SUPPORTING CHARACTERS

Periplectomenus and Pleusicles

Pleusicles is a typical young lover of comedy.  He is a passive character, whose role is minimal in the play's intrigue.  He expresses shame for all the trouble he has caused Periplectomenus in his old age (623).  The old man reproves Pleusicles for his timidity and calls him “more a shadow of a lover rather than a lover (625).”  Later in the play Pleusicles shows an even more timid character.  He so lacks confidence in what he is doing that he consoles himself that he can justify his use of deception by the many examples of lovers who have committed crimes because of their love.  He gives one specific example, that of Achilles, who, because his beloved (Briseis) was taken from him by Agamemnon, withdrew from the war and “allowed his fellow-citizens to be killed (1289)."  This interpretation of Achilles' motivation in refusing to fight totally ignores the issue of his damaged honor, which is emphasized in the Iliad, but the Romans were no doubt familiar with other versions of the legend that stressed Achilles’ love.

An even more dramatic role reversal involving Pleusicles was mentioned earlier in the play.  Palaestrio points out that Pleusicles “has no more intelligence than a stone (236).”  It is essential in Roman comedy that roles be reversed in the master-slave relationship. The clever comic slave can only help his dimwitted master get the girl by giving him orders.1

Periplectomenus is not a censorious old man like the stern fathers of other Plautine comedies.  Since he is not the father of, or even a father-figure for Pleusicles, he plays another stereotypical role as an old man in comedy: the easy-going, affable friend of the young lover.  Rather than sternly admonishing the young man about his relationship with a prostitute, Periplectomenus promises to play the incongruous role of a jovial comrade, a parasite, and a caterer for Pleusicles (666-67).  He also boasts of his supreme ability as an effeminate dancer.  He points out that at 54 years of age he is far from having one foot in the grave. His character is indeed the virtual opposite of the seriousness (gravitas) that was expected of a Roman old man (718-22). Periplectomenus describes himself as a model partygoer, who would never sleep with somebody else’s prostitute or cause a quarrel (637-48; 651-56).  His philosophy of life is to live for himself (677). He disdains marriage because of the impossibility of finding a good wife, i.e., a woman who will take care of all his needs and never cause annoyance to him (685-700). Comedy regularly scorns the restrictions and duties of marriage from the man’s point of view.  The comic wife is typically a shrew; Periplectomenus refers to his imagined wife as a ‘barker’ (i.e.,  ‘a scold’).  Perhaps, the comic view of a wife is best summed up by Henny Youngman’s “Take my wife, please.”

Periplectomenus also rejects the duty of procreation, which was an important responsibility for the Roman man.  Pleusicles, taking the role of levelheaded advisor, alludes to the glory which the generation of children brings to a wealthy noble family and to the father (703-04).  This distinction does not concern Periplectomenus, who is willing to let his relatives take the place of his children (705-15). Children would disturb his peace of mind with fevers, or broken legs or necks (718-22).  As we see with Periplectomenus, comedy overthrows normal everyday morality and allows the audience to enjoy temporarily a pretend world of moral irresponsibility free from the dictates of conventional values.  This character, however, is no threat to Roman morality because he is a Greek. Periplectomenus’ behavior and attitudes are just what a Roman audience would expect of a (in their mind) degenerate Greek.
 

Acroteleutium, Milphiddipa, and Philocomasium

Acroteleutium is an older prostitute, with much more moxy and confidence than her younger counterpart, Philocomasium, who nonetheless shows spirit in her role as her own twin sister.  Acroteleutium is a richly comic character, whose exaggerated impersonation of a woman madly in love with the soldier totally convinces Pyrgopolynices. Philocomasium follows her lead when the younger woman pretends to be emotionally overwhelmed during her farewell to the soldier.  Both Acroteleutium and Philocomasium employ the device of ‘fainting’ to add a persuasive touch to their trickery. Acroteleutium also provides a woman’s view of the soldier. She calls him “that public pest, that big-mouthed menace to women, that scent-reeking hairdresser’s delight (923-24).”

Acroteleutium expresses cocky insistence on her ability in the face of Periplectomenus’ doubts.  She attempts to reassure him by mouthing a misogynistic view of women as more capable of wrongdoing than good (887-95).  This hostile assessment of women expressed by a woman is a dramatic tradition at least as old as Euripides’ Medea (407-09):

Her attitude is:  “Don’t worry. It’s a piece of cake” and ends with a snappy comeback to Periplectomenus’s wordy exhortation to plan carefully: “You are delaying us” (940-46).

Milphidippa also follows Acroteleutium’s lead and throws herself into her role.  In her big scene with the soldier (991-1093) she convincingly describes her mistress’ passion for Pyrgopolynices and used flattery effectively to manipulate him.

Artotrogus

Artotrogus is a parasite, a stock character of Greek New comedy and Roman comedy.  A parasite is a freeborn poor person who uses his wits to get food from others better off than himself.  Artotrogus’ willingness to indulge in the most absurd flattery of the soldier in return for food provides much of the comedy of the play’s first scene.


NOTES

1.  Holt Parker ("Crucially Funny or Tranio on the Couch:  The Servus Callidus and Jokes about Torture," TAPA 119 (1989), 245-46) suggests that the slave's overshadowing of the young lover in the intrigue to get the girl is an attempt to play down the son's defiance of the father.  In a number of Plautine comedies the stern father attempts to keep his son from the girl and the son resorts to a slave to thwart his father.  Such behavior was a violation of the devotion (pietas) that a Roman son owed to his father:

Of course, the stern father is absent from The Swaggering Soldier and, as a blocking figure, is replaced by the soldier, to whom the young man owed no devotion of any kind.  Nonetheless, Plautus still used the tricky slave to outwit the soldier because the slave had too much comic potential to be replaced by the typically colorless young lover.
Return to text.


Return to Contents.