Part 20

(’Tis winter time, and the shuddering chill of December is upon us. None the less, Linus, you dare to greet with your frosty salute all men you meet here and there, and to kiss all Rome. What more disagreeable or more cruel could you do, if you had been struck or thrashed? With an embrace so chilling may no wife kiss me, or unripe maid with wheedling lips. But you,—you think yourself more attractive and more pleasing, you from whose dog-like nose a blue icicle hangs, whose beard is frozen stiff, such a beard as the Cilician shearer crops with his upward-pointing clippers from the chin of a Cinyphian he-goat. I had rather meet a hundred _cunnilingues_; I am less afraid of a Gaul new come to town. Wherefore, if you possess any sense or any shame, I do beseech you, Linus, defer your wintry salutes till April is come). Now _Linus_ is designated by _Martial_, bk. VII. Epigr. 9, as a _fellator_, and bk. XI. Epigr. 26., as a _cunnilingue_.

[56] Whence also the proverbial saying in _Suidas_: κύνα δέρειν δεδαρμένην· τὸ τοῦ Φερεκράτους· σχῆμα δέ ἐστι ἀκόλαστον εἰς τὸ αἰδοῖον· εἴρηται δὲ ἐπὶ τῷ, ἄλλο πασχόντων αὖθις ἐφ’ οἷς πεπόνθασιν ἡ παροιμία. (to skin the skinned bitch; expression of Pherecrates; is an abominable practice in connection with the private parts; the proverb is spoken of such as suffer something a second time over, after having suffered it once already). Similarly _Plautus_, Trinum. II. 4. 27., Edepol _mutuum_ mecum facit (By my faith, he plays give and take with me). Again κυνάμυια (shameless fly) is found in _Suidas_, which he explains by ἀναιδεστάτη· παρεσχημάτικε τὸ ὄνομα ἀπὸ τοῦ κυνὸς καὶ τῆς μυίας· ὁ μὲν γὰρ κύων ἀναιδής, ἡ δὲ μυῖα θρασεῖα, (a most shameless woman: name borrowed figuratively from the dog and the fly; for the dog is shameless, and the fly audacious)—probably with a reference to _Homer_, II. XXI. 394., where κυνόμυια is found, and the Scholiast observes: ἀναιδής ὡς μυῖα, ἐκ δύο ἀναιδῶν τελείων, τοῦ τε κυνός καὶ τὴς μυίας, διὰ τὸ ὑπερβάλλον τῆς ἀναιδείας. (shameless as a fly; from two completely shameless creatures, the dog and the fly; on account of the excessive degree of their shamelessness). Further there is in this connection the word κυναλώπηξ (fox-dog), which was a nick-name of _Philostratus_, as we see from _Aristophanes_, Knights 1078., on which passage the Scholiast observes: λέγει δὲ αὐτὸν καὶ πορνοβοσκὸν καὶ καλλωπιστὴν (now he calls him both brothel-keeper and dandy). If we derive the word from τὸν κύνα (frenulum praeputii,—ligament of the prepuce,—Paulus Aegineta, VI. 54.) ἀλωπίζειν, it would designate the _fellator_, as ἀλωπὸς, ἀλωπίζειν, ἀλωπηκίζω is formed from α privative (negative) and λῶπος, λώπη (the covering, skin, wool); and ἀλωπηκία is to be explained in the same way,—but not from the scab or mange of the fox, nor yet as the Etymologicum Magnum would have it, because the places where the fox discharges his urine die, the grass e. g. dries up and withers. Hence ἀλώπηξ might be taken as _bald-headed_, and then the further meaning of licentious dissoluteness given to it, for in Antiquity baldness was very usually looked upon as a consequence of sexual excesses, and as every one knows, Caesar was called by his soldiers _moechus calvus_ (the bald-headed adulterer). But old men, who in particular are bald-headed, especially practised, owing to their lack of the power of erecting the penis, the vice of _irrumation_ and of the _cunnilingue_, which makes _Martial_ say (IV. 50.) _Nemo est, Thai, senex ad irrumandum_ (No one, Thais, is too old a man for irrumation). κυναλώπηξ would then be a _bald-headed cunnilingue_. Possibly however this idea was also partly due to a reminiscence of the fox’s habit, when desirous of following up a scent, of sticking his head to the ground (_Aelian_, Hist. Anim. VI. ch. 24.),—a manœuvre he also adopts, as is generally known, when dying. In evidence of this view may be quoted what _Cicero_, Orat. pro Domo ch. 18., says to Sextus Clodius: _ligurris_ (you are a licker), and ch. 31. Quaere hoc ex Sexto Clodio, iube adesse, latitat omnino; sed si requiri iusseris, invenient hominem apud sororem tuam (Publii Clodii) _occultantem se capite demisso_ (Require this of Sextus Clodius, bid him appear; he lurks entirely out of sight. But if once you order him to be sought out, they will find the man at your sister’s house (Publius Clodius’s) _hiding himself with head held down_.) Comp. _Catullus_, 87. In _Martial_, Bk. IV. Epigr. 53., _canis_ is used in same sense as κύων in Greek,—apparently? Perhaps the women of Antiquity made use of dogs as well to serve as _cunnilingues_. According to _Brockhusius_ on Tibullus I. 7. 32., II. 4. 32. they were usual companions of “ladies of pleasure” at Rome, whence too _suburanae canes_ (bitches of the Subura) in _Horace_, Epod. V. 58. and _Subura vigilax_ (the watchful Subura) in _Propertius_, IV. 7. 15. During the Middle Ages at any rate such an employment of dogs was nothing unusual. This is stated by _Panormita_, Hermaph. Epigr. XXX., Epitaphium Nichinae Flandrensis, Scorti egregii:—

Pelvis erat cellae in medio, qua saepe lavabar, Lambebat madidum blanda catella femur.

(Epitaph on Nichette the Fleming, a famous Harlot:—There stood a basin in middle of the chamber, in which I would many a time wash myself, the while my fawning bitch-pup licked her mistress’s dripping thigh).

and Epigr. XXXVII.,

Te viset Jannecta, sua comitante catella, Blanda canis dominae est, est hera blanda viris.

(Jeannette shall visit you, her bitch-pup accompanying her; complacent is the hound to its mistress, the lady complacent to men).

[57] _Galen_, De simplic. medicament. temperamentis ac facultat. Bk. X. ch. 1., edit. Kühn Vol. XII. p. 249.

[58] κοπροφάγος (Excrement-Eater). To this _Martial_, bk. III. Epigr. 77., seems to allude, when he says:

Nescio quod stomachi vitium secretius esse Suspicor, ut quid enim, Baetice, _saprofagis_?

(I suspect there exists some secret vitiation of the stomach; else why, Baeticus, do you _eat putrid meat_?)

[59] It is evident from this that Meier in his above mentioned Article on Paederastia is wrong in citing the expression αἰσχρουργὸς (worker of obscenities) as being used for the direct equivalent of _cinaedus_. Incidentally we would take this opportunity of further observing that the word παιδοκόραξ (boy-raven, i. e. a person ravenous after boys), which is also mentioned in the same Article as synonymous with _cinaedus_, is wrongly referred to paederastia, for it really, like the Latin _corvus_ (raven), signifies a _fellator_. Its true explanation is given in _Pliny_, Hist. Nat. bk. X. ch. 15., Corvi pariunt cum plurimum quinos. _Ore eos parere aut coire vulgus arbitratur._ (Ravens produce at most a brood of five each pair. _The vulgar believe these birds produce or copulate with the mouth)._—Aristoteles (De gen anim. Bk. III. ch. 6.) negat,—sed illam exosculationem, quae saepe cernitur, qualem in columbis, esse. (Aristotle denies this,—but adds that there is the same billing, which is often noticed, as with doves). Hence also _Martial_, bk. XIV. Epigr. 74.,

Corve salutator, quare fellator haberis? In caput intravit mentula nulla tuum.

(You raven that salute your mate, why are you thought to be a _fellator_? No member ever penetrated into your head). Greek Anthology, bk. II. Tit. 9. 13., λευκὸν ἰδεῖν κόρακα (a white crow to all appearance).

[60] Instead of ᾧ φαίνεται _Rost_ has proposed to read ὧν φαίνεται. (_Forbiger_, on the Hermaphrod. of Panormita, p. 281. Note b.)

[61] _Brunck_, Analecta Vol. III. p. 334.,

Δημώναξ, μὴ πάντα κάτω βλέπε, μηδὲ χαρίζου τῇ γλώσση· δεινὴν χοῖρος ἄκανθαν ἔχει. Καὶ συζῇς ἡμῖν. _ἐν Φοινίκῃ δὲ καθευδεις_, κοὐκ ὢν ἐκ Σεμέλης μηροτραφὴς γεγόνας.

(Demonax, be not for ever looking downwards, and be not complacent with your tongue; that organ—the _pudenda muliebria_—has a sharp thorn. And indeed you live with us, _but you sleep in Phoenicia_, and though no child of Semelé, are thigh-bred).

[62] In particular it is the following Epigram in _Brunck’s_ Analecta that has given occasion to this explanation:

Ἀλφειοῦ στόμα φεῦγε· φιλεῖ κόλπους Ἀρεθούσης. _πρηνὴς ἐμπίπτων ἁλμυρὸν ἐς πέλαγος._

(Fly the Alpheus’ mouth; he loves the bosom of Arethusa, _falling headlong into the salt sea_). Forbiger might have further cited the following passage from _Aristophanes_, Knights 1086, 87.,

ΑΛ. Καὶ γὰρ ἐμοὶ καὶ γῆς καὶ τῆς ἐρυθρᾶς γε θαλάσσης χὤτι γ’ἐν Ἐκβατάνοις δικάσεις, _λείχων_ ἐπίπαστα.

(Verily for me you shall be judge over earth and the Red Sea to boot and all the realm of Ecbatana, _licking up_ comfit-cakes,—? pickles). Here ἐπίπαστα is, as probably also in v. 103., the Salgama (pickles in brine) of _Ausonius_, Epigr. 125.; which moreover affords at any rate a partial explanation of the passage in _Pollux_, Onomast. bk. VI. ch. 9. p. 61., bk. X. ch. 24. p. 96. Still, even if according to this _Phoenicia_ were used in the sense of the genital organs of women at time of menstruation, it by no means follows that φοινικίζειν meant _only_ to have dealings with women in menstruation, any more than it does that it is identical with καταμηνίου πίνων (drinking of menstrual blood), as it has been shown just above not to be. In fact _Galen_ says explicitly: φαίνεταί μοι παραπλήσιον, (it appears to me to be something _similar!_)

[63] _Seneca_, De beneficiis bk. IV. ch. 31.

[64] _Seneca_, Epist. 87.

[65] _Galen_, Works, edit. Kühn, Vol. XIX. p. 153.

[66] _Naumann_, Handb. der Klinik (Text-book of Clinical Medicine), Vol. 7. p. 88.

[67] The author at any rate is more cautious than _Sprengel_, who (_Th. Batemann_), Prakt. Darstellung der Hautkrankheiten (Practical Exposition of Diseases of the Skin), Halle 1815., p. 427. Note, writes: “Hippocrates appears to mention it (Elephantiasis) under the name φοινικίη νόσος (Phoenician disease), which _Galen_ (Explan. voc. Hipp.) _distinctly and definitely_ explains as Elephantiasis.”

[68] _Hippocrates_, edit. Kühn Vol. I. pp. 223, 233., Λειχῆνες δὲ καὶ λέπραι καὶ λεῦκαι, οἷσι μὲν νέοισιν ἢ παισὶν ἐοῦσιν ἐγένετό τι τούτων, ἢ κατὰ μικρὸν φανὲν αὔξεται ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ, τούτοισι μὲν οὐ χρὴ ἀπόστασιν νομίζειν τὸ ἐξάνθημα, ἀλλὰ νόσημα· οἷσι δὲ ἐγένετο τούτων τι πολύ τε καὶ ἐξαπίνης, τοῦτο ἂν εἴη ἀπόστησις· γίνονται δὲ λεῦκαι μὲν ἐκ τῶν _θανατωδεστάτων_ νοσημάτων, οἷον καὶ ἡ _νοῦσος ἡ φθινικὴ_ καλεομένη. αἱ δὲ λέπραι καὶ οἱ λειχῆνες ἐκ τῶν μελαγχολικῶν. ἰῆσθαι δὲ τουτέων εὐπετέστερά ἐστιν ὅσα νεωτάτοισί τε γίνεται καὶ νεώτατά ἐστι, καὶ τοῦ σώματος ἐν τοῖσι μαλθακωτάτοισι καὶ σαρκωδεστάτοισι φύεται. (for translation see text above).

[69] _J. W. Wedel_, Progr. de Morbo phoeniceo Hippocratis, (Graduation Exercise on the Phœnician disease of Hippocrates), Jena 1702. 4to., reprinted in _E. G. Baldinger_, Selecta doctorum virorum opuscula in quibus Hippocrates explicatur, denuo edita, (Select Tracts of Learned Men dealing with the Interpretation of Hippocrates,—Second ed.), Göttingen 1782., pp. 215-222. The Author does not seem to be really self-consistent; he wavers between Elephantiasis and Purpura.

[70] _Rayer, Maladies de la peau._ Bruxelles 1836. p. 385. Et quoique les termes de la description du λεύκη se rapportent assez bien à la leucopathie partielle, la plupart des interprètes et des critiques, se fondant sur une passage d’Hippocrate (Prorrhet. lib. II.) ont pensé, que sous ce nom les anciens avoient indiqué une maladie grave, l’éléphantiasis anesthétique ou la lèpre des juifs. (_Rayer_, Diseases of the Skin. Brussels 1836., p. 385., And although the terms in which this λεύκη is described are pretty well consistent with the symptoms of partial leucopathy, still the majority of interpreters and critics, taking their stand on a passage of Hippocrates (Prorrhet. bk. II.) have held that under this name the Ancients indicated a serious disease, viz. anaesthetic elephantiasis or the leprosy of Jews).

[71] _Celsus_, Bk. V. ch. 27. 19., λεύκη habet quiddam simile alpho, sed magis albida est et altius descendit: in eaque albi pili sunt, et lanugini similes. (λεύκη has some resemblance to alphus, but is more white in colour, and penetrates deeper; also in it there are white hairs of a woolly appearance). In these last words the interpreters have supposed themselves to find the ἁλὸς ἄχνη (sea-foam) of _Pollux_, Onom. IV. 193., expressed!

[72] _Galen_, Isag., edit. Kühn Vol. XIV. p. 758.,—De symptomat. differ. Vol. VII. p. 63.—De symptomat. caus. bk. II. ibid. pp. 225 sqq., where the λεύκη is described as a consequence of _nutritio depravata_ (morbid nutrition), whereby τὴν σάρκα γίνεσθαι φλεγματικωτέραν (the flesh becomes over phlegmatic). Comp. _Aetius_, Tetrab. IV. I. ch. 133. _Paulus Aegineta_, bk. IV. ch. 5. _Actuarius_, Meth. med. II. 11. VI. 8. _Oribasius_, De morb. curat. III. 58. _Scip. Gentilis_, Comment. in Apuleii apologiam, note 524.—_Suidas_ s. v. _λεύκη_· παρὰ Ἡροδότῳ πάθος τι περὶ ὅλον τὸ σῶμα, (under word λεύκη: in Herodotus, a complaint affecting the whole surface of the body). In _Alexander_, Aphrodis. Problem. I. 146, λεῦκαι signify the white flecks on the finger-nails.

[73] _Pollux_, Onomast IV. ch. 25. p. 187., mentions among forms of wasting-diseases φθίνης νόσος, for which some editors, and quite rightly, prefer to read φθίνας νόσος (wasting disease). _Suidas_ also says φθίνας ἡ νόσος, but without giving any further explanation; on the contrary in _Hesychius_ we find: s. v. φθινὰ[ς] ἡ ἐρυσίβη, καὶ εἶδος ἐλαίας (under word φθινὰ; the red blight, also a species of olive). But by ἐρυσίβη is signified _mildew_, _blight_, _smut on grain_, the same thing therefore as the Romans called _rubigo_ or _robigo_, on which _Servius_, on Virg. Georg. I. 151., has the following observation: Robigo genus est vitii, quo culmi pereunt, quod a rusticanis calamitas dicitur. Hoc autem genus vitii ex nebula nasci solet, cum _nigrescunt et consumuntur_ frumenta. Inde Robigus deus et sacra eius septimo Kalendas Maias Robigalia appellantur. Sed _haec abusive_ robigo dicitur; nam _proprie robigo est_, ut Varro dicit, _vitium obscoenae libidinis quod ulcus vocatur: id autem abundantia et superfluitate humoris_ solet nasci, quae Graece σατυρίασις dicitur. (_Robigo_ is a sort of blight, that kills the corn-stalks, which is spoken of as a _disaster_ by the peasants. Now this kind of blight commonly springs from a mist or exhalation, the crops blackening and being burnt up. Hence the god Robigus, and his feast-day on the seventh day before the Kalends of May (April 24.), known as the Robigalia. But this is called _robigo_ only by a misnomer; for properly speaking _robigo_ is, as Varro says, a vitiation due to abominable licentiousness and is called an ulcer, and it commonly springs from that abundance and over-copiousness of the humour, which in Greek is called Satyriasis). These words are for our purpose pose of the highest importance, teaching us as they do, that _a distinctive form of ulceration, that the patient had brought on himself by sexual excesses, was not only familiar among the Romans_ but actually bore the _special_ name of _robigo_. It must have displayed a distinctive redness, and have consumed the parts affected similarly to the smut or rust of grain, or the rust of iron. It is surely a sufficient indication to call the chancre-ulcer a blight, a burning: Comp. anthrax, carbo (malignant pustule, carbuncle). To this day in Germany it is vulgarly said of any one attacked by the primary forms of Venereal disease, “the man has burned himself”. _Festus_, (edit. Dacier p. 451.) says: _Robum_ rubro colore et quae rufo significare, at bovem quoque rustici appellant, manifestum est, unde et _materia quae plurimas venas eius coloris habet_ dicta est rubor, (_Robus_ clearly indicates things of a red or reddish colour,—now countrymen even speak of an ox as _robus_; hence _any substance having manifold veins of this colour_ is called _rubor_). Now such is habitually the case with the penis attacked by phimosis or paraphimosis and under the morbid condition of constant erection (Satyriasis) superinduced by these. Again this shows us the reason why Priapus is so frequently called “_ruber_ hortorum custos” (the _red_ keeper of gardens),—_Priapeia_ Praef. 5.; and why he is said, “_Ruber_ sedere cum _rubente_ fascino,” (to sit, _red_ with his _ruddy_ verge),—_Horace_, Odes 84. Sat. I. 8. 5. Now as the blight in grain was regarded specially as a consequence of the dew (mil_dew_), and _ros_ (dew) again is used in the sense of the male semen, as well as for the moisture secreted in the female vagina during coition, we might draw yet another analogy from this, and at the same time a proof of the _verecundia loquentium_ (shamefacedness in speech),—p. 43., of the _old_ Romans. Thus it would seem the Greeks too indicated by their φθινὰς the same thing as the Romans by _robigo_. That it was a human disease, is clearly enough shown by the passage from Pollux, and besides we can see it was so from another in _Plutarch_ in his Life of Galba (ch. 21.), where he says: Τιγελλῖνον μὲν οὐ πολὺν ἔτι βιώσεσθαι φάσκοντος· χρόνον, ὑπὸ _φθινάδος νόσου_ δαπανώμενον, (For he said that Tigellinus would not live much longer, being exhausted by a wasting disease),—a quotation proving at the same time the deadliness of the malady. Once more, _Hesychius_ has for φθινὰ also φοινία, saying, _φοινία_. ἐρυσίβη (φοινία: red blight, and as the adjective corresponding would necessarily be φοινικίος or φοινίκινος, it follows that φοινικίη νόσος and φθινικὴ νόσος,—φθινικὴ being the adjective from φθινὴ or φθινὰς, (which however would more strictly speaking be φθινακή), would mean exactly the same thing, viz. an “Ulcus rubrum et rodens ex coitu cum foeda muliere natum” (red eating ulcer, coming from coition with an unclean woman), the fatal event of which affection was a matter of common observation among the Ancients. Now if this interpretation is the right one in the passage of Hippocrates, it is clear that λεῦκαι were the consequences of this malady, and accordingly we should have a proof that in Antiquity, no less than in modern times, primary ulcers not only preceded secondary affections of the skin, but were actually _recognized as such_. However as the proofs for this _aperçu_ are still too fragmentary on the side of the ancient Physicians, we must suspend our immediate judgement on the point, and content ourselves for the present with saying, that φοινικίη νοῦσος stood originally in the text in the sense of _cunnilingere_ (to be a _cunnilingue_), whereas a later inquirer put φθινικὴ into its place, inasmuch as in his time their meanings had become identical as that of a bodily ailment, and so _the consequence_ of the vice instead of the vice itself found its way even into the text. For granted φθινὰς has the meaning of _robigo_ (blight), there is no doubt this only came to be the case as late as in the time of the Alexandrine critics. Besides this, φοινικιστὴς is also found in the _Etymologicum Magnum_ for _Cunnilingus_; we read: γλωττοκομεῖον, ἐν ᾧ οἱ αὐληταὶ ἀπετίθεσαν τὰς γλώττας· εἴρηται δὲ καὶ τὸ _γυναικεῖον αἰδοῖον_ ὑπὸ Εὐβούλου _φοινικιστὴν_ σκώπτοντος· (γλωττοκομεῖον, tongue-hole, place in which fluteplayers insert their tongues); _the female privates_ also called so by Eubulus, making a scoff at the φοινικιστὴς,—_cunnilingue_). The _Etymologicum Magnum_ further has as synonyms for _cunnilingere_: _γλωττοστροφεῖν_, περιλαλεῖν καὶ στωμύλλεσθαι· _γλωττοδεψεῖν_, αἰσχρουργεῖν (_to ply the tongue_: to talk excessively, to babble; _to work or soften with the tongue_: to do obscenely), and for _cunnilingus_, _γλώσσαργον_, στόμαργον (_tongue-busy_: mouth-busy).

[74] _Hippocrates_, περὶ παθῶν, edit. Kühn Vol. II. p. 409. It is true this Work is reckoned among the spurious ones, and _Galen_ (Vol. XI. p. 63.) ascribes it to _Polybius_.

[75] _Aristophanes_, Acharnians 271.

Πολλῷ γὰρ ἐσθ’ ἥδιον, ὦ Φαλῆς Φαλῆς κλέπτουσαν εὑρόνθ’ ὡρικὴν ὑληφόρον, τὴν Στρυμοδώρου Θρᾷτταν ἐκ τοῦ Φελλέως, μέσην λαβόντ’ ἄραντα, καταβαλόντα καταγιγαρτίσαι·

(For ’tis much pleasanter, Phales, Phales! when you have found a blooming woodcutter girl filching wood, say Strymodorus’ Thracian maid from Phelleus, to take her round the middle and lift her up and throw her down and take the kernel right away),—where perhaps we should read Στυμοδώρου for Στρυμοδώρου. Knights 1284.,

Τὴν γὰρ αὐτοῦ γλῶτταν αἰρχραῖς ἡδοναῖς λυμαίνεται, ἐν κασαυρίοισι _λείχων_ τὸν ἀπόπτυστον δρόσον, καὶ μολύνων τὴν ὑπήνην, καὶ κυκῶν τὰς ἐσχάρας.

(For he pollutes his own tongue with foul delights, in the stews licking up the abominable dew, defiling the hair on the upper lip, and tumbling the girls’ _nymphae_). Peace 885.,

Τὸν _ζῶμον_ αὐτῆς προσπεσὼν ἐκλάψεται.

(Falling upon her he will suck up _her broth_).

[76] _Juvenal_, Satir. VI. 455.:

Nec curanda viris Opicae castigat amicae Verba Soloecismum liceat fecisse marito.

(And rebukes the expressions of her clownish (Opican) friend, things not worth men’s notice. Surely a husband should be allowed to make a solecism).

[77] _Martial_, bk. I. Epigr. 78.,

Pulchre valet Charinus, et tamen pallet. Parce bibit Charinus, et tamen pallet. Bene concoquit Charinus, et tamen pallet. Sole utitur Charinus, et tamen pallet. Tingit cutem Charinus, et tamen pallet. _Cunnum Charinus lingit, et tamen pallet._

(Charinus is in excellent health, and yet he is pale. Charinus drinks moderately, and yet he is pale. Charinus digests well, yet he is pale. Charinus takes the sun, yet he is pale. Charinus dyes his skin, yet he is pale. _Charinus licks a woman’s organ, yet he is pale)._

[78] _Martial_, bk. XI. Epigr. 86. As to this Zoilus see _Martial_, bk. XI. Epigr. 61.

[79] _Martial_, Bk. III. Epigr. 61.

[80] _Greek Anthology_ bk. II. Tit. 13. Note 19.,

Τὴν φωνὴν ἐνοπήν σε λέγειν ἐδίδαξεν Ὅμηρος, Τὴν γλῶσσαν δ’ ἐν _ὀπῇ_ τίς σ’ ἐδίδαξεν ἔχειν.

(Homer taught you to utter your voice and speak whole words, but, pray! who taught you to have your tongue in a hole?) Here ὀπὴ (hole) obviously stands for the female organ,—a meaning omitted in the Lexicons.

[81] So too in the following Epigram of _Ausonius_ (127.),

Eune, quod uxoris gravidae _putria inguina_ lambis, Festinas glossas non natis tradere natis.

(Eunus, you lick the flabby organs of your pregnant wife; is it you are in a hurry to give learned explanations to your babes unborn?) we should explain the _putria inguina_ not so much as _rotten_, _ulcerous_, but rather as _laxata_ or _laxa_ (relaxed, flabby). Similarly _Horace_, Epod. VIII. 7., speaks of _mammae putres_ (the flabby dugs) of an old woman.

[82] _Martial_, IX. 63.,

Ad coenam invitant omnes te, Phoebe, cinaedi: Mentula quem pascit, non, puto, purus homo est.

(All the _cinaedi_, Phoebus, invite you to dinner: a man the penis feeds is not, I think, a _clean_ man).

_Petronius_, Sat., Non taces, nocturne percussor, qui ne tum quidem, quum fortiter faceres, cum _pura muliere_ pugnasti. (Silence, stabber by night, who not even when you were at your best, ever faced _a clean woman_).

[83] _Martial_, Bk. IV. Epigr. 43.

[84] _Persius_, Satir. V. 186-188.