Seats and Social Status in the Plautine Theatre

Author(s): Timothy J. Moore

Source: The Classical Journal , Dec., 1994 - Jan., 1995, Vol. 90, No. 2 (Dec., 1994 - Jan.,
1995), pp. 113-123
Published by: The Classical Association of the Middle West and South, Inc. (CAMWS)

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3297753

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3297753?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

The Classical Association of the Middle West and South, Inc. (CAMWS) is collaborating with
JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Classical Journal

This content downloaded from

139.165.31.39 on Sat, 26 Nov 2022 20:15:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SEATS AND SOCIAL STATUS IN THE PLAUTINE THEATRE

Ritschl's thesis that Roman theatres had no seats until the middle
of the second century B.C.E. has long fallen by the wayside.' After the
successive refutations of that thesis by Fabia, Fensterbusch, Duckworth,
and Beare, few would deny that seating was available for at least some
of the spectators for at least some of the original performances of
Plautine plays.2 Nevertheless, it remains unclear just who was likely
to have been sitting while watching Plautus' plays, and what the
distinction between seated and standing spectators meant to Plautus
and his audience. This article addresses these uncertainties through a
reexamination of the relevant passages of Plautus. I shall argue that
seating in the temporary theatres where Plautus' plays were first
performed was often insufficient for all who wished to see the play,
that the primary criterion for determining who was to stand and who
could sit was social status, and that this social distinction between
standers and sitters lies behind several Plautine jokes.
Passages from the Epidicus and the Mercator appear to imply that
at the first performance of those plays the entire audience was seated.
The epilogue of the Epidicus includes a request that the audience get
up and stretch (lumbos porgite atque exsurgite [Epid. 733]).3 In the
Mercator, Acanthio asks Charinus if he is afraid of waking the
sleeping spectators (160). While the joke could be thought particularly
funny if Acanthio imagined the spectators falling asleep even as they
stood, it appears more likely that the spectators mentioned were
sitting down.4 References to seated and standing spectators in the

1 F. Ritschl, Parerga zu Plautus und Terenz (Berlin 1845) 209-38.

2 P. Fabia, "Les theatres de Rome au temps de Plaute et de Terence," RPh 21
(1897) 11-25; C. Fensterbusch, "Theatron," RE 2.5 (1934) 1412-13; G. E. Duckworth,
The Nature of Roman Comedy: A Study in Popular Entertainment (Princeton 1952)
80-81; W. Beare, The Roman Stage, 3rd ed. (London 1964) 174-75, 241-47. Cf. J. Gwyn
Griffiths, "Seats in the Early Roman Theatre," CR 2 (1952) 72; and Erich Gruen,
Culture and National Identity in Republican Rome (Ithaca, NY 1992) 207-208.
3All citations of Plautus are from W. M. Lindsay's edition (Oxford 1904-1905).
Our text of the Truculentus ends in a similar request (plaudite atque exsurgite, 968),
but the line is almost certainly an interpolation. See P. J. Enk, Plauti Truculentus (Leiden
1953, repr. New York 1979) 216.
4 Cf. Duckworth (note 2 above) 81. Another assumption that the spectators are
sitting comes as the prologue to the Pseudolus proposes that the audience stretch

The Classical Journal 90.2 (1994) 113-23

This content downloaded from

139.165.31.39 on Sat, 26 Nov 2022 20:15:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
114 TIMOTHY J. MOORE

Amphitruo, Aulularia, Captivi, Miles Glori

however, suggest that while many of the spec
plays were first performed, there remained
poorest citizens, who were forced to stand in t
for lack of seats.
Plautus' most extensive and complex referen
the prologue to the Poenulus.5 The prologus, p
imperator histricus (4), gives a series of comma
the subsellia sit tranquilly (5-10):

bonoque ut animo sedeant6 in subselliis

et qui essurientes et qui saturi venerint:
qui edistis, multo fecistis sapientius,
qui non edistis, saturi fite fabulis;
nam quoi paratumst quod edit, nostra grat
nimia est stultitia sessum inpransum incede

At least some of the spectators, then, are sitting.

herald to quiet the audience (11-15), however, t
his commands, and it becomes clear that not every
(16-27):

bonum factum tesset edicta ut servetis mea.

scortum exoletum ne quis in proscaenio
sedeat, neu lictor verbum aut virgae muttiant
neu dissignator praeter os obambulet
neu sessum ducat, dum histrio in scaena siet
diu qui domi otiosi dormierunt, decet
animo aequo nunc stent vel dormire temperen
servi ne opsideant, liberis ut sit locus,

their limbs before the long play begins (1-2). These

reference to a Plautina fabula, were probably added for a
death. See M. M. Willcock, Plautus, Pseudolus (Bristol 198
s The Poenulus prologue, like most of Plautus' prolo
Ritschl to be the product of a performance after Plautus'
The refutation of Ritschl's case against seating, howev
powerful argument against the prologues, and this porti
has been cogently defended by K. Abel, Die Plautusprolog
96, and 0. Zwierlein, Zur Kritik und Exegese des Plaut
(Mainz 1990) 206-212. Even H. D. Jocelyn, "Imperator
who approaches the prologue from "a radically scep
concludes that lines 3-49 may well be Plautine (122-23).
negotiations: The Poenulus prologue unpacked," YCS 29
6It makes no difference to my argument whether we rea
or the emendation sedeant. Cf. G. Maurach, Plauti Poenulu

This content downloaded from

139.165.31.39 on Sat, 26 Nov 2022 20:15:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SEATS AND SOCIAL STATUS 115

vel aes pro capite dent; si id facere non queun

domum abeant, vitent ancipiti infortun
ne et hic varientur virgis et loris domi,
si minu' curassint, quom eri reveniant domu

It is not absolutely certain where the scorta

of as sitting. Tanner argued that the proscaenium
in line twenty and must therefore be the area
stage proper, equivalent to an orchestra.8 By li
prologue has started a new thought, so there i
and proscaenium cannot be synonyms, bo
Furthermore, the prologue to the Truculentu
performance of that play the proscaenium is t
very unlikely that he would point out the or
stage itself as the place which is to be transfor
duration of the play.9 Beare, then, is likely to
that proscaenium means "stage" here.10 Wheth
did sometimes solicit from the stage, or this is
the line is not directly relevant to what went o
the lictors might be standing or sitting anywher
When he does return to spectators in the
appears at first to contradict himself. His com
nator not obstruct the view of other spectator
to their seats assumes that seats remained ava
tators. Yet when he orders that slaves not sit, so
for free persons, he implies that there were n
who wanted them. The best explanation of this
is Ritter's proposal that the Poenulus was first
games after the Ludi Romani of 194 (Livy 34.

7They are probably male prostitutes. Cf. Abel (note 5 a

Moore, "Palliata togata: Plautus, Curculio 462-86," AJPh 1
R. G. Tanner, "Problems in Plautus," PCPhS 15 (196
Commentarius in Plauti Comoedias (Copenhagen 1875-9
Thierfelder, Hildesheim 1972) 4.2.297 = 2.231; and Maur
9 "Stage" is as likely a translation as "orchestra" for
proscaenium (Amph. 91, Poen. 57).
10 Beare (note 2 above) 176. Cf. Duckworth (note 2
(note 5 above) 146, n. 559.
" On the alternate, erroneous, tradition that the first
for the senators occurred at the Ludi Megalenses in 194 (
Ungern-Sternberg, "Die Einfiihrung spezieller Sitze ffir
(194 v. Chr.)," Chiron 5 (1975) 157-63, and Gruen (note
Schutter, Quibus annis comoediae Plautinae primum actae si
125, considers 189-188 the most likely date for the first
Cf. Maurach (note 6 above) 41-43.

This content downloaded from

139.165.31.39 on Sat, 26 Nov 2022 20:15:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
116 TIMOTHY J. MOORE

senators received seats separate from others.1

tiered system of seating. The section reserved for
than enough seats for all of that class who migh
the seats were kept reserved by the dissignator
safely assume, was created in order to enforce
mentioned before this passage).
In the rest of the theatre, things were not so c
prologue's command that the slaves not sit is
that the theatre as a whole did not possess enou
and that the non-senatorial section had no offi
enforcing who was to sit where. Who, then, g
senatorial seats? Beare proposed that seating w
first served" basis.13 Yet it is significant that
latecomers should stand comes not with reference to those who
actually compete for seats, but to those who have seats reserved for
them; the actual competition for seats is expressed not in terms of time
of arrival, but rather social status. Even though there was no official
compulsion regarding who was to sit or stand in the non-senatorial
section, it was not latecomers who stood if not enough seats were
available, but those of the very lowest classes, particularly slaves. The
prologue's demand that latecomers not be led to their seats is
therefore an absurd joke. His self-importance is so great that he thinks
he can command senators to stand in the back with slaves.
After forbidding the slaves to sit unless they can buy their free-
dom, the prologue goes on to say that if they cannot buy their
freedom, they should go home to avoid punishment at home and in
the theatre. Is he joking, or must the slaves leave the theatre entirely?14
A passage of Cicero suggests that at some festivals slaves were
forbidden to attend theatrical performances (Har. Resp. 26);15 but,
as Rawson has pointed out, Cicero's prohibition of slaves need not
refer to all festivals, and it may imply that the slaves were barred not
from the entire theatre, but only from the seats.16 Furthermore, Cicero

'2F. Ritter in Allgemeine Schulzeitung (1830) 873 ff., cited in Ritschl (note 1 above)
212. Abel (note 5 above) 90 proposes that the passage could mean that the spectators
were divided into tribes, but there is no evidence for such division at this early a date.
It is not clear whether the senators are envisioned as sitting in the orchestra, as they
did in the later permanent theatres (Vitr. 5.6.2), or if they are in the front rows of the
cavea.

13 Beare (note 2 above) 174.

14So Ritschl (note 1 above) 223-24, and Abel (note 5 above) 1
15 Cf. T. Mommsen, RJmisches Staatsrecht I, 3rd ed. (Berlin
16E. Rawson, "Discrimina ordinum: The Lex Julia Theatra
87-88.

This content downloaded from

139.165.31.39 on Sat, 26 Nov 2022 20:15:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SEATS AND SOCIAL STATUS 117

says that it was the praeco's job to remove the

has already been at work (11-15), and the slave
prologue later proposes that pedisequi, who
slaves, raid the food shop during the perform
are still in the theatre long after the prologu
manded that they leave.7 The prologue's sugg
"just go home" is thus a joke which would no m
attempt to make the senators stand.
It is likely, then, that all of the prologue's
absurdity for their humor. Regardless of wha
spectators would probably get up and get a sn
(5-10). Scorta exoleta may never actually have
Lictors would scarcely obey the wishes of an
magistrates who commanded them (18). It is
senators would remain standing with seats
matter how late they arrived (19-22), or that
of sitting, when free persons needed seats (23
excluded from the theatre entirely (24-27). Ye
may have been, the edicts do reflect the socia
The stage and the back of the theatre are
prestige. The former, inhabited by actors
persons of the lowest class, is of such low st
ciated with a scortum exoletum. The latter is
free persons who could not get a seat-more l
power and wealth than latecomers. In betw
divided, for this performance, and presumably
after 194, into the very front section of senat
everyone except the highest and the lowest cl
This social distinction between sitting an
brings new force to Agorastocles' reference to
in the play. After more than 1200 lines (this
play), Agorastocles encourages Hanno to haste
of his daughters, saying: in pauca confer: sitiu
sedent is not merely a synonym for "spectators,"

17 The fact that the pedisequi are envisioned as getti

mance implies not that they will be absent from the the
rather that they stand in the back. The prologue ca
inversion of social mores by proposing that pedisequi ma
while he had demanded earlier that their social superior
sit still whether or not they are hungry. The lines do a
not be all that interested in the play. This is consistent w
below) which suggest that those standing in the back w

This content downloaded from

139.165.31.39 on Sat, 26 Nov 2022 20:15:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
118 TIMOTHY J. MOORE

to those with enough clout to acquire seats. Th

thus carries extra force: the members of the au
require that the play move toward its close.8
The prologue of the Captivi offers some of t
both standing and sitting spectators. The prol
Tyndarus and Philocrates, who stand on stage

hos quos videtis stare hic captivos duos

illi quia astant, hi stant ambo, non sedent.19
hoc vos mihi testes estis me verum loqui.

Lindsay, proposing that illi are latecomers who

translated, "the prisoners on the stage are sta
ment to our friends at the back of the theatre."20
time of arrival determined who sat, Lindsay's
significance than he realized. The line is not o
explicit connection between both the characters
those who stand in the back of the theatre. The tw
of the standers, are slaves; and the actors, like all
are either slaves or others of the lowest classe
sitting spectators (vos) to witness the connectio
acknowledgement of the slaves and other stan
ignored, an acknowledgement most appropriate
of which revolves around slavery and freedom
The prologue's "democratic" attitude, howev
he begins the argumentum, he stops to make s
following him (10-16):

iam hoc tenetis? optumest.

negat hercle illic ultumus. accedito.
si non ubi sedeas locus est, est ubi ambules,
quando histrionem cogis mendicarier.
ego me tua caussa, ne erres, non rupturu' s

18 The line would have additional humor for any who r

attempt to restrain the sitters from getting up to get fo
well), while allowing the pedisequi to come and go as they
fact been followed, only those who sat would in fact b
would have been able to sneak out for a drink.
19 The manuscripts read "illi qui astant, hi [or i] stant
for a Plautine prologue, this makes an exceptionally insip
illi and i or hi refer to the same persons, a very unusual
single a gives the line a much more reasonable sense and
radical emendation.
20 W. M. Lindsay, The Captivi of Plautus (London 1900) 117.

This content downloaded from

139.165.31.39 on Sat, 26 Nov 2022 20:15:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SEATS AND SOCIAL STATUS 119

vos qui potestis ope vostra censerier

accipite relicuom: alieno uti nil moror.

The prologue singles out a real or, more prob

at the very back of the theater and beckons hi
section.21 If he cannot get a seat, he can just le
prologue will not become a beggar for his sa
means that he will not ruin his voice and therefore be forced to become
a beggar,22 or, as seems more likely, that he will not beg for a hearing,23
the joke introduces the concept of social status. As the prologue
continues, it becomes dear that in fact social status lies at the heart of
his dismissal of the imagined heckler; for he now dismisses all the
standers and offers the rest of his argumentum to those who have
enough property that they are entitled to seats, punning on assiduus
and assideo.24 He jokingly assumes, then, that those standing are capite
censi, who have no property worth reckoning in the census, while those
in the seats are persons of property.2s This need not imply a rigid
restriction of the seating section. It is, after all, a joke, and does not
require literal accuracy to achieve its effect. Nevertheless, it does take
for granted that social status rather than time of arrival distinguished
sitters from standers. The hapless heckler is doubly insulted: he is
summarily dismissed, and he is called a 'low life."26
Palaestrio's prologue in the Miles Gloriosus may also provide
evidence of competition for seats (79-85):

mihi ad enarrandum hoc argumentum est comitas,

si ad auscultandum vostra erit benignitas;
qui autem auscultare nolet exsurgat foras,
ut sit ubi sedeat ille qui auscultare volt.
nunc qua adsedistis caussa in festivo loco,

21 Or, if we accept Rostius' emendation of abscedito for accedito, he orders him to

leave. As ultimus elsewhere in Plautus always refers to physical distance, it is very
unlikely that it means here "the last to arrive" rather than "the farthest away."
22E. Cocchia, I Captivi di M. Accio Plauto (Turin 1886) 6; and J. Brix and M.
Niemeyer, Ausgewahlte KomOdien des T. Maccius Plautus II: Captivi, 5th ed.
(Leipzig 1897) 11.
23Lindsay (note 20 above) 120-21.
24Cf. Ussing (note 8 above) II.462=I.408; A. R. S. Hallidie, The Captivi of T.
Maccius Plautus (London 1891) 82; and F. Leo, Plauti Comoediae (Berlin 1895) 1.181.
2 On capite censi and assidui, cf. T. Mommsen, ROmisches Staatsrecht III (Berlin
1888) 237-38; and D. J. Gargola, "Aulus Gellius and the Property Qualifications of the
proletarii and the capite censi," CP 84 (1989) 231-34.
26 This is, of course, exceedingly ironic, given the low status of the actor-
prologue.

This content downloaded from

139.165.31.39 on Sat, 26 Nov 2022 20:15:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
120 TIMOTHY J. MOORE

comoediai quam nos acturi sumus

et argumentum et nomen vobis eloquar.

Again everyone who counts is sitting: Palaestrio

with adsedistis. But is the entire audience sitti
auscultare nolet exsurgat foras" may not be int
ously; it is perhaps an example of a prologue's
the commands in the Poenulus. Nevertheless, h
qui auscultare volt" does imply that there are
the seats of the seated spectators. These "wann
outside, hoping that someone will leave so t
The implied fluidity between sitters and stand
that those who wish to sit are more likely peop
of the theatre, and that, as in the Captivi, the
trouble hearing. As the standers are envisioned as
who leave, there can have been no official soc
sitters and standers, but this does not mean t
rather than social status determined who got the
that the standers are ignored in the very next
are not merely unfortunate latecomers, but m
classes, whose presence is insignificant.27
Mercury, acting as prologue in the Amphitr
of "Jupiter" to spectators who are sitting (64-68

nunc hoc me orare a vobis iussit luppiter

ut conquistores singula in subsellia
eant per totam caveam spectatoribus,
si quoi favitores delegatos viderint,
ut is in cavea pignus capiantur togae.

Mercury's connection of subsellia and per t

imply that all the spectators are sitting; but it
significance that the claqueurs are to be deprive
spectators would have been wearing togas?
Romani fr. 44 Riposati = Non. 867-68 Lindsay)
1.282) tell us that originally men and women
including slaves, wore togas all the time. By
however, it is clear that the very poorest could no

27 While the other plays discussed here may all post

special seats for senators in 194, the Miles is certainly ear
11 above] 96-99, 102). Palaestrio's words, if my interpretat
confirm what we would suspect in any case: social distinc
sitters preceded the official division of the seating section

This content downloaded from

139.165.31.39 on Sat, 26 Nov 2022 20:15:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SEATS AND SOCIAL STATUS 121

3.36.9, 11.32.1). Furthermore, by imperial time

had become a nuisance. Martial, Juvenal, and Pl
delights of country life and staying at home the f
wear the toga (Juv. 3.171-72,11.203-204, Mart. 1
10.51.6, 10.96.11-12, 12.18.17, Pliny Ep. 7.3.2-3)
decrees are recorded which commanded that the
life (Suet. Aug. 40 [Augustus], Mart. 14. 124 [D
22.2 [Hadrian]).28 Marquardt was no doubt righ
fashion, luxuria, and the introduction of more
from abroad converted the toga from a basic ar
to something along the line of a suit in modem
The paucity of evidence makes it difficult to te
in attitudes toward the toga would have progr
What little evidence there is, however, sugges
century B.C.E. the toga had come to signify a cert
that, as in Martial's day, the very poorest and
own togas. Titinius contrasts togae candidae
(167-68 Ribbeck), and the association of the tog
ship goes back at least to Ennius (Ann. 494 V = 5
"comfort factor," it is unlikely that at this early
a toga would not have worn it to the theatr
Augustus' attempts to make people wear the tog
to bring back habitus vestitusque pristinus. Nev
indignation at seeing a turba pullatorum sugge
the toga was still new enough that it could sur
Aug. 40). Ovid describes common folk as wearin
of Anna Perenna, although they do take them o
the festival to make tents (Fast. 3.530).
Mercury's reference to togas, then, does not
sellia were restricted to the very highest classes
assumption that the poorest members of th
if not all of the slaves, would be standing. Agai
rigid rules regarding who was to stand or sit; b
possession of a seat, like the toga, was a sign of

28 Cf. L. Friedlaender, Darstellungen aus der Sittengeschich

1922) 2.9; and J. Carcopino, Daily Life in Ancient Rome
New Haven 1940) 154-55.
29 J. Marquardt and A. Mau, Das Privatleben der ROi
2.554-55, 564.
30 Some slaves of the wealthy may have worn togas; they did so even much later,
in spite of the assumption that the toga was a sign of Roman citizenship (Suet. Claud.
34, Fronto De Nepote Amisso 2.3).

This content downloaded from

139.165.31.39 on Sat, 26 Nov 2022 20:15:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
122 TIMOTHY J. MOORE

goes on to say that actors guilty of seeking pr

ways will be deprived of their ornamenta (85):
evidence that they belong on the stage; guilty sp
the sign that they deserve to be seated in the su
An association between seating and clothing
Aulularia. Upon discovering his gold missing, Eu
to the audience (715-19):31

opsecro vos, mi auxilio,

oro, optestor, sitis et hominem demonstretis, quis e
quid ais tu? tibi credere certum est, nam esse bonum
quid est? quid ridetis? novi omnis, scio fures esse h
qui vestitu et creta occultant sese atque sedent quasi

Euclio's creta is what Pliny describes as creta f

be used to keep togas clean and white (HN 14
Occultant and sedent, joined as they are by atq
two different ways in which Euclio's thieves p
respectable people: they wear nice white togas,
sitting section of the theatre.33
Aside from the reservation of a portion of the s
194, then, there appear to have been no rigid ru
to sit and who to stand during the original perf
plays. Even the new rule regarding senators did
distinction between standers and sitters; it mere
section. The amount of seating provided would h
much was spent on the games, and there may ha
at which sufficient seating was provided for all
For at least some performances, however, seatin
such occasions it was tacitly accepted that sl
spectators would stand.4 The prologues of th
Poenulus suggest that even when some spect
their presence could be ignored, so we cannot b
spectators sat even during those plays where th
is addressed as sitters.

31 Although there is uncertainty regarding the order of these lines (see W.

Stockert, T. Maccius Plautus Aulularia [Stuttgart 1983] 186-87), transposition will not
affect my argument.
32 Stockert (note 30 above) 187. Cf. H. Blamner, Technologie und Terminologie der
Gewerbe und Kiinste bei Griechen und ROmern (Leipzig 1875) I1.164.
33 Cf. Calpurnius Siculus' distinction between those with white togas in the
Colosseum's lower levels and the pullati in its highest rows (7.26-29). Martial also speaks
of spectators in white togas in the amphitheatre (4.2.4,14.135) and in the theatre (229.1-4).
34 This unofficial division of spectators based on social status is consistent with

This content downloaded from

139.165.31.39 on Sat, 26 Nov 2022 20:15:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SEATS AND SOCIAL STATUS 123

The existence of theatres with limited sea

social status helps in two ways to explain th
accompanied the introduction of special seats
34.54.3-8, Val. Max. 2.4.3).35 First, spectat
feel a sense of superiority merely by sitting in
inferiors were forced to stand, and if they
senators, it was because of their own verecu
coercion. Plautus made it his business to encou
such reminders as Euclio's assumption tha
sidered frugi, Mercury's association of seats
Captivi prologue's flattery of the sitting sp
property. With the addition of special seats f
sense of superiority would be tempered by th
sitters were less privileged than the senators w
Second, it is likely, and the Poenulus prol
section reserved for the senators held enou
who might wish to come, regardless of how
see a given play. The number of seats left ov
accommodated would therefore be smaller,
who previously had been able to acquire a se
to stand, even as they saw before them emp
section.3
TIMOTHY J. MOOR
University of Texas

Valerius Maximus' report that even before the official

senators, "numquam tamen quisquam ex plebe ante p
spectare sustinuit" (4.5.1; cf. Mommsen [note 25 abov
have been some performances for which no seats were
35 Gruen's suggestion (note 2 above, 204) that the d
later historians' imaginations, is intriguing but not, in
36My thanks to Gwyn Morgan, Jerzy Linderski, An
and anonymous readers of CJ for their help and advice

This content downloaded from

139.165.31.39 on Sat, 26 Nov 2022 20:15:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms