No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
So far as we can judge from his one completely preserved play and extensive fragments of others, Menander carefully worked out the movements of his characters on and off stage, so as to give an appearance of realism, within certain conventions, and avoid inconsistencies that might distract the audience. Menander's observed practice confirms the famous anecdote, according to which he regarded the construction of a plot as of primary importance, adding the lines as secondary. Thus a character who returns to the stage after an earlier exit always re-enters through the same stage door or wing by which he made his exit; if, for example, he makes his exit in the direction of the market-place, he will be seen by the audience to return from there. Although the ancient evidence is confused, it seems clear, at least, that convention allowed the Athenian audience to regard one wing as leading to the market-place, the other to the country. Similarly, dramatic time is carefully articulated by means of the conventional choral interludes which divide a play into five acts. Some acceleration of dramatic time is possible within an act, but major lapses of dramatic time take place between acts; if a character makes an off-stage trip of some length, for example to the market-place, his exit and re-entry are separated by a choral interlude. Within the act a strict unity of time is maintained and dramatic time (gespielte Zeii) does not greatly exceed performance time (Spielzeii).
1 Arist. Poet. 1451b 13: τ⋯ εἱκ⋯τα.
2 E. W. Handley, Entretiens Hardt 16 (1970), 9f.
3 Plut. Mor. 347E; cf. E. Lefèvre in G. A. Seeck (ed.), Das griechische Drama (Darmstadt, 1979), pp. 339f
4 W. Beare, CQ32 (1938), 204–10 = The Roman Stage1(London, 1963), pp. 248–55; A. W. Pickard-Cambridge, The Theatre of Dionysus in Athens(Oxford, 1946), pp. 234–7; N. C. Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination in Euripides(Athens, 1965), pp. 128–36; N. J. Lowe, BICS 34(1987), 126–34; K. Frost, Exits and Entrances in Menander(Oxford, 1988), p. 103, n. 5.
5 Hermes111 (1983), 442–4 with references; T. B. L. Webster, An Introduction to Menander(Manchester, 1974 = Introduction)pp. 72f.; N. Holzberg, Menander Untersuchungen zur dramatischen Technik(Nurnberg, 1974), pp. 118f.; A. Primmer, Handlungsgliederung in Nea und Palliata: Dis Exapaton und Bacchides(ost. Ak. Wiss., phil.-hist. Kl., Sitzungsb. 441, Vienna, 1984), pp. 1 IF. The fact that the choral interludes between acts can cover the passage of an unspecified amount of time allows Menander sometimes to blur the chronological implications of off-stage action; cf. W. G. Arnott, Menander, Plautus. Terence(Oxford, 1975), p. 21
6 Johnston, M., Exits and Entrances in Roman Comedy(New York,1933), pp. 34f., 137–41;Google Scholar
7 Duckworth, Cf., NRC (n. 6), pp. 119f. In the Bacchides Nicobulus leaves for the forum at 348 but at 530 is unaccountably at home (cf. 507), an inconsistency which is now explained by Plautus' omission of two scenes from his Menandrian model; cf. E. W Handley, Menander and Plautus. A Study in Comparison (London,1968), p. 20, n. 11. At Asin. 248 Argyrippus leaves for the forum, but at 591 he comes out of Cleareta's house; cf. CQ42 (1992), 163–5. At Stick. 146 Antipho goes to consult his friends, presumably in the forum, but his next entry at 505 is from the harbour, cf. T. B. L. Webster, Studies in Menander (Manchester, 1950 = Studies), pp. 144f., Introduction (n. 5), pp. 112f. At Cure. 524 Curculio presumably goes with Planesium towards the harbour, but at 599 Planesium comes out of Phaedromus' house; cf. G. Burckhardt, Die Akteinteilung in der neuen griechischen und in der romischen Komodie (Diss. Basel, 1927), p. 28, n.4. See also Johnston, Exits (n. 6), pp. 70, 91,98 on Amph. 1009, M.G 1281, True. 669.Google Scholar
8 Frickenhaus, A., Die altgriechische Biihne (Strasbourg, 1917), pp. 26f.; cf. Hermes 111 (1983), 450.Google Scholar
9 Some editors less probably suppose that Phaedria straightaway slips into Dorio's house, in sight of the audience but unseen by Demipho.
10 E. Lefevre, Der Phormio des Terenz und der Epidikazomenos des Apollodor von Karystos(Zetemata 74, Munich, 1978), pp. 15–20; cf. J. Barsby, CM43(1992), 141–5.Google Scholar
11 Duckworth, NRC (n. 6), pp. 120f.; cf. Hermes 111 (1983), 433.
12 K. Buchner, Das Theater des Terenz (Heidelberg, 1974), p. 66, drawing different conclusions.
13 H. Drexler, Hermes 73 (1938), 40f.
14 H. R. Clifford, CJ 26 (1930–1), 609–12; Buchner, Theater (a. 12), p. 271.
15 Buchner, Theater (n. 12), pp. 164, 347f., 454f.
16 Hunter, B., The New Comedy of Greece and Rome (Cambridge,1985), pp. 35–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17 Denzler, B., Der Monolog bei Terenz(Zurich,1968), pp. 45–51Google Scholar
18 On the title of Menander's play, see Webster, Studies (n. 7), p. 86.
19 Cf. A. S. Gratwick, Terence. The Brothers (Warminster, 1987), pp. 34–40.1 think it possible, but less likely, that in Menander the missing exposition was given in a deferred ‘quasi-prologue’ (cf. CQ 33 [1983], 441f. on Eun. 197–206) by Syrus returning home from a mission to Ctesipho; cf. M. Damen, ICS 12 (1987), 74–7.
20 K. Dziatzko, Ausgewahlte Komodien des P. Terentius Afer, vo. II: Adelphoe (Leipzig, 1881), p. 13; L. Havet, Cinquentenaire de I'Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes (Bibl. de l'Ecole des Hautes Etudes, Sciences hist, et philol., 230, Paris, 1921), p. 6; Johnston, Exits (n. 6), p. 54; Webster, Introduction (n. 5), p. 114; Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), p. 83.
21 K. Dziatzko and R. Kauer, Ausgewahlte Komodien des P. Terentius Afer, vol. II: Adelphoe (Leipzig, 1903), p. 19; R. H. Martin, Terence, Adelphoe (Cambridge, 1976), p. 113; B. Radie, Terence, The Comedies (Harmondsworth, 1976), p. 342.
22 Dziatzko-Kauer (n. 21), p. 38; cf. Eun. 234, Hec. 456f.; K. Dziatzko and E. Hauler, Ausgewahlte Komodien des P. Terentius Afer, vol. I: Phormio (Leipzig, 1913), on Pho. 255.
23 Dziatzko-Kauer (n. 21), p. 19 with n. 1
24 Webster, Studies (n. 7), p. 89.
25 Cf. Men. Asp. 393:
26 In Cos. 241–5 Lysidamus, who has clearly entered from the direction of the forum, claims to have been helping a friend buy perfumes but is suspected by his wife of having been drinking in lustra. At Trin. 1008 Stasimus enters from the forum (727), where he has been drinking in a thermopolium (1013f.); cf. Johnston, Exits (n. 6), p. 123. Such establishments should be distinguished from inns for travellers near a city gate; cf. Pseud. 658, Men. 436, Johnston, Exits (n. 6), pp.47, 135
27 S. C. Ashmore, The Comedies of Terence* (New York, 1910), p. 277.
28 E. Fantham, Philologus 112 (1968), 205.Google Scholar
29 H. Drexler, Die (Composition von Terenz‘ Adelphen und Plautus’ Rudens (Philologus suppl. 26.2, Leipig, 1934), pp. 16–22; so Johnston, Exits (n. 6), p. 55.
30 O. Rieth, Die Kunst Menanders in den ‘Adelphen des Terenz, mit einem Nachwort herausgegeben von K. Gaiser (Hildesheim, 1964), p. 39.
31 Fantham (n. 28), p. 208, n. 1.
32 Cf. Ashmore, Comedies (n. 27) on 254: ‘Ctesipho enters from the right’.
33 Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), p. 38. Havet (n. 20), p. 5 had already argued unconvincingly that Ctesipho was in town the preceding night for a religious festival.
34 Rieth, Die Kunst Menanders (n. 30), p. 140, n. 7.
35 In the Phormio Dorio's house is on stage, but in the Greek original it was probably off stage in the direction of the market-place; see above n. 8.
36 Drexler, Komposition (n. 29), pp. 34f.; Webster, Studies (n. 7), pp. 88f., Introduction (n. 5), p. 114; Rieth, Die Kunst Menanders (n. 30), p. 49, n. 80; Gaiser in Rieth, ibid., pp. 139f. with n. 7; ANRW 1.2 (1972), 1055; cf. n. 19 above.
37 It might be objected that on my hypothesis he should then have met Demea on his way
38 The suggestion of V J. Rosivach, CQ 23 (1973), 85–7, that Sannio enters first, pursued by Parmeno, and that Aeschinus addresses 156b-7 to Sannio, not the psaltria, is unconvincing and hardly compatible with 168–74, in which Aeschinus encourages Parmeno to hit Sannio. The difficulties Rosivach finds in 155–8 are partly explained by the transfer of the Diphilean scene to a different context, partly non-existent; 158 ego adds emphasis to the threat, 'Oh yes I will' (cf. McGlynn's Lexicon Terentianum s.v. Ill [5]). More attractive is the suggestion of B. Schneider, RhM 127 (1984), 135–40, and G. Maurach, WJA (1985), 86, n. 5, that Aeschinus addresses 156b to Sannio but in 157 turns to the girl, although one might have expected some indication in the text of a change of addressee.
39 Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), pp. 91, 237.
40 Amph. 550, Asin. 248, Capt. 460, Cos. 143, Merc. 498, 802, Stich. 682; cf. Johnston, Exits (n. 6), pp. 106–14. A similar problem is presented by Eur. Ale. 860; cf. A. M. Dale, Euripides, Alcestis (Oxford, 1954), a d loc.
41 Cf. Dziatzko-Kauer (n. 21), p. 14, n. 1; Drexler {Composition (n. 29), pp. 7–11; Webster, Studies (n. 7), p. 88; O. Bianco, Terenzio: problemi e aspetti deU'originalitd (Nuovi saggi 41, Rome, 1962), pp. 183–6; Rieth, Die Kunst Menanders (n. 30), pp. 31f., 4 2 - 8;Fantham (n. 28), pp. 204f;
42 Cf. Drexler, {Composition (n. 29), pp. 1–6; Webster, Studies (n. 7), pp. 87f.; Bianco, Terenzio (n. 41), pp. 180–3; Rieth, Die Kunst Menanders (n. 30), pp. 34f.; Gaiser in Rieth, ibid., pp. 138–41; Fantham (n. 28), pp. 199–204; Martin, Adelphoe (n. 21), pp. 242f.; F. H. Sandbach, The Comic Theatre of Greece and Rome (London, 1977), p. 140; Grant (n. 41), p. 342; Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), p. 43
43 Drexler, Komposition (n. 29), pp. 12–15,23–5; Webster, Studies (n. 7), p. 89; Gaiser in Rieth, Die Kunst Menanders (n. 30), p. 139; ANRW 1.2 (1972), 1065; Fantham (n. 28), pp. 206–8; Martin, Adelphoe (n. 21), pp. 242f.; Sandbach, Comic Theatre (n. 42), p. 140; Grant (n. 41), p. 343; Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), pp. 43f., 59; Damen (n. 19), pp. 70f., 77–9. Dissentients are Rieth, Gnomon 10 (1934), 643–6; Die Kunst Menanders (n. 30), pp. 49–52; Bianco, Terenzio (n. 41), pp. 186–91; H. J. Mette, Lustrum 10 (1965), 39f
44 Fantham (n. 28), pp. 205,209, notes similarities between this passage and the unrealistic but comic aside dialogue between Syrus and Ctesipho during Demea's entrance monologue in 540–53; in both cases Ctesipho returns to the stage after starting to make his exit to make unnecessary appeals to the slave for protection. Fantham uses the later recurrence of the same 'comic motif as an argument for the Menandrian origin of 28Iff., although she admits that the passage is not essential. It is also possible, however, that it is the first of the two passages (less comic) that imitates the second, or that Terence is responsible for both. It is true that 281c-3 look Menandrian, but they could well have been originally spoken by Ctesipho to Aeschinus, perhaps in response to 277 {absoham quamprimum absolvitote), if 278–81b are a Terentian insertion
45 Grant (n. 41), p. 343; Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), pp. 42f.; Damen (n. 19), pp. 68, 71.
46 Drexler, Komposition (n. 29), p. 37.
47 Rieth, Die Kunst Menanders (n. 30), pp. 137–9.
48 Fantham (n. 28), pp. 208–11.
49 Martin, Adelphoe (n. 21), p. 243
50 Damen (n. 19), pp. 77–82, improbably supposing that Ctesipho enters before Sannio but then remains silently in the background during Syrus-Sannio and Aeschinus-Sannio scenes before meeting Aeschinus. Damen also assumes (ibid., p. 75; cf. ICS 15 [1990], 91, n. 10) that in Menander Aeschinus brought the girl to Micio's house unbeknown to Micio before the beginning of the play
51 Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), pp. 43f, 59.
52 Grant (n. 41), pp. 347f. Grant is led by a speculative reconstruction of the prehistory of the play to the unconvincing conclusion that Syrus was present at the abduction in Menander (approved by Damen [n. 19], p. 70, n. 12).
53 Webster, Studies (n. 7), p. 89.
54 Drexler, Komposition (n. 29), pp. 38–40; Gaiser in Rieth, Die Kunst Menanders (n. 30), p. 138; ANRfVl.2 (1972), 1065; Grant (n. 41), p. 343; Sandbach, Comic Theatre (n. 42), p. 140; Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), p. 43.
55 CQ 33 (1983), 428–31.
56 Rieth, Gnomon 10 (1934), 645, effectively answered Drexler; cf. Gaiser in Rieth, Die Kunst Menanders (n. 30), p. 137, n. 5; Buchner, Theater (n. 12), p. 378. Grant (n. 41), pp. 346f, revives Drexler's objections, no more convincingly, but comes to different conclusions.
57 Gaiser in Rieth, Die Kunst Menanders (n. 30), p. 157, n. 5, Fantham (n. 28), p. 205, and Damen (n.19), p. 74, n. 24, are inclined to agree with Drexler.
58 Comparable errors in Donatus are cited by Rieth, Gnomon 10 (1934), 640f.; cf. H. Lloyd- Jones, CQ 23 (1973), 280f
59 Drexler, Composition (n. 29), pp. 23f
60 H. Marti, Lustrum 8 (1963), 75f.; Grant (n. 41), p. 346
61 Gaiser in Rieth, Die Kunst Menanders (n. 30), p. 137, n. 6.
62 Drexler, Komposition (n. 29), p. 24 and Fantham (n. 28), p. 208 have noted the abrupt change of subject after 276a peccavi. Grant (n. 41), 349, objects to 378 that Aeschinus must already have known about Sannio's journey; but even so, Syrus might mention it as a reason for haste
63 Denzler, Monolog (n. 17), p. 62.
64 Ibid., pp. 45–51, 105.
65 Grant (n. 41), p. 349.
66 Ibid., p. 352; Philologus 117 (1973), 72.
67 Fantham (n. 28), 210, thinks it possible that Aeschinus did not bring the girl with him but had already deposited her with a friend. How, then, did she reach Micio's house? A trip behind the scene is a theoretical possibility, but there is no evidence for it
68 Fantham (n. 28), p. 204: 'his wavering emotions are depicted with a vividness worthy of Menander'. The monologue contains nothing that is inconsistent with the plot of the Adelphoe. Buchner, Theater (n. 12), p. 382, and Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), p. 239, seem to me to suppose an unnecessary degree of Terentian rewriting
69 H. Haffter, MH 10 (1953), 74–9; Buchner, Theater (n. 12), pp. 453–62 ‘Bereicherung des Biihnenbildes’; cf. Grant (n. 41), p. 352.
70 Cf. Denzler, Monolog (n. 17), pp. 114f.
71 Cf. Plaut. Asin. 290f., Capt. 827, Merc. 130, Most. 362, and, for similar phrases at the end of a Plautine digression, E. Fraenkel, Plautinisches im Plautus (Philol. Untersuch. 28, Berlin, 1922), p. 143 = Elementi Plautini in Plauto (Florence, 1960), p. 136.
72 Cf. Dziatzko-Kauer, (n. 21), p. 18
73 Fraenkel, P.imP.(n. 71), pp. 220–7 = El. PL, pp. 211–17.
74 Denzler, Monolog (n. 17), p. 68; Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), p. 242.Google Scholar
75 Denzler, Monolog (n. 17), pp. 45–51, et passimGoogle Scholar
76 Hermes 111 (1983), 433f.; cf. St. Urbin. B. 68 (1997/8), 244–6.Google Scholar
77 Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), p. 243. That the servus currens routine had antecedents in Greek drama I do not dispute, but I think E. Csapo, Phoenix 41 (1987), 399–419, AntKunst 36 (1993), 41–58, underestimates the extent to which it was developed in Rome. Even if Csapo is right to regard Ad. 311–19 as a reversal of the running slave's conventional threat, de via secedite, which I doubt, this does not prove that there was a running slave in the corresponding scene of Adelphoi B'. A more or less threatening ‘get out of my way’ is neither confined to the stock figure of the running slave nor his sole distinguishing feature (cf. IKITOSWV Ar. Eq. 1151, Vesp. 1340; napes j.f Men. Sic. 189)
78 Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), p. 42, following Gaiser in Rieth, Die Kunst Menanders (n. 30), p. 143
79 P. E. Legrand, Daos; tableau de la comedie grecque pendant la periode dite nouvelle (Lyons and Paris, 1910), p. 468; Grant (n. 41), p. 354; cf. Dziatzko-Kauer (n. 21), p. 15, n. 1.
80 Handley, E. W, Entretiens Hardt 16 (1970), 11–13.Google Scholar
81 Cf. Bianco, Terenzio (n. 41), pp. 191f; Rieth, Die Kunst Menanders (n. 30), p. 73; Buchner, Theater (n. 12), pp. 388f.; Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), pp. 36.
82 Cf. Dziatzko-Kauer (n. 21) on 291f.; J. N. Grant, Philologus 117 (1973), 70; Buchner, Theater (n. 12), p. 384.
83 Webster, Introduction (n. 5), p. 115; F. H. Sandbach in J. Bingen et al. (edd.), Le monde grec—hommages a Claire Preaux (Brussels, 1975), p. 202. The theory of Grant, Philologus 117 (1973), 73–5, followed by Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), pp. 46f., that Canthara is entirely Terence's invention, is unconvincing; she plays a small but vital role later (612–24) and it seems better, with Mette (n. 43), p. 40, and Webster, loc. cit., to suppose that Terence cut a brief scene depicting her return with the midwife.
84 Cf. Damen (n. 19), pp. 72f. I agree with Grant (n. 41), p. 354, n. 27, in putting the other Menandrian act-divisions at 516 (covering Hegio's trip to the market-place, 516–92), 712, and 854. Pace Gaiser in Rieth, Die Kunst Menanders (n. 30), p. 144, and Gratwick, Brothers (n. 19), p. 247, an act-division is not essential at 510; Hegio's visit to Sostrata need not have been very long and could by convention have been covered by Demea's monologue, 507–10, if this was somewhat longer in Menander (Webster, Introduction [n. 5], p. 115, n. 8).