History of Roman Literature from its Earliest Period to the Augustan Volume I Part 10

Hence, the recognition of the supposed stranger was of the utmost importance to herself and lover. In real life, this recognition may have been sometimes actually aided by ornaments and trinkets. Parents frequently tied jewels and rings to the children whom they exposed, in order that such as found them might be encouraged to nourish and educate them, and that they themselves might afterwards be enabled to discover them, if Providence took care for their safety(248). Plots, accordingly, which hinged on such circ.u.mstances, were invented even by the writers of the old Greek comedy. One of the later pieces of Aristophanes, now lost, ent.i.tled _Cocalus_, is said to have presented a recognition; and nearly the same sort of intrigue was afterwards employed by Menander, and, from his example, by Plautus and Terence. From imitation of the Greek and Latin comedies, similar incidents became common both in dramatic and romantic fiction. The pastoral romance of Longus hinges on a recognition of this species; and those elegant productions, in which the Italians have introduced the characters and occupations of rural life into the drama, are frequently founded on the exposure of children, who, after being brought up as shepherds by reputed fathers, are recognised by their real parents, from ornaments or tokens fastened to their persons when abandoned in infancy or childhood.

The _Cistellaria_ has been more directly imitated in _Gli Incantesimi_ of Giovam-Maria Cecchi, a Florentine dramatist of the sixteenth century. That part, however, of the plot which gives name to the piece, has been invented by the Italian author himself.

_Curculio_.-The subject of this play, turns on a recognition similar to that which occurs in the _Cistellaria_. It derives its t.i.tle from the name of a parasite, who performs the part usually a.s.signed by Plautus to an intriguing slave; and he is called Curculio, from a species of worm which eats through corn.

It is worthy of observation, that in the fourth act of this play, the Choragus, who was master of the Chorus, and stage-manager, or leader of the band, is introduced, expressing his fear lest he should be deprived of the clothes he had lent to Curculio, and addressing to the spectators a number of satirical remarks on Roman manners.

Vossius has noticed the inadvertency or ignorance of Plautus in this drama, where, though the scene is laid in Epidaurus, he sends the parasite to Caria, and brings him back in four days. This part of the comedy he therefore thinks has been invented by Plautus himself, since a Greek poet, to whom the geography of these districts must have been better known, would not have carried the parasite to so great a distance in so short a period.

_Epidicus_.-This play is so called from the name of a slave who sustains a princ.i.p.al character in the comedy, and on whose rogueries most of the incidents depend. Its most serious part consists in the discovery of a damsel, who proves to be sister to a young man by whom she has been purchased as a slave. The play has no prologue; but, at the beginning, a character is introduced, which the ancients called _persona protatica_,-that is, a person who enters only once, and at the commencement of the piece, for the sake of unfolding the argument, and does not appear again in any part of the drama. Such are Sosia, in the _Andria_ of Terence, and Davus, in his _Phormio_. This is accounted rather an inartificial mode of informing the audience of the circ.u.mstances previous to the opening of the piece. It is generally too evident, that the narrative is made merely for the sake of the spectators; as there seldom appears a sufficient reason for one of the parties being so communicative to the other. Such explanations should come round, as it were, by accident, or be drawn involuntarily from the characters themselves in the course of the action.

The _Epidicus_ is said to have been a princ.i.p.al favourite of the author himself; and, indeed, one of the characters in his _Bacchides_ exclaims,

"Etiam Epidic.u.m, quam ego fabulam aeque ac me ipsum amo."

But, though popular in the ancient theatre, the _Epidicus_ does not appear to be one of the plays of Plautus which has been most frequently imitated on the modern stage. There was, however, a very early Italian imitation of it in the _Emilia_, a comedy of Luigi da Groto, better known by the appellation of Cieco D'Adria, one of the earliest romantic poets of his country. The trick, too, of Epidicus, in persuading his master to buy a slave with whom his son was in love, has suggested the first device fallen on by Mascarelle, the valet in Moliere's _Etourdi_, in order to place the female slave Celie at the disposal of her lover, by inducing his master to purchase her.

_Menaechmi_-hinges on something of the same species of humour as the _Amphitryon_-a doubt and confusion with regard to the ident.i.ty of individuals. According to the Delphin Plautus, it was taken from a lost play of Menander, ent.i.tled ??d???; but other commentators have thought, that it was more probably derived from Epicharmus, or some other Sicilian dramatist.

In this play, a merchant of Syracuse had two sons, possessing so strong a personal resemblance to each other, that they could not be distinguished even by their parents. One of these children, called Menaechmus, was lost by his father in a crowd on the streets of Syracuse, and, being found by a Greek merchant, was carried by him to Epid.a.m.num, (Dyracchium,) and adopted as his son. Meanwhile the brother, (whose name, in consequence of this loss, had been changed to Menaechmus,) having grown up, had set out from Syracuse in quest of his relative. After a long search he arrived at Epid.a.m.num, where his brother had by this time married, and had also succeeded to the merchant's fortune. The amus.e.m.e.nt of the piece hinges on the citizens of Epid.a.m.num mistaking the Syracusan stranger for his brother, and the family of the Epid.a.m.nian brother falling into a corresponding error. In this comedy we have also the everlasting parasite; and the first act opens with a preparation for an entertainment, which Menaechmus of Epid.a.m.num had ordered for his mistress Erotium, and to which the parasite was invited. The Syracusan happening to pa.s.s, is asked to come in by his brother's mistress, and partakes with her of the feast. He also receives from her, in order to bear it to the embroiderer's, a robe which his brother had carried off from his wife, with the view of presenting it to this mistress. Afterwards he is attacked by his brother's jealous wife, and her father; and, as his answers to their reproaches convince them that he is deranged, they send straightway for a physician.

The Syracusan escapes; but they soon afterwards lay hold of the Epid.a.m.nian, in order to carry him to the physician's house, when the servant of the Syracusan, who mistakes him for his master, rescues him from their hands. The Epid.a.m.nian then goes to his mistress with the view of persuading her to return the robe to his wife. At length the whole is unravelled by the two Menaechmi meeting; when the servant of the Syracusan, surprised at their resemblance, discovers, after a few questions to each, that Menaechmus of Epid.a.m.num is the twin-brother of whom his master had been so long in search, and who now agrees to return with them to Syracuse.

The great number of those Latin plays, where the merriment consists in mistakes arising from personal resemblances, must be attributed to the use of masks, which gave probability to such dramas; and yet, if the resemblance was too perfect, the humour, I think, must have lost its effect, as the spectators would not readily perceive the error that was committed.

No play has been so repeatedly imitated as the Menaechmi on the modern stage, particularly the Italian, where masks were also frequently employed. The most celebrated Italian imitation of the _Menaechmi_ is _Lo Ipocrito_ of Aretine, where the twin-brothers, Liseo and Brizio, had the same singular degree of resemblance as the Menaechmi. Brizio had been carried off a prisoner in early youth during the sack of Milan, and returns to that city, after a long absence, in the first act of the play, in quest of his relations. Liseo's servants, and his parasite, Lo Ipocrito, all mistake Brizio for their patron, and his wife takes him to share an entertainment prepared at her husband's house, and also intrusts him with the charge of some ornaments belonging to her daughter; while, on the other hand, Brizio's servant mistakes Liseo for his master. The interest of the play arises from the same sort of confusion as that which occurs in the _Menaechmi_; and from the continual astonishment of those who are deceived by the resemblance, at finding an individual deny a conversation which they were persuaded he had held a few minutes before.

The play is otherwise excessively involved, in consequence of the introduction of the amours and nuptials of the five daughters of Liseo.

The plot of the Latin comedy has also been followed in _Le Moglie_ of Cecchi, and in the _Lucidi_ of Agnuolo Firenzuola; but the incidents have been, in a great measure, adapted by these dramatists to the manners of their native country. Trissino, in his _Simillimi_, has made little change on his original, except adding a chorus of sailors; as, indeed, he has himself acknowledged, in his dedication to the cardinal, Alessandro Farnese. In _Gli due Gemelli_, which was long a favourite piece on the Italian stage, Carlini acted both brothers; the scenes being so contrived that they were never brought on the stage together-in the same manner as in our farce of _Three and the Deuce_, where the idea of giving different characters and manners to the three brothers, with a perfect personal resemblance, by creating still greater astonishment in their friends and acquaintances, seems an agreeable addition.

The _Menaechmi_ was translated into English towards the end of the sixteenth century, by William Warner, the author of _Albion's England_.

This version, which was first printed in 1595, and is ent.i.tled, "Menaechmi, a pleasaunt and fine conceited comedy, taken out of the most excellent wittie poet Plautus, chosen purposely, as least harmefull, yet most delightful," was unquestionably the origin of Shakspeare's _Comedy of Errors_. The resemblance of the two Antipholis', and the other circ.u.mstances which give rise to the intrigue, are nearly the same as in Plautus. Some of the mistakes, too, which occur on the arrival of Antipholis of Syracuse at Ephesus, have been suggested by the Latin play.

Thus, the Syracusan, on coming to Ephesus, dines with his brother's wife.

This lady had under repair, at the goldsmith's, a valuable chain, which her husband resolves to present to his mistress, but the goldsmith gives it to the Syracusan. At length the Ephesian is believed insane by his friends, who bring Doctor Pinch, a conjurer, to exorcise him. Shakspeare has added the characters of the twin Dromios, the servants of the Antipholis's, who have the same singular resemblance to each other as their masters, which has produced such intricacy of plot that it is hardly possible to unravel the incidents.

The _Comedy of Errors_ is accounted one of the earliest, and is certainly one of the least happy efforts of Shakspeare's genius. I cannot agree with M. Schlegel, in thinking it better than the Menaechmi of Plautus, or even than the best modern imitation of that comedy-_Les Menechmes, ou Les Jumeaux_, of the French poet Regnard, which is, at least, a more lively and agreeable imitation. All the scenes, however, have been accommodated to French manners; and the plot differs considerably from that of Plautus, being partly formed on an old French play of the same t.i.tle, by Rotrou, which appeared as early as 1636. One chief distinction is, that the Chevalier Menechme knows of the arrival of his brother from the country, and knows that he had come to Paris in order to receive an inheritance bequeathed to him by his uncle, as also to marry a young lady of whom the Chevalier was enamoured. The Chevalier avails himself of the resemblance to prosecute his love-suit with the lady, and to receive the legacy from the hands of an attorney, while his brother is in the meantime hara.s.sed by women to whom the Chevalier had formerly paid addresses, and is arrested for his debts. It was natural enough, as in Plautus, that an infant, stolen and carried to a remote country, should have transmitted no account of himself to his family, and should have been believed by them to be dead; but this can with difficulty be supposed of Regnard's Chevalier, who had not left his paternal home in Brittany till the usual age for entering on military service, and had ever since resided chiefly at Paris. The Chevalier finds, from letters delivered to him by mistake, that his brother had come to town to receive payment of a legacy recently bequeathed to him: But, unless it was left to any one who bore the name of Menechme, it is not easy to see how the attorney charged with the payment, should have allowed himself to be duped by the Chevalier. Nor is it likely that, suspicious as the elder Menechme is represented, he should trust so much to his brother's valet, or allow himself to be terrified in the public street and open day into payment of a hundred louis d'or. It is equally improbable that Araminte should give up the Chevalier to her niece, or that the elder Menechme should marry the old maid merely to get back half the sum of which his brother had defrauded him. That all the adventures, besides, should terminate to the advantage of the Chevalier, has too much an air of contrivance, and takes away that hazard which ought to animate pieces of this description, and which excites the interest in Plautus, where the incidents prove fortunate or unfavourable indiscriminately to the two brothers.

In Plautus, the robe which Menaechmus of Epid.a.m.num carries off from his wife, suffices for almost the whole intrigue. It alone brings into play the falsehood and avarice of the courtezan, the inclination of both the Menaechmi for pleasure, the gluttony of the parasite, and rage of the jealous wife: But in the French _Menechmes_,-trunks, letters, a portrait, promises of marriage, and presents, are heaped on each other, to produce acc.u.mulated mistakes. Regnard has also introduced an agreeable variety, by discriminating the characters of the brothers, between whom Plautus and Shakspeare have scarcely drawn a shade of difference. The Chevalier is a polished gentleman-very ingenious; but, I think, not very honest: His brother is blunt, testy, and impatient, and not very wise. The difference, indeed, in their language and manners, is so very marked, that it seems hardly possible, whatever might be the personal resemblance, that the Chevalier's mistress could have been deceived. These peculiarities of disposition, however, render the mistakes, and the country brother's impatience under them, doubly entertaining-

"Faudra-t-il que toujours je sois dans l'embarras De voir une furie attachee a mes pas?"

And when a.s.sailed by Araminte, the old maid to whom his brother had promised marriage-

"Esprit, demon, lutin, ombre, femme, ou furie, Qui que tu sois, enfin laisse moi, je te prie."

When his brother is at last discovered, and indubitably recognized, he exclaims,

"Mon frere en verite-Je m'en rejouis fort, Mais j'avais cependant compte sur votre mort."

Boursault's comedy, _Les Menteurs qui ne mentent point_, though somewhat different in its fable from the Latin _Menaechmi_, is founded on precisely the same species of humour-the exact resemblance of the two Nicandres occasioning ludicrous mistakes and misunderstandings among their valets and mistresses.

The most recent French imitation of the play of Plautus is the _Menechmes Grecs_, by Cailhava, in which the plot is still more like the Latin comedy than the _Menechmes_ of Regnard; but the characters are new. This piece has been extremely popular on the modern French stage.-"Le public," says Chenier, "s'est empresse de rendre justice a la peinture piquante de murs de la Grece, a la verite des situations, au naturel du dialogue, au merite rare d'une gaite franche, qui ne degenere pas en bouffonnerie(249)."

_Miles Gloriosus_, (the Braggart Captain.) This was a character of the new Greek comedy, introduced and brought to perfection by Philemon and Menander. These dramatists wrote during the reigns of the immediate successors of Alexander the Great. At that period, his generals who had established sovereignties in Syria and Egypt, were in the practice of recruiting their armies by levying mercenaries in Greece. The soldiers who had thus served in the wars of the Seleucidae and Ptolemies, were in the habit, when they returned home to Greece after their campaigns, of astonis.h.i.+ng their friends with fabulous relations of their exploits in distant countries. Having been engaged in wars with which Athens had no immediate concern or interest, these partizans met with little respect or sympathy from their countrymen, and their lies and bravadoes having made them detested in Athenian society(250), they became the prototypes of that dramatic character of which the constant attributes were the most absurd vanity, stupidity, profusion, and cowardice. This overcharged character, along with that of the slave and parasite, were transferred into the dramas of Plautus, the faithful mirrors of the new Greek comedy. The first act of the _Miles Gloriosus_ has little to do with the plot: It only serves to acquaint us with the character of the Captain Pyrgopolinices; and it is for this purpose alone that Plautus has introduced the parasite, who does not return to the stage after the first scene. The boasts of this captain are quite extravagant, but they are not so gross as the flatteries of the parasite: indeed it is not to be conceived that any one could swallow such compliments as that he had broken an elephant's thigh with his fist, and slaughtered seven thousand men in one day, or that he should not have perceived the sarcasms of the parasite intermixed with his fulsome flattery. Previous, however, to the invention of gunpowder, more could be performed in war by the personal prowess of individuals, than can be now accomplished; and hence the character of the braggart captain may not have appeared quite so exaggerated to the ancients as it seems to us.

One man of peculiar strength and intrepidity often carried dismay into the hostile squadrons, as Goliah defied all the armies of Israel, and, with a big look, and a few arrogant words, struck so great a terror, that the host fled before him.

Most European nations being imbued with military habits and manners for many centuries after their first rise, the part of a boasting coward was one of the broadest, and most obviously humorous characters, that could be presented to the spectators. Accordingly, the braggart Captain, though he has at length disappeared, was one of the most notorious personages on the early Italian, French, and English stage.

Tinca, the braggart Captain in _La Talanta_, a comedy by Aretine, is a close copy of Thraso, the soldier in Terence, the play being taken from the _Eunuchus_, where Thraso is a chief character. But Spampana, the princ.i.p.al figure in the _Farsa Satira Morale_, a dramatic piece of the fifteenth century, by Venturino of Pesaro, was the original and genuine Capitano Glorioso, a character well known, and long distinguished in the Italian drama. He was generally equipped with a mantle and long rapier; and his personal qualities nearly resembled those of the Count di Culagna, the hero of Ta.s.soni's mock heroic poem _La Secchia Rapita_:-

"Quest' era un Cavalier bravo e galante, Ch'era fuor de perigli un Sacripante.

Ma ne perigli un pezzo di polmone: Spesso ammazzato avea qualche gigante, E si scopriva poi, ch'era un cappone."

This military poltroon long kept possession of the Italian stage, under the appellations of Capitan Spavento and Spezzafer, till about the middle of the sixteenth century, when he yielded his place to the Capitano Spagnuolo, whose business was to utter Spanish rodomontades, to kick out the native Italian Captain in compliment to the Spaniards, and then quietly accept of a drubbing from Harlequin. When the Spaniards had entirely lost their influence in Italy, the Capitan Spagnuolo retreated from the stage, and was succeeded by that eternal poltroon, Scaramuccio, a character which was invented by Tiberio Fiurilli, the companion of the boyhood of Louis XIV(251).

In imitation of the Italian captain, the early French dramatists introduced a personage, who patiently received blows while talking of dethroning emperors and distributing crowns. The part was first exhibited in _Le Brave_, by Baif, acted in 1567; but there is no character which comes so near to the Miles Gloriosus of Plautus, as that of Chasteaufort in Cyrano Bergerac's _Pedant Joue_. In general, the French captains have more rodomontade and solemnity, with less buffoonery, than their Italian prototypes. The captain Matamore, in Corneille's _Illusion Comique_, actually addresses the following lines to his valet:-

"II est vrai que je reve, et ne saurois resoudre, Lequel des deux je dois le premier mettre en poudre, Du grand Sophi de Perse, ou bien du grand Mogol."

And again-

"Le seul bruit de mon nom renverse les murailles, Defait les escadrons, et gagne les batailles; D'un seul commandement que je fais aux trois Parques, Je depeuple l'etat des plus heureux monarques."

Corneille's Matamore also resembles the Miles Gloriosus, in his self-complacency on the subject of personal beauty, and his belief that every woman is in love with him. Pyrgopolinices declares-

"Miserum esse pulchrum hominem nimis."

And in like manner, Matamore-

"Ciel qui sais comme quoi j'en suis persecute.

Un peu plus de repos avec moins de beaute.

Fais qu'un si long mepris enfin la desabuse."

Scarron, who was nearly contemporary with Corneille, painted this character in Don Gaspard de Padille, the _Fanfaron_, as he is called, of the comedy _Jodelet Duelliste_. Gaspard, however, is not a very important or prominent character of the piece. Jodelet himself, the valet of Don Felix, seems intended as a burlesque or caricature of all the braggarts who had preceded him. Having received a blow, he is ever vowing vengeance against the author of the injury in his absence, but on his appearance, suddenly becomes tame and submissive.

The braggart captains of the old English theatre have much greater merit than the utterers of these nonsensical rhapsodies of the French stage.

Falstaff has been often considered as a combination of the characters of the parasite and Miles Gloriosus; but he has infinitely more wit than either; and the liberty of fiction in which he indulges, is perhaps scarcely more than is necessary for its display. His cheerfulness and humour are of the most characteristic and captivating sort, and instead of suffering that contumely with which the parasite and Miles Gloriosus are loaded, laughter and approbation attend his greatest excesses. His boasting speeches are chiefly humorous; jest and merriment account for most of them, and palliate them all. It is only subsequent to the robbery that he discovers the traits of a Miles Gloriosus. Most of the ancient braggarts bl.u.s.ter and boast of distant wars, beyond the reach of knowledge or evidence-of exploits performed in Persia and Armenia-of storms and stratagems-of falling pell-mell on a whole army, and putting thousands to the sword, till, by some open and apparent fact, they are brought to shame as cowards and liars; but Falstaff's boasts refer to recent occurrences, and he always preserves himself from degradation by the address with which he defies detection, and extricates himself from every difficulty. His character, however, in the _Merry Wives of Windsor_, has some affinity to the captains of the Roman stage, from his being constantly played on in consequence of his persuasion that women are in love with him. The swaggering Pistol in _King Henry IV._, is chiefly characterized by his inflated language, and is, as Doll calls him, merely "a fustian rascal."

Bessus, in Beaumont and Fletcher's _King and No King_, is said by Theobald to be a copy of Falstaff; but he has little or none of his humour. Bessus was an abusive wretch, and so much contemned, that no one called his words in question; but, afterwards, while flying in battle, having accidentally rushed on the enemy, he acquired a reputation for valour; and being now challenged to combat by those whom he had formerly traduced, his great aim is to avoid fighting, and yet to preserve, by boasting, his new character for courage. However fine the scene between Bessus and Arbaces, at the conclusion of the third act, the darker and more infamous shades of character there portrayed ought not to have been delineated, as our contemptuous laughter is converted, during the rest of the play, or, on a second perusal, into detestation and horror. Bobadil, in Ben Jonson's _Every Man in his Humour_, has generally been regarded as a copy of the Miles Gloriosus; but the late editor of Jonson thinks him a creation _sui generis_, and perfectly original. "The soldiers of the Roman stage," he continues, "have not many traits in common with Bobadil. Pyrgopolinices, and other captains with hard names, are usually wealthy-all of them keep mistresses, and some of them parasites-but Bobadil is poor. They are profligate and luxurious-but Bobadil is stained with no inordinate vice, and is so frugal, that a bunch of radishes, and a pipe to close the orifice of his stomach, satisfy all his wants. Add to this, that the vanity of the ancient soldier is accompanied with such deplorable stupidity, that all temptation to mirth is taken away, whereas Bobadil is really amusing. His gravity, which is of the most inflexible nature, contrasts admirably with the situations into which he is thrown; and though beaten, baffled, and disgraced, he never so far forgets himself as to aid in his own discomfiture. He has no soliloquies, like Bessus and Parolles, to betray his real character, and expose himself to unnecessary contempt: nor does he break through the decorum of the scene in a single instance. He is also an admirer of poetry, and seems to have a pretty taste for criticism, though his reading does not appear very extensive; and his decisions are usually made with somewhat too much prompt.i.tude. In a word, Bobadil has many distinguis.h.i.+ng traits, and, till a preceding braggart shall be discovered, with something more than big words and beating, to characterize him, it may not be amiss to allow Jonson the credit of having depended on his own resources." The character of the braggart captain was continued in the Bernardo of Shadwell's _Amorous Bigot_, and Nol Bluff, in Congreve's _Old Bachelor_. These are persons who apparently would destroy every thing with fire and sword; but their mischief is only in their words, and they "will not swagger with a Barbary hen, if her feathers turn back with any show of resistance." The braggarts, indeed, of modern dramatists, have been universally represented as cowardly, from Spampana down to Captain Flash. But cowardice is not a striking attribute of the Miles Gloriosus of Plautus, at least it is not made the princ.i.p.al source of ridicule as with the moderns. We have instead, a vain conceit of his person, and his conviction that every woman is in love with him.

This feature in the character of the Miles Gloriosus, produces a princ.i.p.al part in the intrigue of this amusing drama, which properly commences at the second act, and is said, in a prologue there introduced, to have been taken from the Greek play ??a???. While residing at Athens, the captain had purchased from her mother a young girl, (whose lover was at that time absent on an emba.s.sy,) and had brought her with him to his house at Ephesus. The lover's slave entered into the captain's service, and, seeing the girl in his possession, wrote to his former master, who, on learning the fate of his mistress, repaired to Ephesus. There he went to reside with Periplectomenes, a merry old bachelor, who had been a friend of his father, and now agreed to a.s.sist him in recovering the object of his affections. The house of Periplectomenes being immediately adjacent to that of the captain, the ingenious slave dug an opening between them; and the keeper, who had been intrusted by the captain with charge of the damsel, was thus easily persuaded by her rapid, and to him unaccountable, transition from one building to the other, that it was a twin sister, possessing an extraordinary resemblance to her, who had arrived at the house of Periplectomenes. Afterwards, by a new contrivance, a courtezan is employed to pretend that she is the wife of Periplectomenes, and to persuade the captain that she is in love with him. To facilitate this amour, he allows the girl, whom he had purchased at Athens, to depart with her twin sister and her lover, who had a.s.sumed the character of the master of the vessel in which she sailed. The captain afterwards goes to the house of Periplectomenes to a supposed a.s.signation, where he is seized and beat, but does not discover how completely he had been duped, till the Athenian girl had got clear off with her lover.

This play must, in the representation, have been one of the most amusing of its author's productions. The scenes are full of action and bustle, while the secret communication between the two houses occasions many lively incidents, and forms an excellent _jeu de theatre_.

With regard to the characters, the one which gives t.i.tle to the play is, as already mentioned, quite extravagant; and no modern reader can enjoy the rodomontade of the Miles Gloriosus, or his credulity in listening with satisfaction to such monstrous tales of his military renown and amorous success. Flattery for potential qualities may be swallowed to any extent, and a vain man may wish that others should be persuaded that he had performed actions of which he is incapable; but no man can himself hearken with pleasure to falsehoods which he knows to be such, and which in the recital are not intended to impose upon others. Pleusides, the lover in this drama, is totally insipid and uninteresting, and we are not impressed with a very favourable opinion of his mistress from the account which is given of her near the beginning of the play:-

"Os habet, linguam, perfidiam, malitiam, atque audaciam, Confidentiam, confirmitatem, fraudolentiam: Qui arguet se, eum contra vincat jurejurando suo.

Domi habet animum falsiloquum, falsific.u.m, falsijurium."

The princ.i.p.al character, the one which is best supported, and which is indeed sustained with considerable humour, is that of Periplectomenes, who is an agreeable old man, distinguished by his frankness, jovial disposition, and abhorrence of matrimony. There is one part of his conduct, however, which I wish had been omitted, as it savours too much of cunning, and reminds us too strongly of Ben Jonson's Volpone. Talking of his friends and relations, he says-

-- "Me ad se, ad prandium, ad cnam vocant.