Th'overthrow of stage-plays, by the way of controversy betwixt D. Gager and D. Rainoldes…Th'overthrow of stage-playes, by the way of controversie betwixt D. Gager and D. Rainoldes…

Yea, even for the branches and points whereunto you stand in the particulars, the four heads of reasons, neither denying their drift, the mark they aimed at; nor excusing them as fair against Momus, though they come nothing near the mark: albeit you deal with greater probability, and therefore carry your self the bolder, yet deal you like your self, and lay still the colours of probability on sophistry. For whereas in the first, concerning the judgement of the ancient Romans holding all stage-players infamous by their law, you said that the Praetor pronounced none infamous but such as played for gain sake, and I proved the contrary by the Praetors words: you reply that the Praetor meant the same that you say, though his words were general of stage-players without distinction. This in the foremost rank, if it will prevail. If not; you add thereto, that the actors of your plays are no stageplayers. But how false both these things are, and how fraudulently sought to be avouched: our betters, if it please them to compare my proofs with your reply, shall see. For Tully, as I showed, affirmeth that the Romans counting all kinds of stage-plays shameful and dishonest, agreed that such as played them should not only want the honour of other citizens, but also be disfranchised: Which, for the last note of infamy, being also witnessed by Livy, and S. Austin having thereupon observed that the Romans counted all stage-players infamous: Gothofredus knowing that the edict of the Praetor did express the judgement and law of the Romans, and marking that the words of the edict were general touching all stage-players, saith in the interpreting thereof that both players for gain sake and without gain were held infamous by it, according to S. Austin and Livy. And this to have been truly said by Gothofredus, I declared agreeably to the grounds of law by testimonies of the Romans; ⟨p. 62⟩of Cornelius Nepos, Laberius, Juvenal, Suetonius, Tacitus, Die, and others. As for that Ulpian (whose words you cited as the Praetors) and Pegasus with Nerva, do say that such as play for gain sake are infamous, I answered that it followeth not that therefore they thought free players not infamous: sith the Scripture likewise counteth a woman infamous who prostituteth her body unto men for money; yet counteth her infamous too who doeth it freely.

Yea, even for the branches and points wherevnto you stand in the particulars, the fower heades of reasons, neither denying their drift, the marke they aimed at; nor excusing them as faire against Momus, though they come nothing neere the marke: albeit you deale with greater probabilitie, and therefore cary your selfe the bolder, yet deale you like your selfe, and lay still the colours of probabilitie on sophistrie. For whereas in the first, concerning the iudgement of the ancient Romans holding all stage-players infamous by their lawe, you saide that the Praetor pronounced none infamous but such as played for gaine sake, and I prooved the contrarie by the Praetors words: you reply that the Praetor meant the same that you say, though his wordes were generall of stage-players without distinction. This in the formost ranke, if it will prevaile. If not; you adde thereto, that the actors of your playes are no stageplayers. But how false both these thinges are, and how fraudulently sought to bee avouched: our bettets, if it please them to compare my proofes with your reply, shall see. For Tullie, as I shewed, affirmeth that the Romans counting all kindes of stageplayes shamefull and dishonest, agreed that such as played them should not onlie want the honour of other citizens, but also bee disfranchised: Which, for the last note of infamie, beeing also witnessed by Livie, and S. Austin having therevpon observed that the Romans counted all stage-players infamous: Gothofredus knowing that the edict of the Praetor did expresse the iudgement and law of the Romans, and marking that the words of the edict were generall touching all stage-players, saith in the interpreting thereof that both players for gaine sake and without gaine were helde infamous by it, according to S. Austin and Livie. And this to haue bene truely saide by Gothofredus, I declared agreeably to the grounds of law by testimonies of the Romans;