« AnteriorContinuar »
iambus must fill the last place ; and that, in a verse not acatalectic, there must be at least one iambus.
Of IAMBIC ACATALECTICS are found the tetrameter, trimeter, dimeter, and monometer.-Of IAMBIC CATALECtics are found the tetrameter and dimeter.-Of IAMBIC HYPERCATALECTICs are found the tetrameter and monometer.–Of IAMBIC BRACHYCATALECTICS are found the tetrameter and dimeter.
The feet admissible are, the spondee, dactyl, anapæst, tribrach, and trochee (--). Any of these may occur in any place with these restrictions: that at least one trochee must occur in every verse; and that, in the tetrameter acatalectic, the dactyl is excluded from the eighth foot.
Of TROCHAIC ACATALECTICs is found only the tetrameter.— Of TROCHAIC CATALECTICs are found the tetrameter, dimeter, and monometer.-Of trocHAIC HYPERCATALECTICS is found the tetrameter.— Of TROCHAIC BRACHYCATALECTICS the tetrameter alone occurs.
The feet admissible are, the pæons [1st.
3rd, wav, and 4th. --] the molossus (---), and the bacchee (--). These may occur in any place of the tetrameter, with this restriction ; that the molossus rarely occurs in any foot but the first. According to Hare, on And. iii. 2. 1. the molossus, choriambus (-uw-), and ionics (--uv and wu--) are lawful in all places.
The admissible feet are the pæons, the molossus, and the cretic (---). The restriction is the same as in the Bacchiacs.
EXAMPLES OF BACCHIACS.
" Adhuc Arschilis, quæ ad solent, quæque oportet
Signa esse ad | salutem, omnia huic esse video.
AND. III, 2. 1.
Ut malis / gaudeant , atque ex in commodis
AND. iv. 1. 1.
N.B.- For a more satisfactory account of the Terentian metres, the student is referred to Dr M Caul's Treatise on the subject.
folio. editio princeps.
Bipont. 1779-1786. 8vo.
MEMOIR OF TERENCE.
The life of PUBLIUS TERENTIUS AFER is known to us through a transcript made from Suetonius by Donatus. At the death of Plautus, Terence was about nine years of age, being born, as is supposed, B. C. 193, at Carthage. He was descended from a family, free and perhaps distinguished in their country, but so little recorded in after memory, that the original sirname of their immortal son has been lost in the darkness of antiquity. The name under which he is handed down to us, he assumed from Terentius Lucanus, a Roman senator, subsequently to his manumission;—for, the refiner of Latinity, the genius of Roman Drama, and the chaste model of every succeeding age, breathed in a slave.—What the vicissitude was, which drew upon him such a doom, remains for little else than conjecture. He could not well have been a Roman prisoner; because peace prevailed between Rome and Carthage from 200, to 149. B. C.- from the close of the second to the opening of the third Punic war-an interval which embraces his entire life. It is suggested, then, that he might have been taken captive by Numidian or Gætulian pirates, during a war between these people and his countrymen, and sold by them to Roman merchants. Fenestella states, as an objection to this, that commerce was not opened between the rival powers until after the downfall of Carthage. But we can readily conceive opportunities to have been casually presented, of making a purchase of this kind on the Italian coast, even before commercial intercourse became habitual.—Howsoever he may have become the property of the Roman, it is certain that the latter took every care of his dependant's education, encouraged his rising talents, and early presenting him with freedom, gave him his own name. The mental acquirements of Terence, as also the graces of his person, soon recommended him to the acquaintance of celebrated men, among whom are particularised, Lælius, Furius, and Scipio, who, honored him with their friendship. This Scipio Africanus must have been Æmilianus, the conqueror of Carthage and Numantia ; as the elder of the same name died 184, B. C. which preceded, probably, even the emancipation of the young Carthaginian. His friend Lælius is thought to have been Lælius Sapiens; because such a person is introduced in Cicero's Amicitia, citing a verse from the Andrian, and designating the author by the words, “ familiaris meus.”
Terence was upbraided, by several contemporaries, with the charge of being an upstart in the pursuit of the comic drama's Muse, and of finding, in the abilities of a Lælius or a Scipio, a resource for uncultivated genius. The poet touches on this subject in the prologue to the Heautontimóreumenos, and treats it more at large in that to the Adelphi. In the former, he refers the decision of the point at issue to the popular judgment;-in the latter, what appears put forward as a defence, is of so tame a character, as to be looked upon by several as tantamount to a direct avowal of the borrowed plumes. But we can only recognise there the modesty which is becoming to talent,—the language dictated by honorable principles of friendship ;-affording a gratification to those friends, by permitting a rumour, which may have been flattering to them, though hostile to the pride and love of approbation natural in an author. However, the two patricians were at this time very young, nor had they yet evinced talents adequate to afford such tokens of friendship. These considerations seem to point to the “ Theonine tooth” of envy, as the true source of such calumnies ;—which had so deep an influence on the mind of the poet, as to expel him from the scene of his sojourn, which never after saw his return ;—from Rome, to whom he bequeathed, ere he left his perishable abode, the “eagle spirit” of his immortality.—This spirit rose, for a time, above the dimness of the land which had fostered its infancy, there to hover till its foes, as death-doomed as was their jealousy, should sink in eternal gloom. Thence it alighted, to diffuse its potent influence through the regions of the globe.
Terence disappeared from Rome either, as Porcius represents, in extreme indigence; or, according to other accounts, in possession of a small independence. The latter is the more probable; for it appears, that he left behind him a heritage of some acres of garden, near the Villa Martis, on the Appian way; as also a daughter, who afterwards wedded a Roman knight. His death is fixed by Suetonius in the consulate of C. Cornelius Dolabella and M. Fulvius Nobilior, B. C. 159, or U. C. 595; ten years before the commencement of the third Punic war.— The place of this great man's death is as doubtful as is his parentage. We are left to suppose, either,—that he died in Stymphalus or Leucadia, the catastrophe being hastened by regret for his property, which had been sent before him, and lost hy shipwreck; or,—that he himself perished (on his departure for Greece or on his return for Italy) in the same voyage by which his effects were lost, among
which were 109 pieces,-translations, extracts, or imitations of Menander. Suetonius assigns to him, a brown complexion, a slender person, and a middle stature. These hints have been followed in delineating his portrait, which accompanies the six plays in a manuscript of the Vatican; and which, engraved in the third volume of the Greek Antiquities of Gronovius, has been thence copied into many editions of the poet's works.—Several writers, and among them Paulus Orosius, have confounded the Carthaginian with Terentius Culeo, a Roman, who was also a writer of comedies, and is mentioned particularly by Livy, in his account of the third Punic war.
The Andrian has been imitated with singular exactness by Baron.—The Hecyra has given rise to a novel by Cervantes. Laharpe considers it the most interesting, in point of subject, of all the plays; but is obliged to confess that the execution is frigid and devoid of comic energy. Accordingly, Volcatius takes its demerit into account, in numbering it as the sixth of the plays; while it is, in point of time, the second.— The Heautontimoreumenos has been admired for its exposition, and happy details; the vivid expression of natural sentiments, and traits of character, in which is discerned the hand of a great master; among such instances, the line “ Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto,” is preeminently distinguished. More interest is excited in the plots of this play, and in its catastrophe, than in those of any other. It has supplied subject for a literary controversy between Aubignac and Menage, as to the question, whether the time of the performance of a dramatic piece ever exceeded, among the ancients, the limit of one day;whether or not one part could be acted in the evening, and the remainder, after an interval, in the morning. The first line of the third scene is the chief instrument of the difficulty.
In the opinion of Erasmus, there was no writer who contributed