Mixing the Roman miles: Character Development in Terence's Eunuchus

Transcription

1 University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Foreign Languages & Literatures ETDs Electronic Theses and Dissertations Mixing the Roman miles: Character Development in Terence's Eunuchus Samantha Davis Follow this and additional works at: Recommended Citation Davis, Samantha. "Mixing the Roman miles: Character Development in Terence's Eunuchus." (2016). This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Electronic Theses and Dissertations at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Foreign Languages & Literatures ETDs by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact

2 Candidate Department This thesis is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication: Approved by the Thesis Committee:, Chairperson

3 by THESIS Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of The University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico

4 iii Acknowledgements I would like to express the deepest appreciation to my committee chair Professor Osman Umurhan, through whose genius, dedication, and endurance this thesis was made possible. Thank you, particularly, for your unceasing support, ever-inspiring words, and relentless ability to find humor in just about any situation. You have inspired me to be a better scholar, teacher, and colleague. I would also like to extend the sincerest thanks to my excellent committee members, the very chic Professor Monica S. Cyrino and the brilliant Professor Lorenzo F. Garcia Jr., whose editorial thoroughness, helpful suggestions, and constructive criticisms were absolutely invaluable. In addition, a thank you to Professor Luke Gorton, whose remarkable knowledge of classical linguistics has encouraged me to think about language and syntax in a much more meaningful way. You have all impacted me profoundly and I am forever grateful to have had the honor of being your student. I would like to also thank my fellow graduate students at the University of New Mexico for your friendship and counsel. I would particularly like to thank Makaila Daeschel and Dannu Hütwohl, who have been the greatest friends and office-mates a girl could ask for. I am so thankful to have had you both throughout this process, your friendship is priceless. I would also like to thank my family for always being there for me, just a phone call away. Finally, I would like to posthumously thank my beloved father, Dr. Jeffrey R. Davis, whose absolute genius and never-ending thirst for knowledge inspired me in every way possible. What the hell, it s not so high.

5 iv Mixing the Roman miles: Character Development in Terence s Eunuchus By Samantha C. Davis B.A., Classical Studies, University of New Mexico, 2013 M.A. Comparative Literature and Cultural Studies, University of New Mexico, 2016 Abstract In my thesis I explore Terence s innovative development of three stock characters: Chaerea, the adulescens amator, Thraso, the miles gloriosus, and Gnatho, the parasitus. In the Eunuchus Terence provides each of these characters with a mythological parallel that reveals the character s inner thoughts, motives, and justifications, as well as their self-perceived position within Roman society. The first chapter traces the development of the figure of the adulescens amator in Roman literature and examines how Terence s incorporation of mythological burlesque defies dramatic conventions. The second chapter analyzes key dramatic relationships that suggest a parallel to the historical relationship between Rome and her subjugated territories. The miles gloriosus, Thraso, is cast as a socius miles, whereas Gnatho, the parasitus, appears as a ciues miles. My analysis, ultimately, offers an interpretation of how these issues respond and react to contemporary Roman political and military institutions of the second century BCE.

6 v Table of Contents INTRODUCTION... 1 New Comedy Stock Characters and Terentian Innovation... 1 New Comedy Stock Characters... 2 Metatheatrical Irony: Challenging Audience Expectation... 5 Character Introspection and Extraspection Chapter Overview CHAPTER ONE Chaerea: When a Soldier is a Lover Chaerea as Adulescens Amator Jupiter and Danaë: Terence s Burlesque Chaerea: A Soldier Compared to Jupiter Defying Conventions: Chaerea s Character Development Defying Conventions: Sexual Violence Ludo: Sex as a Game Chaerea: A Reflection of Roman Reality Conclusions: Introspection and Extraspection CHAPTER TWO A Soldier and his Parasite: Roman Reliance on socii milites Thraso as Miles Gloriosus Hercules and Omphale: Terence s Burlesque Thraso: a Soldier Compared to Hercules Defying Conventions: Thraso s Character Development A Reflection of Roman Reality: Thraso as Roman miles Sisyphean parasitus: Terence s Burlesque Gnatho: a Soldier compared to Sisyphus Defying Conventions: the Development of Gnatho Gnatho: A Reflection of Roman Reality Conclusion CONCLUSION BIBLIOGRAPHY

7 1 INTRODUCTION New Comedy Stock Characters and Terentian Innovation Publius Terentius Afer is one of the most praised authors of archaic Latin dating to the early second century BCE. Plays written by Terence ( BCE) and his predecessor Plautus (ca BCE) constitute the entire surviving tradition of New Comedy at Rome, a Latin genre of plays famous, among other features, for its recycling of Greek material. The Greek based comedies that both Plautus and Terence wrote are called fabula palliata, translated as Greek-cloaked plays. 1 Although Terence s plays are set in Greece and his characters typically bear Greek names, in many aspects they portray the society of the Roman Republic. 2 References to Roman gods, localities, laws, customs, and attire can be found within Terence s Eunuchus, but the presence of such Romanisms has often been explained away as a feature of the play s Plautine qualities. 3 I argue, however, that Romanisms help contextualize Terence s provocative development of certain stock characters, a Terentian innovation to the New Comedy genre. This project follows a trend in recent scholarship, which demonstrates that Terentian innovation can be found in his instances of variation and defiance of the dramatic conventions of New Comedy. 4 Specifically, this thesis explores Terence s use 1 All Latin and Greek translations are my own, unless specified otherwise. 2 Konstan 1983: 22 argues that Roman comedy did not ignore anxieties relating to the turbulent social scene at Rome. He discusses Roman political and social issues such as Roman allies, citizenship, familial structure and paternal authority, and marriage ritual. Hunter 1985 argues that Plautus drew material from contemporary Rome for his plays; however, he denies that Terence did the same. Goldberg 1986: 214 claims that in the plays of Plautus there are reflections of and reactions to contemporary Roman culture. However, some scholars maintain that Terence offers little to no comment on the contemporary scene at Rome. Ludwig 2001 utterly denies Terence any significant originality or Roman commentary and claims that he simply stuck more closely to the Greek originals than Plautus. 3 For scholars who discuss Plautine elements in Terence, see: Norwood 1923; Fraenkel 2007; Sharrock 2009; Christenson 2013; Franko 2013; Karakasis 2013; Packman Beare 1965 claims that because of Terence s alterations and additions to his Greek source material he was able to produce Latin plays that were poetically superior to their Greek originals. More recent scholars

8 2 of stock characters who drastically defy the dramatic conventions ascribed to them by the New Comedy genre. In the Eunuchus Terence does something innovative and transformative with certain stock characters. He takes something old, the stock character, and puts a new spin on it by infusing the character with something even older, a mythological figure, which in combination takes on new meaning within specific Roman contexts. There are three mythological references in the Eunuchus that I identify as mythological parallels and all are informed by the perspective of Roman soldiers Chaerea, Thraso, and Gnatho. The stock character s self-identification with a particular mythological figure and situation from Greek culture and the transposition of that figure and situation into the Roman context help to establish a uniquely Roman characteristic extracted from Greek culture. New Comedy Stock Characters New Comedy offers its audience a glimpse into the life of the average well-to-do citizen and his family. The world of New Comedy was far removed from the charged political and personal invective of its predecessor Old Comedy, which would not have focus on cultural analyses of Terence s additions and alterations. Barsby 1999 suggests that their function is to produce a distinctively Italian production. Starks 2013 identifies references that have Roman historical significance. Papaioannou 2014: argues, the revision of Plautine characterization and the creation of a distinctly personal dramaturgy via the development of different versions of the typical palliata agents express Terence s strategy of interpretation. Fontaine 2014 argues that the additions establish an intertextual dynamism present throughout the corpus of Terence s plays. Terence s characters have also been singled out as having qualities not found in other characters within the New Comedy genre. Goldberg 1986 contrasts Plautine caricatures developed through stage action with Terentian characters who are more fully developed through dialogue. Augoustakis 2013: 9 points out that Terence s characters have a complexity not present in those of Plautus. Franko 2013: 41 argues that Terence s characters are threedimensional and give the sense of a fully realized individual.

9 3 suited Rome s political turbulence of the Middle Republic. 5 New Comedy makes frequent use of stock characters that can be defined as stereotypical characters with whom audiences could easily identify because of their recurrent appearances within the genre. The stock characters found in Plautus are: the senex iratus ( angry old man ), the adulescens amator ( young lover ), the servus callidus ( cunning slave ), the servus stultus ( foolish slave ), the miles gloriosus ( arrogant soldier ), the parasitus ( parasite ), the leno ( pimp ), and the meretrix ( prostitute ). Stock characters represent exaggerated individuals and cultural aspects of Athenian and, arguably, Roman society. The miles gloriosus and his parasitus represent the extravagance of military plunder, the leno and his meretrix exemplify the business of urban luxury, and the senex, adulescens, and servus embody the men of the house. These character types fundamentally represent the military, economic, and domestic institutions in which citizens and foreigners participated. Terence in the prologue to the Eunuchus (161 BCE) offers a list of commonly used New Comedy stock characters and situations in an effort to rebuff accusations of furtum: qui magis licet currentem seruom scribere, bonas matronas facere, meretrices malas, parasitum edacem, gloriosum militem, puerum supponi, falli per seruom senem, amare odisse suspicari? How is it more pleasing to represent a running slave, to portray good wives, woeful whores, a gluttonous parasite, a boastful soldier, that a boy is separated [at birth], that an old man is deceived by a slave, love, hate, suspicion [than to use material borrowed from other Latin sources?] 5 Rome s intolerance for popular reprimand is demonstrated by Gabba 1989: 220 who argues that the destruction of the Books of Numa represented the elimination of politically dangerous texts.

10 4 (Eunuchus 36-40) 6 Here, Terence is defending his right to borrow certain character types not because he stole them from another source by contaminatio or furtum, but because they are stock characters that belong to the genre as a whole. 7 This project calls specific attention to the adulescens amator, miles gloriosus, and the parasitus stock characters that Terence both adapts and manipulates in his Eunuchus. 8 Chaerea, Terence s adulescens amator, does not just represent a member of the Roman patrilineal hierarchy but, more specifically, symbolizes the type of predatory Roman miles who was actively engaged in the aggressive policies of Roman expansionism in the second century BCE. 9 The relationship between Thraso and Gnatho, Terence s miles gloriosus and parasitus, represents that of Rome and her recently subjugated allied soldiers beyond their association with the extravagance of plunder in general. 10 Gnatho is less prominent as the typical parasite who lives off the food from another s table than as a master of philosophically-charged rhetoric and intellectual dexterity over others. 6 All Latin cited from Terence s Eunuchus comes from Kauer and Lindsay This and all subsequent translations are my own. 7 Contaminatio is the blending of two Greek source plays into one Latin play and furtum is the theft of material from a previously produced Roman play. Barsby 1999: 15-7 describes these two accusations made by Luscius of Lanuvium, Terence s malevolent critic, and notes that within the prologue to the Eunuchus, in defending himself against a charge of furtum, Terence was in fact admitting to the practice of contamination. 8 Papaioannou 2014: 152 claims, the subversion of stock characters [is] the driving force of Terence s comic plot. She further argues that in the Eunuchus Chaerea usurps the role of the wily agent and facilitator of plot development from Parmeno when [Parmeno] half-jokingly, half-seriously, gave the leading role to the adulescens Chaerea. 9 Gill 1996: 17 warns against a definitive reading of texts, but supports the notion of [engaging] in dialogue with Greek culture, and to seek to evolve methods and attitudes which enable the texts, as thus studied, to have a voice in this dialogue. He also stresses that the concerns of a specific historicocultural situation may be such as to enable some of the ideas and thought-forms of another culture to let themselves be heard more clearly. By this model, Latin texts help illuminate aspects of Roman culture. 10 Hunter 1985: 77 notes that the miles gloriosus was a common stock character for both Plautus and Terence given they wrote during a time of Roman conquest and expansion. He points to the dramatic character Lamachos in Aristophanes Acharnians as a possible source for this stock character (Hunter 1985: 8). Leigh 2004 discusses the economies of New Comedy, which explain the common presence of a boastful soldier.

11 5 Metatheatrical Irony: Challenging Audience Expectation Terence abolishes the plot-related prologues so common to the plays of Plautus. By doing this, the playwright offers his audience no foreknowledge of the upcoming production and thereby dashes its expectations to make them as emotionally vulnerable as his dramatic characters. Yet, Terence still acknowledges traditional audienceempowering metatheatricality. For example, a character s staged recognition of their own stock role is metatheatrical and calls attention to the genre s conventions: 11 nunc, Parmeno, ostendes te qui vir sies. scis te mihi saepe pollicitum esse Chaerea, aliquid inueni modo quod ames; in ea re utilitatem ego faciam ut cognoscas meam, quom in cellulam ad de patris penum omnem congerebam clanculum. Now, Parmeno, you will reveal what sort of man you are. You know that you often promised me Chaerea, I just now found someone you ll love, in this [love] affair I will make sure that you know my usefulness, when I secretly pile up all your father s provisions in the little cellar for you. (Eunuchus ) Here, Terence draws metatheatrical attention to Parmeno, the servus whose stock role includes acting as facilitator for the adulescens in his amorous affairs, and in doing so he typifies the stock character of Chaerea, too, as amator. However, the characters later stark defiance of these acknowledged stock roles dashes audience expectation. 12 This calls into question the audience s cultural conventions and stereotypes rather than the 11 Vincent 2013: 83 suggests that Terence s characters often display such metatheatrical self-awareness of their stock roles. Papaioannou 2014: 153 claims that Chaerea claims the role of the adulescens amator by emphatically declaring himself love-struck upon first sight of Pamphila. 12 Papaioannou 2014: 144 explains, [s]everal of Terence s characters are aware that their acting is in discordance with the general expectations raised by the career of the same character on the Plautine stage, but instead of resorting to familiar acting patterns they make unexpected decisions, thus leading to the construction of peripeteia that is distinctly Terentian.

12 6 stock characters dramatic conventions. 13 Instead of metatheatricality reinforcing audience familiarity with the character, when Terence frustrates audience expectation of stock qualities the metatheatrical reference to that character becomes ironic. I suggest that those moments where modern readers feel uneasiness or disdain at a character s actions and justifications the types of feelings which many scholars maintain must not be applied to Terence s contemporary Roman audience may qualify as moments of metatheatrical irony that encourage the audience to question existing cultural norms. 14 One explicit example of this is the peculiar treatment of rape in the Eunuchus. In the play, Chaerea rapes Pamphila, a silent female character who, although born a citizen, has been sold into slavery and given to the meretrix Thais. The rape of a girl itself is not what sets Chaerea apart from the generic adulescens amator, but rather his stark defiance of the dramatic conventions concerning the stock scenario of rape. 15 Terence s metatheatrical irony, wherein the metatheatrical moment disrupts audience expectation, provides no humorous effect, but a critical one. Sutton, for example, claims: If we expect something important to happen and it doesn t, we find that funny [but] if our expectations are deceived in the opposite way, we don t find that funny. 16 As Sutton suggests, Terence here deceives his audience in the opposite way when he develops Chaerea outside the stock amator into a reprehensible sexual predator. Terence does not impair his audience s ability to inspire negative emotions in the future as a sort of healthy 13 Goldberg 1986: 117 claims, in the case of Thais, the meretrix from the Eunuchus, Terence plays off his own characterization of Thais against this expected character. Germany 2013: 227 credits the invention of dramatic surprise to Terence. 14 Franko 2013: 39 points out a similar phenomenon in Terence, what he calls paradigmatic substitution, and which he defines as the stock character s [assumption of] new roles within formulaic plots. Metatheatrical irony is different from paradigmatic substitution because the stock character s stereotypical roles and scenarios are simultaneously emphasized and distorted, but are not abandoned and replaced altogether. 15 I address Chaerea s rape of Pamphila in detail in Chapter 1, section Sutton 1994: 21.

13 7 cathartic outlet. 17 Rather, he does so to deprive his audience of a humorous vent. Furthermore, Sutton describes comedic catharsis as didactic and inoculatory. 18 During moments of metatheatrical irony, didactic elements of catharsis are brought forth in Terence s works, while the inoculatory are left out. It is well worth noting that Terence presents Roman audiences with Greek plays that markedly highlight Roman immorality and lax ethics with regard to sexual violence and he does so in a way that lacks cathartic humor. By challenging dramatic conventions surrounding Chaerea s rape of Pamphila, Terence didactically elevates rape to the status of an important social issue that in the playwright s day has become a trademark feature and plot circumstance of the stereotypical comic lover. 19 The metatheatrical discussion of contaminatio in the prologue of the Eunuchus also informs my reading of stock characters and character development. Contaminatio (as mentioned above) involves the blending of multiple Greek sources into one Latin play and thereby spoils the Greek sources for later use in another Roman production. It is evident that Terence used Greek plays as models; he openly admits to the practice Sutton 1994: 81 explains the process of comedic catharsis: When a surrogate evokes bad feelings, and the spectator laughs at the surrogate because of his appreciation of its ridiculous qualities (for such reasons as perceived incongruities), a double effect is achieved. Bad feelings are summoned by the surrogate, and the spectator transfers something of what he knows and feels about the target onto the surrogate. Thus some fraction of his bad feelings towards the target is rendered available for purgation by laughter. Simultaneously, the spectator s thoughts and feelings towards the target are modified so that its capacity to inspire similar bad feelings in the future is prohibited. 18 Sutton 1994: Papaioannou 2014: 154 argues, Terence s tampering with the conventions of the palliata, and the ways in which he portrays his characters confessing themselves ill-at-ease in their roles, discloses tongue-incheek an ingenious effort to reach across the boundaries of the palliata and experiment with the conventions of the togata, the form of Roman comic drama that [closest mirrored Roman life]. 20 In the prologue to the Eunuchus Terence defends his right to use literary models because, nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius. qua re aequomst uos cognoscere atque ignoscere quae ueteres factitarunt si faciunt noui. ( There is nothing now said which has not been said before. Therefore, it s right that you understand and forgive if new [authors] perform the things which old [authors] frequently did, Eunuchus 41-3). He also openly admits to using another play, Menander s Kolax, in addition to Menander s eunuch play. The line reads, Colax Menandrist, in east parasitus colax et miles gloriosus. eas se non negat personas transtulisse in Eunuchum suam ex Graeca. ( There is a Colax of Menander, in it

14 8 However, this is only the surface of an otherwise rich dynamism that infuses his plays. When sifting through his numerous sources (Greek New Comedy plays by both Menander and Apollodorus of Carystus), Terence makes subtle decisions regarding which plays, scenes, and characters to appropriate, as well as how and to what purpose he might adapt, innovate, and highlight those appropriations for his Roman audience. Terence s admitted practice of contaminatio emphasizes his appropriation of stock characters that he later develops beyond their conventional stock roles. Terence s prologues clearly demonstrate that his habit of contaminatio is something his audience would have acknowledged and reacted to: si id est peccatum, peccatum imprudentiast poetae, non quo furtum facere studuerit. If it [contaminatio] is a transgression, it is the poet s unintended outcome, he didn t [do it] because he intended to steal [another Latin playwright s intellectual property]. (Eunuchus 27-8) Because contaminatio was a controversial hot topic in Terence s day, his explicit admission to the practice is significant. Terence does more than arbitrarily appropriate characters from other plays; the characters he adds defy convention and stereotypical characterization in a marked way. Terence offers another marked form of characterization for his audience that exposes a rare glimpse into the minds of three soldiers Chaerea, Thraso and Gnatho. Often he provides these soldiers with introspective moments facilitated by mythological parallels that reveal inner thoughts, motives and justifications. Terence develops each of the soldiers before our eyes by the parallel and its implications. Chaerea, for example, there is a parasite flatterer and a boastful soldier. He does not deny that he appropriated these characters into his own Eunuchus from the Greek [play, i.e. Colax], Eunuchus 30-3).

15 9 diverges from the stereotypical adulescens amator when his mythological parallel reveals that the rape of Pamphila was premeditated, unnecessarily violent, and occurred within an atypical dramatic context. 21 Thraso also deviates from the stereotypical miles gloriosus; his character is innovatively developed when he is afforded an introspective moment where he realizes that he is utterly ridiculous but, nonetheless, continues to act the way he does because of mythological precedent. Likewise, Gnatho the parasitus is also developed by means of an introspective mythological parallel. 22 Chaerea, Thraso, and Gnatho do to an extent still represent certain stock characters. Nevertheless, Terence both renovates and rebels against dramatic convention by developing these characters beyond their generic form. He does so most strikingly by revealing a character s individual perspective through a provocative dynamic that in my project I term character introspection and extraspection. This dynamic reveals a character s introspective perspective by self-comparison to a particular mythological figure within a particular mythological context. For example, the Eunuchus miles gloriosus, Thraso, equates himself to Hercules, who was once a slave to Omphale. The comparison not only reveals Thraso s personal feeling of subordination, but also an extraspective perspective when he compares another dramatic character to another, but related, mythological figure. For example, Thraso likens the meretrix, Thais, to whom he feels subservient, to the mythological character, Omphale. This association illuminates the way Thraso views himself and his relationship to Thais; that is, he justifies his personal view with the assumption that Thais, too, would equate her relationship with Thraso to the mythological relationship between Omphale and Hercules. Furthermore, extraspection is a projection 21 Chaerea s character development is the focus of Chapter The development of Thraso and Gnatho, as well as their relationship, is the focus of Chapter 2.

16 10 of the way the introspective character imagines he is regarded and viewed by society. I illuminate details of this innovative process in the following section. Character Introspection and Extraspection Overall, Terence makes use of Greek mythology more sparingly than Plautus; there are only five mythological references in the entire Terentian corpus, three of which are found in the Eunuchus. 23 I argue that in the Eunuchus Terence experiments with the consolidation of stock characters by drawing from burlesqued mythological characters in Satyr drama, as well as those from Plautus Amphitruo. In the process, he creates something new and original when he blends two types of firmly established comedic characters, the stock character and the mythological figure. The result is a unique type of mythological burlesque wherein a stock character is cast as a mythological figure instead of a mythological figure appearing in the play as its own type of stock character. This phenomenon, which is restricted to Terence s Eunuchus, is different from the hyperbolic mythological comparisons that frequent the plays of Plautus. Terence goes beyond comparison and actually incorporates the mythological figure into his characterization of three stock characters in the Eunuchus: the adulescens amator, the miles gloriosus, and the parasitus. Additionally, those moments wherein Terence grafts the mythological figures onto the stock characters reveal the characters perspectives, thoughts, motives, and justifications through the dynamic of introspection and extraspection The other two examples are discussed in the Conclusion. 24 Bortolussi and Dixon 2003: 134 justify the use of psychoanalytical criticism because, as critical approaches, they analyze characters in terms of their psychological personality traits typically tend to fill in the textual gaps with hypotheses about the motivations, conscious or unconscious, that drive characters actions.

17 11 Each of the mythological parallels in the Eunuchus consists of two dramatic characters that are compared to two mythological figures. The character who makes the parallel, the introspective character, compares himself to a mythological figure (introspection) and simultaneously compares another dramatic character to another mythological figure (extraspection). The mythological contexts as well as the figures parallel the dramatic characters and situations, but only from the point-of-view of the introspective characters. Extraspection doesn t reveal anything about the other dramatic character who is pulled into the parallel by the introspective character: it is only a social projection, a mirrored image, of the introspective perspective. Terence s mythological parallels are more personalized and revealing than a hubristic comparison to a god that characters in Plautus frequently make. 25 Chaerea the amator, for example, does not merely compare himself to Jupiter but, specifically, equates his character and his dramatic situation with Jupiter, who seduces Danaë by disguising himself and infiltrating her chamber. 26 Additionally, the parallel also discloses the character s extraspection where he ascribes his perspective onto another character. For example, when Chaerea casts Pamphila as Danaë, he makes the presumption that Pamphila, too, equates her relationship with Chaerea to the mythological relationship between Danaë and Jupiter. Extraspection allows us better to understand how Chaerea imagines Pamphila, and how society in general, views him. In addition to developing certain stock characters beyond their conventional characteristics, the dynamic of introspection and extraspection also intensifies and 25 Dunsch 2014: 639 observes that the mythological references in Plautus are restricted to instances where mortals hyperbolically compare themselves to a god. 26 Chaerea s character development and mythological parallel (Eunuchus 584-5) will be discussed in detail in Chapter 1.

18 12 reinforces certain features associated with each the stock characters involved in the mythological parallels. Introspection can intensify the negative stereotypes associated with the stock character; for example, in Chaerea s introspective moment, the amator takes the conventional plot device of rape to a new level and becomes more of a predator than an amator. Extraspection can reinforce, but does not add to, preexisting stereotypes of the secondary stock character (that is, the dramatic character who is compared to a mythological figure by the introspective character); for example, in Chaerea s extraspective comparison of Pamphila to one of Zeus mortal lovers, Danaë, the civesturned-ancilla motif is reinforced by Danaë s sovereign-turned-prisoner situation. The extraspective comparison does not inform our reading of Pamphila as her own character, but it does greatly inform our reading of how Chaerea relates himself to others. Terence s treatment of elite males shows citizen male privilege as a socially damaging element at the heart of Rome. 27 This is especially true with regard to elite male soldiers in the Eunuchus whose privilege and socially destructive behavior in the play, for example Chaerea s rape of Pamphila, is emphasized by their moments of introspection and extraspection, as when Chaerea compares himself to Jupiter and Pamphila to Danaë. Furthermore, introspection is a phenomenon that Terence limits to soldiers and, not coincidentally, these soldiers cast extraspection exclusively upon foreign individuals. 28 I maintain that this has larger implications for how the personal perspectives of his Roman 27 James 2013: Thraso, Gnatho s extraspective counterpart, is marked as peregrinus ( foreign, Eunuchus 759); Thais, Thraso s extraspective complement, was raised in Rhodes (Eunuchus 107); and Pamphila was considered foreign by Chaerea, since she was taken from Sunium (Eunuchus 115).

19 13 soldiers may offer a social commentary on Rome s military institutions and relations with foreign kingdoms and city-states during the playwright s day. 29 The model put forth by persona theory can clarify the relationship between the stock role and the character who assumes or defies that role. 30 Although the theory has been argued as a way to explain and separate the speakers of Roman satires from its authors, it can also be a useful tool to explain and detach the certain stock roles within a play, which Terence s characters sometimes assume, but often reject. Terence s characters often do nod to their stock roles, but the development of those characters can clarify that the stock roles do not by themselves inform the identity and perspective of the character. 31 At the same time, Terence s characters often try to force another character into an incongruent stock role. The mythological parallels, which drive an intimate form of character development, can also be understood in terms of persona theory wherein individuals adopt masks: in this case they are adopting the masks of mythological figures in addition to the masks of their stock character. In the same way that an author of Roman 29 Gill 1996: 179 claims, to explore Greek thinking more fully, we need to take into account the relationship between the first and the second aspects of the objective-participant conception of the person: that is, between intra-psychic interplay and socio-ethical engagement. He adds further that his reading of dialogue and monologue in Greek literary texts contributes to critical understanding of these texts (17). 30 The revolutionary work of Kernan 1959 on persona theory seeks to illuminate the difference between Elizabethan authors of satires and the satirists, or characters. He argues that the author s persona, or satirist, is a feature to the genre and supports his argument by looking at Roman authors of satire, specifically Juvenal. In his preface, Elliot 1982 explains that persona theory clarifies the relationship between the writer the historical person and the characters the writer creates. Anderson 1982 applies persona theory to Roman satire and separates the writer, Horace or Juvenal, from the characters within the satires. He specifies that the satirist refers to the speaker, or character, in the satire and that the satirist s words, ideas, and behavior will never be assumed to be identical with those of [the poet]. Braund 1996 presents us with the different personae of the satirist, such as the angry old man. Holler 2013: 17 explains, narrative selfing and narrative recognition of others can be understood as a play with personas and perspectives. 31 Elliot 1982: 25 claims that the word persona, which used to refer specifically to the masks that ancient actors wore on stage, was becoming synonymous with the role played by the actor, namely, his stock character. Holler 2013: 27 explains, perspective is a keyword in explorations of narrative identity It is through perspective that speakers are able to link themselves to the community.

20 14 satire adopts different satiric personae, one of Terence s stock characters can adopt different comedic personae. Chapter Overview In this project, each of the Eunuchus three mythological parallels is discussed individually and in detail. The first chapter entitled Chaerea: When a Soldier is a Lover, traces the development of the adulescens amator with a discussion of the literary tradition informing his character s mythological parallel and Terence s incorporation of mythological burlesque, and how this process defies New Comedy conventions. My analysis ultimately offers an interpretation of how these issues respond and react to contemporary Roman political and military institutions of the second century BCE. The second chapter entitled A Soldier and his Parasite: Roman Reliance on socii milites, analyzes key dramatic relationships that suggest a parallel to the historical relationship between Rome and her subjugated territories. For example, the miles gloriosus, Thraso, is cast as a socius miles, whereas Gnatho, the parasitus, as a ciues miles. Their mythological parallels illuminate the characters individual perspectives about themselves, their relationships and, as I argue, their function in Roman society. The particular context of the parallel within the text of the play will preface my discussions of each character. Then, each of the two chapters will take a deeper look at the literary precedents for the mythological figure and situation. Both chapters will then examine in detail the stock character, which Terence manipulates in each scenario, in order to emphasize the differences made to its paradigmatic structure. Next each chapter describes the type of character development I term Terence s mythological burlesque,

21 15 which illuminates the process of assimilation between the mythological figure and the stock character. Following this, I offer suggestions for how the character s association with the contemporary scene at Rome reveals his citizenship, military rank, and Roman mindset. Each chapter concludes with a discussion of the development of that stock character and ultimately offers a suggestion as to how the manipulation of stock characters paints a critical portrait of Roman soldiers and foreign policies relating to both expansionism and Rome s military reliance on allied soldiers during the early second century BCE.

22 16 CHAPTER ONE Chaerea: When a Soldier is a Lover This chapter seeks to expose a distinctively Terentian imprint on the genre of New Comedy at Rome: specifically, the meaningful development of the adulescens amator stock character, Chaerea, in the Eunuchus and how that development calls into question social and political practices and policies at Rome during the early second century BCE. 32 Terence seamlessly creates this new and original dramatic character in Chaerea by blending two types of firmly established comedic characters that consists of the New Comedy stock character and the burlesqued mythic figure. 33 The mythic figure in this case is the god Jupiter, who is essentially grafted onto the dramatic character, Chaerea, during a mythological parallel, with the result that the personality and conduct of the mythological figure are incorporated into the stock character. The dramatic character Chaerea then identifies himself and Roman society through his self-perceived connections to a Greek mythological figure and situation: this phenomenon can be mirrored in the fact that Rome, during the Middle Republic, was identifying itself through its own incorporations of and reactions to increasing contact with Greek and other foreign cultures through a series of military conflicts abroad during the Punic Wars 32 In New Comedy in general, the adulescens amator young lover stock character is the play s young, elite, citizen protagonist. This character s plot can be generically outlined as follows: respectable boy meets girl, boy falls in love but must overcome familial or societal obstacles, boy marries girl. For this general description of the adulescens amator see Barsby 1999, Karakasis 2005, Christenson 2013, Packman 2013, Gruen 2014, and Konstantakos I use burlesqued as an adjective to describe a mythological figure who has been brought down to a human level and whose solemnity is mocked by the comparison to a mortal. The term burlesque derives from an Athenian dramatic genre of comedy called mythological burlesque that was produced in the fourth century BCE. For a discussion of mythological burlesque, see Konstantakos 2014 who claims that the characters of this genre are mythological figures who have been cast as stereotypical comic stock characters. He also argues that the genre s humor is derived from the juxtaposition of the mythological world and the real world that reflects contemporary Athens.

23 17 ( BCE). 34 The mythological parallel offers its audience an extremely intimate moment with a dramatic character during which time the character s self-perception and cultural identity are exposed. I explain this process of character development, through which these mythological parallels function, in what I call the dynamic of introspection and extraspection. Terence demonstrates this unique process of character development in the Eunuchus through each of the play s prominent soldiers: Chaerea, Gnatho, and Thraso. Terence s soldiers allow for similarities to be drawn between the mythological figures, the play s dramatic characters, and actual soldiers in Rome. Introspection, defined by a dramatic stock character s self-identification with a mythic figure, develops the soldiers into individual characters who expose the mindsets and ethics of Roman soldiers during the tumultuous Middle Republic. Each introspective character, during the moment of his mythological parallel, is further developed by his use of extraspection, which can be defined as the introspective character s impersonal imposition of a secondary mythic identity onto a secondary dramatic character. In other words, Chaerea introspectively compares himself to Jupiter and extraspectively compares another character to Danaë. From this impersonal, extraspective parallel the audience learns how the introspective character perceives his societal position as it relates to another, always foreign, character. Moreover, extraspection offers a commentary on Roman political and military 34 The idea of cultural Hellenization has been discussed by scholars such as Gabba 1989, Rawson 1989, Gruen 1992, Wiseman 1998, Barsby 1999, Leigh 2004, Karakasis 2005, Starks 2013, and Fontaine Gruen 1992: 1 remarks that in the Republic [Roman] nobiles were the persons most drawn to Greek literary achievements, religion, and visual arts. Karakasis 2005: 89 argues that for upper class Romans in Terence s time there was a general trend to avoid speaking Greek and that Terence uses Greek words [and] hellenising [linguistic] constructions to differentiate the speech of low and rustic characters. Fontaine 2014: 552 offers the idea that perhaps Rome in Terence s time was consciously Hellenizing [itself].

24 18 institutions dealing with issues such as the subjugation of new territories and political posts such as the praetor peregrinus. 35 This chapter demonstrates how Terence s manipulation of the stock character Chaerea is also representative of contemporary changes in Rome s social and political infrastructures following the Second Punic War (202 BCE). Terence individualizes certain stock characters beyond their genre-imposed stereotypes and confines through the dynamic of introspection and extraspection. Introspection establishes the characters identities which, in turn, reveal the soldiers roles in Roman society, while extraspection reveals how the soldiers situate themselves within society and how they imagine they are perceived. This method of character development is subtle but, once identified, the impressions it leaves articulate a stern critique of Roman society. The following analysis explores the development of Chaerea from a stock adulescens amator into a militarized rapist through Terence s use of the dynamic of introspection and extraspection, and concludes with the suggestion that his developed character metaphorically represents Roman expansionism and subjugation of others in the second century BCE. Chaerea as Adulescens Amator The Eunuchus, like most of Terence s plays, consists of a double plot. It focuses on two brothers, Phaedria and Chaerea, who are two very different types of the adulescens amator stock character. Chaerea s brother Phaedria is hopelessly in love with 35 This is a formal Roman post established after the First Punic War which granted an elected official legal jurisdiction over foreign non-citizens in Rome as well as Roman foreign relations, as Schiller 1978: 403 notes: the praetor [urbanus as well as peregrinus] could, and sometimes did, exercise military power; he could convoke the assembly to propose laws, he could issue orders (edicta) like any other magistrate, and in general had the powers and duties of a magistrate with imperium.

25 19 the beautiful foreign meretrix next door, Thais. Pamphila, Chaerea s love interest, born a citizen, has been sold into slavery before the action of the play and has been purchased as a present for Thais by the soldier Thraso, another one of her lovers. 36 While Pamphila is being led to Thais house, Chaerea spots her, stalks her, and becomes obsessed with her. Incorrectly assuming that Pamphila is merely a meretrix-in-training, Chaerea impersonates the eunuch whom his brother intended to give to Thais, then infiltrates her house and rapes the young girl. Upon discovering that Pamphila is a citizen, Chaerea, without so much as a word from the silent girl, decides to marry her and thereby resolves one half of the double-plot. Terence defies convention by the development of New Comedy stock characters through the expressive dynamic of introspection and extraspection; the outcome is a plausibly accurate portrait of Roman soldiers in the early second century BCE. Chaerea s mythological parallel occurs in the highly charged erotic scene wherein he, the adulescens amator stock character, boasts to his army-buddy Antipho, a character only onstage for this brief exchange, about having raped Pamphila. A voyeuristic Chaerea describes a painting which he views as Pamphila waits to be bathed. The painting depicts the myth of Jupiter and Danaë: [CH.] ibi inerat pictura haec, Iovem 36 Pamphila s name comes from Greek, meaning all-lover or alternatively loved by all. The name is often thought to suggest that the character is a prostitute, as Sharrock 2013: 62 notes. In Terence, Pamphila occurs once as the name of a meretrix in the Phormio and twice as the name of a virgo, a marriageable citizen, in the Eunuchus and the Adelphoe. The masculinized name Pamphilus occurs in the Andria and Hecyra as the name of an adulescens amator. In using the name Pamphila in the Eunuchus Terence defies expectation with dramatic irony, since its basic meaning turns out to be far from the meaning alllover and more like univira. Fontaine 2014 argues that this repetition of character names throughout the Terentian corpus together with the fact that his comedies allude both to the occasion of presentation (and thus reflect life) as well as to older Roman comedies (and thus reflect art) Terence makes his characters self-consciously reflect earlier incarnations of themselves in a manner reminiscent of mythologically based poetry. In so doing, he manages to combine a quality associated above all with Menandrian drama with a quality associated primarily with the irony-rich, scholastic poetry of Alexandria (542).

26 20 quo pacto Danaae misisse aiunt quondam in gremium imbrem aurem. [CH.] This scene was [painted] on it, namely, the myth that Jove once sent a golden shower into the lap of Danaë. (Eunuchus 584-5) 37 Here, Terence s art imitates Roman life imitating Greek art. 38 In other words, Terence s character Chaerea, representing a Roman soldier, sees a Greek painting depicting the divine seduction of Danaë and, after deciding that their scenarios are comparable, emulates the behavior of Jupiter and rapes Pamphila who, like Danaë, had been locked away for the very purpose of avoiding intercourse. The following discussion analyzes Terence s innovative development of Chaerea s character as it is revealed through a mythological parallel: section 1.2 discusses the literary history of the Jupiter myth; section 1.3 explores Chaerea s selfcomparison to Jupiter; section 1.4 traces how Chaerea s stock character defies convention and is developed through the parallel; section 1.5 examines how the parallel emphasizes Terence s non-conventional treatment of Chaerea s sexual violence; section 1.6 discusses ludo and lusus, the verb and denominative forms that are applied to both Jupiter s and Chaerea s sexual antics; section 1.7 offers an interpretation of how the previous sections react to and comment on contemporary Roman political and military institutions of the second century BCE; and section 1.8 offers concluding remarks Jupiter and Danaë: Terence s Burlesque 37 All Latin cited is taken from Kauer and Lindsay This and all subsequent translations are my own. 38 Paintings depicting mythological scenes would have been among the plunder being brought into Rome from the surrounding Italian towns of Magna Graecia in Terence s own lifetime; the same sorts of scenes wouldn t be locally painted until over a century later, during the late first century BCE. See Barsby 1999: 195. Gruen (1992: 1) remarks, [Roman] nobiles were the persons most drawn to Greek literary achievements, religion, and visual arts.

27 21 A brief summary of this particular myth s literary history will be helpful when determining what aspects of Jupiter s mythic character are intertwined with Chaerea s adulescens amator stock character. In Greek and Roman mythology, Danaë is the daughter of king Acrisios who receives a prophecy that his grandson will kill him. To prevent his daughter from getting pregnant and fulfilling such a prophecy, he locks her away within his home. Zeus essentially breaks in and seduces Danaë, resulting in her pregnancy with the hero Perseus. Homer lists Danaë as one of Zeus lovers, as will be discussed below. Hesiod mentions Danaë in his Catalogue of Women in the context of her role as the mother of the hero Perseus but does not specifically mention the myth of her seduction. 39 In the fifth century BCE Pherecydes Atheniensis, a Greek mythographer, wrote the first complete account of Zeus seduction of Danaë. 40 His version describes how Danaë was locked up for the very purpose of avoiding intercourse, but Zeus disguised himself, infiltrated the house, and had sex with her anyway: θάλαµον ποιεῖ χαλκοῦν ἐν τῇ αὐλῇ τῆς οἰκίας κατὰ γῆς,ἔνθα τὴν Δανάην εἰσάγει µετὰ τῆς τροφοῦ, ἐν ᾧ αὐτὴνἐφύλασσεν, ὅπως ἐξ αὐτῆς παῖς µὴ γένηται. Ἐρασθεὶς δὲ Ζεὺς τῆς παιδὸς, ἐκ τοῦ ὀρόφου χρυσῷ παραπλήσιος ῥεῖ ἡ δὲ ὑποδέχεται τῷ κόλπῳ καὶ ἐκφήνας αὑτὸνὁ Ζεὺς τῇ παιδὶ µίγνυται τῶν δὲ γίνεται Περσεὺς,καὶ ἐκτρέφει αὐτὸν ἡ Δανάη καὶ ἡ τροφὸς, κρύπτουσαι Ἀκρίσιον. [Acrisios] made a bronze chamber in the courtyard of his home under the ground, into which place he takes Danaë accompanied by her nurse, in which he was keeping her prisoner, for the purpose that a child not be born from her. But because Zeus lusted after the young girl, he flows down from the roof, resembling gold. She receives him in her lap. After he revealed himself Zeus has intercourse with the young girl. 39 Fragment 129 M-W (12-13), cited from Most 2006: Karamanou 2006: 2.