258. It is safer to stir up a dog than an old woman.
259. Women are irritable. (Cp. 499.)
294. The behaviour of a low woman.
346. Stupid women.
469. An oath to a woman is not binding.
I have added an analysis of the _Gnomae Monostichi_, for the sake of
completeness. No one will, of course, attach any importance to the views
expressed in this nondescript collection. [Cp. Kock, _Com. Att. Fr._ vol.
iii. praef.]
56. The happiness of being unmarried. (Cp. 78, 437, 468, 595.)
77. The expensiveness of wives.
83. Women are the better for being silent.
84. The ideal woman is the good housekeeper.
85. A woman may save or ruin a house.
86. Do not trust a woman. (Cp. 633.)
87. Women consider nothing but their own wishes.
90. There is nothing so wretched as an old man in love.
91. The man who wants to marry changes his mind.
92. Virtue, not gold, adorns a woman.
93. A good wife saves a man’s position.
94. It is not easy to find a good woman.
95. It is better to bury a woman than to marry her.
97. A wife is an expensive luxury.
98. Marry your wife, not her money.
99. A good wife is the helm of a household.
100. A woman cannot rule; it is against nature.
102. Marriage is an evil men bring on themselves.
103. When about to marry you should consider your neighbours.
106. Women are bad counsellors.
109. All women are alike.
134. Woman is the source of every ill. (Cp. 541, 623.)
156. Love cannot withstand poverty. (Cp. 159.)
160. Some women are virtuous.
161. Women are faithless. (Cp. 560.)
181. Women are a cause of ruin.
195. A woman’s jealousy.
197. A married man is a slave.
199. Try and get a woman as your ally.
211. Don’t marry mere money.
215. A man must rule his wife.
231. Women are as dangerous as sea and fire.
233. A bad woman is a treasure-house of evil.
248. Women are fiercer than beasts.
260. A woman should stay at home.
261. A bad woman is like poison.
264. Woman is like the sea.
267. Woman is as fierce as a lioness.
304. Woman is a necessary evil.
324. A wife is a constant cause of grief.
327. A woman is worse to live with than a lion.
333. A woman’s virtue is worth more than her beauty.
334. A woman is full of evil.
353. Never abuse or advise a woman.
355. Never let a woman into your counsels.
361. Never waste anything good on a woman.
382. Marriage is slavery.
410. A lover’s anger is short-lived.
413. There is nothing worse than a pretty woman.
426. A harlot’s weeping is like a lawyer’s.
469. A woman is dirt silvered over.
493. Woman is a pleasant ill.
540. A bad woman is like a storm in the house.
575. A woman is like a fire.
600. Women flatter with an object.
634. The value of a good wife. (Cp. 675.)
684. May my friends never marry.
700. Women ruin many men.
734. Pretty women are conceited.
735. Your wife is worth taking trouble for.
750. A daughter is hard to dispose of.
757. A poor man should not marry.
PHILEMON.
Adelphi 1. Praise of Solon for having introduced prostitution.
Babylonius. An Hetaera’s prospects.
Pyrphorus. Greater beauty than any painter could depict.
Synephebus. An Hetaera’s dress.
Incert. 31. A lady going out with a pretty servant. (Cp. Plaut.
_Mercator_, ii. 3, 69.)
32. The affectations of a μῦς λευκός.
35. The man who fell in love with the statue.
44. A good wife obeys her husband.
49. The growth of love.
64. A dutiful son and his mother.
76. Where women meet, there is sure to be mischief.
77. Worth is better than beauty.
78. There is no need to teach a woman mischief.
85. The folly of taking counsel with a woman.
95. A conceited woman.
103. Woman is an immortal necessary evil.
105, 106. Advice not to marry.
124. A city of beautiful women.
DIPHILUS.
Pallace. A woman’s ornament.
Synoris 1, 2, 3. A parasite and an Hetaera playing dice.
Theseus 2. A Samian lady’s riddle.
Zographus 1. An Hetaera entertains lavishly.
Incert. 2. An outburst against the trade of the πορνοβοσκός.
6. An ugly girl, from whom even a dog won’t take a
piece of bread.
16. The oath of an Hetaera is not to be believed.
33. It is hard to find a good woman.
34. A virgin is a treasure that it is not easy to guard.
47. A woman described as a carcase.
ARCHEDICUS.
Dihamartanon. A dishonest Hetaera.
The fragments of HIPPARCHUS, LYNCEUS, and APOLLODORUS GELOUS contain no
allusions to women.
EXCURSUS I.
[P. 163.]
_THE QUESTION OF WOMEN’S RIGHTS IN THE MIDDLE COMEDY._
It is usual to assume that there was, during the earlier part of
the fourth century, a strong agitation at Athens in favour of
“women’s rights.” The social status of the Theban, as well as of the
Lacedaemonian, women, had been brought, owing to political events,
under the notice of even the most consistent Athenian, and advantage
is supposed to have been taken of this fact by the advocates of female
liberty at Athens, to endeavour to obtain for the women there some of
those privileges which notoriously belonged to their neighbours. This
being so, it will be interesting to consider in how far, if at all, this
movement is reflected in the literature of the period.
The general treatment of women in the Middle Comedy being such as it
is, there would be every reason to expect to find plays in which these
efforts of women to obtain more general recognition from men, would be
made the subject of more or less contemptuous ridicule. The fashion
started by Aristophanes in the _Ecclesiazusae_ must have been, one would
have thought, too fascinating to be abandoned.
The fact, however, remains that, in such portions of the Middle Comedy
as still exist, there is practically no trace of anything of the kind.
There are, it is true, one or two titles of plays which seem at first
sight suggestive, but further investigation generally reveals little.
Thus the _Gynaecocratia_ and the _Gynaecomania_ of Amphis both seem
aimed, not at the tyranny of women in general, but at the tyranny of
wives.[370]
As for the _Gynaecocratia_ of Alexis, all that can be gathered from the
fragments is that it seems to have had certain features in common with
the _Scenas Catalambanusae_ of Aristophanes; as to its tone or tendency,
there is no clue in the two short passages that remain.
The suggestion made above (p. 228) as to the meaning of the fragment of
the _Atalanta_ of Philetaerus is, of course, purely conjectural, and
cannot, therefore, bear evidence either way.
And that is all. This almost entire absence from the Middle Comedy of
plays dealing with the question of “women’s rights,” would seem to
justify a certain hesitation in accepting the common view that this
question was at the time a burning one. So general a silence on the
point, in a literature which deals exhaustively with every other phase of
contemporary life, seems not unreasonably to suggest that the extent and
influence of the movement have been exaggerated, and that, as far as it
existed at all, it was confined to a small body of enthusiasts, and was
well-nigh without effect on the body of the nation at large.
EXCURSUS K.
[P. 187.]
_SOME FURTHER NOTES ON FAMILY RELATIONS AS TREATED IN MIDDLE AND NEW
COMEDY._
Though it has nothing to do with our immediate subject, it may be
interesting to notice briefly the attitude of the New Comedy towards
that description of family problems which the _Canace_ of Euripides and
similar works had made popular among certain classes of art-lovers. That
such works had ever any great hold over the public at large is neither
proved nor probable.
In the first place, we may notice the unpleasant accident by which, in
the _Curculio_, the soldier is made unconsciously to buy his sister
as his mistress. Here, however (Plaut. _Curc._ v. 2, 55 _seqq._), as
soon as the recognition takes place, Planesium is at once given in
marriage by her brother to her lover—as soon, that is to say, as her
consent has been obtained to this course (_ibid._ 73). In the Middle
Comedy _Epidicus_, where a similar incident occurs, the behaviour of
Stratippocles is somewhat less correct (Plaut. _Epid._ v. 1, 42 _seqq._),
though here, too, the side of propriety is at once championed by the
slave, and prevails without any real delay. That incidents of this kind
were not uncommon in New Comedy seems probable from the nature of that
class of drama, but there is no reason to suppose that they ever had
any other conclusion than that which occurs in the cases quoted above.
Cases of rivalry between father and son, such as occur in the _Casina_
and the _Mercator_, belong to a class of drama which has nothing to do
with romantic New Comedy. The _dénouements_ of the _Asinaria_ and the
_Bacchides_, which are so little sympathetic to modern ideas, are both to
some extent apologised for by their authors,[371] and also, as will be
observed, occur in plays which have Hetaerae for their heroines.
A certain lack of regard for decency on the part of the father in the
son’s presence, and _vice versâ_, (which is rather startling to the
modern reader in such passages as Plaut. _Asin._ v. 2, 30 _seqq._, Ter.
_Heaut. Timor._ iii. 3, 1, and elsewhere,) is probably most simply
explained by _autres temps autres moeurs_. Altogether, it would seem that
the privacy which is to modern ideas somewhat of an essential in these
matters, was at a considerable discount at this period of society. Cp.
Plaut. _Bacch._ iii. 3, 73 _seqq._, _Curc._ i. 3, 16 _seqq._, etc.
Lastly, attention may be called to Hanno’s rather remarkable method of
searching for his lost daughters. (Plaut. _Poen._ prolog. 106 _seqq._).
Whether this is intended for a realistic study of Semitic habits, can be
left to others to decide.
FOOTNOTES
[1] The expression is, of course, an awkward one, for the word “romance,”
like “chivalry,” embodies the old superstition that such feelings were a
product of the Christian Middle Ages; but this and similar expressions
are so generally used in this connection, that there is little real risk
of misunderstanding, and I cannot think of anything better.
[2] Among the many arguments in favour of the social emancipation of
women at the present day, I have never heard it suggested that such an
emancipation would inevitably lead to an increase of chivalrous feelings
on the part of men; the general view seems to be that it would have just
the contrary effect.
[3] Very noticeable is the preponderance of goddesses in the Greek
Pantheon. The powers of nature, whether of sea, mountain, river, or
forest, were almost invariably incarnated in the form of women.
[4] This change, retrograde or not, according to taste, may be exactly
paralleled from the social history of the Arabs.
[5] It is both instructive and amusing to compare this primitive ideal
woman with the contemporary Greek woman, as Hesiod himself knew and
described her. A striking passage is _Op._ 693 _seqq._, and others will
be mentioned in the next few pages.
[6] That this was the general character of the erotic legends introduced
into the celebrated “Catalogus” ascribed to Hesiod, seems shown by the
remark in Serv. _ad. Aen._ vii. 268: “Hesiodus etiam περὶ των γυναικῶν
inducit multas heroidas optasse nuptias virorum fortium”; cp. the whole
note.
[7] The parallel view, that if a man wished to really love anyone, the
only worthy object he could find would be another man, was doubtless, in
part, the result of a similar line of argument, though its true origin
must of course be sought in something more inspiring than mere contempt
for women. A further examination of this side of the question will be
made later on.
[8] Zeus pays ἄποινα to Tros for his son (cp. _Hymn. Hom._ iv. 210); that
the golden shower in which he visited Danae means as much, is hardly a
primitive notion. The argument in Ach. Tat. ii. 37 is ingenious, but
scarcely convincing.
[9] This version of the relations between Zeus and Minos is at least as
old as the _Odyssey_. Cp. _Odyss._ xix. 179; Athen. xiii. 601E.
[10] _Hymn. Hom._ iv. 247 _seqq._
[11] The general view that the erotic version of this story is not the
original seems to rest on the sole authority of Aesch. _Cho._ 613 _seqq._
Probably one version is as old as the other, the one being perhaps
Dorian, the other Ionian. Aeschylus’ treatment of Dorian erotic legends
will be touched upon later. (_Infra_, p. 42.)
[12] A man may sometimes commit suicide after the death of his lady; but
that is a very different thing to dying because she declines to have
anything more to do with him. Stories like that of Iphis and Anaxarete
only appear at a very late period.
[13] Athen. xiv. 619C.
[14] Hermes. _Leont._ i. _Fr._ 3. (Ed. Bach.)
[15] Theocr. i. 82 _seqq._ Cp. Reitzenstein, _Epigramm und Skolion_, p.
212 _seqq._
[16] Serv. _ad Ecl._ viii. 68.
[17] Theocr. vii. 72.
[18] The only real exceptions to this rule are, perhaps, Sappho and her
followers!
[19] Theognis, 183; cp. Pseudo-Phocylides, 189. Very similar in spirit is
Hesiod’s advice to the farmer to get
οἶκον μὲν πρώτιστα γυναῖκά τε βοῦν τ’ ἀροτῆρα. _Op._ 403.
[20] That is to say, these feelings by themselves. As regards the
first, no one, of course, would wish to deny that the sexual instinct,
in its most sensual form, has often played a prominent part in what is
unquestionably love-poetry; but the sexual instinct can never of itself
supply the fundamental basis of the feeling necessary for the production
of such poetry. Woman, regarded _merely_ as a source of pleasure or
convenience, can no more be an object of love than a bottle of brandy or
a railway train.
[21] Cf. Hes. _Op._ 700, _seqq._ A comparison of that passage with the
types mentioned in Simonides, _i.e._ the γυνὴ γηΐνη and the γυνὴ ἐξ ὄνου,
would seem to show that the sense of δειπνόλοχος is not so much ‘fishing
for invitations to dinner,’ _i.e._ fond of going out (so L. and S.),
as ‘waylaying dinners,’ _i.e._ making havoc of the food, like Plautus’
‘pernae pestis.’ Wastefulness in household matters was much more likely
to ‘burn up’ a Greek husband, and bring him to a ‘cruel old age,’ than
any amount of frivolity or flirtation. For the idea cp. Aristoph. _Eccl._
226.
[22]
ἡ δὲ μελίσσης
οἰκόνομός τ’ ἀγαθὴ καὶ ἐπίσταται ἐργάζεσθαι·
ἧς εὔχου, φιλ’ ἑταῖρε, λαχεῖν γάμον ἱμερόεντα.
[Phoc. _Fr._ 3.]
ἱμερόεντα sounds to a modern ear almost like bitter irony.
[23] Nor, for that matter, is the Hetaera, whom later writers manage so
to idealise, treated with any more respect or courtesy than the wife. Cp.
Archil. _Fr._ 142, 184; Hippon. _Fr._ 110, 111. In curious contrast to
what may be called the ‘wife-poetry’ of the early Greeks is the pretty
picture in Hesiod (_Op._ 517, _seqq._) of the unmarried girl, sitting at
home, in every sense of the words κακῶν ἄπειρος. But strangest of all is
the touch where, falling unconsciously into a manner of speech that dated
from a very different social state, he calls her
οὔπω ἔργ’ εἰδυῖα πολυχρύσου (!) Ἀφροδίτης.
[24] “But even these are as nothing compared to the real gush of feeling
when he describes his youthful passions, his love for Neobule, passing
the Homeric love of women. Here he has anticipated Sappho and Alcaeus,
&c.”—Mahaffy, _Class. Gr. Lit._ i. p. 160.
[25] Perhaps Glaucus, for there is at least as much reason for supposing
that Glaucus was the object of Archilochus’ affection as that he was
the object of his scorn. To see in him a prototype of the Egnatius of
Catullus, as, for instance, Lafaye does (_Catulle et ses Modèles_, p.
29), is quite unwarranted by any evidence; for the epithet κεροπλάστης of
_Fr._ 57 is not necessarily derogatory, while the tone of such passages
as _Fr._ 54, 70, is certainly not that of invective.
[26] _Fr._ 100-3, 106-7, 109-10, 116.
[27] It may further be observed that the passage is to all appearances
descriptive of the emotions of some person other than the writer himself,
and there is certainly no reason to suppose that it was addressed to the
woman in question. The difference between describing such an emotion
generally, and describing it as one’s own, to the person who causes it,
need hardly be dwelt upon.
[28] Cp. _Fr._ 71, 72.
[29] To endeavour, as some have done, to reconstruct the satires of
Archilochus from those of Catullus, is simply labour thrown away, because
between the periods in which the two poets lived, the whole way of
regarding women had been revolutionised, and ideas which seemed obvious
to the Latin writer would have been unintelligible to the Greek. To
Catullus thwarted love was an agony; to Archilochus it was an insult,
and no man of his time would, or could, have regarded it otherwise.
Thus, to suppose, as Lafaye (_op. cit._ l.c.) does, that the satires of
Archilochus were interspersed with erotic passages, like Catull. xxxix.
(a poem he considers to be imitated from Archilochus), is to suppose an
anachronism.
[30] His date, and the general character of his poems, make it more
convenient to consider him here, than among the other choral lyric
writers, of whom we shall speak later.
[31] Ἀρχύτας δὲ ὁ ἁρμονικός, ὥς φησι Χαμαιλέων, Ἀλκμᾶνα γεγονέναι τῶν
ἐρωτικῶν μελῶν ἡγεμόνα, καὶ ἐκδοῦναι πρῶτον μέλος ἀκόλαστον, (ἀκόλαστον)
ὄντα καὶ περὶ τὰς γυναῖκας, καὶ τὴν τοιαύτην μοῦσαν (εἰσαγαγεῖν) εἰς τὰς
διατριβάς.
Athen. xiii. 600 F.
(The reading is uncertain.)
[32] It is noteworthy that Archytas (_ap._ Athen. _l.c._), when wishing
to illustrate Alcman’s love for this lady, can quote nothing more pointed
than the lines
τοῦθ’ ἁδεᾶν Μωσᾶν ἔδειξεν
δῶρον μάκαιρα παρσένων
ἁ ξανθὰ Μεγαλοστράτα.
[_Fr._ 37.]
[33] The fragments which may with some confidence be assigned to these,
probably early, poems, are 29 and 94. Besides this, the mention of
Tantalus (87, to which belongs 100) may well have been introduced by the
story of Ganymede; that of Niobe’s children (109) by the story of those
loves of theirs of which Sophocles afterwards wrote. The expression ἐν
Θεσσαλίῳ κλείτει (85) might well in such a poem have had reference to
Apollo and Admetus, whose love is held up as a model, like that of the
lovers in Theocritus xii. But most striking of all, perhaps, to the
modern reader, is the feeling that prompts Alcman to speak of the Spartan
girls as his “female boy-friends.” (καὶ Ἀλκμὰν τὰς ἐπεράστους κόρας ἀΐτας
λέγει. Hypoth. _ad Theocr._ xii.)
[34] Aristides ii. p. 40, Dind.
[35] Cp. _Fr._ 26.
[36] Alcman seems somehow to speak of girls like an old man. To think
of him so, renders far more natural the charming gallantry of his lines
on Agido, or the ὑποκορισμός with which his maidens speak, or his
confessions of how he likes his dinner served. One can think of those
Spartan girls laughing at their old Lydian dancing-master, as they ran
away down to the “baths of Eurotas,” while he went slowly home and made
them immortal.
[37] Anyhow, not in primitive times. One must go a long way down the
history of erotic poetry to find a “love-poet” who praises two ladies
with such impartiality as Alcman does Agido and Agesichora.
[38] Cp. Reitzenstein, _Epigramm und Skolion_, p. 47 _seqq._
[39] That the love thus generally recommended was purely sensual, goes
without saying; the first two or three lines of the first fragment are
proof enough of this.
In _Fr._ 1, l. 3, μείλιχα δῶρα is not very satisfactory, somehow. The
passage in _Hymn. Hom._ x. 2, where the expression occurs again, is
not quite parallel. In a less primitive poet, one would write without
hesitation μείλιχ’ ἄδωρα. For this use of μείλιχα cp. Pind. _Olymp._ i.
49, and for the thought _Anth. Pal._ v. 29, &c., &c. Line 4 again might
begin ἄνθε’ ἐπεί γ’ ἥβης.
[40] _Leont._ iii. 37, of which passage Poseidippus was doubtless
thinking in his epigram _Anth. Pal._ xii. 168.
[41] _Leont._ iii. 27 _seqq._ 47 _seqq._ &c.
[42] Suidas, it may be remarked, flatly contradicts one half of this view
when he says of Mimnermus ἔγραψε βιβλία πολλά.
[43] It is hardly justifiable to infer from the passage of Alexander
Aetolus _ap._ Athen. xv. 699 C, that Mimnermus addressed love-poems to
boys.
[44] It is as a philosopher that Horace (_Ep._ i. 6, 65) cites his
opinion:
si, Mimnermus uti censet, sine amore iocisque
nil est iucundum;
“censet,” the regular word for a philosopher. It is further worth
noticing that the Roman poets, when they mention Mimnermus, speak of him
as the inventor of the elegiac metre, not as an erotic poet. Cp. _e.g._
Prop. i. 9, 11.
[45] That the ancients already recognised the importance of this
particular feature in Anacreon is shown _inter alia_ by the emphasis laid
upon it by Critias (_ap._ Athen. xiii. 600 D).
[46] Vide _e.g._ Athen. xii. 540 E.
[47] Striking instances of this are to be found in _Fr._ 13, 76, etc.
[48] That this tone was specially characteristic of the poems addressed
to women, if not actually confined to these, is shown by the contrast
which the ancient critics made between Anacreon’s two styles of poetry.
Cp. Plut. _Amor._ 4, and _infra_ p. 86.
[49] The arguments of Reitzenstein, _Epig. u. Skol._ p. 81 _seqq._,
to prove that its date is not later than _circa_ 400, are not very
convincing.
[50] Vide Reitzenstein, _op. cit._ p. 52 _seqq._
[51] The exceptions would be the late “sophistical” pieces, such as that
in praise of wealth, 699 _seqq._ etc.
[52] It may be argued that in a work intended “for the use of schools”
the erotic passages would naturally be cut out. But even granted
that this collection was made for the use of schools, the system of
expurgation, which, while striking out the passages dealing with women,
has left what would nowadays be considered so much more objectionable, is
in itself sufficiently noteworthy. The next schoolmaster who undertakes a
school edition of Theocritus may lay this to heart.
[53] How different is the treatment of boy-love both in Book I. and also
in Book II., which is specially devoted to it, will be dwelt upon later.
[p. 88.]
[54] Vide Excursus A.
[55] Cp. Aristoph. _Vesp._ 1217 _seqq._
[56] The only exception, rather an interesting one, is _Scol._ 20, which,
evidently modelled on the one that precedes it, is the answer of a
woman-lover. But here again the vagueness (merely καλὴ γυνή, anyone will
do) shows what the singer means.
[57] Perhaps, too, those of Althaea (in the _Syotherae_) and Medea (_Fr._
54).
[58] _Fr._ 68; to the same poem evidently belongs _Fr._ 85.
[59] There is really no adequate reason for disbelieving the story in
Ptol. Hephaest. iv. (Gale, _Hist. poet. script. ant._ p. 320; cf. Bergk.
_ad Stesich._ _Fr._ 26.) What that story seems to imply is that Helen
of Himera deserted the poet, who was thereby induced to moralise on the
innate faithlessness of Helens in general. A subsequent reconciliation
with the lady in question then led to the celebrated apology. The greater
influence which women seem to have had over old men than over young,
will already have been noticed in the cases of Alcman and Anacreon. The
phenomenon could easily be explained, if it were necessary to explain
it.—Vide _e.g._ Eur. _Suppl._ 1098 _seqq._
[60] That in the original form of the legend Daphnis refuses to yield to
love, and dies sooner than submit, has been shown by Reitzenstein, _Epig.
u. Skol._ p. 193 _seqq._
But the passage from Aelian (_Var. Hist._ x. 18) never says that
Stesichorus told the story of Daphnis. It says he wrote bucolic poetry,
which is not necessarily the same thing. If only Theocritus, who wrote
bucolic poetry, had told some more of the story of Daphnis, the necessity
of reading a great quantity of literature on the subject would have been
spared us.
[61] It is rather tempting to think of this story as a Greek version of
Tristan and Isolde. Rhadina is going from Samos to be married to the
King of Corinth, and travels out with her cousin Leontichus on the same
ship. There the fatal mischief is done; they separate for a while, but
the charm is irresistible, and her lover hurries from Delphi to meet his
death at the hands of the Corinthian “King Marc.”
[62] The name of Cycnus seems at first sight suggestive, but the story as
related in the Scholiast on Pindar unfortunately proves nothing.
[63] He seems to have discussed or commented on the habits of the Spartan
ladies (_Fr._ 61), but whether to praise or blame we do not know.
[64] _e.g._ _Fr._ 37, where he makes Achilles marry Medea; or _Fr._ 38,
where Hermione becomes the wife of Diomed.