In SertoriumMollis erat, facilisque viris Paeantius heros,Vulnera sic Paradis dicitur ulta Venus.Cur lingat cunnum Siculus Sertorius, hoc est,Ex hoc occisus, Rufe, videtur Eryx.
In SertoriumMollis erat, facilisque viris Paeantius heros,Vulnera sic Paradis dicitur ulta Venus.Cur lingat cunnum Siculus Sertorius, hoc est,Ex hoc occisus, Rufe, videtur Eryx.
In SertoriumMollis erat, facilisque viris Paeantius heros,Vulnera sic Paradis dicitur ulta Venus.Cur lingat cunnum Siculus Sertorius, hoc est,Ex hoc occisus, Rufe, videtur Eryx.
In Sertorium
Mollis erat, facilisque viris Paeantius heros,
Vulnera sic Paradis dicitur ulta Venus.
Cur lingat cunnum Siculus Sertorius, hoc est,
Ex hoc occisus, Rufe, videtur Eryx.
(To Sertorius.—The Hero, son of Paeas (Philoctetes), was effeminate and easy of access to men; in this way Venus is said to have avenged the murder of Paris. Why should Sicilian Sertorius lick the pudendum of women? this is why, because it would appear, he was the slayer, Rufus, of a man of Eryx.) Of course there can be no question here of the disease which detained Philoctetes at Lemnos and prevented his taking part in the expedition to Troy; and if the older legend says nothing as to the νοῦσος θήλεια of Philoctetes, it is clear from this (as Meier, loco citato, has shown) that only in times when paederastia was becoming prevalent, were all these legends invented, to get as it were a sort of excuse by alleging a distinguished predecessor in the practice. SoMartialsays, addressingGaurus:314
Quod nimio gaudes noctem producere vino,Ignosco: vitium, Gaure, Catonis habes.Carmina quod scribis Musis et Apolline nullo,Laudari debes: hoc Ciceronis habes.Quod vomis: Antoni, quod luxuriaris: Apici;Quod fellas—vitium dic mihi, cuius habes?
Quod nimio gaudes noctem producere vino,Ignosco: vitium, Gaure, Catonis habes.Carmina quod scribis Musis et Apolline nullo,Laudari debes: hoc Ciceronis habes.Quod vomis: Antoni, quod luxuriaris: Apici;Quod fellas—vitium dic mihi, cuius habes?
Quod nimio gaudes noctem producere vino,Ignosco: vitium, Gaure, Catonis habes.Carmina quod scribis Musis et Apolline nullo,Laudari debes: hoc Ciceronis habes.Quod vomis: Antoni, quod luxuriaris: Apici;Quod fellas—vitium dic mihi, cuius habes?
Quod nimio gaudes noctem producere vino,
Ignosco: vitium, Gaure, Catonis habes.
Carmina quod scribis Musis et Apolline nullo,
Laudari debes: hoc Ciceronis habes.
Quod vomis: Antoni, quod luxuriaris: Apici;
Quod fellas—vitium dic mihi, cuius habes?
(That you love to prolong the night with excess of wine, I can excuse; you have the vice, Gaurus, of Cato. That you write verses with no inspiration of Muses and Apollo, for this, you should be praised; it is a fault of Cicero’s you have. That you vomit, well! ’twas a habit of Antony’s; that you are a gourmand, ’twas Apicius’ weakness.—That you suck (as afellator), whose vice have you here, pray tell me!) The above Epigram ofMartial’s(To Sertorius) shows very clearly how the poets represented each form of unnatural indulgence of the sexual impulse as vengeance of Venus. It is acunnilingusthat is in question here, and his vice is accounted for in this way:—just as Philoctetes on account of the slaying of Paris had been punished by Venus with paederastia, so the Sicilian Sertorius probably became acunnilingusbecause he had killed an inhabitant of Eryx, where was situated a famous temple of the goddess. Similarly it will not surprise us if besides paederastia Philoctetes was saddled with the vice of Onanism at a later period, as is implied in the following poem ofAusonius:315
Subscriptum picturae Crispae mulieris impudicae
Praeter legitimi genitalia foedera coetus,Repperit obscoenas Veneres vitiosa libido.Herculis haeredi quam Lemnia suasit egestas,Quam toga facundi scenis agitavit Afrani,Et quam Nolanis capitalis luxus inussit;Crispa tamen cunctas exercet corpore in uno:Deglubit, fellat, molitur per utramque cavernam,Ne quid inexpertum frustra moritura relinquat.
Praeter legitimi genitalia foedera coetus,Repperit obscoenas Veneres vitiosa libido.Herculis haeredi quam Lemnia suasit egestas,Quam toga facundi scenis agitavit Afrani,Et quam Nolanis capitalis luxus inussit;Crispa tamen cunctas exercet corpore in uno:Deglubit, fellat, molitur per utramque cavernam,Ne quid inexpertum frustra moritura relinquat.
Praeter legitimi genitalia foedera coetus,Repperit obscoenas Veneres vitiosa libido.Herculis haeredi quam Lemnia suasit egestas,Quam toga facundi scenis agitavit Afrani,Et quam Nolanis capitalis luxus inussit;Crispa tamen cunctas exercet corpore in uno:Deglubit, fellat, molitur per utramque cavernam,Ne quid inexpertum frustra moritura relinquat.
Praeter legitimi genitalia foedera coetus,
Repperit obscoenas Veneres vitiosa libido.
Herculis haeredi quam Lemnia suasit egestas,
Quam toga facundi scenis agitavit Afrani,
Et quam Nolanis capitalis luxus inussit;
Crispa tamen cunctas exercet corpore in uno:
Deglubit, fellat, molitur per utramque cavernam,
Ne quid inexpertum frustra moritura relinquat.
(Inscribed beneath a Portrait of Crispa,—an immodest woman.—Over and above the natural modes of intercourse in legitimate coition, vicious lust has discovered impure ways of love: the way that his loneliness at Lemnos taught the heir of Hercules (Philoctetes), that which the comedies of eloquent Afranius displayed on the stage, and that which deadly luxury branded on the men of Nola. But Crispa practises them all in her sole person: she skins, she sucks, she works by either aperture, that she may not leave anything untried, and so have lived in vain!)
No doubtStark, p. 19, is quite right in saying this passage has nothing to do with the θήλεια νοῦσος; but the poet has by no means, as he puts it in his note,temporum ordine lapsus,—committed an anachronism. He makes no mention whatever of any vengeance of Venus, saying nothing more than that loneliness led the inheritor (of the arrows) of Hercules to Onanism. This is not merely advancing a conjecture, asStarkdoes, but (to say nothing of theLemnia egestas—Lemnian loneliness), admits of being legitimately developed from the whole sequence of thought in the Epigram. Crispa’s vices are mentioned in the order of their shamefulness. The least disgraceful is Onanism, such as Philoctetespractised, next comes the vice of thecinaedusand of thepathic, for which Afranius serves as example, and lastlyfellation. Thus it shows a complete want of comprehension, when the commentators quote the scholion to Thucydides given a little above as an explanation. Had Philoctetes been referred to as apathic, the succeeding verse would be entirely superfluous; which verse does not receive a word of notice from the expositors, presumably because they failed to understand the allusion. The true explanation is afforded by a passage inQuintilian:316“Togatis excellit Afranius,utinamque non inquinasset argumenta puerorum foedis amoribus, mores suos fassus.†(Afranius excels infabulae togatae(polite comedies), and it were to be wished he had not defiled his plots by disgusting intrigues with boys, thereby discovering his own morals).Forberg, loco citato p. 283, quotes this passage indeed, but explains (both here and on p. 343) thelibido(lust) of Philoctetes as being that of thepathic.
To prove that Venus manifested her wrath in the way specified, we may further cite the race of the daughters of Helios, whom she punished by the infliction of licentious love. ThusHyginussays:317Soli ob indicium (concubitus cum Marte) Venus adprogeniemeius semper fuit inimica, (Because of the Sun’s revelation (of her intrigue with Mars) Venus was ever a bitter enemy of his posterity); and Seneca:318
Stirpem perosa Solis invisi VenusPer nos catenas vindicat Martis suiSuasque:probrisomne Phoebeum genusOneratinfandis.
Stirpem perosa Solis invisi VenusPer nos catenas vindicat Martis suiSuasque:probrisomne Phoebeum genusOneratinfandis.
Stirpem perosa Solis invisi VenusPer nos catenas vindicat Martis suiSuasque:probrisomne Phoebeum genusOneratinfandis.
Stirpem perosa Solis invisi Venus
Per nos catenas vindicat Martis sui
Suasque:probrisomne Phoebeum genus
Oneratinfandis.
(Venus, loathing the posterity of the hated Sun, punishes on us the fetters that bound her lover Mars and her.With abominable and disgraceful practicesshe afflicts the whole race of Phoebus).
An example of such vengeance is afforded by Pasiphaë, of whom the Scholiast on the passage of Lucian cited below relates how, Ἡλίου οὖσα á¼Îº μήνιδος ἈφÏοδίτης ταÏÏου á¼ Ïάσθη, (being a daughter of the Sun, she became enamoured of a bull through the influence of angry Aphrodité), a fable which might very well be explained—for ταÏÏος (a bull), like κÎνταυÏος (a Centaur), occurs in the sense of paederast—as meaning that she had become a female pathic. So Theomnestus says inLucian:319“So lecherous a look resides in the eyes, that compelling all beauty to its will, it can find no satiety. And often was I uncertain whether this were not some spite of Aphrodité. Yet am I none of the children of Helios, neither a natural heir of the Lemnian women, nor puffed up with the scornful insensibility of Hippolytus, that I could have provoked against me such an implacable hatred on the part of the goddess)â€.Philo Judaeus320also represents paederastia as a punishment of such men as married a woman legally repudiated, and the like: Ï€Ïὸς δὲ συμβάσεις εἴ τις á¼Î¸Îλοι χωÏεῖν á¼€Î½á½´Ï Ï„á¿‡ τοιαÏτῃ γυναικὶ,μαλακίας καὶ ἀνανδÏίας á¼ÎºÏ†ÎµÏÎσθω δόξαν, ὡς á¼Îº τετμημÎνος τῆς ψυχῆς τὸ βιωφελÎστατον μισοπόνηÏον πάθος.... δίκην οὖν τινÎτω σὺν τῇ γυναικί. (But if any man should wish to enter into contracts with such a woman, let him bear theill-repute of softness and effeminacy, as having eradicated from his soul thatsentiment of hatred for ill-doers which is most useful for life,—So let him pay his penalty along with the woman). InAthenaeusone of the speakers exclaims (Deipnos., XIII. p. 605 D.): ὉÏᾶτε οὖν καὶ ὑμεῖς, οἱ φιλόσοφοιπαÏá½° φÏσιν τῇἈφÏοδίτῃ χÏώμενοι, καὶἀσεβοῦντες εἰς τὴν θεὸν, μὴ τὸν αá½Ï„ὸν διαφθαÏῆτε Ï„Ïόπον. (Beware then ye too, philosophers who indulge the pleasures of Aphroditéagainst nature, and act impiously towards the goddess, that ye be not destroyed in the same way).
According toDiodorus(V. 55) the sons of Neptune in consequence of the wrath of Venus plunged into such madness that they violated their mother. The Propontides, who had denied the godhead of Venus, were cast by her into such an amorous phrenzy that they publicly gave themselves to men, and they were subsequently turned into stones.321Myrrha, whose mother proclaimed herself to be fairer than Venus, was driven by the goddess into unchastity with her own father.322
In later times this idea was even transferred to the Star of Venus. The following appears inFirmicus“In octavo ab horoscopo loco, Mercurius cum Venere, si vespertini ambo, inefficaces et apocopos reddent, et qui nihil agere possint.†(In the eighth place of the horoscope, Mercury in conjunction with Venus, if both are evening stars, will make men impotent eunuchs and such as can effect nothing.)—a notion that first arose perhaps from the name Hermaphroditus323.
Thus there would be nothing inconsistent with the views universally held in Antiquity in considering the νοῦσος θήλεια (feminine disease) of the Scythians, and equally that of Philoctetes, as consequences of the wrath of Venus. That paederastia was invariably regarded as aViceby the Ancients (and particularly by the Greeks) we have already, following the lines laid down byMeier, we think sufficiently proved.Stark, who repeatedly (pp. 12, 16, 20.) denies this, has been led into error merely by the mistake that was generally prevalent in his time of confusing paedophilia and paederastia; and it is on this misapprehension he bases his argument. How the Scythians came to hold this belief that the wrath of Venus was to blame for what they suffered, must indeed be left an open question. But it should be remembered it was not thepathicsthemselves who advanced this opinion, but only the rest of the Scythians; for Herodotus says expressly, λÎγουσί τε οἱ ΣκÏθαι διὰ τοῦτοσφεαςνοσÎειν (and the Scythians say that for this causetheywere afflicted). Again it was only ὀλίγοι τινὲς αá½Ï„ῶν ὑπολειφθÎντες (a few of the Scythians who were left behind), a few of the stragglers, who would seem to have plundered the temple of Aphrodité; and it certainly was only later that this act of impiety was brought into connection with the vice,—in the same way as the killing of Paris by Philoctetes was with the legend of his lewd practices.
The second question we have to answer will be this: how could Herodotus writethat the descendants of these few stragglers alive in his time suffered from theνοῦσος θήλεια(feminine disease)? Fromthe fact that, while descendants are named, strictly speaking onlymaledescendants can be in question, it is clear the statement is only a general one, and must not be understood to imply more than that certain members of these families were Cinaedi, not of course that thewholeposterity was afflicted with the νοῦσος θήλεια. We see at the present day how the impurity of the father passes on to the son; so it need be matter for no surprise whatever to find the vice of the cinaedi descending in the same way among certain members of a family. As a matter of fact these Scythian temple-robbers are by no means the only examples Antiquity holds up to us of such a thing, for the OratorLysias324says of the family ofAlcibiades, thatmost members of it had become prostitutes.
What is more, the opinion was avowedly and directly held by the Ancients, that pathics were born with the predisposition to the vice. In particularParmenides(509 B.C.) expressed this view in a Fragment, whichCaelius Aurelianus325has preserved in a chapter of his Work. This chapter treats solely of the vice of the pathic, and is of the greatest importance for our subject. We could notforgo quoting it in full, particularly as it is the sole authority for the views held by physicians on this vice, and up to now appears to have been entirely overlooked.
De mollibus sive subactis; quos GraeciμαλθακοὺςVOCANT.
“Molles sive subactos Graeci μαλθακοὺ vocaverunt, quos quidem esse nullus facile virorum credit. Non enim hoc humanos ex natura venit in mores, sed pulso pudore, libido etiam indebitas partes obscoenis usibus subiugavit. Cum enim nullus cupiditati modus, nulla satietatis spes est, singulis Sparta non sufficit sua. Nam sic nostri corporis loca divina providentia certis destinavit officiis. Tum denique volentes alliciunt veste atque gressu, et aliis femininis rebus, quae sunt a passionibus corporis aliena, sed potius corruptae mentis vitia. Nam saepe tumentes [timentes], vel quod est difficile, verentes quosdam, quibus forte deferunt, repente mutati parvo tempore virilitatis quaerunt indicia demonstrare, cuius quia modum nesciunt, rursum nimietate sublati, plus quoque quam virtuti convenit, faciunt et maioribus si peccatis involvunt. Constat itaque etiam nostro iudicio, hos vera sentire. Est enim, ut Soranus ait, malignae ac foedissimae mentis passio. Nam sicut feminaeTribades326appellatae, quod utramque Veneremexerceant, mulieribus magis quam viris misceri festinant et easdem, invidentia pene virili sectantur, et cum passione fuerint desertae, seu temporaliter relevatae, ea quaerunt aliis obiicere, quae pati noscuntur, iuvamini humilitate [iuvandi voluptate ex] duplici sexu confecta, velut frequenti ebrietate corruptae in novas libidinis formas erumpentes, consuetudine turpi nutritae, sui sexus iniuriis gaudent, illi comparatione talium animi passione iactari noscuntur. Nam neque ulla curatio corporis depellendae passionis causa recte putatur adhibenda, sed potius animus coercendus, qui tanta peccatorumlabe vexatur. Nemo enim pruriens corpus feminando correxit, vel virilis veretri tactu mitigavit, sed communiter querelam sive dolorem alia ex materia toleravit. Denique etiam a Clodio historia curationis data ascaridarum esse perspicitur, quos de lumbricis scribentes vermiculos esse docuimis longaonis327in partibus natos.Parmenides328libris quos de natura scripsit,eventu, inquitconceptionis molles aliquando seu subactos homines generare. Cuius quia graecum est epigramma et hoc versibus intimabo [imitabo]: Latinos enim, ut potui, simili modo composui, ne linguarum ratio misceretur.
Femina, virque simul Veneris cum germina miscentVenis, informans diverso ex sanguine virtusTemperiem servans bene condita corpora fingit.At si virtutes permixto semine pugnent,Nec faciant unam, permixto in corpore diraeNascentem gemino vexabunt semine sexum.
Femina, virque simul Veneris cum germina miscentVenis, informans diverso ex sanguine virtusTemperiem servans bene condita corpora fingit.At si virtutes permixto semine pugnent,Nec faciant unam, permixto in corpore diraeNascentem gemino vexabunt semine sexum.
Femina, virque simul Veneris cum germina miscentVenis, informans diverso ex sanguine virtusTemperiem servans bene condita corpora fingit.At si virtutes permixto semine pugnent,Nec faciant unam, permixto in corpore diraeNascentem gemino vexabunt semine sexum.
Femina, virque simul Veneris cum germina miscent
Venis, informans diverso ex sanguine virtus
Temperiem servans bene condita corpora fingit.
At si virtutes permixto semine pugnent,
Nec faciant unam, permixto in corpore dirae
Nascentem gemino vexabunt semine sexum.
Vult enim seminum praeter materias esse virtutes, quae si se ita miscuerint et [ut] eiusdem corporis [vim unam] faciant, unam congruam sexui generent voluntatem. Si autem permixto semine corporeo virtutes separatae permanserint utriusque Veneris natos adpetentia sequatur. Multi praeterea sectarum principes genuinam dicunt esse passionem et proptereain posteros venire cum semine, non quidem naturam criminantes, quae suae puritatis metas aliis ex animalibus docet: nam sunt eius specula a sapientibus nuncupata: sed humanum genus, quod ita semel recepta tenet vitia, ut nulla possit instauratione purgari, nec ullum novitati liquerit locum, sitque gravior senescentibus mentis culpa, cum plurimae genuinae, seu adventitiae passionis corporibus infractae consenescant, ut podagra, epilepsia, furor et propterea aetate vergente mitiores procul dubio fiant. Omnia et enim vexantia validos effectus dabunt firmitate opposita subiacentium materiarum, quae cum in senibus deficit, passio quoque minuitur, ut fortitudo; sola tamen supra dicta, quae subactos seu molles efficit viros, senescenti corpore gravius invalescit et infanda magis libidine movet, non quidem sine ratione. In aliis enim aetatibus adhuc valido corpore et naturalia ventris [veneris] officia celebrante, gemina luxuriae libido non divititur, animorum nunc faciendo, nunc facie iactata [animo eorum nunc patiendo nunc faciendo iactato]: in iis vero qui senectute defecti virili veneris officio caruerint, omnis animi libido in contrariam ducitur appetentiam, et propterea femina validius Venerem poscit. Hinc denique coniiciunt plurimi etiam pueros hac passione iactari. Similiter enim senibus virili indigent officio, quod in ipsis est nondum, illos deseruit.†(On effeminate men orsubservients, called μαλθακοὶ—soft, effeminate, by the Greeks.—Effeminate men, orsubservients, were called by the Greeks μαλθακοὶ. Amanfinds it difficult to believe in the existence of such creatures. For it was not nature prompted the introduction of this as part of human habits; rather was it lust that, expelling shame, subjected to foul uses parts of the body that should never have been so employed. For no limit being set to passion, and no hope of satiety being entertained, the several members find each its own realm insufficient; whereas divine providence destined the different portions of the body to perform definitefunctions. In fine they go out of their way to allure by dress and gait and other feminine attributes, things unconnected with bodily emotions, being rather due to a corrupted mind. For often, moved by fear, or (however difficult to believe) by shame, towards persons whom they happen to respect, they change of a sudden and for a brief space seek to show marks of manly power; but not knowing where to put the limit, they are again carried away by excess, and going beyond what is fit for an honest man are involved in yet greater offences. Thus it is evident, inouropinion, that such men have a sense of the true state of things. For theirs is, as Soranus declares, the passion of a corrupt and utterly foul mind. For as women that are calledTribades, because they practise the love of either sex, are eager to have intercourse with women more than with men, and pursue these with a jealousy almost as violent as a man’s, and when they have been deserted by their love or for the time being superseded, seek to do to other women what they are known to suffer, and winning from their double sex a pleasure in giving pleasure, like persons deboshed by constant drunkenness, being nurtured on evil habitude, delight in wrongs to their own sex,—even so these men (pathics) are seen by a comparison with women of this sort to be tormented with a passion that is of the mind. For no bodily treatment it is rightly deemed should be adopted to expel the passion, rather must the mind be disciplined which is afflicted with such a pollution of vices.
For no man ever remedied a prurient body by foul practices as a woman, nor got mitigation by contact of the male member, but concurrently he suffered some complaint or pain from a different (material) cause. So in fact the history of a cure given by Clodius is found to be really a case of recovery from “ascaridaeâ€, which writers on intestinal worms have shown are a kind of worm born inthe region of the rectum or straight gut.Parmenidesin his books on natural science says “Effeminate men orsubservientsoccasionally bring forth as a result of conception.†But as his Epigram is in Greek, I will imitate it in verse; so I have composed Latin lines like the original so far as I could make them, that there might not be a mixture of the two languages:—“When a woman and a man together mingle in the veins the seeds of love, the formative virtue that moulds of the diverse blood, if it keep due proportion, makes well-framed bodies. But if the virtues are discordant in the commingled seed, and have no unity, in the commingled body furies will torment the nascent sex with two-fold seed.†He means that over and above the material seed there are certain virtues residing in it; and if these have commingled in such a way as to have one and the same operative force in the same body, then they produce one single will that tallies with the sex. But if when the bodily seed was commingled, the virtues remained separate, the appetite for love of both kinds must pursue the offspring.
Many leading doctors of the schools moreover declare that the passion is innate, andtherefore passes on with the seed to descendants, not indeed hereby incriminating nature, which teaches men the bounds of its purity by the example of other animals (for animals are called by wise men nature’s mirrors), but rather the human race that retains so obstinately vices once adopted, that by no renewal can it be purified, and has left no room for change. Similarly amentaldepravity grows graver as men advance in life, whereas most affections of thebody, whether innate or adventitious, get weaker as men get older, for instance gout, epilepsy and madness, and so as age advances undoubtedly grow milder. For all troublesome factors will produce strong effects in proportion to the firmness to resist possessed by the affected parts, and as this firmness is deficient in old men, so the complaint or passion diminishesin intensity, as does the general strength.Butthat passion which makes men subservient or effeminate, grows stronger and more serious as the body grows old and stirs the sufferers with yet more abominable lustfulness,—and not without a reason. For at other ages, the body being still strong and capable of performing the natural offices of love, there is no division of lust into double forms of wantonness, through their mind being tossed to and fro now by passive now by active lewdness. But in such as have failed from age, and become incapable of the manly office of love, all the wantonness of the mind is directed on the appetite for the opposite form of gratification; and for this cause a woman demands love more strongly than a man. In fact many conjecture it is for this reason that boys also are tormented by this passion. For they resemble old men in lacking power for the virile function. It is not yet born in boys; old men have lost it.)
To leave on one side for the present the many inferences of various sorts that this passage ofCaelius Aurelianusmust necessarily lead us to, as they will find a more suitable place later on, and to return to our question,—the mere fact of Herodotus mentioning posterity at all ought of itself to be sufficient to negative any idea of actual eunuchs, of loss of the generative power. For had the Scythians returning from Ascalon lost this power, they could have had no more descendants, and therefore the νοÏσος θήλεια could not have passed on to these, but must have become extinct with the original sufferers. On the other hand children already begotten by them before that period could have been in no way influenced by a disease communicable through the act of generation. Accordingly the νοῦσος θήλεια cannot possibly have affectedtheseScythians so as to annihilate the power of generation. Both must have co-existed side by side; and the contrary can never be proved from anythingHerodotussays. As to another passage of Herodotusthat might seem to demand some notice here, where the expression ἀνδÏόγυνος (man-woman) is put side by side with á¼Î½Î¬Ïεες, we will speak subsequently.
But, it is maintained by those who take a different view,—the individuals who suffered from the νοῦσος θήλεια (feminine disease) could be recognized as doing so by their looks; thus it cannot have been a mere vice, it must have been an actual bodily complaint. We will not say a word more insisting on the declarations general amongst ancient writers, for example the words ofOvid:Heu! quam difficile est crimen non prodere vultu(Alas! how difficult it is not to betray a vice by the look), but will simply ask the question,—had the Ancients really no bodily marks of identificationby which they could recognise in an individual the vice of the pathic or cinaedus? On this point we must look to the Physiognomists for information, and as a matter of fact they supply it in considerable completeness. First of all Aristotle329:
“Distinguishing Masks of the Cinaedus:
“An eye broken-down, as it were, knees bent inwards, inclination of the head to the right side; movements of the hands always back downwards and flaccid, the gait double, as it were, one leg being crossed over the other in walking, the gaze wandering; such a man for example was the Sophist Dionysius.†Polemo enters into greater detail330:
“Distinguishing Marks of the Androgynus(Man-woman): “Theman-womanhas a lecherous and wanton look, he rolls his eyes and lets his gaze wander; forehead and cheeks twitch, eyebrows are drawn together to a point, neck bent, hips in continual movement. All the limbs twitch spasmodically, knees and hands seeming to crack; like an ox he glares round him and fixes his eyes on the ground. He speaks with a thin voice, at once croaking and shrill, exceedingly uncertain and trembling.†In very similar terms the pathic is sketched by Adamantus331.Dio Chrysostomin hisspeech cited a little above332relates how “a physiognomist had come into a certain city, in order to give an exhibition of his art there, and declared he could tell by looking at any individual whether he were brave or timid, a boaster or a debauchee, a cinaedus or an adulterer. A man was brought to him who had a meagre body, eyebrows grown together, a dirty look, who was in evil condition, with callosities on his hands, and dressed in coarse gray clothing, one that was overgrown with hair to the knuckles, and ill-shaved, and the physiognomist was asked, what sort of a man he was. When he had looked at him a considerable time, and at the end was still uncertain, as it seems to me, what he should finally say, he declared he did not know and ordered the man to go. But when the latter sneezed, just as he was going, he cried out instantly he was a cinaedus. Thus the sneeze betrayed the man’s habits, and prevented them, in spite of all the rest, from continuing hid.†No doubt the man’s walk had already given the Physiognomist an indication, and the gesture he made when he sneezed,quickly confirmed his Diagnosis. In fact the cinaedus probably made a grip at his posterior as he sneezed, so as to close the orifice, the weakened or possibly rupturedSphincter anino longer being able to perform this office (χαυνοπÏώκτος,—wide-breeched, in Aristophanes!). Indeed with a healthySphincterit is often hardly possible during a sneeze to keep back the out-rush of wind and even of the more liquid faeces.333
Further the following passage of Lucian should be quoted in this connection:334
“But I tell you, pathic,—your habits are so obvious that even the blind and the deaf cannot fail to recognise them. If you only open your mouth to speak, only undress at the baths, nay, if you do not yourself undress, but only your slaves put off their garments, what think you,—are not all your secrets of the night at once revealed? Now just tell me, if your Sophist Bassus, or the flute-player Batalus, or the cinaedus Hemitheon of Sybaris, who wrote your beautiful laws, how you must polish the skin, and pluck out the hair (with tweezers), how you must submit to the performance of paederastia, and how yourselves perform it,— now if one of these men should throw a lion’s skin round him, and enter with a club in his hand, what would the spectators really believe?—that it was Hercules? Surely not, unless they were utterly blear-eyed. A thousand things betray such a masquerade,—gait, look, voice,335the bowed neck, the ceruse, the mastich, the paint on the cheeks that you make yourselves up with; in a word it were easier, as the proverb says, to hide five elephants under your armpit than to conceal one cinaedus!â€
Now if thenaturalmarks of identification that have been specified were sufficient to betray the cinaedus, even when he was devoid of all external adornment from art,336how much more readily recognizable must the pathic become, if he arranged his get-up and costume to match his shameful practices,337and that this was soMartialaffords evidence in countless places. In fact these male whores used to have the beard quite clean shaven (á¼Î¾Ï…ÏημÎνοι close-shaven) and not merely on the posteriors but generally all over the body, with the exception of the head, carefully removed the hair, so as make themselves more like women.
αá½Ï„ίκα γυναικεῖ’ ἢν ποιῇ τις δÏάματα,μετουσίαν δεῖ τῶν Ï„Ïόπων τὸ σῶμ’ ἔχειν,
αá½Ï„ίκα γυναικεῖ’ ἢν ποιῇ τις δÏάματα,μετουσίαν δεῖ τῶν Ï„Ïόπων τὸ σῶμ’ ἔχειν,
αá½Ï„ίκα γυναικεῖ’ ἢν ποιῇ τις δÏάματα,μετουσίαν δεῖ τῶν Ï„Ïόπων τὸ σῶμ’ ἔχειν,
αá½Ï„ίκα γυναικεῖ’ ἢν ποιῇ τις δÏάματα,
μετουσίαν δεῖ τῶν Ï„Ïόπων τὸ σῶμ’ ἔχειν,
(Directly, if a man play women’s parts, the body must have its share in the characterization), Aristophanes makes Agatho say at the Thesmophoria, where Mnesilochus has been transformed into a woman by means of depilation, so as to be able to back up the women in opposition to Euripides in their attacks on him at that festival.
On the other hand cinaedi let the hair of the head grow long338(comae,—long locks), and dressed altogether like women. Hence the reply of the CynicDiogenes339to a young man clothed after this fashion, who had asked him a question on some subject or other; he would not answer, he said,till his questioner had lifted up his clothes, and shown him his sex! Equally important is the conversation ofSocrateswithStrepsiadesin the “Clouds†ofAristophanes:340
ΣτÏεψιάδης.... ΛÎξον δή μοι τὶ παθοῦσαι,Îµá¼´Ï€ÎµÏ ÎεφÎλαι γ’ εἰσὶν ἀληθῶς, θνηταῶς εἴξασι Î³Ï…Î½Î±Î¹Î¾Î¯Î½Â·Î¿á½ Î³á½°Ï á¼ÎºÎµá¿–ναί γ’ εἰσὶ τοιαῦται . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ΣωκÏάτης. Γίγνονται πάνθ’ á½… τι βοÏλονται· κᾆτ’ ἢν μὲν ἴδωσι κομήτην,ἄγÏιόν τινα τῶν λασίων τοÏτων, οἷόν Ï€ÎµÏ Ï„á½¸Î½ Ξενοφάντου,σκώπτουσαι τὴν μανίαν αá½Ï„οῦ, ΚενταÏÏοις ᾔκασαν αá½Ï„άς.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Καὶ νῦν ὅτι ΚλεισθÎνη εἶδον, á½Ïá¾·Ï‚, διὰ τοῦτ’ á¼Î³Îνοντο γυναῖκες.
ΣτÏεψιάδης.... ΛÎξον δή μοι τὶ παθοῦσαι,Îµá¼´Ï€ÎµÏ ÎεφÎλαι γ’ εἰσὶν ἀληθῶς, θνηταῶς εἴξασι Î³Ï…Î½Î±Î¹Î¾Î¯Î½Â·Î¿á½ Î³á½°Ï á¼ÎºÎµá¿–ναί γ’ εἰσὶ τοιαῦται . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ΣωκÏάτης. Γίγνονται πάνθ’ á½… τι βοÏλονται· κᾆτ’ ἢν μὲν ἴδωσι κομήτην,ἄγÏιόν τινα τῶν λασίων τοÏτων, οἷόν Ï€ÎµÏ Ï„á½¸Î½ Ξενοφάντου,σκώπτουσαι τὴν μανίαν αá½Ï„οῦ, ΚενταÏÏοις ᾔκασαν αá½Ï„άς.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Καὶ νῦν ὅτι ΚλεισθÎνη εἶδον, á½Ïá¾·Ï‚, διὰ τοῦτ’ á¼Î³Îνοντο γυναῖκες.
ΣτÏεψιάδης.... ΛÎξον δή μοι τὶ παθοῦσαι,Îµá¼´Ï€ÎµÏ ÎεφÎλαι γ’ εἰσὶν ἀληθῶς, θνηταῶς εἴξασι Î³Ï…Î½Î±Î¹Î¾Î¯Î½Â·Î¿á½ Î³á½°Ï á¼ÎºÎµá¿–ναί γ’ εἰσὶ τοιαῦται . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ΣωκÏάτης. Γίγνονται πάνθ’ á½… τι βοÏλονται· κᾆτ’ ἢν μὲν ἴδωσι κομήτην,ἄγÏιόν τινα τῶν λασίων τοÏτων, οἷόν Ï€ÎµÏ Ï„á½¸Î½ Ξενοφάντου,σκώπτουσαι τὴν μανίαν αá½Ï„οῦ, ΚενταÏÏοις ᾔκασαν αá½Ï„άς.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Καὶ νῦν ὅτι ΚλεισθÎνη εἶδον, á½Ïá¾·Ï‚, διὰ τοῦτ’ á¼Î³Îνοντο γυναῖκες.
ΣτÏεψιάδης.... ΛÎξον δή μοι τὶ παθοῦσαι,
Îµá¼´Ï€ÎµÏ ÎεφÎλαι γ’ εἰσὶν ἀληθῶς, θνηταῶς εἴξασι γυναιξίν·
Î¿á½ Î³á½°Ï á¼ÎºÎµá¿–ναί γ’ εἰσὶ τοιαῦται . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ΣωκÏάτης. Γίγνονται πάνθ’ á½… τι βοÏλονται· κᾆτ’ ἢν μὲν ἴδωσι κομήτην,
ἄγÏιόν τινα τῶν λασίων τοÏτων, οἷόν Ï€ÎµÏ Ï„á½¸Î½ Ξενοφάντου,
σκώπτουσαι τὴν μανίαν αá½Ï„οῦ, ΚενταÏÏοις ᾔκασαν αá½Ï„άς.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Καὶ νῦν ὅτι ΚλεισθÎνη εἶδον, á½Ïá¾·Ï‚, διὰ τοῦτ’ á¼Î³Îνοντο γυναῖκες.
(Strepsiades.—Now tell me, how comes it that, if these are really and truly clouds, they resemble women? Common clouds are not like that....Socrates.—They can easily make themselves anything they please. And so, if they but catch sight of one of those long-haired, ruffianly, shaggy fellows, such a man as Xenophantus’ son for example, straightway in derision of their folly they change into Centaurs. And now when they beheld Cleisthenes, see you? they became women!)Cleistheneswas a notorious cinaedus at Athens, whom Aristophanes had made a special butt for his wit; for example, he makes Mnesilochus, mentioned just above, after his transformation into a woman, say,—he looks just like Cleisthenes now.
The evidence adduced will, we think, be sufficient to show that the Scythians had good reason for saying, that with persons in this case (cinaedi) it was easy torecognise by looking at themwhat stamp of men they were: and thatJuvenal341was right when he wrote:
Verius ergoEt magis ingenue Peribomius:hunc ego fatisImputo, qui vultu morbum incessuque fatetur.
Verius ergoEt magis ingenue Peribomius:hunc ego fatisImputo, qui vultu morbum incessuque fatetur.
Verius ergoEt magis ingenue Peribomius:hunc ego fatisImputo, qui vultu morbum incessuque fatetur.
Verius ergo
Et magis ingenue Peribomius:hunc ego fatis
Imputo, qui vultu morbum incessuque fatetur.
(More truly then and more candidly Peribomius says: the man I consider a victim of fate, who in face and gait betrays the disease he suffers from.)—a passage that strongly confirms what has been advanced. Peribomius is quite candid, he confesses to being a pathic, for in any case his appearance would betray the fact. He finds the less reason to deny it, as he regards the vice which has mastered him as an infliction of providence (fatis imputo). Here is proof that the opinion of the Greeks as to the pathic’s being one who had incurred the anger of the gods, was still commonly held in Juvenal’s time, though perhaps less as a matter of conviction than in order to provide an excuse for indulgence. So we must further readhocforhuncin the passage (hoc ego fatis imputo,—thisI regard as an infliction of fate); unless indeed we construe thus,ego, qui morbum vultu incessuque fatetur, hunc (sc. morbum) fatis imputo. “I in truth,—as for the man who confesses by look and gait his disease,this diseaseI regard as an infliction of fate.†The words are obviously Peribomius’ own expression of opinion; and directly afterwards the poet goes on:
Horum simplicitas miserabilis, his furor ipseDat veniam: sed peiores, qui talia verbisHerculis invadunt et de virtute locutiClunem agitant.
Horum simplicitas miserabilis, his furor ipseDat veniam: sed peiores, qui talia verbisHerculis invadunt et de virtute locutiClunem agitant.
Horum simplicitas miserabilis, his furor ipseDat veniam: sed peiores, qui talia verbisHerculis invadunt et de virtute locutiClunem agitant.
Horum simplicitas miserabilis, his furor ipse
Dat veniam: sed peiores, qui talia verbis
Herculis invadunt et de virtute locuti
Clunem agitant.
(These men’s simplicity moves our pity; their very infatuation craves pardon. But worse are they who enter such courses with Hercules’ words on their lips, and prating of manly virtue, heave the wanton buttocks.)
But the passage just quoted fromJuvenalis of still greater importance for another reason. In it the vice of the cinaedus is calledmorbus(a disease); and in virtue of its explicitness it is sufficient by itself to settle all doubts as to this being a usual mode of expression with the Romans, who ordinarily designated any vice by this name342. The onlyquestion remaining will be, Did theGreeksalso usethis form of expression? Any scholar possessed of a special acquaintance with the Greek language will most certainly not hesitate an instant to answer this question in the affirmative, the Lexicographers having long ago collected an exhaustive list of examples of such use343.
Plutarch344says, comparing the action of the Sun with that of Love:— Καὶ μὴν οὔτε σώματος ἀγÏμναστος ἕξις ἥλιον, οὒτε ἜÏωτα δÏναται φÎÏειν ἀλÏπως Ï„Ïόπος ἀπαιδεÏτου ψυχῆς· á¼Î¾Î¯ÏƒÏ„αται δ’ á½Î¼Î¿Î¯Ï‰Ï‚ á¼ÎºÎ¬Ï„εÏον καὶνοσεῖ, τὴν του θεοῦ δÏναμιν, οὠτὴν αὑτοῦ μεμφόμενον ἀσθÎνειαν.—(ch. XXIII.) Τὴν μὲν Ï€Ïὸς ἄῤῥενα ἄῤῥενος á½Î¼Î¹Î»Î¯Î±Î½, μᾶλλον δὲ ἀκÏασίαν καὶ á¼Ï€Î¹Ï€Î®Î´Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î½ εἴποι τις ἂν á¼Î½Î½Î¿Î®ÏƒÎ±Ï‚,
á½Î²Ïιςτάδ’οá½Ï‡á¼¡ ΚÏÏ€Ïις á¼Î¾ÎµÏγάζεται.
Διὸ τοὺς μὲν ἡδομÎνους Ï„á¿· πάσχειν εἰς τὸ χείÏιστον τιθÎμενοι γÎνος κακίας, οὔτε πίστεως μοῖÏαν, οὔτε αἰδοῦς.... Ἀλλὰ πολλὰ φαῦλα καὶ μανικὰ τῶν γυναικῶν á¼Ïώτων· Τὶ δὲ οá½Ï‡á½¶ πλείονα τῶν παιδικῶν; Ἀλλ’ á½¥ÏƒÏ€ÎµÏ Ï„Î¿á¿¦Ï„Î¿ παιδομανίατὸ πάθος, οá½Î´ÎτεÏον δὲ ἜÏως ἔστιν. (And in fact neither can an untrained body bear the sun, nor can any fashion of uneducated soul bear Love (Eros) without pain; but each equally is disorganizedand grows sick, having to blame the power of the god, not its own weakness.—ch. XXIII.—Now intercourse of male with male one would rather call, after due reflection, incontinence and violent assault.
“’Tisovermastering insolenceworks this result, not love (Cypris).â€345
Wherefore such as take pleasure in pathic lust, devoting themselves to the vilest kind of wickedness, have no portion in honour or in modesty.—Indeed much there is base and insane in amours with women; how much more so in those with boys! Now the name of the latter passion is paedomania—346madness for boys,—butneitherkind is Love—Eros).
These passages are of the highest importance in connection with our subject, as confirming in the most distinct manner what has been said above as to the wrath of Venus; but for the sake of greater clearness they had to be held over for discussion till now. It is clearly stated in them: that paederastia is no work of Venus, i.e. not an expression or consequence of the customary activity of the goddess, but a ὕβÏις (act of insolent violence) and the consequence of ὕβÏις i.e. of some act that has roused the anger of the gods. Here we have the oldest view of all: that paederastia is a consequence of the vengeance of Venus, arising in consequence of a ὕβÏις, and again in turn itself constituting a ὕβÏις.347
But besides this the later view of a more enlightened time is also implied. According to this it was not any δÏναμις τοῦ θεοῦ (operation of a god’s might), but simply an ἀσθενεία or ἀκÏασία348(weakness,incontinence) of the individual that was in question, (and it is for this reasonPlutarchquotes the line ofManetho, an old and obscure poet, in this sense);Paederastia was called a πάθος, a form of insanity (παιδομανία—madness for boys), and was not looked upon in any sense as a consequence of the powerof Eros—Love. That the vice was also called νόσος (a disease) is shown,—not to mention the expression νοῦσος θήλεια (femininedisease), which we have yet to fully explain,—by the Speech of Dio Chrysostom cited above, as well as by a number of passages quoted in the course of our investigation,—e.g. on p. 125. In the “Wasps†ofAristophanes,Xanthiasrelates how a son had confined his father and put him under surveillance, and then goes on (vv. 71 sqq.):
Î½ÏŒÏƒÎ¿Î½Î³á½°Ï á½ Ï€Î±Ï„á½´Ï á¼€Î»Î»ÏŒÎºÎ¿Ï„Î¿Î½ αá½Ï„οῦνοσεῖ,ἣν οá½Î´â€™ ἂν εἷς γνοίη ποτ’ οá½Î´á½² ξυμβάλῃ,εἰ μὴ Ï€Ïθοιθ’ ἡμῶν· á¼Ï€Îµá½¶ τοπάζετε·
Î½ÏŒÏƒÎ¿Î½Î³á½°Ï á½ Ï€Î±Ï„á½´Ï á¼€Î»Î»ÏŒÎºÎ¿Ï„Î¿Î½ αá½Ï„οῦνοσεῖ,ἣν οá½Î´â€™ ἂν εἷς γνοίη ποτ’ οá½Î´á½² ξυμβάλῃ,εἰ μὴ Ï€Ïθοιθ’ ἡμῶν· á¼Ï€Îµá½¶ τοπάζετε·
Î½ÏŒÏƒÎ¿Î½Î³á½°Ï á½ Ï€Î±Ï„á½´Ï á¼€Î»Î»ÏŒÎºÎ¿Ï„Î¿Î½ αá½Ï„οῦνοσεῖ,ἣν οá½Î´â€™ ἂν εἷς γνοίη ποτ’ οá½Î´á½² ξυμβάλῃ,εἰ μὴ Ï€Ïθοιθ’ ἡμῶν· á¼Ï€Îµá½¶ τοπάζετε·
Î½ÏŒÏƒÎ¿Î½Î³á½°Ï á½ Ï€Î±Ï„á½´Ï á¼€Î»Î»ÏŒÎºÎ¿Ï„Î¿Î½ αá½Ï„οῦνοσεῖ,
ἣν οá½Î´â€™ ἂν εἷς γνοίη ποτ’ οá½Î´á½² ξυμβάλῃ,
εἰ μὴ Ï€Ïθοιθ’ ἡμῶν· á¼Ï€Îµá½¶ τοπάζετε·
(For his father issickof a portentoussickness, one that no one would ever know or conjecture the nature of, unless he should have learned it from us; for if you doubt me, guess yourselves.)
Love of play is suggested, and love of drink, love of sacrifice and finally love of winning guests and seeing them at his house (φιλόξενον—lover of guests), which last conjecture Sosias understands in an obscene sense as implying a cinaedus, and (vv. 84 sqq.) says: