SCENE VIII.

PAMPHILUS, CHARINUS, DAVUS.

_Davus._ Where is Pamphilus?

_Pam._ Davus.

_Davus._ Who is that?

_Pam._ ’Tis I.

_Davus._ Oh, Pamphilus!

_Pam._ You do not know what has happened to me.

_Davus._ No: but I know perfectly well what has happened to me.

_Pam._ And so do I.

_Davus._ This happens according to custom, that you should learn my evil fortune before I hear of your good fortune.

_Pam._ My dear Glycera has discovered her parents.

_Davus._ Oh! glorious news!

_Char._ (_aside._) What says he?

_Pam._ Her father is our intimate friend!

_Davus._ His name?

_Pam._ Chremes.

_Davus._ I’m transported with joy.

_Pam._ There is now no impediment to our marriage[213].

_Char._ (_aside._) This man is [214]dreaming of what he wishes when awake.

_Pam._ Then, Davus, as for the child――――

_Davus._ Ah, Sir! say no more――you are one of the chief favourites of the gods!

_Char._ (_aside._) I am restored to life if these things be true. I will speak to them.

_Pam._ Who is that? Ah! Charinus, you come in a most auspicious hour.

_Char._ I wish you joy.

_Pam._ How! have you heard then that――――

_Char._ I have heard all: and let me conjure you, my friend, to think of me amidst your happiness. Chremes is now your own: and will, I am very sure, consent to any thing you request of him.

_Pam._ I will not be unmindful of your happiness, I assure you: and, as it would be tedious for us to wait their coming out, accompany me now to my Glycera. Do you, Davus, go home, and order some of our people hither, to [215]remove her to our house. Why do you loiter? Go: don’t lose a moment.

_Davus._ I am going. (_To the spectators._) [216]You must not expect their coming out: she will be betrothed within: where all will be concluded. Farewell: and clap your hands[217].

[218]END OF THE FIFTH ACT.

NOTES.

NOTES.

NOTE 1.

_Caius Suetonius Tranquillus._

The history of the life of Terence is enveloped in more obscurity than might have been expected, considering his many eminent qualities, and the times in which he lived. Suetonius’s account is not very comprehensive; it is, however, the best which has reached us, and indeed the only one at all to be depended on. Caius Suetonius Tranquillus, a correct and impartial biographer, was secretary to the Emperor Adrian: and enjoyed the friendship of Pliny the younger: he flourished about A.D. 115.

NOTE 2.

_Terentius._

This appellation was conferred on the poet by his patron Terentius Lucanus: his true name is unknown, even conjecture is silent on this subject. Slaves, who received their freedom, usually bore the name of the person who manumitted them: sometimes also, during their slavery, they were called by the name of their master. Terentius Lucanus does not appear to have been a person of any particular note; as he is never mentioned but as the friend and patron of Terence, to whom he is indebted for rescuing his name from oblivion.

NOTE 3.

_Fenestella._

“Rome could never boast of a more accurate historian than Lucius Fenestella; he was likewise a very learned antiquarian. He lived at about the end of the reign of Augustus, or the beginning of that of Tiberius: and wrote many things; particularly Annals: none of his works are now extant.” MADAME DACIER.

NOTE 4.

_Terence was born after the conclusion of the second Punic war, and died before the commencement of the third._

The second Punic war ended 201 B. C. in the year of Rome 553: and the third commenced 150 B. C. in the year of Rome 604, about three years before the destruction of Carthage. Terence was born 189 B. C., which was 12 years after the termination of the second Punic war, and he died at the age of 36, three years before the beginning of the third Punic war. If we suppose Terence to have been a freeborn Carthaginian, it is very difficult to account for his being a slave at Rome; because the Romans could not have taken him prisoner in war, as they were at peace with the Carthaginians during the whole of his life. Neither is it probable that he was made a prisoner, and sold to the Romans either by the Numidians, or by the Gætulians, as his perfect knowledge of the Latin and Greek languages, at twenty-five years of age, is a most forcible reason for believing that he was removed to Rome in extreme youth: long before he could have been able to undergo the fatigue attendant on a military life. I can solve this difficulty in no other way than by supposing, either that the parents of Terence were themselves slaves at Carthage, and consequently he also was the property of their master; (as the children of slaves shared the fate of their parents;) or that he was sold to the Carthaginians by the Numidians, or by the Gætulians. In either of these cases, it is by no means improbable that during the peace which followed the second Punic war, Terence might in his infancy have been sold by his Carthaginian master to one of those Romans who visited Carthage during the peace.

NOTE 5.

_The Numidians or Gætulians._

Numidia and Gætulia, or Getulia, at the time of Terence’s birth, formed a part of the dominions of the celebrated African prince Masinissa, who so eminently distinguished himself as the firm and faithful ally of the Roman Republic: and as the formidable enemy of the Carthaginians. Numidia was situated S.W. of the territories of Carthage; and is now that part of Southern Barbary, known by the name of Biledulgerid. Gætulia (the boundaries of which were afterwards regulated by Marius) was a most extensive country, and lay S.W. of Numidia: it is now very little known, and reaches from the south of Barbary, or the country of Dates, across the Great Desert or Sahara, almost as far south as the river Niger. It may be conjectured that the northern region only of this vast country was subject to the control of King Masinissa.

NOTE 6.

_Scipio Africanus._

Publius Cornelius Scipio Æmilianus Africanus Numantinus was the son of Paulus Æmilius, whose conquest of Macedonia procured him the title of Macedonicus. The young Æmilius was adopted (during the life of his father) by the son of the conqueror of Hannibal, Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus, whose name he afterwards bore (in conformity with the established custom): and it is not a little remarkable, that the appellation of Africanus which the son of Æmilius then acquired by adoption, he afterwards claimed in his own right, as the destroyer of Carthage. The title of Numantinus was conferred on this hero, as a tribute to his valour and conduct in the war against the inhabitants of Numantia, who were totally destroyed with their city, after a long and desperate resistance. Scipio was born in the year of Rome 569, and died in the year 624. Some persons have been misled by a singular coincidence of circumstances relative to the two Scipios, into a belief that it was the elder of the two who honoured Terence with his friendship. The error is evident, as the death of the first Scipio Africanus took place before Terence was ten years of age. The elder Scipio honoured with his particular regard Caius Lælius, who obtained the consulship in the year of Rome 563: the connexion between them was cemented by the strict ties of a virtuous friendship. It is a circumstance worthy of remark, that the chosen intimate of the younger Africanus was also called Caius Lælius.

NOTE 7.

_Caius Lælius._

Caius Lælius, whose virtues procured him the appellation of Sapiens, or the Wise, is supposed to have been the son of the Lælius who enjoyed the friendship of the elder Scipio. Caius Lælius Sapiens was the senior Consul or Consul Prior in the year of Rome 613. Cicero’s treatise “De Amicitiâ,” in which he represents Lælius discoursing on the nature and delights of a pure and delicate friendship, is a monument of the attachment of Scipio and Lælius, worthy of them and of himself.

NOTE 8.

_Who were about his own age._

Those who have read Suetonius in the original, will perceive that I have passed by an imputation recorded by that writer, against Scipio, Lælius, and our author: the refined delicacy by which the sentiments of those eminent persons were distinguished, ought to protect them from so disgusting and degrading a suspicion.

NOTE 9.

_Portius._

Licinius Portius, a Latin poet, who flourished about the year of Rome 610: he excelled as an epigrammatist. Fragments only of his writings now remain.

NOTE 10.

_Furius._

Publius Furius, an eminent statesman, was the intimate friend of Scipio and Lælius: he received the surname of Philus or the Lover. Furius was elected the Consul Prior in the year of Rome 617.

NOTE 11.

_While he is frequently carried to the Albanian villa._

There were in Latium two towns called Alba, each of which were situated on the borders of a lake.

Alba Longa, now called Albano, was built by Ascanius, and distant 16 miles from Rome. Alba Fucentis, situated about three times that distance from the capital, on lake Fucinus, is now known by the name of Celano. The Albanian mountain, where Scipio, Lælius, or Furius probably possessed a villa, was in the immediate vicinity of Alba Longa. Portius might have alluded to Terence accompanying his friends to the Latinæ Feriæ, or Latin games, which were celebrated by the Consuls on the Alban mountain on the 27th of April.

NOTE 12.

_And dies at Stymphalus, a town of Arcadia._

Stymphalus, a town of Arcadia, was situated about 25 miles S.W. of Corinth, on the borders of a lake of the same name, which is said to have been infested by a species of Harpies, who were called Stymphalides. A festival called ΣΤΥΜΦΑΛΙΑ was celebrated at Stymphalus in honour of Diana, who on that account received the appellation of Stymphalia.

NOTE 13.

_The Ædiles._

All plays, previous to their appearance on the Roman stage, were submitted to the perusal of the Ædiles, who chose from the number offered them those which (in their judgment) were best suited for representation: they were bound by oath to an impartial decision.

NOTE 14.

_Cærius._

Many have supposed Cæcilius the poet to have been the person meant in this passage: this is a manifest error; as that poet died five or six years before the representation of this play. Others read Acilius, who was one of the Ædiles for the year in which the Andrian was exhibited: this would be a plausible reading, but for one circumstance, which must be considered as an insurmountable objection to it, viz.――The Gens Acilia (of which Acilius was a member) was _a plebeian family_: consequently, Acilius must have been a plebeian Ædile, whereas the inspection of the Roman plays was the office of the Curule Ædiles: who, in the time of Terence, were chosen from the _Patrician_ families.

NOTE 15.

_The Couch of Cærius._

The Cœna of the Romans (their principal meal) was usually taken at three o’clock in the afternoon: when they partook of it, instead of sitting in the modern manner, they reclined on couches which were placed round the table in the form of the letter C; a space was left unoccupied that the slaves in placing and removing the dishes might not incommode the guests. The number of the couches was generally limited to three; each of which was occupied sometimes by four, but usually by only three persons. The body was raised, and supported by the left arm; the feet of him who reclined at the upper end of the couch lay at the back of the person next him: (though prevented from touching his clothes by cushions placed between them) and the feet of the second at the back of the third. To place more than three guests on one couch was accounted both mean and vulgar. Cicero notices this in his oration against Piso, “_Græci stipati, quini in lectulis, sæpe plures_,” speaking of “_five, and often a greater number crowded together on one small couch_.” The Romans indulged themselves with couches only at supper: no ceremony was observed at their other meals, which were taken sitting or standing, alone or in company, as inclination prompted. In the earlier ages both Romans and Greeks sat upright at their meals: Homer expressly mentions (_in Odyss. B. 10._) “ἥμεθα δαινύμενοι,” “_we sat feasting_;” also Virgil. Æn. 7. v. 176.

NOTE 16.

_Volcatius._

Volcatius Sedigitus, a miscellaneous writer and poet, mentioned in very high terms by the younger Pliny, flourished in the reign of one of the 12 Cæsars: the exact time is unknown. His works are entirely lost, with the exception of a few verses; amongst them are the following, in which he classes ten of the most eminent Latin comic poets.

“Multos incertos certare hanc rem vidimus, Palmam poëtæ comico cui deferant: Hunc _meo judicio_ errorem dissolvam tibi; Ut contra si quis sentiat, nihil sentiat. CÆCILIO palmam STATIO do comico: PLAUTUS secundus facile exsuperat cæteros: Dein NÆVIUS, qui servet pretium, tertius est: Si erit quod quarto detur, dabitur LICINIO: Post insequi Licinium facio ATILIUM. In sexto consequitur loco hos TERENTIUS: TURPILIUS septimum, TRABEA octavum obtinet. Nono loco esse facile facio LUSCIUM. Antiquitatis causâ, decimum addo ENNIUM.” Au: Gell: B. 15. C 24.

“Madame Dacier very well observes, that Volcatius has injured the reputation of his own judgment, and not the fame of Terence, by this injudicious arrangement.” Terence yields to none of the above.

NOTE 17.

_The Eunuch was acted twice in one day._

This circumstance is so much the more extraordinary, as a play was seldom exhibited on the Roman stage oftener than on four or five occasions, before it was laid aside; and new pieces were usually provided for every festival: with what enthusiastic applause then, must the Eunuch have been received, when the audience with the loudest acclamations, called for a second representation of this admirable comedy on the same day! It is necessary to explain that the actors had sufficient time to repeat their performance, as dramatic entertainments were usually frequented by the Romans, not in the evening as among the moderns, but in the course of the day, and generally previous to the hour of their principal repast.

NOTE 18.

_Eight thousand sesterces._

Eight thousand sesterces were equal to 64_l._ 11_s._ 8_d._ sterling. The Romans reckoned their money by sesterces: the _sestertius_, which was a brass coin, worth 1. d. 3 qrs. ¾, must not be confounded with the _sestertium_, which was no coin, but money of account, and equal in value to _one thousand sesterces_.

NOTE 19.

_Varro._

Marcus Terentius Varro was born at Rome in the year of the city 632; at the time of the sedition of Caius Gracchus. Varro was the intimate friend of Pompey: and obtaining the consulship in the year 680, had the mortification to find the efforts of himself and his colleague, inadequate to suppress the insurrection of Spartacus, whose successes at the head of the rebellious gladiators, alarmed all Rome. The military occupations of Varro did not prevent his close attention to literature: his writings were very voluminous; and those of them which remain are deservedly in high estimation.

NOTE 20.

_And as for what those malicious railers say, who assert that certain noble persons assist the poet._

The chief of those railers, and the arch-enemy of Terence, was the Luscius Lanuvinus to whom Volcatius in his list of poets assigns the ninth place;――and the same person whom Donatus designates by the name of Lucius Lavinius. Luscius was not singular in this imputation against our author. Valgius and others seem to consider Terence but the mere nominal author of the six pieces which bear his name. That Scipio and Lælius assisted him with their advice, is highly probable, and his vanity might feel flattered by the insertion among his own writings, of short passages of their composition; but when we call to mind, that Africanus and his friend, two persons of the most refined delicacy and taste, distinguished by their friendship, and selected as a companion in their hours of retirement and relaxation, a freedman! a man whose rank was infinitely inferior to their own; we must naturally suppose that those eminent persons courted the society of Terence, as admirers of his extraordinary genius, and elevation of sentiment. As they could not have become thoroughly acquainted with our author’s engaging qualifications, but from his dramatic compositions, it is most probable that the ANDRIAN at least, was published, before he was honoured with the intimacy of either Scipio, Lælius, or Furius. Indeed there can be but little doubt that the success of this play, (which he wrote when he was too little known, perhaps, to receive assistance from any one,) was the means of drawing him from the obscurity of his low rank, and of obtaining the notice and approbation of the great men of his age, and their patronage for his future productions.

NOTE 21.

_Quintus Memmius._

The oration alluded to by Suetonius was written by Memmius to defend himself against a charge of bribery. The Memmii were a plebeian family, though several of them attained to the highest dignities. Quintus was nearly related to the Caius Memmius who was assassinated by Lucius Apuleius Saturninus: and is supposed to have been the son of the Memmius to whom Lucretius dedicated his celebrated poem, “_De Rerum naturâ_.” _Vide_ Cicero in Catilin. and Florus, B. 3., c. 16.

NOTE 22.

_Cornelius Nepos._

Cornelius Nepos, a celebrated biographer of the Augustan age, was born on the banks of the Po, which he quitted in his youth; and, attracted by the splendour and pleasures of a gallant and polite court, removed to Rome, where his talents and taste for literature procured him the friendship of Cicero, and many other eminent persons. Of all his much-admired writings nothing remains but his “_Lives of the most illustrious Greeks and Romans_.”

NOTE 23.

_Puteoli._

Puteoli, or, as it is now called, Puzzoli, was much frequented by the Romans for the sake of its hot-wells: being at a convenient distance from the capital, not more than a day’s journey. It is now become comparatively inconsiderable, while Naples, in its vicinity, has grown into importance. Puzzoli, however, still affords some attraction to the curious; as there are the ruins of a temple of Jupiter Apis, or Serapis, to be seen there. This town was originally called Dicearchea: named, probably, after _Dice_, a daughter of Jupiter.

NOTE 24.

_On the first of March._

The Roman ladies were allowed to exercise extraordinary authority on this day, on which they celebrated the festival called MATRONALIA, instituted in gratitude to Mars, who permitted a termination of the war between the Romans and Sabines; in which the women were particularly concerned. The privileges allowed to ladies on the first of March, were, I believe, confined to the matrons, in commemoration of the _successful interference of the married women_, in the year 749, B. C., which put an end to the war between the Romans and the Sabines, who had taken up arms to revenge the rape of their women by the Romans, at a festival to which Romulus had invited them. (_Vide Note 28._)

NOTE 25.

_Santra._

Little is known of Santra, but that he was cotemporary with Cicero, and author of some biographical Memoirs, and “A Treatise on the Antiquity of Words,” which are now entirely lost. His family, probably, were plebeians, and of no great note.

NOTE 26.

_He would not have requested it from Scipio and Lælius, who were then extremely young._

Santra’s argument is of no force: for when Terence published the Andrian, in the year of Rome 587, at twenty-seven years of age, Scipio was eighteen, and might, at that age, have been perfectly capable of assisting Terence; for, independent of his excellent education, on which his father had bestowed infinite care and pains, he was possessed of a very superior genius: and nature had united in him all the fine qualities of his father, and of his grandfather by adoption, Scipio the Great. Velleius Paterculus wrote his eulogium as follows, “_Publius Scipio Æmilianus inherited the virtues of his grandfather Publius Africanus, and of his father Lucius Paulus, excelled all his cotemporaries in wit and learning, and in all the arts of war and peace; and, in the course of his whole life never did, said, or thought, any thing, but what was worthy of the highest praise_.”

“We have seen princes in France, who, at the age of eighteen, were capable of assisting a poet, as well with respect to the conduct and arrangement of his subject; as in what related to the manners, the diction, and the thoughts. Menander published his first piece at twenty years of age. It is clear, then, that there have been persons of eighteen, capable of assisting a poet. It appears, moreover, that the enemies of Terence did not publish this imputation against him till the latter years of his life, for the poet complains of it only in the prologues to the Self-tormentor and the Brothers: the first of which was played three years, and the last but one year before his death. When the first appeared, he was thirty-one, and Scipio twenty-two: and when the last was published, he was thirty-four, and Scipio was twenty-five.”――MADAME DACIER.

NOTE 27.

_Cneus Sulpicius Gallus._

Cneus Sulpicius Galba, surnamed Gallus, was by no means the least illustrious member of the noble family of the Sulpicii, and filled the office of Consul for the year in which the Andrian was acted. The first of the Sulpicii took the name of _Galba_, from his diminutive stature, that word signifying “_a small insect_;” and the name was afterwards assumed by several of his descendants.

NOTE 28.

_Who procured the representation of comedies at the Consular Games._

The Ludi Consulares and Ludi Consuales were probably the same, as we have no account of the institution of any games particularly in honour of the Consuls, to be celebrated either at their entering on, or resigning their office; for the _Latinæ Feriæ_, though superintended particularly by the Consuls, and a part of their office, were not called Consular Games. The Consual, or Consular Games were instituted on the following occasion. Romulus, the first king of Rome, had no sooner assumed the government of the small band of adventurers who were the ancestors of that illustrious race of heroes, who long held all the nations of the earth in subjection, than he found his kingdom in danger of being totally destroyed in its birth; as none of the inhabitants of the neighbouring states were willing to form a matrimonial alliance with his subjects; many of whom were refuged criminals and exiled foreigners. To obtain wives for his people, he was compelled to have recourse to a stratagem, which Plutarch describes as follows: “_He (Romulus) circulated a report that he had discovered, concealed under ground, the altar of a certain god, whom they called_ CONSUS, _the God of counsel, whose proper appellation is Neptunus Equestris, or Neptune, the inventor of riding; for, except at horse-races, when it is exposed to sight, this altar is kept covered in the great circus; and, it was said, that it was not improperly concealed, because all counsels ought to be kept secret and hidden. Romulus, having found the altar, caused proclamation to be made, that, on an appointed day, a magnificent sacrifice would be offered; and public games and shows exhibited, which were to be open to all who should choose to attend them. Upon this, great numbers went there. The king, dressed in a purple robe, was seated on high, surrounded by the chief patricians: he was to arise, take up his robe, and throw it over him, as a signal for the attack: his subjects, with ready weapons, kept their eyes intently fixed upon their sovereign; and, when the sign was given, they drew their swords with a shout, and seized, and carried off the daughters of the Sabines, who fled, without offering resistance._”――PLUTARCH.

The games which were instituted on this singular occasion were afterwards celebrated annually on the 12th of the calends of September, and considered to be an imitation of the Olympian Games of the Greeks. The Consuales, being celebrated in the Circus were sometimes called Circenses. The conduct of the Romans in the before-mentioned circumstances, and that of the Benjamites in a like predicament is so uniformly similar, that whoever attentively compares them, cannot think it very improbable that Romulus derived the idea of his stratagem from that passage of Jewish history. _Vide_ Judges, C. 21.

NOTE 29.

_Quintus Fabius Labeo._

If the accuracy of Plutarch may be depended on, Santra must have been mistaken in supposing Quintus Fabius Labeo to be still living at the time of the Andrian’s publication, or for several years before its appearance. This conclusion is deduced from the following circumstances: Quintus Fabius Maximus, whose prudent method of delaying a battle, and harassing his enemy, (in his campaigns against Hannibal,) procured him the surname of _Cunctator_, or _Delayer_, enjoyed the dignity of the consulship _five_ several times: he was first chosen in the year of Rome 525, and, supposing that he obtained that office in what Cicero calls _suo anno_, his own year, that is, as soon as he had attained the age required by law, Fabius must then have been forty-three years of age, and, as he died in his one hundredth year, he could not have been alive after the year 582. Quintus Fabius Labeo, who was the son of this hero, died (Plutarch informs us) some years before his father; and, consequently, could not have assisted Terence, even in his first play, the Andrian, which did not appear till the year of Rome 587. That Quintus Fabius Maximus Cunctator was the father of Quintus Fabius Labeo can admit of no doubt, though some authors who have mentioned them have omitted to notice their relationship. Plutarch expressly informs us, that the son of Quintus Fabius Maximus was of consular dignity, and, with the exception of the Cunctator, Quintus Fabius Labeo was the only Fabius whose name appears on record as consul, from the year of Rome 521 to the year 611.

NOTE 30.

_Marcus Popilius Lænas._

Madame Dacier thinks that the person here meant was Caius Popilius Lænas, who shared the consular government with Publius Ælius Ligur in the year of Rome 581; but that learned and celebrated lady assigns no reason why we should suppose either Suetonius or Santra to have been incorrect in affirming Marcus the brother of Caius to have been the reputed assistant of Terence. Marcus was a man of high reputation, and eminent abilities: the following anecdote, related by Velleius Paterculus, (_Book_ I. _Chap._ 10.) will afford some idea of the resolute decision of his character. “_The king of Syria, Antiochus Epiphanes, (or the illustrious) was at that time besieging Ptolemy, king of Egypt. Marcus Popilius Lænas was sent ambassador to Antiochus, to desire him to desist: he delivered his message; the king replied that he would consider of it; upon which Popilius drew a circle round him in the sand on which they stood, and told him, that he insisted on his final answer before he quitted that circumscribed space. This resolute boldness prevailed, and Antiochus obeyed the Roman mandate._”

Marcus Popilius Lænas was the junior Consul for the year of Rome 580: the name of his colleague was Lucius Posthumius Albinus.

NOTE 31.

_Persons of Consular dignity._

Those who had filled the office of consul were afterwards always called consulares, _of Consular dignity_; those who had been Prætors were styled Prætorii, _of Prætorian dignity_; in a similar manner the Censors took the title of Censorii, the Quæstors of Quæstorii, and the Ædiles of Ædilitii, though it does not appear that they were very strict in taking precedence accordingly.

NOTE 32.

_Quintus Consentius._

If any Latin writer called Quintus Consentius ever existed, all traces are lost both of his compositions and of his history; even the name of his family is unknown. It is possible that instead of Consentius, Cn. Sentius may be the person meant in this passage. Several of the Sentii were authors of some celebrity.

NOTE 33.

_Menander._

Menander was born at Athens, 345 B. C., and educated with great care by Theophrastus the peripatetic, whose labours must have been amply repaid, when he witnessed the proficiency of his pupil, who distinguished himself by successful dramatic compositions before he had attained his 21st year. With the exception of a few fragments, his works are entirely lost. Comedy was invented at Athens, and divided into three kinds; _the old_, _the middle_, and _the new_. The old comedy was that in which both the names and the circumstances were real; the middle, was where the circumstances were true, but the names disguised. To these two kinds, Menander had the glory of adding a third, which was called the new comedy, where both the plot and the characters were wholly fictitious. His style is said to have been elegant, and his ideas and sentiments refined. Dion Chrysostom considers his writings to be an excellent model for orators. This great poet wrote from 100 to 108 plays; from which Terence took four of his, viz., his Andrian, Eunuch, Self-tormentor, and Brothers. Menander obtained a poetical prize, eight several times; his chief competitor was called Philemon.

NOTE 34.

_Leucadia._

Leucadia, or as it is now called Santa Maura, or Lefcathia, is an island about 50 miles in circumference, in that part of the Mediterranean which was known among the ancients by the name of the Ionian sea. This island was rendered famous by one of its promontories called Leucas, and Leucate, which overhangs the sea at a very considerable perpendicular height: a leap from this promontory into the water beneath, was reckoned among the Greeks as an infallible cure for unhappy lovers of either sex, and most of those who made the experiment, found their love, and all the rest of their cares effectually terminated by this wise step. The famous poetess Sappho perished in this leap. _Vide The Spectator, Nos. 223, 227, 233._

NOTE 35.

_The consulate of Cneus Cornelius Dolabella, and Marcus Fulvius Nobilior._

This was in the year of Rome 594, and about 7 years after the appearance of our author’s first play. As his last production, The Brothers had been published but one year before this period; this circumstance alone, is sufficient to decide the degree of credit which ought to be accorded to the absurd report of Terence having translated 108 plays from Menander.

NOTE 36.

_A Roman Knight._

The Romans were divided into three classes. 1. _The Patricians_, or nobility. 2. _The Equites_, or knights. 3. _The Plebeians_, or the commons: that is, all who were not included in the two first ranks. The Equites, or knights, were in fact the Roman cavalry, as they usually had no other: though all of them were men of fortune; it being required by law (at least under the Emperors, if not before) that each Eques at his enrolment should possess 400 sestertia: a sum equal to between 3,000_l._ and 4,000_l._ sterling: a person worth double that sum might be chosen senator. Each knight was provided with a horse, and a gold ring, at the public expense; and at a general review, which took place every five years, the Censor was empowered ignominiously to deprive of his horse, and degrade from his rank, any knight who by disgraceful conduct had proved himself unworthy of his dignity.

NOTE 37.

_A garden of XX jugera._

The jugerum, or Roman acre, contained 28,800 feet; consequently, Terence’s estate must have been equal to rather more than 13 English acres: and (_as a garden_) must have been of considerable value: land in Italy, especially in the vicinity of the capital, bearing a high price; though not so high as in the reign of Trajan, who passed a law that every candidate for an office should hold a third part of his property in land. The Romans were particularly partial to gardens; to improve and beautify them, they bestowed great care, and expended large sums of money; some of these gardens were of vast extent, and most magnificently embellished with statues, paintings, aqueducts, &c., as were those of Cæsar and Sallust.

NOTE 38.

_The Villa Martis._

The ancient Roman villas were built with extraordinary magnificence, according to those descriptions of them which have reached modern times, and are not unworthy of attention. The great pleasure the Romans took in their villas, and gardens adjoining, may be seen in the writings of many of the most eminent among them; Varro, Cicero, Pliny, Cato, and others, have described these delightful retirements in a particular manner. In the villas of the richest, were concentred all the attractions that art or nature could be made to yield; and magnificence was every where blended with convenience. For the site of a villa of this description they chose the centre of a fine park, well stocked with game and fish: the building was generally lofty; (nearly 100 feet in height) for the advantage of an extensive view; as the _cœnatio_ where the family met at meals was selected in the upper story. The villa was divided into two parts, called _urbana_ and _rustica_: the first contained the chambers used by the family and guests, together with the places of amusement and refreshment; as the baths, terraces, &c. The _villa rustica_ was that part allotted to the slaves and domestics, who were extremely numerous. Those who wish for a minute description of the habits and manners of the Romans, in the country, may be fully gratified by consulting the following writers on the subject; Varro and Cato _de re rustica_; Dickson on _Roman agriculture_; and the works of Columella, and Dionysius Halicarnasseus.

NOTE 39.

_Afranius._

Lucius Afranius, a comic writer, was contemporary with Terence, and elevated himself into notice, by his imitations of that favourite poet, and of his great prototype Menander. Fragments of the compositions of Afranius are still extant: in his work quoted by Suetonius he probably gave a poetical description of the festival called Compitalia, or Compitalitia, and mentioned Terence as the author of comedies, which had been represented at that festival.

NOTE 40.

_Compitalia._

The Compitalia or Compitalitia were _originally_ ceremonies, (for nothing could be more improperly denominated _festivals_) of a nature at once extraordinary, disgusting and barbarous. It was never possible to ascertain where, or by whom, they were first instituted; though it is generally agreed that they were revived by _Servius Tullius_, the sixth king of Rome, who first introduced the observance of them among his subjects about the year 200. They were celebrated in honour of the goddess _Mania_, and of the _Lares_, who were supposed to be her offspring. The _Lares_ were the household gods of the Romans, and placed in the innermost recesses of their houses. These household gods were small images of their ancestors, which they always kept wrapped in dog’s skin, (which was intended for an emblem of _watchfulness_) as being for the protection of the house and its inhabitants. They were also called the _Manes_ of their forefathers, from _Mania_. It was pretended, that on consulting an oracle respecting the religious means to be employed for ensuring domestic security, the oracular response commanded that _Heads should be sacrificed for Heads_, meaning, that as divine vengeance required the lives of the culprits, the people should offer the heads of others instead of their own, and accordingly the Compitalia were instituted on this occasion, and _human victims_ were on this preposterous pretence sacrificed with a sow, to ensure family safety. The Romans, however, had too much good sense to suffer a long continuance of this diabolical folly: and they threw off the yoke of the tyrannical Tarquin, and this obnoxious custom at the same time. Lucius Junius Brutus abolished the sacrifice of human beings; and as the oracle required the offering of heads, he fulfilled its commands by substituting the heads of onions and poppies. They afterwards made figures of wool, which they suspended at their doors, imprecating all misfortunes on the images, instead of themselves. Slaves were allowed their liberty during the celebration of the Compitalia; and with freedmen officiated as priests on the occasion. Being rendered harmless by Brutus’ convenient interpretation of the oracle, the Compitalia were continued till the reigns of the emperors. The word Compitalia is by some derived from Compita, crossways, because during the ceremonies, the statues of the _Lares_ were placed in a spot where several streets met, and crowned with flowers. I think it not improbable that the original name was _Capitalia_, from _capita_, _heads_, because _heads_ were the requisite offerings.

NOTE 41.

_Nævius._

Cneus Nævius flourished about the year 500, and acquired great fame by some successful comedies which are now lost: he offended Lucius Cæcilius Metellus, a man of great power, and consular dignity, by whose influence the unfortunate poet was banished to Africa, where he died. Volcatius assigns to Nævius the third place.

NOTE 42.

_Plautus._

Marcus Accius Plautus was a native of Sarsina, a town of Umbria, near the Adriatic sea, and died at Rome, 182 B. C., at the age of forty, leaving behind him a literary reputation which very few, of any age or county, have ever been able to equal. Of those who refused to allow Plautus the title of the _First comic poet of Rome_, scarcely any have disputed his right to be second in the list, where Terence holds the _first_ place: some critics, indeed, have gone so far as to prefer Plautus, even to Terence himself; but Volcatius Sedigitus, whose judgment did Terence great injustice, makes Plautus second only to Cæcilius. The saying of Ælius Stilo is worthy of being recorded; “Musas Plautino sermone locuturas fuisse, si Latinè loqui vellent,” _that if the Muses wished to speak in Latin, they would speak in the language of Plautus_. This celebrated man wrote 27 or 28 comedies, which, notwithstanding the change of manners, kept possession of the stage for nearly 500 years; and were performed with applause as late as the reigns of Carus and Numerian. Only 20 of them are now extant. The following is the poet’s epitaph, written (as is supposed) by Varro, though Pietro Crinito affirms it to be the production of Plautus himself, of whom Crinito has written a biographical account.

“_Postquam est morte captus Plautus, Comœdia luget, scena est deserta, Deinde risus, ludus jocusque et numeri Innumeri simul omnes collacrymarunt._”

The comic muse bewails her Plautus dead, And silence reigns o’er the deserted stage; The joyous train that graced the scene are fled, And weep to lose, the wittiest of his age. While jests and sports their patron’s death deplore, And even laughter, now can smile no more.

NOTE 43.

_Cæcilius._

Cæcilius Statius was born in Gaul, and raised himself into eminence, from the condition of a slave, by his poetical talents: he died at Rome five or six years before the Andrian was first published. Volcatius gives Cæcilius the first place: Horace draws a sort of comparison between him and Terence in the following line,

“Vincere Cæcilius gravitate, Terentius arte.”

_Cæcilius Excelled in force, and grandeur of expression, Terence in art._

Quintilian tells us, “Cæcilium veteres laudibus serunt.” _The ancients resounded the praises of Cæcilius._――Also Varro, “Pathè vero, Cæcilius facile moverat.” That _Cæcilius knew how to interest the passions_.

Cæcilius wrote more than 30 comedies, now lost.

NOTE 44.

_Licinius._

Publius Licinius Tegula, a comic poet, flourished during the _second Punic war_. Aulus Gellius mentions him by the name of Caius Licinius Imbrex, author of a comedy called Neæra, but there can be little doubt but that Imbrex, and the Tegula above-mentioned were the same person.

NOTE 45.

_Cicero in his_ ΛΕΙΜΩΝ.

“Cicero wrote a poem, to which he affixed the title of λειμων, a Greek word signifying _a meadow_; he gave it this name, probably, because, as meadows are filled with various kinds of flowers, his work was a numerous collection of flowers (_of literature_) affording an agreeable variety. This poem, it seems, consisted entirely of panegyrics on illustrious persons. Nothing can be more erroneous than a supposition that these verses were the forgery of some grammarian: the Latin is too elegant, and they are too finely written, to allow us to suppose them a spurious production; and if Cicero had never written any lines inferior to these; his fame as a poet, might have equalled his fame as an orator. Ausonius had these verses in his mind, when he wrote

Tu quoque qui Latium lecto sermone Terenti, Comis, et astricto percurris pulpita socco.

What is still more remarkable, Cæsar commences his lines on Terence, in Cicero’s words, Tu quoque, &c., for there is not the least doubt but that Cæsar undertook this work, merely with a view to irritate, and to contradict Cicero.”

MADAME DACIER.

The name of Cicero is too well known, to need any further mention here; suffice it to say, that this great orator was totally unsuccessful in his poetical attempts, the chief fault of which was want of harmony in the measure: it may be remarked of Cicero, that very frequently his prose was written with the music of verse, and his verse with the roughness of prose.

NOTE 46.

_Caius Julius Cæsar._

The poem, of which these lines formed a part, is entirely lost; what remains of it, however, proves Julius Cæsar to have been no mean poet, but he seems to have excelled in every art of war and peace;――

quem Marte, togâque Præcipium.

The first alike in war, and peace. OVID.

If the lines quoted by Suetonius were written in ridicule of Cicero, they are another proof in support of an opinion that has been very prevalent, that the orator was not very high in the good graces of Cæsar, whose dislike of him may be easily traced to Marc Antony, Cæsar’s intimate and favourite companion, and the most inveterate enemy of Cicero.

NOTE 47.

_The Megalesian Games._

The Megalesian games were celebrated annually at Rome, in the beginning of April, with solemn feasts, in honour of Cybele, otherwise called Rhea, the mother of the gods. Opinions vary as to their duration, some fixing it at six days, and others at not more than one. Originally instituted in Phrygia, these ceremonies were introduced at Rome, during the _second Punic war_, when the statue of the goddess was carried thither from Pessinus. They consisted chiefly of scenic sports; and women danced before this statue, which was held so sacred, that no servant was allowed to approach it, or to take any part in the games. They were called Megalesian, from the Greek words, μεγαλη, great, Cybele being known by the name of the Great Goddess, and Ευαλωσια, another name of Cybele, as presiding over husbandry. The festival ΘΕΣΜΟΦΟΡΙΑ, celebrated in Athens, Sparta, and Thebes, in honour of the same goddess resembled in many circumstances the Roman Megalesia; the Latins appear to have adopted partially, on various occasions, the religious ceremonies of the Greeks, particularly in their imitation of certain of the solemnities which were observed at the _Eleusinian_ mysteries.

NOTE 48.

_Curule Ædilate._

The Curule Ædiles, created in the year of Rome 388, were at first elected from among the patricians. These magistrates were appointed to inspect all public edifices, (whence their name) to fix the rate of provisions, to take cognizance of disorders committed within the city, and to examine weights and measures: but their chief employment was to procure the celebration of the various Roman games, and to exhibit comedies and shews of gladiators; on which account, though inferior in rank to the Consuls, they precede them in the title of this play. The Ædilate was an honourable office, and a primary step to higher dignities in the republic. Curule magistrates were those who were entitled to use the _sella curulis_, viz., the consuls, prætors, curule ædiles, and censors: this chair was called _curulis_, because those privileged to use it, always carried it in their chariots, to and from the tribunals at which they presided. Tacitus informs us in his annals (_Book XIII. Chap. XXX._) that in the year 809, the power of the Ædiles, both curule, and plebeian, was very much circumscribed; that their salary was regulated anew; and limits fixed, as to the sum they were allowed to impose as a fine.

NOTE 49.

_Marcus Fulvius._

Son of the Consul for the year 564, and great grandson of the illustrious Servius Fulvius Pætinus Nobilior, the companion of Regulus; Pætinus was consul in the year 498. Marcus Fulvius obtained the consulate eight years after his Ædilate: the name of his colleague was Cneus Cornelius Dolabella. It is probable that this branch of the Fulvian family assumed the agnomen of _Nobilior_, to distinguish themselves as _nobiles_ from the rest of the Fulvii, who might not have had any claim to that title. None but those, and the posterity of those, who had borne some curule office, (_vide note 48_) were _nobiles_, or nobles. The _nobiles_ possessed the exclusive right of making statues of themselves; which were carefully preserved by their posterity, and usually carried in procession on solemn occasions: they painted the faces of these images

“Quid prodest, Pontice, longo Sanguine censeri, pictosque ostendere vultus Majorum.”

_What avails it to be thought, Of ancient blood? and to expose to view, The painted features of dead ancestors?_ JUVENAL.

NOTE 50.

_Marcus Glabrio._

This person was doubtless distinguished by another appellation which is not set down in the title to this play: under the name of Glabrio, there is no account of him extant. As Glabrio does not appear to have been the name of any _Gens_, or family in Rome, it was probably the _Agnomen_ of Marcus only, and not common to his kindred.

NOTE 51.

_By the company of Lucius Ambivius Turpio, and Lucius Attilius._

These were the principal actors of their company, but otherwise persons of little note; for contrary to the customs of Greece, where men of the highest rank thought it no degradation to appear on the stage; the actors at the Roman theatres were not treated with that consideration to which persons of talent, who furnish the public with a polite and rational amusement, united with instruction, have a just and undeniable claim. However unjust the Romans might have been in this particular, they made an exception in favour of transcendent merit; as in the case of the admirable Roscius, though the mention made of this favourite performer by his friend Cicero, shews the truth of the foregoing remark. “Cum artifex ejusmodi sit, ut solus dignus videatur esse qui in scenâ spectetur; tum vir ejusmodi fuit, ut _solus dignus videatur qui non accedat_;” _so excellent an actor, that he only seemed worthy to tread the stage, and yet so noble a man, that he seemed to be the very last person that ought to appear there_. Though the Roman actors were not allowed their due privileges as citizens, yet some of the most eminent were often very great favourites with the people, and created so much interest among them, that (as Suetonius tells us) the parties of rival performers disputing for precedence, have proceeded so far as to terminate the quarrel in bloodshed. Turpio and Attilius were actors of the first class, and were said (_vid. Terence Phorm:_) _agere primas partes_, because they always personated the principal characters in the piece.

NOTE 52.

_Præneste._

Præneste was a town of Latium, about twenty-four miles from Rome, and founded by Cæculus, as we are told by _Virgil, B. 7._

“Nec _Prænestinæ fundator_ defuit _urbis_, _Vulcano genitum_que omnis quem credidit ætas _Cæculus_.”

Nor was the founder of Præneste absent, Cæculus, the reputed son of Vulcan.

Præneste was deemed a place of military importance, from its situation, and Cicero (_in Catal._) tells us that Catiline, when foiled in his attempt to seize the capital, endeavoured to make himself master of Præneste. This town was particularly celebrated for very cold springs, which were held in high esteem, as Strabo assures us, and Horace mentions the circumstance in one of his odes.

“seu mihi _frigidum Præneste_, seu Tibur supinum, Seu liquidæ placuere Baiæ.”

NOTE 53.

_Equal flutes right and left handed._

Flutes were called in Latin _tibiæ_, because they were made of the shank or shin-bone of some animal, until the discovery of the art of boring flutes, when they began to use wood,

“_Longave multifori delectat tibia buxi._”――OVID.

The manner in which these instruments were played on the stage, and the distinction of right- and left-handed flutes, has never been ascertained with any degree of certainty: few subjects have more obstinately baffled the researches of the learned. The most perspicuous detail of all that the moderns are acquainted with respecting the ancient flutes, is written by the learned Madame Dacier, part of which is quoted in the Preface to this Translation.

NOTE 54.

_It is taken from the Greek._

All Terence’s comedies were of this class, which was called _Palliatæ_, viz., plays in which the scene was laid in Greece. The class, called _Togatæ_, were pieces entirely Roman. The palliatæ were generally _new_ comedies, of which Menander was the inventor; but Pacuvius wrote the _middle_, and Livius Andronicus the _old_ comedy. (_Vide Note 33._) In the age in which Terence wrote his comedies, the Romans were some degrees less advanced in the refinements of civilization, than the Greeks. But little more than a century before, Pyrrhus, king of Epirus, thought them worthy of no better epithet than that of “_barbarians_” in comparison with his own subjects, who were not themselves the most polished nation in the world. The Romans, therefore, omitted no opportunity of improving the manners and perfecting the education of their youth, by sending them to mix with the Greeks, and to unite themselves to the disciples of those Grecian sages, who, as far as the light of reason, unassisted by _divine revelation_, could penetrate, dispelled the clouds of ignorance, and taught their followers that happiness and wisdom can be attained only by the virtuous. It was, doubtless, on this account, that Terence chose Greece as the scene of his comedies, which he intended should portray to the Romans the manners, customs, and characters of those whom they often held up as a pattern of polished refinement, worthy the imitation of the rising generation.

It is to this, doubtless, that we must attribute Terence’s choice of Athens in preference to Rome as the scene of his plays; as, particularly, in the comedy which the critics call the _comedy of intrigue_, the best judges agree that the scene is preferably laid in that country in which it is meant to be performed. But the comedies of Terence were more of that description which Dr. Blair denominates the _comedy of character_, and preferable to what he calls the _comedy of intrigue_, because “it exhibits the prevailing manners which mark the character of the age in which the scene is laid. _Incidents_ should afford a proper field for the exhibition of character: the action in comedy, though it demands the poet’s care in order to render it animated and natural, is a less significant and important part of the performance than the action in tragedy; as, in comedy, it is what men say, and how they behave, that draws our attention, rather than what they perform or what they suffer.”

NOTE 55.

_The consulate of Marcus Claudius Marcellus, and Cneus Sulpicius Galba._

The consuls, the chief magistrates of the Roman republic were first created at the expulsion of the kings in the year 244: they were two in number, and chosen annually. The consuls were the head of the _Senate_, which they assembled and dismissed at pleasure, though it was not their exclusive privilege, as a dictator, his master of the horse, the prætors, military tribunes, and even the tribunes of the people, might also, on certain occasions, assemble the Senate. The consuls, however, were the supreme judges of all differences; they commanded the armies of the republic, and, during their consulate, enjoyed almost unbounded power, which could only be checked by the creation of a dictator, to whom the consuls were subordinate. It was requisite that every candidate for the consulship should be _forty-three_ years of age, and that he should previously have discharged the functions of Prætor, Ædile, and Quæstor. The consuls were always patricians till the year 388, when, by the influence of their tribunes, the people obtained a law, that henceforth one of them should be a plebeian. The ensigns of consular dignity were twelve guards, called _lictors_, (who bore the _fasces_,) and a robe, fringed with purple, worn by these magistrates, during their consulate. The names of the consuls are mentioned in the title of this play, merely to fix its date, as the Roman method of reckoning their years was by the names of the consuls. This custom continued for 1,300 years. Marcus Claudius Marcellus was the grandson of the great Marcellus, slain in the year 545; for Caius Sulpicius Galba, _vide_ Note 27.

NOTE 56.

_Prologue._

Madame Dacier grounds on the first line of this Prologue an opinion, that the Andrian was not Terence’s first play: but, if that learned and justly-celebrated lady had attentively considered the relation the sixteen following lines of the Prologue bear to the first, she could not have made this deviation from her usual extreme accuracy. Whether the Andrian was, or was not, our Author’s first production, is a question of more curiosity than real importance: it has, however, undergone some discussion among the learned; and, in my opinion, it may be clearly ascertained by an attentive perusal of the Prologue to the Andrian, and learned and unlearned are equally competent to decide upon it. Let us now examine the proof. The first seven lines inform us, that “when the poet began to write, he thought he had only to please the people, but that he finds it far otherwise; as he is obliged to write a Prologue to answer the objections of an older bard.”

If we stop here, it is natural enough to conclude, that in the Prologue to the Andrian, he is alluding to censures passed on some former play. But, if we look at the next nine lines we see that _in the prologue to the Andrian_, he repels a censure _not passed on any former production, but on the_ ANDRIAN _itself_. Listen, says he, to their objections, which are, in short, that in the composition of _this very Andrian_, he has made a confused mixture of two of Menander’s plays. What allusion is made to any former writings? None: the snarling criticisms of the older bard were directed _only_ against the _Andrian_. I imagine that the case was thus: Terence wrote the Andrian, and procured its representation, probably without any Prologue, (which was sometimes dispensed with, as we see in Plautus,) the play, and its author, were, probably, cried down and abused by this older bard and his admirers, who might envy the visible superiority of Terence, who _afterwards_ composed the Prologue in question, to answer their objections. The reader is referred for further proof, to Suetonius’s Life of Terence, a translation of which is prefixed to this play.

NOTE 57.

_To answer the snarling malice of an older poet._

According to Donatus, the name of this older bard was Lucius Lavinius: but there can be little doubt but that name is a corruption of Luscius Lanuvinus, the arch-enemy of Terence, whom he handles so roughly in his Prologue to the Eunuch. Luscius was a poet of considerable talent. Volcatius gives him the ninth place,

“Nono loco esse facilè facio Luscium.”

Luscius undoubtedly I make the ninth.

NOTE 58.

_Menander wrote the Andrian and Perinthian._

The _Perinthian_ (a fine comedy now lost) was so called from Perinthus, a town of Thrace, the name of which was afterwards changed to Heraclea, and that name is now corrupted to Herecli, or Erekli, its present appellation. Erekli is a town in the Turkish province of Romania, on the north of the sea of Marmora, and about sixty miles from Constantinople. It is a place of some consequence from its vicinity to the Turkish capital. For the _Andrian_, _vide_ Note 69.

NOTE 59.

_They censure Nævius, Plautus, Ennius._

An account of Nævius has been given in Note 41, and of Plautus in Note 42. Ennius was the tenth comic poet of Rome, according to Volcatius, who says, “Antiquitatis causâ decimum addo Ennium.” If it be true that Ennius was but the tenth in poetical merit, the greatest glory of the nine who were above him, must have been the distinguished honour of excelling this highly extolled poet. Ennius was born in the year of Rome 515, and died in 585; though he obtained the privileges of a Roman citizen, he was, by birth, a Calabrian, as _Ovid_ expressly tells us, and informs us, that his statue was placed on the tomb of the Scipios, because he had so nobly celebrated their renowned actions:

“Ennius emeruit, Calabris in montibus ortus, Contiguus poni, Scipio, magne tibi.”

_Ennius, among Calabrian mountains born, Deserves, O Scipio, to be placed by thee._

The reader cannot become acquainted with the enthusiastic admiration of the Romans for the brilliant performances of Ennius, better than by a perusal of some of the many and great encomiums passed on him by those who, though they lived after him, may be called his competitors for literary fame. _Cicero_ calls him,

“Ingeniosus, poeta et auctor valde bonus.”――_A man of great abilities and wit, and an admirable writer both of poetry and of prose._ _Horace_ also

“Ennius et sapiens, et fortis, et alter Homerus.”

_Ennius the wise, and strong, another Homer._

_Quintilian_ speaks of him thus, “Ennium sicut sacros vetustate lucos adoremus, in quibus grandia et antiqua robora jam non tantam speciem habent quam religionem.”――_We revere Ennius, as we revere the groves, sacred for their antiquity, in which the great and ancient oaks are not reckoned precious for their beauty, but because they are consecrated to religious purposes._

_Lucretius_ thus,

“Ennius―――――――――――――― primus amœno Detulit ex Helicone perenni fronde coronam.”

_Ennius first wore the never-fading crown, Gain’d at the Muses’ seat, the pleasant Helicon._

And, lastly, _Ovid_,

“Ennius ingenio maximus, arte rudis.”

_Ennius, the first in wit, though wanting art._

Ennius wrote tragedies, comedies, annals, _&c._, of which some fragments remain: he died of the gout, brought on by drinking. _Horace_ tells us, that Ennius was in the habit of raising his imagination by large draughts of wine, when he intended to write a description of any warlike action.

NOTE 60.

Simo. _Carry in these things directly._

What “_those things_” were, though a subject of no great importance, has been discussed with extreme diligence by various learned commentators, who have not a little differed in opinion. The idea of a French commentator, who supposed Simo to allude to furniture bought by him for his son’s wedding, is ridiculed by the learned Madame Dacier, who has herself suffered the same treatment under the hands of some of our English critics, for interpreting them in the sense I have adopted. That Simo should provide furniture for a marriage which he had but slight hopes of negotiating at that time, is not very probable. But Athenian slaves performed all domestic offices in their masters’ houses: and Sosia, even after he became a freedman might have practised cookery, in which, perhaps, he excelled. He uses the words “_mea ars_,” _my art_, and Simo answers him with “_isthac arte_,” _that art_, by which it is clear that he means some particular art. The word art has in English both a general and particular sense; but, in Latin, “_ars_” is generally used only in the latter.

“Rara quidem facie, sed rarior _arte_ canendi.”――OVID.

_Her beauty charms us; and oh! how much more Her matchless skill in_ arts _of melody._

Again,

“Hac _arte_ Pollux, et vagus Hercules Innixus, arces attigit igneas.”――HORACE.

_Supported by this_ art, _Pollux and Hercules were raised to heaven._

Sosia speaks in this character also at the end of the scene, “Sat est _curabo_,” curo, meaning to cook; he uses also more than once the word _rectè_, which is peculiarly a term of cookery, thus “_rectiùs cœnare_,” PLAUTUS; and, at Rome, when patrons invited their clients or followers to supper, where a very plentiful banquet was always served up: the supper was particularly designated CŒNA RECTA. The art of cookery, in Greece, was, in the earlier ages, far from being accounted degrading, and was, indeed, frequently practised by men very far above a servile station.

I mention this, lest those who are unacquainted with these customs, might object against our author, that _Simo_ was guilty of an inconsistent condescension, in making a confidant of one who held an office of this nature.

NOTE 61.

_When I first bought you as my slave._

Slaves, among the Greeks, formed a very considerable portion of the population of a city, and, in some places, were more numerous than the citizens themselves. In Athens, all domestic offices were performed by slaves, who were employed also in the capacities of tutors, scribes, stewards, overseers, and husbandmen, according to their respective talents: when a slave manifested great abilities, he was taught the art or science for which he seemed most fitted. Some were instructed in literature, and often so distinguished themselves by their writings, that they obtained their freedom. The slaves of the Athenians were either taken in war, or purchased, or reduced to slavery for some crime: they were divided into _two_ classes: 1. those who were natives of some part of Greece, who had the privilege of redeeming themselves; who, if cruelly treated, might appeal to the archons, and change their master; and whose lives were not in their master’s power; 2. those slaves who were transported from barbarous nations, who were wholly at the disposal of their owners in every respect. The price of a slave varied according to his qualifications; some were worth about 10_l._ sterling, some were valued at 20_l._, and others much higher. The Athenians were celebrated for the gentleness with which they treated their slaves. Xenophon informs us, that they frequently spoiled them by excessive indulgence. Slaves were made free, if they rendered any essential service to the government; and frequently received their liberty as a reward for their fidelity and attachment to their master, and his family. For further information respecting the Athenian slaves, and remarks on their habits and manners, _vide_ Notes 62, 63, 64, 68, 86, 88, 110, 131, 154ᴮ, 195, 196.

NOTE 62.

_I gave you freedom._

The ceremony of Ἀπελεύθερια, or giving a slave his liberty, was performed in Athens as follows, the slave kneeled down at the feet of his master, who struck him a slight blow, saying, “_Be free_;” or he took the slave before a magistrate, and there formally declared him at liberty. These ceremonies were extremely similar to those used by the Romans on the same occasion. The Greeks sometimes set their slaves at liberty in a public assembly, which Æschines describes as follows, Ἄλλοι δέ τινες ὑποκηρυξάμενοι, τοὺς αὑτῶν οἰκέτας ἀφίεσαν ἀπελευθέρους, μάρτυρας τῆς ἀπελευθερίας τοὺς Ἕλληνας ποιούμενοι.”――_Others, when they had obtained silence by means of the heralds, gave their household slaves their liberty; and made the assembled Greeks witnesses of their manumission._

The same author mentions a very singular law, which stigmatized with infamy any person who should proclaim the freedom of a slave in the theatre. “Καὶ διαῤῥήδην ἀπαγορεύει μήτε οἰκέτην ἀπελευθεροῦν ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ――――――――ἢ ἄτιμον εἶναι τὸν κήρυκα.”――_And_ this law _clearly forbids that any person shall manumit a slave in the theatre――――――――and decrees infamy to the herald who shall proclaim his freedom there_.

Slaves were called οἰκέται, and πελάται, but, after they became free, received the appellation of ἀπελεύθεροι, and enjoyed all the privileges granted to the νόθοι, or illegitimate citizens, who were not admitted to all the rights of those whose parents were both freeborn Athenian citizens. It was usual for a freedman to continue with his master, who was called his προστατης, or patron; he was also allowed to choose a sort of guardian, who was called ἐπίτροπος.

NOTE 63.

_Nor have you given me any cause to repent that I did so._

An emancipated slave was bound to perform certain services for his former master: he was to assist him in any emergency to the utmost of his power: and, if he proved remiss in these duties, was liable to a severe punishment. No freedman could appear in a court of justice against his patron, either to give evidence in his own suit, or in that of another.

NOTE 64.

_It pains me to be thus reminded of the benefits you have conferred upon me, as it seems to upbraid me with having forgotten them._

By the Athenian laws, any freedman convicted of ingratitude to his former master, was reduced a second time to a state of slavery: but, if a freedman was brought to a trial on a charge of this nature, and acquitted of it, he was declared τελέως ἐλεύθερος, _perfectly free_, and was then wholly released from all obligations of service to his former patron.

NOTE 65.

_You shall hear every thing from the beginning._

This is the _initium narrationis_, the first part of the narration, and, by far the longest: it is, in the original, inimitably beautiful. Scarcely any branch of dramatic writing is more difficult than _narration_, which, unless composed in that happy vein, attainable by so few, generally proves embarrassing to the actor, and tiresome to the auditors. The writings of Terence abound with narrations, a necessary consequence of his strict adherence to the unities. A judicious French writer, whose opinions (_as a critic_,) have ever been treated with deference, speaking of our author’s excellence in this branch of the drama, makes his eulogium in just and forcible terms.

“Terence is without a rival, especially in his narrations, which flow along with a smooth and even course, like a clear and transparent river. We see no parade of sentiment, no glare of obtrusive wit: no smart epigrammatical sentences, which Nicole and Rochefoucault only can make acceptable. When he applies a maxim, it is in so plain and familiar a manner, that it has all the simplicity of a proverb. He introduces nothing but what appertains to the subject. I have perused, and re-perused the writings of this poet with the greatest attention, and have laid them aside with the impression that there is not a scene too much in any play, nor a line too much in any scene.” DIDEROT _on dramatic poetry_.

For further remarks on the narrations of the Andrian, _vide_ Notes. Nos. 89. 95. 101. I shall postpone a continuance of observations on the very obvious inconvenience attendant on narrations; and pursue a remark made in the commencement of this note, respecting the source from which has flowed so many of these narrations, which require all the _art_ and wit of a Terence to prevent them from seeming too prolix.

This source may be found in those irksome _unities_ of _time_ and _place_, those leaden fetters of dramatic genius, which, by chaining down the imagination and talents of many of the ancient, and even some of the modern, dramatic writers, have deprived the world of more, than the embellishments they may have given to composition can ever repay.

Terence, in all his works, in compliance with the reigning taste of his age, observed the unities of _action_, _time_, and _place_, with the most scrupulous exactness: and this observance is the chief reason that his comedies can never succeed on any modern stage. His plays are crowded with narratives, which, however beautifully written, will never yield that attraction to an audience, which they find in busy and lively action. He cannot bring on the stage what is supposed to happen in the next street, or adjoining house, it must therefore be _related_. All the story of the piece _must_ be supposed to pass in a very few hours: all those events which cannot be imagined to take place in _one day_, and which, when represented to the spectators in the _modern drama_, are often of the greatest interest, must, by the law of the unity of time be _related_. Of what a scene, to instance one of _many_, has the unity of place robbed us in Terence’s Eunuch! where Laches (_Act 5_) rushes into the house of Thais. How many modern plays, in which the unities were preserved, ever kept the stage a month? None: if we except Ben Jonson’s “_Silent Woman_,” “_The Adventures of Five Hours_,” and a very few others; and it may well be doubted whether even our immortal SHAKSPEARE himself, if he had shackled his genius with these rules, would not have been generally confined to the closet. The practice of that great poet, and of most of the modern dramatists of all countries; who have observed _only_ (the rule of all stages, ancient and modern,) unity of action, is a tacit condemnation of the other two: and the fiat of Dr. Johnson speaks a yet plainer language. He has decided on the value of the unities in his preface to Shakspeare: and though what he has written respecting them is too long to be inserted here, the following extracts will not be unacceptable, as they shew the grounds on which it is assumed that dramatic writers ought, in general, to dispense with the unities of _time_ and _place_.

“The critics hold it impossible, that an action of months or years can be possibly believed to pass in three hours. The spectator, who knows that he saw the first act at Alexandria, cannot suppose that he sees the next at Rome; he knows that he has not changed his place, and that the place cannot change itself; that what was a house can never become a plain; that what was Thebes, can never be Persepolis. Such is the triumphant language with which a critic exults over the miseries of an irregular poet; it is time, therefore, to tell him, that he assumes as an unquestionable principle, a position, which, while his breath is forming it into words, his understanding pronounces to be false. It is false, that any representation is mistaken for reality; that any dramatic fable, in its materiality was ever credible, or, for a single moment, was ever credited. The objection arising from the impossibility of passing the first hour at Alexandria, and the next at Rome, supposes that when the play opens, the spectator really imagines himself at Alexandria; and believes that his walk to the theatre has been a voyage to Egypt, and that he lives in the days of Antony and Cleopatra. Surely he that can imagine this may imagine more. He that can take the stage at one time for the Palace of the Ptolemies, may take it in half an hour for the promontory of Actium: delusion, if delusion be admitted, has no certain limitation. The truth is, that (judicious) spectators are always in their senses, and know from the first act to the last, that the stage is only a stage, and that the players are only players: and by supposition as place is introduced, time may be extended.” Dr. Johnson concludes this subject as follows; “He that, _without diminution_ of any other _excellence_, shall preserve all the unities unbroken, deserves the like applause with the architect, who shall display all the orders of architecture in a citadel, without any deduction from its strength; but the principal beauty of a citadel is to exclude the enemy; and the greatest graces of a play are to copy nature, and instruct life.”

It is needless to add any thing to these arguments, as they must be deemed conclusive. The plays of our author are better calculated, perhaps, to please in the closet by his mode of writing, as it adds to perspicuity: Terence is, probably, the greatest practical champion for the three unities that ever did, or ever will, exist. His easy flowing _narratives_, judiciously divided, and introduced with so much art, as in some places to seem no narratives until they are concluded, remedy as much as possible the inconveniences attendant on this mode of writing.

NOTE 66.

_When my son Pamphilus arrived at man’s estate._

In the Latin, _postquam excessit ex Ephebis_, _after he was removed from the class of young men called_ ἔφηβοι.

All the Athenian citizens were publicly registered three several times. 1. In their _infancy_, on the _second day_ of the festival ἀπατούρια, called ἀνάῤῥυσις. 2. When they were _18 years of age_, they were registered on the _third day_ of the ἀπατούρια, called κουρεῶτις, when they received the title of ἔφηβοι. 3. At _20 years of age_, they were registered for the last time at the feast called βενδίδεια on the 19th of the month, Thargelion, when they were said to be admitted “_among the men_.” These ceremonies were used to prevent the intrusion of persons, who had no claim to the title of Athenian citizen, which was an honour, that even foreign kings thought worthy of their pursuit. Having quitted the class of the ἔφηβοι, Pamphilus, at the time mentioned by Simo, must have been 20 years of age.

NOTE 67.

_The schools of the Philosophers._

Several schools of Philosophy were established at Athens, in which philosophers of different sects presided, and gave instructions to those of Athens, and of other countries, whose fortunes allowed them leisure to pursue studies of this nature. The buildings in which the philosophers delivered their lectures were provided at the public expense: they were called _Gymnasia_, and built in divisions, some for study called στοαὶ, and others for various exercises, as wrestling, pugilism, dancing, &c.; these were denominated παλαίστρα. The principal _Gymnasia_ in Athens were the Lyceum, where Aristotle taught; the academy, in which Plato presided; and, lastly, the Cynosarges, which gave the name of Cynics to that sect of philosophers, founded in this place by Antisthenes. (_vid. Plutarch’s Life of Themistocles_).

NOTE 68.

_In these times flattery makes friends; truth, foes._

Madame Dacier has elucidated this passage in an elegant and ingenious criticism, which clears Pamphilus from the charge of flattery which Sosia appears to insinuate against him. The sentence in the original runs thus: “namque hoc tempore _obsequium amicos veritas odium parit_.” “When Simo spoke of the obliging temper of his son, he intended to describe him as behaving with that complaisant politeness which is as remote as possible from flattery; the practice of which never requires of a man any thing inconsistent with the laws of truth and candour; otherwise he would have blamed his son, instead of praising him. But Sosia, following the example of people of his own rank, who always look on the dark side of every thing, takes this opportunity of censuring the manners of the age, by declaring that people were unwilling to hear the truth. Thus he mistakes _obsequium_, which really means _an amiable mildness of manners_, for _assentatio_, _servile flattery_, a vice which shows weakness of mind, and baseness of heart: and which renders those of our friends who practise it, more dangerous than even our enemies themselves. There is more ingenuity in this passage than appears at first sight.”

MADAME DACIER.

For some further very valuable critical observations, the reader is referred to the preface to a translation of Phædrus’s fables, published at Paris, about the middle of the 17th century. Besides very able remarks on the Andrian, and the rest of Terence’s plays, the translator gives an ingenious comparison between fable and comedy; he also translated into French, three of Terence’s comedies, viz., The Andrian, The Brothers, and Phormio.

NOTE 69.

_The Island of Andros._

This island is situated in the Ægean sea, or, as it is now called, the Archipelago; it is distant from the Piræus, or port of Athens, about 500 of the stadia Olympica, or rather more than 50 English miles. It retains its original appellation. Bacchus seems to have been the reputed patron of this island; which was also called Antandros, and has been mistaken by some for the Antandros of Phrygia Minor, where Æneas built his fleet. _Vide_ Ovid’s Meta. Book 13, l. 623 to 670.

NOTE 70.

_The neglect of her relations._

The relations of unmarried women in Greece were bound by law to provide for them, either by seeing them married to some suitable person, or to furnish them with the means of support according to their rank in life; or if a woman had no near kindred, this duty devolved upon a guardian called κυριος. It is probable that this obligation extended equally to the paternal and maternal relations, though the latter generally acted only in case of the former becoming extinct. Terence warrants the supposition of relations on both sides, being compelled to act, as he uses the word _cognatus_, which signifies strictly a relation by the mother’s side, _agnatus_, on the contrary, is never employed but to designate a kinsman by the father’s side, though _cognatus_ is often used as a common term for both; and such is its meaning in this passage: for if the law had been confined to the father’s relations, Terence would certainly have used _agnatus_, and thereby clearly designated the particular persons who were bound to observe it.

NOTE 71.

_The distaff and the loom._

The Greek and Roman women led generally very domesticated lives, and passed a considerable portion of their time in spinning and weaving. The simple manners of the earlier ages obliged each family to depend, in a great measure, on itself, for the supply of its various wants, and the kings and heroes of antiquity, might doubly prize a mantle or a vest, wrought by the hands of those who were dearest to them. Wool was usually worn; but linen, though highly valued, seems to have been but rarely used. When the Greeks became more refined, this simplicity of manners among women of rank gave place to less laborious habits, and slaves were instructed in the art of spinning and weaving.

NOTE 72.

_Several lovers made their addresses to her, &c._

This passage has been elegantly and chastely softened by an ingenious French writer, who flourished about the year 1650. I shall subjoin in this, and other subsequent notes, the various alterations made by this judicious editor, together with the original passages: the lines he has introduced are beautifully written, and a close imitation of the style of Terence: I cannot doubt but they will be considered worthy of a perusal: they are a proof of a laudable delicacy, which was but too rarely to be met with in many of the poets of both England and France, _in the 17th century_.

The original passage runs thus:――

“Primùm hæc pudicè vitam, parcè, ac duriter Agebat, lana ac tela victum quæritans: Sed postquam amans accessit, _pretium pollicens, Unus, et item alter, ita ut ingenium est omnium Hominum ab labore proclive ad libidinem: Accepit conditionem, dein_ quæstum occipit.”

Which is altered by the French translator to the following:――

“Primum hæc pudicè vitam, parce, ac duriter Agebat, lana ac tela victum quæeritans: _Sed postquam ad illam accessit adolescentulus_, Unus, et item alter; ita ut ingenium est omnium Hominum ab labore _proclive ad desidiam; Sperans se cuipiam illorum uxorem fore, Famæ haud pepercit, illosque in domum suam Lubens admisit nimium familiariter_.

“At first she lived chastely, and penuriously, and laboured hard, managing with difficulty to gain a livelihood with the distaff and the loom: but soon after several lovers made their addresses to her, and as we are all naturally prone to idleness, and averse to labour, and _as they made her promises of marriage, she was too negligent of her reputation, and admitted their visits oftener than was prudent_.”

NOTE 73.

_Aha! thought I, he is caught._

In the Latin, Certè captus est. HABET. Terence borrowed this expression (_habet_) from the amphitheatre at Rome, where men called _gladiators_, who were (for the chief part) captives and slaves, fought before the people: who looked with great delight on these combats, which often terminated in death to half the persons engaged. When a gladiator was wounded, the people exclaimed HABET, _he has it_, and thus the word was often used at Rome, in the sense adopted by Terence.

NOTE 74.

_He paid his share, and supped with the rest._

In the Latin _symbolum dedit_, _he gave his ring as a token, or pledge_. This phrase is an allusion to a custom which prevailed chiefly at Rome. When a party agreed to dine together at their own expense, or, in other words, to club together for an entertainment: each of the party _gave his ring_ to him who had the care of providing the feast, as a symbol or token that he, the owner of the ring, was to join the company, and defray his share of the expense. Hence, he who paid nothing, was called _asymbolus_. Rings were also given in contracts instead of a bond: and used for tokens of various kinds. The Greeks also seem to have called rings by the same name, σύμβολα.

NOTE 75.

_To give his daughter to Pamphilus with a large dowry._

The word dowry, which is called, in Greek, προὶξ, or μείλια, or ἕδνα, originally meant the sum which a man gave to the family of the woman he married, and with which he might be said to purchase his wife: but, as the Greeks grew more refined, and also more wealthy, this custom was wholly abolished; and the dowry was given by the wife’s relations to the husband, to assist him in the maintenance of her and of her children. The dowries of women were, in Athens, considered a subject of great importance; and many laws were framed by the Athenian legislators, (particularly by Solon,) to provide for the well ordering of women’s fortunes. An heiress could be disposed of in marriage, only by her father, grandfather, or brother: if she had neither of these relations, the archons determined who was to be her husband; and it was held so important to keep her estate in the family, that _at one time_ a law prevailed, that if an heiress had no children by her first husband, she was taken from him by the authority of the archons, and given to her nearest relation. A wife, who brought a fortune to her husband, was called γυνὴ; she who brought none παλλακὴ. Solon, apprehensive of mercenary unions, at one time, passed a law, that a woman should carry to her husband only some furniture, and four or five changes of dress. But this seems to have been little observed.

The large dowry which _Simo_ says _Chremes_ offered with Philumena, we may fairly suppose to have been twenty talents, as _Chremes_ imagined he had but one daughter to portion off; when he had discovered _Glycera_, he gave her a dowry of ten talents; and we must suppose that he reserved as much more for _Philumena_. This will give us an idea of what the portions of the Athenian women usually were, and of the fortune of a citizen.

Twenty Greek talents were nearly equal to 5,000_l._ sterling, according to some authors, though writers differ widely as to the amount of the Attic talent; Dr. Arbuthnot makes it equal to 193_l._ 15_s._, Mr. Raper to 232_l._ 3_s._ It is agreed on all sides that the Attic talent consisted of 6,000 drachmæ; but the value of the drachma was never correctly ascertained. _Vide_ the table of monies in Note 208.

NOTE 76.

_I contracted my son._

The Athenian youth were not allowed to dispose of themselves in marriage without consulting their parents, who had almost unlimited authority over them: if they had no parents, guardians, called ἐπίτροποι, were appointed to control them.

But it does not appear that any particular ceremonies were used in Athens, in contracting a bride and bridegroom, previous to the day of marriage; and I rather imagine, Terence, in order to make the subject clear to his Roman auditors, alluded, by the word _despondi_, to the _Roman custom of betrothing_, called _sponsalia_, which they performed as follows:――

Some days before the wedding, the intended bride and bridegroom, with their friends, met together at the lady’s residence, and the parent or guardian of each (as I imagine) asked each other, _Spondes? Do you betroth her or him?_ Then the other party answered, _Spondeo, I do betroth, &c._ Then the deeds were signed, the dowry agreed on, and the day appointed for the marriage.

NOTE 77.

_Among the women who were there I saw one young girl._

Women were frequently hired on these occasions, to appear in the funeral procession as mourners, of whom Horace says,

“Ut quæ conductæ plorant in funere, dicunt Et faciunt propè plura dolentibus ex animoque.”

Like those, who, hired to weep at funerals, Exceed, in noisy grief, a faithful friend.

NOTE 78.

_She appeared more afflicted than the others who were there, and so pre-eminently beautiful, and of so noble a carriage, I approach._

To understand the full force of Simo’s remark, when he says how much he was struck with the contrast between Glycera and the rest of the mourners, it is necessary that the reader should be informed, that, in Athens, no woman under sixty years of age was allowed to appear at a funeral; except the relations of the deceased. Solon imposed this law upon the Athenians.

NOTE 79.

_I approach the women who were following the body._

Literally, the women who were _walking_ after the body. Though those women who were hired to follow a corpse, _walked_ in procession, it was very usual in Greece, to attend funerals in carriages, and on horseback: but Chrysis, not being represented as a citizen, the ceremonies, in respect to the procession, must be supposed to be different. The interment of the dead was considered of such extreme importance throughout the whole of Greece, that to want the rites of sepulture, was deemed by the natives of that country, a much greater misfortune than even death itself. The Greeks (and many other nations) believed that the spirit of a person whose corpse was unburied, could never obtain admittance to the Elysian fields: their imaginary place of reward for virtuous men after death. Two different methods of disposing of the dead prevailed in Greece. The most ancient of the two (as is generally allowed,) was much the same as the modern practice, the corpse was interred in a coffin, and deposited in the earth. The other mode was to burn the body, and to preserve the ashes. The Athenians seem to have used both methods indiscriminately: their funerals were usually conducted by torch-light. On the third or fourth day after death, (though the time was varied according to circumstances,) the corpse was placed on a bier, with the feet towards the door; and an obolus put into its mouth, to defray the passage across the Styx: a certain form of words was then pronounced over the body, which was afterwards carried out, and followed by the mourners: those of the same sex as the deceased were to be nearest the corpse: when it was placed on the pile, and a second form of words recited over it, some one of the mourners, (usually the nearest relation,) applied a torch to the wood; and, if the deceased was of high rank, animals of various kinds, and sometimes even _human victims_, were slaughtered, and thrown into the flames. The ashes of the dead were collected from the extinguished pile into an urn, and with some further ceremonies deposited in a sepulchre. The Romans burned their dead in a similar manner. For a further mention of Greek funerals, _vide_ Notes 77, 78, 80, 81.

NOTE 80.

_We follow, and arrive at the tomb._

Tombs, called by the Greeks τάφοι, or τύμβοι, which signify both the grave and the monument, were not allowed to be within the city of Athens, but were placed either in the public burial-place, or in private grounds belonging to the relatives of the deceased: it was not unusual to erect them by the road side at some distance from the city, whence the expression, so common on monuments, _Siste Viator_, _Stay Traveller_. The public burial-place of the Athenians was in that part of the Ceramicus situated beyond the city: it was very extensive. The other part of the Ceramicus contained the old forum, called ἀρχαία ἀγορὰ.

NOTE 81.

_The corpse is placed on the pile, and quickly enveloped in flames; they weep; while the sister I was speaking of, rushed forward, in an agony of grief, toward the fire; and her imprudence exposed her to great danger._

An eminent English poet, Sir Richard Steele, has endeavoured to adapt Terence’s Andrian to the taste of an English audience, and has succeeded in that attempt, in his play, called _The Conscious Lovers_, as well as circumstances would permit. A French poet of equal eminence, Monsieur Baron, has made a similar attempt in French verse, and has met with equal success in his Andrienne: he has kept much closer to the original than has Sir Richard Steele; indeed, many scenes of the Andrienne are a literal version of Terence. I purpose to point out the most material changes which the two modern poets have made in the incidents: the bent of the dramatic taste of the nation of each, may be discovered, in some measure, from a comparison between the _English_, the _French_, and the _Roman_ dramatist. M. Baron has not made any alteration in the scene at Chrysis’ funeral, where Simo discovers his son’s attachment to Glycera; but Sir R. Steele, has altered the mode of discovery to _a quarrel at a masquerade_; and his scene, though it may want the pathos of the original, yet displays the filial affection of Bevil, the English Pamphilus, in a very amiable light. Sir Richard has modernized the characters of Simo and Sosia in Sir John Bevil and Humphrey.

“_Sir J._ You know I was, last Thursday, at the masquerade: my son, you may remember, soon found us out. He knew his grandfather’s habit, which I then wore, and though it was in the mode of the last age, yet the maskers followed us, as if we had been the most monstrous figures in the whole assembly.

“_Humph._ I remember a young man of quality, in the habit of a clown, was particularly troublesome.

“_Sir J._ Right: he was too much what he seemed to be: he followed us, till the gentleman, who led the lady in the Indian mantle, presented that gay creature to the rustic, and bid him (like Cymon in the fable) grow polite, by falling in love, and let that worthy gentleman alone, meaning me. The clown was not reformed, but rudely offered to force off my mask; with that the gentleman, throwing off his own, appeared to be my son; and, in his concern for me, tore off that of the nobleman. At this, they seized each other, the company called the guards, and, in the surprise, the lady swooned away; upon which my son quitted his adversary, and had now no care but of the lady; when, raising her in his arms, ‘Art thou gone,’ cried he, ‘for ever?――Forbid it, Heaven!’――She revives at his known voice, and, with the most familiar, though modest gesture, hangs in safety over his shoulders weeping; but wept as in the arms of one before whom she could give herself a loose, were she not under observation. While she hides her face in his neck, he carefully conveys her from the company.”――CONSCIOUS LOVERS.

Sir John Bevil makes the same trial of his son, as Simo of his: and young Bevil makes the same reply with Pamphilus. The only difference in the conduct of the plot in that part is, that Bevil is not apprized of his father’s stratagem by his own servant; but by Humphrey, which, as it shews a sort of half-treachery in him, is an inferior arrangement to that of the Latin poet.

NOTE 82.

_That Pamphilus had actually married this strange woman._

The expression ξένα, _peregrina_, or _strange woman_, was generally used amongst eastern nations, to signify a woman of light character: it is very frequently employed in the Holy Writings in that sense. _Vide_ Judges, chap. xi. ver. 2; Proverbs, chap. v. ver. 3. 10, 20. Thais, in the Eunuch, speaking of her mother, says,

“_Samia mihi mater fuit: ea habitabat Rhodi._”

_My mother was born in Samos, and dwelt in Rhodes._

Athenian citizens were not allowed to marry foreign women, even of reputation and virtue; this law was not strictly observed: the penalty for the violation of it was fixed at one thousand drachms. Simo mentions the epithet _peregrina_, as what Chremes said he had heard Glycera called; but does not himself drop the slightest hint against her, but, on the contrary, praises her modest demeanour; as he must have been well aware, that she did not deserve such an epithet, being her opposite neighbour, and having seen her abroad: ξέναι, or _strange women_, when they appeared in public, were obliged to wear striped dresses, to distinguish them from women of innocent conversation.

NOTE 83.

_Of a wicked mind, one can expect nothing but wicked intentions._

In the Latin, _mala mens, malus animus_. It is not easy to discriminate with accuracy the different meanings the Romans attached to _mens_ and _animus_. Some think that _animus_ meant the _heart_, and _mens_ the faculty of thinking. Grotius has, in this passage, taken those words to signify _conscience_ and _judgment_: but, I think it probable, that the word _animus_ was usually employed when they spoke of the _soul_, and that _mens_ was intended to express what we understand by the word _mind_, when we speak of _greatness of mind_, or _littleness of mind_. _Animus_ was, perhaps, about equivalent to that elegant expression,――_instinctus divinitatis_.

NOTE 84.

_Exit Sosia._

“Here we take our last leave of Sosia, who is, in the language of the commentators, a _protatick personage_, that is, as Donatus explains it, one who appears only once in the beginning (the _protasis_) of the piece, for the sake of unfolding the argument, and is never seen again in any part of the play. The narration being ended, says Donatus, the character of Sosia is no longer necessary. He therefore departs, and leaves Simo alone to carry on the action. With all due deference to the ancients, I cannot help thinking this method, if too constantly practised, as I think it is in our author, rather inartificial. Narration, however beautiful, is certainly the deadest part of theatrical compositions: it is, indeed, strictly speaking, scarce dramatic, and strikes the least in the representation: and the too frequent introduction of a character, to whom a principal person in the fable is to relate in confidence the circumstances, previous to the opening of the play, is surely too direct a manner of conveying that information to the audience. Every thing of this nature should come obliquely, fall in a manner by accident, or be drawn as it were perforce, from the parties concerned, in the course of the action: a practice, which, if reckoned highly beautiful in epic, may be almost set down as absolutely necessary in dramatic poetry. It is, however, more adviseable, even to seem tedious, than to hazard being obscure. Terence certainly opens his plays with great address, and assigns a probable reason for one of the parties being so communicative to the other; and yet it is too plain that this narration is made merely for the sake of the audience, since there never was a duller hearer than Master Sosia, and it never appears, in the sequel of the play, that Simo’s instructions to him are of the least use to frighten Davus, or work upon Pamphilus. Yet even this _protatick personage_ is one of the instances of Terence’s art, since it was often used in the Roman comedy, as may be seen even in Plautus, to make the relation of the argument the express office of the prologue.”――COLMAN.

Monsieur Baron does not dismiss Sosia here, but brings him on the stage again; once in the third act, and once in the fourth. Sir R. Steele introduces Humphrey again in the first act, and also in the fifth. We are told by Donatus, that in the Andrian and Perinthian of Menander, which are similar in the plot, the first scene is the same as in Terence, but that in the Perinthian, the old man consults with his wife instead of Sosia; and, in the Andrian he opens with a soliloquy.

NOTE 85.

_But, here he comes._

It has been objected against many dramatic writers, that they are guilty of great neglect in first bringing their characters on the stage, without preparing the audience for their appearance, and acquainting them with their names; and sometimes it happens that an actor has been on the stage a considerable time, before the audience know whom he is meant to personate. Terence’s art is admirably shown in this particular; a new character scarcely ever appears on the stage after the first scene, before his name, and character, and perhaps what he may be expected to say or do, is announced to the audience. For example, in the Andrian, Act I. Scene I., Simo describes the occupation and character of Davus before he appears; and names him to the audience as he comes on the stage. In Act I. Scene III., Davus introduces Mysis: in Act I. Scene IV., Mysis prepares the audience for the appearance of Pamphilus: in Act III. Scene IV., Simo announces Chremes, and Mysis is the nomenclator of Crito in the last scene of the fourth Act. This rule of preparation for the next scene was called, among the ancients, παρασκευὴ.

NOTE 86.

_How this rascal prates!_

_Carnifex_ quæ loquitur. _Carnifex_, or _carnufex_, means literally an executioner: this was one of the most opprobrious epithets used by the Romans. Of all their public servants, the carnifex was the lowest in rank: his office extended only to crucifixion, which was never inflicted in Rome on any but those who were considered as the very worst of criminals. The person of the carnifex was held in such abhorrence, that he was never suffered to reside in Rome, and rarely (though sometimes) permitted to enter the city. _Vide Cicero’s Oration for Rabirius._ Carnifex means literally _a butcher_; and most of the writers of later ages have used it in that sense.

NOTE 87.

_No: I am not Œdipus, but Davus._

This is as much as to say, _I am a plain man, I am no reader of riddles_: because Œdipus, king of Thebes, was particularly celebrated for solving an enigma, which had long baffled the penetration of all the Thebans. Ancient writers relate the story thus: Europa, the sister of Cadmus, the first king of Thebes, having been carried off by Jupiter; Juno, in her jealousy, wreaked her vengeance on Europa’s family, and persecuted Cadmus and his descendants with the most inveterate hostility. During the reign of Creon, one of the successors of Cadmus, Juno sent to destroy Thebes, a dreadful monster, called Sphinx, which was described as having the face and voice of a woman, the wings of a dragon, the body of a dog, and the claws of a lion. This extraordinary monster dwelt in a cave, immediately in the neighbourhood of Thebes, and seizing every one that ventured to approach, proposed the following well-known riddle, “_What walks in the morning on four legs, at noon on two, and at night on three?_” Those who were unable to solve the enigma were instantly torn in pieces; and, as the Thebans were, in general, so remarkable for their slowness and sluggishness, that they were called “_Theban pigs_” by the rest of Greece, it may be readily believed that the monster’s question long remained unanswered. When the city was in danger of total demolition, Creon the king offered his daughter Jocasta, and his crown, to him who should solve the riddle, as the oracle declared that to be the only means of deliverance. This was at last accomplished by _Œdipus_, who replied, that it was _man_: _who crawls in his childhood, walks upright in the vigour of his age, and who uses a crutch when he grows old_: on hearing this answer, the Sphinx slew herself.

Some commentator on Terence very ingeniously observes, that Davus, by saying that he is not Œdipus, and cannot understand his riddle, covertly insinuates that Simo is a second Sphinx.

NOTE 88.

_The grinding-house._

Terence has rendered by the word _pistrinum_, the Greek σωφρονιστήριον, or house of correction, whither criminals were sent for the various terms of imprisonment proportioned to their offences. Slaves, while in this prison, were employed chiefly in grinding corn, which, from a deficiency of mechanical knowledge, was, in those times, a very laborious employment. The Athenians, who were universally celebrated for their kind and gentle treatment of slaves, were very reluctant to proceed to severer punishments than whipping or imprisonment: but when a flagrant delinquency rendered it necessary to make an example, they either burned the criminal with a hot iron, in the offending member, if possible; or put on his feet a torturing instrument, called χοῖνιξ. If the law required the criminal to suffer death, which happened in very few cases, he was either hung, beaten to death with clubs, or cast into a deep pit, called βάραθρον, filled at the bottom with sharp spikes. They sometimes had recourse to other extraordinary modes of punishment: but the before-mentioned were the most common.

NOTE 89.

_In truth, friend Davus, from what I have just heard._

This scene contains the second part of the narration, which possesses all the requisites enumerated by Cicero, _perspicuity, probability, brevity, and sweetness_. It is introduced with Terence’s usual art, and enough is said respecting Glycera’s birth, to prepare the mind for the _dénouement_ in the last act. This scene, and that before it, are omitted in the Conscious Lovers; and a dialogue between Humphrey and Tom, and another between Tom and Phyllis, the English Davus and Mysis, are substituted instead of them: but Phyllis is the servant of Lucinda, the lady Sir J. Bevil wishes his son to marry: and not of Indiana, the modern Glycera. The two scenes above mentioned contain only one incident: the conveyance of a letter from young Bevil to Lucinda, apprizing her of his disinclination to the match.

NOTE 90.

_This affair must be handled dexterously, or either my young master or I must be quite undone._

The original of this passage is as follows: _Quæ si non_ astu _providentur, me, aut herum pessundabunt_. A deviation from the customary mode of expression sometimes occurs in our author’s writings. I shall set down the most remarkable words of this nature that are to be found in this play.

_Abutor_, with an accusative. _Alterco_, for altercor. _Astu_, for Astutia. _Complacita est_, for placuit. _Catus._ _Claudier_, for claudi. _Conflictatur_, cum ingeniis ejusmodis. _Duint_, for dent. _Diecula._ _Emergere se_, for emergere. _Face_, for fac. _Introspicere._ _Ipsus._ _Immutarier_, for immutari. _Morigera._ _Maximum facere hominem_, for maximi. _Ornati_, for ornatus. _Preci_, for precibus. _Postillà_, for posteà. _Symbola_, for symbolum. _Spero_, for timeo. _Subsarcinatam._ _Tetulit._ _Tumulti_, for tumultus.

NOTE 91.

_If he finds out the least thing I am undone._

Terence has the art of making us feel interested in the favour of almost all his characters: they insensibly gain ground in our good opinion: even this Davus, who certainly has a spice of the rogue about him, creates a warm interest in his favour by his fidelity to Pamphilus; and his generosity in risking his own safety to serve him: he braves the threats of Simo, when, by assisting him, and betraying Pamphilus, he must have secured the old man’s favour, and consequently great advantages to himself. But very few of the worst characters in Terence’s plays seem to us to be wholly unamiable.

NOTE 92.

_I think their intentions savour more of madness than of any thing else._

Terence plays upon the words in the original of this passage, which is as follows,

“Nam inceptio est _amentium_, haud _amantium_.”

Literally, For they act like _mad people_, not like _lovers_. This pun cannot be preserved in an English translation, till two words can be found alike in sound, one meaning “_mad people_,” and the other “_lovers_.” The only attempt in English is the following: but the author has rather altered the sense.

“For they fare as they were _lunaticke_, and not _lovesicke_.” BERNARD.

Terence plays upon words in this manner several times in this play,

_Maledicere_, _malefacta_ ne noscant sua. _Solicitando_, et _pollicitando_ eorum animos lactas. Quia habet aliud _magis_ ex sese, et _majus_. Quo _jure_, quaque _injuria_. Ipsu’ sibi esse _injurius_ videatur, neque id _injuriâ_. P. Quid vis _patiar_? D. _Pater_ est Pamphile.

The ancients manifested very great partiality for this species of wit, which the Greeks called παρανομασία and the Romans _agnominatio_. The writings of Plautus abound with puns above all others, and he is thought to have applied them with great ingenuity: the following may serve as a specimen.

_Boius_ est, _Boiam_ terit. Advenisse _familiares_ dicito. Nescio quam tu _familiaris_ es: nisi actutum hinc abis, _Familiaris_, accipiere faxo haud _familiariter_ _Optumo optumè optumam operam_ das.

Though the Greeks and Romans considered puns an ornament to writings and discourses of all kinds, modern critics have decided that they ought to be admitted only in writings of a light nature; and that they decrease the force and beauty of grave and serious compositions, which ought to wear an air of dignified sublimity, unmixed with any thing of a trivial nature.

The lines immediately preceding the before-mentioned passages are thus altered by a French editor. _Vide_ Note 72.

Ad hæc mala hoc etiam mihi accedit; hæc Andria, _Quam clam patre uxorem duxit Pamphilus_, gravida ab eo est.

The original lines are,

Ad hæc mala hoc etiam mihi accedit; hæc Andria, _Sine ista uxor, sine amica est_ gravida a Pamphilo est.

NOTE 93.

_Boy or girl, say they, the child shall be brought up._

In the Latin,

Quidquid peperisset decreverunt tollere.

Boy or girl, they have resolved that it shall be _taken up_. The words _taken up_ allude to the custom which prevailed in Greece, of destroying children. This barbarous cruelty was practised on various pretences; if an infant was, at its birth, deformed in any of its members, or if it appeared extremely feeble or sickly, the laws allowed, and even enjoined, that it should be exposed: sometimes illegitimacy was considered a sufficient cause for the exposure of a child. Though the parents were generally allowed to choose whether their offspring should be destroyed or preserved; in some parts of Greece all the inhabitants were compelled to send their new-born infants to officers appointed to examine them: who, if they found them not robust and healthy, cast them immediately into deep caverns, called ἀποθέται, which were dedicated to this purpose. It was customary, in Athens, to place a new-born infant on the ground at the feet of its father, if he then took it up in his arms, it was considered that he bound himself to educate and provide for the child: hence, the expression _tollere_, _to take up_: but, if on the contrary, he refused to acknowledge it, a person appointed for that purpose conveyed it to some desert place at a distance from the city: and there left it to perish. The Thebans are said to have been the only people in Greece, among whom this barbarous custom did not prevail: but the story of Œdipus, a prince who was exposed, though afterwards preserved, is a proof that they did not altogether abstain from this practice.

NOTE 94.

_To prove that she is a citizen of Athens._

Women were allowed to enjoy the privileges of Athenian citizens, and, at the building of Athens, by Cecrops, they carried a point of no less importance than the choice of a name for the new city, in opposition to the votes of the men. Varro tells us that _Neptune_ wished the new-built city to be called after his name, and that _Athena_, or _Minerva_, rivalled his pretensions. The question being put by Cecrops to his people, the men all voted for _Neptune_, but the women voted for _Minerva_, and gained, by one vote, the privilege of naming the city. The women were wholly excluded from any share in the government of Athens, in later ages; though they still retained various privileges as Athenian citizens.

For a further explanation of the rights of the Athenian citizens; and for some account of the city of Athens, _vide_ Notes 150, 179, 180, 181, 193, 197.

NOTE 95.

_Once upon a time, a certain old merchant._

The title of _merchant_ we are to suppose to be added by Davus to embellish the tale. Neither Chremes nor Phania are described as _merchants_. This addition is well managed by the author, as Davus, who thought the whole a fabrication, imagined he was more likely to gain credit by telling the tale that way; as a considerable traffick was carried on between Athens and the island of Andros, which was a very fertile spot.

M. Baron has translated this scene with great fidelity and beauty. Davus developes in it a plan to break off the dreaded match with Philumena, by introducing Glycera to Chremes: which incident is substituted instead of the birth of the child. There is a break in the French lines which renders them inimitably beautiful.

“De ce vieillard fougueux pour calmer la furie, Quoi! Ne pourrions nous pas résoudre Glycérie A venir à ses pieds lui demander――――? Helas! Glycérie est malade, et je n’y songe pas.” BARON.

NOTE 96.

_Well, I’ll betake myself to the Forum._

A forum, both in Athens and Rome, was a large open space within the city, dedicated to various purposes. The forum was a place where the people met for _public worship_, for _the administration of justice_, and to debate on the _public affairs_. In the Forum, also, were the _temples_, _hospitals_, _sanctuaries_, and the _markets of all kinds_: in short, it was a place of general rendezvous for men of all ranks and professions, and was, in many respects, very similar to those places of meeting we call by the name _Exchange_.

In Rome there were six great forums, 1. the Roman, 2. the Julian, 3. the Augustan, 4. the Palladian, 5. the Trojan, 6. the Forum of Sallust. In Athens, the principal Forum was called ἀρχαία ἀγορὰ; it was extremely spacious, and decorated with some very fine buildings, and statues of eminent persons. There were also many others, but the most considerable was called _the Forum_, by way of distinction.

NOTE 97.

_Act_ I. _Scene_ IV.

Of all writers ancient or modern, except Seneca, Terence was the most indefatigable in endeavouring to embellish his writings with all the ornaments that _alliteration_ could give them. It is not my intention to enter in this place into a discussion of the advantages, or disadvantages that verses may derive from alliteration; a subject on which critics differ as widely as they can on any other point. The practice of many first-rate writers, however, both ancient and modern, who have thought that alliteration adorned their compositions, entitles it to attention. Although eminent critics have argued against this literary ornament, that its success is but a trivial excellence, I cannot but remark that it is allowed on all sides that great labour, care, and patience, are requisite, to succeed in alliteration; which must certainly contribute to render it of some value, and afford an absolute proof of the excessive labour and deliberation with which Terence wrote his plays, every line of which was, as I may say, weighed, before he wrote it down: for no author, ancient or modern, (with the before-mentioned exception,) ever employed alliteration so frequently, nor, in my opinion, with better effect than Terence.

The following lines will afford the reader a specimen of the almost astonishing extent to which alliteration was used by some of the ancient authors, Greek and Latin.

I. From Terence.

“_A_udivi, _A_rchillis, jamdudum: Lesbi_a_m _a_dduci jubes Sane pol illa _t_emulen_t_a est mulier, et _t_emeraria Nec sati digna _c_ui _c_ommittas _p_rimo _p_artis mulierem. _T_amen eam _a_dducam. Impor_t_uni_t_a_t_em spec_t_a_t_e _a_niculæ; Quia compotrix ejus est. _D_iana _d_a facultatem, obsecro, Huic _p_ariundi, atque illi in alius _p_otius _p_eccandi locum. Sed, quidnam Pamphilum exanimatum _v_ideo? _v_ereor quid siet. Opperiar, ut sciam, numquidnam hæc _t_urba _t_ris_t_i_t_iæ adferat. Ut _a_nimum _a_d _a_liquod stadium _a_djungant, _a_ut equos―― _A_lere, _a_ut canes _a_d venandum, _a_ut _a_d philosophos. _I_n _i_gnem _i_mposita est. Fletur. _I_nterea hæc soror. _M_ala _m_ens, _m_alus ani_m_us. _Q_uem _q_uidem ego _s_i _s_ensero. Ipsum _a_nimum _æ_grotum _a_d deteriorem _p_artem _p_lerumque _app_licat, Nec, quid _a_gam, cerium est; Pamphilumne _a_djutem, _a_n _a_uscultem seni. Faci_t_e, fingi_t_e, inveni_t_e, effici_t_e, qui de_t_ur _t_ibi. _A_liquot me _a_diere, ex te _a_uditum qui _a_iebant. Quid _i_sthuc? si _i_ta _i_sthuc animum _i_nduxti esse utile, _M_ala ingeram _m_ulta? _A_tque _a_liquis dicat, nihil pro_m_overis. _M_ultum, _M_olestas certe ei fuero, atque ani_m_o _m_orem gessero. _Q_uibu’ _q_uidem _q_uam facile poterat _q_uiesci, si hic _q_uiesset. Age, _s_i hic non in_s_anit _s_atis _s_uà _s_ponte, in_s_tiga. _A_uscult_a_. _A_udivi jam omni_a_. _A_nne tu omni_a_? _A_udivi inquam _a_ principio. _A_udistin’? ――――――――opta_v_it _p_arare hic di_v_itias, _P_otius quam in _p_atria honeste _p_au_p_er _v_i_v_ere. _S_a_t_i’ jam _s_a_t_i’ _S_imo, _s_pec_t_a_t_a. In _a_lio occup_a_to _a_more, _a_bhorrenti _a_b re uxori_â_. _P_ro _p_eccato magno _p_aulum su_pp_licii satis est _p_atri. Nam hunc _s_cio mea _s_olide _s_olum gavi_s_urum gaudia. _S_olus est quem diligunt Di. _S_alvus _s_um _s_i hæc veca _s_unt.”

II. From _Seneca_.

“_M_eleagre, _m_atris Impius _m_actas; _m_orerisque dextra _M_atris iratae _m_eruere cuncti _M_orte quod.”

_A_ccingere, _a_nime; bella non levia _a_pp_a_r_a_s.

_S_ervate _s_ontem _s_axeo inclu_s_um _s_pecu.

_P_astor triformis littoris Tartessii. _P_eremptus, acta est _p_ræda ab occasu ultimo Notum Cythæron _p_avit Oceano _p_ecus. _P_enetrare jussus solis æstivi _p_lagas.

_C_onquesta domum: li_c_et ipse velit _C_larus niveos inter olores, Istrum _c_ygnus Tanaimque _c_olens, Extrema loqui; li_c_et Al_c_yones _C_ey_c_a suum fluxu leviter. Plangente sonent, _c_um tranquillo Male _c_onfisae _c_redunt interum. _O_bliquatque; _o_cul_o_s, _o_raque. Tandemque _v_enias _v_ictor ad _v_ictam domum.

III. From _Cicero_.

De _s_cripto dicta _s_ententia est, quam Senatus frequens _s_ecutus est _s_ummo _s_tudio magnoque con_s_en_s_u.

IV. From _Pliny_.

Cum sciam, Domine, ad testimonium laudemque morum meorum, _p_ertinere tam boni _p_rinci_p_is judicio exornari, rogo, dignitati, ad quam me _p_rovexit indulgentia tua, vel auguratum, vel septemviratum, quia vacant, adjicere digneris: ut jure sacerdotii _p_recari deos _p_ro te _p_ublicè _p_ossim, quos nunc _p_recor _p_ietate _p_rivatâ.

V. From _Horace_.

Acriter el_a_trem, pretium _æ_t_a_s _a_lter_a_ sordet. Ambigitur.

VI. From _Ovid_.

Se cu_p_it im_p_rudens. Et qui _p_robat i_p_se _p_robatur. Dumque _p_etit, _p_etitur; _p_ariterque.

VII. From _Plutarch_.

Κόσμος ἐστιν ὡς ἔλεγε Κράτης, τὸ Κοσμοῦν. Κοσμεῖ δὲ τὸ Κοσμιώτερον.

VIII. From _Tyrtæus_.

Ἡ δ’ Ἀρετὴ τόδ’ Ἄεθλον ἐν Ἀνθρώποισιν Ἄριστον.

IX. From _Æschines_.

Οἱ Ἐξ Ἐκείνου Ἔχοντες Ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ.

ΤαῦΤα μὲν οὖν μοι δοκῶ καὶ Τἄλλα Τὰ ΤούΤοις.

Ἔοικε, Φειδίας Ἐνεργολαβεῖν Εἰργάσατο καὶ Ἐνεπιορκεῖν.

X. From _Anacreon_.

Τί Μοι, τί Μοι γόων, Τί Μοι Μέλει Μεριμνῶν.

Μέσον, ναῒ ΦορήΜεθα σὺν Μελαίνᾳ, ΧειΜῶνι Μοχθεῦντες Μεγάλῳ.

NOTE 98.

_However, I’ll bring her._

Mr. Cooke makes this speech come from Archillis, and writes it thus: _Tamen eam adduce_, _I say, fetch her_. This reading is taken from Guyetus: but Dr. Bentley objects to Archillis within calling to Mysis without. But as Mysis uses the expression _importunitatem_ SPECTATE _aniculæ_, _see_ the old woman’s importunity, and not _audite_ importunitatem, _hear_, &c.: we must suppose Archillis to show her impatience by gestures, as she stood at the door of Glycera’s house.

NOTE 99.

_Mark, how importunate this old baggage is._

Importunitatem spectate _aniculæ_. _Anicula_ is a word of singular derivation, and signifies literally a sorceress; being compounded of two Latin words, one signifying _an old woman_, and the other _to howl_: because sorceresses always _howled_ when they made their incantations. We must not suppose that Mysis here meant to call Archillis a sorceress, but merely used the word above mentioned as a term of reproach. According to Antonius Magnus, the _aniculæ_ were not a little mischievous, as he proposes to shew by the following quotation: “Retulit Leonardus Varius, lib. I. de Fascino, multas hac nostra tempestate existere _aniculas_, quarum impuritate non paucos effascinari pueros, illosque non modo in gravissimum incidere discrimen, verum atque acerbam sæpissime subire mortem. Pecudes insuper partu, et lacte privari, equos macrescere, et emori, segetes absque fructu colligi, arbores arescere, ac denique omnia pessum iri quandoque videri.”――ANTONIUS MAGNUS. Perscrutator rerum abditarum naturæ. Norimberga, 1681, p. 39.

NOTE 100.

_Well, may Diana grant my poor mistress_, &c.

The common reading of this passage is, DI _date facultatem_, _May the_ GODS _grant_, &c., but I should rather imagine that Terence wrote, DIANA _da facultatem_, _May_ DIANA _grant_, &c., because, on these occasions, the Greeks never invoked the assistance of all the gods, but usually requested the help of Diana, as Glycera does afterwards, when she calls upon her by the name of Juno Lucina, (_vide_ Note 143). Diana was supposed to preside over women in childbirth, and was called Εἰλείθυια.

NOTE 101.

_A._ I. _S._ V. _Pamphilus, Mysis._

This scene contains the third and last part of the narration, which is entirely pathetic, and its length is very artificially and successfully relieved by the figure called by the Greeks προσωποποια, which is introduced with so many moving and pathetic graces, as afford ample proof that Terence was as great a master of the passions, as even Trabea, Attilius, and Cæcilius themselves, who were so highly extolled by the ancients for their excellence in compositions of that nature. Terence has admirably relieved the necessary length of his narration in this play, by his judicious method of dividing it: the first part is serious, (_vide_ Note 65,) and raises our curiosity: the second part is comic, (_vide_ Note 89,) and excites our laughter; the third part is pathetic, and moves our pity. The lines in which Pamphilus describes the death of Chrysis are so extremely moving, that some of the most eminent critics have considered them at least equal, if not superior, to all attempts in the pathetic both ancient and modern. The finest passage in M. Baron’s Andrienne is, (in my opinion,) his imitation of the before-mentioned speech of Pamphilus: and the inimitable beauty which so much strikes us in the _French copy_ ought to impress us with a just idea of the splendid merit of the _Latin original_.

The whole speech is too long to be inserted here, the following are extracts:

“Si je m’en souviendrai! Qui? moi? Toute ma vie. Ce que me dit Chrysis parlant de Glicérie, Elle me dit, (Misis j’en verse encore des pleurs.) Elle est jeune, elle est belle, elle est sage, et je meurs. Je vous conjure donc par sa main que je tiens; Par la foi, par l’honneur, par mes pleurs, par les siens; Par ce dernier moment qui va finir, ma vie, De ne vous séparer jamais de Glicérie. Elle prit nos deux mains, et les mit dans la sienne: Que dans cette union l’amour vous entretienne; C’est tout.――Elle expira dans le même moment. Je l’ai promis, Misis, je tiendrai mon serment.” _Andrienne_, A. I. S. VII.

NOTE 102.

_And why has Chremes changed his mind._

“Id mutavit, quoniam me IMMUTATUM videt.”

The verb _immutare_ in other Latin authors, and even in other parts of Terence himself, signifies _to change_; as in the Phormio, Antipho says, _Non possum_ immutarier. I cannot _be changed_. But here, the sense absolutely requires that _immutatum_ should be rendered _not changed_. Madame Dacier endeavours to reconcile this, according to a conjecture of her father’s, by shewing that _immutatum_ stands for _immutabilis_, as _immotus_ for _immobilis_, _invictus_ for _invincibilis_, &c. But these examples do not remove the difficulty; since those participles always bear a negative sense, which _immutatus_ does not: and thence arises all the difficulty. Terence certainly uses the verb _immutare_ both negatively and positively, as is plain from this passage, and the above passage in the Phormio: and I dare say, with strict propriety. In our own language, we have instances of the same word bearing two senses, directly opposite to each other. The word _let_, for instance, is used in the contradictory meanings of _permission_ and _prohibition_. The modern acceptation of the word is indeed almost entirely confined to the first sense; though we say, even at this day, _without let or molestation_. Shakspeare, in Hamlet, says,

‘I’ll make a ghost of him that _lets_ me;’

“That is, _stops_, _prevents_, _hinders_ me, which is directly opposite to the modern use of the word.”――COLMAN.

“_Immutare_ always signifies to _change_, _immutatus_ therefore cannot mean _unchanged_: we see, moreover, that Pamphilus has been all along in love with Glycera, and that he never for a moment entertained the slightest idea of forsaking her. This passage was very difficult; but my father has made it easy, by shewing that _immutatus_ is put for _immutabilis_, and that composed adjectives, which are derived from passive participles, do not always express what is _done_, but sometimes what _may be done_; that is to say, they become potentials. For example, _immotus_ for _immobilis_, _infectus_ for _what cannot be done_, _invictus_ for _invincibilis_, _invisus_ for _invisibilis_, _indomitus_ for _indomabilis_, thus _immutatus_ is for _immutabilis_.”――MADAME DACIER.

The reader will judge whether the arguments used by these two learned and ingenious critics, will justify them in translating _immutatus_ in a sense directly _opposite_ to its usual meaning, in the writings of Cicero, and the most learned of the Roman authors. With all the respect which is unquestionably due to the pre-eminent talents of Madame Dacier and Mr. Colman, I am inclined to believe that the sense of this passage is made more clear by the reading I have adopted. If we allow their arguments to be of force, we must translate the sentence thus, _is Chremes changed because he sees that I am unchanged_. But if we allow _immutatus_ to retain its usual signification, the sentence must be read thus, _is he changed because he sees that I am changed_: i. e., _because I, who had so high a character for prudence, am changed, and by my connexion with Glycera have proved that I am imprudent_. It is, in short, as if he said, Chremes has changed his mind once on account of my connexion with Glycera, and now, I suppose, he changes it again for the same wise reason. This would not, (in my opinion,) be an unnatural expression for an impatient man: and the sequel of the same speech seems to favour this interpretation.

NOTE 103.

_I shrewdly suspect that this daughter of Chremes is either hideously ugly, or that something is amiss in her._

In the Latin _aliquid monstri alunt_, _they breed up some monster_.

This expression took its rise from the custom of exposing and destroying monstrous and deformed children, (_see Note 93_) which was required by law: therefore, those parents who resolved, notwithstanding, to educate a child of that kind, were compelled to do so with the utmost secrecy: hence, the phrase “_alere monstrum_,” _to breed up a monster_, was used in Rome, to express any thing done in great secrecy. Terence has, by no means, violated probability, in representing Pamphilus as unacquainted with the person of Philumena: _though she had been contracted to him_; as Grecian women very seldom appeared abroad, and never, unveiled: and it not unfrequently occurred, that the bridegroom was introduced to the bride for the _first time_ on the day of marriage.

NOTE 104.

_She is in labour._

In the Latin, _Laborat e dolore_. Cooke thinks that these words mean merely _she is weighed down by grief_: and argues, that if Pamphilus had understood her words in any other sense, he would have urged her to more haste; as he does, when she tells him that she is going for a midwife. But _laboro_ sometimes means to strive or struggle, as in _Ovid_,

“Et simul arma tuli, quæ nunc quoque ferre _laboro_.” _Metam._, B. XIII. L. 285.

’Twas then I bare Achilles’ arms, which now _I strive_ to wear.

Also, in _Horace_,

――――――――――――――“_laborat_ Lympha fugax trepidare.” _Od._, B. II. O. 3. L. 11.

The rushing water _strives_ To force a swifter passage.

And that, doubtless, is its meaning, when joined to _dolore_. What Mysis says, moreover, to Lesbia the midwife, in the first scene of the third act, is sufficient to justify this interpretation.

NOTE 105.

_Can I suffer, that she, who has been brought up in the paths of modesty and virtue, should be exposed to want, and, perhaps, even to dishonour?_

By the expression _sinam coactum egestate ingenium immutarier?_ _shall I suffer her innocence to be endangered by want?_ I am inclined to believe that Terence meant, the want of friends and protection, and not poverty, because we are told afterwards, (_Act_ IV.) that Glycera was possessed of the property of Chrysis, which we are to imagine, from what Crito says concerning it, to have been something considerable. I believe _egestate_ is often put for want of any kind. It may appear somewhat enigmatical, that Terence should speak of the liberal and virtuous education of Glycera, by such a person as Chrysis was said to have been; but it is a circumstance in no wise repugnant to the manners of the Greeks; as we see in the Eunuch in the instance of _Thais_ and _Pamphila_.

NOTE 106.

_I call upon you, then, by the pledge of this hand you now extend to me, and by the natural goodness of your disposition._

Quod ego te per hanc dextram oro, et _ingenium_ tuum. Some read _genium_, _by your genius_, or _by your good angel_, and quote the following passage from Horace in support of this reading:

“Quod te per _genium_ dextramque, deosque penates Obsecro et obtestor.” _Epistles_, B. I. E. 7. L. 94.

The difference, however, between the _genius_ and the _ingenium_, is not very material; as the _ingenium_ or disposition, was supposed by the ancients to be prompted by the _genius_, or tutelar spirit, who presided over and directed all the actions of mankind. Each person was thought to have a good and also an evil spirit, who never quitted its charge till death: the spirits attendant on the men were called by the Romans _genii_, and those belonging to the women were named _junones_. The Greeks considered these aërial beings as of a nature between that of gods and men: and that they communicated to the latter the will of the former by oracles, dreams, _&c._ Apuleius takes the genius to be the same as the lar and larva: but it is most probable, that the larvæ, lemures, and dæmones, were all used as names for what were termed the _evil genii_.

NOTE 107.

_Be to her a friend, a guardian, a parent._

_Amicum_, tutorem _patrem_. The word _tutorem_ in this line, alludes to the Roman custom of appointing _guardians_, which was usually performed with great ceremony: frequently on a dead-bed. The person who intended to constitute a _tutor_ or guardian, made use of a set form of words, which were spoken before witnesses, when the ward was delivered to the guardian, with these words, “_Hunc (vel hanc) tibi commendo, Tutor esto._” _I commend him (or her) to your protection, be to him a guardian._ Thus Ovid,

“Hæc progeniesque mea est _Hanc tibi commendo_.” Trist., B. III. El. 14. L. 14.

To your protection I commit my offspring.

Some words were also addressed to the ward, as “_Hunc tibi tutorem do_,” _I appoint this person your guardian_.

Donatus observes, that the line

――――“Te isti virum do, amicum, tutorem, patrem,”

ought to be read with a long pause between each word, as Terence intended to describe the broken, interrupted voice of a person at the point of death.

NOTE 108.

_Charinus, Byrrhia._

“These two characters were not in the works of Menander, but were added to the fable by Terence, lest Philumena’s being left without a husband, on the marriage of Pamphilus to Glycerium should appear too _tragical_ a circumstance.――DONATUS.

Madame Dacier, after transcribing this remark adds, that it appears to her to be an observation of great importance to the theatre, and well worthy our attention.

Important as this dramatic arcanum may be, it were to be wished, that Terence had never found it out, or, at least, that he had not availed himself of it in the construction of the Andrian. It is plain that the duplicity of the intrigue did not proceed from the imitation of Menander, since these characters, on which the double plot is founded, were not drawn from the Greek poet. Charinus and Byrrhia are indeed but poor counterparts, or faint shadows of Pamphilus and Davus; and, instead of adding life and vigour to the fable, rather damp its spirit, and stop the activity of its progress. As to the tragical circumstance of Philumena’s having no husband, it seems something like the distress of Prince Prettyman[A], who thinks it a matter of indifference, whether he shall appear to be the son of a king or a fisherman, and is only uneasy lest he should be the son of nobody at all. I am much more inclined to the opinion of an ingenious French critic, whom I have already cited more than once, than to that of Donatus or Madame Dacier. His comment in this underplot is as follows:――

“_It is almost impossible to conduct two intrigues at a time without weakening the interest of both. With what address has Terence interwoven the amours of Pamphilus and Charinus in the Andrian! But has he done it without inconvenience? At the beginning of the second act, do we not seem to be entering upon a new piece? and does the fifth conclude in a very interesting manner?_”――DIDEROT.

It is but justice to Sir Richard Steele to confess, that he has conducted the under-plot in the Conscious Lovers in a much more artful and interesting manner than Terence in the play before us. The part which Myrtle sustains (though not wholly unexceptionable, especially the last act,) is more essential to the fable than Charinus in the Andrian. His character also is more separated and distinguished from Bevil, than Charinus from Pamphilus, and serves to produce one of the best scenes[B] in the play.” COLMAN.

[A] The following extract will explain Mr. Colman’s allusion,

_Thimble._ Brave Prettyman, it is at length revealed, That he is not thy Sire who thee conceal’d.

_Prettyman._ What oracle this darkness can evince! Sometimes a fisher’s son, sometimes a prince. It is a secret, great as is the world; In which I, like the soul, am toss’d and hurl’d. The blackest ink of fate sure was my lot, And when she writ my name, she made a blot. [_Exit._

_Bayes._ There’s a blustering verse for you now.

_Smith._ Yes, Sir; but why is he so mightily troubled to find he is not a fisherman’s son?

_Bayes._ Phoo! that is not because he has a mind to be his son, but for fear he should be thought to be nobody’s son at all.

_Smith._ Nay, that would trouble a man, indeed. _Rehearsal_, A. III. S. IV.

[B] A. IV. S. I.

NOTE 109.

_Byrrhia.――I beseech you, O Charinus._

_Quæso ædepol_, Charine. _Ædepol_ means literally by the temple of Pollux, being an abbreviation of the words per templum Pollucis, as _pol_ was used for per Pollucem: and _hercle_ for per Herculem. These ancient expletives are of a similar nature to those in modern use, which are almost all of religious derivation.

To affirm a thing by the temple of Pollux, was a very common expression among the ancients; and is frequently used in the plays of Terence, where it seems to have been particularly the oath of slaves. It was natural enough that Athenian slaves should asseverate by this temple, as it was the place where they were bought and sold by the inhabitants of Attica. This splendid building, which was so unworthily employed, was situated in the κάτω πόλις, or the lower city, towards the sea; and was called Ἀνάκειον, because Castor and Pollux were called ἄνακες. In the Greek mythology, Castor and Pollux were the twin sons of Leda: their father, Jupiter, rewarded their virtues, by giving them a place in the heavens, where they are called Gemini. They were supposed to preside over martial exercises, (for their skill in which they were particularly eminent,) and they had the power of allaying storms. These fables have caused the names of Castor and Pollux to be given to that well-known meteor which sometimes appears at sea in the shape of several fire-balls, which seem to adhere to the vessel, and which are judged to indicate an approaching calm. This phænomenon is called by the French, Spaniards, and Italians, San Elmo, or Hermo.

NOTE 110.

_Byrrhia.――I beseech you, O Charinus, to wish for something possible, since what you now wish for is impossible!_

Terence always admirably preserves the characters of domestics, in the style of the advice they give their masters, which is very often conveyed in some trite adage, or formal apothegm. This is another instance of our author’s art. Want of attention to the dialogue of the inferior characters, is a frequent fault among dramatic writers; and often proves hostile to the success of a piece, particularly of a comedy, where it is absolutely essential.

NOTE 111.

_To nourish a hopeless passion._

Madame Dacier observes, with her usual judgment, that Terence simplifies a philosophical maxim in so elegant and familiar a manner, that it assumes a grace, even from the lips of a domestic. Diderot makes a similar remark in the Preface to his Père de Famille; which he probably remembered from the learned lady before mentioned. Montaigne has elegantly expressed the sense of Byrrhia’s speech. C’est _foiblesse_ de ceder aux maux, mais c’est _folie_ de les nourrir.

NOTE 112.

_Charinus.――What think you, Byrrhia, shall I speak to him?_

_Byrrhia.――Why not? that even if you can obtain nothing, you may make him think, at least, that Philumena will find a pressing gallant in you, if he marries her._

The original of these lines is the most exceptionable passage in this play.

“C. Byrrhia, Quid tibi videtur? Adeon’ ad eum? B. Quidni? si nihil impetres, _Ut te arbitretur sibi paratum mœchum, si illam duxerit_.”

The ingenious French editor, mentioned in Note 72, has given the following elegant and delicate turn to this objectionable passage.

“C. Byrrhia, Quid tibi videtur? Adeon’ ad eum? B. Quidni? ut, si nihil impetres, _Te sibi cavendum credat, si illam duxerit_.”

NOTE 113.

_You see me to-day for the last time._

Though Charinus means, that the misery of losing Philumena would cost him his life, as he expressly tells Davus in the next scene, yet he only insinuates this by saying, You will never see me again: and avoids the mention of _death_: which was considered among the Greeks as a word that should scarcely ever be named: and it was reckoned the height of ill breeding to discourse in company respecting human mortality; which was a subject to be spoken of only by distant hints: (_vide Note 190_.) This whole scene is admirably written; and as well as the last scene in the first act, is a specimen of Terence’s powers in the pathetic. Some very ingenious remarks on this scene are to be found in Donatus, and in the Miscellanies of Nonnius.

NOTE 114.

_Now, if either you, or Byrrhia here, can do any thing; in Heavens name, do it; contrive, invent, and manage, if you can, that she may be given to you._

It does not appear that Charinus and Byrrhia set any stratagem on foot, in compliance with the wishes of Pamphilus, to break off the treaty between Simo and Chremes; indeed, they are rather inactive throughout the play, and the under-plot proceeds separately from the principal plot: this, I attribute to Terence’s close imitation of Menander, in what respects Pamphilus’s intrigue, as the characters of Charinus and Byrrhia were added by Terence: Menander’s play being written with a single plot; which was doubled by our author, in compliance with the taste of his age. It is supposed that Terence’s reputation for art was gained chiefly by his success in combining two intrigues in one play: a mode of dramatic writing which the Romans in those times considered a great novelty. The Stepmother is the only play written by Terence, in which the plot is single, and though critics in general argue with Volcatius,

“Sumetur _Hecyra sexta_ ex his fabula,”

that it is not equal to the rest of his productions, many persons, very eminent for their judgment, have attributed the superiority of the other five plays, to the advantages they possess over the Stepmother, both in portraiture of character, and in the conduct of the catastrophe, and of the fable in general, rather than to any additional attraction which they can derive from a double plot. The Carin and Byrrhie of M. Baron, are, in every respect, the counterparts of the Charinus and Byrrhia of Terence; but Sir R. Steele has very much enlivened the character of Charinus; his Myrtle is one of the most entertaining personages in the piece. _Vide_ Notes 108, 159, 162, 163.

NOTE 115.

_I know your affair also._

From _Byrrhia_, whom he had just parted from, as he afterwards relates: this, though a trivial circumstance, shews Terence’s great art. Donatus reads this sentence,

“Et tu quid _timeas_ scio.”

but the measure of the verse does not seem to admit of timeas.

NOTE 116.

_Not a soul do I see before the door._

The marriage ceremonies of the Greeks were, in many respects, very similar to those of the Romans. In Athens, as at Rome, sacrifices were deemed necessary preliminaries to the celebration of a marriage: and the bride, accompanied by bride-women, whom the Latins called _pronubæ_, the Greeks νυμφεύτριαι, was conducted to her husband’s house with great ceremony; if the parties were of rank, the bride’s train was increased by the attendance of many of her friends and relatives, who previously assembled at her father’s house. It is to the absence of the bride’s train, and of the musicians who usually assembled before her door, and attended her to her new habitation, that Davus alludes, when he says, that he could perceive no company in the house, or before the door. For further information respecting the marriages of the Greeks and Romans, _vide_ Notes 70, 75, 76, 117, 118, 148, 149, 181.

NOTE 117.

_Every thing is quite still and quiet._

Cecrops, the first king of Athens, seems to have been the reputed founder of marriage-ceremonies among the Greeks: the Athenians accounted it so dishonourable to grow old in a single state, that their laws peremptorily required, that all the αὐτοκράτορες, στρατηγοὶ, πολέμαρχοι, and ταξίαρχοι, who were the principal military officers, also the ἄρχοντες and ἱεροφύλακες, or chief priests, as well as the archons and other chief magistrates, should be chosen from the married men only.

Numerous ceremonies were always performed at Grecian marriages, many of which were performed at the house of the bride, and in procession from it: it is exceedingly well managed by Terence, that Davus should discover Simo’s stratagem, by finding Chremes’ house “quite still and quiet,” because the house of a bride was generally full of noisy company. The following extracts from a learned writer on antiquities will afford some valuable information respecting the Greek marriages.

“The Athenian virgins were presented to Diana before it was lawful for them to marry. This ceremony, which was performed at Brauron, an Athenian borough, was called ἀρκτεία. There was also another custom for virgins, when they became marriageable, to present certain baskets, full of little curiosities, to Diana, to obtain permission to leave her train, and to change their state of life. Indeed we find Diana concerned in the preparatory solemnities before all marriages; for a married state being her aversion, it was thought necessary for all who entered upon it, to ask her pardon for dissenting from her. The ancient Athenians paid the same honour to Heaven and Earth, which were believed to have a particular concern in marriages, of which they were thought a proper emblem. (_Procl. in Timæ. Platon. Comment. 5._) The fates and graces being supposed to join, and afterwards to preserve the tie of love, were partakers of the same respect. (_Pol. lib._ III. _cap._ 3.) Before the marriage could be solemnized, the other gods were consulted, and their assistance also implored by prayers and sacrifices. When the victim was opened, the gall was taken out and thrown behind the altar, as being the seat of anger and revenge, and therefore the aversion of all the deities who superintended the affairs of love. The married persons, with their attendants, were richly adorned, according to their rank. The house, in which the nuptials were celebrated, was also decorated with garlands. (_Hierocl. in Frag._ περὶ γάμον; _Stob. Serm. 186_, _Senec. Thebaid. v. 507_;) a pestle was tied upon the door, (_Poll. lib._ III. _cap._ 3. _seg._ 37;) and a maid carried a sieve, (_Id. ibid._) the bride herself bearing φρύγετον, φρύγετρον, or φρύγητρον, which was an earthen vessel, in which barley was parched, (_Poll. lib._ I. _cap._ 12. _seg._ 246; _Hesych._) and which was intended to signify her obligation to attend to the business of a family. The bride was usually conducted in a chariot from her father’s to her husband’s house in the evening. She was placed in the middle, her husband sitting on one side, and, on the other, one of his most intimate friends, who was called πάροχος. They were sometimes accompanied by bands of musicians and dancers, (_Hom. Il._ σʹ. _v. 491._) The song with which they were entertained on the road was called ἁρμάτειον μέλος, from ἅρμα, the coach in which they rode, and the axle-tree of which they burned as soon as they arrived at the end of their journey; thereby signifying that the bride was never to return to her father’s house. The day of the bride’s leaving her father was celebrated in the manner of a festival, which was distinct from the nuptial solemnity, which was kept at the bride-groom’s house, and began at evening, the usual time of the bride’s arrival.”――ROBINSON’S _Archæologia Græca_.

NOTE 118.

_But can see no bridemaid._

Matronam nullam: Some commentators think that matrona and pronuba have a similar meaning; but though it is clear that both those words were used to describe females who attended the bride at a Roman marriage, I am inclined to believe that they have each a distinct signification. The Latin poets used matrona as a name for all married women without distinction: thus, Horace evidently speaks of wives in general, when he says,

“Matronæ præter faciem nil cernere possis, Cetera, ――――demissa veste tegentis.”

The matron muffled in her modest stole, Will scarce allow her features to be seen.

because married women only were allowed to wear the _stola_, a large robe which covered the person from head to foot. Matrons were distinguished as follows, matronas appellabant, quibus _stolas habendi_ jus erat: those only were called matrons, whose rank entitled them to wear the stola, (_Alex. ab. Alex. lib._ 5. _cap._ 18.) as women of inferior rank wore the instita. The pronubæ were always chosen from those women who had been married only once; and it appears that a bride had several pronubæ to attend her, but only one matrona. Terence says nullam matronam, whereas the pronubæ were spoken of as being four or five in number. I think it not unlikely that the first in rank of the pronubæ was chosen to preside over the rest of the bridemaids, and to attend immediately on the person of the bride, whence she was called matrona pronubarum, the chief of the bridemaids. Servius thinks that matrona was used to designate a woman who had one child: and thus distinguished from the mater-familias who had several. But Aulus Gellius is of opinion that all married women were called matronæ, whether they had any children or not. Thus Ovid, speaking of Hersilia, the wife of Romulus, who had no offspring, calls her matrona.

“O et de Latiâ, O et de gente Sabinâ Præcipuum matrona decus; dignissima tanti”――

And thou, O matron, ornament of Latium, The chiefest glory of the Sabine race, Most worthy consort of so great a hero――――

Nonnius supports Gellius in this opinion.

NOTE 119.

_All was silent._

Nil tumulti. Terence here compares guests, called together in a hurry, to soldiers raised on any sudden emergency of great importance. As no marriage had been thought of till that day, _if_ Chremes _had_ invited any guests, they could have had scarcely an hour’s notice; Davus, therefore, aptly calls such a hasty assemblage tumultus, which word was used to signify a very quick muster of soldiers on any pressing occasion, when all that took arms were called tumultuarii. (_Vide_ Liv. I. 37, 35.) Numerous allusions of this kind, which abound in the writings of Terence, cannot be happily preserved in a translation.

NOTE 120.

_Besides all this, as I was returning, I met Chremes’ servant, who was carrying home some herbs, and as many little fishes for the old man’s supper, as might have cost an obolus._

What a supper for a man of fortune! as we must suppose Chremes to have been, since he could give Glycera and Philumena each a dowry of ten talents. The Athenians were remarkable, _even to a proverb_, for their extreme frugality. To tell a person that he lived ἀττικηρῶς or like an Athenian, was to tell him in other words that he lived penuriously. The food of the common people was very coarse; being such as they could procure at a slight expense. Mάζα, a very common food among them, was a mixture of meal, salt, water, and oil: and another, called μυττωτὸν, was a composition of garlick, eggs, and milk. Many of those who drank water, drank it warm; as the water of the hot fountains, (of which there are many in Greece,) was reckoned highly restorative. This simple diet, however, soon gave place to greater delicacies, and, in Greece, as in all other countries, refinement and luxury kept pace with each other. For the value of an obolus, see the table of money in Note 208. An obolus worth of food was, probably, as much as would furnish a coarse meal for one person. Plutarch tells us, that the Athenian women were forbidden, by law, to travel with more food than could be purchased with an obolus: this harsh law must have been formed with a view to prevent them from making any long stay abroad. _Vide_ Notes 71, 103.

NOTE 121.

_If you do not use all your endeavours to gain the support of the old man’s friends, you will be no nearer your wishes than ever._

Nisi vides, nisi senis amicos oras, _ambis_. The meaning of ambis in this line is very equivocal; ambire means to solicit, and also to run round. Some commentators give ambis the same sense with oras: but that makes Davus’s speech incomplete. I have seen an attempt to support this reading by making Pamphilus speak the word ambis, with which he breaks in upon Davus. The learned reader will judge what degree of attention ought to be paid to this reading; I have adopted that which seemed to me to be most agreeable to the sense. If frustra had been added, the line would have been more intelligible. Ambit has much the same meaning in the following passage,

“Locum, quo me Dea texerat inscius _ambit_.”――OVID.

NOTE 122.

_Glycera, moreover, is destitute and friendless._

Terence here alludes to the Athenian law, which compelled all sojourners in Athens to choose a patron and protector: we must suppose that Glycera had neglected that ceremony after Chrysis’ death. Davus insinuates that it would afford Simo a sufficient pretext to drive her from the city. If a suit at law, called ἀποστασίου δίκη, was instituted against a sojourner in the before-mentioned circumstances: all the offender’s property was confiscated to public use.

NOTE 123.

_To banish her from the city._

Banishment, among the Athenians, was of three kinds, 1. φυγὴ, temporary exile, the length of which was fixed by the judges. 2. Ὀστρακισμὸς, ten years’ banishment, during which the exile was allowed to receive the proceeds of his estate. 3. ἀειφυγία, perpetual banishment. The last kind was chiefly inflicted on murderers, the second on men, who grew so extremely popular and powerful as to endanger the security of a republican government. Mr. Cooke thinks, with Dr. Bentley, that “the original of this passage should be read, eam _eiciat_ oppido,” instead of _eam ejiciat_ oppido: he supports this reading by the following quotation,

Tityre, pascentes a flumine _reice_ capellas.――VIRGIL.

where the measure determines the spelling.

“In the three manuscript copies of Terence, in the possession of Dr. Mead, two of them have eiciat; and what is worthy the reader’s notice, that which has ejiciat is written in the manner of prose.”

NOTE 124.

_Therefore, do not let the fear of his changing his mind prevent you from following my advice._

――――Nec tu ea causa minueris Hæc quæ facis, ne is suam mutet sententiam.

It is impossible to ascertain, beyond a doubt, what Terence meant to express by these lines, and the most ingenious critics have differed entirely respecting their true signification. Some think this sentence should be interpreted thus: Be careful not to discontinue your visits to Glycera, lest Chremes should think you have broken off your connexion with her, and change his mind in consequence, and resolve to give you his daughter. In short, _don’t quit your intrigue, and reform, lest Chremes should hear of it, and give you Philumena_: among those who read the words in this sense, the most eminent are _Bernard, Echard, M. Baron, the authors of the old Paris edition of 1671, and of the old English edition with notes_. At the head of those who have adopted a contrary interpretation are _Cooke_, _Colman_, and _Madame Dacier_, who translate the lines thus, _Let not the fear of Chremes’ changing his mind, and resolving to give you his daughter, make you hesitate in doing this_, i. e., in telling your father that you’ll marry. I have adopted the latter translation, which seems more pertinent to the subject on which Davus and Pamphilus were conversing. The word hæc, moreover, usually refers to something immediately present, as was the topic of Pamphilus consenting to the marriage to deceive Simo. Terence, I think, if he had intended to allude to the visits, letters, _&c._, to Glycera, would have used the word isthæc. I conclude this note with the opinion of Madame Dacier respecting this passage, which that learned lady translates as follows:――

“_Car que Chremès ne veuille pas vous donner sa fille, cela est hors de doute. Gardez vous donc bien que la crainte qu’il ne change de sentiment, et ne veuille que vous soyez bon gendre, ne vous fasse changer quelque chose au conseil que je vous ai donné._

This passage is extremely difficult. I have been obliged to take a little latitude to make it clear. I shall explain the words literally: Nec tu ea causa minueris hæc quæ facis, ne is mutet suam sententiam. This is the construction, nec tu minueris hæc quæ facis, ea causa ne is mutet suam sententiam. Change not your intention to do what you are going to do; that is to say, what I advise you to do: ea causa; on this pretext; ne is mutet suam sententiam; that you fear lest Chremes should change his mind: minuere, to diminish, is used for to change, as in the Stepmother,

Sed non minuam meum consilium.

But I will not alter my resolution.” MADAME DACIER.

NOTE 125.

_As to the hopes you indulge, that no man will give his daughter to you, on account of this imprudent connexion that you have formed; I will soon convince you of their fallacy._

We must not suppose, that the sentiments of Pamphilus were really such as Davus here insinuates: this would be representing him as an unblushing profligate; who, because he was disinclined to marriage, wished his character to be so very black, that no reputable family in Athens would admit him as a son-in-law: for this is the sense of what Davus says, though I have rather softened his expression. Whoever attentively peruses what Simo says of his son, (in Act I. Scene I.) must perceive how inconsistent such a wish must be with the character of Pamphilus. Madame Dacier observes very aptly on a similar expression of Sosia, “_les valets prennent toujours tout du mauvais côte_, slaves always look on the dark side of every thing. In respect to the _before-mentioned passage_, I am rather inclined to the opinion of a late ingenious commentator, who speaks of it as follows:

“Mr. Davus talks here as if he did not know what to say. In my humble opinion, these four lines are no ornaments to the scene:

Nam quod tu speras, Propulsabo facile: uxorem his moribus Dabit nemo: inopem inveniet potius, quam te corrumpi sinat: Sed si te æquo animo ferre accipiet, negligentem feceris; Aliam otiosus quæret: interea aliquid acciderit boni.

Here are _poor_ sentiments in _pure_ Latin, which is more than once the case in our poet. The speech closes better with tibi jure irasci non queat.”――COOKE.

NOTE 126.

_Pamphilus. But we must take care that he knows nothing of the child, for I have promised to bring it up._

_Davus. Is it possible!_

An allusion is here made to the exposure of children, for an account of which, see Note 93.

Pamphilus, in this sentence, says pollicitus sum: there is very great force in this expression, which cannot be gracefully expressed in English. Pollicitatio, writes a learned commentator, magnarum rerum est promissio, means the promise of something of great consequence. It signifies also something promised over and over again, after great persuasion and entreaty.

NOTE 127.

_So as I saw the old man coming this way, I followed him._

Id propterea nunc _hunc_ venientem sequor.

Dr. Bentley thinks that this line ought to be omitted as spurious, because the word _hunc_ refers to Pamphilus, who had not quitted the stage at all, from the time of Charinus’ departure until that moment: and, therefore, what Byrrhia says about following him thither must be nonsense. This passage is made very clear by Madame Dacier, who shews that Id propterea is the commencement of another sentence, and makes _hunc_ refer to Simo, instead of Pamphilus. The lines ought to be read thus,

_Byrrhia._ Herus me, relictis rebus, jussit Pamphilum Hodiè observare, ut quid ageret de nuptiis Scirem. Id propterea nunc hunc venientem sequor.

NOTE 128.

_Byrrhia. (aside.) Now, for my master’s sake, I dread to hear his answer._

Some commentators make this speech come from Davus; but it certainly is more natural from Byrrhia: because, by the word _dread_, he expresses a suspense about what the answer might be, which Davus could not feel, because he and his master had previously agreed upon it.

NOTE 129.

_Byrrhia. (aside.) Ha! I am struck dumb; what did he say?_

Hem! obmutui! quid dixit!

I think this reading seems more consistent than that which is usually printed, where obmutuit comes from Davus: as _Byrrhia_ might well be supposed to _express surprise_ at Pamphilus’s answer, which was _directly different from what Pamphilus and Charinus had previously agreed on_.

The dialogue of this scene is carried on too unconnectedly, as Mr. Colman observes.

“Donatus remarks on this scene between Byrrhia, Simo, Pamphilus, and Davus, that the dialogue is sustained by four persons, who have little or no intercourse with each other: so that the scene is not only in direct contradiction to the precept of Horace excluding a fourth person, but is also otherwise vicious in its construction. Scenes of this kind are, I think, much too frequent in Terence, though, indeed, the form of the ancient theatre was more adapted to the representation of them than the modern. The multiplicity of speeches _aside_ is also the chief error in his dialogue; such speeches, though very common in dramatic writers, ancient and modern, being always more or less unnatural. Myrtle’s suspicions, grounded on the intelligence drawn from Bevil’s servant, are more artfully imagined by the English poet, than those of Charinus, created by employing his servant as a spy on the actions of Pamphilus.”――COLMAN.

NOTE 130.

_Byrrhia. (aside.) From what I hear, I fancy my master has nothing to do but to provide himself with another mistress as soon as possible._

Herus, quantum audio, uxore _excidit_.

“This expression is extremely elegant; excidere uxore means to lose all hope of obtaining the woman he courted, Excidere lite, to lose a cause, is a similar phrase. This mode of expression is in imitation of the Greeks, who used ἐκπιπτεῖν in the same sense.”――MADAME DACIER.

Terence, undoubtedly, was extremely happy in the choice of his words; and his expressions are frequently so terse and nervous, that they cannot be translated but by a circumlocution which very much diminishes their grace: the following are words of that description which occur in this play,

“_Liberaliter, conflictatur, familiariter, invenustum, indigeas, pollicitus, excidit, lactasses, ingeram, in proclive, produceres, conglutinas, illicis, attentus._”

NOTE 131.

_Byrrhia. Well, I’ll carry him an account of what has passed. I suppose I shall receive an abundance of bad language in return for my bad news._

Renunciabo, ut pro hoc malo mihi det malum.

There is a jest in the Latin, which it is impossible to preserve in a translation: it turns on the word _malum_, which was used at Rome to signify the punishment inflicted on a slave, who played his part badly on the stage: as the inferior characters in a Roman play were personated by slaves. Thus, Byrrhia means to say, I shall rehearse my part so little to my master’s satisfaction, that I am sure to be punished. The writings of Terence abound with allusions of different kinds. It is not improbable that Terence acquired a taste for dramatic writing, by frequenting the stage in his youth, before he obtained his liberty: as slaves were employed in the theatres in considerable numbers. It is remarkable that several very eminent Latin and Greek writers were originally slaves; Terence, Cæcilius, Æsop, Diocles, Rhianus, Epictetus, Tyrannion, and (_as some say_) Plautus, were all elevated from a servile station. A celebrated writer remarks on this subject as follows:――

“Of the politest and best writers of antiquity, several were slaves, or the immediate descendants of slaves. But all the difficulties occasioned by their low birth, mean fortune, want of friends, and defective education, were surmounted by their _love of letters_, and that generous spirit, which incites,

Ἀὲν ἀριστεύειν καὶ ὑπείροχον ἔμμεναι ἄλλων.

Still to be first, and rise above the rest.

Stimulos dedit æmula virtus: Nec quemquam jam ferre potest Cæsarve priorem Pompeiusve parem.――LUCAN.

’Twas emulative virtue spurred them on; Cæsar no longer a superior brooks, And Pompey scorns an equal.”――KNOX.

Byrrhia’s whole speech, from which the before-mentioned line was taken, has been thus altered by the learned French writer mentioned in Notes 72 and 112. _Vide_ Note 133.

“Ego illam vidi virginem: formâ bonâ Memini videre, quo æquior sum Pamphilo, Si se illam uxorem quam illum habere maluit. Renunciabo, ut pro hoc malo mihi det malum.”

The original lines are as follows,

“Ego illam vidi virginem: formâ bonâ Memini videre; quo æquior sum Pamphilo, Si se illam in somnis, quàm illum, amplecti maluit. Renunciabo, ut pro hoc malo mihi det malum.”

NOTE 132.

_Davus. (aside.) He has missed his aim! I see this nettles him to the quick._

M. Baron has lengthened this scene considerably: and makes a trial of repartee between Simo and Davus: one passage in which I think the ancient is surpassed by the modern, particularly deserves to be recorded.

“Puis-je espérer qu’aujourd’hui sans contrainte La vérité pourra, sans recevoir d’atteinte, Une fois seulement de ta bouche sortir.” _Andrienne_, A. II. S. VII.

Tell me, slave, Is’t possible that truth can pass thy lips, And be for once unsullied in its passage.

NOTE 133.

_Davus. While circumstances allowed him, and while his youth, in some measure, excused him, I confess he did._

This is the last passage in this play that has been altered by the learned French writer, whom I have already cited several times. He has varied the lines as follows,

“Dum licitum est illi, dumque ætas tulit, Si vixit liberius, at cavit ne id sibi Infamiæ esset, ut virum fortem decet.”

Altered from the following,

“Dum licitum est illi, dumque ætas tulit, Amavit: tum id clam. Cavit ne unquam infamiæ Ea res sibi esset, ut virum fortem decet.”

I have now completed my extracts of the alterations made by this very learned and judicious writer, of various passages in our author, which might sound somewhat harsh to a delicate ear. I cannot but think that these alterations are worthy of the attention of the editors of Latin classics, who might adopt them with advantage in those editions of Terence, which are intended to be introduced into schools. It is impossible to be too cautious respecting those writings which are placed in the hands of youth: that work, perhaps, has the greatest merit, which can be submitted to their perusal most unreservedly.

“Virtutem doctrina paret.”――HORACE.

I shall conclude this subject with an extract from that inestimable Tractate of Education, addressed by Milton to Mr. Samuel Hartlib: after various instructions to those who superintend the studies of youth, he observes, “Either now, or before this, they may have easily learnt, at any odd hour, the _Italian_ tongue; and soon after, but with _wariness and good antidote_, it would be wholesome enough to let them taste some choice comedies, _Greek_, _Latin_, or _Italian_. Those tragedies, also, that treat of household matters, as _Trachiniæ_, _Alcestis_, and the like.”

NOTE 134.

_He was cautious as a gentleman should be._

Cavit――――ut _virum fortem_ decet.

The words virum fortem in this passage do not mean a brave man, but a noble, well-bred, or honourable man. Latin authors sometimes used fortis in that sense. Thus, Ovid, speaking of Polyxena, says,

“Rapta sinu matris, quam jam propè sola fovebat, Fortis, et infelix, et plusquam fœmina, virgo Ducitur ad tumulum; diroque fit hostia busto.”

The noble maid, her mother’s only hope, Torn from her fostering arms by barbarous force, Was led a victim to Achilles’ tomb: Where, to appease the hero’s angry shade, They offered up the life of her he loved.

The Romans used virtus also in a similar manner to signify virtue, bravery, and nobleness. The Greek word καλὸς was of the same signification with the Latin fortis: it meant sometimes a brave, sometimes a virtuous man. Menander employs τα καλα in this sense,

“Ἐν μυρίοις τα καλα γιγνεται πονοι.” MENANDER.

A man, ere he deserves the name of great, Must overcome ten thousand difficulties.

NOTE 135.

_Simo. Yet he appeared to me to be somewhat melancholy._

This is admirably contrived by our author. Pamphilus is a youth of so open and ingenuous a disposition, that he cannot attempt to practise the slightest deceit upon his father, without a visible uneasiness and sadness in his demeanour. Terence conducts this affair in a manner infinitely more natural than does Sir R. Steele; who makes young Bevil counterfeit an eagerness to attend the lady his father designs for him, that is rather inconsistent with strict ingenuousness. But Terence has shewn wonderful art in his portraiture of Pamphilus’s behaviour in this scene: he asks his father no questions; he is silent and spiritless; and sedulously avoids mentioning any thing connected with his marriage, or his intended bride, and, as Mr. Colman ingeniously suggests, Pamphilus’s dissimulation may find some palliations in the artful instigations of Davus.

NOTE 136.

_Ten drachms for the wedding supper._

Instead of referring the reader to the Table of Money in Note 208, for the value of the drachma, I purpose to enter more at large, in this place, into a subject that has so much occupied the attention of the learned. The drachma, (δραχμὴ,) it is generally agreed, was equal to three scruples, six oboli, (ὀβολὸς,) and eighteen siliqua, (κέρατιον). Pliny, Valerius Maximus, and Strabo, believed the Attic drachma and the Roman denarius to be equivalent. But, if we admit of the correctness of this estimation, it affords us no certain information, as authors can agree as little on the value of the denarius, as on that of the drachma. Kennett computes the Roman denarius at 7_d._ 2_qrs._; Greaves, Arbuthnot, and Adams, at 7_d._ 3_q._; Tillemont at 11_d._, and, in the Philosophical Transactions, (Vol. LXI., Part II., Art. 48.) they estimate the denarius at 8_d._ 1½_q._

Mr. Raper makes the Attic drachm worth 9_d._ ²⁸⁶⁄₁₀₀₀. Greaves reckons it equal to 67 grains, which, supposing silver to be sold at 5_s._ per ounce, fixes the drachm at 8_d._ 1½_qr._ Dr. Arbuthnot computes it 6_d._ 3_qr._ ¹³⁶⁸⁄₄₇₀₄. Others fix the Attic talent at 187_l._ 10_s._, and the drachm at 7_d._ 2_qrs._, or the eighth part of an ounce of silver. If we take the mean of these computations, we may suppose the Attic drachm to have been equal to 8_d._; the Eginean to 13_d._ 3_qrs._; the insular to 16_d._; and the drachm of Antioch, to 48_d._ The learned Madame Dacier speaks of the Attic drachm thus: “la drachme Attique valait à peu près _cinq sols_.” No person, I think I may venture to assert, was ever more habitually correct than Madame D.

NOTE 137.

_Indeed, Sir, I think you are too frugal; it is not well timed._

Tu _quoque_ perparce nimium. Non laudo.

Donatus thinks, that the force of _quoque_ in this line is as follows: _He (Pamphilus) is much to blame for his childish petulance in taking offence at so trifling a circumstance: and you (Simo)_ ALSO _are to blame for having made so sparing a provision for your son’s wedding supper_. Terence has managed the whole circumstance very artfully: Simo intending to deceive Pamphilus and Davus, had provided to the amount of ten drachms, which was sixty times more than the expense of Chremes’ supper, which cost but an obolus, (_vide_ Note 120,) and accounts for what he said to Sosia, Act I. Scene I. (_vide_ Note 60.) But we are meant to suppose, that his frugality would not allow him to support the deceit by purchasing a plentiful wedding supper, which, among the Athenian citizens of rank, was a most expensive entertainment. (_Vide_ Herodot. B. 1. C. 133. Arrian, B. 7. C. 26.)

NOTE 138.

_Davus. (aside.) I’ve ruffled him now._

Simo is supposed to overhear this speech of Davus. _Vide_ Note 210.

The whole of the second act (as well as the first) has been preserved in Baron’s Andrienne, without alteration.

In the Conscious Lovers, the second act varies considerably. Instead of the scene between Davus and his master, Indiana and Isabella are introduced, and afterwards Indiana and Bevil: but both these scenes are entirely barren of incident. Bevil protects Indiana, as Pamphilus protects Glycera; but the former is on the footing of a _protector only_, and remains an undeclared lover until the fifth act.

Terence has wrought up the second act of this play with the utmost art and caution: a particular beauty in the pieces written by this great poet appears in the judicious disposition of his incidents, and in his so industriously concealing his catastrophe until the proper time for its appearance. This is a circumstance of great importance in dramatic writing, to which some authors pay too little attention. An ingenious critic of the last age has pointed out a very extraordinary instance of a total deficiency of art in this respect, where both the _plot_ and the _catastrophe_ are completely _revealed in the very title_. This piece is _Venice Preserved, or the Plot Discovered_, which is, in other respects, a very fine production. How much such a title as this must deaden the interest that an audience would otherwise feel from their suspense! This is a point which admits of no argument.

“Vestibulum ante ipsum, primoque in limine FINIS Scribitur.”――――

NOTE 139.

_Lesbia._

The circumstance of a female officiating as a medical attendant is of some importance. Caius Hyginus, a learned Spaniard, and the freedman of Augustus Cæsar, mentions in his “_Mythological Fables_” an ancient Athenian law, prohibiting women from the practice of physic: this prohibition was productive of great inconvenience in _many cases_, and afterwards repealed; when _free women_ were suffered to practise midwifery. To ascertain the date of this repeal, would afford us some guide to fix on _the times_, when the scenes described in this play were supposed to happen, and the _manners_ of which both Menander and Terence meant to portray.

NOTE 140.

_Glycera._

I have taken the liberty of following the example of Bernard, Echard, and most of the French translators, in softening the word Glycerium, which, to an English ear, sounds masculine enough for the name of Cæsar or of Alexander. But, for a female’s name,

――――“Why, it is harder, Sirs, than Gordon, Colkitto, or Macdonnel, or Galasp? Those rugged names to our like mouths grow sleek, That would have made _Quintilian_ stare and gasp.” MILTON.

NOTE 141.

_Mysis.――For, girl or boy, he has given orders, that the child shall be brought up._

Nam quod peperisset _jussit_ tolli.

_Vide_ Notes 93, 126. When circumstances would not allow the father of an infant to take it up from the ground himself, if he intended to preserve it, he commissioned some friend to perform the ceremony for him. This is the meaning of _jussit tolli_ in this passage. _Vide_ Pitis Dict., Art. _Expositio_, and Athenæ. B. 10.

NOTE 142.

_Simo.――O Jupiter! what do I hear? it is all over if what she says be truth!――is he so mad? a foreigner too!_

I imagine that in this passage, Terence meant Simo to call Glycera a _foreigner_ merely, and not a woman of light character, which _peregrina_ sometimes means, (_vide_ Note 82.) Madame Dacier translates the words ex peregrina by “_quoi d’une étrangère? c’est à dire d’une courtisane, car comme je l’ai remarqué ailleurs, on donnoit le nom d’étrangères à toutes les femmes debauchées_: et je crois qu’ils avoient pris cela des Orientaux; car on trouve étrangère en ce sens là dans les livres du VIEUX TESTAMENT.” But peregrina will hardly bear this interpretation in this particular passage, because we must suppose that Simo had not that opinion of Glycera’s character; for he himself (Act I. Scene I.) says, that her appearance was “so modest and so charming, that nothing could surpass it.” Simo, however, had sufficient reason for exclamation; supposing that he considered Glycera merely as a person who was not a native of Athens. The Athenian laws were rigorously strict in prohibiting a citizen from contracting a marriage with any woman who was not a citizen: if such a marriage was contracted, and the parties impeached and convicted, the husband was fined very heavily, in proportion to his property; the wife sold for a slave; and any person who was proved to have used any species of deceit to induce the Athenian to form this forbidden connexion, was punished with the worst kind of infamy, which included the loss of his liberty and of his estate. The first of these punishments was called ζημία, the second δουλεία, and the third ἀτιμία. If Simo, therefore, supposed that Glycera was not a citizen, and believed Pamphilus to be her husband, his apprehensions appear very natural.

NOTE 143.

_Glycera.――O Juno, Lucina, help! save me, I beseech thee._

Though Juno was sometimes called Lucina, Diana is the goddess here called Juno Lucina. Diana received the appellation of Juno, (as I apprehend,) because she was considered by the ancients as presiding over women in child-birth: and might, therefore, very properly be termed _Juno_, the guardian _genius_ of women; as Junones was the usual name for those spirits who were supposed to be the protectors of women, as the genii were thought to be the guardians of men: (_vide_ Note 106.) _Catullus_ addressing Diana, calls her expressly by the names Juno Lucina:

“Tu _Lucina_ dolentibus _Juno_ dicta puerperis.”

And thou, Juno Lucina called By women who implore thy aid.

_Cicero_ also confirms the assertion of Catullus, “Ut apud Græcos Dianam eamque Luciferam, sic apud nostros _Junonem Lucinam_ invocant.” As the Greeks call upon Diana Lucifera, so we call upon the same goddess by the names of Juno Lucina. Diana was almost universally worshipped in Greece, where many magnificent temples were erected in her honour: amongst which, was that of Ephesus, reckoned one of the wonders of the world. Of this magnificent structure, the ruins may now be seen near Ajasalouc in Natolia. The temple was purposely burned by Eratorastus, who adopted this mode of perpetuating his name. The Greek festivals celebrated in honour of their imaginary deities were almost innumerable: and those dedicated to Diana, shew the high estimation in which she was held. A surprising number of festivals were celebrated in honour of this goddess, in various parts of Greece. The following are the names of the chief of those held in Athens,

Τεσσαρακοστὸν, Μουνυχία, Θαργήλια, Λιμνατίδια, Ἀρτεμίσια, Βραυρώνια, Ἐλαφηβόλια. _Vide_ Athen., Δειπνοσο, B. 14.

NOTE 144.

_Why, Davus, your incidents are not well timed at all, man._

“Non sat commode Divisa sunt temporibus tibi, Dave, hæc.”

Another allusion to the drama: Simo compares Davus’s supposed plot to a comedy, and Davus the contriver of it he calls _magister_, which was the title of the person who instructed the actors in their parts, or perhaps the title of the author. Simo accuses Davus of bringing forward his catastrophe too soon, and asks him whether the actors in his piece (_discipuli_) had forgotten their parts.

Ancient dramatic writers were very strict in adhering to their rules of composition.

According to Vossius, the ancients divided a comedy into three parts: 1. _protasis_, 2. _epitasis_, 3. _catastrophe_. The _protasis_ occupied Act I., and was devoted to the explanation of the argument. The _epitasis_ took up Act II. III. IV., contained the incidents, and wrought up the mind to a degree of interest, taking care to leave it _in doubt_; which brought on the catastrophe, which unravelled and cleared up the whole; and is defined by _Scaliger_ thus, “_conversio negotii exagitati in tranquillitatem non expectatam_:” _a sudden changing of the hurry and bustle of action into unexpected tranquillity_. The same learned critic adds a fourth part to the before-mentioned three, which he calls _catastasis_, and places immediately before the catastrophe: he defines the catastasis as follows, “_vigor ac status fabulæ, in qua res miscetur in ea fortunæ tempestate, in quam subducta est_:” _that liveliness and issue of the plot, in which the various incidents are mixed up in such a commotion of fortune as to be in a proper state to be brought down to the catastrophe_.

NOTE 145.

_What a laughing-stock would this rascal have made of me._

Quos mihi _ludos_ redderet.

This is an allusion to the games which were exhibited among the ancients with a view to entertain the people; and also to create in them a spirit of emulation in glorious actions. Games, both in Greece and Rome, constituted a part of religious worship; they were divided into three classes, 1. what the Romans called _ludi equestres_, or horse, and chariot-races; 2. _ludi agonales_, or combats of gladiators and others, and also of beasts; 3. _ludi scenici et musici_, or dramatic exhibitions of all kinds, music, dancing, _&c._ The chief games among the Greeks were, 1. the _Olympic_, dedicated to Jupiter; 2. the _Pythian_, to Apollo; 3. the _Nemæan_, to Hercules; 4. the _Isthmian_, to Neptune; 5. the games celebrated at the observation of the _Eleusinian_ mysteries, in honour of Ceres and Proserpine: 6. _the great Panathenæa_, dedicated to Minerva. Those who obtained the victory in these games, were universally distinguished; and their success reflected glory on their family, and even on the cities from whence they came; part of the wall of which was thrown down to admit them in triumph on their return. Those Athenians who were conquerors in the Olympic games, were afterwards (_at their own option_,) maintained at the public charge, and enjoyed various extraordinary privileges. Among the Romans, the principal games were, 1. _the Ludi Romani_, dedicated to Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva; 2. _the Sæculares_, to the deities and the fates; 3. _the Consuales_, to Neptunus Equestris; 4. _the Capitolini_, to Jupiter Capitolinus. The Romans celebrated their games chiefly in the Circus Maximus; which, as a place of entertainment, was magnificently extensive. Pliny asserts that it would contain _one quarter of a million_ of spectators; and more modern authors have augmented that number to 380,000.

NOTE 146.

_Now, first, let her be bathed._

Nunc primum _fac――――ut lavet_.

Though I have followed the common reading in this passage, as it is not a point of any importance, I think it doubtful whether Terence meant Lesbia to speak of the mother or the child, when she said the words _fac ut lavet_, as the Greeks practised a remarkable ceremony on new-born infants, in order to strengthen them. A mixture of water, oil, and wine, was made in a vessel kept for the purpose, which they called λουτρὸν and χύτλος, and, with this liquid, they _washed_ the children; as some think, they wished to try the strength of the infant’s constitution, which, if weak, yielded to the powerful fumes of the wine, and the children fell into fits. I imagine that this was done, when it was the question if an infant should be exposed, as puny, sickly children sometimes were. (_Vide_ Note 93.)

NOTE 147.

_Davus.――Truly, at this rate, I shall hardly dare open my mouth._

Sed, si quid narrare occæpi continuo dari Tibi verba censes. S. _Falso._ D. Itaque hercle nil jam mutire audeo.

Dr. Bentley reads _falso_ in Davus’s speech; and Cooke thinks it should be altogether omitted. I have followed the old English edition in supposing the word in question to be spoken _ironically_, which is certainly consistent with the usual style of conversation between Simo and Davus.

NOTE 148.

_Now, finding that the marriage preparations are going forwards in our house, she sends her maid to fetch a midwife._

This is a very subtle contrivance. Davus intends that the birth of Pamphilus’s child shall be reported to Chremes to alarm him, (as we see