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.