Chapter IV.
§ 1. Freedom of intercourse between unmarried persons at Sparta. § 2. Marriage ceremonies. § 3. Age of marriage. § 4. Relations of husband and wife. § 5. Different treatment of women among the Ionians. § 6. Παιδεραστία of Sparta. § 7. And of Crete. § 8. Origin of this custom.
1. We now proceed to describe the different relations in the domestic life of the Dorians; and first, that between man and wife. Here it will be necessary to contradict the idea, that the duties of private life were but little esteemed by the Doric race, particularly at Sparta, and were sacrificed to the duty owed to the community. The Lacedæmonian maxim was in direct opposition to this doctrine; viz., that the door of his court[1341] was the boundary of every [pg 291] man's freedom:[1342] without, all owned the authority of the state; within, the master of the house ruled as lord on his own ground;[1343] and the rights of domestic life, notwithstanding their frequent collision with the public institutions, were more respected than at Athens. At the same time, however, a peculiar national custom, which pervaded the whole system of legislation, prevailed throughout these relations with a force and energy, which we, taking the accounts of the ancients as our guide, will endeavour now to examine. It has been above remarked how, in accordance with the manners of the east, but in direct opposition to the later habits of the Greeks,[1344] a free intercourse in public was permitted by the Dorians to the youth of both sexes, who were brought into contact particularly at festivals and choruses.[1345] Hence Homer represents the Cretan chorus as composed of young men and women, who dance hand in hand.[1346] At Sparta in particular the young men lived in the presence of the unmarried women, and as their derision was an object of dread, so to be the theme of their praise was the highest reward for noble actions.[1347] Hence it was very possible [pg 292] at Sparta, that affection and love, although not of a romantic nature, should take possession of the heart: but at Athens, as far as my recollection goes, we have not a single instance of a man having loved a free-born woman, and marrying her from any strong affection, whilst a single narrative of Herodotus[1348] contains two love stories at Sparta. How many opportunities may have been given by the festivals, as for instance the Hyacinthia, at which the Spartan damsels were seen going about in κάναθρα (ornamented cars peculiar to the country, which were also used in the procession to the temple of Helen at Therapne), and racing in chariots in the midst of assembled multitudes.[1349] Accordingly, the beauty of her women, the most beautiful in all Greece,[1350] was at Sparta more than any other town, an object of general admiration, in a nation where beauty of form was particularly felt and esteemed.[1351]
2. Two things were, however, requisite as an introduction and preparation to marriage at Sparta, first, betrothing on the part of the father;[1352] secondly, the seizure of the bride. The latter was clearly an ancient [pg 293] national custom, founded on the idea that the young woman could not surrender her freedom and virgin purity unless compelled by the violence of the stronger sex. They married, says Plutarch, by ravishing. The bridegroom brought the young virgin, having carried her off from the chorus of maidens or elsewhere, to the bride's maid, who cut short her hair, and left her lying in a man's dress and shoes, without a light, on a bed of rushes, until the bridegroom returned from the public banquet, carried the bride to the nuptial couch, and loosened her girdle.[1353] And this intercourse was for some time carried on clandestinely, till the man brought his wife, and frequently her mother, into his house. That this usage was retained to the last days of Sparta may be inferred from the fact, that the young wife of Panteus was still in the house of her parents, and remained there, when he went with Cleomenes to Egypt.[1354] A similar custom must have prevailed in Crete, where we find, that the young persons who were dismissed at the same time from the agele, were immediately married, but did not till some time after introduce their wives into their own house.[1355] The children born before this took place [pg 294] were probably called παρθενίαι;[1356] they were in general considered in all respects equal to those born at home; but in the first Messenian war particular circumstances seem to have made it impossible to provide them with lots of land;[1357] and hence they became the founders of Tarentum.[1358]
3. The age of marriage was fixed by the ancient Greeks and western nations much later than at a subsequent period by those of the east. Following the former, the laws of Sparta did not allow women of too tender an age to be disposed of in marriage. The women were generally those at the highest pitch of youthful vigour[1359] (called in Rhodes ἀνθεστηριάδες),[1360] and for the men, about the age of thirty was esteemed the most proper, as we find in Hesiod,[1361] Plato,[1362] and even Aristotle. Public actions might however be brought against those who married too late (γραφὴ ὀψιγαμίου), to which those also were liable who had entered into unsuitable marriages (γραφὴ κακογαμίου), [pg 295] and those who remained unmarried (γραφὴ ἀγαμίου).[1363] It is well known that these laws have been blamed as a violation of the rights of individuals, and even a profanation of the rite of marriage: but these censors should have remembered that they were judging those institutions by principles which the founders of them would not have recognised. For the Spartans considered marriage, not as a private relation, about which the state had little or no interest, but as a public institution, in order to rear up a strong and healthy progeny to the nation. In Solon's legislation, marriage was also placed under the inspection of the state, and an action for not marrying (γραφὴ ἀγαμίου[1364]), though merely as a relic of antiquity, existed at Athens. It is nevertheless true that marriage, especially in Sparta, was, to a certain degree, viewed with a primitive simplicity, which shocks the feelings of more refined ages, as the peculiar object of matrimony was never kept out of sight. Leonidas, when despatched to Thermopylæ, is said to have left as a legacy to his wife Gorgo the maxim, Marry nobly, and produce a noble offspring;[1365] and when Acrotatus had fought bravely in the war against Pyrrhus, the women followed him through the town, and some of the older ones shouted after him, “Go, Acrotatus, enjoy yourself with Chelidonis, and beget valiant sons for [pg 296] Sparta.”[1366] Hence we may perceive the reason why in various cases[1367] (such as are known to us have been mentioned above[1368]) Lycurgus not only allowed, but enjoined the marriage duties to be transferred to another; always, however, providing that the sanctity of the marriage union should be for a certain time sacrificed to that which the Doric race considered as of higher importance, viz., the maintenance of the family. That these cases were so defined by custom, as to leave but little room for the effects of caprice or passion, is evident from the infrequency of adultery at Sparta:[1369] but the above aim justified even king Anaxandridas, when, contrary to all national customs, he cohabited with two wives,[1370] who lived without doubt in separate houses. To marry foreign women was certainly forbidden to all Spartans, and to the Heraclidæ by a separate rhetra;[1371] contrary to the custom in other Grecian towns, especially Athens, whose princes in early times, as Megacles, Miltiades, &c., frequently contracted marriages with foreigners.
4. The domestic relation of the wife to her husband [pg 297] among the Dorians was in general the same as that of the ancient western nations, described by Homer as universal among the Greeks, and which existed at Rome till a late period; the only difference being, that the peculiarities of the custom were preserved by the Dorians more strictly than elsewhere. It formed a striking contrast with the habits of the Ionic Athenians, with whom the ancient custom of Greece was almost entirely supplanted by that of the east.[1372] Amongst the Ionians of Asia, the wife (as we are informed by Herodotus[1373]) shared indeed the bed, but not the table of her husband; she dared not call him by his name, but addressed him with the title of lord, and lived secluded in the interior of the house: on this model the most important relations between man and wife were regulated at Athens. But amongst the Dorians of Sparta, the wife[1374] was honoured by her husband with the title of mistress (δέσποινα),[1375] (a gallantry belonging to the north of Greece, and also practised by the Thessalians[1376]), which was used neither ironically nor unmeaningly. Nay, so strange did the importance [pg 298] which the Lacedæmonian women enjoyed, and the influence which they exercised as the managers of their household, and mothers of families, appear to the Greeks, at a time when the prevalence of Athenian manners prevented a due consideration for national customs, that Aristotle[1377] supposed Lycurgus to have attempted, but without success, to regulate the life of women as he had that of the men; and the Spartans were frequently censured for submitting to the yoke of their wives.[1378] Nevertheless Alcman, generally a great admirer of the beauty of Lacedæmonian women, could say, “It becomes a man to say much, and a woman to rejoice at all she hears.”[1379] In accusing the women of Sparta, however, for not essentially assisting their country in times of necessity, Aristotle has in the first place required of them a duty which even in Sparta lay out of their sphere, and in the second place, his assertion has been sufficiently contradicted by the events of a subsequent period, in the last days of Sparta, which acquired a surprising lustre from female valour.[1380] On the whole, however, little as the Athenians esteemed their own women, they involuntarily [pg 299] revered the heroines of Sparta, such as Gorgo the wife of Leonidas, Lampito the daughter of Leotychidas, the wife of Archidamus and mother of Agis;[1381] and this feeling is sometimes apparent even in the coarse jests of Aristophanes.
5. How this indulgent treatment of the women among the Dorians produced a state of opinion entirely different from that prevalent at Athens, has been intimated above, and will be further explained hereafter. In general it may be remarked, that while among the Ionians women were merely considered in an inferior and sensual light, and though the Æolians allowed their feelings a more exalted tone, as is proved by the amatory poetesses of Lesbos;[1382] the Dorians, as well at Sparta as in the south of Italy, were almost the only nation who esteemed the higher attributes of the female mind as capable of cultivation.
It is hardly necessary to remark, that in considering the rights and duties of the wife, as represented in the above pages, to apply to the whole Doric race, allowance must be made for the alterations introduced into different towns, particularly by foreign intercourse and luxury. At Corinth, for instance, the institution of the sacred slaves (ἱερόδουλοι) in the temple of Aphrodite, probably introduced from Asia Minor, produced a most prejudicial effect on the morals of that city, [pg 300] and made it the ancient and great resort of courtesans.[1383]
6. Having now considered the personal relations between the sexes, we next come to those depending on difference of age; which from the Doric principle of the elders instructing the younger, are intimately connected with education.[1384] But before we enter on that subject, it will be necessary to speak of a connexion (termed by the Greeks παιδεραστία), which, so long as it was regulated by the ancient Doric principles, to be recognised both in the Cretan laws and those of Lycurgus, had great influence on the instruction of youth. We will first state the exact circumstances of this relation, and then make some general remarks on it; but without examining it in a moral point of view, which does not fall within the scope of this work.
At Sparta the party loving was called εἰσπνήλας,[1385] [pg 301] and his affection was termed a breathing in, or inspiring (εἰσπνεῖν[1386]); which expresses the pure and mental connexion between the two persons, and corresponds with the name of the other, viz., ἀΐτας,[1387] i.e., listener or hearer. Now it appears to have been the practice for every youth of good character to have his lover;[1388] and, on the other hand, every well-educated man was bound by custom to be the lover of some youth.[1389] Instances of this connexion are furnished by several of the royal family of Sparta; thus Agesilaus, while he still belonged to the herd of youths, was the hearer of Lysander,[1390] and himself had in his turn also a hearer;[1391] his son Archidamus was the lover of the son of Sphodrias, the noble Cleonymus;[1392] Cleomenes the Third was, when a young man, the hearer of Xenares,[1393] and later in life the lover of the brave Panteus.[1394] The connexion usually originated from the proposal of the lover; yet it was necessary that the listener should accept him from real affection, as a regard to the riches of the proposer was considered very disgraceful:[1395] [pg 302] sometimes however it happened that the proposal originated from the other party.[1396] The connexion appears to have been very intimate and faithful, and was recognised by the state. If his kinsmen were absent, the youth might be represented in the public assembly by his lover:[1397] in battle too they stood near one another, where their fidelity and affection were often shown till death;[1398] while at home the youth was constantly under the eyes of his lover, who was to him as it were a model and pattern of life;[1399] which explains why, for many faults, particularly for want of ambition, the lover could be punished instead of the listener.[1400]
7. This ancient national custom prevailed with still greater force in Crete; which island was hence by many persons considered as the original seat of the connexion in question.[1401] Here too it was disgraceful for a well-educated youth to be without a lover;[1402] and hence the party loved was termed κλεινὸς,[1403] the praised; the lover being simply called φιλήτωρ. It appears that the youth was always carried away by force,[1404] the intention of the ravisher being previously communicated to the relations, who however took no measures of precaution, and only made a feigned resistance; except when the ravisher appeared, either in family or talent, unworthy of the youth. The lover then led [pg 303] him away to his apartment (ἀνδρεῖον), and afterwards, with any chance companions, either to the mountains or to his estate. Here they remained two months (the period prescribed by custom), which were passed chiefly in hunting together. After this time had expired, the lover dismissed the youth, and at his departure gave him, according to custom, an ox, a military dress, and brazen cup, with other things; and frequently these gifts were increased by the friends of the ravisher.[1405] The youth then sacrificed the ox to Zeus, with which he gave a feast to his companions: at this he stated how he had been pleased with his lover; and he had complete liberty by law to punish any insult or disgraceful treatment. It depended now on the choice of the youth whether the connexion should be broken off or not. If it was kept up, the companion in arms (παραστάτης), as the youth was then called, wore the military dress which had been given him; and fought in battle next his lover, inspired with double valour by the gods of war and love, according to the notion of the Cretans;[1406] and even in man's age he was distinguished by the first place and rank in the course, and certain insignia worn about the body.
Institutions, so systematic and regular as these, did not indeed exist in any Doric state except Crete and Sparta; but the feelings on which they were founded seem to have been common to all the Dorians. The love of Philolaus, a Corinthian of the family of the [pg 304] Bacchiadæ, and the lawgiver of Thebes, and of Diocles the Olympic conqueror, lasted until death; and even their graves were turned towards one another, in token of their affection:[1407] and another person of the same name was honoured in Megara, as a noble instance of self-devotion for the object of his love.[1408]
8. It is indeed clear that a custom of such general prevalence cannot have originated from any accidental impression or train of reasoning; but must have been founded on feelings natural to the whole Doric race. Now that the affection of the lover was not entirely mental, and that a pleasure in beholding the beauty and vigour, the manly activity and exercises[1409] of the youth was also present, is certain. But it is a very different question, whether this custom, universally prevalent both in Crete and Sparta, followed by the noblest men, by the legislators encouraged with all care, and having so powerful an influence on education, was identical with the vice to which in its name and outward form it is so nearly allied.
The subject should be carefully considered, before, with Aristotle, we answer this question in the affirmative, who not only takes the fact as certain, but even accounts for it by supposing that the custom was instituted by the legislator of Crete as a check to population.[1410] Is it, I ask, likely that so disgraceful a vice, not practised in secret, but publicly acknowledged and [pg 305] countenanced by the state, not confined to a few individuals, but common for centuries to the whole people, should really have existed, and this in the race of all the Greeks, the most distinguished for its healthy, temperate, and even ascetic habits? These difficulties must be solved before the testimony of Aristotle can be received.
I will now offer what appears to me the most probable view of this question. The Dorians seem in early times to have considered an intimate friendship and connexion between males as necessary for their proper education. But the objection which would have presented itself in a later age, viz. the liability to abuse of such a habit, had then no existence, as has been already remarked by a learned writer.[1411] And hence they saw no disadvantage to counterbalance the advantages which they promised themselves in the unrestrained intercourse which would be the natural consequence of the new institution. It is also true that the manners of simple and primitive nations generally have and need less restraint than those whom a more general intercourse and the greater facility of concealment have forced to enact prohibitory laws. This view is in fact confirmed by the declaration of Cicero, that the Lacedæmonians brought the lover into the closest relation with the object of his love, and that every sign of affection was permitted præter stuprum;[1412] [pg 306] for although in the times of the corruption of manners this proximity would have been attended with the most dangerous consequences, in early times it never would have been permitted, if any pollution had been apprehended from it. And we know from another source that this stuprum was punished by the Lacedæmonians most severely, viz. with banishment or death.[1413] It may be moreover added, that this pure connexion was encouraged by the Doric principle of taking the education from the hands of parents, and introducing boys in early youth to a wider society than their home could afford.[1414]