The statement that masks were not introduced on the Roman stage until after the time of Terence is still repeated by editors and has the support of Pauly Wissowa as well as Daremberg and Saglio ; it may, in fact, be regarded as generally accepted. Yet so long ago as 1912 A. S. F. Gow put forward strong arguments on the opposite side; his article, though mentioned with respect in Bursian and referred to by Schanz-Hosius , has not yet been (...) satisfactorily answered, so far as I am aware. Gow did not claim that a final solution of this problem could be attained on our present evidence, but he did show that the orthodox position is open to attack. I hope to prove that the arguments in favour of the early use of masks are even stronger than he claimed. (shrink)

In my second article on this subject I asked Professor Webster to clarify his previous statements. My article was shown to him before publication, and his reply will be found immediately following it. I will confine my remarks here to a single point, because it is simple and decisive. The only passage in ancient literature explicitly connecting the phallus with Old Comedy is Clouds 537 f. There Aristophanes says that his play does not wear ‘any stitched-on leather, hanging down, red-tipped, (...) thick, to make the children laugh’. Webster, following Körte, throws all the emphasis on and interprets the passage as meaning ‘the phalli worn in this play do not hang down’. Asked why so much emphasis should be placed on the word , he makes no reply. (shrink)

Professor Webster has replied briefly to my article on this subject, and has dealt elsewhere with the works of art. One point I will gladly concede. In referring the phlyakes-vases to ‘the fourth or third century’ I was quoting Pickard-Cambridge's words in Dithyramb, etc. , p. 267. But in Dramatic Festivals , Pickard-Cambridge, perhaps influenced by Trendall, speaks of the fourth century only.