Part 9 (2/2)
_Ad quid enim tam longa digressione extra, rem propositam in Romanos inveberetur, c.u.m de iis nihil aliud dicat, quam eos genio ac valuptatibus indulgere: c.u.m potius_ veteres Romanos insimulare videatur ionorantiae, quod ignoraverint soni et musices venustatem et jucunditatem, illa priori scilicet incondita et rudi admodum contenti, _dum ait_; Indoctus quid enim saperet, liberque laborum, Rusticus urbano confusus, turpis honesto?
The other note is expressly applied by way of comment on this pa.s.sage itself.
[Indoctus quidenim saperet?] Reddit rationem quasiper digressionem, occurrens tacitae objectioni quare antea apud Romanos musica melodia parva aut nulla pene fuerat: quia, inquit, indocti ignarique rerum omnium veteres illi nondum poterant judicare de melodia, utpote apud eos re nova, atque inufitata, neque illius jucunditatem degustare, quibus verbis imperitiam eorum, rusticatatemque demonstrat.
Upon the whole De Nores appears to me to have given the true sense of the pa.s.sage. I am no friend to licentious transpositions, or arbitrary variations, of an author's text; yet I confess, I was strongly tempted, in order to elucidate his perplexed pa.s.sage, to have carried these two lines of Horace four lines back, and to have inserted them immediately after the 207th verse.
_Et frugi, castus, verecundusque coibat._
The English reader, who wishes to try the experiment, is desired to read the four lines, that compose my version, immediately after the 307th line,
_With modest mirth indulg'd their sober taste._
3l8.--The Piper, _grown luxuriant in his art._]
320.--_Now too, its powers increas'd_, The Lyre severe.]
Sic priscae--arti tibicen, &c.
sic fidibus, &c.
”This is the application of what hath been said, in general, concerning the refinement of theatrical music to the case of _tragedy_. Some commentators say, and to _comedy._ But in this they mistake, as will appear presently. M. _Dacier_ hath I know not what conceit about a comparison betwixt the _Roman_ and _Greek_ stage. His reason is, _that the lyre was used in the Greek chorus, as appears, he says, from Sophocles himself playing upon this instrument himself in one of his tragedies._ And was it not used too in the Roman chorus, as appears from Nero's playing upon it in several tragedies? But the learned critic did not apprehend this matter. Indeed from the caution, with which his guides, the dealers in antiquities, always touch this point, it should seem, that they too had no very clear conceptions of it. The case I take to have been this: The _tibia_, as being most proper to accompany the declamation of the acts, _cantanti fuccinere_, was constantly employed, as well in the Roman tragedy as comedy. This appears from many authorities. I mention only two from Cicero. _Quam multa_ [Acad. 1. ii.
7.] _quae nos fugiunt in cantu, exaudiunt in eo genere exercitati: Qui, primo inflatu Tibicinis, Antiopam esse aiunt aut Andromacham, c.u.m nos ne suspicemur quidem_. The other is still more express. In his piece ent.i.tled _Orator_, speaking of the negligence of the Roman writers, in respect of _numbers_, he observes, _that there were even many pa.s.sages in their tragedies, which, unless the_ TIBIA _played to them, could not be distinguished from mere prose: quae, nisi c.u.m Tibicen accesserit, orationi sint solutae simillima._ One of these pa.s.sages is expressly quoted from _Thyestes_, a tragedy of _Ennius_; and, as appears from the measure, taken out of one of the acts. It is clear then, that the _tibia_ was certainly used in the _declamation_ of tragedy. But now the song of the tragic chorus, being of the nature of the ode, of course required _fides_, the lyre, the peculiar and appropriated instrument of the lyric muse. And this is clearly collected, if not from express testimonies; yet from some occasional hints dropt by the antients. For, 1. the lyre, we are told, [Cic. De Leg. ii. 9. & 15.] and is agreed on all hands, was an instrument of the Romon theatre; but it was not employed in comedy, This we certainly know from the short accounts of the music prefixed to Terence's plays. 2. Further, the _tibicen_, as we saw, accompanied the declamation of the acts in tragedy. It remains then, that the proper place of the lyre was, where one should naturally look for it, in the songs of the chorus; but we need not go further than this very pa.s.sage for a proof. It is unquestionable, that the poet is here speaking of the chorus only; the following lines not admitting any other possible interpretation. By _fidibus_ then is necessarily understood the instrument peculiarly used in it. Not that it need be said that the _tibia_ was never used in the chorus. The contrary seems expressed in a pa.s.sage of Seneca, [Ep. ix.x.xiv.] and in Julius Pollux [1. iv. 15. -- 107.] It is sufficient, if the _lyre_ was used solely, or princ.i.p.ally, in it at this time. In this view, the whole digression is more pertinent, and connects better. The poet had before been speaking of tragedy. All his directions, from 1. 100, respect this species of the drama only. The application of what he had said concerning music, is then most naturally made, I. to the _tibia_, the music of the acts; and, 2. to _fides_, that of the choir: thus confining himself, as the tenor of this part required, to tragedy only. Hence is seen the mistake, not only of M. Dacier, whose comment is in every view insupportable; but, as was hinted, of Heinsius, Lambin, and others, who, with more probability, explained this of the Roman comedy and tragedy. For, though _tibia_ might be allowed to stand for comedy, as opposed to _tragoedia_, [as in fact, we find it in 1. ii. Ep. I. 98,] that being the only instrument employed in it; yet, in speaking expressly of the music of the stage, _fides_ could not determinately enough, and in contradistinction to _tibia_, denote that of tragedy, it being an instrument used solely, or princ.i.p.ally, in the chorus; of which, the context shews, he alone speaks. It is further to be observed, that, in the application here made, besides the music, the poet takes in the other improvements of the tragic chorus, these happening, as from the nature of the thing they would do, at the same tine. _Notes on the Art of Poetry._
3l9.--with dance and flowing vest embellishes his part.]
_Traxitque vagus per pulpita vestem._
”This expresses not only the improvement arising from the ornament of proper dresses, but from the grace of motion: not only the _actor_, whose peculiar office it was, but the _minstrel_ himself, as appears from hence, conforming his gesture in some sort to the music.
”Of the use and propriety of these gestures, or dances, it will not be easy for us, who see no such things attempted on the modern stage, to form any very clear or exact notions. What we cannot doubt of is, 1. That the several theatrical dances of the antients were strictly conformable to the genius of the different species of composition, to which they were applied. 2. That, therefore, the tragic dance, which more especially accompanied the Chorus, must have been expressive of the highest gravity and decorum, tending to inspire ideas of what is _becoming, graceful, and majestic;_ in which view we cannot but perceive the important a.s.sistance it must needs lend to virtue, and how greatly it must contribute to set all her graces and attractions in the fairest light. 3. This idea of the ancient tragic dance, is not solely formed upon our knowledge of the conformity before-mentioned; but is further collected from the name usually given to it, which was [Greek transliteration: Emmeleia] This word cannot well be translated into our language; but expresses all that grace and concinnity of motion, which the dignity of the choral song required. 4. Lastly, it must give us a very high notion of the moral effect of this dance, when we find the severe Plato admitting it into his commonwealth. _Notes on the Art of Poetry._”
326--he who the prize, a filthy goat, to gain, at first contended in the tragick strain.
_Carmine qui tragico, vilem certavit ob birc.u.m._
If I am not greatly deceived, all the Editors, and Commentators on this Epistle, have failed to observe, that the _historical_ part of it, relative to the Graecian Drama, commences at this verse; all of them supposing it to begin, 55 lines further in the Epistle, on the mention of Thespis; whom Horace as early, as correctly, describes to be the first _improver_, not _inventor_ of Tragedy, _whose_ original he marks _here._ Much confusion has, I think, arisen from this oversight, as I shall endeavour to explain in the following notes; only observing this place, that the Poet, having spoken particularly of all the parts of Tragedy, now enters with the strictest _order_, and greatest propriety, into its general history, which, by his strictures on the chorus, he most elegantly, as well as forcibly, connects with his subject, taking occasion to speak _incidentally_ of other branches of the Drama, particularly the satyre, and the Old Comedy
<script>