Chapter XI: Act V: Scene I. page 82,) and, therefore, that Simo may not suspect (1)

_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._