Aristotle, whose Discourse on Poetry is employ'd chiefly on this Subject, defines Tragedy in this Manner,[424]
Εστιν ουν τραγωδια μιμησιϛ πραξεωϛ σπουδαιαϛ, και τελειαϛ, μεγεθοϛ εχουσηϛ, ἡδυσμενω λογω, χωριϛ εκαστου των ειδων εν τοιϛ μορ ιοιϛ δρωντων, κα ου δι' επαγγελιαϛ, αλλα δι' ελεουϛ, και φοβου, περαινουσα την των τοιουτων παθηματων καθαρσιν.
Tragedy is the Imitation of a serious, entire, and important Action, in an agreeable Style, the different Sorts of which Style must be regularly varied in the several Parts; and not by Narration, but by the Means of Terror and Pity purging the like Passions in us.
All I would observe of this Definition, at present, is, that there are two Parts of it which want some Explication. The first is, χωριϛ εκαστου των ειδων εν τοιϛ μοριοιϛ δρωντων; that is, says[425]Vossius, "That the several Sorts of Style should not be mix'd together, but brought in separately in their several Parts. For Aristotle adds, immediately after, Some Parts are perform'd in Metre only, some with Music[426]. "This Clause, therefore, of the Definition, can belong only to the ancient Tragedy, and not to our modern, which is entirely without a Chorus. The other Difficulty is, in ου δι επαγγλελιαϛ. Vossius and Dacier are both of Opinion, that this Part of the Definition was added for no other Reason, but to distinguish Tragedy from Epic Poetry, which is form'd, not upon Action, but Narration. But still there is a Doubt left, which neither of them attempt to clear up: Must we, therefore, exclude all Sort of Narration from Tragedy? Has not Horace, and all the Poets and Critics after him, made a proper Distinction between Things represented and related in the Drama?
[427] Aut agitur res in scenis, aut acta refertur.
Some Things are acted, others only told. Roscom.
The Answer to which Question, I think, is this; That there is undoubtedly a Dramatic Narration, but always related by some Persons in the Play, not by the Poet himself, as in Epic Poetry; and this latter Sort of Narration is what Aristotle meant in the Definition before us. There is no Occasion to explain the several Parts of it any further, since Vossius has express'd the Substance more clearly, and fully, in the following Definition.[428] Tragedy is a Dramatic Poem, imitating some great, but unfortunate Event, in a grave and majestic Style: To which, says he, if you please, you may add, to raise the Passions, and purge the Mind from them. All this is intelligible, and to the Point: But I wonder this learned Writer should think the last Clause rather not impertinent, than essential, by that negligent Introduction, that you may add it if you please; which, as Dacier observes with great Judgment, is much the best Part of Aristotle's Definition, and deserves, of all others, to be most accurately explain'd. He should also (as Aristotle has done) have particularly mention'd the two prevailing Passions of Pity and Terror, which are the proper Objects of Tragedy, and chiefly affected by it: And further, in Imitation of the same great Author, the Beauties of the Style should not have been intirely forgot. I shall therefore, from these two Definitions, endeavour to form a third, much clearer than Aristotle's, and more compleat than Vossius's. Tragedy is a Dramatic Poem, imitating some great, but unfortunate Event, in a grave, majestic, and entertaining Style, to raise the Passions, especially those of Pity and Terror, and to purge the Mind of them.
This Definition, expresly, or by Implication, contains these several Parts; the Argument, or the Subject Matter, the Sentiments, the Language and Versification, the Characters and Manners, and, lastly, the Moral, or the propos'd Effect. All which agree in this, that they ought to be great and sublime; for with Regard to all these, Tragedy is the noblest Kind of Poetry, except one.
The Subject is always some serious and important Event, as the Expulsion of a Tyrant, the Death of a Hero, and the like; which Event turns, and depends intirely upon some violent Passion, either good or bad; as Ambition, Revenge, Friendship, and especially Love, (for Love, as I have before observ'd, is the chief Subject of the modern Drama, whether Tragedy, or Comedy;) or else upon the divine Justice, which gives either to Virtue, or Vice, or to both at once, their proper Retributions. It is likewise necessary, that the Manners, the Thoughts, the Language, (for these are so nearly allied, that they are much better consider'd jointly, than separately) should be grave, sublime, and magnificent. Hence Horace, in his Art of Poetry, after laying down Rules for the Style of Comedy,
[429] Versibus exponi tragicis res comica non vult,