Page:History of the Literature of Ancient Greece (Müller) 2ed.djvu/326

304 304 HISTORY OF THE works of nature, where the most rigorous conformity to laws is com- bined with boundless variety and beauty. In the dramatic poetry of Greece, indeed, the outward form to which genius is forced to adapt itself, appears the more rigid, and, we may say arbitrary, since, to the conditions imposed on the choice of thoughts, expression and metre, are added rules, prescribed by the local and personal character of the representation. With regard to the persons of the drama, the ancients show that historical taste which consists in a singular union of attachment to given forms, with aspiration after further progress. The antique type is never unnecessarily rejected; but is rendered susceptible of a greater display of creative power by expansions which may be said to lie in its very nature. We have seen how a single actor was detached from the chorus, and how Thespis and Phrynichus contented themselves with this arrange- ment, by causing him to represent in succession all the persons of the drama, and either before, or with the chorus, to conduct the whole action of the piece. iEschylus added the second actor, in order to obtain the contrast of two acting persons on the stage, since the general character of the chorus was that of a mere hearer or recipient ; and although ca- pable of expressing its own wishes, hopes, and fears, it was not adapted to independent action. According to this form, only two speaking persons (mutes might be introduced in any number) could appear on the stage at the same time : — they, however, might both enter again in other characters, time only being allowed for change of dress. The appearance of the same actor in different parts of the same play did not strike the ancients as more extraordinary than his appearance in dif- ferent parts in different plays ; since the persons of the actors were effectually disguised by masks, and their skill enabled them to represent various characters with perfect success. The dramatic art of those times required extraordinary natural gifts; strength of body and of voice, as well as a most careful education and training for the pro- fession. From the time of the great poets, and even later, in the age of Philip and Alexander, when the interest and character of dramatic performance rested entirely on the actors, the number of actors capable of satisfying the taste and judgment of t!.e public was always very small. Hence, it was an object to turn the talents of the few eminent actors to the greatest possible account ; and to prevent that injury to the general effect which the interposition of inferior actors, even in subordinate parts, must ever produce ; and, in fact, so often nowadays does produce. Even Sophocles did not venture beyond the introduction of a third actor ; this appeared to accomplish all that was necessary to the variety and mobility of action in tragedy, without sacrificing the