in character, but they are interesting as furnishing what is, perhaps,
the first complimentary notice of the ἑταίρα in literature. (_Fr._ 24.)
[66] The Sicilian Telestes makes rather an interesting remark about
Athene when she throws away the flute because it spoils her looks:
τί γάρ νιν εὐηράτοιο κάλλεος
ὀξὺς ἔρως ἔτειρεν,
ᾇ παρθενίαν ἄγαμον καὶ ἄπαιδ’ ἀπένειμε Κλωθώ;
But, as we have already seen, men took more interest in women in Magna
Graecia than in Greece itself.
[67] The _Phaedra_, _Oenomaus_, and perhaps the _Colchides_.
[68] Among the extant plays there is only the _Hippolytus_, and even in
this, probably to the Greek mind a great part of the interest centred
in the relations between Hippolytus and Theseus, and in their argument,
where both start from the assumption that it would be absurd to suppose
that the former could possibly have been in love with Phaedra. Of the
lost plays it is hard to speak with confidence, but certainly the
_Andromeda_, _Phoenix_, and _Aeolus_, seem to have been the only three in
which the love element was at all the leading motive. The heroine of the
_Meleager_ was probably Althaea, not Atalanta. The _Stheneboea_ merely
describes the vengeance of Bellerophon for the treachery of his hosts.
In the _Antigone_ the “love-story” has all taken place before the action
begins. Of the _Alcestis_ and the _Protesilaus_ we shall speak elsewhere,
pp. 57, 99.
[69] That is to say, two only in which it furnished the main interest.
That it lent a peculiar character to various other tragedies will be
shown further on.
[70] Cp. what has been said above (p. 35) in the case of Ibycus; the
parallel is a remarkable and important one.
[71] The statement to this effect in Aristoph. _Ran._ 1044, is so
definite that it seems necessary to infer from it that, in spite of the
words in Schol. _ad Apoll. Rhod._ i. 773, the erotic incident in the
_Hypsipyle_ was very little emphasised.
[72] _Suppl._ 996 _seqq._
[73] _Theb._ 182 _seqq._
[74]
πῶς οὐχὶ τἀνάλωμα γίγνεται πικρόν,
ἄνδρας γυναικῶν οὕνεχ’ αἱμάξαι πέδον;
_Suppl._ 476.
καὶ γυναικὸς οὕνεκα
πόλιν διημάθυνεν Ἀργεῖον δάκος.
_Agam._ 823.
[75]
οὕτω γυναικὸς οὐ προτιμήσω μόρον
ἄνδρα κτανούσης.
_Eum._ 739.
To his views as to the physical unimportance of the mother, as compared
with the father (_e.g._ _Eum._ 657 _seqq._), I shall have occasion to
refer later. See Excursus. [This Excursus does not seem to have been
written.]
[76] How far Aeschylus has followed the _Oresteia_ of Stesichorus, and
how far he has modified it, cannot now be known; but it seems reasonable
to suppose that, in all probability, the Clytemnestra of the latter poet
was a good deal more in love with Aegisthus than is the Clytemnestra
of the former. This would explain some incongruities in the Aeschylean
character, such as her sudden protestations of affection for Aegisthus
when dead, after her apparent indifference to him when living. (_Cho._
893, etc.) That she should kill Agamemnon out of revenge for the death
of Iphigeneia and through jealousy of Cassandra, are perhaps additions
of Aeschylus, to whose Athenian mind it seemed impossible that a woman
should murder her husband merely because she was fond of another man.
[77] One may say, of course, if one likes, that this is all ironical,
that she does not mean it, and that in reality she is as jealous as
anyone else could be, as her subsequent actions show. Personally, I do
not believe that the passage is meant to be in the least ironical; the
absence of jealousy is always a feature of the model wife (_cp._ Eur.
_And._ 222, and numerous similar passages); but even if this be granted,
it makes no difference to the point at all. Whatever the audience are to
think, the characters on the stage are supposed to take her seriously;
and this fact throws a sufficient light on what was then thought to be
the duty of a loving wife.
It is satisfactory to notice that neither does Heracles attach any
undue importance to Iole. In his last words to Hyllus, after elaborate
instructions as to how his funeral-pyre is to be built, he adds casually—
ἀλλ’ ἀρκέσει καὶ ταῦτα· πρόσνειμαι δέ μοι
χάριν βραχεῖαν πρὸς μακροῖς ἄλλοις διδούς.
“Just marry Iole for me, will you?” (l. 1216.)
[78] In this same play, the reader must be careful not to misunderstand
the motives of Haemon’s suicide. He does not kill himself out of grief
for Antigone, but out of shame (αὑτῷ χολωθείς) at having attacked his
father. That love for a woman should have made him so far forget himself
was a disgrace not to be borne.
[79] The words of l. 144 _seqq._ at once suggest Catullus lxii. esp. 39
_seqq._ But this poem of Catullus is generally admitted to be, if not an
actual translation, at least a paraphrase of Sappho; hence it is far more
probable that Sophocles copied Sappho here, than that Catullus copied
Sophocles there.
Another instance in which a tragedian copied an _Epithalamium_ of Sappho
is furnished by Aesch. _Suppl._ 998. _Cp._ Sappho _Fr._ 91, Longus
_Past._ 3, 33, and my _Apospasmata Critica_ (Oxford, Blackwell, 1892), p.
5.
[80] A great deal of light would be thrown on all this intricate subject
if only one could find out how far, if at all, Sophocles was influenced
by Euripides. Euripides, as we shall see later, was always ready to
sympathise with women who suffered from the unreasonable treatment of the
time, but it does not seem _prima facie_ probable that this particular
trait should have had influence on anyone so Athenian as Sophocles.
Anyhow, these two passages prove nothing.
[81] This is exactly the idea of the well-known Ἔρως chorus in the
_Antigone_. (l. 781). There, too, love is unavoidable (καί σ’ οὔτ’
ἀθανάτων φύξιμος οὐδεὶς, οὔθ’ ἁμερίων σέ γ’ ἀνθρώπων), it results in
madness (ὁ δ’ ἔχων μέμηνεν, “the stricken one is mad,” as the Romans said
“habet” of their gladiators), and the chief damage it does is to property
(ὃς ἐν κτήμασι, πίπτεις). Like Eresichthon’s father, what the Chorus most
object to is the expense.
[82] [p. 38.]
[83] Vide Excursus B.
[84] This feature is of course by no means peculiar to Sophocles; it is
prominent both in Aeschylus and Euripides (_e.g._ the pathetic passage in
_Orest._ 1041 _seqq._), and doubtless for the same reason. In Sophocles,
however, perhaps owing merely to the chance which has preserved certain
plays while others have been lost, it plays a particularly important
part. Not only are the _Antigone_ and the _Electra_ almost entirely
devoted to it, but the one ray of light in the 1800 lines of the _Oedipus
Coloneus_ is the farewell of Polynices to his sister. (l. 1414 _seqq._)
[85] Soph. _Ant._ 909 _seqq._ This seems the natural and obvious way of
taking these words, but whichever way one takes them they do not imply
any very great respect for matrimony.
Whether the lines are Sophocles’ or not is of course indifferent in this
connection, as everyone is agreed that, if an interpolation, they are a
very early one.
[86] This is not, I think, saying too much. A story like that of Canace,
however powerfully it might affect its audience, was, after all, even in
later times, looked upon as something quite exceptional in Greece. (Cp.
the later Athenian view on the subject as illustrated by Plaut. _Epid._
v. i. 45, _seqq._)
[87] It is worth while, however, to notice that even the women themselves
in Aristophanes are made to confess that this so-called misogyny is, in
truth, merely realism. Cp. _e.g._ Aristoph. _Thesm._ 389 _seqq._, _Eccl._
214 _seqq._
[88] _e.g._ _Fr._ 822, etc.
[89] _Fr._ 321.
[90] _Hipp._ 373 _seqq._ Tempting as it is to take this passage as
ironical, it would almost certainly be wrong to do so.
[91] _Hec._ 342 _seqq._
[92] See Excursus C. It is true that in the intrigue of Macareus and
Canace there is some reason to believe that the former was, contrary to
the usual habit of these legends, the leading spirit; but in the _Aeolus_
of Euripides this beginning of the story seems to have only been alluded
to in the prologue, and not to have formed part of the action.—Cp.
Antiphanes, _Aeol. Fr._ 1.
[93] The most striking example is perhaps the _Iphigeneia in Aulis_, but
there are plenty of others.
Instances in which women are represented as in love with men are somewhat
commoner, as they were commoner in the legends; but the part they play in
Euripides, as a whole, has been greatly exaggerated. Cp. p. 38.
[94] ἤρων· τὸ μαίνεσθαι δ’ ἄρ’ ἦν ἔρως βροτοῖς.—_Fr._ 161 (_Antigone_).
Cp. _Hipp._ 443 _seqq._
[95] Suidas (s.v. Ἀναγυράσιος) τούτου δὲ (τοῦ θεοῦ) ἐξέκοψέ τις τὸ ἄλσος·
ὁ δὲ τῷ υἱῷ αὐτοῦ ἐπέμηνε τὴν παλλακήν ... ἱστορεῖ δὲ Ἱερώνυμος ἐν τῷ
περὶ τραγῳδοποιῶν, ἀπεικάζων τούτοις τὸν Εὐριπίδου Φοίνικα. Cp. id. s.v.
ἐναύειν. Vide Nauck, _Trag. Graec. Frag._ p. 621.
[96] The difference is described with wonderful force by Maximus Tyrius
(xxv. 4): ὁ μὲν ἐφ’ ἡδονὴν οἰστρεῖ, ὁ δὲ κάλλους ἐρᾶ· ὁ μὲν ἄκων νοσεῖ, ὁ
δὲ ἑκὼν ἐρᾷ· ὁ μὲν ἐπ’ ἀγαθῷ ἐρᾷ τοῦ ἐρωμένου, ὁ δὲ ἐπ’ ὀλέθρῳ ἀμφοῖν.—I
have spoken here merely of women because we have so little absolute
evidence as to men, but what little we have all goes to prove that
their view of “love” was at least as sensual as that of the women, and
if anything even more brutal; and, anyhow, there is no evidence of the
contrary. It is very hard satisfactorily to compare Euripides with people
like Asclepiades, who are the earliest representatives we know of the
modern spirit, for this very reason, that while the former nearly always
discusses the matter from the point of view of the woman, the latter do
so with almost equal regularity, as far as we can now judge, from the
point of view of the man. One thing, however, is clear enough at the
very outset. While Euripides regards the relation between man and woman
as entirely based on the sexual instinct, the Alexandrians have from the
first imported into it that further feeling of comradeship and mutual
self-sacrifice which had before been peculiar to the relation between man
and man. For obvious reasons this great change first became noticeable on
the side of the man (for the influence of Sappho’s school had probably by
this time become inappreciable), but its effects are evident enough as
soon as the Alexandrians begin to talk of a woman’s love. The difference
between, say, the Medea of Apollonius and the most refined heroine of the
Attic drama is one, not of degree, but of kind.
[97] _Andr._ 205 _seqq._
[98] The early Greek view of “love” is put here with almost revolting
crudeness. Hermione’s devotion to her husband and Helen’s desertion of
hers, are due to one and the same cause—sensual passion.
[99]
γυναῖκα γὰρ χρὴ πάντα συγχωρεῖν πόσει,
ἥτις φρενήρης.
(_Elect._ 1052.)
[100]
ἀλλ’ ἐς τοσοῦτον ἥκεθ’ ὥστ’ ὀρθουμένης
εὐνῆς γυναῖκες πάντ’ ἔχειν νομίζετε,
ἢν δ’ αὖ γένηται ξυμφορά τις ἐς λέχος κ.τ.λ.
(_Med._ 569.)
ΙΑ. λέχους σφε κἠξίωσας οὕνεκα κτανεῖν;
ΜΗ. σμικρὸν γυναικὶ πῆμα τοῦτ’ εἶναι δοκεῖς;
ΙΑ. ἥτις γε σώφρων.
(_ibid._ 1367.)
[101] πᾶσα γὰρ δούλη πέφυκεν ἀνδρὸς ἡ σώφρων γυνή.—_Fr._ 545 (_Oedipus_).
[102] Cp. Andromache in _Tro._ 642 _seqq._ Other instances are numerous.
This view and that as to jealousy evidently hang together, for it must
be admitted that if a wife considers it her duty to become so supremely
uninteresting and stupid as such a method of life must inevitably make
her, it is also her duty to be lenient to her husband if he occasionally
seeks for entertainment outside the domestic circle.
[103]
οὐ γὰρ ποτ’ ἄνδρα τὸν σοφὸν γυναικὶ χρὴ
δοῦναι χαλινοὺς.
_Fr._ 463 (_Cressae_); cp. _Fr._ 464.
[104] _Tro._ 1012 _seqq._; cp. _Hipp._ 419 _seqq._
[105] _i.e._ her means of livelihood.
τὰ μὲν γὰρ ἄλλα δεύτερ’ ἂν πάσχοι γυνή·
ἀνδρὸς δ’ ἁμαρτάνουσ’ ἁμαρτάνει βίου.
(_Andr._ 372; cp. _ibid._ 904.)
[106] _Fr._ 402 (_Ino_).
[107] Cp. _Andr._ 1279 _seqq._; _Fr._ 215 (_Antiope_), &c.
[108]
οὐκ ἔστι τοῦδε παισὶ κάλλιον γέρας,
ἢ πατρὸς ἐσθλοῦ κἀγαθοῦ πεφυκέναι,
γαμεῖν τ’ ἀπ’ ἐσθλῶν· ὃς δὲ νικηθεὶς πόθῳ
κακοῖς ἐκοινώνησεν, οὐκ ἐπαινέσω,
τέκνοις ὄνειδος οὕνεχ’ ἡδονῆς λιπεῖν.
(_Heracl._ 297.)
[109] To what extent it also figured in that strange play, the
_Protesilaus_, cannot now be known, but it is only probable that it was
prominent there also.
[110] Here again one almost marvels at the way in which Euripides misses
an opportunity. The contrast between the joy of Alcestis at saving
Admetus’ life, and her grief for her ruined ideal, would have furnished
as splendid a conflict of emotions as any dramatist could desire.
Athenian taste, however, preferred that she should die congratulating him
on having had such a wife, while he stands by expressing his deep regret
that he cannot accompany her, as Charon does not issue return tickets.
For a further examination of the motives of Admetus, however, see p. 101.
[111] It must be admitted that Jason has a higher opinion of his own
influence (_Med._ 942 _seqq._), if, indeed, this be the right way to take
the passage.
[112] This seems to have been still more the case in the first version
of the play, where Hippolytus appears actually as a βουκόλος, or ascetic
worshipper of Artemis, and where he is promised immortality as the reward
of his constancy. See Reitzenstein, _Epig. u. Skol._ p. 210 _seqq._ and
Excursus D.
[113]
oἱ σώφρονες yὰp οὐχ ἑκόντες, ἀλλ’ ὅμως
κακῶν ἐρῶσι.
(_Hipp._ 358.)
[114] One may argue, of course, that Hippolytus, as a devotee of Orpheus,
etc., would be naturally more prone to ignore the “love-element” than a
person of more human passions, and that this strange disproportion in his
speech is a mark of his character. Personally I doubt this, as, firstly,
the characters of the Athenian drama, when making their set speeches,
generally quite forget who they are—indeed, the wonder is they don’t
sometimes slip into an ἄνδρες δικασταί—and, secondly, if Hippolytus had
been meant to slur over an important part of his subject, his reasons
for so doing would have been more definitely explained. The conclusion
seems to me inevitable, that neither Hippolytus nor Theseus thought the
possibility of the former’s having been in love with Phaedra worthy of
serious discussion.
[115] Mahaffy, _Class. Gr. Lit._ vol. i. p. 370.
[116] It is true that, later on, the magnificent heroism of Iphigeneia
extorts from Achilles what is perhaps one of the earliest declarations of
love from a man to a woman that we know:
Ἀγαμέμνονος παῖ, μακάριόν μέ τις θεῶν
ἔμελλε θήσειν, εἰ τύχοιμι σῶν γάμων·
ζηλῶ δὲ σοῦ μὲν Ἑλλάδ’, Ἑλλάδος δὲ σέ.
(l. 1405.)
But this utterance, made under such exceptional circumstances, cannot
counteract the effect of what has gone before; and, anyhow, it is a
curiously isolated expression, and rather a qualified one.
[117] Worthy of notice is the excellent touch which makes this man,
though poor, yet a member of a good family. (l. 37.) As Euripides knew
well enough, a son of the soil would have been incapable of even this
much refinement of feeling. We may observe, by the way, that Orestes
expresses himself as very sceptical of the whole story—anyhow as far as
motives go. (l. 253 _seqq._)
[118] _Hel._ 566 _seqq._ Still more offensive, of course, are the
suggestions of Ion to his mother (_Ion_ 1523 _seqq._); but there the
offence is against decency, not against romance.
[119] Except occasionally, as already noticed, in the case of close
blood-relations.
[120] Such erotic legends as he does introduce are treated with strangely
little sympathy. The best (in the extant odes) is that of Pelops and
Hippodameia (_Olymp._ 1), where the writer has, perhaps, been roused to
a little warmth by the story of Pelops and Poseidon that has immediately
preceded. The legend of Peleus and Hippolyte (_Nem._ 5) is noticeable as
being, strangely enough, the only one in which the woman is represented
as taking the initiative; but this is doubtless to be explained by the
fact that nearly all these stories are descriptive of the amours of
_gods_. The story of Jason and Medea is utterly spoiled in _Pyth._ 4.
In that of Apollo and Coronis (_Pyth._ 3) only the unfaithfulness of
the nymph and her punishment are dwelt upon. The other erotic stories
told—_i.e._ those of Apollo and Euadne (_Olymp._ 6), Apollo and Cyrene
(_Pyth._ 9), Zeus and the daughter of Opoeis (_Olymp._ 9), Ixion and Hera
(_Pyth._ 2), are merely concerned with seductions of the most commonplace
kind. The story of Rhoecus and the Hamadryad (_Fr._ 165) is the only one
of importance alluded to in the fragments; but here it is uncertain how
far Pindar told the story, and how far he merely alluded to it.
[121] [On the position occupied by women in the Old Comedy compare _Women
in Greek Comedy_, § 3, 4.]
[122] Cp. Theocr. vii. 39.
[123] One or two points are perhaps worth noticing in this connection. It
is usual to assume that the Battis of Philetas was an Hetaera; but the
evidence seems rather to suggest that she was his wife. The way in which
she is spoken of in Ovid, _Trist._ i. 6, 2, _Pont._ iii. 1, 57, (in the
former place coupled with the Lyde of Antimachus,) seems to support this
view; and, at any rate, there does not appear to be any evidence to the
contrary. The personal character of Philetas, as we learn it from various
notices of him, seems also rather to point in the same direction; though
this is not, of course, an argument that can be pressed. (It would be
interesting to know whether the fact that Philetas is apparently never
alluded to under a nickname, like so many others of the Alexandrian
writers, was due to this austerity of character.)
Whether these elegies were as sober and as little sensual in tone as
those of Antimachus (cp. _infra_, p. 110), it is impossible now to say;
though the two passages cited from Ovid both seem indirectly to imply
that they were, and there is certainly nothing in the fragments of
Philetas which would lead one to infer that they were not. It need hardly
be added that the passage in Ovid, _Ars Amat._ iii. 329 _seqq._ proves
nothing, for the “lascivia” there ascribed to Sappho is obviously not
meant to apply to all the other poets mentioned in the list, or Vergil’s
name would hardly appear in it.
[124] In the poems of Theognis, which are practically epigrams, in the
later sense of the word. The epigrams of Plato, if genuine, would be
another even more striking instance.
[125] Whether the words are to be taken as really seriously meant is, of
course, doubtful, though one’s instinctive distrust of their sincerity is
perhaps misplaced; for, after all, this is very primitive poetry of its
kind. That such words should have been written at all is the remarkable
point about them.
[126] [Cp. p. 81, n. 1.]
[127] Vide _e.g._ _Anth. Pal._ v. 158.
[128] The reading ποτέ is certainly happier than παρά. _Cp. Theocr._
xxix. 39; vide _infra_ p. 84.
[129] xii. 153 is further interesting as one of the very few of the
earlier epigrams, which profess to describe the woman’s feelings.
[130] In the _Antilais_; vide Meineke, _Com. Fr._ iii. p. 365.
[131] The above instances may serve to give some idea of the prevailing
character of Asclepiades’ epigrams; on the wonderful grace and charm
of this new love-poetry, it is needless to dwell. The best and truest
description of Asclepiades and his followers ever given, is that of
Meleager, when he calls them the wild-flowers in his Garland.
ἐν δὲ Ποσείδιππόν τε καὶ Ἡδύλον, ἄγρι’ ἀρούρης,
Σικελίδεώ τ’ ἀνέμοις ἄνθεα φυόμενα.
_Anth. Pal._ iv. 1, 45.
[132] Those who do not care to read the proof of this really self-evident
fact, can skip the next 28 pages, and pick up the thread again on p. 103.
[133] _Vide_ Rohde, _Der griech. Roman_, p. 42.
[134] His sorrow for Briseis does not, of course, as already observed,
go very deep, as is sufficiently shown by the little effect which her
restoration has on him; and his indignation at her loss is doubtless due
to wounded self-love, more than to love of any other description. But,
none the less, the introduction of such an incident shows clearly how
little the purely military hero was in sympathy with Greek ideas.
[135] There is an elaborate analysis of this erotic element in Max. Tyr.
xxiv. 8: καὶ τὸν ἀνδρεῖον (ἔρωτα) ἐπὶ τῷ Πατρόκλῳ, τὸν πόνῳ κτητόν καὶ
χρόνῳ, καὶ μέχρι θανάτου προερχόμενον, νεῶν καὶ καλῶν ἀμφοτέρων, καὶ
σωφρόνων, τοῦ μὲν παιδεύοντος, τοῦ δὲ παιδευομένου, ὁ μὲν ἄχθεται, ὁ
δὲ παραμυθεῖται, ὁ μὲν ᾄδει, ὁ δὲ ἀκροᾶται. ἐρωτικὸν δὲ καὶ τὸ τυχεῖν
ἐθέλοντα ἐξουσίας πρὸς μάχην, δακρῦσαι ὡς οὐκ ἀνεξομένου τοῦ ἐραστοῦ· ὁ
δὲ ἐφίησι, καὶ τοῖς αὐτοῦ ὅπλοις κοσμεῖ, καὶ βραδύνοντος περιδεῶς ἔχει,
καὶ ἀποθανόντος ἀποθανεῖν ἐρᾷ, καὶ τὴν ὀργὴν κατατίθεται. ἐρωτικὰ δὲ καὶ
τὰ ἐνύπνια, καὶ τὰ ὀνείρατα, καὶ τὰ δάκρυα, καὶ τὸ τελευταῖον δῶρον ἤδη
θαπτομένῳ ἡ κόμη.
It need hardly be pointed out that this central pair is not an isolated
phenomenon. Ajax and Teucer (of whom we shall have occasion to speak
again, p. 99), Idomeneus and Meriones, Diomed and Sthenelus, are obvious
examples of similar relations among the subordinate characters.
[136] Its prevalence among the Lacedaemonians, in spite of the
influential position of women in that state, is vouched for by the
usage of the word λακωνίζω. Vide Meineke, _Com. Fr._ ii. pp. 200, 1088.
(The derivation mentioned by Photius, Meineke _l.c._, seems due to
Aristophanes, and need not be taken seriously.)
[137] Athen. xiii. 561 E. On this principle, the Ἱεpὸς Λόχος founded
by Epaminondas was composed entirely of youths and their lovers,
παιδικῶν γὰρ παρόντων ἐραστὴς πᾶν ὁτιοῦν ἕλοιτ’ ἂν παθεῖν ἢ δειλοῦ δόξαν
ἀπενέγκασθαι. Athen. xiii. 602 A, cp. 561 F; Max. Tyr. xxiv. 2.
[138] Athen. xiii. 561 D. Cp. Paus. ix. 31, p. 771.
[139] Athen. xiii. 609 F.
[140] Schol. _ad Theocr._ xii. 29.
[141] This view was, of course, especially prominent at Athens, where
Harmodius and Aristogeiton had become well-nigh the ‘patron saints’ of
the democracy. Very interesting in this connection is the remark in Ath.
xiii. 562 A, that the Peisistratidae, after their expulsion, were the
first persons who ventured to slander this form of intimacy. Cp. too Max.
Tyr. xxiv. 2. The important part that it played in, at any rate, the
old-fashioned Athenian education is shown by more than one passage in
Aristophanes, of which the most striking is perhaps _Nubes_, 972 _seqq._;
cp. 1002 _seqq._
[142] Athen. xiii. 602 D. διὰ τοὺς τοιούτους οὖν ἔρωτας οἱ τύραννοι
(πολέμιοι γὰρ αὐτοῖς αὗται αἱ φιλίαι) τὸ παράπαν ἐκώλυον τοὺς παιδικοὺς
ἔρωτας, πανταχόθεν αὐτοὺς ἐκκόπτοντες.
[143] The gymnasium is always a prominent feature in this connection.
Cp. Catull. lxiii. 64; _Anth. Pal._ xii. 123; Ach. Tat. ii. 38, πάσης δὲ
γυναικῶν μωραλοιφίας ἥδιον ὄδωδεν ὁ τῶν παίδων ἱδρώς.
[144] Athen. _loc. cit._
[145] Athen. xiii. 561 D. σεμνόν τινα τὸν Ἔρωτα καὶ παντὸς αἰσχροῦ
κεχωρισμένον. Very characteristic in this respect is the story of
Agesilaus, related in Xen. _Ages._ v. 4, 5; cp. Max. Tyr. xxv. 5, xxvi.
8. Other noticeable instances will appear in the next few pages.
[146] Demosth. 1401.
[147] Hence it is not without significance that, according to a common
story, the originator of this form of intimacy was said to be Orpheus.
See Ovid, _Met._ x. 83; Phanocles, _Fr._ 1.
[148] Antimachus already seems to have been inclined to ridicule the
story of Heracles and Hylas. (Vide _Fr._ 8.) Plato and “Platonic” love
are, of course, stock subjects throughout the Middle Comedy. (Vide _e.g._
Amphis, _Dithyramb. Fr._ 2; Meineke, _Com. Fr._ iii. p. 307.) The nature
of this general attack on the philosophers must not be misunderstood. It
is an error to suppose that the more old-fashioned among the Athenians
disapproved, in the first instance, of the philosophers because they were
paederasts; it would be truer to say that they turned against paederasty
because it was so intimately associated with philosophy.
[149] The poems of Strato form, of course, an exception; but then the
incidents on which they are based are professedly the product of his
own, not always very charming, imagination. Cp. _Anth. Pal_. xii. 258. A
further fact worth noticing is that abstract love-poems (_e.g._ xii. 50)
are regularly placed among the Παιδικά.
[150] The reader will perhaps be thinking of another love “passing the
love of women.” One might write many pages on the differences between
these two similar emotions.