The Plague of Lust, Vol. 2 (of 2): Being a History of Venereal Disease in Classical AntiquityRosenbaum, Julius
History
The Plague of Lust, Vol. 2 (of 2): Being a History of Venereal Disease in Classical Antiquity
Rosenbaum, Julius
Sexually transmitted diseases -- History
In the preceding Sections we have become acquainted with the various
influences capable of favouring or counteracting the rise of diseases
consequent upon the use or misuse of the genitals in Antiquity. At
the same time we have shown how a multitude of affections of the most
different kinds attacked, as a result of the unnatural gratification
of sexual desire, those parts which under these circumstances had
to undertake the rôle of the genital organs of the one or the other
sex. Thirdly we have brought forward in the course of the enquiry at
any rate some examples, proving beyond a doubt that the sexual parts
themselves too under favourable external conditions sometimes became
diseased as the consequence of indulgence in sexual intercourse.
Still these results were for the most part based on the evidence
of non-medical Writers, for of set purpose we abstained as much as
possible from calling the professional Writers into Court on these
points, so as to be able to treat in their proper mutual connexion
whatever statements these latter have left us as to the maladies in
question. This course appeared to us all the more necessary, as it is
precisely the medical evidence which the opponents of the existence of
Venereal disease in Antiquity believe themselves able to utilize in
justification of their opinions.
But before we proceed to the detailed examination of the actual
statements, it would seem expedient to get an answer to the following
question: _whether indeed the Physicians of Antiquity generally were in
a position to acquire an adequate knowledge of the bodily consequences
of vicious living?_ In fact on the correct answer to this question
obviously depends the correct appreciation of the medical Writings as
sources for the History of Venereal disease. Only under the condition
that this question may be answered in the affirmative, can the evidence
supplied by the Physicians be regarded as satisfactory for their own
period. That it cannot of course be so for all periods, has been
pointed out already in our examination of the authorities for Antiquity
generally. Indeed for long periods of time Physicians had no special
_locus standi_, inasmuch as each individual in the case of the most
usual maladies endeavoured to help himself, and if the family recipes
left him stranded, then betook himself with prayers for assistance to
the Gods and their intermediaries on earth, the Priests. This still
continued, even after the Physicians had won their recognition as
a special profession, and we find accordingly throughout Antiquity
popular, sacerdotal, and professional or _medical_ medicine, if we may
be allowed the expression, continuing to exist simultaneously side by
side, and not a trace anywhere of the ridiculous limitation according
to which no man has a right to be well without the help of a doctor.
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