Cambridge University Press, The Classical Association Greece & Rome

The Slaves of Plautus
Author(s): C. Stace
Source: Greece & Rome, Vol. 15, No. 1 (Apr., 1968), pp. 64-77
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/642260
Accessed: 08-09-2017 16:13 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
Cambridge University Press, The Classical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Greece & Rome
This content downloaded from 202.41.10.3 on Fri, 08 Sep 2017 16:13:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE SLAVES OF PLAUTUS
By c. STACE
BEFORE drama ever appeared in Rome, comedy in Greece had

passed to its final stage of evolution; and it was this form of comedy
-New Comedy-which was to provide the stimulus for Roman Comedy.
It is necessary, therefore, very briefly to describe the various stages of
Greek Comedy, especially New Comedy, before passing on to Plautus.
This will raise at least two important issues: (i) the reason for Plautus'
choice of New Comedy for his models, and (ii) his treatment of the
originals.
Of Epicharmus' the Sicilian (ft. early fifth century) we have few frag-
ments. Apparently he wrote mythological travesties and social comedies.
Of Old Comedy (486-404), a purely Athenian comedy, we have only
the eleven plays of Aristophanes; of Cratinus and Eupolis nothing
remains. Mythological travesty, political satire, fantasy, and vulgar
jesting-all this is in evidence. The Chorus is important, and peculiar
to Old Comedy are the agon and parabasis.z The satyric atmosphere of
Old Comedy depended on freedom of speech, and so, after 404 B.C. (the
fall of Athens) it died out. In the fifth century, Social Comedy was
developing under Crates,3 Phyrnicus, Pherecrates, and Plato Comicus.
The fragments we possess show a marked resemblance to the later New
Comedy.
After Old Comedy, 'Middle' Comedy (404-336), which was a period
of transition. No play has survived, but fragments suggest that social
comedy and mythological travesty were prominent themes. The plot
was usually a love story, involving family types (as in New Comedy).
New Comedy (c. 336-250) followed. Athens, now under Macedonian
domination, produced the great Menander. He, Diphilus, and Philemon
wrote about Ioo plays each, of which only five fragments of any length
existed prior to 1959. That year the Dyskolos was discovered-a complete
Menandrian play-and a clearer picture of New Comedy was possible.
Our evidence shows that (if Menander is typical of New Comedy)
love stories, violations of maidens, exposure of children (consequently
reared as foundlings), misunderstandings, family characters, etc., were
I For his influence see G. Norwood, Greek Comedy (London, 1931), 113.
2 The agon is a contest between two characters. The parabasis was an address to the
audience by the chorus (in the middle of the play).
3 See Aristotle, Poetics 1449b.
THE SLAVES OF PLAUTUS 65
the stock-in-trade of current comedy. Also we
no longer important as part of the drama, and t
are frequent. It is a social drama, with themes o
Scholars have written much on the subject of E
Greek Comedy. Now Euripides was greatly a
generation, and certain features of plotz (e.g. vi
exposure of children) and structure (e.g. exposito
divinities) may be owed to him; but in theme, t
conventions New Comedy is perhaps closer t
Comedy is a complex-no doubt influenced by
phrastus, as well as Old and Middle Comedy, Tr
politics; it is not a rehash of Euripides, as some
We come now to the two issues mentioned earlier:
(i) Plautus' choice of models: Aristophanes was obviously not as

suitable as Menander. He was too personal, his satire too biting, his
themes too fantastic for Plautus' Rome. New Comedy, on the other
hand, was an easy and natural choice, being the current popular dramatic
form of the day.
(ii) Treatment of originals: it is obvious that changes had to be made,
as Plautus' audiences would lack the sophistication of their Greek
contemporaries. Hitherto most criteria of originality have been based
on the hazardous assumption that Menander was typical of New Comedy,
but this is setting far too high a standard. Unfortunately, none of
Plautus' originals is extant, though we do know the titles of eight.3
The problem of Plautine originality is a thorny one. Fraenkel's work
on this subject must still be the starting-point for any discussion,4 and
one of his conclusions was that Plautus improvised on given themes, but
was not a composer. The Plautine slave, Fraenkel thought, was one of
the best examples of the 'inflation' of a stock New Comedy character.
What follows is an attempt to give a brief survey of Plautine slaves, their
importance and function, representation and originality. It will be
shown that a study of Plautus' slaves can be a rewarding study of
Plautine originality.
In the twenty-ones plays of Plautus (counting the fragmentary
I See G. Duckworth, The Nature of Roman Comedy, (Princeton, 1952), 33 f.

2 e.g. the plot of Ion.
3 Three plays of Menander; two of Philemon; two of Diphilus, and one of Demo-
philus.
4 Plautinisches im Plautus (Berlin, 1922).
s The twenty-one, i.e., which have come down to us from the recension of Varro
(see Aul. Gell. iii. 3). Plautus certainly wrote many more.
3871.1 F
66 THE SLAVES OF PLAUTUS
Vidularia) there are forty slaves. In fa

without a slave.' Of these forty slaves
important to their plays; the rest hav
These fourteen could perhaps be div
callidi', deceived slaves, and slaves of sp
the largest, as the slave is usually the a
callidus, the Plautine 'intriguing' slave
their plays these slaves are important
one must remember (as Duckworth poi
Roman Comedy)z that most slaves in P
trickery. Only eight out of twenty-on
type. In other plays there may be tric
engineered by someone other than a
important point that the servus callidu
portion in Plautus' and Terence's plays,
themselves more on the reader's min
point, the trickery is concerted by ma
darus does not really qualify as callidus
There is evidently something in the
which attracted Plautus and brought o
(Asinaria, Bacchides, Epidicus, Miles
Poenulus, and Pseudolus) certainly cont
and indeed some of the best slaves in R
to inject vis into this cunning and inso
and abuse, claims our complete sympa
(Bacchides), Epidicus, Palaestrio (Miles)
(Persa), Milphio (Poenulus), and Pseudol
and Pseudolus are the poet's crowning
A few notes on the more famous of t
Chrysalus is an ingenious liar of the
every occasion. He engineers two dece
subtlety and imagination.4 Like Pseud
himself, as can be seen from vv. 925
where he claims to be a combination
Epidicus manages two deceptions of a sen
his trickery is as elaborate as it is ingeni
of the crafty and unscrupulous intrig
I Of the Plautine plays six have one, thirtee

Incidental slaves, lorarii, coqui, Koi<a wTp608Trwa
2 Op. cit. 3 Op. cit. 250.
* For a comparison see G. Williams's article i
(Mostellaria), must be discovered and are perha
because of this.' But Epidicus is more memorab
a skilful opportunist as well as an artful twister.
cunning to the end (N.B. there are long expository
character). But his tricks must be discovered soon
may detract from their amusement-value.z Pseudo
ing, and boastful in the extreme. He plays a un
Comedy, as he is on stage continuously for 57
for 200 more. He is the controlling figure throu
dominates the action.
The second group-the 'deceived slaves'-consists of Sosia (Amphi-
truo), Olympio (Casina), and Sceledrus (Miles). These slaves undoubt-
edly represent attempts on the part of the poet to avoid the callidus
type; here the slave is not the architectus doli. The Amphitruo and
Casina could certainly be very effective comedies indeed, if they were
both complete (especially Amphitruo with its splendid Sosia/Mercury
scene of repartee and double-talk.). This type of slave provides laughter
because he is deceived, and the audience, having been apprised of the
situation before, can fully appreciate the dramatic irony (e.g. Casina
vv. 915-I6 to 933). Obviously, too, the foreshadowing achieves a certain
amount of suspense.
The rest of the more important slaves fall into the third group,
which I am calling 'slaves of special interest.' Of these, at least three
examples spring immediately to mind: Tyndarus (Captivi), Gripus
(Rudens), and Truculentus-none of these could be called typical.
Tyndarus is quite sui generis, in that he is unfailingly loving, faithful,
and honest. In fact he is in every way too good to be true. He engages
in trickery, but together with his master (and perhaps with some
reluctance). He even risks his life for his master-a most refreshing
change after the normal Plautine slave-and is quite unPlautine in his
nobility.
Gripus is surly and cynical, but pathetically amusing for his grand
thoughts3 after he has caught his vidulus-fish. His arguments in the
next scene against surrendering his catch to Trachalio and Labrax are
very amusing indeed; after this point he plays quite a prominent part
until the end of the play, which closes to the accompaniment of his
grumblings and groanings. The scenes in which he appears are lively
and entertaining, but Duckworth complains of 'weak motivation' and
I See Duckworth, op. cit. 250.

2 Rudens 906 f.
suggests that this proves Plautus to be 'l

personnel than with unity of action'.'
Truculentus is an unpleasant slave in an
is not good,2 and its conclusion rather so
He spends most of his time grumbling ab
and is, though unattractive, an interestin
Finally, like the two senes in Bacchide
volte-face.
These three slaves appear to be characters drawn for their own sake.
True, Gripus and Truculentus are basically comic, but the comedy does
not rely on caricature. They are more character-studies than types.
So much for the more important slaves. The rest are of moderate
importance, playing minor or very small roles. There are the 'ordinary'
slaves of comedy, e.g., Lampadio (Cistellaria), Messenio (Menaechmi),
and Trachalio (Rudens). (Trachalio has quite a large part, but is not an
outstanding character.) The slaves with very minor parts include
Thesprio (Epidicus) and Grumio (Mostellaria). They are often of no
great importance, but are certainly brought on stage for a purpose, as are
all the minor slaves. In fact these are those which Plautus introduces
especially to suit his own dramatic purposes.
It is not insignificant, of course, that slaves are some of the coarsest
characters in Plautus, and that the overriding tone of most of the plays
is one of vulgarity. This is quite natural, as Plautus deals mostly with
lower-class characters, the contemporary demi-monde. In fact the great
proportion of his humour is achieved by such characters, and so their
importance to Plautus can hardly be exaggerated.
As to the dramatic function of the slaves, much should already be
plain after what has been said. In general, it is a twofold function: (i) to
provide humour, and ridiculous situations in which comedy is possible;
this is usually farcical humour, often downright vulgar, and of a
'slapstick' nature; (ii) to engineer deceptions and trickery of all kinds,
and be agents, or directors, of intrigue. Plainly, most of the servi
callidi fulfil both these functions, and more besides. Chrysalus (Bac-
chides), and Pseudolus are good examples.
Of the second class-the deceived slaves-something has already
been said. The conventional role was one of cunning and sharp-
wittedness, and when the tables were turned, and the slave was himself
fooled, the situation could be very comic. Dramatic irony, in each case,
I p. 181.
2 This is the modern view. Cf. Cic. De Sen. 14. 50.
3 As Miss Wilner pointed out in CPh xxvi (I93I), 266 f.
is made possible by earlier exposition (e.g. in Am
logue of Mercury). Olympio (Casina) is 'married'
Chalinus, who is impersonating Casina; Sosia (Am
vellous duel of words with Mercury, who claims
Sceledrus (Miles) is persuaded that his master's sw
self, but her twin sister. By introducing this ty
slave, Plautus can achieve comedy, dramatic iron
Norwood' praises Terence highly for altering t
of the slave-and the same is no less in evidence when one considers the
functions of Plautus' slaves. Most are agents of comedy in one way or
another, if not of intrigue, but there are some interesting variations to be
found in our third group, the 'slaves of special interest'. Tyndarus helps
set the high moral tone of the Captivi. Gripus and Truculentus are
amusing for their uncouthness and surliness (the reader who doubts
that such traits can be amusing should read Pseudolus I. iii.). Such
wretched creatures are made to seem all the more unlikely through the
relative normality of other characters. By such contrasts, Plautus
manages to make these types amusing in the extreme. It is the hall-
mark of great talent.
But what do the other, less important slaves do to justify their in-
clusion in the plays? At the risk of oversimplifying the issue, there
appear to be two broadly defined groups: (i) the protatic and other
expository characters, and (ii) those loyal servants who, to a greater or
lesser extent, help to develop the action of the play.
The first group comprises: Thesprio (Epidicus), Acanthio (Mercator),
Artotrogus (Miles), and Grumio (Mostellaria). These are the truly
'protatic' characters.2 Naturally such a character fulfils the purpose of
exposition primarily, but he may do other things at the same time as,
e.g., Grumio, who helps delineate the characters of Tranio and Philo-
laches in the opening scene, as well as giving the audience many laughs.
Thesprio, too, provides much humour as well as bringing news neces-
sary to the plot.
Other expository characters included in this group are: Gymnasium
(Cistellaria), Palinurus (Curculio), and Sceparnio (Rudens). They all
further the action in some way, setting the scene for what is to come, or
explaining what has happened (this is vital when the plot is elaborate).
Sceparnio sets the scene after the storm of the night before (Rudens I. i.)
has wrecked the tiles of his master's roof, and paves the way for the
The Art of Terence (Oxford, 1923), 144 f.
2 The protatic figure is defined by Donatus, ad Andr. praef. 18. as 'quae semel
inducta in principio fabulae in nullis deinceps fabulae partibus adhibetur'.
shipwreck, as well as giving the play its s

phere. Pinacium and Phaniscus (Moste
appearing primarily as a diversion (while T
inform Theopropides that he has been fo
vital to the denouement of the play.
Another form of exposition is that provide
currens.I These slaves often withold the n
this can itself be a source of humour.' Th
Examples of this type are: Leonida (Asina
768 f.), Curculio (Curculio 280 f.), Acan
Thesprio (Epidicus I f.). The last is both a
character.
A brief survey of the passages quoted s

these slaves is connected closely with t
monologue. Slaves in Plautus account f
monologue as any other character.2 This i
of the monologues being, as they are, for
ing, or exposition of some kind, we can now
of the slave's importance. For humour
slaves), exposition, and deception are the v
Plautine play. (In Terence, where humour
rare, slaves deliver the least number of m
But exposition and humour are not the only
Monologues can explain, announce, or
moralizing monologue, too, is very comm
about the doubling of roles in Comedy ar
various scenes which in no way advance th
supposing that time is being 'wasted' to f
(changing masks etc., offstage). I find th
explain away every piece of non-expositor
in this way would be foolhardy. Until we
act-division and stage-presentation it is im
speculate, though it does seem likely that
by quite small companies; probably, t
Blanck6, The Dramatic Values of Plautus (Genev
slaves made a comic pretence of running on the spo
at Mercator vv. 123 f. Also see G. Duckworth, 'Th
Currens in Roman Comedy', in Classical Studies pre
1936), 93-102.
2 Duckworth quotes these figures: 44 per cent. of
to slaves; 25 per cent. to the senex (op. cit. io6).
3 See his articles in CPh xxxvi (I941), 284 ff.;
Duckworth on Act Division, in his edition of Epid
monologues may be replacing an original Xopds in
as facilitating changes of costume, etc., offsta
Now we come to the second group-the fai
more frequent than one might think; the fact th
not prevent him from being faithful. There is
of slaves who are largely unimportant to the
helpful and decent, patient and obedient, e.g
Trachalio (Rudens), Lampadio (Cistellaria), and
Usually in these situations humour takes secon
other sources, and so these types are not the
then (I would argue) neither is Tyndarus (Capt
loyal slave, who does play an important role-a
comedy.
There remain the usual few who refuse to be catalogued. The
existence of some of these is doubtless owed to Plautus' preference for
contrasting pairs of character. Chalinus (Casina) is a foil for Olympio;
in Bacchides and Mostellaria, too, there are sets of slaves (as well as
other 'sets' of characters) for the sake of contrast. This became a
favourite device in Roman Comedy for the portrayal of character, and
was developed by Terence, whose interest lay more in character-
portrayal' than in humour.
Other curiosities are harder to explain away. Syncerastus (Poenulus
823 f.) is abruptly introduced when the play is well advanced and goes
off equally abruptly, never to reappear. In Stichus, the slave in the title
role does not appear until over half-way through the play (v. 402). From
vv. 641-775 (end) there is a 'festal' conclusion, and Sangarinus, another
slave, is introduced for the first time solely for this carousal. This
strange play, with its episodic form, and curious ending, presents very
difficult problems.
There are also Strobilus and Pythodicus (Aulularia), who have four
monologues between them. They do indeed help to delineate the
character of the miser Euclio (and might thus be termed expository, in
a broad sense) and they do break up the action into fast-moving smaller
wholes-but there is some confusion, due to textualz difficulties. The
Lyconidis servus-whoever he is-actually steals the pot of gold, an
essential part of the plot!
So much for the function of the slaves; now we turn to their treatment
as characters. Are they accurately portrayed, or rather creations of
I Varro ap. Non. 374. 9: 'In ethesin Terentius poscit palmam'.
2 See W. Ludwig's article in Philologus 105 (1961), 44-71, 247-262, for an excellent
summary of the whole play and its problems.
Plautus? This question will run quite natura
the problem of Plautine originality. But to
utter a word of warning: slavery was accepted a
Roman alike, and however repugnant the id
reader, it will do no good to our argument t
present-day standards, as have some critics.
Of course, not all slaves were treated badly by
ably many enjoyed humane and affectionate
doubt led very wretched lives. But while slav
fairly, the picture of licence and leisurely
Comedy cannot be accurate. True, a slave
Plautus he does not lack much else. He can, a
does, live well, if he behaves himself. Few of
ill treated or deprived. Ballio (Pseudolus) does
badly, but this is less a commentary on the
between master and slave than a character-s
dealer.
Almost all the slaves are talkative, conceite

many are gluttonous, lying, sordid, and
character is not one of much dignity, but it
Plautus often allows his slaves too much. He
comedy, and some of his slaves must be gross
reality. These are his most memorable slaves
his most hilarious inventors, etc., not his mo
course, is the crux of the question.
Many other of the slave's characteristics a
moralizing, e.g., and clever repartee are, and alw
among the lower classes; abuse, threats, com
all the stock-in-trade of the demi-monde. P
ingenuity, too, are likely qualities of a subjec
and conceit are surely not (though if slaves
confidants they may well have assumed a positi
which theory never allowed them). However,
are allowed to go in irritating and teasing th
v. 75 f. and Poenulus v. 364 f.) leave us in no
concern is humour rather than realism.
The slaves do indeed take a great delight in trickery-a likely enough

trait, one may suppose. Dunkinz claims that the Plautine slave is driven
I Unlike Terence, he is very little concerned with reality, except in so far as a cari-
caturist is always concerned with exaggerating what is real.
2 Post-Aristophanic Comedy. Studies in the Social Outlook of Middle and New
to deception and vice by poverty and ill trea
shred of evidence for this conclusion in the pl
So far, then, we have found that the slaves
licence in what they both say and do to be re
relationships with their masters and other sup
those characteristics which would be most tru
beyond the limits of credulity. A curious fact
relationships is that the slaves who engine
always doing so out of loyalty to their master
to gain by working against them. The slave m
master, and irritate him by nonchalant behaviou
It seems, then, that the memorable slaves ar
most incredible characteristics, and that it is
more pedestrian roles who provide the rea
Grumio). They have a sense of decency, and ar
reality than the servi callidi, those superhuma
a loss, are utterly unconvincing as real peopl
the confines of the play itself, they provide a
comic business, which more than makes up fo
realism. For the servus callidus, we must suspe
worth the trouble.
Again, the lying and deceitful slave usually g
ment; while Tyndarus, that paragon of loyal
Plautus' preference for the cunning is quite
understandable. It was certainly more import
deception and humour than faithfully to adhe
Very often, too, the slave is forgiven for h
Tranio is forgiven by Theopropides (Mostella
an otherwise admirable play; weak, that is, if we
stick. The endings of Pseudolus and Epidicus
Hollywood make-believe; all this at the expen
great delight of the audience. Wight Duff' p
nalian liberties taken by the gleeful slaves in
farce, cheap and broad'. No doubt the audienc
comedies so much derived much of their fun fro
were watching was so far removed from rea
Comedy atof
judgement both Athens and Rome (Urbana, 1946), 11
interest.
IA Literary History of Rome from the Origins to the Clo
I909), 185.
2 Probably Messenio, Grumio, etc., are much nearer reality than the other plays
(which have been seen to be the minority) would suggest.
slaves end up sooner or later being punished-
Captivi gives a starker and doubtless more rea
than most'-a play which is in many ways mo
Roman Comedy, and quite atypical.
The carousals of the slaves at the end of the Stichus would have been
an unheard-of institution in Rome.z Nor did slaves go drinking with
their masters (Pseudolus, last scene). However, the very incongruity of
character in Pseudolus and Chrysalus was a vital source of comedy.
When a slave compared himself to Alexander the Great, it must have
struck the average Roman as funny. Donatus3 says that serious state-
ments are automatically made ridiculous when uttered by slaves, and
that they are often put in the mouths of slaves for this very reason.
Slaves were, legally speaking, mere chattels. Any attempt, therefore,
on the part of a slave to act as a free citizen would certainly (as long as it
was kept on the stage) have provoked much laughter. Country slaves
worked in chains, some were even branded; they were kept in guarded
work-houses-but little of this aspect can be seen in Plautus. His
picture of slave-life is, therefore, while in general remaining recogniz-
able, in many of its details unrealistic.
Now Plautus must have made considerable changes in the slaves of his
originals for them to have been acceptable to his audiences. Terence,
whose dramas are altogether more Menandrian4 in character, makes
fewer changes, paying more attention to character-portrayal than comedy.
Obviously Plautus, his object being comedy at all costs, made a great
many changes. What did he inherit from Greek Comedy? To summar-
ize the part of the slave in previous comedy is not so large a task as it
might seem; we have nothing very much to support our knowledge of
Aristophanes and Menander, and have, in fact, to regard these two as
representative of the whole of Old and New Comedy; we must not lose
sight of this fact if we are to arrive at a balanced conclusion.
In Aristophanes slaves are usually introduced for purposes of Comedy
(Frogs), or exposition, or both (Peace). There is character delineation
(Peace, Knights) by slaves. Lies, trickery, and impersonation are used
frequently in the plots, but the slave is not the architectus doli of Roman
Comedy. Most of the slaves do help the action along, but are not central
I Duckworth, op. cit., lists Aulularia 387 ff., Menaechmi 966 ff., Mostellaria 858 ff.,
and Pseudolus 1103 ff., as likely to be close to the truth; these are all monologues
describing faithful slaves.
2 An 'apology' is given at 466 ff.: 'atque id ne vos miremini, homines servolos potare,
amare atque ad cenam condicere: licet haec Athenis nobis'.
3 ad Phorm. 138.
4 A remark attributed to Caesar by Suetonius, Vita Terenti 7.
to the action. This poet was interested in political
e.g., Cleon (Knights, Peace)-not in comedy as an e
In Middle Comedy we are even more hindered
New Comedy, we have only Menander (and ver
fragments' of some length and one play). It appear
part in the action, but is not of the same mould as
part. He is more regularly faithful, rather dull an
(though intrigue is frequent). In the Dyskolos, e.
slaves: Pyrrhias, Getas, and Daos. Their dramatic
usual. Pyrrhias enters as a servus currens (91 f.). In th
ter of Knemon is described, and his entry at v. 15
shadowed. Daos, the faithful old servant, makes an
(vv. 206-11 i) to HEvtaz which serves a variety of pur
comedy, but not intrigue; he helps the action alo
standard kind of remarks, but he is not important
In what we have of previous comedy, then, the slav
more than a comic turn, with the added purpose, p
What happened, therefore, between the New C
fabula togata4 to change his 'image'? Have we to se
comic genius and imagination of Plautus himself?
Using the Dyskolos, then, as our evidence-as sch
able to do before-it seems that the Menandrian
quieter than the Plautine, with less farce and buffoon
we have therefore supports the theory of Plautine
So much for the external evidence of Plautus' inheritance from Greek
Comedy; the internal evidence within the plays themselves must now
be briefly considered. K. Westaway6 has some interesting observa-
tion to make about slaves and slave life. It becomes immediately
clear that much of the slave terminology in Plautus is Roman rather
than Greek; some of the terms used, in fact, cannot have had any Greek
equivalent. There were very few vernae7 in Greece, and very little
manumissions until the second century B.C.; branding was a Roman
I Fraenkel in 1922 thought that there was already enough text in fragments to show
the regular trends of New Comedy.
2 Cf. Aristophanes, Plutus 456.
3 See E. W. Handley's excellent commentary on this in his edition (London, 1965).
4 Where, Donatus informs us (ad Eun. 57), 'slaves are not allowed to outwit their
masters, now that they are dressed as Romans'!
s Until such time, i.e., as we discover a New Comedy play containing a slave of the
stature of Pseudolus or Chrysalus.
6 The Original Element in Plautus (Cambridge, 1917) in the section on 'Slaves and
Slave Life'. 7 e.g. Amphitruo 179.
8 Passim, e.g., Captivi 408, 713; Rudens 1218, 1388.
punishment; the festuca' and other things conne
manumission are plainly Roman. Very few slaves
side in Greece, though many did in Italy.
The Romanization of Plautus' slaves is fairly th
minor slaves must certainly be more like their Gr
the servi callidi, for it was unnecessary to chang
fundamental way. In this element-the slave elem
very best and most original. If, as Fraenkel argue
to compose freely, but only improvise on given
area in which his improvisation is most evident. N
more of Naevius and his works-fragments of wh
resemblance, at least in diction, to the plays of P
much better equipped to make judgements about
as it is, we must make reasoned guesses.
The early chapters of Fraenkel's book deal with
running through the plays which are presumably
as they are uniform, though the plays had differe
discusses at length the additions and expansions of
ter made by the Roman poet; the predominance of
as the example par excellence of the 'inflated'
Comedy.
So, in the slave, we can see much that both explains and proves the
originality of Plautus. New Comedy, it seems, dealt quietly with basic
human problems. It was social, perhaps more philosophic and reflec-
tive; character mattered more than comedy; actions were of interest
I Miles 961.
2 But see Westaway, op. cit. (who believes that 'nearly all the slaves are Greek in
character' and resemble their prototypes in Aristophanes and Menander).
Some are perhaps broadly Greek in character, but in most plays the atmosphere, and
indeed characters, are very Roman in flavour.
3 Op. cit.
4 cc. I-3. Nearly all the examples quoted are from the mouths of slaves (a significant
indication of their originality): (i) 'Mythological or other comparisons forming ex-
aggerated beginnings of speeches': e.g. Bacchides 925 (Chrysalus). Mostellaria 775
(Tranio). This is not evident in either New Comedy or Terence. (ii) 'Changes of
Identity': e.g. Bacchides 665, 8Io (Chrysalus); Casina I24 (Olympio). (iii) 'Mythological
Flourishes': e.g. Bacchides 925-78 (The Trojan Monody). Chrysalus' monody seems
more like tragic parody than Greek Comedy translated. (But P. E. Legrand, The Nerw
Greek Comedy [London, I9171, 469, argues that this cannot be Plautine.) One must
remember that Roman tragedy was being performed on the same stage and for the
same audiences within short periods of time. (What fragments we have of tragedy do
bear a marked similarity to this Trojan passage.) This could quite easily be tragic
parody, which would be the natural thing for this type of comedy.
s Fraenkel argues that the original of the Bacchides was a moral tale based on the
philosophy of education, in which Chrysalus would have played no important part.
only as they reflected character. The Romans
Plautus, pushed this human interest into the
further from nature, in the direction of livel
Plautus is after laughs, farce, clowning, and s
and sacrifices everything for the sake of hu
important attempts to achieve this is repres
slave-the servus callidus. This rogue he glo
quite remarkable way, and in doing so, is surely
ter, as well as exemplifying the Roman reaction
philosophic introversion which often found ex
cynicism.
In the Plautine servus callidus, we have possibly the greatest creation
of Roman Comedy-the product of an imaginative genius. Plautus'
great attributes of 'vis comica', 'richness' and verbal dexterity-which
make other Roman comedies we possess pale by comparison-are best
exemplified in his slaves, surely his favourite creations.' Nowhere else
in ancient comedy does the slave assume such importance, neither
before nor again, as far as we may judge, as he does in the role of the
Plautine servus callidus. We may well conclude with Gomme2 that the
Plautine slave (this I take to mean the famous Plautine slave) with his
intoxicating mixture of gaiety, wit, ingenuity, and ruthlessness is the
creation of Roman Comedy-and (my conclusion) the special creation
of Plautus.
I As Cicero suggests, De Sen., 14. 50; perhaps also Plautus, Bacchides 214?
2 Essays in Greek History and Literature (Oxford, I937), 287.

Cambridge University Press, The Classical Association Greece & Rome

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

Cambridge University Press, The Classical Association Greece & Rome

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Slaves of Plautus

BEFORE drama ever appeared in Rome, comedy in Greece had

(i) Plautus' choice of models: Aristophanes was obviously not as

I See G. Duckworth, The Nature of Roman Comedy, (Princeton, 1952), 33 f.

Vidularia) there are forty slaves. In fa

I Of the Plautine plays six have one, thirtee

I See Duckworth, op. cit. 250.

suggests that this proves Plautus to be 'l

shipwreck, as well as giving the play its s

A brief survey of the passages quoted s

Almost all the slaves are talkative, conceite

The slaves do indeed take a great delight in trickery-a likely enough

You might also like