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
Καὶ νῦν ὅτι Κλεισθένη εἶδον, ὁρᾷς, διὰ τοῦτ’ ἐγένοντο 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!) _Cleisthenes_ was 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 to _recognise by looking at them_ what stamp of
men they were: and that _Juvenal_[341] was right when he wrote:
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 read _hoc_ for _hunc_ in the passage
(_hoc ego fatis imputo_,— _this_ I 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 disease_ I 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 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.)
§ 17.
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