μικροῦ πρίασθαι κέρματος τὴν ἡδονήν,
καὶ μὴ λαθραίαν κύπριν, αἰσχίστην νόσων
πασῶν, διώκειν, ὕβρεος οὐ πόθου χάριν.
[261] The one or two apparent exceptions to this rule, such as those in the Marathonii of Timocles or the Philaulus of Theophilus, are in reality no exceptions at all. This will be clear enough if we consider what is meant in these passages by a κόρη, and do not confuse the sentiment there expressed with a sentiment which does not occur till a later period. The κόρη in question (a κιθαρίστρια in the Philaulus) is merely an Hetaera in posse instead of in esse, an Hetaera who has not yet entered into regular business, and herein consists her superiority from the point of view of those who do not share Diogenes’ view as to the parallel between women and houses. That her attractions do not differ in kind from those of the regular Hetaera will be plain enough to anyone who takes the trouble to turn to the passage in the Marathonii, and that the character of the “love” she inspires is also similar will be equally apparent from the same lines. That this was the character of the παρθένων ἔρωτες with which, according to Suidas, Anaxandrides dealt, seems beyond question.
[262] Alexis himself says this, in almost as many words, in the passage quoted below, [p. 163].
[264] The “Platonic” nature of Theseus’ admiration for the undeveloped charms of Helen is a well-known feature of the legend. A comparison with Aristoph. Thesmoph. B, Fr. 26, seems to suggest a further reason why Theseus should have been introduced as a mock “Platonic” lover. Cp. Phot. s.v. κυσολάκων. τὸ δὲ τοῖς παιδικοῖς χρῆσθαι λακωνίζειν ἔλεγον. Ἑλένῃ (so Ruhnken for Μελαίνῃ) γὰρ Θησεὺς οὕτως ἐχρήσατο.
[265] In this connection we may remark that the tendency of the mythological stories commonly parodied by Middle Comedy was also almost entirely in this direction. The Ζεὺς μοιχός with whom the Athenian audience of the day was so familiar, was hardly the type of character to inspire respect for married life. How different was the New Comedy treatment of the adulterer, we shall see further on.
[266] Another phase of the Middle Comedy treatment of women, the discussion of which here would lead us too far away from our immediate subject, will be considered in [Excursus I].
[267] That the ψενδοκόρη, as the Athenian stage-managers rather quaintly called her—a class of character sufficiently common, it must be admitted—differs toto caelo from the regular Hetaera, is almost too obvious to need mention.