LESSING'S INTERPRETATION OF ARISTOTLE.

I.

Lessing's
So much has been already written on the subject of
to it,
attitude to Aristotle, that it may.seem supererogatory to add
labours of others. I do
even by way of summarising and criticising the
in the present
not, however, propose merely to offer a critical summary
aspect of the subject which has not yet
study, but also to deal with an
received adequate attention, namely, the actual sources of Lessing's know
ledge. Commentators on the Hamburgische Dramaturgie have hitherto
been so zealously engaged in explaining and discussing Lessing's
criticisnm of the Aristotelian theory that they have overlooked, or given
but scant attention to, his relation to the other interpretations of his
time; and where they have broached the question of sources, they have
often been inclined to discover these in quarters unnecessarily remote.
It is obviously, however, of the first importance to know exactly what
in Lessing's criticism is his own, what he has taken over from his pre
decessors. This is the first step.
It would be difficult to say exactly when Lessing began to study the
theoretical side of the drama; he says in the Preface to his Leben
des Sophocles that he had interested himself in the Poetics of Aristotle
before he had studied die Muster, aus welchen er sie abstrahierte'
As far, however, as his works are concerned, the Beyträge zur Historie
und Aufnuhme des Theaters (1750), in which he published a translation
-possibly by himself-of the Trois Discours of Corneille and discussed
from a theoretical standpoint the Captivi of Plautus, affords a starting
point. At this stage of his development Lessing stood completely
under the domination of the French classic canon, and had nothing to
1 See espeoially Enil Gotschlich, Lessings Aristotelische Studien und der Einfuss
derselben auf seine Werke, Berlin, 1876. Other literature will be referred to in the course
of the following pages.
3 Schrifien, ed. Muncker, vIII, p. 294.
3 See Modern Lunguage Review, Ix (1914), pp. 214 f.

This contcnt downloaded from

3.6.221.174 on Wed, 03 May 2023 (04:19:15+00:00
All use subjcet to https:about jstor.org/tens
158 Lessing's Interpretation of Aristotle
not be far wrong in dating
say of Aristotle'. We shall probably
the Greek Poetics from the appear
Lessing's actual acquaintance withtranslation, which he reviewed in the
ance in 1753of Curtius's German year?. Here, at
Berlinische privilegirte Zeitung of August 23 of that :
Aristotle
least, Lessing first recognises the importance of
Geschmacks unter den Dichtern und Rednern
Er herrscht in dem Reiche des Dichtkunst,
seinen Peripatetikern. Seine Horaze, alle
ehedem unter
eben so unumschränkt, als aus welchem ulle
ist der Quell,
oder vielmehr das Fragment derselben, so gar die Gottschede, ihre Fluren
Boileaus, alle Hedelins, alle Bodmers, bis
bewässert haben.
(1754-58) marks no advance of
The Theatralische Bibliothelk
again conspicuously
Lessing's interest in Aristotle, the name being
translations of Gellert's
absent from that periodical, except in the
Essay of Dramatic
Abhandlung fiür das rührende Lustspiel and Dryden's
as they were, inclined
Poesy'. Lessing's theoretical interests, such or of theatrical
Saint-Albine),
rather to the art of acting (Rémond de composition; and even
representation (Dubos), than to that of dramatic
a type of tragedy,
his serious interest in the bürgerliche Trauerspiel,' as
Miss Sara Sampson; it
appears to have set in subsequent to his own plays and treatises of
dates, in fact, from his acquain tance with the Hermilly's
Diderot. It is significant that he preferred to translate
rather than the first,
second volume, containing Montiano's Virginia,
containing the Spanish writer's Discorso sobre las Tragedias espatolas.
The beginnings of a theoretical interest in literature are to be sought,
scattered reviews, such as
not in the Theatralische Bibliothek, but in Witzes, of Le Bossu,
that of Batteux in the Neueste aus dem Reiche des
referred to, and, in a more
and of Curtius's translation of Aristotle just Mendelssohn,
collaboration with
remote degree, of the essay written in
on Pope ein Metaphysilker 14
Lessing had busied
Thus we may say that down to the year 1756 year his friend
himself but little with the theory of the drama. In that
Wissen.
Nicolai wrote for the first number of the Bibliothelc der schönen
154) and both times in the Critik
1The name occurs only twice (Schriften, Iv, pp. 136, by LeBsing him_elf.
lber die Gefangnen des Plautus, which, I am convinced, was not written
Cp. Modern Lunguage Review, vIII, pp. 525 ff. brother Karl (K, G.
2 Schriften, v, pp. 194 f. G. G. Fülleborn reported to Lessing's
Lessing, ß. E. Lessings Leben, Berlin, 1795, II, p. vi) that among papers sus Lessings
Jugendzeit' he found hin und wieder auf einzelnen Blättern Perioden aus Aristoteles
richtiger und deutscher
Poetik übersetzt, die Le8sing später in der Dramaturgie weitimpossible
wiedergegeben hat.' But as these papers have disappeared, it is to say whether,
belonged to a period before the
as Muncker suggests (Lessings Schriften, xiv, p. 164), theythat
appearance of Cortius's book, or subsequent to it, or, for part, whether they were not
merely excerpts from tlhe German translation.
8Schrift en, vI, pp. 32, 252 ff.
4 Ibid., IY, pp. 413 f., v, pp. 193 f., 194 f., VI, pp. 411 f,

This content downloaded fronn

36.221.I74 on Wed, 03 May 2023 04:19:15 +00:00
Aluse subjcct to hltps:/about.jstor.org/lerms
 J. G. ROBERTSON 159

schaften und der freyen Kunste, an Abhandlung vom Trauerspiele, which

was to serve as a guide for the authors who might take part in the compe
tition for the best German tragedy!; and on August 31-the first number
of the Bibliothel did not appear until the following year-Nicolai wrote
to Lessing, who had set out on his European tour with Winkler, giving
him a brief account of the subject of his essay The letter had, however,
he replied to it in
to follow Lessing back to Leipzig, from which place between
November. There now ensued a correspondence the three
friends, Lessing, Nicolai and Mendelssohn, which continued until
the
which are
spring of the following year. The letters of Lessing's Nicolai,
concerned in this controversy are eight in number, namely: to
November 13, 1756: to Mendelssohn, November 13 and 28: to Nicolai,
November 29: to Mendelssohn, December 18 and February 2, 1757: to
Nicolai, March 29 and April 2*.
With this correspondence Lessing's real interest in questions of
dramatic theory begins. He seems, however, to have turned by pre
ference to the analysis of the emotions that lie beneath dramatic effects,
while the discussion of the technique and theory of tragedy in the
stricter sense occupies a subordinate place. He is more particularly
concerned with the definition of Schrecken,' of Mitleiden,' of
Bewunderung with the difference between Bewunderung ' and
Verwunderung.' This metaphysical trend of his thought was no doubt
due in the first instance to the influence of his friend Mendelssohn;
like
it was further strengthened by his study of English moralists
Hutcheson, a translation of whose Elements of Moral Philosophy he
published in l756, and by Baumgarten,or rather Baumgarten's vulgari
sateur, CG. F. Meier. Lessing followed Meier's work closely; the well
reasoned attack on Gottsched which Meier published in 1747 and l748
helped Lessing to emancipate himself from the Leipzig dictator; and
there is a distinct echo of the Anfangsgründe aller schönen Wissenschaften
in the correspondence with Nicolai and Mendelssohn. Possibly, too,
that theory of laughter, on which, according to Mendelssohn, Lessing
was engaged in 1755, owed something to Meier's Gedanken von Scherzen,
as well as to Hutcheson. But these are matters that lie outside the
scope of the present investigation. Suffice it to say, that Lessing's own
Minor's Lessings
I The Abhandlung is reprinted in (Kürschner's Deutsche
ugerith
Nationallitera tur, LXXII, 1883) ; a convenient edition of it, tthe
correspondence,
bas recently been published by R. Petsch, Lessings Briefwechsel mit Mendelssohn und
Nicolui ber das Trauerspiel (Dürr's Plilosophische Bibliothek, cxx1), Leipzig, 1910.
2 Schrften, xIx, pp. 40 ff. (Petsch, pp. 46 f. ).
3Ibid., xvn, pp. 63 ff.
4See ILessing's Schriften, xIx, p. 20.

This contcnt downloaded from

3.6.221. I74 on Wed, 03 May 2023 04:19:15+00:00
Alluse subjcct to https:/about.jstor.org/terms
160 Lessing's Interpretation of Aristotle
on that which he
theory of tragedy at this time was based, in the main, at least, it drew
found in Batteux's Principes de la Littérature; or,
Batteux con
more from Batteux than from any other theorist. And
tinued, as will be secn in the course of the following investigation, a
drama'.
factor in all Lessing's later speculation on the theory of the with
Gottschlich infers that, in the course of his correspondence
Greek
Mendelssohn and Nicolui, Lessing turned from Curtius to the
solely on the
text of Aristotle; but this contention, which is basedconvincing. I
from
note on oßos in the letter of April 2, 1757, is far
undertook any serious study of Aristotle at
am very doubtful if Lessing matter
this time. He had, however, the intention of pursuing the
return his letters to him that he
further, for he begged his friends to
lengthy letter-an ordentliches
might gather his ideas together in one
Buch'to Mendelssohn: but nothing came of the plan, and the
until ten
materials were put aside, possibly not to be looked at again
years later. In l759 Lessing published his Fabeln, accompanied by
dramas
theoretical treatises, and in 1760 his translation of Diderot's
opened
and dramaturgicwritings. Then, however, a new and varied life
up for him in Breslau, and his study of the theory of the drana gave
Laocoon.
way to a new interest in the aesthetic problems of the
Thus, when Lessing found himself suddenly called upon to act as
mentor and critic to the Hamburg Enterprise' in 1767, he had to
resume a line of thought that had been virtually broken since 1758, or,
had died
at least, 1760: he himself confessed that his love for the theatre
down'. The years of Lessing's life when he was most vitally interested
in the theory of the drama were thus, I am inclined to think, 1756-58,
rather than 1767-68: and there is no reason to infer that he approached
1It is hardly necessary to adduce evidence of Lessing's familiarity with Batteux,
whose original work (Les Beauz-arts réduites àun ménne Principe,¢dolfParis, 1746) had been
frat translated by P. E. B[ertram], Gotha, 1751; then by J. Sehlegel (1752, or
rather 1751; 3rd ed., 1769; op. H. Bieber, J. A. Schlegels poetische Theorien, in ihren
historischen Zusammenhange untersucht, Berlin, 1912); while the complete Cours de
Belles-letires ou Principes de la Litlérature (Paris, 1747-50) was translated by Lessing's
friend K. W. Ramler (1756-58; 2nd ed., 1762-63 ; &sixth and'last ed. appeared in 1802).
In 1751 Lessing noticed the two earliest translations of the Einschränkung der schönen
Klnste auf einem eintzigen Grundsatz, dieser glücklichen Arbeit des Hrn. Batteux,' in the
Neueste aus dem Reichees Witzes (Schriften, IV, pp. 413 f.), wherebe clearlyplaces himself
on theside of the French eritic, against whom Schlegel bad asserted acertain independence;
and in 1758 Lessing defended bim again in a review (Schriften, V, pp. 151 f.). In his
Abhandlung von dem Wesen der Fabel (1759; Schriften, vii, Pp. 4433 f.) he refers to Batteux
with allrespect, although maintaining his own theory of the fable against him (op.
M, Schenker, Ch. Batteux und seine Nachahmungstheorie in Deutschland, Lipzig, 1909,
Pp. 137f,),
2 Op. cit., pp. 2 f., 26 f., 31.
3 Letters of February 19 and March 29, 1757 (Schriften, xviI, pp. 94, 96; op. 101 f.).
4 Op. his letter to leim (February 1, 1767) going to Hamburg, in which he
Speake of his orlosohene Liebe zum Theater' (Schriften, xv1L, p. 228).

This content downloaded tron

3.6.221.174 on Wed, 03 May 2023 04:19:15 +00:00
Alluse subjcet to htlps://about.jstor.org/terns
 J, G. ROBERTSON 161

which
his work in Hamburg from amore ad vanced standpoint than thatout for
When he get
he had maintained in his Leipzig letters. his
Hamburg to take over his new duties, he no doubt took with him
studied in
old notes, he selected from his library the text-books he had
earlier days, procured one or two new ones-not many; for it is sur
prising how small the library was which he had at his disposal in writing
the Dramaturgie-and left the rest of his library to be sold in his
absence. As a critic he had gained in insight and power of expression ;
but the ideas to which he gave such trenchant shape in the Dramaturgie,
show, when carefully serutinised, but little advance on those which he
had held ten years before.
The most cursory reader of the Hamburgische Dramaturgie is forced
to admit that there are very varying degrees of Lessing's interest in
Aristotle in that work. Throughout the first thirty-six sections he was
The
clearly no nearer to Aristotle than he had been ten years before.
philosopher's name is only mentioned once by him in these sections, and
that in a passage where no reference to the Aristotelian text is implied';
and such statements concerning the nature and function of the drama as
appear sporadically, make the irresistible impression of having come
In Stück
down from an early stage of Lessing's dramaturgic studies:.
XXxvii, however, he plunges unexpectedly into a problem of Aristotelian
exegesis, suggested by a remark of Tournemine's on Voltaire's Mérope,
with regard to the best forn of tragie plot: and he follows this up in
Stück xxx viii with a discussion of the meaning of certain technical
1St. xix (p, 261: my references &re to Muncker's ediion OX e C , IX andx):
Nun hat es Aristoteles längst entschieden, wie weit sich der tragiscbe
historische Wahrheit zu bekümmern habe.' A second mention of the name (St. xxxi,
p. 314) occurs in a quotation from Corneille,
For example: St. i (p. 187) : Doch diese Thräne ist keine
..mit dem von den Cohfh der
ganzen d
die das Trauerspiel erregen will?: St. ii (p. 189):
Tragödie,welches Leidenschaften durch Leiden schaftenzu reinigen sucht'; St. xii (p. 231):
Ich will nicht sagen [with reference to Voltaire's assertiun that: les Ancieng avaient
BOuvent, dans leurs ouvrages,le but d'établir quelque grande maxime'], dass es ein Fehler
jst, wenn der dramatische Dichter seine Fabel so einrichtet, dass sie zur Erläuterung oder
Bestätigung irgend einer grossen moralischen Wabrheit dienen kann. Aber ich darf
83gen, dass diese Einrichtung der Fabel nichts weniger als nothwendig ist; das8 es sehr
lehrreiche, vollkommene Stçcke geben kann, die auf keine solche einzelne Maxime
abzwecken ; mau Uprecht thut, den letzteu Sittenspruch, den man zum Schlusse
verschiedenerer Trauerspiele der Alten findet, s0 anzusehen, als ob das Ganze blos um
seinetwegen da wäre': St. xxxv (p. 331) : Das Drama hingegea macht auf eine einzige,
bestimmte, aus seiner Fabel liessende Lehre, keinen Anspruch; es gehet entweder &uft
die Leidenschaften, welohe der Verlauf und die Glücksverënderungen seiner Fabel anzu
fachen, und zu unterhalten vermögend sind, oder auf cewöbrot
das Vergnügen, ene waare
und lebhafte Sohilderung der Sitten und Charaktere erfordert eine
gewisse Vollständigkeit der Handlung, ein gewisses befriedigendes Ende, welches wir bey
der moralischen Erzehlung nicht vermissen, weil alle unsere Aufmerksamkeit auf den
allgemeinen Satz gelenkt wird, von welchem der einzelne Fall derselben ein 80 einleuch
tendes Beyspiel giebt.'
M. L R. XII,. 11

This content downloaded from

3.6.221.174 on Wed, 03 May 2023 04:19:15+00:00
All usc subjcct to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 162 Lessing's Interpretation of Aristotle
terms used by Aristotle. So far, however, from this beginning being
a prelude to further Aristotelian interpretation, Aristotle disappears
entirely, or, at least, with the exception of a passing mention of his
name', until Stück lxxiv. In xlv and xlvi Lessing discusses the unities,
with reference to the views of Hédelin and Corneille, but, strange to
say, without a single mention of Aristotle's name !
It is not until Stück lxxiv (published at the end of March, 1768)
that he settles down in earnest to the study of the Poetics. As a first
step, he puts hinself right with regard to the translation of óßos,
which, he says, should be translated Furcht' and not 'Schrecken.' But
surely there could be no more eloquent proof of Lessing's indifference
to Aristotle throughout three quarters of his Dramaturgie than the fact
that he should have gone on writing Schrecken' until he suddenly,
in Stück lxxiv, remembered how, in 1757, he had already corrected
Nicolai on this very point ! From Stück lxxiv on Lessing's interest in
Aristotle is constant, but, unfortunately, the failure of the Enterprise,'
which, as Lessing, no doubt, foresaw, was inevitable long before the
Dramaturgie had reached this stage, damped his enthusiasm; and in the
later sections he too often regarded it merely as an irksome task to spin
out the journal to the hundred and four numbers promised to the sub
scribers. But the interest in Aristotle's Poetics remained, and on
November 5, l768, we find him writing to Mendelssohn: Ich gehe in
allem Ernst mit einem neuen Commentar über die Dichtkunst des
Aristoleles, wenigstens, desjenigen Theils, der die Tragödie angeht,
schwanger' When that letter was written, eighty-two parts of the
Dramaturgie were published, and, no doubt, the greater part of the
remainder, promised for the middle of May, 1768,was in type, although
the actual publication did not take place until Easter, 1769.
Looked at in this way, it seems incredible that Guhrauer, and after
him, Gottschlich and others, could have made the claim that the
criticisra of Aristotle is the fulerum round which the entire Dramaturgie
turns.

1Stück xlix (p. 392):Stück l (p. 395) ; Stück lxx (P. 84).
2 Cp, letter to Nicolai of Feb. 2, 1768: Ich muss um mich greifen, um die Materie zu
meiner Dramaturgie so lange zu dehnen, bis die Gesellschaft wieder nach Hamburg kömmt.'
von sdem
Schriften, zv, yon
Éntstehen, p. 270. Op. also the Dramaturgie, St. ci-civ (p. 214): Ich habe
der Grundlage der Dichtkunst dieses Philosophen meine eigene
Gedanken, die ich hier ohne Weitläuftigkeit nicht äussern konnte.' In St. lxrxiii (p. 136)
be also refere
r to at 'andere Gelegenheit' when he will deal more fully with the interpreta
tion of Aristotle.
4 Th. W. Danzel and G. E. Guhrauer, G. E. Lessig, 2nd ed.,
pp. 156 fi.
Berlin, 1880 f., I,
6 Op. cit., pp. 16 f. Cp. M, Preusgen, Geschichte der Theorie der
1899, p. 125. Tragödie, Leipzig,

This content downloaded trom

3.6.221.I74 on Wed, 03 May 2023 04:19:15 +00:00
All use subjcct to
https://about.jstor.org/terms
 J. G. ROBERTSON 163

II.

Before passing to a systematic consideration of Lessing's interpre

far as possible,
tation of Aristotle, it seems of importance to ascertain, as
what editions of Aristotle, and what translations and other aids to
interpretation, Lessing used.
can
In the Dramaturgie we find the statement that before any one
understand the Poetics properly he must have studied every other work
of Aristotle'. Whereupon the inference has been drawn that Lessing inference is at all
had actually done so. But I am doubtful if this
justified ; there is no ground for believing that Lessing was intimately
familiar with any work of Aristotle's except the Poetics. Looking
through Lessing's writings, I find references to the Nicomachean Ethics,
thése
the Politics, Rhetoric and Poetics ; but in the majority of cases
It is
references are vaguely general or based on second-hand sources².
of Aristotle-of the
not even possible to say with certainty what edition In the
possessed.
works in general, or the Poetics in particular-Lessing
the original
Dramaturgie he quotes the Poetics more than once in Laocoon-in
Greek: but neither here nor in the Leben Sophocles and
Dichtkunst liefern
St. lxxv (p. 102): Wer uns einen neuen Commentar über seine
will, welcher den Dacierschen weit hinter sich lässt, den rathe
ich, vor allen Dingen die
And he recom mends
Werke des Philo8ophen vom Anfange bis zum Ende zu lesen.' He bad written similarly,
especially the study of die Bücher der Rhetorik und Moral,' xVII, p. 98; Petsch, p. 104): Ich
ten years before, to Nicolaidass(April 2, 1757; Schriften,
einbilden, einer, der dieses z weyte Buch [der Fhetorik] und die ganze
kann mir nicht Dichtkunst dieses
Aristotelische Sittenlehre an den Nicomachus nicht gelesen hat, die
Weltweisen verstehen könne.'
Op. Gottschlich, op. cit., p. 5.
3 The Nicomachean Ethics is mentioned in the letter to Nicolai just quoted, in the
Preface to the tranelation of Hutcheson's Sittenlehre derPolitics Vernunft (Schriften, vn, p. 64),
and in the Dramaturgie, St.with xo, note (p. 167); the H. Couring's in the Leben Sophocles
a specific reference to edition (1656), in
(Schriften, viII, p, 312), and Rheturic in the reviewy (Schri
of Curtius dbhonen, V,
Laocvon, I (Schriften, 1x, p. 11); the
194), in the letter of April 2, 1757, to Nicolai (Sehr1ften, xvI, p. 98), in the d ungen
p. (Schriften, VI, Pp. 434, 140, 444 f.),
VUn den Fubeln, both iin the origiual nnd iu translation
LXX (Schriften, vIII, p. 188), aud in the
in a quotation from himsel f in the Litteraturbriefe, In his note to LXXv (p. 103)
Dranuturgie, LxXY (p. 102), LXXYII (p.. 112), and LXxIx (p.
Lessing quotes the edition of the Rhetoric by Aemilius Portus, Spirae, 1598, but he does
to St. lxxvii
not draw his text from this edition; nor does the parsage quoted in a note
(p. 112) correspond with Portus, and the latter numbers his chapters diferen tly. In St. lxx
(p. 84). however, he quotes from Portus's commentary on the Rhetoric (1, p. 3): Solet
f non temere et casu, sed incerta
Äristoteles quaerere pugnam in suis libris. Atque boc The Poetics is discussed
ratione atque consilio : nam labefactatis aliorum opinionibus.'
194 f.), in the correspondence of 1757 (see
in the review of Curtius (Sclriften, v, pp. already
especiallyv letter to Nicolai of April 2, 1757, referred to); it is quoted hoth in Greek
and in the translation of Dacier in the Leben Sophoclesthe(Schriften. vIII, pp. 351 f.) and in
(Schriften, IX, pp. 4, 140, 144). Lastly, Aristotelian treatise De incessu
Laocoon for the Laocoon
animalium is elerred to as cited by Erasnu8, in the materials
xIY, p. 420)
(Sekxxik (P. 162), xo (p. 164), xoi (pp. 168, 169, 170), and, in a quotation from
Hurd, xciv (p. 181).
11 2

This content downloaded from

3.6.221.174 on Wed, 03 May 2023 04:19:15 +00:00
Alusc subjcct to https://about.jstor.org/terms
164 Le_sing's Interpretation of Aristotle
both of which troatises the Poetics is quoted in Greek-does Lessing
give any indication of his edition, We know from Stúck Ixxvi (p. 108)
that he possessed Gonlston's Latin paraphrase (see below); but the
passage quoted in Sttück xc (p. 164) differs materially from the reading
of Goulston's edition of the Poetics (1686). The fact of the edition not
being specified--and, as a rule, Lessing does specify the editions of
the classics which he uses--would point to one in general use in the
eighteenth century. The text of Lessing's quotations from the Poetics,
as well as from theNicomachean Ethics and the Rhetoric, corresponds,
however, with the text of the Du Val editions', and we shall probably
not be far wrong in assuming that Lessing had one of these editions
at hand.
Afurther clue to Lossing's Aristotelian literature is afforded by his
discussion, in Stiick lxxvi (p. 108), of the meaning of the word
dvbpoTov :
Ich kenne, he says, nichts kahleres und abgesch mackteres, als die gewöhnlichen
Uebersetzungen dieses Wortes Philanthropie. geben nehmlich das Adjektivum
davon im Lateinischen durch hominilus gratum'; im Französischen [Dacier] durch
Deutschen[Curtius] durch 'was Vergnügen
'ce que peut faire quelque plaisir'; und im viel
kann.? Der einzige Goulston, so
machen nicht ich finde, scheinet den Sinn des Philo
sophen verfeblt zu haben ; indem er das hidavbpwrov durch quod humanitatis
sensu tangat übersetzt.
Goulston's translation is to be found in his Aristotelis de Poetica liber,
Latine conversus et analytica methodo illustratus, Cambridge, 1686, p. 37.
The other Latin translation of Tò oirivlpwrov, hominibus gratum' is
that of the Du Val editions ; but it would appear to go back to Victorius?,
and was also adopted by Antonio Riccoboni'. Daniel Heinsius has been
suggested as Lessing's source here, as in one passage of his translation
of the Poetics he renders the Greek word by 'aliquid gratum hominibus';
but the fact that Lessing does not refer to the more picturesque inter
pretation, communis lex ac vinculum humanitatis, which Heinsins also
gives-an interpretation which might have appealed to Lessingdoes
1 Aristotelis Operu omnia quae extant, Gracce et Latine, Tom, iu, pars ii. Paris, 1619,
1629, 1639, 1654,
P. Victorii Commentarii in primum ibrum Aristotelis de Arte Poeturum, Florence,
1560, p. 121. The fact that Lessing mentions Victorius in his Dramaturgie (St. xxxvii,
p. 340) is no proof that he had a first-hand knowledge of that writer, as the reference
occurs in a pas8A ge quoted from Dacier.
3 Cp. A. Riccobonus, Compendium Artis Poeticae Aristotelis, Patavii, 1591, p. 76:
... philanthropum tripliciter explicstur: a Madio, conferens ad vitam humanam; a
Victorio gratun hominibus; ab Alexandro Picoolomineo, accommodatum ad humanum
interpretatio Victorii sequentibus exemplis valde oonvenire.'
affectum. Videtur autem
4 D. Heinsius, De Tragoediue Constitutione, Leyden, 1643, pp. 268 f.; also Aristotelis de
Poetica, Leydep, 1611, p. 28. That Lessing at a later date was familiar with Heinsius is to
be seen from a letter to Eschenburg of April 25, 1772, concerning the latter's translation
of Hurd's Commentary on Horace (Schrijten, xvII, p. 37): Ich wünschte, dass Sie aus der

This content downloaded from

3.6.221.174 on Wed, 03 May 2023 04:19:15 +00:00
All use subjcet to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 J. G, ROBERTsON 165
not lend support to the view that he consulted Heinsius when he wrote
his Stuck lxxvi.
Of all Lessing's guides to the interpretation of Aristotle, the most
important was clearly Dacier's commentary, which nppeared in 1692
under the title: La Poetiyue d'Aristote, contenant les Regles les plus
ecactes pour juger du Poëme Heroique, et des Pieces de Theutre, la
Tragedie et la Comedie. Traduite en François avec des Remurques
Oritiques sur tout l'Ourage. Par Mr Dacier. Paris, 16921., This work
merits a more careful analysis and examination than I have space to
give it here; but I hope to return to it in a subsequent article. It has
ben unduly neglected bystudents of eigh teenth-century literary theories.
Lessing, it is true, does not speak very kindly of Dacier: he calls him a
Pedant' (Stück lxxxi, p. 128), refers to him ironically as 'der ehrliche
Dacier" (Stück xxxv, p. 341); and when he does quote him, it is
usually to refute his opinion. But his indebtedness to Dacier is none
the less great ; indeed, it is hardly too much to say that, without the
French work we might probablynever have had Lessing's Aristotelian
interpretation at all.
By making Aristotle's Poetics universally accessible in his French
translation, Dacier reopened the Aristotelian question anongst those
poets and men of letters who made no special pretence to classical
scholarship; his purpose was not merely to familiarise the modern world
with Aristotle's treatise ; he also hoped toassist the theatre to counteract
le desordre où il est tombé depuis quelque temps Dacier advanced
the movement of critical thought from the pseudo-classical to the true
classical, a movement with which Lessing himself was wholly identified.
The method, moreover, which Dacier followed in his interpretation was
also Lessing's, and he approached his task with no contemptible equip
ment of learning, both classical and modern. Amongst his prede
Erklärung des Aristotelisohen oihaypwrov das Wort PAichtmässig" wegliessen. Sie
scheinen es aus dem lege" der Heinsiusschen Umschreibung genommen zu haben, wo e8
aber nicht absolute steht, sondern auf " humanitatis" geht, und so viel als vinculo humani
tatis " seyn soll. Das PAiohtmässigewäre, meiner Meinung nach, gerade wieder das oiday.
Opwmov. Denu es wäre obnstreitig unsere Paicht, uns über das Unglück eines Böaewichts zu
freuen: wenn Piicht das heisst, was dem positiven Gesetze gemiss ist. Aber dieser PAicht
ungeachtet, können wir iha nicht ganz ohne Mitleid lsssen, weil dieser Bösewicht dooh ein
Mensoh ist.' But Ioan ind nocertain evidence that Heinsius's De Tragoediae Constitu
tione was one of Lessing's direot sources when he was engaged on the Dramaturgie. With
the oontention of M. Zerbst, Ein Vorliufer Lessings in der Aristotelesinterpretation, Jena,
1887, I will deal later.
1In his Schriften, VI, p. 32, Lessing quotes the Paris edition of 1692. R. Petsch, op.
cit., p. xv, note, imentions that Daoier's work was anonymous; but there were two editions,
a 4t0 one which appeared anonymously, and a 12mo one with Daoier's Dame. It is the
Jatter to whicb o3 refers in vi,is p. ot32.paged)"
There was also an Amsterdam edition of 1733.
a Préface, p. (iii) Prétace

This content downloadcd trom

3.6.221.174 on Wed, 03 May 2023 04:19:15+00:00
Alluse subject to htps://about.jstor.org/terms
166
Lessing's Interpretation of Aristotle
cessors, he pinned his faith to Victorius, 'le plus savant, le plus exact et
leplus sage'}'and his own commentary is, in many respects, a polemic
against the more arbitrary methods of Castelvetro'. Of other critics,
he speaks with most respect of Le Bossu, and finds much to approve of
in Hédelin's Pratique du Théátre'.
Dacier's attitude towards Aristotle foreshadows- one might perhaps
go so far as to say that it actually suggested-Lessing's. The rules of
poetry, he asserts, 'sont si certainement celles qu'Aristote nous donne,
qu'il est impossible d'y réussir par un autre chemin,' and he compares
the laws of Aristotle to the laws of nature, not of men. Lessing
repeatedly expressed a similar confidence in Aristotle; and at the close
of the Dramaturgie went so far as to declare that the Poetics is
ein eben so unfehlbares Werk, als die Elemente des Euklides nur immer sind.
Ihre Grundsätze sind eben so wahr und gewiss, nur freylich nicht so fasslich, und
daher melhr der Chikane ausgesetzt, als alles, was diese enthalten. Besonders
getraue ich mir von der Tragödie, als über die uns die Zeit so zienlich alles dara1ns
gönnen wollen, unwidersprechlich zu beweisen, dass sie sich von der Richtschuur
des Aristoteles keiuen Schritt entfernen kann. ohne sich eben so weit von ihrer
Vollkommenheit zu entfernen .
It is Dacier's mission as well as Lessing's to uphold Aristotle in the face
of modern detractors and perverters of his views: and an imnediate
model for Lessing's anti-Cornelian criticism is to be found in Dacier's
1 Ibid., p. [xxiv]; cf. pp. 44 f., 53, 95, 102, 235, 266, etc.
Ibid., pp. [xxv], 47.
3 Ibid., p. [xxv i.]; he quotes Le Bossu very frequently (pp. 111, 246, 251, 266, 304,
etc.); Hédelin, pp. 168, 170, 174.
Ibid., pp. [iii,x]. Corneille, too, had said of Aristotle's precepts that they sont de
tous les temps et de tous les peuples(Avertissement to the id, ed. Marty.Leveaux, II,
p. 85). This couidence in Aristotle would appear to go back to Scaliger.
BHamburgische Dramaturgie, St. xxxvii (p. 342): Eines offentbaren Widersprucbs
macht sich eiu Aristoteles nicht leicht suhuldig. Wo ich dergleichen bey so einem Manne
zu fnden glaube, setze ich das grössere Misstrauen lieber in meinen, als in seinen
Verstand. Ich verdoppele meine Aufmerksamkeit,' etc. and St. lxxiv (p. 97): Aristoteles
würde ihn schlechterding8 verworfen haben ; zwar mit dem Ansehen des Aristoteles wollte
ich bald fertig werden, wenn ich nur auch mit seinen Gründen zu werden wüsste. These
passages recall Batteux (Principes de la Littérature, Traité v, ch. iv, ed. 1764, uI, p. 19):
Quand un iomme, tel qu'Aristote, n pronon c» avec assuran ce et s8ns intérèt, sur dee
matières qui sont véritablement du ressort de lleaprit humain,, il faut tenter tontes sortes
des voies pour l'expliquer; ou avoir des denonstrations rigoureuses, pour le condamner.
Curtius, too, the German translntor of Arigtotle, had said (p. 213) : Die genaue Ueber
legung, womit Aristoteles schrieb, erlanbet nicht, einem so grossen Munne einen Wider
spruch beyzume8sen.
Stück ci-civ (p. 214). In his commentary on the Dramaturgie (Lessings Werke,
Goldene Klassiker-BibliotLek, vI, p. 217), Julins Petersen draws attention to two parallel
comparisons of Aristotle with Euclid in reviews ascribed to Lersing in the Critische
Nachrichten of 1751. They are (Schriften, IY, p. 217): Die Geometrie und Poesie haben
ganz1%. verschiedene Kegeln, und derjenige, welcher den Homer D&ch dem Euklides
beurt wolte, vürde eben so abgeschmackt handeln, als der, welcher den Euklides
nach dem Homer beurtheil te;and (Ibid., p. 240) : ...dass man also hier [in Euclid]die
logischen Regel1n beysauumen antrilt, deren Nutzen und Wahrheit so 2u reden die
Erfahrung vieler Jahrhunderte bestätiget hat ; eben wie die Vorschriften in des Aristoteles
Poetik von den Mustern hergenommen sind, deren Schönheit eine allgemeine Empindung
erkennet hatte.

"This content downloaded from

3.6.221.174 on Wed, 03 May 2023 04:19:15 +00:00
All use subjcct to https:/about.jstor.org/terms
 J. G. ROBERTSON 167
sharp attacks on Corneille for his accommodating' interpretation of the
Poetics. But Lessing went a step further than his predecessor and
defended Aristotle's opinion in passages where to Dacier he seemed to
have nodded. Lastly, Lessing's method of interpreting Aristotle by
Aristotle, had also been extensively employed by Dacier"
The German translation of Aristotle's Poetics? by Michael Conrad
Curtius-Aristoteles Dichtkeunst, ins Deutsche übersetzet, mit Anmer
kungen, und besondern Abhandlungen versehen-appeared at Hanover in
1753, and, as we have seen, was briefly reviewed by Lessing on
August 23 of the sàåme year, in the Berliner privilegirte Zeitung. The
character and form of Curtius's work are clearly suggested by Dacier ;
but it is not by any means a mere copy of the French work. It bene
fited, moreover, by the advance of literary and critical ideas during the
fifty years that lay between the two translations. Curtius is even more
interested than Dacier had been in contemporary literature and in the
newest literary theories of his day: indeed, his familiarity with such
things is clearly greater than his Greek learning,. His opinions are less
original than Dacier's and are often lacking in logical consistency.
Dacier was an 'ancient'; Curtius tries to reconcile the 'ancient' stand
point with that of the moderns. He holds to Aristotle, but is in
sympathy with the new conception of poetry as a vollkommen sinniche
Rede,'set forth by Baumgarten and Meier; and he does not recognise
the damaging effect of Baumgarten's theory on the older aesthetics of
Gottsched and his school. Thus Curtius often Aounders helplessly
between conficting theories; he accepts Gottsched as well as Bodmer as
an
authority ; he looks up to Corneille and Voltaire as unsurpasable
masters of modern tragedy, but at the same time he twice mentions
Shakespeare", whose Julius Caesar he knew from Borck's translation ;
1 Stück xxxvii(p. 341); lxxvi (p. 105).
Dacier refers especially frequentiy tó the Rhetoric (pp. 5, 37, 63, 100, 189, 329, 340,
364, 366 f., etc.). But such cross references were general even in the early Italian
editions; as a matter of fact, they go back, in the great majority of cases, to that most
industrious of Aristotle's commentators, Robortelli.
3This was not the earliest German translation of the Poetics ; one had appeared at
Hamburg in 1737, by Wolfgang Balthasar von Steinwebr, and Gottsched contenplated.,
when, in 1740, he planned his Deutsche Schaubüilne, opening the first volume with Die
Dichtkunst Aristotels.,.. in's Deutsche übersetzt und mit Anmerkungen versehen yon
Herrn Prof. Gottscheden' ('Nacbricht
Schaubühne in the
von der unter der Presse beiudlichen deutschen
zur critischen Historie, et., vI, 1740, p. 525). And in
the preface to the irst f the Schaubuhne (1742, p. 7) he said : Die
Uebersetzung...
ist längst von mir verfertiget worden; indem ich vor zwölf Jahren schon, gleich nach dem
Antritt meines poetischen Lehramtes darüber öffentlich gelesen, und dadurch die Regeln
der guten Schaubühne in Deutscbland zuerst bekannt zu machen gesuchet.' ILessing
refers to this promised translation his review of Curtius.
4 Pages ií1 and l15.

This content downloaded from

3.6.22 1.I74on Wed, 03 May 2023 04:19:15 +00:00
All usc subjcct to https://about.jstor.org/tcrms
168 Lessing's Interpretation of Aristotle
in one of the passages he even calls him der englische grosse
Shakespear'; although this does not mean that he was in the least
prepared to defend a form of drama in conflict with the classic canon.
Down to the controversy with Mendelssohn and Nicolai on the
subject of tragedy, Lessing accepted Curtius as his guide. In the
Dramaturgie he quotes him frequently', usually with a viey to contra
dicting him; yet he cannot altogether obliterate his ffrst indebtedness
to him. When he cites Aristotle in German, he does not make use of
Curtius's translation, as Nicolai and Mendelssohn, and even Schiller
were obliged to do; but he shows at times an unmistakable dependence
on Curtius, especially in his technical vocabulary.
Such were the editions and translations of Aristotle's Poetics which
Lessing had at hand. He found, of course, much criticism and interpre
tation of Aristotle's theories in other eighteenth-century writers on
aesthetics and literary criticism, but these will be more conveniently
discussed in the course of my examination of Lessing's interpretation of
the Poetics.
J. G. ROBERTSON.
LONDON.

ISt. xzrviii (p. 342); Irxvi(p. 108) ; lurii (p. 111); lzxvii (p. 118); lxrrix (p. 164);
xo (p. 164). Pröbably Mendelssohn was responsible for freeing Lessing trom Curtiue's
leading-strings ; that oritio published in the Litteraturbriefe (No. 146; February 19, 1761)
a review of Curtius's Critische Abhandlungen und Gedichte (Hanover, 1761), in which he
did not conceal his low opinion of the author.
3 These pointswill be dealt with fully in tbe continuation of this article.

This content downloadcd from

3.6.221.I74 on Wed, (03 Muy 2023 04:19:15 +00:00
All use subjcct to htips://about.jstor.org/terms