was never received in the sense, which the learned Critick assigns to
it.
The Dauphin Editor interprets it,
STANTE _urbe, & Capitolino Jove Romanos protegente._
Schrevelius, to the same effect, explains it,
SALVO _Capitolio, quae Jovis erat sedes._
These interpretations, as they are certainly the most obvious, seem also
to be most consonant to the plain sense of the Poet.
330.--_For holiday spectators, flush'd and wild,
With new conceits and mummeries were beguil'd.
Quippe erat_ ILLECEBRIS, _&c._
Monsieur Dacier, though he allows that "all that is here said by Horace
proves _incontestibly_, that the Satyrick Piece had possession of the
Roman stage;" _tout ce qu' Horace dit icy prouve_ incontestablement
_qu'il y avoit des Satyres_; yet thinks that Horace lavished all these
instructions on them, chiefly for the sake of the atellane fables. The
author of the English Commentary is of the same opinion, and labours
the point very assiduously. I cannot, however, discover, in any part
of Horace's discourse on _the_ satyrs, one expression glancing towards
_the_ atellanes, though their oscan peculiarities might easily have been
marked, so as not to be mistaken.
335.--_That_ GOD _or_ HERO _of the lofty scene,
May not, &c.
Ne quicumque_ DEUS, _&c._
The Commentators have given various explanations of this precept. _De
Nores_ interprets it to signify _that the same actor, who represented a
God or Hero in the_ Tragick _part of the Drama, must not be employed
to represent a Faun or Sylvan in the_ Satyrick. _Dacier has a strange
conceit concerning the joint performance of a _Tragedy_ and _Atellane_
at one time, the same God or Hero being represented as the principal
subject and character of both; on which occasion, (says he) the Poet
recommends to the author not to debase the God, or Hero of _the_
Tragedy, by sinking his language and manners too low in _the_ atellane;
whose stile, as well as measure, should be peculiar to itself, equally
distant from Tragedy and Farce.
The author of the English Commentary tells us, that "Gods and Heroes
were introduced as well into the _Satyrick_ as _Tragick_ Drama, and
often the very same Gods and Heroes, which had born a part in THE
PRECEDING TRAGEDY; a practice, which Horace, I suppose, intended, by
this hint, to recommend as most regular."
The two short notes of Schrevelius, in my opinion, more clearly explain
the sense of Horace, and are in these words.
_Poema serium, jocis_ Satyricis _ita_ commiscere--_ne seilicet is, qui
paulo ante_ DEI _instar aut_ herois _in scenam fuit introductus, postea
lacernosus prodeat._
On the whole, supposing _the_ Satyrick _Piece_ to be _Tragi-Comick_, as
Dacier himself seems half inclined to believe, the precept of Horace
only recommends to the author so to support his principal personage,
that his behaviour in the Satyrick scenes shall not debase the character
he has sustained in the TRAGICK. No specimen remaining of the Roman
Satyrick Piece, I may be permitted to illustrate the rule of Horace by a
brilliant example from the _seroi-comick_ Histories of the Sovereign
of our Drama. The example to which I point, is the character of _the_
Prince _of_ Wales, in the two Parts of _Henry the Fourth_, Such a
natural and beautiful decorum is maintained in the display of that
character, that the _Prince_ is as discoverable in the loose scenes with
Falstaff and his associates, as in the Presence Chamber, or the closet.
after _the natural_, though mixt dramas, of Shakespear, and Beaumont and
Fletcher, had prevailed on our stage, it is surprising that our
progress to _pure_ Tragedy and Comedy, should have been interrupted, or
disturbed, by _the regular monster of_ Tragi-comedy, nursed by Southerne
and Dryden.
346.--LET ME NOT, PISOS, IN THE SYLVIAN SCENE, USE ABJECT TERMS ALONE,
AND PHRASES MEAN]
_Non ego_ INORNATA & DOMINANTIA, &c.
The author of the English Commentary proposes a conjectural emendation
of Horace's text--honodrata instead of inornata--and accompanied with a
new and elevated sense assigned to the word dominantia. This last word
is interpreted in the same manner by _de Nores_. Most other Commentators
explain it to signify _common words_, observing its analogy to the Greek
term [Greek: kuria]. The same expression prevails in our own tongue--_a_
reigning _word_, _a reigning _fashion_, &c. the general cast of _the_
satyr, seems to render a caution against a lofty stile not very
necessary; yet it must be acknowledged that such a caution is given by
the Poet, exclusive of the above proposed variation.
_Ne quicumque_ DEUS------
_Migret in obscuras_ HUMILI SERMONE _tabernas_,
_Aut dum vitat humum_, NUBES & INANIA CAPTET.