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

ON DEPILATION: BODY COSMETICS IN CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY 599
her female nature (in all senses) and not a monstrosity of a woman
with man-like feelings and thoughts etc. And again this latter
dimension of meaning subtly alludes to the converse deceit actually
being at work against the women. Thus the speaking woman also
means: if she is a true woman, like the rest of us, she would feel like us
and would not condemn in such a sweeping way practices and
behaviour which we women all feel the urge towards, and, to a lesser
or greater extent, all follow. And this sense has a special effect since
Mnesilochus is not, in reality, a true woman at all.
NOTE
1. The legal situation as regards punishment of adultery in Athens seems to
have been as follows. There was an ancient law which allowed the husband to
kill the adulterer (if he caught him in the act of criminal intercourse with his
wife) with impunity: Lysias, de Caede Eratosth. 30-2. The law was contained
in the Solonian legislation; Plutarch Solon, XXIII, 1. But whether this law
was actually considered valid in classical times, or if so, whether it was
actually applied, is difficult to decide. Lysias, of course, invokes it; but even
from what he says about the fact that actual, violent rape was not liable to
death penalty (32-3; cf. 34 sqq.) [although he gives a transparently rhetorical
turn to this discrepancy which, however, even if were itself discredited by the
‚È·˙Ô̤ÓFË in Plato, Leges 874c, was nonetheless a peculiar feature of Solon’s
codification of laws concerning women, v. Plutarch, Solon, XXIII, 1-4] we
may conclude that the ancient law had fallen into relative or absolute
abeyance. There might only be a question of the courts displaying some
lenience towards one who killed the adulterer of his wife in the heat of
passion and at the moment when not designedly caught them in the actual
act. I think Lysias implicitly concedes so much in his peroration to the speech
in question. There (§49) he represents the standing laws as allowing â¿Ó ÙȘ
ÌÔȯeÓ Ï¿‚FË, ¬,ÙÈ iÓ ‚Ô‡ÏËÙ·È ¯ÚÉÛı·È. Perhaps the ancient traditional and
Pre-Solonian law had this form (rather than specifically allowing the killing
of the adulterer), but the custom in classical times was to allow less than
killing, namely what Aristophanes refers to. And even this was rather a
liability reserved for the end of a law-suit; the normal procedure seems to be
the one described by Demosthenes, Contra Neairam p. 1367 Reiske (§§65-
6): the husband, by threatening the adulterer with an indictment or with
violence on the spot, might agree to take a sum of money from him by way
of compensation, and detain him in order to coerce him into such an