was also adopted, that of putting out the the adulterer's eyes, either thus to extinguish the fire which had enflamed so destructively, or to stop the avenues by which temptation might again enter. This latter custom the Locrians observed in later ages, and a memorable instance of it is afforded in the case of Zaleucus their lawgiver,* who executed it with the utmost rigour, although the offender was his own son; but the feelings of the father conflicting with the sternness of the judge, he redeemed one of his son's eyes by putting out one of his own, and thus became as memorable for his mercy as he was for his justice.†

But the first who is said to have enacted a law, and instituted punishments against Adultery, was one Hyettus, an inhabitant of Argos. With a barbarity, characteristic of his age, he delivered the offenders up to the power of

* Valerius Maximus and Ælianus.

+ Owing to the similarity of names, (a circumstance which is found, not seldom, to originate such mistakes,) this anecdote is stated, by some writers, of" Seleucus Nicanor, who succeded Alexander in the government of Syria, and (as they say) decreed this exoculation against the adulterer, and first impartially executed it on his own son."

the man who detected them, who might dismember, or murder, or treat them in any manner he might think best.

A discretion somewhat similar to this was afterwards authorized by the laws of Solon. According to the statement of Lysias, if any one were imprisoned on suspicion of Adultery, he might appeal to the Thesmothetæ, and, if he was acquitted of the crime, he was to be discharged; but, if guilty, he was to give sureties for his future chastity, and punished according to the discretion of the judges. This supposes that their authority to punish was restrained within the limits of the vitæ et necis potestas.

The Greek writers have mentioned a remarkable kind of infliction, employed as the punishment of this offence. It is chiefly to be collected from passages in Lucian, Diogenes Laertius, † and Vossius. It was that of impaling the offender with a radish, or a fish called the mugilis, or mullet.

Ραφανίδι την πυγην βεβυσμένος. Lucian.

+ Προς τον μοιχον έφη, αγνοεις οτι ου μονον εχει χρηστον, αλλα και papandis. Diog. Laert.

↑ Tiμwgos porxar paparos. Voss. in Notes on Catullus.

The Latin poets, Juvenal* and Catullus,† also allude to it: whether there were any thing similar in the Roman jurisprudence; or whether, if not sanctioned by the magistrate, or any express law, it was a custom prevalent among them, is altogether uncertain.

Probably this punishment, like that mentioned in Homer, was confined to the poorer class; it is not known if it was mortal, although one instance is recorded, that of Alcæus, who is said to have died of it. It was called παρατίλμος ραφανίδωσις.

By the laws of Crete, the punishment of Adultery was characterized as much by satire as by severity. They covered the guilty persons with wool, as an emblem of the effeminacy of their disposition, and in that dress, carried them through the city to the house of the magistrate, who condemned them to ignominy, which deprived them of all their privileges,

"Quosdam mæchos et mugilis intrat." Juv. Sat. x.

t "Ah tum te miserum, malique fati Quem attractis pedibus, patente portâ Percurrent raphanique, mugilesque."

Catull. Epig. xv.

See Bayle's Dictionary, in Voc. Alceus.

and their share in the management of public business.

The Athenian punishments were very arbitrary, and inflicted often solely at the will of the supreme magistrate. An instance of extreme severity is mentioned in the annals of Attica, as imposed by the last Archon of Codrus's line, on his own son, whom he caused to be torn in pieces for this crime.*

This was, however, before the time of Solon; part of his legislation on this subject has been already noticed; but, in addition, it may be observed, that he enacted, that the husband who detected his wife in the act, might kill the adulterer; as if the lawgiver felt the probability, that the cool and dilatory sentence of the law would not keep pace with the vengeance which a husband might consider due to this crime. The adulteress was likewise ever afterwards prohibited the use of ornaments; and any one who found her wearing them was at liberty to tear them from

* This Archon's name was Hippomanes, a somewhat unfortunate one for such an act. He also discovered a similar punishment for his daughter, whom, having been debauched by a citizen, he shut up with a wild horse, without food, to be devoured alive. Suidas says, there was a place in the City of Athens, called o xa in xupng, memory of the horse and the young girl.

E

her. Æschines adds, that he was allowed also to beat her.

The only other observation on the punishment of Adultery, seems to be that of Demosthenes, who states a consequence of this crime to have been, in his day, a kind of privation, similar to our suspension ab ingressu ecclesiæ. The adulteress (he says) was forbidden from entering any public temple on pain of suffering any punishment except death.

These, then, are the penalties of Adultery by the laws of Greece; on which we may briefly remark, that, various as they were, they all appear to have been as severe as they could have been, not to be capital. This last they were only under certain circumstances, though Plato made a law, that, whoever should kill an adulterer, should be exempt from punishment.

We pass now to their views of Divorce.

In respect of Divorce some little analogy is observable in the laws of Greece to those of the Mosaic Institutes, although, generally, considerable variation prevailed.

Divorce was often permitted for slight causes in some parts of Greece, for the laws differed greatly in the several districts. In