[61]: Korting, op. cit., p. 244 ff.
[62]: Cic. _de Or._ I.59.251, Suet. _Nero_ 20, Quint. XI. 3.19.
[63]: I.ii.i-2, I.ii.12.
[64]: Quint. XI.3.iii.
[65]: Cic. _Or._ 31.109.
[66]: Quint. XI.3.178, Juv. III. 98-9.
[67]: Cic. _de Off._ I.31.114, _ad Att._ IV.15.6.
[68]: Ap. Athen. XIV. 615 A.
[69]: For a full discussion of the ancient actor v. Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encyclopadie der cla.s.sischen Altertumswissenschaft_, s. v.
_histrio_; Friedlander in Marquardt-Mommsen _Handbuch der romischen Altertumer_, VI. p. 508 ff.; J. van Wageningen, _Scaenica Romana_; Warnecke, _Die Vortragskunst der romischen Schauspieler_, in _Neue Jahrbucher_, 1908, p. 704 ff.
[70]: Cf. _de Or._ III.56.214, III.22.83, Quint. XI. 3.125, 181-2.
[71]: Quint. XI.3.112.
[72]: Cf. Quint. XI.3.89.
[73]: Cic. _ad Att._ VI.1.8.
[74]: Cf. _de Or._ III.26.102, Quint. XI.3.71, 89.
[75]: For further treatment of the gestures of orators see Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encyclopadie_, s. v. _histrio_; Warnecke in _Neue Jahrbucher_, 1910, p. 593; Sittl, _Die Gebarden der Griechen und Romer_, Chap. XI; Mart. Cap. 43. In the other rhetoricians of the later Empire there is much copying of Cicero and Quintilian, but nothing of significance for our purpose, unless it be the comparison of the rigid training recommended to the embryo orator. For further citations, v.
Pauly-Wissowa, op. cit.
[76]: 0p. cit., p. 203.
[77]: _Wiener Studien_, Vol. XIV, p. 120.
[78]: _Scaen. Rom._, p. 52. Cf. Karsten in _Mnem._ x.x.xII, (1904), pp. 209-251, 287-322, who concludes that at least four hands aided in the commentaries.
[79]: E.g., Donat. ad _And._ 88, _Eun._ 187, 986, _Phor._ 315.
[80]: A11 the pa.s.sages in Donatus dealing with gesture have been collected by Leo, _Rheinisches Museum_ x.x.xVIII, p. 331 ff.
[81]: E.g., Donat. ad _And._ 180, 363, 380-1, _Eun._ 209, 559, 974, _Ad._ 84, 499, 661, 795, 951, _Hec._ 612, 689, _Phor._ 49, 315. Cf. _Ad._ 285: superbe ac magnifice. Cf. Schol. ad _And._ 332: Vultuose hoc dicitur, hoc est c.u.m gestu. Cf. also Warnecke in _Neue Jahrbucher_, 1910, note 75.
[82]: Cf. XI.3.103, _Auct. ad Her._ III.15.27.
[83]: Their precise age and antiquity have been disputed with some acrimony. With Sittl cf. Bethe, _Praef. Cod. Ambros._ p. 64; van Wageningen, op. cit., p. 50 ff.; Leo in _Rhein. Mus._ x.x.xVIII, p. 342 ff. V. reproductions in Wieseler, _Theatergebaude und Denkmaler des Buhnenwesens bei den Griechen und Romern,_ Tafel X; and Bethe, ed. of Codex Ambrosia.n.u.s.
[84]: _Neue Jahr._, Sup. Band I (1832), p. 447 ff.
[85]: Quint. VI.3.29, Mart. Cap., Chap. 43, p. 543 ed. Kopp.
[86]: V. reproductions in Baumeister, _Denkmaler des kla.s.sischen Altertums_, s. v. "l.u.s.tspiel" and Wieseler, op. cit., note 83.
[87]: Donat. _de Com._ VI. 3. There is some suspicion that the names have been interchanged.
[88]: _Ars Gram._ III, p. 489, 10 K; Festus, s.v. _personata_, p. 217. Cf. Cic. _de Nat. Deo._ I. 28.79. Ribbock, _Romische TraG.o.die_ p. 661, and Dziatzko in _Rhein. Mus._ XXI. 68, have made a violent effort to reconcile the conflicting statements by arguing that Roscius belonged to the troupe of Minucius. This is denied by Weinberger, _Wien. Stud._ XIV. 126. For further discussion v. van Wageningen, _Scaen. Rom._ p. 34 ff.; Leo in _Rhein. Mus._ x.x.xVIII.
342; Oehmichen, op. cit. p. 250; B. Arnold, _Ueber Antike Theatermasken_; Teuffel, _Romische Litteraturgeschichte_ --16.
Sec. 13; Pauly-Wissowa, op. cit., s.v. _histrio_, pp. 2120-21. A recent article by Saunders (A.J.P., x.x.xII, p. 58) gives an admirable summing-up of the whole controversy, with substantial proof that at any rate the performers of Plautus" day were unmasked.
[89]: Diom. III. p. 489.10 K. Cf. Saunders, _Costume in Roman Comedy_; Marquardt-Mommsen, _Handbuch der romischen Altertumer_, VI. p. 525; Pauly-Wissowa, l.c. Cf. Cic. _ad Fam._ VII. 6.
[90]: Cf. _Mil._ 629 ff., 923, _Ps._ 967, _Rud._ 125 f., 313 f., 1303, _Trin._ 861 f., _Truc._ 286 ff.; Ter., _Phor._ 51.
[91]: V. van Wageningen, op. cit. pp. 40 f.
[92]: _De Or._ III. 22.83.
[93]: II. 10.13. Cf. XI. 3.91.
[94]: I. II. 1-2
[95]: Donat. ad _And._ 505, _Eun._ 224, 288, 403, _Ad._ 187, 395.
[96]: Ad _And._ 194, 301, _Eun._ 467, 986, _Hec._ 98, 439, 640, _Ad._ 101. Cf. _Ad._ 96.; c.u.m admiratone indignantis; 97; intento digito et infestis in Micionem oculis.
[97]: Ad _Eun._ 1055.
[98]: Ad _And._ 633, _Eun._ 233, 451, _Hec._ 63, _Ad._ 259.
[99]: Ad _Phor._ 145.
[100]: Ad _Ad._ 200.
[101]: Ad _Eun._ 187.
[102]: VII. 2.8-10.
[103]: Cf. Diom. 291, 23 ff., K; Ribbeck, _Rom. Trag._ p. 634, believes that this was the rule, but he is apparently alone in the opinion. Cf. Budensteiner in Bursian"s _Jahresbericht_ CVI, p. 162 ff., who agrees with the proof of van Eck, _Quaest. Sten. Rom._ (Amsterdam 1892), that it was an isolated intance.
[104]: We are not even remotely concerned with metrical a.n.a.lysis. For that phase, with a discussion as to the effect of the various metrical systems, see Klotz, _Grundzuge der altromischen Metrik_, esp. p. 370 ff. Cf.
Duff, _A Lit. Hist. of Rome_, p. 196. Note Donat, _de Com._ VIII. 9 and Diom. 491, 23K.
[105]: For arguments as to the divisions of the three cla.s.ses, v., besides Klotz, Ritschl, _Parerga_, p. 40; Conradt, _Die metrische Komposition der Komodien des Terenz_ (Berlin 1876); Bucheler in _Neue Jahr. fur Phil._ CXLI (1871), p. 273 ff.; Dziatzko in _Rhein.
Mus._ XXVI (1871), pp. 97-100: G. Hermann, _de Canticis in Romanorum Fabulis, Opusc._ I. 290; which have all been landmarks in the discussion. Cf. also Teuffel, _Rom. Lit._, -- 16. Sec. 5, etc.
[106]: Cf. Cic. _de Or._ II.46.193.
[107]: Cf. _As._ 265, 587, 640, 403, _Bac._ 611, _Cap._ 637, _Cas._ 845 ff., _Cis._ 53 ff., _Cur._ 278, 309, 311, _Ep._ 623 ff., _Men._ 828 f., 910, _Mer._ 599 f., _Mil._ 200 ff. (quoted infra, Part II), 798-9 (Palaestrio must shout at Periplecomenus to provoke such a reply), _Most._ 265 ff., 594, _Per._ 307 f., _Ps._ 911, 1287, _St._ 271, 288 f., _Trin._ 1099, _Truc._ 276, 476 ff., 549, 593 f., 599 ff., 822.