[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.