No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
within the household. Finally, some scholars are misrepresented. Those curious to know what Lambert thinks about the involvement of women in Athenian phratries (p. 77 n. 37) or what Golden guesstimated on the prevalence of exposure of girls (p. 120) should check for themselves; in Lambert's case they will find a more careful and complete account than that on offer here. Of course, P.'s treatment of the ancient evidence is more important. Space permits commentary only on some instances concerning Sparta. (1) 'The decision whether to raise babies was in the hands of the state immediately ... (Female babies, apparently, were not subjected to such scrutiny.)' (pp. 48-9). The only relevant text cited, Plut. Lyc. 16.1-2, speaks of a scrutiny by 'the eldest of the tribesmen'-a mysterious group who were almost certainly not magistrates-of a newborn (to gennethen, to paidarion). Even supposing that only boys are included, this cannot be pushed still further to show that 'there is no evidence for female infanticide at Sparta' (p. 55). (2) Spartan women 'did reject the burden of continuous child production .... According to Cicero, the women refused to bear children' (p. 49). Cicero (Tusc. 2.15.36) cites a few Latin verses of uncertain provenance which refer to Spartan girls' enthusiasm for exercise rather thanfertilitas barbara-they are tough like Greek men, not like foreign women. (3) 'Not only were Spartan women fully integrated members of the oikos, but, as Xenophon (Lac Pol. 1.9) observed, women ruled the oikoi' (p. 50). Xenophon has a specific context in mind, the sharing of Spartan women for procreation, and 'rule' is too strong a word for katekhein-Talbert's translation, which P. uses elsewhere, gives 'have' (Plutarch on Sparta [1988], p. 167). This book is a useful supplement for recent work on the Greek family but no substitute.
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.