CHAPTER XII
THE CAUSES OF SXPHILIS

Now, on the first appearance of so novel a disease, & violent
controversy at once arose among doctors; some contending that
no mention of it had been made by the ancients, others that it
had been mentioned, and some said that it had been called
elephantia, others that it was what the Arabians called 'Safati';
while others said it had been called lichen'. Niccolo Leon—
iceno,! a man of the greatest learning and authority, was the
first to clear up this difficulty by demonstrating with certainty
that syphilis was not any one of the above diseases, but was a&
disease never named by the ancients. Nevertheless, certain
later authorities, more from obstinacy than correct reasoning,
entirely disagreed with that great man, and continued to as—
sert that it was actually elephantiasis; on this subject I shall
have something to say later on.

For the rest, those who have written on this malady, hitherto,
have in some cases preferred to say what it was not, rather than
what it was; while others have sought to explain it theoretically,
dealing with its form, and saying what sort of malady it was as
it occurs in composition, in combination or alone, and questions
of that sort. But they left out of account its substance and
principles, though these should rather have been thoroughly in—
vestigated. Other writers did discuss its substance, but did
not, as they should have done, investigate its principles, or how,
why and when it depends on contagion. As for myself, in the
poem which I dedicated to Pietro Bembo, now Cardinal,**
at a time when I was driven by the plague?' into the country
and had abundant leisure, I did, indeed, touch on all these ques—
tions, but only so far as the poetic form allowed. But since
verse does not admit of exhaustive treatment of a subject, I
was obliged to pass over many points in regard to the whole
subject, and if I now proceed to deal with these, I think it will
prove worth while.

In regard to the original source of the disease, some have be—

143