Φωνη κερκίδος. Owen xeρxidos. But neither of thefe interpretations fatisfies us. Ariftotle means to fay, That it is almoft as great a fault to bring about the avaylapios 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 aTeXvov, and for which Sophocles is cu pable in his Tereus, as Euripides is in his Iphigenia, for inventing a fpeech for Oreftes. So the connection is between olov Opens ev τη Ιφιγενεια - και εν τῷ Σοφοκλεας Τηρεί ή της κερκίδος 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 Αναγνώρισις εξ αυτών των πραγμάτων in the Oedipus Tyrannus and Iphigenia, as moft excellent, because avEU TWV TETTOINμEVWV σημείων; and then he fpecifies the Αναγνωρισις εκ Συλλογισμό 28 next beft. But by his filence with respect to that di is to be inferred his difapprobation: but fuch was the xspidos Cum, and therefore the Tereus was not to be commended. C. 15. Διόπερ εδεις ποιεῖ ὁμοιως, ει μη ολιγάκις. The editor renders oxigans Minoribus in locis: and remarks, Perολιγάκις feram vertitur "raro;" effet enim abfurdum, talem fabulæ confiitutisnem probari in paucis tragædiis, fed non in omnibus.' But Ariftotle thews his difapprobation of the γινώσκοντα μελλησαν xzi un mрzzi, 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 тo osрov xx A is a fufficient proof that it was vicious. Oxyxxis, therefore, may still be rendered raro in this paffage, as in c. 24. μιμώνται δε ολίγα και ολιγάκις.

σημείων,

-

TWV

C. 15. KpaTIS is rendered Quod maximè valet has the vogue' and it is remarked that Ariftotle is made to contradict himself, if xpzTisov be taken for "optimum;" for by the words ετι δε τρίτον prefixed to τον μέλλοντα ποιειν τι RITXESTOV, &c. the critic fhews his difapprobation of that practice. Though we do not think the words ETI de, &c. imply that cenfure, yet from the doctrine laid down in c. 14. which fays that the fable ought μεταβάλλειν εκ εις ευτυχίαν εκ έτυχίας, αλλά τεναντιον εξ ευτυχίας εις δυςυχίαν, it is clear Ariftotle could not give the preference to an example di. rectly 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 xparison by ❝ optimum;" but according to Mr. Cooke's' quod maximè valet,' although “ragœdiæ inidoneus."

C.16. In preface, p. xxxvi. Mavтix is fubftituted for Mavixouand in Note, p. 142. this reading is again fupported: Cui lectioni fidem facit Horatius, ipfis verbis converfis, "Ingenium, cui fit, cui mens divinier." But from a paffage cited by Winftanley from Toup's Longinus, it appears that paving is the word familiar to Ariftotle. We think too, that the expreffion of de exsatixoi est i ̧ in the very next fentence after μaving, proves μaving to be the right reading. The pavia of the Poet is wonderfully described 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 λόγες τις πεποιημενες δεῖ καὶ αυτον ποιεντα εκτι Θεσθαι καθολά. Argumenta verò, quæ finxerit, Poëtam oportebit ipfum, dum fingit, univerfim exponere.' This verfion is far preferable to that given by Winftanley after Goulfton, "Tum quibus antea filis utitur, tum quæ denuo confingit ipfe." Batteux fays in general terms, Quel que foit le fujet qu'on traite, il faut commençer par la crayonner dans le général."

66

C. 16. Maxp is retained; but we think ne preferable. See Winft. 293.

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

C. 17. Εν δε τοις δράμασι, πολύ παρά την υπόληψιν αποβαι VEL; fed in dramatibus multum excedit id quod fpondet tragœdia.' We are much pleased with this interpretation; and the fenfe in which Ariftotle ufes uroλabaw in the fame chapter, confirms it: Tou χορον δε ἕνα δεῖ ὑπολαβειν τον ὑποκριτον, 6 the Chorus (i. e. the Coryphæus) ought to undertake the character of an actor."

C. 17. We think Mr. C. is mistaken in this explanation of Infusion de, &c. Poëtæ, qui totam actionem ficut Euripides fingunt, non partem ejus ficut fchylus, aut carent fucceffu, aut xanws ayan Corral, malè rem gerunt.' Euripides did not comprise the ολον μύθον Μηδείας, but κατα μερος ; he therefore is propofed as an example for imitation, no lets than fchylus. "L'un et l'autre 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 éire fait." Batteux.

C. 17. Στοχάζονται ών βέλονται θαύμαςως. — Στοχάζονται Efchylus fcilicet, et Euripides.' We rather think Iλλ, the word which precedes Aveo, to be the nominative before soxaCortal: and Gaupasws thould be rendered not by admirandum

in modum;' but according to Goulton, " per admirabile,"par une forte de merveilleux.'

66

Batteux.

C. 17. Τρις δε λοιποις τα διδομενα μαλλον το μυθε, η αλλης τραγωδίας εςι. Quæ vero cæteris chori perfonis dantur, non magis ad fabulam, quàm ad alteram tragediam, 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 aclus,

Quod non propofito conducat, et hæreat aptè,

Προσβολη eft

we are convinced that by TOIS 201TOIS, the Critic muft mean τοις λοιποις ποιηταίς. "Dans les autres poëtes." Batteux. C. 20. Ανευ προσβολής έχον φωνην ακοςην. ilus litteræ in litteram; non ictus palati per linguam, ficuti omnes perperam interpretantur.' This feems to be the right interpretation of wearborn. Harris, in his edition of the Poetics 1760, renders the paffage, "fine ullâ adjunctione fonum habet qui poteft audiri," which conveys Mr. Cooke's idea.

C. 22. Ανακεκραται πως τέτοις. "His quodammodo reclamatur. Note, p. 157. But avaxexgaraι cannot be derived

from ανακράζω ανακράξω ανακεκραχα-ανακεκραγμαι must come from avangavvuus, and fignify" temperatur." Vid. c. 26. Πολλῳ κεκραμένον τῷ χρόνῳ

C. 23. OαTEROV METа JaтEY. Interpreters have followed one another in rendering this paffage, fit unum poft alterum. This conftruction must be erroneous, fince μera, 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; ίο και εν τοις εφέξης χρόνοις, in after times alfo, ενιοτε γίνεται θατερον μετα θατερ, occafionally 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. There words, περι ένα χρονον, confirm our confruation of μετα θατερο.

C. 24. Ενδέχεται εν τη εποποιΐα Αναλογων. • Minimè legendum eft ahoyos, 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 popoeia, quo longior et prolixior, eò etiam temperantior, atque ad exemplar vita accommodatior.' Pertinent and just.

C. 24. Περιττη γαρ ή διηγηματική μίμησις των αλλων.—ΠεPTTn 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. ПETTY, therefore, is to be taken in a limited fenfe; and un

B 4

σις

σις διηγηματικη is fo far only περιττη των άλλων, as it admits of greater ornaments in point of language and figurative ftvie. "La narration epique eft, de toutes les poëfies, la plus hardie dans fon flyle." Batteux.

C. 24. OlQUTαl yag avdgwaα-weоo Javal. We with Mr. Cooke had adopted the reading propofed by Mr. Winstanley. The paffage, as it ftands now, is unintelligible; but as in Mr. Winftanley's Note, p. 305. much more clear.

C. 24. Mr. Cooke remarks on supov, Victorius legit aqxVICE; parùm reclè. Nam Horatius ipfum verbum vertit,

Non fumum ex fulgore, fed ex fumo dare lucem

Cogitat

This paffage from Horace is not pertinently quoted, as the Roman and Greek Critic are treating of different fubjects: aupan however fhould be retained, and rendered by illuftrat,、 according to Mr. C.'s verfion, i. e. he fets off.

C. 25. Οἷον τον κεκραμένου πινοντων οίνον. It feems to have efcaped Mr. Cooke's obfervation, that this paffage was deranged. Mr. Winftanley has placed it in right order, p. 307. Note.

C. 25. To Winftanley we are indebted for the right understanding of this paflage τοικτες δ' είναι προς άφασι τ' αλογα. In Mr. Cooke's verfion, there is not his ufual perfpicacity. The meaning of the whole paffage is this: "That which appears impoffible, must be excufed by being referred, either, firft, to the nature of poetry; or, 2dly, to the purpofe of reprefenting every thing in the beft light; or, 3dly, to common opinion. We should refer it to the nature of poetry, that a thing probable, though impoffible, is a more eligible fubject, than a thing improbable, although poffible. But we would refer it to the purpofe of representing every thing in the beft light, that perfons are fuch as Zeuxis painted them; for an example ought to be excellent (fee c. 18.); but pos à quoi, to common report we fhould refer things that exceed reafon or probability."

· C. 25. Ορθή δε επιτιμησις, και αλογια, και μοχθηρία; και criminatio erit jufta, eritque abfurdum, et pravum. This verfion does not pleafe us fo well as Goulfton's, in which λcyia and μcy Inpix, are properly marked out as objects for reprehenfion : and the context proves, that Ariftotle meant to reprehend a needlefs introduction of improbability, or of improbity for no purpofe; for he condemns Euripides, because he admitted the To axoyo in bis geus; and the mangia in his Oreftes. It is true, indeed, this does not appear fo plain, according to Mr.C.'s reading ώσπερ Ευριπίδης τῳ Αιγείητε πονηριά, ώσπερ εν Ορεση τα Μενελας ; but we reject that reading, as being neither clear nor correfponding with what precedes, and prefer the emendation defended by Winftanley, p. 309. ωσπερ Ευριπίδης εν τω Αίγει" η την πονηρία ώσπερ εν Ορέση, δc. Batteux reads, ώσπερ Ευριπίδης εν τω Αιγεί, TH Tε wangia, &c, and remarks," Nous avons fuivis la correction

de

de Caftelvetro, ou le fens nous avoit conduit, avant que de l'avoir confulté."

C. 26. optin is rendered molefta;' by Cooke: "onerofa," by Goulton: "que artem adventitiam poftulat ;" by Harris: chargée," by Batteux. Of these interpretations, molefta' is the moft fuitable with the context, in which Ariftotle goes on to fhew the principal caufe which made dramatic imitation more "difgufting" to the ferious part of the fpectators, than epic would be. It was "difgufting," because the actors overdid their parts by injudicious and extravagant geiture. But this charge affects not dramatic poetry in its own nature; it reaches only the hiftrionic art, which by the unfkilful is improperly applied. And this brings us to the laft paffage which we fhall re6. Αν με αυτος mark in the work we have been examining: woon." Heinfius would read auro; Toup propofed to Winflanley av un avros porn; but our Editor very properly retains autos, and judicioufly explains it thus: nifi ipfe, quam imitantur, quafi fe coram atque in oculis fillat, per hiftrionum motus,' p. 167. With this Extract we finish our Critique on a work, which merits the approbation of the learned, and of which we fay in the language of Ariftotle, A KOOTELS.

To this Edition of Ariftotle's Poetics, a Greek Tranflation of Gray's Elegy is fubjoined. The dialect is Doric, and in general well preferved. To the fhortening of the laft fyllable in To before Euvos-of Su in suyuz-and of the last fyllable in rogi before Luxx-we can never affent.

Μητε τι Μήδειας, μητε ξανθας Περιμηδας.

Theocr. Id. 2. 16.

Ἱλαθι νυν, φιλ ̓ Αδωνι, και ες νεωτ' ευθύμησαις.

Id. 15. 143.

Αδυ τι το ψιθύρισμα και ο πιτυς, αιπολε, τηνα.

Id. I. I.

are all examples which prove fuch liberties to be inadmiffible. Here and there fome Anglicilms occur, as Javator xj padov Euge-and very wide from the original,

"And Melancholy mark'd him for her own"-is,

Μναμοσύνα τον δων, παις εμος εσσετ', εφα.

How can Mvaporuva be uted for "melancholy," and is lowy mafculine allowable in Doric dialect?

ART. II. Sketches of the Hiftory of the Auftrian Netherlands; with Remarks on the Conftitution, Commerce, Arts, and general State of thefe Provinces. By James Shaw. 8vo. 5s. Boards. Ro. bin fons. 1786.

T

rife

HE recent difpute between the Emperor and the States of Holland relative to Holland relative to the navigation of the Scheld gave to the prefent performance.

The