Introduction
This essay examines the character of Megadorus in Plautus’ *Aulularia* (The Pot of Gold), a Roman comedy written in the early 2nd century BCE. As a key figure in the play, Megadorus serves as both a foil to the protagonist, Euclio, and a vehicle for Plautus’ commentary on wealth, marriage, and social dynamics in Roman society. The purpose of this analysis is to explore Megadorus’ role within the narrative, his characterisation as a wealthy but pragmatic bachelor, and the broader implications of his interactions with other characters. The essay will first discuss Megadorus’ significance as a social archetype before analysing his relationship with Euclio, particularly in the context of marriage negotiations. Finally, it will consider how Plautus uses Megadorus to critique societal values. Through this exploration, the essay aims to demonstrate a sound understanding of the text while offering limited but relevant critical insight.
Megadorus as a Social Archetype
Megadorus embodies the archetype of the wealthy, older Roman man who prioritises practicality over romantic ideals. Introduced as Euclio’s affluent neighbour, he expresses a desire to marry Euclio’s daughter, Phaedria, without demanding a dowry—an unusual stance in Roman marital customs, where dowries often symbolised a family’s status (Duckworth, 1952). This decision highlights Megadorus’ pragmatic nature; he values simplicity and seeks to avoid the financial entanglements often associated with marriage. Furthermore, his lengthy monologue in Act 3 reveals a cynical view of wealthy women and their extravagance, positioning him as a voice of reason within the play’s comedic framework. However, this cynicism also limits his depth as a character, as Plautus uses him primarily to advance the plot rather than to explore complex emotional motivations.
The Relationship with Euclio
Megadorus’ interactions with Euclio are central to the play’s comedic tension and social commentary. Euclio, obsessed with protecting his hidden pot of gold, suspects everyone, including Megadorus, of ulterior motives. When Megadorus proposes marriage to Phaedria, Euclio’s paranoia leads him to misinterpret the gesture as a scheme to uncover his treasure (Segal, 1987). This misunderstanding drives much of the play’s humour, as Megadorus remains unaware of Euclio’s secret and genuinely believes his offer is generous. Arguably, Plautus uses this dynamic to contrast Megadorus’ straightforwardness with Euclio’s irrational mistrust, thereby critiquing the corrosive effects of greed. While Megadorus is not portrayed as particularly insightful, his role as a stabilising counterpoint to Euclio’s eccentricity underscores key themes of trust and social obligation in Roman comedy.
Social Commentary through Megadorus
Plautus employs Megadorus to comment on Roman societal values, particularly regarding wealth and marriage. His rejection of a dowry and disdain for materialistic women challenge conventional expectations, suggesting a critique of the commodification of marriage (Moore, 1998). Indeed, Megadorus’ preference for a simple union reflects a broader tension between traditional Roman values of frugality and the increasing materialism of Plautus’ era. However, this critical perspective is only partially developed, as Megadorus remains a comedic figure rather than a fully realised moral authority. His eventual agreement to marry Phaedria, despite the misunderstandings with Euclio, reinforces the play’s resolution-oriented structure, prioritising harmony over sustained social critique. This limited exploration aligns with the genre’s focus on entertainment, though it hints at Plautus’ awareness of deeper societal issues.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Megadorus plays a pivotal role in Plautus’ *Aulularia* as a pragmatic, wealthy bachelor whose interactions with Euclio drive both the comedic plot and thematic exploration. As a social archetype, he represents a voice of reason, while his relationship with Euclio highlights themes of mistrust and greed. Furthermore, through Megadorus, Plautus offers a subtle critique of Roman marital and economic values, though this remains secondary to the play’s humorous intent. The analysis demonstrates that while Megadorus is not a deeply complex character, his presence is essential to the narrative’s structure and broader implications. Future study could explore how Megadorus compares to similar figures in other Plautine comedies, potentially revealing more about the playwright’s evolving commentary on Roman society. This essay has aimed to balance textual analysis with critical insight, acknowledging the limitations of depth within the scope of a comedic framework.
References
- Duckworth, G. E. (1952) The Nature of Roman Comedy: A Study in Popular Entertainment. Princeton University Press.
- Moore, T. J. (1998) The Theater of Plautus: Playing to the Audience. University of Texas Press.
- Segal, E. (1987) Roman Laughter: The Comedy of Plautus. Oxford University Press.
