I prigionieri

by Plautus, Cesare Questa (Foreword), Guido Paduano (Foreword)

Commedia singolare I prigionieri, come dice l'autore stesso. Secondo le consuetudini della Commedia Nuova, la trama è costituita da un imbroglio, ma questo imbroglio non ha di mira il piacere di vivere, bensì l'esaltazione dei valori morali, della virtù, del sacrificio. Un giovane schiavo, fatto prigioniero assieme al suo padroncino, si spaccia per lui al fine di consentirgli di tornare in patria, nelle vesti di servo, a trattare il suo proprio riscatto. La generosità del suo gesto si fonda su una relazione che ha la dignità dell'amicizia, ma a sua volta urta contro la nobiltà del nuovo padrone, che attraverso l'acquisto di schiavi cerca solo di riavere suo figlio, anche lui fatto prigioniero. Il conflitto ha una durezza adeguata all'intensità dell'impegno affettivo e morale. e si trasforma in una scelta tra valori contrastanti e incompatibili: deve prevalere la lealtà verso il vecchio padrone, nutrita di familiarità affettuosa, o il dovere giuridicamente radicato verso il nuovo padrone, cui non si contesta il diritto di vita e di morte?

Genres: Classics, Plays, Drama, Theatre, School, Humor, Ancient

194 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 196

About the author

Titus Maccius Plautus (c. 254 – 184 BC), commonly known as Plautus, was a Roman playwright of the Old Latin period. His comedies are the earliest works in Latin literature to have survived in their entirety. He wrote Palliata comoedia, the genre devised by the innovator of Latin literature, Livius Andronicus. The word Plautine refers to both Plautus's own works and works similar to or influenced by his.

Reviews

[Tamoghna Biswas · Rating 3 out of 5]

The prologue of this play is absolutely mind-blowing, and while the plot is entertaining and sufficiently intriguing in its own right, the conclusion comes up without as much conflict as I would have liked. When I finished it, I simply headed back to the first page and read the prologue once again, and that's saying something (for me) because I read five of his plays in a single sitting.

[Illiterate · Rating 3 out of 5]

A serious comedy on slavery. The characters are virtuous. I miss the humor of his low farces.

[Mike · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5 stars. According to the critical introduction, this play was lauded by Lessing as the most perfect comedy ever staged. If we were to amend that to “most perfect ancient comedy," then I certainly wouldn’t squabble with that claim. This is the first play I’ve read by Plautus that felt like it had something important to impart to the audience. In fact, the play’s Epilogue makes just that point. I would almost classify this as a drama, especially if we were to remove the entirely tangential character Ergasilus, who appears as the stereotypical moocher who will do anything for some food and drink. With his antics cast aside, we are left with a drama (although not a tragedy) that touches on the vicious cycle of slavery, the bonds of friendship, and the abiding love of fathers for their lost children.

The concept is ultra-theatrical (i.e., contrived): a son of a wealthy man is kidnapped and sold into slavery as the companion of another wealthy boy. As adults, they are captured into slavery by the son’s father, who has no idea that one man is his son. Instead, he is attempting to trade them for the release of his other son, who has also been enslaved. If that weren’t enough, the first enslaved son and his master switch identities in a ruse to escape, causing the father to think that his enslaved son is actually a wealthy young man.

I know: that’s confusing as hell! But the confusion is only due to my poor ability to summarize the plot. Part of Plautus’s brilliance is making this all perfectly understandable. Sure, we know how it’s all going to end; but the fun is watching as Plautus takes us on the ride.

[Emi · Rating 3 out of 5]

"I preferred to put my own life at risk rather than let him die."
"Then make sure that you're famous in the Underworld."
"A man who dies as a result of his noble character does not perish."

(I feverishly read this like a mad woman at 7am with 3h of sleep because tutorial was this morning. I have also recently discovered I'm a sucker for ancient plays. They don't write unhinged dialogue like in the BCEs anymore...)

[Jade · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely hilarious. Good times were had by all. I love the comic elements in an otherwise interesting moral play.

Also, their whole moral of “be a good slave to your master and you will be rewarded” is kinda wild but ok.

[David Sarkies · Rating 3 out of 5]

An ancient criticism of slavery
27 September 2014

The issue of slavery and war is not necessarily something that dominates our discourse in the 21st century, namely because the losers in a war are not enslaved by the victors. While I am not suggesting that wars of the 21st century are less brutal than the wars of the Roman era, these days enemy combatants are generally taken prisoner, usually for the duration of the war (as is stipulated in the Geneva Convention), or they are simply killed.
However this was not the case in the Roman world, and this is a theme that Plautus explores in this play. It appears that this is one of his darker plays and it explores the strain that war and slavery can place on the families of those who have been taken prisoner. The play itself is about a father who has lost his son when he was on the losing side of a battle, and seeks to regain him by whatever means possible. The play does have its light-hearted elements though, with two prisoners taking on the identity of the other, as well as another character whose only goal is to get a free meal.
This is an interesting look at slavery in the ancient world namely because back then it was a natural part of life. This is not the case today where slavery is riled against as the denial of basic human rights. These days we do not believe that a human can be owned by another human. This does not necessarily mean that slavery is non-existent, however it is something that we in the Western World do not wish to think about because we simply want to believe that we have grown up as a race.
However war is still as brutal as it was back then, though in many cases its form has changed dramatically. While countries still go to war against each other, we in the West believe that we have climbed above that and that these days we nut out our disagreements in councils such as a United Nations. Wars these days seem to be between ideologies and seem to exist beyond state boundaries, as the case with ISIS seems to demonstrate. However, wars also seem to be funded from the background, as is the case with the situation in the Ukraine. Despite Russia's claims to the contrary, it is clear that there is a lot of funding going to the separatists in Eastern Ukraine.
However, looking back at the time that this book was written, there was no such thing as the United Nations, nor was their any belief in the sovereignty of other states. The view of the time was that there were the people in the empire and people outside of it, and the people outside of it only existed to be conquered and brought into the empire. Despite arguments to the contrary, once again little as really changed because those of us in the West still have a very 'us and them' approach to world affairs. There are those in the West and then there are those outside, and those that exist outside are seen as targets of incorporation – and once again the current situation in the Ukraine is evidence of that.

[Drianne · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was as "schoolchild" appropriate as the introduction and Plautus' prologue promised. Weird. A pretty good play, nonetheless.

[edit. Lindsay's notes are, of course, magisterial, even in this school edition -- and as always, I am in awe of these schoolboys [it's always boys] who would need the kind of philological information in these notes and not help with, say, what case is that, etc. The play itself I still really like, as perhaps the closest thing to a slave's perspective on the inherent wrongness of that institution that survives from antiquity. But I would also like to share these quotes from my notes on this play, viz.:

What even is this, Lindsay, a list:

* [184n.] “leporem, ‘a hare’, and irim, ‘a hedgehog’ (which gipsies find very good eating)"
* “Any reader who fails to see that vv.478-489 tell the tale in the liveliest style had better give up the study of Latin and take to some light manual labour.”
* “539. This is very Irish. Tyndarus shows a gay defiance of danger.”
* [781n.] “mark the different metrical expression of ‘Jean qui pleure’ and ‘Jean qui rit'
* [790n.] “And he does get to work, and no mistake. His vapourings are quite in the Cambyses vein."
* [809n.] “scrofam: the same word as our ‘grumphy'"
* [note on Books of Reference]: “In a school-edition it is best not to reveal the uncertainty of many a statement nor the divergence of authorities—‘Dr. Dryasdust thinks this, Prof. Rechterwinkel that’. This edition can take the easy path without scruple since the author has also a large edition of this play (Methuen, 1900), with full discussion of moot points."

You're welcome.

[Giorgia Saolini · Rating 4 out of 5]

Non ne farò una recensione

[JR Snow · Rating 4 out of 5]

Surprisingly serious for Plautus, and a departure from the slapstick-esque style of Roman Comedy in general. Full of stock characters (like Roman drama) but tackling a pertinent issue for late-Republic Rome: the increasing volume of slaves from foreign conquests. Plautus uses his typical "mistaken identities" plot that switches a slave and his master. This begs the question–if you can't tell them apart, then are they so different?

I great read, by the standards of Roman Drama, with a surprisingly complex plot.

[Santiago González · Rating 5 out of 5]

Obra maestra. Innovadora a más no poder, moderna y fresca, con un mensaje moral pronunciado y alejado de lo burlesco y vulgar de la comedia. Me ha encantado. Una pena que sea menos leída y representada que otras dentro del corpus plautino.

[Pam · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting play with good characterization.

[Aaron Schuschu · Rating 2 out of 5]

Really dry social commentary plus the translator had to be British because “pound” was anachronistic

[Aida]

Muy interesante!!

[Emily Foligni · Rating 3 out of 5]

(read for uni)

[Taylor Swift · Rating 4 out of 5]

Would a slave write a character like Tyndarus? I don’t know. Maybe not. Stalagmus for the win.

[Carol R. Amézquita · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5 ⭐️