Terence has portrayed Chremes as a very amiable character; he is mild and patient, and the most benevolent sentiments issue from his lips. It was necessary, as Donatus observes, to represent Chremes with this temper, for, had he been violent and headstrong, he could not have been supposed to seek Simo, and afterwards _renew his consent_, which is a very important incident, upon which the remainder of the epitasis entirely hinges. The Chremes of Sir R. Steele (_Sealand_) has all the worth of Terence’s original, but is deficient in that polish of manners which renders the Latin character so graceful. NOTE 152. _The quarrels of lovers is the renewal of their love._ Amantium iræ amoris integratio est. In this sentence I have followed the Latin grammatical construction; and I believe it is also allowable in English, in such a case as this, to choose at pleasure either the antecedent or the subsequent for the nominative case. Very few sentences from profane writers have (I imagine) been more frequently repeated than _Amantium iræ amoris integratio est_, an observation which is undeniably just. This sentence has been repeatedly imitated. As by _Seneca_, _Plisth._ “Redire pietas, unde summota est, solet. Reparatque vires justus amissas amor.” THYESTES, A. III. S. I. Affection, though repell’d, will still return: And faithful love, though for a moment curb’d, Or driven away, will, with augmented strength, Regain its empire. And also by _Ovid_, Quæ modò pugnarunt jungunt sua rostra columbæ, Quarum blanditias verbaque murmur habet. OVID, _Art. Am._, B. 2. v. 465. NOTE 153. _Simo.――Yet the most serious mischief, after all, can amount but to a separation, which may the gods avert._ The Athenian laws permitted citizens to divorce their wives on very trivial pretences; but compelled them, at the same time, to give in a memorial to the _archons_, stating the grounds on which the divorce was desired. A citizen might put away his wife, without any particular disgrace being attached to either the husband or the wife; and when the divorce was by mutual consent, the parties were at liberty to contract elsewhere. He who divorced his wife, was compelled to restore her dowry, though he was allowed to pay it by instalments: sometimes it was paid as alimony, nine oboli each month. For a very flagrant offence, a wife, by the Athenian laws, might divorce her husband: if the men divorced, they were said ἀποπέμπειν, or ἀπολεύειν, to send away their wives: but if the women divorced, they were said ἀπολείπειν, to quit their husbands. (_Vide Potter’s Arch. Græc._, Vol. II. B. IV. C. 12.)