Cratin and Eupolis, that lash'd the Age, Those old Comedian Furies of the Stage; If they were to describe a vile, unjust, And cheating Knave, or scourge a lawless Lust, Or other Crimes; regardless of his Fame, They shew'd the Man, and boldly told his Name. Creech.
Dignus erat describi, deserv'd to be expos'd, i. e. in the Poet's Opinion; for we are not to imagine, that all Persons who underwent that theatrical Discipline, did really deserve it: It is well known, how ill Aristophanes us'd the very best of the Athenians, the almost divine Socrates. Besides, it might, and probably did often happen, that a Man who had in Justice deserv'd Correction, might be too much a Sufferer in the Measure of it. But, however, to point its Satire in plain Terms against the greatest Men, and the greatest Crimes, was a Liberty which this old Comedy assum'd; an unreasonable Liberty upon all Accounts, and not to be endur'd. For Men of the first Rank, and Crimes of the blackest Die, are not the proper Characters or Objects of Comedy, as will be shewn more at large hereafter: And in writing Satire directly to name Men, whatsoever Rank they are of, is inconsistent with all the sober Rules of Poetry: As, in the Comedy of the Clouds, Aristophanes brings Socrates upon the Stage by Name, as one of the Persons of the Drama. Indeed, this Liberty of Abuse and Defamation, was allow'd chiefly to the Chorus, and was most in Use during the Democracy of the Athenians, especially in the Time of the Peloponnesian War. But when the Thirty Tyrants had seiz'd the Government, they thought proper to make a Law against it. This Horace speaks of, in his Art of Poetry:
[396] Successit vetus his Comœdia, non sine multa Laude; sed in vitium libertas excidit, & vim Dignam lege regi; Lex est accepta, Chorusque Turpiter obticuit, sublato jure nocendi.
Next these, old Comedy did please the Age, But soon their Liberty was turn'd to Rage; Such Rage, as Civil Pow'r was forc'd to tame, And by good Laws secure Men's injur'd Fame. Thus was the Chorus lost, their railing Muse Grew silent, when forbidden to abuse. Creech.
The most learned Gerrard Vossius has oblig'd us with so good an Account of the Rise and Progress of the two other Sorts of Comedy, I mentioned, that I am capable of giving it no Improvements; it is as follows: [397] The Government, for fear of being too freely us'd, took away the Chorus, which was generally extreamly abusive. Instead of it, succeeded παρεκβασειϛ, or Digressions, which, like the old Chorus, were Breaks in the Action, but design'd chiefly to censure or expose the Poets: If any other Persons were struck at, it was not done rudely, but in a modest and decent Manner. The Vices of all the Citizens, were, without Exception, brought under the Lash, but no Body was nam'd: Or if any particular Person was pointed at, it was covertly, and in Disguise. And this Sort of Comedy, after the third was invented, was call'd the Middle Comedy; introduc'd between the Old and New, but had a greater Resemblance with the Old. The most celebrated Authors of this Middle Comedy at Athens, were Philiseus and Stephanus; as is mention'd in the Prolegomena to Aristophanes. It was a Rule with them to name no Body, but Gentlemen of their own Profession; a Liberty which others were very willing to allow them: In this, alone, they follow'd the Old Comedy, which did the same Thing." Most, if not all the modern Comedies, are of this Sort, except in the last Particular, especially those of our own Country; as will be very evident, from what we have to offer upon this Subject hereafter. Such, then, was the Middle Comedy, and was succeeded by the New, which we have the History of from the same Hand.
"Afterwards, in the Reign of Alexander the Great, to expose the Vices of great Men, even without naming them, was look'd upon as an Offence to the Government. Comedy, by this Means, entirely lost its ancient Privilege of Correction, and a new Way of Writing was introduc'd, to work up an imaginary Story, and instead of Chorus's, or Digressions, to make Use of Prologues." Vossius then gives us a long Account of the Writers of this new Comedy, which we don't think proper to repeat; and observes, "That Menander's Character was universally allow'd to be superior to all of them. In these Comedies the Liberty of Scandal, and all the Bitterness of Abuse, was in great Measure laid aside: The Chorus (as before observ'd) was entirely dropp'd, and the new Invention, Prologue, now succeeded. Comedy, at its first Appearance, was nothing else but a Chorus; afterwards, Variety of Persons and Characters were introduc'd, and the Chorus taken away: So that it was first of all a Chorus only, without Dialogue; and then Dialogue, without a Chorus. This new Comedy differ'd very much from the old; the Plots in the old Comedy were chiefly taken from real Stories, in this always from fictitious ones; that was abusive, this had its pointed Satire, but no scandalous and unmannerly Reflections. Nor were the Parts of it divided in the same Manner, or into the same Number of Acts. There was a great Variety of Measures in the old Comedy, but only Trochaic, or Iambic, in the new: And, lastly, the Style of this was more correct and elegant than the old, whose Language, as it was more elevated, so was it less regular and uniform." This new Comedy was the only Sort that ever appear'd upon the Roman Stage, introduc'd thither by Livius Andronicus, the Author of Dramatic Poetry among the Romans. Plautus and Terence proceeded upon the same Plan, especially Terence; for Plautus's Way of Writing has a greater Resemblance of the Middle Comedy. And therefore, tho' Aristophanes, considering when he liv'd, and the Nature of his Poetry, was so much, and so justly celebrated; yet, rejecting utterly the old Comedy, the two last Sorts are such only as ought to be included in the general Idea of Comic Poetry: Or, perhaps, by uniting both the last together, a just Notion of Comedy may be better form'd, which, I think, may be defin'd in this Manner: Comedy is a Sort of Dramatic Poetry, which gives a View of common and private Life, recommends Virtue, and exposes the Vices and Follies of Mankind in a humorous and merry Way of Writing.
This Idea of Comedy, is what arises rather from joining both Sorts together, than what properly belongs to either of them: For neither, taken separately, come up to it. Virtue had not its just Commendation in the Middle Comedy, nor Vice its due Correction in the New: There was too much Mirth in one, and Gravity in the other. This, therefore, is the Definition of a perfect Comedy, not as it always, or indeed generally is, but as it is sometimes, and always ought to be. "Comedy (says Vossius) is divided by some Greek and Roman Criticks into the Moral and the Merry: The first gives a natural and sober View of common Life; the other is all over Pleasantry and Ridicule." And this was undoubtedly a very convenient Division, because it takes the Case as it really is. Of the first Kind, are Terence's Comedies, of the last Plautus's: But both of them had been more perfect, if they had fallen a little more into each other's Way of Writing; if Terence had endeavour'd more to make us laugh, and Plautus to be more serious.
Comedy is defin'd by Scaliger[398], to be a Dramatic Poem, representing the Business of Life, whose Event is fortunate, and Style familiar. But to represent the Business of Life, belongs to the Drama in general, and may equally be applied to Tragedy or Comedy; and therefore ought not to make Part of the distinguishing Character of either of them. Comedy, indeed, ought always to end fortunately, and the Style should be familiar: But both these are included under that Branch of our Definition which says, it must be in a humorous or facetious Way of Writing. Mirth and Raillery, tho' essential to this Sort of Poetry, are not taken Notice of in Scaliger's Definition, and, in Vossius's Opinion[399], are not at all necessary in the Idea of it. But is it possible to have any Notion of Comedy, where Mirth and Humour have no Place in it? Scaliger says, in another Place[400], tho' not very consistently, that it was common, both in Tragedy and Comedy, to have the Play sometimes conclude with a Mixture of Grief and Gladness. He seems to have forgot his own Definition of Comedy, where he would have it always end successfully. He mentions, indeed, many Comedies[401], where there it a Mixture of Mirth and Sorrow in them; and the Observation might have been as true of all the rest. For it is scarce, if at all possible, that all the Persons concern'd in an Action should rejoice in the most fortunate and successful Conclusion of it; because, where-ever any Emulation or Competition rises, it is impossible that every Body should succeed: And were it possible, it would be improper; for Vice should always receive its Punishment, and Virtue its Reward. It is therefore to no Purpose to give us the Instances of Thraso in Terence's Eunuch, of Chremes in his Phormio, or of others, who at the End of the Play go off in some Concern. For (not to observe that their Sorrow is very much soften'd in the Conclusion) to make the Event prosperous, it is enough, that in general, and in the main Point, it turns out successfully, and that all the Audience, tho' not all the Persons concern'd in the Action, are dismiss'd in good Humour. What Scaliger says of Tragedies, (which we shall speak of hereafter) is very true, that the Catastrophe neither is, nor always ought to be unfortunate. But certainly a Comedy ought always to end chearfully. And this may serve, by way of Answer, to what Vossius has observ'd about the double Catastrophe of some Comedies, which, with regard to different Persons, are joyful and unfortunate[402].
Vossius defines Comedy in this Manner,[403] A Dramatic Poem, copying the Actions of the principal Citizens, and common People, in a familiar Style, not without Mirth and Raillery. He therefore manifestly contradicts[404] himself, when he affirms, afterwards, that Mirth is not essential to Comedy. Having given us this Definition, he proceeds thus: "But if we consider Comedy, as it has generally been written, we might call it, a Representation not only of public, but private Life." Yes, truly, if we consider Comedy as it ought to be written, we may venture to say, that it is a Copy of the Actions of private Men, and not of the chief Magistrates. For by the Actions of the principal Citizens[405] he means (as it appears plainly afterwards) those, who are concern'd in the Government, and in the Administration of Public Affairs, which are by no Means a proper Subject for Comedy.
Twenty-fourth Lecture.