A very slight acquaintance with Greco-Roman literature furnishes abundant information on this matter. I have no need, therefore, to dwell on it, but I must quote a curious passage of Strabo, from which we learn that the ancient Cretans associated with so-called Socratic amours the ceremonial of marriage by capture, of which I shall soon have to speak. This strange passage is as follows:--“It is not by persuasion, but by capture, that they obtain possession of the beloved object. Three days or more in advance the _erastes_ apprises the friends of the young boy of his project of abduction. It would be considered the greatest disgrace for them to conceal the child, or prevent him from passing by the road indicated. By so doing they would appear to confess that he did not merit the favours of such a distinguished _erastes_. What do they do therefore? They meet together, and if the ravisher is equal or superior in rank and all other respects to the family of the child, they are content in their pursuit to comply with the idea of the law, and to make a semblance of attack only, allowing the child to be carried off, and even testifying their satisfaction; but if, on the contrary, the ravisher should be of greatly inferior rank, they invariably rescue the child from his hands. In any case the pursuit comes to an end when the child has crossed the threshold of the _andrion_ of his captor.” We may doubtless presume, from this passage, that the ancient Cretans were no longer in the state of bestial coarseness of the New Caledonians. With them the capture was a symbol or comedy. It was a mark of esteem, paid less to the beauty of the child than to his valour and propriety of manners. In fact, the boy had the legal right to revenge himself, if he had suffered any violence in his capture; and in restoring him to liberty his ravisher loaded him with presents, some of which were obligatory and legal, namely, a warrior’s cloak, an ox, and a goblet; it was a kind of initiation in virility, and it was considered a disgrace for a young boy not to obtain an _erastes_.[140] But even if we admit that all the ceremonial of this singular platonic marriage among the Cretans was perfectly innocent, it arose, none the less, from a moral laxity, plainly showing that ancient morals were gross in the extreme. I here conclude my enumeration. Short as it has been, for I have purposely limited my facts to a small number, it is sufficient to prove that for an immense period man has been a very coarse animal. We may, therefore, expect to find him adapting without scruple forms of marriage or sexual association quite unusual among Europeans, and which it now remains for me to describe briefly. II. _Some Strange Forms of Marriage._