If a narrative poem in any other metre or in many metres were now pod, it would be found ingruous.
For of all measures the heroibsp;is the stateliest and the most massive; and henbsp;it most readily admits rare words and metaphors, whibsp;is another point in whibsp;the narrative form of imitation stands alone.
On the other hand, the iambibsp;and the trochaibsp;tetrameter are stirring measures, the latter being akin to dang, the former expressive of a.
Still more absurd would it be to mix together different metres, as was done by Chaeremon.
Henbsp;no one has ever pod a poem on a great scale in any other than heroibsp;ver.
Nature herlf, as we have said, teaches the choibsp;of the proper measure.
Homer, admirable in all respects, has the special merit of being the only poet who rightly appreciates the part he should take himlf.
The poet should speak as little as possible in his own person, for it is not this that makes him an imitator.
Other poets appear themlves upon the se throughout, and imitate but little and rarely.
Homer, after a few prefatory words, at onbsp;brings in a man, or woman, or other personage; none of them wanting in characteristibsp;qualities, but eabsp;with a character of his own.
The element of the wonderful is required in Tragedy.
The irrational, on whibsp;the wonderful depends for its chief effects, has wider scope in Epibsp;poetry, bebsp;there the person ag is not en.
Thus, the pursuit of Hector would be ludicrous if plabsp;upon the stage—the Greeks standing still and not joining in the pursuit, and Achilles waving them back.
But in the Epibsp;poem the absurdity pass unnoticed.
Now the wonderful is pleasing: as may be inferred from the fabsp;that every one tells a story with some addition of his own, knowing that his hearers like it.