appearance. Next to her is an attendant helping a girl arrange her head-dress; both her hands are occupied with it, while the girl bends her head a little forward, and in her hands already holds the necklace which she is going to put on. Two Cupids stand beside her, one carrying some indistinct object, perhaps a tympanum, the other apparently holding two bracelets. On an easy-chair, under which appears a bird, perhaps a duck, a girl is sitting holding an open casket, out of which a woman, standing in front of her, has taken some fine material, or a veil, which she is now unfolding. Between the two, on the ground stands an incense-burner (θυμιατήριον), next a Cupid holding an oil-flask in his hands. A richly-dressed woman leans against a terminal figure of the bearded Dionysus, bending a branch into a wreath with both hands; in front stands a dog, looking up at her. Further to the left a girl is sitting on a stool, while an attendant is arranging her hair; she has placed both hands on her knees, and is sitting quite quietly while the other, to judge from the posture of her left hand, appears to be saying something to her; the Cupid, kneeling on the ground, is fastening the sandals of the seated girl; an incense-burner stands beside them. Next them stands a woman with richly-dressed hair; her right hand hangs down and holds a mirror; at her feet is some object whose meaning is not clear. Still further we see a little table on three goat-shaped feet, at which two girls are sitting opposite one another, one on an easy-chair, the other on a simpler seat; under the easy-chair is a cage with a little bird. We cannot determine the occupation of the girls who have placed their hands on the table, while one of them holds some indistinct object in her left hand—probably they are playing some game; above them hovers a Cupid with a wreath of leaves; near him we observe a beautifully ornamented little chest. The last of these female figures stands in front of a washing basin, in which she has placed both hands, probably to wash them, rather than, as Stephani supposes, in order to wash some object in the basin; for a domestic occupation such as the washing of any garment would not be appropriate to the rest of the scenes. On the ground stands a beautifully-shaped water-jar.
It would not be easy to pass judgment on Greek women in general, as differences of race have considerable influence. Nor can we place much confidence in our literary authorities, least of all in Aristophanes, who says in the Thesmophoriazusae that the men could place no trust whatever in their wives, and were obliged to keep them under lock and key, and keep Molossian hounds on purpose to frighten away their lovers, while they deprived them even of the keys of the storeroom. This is, of course, exaggerated invention, as is also the statement that all the suspicion of the women is due to the calumnies of Euripides. The poets of the Old Comedy directed the arrows of their wit only at women of ill fame; and the Newer Attic Comedy chooses most of its heroines from among the hetaerae (though a favourite dénoûment was the discovery that these were really long-lost legitimate daughters of citizens); and consequently the women are generally treated from their worst side, and the men represented as poor victims. The aim of comedy, which is to provoke laughter, is more easily attained by the representation of characters whose morality is not unimpeachable; and it would be equally unfair in our own time to form a picture of modern morals based on the representations of the stage. Undoubtedly, the Athenian women were far inferior to the Spartan in morality, and in some towns—especially Corinth and Byzantium—female morality seems to have been at a very low ebb; but we must not on that account condemn all Greek women indiscriminately. One reproach is too often heard, and too clearly proved to be discredited, and that is inclination to drink. This vice was so common that in some places women were actually forbidden to drink wine, and it was this that sometimes compelled husbands to take the keys from their wives.
We cannot close this section without a word on that class of women who sold their favours to any who would pay the price for them. The Greeks euphemistically called these hetaerae (ἑταῖραι), female companions. They seem to have been unknown in the heroic age, but in historic times they were found almost everywhere, and association with them was so common that it was hardly a cause of reproach even to married men. The law regarded their existence as not only a matter of course, but even as necessary, and the State promoted the establishment of houses for them. There were many such at all the ports, and many large manufacturing or trading cities, such as Corinth, obtained a distinct reputation on this account; though at the same time it was often said that a stay there was both dangerous and expensive. Besides these public establishments, the visitors to which paid a fixed entrance fee, the amount of which varied according to the elegance of the house, there were also private establishments of a somewhat different character. These were kept by a man or woman, sometimes an old hetaera, whose property the girls in the house became, by being bought direct as slaves or obtained in some other way. Many of these poor girls had been exposed in their infancy, and brought up by the owners of these houses, who repaid themselves for the cost of nurture by the income thus brought in. Such girls were often the heroines of comedies, and in the end were happily united to their lovers. The flute-girls, who played at the symposia, were also often kept in such houses, and their owners not only provided rich and elegant clothing, but also spent much money on their education, and especially on the training of their musical talents, which enabled them to earn higher pay.
But far the greater part of the hetaerae lived alone, and every large town possessed a number of these women, who were classed in different grades according to their education. Some of them were rich women, owning large numbers of slaves; their fame spread through the whole of Greece, and their rooms were crowded by men of the first rank in politics, literature, and art; great artists vied in representing them in bronze and marble, and their fame has descended even to our own times. Among all these, the most celebrated was the older Aspasia, the friend of Pericles, a woman of the highest intellectual endowments and most cultivated taste, who attracted men rather by the power of her intellect than of her charms. Other celebrated hetaerae, such as Laïs and Phryne, owe their renown, which has descended even to the present day, chiefly to their extraordinary beauty and the numerous anecdotes current about their life and also about their greed for money, and shameless character. These hetaerae, who thus lived by themselves, were either freed women or foreigners; some of them are not unattractive characters, whose wit and grace may easily have attracted even men of note, while others were mere courtesans, covetous, superficial, and dress-loving.
In order to understand the possibility of their social intercourse with men of unblemished reputation, and the fact that these girls played a part in Greek literature almost more important than that of honest women, we must bear in mind the slight education and retired life of the Greek women. Even this can hardly account for the permission granted to a hetaera like Phryne to dedicate her statue by Praxiteles at Delphi, or her venturing to bathe in the sea, completely naked, like an Aphrodite Anadyomene, in the presence of numerous admiring spectators. We can only explain this by remembering the intense Hellenic love of beauty, apart from the considerations of morality, which looked on a beautiful human body as a divine work demanding adoration, which made it possible to forget the moral weaknesses inherent in it. At Corinth, in the temple of Aphrodite, more than a thousand temple slaves (ίερόδουλοι) were maintained, who were regarded as in the service of the goddess, and this conception of love as worship was very common throughout the East. But although much was openly done in ancient times which would be concealed at the present day, it would be a mistake to suppose that the position occupied by these women was a really honourable one.
Although there was no official control kept over them, yet they were not left absolutely free; in most towns they had to pay a tax to the State. Later writers have maintained, but with what accuracy is uncertain, that a special dress was prescribed for them; probably they were only distinguished from other women by conspicuous bright clothing and more elaborate dress. The legal protection generally accorded to women in case of wrongful treatment, could naturally not be claimed by them, and a hetaera who had a child could not claim from its father money for its support. In fact, the lot of the majority was at best but gilded misery, and many ended their days in extreme poverty.
Greek art is very rich in scenes from the life of hetaerae; many have been already represented here (compare Figs. [17] and [17]), and others will follow. We must face the fact that the very period which is renowned in Greek literature and art as that of the greatest splendour, was a time, also, of moral rottenness. Where there is much light we must expect much shade; and in modern art, too, the highest development of painting and sculpture was contemporaneous with the religious and moral degeneracy of the Middle ages; indeed, the Rome of Alexander VI. and Leo X. was probably far more immoral than the Athens of Pericles.
CHAPTER V.
DAILY LIFE WITHIN AND WITHOUT THE HOUSE.
At Sparta—At Athens—Chronology—Sun-dials—Breakfast—Morning Occupations—Lunch—The Afternoon—Warm Baths—Dinner—Amusements—The Gymnasia—Greek Hospitality.
A picture of the daily life of the Greeks must of necessity be subject to various changes according to time and place. Life in the sixth century B.C. was different from that in the fourth; the daily occupation and the mode of life of a Spartan differed from those of an Athenian or Theban; and again, the rich and free citizen spent his time in a very different way from the small artisan or countryman, who was dependent on the work of his own hands.