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.