Terence and the Behavior of Love

Mary Jane Cuyler (University of Texas, Austin)

During the last century, scholars have questioned whether romantic love existed in Classical times. This debate t has been greatly hampered by the lack of clarity over just what romantic love is and how it manifests itself in interpersonal relationships. Clearly the rituals of romantic love are products of cultural expectations: we must look beyond these in order to ascertain what aspects of romantic love – if any – we might share with the people of antiquity. In recent years psychologists have begun to use behavioral systems theory to analyze the normative behaviors in romantic relationships. Using this theory as a model for analyzing the relationship between Pamphilus and Glycerium in Terence’s Andria, I will demonstrate that the behaviors exhibited by these characters fall within the framework of our modern understanding of romantic love.

C.S. Lewis wrote, “In ancient literature, love seldom rises above the levels of merry sensuality or domestic comfort . . . we must conceive of a world emptied of that ideal ‘happiness’ – a happiness grounded on successful romantic love.” (Lewis 4) Both N. Rudd and J. Barsby have helped to delegitimize this claim, yet they have not been entirely successful because their taxonomic model is problematic. It shows us one-sided, mostly external manifestations of passion. If a lover feels passion for his/her beloved and expresses desire to marry, this alone is not evidence of a developed romantic relationship, especially if the feeling is not reciprocated. Behavioral systems theory requires that we observe how two people interact and react to each other within a relationship structure in order to determine the validity and developmental level of that relationship.

Three major behavioral systems are found in the framework of romantic love: attachment, caregiving, and sex. I will focus on the first two systems; Glycerium’s pregnancy indicates that sex was a part of their relationship but this aspect cannot be analyzed any further. The attachment system reaffirms the adaptive advantage of closeness and consolidates a relationship –specific sense of security. In lines 270-80, Glycerium’s slave Mysis expresses her mistress’ doubt as to whether Pamphilus will honor his promise of marriage to her. Pamphilus is offended and shocked that his honor and love would thus be called into question. This is a textbook case of attachment-system dysfunction (Mikulinker 27-30), which occurs when bids for proximity or support (in this case, G. is in the throes of giving birth) fail to provide a sense of protection and security (P. is not present, and may be marrying someone else.)

The caregiving system is focused on another’s welfare and therefore directs attention to the other’s distress rather than to one’s own emotional state. In lines 131-136, Pamphilus’ bewildered father Simo describes the funeral of Chrysis, a neighboring meretrix. Glycerium’s overwhelming grief at the funeral of her ‘sister’ and friend brings her dangerously close to the funeral pyre, at which point Pamphilus snatches her from the flames and she falls weeping into his arms. Pamphilus takes the chance that his father and the community will learn of his relationship with Glycerium, but his caregiving behavior overrides the fear of discovery.

The behavioral systems model effectively shows that romantic love is represented in the behavior of the lovers in Terence’s Andria. The implications are two-fold. First, although there are many variations in the experience of romantic love, it appears that we share certain behaviors in common with some lovers of 2^nd century BC Rome, and therefore we cannot legitimately banish all of antiquity to a ‘a world emptied of that ideal happiness.’ Second, Terence’s fairly realistic representation of Pamphilus’ and Glycerium’s emotional relationship suggests that he is drawing upon his own observations of human behavior to create some of his comic characters.

Works Cited:

Barsby, John. “Love in Terence.” In Amor: Roma Love in Latin Literature, edited by Susanna

Morton Braund and Roland Mayer. Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Lewis, C.S. The Allegory of Love. Oxford, 1936.

Mikulinker, M. “Attachment, Caregiving and Sex within Romantic Relationships.” In

Dynamics of Romantic Love: Attachment, Caregiving and Sex, edited by M. Mikulincer and G. Goodman. New York: Guilford Press, 2006.

Rudd, Niall. “Romantic Love in Classical Times?” Ramus 10 (1981) pp. 140-158.