The Plague of Lust, Vol. 1 (of 2): Being a History of Venereal Disease in Classical AntiquityRosenbaum, Julius
History
The Plague of Lust, Vol. 1 (of 2): Being a History of Venereal Disease in Classical Antiquity
Rosenbaum, Julius
Sexually transmitted diseases -- History
let his cloak trail in the mud to avoid the trouble of lifting it
up, etc.—if a person is mastered by things against which most people
succeed in holding out, and is impotent to struggle against them,
unless his impotence is due to hereditary constitution or to disease,
as effeminacy is hereditary in the kings of Scythia, or as a woman is
naturally weaker than a man. But the man addicted to boys would seem
to be incontinent, and is effeminate.—_Incontinence_ assumes sometimes
the form of impetuosity, and at other times that of _weakness_. Some
men deliberate, but _their emotion_ prevents them from abiding by the
result of their deliberation; others again do not deliberate, and are
therefore carried away _by their emotion_).
This passage has been quite misunderstood by _Stark_, loco citato
p. 27, for he has made it too refer to the νοῦσος θήλεια (feminine
disease); in this error indeed _Camerarius_, (Explic. Ethic. Aristot.
Nicomach.—Explanations of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics—Frankfort
1578, 4to., p. 344) whom he cites, had preceded him. _Stark_ says:
Excusat autor eos, qui propter naturae quandam mollitiem et levitatem
vitiorum illecebris resistere nequeant. Haec infirmitas vel ex morbo
procreata vel a sexus differente natura profecta esse potest. Quarum
rationum exempla et _quidem alterius_ _διὰ νόσον_, _Scytharum morbum_,
alterius διὰ φύσιν τοῦ γένους mulierum debilitatem affert. (The author
is excusing such as on account of a certain softness and lightness of
nature cannot resist the allurements of vice. This weakness may have
been either induced by disease, or have sprung from the different
nature of the sexes. Of which cases he gives two examples—_of the one_
διὰ νόσον (_on account of disease_), _the disease of the Scythians_,
of the other διὰ φύσιν τοῦ γένους (on account of congenital nature),
the relative weakness of women). But Aristotle says expressly in the
passage that the μαλακία (softness, effeminacy) of the Scythians,
as well as of a woman, was διὰ γένους (congenital),—that Scythians
equally with women are weakly by birth; while his examples of the
διὰ νόσον (on account of disease) do not come till further on. The
Scythians, he says, like women, are μαλακοί (soft), and the same is
true of the man who practises vices with boys (παιδιώδης); it is a
part of their nature, and so they are not ἀκόλαστοι (“intemperate”),
for the ἀκόλαστος is such a man as cannot owing to disease govern
himself (ἀκρασία, ἀσθενεία, διὰ τὸ πάθος—incontinence, weakness,
owing to passion). Thus the question cannot possibly be here of the
νοῦσος θήλεια (feminine disease), but merely of a weakly, effeminate
mode of life; and this is properly speaking μαλακία, while the vice
of the pathic is called μαλθακία,—but the two words were constantly
interchanged, and thus a part of the blame for the mistake may very
well lie with the transcribers. A Pathic is habitually μαλακός, but
the μαλακὸς is not necessarily also a Pathic. Hence it might very
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account