cum notis variorum, praecipue Leonardi Hotchkis, A. M. curante Th.
Gaisford, Edit. nova et auct. Lips. 1832. c. 12. p. 75. (Hephaestion’s
Enchiridion (on metres); the text revised and compared with the MSS.,
together with notes of various Commentators, notably Leonard Hotchkiss,
M. A. edit. Th. Gaisford. New and enlarged edition). Leipzig 1832., ch.
12. p. 75.
[389] _Dio Chrysostom_, De Regno, Orat. IV. p. 76., Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἀσθένης
τε καὶ ἄτολμος ἐκ τούτου τοῦ γένους δαίμων ἐπί τε τὰς _γυναικείας
νόσους_ καὶ _ἄλλας αἰσχύνας_, ὁπόσαις πρόσεστι ζημία καὶ
ὀνείδη, προσάγει ῥαδίως. for translation see text.—Ὁ δ’ ἐκ μέσων
ἀναβοάτων τῶν γυναικῶν, ὀξύτερον καὶ ἀκρατέστερον· λευκὸς ἰδεῖν,
ἐντρυφερὸς αἰθρίας καὶ πόνων ἄπερος, ἀποκλίνων τὸν τράχηλον, ὑγροῖς
τοῖς ὄμμασι, μάχλον ὑποβλέπων, ἀεὶ τὸ σῶμα καταθεώμενος, τῇ ψυχῇ δὲ
οὐδὲν προσέχων, οὐδὲ τοῖς ὑπ’ αὐτῆς προστασσομένοις. (But that Spirit
which cries out from the midst of women is something shriller and more
intemperate; he is pale to look upon, wanton and luxurious, incapable
of enduring open air or toil, drooping the neck, with liquorish
eyes, casting stolen glances of lewdness, ever looking down upon the
body, but giving no thought to the soul, nor the things beneath its
ordinance).
[390] Comp. author’s Work, De Sexuali Organismorum Fabrica (Of the
Sexual Conformation of Organisms), Pt. I. Halle 1832. pp. 1-12.,
where these relations are brought out in detail, and referred back to
anatomical reasons.
[391] We expressed an opinion above (p. 175.) that no grounds of excuse
could be found for the Pathic; but we must here modify this so far
as to admit that Aristotle imagines himself to have discovered such.
In the _Problemata_, IV. 26., he examines the question: διὰ τί ἔνιοι
ἀφροδισιαζόμενοι χαίρουσι, καὶ οἱ μὲν ἅμα δρῶντες, οἱ δ’ οὔ; (Why some
men take pleasure in being loved, and of these some in performing the
act also, but others not?), i.e. why some find a pleasure in suffering
paederastia to be practised with them (the word ἀφροδισιάζεσθαι
is found in this meaning possibly also in _Hippocrates_, edit.
Kühn, Vol. III. pp. 680 and 574., where exactly such symptoms of a
complaint are described as might serve for an explanation of the
ῥέγχειν—snorting (mentioned above), while either they exercise coition
as men concurrently, or do not. As answer we read, to follow the
translation given by _Th. Gaza_: An quod excrementis singulis locus
determinatus a natura est, in quem instituto secerni naturali debeat,
sollicitaque natura spiritus excurrens tumorem admovet, excrementumque
una extrudere solet.... His autem proxime genituram quoque in testes
et penem deferri constitutum est. _Quibus itaque meatus habitu suo
naturali privantur, vel quia occoecati sunt qui ad penem tendant,
quod spadonibus hisque similibus evenit_ (οἷς δὲ οἱ πόροι μὴ κατὰ
φύσιν ἔχουσιν, ἀλλ’ ἢ διὰ τὸ ἀποτυφλωθῆναι τοὺς εἰς τὸ αἰδοῖον, οἷον
συμβαίνει τοῖς _εὐνουχίαις_), vel etiam aliis de causis, his
_talis humor in sedem confluit_ ( εἰς τὴν ἕδραν συῤῥεῖ ἡ τοιαύτη ἰκμας),
quippe qui hac transmeare soleat, quod eius loci contractio in coeundo
et partium sedi oppositarum consumptio incidant. Qui si admodum semine
genitali abundant, _excrementum illud large in eum locum se colligit;
itaque_ cum excitata cupiditas est, _attritum pars ea desiderat_, in
quam confluit excrementum. Cupiditas autem excitari tum a cibo tum
imaginatione potest. Cum enim alterutra de causa libido commota est,
spiritus eodem concurrit, et genus id excrementi confluit, quo secedere
natum est.... Quorum vera natura mollis et feminea est (οἱ δὲ φύσει
θηλυδρίαι) ita ii constant ut genitura vel nulla vel minima conveniat,
quo illorum secernitur qui praediti natura integra sunt, sed se in
partem sedis divertat; quod propterea evenit quia praeter naturae
normam constiterunt. Cum enim mares crearentur, ita degenerarunt ut
partem virilem mancam atque oblaesam habere cogerentur, ... ita enim
mulieres non viri crearentur. Ergo perverti citarique aliorsum, quam
secernendum natura voluit, necesse est. Unde fit ut insatiabiles
etiam sint modo mulierum (διὸ καὶ ἄπληστοι, ὥσπερ αἱ γυναῖκες). Humor
enim sollicitans ille exiguus est, nec quicquam se promere conatur,
refrigeraturque celeriter. _Quibus itaque sedem humor ex toto adiit,
ii pati tantummodo avent, quibus autem in utramque partem sese
dispertit, ii et agere et pati concupiunt_ (καὶ ὅσοις μὲν ἐπὶ τὴν
ἕδραν, οὗτοι πάσχειν ἐπιθυμοῦσιν· ὅσοις δὲ ἐπ’ ἀμφότερα, οὗτοι καὶ δρᾶν
καὶ πάσχειν), idque eo amplius quo tandem plenius fluxerit. Sed sunt
quibus vel ex consuetudine affectus hic accidet (ἐνίοις δὲ γίνεται καὶ
ἐξ ἔθους _τὸ πάθος_ τοῦτο). Fit enim ut tam gestiant quam cum agunt,
usque genituram nihilo minus ita emittere valeant. Ergo agere cupiunt,
quibus haec ipsa usu evenerunt et consuetudo magis veluti in naturam
iccirco illis evadit, quibus non ante pubem sed in ea vitium patiendi
invaluit (ἐθισθῶσιν ἀφροδισιάζεσθαι), quoniam his recordatio rei,
cum desiderant, oritur; una autem cum recordatione gestiens exsultat
voluptas. Desiderant autem perinde ac _nati ad patiendum_ (ὥσπερ
πεφυκότες, ἐπιθυμοῦσι πάσχειν) magna igitur parte vel ob consuetudinem
rex exsistit sed si accidat ut idem et salax et mollis sit (λάγνος ὢν
καὶ μαλακὸς) longe expeditius haec omnia evenire posse putandum est.
(Is it because for each evacuation a particular locality has been
fixed by nature, to which it must be secreted by the law of its being,
and when effort occurs the spirit issuing out causes a swelling, and
then pours out the evacuation along with it.—And similarly to these
other secretions, the semen is naturally secreted to the testicles
and private parts. _And accordingly in the case of those in whom the
passages are not in a natural state, either through those that lead to
the private part being blocked as is the case with eunuchs and those
similarly affected to eunuchs_, or through some other circumstance,
_this sort of humour flows to the seat_; for it passes that way, as is
proved by the contraction of this part in the act of coition, and the
wasting of the regions about the seat. Therefore whenever men have an
excess of lewdness, in their case _it collects in this quarter_, and
so when desire is excited, _that part where it accumulates desires
friction_. And desire may be excited either by food or mentally; for
whenever it is stirred by any circumstance, the spirit runs to that
spot, and the particular secretion flows to the particular quarter
natural to it.—But such as are womanish by nature are so constituted
that no secretion or only a little occurs in the quarter where the
secretion takes place with such as are naturally constituted, but to
this spot (the seat) instead. And the reason is they are not naturally
constituted, for being males they are yet so framed that of necessity
the manly part in them is maimed. Now maiming either destroys an organ
completely, or produces perversion and deterioration; but here it
cannot be the former; otherwise the patient would be a woman outright.
Wherefore it follows that it is perverted and deteriorated, and the
secretion of semen elsewhere directed. And for this cause they are
insatiable, like women; for the humour is small in quantity, is not
constrained to find an issue, and quickly cools. _And those in whom
the secretion is to the seat, these desire passive pleasure only,
but those in whom it is both to the seat and to the private parts,
these desire both active and passive love_; and to whichever part the
secretion is greater, the more do they desire the corresponding kind
of pleasure. Besides in some cases this occurs through habituation.
Whichever act they do, a pleasurable feeling results, and so they emit
semen correspondingly. Then they desire to do the act in which this
most occurs, and thus this becomes in preference their custom, and
a sort of second nature. Wherefore such as have been habituated to
passive love not before puberty but about the time of puberty, because
when they desire pleasure memory suggests what they must do, and on
memory follows pleasure, acquire through habituation the desire for
passive gratification _just as if they were born to it_. And if a man
happen to be lewd and effeminate to begin with, all this results all
the sooner).—In the Pathic then, according to _Aristotle’s_ view, the
semen-vessels carry the semen not to the penis, but to the fundament,
and set up there the feeling of desire and sensual craving. These
are the _born Pathics_ (πεφυκότες), from whom he distinguishes the
_seduced_ Pathics, who indulge in the vice as the result of habituation
(ἐξ ἔθους). This is the very same view that we have already (p. 172.
Note 3.) gathered from his Ethics, and which supports in the strongest
way what we there made good as against _Stark_.
[392] Hippocratis Coi XXII. Commentarii tabulis illustrati,
(Hippocrates of Cos, The XXII Commentaries; illustrated with Plates).
Bâle 1579. fol., p. 273.
[393] Hippocratis Opera (Hippocrates, Works), edit. Kahn, Vol. I. pp.
561-564.
[394] For the use of this word, compare _Létronne_, Recherches pour
servir à l’Histoire d’Egypte, (Researches with a view towards a History
of Egypt), pp. 134, 148, 458; and what we have called attention to on
an earlier page in _Hecker’s_ Annalen (Annals), Vol. XXVI. p. 143.
[395] The word κέδματα, which probably is used in several senses,
can scarcely in this case betoken anything else than varicose veins,
and is according synonymous with ἰξίαι, with which it also occurs
in connection. It is interesting to find Aristotle also pronouncing
those suffering from varicose veins incapable of generation; he writes
in Problemata, Bk. IV. 20., Διὰ τί αἱ ἰξίαι τοὺς ἔχοντας κωλύουσι
γεννᾶν, καὶ ἀνθρώπους καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ζώων ὅ, τι ἂν ἔχη; ἢ ὅτι ἡ ἰξία
γίνεται, μεταστάντος; διὸ καὶ ὠφελεῖ πρὸς τὰ μελαγχολικά. Ἔστι δὲ
καὶ ὁ ἀφροδισιασμὸς μετὰ πνεύματος ἐξόδου. Εἰ οὖν ὁδοποιεῖται ἡ ὁρμὴ
γινομένου αὐτοῦ, οὐ ποιεῖ ὁρμᾶν τὸ σπέρμα, ἀλλὰ καταψύχεται· μαραίνει
οὖν τὴν συντονίαν τοῦ αἰδοίου. (Why varicosities hinder those that have
them from begetting, both men and of other animals all that are subject
to them? is it because the varicosity arises, through a transference of
spirit; for which reason also it is of use in case of melancholia. But
the act of love also occurs in conjunction with an outburst of spirit.
If therefore the impulse is made at the time the varicosity is forming,
it suffers not the seed to make a vigorous impulse, but it is quickly
cooled; and so it wastes and destroys the tension of the private part).
On the contrary according to Problemata, 31., the lame are lecherous:
διὰ τ’ αὐτὸ δὲ καὶ οἱ ὄρνιθες _λάγνοι_ και οἱ _χωλοί_· ἡ γὰρ τροφὴ
ἀμφοτέροις. κάτω μὲν ὀλίγη, διὰ τὴν ἀναπηρίαν τῶν σκελῶν. (And for the
same reason birds are lecherous and lame men; because in both cases the
nourishment downwards is slight, on account of the deficiency in the
legs). In connection with κέδματα we must refer to _Foesius_, Œconomia
Hippocratis, _Coray_, loco citato p. 339 sqq., and _Stark_, loco citato
Note 20., and observe that like the Latin _ruptura_ and the English
_rupture_ it appears to specially signify swellings due to distension
and subsequent bursting. That swellings of the groin are a result of
long-continued riding, we see also from _Livy_, Hist. bk. XLV. ch. 39.,
where _M. Servilius_ says: tumorem hunc inguinum in equo dies noctesque
persedendo habeo (this swelling of the groin I have owing to sitting my
horse nights and days on end). Comp. _Plutarch_, In Aemil., Vol. II. p.
308.
[396] ἕλκοντα τὰ ἴσχια (they are ulcerated on the hip-joints) is found
in the text. But the meaning of both words is disputed, and by no
means fixed so far. With regard to ἰσχία—we must primarily understand
the mass of muscle at the lower exterior portion of the “os ilium”,
secondly the whole seat, and the joint-socket (cotyla) of the upper
thigh. This is the interpretation of the _Etymologicon Magnum_;
ἰσχία, ὅτι ἴσχει τοὺς καθημένους· σημαίνει δὲ ἰσχίον τὸ ὑπὸ τὴν ὀσφῦν
ὀστέον, εἰς ὃ ἔγκειται τὸ ἱερὸν ὀστοῦν, ὅπερ καὶ γλουτὸς καλεῖται, καὶ
κοτύλη, παρὰ τὴν κοιλότητα· ἢ τὸ κοῖλον τοῦ γλουτοῦ, ἐν ᾧ ἡ κοτύλη
στρέφεται.(ἰσχία,—so called because supporting (ἴσχειν) those who
sit; also ἰσχίον signifies the bone below, the loin, on which rests
the _os sacrum_, which is also called γλουτός (rump), and also κοτύλη
(joint-socket) in reference to its hollowness; or else the hollow of
the rump, in which the joint-socket turns). Similar is the explanation
of _Suidas_, _Hesychius_, _Zonaras_, the Scholiast on Homer, Iliad,
V. 305, and on Theocritus, VI. 30. The general context shows that the
meaning of “Joint-socket” is evidently to be preferred here.
[397] The word διαφθείρεσθαι (ruin themselves) in the text is
undoubtedly written by the author with reference to the ἀνανδρία
(unmanliness). Still it is surprising that what is here pointed out
as injurious is in the Epidem. bk. VI. edit. Kühn, Vol. III. p. 609.
recommended as salutary. The expression there is: κεδμάτων τὰς ἐν
τοῖσιν ὠσὶν ὄπισθεν φλέβας σχάζειν (in cases of varicose dilatations
to open the veins that are behind in the ears). _Palladius_ in his
Commentary on this passage (edit. Dietz. Vol. II. p. 143.) declares the
whole sentence wrong, writing: _Πᾶς οὕτος ὁ λόγος ψευδής_· κέδμα γάρ
ἐστι διάθεσίς τις περὶ τὴν λαγόνα, ἢ φλεγμονὴ ἢ ῥευματικὴ διάθεσις·
φησὶν οὖν ὅτι καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ διαθέσει τέμνων τὰς ὄπισθεν φλέβας
ὠφελήσεις· καὶ ποία συγγένεια τῆς λαγόνος καὶ τῶν ὤτων, καὶ ταῦτα
τῶν ἐκεῖ ἀγγείων λεπτῶν ὄντων, καὶ τριχοειδῶν καὶ μηδὲν ἀξιόλογον
κενῶσαι δυναμένων; (_All this sentence is wrong_; for κέδμα is really
a certain condition of the parts about the flank, either inflammation
or rheumatic condition.) Now they say that in this condition, by cutting
the veins behind, you will do good; but what connexion is there between
the flank and the ears, and especially as the vessels there are small,
and like hairs, and not able to void any considerable quantity?).—Not
a word is said here about the practice among the Scythians; are we to
suppose _Palladius_ was ignorant of the fact? Also in the “De Natura
Ossium” (Of the Nature of Bones), (edit. Kühn, I. p. 508.) we find
the operation recommended in pains of the hips, testicles, knees and
knuckles; and according to a passage in the “De Morbis” (Of Diseases),
bk. II. (edit. Kühn, bk. II. p. 223.) these veins should be seared,
until they cease to pulsate. On the other hand in the “De Genitura” (Of
Generation), (edit. Kühn, I. p. 373.) and the “De Locis in Homine” (Of
certain Localities in the Body), edit. Kühn, II. p. 106.) incapacity
for generation is represented as a consequence of blood-letting from
these vessels. We leave to others the task of drawing the necessary
conclusions in view of the unanimity of the Authors of the books named,
and merely observe further that _Dr. Paris_ (Roux Journ. de Med., Vol.
XLIV. p. 355., _Murray_, Med. Pract. Bibliothek., Vol. III. p. 293.)
while giving some observations on the diseases of the Turks, relates as
following: Almost every Armenian, Greek, Jew, Turk, has a seton, and
they abuse cupping to an equal extent. For a simple head-ache, they
allow the first barber they come across to put a bandage round their
throat, in order to retain the blood, and then with a razor make sundry
cuts round about the ears, for then as much blood flows away, and
without risk, as would fill a phial.
[398] In the text of Froesius it stands: καὶ μᾶλλον τοῖσιν ὀλίγα
κεκτημένοισιν, _οὐ τιμωμένοισιν ἤδη_, εἰ χαίρουσιν οἱ θεοὶ καὶ
θαυμαζόμενοι ὑπ’ ἀνθρώπων, κ. τ. λ. (to a greater extent those who
possess little and therefore fail to make offerings; if that is to say
the gods take pleasure in being venerated by men, etc). _Coray_ has
emended this into εἰ δὴ τιμώμενοι χαίρουσι (if that is to say the gods
take pleasure in being honoured and venerated), on the grounds that
τιμᾶν and θαυμάζειν (to honour, to venerate) are frequently used in
conjunction with one another to express the veneration of the gods,
which fact he confirms by passages from _Euripides_ and _Aristophanes_.
Yet this emendation can scarcely be right, even though _de Mercy_
has also adopted it. The latest editor, Prof. Petersen of Hamburg, a
professed Philologist, has undoubtedly maintained not without weighty
reasons the old reading, noting Coray’s conjecture in the notes. Indeed
neither is the old reading altogether correct, but can be easily
restored, we think, if the words, as has already been done in our
translation above, are read in the following way: οὐ τιμωμένοισιν· εἰ
δὴ χαίρουσιν οἱ θεοὶ θαυμαζόμενοι,—a way of taking it that _Coray_ had
already seen to be possible, only that he preferred to read instead of
οὐ τιμωμένοισιν,—ἢ τοῖσι τιμωμένοισιν, because he does not think that
the words can refer at all to the poorer Scythians, as did _Cornarius_
before him, though he translates quite correctly: “It affected to a
greater extent poorer men, as being more negligent concerning the
worship of the gods.” _Foesius_ translates: “and they do not pay
honour.” In fact Coray’s chief difficulty was as to the active meaning
of τιμωμένοισι (i.e. “paying honour”, not “being honoured”); but this
use is by no means so rare, and exactly in this sense of veneration
paid to the gods by men is found in _Homer_, Od. XIX. 280, where we
read of the Phaeacians on the occasion of Odysseus’ landing:
οἳ δή μιν περὶ κῆρι θεὸν ὣς τιμήσαντο.
(Now they _honoured_ him from their heart as if he had been a god).
The whole sense of the passage requires us to refer the words οὐ
τιμωμένοισιν to the poorer Scythians, who possess little, and therefore
can offer nothing to the gods, and also do not wish to do so, as is
clearly shown in what follows; and it is exactly for this reason that
Hippocrates says, then they ought to suffer more from the disease than
the rich, if the gods practised any system of equivalent returns.
[399] Ταῦτα δὲ τοῖσί τε Σκύθῃσι πρόσεστι, καὶ _εὐνουχοειδέστατοί_
εἰσι ἀνθρώπων διὰ τὰς προφάσιας, καὶ ὅτι ἀναξυρίδας ἔχουσι ἀεὶ καὶ
εἰσι ἐπὶ τῶν ἵππων τὸ πλεῖστον τοῦ χρόνου, ὥστε μήτε χειρὶ ἅπτεσθαι
τοῦ αἰδοίου, _ὑπό τε τοῦ ψύχεος καὶ τοὺ κόπου ἐπιλήθεσθαι τοῦ ἱμέρου
καὶ τῆς μίξιος, καὶ μηδὲν παρακινέειν πρότερον ἢ ἀνανδρωθῆναι_.
for translation see text above: “And this is the case ..., to resign
their manly privilege.” We have it is true translated according to
the text, yet we cannot possibly take this as being uncorrupted,
but without for the moment being in a position to offer a complete
emendation of it. The sequence of thought, if we are not altogether in
error, is this: The Scythians ride _continually_, which of its self
weakens their power of generation and desire for coition, then besides
this they wear trousers, a thing that particularly struck the Greek
because he did not use them himself. These trousers were so tight,
that the wearer could not get at the genitals with his hand; again
the genitals lay close to the body, did not hang down, could not be
set in motion; at the same time they were also protected against the
wind, so that no cooling process could take place; the idle repose
and the constantly heightened temperature in combination weakened the
genitals to such a degree that the impulse to coition was at last
totally lost. Views which entirely agree with our experience of the
present day, and indeed were by _Faust_, as is notorious, exaggerated
almost to caricature. Now if Hippocrates has expressed, as is likely
enough, these views in the words ὑπό τε τοῦ ψύχεος καὶ τοῦ κόπου (under
the influence of cold and lassitude), the text must be corrupt, and
this is what we wish to insist on. For if by the words we understand
frost and lassitude, then the first at any rate is impossible; how
could the Scythians suffer from frost, when they wore trousers! Then
the cooling process spoken of just now must be intended by ψύχος
(cold)! But if κόπος (striking, beating, so weariness, lassitude) is
understood literally, in accordance with its derivation from κόπτω (to
strike), in the sense of blows, shocks, and taken as referring to the
genitals, especially the testicles, a negative and a verb must have
been lost from the text, and this appears to us too the most probable
explanation, though at the time we cannot say what verb. The matter
would be at once decided, if we could translate: so that they could
not put the hand to the genitals, and since these were encountered
neither by the cooling wind, nor yet by the shock (against the horse’s
back or the saddle), they forgot the desire for coition and coition
itself, i.e. the genitals being neither fortified by the cold nor
yet set in motion, do not remind the Scythians of the fact that they
have such organs and must use them. The movement (κίνησις) in riding
is at any rate regarded as early as Aristotle (Probl. bk. IV. 12.)
as cause of the greater lasciviousness of those who ride. He asks:
Quare qui equitant libidinosiores evadunt? An caloris agitationisque
causa eodem afficiuntur modo, quo per coitum. Quocirca aetatis quoque
accessione membra genitalia contrectata agitataque plenius augentur,
quod igitur semper eo utuntur motu qui equitant, hinc fluentiore
corpore praeparatoque ad concumbendum evadunt. (Why those who ride come
to be more lascivious? Is it that on account of the heat and movement
they are affected in the same way as by coition? Wherefore as age also
advances, the genital organs being handled and moved more, are the
more increased in size, so therefore because those who ride use the
same movement hence they come to be of a more fluid body and one ready
prepared for sexual intercourse). In Probl. 24. he is investigating
the causes of the erection of the penis, and says διά τε τὸ βάρος
ἐπιγίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ὄπισθεν τῶν ὄρχεων αἴρεσθαι (now it is on account
of the increase of weight in the hinder part of the testicles that it
is raised). Comp. Probl. 25. _Continual_ riding naturally stimulates
the impulse, wherefore the Scythians are the first in later times to
become ἀνάνδριες (unmanly), and this sooner than other riding nations
because they wore trousers. However those who are better informed must
decide the point!—Finally that in any case ἀνανδρωθῆναι (to be made
unmanly) and not ἀνδρωθῆναι (to be made manly) must be read, any one
who considers the passage at all carefully must easily see. _Coray’s_
lucubration cannot for a moment convince us.
[400] Edit. Kühn, Vol. III. p. 218., _μυθολογοῦσι_ δέ τινες ὅτι οἱ
Ἀμαζονίδες τὸ ἄρσεν γένος το ἑωυτῶν αὐτίκα νήπιον ἐὸν ἐξαρθρέουσιν, αἱ
μὲν κατὰ γούνατα, αἱ δὲ κατὰ τὰ ἰσχία, ὡς δῆθεν χωλὰ γίνοιτο καὶ μὴ
ἐπιβουλεύει τὸ ἄῤῥεν γένος τῷ θήλει· χειρώναξιν ἄρα τούτοισι χρέονται,
ὁκόσα ἢ σκυτίης ἔργα ἤ χαλκείης ἢ ἄλλο τι ἑδραῖον ἔργον· εἰ μὲν οὖν
ἀληθέα ταῦτα ἐστί, ἐγὼ μὲν οὐκ οἶδα. (Now some relate _the myth_ that
the Amazons dislocate the male sex of their offspring while still quite
young, some doing it at the knees, some at the hips, with the avowed
object of laming them, and so the male sex does not rise in revolt
against the female; then they employ them as handicraftsmen, for such
tasks as shoe-making or brassworking or other sedentary occupations.
_But whether this tale is true, I do not know_). _Gardeil_ also in a
work that is not often met with in Germany, his “Traduction des œuvres
médicales d’Hippocrate, sur le texte grec, d’après l’édition de Foes”.
(Translation of the Medical Works of Hippocrates,—from the Greek text
of Foesius’ edition.), Vol. I. Toulouse 1801. large 8vo., p. 162.,
says: “On pourroit induire d’un endroit du traité des articles, à la
fin du numéro 38 (27), que ce qu’Hippocrate rapporte ici concernant
les Scythes, et ce qu’il a dit ci-dessus, numéro 23, au sujet des
Sarmates _ne lui étoit connu que par_ une tradition dont il n’étoit pas
bien assuré,” (It might be inferred from a passage in the _Treatise on
Joints_, at the end of no. 38 (27), that what Hippocrates relates here
concerning the Scythians, and what he had said in a previous passage,
no. 23, of the Sarmatians, _was known to him only by a tradition, the
authenticity of which he was not well assured of_).
[401] “Censura Librorum Hippocraticorum”, (Criticism of the Works of
Hippocrates), p. 181.