Beneath the skin: investigating cutaneous conditions as somatisations of gendered emotions

di Chiara Blanco

 

 

 

A medium between the self and the external world, the skin was deemed to be one of the seats of human emotions in antiquity; nonetheless, its prominent role in ancient literature has been overlooked by scholars thus far. In this paper, I focus on the connection between cutaneous conditions and emotional alterations, as found in some of the best-known ancient authors, ranging from Hesiod to Hellenistic epigrammatists such as Meleager. The paper is divided into two parts. In the first part, I investigate literary texts in which cutaneous conditions appear to be a manifestation of psychological or emotional alterations. I begin by focusing on the somatisation of shame, with a specific focus on gendered emotions, and the role that skin played in experiencing, expressing and somatising this feeling in ancient Greek literature. I then examine medical treatises, more specifically Hippocratic works, with the aim of understanding whether the narrative that they provide is consistent with what is found in literary sources. In particular, I focus on the aetiology of cutaneous conditions and explore the extent to which skin diseases were linked to somatic and mental disorders.

In the second part, I investigate the itch and its connection with bodily pleasures. I begin my analysis with a focus on literary texts in which the itch is deployed as the physical manifestation of erotic feeling in order to investigate how this bodily discomfort was believed to be linked to one’s mental and emotional sphere; I then continue by investigating the figurative use of itching and scratching as metaphors for bodily pleasure and pain. Finally, I demonstrate how this metaphorical association, which was employed extensively in ancient Greek literature, was also supported by medical sources. By analysing two distinctive facets of cutaneous conditions, namely their visible bodily manifestations and the disquieting feelings that they cause, I aim to shed new light on the connection between the skin and human emotions in ancient Greece.

 

1. Shameful girls: the Proetides

The earliest extant work that connects cutaneous diseases and emotions is Hesiod’s Catalogue of Women.^[2] Fragments 131-133 M-W focus on the mythological account of the daughters of king Proetus of Tiryns, the Proetides, who were punished by a god, possibly Hera, for committing ὕβρις.^[3] The myth is also discussed in later texts, which vary with regard to the identity of the vindictive god, the geographical setting and the ending of the tale; more specifically, whereas the goddess Hera features in Hesiod’s version, it is Dionysus or Aphrodite who punish the young girls in other accounts.^[4] Regardless of the identity of the god and the nature of their punishments, there is general agreement about interpreting the myth as a rite of passage for the girls from maidenhood to womanhood.^[5] Hesiod’s account, which is also the earliest, is particularly interesting in that it provides the most complex description of the punishment inflicted upon the girls, who display lewdness and frenzy on one hand, and cutaneous diseases on the other. Due to the highly fragmentary state of the Hesiodic work, we cannot determine whether the girls’ μαχλοσύνη is indeed the crime for which they are punished by Hera, (fr. 132 M-W= Suda μ 307 iii. 339. 4 Alder), or rather part of her divine punishment (fr. 132 in app. M-W= Philodemus De Pietate B 6529–33 Obbink). However, we are certain that Hera’s punishment included mental frenzy, along with bodily ailments, of which fragment 133 M-W offers a detailed description:^[6]

 

The Proetides are said to have been punished specifically with regard to their skin via two cutaneous ailments, ἀλφός, ‘dull-white leprosy’ and κνύος, ‘itch’ (LSJ s.v.), resulting in their complete baldness, either in addition to, or because of, their lewdness.^[8] Although the Hesiodic version of the myth is the only one that includes hair loss in the punishment, the relevance of the girls’ baldness in the story is reiterated by iconographic evidence.^[9] Marzari has discussed the myth extensively, and elaborated on the ἀλφός that affects the young girls.^[10] In what follows, I aim to explore the connection of the Proetides’ multiple diseases (their lewdness, frenzy and cutaneous conditions) by focusing more closely on the emotional aspect of the mythological account.   

Hesiod is the only author to mention cutaneous conditions along with the girls’ lewdness; however, even in later accounts, the healing process of the young women presupposes an intricate situation in which ancient religious beliefs and theories of the body are combined, which betrays the original complexity of their symptoms. Most of the ancient sources agree on assigning the role of the healer to Melampus, the seer son of Amythaon, although the modality of the healing process differs significantly. For example, whereas Bacchylides and Callimachus ascribe the young women’s renewed health to Artemis’ intervention, Apollodorus (2.2.2) reports two versions, according to which the Proetides were healed by Melampus by means of a ritualistic dance (μετ᾿ ἀλαλαγμοῦ καί τινος ἐνθέου χορείας), but also with the help of some purifying therapy (τὴν διὰ φαρμάκων καὶ καθαρμῶν θεραπείαν); the myth is also discussed in ancient scientific texts, which tend to provide more details about the therapeutic treatment, specifying that it consisted of cataplasms of hellebore and thermal baths.^[11] As Marzari points out, the association between hellebore and the Proetides’ conditions is of particular interest: hellebore features in the ancient Greek medical tradition as a purgative herb, recommended for a specific range of illnesses, among which mental diseases, as well as cutaneous ailments, are listed.^[12] More specifically, the purgative effect of hellebore would make it the perfect candidate to address humoral imbalances, which would be responsible for both cutaneous conditions and mental derangements. In the Hippocratic treatise Epidemics 2.1.7, for example, loss of hair and cutaneous conditions are deemed to be caused by humoral imbalance, whereas 2.6.14 ascribes both folly and baldness to an excess of bile.^[13]

The simultaneous presence of skin diseases and emotional and mental derangement in Hesiod’s account is particularly remarkable, as it refers to an association much prior to humoral medical theories. I argue that the interpretation of the Proetides’ symptoms in the Catalogue of Women is therefore twofold. On one hand, as I will explain more in detail below, the itch that afflicts them is the physical manifestation of their emotional disturbance; just as their minds are disquieted by erotic obsession, so is their skin, by means of the incessant itch that the goddess inflicts upon them. On the other hand, the ἀλφός and baldness are the visible markers of the shamefulness of their behaviour, whereby the god stigmatises their loss of female decency in a visual and immediate manner.^[14] This hypothesis seems to be confirmed by the fact that, although baldness and skin ailments do not feature in later accounts of the myth,^[15] the authors nevertheless capitalise on the shameful behaviour of the young girls.^[16]

Unsurprisingly, medical texts addressing cutaneous diseases do not consider these ailments as being god-inflicted; however, the shamefulness of such conditions is still a recurrent element, even in scientific texts.^[17] The Hippocratic treatise Affections 35, for example, capitalises on the stigmatisation of the affected patients, and even goes as far as not to consider skin ailments and hair loss as proper conditions, but rather as shameful manifestations:

 

 

Another case in point is provided by Theophrastus’ Characters 19, and is concerned with δυσχέρεια, ‘squalor’. When describing the main characteristics of a squalid person, Theophrastus lists λέπρα and ἀλφός, here considered as evidence of bodily neglect, from which the general character of the affected person could also be assumed:

 

Ἔστι δὲ ἡ δυσχέρεια  θεραπευσία σώματος λύπης
παρασκευαστική, ὁ δὲ δυσχερὴς τοιοῦτός τις, οἷος
λέπραν ἔχων καὶ  λφὸν καὶ τοὺς ὄνυχας μεγάλους
περιπατεῖν καὶ φῆσαι ταῦτα εἶναι αὑτῷ συγγενικὰ
 ρρωστήματα.

Squalor is a neglect of one’s body which produces distress.
The squalid man is the sort who goes around with
λέπρα and  λφός, with long fingernails, and says these
are all inherited illnesses.^[19]           

Theophrastus’ squalid man is described as being animalistic in his behaviour and appearance; details of his hairy and unkempt aspect follow the reference to cutaneous conditions, along with shameful behavioural traits, such as the inability to behave appropriately in public. The general assumption behind such a description is that one’s aspect mirrors one’s behaviour and character; the smoothness of the skin and general condition of the flesh are, together with the growth of hair, good indicators of one’s moral conduct.^[20] The same principle applies to the Proetides’ account: skin that is spoiled by ἀλφός is a marker of divine punishment and simultaneously signals their shameful, non-human behaviour, which breaches the boundaries of bestiality.

 

2. Shameful skin

The fact that cutaneous conditions were linked to shame in ancient Greece is also proven by a passage from Aeschylus’ Libation Bearers (278-82) in which Orestes describes the punishment that the gods would inflict on him should he fail to avenge the death of his father:

 

He revealed the effects of the wrath of hostile powers
from under the earth against mortals, and spoke of these
dreadful afflictions—leprous ulcers attacking the flesh,
eating away its pristine appearance with savage jaws,
and short white hairs arising on the disease site.^[21]   

 

Following Hesiod’s tradition, Aeschylus also considers skin ailments to be a divine punishment: the oracle of Apollo warns Orestes about the terrible diseases (αἰνὰς νόσους, 279) that would afflict him should he allow his father’s murder to remain unavenged. As the oracle reveals, these diseases appear to be a manifestation of the wrath of the wretched souls in the underworld (ἐκ γῆς δυσφρόνων, 278), which Aeschylus represents through the image of leprosy provided with ‘wild jaws’ (ἀγρίαις γνάθοις, 280).^[22] Interestingly, skin afflictions are also used here to convey a shameful emotion: with λεύκη, white hairs would grow on Orestes’ lesions, thus marking his skin as a visible reminder of his cowardly disrespect of his dead father. Aeschylus’ description of the λεύκη is consistent with the Hippocratic account of the disease, as found in Prorrhetic 2.43:

 

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  πόστασιν
νομίζειν τὸ ἐξάνθημα,  λλὰ νόσημα· οἷσι δὲ ἐγένετο
τούτων τι πολύ τε καὶ ἐξαπίνης, τοῦτο ἂν εἴη  πόστασις.
γίνονται δὲ λεῦκαι μὲν ἐκ τῶν θανατωδεστάτων
νοσημάτων, οἷον καὶ ἡ νοῦσος ἡ Φοινικίη καλεομένη. αἱ
δὲ λέπραι καὶ οἱ λειχῆνες ἐκ τῶν μελαγχολικῶν.

Λειχήν, λέπρα and λεύκη: when one of these has arisen
in a young person or a child, or when it appears it grows
but little over a long time, you must consider the eruption
not to be an  πόστασις, but a disease; whereas when one
of them appears suddenly and over a large area, it is an
 πόστασις. Λεύκη is among the most mortal of diseases,
like the so-called Phoenician disease. Λέπρα and λειχήν
are melancholic.^[23]              

                                                                       

Consistent with the discussion above, the passage explains that cutaneous conditions are caused by humoral imbalance, except when they arise in young children or when their development is slow, in which cases they are classified as proper diseases. The case of Orestes would be included in the first category, since his skin lesions would occur abruptly and in adulthood.^[24] Whereas Aeschylus’ description of cutaneous conditions pays particular attention to the medical manifestation of the related symptoms on one hand, skin lesions are still deemed to be the visible shameful markers of divine punishment on the other, which is consistent with Hesiod’s account. What we can infer from both accounts is therefore twofold: 1) branding the skin is the gods’ punishment of women and men who are guilty of committing some form of ὕβρις; a mutual correspondence is therefore established between the skin of the culprit and the emotion of shame; their shameful behaviour is punished by the infliction of skin ailments, which in turn will stigmatise the ὑβριστής. 2) Women and men are punished for different crimes, since the emotion of shame was gendered in ancient Greece: whereas Orestes’ societal and filial duty consists of avenging his father’s death, the Proetides were required to comply with both their societal and their biological role.^[25] By offending Hera, the goddess of marriage, they neglect their female role, and are therefore excluded from civilised society, relegated to roaming in the wilderness and in the grip of lewdness, while simultaneously losing their most feminine bodily characteristics, namely the beauty of their skin and their hair.^[26]

A strikingly similar symptomatology to that of the young daughters of Proetus is found in the detailed account by Aretaeus of Cappadocia, a medical writer who lived in the first to second centuries CE, of the so-called ἐλέφας or ἐλεφαντίασις, a disease that takes its name from the animal (elephant), either on account of its might, or due to the appearance of the patients’ skin, which resembled that of an elephant.^[27] The ἐλέφας consists of a congelation of the inner heat of the patient, which inevitably leads to their death.^[28] While the disease is difficult to detect at first, as it primarily affects the internal organs, the general appearance of the sufferer is dramatically altered in the second stage of the ailment. First, cutaneous rashes that are likened to a bad ‘signal-fire’ attack the face and the rest of the body; later, the breath and digestion are also affected, an itchy sensation pervades the rest of the skin, and the hair falls out, as we read in Chronic Diseases 2.13:^[29]

 

The similarity between the symptoms experienced by Hesiod’s Proetides and Aretaeus’ description of the ἐλέφας is striking; both accounts list:

 

Although Aretaeus seeks to justify the brutal practice of abandoning sufferers in the wilderness by mentioning that the disease was highly contagious, he also adds that those close to the diseased flee from them or leave them to die due to the impossibility of coping with people in such a state (τοιούσδε οὖν ἐόντας), whose behaviour is described as being shameful and unhuman. Thus, skin ailments are considered to be a source of shame for the affected victims on one hand; on the other, they are also accompanied by other manifestations of shameful behaviour of which skin ailments represent the visible markers.

The general picture analysed above suggests a significant interaction and cross-influence between literary texts and scientific theories in ancient Greece. In the case of the Proetides, while the myth is progressively affected by medical literature – the religious and magical remedies that feature in earlier accounts are replaced by medicinal herbs in later scientific literature – the myth also influences medical texts in turn. For example, the pseudo-Hippocratic Epistle 16 refers to Melampus when discussing the healing properties of hellebore, while Aretaeus’ description of the ἐλέφας seems to have been modelled on the Hesiodic myth.^[31] Similarly, the terminology and accurate description of the symptomatology of skin diseases found in Aeschylus points towards the circulation of medical ideas at the time of the play. As discussed above, both Hesiod’s and Aeschylus’ accounts explain skin conditions as divine punishments for shameful behaviours; although there is no trace of the divine element in medical literature dealing with skin ailments, the connection with the emotional sphere is still vivid in scientific texts. More specifically, discoloured or damaged skin is a shameful disfigurement, while simultaneously being the marker of a dishonourable character. In the following section, I focus on another relevant aspect of cutaneous conditions that ancient Greeks linked to human emotions: the itch.

 

3. Erotic Itches
 

The itch, κνύος, is one of the symptoms we find listed in Hesiod’s account of the Proetides’ punishment (fr. 133 M-W). More specifically, I argue that it expresses the erotic torments that the young women undergo in the account, thus representing their more tangible, physical manifestation. An extremely similar association can also be found in Sophocles’ Trachiniae, in which Heracles is afflicted by a cutaneous condition while also undergoing feminisation within the tragedy. The garment that Deianira smears with Nessus’ blood adheres to Heracles’ skin, thus triggering a cutaneous reaction that eventually leads to his feminisation and later death.^[32] This connection between Heracles and skin ailments was well established in ancient literature. For example, both Strabo and Pausanias ascribe the healing properties of the river Anigrus to the hero. According to both accounts, the river would be able to cure cutaneous diseases due to the venom that had been spread on Heracles’ arrows, which a Centaur washed from his wound in Anigrus’ waters.^[33] It is interesting that both authors provide another version, according to which it was Melampus who bestowed healing properties on Anigrus by throwing the unidentified means that he used to purify the daughters of Proetus into the river.

This association between the mythological accounts of the Proetides and that of Heracles is of particular interest: similarly to the daughters of Proetus, Heracles is affected by a cutaneous rash and consequent mental derangement, while simultaneously displaying signs of what has been interpreted as feminisation and excessive erotic desire.^[34] Although Nessus and Deianira are the only responsible for Heracles’ malady, his torments still stem from a punishment: before dying at Heracles’ hands, Nessus gives Deianira his blood mixed with Hydra’s venom, and makes her believe that this concoction is a powerful love potion. Neglected by her husband, Deianira smears the poisonous filter on Heracles’ robe and thus triggers the series of torments that eventually cause his death. Furthermore, since both myths feature skin ailments and mental disturbances, their association with thermal baths is consistent with medical texts, in which hot baths are recommended in cases of cutaneous conditions and to treat mental illnesses.^[35]

Unlike the case of Orestes in Aeschylus’s Libation Bearers, I argue that the link between Heracles and the Proetides is not to be found in the shame caused by cutaneous diseases, but in another distinctive feature of skin complaints, namely the tormenting itch that arises from them. In both accounts, the itch is intended to be the physical manifestation of a deeper discomfort which, in addition to affecting the bodies of the victims, disturbs their minds. The folly and lewdness of the Proetides corresponds to Heracles’ mental derangement and erotic needs; in other words, I take the itch to be the somatisation of emotional disturbance, of which it constitutes the most immediate bodily manifestation. 

As pointed out by Thumiger, feelings of pricking and stinging are «a well-known metaphor or conceptualisation of the force of mental disturbance in Greek literature». This association is based on the assumption that these feelings are perceived throughout the body, and go «beyond the suffering of the individual body part», as they are «perhaps mental in nature».^[36] Similarly, the relief obtained from the discomfort caused by the itch by means of scratching is interpreted as a pleasurable sensation for the body. A case in point can be found in Plato’s Philebus 46d-47a, in which the cutaneous condition known as ψώρα is used as a metaphor; scratching the affected parts tormented by the itch is a combination of pleasure and pain for the body: ^[37]

 

Λέγε δὴ τὰς μ έν, ὅταν πλείους λῦπαι τῶν ἡδονῶν
γίγνωνται—τὰς τῆς ψώρας λεγομένας νῦν δὴ ταύτας
εἶναι καὶ τὰς τῶν γαργαλισμῶν—ὁπόταν ἐντὸς τὸ ζέον ᾖ
καὶ τὸ φλεγμαῖνον, τῇ τρίψει δὲ καὶ τῇ κνήσει μὴ ἐφικνῆταί
τις, τὰ δ᾿ ἐπιπολῆς μόνον διαχέῃ, τοτὲ φέροντες εἰς πῦρ
αὐτὰ καὶ εἰς τοὐναντίον,  πορίαις μεταβάλλοντες ἐνίοτε
 μηχάνους ἡδονάς, τοτὲ δὲ τοὐναντίον τοῖς ἐντὸς π ρὸς
τὰ τῶν ἔξω λύπας ἡδοναῖς ξυγκερασθείσας, εἰς ὁπότερ᾿
ἂν ῥέψῃ, παρέσχοντο τῷ τὰ συγκεκριμένα βίᾳ διαχεῖν
ἢ τὰ διακεκριμένα συγχεῖν καὶ ὁμοῦ λύπας ἡδοναῖς
παρατιθέναι.

In the case of the mixtures in which the pains are
more than the pleasures—say the ψώρα, which we
mentioned just now, or tickling—when the burning inflammation
is within and is not reached by the rubbing
and scratching, which separate only such mixtures as
are on the surface, sometimes by bringing the affected
parts to the fire or to something cold we change from
wretchedness to inexpressible pleasures, and sometimes
the opposition between the internal and the
external produces a mixture of pains and pleasures,
whichever happens to preponderate; this is the result
of the forcible separation of combined elements, or the
combination of those that were separate, and the concomitant
juxtaposition of pains and pleasures.^[38]

 

On one hand, Plato’s figurative use of the ψώρα to explain the mixed feelings of physical pleasure and pain confirms that the circulation of medical knowledge in classical Athens included skin conditions; on the other hand, it consolidates the association between cutaneous ailments and emotions, as first attested in Hesiod’s Catalogue of Women. Consistently with the account of the Proetides, Plato’s passage capitalises on the itch in the discussion of pleasure: it is a continuous, obsessive, bodily discomfort, the relief from which is considered pleasurable per se. As Peponi explains, the passage presupposes that «physical illness guarantees more pleasure and intensified pleasure», as Plato hints at 45c, since it would presuppose the presence of strong desires, which a debilitated and unhealthy body is more likely to experience.^[39] Even more interesting are the types of diseases that Plato lists in his analysis: as Socrates explains, to understand how bodily pleasures operate, we should consider those derived from the so-called shameful diseases (τὰς [ἡδονάς] τῶν ἀσχημόνων); his speech continues with a discussion of the itch and the ψώρα (46a5-11).^[40] I argue that, by mentioning τῶν ἀσχημόνων, Plato intends to refer to those cutaneous ailments which, as discussed above, were called «shameful manifestations» even in the medical literature.^[41] Socrates continues his analysis by describing the case in which pleasure dominates the combination of sensations arising from such conditions (47a):

 

Οὐκοῦν ὁπόταν αὖ πλείων ἡδονὴ κατὰ τὰ τοιαῦτα πάντα
ξυμμιχθῇ, τὸ μὲν ὑπομεμιγμένον τῆς λύπης γαργαλίζει
τε καὶ ἠρέμα  γανακτεῖν ποιεῖ, τὸ δ᾿ αὖ τῆς ἡδονῆς πολὺ
πλέον ἐγκεχυμένον συντείνει τε καὶ ἐνίοτε π ηδᾶν π οιεῖ,
καὶ παντοῖα μὲν χρώματα, παντοῖα δὲ σχήματα, παντοῖα
δὲ π νεύματα  περγαζόμενον πᾶσαν ἔκπληξιν καὶ βοὰς
μετ᾿  φροσύνης ἐνεργάζεται;

And when the pleasure is the predominant element in
the mixture, the slight tincture of pain tickles a man
and makes him mildly impatient, or again an excessive
proportion of pleasure excites him and sometimes even
makes him leap for joy; it produces in him all sorts of
colours, attitudes, and pantings, and even causes great
amazement and foolish shouting, does it not? ^[42]            

 

This description has been interpreted as being a reference to sexual gratification, the pleasurable effects of which are compared to those of an itch that is finally relieved; the excitement deriving from such relief is described as the loss of lucidity, which leads to uncontrolled movements and unrestrained sounds.^[43] As Peponi highlights, the association between skin conditions and sexual pleasure in Plato is consistent with the medical literature of his time;^[44] the late fifth-century Hippocratic treatise Generation 1.1-4 explains the connection between itch and pleasure as the result of sexual arousal:

1.1
Ἔχει δὲ οὕτω· φλέβες καὶ νεῦρα  πὸ παντὸς τοῦ σώματος
τείνουσιν ἐς τὸ α ἰδοῖον, οἷσιν ὑποτριβομένοισι καὶ
θερμαινομένοισι καὶ πληρευμένοισιν ὥσπερ κνησμὸς
ἐμπίπτει καὶ τῷ σώματι παντὶ ἡδονὴ καὶ θέρμη ἐκ τούτου
παραγίνεται· τριβομένου δὲ τοῦ αἰδοίου καὶ τοῦ  νθρώπου
κινευμένου, τὸ ὑγρὸν θερμαίνεται ἐν τῷ σώματι καὶ
διαχέεται καὶ κλονέεται ὑπὸ τῆς κινήσιος καὶ  φρέει,
καθάπερ καὶ τἆλλα ὑγρὰ ξύμπαντα κλονεύμενα  φρέει·

The matter is as follows: vessels and cords from the whole
body lead to the penis, and these, as they are gently
rubbed, warmed, and filled, are befallen by a kind of
tickling sensation, and from this pleasure and warmth
arise in the whole body. As the penis is rubbed and the
man moves, the moisture in his body is warmed, turns to
liquid, is agitated by his movement, and foams up, just as
all other liquids foam when they are agitated.^[45]

1.4
Τῇσι δὲ γυναιξί <φημι> ἐν τῇ μίξει τριβομένου τοῦ αἰδοίου
καὶ τῶν μητρέων κινευμένων, ὥσπερ κνησμὸν ἐμπίπτειν ἐς
αὐτὰς καὶ τῷ ἄλλῳ σώματι ἡδονὴν καὶ θέρμην παρέχειν.

Now in women, I assert that as their vagina is rubbed and
their uterus moved during intercourse, a kind of tickling
sensation befalls these parts and gives rise to pleasure
and warmth in the rest of their body.^[46]  

                                                                         

Sexual arousal in both females and males is described similarly as a tickling sensation, generating pleasure and warmth in the entire body, which leads them to rub their intimate parts. This description supports the discussion in the literary texts, in which an itch is understood to be an obsessive sensation, generating pleasure, but also pain if not relieved. This association was well established by Plato’s time, as references to cutaneous conditions were already being used metaphorically to express physical and, more specifically, sexual pleasures.

I argue that the same principle of association is behind the use of scratching and itching as erotic metaphors by Hellenistic epigrammatists.^[47] The god Eros, traditionally pricking his victims with his arrows, was assigned an additional property in erotic epigrams, namely that of scratching his victims. For example, Meleager describes the ‘sweet wound’ of Love as the result of the god scratching his victims’ hearts with his nails. Similarly, Pompey the Younger refers to erotic torments as κνίσµατα, ‘scratches’ (AP 7.219):^[48]

 

Ἡ τὸ καλὸν και πᾶσιν ἐράσμιον  νθήσασα,
ἡ μούνη Χαρίτων λείρια δρεψαμένη,
οὐκέτι χρυσοχάλινον ὁρᾷ δρόμον ἠελίοιο
Λαΐς, ἐκοιμήθη δ᾿ ὕπνον ὀφειλόμενον,
κώμους, καὶ τὰ νέων ζηλώματα, καὶ τὰ ποθεύντων 5
κνίσματα, καὶ μύστην λύχνον  πειπαμένη.

Lais, whose bloom was so lovely and delightful in the
eyes of all, she who alone culled the lilies of the Graces,
no longer looks on the course of the Sun’s golden-bitted
steeds, but sleeps the appointed sleep, having bid farewell
to revelling and young men’s rivalries and lovers’
scratches and the lamp her confidant.^[49]      
 

The expression τὰ ποθεύντων κνίσµατα is particularly significant: consistent with Plato’s passage and the medical and literary texts analysed above, the act of scratching also expresses physical discomfort that extends to the minds of the sufferers, particularly to their emotions; this is confirmed by the use of the verb ποθέω, which focuses on a specific aspect of erotic experience, namely the tormenting desire that it causes.

 

4. Conclusion

What we see in Hesiod’s account of the Proetides is a twofold example of the connection between the skin and human emotions that permeates Greek literature: the disfigurement of the young girls’ skin is connected with the emotion of shame, whereas the itch that torments them is the physical manifestation of their lewdness. The visible disfigurements caused by cutaneous conditions expose the afflicted victims, thus stigmatising their shameful behaviour. In Hesiod’s account, cutaneous ailments are divine punishments, inflicted by the gods to reprimand crimes of ὕβρις. Discoloured and disfigured skin is thus the visible marker of the gods’ wrath, which emphasises the illicit behaviour of the victims; while for men, such as Orestes, this coincides with their neglect of filial duty, the act of shame for the Proetides includes refusing to marry and displaying erotic desire.

Another distinctive element of cutaneous conditions that both literary and medical texts emphasise is the itch. The bodily discomfort that an itch causes expands to the entire body, thus being effectively considered as a mental disturbance; as a result, ancient Greeks associated it with erotic desire. More specifically, the discomfort caused by an itch, the relief from which brings pleasure to the body, has been compared to the torments of erotic desire which, if satisfied, cause pleasure. While this association was established by Plato’s time, as also supported by medical texts, its first appearance in literary texts is considerably earlier, as we can find it in Hesiod’s Catalogue of Women. This is yet another complex facet of ancient Greek representations of the human body and its connection with emotions, its proneness to experiencing a wide array of feelings, while simultaneously falling victim to their somatisation.

 

 

 

 

References

Blanco 2020 = C. Blanco, Heracles’ Itch: an Analysis of the First Case of Male Uterine Displacement in Greek Literature, «The Classical Quarterly», 70, 1, 2020, pp. 27-42.

Cairns 1993 = D. Cairns, Aidōs. The Psychology and Ethics of Honour and Shame in Ancient Greek Literature, Oxford, 1993.

Cairns 1996 = D. Cairns, Off with her ΑΙΔΩΣ: Herodotus 1.8.3-4, «The Classical Quarterly», 46, 1, 1996, pp. 78-83.

Cairns 2005 = D. Cairns, Myth and the Polis in Bacchylides’ Eleventh Ode, «Journal of Hellenic Studies», 125, 2005, pp. 35-50.

Cawthorn 2008 = K. Cawthorn, Becoming Female: The Male Body in Greek Tragedy, London, 2008.

Costanza 2009 = S. Costanza, Melampo, le Pretidi e il ΧΟΛΟΣ di Era nel Catalogo Esiodeo, «Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik», 169, 2009, pp. 1-14.

Frede 1992 = D. Frede, Disintegration and Restoration: Pleasure and Pain in Plato’s Philebus, in R. Kraut (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Plato, Cambridge, 1992, pp. 425–463.

Gavrylenko 2012 = V. Gavrylenko, The «Body without Skin» in the Homeric Poems, in M. Horstmanshoff, H. King, C. Zittel, Blood, Sweat, and Tears: the Changing Concepts of Physiology from Antiquity into Early Modern Europe, Leiden-Boston (Mass.), 2012, pp. 481-502 .

Gosling, Taylor 1982 = J.C.B. Gosling, C.C.W. Taylor, The Greeks on Pleasure, Oxford, 1982.

Grmek 1989 = M. Grmek, Diseases in the Ancient Greek World (transl. by M. Muellner, L. Muellner), Baltimore, 1989.

Hampton 1990 = C. Hampton, Pleasure, Knowledge and Being: Analysis of Plato’s Philebus, Albany, 1990.

Håland 2009 = E.J. Håland, “Take, Skamandros, My Virginity”: Ideas of Water in Connection with Rites of Passage in Greece, Modern and Ancient, in C. Kosso, A. Scott (eds.), The Nature and Function of Water, Baths, Bathing, and Hygiene from Antiquity through the Renaissance, Leiden-Boston, 2009, pp. 109-148

Jouanna 2012 = J. Jouanna, Disease as Aggression in the Hippocratic Corpus and Greek Tragedy. Wild and Devouring Disease, in Greek Medicine from Hippocrates to Galen, Selected Papers by J. Jouanna, translated by N. Allies, edited with a Preface by Ph. van der Eijk, Leiden-Boston 2012.

Konstan 2003 = D. Konstan, Shame in Ancient Greece, «Social Research», 70, 4, 2003, pp. 1031-1060.

Lambert 2002 = M. Lambert, Desperate Simaetha: Gender and Power in Theocritus, Idyll 2, «Acta Classica», 45, 2002, pp. 71-88.

Loraux 1995 = N. Loraux, The Experiences of Tiresias: The Feminine and the Greek Man (transl. P. Wissing), Princeton, NJ, 1995.

Maehler 1982 = H. Maehler, Die Lieder des Bakchylides, Erster Teil, Die Siegeslieder. I. Edition des Textes mit Einleitung und Übersetzung von H. Maehler; II. Kommentar von H. Maehler, Leiden, 1982.

Marzari 2010 = F. Marzari, Paradigmi di Follia e Lussuria Virginale in Grecia Antica: le Pretidi fra Tradizione Mitica e Medica, «I Quaderni del Ramo d’Oro Online», 3, 2010, pp. 47-74.

Marzari 2015 = F. Marzari, L’Alphós delle Pretidi fra Mito e Tradizione Medica, «Gaia: Revue Interdisciplinaire sur la Grèce Archaïque», 18, 2015, pp. 521-534.

Marzari 2019 = F. Marzari, Folie et Purification Rituelle: Oreste et les Proïtides, Apollon et Mélampous, in V. Zachari, É. Lehoux, N. Hosoi (eds.), La Cité des Regards: autour de François Lissarrague, Rennes, 2019, pp. 105-122.

Olivieri, et al. 2017 = M. F. Olivieri, et al., Pharmacology and Psychiatry at the Origins of Greek Medicine: the Myth of Melampus and the Madness of the Proetides, «Journal of the History of Neuroscience», 26, 2, 2017, pp. 193-215.

Peponi 2002 = A. E. Peponi Mixed Pleasures, Blended Discourses: Poetry, Medicine and the Body in Plato’s Philebus 46–47c’, «Classical Antiquity», 21, 2002, pp. 135-160.

Pigeaud 2005 = J. Pigeaud, La Peau comme Frontière, «Micrologus», 13, 2005, pp. 23-53.

Seaford 1988 = R. Seaford, The Eleventh Ode of Bacchylides: Hera, Artemis, and the Absence of Dionysos, «Journal of Hellenic Studies», 108, 1988, pp. 118-136.

Silver 2019 = M. Silver, Sacred Prostitution in the Ancient Greek World. From Aphrodite to Baubo to Cassandra and Beyond, Münster, 2019.

Thumiger 2017 = C. Thumiger, A History of the Mind and Mental Health in Classical Greek Medical Thought, Cambridge, 2017.

Thumiger 2018 = C. Thumiger, “A Most Acute, Disgusting and Indecent Disease”: Satyriasis and Sexual Disorders in Ancient Medicine, in C. Thumiger, P. Singer (eds.), Mental Illness in Ancient Medicine from Celsus to Paul of Aegina, Leiden, 2018.

Von Staden 1992 = H. Von Staden, The Mind and Skin of Heracles: Heroic Diseases, in D. Gourevitch (ed.), Maladie et Maladies: Histoire et Conceptualisation. Mèlanges en l’honneur de M. Grmek, Genève, 1992, pp. 131-150.

Tags

GENDER ,

EMOTION ,

HELLENISTIC LITERATURE

Categoria

Antichistica

Scarica il PDF