Soliloquy in Ancient Comedy (Ph.D. Diss. Princeton, 1922)

628Go
SOLILOQUY IN ANCIENT COMEDY
BY
JOHN DEAN BICKFORD
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF PRINCETON

UNIVERSITY IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY .
AL
PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR
PRINCETON , N . J.
ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF CLASSICS
MAY , 1920
Published February , 1922
PRESSOF
THENEWERAPRINTING
, PA.COMPANY
LANCASTER
PATRI MEO
SINE QUO FORSITAN NE HOC TANTULUM
QUIDEM OPUS CONFECTUM ESSET

…
…
--
…
…
--
--
-
-
-
-
PREFACE .
The purpose of study was to investigate a particular

this
topic in ancient comedy ,
of perhaps some intrinsic interest , and
to draw from this investigation whatever conclusions it seemed

possible to reach as to the development of comedy , and to some
extent of drama as a whole , among the Greeks and Romans.
For suggesting the topic and for continual aid and encourage
ment in the work the author acknowledges his obligation to
Prof. Frank Frost Abbott ,
for
and several valuable suggestions

his
expresses Prof Edward Capps Prin

of
thanks also both
to
,
.
ceton University
.
Citations are made from the following texts

:
Plautus Lindsay Oxford 1903

Terence Fleckeisen Teubner 1898
Menander Körte 1912
Aristophanes Bergk 1907
Comic fragments Kock 1880 1888
-
Aeschylus Weil 1907

Sophocles Dindorf 1887
Euripides Nauck 1895
CULVER MILITARY ACADEMY

,
CULVER INDIANA
,
June 1921
,
.
TABLE OF CONTENTS .
PAGE
Introduction . . . . . . .
I. The Types of Soliloquy . . . . . . . . .. 3
II. The Function of the Soliloquy in the Structure .. ..

III. The Relation between Latin and New Greek Comedy
in Respect to Soliloquy . . . . . . . ... 19
IV . The Relation between the Chorus and the Soliloquy 28

V . The Causes of the Development of the Structurally 35
Useful Soliloquy . . . . . . . . .
VI. The Causes of the Development of the Structurally
Useless Soliloquy . . . . . . . . . . . .
VII. Outside Influences on the Development of Soliloquy 48

VIII . The Relation between Soliloquy and Meter . . . . . . .
Appendix
Appendix .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
THE SOLILOQUY IN ANCIENT COMEDY
INTRODUCTION .
for
The natural starting -point any study ancient comedy
of
as
whole lies the plays Plautus They constitute the

in
of
a
.
largest extant group complete Greek
of
Latin comedies and
or
,
they are the only large group representing New Comedy around
,
the development Greek comedy
as
of
of
which the culmination
,
,
as
the entire Greek drama and that type
of
and some sense

in
comedy that has influenced modern drama most ,

of
ancient
largely our interest naturally centers Especially for the subject
,
study will soon appear that we are right

of
this moreover
in
it
,
beginning with Plautus rather than with Aristophanes and
in
,
far
general concerns the development soliloquy

so
as
of
in
,
working backward rather than forward ,

.
We consider four main topics first the types

of
shall have
to
,
:
soliloquy the function the soliloquy the structure

of of
second
in
;
, ,
of
the plays third the relation the soliloquy Roman comedy

in
;
the soliloquy new Greek comedy For the first topic the
to
in
Menander and the comic fragments perhaps

of
evidence
is is
comedy
So
sufficient for Greek but for the second not

,
it
long we have not extant plays

as
of
of of
considerable number
a
Comedy complete parts

of
New the evidence the extant

,
Menander ETIT PÉTOVTES IIepikelpouévn and Eauia valuable

,
,
, s
'
'
though yet inadequate enough need confirmation by

to
is
is
it
argument and demonstration from Latin comedy This last

.
topic finally will lead naturally

. of
the causes
to
fourth
,
,
e
.,
a
i.
of
the development soliloquy Greek comedy from Old New

in
to
be
preliminary question importance an

to
of
There one
is
swered just what here meant by soliloquy the first place

be is
In
,
:
in ?
by
by
soliloquy must spoken character the play this

a
criterion the ordinary prologue the Captivi

(e of
excluded
is
.,
,
.g
(e
likewise the prologue by divinity the Aulularia and

of
.g
.,
a
the prologues Mercator and the Miles

of
Cistellaria while the

),
THE SOLILOQUY IN ANCIENT COMEDY .
are included . In the second place , a soliloquy must be spoken

by a character who either believes himself to be alone on the
stage , or deliberately ignores the presence of other characters .
The introduction of this second variety of soliloquy into comedy
can be traced back to the dramatic necessity in tragedy of repre
senting a character as occasionally speaking in disregard of the
presence of the chorus . There , however , the dramatic resem
blance ceases , for in comedy the soliloquy , whether , as occasion
ally , it be addressed by the character directly to himself , as in
Trin . 1008 - 1023 , or specifically to the audience , as in Stich .673
682 , or whether , asmost commonly , it be left without definite ad
dress , is in reality always spoken for the benefit of the audience .
(But here we are anticipating . ) Even this second criterion
proves in practice impossible always to apply strictly , for there
are some clear cases of soliloquy where the speaker ignores , not
the presence of another character , who may even be made the
subject of his soliloquy , but
only the possibility of entering into
conversation with him .
The exact opposite of the soliloquy
spoken by a character aware of another 's presence is found in
the aside , which specifically recognizes the other s presence and , '
while indeed no part of the dialogue itself , not only does not
ignore the possibility of conversation but usually leads directly
to a dialogue following . So , for example , Sosia 's soliloquy in
Amph . 153 ff ends at line 292 , where he discovers Mercury 's
presence , although neither speaks to the other until line 341 .
Between many soliloquies and many speeches in dialogue ad
dressed mere interlocutor
to a there is of course no essential
difference . there is a technical difference , and , if only to
But
some limit for this study seemed best insist upon this
to
fix
it
,
of
distinction especially since take dialogues this sort into

to
,
consideration would add nothing the validity

or
whatever
to
variety
of
our conclusions
.
Plaut Amph 1005 1008 Menander Erit 359

.,
,
g
ff
1
E
'
-
.
.
I. THE TYPES OF SOLILOQUY .
By classification of soliloquies according to type we mean

classification according to content . There are , first, two solilo
quies that take the place of the technical prologue , Merc . 1 - 110 ,
spoken by adulescens Charinus, and Mil . 79 - 155 , spoken by the
slave Palaestrio ; the latter differs scarcely at all , save in position ,
from the ordinary prologue , the former only in that it combines
with the technical prologue a monologue in character . The
consideration of these two soliloquies properly belongs , however ,
to the subject of the Plautine prologue ; they are amply discussed
by Leo ? and we shall have occasion to say little more about them .
The scanty remains of Menander furnish no parallel for such a
prologue by a character , although the monologue by ' Ayvola in
Ileplk . 1 - 51 corresponds to Mil . 79 - 155 in position , and still
more closely to the speech of Auxilium in Cist. 149 ff.
In the second place , soliloquies are often used in the apólogos :
for exposition : so , for example , the long soliloquies spoken by a
slave in Amph , 153 – 292 , by lena in Cist . 120 - 148 , by mulier in
Rud . 185 – 219 , by adulescens in Truc . 22 – 94 . This type again is
fully treated by Leo4 and will require little further space in the
present discussion . The only example of this type of soliloquy
to be found in Menander is the fragment of the ewprós ; the l'
beginnings of
all
the other plays except the Hero are lost

,
5
of
while the extant fragment that play consists

of
the apólogos
entirely dialogue
, . of
which one character mÓOWTOV

in
,
is
a
προτακτικόν
Thirdly the soliloquy similarly used for exposition what
is
we may better call development explanation the plot

of
or
.
pp
Plautinische Forschungen Berlin 1895 194

,
),
ff
(
a *
Weuse throughout the Greek word denote the prologue the Greek
to
in
of as
sense reserving the term prologue for the technical prologue Latin comedy
in
,
or .
, as
this sense corresponds the term exposition Latin comedy

In
to
used
it
modern drama Leo uses der Prolog both senses but chiefly this latter
in
in
.
see
pp
sense Plaut Forsch 171

;
ff
.
.
. .
.
pp
Plaut Forsch 176

ff
5 *
70 .
.
See footnote
.
throughout the play . Men . 446 ff helps to get the action under
way by revealing to the audience how the parasite lost track of
his proper Menaechmus ; Cas . 759 ff helps to keep it moving by
revealing how the slave Chalinus is being rigged up in the house
by the to pose as Olympio 's bride ; Amph , 1053 . ff assists
women
the dénouement by revealing the confusion of identity between
Jupiter and Amphitruo .
Similar examples are to be found in
Menander at the beginning of the action and in the development .6
Such soliloquies usually recount action recently past , as in the
examples just mentioned from the Menaechmi and the Amphi
truo , butmay also serve to make clear contemporaneous action , as
in the example from the Casina . The relation between soliloquies
of this type and the narratives of the messengers in tragedy is
plain enough ; it is well illustrated by Sceparnio ' s running com
mentary on the struggles of the ship -wrecked women in Rud .
162 ff ,
which is neither a conventional narrative , dealing as it
does with contemporaneous action , nor a conventional soliloquy,
being dramatically motivated as a report to Daemones , who is
standing by .
In the fourth place , there is a type that may be called the
soliloquy of announcement . It is much like the soliloquy of
development , except that it is designed to make clear not what
has happened or is happening off stage , but what is about to
happen , whether off stage , as in the case of Rud . 440 ff , ' or on
stage , as in the case of Mercury 's announcement in Amph . 463 ff
and Jupiter ' s id . 861 ff . . Both these last are good examples of
the commonest kind of announcements , those especially necessi
tated by confusions of identity in the plot that contribute towards
the åvayvápiols. Sometimes , on the contrary , such a soliloquy
merely indicates in general the course that the character is
going to pursue , as when Diniarchus in Truc . 434 ff declares his
intention to remain faithful to his faithless mistress . The only
6 E . g., an . 1–64 and IIepik . 276 ff ; Dan . 204 ff respectively .
? Lines 442 - 453 announce that Labrax and Charmides have reached land ,
lines 454 - 457 that the two women will take refuge at the altar within before
they can reach the temple . At line 485 Labrax and Charmides enter and
hold the stage until line 558 , when Sceparnio enters with a short soliloquy of
development (559 - 562) to show that the action announced in lines 454 - 457
has been carried out .
examples of this type from Menander indeed both verge on the

soliloquy of deliberation ,
for
not only the announcement
is
in
both general and somewhat vague but neither case the
is
,
in
action suggested actually carried out
of
course
.'
The fifth type
the soliloquy
of
mere comment which some
,
is
what resembles the third type but differs that deals either
in
,
it
or
stage that already becoming perfectly
on
with action
is
is
off
or
plain without with action stage that has already been

it,
by
made plain some other means numerically the com
is
It
.
type important distinguish this from the
10
monest
is
It
to
.
the
To
third type
as
example soliloquy Capt 516

an
take
in
.
, ff:
he
lines 516 517 Tyndarus remarks that bad situation is
in
in
a
-
he
no
hope escaping from all

of
of
lines 518 526 that sees
it,
in
lines 527 528 he tells

us
which we know without his telling

in
;
-
us
what we already know from Hegio remark lines 509

in
,
ff,
's
that Aristophontes sure

as
recognize him impostor while

to
an
is
,
again bewails his wretched plight
he
lines 529 531 Plainly

in
it ,
-
the least advanced by such

as
the action not soliloquy
is
in
,
a
by soliloquies exposition nor we learn anything new

do
of
is
do
as
about what going happen we from soliloquies

of
to
,
is
of
example this type soliloquy

of
announcement An extreme
. .
occurs Mil 200 215 where Periplectomenus says line 200

in
in
,
–
ego hinc abscessero abs huc interim and then turning with
te
,
sis
illuc vide the audience describes Palaestrio actions

to
,
:
's
during his mental gestation clear that Palaestrio does not

it
is
:
into the angi portus and that most not all the
of
even withdraw
,
if
action Periplectomenus calls attention must have been

to
which
the
already plain
11
audience
to
271
Eau and Ent 522
ff
ff
&
.
.
'
.
pretend flight seems

be
plan
of
the case Eau 271 Moschion

to
to
In
ff
's
.
'
we can tell from the extant part

so
as
forestalled the play that

at
least far
of
,
follows his soliloquy Likewise the scene the ETIT PÉTOUTES 582
in
in
ff
.
'
where Smicrines finally confronts Sophrona there no indication that the

is
,
his
soliloquy are actually carried

he
threats has uttered against her 522

in
in
ff
out
.
by
Characteristic examples are Capt 516

10
and Truc
. ff
ff
553 slave
,
id a
.
.
by
by
Cas 937 senex and from Menander EtLT 340 slave and 487
ff
ff
ff
a
.
.
'
by adulescens
.
We shall
11
37
to
refer especially this soliloquy

to
have occasion below

(p
.
).
The sixth type , the soliloquy of deliberation , likewise resembles

the fourth , except that it does not announce but merely considers
what course of action is to be followed . The sentiment with
100
which Epidicus ends his soliloquy in Epid . characteristic
is
all soliloquies this type aliquid aliqua reperiundumst We
of
of
.
how easily the soliloquy announcement may
of
have remarked
verge upon deliberation and easy see how vice versa the
it
to
is
, ,
soliloquy ending naturally
as
of
deliberation often does with
; it
,
,
some decision may merge into announcement such cases the
in
,
question whether the greater emphasis falls the reaching
on
is
Such soliloquies
of
12
on
the decision the decision reached

or
in
.
Plautus commonly used by the intriguing slave but
13
are most
,
by
by
sometimes also other characters Merc 328
in
,
. .,
,
senex
.g
ff
e
.
Menander still more commonly
14
and
in
the seventh place few soliloquies are used primarily for

In
,
a
as
characterization They are rare even
characterization New
in
,
, .
Comedy beyond types
of
rare the broad characterization
is
.
Perhaps the best examples Plautus are two soliloquies
of
in
the Amphitruo and three

of
15
Alcumena Euclio the Aulularia
in
in
.
hardly necessary remark that any soliloquy that
to
is
It
is
dramatically well motivated will probably contribute least

something Most the at
of
of
to
the characterization the speaker

.
as as
soliloquies Plautus we shall see are not well motivated

in
but ,
usually are motivated that we find elements
so
such
is
in
it
sometimes only implicit sometimes more

of
characterization
,
explicit but still interfused with other elements that the

so
even mainly intended

be
soliloquy can not

or
as
regardedsolely
for characterization Indeed beyond the examples just given
,
.
impossible specify any such soliloquies Plautus and

it
to
is
in
moralizing
of
of
even these there considerable element

is
a
Amph 633 comedy Aul 371 and 466

of
comment and
ff
ff
ff
in
in
.
All interesting
of
these observe are drawn from two the

it
to
,
,
is
the soliloquy
12
Mil 259 which clearly deliberation ends thus

in
.g
is
.,
,
ff
E
267 268
–
(
)
:
res
pugnandoque hominem
vi
res paratast caperest certa

,
;
ita
non reperio ibo

si
,
.
ff, .
.
.
13
Asin 249 Epid 81 Mil

.g
259
ff
E
ff
,
.
by
by
15 14
IIeplk 121 and Eau 337 adulescens Eap 110 senex

.g
ff
ff ff
ff
,
,
E
.
. .
Amph 633 882 Aul 105 371 460

ff
ff
ff
ff
,
,
;
.
.
best plays ; they are
all
excellent far beyond the average soliloquy
's ,
and usually tone far above the common level Plautus
of
in
plays As for Menander long soliloquies that
of
16
the two
,
.
to
the speaker one Eau
of
contribute most the characterization
, (
.
has already been cited deliberation the
as
example
of
an
110
ff
)
Erit only the short one Ileplk

of
other 487 comment
in
;
,
ff
('
be .
.
)
regarded pure example type
of
as
110 can this

ff
.
The eighth type the soliloquy pure moralizing which
of
is
is
,
either merely monologue some general topic generaliza
on
or
a
a
tion from the particulars the play
of
For this
17
some situation
in
.
and the next two types soliloquy we find
of
considerable number a
of
of
examples compared with other types the fragments
as
in
,
,
Middlel8 and New Comedy This not surprising we recall
is
if
.
themotives and methods the compilers whom we owe most

of
to
they were looking for the topical and general

of
these fragments
:
more often than for the dramatic and particular genuine A

.
commentary Aul Gell Menander

as
23
on
dramatic such
II
-
.
's
which we owe the fragments that play the
to
of
IIMóklov
is
,
exception usually we have only the topical passages that an

;
or
Athenaeus would find useful the purple patches that

,
Stobaeus would admire Just the man who quotes Shake

so
(
.
speare seldom knows from what play he quoting For this

is
.)
very reason the question naturally arises how can we

be
sure
,
at
that such fragments are really soliloquies fact we

all
In
,
?
can not fragment contains proof

be
sure Sometimes indeed

,
,
a
.
that soliloquy but just fragment that otherwise

as
19
often
it
,
is
a
a
16
Amph 640
.g ,
E
•
ille
sola hic mi nunc videor quia hinc abest quem ego amo praeter omnis
,
644 645
id
.
apsit dum modo laude parta

,
recipiat
se
domum
.
882 883
id
.
ita
durare nequeo aedibus me probri

in
stupro dedecoris viro argutam meo

a
.
pp
18 17
Der Monolog
im
76
77
See Leo Drama

,
–
.
We indicate the stage the development comedy

of
to
use this term

in
that must necessarily have intervened between the last two plays Aristoph
of
anes and the perfection New Comedy Menander and Philemon

of
in
.
19
Alexis 186 line

.g
,
1
E
.
όμως λογίσασθαι προς εμαυτόν βούλομαι

.
Alexis 245 line

,
2
precisely resembles
a soliloquy contains a vocative to prove that
it is not.20However , from our exact knowledge of such solilo

quies in Latin comedy , and especially from the fact that in
Plautus and Terence , just as among the Greek fragments , we
find the same substance continually cast now into monologue ,
now into dialogue , we may argue considering the negative
character of what little evidence the fragments themselves supply
and the fact that in this respect the vast majority are non
are
for
committal — that the purpose fully
of of
discussion we this
warranted using any fragment this sort provided that not
is
in
,
specifically excluded by
its
specimen type
as
of
own content
,
a
whether that particular fragment was
of or
fact soliloquy not
in
.
The only point real
to
speak
of
contact too much is

it
-
moralizing soliloquy with the play

of
connection the which
in
stands that usually suggested by some point the plot
is
is
in
it
it
Megadorus monologue
So
the situation the speaker

on or
of
in
's
.
by
the bad ways Aul 575
of
rich women suggested the ff

is
in
fact that he intends marry poor woman but might just
it
to
,
a
of
as
well have been put the mouth confirmed old bachelor

in
a
or
like Periplectomenus the Miles hen pecked husband like

in
Demaenetus the Asinaria who does fact express similar

in
in
,
a
by
The two topics discussed Megadorus the evil

21
sentiment
,
.
of
of
having
dowried wife and the extravagance such women
a
with their money are among the commonest subjects for

,
moralizing New Comedy still more

22
There are moreover

in
,
.
general attacks and marriage expressing the

23
on
women
,
Demipho
of
attitude Demaenetus the Asinaria and the

in
in
μοι
φιλοσοφείν επήλθέ
.
ως 79
Philemon lines
,
. μ 1
. ’ -2
γη
τε
ίμερός υπήλθε κουρανό

dégal
.
.
Cf also footnote 158

.
Apollodorus Carystius Euphron Posidippus

20
13
15
line line
.g
.,
1,
;
1
;
E
26
26
lines Nicolaus lines and

,
,
1
2
87 ;
–
.
i
21
Asin
.
Argentum accepi dote imperium vendidi

. ,
.
Cf
also Epid 180 also dialogue

in
,
.
represented by Menander 532 and Diodorus

22
the former and

.g in .g
is
,
3
E
.
by
by
again Plautus Most 702 the latter Menander 326

ff,
.
- .
116
117
23
52
Anaxandrides Alexis 146 and 262 Eubulus Menander

.,
,
E
154 and 535

.
Mercator , but not precisely paralleled by any one soliloquy in

Plautus. 24 Another favorite topic is love, 25 still another the
decay of morals and regret for the good old days .26 Finally ,
we find the purely general , almost theoretical soliloquy , which
we may even term philosophical : 27 carpe diem says Plautus in
Merc . 544 ff , and Antiphanes in fragment 204 . 28
Some moralizing soliloquies , like Most . 84 ff , are, to be sure ,
better motivated than the great majority that we have been
discussing . The two soliloquies on the raising of children in
Terence 's Adelphi, 26 ff , by Micio ,

and 855 ff, by Demea , no
matter how general , are dramatically well motivated ; so is the
complaint of senex in Men . 758 ff against old age . 29 Again , the
slave 's opportunity moralize about duty is always furnished
to
by the situation . 30 But
generally there is no more motivation
'
than there is for Hamlet s monologue to the players ; playwright
and audience were alike interested , and in more spacious times
that was enough . The soliloquy of moralizing is put most
often into the mouth of slave or of senex . It is also sometimes
spoken by adulescens, as in Men . 571 ff , which is of special interest
because it contains a large number of Roman social and political
allusions , such as we should expect find in soliloquies of this
to
type adapted for Roman comedy . The soliloquies of meretrix
in Truc . 448 ff and of her maid in 209 ff illustrate a rare variety ,
i.e. , moralizing without morals , where the motivation is better
than usual and at the same time highly ironical.
A ninth type of soliloquy is used wholly , or at least mostly , for
comic effect. 31 Naturally it is almost always assigned to the
24Except in general by Merc . 817 ff , which however represents the woman 's
point of view .
25 E .g., Plaut . Trin . 223 ff , Alexis 245, Eubulus 41 , Aristophon II .
24E . g. , Plaut . Trin 23 ff , 1028 ff.
the
. Cf. . 419
for
Bacc ff same sentiment

dialogue
in
.
27
The philosophical soliloquy which far more common Greek than

in
in
is
,
be
Latin comedy may much more profitably considered

so
later another
in
,
connection Section VI that we need here only call attention

, to
it
(
On the general subject

28
what we have called moralizing see Legrand

of
pp
Loeb The New Greek Comedy London and New York 1917 439
,
),
ff
.
.
(
For the topic Antiphanes

31 30 29
94
Menander 552 555

cf
,
. .
. .
Aul 587 Men 966 Most 858 Pseud 1103

. ff
,
ff,
ff
ff
.
pp .
On
this general subject see Legrand Loeb 463

,
ff
-
.
IO THE SOLILOQUY IN ANCIENT COMEDY .
lower characters : we find the roguish puer , the blasphemous

so
leno , the bibulous , the rascally trapezita . 32 But the favorite

lena
comic characters are the cook , the parasite and the slave . The
monologue of the cook is not well represented in Plautus .33 To
parallel his high - flown disquisitions on his art , which are fairly
common in new Greek comedy , 34 we have in Plautus only the
short speech of the cook in Aul. 398 ff and the cook 's conversation
with Ballio in Pseud . 803 ff , which better reproduces the content
of the Greek examples , though neither is properly a soliloquy at
all
We find also humorous attack
on
the cooks for their
a
.
by
be
slang Strato which can paralleled only the far more
in
I,
general attack which again

of
on
Ballio the cook Pseud 790
in
,
to ff
.
not soliloquy The tardy cook seems also have been
is
a
.
stock joke Merc 697 698 soliloquy complains
as of
of in
senex in
a
:
-
.
line 741 just
at
the lateness who finally arrives
the cook
,
,
165
Menander EnLTPÉTOVTES the slave complains lines
for in
167
of in
'
-
's
the cook who arrives only As the parasite

at
35
line 384
,
.
of
the nearest parallels Plautus the elaborate defense his
in
to
calling and exposition his art that we find New Comedy

of
36
in
are perhaps Capt 461 The best parallel

53
and Pers
of in
, ff
ff
. .
Latin
of
Ter Eun 232 which because the resemblance

is
ff
.
line 238 fragment 296 from Menander Kólag we may fairly

to
's
suppose closely reproduces the original The parasite the

in
.
as
Stichus refers Hercules his patron but there

line 233 no
to
is
in
parallel for the mythological derivation his calling that we

of
Diodorus By way compensation Plautus offers the

of
find
in
2
.
no
for which there parallel

of
comic auction Stich 193

in
,
is
ff
.
us
the Greek Usually however he shows merely the hungry

,
,
.
69
parasite Capt the parasite dis

or
on as
77
and Men
his in
,
, ff,
as ff
.
.
.
coursing stomach Stich 155 which Diphilus 60

in
to
,
ff
.
Capt 909
32
96
Poen 449 Curc 371 respectively The

id
.,
,
g
ff
ff
ff
ff
E
.
.
on
banker has since risen the drama the best commentary his ancient
- of in
position fragment Antiphanes 159 where bankers are classed with

is
),
a
priests Cybele and fish sellers

of
.
33
the payelpol the Life the Ancient

of
of
See Ranklin The Role

in
M
,
E
.
.
Greeks Diss Chicago 1907

,
.
).
., (
35 34
O 79
Alexis 186 Sotades Archedicus Philemon

.g
I,
,
2
E
Legrand Loeb see

on
Besides the general discussion Ribbeck the

in
,
-
for
kólag Abhandlungen der sächs Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften 1883

.g in
Antiphanes
36
80
144 Axionicus Timocles

,
,
,
,
6
8
E
.
.
THE SOLILOQUY IN ANCIENT COMEDY . II
is similar. Plautus in dealing with the parasite is generally more
realistic than the Greek fragments , though even he hardly equals
the stark realism of Epicharmus in the parasite s speech preserved '
from one of his plays . 37
The chief comic character is of course the slave .38 We have
the drunken slave in Pseud . 1246 ff , the slave in fear of punish
ment in Most . 348 ff and Trin . 1008 ff and Menander 195 , the
slave love (and out of luck ) in Rud . 458 ff . Commonest of
in
all
soliloquy however the monologue

of
of
comic varieties the
is
,
,
running slave which the best examples are Merc
In
of
and
,
ff
.
burlesques which Mercury monologue Amph
. of
Stich 274
in
,
ff
.
.
burlesque There are also two running
's mono
39
984 itself
is
ff
logues call them part

for the parasite where the parasite
to
so
,
's
of
all
differs not that This last fact

at
from the usual slave 40

.
suggests that comic soliloquies are also sometimes based upon
situation rather than upon character We have already noticed
.
of So
the motif drunkenness applied
of
both slave and lena we

to
.
as
find the appeal for help difficulty such the outburst the
in
cook Aul 406 after being beaten and the similar outburst
in
ff
. .
Euclio after being Or we might regard the

of
713 robbed
id
ff
.
as
latter illustrating the motif the search and compare

of
to
it
the soliloquy Cist 671 while hunting for the

of
the slave
in
ff
.
lost casket
.
distinct type
soliloquy easier however recog
of
Tenth
to
is
,
41 to a
nize than which we may call the topical rhetorical

name
,
monologue The best examples are the adulescens comparison

's '
.
of
his character Most comparison

84
house the slave

to
in
,
ff
a
.
37
34
35
Kaibel Comicorum Graecorum Fragmenta Berlin 1899 from

,
,
(
the Ελπίς Πλούτος No other fragment Epicharmus offers any point

, of
of
ή
'
contact with the soliloquy New Comedy and none sheds any light
on
the
in
Epist
58
precise sense which Horace meant his well known comment

in
in
,
1,
, .2
.
-
38
the parasite and the cook see

on
On the slave especially but also

W
,
, .
Suess De personarum antiquae comoediae Atticae usu atque origine Bonn

,
Aris
IV
1905 Part and Haile The Clown Greek Literature after

in
),
,
H
C
.
, .
tophanes Diss especially chapters

to
Princeton 1913
),
5
.
.
C (
39
See Weissmann De servi currentis persona apud comicos Romanos

,
.
Diss Giessen 1911

,
.
).
(
Capt 790
41 40
and Curc 280

ff
ff
.
we
Soliloquies reality what

to
the type here refer are

of
which the
50 in
pp
by
49
ancient rhetoricians meant apoyvuvao uara see

;
.
-
12 THE SOLILOQUY IN ANCIENT COMEDY .
of his exploits to the siege of Troy in Bacc . 925 ff , and the

adulescens ' trial and condemnation . 223 ff ,
of Love in Trin to
which we might add the rather elaborate military metaphor in
Pseud . 574ff . There are no satisfactory parallels from the Greek ;

possibly the nearest equivalents are the comparison drawn be
tween the hetaerae and the monsters of mythology in Anaxilas 1 ,
the analysis of the character of Love in Alexis 245 and the criti
cism of the painting of Love in Eubulus 41 .
far
of
So we have distinguished ten different types soliloquy
.
point out many
as
But scarcely necessary the
of
fact
to
is
in
it
,
,
soliloquies are more less mixed kind We have already
or
in
.
indicated the obvious resemblance between exposition and com
ment and between announcement and deliberation and remarked
,
as
of
how such elements true characterization

there are Latin
in
New Comedy
as
comedy and least at
represented
so
far
is
in
it
,
by Menander are fused into soliloquies that must be differently

,
classified All the different classes however overlap various
in
,
,
.
ways comic element

The for example
very great the
is
in
,
,
.
as
clever rhetorical monologue Bacc 925 and general is
in
in
ff,
,
.
all
be
would expected more often present than not the solilo

in
,
quies slave cite another example can not philosophize

to
,
,
A
.
as
like any freeman

he
does Trin 1028 and Pseud 679
ff
in
ff
,
,
.
.
without raising laugh particular the dutiful slave moralizing
in
a
his duty invariably comic

by on
no
for other reason because

if
is
,
talking
he
he
dramatic irony seldom doing his duty while

is
,
is
about Again Pseudolus drunken monologue lines 1246

it
in
,
ff
.
's
at
the same time narrative past events off stage while

of
is
,
a
Olympio narrative Cas 875 pure farce the only reason

ff
in
is
.
:
's
as
for placing these two soliloquies different classes we have

in
done that the events related the former are trivial and the
is
,
in
comedy the only important effect aimed

, at
the latter
42
while
in
,
no
the events related matter how comic are essential the

to
,
dénouement Similarly the comic appeals for help the

in
,
.
Aulularia mentioned above are also explanations

of
comments
or
,
action just past perhaps the miser

on
laments would not even

;
's
do
as
funny modern audience Harpagon not

in
to
seem
a
's
this monologue immediately preceding the happy dénoue

42
The effect
of
not unlike the typical godos Old Comedy especially the

of
of
ment
is
,
Acharnians
.
THE SOLILOQUY IN ANCIENT COMEDY . 13
'Avare , nor
Shylock ' s for his lost daughter and
his
L lost ducats
- .
Still the monologue the running slave parasite
of
of or
again
,
-
must always
to
the soliloquy exposition
be
related somewhat
development
or
be
On the contrary must not supposed that classification
it
,
a
according distinction type we have attempted
as
of such
to
is
,
,
without sound basis Not only are most soliloquies plainly
a
some one thing more than any other but there are plenty
of
,
soliloquies pure type glance the appendix
of
Table
at
in
A
I
.
are
will majority soliloquies pure type
of
that the
of
in
show
a
writer judgment the passages

of
an
and examination indicated

,
's
their context the plays will test his judgment that the
so
in
in
,
will either find him right easily prove him wrong
or
reader
of of .
This table should moreover show clearly just what kinds
,
., ,
confusion are commonest those that arise from blending

i.,
e
a
comment moralizing and comedy with other types especially
,
,
exposition and development That say all we can pretend
to
is
,
.
assign any given soliloquy

do
the class wherein

to
to
to
is
it
predominantly belongs disregarding the minor elements call
to
,
we wish emphasize the unquestionable existence

so
to of
to
if
them
,
the different types but calling attention them we wish

to
if
,
emphasize the confusion the different types practice

for of
in
.
To
provide however certain soliloquies that will not con

,
,
ten
any types we have distinguished

of
seems
it
the
to
form
,
necessary First
as
make two additional classes the eleventh

to
—
.
type there are some soliloquies that are evenly blended

of
so
-
different elements that we can only call them mixed

So
we
.
find moralizing joined with exposition

22
Truc elsewhere
in
ff,
.
with development and comment likewise comedy with exposi

43
;
as
Men 446 with development we have

44
tion and These

in
, ,
,
ff
.
said are the commonest mixtures but we find also comedy with
;
moralizing comment with announcement deliberation with ex

,
906
position The soliloquy Gripus Rud dramatically

of
in
,
ff
.
.
be
of
one the best Plautus contains explanation

to
found
in
. .,
.e
(i
development characterization moralizing and comic relief

,
,
)
Similarly the topical rhetorical monologue that we have men

-
44 43
Poen 823 Pseud 667

ff
,
, ff
.
Capt
69
Most 348
ff
ff
.
ff, .
respectively
81
Trin 1008 Bacc 500 Epid

.g
.,
ff,
ff
4
E
.
ff46
of
tioned in Trin . 223 contains also considerable elements
deliberation and characterization With these two the rhetorical
.
monologue Most might also be classified except that
84
in
,
ff
.
there the rhetorical element predominates decidedly that
so
even the exposition does contain cast metaphorical form
in
it
is
, .
there are two clear examples the mixed soliloquy
In
Menander
of
up
of
Eml 340 made comment and characterization and
,
,
ff
'
.
Eaj
of
110 characterization and deliberation

ff,
.
.
Lastly few monologues peculiar type always
of
there are
,
,
a
few
very kind which while deserving distinguished
be
of
to
,
,
a
can only lumped together

be
an
anomalous twelfth class
in
, .
These are first the monologue the choragus of of Curc 462
in
,
ff
.
which while consists entirely comment general comment
is
it
,
,
only without even the slight connection that the ordinary
,
moralizing soliloquy has with the play which stands

in
it
;
secondly two monologues that relate dreams symbolizing the
,
the play both by the Carthagin

of
thirdly
47
entire action senes

ff; ;
,
, ,
ian
finally two soliloquies

of
speech Hanno Poen 930

in
interwoven Merc 830 863 where neither adulescens aware

in
is
,
-
.
of
the other presence device employed also Menander

in
,
,
a
's
48
ETLt 214 225

–
’
should by now be clear general how far the classification

It
in
be
soliloquies according type and content can

of
carried and
to
be
its
what hoped that

at
results are has least been

It
to
, it
is
.
at
do
shown that clear differences type exist and that the

in
same time many soliloquies

of
contain minor elements other

be
types hoped also that enough examples have been

It
to
is
.
justify the conclusions such they are that have been

as
cited
to
reached any case more examples can easily be found with the
in
;
of
for
the appended Table As the attempt give exact

to
aid
I.
figures for the twelve different types the calculation depends

so
,
46
as
These mixed soliloquies we shall refer belonging any one

to
as , to
of
the
individual types
of
the mingling which they are composed they contain

of
if
any evidence which that type we have already

of
useful for consideration

is
done citing this soliloquy and using the two mixed soliloquies
26 in
in
in
.eg
,
. . ,
.
Ter
as
Adel and 855 specimens characterization

of
ff
ff
48 47 .
Merc 225 and Rud 593

ff
ff
we
these soliloquies that

to
only the first three

of
shall need mention

. It
is
again
much on the writer 's judgment that the reader may well be
induced to examine for himself the numerous examples that will
appear to him dubious . The table will also show the number of
soliloquies of each type and the total number spoken by each type
of character , and the proportion of soliloquies belonging to any
one type of character to the whole number . A glance will show
to how great an extent the slave, senex and adulescens predomi
nate . 49
49 Table II , which similarly analyzes the plays of Terence , is interesting in
this connection ; it shows that the only considerable difference in Terence is
the reversal of the relative prominence of adulescens and slave , which well
typifies the difference in plot , style and general tone between Plautus and
Terence .
II. THE FUNCTION OF THE SOLILOQUY IN THE
STRUCTURE .
By structure we the process of employing and adapting

mean
the
the development
of
dramatic means to dramatic end
,
.,
i.e
the plot and situation their proper conclusion We define
to
.
the sense which we use the term order make plain the
to
in
in
difference between the point here adopted and that
of
of
view
Leo Der Monolog Drama He concerns himself chiefly

im
in
with what we may call the purely internal economy .
., of
the play
,
irrespective
be
with the
of
the dramatic end achieved to
,
ie.
of
of
as
relation the soliloquy one kind dramatic device
to
,
,
of
other parts the play particularly respect its position
to
in
,
.
So pp Auftrittsmonolog
as
he classifies soliloquies
46
ff
), ,
1
(
(
(b a)
.
Zutrittsmonolog
on
empty stage
an
the character enters

.,
e
(i
.
)
the character stage already occupied Ab
on
enters
;
,
2
a
a
(
) )
(
)
gangsmonolog the character leaves the stage Uebergangs
),
(b
(
monolog the stage

on
the character remains and das

;
,
3
"
(
)
die
pathetische Sprechen über Köpfe der Anwesenden fort
."
he
only his third class that all

It
at
regard considers
to
in
is
what we mean by dramatic end his argument we

at of
The sum
.
may perhaps profitably quote here though the end some

it
,
62
he
what anticipates our page

on
own concludes dass der

in
:
Komödie von Anfang die Monologe eine besondere

an
neuen
für
Bedeutung die theatralische Distinction der Teile gehabt

haben dass auch dieser Verwendung des Monologs die
in
.
.
.
junge Komödie unmittelbar späte

an
sich die Produktion des

Euripides
um
anlehnen könnte aber musste etwas

,
.
.
.
.
.
.
dieser Richtung ausbilden der Chor

zu
die Technik können

in
als apóownov der Handlung beseitigt sein den Euripides erst von
,
Einzelspiel herbeizuführen
um
ein
der Bühne entfernen musste

50
'
."
be
To
return our immediate subject need hardly said

to
,
it
that we have adopted

of
that the criteria are the criteria Plautus

's
by
carefully criticized
50
theory The Technique

of
Leo Conrad
in
is
C
's
. C.
.
Continuous Action Roman Comedy Diss Chicago 1915 especially the

in
in
,
),
(
introduction and Chapter His final conclusions are unfavorable Leo

to
in
V
.
.
16
, not of
the
technique modern technique : question asked was
not Plautus given soliloquy but what use
to
did need use
of if
, ,
,
a
any his play
he
of
of
did make the structure Whether
in
is it
?
or
itself the structure bad good bad according
good
or
to
-
even according
or
modern standards Plautus own standards
to
,
's
makes no difference for our purpose Now granted only that
51
,
.
correct the first four types soliloquy we
be
our classification
of
,
as
easily recognize largely The other types

at
can least essential
Of
we can easily recognize are not essential all
at
as
these the
.
soliloquy suggest character and the soliloquy deliberation
to
of
may useful though not necessary but with possibly
be
called
,
some few exceptions they are comparatively quite unnecessary
.
We not mean that they are bad
do
of
fact some them are
in
among the best all the soliloquies but only that the
of
in
),
by
structure they are practically useless and that them the
action rather held up than helped along Of the 193 soliloquies
is
of
including most the mixed type

70
examined Plautus
in
)
the writer necessary useful 114 not useful
It
to
seemed
,
,
9
.
appears extraordinary reliance
on
that there
an
therefore both
is
soliloquies develop the structure and still more extraordinary

to
a
for
soliloquies unnecessary
, of
number the structure Extreme

.
cases are for example Aul 580 726 which there are nine
in
,
of ,
-
.
soliloquies
91
out 147 lines which are necessary and

of
six
),
,
(
24
44
Merc 661 out

of
which there are four lines three

of
704
in
,
),
(
-
.
which are necessary Menander Eaula lines 271 312 consist

In
s
' '
-
.
wholly two soliloquies likewise Ehlt 457 501 Nor can any
of
-
.
respect
be
distinction drawn this between the better and the

in
poorer plays plays containing the fewest soliloquies

of
the
,
:
Cistellaria the Epidicus and the Asinaria which has only one
,
),
of (
none among Plautus best whereas those containing the

is
,
's
most the Pseudolus the Truculentus the Trinummus the

,
the Mercator the last two have respec

16
14
Aulularia and
,
tively and the Rudens which has the largest number found
20
,
,
In )
)
us
warning
51
how completely
to
this connection there valuable the

is
a
be
modern dislike the soliloquy must Leo remarks Der

4 of
discounted
in in
's
Monolog pp the fact that its frequent use

on
ancient comedy was

3
,
)
.
-
probably due not wholly dramatic theatrical convention but partly

or
to
a
talking aloud
at
natural Greek habit early times one

to
to
of
also least
in
,
,
a
's
self already abundantly illustrated Homer

in
,
.
at least four are mong his best . To consider the plays as a whole ,
Table I will show that , in the plays that contain more than
ten soliloquies each , the number of lines of soliloquy varies from
16 to 31 per cent of the total number of lines , while in only two
plays is the percentage below ten . The significance of these
figures can perhaps be brought out most forcibly if we remark
the
proportion soliloquy only
of
of
that even in Hamlet lines
is
seven per cent
.
III
THE RELATION BETWEEN LATIN AND NEW

.
GREEK RESPECT
TO
COMEDY THE
IN
SOLILOQUY
by
the part played as
soliloquy
of
these facts
In
in
to
view
Latin comedy which the most casual reader must know differ
,
greatly from the facts the use soliloquy Aristophanes

as
of
to
in
tragedy we are naturally led ask precisely what
52
and
to
to
in
In
extent Plautus was this respect following his originals
in
.
other words what extent does soliloquy Plautus imply
to
in
,
soliloquy his original this respect was

or
how much
in
in
,
,
a
a
typical specimen New Comedy like typical play
of
Plautus
of
a
?
The natural way approach this question course through of
II to
is
the appendix tabulates the results
of
an
Terence Table
in
.
his
plays similar that we have made

to
of
of
examination Plautus
.
the first place the proportion soliloquy total
of
In
lines
to
of
,
the six plays from per cent

of
18
number lines varies the

in
in
Adelphi seven the Heautontimoroumenos the highest
to
in
average below the highest Plautus the lowest above the

in
is
,
of
lowest Plautus The average number soliloquies play

in
in
a
.
slightly greater than place

of
Plautus the second the

is
In
in
,
.
different types soliloquy that we have distinguished the table

of
,
all
will show that there are Terence specimens except the

of
in
soliloquy
of
as
technical prologue the soliloquy announcement

,
and what we have called the topical rhetorical monologue

53
The
-
.
no
of
the first type consequence the absence

of
of
absence the
is
second can hardly thought significant the presence

be
of
of
view
in
many soliloquies development comment and

so
of
deliberation
;
,
the possible significance type we shall

of
the absence the third

of
consider later There are only two considerabledifferences

in
.
as
proportion among the different classes compared with Plautus

,
First Terence the soliloquy development and the soliloquy

of
in
,
comment are relatively more common than

, of
Plautus which
in
little importance only

of
however fact Second there

is
is
,
,
a
one comic soliloquy Terence which represents proportion

in
a
be
This point will

53 82
IV
considered more detail Section

in
in
.
be
as
no
There are soliloquies Terence that need classified anomalous

in
.
of the total number of soliloquies only one eighth of the corre

sponding proportion in Plautus ; to this fact , which on the con
trary is of importance , we shall shortly recur . In the third
place , and lastly , the ratio in Terence of soliloquies necessary or
useful to those not useful differs only in being a little higher
than the ratio in Plautus .
All facts stand out so plainly that we are quite justified
these
in concluding that so far , with the exception of the topical
rhetorical monologue and the comic soliloquy , Terence 's treat
ment of the soliloquy differs in no important respect from
Plautus 's. Now we know how closely Terence imitated his Greek
originals . Therefore Plautus's treatment of those types of solilo
quy that are found also in Terence , likewise their place , or lack
of place , in the structure of his plays , may safely be assumed to
be the same as that of the Greek originals .
In addition to the evidence of the plays of Terence themselves ,
the commentary of Donatus furnishes us with valuable informa
tion . First , he quotes four fragments of Menander , three on the
Adelphi , one on the Eunuchus,54 as equivalents of lines in solilo
quies in Terence ; it is therefore fair to assume , if he says nothing
to the contrary , that there were similar soliloquies in the originals .
Second , he comments three times , once with express approval ,
on places where Terence has eliminated a soliloquy that he
found in Menander .55 On the contrary , only once does Donatus
tell us that Terence used a soliloquy where there was none in his
54Men . ' Adel . I on Ter . Adel. 43 - 44 ; a line of which the Greek is hopelessly
corrupt on Ter . Adel . 199 ; Men . ' Aden . 10 on Ter. Adel . 866 ; Men . Kólag
on Ter. Eun . 238 .
est
ne
55On Ter . Eun . 539 : Bene inventa persona cui narret Chaerea unus
,
diu loquatur
ut
apud Menandrum
,
On Ter And prol

14
de
Primam scaenam Perinthia translatam

.,
.
.
.
:
ubi senex ita cum uxore loquitur apud Terentium At

ut
cum liberto
in
.
Andria Menandri solus senex est

.
On Ter Hec Novo genere hic utraque apot AKTIKà apóowna inducuntur
1
;
:
.
hoc autem maluit Terentius quam aut per prologum narraret aut
.
.
.
θεόν από μηχανής induceret Ioqui

.
With this last comment may compared the elimination by Turpilius

be
in
his Epicleros rag quoted by Priscian De metris Terentii Keil III

in
in
I,
,
.
(f
soliloquy the type unfavorably referred

of
the love sick youth

of
of
254
p
,
a
.
-
)
Plaut Merc which was apparently found Menander ErikAmpos

to
in
in
4,
3
's
.
.
-
'
frag 164
(
)
.
original , that instance he implies that there was a good

and in
reason .56 Aulus Gellius in his commentary on Menan
Similarly
der 's Illóklov quotes two fragments of soliloquies .57 The solilo
quies upon which these comments are based represent the types
of exposition , development , and comment surely , perhaps also
announcement , deliberation characterization and moralizing . ,
We can accordingly now go further and maintain that , at a step
least with regard to those types of soliloquy , there is not only

did
no doubt that Terence not use the soliloquy more freely

than his originals but some probability that he used less freely
it
,
, .
This hypothesis receives additional support from the fact that
the two plays Plautus that can safely be attributed definitely
of
to in
Menander the Bacchides and the Stichus and the Aulularia

in
,
,
high degree probability
be
of
58
which can attributed him with
of to
,
in a
of
the percentage soliloquy the total number
of
lines lines
is
respectively figures which
23
we shall soon see

as
18
26
and
,
of ,
accord more nearly with the figures for the actual remnants
the
Menander than the corresponding figures for plays

of
Terence
Menander which vary from seven
to
18
on
based
,
Terence we have shown above surely holds

of
Now what holds

not necessarily true May
of
Plautus But the converse

is
.
.
of
of
what holds Plautus does not hold

of
Terence hold
if
it
,
Plautus originals We must that seek more light

on
the
,
,
is
?
's
topical rhetorical monologue which

of all
not found Terence

at
is
in
,
,
-
soliloquy The one example

on
and the comic the latter

,
.
Eun 223 true we have just seen can safely be attributed

is
it
,
ff
.
the original
an
of
Menander But even conclusive instance

so
to
, .
at
seems insufficient evidence all possible get more

is
to
if
,
it
when we consider that the Phormio play which the

in
in
,
a
central figure the parasite there not one purely comic

is
is
,
by
soliloquy spoken any plays any

of
him nor Terence

in
by ,
's
such soliloquy spoken slave Happily while Terence

,
a
's
us
this point his prologues

do
plays any information

on
not give
,
56
, on
Don Ter Hec 825 Brevitati consulit Terentius nam Graeca

in
,
:
.
haec aguntur non narrantur

.
68 57
Aul Gell
23
Menander 402 404

,
, ;
2
,
.
See Hueffner De Plauti comoediarum exemplis Atticis Diss Göttin

F
.
.
(
gen 1894
,
).
do. In prol . Eun . 7 - 8 Terence refers to his enemy Luscius

Lanuvinus , the malus poeta of the prologues ,
qui bene vortendo et easdem scribendo male
ex graecis bonis Latinas fecit non bonas.
That is , Lanuvinus imitated his originals closely . Now in prol .

Heaut. 31 – 32 Terence again refers to him ,
qui nuper fecit servo currenti in via
decesse populum .
Lastly ,
in prol. Eun . 36 he mentions currentem servum scribere
among the commonplaces of comedy , in line 41 concluding that
iam
69
sit
nullumst dictum quod non dictum prius
.
Apparently Terence either carefully originals
of
then selected
,
type less likely such soliloquies
he
did find them
or
contain
to
if
,
a
original possibility that seems probable

60
his omitted them

in
,
a
enough Donatus that we have just

of
of
view the comments

in
for
quoted For this seems quite conclusive
61
evidence new
.
Greek comedy general particularly when reinforced from

in
Plautus
62
similar allusions
in
The same question regard the topical rhetorical mono

to
in
logue somewhat more difficult prol Phor Terence

is
In
,
6
8
.
.
–
comparing himself Lanuvinus says

of
himself
to
nusquam insanum scripsit adulescentulum

fugere
et
cervam videre sectari canes

,
subveniat sibi
ut
eam plorare
et
This soliloquy the running slave may well have been parody
59
of
of
such
a
walking soliloquy Eur Elec

to
so
as
call that the apéoBus 487

of
in
it
,
ff,
a
not unlike the walking hurrying soliloquy

or
of
which senex Plaut

in
is
.
-
Men 753
ff
.
.
60
Menander really went further than his predecessors and contemporaries

If
distinguishing true comedy from farce seems that Terence was inclined
to in
it
,
62 10 61 go
certainly
is as
even further than Menander far

.
-
afforded by Ter prol Adel

by
of
Similar evidence omissions Plautus

.
.
63
65
and Plaut Cas

6
, .
.
-
ut
Capt 778 eodem pacto comici servi solent Poen 523 servoli esse
,
;
.
festinantem currere and especially Mercury words Amph 986 987

in
;
's
num mihi quidem hercle qui minus licet deo minitari

mihi
ni
populo decedat quam servolo comoediis

in
?
This perhaps hints at a rhetorical monologue somewhat similar

to those Plautus . 63 This evidence is to be sure in
found in
adequate . It is perhaps a little strengthened by the three
fragments of New Comedy that we have already referred to 64
as probable specimens of this type of soliloquy , although , as we
remarked , they also are inadequate by themselves . The strongest
argument , however , is the negative one that we know of no case
where either Plautus or Terence added any considerable element
to his play that , even though not found in the original, was not
at least
the common property of New Comedy . 65 The occasional
minor Roman allusions in Plautus are of course to be excepted ,
for
and even these were doubtless largely substitutes similar
as
the originals
So
Greek local allusions the writer

66
far
is
in
aware the only case where has been suggested that either
it
,
poet used non dramatic source Ter Phor 339 where

is
ff,
a
for the illegible name Donatus comment
ab
haec non
in
's
Apollodoro
de
sed translata sunt omnia Vahlen would

.
.
.
"
for
he
read reference Ennius satires which however seems
to
,
a
's
produce Similarly the only case known

no
good evidence
to
to
,
.
the writer where has been plausibly suggested that any con
it
siderable portion play original

, of
of
either the comic

is
is
a
of
on
67
auction Stich 193 which the basis lines 193 195

in
,
ff
–
.
Leo argues68 could not have been the Greek play Leo
in
an s
.
'
argument we must grant succeeds establishing

at
least
in
interesting possibility but even we grant him his conclusion

, if
,
he
no
we have only solitary instance for himself adduces

a
parallels
.
On
may indicate only

65 64 63
the contrary scene similar Plaut Men

to
835
it
,
ff
a
.
.12
See
p
.
of
of
Such additions exclusive contamination are the addition characters

,
the original
of
on
not found
us
which Donatus informs And 301 and Eun

in
539 and minor alterations dramatic detail where Donatus thinks Terence
of
,
has improved his original

91
on
And 891 Phor 482

.g
,
.,
,
e
See Westaway Original Elements ambridge 1917 which

66
Plautus
.eg in
,
),
(C
confirms this suggestion by comparing the Mercator and the Pseudolus

,
.,
this respect
in
67 Haec verba subigunt med

ut
mores barbaros
discamatque ut faciam praeconis compendium
ut
itaque auctionem praedicem ipse venditem

.
.pp
S8
Plaut Forsch 152

ff
.
.
, we are
the
To sum thus brought to
up the argument conclusion
first that the twelve types
soliloquy which we distinguished
of
of
,
of
Plautus exclusive only
of
the case the first and last classes
in
,
the new Greek comedy contained examples
of
all second that
,
frequent and occupied pro
as
soliloquies New Comedy were
in
,
as
portionately large part the play third that
as
of
Latin
in
;
,
,
a
New Comedy soliloquies played practically the same part
in
in
as
the structure Latin only respect the tenth

in
It
to
is
in
.
class the topical rhetorical monologue that we are reduced
to
,
of ,
-
claiming high degree probability for all the

no
more than
;
a
others we can safely claim absolute certainty
.
The remnants we possess New Comedy will when examined
of
bear out
these conclusions their entirety Table III
in
in
an .
the appendix contains the results of
of
such examination
Menander Επιτρέποντες Περικειρομένη and Σαμία Through
,
'
.
's
as
out Section we referred such examples there are
to
I
soliloquies the different types repre

of
of
Menander All are

in
sented again exclusive the first and last classes except the .
of
,
,
soliloquy exposition the comic soliloquy and the rhetorical
. of
monologue The last we have discussed fully

69
The absence
.
we have already sug

of
as
the comic soliloquy can only mean

,
gested connection with its rarity Terence that Menander

in
in
,
,
or
individually avoided else that the fragments we have are

it
it ,
all from plays where happened not occur such plays of as

to
by
as
Terence preference chose his originals The soliloquy

.
exposition would doubtless be found we had preserved the

if
beginnings plays Menander Tewprós

of
the since found

is
in
,
it
's
common enough The only striking difference

70
and Terence
is
in
Menander justifies
69
two soliloquies
of of (p of
of
The occurrence announcement

in
significance
19
no
of
our conclusion above that their absence

is
Terence
of in
.
. .
)
the opinion Prof Edward Capps University

M 70
Prof
. In
Princeton
,
.
Yale University has demonstrated that the Peters

St
Harmon now
A
,
,
.
.
by
burg fragment placed Capps Four Plays Menander Boston etc

of
in
.,
,
really belongs
as
1910 after line 408 and printed by Körte Fabula Incerta

II,
,
)
ET
the apóloyos that case we have two soliloquies

LT
of
to
the PÉTOVTES
In
in
.
'
the apóloyos one exposition one moralizing Harmon also argued that
of
of
,
,
soliloquy also belongs the

of
the rôle the cook who has

to
lines 391
in
,
ff,
a
still
of
pólovos The results his study were not published and his papers are
,
.
the intervention the war

of
of
inaccessible because
,
.
in proportion is the relatively large number in Menander of

soliloquies for characterization , as compared to the Latin come
dians , a difference which is perhaps not surprising .
If we had these three plays complete , the results of an examina
tion might be somewhat different , although it is scarcely con
ceivable that they could be fundamentally so . At any rate , as
they stand , the average number of soliloquies to a play and the
percentage of lines of soliloquy in the total number of lines are
higher than in either Plautus or Terence . 71 Moreover , the three
plays of Plautus that may be attributed to Menander show , as
we have pointed out above , a percentage of lines of soliloquy
for
likewise considerably
higher than the average Plautus
, of all so
, ,
at
that this question least for Menander individually

on
,
be
doubts may safely dismissed Menander the proportion

In
.
necessary and useful soliloquies per cent

50
46
Terence in
is
Plautus 41 Menander senex adulescens and slave together

in
In
, ,
.
all
per cent soliloquies

85
83
80
of
have Terence Plautus

,
in
in
.
as for
Surely these facts speak plainly enough themselves

.
The comic fragments we have used possible

as
much
in
furnish examples different types soliloquy For
of
of
Section
to
I
.
by
all
the part played

as
questions soliloquies the structure

to
in
of
all
they were At most

be
course almost useless they could

.
expected prove the existence New Comedy such struc

to
of
is
in
moralizing and comedy

as
turally unnecessary soliloquies

of
those
.
For
of
that we have demonstrated the presence

now such solilo
quies by more reliable evidence we may more safely take the
,
fragments philosophizing and the speeches cooks and para

of
of
as
examples soliloquy even though we can seldom prove

of
sites
,
do
conclusively that they were soliloquies few fragments

,
A
.
however really supply probable examples structurally neces

of
,
sary soliloquies parallel

13
Menander seems Plaut Bacc

to
a
:
170 where the returned traveler greets his homeland and

ff,
Antiphanes 206 and Diphilus Aul

33
371 where the man

to
. ff,
.
returning market complains high prices

of
from
be
The conclusions that we have thus reached may perhaps

further confirmed negative way the first place we
In
in
if
,
a
.
of
examine the comedies Plautus reference the authors

to
with
71
17
12
32
The average percentage Plautus Terence Menander

in
in
in
is
.
of the originals , 72 we find that in the Mercator , the Mostellaria

and the Trinummus , which we
know were translations of Phile
mon , the average percentage of lines of soliloquy in the total
number of lines is 23 , slightly higher than the average for the
plays from Menander , while in the Rudens and the Casina of
Diphilus73 it is 16 , somewhat lower . This would seem to indicate
that, even though the figures for Menander , or
for
the plays
of
Plautus based Menander are higher than the average for
on
if ,
be
all the Plautine plays little any significance can attached
,
ly
this fact For we conclude that Menander did rea use
to
if
.
soliloquy more freely ordinary poet Comedy
of
the than the New
,
too we must conclude did Philemon But since the
so
then
,
for
Diphilus
for
average not only lower than that Menander

is
and Philemon but also little lower than the average for Plautus
,
,
a
while the two plays Diphilus upon which the average

of
based
is
respect soliloquies opposite
at
of
stand number almost

in
to
,
,
there are only nine the asagainst
20
extremes the Casina
in
in
it (
Rudens suppose that none
of
seems more reasonable the
to
),
no
long suppose
as
differences matter much we find

so
reason
to
,
that soliloquy New Comedy was less common than Plautus

in
in
,
find that nothing disturb our conclusion that this
to
is
in
,
,
-
respect new Greek comedy and Plautine comedy were exactly

Plautus that commonly assigned
to
The one play
of
an
alike
is
.
origiral Comedy percentage

of
Middle the Persa

74
shows
,
.,
,
i.e
a
of
soliloquy percentage
12
lower than the we have found

in
(
)
Menander Philemon and Diphilus and lower than the general

,
average Plautus but the difference hardly great enough

is
in
any infer
us
nor one example sufficient allow base thereon

to
to
,
throughout
of
gradual increase the soliloquy

to
as
ence use
in
a
Middle Comedy only culminating the New represented

as
in
,
,
by
Menander although such gradual development

is
.,
,
g
e
a
.
plausible
as
and we shall soon reason think indeed

to
see
,
probable the second place the plays

of of
we examine
if
In
,
.
his
Leo attempts something particular

72
this sort point

. of
from own
,
.pp
Der Monolog
63
view
Of in
ff
,
,
all
the original
73
plays except
of
these the Mostellaria the author

is
named the prologue for the last see Hueffner De Plauti comoediarum
in
,
;
etc 68
p
74 ,
.
.
.
pp
70
See Hueffner
,
ff
.
.
Plautus from the point of view of date of composition , we are

brought back again to the same conclusion . The use of soliloquy
does not depend in the least on any special development of
Plautus ' s own technique or on any growth of his originality . For
(to take a few easily dated examples ) in the Menaechmi and the
Stichus , both early plays , 75 the percentage of lines of soliloquy
is 14 and 23 respectively ; in the Poenulus, the Pseudolus and the
,
all
respectively
76
16
28
Truculentus late and
,
7
,
.
by
King
75
be
The Menaechmi can the allusion
to
dated lines 408 409
in
-
of
Hiero Syracuse who died still living assigned by

as
215 the Stichus

in
is
,
;
the didascalia
to
200
.
by
76
The Poenulus placed after the capture Sparta of189 line 665
in
is
,
the previous capture 222 being out the question because the frequent
of
of
of in
mention the play Philippean money which came into use first 194
in
in
;
,
the Pseudolus placed 191 by the didascalia and the Truculentus classed
of in
is
,
as
Plautus old age by Cicero
14
50
with production De Senectute
in
it
,
,
's
.
IV . THE RELATION BETWEEN THE CHORUS AND
THE SOLILOQUY .
If
we are to account for the part played by the soliloquy in
New Comedy , it is necessary first to see what its function was in
Old Comedy and tragedy , where
its
use was still conditioned
by
the presence Referring

of
of
the chorus our definition
to
.
soliloquy the introduction we should naturally infer that
in
,
to in
tragedy
as
consider that first far concerns the chorus
so
—
,
-
soliloquy can occur only the apólovos thereafter only
or
in
,
a
be
dramatically possible for ignore
to
when would character
it
a
of
the presence the chorus or when the chorus leaves the stage
,
entirely The other alternative that we mentioned for New

, .
Comedy that character should without ignoring the pres

.,
a
ie.
of
another still ignore the possibility conversation with
of of
ence
scarcely conceivable the case chorus that
is
is
him
in
,
a
normally present throughout the whole the play after the
of of
póloyos The question the presence
of
second character
a
a
.
all
at
long
do
we
as
not here need consider the chorus
so
to
is
,
present
.
tragedy
be
This inference we find fact correct In

to
in
soliloquies are already used the apóloyos by Aeschylus

in
and Sophocles Elsewhere they use the soliloquy only where

77
.
psychologically and dramatically plausible that character

it
is
should ignore the presence The few examples

of
the chorus of
.
such soliloquies are all this type and all dramatically well
of
frenzy the greeting Agamemnon

, of
motivated herald
Io
to
,
:
's
's
prophecy the soliloquy Ajax

of
the fatherland Cassandra

,
's
he
where ignores Tecmessa also and Teucer soliloquy over

'
(
thes
are
the dead body only examples

. of
78
his brother These

.
before Euripides the soliloquy Ajax

of
The only other case

is
his leaving the chorus before his

on
alone the shore between

,
at
and their reappearance the shore line 866

at
79
on
tent line 814

.
are
69
77
88
The only Prometheus Sept

ff
cases Aesch Prom the

; ff ),
ff
.
.
(
prayer Agam the priestess

of
Eteocles the watchman Eum

ff
),
),
ff ),
.
.
i
I
(
(
94
the ghost Clytaemnestra the sleeping Furies Soph

of
to
Trac
id
ff
,
.
I
86
Deianeira Elec Electra

566 ff
),
).
.
(
.Aj
78
Aesch Prom and 877 Agam 503 523 1072 Soph

id
;
;
ff
ff
ff
–
. .
646 992 1027 respectively

id
ff;
con
79
on
The presence mutes the stage have been almost

of
which must
,
-
.
28
At this point we should perhaps call attention to the very

common confusion of soliloquy and apostrophe . We find this
the
already in the fatherland just mentioned from the
to
address
Agamemnon
80
the address house tomb which
or
to
and
in
,
,
a
by
we find represented New Comedy respectively the greeting
in
the fatherland Plaut Bacc 170 and Menander and

in
by to
1381
ff
.
.
the farewell the ancestral home Plaut Merc 830
ff
to
in
, .
.
all
Probably these certainly least those comedy we may at
in
,
safely call soliloquies the frequent apos
of
But the case
in
.
trophes express strong emotion particularly Sophocles
82
in
to
,
used the soliloquy mostly for ráðos
as
83
who Leo remarks
it
,
,
of
seems impossible say that the presence the chorus was
to
really ignored We need therefore add soliloquies

no
from this
.
source those just enumerated

to
it .
all
Aeschylus and Sophocles important observe that
to
In
is
of
these soliloquies are carefully motivated Not speak those
to
.
that occur after the apóloyos where instance the high every
in
,
feeling under which the character speaks makes the

of
tension
presence the chorus inconsequential the soliloquies
of
the
in
,
póloyos also are each one thoroughly natural and convincing

T
.
Euripides the contrary almost entirely abandoned dramatic
on
,
,
for
soliloquies the apóloyos soliloquies

of
motivation
in
,
.,
.ie
We need not
of
exposition here speak the typical Euripidean

.
by
prologue delivered god whether the god reappears the

,
in
a
by
play
or
then only soliloquies spoken

To
not consider other

,
,
.
be
as
tinuous tragedy need not taken into account this connection

in
in
, it
,
was always quite natural for ignore their presence For example
to
character
a
Eur Elec
an
150 Electra addresses attendant whose presence

in
140 and
is
.
.
by
proved line 218 and yet lines 112 166 are clearly soliloquy
,
a
-
Eur Herc Fur

to
to
house 523 Orest 356 Bacc 1024

.g
ff;
.,
ff,
ff,
$
0
E
a
.
tomb Hel 1165

ff
.
Old Comedy by
Also new fragment the Aņuol Eupolis which
of
in
of
$
1
may be soliloquy published by Körte Hermes 1912 pp 276 Fragmente

in
a
ff
,
(
.
as
einder Handschrift der Demen des Eupolis

13
14
of
which lines read

Iv
,
)
:
γη
σε
πατρώα χαίρε γάρ ασπάζομαι

ώ
πασών πόλεων εκπαγλοτάτη και φιλτάτη

.
of
82
Phil Trac 983

1081 Elec 1126 the case
.g
1391
in
,
ff,
E
ff
ff
,
ff
,
0
;
of T
.
.
.
the last two we

should also remember the influence the conventional public
or
semi ublic forms

of
lamentation
.
-p
83
Der Monolog
13
p
,
.
.
characters , we find that only in the Cyclops is both the presence

and the speech of the character ( Silenus ) in the apóloyos moti
vated .84 In the Medea , on the contrary , wherein lines 57 - 5885
the nurse even states her motive for speaking as she does in her
soliloquy in lines 1 - 48 , yet it is plain that her only purpose , either
in coming out of the house when she did or in speaking as she
did , was address the audience .
to The motivation here given is
not only longer genuine , as Leo shows that it was in Homer , 86
no
nor even dramatically logical , as it is in the two places where it

is adduced in Aeschylus, 87 but purely conventional and wholly
unreal , as it always is wherever it is found in Euripides . 88 Pre
cisely the same may be said of the same motivation , i .e ., the
address the elements , with the added motif of sleeplessness ,
to
that we in Elec . 54 ff . We may accordingly be sure that
find
whenever we find this motivation in comedy89 it is likewise
wholly artificial , and conceals but slightly a speech designed
for
merely
of
the benefit the audience The case the same
is
.
the motivations for soliloquy

of
with the second the address

,
e
.,
i.
one self We find the apóloyos Euripides Troi
to
in
in
in
it
's
.
This may well have been the case also certainly
84
at
to
respect least
in
, ,
the presence the character with the soliloquy that we know

of
of
motivation
from Dion Chrys
59
opened the Philoctetes certainly the case with the

is
It
.
.
Apollo that opens the newly found

of
monologue Xvertai Dátupou Sophocles

of
, I
'
The Fragments Sophocles Cambridge 1917 Vol But this

in
of
Pearson
,
,
,
.
of I).
(
case Apollo speech announcing

questionable the loss his cattle and
is
it
,
if
's
for their return the audience after the

to
reward not rather an address

is
a
for
Old Comedy than properly soliloquy genuine soliloquy

of
manner
ff in
;
a
New Comedy under somewhat similar circumstances Plaut Aul 713

cf
,
.
which likewise part address the audience but with very different effect
in
in ,
85
T6
đơe tuẹpos made KoỦpav

s
'
λέξαι μολούση δεύρο Μηδείας τύχας

.
.pp
89 88 87 86
Der Monolog
,
ff
3
.
Prom 106 107 Agam

54 ff
to - ,
.
.
. i
.
91
95
Iph
42
43
Also Andr Elec Taur

ff
,
,
.
.
-
by
79
The address the elements illustrated Philemon where lines

is
,
57
58
are obviously parody Med

of
1
2
.
-
-
:
yÔ
de
üol
Te
epós koúpavợ
a
'
'
(u
it ώς
λέξαι μολόντι τούφον έσκεύασα

.
With the added motif sleeplessness Comedy Arist

of
found Old
in
in
is
. .
Clouds and Menander 164 and unfavorably criticized Plaut

in
in
is
ff,
,
i
Merc
3
5
.
.
-
98 - 100 , thoughmore commonly in soliloquies after the apólovos , 90

also in Old Comedy , the comic fragments and Menander , 91 and
often in Latin comedy ,92 in the form of either a simple address to
the self , usually by name , 93 or or heart an address to the spirit
or some part of the body . 84 The third possible motivation ,
prayer to the gods , is not represented by any one soliloquy in
Euripides , but is found in Aesch . Sept . 69 – 77 ; on the contrary ,
it preserves , even where it occurs in comedy , 95 something of
its
original genuineness
.
We may therefore conclude that soliloquies spoken by
a
the apólovos Euripides
96
character whether motivation
, is
in
in
,
or
as
as
assigned the cases we have cited more commonly
in
,
,
,
all
at
not are fact alike not dramatically motivated all but
in
,
,
expressly designed for not addressed directly the audience
to
if
,
.
That Euripides has here taken long step from tragedy
as
,
is
a
by
represented Aeschylus and Sophocles towards New Comedy
.
On the other hand soliloquies after the apólovos are conditioned
as ,
almost strictly Aeschylus and Sophocles by the dramatic

as
in
plausibility the character ignoring the chorus

of
97
Sometimes
.
's
as
such cases there even particularly good motivation
of is
in
100 98 in
,
the two soliloquies Hercules and Orestes waking from sleep

,
of
ravings comedy
99
and the Phaedra which also are imitated

in
,
.
on
But the two occasions where between tápodos and čodcs he

gets the chorus off the stage Alc 747 and Hel 386 Euripides
,
ff,
ff
.
reappearance largely
up
fills the interval until their with solilo

no
quies that show motivation whatever the Alcestis with

in
:
40
Med 401 1056 1242 Ion 1041 1044 Alc 837

.g
., .,
ff;
;
ff
ff
ff
E
–
. .
; .
.
186
59
Arist Achar 480 489 Alexis Anaxandrides Menander Eau

;
;
$
1
8
E
-
.
III 113 134 141

, ,
93 42 -
Plaut Asin 249 Trin 1008

., .g
ff
E E
ff,
III
.g .
Eur Med 402 Menander Eau Plaut Trin 1008

,
,
.
.
837
Ion
Alc
Eur kapola kal Xelp Med 1056 Ovué 1041 tous

.g
., . .,
),
),
);
9
E
.
(
Plaut Pseud pedes

cf
1246
.
)
, .
Mil
95
Plaut 431 444 Poen 950 960

.g
,
E
-
.
.
-
.
91
98
54
82
Med Andr Orest 126 Troi Elec Ion

>
ff,
ff,
ff
ff
ff
ff
1
.
Cycl
., ff
E 1
.
.
97
Med 364 409 1021 1080 1242 1250

.g
, ,
,
. .
.
-
cf -
Herc Fur 1088 Orest 211 214 also Soph Trac 983
;
ff
ff
99 $
8
-
.
Hipp 215 222 228 231

,
.
.
-
-
ff 100
for
For the first variety

25
Arist Clouds the second Plaut Men

cf
cf
ff
;
.
. .
.
see
835 and Ter prol Phor

6
8
-
.
.
.
soliloquies of development and announcement , in the Helen with
101
a second prologue and a soliloquy of deliberation . Here the
contrast great the highly dramatic soliloquy the lone
to
of
is
Ajax the only case outside Euripides where the chorus thus
in
is
102
removed from the stage
.
To
pass now soliloquy and chorus
of
the consideration to
in
Old Comedy we find Aristophanes five soliloquies the
in
in
,
103
few
póloyos Thereafter we should expect find very any
, if
to
,
a
since the chorus comedy was not only always present
as
in
in
the
far
tragedy but generally took larger part action than
in
,
a
tragedy the first nine plays indeed we find only Dicae
In
in
,
.
opolis address his heart Achar 480 and Cinesias burlesque

to
in
ff
'
'
.
prayer Lys 973 that are plainly soliloquies both com
in
of
ff
(
.
Perhaps also Socrates
al
ment comment Clouds 627
in
ff,
).
's
though dubious character since Old Comedy was always

to in
in
it
,
the
be
possible really address remarks audience might
to
,
as
reckoned soliloquy But since between the first nine and

of a
the last two the extant plays Aristophanes great difference

of
came about the function the chorus we might expect

of
to
in
corresponding difference the use soliloquy the
In
of
find
in
a
.
Ecclesiazusae the chorus absent from line 310 until the second
is
Nothing
at
trápodos beginning line 478 written for after line

is
it
.
of
582 until the lines the coryphaeus 1127 thereafter only

is in
ff,
it at
the closing song 1179 1182 Xopoũ read our texts lines
in
104 (
).
part
no
for
729 1111 the Plutus written after

In
is
,
876
.
, at
the cory
for
except
of
the end the rápodos line 315 the lines

phaeus 328 631 962 and the closing lines also for
in
ff,
,
ff
ff
coryphaeus
at
XopoŮ read lines 321 626 770

is
1208 1209
,
,
(
).
at
801 obvious that except perhaps the be

It
is
958 1096
,
,
.
binning these two plays

of
the Ecclesiazusae the chorus

is
in
,
all
longer although the coryphaeus still

no
an
at
actor
is
to
,
slight degree The chorus itself except Eccl 310 478 seems
in
,
,
-
.
throughout but any case

to
the stage
on
have been could

in
,
it
101
. Alc
747 837 Hel 386 483 respectively

;
,
,
ff
ff
ff
ff
103102
Aj 815
I ff
ff .
Lys
60
41
Achar Clouds Eccl Plut

It
is
ff
ff,
be a
ff,
ff,
ff,
ff
,
.
.
.
i
I
.
I
.
not the monologue

of
or
question whether Trygaeus Peace 150 should

in
ff
included probably not

;
.
104
its
On Xopoll and significance see footnote 111

.
THE SOLILOQUY IN ANCIENT COMEDY . 33 .
have been plausibly ignored by a character almost anywhere in
106
the play after the trápodos . point fact already
of
the
In
in
,
Frogs the chorus hardly
an
actor but that fact makes
no
is
,
go
far soliloquies there being none the play
as
difference
so
in
.
Did the same fact make any difference the last two plays
in
?
respect they apparently
of In
this are different that the effect
is
;
,
the removal the chorus from the action not yet consistent
of
is
.
For the Ecclesiazusae there are four soliloquies during its
in
absence from the stage withdrawal from the action

its
after
or
,
106
107
the plot
of
while the Plutus there only one The
is
in
,
.
choral songs these two plays except for the nápodol and the
of
one ode the beginning the dyúv 571

at
of
of
the Ecclusiаzusae
(
108
581 are therefore only what Aristotle calls éußóleua The
),
.
comedy from the action was accord
of
seclusion the chorus

in
see
ingly gradual process the beginning
of
which we can
in
,
a
the Frogs the continuation the Ecclesiazusae and the Plutus

in
,
; ,
soliloquy we shall now proceed
of
on
had the use examine

to
its
survival the form which survived could have had none

in
in
it
,
.
we
the culmination New Comedy tragedy too had
In
in
,
if
.
specimens extant covering the first quarter the fourth century

, of
,
109
we should expect find similar process differing only

to
,
if
a
typical
its
being carried perhaps not

of
the Rhesus period

in
,
is
105
Plutus 766 767

–
μή
νυν μέλλ έτι

'
ώς
άνδρες εγγύς είσιν ήδη των θυρών

.
Comedy
so
are
to
much like similar references the approach

of
New the
in
33
34
incidental chorus Menander Fab Inc

.eg
,
.,
II,
.
-
ώς
ίωμεν και μειρακυλλίων όχλος

els
TÒV TÓTOV TLS XEN Uoßeßpeyuévwv

<
p
,
'
that although the

to
lines the Plutus refer not the chorus proper but the
in
to
,
of
to
incidental band revelers yet easy them step towards the

discern
in
is
,
it
a
use
as
later the chorus itself the incidental Wuos which had some extent
to
of
,
by
already been anticipated the employment the auxiliary chorus

of
the
in
Frogs
.
107106
IV
the appendix
See Table
in
the audience but clearly resembles the

to
which 802
addressed
is
.,
ff,
e
,
I.
soliloquies New Comedy more than

of
to
resembles Clouds 627 632 which

it
,
-
32
we have referred above

(p
.
).
108
Poet 1456 On the whole question éußodua sce Flickinger

of
The
a
,
.
.pp
Greek Theater and Its Drama Chicago 1918 144

,
),
ff
(
109
Flickinger the occurrence Xopoù

of
to
146 calls attention

(p
new
in
a
of )
.
fragment
of
Medea the fourth century

a
.
far
quite says that Agathon used éußbdqua
For Aristotle
,
so
.
and before him we can see how Euripides even though that term
,
not applicable any his choral odes gradually removed
of
is
to
, ,
no at
the chorus from participation the action and one case
in
in
least the Suppliants even employed chorus that had
,
.,
,
i.e
a
more connection with the plot personnel than had
in
in
it
110
action
.
the last two plays Aristophanes we may say then that
of
In
,
by
at no
for
part written the chorus was published the author
or
,
any rate retained the text by scholars except the tápodou
in
,
and one other ode Eccl 571 581 Comedy
In
far
so
New
-
.
).
(
we
part whatever was published

as
perhaps none even

no
know
,
by
for
of
written the poet himself the chorus The question
,
.
what the chorus actually was New Comedy we have here no
in
111
nor the question what traces

of any
of
discuss
to
occasion
,
it,
,
if
112
may
be
found Latin comedy Suffice say that the

it
in
in on in
to
.
no
Greek plays took part the action and appeared the

in
it
for
its
stage only the intervals set performances while the

in
,
at
its
all
Latin even appearance few plays open doubt
to
is
in
a
. .
the old chorus be found Plaut Rud
of
trace doubtless
to
is
in
A
.
us
fishermen recite what reminds
of
of
290 305 where band
,
a
–
Trápodos but only through the mouth the single leader who
of
,
speaks for them the following dialogue 305 324 Perhaps

in
).
(
Menander 547 548 similar but these two are the only such
is
,
-
of
where groups
of
cases unless we include some the scenes

,
113
supernumeraries appear What effect the loss

of
the chorus
.
soliloquy we shall now proceed

of
the
on
had use examine

to
;
its
survival the form which survived have had none

in
it
in
,
could
,
.
110
typical chorus New Comedy

at
so
practically far
of
This least
in
in is
,
a
Aristophanes
as
its rôle the play concerned The chorus Plutus falls

in
is
's
.
midway between this chorus and that

of
New Comedy
.
111
.pp
See Leo Der Monolog

39
,
ff
,
Technique Continuous Action etc introduction and Chapter

of
Conrad
,
,
.,
V
.
Legrand Loeb The New Greek Comedy

,
.
-
Flickinger TheGreek Theater and Its Drama

,
.
113. 112
etc
See Conrad also Flickinger Xopoll Terence Heauton Class

in
;
,
.,
.
's
.pp
24
Phil
7
,
ff
.
Conrad gives
76
12
on
of
list such scenes note

p
,
a
.
V . THE CAUSES OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE
STRUCTURALLY USEFUL SOLILOQUY .
The soliloquies that we have been enumerating from tragedy

of
of all
and Old Comedy are the necessary
, In
or
useful classes
.
tragedy not soliloquies exposition the apóloyos
of
speak
to
in
,
soliloquies development
of
we have found announcement and
the
114
deliberation Euripides
favored purely infor especially
.
mative explanatory soliloquy the apóloyos which obviously

or
in
,
anticipated the type New Comedy
as
exists unmotivated
it
in
,
as opposed the more dramatic soliloquy represented for
to
,
by Euripides
he
example when
88
Aesch Prom also could

,
,
ff
.
., .
.
off
get the chorus the stage the Alcestis and the Helen
in
,
,
i.e
take advantage
as
was
of
we have seen quick the situation
to
to
,
he
employ the soliloquy His motive we can easily guess was :
.
aiming always for immediate effect

on
his audience and the

,
soliloquy
to
convenient device save time and trouble This

is
a
.
be
he
particular because the effect desired was got not

to
in
through dramatic action but chiefly through tábos

of
situation
,
:
the soliloquy accordingly helped quickly and
as
dispose
to
as
expeditiously possible plot leaving the

of
necessary
of
details
,
elaborate those parts the play that really interested

to
of
him free
he
What would have done with soliloquies all types

of
, if
him
.
he could have got entirely the chorus we can imagine

rid
of
especially from what actually did with the monody doubtless

he
precisely what we know that the poets New Comedy did

In
of
Old Comedy moreover we have seen development analogous

,
of
tragedy
which likewise favored the growth
to
that the
in in
soliloquy New Comedy the first nine plays Aristophanes

of
of In
.
we found three soliloquies exposition the apóloyos the

in
in
last two plays one each while elsewhere the last two there are
in
,
116 115
development one
of
of
deliberation
of
three comment and one

,
against only three the first nine together

of
comment
in
.
116115114
Alc
Eur Hel and Med 364 respectively

. ff
747 837 483

id
;
ff ff;
ff ff
. .,
ff
E
. .
.
. .
..
. .
Eccl 311 377 and Plut 802 Eccl 938 746 respectively
, id
id
ff
ff,
ff
;
;
.
Achar 480 Clouds 627 Lys 973

ff,
ff
ff
.
.
35
But it is probable that on New Comedy Euripides was the greater

influence in this particular if he was in general the greater
117
influence ; his obvious influence the related matter the
of
in
118
prologue especially strong evidence this connection
in
is
.
as
New Comedy was subject
of
In
the influence
to
so
far then
,
Euripides then especially ,
as
comedy
of
far was manners
so
to in
it
,
a
was especially subject his influence towards development
of it
by
the plot
On
soliloquies
of
means the other hand
so
in
,
.
far
plot
as
as
New Comedy
was interested distinct from
in
might
to
characterization we have expected return the
to
,
it
carefully wrought manner exposition Sophocles
of
of
Needless
.
was interested plot far more than either Euripides
or to
say
in
it
,
Comedy yet developed for the exposition the plot
of
Old
it
,
the very means that Euripides had begun employ escape
to
to
of
the necessity troubling himself with the action and leave
to
ex
to
be
himself elaborate the situation This fact
to
free
is is
.
by
plained several general considerations

which necessary
to
it
,
only call attention without amplifying greatly

to
.
general the plot
In
the first place the audience knew
of
in
,
a
its
tragedy the comedian

as
as
they
of
soon heard title while one

of ,
's
119
chief aims was necessarily novelty plot Antiphanes com

.
of
plains this disadvantage under which the comic poet labored of

as
clever fragment 191 which he names examples the

in
in
),
a
(
old
tragedians stock trade Oedipus Alcmaeon Adrastus

in
,
'
Peleus Teucer Incidentally this suggests the possibility that

,
,
.
Euripides was somewhat influenced the explana

of
his choice
in
tory prologue by his preference both known myths

for
as
less such
117
As
for
slight
bit
of
further evidence what has come under Leo

,
, a
's
an
pass for we may cite here quote

to
influence fact not

to
established
,
of (
nor the quotations Euripides

10
60 69
Quintilian familiar comment

in
in his in
,
1,
,
's
Menander Enit 583 584 and Diphilus

to
lines nor the reference

,
ó 3,
2
–
-
.
'
86
Alcmena Plaut Rud especially the phrase Eupitrions

, in
karáXovoos
)
.
'
Diphilus
60
line
1
.
.pp
13
Prescott Class Phil argues against what he thinks the too

in
113
,
ff,
.
quick acceptance theory Euripidean

of
of
too careless and too inclusive Leo

,
's
influence
.
118
The question the prologue and Euripidean influence

of
Leo has discussed

IV
fully Plaut Forsch

in
. .,
.
ff .
119
Cf
53
55
Plaut Capt especially line

,
.
non pertractate facta

ut
est neque item ceterae

.
( to cite only
extant plays ) the stories of the Ion and the Iphigeneia
, and
for
in Tauris variants and innovations well known myths
in
,
-
as
at
of
such those the Helen and the Electra which would once
,
give him the greater freedom plot which we have seen that
in
he desired and yet require more initial explanation
.
with this general fact the plot
as
the second place
of of
to
In
, ,
if,
all comedies mind we take into account the conditions
in
at
performance we shall see once how and why the poets
of
New
,
Comedy already subject the influences that we have observed

to
,
tragedy and Old Comedy were naturally driven
to
from employ
,
the soliloquy they did We might almost say that irrespective

as
.
of
influence from the older drama they would have been driven
adopt some such device The play was performed
an
to
in
.
of
plenty
of
out door theater where there evidence show
to
is
,
-
-
121 120
hearing especially Rome
to
how difficult was get

it
in
,
,
a
displeasure
its
and quick the audience was

to
how show
.
Plautus prologues
of
Hence the damnable

iteration some
of
,
's
the prologue Hence also the soliloquies

of
the Menaechmi
.,
g
e
.
anticipating development
of
announcement
and deliberation
,
us
of
soliloquies useless com

of
and the vast number

to
—
—
122
ment Moreover the attention not only the ears but also
of
,
.
the eyes must be held constantly and

of
theater that was

in
,
comparatively huge
such only
theater under such condi
as in
;
123
tions such that Mil 200

soliloquy conceivable
is
in
ff
a
Again there was no particular scenery especially little any

if
,
, ,
in
possibility changing scenery beside the general

of
hence
:
120
consider the prologues plays especially

of
of
several Plautus the

.g
.,
,
E
's
Captivi and the fate Hecyra

of
Terence
,
's
, .
see
21
Antiphanes 191 lines

12
17
.g
.,
,
E
δει
πάντα
τα
ευρείν ονόματα καινά

,
διώκημένα
,
τα
πρότερον νύν παρόντα την καταστροφής

,
,
αν
έν
τιςτι
την εισβολήν τούτων παραλίπη

η .
τις
Χρέμης Φέιδων εκσυρίττεται

,
.
192
.pp
Legrand discusses the necessity Henry

of
430 this reiteration

ff
.
(
audience the same thing three

an
Ward Beecher remarked that you must tell

once that going happen then that happening finally that
to
times
it
is
is
,
,
it
it
has happened them may understand Many

of
of
after which some the

,
soliloquies that we have called structurally useless may have been very neces
sary their way after all
in
,
123
See
p
5
.
.
all
congruity of having to show the action scene representing
in
a
public place the impossibility also acting and the necessity
of
,
a
narrating much important even essential action which

of
so
in
,
at ,
,
all
off
the modern theater would not occur stage for ex
as So
,
.
ample the Rudens the speech lines 160 which we have
in
in
,
ff,
,
remarked page closely resembles soliloquy represents
),
,
4
a
(
at
scene the sea shore the soliloquies lines 559 and 615
in
,
ff
ff
a
-
scene the temple and the soliloquy lines 892 scene

in
in
in
,
ff
a
Daemones house Even Shakespeare simple sign board would
's
'
-
.
have relieved the ancient comedian marvelously still without
or
requiring the niusance scenery and scene shifting over
of
,
-
taxing the imagination Sophocles
of
the audience more than

by
overtaxed requiring see the stage the Ajax

it
them to
in
camp then Finally there
to
as
as
first sea shore seem have

,
,
no a
.
124
been distinct individual costumes and there were certainly
,
no programs hence the necessity which many soliloquies

so
:
125
announcing
of
, of
serve the entrance new character

a
.
All these general considerations important remember
to
is
it
, ,
the chorus by which
of
must be taken connection with the loss

in
,
far concerns the soliloquy their influence and effect was
so
as
largely conditioned We have seen that was the apólovos

it
in
,
.
before the appearance tragedy

of
the chorus that and Old

,
Comedy chiefly employed the soliloquy for exposition

,
.,
e
, i.
Elsewhere the chorus was normally present both speak and .

to
spoken Many
soliloquies comment are obviously
be
of
to
to
.
equivalent running commentary the action that

on
the the
of
the old chorus supplied which was reality doubtless more than
in
,
126
we are apt
On
of
think for the benefit the

to
the audience
,
everything the development the plot that was

of
other hand
in
by ,
managed dialogue with the chorus was left

or
address
to
an in
Comedy monologue
to
of
New take the form either

.,
i.e
undisguised appeal dialogue with char

or
to
of
the audience
a
-
p 124
47 See
Saunders Costume Roman Comedy Diss New York 1909

in
);
,
,
, C
(
.
.
on
the confusion of costume between two adulescentes the same

in
g
e
.,
.
play
125.
Plaut Amph Koch De personarum comi

W
1005 1008 See

.g
.,
,
E
-
.
, .
Many
of
carum introductione Diss Breslau 1914 these introductions

.
).
(
parts
of
course not soliloquies but asides the dialogue

E of
were
or
.
126
Pseud 667
.g
.,
ff
.
.
acter to be found to replace the chorus . In the apólovos it was

possible to employ a ,
πρόσωπον προτακτικόν as Terence preferred to
127
do, but was not easy invent character
so
elsewhere
it
to
a
at
the action and yet not although Terence
of
that was once
in
,
it
128
no
attempted wonder that
at
this also least once Hence
it
is
.
New Comedy never consistently made any attempt
of
the poets
limit their employment the structurally useful soliloquy of
to
,
as
not an attempt
on
far we know small scale
so
even such
,
a
as
Terence did really make

.
particular often plainly repre

of
The soliloquy development

in
129
sents the messenger narrative tragedy The considerable
in
.
's
proportion
of
such narratives that are addressed the chorus
to
significant naturally happen
of
alone130 what would when the

is
be
chorus disappeared comedy sure such soliloquies

to
Even
in
,
.
131
are occasionally motivated but far more often not whereas

,
,
the contrary Aeschylus and Sophocles were usually careful
on
motivate those narratives where the mere presence
of
even
to
132
the chorus was not dramatically sufficient But Euripides was

.
let
content his messengers address the chorus without further

to
motivation the chorus ostensibly the audience really being

,
,
-
here again the precursor New Comedy

It
of
however not
is
,
,
.
only respect the messenger narrative that the soliloquy

of
to
in
's
development largely owes its existence

to
of
the loss the chorus

.
by
Another excellent illustration comparison

of
furnished
is
the manner which the different poets used dreams for dramatic
in
133
purposes
to
In
Aesch Pers Atossa recounts the chorus

. ff
176
.
dream she has had Choe 527 the chorus recounts

ff
in
;
a
128127
55
See footnote
ut .
on
Ter Eun 539 Bene inventa persona est cui narret Chaerea ne
Don
,
:
.
, .
unus diu loquatur apud Menandrum

.
129
On
the general topic tragedy and comedy see

of
narratives Fraenkel
in
, ,
E
.
De media quaestiones Göttingen

et
nova comoedia selectae Diss 1912

,
.
(
Chapter
I.
130
.Aj
Aesch Sept 791 Soph 719 1237 1586 Eur

,
,
. ff;
;
ff
ff
ff
C
0
T
.
. 0.
.
.
.
, .
Iph Taur 1284 Bacc 1043 Herc Fur 922 Ion 1122 Alc 152
,
ff,
ff,
ff
ff
ff
.
Rhes 756
ff
.
.
133132131
Men Ent 202 Plaut Bacc 368 Ter Adel 610

., .,
ff,
ff
ff
E E
On .g ..
. .
.
. '
Aesch Prom 441 446 Soph Trac 531 535

,
-
-
.
, .
this general subject see Messer The Dream Homer and Greek
W
in
S
.
.
Tragedy New York 1918

,
.
Clytaemnestra 's dream to Orestes ; in Soph . Elec . 417 ff Chryso

themis tells Clytaemnestra ' s dream to Electra and the chorus ;
in Eur . Hec . 65 ff Hecuba tells the chorus her own dream . In
all these cases the chorus either acts as audience or itself speaks
through the coryphaeus. In Iph . Taur . 42 ff , however , Iphigeneia
recounts her dream in a soliloquy . A specious motivation , to
134
be sure , is assigned , but Plaut Merc 225 and Rud 593
ff
ff
.
.
show that New Comedy even the pretext was abandoned and
in
the dreams told quite frankly the audience Old Comedy
to
.
supplies one instance told and interpreted
of
dream the
in
,
a
by
dialogue the two slaves Wasps
of
13
method imitated
in
ff,
a
Plautus Curc 260 where the cook interprets the dream that
in
ff,
.
the procurer tells him But here again Euripides not Old
,
.
Comedy seems have set the standard for New Comedy

to
,
.
The technique the structurally necessary useful soliloquy
of
or
we accordingly see that New Comedy owed rather more largely
Euripides than Old Comedy even though such soliloquies
to
to
are actually more numerous Aristophanes than Euripides

in
in
.
one very important inheritance
of
There was however New
,
, . ie. ,
Comedy from Old the liberty the dramatist

of
to
address
,
.,
the audience directly We have seen that Euripides practice

in
took the same liberty attempt motivation

at
an
sometimes with
,
. or
usually without but only the apóloyos thereafter when the

in
,
135
chorus had been removed from the stage The poet Old
in
Comedy had this liberty throughout the play Not mention

to
.
the parabasis we find four monologues Aristophanes addressed

in
,
be by
character specifically the audience that can not possibly

to
a
136
called soliloquies Then again we find

an
address the
to
.
Plut 802 that precisely resembles

. as
audience such soliloquy

is a
.
of
New Comedy The decisive factor the interval

of
course
in
the disappearance
of
the chorus this influence from Old

is
It
.
Comedy that doubtless chiefly explains the indifference dra

to
matic motivation that characterizes the soliloquies New

of
Comedy And not only indifference

to
motivation for even

:
.
cases where the audience addressed quite gratuitously are

is
by
fairly common which can only explained

to
be
reference such
,
136135134
88
See footnote
.
The best example the second prologue Hel

is
386
in
ff
.
Knights Wasps
50
54
50
30
Peace Birds
ff
ff
ff,
ff,
.
a soliloquy as Plut . 802 ff ,

which in turn had developed from
such a monologue as the four just cited from the earlier plays .
137
This address to the audience we find in Menander , and
in
Latin comedy occasionally extends entire solilo
an
include
, it
to
138
quy Finally
of
the combination these influences from
it
is
.
Euripides and Old Comedy that leads such anomalous
to
soliloquies Plaut Merc and Mil
as
79
where the character
ff
ff,
I
.
.
steps out the play entirely address the audience about
of
even
to
the play which he character There can hardly have been
is
in
anything precisely like these two monologues new .

Greek
in
comedy but
there were surely precedents similar enough
to
,
warrant Plautus taking still little greater liberty

in
.
138137
338
pp
Der Monolog
. 54
79
Pap
ff
114 see Leo
.g E.g
., .,
,
. ,
. ,
,
;
.
.
Plaut Stich 673 682 Ter Phor 465 470
E
,
-
-
.
.
VI. THE CAUSES OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE
STRUCTURALLY USELESS SOLILOQUY .
far
we have considered only the structurally necessary
or
So
useful soliloquies
those exposition development an
of
,
.,
,
e
i.
together many particular com
of
nouncement deliberation with
,
ment We have left ,

consider the structurally useless solilo
to
, .
quies more general comment which verge upon

, of
those
.,
,
i.e
those moralizing and finally the comic and topical rhetorical

of
-
monologues Here will be plain that the freedom addressing
in
it
.
the audience inherited Old Comedy was far more im

from
portant For here we are dealing with the soliloquies that most
.
nearly reproduced the parabasis and the otáolua perhaps
to
,
some extent the rápodos also Indeed save personal invective
,
.
and political propaganda there scarcely choral element from

is
Old Comedy moralizing

be
ethical social rhetorical conceit

or
it
,
,
or
incidental farce and horse lay that not represented the

is
in
,
-p
soliloquies New Comedy

of
the running slave

of
The resemblance between the soliloquy

typical
or
parasite and tápodos Comedy while perhaps

In of
Old
,
a
not close surely plain enough particular the usual threats

is
,
against the by standers139 suggest strongly the pugnacious atti

-
tude which the chorus enters the Acharnians Knights and

in
in
Wasps Again the chorus the Acharnians hunting for the

is
in
,
.
missing culprit just always looking

as
the slave for his master

is
140
the parasite for his patron The slave always hurry

or
is
in
,
a
.
141
just like the chorus the Wasps and like the chorus the
in
in
,
,
139
984
Plaut Capt Amph

.,
ff,
791 Curc 280 Stich 285 985

. g
ff
ff
140
E
-
.
Cf Achar 204 205

.
τηδε πας επού δίωκε και τον άνδρα πυνθάνου

,
των οδοιπόρων απάντων

.
and Plaut Merc 128

.
an
domin foris dicam esse erum Charinum

?
141
Cf
Wasps 230
.
xúpel apóßair éppwuévws Kwula Bpaduvets

;
,
,
ů
'
.
13
and Plaut Merc

.
praevorteris
te
abige abs lassitudinem cave pigritiae

,
42
142
Acharnians ,
of At
of weariness and exhaustion .
often complains
least this type comic soliloquy accordingly betrays some
of
,
143
the common features the πάροδος
of
.
Old Comedy being
of
of
The otáovua the nature interludes
in
,
,
were generally replaced New by the choral interludes referred
in
,
the fragments that filled the breaks
as
uol the action

in
in
to
,
k
at points such
as
those where often xopoù now occurs the text
in
.
But some soliloquies rhetorical character may also
of
. or
comic
well represent the old oráoluov For example the rhetorical
,
soliloquy lends plausi
of
character the Plaut Pseud 574
ff
in
.
bility
of
Conrad suggestion144 that the tibicen line 573a
to
's
merely played prelude Pseudolus monody and that the

to
,
a
'
real interlude was the monody itself not the instrumental solo
,
. .
145
Again Leo points out that the parasite monologue Capt
in
,
's
at
461 497 standing does between his previous exit line
as
it
,
-
at
191 and his immediate exit again line 497 and consisting
,
entirely comedy that does nothing

of
incidental forward the

to
plot partakes largely He makes

of
to of
an
the nature interlude

,
the same suggestion regard the soliloquy puer

of
also
in
id
begin the play . 146
as
of
an
909 which ends lines 461 act

ff,
,
ff
.
might
be
of
Other possible examples added the soliloquy the

:
parasite Men 446 the dutiful slave Aul 587

of
and
in
in
ff,
ff
.
Most soliloquies more general moraliz

of
of
and number 858

,
ff
a
.
148
ing147and monodies more general comment All these

of
examples satisfy the two tests that we should necessarily require

suggest soliloquy reproduces
of
that the effect the old

to
a
142
Cf
Achar 219 220

-
.
ήδη
νύν επειδή στέρρoν τoυμόν αντικνήμιον

δ
'
το
και παλαιό Λακρατείδη σκέλος βαρύνεται

.
and Plaut Merc 123 124

.
genua hunc cursorem deserunt

;
perii seditionem facit lien occupat praecordia

,
.
146 145144143
Of the apparent zápodos

25
on
Rud 290 we have spoken

in
p
., ff
.
.
.
Technique
79
Continuous Action etc

of
p
,
.
.
Der Monolog
59
p
,
.
.
be
, he
should remembered that Leo bent upon showing wherever

It
a is
monologue one type

of
can that the acts begin another

or
or
or
end both with

be
so
as
his examples could not possibly regarded

of
that most descended

Old Comedy
of
from the otáolua

.
148 147
Merc 817 Pers 449

.g .g
ff
E E
ff
.,
,
.
Bacc 1076 Cist 203

.,
,
ff
ff
.
.
otoLuov : first , in respect to position , they occur at a break in

the action , i. e. , at the beginning or end of an act ; second , in
respect to content , they are either general or incidental, never
an integral part of the structure of the play .
But it is the parabasis of Old Comedy that is most fully
reproduced in the soliloquies of New , especially of course in what
we have called soliloquies of moralizing . There is in Plautus
one soliloquy , i. e. , Curc. 462 - 486 , that we might almost call a
parabasis , just as we have called Rud . 290 ff a nápodos . It is
delivered in the middle of the play by the choragus , who is not an
actor at all , and consists entirely of general comment without the
slightest the play . But because of purely
its
connection with
Roman content and because local allusions anachronisms its
,
in
have been suspected authenticity has been called into serious

its
,
149
question example
It
us
as
an
therefore unsafe for use
do to
it
,
is
.
but fortunately will soon appear we

as
not really need
it
,
.
The typical feature the parabasis was the direct address
of
to
by
the audience the chorus which for the moment laid aside
,
the play and became merely the mouthpiece
of
their rôle the
in
150
poet We should therefore expect soliloquies de

to
find
in
.
scended from the parabasis these two direct features first

,
:
of
no
address the audience which we have itself more

to
than
is
of (
observed soliloquies other types second either some gen

in
,
);
eral topic not particularly all connected with the plot , or

at
if
the play
of
situation the play else allusion within the play

or
to
,
the parabasis may speak

as
itself since the poet freely

of
the
,
in
play which the parabasis occurs any other subject To

as
of
in
.
for
consider the latter first the plea the spectators favor which
,
,
'
while found elsewhere Old Comedy most characteristic

it
is
in
,
is
151
parabasis represented New Comedy not

of
the we find
to
in
,
mention the prologues the monologue Ayvo

51 of
of
Plautus
in
,
:a
"
Menander Ileplk the spectators

to
50
and the address

in
in
,
-
.
140
116
.pp
by
Its authenticity Jordan Hermes 1880

is
denied
in
,
H
ff
.
but defended by
pp
Friedrich Jahrb Klass Phil 1891

in
708
G
ff
.
of .
.
150
On the question the costume the chorus during the parabasis see
of
Poppelreuter De comoediae Atticae primordiis particulae duae Diss Berlin

,
,
(
.
.g pp
34
1893
ff
E ,
., .
.
161)
Clouds 518
ff
.
152
which is so common at the end of Plautus ' s plays , and found
is
as
of
also Menander 887 Discussion the comic art such we
in
.
the
parabasis the Knights
of
have the Clouds we find
of
and
in
fragment Antiphanes which we have already
of
191
in
of
,
153
Antiphanes 209 The nearest parallels
to
spoken also this
in
,
.
as 154
Plautus are Bacc 213 215 which however occur dialogue
in
in
,
,
-
.
and such dramatic allusions Merc 5155 and the references
to
3
-
.
158
the running slave most which occur soliloquies The of
in
,
.
general license that allows character any time step out
at
to
a
as
the play speak for the moment merely
an
of
of
actor157
to
is
course not due the parabasis Old Comedy any more than
of
to
158
To its
general freedom that respect

to
in
old
pass now soliloquies that represent the parabasis
of
to
more general philosophical character we find among the comic

,
160
fragments praise philosophy169 and attacks More
of
on
it
.
commonly various particular philosophical and moral
we find
the uncertainty Antiphanes
of
TÓTOL elaborated human life

so
in
:
161
inconsistency
89
of
204 the human nature Philemon the

in
,
,
, of
discontent mankind Alexis 141 their slavery toil

or to
in
in
,
or
88
93
Philemon law and custom Philemon the

to
to
in
needless complications with which they involve their lives in

162
Menander 534 Some these fragments are very fine most

of
;
.
all
moving perhaps virtue

of
of
on
Menander 223 the theme

,
,
is
152
Amphitruo closing speech Amph 1144 1145

.g
.,
,
E
's
-
.
153See footnote 121

.
154
Non res sed actor mihi cor odio sauciat

;
ac
etiam Epidicum quam ego fabulam aeque me ipsum amo

,
aeque invitus specto agit Pellio

si
nullum
,
.
157156166
. 89
See footnote
, 62 .
See footnote
Cas 1006 Merc 1007 Pseud 388 720 721 and especially Merc
.g
.,
,
E
-
.
160
,
dormientis spectatores metuis

ne
ex
somno excites
?
159158
Besides the monologues cited footnote 136 Peace 962

in
cf
,
ff
.
.
by
be
proved soliloquy lines

to
is
adeoTOTA 104 which

.g
.,
1
2
E
-
(
)
μέν
ερημία έστι κούκ ακούσεται

ών
αν
ουδείς παρών μού των λόγων λέγω

.
160
Antiphanes 122 particularly

71
36
Philemon and Alexis directed

.g
.,
,
E
against Aristippus
).
162161
Cf
the parabasis
of
the Birds
.
More examples are given Section VII

in
.
all
unrewarded . To emphasize still more the fact that such
soliloquies are general and topical not dramatic the contrast
,
eloquent between the fragment Menander
74
on
the text
of
is
(
)
Uneasy lies the head that wears crown
,
a
and the soliloquy ending with that famous line the king
of
in
,
163
Shakespeare Henry Part
IV
on
the same theme
II,
.
's
The parabasis Old Comedy dealt perhaps still more often with
of
political and social topics than with such themes we have just
as
enumerating
Indeed the discussion philosophy and
of
been ,
.
morality doubt largely by way

no
New Comedy was com
of
in
of
pensation for the abandonment free personal invective and
164
the general loss politics But social subjects
of
interest
in
.
ever and gradually took up more and
as
as
remained available
One general feature this type parabasis
of
of
more attention
is
.
moralizing soliloquy
of
or
likewise common feature the comic
a
the
165
place the praise de
of
that took
of its
one self and

,
.,
e
of i.
's
166
nunciation those whom one disapproves Some examples
.
167
this type soliloquy we have already cited
of
of
addition
In
,
.
we may cite the frequent attacks the comic fragments
on
the
in
168
fish sellers which are paralleled Plautus only Capt by

in
,
-
.
813 Plautus however has corresponding attacks perhaps
,
,
ff
.
his
Greek models for

on
inserted from Roman audience bakers

,
169
Antiphanes 159
on
and butchers The attack the bankers

in
.
by
represented Plautus two comic soliloquies put into the

is
in
163
74
Menander begins
:
Tploalcol
ů
,
τι
πλέον έχουσι των άλλων

;
Henry Act the king begins

IV
Part
In
Scene
,
1,
2
How many thousands my poorest subjects

of
at
Are this hour asleep

!
165164
.pp
See Legrand Loeb

23
,
ff
-
Arist Thes 785

.g
E
.,
of .
.
Cf
. 34
36
the soliloquies cook and parasite listed footnotes and

in
166
.
the typical parabasis Aristophanes

ff of
Not Birds 1076

cf
to
mention
. ff
,
with the parasite edicts Plaut Capt 803 and his threats Curc 288
in
in
ff
. 's
.
169168167
.pp
See
7
8
-
166
Antiphanes 125 126 Diphilus

16
33
161 Alexis Xenarchus

,
7
; -
Capt 807 the grain

to
respectively also the allusions

ff
. ff
and 818
cf
.
dealers dialogue Pseud 188

in
in
ff
.
170
. Thirdly
to
a trapezita
on
mouth of the attacks the hetaerae
,
the comic fragments171 correspond the soliloquy Truc Plaut
in 22 in
in
, , .
and that Poen against lenones
823 Again
directed
in
,
ff
ff
.
.
Trin there similar soliloquy attacking the scurrae
ff
199 is
a
.
at
probably due least partly Roman influence
to
which
is
.
Finally the laudatio temporis acti the slave soliloquy
in
in
,
's
of
Trin 1028 like the conversation the paedagogus Bacc
in
, ff
.
.
particular strongly reminiscent the whole spirit
of
419
in
ff,
is
Aristophanes which he indulged especially the parabasis

of
in
),
(
Old Comedy
of
of
which was transmitted
as
one the inheritances

172
New
to
.
170
Curc Most also the allusions Pers

ff
371 and 532 434 and
in
cf
ff
;
ff
.
.
Pseud 296
.ff
.
172171
Epicrates
98
Alexis Xenarchus
,
,
De 2
3
4
–
Fraenkel quaestiones
et
See media nova comoedia selectae

,
,
E
.
Chapter III aliorumque orationibus quae antiquae
ex
De parasitorum
a
,
comoediae parabasi mediam novamque fluxerunt

in
.
VII . OUTSIDE INFLUENCES ON THE DEVELOPMENT
OF SOLILOQUY .
We have seen that the structurally useful soliloquy shows a

clear course of development entirely due to internal , or at any
rate purely dramatic , influences . But it is not difficult to per
ceive that , to
aid
of
the development the structurally useless types
of
all
soliloquy that we have just been discussing besides possible
at
influence from Old Comedy certain external influences were
,
New Comedy
on
work These influences have been studied

.
exhaustively connection with the elegy and the epigram and
to in
their relation New Comedy that will suffice indicate 173
to
so
it
,
here how they operated particularly upon the soliloquy
.
We need scarcely say more emphasize how the soliloquy
to
for the influence exerted upon

as
acted convenient vehicle

a
174
comedy by philosophy
of
The chief outside influence was
.
course the common rhetoric that underlay all the different literary
genres Illustrations are almost innumerable for example not
, ;
,
.
Theophrastus which may even

of
mention the Characters

to
have been based immediately New Comedy the soliloquy

on
in
,
up
of
Plaut Truc working different genre
98
the
is
in
ff
a
-
.
same material that we find the second mime Herondas

of
in
of .
This same moreover illustrates the
poem special influence
,
oratory and the rhetoric the courts which already visible

of
in
,
Euripides appears
of
the Olkavikoi doyou New Comedy the

in
in
,
opening
of
of
scene Menander ETITPÉTOVTES and the trial

in
'
's
Love the soliloquy Plaut Trin 223 Perhaps the best

in
in
ff
.
.
of
the operation the similar

of
instance this common rhetoric

is
175
of
of
treatment the theme love the various genres

in
.
173
ibid
Pauly Wissowa
on
on
See Reitzenstein Epigram and Crusius

in
Elegy
.
174
und die Philosophie

to
See Pohlenz Die hellenistische Poesie Xépites

in
,
,
pp
76
Leo
ff
,
.
Leo gives examples philosophical comedy Der

of
rómol from Latin

in
.pp
Monolog
76
78
,
–
175
. 25
See footnote
.
all
The intensive study this subject springs from Leo Plaut Forsch
of
.,
ab .
elegiacis
pp
126 see Hölzer De poesie amatoria comicis exculta

.g
a
ff
,
.
.
.
imitatione expressa Diss Marburg 1899 and Wheeler Class Phil 1910
in
,
),
,
.
.
(
.pp
pp
56
440 and 1911

id
ff
ff
,
.
48
.
Sofar as specifically concerns the soliloquy , the influence of

rhetoric is manifested in various ways . In the first place , we
find the elaborate working out of a simile176 in several soliloquies
177
in Plautus , while Menander 536 the speaker complains

în
for
adequate simile
he
no
that can find love the second
In
.
place many soliloquies represent the common rhetorical types
,
,
To 178
especially the eykulov laudatio and the yóyos vituperatio
(
of )
).
179
poverty
of
of
So we find éykuula solitude peace and
,
.
compensate for the attacks
on
the hetaerae mentioned above
,
we find Philemon praising Solon for establishing them the
in
180
state by law Similar praise

of
individuals found Alexis
is
in
's
.
for
Solon and Aristonicus laws against the
of
commendation
181
Still more important the eykuulov the simple
of
fish sellers
is
, -
182
an
life particularly country life which sometimes takes ironical
,
as
98
Philemon
in
form
,
of
The soliloquy the form bóyos likewise embraces variety

in
a
topics The typical fóyou marriage philosophy
of
of
and love
,
.
183
we havealready referred We
187 of
find also the yoyos wealth

to
.
184
185
186
old
and money poverty

of
of
age war Other

of
and
,
.
176
the type apoyúuvaoua called ovykplois comparatio

of
,
.g e
(
177
I
E .
.
).
84
Bacc 925 Most Pseud 574

ff
.,
ff
,
ff,
.
178This suggests that many soliloquies that we have not actually classified
no
topical rhetorical might doubt containing they

do
as
as
so
large rhetorical
,
a
-
as
apoyvuváo para and classified accordingly

as
element be regarded just

,
,
as
legitimately the more striking examples that we have

so
classified
.
apoyuuváo para are conveniently defined

of
The types Westermann

in
,
, .pp
Geschichte der Beredtsamkeit eipzig 1833 Vol 265 266 see also
,
),
I,
;
-
.
(L
Reichel Quaestiones progymnasmaticae Diss Leipzig

G
1909
,
.
179
.
(
).
92
Menander 466 Philemon 71 Philemon respectively

,
Propertius
17
180Philemon Müller
. cf
. - 4;
3
,
.
)
.
. E . 181
Cf
Alexis 125 126 See footnote 168

to
also the allusion Solon

in
.
Plaut Asin 599

.
182
Amphis
Tib 17
Philemon 105
.g
.,
. .
Cf
Prop
10
12
Theoc Hor Epod

W ;
, 3;
;
,
,
7
1
1
1
2
1
3
8
4
.
Müller See Meyer Laudes inopiae Diss Göttingen

; ,
1916
(
).
. .
(
185184183
).
22
23
25
See footnotes 159 respectively

,
, 92
Menander 537 and Philemon Propertius Müller

cf
.g .g
E E
., .,
4
6
,
.
)
.
Menander 404 from the IIXóklov which the situation similar

to
in
is
,
that Plautus Aulularia

E E in
.
's
187186
Antiphanes
94
Menander 552 555 Plaut Men 758

.g .g
., .,
,
,
ff
.
Apollodorus Carystius
5
.
CEN
1
!
INI
rhetorical types represented in soliloquies are the controversia ,
188
e. g. , Plaut . Trin . 223 ff , and the napaklavoidupov . Finally
,
we find soliloquies which Yóyos begins with some such common
in
a
the pereat qui primus sentiment
as
41
rhetorical Tótos Eubulus
of
189
of
regard the painters
of
Love Menander 154 directed
to
and
in
,
against the inventor marriage these much like the fóyou
of
all ,
"
"
of the greatest
of
condemnation inventors Prometheus for
in
,
190
for
making men inconsistent and making women
at
all
.
188
Arist Eccl 960 and Plaut

.g
.,
Curc 147 154

ff
E
, .
3, .
; -
.
Cf
Od
8 67 Hor Prop
10
16
17
42
17
Theoc 122 Catul
1 ff
. .7
I,
,
;
,
2
;
.
.
.
-
Müller Ov Amor
. );
ff
6
1
9
;
3 ,
,
,
(
3, .
.
190189
Cf
Propertius Müller
).
(
89
Philemon and Menander 535 respectively

.
.
VIII . THE RELATION BETWEEN SOLILOQUY AND
METER .
It is futile to attempt any inference from
the meter of solilo
quies ,
although one is tempted to make the effort because of the
obvious choral origin of certain types of soliloquy . We see ,
as soon as we begin to examine the soliloquies from the point of
view of meter, that Plautus used all sorts of meters for all sorts
of soliloquies . For every soliloquy representing a choral element ,
whether from parabasis , στάσιμα or πάροδος , that is cast in the
of a monody, and thereby seems to reveal
its
form descent from
as
as
the chorus meter well substance we can find another

in
in
,
its
soliloquy similar every respect save that meter the ordi
in
is
nary trimeter any principles
be
senarius therefore there
or
If,
,
.
determining the relation between form and content Plautine
in
at
comedy any case they
be
no
which dubious best can
in
is
,
-
-
for
different monologue from whatever they may be for dia

191
logue
.
All we say that New Comedy there are soliloquies

is
can
in
not only the ordinary trimeter but the only other meter
in
in
,
that we know was used New Comedy trochaic tetram

in
,
.,
e
i.
192
193
for
eter The same the case Middle Comedy We know

is
.
the monody and the duet lyric

or
also that Plautus restored

at ,
dialogue which had been discarded New Comedy

so
least
in
,
,
by
far
extant fragments although

as
represented several
it
is
in
,
194
fragments Comedy
of
Middle we find traces

its
of
existence
.
195
Whether he was herein influenced by Euripides by Old Com

,
by
the
196
197
or
edy Alexandrian mime we not tell and

it
can
,
,
191
die
On
general subject see Leo

this Die plautinischen Cantica und
,
hellenistische Lyrik Berlin 1897

,
.
(
)
14 193182
110
22 114
210
337
Men Ilepik 121 195 Eau 203

.,
,
;
ff
E
-
..
.
98
Alexis and Anaxilas are trochaic tetrameter

in
Anaxandrides 41 and Mnesimachus are monodies while Epicrates

g
4
E
.,
,
.
11
duet
is
a
.
196 195
Euripides that are also soliloquies

98
Monodies are Troi and

in
.g
,
.,
ff
e
.
82
Ion
ff
.
Arist Eccl 938 soliloquy monody which combines

of
the form
in
a is
,
ff
a
.
with the asides

to
make duet
15 .
197
Cf
the song Theoc 100

in
ff
,
.
51
198
does For while we find many monodies
not matter. Plautus
in
199
that are also we find beside the lyric duets many
soliloquies
of
monodies that are not soliloquies Further consideration
.
meter therefore not germane this study
to
is
.
198
meter midway between
to
respect
of
Terence stands freedom New
in
Comedy and Plautus
.
ff 199
ff are
Amph 633 Capt 498
81
Examples Cas 937 Epid Men
ff ff,
,
ff
ff
ff
. .
.
84
571 Most Pseud 1246 Trin 223

,
ff,
.
six .
.
Even these few examples represent different types soliloquy
of
.
APPENDIX .
TABLE I: SOLILOQUIES IN PLAUTUS .
In the first column the soliloquies are denoted by line ; in the

second the speakers are indicated . The third column indicates
the content. Where a soliloquy seemed clearly to contain more
than one element but also to belong predominantly to some
one class , the minor element is indicated in parenthesis , but the
soliloquy is not considered mixed . It is from the third column
that the statistical summaries at the end of the table have been
drawn up .
few
very short unimportant soliloquies have not been

,
A
included the table
in
Amph 153 292 Slave Exposition omedy

–
.
)
(c
463 498 Mercury Announcement

–
633 653 Alcumena Character comment

(
)
–
861 881 Jupiter Announcement

-
882 890 Alcumena Character

–
974 983 Jupiter Comment

-
984 1005 Mercury Comedy announcement

-
1009 1020 Amphitruo Development

-
1053 1075 Slave

–
266
Asin 249 Deliberation

"
.
Aul 67 Exposition
78
"
.
, - - -
105 119 Senex Character

371 389
406 414 Cook Comedy
460 474 Senex Character
475 535 Moralizing
- -
580 586 Announcement

587 607 Slave Moralizing development
;
–
608 615 Senex Development

,
53
54 PENDIX .
616 - 623 Slave Announcement

661- 666 " Comment
667 – 676 Senex Announcement
677 - 681 Slave
701 - 712 Development
713 - 726 Senex Comedy
177
Bacc . 170 - Slave Exposition

349 367 Comment
“
-
368 384 Paedag Announcement comment
)
. .
–
385 404 Adulesc Moralizing comment
)
-
500 525 Announcement comment
;
- -
612 624 Comment

649 666 Slave
-

-
925 978
Topical rhetorical
-
- -
1076 1086 Senex Comment

1087 1103 development
"
)
–
Capt 69 109 Parasite Exposition comedy

;
-
.
461 497 Comedy

-
498 515 Senex Development

, -
516 531 Slave Comment

768 780 Parasite Comedy announcement
(
)
–

–
790 828 Parasite Comedy

-
901 908 Parasite

-
909 921 Puer

–
Cas 217 227 Senex Comment

.
424 436 Slave

-
502 514
-
531 538 Matrona

–
549 557 Senex

, -
558 562 Matrona

563 573 Senex
-
759 779 Slave Development

-
875 891
-

-
APPENDIX . 55
Cist . 120 148 Lena Exposition

203 – 228 Adulesc . Comment
536 , 542 Slave
671 - 703 Comedy
Curc . 96 - 109 Lena

216 - 222 Leno Comment
280 - 298 Parasite Comedy
371 - 383 Trapezita
462 – 486 Choragus Anomalous
591 - 598 Parasite Development
679 - 686 Leno
Epid . 81- 103 Slave Exposition ; deliberation

158 – 165 Announcement
306
206
319
,

-
517 525
-
526 536 Mulier exposition

–
Men Comedy
77
109 Parasite
.
446 465 development

;
-
571 601 Adulesc Moralizing development

;
, -
753 774 Senex Development moralizing

(
882 888
–
899 908 Adulesc

–
957 965 Comment

-
966 989 Slave Moralizing

–
1039 1049 Adulesc Comment

–
Merc 110 Prologue

1
-
.
III 129 Slave Comedy

-
225 271 Senex Anomalous development

, -
334 Deliberation
"
328
.
335 363 Adulesc Development

,
- -
544 561 Senex Comment moralizing

(
588 600 Adulesc

–

-
APPENDIX .
667 – 671 Matrona Development

692 - 699 Senex
700 - 704 Matrona Comment
792 - 799 Senex Development
817 - 829 Slave Moralizing
830 - 863 2 adul. Anomalous (announcement
and development )
Mil. 79 - 155 Slave Prologue

200 - 215 Senex Comment
259 - 271 Slave Deliberation
345 - 353
586 - 595 Adulesc . Comment
867 - 873 Slave
1284 - 1295 Adulesc .
Most . 84 – 156 Topical-rhetorical

348 , 362 Slave Exposition ; comedy
431 - 444 Senex Development
536 , 546 Slave
· 690 - 710 Senex Comedy
775 - 782 Slave · Comment
858 – 884 Moralizing
993 – 998 Senex Comment
1041 - 1061 Slave Development
1122 - 1127 . Adulesc .
Pers . 1- 6 Slave Exposition

7- 12 Comment
251 – 271 Slave Development (announce
ment )
449 - 457 Comment (moralizing )
470 479 Leno
753 - 762 Slave (development )
777 - 787 Leno
APPENDIX .
57
-
Poen . 449 - 469 Leno Comedy
817 - 822 Slave Comment
823 - 844 moralizing
;
"
930 - 949 Senex Anomalous
956
960 Development
,
1280 1291 Miles

-
Pseud 394 408 Slave Comment

.
, -
562 573
574 593 topical rhetorical
)
- -
667 691 moralizing
;
758 766
–
767 787 Puer

-
892 904 Leno

–
905 910 Slave

-
1017 1036
-
1052 1062 Leno

–
1103 1123 Slave Moralizing development

;
-
1238 1245 Senex Announcement

–
1246 1283 Slave Comedy

–
83
Rud
88
Exposition
“
-
.
185 219 Mulier

-
220 227 Slave

-
306
309
- ,
, 24
330
403 413 Comment

181 Comedy
458 484
–
485 491 Leno Comment

- - -

593 612 Anomalous
–

-

-
58 APPENDIX .
892 – 905 Senex Development (comment )

906 – 937 Slave ; character ;
comedy ; moralizing
1184 - 1190 Comment

1191 - 1204 Senex
1258 – 1264 Moralizing
1281- 1287 Leno Development
Stich . 75 - 87 Senex Deliberation

<<
274 - 308 Puer
454 - 463 Parasite Comment
497 – 504 . "
632 - 640 Comedy

649 – 654
673 - 682
Trin . 23 - 38 Senex Moralizing

199 - 222
223 – 275 Adulescens Topical -rhetorical ; delibera
tion ; character ; moralizing
392 – 399 Senex Comment
591 - 601 Slave
718 – 728 Comedy ( comment )
843 – 867 Sycophant Development
1008 – 1059 Slave ; moralizing
Comedy
1115 - 1124 Adulescens Comment
Truc . 22 - 94 Exposition ; moralizing

98 - 112 Slave Moralizing
209 - 254 (comment )
315 - 321 Comment
335 - 351 Adulescens
434 - 447 ; announcement
APPENDIX . 59
· 448 - 475 Meretrix Moralizing ( comment )

482 – 498 Miles (development )
553 – 574 Slave Comment
633 – 644 Miles
645 - 662 Adulescens Development
66
699 - 710 Comment
60 APPENDIX .
Play D.IL 1
II .
na. Mor. Cmd. T - r. Mix .
H
12
Amph . . .
Asin . . . . . %
Aul.. . . . . .
Bacc . . . . . .
Capt .. ...
NONUT
Cas.. . . . . .
.
Cist . . . . . .
Curc . . . . . . H
Epid .. . . ..
NW
Men . .
Merc. . . . . AW
Mil . . . . . . .
Most . . . . .
Pers . . . . . .
Poen . . . .
Pseud . . . .
NaoNN
Rud . . . . . .
Stich . . . . .
Trin . . en
Truc
.
.
.
Total
10
23
34
17
68 15
%
2
..
..
.
Summary Necessary
:
.
..
Useful
.
.
.
.
Not useful II4

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Character
:
Senex e
2
Adulescens
.
Slave
.
.
.
..
.
Parasite
. .
. ..
. .
Mulier
. .. .
.
Leno en
. .
Lena
..
.
Cook
.
.
..
Trapezita
.
Miles
.
.
. ..
Meretrix
.
Total 1033
13
08
12
24
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
Prologue
.
. .. ..
.
Rhetorical
Anomalous
.
APPENDIX . 61
TABLE II : SOLILOQUIES IN TERENCE .

And . 206 , 228 Slave Exposition
236 - 264 Adulescens Deliberation (comment )
625 - 641 Adulescens Moralizing
Heaut . 167 - 173 Senex Comment.

230 - 234
410 419 Senex
420 425 Character
503 - 507 Comment
668 – 678 Slave Deliberation
6
197
206
Eun . Meretrix Exposition

- -
225 231 Slave Comment

232 264 Parasite Comedy
–
292 302 Adulescens Development

–
507 529
-
539 548
-
549 556 Comment

-

- - - -
629 640 Adulescens

840 847
923 940 Slave Comment moralizing
(
Phor
50
Exposition
35
"
.
179 190 Comment

- - -
231 246 Senex

465 470 Adulescens
–
783 Comment announcement

,
"
778
(
820 828 Adulescens

–
829 832 Parasite Development

-
884 893
-
APPENDIX .
Hec. 274 - 279 Matrona Character

444 - 449 Comment
510 - 515 Senex
516 - 520 Matrona
566- 576 Development
799 - 806 Slave
816 - 840 Meretrix
Adel . 26 - 77 Senex Exposition ; moralizing ;

character
141 - 154 Comment
196 - 208 Leno
610 - 633 Adulescens Development
713 – 718 Senex
757 - 762 Comment
855 - 881 Moralizing ; comment ;
announcement
III2 % of
Play 27 t. Del . a. Mor . Cmd1. T - r Mix . Ano . Tot . lines
And . . .
Heaut . . . .
II 02
Eun . . . . ,
Phor . . . . .
Hec. . . . .
Adel . . .
Total . . . . .10 3170 24 2 2
Summary : Necessary .
Useful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Not useful
52
APPENDIX .
Character :
Senex . . . . . .
Adulescens .
Slave
Parasite . . .
Mulier . . .
Leno . . . . .
ili
Miles . . . . . .
Total . . . . . . . . 3 17 | 0 | 24 | 2 | 2 | !
TABLE III : SOLILOQUIES IN MENANDER .
' ETIT . 165 - 167 Slave Comment

199 - 201
202 - 212 " Development
214 - 224 Meretrix
218 , 225 Slave Deliberation
340 - 365 Comment ; character
366 ff Senex Fragmentary : = develop
ment ?
391 ff Cook Fragmentary : = comment ?
Fab . Inc. II 1 - 15 * Senex Development
36 ff Slave Moralizing
410 ff Senex Fragmentary : = announce
ment ?
566
Frag . Slave Development

*
457 486
–
487 Adulescens Character

ff

-
Development
52
Περικ 60 Slave
.
64 Comment
70
- -
110 114 Adulescens Character

121 125 Deliberation
-
208 Miles Comment

ff ff
276 Adulescens Development

407 411 Miles Comment
-
.
of
the evidence they supply we have left these frag

To
get the benefit

,
*
the places where Capps Four Plays

at
of
ments the table Menander

in
)
by
he
incorporated them into his text though not followed therein Körte
of is
,
We have also accepted Capps assignment characters

's
.
64 APPENDIX .
Eau . I- 64 Senex Development

65 - 67 Comment
83 - 86 Character
110 - 141 ; deliberation
145 - 153 Cook Comment

184 - 191 Senex
219 - 222 Comment
269 , 270
271 - 295 Adulescens Announcement
296 , 312 Slave Comment
337 ff Adulescens Deliberation
. of
%
Dev
Di
Mor
cha
Mix
Play Ann Chat
Cmt Tot lines
.
.
.
.
.
.
ETIT
30
+
=
'
%
5
4
?
. . .
?
.. .. ...
I
. . .
.
IIepik
2 7
Sau
I
..
10
12
13
Total 34
+
=
9
3
?
?
.
.
..
..
Character
. :
12
50 1835
Senex
+
% %%
3
1
?
?
.
.
.
Adul
.
.
.
.
Slave
I
..
.
.
.
Meret
..
.
.
Cook
+
=
1
2
?
.
.
.
.
Miles
.
.
.
.
10
12
Total
+
13
=
=
9
3
?
?
.
.
.
.
.
.
Summary Necessary
:
. .
. .
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Useful
.
.
.
Not useful
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
..
.
IV
TABLE SOLILOQUIES ARISTOPHANES

IN
:
Dicaeopolis Exposition
39
Achar
1
-
.
480 489 Comment

-
Clouds Strepsiades Exposition

79
1
-
627 632 Socrates Comment

- -
Lys Lysistrata Exposition

1
4
.
973 979 Cinesias Comment

-
no
APPENDIX .
Eccl . 1- 29 Praxagora Exposition

311 - 326 Blepyrus Development
746 - 752 dvip Deliberation
877 - 883 ypaus Development
938 – 948 veavlas Comment
Plut . I- 17 Carion Exposition

802 , 822 Development
. |
cắt
Play . Exp. Dev Cmt Del Total
Dé
Dể
.
.
.
.
.
.
|
Achar
.
.
.
.
Clouds
. . ..
Lys
. . .
. . .
. .
.
.
. .
. ..
Eccl
.
Plut
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Total
.
.
..
....
....
3
5
L
.
..
..
.
..
.
..

Soliloquy in Ancient Comedy (Ph.D. Diss. Princeton, 1922)

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

Soliloquy in Ancient Comedy (Ph.D. Diss. Princeton, 1922)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

628Go

SOLILOQUY IN ANCIENT COMEDY

JOHN DEAN BICKFORD

A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF PRINCETON

PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR

Published February , 1922

SINE QUO FORSITAN NE HOC TANTULUM

QUIDEM OPUS CONFECTUM ESSET

The purpose of study was to investigate a particular

to draw from this investigation whatever conclusions it seemed

and several valuable suggestions

expresses Prof Edward Capps Prin

Citations are made from the following texts

Plautus Lindsay Oxford 1903

Aeschylus Weil 1907

CULVER MILITARY ACADEMY

II. The Function of the Soliloquy in the Structure .. ..

IV . The Relation between the Chorus and the Soliloquy 28

VII. Outside Influences on the Development of Soliloquy 48

whole lies the plays Plautus They constitute the

Latin comedies and

and some sense

comedy that has influenced modern drama most ,

study will soon appear that we are right

beginning with Plautus rather than with Aristophanes and

general concerns the development soliloquy

working backward rather than forward ,

We consider four main topics first the types

soliloquy the function the soliloquy the structure

the plays third the relation the soliloquy Roman comedy

Menander and the comic fragments perhaps

sufficient for Greek but for the second not

long we have not extant plays

Comedy complete parts

New the evidence the extant

Menander ETIT PÉTOVTES IIepikelpouévn and Eauia valuable

though yet inadequate enough need confirmation by

argument and demonstration from Latin comedy This last

topic finally will lead naturally

the development soliloquy Greek comedy from Old New

preliminary question importance an

swered just what here meant by soliloquy the first place

soliloquy must spoken character the play this

criterion the ordinary prologue the Captivi

likewise the prologue by divinity the Aulularia and

the prologues Mercator and the Miles

Cistellaria while the

are included . In the second place , a soliloquy must be spoken

distinction especially since take dialogues this sort into

consideration would add nothing the validity

Plaut Amph 1005 1008 Menander Erit 359

By classification of soliloquies according to type we mean

the other plays except the Hero are lost

while the extant fragment that play consists

which one character mÓOWTOV

we may better call development explanation the plot

Plautinische Forschungen Berlin 1895 194

this sense corresponds the term exposition Latin comedy

sense Plaut Forsch 171

Plaut Forsch 176

examples of this type from Menander indeed both verge on the

plain without with action stage that has already been

made plain some other means numerically the com