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.

Terence has wrought up the second act of this play with the utmost art and caution: a particular beauty in the pieces written by this great poet appears in the judicious disposition of his incidents, and in his so industriously concealing his catastrophe until the proper time for its appearance. This is a circumstance of great importance in dramatic writing, to which some authors pay too little attention. An ingenious critic of the last age has pointed out a very extraordinary instance of a total deficiency of art in this respect, where both the _plot_ and the _catastrophe_ are completely _revealed in the very title_. This piece is _Venice Preserved, or the Plot Discovered_, which is, in other respects, a very fine production. How much such a title as this must deaden the interest that an audience would otherwise feel from their suspense! This is a point which admits of no argument.

“Vestibulum ante ipsum, primoque in limine FINIS Scribitur.”――――

NOTE 139.

_Lesbia._

The circumstance of a female officiating as a medical attendant is of some importance. Caius Hyginus, a learned Spaniard, and the freedman of Augustus Cæsar, mentions in his “_Mythological Fables_” an ancient Athenian law, prohibiting women from the practice of physic: this prohibition was productive of great inconvenience in _many cases_, and afterwards repealed; when _free women_ were suffered to practise midwifery. To ascertain the date of this repeal, would afford us some guide to fix on _the times_, when the scenes described in this play were supposed to happen, and the _manners_ of which both Menander and Terence meant to portray.

NOTE 140.

_Glycera._

I have taken the liberty of following the example of Bernard, Echard, and most of the French translators, in softening the word Glycerium, which, to an English ear, sounds masculine enough for the name of Cæsar or of Alexander. But, for a female’s name,

――――“Why, it is harder, Sirs, than Gordon, Colkitto, or Macdonnel, or Galasp? Those rugged names to our like mouths grow sleek, That would have made _Quintilian_ stare and gasp.” MILTON.

NOTE 141.

_Mysis.――For, girl or boy, he has given orders, that the child shall be brought up._

Nam quod peperisset _jussit_ tolli.

_Vide_ Notes 93, 126. When circumstances would not allow the father of an infant to take it up from the ground himself, if he intended to preserve it, he commissioned some friend to perform the ceremony for him. This is the meaning of _jussit tolli_ in this passage. _Vide_ Pitis Dict., Art. _Expositio_, and Athenæ. B. 10.

NOTE 142.

_Simo.――O Jupiter! what do I hear? it is all over if what she says be truth!――is he so mad? a foreigner too!_

I imagine that in this passage, Terence meant Simo to call Glycera a _foreigner_ merely, and not a woman of light character, which _peregrina_ sometimes means, (_vide_ Note 82.) Madame Dacier translates the words ex peregrina by “_quoi d’une étrangère? c’est à dire d’une courtisane, car comme je l’ai remarqué ailleurs, on donnoit le nom d’étrangères à toutes les femmes debauchées_: et je crois qu’ils avoient pris cela des Orientaux; car on trouve étrangère en ce sens là dans les livres du VIEUX TESTAMENT.” But peregrina will hardly bear this interpretation in this particular passage, because we must suppose that Simo had not that opinion of Glycera’s character; for he himself (Act I. Scene I.) says, that her appearance was “so modest and so charming, that nothing could surpass it.” Simo, however, had sufficient reason for exclamation; supposing that he considered Glycera merely as a person who was not a native of Athens. The Athenian laws were rigorously strict in prohibiting a citizen from contracting a marriage with any woman who was not a citizen: if such a marriage was contracted, and the parties impeached and convicted, the husband was fined very heavily, in proportion to his property; the wife sold for a slave; and any person who was proved to have used any species of deceit to induce the Athenian to form this forbidden connexion, was punished with the worst kind of infamy, which included the loss of his liberty and of his estate. The first of these punishments was called ζημία, the second δουλεία, and the third ἀτιμία. If Simo, therefore, supposed that Glycera was not a citizen, and believed Pamphilus to be her husband, his apprehensions appear very natural.

NOTE 143.

_Glycera.――O Juno, Lucina, help! save me, I beseech thee._

Though Juno was sometimes called Lucina, Diana is the goddess here called Juno Lucina. Diana received the appellation of Juno, (as I apprehend,) because she was considered by the ancients as presiding over women in child-birth: and might, therefore, very properly be termed _Juno_, the guardian _genius_ of women; as Junones was the usual name for those spirits who were supposed to be the protectors of women, as the genii were thought to be the guardians of men: (_vide_ Note 106.) _Catullus_ addressing Diana, calls her expressly by the names Juno Lucina:

“Tu _Lucina_ dolentibus _Juno_ dicta puerperis.”

And thou, Juno Lucina called By women who implore thy aid.

_Cicero_ also confirms the assertion of Catullus, “Ut apud Græcos Dianam eamque Luciferam, sic apud nostros _Junonem Lucinam_ invocant.” As the Greeks call upon Diana Lucifera, so we call upon the same goddess by the names of Juno Lucina. Diana was almost universally worshipped in Greece, where many magnificent temples were erected in her honour: amongst which, was that of Ephesus, reckoned one of the wonders of the world. Of this magnificent structure, the ruins may now be seen near Ajasalouc in Natolia. The temple was purposely burned by Eratorastus, who adopted this mode of perpetuating his name. The Greek festivals celebrated in honour of their imaginary deities were almost innumerable: and those dedicated to Diana, shew the high estimation in which she was held. A surprising number of festivals were celebrated in honour of this goddess, in various parts of Greece. The following are the names of the chief of those held in Athens,

Τεσσαρακοστὸν, Μουνυχία, Θαργήλια, Λιμνατίδια, Ἀρτεμίσια, Βραυρώνια, Ἐλαφηβόλια. _Vide_ Athen., Δειπνοσο, B. 14.

NOTE 144.

_Why, Davus, your incidents are not well timed at all, man._

“Non sat commode Divisa sunt temporibus tibi, Dave, hæc.”

Another allusion to the drama: Simo compares Davus’s supposed plot to a comedy, and Davus the contriver of it he calls _magister_, which was the title of the person who instructed the actors in their parts, or perhaps the title of the author. Simo accuses Davus of bringing forward his catastrophe too soon, and asks him whether the actors in his piece (_discipuli_) had forgotten their parts.

Ancient dramatic writers were very strict in adhering to their rules of composition.

According to Vossius, the ancients divided a comedy into three parts: 1. _protasis_, 2. _epitasis_, 3. _catastrophe_. The _protasis_ occupied Act I., and was devoted to the explanation of the argument. The _epitasis_ took up Act II. III. IV., contained the incidents, and wrought up the mind to a degree of interest, taking care to leave it _in doubt_; which brought on the catastrophe, which unravelled and cleared up the whole; and is defined by _Scaliger_ thus, “_conversio negotii exagitati in tranquillitatem non expectatam_:” _a sudden changing of the hurry and bustle of action into unexpected tranquillity_. The same learned critic adds a fourth part to the before-mentioned three, which he calls _catastasis_, and places immediately before the catastrophe: he defines the catastasis as follows, “_vigor ac status fabulæ, in qua res miscetur in ea fortunæ tempestate, in quam subducta est_:” _that liveliness and issue of the plot, in which the various incidents are mixed up in such a commotion of fortune as to be in a proper state to be brought down to the catastrophe_.

NOTE 145.

_What a laughing-stock would this rascal have made of me._

Quos mihi _ludos_ redderet.

This is an allusion to the games which were exhibited among the ancients with a view to entertain the people; and also to create in them a spirit of emulation in glorious actions. Games, both in Greece and Rome, constituted a part of religious worship; they were divided into three classes, 1. what the Romans called _ludi equestres_, or horse, and chariot-races; 2. _ludi agonales_, or combats of gladiators and others, and also of beasts; 3. _ludi scenici et musici_, or dramatic exhibitions of all kinds, music, dancing, _&c._ The chief games among the Greeks were, 1. the _Olympic_, dedicated to Jupiter; 2. the _Pythian_, to Apollo; 3. the _Nemæan_, to Hercules; 4. the _Isthmian_, to Neptune; 5. the games celebrated at the observation of the _Eleusinian_ mysteries, in honour of Ceres and Proserpine: 6. _the great Panathenæa_, dedicated to Minerva. Those who obtained the victory in these games, were universally distinguished; and their success reflected glory on their family, and even on the cities from whence they came; part of the wall of which was thrown down to admit them in triumph on their return. Those Athenians who were conquerors in the Olympic games, were afterwards (_at their own option_,) maintained at the public charge, and enjoyed various extraordinary privileges. Among the Romans, the principal games were, 1. _the Ludi Romani_, dedicated to Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva; 2. _the Sæculares_, to the deities and the fates; 3. _the Consuales_, to Neptunus Equestris; 4. _the Capitolini_, to Jupiter Capitolinus. The Romans celebrated their games chiefly in the Circus Maximus; which, as a place of entertainment, was magnificently extensive. Pliny asserts that it would contain _one quarter of a million_ of spectators; and more modern authors have augmented that number to 380,000.

NOTE 146.

_Now, first, let her be bathed._

Nunc primum _fac――――ut lavet_.

Though I have followed the common reading in this passage, as it is not a point of any importance, I think it doubtful whether Terence meant Lesbia to speak of the mother or the child, when she said the words _fac ut lavet_, as the Greeks practised a remarkable ceremony on new-born infants, in order to strengthen them. A mixture of water, oil, and wine, was made in a vessel kept for the purpose, which they called λουτρὸν and χύτλος, and, with this liquid, they _washed_ the children; as some think, they wished to try the strength of the infant’s constitution, which, if weak, yielded to the powerful fumes of the wine, and the children fell into fits. I imagine that this was done, when it was the question if an infant should be exposed, as puny, sickly children sometimes were. (_Vide_ Note 93.)

NOTE 147.

_Davus.――Truly, at this rate, I shall hardly dare open my mouth._

Sed, si quid narrare occæpi continuo dari Tibi verba censes. S. _Falso._ D. Itaque hercle nil jam mutire audeo.

Dr. Bentley reads _falso_ in Davus’s speech; and Cooke thinks it should be altogether omitted. I have followed the old English edition in supposing the word in question to be spoken _ironically_, which is certainly consistent with the usual style of conversation between Simo and Davus.

NOTE 148.

_Now, finding that the marriage preparations are going forwards in our house, she sends her maid to fetch a midwife._

This is a very subtle contrivance. Davus intends that the birth of Pamphilus’s child shall be reported to Chremes to alarm him, (as we see

## Act V. Scene I. page 82,) and, therefore, that Simo may not suspect

_him_, he persuades him that Glycera is contriving to spread reports of Pamphilus’s engagements to her. M. Baron has entirely omitted the incident of the birth of the child. He introduces Sosia again to fill up the chasm. In a scene between Simo, Davus, and Chremes, the latter is induced to renew his consent to the marriage, by overhearing a conversation between Simo and Davus; in which, as in the original, the slave invents a tale that Pamphilus and Glycera are at variance.

Sir R. Steele varies the third act altogether; he makes it turn wholly on the underplot, of which the chief personages are Lucinda, and her two lovers Myrtle and Cimberton: the latter is a pedantic coxcomb, and added to the original characters by the English poet.

NOTE 149.

_And to provide a child at the same time, thinking that unless you should see a child, the marriage would not be impeded._

――――“Et puerum ut adferret simul; Hoc nisi fit puerum ut tu videas, nil _moventur_ nuptiæ.”

_Moventur_, in this passage, does not mean to _move forward_: but signifies _to move back with disturbance_, _to hinder_, or _to disorder_, and is used instead of _perturbantur_. Moveo is very unfrequently though sometimes employed in this sense. I shall cite one passage from _Horace_, where it has the same meaning as in the before-mentioned line from _Terence_.

――――“Censorque _moveret_ Appius, ingenuo si non essem patre natus.”

He to whom I owe my birth was free, A freeborn citizen: had he not been so, The censor Claudius Appius would have _stopt_, And _driven_ me _back_.

NOTE 150.

A. III. S. III. _Simo. (alone) I am not exactly, &c._

Terence uses an expression in the beginning of this scene that has been a source of discussion among the critics. It is in the following line,

“Atque haud scio AN quæ dixit sint vera omnia.”

I have selected from a very long note on this passage, by an eminent writer, the following extracts, which will afford, I trust, a satisfactory elucidation of the line in question.

“_Atque haud scio an quæ dixit sint vera omnia_: this seems, at first sight, to signify, _I do not know if all that he has told me be truth_; but, in the elegance of the Latin expression, however, _haud scio an_, means the same as _fortasse_ (perhaps) as if he had said _haud scio an non_. Thus, in the Brothers, A. IV. S. V. v. 33. _Qui infelix haud scio an illam misere non amat_: which does not mean, _I do not know whether he loves her_, but, on the contrary, _I do not know that he does not love her_. Also, in Cicero’s Epistles, B. IX. L. 13., _Istud quidem magnum, atque haud scio an maximum_; _this is a great thing, and perhaps the greatest of all, or, I do not know but it is the greatest of all_. And, also, in his Oration for Marcellus, when he said that future ages would form a juster estimate of Cæsar’s character than could be made by men of his own times; he says, _Servis iis etiam indicibus qui multis post sæculis de te judicabunt, et quidem haud scio, an incorruptius quam nos_. There are numberless examples of this kind in the writings of Cicero, and I know that there are some which make for the opposite side of the question, as in his book on “_Old Age_,” speaking of a country life, he says, _Atque haud scia an ulla possit esse beatior vita_. But, it is my opinion, that these passages have been altered by some person who did not understand that mode of expression, and that it ought to be, Atque haud scio an _nulla_ possit esse beatior vita.” THE AUTHOR _of the old Translation of Terence. Printed 1671. Paris._

Terence frequently has this construction: the two following sentences are of similar difficulty: they both occur in this play:

Id paves, ne ducas tu illam; tu autem, ut ducas. Cave te esse tristem sentiat.

NOTE 151.

A. III. S. IV. _Simo, Chremes._

_Simo.――Chremes, I am very glad to see you._

“Jubeo Chremetem (_saluere_)”: the last word is not spoken, because the speaker is interrupted by Simo. It is necessary to observe that _jubeo_ does not always signify to _command_, but sometimes means to _wish_, to _desire_, especially when the speaker’s wish is afterwards verbally expressed; according to what Donatus observes on this passage, “Columus animo, jubemus verbis.”――OLD PARIS EDITION.

Terence has portrayed Chremes as a very amiable character; he is mild and patient, and the most benevolent sentiments issue from his lips. It was necessary, as Donatus observes, to represent Chremes with this temper, for, had he been violent and headstrong, he could not have been supposed to seek Simo, and afterwards _renew his consent_, which is a very important incident, upon which the remainder of the epitasis entirely hinges. The Chremes of Sir R. Steele (_Sealand_) has all the worth of Terence’s original, but is deficient in that polish of manners which renders the Latin character so graceful.

NOTE 152.

_The quarrels of lovers is the renewal of their love._

Amantium iræ amoris integratio est.

In this sentence I have followed the Latin grammatical construction; and I believe it is also allowable in English, in such a case as this, to choose at pleasure either the antecedent or the subsequent for the nominative case. Very few sentences from profane writers have (I imagine) been more frequently repeated than _Amantium iræ amoris integratio est_, an observation which is undeniably just. This sentence has been repeatedly imitated.

As by _Seneca_,

_Plisth._ “Redire pietas, unde summota est, solet. Reparatque vires justus amissas amor.” THYESTES, A. III. S. I.

Affection, though repell’d, will still return: And faithful love, though for a moment curb’d, Or driven away, will, with augmented strength, Regain its empire.

And also by _Ovid_,

Quæ modò pugnarunt jungunt sua rostra columbæ, Quarum blanditias verbaque murmur habet. OVID, _Art. Am._, B. 2. v. 465.

NOTE 153.

_Simo.――Yet the most serious mischief, after all, can amount but to a separation, which may the gods avert._

The Athenian laws permitted citizens to divorce their wives on very trivial pretences; but compelled them, at the same time, to give in a memorial to the _archons_, stating the grounds on which the divorce was desired. A citizen might put away his wife, without any particular disgrace being attached to either the husband or the wife; and when the divorce was by mutual consent, the parties were at liberty to contract elsewhere. He who divorced his wife, was compelled to restore her dowry, though he was allowed to pay it by instalments: sometimes it was paid as alimony, nine oboli each month.

For a very flagrant offence, a wife, by the Athenian laws, might divorce her husband: if the men divorced, they were said ἀποπέμπειν, or ἀπολεύειν, to send away their wives: but if the women divorced, they were said ἀπολείπειν, to quit their husbands. (_Vide Potter’s Arch. Græc._, Vol. II. B. IV. C. 12.)

Terence artfully makes Simo use the word _discessio_ instead of _divortium_, or _discidium_, or _repudium_: which means the worst kind of divorce. _Discessio_, among the Romans, was nearly the same as _a separation_ among us: by separation, I mean what our lawyers call _divorce a mensa et thoro_; _which does not dissolve the marriage_; and which they place in opposition to _divorce a vinculo matrimonii_; which is a total divorce. In the earlier ages of the Roman Republic, the wife had no option of divorcing her husband: but it was afterwards allowed, as we see in _Martial_.

“Mense novo Jani _veterem, Proculeia, maritum Deseris_, atque jubes res sibi habere suas. Quid, rogo, quid factum est? subiti quæ causa doloris?” B. 10. Epigr. 39.

NOTE 154ᴬ.

_Why is not the bride brought? it grows late._

An Athenian bride was conveyed to her bridegroom’s house in the evening by torchlight, attended by her friends: _vide_ Notes 116, 117, 118, 119. Various singular customs prevailed among the Athenians at their marriages: when the bride entered her new habitation, quantities of sweetmeats were poured over her person: she and her husband also ate quinces, and the priests who officiated at marriages (_vide St. Basil_, _Hom._ 7, _Hexame._) first made a repast on grasshoppers, (τέττιγες, cicadæ,) which were in high esteem among the Athenians, who wore golden images of this insect in their hair, and, on that account, were called τέττιγες. Grasshoppers were thought to have originally sprung from the earth; and, for that reason, were chosen as the symbol of the Athenians, who pretended to the same origin.

NOTE 154ᴮ.

_I have been fearful that you would prove perfidious, like the common herd of slaves, and deceive me in this intrigue of Pamphilus._

Ego dudum non nil veritus sum.

Donatus makes a remark on the style of this sentence, which deserves attention, “gravis oratio ab hoc pronomine (_ego_) plerumque inchoatur,” a speech which begins with the pronoun _ego_ is generally grave and serious: to which some commentator has added the following remark respecting the before-mentioned passage from Terence, “Est autem hoc principium orationis Simonis à benevolentia per antithesin.” The remarks of _Donatus_ and _Nonnius_ on the style of our author, are generally very acute and ingenious. _Scaliger_, _Muretus_, and _Trapp_, may be added to the critics before mentioned. The learned writer last named has composed a treatise in Latin “_De Dramate_,” which contains many very valuable hints relative to dramatic writing.

NOTE 155.

_Simo.――Ha! what’s that you say?_

There is a play upon words here, which I have endeavoured to preserve in the English. The Latin is as follows. _Davus._ OCCIDI. _Simo._ Hem! quid dixisti? _Davus._ OPTUME inquam factum. If the requisite similarity of sound was preserved in this pun, it may be conjectured that the Latin _i_ was not pronounced very differently from the _i_ of the modern Italians. _Vide_ Note 92.

NOTE 156.

_Pam.――What trust can I put in such a rascal?_

Oh! tibi ego ut credam FURCIFER?

The epithet _furcifer_ (rascal) is of singular derivation; and, though it was an appellation of great reproach in the times of Terence, yet, in later ages of the Roman Republic, it bore a very different signification. The name of _furcifer_, which was originally given to slaves, took its rise from the Roman custom of punishing a slave who had committed any flagrant offence, by fastening round his neck a heavy piece of wood, in the shape of a fork, and thence called furca; this occasioned the delinquent to be afterwards called furcifer, (furcam ferre.) Three modes of punishment by the furca were practised at Rome: 1. ignominious, 2. penal, 3. capital. In the first, the criminal merely carried the furca on his shoulders for a short period; in the second, he wore the furca, and was whipped round the Forum; in the third, after having been tied to a large furca, somewhat like a modern gallows, he was beaten to death. Slaves were treated more severely by the Romans than by the Athenians, who were celebrated for their mild and gentle behaviour to that class of persons. The furca was afterwards employed in a very different manner; and, from a badge of disgrace, was changed to a serviceable implement. Caius Marius, nearly a hundred years after Terence composed this play, introduced the use of the furca among his soldiers. It was employed to carry baggage and other requisites; and, in use, somewhat resembled a modern porter’s knot, hence, the word _furculum_ or _ferculum_, became an expression to signify a burden, or any thing carried in the hand: and sometimes, also, the various courses brought to table, as in _Horace_,

“Multaque de magnâ superessent _fercula_ cœnâ, Quæ procul extructis inerant hesterna canistris?” B. II. Sat. 6.

NOTE 157.

_Ah! how foolishly have I relied on you, who, out of a perfect calm, have raised this storm._

Hem quo fretu siem Qui me hodie ex tranquillissima re conjecisti in nuptias.

“My father reads this passage thus, _en quo fretus sum_, _that is, the rascal on whom I relied_,” &c.

MADAME DACIER.

If an error has been insinuated into the text in this passage, it can scarcely be of sufficient importance to render an alteration essential: the correction suggested by Madame Dacier, is not so decidedly superior to the usual mode of reading the lines, as to compensate for the inconvenience which must be occasioned by a general variation of the text.

NOTE 158.

_Pam.――What do you deserve?_

This alludes to the Athenian custom of questioning supposed criminals, either before sentence was passed, or while they were under the torture, to the following effect: What have you deserved? and, according to the tenor of the reply, they augmented or diminished the punishment: _vide Nonni. Miscel._, B. 2. It was also customary, at Athens, when the punishment was not fixed by the laws, but was left to the discretion of the judges, that the condemned person was required to state what injury he thought his adversary had suffered from him; and the answer, when delivered upon oath, was called διαμοσία; by which the final sentence was in some measure regulated.

NOTE 159.

_Char. (alone.) Is this credible, or to be mentioned as a truth?_

“Hoccine credibile est, aut memorabile, Tanta vecordia innata cuiquam ut siet, Ut malis gaudeat alienis, atque ex incommodis Alterius, sua ut comparet commoda? ah! Idne est verum? Imo id genus est hominum pessimum In denegando modo queis pudor est paululum: Post ubi jam tempus est promissa perfici, Tum coacti necessario se aperiunt et timent, Et tamen res cogit eos denegare. Ibi Tum impudentissima eorum oratio est: Quis tu es? quis mihi es? cur meam tibi? heus; Proximus sum egomet mihi.”

Terence, in the composition of these lines, has admirably succeeded in expressing the sense by the sounds and measure of his verse, and the very lines seem as angry (if I may be allowed to use such an expression) as Charinus, who is to speak them, is supposed to be. The whole speech is written with a great deal of fire and spirit; and represents, in a very lively manner, the impatient bursts of indignation, and the broken periods which issue from the mouth of an enraged and disappointed person, during the first transports of his anger. The ancients particularly studied this poetical beauty; and many of them have reached a degree of excellence scarcely inferior to that of the moderns. Terence has as eminently distinguished himself by his success in this ornament to composition as he has by his other excellencies: as familiar verse, his compositions are extremely harmonious.

Mr. Pope has described the poetical embellishment before mentioned in a most inimitable poem, which at once explains and exemplifies his meaning.

“’Tis not enough no harshness gives offence, The sound must seem an echo to the sense: Soft is the strain when zephyr gently blows, And the smooth stream in smoother numbers flows; But when loud surges lash the sounding shore, The hoarse, rough verse should like the torrent roar: When Ajax strives some rock’s vast weight to throw, The line too labours, and the words move slow; Not so, when swift Camilla scours the plain, Flies o’er th’ unbending corn, and skims along the main.”

Virgil was particularly successful in his endeavours to impart this ornament to his composition. The following lines are reckoned by the critics to be a beautiful specimen of his ability in this species of verse.

“Ter sunt conati imponere Pelio Ossam Scilicet, atque Ossæ frondosum involvere Olympum.” Georg., B. I. V. 281.

Sternitur exanimisque tremens procumbit humi bos. Æneis, B. 5.

NOTE 160.

_Those men have characters of the very worst description, who make a scruple to deny a favour; and are ashamed, or unwilling to give a downright refusal at first; but who, when the time arrives. &c._

This is one of those beautiful passages which prove Terence to have been so able a delineator of character. How faithful a picture does he here draw of this particular species of weakness! A man is asked a favour which he knows it is out of his power to compass, and yet feels a repugnance to candidly avow it: he cannot bear to witness the uneasiness of the disappointed person, and, from a kind of false shame, he misleads him with a promise which he cannot perform. To detect those lurking impulses which almost escape observation, though they influence the actions: to describe with force and elegance, and convince the mind of a feeling of which it was before scarcely conscious, is an effort of genius worthy of a Terence.

NOTE 161.

_If any one tell me, that no advantage will result from it: I answer this, that I shall poison his joy: and even that will yield me some satisfaction._

Ingeram mala multa: atque aliquis dicat; Nihil promoveris. Multum; molestus certè ei fuero, atque animo morem gessero.

This sentiment has been imitated by the first of dramatists in his Othello: he has expanded it into a greater number of lines, which are extremely beautiful.

_Iago._ Call up her father, Rouse him, make after him, poison his delight. Proclaim him in the streets, incense her kinsmen. And tho’ he in a fertile climate dwell, Plague him with flies: tho’ that his joy be joy, Yet throw such changes of vexation on’t, As it may lose some colour.―― SHAKSPEARE’S _Othello_, A. 1. S. 1.

The soliloquy of Charinus, (of which the lines I have cited in the commencement of this Note form a part,) is one of the best written in the plays of our author: it is exactly of the kind recommended by the _Duke of Buckingham_.

“Soliloquies had need be very few, Extremely short, and spoke in passion too. Our lovers, talking to themselves, for want Of others, make the pit their confidant: Nor is the matter mended yet, if thus They trust a friend only to tell it us.”

A soliloquy is introduced with most success, when the speaker of it is supposed to be deliberating with himself on doubtful subjects: but, when narration is to be introduced, it is brought forward with more advantage in the shape of a dialogue between the speaker and his confidant. But a skilful dramatist can often employ a preferable method to either of those I have just named, for the disposition of narration. Papias lays it down as an absolute rule for the composition of soliloquies, that they must be deliberations only.

NOTE 162.

_Well, take her._

Sir R. Steele, in his play, called _the Conscious Lovers_, does not represent Myrtle as comporting himself in his disappointment with the moderation observed by Charinus. He challenges Bevil: though the duel is afterwards prevented by the patience and forbearance of the latter, who communicates to his angry friend a letter which he had received from Lucinda, expressive of her favourable thoughts of Myrtle. The ingenious author of the Conscious Lovers imagined, no doubt, that to an English audience, Charinus’s easy resignation of his mistress to Pamphilus would appear tame and unnatural. In nothing do the manners of the ancients and the moderns differ more widely than in their respective behaviour in cases of private injury, real or imagined. Among the ancient Greeks and Romans, _duelling_ was totally unknown. Alexander and Pyrrhus, Themistocles, Leonidas, and Epaminondas, the Scipios and Hannibal, Cæsar and Pompey, all men whose fame will never be surpassed, and a countless number of the heroes of antiquity, would have scorned to draw their swords in a private quarrel. It was reserved for Christians, to introduce and countenance this barbarous practice; which ought to be the shame of civilized humanity. Barbarous, however, it can scarcely with justice be called: for those nations whose unpolished manners caused them to be termed barbarians, were never known to have adopted it; nor has a single instance occurred, where men, in a state of uncultivated nature, have been known to sacrifice a brother’s life in the mortal arbitration of a private quarrel. Duelling was originally practised among northern nations. Those who wish to entertain just ideas on this subject cannot do better than to consult _A Discourse on Duelling, by the Rev. Thomas Jones, A.M., Trinity College, Cambridge_.

NOTE 163.

_Pam.――Why do you vex me thus?_

Cur me enicas.

Eneco and enico are thought by some critics to have been exactly similar in signification; but eneco generally means to kill, as in Plautus _angues enecavit_: whereas enico signifies only to teaze, or to torment; as in the passage in Terence before mentioned. _Vide_ Horace Ep., B. I. Ep. 7. L. 87.

NOTE 164.

_Davus.――Hist! Glycera’s door opens._

_Hem’! st, mane, crepuit a Glycerio ostium._

Literally, a noise is made on the inside of Glycera’s door. As all the street-doors in Athens opened towards the street, it was customary to knock loudly on the inside, before the door was thrown open, lest, by a sudden and violent swing, the heavy barrier should injure any of the passengers. The Greeks called this ceremony ψοφεῖν θυραν. All the doors of the Romans opened inwards, unless (which rarely happened) a law was passed to allow any particular person to open his door towards the street. This was considered a very great honour, and never conferred but as a reward for very eminent services.

In Sparta, a law prevailed that no instrument but a kind of saw should be employed in making the doors of the houses; this regulation was intended to prevent luxury, and wasteful expense. Both in Athens and Rome, the first room within the door was made extremely large, and highly ornamented. This room was called aula by the Romans, and, by the Greeks αὐλὴ. Here were placed the trophies gained by the master of the house, and by his family. In later and more luxurious ages, the doors were made of more costly materials, sometimes they formed them of metal, either iron or brass; sometimes also ivory was used for this purpose, or scarce and curious kinds of wood.

NOTE 165.

_Mysis. (speaking to Glycera within.) I will directly, Madam; wherever he may be, I’ll take care to find your dear Pamphilus, and bring him to you: only, my love, let me beg you not to make yourself so wretched._

Sir R. Steele and Monsieur Baron have brought both Glycera and Philumena on the stage; but, in the Latin drama, the principal female characters (if they appear at all) are generally mutes. It is a circumstance worthy of our attention, that (except in one instance) Terence never brings on the stage any female character of rank and consideration: the women who take a part in the dialogue are generally either attendants, or professional people, as nurses, midwives, _&c._ But this exclusion, (though our author has been compelled to sacrifice to it all those embellishments which the portraiture of the Athenian ladies must have added to his scenes,) is in strict conformity with the manners of the Greeks. Grecian women of rank seldom appeared in company, and closely confined themselves within doors, occupying the most remote parts of the house. Unmarried women were scarcely allowed to quit the rooms they inhabited, without giving previous notice to their protectors. Terence was instructed clearly in this point, by his great original _Menander_; who expressly says, that the door of the αὐλὴ, or hall, was a place where even a married woman ought never to be seen. Women, among the Greeks, seldom inhabited the same apartment with the men: their rooms were always kept as retired as possible, usually in the loftiest part of the house. _Vide_ Hom. Il., γʹ v. 423; their apartments were called Gynæceum, (γυναικεῖον). _Vide_ Terence’s Phormio, Act 5. S. 6, where he says,

“Ubi in _Gynæceum_ ire occipio, puer ad me accurrit Mida.”

These rooms were sometimes called ὦα, which signifies also _eggs_; it is supposed that the fable of Castor, Pollux, Helen, and Clytemnestra, being hatched from eggs, took its rise from the double signification of the word ὦα.

NOTE 166.

_Pam.――The oracles of Apollo are not more true: I wish that, if possible, my father may not think that I throw any impediments in the way of the marriage: if not, I will do what will be easily done, tell him frankly that I cannot marry Chremes’ daughter._

Among the Greeks, no oracles were either so numerous or so highly esteemed as those of Apollo. The first place among them is assigned to the oracle at Delphi, near mount Parnassus, which excelled the others in magnificence, and claimed the precedence in point of antiquity. Next to this, ranks the oracle in the island of Delos, the birthplace of Apollo and Diana. It is situated in the north part of Mare Ægeum, or Archipelago, not far from the Isle of Andros, and between Myconus and Rhene. The Athenians reverenced this oracle above all others, and its answers were held to be infallible. Theseus, the most celebrated of the Athenian heroes, instituted a solemn procession to Delos, in honour of Apollo. A certain number of Athenian citizens were chosen, who were called Θεωροὶ, who made the voyage in a sacred ship; the same in which Theseus and his companions were said to have sailed to Crete. This ship was denominated ἀειζώοντα, on account of its great age: it was preserved till the time of Demetrius Phalereus. No criminal was ever put to death during the absence of the sacred ship.

NOTE 167.

_Char. (to Pamphilus.) But you are constant and courageous._

P. Quis videor? C. Miser æque atque ego. D. Consilium quæro. C. Fortis.

Critics have differed considerably respecting this passage. Some think the word fortis should be understood as addressed to Davus.

I have adopted the interpretation which M. le Fevre, Madame Dacier’s father, has given of this passage. Pamphilus, after expressing his resolution to remain faithful to Glycera, turns to Charinus, expecting a compliment on his behaviour. After a jest on his friend’s having reduced himself to such a forlorn situation, by following the advice of Davus, Charinus, by the word fortis, pays him the compliment his handsome conduct deserved.

NOTE 168.

_Pam. (to Davus.) I know what you would attempt._

Pamphilus, in this speech, alludes to his jest upon Davus in the previous scene, where he says, “I have no doubt, that if that wise head of yours goes to work,” _&c._, _vide_ p. 67, l. 8. Pamphilus means, I imagine, when he says, “I know what you would attempt,” I suppose you are going to provide the two wives I was speaking of. He could not mean that he really knew Davus’s plan: because he asks him afterwards, page 70, line 10, what he intended to do.

NOTE 169.

_Pam.――What are you going to do? tell me._

The Davus of M. Baron, instead of laying the child at Simo’s door, makes a false report to Mysis, that Pamphilus intends to desert Glycera, and to espouse Philumena: Mysis communicates this to her mistress, who, in her distress, throws herself at Chremes’ feet, and shews him the contract of her marriage with Pamphilus. This induces Chremes to favour Glycera, and to break off the intended marriage.

NOTE 170.

_Hitherto, he has been to her a source of more evil than good._

“As I never was able to make any sense of facile hic plus est quam illic boni, I choose to give the passage a turn, though contrary to all the readings which I have seen, which makes that proper, with the omission of one word, which was not before intelligible. The usual construction of the words, as they stand in all editions, is this,――there is more ill in his sorrow, or trouble, (some read dolorem, some laborem,) than there is good in his love: see, particularly, Camus’s edition for the use of the Dauphin, which is not only a poor meaning, and unworthy Terence, but inconsistent with what Mysis had said before in the preceding scenes: I therefore choose to be singular and intelligible, rather than to go with all the editors and translators of our poet, and be obscure.”――COOKE.

NOTE 171.

_Davus.――Take the child from me directly, and lay him down at our door._

Accipe à me hunc ocius, Atque ante nostram januam appone.

Some commentators read vestram januam, appone, lay him down before your door. But Davus tells Simo, A. III. S. II., (page 51, line 13,) that Glycera intends to have a child laid at _his_ door. It could have answered no purpose, moreover, to have placed Glycera’s child at her own door. We must rather suppose that Davus wished Simo to think that Glycera had sent the infant to Pamphilus as its father. _Vide_ Note 174.

NOTE 172.

_Davus.――You may take some of the herbs from that altar, and strew them under him._

“Altar, Altare, Ara, a place or pile whereon to offer sacrifice to some deity. Among the Romans, the _altar_ was a kind of pedestal, either square, round, or triangular; adorned with sculpture, with basso-relievos, and inscriptions, whereon were burnt the victims sacrificed to idols. According to Servius, those _altars_ set apart for the honour of the celestial gods, and gods of the higher class, were placed on some pretty tall pile of building; and, for that reason, were called _altaria_, from the word _alta_ and _ara_, a high elevated _altar_. Those appointed for the terrestrial gods, were laid on the surface of the earth, and called _aræ_. And, on the contrary, they dug into the earth, and opened a pit for those of the infernal gods which were called βοθροι λακκοι, _scrobiculi_. But this distinction is not every-where observed: the best authors frequently use _ara_ as a general word, under which are included the altars of the celestial and infernal, as well as those of the terrestrial gods. Witness Virgil, Ecl. 5.

――――_En quatuor aras_,

where _aræ_ plainly includes _altaria_; for whatever we make of Daphnis, Phœbus was certainly a celestial god. So Cicero, pro Quint. _Aras delubraque Hecates in Græcia vidimus._ The Greeks, also, distinguish two sorts of _altars_; that whereon they sacrificed to the gods was called βωμος, and was a real _altar_, different from the other, whereon they sacrificed to the heroes, which was smaller, and called εσχαρα. Pollux makes this distinction of _altars_ in his Onomasticon: he adds, however, that some poets used the word εσχαρα, for the altar whereon sacrifice was offered to the gods. The Septuagint version does sometimes also use the word εσχαρα, for a sort of little low _altar_, which may be expressed in Latin by _craticula_, being a hearth, rather than an _altar_.”――CHAMBERS’ _Cyclopædia_.

Scaliger thinks that the altar mentioned by Terence was the altar usually placed on the stage of a theatre during representation, and consecrated to Bacchus in tragedy, and to Apollo in comedy. It is most probable, that one of the ἐσχάραι is alluded to by our author in this passage. The ἐσχάραι were low altars which stood before the doors in Athens: they were dedicated to the ancient heroes.

NOTE 173.

_Davus.――That if my master should require me to swear that I did not do it, I may take the oath with a safe conscience._

The Greeks paid very great regard to oaths. They divided them into two classes. The first kind was the μέγας ὅρκος, or great oath, when the swearer called the gods to witness his truth; the second was the μικρὸς ὅρκος, when the swearer called on other creatures. They usually, when falsely accused of any crime, took an oath to clear themselves. This oath was sometimes administered in a very singular manner: the oath of exculpation was written on a tablet, and hung round the neck, and rested on the breast of the accused, who was then compelled to wade into the sea about knee-deep: if the oath was true, the water remained stationary; but, if false, it instantly rose up, and covered the tablet, that so dreadful a sight as a false oath might be concealed from the view of mankind. The Athenians were proverbial for their sincere regard for truth. _Vide_ Velleius Paterculus, B. 1. C. 4., also, in B. 2. C. 23: we are told

“Adeò enim certa Atheniensum in Romanos fides fuit, ut semper et in omni re, quicquid sincerâ fide generetur, id Romani Atticâ fieri, prædicarent.”――MARCUS VELLEIUS PATERCULUS, B. 2. C. 23. L. 18.

The Athenians behaved with so much good faith and inviolable honour in all their treaties with the Romans, that it became a custom at Rome, when a person was affirmed to be just and honourable, to say, he is as faithful as an Athenian.

NOTE 174.

_Davus. (to himself.) The father of the bride is coming this way; I abandon my first design._

_Mysis.――I don’t understand this._

Davus’s first design was (we are to suppose) to go to Simo as soon as Mysis had placed the child at the door, and acquaint him that Glycera had sent him Pamphilus’s child. This would have compelled Simo to suspend the marriage until he had ascertained the real nature of Glycera’s claims on his son. Though Davus’s speech is not usually read aside, we cannot suppose that Mysis heard him say, that Chremes, the bride’s father, approached, because, in the ninth scene of the same act, (_vide_ p. 78, l. preantepen,) he tells her, “that was the bride’s father,” and she replies, “you should have given me notice then.”

NOTE 175.

_Mysis. (aside to Davus.)――Are you mad to ask me such a question?_

_Davus.――Whom should I ask? I can see no one else here._

This certainly seems a little over-acted on the part of Davus, considering that he knew Chremes to be so very near him. If we conclude that Davus acted his part with the proper gestures, and accompanied the above words with the very natural action of looking round him, to see if any other person was visible near Simo’s door; it appears extremely improbable that he should not have seen Chremes, who was near enough to hear all that passed between Davus and Mysis. Davus intended that what passed between Mysis and himself should be overheard by Chremes, whom he knew to be but a very few yards distant. It seems extraordinary, therefore, that Davus should make use of an expression which compelled him to run the risk of being obliged to recognise Chremes if he looked round, and, if he did not, of raising a suspicion in his mind, that Davus knew him to be there: either circumstance must effectually have spoiled the stratagem, to deter Chremes from the match. To solve this apparent inconsistency, we must suppose that Chremes, wishing, for obvious reasons, to overhear what passed between Mysis and Davus, had, at the entrance of the latter, withdrawn himself behind a row of pillars, or into a portico, or cloister, (which were common in the streets of Athens, and were also built upon the Roman stage,) lest his presence, which Mysis knew of, as he had questioned her, should be a check upon their conversation; from which he, of course, expected to learn the truth respecting the child at Simo’s door, as he knew that Mysis was the servant of Glycera, and Davus the servant of Pamphilus.

NOTE 176.

_Mysis.――The deuce take you, fellow, for terrifying me in this manner._

Dii te _eradicent_, ita me miseram territas.

Literally, May the gods root you up. An ingenious French critic informs us, that the Romans borrowed this expression from the Greeks, who say, “_to destroy a man to the very root_:” and, that the Greeks borrowed it from the eastern nations. We have a similar expression in English, _to destroy root and branch_.

NOTE 177.

_Chremes. (aside.) I acted wisely in avoiding the match._

Recte ego fugio has nuptias.

The general way of reading this line is as follows:

Recte ego _semper_ fugi has nuptias.

I acted wisely in _always_ avoiding the match.

This reading must be erroneous, because, so far from having _always_ avoided the match, Chremes himself originally proposed it to Simo, (_vide_ p. 15, l. 18.) and afterwards renewed his consent to it. (_Vide_ p. 58. l. 24.)

NOTE 178.

_Davus.――’Tis true, I saw old Canthara, with something under her cloak._

There is great ingenuity displayed in the conduct of this scene. Davus affirms this, as Donatus observes, “Hoc dicit ut leviter redarguat Mysis, non ut vincatur,” that Mysis may easily confute him; and prove that it is the child of Pamphilus which must terrify Chremes. He contradicts her, that she may (in Chremes’ hearing) enter into the proof of what she says. Instead of Cantharam, Nonnius thinks that Terence meant cantharum, a large jug; and that he intended Davus to say, that the child was brought to Glycera’s house in a large cantharus. _Vide_ Nonnius’s Miscell., B. 1, and his remarks on the whole of this scene.

NOTE 179ᴬ.

_Mysis.――Thank Heaven, that there were some free-women present when my mistress was delivered._

No person could appear as a witness in the Athenian courts of justice, who was not free-born, and also possessed of a fair character. Those who were ἄτιμοι, infamous, were not permitted to give testimony. In

## particular cases, strangers and freedmen were admitted as witnesses.

Every person who was appealed to as a witness, was compelled either to state what he knew of the affair, or to swear that he was ignorant of all the circumstances of it: if he refused to give any answer whatever, he incurred a heavy fine.

NOTE 179ᴮ.

_Mysis.――By Pollux, fellow, you are drunk._

To accuse a person of intoxication was considered in Athens and Sparta as one of the greatest affronts that could possibly be committed. Very severe laws were framed in Greece for the punishment of those who were seen in a state of intoxication. The Athenian archons suffered death, if detected in this vice. The Greeks accused the Scythians of having taught them habits of drunkenness. The Spartans affirm, that Cleomenes became first drunk, and afterwards mad, by his associating and drinking with them.

Σκυθησι, δε ὁμιλησαντά μιν ακρηποτην και εκ τουτου μανῆναι. HERODOTUS.

NOTE 180.

_Davus.――One falsehood brings on another: I hear it whispered about that she is a citizen of Athens._

The citizens of Athens were called γηγενεῖς, or sons of the earth, and ἀστοὶ. They were called also τεττιγες, or τεττιγοφορους, _wearers of grasshoppers_; this appellation, authors have derived differently. _Tretzes_ thinks it was to designate them as fluent orators. _Lucian_ considers it merely as a distinction to divide them from the slaves: and others say, it was because they thought that grasshoppers sprung from the earth; and therefore chose them for the symbol of a people who pretended to the same origin: _vide_ Note 154. The Athenians were called also πολίται. The citizens were divided by Cecrops into four tribes, (_vide_ Poll., B. 3. 64,) each tribe was divided into three classes, and each class into thirty families. The names of the tribes were, 1. Κεκροπὶς, 2. Αὐτόχθων, 3. Ἀκταία, 4. Παραλιά. These names were afterwards changed by Cranaus, (_vide_ Plut. in Solon,) and also by Ericthonius and Erectheus. When the number of the inhabitants increased, new tribes were added. To obtain the Athenian citizenship was deemed so glorious, that foreigners of the very first rank eagerly sought this distinction; which it was extremely difficult to gain: as the Athenians would never admit any persons but those who had signalized themselves by their virtue and bravery.

NOTE 181.

_Davus.――And that he will be compelled to marry her._

The Athenian laws did not allow of polygamy: if Glycera, therefore, had been proved to be a citizen, her marriage with Pamphilus would have been valid; and Philumena, if married to him, must have been divorced. We are to suppose, that the apprehension of this circumstance induces Chremes to break off the marriage.

NOTE 182.

_Davus. (half aloud.)――He has heard all: what an accident._

――――Audistin’ obsecro?

These words are usually read as addressed directly to Chremes; but it appears more probable that Terence intended Davus to speak them as if he meant no one to hear what he said, and yet contrive to raise his voice loud enough for Chremes to overhear him pretend to be alarmed, lest what Mysis had been saying should do any mischief. This feigned consternation was calculated to strengthen Chremes’ belief of the genuineness of the previous scene.

NOTE 183.

_This impudent wench ought to be taken hence and punished._

――――Hanc jam oportet in cruciatum abripi.

The usual reading is cruciatum _hinc_ abripi; but _hinc_ cannot be necessary to the sense, and spoils moreover the harmony of the line. Neither of the two ancient manuscripts of Terence, in the royal library at Paris, have _hinc_. There are a great many disputed readings in the plays of Terence, which, by a reference to the various ancient MSS. of our author now extant, might probably be determined. An edition of the plays, regulated by the authority of these MSS., would doubtless be highly serviceable. The most learned woman of her age, Madame Dacier, whose translation of Terence is alone sufficient to perpetuate his name and her own, in her preface to that inestimable work, speaks at length, and in very high terms, of the MSS. of Terence, in the library of his most Christian Majesty. She expresses herself as follows: “I found in them (the MSS.) several things which gave me the greatest pleasure, and which satisfactorily prove the correctness of the most important alterations which I have made in the text, as to the division of the acts, which is of great consequence.” Madame D. reckons the MSS. to be eight or nine hundred years old. _Vide Madame Dacier’s Translation of Terence, Edition of Rotterdam, 1717, Preface, page 38._ Among the books which his holiness Pope Sixtus V. caused to be removed to the _Bibliotheca Vaticana_, which he placed in the old Vatican palace, or the _Palazzo Vecchio_, there was a very curious MS. of the comedies of Terence, which was particularly valued for the representation which it contained of the _personæ_, or masks, worn by the ancient actors. It was also extremely curious in other respects. Those who enjoy an opportunity of consulting this MS. might derive much and very profitable amusement from a perusal of it. If it still remain in Rome, it may be seen, on application to the chief librarian, who is generally a member of the sacred college. A very curious MS. of Virgil, of the fourth century, written in the _Literæ unciales_, and Henry VIII.’s MS. de Septem Sacramentis, were formerly shewn to strangers with the before-mentioned MS. of Terence.

NOTE 184.

_Davus.――That’s the bride’s father: I wished him to know all this; and there was no other way to acquaint him with it._

Terence here (say the critics) obliquely praises himself, and the art which he has displayed in this scene. The only scenes of a similar nature, (I mean where the plot is carried on by a concerted conversation intended to be overheard by some person who thinks it genuine,) which are equal to this scene in the Andrian, are the ninth scene of the second act, and the first scene of the third act of Shakspeare’s comedy of _Much Ado about Nothing_.

The before-mentioned scene from the Andrian has been wholly omitted by Sir R. Steele. Sealand does not renew his consent to the marriage till the end of the fifth act.

M. Baron has introduced Crito earlier than he appears in the Latin play, and closes the fourth act with Glycera’s appeal to Chremes; and two subsequent scenes between Glycera, Mysis, Pamphilus, and Davus. Glycera’s appeal to Chremes is extremely pathetic. It concludes with the following lines:――

“Vous en qui je crois voir un protecteur, un père Ne m’abandonnez pas à toute ma misère En m’ôtant mon époux, vous me donnez la mort. Vous pouvez d’un seul mot faire changer mon sort. C’est donc entre vos mains qu’aujourd’hui je confie Mon repos, mon honneur, ma fortune, et ma vie.” _Andrienne_, A. IV. S. VIII.

NOTE 185.

_Davus.――Do you think that a thing of this sort can be done as well by premeditating and studying, as by acting according to the natural impulse of the moment?_

“It is an observation of Voltaire’s, in the Preface to his comedy of L’Enfant Prodigue, that although there are various kinds of pleasantry that excite mirth, yet universal bursts of laughter are seldom produced, unless by a scene of mistake or _æquivoque_. A thousand instances might be given to prove the truth of this judicious observation. There is scarce any writer of comedy who has not drawn from this source of humour. A scene, founded on a misunderstanding between the parties, where the characters are all at cross-purposes with each other, never fails to set the audience in a roar; nor, indeed, can there be a happier incident in a comedy, if produced naturally, and managed judiciously.

“The scenes in this act, occasioned by the artifice of Davus concerning the child, do not fall directly under the observation of Voltaire; but are, however, so much of the same colour, that, if represented on the stage, they would, I doubt not, have the like effect, and be the best means of confuting those infidel critics who maintain that Terence has no humour. I do not remember a scene in any comedy where there is such a natural complication of pleasant circumstances. Davus’s sudden change of his intentions on seeing Chremes, without having time to explain himself to Mysis; her confusion and comical distress, together with the genuine simplicity of her answers; and the conclusion drawn by Chremes from the supposed quarrel; are all finely imagined, and directly calculated for the purposes of exciting the highest mirth in the spectators. The words of Davus to Mysis in this speech, “Is there then,” _&c._, have the air of an oblique praise of this scene from the poet himself, shewing with what art it is introduced, and how naturally it is sustained. Sir Richard Steele had deviated so much from Terence in the original construction of his fable, that he had no opportunity of working this scene into it. Baron, who, I suppose, was afraid to hazard it on the French theatre, fills up the chasm by bringing Glycerium on the stage. She, amused by Davus with a forged tale of the falsehood of Pamphilus, throws herself at the feet of Chremes, and prevails on him once more to break off the intended match with Philumena. In consequence of this alteration, the most lively part of the comedy in Terence becomes the gravest in Baron: the artifice of Davus is carried on with the most starch formality, and the whole incident, as conducted in the French imitation, loses all that air of ease and pleasantry, which it wears in the original.”――COLMAN.

NOTE 186.

A. IV. S. 10.――_Crito. (to himself.) I am told_, &c.

Crito is what Scaliger calls a _catastatic_ character, because he is the chief personage of the catastasis, (καταστασις,) _vide_ Note 144, and introduced for the purpose of leading the way to the catastrophe of the piece.

NOTE 187.

_Rather than live in honest poverty in her own country._

Quæ se inhonestè optavit _parare_ hîc divitias Potius, quàm in patriâ honestè _pauper_ vivere

Some editors (_vide Joan. Riveus_) read this passage differently,

Quæ se inhonestè optavit _parere_ hîc divitias Potius, quàm in patriâ honestè _paupera_ vivere.

Others, instead of Quæ _se_ read Quæ _sese_: this is a very elegant pleonasm.

NOTE 188.

_That wealth, however, now devolves to me._

The inhabitants of the island of Andros were subject to the Athenian laws, which prohibited women from bequeathing by will more than the value of a medimnum (μεδιμνον) of barley. The medimnum was equal to four English pecks and a half. Therefore, as Chrysis had not the power of bequeathing her property, Crito claimed it as heir at law. The Athenian laws relating to wills were very numerous, and very strict in guarding against an improper appropriation of property. Slaves, foreigners, minors, and adopted persons, as well as those who had male heirs, were, by the laws of Solon, rendered incapable of making a will.

Those persons who had no offspring of their own, frequently adopted the children of others, who inherited their estates. Sometimes foreigners were adopted, after having received the freedom of the city. A person who succeeded to the property of another, as heir at law, was bound, under a heavy penalty, to take care, (if on the spot,) that funeral honours were paid to the deceased. This was reckoned a point of great importance: the Greeks were willing to proceed to any extremity rather than suffer their friends to want the rites of sepulture, as we see in _Lucretius_, who describes the outrageous actions to which the people were driven during a plague; when they committed acts of the greatest violence, rather than permit their friends to want funeral honours.

“Multaque vis subita, et paupertas horrida suasit; Namque suos consanguineos aliena rogorum, Insuper instructa ingenti clamore locabant: Subdebantque faces, multo cum sanguine sæpe Rixantes, potiùs quam corpora deserentur.” LUCRETIUS.

Compelled by poverty to desperate deeds, Their rage another’s funeral pile invades: With furious shouts they rend his corse away, Then to the pile their own dead friends convey. They guard the spot, until the rising flames } Consume the load the lofty pile sustains, } And fight, and bleed, and die, ere quit their loved remains.}

NOTE 189.

_Mysis.――Bless me! whom do I see? Is not this Crito, the kinsman of Chrysis? It is._

Quem video? estne hic Crito, _sobrinus_ Chrysidis.

_Sobrinus_ means literally a mother’s sister’s child, or what we call in English, a maternal cousin-german: but this particularity is not admissible in a translation.

NOTE 190.

_Crito.――Alas! poor Chrysis is then gone._

Here is an additional instance of Terence’s infinite attention to manners, and of his success in presenting to his readers a perfect copy of the customs and habits of the Greeks. Crito, though he alludes to the death of Chrysis, avoids any mention of death; and breaks off in a manner which is infinitely more expressive than words could have been. Some of the ancients, the Greeks in particular, studiously avoided, as much as possible, any direct mention of death, which they accounted to be ominous of evil; and always spoke of human mortality, (when compelled to mention it,) in soft and gentle expressions. They were even averse to write θανατος, death, at full length; and not unfrequently expressed it by the first letter θ; thus, if they wished to write down the circumstance of any person’s decease, they wrote the name of the deceased, and affixed to it the letter θ, _vide_ Note 113, also Isidor. Hispal. Orig. B. 1. C. 23. In breviculis, quibus militum nomina continebantur, propria nota erat apud veteres, quæ respiceretur, quanti ex militibus superessent, quanti in bello excidissent, τ in capite versiculi posita superstitem designabat, θ verò ad unius cujusque defuncti nomen adponebatur.

NOTE 191.

_And the example of others will teach me what ease, redress, and profit, I have to expect from a suit at law: besides, I suppose by this time, she has some lover to espouse her cause._

Madame Dacier, in a brilliant and acute critique, has explained this passage in a most perspicuous and comprehensive manner.

――――Nunc me hospitem Lites sequi, quam hîc mihi sit facile atque utile, Aliorum exempla commonent.

“Présentement qu’un étranger comme moi aille entreprendre des procès, les exemples des autres me font voir combien cela serait difficile dans une ville comme celle-ci.”

“I have found, in a copy of Terence’s plays, a marginal note, in my father’s hand-writing, to the following effect: Hunc locum non satis potest intelligere qui librum Xenophontis περὶ Ἀθηναίων πολιτείας non legerit. He who has not read the short treatise of Xenophon on the civil government of the Athenians, can never perfectly comprehend the full force of this passage. I profited by this information: I have read this short treatise, and have been extremely pleased with it: the trouble the perusal cost me has been amply repaid, as I have ascertained by reading this treatise, that the inhabitants of those cities and islands which were subject to the Athenian government were obliged, when they had a suit at law pending, to plead it in Athens, before the people: it could be decided no where else. Crito, therefore, could not have expected impartial judgment from that tribunal, which would certainly have favoured Glycera, the reputed sister of Chrysis, who had settled in Athens, in preference to a stranger like Crito. So much for the success of the affair: next the delays are to be considered, which, to a stranger, are so doubly annoying. For law-suits at Athens were protracted to an almost endless length: the Athenians were such a very litigious people, and had so many law-suits of their own, and celebrated so many festivals, that they had very few days to spare, and the suits of strangers were so lengthened out, and deferred from time to time, that they were almost endless. In addition, moreover, to the uncertainty, and the delay, there was a third inconvenience, still more disagreeable than either of the others, which was, that in a case of that kind, it became necessary to pay court to the people at a great expense. Crito, therefore, had sufficient reason to feel repugnant to engage in a process which might be so protracted and so expensive, the event of which (to say no worse) was extremely precarious. I hope I have rendered this passage perfectly clear.”――MADAME DACIER.

NOTE 192.

_Chremes.――Cease your entreaties, Simo; enough, and more than enough, have I already shewn my friendship towards you: enough have I risked for you._

Monsieur Baron, in his Andrienne, has given a literal translation of this scene between Simo and Chremes, which, from its serious cast, appears, perhaps, with more dignity in a poetical dress, than it would have received from prose. A learned translator of Terence, who was also an ingenious critic and a successful dramatist, speaks of Baron’s play in the following terms: “Its extreme elegance, and great superiority to the _prose_ translation of Dacier, is a strong _proof_ of the superior excellence and propriety of a poetical translation of this author:” (Terence.) COLMAN’S _Notes on Terence’s Plays_.

The celebrated writer, who made this remark, has himself employed _verse_ throughout the whole of his translation of our author’s plays: and, in the preface to that work, has delivered his opinion very strongly in favour of the composition of comedy in verse, even in the most comic scenes: and argues, that as Terence wrote in verse, a translation of his plays ought to be in verse also.

I must observe that though the comedies of Terence certainly are not prose, yet they are a species of verse so nearly approaching to prose, that many eminent critics have denied that they were written with any regard to measure: they are, therefore, as well calculated, perhaps, as prose, for comic expression. But we have in English no measure at all similar to that used by Terence, nor have we, in my opinion, any measure of verse whatever, in which the most humorous passages in comedy can be so forcibly expressed as they may be in prose. The practice of modern dramatists entirely favours this opinion. Our great Shakspeare, _even in tragedy_, changes from verse to prose, when he introduces a _comic_ scene, as we see in _Hamlet_, A. 5. S. 1, 4., _Coriolanus_, A. 2. S. 1., _Antony and Cleopatra_, A. 2. S. 6, 7, _Othello_, A. 2. S. 11, A. 3. S. 1. Could the wit of Congreve, Farquhar, Cibber, Sheridan, and many other eminent English dramatists (among whom I may number Mr. Colman himself,) have been measured out into verse without a diminution of the poignancy of its expression? If the answer to this question be, as I think it must, _in the negative_, it must surely be decisive against the general introduction of verse into comedies; a species of writing, in which THE RIDICULOUS, according to Aristotle, ought to claim a principal share.

NOTE 193.

_A citizen of Athens._

Athens, the most celebrated city of Greece, was the capital of that part of Achaia, which, lying towards the sea-shore, (ἀκτὴ,) was called Attica. It was called _Athens_ after Minerva, (_vide_ Note 94,) _Cecropia_ after Cecrops, and _Ionia_ after Ion. The circumference of this city, at the time of its greatest prosperity, is computed at twenty-three English miles. A much greater space was enclosed within the walls than was required by the usual inhabitants of the city, because, in time of war, the country people were compelled to take refuge within the walls. Aristophanes tells us, (in his Knights,) that these country people, in time of war, dwelt in huts, resembling bee-hives in shape, which were erected in the squares, and other open places.

This accounts for the magnitude of the city, so disproportionate to the _usual_ number of inhabitants in time of peace, when they did not amount to a hundred thousand persons. Athens was governed by kings for the space of 460 years: by magistrates, chosen for life, during about 300 years more: after that time, their rulers were allowed to hold their offices for ten years only; and, at last, for no longer than one. The citadel, or upper city, which was called the Ἀκρόπολις, was ornamented with the most magnificent temples, monuments, and statues. It contained the temples of Minerva, Neptune, Aglauros, Venus, and Jupiter. Dicearchus tells us, that the enormous disproportion in the size of the temples which were magnificent, and of the houses which were low and small, considerably diminished the beauty of the city. Athens was sometimes called the academy of the Roman empire, and the fountain of learning: learned men, and philosophers of different countries, resorted to this celebrated city in great numbers. The Romans scarcely considered a liberal education as completed, without the student received his final polish at Athens. (_Vide Horace Sat._, B. 2. S. 7. L. 13., _Pliny_, 7. E. 56.) After a career of glory, which must render the name of Athens immortal, that city sunk beneath the all-conquering power of the Romans, B. C. 85; and the Athenians never regained their importance in the scale of nations.

Athens is now called Setines; Dr. Chandler gives it the name of Athini. It contains 15,000 inhabitants, and is the see of a Greek archbishop.

NOTE 194.

_There is a grave severity in his countenance; and he speaks with boldness._

_Tristis severitas_ inest in voltu.

Gravity, among the ancient philosophers, was recommended as one of the greatest ornaments of old age.

“Lætitia juvenem, _frons_ decet _tristis senem_.” SENECA. _Hip._, A. II. S. II.

Graceful is gaiety in youth: in age Gravity most becomes us.

Old men, among the Greeks, sometimes affected the manners and exercises of youth: a species of weakness which the literary men of their age reprobated with very poignant ridicule. Theophrastus admirably exposes people of this sort in his portraiture of those who begin to learn in old age. (_Vide Theoph. Moral Characters._)

NOTE 195.

_Simo.――Seize this rascal directly, and take him away._

――――_Sublimem_ hunc intrò rape quantum potes.

There is a sort of pun here upon the word _sublimem_. Terence alludes to the prisons where slaves were confined, which, in Athens, were usually in the loftiest part of the house: so that Simo says, take him _up_, and also take him _up to the top of the house_: this is the force of the word _sublimem_ in this passage.

Slaves, in Greece, were treated with great indulgence, and never chained but for some heinous fault, or when they were brought into the slave-market, (_vide Plautus’s Captives_, A. 1. S. 2,) and then they were only worn for a short time. As Simo here commands that Davus should be put into chains, we are to suppose him to be exasperated to the utmost, which naturally leads _ad finem epitaseos_, to the end of the epitasis. The anger of _Simo_, the distress of _Pamphilus_ and _Glycera_, the imprisonment of _Davus_, and the anxious suspense of _Charinus_, are what Scaliger (_Poet_, B. 1. C. 9.) calls the _negotia exagitata_, or the confused and disturbed state of affairs, which the _catastrophe_ is to reduce _in tranquillitatem non expectatam_, into a sudden and unexpected tranquillity.

NOTE 196.

_Simo.――I’ll not hear a single word. I’ll ruffle you now, rascal, I will._

_Davus.――For all that, what I say is true._

_Simo.――For all that, Dromo, take care to keep him bound._

_S._ Nihil audio. Ego jam te COMMOTUM REDDAM.

_D._ Tamen etsi hoc verum est.

_S._ Tamen. Cura adservandum vinctum.

The word _commotum_ seems to have been imperfectly understood by Donatus and some other commentators, who have interpreted it as signifying motion; and would translate the line thus, “I’ll make you caper! I’ll make you dance to some tune, sirrah!” which is extremely foreign to its true meaning. Simo uses the phrase _commotum_ reddam instead of _commovebo_, for the sake of a pun which Terence makes with the word _reddam_: which cannot be perfectly preserved in English.

In the seventh scene of the second act, Davus jests upon the empty larder, and says,

_Indeed, Sir, I think you are too frugal: it is not well timed._

Simo is quite nettled at this severe joke, which leads him to think his stratagem discovered, and he cries out _Tace: hold your tongue_; upon which, Davus, delighted with his success in tormenting his master, says to himself Commovi, _I’ve ruffled him now._ Simo accidentally overhears this, and most severely retorts on him his own expression,

Ego jam te commotum reddam: _I will ruffle you now, rascal; I will pay you back your ruffling._

The wit of the sentence depends on the word _reddam_; which allows of a double construction, as _reddo_ taken separately, signifies _to pay back_, _to requite_, and _to retaliate_. Simo may, therefore, be understood to say, that he pays him back the ruffling he received. But, for this conceit, Simo would have said, Commovebo, which is Davus’s own word: the sense would then have been clearer, though Terence has the same expression in another scene in this play,

Quos me ludos redderet,

where _reddo_ has the same meaning with facio: which is frequently used by Plautus, as “_ludos facere_.”

NOTE 197.

_Can he be so weak? so totally regardless of the customs and laws of his country?_

The Athenian laws prohibited a citizen from marrying with a woman who was not a citizen, _vide_ Note 181. A law was passed by Pericles, that the children of a marriage in which both parties were not citizens, should be considered as νοθοι, illegitimate. Pericles himself violated this law, when he had lost all his legitimate children.

As this is one of the most lively and interesting, so it is also one of the most instructive scenes of this comedy. How noble are the sentiments! How engaging the mutual affection of the father and son, which, in spite of their disagreement, is visible in all they say to each other. How amiable are the efforts of Chremes to soften the anger of the justly-offended Simo! He forgets his own disappointment, and the slight his daughter Philumena had received from Pamphilus, and endeavours to reconcile him to his father. It is impossible to read this beautiful scene, without being both affected and improved by the perusal of it.

NOTE 198.

_Persons are suborned hither too, who say that she is a citizen of Athens. You have conquered._

The subornation of false witness was punished in Athens with the greatest severity. Both the suborner and the perjured were subject to the same punishment. Upon a third conviction, the offender was branded with infamy, and forfeited his estate. The Athenians, in general, were so celebrated for their love of truth, that the words _an Attic witness_ were used proverbially to designate a witness, whose truth and honour were proof against corruption.

NOTE 199.

_If you insist on your marriage with Philumena, and compel me to subdue my love for Glycera, I will endeavour to comply._

This speech is exceedingly artificial. Pamphilus, _in the hearing of Chremes, the father of his intended wife_, confesses his love for another; and owns, that it must cost him a severe struggle to conquer his affection for her, and resolve to wed Philumena. The knowledge of this was sufficient to deter Chremes from giving his daughter to Pamphilus.

NOTE 200.

_I implore only, that you will cease to accuse me of suborning hither this old man. Suffer me to bring him before you, that I may clear myself from this degrading suspicion._

“Pamphilus had all the reason in the world to endeavour to bring Simo and Crito together, that so he might clear himself of such a scandal as his father very reasonably imputed to him. And this was all the young gentleman’s design, but the poet had a far greater, which the audience could not so much as suspect: namely, the discovery of Glycerie, which comes in very naturally.”――ECHARD.

NOTE 201.

_Chremes.――Simo, if you knew this stranger as well as I do, you would think better of him; he is a worthy man._

M. Baron in this and the following scenes gives almost a literal translation from Terence: and the Andrienne concludes exactly in the same manner with the Latin play; excepting the affranchisement of Davus, with which M. Baron makes Pamphilus reward his faithful services.

In the Conscious Lovers, Sir R. Steele changes Crito into Isabella, the aunt of Indiana, whose real birth is discovered by Sealand’s making her a visit, to inquire into the nature of her connexion with young Bevil: the discovery is made by Sealand himself, who recognizes one of the ornaments worn by his daughter. He gives Indiana willingly to her preserver Bevil, jun., and Lucinda, who was intended to be the wife of Bevil, was, upon his marriage with her sister Indiana, given to Myrtle, the lover whom she herself had always favoured.

NOTE 202.

_Simo.――A sycophant._

The word sycophant was an epithet of peculiar opprobrium at Athens, and of very singular derivation. In a season of great scarcity, a law was passed at Athens, prohibiting the exportation of figs; and afterwards, through neglect, remained unrepealed. Hence, those malicious men who informed against those who transgressed it, were called συκοφάνται, and this appellation was afterwards always applied to false witnesses, and busy and malicious informers.

NOTE 203.

_Crito.――Chrysis’ father, who received him, was my relation, and, at his house, I’ve heard that shipwrecked stranger say, that he was an Athenian: he died in Andros._

――――Tum is mihi cognatus fuit, Qui eum _recepit_: ibi ego audivi ex illo sese esse Atticum: Is ibi mortuus est.

The word _recepit_, in this sentence, alludes to the Roman customs respecting foreigners. Crito had just before used the term _applicat_, _he applied for assistance_. When an exile or foreigner arrived at Rome, he was said _applicare_, _to apply_ to some person to become his patron; as every stranger at Rome was compelled to obtain the protection of one of the citizens, who succeeded to his effects at his death: jure applicationis. When a Roman citizen agreed to accept of a foreigner as his client, he was said _recipere_, to receive him.

NOTE 204.

_Crito.――At least I think it was Phania: one thing I am sure of, he said he was from Rhamnus._

Rhamnus was a small town in the north of Attica, and only a few miles to the north-west of Marathon. It seems to have been famous for little but a magnificent temple of Nemesis, and an exquisite statue of that goddess, sculptured by Phidias; hence she was sometimes called Rhamnusia, thus by Ovid,

――――Assensit precibus Rhamnusia justis. _Metam._, B. 3. L. 406.

Rhamnusia heard the lover’s just request.

We must not understand Crito to mean, that Phania was a Rhamnusian, because we know that he and Chremes both resided in the city of Athens. Phania probably was prevented, by the confusion of the war, from obtaining a vessel at the Piræus, or either of the Athenian ports; and therefore returned to Rhamnus, and embarked for the opposite coast of Attica. Phania might, therefore, call himself Rhamnusius from Rhamnus, as being bound from Rhamnus to Smyrna, or any other Asian port. Some, instead of Rhamnus and Rhamnusius, read Rhamus and Rhamusius.

NOTE 205.

_Crito.――The very name._

_Chremes.――You are right._

_Crito.――Ipsa est. Chremes.――Ea est._ Terence has shewn his usual art in the arrangement of these two speeches. Upon hearing the true name, one would have expected that the father would have been the first to recognize it, but he prudently delays until Crito confirms the truth of his testimony by agreeing to the name of the long-lost Pasibula. This is finely imagined by the author, as Chremes might very well be supposed to suspect that this discovery was a trick of Davus’, (who might have heard of the loss of this infant daughter,) and taken Crito for an accomplice in the conceived imposture. Chremes, therefore, waited to know whether Crito recognised the name of Pasibula, which, if the story had been false, must have been unknown to him: for the high character of Pamphilus placed him beyond the reach of suspicion.

NOTE 206.

_Simo.――Chremes, I hope you are convinced how sincerely we all rejoice at this discovery._

――――S. _Omnes_ nos gaudere hoc, Chreme, Te credo credere.

In many of the old editions of our author, this passage is written _omneis_ nos gaudere; this variation has a reference to the measure of the verse. I have seen one edition in which the line is written _omnis_ nos gaudere.

NOTE 207.

_Pam.――Oh! that is certain._

_Simo.――I consent most joyfully._

P. Nempe.

S. Scilicet.

Some commentators interpret these words from Pamphilus and Simo, (Nempe and Scilicet,) as a hint to Chremes, respecting the dowry which they expected to receive with Glycera; and think that the actor who personates Simo ought to produce a bag of money, that he may “_suit the

## action to the word_.” An ingenious critic, speaking of this vague and

fanciful conjecture, observes, as follows: “This, surely, is a precious refinement, worthy the genius of a true commentator. Madame Dacier, who entertains a just veneration for Donatus, doubts the authenticity of the observation, which is ascribed to him.” Certainly, if either of the words could be wrested to such a meaning, it must be _Nempe_, but Terence has represented Pamphilus as a character, so noble, generous, and high-spirited, that we cannot consistently suppose that he would suffer any mercenary considerations to delay for a single moment his acceptance of his beloved Glycera, when offered to him by her father.

NOTE 208.

_Chremes.――Pamphilus, my daughter’s portion is ten talents._

A TABLE OF THE MONEY CURRENT IN GREECE.

equal to worth (_sterling_) £. _s._ _d._ _qrs._

Lepton 0 0 0 0¹¹⁄₁₁₂ Chalcus 7 Lepta 0 0 0 0¹¹⁄₁₆ Dichalcus 2 Chalci 0 0 0 1⅜ Hemiobolus 2 Dichalci 0 0 0 2¾ Obolus 2 Hemioboli 0 0 1 1½ Diobolus 2 Oboli 0 0 2 3 Triobolus 3 Oboli 0 0 4 0½ Hemidrachm 3 Oboli 0 0 4 0½ Tetrobolus 4 Oboli 0 0 5 2 Pentobolus 5 Oboli 0 0 6 3½ Drachm 6 Oboli 0 0 8 Didrachm 2 Drachms 0 1 4 2 Tetradrachm 4 Drachms 0 2 9 0 Stater of silver 4 Drachms 0 2 9 0 Pentadrachm 5 Drachms 0 3 5 1 Stater of gold 25 Drachms 0 17 2 1 Stater of Philip 28 Drachms 0 19 3 0 Stater of Alexander 28 Drachms 0 19 3 0 Stater of Cyzicus 28 Drachms 0 19 3 0 Stater of Darius 48 Drachms 1 13 0 0 Stater of Crœsus 48 Drachms 1 13 0 0 Homerical talent 75 Drachms 2 11 6 3 Mina 100 Drachms 3 8 9 0 The smaller Ptolemaic talent 20 Minæ 68 15 0 0 The smaller Antiochan talent 60 Minæ 206 5 0 0 The Attic talent 60 Minæ 206 5 0 0 The smaller Euboic talent 60 Minæ 206 5 0 0 The great Attic talent 80 Minæ 275 0 0 0 The great Ptolemaic talent of Cleopatra 86⅔ Minæ 297 18 4 0 The Eginean talent 100 Minæ 343 15 0 0 The Rhodian talent 100 Minæ 343 15 0 0 The insular talent 120 Minæ 412 10 0 0 The great Antiochan talent 360 Minæ 1237 10 0 0

Those who wish for complete information respecting the ancient and modern _real money, and money of account_, may be fully satisfied by consulting the following writers on the subject.

Augustinus, Arbuthnot, Budæus, Boisard, Bircherod, Bonneville, Bouteroue, Camden, Du Bost, De Asse, Folkes, Fleetwood, Goltzius, Guthrie, Gerhart, Greaves, Hardouin, Joubert, Krause, Kelly, Lowndes, Le Blanc, Locke, Lord Liverpool, Marien, Morel, Mezzabarba, Norris, Occo, Oiselius, Patin, Pinkerton, Ricard, Richebourg, Raper, Simon, Snelling, Souciet, Seguin, Sirmond, Spanheim, Smith, Tristran, Ursinus, Vicus, Vaillant.

NOTE 209.

_Simo.――Why do you not immediately give orders for her removal to our house?_

Grecian women, in the situation in which Glycera is represented to have been, were usually well enough to go abroad in a litter in one day’s time. This topic is introduced by the poet, in order that Davus may be spoken of, and delivered from confinement; because his remaining in prison would have been contrary to the rules of comedy.

NOTE 210.

_Simo.――Because he is now carrying on things of great weight, and which touch him more nearly._

――――Quia habet aliud _magis_ ex sese et _majus_.

There is a pun in the original, which I have attempted to preserve in the translation by a circumlocution which I trust on such an occasion will be deemed allowable. The critics remark, that Terence, by Simo’s pleasantry, (_vide Note 211_,) intended to shew that he was thoroughly reconciled to his son. (_Vide Note 92._)

NOTE 211.

_Simo.――He is chained._

_Pam.――Ah! dear Sir, that was not_ well done.

_Simo.――I am sure I ordered it to be_ well done.

S. Vinctus est.

P. Pater non _rectè_ vinctus est.

S. _Haud ita jussi._

The jest in this sentence turns on the word _rectè_, which refers to an Athenian custom of binding criminals’ hands and feet together. Simo (A. 5. S. 3. _p._ 86.) orders Dromo to bind Davus in the manner before mentioned: (_atque audin’? quadrupedem constringito_.) Pamphilus says, non _rectè_ vinctus est: _rectè_ has a double meaning, it signifies _rightly_, and also _straight_. Simo pretends to take it in the latter sense, which makes his son’s speech run thus, _He is not bound straight or upright_: to which Simo replies, _I ordered he should not be bound straight, but crooked_, or neck and heels. I trust I have made the force of this pun clear to the unlearned reader: the turn given it in the English translation is borrowed from Echard.

NOTE 212.

_Pam. (to himself.)――Any one would think, perhaps, that I do not believe this to be true, but I know it is because I wish it so. I am of opinion, that the lives of the gods are eternal, because their pleasures are secure and without end._

“Epicurus observed, that the gods could not but be immortal, since they are exempt from all kinds of evils, cares, and dangers. But Terence gives another more refined reason, which more forcibly expresses the joy of Pamphilus; for he affirms that their immortality springs only from the durability of their pleasures. This passage is very beautiful. Pamphilus prefaces what he is going to say by the expression, “_Any one would think, perhaps_;” this was in a manner necessary to excuse the freedom which, arising from his joy, makes him assign another reason for the immortality of the gods than those discovered by the philosophers, particularly by Epicurus, whose name was still fresh in the recollection of every person, and whose doctrines were very generally received and adopted.” MADAME DACIER.

NOTE 213.

_Pam.――There is now no impediment to our marriage._

Nec mora ulla est, quin jam uxorem ducam.

Pamphilus does not mean by this expression, that he was not married before, but that now that he has his father’s consent to his union, he can ducere uxorem, _lead his wife_ publicly to his own house with the usual ceremonies. The latter phrase _ducere uxorem_, _to marry_, took its rise from the custom of leading the bride from her father’s to her husband’s house, in a ceremonial procession. For an account of the marriages of the Greeks, _vide_ Notes 116, 117, 118. Marriages, among the Romans, were of three kinds. The first, and most binding, by which women of rank and consideration were married, was called _confarreatio_: when the parties were joined by the high priest, in the presence of a great number of witnesses; and ate a cake made of meal and salt. The second kind of marriage was _usus_, when the parties lived together for one year. The third kind was called _coemptio_ or mutual purchase, in which the bride and bridegroom gave each other a piece of money, and repeated over a set form of words.

NOTE 214.

_Char. (aside.)――This man is dreaming of what he wishes when awake._

――――Num ille somniat Ea, quæ vigilans voluit.

The optative influence, (if I may so call it,) on the visions of the night, here alluded to by Terence, has been described at length by a celebrated poet, in verses which charm the ear with their melody, and which command the approbation of the judgment as a faithful portraiture of nature. Their author wrote verses, which, in _harmony of measure_, excelled those of all the Roman poets, excepting _Ovid_.

Omnia quæ sensu volvuntur vota diurno, Pectore sopito, reddit amica quies: Venator defessa toro cum membra reponit. Mens tamen ad sylvas, et sua lustra redit. Judicibus lites, aurige somnia currus, Vanaque nocturnis meta cavetur equis. Furto gaudet amans; permutat navita merces; Et vigil elapsas quærit avarus opes. Vatem Musarum studium sub nocte silenti Artibus assuetis solicitare solet.――CLAUDIAN.

NOTE 215.

_Do you, Davus, go home, and order some of our people hither, to remove her to our house. Why do you loiter? go, don’t lose a moment._

_Davus.――I am going. You must not expect their coming out: she will be betrothed within_, &c.

The concluding lines of the play from “_You must not expect_,” &c., were not originally spoken by the actor who personated Davus, but formed a sort of epilogue, spoken by a performer, called Cantor; who also pronounced the word PLAUDITE, with which the _comedies_ and tragedies of the Romans usually terminated. _Vide Note 217, also Quintilian_, B. 6. C. 1., _and Cicero and Cato_. Horace expressly tells us, that the Cantor said the words, vos plaudite.

“Tu quid ego, et populus mecum desideret audi. Si plausoris eges aulæa manentis, et usque Sessuri, DONEC CANTOR VOS PLAUDITE DICAT; Ætatis cujusque notandi sunt tibi mores, Mobilibusque decor naturis dandus et annis.” _Art of Poet._, L. 153.

Attend, whilst I instruct thee how to please Him whose experience guides thee; and the taste That rules the present age. If thou wouldst charm Our listening ears, until the scene be done; And in our seats _detain us till the Cantor Requests applause_; give to each stage of life, Its attributes: and justly paint the changes, Wrought by the hand of Time.

NOTE 216.

_You must not expect their coming out._

Some editors give nearly twenty lines of dialogue between Chremes and Charinus respecting the marriage of the latter with Philumena, but those additional lines are spurious. The critics have decided that the play should terminate with the winding up of Pamphilus’s intrigue, and that that of Charinus should be left to the imagination: as the

## action must languish, if continued after the interest felt for the

principal characters has subsided. Davus here addresses the spectators, as does Mysis, in A. 1. S. 4. Commentators deem this a blemish in the composition of the piece. These addresses, in ancient comedies, were not, I imagine, made to the spectators in general, but to those persons who stood on the stage during the performance, as the chorus, or as musicians.

NOTE 217.

_Farewell, and clap your hands._

“All the ancient copies have the Greek omega, Ω, placed before the words, ‘_clap your hands_,’ and before ‘_Farewell, and clap your hands_,’ in other plays: ‘which,’ says Eugraphius, ‘are the words of the prompter, who, at the end of the play, lifted up the curtain, and said to the audience, ‘_Farewell, and clap your hands_:’ thus far Faernus. Leng, at the end of every play, subscribes these words, Calliopius recensui, and says Calliopius was the prompter; and he quotes the same words of Eugraphius, which I have here quoted from Faernus. If Ω stands for any thing more than ‘_Finis_,’ (as some imagine to be placed there by transcribers to signify the end,) it may be designed for the first letter Ωδος, which is the Greek for Cantor: and Horace, in his art of poetry, says,

Donec cantor vos plaudite dicat.

“Bentley supposes this Cantor to have been Flaccus the musician, (_mentioned in the title_,) who, when the play was over, entreated the favour of the audience: but I should rather think Calliopius to have been the Cantor, if there was any foundation in antiquity for his name being at the end of the plays; but the name seems fictitious to me by the etymology thereof, and it being used in this place. It is indeed at the end of every play, in all the _three manuscripts in Dr. Mead’s_ collection except Phormio, which is the last play in the prosaic copy; and the only reason for Calliopius recensui not being there, is, doubtless, because the play is imperfect, some few verses being out at the conclusion; ω precedes the farewell in one of the doctor’s copies, ο in another, and the largest copy has neither. What is independent of the action of the play, as the last two lines are, may be looked upon as an epilogue, and was probably spoken by the same person, whether _player_, _prompter_, or _cantor_.”――COOKE.

NOTE 218.

_End of the fifth Act._

At the end of a play, the Romans closed their scenes, which, instead of falling from the roof of the theatre downwards, as among the moderns, were constructed something similarly to the blinds of a carriage; so that when the stage was to be exposed to the view of the spectators, the scene or curtain was let down, and when the piece was concluded, it was drawn up again. The ancients originally performed their plays in the open air, with no scenery but that furnished by nature. As they became more refined, they erected theatres, and introduced scenes, which they divided into three kinds: 1. tragic, 2. comic, 3. pastoral. Some very valuable information on this subject may be gathered from M. Perrault’s Notes on Vitruvius, who has described the various sorts of ancient scenes. Ovid, in the following verses, describes the original simplicity of the Roman dramatic entertainments:

“Tunc neque marmoreo pendebant vela theatro, Nec fuerant liquido pulpita rubra croco. Illic quas tulerant nemorosa palatia frondes Simpliciter positæ SCENA sine arte fuit.”

FINIS.

LONDON: Printed by W. CLOWES, Northumberland-court.

Transcriber’s Note:

Words may have multiple spelling variations or inconsistent hyphenation in the text. These have been left unchanged unless indicated below. Obsolete and alternative spellings were left unchanged.

Words and phrases in italics are surrounded by underscores, _like this_. Note 108 has two footnotes that were lettered sequentially and were moved to the end of the Note. Missing anchor was added to Note 50. Obvious printing errors, such as backwards, upside down, reverse order, or partially printed letters and punctuation, were corrected. Final stops missing at the end of sentences and abbreviations were added. Duplicate letters at line endings or page breaks were removed. Punctuation and accent marks were normalized.

The following items were changed: “his“ to “this,“ line 148 “praisng” changed to “praising,” line 2856 “thing” added to text where not legible in the original, Note 114