

54*>4

dvBpanroi

rj

to dVdpcoiros 57

dvBpdiTroi

57^21

opiapos 57*26, 30 47'*i3j 48'’6 ; 60*20 TTOV

TrpSfis Kal

0 ios 50*16

*

16

dvBpdJ-

avBpantoi

— opp.

55*9 55*2

59 ’>7 ; dvopiav 54’’ 21 dneafpvvvBr] 49*20 diroTvyxdvovat opp. Tvyxdvovat dirotpaiveaBai yvdjpyv 50*7 Xov ri 5o'>l2 dTTOTrXoos 54’’2 St’

50*3

— naBu-

d-nocpTjaai 5 7 *>3

d-npt-nh

58’'I4

54*30;

59 ’>34

oTTprirtos

4 72

1

1

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

368

Apyds 48^15 “S dpyoh piptai 60 ''3 apirij opp. KaKia 48“3;53'*8

— \i-

58*18

(tais

dpriT 7jpa

= Upfa

57

apOpov 56 *>2 1 dpidpos 60 ''9

avTuox^didapaTa 48 ’’2 3

'^35

—

57*6

def.

avTocrxfStaaTiKTj

48*27

’Apiippahys 5 8 '>3 appov'ta 47*22+

48 '*20;

;

49*9

d^,aip€iV5i*34;57'’i6;58*3 d
dptBpoi 61 '’25

Kpi(TTO(pa.vr)S

;

^57*12 +

57*'2I, 22, 32

''Aprjs

tov avTOpdrov 52*5 47*8, 26; 51 '’36; 53'’ 25; 55*9, '>11, 21, 22 ; 57'’34; 58*8 60*6 + , '’15 + ; 6i*’2, 30; 62'’i6 Kad’ avTov 57*3 «a0' avTO 49*8; (Itio

aMs

iv "kpyti 52

‘

;

49*^29

49*28 appoTTUv 56*31; 57*3;

dtpUvai

KapiTov

57

*’27

d
XtHTiK^i dppovia

59 ’’32

T^PP-oKt

54*22 +

;

60*4

;

d
Kara TO appoTTOV

tXov

dp/iOTToi'Tajj 48 ’’3 1 apptva dvSpara 58*8 +

dpvcrat

= Tapav

(

dpxo^os 58*’7 5o

;

58’'

o dpxaiv

dpx'n

—

47^12; 48^29

def.

49 2 50 ’’2 7

—

50*38 (comp.

— opp.

55^26, opp.

•'19

dpxvil^d

conj.

tpvxv

57*6

Te'Aos

28);

59*20,

Tf\«l/T17 5 o '’26

«"’

opp.

56*29

a/)fai'Tos

32, iv

tf

dpx^s 48 ''22;

49’'!, 6; 60*33 _ dpx‘T€KTOVtK:q 56 *’11 aarjpou opp. arjpaTvou 57*33, 34 aarjpos (poiirf, 56'>35, 38; 57“4 + doBfveia 53*34

57 **2 1 + , 32 dart pas 5 4 ’'2 2

dan'is

48*38

aToirov

dTVXftv opp. (vTVXfiy 5 2 ’’2 drvx'o opp- fiiTVXta 52 *’37

^KvKXav 6

—

’’

53‘‘i6,

48*4, 12, 18;

Xftpojy

iSe'ATiOi'

61

’’

10

/JeATioi'

— opp.

6o*’ 36; 61 *i,'’i3

26 55 '*i 6 54*”

jSeATi'cTTjy

33

54*2

;

x«/>o''

dvayvwptais

50*17; 57'’23 + 0 Xal3 epd 6l'’23 ^Xi-novra 61*6 jSi'os

58*15

54'’34; fTTi

iSpaxu

55^19 48

5

'’14

TO r 56 '’30 yrjpat 61

’’

7

TavvptjSqs 61 *30 7«Aoros 49*36 60*15 Xi^is yeXoia T0 7€Aoroi/48‘>37; 49*34; 49*20 7«Aoro>' 5 i'> 25; 58’’I2; 58'’I4 ;

6**^5

60 *’2 dTOTTWTepoy 60^1 dTpaywddraroy 5 2 ’’3

aiXfiv

*’

62 '’6 PpaxoTrjs opp. pqKOs 56 ’’3 2

dripa^opivovs 48*38 dripdrara Orjpta 48 *’12

1

nept

fipaxtfos

drex^drepos 53’’8 ; aTfx>'OS 54*^31 54*’28 dTex''<5 T“+of 5 o'^i 7 ; 54’'2o

60*35,;


58*14

^aSt^ovra 58 10 to /SaSi^fi 57*27 TO 0 aSt^(i fj 0 ( 0 dSiKe 57 *17 t3 ePdSiaev -q Pddi^e 57*22 ^ap 0 apiap 6 s 58*24 + papvTqs opp. o^vrqs 56 '’33 /SeAtiW 54'’9, 30 ; 61 26 + opp.

Ppaxv

'AoTvSipas 5 3 '’3 3 davpp(Tpos 61*13 dreipu xaX«i£ 5 7 ''1

drotrov

opp. ;

’AxiAAtcut

54’’ 14

ffoowaiv 58 '’31 fiovXeaeai 48*18; 56*20; 58'’8

daSevinds 58 ’’2 7

aarecus

—

56 ’’26, 28

59“I d 4>vxa 52*34

t3

49“9

dpxds 48*25

dipwvov opp. (puyfjv

56'’ 35

’AxiAXevs

5 7 '>14, 15 ot [dpxaioi 59 **20

TtKfvray

55

’’2

60*32

Tjpiipcovov

15

)

''7

apxfirOo-t

d
59*9, 12 appoTTov 5o''5

’’3

6oJ*33 yfvvTjaai 48

'’4, 23 7tVos( = kind)47*’8; 54*20 opp. = race) 53*11 £7Sos57'’8+ (

—

—

54*10

ertpo

47*17

avKrjais 48*9 avXrjTai 6l ’’31

77, dnXovy ovopa 57^32

avXrjTiKTj

Tqyevus 54 ’’2 2

7fJ'£i

fV AvXiSi

47*15, 24 54*32

yijpas 57*’22

+

avXwv 61

“

y'iv«j$ai

thai 50’’ 28; 60*22, Td yiyvdpcvov 53*17

18 avferai 59’’28

49“*3

24

dist. ri>

9

5

3

1

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS — didvota 50*2 + — 29, 30

yei'OMft'a 51 *’17,

(list.

yivoiTO 51 '‘36, ‘’4 ytv 6 ixtva uvojJxiTa 31 1 yivuiOKCtiv con]. eiSuif 53''28, 38 yvwataQai to to^ov 55^14 r\ai;«coi' 61 ’’ I 58^*22 + ‘'13+ 7A.(DTTa 57»i, 6 ; ola

ai'

**

,

;

“

—

61^10

6o>'i2;

‘'35: 9. def. 57''4

59 5

.

51

7t'cupiftos

25; 6i‘‘2I

‘’20,

yviuats opp. ayvoia

PPA 56

TO rP, TO

48 5

6013

10

e\(v 9 epa

—

6’ o5i/

—

53*22

dist.

Siivov 33*' 30

58*7

5cfiTcpoJ', (ivTi

StrjyrjTtK^

48*13

opp.

yvv^ 54*24

54 ’’5; 62*3 Td 8cf((i 60 1 TOO Se^wv 58*7

AiiiTiy

55 ’'24

+

;

22,

50*9

8^X0!/

;

\6yov

dist.

dpxri,

tc'Aoj

Bixais

mi-rjcrtv

59*37

Troirjr-qv 58’'

iiavor^TiKa (opp. T/OtKa)

57*28

BiuKovres 60* 16

61*23 tov

'’3

dpapTia 60** 15 Bi(ppov 58 ''29, 30

—

T)

6

irpus dk\ri-

60* 15, 53*33; AoKojv 61*12

6icofis

’'26

Soicu

57'"

6ofa 61

61*10 49*12

POETICS

23

Bittti

\ovs 49*26 5 tapkv€i

Biopiap.cs

BiaKov pipeta 9 ai 61

'J

Si(iXc«TOJ 58''6, 32

SiaXveiv

47

TrKfj

62^

r^v

BiaiplaBai

8i7rAoos opp. dn-AoSs pC0oy

SiaipuaBat 52 *'15, 27

SiaKoip-cpSodvres

51*12

8i53* 13 BirrXovv avOTaais 53*31 ovopa 57*12, 32; 59*5, 9

52*26; 57*7 59*22 SrjfioKparia 48*32 hfjpoi = Kuipat 48*37 6id Td6c dist. jiira raSt 52*21

5 ta\api 0 avfi

60*8

;

Aiovvaios 48*6 Aiovvaos 57 *^2 1, 22

55'!,7

i

Siaipkati (Xviiv)

53*8 oXou) 59*^15

(8t’

50'^2I

SrjhoKJiv noifiadai

SicpSovra

55*1

6ioAou

,

5O12 ^0° 8

*30

SiKaioavvT)

BtopiaavTfs

57*4, , ^ 6^\oy Tif lcrT(j'52“4 5>7

Sr/Kovv

Alt oivoxoeveiv 61 SiioTrjKev 48*17

c^dp-

diKawv 47 ''19; 56*7

86X€a0ai 59 ''36

(i);

0 iKuiv notrjais 47 26 0 orroiT]TiKrj 47*14 01' Bi 9 vpapL 0 oi 48*14; 59*9 XovTts TOV Bi 9 vpap 0 ov 49*11

AiKaioykvrjs

50*39 53*30; 54*2, ”30; 55*20; 57''i7 +

6cdTcpos

'’36

Si 9 vpapi

dist. cXcctra (etc.) oi«Tpd 53'’ 14 to 5cii'^

59*17,

59 ’'26 piprjcris 59 *'33 ;

Si 9 vpap

55*20

Sf paiaiv

^6^11

Sir/y-rjais

49*9

6 i-

49*31

Sie^ievai

Ppaxiw 62 "^6

— x^'’8

*22

BiriyrjpaTiKr) pipirjaii

5 (Mat 53'"8;

5c(r(S

’'5

BiBdaKtLv 60*4, 18 BiBovai Toh iToiTjTa?s 60 ''I3 poi/ 49''2 c«TCiVc(j/ 58 Bop.tv Sc oi 61

o AfiKiaSa TTot-qaas

6cfio('

icai

;

SiSaaKaKia 56

52*28

—

52*20; 53*8; hiapiptaOaL

48*8

—

SaavTTjs opp. xj/iXoTip 56 '’32

56 '^3

62 ’'12

;

TO A fSaKpvffW 55*3

66ii'd

81c-

48* 16, 19 Sia^opai 47 29 48*24, 2 56’’37 6ia
56’’3I

57*4

52*1

6ia4)opd

— Zev^tSos 50“ 28

54*23 yvvrj 54*' 20; 60“ 62*10

SeiKvvfievov

;

KivuaOai 51*34 BiatpOupdv 55*' 23

ypa(piKri 50*’!

6c

''4

SiaTropTjattfv 6l'’2 7 dtfanaadt] 48 '’24

58 ''15;

ywaiKeto)

AavacSs

50*6,

56*34+

59'' 16 Btdvotat Kal Ac'fiy 59''I2 Sidvoia dist. ^6os 49’’38+; 50'’ 11 f/Bri Kal Bidvoiat 60 '’5 BiairovfTv 60*^3

Biaipkpuv 51*23, •’2;

1

50^26

;

35^2

ypa
**

36

ypa/xixaTa i-niOtivai 55^19 7p(i^ea' 54''ii ; 6 o ''32 ; 7pa
def.

50*30;

Xe'^is

BiaTTjptlv 54*’ 15

52^30; 56

1*

conj.

BiaOTpitpdV TO (ipe^rji OTpapLpkvov 49*36

50^7

yvuixt]

—

369

4

34; 6o‘>Io

TTopd TTjv Bo^av 52 * 10, 35 fv peydKr) Bo^tj 53*10

60OA0S 54*20 fic'pr/

60*^4

8pd/iaTa

48*28; 55''I5 B

;

56*15

b

(v

33

4

11

;

7

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

370 Spa/mn 6o

tSi

53 ‘’32

tov Spap.aTOi

31

'*

hpanaTLKoi (pvdoi) 59^^19 /iiyUTjo-Eis

dpapre 55*11 dvac

Si"

\

SpapartKal

48''3S

hpapaTOTToiTjaat 48

''3 7

— — opp.

59“3o^ 53^25, >'22 vpaTTdv 48 I SpuivTfs np&TTovTts 48*28, 29

S/jSv

;

f om. 51'' 3 dprjKoTos 6 i ''2;

Svi^apis

47*9, vapd

16 ds \6yes

—

49 35

;

5o’'i5,

18 rfjv SCvap.iv ^8 Svvarov 5i'’i6; 55^^29; 57''5;6 i’'J 2 SwoTa 51 *38, *’17+ , 32 Sward

dmdava 60*27 Svapds Piov 57 25 SvarvxfCv 53*4 Svarvxio opp. eurvxta 51

dprjpivev 61'’ 6l *6

57*28

Sixdfs

Tcpd^tis kvos

dw 9 us

duidam 47 ’'1 7 ovopa 58 *'2 1 ficffaivfiv

dppovias 49*27

iicStSovai

54*8

54

'’

i

(icStSopivois \6yois

8

,

AcopicTs

itcTtivtiv

Svax^po-^dvTcov

(fcBeais

;

55*28

;

58 ''8 KaOoKov 55

iicTl6e
55 “i 1'

;

,

pirpeuv 47 ''1 ’iKarrov dpdprrjpa 60 '^31 iiccpipeiv Sid

62*18

IX(ix‘0’70i'

49 ’’2 \ i^(ais 61*27

ikaipos

iKcydcav 47 ''12

dSivai 54’'4; 56'’io; 60*24, 30 dSitis o?5 € 49 ’>i 7 18 53 28 37 tJSos 49’>26, 30; 57*23 58*34; 60 *> 7; 61 ’'22 opp. 7tVos 57''8 + '>

,

,

—

;

— 25 —

pipes 6 2 ’'17

50*13;

53’'I4,

dvayvwp'icreais 5 4 '’1 9

—

56'>9

58*34,

)

elSos fT]V

synon. dSr] Oeojp'ias

dvopares

57*31; TTOirjTiK^s 47*8

—

'’14

— 7^^ 70

8(05 49 * 8 55 KaKds 61*12

''

;

32

;

59'’8

52

*

50 ’>3 15 dices 481^29; 5*1*28, bji

51

* 12, ^

54 34 35

.

— —

((kSto 5

27

(in

36^ napd TO 1

;

Agathon) 56*

dvayvatov 52*24 (comp. *20) “''“y «7 51'' dist.

56*25; 6l''l5 55*17; 56 '’4; 60“ E(«oj

— opp. dirWava 60*27 1

;

'’

1

4 \6yois) 61 ’^17

conj. (ppirreiv

53 '’5

—

€Ae 6 (r( 3 s 53*'I7

dist. (^OiSepcis

3. ‘'32, 36; 53“i> 6, dist. Seivd (etc.) 56 ’'3

ikfos 56''! 53')j

— —

52

*

ikeeivd

conj. ipu/Sos

dist.

2

>^1

(poffos

49 '’2 7

;

52*38;

'‘

53

3, 5

iKdi9(pai yvvaiKts

62*10

49'>7; 55'^6, 8

ik-q-

’'31

"Ekkq 54*8 ipl3 c 0 kqppivq aokka^q 58*2

;

38, ’^9;

ikedv

47

(o( iv TOis

XuSe 55*5,6 ikKovres TOV Kopvtpaiov 6 1 ikki^opos 58 '’10

10

•'lo; 61’' 9 24; 61 '’15

(KfyXoi

;

diKoveypdcpoi 54’’9 ducevoneios 60 ’'9 fiKuiv 48’'! I,

ikeytioTTOies

lA.6»Erj'48''3i

tUa^tv opeievs 48*6 dicfj

59**

;

49*17 60 '*3

idtKovTa'i

pipes

prices

r/kaTTaiac

f6os

dist.

—

avaTaads 58*34 60*7

iKarrovs

20

kyxos 61*2, 34 tydi Si viv 58 '^34

—

i^fridrjaav

I

2

"EicTopos Siai^ts 60*15, “26 (KTos opp. iv awpari 54’’ 24

iyylveaOai 53 '’I9 5o''38 54 35 eyKaXovvres 53*24 kyKwpia 48*^27 iyxeipovvres 50*35

Tijs

59’’3I

€/£7r(7rT€(J'

48 * 30 Swpov 57*13

677M

conj. Kvpiev

TO dou86s 58 *'4, 5

Tu Si 58*5 SojpdrMv drro 58 ’^33

>

tS

59^ 2^

ivbs XPovo^

60*36 55*28 56*18; l«irA.i;(CT(« 3 s 54*4 6o'^25 iicwd-Tj^iS 55*17 (KOTaTiicoi 55*34

53°'^+ *^35 \evTdv 53*25

57'’ dist.

Ii'(5l*l7 Trepi €1)0 51 *17; 59*23 t 3 iv Kat re oKev 51*1 duTayti avSpa 6o*lo

“

13; 52*32, Svarrvxiav re-

.

—

dist. ireirpaypivov

51*18 ’'

25;

61*5

niirpaKrai

drrayyeKias 49''26

81’

52’'!!;

tiprjrai

29; 6o’> 25; 61*16, 20

syn.

conj.

dpappivrj 55*11 5o’'28; 60*22 +

dist. y'lvtaOac

ipfidkipa 56*29, 30

eppfTpa 50 '’14; 51 ’Ep-rreSoKkfjs

ipireauiv

18

‘’I ,

57'’24; 61*24

52*9

ipTroiqriov 53'’ 1 EK 47*17, 22, '>29; 49'’33 ivakthjjiit tpappd/cots 50'’!

TO ivavTLOv 52*22

TowavTLOV 52*

15

1

1

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 50^20 26; 5o’'-9; 53*14 32

371

pivy bvopara 51*10

ToivavTiov (adv.) fvavTias

kniOtptvos

55‘’22

TO

56*16; 58*6; 6 i* 3 fTTtTtpdaOai 55*26; 60*33; 62*10 imTtprjpa 61*22
62^17

ivapyis

Xvapykarara

62^7

55^24;

58^29;

iviex^oBai

6o'‘l2, 35;

—

— Xveiv 60*21

60’'

— £iVai57* —

29; 61*34; 62 '^io 26 vndpxiiv 60^ 2‘J

kniripyatL^

53*12

fTTKpaveTs

ivtpyovvTas conj. nparTovTas 48*23 ivovra 50’' evTiOepivwv tls to perpov 58’’ 16 evTiporepa 49*6

enKpopd bubparos 57 */ ’Emxdprjv 58*9 ‘Enixappos 48*33; 49*6

ivToXrj 56*' II

eiroiroda

ivTVXi^v 6

16

5

^

IfoSos 52

'’i 6

def. 52''2i

€£a)TouSpa/«iTOi 53

TpaywSias

60*29 ^

55

7i ^

*>

54’’ 7

54''3 — t^s — too pvBevparos

32

;

— Tov KadoXov, Tov pidov — ptXoirouas 59’' 10

elaiOev io’iKaai 48''4; 51*23; 52*9 eoitt£ tt) varipa 54*32 51*19

totKe

55* 47*13, 28; 49*9, 14+ 60*13; 62*2, 12, 59*8, 18 +

iW 55''23

t7r€i£ro5ioCi'55'’i3

;

59'’3o

53*24 kppyvtiav 50*14

'EppoKaiicb^avOos

56* 12 ; 57*22 58*23, 24

kaQXd topytv 57*12 tanepa 57*23 +

(Ttpoi

yivti fTtpots

34

paKpd tpaivijiVTa ovopa 57 iirfKTiTapivov del

*’

58*12 2 35; ,

58^3 .

,

55*20

tTTijSooXeueaflai

tm'S^Xoi'

51*35

imeiKTjs 54*"

1

—

3

— opp.

(pavXos

—

f5

*’

48 35

53^29; 56*9; py 62*18

5 o** 30 i*’ 32

;

TOV

59*7

til rj

;

50*20 (vSaipovtas 50*17 fvSov mvvvxioi 61*17 £uSa(/ioj'£s

tbftSts

opp. pox^ypos

62*2 52*34 ewiKTrjTa opp. (Jup
47*17; 48*8 fTtpojs 47*

,

entiCTttvopeva

lutKTtiviaBai 59'’ 23

opp.

'irepa

47^17

17 „ , try TToXXd 55* 18

58*23, ^2

eireicTaats

55*27 55*25 48*27

tax^-Tov

TTapaTUveiv 55'’! (TTfiaoSiwSys pvdos 51 *'33,

57*35

kpvvyai = Ktpara 57*35

£O-co0£:'

conj.

+

57*’

’EpKpvXr]

£pcuT7/(riy

— —

tiro-

plpr^ais

;

kaOiti

—

56*11, 12

61*26 £710^010147*14; 62*4 krTt] 49*5, *16, 18; 58*16; 60*17; 62*3 kpdpivos 58*10 kpya^opkvovs 61*29 ipyov 48*10; 62*18 TToXu tpyov tpyov Tpaycpbias 52*29 49*31 770(7/50*31 T£X1'’/s62 * 13 TOV 51*37 TToXLTtKyS KoX pT]TOpiKijs 50*6 TTOiiKTi

60*5 51 ’’34; 52 ’’16; i-nuaobiov 49*28; * 56*31; 36, 59 35 55 ‘’i 3 +; def. 52^20 opp. >

;

;

;

14, *15, 16 knoirouKov avOTTjpui

lop7ei' 57''l2

iTTaiveiaOai

59*32

kmxetpfjffoi

**5

e^ayyiWtrat 60*’ 1 k^aWaycu bvopAraiv 58'^ 2 e^aWaTTeiv 49 ’'13; 58*21 Xayptvov ovop^ 57*' 3 58f 5 f^apfTpa 49*27 y ev h^apirpois piprjTiKTi 49 ’’2 efarraTT/^^ 56*22 i^apxovrtav rbv Si9vpap0ov 49*11 efedrt 62*15 54'’35 kiipxovrai 53*38

Kal

Xvaw 62*18

pi-

ptLaOai 59*' 24

61*19

tTTiTlprjcns

61

*

14

49*36; 52*14; 60*10 EvKXtibys 58*7 £0005

tbXa^tiaBat opp. aroxo-itadat. 52*28 tvXoycuTtpas 60*35

tvpvypbvtVTOv 51*5 tvirXaarot

55*33

61 * 14 53*24, 29, *28; 55*’9; 17,27; 58*20; 60*34; 61*20

tvirpoffcijnov

Edp(7r(57/s

B b 2

8

_

+

5

1

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS fvpiaKtiv ^9“24;55“9,25 — conj. — (with 50*5

372

— opp.

47*28

inf.) 53'>25; 54*11 EvpviTv\os 59 *’6

^i6v€s 58

51 *4 59*33 fvTfKh opp. Kakov 58 '’2 2 (vTtXtarepoi opp. cfpvoTtpoi 48 ''26

'HKiKTpa 60*31 ^X(0S57’’28

€VTvxfiv opp. aTvxftv 5 2 *'2 iVTVXM opp. diTVxia 52 '’37

ypiovovs 61*11

fuffiii'OTrTos

;

Svaivxia^i^ii; p*3i, 10, 14 (comp. 55‘'28) tu(/>paiVtiJ' 50’^ 2

(V(pvovs

— ‘'35;

52*25

(vpv'ias
52''3o" ,

(V toTs ((pi^fjs xpovots

— d!'a\oyov 48“ 58*3 — iKavm 49*7 — -prjSe47*10; 53*12; 59'*I2 — 57^20, 53 28 OpSwS 24 — 55’’i9; 61*2 6i*’6

fX^‘^ oAAcds

38

Ka\ais

^

*’19

opoiais

60*’

OUTOUS

uiijjT^p

61*33 52*31

t'x^pa opp. i\la

— opp. ^iXor

tX^pos 55''2 2 ix^iOToi 17 ZeC^is

53’* 16,

—

airiaais 55*’ 52*9 Tw tpavipw Odvarot ^2^ 12 61*22 ©dcrios 48 * 1 2 OaTTov 61*16 9avpa<7iWTaTa 52*6 9avpaariv 52*4; 60 *12+ 9avpaaruii 56*20 a’lrios

oi tv

;

9td 56** 17 etar^s ecarai 53*35; 29 61 •'28 62*2 9taTpa 49*9; 53*34

55*

;

QfoStKTrjs 55*9, ’'29

65’’ 7

f'7-

9tairtaio%

5o'>34,

38

51*3, 4;

;

60’' ^'cupoTtpoJ'

*

61

16; 56''34, 37; 59*8;

fieoipoOi'Tei 5

01'

7

61*17

;

59*30

48 I'll,

660)^60/

65’’

V

54’'6; 6o''35

^aiypicpos 60''

59*20 ^copd 61*25

rjpmKa

Qtodupcp 57*13 9toKTtaTav (p\6ya 57'' 29

50*27, 28; 6 i*'i2

48*’ 7;

9avdTov 31

;

C9T£1>5i'' 25; 53^1:54* 10,34 rriTfov 51 >>23; 53*' 22

Iwov

*’2

ptrpov 59’'32, 34 ;

59^7

£(rx€To

51*20

48‘’33 59“ 10, II TipZov pirpov 60*3 VTTr]9y 56*23

Kar' ihxvv TTOiw

Ttpais

'HpaKkij'iSa

_

f0ff^5_5o“29; i
TTfpioSoS ^X(Ot) 49*’ 13

24

56 ''25, 27

rjp'itpaivov

TjpaiiKov

tvxfo 9ai 56 '’16 fvx'n’^ 6^11

j)/r6pa 57''23,

'HpoSoTOJ 51

55*32 59*7

noirjTiKTj

))

50* 19

‘HpoKX^s 51*22

5i’'23, 26;

;

op]).

53*2,

Kal npa^fis

TtaOr]

TTpdffts

**3

povvTi tpireauv

14

1 * I

52*9

9toi-

9tttipti(j9ai

55’’2; 58 '’i 6

H 58*11

9tuprjpj.a 56''

"Hyrjpcav o ©iffios

48*12

9tajpia 50’'

— o'lKda

48 1 8 53 * 36, 1 2 53''li; 59*21 oux ^ ruxoDo-a 62’’ 13 •fjioval 62 * 16 ySvvoiv 60 '’2 ^Svcrpivos \ 6 yos 49 25, 28 62’'! i] 5 iov ySv 60*17 rjSia'roi' *'

fj^ovT)

*’

—

;

38

19

51*1,2

;

tldos 9twplas

,56‘’9 9fiXtta fXatpos

OrjXta bvupara

60 “ 3 1

58*8 + Bqpiaiv poptpa'i

48

*'

1 2

—

(pcava'i

56

’’

*'

48 ”,13

I

60 ’'3

—

^OiKTj

«7roiTOi/a

(T«(a59*’l5 fi

6 oyp 6.(poi

j}9o9

56* ^’05ua50*29

rpaycpSla

—

59''9

—

p^cris

Oprjvos 52’'24; 9vtiv 55 *'4, 5

54*30 9vt(r9ai 55*8, *’3

—

Qvtarrjs 53*11, 21

+

(Carcinus)

54'’23

50*28

48*2,3,b24; 50*14,

— —

60*11 50*2

>'9;

54*I7^;

Sidvoia 49 ’'38; dist. 5 o’’8, 9 (2) ^ 9 os

vTroTi 9 tis

conj.

54*27

— —

(in

50“5+

50*29 *’13;

51*20

61 *24

9oivdTai 58'' 24

rjivapdraiv 50*' 16

yOiKos

Brjarjlda Bvijr'

60*11,

'’5

;

a picture) .54'^*6 +

dist.

,

Sidvom

TO I 58*15 iap^tiov 58'' 19 49“ 21, 25; 59''37

— ptrpov

26

;

59*10, 12

ldp0i^ov 48 ’'3 2 iap0iKri idta 49 ’’8

48’'3l

lapMa

;

49*

4

,

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 58

ia/iffoTroiTjaas

KaWiTridTjs 6

''9

—

noirjTat 48'^

larpiicq

— 58^26

—

i’Seai5o'’34

uvSpiaTos) 58** 18

33 60^ 20 alviypaTos

S

iapiBiKr) ISia

Idia.

dird

{

= eit

7

]

twv avTuiv

tSewy 56 *’3 rSios49‘’i6; 52 ‘>18, 33; 54'' 10; 55 jQ** 23; 56 '*6. 35 23^ TO pfj Ih.UTlKUV TO iSlWTtKOy 58“ 21 ;

58^32,

4: 39^3

*’1.

35

1

lSpvy$(iai]s 5 5 ‘’4 lepea 5 7 '’3 3

—

;

(

Kap/f(Vo9 54*' 23

—

55*26

;

lepeias 5 5 *’7

55*27

naaatTfpoto 61*28

Upaiavvrj 55''6

KaradceffTepois

’I«a5 ios 61 ’'8

Karakditri

—

dpos 1)1 1 4 59*16 tKatm 49*8; 54“i5,

(Vavor

18

''

,

59'^ *>18;

39O3 Ixapios 61 “4, 8

iKtitvovaa 54*32 '

17 ’IX((i9 51 *29 48 ''38; 59 '3 54''2; 56*13; 57*29; 59G4;62'>

13.(09

3, ’I

;

piKpd 13(09 59*’ 2, 5 TTfpais IKlov 56* 59 *"6 '

8

3 (ou

17

iTtpais

’I^(0> e9

'Iintlas

61*4

karayai

hrcpia 5 1

1

taTqKiy

1

60“ 16 *’3

— OPP-

57’’

10

6

Troitjats

ioTcpiai avyrjdeif 59*21 iaropiKos opp. iroirjT-fjs 51’'!

56*8

6l

;

* I,

II,

'^6

— (Enrip.)

55^7

^

7; 54 7 ) ’’32; 55*18 7^9 '\(piyiytios 55*’ 3 'Icpiyiyeia

TO «o 0 o 3 oo 17

ly Avk'iSi

— naSypaToiy

’’7,

;

48*10

Ki9api(jTov aKOvcay KiOapiaTiKTi

55*3

47*15, 24

Kiyqaiy 61 '^30

Kiyetadai alyrjais

49’’

tKamov

’’

56'^

10

34 irfpt

1

to Ka$‘ ruy kolQ’

—

«a0o3ou49’^8; 5o’’l2; 55’'! opp. «q6’ tKaOToy 5I*’7 + to KaBdkov ’ItpLytydos too koT^9 55'’ 2 ffco 66\ov 5 5 *“8 icard KOKio opp. dp€T77 48*3 53*8 ;

irdaay KOKiay 49*33 Kaxolcu pioyia 50^17 Hanoy «a «09 61*12

61^

/ciyrjTtKa

;

KiydaOai

51*34

62*8,

ii

[piTpa) 60*1

«a«-c()9

KAco<7)£i'

48*

1

opp.

dyaOoy

2

58*20

;

npds Kk(\pd5pai d.yojyi^((j9ai 51*8 Kkiojv 57*28 KkvTaipvTjaTpa 53'’ 23 Kvtjpls

Koiyos

61*28 52’’

Koivuv

24

58'’ 12

icoad

47^10,

opp.

(5(0

Kotyyj-j^l^ Koiyaiyciy 4S'^

56* 10, 18 Ka \ ovp.tvoy ( uyopa ) 57 *’33

61*9

Kocpaptyoy 61* K€'Kp77To 61 * 25 27; 62’’! Kepara 57*^35 6 o'> 3 I Kipmdos (ptuy-q 54'’ 37 K«pakkTjyes 61 *’6

iKkavoiy 55*2

iKaaroy 51 1

oi'o-

61*15 58*31

conj. Sia(p(p(c 9 ai

imaroy 49*31 5

56*35

KeapdaSat

KiOdptaii

52'’6,

54*32

KoBapais 55’' 15 28 Kckd’

udaOcii

23

Kiyravpos (Chaeremon) 47 '’21

7

’I
53*28

KaTcpOaiOSiaiy

Kfpaie

57*’

59*34

’’

fcekfvaai 56’' 17

18

eoTaires

(<7co9

Karadeis 58 ''29, 30 Karairtirkiypiyov rp troiKikiq KaTaipr](pt(Tdpwci 6l 2 Karijyopla 62*5 Karidoi 58*^ 19

pa Kdpfvoy 57 25

56*1 61*22

iTTiTov 60’’

59*26

50*31 58*6 nardkoyos (yeuv) 59*36 KarayTiKpv ^ (09 61*35 KaraTTvOfTai 61*23

tceiTai 50'^

16 'I33o7!(01

—

/fa3co96Yf[i'47*io; i;3*i2 £o’’37 59'^ 12 5 (('i/ 5^1*24 -XPVadai 53*^26 eiprjTat ^ niirpaicTai 61*4 Kakkla.v 51*11; 52* icakklcvs ypdi; 52*32, ’'31; 53® KakkiaiTj Kard rr/v Tixyrjv 19 Tpaycplla 53*23 naptrds 57*’27, 29 KapxrjSoytcyy pdxy

lepov

62*9

;

Kakoy opp. evTfkh 58''2I C'?®’' icakal irpd^tts 48*^ So'^34, 38 TO Kakuv iv ptyi$ti /cal r&^tt 23

*’

51 14 Id/x^wy 49'‘4 larpiKov 16 lafifioiroioi

373

14; 53'’io; 58’’4

Kokkqaayra 58*30 Koppt 58*15 /f(5/i/«)9

52'’ 18

x^pn 55 "3

—

clef.

5

2

’’24

17;

52'’ 17

5

1

O

6

6

l

2

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

374

KopvipaTov fkiceiv 6i ''32

Af^ews

49*30

KoanTjOrjvai

KoapLOi (0 rff's oiptaii) 49'' 33 liaros c?Sos)57'>2; 58*33;

—

(uvu-

59*14

’'14 (synon. iScXnW KpfiTTOvs 48*6 (synon. KpaTioToi/ 54*4 48* 18)

/36\Ti'oiir

54^5

(Dicaeogenes) KoTrpiO 59'’4 oTdKvTTpia

iroi^cras 59*’ 2

Kvpiov ovopa 57*’! 18 + ; 59*2, 14

58*23

58*19) 34) *’3) vapd TO Kvpiov

;

ig ovSiv KW-

itvpicoTfpa

opp.

TTOier

57

51*^31

* 1

8

,

KaiXvOrjvai

6\

^ Z‘i

TO. rijs KoipcpSias

axqpaTa

48'’3<>

49*4 48*37 49'’

dWov 59*7

\av 6 avfiv 49*38,

55

I

28;

55*25,

;

<5

o

7 avTrjs

34

49*17

50'’ ;

;

1

iroir^rai

^

3

rp Atfet

\((iv

56'’ 8

55*22 — — (synon. K yos)

def.

6

56*^ 6)

Td sqq.

49 ’’3

\(KTiK(iv pk-

49*23 (comp.

aiirp

47*29

—

—

dist.

\f/i-

Xop(Tpia 48*11 dist. (pp(rpa 50'’ er Ad70is 59* 13 x6yos 15 XoyOVS TTOKtV { = pvdos) 55’’ I 7 49'’8;55’’i
—

*

57 3

47

1 1

61

16

Xoyov

57*23+

def.

dpxh

SaiKpariKol X6yoi ol (V rots XoyoiS (X(yxoi

6

)

53* 7 52*27 ;

— opp.d

77 o

48

**

Xvats opp. SfOis 55'’

— —

56* 28 (Theodectes)

of AoiiT 04

opp. wAcKeiJ' 56* 10 pv56*38 (iriripypa 60’’ 22

—

5 €itfi'di'ai

60V 5 3 '’2 3 Xvriov 6o''35 XvtrrjpZs

—

—

I

vXoKrj

24+

56*9

—

— pvdojv

conj. vpdldXypxi 60*^6; conj. (niTtpycris 62 ’’18

opp.

54*37 6l’’24

*’2

49*27

49*24

Ac£is 50*9, la, '^13; 49*’

npaTTcoy

ipiv^r) Xiy (IV 60'^ ig

opoiojs A€x0>7fffTai 5 7

rpov

(50**

55’’29 Ao61I'6i* 22

14

’’9,

;

\(KTtKri appov'ia

(vXSycp lS(comp. *35) I 2 ?) rd (V tZ Xuycp 56'' ooa vTTu Tov Xuyov 3(1 napao'/fcoao'fi^i/ai 56*37 Adyosopp. to TOO xopoS49*i7 5 o'^ 6, 9 (2) Ad-

47* 22

AvyK(vs

60*17 kiyetv 49*26; 50*6, '>5, 7; 51*37) •^1+ keydv ^ 54'’ 34; 60*7 keywv irpaTTtiv 5l*’9; 54*35

\(y 6 p(voi

* 22 dist.

7rpa^i$54*

AoijTdr5o'' 15

—

56*14

;

\rj(p 6 rjvai

Ae7cui'6l*7

—47

(v rots (/cS(Sop(vots Add'AAos Ad70f 49 * 9 701 s 54*’ 18 XSyxyv 5 4 '>2 2

kapirpd Aefis 60 ’'4

56'’ 6,

appovta 25,“28

pvdpos,

dist.

iJSuo'/iEi'os 49*'

etc.

;

Aaior 60*30 AaKaivai 59 *’6 AaKeSalpcov 61 '’6 AaKcov 61 '’4 Aapj^Sarfii/ 53*>I5

—

—

KOipwSonotol

ol

10

59*33; 6o'^4; 6i’’28, 34

X6yos

;

KCOpCpSHV 58*' 32 KwpcpSia 47*14, *’27; 48*17, 30, 31 ; 49*2, 10, 32, 38, '^22; 5l'’l2;

53*36

X'lav

701 dist. p(Tpa

Kwp&^fiv 48*37 Kwpai (=6^yuoi) 48*36, 38

50’’ 10;

dpdv 61

X^ipts (waiSiOu) 55 ’’30

—

57 ’’6

«a)^a>5oi

X(^(ais

rrjs

Tradr]

-npos rfjv X(^tv

X(vk6v 57*16

Kv\i 6 ptvoi 6 1 *'3

AiJfi

61*27

X(VKoypa
Kpiaii (ottKcov) 59'’ KvKka)tres 48*15

«£tiAofj

aaiprjs

58*21 Affis (V rp Aefa 59*3 (60s rrjs 59*12

(repiv)7

X(^(i

Kp^Tfj 61*14 TO Kpi 58*5

55*1

— —

^ayy(XX(a6ai do**!! rfj 60 ’'3 X(^(i hiaiTovdv fAf^isf 12*17

Kpeaiv 54*1

Kv-npioi

—

Xopov 52’’23 Xi^iv ptp(Ta 9 ai Xi^eais 60’’ 12

56*’

peprj

X(^tsy(\o'iat^g’-

33

Aa/irrpd 60’’ 5

58*18

KpHTTWv 62*13,

Kpfatpuvrrj^

— —

pteAoTroiia 49'^

19

Ac^eojs

58*18 Ae'fis conj. 50*29; 56*34; 59'’ 12, conj. ^^7 50*36 dist. dp6T97

Siavoia

16

upa^ovaiv 58*^31 xparaffBat 56*10 KpaTT]^ 49*’ 7

61 '’26)

56'^9

—

20

(v

irepi rr/v

ax'nf^O’Ta

rijs

tildyvys

48 * 34 pa(6v 58*7 padyads nOKicSai 48 ''7 P&60V 61*24 pavyvai 51*26 paKpos 55 '’1 7 paicpuv

ipctivy(v

paKpd avaraais 60*3 58*1, II

1

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS /iaA\0V5l“7, 27; 52^3,5:53^13.16; aXAd 56*28,35; 6 o®i2; 62‘’i 4

dA\d TToXii /idWov

fidWov 53*36

pidX\ov,^TTOv6o'^2'j

50“ 3 1

ftd-

Kiara 4S‘’il+; 49*24; 501*4; 56*3; 59 ^ 9 >, 36 ; 52^3, 37; oTi nd60*13, 19, 28; 61*35 Xiara 491* 12; 55*23; 59*12; ''

621*

1

liwOavuv

481* 13,

fiovia 55*’

14 (i
(dist.

ftavi/cov

16 rcoirjTiKrj

fj

55^33 Mapaffu/i'dSe 58 “9 mapy'iTrjs 481*30, 38

29

48*31

^<670 59/4 59*33 ty peyd\y pcydka -q dKora 561*4 Si' dpapriav peydXqv do^T) 53*10 ^

1

^

KaicSv 61^ 8, g

,

,

pu^oiv (pvdos) 51*10

pei^ovayaOoi',

pd^ova iaxqpiaTa)

49^6 Htyimov 50*15, 23, 33, '>16; 53*27; vpuiiroAv/ie7iaTo>'59*6 56*4 Tov ml piiyiCTov 501*23 /ie7€5os49*i9 ; 501*26 ; 51*11,12 opos pey€$ovs pityidd 501*37 piy^eos ix^iv 49/25; 51*15

h

^

51*4; 621*10

i^^yfOos

ex^‘1'

piiyeBesXapPdviiv ^6^ 14 ml puKpS23

501*25

—

eireicTelveiv 59!*

rqTa irapaiTKeva^dV ^6^

—

—

I

fv*

TO irpCTTOV 56 51 *4 rZ p (Toxo** 501*36 p-eTpia^dV 59*34

CrUJ'OTTTOI'

— TO

14

yeOd /i€ 0 o 5 ou

47 *

pc'pos TpaycpSiaSji-neirodas ^g^

34

Ka6' 16; 50*8, 11; 551*33; 591*10 'imerev pipes 56*6 pipy KarcL TO noaov 52I* 15 sqq. pipes 'oKov TpaywSias ^2^ \g pipq dist. ciSt; 621*17 pipq pvOov 50*34; 52!* Twv irpaypaTOiv 51*32, 33 9

— — dkoya

12

56*36

;

— dpya

60*28

SiavoyriKo) 60 1*3 561*20 pipes

(opp. Xi-

—

aqpavTimv

57*11, 15, 24, 27 piaov opp. dpxy< TfXevTri (tcAos) opp.aKpa 501*26,31; 59*20 ^ 3 api;, etc. 57 3 10 °PPetc.

;ie7as 49'*lo;

53

>

—

^(ois

57*35

fif^aKo-npiirtia 59**

'M.fyapdS

pipes 55'>27; 56*14, 37, 1*25; 581* * 1 62I* 12; 59 35 , 11251-; 6 o 26 ; mrei opp. t 3 oAoJ' 51 *33 9 pipes opp.dpa^’j'^ 28 Kara pipes opp. 0A7 56*16 ev piKpov pipes 62*15 cAdxio'TOi' pipes 58*

rjOticd,

59^26 /j-ffaKdoiTSiv

375

62^6 54*31 M€A£a7pos 53*20 /ifAi 58*15 piHOvpov

—

—

,

:

56I133

perd xp^i'ou 57*14 peroL rdSe dist. St(i rdSe 52*21 peTa^aivdV 551*27 piTaUdXXeiv 49*20; 51*14; 53*13; 52I* pteTa/SdAAcoi/ 48* 22 59**29 pieTa/SaAoCffa 49* 14 34: 53*9 perdffaais 49*37; 52*16, 18; 55I* ;

28 iroXXds ptra-

ptrafioXij 52*23, 31

PoXds peraPaXoSaa 49*14 52I* 20 piETO^i; op<€Tafo53*7 pera^v (ovSpaTa) 58*9, 16 peTamiTTdV 53*2 pieTaTiflei'ai 58!* 18,

rd

—

20, 24, 26

dist.

51*33 ptrafipdv 59*8 dipaipHV

p(£Ta^opd57l>2, 30; 58*22-)-, 1*13, 17; def. 59*10, 14, 1*35; 6 o 1*I2 mrd p(Ta
—

'yieXay'nnrq

31 peracpopiKos

/i£'AA£ii'47*

perpid^ovTa tw ptyidei 59*34 perpiKois 561*34 perpiKfjs 561*38 t 3 pirpiov 58!* 12

10

;

59* 33

eiv (etc.) 531*18, 21, 34,

8

:

—

dist. n-oi-

38; 54*6,

55^9

/leTpov 471*13, 18; 1*7

,

491*33, 35 : 5 ° 16; 10 (synon. pieXos) 50*10 pe\cs{sjaou.p€\oiToua) 50*14

/leAoirou'o

—

^o0/its,/ieTpoi'47’’ 25

—

—

—

591*

dist.

dist.po^1*

dist. pterpa 49 491*29 apjiovla Kal piXoi ^g^ 2g p-i31 Aoj x°P°^ 521122, 23 521*21 pio?

—

pev 571*4 Mfj'fAaos 54*29 M(p6nq 54*5

61 1*21 ;

59*6

—

—

—

aTTAoui'

59I133,

dist. pvOpos,

49

1*

—

1 1

.35;

oi’«eroj'49*

—

qpwiKov 59I132

TeTpd/xeTpoi/ 481*31, 32

—

62*15,

piXos 471*25

;

24

lapIdeTov,

49*21,25;

CTaaipwrarov, 07/fco591*37 mrd to pirpoy Sierraroy 591*35 591*18 opp- KaTd TTjy pi pyaiy e?s TO piTpov iyTiPiptya 471*15 piTpov piydXov 491*10 581*16 peTd piTpov opp. ayev piTpojy 511*3 phpa £1' piTpep pipyTlKT] 59*17 47I* dist. 17, 22; 481*21 51 28

—

1*

;

—

8

3

I

l

—

^e\os 49*’30

dist.\(J 7 o<

47^29

noiiiaBai pip.i]aiv 47‘‘22,

5I*’2 ;

•'

1

56“'

2

X^TTjs 56''32 p.6v(VTOV

opp. 3 /)a-

---

14

;

)

26;

avcToaem

pTjKos

p.r)x
.'>4’'

59''i8 to tov

“^6

’’ 54’‘3 piapdv 5>36; 53 39 puyvvvai 47 *’8, 20; 60“ 2

opp.

49“ 19

pitHpd ’lAids

56“ 2

piKTTj 47 **2 2 pipLfTaOai 47^17+;

6 o'‘ 9, '’9, pi/xov/xeroi 48“' I,

TOi dir£(«dfoi'Tes47

17; 24

— TToWd

29

Trpd^cis 48'^ 25 /utp?; 59** 25

—

—

Saiovs 2^8“ 26 54''

— Spwvras

— ;

51

''

—

1

62^10

T]

9 r]

^0^20

airov-

StCTKOV

6i'>3i piprjpia

feojs

31 II

—

—

'‘13, *'33

—

52^*2

50% /iias

>^3,

TTpa-

24; 51^

— vpa^tm

—

Plov 50^16 (pofiepSiv /cal fA.ceil'CUJ/ 52 2 dvOpdiTTCov 16 Tuiv T/paTTOVTOlV 50 ''3 kv 6 s

51^31

—

10 Korepaip

49 '‘32 64 ‘‘27 “ 7rpdTr£i!' 59 15 62*^4

—

Sirjyrjpari/cri

TTOtiKri,

— —

/SeAridi'a)!'

vapex'^''

cpopai

7

48^3, '^35; 55^20, ''19; 56“ ;

59'’4

60^6

;

— TOV

oKov 31^33; alaxpov 49 “34 popia popiovTi TpaycpSias ^2 48 2 49**26 Tu)i' ISiav popcpfjv pop^ai Btjpiojv 48^ 12 dnoSiSoVTts 54 10 **16 povaiKT) conj. oxptK 62

47 “2 6 56

“ 1 1

— —

TOV

*'

dKoyia

/ca/c'ia

6 1 **19

—

53*9

—

conj.

opp. dpapTia

53’‘*5 , poxBrjpoi opp. tviti/ctit ^2” ,

2fi

Slippov

poxBr]p 6 v 58 *>30

pvBevpaTos 60^29 pvBo5 4'j^g; 5o“4+

;

31 “3; 53

'*

37

;

-irpd-

35; 56“8, 28 ffa;s/2i/i7(ris3l “31 ; 52'*I3 **1,

— TTpaypdrcvv Twv — crvuTaais npaypdToiv synon. 4 — synon. 30^32 (comp. 34^*14) Td T/pdypaTa 22 — — synon. fets3l**33 def.

30“*

cvvBfixis

ixpafis 52**

irpa^ews 62*'

Trpd^eaiv ^2^ T

mi

—

9

conj. Tipd-

48 9, 1 48^24; 52 49''24, 36;

;

19

54‘*i2,

PeXriovs 48'‘l8 opytKovs (etc.) i\ev 9 (pas yvvaiKas 1

povs,

“-8,

,

fxipovv-

puptiaBai

—

28,29

20; 6i‘’29

*’5,

,

“•

19 TrpaTTOvras 48“!, 28 ‘‘

52 ''33 piprjTiKai ptprjTifCMTaTov 48 '' 7 ptpvrjadai 56 1 pvrjaSt'n 33 “ pTpoi 47*’ 10

poxB/jpia conj.

48^8 +

59'‘i2; ol

*'2

49 — ipopfpZv

69 “i 7

*’

59/2,4 pi/cpoTrjra

*'8

t^aptTpois)

51^30

^dpioi'

ov pticpbv ptpo% Kara puKpbv ^8^’ 22‘, 49“ piKpov i^aWdTTftv 49 ’’1

jiiKpoi pivOot

tv ptTpcp

/idi'os

ptpiy-

piKpSs 58’' 27, 30

62 ‘‘I 5 13

6o“8,

;

tv

(j)

pvrjaTrjpoJV 5 3 *’20

47 “23

X‘^p'‘^

piprjTiicri

pvrjpovcvovTai 49 *“4

;

pievoii

pi pT/TTjs ^8“^ 26

—

pipr)-

SpapaTt/cds noiftp 48 ''35

Vlvaa'iOtos 6 'Otiovvtios 62 Sid pvTipi^s 34*’ 37

diro prjxo-vrj^ 54*’

2

/2i/ii7(T£1947“'i6;48“7

28 creis

MiVes 52

21; 54 ‘‘8

53‘> 20,

21,

Kai iXtfivwv

ex^^'’

/x^Kovs opoi 51 59'’i7 iv ikArTovi pLTjKet 62 “iS fiirpov prjKos 6 2 ''7 prjKvveTai 55'' 16 prjviv aeiSe 56'' 16 p-flTrjp

''13,

fitprjcreois 29; 49 3 i; 59'’33 to Te\os Trjs pup-rj48*’8;53’’I2 acais 62 '‘18 Kara Tfjv p'lprjaiv opp. KaTcL TO ptTpnv 47 ''15; 5i'>

55*' 27 + pixpt 47''9 49‘’9; MijSeia 53‘'29; 54'' prjSerfpoi opp. QJi 53‘'I9; 60'' 35

49

M

’’

47 *'20 (comp. *‘8) yivos Twv pirpwv 47 *'8 perpoav avvdects 49’' 35 ds piirpa TfBfjvai

TO. fierpa piyvvctjv

—

1

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

376

48

1 3

1

Tpayi/CTj TTjf

oiTcv 5 alo/v

tt/v

ixipcrjaiv

p-ipiijais

—

fj

tZv

StTjyT]Ti/cri

59 ''36 61 ’'26

pipi-rjaectis

1*

— 0 au-

54’’8 6

49

rj

iv

tZ

kiroTTOiZv

—59^*33 enoai

48^24,

dia*^3

avOTaais tov pvBov 52“ 19 37 piBcov pvBovs noittv 49*’ 3, 9 woirjTTjs 51 *’2 7 pvBov avviardvai ** 52 29 ; 53 4 ; 5 i*>i 3 ; 55 22 39“'i 8 Xdeiy33*'22 dvaiptiv 60’'' 28 fva Tcnifiv 62^6 irapad\ov TTOittv 56 “ 1 3 *>

‘*

—

—

— — — dmpiBptiv 23

—

Ttlvciv

18

21^38

Xi;
;

’^

ptpr]

pvBov “32; 52*’9 dirKovv 51*^16, 22; 62'’5 vtT/Xtyptvov 2'^°' 6I*’33;32“I2

)Ui;0ou3O'*'34; 51 fis

—

—

— 6papaT(K(5s59“' 19 — — vaptiXrjppivoi 2^^ 3 — vapaSfSoptvov 33*'22 — /caXws 33“ 24; S3’’23 12

(ToSiZSrjs

i-nti-

‘i

31**

tx
2

— ev

12

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS — Ka\59*21 — ^001? 49*4 ^2 — 6 Tux^y 53 000/^058*2 — /itTpoo49*24

pvOos 49 1 9 ijeri 50 ^ 38 opp. F^rpa 5 1 2 7 Ifcu Tov pvBov 55 **8 o Tov Oi’Stiroi' piBos 53 *>7 MvvrtaKos 6l'’34 pvpi 57 **11 TO pvpiov iro\v 57’’ jiiKpol /xvSot

1

8 opp.

12

of/coj

55*17 53*29

o’lKOVOpdv

oilCTpa dist. Stiod 53''

N

60^32

bXlyos

58^9, 17

vavpaxM 59^^26 KaraXoyos 59'“ 36 vtjv? 57’’I0 48 1 veoKTtvKTov KacaiTepoto 6l 28

50*26

50^25 iiiKOxaprjs 48^13 Hio^r] 56“ 17 Ni'-n-Tpa 54*’ 30; 60^26

24

o£ viot

KOI

VVV

12

evopi^ov

vopoi

48^15

—

62^10

eri

vvv vvv

vv( 61^26

a

19+

to't6

opP-

59^35; 6 o''i

TO

;

47* 18 51*23; 54”

oSvvrjpd irpafis 5 2 '’12

49*37 51*24; 59''3; 60*35 V 'OSoWeia 49*1; 51*29; 53*32;

’OSoo-o-eta

59*’ 15

;

62''9

61

’OSoct(T€os 54'>26; 57’'ii;

— —

*’7

—

—

;

;

60*30

62’’2

51*16, 21; 56''l6; 60*20; ‘^*,’*4. 33 . 017) 5’ dppopos 61 * 20 017) 0(1 6 1 *’3 55’^I3

57*’ 32 50*“ 17

T<

;

59’’28

tSiv olxeltm/

oIk(ToV TTjS olK(ia 7)hov 7)

appoTToy)

48*14;

7T 0 l 7)TlK 7js

53*36,

*’11 ;

r)Bos

49*15;

—

54*24 50*2; 57'’i7)

— \(x6v
;

bpo'iais

51*21; 28

20,

59’’ 52*30; ^57”! dist. p^pa 56*21 (indef. 57*10 57*16+ bvdpaTOi cluding p7/to) 61*31

ooo/to

48*35;

;

ovopa

13

—

—

TTToitris

;

oieaBai

oi’/ftros

*34

22, 26,

‘‘

;

'Op7)pov dp^dpiyot 48*29 pb opparaiv TiB(oBat 55*23 bpotos 55*5; TO bpoiov 59*21 TTtpt TOO O/tOtOO 53*5, 59 ^ 8,^ * 31 6 bpoiovs (^opp. icpdrTovs, x^poo^'f (LKCL^ay 48*6, 12 bpoiovs ttokTv opoioy (dist. xP'H'kToy, 54*10

54*1

(to

orpavparia^ tJ SmjAAj;) 54*30 d •pevSdyyeXos 55*13 34 OlS'iirovs 53*11, 20 (Sophocl.) 54»S; 55* 52*24+ 53»7, 31 ;

1 1,

59 3 i, ”12; 60* OTTO 'Op 77 p 0 l/ 48 * 28

5

77

bSvvris

*’

48*

;

01 TTpO

5,19

oyicos TTOtripaTos 59’’ 28 oyKaiStaTaTov 59*' 35

18

0X0

f7rtio'd5ioooXoo56*3l

52*21 0X0/548*4; 50*26, *10; 54*21 57*33; 60*29; 61*9 bpaSoy 61*19 bpakoy {7)Bo%) 54*26 opaXais 54*

"0/tJ7po5

feooos Bvw 5 5 ''5 acvopduTjf 61 ® I

_63

*

pta

27 . 6p0pcp 61 *23

58'‘io, 13

:

piaxai oKr) ^l^^2

ptX?;

sevapxov pTpoi 47'' 10 ^tviKbv ovopa 58'^ 22

S5’'^7

TTpd^is

def.

50

0X7 /tot TtXtt'o 59* 19 t 3 to TO 0X00 51*2 bXoy 59*20 TO 0X00 51*34; 55* ^dptoo TOO oXou 51*35; 56 * 33 26 6X7 62*1 oXos Texyt) 77 Xopds 52*23 /ttpos 6X00 52*

v 6 paiv

49“ 12 I^^XP‘ TOO o£j'oi'48*i8; 5o'’8

47‘’9

—

_

TtXti'o /tot b\7) opd^is

/tot

— opp. 77pioTOV53*l8

61^4

Tr(pt bXiya'S

irpofij

26

vvv 4S'’32;

oXlyoi 29 ovK bXiyci

0X0550*25; 56*13, 16; 59*32

UtorrroXepos 5 9 ’’6

47''

54*1; 60*9 58*'25,

51*26 50*12 0X17060*9 oiKias 53*19

veuiv

TTo'irjais

;

= piKpos

opp. TfdoTts

vtKpuiv popipaT

vopi^opiva vopos 5 5 ’’5

14

ofooo 61 *27, 30

oAi^dms 49*27 TO

ol-

K(ia r)B7) 48 '’24 oiKiai (synon. yivT)) 53*19; 54*12

oivopXv^iV 61*15 otoo^ototio 61*30 oHxfTai TO to 51 * I

^1^2

pvp'iQiv (TTaSiwi'

Mvaia 60^32 Moo’ors

377

oIk(Tov

a'vyt(TT(is

52“ ir

\icuv

;

57

*

ovoparos

19

(tdT)

000-

31 (comp. 58*34, *14, 18) /to/fdpioo,ftoi/tdo

pa

(

= doopo

58*

doo-

19, * 3

KTjpioy)

;

58*28,

—

*2,

doo/to oi’/ttfoo 58 * 2 dX16 K(lp(VOV XoTpiov 57*7, 31 bvopa^opevov 58*6 57^^5 /toXod/ttooo dird Tivav 57*

—

—

—

3

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

378

uvdnara

33

—

22

dist. TTpayfiara 51'^ **

1

—

trKovv etc.

59

5,

—

34

—

ovopara apptva ovopa TtOiaOat

9

sqq.

sS^-S

57*”

51 ’’10

tiriTlStaOcu

55*’ ^3 5l’'l3; irpoapiTaridivai 58'’20 + ayopeveiv 5 7 ’'31 ovopa^eiv 47*^10, 14 bvopa^optvov (ovopa) 58^6 bvopaaia 50*’ 14 d^vTTjs opp. Papvrrjs 56'’33 rd TT€pl ruv bnbnXaiv Kp'iais 59 *’5

viroTiOevat

—

—

61^2 'OirovVTioi 62^8

20

61*10

tSefi'

1 *

/fa\ws 5

“•

1

—

5,

24,

Trpds Tl

Ihuv

24

I

bpyi(6 ptvos 55*32 opyiKovs Kal pqBvpovi 54’’ 12 o ’OpecTTijs 53*20, 37 (Eurip.) 62''6; 54‘‘29> 53’>24; «*' 'OpioTip '’31; 7>’’H 6 i'’ 2I opBov bpd’ ent (TavpojTrjpoi6l^^ bp6 p 9 rj kniTip-qatsSl^ ig 26 bpOSis (X^ty dws 58 '’5; 60'’ 18 60^24, 28 ’Opearrjs

60’’

bpOoTTji

—

14

61^24 wpiarai 52*15 X'lay 52*32

TraOrjriKov

10;

Karol,

77

rixvqv

57*26

59 “18 ;

07] 07]

—

51* ptyiOovs 51*

bpxyOTiKcoripav *’

26

ov-

pdWoy 56*28

50* 30; Jl’>17 ptv TtpUlTOV 61*10

(TKtva^otv

=

58'’

naiSiov

fK TralScoy

29

54*9

ot TraXotot

48'’33; 53’’27 vdXiv 49’’30 ; 60 '’4 irappeyeBes 50'’ 39 TrdppiKpov 50’’ 37

TTawvxioi 61*17 wdyrcas 5 1 ’’23 mpd Toy Xoyoy 56 ’’7 irapdBeiypa 58*20;

—

60*26,

—

54*28

wovrjpias

rb napdSoiypa ine-

TTjro^ 54*’ 14

7TapanX7]C7toy

II

;

50*39 49^18; 53'’7+;

—

56^371 ”6

— eXeetyd

77d9r}

oYeoij ifo(r/ios49’’33

56*^2; oip-

54'*

56*

(etc.) 56'’4

— Xoyoy

49*2

7rapa
napexoiy rqy pipTjaiy 54*27 TtapqKoiey 59*’ 22 napoicBo) 56'’ 18

rZ TlapyaaoZ 51*26 1 7 +

TrdpoSos 52*’

61*20 61*19 oay KaKiav 49*33 Tray

*26 to ndvres Kara ttS-

iroXv ti

50*27

^

’’26

OKXTjpb-

pix^^y 6 1 *’ 1 rrapaBoBopiyoi pvBoi 5l’’24; 53’’25 vaptiXTjppivoi pvBoi 5 3 *’2 2 TrapaXoyl^orai f] >pvxy 60*23 TrapaXoyiapbs 55*13, 16; 60*20

ird^x^iv 53'’6; 6 i'’4

25

58*5 bipe nore 49 *’2 b\pe 49*20 53'’l+; ofii 50*10, ”16; 10

55 ’’30

Xqifits

rraiBaf diroKreiyeiy

dvTi rod TToXXol

oipis

59’’

Xf'^eois

riji

TrdBTj

60 *’12

TO

ovaias 49'’ 24 oil>

ndira-


TrapZxTJKOv Se TrXtoi vv^ 61 vapcpB'ias itoiuy 48*13

24, 27

ovpijas

ovnSavos

52*’

eXfov,

vdBeaiy 55*31

ev

oirSJl'^TTOl'5T “3, 23, 30; 57

007701

(scil.

7rapa(pavela7]i

— pqKOVS

49*^23 Biv

— def.

Trapardyoiy pvBov 51 ’’38 55‘’2

62*9

bpxqarSiv 47*27 bpxqOTiKov 60*1

011X17 54*’

naBqTiicfj rpaycpBia

4

iS Kaiirpa^ei! ptpuaBai 4'j’^ 2S

38

'5

48*9

1

,55’’34: .59'’9 53'’2o; 54*13 II Kar' avrb rb vdBos

iraBos

iipiapivoi irpos fvrv-

opo 9 ovarias 49'’ 23 6,

59

*’

TrapaaKeva^fiy

optapbs dvBpumov bppSjvres 49*3 bppHV 57*’ 10

. opx’7<^<5

naO-qpArwv K&Bap-

ais 49’’ 28

TidXai

55

;

55*1, 10 dpyrjv 56’’

dvepyaaia 50’’

48'’6

io,_i 5; 53'> 4 ; 54'’ 6 opai' €1! T( 60 “ 1 4

27

bipocov

d^€is ex*'*' 50 **13

naOypara

Xaiv

bpav 48 »

62*16

eis

—

yf3 vd/xeva, yviipipa opp. newoirjpeva 51 ’'15, 20 wopaaTrKovv,Stir\ovv, TpiwXow etc. 57 31 sqq. 5iT(i TVX<5>'Ta 5 1

—

—

dist.

II dist TTOieiV iraropa 53’’ 20

f-navaaro

49*15

—

rrpbs

TTpdrroiy

53*22

riua 51

^

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 48^6

Tlavcaiv

avayvaipiads

TO TpaitKov 61“ iS TTt'ipas (djTo T^s) 59’’ 32 TrftpdaBcu 49*’i2 ; 56“'3 TleXoTrovv^aw

’>

;

48^35

emaToXrjs 5 2 *'6 58 16 nepaLvovaa ica.$apffLV 49'’ 27 pepr] dpa vipaivoptva 59’’ 27 TTtpa'ive
TTipiSipaia 54*’

24

62^6

54^29

(k iTepnreconj.

50*34;

dvayviipiuis (avayvcopicrpos)

10; 55'^34;

‘'9.

S2’‘i5, 17. 33. 38,

10

vepiTTireiai

077X0

dist.

pay para 56*19 *>36

’IXi'ou

Tripais

58*4

51 ’’16

TTiOavbv

dSvvarov

61 ’’II mOavd/raroi mOrjKos 61 ’’34 HtvSapos 61 ’’35 ’’

48*38

6l * 26 [see TToXd] ttAskciv opp. \veiv 56*9 ireirXtyTrevXeypevot pv 9 ot pivov 59 ’’1 5 16

—

TTen\eypivrj

irpd^is

52*

— rpa-

avvBecris 52 ’’32

^S/o

55’’33j 59’’9 iT\Tj 0 os TpayqiSiZv 59’’ 2 1 viroKpi0770T£Di' 49 *i 6 77X170758*13 /fpiTcoi' 49 ’’ l77e«To5tW49* 28 5

—

—

77X771.

56 ”4

TrXrjyTjvat

51*26

53^ 28 +

—

{cOTii.Spdv,Trpa.TT(tv')

invent) 5i'’20, 22;

770I7/167.0V OVO/ia 57’’ 2,

pivoi

Xoyol

yevSpfva

51’’

51 * 25

(7171.6)37

--

77017/10 48’’

TOV

— —5

^77.

47*21

plp-qaiv

—

tos

padrjdds

29

;

62’’

51*21; 59'’i3;

irovqpaTOi 07170s 59’’ 28

47*10; 48’’23, 24; Sii’ic; 58*20; 59*37 ^ laropia 51 ’’6 77/105 Trjv

49*23;

—opp. TTo'iTjaiv

eKarepay iToirjiTis * 770/7(715 T7S TpayipSia^ 47 49 * 3 26 Si 0 vpap 0 iKS)v,i' 6 piuv 14 77oi7T77S47’’I5+ 48*33, '’34; 51*20, ”30, 32; 53‘‘i 8, 30, 34, ”13; 54” —opp. 31,34; 56^5; 60*7; ”13 ()>u(7ioX(57os 47'’ 19 opp. oneiioopp. iaropiKos 770105 50’’ 20 51’’! conj. ^aiypacpos, UKOvo60’’ 8 conj. 770105 7/0*605

50*26 54’’ II

33 28

— — — — pvOwv,

01

conj.

flKovoypdipos

^pcoiKoiv,

Idp^tuv 48’’

Xtyopfvoi

phpav

770i7T^s d7a0(js

3

55*34

—

TTOirjTuv

—

56*6

59*29 TTOiTjTov

1

d-

’’36; oi

povos ipyov

(= Homer)

57'’

34; 58'’7; 6 o’’2 48 *’4; 5o’’i 8; 54*16; 77017T11777 47*8 56’’ 14, iS opp. TToXtrtKrj, opp. laTpiKTj etc. 60'’ 14, 20 ;

dXX7

—

T6X1.7 56'’ 18

KpiTiKTi

62*5

TTtlTOirj-

TToXtpOV 59*31

ire-

60*6

d 77017775

TTfTTOiTjpivai

33

ttokTv

51 ’’27,

avTrj's TTOtrjTai

i/oCXos 5 pelvaiv 5 3 ’’3 oiTTpSiTonroiyrai^o^ 60’’ I

55*33 59*34 TTOlOTTjS 50*18

I

58*7

—

—

51*37

j

—

(=

;

TToXepov oXov 59*32 oiovs S6? 77016 o ’’34 7701611. ( = 5 /701.) 49*’! tiaOai 5 -qXwatv 59*22 arjpetov

Twv

opp. Xvais 56*9

54*1; 55'’io; 57* dist. opp. Traax^‘v 53*22 5 piXXetv 53’’ 18 opp. KcuXveiv 57* 770160. 75oi')70 48 ’’18; 59*21 1,8 kmS-qXov 51* (comp. 62’’ 13) ttokiv Toivavrlov ^2^ 26 35

77oieH.

— dad-

—

60’’

TToXXoi Tuiv iToirjTuiv

irXrjpmv 59'’ 31 ttXoktj

— — ooo23

37 vara 30

;

28

TrXfi'cu, TrXfOj

52*12

Kvnpia 59*

—

17

TrlaTiais tvtica 54'’ irXdvT]

Td

dj.(i76iv6l'’lo, II

61*30

ntarevopev 51

—

-nepi

TTo'irjais

56*2

TTivovTOJv

—

Tiva 5 l’’l 5 77 70^615 51 '’36 /

10

mSavov

pi-

iap-

48’’8

59^6 n.7X€(Sov HijXyidSeai

tpoyovs

48* 13

*

761 ?

(

47 ’’2 1

(and passim)

irepioiSwiai 5 2 *’12 ntpais ’IX/ou 56*16

IlTjXeus

77a/)ii.Si'of

'’35

48^35

IT

vtpiTrq 59

— — — p^aeii SpapariKas 48 Pctov^S'^ig — dyaiviapaTa — — KtV38 50 30 —

48'’ 27

59’’ 2

TrepiireTfia

—

—

— Xo7oiiS49’’8; 55*34

Tavpov

49 ‘’13

vepioiKiSas 48 ® 36 Trepmtrtia def. 52*22

59'’

—

77

nepiepya^eaOat arjpetots •neptoSov Tjkiov

ntvoirjpiva 54'’ 30 20 notuv (as a poet) 53*35, ”28, 47 '’i 4 ; 50*35, 7 29: 54 “25. ‘’13; 56*11+ ; 58'’8, 61* 60*3, *>23; 22; 59'’27;, 28 7701771051*21 pv0 OVS 49 ’’6, 9 eVo pv 0 ov 6 2 ’’6 arjpeia 55 *

TTfSiov

Ttlas

379

TtoiKiXla

— — opp.

V770-

— evpvois 7 pavi-

7

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

380 49“ 12

iroAtoii'

TToAfWS 7roA?;os 58 “ 3 60*^14 troXiTiKrji Hpyov iroXiTiKm opp. prjToptKws

rroXiTiKT)

50 ’’6

Xeyetv 50*' 51 ‘>38; TToAAa/fiJ 56 “! I

5407;

55''25;

59

57 “20

— 1

TrAciooj

fV

62

'’8

*

23

59

62^*5

rpaycpSiai

—

— A0701 57*29

+

ol

dneipa

irKitovs

Trpdfeis

ewl TO

ois

«at 51“ (adv.)52“2l; 56*15;

ttoAu

59*5

tto-

50 '’30 iroAAd opp.

TToAAd

17

30

“

avayK-q's

59 “29

TToAAot

(puvai

57* «Va

TTfpi

irKtwvtuv pidf

TO TrAeio) d/t(^i;3 oAoi' 6l *26 aiXqTiKqi q irXHffTq 47*15 irKelarq 54'' 20 7roo);/)ia 54* 28 ptrd irotq6l'’2I

57*4

T^s

;

pias

56*22 53*1

dAAoTf 51*9 0 avviajqKfv (k tivwv 50*^ “ ^vtri? TOO jrpayparos 51 77 35 Tci auTd rd 7rpd 7 //aTa 55*1 7 10 npdyparaavvimaaOai -npay/^aToii/ O’do'Taois 50* 15, 53’’ 2; 22 ;

50*32; Ttpayparaiv avvOeats 50* /iC6os

TO 7rpd7yoaTa (synon. /uC0os) 5 22, 37; SS^S. 13; 54''^

51*33 56*^2

Tali'

vpayparwv

TTpaypuaTa

—

50*

dist.

ovdpara

dist.

51 22 vpaKTiKuv 60*1 •>

TT/iafis

50*18+

53*’ 16,

;

51*18,

'’29

y'lveadai

27

;

52*^3;

r^v

irpa^iv

irpd^is opp. Ttoiorqs 50* 53'’27 15 dist.Ao7os54*i8 dist. vdOos 47*28 conj. 0 lo! 50* 16 irpd^h Tis 50*18 Tipafis TTOid Tiy 50*1 KaXq 48** tpBaprticq rj dSvvqpd ^2^’ 11 25 npd^eaiv ahiai 50* (comp. *’1)

—

2

—

51

49'^

Trpdffois “

51^31; 62'’1I 19, 28;

—

—

—

*’3;

Tf-

'’24

59*22;

conj.

*>33

’’

53 30 aoTd 24

“A*a irpaTTofieva

25

59 vpaTTopeva 55 * irpaTTopivaiv ptTa^oXq 52*

22

TtpdTTftv

Td

36

;

50*4,

irpd^is

62’' II

—

p'la p'la

Xtyuv

dist.

etc.

5i‘’9;54'‘35;6i* 5, 7rd(rxeii'5i

noiccy

1 1

48*23 (comp. 0

I

—dist. 6, 7 conj.li'€p7tri', hpdv,

TrpaTTUv

TTpaTTiTai

14

49’’3l), 27,

50*6, vird

60*

^^4;

Tivuiv

irpar-

Tui'Toiv 49 ’'37 q to t£ Trpdmiv ptpqais 59*15 vpaTTovTas pipciaOai 48*1 irpaTTOVTei TioiovvTai Tqv pipqaiv 49 ’’3 1

TO npinov (vp'wKeiv 55*25 irplirev /it' rr/ifirooTOi? 59*4 7 f 0 os 56 * 14 TTpb TOO opp. vartpov 54''

49*13

;

teal

dyyeXiai

ZtiaOai

5.

npoatpeTaOai 60*26, TTOTC

/tai

pepq Koyos

anovSaiaieatTeXfta

ital

54"

irpdypa

npaypara 56*20

Tf A«ia

— TeAc(a 52*2 — Acia dXq 50 — — d'rA7 5i»33; 52* /i{;eos52*37 — 51 14

23 vpoayopevaeojs

nocaxS/s 61*32, 34 noCTeiStoi/os SS** 18 TO TToadv 52'’ 1 5, 26 7rOT 6 6 l'’l TO nuTt 57*17 4

— synon.

dXq

leal

leal

24

7rpod7tii/ 48*’

iTOvqpSv

54*34 54*14

irpd^is

oXq

CTTfiffoSidiSTyr

iroKipvOov avarrjpa 56“ I 2 TTo Ail f rro\v^‘j^l2 P70 v 49 \v Ti 59'^ 23; 61 “20 if

— pla

I

p'la irpofis

50*21; 53 30 + ti TTfTtpayi Tis 7 Td ire-npa52*36 ypiva 52*29 -npaTTdv to Stii'oi'

rioAviSos 0 aoiptarrjs 55 “6, ''10 ^^ TToXvpfpjj I

clist.

51*32 59*19

TrpdTTClV

;

iroAu

TToXvptpqi 59 *^

49''

iroWanKovv uvopa 57 “35 noAv7i'ajT0j 48 “ 5 50^27

7}

3

7

''17,

18

opp.

(pivydv 5o'’9 (1)

54*18

irpoa'ipeais

TrpofiiPXqKUTa 60 ’’19 irpoPXqpa 60 ’'22; 61

PXqpdrwv

52*19

TTpoyeyevqptvaiv

TP0A070S 49 4

nepl npo-

’’9

Xvaewv 60 ’’6 sqq.

icat

52’' 16, 19

;

UpopqOevs 56*2 Trpoeaipaicdjs 48 1 TtpoTTtTTpaypiva 5 5 ’’30 irpoffayopfvfiv 47 '^15;

48''!

aayopivaavra 5 7'' 3 1

irpo-

npouayo-

ptvriov 47 *^23 dvfv irpoa^oXqs 56'' 26 ptrd npoa0 oXqs 56'' 27, 29 IT pda tan 54*4 irpoadv 5 1 * 34, 35 npoaqKtiv 51*22; 56 *’34 TTpoa-noiqaaaOai

51*26

TrpoaaqpaivH xpdvov 57*1? irpoanOtaaiv 5 7 '’19 irpcoTifftoTts 60*18 Tpocdtroai 60*24 dv avTOS vpoaOp 61 ''30

Kara Trpoawdlav Xvtiv 61*23 TTpdaojwov 49*36, ^^4 TO aiaxpds 61*13

48 * 33 ; 53''3 opp. ol vartpoi 6 [‘’33 v purayaiviaTqv 49*18 irpoTtpof

Trpdaaiirov

otirpdrtpov

6

1

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS *

irpwros

48 13

37

52‘’23

:

*

‘'

‘'

37 49 16 7 56*29 59''I3

,

,

;

;

TT pojTas

fiaOrjOfis 48 opp. Sevrepos etc. 53 * 30 20 OTTO TWV irpUTOlV

47*13

(adv.) 47

To:/

tcLs

npwTos *>

33

,

54

;

o-px^aOcii

TTpuirov Kal pLfyiaTov

TO 7rpaiTo:'49* 22

23

50

;

;

*’8

*

’’ ,

15

48'’

12

*

''

50 npu-

rrpwTov

; 27 opp. vvv be 53*17 oppopp. (Jra, eireiTa i; 62*5 opp.au 52''34 49 3

pt.iv

—

—

60 22 '’

£Ti

—

'>

O

I 6 Tlparayopas 56’’ 15 * TTTOKTIS 56»21 57 18 , 22

vpoviTo\aiJ.ffa,vovcri

;

rrais

*

31 ,

’’

*>

II

,

pfj pa

aKTjvijs

62*6

21

57

;

14 , 22 +

TTTttiais

ifiiKq

50

*

29

, prjToptinjs

ivi

59'' 25

ini

UKtnriai

61 *^32

tv toTs

56*35

prjTopiKSis

— conj.

47 * 26

— conj. — —

irtpl

50 '’8

dp/xoi'ia

48

\6yos, appovia 47 conj. peAos, peTpoi/ 47

22,23

^ 1/ 6 ^ 0 x

^optvoi pvdpoi

48 *’2

* ''

piKos

appovia Kal

conj.

25

49*^29

*^

crxV/““’’'‘'

47*27

ao(p6 s

6l''25

iv Tp'ZKvXK'p

tK aarvpiKov

anovSalos opp. (fiavKos 48*2, 27

TO opp. TOJTtlJ'TJ \t^ti 58*18 aa
aaipTIS

*^

**

fvTf\tCTfpoi 48'’ 25

30

57

;

arjpaivov^’j^

* ('* 1 ^ 57 29,30 arjpavTiKq tpuvi] 57*1

l

*

14 +

;

61

*

ivarjpai-

2i+

;

anovSaiOTtpov ^ 1^6 anovSqs a^iov 56 ’'1 4

49

*'10

arjpavTiKuv

* * 63^17; 50 35 49 25 * 62 63 * 17 56 15 ;

;

''

;

51*2 araaipujTaTOv

moix^iov 56" 20 + GTopaTos axvpviTa Kal runoi 56 *'31 GToxa^taeai 5i'’9; 52*'28; 54*16;

;

GvPoTU/V 54'’ 28 GvyKtiTai 57^25 + KtipivT] 62 ’'8

;

58*10

;

avy-

avyx^iTai ij Btwpta 50’' 38 avKO
avX\a 0 r]

56'’ 21, 34,

(7oA\o7i'feo'6ai 48'’

16

36; 58*2 ;

55*7>'°; 6l'’2

tK avKXoyiapov 55*4, 21 cvpPaivtiv 52*35,^ ''3;

54'’!

58“' :

TO avp^aivov 48 ''9; rdavpPalvovTa avp-

12; 60*13

53*7

+

ptpos 57^12 arjptTov

49'’

;

anovSaia npai^is 49'’ 17; 61*6 (TJrouSara opp. 7eXora 48''34 24

56*20

61*3 58*34

*

''’

,

(Tavpairf/pos

52

67

59'’34

adpKas 5 3 o’aTiipiK9 Troi' 9 cr(S 49 * 22 ptraPaKfiv 49*20

arjpaivtiv

S3*’^i;

56*22

(TTaaipov 52'’ 17, 23

8 ’’2

aacpTjvttav

40* iq;

55^187 66^7;

antiptiv 57’’ 29 cnovdd^taOai 49’’!

(TTabicuv

28 58*9 + | tv SaXapavi 59*25 ''

55*6 48*26;

54‘'8; 36; 33; 62''3

,

tpyov 5o''6

prjToptKjjs

21

aotpiarov

2o
—

;

26

61 *’16

S/ioAA.ai' ooAeri'

*

par 0 $ 57*19 56*31 pfiais 54*31

*

tj}s (Tki/v^s

60^ 1 ^

OKtmiov 61*5

pit

55

twi aKtjvrjs

47 '’2 2

pa.'paihiav

32

2 i-

tv

59^7 56*22

OKontiv

*'

2 56

49’’7

aKXTjpoTrjTos napdSttypa 54'’ 14

58 9 17 ; 58 *’8 pqSvpiovs 54 12

poS/xos

'S.ivoiv

61*29

55*28; TWV OKrjVU/V 53*27 (jKrivoypaipiav 49*18

pq-biov

paxpiubovvTa

'ZOtvtXov 58*21 aiyvvov 5 7'' aibqpov ipya^optvovs tK 'StKtXias 48*32; KtXiq 59*26

Trjs

*

P 56 28

TToioopeiioi 48 * 35 or]avptpvTa etc. 54’’2i; 55*20 orjptiois ntpitpyd^taOai 62*6

ptia

53 ’’i 8

KoWrjaavra 58*29 58

at]-

— ptyicTTOv

aKatpqs 54’’ 25 CKtVOTTOlOV TtXVT] 50’' 20 and aKqvrj^ 5 2 *'2 5 dvd

TO nuffia dnayyiWovTfs 60*31 Ttvpl

48 ’’9

59*7

—

53*26

aiTiov

dist.

Si(jV(pos

59*^6

jrTa)Xf‘<>

—

4

ptTov fii^oios

381

PatvtLV ntpi riva

59*23

—

rivi

avp&alvfiv 5i^i7> 25; 54'‘I3 with inf. 48’' 16 51*13, '’29; 52* avpISalvfiV rivi with inf 19, 28 ;

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

382

5O8

53^21

;

(comp.

55“8,

;

«aTO

*>6

h

*’

30) av/i0a\KeTai 58’'! aviiTrapaha/i^avovat 50^21 avfimTTTdvTOiv 53’’ 15

avfupvTov 64''22

48 **5

ar^pLua

avii(pvTa

56^26

avva‘fa)vi^taBai

avvawepya^faOai 55 “2 2, 30 (TwdirTei:/ 47** 13 58*27 avvHapup us avvStcuos 56 2 1 38 57^29, 30 ;

,

51*10

avvSrjKos cvvtTfj

Kpaivri

—

67^11 +

— 5i“i2; 52“28; 51

avviaTovai paiBov

55*22; 59*18

’OSufTcreiai'

avvicrraaBai

29

60*28)62*16 35; 10

5 i“' 32

*

47*9;

(pass.)

awtardvai

^2, 62'’

‘'

59 '’i 4 avvioTaaBai (midd.) 50*37;

63 4

:

,38 riKos dist, dpxrj etc. 57*7 ; 59*20, 32, 2o TO ptxpi 55 * 9 32 reXos npd^is ns 50* 18 piyicTov 50*23 Tijs rpaywS'ias 50* *”

;

;

60*34

22 (comp. 60*1 24

Ttrpdptrpov ^g^ 2 l, 22; 59*137 rtrpa-nXovv ovopa 57*34 rtxvr] 47*21, **29; 50*120; 15

fj

tari

61*18

cv
;

—

51*3

iiroTTOuKov

(70o5pa 53*1 cxibby d(i 48*2

—

oi 37 axvpi^Ta 49*6

56*11

— dvavres

50*

voWoi 59*29

(TX)7 /(ar (2 Tti/a

—

’'36

(rxij/iara

—

opp. xP"/*“™ 47*19 aro pares 56 **31 rys Xt^eais 56 9 axvi^^^ avvanepyd^eaBai axvi^drwy ZtiaBai 62*3 55*29

—

1

'

a xiipari^opivaiv pvBpmv 47*27 70 0 ^ 1)01 52*29; 55 “22 (

)

\ 6 yoi 4 7 ''11 707/20 64*’ 24; 61*13 'Zwaiarparos 62*7 ^(OKpartKol (

crajrrjpia

10

TfOTO

30

T)//)6t7S

rtxvqs opp. dirb

60*1 Texvi/K 53*22 vpbs avrijv r^v rtxvqv ;

tO0 £K(X(7 T 7/J' ’

7

rexi'^l' 60*1 19

54*136

017 57*3,9; 59*22 riBtvai tls ptrpa 60*34

riBtvai

(comp.

—

£17

St

Bfj

51*12 tntatv

16) riBtptvai tis ptav axpoaoiv TiBtaBai ovopa 57*134

59*122

bppdroiV 55*23

TTpb

’SipoBtos

—

58*1

62*12

48*15

n

49*132; 50*7, 18, *111, 25; 3 ; 52 3 : 53*10; 54*19: n>'£S 48*29; 53“ 56*130; 61*20 5 i* 33 >

*'

'*

^13.31 TO 5 ’

i'oeos

ixu

Ihantp

ol

KttpaXXjjvts

(paaiv 61*16

roiyapovv 2 ’0157*4 Tofov 55*14 OToparos ronoi 56*132 Tonos 55*10 TuTt opp. vvv 61*3 r pay MX) T pay MOV 53*139; 56*21 ^(/i)/(7(s6l*i26; 62*3 rpayiKwra^

rai

55’^I2, 14

'S.uKppovos pipoi 47''

rrjs

Tf XVTfS

Ski rtxvris opp. 5 td 6id rtxvrjv opp. avvqBt'ias 47 * 20 * Kardrtxvqv 61^ 6id 51 24

ns,

48

Kwpcpd'ias

ex«i' 49’’3

diro

Tjjs

1 r}Xt(pos 53*21

’'

53*3, 23

51*7 54*10

60*1

rb

1

TI7 XVS

60*123

avOTa59 2 i (Tis •npaypLo.TOjv 50*15, 32, *'22; 53I' —/lo'eou 52*19 2; 54*14,34 paicpd avffraais 60*3 avarda tois * SittA.^ pyKOs^^^i"] (ru(7 ra(riJ 53 3i 7 Tacris

62^

IriXtyovos 53*133 'IrjXtpaxos 61*15

avvTopa (

dXrj rtxvrj

TtXVT]S tpyOV 62*112

28,

(7 i7

rrjs pipri-

TtXos 59*27, rod TtXovs Tvyxdvtiv 62^ 1 ^

29

24

55'' 16 (71)^17701^47*26;

—

)

tv

TtparuiSts 53*19

avvopdaBai 59'' 19 avvTHvovaai trpbs TtKos 59*27

53*19; 57*2

+

62*18

atojs

cvvoKov 47*16

crui'T(0€(r0ai

—

)

—

—

— ;

rd^u 50*137 rairtivos 58*18, 20, 32 reraypeva 50*135 ™xii 59'' 31 fK leytas 60*32 Tf\ua irpd^is 49*125; 50*124; 52*2; 59*19 rtXtvTcuov 54*5 TeA€t77ai7 5oi33; 53*26,32; 58*9, 14 rtXtvT-q 50*126, 29 ei7i TfXfvrrjs 53*

—

avvridus laropiai 59*22 avvOtais p-irpaiv 49’' 35 ovop.aTwv 58*28 npaypLaroiv 50* TpaycpSias 52*^31 5 awBiTT) (avayvwpiats) 55*12 (pwvrj ‘'

rtpuiv x
57 '*i 4

*i

56’’

23 avvexo^^ /'‘“s 5^*15 avvijdua opp. rex’'V 47*20

56 35

rapuv = dpvffai 57*115

opp. KaO’ avr^v 60'^ 16

aviiffePrjicos

2

'j

Twv 53*30

^

Tpayncdiraros Tuiv

TTOiT}-

7

2

1

2

1

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS TpayaiSia conj.

59^15

r/

kv

47 ”13

rw

TTpirTeiv pupr)ai$

TpaycpSias iroiTjais ttJs Tpaywd'ias epyov

V TO

52^2g (comp. 62^11) TpaycpSias epyov 50^30 ycpSias TjSovq 53*35 Tpa7ip5ia 52’>3l TpaycpSoSiSdcjKaXoi

3

rijs

diro

Tpa-

KaWtOTC]

59’’

57 30; *'

oirdflcf',

*

OTTOU,

wstTVX^ TO Tvxdv

eTuxf6o''36

Tv 3 cur 55*9 54»25 OTTO TUX 7JS 52 *6 54^11 Topa)

opp.

OTTO 7 eX'' 7 S

T 58*16 ;

vwapxovTa

vnevaVTLOs 6 l’' 3

1)8^

rd

23 vvevavriws

55*26

,

61*32

vcrtvavTicopca

virevavria

eipijpieva

—

vnep 0 a\\fiv 6 1 ’’34 Til'd 59’’ 16 vnepixecv 6l 13

—

61^ l 6

— opp.

56*7

;

49

48 3 7

VTTOKetTai 52’’!

OTTOKpirds 61

vvoKpiTuiv ttA^Bos,

'*

34 49*16,

avtv VTTOKpLTUlV eVa Twv viroxpcTaiv 1 6 ^ 5o'’I9 TO TWV VTTOKplTWV ptpOS 59'’ 26 26 £td TOO? VTTOKpiTaS 5 I ’’37 VTIOKpiTlKa VTTOKpcTCKT] 56''l0; 62*5 '^5

,

57*21 oTToA.a/Seri'

naps. Trjv inroXrp^iv VTTOTiSivac

61*35 56*15 15

ovSpaTa

;

5i''i3;

55*^12

;

53*2; 56*21

pcKtav 53’’3l

dvayvwpiev Tais pcKiacs

58'’22 ;

48*15

piXoi opp. exSpoi 53*38, 15 piXoaopwrepov ptXoaopois 48 '1 3 1

’'5

55*10

aneipeiv, apiivai 57'’ 27,

30

Tj poffepov opp. TO TepaTwSes povov TO pojiepov Kcu iKeeiviv 53 '’9 53''! polBepd leal kkeeiva 52*2, *^32 0076 ikeeivov ovre po0epov

53*1,6 epu^os

53*5

52*26; 0770

56*’! dist. ekfos IX600 KOI ^j^oo 53’* 1

IXeoo KOI p60ov 49'’ 27 ekeov £xeo' V pdfiov 52'’! ’ikeov ovTe po^ov 6X6”' 53*4 popovai 54'^ 22 Si’

56* 25,

'’

53’’ 19 4’iXo« 77 T 7 ? 59'*5

pKoya

**

+ 32 52’*38

opp. £X®P“ 52*31

4>ii'£r5ai

13

1

56*1

'0pfU77oi'

pcfcla

;

— —

pidXr] 57'^ 20

5

OTTO pilav irepioSov r/Kiov

ffiiooSaros

—

4>iXo^£1'0?

Tcvos

12

opp. Ka\6s 48*" 48 * 2 61* pavKos 6 y pavX.wv mvrjais 62*9 (opp. ciyaBos) irocrjTrjS 5 1 36 60 ** I 00X7/777? 61 **30 (opp. fTTiei/CT/?) 060777? 62 *4 pav\r] (opp. crirovSala) rpaywSia 49 1 8 (opp. pavAov XpT/O’TT/) TT-poO'pfOi? 54* 19 pn>7(opp. xpi?<^’'do) 700? 54*19 cTis pav\0Tepwv 49*32 pipeiv £77171717771070 56 '’14; 6i''2 2 iveycctiv 54'' 36 pevyeiv opp. rpoacpeicrOac 50*’9 (2), 10 pPapTCKOV 49*32 TTpO^l? pOapTiKT) 7

(701

2‘J

51

—

54*21

26

^01077156?

54*6, 8; 55'’20 vpvovs 48'' 27 vnapxfcv ^6', 52*13; 6o’’27; 62*

J

T,S f^aoepiS

uSvvrjpa 52’’

vSapy 62^’/

7rA. 7707

£1/

ipavKos

50

y Tvxovcra ySovy 62^13 TO. Of TvxovTa 5l’'l3; 52*35 TVxdvTfs pciOoi 53*18

viriSei^tv

;

;

50*’36

14

49*11

cpappaKois 50'’

cTUxei' 5o’’32, 33

vlos 53’'20, 21

'<

56'’ 17 50* I, 6 61*17 10,35 61*1, 28, ''7, 14; 62*3 cpavepa 49 35 6 1 * favepov 49*14

12

59*24

53*28; 56 '>5, 8; 60*15

59*31, >>34;

;

;

opp. diroTvyx^vtiv TOO TeA.OOS 62'’ 15

3

52 >>35;

’’

Tpiiatis 5 2 ’’13

Tvyx^v^cv

58*23

(paiveaeat

cpaWcKcx

rpocpov 54'’ 27 TpOXO'ioV 52 ’'24

61*18

(payiSatva

58»ii, 21

47 1 TpcnKovv ovopia 57*34 Tponos 47*18, ''24; 48*9; 58»6, 12

TpaiiKoy

vOTepa 54*33 ot vOTtpoi opp. oi vpdTepov 61 •’33 vcXTepov opp. nporepov 60*21 opp. irpo too 54 *’4 Xpo^w vcTTtpov

62'*6

*'

T/wdSes

6 di' cppovcpcos iino-

18

’’

49*5

TpaycpSovs 58 ''3 2 Tpaire^av 58*’ 29, 30 TpavpaTias ’OSvacrevs 53'' 34 TpipceTpoiv

54*27

6 os

O^Tai 61

vcppprjpievov 6 vop.a 57*^2

53*19, 23

;

—^

383

7 ovre

9

1

98

I

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

384 56“ *’6 49

•PopKlSiS

^vpfii!

Xopos 49*17, >'1 XmP-ara 5 5'' 1 Xpjo’i/ia 59*11

2

opTiKr] (ptprjais)

61

‘’27,

29

62^4

;

ipplrreiv kcu tKeetu 5 3 **5 ippoipj.aaaptvo's 60“ 10

XPV<^6a.t

TtiipvKvia

ireipvKOTts 48''

57 ‘'2, 9

ah tat

ijwcnKov 47'' 16

ipvatoKSyov 47

auT^

^vats.

avrrfv

*’5

1

Kara

60^4

jov

tpvatv

TTjv

51 ‘‘10

48

tjyvaticat


17

irpayptaros

otKiiav

Trjv

49^15

—

23

— —

24

10+

—

ipvatv

29,

30

2+

KepidSos

tpwvT,tv 561^25;

—

1*

I

Et.

npoaiptats

rots ftpe^ijs XP°*'0‘* 59^ avToiis XP°^°^^ 59°'

do/)t(TTos t£ xpoi'?' 49 1 25 Kpapivov Tcp xpoi.a'62’'2 XP^^'V varepov 5 5 ’’6 dvsv xpoi'oi' 57* II perd xpovov 57*14

at]-

Xputpaat pttptTaOat

irKfiovaiv tpaivuiv

57“

XvSi^v

50 *'2

Xupav

55

54’'

fj

Hard TOW

28

47*18

>^4

nexoiptapeva {peprj) 52 '’16, 27 49'' 25, 29 Xaiph 47*23;

37

58^1, II, 15

dppov'tas

Xatpuv

xpTlorft

56''

tpaivrj

;

^iXTtov

xPVO’i'fo’' 54';3

txov

tpaivrjv

5id TTji tpwvTjs ptpLtiaOat 47“^

20

59

]

^6^35+

+

I

53l’25

icaXws

—

56^22, 57“ 56''35;

avvesTT]

—

;

XPotdv 48’' 19 * Ttapiiv , vap €\ rj \ v$us Xpuvos 57 18 dvataOr/Tos SO^ 39 has TTfpi iva xpovoi. Xpovov 59*23

d 5 taip€Tos

darjpos

pavTiKT) 57“

47 '’24;

.

xnpov s4'‘26 XPnaTos 54*20

— avvcTT

dKovarr) 56'’ 27, 28

56'^

56*25

kot’

icaTcL tpvatv 47^^12; 48*' 49 '*^4 Sta tpvatv 51 “24 diro ttJs 20 avryt (pvcrews 55^^30

avrrjs tpvatv

;

persons)

of

—

56 ''23; 57 ‘‘5

;

(tpVOVTO 6l‘^ 24

22

52>'i9 +

'‘

so^^i, ‘'2S, 29

7re'(fu«E

(said

;

49*22; 50*13; 52‘>I4,26; 54'", 21, 26; 56'^3; 57*12, *>3, 13, 30; 58^’ II. 14.33: 59 5 13.35, ‘'13; 61'' 20 (said of things) 47*23, ‘'I 50*32, ‘'33; 58*2, 22 62*15

<(p6vip.oi 61 18 ipvKaxas 61 “ 1

iptuvr]

4

47

*

x^^P'S

26

48'' 8, II, 15

60 “2

XaipTjpojv 47’'2I ; XaXt-rraivu 55*32

58*29 Xapt^optfvot 60*18

58*10, 13

ipfvSdyyeKos 57'*^3>

Xa.\ic6v

Y

TO

tpiyovat 5 8 '’5

XaKxias 61*29 Xd\K(OV eyx°^ 61 “33

H

tpfvSy

55*14 Keyuv 60*19

60*22, 23 \ op.fTpia 48*11 tptXots (\6yots) 47*29 tpfvdos

tpt

Xfipta^opevos Si

*

5

31

55*31 54*21 opp. /S eXtiW 48* opp. 4+,; 53^ I7» 33; 62*4

Xit/iaiVet

—

X«t/)a)i'

—

x^^P°^ (adv.) opp. 53*’3S

upfiTTuv 48*6 ^SeAtiov 54*^ 26

tptXoTyTt 56 *'32

foyo^

tpvxayaiyticSv 50’' 17 olov ipvxv 60*25

Xt'tptarai 51 ’'34 Xtwv'tSrji

tpvx^jv

48 * 34

Xorjtpopots

52*’ 21

dpvaas 5 7 ’'14

55*4

Xoprjyias dfopevov 53 ’'8

XopiKov

37

48'°_^2 7,

tpvxayaiyii so^ 33

52

*'16,

22

Cl

XopiKa \

58*12

w 5 61*34, 35 i

watrepavei

60

1’

tpvx^

50*38

2

1

:

INDEX TO THE COMMENTARY The references m-e

7narginal nu>?ibers, the first two figures of

to the

’which are here omitted.

Accent

56**

Adjectives

33

compounded with a

priva-

tivum ambiguous 50^25; 60 **3 with two terminations

— some

Aristotle

54^29

Adscripts in the text 50’’ 16 55

in

;

54’'

14;

*^7

Agathon 56^18 Apollonius Rhodius

59

(iiapov in

in

5o'^i9; 52'>i9; 56'>3o; 58*25, 29 ‘ Art for Art,’ an idea not sanctioned by Aristotle 60 '’14 Article, concurrence of identical forms of 56*8 possessive sense of 49'’ 27 with names of dramatis personae

plays

and books

48 >>38

binary structure in

53*24,

29;

Fallacia conseqtientis 60*20 Fear, in the Rhetoric and Poetics 52 ‘>32 ‘ Figures of speech ’ of later writers 56'>9

Gender of words 58*8 General Terms used in a special sense

47*29 Genitive

depending

on

a

genitive

coming after it 5 2 ‘’7 Glaucon 61 i Grammar and Poetry 56'’ 20 History in Aristotle’s view a sort of chronicle 51* 36; 59*23 Homer 48'’ 35, 37; 60*5 Aristotle’s text of 58'' 25

Hyper baton

49**

;

61*3,16,

23

Illustrations at some distance from the statement illustrated 50*34 51*2; ;

with ‘

— inyersion of terms

'’8;

22, 26

Carpentariana quoted 55*29 Casaubon quoted 53*18 Chaeremon’s Centaur ep-fi Cleophon 48*12

Comedy, names

53'' 17; 54*1; 61 '’18 Empedocles 47’’ 18 ; 57'’i3; 61*24 Epicharmus 48*33, 34

—

Barbarism and Solecism 58*30

Comparisons, 60 ‘‘34

*’29

47’’ 22

— Tragedy 54^4 — his view of the evolution of the Drama 49*11, 19 — his view of the peripety of the Oed. Tyr. 52*25 — Passages Pol. and Rhet. emended

01

i

54'>2; 56*27; 59'’i7; 6i''2i Eustathius emended 59*37

'>

titles

— 6 — other forms of

Euclides 58** 7 Euripides 50*25,

*’19

Archilochus 48 33 Archinus 5 6 *’31 Aristotle, overstatements in his condemnation of to

— — 54*30 — with

Ellipse of 77 60 •'2 subject in nom. sing. 57'’ 18 of subject with gen. abs. 49 ''26;

— of

59*21

in 51 **13

Cupping-glass, the brazen 58*29

56*12; 62''7 Imitators ’, in the Poetics sometimes the poets and sometimes the actors

48*23 Jones (H. A.) quoted 50*15

Diderot quoted 51 ’’6

Dithyramb and time 47*14

Nome

Ellipse of efyai 59*’7 POETICS

of Aristotle’s

60’’ ;

10; 6l’’9

Language of Tragedy in Aristotle’s time 59*13 Lessing 47*19; 49^27 (pp. 156, 160) ; 52'’32

C C

I2

1

9

6

8

INDEX TO THE COMMENTARY

386

Literary whole analogy between it and a living creature 50 '’34 Longinus 55 “34; 58^24; 59‘'i5 Lyric poetry ignored in the Poetics 47"'8 ;

Margites, original form of 48 '’30 Megaiian Comedy 48^31 Menander’s mode of working 53^22 Metre, importance of, minimized by Aristotle 47

*’

Protagoras 56 *’11, 16; 58^8 Pseudo-Sergius emended 56 *’33 Qualification introduced in subordinate clause with uicnep 53*’ 28 Quintilian emended 58'^ 30

Reading

play, idea of a, not in Aristotle 62 “•! 2 Repetition of the same word not

1

Metric, ancient 56 •’34, 38 Music, Plato’s view of instrumental

always avoided 53 “31

Rhythm

significant of character

47 “26

47^15

Names i

3

>

of dramatis personae 51 *'10,

Shakespeare quoted 49 ‘’25 Sophron and Xenarchiis, the mimes in

21

of,

prose 47*“ 10

Names

of personages meant supposed by Aristotle to be known to us 60 “30

Names known :

triple

in

compounds not un-

Athens

in Aristotle’s

age

57^35 Neuter nouns, Aristotle’s view of the 58^9, 16 Number singular and plural in juxta:

position S3”'33; 56*’

Telephus 60 “32 Tenues = Greek ^tKd 66*’32 Theatrical terms already current in Aristotle’s time 49’' 33 in a more general sense 6 3 *’8

— used

Theophrastus 49** 27 (pp. 157 sq.) 61 •’12, 30 Timotheus 48 '‘i 5 54*31 Twining’s summary of the history of ;

;

the Chorus

Parallelismus antitheticus 47^18 ; 48“ 22 ; 59‘‘2i ; bo^ii Parenthesis giving a reason for something after it 57 ’’34 ' Parts of Speech 56 ''20 Plutarch emended 49*’ 25, 27 (p. 157) Poet, meaning of the term 47'' 22 Poetic imagination and its physiological conditions 55 “'32 sqq. Poetry : the two causes to which its ’

birth

is

attributed 48 *’4

Polyphemus in literature 48 ‘’15 Pope quoted 50“ 25; 3 5 “'2 Porphyry emended 54'’ Preposition not repeated 48^10;

56*29

Unitie-s, LhaJThree,

how

far

recognized

by Aristotle 49^ T^ Universality,’

‘

the

Greek Tragedy 51

Verb

—

in singular

element

of,

in

’’6

with plural subjects

58" 1 understood

in the principal from a subordinate clause

\Yomen,

Aristotle’s estimate of 54*21,

24

Wordsworth quoted 55*29

59'>29

Prose poem an idea unknown to the Greeks of Aristotle’s age 47 “2

Zeuxis 61 12 Zoilus 60*’

070;^ and its derivatives, sense of, in the Poetics 50** 18 actors = SuffeiSijs a late word 58'’ 25 dvayvwpi^etv 52 ''s ; 55’’2I dpiOpLoi = ‘ lieads enumerated 61^24

St after a participial clause 55 *’21 Sia 51 '’13

;

bidvoia

50*6

Sta
construction with

52*20

’

47 *22 49*27 avTOCx^^udap.a 7 a 48'’ 23

d/)/xo»'/a

;

yeXoia, Aristotle’s idea of

a formative constituent allusive use of 49** 25

eiSos,

— 49*34

‘

eiprjrai 5 2 *’11

’49*7

::

INDEX TO THE COMMENTARY tvSfX^aOat with verb understood from context 60*34 iviot, appositional use of 51*18 fjrei
corresponding to a

irpSiTov

plv

some distance 62*14 iariv uj; 52*35 fv
387

orthography of 62 ’’6 62*’5 solitarium 50*3 p-tpeicOat, uses of the term 47*16 pL'ipLrjcts Vahlen’s view of its sense in the Poetics 51 ** 28 /lei'oupos,

pel'

;

at

with a second instance and a change of construction 54'’

oTov

25 — formal incongraence not uncommon

;

tcexpritjOai

50*

I

2

with instances introduced iJSi/cr/ifVos 49’’

25

qBiKos 50*29 ^dos, a character

4

tt)s

—

illustrations

often

54*23

liy

olov

56*2

some

at

introduced by utov distance from the

statement illustrated 51*2 olov aal introducing a parallel 50*37 opolovs representing the apodosis of a

61*35

61^28 ^eanjs 53*2; SiaTpa, audiences 53*34 ;

conditional sentence 47

"

20

wide term in Aristotle 57*10 with fut. indie, as an imperative

ovopia a idta, allusive use of 50*' iacos

oTTws

34

55D3

56*8

meaning of this and similar terms in the Poetics 49*23 "/"s 49” 33 bpx'0
KaOapais

:

objective gen. after

(P- 156) /rafloAou 49*’8

;

51

it

49*’ 27

;

''7

Kai giving emphasis 52*3 Ke
time 49*’! [comp. J. B. O’Connor, Chapters in the history of Actors and Acting in ancient Greece. Chicago, 190S]

back -references 54*9 an impersonal 50*1 TrpoawSia 61*21, 23 TTTuiats no modern equivalent for as used by Aristotle 57*18 TtaXai in

7ri
it

totle’s

—

poOfibs

it

spoken language 59*12 meanings of, in tlie Poetics 49*17 as a term of Aristotelian logic or grammar 56 *>38 p. 270)

Xffis, the

47*2 2, 27

awtaravai with a predicative

adj. after

59*18

viro/cpiTT]!

49*15

\6yos,

—

^vxn, metaphorical use of 50*38

war

oi>,

constructions with 51 ’’23

OXFORD TRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESS BY HORACE HART, M.A. PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY

CLARENDON PRESS BOOKS LATIN AND GREEK Grammars and Exercise Books Extra fcap 8vo B. Allen’s Elementary Series Rudimenta Latina. Comprising accidence and exercises

Mr.

J.

elementary character for the use of beginners.

An

Elementary Latin Grammar.

266 th thousand.

A First Latin Exercise Book. Eighth A Second Latin Exercise Book. Second

edition.

Key

An

2 s. 6d.

2 s. 6d.

edition, ss. 6d. (see note p. 35) to both Exercise Books. 5s. net.

Elementary Greek Grammar.

mentary syntax.

Containing accidence and

ele-

3s.

Mr. With

of a very

2s.

Ali.en’s Latin Readers

B.

J.

notes, maps, vocabularies and Enghsh exercises ; stiff covers. Is. 6d. each. These books are of the same and not of graduated difficulty.

Lives Tales Tales Tales

from Cornelius Nepos. of Early Rome.

Roman Republic, Roman Repubhc,

of the of the

Part I. Part II.

Adapted from the Text of Livy. (

Other Latin Readers, etc Tales of the Civil War, edited by w. d. Lowe. is. Scenes from the Life of Hannibal. W. D. Lowe. Caesar in Britain Edited by

Illustrated.

from

Selected

Livy.

Is. 6d.

Selections from the Gallic

;

Lowe.

6d.

War.

W.

Edited by

D.

Is.

Extracts from Cicero,

with notes, by Henry Walford. In three Anecdotes from Grecian and Roman History. Partll. Omens and Dreams Beauties of Nature. Is. 6d. PartIH. Rome’s Rule of her Provinces. Is. 6d. Parts I-IH, 4s. 6d. Parts. Is. 6d.

Third edition.

Part

I.

:

Extracts from Livy, New edition. Part 1. The paign in Italy.

Part III, by H.

Macedonian War.

Is. 6d.

Lee-Warner and

by

T, j. Nunns.

Mr. C. translation.

enlarged.

;

S.

Is. 6d.

2s.

s. Girson.

2s.

Latin extracts, separately.

and Greek,

for

unseen

Sixth edition, revised and Is.

or extracts, Latin and Greek, for unseen trans-

New edition. First Series. Fifth edition. 2s. 6d. Second Series. (Also Latin extracts (First and Second Series), 2s. 6d. Greek extracts,

lation.

3s. 3s.)

The

Jerram’s Series

or easy passages, Latin

For the use of lower forms.

Anglice Reddenda

W. Gouid.

Third edition.

Introduction to Latin Syntax, by w.

Reddenda Minora

T.

each.

A First Latin Reader, An

with notes and maps, by H. Lee-Warneh. Caudine Disaster. Part H. Hannibal’s Cam-

;

Third Series.

3s. 1

Greek Readers and Primers Greek Reader. fessor

von

March ANT.

Selected and adapted with English notes from ProWilaraowitz-MoellendorfFs Griechisches Lesebuch, by E. C. Crown 8vo. 2 vols., each (with or without Vocabulary), 2s.

Selections from

Plutarch’s Caesar. Crown svo, large type. Du Pontet. 2s. (With or without Vocabulary.) Greek Readers Easy, by Evelyn Abbott. In stiff covers. 2s. Fil’St Reader, by W. G. Rushbhooke. Third edition. 2s. 6d. ScCOlld Reader, by a. m. Beix. Second edition. 3s. Specimens of Greek Dialects being a Fourth Greek Reader. With introductions, Edited by R. L. A.

etc,

by w. w. Merry.

Homer and

Selections from

4s. 6d.

the Greek Dramatists

being a Fifth Greek Reader. With ex; planatory notes and introductions to the studj"^ of Greek Epic and Dramatic Poetry, by Evelyn Abbott. 4s. 6d.

A

Greek Xestament Primer, Greek, by E. Miller.

Second

edition.

Xenophon Easy

For the use of students beginning Paper covers, 2s. cloth, 3s. 6d. ;

(see p. 43)

Selections, with a

vocabulary, notes, illustrations carefully chosen from coins, casts and ancient statues, and map, by J. S. Phillpotts and C. S. Jerram.

Third edition.

Selections, with Fifth ed.

A

3s. 6d.

notes,

Key

3s. 6d.

illustrations,

and maps, by

J.

S.

Phillpotts.

(see p. 35) to §§ 1-3, 2s. 6d. net.

Greek Primer, for the use of beginners in that language. Right Rev. Charles Wordsworth. Eighty-sixth thousand. Is. 6d. Grammaticae Rudimenta. Nineteenth edition. 4s.

An

Introduction to the Comparative

and Latin.

By

J. E.

By

the

Graecae

Grammar of Greek

King and C. Cookson.

Extra fcap Svo.

5s. 6d.

Latin Dictionaries

A

Latin Dictionary. Dictionary.

Founded on Andrews’s edition of Freund’s Latin Revised, enlarged, and in great part rewritten, by Chari.ton T.

Lewis and Charles Short.

4to.

25s.

A School Latin Dictionary.

By

c. T. Lewis.

Elementary Latin Dictionary. By c. T. Lewis.

i2s. ed.

4to.

Square svo.

7s. ed.

Greek Dictionaries

A

Greek-English Lexicon. Eighth edition, revised.

An An

4to.

By H.

G. Liddell and Robert Scott.

3es.

Intermediate Greek Lexicon.

Abridged Greek Lexicon. 2

By

By

the same.

the same.

i 2 s.

7s. ed.

ed.

Latin and Greek Prose Composition Mr.

J.

Y. Sargent’s Course.

Extra fcap 8vo

Primer of Latin Prose Composition. 2s. ed. Passages for Translation into Latin Prose. Key

2s. 6d.

Primer of Greek Prose. Passages

Eighth edition.

(see note below) to the eighth edition, 5s. net.

[Out of print.] Key(seenotebelow),

for Translation into

Greek Prose,

5s. net.

ss.

Exemplaria Graeca. Select Greek versions of the above. 3s. Other Prose Composition Books. Extra fcap 8vo Ramsay’s Latin Prose Composition. Fourth edition. Syntax and Exercises. 4s. 6d. Or Part 1, First Year’s Course, Part 2, Second Year’s Course, Is. fid. Part 3, Syntax and Appendix, 2s. fid. Key (see note below) to the volume, 5s. net.

Vol.

Is.

I

:

fid.

Vol. II

:

;

;

Passages for Translation.

Latin Prose Versions. G. G. Ramsay.

JeiTam

4s. fid.

Contributed by various Scholars, edited by

Extra fcap 8vo,

5s.

Graece Reddenda.

S

Being exercises for Greek Prose.

2s. fid.

Unseen Translation Jerram’s Reddenda Minora and Anglice Reddenda. See p. 33. Fox and Bromley’s Models and Exercises in Unseen Translation.

A

Key (see note below) giving Revised edition. Extra fcap 8vo. 5s. fid. references for the passages contained in the above, fid. net.

Latin and Greek Verse Lee-AA^arner’s Helps and Exercises for Latin Elegiacs. Key (see note below) 4s. fid. net. 3s. fid. Rouse’s Demonstrations in Latin Elegiac Verse. Crown 8vo.

4s. fid.

Verse.

3s.

Sargent’s 4s. fid.

(Exercises

fid.

Key

Exercises

for

Greek lambic

(see note below) 5s. net.

for

Greek lambic

Averse.

(see note below) 5s. net.

N ova Anthologia

Oxoniensis.

Crown 8vo buckram

IVIusa Clauda.

OwEX and

versions.)

Models and Materials

Key

Godley.

and

Helps and

Laurence’s

extra,

fis.

Edited by Romnson Elus and A. D. net ; on India paper, 7s. fid. net.

Being translations into Latin Elegiac Verse, by S. G.

J. S. Phiixi.mohe.

Crown

8vo, boards, 3s.

fid.

KEYS Keys to be made direct to the Secretary, Clarendon Keys can be obPress, Oxford, and accompanied by a remittance. tained by teachers or bona fide private students. Application for

all

3

Annotated editions of Latin Authors For Oxford Classical Texts see

a

Aetna,

p. 41

;

Oxford Translations,

for

p. 91.

of the Text, with prolegomena, translation,

critical recension

commentary, and index verborum. By Robinson Ellis. Crown 8vo. 7s.6d.net.

The

AvianUS, mentary,

Caesar,

etc.

De

Fables. With By Robinson Ellis.

Bello GaUico, St. G. Stock. Vol.

The

8vo.

in two crown 8vo volumes. By Vol. II, Text and Notes, 6s.

I-III, 2s.

;

;

Moberly.

C. E.

III-V,

2s. 6d.

By

the same editor.

on.

By Robinson

Second edition. VI-VIII, 3s. 6d.

;

3s. 6d.

Second

Ellis.

edition.

18s. net.

Carmina S electa. Cicero, de Amicitia. By de Senectute.

Text only, for Schools. St.

By

in Catilinam. in

By

apparatus, com-

critical

8s. 6d.

i-vii,

Gallic AVar.

The Civil AV ar. Catullus, Commentary

8vo.

Introduction, 5s.

I,

With maps. Books

prolegomena,

By

George Stock.

L. Huxley.

Frima.

By

J.

R. King.

3s.

2s.

E. a. Upcott.

Q. Caecilium Divinatio

3s. 6d.

Third edition.

Limp,

2s. 6d.

A^enem Actio

and in C. Is. 6d.

pro Cluentio. By G. G. Rajisay. Second ed. 3s. 6d. pro Marcello, pro Ligario, pro Rege Deiotaro. By W. Y. Fausset. Second edition. 2s. 6d. pro Milone. By a. C. Clark. 8vo. 8s. 6d. By A. B. PoYNTON.

Phihppics, Clark.

Second

edition.

I, II, III,

V, VII.

Crown

By

J.

8vo.

2s. 6d.

R. King.

Revised by A. C.

3s. 6d.

pro Roscio.

By

St.

George Stock.

3s. 6d.

Select Orations, viz. in A^en-em Actio Prima, de Imperio Gn. Pompeii, pro Archia, Philippica IX. By J. R. King. Second edition. 2s. 6d.

Select Letters. With introductions, notes, and appendices. By A. Watson. Fourth edition. 8vo. 18s. Text only of the large edition. By the same. Third edition. Extra fcap 8vo. 4s. Selected Letters. By C. E. Prichard and E. R. Bernard. Second

edition.

3s.

T)e Oratore Libri Tres. With introduction and By A. S. Wilkins. 8vo. 18s. Or separately. Book I. edition.

7s. 6d.

Book

II.

4

Second

edition.

5s.

Book

notes.

Third

III.

6s,

:

Horace, Odes, Carmen Saeculare, and Epodes. WicKHAJi.

Third edition.

8vo.

Crown

12s.

8vo.

Selected Odes.

By

Satires, Epistles,

De Arte Poetica.

Text only luvenalis ad

miniature Oxford edition. on Oxford India paper, roan,

:

notes, 3s. net

2nd ed.

the same.

;

Second 2s.

By

edition.

Odes, Book

4s. 6d. net. 2s. 6d. net.

Thirteen Satires. ByC. h. Pearson andH. A. Strong. Cr. Livy, Book I. By Sir J. R. Seeley. Third edition. Svo. :

Book IX.

Book V,

By

Svo. 9s. 6s.

By A. R. Cluer.

V-VII.

Separately

2s.

I.

By the same. Cr. svo. 6s. On writing-paper for MS

satiram vi additi versus xxxvi exscr. E. O. Wixstedt.

Books

e. c.

6s.

2s. 6d.

T. Nicklin.

Revised by P. E. Matheson. Book VI, 2s. ; Book VII, 2s.

;

Crown

Svo,

2s. 6d.

;

5s.

with vocabulary, 3s.

Books

XXI-XXIII. By M. T. Tathaji. Second edition, enlarged. 5s. Separately Book XXI, 2s. 6d. Book XXII, 2s. 6d. Lucretius, Book V, Edited by W. D. Lowe. Crown Svo. 1-782, 2s. :

;

;

783-1457, 2s.

;

together, 3s. 6d.

ManiliAstronomicon Liber II.

N OCteS

Ed.H.w.GARRon.

svo. ios.6d.net.

By Robinson Ellis. Crown 8vo. 6s. ISIartialis Epigrammata Selecta (W. M. Lindsay’s Text and critical Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. On India paper. 5s. notes). INIanilianae.

Books

I-VI, VII-XII.

Lake, each

3s. 6d.

Edited by R. T. Bridge and E. D. C.

Notes only, each

2s.

NepOS.

By Oscar Browning. Third edition, revised by W. R. Inge. 3s. Nonius Marcellus, de compendiosa doctrina i-iii. Edited, with introduction and

Ovid, HeroideS, Arthur Palmer.

critical

apparatus,

by

J.

H. Onions.

8vo.

with the Greek translations of Planudes. Svo. With a facsimile. 21s.

10s. 6d.

Edited by

Ibis. With scholia and commentary. By Robinson Ellis. Svo.

Tristia. Ed.S.G.OwEN.

By

Selections.

10s. 6d.

Svo. 16s. FcapSvo. Ed.3. Bk.I,3s.6d. Bk.III,2s.

g. g. Raaisay.

Third edition.

5s. 6d.

The follovnng can he obtained either with or without vocabulary

Book Book XI.

INIetamorphoseS, Crown

Svo.

2s.

III.

Edited by M. Cartwright.

Ed. G. A. T. Davies.

Crown

Svo.

2s.

Stories from the Metamorphoses. Edited by d.a. Slater. Crown Svo, Ulustrated. 2s. 6d. Selections, Heroic & Elegiac. Ed. a. c. b. Brown. Cr. Svo. is. 6d.

Persius,

The

Satires,

with a

translation

and commentary, by John

Henry Nettleship. Third edition. Svo. 8s. 6d. Plautus, Captivi. By Wallace M. Lindsay. Second edition. 2s. 6d. Mostellaria. By e. a. SoNNENscHEiN. Second edition. Fcap Svo. CoNiNGTON.

Edited by

Text interleaved.

Rudens.

By

4s. 6d.

the same.

and Appendix on Metre

Svo.

8s.

interleaved.

6d.

Editio millOr,

Second

edition.

Text

4s. 6d.

Trinummus. By c. e. Freeman and A. Sloman. Third edition. Codex Turnebi. By W. M. Lindsay. Svo. 21s. net

Plauti

5

3s.

Pliny, Selected Letters. Third edition.

Propertius. 43. 6d. net.

By

Prichabd and E, R.. Bernard,

C. E.

3s,

Index Verborum. By Pranslation by

J. S.

the same.

Selections. See TibuUus. Quintilian, Institutionis Oratoriae Lib. x. 8vo.

School edition.

12s. 6d.

Crown

Phillimore.

Extra fcap 8vo,

By w.

Fcap 8vo. Second edition. Second edition. 4s. 6d.

Peierson.

3s. 6d.

Sallust. By W. W, Capes. Scriptures LatiniReiMetricae. Edited by t.Gaisfohd. 8vo. Selections from the less known Poets. By North Pinder. Tacitus. Edited, with introductions and notes, by H. Furneaux.

Books

Annals. Second

6s.net.

4s.net.

8vo.

Books XI-XVI. Second ed. 18s. revised by H. F. Pelhaji and C. D. Fisher. 31s.

edition,

Annals.

8vo.

3s. 6d. net.

I-VI.

(Text only.)

Crown

8vo.

6s.

Books I-IV. 5s. Book I. Limp, 2s. Books XIII-XVI (abridged from Furneaux’s 8vo edition). By H. Pitman. 4s. 6d.

De

Germania.

Vita Agricolae.

DialogUS de Oratoribus. by W. Peterson.

I'erence, Adelphi.

6s. 6d.

each.

Edited, with introduction and notes

10s. 6d. net.

8vo.

By a. Sloman.

Second

edition.

Andria. By C. E. Freeman and A. Sloman.

3s.

Second

edition, 3s.

Phormio. By 3s. ‘Famulus. By J. Sargeaunt and A. G. S. Raynor. Tibullus and Propertius, Selections. By g. g. Ramsay. Second

a. Sloman.

edition.

edition.

23.

Third

6s.

Velleius Paterculus. By Robinson Ellis. Crown 8vo, By T. L. Papillon and A. E. Haigh. Two volumes.

A^irgil.

Cloth, 6s. each

;

or

stiff

6s.

Crown

8vo.

covers, 3s. 6d. each.

Text only

(including the minor works emended by R. Ellis). Miniature Oxford edition. By the same editors. 32mo. On writingpaper, 3s. net ; on Oxford India paper, roan, 4s. 6d. net.

Aeneid, 2s.

Books

each part.

Bucolics and Bucolics. 2s. 6d.

By the same editors. I-III, IV-VI, VII-IX, X-XII. Book IX, by A, E. Haigh, Is. 6d. ; in two parts, 2s. Georgies. By the same editors. 2s. 6d.

2s. 6d.

Georgies, Books

Aeneid, Book I. Limp cloth.

I, II, 2s.

Is. 6d.

6d.

All

Books

by

III,

IV,

C. S. Jerram.

Empire selections edited by a. c. b. Crown 8vo, in two parts, each 2s. 6d. together 4s. 6d. Somnium Scipionis. Fcap.Svo. Paper covers, 3d. ; doth, 4d. (Oxford Literature of the Early

:

Brown.

;

Plain Texts.)

Pervigilium Veneris.

Introd.

by

Plain Texts.) 6

J.

W, Mackail.

Cloth, 4d.

(Oxford

Works

Latin

of Reference

Lewis and Short’s Latin Dictionaries. See p. 34 Xhe Latin Language, being an historical account of Latin .

By W. M.

Stems, and Flexions.

Lindsay.

8vo.

Sounds,

21s.

Selected Fragments of Roman Poetry. Edited, with introduction and notes, by W. W. Merry. Second edition. Crown 8vo. 6s. 6d. Fragments and Specimens of Early Latin. With introductions and notes. By J. Wordsworth. 8vo. 18s. Selections from the less known Latin Poets. By North Finder.

4s. net.

8vo.

Latin Historical Inscriptions,

illustrating the history of the

By G. M'N. Rushforth. 8vo. 10s. net. SchellerS Latin Dictionary. Revised and

Early

Empire.

by

J.

E. Riddle.

Folio.

translated into English

21s. net.

Professor Nettleship’s Books Contributions to Latin Lexicography, svo. 21 s. Lectures and Essays. Second Series. Edited by With

portrait out of print.)

FiELD. is

The Roman

Crown

and memoir.

Satura.

svo.

Sewed,

Svo.

(The

7s. 6d.

f.

Haver-

first series

is.

Professor Sellars Books Poets of the Republic. Third edition. Crown 8vo. 10s. Poets of the Augustan Age. Crown svo. viz. Virgil. 9s., and Hoi’ace and the Elegiac Poets, with edition.

Roman Roman

:

Third a memoir of the Author, by

(A

limited

Andrew Lang.

Second edition. 7s. 6d. edition of Horace, containing a portrait be obtained in Demy Svo, price 14s.)

number of copies of the first

of the Author, can

still

Post- Augustan Poetry from Seneca Svo.

The

to Juvenal.

By H.

E. Butler.

8s. 6d. net.

Principles of

Sound and

Inflexion, as illustrated in the By J. E. King and C. Cookson. Svo. 18s. Comparative Philology. By T. L. Pakllon. Ed. 3. Crown Svo. 6s. Greek and Latin Languages.

F ontes

Prosae

The Cursus Author.

Svo.

N umerosae

collegit

a. C. Clark.

Svo.

4s. 6d. net.

By in IMediaeval and Vulgar Latin. The two bound together, 4s. 6d. net. 2s. net.

the

same

Professor Ellis’s Lectures 8vo, each Is. net.

Juvenal,

Published by Mr. Frowde.

Fables. — The Corre— Catullus in the Fourteenth

The New Fragments. — Phaedrus, The

spondence of Fronto and M. Aurelius. Century.

— A Bodleian MS of Copa, Moretum, and other Poems of the Svo.) — The Elegiac in Maecenatem. — The

Appendix Vergiliana.

(Cr.

Annalist Licinianus, with an Appendix of Emendations of the Text. The Tenth Prof. Birt’s Edition of the Vergilian Catalepton. Declamation of (Pseudo) Quintilian.

—

7

OXFORD CLASSICAL TEXTS Crown Uncut

Greek ...... .

I.

Ach., Eq., Nub., Vesp., Pax, Aves. Lys., Thesm., Ran., Eccl., Pint. fr.

Aristotle.

I.

Bucolici Graeci. U.

Demosthenes. II.

.

De Arte Poetica (Quarto writing-paper,

S.

v.

or above in cloth)

B

C

3s. 6d.

7s. 6d.

4s. 6d.

3s.

5s. 6d.

4s

3s.

5s. 6d.

.

3s. 6d.

7s. 6d.

3s. 6d.

7s. 6d.

2s.

4s. 6d.

10s. 6d.)

4s.

8s.

Wilamowitz-Moellendorff.

3s.

7s.

H. Butcher.

.

4s 8s 6d.

Bywater.

Ethica.

I.

.

6s.

A

Aeschylus, a. Sidgwick Antoninus. J. H. Leopold Apollonius Rhodius. R. C. Seaton Aristophanes. F. W. Hall, W. M. Geldart II.

on India paper (C)

Prices in cloth (A), interleaved (B),

8vo.

copies in paper covers at 6d. less (Is. for those priced at

4s 6d. 4s 6d.

4s 12s

.

Orationes I-XIX i. Orationes XX-XXVI

4s. 6d.

8s. 6d.

3s. 6d.

7s. 6d.

3s. 6d.

7s. 6d.

3s. 6d. 3s. 6d.

7s. 6d.

Euripides. I.

G. G. a. Murray Cyc., Ale., Med., Heracl., Hip., Andr., Hec.

H. Suppl., Here., Ion, Tro.,

El.,

I.

12s 6d.

T

HI. Hel., Phoen., Or., Bacch., Iph. Aul., Rh.

Oxyrhynchia cum

Hellenica

Herodotus.

K. Hude.

I

II

Homer.

Iliad.

Plato.

F. G.

Hunt

Qc

)

4s 6d.

7s. 6d.

'

.

6d.

10s.

4s. 6d.

10s.

4s.

1

W. Allen. I-XII

Books XHI-XXIV Books I-XII T. W. Allen. Books XHI-XXIV

5s. 6d.

1

3s.

5s. 6d.

'

3s.

5s. 6d.

7s.

10s 1

5s. 6d.

3s.

Kenyon

12s 6d.

)

3s.

6s.

1

3s. 6d.

a. o. Prickard

2s. 6d.

(Also India Paper I-III, 20s. IV- V, 18s.) 6s. I. Euth., ApoL, Crit., Ph.; Crat., Tht., Soph., Polit. 6s. II. Par., Phd., Symp., Phdr. Ale. I, H, Hipp., Am. III. Thg., Chrm., Lch., Lys.; Euthd., Prot., Gorg., 6s. Men. Hp., Ma. et Min., lo, Mnx. 7s. IV. Clit., Rep., Tim., Critias. 6s. Republic separately (4to with margin, 10s. 6d.) Clit., Tim., Crit., paper covers, 2s. V. Part i. Minos, Leges I-VIH 8s Part ii. Leges IX-XII, Ep., Epp., Def., Spuria Separately First tetralogy ; Apology and Meno ; Fifth tetralogy paper covers, each 2s. J.

I

eti 4s. 6d.

(Books I-IV) (Books V-IX)

D. B. Monro, T.

Odyssey. Hyperides. Longinus,

Theopompi

B. P. Grenfell, A. S.

Cratippi fragmentis.

6d.

Burnet.

.

;

•

7s 7s

12s. 12s. 12s.

7s

14s.

8s

6d.

10s

6d.

8s

6d.

12s

6d.

.

;

12s.

16s.

,

:

:

Theophrasti Characteres. H. Diels Thucydides. H. Stuart Jones. Books I-IV V-VHI

3s. 6d.

.

3s. 6d.

7s. 6d.

I

3s. 6d.

7s. 6d.

)

Xenophon,

e. c. Marchant. i-iii Historia Graeca and HI. Anabasis . H. Libri Socratici and IV. Institutio Cyri.

I.

. ,

each

7s.

3s.

each 3s. 6d.

The Oxford Greek Testament. Text, with app. 8s. 6d. net

crit.

The Revisers’) by A. Souter (Quarto writing-paper, r '

8

3s.

net

7s. 6d.

i

Latin AsCOlliuS.

Caesar, Commeiitarii.

With I.

III.

ad

Du Pontet

Tibullus and Propertius

L. C, Purser

6s.

2s. 6d.

6s.

3s.

7s.

2s. 6d.

5s.

c 7s.

8s. 6d.

....

21s.

Fam

6s.

ad Att., Pars i (1-8), Pars ii (9-16) ad Q. F., ad M. Brut., Fragm.

B

3 s, 6d. .

R, Ellis

Cicero, Epistulae. II.

R. l. a.

........

Bellum Gallicum Bellum Civile

Catullus.

A

A. C. Clark

.

.

.

.

.

each

4s. 6d.

.3s.

12s. 8s. 6d.

5s. 6d.

Orationes. Rose. Am.,

I.

Pomp., Clu., Cat., Mur., Cael.

A. C.

|3s.

7s.

Philippicae. A. C. Clark.

3s.

7s.

Verrinae. W. Peterson Quinct., Rose. Com., Caec., Leg. Agr., Rab. PerdueU., Flacc., Pis., Rab. Post. A. C. Clark P ost Reditum, De Domo, Har. Resp., Sest., Vat., Prov. Cons., Balb. W. Peterson TuU., Font., SuU., Arch., Plane., Scaur. A. C.

4s.

8s.

Clark Pro MUone, Caesarianae, .

1

)

.

1

-

18s. 6d.

1

Clark

......... ....

Rhetorica. a. I. De Oratore

s.

...... ..... Lin DSAY.

Lucretius. C. Bailey IMartial. w. m. Linhsay NepOS. E. O. Win STEDT Persius and Juvenal. S. G. Owen Plautus. W. M. Lindsay’. I. Amph. — Merc. II.

Miles

Phillimore.

Silvae. j. s. Philldiore Xliebais and Achilleis.

Tacitus Annales.

IVdinora.

F. A.

(I.

P, with Catullus)

.

..... h. w. Garrod

C. D. Fisher

h. Furneaux

.

Appendix

2s. 6d.

5s.

1

16s.

I

1

1

7s. 6d.

3s. 6d.

7s. 6d.

3s.

5s. 6d.

4s. 6d,

[In the press.] 3s. 6s.

5s. 6d.

4s. 7s. 6d.

12s. 4s. 6d.

3s.

5s. 6d.

6s.

13s. 6d.

6s.

13s. 6d.

3s.

5s. 6d.

4s.

16s. 1

lOs. 6d. 3s, 6d,

6s.

6s.

12s.

6s.

12s.

15s.

Terence. R. Y. Tyrrell Tibullus. J.p Postgate.

V ergil.

.

c. d. Fisher

Historiae.

Opera

7s.

2s.

— fragm

J. S.

1

3s. 1

7s.

Horace, e. c. Wickham Isidori Etymologiae. w. m.

Propertius. Statius

3s. 1

Wilkins

Brutus, etc

II.

J

Hirtzel

Vergiliana.

......

(IndiaPaper, see Catullus)

r. Ellis

4s.

7s. 6d.

2s.

4s. 6d.

3s. 6d.

7s. 6d.

2s.

4s. 6d.

3s. 6d,

8s. 6d.

4s« 9

7s,

5s. 6d.

5s.

4s. 6d,

Annotated Greek Classics For Oxford Classical Texts, see

40

p.

Oxford Translations,

for

;

p. 21.

Extra fcap 8vo Aeschylus.

By Arthur

Oxford Classical

New

Sidgwick.

editions with the text of the

Texts.

Agamemnon.

Sixth edition revised.

Eumenidcs.

edition revised. 3s.

Chocphoroi. New

3s.

Third edition.

Septem contra Thebas. 3s. Prometheus \^inctus. By a. O. Prickard.

3s.

Pcrsac.

3s.

Aristophanes. By W, W. Merry, AcharnianS. Fifth edition. 3s. Clouds. Second edition. 3s. EnightS. Second edition. 3s.

W

asps.

Second

CebeS, Pabula.

By

Fourth edition.

Birds. Fourth

FrOgS. PcaCC.

III.

De

3s.

3s. 6d.

3s. 6d.

edition.

C. S. Jerram.

stiff covers. Is. 6d.

cloth, 2s. 6d.

;

I-III.

Fourth

de Chersoneso, Philippic 2s. (id. Philippics I-III (reprinted from above),

Vol. II

3s.

3s. 6d.

edition.

Fifth edition.

Demosthenes. By Evelyn Ahhoit and P. E. Matheson. Against Philip. Vol. I: Philippic I, OlyntWacs edition,

2s.

4s. 6d,

:

Pace, Philippic

II,

On the

Crown. 3s. ed. Against ivieidias. By J,

Crown

R. King.

3s. 6d.

8vo.

Euripides. Alcestis. By

Hecuba. By c.

By C.

Second

Heberden.

Selections. Iliad.

edition.

Third edition.

Herodotus, Book

Homer,

Heberden.

2s. 6d.

Helena. By c.

2s. 6d.

s.

2s.

By Evelyn Abbott.

IX.

With a map.

By D.

3s.

B.

3s.

By W. W. Merry.

Sixty-sixth thousand. 5s. VH. Is. 6d. Books

XHI-XXIV. XIX-XXIV. 3s.

2s, 6d.

I-XII. With a brief Homeric Gramwith the Homeric Grammar, separately.

Fourth edition.

Book HI (for beginners), by M. T. Tatham. Herbert Hailstone. Is. 6d. Homer, Odyssey. By w, w. Merry. Books VI and

'

Monro.

mar. Fifth edition. 6s. Book I, Third edition. Is. 6d. XHI-XXIV.

I-XII.

E. Long.

Heraclcidae. By C. S. Jerram. Iphigcnia in Tauris. Ion. By c. s. Jerram. 3s. S, Jerram. New edition revised. 3s. JVIedea. By C. B.

Jerram. 3s.

CyclopS. By W.

3s. 6d.

b.

BaCchaC. By

Fifth edition. 2s. 6d.

C. S. Jerraai.

A. H. Cruickshank.

Books

I

10

5s.

6s.

6d.

Book

XXL By

and H, separately, each

VH-XH.

Sixteenth thousand.

Is.

Is.

6d.

3s.

Books

XHI-XVHI.

3s.

Books

Lucian, Vera Historia. By C. S. Jeuraji. Dialogues prepared for Schools. Text

2s.,

Notes

Greek

in

Lysias, Epitaphios. By

Plato.

Ed.

3.

St.

By

f. j.

CritO.

By w. h.

S.N

ELL.

EutliyphrO. JMcilO. Ed.

2s.

With

introd.

By

J.

2s. 6d.

Crown

preface

Plutarch, Lives of the Gracchi. 8vo.

lon. and

notes,

and notes by John Burxet. Crown A. Shawyer.

By J. Purves with

Selections.

Apology.

2 s. 6d. 3.

With revised text, introduction, by E. H. Gifford. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.

IVIenexenUS.

d. Rouse.

2S.

EuthydemUS. Phaedo.

Is. 6d.

edition.

2s.

George Stock.

2s. 6d.

Second

8vo.

by B.

By G.

2s. 6d.

indices,

8vo.

5s.

2s.

2nd

Jowe-it.

ed.

5s.

Crown

E. Underhill.

4s. 6d.

CoriolanUS

(for

Junior Students).

With introduction and

notes.

Sophocles. By Lewis Campbell and Evelyn Abbott. New and edition. Two volumes: Vol. I text 4s. 6d. Vol. II notes 6s.

2s.

revised

;

Or

singly 2s. each (text and notes), Ajax, Antigone, Electra, Oedipus Coloneus, Oedipus Tyrannus, Philoctetes, Trachiniae.

Scenes from Sophocles, Is. 6d. each. (1) Ajax.

edited

Crown

With

C. E. Laurence.

8vo.

Second

Revised by E. Abbott.

edition.

Golden Treasury of Greek Prose. J. J-

E. L. Shadwell.

heocritus.

Extra fcap 8vo.

By H. Kynaston.

T. R. Mills.

3s. 6d.

Xenophon.

w.

By

sir r. s. 10s. 6d.

By

Sir r. s.

Wright and

4s. 6d.

Fifth edition.

4s. 6d.

With an introductory essay by H.

Notes only,

a.

Extra fcap 8vo.

Thucydides. Book III. ByH. F.Fox. Crown 8vo. By

By

5s.

Gplden Treasury of Ancient Greek Poetiy. Weight.

illustrations.

AlltigOlie.

Greek Comic Poets.

Select Fragments of the Pickard-Cambridge.

by

(2)

3s. 6d.

S. Jones.

Book IV. Crown

8vo.

2s. 6d.

(See also p. 34.)

Anabasis.

Each of the first four Books is now issued in uniform Each volume contains introduction, text, notes, and a fuU vocabulary to the Anabasis. Book I. By J. Marshall. Jeream. Books III and IV. By J. Marshall. Book II. By C. S. Books III, IV, 3s. Vocabulm-y to the Anabasis, by J. Marsh.all. Is. cloth binding at Is. 6d.

Cyropaedia, Book I. Hellenica, Books

Memorabilia.

I, II.

2s.

Books IV and V.

By G.

E. Underhill.

By J. Marshall. 11

4s. 6d.

2s. 6d.

3s.

By

C. Bigg.

Editions etc of Greek Authors mostly with English notes Appian, Book

I. Edited with map and appendix on Pompey’s passage of the Alps, by J. L. Strachan-Davidson. Crown 8vo. 3s, 6d.

A Concordance to.

Aristophanes,

By H. Dunbar.

£1

4to.

ls.net,

Aristotle.

The

a revised Greek text, with critical introduction, English and commentary, by I. Bywater. 8vo. 16 s. net.

Poetics,

translation

De Arte

Poetica Liber

Ethica Nicomachea Contributions By

Ethics.

I.

recognovit

recognovit

I.

I.

Bywater.

Bywater.

see

Bywvater.

Stiff cover.

£1

p. 40.

p, 40.

to the Textual Criticism of Aristotle’s

Nicomachean

2s, 6d.

Notes on the Nicomachean Ethics. By J. Post 8 VO.

See

a. Stewart. 2

vois,

12s.

The English Manuscripts

of the Nicomachean Ethics. By J. A. Stewart. Crown 4to. 3s. 6d. net. Selecta ex Organo Capitula in usum Scholarum Academi1

Crown

carum.

8vo,

stiff

covers.

3s. 6d.

The

Pohtics, with introduction, notes, Medium 8vo. 14s. net per volume.

The

Pohtics,

indices,

by W. L. NE^vsIAN. 4

vols.

translated into English, with introduction, notes, and 8vo. Vol. I, 10s. net; Vol. II, 8s. 6d. net.

by B. Jowett. Medium

Aristotehan Studies. Nicomachean

On

etc,

By

Ethics.

On J.

the structure of the Seventh

Cook Wilson.

8vo.

Book of the

5s.

the History of the Aristotelian Writings.

Shute.

8vo.

By

r.

7s. 6d.

Book VII. With introduction by R. Shute. 2s, net. The ^Vorks of Aristotle. Translated into English under Physics,

Editorship of J. A. Smith and

W.

Parva Naturalia. By J,

D. Ross.

I.

the

8vo.

Beare and G, ,R.

T. Ross,

3s. 6d. net.

De

Lineis Insecabilibus. By H. H. Joachim. 2s. 6d. net. Metaphysica. (Voi. viii.) By w. d. Ross. ts. ed. net. De Mirabilibus Auscultationibus. By L. d. Dowdall. 2s, net,

Historia Animalium.

(Vol. IV.)

By D’Arcy W. Thompson.

lOs. 6d. net.

De De

Generatione Animalium. By a. Platt, ts. ed. net. Partibus Animalium. By w. Ogle. 5s. net, M, with introduction, music, translation, and notes, AristOXenUSH.

S.

Macra;

jwn

8vo.

10s. 6d. net.

12

by

;

Demosthenes and Aeschines on the Crown. tory essays and notes,

by G. A. Simcox and W. H. Smcox.

Herachti Ephesii Rehquiae. Laertius’ Life of Heraclitus, etc.

HerodaS. With

Edited, with

notes and appendices,

Homer,

A

by

I.

8vo.

12s.

Bywater, with Diogenes

6s.

introduction and notes,

full

facsimiles of the fragments

Herodotus, Books V

Edited by

8vo.

With introduc-

and other

by

J.

illustrations.

Arbuthnot Natrk. 12s. 6d. net.

8vo.

and VI.

Terpsichore and Erato. Edited, with E. Abbott. With two maps. Post 8vo. 6s.

Concordance to the Odyssey and H5nnns

and to the Parallel Passages in the H. Dunbar. 4to. £1 Is. net.

Odyssey. Books

I-XII.

Iliad,

By

Odyssey, and Hymns.

Edited, with English notes, appendices,

by W. W. Merry and J. Riddell. Second edition. 8vo. 16s. Books XIII-XXIV. Edited, with English notes, appendices, and illustrations, by D. B. Monro. 8vo. 16s.

etc,

Hymni Homerici Small

folio.

With

codicibus denuo coUatis recensuit A. Goodwin.

four plates.

£l

Is. net.

Scholia Graeca in Ihadem. a new collation of the Venetian £2 10s. net. See also p. 47. ‘

The Oxford Homer T.

W. Allen.

Crown

Homerica. T. L.

Agar.

’

;

Edited by w. Dindorf, after D. B. Monro. 4 vols. 8vo.

MSS by

10s. 6d. net.

14s. net.

8vo.

by

B. P.

confectus

ab

7s. 6d. net.

IMenander s T eojproc, notes,

By

Emendations and Elucidations of the Odyssey. 8vo.

Index Andocideus, Lycurgeus, Dinarcheus, L. L. Forman.

Monro and

the text edited by D. B.

8vo, on India paper.

the Geneva Fragment, with Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 8vo, stiff

text, translation,

covers.

and

Is. 6d.

No)U,os 'PoStcov Nauri/co?. The Rhodian Sea-Law. Edited, with introduction, translation, and commentary, by W. Ashburner. 8vo. 18s. net.

Plato, Philebus.

Edited by E. Poste.

Republic.

Edited, with notes In three volumes. L. Campbell.

7s. 6d.

8vo.

and essays, by B, Jowett and Medium 8vo, cloth. £2 2s.

Sophistes and Politicus. Edited by L. Campbell. 8vo. 10 s. 6 d.net. TheaetetUS. Edited by L. Campbell. 2nd ed. 8vo. 10s. 6d. net. The Dialogues, translated into English, with analyses and introby B. Joi^'ETT. Third edition. Five volumes, medium 8vo. In half-morocco, £5. The Subject-Index to the second edition of the Dialogues, by E. Abbott, separately. 8vo, cloth. 2s. 6d. Third Republic, translated into Enghsh, by B. Jowett. edition. Medium 8vo. 12s. 6d. Half-roan, 14s.

ductions,

£4

4s.

The

Selections from Jowett’s translation, Knight. Two volumes. Crown 8vo.

Polybius, Selections. Edited maps. Medium 8vo, buckram. 21s. 13

with introductions by M.

J.

12s.

DAnnsoN.

by.J. L. St =

With

The

and

Plays Fragments. Edited by L. Cajipbell, Vol. I Oedipus Tyrannus. Oedipus Coloneus. Antigone. 8vo. 16s. Vol. II Ajax. Electra. Trachiniae. Philoctetes. Fragments. 8vo. 16s.

Sophocles, :

:

Strabo, Selections. With an introduction on Strabo’s By H. F. Tozer. With maps and plans. Post 8vo, cloth.

Thucydides.

Life and Works.

Translated into English by B. Jowett. 9 vols.

revised.

Vol.

I

:

Vol. II

:

8vo.

13s.

Second

edition,

15s.

Essay on Inscriptions, and Books I-III. Books IV-VIII, and Historical Index.

Xenophon, Hellenica.

Edited, with introduction and appendices, by G. E. Underhill. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. Also with the Oxford Text by E. C. Marchant, one volume. Is. 6d. net.

Older Clarendon Press Editions of Greek Authors The Greek texts in fine and generally large type ; the Scholia (and some of the texts) have not appeared in any later editions. The annotations are in Latin.

Aeschinem 8vo.

et Isocratem,

Scholia Graeca in, edidit G. Dindorfius.

4s.

Aeschylus

Second Tragoediae et Fragmenta. G. Dindorfii. Annotationes. Partes II. 8vo. lOs. 6d. net. Quae supersunt in codice Laurentiano typis descripta edidit R. Merkel. Small folio. £1 Is. net.

edition.

ex

rec.

8vo.

5s. 6d. net.

Apsinis et Longini Rhetorica recensuit

Joh. Bakius.

svo.

ss.

Aristophanes

ex rec. G. DiNnonm. Comoediae et Fragmenta. Tomi 11. Svo. 10s.6d.net. Annotationes. PartesII.8vo.10s.6d.net. Scholia Graeca. Partes III. Svo. £1 Is. net. J. Caravellae Index. Svo. 3s.

Al’istoteles

ex

recensione

Tomi I-XI.

Sylburgiani.

The nine volumes

Lmjianueus

Accedunt

Thomas Gaisford.

Tomi

Svo.

15s.net.

Tomi IX. Svo. ex recensione G. Dindorfii. Textus, £1 Is. Annotationes, 15s. Scholia, 10s.

:

Etymologicon Magnum. Euripides Svo. Svo.

10s.

£1

EditedbyT. Gaisford.

Folio.

Alcestis.

Svo.

2s. 6d.

14

£9

6s.

(Out of print.)

rec. G. Dindorfii. Tragoediae et Fragmenta. Annotationes. Partes II. Svo. 10s. Scholia Graeca.

ex

16s.

may

Canones, necnon Epimerisrai in Psalmos

III.

Demosthenes Separately

Indices

(Organon) and IX (Ethica) are out of print) be had separatelj% price 5s. 6d. each.'

in print (I

Choerobosci Dictata in Theodosii edidit

Bekkeri.

Svo.

Tomi II. Tomi IV.

HarpOCrationis Lexicon

Tomi

ex recensione G. Dindorfii.

8vo.

II.

31s. net.

Hephaestionis

Enchiridion, Terentianus Maurus,

Tomi

T. Gaisford.

Proclus,

etc.

edidit

13s. 6d. net.

II.

Homerus cum brevi annotatione Tomi II. 8vo. 15s.

Ex

Ilias.

G. Dixdorfii.

rec.

Accedunt Scholia minora.

C. G. Hevnii.

Ilias,

8vo.

5s. 6d.

Scholia Graeca in Iliadem. See p. 45. Scholia Graeca in Iliadem Townleyana recensuit Ernestus Maass. 8vo. £1 16s. net.

Ex

Odyssea.

rec.

Seberi Index in

OratoreS AttlCl Lycurgus,

G. Dindorfii. 8vo. 5s. 6d. ed. G. Dindorfius. Tomi

Odysseam Homerum.

Scholia Graeca in

8vo.

8vo.

18s.net.

6s. 6d.

ex recensione Bekkeri: Vol. III. Isaeus, jEschines, 7s.6d.net. Vols. I and II are out of print.

8vo.

etc.

Paroemiographi Graeci

Out of

edidit t. Gaisford.

Index Graecitatis Platonicae 8 VO.

II.

2 vols.

print.

confecit T. Mitchell.

1832.

2 vols.

5s.

Plotinus

Tomi

edidit F. Creuzer.

Plutarchi IMoralia Tomi VIII.

Partes

8vo, cloth.

SoptlOclis Tragoediae

et Fragmenta. Third edition. 2 vols.

G. Dindorfii.

Each Play

separately, limp, Is.

;

Tomi

Stobaei

I,

Ex

recensione et

Fcap 8vo.

£3

8vo.

;

cum

text

£1

cum

commentariis

Is.

on writing-paper,

8s.

annotationibus G. Dindorfii.

10s.

5s. 6d.

MSS

Florilegium ad

Tomi IV.

Accedit Index Graecitatis,

10s. net.

text only, 6d.

8vo.

II.

text, Vol.

net.

£3

Tragoediae et Fragmenta

The

4'2s.

D. Wyttenbach.

edidit

XV.

4to.

III.

The

notes, Vol. II, 4s. 6d.

fidem emendavit et supplevit T. Gaisford.

3s. net.

Eclogarum Physicarum et Ethicarum libri duo accedit Hieroclis Recensuit T. Commentarius in aurea carmina Pyihagoreorum. :

Gaisford.

SuidaC Lexicon. paper copies, £6

Xenophon.

Tomi

8vo.

12s. 6d. net.

Edited by T. Gaisford.

(A few

6s. net.

Ex rec.

II.

et

cum annotatt.

Expeditio Cyri. Institutio Cyri.

8vo.

Folio.

Large

10s. 6d. 10s. 6d.

10s. 6d.

Memorabilia Socratis. 8vo. 7s. 6d. Opuscula Politica Equestria et Venatica 8vo.

vols.

L. Dindorfii.

Second edition. 8vo. Second edition. 8vo.

Historia Graeca.

Three

copies remain.)

10s. 6d.

15

cum

Arriani Libello de Venatione.

Greek Literature

The Attic

Theatre. By a. E. Haigh. in part rewritten by A. W. Pickard-Cambridge.

Third edition, revised and Illustrated. 8vo. 10s.6d.net.

A few copies of the second edition can still be obtained. Greek Tragic Drama. By a. e. Haigh, illustrated, svo. los. ed. net. Ancient Classical Drama. By R. g. Moulton. Ed. 2. Cr. svo. 8s. ed. The Rise of the Greek Epic. ByGiLBE RT Murray. Second edition and enlarged.

(1911) revised

7s.6d.net.

8vo.

Interpretation of Greek Literature. By g. Murray,

The Greek Commonwealth. By

Athens.

A. E. Zijimern.

Politics

Svo.

svo. is.net.

and Economics in Fifth-Century

8s. 6d. net.

Greek Historical Writing and Apollo.

Two Lectures by U. von Wilajigwitz-Moellendorff. Translation by Gilbert Murray. Svo. 2s.net.

The Erasmian Pronunciation I.

Bywater.

The Value by

S.

Svo.

Is.

Svo.

Ionia and the East. By D.G. Hogarth.

Svo.

Soil

By

Historia

A

J. B.

Bury.

Lecture

With a map. :

3s.6d.net.

The Romanes Lecture,

2s. net.

Coins and Inscriptions Numorum. a Manual of Greek Numismatics.

V. Head. New and enlarged edition with morocco back, £2 6s. net.

Manual of Greek

Royal Svo,

(1911).

Historical

By Barclay

cloth,

Inscriptions.

New edition, revised by G. F. Hill. Svo. 10s. 6d. Inscriptions of Cos. By W.R.Paton&E.L. Hicks.

Hicks.

The

Lecture by

Is. net.

Romances of Chivalry on Greek 1911.

a

Modern Greek, a

of Byzantine and

Menardos.

of Greek,

net (published by Mr. Frowde).

£2

2s.

By

net;

e. l.

net.

Ry.Svo. £18s.

AGrammaroftheHomericDialect. ByD.B.MoNRo. svo. Ed.2,i4s. Inflections of Greek Dialects (Ionic).

The Sounds and By H. W. Smyth.

Svo.

£1

4s.

AGloSSaryof Greek Birds. By D’ArcyW. Thompson, C.B. Svo. lOs.n, Practical Introduction to Greek Accentuation. By h. w. Chandler. Svo. 2nd ed.

10s. 6d.

Also an abridgement. Ext. fcap Svo.

Palaeography

Papyri

:

Catalogus Codicum Graecorum Sinaiticorum. With

V. Gardthausen.

Svo, linen.

facsimiles.

2s. 6d.

On abbreviations in Greek MSS.

£1

By t. w.

Scnpsit

5s. net.

Allen. Royal svo.

5s.

An Alexandrian erotic fragment and other Greek papyri, chiefly 6d. net. Ptolemaic. Edited by B. P. Grenfell. Small New classical fragments and other papyri. Edited by B. P. Grenfell 4to.

and A.

S.

Hunt.

8s.

12s. 6d. net.

Revenue laws of Ptolemy Philadelphus. Grenfell and

J. P.

Mahaffy.

£1

Edited by B. p.

11s. 6d. net.

Palaeography of Greek papyri, 16

by

f. g.

Kenyon,

svo,

los. ed.

'V

r

K

r,

1'*;'

;

O/ioo

a

[

•sn

'

9 ZJ 27 OCT

« ?

PSt-

>»{*•

3 .i ;

,

‘H

,

<\ ij

'

’t’

•

I#'

^^' ?*: 'V rsiST

v*«;

"'

fr

•

.V’§.

.yk-,

iiisi

]i •:

ill!

Iflii iisii iiiifill

illll

flit

:i!!

y

•V

>4'