BOTH Italy and France have swarm'd with Critiques upon the Business of the Stage, and trac'd it's Histo­ry up to Thespis's Cart. The Mimica Satyra Tra­goedia Comoediá have been thoroughly canvass'd. A Man might almost conjure with their Planipedes, Attalanae, Prae­textatae, Tabernariae, &c. Distinctions, Divisions and Sub­divisions, but amongst them All not one word of a Farce. None have taken into Consideration, or condescended to tell us, whether the Trappolin, Scapin, Harlequin or Sca­ramouch be Originals; or if France be a Species of Stage-Poetry unknown to the Ancients. This Subject therefore being yet untouch'd, and the Bookseller having occasion to re-print this short Play, I thought it worth the business of a Preface to speak my Sentiments of the matter, though but to provoke some Learned Person to clear the Doubt, and set the Question in a true Light.

In order to this Enquiry, 'twill be proper first to speak something of those Stage-Properties or Implements called Personae and Larvae, used by Players of former Times; for Harlequill was not the first that acted in a Vizard.

Athanaeus in his Twelfth Book mentions one Aristopha­nes of Byzantium, with several others, who had written particularly on this Subject. Amongst Latin Writers An­lon. Codr. Vre. is said to have published an Elegant Epistle concerning this matter. Caelius Calcagn. in his Book Entitu­led, [Page] Personati, speaks pretty home to the Point; and above all, the Learned Bullinger, lib. 1. de Theatro.

But I meet with enough for my purpose in the Syntagm. of Marischott, who, for the benefit of most Readers, contents himself with citing the Latin Version of Lucian De Personis & Larvis., and others, which I have so transcribed on occasion as I there found them. Neither can my Abstract of his Book seem needless, because the Treatise it self having been only Printed in Italy, is scarce to be met with in England.

'Tis agreed that the Word Persona in a restrained Sence signifies only the Vizard or Counterfeit Face worn by the Actor: But in larger and more frequent Acceptation, the whole Habit or Dress of Him that enter'd the Scene; which (under the Reign of Old Comedy) was contrived exactly like the usual wearing Garb of some Person whom they had a mind to represent upon the Stage. An Instance hereof against no less a Person than Socrates we find described at large by Aelian. The Substance of the Story is this: That Aristophanes in his [...] represented both the Figure, Gesture and Habit of Socrates, with which Spectacle the Athenians were at first surprized. However, the common sort presently expressed their Applause. Socrates himself being then amongst the Audience, not by chance but design, and seated where he might be most exposed to view, encountring with his grave, steddy and unconcerned Countenance at once the Mimickry of the Actor, and Ral­lery of the Poet.

But whether the Stage-dresses and Masks were made in Imitation of some particular Person, or contrived by Hu­mour and Fancy, as might be most agreeable to the Fable, (in which they always observed a Decorum.) 'Tis evident, says my Author, that they never enter'd the Scene nisi Per­sonis induti.

But who was the first Inventor of them is a matter of no small Dispute. They appear to be as ancient as the Practice [Page] of Plays and Drolls themselves, which were of as old a date as the Worship of Bacchus, or perhaps any other Gods. That this manner of Celebrating the Rites of Bacchus was in use not only among the Thracians and Greeks, but also very frequent and ancient among the Latins. We have evident Proof from Virgil's Georgicks, Lib. 11. with a most Elegant Description of the Personae in these Words:

Ovid hints almost as much in the Minores Quinquatrus celebrated in Honour of Minerva.

Suidas affirms Chaerilus the Athenian to have been the first that erected a Stage, and used the Larva; yet else­where (according to Diomedes and other Greek Writers) he makes Thespis Inventor of the Persona, who at first disco­loured his Face with Vermilion, before he came to use the Juyce of Purslane; or, according to Horace, the Lees of Wine.

[Page] This Practice, and Cartshow's of Thespis were performed about the 56th Olympiad. Others give the Honour of this Invention to Aeschylus, and presume that they have likewise Horace's Word for their Opinion.

But Horace is still consistent, if rightly understood; for he does not affirm Aeschylus to be the absolute Inventor of the Persona, but of the Persona Honesta, of more graceful Masks and Habits than were contrived by others; for which Reason we may suppose, as Philostratus relates, this Aeschylus was called the Father of Tragedy. After Aeschy­lus Stage-Habits for Women were also invented by Phryni­cus.

Amongst the Romans till Livius Andronicus his Time, the Galeri and not Personae were used upon the Stage; and Suidas will have Roscius Gallus to be the first that brought the Personae into custom with the Romans; But Donatus tells us, that Minutius and Prothonius were the first Players that Acted Tragedy, Personati: Which Fashion afterwards ob­tained that Degree, that Nero Caesar himself is recorded by Suetonius to have appeared in such Dresses upon the open Stage. Tragoedias cantaverit Personatus; Herôum Deorum­que item heroidum & Dearum, Personis effictis. That pom­pous and splendid Dresses were proper for Tragedy, both Pollux and Donatus affirm.

Next to Tragedy came Satyr, which was but a Species of the former, as appears by the Cyclops of Euripides. This sort of Dramma (though less practised as the World grew more civilized) had also it's peculiar Personae or [...], made of Goats Skins and Hides, and other Beasts, which are described by Dyonisius, Pollux and Causa­bon.

[Page] The personal Habits used in the Licentious Comdiaaevetus were contrived (as we instanced) to repre­sent particular Persons, Poet. Lib. c. 4. 14. Lib. xi. c. 12. l. 4. c. ix. Mo­rum Charact. Ch. 6. which therefore could he no constant or fix'd Garb; For Suidus says expresly, [...], &c.— That is, Moris fuit ut Comici Personas Hi­strionibus darent eorum similes quos imitaren­tur. Horace alludes to the same Custom, Sat. 4. L. 1.— Quivis Stomacheter eodem quo personatus Pater. Their re­sembling Dresses (says the Scholiast upon Aristoph.) were so aptly contrived, that the Spectators knew what Person the Actor mimick'd at his first appearance, before he spoke a Word. While Athens was a popular State, the Rabble were so much delighted with these Representations of par­ticular Men, that Isocrates complains they would run to those Entertainments from their Orators, while they were haranguing upon Matters of greatest Importance to the Publick. 'Tis true, this Practice of exposing Men upon the Stage, was at its beginning more justifiable, while con­fin'd to those Limits mentioned by Horace,

Nay, it did not a little conduce to the reforming of the State, in deterring Men from Wickedness; upon which Dionys. Halycarn. did not stick to Dionys. [...]. affirm of Eupolis Cratinus and Aristophanes, that they perform'd the Office of Philosophers and States-men as well as of Poets. But when from repre­sentation of evil Men, the Practice declin'd to the Tradu­cing of the Good and Vertuous, and even to the Disho­nour of Religion, and ridiculing their very Gods, 'twas [Page] high time for the Government to take Cognizance of the Matter, and enact Laws to restrain their License.

And a little after,

Upon this Regulation succeed the Media and Nova Co­media, in which the Personae ludicrae & ad risum accommo­datae were invented and made famillar to the Stage. One contriv'd a peculiar Habit, when the part of a Paedagogue was to be plaid, another of a Parisite, others of Bawds, Cooks, &c. All which are recited by In prolegom. ad Terent. Donatus, and more largely by Lib. 4. c. 19. Pollux. That Comedians acted Personati in Te­rence his time appears by an ancient Copy of that Author preserved in the Vatican, where Figures are drawn of the Actors in the Play, as they were Larvati and Personati.

'Tis impossible for us to conceive the Art and Curiosity in the Contrivance and Making of these Shapes, in which these Players acted, or how much the Player himself was sometimes enamour'd on his Persona, or Stage-dress, attri­buting his Success and Theatrical Applause to the Sem­blance in which he acted. As to this Particular, Pliny has given us an Instance of memorable Event in his Natural Hi­story, [Page] Lib. 8. cap. 43. speaking of M. Opilius Hilarius. He tells us, That this Actor having wonderfully pleas'd the People in performance of a certain Part; He invited his Friends to a Treat upon his Birth-day, and this Shape in which he succeeded so well being brought into his sight, he pull'd off his banqueting Wreath from his Head to put it upon the Figure, which he survey'd with such Pleasure, that he lost his Sense, grew stiff and cold, and unperceived by the Company, expir'd with Transport.

Hitherto we have discoursed of the Persona in the larger Acceptation, as it signified amongst them, the intire Stage-Habit. But must acknowledge that it was sometimes taken in a more restrain'd Sense, and used by Actors for only the Larva or Vizard, as the Larva again is sometimes men­tioned to express the Persona intire.

Martial uses the Word for a Border or Perriwigg, Epigr. 43. Lib. 3.

But Seneca expresly for a Mask or Vizard, Quid tantopere te supinat? Quid Vultum habitum (que) oris praevertit ut malis habere Personam quam faciem.

The Advantages of using these Persona or Disguises on the Stage were, in Comedy, that they might first have Re­semblance to the Person imitated, and afterwards adapted for Humour, and to excite Mirth; besides the Consulting the Decency of the Actors, who were in those Days gene­rally [Page] too modest to Act barefac'd, Yet Nero that Monster having compell'd Noblemen to act Parts in a Play, he Com­manded them to pull off their Vizards on the Stage, Histrio­num apparatu eos patefaci­ens Hominibus apud quos ipsi paulò ante Magistratum gesserant. and in usual Habits. In Tragedy the Dress assisted to the Pomp and Show. The Tragedian's Vizard making the Voice to come forth more sonorous, being made with a larger Lucian de Salt descri­bing the Mimick-Mask, says it was Larva pulcherrima, Quae non immane hint ut Tragica. Mouth that seem Hiare as the Actor spoke, which I could almost suppose Persius to hint at in that Verse, ‘Fabula seu maesto ponatur hianda Tragedo.’ The Convenience of these Disguises on other occasions, as in Interludes at Sacred Rites (as they call'd them) is ma­nifest from Servius on our fore-cited place of Vpon the—Bac­cho caper omni­bus aris, &c. Georg. l. 2. Virgil, Quia necesse erat pro ratione Sa­crorum aliqua ludicra & turpia fieri quibus populo possit risus Moveri, qui ea exercebant, propter verecundiam remedium hoc adhibue­runt, ne agnoscerentur.

Yet were not Disguises Masks and Maskers, employ'd only in the Service of the Theatre and Temples, but pro­miscuously used by the Ancients on many other occasions, as in Triumphs, Feasts, Marriages, Funerals, &c. the Hi­story whereof would be furnish'd with many entertaining Circumstances; but I must remember that I am confin'd to the scanty Limits of a Preface.

[Page] The good Uses that have been made of Vizards and Counterfeit-Habits, without the compass of the Theatre would make no small Collection, but the Abu­ses of them much greater. This would afford more Horror than Diversion. The yearly Harvest of Wick­edness, and evil Consequences occasion'd by the Car­nival at Venice, give too sufficient Proofs of the Mis­chief. Larvati took their Appellation from Larva, a Vizard; and Larva from the Lares, whom the Anci­ents supposed to possess Men's Minds with Madness. This was ascribed as peculiar to those Powers. Can there be greater Demonstration of Distraction and Frenzy of all sorts, than in the Impious Practices and Debaucheries at the fore-mentioned Festival? Can all their Mortifications of the ensuing Lent make any to­lerable Amends for the Lewdness then committed? Has the Devil at any time such a Jubilee, where Vice like an Infernal Cebele sees all her black Offspring assembled together? What are the effects of this Masquerade, but Whoredoms, Adulteries, Incests, Brawls, Murders, and a general Corruption of Manners. Pollydor. re­cites it to the Honour of our English Ancestors, that they had Law in force against Masqueradings, Capitale fuisse si quis personam induisset. De Rev. Invent. l. 5. c. 2. Ludovicus vives, lib. de Christianâ Faeminâ, thinks he did the Masquerading Ladies no wrong, in affirming, that detrimentum quod sub Personâ earum accepit vere­cundia citra personam se proferat & ostendat. That they proved after wearing those Disguises just as modest out of their Masques as they were in them. And honest Iuvenal civilly puts the Question, ‘Quem praestare potest mulier Larvata pudorem?’

[Page] But restoring these Guises to their proper Owners, the Stage-Players, let us proceed from the Considerati­on of th Larva to our first Enquiry about Farce, and whether or no the Ancients had any such Species of Stage-Poetry.

In the first place I would ask the Readers Opinion, if he can suppose any more genuine and natural use of those Larvae or Vizards which we have described, than for Farce-Players, especially if we take in those other Im­plements mentioned by Lucian, de Salt. thus rendred by Marisch. Mitto adscitia pectora & ventres fictitios, ad­junctam & arte compositam corporis crassitudinem. One would almost conclude from this Description of their Stage-Properties, that they could be contrived for no­thing but Farce.

I have not yet seen any Definition of Farce, and dare not be the first that ventures to define it. I know not by what Fate it happens (in common Notion) to be the most contemptible sort of the Drama. 'Tis thought to bring least Reputation to an Author. But if the dif­ficulty of the Task were to decide the Case, we should soon alter our Opinion. I would desire him who thinks it an easie thing, to make Tryal of it with all the speed he can, it being such a Work

The reason of the Difficulty I presume to be this, (and the Undertakers will find it true) That Comedy properly so called, is an Imitation of Humane Life, ( quicquid agunt homines) and subsists upon Nature; so that whosoever has a Genius to coppy her, and will take the Pains, is assured of Success, and all the World af­fords [Page] him Subject. Whereas the business of Farce ex­tends beyond Nature and Probability. But then there are so few Improbabilities that will appear pleasant in the Re­presentation, that it will strain the best Invention to find them out, and require the nicest Judgment to manage them when they are conceived. Extravagant and mon­strous Fancies are but sick Dreams, that rather torment than divert the Mind; but when Extravagancy and Im­probability happen to please at all, they do it to purpose, because they strike our Thought with greatest Surprise. But to our Question.

I cannot averr, that the Ancients had Entertainments on the Stage entirely resembling the Harlequin and Sca­ramouch, but 'tis highly probable that the Satyrical Diver­sions and Interludes invented to As the French now make use of their Farces. relieve the Heaviness of Tragedy were of this Nature▪ For that they were introduced for Mirth and Rallery, and thereby to help off the serious Action, is expresly told us.

For as Madam le Fevre In her admi­rable Preface to her Version of Amphitrio. says, the Stage-Satyr; or Satyrizing Scenes must by no means be confounded with Satyrique Poems written by Lucilius, Horace, or Greek Sa­tyrist. The business of the Satyr-Actors was not to lash out into long Invectives, only now and then a Elurt of such harmless Sarcasm as used to be some­times thrown out by Harlequin or Scaramouch, because as Horace adds,

Which shews they were to keep within Bounds; and what he subjoyns ‘—Ita vertere seria ludo.’ Seems to emply Drollery, Banter, Buffoonry, Vagaries, Whimsies, which are so many Ingredients of Modern Farce. Nay, I have some where read (though I cannot at present recollect my Author) that their Comick Actors used to deliver what they had to say in various and feigned Tones, which was Harlequin's manner.

Nor will this appear unlikely, if we consider particu­larly the Gesticulations, Tricks, Feats of Activity and wonderful Performances of another sort of Actors whom they called Mimi and Pantomimi, from their admirable knack at Mimickry; which was not the least of Harle­quin's and Scaramouch's Talents. 'Tis unconceivable how expert these Persons were in humorous Actions, as will appear by a few Testimonies very well worth our menti­oning.

Their Performance was so extraordinary, that as Strabo informs us, Lib. 14. their Art was called [...]. their Legerdemain Shifts, Slights and Postures, Magical Arts, Praestigia: And further asserts, Eos quam saepissime argu­mento è Comoediis desumpto varias personas representasse, nunc foeminae, nunc lenonis, nunc Adulteri, nunc temulenti. To which we may add that old Epigram,

[Page] There was no Fable accommodated to the Stage, which these Mute-Actors could not represent by Gestures and Movements of their Body. For as Lucian says, Perso­nis in Scenam introductis, gestibus per omnia responderent, neque ea quae dicuntur ab introductit optimatibus, aut agri­colis, aut mendicis discrepabant sed in unoquo (que) illorum pro­prietas & excellentia demonstrabantur. In dumb Action and Gestures they could express, and as it were, speak what they pleased. Wherefore Vid. Scalig. Poet. l. 1. Tigranes amongst all the Rarities the World's Imperial City afforded, begged one of these Pantomimes to serve him as it were for an Interpreter to all Nations.

Pantomimus (says Cassiod. Var. 4. Epist. ult.) a multi­faria imitatione nomen est, idem corpus Herculem designat & venerem, f [...]minam presentat & marem; Regem facit & Militem; Senam reddit & Iuvenem ut in uno videas esse multos. And Lucian seeing a Pantomime prepare to personate five Representations, cries, That the Mimick seem'd to him to have five Souls, who could exhibit so many Personages with one Body. What was all this but Farce to the Degree of Harlequin with his Cloak, whisk'd about, and acting a Windmil.

All this, you'll say, was only Farce of Action, Farce in the Player, nothing on the Poets Part, no Proof that the Ancients had any written Farce.

I will not affirm they had any Stage-Play entirely of Harlequin and Scarramouch's Cast; but if Molier's Come­dies come under the Denomination of Farce, (as every body allows) 'tis plain that both the Greeks and Romans had Farcical Plays. The Comedies of Aristophanes and Plautus are mostly of this Cut, call them Palliatae, Togatae, mixt Comedy, low Comedy, or what you will. Their Old Comedy, generally speaking, had the very Air of Farce. Aristophanes his Socrates Philosophing in a Bas­ket, &c. is as much Farce as any thing in the Character [Page] of Mr. Shadwell's Virtuoso. The Frog and Swimming-Master, Tame Spider, Bottled Air, &c. are not more Humorous and Farcy. Aristophanes his Frogs were a ve­ry Rehearsal of those days; As our Fletcher's Knight of the Burning Pestle was a sort of Quixot on the Stage. Which teaches us, that Farce is not inconsistent with good Sence, because 'tis capable of Satyr, which is Sence with a Vengeance. The Amphytrio and Menae [...]h of Plau­tus through the whole Contrivance and Course of Acci­dents are all Farce. They were the Originals of Shake­spear's Comedy of Errours, and the Italian Trappoline. I would not be a Heretick in Poetry, but Reason and Ex­perience convince us, that the best Comedies of Ben. Iohnson are near a-kin to Farce; nay, the most entertain­ing parts of them are Farce it self. The Alchymist which cannot be read by any sensible Man without Astonish­ment, is Farce from the opening of the First Scene to the end of the Intr [...]igue. 'Tis Farce but such Farce as bequeaths that Blessing (pronounced by Horace) on him that shall attempt the like.

The whole business is carry'd on with Shuffles, Sh [...]m and Banter, to the greatest degree of Pleasantness in the World. For Farce (in the Notion I have of it) may ad­mit of most admirable Plot, as well as subsist sometimes without it. Nay, it has it's several Species or Distincti­ons as well as Comedy amongst the Romans Stataria mix­ta, &c. but still 'twas Comedy. So Comedy may admit of Humour, which is a great Province of Farce; but then it might be such Humour as comes within compass of Nature and Probability: For where it exceeds these Bounds it becomes Farce. Which Freedom I would al­low [Page] a Poet, and thank him into the Bargain, provided he has the Judgment so to manage his Excursion, as to heighten my Mirth without too grosly shocking my Senses. I cannot call to mind one Humour in all Terence's Pl [...]ys, but what he might have taken by Observation, all lies within the Compass of Conversation; but there­fore Caesar (amidst all his Beauties and Excellencies) says he, wants the Vis Comica, which made Plaurus so divert­ing. There is so much said for these two Authors by their respective Admirers, that a Man knows not where to give the Preference. All that I would presume to say, [...]s, That I esteem them both admirable in their way; that one chose to write pure Comedy in the strictest No­tion, and the other liberty of extending Comedy some­times into Farce; and each got his Point, Terence of be­ing exact, and Plautus pleasant. Neat Terence, witty Plautus, says our greatest Ben. Ialmson 's Verses on Shake­spear. Master of Co­medy, who scorn'd not to Copy some­times from the Ancients; yet for one Hint he has taken from Terence, he has bor­rowed three from Plautus. I will instance only that pleasant Passage in his Alchymist, where the Confederates banter and play upon Surly disguised like a Spanish Don, not supposing that he understood them. We find the same Humour in the Paenulus of Plautus, where the old Carthaginian speaks in the Punick Language; Milphio a Roman Servant plays the wagg, and drolls upon him, un­der pretence of interpreting for him; the Stranger suf­fers him to run himself out of breath with his Ribaldry, and then surprizes him with thundring out as good Latin as the best of them could speak. Vulpone's playing the Mountebank in the Fox is Farce; and Sir Politick's turn­ing himself into a Tortoise. This Passage however is un­diverting, which proves (as I said) the Nicety of Judg­ment required in managing Improbabilities. Had this [Page] been told to the Audience like other Projects which are only recited, it might have made a pleasant Relation.

Now if we enquire into the best of our Modern Co­medies, we should find the most diverting parts of them to be Farce, or near a-kin to it. Remembrancer Iohn in the Cutter, Sir Martin turn'd East-India Gentleman, the Try­al Scene in the Spanish Fryar, where Gomes menac'd by the Colonel in dumb shew, runs Counter in his Evidence, says and unsays in a Breath, till he confounds himself and the Court. Such Pleasantry as this is I cannot think be­low it's great Author, who in the Serious Scenes of the same Play, has shewn us the Refinedness and Perfection of the English Style. Quintilian, speak­ing of Repartees, after these Words, Lib. vi. c. 3. de Risu. Lon­gè venustiora omnia in respondendo quam in provocando; That more Wit's required to retort a Jest than to break one, adds this Expression, Accedit difficul­tati quod ejus rei nulla exercitatio est, nulli praeceptores. The same may be said of Farce; there are no Rules to be prescribed for that sort of Wit, no Patterns to Copy, 'tis altogether the Creature of Imagination. And our English Mec [...]nas (to whose Judgment the Muses willing­ly subscribe) has declared that he approves Genius and Invention beyond the best Performances of Imitation. Such is the Farce-Writers Task. Neither can I assume any thing to my self by the Preference I have given to Farce on account of the Trapoline, which I only new modell'd: I pretend but to have Improv'd what I would be proud to have Invented.