This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
This is a featured article of the German Wikipedia, and deserves translation.
I've only partially translated the first two sections. There are certainly many errors and inconsistencies. Your input is appreciated. Deatonjr06:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nikarete took Neaira as her daughter and provided for her "training" as a prostitute. Why is "training" in quotes? If there is a source that says she was "trained" but use of this word is considered dubious, the nature of the controversy should be explained in the article. From the description of the full role of Hetaera in that article's introduction:
In ancient Greek society, hetaerae were independent and sometimes influential women who were required to wear distinctive dresses and had to pay taxes. Composed mostly of ex-slaves and foreigners, these courtesans were renowned for their achievements in dance and music, as well as for their physical talents. There is evidence that, unlike most other women in Greek society at the time, hetaerae were educated. It is remarkable that hetaerae not only were the only females who would actively take part in the symposiums, but also that their opinions and beliefs were respected by men.[citation needed]
it appears to me that the word "training" may be used without reservation or quotation marks.
i have no objection to removing the quotes, but "training" was probably meant to signify the informality that such an apprenticeship involved. Deatonjr14:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Was the word in quotes in Debra Hamil's book, or were they inserted into the German Wiki? If the former, did the author explain her use of quotes? jiHymas@himivest.com 216.191.217.9201:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have access to the book, so there is no way no tell. In any case, it doesn't seem too significant of an issue. The meaning of the sentence is the same either way. Deatonjr03:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it's a minor issue, but disagree that the meaning of the sentence is the same either way. There's a sneer implicit in the use of quotes; if the sentence is simply a gratuitous sneer, it doesn't belong in the article. Actually, having thought about this a bit, I suggest that the sentence be changed to Nikarete took Neaira as her daughter and provided for her training as a hetaera. Or, since most people will not know what a hetaera was (I didn't!), perhaps Nikarete took Neaira as her daughter and provided for her training as a hetaera, the ancient Greek equivalent of a courtesan. jiHymas@himivest.com 69.158.144.2206:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to the other words in quotes in the introductory paragraphs: "bettering" is presumably a literal translation from source documents, but will be unfamiliar to most English-speaking readers; "to fornicate" is a specific phrase (loosely) translating "korinthiazein". jiHymas@himivest.com 216.191.217.9215:34, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
korinthiazein is a Greek verb, and left in italics. Again, "bettering" was my literal translation of the German article. The source was a book written (albeit translated into) German, so the wiki author probably wasn't quoting single words from the source.
Ironically, the primary source for this article is the book written by Yale professor Debra Hamil translated into german. "bettering" probably refers to nikarete's desire to establish her house as something other than a brothel. She purchased the girls as slaves, but raised them as her own, and allowed them to "better" themselves, with the eventual possibility of purchasing their own freedom. Deatonjr14:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hamel claims to have received a Ph.D in Classical Languages and Literatures from Yale; to have been a Visiting Assistant Professor at Wesleyan University for a few terms; and to be, basically, a professional writer. Wesleyan confirms that she worked there for a while, anyway. jiHymas@himivest.com 69.158.144.2206:11, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'm an owner of Hamels book, but in the german translation (made by professor Kai Brodersen, an well respected man). And I#m the owner of a book with the original source. "training" is an possible word. "Instruction" also would be OK. All the young girls were trained by Nikarete, to getting good prostitutes at the end, so say the original source by Apollodoros. And please do not iuse the article Hetaira to define something. The article is very bad and absolutely not on a modern standard. Actually in the reseach the old meaning oth "hetaira" is hardly controversial and disputed. In the article Aspasia is named as hetaira - this is a bad joke. The ancient aources could be interpreted in this way - but these authors had cultural and political causes to write againt a woman who thinks for herself. She never was an hetaira. So much about the horrible article. To say it in an easy and short way: hetairas were prostitutes who were more expensive and on an higher educationlevel. But normally they were not of influence. Often they were slaves, former slaves or foreingners. The special "Aura" (don't know the englich word for this) is an modern creation. The philologues and hitorians were imperessed by these woman - but it wasn't possible the see them as prostitutes in times were prostitution were a bad thing. So they made them an special version of greek women. The ancient sources don't justified that. And if someone likes to ask mrs Hamel, it's not a big problem. It's possible here. She's a very fine person and give quick answers. I hope, it's to understand, what I'm trying to say. Marcus Cyron21:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any evidence that the scene depicted in the image involves an actual hetaera? If a musical instrument or other prop was depicted, that would be one thing, but there's nothing in image that suggests to me that the woman is of the highest rank of prostitute - but I am not even an informed layman on the subject. This image might make a better illustration for Prostitution in ancient Greece. jiHymas@himivest.com 216.191.217.9201:33, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, but the image is used in the German article for Neaira, for whom there is no known likeness. There are several other images used in these articles that may be appropriate: Deatonjr03:21, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Jean-Léon Gérôme, Phryne before the Areopagus, 1861 The jacket illustration of Hamel's book, might be best - at least Phryne was in fact a hetara! I was just a little puzzled that the image caption specifies the woman as a hetaera, without much justification that I can see - quite the opposite, in fact, since the juxtaposition of the moneybag and the sex seems somewhat vulgar. jiHymas@himivest.com 69.158.144.2206:31, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Again: "hetaira" isn't a rank. It's a modern thing. In the ancient greek or roman world nobody would see that this way. There were differences - but not in this way. And the picture is a modern Painting. I used it as illustration in the german article with the same cause, Hamel jused it: it shows a prostitute in front of a trial. Marcus Cyron10:53, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am aware - from your comments - that "hetaira" is not a formalized rank. However, you have also stated that "hetairas were prostitutes who were more expensive and on an higher education level." I may very well be wrong here, but it seems to me that such a woman would not normally be depicted as having sex after hanging up the moneybag - that seems to me to be a much more vulgar thing, "wham bam thank you ma'am". From your description (and from the life of Neaira) it seems to me that the relationship would be more subtle - regular support in exchange for regular companionship & sex. In any event, the image caption specifies the woman as a hetaira. Why? What is there in the image that allows the identification of the woman as a hetaira rather than as a streetwalker? jiHymas@himivest.com 216.191.217.9214:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
More : On the image page the caption is Customer and a prostitute (a money pouch is hanging on the wall), tondo of a red-figure kylix. Munich, private collection, ARV 923,29.. The more general characterization seems much more defensible. jiHymas@himivest.com 216.191.217.9217:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Lead section. It is very skimpy for an article of this size. Needs expansion to better summarize the article.
Overall prose. There are a number of paragraphs that are very short and give the prose a choppy feel. Consider consolidating them.
Biography section, early years subsection. First paragraph and last paragraph need source citations.
A number of statements of opinion are unsourced. Specific instances (and these are not all of them) "It is also possible that Neaira wasn't in love..." and the trials and conclusion subsections. Another is the last sentence of the first paragraph of the Events surrounding Phano section. There are a number of other places in the article also.
You mention Apollodoros, but do not ever explain exactly who he is and why his opinion is relevant.
You need to source things to more modern sources than Pseudo-Demosthenes. I see that the first footnote says that it's based on a book by Hamel, but you need to say exactly where the opinions are coming from.
Generally, the article feels very disjointed. Some things are explained in detail, but others are left unexplained. One example is the Between brothel and freedom section, Neaira is in Athens, but the next section implies that she's in Megara.The prose also could use a good copyedit.The disjointed feel of the prose gives the impression that the article is unfocused.
I'm failing this article due to sourcing and prose issues. Please note that the above suggestions are not exhaustive by any means. The article is disjointed and the prose needs some serious work. Also, large numbers of opinions are sourced to either an ancient source or are unsourced. The lede also needs expansion.
Problem: the article seems not to be translated completely from the german Wikipedia. So there are missing parts. But the citation-fetish here on en:WP is too extreme. Marcus Cyron (talk) 11:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The section Conclusion seems unnecessary, especially the final paragraph, which is not a thorough review of the literature but merely mentions a few sources which are available in German (because this is part of the article which came translated directly from the German?)
Discussion of the authorship of the speech is relevant (though could be in the lead section instead?), but there is no evidence given that the academic consensus is that the speech should be considered Pseudo-Demosthenic, rather than authentic, and certainly not all authors on the topic refer to the speech as Pseudo-Demosthenic. Does this claim come from Hamel's book like so much of the rest of the article? Trevett (1992) appears to be a good source for this claim, but I don't have a copy of it on hand, though I can find at least five favourable reviews on JSTOR (though Carey notes that not all of Trevett's methodology is universally accepted: his use of analysis of sentence length has been criticised by e.g. Dover). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.233.97 (talk) 15:46, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Making extensive changes in a single edit, so I'm detailing them here:
Added various 'citation needed' tags; I plan to go away and hunt down citations for some of these.
Split references to Dem. and Athanaesius in third paragraph out into two, and moved the Dem. reference to the claim it supports.
Removed unreferenced 'probably very prominent' claim. If someone can come up with an ancient historian who has argued that, feel free to put it back in with a citation.
Unlinked Philetairos, as it links to Philetaerus, who doesn't seem to be the same person at all.
Cited claim that Lysias was a regular customer of Metaneira
Deleted unsourced description of Simos of Thessaly
Seems like a very interesting topic. I'm happy to offer a review, but it may not be for a few days. Others are of course welcome to chip in before that- it's a collaborative project after all! Josh Milburn (talk) 16:33, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"who seems to have worked on many of the speeches concerning Apollodorus" Do you mean "concerning", or just "by"?
I mean 'concerning': the point is that (many of) the speeches which Apollodorus made in court, whether or not they were written by him, were written by (the same) Pseudo-Demosthenes
"The speech provides more details than about any other prostitute of antiquity, and consequently a great deal of information about sex trade in the ancient Greek city-states (poleis)." Do you mean "The speech provides more details than any other about prostitutes of antiquity, and consequently a great deal of information about sex trade in the ancient Greek city-states (poleis)."
Good spot. Fixed.
"The Pseudo-Demosthenic" Do you mean that it's reminiscent of Pseudo-Demosthene or that it's by him? If the latter, this seems to offer more certainty than the lead implies it should be.
I mean that it's definitely not by Demosthenes, though it is in the Demosthenic corpus, and that it's probably by the same author as many of the other Apollodorus speeches (exactly which are all by the same author is still debated, and at least one is probably genuinely Demosthenes). If you have a suggestion for a better way of wording this, I'd be happy to incorporate it.
Ok- I'm happy with all of this. The issue is the slight inconsistency between "though the speech is often attributed to Pseudo-Demosthenes" and "The Pseudo-Demosthenic[4] speech"; so which is it? Is it definitely by Pseudo-Demosthenes, or is it merely often attributed to him? Josh Milburn (talk) 18:34, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think the problem here is the ambiguity in descriptions of authors of pseudepigraphic works. "Pseudo-Demosthenes" has two meanings: firstly, the author of any work attributed to Demosthenes but not by him, and secondly, the specific author of Ps-Dem. 59 (and the other Apollodoran speeches).
I'm not sure that the distinction in really relevant here. Perhaps if this was an article on the speech itself (which doesn't currently exist, but I'm working on...) we should go into detail on the question of authorship, but it doesn't really matter to Neaira's biography who exactly it was who wrote about her. What I'm going to do, then, is simply remove 'Pseudo-Demosthenic' from the section "speech against Neaira", and when I finish off the article on the speech itself, link that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caeciliusinhorto (talk • contribs) 10:56, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"though apart from a brief introduction of the case" Who gave this part?
Theomnestus. I've added a bit which clarifies this.
"know of is her purchase when she was a young girl" Could we perhaps have a link to an article on slavery to help provide some context?
"It is during this time that her first known visit to Athens occurred." Picky, but could we have a reference for this?
I'll try to dig up something for this.
" initiated into the Eleusinian Mysteries" Is this grammatically correct? Our article suggests that the Mysteries were a ceremony? (Apologies if I am displaying ignorance here.)
The article on the Mysteries twice uses the phrase 'initiation into the mysteries' and once 'initiating people into the Eleusinian rites'. I think we're okay here.
Greek Orators VI: Apollodorus against Neaira [Demosthenes] 59 is, I think, edited by Carey. Is that correct? It could be clarified in the reference.
I don't have a copy on hand, so I can't see what the frontispiece of the book says. Amazon.com credits Carey as the editor; AbeBooks, Carey as the author. Googling leads me to OpenISBN (I have never used the site before, I have no idea how reliable it is) which also has Carey as the author, and various other places online list him as either author or editor. I shall try to find a copy of the book itself to see if that clears things up (I'll definitely be able to get hold of one on the 4th of November, if not before).
"we cannot say for certain that the suit failed." Reference, please?
I should be able to dig one up for this, too.
I'll offer some more comments another time, but this gives you something to have a look at for now! Really interesting article; I commend you for taking it on. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:16, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've added various responses directly underneath your comments, and had a quick look at your edits; I'll try to go through them properly now and then dig up some of the citations you want...
Right, I've added a source for the fact that we don't know the outcome of the suit. I can't find any secondary sources which explicitly say that we don't know of any prior visits to Athens, and that's not really crucial to the article, so I've removed that and concatenated that paragraph with the following one. I looked through your changes to the article and they all look like improvements, so thanks for that. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:08, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I've done some more light copyediting and played around with the references a little. I'm now happy to promote to GA- I had a worry about the scope of the article (the strong focus on Neaira herself rather than the speech), but now that I know that you're working on a separate article on the speech, I'm not worried about this. A very worthy topic- I commend you for taking it on and look forward to seeing more of your articles in the future. Josh Milburn (talk) 11:21, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Rebbeca Futo Kennedy, Immigrant Women in Athens: Gender, Ethnicity, and Citizenship in the Classical City, Routledge, 2014. There's a section about Neaira and the way she was treated, from p. 103: "Violence against metic women: The case of Neaira." SarahSV(talk)02:20, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
_-_01.jpg)
b (MoS): 
b (focused): 
