GENERAL CONCLUSION

TO

BRUMOY's GREEK THEATRE.

Summary of the I. four articles

treated of in this difcourfe.

THE

HUS I have given a faithful extract of the remains of Arifto

phanes. That I have not fhewn them in their true form, I am not afraid that any body will complain. I have given an account of every thing as far as it was confiftent with moral decency. No pen, however cynical or heathenifh, would venture to produce in open day the horrid paffages which I have put out of fight; and instead of regretting any part that I have fuppreffed, the very fuppreffion will eafily fhew to what degree the Athenians were infected with licentiousness of imagination and corruption of principles. If the taste of antiquity allows us to preserve what time and barbarity have hitherto fpared, religion and virtue at least oblige us not to spread it before the eyes of mankind, To end this work in an useful manner, let us examine in a few words the four particulars which are most striking in the eleven pieces of Ariftophanes.

Character of ancient come

dy.

II. The firft is the character of the ancient comedy, which has no likeness to any thing in nature. Its genius is fo

wild and ftrange, that it fcarce admits a definition. In what clafs of comedy muft we place it? It appears to me to be a fpecies of writing by itself. If we had Phrynicus, Plato, Eupolis, Critinus, Ameipfias, and fo many other celebrated rivals of Aristophanes, of whom all that we can find are a few fragments fcattered in Plutarch, Athenias and Suidas, we might compare them with our poet, fettle the general scheme, obferve the minuter differences, and form a complete notion of their comic stage. But for want of all this we can fix only on Aristophanes, and it is true that he may be in fome measure fufficient to furnifh a tolerable judgment of the old comedy; for if we believe him, and who can be better credited? he was the most daring of all his brethren the poets, who practifed the fame kind of writing. Upon this fuppofition we may conclude, that the comedy of thofe days confifted in an allegory drawn out and continued; an allegory never very regular, but often ingenious, and almost always carried beyond strict propriety, of fatire keen and biting, but diversified, fprightly, and unexpected; fo that the wound was given before it was perceived. Their points of fatire were thunderbolts, and their wild figures, with their variety and quickness, had the effect of lightning. Their imitation was carried even to resemblance of perfons, and their common entertainments was a parody of rival poets joined, if I may fo exprefs it, with a parody of manners and habits.

But it would be tedious to draw out to the reader that which he will already have perceived better than myself. I have no defign to anticipate his reflections; and therefore

X 4

fore fhall only sketch the picture, which he must finish by himself: he will pursue the fubject farther, and form to himself a view of the common and domestic life of the Athenians, of which this kind of comedy was a picture, with fome aggravation of the features: he will bring within his view all the customs, manners, and vices, and the whole character of the people of Athens, By bringing all these together he will fix in his mind an indelible idea of a people in whom so many contrarieties were united, and who in a manner that can scarce be expreffed, connected nobility with the caft of Athens, wisdom with madness, rage for novelty, with a bigotry for antiquity, the politeness of a monarchy with the roughnefs of a republic, refinement with coarfenefs, independence with flavery, haughtiness with fervile compliance, severity of manners with debauchery, a kind of irreligion with piety. We fhall do this in reading; as in travelling through different nations we make ourselves masters of their characters by combining their different appearances, and reflecting upon what we fee.

The govern ment of the Athenians.

In

III. The government of Athens makes a fine part of the ancient comedy. most states the mystery of government is

confined within the walls of the cabinet; even in commonwealths it does not pass but through five or fix heads, who rule thofe that think themselves the rulers. Oratory dares not touch it, and comedy ftill lefs. Cicero himself did not speak freely upon fo nice a fubject as the Roman commonwealth; but the Athenian eloquence was informed of the whole fecret, and fearches the receffes of the human mind, to fetch it out and expofe it to the

people.

people. Demofthenes, and his contemporaries, speak with a freedom at which we are aftonished, notwithstanding the notion we have of a popular government, yet at what time but this did comedy adventure to claim the fame rights with civil eloquence? The Italian comedy of the laft age, all daring as it was, could for its boldness come into no competition with the ancient. It was limited to general fatire, which was fometimes carried fo far, that the malignity was overlooked in an attention to the wild exaggeration, the unexpected strokes, the pungent wit, and the malignity concealed under fuch wild flights as became the character of Harlequin. But though it fo far resembled Aristophanes, our age is yet at a great distance from his, and the Italian comedy from his scenes. But with refpect to the liberty of cenfuring the government, there can be no comparison made of one age or comedy with another. Aristophanes is the only writer of his kind, and is for that reason of the highest value. A powerful state set at the head of Greece, is the subject of his merriment, and that merriment is allowed by the ftate itfelf. This appears to us an inconsistency; but it is true that it was the interest of the state to allow it, though not always without inconveniency. It was a restraint upon the ambition and tyranny of fingle men, a matter of great importance to a people so very jealous of their liberty. Cleon, Alcibiades, Lamachus, and many other generals and magiftrates, were kept under by fear of the comic strokes of a poet fo little cautious as Aristophanes. He was once indeed in danger of paying dear for his wit. He profeffed, as he tells us himself, to be of great use by his writings to the ftate; and rated his

merit so high as to complain that he was not rewarded. But, under pretence of this public fpirit, he fpared no part of the public conduct, neither was government, councils, revenues, popular affemblies, fecret proceedings in judicature, choice of ministers, the government of the nobles, or that of the people spared.

The Acharnians, the Peace, and the Birds, are eternal monuments of the boldness of the poet, who was not afraid of cenfuring the government for the obftinate continuance of a ruinous war, for undertaking new ones, and feeding itself with wild imaginations, and running to deftruction as it did for an idle point of honour.

Nothing can be more reproachful to the Athenians than his play of the Knights, when he represents under an allegory that may be easily seen through, the nation of the Athenians as an old doating fellow tricked by a new man, fuch as Cleon and his companions, who were of the fame ftamp.

A fingle glance upon Lyfiftrata, and the Female Orators, must raise astonishment when the Athenian policy is fet below the fchemes of women, whom the authour makes ridiculous for no other reafon than to bring contempt upon their husbands, who held the helm of go

vernment.

The Wafps is written to expose the madness of people for lawfuits and litigations, and a multitude of iniquities are laid open.

It may easily be gathered, that notwithstanding the wife laws of Solon, which they still profeffed to follow, the government was falling into decay, for we are not to understand the jefts of Aristophanes in the literal fense.