R. G. Bury, The Symposium of Plato

ἀνδρόγυνον κτλ. Suidas ἀνδρόγυνος: ὁ τὰ ἀνδρὸς ποιῶν καὶ τὰ γυναικῶν πάσχων. Rückert wrongly renders εἶδος by “genus”: it means “forma” (as Stallb.). εἶδος καὶ ὄνομα are taken by Rückert and Hug as nomin., by Stallb. as accus. of respect, the construction being ἓν γὰρ (sc. τῶν γενῶν) ἦν τότε ἀνδρόγυνον: the latter way seems the better. Rettig proposes to insert τό before ἕν, which would give the same sense. If εἶδος καὶ ὄνομα are construed as accus., it is better to take them closely with ἀνδρόγυνον than with ἐξ ἀμφοτ. κτλ. (as Stallb.). For ἀνδρόγυνος, see also Hippocr. de diaet. 28.

For the description cp. Emped. 257 ff. (St.) πολλὰ μὲν ἀμφιπρόσωπα καὶ ἀμφίστερνα φύεσθαι | ...μεμιγμένα τῇ μὲν ἀπ᾽ ἀνδρῶν | τῇ δὲ γυναικοφυῆ, στείροις ἠσκημένα γυίοις: Lucr. V. 837 ff. portenta...androgynum, interutrasque nec utrum, utrimque remotum: Ov. Met. IV. 378 “nec femina dici | nec puer ut possint; neutrumque et utrumque videntur” : Livy XXVII. 11. 4. Theophrastus (Char. 16) mentions Hermaphroditus-statues; and the Orphic conception of Eros-Phanes may also be compared.

νῦν δὲ κτλ. “But now the name exists solely as a term of reproach”: cp. the use in Latin of semivir, Virg. A. IV. 215 ille Paris cum semiviro comitatu: Livy XXXIII. 28. 7.

ὅλον ἦν κτλ. Cp. Emped. 265 (St.) οὐλοφυεῖς μὲν πρῶτα τύποι χθονὸς ἐξανέτελλον. ὅλον is predicate and not merely (as Ast, Schleierm.) a qualifying adj. with τὸ εἶδος. Certainly, as Rettig notes, Zeller's “ganz rund” is impossible. Rabelais (I. 8) has a reference to this passage—“ung corps humain ayant deux testes, l'une virée vers l'autre, quatre bras, quatre pieds, et deux culs; tel que dict Platon, in Symposio, avoir esté l'humaine nature à son commencement mysticq”—in his description of Gargantua's equipment.