Text
Editionsbericht
Literatur
SIR,
[52] IF to commend your Poem, I should onely say (in general Terms) that in the choice of your Argument, the disposition of the parts, the maintenance of the Characters of your Persons, the dignitie and vigour of your expression, you have performed all the parts of various experience, readie memorie, clear judgement, swift and well govern'd fancie, though it were enough for the truth, it were too little for the weight and credit of my testimonie. For I lie open to two Exceptions, one of an incompetent, the other of a corrupted Witness. Incompetent, because I am not a Poet; and corrupted with the Honour done me by your Preface. The former obliges me to say something (by the way) of the Nature and Differences of Poesie.
As Philosophers have divided the Universe (their subject) into three Regions, Celestial, Aërial, and Terrestrial; so the Poets, (whose work it is by imitating humane life, in delightfull and measur'd lines, to avert men from vice, and incline them to virtuous and honourable actions) have lodg'd themselves in the three Regions of mankind, Court, [53] Citie, and Countrey, correspondent in some proportion, to those three Regions of the World. For there is in Princes, and men of conspicuous power (anciently call'd Heroes) a lustre and influence upon the rest of men, resembling that of the Heavens, and an insincereness, inconstancie, and troublesom humour of those that dwell in populous Cities, like the mobilitie, blustering, and impuritie of the Air; and a plainness, and (though dul) yet a nutritive facultie in rural people, that endures a comparison with the Earth they labour.
From hence have proceeded three sorts of Poesie, Heroique, Scommatique, and Pastoral. Every one of these is distinguished again in the manner of Representation, which sometimes is Narrative, wherein the Poet himself relateth; and sometimes Dramatique, as when the persons are every one adorned and brought upon the Theatre, to speak and act their own parts. There is therefore neither more nor less than six sorts of Poesie. For the Heroique Poem Narrative (such as is yours) is call'd Epique Poem; The Heroique Poem Dramatique, is Tragedie. The Scommatique Narrative, is Satyre; Dramatique is Comedie. The Pastoral Narrative, is called simply Pastoral (anciently Bucolique) the same Dramatique, Pastoral Comedie. The Figure therefore of an Epique Poem, and of a Tragedie, ought to be the same, for they differ no more but in that they are pronounced by one, or many persons. Which I insert to iustifie the figure of yours, consisting of five books divided into Songs, or Cantoes, as five Acts divided into Scenes has ever been the approved figure of a Tragedie.
They that take for Poesie whatsoever is writ in Verse, will think this Division imperfect, and call in Sonets, Epigrams; Eclogues, and the like pieces (which are but Essayes, and parts of an entire Poem) and reckon Empedocles and Lucretius (natural Philosophers) for Poets, and the moral precepts of Phocylides Theognis, and the Quatrains of Pybrach, and the Historie of Lucan, and others of that kind amongst Poems; bestowing on such Writers for honour, [54] the name of Poets, rather than of Historians, or Philosophers. But the subject of a Poem, is the manners of men, not natural causes; manners presented, not dictated; and manners feigned (as the name of Poesie imports) not found in men. They that give enterance to Fictions writ in Prose, erre not so much, but they erre: For Prose requiteth delightfulness, not onely of fiction, but of stile; in which if Prose contend with Verse, it is with disadvantage and (as it were) on foot against the strength and wings of Pegasus.
Erstdruck und Druckvorlage
Gondibert: An Heroick Poem;
Written by Sir William D'Avenant.
London: Printed for John Holden 1651, S. 52-54.
Die Textwiedergabe erfolgt nach dem ersten Druck
(Editionsrichtlinien).
Zur Druckgeschichte vgl.
Alfred Harbage: Sir William Davenant. Poet Venturer, 1606 - 1668.
London 1935, S. 291.
PURL: https://hdl.handle.net/2027/dul1.ark:/13960/t1cj9501z
URL: https://archive.org/details/gondibertheroick00dave
Literatur
Connell, Philip: Hobbes and Davenant. Poetry as Civil Science.
In: The Poetic Enlightenment. Poetry and Human Science, 1650-1820.
Hrsg. von Tom Jones u. Rowan Boyson.
London 2013, S. 63-74.
Domsch, Sebastian: The Emergence of Literary Criticism in 18th-Century Britain.
Discourse between Attacks and Authority.
Berlin u. Boston 2014 (= Buchreihe der Anglia / Anglia Book Series, 47).
Gavin, Michael: The Invention of English Criticism, 1650–1760.
Cambridge 2015.
Genette, Gérard: Paratexte. Das Buch vom Beiwerk des Buches.
Frankfurt a.M. 2001 (= suhrkamp taschenbuch wissenschaft, 1510).
Hillyer, Richard: "To Governe the Reader": Hobbes and Davenant.
In: Hobbes and His Poetic Contemporaries.
Cultural Transmission in Early Modern England.
Hrsg. von Richard Hillyer.
New York 2007, S. 19–50.
Hopkins, David / Martindale, Charles (Hrsg.):
The Oxford History of Classical Reception in English Literature.
Bd. 3: 1660-1790.
Oxford 2012.
Knoppers, Laura L. (Hrsg.): The Oxford History of Poetry in English.
Volume 5: Seventeenth-Century British Poetry. Oxford 2024.
Mauduit, Christine u.a. (Hrsg.):
Brill's Companion to the Reception of Aristotle's Poetics.
Leiden u. Boston 2025.
Raylor, Timothy: Hobbes on the Nature and Scope of Poetry.
In: The Oxford Handbook of Hobbes.
Hrsg. von A.P. Martinich and Kinch Hoekstra.
New York 2016, S. 603-623.
Rodriguez, Antonio (Hrsg.): Dictionnaire du lyrique.
Poésie, arts, médias.
Paris 2024.
Scherpe, Klaus R.: Gattungspoetik im 18. Jahrhundert.
Historische Entwicklung von Gottsched bis Herder.
Stuttgart 1968.
Vgl. S. 23-24.
Stockhorst, Stefanie: Reformpoetik.
Kodifizierte Genustheorie des Barock und alternative Normenbildung in poetologischen Paratexten.
Tübingen 2008 (= Frühe Neuzeit, 128).
Trappen, Stefan: Gattungspoetik.
Studien zur Poetik des 16. bis 19. Jahrhunderts
und zur Geschichte der triadischen Gattungslehre.
Heidelberg 2001 (= Beihefte zum Euphorion, 40).
Zymner, Rüdiger (Hrsg.): Handbuch Gattungstheorie.
Stuttgart u.a. 2010.
Edition
Lyriktheorie » R. Brandmeyer