Still fomething remains to be wifhed. Numerous and able as the Commentators on this tract have been, they have not, perhaps, any of them, attended fufficiently to the fcientific ufe of fome words or phrafes by Ariftotle, as defined and exemplified in his other works, which here they have interpreted therefore in a loose and irregular way, instead of limiting them according to the conftant ufage of the Philofopher. Even the prefent admirable Editor cannot wholly be exempted from this objection. Several paffages he has, indeed, happily illustrated from other parts of Ariftotle's writings, but this exact limitation of particular scientific words he has not attempted. Yet no author, ancient or modern, has employed his fcientific expreffions with more precision and conftancy than Ariftotle. The fense thus fixed by this author is generally the primitive and most proper fenfe, in which the words can be used, in the Greek language. Very far, therefore, was the accufation of Le Clerc from being true, who says that" if there be any thing which can be faid to be evident, to thofe ever fo little acquainted with language, it is that Aristotle was as far from writing with ftrict propriety as any perfon whatsoever*." The reverfe of this is the truth; and the obfcurities of Ariftotle have arifen chiefly from his ftrict attention to fcientific propriety, and a consequent habit of extreme brevity. What he has once expreffed with precifion in a few scientific words, he thinks it unneceffary to explain by more diffuse or popular expreffions. We shall illuftrate this pofition by a few remarks on the words αυτά, δύναμις, καλα φυσιν, and το σύνολον as ufed by Ariftotle, not only in the opening of this treatise but in general. Ρ. 1. Περί Ποιητικης αυτής τε και των ειδων αυλης. Mr. T. renders this" De arte Poetica, et ipfa, et ejus fpecibus," which is faithful, but as obfcure as the original. The diftinction here, which ought to be explained, is marked in the other works of Ariftotle. aur, we there find, is a scientific term employed by that author to denote the fubftance of any thing, which makes it what it is; confifting of its effential properties, (ra naga) which form the genus: whereas the ra avμbe6nnola, or accidental and variable properties, diftinguish the in or fpeciest. According to this distinction Ariftotle promises to confider • Biblioth. Univerf, tom. 19. 7. + Εισι καθ' αυτα δε, όσα ὑπαρχει εν τῷ τι εστιν οἷον τριγώνω γράμμα, και γραμμή σιγμα ή γαρ ἔσια αυτών εκ τέτων επι-όσα δε μη ὑπάρχει, συμβ βεβηκοία, όσον το μεσικόν η λευκον τω ζωω. σε By καθ' αυτά, Ι mean whatever properties exist in any thing as being effential to make it what it, fider first in what the fubftance of the poetic art confifts, and afterwards what is the nature of the feveral fpecies: which cannot, perhaps, be clearly rendered intelligible in a tranflation, without paraphrafing the concife fcientific terms in the manner of Goulton. This fignification will be found to be uniformly employed here by Ariftotle, as in the conclufion of the Poetics, where he speaks of Tragedy and Epopeia και αυτων, και των ειδων, και των μέρων αυτών, as to their very ellence, as well as their fpecies and their parts. Dacier and others tranflate these passages by en general, which is by no means fufficient. · Ρ. 1. ἣν τινα δυναμιν έκαςον ἔχει. Now δύναμις, we conceive to be alfo a fcientific term, limited by the ufage of Ariftotle in his other works, to the fenfe of inherent power or faculty; and by no means properly expreffed by force or effects, as it has ufually been rendered, being prior both to the exertion of force and the production of effects. Ariftotle therefore means to fay, that he will enquire what kind of faculty or power each fpecies of Poetry poffeffes." He defines δυναμιs in his Metaphyfics, Δύναμις λεγεται ἡ αρχη κινησεως. Power is the first cause of motion. Ibid. αρξάμενοι καλα Φυσιν, πρώτον απο των πρώτων. Here the intention of Ariftotle is to say that he will treat first of the common fubftance of the Poetic arts, that being the first and principal part in the nature of each. He ufes exactly the fame phrafe in his Sophift. Elench. c. I. But in his Meta phyfics (iv. 11.) he minutely explains it, by fhowing in how many ways any thing may be called firft or laft, among which, the first xala que, according to nature, is particularly specified. Things may be firft or laft, he fays (xala ToTTov,) as to place, by being nearer or more diftant. With refpect to time (xalaxgovor; to motion (xala xa) as being nearer or more remote from the first moving principle; to power (xala duvan) the greatest power being efteemed the firft; to order (nala Ta) fome being prior and fome pofterior in arrangement. With regard to knowledge (xala yvwo) as in reasoning, the knowledge of univerfals is prior to their application to particu lar cafes, though, in the acquifition of knowledge by sensation, is, as for inftance, a line in a triangle, or a point in a line, for their fubftance confifts of thefe-Whatever properties do not exist after this manner are called cupCanada, as to an animal, its being mufical, or white." Analyt. pofter. i. 4.-Agreeably to this he fays in his PhyGcs Ει τις ἑκατέρων πειραια λέγειν της όρες, και αυτών, και των συμβέβηκε "If any one fhould attempt to give definitions of these things, both of their fubftances and alfo of their accidents." Phyf. ii. 2. Tay. the knowledge of particular objects is prior to the knowledge of univerfals. Laftly, according to nature, (xxlx for); thofe properties being called firft, in the internal nature of objects, which are able to fubfift by themselves, and those last which are not able fo to fubfift; thus the substance of any thing is prior, xala que, to its accidental properties *.Now this order Ariftotle actually obferves here, as he profeffes, for he tells us firft in what the common fubftance of all the poetic arts confift, namely, in their being all imitations. This, however, has perplexed all the commentators. Mr. Tyrwhitt's literal verfion "primum a primis" is in no refpect clearer than the Greek. Batteux makes Ariftotle fay he will begin "avec les principes" though what thofe principles are he does not explain. Dacier fays avec les premiers traits" which is still more vague and obfcure. Nor is it cleared by the notes, which talk of caufe and effect. Goulton fays, " initio fecundum rerum dicendarum naturam ducto" which is as remote as poffible from the truth, fpeaking of the order of compofition instead of that of nature. Ρ. 2. Πασαι τυγχάνεσιν ὅσαι μιμησεις το σύνολον. Here Mr. Tyrwhitt, with the other commentators, renders To avo in univerfum, thereby not diftinguishing it from ro xabóλov, or xados. Dacier has reftrained the fenfe ftill more by saying "ne font que des pures imitations, "which feems to exprefs that they are imitations only, and nothing more, an affertion that is not exactly true. The To xashov, in the language of Ariftotle, is a generic property, or that which fubfifts in every individual of a genus; the ro uvodov is the aggregate whole, or that which conftitutes both matter and form of a compound. He explains the difference himfelt, with great accuracy, in his other works. Λέγω δε καθόλις το πανί η μηδενί υπάρχει α "By zabodov I mean that a property fubfifts in all univerfally, or not in any one." Analyt. prior. I. 1. But of guvohos he fays, Εξ είδος και της ύλης ή συνολος λεγεται εσια- Out of the matter and form it is called an aggregate whole." Metaph. vii. 11. Again, speaking of the inftance of a ftatue, "By matter I mean the brafs, and by form the figure reprefented, and that which is produced out of these two, is the aggregate ftatue of a man t." ib. vii. 3. At other times, instead of guvohov, he expreffes himself by rox τέτων, το εξ αμφοιν, το συνθεῖον, το συνειλημμένον, συγκείμενον, ὅλον μεμιγ , which words, all denoting a collective whole, containing * So in his Analyris. Πρότερα λεγεται, και ύτερα ταδε όσα ενδεχεται είναι ανευ αλλων έκεινα δε ανευ εκείνων μη δι po. Analyt. pofter. i. z. * το δε εκ τότων τον ανδριανα, το συνολου. καλα Φυσιν, ή και προ all το σύνολον. all the parts and properties of an individual, form a very different fenfe from that of any fingle property belonging to a whole genus univerfally, xa'oxov. Budæus, and even the Lexicons of Conftantine and Scapula notice this difference between σύνολο and καθόλον. Neither is it merely an arbitrary diftinction imposed by Ariftotle; for the prepofitions ufed in thefe compounds lead to it naturally: and Ariftotle always formed his fcientific diftinctions on these natural grounds. The Philo fopher, therefore, means to fay of the poetic arts that they are imitations both in matter and form, that is in their collective or aggregate whole xala To avoλov. Now this interpretation obviates the cenfure brought against Ariftotle, as having given an imperfect account of the fubftance of the poetic arts. Thus Scaliger and Patritiot object that he does not diftinguish Poetry from Hiftory, the latter being also an imitation. But Ariftotle's phrafe to uvodov points out an effential difference. For Hiftory is an imitation only in form, its matter being a real series of actions, whereas an Epic or Drama tic Poem, for instance, have for their matter, only an imitation of fuch actions as might be real and therefore are imitative in matter as well as form; in their aggregate whole. That is, in every part, both of their matter and form ‡, they con tain fome degree of imitation. In this manner, we conceive, ought any work of Ariftotle to be illustrated: recollecting that where he introduces expreffions which he himself has defined fcientifically, they ought on the faith of that precifion, for which he was fo eminently remarkable, to be explained according to those definitions, and not in any vague and popular manner. Nor, whatever may be the critical acutenefs of those who undertake it, can we ever expect to fee the Poetics fully illuftrated except by a perfon completely verfed in the general fcientific language of the author. Mr. Tyrwhitt's edition is an honour to himself, and to the Univerfity which with fuch care has brought it forward. But a man of his modefty certainly did not expect to leave nothing to be done after him. Poetica, Epinomis c. 2. and Hittor. c. 1. + Della Poetica difputata. 1. 3. In a Drama the form of the imitation is effected by a combination of various articles: fuch as human agents, fpeaking their thoughts and intentions, and performing their actions with fuitable gftures and demeanour, with driffes and Jcenes correfponding to their fituation; accompanied alf, anciently, with mufic and dance, imitative or expreffive of their feveral paflions. The combination of thefe parts give to a Drama its outward form, whereas its fubftance or matter confift in an imitation of fuch tranfactions as do or probably may take plac among men. Thus is it an imitation both in matter and form, or Mala To σuvodov, according to Ariftotle. ART. ART. X. A charge delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of London, at the vifitation of that Diocefe in the year 1794. By Beilby, Lord Bishop of London. 8vo. 31. pp. 1s. Rivingtons, 1794. IN the inftitution of epifopacy, as in the other gradations that diftinguish and decorate fociety, regard was doubtless had to the ftrong propensity, fo evident in human nature, to be influenced by example. It is expedient for the fake of regulation and fuperintendance, as its name implies, that fuch an order should subfift; it is useful to excite an honeft emulation, and fupport the virtuous mind with honourable hope. But in no fhape does it poffefs more clear advantages than in the effect which piety and abilities, fo fituated, are able to produce. They who talk of allowing no pre-eminence but virtue, may have due refpect to the abftract fitness of things, but they have quite forgotten the nature of man. Virtue and piety are little calculated to thine without external aid; their walks are humble, their demeanour modeft, and their occupations fuch as make no noife. They rather feek concealment than diftinction and often pafs through life unknown, except to him. who is omnifcient, and, too frequently, oppreffed with obloquy and undeferved reproach. In an equal, few have virtue to confefs fuperior merit; and if there be no other claim to preeminence, malignity will feldom fail to make that level by detraction; but render it confpicuous by fituation, and it then can act with advantage. Malignity may ftill affail it, but its efforts will be ineffectual. Integrity in public conduct is fup ported by innumerable witneffes; and in thofe multitudes it may be hoped that many will be imitators. It will itself be improved. High duties, and a refponfible fituation call for efforts that will not be made in private life; and the value of a good man in high rank is actually, as well as relatively, increafed. As his duties are more numerous and more impor tant than before his elevation, fo is his merit greater in fulfilling them. To fociety his worth is beyond eftimation. That a bad man fo circumstanced is also pernicious, cannot be denied, but they who argue from the abufe of any thing againft its ufe, have feldom been commended for their skill in reafoning. Could any method be devifed by which good men only fhould be elevated, it would deferve univerfal reception, but fome of the most promifing contrivances in theory, have certainly but little to fupport them in practice; and happily there never yet has been a time when the Epifcopal bench of Eng land |