University of Virginia Library

These two prologues are by some blended together, but most learned and judicious editors make two of them. Faernus says that in some copies the name of L. Ambivius is over them, in great letters; thus, L. AMBIVIUS PROLOGUS: and the same distinction is made in the Basilican copy. Eugraphius says positively that the prologue was spoken by Ambivius Turpio. Cooke.

Orator ad vos venio. Madam Dacier, and some who follow her, translate Orator by the word Ambassador. Her explanation of the original (though in this instance, as well as many others, she does not acknowledge it) is taken from Donatus. But what is very extraordinary, Donatus, in his comment on the very next line, gives the word a quite different signification; and tells us that Orator signifies a person entrusted with the defence of a cause; in one word, a Pleader: and that Exorator signifies him who has gained the cause. The word is undoubtedly used in this latter sense in the Prologue to the Self-Tormentor—Oratorem voluit esse me, non Prologum—and it seems to be the best and easiest construction in this place also.

A famous comick Poet among the Romans. His chief excellencies are said to have been the gravity of his stile, and the choice of his subjects. The first quality was attributed to him by Horace, Tully, &c. and the last by Varro. In argumentis Cæcilius poscit palmam, in ethesi Terentius.—“In the choice of subjects Cæcilius demands the preference, in the manners Terence.” —Madam Dacier indeed renders in argumentis “in the disposition of his subjects.” But the words will not bear that construction. Argumentum, I believe, is uniformly used for the argument itself, never implies the conduct of it—as in the Prologue to the Andrian, non tam dissimili argumento—“in argument less different.”—Besides, the disposition of the subject was the very art attributed by the criticks of those days to Terence, and which Horace mentions in the very same line with the gravity of Cæcilius, distinguishing them as the several characteristicks of each writer.

See Hurd's notes to the Epistle to Augustus.

There is great force and eloquence in the actor's affecting a concern for the sacred festivals, which were in danger of being deprived of their chief ornaments, if by too great a severity they discouraged the Poets, who undertook to furnish the plays during the celebrity. Dacier.

Pretio emtas meo. These words I have rendered literally, tho' there is great dispute among commentators concerning them. Donatus, and, after him, Madam Dacier, explains pretio by æstimatione pretii, importing that Ambivius valued the play, when the Ædiles were to purchase it. Madam Dacier therefore supposes the case to be thus. When the Ædiles had a mind to purchase a copy for the Stage, they gave it to the Master of the Company, to peruse, and set a price upon it. If it failed, the master was bound to return the money to the Magistrates; which made it the interest of the Actors to support the piece, as the loss, if it was rejected, fell upon themselves.—This it must be owned is ingenious, but has nothing to support it but conjecture. We are entirely unacquainted with the nature of these transactions between the Ædiles, Players, and Poet, and therefore cannot pronounce with certainty about them. Besides, I believe it will be hard to find an instance where Pretium is put for Æstimatio Pretii. I am therefore more inclined to think, that on some occasions the Ædiles, on others the Master of the Company bought the play, of which last kind was the purchase of the Step-Mother. But how in either case, if it was not received by the publick, the Poet could claim a right to a second sale, as is mentioned in the first prologue, is a matter not easily determined at this distance of time.

Madam Dacier's reasoning on this dark point of theatrical history is certainly inconclusive; not only for want of proof, but because no method of settling the assize of plays could be more unworthy the Magistrate, more detrimental to Authors, or more hurtful to the credit of the Stage: for if the Actor was to abide by the loss, his interest would incline him to set the very lowest value on the piece. —Taking the whole prologue together, may not one conjecture, that the first time a play was exhibited it was purchased, as is mentioned in other prologues, by the Ædiles: but if it failed, or, for the sake of Gladiators and Rope-dancers, was then refused a hearing, the Poet had a right to withdraw his piece without returning the copy-money; and if it was brought on again by the manager, it was at his own hazard and expence? This conjecture explains the passage in the first prologue concerning a second sale, and gives an additional force to every thing urged by Ambivius in the second; in which, supposing the actor to be speaking to the audience concerning a theatrical usage with which they were all familiarly acquainted, the whole obscurity of both the prologues vanishes. We immediately comprehend the manner of his revival of the plays of Cæcilius, and see how essentially his interest is concerned in the reception of this of Terence. It gives us also a very high opinion of the penetration and humanity of Ambivius.

From these two prologues, and some passages in Horace, we may collect that riots, parties, &c. were as common in Rome as in England; and that a first night was as terrible, and the town as formidable to Cæcilius, and Terence, as to the puny authors of our days. The high reputation of Ambivius Turpio, (the actor who spoke this Prologue, and probably the Manager of the Company) as well as the esteem which Terence had for him, is evident; and we conceive no unfavourable idea of the town-criticks of those times, who could listen to such a plea urged by the Actor, and so candidly acquiesce in all that he said in his own commendation. We have seen indeed, and it is to be hoped shall see again, an acting manager in our time, to whom modern authors have as much reason to be partial, as Terence to Ambivius: but though he has helped out many a lame play with a lively prologue, I believe he would hardly venture to make such an address to the publick as this now before us.