There is a large difference between the styles of Plautus and Terence. This is not only, or even primarily, a matter of one being more ‘‘rhetorical’’ than the other. Both represent the conversation of ordinary people, albeit in a verse form which imposes a certain artificiality, and the difference between them is best expressed in terms of the kind of colloquialism at which they aim: Plautus is bold and racy, whereas Terence seeks to produce something which is more studied and elegant. Nonetheless, the style of both has unmistakable rhetorical elements; and, if our original hypothesis is correct, the difference will be that Plautus’ rhetoric depends more on the native tendencies of the Latin language and is less (if at all) touched by the effects of exposure to Greek theory and practice.
We may begin with an example of Plautus’ most exuberant style. Toward the end of Bacchides (1087-103), the old man Nicobulus laments that he has allowed himself to be tricked by his slave. The meter is anapaestic long verse (octonarii and septenarii), a rollicking meter which may be felt to invite rhetorical effects; it may be significant that Terence avoids this meter altogether:
Quicumque ubi sunt, qui fuerunt quique futuri sunt posthac
Stulti, stolidi, fatui, fungi, bardi, blenni, buccones,
Solus ego omnis longe antideo stultitia et moribus indoctis.
Perii, pudet; hocine me aetatis ludos bis factum esse indigne! 1090
Magis quam id reputo, tam magis uror quae meus filius turbavit.
Perditus sum atque eradicatus sum, omnibus exemplis excrucior.
Omnia me mala consectantur, omnibus exitiis interii.
Chrysalus med hodie laceravit, Chrysalus med hodie spoliavit:
Is me scelus auro usque attondit dolis doctis indoctum ut 1095
Flubitumst.
Ita miles memorat meretricem esse eam quam ille uxorem esse aiebat,
Omniaque ut quidque actumst memorat, eam sibi in hunc annum conductam,
Relicuom id auri factum quod ego ei stultissumus homo promi-sissem.
Hoc, hoc est quod cor peracescit, hoc est demum quod percrucior: me hoc aetatis ludificari, immo edepol bis ludos factum 1100
Cano capite atque alba barba miserum me auro esse emunctum. perii, hoc servum meum non nauci facere ausum! atque ego si alibi
Plus perdiderim, minus aegre habeam minusque id mihi damno ducam.
(Plautus, Bacchides 1087-103; tr. Barsby 1986 adapted)
Of all that there are in the world or have been or are going to be in the future,
The fatheads, the fools, the dullards, the dolts, the babblers, the blundering blockheads,
I far and away surpass the whole lot in stupidity and in slowness of wit.
I’m damned, I’m disgraced! Just to think at my age I could twice be befooled in this scandalous way! (1090)
And the more I reflect, the more I’m enraged at the trouble my son has created.
I’m destroyed, yes indeed, I’m torn up by the roots, I’m tortured by every torment that’s known;
I’m plagued by every ill that exists, I’m engulfed in every manner of doom.
I’ve been mangled today and it’s Chrysalus’ doing: I’ve been pillaged, alas, and it’s Chrysalus’ doing:
That villain has shorn me of gold as he pleased, using clever deceits against unclever me. (1095)
So the soldier made clear when he told me that she was a harlot whom he maintained was a wife,
And he told me the details of what had been done, how the woman was hired out to him for the year,
And the balance remaining was just the amount that I in my folly had promised to pay.
It is this, it is this, which vexes my heart, it is this above all that crucifies me:
That I at my age should be made such a fool, and then, what is worse, should be made a fool twice, (1100)
When my head is grey and my beard is white, and be cleaned right out of my money.
Damnation! To think that my no good slave should have dared to do this! Were I losing
Much more somewhere else, I’d be much less annoyed, I’d consider my losses the lesser.
This speech is full of rhetorical features: tricolon with anaphora (quicumque... qui... quique) and the pleonastic addition of posthac (1087); an asyndetic accumulation of seven synonyms in an alliterative pattern (two ss, two fs, three b s; 1088); doublet stultitia et moribus indoctis (1089); alliteration (perii pudet) and infinitive of exclamation (1090); antithesis with chiasmus (magis quam...tam magis, 1091); doublet of synonyms joined by atque (perditus atque eradicatus), tricolon with anaphora, asyndeton, and polyptoton (omnibus.. .omnia.. .omnibus), homoeoarchon (exem-plis excrucior), and paronomasia (exitiis interii: a play between exire and interire, 1092-3); antithesis (parallelism) with anaphora, asyndeton, and homoeoteleuton (Chrysalus med.. .laceravit, Chrysalus med.. .spoliavit, 1094); alliteration and paronomasia (dolis doctis indoctum, 1095); alliteration (miles memorat meretricem) and antithesis (miles meretricem / ille uxorem, 1096); alliteration (stultissumus... promisissem, 1098); gemination (hoc, hoc), antithesis (parallelism) with anaphora and asyndeton (hoc est quod..., hoc est demum quod...), and homoeoarchon (peracescit ... percrucior, 1099); paronomasia involving figura etymologica (ludificari...ludos factum), doublet with alliteration and assonance (cano capite atque alba barba), and threefold alliteration ( miserum me... emunctum, 1100-1); exclamation (perii) and
Exclamatory infinitive (1102); alliteration (plus perdiderim, damno ducam), verbal antithesis (plus... minus), and antithesis (parallelism) with anaphora and homoeote-leuton (minus... habeam minusque... ducam, 1103).
It is evident that this is a larger concentration of rhetorical effects than is found even in Terence’s prologues, let alone in the speeches of his characters. As is to be expected, there is a large amount of alliteration and assonance, and there are several examples of those rhetorical figures (homoeoarchon, homoeoteleuton, paronomasia) which create further patterns of sound. Also evident is Plautus’ so-called ‘‘padded style,’’ which uses more words than are necessary simply to convey the sense: most striking is the accumulation of seven synonyms for ‘‘stupid’’ in 1088, to which can be added the three doublets in 1089, 1092, and 1101, where the paired words or phrases, if not exactly synonymous, express the same idea. The general impression of forcefulness is enhanced by the use of the indignant exclamatory infinitive (‘‘to think that...’’) and by the forcefulness of the vocabulary (eradicare, excruciare, lacerare, peracescere, percruciare are all striking words, as are the metaphorical atton-dere and emungere).
But perhaps most interesting is the number of examples of parallel clauses, many of them joined by anaphora and asyndeton and in two cases forming a tricolon. On the surface this looks like sophisticated writing and, as we have already seen, antithesis is something favored by the rhetorical handbooks. Anaphora ( repetitio) is highly praised in the Ad Herennium (4.19) as having charm (venustas), dignity (gravitas), and animation (acrimonia); asyndeton (dissolutum) (4.41) as being animated and forceful ( vehemens) and conducing to brevity; and the three-member sentence (4.26; the word tricolon does not occur before the elder Seneca) as being neat ( commodissima) and accomplished (absolutissima). However, we cannot infer from this some acquaintance of Plautus with Greek handbooks; on the contrary, this combination of short parallel compositional units in pairs or threes linked by anaphora and asyndeton is typical of early Latin carmina (in the sense of the formalized utterances of religion or law; Timpanaro 1988: 257-97) and will have been part of Plautus’ native Latin inheritance. It is also very much a feature of Terence’s plays (Palmer 19613: 92-3), even if there are no examples in the speeches discussed above.
World History
