APPENDIX C΄ ON DEPILATION: BODY COSMETICS IN CLASSICAL ...

ON DEPILATION: BODY COSMETICS IN CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY 575
calling Paris apple‡Á·ÚÁÔÓ as referring to his rape of Helen as such). But
all this may well be an (Alexandrian probably) example of philological
obtuseness. Hesychius, the prince of the extant lexicographers, and the
best source of accurate explanations for rare words and peculiar
meanings, explains the Αrchilochian expression without any reference
to eagles: M‹ Ù¢ ÌÂÏ·Ìapple‡ÁÔ˘ Ù‡¯ÔÈ˜Ø Ì‹ ÙÈÓÔ˜ àÓ‰Ú›Ԣ ηd åÛ¯˘ÚÔÜ
Ù‡¯ÔȘ. He knows, of course, that apple‡Á·ÚÁÔ˜ is an Âr‰Ô˜ àÂÙÔÜ (s.v.);
the fact is that apple‡Á·ÚÁÔ˜ was; ÌÂÏ¿Ìapple˘ÁÔ˜ was not. The Homeric
eagle in Iliad Ω, 316 is described as ·åÂÙfiÓ… / ÌfiÚÊÓÔÓ ıËÚËÙÉÚ’, nÓ
ηd appleÂÚÎÓeÓ Î·Ï¤Ô˘ÛÈÓ. The difficulty as to the precise meaning of
ÌfiÚÊÓÔ˜ is well known. The Etym. Magnum s.v. proposes three
derivations and corresponding meanings: from Ì¿ÚappleÙˆ, the snatcher,
the catcher; from ùÚÊÓË, the dark-coloured, blackened; from ÌfiÚÔ˜
and ÊfiÓÔ˜, the ÊfiÓÈÔ˜, murderous, deadly. Hesychius has an
interesting note: ÌÔÚÊÓfiÓØ Âr‰Ô˜ àÂÙÔÜ. ηd Í·Óıfi˜. Significantly,
Aristotle says that the name of this kind of eagle is appleÏ¿ÁÁÔ˜: Historia
Anim. I, 618b23 sqq.: ≤ÙÂÚÔÓ ‰b Á¤ÓÔ˜ àÂÙÔÜ âÛÙdÓ n appleÏ¿ÁÁÔ˜
ηÏÂÖÙ·È, ‰Â‡ÙÂÚÔ˜ ÌÂÁ¤ıÂÈ Î·d ÚÒÌFËØ ÔåÎÂÖ ‰b ‚‹ÛÛ·˜ ηd ôÁÎË Î·d
Ï›ÌÓ·˜ (hence likely to appear by the Greek camp), âappleÈηÏÂÖÙ·È ‰b
ÓËÙÙÔÊfiÓÔ˜ ηd ÌÔÚÊÓfi˜Ø Ôy ηd ≠OÌËÚÔ˜ ̤ÌÓËÙ·È âÓ ÙFÉ ÙÔÜ ÚÈ¿-
ÌÔ˘ âÍfi‰ˇˆ (i.e. in our passage). And he continues immediately with:
≤ÙÂÚÔ˜ ‰b ̤Ϸ˜ ÙcÓ ¯Úfi·Ó etc., which implies that the kind
concerned is not ̤Ϸ˜; it could still be ÌÂÏ¿Ìapple˘ÁÔ˜, it is true, but if
it was so against a light, Í·ÓıfiÓ background this would be
characteristic enough to be mentioned, side by side with the apple‡Á·Ú-
ÁÔ˜. Besides, appleÏ·ÁÁÒÓ was a wax item (esp. a girl’s toy or ornament),
as is very well attested: v. Hesychius, Photius and Etym. M. s.v.;
Scholia ad Theocr. II, 110; Callimachus, Hymn. in Cerer. 92 with the
scholion; should we not then assume that appleÏ·ÁÁfi˜ means waxen in
colour, that is, precisely Í·Óıfi˜? Perhaps the difficulty may be thought
to lie with Homer’s nÓ Î·d appleÂÚÎÓeÓ Î·Ï¤Ô˘ÛÈÓ. But appleÂÚÎÓfi˜ does not
really mean black; it refers mainly to the ripening of the fruit,
especially of grapes, to the darker hues assumed in this process by it; it
does not even so much signify the dark or dusky as such but rather
what is deeper and more ripe relative to something else. Like the word
shade it can apply to anything from deep dark through dim to even
the slightest shading in a drawing. And like the word deep, it does not
indicate certain colours, but rather a darker tint even of the same