vicarius fummo ipfe fupplicio mactaretur-of the Plures Hypoftafes' of the doctrine Quòd S. Spiritus, omnis boni muneris dator ac largitor, ternarium in Deo numerum conficeret, effetque fummi numinis tanquam apex, et cumulus.' We presume not to difcufs fubjects of fo facred and mysterious a nature in this our critique: but we muft fay again, that it is very unbecoming to introduce them in a Preface to the Poetics.

The interpretation of λόγου πρωταγωνισήν, β. κxxii. the reafons for retaining ayyias, p. xxxiii-and for reading paring for panxx, p. xxxvi, fhall be noticed when we come to the respective chapters of the Poetics, which contain these words. ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΟΥΣ ΠΕΡΙ ΠΟΙΗΤΙΚΗΣ.

Whatever fingularities we may find in the hypothefis which the Preface is employed to establish, we think the Latinity entitled to very high praife for correctness, perfpicuity and elegance; in two or three places we faw marks of inattention to the niceties of verbal criticism; but the particular defects are few and trifling; while the general excellence has been made the fubject of admiration among fcholars, whofe fuffrages do honour to Mr. Cooke, and are of great weight with ourselves.

66

C. 1. Tois Royas finas. On thefe words Mr. C. remarks -Vel prosâ oratione, vel metris'-agreeable to the opinion advanced in his Preface; and he confirms this interpretation by a paffage cited from Ariftotle's Rhetoric, which is pertinent, and fully proves λιγα ψιλοι to mean profe. So that the Επιποΐα may be written either in profe ayos xas, or in metre n PETPOIS. Goulton's interpretation feems to render the conjunction, as if it were only explanatory of λoya Viña, but certainly the critic meant to point out two diftinét things by that particle, as in τες λόγες και την ψιλομετρίαν, c. 2, and επι των εμμέτρων και επι των λόγων, c. 6. “ Dans l' epopée, il n'y a que la parole, foit en profe, fort en vers;" fays Biteux, whose tranflation is occafionally very happy, though in general, like the translations of all his countrymen, too loole and wide from the text. With the words ψιλος λογοις η μετρας Mr. C. connets ουδεν γαρ αν εχοιμεν ονόμασαι κοινον thus: • Adimplendum eft quod deficit in hunc modum: miraris fane me dicere, epopeiam poffe prosa conftare, fine metris. At profectò ni ita effet, abjurda muita confequerentur.' We are rather of opinion that the conneion is between ουδεν γαρ, and the general definition πασαί τυγχάνεσιν έσαι μιμησεις το σύνολον. We approve of what he advances when he afterwards goes on to fhew, how, according to Ariftotle's opinion, poetry confifts not fo much in writing metrically, as in imitation; and he demonftrates, that a writer, who invents and imitates, may be a poet, without metre, but that he who does not invent and imitate is no poet although he may write metre. The Dialogues of Plato are as much poems as the Mimes of Sophron, though the former are written in B 2 profe,

profe, the latter in verfe. The context and the words od #OINTNG XATα Tny Miμnowv esi, c. 10, prove Mr. Cooke's opinion to be right: and we think he has given the proper interpretation οι της Σωκρατικός Λογος, when in his note he calls them Platonis Dialogi.' Goulfton renders thefe words, "Fabella Socratis alternis verfibus confcriptæ"-but where then is the concraft between the Σωφρονος Μιμοι and Σωκρατικοι Λογοι? Batteux has been fuccefsful in this paffage: Les Dialogues Philofophiques, ou l'on fait parler Socrate."

C. 4. Όσον εγενετο φανερον αυτής. Quod in iis jam extat." But how can aurs refer both to tragedy and comedy? The right interpretation of this place feems to be, It (i. e. comedy) was gradually improved by means of thofe writers, who carried it on to that ftate, in which at laft it appeared (but not to perfection).

C. 4. The preface and the note on Aoyo IIрway w abundantly prove thofe words to mean, that Eichylus made dialogue to be the principal part, whereas, heretofore, the chorus almoft occupied the whole.

C. 6. The editor retains rayas in the fentence, ou d' επayyeλias, arλλa dλ8 xα Qoes. In p. xxxiii. of the Preface he defends this reading; Tayyɛhas rectè fe habet, nam sayyλλ eft præcipere, tradere; et εпayyεxix præceptio : tragedia itaque est & di' εTayyεrias, non monftrando et docendo ea, quæ formidini et vel miferationi futura fint, αλλα δι' ελες και φοβε jed ex rebus ipfis formidolofis et miferandis coràm ante oculos pofitis efficit, ut homines edifcere poffint quæ rectè miferari oportet, in quibus timere. His note, p. 121, is to the fame effect. This reafoning is good, but nevertheless we prefer awayуthias "narratione,” because, as Ariftotle deduces the definition of tragedy : TWO ειρημένων, and as among the ειρημένα it had been obferved that epic poetry differed from tragedy τῳ δε το μετρον άπλον έχειν, και Απαγγελίαν είναι, “ in having metre unaccompanied with mufic, and in being narration," it is most probable that he would define tragedy as not confifting of narration, vid. c. 5. Moreover απαγγελλω is the word familiar to Ariftotle: Και γαρ εν τοις αυτοίς και τα αυτα μιμεῖσθαι εςι, ετε μεν Απαγγέλλοντα, c. 3.

T

C. 13. Tranflators differ very much about the fenfe of the following pafiage; εξην γαρ αν ένια και ενεγκειν, "" poterat anim quædam etiam attuliffe," says the Oxford edition 1760. by James Harris-"Quædam licebat ponere ante oculos"—Winftanley, after Goulfton "Nonnulla enim poffunt ferri: ut cùm in Tereo Sophoclis, radio vox tribuitur." Heinlius. "Le poëte eût pu tirer de fon fujet." Batteux. Licebit enim quædam proferre.' Cooke. As if permiffion might be given to the poet to bring about the αναγνωρισις by rome σημεία produced before the Spedators, and as if Sophocles were to be commended in his Tereus for the

φωνη

Owun xepnidos. But neither of these interpretations fatisfies us. Ariftotle means to fay, That it is almoft as great a fault to bring about the avayapiois by words which the poet may invent, and not by payμara, which naturally arife from the fable, as it is to do it by figns: and that the one method is nearly as reprehenfible as the other: for by the fame liberty, with which the poet feigns words for his characters to speak on fuch an occafion, he MIGHT AS WELL HAVE PRODUCED fome figns; which is aTEXOV, and for which Sophocles is culpable in his Tereus, as Euripides is in his Iphigenia, for inventing a fpeech for Oreftes. So the connection is between oiov Operns Ev τη Ιφιγενεια και εν τῷ Σοφοκλεας Τηρεί ή της κερκιδος Φονη. From the conclufion of this chapter, it is evident, that Ariftotle does not approve of Sophocles in his Tereus, for he does not recommend that play as an example, but exprefsly mentions the Αναγνωρισις εξ αυτών των πραγματων in the Oedipus Tyrannus and Iphigenia, as moft excellent, because aveu TWY TETTOINLEVIN σημείων; and then he fpeciñes the Αναγνωρισις εκ Συλλογισμε as next best. But by his filence with respect to that dia σημείων, is to be inferred his difapprobation: but fuch was the xpidos Parn, and therefore the Tereus was not to be commended.

.

C. 15. Διοπερ εδεις ποιεῖ ὁμοιως, ει μη ολιγάκις. The edi tor renders oxyanıs Minoribus in locis: and remarks, Perολιγάκις peram vertitur "raro;" effet enim abfurdum, talem fabula conflitu tionem probari in paucis tragediis, fed non in omnibus.' But Ariftotle fews his difapprobation of the γινωσκοντα μελλησας xas un mрatas, by obferving that it was feldom ufed; as much as if he had faid it was ufed only in lefs important places. The unfrequent use of fuch a method to excite the To Polepov nar EXEELVOV is a fufficient proof that it was vicious. Oxyaxis, therefore, may ftill be rendered raro in this paffage, as in c. 24. μιμόνται δε ολίγα και ολιγακις.

C. 15. Κράτισον is rendered Quod maxime valet - has the vogue'-and it is remarked that Ariftotle is made to contradict himself, if xparison be taken for "optimum;" for by the words ετι δε τρίτον prefixed to του μέλλοντα ποιειν τι των avrxeolwr, &c. the critic fhews his difapprobation of that practice. Though we do not think the words ETI ds, &c. imply that cenfure, yet from the doctrine laid down in c. 14. which fays that the fable ought μεταβάλλειν εκ εις ευτυχίαν εκ ευτυχίας, αλλα τεναντιον εξ ευτυχίας εις δυςυχίαν, it is clear Ariftotle could not give the preference to an example directly contrary. In order, therefore, to avoid making the Cri tic contradict in one chapter what he has taught in a preceding one, we cannot render xparisov by "optimum;" but according to Mr. Cooke's quod maximè valet,' although "tragedia inidoneus."

C. 16. In preface, p. xxxvi. Mavтix is fubftituted for Mavixouand in Note, p. 142. this reading is again fupported: Cui let tioni fidem facit Horatius, ipfis verbis converfis, “Ingenium, cui fit, cui mens divinior." But from a paffage cited by Winftanley from Toup's Longinus, it appears that μavixa is the word familiar to Ariftotle. We think too, that the expreffion of de exsatixol Elσ in in the very next fentence after μaving, proves paving to be the right reading. The paria of the Poet is wonderfully described μανία by Shakespeare:

"The Poet's eye, in a fine phrenzy rolling,

Doth glance from heaven to earth, from earth to heaven:
And, as Imagination bodies forth,

The forms of things unknown, the Poet's pen

Turns them to fhapes, and gives to airy nothing

A local habitation, and a name."

C. 16. Τες τε λίγες τις πεποιημενες δεῖ καὶ αυτον ποιεντα εκτιθεσθαι καθολά. 6 Argumenta verò, quæ finxerit, Poitam oportebit ipfum, dum fingit, univerfim exponere.' This verfion is far preferable to that given by Winftanley after Goulfton, "Tum quibus antea fillis utitur, tum quæ denuo confingit ipfe." Batteux fays in general terms, Quel que foit le sujet qu'on traite, il faut commençer par la crayonner dans le général."

66

C. 16. Maxp is retained; but we think ung

See Winft. 293.

preferable.

C. 17. 'H de Hn. This is rightly interpreted morata," as in Horace," morataque re&è fabula," Art. Poet. 319. "a play in which the manners are well preferved." And Hin here fignifies a Play which confifts more of manners well kept, than of

action.

C. 17. Εν δε τοις δράμασι, πολυ παρα την υπόληψιν αποβαι vel; fed in dramatibus multum excedit id quod fpondet tragœdia.' We are much pleafed with this interpretation; and the fenfe in which Ariftotle ufes úroλabs in the fame chapter, confirms it: TOU χορον δε ἕνα δεῖ ὑπολαβειν τον ὑποκριτον, " the Chorus (i. e. the Coryphæus) ought to undertake the character of an actor."

66

C. 17. We think Mr. C. is miftaken in this explanation of Infusion de, &c. Poëtæ, qui totam actionem ficut Euripides finΣημειον δε, gunt, non partem ejus ficut Efchylus, aut carent fucceffu, aut nanws aywu Coutai, male rem gerunt.' Euripides did not comprise the ολον μύθον Μηδειάς, but κατα μερος ; he therefore is propofed as an example for imitation, no less than Efchylus. "L'un et Pautre de ces deux poëtes n'avoit prit qu'une partie de l'hiftoire de Niobe, et de celle de Medée; on les cite comme exemple de ce qui doit être fait." Batteux.

C. 17. Στοχάζονται ὧν βέλονται θαυμαςως.-Στοχάζονται Efchylus fcilicet, et Euripides.' We rather toink ПIλão, the word which precedes Audi, to be the nominative betore soxaζονται : and θαυμαςως fhould be rendered not by 4 admirandum

in modum; but according to Goulton, "per admirabile,”— 66 par une forte de merveilleux." Batteux.

6

C. 17. Τοις δε λοιποις τα διδομενα μαλλον το μυθε, η άλλης τραγωδίας εσι. Que vero cæteris chori perfonis dantur, non magis ad fabulam, quàm ad alteram tragoediam, spectant.' Note, P. 145.-But from the Critic's pointing out Sophocles for imitation, and from the known art of that Poet in accommodating the fongs of the chorus to the main fubject, and his care,

Ne quid medios intercinat actus,

Quod non propofito conducat, et hæreat aptè,

we are convinced that by Tois 2010s, the Critic must mean τοις λοιποις ποιηταις. "Dans les autres poëtes." Batteux.

C. 20. Ανευ προσβολης εχον φωνην ακοςην. — Προσβολη ef icus litteræ in litteram; non ittus palati per linguam, ficuti omnes perperam interpretantur.' This seems to be the right interpretation of porcon. Harris, in his edition of the Poetics 1760, renders the paffage, "fine ullâ adjun&tione fonum habet qui poteft audiri," which conveys Mr. Cooke's idea.

C. 22. Ανακεκραται πως τέτοις. • His quodammodo reclamatur.' Note, p. 157. But avanɛngαтαι cannot be derived from ανακράζω ανακράξω ανακεκραχα-ανακεκραγμαι - it must come from avaxegavvumi, and fignify " temperatur." Vid. c. 26. Πολλῳ κεκραμένον τῷ χρον

C. 23. Θάτερον μετα θατερο. Interpreters have followed one another in rendering this paffage, fit unum poft alterum. This conftruction must be erroneous, fince era, with a genitive, fignifies," in conjunction with." The paffage fhould be rendered thus: "For as both the fea fight at Salamis, and the engagement of the Carthaginians at Sicily happened, κατα τες αυτές Xoves, at the fame time, though not at all tending to the fame end ; το και εν τοις εφέξης χρόνοις, in after times alfo, ενιοτε γίνεται θατερον μετα θατερα, occationally one thing happens at the fame period with another;"-and therefore is it, that inexpert poets think they are treating of μια πράξις, if περι ένα ποιέσι και περι ένα χρονον. These words, confirm our confru&tion of μετα θατερα.

περι

ένα

Χρονον,

C. 24. Ενδέχεται εν τη εποποιϊα Αναλογον. • Minimè legendum eft anoyov, quod erit omnino abfurdum. Senfus enim loci eft planè hujufmodi. Admiratio magis propria eft Tragœdiæ, quippe ea brevior eft, et majoris vehementia ad fenfus hominum movendos capax. At epopeia, quo longior et prolixior, eò etiam temperantior, atque ad exemplar vitæ accommodatior.' Pertinent and juft.

C. 24. Περιττη γαρ ή διηγηματικη μιμησις των αλλων.—Περ FITTA yap.-Sublimior. Non id vult, ut præftet epopeia tragœdiæ. Note, p. 159. It is clear from the laft chapter of the Poetics, that Ariftotle preferred dramatic, or rather tragic, to epic poetry. HEPITT, therefore, is to be taken in a limited sense; and in