University of Virginia Library

Juno Lucina was the Goddess supposed to preside over child-birth.

“In their Comedies, the Romans generally borrowed their plots from the Greek Poets; and theirs was commonly a little Girl stolen or wandered from her Parents, brought back unknown to the city, there got with child by some lewd young fellow; who, by the help of his servant, cheats his father: and when her time comes, to cry Juno Lucina, fer opem! one or other sees a little Box or Cabinet, which was carried away with her, and so discovers her to her friends; if some God do not prevent it, by coming down in a Machine, and taking the thanks of it to himself.

“By the Plot you may guess much of the characters of the Persons. An old father, who would willingly, before he dies, see his Son well married; a debauched Son, kind in his nature to his mistress, but miserably in want of money; a servant or slave, who has so much wit as to strike in with him, and help to dupe his father; a Braggadochio Captain; a Parasite; and a Lady of Pleasure.

“As for the poor honest maid, on whom the Story is built, and who ought to be one the principal Actors in the Play, she is commonly a Mute in it: She has the breeding of the old Elizabeth way, which was for maids to be seen, and not to be heard; and it is enough you know she is willing to be married when the fifth Act requires it.”

It must be remembered that Dryden's Essay is written in the form of a Dialogue, and therefore the above Extract is not to be supposed to be absolutely the very opinion of the writer, but receives a good deal of its high colouring from the character of the Speaker. It is true, indeed, that this crying out of a woman in labour behind the Scenes, which Donatus gravely remarks is the only way in which the Severity of the Comœdiæ Palliata would allow a young gentlewoman to be introduced, is perhaps the most exceptionable circumstance of all the antient Drama: and if the modern Theatre has any transcendent advantage over the antient, it is in the frequent and successful introduction of female personages.

The antients were so little sensible of the impropriety or indecorum of such an incident, that it is (as Dryden has observed) introduced into many of their plays, wherein the Lady cries out in the same, or very similar, words with Glycerium. I do not, however, remember any play where the Lady in the Straw produces so many pleasant circumstances, as in the play before us; nor is there, I think, any one of those circumstances, except the crying out, which might not be represented on our Stage. This act, and the next, which are entirely built on the delivery of Glycerium, are the most humourous of the five; and yet these very acts seem to have been the most obnoxious to the delicacy of the modern imitators of our Author. Sir Richard Steele, indeed, departed in many other circumstances from the Fable of Terence, so that it is no wonder he took the advantage of bringing our Glycerium on the Stage in the person of Indiana: but Baron, who has wrought his whole piece on the Ground of Terence, thought it necessary to new-mould these two Acts, and has introduced Glycerium merely to fill up the chasm created by the omission of the other incidents. Baron, I doubt not, judged right in thinking it unsafe to hazard them on the French Stage: but it must be obvious to every reader that the deadest and most insipid parts of Baron's play are those scenes in which he deviates from Terence.

Non sat commode divisa sunt temporibus tibi, Dave, hæc. A metaphor taken from the Theatre. Dacier.

This was a piece of roguery very common in Greece, where they often deceived the old men by suppositious children. Dacier.

Chremes is a humane, natural, unaffected old gentleman. Sealand in the Conscious Lovers, the English Chremes, is a sensible respectable merchant. Both the characters are properly sustained: but Chremes being induced first to renew his consent match, and afterwards wrought upon by currences arising in the fable to withdraw again, renders his character more essential to the Drama, than Sealand's.

Quid meritus? This question is taken from the custom of the Athenians, who never condemned a criminal without first asking what punishment he thought he deserved; and according to the nature of the culprit's answer, they mitigated or aggravated his punishment.

The Commentators cite a passage exactly parallel from the Frogs of Aristophanes.

Characters too faintly drawn are the opposite of Caricature. Pamphilus in the Andrian is, in my mind a faint character. Davus has precipitated him into a marriage that he abhors. His mistress has but just been brought to-bed. He has a hundred reasons to be out of humour. Yet he takes all in good part.

I cannot think there is much justice in the above observation. Pamphilus appears to me to have all the feelings of an amiable and ingenuous mind. There is an observation of Donatus on Simo's observing to Davus, at the end of the second Act, that his son appeared to him to be rather melancholy, which is in my opinion infinitely more just, and applicable to the character of Pamphilus than the remark of our ingenious French Critick. It has been reserved for this place on purpose to oppose them to each other. The passage and note on it are as follow.

Yet in my mind he seem'd a little sad.]

The propriety of behaviour necessary to the different characters of the Son and the Lover, is wonderfully preserved in this instance. A deceit, sustained with great assurance, would not have been agreeable to the character of an ingenuous youth: and it would have been improbable in the character of the Lover to have entirely smothered his concern. He suppresses it therefore in some measure, because the thing was to be concealed; but could not assume a thorough joyfulness, because his disposition and his passion inspired him with melancholy.

It may be added also, as a further answer to Diderot, that the words with which Pamphilus concludes this act, alluding to his present situation, assign a very natural reason for his subduing the transports of his anger towards Davus.