Pausanias — the heavenly and the common

Pausanias begins by complaining that Phaedrus has framed the question badly. We cannot praise Love simply, he says, as if there were only one Love to praise. Greek religion already knows there are two Aphrodites — Pandemos, the Common, and Ourania, the Heavenly. Each Aphrodite has her own Eros. To praise Love truthfully you must distinguish them.

Common Love is what most people mean when they say they are in love. It is drawn to bodies, satisfied in the moment, indifferent to the character of the beloved, and as quick to fade as it was to arrive. It is the Love of inferior men. Heavenly Love is something else. It is drawn to the soul rather than the body, to intelligence and steadiness rather than youthful beauty, and it lasts. The Heavenly lover takes a young man whose mind he respects and devotes himself to making that young man better — a true mentor — and the relationship endures because what they share is character, not appetite.

Pausanias then turns to Athenian custom, which he says is confused. In some cities — Sparta, Boeotia, Elis — relationships between men and youths are celebrated; in others, where the Persians rule, they are forbidden, because rulers fear the loyalty such bonds produce. Athens is in between: it both encourages and disapproves. The right rule, Pausanias says, distinguishes by motive. A youth who yields for money or favor is shamed; a youth who yields because the lover has genuinely improved him is honored. By the end the defense of the kind of attachment Pausanias is in is transparent. He sits down. Aristophanes is to speak next but has the hiccups.