^{page 84 note 1} ' comedies vary in length from 1,183 to 765 lines (O.C.T.), the last two, which are closest to Middle Comedy, are his shortest plays, the Ecclesiazusae with 1,183, the Plutus with 1,209 lines. The only complete Menander play, the Dyscolus, has 969 lines: the Epitrepontes seems from details of the Codex in Körte, , Menander, Reliquiae, vol. i, p. xvi, to have contained at least 910 (26 pp. x 35) lines. All these plays are noticeably longer than the Plautine plays discussed. The length of Greek tragedies varies greatly, but with the exception of the Rhesus (996 lines) no extant Greek tragedy has less than 1,000 lines, and the average is considerably longer.Google Scholar

^{page 84 note 3} For what is known of these conditions of presentation see Duckworth, Nature of Roman Comedy, ch. iv, ‘From Poet to Producer’; Beare, The Roman Stage, ch. xx, ‘The Organization of the Roman Theatre’.

^{page 84 note 4} This comprehensive footnote of Fraenkel's, which lists and gives his assessment of those passages in the Curculio to which editors have objected, seems to me the best point of departure for any analysis of Plautine technique in this play.

^{page 85 note 1} I reached the theories outlined in this article independently of Webster's, T. B. L. discussion of the Curculio in Studies in Later Greek Comedy (Manchester, 1953), pp. 196. 204. Although there are points of difference between our conclusions, many of the essentials of my interpretation are supported by his analysis.Google Scholar

^{page 86 note 1} But since Adelphasium, like Planesium, is free-born, the dramatist cannot allow her to lose her virginity. Similarly in Cu. 51 Phaedromus tells Palinurus that Planesium is unharmed: if the audience did not know that she was free-born, this might encourage them to suspect it; if they were forewarned by the prologue, they would be waiting to hear that she had suffered no harm.

^{page 86 note 2} Meretrkes cost 30 minae at Ep. 703, Mo. 300, Ru. 45, fr. 123 L. Phoenicium (Ps. 52 above) costs only 20 minae. On talentum magnum or talentum magnum argenti, cf. Rose, H. J., C.R. xxxviii (1924), 155–7. Th'is phrase, common in Plautus, is used to describe the Attic talent. In Terence it occurs only once, in a context similar to this, at Pho. 642–4: Cedo quid postulat? |:: quid? nimium quantum.:: dic::si quis daret | talentum magnum.Google Scholar

^{page 88 note 1} The supposed time for Curculio's journey to Caria and back, though impossible, may be influenced by the original of 438, quia nudiusquartus venimus in Cariam | ex India. There is no need for Monaco (Teatro di Plauto I. II Curculione, Rome 1963, pp. 78–79Google Scholar) to accept Legrand's theory that Curculio in the original was sent to Calauria; Plautus is responsible for depicting Caria as a city with a Forum (336); he does the same for Aetolia (Capt. 475, 478)Google Scholar. Again the Greek dramatist would not have sent his parasite to Caria and back in three days; Plautus would neither know the length of the journey nor care, but recalling the original of 438, where the lying parasite implies that he has arrived from Caria in less than three days, could have added the detail in 206. It is quite startling that he should then, in 207, make Phaedromus expect Curculio ‘today’ in spite of the uncertainty of sea-voyages, and after so short a time. Phaedromus may just be pretending confidence, but Plautus probably had smother motive. See Section IV, and Williams, G. W., Hermes lxxxvi (1958), 103–5.Google Scholar

^{page 88 note 2} Cf. especially Rudens, Prol. 44–47 (a slightly different type of agreement): … ad lenonem devenit, minis triginta sibi puellam destinat datque arrabonem et iure iurando alligat. is leno, ut se aequom est, flocci non fecit fidem.Google Scholar

^{page 88 note 3} Compare Duckworth, , Nature of Roman Comedy, p. 225Google Scholar, and Monaco, , op. cit. 53–54, for analyses of the special features of the Plautine Servus Currens. In Terence we have both the plain messenger (Syrus in Ht. 269 ff. delivers his main message in three lines) and the verbose: cf. Pho. I. iv, Ad. III. ii; but their message is already known to the audience, and their speeches refer only to the situation of the play, making no personal boasts.Google Scholar

^{page 90 note 1} P.U.F., Paris, 1962.Google Scholar

^{page 90 note 2} This disguise is not mentioned in die text, merely implied by 392 unocule, salve (Curculio has adopted an eyepatch for his role as Summanus), and by the introductory comments of the Choragus (vv. 462–6). This too must have been explained at the end of Act II in the original, in the passage abbreviated by Plautus at 364. In Miles Gloriosus a similar disguise is described in detail (vv. 1176–80).

^{page 90 note 3} Compare El. PL., pp. 139, 276.Google Scholar

^{page 91 note 1} There is no linguistic irregularity except the metrical awkwardness of 461 (which is easily removed by the transposition cave mora in te sit mihi), to support the assumption that these lines are not the work of Plautus. Ussing speaks of Poetae Festinatio: it would be natural for Plautus to abbreviate the prosaic and predictable details of this business transaction.

^{page 91 note 2} Vv. 266–7, namque incubare satius te fuerat Iovi | qui tibi auxilio in iure iurando fuit, probably refers only to the general behaviour of pimps in swearing and perjuring themselves: but the original of these lines, spoken by Palinurus, as I will argue below, could have involved a more specific reference to Cappadox' own perjury in his treatment of Phaedromus.

^{page 91 note 3} This idea has been revived by Monaco, , op. cit. 70, who believes that Cappadox promised only to deliver Planesium to Therapontigonus himself. (This is in fact excluded by 346–8.) According to Monaco, Cappadox recognizes Curculio, and, since Lyco does not mention that Curculio-Summanus has come from Therapontigonus, believes that he is breaking this oath. Monaco sees evidence for this in 461, leno cave in te sit mora mihi, but this is in no way apparent from the text. Curculio in 461 is blustering as a soldier's envoy would bluster. If Plautus wanted to imply that Cappadox recognized Curculio he would have suggested it clearly in the text.Google Scholar

^{page 94 note 4} I equate oaths and promises here because Plautus elsewhere uses both words of the same transaction: cf. Labrax' oath to Gripus in the Rudens: iurare in 1334, 1355, ‘372–3–6–7, becomes promittere in 1378 and 1384–5; similarly promittere in Po. 360 becomes iurare in 361.

^{page 92 note 1} Labrax' oath to Plesidippus (Ru. 46 and 861) differs in being based on the Greek practice of leaving an arrabo (deposit), but Plesidippus, like Phaedromus, will have bound the pimp not to sell the girl to another.

^{page 94 note 1} The contradiction between 321, immo si scias reliquiae quae sint, and 325, again shows that the celebratory lunch cooked for Curculio was invented by Plautus. In his original his starvation was relieved only by the reliquiae of 321.

^{page 94 note 2} These derive from Prescott (Harvard Studies xxi [1910], 31–50), who argues for such doubling in the Captivi (Ergasilus and Philopolemus or Stalagmus), Miles Gloriosus and Pseudolus, where Pseudolus could double with the cook or even Ballio; in each case a character with no concern in the main action appears for one scene only, lasting about 20 lines. The Pseudolus instance is very doubtful; indeed the Puer-scene in question (III. i. 767–789) is thought by Fraenkel to be post-Plautine.Google Scholar

^{page 95 note 1} See pp. 17 and 72 on Ru. 904 and 1215, and the Excursus, pp. 244–54 on Ter. Ht. 170.

^{page 96 note 1} We may ask how the cook has knowledge of Phaedromus' private business, which he has only just disclosed to Palinurus. But this is clearly intended by Plautus, who in Scene ii introduces the cook with the inquiry about Curculio's celebratory meal. In the original, where Palinurus alone knew of Curculio's mission, he must have remained on stage to announce Curculio's arrival, and share in the dialogue of Scene iii.2 It is tempting to believe that 321 and 323, pemam abdomen sumen suis glandium, were spoken by the same person; this is assumed by Ernout and Collart, but they argue back from the nota of Phaedromus in 323, to give 321 to him also. It would surely be more appropriate to give both lines to the cook.

^{page 98 note 1} Since the beginning of the Bacchides is lost, we cannot assume that it had no prologue.

^{page 99 note 1} The others are Captivi, Casina, Cistellaria, Menaechmi, Poenulus, Rudens. Although the prologue of Casina is probably post-Plautine the details of Casina's identity, since they are suppressed in the play itself, must derive from an original Plautine prologue. On this question of plays with see Leo, Plautinische Forschungen, ch. iv, pp. 196–200.Google Scholar

^{page 99 note 2} Contrast Amph. 97Google Scholar (Thebes), Capt. 24, 94Google Scholar (Aetolia), Cist, . 130, 156–7 (Sicyon), Men. 72 (Epidamnus), Mil. 88 (Ephesus), Po. 72–73, 95 (Calydon) and Ru. 32–33 (Cyrene).Google Scholar

^{page 99 note 3} Compare Webster, , op. cit. 200. In support of Asclepius as the speaker of the Prologue, note that Pan, whose shrine is on stage in the Dyscolus, as is that of Asclepius in the Curculio, speaks the prologue of that play. Similarly the Lar Familiaris speaks the prologue of Aulularia. Both Pan (Dysc. 36–39) and the Lar (Aul. 23–27) stress that they have ensured the happy ending of the play to reward their worshippers and punish the undeserving. I have referred above to traces of the second idea in Curculio.Google Scholar Webster's suggestion that Asclepius' prologue in the original occurred after the equivalent of Act I, Sc. i, is unnecessary (contrast the Pan and Lar prologues), and creates a further difficulty. Since the dramatic point of a delayed prologue is to exploit the elements of curiosity and suspense in the opening scenes, it would have entailed considerable rewriting, and a loss of effect, for Plautus either to move it forward or eliminate it: yet if he took the simplest course, of retaining it in position in the body of the play, it could not have been lost subsequently without damage to adjacent scenes.