Dicea's Portrayal in Plautus' MILES GLORIOSUS Reconsidered In
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chrysanthi Demetriou DiCea’s portrayal in plautus’ MILES GLORIOSUS reConsiDereD in plautus’ Miles Gloriosus , the clever slave, palaestrio, successfully re-unites his young master, pleusicles, with his beloved, the courtesan philocomasium, after plot - ting against pyrgopolynices, the soldier of the play’s title. With the help of periplec - tomenus, palaestrio ‘instructs’ another courtesan, acroteleutium, to pretend she is a rich matron, desperately in love with pyrgopolynices and eager to abandon her hus - band for him. as a result, the soldier leaves philocomasium free in order to enjoy his new love-affair; hence, the young lovers finally escape together, along with palaestrio. yet, before getting a happy ending, palaestrio faces a problem: a slave from the sol - dier’s house, sceledrus, has accidently witnessed philocomasium in a tête-à-tête with pleusicles, at the neighbour’s implu uium . For overcoming the complications of this unfortunate encounter , palaestrio must persuade sceledrus that the girl he saw with a stranger was not philocomasium but her twin sister, Dicea 1. Whereas palaestrio is free to entirely fabricate his second intrigue, in the first part of the play the slave has to deal with a prior situation 2. more importantly, this first comic intrigue constitutes a special occurrence: although philocomasium, similarly to other comic characters, has to perform a certain role 3, nevertheless, she is the only plautine character that adopts a persona that has to bear her own, identical appearance 4. While scholarship has extensively studied plautus’ exceptional composition of Miles Gloriosus – often in relation to the central question of the playwright’s originals 5, 1 on the invention of the ‘twin’ being a part of palaestrio’s intrigue, see also i.C. Crapisi , Omnes congeminavimus (Amph. 786). Rappresentazioni e immagini del doppio nelle commedie plautine , in Pan 21 (2003), pp. 105-129, in p. 113. 2 C. BungarD , To Script or not to Script: Rethinking Pseudolus as Playwright , in Helios 41, 1 (2014), pp. 87-106, in p. 92, due to the emphasis on the scheme’s conception (line 208), rightly places palaestrio against improvising serui ; yet, there is an evident difference between palaestrio’s first and second scheme. 3 on this intrigue as a play-within-the-play, see t. moore , The Theater of Plautus , austin 1998, pp. 72-74; on plays-within-the-play in the whole comedy, see J.C. Dumont , Le Miles Gloriosus et le Théâtre dans le Théâtre , in Helmantica 44 (1993), pp. 133-146 . 4 F. mueCke , Plautus and the Theater of Disguise , in CA 5, 2 (1986), pp. 216-229, in p. 217 n. 4 observes that Dicea’s case is rare for being “a specific person who is invented as existing in the world of the play”. 5 e. Fraenkel , Plautine Elements in Plautus , tr. t. Drevikovsky and F. mueCke , oxford/new york 2007, pp. 174-179 and C. Questa , Sei letture plautine , urbino 2004, pp. 87-93 suggest that plautus, through contaminatio , might have used two originals. on the other hand, e. leFèvre , Plautus-Studien IV. Die Umfor - mung des Ἀλαζών zu der Doppel-Komödie des Miles gloriosus , in Hermes 112, 2 (1984), pp. 30-53, in pp. 32-37 ar - gues that only Alazon was used, to which Dicea’s episode was added. similarly, g. Williams , Evidence for Plautus’ Workmanship in the Miles Gloriosus , in Hermes 86, 1 (1958), pp. 79-105 argues for the use of a single original, often re-structured or even enriched by plautine material. For a good overview of the scholarship, see also l. mauriCe , Structure and Stagecraft in Plautus’ Miles Gloriosus , in Mnemosyne 60, 3 (2007), pp. 407- 426, in p. 409 n. 4 and 5. the play itself, following the convention, gives the title of the greek play, Alazon (line 86), on which this latin one is based, but not the name of the greek author. however, it should be noted that this is the only evidence for this play, which is not recorded anywhere else (see PCG viii p. 2). Chrysanthi Demetriou the play ’s strong metatheatrical tone 6 and palaestrio’s portrayal as an exemplary seruus callidus 7, philocomasium’s double role, i.e. her impersonation of Dicea, and its dis - tinctive position in the plautine corpus have not been fully appreciated. this paper will therefore focus on the first part of the play, or, rather, the first of palaestrio’s two intrigues. more specifically, it will examine the portrayal of philocomasium’s ‘twin’, particularly what can be perceived as problematic with regard to her status, since, as we shall see below, Dicea, in contrast to her ‘ sister’ , is inferred as a citizen. Drawing on previous studies and suggestions, by treating the play as an ‘au - tonomous’ literary creation by plautus, 8 and by re-examining textual as well as per - formative aspects of this episode, i shall attempt to demonstrate that Dicea’s – and consequently philocomasium’s – representation is enriched by the comic motif of the pseudo-meretrix . to be sure, the portrayal of philocomasium’s supposed twin sister, Dicea, is am - biguous. philocomasium’s impersonation unexpectedly presents a considerably se - rious profile, since, in her first entrance as Dicea, the spectators are confronted with an invocation to Diana (411-414) 9. undoubtedly, the discrepancy between philoco - masium’s nature, being a courtesan, and Dicea’s serious tone would constitute an amusing moment for plautus’ audience. however, this discrepancy soon becomes more intriguing. at first, Dicea mentions that she came from athens with her lover (440 cum meo amatore , adulescente Atheniensi – “with my lover, a young athenian”) 10 , without clarifying whether she is a citizen or a courtesan . the latter is of course nat - urally expected , since she is philocomasium’s sister, and it is also possibly implied by the use of the term erus , a ‘master’ in line 451, which De melo appropriately trans - lates as a “procurer”. nevertheless, periplectomenus, in his subsequent attack to - wards sceledrus, refers to her as a freeborn citizen (488-490; ingenuam et liberam – “freeborn and free” in 490). Τhis reference to Dicea’s status forms a paradox . nat - urally, one may wonder how she can be a citizen while her twin a courtesan 11 . Whereas this puzzling situation has caused doubts regarding plautus’ successful ma - 6 on various uses of the term ‘metatheatre’, see mauriCe , art. cit ., pp. 407-408. in his seminal work, n.W. slater , Plautus in Performance: the Theater of the Mind , amsterdam 2000, p. 10 defines it as the “theatre that demonstrates an awareness of its own theatricality”; i use this term to refer to all instances that re - mind the audience that they are watching theatre, either explicitly, e.g. when the theatrical illusion is in - terrupted, or through passages that reveal elements of theatrical composition, e.g. when there is a dramatization of the theatrical process or when the characters themselves seem aware of their acting. 7 on the metatheatricality of the Miles Gloriosus , see mainly s.a. FrangouliDis , Palaestrio as Play - wright: Plautus, Miles Gloriosus 209-212 , in C. Deroux (ed.), Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History VII , Brussels 1994, pp. 72-86, s.a. FrangouliDis , A Prologue-within-a-Prologue: Plautus, Miles Gloriosus 145-153 , in Latomus 55 (1996), pp. 568-570, moore , op. cit ., pp. 72-77, mauriCe , art. cit . 8 that is, by leaving aside the complicated question of plautus’ original(s), on which see note 5. 9 m. hammonD -a.m. maCk -W. moskaleW (eds.), T. Macci Plauti Miles Gloriosus , rev. m. hammond, Cambridge, mass./london 1997, p. 115 on 411 note philocomasium’s “ritually solemn” tone. 10 plautus’ text throughout comes from W.m. linDsay , T. Macci Plauti Comoediae , vol. 1-2, oxford 1904-1905 ; translations are quoted from W. De melo (ed., tr.), Plautus , vol. 1-5, Cambridge, mass./lon - don 2011-2013 . 11 this problem is also noted by s. papaioannou , Πλαύτου Ο Καυχησιάρης Στρατιώτης , Εισα - γωγή , Μετάφραση , Σχόλια , athens 2009, pp. 441-442, n. 44, on 490. Dicea’s portrayal in Plautus’ miles gloriosus reconsidered nipulation of the plot 12 , i believe that plautus intends Dicea’s ambiguous status to belong exclusively to the world of theatre. in iii.i, where palaestrio asks periplectomenus to provide him with a woman – indicating the role that acroteleutium will assume – the senex asks the slave whether he refers to a citizen or a freedwoman – ingenua /libertina (784, “a freeborn girl or one who’s been freed”). palaestrio’s response suggests that they are looking for a courtesan (784-786, especially 785: quae alat corpus corpore – “who feeds her body by means of her body”). yet, in comic contexts, ‘free’ women practise this profession in exceptional circumstances; more specifically, in plots that use a pseudokore or pseudo-meretrix 13 , which are terms that usually (and rather conventionally) describe a female character who is introduced in a play as a prostitute but eventually proves to be a citizen. as it has been noted elsewhere, this allusion to the well-known motif of the pseudokore can si - multaneously shed light on Dicea’s dubious descent 14 : the fact that Dicea, possibly a citizen, is, supposedly, the sister of philocomasium, an enslaved courtesan, suggests that her representation is presumably related to this comic convention. more impor - tantly, this parameter gives rise to the possibility that philocomasium is also freeborn 15 , although she is not ‘acknowledged’ as such during the course of action 16 . i believe that the hypothesis that plautus exploits the concept of the pseudo-mere - trix is further bolstered by a reference that periplectomenus makes about philoco - masium. the old man characterizes her a pudica concubina (508-509), a “chaste concubine”.