§24.1ἔτι δὲ τὰ εἴδη ταὐτὰ δεῖ ἔχειν τὴν ἐποποιίαν τῇ τραγῳδίᾳ, ἢ γὰρ ἁπλῆν ἢ πεπλεγμένην ἢ ἠθικὴν ἢ παθητικήν·
Furthermore, epic poetry must have the same kinds as tragedy: for it must be either simple, or complex, or ethical, or pathetic.
§24.2καὶ τὰ μέρη ἔξω μελοποιίας καὶ ὄψεως ταὐτά· καὶ γὰρ περιπετειῶν δεῖ καὶ ἀναγνωρίσεων καὶ παθημάτων·
Its parts are also the same, except for song-making and spectacle; for it requires reversals, recognitions, and sufferings.
§24.3ἔτι τὰς διανοίας καὶ τὴν λέξιν ἔχειν καλῶς.
Furthermore, the thought and the diction must be excellent.
οἷς ἅπασιν Ὅμηρος κέχρηται καὶ πρῶτος καὶ ἱκανῶς.
All of these Homer was the first to use, and in a sufficient manner.
καὶ γὰρ τῶν ποιημάτων ἑκάτερον συνέστηκεν ἡ μὲν Ἰλιὰς ἁπλοῦν καὶ παθητικόν, ἡ δὲ Ὀδύσσεια πεπλεγμένον (ἀναγνώρισις γὰρ διόλου) καὶ ἠθική· πρὸς δὲ τούτοις λέξει καὶ διανοίᾳ πάντα ὑπερβέβληκεν.
For each of his two poems is so constructed: the Iliad is simple and pathetic, and the Odyssey is complex (for recognition is used throughout) and ethical; and besides these, in diction and thought he has surpassed all others.
§24.4διαφέρει δὲ κατά τε τῆς συστάσεως τὸ μῆκος ἡ ἐποποιία καὶ τὸ μέτρον.
But epic poetry differs both in the length of its composition and in its metre.
§24.5τοῦ μὲν οὖν μήκους ὅρος ἱκανὸς ὁ εἰρημένος· δύνασθαι γὰρ δεῖ συνορᾶσθαι τὴν ἀρχὴν καὶ τὸ τέλος.
Now, as for its length, the limit already mentioned is sufficient: for it must be possible to take in the beginning and the end at one glance.
εἴη δ’ ἂν τοῦτο, εἰ τῶν μὲν ἀρχαίων ἐλάττους αἱ συστάσεις εἶεν, πρὸς δὲ τὸ πλῆθος τραγῳδιῶν τῶν εἰς μίαν ἀκρόασιν τιθεμένων παρήκοιεν.
And this would be the case if the compositions were shorter than those of the ancients, and were equal in length to the quantity of tragedies presented for a single hearing.
§24.6ἔχει δὲ πρὸς τὸ ἐπεκτείνεσθαι τὸ μέγεθος πολύ τι ἡ ἐποποιία ἴδιον διὰ τὸ ἐν μὲν τῇ τραγῳδίᾳ μὴ ἐνδέχεσθαι ἅμα πραττόμενα πολλὰ μέρη μιμεῖσθαι ἀλλὰ τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς καὶ τῶν ὑποκριτῶν μέρος μόνον· ἐν δὲ τῇ ἐποποιίᾳ διὰ τὸ διήγησιν εἶναι ἔστι πολλὰ μέρη ἅμα ποιεῖν περαινόμενα, ὑφ’ ὧν οἰκείων ὄντων αὔξεται ὁ τοῦ ποιήματος ὄγκος.
But epic poetry has a very special property for extending its magnitude, because while in tragedy it is not possible to imitate many parts being performed at the same time, but only that part which is on the stage and performed by the actors; yet in epic poetry, because it is a narrative, it is possible to present many parts being completed at the same time, by which, if they are appropriate, the bulk of the poem is increased.
§24.7ὥστε τοῦτ’ ἔχει τὸ ἀγαθὸν εἰς μεγαλοπρέπειαν καὶ τὸ μεταβάλλειν τὸν ἀκούοντα καὶ ἐπεισοδιοῦν ἀνομοίοις ἐπεισοδίοις· τὸ γὰρ ὅμοιον ταχὺ πληροῦν ἐκπίπτειν ποιεῖ τὰς τραγῳδίας.
Consequently, this has the advantage of contributing to grandeur, and of varying the listener, and of introducing dissimilar episodes; for monotony, quickly satisfying, causes tragedies to fail.
§24.8τὸ δὲ μέτρον τὸ ἡρωικὸν ἀπὸ τῆς πείρας ἥρμοκεν.
And as for the metre, the heroic has proved appropriate from experience.
εἰ γάρ τις ἐν ἄλλῳ τινὶ μέτρῳ διηγηματικὴν μίμησιν ποιοῖτο ἢ ἐν πολλοῖς, ἀπρεπὲς ἂν φαίνοιτο·
For if anyone should make a narrative imitation in any other metre or in many, it would appear inappropriate.
§24.9τὸ γὰρ ἡρωικὸν στασιμώτατον καὶ ὀγκωδέστατον τῶν μέτρων ἐστίν (διὸ καὶ γλώττας καὶ μεταφορὰς δέχεται μάλιστα· περιττὴ γὰρ καὶ ἡ διηγηματικὴ μίμησις τῶν ἄλλων), §24.10τὸ δὲ ἰαμβεῖον καὶ τετράμετρον κινητικὰ καὶ τὸ μὲν ὀρχηστικὸν τὸ δὲ πρακτικόν.
For the heroic is the most stable and most weighty of the metres (wherefore it especially admits rare words and metaphors; for narrative imitation is superfluous compared to the others), whereas the iambic and the tetrameter are active metres, the latter being suited to dancing and the former to action.
§24.11ἔτι δὲ ἀτοπώτερον εἰ μιγνύοι τις αὐτά, ὥσπερ Χαιρήμων.
And it is still more absurd if one should mix them, like Chaeremon.
§24.12διὸ οὐδεὶς μακρὰν σύστασιν ἐν ἄλλῳ πεποίηκεν ἢ τῷ ἡρῴῳ, ἀλλ’ ὥσπερ εἴπομεν αὐτὴ ἡ φύσις διδάσκει τὸ ἁρμόττον αὐτῇ αἱρεῖσθαι.
Therefore no one has composed a long structure in any other metre than the heroic; but, as we said, nature itself teaches us to choose what is appropriate to it.
§24.13Ὅμηρος δὲ ἄλλα τε πολλὰ ἄξιος ἐπαινεῖσθαι καὶ δὴ καὶ ὅτι μόνος τῶν ποιητῶν οὐκ ἀγνοεῖ ὃ δεῖ ποιεῖν αὐτόν.
Homer, besides being worthy of praise in many other respects, is especially so because he alone of the poets is not ignorant of what he ought to do.
§24.14αὐτὸν γὰρ δεῖ τὸν ποιητὴν ἐλάχιστα λέγειν· οὐ γάρ ἐστι κατὰ ταῦτα μιμητής.
For the poet himself ought to speak as little as possible; for in this respect he is not an imitator.
οἱ μὲν οὖν ἄλλοι αὐτοὶ μὲν δι’ ὅλου ἀγωνίζονται, μιμοῦνται δὲ ὀλίγα καὶ ὀλιγάκις· ὁ δὲ ὀλίγα φροιμιασάμενος εὐθὺς εἰσάγει ἄνδρα ἢ γυναῖκα ἢ ἄλλο τι ἦθος, καὶ οὐδέν’ ἀήθη ἀλλ’ ἔχοντα ἦθος.
The others, then, play a part themselves throughout, and imitate only a few things and rarely; but he, after a brief prelude, immediately introduces a man or a woman or some other character, and none of them characterless, but each having a character of their own.
§24.15δεῖ μὲν οὖν ἐν ταῖς τραγῳδίαις ποιεῖν τὸ θαυμαστόν, μᾶλλον δ’ ἐνδέχεται ἐν τῇ ἐποποιίᾳ τὸ ἄλογον, δι’ ὃ συμβαίνει μάλιστα τὸ θαυμαστόν, διὰ τὸ μὴ ὁρᾶν εἰς τὸν πράττοντα·
Now, while one must produce the wonderful in tragedies, the irrational—by which the wonderful is especially produced—is more admissible in epic poetry, because one does not see the agent.
§24.16ἐπεὶ τὰ περὶ τὴν Ἕκτορος δίωξιν ἐπὶ σκηνῆς ὄντα γελοῖα ἂν φανείη, οἱ μὲν ἑστῶτες καὶ οὐ διώκοντες, ὁ δὲ ἀνανεύων, ἐν δὲ τοῖς ἔπεσιν λανθάνει.
For the circumstances of the pursuit of Hector, if they were on the stage, would appear ridiculous—the men standing still and not pursuing, and Achilles shaking his head to restrain them; but in the epic verses this escapes notice.
§24.17τὸ δὲ θαυμαστὸν ἡδύ· σημεῖον δέ, πάντες γὰρ προστιθέντες ἀπαγγέλλουσιν ὡς χαριζόμενοι.
And the wonderful is pleasant; of which there is a sign, for everyone tells stories with additions, as if to please.
§24.18δεδίδαχεν δὲ μάλιστα Ὅμηρος καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους ψευδῆ λέγειν ὡς δεῖ.
Homer has also taught the others, most of all, how one ought to tell falsehoods.
ἔστι δὲ τοῦτο παραλογισμός.
This is a paralogism.
οἴονται γὰρ οἱ ἄνθρωποι, ὅταν τουδὶ ὄντος τοδὶ ᾖ ἢ γινομένου γίνηται, εἰ τὸ ὕστερον ἔστιν, καὶ τὸ πρότερον εἶναι ἢ γίνεσθαι· τοῦτο δέ ἐστι ψεῦδος.
For people think that when, if this exists, that exists, or if this happens, that happens, if the latter is the case, the former also must exist or happen; but this is false.
διὸ δεῖ, ἂν τὸ πρῶτον ψεῦδος, ἄλλο δὲ τούτου ὄντος ἀνάγκη εἶναι ἢ γενέσθαι ᾖ, προσθεῖναι· διὰ γὰρ τὸ τοῦτο εἰδέναι ἀληθὲς ὂν παραλογίζεται ἡμῶν ἡ ψυχὴ καὶ τὸ πρῶτον ὡς ὄν.
Therefore, if the first is false, but if it were true, another thing would necessarily exist or happen, one must add the latter; for because our soul knows this latter to be true, it paralogizes that the first also exists.
παράδειγμα δὲ τούτου τὸ ἐκ τῶν Νίπτρων.
An example of this is the scene from the Bathing.
§24.19προαιρεῖσθαί τε δεῖ ἀδύνατα εἰκότα μᾶλλον ἢ δυνατὰ ἀπίθανα·
And one should prefer plausible impossibilities rather than implausible possibilities.
§24.20τούς τε λόγους μὴ συνίστασθαι ἐκ μερῶν ἀλόγων, ἀλλὰ μάλιστα μὲν μηδὲν ἔχειν ἄλογον, εἰ δὲ μή, ἔξω τοῦ μυθεύματος, ὥσπερ Οἰδίπους τὸ μὴ εἰδέναι πῶς ὁ Λάιος ἀπέθανεν, ἀλλὰ μὴ ἐν τῷ δράματι, ὥσπερ ἐν Ἠλέκτρᾳ οἱ τὰ Πύθια ἀπαγγέλλοντες ἢ ἐν Μυσοῖς ὁ ἄφωνος ἐκ Τεγέας εἰς τὴν Μυσίαν ἥκων.
And the plots should not be constructed of irrational parts, but especially should contain nothing irrational; or if they do, it should be outside the story (as Oedipus not knowing how Laius died), but not in the drama (as the messengers reporting the Pythian games in Electra, or the speechless man coming from Tegea to Mysia in the Mysians).
§24.21ὥστε τὸ λέγειν ὅτι ἀνῄρητο ἂν ὁ μῦθος γελοῖον· ἐξ ἀρχῆς γὰρ οὐ δεῖ συνίστασθαι τοιούτους.
So to say that the plot would have been ruined is ridiculous; for from the beginning one should not construct such plots.
† ἂν δὲ θῇ καὶ φαίνηται εὐλογωτέρως ἐνδέχεσθαι καὶ ἄτοπον †
But if one does introduce it, and it appears to admit of a more reasonable interpretation, even the absurd is acceptable.
§24.22ἐπεὶ καὶ τὰ ἐν Ὀδυσσείᾳ ἄλογα τὰ περὶ τὴν ἔκθεσιν ὡς οὐκ ἂν ἦν ἀνεκτὰ δῆλον ἂν γένοιτο, εἰ αὐτὰ φαῦλος ποιητὴς ποιήσειε· νῦν δὲ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἀγαθοῖς ὁ ποιητὴς ἀφανίζει ἡδύνων τὸ ἄτοπον.
Since even the irrational points in the Odyssey concerning the putting ashore, as they would not have been tolerable, is clear if a bad poet had made them; but as it is, the poet, sweetening it with his other beauties, makes the absurdity disappear.
§24.23τῇ δὲ λέξει δεῖ διαπονεῖν ἐν τοῖς ἀργοῖς μέρεσιν καὶ μήτε ἠθικοῖς μήτε διανοητικοῖς· ἀποκρύπτει γὰρ πάλιν ἡ λίαν λαμπρὰ λέξις τά τε ἤθη καὶ τὰς διανοίας.
And one should elaborate the diction in the idle parts, which are neither ethical nor intellectual; for too brilliant a diction, on the contrary, obscures both character and thought.