Introduction
Plautus’ Aulularia (The Pot of Gold), a Roman comedy dating to the late 3rd or early 2nd century BCE, offers a rich exploration of social conventions, particularly around marriage and dowry, within the context of ancient Roman society. One of the central characters, Megadorus, an older and wealthy man, articulates a distinctive perspective on the practice of dowry, challenging societal norms of his time. This essay examines Megadorus’ opinion on dowry as presented in Aulularia, focusing on his rejection of large dowries, the implications of his views for understanding gender and class dynamics, and how his stance reflects broader themes in Plautine comedy. By analysing key passages and contextualising them within the socio-cultural milieu of Republican Rome, this essay aims to demonstrate that Megadorus’ perspective, while progressive in tone, ultimately serves both a comedic and critical purpose in exposing societal greed and inequality. The essay will first explore the context of dowry in Roman society, then analyse Megadorus’ specific arguments, before finally considering the dramatic and thematic significance of his views.
The Context of Dowry in Roman Society
In ancient Rome, dowry (dos) was a customary contribution provided by the bride’s family to the groom or his household upon marriage. This practice, as noted by Treggiari (1991), was intended to support the financial burdens of marriage and often acted as a safeguard for the wife in case of divorce. However, dowry also reinforced social hierarchies, as wealthier families could offer substantial sums to secure advantageous matches, thereby perpetuating class distinctions. During the late Republic, when Plautus was active (circa 254–184 BCE), dowries had become increasingly extravagant among the elite, often serving as a display of status rather than a practical contribution (Treggiari, 1991). This trend, while beneficial to grooms seeking financial gain, placed significant pressure on families of lesser means, particularly in arranging marriages for their daughters.
Plautus’ comedies often reflect adaptations of Greek New Comedy, tailored to Roman audiences, and thus incorporate contemporary social critiques. In Aulularia, the issue of dowry is foregrounded through Megadorus’ unconventional stance, which appears to subvert the expectation that a man of his wealth and status would demand a substantial dowry. Understanding this historical backdrop is essential to appreciating the significance of his opinion, as it positions him as an outlier in a society increasingly driven by material gain.
Megadorus’ Critique of Dowry
Megadorus, a prosperous older man in Aulularia, explicitly rejects the notion of requiring a large dowry when he proposes to marry Phaedria, the daughter of the poor and miserly Euclio. In lines 475–495 of the play, Megadorus argues that a dowry is unnecessary, famously declaring that he is content to marry without one, as long as the bride brings virtue and good character (Plautus, trans. Nixon, 1916). This stance is striking, particularly given his social standing, as it directly contradicts the prevailing expectation that a man of his wealth would leverage marriage for financial or social advancement. Instead, Megadorus frames dowry as a source of societal corruption, suggesting that large dowries encourage women to dominate their husbands and undermine marital harmony.
His critique extends beyond personal preference to a broader condemnation of how dowries perpetuate inequality. Megadorus argues that exorbitant dowries exclude poorer women from marriage, as their families cannot afford to compete with the wealth of elite brides (Plautus, trans. Nixon, 1916). This perspective, while framed comically, reveals an awareness of the exclusionary nature of dowry practices and their impact on social mobility. Moreover, Megadorus’ assertion that dowries make wives “tyrannical” reflects a gendered anxiety prevalent in Roman discourse, where financial power in marriage was often seen as a threat to traditional patriarchal structures (Treggiari, 1991). Thus, his opinion serves a dual purpose: it critiques the materialism of Roman society while reinforcing stereotypical fears about female influence.
Dramatic and Thematic Implications
Megadorus’ opinion on dowry is not merely a personal quirk but a pivotal element of Plautus’ comedic and thematic design in Aulularia. On a dramatic level, his rejection of dowry creates tension with Euclio, whose obsession with his hidden pot of gold makes him suspicious of Megadorus’ seemingly altruistic motives. Indeed, Euclio’s mistrust—rooted in his belief that Megadorus must have ulterior motives—underscores the pervasive materialism that Megadorus critiques (Konstan, 1983). This irony is central to the play’s humour, as Megadorus’ progressive stance is misunderstood by a character wholly consumed by greed. The audience, therefore, is invited to laugh at the misalignment of values while reflecting on the societal issues at play.
Thematically, Megadorus’ views align with Plautus’ broader critique of avarice and social inequality. As Konstan (1983) argues, Aulularia often juxtaposes characters of varying economic status to expose the absurdities of wealth-driven behaviour. Megadorus, in rejecting dowry, becomes a foil to Euclio’s miserliness, offering a momentary glimpse of an alternative value system that prioritises personal merit over material gain. However, it must be acknowledged that his perspective is not entirely egalitarian; his willingness to marry without a dowry may also reflect his confidence in his own financial security, a privilege not shared by less affluent men. This nuance suggests that while Megadorus’ opinion appears idealistic, it is not without limitations, reflecting the complexity of social reform within a comedic framework.
Furthermore, Megadorus’ stance contributes to the play’s exploration of gender dynamics. By criticising dowries for empowering women unduly, he reinforces traditional Roman anxieties about female agency, a recurring theme in Plautine comedy (Moore, 1998). This duality—progressive in rejecting materialism, conservative in upholding patriarchal norms—demonstrates the layered nature of his character and Plautus’ commentary. It highlights how even seemingly radical ideas in ancient comedy are often bound by the cultural constraints of their time.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Megadorus’ opinion on dowry in Plautus’ Aulularia serves as a critical lens through which to examine the social and cultural dynamics of Republican Rome. His rejection of large dowries challenges the materialistic tendencies of his society, exposing the exclusionary and corrupting influence of such practices, while simultaneously reflecting gendered anxieties about female power. Dramatically, his stance fuels the comedic tension with Euclio, and thematically, it underscores Plautus’ critique of greed and inequality. However, Megadorus’ views are not without limitation, as they remain rooted in the privileges of his class and the patriarchal norms of his era. This ambivalence invites readers to consider the extent to which social critique in ancient comedy can transcend its historical context. Ultimately, Megadorus’ perspective on dowry enriches our understanding of Aulularia as a text that both entertains and critiques, offering insights into the complexities of marriage, wealth, and power in Roman society. Future analysis might explore how these themes resonate with other Plautine works or compare Megadorus’ views with those in later Roman literature to trace evolving attitudes toward dowry and marriage.
References
- Konstan, D. (1983) Roman Comedy. Cornell University Press.
- Moore, T. J. (1998) The Theater of Plautus: Playing to the Audience. University of Texas Press.
- Plautus, T. M. (trans. Nixon, P.) (1916) Plautus: The Pot of Gold. Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press.
- Treggiari, S. (1991) Roman Marriage: Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian. Clarendon Press.
