University of Virginia Library

It appears from this passage that the Prologue was usually spoken by young men. Dacier.

Terence has been accused by some criticks of being worse than his word here; for, say they, he does not first explain why he has chosen an old performer. But this accusation is unjust, for it is the first thing which he does: what he says before is merely to make the piece known, which business he dispatches in two words, and that too in a parenthesis.

Dacier.

This passage is also vindicated by Scaliger in his Poeticks, chap. 3. book 6.

Duplex quæ ex argumento facta est simplici. This passage has greatly perplexed the Commentators. Julius Scaliger was of opinion that Terence called this Comedy Duplex, double, because it was acted at two different times: the two first Acts at the close of the evening, and the remaining three on the following morning; and that it therefore served as two distinct pieces. But this conjecture is not admissible: Terence only meant to say that he had doubled the characters; instead of one old man, one young gallant, one mistress, as in Menander, he had two old men, &c. he therefore adds very properly, novam esse ostendi,—That our Comedy is New,—which certainly could not have been implied, had the characters been the same in the Greek poet. Dacier.

Terence pretends, that having doubled the subject of the Self-Tormentor, his piece is new. I allow it; but whether it is better on that account, is quite another question.

Diderot.

It is impossible not to regret that there are not above ten lines of the Self-Tormentor preserved among the Fragments of Menander. We are so deeply interested by what we see of that character in Terence, that one cannot but be curious to enquire in what manner the Greek Poet sustained it through five acts. The Roman Author, though he has adopted the title of the Greek Play, has so altered the fable, that Menedemus is soon thrown into the back-ground, and Chremes is brought forward as the principal object: or, to vary the allusion a little, the Menedemus of Terence seems to be a drawing in miniature copied from a full length, as large as the life, by Menander.

This is a remarkable proof how careful the Romans were in the study of the Greek Poets. S.

The Ancients called that Musick, which we now term the Belles Lettres. Aristophanes more than once calls the art of dramatick writing, Musick. Dacier.

It must have been a very wretched piece, if this was the most beautiful passage in it. Yet such an incident is often necessary, as may be seen in the Amphitryon of Plautus, where Mercury runs in crying,

Terence therefore only blames those authors, who, like Luscius, made it the capital circumstance in their plays.

Dacier.

Had Madam Dacier quoted the whole passage in the Amphitryon, I think, it would have been evident that Plautus also meant to ridicule the like practice.

Plaut, Amph. Act 2. Sc. 4.

Statariam agere. The word Statariam has not not been thoroughly understood; in order more fully to explain it, we must have recourse to its original meaning. The Greek Poets divided their choruses into two different sorts of verse, the στασιμα μελη, statarios versus, so called, because the actor who repeated them never moved from his place; and into the παροδικα μελη, motorios versus, because the performer skipped and danced about while he was repeating his part. This has been perfectly well explained by the Scholiasts upon Æschylus and Aristophanes. The Romans made the same distinctions, and called those Pieces Statariæ which were grave and composed, and required little or no action. The Motoriæ on the contrary were lively and full of business and action.—This Play is of the former kind.—Some Commentators imagine Terence means one character only by Statariam, as if personam were to be understood; though the Ancients did call the actors statorios et motorios, according to the different parts they were engaged in, I am convinced that it is not in this place at all applicable to them, but to the whole comedy: how else are we to explain the 45th verse.

To apply it to any one of the other actors of the company, would be overstraining the sense of the text.

Dacier.

Being entirely of a different opinion from Madam Dacier, concerning the sense of the words Statariam agere, I have translated them as referring merely to the character, which the Prologue-Speaker was to play, (which I apprehend to have been Menedemus) and not to the whole comedy: and the lines immediately subsequent, I think, confirm this interpretation, as they contain a description of the laborious characters he usually represented, Clamore summo, cum labore maxumo; and which he urges as a plea for his being allowed to act an easier part at present.

As to the difficulty started by Madam Dacier of reconciling Sin levis, &c. to the rest of the context, it is a difficulty, which I must own I cannot entirely comprehend.

Terence with great propriety commends this play for the purity of its stile; he knew it to be very deficient in point of action, and therefore determined to repair that defect by the vivacity and purity of the language; and he has perfectly succeeded.

Dacier.

Here I have again quoted Madam Dacier merely to express my dissent from her opinion. The play is, in my mind, far from being destitute of action: the plot being as artfully constructed, and containing as many unexpected turns and variety of incidents, as any of our Author's pieces, as may perhaps appear in the course of these notes.