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

ON DEPILATION: BODY COSMETICS IN CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY 581
with the scholia; we see he was a lover of luxurious lewdness and
exquisitely perverted pleasures). KˆÌˇˆ‰ÂÖÙ·È ÁaÚ Âå˜ Ì·Ï·Î›·Ó ηd
ç„ÔÊ·Á›·Ó. ... K·ÏÏ›·˜ ‰‹Ù·È˜: «Ù› ‰’ pÚ· (Nauck’s correction; cf.
appleᘠpÚ·, Meineke’s conjecture for the mss. Ù›˜ ôÚ·); ÙÔf˜ MÂÏ·Óı›Ô˘
Ùˇá ÁÓÒÛÔÌ·È; / ÔR˜ iÓ Ì¿ÏÈÛÙ· Ï¢ÎÔappleÚÒÎÙÔ˘˜ ÂåÛ›‰F˘» (Fr. I,
‰ÉÙ·È, Meineke, vol. II, p. 238 = Fr. 14 PCGr. vol. IV p. 46). Here
we have come back to our point of departure: fundament clear of hair
bespeaks elaborate lasciviousness. On the other hand, what we have
repeatedly emphasized in relation to the qualifications necessary for
the alleged disrepute of the Ï¢ÎÔ› or Ï¢Îfiapple˘ÁÔÈ to be comprehended
properly, applies here, too. Thus the opposite condition of the
fundament is equally liable to comic ridicule. Etym. M. p. 512.8 sqq.
preserved a Cratinean fragment to this effect (Incertae Fabulae Fr. 27,
Meineke vol. II 184 = Fr. 339 PCGr. vol. IV p. 287): K˘ÚË‚›ˆÓ:
ηı·ÚÌ·Ùቤ˜ âÛÙÈ Ùe ùÓÔÌ·. ÎËÚ‡‚È· ÁaÚ Î˘Ú›ˆ˜ Ùa àappleÔ‚Ú¿-
ÛÌ·Ù· ÙáÓ Î˘¿ÌˆÓ. KÚ·ÙÖÓÔ˜: ¢·ÛfÓ ö¯ˆÓ ÙeÓ appleÚˆÎÙeÓ ±ÙÂ
΢ڋ‚È âÛı›ˆÓ.
The ÌÂÏ¿Ìapple˘ÁÔ˜, Ï¢Îfiapple˘ÁÔ˜ antithesis, we thus see, pertains to
the natural hairiness or otherwise of the apple˘Á‹ (another proof that the
connection of Ï¢Îfiapple˘ÁÔ˜ with the apple‡Á·ÚÁÔ˜ eagle could not have
been but indirect, however obvious). The same general antithesis in its
aggravated sense, i.e. as ‰·Û‡appleÚˆÎÙÔ˜ Ï¢ÎfiappleÚˆÎÙÔ˜, is liable to be
(and was) applied also to the artificially induced condition of the anal
region as regards hairiness. And we should never forget that it was
really artificial hairlessness which became the object of comic and
satiric lampoon; just as it was Ï¢ÎfiÙ˘ resulting from lack of exercise
and outdoor (mainly gymnastic) activities that was ridiculed and
castigated.
But let us return to the main point, depilation in the male body.
The usefulness of the digression becomes apparent if one will
thoroughly examine the supposedly effeminate nature of Dionysus.
However, for the purpose at hand, it has been established that the
opposition to Ï¢ÎfiÙ˘, just as to hairlessness, was far from
unqualified; to the contrary it was qualified in a number of specific
important respects which have been discussed above. In fact, one may
go as far as to claim that the appreciation was mainly positive; for the
Greek ideal of beauty was materialized, as I said, primarily in the well-