Epic poetry differs from Tragedy in the scale on which it is constructed,
and in its metre. As regards scale or length, we have already laid down
an adequate limit:--the beginning and the end must be capable of being
brought within a single view. This condition will be satisfied by poems
on a smaller scale than the old epics, and answering in length to the
group of tragedies presented at a single sitting.

Epic poetry has, however, a great--a special--capacity for enlarging its
dimensions, and we can see the reason. In Tragedy we cannot imitate
several lines of actions carried on at one and the same time; we must
confine ourselves to the action on the stage and the part taken by the
players. But in Epic poetry, owing to the narrative form, many events
simultaneously transacted can be presented; and these, if relevant to the
subject, add mass and dignity to the poem. The Epic has here an
advantage, and one that conduces to grandeur of effect, to diverting the
mind of the hearer, and relieving the story with varying episodes. For
sameness of incident soon produces satiety, and makes tragedies fail on
the stage.

As for the metre, the heroic measure has proved its fitness by the test
of experience. If a narrative poem in any other metre or in many metres
were now composed, it would be found incongruous. For of all measures the
heroic is the stateliest and the most massive; and hence it most readily
admits rare words and metaphors, which is another point in which the
narrative form of imitation stands alone. On the other hand, the iambic
and the trochaic tetrameter are stirring measures, the latter being akin
to dancing, the former expressive of action. Still more absurd would it
be to mix together different metres, as was done by Chaeremon. Hence no
one has ever composed a poem on a great scale in any other than heroic