Note 369 — FIRST SECTION. (continued 3)

Hesychius does give the word ἀνάρσιοι, and explains it by ἀνάρμοστοι πολέμιοι· ἀπὸ τοῦ μὴ συνηρμοσθῆναι τοῖς ἤθεσιν. (incompatible foes: from their not being compatible in character and disposition). Plutarch, περὶ τῆς ἐν Τιμαίῳ ψυχογονίας (On the Generation of the Soul in Plato’s “Timaeus”) near the end says: οἱ ποιηταὶ καλοῦσιν ἀναρσίους τοὺς ἐχθροὺς καὶ τοὺς πολεμίους, ὡς ἀναρμοστίαν τὴν διαφορὰν οὖσαν. (the poets call incompatible such as are hostile and at enmity, the difference being irreconcileable). Zonaras, Lexicon, writes: s. v. ἀνάρσιοι· ἐχθροί· ἀδικοί· ἀνάρμοστοι. (under the word ἀνάρσιοι—incompatible: hostile; unjust; irreconcileable). Similarly the Etymologicum Magnum; s. v. ἀνάρσιοι· ἀδικοὶ, ἐχθροί.—ὁ ἀνάρμοστος καὶ ἀσύμφωνος· Ὦρος · πολέμιος, ὑβριστής· καὶ ἄναρσις· νεῖκος, πόλεμος. (under the word ἀνάρσιοι—incompatible: unjust, hostile,—one that is irreconcileable, discordant. Orus (the Grammarian) gives: enemy, overbearing man; also ἄναρσις,—incompatibility: strife, war). According to this we might very well read for ἐναρέες ἀνάρσιοι; for the Temple-robbers had been ἄδικοι and ὑβρισταὶ (unjust, overbearing), and were further known as pathics—whose vice was ἀδικία and ὕβρις (injustice, overbearing violence), as we have seen again and again. Another point is that Homer, Iliad XXIV. 365., Odyssey X. 459., uses the expression ἀνάρσιοι in the sense of ὑβρισταὶ, ἄδικοι (overbearing, unjust men), and this fact was always likely to be of weight with Herodotus, even when he was translating a foreign word. Inasmuch as the word ἀνάρσιοι had several meanings, he may very well have added the ἀνδρόγυνοι in the second passage, instead of the καλοῦσι Σκύθαι (the Scythians call it), in explanation of it.