Understanding the play ‘Casina’
As in ‘The Taming of the Shrew,’ part of ‘Casina’s’ ‘comedic’ atmosphere comes from upsetting the established social order: Athenian and Roman fathers, even in middle-class households like this one, were supposed to have absolute power over their households, and were able to take whatever sex partners amongst their slaves they wished (although taking an adult male as a partner or being the ‘passive’ partner in a homosexual relationship was frowned upon, especially in Rome). Athenian men could even have a free (non-citizen) concubine living in his house along with a wife. Providing the husband treated his wife well and his lovers were from the lower classes, foreigners, or slaves, the wife, as Myrrhina comments to Cleostrata, was to “Let him have his affairs; let him do as he pleases – so long as you lack nothing at home.” (Bolton, Act 2.2; Christianson, in scene 3, has “Let him lech and do whatever he wants, as long as he provides for you at home.”) The father/husband was expected to have power and respect in his household.
We do not see this in ‘Casina.’ The three slaves with major speaking roles are disrespectful to their owner, Lysidamus. While his wife Cleostrata doesn’t mind the idea that their son have their slave Casina as his lover, she objects to her husband doing the same. While both Athenian and Roman society accepted that the slave owner would do with his slaves as he wished, Lysidamus’ obvious ‘crush’ on Casina would have been seen as excessive in both societies. Lysidamus’ apparent previous (or possibly still on-going as the play began) relationship with his farm steward/slave Olympio would also have been seen as suspect at best in Athens, and as scandalous is Rome. Still, despite his excesses, Lysidamus was not treated as expected by his household. His failures to control his wife and slaves meant he would have been seen as weak, and therefore got was he deserved from his dependents.
Note that this play, like most ancient plays, did not really have breaks in the action that correspond to our ideas of acts and scenes. The two translators cater to modern expectations, with Bolton dividing the play into prologue/5 acts/epilogue and Christianson into prologue/23 scenes/epilogue.
Loading…
In addition to having read the play, make certain you at least read pp. 10-14 of the ‘Introduction’ if you are using the Christenson translation, pp. 13-14 if you using the Bolton version.
Prologue: When you look over the TV listings, you might click on a program to read the synopsis of the show or movie to see if you are interested. If you go to a play, opera, or ballet, you will find something similar, plus the background of the show, in the Playbill, printed program, or something like it. The prologue serves that purpose for an audience that would only know the title of the play. Plautus’s surrogate lets the audience know what to expect, although here the prologue was modified for performances after Plautus’ time.
Bolton Act 1/Christianson Scene 1: We meet two slaves of the family, Olympio, who oversees the main family farm and the favorite of Lysidamus (head of the family), and Chalinus, the personal slave of Lysidamus’s son. We learn both father and son lust after the teen female slave Casina, raised as a foundling within the household. Both father and son hope to set her up with their respective favorite slave, and each intend to enjoy her favors, using their favorite slave to cover their affair. The two slaves are not only surrogate rivals for their owners, but also clearly dislike each other.
Bolton Act 2/Christianson Scenes 2-9: We first meet Lysidamus’ wife Cleostrata and her slave Pardalisca, as they go to meet Myrrhina, who lives next door. Cleostrata first orders that no food be prepared for her husband that evening, and after Pardalisca leaves, complains to Myrrhina about her husband’s desire for Casina. While sympathetic, Myrrhina does suggest Cleostrata put up with such goings on rather than risk being divorced.
Cont.
Continued: Myrrhina leaves when Lysidamus returns. He tries to make up to his wife, who does not believe his comments. When he brings up the idea of Olympio marrying Casina, Cleostrata shows that she knows in general what her husband is planning and that she prefers Casina becoming their son’s mistress to becoming her husband’s. Each agrees to try and convince the slaves to give up the idea of marrying Casina. Each tries to bribe the slaves with freedom, but each fail. Olympio can ignore Cleostrata’s offer, because Lysidamus has already promised him his freedom as part of the deal for Olympio to go through with the shame marriage. Chalinus believes that if freed, he will have to work far harder than he does at the moment, and so also refuses to change his mind.
In the end, the four agree the slaves will draw lots. Olympio wins the drawing, and he and Lysidamus insist on a wedding that evening. Chalinus overhears the two plotting (where the pair strongly hint they’ve had a physical relationship in the past) and starts his own plot to foil the pair.
Bolton Act 3/Christianson Scenes 10-15: While Lysidamus claims Olympio and Casina will leave for the farm after the wedding, he plots with Myrrhina’s husband (Alcesimus) to take Casina in his neighbor’s house before the pair leave for the country. Lysidamus then leaves for the forum, to defend a relative in a lawsuit. (He fails, as he is too distracted by his lust for Casina.) Having overheard the pair, Cleostrata temporarily frustrates her husband’s plan. After Lysidamus’ return, Pardalisca delays the wedding by claiming Casina has armed herself and is threatening to kill both Olympio and Lysidamus if she is forced to marry. When Olympio returns, already acting as if he were freed, he convinces Lysidamus to enter the house with him to see what is actually going on.
Bolton Act 4/Christianson Scenes 16-19: Pardalisca enters and tells the audience of the new plan: Chalinus is being disguised as Casina (Roman marriages include a veiled bride), and will go through the wedding ceremony with Olympio rather than Casina. NOTE: Slave marriages were not recognized as legal in Rome, and are unlikely to have any formal ceremony.
Cont.
Loading…
Continued: Lysidamus and then Olympio enter and await ‘Casina,’ each very impatient. When the disguised Chalinus enters, he stomps on Olympio’s foot and elbows him in the stomach rather than embrace him, but allows the pair to escort him into Alcesimus’ house for Lysidamus (and then perhaps Olympio) to have sex with ‘the bride.’
Bolton Act 5/Christianson 20-23: The three women exit from Lysidamus’ house to spy on the goings-on next door. Olympio, with a black eye, sneaks out and admits to the audience and then the women that upon discovering that his ‘bride’ had both a ‘warm sword’ and beard, he was beaten up and left Lysidamus to take his turn. Lysidamus then tries to sneak out, but his caught first by Chalinus and then by Cleostrata and Myrrhina. He tries weak excuses, but finally, berated by all, confesses his guilt. Cleostrata takes her contrite husband home, while Chalinus assures the audience that while he married two men that evening ‘neither of them gave me what a young bride expects.’ (Bolton; Christianson translated the line ‘I married two men, and neither did me his husbandly duty!’)
Epilogue – as the play ended rather abruptly, the epilogue assured the audience that the lovers Casina and Euthynicus (who would usually be at the center of a play’s action, but who were both unseen in this one) would have the required, stereotypical happy ending, as Casina would prove to have been free born, and thus eligible for marriage.
Paper II – ‘Casina’
‘Casina’ plays with the gender and class roles within a (mostly Romanized) middle class household. Both the culture of the original play (Athenian) and this revised version (Roman) were patriarchal societies, where the father/husband was to have firm control over his wife, children, and slaves. Lysidamus clearly did not have such control. This demonstrates that, while societal expectations be be clear about such relationships and the underlying power dynamics, the personalities of the individuals must also be considered.
Considering both aspects (gender & class), which do you believe was more subverted (that is gender roles or class roles) in the play, and most importantly, why?
Your essay should have an introduction, body, and conclusion. As this is not an in-class essay, you have time to consider, revise, expand, and explain. No matter which side you argue (gender or class), you should at least briefly consider the other in explaining your choice. There is no correct answer, the goal of the paper is what your opinion is and your arguments/explanations as to how and why you made your choices based on what you’ve learned of the societies.
