e, as that of Diphilus and others gave
power to Plautus, and it may well be supposed that men of their talent
appropriated all that was most excellent, and left their successors to
draw from inferior sources. It may, moreover, be doubted, whether the
regular drama was ever popular among the lower classes in Rome, who
preferred the more exciting scenes of the circus. Such plays as were
intended for them were coarser and more sensational.

Terence has not the rough power and drollery of Plautus; his whole
attraction lies in the subtlety of his amorous intrigues. Steele,
speaking of one of the plays, "The Self-Tormentor," observes, "It is
from the beginning to the end a perfect picture of human life, but I did
not observe in the whole one passage that could possibly raise a laugh."
It was for this reason, no doubt, that Caesar spoke of him as only "half
a Menander," and as deficient in comic force. Ingenious complexity is so
exclusively his aim, that we have neither the coarseness nor the sparkle
of earlier writers. He was the first to introduce Comedies, which were
not comic, and whatever humour he introduces is that of situation.

We now come to consider a kind of humour of which the Romans claim to
have been the originators, and which they certainly developed into a
branch of literature. Satire first signified a basket of first fruits
offered to Ceres; then a hotchpot or olla podrida, then a medley; and so
the name was given to poems written without any definite design. We
might therefore conclude that they possessed no uniform character, but
merely contained a mixture of miscellaneous matter. But we find in them
no allusions to politics or war, and but few to the literature and
philosophy of the day--their variety being due to their social
complexion. One feeling and character pervades them all--they were
called forth by a scornful indignation at the degeneracy of the age as
represented by the rich and powerful, or even by certain leading
individuals. The appearance of such a kind of literature denoted greater
activity in society, an increase of profligacy among some, and of moral
sensibility among others. Satire was a social scourge. It was not a
philosophical investigation into the nature and origin of vice, but a
denunciation of it as inimical to the interests of society. It was
practical not theoretical--and sought to bring vice into contempt, by
making it both odious and ridiculous. In the latter attempt, the
sat