t was termed a jig: this was a ludicrous
composition in rhyme, sung by the Clown, accompanied by his pipe and
tabor. In these jigs there were sometimes more actors than one, and the
most unbounded license of tongue was allowed; the pith of the matter
being usually some scurrilous exposure of persons among, or well known
to the audience. Here again history repeats itself in this once more,
and in imitation of the satirical interludes of the Grecian stage and
the _Atellans_ and _Mimis_ of the Roman theatres.

The practice of putting the fools and Clowns in requisition between the
acts and scenes (observes Francis Douce), and after the play was
finished, to amuse the spectators with their tricks, may be traced to
the Greek and Roman theatres; and their usages being preserved in the
middle ages, wherever the Roman influence had spread, it would not, of
course, be peculiar to England. The records of the French theatre
demonstrate this fact; in the "Mystery of Saint Barbara," we find this
stage direction:--_Pausa. Vadunt, et stultus loquitur._ (A pause. They
quit the stage, and the fool speaks). And in this way he is frequently
brought on between the scenes.

It is quite obvious that the terms Clown and fool were used, though
improperly, perhaps, as synonymous by our old dramatists. Their confused
introduction might render this doubtful to one who had not well
considered the matter. The fool of our early plays denoted a mere idiot
or natural, or else a witty hireling retained to make sport for his
masters. The Clown was a character of more variety; sometimes he was a
mere rustic; and, often, no more than a shrewd domestic. There are
instances in which any low character in a play served to amuse with his
coarse sallies, and thus became the Clown of the piece. In fact, the
fool of the drama was a kind of heterogeneous being, copied in part from
real life, but highly coloured in order to produce effect. This opinion
derives force from what is put into the mouth of Hamlet, when he
admonishes those who perform the Clowns, to speak no more than is set
down for them. Indeed, Shakespeare himself cannot be absolved from the
imputation of making mere caricatures of his merry Andrews, unless we
suppose, what is very probable, that his compositions have been much
interpolated with the extemporaneous jokes of the players. To this
folly, allusions are made in a clever satire, entitled, "Pasquils
Mad-cappe, throwne at the Corruptions of th