WOMAN AND LOVE IN EURIPIDES

Of Euripides it cannot be said, as of his two great predecessors, that

woman plays an insignificant rôle in his dramas. Most of the nineteen

plays which have come down to us of the ninety-two he wrote are named

after women; and Bulwer-Lytton was quite right when he declared that

"he is the first of the Hellenic poets who interests us

_intellectually_ in the antagonism and affinity between the sexes."

But I cannot agree with him when he says that with Euripides commences

"the distinction between love as a passion and love as a sentiment."

There is true sentiment in Euripides, as there is in Sophocles, in the

relations between parents and children, friends, brothers and sisters;

but in the attitude of lovers, or of husband and wife, there is only

sensuality or at most sentimentality; and this sentimentality, or sham

sentiment, does not begin with Euripides, for we have found instances

of it in the fond words of Clytaemnestra regarding the husband she

intended to murder, and did murder, and even in the Homeric Achilles,

whose fine words regarding conjugal love contrast so ludicrously with

his unloving actions. These, however, are mere episodes, while

Euripides has written a whole play which from beginning to end is an

exposition of sentimentality.

The Fates had granted that when the Thessalian King Admetus approached

the ordained end of his life it should be prolonged if another person

voluntarily consented to die in his place. His aged parents had no

heart to "plunge into the darkness of the tomb" for his sake. "It is

not the custom in Greece for fathers to die for children," his father

informs him; while Adinetus indulges in coarse abuse: "By heaven, thou

art the very pattern of cowards, who at thy age, on the borderland of

life, would'st not, nay, could'st not find the heart to die for thy

own son; but ye, my parents, left to this stranger, whom henceforth I

shall justly hold e'en as mother and as father too, and none but her."

This "stranger" is his wife Alcestis, who has volunteered to die for

him, exclaiming:

"Thee I set before myself, and instead of living have

ensured thy life, and so I die, though I need not have died

for thee, but might have taken for my husband whom I would

of the Thessalians, and have had a home blest with royal

power; reft of thee, with my children orphans, I cared not

to live."

The world has naïvely accepted this speech and the sacrifice of

Alcestis as belonging to the region of sentiment; but in reality it is

nothing more than one of those stories shrewdly invented by selfish

men to teach women that the object of their existence is to sacrifice

themselves for their husbands. The king's father tells us this in so

many words: "By the generous deed she dared, hath she made her life _a

noble example for all her sex_;" adding that "such marriages I declare

are gain to man, else to wed is not worth while." If these stories,

like those manufactured by the Hindoos, were an indication of existing

conjugal sentiment, would it be possible that the self-sacrifice was

invariably on the woman's side? Adinetus would have never dreamt of

sacrificing _his_ life for his wife. He is not even ashamed to have

her die for him. It is true that he has one moment when he fancies his

foe deriding him thus:

"Behold him living in his shame, a wretch who quailed at

death himself, but of his coward heart gave up his wedded

wife instead, and escaped from Hades; doth he deem himself a

man after that?"

It is true also that his father taunts him contemptuously,

"Dost thou then speak of cowardice in me, thou craven

heart!... A clever scheme hast thou devised to stave off

death forever, if thou canst persuade each new wife to die

instead of thee."

Yet Admetus is constantly assuring everyone of his undying attachment

to his wife. He holds her in his arms, imploring her not to leave him.

"If thou die," he exclaims,

"I can no longer live; my life, my death, are in thy hands; thy

love is what I worship.... Not a year only, but all my life will

I mourn for thee.... In my bed thy figure shall be laid full

length, by cunning artists fashioned; thereon will I throw myself

and, folding my arms about thee, call upon thy name, and think I

hold my dear wife in my embrace.... Take me, O take me, I

beseech, with thee 'neath the earth;"

and so on, _ad nauseam_--a sickening display of sentimentality,

_i.e._, fond words belied by cowardly, selfish actions.

The father-in-law of Alcestis, in his indignation at his son's

impertinence and lack of filial pity, exclaims that what made Alcestis

sacrifice herself was "want of sense;" which is quite true. But in

painting such a character, Euripides's chief motive appears to have

been to please his audience by enforcing a maxim which the Greeks

shared with the Hindoos and barbarians that "a woman, though bestowed

upon a worthless husband, must be content with him." These words are

actually put by him into the mouth of Andromache in the play of that

name. Andromache, once the wife of the Trojan Hector, now the

concubine of Achilles's son, is made to declare to the Chorus that "it

is not beauty but virtuous acts that win a husband's heart;" whereupon

she proceeds to spoil this fine maxim by explaining what the Greeks

understood by "virtuous acts" in a wife--namely, subordinating herself

even to a "worthless husband." "Suppose," she continues, "thou hadst

wedded a prince of Thrace... where one lord shares his affections with

a host of wives, would'st thou have slain them? If so, thou would'st

have set a stigma of insatiate lust on all our sex." And she proceeds

to relate how she herself paid no heed in Troy to Hector's amours with

other women: "Oft in days gone by I held thy bastard babes to my own

breast, to spare thee any cause for grief. By this course I bound my

husband to me by virtue's chains." To spare _him_ annoyance, no matter

how much his conduct might grieve _her_--that was the Greek idea of

conjugal devotion--all on one side. And how like the Hindoos, and

Orientals, and barbarians in general, is the Greek seen to be in the

remarks made by Hermione, the legitimate wife, to Andromache, the

concubine--accusing the latter of having by means of witchcraft made

her barren and thus caused her husband to hate her.

With the subtle ingenuity of masculine selfishness the Greek dramatist

doubles the force of all his fine talk about the "virtuous acts" of

wives by representing the women themselves as uttering these maxims

and admitting that their function is self-denial--that woman is

altogether an inferior and contemptible being. "How strange it is,"

exclaims Andromache,

"that, though some god has devised cures for mortals against

the venom of reptiles, no man ever yet hath discovered aught

to cure a woman's venom, which is far worse than viper's

sting or scorching flame; so terrible a curse are we to

mankind."

Hermione declares:

"Oh! never, never--this truth will I repeat--should men

of sense, who have wives, allow women-folks to visit

them in their homes, for they teach them mischief; one,

to gain some private end, helps to corrupt their honor;

another having made a slip herself, wants a companion

in misfortune, while many are wantons; and hence it is

men's houses are tainted. Wherefore keep strict guard

upon the portals of your houses with bolts and bars."

Bolts and bars were what the gallant Greek men kept their wives under,

hence this custom too is here slyly justified out of a woman's mouth.

And thus it goes on throughout the pages of Euripides. Iphigenia, in

one of the two plays devoted to her, declares: "Not that I shrink from

death, if die I must,--when I have saved thee; no, indeed! for a man's

loss from his family is felt, while a woman's is of little moment." In

the other she declares that one man is worth a myriad of

Women--[Greek: heis g' anaer kreisson gunaikon murion]--wherefore, as

soon as she realizes the situation at Aulis, she expresses her

willingness to be immolated on the altar in order that the war against

Troy may no longer be delayed by adverse minds. She had, however, come

for a very different purpose, having been, with her queen mother,

inveigled from home under the pretext that Achilles was to make her

his wife. Achilles, however, knew as little of the plot as she did,

and he is much surprised when the queen refers to his impending

marriage. A modern poet would have seen here a splendid, seemingly

inevitable, opportunity for a story of romantic love. He would have

made Achilles fall in love at sight of Iphigenia and resolve to save

her life, if need be at the cost of his own. What use does Euripides

make of this opportunity? In his play Achilles does not see the girl

till toward the close of the tragedy. He promises her unhappy mother

that "never shall thy daughter, after being once called my bride, die

by her father's hand;" But his reason for this is not love for a girl

or a chivalrous attitude toward women in distress, but offended

vanity. "It is not to secure a bride that I have spoken thus," he

exclaims; "there be maids unnumbered, eager to have my love--no! but

King Agamemnon has put an insult on me; he should have asked my leave

to use my name as a means to catch the child." In that case he "would

never have refused" to further his fellow-soldiers' common interest by

allowing the maiden to be sacrificed.

It is true that after Iphigenia has made her brave speech declaring

that a woman's life was of no account anyway, and that she had

resolved to die voluntarily for the army's sake, Achilles assumes a

different attitude, declaring,

"Some god was bent on blessing me, could I but have won

thee for my wife.... But now that I have looked into

thy noble nature, I feel still more a fond desire to

win thee for my bride,"

and promising to protect her against the whole army. But what was it

in Iphigenia that thus aroused his admiration? A feminine trait, such

as would impress a modern romantic lover? Not in the least. He admired

her because, like a man, she offered to lay down her life in behalf of

the manly virtue of patriotism. Greek men admired women only in so far

as they resembled men; a truth to which I shall recur on another page.

It would be foolish to chide Euripides for not making of this tragedy

a story of romantic love; he was a Greek and could not lift himself

above his times by a miracle. To him, as to all his contemporaries,

love was not a sentiment, "an illumination of the senses by the soul,"

an impulse to noble actions, but a common appetite, apt to become a

species of madness, a disease. His _Hippolytus_ is a study of this

disease, unpleasant but striking; it has for its subject the lawless

pathologic love of Phædra for her step-son. She is "seized with wild

desire;" she "pines away in silence, moaning beneath love's cruel

scourge;" she "wastes away on a bed of sickness;" denies herself all

food, eager to reach death's cheerless bourn; a canker wastes her

fading charms; she is "stricken by some demon's curse;" from her eyes

the tear-drops stream, and for very shame she turns them away; on her

soul "there rests a stain;" she knows that to yield to her "sickly

passion" would be "infamous;" yet she cannot suppress her wanton

thoughts. Following the topsy-turvy, unchivalrous custom of the Greek

poets, Euripides makes a woman--"a thing the world detests"--the

victim of this mad passion, opposing to it the coy resistance of a

man, a devotee of the chaste Diana. And at the end he makes Phaedra,

before committing suicide, write an infamous letter which, to save her

reputation, dooms to a cruel death the innocent victim of her

infatuation.

To us, this last touch alone would demonstrate the worldwide

difference between lust and love. But Euripides knows no such

difference. To him there is only one kind of love, and it varies only

in being moderate in some cases, excessive in others. Love is "at once

the sweetest and the bitterest thing," according as it is one or the

other of the two. Phaedra's nurse deplores her passion, chiefly

because of its violence. The chorus in _Medea_ (627 _seqq_.) sings:

"When in excess and past all limits Love doth come, he

brings not glory or repute to man; but if the Cyprian

queen in moderate might approach, no goddess is so full

of charm as she."

And in _Iphigenia at Aulis_ the chorus declares:

"Happy they who find the goddess come in moderate might,

sharing with self-restraint in Aphrodite's gift of marriage

and enjoying calm and rest from frenzied passions.... Be

mine delight in moderate and hallowed [Greek: hosioi]

desires, and may I have a share in love, but shun excess

therein."

To Euripides, as to all the Greeks, there is no difference in the

loves of gods and goddesses or kings and queens on the one hand, and

the lowest animals on the other. As the chorus sings in _Hippolytus_:

"O'er the land and booming deep, on golden pinion

borne, flits the god of love, maddening the heart and

beguiling the senses of all whom he attacks, savage

whelps on mountains bred, ocean's monsters, creatures

of this sun-warmed earth, and man; thine, O Cypris,

thine alone, the sovereign power to rule them

all."[304]

Primitive Love and Love-Stories · 第 502 / 548 题