( ”0 )

This, it must be allowed, was a great Defect. Yet itmay be said, in defence os ancient Masks, that they didnot hide the Eyes of the Actors And the Eye is theprincipal Actor in the Face : it is it chiefly which dis-covers the Mind and all its inward Sentiments and Emo-tions. Animi eft omnis aElio , d# imago animi vultus eft ,indices oculi> fays Cicero (d). When we fee the Eyes, I-magination is almost able to supply all the rest that caaappear in the Face. And several Passages of Cicero and^uintilian put it beyond doubt, that ancient Actors ex-pressed all the Passions very strongly by their Eyes toge-ther with their Hands, and other Motions of their Bodies..Nor can we doubt of their Testimony, since we may averthe same of the Italian Comedians who act in Masks.

I hold however by the more common and simple Opi-nion, that the greater Part of the Passions, the soft onesin particular, could not be so well expressed by an Actorin a Mask, as they may be by the Face. And therefore Ican’t but think, the Ancients who had such a Taste forDramatick Representations, would have laid aside Masks,is they had not had some very good Reason for continu-ing to use them. Now the Reason seems to be, that onthe one hand they lost but very little by the Use of Masks,,with regard to the Expression of the Passions, becausetheir Theatres were vastly large, and the far greater Num-ber of the Spectators were at so great a distance from theStage, that they could not have diseern’d any Changesthe Features of the Actors, had they acted without Masks.

And

(d) Cicero de Or at. 1. 3. So Quint. I. 11. c. 3. In ipso vuttu plurimumvalent oculi per quos maxime animus emanat.