Isabelle David has presented us with the first monograph devoted entirely to masks and gesticulation in Plautine theatre, a valuable contribution to our understanding of the theatrical experience of Plautine comedy. Following and advancing current modern perspectives in the study in Roman comedy, her study thereby foregrounds the spectacle and focuses on major aspects of the visual identity of Plautine characters. Basing her analysis on concrete evidence, the author fully explores masks and gesticulation as a means of character presentation and differentiation, and of affecting audience response, advancing further perspectives in Plautine studies.
The book begins with an introduction and is organized into three Parts (1: masks; 2 and 3: gesticulation) followed by a conclusion. Each part is divided into chapters, with each preceded by a short introduction, structured in shorter sections, and followed by a conclusion, thus assuring clarity, with the reading process further facilitated by means of frequent cross-references throughout. There follow an appendix of illustrations containing iconographic evidence, a valuable appendix comprising textual evidence for gestures grouped into two categories, “Actions” and “Dispositions,” presented in the form of four-column tables (type of gesture; relevant passages; character and type; quotations). The book concludes with the Bibliography, the Index locorum and Index of Illustrations, and the Contents. The text used for Plautus is that of Ernout, although Lindsay (19102) would be a better option, and even the available comedies by Editio Plautina Sarsinatis. All Latin passages are translated by the author.
The Introduction contains the status quaestionis, clearly outlines the content, structure and scope of the book, and provides all the necessary definitions and caveats: the focus of the treatment lies on masks and gesticulation as the most important factors of the characters’ visual presentation; costume, metre, music, voice, paralinguistic features lie out of the scope of the present study. Nevertheless, in Part 2 certain features of costume and props are occasionally discussed.
Part 1 begins with a corroboration of the mask-theory for Plautine theatre through a reexamination of extant evidence from palliata and grammarians, and traditional arguments, partly overlapping with Gow (1912), which is regrettably missing from the bibliography. David’s treatment may now serve as a full-scale guide to the question, presenting new interpretative perspectives. To this end, the author adduces the “algebraic notation” of the dramatis personae in the manuscripts, tentatively attributing the sigla to Plautus drawing from the practice of Hellenistic dramatic texts; this is, however, a piece of evidence actually supporting the doubling of roles, in turn a common argument in favor of the early use of masks in Roman theatre. Certain presgnant terms occurring in palliata are scrutinized (persona, persolla, larua, imago, uultus), pertaining also to the materiality of the mask, as shown in previous studies. The discussion on imago, concentrated entirely on Amphitruo (omitting Am. 121, an important reference) could have been put into its wider context as a key word for impersonation (cf. Capt. 39, Mil. 151-152), in order to fully appreciate the polysemy of the term. David tackles the issue of the apparently fixed expression of the mask adding the angle of presentation and light modifications according to the inclination of the head to the actor’s virtuosity bringing about an effect of changing expression, foregrounded more recently by Marshall (2006) 127 and n. 7, 156 and Gellar-Goad (2024) 38, 40, 42–45; most importantly, here are foreshadowed certain thought-provoking insights on the accommodation of facial expressions to gesticulation and the fundamental contribution of the interplay between gesticulation and mask to the character presentation.
Addressing the question of the nature of Plautine masks, David argues in favor of the continuity in mask practice between Greece and Rome, adducing information drawn from the Plautine corpus, Pollux and New Comedy iconography, with all due reservations concerning the validity of the process. Following Petrides (2014) 436–440, she expresses reservations concerning the influence of Atellan farce on Plautine masks, restricting distinctive Atellan associations to the verbal—also metatheatrical—sphere, and denying their application to the visual level. Here as well as in the discussion of the running slave routine and the parasites (Part 2), it seems that the Italian background is rather underplayed. This may seem to be a judicious approach, due to the lack of direct evidence for the Atellana, and certainly one that tallies with the professed “Greekness” of the plays. We need not, however, be reluctant to acknowledge that native traditional elements forming long-term parts of the Roman theatrical experience would certainly not be absent from the complex process of the accommodation of a foreign genre to the Roman audience, and this may encourage less tentative assumptions for the recontextualization of Greek masks into a new aesthetic frame, different from that of New Comedy, as well as that of Terence in the next generation; see, especially on masks, Marshall (2006) 127, 132–146.
Turning to the function, significance and aesthetics of the masks, the author explicates certain observable affinities between Plautine information on facial features and certain masks in Pollux’s list. Sharing Marshall’s views (2006: 131–139; a reference to his argumentation would be in order here), she demonstrates that masks may serve as a programmatic index of identification, instantly recognizable and generating audience expectations (more often than not challenged), and that there is significant diversity, since wide-ranging conventions are at work here (social, physiognomist, generic, dramatic), never limiting the playwright from experimenting to achieve character differentiation.
Part 2 is the most delightful part of the book, offering a valuable treatment of an area not yet fully explored, namely Plautine gesticulation, building on previous work and based on textual evidence. David attempts to prove an association of certain gestures to individual comic types. Quintilian’s account on actio is presented as a backdrop reflecting social, ethical, and aesthetic norms, with all due reservations concerning its late date and different scope, and major points of divergency between theatrical and rhetorical conventions. Concerning the overall aesthetics of Plautine gesticulation the author captures a vivid stage action, with a significant degree of liberty in the nature and mode of execution, especially in light of social norms, and a certain gradation between character types, and occasionally artificial, as it were, aspects ultimately relating to generic conventions, often subject to variation. As an example of the latter, the sophisticated and highly metatheatrical “live painting effect” in Plautus (with a character reproducing a pose drawn from famous artworks through his gestures) is marvelously foregrounded here through a discussion of the most known relevant passages (Men. 143–146, Poen. 1271–1273, St. 271) and the use of graphicus and graphice in Plautine comedy, an area indeed worth further research; see recently Fontaine (2024).
The author groups the available material into two categories, male and female characters, and proceeds to distinguish general characteristics of each type and individual features, and to assess the contribution of gesticulation to the overall character construction and differentiation, occasionally exploring the social context of the plays. The somewhat selective use of bibliography here, especially of commentaries, is understandable given the extensive material treated by the author.
Slaves, senes, parasites, pimps, soldiers and cooks are systematically caricatured through their gesticulation. Plautine slaves are the most active comic type, with unconstrained, intense gesticulation, based on certain common features and certain noteworthy individual characteristics pointing to attempts at differentiation. The eminent group of the serui callidi present some gestures particularly attached to their role as masterminds of the ruse (most importantly, reflection poses, to which the author detects a “gesticular translation” of the intellectual activity achieved by means of a “loupe effect”). The seruus currens routine receives a detailed discussion comprising the well-known gestures with emphasis on inherent metatheatrical implications of the routine. Producing their own hands emerges from the discussion as an exclusively slave hand gesture, either emphasizing their words or implying their professed propensity to thievery. Some cases, however, call for more attention, when their hands are bound (Ba. 799, 862, Cap. 205, 667–668), where gesticulation is supplemented by props, serving altogether as representations of hierarchical relationships in Plautine comedy. Old men’s gesticulation comprises decrepitude (contributing to their depiction as “blocking characters” and in keeping with ancient negative concepts of old age, rather tempered in Rome), the emblematic slowness, yet also running at times (physically difficult, socially unacceptable; sometimes foregrounding moral vices). In their gestures unsuccessfully attempting to assert authority, instead of a carnivalesque inversion of the master-slave relationship, the author sees emerging character flaws. A rather farcical gesticulation, supplemented possibly by corpulence, with a clearly protean dimension, is pinpointed in the case of parasites, dictated by their insatiable appetite and subsequent status of dependance and submission. Plautine pimps are conventionally caricatured through gestures attesting to their greed, disbelief, perjury, feebleness, even effeminacy, in accordance with their status as marginalized figures. Ballio (Pseudolus), quite naturally, stands out as more vigorous, even violent and repulsive. The overall conventional gestures of the miles gloriosus translate visually the sheer contradiction between words and actions, substantial to his type, also attested in the cook’s presence. For all their passivity, the gesticulation of adulescentes gives off openness and vigor contrasted to the old men’s reticence. Being somewhat impulsive and sentimental, their signature gestures are holding someone’s hand expressing affection, protection, and trust, and delayed exits, producing a more subtle humorous effect often entailing sympathy. Further treatment of the twins in Menaechmi would probably be rewarding, since the text provides rich evidence for vigorous gesticulation throughout.
In her approach to Plautine female characters, despite the scant textual evidence, the author explores lavishly gender and sexuality. Age goes hand in hand with sexuality in the visual presentation of many female servants. The courtesan’s ancilla conventionally calques her comportment on that of her mistress employing seduction. The discussion of the uxor dotata is a learned gender-based approach shedding light on her ambiguous presentation in Plautine theatre, oscillating from sobriety to caricature (with the latter mostly provisional). David rightly breaks away from the traditional distinction between bona meretrix and mala meretrix, finely capturing the contradictory aspects of her onstage presence imposed by her profession, and finally highlights the ambiguous visual presentation of the pseudomeretrix, combining traits of a meretrix with gravity and genuine sentimentality, as essential to the liminality of her dramatic presence.
Here an occasional evaluation of the function of props is also attempted (though without consulting Ketterer’s series of papers 1986a–c), focusing specifically on Plautine senes, pimps, soldiers, cooks, female servants and Philemation’s make-up scene in Mostellaria. Such an approach proves to be rewarding and is worth further development, since props are inextricable to the overall effect of the spectacle, serving multiple functions.
In Part 3, David proceeds to a tentative further reconstruction of the Plautine gesticulation through New Comedy iconography and Terentian manuscripts illustration, with the latter, according to the author, ultimately drawing on Hellenistic iconographic tradition, though this is hard to prove. She acknowledges the precarious nature of this endeavor, given the origin and date of iconography, the divergent stage and iconographic practices, and the decisive importance of social and cultural context on gesticulation. Thus, she works with prudence, mostly locating affinities between the Plautine text and iconographic documents, otherwise limiting herself to interesting speculations about gestures whose presence would be plausible in Plautine theatre. It is clear, however, that the text is our sole secure resource after all.
In the last chapter of Part 3, David argues for a distinct feature of Plautine aesthetics of character presentation, the “constant metamorphosis” of character achieved by means of the interplay between visual and verbal signs, tallying and occasionally diverging, thereby constructing the character identity during performance.
In conclusion, David has achieved a voluminous, wide-ranging treatment of the Plautine material, putting forward, through a neatly structured layout, coherent and nuanced argumentation, always based on a close reading of the texts of which she avails herself with painstaking attention and prudence, and statistics concerning onstage activity and distribution of gestures. David’s study is a valuable and comprehensive guide for instructional and research purposes, translations, and commentaries, strongly encouraging future research alongside major components of Plautine spectacle (characterization, staging, music, audience response).
References
Fontaine, M. 2024. “Ut Pictura Po(e)sis: Wine, Women, and Song in Plautus’ Gorgylio.” In Vogt-Spira, G. – Zimmermann, B. (Eds.). Plautus Revisited. Problemstellungen und Perspektiven der Plautusforschung. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht Verlage: 375–391.
Gellar-Goad, T.H.M. 2024. Masks. Berkeley: Tangent/punctum.
Gow, A.S.F. 1912. “On the Use of Masks in Roman Comedy.” JRS 2: 65–77.
Ketterer, R.C. 1986a. “Stage properties in Plautine comedy I.” Semiotica 58 (1): 193–216,
Ketterer, R.C. 1986b. “Stage Properties in Plautine Comedy II.” Semiotica 59 (2): 93–135.
Ketterer, R.C. 1986c. “Stage properties in Plautine comedy III.” Semiotica 59 (3): 29–72.
Lindsay, W.M. 21910. T. Macci Plauti Comoediae, t. I–II. Oxonii: E typographeo Clarendoniano.
Marshall, C. W. 2006. The Stagecraft and Performance of Roman Come. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Petrides, A. K. 2014. “Plautus Between Greek Comedy and Atellan Farce: Assessments and Reassessments.” In Fontaine, M. and Scafuro, A. C. (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Greek and Roman Comedy. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 424–443.