Chap. II.An historical and critical Account of the Causes of Hermaphrodites.
An historical and critical Account of the Causes of Hermaphrodites.
If Hermaphrodites actually existed, sure there might have been before now some probable Conjectures made to shew the Reasons, or Necessity of such Beings upon Earth, since so many Authors have been busy’d about them from the Beginning of the World. But there appears throughout their several Opinions, so general a Train of Absurdities, that I cannot but wonder, they were any more satisfactory to Mankind in their Days than they are to me at present. However, when the several Causes laid down by certain Authors from Time to Time, for the producing of those Creatures, are consider’d, it will not be difficult Matter to point out innumerable Errors amongst them, and denythat those Causes can produce any such Effect as a double Nature in human Bodies.
The first then that I shall take notice of is that ofConstantinus Africanus[42], who accuses Nature of being hindered, or of forgetting its duty in the Formation of the Fœtus, and by this Mistake Hermaphrodites are generated.
‘[43]It happens to some Men, in Generation, to have added to them those Female Parts, and to some Women those Masculine Parts that are luxuriant in them, when Nature is hinder’d, or grows forgetful; for when by any Accidentit happens thus, that Superfluity of humid Matter that usually contributes to either the inordinate Size or Number of any Limb, goes to the Formation of a Member of any other Nature without Rule or Order.’
Before we can in any wise understand whether the Cause assigned by this Author be just or not, we must guess at what he means by the WordNature.
Amongst the Poets, and some Philosophical Authors,NaturaandDeusmay be conceived to signify the same Thing; in this Sense, not the least Impediment can be ascribed, nor Oblivion attributed to it.
If it be a Term used to hint at theVis Formatrix, or at the Matter of which the Fœtus is form’d, his Reason for giving this as a Cause will appear to be as ill grounded as any other; because as to the latter, all reasonable Men must allow, that as Matter is totallypassive, it cannot be said to err or forget; and as to the former, if such an occult Power existed, it must have been by God’s Appointment, and consequently not liable to such Imperfections, in conducting so great a Work as that of Generation, with which so many Authors have taken much pains to charge this Vis Plastica; but of both these in another Place.
Avicenna[44]sums up a great many Causes for Masculinity and Femineity, as his TranslatorGerardus Cremonensistranslates it: For the former, or the Production of Males, the Heat and Abundance of theSperma virile; its being promoted from the right Testicle; because (according to our Author) it is of a thicker Consistence, more hot, and drawn from the Right-Rein,è rene dextro; which is, says he, both warmer and higher than the other as being nearer the Liver; itsfalling into the right Side in the Coitus,&c.and that on the other Hand Females are engender’d by Causes contrary to these: All these Opinions he has gather’d fromHypocrates,Galen, andRhasus, and because he does not seem in the least, to contradict them, we are inclin’d to believe them his own also.
Now from this Manner of accounting for Masculinity and Femineity, or the Production of Males and Females, there arises a third Doctrine to which this Author seems to assent, and by which he accounts for the rise of Hermaphrodites; and tho’ he confesses that some say so; which signifies he has it from others, yet he delivers it with an Air of Approbation, and consequently was not displeased with the Hypothesis[45].
‘And some say, that if it runs from the Right-side of the Man to the same of the Woman, it produces a Male; and from their Left-sides a Female; and if from the Man’s Left-side to the Right of the Woman, the Production will be a masculine Woman; but if from his Right, to her Left-side, it will be a feminine Male.’
If the old Doctrine[46]of Males being proper to the Right-sides, and Females to the Left, of both Sexes, in the Act of Generation, were true, (which cannot but seem obsolete before even a Capacity of the lowest Class) this crossing the Strain, in the Manner he relates, might hold, and would not be an unpleasant Method of explaining the Nature of the Growth of these Androgyni; but I believe, that Notion is so much explodedalready, as not to need taking pains to Invalidate.
Let us, however, accept it as this Author’s Opinion, and a Variety from that of any other; and proceed to shew, thatLemniushas mistakenAvicenna, when he ascribes to him the Opinion contained in the following Words[47].
‘When the Menses have come down, and the Uterus is cleansed, which happens about the fifth or seventh Day, if a Man cohabits with a Woman any time from the first to the fifth after they have ceased, a Male will be begotten; from thence to the eighth a Female; again from that to the twelfth a Male; but after that an Hermaphrodite.
For the Words ofAvicennaaccording toGerrard’s Translation, are very different from the above quoted byLemnius, tho’ they import the same thing; yet they are far from being his Opinion, because he plainly rejects it as unreasonable, having it from another[48]Author, thusAvicenna[49]:
‘And some of them say, who speak without Reason,&c.’
Now since he absolutely declares, they who think thus are without Reason, it follows thatLemniushad no right to quote him, for the only Opinion he dislikes, of those contained in the whole Chapter; but to whomsoever the Opinion belongs, there is a Necessity for the following Animadversions upon it.
If a limited Time was necessary thus for the procreating of the different Sexes, as, that for the first five Days after the Cessation of the menstrual Discharge, Males only are begotten, it should have been universally known by Experience long ago, since the Opinion was as early asAvicenna; and none of those that we daily see very anxious for Male Heirs, would ever want them, if their Consorts were breeding Women, and this the Case. Again, no Lady that languishes for a little Daughter amongst her Sons, would be long in Pain about it, if she could by Coition at any certain Time be capable of chusing one; nor in fine, would anysuch Appearance happen in human Nature, as is erroneously reputed Hermaphrodital, if such were never produced, but after the twelfth Day from those times of the Menses; for Mankind would, at such Seasons, avoid the Act of Generation; lest Beings so infamous, as they are superstitiously thought, should be the Product of their Embraces.
‘Yet, notwithstandingAvicenna(saysLemnius[50]) does not account for this Doctrine, I will endeavour to reason upon it, and support it;’ which is an Evidence that he was so fond of it, that besides laying it down as the Opinion of the former, in order to gain the more Credit for the Notion, he runs into an anatomical Way of enlarging on it; the bare Recital of which, without the least Animadversion on it, will be sufficient to shew every judicious Reader, how Errors beget Errors, and may successively do so,to the End of time, whilst an implicit Credit is given to Mysteries of this kind[51].
‘For at first, when the Uterus is cleansed by the Expurgation of the Humours, it acquires greater Heat, whereby the Semen Virile mixes the more powerfully with that of the Female, and is directed into the right Sinus of the Uterus, by the attractive Force of the Liver and right Kidney, from whence also, in these first Days, warm Blood is derived, to the Nutrition of the future Fœtus: Nor can the Parts on the left Side, being then cold, and void of Blood, immediately after the menstrual Discharge, contribute any thing; but Blood is by degrees drawn from the emulgent Veins of the left Side, which go into the Spleen and Kidney, so that, from the fifth to the eighth Day, some Blood flows from them, whereby the Fœtus is to be nourished; thus a Female is formed when these Parts compass their Strength, or are esteem’d as those of the Right out of their Situation, and also on Account of the Coldness of the Aliment.After the eighth Day, the Parts on the Right-side take the Office of preparing the Blood, which again begins to flow freely from them for the Growth of a Male.
‘After this Number of Days, because the menstrual Blood flows promiscuously, and the Matrix becomes too moist by the Afflux of cold Humours, and the Blood not being determin’d to either Part, but fluctuating in the middle of the Uterus, the Semina being there confus’d together produce an Hermaphrodite; which, when conceiv’d, receives Strength and Form sometimes from the right and sometimes from the left Sinus, enjoying the Efforts of both; HenceAndrogynior Hermaphrodites spring up.’
Tho’Lemnius[52]has made so large a Comment upon that Sentence, which he would have us take forAvicenna’s Opinion,he is fond of giving another Opinion of his own, which he supposes to account for Hermaphroditism, and that is, any unusual or indecent Execution of the Coition.
‘Sometimes this infamous Conception is form’d from an indecent and unusual Copulation, as when the Man is supine, and the Woman prone in the Act,&c.’[53]
That this cannot be the Cause of Hermaphrodites is evident from this short Reflection,viz.That since the Fœcundation of the Ovum which contains the Fœtus, depends upon something immitted from the Penis, I believe it matters not in what manner that Ceremony is perform’d, provided that End is answer’d; and therefore Fœcundation cannotbe alter’d, nor the Seminium changed, by any Variety in the Position of the two Sexes whatsoever, during the Act of Generation; for the Effect of the fœcundating Juice will be always the same upon the Ovum howsoever it is injected.
Dominicus Terrelius[54]imagines, the Cause to be in the Position of the Female, immediately after the Coitus.
‘After a Woman has receiv’d the Semen Virile into the Uterus, care must be had of the Position of her Body; which ought not to be supine, because then the Semen, remaining in the middle of the Uterus, does not become either a Male or Female absolutely, but both together which is call’d an Hermaphrodite.’
And tho’ this Author does not seem to think of a Number of Cells in the Uterus, yet according to his Notion for this Doctrine, he supposes Nourishment is drawn from each side of the Uterus to the Center, where he says the Semen is lodg’d, and being somewhat different, as to their Heat and Cold, the Mixture of these two kinds of Nourishment causes a promiscuous Sex; which he compares to certain Women ofTuscanycall’dLunenses, who, says he, being careless of their Position after the Reception of the seminal Matter in Coitu, brought forth many Hermaphrodites from time to time.
Now, that the Semen should lodge in the Middle of the Uterus, and not in the rest of its Cavity, is very strange, since there is but one Cavity, and no manner of Partition to confine it in one part more than another; and as to the Capacity of the Cavity of the Uterus, it is known to be very small, insomuchthat if we may suppose any of that Matter passes into it, it is impossible but the whole must be fill’d, considering the Quantity of that Fluid that is generally injected at such Times.
But how ridiculous a Notion must it be, that in so small a thing as the Uterus, when empty, a hot nutritious Juice should occupy one side, and a cold one the other; besides, if it were incumbent on Women, after Coition, to place themselves in a certain Position, for fear of having monstrous Children, there would certainly be great danger of the Produce of many; for we may be confident no such Care is taken at those times, by any Woman whatsoever.
Empedoclesthinks, that in the Formation of Hermaphrodites, the Parts of the different Sexes are drawn from the Parents in the Coitus; that is, those of the Male from the Male Parent, and those of the Female from the contrary Sex that begets them. These two Sexes,join’d in one Fœtus, constitute the double Sex, and an Hermaphrodite is form’d. His Words according toCaspar Bauhin[55]are,
Αλλὰ διέσπασται μελέων φύσις, ἡ μὲνἐν ανδρος, ἡ δ’ ἐν γυναικος,——
Αλλὰ διέσπασται μελέων φύσις, ἡ μὲνἐν ανδρος, ἡ δ’ ἐν γυναικος,——
Αλλὰ διέσπασται μελέων φύσις, ἡ μὲνἐν ανδρος, ἡ δ’ ἐν γυναικος,——
Αλλὰ διέσπασται μελέων φύσις, ἡ μὲν
ἐν ανδρος, ἡ δ’ ἐν γυναικος,——
If we must, from this Opinion, suppose, that no Particle in the Semen Virile can contain any thing that might contribute to the Formation of a female Part of Generation, nor in the Semen Muliebre to that of the Parts of the Male; It is to be much fear’d, something absurd must be the Consequence; for allowing that Hypothesis held and receiv’d byHypocrates,Galen, and many of the Learned that followed them, that the Fœtus is always form’d of both these Semina mingled together, it must follow, from the Notion held byEmpedocles, that no other than a Child oftwo Sexes could be produced, and consequently the entire Race of Mankind must have been Hermaphrodites, since it was necessary both should contribute something, in order to consummate the Act of Generation. Or else, that if the Females should have no such Matter, as is call’d Seminal, that of the Males would always produce a Male by virtue of theirs alone, when injected into the Female.
But we are, according this Hypothesis, at a terrible Loss to know (if the Males had no seminal Matter) how a Female could be produced, tho’ the latter were never so well stored with such female seminal Matter; because, the former being without it, there could be no consummate Coitus, and consequently no Female; so that, to sum up this Opinion, we must conclude, if both contribute, Hermaphrodites must ensue; if the Males only, Males must only be born; but if Males have nothing to emit, neither Male nor Female couldbe begotten, and Generation must drop by Degrees.
The Opinion ofParmenides, an ancientGreekAuthor, appears in the following Lines, translated byCælius Siciensis, from his Book which he wrote of Nature, concerning Hermaphrodites being produced[56].
‘When the Semina of a Man and Woman are mixed together, the forming Virtue, preserving a due Moderation and Temperature, will produce Bodies properly made; for if there be an Opposition of the said Virtue in the mingled Semen, she unhappily implants in the Fœtus a double Sex.’
Here is theVis Informansaccused of Opposition or Neglect in resisting, or letting the Semina go on their own way in the Formation of the Fœtus, which is much the same withConstant.Africanus’s Accusation of Forgetfulness or Impediment; and therefore what is said under that Author, will suffice for the rendering this Opinion also of little Worth.
The Principles laid down byAverroës[57]are no less particular than others just mentioned; he says, The Semen Muliebre abounds with, or is constituted of, Particles adapted to the Nature of every Member in the Body, and in order to account for a Superfluity of Members in a Body, he draws this Conclusion from thence; that if the seminal Matter in a Female is more than is necessary for the Formation of one Child, and less than will make two, the superfluousPart will form superfluous Limbs to the one Child, according to the Nature of the Particles it contains; that is, if it consists of Particles fit for the Head, there will be two Heads, and so of the Hands, Feet,&c.and then he adds[58], ‘The Cause is much the same, when the Parts of Generation of both Sexes exist in any Person.’ And that on the other Hand, if their be a Deficiency of the seminal Matter, some Limb or other must be wanting.
If this be thought a just Hypothesis, then we cannot but suppose, there is a great and most miserable Restraint upon the whole animal Part of the Creation; for if it be absolutely necessary that such a certain Quantity (and no more, nor less) is to be expended on the compleating of a proportionable Fœtus, I am of Opinion that not one third of the Animals of theWorld would escape being Monsters; and the Art and Business of Physicians would be more requisitely employed in ordering Regimens, and Calculations towards the fixing the Sustenance and other Non-naturals, in such Proportion to every Animal, as should produce in each an exact limited Quantity of seminal Matter, than in curing Diseases.
But besides adjusting the necessary Quantity of such seminal Matter, it would be no less difficult to calculate a Proportion of Particles for each Part, since our Author makes some Head-Particles, some for the Feet, and so of the rest; least, tho’ the Quantity in the whole may be just enough, yet, the Head Particles, for example, might be too many, when there might at the same time be less of any other Part; so that according to this Notion, a Child might be begotten with a Head and half, and but half a Foot.
ButGorræusdiffers fromAverroës, asLiebaultiusrelates, who would not place the Cause of Hermaphrodites in the whole seminal Mass, but only in those Parts of it that are chiefly concern’d in contributing to the Formation of the Parts of Generation of both Sexes; and therefore, so general a mistake is not to be ascribed to him, as to the former, tho’ his Supposition is altogether as ill grounded.
Peucerus[59]comes into a Class withAverroës, but tacks some little Addition to the Doctrine of the latter, of a Superabundance, or Scarcity in any Parts of the Semen, their producing a Superfluity or want of any of the Members of the Body; he says[60],
‘If for making two Bodies the Matter is deficient, but is too much for one, the Vis Plastica forms more Limbs than are natural.’ A little after he adds[61],
‘In this Manner Hermaphrodites and Androgyni are begotten, who have the Parts of both Sexes; although one of them may be weaker and of less Efficacy than the other, and sometimes it happens that one may be changed or quite abolish’d.’
This Opinion in general is pretty near that of the former Author; but when he says, that one of the Sexes in an Hermaphrodite may be changed, or quite destroyed, it is somewhat obscure, and difficult toreconcile to the first Part of his Opinion; for first, he says, pursuant to the same Cause, of the Redundancy of such and such Matter, Hermaphrodites arise, ‘quibus sexus utriusque membra insunt,’ and then,altho’ one of the Sexes may be weaker and of no Efficacy; nay,sometimes one may be changed or quite abolish’d. Indeed when he says, that one of the Sexes in an Hermaphrodite is of no Efficacy, he is right; for our reputed Androgyni, which are the Macroclitorideæ, have one of theirs so, which is the Clitoris; and consequently ought to be deny’d the Character of an Hermaphrodite; but when he says, one of the Sexes is chang’d, he can, with less right, call them Hermaphrodites. If one be changed, it must be to some other Sex; and as there are but two, then there must be a double Male or female Sex, upon the Alteration, and all this, after they have become of this double Nature, according to the Cause in the first Part of his Opinion; for a Change is consequent to the former State of the thingchanged. But, in fine, when one Sex is abolish’d, there ought to remain but a perfect Man, or Woman; how therefore can this most unaccountable Variety be said to proceed from a Redundancy of Particles of any kind whatsoever.
Pontanus[62], besides being of the same Opinion withAverroës, seems also to lay a great deal of blame to Heat, by which I suppose, he means the Calor Nativus, because he says[63],——he endeavours to make this plain, by likening Generation to a Vessel of Water on a Fire; alledging that a gentle Heat will render the Water hot, as well as an inordinate one; and that, as by a very great Heat, the Water will be subject to a total Evaporation, so the Oeconomyof Generation may be destroyed, or become monstrous or preposterous by the same. Innate Heat is indeed a necessary Quality that attends every Part as well as Action of animal Bodies; but I cannot conceive any Excess of Heat in such Bodies, but what is symptomatick of some morbid State, and therefore not to be assign’d as a Cause for any effect, whether regular or irregular, in Generation.
By this Author’s laying so much Stress upon inordinate Heat, one would imagine, he had nothing else to blame for causing Hermaphrodites; yet he joins withPeucerusso as to mention his very Words[64], in consequence of this Notion of a Superfluity of Particles producing more Members than are natural; and makes an offer at explaining this also in the following Manner; however inartfuland unreasonable, let every Reader judge[65].
‘When therefore this acting or procreating Virtue directly influences either Sex, so as to conquer or quite overcome, Women bring forth Children of either Sex; but where she partly conquers and partly is subdued, then the thing is otherwise conducted, and one both Male and Female is begotten.’
By this Manner of accounting for it, we are to suppose, when theVis Agenschiefly predominates over the Materia Seminalis, the Male Sex is begotten; and when the seminal Matter totally rules the Vis Agens, a Female is produced;but if the latter is partly conquer’d and partly overcomes, then one of both Sexes is the Consequence.
How inconsiderately does this Author give way to an erroneous Principle? For it is very plain to all Capacities, if it be necessary that such a Power as he calls his Vis Agens should accompany and direct the seminal Matter, in order to assist, and carry on, the Work of Generation, that whensoever she was so overcome, as not to have any concern in the Work, or act upon the seminal Matter, it ought to be deprived of any Manner, or Power, of growing into any Form whatsoever; whereas, by our Author’s System, we find, that when this Vis Agens has any thing to do, it is only towards the Formation of a Male; because if she be, as he expresses it, overcome, the Matter will produce a Female of itself; so that, an Hermaphrodite cannot be formed, till the Matter and the Vis Agens quarrel, and strive for Mastership, whenin the Scuffle, each contributes something towards its favourite Sex, and a fœtus of both Sexes is made; yet he does not say both are perfect; for, as we observ’d before, he says one is obscure, so that in the Dispute they never come off equal; and this he proves in these Words[66]; ‘Nature in Mankind in general distinguishes the Male from the Female, so that both Sexes cannot exist in the same Body, in their proper degrees of Perfection.’
This last Opinion is not consistent with the rest, because, according to his first Principles, there should be an absolute Male or Female, just as either prevail’d over the other; and an Hermaphrodite, when each was so stubborn, as to force in upon the poor Fœtus it’s different Sex.
Thecontrary QualitiesofAlbertus Magnus[67]in their Strife about the Formation of the Fœtus, are not much unlike the foregoing Hypothesis; he says, ‘When contrary Qualities join together in the Body, either of which is absolute, and, by the help of the Vis Formativa, capable of terminating in a different Sex, that then Hermaphrodites are begotten[68].’
I should be glad to find out what these Qualities are, for as the Matter is stated it is hard to apply it; however therefore, if by the Contumacy of these Qualities, a Fœtus may be impressed with two Sexes, we must conclude that human Nature is very unhappy under the Guidance of such capricious Directors;but he ought here more particularly to lay the blame to the Vis Formatrix; for tho’ according to him either quality may be complexional of and terminating in its Sex; yet, these are but as Instruments made use of by the Vis Formatrix, to work upon the Matter withal; and therefore, the Tools used by a Workman may be as well blamed for making a bad Piece of Work, as these supposed Qualities; but as this Hypothesis in general, is as weak as any of the former, enough is said of it; let us therefore pass on to another, in which we shall find a great Variety.
Not a few old Authors[69]imagined there were several Cells and Ditches in the Uterus for the Reception of Fœtus’s of the different Sexes; and those who were of Opinion that the Cells were but seven, thought that three were on the Right-side for Males; as manyon the Left, for Females; and the seventh in the middle for Hermaphrodites; which were generated, whenever the Semen Virile happen’d to fall into it. Another[70]supposes but three, one on each side for Males and Females, and the central Cell for Androgyni; and that ‘Nature always intends the Formation of a Male, being inclin’d to form the best; that a Woman is but a Man, having an accidental Change in the Parts, and is therefore a Monster in Nature; that a Male is always begotten, but because of the ill Disposition of the Matrix and the Object it contains, and the Inequality of the Semen, (whensoever Nature cannot accomplish the Formation of a perfect Man) a Female or Hermaphrodite must be the Consequence[71].’
If Nature intended the Procreation of no Sex but the Male, there would have been no Female; but if it was, at first, necessary, that a Female should accompany the Male in order to propagate their Likeness and Species, without which (it is evident) Generation could neither have been begun nor carry’d on, the same Necessity must always hold, and a Race of Females as well as Males ought always to continue, in order to carry on that great Work. How then are Women Monsters in Nature?
The first Woman as well as the first Man, when created, were endowed with different Organs serving to Generation, tho’ in all other Respects alike in their Members; and since every Woman afterwardshad no difference in the Formation of those Parts, but must have been exactly the same with her Female Predecessors, even back to the first; by what Reason can her Parts be accounted monstrous or accidentally changed?
Besides, whatsoever is monstrous in Nature ought to be of no further Use in the Oeconomy of that particular System to which it properly may be said to belong, if in a natural State. But this Hypothesis is of such a Nature, as scarce to be worth taking any more trouble to confute, being the produce of a mere Monster in Nature.
StAugustin,[72]who was more inclin’d to deal in Matters metaphysical than natural, makes a long detail of several Kinds of Cripples, and what he calls monstrous Kinds of Men, such as, those having but one Eye in the Forehead,Pigmies, Sciopoda’s, Cynocephales, and such like; and proposes this Question: Whether it was fromAdam, or the Sons ofNoah, that such Kinds of Men had proceeded? But seems to believe that whatsoever they be, they were brought upon the Earth by the special Appointment of God[73].
This he gives as the Cause in general, but argues that the same will hold for those particularly believed to exist in this Part of the World, as Hermaphrodites, and those of a doubtful Sex[74].
‘The same Reason that accounts for the monstrous Births of Men with us, may serve to account also for those of Nations that are so; for God the Creatorof all, knew when and where every thing should be created.’
As yet we know not of any Nation or Genus of Men heterogeneous to us in their Form, tho’ some[75]have wrote concerning such; but later Progresses and Discoveries round the World, shew us to the contrary; if such a Nation was to be found, we might indeed with some Reason, suppose them to be a Race, created on Purpose by God; but we must not therefore assent to the Saint, in imagining God to be the immediate Author of any Form in those poor Children (commonly call’d monstrous) that might be painful or disadvantageous to their well-being and Preservation; and therefore his Comparison is not justly laid down, because, tho’ the first Semina of any Species of Animals areplanted by the Ordination of the Almighty, in an absolute Manner in the Beginning, from which they cannot digress in their successive Generations; yet a Woman, possessing all the greatest Beauties and Proportion in an hereditary Succession, may bring forth a Child, deformed in every Member; which can reasonably be accounted no other than one accidentally injured in the Uterus.
A Word or two more of this great Man may be necessary here, to shew that amongst those monstrous Births we have enumerated from him, he was not less certain of the Existence of Hermaphrodites, than of any other, which appears in these Words[76].
‘Altho’ the Androgyni, which are also call’d Hermaphrodites, are not often, yet, no doubt, they sometimes are, found, in whom the two Sexes are so apparent, that it is uncertain from which they should be named; however the Custom of speaking has prevail’d that they should be nominated after the superior Sex, which is the masculine, for no Body has ever said Androgynecas or Hermaphroditas.’
These amount to the Majority of the physical Causes, commonly assign’d for the Growth of Hermaphrodites; many more as unreasonable as these might be drawn from the Opinions of Astronomers[77], who have endeavour’d to account for such Births, by the Motions of certain planetary Bodies, that, they think, influence the Actions of Generationin a particular Manner, and produce Variety of Monsters; but what are already laid down, are fully sufficient to demonstrate the Errors that reign thro’ the whole; and that the Existence of Hermaphrodites being once granted amongst them, the greater the Number of Authors that strove to shew the Causes of their Generation, the greater the Distance to which Truth was banished on this Occasion.