The Comedy of Errors

Whereas the first Act establishes the arrival of strangers in Ephesus by following Egeon and Antipholus of Syracuse, Act II moves the action fully into the setting of Ephesus and the social sphere inhabited by Antipholus of Ephesus. This shift creates the setting for the main plot, fully establishing the obstacle facing the Syracusian twins: Their Ephesian counterparts have lives and roles here that they are now unwittingly drawn into due to confusion over The Nature of Identity.

Antipholus is recognized by a stranger—Adriana—and placed into a relationship with her despite not knowing who she is. What is more, the stranger claims to know him as intimately as he knows himself: Adriana points out that, as a married couple, they are essentially one flesh. Shakespeare uses marriage rather than another relationship, such as friendship or business associates, as this creates comedy through engineering the largest possible contrast between Adriana’s view of their intimate relationship and Antipholus’s belief that they are total strangers.

The dissonance between their views of their relationship parallels the divide between Adriana and her real husband, highlighting the theme of The Problem of Rifts in Interpersonal Relationships. Antipholus’s blunt, simple response to Adriana’s long monologue—“plead you to me fair dame? I know you not” (II.2.147)—offers a comical juxtaposition but also duplicates the humiliation and rejection Adriana feels from her real husband. Adriana does not realize that she is talking to a stranger who looks the same as her husband, reflecting the lack of real intimacy in their marriage.

Act II also seeks to examine how the marital rift arose through Luciana and Adriana’s debate. Each sister seeks to apportion blame to one of the spouses: Adriana blames Antipholus’s neglect, while Luciana blames Adriana’s jealousy. Both sisters agree that Adriana’s role as wife defines who she is, but they have different approaches to what that role means. Luciana has a theoretical view informed by religious ideology. She draws on Biblical language and comparisons to the natural world to argue that Adriana owes her husband obedience, no matter how poorly he behaves. Adriana, in contrast, is frustrated by the practical reality of marriage and actively protests her husband’s actions: In failing to value her, he makes her feel less valuable.

The play suggests that the spouses are in a vicious cycle of alienation: This discussion is never staged between them, as in this Act the debate takes place between the two sisters, and then between Adriana and an accidental imposter. Antipholus’s neglect of Adriana is so bad because, as her husband, his actions shape her worth. Adriana’s jealousy is so intolerable because it goes against a wife’s duty to remain incuriously confined to the domestic sphere: The fact that she ventures out to look for her husband is responsible for much of the chaos, resulting in her bringing home the wrong Antipholus and setting up the plot of the next Act, in which the right one is barred entry. The spouses’ personal failings thus exacerbate both their negative feelings toward one another and add to the comedic confusion of the play.

Adriana’s marital dilemma also highlights The Importance of Commerce and Wealth in the play. Commerce and wealth are associated with male, public spheres of action, while the women are placed into a private, domestic sphere of passivity, debating Adriana’s situation within her home. When Adriana questions why men have more liberty than women, Luciana states that this is because “their business still lies out o’ door” (II.1.11). Adriana couches her understanding of her own value using metaphors of physical wealth, reflecting that even this domestic world exists within a larger commercial, material society. Her domestic life is an extension of Antipholus’s commercial life because, as his wife, she is now one of his material possessions, and her material world (such as her clothing, as she mentions here) is dictated by his choices.

The two women feature heavily in this Act. The first scene focuses on them, and they erupt into the second scene to dictate the plot by drawing Antipholus into their world. Their agency reflects that these characters are not solely supporting players in the twins’ journey, but instead have their own desires, worldviews, and thematic relevance. However, their actions and feelings all revolve around their womanhood, reflecting the play’s interest in gender and marriage. Their ideas about responsibility for marital discord reflect a world in which the intimate, personal elements of a marriage cannot be separated from marriage as a rigid social institution with defined gender roles.

Act II thus shifts the focus from Act I in many respects: From Syracusian outsiders to the setting of Ephesus; from Antipholus and Dromio to Adriana and Luciana; from the world of commerce to the intimate space of marriage and the household. These shifts set up the chaos of the remaining Acts, which stems from the collision and apparent incompatibility of these different viewpoints, spheres, and characters.