"The tragic costume for male characters of the highest rank consisted of an embroi dered tunic with sleeves, which, in the older personages reached to the feet (chiton pod eres), and in the younger to the knees. Over this was thrown a green pall, or long man tle (Gr. 8urnta, Lat. palla), which also reached to the feet, and was richly ornamented with a purple and gold border. Persons of high but not royal rank wore a shorter red mantle, embroidered with gold, which was partially covered by a richly-embroidered, high-fitting scarf. Soothsayers wore over the tunic a kind of a network, composed of woolen threads. A sort of waistcoat (kolpema) was also worn over the tunic. This was the costume of powerful and warlike sovereigns, such as Atreus, Agamemnon, etc. Dionysus (Bacchus) appeared in a purple tunic, which hung negligently from an em broidered shoulder-knot, and a thin, transparent, saffron-colored upper robe, with a thymus in his hand. Even Hercules himself was not the athletic hero of the old my thology, with a lion's skin thrown loosely round his muscular limbs, but a solemn, theat rical personage, enveloped in a long mantle. The costume of a queen was a flowing purple robe, with a white scarf; and for mourning, a black robe, and blue or dark yel low shawl. Persons in distress, especially exiles, wore dirty-white, dark-gray, dingy yellow, or blush garments To increase their height, the tragic performers wore the cothurnus, a sort of buskin, with high soles and still higher heels, which compelled them to walk with a measured and sounding tread; and a top-knot of hair, or toupet (Gr. ongkos), suitable to the age and condition of the character represented. A correspond ing breadth of figure was produced by means of padding and by a sort of glove. Thus equipped, the tragic hero seemed a giant as compared with ordinary mortals. Lastly, they had the mask, a part of the ancient theatrical costume which seems to us so strange and unnatural. For its meaning and origin we must go back to the Dionysian festival, at which the excited crowd were wont, in honor of the jolly god, to smear their faces with lees of wine; and at a later period, when dramatic interludes were attempted, with vermilion, or to cover their cheeks with rude masks of bark. In the course of time these primitive inventions were discarded, and their places supplied by linen masks, characteristically painted. For the sake of retaining this uncouth but distinctive appendage of the Dionysian festival, the Greeks were content to forego the delicate expression of feeling and eloquent play of features which are indispensable to a modern actor; but on the other hand, when we remember the enormous size of their theaters, which scarcely permitted the assembled thousands to hear what was said by the actors, still less to distinguish their features, we are forced to acknowledge that .the practice of wearing masks was rather an advantage than an inconvenience." The above de scription' is, in the main, applicable to the Roman as well as the Greek theaters. The only additional point which it is necessary to notice is that, among the ancients, the acting of plays was not (as it is now) a regular and daily, but only an occasional affair, at festival seasons and the like. With the fall of the western empire, the disappearance of classic paganism and classic tastes, and the triumph of the Christianised barbarians of the n. and e., theatrical performances ceased. But the liking for such things is not
artificial; it is natural and irrepressible; and gradually, as the ancient culture resumed something of its former sway, efforts were made, not indeed, to re-enact the majestic tragedy of Greece (for its language was scarcely known), or the pungent comedy of Borne, but to throw into dramatic form the " mysteries," " miracles," and " morali ties," of the Christian religion. The rudeness of these medimval plays may perhaps sug to us what Greek performances were before the days of Thespis. In fact, they were introduced as a means of edifying, as much as of amusing, the ignorant laity, were cus tomarily the works of monks, and were performed on festive occasions in the churches. It does not, however, appear that they were accompanied by any scenic representations. A raised wooden stage like that which forms the front of a travel ing show, was all that the untutored taste of the times demanded. Nor are we to sup pose for a moment that the slightest attention was paid to propriety of costume or speech. The personages rather than the actions, the ceremony rather than the dialogue, the moral rather than the matter, were the things looked to, and hence no subtle or artistic representation of life and character was possible. The development of the modern drama (q.v.) ultimately the art of the actor to its ancient dignity and importance; but it was long before those changes took place that gave gmatleal per formances their modern character. Good acting—that is to say, skillful impersona tion of character and varied elocution—became quite common in England after the restoration, and was not unknown before it; but appropriate costume and scenery were scarcely thought of until the time of Talmo, (q.v.), toward the close of last cen tury. Since then the best theaters have displayed a most creditable desire to repro duce, with something like verisimilitude, the outward "form and pressure," the garb, deportment, and air of the age represented.
The employment of female actors is of French origin, and dates from the first half of the 17th c.; but they were not permitted (without molestation) to tread the English stage till 1661. Before this innovation, female parts were performed by youths; and though it ill consorts with our ideas of adequate representation to conceive the parts of Desdemona, Ophelia, Cordelia, etc., executed by those of another sex, it would appear that several actors obtained a wonderful success in this line.
The title of " his majesty's servants," which English actors once bore, originated in the fact that some of them were really members of the royal household. The king and particular nobles kept troops of actors for their own pleasure, whom they sometimes permitted to go about the country and perform. The first prince we read of that gave his "servants" such permission, was Richard, duke of Gloucester (afterward Richard III.). In queen Elizabeth's time (1571), the earl of Leicester's " servants" were licensed to open the first public theater in England, and it is owing to the circumstance of actors having originally formed part of the household of the king that a license from the lord chamberlain is still necessary to the opening of a theater.—For an anecdotical and amus ing history of the English stage see Their Majesties' Servants, by Dr. Doran (1865); see also Dutton Cook's Book of the Play (1876).