And, in fact, every shred of evidence, however scant, goes to show that
the histrionism must have been conceived in a spirit of extreme
liveliness, abandon and extravagance in gesture and declamation, that
would not confine the actor to faithful portrayal in character, but would
allow him scope and license to resort to any means whatsoever to bestir
laughter amongst a not over-stolid audience.
Footnotes
[1]: E.g., Casina in the _Cas._, Silenium in the _Cis._,
Planesium in the _Cur._, Adelphasium and Anterastylis in the
_Poen._, Palaestra in the _Rud._
[2]: V. infra, part II, sec. I. B. I.
[3]: E.g., Lorcnz's Introd. to _Most._ and _Pseud._ V. infra,
part I, Sec. i.
[4]: We are not concerned in this question with technical discussion as to
the position of the banquet table on the stage, the nature of the dog of
the _Most._ and the like, but with the delivery and movements of the
actors themselves.
[5]: De Off. I. 29.104.
[6]: X. 1.99. Cf. Ritschl's citations of Varro: _Parerga_, p. 71 ff.
Cf. Epig. quoted by Varro and attributed to Plautus himself, ap. Gel.
N.A., I. 24.1-3. But that this was a patent literary forgery is proved by
Gudeman in TAPA. XXV, p. 160.
[7]: N.A., VI. 17.4.
[8]: I.7.17.
[9]: XIX. 8.6.
[10]: _A.P._, 270 ff. Cf. _Ep._ II. I.170 ff. and Fay, ed.
_Most._, Intro. Sec. 2.
[11]: _De Com._ III.
Pages:
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105