Content area
Full Text
Proquest Information and Learning: ... Denotes non-USASCII text omitted)
Abstract. This article examines Apollodorus' use of the terms hetaira, pallake, and porne in the speech Against Neaira. It argues that he employs these terms with consistency and with attention to differences among them rather than haphazardly or interchangeably as was previously believed. Apollodorus' distinctions among types of prostitutes are further clarified through comparisons with his use of the terms in other speeches. Finally, there is a reexamination of the famous statement on the existence of three types of women in society. By resituating this claim in its oratorical context, I show that it is not an all-inclusive remark on women's roles but rather a statement quite specific to Apollodorus' attack on Neaira.
IN THE OPENING SECTION on "desire" in Davidson's well-received book Courtesans and Fishcakes, he quotes the famous passage from [Demosthenes] 59, Apollodorus' speech Against Neaira, about the three categories of women in Athens: "For we have courtesans (hetairai) for pleasure, and concubines (pallakai) for the daily service of our bodies, [and] wives (gunaikes) for the production of legitimate offspring and to have a reliable guardian of our household property" (122). After he points out how influential this passage has been and how it has been wrongly understood as straightforward by some modern historians, he adds:
The speaker himself shows a remarkable level of inconsistency in conferring his titles on Neaera and the whole thrust of the speech is that such distinctions are easily flouted, enabling Neaera's daughter, 'a common whore' (porne), to infiltrate the ranks of decent citizens by marrying the King Archon, even presiding with him over the most ancient rites in the city's religious calendar and risking the wrath of the gods.1
There is much of value in Davidson's study of prostitution in society, but his analysis of the terminology of prostitution and how it is used by Apollodorus is misleading.2 Far from implementing these terms with "a remarkable level of inconsistency," Apollodorus (like many of the orators) is strikingly consistent in his use of prostitution terminology.3 Furthermore, this consistency is an integral part of his rhetorical strategy.4 This is not to say that the terms themselves or the categories of women they represent are precise.5 Nevertheless, an understanding of...