. . . It is, moreover, evident from what has been said that it is not the function of the poet to relate what has happened but what may happen–what is possible according to the law of probability and necessity. The poet and the historian differ not by writing in verse and in prose. The work of Herodotus might be put into verse, and it would still be a species of history, with meter no less than without it. The true difference is that one relates what has happened, the other what may happen. Poetry, therefore, is a more philosophical and a higher thing than history; for poetry tends to express the universal, history the particular. . . .

In this insightful observation, Aristotle contrasts the realms of poetry and history, illuminating the broader scope of poetry. He asserts that poets are not confined to recounting past events; instead, they explore what could potentially unfold, guided by probability and necessity. This imaginative freedom elevates poetry above history, as it delves into universal truths rather than particular occurrences. Aristotle argues that while historians like Herodotus aim to capture factual accounts, poets strive to evoke universal experiences and emotions. Thus, poetry achieves a philosophical depth, engaging with timeless concepts and human experiences, while history remains tethered to specific events. This distinction highlights poetry’s power to transcend the limitations of time, offering insight into the human condition.