University of Virginia Library

There is much controversy among the Criticks, whether the Andrian was the first play, which Terence produced, or only the first of those which have come down to our times. Donatus positively asserts it to be our author's first production, and adds that the favourable reception it met with, encouraged him to go on in writing for the Stage. He tells us also that this Piece was entitled “The Andrian of Terence,” and not “Terence's Andrian,” according to the custom of the Romans, who placed the name of the Play first, if it was written by an author, yet unknown in the Theatrical world, but placed the author's name first in the title, if it was one already celebrated. Madam Dacier is of a contrary opinion, and thinks that the introductory lines of the Prologue make it evident that Terence had written before. These inquiries are little more that mere matter of curiosity. For my part, I am rather inclined to the opinion of Donatus. The objections of Lavinius, which Terence in his Prologue endeavours to refute, are entirely confined to this play; and that it was possible for Lavinius to have seen the manuscript before the representation is evident from the Prologue to the Eunuch, where Terence directly charges that circumstance to his adversary. The concluding lines of the Prologue speak the language of an author, new in the Drama, much stronger than those in the beginning denote his having written before. It may be remembered also, that Terence was no more than 27 years of age at the time of the first representation of this comedy.

Both the English and French Theatres have borrowed the Fable of this Play. Sir Richard Steele has raised on that foundation his Comedy of the Conscious Lovers; and Baron has adopted even the Title. It is proposed to throw out some observations on each of these pieces, and to compare them with Terence's comedy, in the course of these notes.