tone of voice). The word ἄγριος (rough, savage) is specially used of
the paederast, _Aristophanes_, Clouds 347., and the Scholiast on the
passage; the same is true of χαλεπὸς (hard, harsh). The Scholiast on
_Aeschines_, In Timarch., p. 731 R., ἀγρίους τοὺς σφόδρα ἐπτοημένους
περὶ τὰ παιδικὰ καὶ χαλεποὺς παιδεραστάς. (rough men that are above
measure agog for boy-loves,—hard paederasts.) All through the Speech
are found a host of allusions to the expressions in common use to
signify paederastia, which may well make the right understanding of it
difficult.
[282] Τὸ πρᾶγμα (the thing) has the same meaning here as πρᾶξις (doing,
intercourse) in _Aeschines_, In Timarch., pp. 159, 160. _Plato_,
Sympos., 181 b.
[283] Κινεῖται (is raised, is stirred), from which the word Κίναιδος,
_cinaedus_, is derived.
[284] On the _digitus medius_ (middle finger) or _infamis_ compare
_Upton_ on Arrian’s Diss. Epictet, II. 2. p. 176.—“_Abhandlung von den
Fingern_, deren Verrichtungen und symbolischen Bedeutung.” (Treatise
on the Fingers, their Gestures and Symbolic Meaning). Leipzig 1756.
pp. 172-221. But in particular _Forberg_, loco citato p. 338. note h.:
Cum digitus medius porrectus, reliquis incurvatis, tentam repraesentet
mentulam cum coleis suis, factum est, ut medium digitum hoc modo
ostenderent (Graeci uno verbo dixerunt σκιμαλίζειν) cinaedis, sive
pelliciendis, sive irridendis. (In as much as the middle finger
stretched out, the other fingers being bent under, represents the
extended penis with its bags (testicles), it came about that the Greeks
used to show the middle finger in this way (the Greeks expressed it by
one word σκιμαλίζειν) to cinaedi, whether to beckon them or by way of
derision.). _Martial_, I. 93., Saepe mihi queritur Celsus.... Tangi
se digito, Mamuriane, tuo. (Often Celsus complains to me that he is
touched by your finger, Mamurianus.) VI. 70., Ostendit digitum, sed
impudicum. (He shows a finger, but an indecent one). Οἱ δὲ Ἀττικοὶ καὶ
τὸν μέσον τῆς χειρὸς δάκτυλον καταπύγωνα ὠνόμαζον. (Now the Attics used
to call the middle finger of the hand the _lewd_ finger.) _Pollux_,
Onomast., II. 4. 184. _Suetonius_, Caligula, ch. 56., Osculandam manum
offerre, formatam commotamque in obscoenum modum. (To offer his hand to
be kissed, put into an obscene shape and moved in an obscene way.) _Th.
Echtermeyer_, “Progr. über Namen und symbol. Bedeut. der Finger bei
den Griechen und Römern.” (Names and Symbolic Meaning of the Fingers
amongst the Greeks and Romans.) Halle 1835. 4to., pp. 41-49., treats
very exhaustively of this subject.
[285] On account of the resemblance of its harsh, screeching note?
_Reiske_ remarks on this passage: Est autem κερχνίς avis quaedam a
stertendo sic dicta, vel stridore, quem edit similem iis qui stertunt.
(But the κερχνίς,—hawk, is a bird so called from the snoring, or harsh
note it utters, like men who snore). Comp. _Schneider_, Lexicon, under
words κέρχνος and κέρχω (hoarseness, to make hoarse).
[286] _Horace_, Odes II. 8.,
Ulla si iuris tibi peierati
Poena, Barine, nocuisset unquam,
Dente si nigro fieres, vel uno
Turpior ungui, Crederem.
(If _any_ punishment for perjured faith had ever hurt you, Barinus, if
you had had but a blackened tooth, or had been disfigured in one single
nail, I would believe).
[287] Epistle to the Romans, Ch. I. vv. 24, 26, 27.
[288] Names of noted women are given by _Martial_, bk. XI. Epigr. 95.
Comp. below. p. 118. note 3.
[289] Rerum Gestarum bk. XIV. ch. 19.—_Petronius_, Satir., ch. 68.,
says of a slave: duo tamen vitia habet, quae si non haberet, esset
omnium nummorum: recutitus est et _stertit_. (Yet has he two faults,
lacking which he would be a man above price: he is circumcised and he
snorts.)—Terence, Eunuch., Act V. sc 1. v. 53, Fatuus et insulsus,
bardus, _stertit noctes et dies_. Neque istum metuas ne amet mulier.
(Foolish and silly, a stupid fellow, _he snores all night and all day_.
Have no fear that a woman could love him.)
[290] Bk. XII. Epigr. 87.,
_Paediconibus os olere_ dicis.
Hoc si sic, ut ais, Fabulle, verum est,
Quid tu credis olere cunnilingis?
(You say paederasts’ breath smells foul. If what you allege
is true, Fabullus, what sort of a breath think you have
_cunnilingi_?—_cunnilingi_, i. e. illi qui pudenda mulierum lingunt,
men who lick women’s private parts).
[291] _Lucian_, Philopatr., ch. 20. relates: Ἀνθρωπίσκος δέ τις,
τοὔνομα Χαρίκενος, σεσημμένον γερόντιον, _ῥέγχον τῇ ῥινὶ_, ὑπέβηττε
μύχιον, ἐχρέμπτετο ἐπισεσυρμένον· ὁ δὲ πτύελος κυανώτερος θανάτου· εἶτα
ἤρξατο ἐπιφθέγγεσθαι κατισχνημένον. (But a little man, whose name was
Charicenus, a tiny mouldy old man, _snorting through his nose_, gave
a deep cough and cleared his throat with a long-drawn hawking,—and
his spittle was blacker than death. Then he began to speak in a thin
voice). The same is said of an Egyptian boy in Lucian’s Navigium, ch.
2. _Aulus Gellius_, Noct. Attic., Bk. III. ch. 5., gives the following
story: Plutarchus refert, Arcesilaum philosophum vehementi verbo usum
esse de quodam nimis delicato divite, qui incorruptus tamen et castus
et perinteger dicebatur. Num cum _vocem eius infractam_, capillumque
arte compositum et oculos ludibundos atque illecebrae voluptatisque
plenos videret: _Nihil interest_, inquit _quibus membris cinaedi sitis,
posterioribus an prioribus_. (Plutarch reports a biting phrase made
use of by the philosopher Arcesilaus of a certain rich and over-dainty
man, who yet had the name of being unspoiled and temperate and highly
virtuous. Noting his _broken voice_, and hair artfully arranged, and
rolling eyes full of allurement and wantonness, “It makes no odds,” he
said, “which members ye play the _cinaedus_ with, whether those behind
or those in front.”) Comp. § 16. below.
[292] Paedagog., bk. III. ch. 4. p. 230.
[293] _E. G. Bose_, νόσῳ θηλείᾳ· (Discussion of the νόσος θήλεια of
the Scythians). Leipzig 1774. 4to.—_Chr. Heyne_, “De maribus inter
Scythas morbo effeminatis et de Hermaphroditis Floridae.” (On the
transformation of males into females among the Scythians as the result
of disease, and on the Hermaphrodites of Florida). Göttingen 1779.,
Vol. I. pp. 28-44.—_E. L. W. Nebel_, “De Morbis Veterum obscuris.” (On
some Obscure Diseases of the Ancients) Sect. I. Giessen 1794. No. I.
pp. 17, 18.—_Graaf_, “Morbus femineus Scytharum.” (Feminine Disease
of the Scythians). Würzburg N. D. 8vo., is cited by _Friedreich_.
p. 33.—_C. W. Stark_, “De νούσῳ θηλείᾳ apud Herodotum Prolusio.”
(Disquisition on the νούσος θήλεια in Herodotus). Jena 1827. 64 pp.
4to.—_J. B. Friedreich_, “Νοῦσος θήλεια”, a Historical fragment in his
“Magazin für Seelenheilkunde” (Magazine of Medical Psychology). Pt.
I. Würzburg 1829., pp. 71-78., and in his “Analekten zur Natur- und
Heilkunde” (Selections in Natural and Medical Science) Würzburg 1831.
4to., pp. 28-33.
[294] _Herodotus_, Hist. Bk. I. ch. 105. Τοῖσι δὲ τῶν Σκυθέων συλήσασι
τὸ ἱρὸν τὸ ἐν Ἀσκάλωνι, καὶ τοῖσι τούτων αἰεὶ ἐκγὁνοισι, ἐνέσκηψε ἡ
θεὸς _θήλειαν νοῦσον_· ὥστε ἅμα λέγουσί τε οἱ Σκύθαι διὰ τοῦτό σφεας
νοσέειν, καὶ ὁρᾷν παρ’ ἑωυτοῖσι τοὺς ἀπικνεομένους ἐς τὴν Σκυθικὴν
χώρην ὡς διακέαται, τοὺς καλέουσι _Ἐναρέας_ οἱ Σκύθαι.—for translation
see text.
[295] “Recherches et Dissertations sur Herodote.” (Researches and
Dissertations on Herodotus). Dijon 1746. 4to., pp. 207-212. Ch. XX.,
Ce que c’étoit que la maladie des femmes, que la Déesse Venus envoya
aus Scythes. (What was the nature of the “Women’s Disease” which the
goddess Venus sent on the Scythians).
[296] _Costar_, “Defence des Œuvres de Voiture.” (Defence of the Works
of Voiture), and “Apologie” p. 194.
[297] _Sprengel_, “Apologie des Hippocrates.” (Defence of Hippocrates).
Leipzig 1792. Pt. II. p. 616.
[298] _De Girac_, “Réponse à l’Apologie de Voiture par Costar.” (Reply
to Costar’s Apology of Voiture). p. 54.
[299] _Bayer_, “Memoria Scythica in Commentat. Petropolitan,” (Memoir
on the Scythians,—in St. Petersburg Commentaries). 1732., Vol. III. pp.
377, 8.
[300] Part. VI. p. 35.
[301] _Patin_, “Comment. in vetus monument. Ulpiae Marcellin.”
(Commentary on the ancient Monument of Ulpia Marcellina) p. 413.
[302] _Hensler_, “Geschichte der Lustseuche.” (History of Venereal
Disease). Altona 1783., Vol. I. p. 211.
[303] _Degen_, Translation of Herodotus (German), Vol. I. p. 81. note.
[304] _Mercurialis_, Various Readings. Bk. III. d. 64.
[305] _Sauvages_, “Nosologia methodic.” (Systematic Nosology). Lyons
1772., Vol. VII. p. 365.
[306] _Koray_ on Hippocrates, “De aere aq. et loc.” (On influence of
Air, Water and Locality)., Vol. II. p. 326.
[307] In _Euripides’_ Hippolytus, v. 5., Venus says of herself:
τοὺς μὲν σέβοντας τἀμὰ πρεσβεύω κράτη,
σφάλλω δ’ ὅσοι φρονοῦσιν εἰς ἡμᾶς μέγα.
(I love and protect him who recognises my right, and undo him whose
pride rebels against me).
[308] _Plato_, Sympos. 192 b., πρὸς γάμους καὶ παιδοποιΐας οὐ
προσέχουσι τὸν νοῦν φύσει, ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ τοῦ νόμου ἀναγκάζονται, ἀλλ’
ἐξαρκεῖ αὐτοῖς μετ’ ἀλλήλων καταζῆν ἀγάμοις. (To marriage and the
procreation of children they pay no attention whatever naturally, but
are only forced by the law to do so. It is enough for them to live out
their lives with one another unwed).
[309] “Histoire d’Herodote, par M. Larcher.” (Herodotus’ History,
translated (French) by Mons. Larcher). Vol. I. Paris 1786., p. 368.
Un homme d’esprit, mais peu instruit, croyoit que le sentiment de M.
le President Bouhier se detruisoit de lui-même. Peut on supposer,
disoit il, que Vénus aveugle en sa vengeance, se soit fait à elle
même l’affront le plus sanglant, et qu’aux dépens de son culte, elle
ait procuré des adorateurs au Dieu de Lampsaque, qu’elle ne doit
chérir que lorsqu’il vient sacrifier sur ses autels. (A witty but
superficial critic considered the opinion of the president Bouhier to
be self-contradictory. Can Venus be supposed, he argued, so blind in
her vengeance as to have put on herself the deadliest of affronts, and
at the expense of her own worship to have given adorers to the god of
Lampsacus, whom she must only patronize when he comes to sacrifice at
her altars?)
[310] _Natalis Comes_, Mythologia p. 392., according to the report
of several Scholiasts. The Scholiast on _Lucian_, Amores ch. 2.,
writes Ἐπεὶ καὶ ταῖς Λημνίαις γυναιξὶν ἔγκοτος Ἀφροδίτη γενομένη,
εἶτα _δυσώδεις αὐτὰς ποιήσασα, ἀποκοίτους αὐτὰς ποιῆσαι τοὺς ἄνδρας
αὐτῶν ἠνάγκασεν_. (When Aphrodité, angered with the women of Lemnos,
had then _made them malodorous, and so compelled their husbands to
expel them from their beds_). Similarly the Scholiast on _Apollonius
Rhodius_, Argonaut., I. 609., αἱ Λήμνιαι γυναῖκες ... τῶν τῆς Ἀφροδίτης
τιμῶν κατολιγωρήσασαι, καθ’ ἑαυτῶν τὴν θεὸν ἐκίνησαν· _πάσαις γάρ
δυσοσμίαν ἐνέβαλεν, ὡς μηκέτι αὐτὰς τοῖς ἀνδράσιν ἀρέσκειν_. (The
Lemnian women, by neglecting the honours due to Aphrodité, stirred
the goddess’ anger against them. For _she inflicted on them all an
ill-odour, so that they were no longer pleasing to their husbands_).
To the same purport the Scholiast on _Euripides_, Hecuba v. 887., who
cites Didymus as authority: Ἐν Λήμνῳ γυναῖκες ἐτέλουν ἐτήσιον ἑορτὴν
Ἀφροδίτῃ· ἐπεὶ οὖν ποτε καταφρονήσασαι τῆς θεοῦ, ἀπέλιπον τὸ ἔθος, _ἡ
Ἀφροδίτη ἐνέβαλεν αὐταῖς δυσωδίαν, ὡς μὴ δύνασθαι τοὺς ἑαυτῶν ἄνδρας
αὐταῖς πλησιάσαι_· αἱ δὲ νομίσασαι, ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνδρῶν καταφρονεῖσθαι,
τούτους πάντας ἀπέκτειναν. ὁ δέ Δίδυμος οὕτω. (At Lemnos the women used
to celebrate a yearly festival in honour of Aphrodité. And so when
on one occasion they scorned the goddess and neglected the custom,
Aphrodité afflicted them with an ill odour, so that their own husbands
could not come near them. And they concluding they were scorned by
their husbands, killed them all. Didymus confirms this). The Lesbian
_Myrtilus_ or _Myrsilus_ gives a different account of the origin of
the evil smell of the Lesbian women, representing it in the First Book
of his “Lesbica” as a consequence of the magic arts of Medea, who had
landed with Jason at Lemnos. The story was taken from the lost Work of
Myrtilus by _Antigonus Carystius_, Histor. mirab. collect., edit. J.
Meursius. Leyden 1629. 4to., ch. 130. p. 97., Τὰς δέ Λημνίας δυσόσμους
γενέσθαι, Μηδείας ἀφικομένης μετ’ Ἰάσονος καὶ φάρμακα ἐμβαλλούσης εἰς
τὴν νῆσον· κατὰ δέ τινα χρόνον καὶ μάλιστα ἐν ταύταις ταῖς ἡμέραις, ἐν
αἷς ἱστοροῦσι τὴν Μήδειαν παραγενέσθαι, δυσώδεις αὐτὰς οὕτως γίνεσθαι
ὥστε μηδένα προσϊέναι. (And that the Lemnian women became malodorous,
when Medea came thither with Jason and cast poisonous drugs on the
island; and that for some length of time and particularly in those days
when Medea is related to have been there, they were so ill-smelling
that no man could approach them.) Also the Scholiast on _Apollonius
Rhodius_, I. 165., says: τῶν ἄλλων ἱστορούντων, ὅτι κατὰ χόλον τῆς
Ἀφροδίτης αἱ Λημνιάδες δύσοσμοι ἐγένοντο, Μυρτίλος ἐν πρώτῳ Λεσβικῶν
διαφέρεται· καὶ φησὶ τὴν Μήδειαν παραπλέουσαν, διὰ ζηλοτυπίαν ῥίψαι
εἰς τὴν Λήμνον φάρμακον, καὶ δυσοσμίαν γενέσθαι ταῖς γυναιξίν, εἶναί
τε μέχρι τοῦ νῦν κατ’ ἐνιαυτὸν ἡμέραν τινὰ, ἐν ᾗ διὰ τὴν δυσωδίαν
ἀποστρέφονται τὰς γυναῖκας ἄνδρές τε καὶ υἱεῖς. (Whereas others relate
that in consequence of the anger of Aphrodité the women of Lemnos
became evil-smelling, Myrtilus in the first Book of the “Lesbica”
tells a different tale. He says that Medea, sailing past the land,
moved by envy cast a poison on the island, and so an ill odour fell on
the women; further that there is down to the present time a day once
a year, on which owing to this foul odour husbands and sons turn and
flee from the women.) Finally there is an Epigram of _Lucillius_ in the
_Greek Anthology_ (edit. H. de Bosch, Vol. I. p. 416.) Bk. II. Tit. 14.
no. 4., mentioning the evil smell of the Lemnian women:
Οὔτε Χίμαιρα τοιοῦτον _ἔπνει_ κακὸν, ἡ καθ’ Ὅμηρον,
Οὐκ ἀγέλη ταύρων (ὡς ὁ λόγος) πυρίπνους,
_Οὐ Λῆμνος σύμπασ’_, οὐχ Ἁρπυιῶν τὰ περισσὰ,
Οὐδ’ ὁ Φιλοκτήτου ποὺς ἀποσηπόμενος,
Ὥστε σε παμψηφεὶ νικᾶν, Τελέσιλλα, Χιμαίρας,
Σηπεδόνας, ταύρους, ὄρνεα, _Λημνιάδας_.
(Neither the Chimaera of Homer had so ill a smell, nor yet the herd
(as the story goes) of fire-breathing bulls, not _all Lemnos_, not
the foulest of the Harpies, nor even Philoctetes’ putrefying foot.
So you see, Telesilla, you outdo—the vote is unanimous,—Chimaeras,
putrefactions, bulls, birds, _Lemnian women_!) The stench of Telesilla
outdid, we see, all known evil smells, even that of the Lemnian women,
etc. Also in _Valerius Flaccus_, bk. II. 99-241., is found this myth
of the Lemnian women.
[311] Hence Iphis, in _Ovid_, Metam., IX. 723 sqq., says:
Iphis amat, qua posse frui desperat, et auget
Hoc ipsum flammas: ardetque in virgine virgo.
Vix tenens lacrimas: Quis me manet exitus, inquit,
Cognita quam nulli, quam prodigiosa novaeque
Cura tenet Veneris? si dii mihi parcere vellent.
_Naturale malum_ saltem et de _more_ dedissent.
Nec vaccam vaccae, nec equas amor urit equarum.
Femina femineo correpta cupidine nulla est.
Vellem nulla forem.
(Iphis loves one that she knows, alas! she can never enjoy, and this
fact itself increases her passion. A maiden burns for a maiden. Hardly
keeping back her tears she cries: What fate awaits me,—me who suffer
sorrow of Venus known to none, a sorrow monstrous and of strange new
sort? If the gods were willing to spare me, they would have given me a
_natural_ curse surely, one _of ordinary kind_. No cow burns for a cow,
no mare for the love of mares, nor any woman is taken with love for a
woman. Would I were no woman!)
Similarly _Lucillius_ says of the paederast Cratippus in the Greek
Anthology, bk. II. Tit. V. no. 1.;
Τὸν φιλόοπαιδα Κράτιππον ἀκούσατε· θαῦμα γὰρ ὑμῖν
Καινὸν ἀπαγγέλλω· _πλὴν μεγάλαι νεμέσεις_·
Τὸν φιλόπαιδα Κράτιππον ἀνεύρομεν ἄλλο γένος· τί;
Τῶν ἑτεροζήλων ἤλπισα τοῦτ’ ἂν ἐγὼ;
Ἤλπισα τοῦτο, Κράτιππε; μανήσομαι, εἰ λύκος εἶναι
Πᾶσι λέγων ἐφάνης ἐξαπίνης ἔριφος.
(Of the boy-loving Cratippus will I tell you; for a strange new wonder
I report. _Yea! great are the penalties he pays._ The boy-loving
Cratippus we have found has another character. What character? I should
have thought him to be of those whose love is eager on one side only.
Did I think so, Cratippus? Well, I shall seem a madman, if—professing
the while to all to be a wolf,—you of a sudden appear in the character
of a kid).
But most important in this connection is the passage of _Aeschines_,
Orat. in Timarch., p. 178., μὴ γὰρ οἴεσθαι, ὦ Ἀθηναῖοι, τὰς τῶν
ἀτυχημάτων ἀρχὰς ἀπὸ θεῶν, ἀλλ’ οὐχ ὑπ’ ἀνθρώπων ἀσελγείας γίνεσθαι,
μηδὲ τοὺς ἠσεβηκότας, καθάπερ ἐπὶ ταῖς τραγῳδίαισι, Ποινὰς ἐλαύνειν
καὶ κολάζειν δᾳσὶν ἡμμέναις· ἀλλ’ αἱ προπετεῖς τοῦ σώματος ἡδοναὶ, καὶ
τὸ μηδὲν ἱκανὸν ἡγεῖσθαι. (For you must not dream, Athenians, that the
causes of calamities are from the gods, and that such are not rather
due to the wickedness of mankind. Do not imagine the impious are
driven by Furies, as is represented in the Tragedies, and chastised
with blazing torches; nay! it is reckless indulgence in bodily
pleasures that is the scourge, and immoderate desires). Comp. _Theon_,
Progymn., ch. 7.—_Cicero_, Orat. in Pison., 20., Nolite putare, Patres
Conscripti, ut in scena videtis homines consceleratos impulso deorum
terreri Furiarum taedis ardentibus. Sua quemque fraus, suum facinus,
suum scelus, sua audacia de sanitate ac mente deturbat. Hae sunt
impiorum Furiae, hae flammae, hae faces. (Dream not, Conscript Fathers,
that wicked men, as you see represented on the stage, are driven in
terror, at the instigation of the gods, by the blazing torches of the
Furies. ’Tis his own dishonesty, his own wickedness, his own baseness,
his own recklessness, that destroys each man’s health and sanity. These
are the furies that torment the impious, these the flames and torches).
[312] De Bello Peloponnesiaco, Bk. I. ch. 12. (edit. Bauer. Leipzig
1790. 4to., p. 33.), καὶ Φιλοκτήτης διὰ τὸν Πάριδος θάνατον _θήλειαν
νόσον_ νοσήσας, καὶ μὴ φέρων τὴν αἰσχύνην, ἀπελθὼν ἐκ τῆς πατρίδος,
ἔκτισε πόλιν, ἣν διὰ _τὸ πάθος Μαλακίαν_ ἐκάλεσε.—for translation see
text above. Our view on this passage is shared by _Manso_, pp. 46 and
70.
[313] Bk. II. Epigr. 84. How _Meier_, loco citato p. 160., could derive
a proof from this passage that Philoctetes had been the _pathic_ of
Hercules is beyond our comprehension, seeing that Hercules had long
been dead when Philoctetes was punished with this vice by Venus.
[314] Bk. II. Epigr. 89.
[315] Works of Ausonius; Delphin edition, revised by _J. B. Souchay_.
Paris 1730. 4to., p. 4. Carm. 71. Following a ridiculous custom the
“Obscoena e textu Ausoniano resecta” (Objectionable passages removed
from the text of Ausonius) are printed together at the end of the Book,
and separately paged.
[316] Instit. orat, Bk. X. ch. 1.
[317] Fab. 148.—_Barth_ on Statius’ Thebaid. V. 59.
[318] Tragoed. Hippolyt., 124.; and _Servius_ on _Virgil_, Aeneid,
Bk. VI. v. 14., Venus vehementer dolens stirpem omnem Solis persequi
_infandis amoribus_ coepit. (Venus, exceedingly indignant, proceeds to
afflict all the descendants of the Sun _with abominable loves_.)
[319] Amores, ch. 2., οὕτω τις ὑγρὸς τοῖς ὄμμασιν ἐνοικεῖ μύωψ, ὃς
ἅπαν πάλλος εἰς αὑτὸν ἁρπάζων ἐπ’ οὐδενὶ κόρῳ παύεται· καὶ συνεχὲς
ἀπορεῖν ἐπέρχεταί μοι, τίς οὗτος Ἀφροδίτης ὁ χόλος· οὐ γὰρ Ἡλιάδης ἐγώ
τις, οὐδὲ Λημνιάδων _ἔρις_, οὐδὲ Ἱππολύτειον ἀγροικίαν ὠφρυωμένος, ὡς
ἐρεθίσαι τῆς θεοῦ τὴν ἄπαυστον ταύτην ὀργήν. (for translation see text
above.) The word ἔρις—strife, in this passage is obviously corrupt,
having got into the text probably by confusion with ἐρεθίσαι—to
provoke, standing just below in the MS. _Jacobs_ proposed ἔρνος—scion,
but according to _Lehmann_ this is too poetical a word for _Lucian_;
ἐρεὺς—in the sense of _heir_, might very well be read, giving the
same meaning. Could ὕβριν—insolence, have been the original word in
the text? Lucian must have written the passage with a reference to
the above mentioned punishment of the Lemnian women by Venus, and
by Λημνιάδων—Lemnian women, we must understand not the descendants
of the women of Lemnos, but these women themselves, _Apollonius
Rhodius_ (Argon., I. 653.) also using Λημνιάδες δὲ γυναῖκες—Lemnian
women, of these same inhabitants of the island. Now the Greeks
characterized every form of behaviour of a kind to incur the anger
of the goddess by the word ὕβρις—overbearing insolence; and this
would exactly fit in the passage, for the οὐδὲ ... οὐδὲ—neither ...
nor, calls for a correspondence of phrase in each clause, and ὕβρις
and ἀγροικία—brutal insensibility, tally excellently. For ὕβρις in
the sense indicated comp. _Clement of Alexandria_, Paedag., Bk. II.
ch. 10., ἐπιθυμία γὰρ κακὴ ὄνομα ὕβρις, καὶ τὸν τῆς ἐπιθυμίας ἵππον,
ὑβριστὴν ὁ Πλάτων (Phaedr. pp. 1226, 27.) προσεῖπεν, Ἵπποι θηλυμανεῖς
ἐγενήθητέ μοι, ἀναγνούς. (for evil concupiscence is called ὕβρις,
and the horse of concupiscence Plato named Ὑβριστὴς—Overbearing,
having read “Wild horses ye became to me.”) We should then have to
translate, supposing we read ὕβριν in the text, “I am neither puffed
up with the insolence of the women of Lemnos, nor yet with the brutal
insensibility of Hippolytus.” Very possibly an Attic writer would not
have expressed himself so; but we must remember that _Fr. Jacobs_, a
man of fine discrimination of Classical diction, denied from the first
Lucian’s authorship of the passage _ob orationem difficilem valdeque
impeditam_—because of its difficult and exceedingly awkward style. The
unfavourable judgement which _Lehmann_ in his edition passes on this
Work (Lucian’s Amores) so far as its general tenor is concerned, is
based we may observe almost entirely on the confusion of paedophilia
with paederastia. However under no circumstances has any actual
allusion been made to the lewdness of the Lemnian women, if _Belin_,
_de Ballu_, and others agree in this rendering.
[320] De special legib., Opera Vol. II. p. 304.
[321] _Ovid_, Metamorphos., bk. X. 238.
[322] _Ovid_, Metamorphos., bk. X. 298.—_Servius_ on Virgil, Eclog. X.
18. _Fulgentius_, Mytholog. III. 8.
[323] _Ausonius_, Epigr. C.,
De Hermaphrodito
Mercurio genitore satus, genetrice Cythere,
Nominis ut mixti, sic corporis Hermaphroditus,
Concretus sexu, sed non perfectus, utroque:
Ambiguae Veneris, neutro potiundus amori.
(Of Hermaphroditus.—Born of Mercury as sire, of Cythera as mother,
Hermaphroditus, at once of compound name and compound body, combined of
either sex, but complete in neither; a being of ambiguous love, that
can enjoy the joys of neither passion.)
[324] Orat contra Alcibiad., I. p. 550., οἱ μὲν πολλοὶ αὐτῶν
ἡταιρήκασιν. (the majority of them have become prostitutes.) Comp.
_Meier_, loco citato p. 173., who in another place, p. 154 note 79.,
has authenticated the meaning of ἑταιρεῖν (to be a hetaera, prostitute,
used of men, viz. to submit the body for pay to another to violate.)
[325] “De morbis acutis et chronicis, lib. VIII.” (On acute and chronic
Diseases—8 Books.) edit. Amman. Amsterdam 1722. 4to. Chronic Diseases,
Bk. IV. ch. 9. In this book diseases of the intestinal canal are
treated, and immediately preceding the subject of Worms. So the vice
must have been regarded as if it were a disease of the rectum, though
the author says it had its origin in a mental derangement. Comp. _C.
Barth_, Adversar., bk. IV. ch. 3., bk. XLIII. ch. 21, bk. XLVIII. ch.
3., bk. XXIII. ch. 2. bk. XIII. ch. 13., where several emendations are
to be found of the corruptions of the text.