Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T04:24:50.602Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

TWO ALLUSIONS TO TERENCE, EUNUCHUS 579 IN JEROME

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2013

Andrew Cain
Andrew Cain*
Affiliation:
University of Colorado at Boulder
*
ac@colorado.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

During the Late Roman Empire Terence was the most revered and the most quoted classical Latin poet after Virgil. Among authors both pagan and Christian, none (to judge, of course, by the surviving written record) made as frequent or as creative literary use of his comedies as Jerome, one of the most accomplished polymaths in all of Latin antiquity. In his estimation Terence ranked, alongside Homer, Menander and Virgil, as one of the greatest of all poets. Jerome had an encyclopedic knowledge of Terence's dramatic corpus and quoted or appropriated phraseology from all six of his comedies. A significant number of these reminiscences have already been identified, but others await discovery. The purpose of the present study is to make a further contribution to this particular branch of Hieronymian Quellenforschung by adducing and analysing two hitherto unrecognized allusions in Jerome's correspondence to Terence's Eunuchus, apparently one of the biggest blockbusters in the history of the Roman stage.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 63 , Issue 1 , May 2013 , pp. 407 - 412
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 2013

During the Late Roman Empire Terence was the most revered and the most quoted classical Latin poet after Virgil. Among authors both pagan and Christian, noneFootnote 1 (to judge, of course, by the surviving written record) made as frequent or as creative literary use of his comedies as Jerome,Footnote 2 one of the most accomplished polymaths in all of Latin antiquity.Footnote 3 In his estimation Terence ranked, alongside Homer, Menander and Virgil, as one of the greatest of all poets.Footnote 4 Jerome had an encyclopedic knowledge of Terence's dramatic corpus and quoted or appropriated phraseology from all six of his comedies. A significant number of these reminiscences have already been identified,Footnote 5 but others await discovery. The purpose of the present study is to make a further contribution to this particular branch of Hieronymian Quellenforschung by adducing and analysing two hitherto unrecognized allusions in Jerome's correspondence to Terence's Eunuchus, apparently one of the biggest blockbusters in the history of the Roman stage.Footnote 6

In mid 393Footnote 7 Jerome composed what was posthumously to become one of his most celebrated writings.Footnote 8 Printed as Epistula 52 in Isidor Hilberg's standard critical edition of the Hieronymian correspondence in the Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum (vols 54–6),Footnote 9 this lengthy work is addressed to Nepotian, a celibate priest in his late twenties who was serving the church in his native Altinum, a coastal city in the province of Venetia-Istria in north-eastern Italy. A few years earlier Nepotian had abandoned a post in the imperial bureaucracyFootnote 10 for an ecclesiastical career and he was even being groomed to succeed his uncle Heliodorus as bishop of Altinum.Footnote 11 He had strong monastic proclivities and wrote to Jerome, who had been living in the Palestinian village of Bethlehem since 386, to seek guidance on how best to integrate his monastic and clerical vocations. In his response (Ep. 52) Jerome seized the occasion to articulate his ideal of the monastic clergy, according to which all ordained ministers of the church have a moral imperative to adopt a rigorous ascetic lifestyle of the kind (not surprisingly) that Jerome himself advocates for lay Christians elsewhere in his writings.Footnote 12

Jerome casts his letter as a stylish exercise in paraenesis,Footnote 13 and he accordingly aims to shape Nepotian's daily conduct through a lengthy series of authoritative precepts and prohibitions. He is especially concerned about the young priest's conduct around women (5.4–8, 15.1).Footnote 14 For instance, at 5.6 he gives specific directives regarding the house calls that Nepotian, as part of his basic pastoral duties, makes to the homes of female parishioners:

si propter officium clericatus aut vidua tibi visitatur aut virgo, numquam domum solus introeas talesque habeto socios quorum contubernio non infameris. si lector, si acolythus, si psaltes te sequitur, non ornentur vestibus sed moribus, nec calamistro crispent comas sed pudicitiam habitu polliceantur. solus cum sola secreto et absque arbitreFootnote 15 non sedeas.

This is an elegant passage characterized by an aggregation of rhetorical figures including threefold alliteration (vidua tibi visitatur aut virgo and calamistro crispent comas), threefold anaphora (si … si … si …), twofold negative–positive arsis–thesis (non … sed … nec … sed …) and antithesis (i.e. beautification of the soul with virtues vs. adornment of the body with fancy attire and through coiffingFootnote 16). Of particular interest, though, is the last sentence, solus cum sola secreto et absque arbitre non sedeas, which itself is marked by polyptoton, pleonasm, alliteration and assonance. Hieronymian source critics have failed to recognize that it bears a striking resemblance to a line from Terence's Eunuchus. In one scene Chaerea relates to his friend Antipho how he traded clothes with a eunuch named Dorus so that under this disguise he could gain unlimited access to, with an eye to sexually assaulting,Footnote 17 his love interest Pamphila, who had been staying at the time in the home of the courtesan Thais. His ruse was successful and, much to his delight, he was put in charge of guarding the girl. He was given explicit instructions by Thais neither to allow any man to see her nor to leave her side:

edicit ne vir quisquam ad eam adeat et mihi ne abscedam imperat;

in interiore parti ut maneam solus cum sola. adnuo

terram intuens modeste.

(578–80)

There are compelling reasons for supposing that Jerome's solus cum sola secreto et absque arbitre non sedeas constitutes an allusion to Chaerea's ut maneam solus cum sola. The arresting polyptoticFootnote 18 expression solus cum sola is attested only here in Latin literature prior to Jerome.Footnote 19 This fact alone is noteworthy in view of Jerome's exceptional fondness for Terentian turns of phrase more generally and for Eunuchus in particular, evidently his favourite of the six plays.Footnote 20 This rarity of occurrence assumes special significance when we consider that both authors deploy the locution in similar contexts where the propriety of male–female relations is at stake.

Jerome has not merely borrowed a flashy formulation; he has introduced it as an intertext which he summarily subverts. In essence, Chaerea is allusively held up as an example of someone whom Nepotian must not emulate in his own dealings with women. Chaerea had resorted to deception and feigned modesty (adnuo | terram intuens modeste) so that he could be all alone with Pamphila and execute his scheme.Footnote 21 Nepotian, by contrast, is urged to be duly circumspect during house calls to Christian womenFootnote 22 and to avoid unsupervised socializing with them so that he does not expose himself to sexual temptation or give external observers grounds for harbouring suspicions about him.Footnote 23 Jerome's allusion thus implies a twofold antithesis between the cunning and prurience of Chaerea, and the integrity and sexual purity which he adjures his protégé to embody. This is an appropriate, even ideal, intertext for another, related reason: Eunuchus derives its title from Chaerea's duplicitous impersonation of a eunuch, and Jerome (and other contemporary ecclesiastical writers) regarded monks as metaphorical eunuchs.Footnote 24 Throughout his correspondence and other writings he excoriates hypocrites who use their monastic vocations as a pretence for licentious living.Footnote 25 In the letter to Nepotian he implicitly acknowledges the possibility that monastic clergymen may not always behave as ‘eunuchs’ or be blameless in female company but rather may follow Chaerea's lead and engage in sexual escapades under the guise of their religious profession, and he accordingly establishes measures to preclude this eventuality.

The scene in Eunuchus in which Chaerea recounts his exploits was well known in Late Antiquity and drew criticism from Christian moralists like Augustine.Footnote 26 Jerome retains a striking enough component of his infamous source text for Nepotian and other contemporary readersFootnote 27 who had been classically trained (i.e. those who had intensively studied Terence's plays as schoolboys under a grammaticus) to be able to identify and relish his intertextual play. He nevertheless retouches his model in such a way stylistically as to reinforce the rhetorical import of his argument.Footnote 28 He preserves the Terentian solus cum sola in its original form not only because it cues his readership to recall the rape scene more readily but also because the adjectival polyptoton itself (not to mention the close proximity of its two constituent words) has an intrinsic charm and vivacity. Jerome does however improve upon his model in other respects. He converts manere to the synonymous verb sedere,Footnote 29 thereby creating a stunning tonal effect through fourfold sibilant alliteration (solus, sola, secreto, sedeas).Footnote 30 Additionally, the hyperbatic displacement of solus from sedeas as well as the pleonastic secreto et absque arbitre Footnote 31 – which combines assonance (absque arbitre) and alliteration (initial–sequent: absque arbitre; initial–interior: secreto et), thereby complementing the musicality of the immediately preceding polyptoton – work in synergy to lend exceptional vividness and emphasis to Jerome's inculcation of Nepotian's need for absolute discretion around the opposite sex.

This was not the last time in his long and distinguished literary careerFootnote 32 that Jerome would invoke this cogent intertext in a discussion of monastic ethics. Almost twenty years after writing to Nepotian, he addressed a letter (Ep. 128) to his Roman friend Gaudentius, a senatorial Christian with monastic leanings who had requested advice about how to give his infant daughter Pacatula, whom he had dedicated as a virgin at her birth,Footnote 33 a proper ascetic upbringing amidst the self-indulgence of aristocratic culture at Rome. At one point in the letter Jerome directs a polemical aside, in the generalizing second person singular,Footnote 34 at randy pseudo-monks who profess celibacy and yet plead any excuse they can to have clandestine meetings with their beautiful young maidservants.Footnote 35

virgo es: quid te mulieris delectat societas? quid fragilem et sutilem ratem magnis committis fluctibus et grande periculum navigationis incertae securus ascendis? nescis, quid desideres, et tamen sic ei iungeris, quasi aut ante desideraveris aut – ut levissime dicam – postea desideraturus sis. ‘sed ad ministerium iste sexus est aptior’. elige ergo anum, elige deformem, elige probatae in domino continentiae. quid te adulescentia, quid pulchra, quid luxuriosa delectat? uteris balneis, cute nitida, rubicundus incedis, carnibus vesceris, affluis divitiis, pretiosa veste circumdaris et iuxta serpentem mortiferum securum dormire te credis? an non habitas in eodem hospitio, in nocte dumtaxat? ceterum totos dies in huiusce modi confabulatione consumens quare solus cum sola et non cum arbitris sedes? cum etiam ipse non pecces, aliis peccare videaris.Footnote 36

Jerome has resolved his impressive sequence solus cum sola secreto et absque arbitre non sedeas from the letter to Nepotian into a slightly simpler form. He dispenses with the pleonastic secreto, though by the same token solus cum sola + non cum arbitris is pleonastic, and so the basic rhetorical impact in this regard has been minimally affected (but the elimination of secreto does nevertheless weaken the acoustical effect produced by the sibilant alliteration). The substitution of non cum for absque seems a negligible matter of lexical variatio, but there are minor rhetorical implications for this alteration: what is lost from the alliteration of absque arbitris essentially is gained back by the repetition of cum, which, on account of its identical placement within the two phrases, imposes a sense of symmetry onto this last part of the sentence.

This second allusion to Eunuchus is not merely a function of Jerome's propensity to recycle sententious phraseology that he has adapted from other authors.Footnote 37 As in the letter to Nepotian, so too here, the intertext serves to accentuate the polar opposition between two extremes of monastic behaviour and at the same time to underscore the importance of maintaining absolute propriety in one's interactions with women, especially behind closed doors. Additionally, in both letters Jerome makes an ironic connection between the title of the play and the notion of the monk as a spiritual eunuch (e.g. at the beginning of the above-cited passage he calls the monk a virgo). Yet there is a fundamental difference between the manner in which he applies the Terentian reminiscence in each letter. When writing to Nepotian he only alludes to the possibility of malfeasance on the part of the monk, but in the letter to Gaudentius he caricatures a certain monastic type who bears an uncanny resemblance to Chaerea in his obsession with arranging secret meetings with his attractive young slave girls. And like Chaerea, who treated the sexual assault so nonchalantly because he was under the impression that Pamphila was a slave (Eun. 856–8), this salacious monk shows no remorse for his behaviour; on the contrary, he goes to considerable lengths to justify it. Moreover, in certain respects the Terentian allusion better suits the context of Epistula 128 than it does that of Epistula 52.

The two newly adduced echoes of Eunuchus 579 in the letters to Nepotian and Gaudentius augment the ever-growing list of classical allusions in Jerome's correspondence,Footnote 38 and the first one in particular enhances our appreciation of the already robust source-critical profile of Epistula 52, which is one of the most self-consciously erudite and classicizing literary productions to survive from his pen.Footnote 39 They have additional significance in that, with respect to their allusive appropriation of a Terentian character as a negative moral exemplum, they typify a prevailing trend in the early Christian Rezeptionsgeschichte of Terence.Footnote 40

References

1 Not even Augustine cited Terence at a higher frequency than Jerome. On the North African bishop's use of Terence in his works, see Hagendahl, H., Augustine and the Latin Classics, 2 vols. (Göteborg, 1967), 1.254–64Google Scholar, 2.377–81.

2 His passion for Terence's drama was probably first kindled in the late 350s and early 360s when he studied in Rome, as a young teenager, under the renowned Terentian scholar Aelius Donatus (see Brugnoli, G., ‘Donato e Girolamo’, VetChr 2 [1965], 139–49Google Scholar), whose commentary on the plays he had studied intensively in school (see Jer. Apol. c. Ruf. 1.16).

3 On his immense erudition, which was unrivalled, by a wide margin, in Latin Christian antiquity, see Cain, A., ‘Jerome's Pauline commentaries between East and West: tradition and innovation in the Commentary on Galatians’, in Lössl, J. and Watt, J. (edd.), Interpreting the Bible and Aristotle in Late Antiquity: The Alexandrian Commentary Tradition from Rome to Baghdad (Aldershot, 2011), 91–110Google Scholar.

4 Jer. Ep. 58.5.2.

5 See e.g. Adkin, N., ‘Terence's Eunuchus and Jerome’, RhM 137 (1994), 187–95Google Scholar; id., ‘Hieronymus Eunuchinus’, GIF 58 (2006), 327–34Google Scholar; Godel, R., ‘Réminiscences de poètes profanes dans les Lettres de St. Jérôme’, MH 21 (1964), 65–70Google Scholar; Hagendahl, H., Latin Fathers and the Classics: A Study on the Apologists, Jerome, and other Christian Writers (Göteborg, 1958)Google Scholar, passim; id., ‘Jerome and the Latin classics’, VChr 28 (1974), 216–27Google Scholar; López Fonseca, A., ‘San Jerónimo, lector de los cómicos latinos: cristianos y paganos’, CFC(L) 15 (1998), 333–52Google Scholar; Jürgens, H., Pompa diaboli. Die lateinischen Kirchenväter und das antike Theater (Stuttgart, 1972), 123–9Google Scholar; Luebeck, E., Hieronymus quos noverit scriptores et ex quibus hauserit (Leipzig, 1872), 110–14Google Scholar.

6 i.e. not only was the first audience so enthralled that it demanded and then received an encore presentation on the same day as the debut, but also this play netted its author a small fortune, an unprecedented fee of 8,000 sesterces (Suet. Vita Ter. 2). Eunuchus, needless to say, greatly contributed to Terence's commercial and financial success; see Gilula, D., ‘How rich was Terence?’, SCI 8/9 (1989), 74–8Google Scholar.

7 Nautin, P., ‘Études de chronologie hiéronymienne (393–397)’, REAug 20 (1974), 251–84Google Scholar, esp. 251–3, 277. This dating is accepted by Rebenich, S., Hieronymus und sein Kreis: prosopographische und sozialgeschichtliche Untersuchungen (Stuttgart, 1992)Google Scholar, 202 n. 382. The letter is erroneously dated to 394 by Cavallera, F., Saint Jérôme: Sa vie et son oeuvre (2 vols, Paris, 1922)Google Scholar, 1.183 n. 2, and Kelly, J.N.D., Jerome: His Life, Writings, and Controversies (London, 1975)Google Scholar, 190 n. 59.

8 For its influence on e.g. St. Patrick's clerical formation, see Cain, A., ‘Patrick's Confessio and Jerome's Epistula 52 to Nepotian’, JMedLat 20 (2010), 1–15Google Scholar. On Jerome's fortuna more generally, see the various essays in Cain, A. and Lössl, J. (edd.), Jerome of Stridon: His Life, Writings, and Legacy (Aldershot, 2009)Google Scholar.

9 This is the edition from which all quotations from the correspondence in this article are taken.

10 See Scourfield, J.H.D., Consoling Heliodorus: A Commentary on Jerome, Letter 60 (Oxford, 1993), 142–3Google Scholar.

11 Jer. Ep. 60.14.1.

12 See e.g. Laurence, P., Jérôme et le nouveau modèle féminin: La conversion à la vie parfaite (Paris, 1997)Google Scholar. On the important place occupied by Epistula 52 in Jerome's broader epistolary agenda, see Cain, A., The Letters of Jerome: Asceticism, Biblical Exegesis, and the Construction of Christian Authority in Late Antiquity (Oxford, 2009), 145–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 For an overview of ancient paraenetic letters, see Stowers, S., Letter Writing in Greco-Roman Antiquity (Philadelphia, 1986), 94–106Google Scholar.

14 In this respect Jerome undoubtedly is projecting onto his young advisee his own anxieties stemming from his experience at Rome several years earlier when he had been accused of committing sexual indiscretions with some of his female disciples; see Cain (n. 12), 107–9.

15 This form, rather than the more conventional arbitro, is the one given by Hilberg in his critical edition.

16 This notion is a commonplace of patristic moral exhortation. See e.g. Clem. Al. Paed. 3.1.1, 3.35.2; Cyprian, Hab. virg. 9; Greg. Nyss. V. Macr. 29; Ambrose, Virg. 1.6.30; John Chrys. Hom. in Matth. 30.6, 51.5, 89.4 (PG 57:370; 58:516, 786); Paul. Carm. 25.49–53; August. Ep. 211.10 ‘non sit notabilis habitus vester nec affectetis vestibus placere sed moribus’, 262.9.

17 Chaerea's admission of rape is indirect: he tells Antipho after the fact that if he had failed to capitalize on being alone with Pamphila in the locked house, then he would have been no better than the eunuch whom he was impersonating (604–6). Thus he leaves the details of the act to the imagination of Antipho and the audience. As Barsby, J., Terence, Eunuchus (Cambridge, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 201, points out, this omission is not simply a matter of discretion but rather it is a dramatic technique whereby the audience is able to hear a different account of the rape later and from a different point of view (643–67); cf. Rosivach, V., When a Young Man Falls in Love: The Sexual Exploitation of Women in New Comedy (London, 1998), 46–50Google Scholar, and see also Smith, L.P., ‘Audience response to rape: Chaerea in Terence's Eunuchus’, Helios 21 (1994), 21–38Google Scholar. Even though the rape is not actually described, it none the less is characterized allusively as being violent and as having a devastating effect on the victim, Pamphila; see James, S., ‘From boys to men: rape and developing masculinity in Terence's Hecyra and Eunuchus’, Helios 25 (1998), 31–47Google Scholar. See also, more generally, Pierce, K.F., ‘The portrayal of rape in New Comedy’, in Deacy, S. and Pierce, K.F. (edd.), Rape in Antiquity (London, 1997), 163–84Google Scholar.

18 On Terence's partiality to polyptoton and other devices of sound, see Focardi, G., ‘Lo stile oratorio nei prologhi terenziani’, SIFC 50 (1978), 70–89Google Scholar.

19 This is confirmed by a search of the relevant databases, the most comprehensive of which is the Cetedoc Library of Christian Latin Texts, CLCLT–6 (Turnhout, 2005)Google Scholar.

20 Adkin (n. 5), 327, noting that Jerome quotes from this play more than from any other Terentian play, calls Jerome a ‘Eunuch-freak’.

21 On the fraudulence and impetuosity of Chaerea's character, see Forehand, W.E., Terence (Boston, 1985), 75Google Scholar.

22 For their own part Christian women were expected to be conscientious about avoiding clandestine meetings with monks and clerics. Thus Basil (Ep. 173) lists vigilance in dealings with men (τὸ ἐν ταῖς συντυχίαις τῶν ἀνδρῶν πɛϕυλαγμένον) as one of the necessary attributes of the chaste woman. Likewise Jerome advises the widow Furia: si sermocinandi cum viris incumbit necessitas, arbitros ne devites tantaque confabulandi fiducia sit, ut intrante alio nec paveas nec erubescas (Ep. 54.13.2). Marcella is said never to have invited a cleric or monk into her home unless there were plenty of witnesses (Jer. Ep. 127.3.4).

23 Jerome's concern that his advisees not only be holy but also appear holy to others recurs again and again in his correspondence. For the relevant references and discussion, see Cain, A., ‘Jerome's Epistula 117 on the subintroductae: satire, apology, and ascetic propaganda in Gaul’, Augustinianum 49 (2009), 119–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 See Kuefler, M., The Manly Eunuch: Masculinity, Gender Ambiguity, and Christian Ideology in Late Antiquity (Chicago, 2001), 245–82Google Scholar.

25 e.g. in Ep. 147 he reprimands the deacon Sabinian, until recently a monk in his monastery in Bethlehem, for having seduced a nun in Paula's adjoining convent. For his invective against sham monks and clerics, see further Curran, J., ‘Jerome and the sham Christians of Rome’, JEH 48 (1997), 213–29Google Scholar; Wiesen, D.S., St. Jerome as a Satirist (Ithaca, NY, 1964)Google Scholar, passim.

26 See Conf. 1.16.26; De civ. D. 2.7.

27 Jerome states his anticipation of an indefinitely broad readership for Ep. 52 at two different junctures in the work (4.3; 17.1–2).

28 On his custom of refining his literary models, see e.g. Cain, A., ‘Tertullian, Cyprian, and Lactantius in Jerome's Commentary on Galatians’, REAug 55 (2009), 23–51Google Scholar; id., ‘Three further echoes of Lactantius in Jerome’, Philologus 154 (2010), 88–96Google Scholar.

29 For their interchangeable use, cf. TLL 8.2.281.11–13.

30 On Jerome's fondness for alliteration in his correspondence, see Hritzu, J., The Style of the Letters of St. Jerome (Washington, 1939), 41–4Google Scholar.

31 Cf. secrete et absque arbitris at Ep. 130.5.1.

32 For an overview of his illustrious career, see Cain, A., St. Jerome, Commentary on Galatians (Washington, 2010), 3–14Google Scholar.

33 On this practice, see Metz, R., La consécration des vierges dans l’église romaine (Paris, 1954)Google Scholar.

34 This usage of the second person singular is typical of the Diatribenstil in satiric writing. See Hofmann, J.B., Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik, rev. by Szantyr, A. (Munich, 1965), 419Google Scholar; Schmidt, E.G., ‘Diatribe und Satire’, WZRostock 15 (1966), 507–15Google Scholar.

35 Here contemporary social reality undoubtedly hovers beneath the surface of the text, as Jerome appears to be alluding to the routine sexual exploitation of female slaves by male masters, on which see e.g. Osiek, C., ‘Female slaves, porneia, and the limits of obedience’, in Balch, D.L. and Osiek, C. (edd.), Early Christian Families in Context: An Interdisciplinary Dialogue (Grand Rapids, MI, 2003), 255–75Google Scholar, and Pomeroy, S., Goddesses, Whores, Wives and Slaves: Women in Classical Antiquity (New York, 1995), 191–3Google Scholar.

36 Ep. 128.3.4–5.

37 See e.g. Adkin, N., ‘Falling asleep over a book: Jerome, Letter 60, 11, 2’, Eos 81 (1993), 227–30Google Scholar; id., ‘Self-Imitation in Jerome's Libellus de virginitate servanda (epist. XXII)’, Athenaeum 83 (1995), 469–85Google Scholar.

38 Cf. e.g. Cain, A., ‘Liber manet: Pliny, Epist. 9.27.2 and Jerome, Epist. 130.19.5’, CQ 58 (2008), 708–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39 For instance, the classical literary references include but are by no means limited to: verbal reminiscences from at least eleven different Ciceronian works (Jerome also imports a significant amount of material from Cicero's Cato maior de senectute in chapter 3 and concludes chapter 8 with an apt extract from the now-fragmentary speech Pro Gallio); an epithet for Cato borrowed from Sallust; four Virgilian quotations; one phraseological echo of Plautus, two of Terence (including the one adduced in the present study), and one of Juvenal. See e.g. Adkin, N., ‘Cato, Romani generis disertissimus (Sallust, Hist. fr. I 4 M. in Jerome)’, Eikasmos 9 (1998), 229–32Google Scholar; Hagendahl (n. 5), 191–4.

40 On this and other ways in which Christian authors (mis)treated Terence's dramatic text, see Cain, A., ‘Terence in Late Antiquity’, in Augoustakis, A. and Traill, A. (edd.), A Companion to Terence (Oxford, 2013)Google Scholar, 380–96.