SECT. XIII.—ON THE AMPHISBÆNA AND SCYTALA.
The same symptoms follow their bites, and the same remedies are applicable to them; therefore it is unnecessary to treat of them particularly.
Commentary. Nicander says that the amphisbæna is a small serpent with two heads, and small eyes. The scytala, he says, is like the amphisbæna, but thicker and larger towards the tail. Avicenna doubts whether the amphisbæna moves both ways. He says it is a serpent of equal thickness at both extremities, which probably gave rise to the supposition that it had two heads. He calls it a snake of the fragile nature, which description evidently points to the blind-worm. (See further, Matthiolus, Comment. in Dioscor.) We suppose the altahban and alhuidia of Alsaharavius are the amphisbæna and scytala. (Pract. xxx, 2, 19.) He recommends general treatment, namely, the ligature, cupping, scarifications, with cold water to drink.
Sprengel inclines to think that the scytala was the anguis eryx. He makes the amphisbæna to be the anguis fragilis, L.; he questions, however, the accuracy of the ancient accounts respecting its venomous qualities. (Notæ in Dioscor.) But, indeed, Aëtius states distinctly that these serpents are not venomous, and that their sting merely occasions inflammation like that of wasps and bees. (l. c.) Nicander also merely describes these serpents, and says nothing about their being venomous.