Rhetorical and Dramatic Performance in Donatus' Commentary On
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
chapter 10 From the Stage to the Court: Rhetorical and Dramatic Performance in Donatus’ Commentary on Terence Beatrice da Vela Aelius Donatus’ Commentary on Terence (4th cent. ad) is the most complete late antique exegesis of Terence’s plays, commenting on five of them (Andria, Eunuchus, Adelphoe, Hecyra, Phormio) in full.1 Scholars have often used this work to shed light on Terence’s words and lines which are not sufficiently clear, or to reconstruct extra-textual features (particularly concerning delivery and performance). Besides commenting on Terence’s language and explain- ing the meaning of obscure references in the text (in a way which is very similar to another great late-antique commentary, that of Servius on Vergil), Aelius Donatus is particularly interested in performative elements, especially the different uses of the voice and the gestures of different parts of the body (primarily hands and face).2 The grammarian is able to describe extra-textual features of Terence’s text in detail, showing awareness of and sensibility to the peculiarity of drama as a genre.3 What remains to be determined is the 1 From now on, texts from the Donatus’ Commentary on Terence will be indicated by the abbre- viation Don., followed by the abbreviation for the name of Terence’s play (e.g. Don. Ad. shall be interpreted as Donatus’ commentary on Terence’s Adelphoe). To avoid ambiguity, each time Terence’s text is quoted, the abbreviation of the play is preceded by the abbreviation of the author (e.g. Ter. Ad.). 2 An example of a note on delivery: Don. Ad. 35.2 Quae cogito quibus et hoc sic pronuntiandum est, ut horrere uideatur ipse cogitationem suam (“the things I imagine, the fears that I have. And this must be pronounced in a way so that Micio seems horrified by his own thought”); an example of note on gesture: Don. Ad. 127.5 [Et]] hoc gestu abeuntis uel abituri pronuntiatur (“And this is spoken with the gesture of someone who is leaving or is going to leave”). 3 It is highly problematic to know the sources of Donatus’ remarks on performance, if Donatus found some of these explanations already in the works of his predecessors (in the Com- mentary on Adelphoe Donatus names as his references three earlier scholars, Asper, Probus and Nigidius Figulus), if he took inspiration from contemporary productions of Terence or other authors (this is the hypothesis of Kragelund [2012]) or finally if some descriptions are Donatus’s own interpretation of the text. For the purpose of this chapter, however, it is not necessary to develop this point further. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2017 | doi: 10.1163/9789004341876_011 158 da vela purpose that such detailed descriptions of delivery and actions had in Dona- tus’ Commentary (for a general introduction to the question see Demetriou (2014)). This chapter aims to investigate thenotes on performance in the Commen- tary on Terence, with particular reference to the section dedicated to the Adel- phoe; I briefly survey the different extra-textual features explored by Donatus; I then intend to discuss the nature and use of these notes and to demonstrate that their aim was didactic, and must be linked to the rhetorical and didac- tic settings in which and for which the Commentary on Terence was created. In other words, this chapter intends to show how information about what should be a dramatic performance—especially notes concerning delivery and gestures—are more strictly linked to the oratorical performance and serve the didactic purpose of the Commentary. That is, these notes do not mean to clar- ify the meaning of Terence’s text as much as to provide basic training for the wannabe speakers; to offer them the opportunity to acquire some rudimentary skills through both analysis of Terence’s comedies and practice (reading aloud Terence’s passages). Terence’s text was particularly suitable for use in school because it was relatively readable and at the same time it provided a strong con- nection with oratory. The rhetorical nature of Terence’s prologues has received great attention, but recently Gesine Manuwald (2013) has explored the deeper interconnection between early Latin drama and oratory, showing that there are strong mutual influences (as far as arguing that early Latin drama should be used as a source for early Latin oratory). Moreover, the use of dramatic techniques in the training of the public speaker is not Donatus’ invention; Quintilian had already used dramatic tech- niques extensively in his Institutio Oratoria, as Nocchi (2013) has illustrated. In the Commentary on Terence, as I will show, Donatus seems to draw his interpre- tations of Terence’s performance from Quintilian’s theory. 1 The Didactic Nature of the Commentary on Adelphoe Before examining the performance-related notes in Donatus’ Commentary, it is important to better define the exact genre of the Commentary itself and place it in its context, as this consideration will be of great help in understanding the proper value of the notes. The didactic nature of commentaries and scholia in general and of those on dramatic texts in particular is an accepted assumption, although it is often generic: “the proper understanding of an utterance can depend on, or gain from, having a sense of the tone in which it is spoken. However, whereas a modern reader would usually be content with knowing.