It does not suit the Baconians, or Mr. Greenwood, to find
contemporary recognition of Will as an author. {0i} Consequently,
Mr. Greenwood finds Davies's "curious, and at first sight,
inappropriate comparison of 'Shake-speare' to Terence worthy of
remark, for Terence is the very author whose name is alleged to have
been used as a mask-name, or nom de plume, for the writings of great
men who wished to keep the fact of their authorship concealed."

Now Davies felt bound to bring in SOME Roman parallel to Shakespeare;
and had only the choice of Terence or Plautus. Meres (1598) used
Plautus; Davies used Terence. Mr. Greenwood {0j} shows us that
Plautus would not do. "Could HE" (Shakespeare) "write only of
courtesans and cocottes, and not of ladies highly born, cultured, and
refined? . . . "

"The supposed parallel" (Plautus and Shakespeare) "breaks down at
every point." Thus, on Mr. Greenwood's showing, Plautus could not
serve Davies, or should not serve him, in his search for a Roman
parallel to "good Will." But Mr. Greenwood also writes, "if he"
(Shakespeare) "was to be likened to a Latin comedian, surely Plautus
is the writer with whom he should have been compared." {0k} Yet
Plautus was the very man who cannot be used as a parallel to
Shakespeare. Of course no Roman nor any other comic dramatist
closely resembles the AUTHOR of As You Like It. They who selected
either Plautus or Terence meant no more than that both were
celebrated comic dramatists. Plautus was no parallel to Will. Yet
"surely Plautus is the author to whom he should have been compared"
by Davies, says Mr. Greenwood. If Davies tried Plautus, the
comparison was bad; if Terence, it was "curious," as Terence was