This word is scientific, and a little obscure, signifying small witnesses. Sixtus V., a Cordelier become pope, declared, by his letter of the 25th of June, 1587, to his nuncio in Spain, that he must unmarry all those who were not possessed1 of testicles. It seems by this order, which was executed by Philip II., that there were many husbands in Spain deprived of these two organs. But how could a man, who had been a Cordelier, be ignorant that the testicles of men are often hidden in the abdomen2, and that they are equally if not more effective in that situation? We have beheld3 in France three brothers of the highest rank, one of whom possessed three, the other only one, while the third possessed no appearance of any, and yet was the most vigorous of the three.
The angelic doctor, who was simply a Jacobin, decides that two testicles are “de essentia matrimonii” (of the essence of marriage); in which opinion he is followed by Ricardus, Scotus, Durandus, and Sylvius. If you are not able to obtain a sight of the pleadings of the advocate Sebastian Rouillard, in 1600, in favor of the testicles of his client, concealed4 in his abdomen, at least consult the dictionary of Bayle, at the article “Quellenec.” You will there discover, that the wicked wife of the client of Sebastian Rouillard wished to render her marriage void, on the plea that her husband could not exhibit testicles. The defendant5 replied, that he had perfectly6 fulfilled his matrimonial duties, and offered the usual proof of a re-performance of them in full assembly. The jilt replied, that this trial was too offensive to her modesty7, and was, moreover, superfluous8, since the defendant was visibly deprived of testicles, and that messieurs of the assembly were fully9 aware that testicles are necessary to perfect consummation.
I am unacquainted with the result of this process, but I suspect that her husband lost his cause. What induces me to think so is, that the same Parliament of Paris, on the 8th of January, 1665, issued a decree, asserting the necessity of two visible testicles, without which marriage was not to be contracted. Had there been any member in the assembly in the situation described, and reduced to the necessity of being a witness, he might have convinced the assembly that it decided10 without a due knowledge of circumstances. Pontas may be profitably consulted on testicles, as well as upon any other subject. He was a sub-penitentiary, who decided every sort of case, and who sometimes comes near to Sanchez.
§ II.
A word or two on hermaphrodites. A prejudice has for a long time crept into the Russian Church, that it is not lawful11 to say mass without testicles; or, at least, they must be hid in the officiator’s pocket. This ancient idea was founded in the Council of Nice, who forbade the admission into orders of those who mutilated themselves. The example of Origen, and of certain enthusiasts12, was the cause of this order, which was confirmed a second time in the Council of Arles.
The Greek Church did not exclude from the altar those who had endured the operation of Origen against their own consent. The patriarchs of Constantinople, Nicetas, Ignatius, Photius, and Methodius, were eunuchs. At present this point of discipline seems undecided in the Catholic Church. The most general opinion, however, is, that in order to be ordained13 a priest, a eunuch will require a dispensation.
The banishment14 of eunuchs from the service of the altar appears contrary to the purity and chastity which the service exacts; and certainly such of the priests as confess handsome women and girls would be exposed to less temptation. Opposing reasons of convenience and decorum have determined15 those who make these laws.
In Leviticus, all corporeal16 defects are excluded from the service of the altar — the blind, the crooked17, the maimed, the lame18, the one-eyed, the leper, the scabby, long noses, and short noses. Eunuchs are not spoken of, as there were none among the Jews. Those who acted as eunuchs in the service of their kings, were foreigners.
It has been demanded whether an animal, a man for example, can possess at once testicles and ovaries, or the glands19 which are taken for ovaries; in a word, the distinctive21 organs of both sexes? Can nature form veritable hermaphrodites, and can a hermaphrodite be rendered pregnant? I answer, that I know nothing about it, nor the ten-thousandth part of what is within the operation of nature. I believe, however, that Europe has never witnessed a genuine hermaphrodite, nor has it indeed produced elephants, zebras, giraffes, ostriches22, and many more of the animals which inhabit Asia, Africa, and America. It is hazardous23 to assert, that because we never beheld a thing, it does not exist.
Examine “Cheselden,” page 34, and you will behold24 there a very good delineation25 of an animal man and woman — a negro and negress of Angola, which was brought to London in its infancy26, and carefully examined by this celebrated27 surgeon, as much distinguished28 for his probity29 as his information. The plate is entitled “Members of an Hermaphrodite Negro, of the Age of Twenty-six Years, of both Sexes.” They are not absolutely perfect, but they exhibit a strange mixture of the one and the other.
Cheselden has frequently attested30 the truth of this prodigy31, which, however, is possibly no such thing in some of the countries of Africa. The two sexes are not perfect in this instance; who can assure us, that other negroes, mulatto, or copper-colored individuals, are not absolutely male and female? It would be as reasonable to assert, that a perfect statue cannot exist, because we have witnessed none without defects. There are insects which possess both sexes; why may there not be human beings similarly endowed? I affirm nothing; God keep me from doing so. I only doubt.
How many things belong to the animal man, in respect to which he must doubt, from his pineal gland20 to his spleen, the use of which is unknown; and from the principle of his thoughts and sensations to his animal spirits, of which everybody speaks, and which nobody ever saw or ever will see!
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
abdomen
|
|
| n.腹，下腹(胸部到腿部的部分) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
beheld
|
|
| v.看，注视( behold的过去式和过去分词 )；瞧；看呀；（叙述中用于引出某人意外的出现）哎哟 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
concealed
|
|
| a.隐藏的，隐蔽的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
defendant
|
|
| n.被告；adj.处于被告地位的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
modesty
|
|
| n.谦逊，虚心，端庄，稳重，羞怯，朴素 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
superfluous
|
|
| adj.过多的，过剩的，多余的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
decided
|
|
| adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
lawful
|
|
| adj.法律许可的，守法的，合法的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
enthusiasts
|
|
| n.热心人，热衷者( enthusiast的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
ordained
|
|
| v.任命（某人）为牧师( ordain的过去式和过去分词 )；授予（某人）圣职；（上帝、法律等）命令；判定 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
banishment
|
|
| n.放逐，驱逐 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
corporeal
|
|
| adj.肉体的，身体的；物质的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
crooked
|
|
| adj.弯曲的；不诚实的，狡猾的，不正当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
lame
|
|
| adj.跛的，(辩解、论据等)无说服力的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
glands
|
|
| n.腺( gland的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
gland
|
|
| n.腺体，(机)密封压盖，填料盖 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
distinctive
|
|
| adj.特别的，有特色的，与众不同的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
ostriches
|
|
| n.鸵鸟( ostrich的名词复数 )；逃避现实的人，不愿正视现实者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
hazardous
|
|
| adj.(有)危险的，冒险的；碰运气的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
behold
|
|
| v.看，注视，看到 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
delineation
|
|
| n.记述；描写 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
infancy
|
|
| n.婴儿期；幼年期；初期 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
celebrated
|
|
| adj.有名的，声誉卓著的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
distinguished
|
|
| adj.卓越的，杰出的，著名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
probity
|
|
| n.刚直；廉洁，正直 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
attested
|
|
| adj.经检验证明无病的，经检验证明无菌的v.证明( attest的过去式和过去分词 )；证实；声称…属实；使宣誓 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
prodigy
|
|
| n.惊人的事物，奇迹，神童，天才，预兆 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |