after brought to perfection by Sophocles and Euripides. It is remarkable, in how short a space of time tragedy grew up among the Greeks, from the rudest beginnings, to its most perfect state. For Sophocles, the greatest and most correct of all the tragic poets, flourished only twenty-two years after Æschylus, and was little more than seventy years posterior to Thespis. From the account which I have now given, it appears, that the chorus was the basis or foundation of the ancient tragedy. It was not an ornament added to it; or a contrivance designed to render it more perfect; but, in 'truth, the dramatic dialogue was an addition to the chorus, which was the original entertainment. In process of time, the chorus, from being the principal, became only the accessory in tragedy; till at last, in modern tragedy, it has disappeared altoge ther; which forms the chief distinction between the ancient and the modern stage. This has given rise to a question, much agitated between the partizans of the ancients and the moderns, whether the drama has gained, or has suffered, by the abolition of the chorus. It must be admitted, that the chorus tended to render tragedy both more magnificent, and more instructive and moral. It was always the most sublime and poetical part of the work; and being carried on by singing, and accompanied with music, it must, no doubt, have diversified the entertainment greatly, and added to its splendor. The chorus, at the same time, conveyed constant lessons of virtue. It was composed of such persons as might most naturally be supposed present on the occasion; inhabitants of the place where the scene was laid, often the companions of some of the principal actors, and therefore, in some degree, interested in the issue of the action. This company, which, in the days of Sophocles, was restricted to the number of fifteen persons, was constantly on the stage, during the whole performance, mingled in discourse with the actors, entered into their concerns, suggested counsel and advice to them, moralised on all the incidents that were going on, and, during the intervals of the action, sung their odes or songs, in which they addressed the gods, prayed for success to the virtuous, lamented their misfortunes, and delivered many religious and moral sentiments*. The office of the chorus is thus described by Horace:/ Actoris partes chorus, officiumque virile But, notwithstanding the advantages which were obtained by means of the chorus, the inconveniencies on the other side are so great, as to render the modern practice of excluding the chorus, far more eligible upon the whole. For if a natural and probable imitation of human actions be the chief end of the drama, no other persons ought to be brought on the stage, than those who are necessary to the dramatic action. The introduction of an adventitious company of persons, who have but a slight concern in the business of the play, is unnatural in itself, embarrassing to the poet, and, though it may render the spectacle splendid, tends, undoubtedly, to render it more cold and uninteresting, because more unlike a real transaction. The mixture of music, or song, on the part of the chorus, with the dialogue carried on by the actors, is another unnatural circumstance, removing the representation still farther from the resemblance of life. The poet, besides, is subjected to innume rable difficulties in so contriving his plan, that the presence of the chorus, during all the incidents of the play, shall consist with any probability. The scene must be constantly, and often absurdly laid in some public place, that the chorus may be supposed to have free access to it. To many things that ought to be transacted in private, the chorus must ever be witnesses; they must be the confederates of both parties, who come successively upon the stage, and who are, perhaps, conspiring against each other. In short, the management of a chorus is an unnatural confinement to a poet; it requires too great a sacrifice of probability in the conduct of the action; it has too much the air of a theatrical decoration, to be consistent with that appearance of reality which a poet must ever Ille dapes laudet mensæ brevis ; ille salubrem De Art. Poet. 193. The chorus must support an actor's part, Francis. preserve, in order to move our passions. The origin of tragedy, among the Greeks, we have seen, was a choral song, or hymn to the Gods. There is no wonder, therefore, that on the Greek stage it so long maintained possession. But it may confidently, I think, be asserted, that if, instead of the dramatic dialogue having been superadded to the chorus, the dialogue itself had been the first invention, the chorus would, in that case, never have been thought of, One use, I am of opinion, might still be made of the ancient chorus, and would be a considerable improvement of the modern theatre; if, instead of that unmeaning, and often improperly chosen music, with which the audience is entertained in the intervals between the acts, a chorus were then to be introduced, whose music and songs, though forming no part of the play, should have a relation to the incidents of the preceding act, and to the dispositions which those incidents are presumed to have awakened in the spectators. By this means, the tone of passion would be kept up without interruption; and all the good effects of the ancient chorus might be preserved, for inspiring proper sentiments, and for increasing the morality of the performance, without those inconveniences which arose from the chorus forming a constituent part of the play, and mingling unseasonably, and unnaturally, with the personages of the drama. BIOGRAPHICAL ACCOUNTS OF LITERARY PERSONS RECENTLY DECEASED. JOHN HOOLE, ESQ. THIS gentleman, who died near Dorking in Surry, was the son of Samuel Hoole, of the city of London, watch-maker, by Sarah his wife, the daughter of James Drury, a clock-maker, whose family came from Warwickshire. Mr. Hoole, the father, was born about * Mr. Hoole told him [Dr. Johnson] he was born in Moorfields, and had received part of his early instruction in Grub-street. "Sir (said Johnson, smiling) you have been regularly educated." Having asked who was his instructor, and Mr. Hoole having answered, "My uncle, Sir, who was a taylor;" Johnson, recollecting himself, said, "Sir, I knew him; we called him the metaphysical taylor. He was of a club in Old-street, with me and George Psalmanazar and some others: but pray, Sir, was he a good taylor ?" Mr. Hoole having answered "that he believed he was too niathematical, and used to draw squares and triangles on his shop-board, so that he did not excel in the cut of a coat."" I am sorry for it (said Johnson) for I would have every man to be master of his own business." In pleasant reference to himself and Mr. Hoole, as brother authors, he often said, "Let you and I, Sir, go together, and eat a beef steak in Grub-street." Boswell's Life of Johnson. Q-VOL. XVI. the year 1693, at Sheffield in Yorkshire, which place he left at the age of nine years, and came to an uncle in London, by whom he was educated. At an early period of life, this gentleman displayed a strong propensity to the study of mechanics, and for many years had the management of the machinery at Covent-Garden theatre, in the time of the late Mr. Rich; and, among many other pieces of mechanism, constructed the celebrated serpent in Orpheus and Eurydice,* exhihited the first time on the 12th of Feb. 1739-40. Our author, John Hoole, was born in December 1727, and was educated at a private boarding-school in Hertfordshire, kept by Mr. James Bennett, the publisher of Roger Ascham's works. In 1744, being then seventeen years of age, he was placed as a clerk in the East India House; and having a great delight in reading, particularly works of imagination, he employed his leisure-hours in his favourite amusement, and, at the same time, endeavoured to improve himself in the knowledge of the Latin tongue,. and of the Italian; which last he earnestly wished to acquire, that he might peruse in the original his favourite author Ariosto, of whom, when a boy, he became enamoured, from reading the Orlando Furioso in Sir John Harington's old translation. In 1757 he was married to Susannah Smith, of Bishop Stortford in Hertfordshire, and, in January 1758, he suddenly lost his father, who died on the 12th of that month, leaving behind him a striking example of noble-minded integrity in his intercourse with mankind, and of indefatigable industry in the application of his talents for the maintenance of a numerous family. In this year Mr. Hoole undertook the translation of Tasso's Jerusalem Delivered, laying aside his design of translating Ariosto, of which he had already finished some of the first books. About this time he was introduced to the knowledge of Dr. Hawkesworth, by whom he was encouraged in his intended work. Through this gentleman he became acquainted, in 1761, with the late Dr. Samuel Johnson; which acquaintance grew to a friendship that only terminated with the lamented death of that excellent man, whose loss he regretted as that of a second father. season. On the death of Mrs. Woffington, which happened in March *The fate of this pantomime affords a remarkable instance of public caprice. On its original appearance, it drew the town to see it during the greater part of the It was revived in 1747 and in 1755, when it was repeated thirty-one times; and again in 1768. At each revival it was greatly applauded. In October 1787 it was produced again by a royal command, as supposed, when, to the astonishment of all the old frequenters of the theatre, it was damned. Mr. Hoole, we are informed, also made the Peacock, which was not produced until after his death in 1781, in the Choice of Harlequin. 1760, Mr. Hoole published a monody, which has been since printed in Pearch's Collection of Poems, and in Bell's Fugitive Poetry. In 1763 he printed his translation of the "Jerusalem," which procured him the acquaintance of Mr. Glover, author of Leonidas. This was his first avowed publication,* having before only printed two or three little poetical essays, which, with the monody, were without any name. In the year 1764 Dr. Johnson introduced him to Dr. Warton, of Winchester. In 1767 he published two volumes of the dramas of Metastasio, a copy of which book he transmitted to the author at Vienna, and was in return honoured with a very elegant letter from Metastasio. In the same year he wrote the tragedy of Cyrus, professedly taken from the Ciro Reconosciuto of that celebrated Italian; which tragedy he first communicated to Mrs. Anna Williams, the well known friend of Dr. Johnson, a lady of uncommon talents, to whose benevolent and friendly disposition all that knew her were indebted. Encouraged by her, he read his play to Dr. Johnson, who told him "he might send his play to the stage." The tragedy was accordingly accepted by Mr. Colman, and exhibited at Covent-Garden theatre, in December, 1768, with great success, being strongly supported by the talents of Powell, in the zenith of his fame, of Smith when he was a great favourite with the public, and of Mrs. Yates when she was in the maturity of beauty and theatrical repute; they played the parts of Cyrus, Cambyses, and Mandane, the last of which characters was particularly adapted to the tragic powers of Mrs. Yates. The merit of Mrs. Yates was so very great in Mandane, that it was very common to hear people say, instead of we are going to see Cyrus," we are going to see Mrs. Yates." In 1770 Mr. Hoole produced another tragedy, called Timanthes, taken from the Demofoonte of Metastasio, which was likewise successful, though the author sustained a great loss in the death of Mr. Powell, which happened in 1769, the part of Timanthes having been expressly written for him. In 1773 Mr. Hoole published a volume containing the first ten books of Orlando Furioso, intending to have proceeded with the entire translation; but being at this time established in an office of consequence as Auditor of Indian accounts to the East India Company, his poetical studies were discontinued; the great business arising from the parliamentary enquiries into the company's affairs calling for all his exertions in preparing accounts and estimates for the House of Commons, during which enquiry he was examined at the bar of both houses. In 1775 he found leisure to produce an original tragedy, called * Dr. Johnson wrote the dedication, which is to the Queen. |