class="tdhang ptop">A Young Lady’s Conversation,

[Pg 8]
[Pg 9]

INTRODUCTION.

With the assistance of information that we have gained, being a practical performer of acknowledged ability, we are about to fill up a hiatus in theatrical history.

It is singular that, to the present day, save by one author of a valuable work, now out of print, no other attempt has been made to illustrate the origin, biography and character of a person so distinguished and notorious as Mr. Punch. His name and his performances are familiar to all ranks and ages; yet none have hitherto taken the trouble, in this country or abroad, to make any inquiries regarding himself, his family or connections. The “studious Bayle” is recorded to have repeatedly sallied from his retreat, at the sound of the cracked trumpet, announcing his arrival in Rotterdam; and we ourselves, who have often hunted our favorite performer from street to street, saw the late Mr. Windham, then one of the Secretaries of State, on his way from Downing Street to the House of Commons, on a night of important debate, pause like a truant boy until the whole performance was concluded, to enjoy a hearty laugh at the whimsicalities of “the motley hero.” But it is needless to particularize. Punch has

while the old have stood by, “delighted with delight” of others, and themselves, too, enjoying the ludicrous representation. Why the interest has hitherto been limited to the period of representation, and whether it has not in part arisen from inability to satisfy it, is not for us to explain. We confine ourselves to an endeavor, in some degree, to supply the deficiency.

The contrast between the neglect Mr. Punch has experienced, and the industry employed in collecting particulars relating to other performers of far less reputation, is remarkable. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that his fame has spread “without his stirring” over all the kingdoms of the civilized world. To use the wordy periphrasis of Dr. Johnson,

if it can, and it will everywhere behold Punch dispensing “the luxury of a laugh.” It is literally true that some years ago he found his way to Canton; and that since the South American Revolution he has been seen even on the western side of the Andes. He is, perhaps, himself in part to blame for the neglect we have noticed. Several of the principal supporters of our theatres, in our own day, have given their memoirs to the world, either by writing them with their own hands, or by furnishing the materials to others; and the works of this kind by dead actors, “the forgotten of the stage,” consist of many volumes. Whether it has arisen from an absence of that vanity (may we call it?) which has at times influenced his histrionic rivals, or from a somewhat haughty reluctance on his part to gratify public curiosity, we know not.

CHAPTER I.
ORIGIN OF PUNCH IN ITALY.

Mr. Punch (whose original family name was probably Pulcinella) first came into existence at Acerra, an ancient city at a short distance from Naples. The date of this event is differently stated by authors who have incidentally mentioned him, Riccoboni fixing it before the year 1600, and Gimma and Signorelli after the commencement of the seventeenth century. The words of Gimma are very precise, and as he enters into particulars, it seems safe to rely upon his authority for this important fact.

The performances, in which the actor was left to his own talents and discretion in furnishing the dialogue, were once extremely popular throughout Italy; but from the very nature of the representation, it unluckily happens that not a single specimen has been handed down to our time.

However, to pursue this topic would lead us away from the object of our present inquiry. We take it for granted that Silvio Fiorillo invented Pulcinella, and first introduced him as a variety in the list of buffoons required to represent the impromptu comedies of Naples: but, although he may date his separate existence from about the year 1600, it is a matter of much doubt whether he was not, in fact, only a branch of a family of far greater antiquity. The discovery, in the year 1727, of a bronze statue of a mime, called by the Romans Maccus, has indeed led some antiquaries to the conclusion that he was, in fact, Pulcinella under a different name, but with the same attributes, and among them a hump-back and a large nose.

The dress, too, corresponds very much with the motley or parti-colored habit of the clowns of our old dramatic poets. It is true that the different hues have been arranged with greater regularity, and the patches are of smaller size. The ordinary habiliments of Punch at the present day, preserved by ancient usage, with his pointed fool’s-cap, bear a much nearer resemblance; and this is one circumstance that evidences the strong family likeness between the Vice, Harlequin and Pulcinella. Riccoboni represents the ancient Harlequin in a dress composed of patches, as if his ragged clothes had been often mended, and Goldoni speaks of him as originally a poor, foolish dolt.

According to Quadrio, in his “Storia d’ogni Poesia,” the name of our hero has relation to the length of his nose: he would spell it Pullicinello from Pulliceno, which Mr. D’Israeli translates “turkey-cock,” an allusion to the beak of that bird. Baretti has it Pulcinella, because that word in Italian means a hen-chicken, whose cry the voice of Punch is said to resemble. Pollicenello, as it has also been written, in its etymology from pollice, “the thumb,” goes upon the mistaken presumption that his size was always diminutive, like that of our English worthy, of cow-swallowing memory. The French Ponche has been fancifully derived from no less a personage than Pontius Pilate of the old Mysteries, whom, in barbarous times, the Christians wished to abuse and ridicule. If we cannot settle the disputed point, it is very evident that, in future, ingenuity and learning will be thrown away in attempting further elucidation.

CHAPTER II.
ORIGIN