of one fpecies were short; thofe of the other long, and not quite fo grotesque. These two kinds were fubdivided into many species, distinguished by the dreffes and characters, fuch as fhews, drunkards, physicians, men, and women.

Thus far of the Greeks. The Romans having borrowed of them the more noble fhews of tragedy and comedy, were not content till they had their rhapsodies. They had their planipedes, who played with flat foles, that they might have the more agility; and their Sannions, whose head was fhaved, that they might box the better. There is no need of naming here all who had a name for these diversions among the Greeks and Romans. I have faid enough, and perhaps too much of this abortion of comedy, which drew upon itfelf the contempt of good men, the cenfures of the magiftrates, and the indignation of the fathers of the church *.

Another fet of players were called Pantomimes: thefe were at least so far preferable to the former, that they gave no offence to the ears. They spoke only to the eyes; but with fuch art of expreffion, that without the utterance of a single word, they represented, as we are told, a complete tragedy or comedy, in the fame manner as dumb Harlequin is exhibited on our theatres. Thefe Pantomimes among the Greeks first mingled finging with their dances; afterwards, about the time of

It is the licentioufnefs of the Mimi and Pantomimes, againf which the cenfure of the Holy Fathers particularly breaks out, as against a thing irregular and indecent, without fuppofing it much connected with the cause of religion.

Livius Andronicas, the fongs were performed by one part, and the dances by another. Afterwards, in the time of Auguftus, when they were fent for to Rome, for the diverfions of the people, whom he had enslaved, they played comedies without fongs or vocal utterance; but by the sprightlinefs, activity, and efficacy of their gef tures; or, as Sidonius Apollinaris expreffes it, claufis fau cibus, et loquente geftu, they not only exhibited things and paffions, but even the moft delicate diftinctions of paffions, and the flighteft circumftances of facts. We muft not however imagine, at least in my opinion, that the Pantomimes did literally reprefent regular tragedies or comedies by the mere motions of their bodies. We may juftly determine, notwithstanding all their agility, their reprefentations would at laft be very incomplete : yet we may fuppofe, with good reason, that their action was very lively; and that the art of imitation went great lengths, fince it raised the admiration of the wifeft men, and made the people mad with eagerness. Yet when we read that one Hylus, the pupil of one Pylades, in the time of Auguftus, divided the applauses of the people with his master, when they reprefented Oedipus, or when Juvenal tells us, that Bathillus played Leda, and other things, of the fame kind, it is not eafy to believe that a fingle man, without fpeaking a word, could exhibit tragedies or comedies, and make starts and bounds fupply the place of vocal articulation. Notwithstanding the obfcurity of this whole matter, one may know what to admit as certain, or how far a reprefentation could be carried by dance, pofture, and grimace. Among thefe

these artificial dances, of which we know nothing but the names, there was as early as the times of Aristophanes fome extremely indecent. These were continued in Italy from the time of Auguftus, long after the empe

It was a public mifchief, which contributed in fome measure to the decay and ruin of the Roman empire. To have a due deteftation of thefe licentious entertainments, there is no need of any recourse to the fathers; the wiser Pagans tell us very plainly what they thought of them. I have made this mention of the Mimi and Pantomimes, only to fhew how the most noble of public fpectacles were corrupted and abused, and to conduct the reader to the end through every road, and through all the bye-paths of human wit, from Homer and Efchylus to our own time.

mind in the

birth and progrefs of theatrical reprefen

tations.

VII. That we may conclude this work Wanderings of the human by applying the principles laid down at the beginning, and extend it through the whole, I defire the reader to recur to that point where I have reprefented the human mind as beginning the courfe of the drama. The chorus was first a hymn to Bacchus, produced by accident; art brought it to perfection, and delight made it a public diverfion. Thefpis made a fingle actor play before the people; this was the beginning of theatrical fhews. Efchylus, taking the idea of the Iliad and Odyffey, animated, if I may fo exprefs it, the epic poem, and gave a dialogue in place of fimple recitation, puts the whole into action, and fets it before the eyes, as if it was a prefent and real tranfaction: he gives the cho

*

rus an intereft in the fcenes, contrives habits of dignity and theatrical decorations. In a word, he gives both to tragedy; or, more properly, draws it from the bofom of the epic poem. She made her appearance fparkling with graces, and difplayed fuch majefty as gained every heart at the first view. Sophocles confiders her more nearly, with the eyes of a critic, and finds that she has something ftill about her rough and fwelling he divefts her of her falfe ornaments, teaches her a more regular walk, and more familiar dignity. Euripides was of opinion, that he ought to receive ftill more foftnefs and tenderness; he teaches her the new art of pleafing by fimplicity, and gives her the charms of graceful negligence; fo that he makes her ftand in fufpence, whether the appears moft to advantage in the drefs of Sophocles fparkling with gems, or in that of Euripides, which is more fimple and modeft. Both indeed are elegant; but the elegance is of different kinds, between which no judgment as yet has decided the prize of fuperiority.

We can now trace it no farther; its progrefs amongst the Greeks is out of fight. We muft pafs at once to the time of Auguftus, where Apollo and the Mufes quitted their ancient refidence in Greece, to fix their abode in Italy. But it is vain to afk queftions of Mispemone; the is obftinately filent, and we only know froin ftrangers her power amongit the Romans. Seneca endeavours to

*Efchylus, in my opinion, as well as the other poets his contemporaries, retained the chorus, not merely because it was the fashion, but becaufe cxamining tragedy to the bottom, they found it not pational to conceive, that an action great and fplendid, like the revolution of a state, could pafs without witneffes.

make her speak; but the gaudy fhew with which he ranther loads than adorns her, makes us think that he took. fome phantom of Melpomone for the Mufe herfelf.

Another flight, equally rapid with that to Rome, must carry us through thousands of years, from Rome to France. There in the time of Lewis XIV. we fee the, mind of man giving birth to tragedy a fecond time, as if the Greek tragedy had been utterly forgot, In the place of Efchylus, we have our Rotrou. In Corneille, we have another Sophocles, and in Racine a fecond Euripides. Thus is tragedy raised from her afhes, carried to the. utmost point of greatnefs, and fo dazzling that she pre fers herself to herself. Surprised to see herself produced, again in France in fo fhort a time, and nearly in the fame manner as before in Greece, fhe is difpofed to believe that her fate is to make a fhort tranfition from her, birth to her perfection, like the goddess that issued from the brain of Jupiter.

If we look back on the other fide to the rife of comedy, we shall fee it hatched by Margites from the Odyffey of Homer, in imitation of her eldest fifter; but we, fee her under the conduct of Aristophanes become licentious and petulant, taking airs to herself which the magiftrates were obliged to crush. Menander reduced her to bounds, taught her at once gaiety and politenefs, and enabled her to correct vice, without fhocking the offenders. Plautus, among the Romans, to whom we must now pafs, united the earlier and the later comedy, and joined buffoonery with delicacy. Terence, who was better inftructed, received comedy from Menander, and furpaffed his original, as he endeavoured to copy it. And lastly, Moliere produced a new fpecies of comedy,, which

Y 4