[NOTE 54.]
It is taken from the Greek.
All Terence’s comedies were of this class, which was called Palliatæ, viz., plays in which the scene was laid in Greece. The class, called Togatæ, were pieces entirely Roman. The palliatæ were generally new comedies, of which Menander was the inventor; but Pacuvius wrote the middle, and Livius Andronicus the old comedy. (Vide [Note 33].) In the age in which Terence wrote his comedies, the Romans were some degrees less advanced in the refinements of civilization, than the Greeks. But little more than a century before, Pyrrhus, king of Epirus, thought them worthy of no better epithet than that of “barbarians” in comparison with his own subjects, who were not themselves the most polished nation in the world. The Romans, therefore, omitted no opportunity of improving the manners and perfecting the education of their youth, by sending them to mix with the Greeks, and to unite themselves to the disciples of those Grecian sages, who, as far as the light of reason, unassisted by divine revelation, could penetrate, dispelled the clouds of ignorance, and taught their followers that happiness and wisdom can be attained only by the virtuous. It was, doubtless, on this account, that Terence chose Greece as the scene of his comedies, which he intended should portray to the Romans the manners, customs, and characters of those whom they often held up as a pattern of polished refinement, worthy the imitation of the rising generation.
It is to this, doubtless, that we must attribute Terence’s choice of Athens in preference to Rome as the scene of his plays; as, particularly, in the comedy which the critics call the comedy of intrigue, the best judges agree that the scene is preferably laid in that country in which it is meant to be performed. But the comedies of Terence were more of that description which Dr. Blair denominates the comedy of character, and preferable to what he calls the comedy of intrigue, because “it exhibits the prevailing manners which mark the character of the age in which the scene is laid. Incidents should afford a proper field for the exhibition of character: the action in comedy, though it demands the poet’s care in order to render it animated and natural, is a less significant and important part of the performance than the action in tragedy; as, in comedy, it is what men say, and how they behave, that draws our attention, rather than what they perform or what they suffer.”
[NOTE 55.]
The consulate of Marcus Claudius Marcellus, and Cneus Sulpicius Galba.
The consuls, the chief magistrates of the Roman republic were first created at the expulsion of the kings in the year 244: they were two in number, and chosen annually. The consuls were the head of the Senate, which they assembled and dismissed at pleasure, though it was not their exclusive privilege, as a dictator, his master of the horse, the prætors, military tribunes, and even the tribunes of the people, might also, on certain occasions, assemble the Senate. The consuls, however, were the supreme judges of all differences; they commanded the armies of the republic, and, during their consulate, enjoyed almost unbounded power, which could only be checked by the creation of a dictator, to whom the consuls were subordinate. It was requisite that every candidate for the consulship should be forty-three years of age, and that he should previously have discharged the functions of Prætor, Ædile, and Quæstor. The consuls were always patricians till the year 388, when, by the influence of their tribunes, the people obtained a law, that henceforth one of them should be a plebeian. The ensigns of consular dignity were twelve guards, called lictors, (who bore the fasces,) and a robe, fringed with purple, worn by these magistrates, during their consulate. The names of the consuls are mentioned in the title of this play, merely to fix its date, as the Roman method of reckoning their years was by the names of the consuls. This custom continued for 1,300 years. Marcus Claudius Marcellus was the grandson of the great Marcellus, slain in the year 545; for Caius Sulpicius Galba, vide [Note 27].
[NOTE 56.]
Prologue.
Madame Dacier grounds on the first line of this Prologue an opinion, that the Andrian was not Terence’s first play: but, if that learned and justly-celebrated lady had attentively considered the relation the sixteen following lines of the Prologue bear to the first, she could not have made this deviation from her usual extreme accuracy. Whether the Andrian was, or was not, our Author’s first production, is a question of more curiosity than real importance: it has, however, undergone some discussion among the learned; and, in my opinion, it may be clearly ascertained by an attentive perusal of the Prologue to the Andrian, and learned and unlearned are equally competent to decide upon it. Let us now examine the proof. The first seven lines inform us, that “when the poet began to write, he thought he had only to please the people, but that he finds it far otherwise; as he is obliged to write a Prologue to answer the objections of an older bard.”
If we stop here, it is natural enough to conclude, that in the Prologue to the Andrian, he is alluding to censures passed on some former play. But, if we look at the next nine lines we see that in the prologue to the Andrian, he repels a censure not passed on any former production, but on the Andrian itself. Listen, says he, to their objections, which are, in short, that in the composition of this very Andrian, he has made a confused mixture of two of Menander’s plays. What allusion is made to any former writings? None: the snarling criticisms of the older bard were directed only against the Andrian. I imagine that the case was thus: Terence wrote the Andrian, and procured its representation, probably without any Prologue, (which was sometimes dispensed with, as we see in Plautus,) the play, and its author, were, probably, cried down and abused by this older bard and his admirers, who might envy the visible superiority of Terence, who afterwards composed the Prologue in question, to answer their objections. The reader is referred for further proof, to Suetonius’s Life of Terence, a translation of which is prefixed to this play.
[NOTE 57.]
To answer the snarling malice of an older poet.
According to Donatus, the name of this older bard was Lucius Lavinius: but there can be little doubt but that name is a corruption of Luscius Lanuvinus, the arch-enemy of Terence, whom he handles so roughly in his Prologue to the Eunuch. Luscius was a poet of considerable talent. Volcatius gives him the ninth place,