Feminine Role Designations in The Comedies of Plautus

Feminine Role Designations in the Comedies of Plautus
Author(s): Z. M. Packman
Source: The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 120, No. 2 (Summer, 1999), pp. 245-258
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1561866
Accessed: 20-04-2018 18:52 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The American Journal of Philology
This content downloaded from 200.3.120.149 on Fri, 20 Apr 2018 18:52:17 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
FEMININE ROLE DESIGNATIONS
IN THE COMEDIES OF PLAUTUS
Z. M. Packman
There is a considerable degree of inconsistency in the rol

nations applied to female characters in the list of personae p
with each of the Plautine comedies in the standard modern edi
purpose here is to compare these role designations as they ap
modern editions with the designations attested by the scene he
the manuscripts, identifying and where possible accounting for
ancies, and to propose, on the one hand, a general reading of th
of female role designations as assigned in the manuscripts, and
other, a critique of modifications introduced by modern edit
tions chiefly referred to are the Oxford Classical Texts and th
and Bude series.1 For role designations in manuscripts I have d
on the text and apparatus of Friedrich Leo (1895-96) as weil a
paratus of the Bude texts.
To begin with the role of matrona: of all characters so de
in the OCT, only one?the nameless wife of the local Menaech
Menaechmi?is so called also in both the Teubner and the Bude edi?
tions. In other cases, those designated matrona in the OCT are c
uxor in the Teubner and the Bude (Alcumena in Amphitryo and P
strata in Cistellaria), or, in those same editions, mulier (Eunomia i
lularia, Cleostrata and Myrrhina in Casina, and Dorippa in Merca
In one case (Artemona of Asinaria) the OCT's matrona is also ma
in the Bude, but uxor in the Teubner. Philippa in Epidicus, Philo
masium in Miles Gloriosus, and Palaestra and Ampelisca in Ruden
each called mulier in the Personae of the OCT, Bude, and Teubne
but Telestis in Epidicus, called mulier in the OCT, is identified as
in the Bude and Teubner editions. In the one play where the OC
the word uxor as a role designation (for the young sisters in St
the same characters are designated sorores in the Teubner, and
(singly) and sorores (together) in the Bude.
lindsay 1903; Goetz and Schoell 1898; Ernout 1932-40.

Journal of Philology 120 (1999) 245-258 ? 1999 by The Johns Hopkins University Press
246 Z. M. PACKMAN
Where the OCT applies the des

laria, Planesium in Curculio, and
meretrix (Philaenium in Asinaria
addition of the word sorores; Se
Erotium in Menaechmi; Pasicomp
les Gloriosus; Philematium and D
in Persa, and Phronesium in Tru
do the same?but in the case of t
inconsistently, describes as puell
Teubner and the Bude (Adelphasi
Like meretrix, the role designa
persons so designated in the Per
the Teubner and the Bude (Bromi
Halisca in Cistellaria, Milphidippa
laria, Sophoclodisca in Persa, Cro
and Astaphium in Truculentus, as
naechmi). In two cases the design
editions under consideration (Stap
culio), and this degree of consist
uncommon female roles, like len
Syra in Cistellaria), fidicina (Acro
denis in Poenulus). Just once the
acter designated ancilla in the Te
lentus is here called tonstrix (an
simply anus in the OCT (Syra in
Teubner and the Bude. In the cas
sacerdos in the Teubner and the
sacerdos Veneris, which becomes
By comparison with those assig
designations of male characters i
Plautus' comedies are relatively s
among the editions here under co
nations in such occasional types a
also with the even rarer designa
dicus. Some thirty characters ar
Teubner and Bude concurring. In
tions, is a slave assigned a more
designated paedagogus in the OCT
editions; Olympio of Casina is des
in the Teubner and the Bude. In
FEMININE ROLE DESIGNATIONS IN PLAUTUS 247
Tyndarus?born free, enslaved through kidnapping, and

captive of war to the city from whence he was originally
the Teubner gives the designation servus, while OCT and t
pand to servus captivus.
The role designation adulescens is also very consistent
by editors of Plautus, with twenty-two characters so calle
Teubner, and Bude. Here again, the exceptional circumstan
Captivi are acknowledged by unparalleled entries for role d
Philocrates is adulescens captivus in the OCT and the Bude
only in the Teubner edition; Aristophontes is captivus in th
adulescens in the OCT, and adulescens captivus in the Bude
Truculentus, Strabax is adulescens in the Teubner and the B
OCT expands to adulescens rusticus. And the role designat
perhaps the most consistently applied of all, with twenty-five
so called in all three of the editions here considered; only in
with extensive damage to the text, is a nameless character
in the Personae of the OCT referred to otherwise in the Teubner and
the Bude: pater Alcesimarchi.
It is noticeable that it is among the most nearly comparable cha
acters?free, citizen-class adults, married or widowed?that there is
the greatest discrepancy in terms of the consistency of role designations
the highly consistent senex, for males; for females, the seemingly inter-
changeable matrona, mulier, or uxor. Are the inconsistencies in rol
designations for female characters in the comedies of Plautus to be
traced to the manuscripts of those works, or do they represent edito
departures from the manuscript tradition? Let us consider the man
script tradition as it relates to the lists of personae printed in mode
editions of Plautus' comedies.
Dramatis personae as such?a list of names and roles prefaced,
like argumenta or didascalia, to the text of the play?are not transmit-
ted in the manuscripts of Roman comedies. This is sometimes, though
not always, acknowledged by editors of texts annotated for students. S
Lindsay: "In accordance with the custom of modern editors I prefix an
'index personarum.' It is not found in the manuscripts."2 Editors of th
standard texts, by contrast, appear to assume that readers will be awar
of the origin of the Personae there printed without the help of sigla o
notes to indicate that these have been supplied by the editor. Lists o
2Lindsay 1900, 111; cf., to the same effect, Hammond 1963, 71, and Kohler 1964, 26
248 Z. M. PACKMAN
personae standing before each

annotated in the Teubner, a feat
from those recording text wh
scripts. Personae lists sometime
Bude editions as well, but wher
couched as to suggest to the un
script tradition behind the text a
of p. 148r, on the Personae of A
thodicus FZ: Fitodicus FJ Philod
Only occasionally do notes on
manuscript readings referred to s
titles. So the OCT, on the Pers
(II. vii. tit.)," and "Serv. Lyc] S
recte."
Where standard editions off
notes are addressed to the perso
never to the role or characte
names. The reason for this may
corded in the text of the Plaut
only preserved in scene titles su
of the text. This is not to say t
adulescens, and so on, might no
text of a Plautine play, but rat
the text, would stand alongside
the limited set of terms in use as
to that limited set of terms, mig
the role designation ought to be
With regard to the relation
corded in scene headings and te
the texts of the Plautine comed
46-48) has shown that the prol
duce the dramatis personae in t
tions known to be connected w
while, on the other hand, supp
relationships meant to clarify t
each play. In the prologue to
scribed as senex (35, 48, 58), w
Personae supplied by modern
(36, 51, 52, 62), and vir (58). Ea
naechmi, by contrast, is designated adulescens in the Person

modern editions, but this term is not used of either character in
logue or in the text of the play, until the very last scene (1066 fo
cal Menaechmus, 1079 for his visiting brother), while in the
each of several other characters has been addressed as adules
lindrus (285, 289), Peniculus (494, 498, 506), and Messenio (10
1065)?characters designated cocus, parasitus, and servus, resp
in the Personae supplied in modern editions. By comparison w
nations employed in the text of the plays, those entered in s
ings are relatively consistent. Each Menaechmus is design
lescens at every point where any manuscript notes his charac
start of a new scene, as can be seen by consulting the notes
headings in Leo's edition; but this designation is never applied
drus, Peniculus, or Messenio in a scene heading. Similarly, the
tion senex, and none other, is applied to Lysidamus in every s
ing where any manuscript of Casina records his role. It is the
be understood, despite the reluctance of editors to say so, tha
designations printed alongside the names of characters in the
supplied in modern editions of Plautus' comedies are deri
scene headings in the manuscripts. It may be that the reluctan
tors to acknowledge the role designations in these scene head
to difficulties presented by this aspect of the manuscript traditio
The most thorough treatment known to me of the scene
in the manuscripts of Plautus is that of Bernd Bader (1970), w
be consulted for earlier studies on this aspect of the text, and for
ough accounting for the various elements appearing in the sc
ings, in the Ambrosian Palimpsest (A) and in manuscripts of
tine tradition (the various hands of B and D, in particular). As
in Bader's study (14-17, 25), scene headings must have inc
some point in the history of the manuscripts, both names an
characters, probably in separate lines, with names standing fi
ing manuscripts list names and roles on the same lines, usuall
order?or sometimes only names or only roles, and this with
consistency. Roles are for the most part not preserved in th
headings of A, and the later manuscripts of the Palatine trad
evidence of attempts on the part of copyists to restore role de
where these had been lost, omitted, or abbreviated in exemp
condition of the scene headings in the manuscripts of Plautus
such as to have caused editors to lose confidence in the role
250 Z. M. PACKMAN
tions there transmitted, and pro

part from, those designations in
the individual Plautine comedies.
Such departures are, however, rare where the role designations
male characters are concerned. In the few cases where scene heading
in the manuscripts give varying role designations for male character
editors normally choose one of those variants for the role designatio
in lists of personae. So, for example, the scene headings give senex
the role designation of Messenio in Menaechmi at 226 and 351, b
servus at 990 and 1060; as the character is unambiguously a slave, th
designation senex is regarded as an error in the manuscript traditio
and all modern editors give Messenio the role designation servus
their lists of personae. There are very few cases?leaving aside the e
ceptional Amphitryo, in which most characters have no role design
tions in any manuscript's scene headings?where modern editors use
for male characters, role designations in their lists of personae which
not appear at all in the scene headings of that play. Lydus of Bacchide
for example, is designated servus in scene headings at 109 and 36
Servus is the designation appearing in the Personae of the Teubner ed
tion, but OCT and Bude offer paedagogus instead. Lydus is both slav
and, as his scenes with his young charge make clear, paedagogus, an
some editors have chosen a more specific designation over that given
the scene headings.
Of the many male characters in the comedies of Plautus, howeve
very few appear in the Personae of modern editions with role design
tions which are not derived from the manuscripts' scene headings.
contrast, a much larger number of the relatively few female characte
have been relabeled with designations not found in the scene hea
ings?but the characters so relabeled fall into a much narrower class
that of free, citizen-class, adult women, married or widowed. All suc
characters are designated mulier in scene headings, with the exceptio
of Myrrhina in Casina and Alcumena of Amphitryo, whose role desig
nations do not appear in scene headings in the surviving manuscrip
This is the case with Artemona of Asinaria, Eunomia of Aululari
Cleostrata of Casina, Phanostrata of Cistellaria, Dorippa of Mercator
the unnamed wife of the local Menaechmus in Menaechmi, and the tw
sisters of disputed name in Stichus. In only the last two of these play
oddly, those where names are absent or given in variant forms?
scene headings in the manuscripts offer alternative designations for t
sort of character: the two young women of Stichus are designated s
rores at their first entrance, mulieres thereafter; that of the Men

is mulier in two scene headings, matrona in a third. The desi
uxor, assigned to five of these characters in the list of personae in
more of the modern editions here surveyed, never appears in
heading in the manuscripts. The designation matrona, applied
of them, mostly in the OCT, occurs just once in a scene head
Menaechmi 701?and other anomalies in the scene headings
naechmi point to a false expansion in this case of an abbrevia
designation.
It is in the Menaechmi that, as mentioned above, the slave
nio is described as senex in scene headings at his first two rol
scenes (226, 351) and as servus only at his final appearance (9
The error, as indicated by Bader (1970, 51), is almost certainl
careless expansion of an abbreviation: even in surviving manu
roles are occasionally marked only by initial letters, and instan
by Bader involve both senex and servus, which are therefore
confusion when a copyist wishes to expand. In the same play,
acter Erotium?unmistakably a free woman not of citizen clas
properly described as meretrix in the Personae of all modern
is so designated in scene headings at her second scene and her
(182, 675), but as mulier at her first and her third (182, 351). Alm
tainly this variance in designation, like that affecting the desig
Messenio in the same play, is the result of careless expansion o
designation indicated only by the initial letter m (Bader, 138
the young wife in the play, she is called mulier at her first an
appearances (559, 571)?and matrona at her third (701)?once
designation beginning with m, and if the scribe has resorted
otherwise unknown in role designations in Roman comedy, th
quite possibly out of awareness that, with the term mulier hav
applied to both the play's young women in the scene heading
the reader is not going to be able to make out which one of
about to appear in this instance. In short, the single appearanc
term matrona as a role designation in the scene headings of th
scripts of Plautus appears to be a desperate remedy of confusio
ing from incorrect expansion of abbreviated role designation
least three characters in the Menaechmi.
The evidence of the manuscripts of Plautus' comedies is therefore
overwhelmingly in favor of the role designation mulier for female char?
acters represented as being of citizen class and of an age to be, or have
been, married. For unmarried, citizen-class girls, regardless of sexual
252 Z. M. PACKMAN
experience or the absence thereo

Phaedria in Aulularia and the u
though it is perhaps to be under
lieres: both designations are app
Curculio (for whom see discussio
status changes during the course
Something of the same sort is
who are represented as household
at the opposite end of the age sc
applied in every case where any d
phitryo (the only character in t
headings), Pardalisca in Casina,
Miles, Scapha in Mostellaria, So
Stephanium of Stichus, and Asta
unnamed second ancilla of Truculentus and the unnamed ancilla of Me?
naechmi. Anus is the designation of an elderly household slave, and tha
role is consistently indicated for Leaena of Curculio and Staphyla of
Aulularia. But the anus is a special case of the ancilla, and in Mercato
scene headings give either role for Syra (anus, 667, 700; ancilla, 803).
Nutrix is a similar case to anus, but that role designation is found onl
for one character, Giddenis of Poenulus.
A young woman unmarriageable due to status is normally desig?
nated meretrix in the scene headings of the Plautine comedies, and i
modern lists of personae as well. This designation applies to fema
slaves owned by a leno, but also to free women of foreign status, ofte
in households headed by a mother, biological or adoptive, who, if sh
appears or is referred to in the drama, is designated lena?another ex
ample of a class of women characters where those of a specific age ma
have a specific designation. Among the Plautine characters there appea
a number of women who seem at the outset to belong in the category o
meretrices but are found in the end to be freeborn and citizen-class?
and so marriageable?instead, and a few who have been or will be s
free by admirers who have purchased them. As there is some variat
in scene-heading designations, and some also in the Personae of m
ern editions, let us consider separately these several categories of
male characters.
In the rare case of a slave meretrix who remains a slave through
the end of her story, or the portion of it made known to us in the play,
the designation meretrix seems always to apply in the scene headin
this is the case with Pasicompsa of Mercator and with the unnamed
young woman of Pseudolus 1038. A slave meretrix found to

and of citizen class may be designated meretrix, in accorda
apparent status at the beginning of the play (so Adelphas
terastilis of Poenulus), or, in accordance with her true st
tually revealed, mulier or virgo (Palaestra of Rudens and
Epidicus are regularly labeled mulier in scene headings; P
Curculio is designated virgo twice, and mulier once). Sim
meretrix bought to be set free may be designated meret
dance with her earlier standing (Lemniselenis of Persa, at
trance, and Delphium of Mostellaria, if we are to underst
sition as being comparable to that of her parallel in th
Philematium), or mulier, in accordance with her freedwom
Ampelisca of Rudens; Philematium of Mostellaria is designa
and mulier in different manuscripts at her one entrance; A
Epidicus is described at different scenes as either mulier
The designation fidicina, as used in Epidicus, might be re
special case either of meretrix or of mulier.
For a free but noncitizen woman who retains that statu
meretrix is normal in scene headings: this is the case with
Asinaria, Gymnasium of Cistellaria, and Phronesium of Tr
role designation survives for the title characters of Bacchid
because of textual disturbances in the earlier portions of the p
Acroteleutium of Miles, but modern editors are almost cer
to have supplied the designation meretrix in lists of perso
cases are identical with those of the aforementioned characters. The
sole example of an apparently free but noncitizen woman found after
all to be a birthright member of the citizen class is Selenium, in Cistel?
laria: scene headings designate her meretrix, in accordance with her ap?
parent status at the opening of the play.
In two cases, however, a free but noncitizen class woman is des?
ignated mulier, rather than meretrix, in the scene headings. This is the
case with Philocomasium of Miles, whose role, however, is noted only
once in a scene heading, and with Erotium of Menaechmi, who is desig
nated meretrix and mulier by turns. The case of Erotium can probably
be dismissed as evidence: Menaechmi is the comedy where, as described
above, senex and servus alternate as designations for Messenio, mulier
and the otherwise unattested designation matrona for the unnamed
young wife in the piece. Almost certainly the role designation of Ero?
tium has been expanded from the abbreviation m?to meretrix, cor-
rectly, in some cases; to mulier, incorrectly, in others. It might be tha
254 Z. M. PACKMAN
the single occurrence of the d

should be disregarded as well, as
taken guess on the part of a cop
ated the role designation.
In short, the role designations
scene headings of the manuscrip
cases of probable error resulting
tions, are fairly consistently sor
the character represented in th
and citizen-class from birth: mul
the young and unmarried in this c
mulier may be equally available
household slaves: ancilla, with an
the older examples of the class.
chased from a leno: meretrix. Meretrix also for women who are free but
not of the citizen class, among whom the elder may be distinguished
as lenae. Female characters whose status changes during the play, or
shortly before or after events represented in it, may be given either the
designation that represents their earlier status (meretrix) or that which
they attain (mulier or virgo).
Where different modern editions offer different role designations
in the Personae prefixed to Plautus' comedies, this sometimes repre?
sents different choices between reasonable alternatives occurring in
scene headings, as for example either anus (OCT) or ancilla (Teubner
and Bude) for Syra of Mercator. In some other cases, editors have re-
placed a role designation found in scene headings with another role
designation applied to characters of similar station in other plays, as
for example the perfectly correct mulier, for Telestis of Epidicus, is re-
placed with the equally applicable virgo. In most cases, however, such
discrepancies result from editors' having assigned to female characters
role designations which do not occur in the scene headings of any Plau?
tine comedy?puella, tonstrix, or uxor?or having adopted for a num?
ber of characters a designation which is only once applied to only one
of them in a scene heading, and that under circumstances which east
doubt on the scribe's reliability, to put it mildly: matrona.
As for the designation soror, or sorores, given in modern lists of
personae for the title characters of Bacchides (alongside meretrices) and
the two young women of Stichus (alongside, in most cases, uxores), this
designation is found in one scene heading of Stichus, while the more
regular designation mulier occurs in two others; and in one scene head-
ing of Rudens (wrongly, as the characters there appearing are not

sisters), while the more familiar mulier appears in seven. The
tion soror is not preserved in the somewhat disturbed text of
or in the more reliable text of Poenulus, both comedies offerin
characters to whom the designation might properly apply. As
Questa (1982, 48), such relational terms are not to be regarde
designations; they are, as shown in the analysis of Bader (
49), glosses for the occasional orientation of readers?rather lik
eius, appearing in the scene heading where both title char
Menaechmi are finally found onstage together (1060ff.). It is
enough for modern editors to include such terms in personae
characters to whom they have been applied in scene headings,
to extend the practice by applying them to characters not so g
the manuscripts?in the fashion of the Dramatis Personae pre
modern plays, to indicate relationships between characters, a
or instead of, the independent "type" of the role.
In fact, as they are entirely supplied by editors, there is n
why the lists of personae prefaced to the comedies of Plautu
not be handled however those editors prefer, even quite like
matis Personae of modern plays, if that is their wish. Altern
it would have made sense for editors to print role design
their Personae which were drawn exclusively from the ancie
headings, offering corrections?by preference acknowledged i
where role designations are absent from scene headings or give
flicting forms, or where a role designation seems out of place
parison with its use in other cases. In fact, however, modern
have combined these two approaches to the creation of lists o
nae, and have done so in silence, so that readers and critics h
unable to distinguish between role designations derived from
cient scene headings?as is the case with almost all male ro
those altered or invented by the editors themselves?as wit
proportion of the female roles.
The results of this choice on the part of modern editors h
fected modern discussion and interpretation of the work of
particularly with respect to free, citizen-class female character
of English-language volumes on the work of Plautus?Duck
classic overview (1952), for example, and Konstan's more recen
(1983)?show entries for matrona, but none for mulier. Konst
menting on character types, observes (97 n. 4) that "Matrona
'married woman,' but, in opposition to meretrix ... it refers mo
256 Z. M. PACKMAN
ally to the class of women who

but it is only modern editors wh
barreled way. In the judgment o
ings, mulier was the role designa
contracting a lawful marriage. D
Questa for character types indica
offers a list of these reorganized, a
Pollux. For women, the roles are
to either; matrona, virgo, mulier, m
trona never appears in a prologu
where it refers to members of t
the play: matronae tacitae spectent,
domi molestiae. And Questa him
meretrix, mulier, anus, ancilla, vi
that Wiles's additional matrona h
sonae of the OCT
For European scholars, relying perhaps on the Teubner editio
rather than on the OCT, it is sometimes uxor, rather than matro
which replaces the role designation mulier as recorded in the s
headings of Plautus' comedies. So Elisabeth Schuhmann (1978
distinguishes four types of female characters in Plautus: virgo, u
rather than mulier or matrona?meretrix, and ancilla. The variation
terminology can prove thoroughly confusing. So to Catharine Saund
"From the plays themselves we get no information concerning the
tails of the regular costumes of the Matrona, the Mulier, and the U
Moreover, the three types themselves are confused and obviously o
lap one another" (1966, 70). It is actually a question of only one ty
with three names applied to it by various editors, ancient and mod
One effect of modern editors' departure from ancient terminol
in the role designation of female characters represented as free an
citizen-class has obviously been to introduce a trace of muddle
twentieth-century discussion of Plautine comedy?only a trace, but
which surfaces whenever character types are under discussion, a th
which happens often in this area of literary study. This can hardly
been the purpose of the editors' actions, and in the absence of dis
sion thereof, which I have not been able to find, I can only specu
that their frequent substitution of matrona and uxor for mulier as
designation represents an act of interpretation. Editors of the first
of the twentieth century wished the characters designated by on
these terms to be thought of in terms of their relationships to t
husbands, rather than in terms of their own individual statu

thought of as wives, in fact, rather than independent persons
strongly enough about this to create role designations which w
mote such an attitude in readers and commentators?so stron
fact, as to suppress any acknowledgment of the ancient role
tions which did not seem to promote such an attitude.
Twentieth-century discussion has certainly proceeded al
lines thus promoted by editors, concentrating on how the adu
of the comedies affect their husbands, or even more particular
attitudes of those husbands towards them. It only bears rem
that the ancient supplier of scene headings assigned a role d
to free, citizen-class female characters which did not draw att
their marital status, but acknowledged in them an independen
of their own, wherein they might be recognized as having int
goals of their own, which they promote to the best of their limi
ties, typically under very trying conditions?like all the other
in the Plautine plays. It might be time to treat these charac
nearly like the others in the Roman comedy repertory. It mig
time to restore their original designation: mulier.3
University of Natal
e-mail: zpack@acpub.duke.edu
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bader, Bernd. 1970. Szenentitel und Szeneneinteilung bei Plautu

gen.
Duckworth, G. E. 1952. The Nature of Roman Comedy. Prince
University Press.
Ernout, Alfred, ed. 1932-40. Plaute. 1 vols. Paris: Les Belles Lett
Goetz, Georg, and Friedrich Schoell, eds. 1898. T. Macci Pl
Leipzig: Teubner.
Hammond, Mason, et al, eds. 1963. T. Macci Plauti Miles Glorio
Harvard University Press.
Kohler, Oskar, ed. 1964. Ausgewdhlte Komodien des T. Maccius
Teubner.
3My thanks are due to Francis Newton of Duke University for his guidance in the
preparation of this material, and to this Journal's anonymous referee, for further advice
and suggestions.
258 Z. M. PACKMAN
Konstan, David. 1983. Roman Comedy.

Leo, Friedrich, ed. 1895-96. Plauti Com
Lindsay, W. M., ed. 1900. The Captivi o
-. 1903. T. Macci Plauti Comoediae. Oxford: Clarendon.
Questa, Cesare. 1982. "Maschere e funzioni nelle commedie di Plauto." MD 8:
9-64.
Saunders, Catharine. 1966. Costume in Roman Comedy. New York: AMS Press.
Schuhmann, Elisabeth. 1978. "Zur sozialen Stellung der Frau in den Komodien
des Plautus." Altertum 24:97-105.
Wiles, David. 1991. The Masks of Menander. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.

Feminine Role Designations in The Comedies of Plautus

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Feminine Role Designations in The Comedies of Plautus

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Feminine Role Designations in the Comedies of Plautus

There is a considerable degree of inconsistency in the rol

lindsay 1903; Goetz and Schoell 1898; Ernout 1932-40.

Where the OCT applies the des

Tyndarus?born free, enslaved through kidnapping, and

personae standing before each

naechmi, by contrast, is designated adulescens in the Person

tions there transmitted, and pro

rores at their first entrance, mulieres thereafter; that of the Men

experience or the absence thereo

young woman of Pseudolus 1038. A slave meretrix found to

the single occurrence of the d

ing of Rudens (wrongly, as the characters there appearing are not

ally to the class of women who

husbands, rather than in terms of their own individual statu

Bader, Bernd. 1970. Szenentitel und Szeneneinteilung bei Plautu

Konstan, David. 1983. Roman Comedy.

You might also like