Revisiting Lysias: On the Murder of Eratosthenes
For students of history, especially those who have taken histories covering ancient Rome and Greece, many will fondly remember the case concerning the murder of Eratosthenes in Athens by Euphiletus, who found his victim engaging in an extramarital affair with his wife. Interestingly, the speech, written for the trial in question, offers wonderful insight into the public and private lives of men and women in ancient Athens.
The speech in question was composed, by a speech writer named Lysias, for the legal defense of Euphiletus, who was being charged with murder. One thing is clear throughout the speech: Euphiletus was hoping to justify his murder of Eratosthenes, making it abundantly clear he did nothing wrong, at least under Athenian law. Lysias’ speech was later studied as part of the great canon of oratory works. Lysias’ speech is still studied today by rhetoricians, historians, and classicists. What is most striking about Lysias’ speech for Euphiletus was the number of snapshots it offered of the oikos (home, private sphere) in Athenian society.
Seasoned professional and budding historians can examine Lysias’ speech beyond the legal defense offered by its author. In other words, much like the work of micro-historians and many social historians, this piece of oration allows us to examine the lives of those who are not often recorded within the history books. The voiceless, the quietened voices, are given some attention here, which is fantastic, even if it is difficult to tease out realities from this work.
At the beginning of his speech, Euphiletus describes the situation of his house, his marriage, and how he finally learns of the extramarital affair. In doing so, Euphiletus is made out to be the victim, someone who is completely (and utterly) justified in his murder of Eratosthenes.
When I, Athenians, decided to marry, and brought a wife into my house, for some time I was disposed neither to vex her nor to leave her too free to do just as she pleased; I kept a watch on her as far as possible, with such observation of her as was reasonable. But when a child was born to me, thence-forward I began to trust her, and placed all my affairs in her hands, presuming that we were now in perfect intimacy.
In this section of Euphiletus’ speech, we see a glimpse into the nature of the oikos in Athens. Moreover, we see the development of a loving marriage, something built on trust, which is cemented by the procreation of heirs or children by Euphiletus’ wife. With the birth of Euphiletus’ first child, we learn that his stricter controls over his wife’s affairs were loosened, as she showed she could be trusted to avoid engaging in extramarital affairs, and other things that might ruin his house and name.
This supposes Grecian women, especially in Athens, were not chattel owned by their controlling husbands, as some have suggested. Instead, it appears that Athenian women commanded more respect and power than many within the ancient world. Furthermore, this speech suggests Athenian women were given their quarters, providing some measure of privacy, meaning they had some level of autonomy even with the house itself.
[M]y dwelling is on two floors, the upper being equal in space to the lower, with the women's quarters above and the men's below.
As the speech moves forward, toward the realization of Euphiletus’ wife’s affair, we discover the use of makeup by Euphiletus’ wife. The use of makeup also suggests autonomy over one’s person. In other words, Euphiletus had no say in his wife’s appearance, and it shows that Grecian women exerted considerable independence and power over their bodies. Moreover, as we read (and re-read) Euphiletus’ descriptions of the events that transpired, we find that Athenian women were not confined to the oikos. This seems rather counterintuitive, especially considering the mixed messages we often receive from written history and primary documents. Wolpert, who compiled an abridged version of Lysias’ famous speech, and one I was introduced to by Dr. Dale Street back in 2010, offers the following observation: “If women did live in seclusion, then Eratosthenes would never have had the opportunity to meet Euphiletus’ wife.” Wolpert’s observation helps us shatter the notion that ancient societies clamped down on women, particularly their lives and their bodies. This isn’t entirely the case. Instead, women, especially in ancient cities like Athens, were able to exert their influence, project agency, and act as independent individuals, who didn’t necessarily have to follow the commands of their husbands.
What does this mean for us? It offers a rather interesting picture of Athenian society, one that portrays society in a way that seems counterintuitive. Women had autonomy, albeit with strings attached. Women were not confined to the private sphere, as some might believe. Instead, women appeared to be active members of Athens’ public sphere, and, again, in a very limited fashion. While Athenian society was unique in many ways, it does show the need to examine (and re-examine) the intricacies of pre-modern societies, so we can understand the agency exerted by women.
-—
Bibliography
1. Lysias, Lysias with an English translation by W.R.M. Lamb, M.A., Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1930. [Available in electronic form through the Perseus Digital Library.]
The Eighty-Column Rule is by Gregory Rapp and is subject to international copyright protections. However, if you feel inclined to share, respond to, or discuss anything here, let me know. Be sure to share a link to the essay you're sharing, responding to, or discussing. Every little thing helps!