FOOTNOTES:
[1] ‘Trach.,’ 438.
[2] Stob., ‘Flor.,’ 85, 19.
[3] De Legg. viii. p. 841 D. (Jowett’s translation).
[4] Pol. iv. (vii.) 16, 18.
[5] δεισιδαιμονῆσαι. Athenæus, xiii. c. 59, p. 590. There are two versions of the story, which are given with all the authorities in Wagner’s edition of ‘Alciphron,’ vol. i. p. 178.
[6] Stob. 73, 61.
[7] These passages are all given from the large collections in Stobæus (Flor. Tituli, 68–74). The genuineness of the fragment of Susarion is justly doubted; but the sentiment is no doubt correctly ascribed to him.
[8] Stob. 68, 8.
[9] Stob. 68, 3.
[10] Discussions on the Homeric women are very numerous. I give a list of the most notable works in the bibliography. Special praise is due to Lenz’s ‘Geschichte der Weiber im Heroischen Zeitalter’: Hannover, 1790. The fullest and ablest account in English is in Mr. Gladstone’s ‘Homeric Studies,’ vol. ii.
[11] And according to the ideas of later Greeks, see especially Isocrates’s Encomium on Helen.
[12] The later Greeks attributed to Cecrops, or some other Attic hero, the introduction of monogamy. The state of women in Greece before the time of Homer is discussed in Bachofen’s ‘Mutterrecht,’ and in Mr. McLennan’s ‘Kinship in Ancient Greece.’
[13] Il. ix. 336.
[14] Il. xix. 297.
[15] Od. vi. 182.
[16] Il. vi. 429.
[17] Od. xxiii. 210.
[18] Lasaulx (‘Zur Geschichte und Philosophie der Ehe bei den Griechen,’ p. 30) adduces Laodamia as an instance of the same constancy; but the case is not so clear.
[19] See Mr. Gladstone’s ‘Homeric Studies,’ vol. ii. p. 507.
[20] Il. vi. 442.
[21] Od. i. 433.
[22] Od. iii. 450.
[23] Il. vi. 301.
[24] Euripides, ‘Andromache’ 597; Propertius iv. 14; Athenæus, xiii. 20, p. 566 e.
[25] Ath. xiii. 2, p. 555c.
[26] ‘Lysist.’ 78.
[27] Plutarch discusses the women of Sparta in the ‘Life of Lycurgus,’ and in a treatise on ‘Sayings of Spartan Women.’ He discusses women generally in ‘Conjugal Precepts,’ ‘Consolation to his Wife,’ ‘Erotic Discourse,’ ‘Erotic Narratives,’ and ‘Virtues of Women.’
[28] Especially in his ‘Andromache,’ but, as Paley remarks, this play is animated throughout by a bitter hostility to Sparta, and it may therefore be regarded as an expression merely of a strong temporary feeling.
[29] Plato shows his approbation by adopting the questionable features into his own ideal commonwealth. “Then,” he says, “let the wives of our guardians strip, having virtue for their robe.... And as for the man who laughs at naked women exercising in gymnastics for the sake of the highest good, his laughter is ‘A fruit of unripe wisdom,’ which he gathers, and he himself is ignorant of what he is laughing at, or what he is about; for that is, and ever will be, the best of sayings—that the useful is the noble, and the hurtful the base.”—‘Rep.’ v. p. 457 (Professor Jowett’s translation). Plato discusses the objections to the Spartan method in ‘Legg.’ i. p. 637 C.; vi. p. 781 A.; vii. p. 806 C.; p. 814 A.; and tacitly in ‘Rep.’ viii. p. 548.
[30] ‘Polit.’ ii. 9, 9.
[31] Plutarch, ‘Life of Agis.’
[32] Plutarch ‘Life of Cleomenes.’
[33] Stob., 29, 58.
[34] xiii. c. 2, sec. 3.
[35] Diss. 24, 9.
[36] ‘Athenæus,’ 14, 19, p. 624e.
[37] “To attack a woman’s reputation is the ready resort of the blockhead who is jealous of her talents.”—Miss Cornwallis.
[38] ii. 135.
[39] Rhet. 23.
[40] Luňák, p. 71 note, and Boech, ‘Greek Inscriptions,’ 2374 (51).
[41] It seems to have been possible for an Athenian to take a free Athenian woman as a concubine; but the rights of such concubines and children, and indeed the whole subject, are involved in difficulties. See Van den Es: ‘De Jure Familiarum apud Athenienses.’
[42] Xen. ‘Œc.’ iii. 13; vii. 5.
[43] v. 641.
[44] The verses in Sophocles (‘Antig.’ 905–13) are probably interpolated, but the interpolation was as early as Aristotle (‘Rhet.’ 3, 16, p. 1417 A, 32), and the same ideas are placed by Herodotus (3, 119) in the mouth of the wife of Intaphernes.
[45] ii. 45.
[46] Theodota, Xen. ‘Mem.,’ iii. 11.
[47] Some have affirmed Diotima to be a fiction of Plato (Mähly, ‘Die Frauen des Griechischen Alterthums,’ p. 14), but this supposition has been amply refuted: Stallbaum on the ‘Symposium,’ p. 201 D. Otto Jahn collects all the references to Diotima by ancient writers in his edition of the ‘Symposium.’
[48] Timandra, Plut. ‘Alcib.’ c. 39.
[49] Pericles, 24.
[50] See Book iv. c. 2 s. 2.
[51] ‘Symp.,’ xvi. p. 193 C.
[52] Chronological difficulties have been suggested in the way of this statement being true (see especially a beautiful monograph on Aspasia, ‘Aspasie de Milet,’ par L. Becq de Fouquières, p. 342), but I do not think that the difficulties are insuperable. Müller-Strübing (Aristophanes, p. 585) has found an allusion to this connexion with Lysicles in Aristophanes with greater ingenuity than success.
[53] See especially Miss Cornwallis’s able defence of Aspasia: Letters, p. 181.
[54] Ovid, ‘Ep. ad Phaon.’ 33; Max. Tyr. Diss. 24, 7.
[55] ‘Jahrgang,’ xxxv. 1877, p. 56.
[56] P. 920.
[57] Opuscula ‘Lysias,’ c. 33, ed. Usener and Radermacher.
[58] See Book 4 c. 2 sec. 4.
[59] p. 291.
[60] ‘Drerup,’ p. 223, especially 247.
[61] Some have doubted the existence of this grandson Sophocles, because an inscription was found in 1849, “Sophocles the son of Iophon” (Rangabe, ‘Antiq. Hell.,’ ii. p. 997); but there is nothing to prevent the supposition that Sophocles had two grandsons named Sophocles. If Iophon had a son, he would naturally be called Sophocles; and if the son of Theoris had a son, Sophocles also would be the name that would certainly be given to him.
[62] 2, 6, 36.
[63] Jowett, p. 285; ‘Rep.,’ p. 455.
[64] See Book iv. c. 2, sect. 6.
[65] Cl. Alex. p. 751, ‘Strom.,’ vi. 24.
[66] ‘Symp.,’ c. ii. 9.
[67] Dionysius makes Servius Tullius admit the freedman to citizenship (iv. 22).
[68] Columella, i. 8, 19.
[69] Livy, 4, 1 ff.
[70] Plutarch, ‘Tib. Gracchus,’ i.
[71] The story may not be historical, but the Romans regarded it as such.
[72] Gell. x. 23; Val. Max. vi. c. 3, 9–12.
[73] Livy, viii. 18.
[74] Livy, xl. 37.
[75] Livy, xxix. 14, 10.
[76] Livy, xxix. 10, 5.
[77] Livy, xxxix. 8 ff. 18.
[78] Livy xxxiv. 1–8; Val. Max. ix. 1, 3; Zonaras ix. 17; Livy v. 25; Mackintosh ii. 345.
[79] Plutarch, ‘Cato Major,’ viii.
[80] Val. Max. viii. 3, 3; Quint. i. 1, 6; App. ‘Bell. Civ.,’ iv. (6), 32.
[81] Livy, Epitome, xli.
[82] Plutarch, ‘Cato Minor.’ 25.
[83] xiv. 6, 17, &c.
[84] ‘De Gubernatione Dei,’ vii. 65–91.
[85] i. 376.
[86] Paulus in ‘Digest,’ 45, l. 134.
[87] vi. 200.
[88] P. 133.
[89] Val. Max., 2, 1, 4; Dionys. Hal., ‘Antiqu. Rom.,’ ii. 25; Plutarch, ‘Quæst Rom.,’ 14, compar. Thes. c. Rom. 6; Lycurg., c. Numa 3; A. Gellius, iv. 3, xvii. 21, 44; Rein, ‘Rom. Privatrecht,’ 451 note; Val. Max. 2, 9, 2.
[90] P. 70.
[91] Rev. David Williamson died 6 August, 1706. “After threescore he married the seventh wife.” Many lampoons were made on this divine, collected by Maidment; he refers to Kirkton’s ‘Church History’, p. 349.
[92] Long’s translation.
[93] Ep., iv. 19.
[94] Tac. ‘Ann.,’ 3, 33, 34 (A.D. 21).
[95] xv. 11.
[96] vi. 34, 5–11.
[97] Corp. Inscript. Lat., vol. viii. part ii. n. 9407; Renier, 3914, ‘Messia Castula duumvira.’
[98] viii. 3, 1.
[99] Book iii. 1, 5.
[100] Suet., ‘Galba,’ 5; Lampridius, ‘Heliogabalus,’ 4; Flav. Vopis. ‘Aurelianus,’ 49.
[101] Epict. fr. 53, Schw., vol. iii. p. 84.
[102] ‘Brutus,’ 13.
[103] Long’s translation.
[104] Pliny, ‘Epist.,’ 3, 16.
[105] Translation by Dr. John Muir.
[106] Paulus Diaconus, ‘Uxorium,’ 379 (Müller).
[107] Val. Max. 2, 9, 1, cf. Plutarch, ‘Cam.,’ ii.
[108] Livy, Epitome, lix.; Gell., i. 6.
[109] Suet. ‘Aug.,’ 89.
[110] Lib. iii. 7.
[111] Civil. Bell, ii. 102.
[112] xliii. 25.
[113] Darst., 15, p. 52.
[114] lvi. 1–10.
[115] Dio. Cass., xliii. 25; Cicero pro Marcello, viii. 23; Suet. ‘Cæs.,’ 20; Appian ‘Bell, Civ.,’ ii. 10; Dio. Cass., xxxviii. 7.
[116] Epiph., ‘Haer.,’ xxx. 16, p. 140.
[117] Tarsica prior Orat., xxxiii. p. 408 M.
[118] Zscharnack, p. 22, 45; Harnack Mission, 395–407.
[119] Eusebius, ‘Hist. Eccl.,’ iii. 31.
[120] All the translations are taken from Clark’s Ante-Nicene Library, but altered when the meaning can be expressed more exactly. De Virg. Veland., c. ix.
[121] Apost. Const., Book iii. 15, 5.
[122] iii. 5 and 7.
[123] Tertull., De Baptismo, c. xvii.
[124] C. 40.
[125] P. 274.
[126] Book iii. c. ix.
[127] For Athena Polias, C. O. Müller, Minervæ Poliadis Sacra, &c., p. 13, where he enumerates the honours paid to the priestess. For Demeter and Core, Mommsen, ‘Feste der Stadt Athen,’ 1898, p. 265, M. F. Foucart, ‘Les Grands Mystères d’Éleusis,’ Paris, 1900, p. 62. Weniger discusses priestesses in Delphi and Elis in his programmes, mentioned in Bibliography.
[128] Epiphanius ‘Haer.,’ 49. Augustine de Haeresibus, c. 27.
[129] Bonwetsch regards these statements as strictly historical, p. 168.
[130] ‘Haer.,’ 78, c. 23; 79.
[131] Probably the reading should be οἰκοῦσαι.
[132] C. 24.
[133] Carpocrates Irenæus, i. 25, 4; Cainites Iren., i. 31, 2.
[134] Marcion, Tertull. contra Marcionem, i. 29; Iren., i. c. 28.
[135] 1 Cor. vi. 9.
[136] Supplic. c. 32.
[137] Pæd., iii. 81, 301 P.
[138] Polycarp, Ep., c. 4.
[139] Ad Ux., ii. 8.
[140] Apost. Const., i. 8.
[141] Conviv., i. 2, 17; ii. 1, 29.
[142] De Virg. Veland., c. 17.
[143] Supplic., c. 33.
[144] De Exhort. Cast., 5.
[145] Ad Ux., i. 1.
[146] De Exhort. Cast., 10.
[147] Clem. Alex. Frag., 1012 P.
[148] Ad Ux., i. 5.
[149] De Monogamia, 16.
[150] ‘De Cultu Feminarum,’ i. 1.
[151] Pæd., ii. 2, 83, 186 P.
[152] Metaphrasis in Ecclesiasten, c. 7, 28.
[153] Test. of Reuben, c. 5.
[154] Test. of Judah, c. 15.
[155] Pæd. iii. 10, 11.
[156] See p. 249.
[157] ‘De Cult. Fem.’ ii. 2.
[158] Pæd., iii. 11, 79.
[159] Instruct. 60 or Book ii. 19.
[160] Pæd., iii. 2, 11, p. 258 P.
[161] De Habitu Virg., 16, 17, 21, 20.
[162] Conviv., xi. 1, 282.
[163] De Anima, 25.
[164] Tert. Apol. 9.
[165] C. 19, 5; Didache c. 2.
[166] Clem. Alex. Eclog., 48 and 41; Method. Conviv. 2, 6; Harnack, ‘Bruchstücke des Evangeliums und der Apokalypse des Petrus,’ p. 48 in ‘Texte und Unters.,’ vol. 9, part 2.
[167] Il., 24, 495.
[168] Il., 21, 85; 22, 48.
[169] Il., 8, 305.
[170] Il., 9, 340.
[171] Od., 21, 214; 14, 64.
[172] Il., 9, 449, 452.
[173] 14, 203.
[174] Il., on viii. 284.
[175] Od., 4, 12.
[176] Il., 13, 174.
[177] Il., 5, 70.
[178] Il., 8, 282.
[179] Il., 2, 727; 13, 694; 15, 333.
[180] Il., 4, 499; 11, 490; 16, 738.
[181] 11, 101.
[182] 14, 200.
[183] ‘Polygamie und Pellikat nach Griechischem Rechte von Dr. Ernst Hruza’ (Erlangen and Leipzig, 1894).
[184] P. 72.
[185] P. 27 or 394.
[186] Diodorus Siculus, 1, 80, 3; Wessely Karanis, 30; Nietzold, p. 19.
[187] Curtius, ‘Grundzüge,’ 1st ed., vol. i. p. 128, and Schmidt, ‘Synonymik der Griechischen Sprache,’ 67, 7, vol. ii. p. 408.
[188] Il., i. 113.
[189] 11, 102.
[190] 14, 202.
[191] 13, 363.
[192] 130, 676.
[193] ‘Opuscula Philologica,’ vol. ii. p. 59.
[194] ‘Homerische Abhandlungen,’ p. 341.
[195] 3, 464.
[196] Od. 5, 264.
[197] 10, 362.
[198] 4, 49.
[199] 23, 154; 24, 366.
[200] 5, 905.
[201] See Nägelsbach, ‘Homerische Theologie,’ 2nd ed., p. 251.
[202] ‘Studies of Homer,’ ii. 514.
[203] 7, 296.
[204] 6, 210.
[205] 4, 252.
[206] ‘Naivetät,’ p. 152.
[207] Grasberger, &c.
[208] ‘Meyer de virginum exercitationibus apud veteres’ (Clausthal, 1872), p. 7.
[209] Aristoph., ‘Clouds,’ 965; ‘Thesm.,’ 163.
[210] ‘Homerische Blätter,’ 2, p. 128.
[211] P. 36.
[212] P. 286 (London, 1896).
[213] Vol. ii. part 2 das Privatleben, ‘Die Homerischen Realien,’ p. 14.
[214] Pp. 1 and 2.
[215] Vol. ii. (1845) with an appendix.
[216] Vol. iii. p. 272.
[217] Vol. xii. p. 564 (1857).
[218] Vol. v. p. 228.
[219] P. 5.
[220] P. 17.
[221] ‘Comicorum Atticorum Fragmenta.’
[222] De Vries and Luňák.
[223] Lesefrüchte in Hermes, vol. 53.
[224] P. 814.
[225] ‘Masterpieces of Greek Sculpture,’ by Adolf Furtwängler, edited by Eugénie Sellers (London, Heinemann, 1895), Sappho, p. 71, Aspasia, 81.
[226] P. 50.
[227] See the decree of the Athenians in regard to Chalcis, ‘Ἀθήναιον,’ t. v. p. 76; ‘Mittheilungen des Deutschen Archæol. Inst. in Athen,’ vol. i. p. 184; ‘Revue Archéologique,’ April, 1877, p. 242; Nos. 70 and 87 in ‘Recueil d’Inscriptions Grecques,’ par Charles Michel.
[228] P. 70.
[229] P. 812.
[230] See Sandys on c. 26 of Aristotle’s ‘Politeia.’
[231] ‘Constitution of Athens,’ c. 26.
[232] The authorities are given in Müller, p. 666.
[233] Sect. 122, p. 1386.
[234] ‘Ancora sui rapporti fra l’Ecclesiazusæ d’Aristofane e la Repubblica Platonica’ (Torino, Loescher, 1886).
[235] Bell, 1902.
[236] P. xcviii.
[237] P. 325 (Longmans, 1897).
[238] ‘Plato,’ p. 225.
[239] See also ‘The Republic of Plato,’ edited, with critical notes, commentary, and appendices, by James Adam, M.A. (Cambridge, 1902), vol. i. Appendix, p. 345, ‘On the relation of the fifth Book of the Republic to Aristophanes’s “Ecclesiazusæ.”’ Mr. Adam favours the priority of the play to the ‘Republic.’ Maurice Croiset, ‘Aristophane,’ p. 286 (Paris, 1906), is of the same opinion.
[240] Some divide Greek comedy into ancient and middle and new. Kock follows Aristotle in speaking only of old and new comedy.
[241] ‘Aulularia,’ 504–15. We give Wagner’s text.
[242] Verses 676–707, Lorenz.
[243] See ‘Arnobius adversus Nationes,’ vii. 33.
[244] ‘Mercator,’ v. 805–13.
[245] ‘Stich.,’ 39–46.
[246] ‘Rudens,’ 406–11.
[247] M. Benoist has gone over separately the characters of the women in Plautus in his thesis, ‘De Personis Muliebribus apud Plautum’ (Massiliæ, 1862).
[248] Édélestand du Méril, ‘Histoire de la Comédie Ancienne,’ vol. ii. p. 211; Gaston Boissier, ‘Quomodo Græcos Poetas Plautus transtulerit’ (Parisiis, 1857).
[249] Verses 368–70.
[250] ‘Cur.,’ 146–54.
[251] ‘Truc.,’ 354.
[252] ‘Pœn.,’ 353.
[253] ‘Journal of Hellenic Studies,’ vol. viii. (1887), p. 256.
[254] See Bachofen’s ‘Mutterrecht.’
[255] Pearson, p. 53.
[256] ‘Strom.,’ iv. 19.
[257] P. 121.
[258] ‘Fabulæ,’ 274.
[259] Vol. xviii.
[260] ‘The Ptolemies,’ vii., p. 374.
[261] P. 11.
[262] Nietzold, p. 79; Grenfell, ‘Greek Papyri,’ ii. 76.
[263] P. 257.
[264] P. 9.
[265] ix. 12, Schn.
[266] Paulus, however, in ‘Dig.,’ 23, 2, 44, attributes this to a “lex Julia.”
[267] ‘Digest,’ 23, 2, 16; the extract is quoted from Paulus. See also ‘Dig.,’ 23, 1, 16; 23, 2, 23; 1, 9, 9; 1, 9, 10; 1, 9, 8; 24, 1, 3, 1.
[268] ‘Les Esclaves Chrétiens,’ p. 293.
[269] C. 5.
[270] Book xxii. c. 2.
[271] ‘Refut.,’ ix. II.
[272] The action of Callistus is discussed by Abbé de Hir, de Rossi, Armellini, Bunsen, Wordsworth, Volkmar, Döllinger, Cruice, Meyer, and Neumann.
Transcriber’s Note:
1. Greek words/phrases have been corrected where necessary.
2. Obvious printers’, spelling and punctuation errors have been silently corrected.
3. Original spelling has been retained where necessary.