You are on page 1of 194

TWO HIPPOCRATIC TREATISES

ON SIGHT AND ON ANATOMY
STUDIES IN
ANCIENT MEDICINE
EDITED BY
JOHN SCARBOROUGH
PHILIP J. VAN DER EIJK
ANN HANSON
NANCY SIRAISI
VOLUME 33
TWO HIPPOCRATIC TREATISES
ON SIGHT
AND
ON ANATOMY
Edited and Translated
with Introduction and Commentary
BY
ELIZABETH M. CRAIK
LEIDEN

BOSTON
2006
This book is printed on acid-free paper.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A C.I.P. record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.
ISSN 0925–1421
ISBN-13: 978-90-04-15396-7
ISBN-10: 90-04-15396-9
© Copyright 2006 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill,
Hotei Publishing, IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written
permission from the publisher.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal
use is granted by Brill provided that
the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright
Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910
Danvers MA 01923, USA.
Fees are subject to change.
printed in the netherlands
CONTENTS
Preface and Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
part i. on sight
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
I. Title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
II. Transmission and Reception. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
III. Content and Expression. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
IV. Place in the Hippocratic Corpus: Provenance and Date. . . . . 15
V. Place in the History of Ophthalmology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
References and Abbreviations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Conspectus Siglorum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Text and Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Commentary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Glossary of Ophthalmological Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
1. The Eye: anterior view. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
2. The Head: lateral view . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
3. Section of the Eyeball . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
part ii. on anatomy
The Hippocratic Treatise On Anatomy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
References and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Text and Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
Commentary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
I. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
II. Anat. and the HC: content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
III. Anat. and the HC: expression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
IV. The Demokritean dimension. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
V. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
vi contents
Appendix. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
Index of Authors and Texts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
General Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The two short texts published here, both transmitted in the Hippo-
cratic Corpus but surely neither by the historical Hippocrates, are very
different in nature and origins. On Sight is a sketchy surgical manual
on eye afflictions, perhaps originating in North Africa, and On Anatomy
an allusive account of basic human anatomy with evident Demokritean
connections.
I am very grateful to Cambridge University Press for permission to
republish here with slight alterations in presentation my article ‘The
Hippocratic Treatise On Anatomy’ from Classical Quarterly 48 (1998), 135–
167. The original pagination is indicated. An Appendix has been added
to take account of a new Budé text: M.-P. Duminil, Hippocrate: CUF t.
8, Ulc., Oss., Cor, Anat. (Paris, 1998). The ‘background’ to On Sight is dis-
cussed in my paper ‘The Hippocratic Treatise Peri Opsios’ in Hippocrates
in Context, edited by P.J. van der Eijk (Leiden, 2005), 191–207; I hope
readers will refer to this for amplification.
I need not repeat all the acknowledgements made in note 1 of On
Anatomy, but wish to reiterate thanks to the Wellcome Trust for the
award of a research leave fellowship, which gave temporary relief from
a demanding post at the University of St. Andrews, and facilitated
a change in research direction. After a brief return to St. Andrews,
I took up a post at Kyoto University in 1997. Work on the treatise
On Sight was begun in Kyoto just before retirement in 2002. I have
benefited from the comments of participants at several seminars in
Japan, especially from those of Professor Noburu Notomi, who sup-
ported presentation of the work in its very first and very last stages at
Kyushu University in spring 2002 and at Keio University in autumn
2005. From September 2003 to September 2005 I held at the Uni-
versity of St. Andrews an Emeritus Research Fellowship, awarded by
the Leverhulme Trust, to complete this book. I am most grateful to
the Trust for their support, which enabled me to spend some time in
London at the Wellcome Trust Centre for the History of Medicine
at UCL and to make brief visits to Cambridge, Oxford, Paris, Flo-
rence, Modena, Rome and Venice to collate manuscripts. I express
viii preface and acknowledgements
thanks to all the hard-working librarians who have given indispens-
able aid.
I am particularly grateful to two scholars who made time to read and
comment on a complete draft: Professor Vivian Nutton and Professor
Philip van der Eijk. Professor Nutton saved me from Galenic error and
Professor van der Eijk suggested that the work might be published in
this series. I owe special thanks also to Dr Thomas Rütten who gave
generous help with the manuscript tradition just when I most needed
it. Professor Heinrich von Staden provided valuable bibliographical
aid. In medical matters, I have been fortunate to be able to call on
colleagues in the Bute Medical School, University of St. Andrews: Mr
Robin Clark read sections of the commentary at various stages and
gave much practical guidance and Dr David Sinclair organized and
led a useful seminar on the anatomy of the eye. Above all, Dr Susan
Whiten has provided essential information at many points and has
very kindly supplied the diagrams, adapted from her book The Flesh
and Bones of Anatomy (forthcoming, Elsevier Press). Mr David Spalton,
a consultant ophthalmic surgeon in London with a special interest in
cataract surgery, communicated his general views of the text.
Finally, I wish to thank Dr John Ball of IT services, University of
St. Andrews, for adroit rescue from several technological impasses, and
to express my gratitude to all at Brill involved in the execution of this
complex task.
part i
ON SIGHT
INTRODUCTION
I. Title
The titles given to Hippocratic works seem in some cases to be based
on later commentators’ superficial impressions of their content. The
title περi ðψιος in itself gives little idea of the actual content of the
treatise; it was doubtless adopted because the first words are αl ðψιες
and the word ðψις is soon repeated, in 2. Similarly, the treatise now
called Bones—though it begins with the word oστrα ‘bones’ and with
an enumeration of the bones in the body—is really about the vessels,
and was known to Galen as ‘Vessels, attached to Mochlicon’ (linguarum
Hippocratis explicatio 19. 128 K.). In view of the initial plural, we might
have expected a plural rather than a singular for the title; and indeed
the manuscripts vary in the title given at the end, some having τrλος
τuν περi oψiων. The term ðψις used three times in the work—in 1
(plural), 2 (singular) and 8 (singular)—can be either abstract or con-
crete in sense. In the former case, it is always singular ‘vision’ (the
sense in 2 and 8), while in the latter it may be singular or plural, with
reference to the seeing organ, ‘eye(s)’ or to the central ‘seeing part’
of the eye, that is iris with pupil (the sense in 1; cf. Loc. Hom. 13.6
[6.302 L.]; Epid. 4. 30 [5.174 L.]); or perhaps pupil alone, though for
this the word κορj was available. It can also mean ‘dream’, a particular
thing ‘seen’ (Hdt. 3. 30, 8. 54 etc.). This range of meanings is paral-
leled by 0κοj, ‘sense of hearing’, ‘ear’, ‘something heard’. The term
ðψις is more often abstract than concrete in the Hippocratic Corpus
(as de Arte. 11 [6.20 L.]). Translators and commentators have wrestled
with the sense. Most opt for a title based simply on vision such as, ‘de
visu’, ‘de la vision’; but the meticulous Foesius preferred ‘de videndi acie’,
and this choice of title is ossified in the standard modern abbreviation,
Vid. Ac. It is difficult to find a single translation acceptable through-
out: ‘vision’ or ‘sight’ can serve for both abstract and concrete senses,
but become impossible when a plural is required. The translation Organ
of Sight conveys the full range of meaning, but is somewhat cumber-
4 introduction
some; accordingly, for ease of reference, the title is here rendered simply
On Sight.
1
II. Transmission and Reception
On Sight occupies a mere four pages of Greek in the modern printed
text.
2
The treatise is brief and allusive in content; in addition, the
text is seriously corrupt. In part, the pervasive corruption lies in the
technical nature of the work, which deals with procedures naturally
unfamiliar to scribes, as indeed to scholars. In part, it lies simply in
visual or aural error on the part of scribes, liable to make mistakes
when faced with difficult and unfamiliar material, and liable to treat
such a short piece as relatively unworthy of attention. Sichel laments
the ‘état de mutilation tel qu’il est impossible de reconstituer un texte
irréprochable’; Ermerins finds both the corrupt state of the text and
its technical content such obstacles to comprehension that he declines
to translate large parts of it; Joly concurs that ‘les problèmes … ne
comportent pas de solution tranchée’.
3
A further problem is that, while there is no shortage of mss contain-
ing the work, the tradition is uniform and so uniformly corrupt.
4
The
extant tradition depends entirely, directly or indirectly, on the tenth
century ms M (Marcianus 269). In the absence of evidence from the
separate strand of the tradition represented by V (Vaticanus gr. 276,
twelfth century) and mss descended from V such as C, much used by
Littré (Parisinus gr. 2146), the deep-seated corruption in the text with
its single medieval source is intractable. We may contrast the tradi-
tion of, for instance, Epidemics 7.
5
Sichel knew readings of M through
information from Daremberg, but did not recognise M’s early date, pri-
ority and relative importance. Similarly Ermerins knew M only indi-
rectly, through readings communicated by Cobet. Sichel collated and
recorded the readings of the recentiores, especially the Parisian recentiores,
with great thoroughness. Ermerins supplemented Sichel’s critical appa-
1
See Craik, 2005; cf. Montfort, 2003, 46–50.
2
Sichel ap. Littré 9, 152–161 (1861); Ermerins 3, 279–283 (1864); Joly, CUF 13, 168–
171 (1978).
3
Sichel 152; Ermerins Praefatio XL–XLI; Joly 163.
4
See Diels, 1905 and 1907.
5
But see Jouanna, 2000, 95–97 on closeness of M and V.
introduction 5
ratus with information from one further ms in the Netherlands. Joly
collated M and relied on Sichel for the rest.
For this edition, I have seen almost all mss (see conspectus siglorum).
Several minor mistakes in Joly’s representation of the text of M have
been corrected (καi 1.2; τε, 2.1; article j to be included, 3.3; article
τjν to be omitted, 7; σοι ‘you’ to be omitted, 9.2; 0λλ’ ‘but’ to be
omitted, 9.3).
6
Such variations as preference in M for uncontracted
verbal forms, for γiγνονται rather than γiνονται and for oκως rather
than oπως are not recorded in the critical apparatus. On checking
Sichel’s apparatus for the recentiores, I find many instances where the
punctuation is wrongly recorded. This is unsurprising, as versions of
the punctuation vary greatly (especially in relation to headings or quasi
introductory material) and are frequently awry, betraying a complete
lack of comprehension on the part of scribes: there is a tendency to
reduce the text to staccato bursts of short clauses, or apparent semantic
units, which are devoid of overall syntactic sense. I have not thought
it worthwhile to record these different versions, which have no interest
except as a means of suggesting links among the recentiores. Scrutiny of
the mss merely reinforces the impression of careless transmission. It
is remarkable that several obvious errors in M go almost universally
uncorrected: α0τóμαται, 1.1; 0αλασσοειδj, 1.2; μηλησi_ ω, 4.1.
There is an almost total lack of marginalia (even in mss where these
abound for other works) and such glosses as do exist are banal in
the extreme (in G, δεuων glossed βρrχων, 3.2). There is, however, a
general regard for marking new topics: a red initial letter or a small
space precedes a separation into ‘chapters’ similar to that adumbrated
in notes by Cornarius, then pioneered in his text by van der Linden,
refined by Iugler and followed in modern editions. M has a sizeable
space only before 7 init. but has slight spaces before each of the repeated
rπειτα ‘then’ conjunctions in 3.1; while there is not complete unanimity
in the recentiores over the existence or placing of these sense divisions
there is most general agreement over the start of our chapters 7, 8 and
9 – R, however, has spacing before 4, 7 and 8 and Laur. only before 6
and 8.
In M, f. 212 starts with the words o κoτω0εν 3.3 and ends with
the words rπανιεiς δr, 7.1. At both points, where scribal inattention is
explicable, the text is particularly problematical and can be understood
6
Cf. Anastassiou, 1980.
6 introduction
only with substantial extension and emendation. In defence of the
scribe of M—generally known to be faithful and reliable—it may be
added that many readings emended by editors are perfectly acceptable
in the context of the rough and elliptical Greek of this work. (See on 1.1,
2.1, 4.1 etc.) Although the precise nature of the relation of the later mss
to M and to one another is much debated and there is no agreement on
details of classification, the general lines of affiliation are clear. The mss
H and I are both close to M, either through faithful copying or—as has
been suggested—because they share a common (lost) source; they are
in turn the basis of the later tradition. The consensus view that I had
a great influence on the later tradition—for instance being source of F,
source in turn of G, source in turn of Z—is corroborated in the case of
this work. That different sources can be seen in R is clear also: R agrees
more often with H (and is familiar with the second hand in H) but, at
the same time, shares several readings with I. There is no evidence
from this treatise that R had access to significant material extraneous to
the tradition of MHI. Detail in the critical apparatus is confined to the
readings of M, H, I, R.
7
(See further on πo0¸η, 1.1; iσχυρuς, 3.3; ξυσμóς,
6.1; κοιλiης κo0αρσις, 9.1; πλoγιον, 9.1; ο0 γoρ συμφrρει, 9.2.)
In the final analysis, precise textual study is of no help whatsoever in
retrieving the original lost text of this work. As elsewhere, it may be sus-
pected that scribes were more concerned with general fidelity to con-
tent than with an exact record. In this edition and commentary, clues
to the source and nature of corruption are sought in other Hippocratic
works, and in parallel passages of Celsus and Galen. This is, of course,
a hazardous enterprise. It must be stressed that, where emendations are
suggested on this basis, they lay no claim to verbatim restitution of the
lost original; rather to recovery of the lost gist expressed in wording
which is possible and plausible. The only justification is that manifest
nonsense is here converted to patent sense fitting its context.
Earlier editors and translators made distinctive contributions, in line
with their work on other Hippocratic treatises. Both Calvus and Cor-
narius, generally conservative and literal, used translation as a means
of explication and interpretation. Calvus, using the ms W at Rome
in 1512, made the obvious correction of μηλησi_ ω to μιλησi_ω, 4.1 and
recorded the variant, or intelligent conjecture, ξuσιος for κρiσιος, 4.2;
see also on the significance of the translation scapulares ‘scapulars’, 3.1.
7
On M, see esp. Jouanna, 2000; on H, esp. Duminil, 1998, 28.
introduction 7
Cornarius’ annotations, comprising both observations and corrections
made in his personal copy of the Aldine text of 1526, survive, as was
realised by Sichel, who checked and recorded his notes in the copy
at Göttingen; from this it is possible to see the use Cornarius made
of further ms sources (as rρυ0ρo for rρυ0ραi, 3.4).
8
Foesius, thanks to
an influential patron, had access to three mss held in the royal library
at Fontainebleau where they were transferred in 1544 and catalogued in
1550; he had also seen the Vatican ms now known as R.
9
Foesius printed
a text in line with the current vulgate, but permitted himself deviations
from this in translation and comment; see on 4 and 7. Van der Linden
followed Foesius but not slavishly; he was familiar with Ermerins’ ms
Q. The philological value of these early printed texts lies primarily in
the access of scholars then to a wider range of manuscript sources than
we now possess (see app. crit.). In practice, however, the sources they
cite add little to our knowledge and do not mitigate our dependence
on M. The medical value of these early printed texts is considerable,
especially for such surgical works as On Sight. All contributors were
practising doctors who had personal experience of bloodletting and
cupping—and of such activities before Harvey’s work of 1628 changed
our perception of the blood vessels and their course in the body; see
especially on 3.1.
It has commonly been asserted that there is no ancient reference to
On Sight, which would authenticate its place in the Hippocratic Corpus
of antiquity.
10
This negative view has now been contested with regard
to the Galenic gloss 0τρακτον, relevant to 4.1.
11
To this can certainly be
added Erotian’s gloss φολiδα, relevant to 6 and possibly also ο0λ_ u rele-
vant to 4.1. Both fall in the appropriate position in Erotian’s list: in the
third category, Therapeutics, placed with the lost work On Wounds and
Missiles, between Head Wounds preceding and Fractures with Articulations
following; see also for διαφανrσι 2 and 5, for τoχα, 3.4, and for ξυσμóς
6.1. That many words glossed by Galen are present in the treatise con-
firms that the vocabulary has a Hippocratic, if at times recondite, char-
acter (see on 2, 4, 6, 7 and 9). Hesychios too contains much of relevance
to the work (see on 2, 3 and 4).
8
See now the thorough treatment of Montfort, 2003.
9
Foesius, preface lectori candido; Omont, 1888.
10
Joly 163; Nachmanson, 1917, XIX.
11
Anastassiou and Irmer, 1997.
8 introduction
III. Content and Expression
Short works—we may compare the still shorter On Anatomy and the
somewhat longer Dentition—are peculiarly difficult to interpret, and
to place in the wider context of the Hippocratic Corpus and other
writings. To argue that different works of the Corpus belong together, a
conjunction of similar content and similar language is required. Many
associations in content can be explained simply by access to a common
pool of knowledge, from which items might be taken and reworked.
Unless it is unusually esoteric, or there is a high concentration of
coincident elements, content is not a reliable indicator. Language may
be somewhat more reliable, though here too caution in interpretation
is imperative. Where such elements as vocabulary, or grammatical and
syntactical features, or use and frequency of particles and pronouns are
shared—especially where these are distinctive or non-standard—they
may be pointers to a common tradition.
On Sight is a manual of surgery, giving instructions for surgical proce-
dures to be followed and, to a lesser extent, for drugs to be applied
in different ocular affections or diseases or, rather, to treat different
sets of ocular symptoms. Retrospective diagnosis of Hippocratic cases is
always hazardous, but here the conditions can be more or less plausibly
identified as follows: cataract (1), weeping sores and their complication
ectropion (2), trachoma and its effects (4), papilloma or chalazion (5),
‘night vision’ (7), recurrent seasonal allergy or conjunctivitis (9). The
procedures are: cautery of the vessels (1.1, 2; 3) or of the eyelid (4), cut-
ting and/or scraping of the eyelid (5), letting blood by phlebotomy or
cupping (3; 7; 9), cutting the scalp (4.2), trephination of the skull (8),
purging the head and/or the body generally (1.1, 2; 4; 7; 9), applying
ointments and poultices (6; 9). All these procedures, some gentle and
others drastic, are boldly indicated, but care and caution are likewise
enjoined.
The first requirement of a surgeon is a secure knowledge of the
anatomy of the parts on which he operates. We might expect this
knowledge to be expressed in technical language. However, our author
displays no awareness of the complexity of the eye’s anatomy. Few
technical terms are used, apart from the repeated ψις already noted.
No word, apart from ψις, is used for pupil, iris or cornea and there is
no reference to the nature or number of μνιγγες ‘membranes’ (coats or
tunics) of the eye; this contrasts with reference to three membranes in
introduction 9
Places in Man.
12
There is frequent reference to the βλrφαρον ‘eyelid’ (2;
4.1; 5 bis; 6 bis), but no word except 0ρiξ ‘hair’ for eyelash (5). The
rather vague στεφoνη ‘circle’, ‘ring’ is used for the eyeball and the
rather general χóνδρος ‘cartilage’ or σoρξ ‘flesh’ for the inside of the
eyelid (4.1). The author operates not only on the eyelids but also on
the head more generally, and here his knowledge seems more extensive,
though it is still not technical in expression. He cuts into the βρrγμα
‘bregma’ or the vertex in two different procedures, either in order to
release blood, or in order to gain access to the skull for trephination
(4.2; 8). Apart from bregma, no anatomical terms are used for parts of
the head. The skull is simply oστrον ‘the bone’ (3.1, 2, 4; 8). The φλrβες
‘vessels’ are important to his practices (1.1; 3.1, 3 ter; 9. 1), but there is
only one indication of particular vessels and their location, and that is
unclear (3.1).
Despite the disconcerting absence of anatomical nomenclature, our
doctor was evidently familiar with the general anatomy of the head,
knowing where to cut and how to trephine: he would know exactly
where the bone of the skull was thickest and exactly where the flesh of
the scalp was thinnest, and be able to trace the location of the sutures
and of the inion, occipital protuberance; he would have some idea of
the course of the main blood vessels. Even in Head Wounds, rather vague
terms are used for regions of the head: κορυφj ‘top’ or ‘vertex’ is not a
well-defined anatomical term, and the words for ‘forehead’, and ‘brows’
are somewhat vague also.
13
Use of the term ðπισ0εν ‘behind’ to indicate
posterior orientation in the body seems to show a nascent striving for
precision (3.1 bis; cf. πρóσ0εν, 1. 2, and rνδο0εν, 2). The paucity of
anatomical terminology may indicate simply that the surgeon was not
concerned, or not here concerned, with names for bodily parts; it need
not suggest ignorance of these, far less inability to operate safely and
effectively.
The author’s pathology, like his anatomy, is almost devoid of techni-
cal terminology and the lack of nosological specification is striking. The
rather crude term διαφ0εiρεσ0αι ‘be destroyed’ describes loss of sight
(1.1; 8). The only abstract noun for a disease is ‘ophthalmia’ (9), in gen-
eral usage applied indiscriminately to eye trouble; to this we may add a
case designation ‘sufferer from night blindness’ (7). The absence of such
terms for sight impairment as 0μαuρωσις (appropriate to 1) and 0μβλυ-
12
See Craik, 1998, 105.
13
Cf. Hanson, 1999, 99.
10 introduction
ωπα (appropriate to 8) common even in non-medical authors, and the
absence of any reference to treatment of eye injuries, is remarkable. In
this practical work, prognosis is more important than diagnosis. Diag-
nosis is by appearance (1) or by the patient’s report of discomfort (6)
or of loss of vision (8). In practice, the physician considers two broad
categories: problems where the eye, but not the eyesight, is affected (2)
and problems where the eyesight, but not apparently the eye, is affected
(8); he differentiates between sudden and gradual loss of sight (1) and
between child and adult patients (2). The writer seems familiar with
a wide range of problems, even if he does not apply names to them.
This may be a merit: in practice, many eye conditions display similar
symptoms, or take many forms; for example, conjunctivitis—perhaps
the most common of all eye diseases—may be classified as catarrhal,
purulent etc; and trachoma has many complications, including trichi-
asis and entropion. If the author has any knowledge of terms for the
diseases here described, he does not display it. We cannot assume that
names were unknown or unavailable; it may be simply that the author
is not concerned with nomenclature and that the modern quest for
nomenclature and definitions is bound to be of limited success.
The author is no more concerned to expound his views on physi-
ology than on anatomy and pathology. However, it is evident from his
practices—purging the head and body, cauterising the vessels—that he
subscribes to this common theory: that flux of peccant matter (usually
viewed as phlegm) from the head is the major cause of disease in gen-
eral, and that such matter concentrated at the eyes is the cause of the
most common eye disorders. It is evident too that he subscribes to a
refinement of this, postulating two different types of flux from two dif-
ferent parts of the head to two different locations in the body (here,
two different regions of the eye): superficial upper flux, from the area
above the skull, or the scalp, and deep lower flux, from the area under
the skull, or the brain. The fluids mentioned, apart from blood, are
δρωψ ‘moisture’ (removed on trephination, 8) and χρ ‘ichor’ fluid
with a watery or bloody appearance (4.1). There is some awareness of
pulsation in the vessels (3). It is apparent that the author believes that
an excess of matter in the head flows down through the vessels, and
that this noxious flux can be arrested by cautery or venesection. This
was the desired effect. As to the actual effect, it must be supposed that
he cured some of the people at least some of the time, as his practice
would depend on his establishing a reputation and securing the respect
of physicians and the trust of patients.
introduction 11
The text, then, is not about anatomy, physiology or pathology, but
about surgery and therapy with especial emphasis on cautery. Cautery
was commonly used to arrest haemorrhage, to burn off excess tissues,
to lance abscesses and, as in On Sight, to eliminate noxious bodily mois-
ture. It would have the additional unappreciated benefit of combating
infection. Cautery, like cupping, might be dry (a less invasive treatment
involving no break in the skin and no bleeding) or wet. In dry cautery,
the instrument is used simply to apply gentle warmth to the body, com-
monly but not always to the blood vessels. Even when the instrument
is used to address the vessels, it may just be placed alongside (παρακα-
ειν ‘burn beside’, 3.3) apparently with a view to changing the consis-
tency or the movement of their contents. Alternatively, in wet cautery,
the instrument is placed across them (διακαειν ‘burn over’, 3.3 quater;
cf. treatment of the eyelids, 4.1) apparently with the intent of actually
breaking the wall of the vessel—surely vein, not artery—or even sever-
ing it. In both wet and dry procedures, sponges might inserted between
the surgeon’s instrument and the patient’s skin (γκατακαειν ‘burn in
and down’), possibly in an attempt to mitigate the pain, to control the
severity of the heat, or to mop up blood (but see further on 3.2). Simi-
larly, in dry cupping, the cupping instrument is applied to the surface of
the skin and left there, with the aim of drawing out noxious stuff from
the unbroken skin by suction, while in wet cupping the skin is broken
or scarified in order to remove blood or noxious matter from a vessel
or elsewhere. Thus, the verb καειν, lit. ‘burn’, med. ‘cauterise’ does not
necessarily or always involve extreme heat, far less branding and scar-
ring; it is simply ‘heat, using a cauterising instrument’. The practices of
cutting and cautery are often allied, as alternative or successive ways to
address a problem: to drain or burn out an excess of fluid, reducing it
by incision or by application of heat; to stop flow by creating a barrier.
Celsus too viewed these as alternative ways to eliminate noxious matter
from the vessels.
Many elements in the doctor’s pharmacopoea are everyday items
from the domestic store cupboard, such as olive oil (3.3), garlic (7) and
honey, applied (3.2) or ingested (7). Sponges and fine wool are also
part of his stock-in-trade (3, 4.1). In preparation, an ointment must
be ‘in consistency like myssotos’, a culinary paste (6); the simile conveys
a homely atmosphere. Similarly, the verb used of thoroughly heated
cauterising instruments ‘well-roasted’ (3.2) is one with a regular culinary
nuance. It may be that the doctor simply requisitioned items, such as
sponges, from the patient’s kitchen. Such improvisation is commended
12 introduction
in Articulations (Artic. 7 [4.86 L.]). However, there is evidence too of
specialist supplies. The most commonly named specific is a derivative of
copper, evidently copper sulphate, perennially favoured to treat certain
ulcerative eye conditions, such as trachoma: νος χαλκο ‘flower of
copper’ (4.1, 6; slightly different terminology in 5). A second ingredient
in an eye salve, specified without indication of quantities or proportions,
is unripe grape juice. This is a seasonal item but there may have
been procedures (?ancillary to wine manufacture), to preserve it for use
throughout the year (6). Arum root, used in cautery, would be more
readily stored (3.2).
The preparation of an eye ointment detailed (6) demands a ‘grind-
stone’ (or perhaps rather a pestle and mortar), a strainer, and a special
container of red copper. The ‘couch’ where the patient is positioned in
preparation for surgery (3.1) would ideally be one regularly used by the
doctor performing the operation and appropriately positioned, height
and light source being important considerations, but might be rather a
piece of ordinary household furniture which came to hand. Cupping
vessels are explicitly mentioned once (9.1) and required by implication
elsewhere (7); scalpels would be required in order to let blood (3.1, 9.1)
and to cut into the scalp (4.2, 8), and a sawing instrument would be
needed for trephination (8). A scraping instrument or rasp, or material
of some unspecified sort is needed to scrape the lids (2; 4. 1, 2) and
another special blade is needed to ‘thin’ them (4.2). Finally, different
instruments for cautery either of metal (3.1) or of wood (4.1) are used;
these are sometimes required to be delicate (‘not thick’, 1). A means of
heating these would also be required. The absence of technical terms
for instruments is as marked as the absence of anatomical and other
medical terminology noted above. The eye surgery seen in Paul of Aig-
ina is described in very different terms, with such dedicated instruments
as a βλεφαρξυστον ‘raspatory to treat the eyelids’ and πτερυγοτμον
‘knife to excise a pterygium’ and many others (Paul 3. 23, 6. 15 etc.)
The drugs to be used for the most routine treatments are not speci-
fied: it is taken for granted that the doctor will know how to purge the
head by nasal insertions and the body by laxatives (1.1, 2; 4. 2; 7; 9.1);
exceptionally, elaterion lit. ‘driver’ is once indicated for drastic purging
(7). It is assumed too that he will know which applications will have a
particular effect, such as ‘astringent’ (δριμς, 9.2), and what drug will
be effective to stop a flow of blood (ναιμος, 4.2). When poultices are
indicated, their composition is left to the doctor’s discretion (9). The
shorthand ‘give the further treatment’, i.e. ‘continue to treat as appro-
introduction 13
priate’ (iητρεuειν τo λοιπo, 5) presupposes practical experience. There
is some evidence of observation, though this is somewhat subjective
in character (comments on different colours of the seeing part of the
eye, 1); the doctor sets store by ‘signs’ (change in nature of discharge,
4.1). There is some evidence also of careful interrogation of the patient
(comments on whether the onset of the affection has been sudden or
gradual, and with or without apparent cause, 1); the patient’s report
of symptoms may condition the choice of treatment deemed appropri-
ate (presence or absence of pain, that is of headache, 9). Some store is
laid on seasonal factors (in ophthalmia, 9). The patient’s diet may be
restricted and his environment monitored (in ophthalmia, 9).
The instructions given are often expressed in a peremptory and
authoritative fashion. The doctor treats (ποιεtν, 2; also ijσ0αι, 8 and
iησις, 1.1, iητρεuειν, 5) and the patient is on the receiving end of treat-
ment (πoσχειν, 1.1, 3.3). Instructions are confident, often expressed in
terms of what ‘should’ be done (χρj ‘one should’ 1.1; 3.3 bis; 4.1, 2;
8). The clinical approach throughout is pragmatic. It is important to
recognise cases where treatment would be useless (ο0κ 0ν uφελοiης ποι-
rων ο0δrν ‘you could not help by any action at all’, 2). The doctor’s
concern is with what will or will not ‘work’; hence repetition of the verb
συμφrρει ‘it is beneficial’ (1.2 bis; 9.1 bis, 2 quarter, 3 bis). There is much
room for discretion: letting blood helps in some cases of ophthalmia
(9.1) and poultices are helpful in certain specified circumstances (9.2).
Although the doctor must act decisively (iσχυρuς ‘strongly’ in cautery,
3.3; uς μoλιστα ‘as much as possible’ in pressure for cupping, 7) he
must also act with due care and caution (α0τu τu oφ0αλμu σκεψoμενος
‘considering the actual eyes’, 2; jσυχi¸j δια0ερμαiνειν ‘heat gently’, 3.1;
τjν σoρκα oκóσην ε0μαρrστατα δuν¸η ‘the flesh … as much as you can,
very gently’, 5.1; φυλασσóμενος ‘with care’, 4; 5.1). He must recognise
the signs which indicate that it is time to stop scraping the lids (4.1),
and know what follow-up procedures are appropriate (4.2). Long-term
treatment seems to be envisaged; thus the processes of vascular healing
after cautery and of lid repair and regrowth after scraping seem to be
monitored (3; 4. 2).
Where injunctions are given for procedures to be followed, the ad-
dress is sometimes direct, in the second person: ‘you could not aid’,
‘when you cauterise’, ‘when you scrape’, ‘you should pour’ (2; 3.3;
4.1; 6); jussive infinitives with nominative participles are particularly
common (2; 3.1 and 2 repeatedly; 4; 5; 6; 7). A favoured syntactical
structure is a chain of loosely linked participles, indicating successive
14 introduction
steps in treatment or preparations for treatment, used in conjunction
with jussive infinitives. There is much use of the adverb πειτα ‘then’ to
indicate clearly successive stages in procedures to be followed. Verbal
expressions ‘it is beneficial’ and ‘it is expedient’ are much used also
(συμφρει and χρ discussed above; cf. ργον 4. 2). Jussive subjunctives
too are used: once of the practitioner (6), once of an aide (3.1) and once
of the patient (7.1).
The work begins abruptly, with asyndeton, and the use of τοιατη
‘such’ (sc. such as before) indicates loss of context. The end is simi-
larly abrupt and the editorial thesis of Joly and others that the text is a
mere disjointed fragment is plausible. The extreme brevity of the sur-
viving text and the fact that it considers relatively few eye diseases add
to the impression that we are dealing with a lacunose piece, possibly an
excerpt from, or partial summary of, a much larger work. The extent
and nature of textual corruption is consonant with this possibility: there
are lacunae even in the text as transmitted (especially in 3, 7 and 9, but
probably not between 2 and 3, pace Sichel and others). Although the
sporadic use of headings or quasi-introductory phrases (the basis of the
modern division into ‘chapters’) may be vestigial evidence of a degree
of organisation, some major transitions in thought are unmarked (3
init.). Within several chapters the content is uneven, surgical instruc-
tions sitting incongruously alongside general comments and advice: the
presence of such disparate material is particularly marked in 3 and 9.
Overall, the work is a series of disconnected jottings, elliptical, allusive,
and telegraphic in expression.
The syntax is primitive and inelegant. Paratactic sentence structures
predominate. Subordinate clauses, where used, are not well integrated
but appended in a loose agglomeration (2). There is a marked tendency
to careless or otiose repetition, especially repetition of the demonstra-
tive pronoun (1, 6, 9), and there may be a trace of Doric idiom (neuter
plural noun with verb in plural, 3.4). These features are typical of early
Greek prose writing. In addition, the grammatical forms are rough,
functional and unidiomatic to the point of solecism, with particular
oddities in the use of prepositions.
14
The vocabulary is functional. How-
ever one salient feature is a tendency to employ compound verbs. In
some instances, these are semantically significant, conveying precise
surgical nuances (διακαειν and γκατακαειν discussed above); in others
14
See Craik, 2005, 204–205.
introduction 15
the compound is used where the simple verb would suffice (διαβλπω,
διαερμανω, διασημανω, διαχρω, διαχωρζω).
The content, with its stress on practical instruction and disregard of
matters not germane to that immediate concern, suggests a target audi-
ence of trainee physicians. The form, with its strongly didactic tone,
in conjunction with loosely juxtaposed clauses and truncated elliptical
expression, suggests the format of notes intended to accompany a set of
lectures or demonstrations. While such notes may be made and kept by
pupils as well as teachers, our treatise seems to mirror the attitudes of
one giving, not receiving, instruction: the magisterial, authoritative and
abrupt expression seems to be directed at a learner, receiving instruc-
tion from an experienced practitioner. Surgery above all must be taught
by demonstration and participation; the work we have may have origi-
nated as a relatively unimportant adjunct to the manual business.
IV. Place in the Hippocratic Corpus; Provenance and Date
Much medical writing is essentially derivative and repetitive in char-
acter. Even modern textbooks can be shown to parrot one another,
especially where factual material is presented. In antiquity, where it was
impossible to establish prior claim by definitive publication, where the
notion of plagiarism was lacking, and where medical scientists worked
in collaborative or combative groups, such repetition is inevitable. It
may be said that all the Hippocratic works are mixed and derivative
to some degree, and that few, if any, are original in an accepted lit-
erary sense: the words ‘redactor’ rather than ‘author’ and ‘compile’
rather than ‘compose’ are appropriate. The integrity of the Hippocratic
canon has been increasingly questioned, to a point where it has been
suggested that the very concept of a Corpus is flawed:
15
while individ-
ual Hippocratic writings have much in common and can be regarded
as groups or clusters, it is possible to parallel much of the content of the
Hippocratic Corpus in fragments of many medical authors, including
those whose views are summarised in the papyrus known as Anonymus
Londinensis, and in fragments of the Presocratics, as well as in the Aris-
totelian Corpus. (For Vid. Ac. and the Aristotelian Problemata, see espe-
cially on 1, 2 and 9.) It remains likely that there was direct interaction
15
See Nutton, 2004, 61–66; van der Eijk, forthcoming.
16 introduction
between some of the authors represented in the Hippocratic Corpus
and the quest for affinities remains meaningful.
It is immediately evident that there are general similarities in On
Sight with the practices and so with the expression and vocabulary of
such surgical works as Articulations and Sores, also with the surgical pro-
cedures in the gynaecological and nosological treatises—though none
of these works is so uncompromisingly surgical in content or so aggres-
sively peremptory in expression as On Sight. Unsurprisingly, there are
particular resemblances with works featuring cautery; for instance, the
term τρακτος for a cauterising instrument occurs only in On Sight and
in Internal Affections.
The extreme brevity and rugged idiom of On Sight compound the
difficulties of making such comparisons. However, there is no doubt
that in both content (on eye flux and on cautery) and expression (style,
syntax and grammar) On Sight particularly resembles Places in Man. The
author of Places in Man seems to have a particular interest in the eye:
different kinds of ocular flux are classified at length and treatments are
specified: eye salves (13.1, 2 [6.298, 300 L.]); purging the body by ene-
mas and laxatives (13.1, 4 [6.298, 300 L.]); purging the head by errhines
(13.2, 4 [6.300 L.]); cautery of the vessels in the temples (13.7 [6.302 L.]);
and, in an extreme case, making incisions in the scalp to the bone (13.5
[6.300 L.]). Similarly, in On Sight, according to type of symptoms, the
treatments are: eye salves (6; 9.2, 3); purging the body (7.1; 9.1); purging
the head (1.1, 2; 7.1; 9.1); cautery of the vessels (1.1, 2; 3.1–4) and incis-
ing the scalp (4.2; 8). There is also cautery almost up to the bone of
the skull (3.1–2). In both works too, trephining is practised, as is vene-
section or cupping. Treatment of the eyelids as prescribed in On Sight
is by similar methods; that is, by surgical cutting and burning, and by
ointments or lotions. In both works, detailed instructions are given as
to how cautery of the vessels should be performed. These instructions
are given in similar terminology and with a similar emphasis in content
(Loc. Hom. 40 [6.330 L.]; Vid. Ac. 3).
The theory of flux from the head, underlying the therapy advocated
for eye conditions, is explicitly presented in Places in Man and implicitly
present in On Sight (especially in 9, in language similar to that of Glands,
a treatise close in details of its theoretical stance to Places in Man). The
same theory can be seen, in different guises, in other works which are
concerned with symptoms and therapy of diseases stemming from the
head, notably in Diseases 2, Internal Affections and Affections, and notably
where cautery is the preferred practice. In both Places in Man and
introduction 17
Glands: it is the ‘marrow’ which carries noxious flux to lower parts of
the body (Gland. 11, 14 [8.564, 570 L.]). Similarly, in Koan Prognoses, a
list of diseases not found before puberty includes κατρρους νωτιαος
‘flux in the back’ (Coac. 5. 502 [5.700 L.]) and in Internal Affections, two
types of phthisis are related to abnormal functioning of the ‘marrow’: in
one, the ‘marrow’ becomes filled with blood (or the hollow vessels filled
with bile and phlegm) and in the other, the ‘marrow’ becomes dry, with
blockage in the ‘small vessels’ from the brain—here, cautery of the neck
is prescribed (Int. 12, 13 [7.192, 200 L.]; cf. Loc. Hom. 21 [6.312 L.]).
There is a further nexus of associations with treatises which detail
ingredients and preparation of recipe cures, Affections, Regimen in Acute
Diseases, Diseases of Women 1; Affections is unusual in referring to a work
on drugs sometimes called pharmakitis (Aff. 15, 23, 28, 40 [6.224, 234,
240, 250 L.]) sometimes ta pharmaka (Aff. 4, 18, 29 [6.212, 228, 240 L.]).
(It is usually supposed that a particular treatise is intended. However,
the different modes of allusion seem to suggest a fluid body of mate-
rial; and as in Greek idiom the definite article is frequently used in
place of a possessive pronoun, it may be that the meaning is ‘your’—
rather than ‘the’—recipe book, the reader being enjoined to refer to his
files on drugs.) There are marked affinities also with Prorrhetic 2 (18–20
[9.44, 46, 48 L.], theoretical prognosis for eye conditions) and with cer-
tain passages of Epidemics (practical treatment of eye conditions). Other
passing or incidental similarities can be identified: belief in the impor-
tance of the seasons in the aetiology of disease, pervasively evident in
Airs, Waters and Places and seen intermittently in Epidemics and Aphorisms
features in the treatment of ophthalmia at the end of On Sight. The
procedures of the treatise can be paralleled in various works: Hippo-
cratic surgeons cut different parts of the head for different supposed
conditions, with different purposes, in different ways and with different
follow-up procedures. The main expedients are, briefly: a single cut in
order to saw or pierce the bone, usually treatment for skull fracture but
also to release unwanted moisture; a single cut, usually in the forehead
or the bregma to release excessive or noxious matter; multiple cuts in
the scalp, to release excessive or noxious matter. The recommendations
in Physician that if only one cut is required, incision should be swift;
while if several are required, incision should be slow indicate a general
interest in such surgery (Medic. 5 [9.212 L.]).
The author of Affections, while discussing head diseases, states his
intention to write separately on diseases of the eye (Aff. 5 [6.214 L.]);
he further, while treating diseases of the belly, states his intention to
18 introduction
write on cases of suppuration, of phthisis and of gynaecological ail-
ments (Aff. 33 [6.244 L.]). Inevitably, there has been speculation on
common authorship, and inevitably On Sight is a contender for the work
supposedly projected on the eye.
16
The range of works proposed by
the author of Affections resembles the range proposed by the author of
Articulations, and the question of interrelated authorship between major
and minor works resembles that between Articulations and Glands. It is
very likely that Hippocratic authors, who had to be versatile in their
clinical practice, chose to be versatile in their written output also. But
establishing common authorship—as opposed simply to common influ-
ence and interaction—is an elusive and perhaps ultimately impossible
goal. Although On Sight has some common content with Affections, com-
mon expression suggests rather a grouping with Places in Man, Glands,
Fractures, Articulations, parts of Epidemics and some of the gynaecological
works. The abrupt manner is reminiscent of the aphoristic works, espe-
cially of the unpolished Koan Prognoses and there are some similarities in
vocabulary also with this collection.
17
The treatise is dated to the end of the fifth or beginning of the fourth
century by Joly, on the basis of its supposed ‘Knidian’ content, espe-
cially the stress on cautery, traditionally associated with the name of
Euryphon and regarded as a Knidian practice; but cautery may more
properly be regarded as an ancient practice, persisting in pockets every-
where.
18
It has been argued, on the basis of language, that Places in
Man is an early work, originating in Italy or in Sicily.
19
In view of the
similarities noted, it may be suggested that On Sight has a similar date
and provenance. It may then be conjectured that the author had affil-
iations with the west Greek thinkers Alkmaion of Kroton and Empe-
dokles of Akragas, both known to have taken a particular interest in
the eye. However, although thinkers with an interest in the workings of
the eye and doctors with an interest in diseases of the eye might well
have found their activities complementary, the severely practical tone
of On Sight militates against direct comparison with these highly theo-
retical and philosophical writers. Although Alkmaion was said to have
dissected the eye, it is unlikely that this bears any relation to the activi-
16
See Rodriguez Alfageme, 1993 on use of particles in Aff. and Vid. Ac.; also Craik,
2005.
17
See Craik, 2002, 288, n. 3; also 2005.
18
Joly 164; Thivel, 1981, 281–282.
19
Craik, 1998, esp. 22, 28–29, 33.
introduction 19
ties of our doctor: even if true, the dissection was doubtless of an animal
(just as Demokritos from Thracian Abdera was said to have dissected
animals, cutting into the bregma, with an interest in sense perception).
20
Another possible source for the work is north Africa: there is good
fifth century evidence that ‘Egypt’ produced the best ophthalmologists;
papyri confirm an earlier specialist interest in ophthalmology; Libyan
Kyrene was a prominent medical centre. Trachoma, a disease given
much attention in On Sight, has a peculiar association with Egypt. If the
piece is based on the work of someone whose first language was not
Greek and who was not entirely at home with the idiom, the vagaries
in expression are more explicable.
21
V. Place in the History of Ophthalmology
Modern works, aimed to assist the hard-pressed family doctor in diag-
nosis of ocular problems, suggest that the first distinction should be
between gradual and sudden loss of sight, and that each of these sub-
divisions should then be classified further on an anatomical basis, work-
ing posteriorly from cornea to retina to choroid and optic nerves. And
in ophthalmic pathology, topics are generally grouped together with
reference to the part affected. Unable to examine the inside of the eye
and unaware of its full complexity, the ancient practitioner uses a more
crude yardstick, and thinks primarily in terms of ocular flux.
In the development of ophthalmology in antiquity, increasing ana-
tomical knowledge is evident and well documented.
22
In the Hellenis-
tic period great advances were made by Herophilos and Erasistratos:
Herophilos had a particular interest in vision and the connections
between eye and brain; also in the structure of the eye, where he dis-
tinguished four membranes.
23
But still, the theory of flux and therapy
based on it continued to survive and pervade ancient ophthalmology
centuries later. Both Galen and Celsus, despite awareness of the huge
advances in ocular anatomy and physiology initiated by Herophilos and
developed by Demosthenes Philalethes, and despite practical advances
in surgical techniques, subscribe to the same general scheme of beliefs
20
Lloyd, 1975.
21
For detailed argument, see Craik, 2005.
22
For general discussion, see Hirschberg, 1899 and Magnus, 1901.
23
See von Staden, 1989, 570–576.
20 introduction
as their Hippocratic predecessors. (A rare attempt to classify eye trou-
bles with reference to the parts affected survives in the pseudo-Galenic
introductio seu medicus 14. 767–777 K.; in this classification—though not
in discussion of theory or description of treatment—the anatomical
advances of the great Alexandrians are apparent.)
Already Alkmaion put forward theories of sense perception based on
the concept of ‘ducts’ leading from brain to eye (DK 24 A 5 = Thphr. de
sens. 25) and similar concepts of psychophysiology can be seen not only
in the Hippocratic Corpus (Loc. Hom. 1.3, 2.2 [6.276, 280 L.]; Carn. 17
[8.604 L.]), but also in the works of Aristotle (GA B 6. 744a8 and else-
where).
24
Both the supposed route and the postulated function of these
‘ducts’ were variously understood. Certainly there was progress towards
understanding of the location and importance of the optic nerve, and
certainly it came to be envisaged that pneuma ‘breath’ was conveyed
from brain to eye (as already supposed, Morb. Sacr. 7 [6.374 L.]). But the
theory of ducts or channels from the head has a much wider and
simpler, more material, significance. The related theories of physiol-
ogy, that optical wellbeing depended on the proper functioning of the
ducts, which conveyed pure moisture to the healthy eye, and pathol-
ogy, that the sight was affected if the ducts became blocked or flooded
or conveyed peccant moisture to the diseased eye, can be seen perva-
sively in Greek medical texts of all eras. These theories are allied with
the common general theory of a κατρρους ‘downward flux’ from the
head to various parts of the body through various channels, includ-
ing channels linking the brain, via the cerebral or spinal fluid, to the
lower body (Epid. 2. 4. 2 [5.126 L.]; Oss. 12 [9.182 L.]). Effects on the
eye are described both in the Hippocratic Corpus (eye and lungs, Aer.
10 [2.46 L.]; cf. Aph. 3. 12 [4.490 L.]) and in related medical authors
(eye, ear, and nose in Dexippos, Anon. Lond. XII. 22–26; eye and
joints in Diokles fr. 137; night blindness caused by ‘moisture and excess’,
Arist. GA 5. 1).
Formulations in Galenic texts, though expressed in more sophisti-
cated language, belong fundamentally to the same perception as that
prevailing in the Hippocratic era. Thus, the author of Places in Man
states that φλβια ‘little vessels’ from the brain nourish the eye with pure
moisture but ποσβννυσι τς ψιας ‘extinguish the organs of sight’ if
they happen to dry up (Loc. Hom. 2.2 [6.280 L.]), while Galen tells us
24
On Aristotle, see von Staden, 1989, 157, n. 54; on Diokles, see van der Eijk II,
2001, 267.
introduction 21
that when, in spite of no apparent disease affecting the eye, it happens
that 0πóλεσ0αι τjν oπτικjν αiσ0ησιν ‘the sense of sight is lost’, the cause
is a νε0ρον ‘a nerve’ or ‘a duct’ from the brain swelling, damaged or
blocked by a flux of moist matter (de locis affectis, 8. 218 K.; cf. on various
destinations of a defluxion the pseudo-Galenic introductio seu medicus 14.
742 K. and on the different effects of moisture in different parts of the
head—below skin, below bone, between membrane and bone—ibid. 14.
782 K.). Commenting on the Hippocratic Prognostic (Prog. 2 [2.114 L.],
an account of ‘signs’ to be detected in the eyes of patients), Galen inter-
prets through extensive paraphrase but still writes of ‘flux carried down
from the head’ and gives its aetiology as πλj0ος ‘excess’ or some kind
of φλεγμονj ‘inflammation’ or ‘phlegmatic content’ in the brain.
Further, the same theories with the same rationale persist, perpetu-
ated by Oreibasios and others, even in Paul of Aigina, who describes
the cause of eye ailments as an acrid defluxion and makes a clear
distinction between types situated above or below the skull.
25
Surgical
procedures too remain constant over the centuries. The operations per-
formed in On Sight, other Hippocratic works and the Aristotelian Prob-
lemata (cautery of the vessels in the temples, πυκνο0ντες τοuς τuν íγρuν
πóρους ‘thickening up—i.e. reducing the width of—the channels of the
fluids’ and scarification of the scalp) are paralleled in evidence from
papyri for excising the temples and other areas of the scalp.
26
Paul of
Aigina describes attempts to dissipate or evacuate peccant matter by
applying a cupping instrument to the back of the head, by scarification,
by applying leeches to the temples and by poultices.
27
Galen and Celsus, in conjunction with such Hippocratic writers as
the authors of Prorrhetic 2, Diseases 2 and Places in Man, provide direct
aid to understanding the abbreviated and allusive content of On Sight
(see on 1, 3, 9) or have indirect corroborative relevance to it (see on 4,
6, and especially 7). This is evidence for the long currency and inher-
ent conservatism of the physiological theories and surgical procedures
concerned, rather than for direct influence of the earlier texts, though
it seems likely that Celsus drew directly at least on Prorrhetic 2.
28
In gen-
eral, Galen—or contemporaries whose work has found its way into the
Galenic corpus—favoured non-invasive procedures in treating the eye.
25
See Adams I 1844, 411–412; III 1847, 248.
26
See Marganne, 1994, esp. 1–14.
27
Adams I 1844, 420–421.
28
See Pardon, 2005.
22 introduction
Thus his remedy for accumulated rheum is simple: the problem is to
be removed by a soft sponge with warm water (de remediis parabilibus,
14. 341 K.). He approves the simple Hippocratic recommendations of
the aphoristic texts—neat wine, baths, vapour baths, phlebotomy, purg-
ing (Aph. 6. 31 [4.570 L.])—and regards the physician’s role as merely
to aid nature (cf. the view that spontaneous diarrhoea gives relief in
ophthalmia, Coac. 2. 220 [5.632 L.]). According to a later (Arabic) ver-
sion, he lauded practitioners who cured by drugs alone, rather than by
excision, not only growths such as pterygion and chalazion but also
serious eye diseases such as cataract and trachoma (de optimo medico
cognoscendo, CMG Suppl. Orientale 4. 10. 2). Trepanation was known but
rarely practised.
29
Celsus is much more interventionist. Archaeological
finds of surgical kits, especially from Roman Gaul, confirm the evi-
dence of Celsus for the practice of eye surgery; according to one mod-
ern ophthalmologist—writing before a further spectacular find near
Lyon—these ‘could almost still be used’.
30
Most of the conditions addressed (though not by name) in On Sight
are of central and perennial importance in the history of ophthal-
mology: cataract, glaucoma, trachoma, recurrent conjunctivitis, night
blindness. All of these conditions were addressed by ‘Susruta’, to whom
is attributed a series of works in classical Sanskrit; this composition
has its origins several centuries BC, but betrays several historical layers
and different hands. The works show formidable clinical skill, includ-
ing knowledge of how to couch cataracts, dislodging the lens of the eye.
Like the surgeon of our treatise, Susruta favoured the use of general
purgatives before starting specific ocular treatment; treatments used by
both include scarification, venesection, cautery in the temporal region,
use of copper sulphate for trachoma, prescription of (cooked) goat or
sheep liver eaten with honey for night blindness and prescription of
unguents mixed in a copper vessel; advice given by both is to avoid
smoke, fire and bright lights.
31
The ophthalmologists of ancient Egypt
(known from Ebers papyrus, c. 1500BC) knew a similar range of dis-
eases and practised some of the same responses. In Kahun 1, in a
gynaecological context, a meal of ‘fresh’ (possibly raw) liver is pre-
scribed for a patient suffering loss of vision and neck pain. In Ebers 351,
29
Rocca, 2003, 266, n. 1.
30
Dolffus, 1968; on the find of 1975 see Feugère, Künzl, Weisser, 1985 and Jackson,
1996, 2249.
31
See Biyadhar, 1939, 1947; Wujastyk, 2003, 63–64.
introduction 23
roasted ox liver is to be pressed to the eyes for sharu disease, regarded
by some editors as night blindness.
32
The names of many ophthalmologists over the centuries are associ-
ated with advancements in the understanding of and controversies over
therapeutic methods for cataract and glaucoma. Celsus had attempted
surgery for cataract in its early stages. Even after Rufus systematised
the distinction between the two diseases, they were frequently spoken
of together, and not clearly differentiated.
33
Paul of Aigina regarded
cataract as sometimes curable, glaucoma as always incurable.
34
Cat-
aract surgery was long a hit and miss affair, frequently the province
of itinerant barbers, not of professional surgeons. Palliative couching
remained the standard method until the middle of the eighteenth cen-
tury, when a cataract was first successfully extracted by Daviel (in 1752);
however, controversy still centred on the true nature of cataract (a dis-
ease of the lens or a structure in front of the lens) and so on the rival
methods, some declaring fragmentation or discission was always to be
preferred to extraction. Failure in skill and purulent infection were long
hazards.
35
In the nineteenth century, the initiation of iridectomy for
glaucoma was a notable advance.
36
However, the annals of the new pro-
fessional bodies concerned with ophthalmology continue to be domi-
nated by the question of how best to treat these two dominant diseases.
Even today glaucoma and senile cataract, together with senile macu-
lar lesions and myopic chorioretinal atrophy, can be viewed as major
causes of blindness and it is conceded that the underlying aetiology of
these and many other eye disorders remains obscure.
37
Trachoma too has generated a vast literature.
38
The condition be-
came prevalent in England in the early nineteenth century. Troops
who had served in the Napoleonic wars were carriers and sufferers. In
London, a special institution for blind ex-army personnel suffering from
‘Egyptian ophthalmia’ (a misleading designation) was founded—this
later developed into Moorfields Eye Hospital—and ophthalmologists
32
See for the evidence Hirschberg, 1899, 1–19; Nunn, 1996, 200 and for different
estimates of its significance Marganne, 1993 and Craik, 2005.
33
Marganne, 1979.
34
Adams I 1844, 420.
35
Blodi, 1996; on the designation ‘cataract’, see Fischer, 2000.
36
Kronfeld, 1996.
37
Cf. Sorsby, 1963, 505.
38
For a general survey, see Tower, 1963; on late antiquity, see Savage-Smith, 1984,
2000.
24 introduction
vied with one another to discover a ‘cure’ for the condition.
39
Trachoma
has a tendency to associations with military operations, though this
may be merely because of the overcrowding common in armies. It may
have been carried to Greece from Egypt. However, it is not confined to
these regions: there was an epidemic of Asian origin in Japan in 1897,
affecting soldiers of the recent Sino-Japanese war.
Treatment by scraping (to allow the release of noxious matter) and
burning (to sterilize and accelerate wound closure) followed by appli-
cation of a copper-based salve (as an astringent and haemostatic) re-
mained standard until the twentieth century. Sichel adumbrates the
history of medical fashions in recognising and addressing this condition
and finds the method described in On Sight still ‘fort efficace et générale-
ment usitée’. According to Duke-Elder, writing on this ‘immense sub-
ject’, copper still excelled, used as ‘blue stone’, a pointed crystal of cop-
per sulphate held in a wooden holder and used for daily scouring of
the lids. Other expedients were scarification with a knife and subse-
quent strong massage with antiseptics; or rubbing with a curette, hard
brush or sandpaper; or attack on groups of blebs by galvanocautery—
essentially detergent and caustic substances.
40
A bizarre misinterpretation of a passage in On Sight led to a noto-
rious dispute over the proper means of scarifying the eyelids. Wool-
house was a successful but highly controversial oculist of France and
England in the late seventeenth to early eighteenth century. His career
embraced extremes of effectiveness in practical operation and failure
in conceptual understanding: on the one hand he performed iridec-
tomy and restored patients’ sight; on the other he opposed the view that
cataract was situated in the crystalline lens. Claiming a unique under-
standing of the Hippocratic method where a ‘spindle’ was employed, he
used a teasle or thistle-like plant to perform surgery which he termed
technically ophthalmoxusis or more popularly ‘degourdissement’, ‘degon-
flement’ on the internal surface of upper and lower lids for trachoma
and many other conditions. He attracted both disciples (most notably
B.D. Mauchart, professor of ophthalmology at Tubingen) who followed
his practices, and enemies who regarded him as a charlatan operating
for personal profit.
41
39
On William Adams (later knighted as Sir William Rawson), John Cunningham
Saunders and John Vetch, see Gorin, 1982, 73.
40
Sichel 123, 148; Duke-Elder II 1938, 1593, 1619, 1622; cf. Lawson, 1903, 535.
41
See Haller, 1755, 315–338 and Triller, 1766, 72 for trenchant criticism.
introduction 25
Night blindness (7), a deficiency disease affecting the sight, is another
important perennial condition. In general men are more susceptible
to night blindness than women and, even among children, boys more
prone than girls.
42
Hippocratic authors knew this: the author of Pror-
rhetic 2 is correct, though too categorical, in differentiating between the
sexes; in Epidemics 6, where night blindness is seen especially in chil-
dren, the different developments and mutations of the disease in men
and women are noted, and the author conjectures that the reasons for
the relative incidence were that women were intrinsically less suscepti-
ble, or that women were more confined indoors.
Λμαι ‘rheum’ in the eyes (2—on the term see on 2.1) is indicative
of underlying infection, which might have many precipitating causes
and which, in the absence of good preventative hygiene and of drugs
which could serve as antibiotics, must have been common and incur-
able. The inexorable progress of chronic eye disease to complete loss of
sight can be seen from successive plays of Aristophanes, where Neok-
leides is mercilessly and unsympathetically portrayed: in around 392 he
is simply γλμων ‘blear-eyed’ (Eccles. 254, 398); and in 388 he is com-
pletely blind, hoping for a miracle cure from Asklepios (Ploutos 665,
717–725). Archedamos too was characterized as ‘blear-eyed’ (Ar. Ran.
588, cf. Lys. 14. 25). A differentiation is imputed to the eyes of males
and females in On Sight, and more explicitly in Prorrhetic 2. This may
not be altogether fanciful, especially as the additional symptom ulcer-
ation is attributed by the author to women; but may rather indicate
vigilant observation. It is now recognised (first noted in 1870 and con-
firmed by further studies) that there is a type of purulent conjunctivi-
tis typical of young girls in which there is an association between pri-
mary vulvo-vaginitis and secondary conjunctivitis, or conjunctival gon-
orrhea.
43
When Helmholtz in 1850 demonstrated the ophthalmoscope to the
Physical Society of Berlin, exploration of the inner eye became possible
for the first time. This completely altered understanding of the function
of the eye and made obsolete the work of many—including Sichel, the
editor of On Sight for Littré, who had been working for many years
on a book entitled Iconographie Ophthalmologique without knowledge of
the fundus.
44
Many failed to capitalise on the new technology, which
42
Jayle et al., 1959, 176.
43
See Duke-Elder II 1938, 1579.
44
On Sichel as ‘a tragic person’ see Gorin, 1982, 84–85.
26 introduction
only gradually became accepted.
45
In modern ophthalmology the ‘slit-
lamp’ (a combination light and microscope for examination of the eye)
is ubiquitous; but of course our surgeon saw only what could be seen
with the naked eye.
Some of the areas selected for cutting and cautery by the physician
of On Sight (3) coincide with the points targeted by modern oriental
practitioners treating eye disorders by acupuncture or (especially) mox-
ibustion, and their practices have a very long history.
46
Of course there
is a ready explanation for these similarities in treatment: as human
physiology is constant, it is intrinsically probable that doctors of dif-
ferent societies at different times should treat similar afflictions in a
similar way simply because they separately have discovered an effec-
tive treatment on an empirical practical basis. After all, doctors do
not cut and burn for fun, but in the hope of a cure; and they do not
advocate treatments which never work, or at least seem to work. Even
today, the reasons for the undoubted effectiveness of the practice of
acumoxa is not understood; the treatment seems to stimulate the body
to resist disease and to become stronger, but its workings, especially
in relation to particular diseases, where it acts not merely as a pallia-
tive but actually as a remedy, are mysterious. It has been suggested
that acupuncture raises the red corpuscle count and enhances blood
circulation; that it stimulates the nervous system (perhaps through spe-
cific neurological reactions between parts treated and parts affected);
that it provokes responses in the cerebral cortex which in turn react
on the organs. It is possible to review anatomical data seeming to vin-
dicate some of our surgeon’s ideas and practices: there is an external
blood supply to the skull by the temporal arteries; there is a direct
link of cerebro-spinal fluid to the eyeball through the optic nerve.
47
In
visual function, the ocular blood circulation is fundamentally important
and systemic diseases undoubtedly affect the complex physiology of the
eye.
Disputes over the proper methods in ophthalmology permeate works
of the nineteenth century: even such an apparently simple question as
the desirability of exclusion of light was still debated, as were the pros
and cons of dividing or opening the temporal artery, the choice of scis-
sors or knife for surgery and the choice of agents or procedures to treat
45
Duke-Elder, 1958.
46
For discussion, see Craik, forthcoming; see also Charlevoix, 1754.
47
On the orbital blood supply, see Spalton et al., 2005, 674–675, fig. 20.7 and 20. 8.
introduction 27
the palpebral surface.
48
Trepanation was still sometimes practised to
alleviate cerebral seizures accompanied by sight loss, through drainage
of pus collected between bone and dura.
49
In the early years of the
twentieth century, many of the procedures found in On Sight were still
advocated: local blood-letting (scarification and cupping at the temples;
bleeding by leeches); application of heat; cautery by a ‘burnt wood’
needle; ‘grattage and swabbage’ for trachoma, with instruction to rub
with gauze wrapped in a wooden spatula, after bleeding had completely
stopped; and for night blindness ingestion of liver of ox, goat or sheep
fried in oil and well seasoned (5 to 10 ounces, three times a day).
50
For
this reason, the selected reference books cited here are drawn from a
range of dates, roughly a generation apart. The most modern author-
ity noted is David Spalton, a distinguished consultant ophthalmologist
who was kind enough to scan this commentary in draft form. He con-
cluded: ‘It seems he described a number of diseases and one can only
guess at what the modern diagnosis is; in some ways this does not seem
important as the treatment was the same.’
48
Vetch, 1820, 16–17, 38–39, 81 etc.
49
Hirschberg I 1982 (tr. Blodi), 93, n. 403.
50
Wood, 1909, 78–79, 79–80, 81, 83, 801.
REFERENCES AND ABBREVIATIONS
Anon. Lond. Anonymus Londinensis (ed. Jones, London, 1947)
BMD Black’s Medical Dictionary (39th edn, London, 1999 and repr.)
CIH Colloque International Hippocratique
CMG Corpus Medicorum Graecorum
CUF Collection des Universités de France (Association G. Budé)
DK H. Diels and W. Kranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker (6th edn,
Berlin and Zurich, 1952)
DR C. Daremberg and C.E. Ruelle, Oeuvres de Rufus d’Éphèse (Paris,
1879)
Duke-Elder Sir W.S. Duke-Elder, Text-Book of Ophthalmology (London,
1932–1954)
Ermerins ed., vol. 3 (Utrecht, 1864), 278–283; praefatio XL–XLI
Erot. Erotian (ed. Nachmanson, 1918)
Foesius ed., cited with volume and page ref. to revised edn (Geneva,
1657 and 1662)
Gal. Galen, cited with volume and page ref. to C.G. Kühn, Claudii
Galeni Opera Omnia (Leipzig, 1821–1830) [K.]
GMT W.W. Goodwin, Syntax of Moods and Tenses of the Greek Verb
(London, 1889)
HC Hippocratic Corpus
Hsch. Hesychios, cited with page ref. to K. Latte, Hesychii Alexandrini
Lexicon (Copenhagen, 1953)
Joly ed. (Paris, 1978), 163–171
LSJ H.G. Liddell, R. Scott, and H.S. Jones, Greek-English Lexicon
Sichel ed. ap. Littré ed. vol. 9 (Paris, 1861), 152–161
Abbreviations for ancient authors and works (including Hippocratic treatises)
follow LSJ.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adams, F., The Seven Books of Paulus Aegineta (3 vols; I 1844, II 1846, III 1847,
London).
Albert, D.M. and Edwards, D.D. (eds), The History of Ophthalmology (Cambridge
Mass., 1996).
Alexanderson, B., Die Hippokratische Schrift Prognostikon: Überlieferung und Text,
Studia Graeca et Latina Gothoburgensia 17 (1963).
Anastassiou, A., Review of Hippocrate t. 13 CUF (Joly, 1978), Gnomon 52 (1980),
304–316.
Anastassiou, A. and Irmer, D. (edd.), Testimonien zum Corpus Hippocraticum Teil II
Galen 1. Bd Hippokrateszitate in den Kommentaren und im Glossar (Gottingen, 1997).
Arnott, R., Finger, S., Smith, C.U.M. (eds), Trepanation: History, Discovery, Theory
(Lisse, 2003).
Arrington, G.E., A History of Ophthalmology (NY, 1959).
Bedford, M.A., A Colour Atlas of Ophthalmological Diagnosis (London, 1971).
Bidyadhar, N.K., ‘Susruta and his Ophthalmic Operations’, Archives of Ophthal-
mology 22 (1939), 550–574.
———, ‘Principles of Susrutian Ocular Therapy, interpreted in the light of
modern ophthalmic Science’, Archives of Ophthalmology 25 (1947), 528–628.
Bier, A., ‘Geschichtliches zur Behandlung mit Leber’, Münchene medizinische
Wochenschrift 75 (1928), 1767.
Blodi, F.C., ‘Cataract Surgery’, in Albert and Edwards (eds), 1996, 165–175.
Calvus, F.M., Hippocratis Coi … octoginta volumina (Rome, 1525).
Chadwick, J., Lexicographica Graeca (Oxford, 1996).
Charlevoix, le Père de, Histoire de Japon (Paris, 1754).
Chaviara-Karahaliou, S., ‘Eye votives in the Asklepieion of Ancient Corinth’,
Documenta Ophthalmologica 74 (1990), 135–139.
Clavey, S., Fluid Physiology and Pathology in Traditional Chinese Medicine (Elsevier
Science, 1995 and 2003).
Cornarius, J., Hippocratis Coi medici … libri omnes (Basle, 1538).
Craik, E.M., Hippocrates Places in Man (Oxford, 1998).
———, ‘Phlegmone normal and abnormal’, in Thivel, A. and Zucker, A. (eds),
Le normal et le pathologique dans la Collection hippocratique, CIH X (Nice, 2002),
285–301.
———, ‘The Hippocratic treatise περ ψιος (de videndi acie, On the Organ of Sight)’,
in Eijk, P.J. van der (ed.), Hippocrates in Context, CIH XI (Leiden, 2005), 191–
207.
———, ‘Some Aspects of Hippocratic Vascular Anatomy’, in Arnott, R. and
Dean-Jones, L. (eds), Proceedings of the First European Meeting of the
Society for Ancient Medicine (forthcoming).
32 bibliography
Daremberg, C. and Ruelle, C.E., Oeuvres de Rufus d’Éphèse (Paris, 1879).
Diels, H., ‘Die Handschriften der antiken Arzte, I Teil: Hippokrates und
Galenos’, Abh. Konigl. Preuss. Akad. Wiss., phil.-hist. Klasse (Berlin, 1905).
———, ‘Erster Nachtrag zu Die Handschriften’, Abh. Konigl. Preuss. Akad. Wiss.,
phil.-hist. Klasse (Berlin, 1907).
Diller, H., Review of Alexanderson, B., Die hippokratische Schrift Prognostikon:
Überlieferung und Text, Studia Graeca et Latina Gothoburgensia 17 (1963), Gnomon
36 (1964), 760–768.
Dolffus, M.A., ‘Le Traitement des plaies cutanées et la réparation par greffe
des plaies palpébrales à l’époque romaine’, Archives d’Ophtalmologie 28, 7
(1968), 751–754.
———, ‘Chirurgie conjunctivo-palpébrale à l’époque romaine d’après l’oeuvre
de Celse’, Archives d’Ophtalmologie 28, 8 (1968), 883–888.
Douthwaite, A.H., Hale-White’s Materia Medica, Pharmacology and Therapeutics
(32nd edn, London, 1963).
Duke-Elder, Sir W.S., Text-Book of Ophthalmology (7 vols; I 1932, II 1938, III 1940,
IV 1949, V 1952, VI 1954, VII 1954, London).
———, A Century of International Ophthalmology (London, 1958).
Duminil, M.-P., ‘Les Sens de ichor dans les textes hippocratiques’, in Joly, R.
(ed.). Corpus Hippocraticum, CIH II (Mons, 1977), 65–76.
———, ‘La Description des vaisseaux dans les chapitres 11–19 du traité de la
Nature des Os’, in Grmek, M.D. and Robert, F. (eds), Hippocratica, CIH III
(Paris, 1980), 135–148.
———, Le Sang, les vaisseaux, le coeur dans la collection hippocratique: anatomie et
physiologie (Paris, 1983).
———, Hippocrate: CUF t. 8, Ulc., Oss., Cor, Anat. (Paris, 1998).
Eijk, P. van der, Diocles of Carystus: A Collection of the Fragments with Translation and
Commentary (2 vols; Leiden, 2000–2001).
Ermerins, F.Z., Hippocratis et aliorum veterum reliquiae (3 vols; Utrecht, 1859–1864).
Feugère, M., Künzl, E., Weisser, U., ‘Les aiguilles à cataracte de Montbellet’,
Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 32 (1985), 436–508.
Filliozat, J., La Doctrine classique de la médecine indienne. Ses origines et ses parallèles
grecs (Paris, 1949).
Fischer, K.-D., ‘Die Klappe fällt—frühe Belege für lat. cataracta als Bezeich-
nung einer Augenkrankheit’, Medizinhistorisches Journal 35 (2000), 127–147.
Flashar, H., Aristoteles. Problemata Physica (Berlin, 1962).
Foesius, A., Oeconomia Hippocratis (Frankfurt, 1588).
———, Magni Hippocratis … opera omnia (Frankfurt, 1595); Magni Hippocratis …
opera omnia … nunc denuo Latina interpretatione & Annotationibus illustrata, 2 vols
(Geneva, 1657 and 1662).
Fronimopoulos, J. and Lascaratos, J., ‘Eye References in the Homeric Epics’,
Documenta Ophthalmologica 74 (1990), 125–133.
———, ‘The Terms Glaucoma and Cataract in the Ancient Greek and Byzan-
tine Writers’, Documenta Ophthalmologica 77 (1991), 369–375.
Gorin, G., History of Ophthalmology (Delaware, 1982).
Gourevitch, D., ‘Le dossier philologique du nyctalope’, in Grmek, M.D. and
Robert, F. (eds), Hippocratica, CIH III (Paris, 1980), 167–187.
bibliography 33
———, and Grmek, M.D., ‘Les yeux malades dans l’art antique’ in Boyer, R.
et al., (eds), Découverte de la tombe d’un oculiste à Lyon, Gallia t. 47 (Paris, 1990),
57–60.
Grmek, M.D., ‘La description hippocratique de la “toux épidémique de Périn-
the”’, in Grmek, M.D. and Robert, F. (eds), Hippocratica, CIH III (Paris,
1980), 199–221.
———, Diseases in the Ancient Greek World (Baltimore and London, 1989).
Haller, A. von, Disputationes chirurgicae selectae I (Lausanne, 1755).
Hanson, M., Hippocrates, On Head Wounds, CMG I. 4. 1 (Berlin, 1999).
Harris, C.R.S., The Heart and the Vascular System in Ancient Greek Medicine (Oxford,
1973).
Heiberg, I.L., CMG 9. 1 and 2, Paulus Aegineta (Leipzig and Berlin, 1924).
Heidel, W.A., ‘Hippocratea I’, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 25 (1914),
139–203.
Hirschberg, J., Geschichte der Augenheilkunde im Alterthum (Leipzig, 1899), tr.
Blodi, F.C. The History of Ophthalmology In Antiquity (Bonn, 1982).
Iugler, Io. H., Hippocratis de visu libellus (Helmstadt, 1792).
Jackson, R.P.J. ‘Eye Medicine in the Roman Empire’, Aufstieg und Niedergang der
Römischen Welt II. 37. 3 (Berlin and New York, 1996), 2228–2251.
Jayle, G.E., Ourgaud, A.G., Baisinger, L.F., Holmes, W.J., Night Vision (Eng. edn
Springfield, Illinois, 1959; French edn 1950).
Jessop, W.H.H., Manual of Ophthalmic Surgery and Medicine (2nd edn London,
1908).
Joly, R., ‘Notes sur trois recentiores hippocratiques’, Antiquité Classique 34 (1965),
193–198.
———, Hippocrate: CUF t. 6. 1, Vict. 1–4 (Paris, 1967).
———, Hippocrate: CUF t. 11, Genit., Nat. Pue., Morb. 4, Oct. (Paris, 1970).
———, Hippocrate: CUF t. 6. 2, Acut., Acut. Sp., Alim., Liqu. (Paris, 1972).
———, Hippocrate: CUF t. 13, Loc. Hom., Gland., Fist., Haem., Vid. Ac., Carn.,
Dent. (Paris, 1978).
———, Hippocrate: CMG 1. 2. 4, Vict. (Berlin, 1984).
Jouanna, J, Hippocrate: Pour une archéologie de l’école de Cnide (Paris, 1974).
———, Hippocrate: CMG 1. 1. 3, Nat. Hom. (Berlin, 1975).
———, Hippocrate: CUF t. 10. 2, Morb. 2 (Paris, 1983).
———, Hippocrate: CUF t. 5. 1, Flat., Art. (Paris, 1988).
———, Hippocrate: CUF t. 2. 1, VM (Paris, 1990).
———, Hippocrate: CUF t. 2. 2, Aer. (Paris, 1996).
———, ‘L’Hippocrate de Venise (Marcianus gr. 269; coll. 533): nouvelles obser-
vations codicologiques et histoire du texte’, Revue des Études Grecques 113
(2000), 193–210.
———, Hippocrate: CUF t. 2. 3, Marb. Sacr. (Paris, 2003).
Kapferer, R., Hippokrates–Fibel. Auszüge aus der Schriftensammlung die Werke des
Hippokrates (Stuttgart, 1943).
Kovacs, J. and Unschuld, P.U., Essential Subtleties on the Silver Sea: A Chinese Classic
on Ophthalmology (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1998).
Kretschmer, P. and Locker, E., Rücklaüfiges Wörterbuch der griechischer Sprache (2nd
edn, Göttingen, 1963).
34 bibliography
Kronfeld, P.C., ‘Glaucoma’, in Albert and Edwards (eds), 1996, 203–233.
Kühn, J.H. and Fleischer U., Index Hippocraticus (Göttingen, 1986–1989).
Langslow, D.R., Medical Latin in the Roman Empire (Oxford, 2000).
Latte, K., Hesychii Alexandrini Lexicon (Copenhagen, 1953).
Lawson, G., Diseases and Injuries of the Eye (6th edn, London, 1903).
Linden, J.A. van der, Magni Hippocratis Coi omnia opera … (Leiden, 1665).
Littré, E., Oeuvres complètes d’Hippocrate (10 vols, Paris, 1839–1861).
Louis, P., Aristote Problèmes t. I–III (Paris, 1991–1994).
Lloyd, G.E.R., ‘Alcmaeon and the early History of Dissection’, Sudhoffs Archiv
59 (1975), 113–147; repr. with new intro., in Lloyd, 1991, 164–193.
Lloyd, G.E.R., Methods and Problems in Greek Science (Cambridge, 1991).
Longrigg, J., Greek Rational Medicine (London, 1993).
Magnus, H., Die Augenheilkunde der Alten (Breslau, 1901), tr. R.L. Waugh, Ophthal-
mology of the Ancients (2 vols, Ostend, 1998 and 1999).
Majno, G., The Healing Hand (Cambridge, Mass., 1991).
Mani, N., ‘Die Nachtblindheit und ihre Behandlung in der griechisch-römi-
schen Medizin’, Gesnerus 10 (1953), 53–58.
Marganne, M.-H., ‘Glaucome ou cataracte? Sur l’emploi des dérivés de γλαυ-
κς en ophtalmologie antique’, History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 1, 2
(1979), 199–214.
———, ‘Links between Egyptian and Greek Medicine’, Forum 3. 5 (1993), 35–
43.
———, L’ophtalmologie dans l’Égypte gréco-romaine d’apres les papyrus littéraires grecs
(Leiden, New York, Cologne, 1994).
Martin, G., ‘Why Trepan? Contributions from Medical History and the South
Pacific’, in Arnott, Finger and Smith (eds), 2003, 323–345.
Maxwell-Stuart, P.G., Studies in Greek Colour Terminology 2 vols, Mnemosyne suppl.
65 (Leiden, 1981).
Montfort, M.-L., ‘Le traité hippocratique De videndi acie est-il d’époque
impériale?’, in Boehm, I. & P. Luccioni (edd.), Les cinq Sens dans la médecine de
l’époque impériale (Lyon, 2003).
Moore, K.L. and Dalley, A.F., Clinically Oriented Anatomy (4th edn, Philadelphia
etc., 1999).
Mugler, C., Dictionnaire historique de la terminologie optique des Grecs (Paris, 1964).
Nachmanson, E., Erotianstudien (Uppsala, 1917).
———, Erotiani vocum hippocraticum collectio cum fragmentis (Uppsala, 1918).
Nielsen, H., Ancient Ophthalmological Agents (Odense, 1974).
———, Medicaments used in the Treatment of Eye Diseases in Egypt, the Countries of the
Near East, India and China in Antiquity (Odense, 1987).
Nunn, J.F., Ancient Egyptian Medicine (London, 1996).
Nutton, V., ‘The Drug Trade in Antiquity’, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine
78 (1985), 138–145; repr. as Ch. IX in Nutton, 1988.
———, From Demokedes to Harvey: Studies in the History of Medicine (London, 1988).
———, Ancient Medicine (London, 2004).
Omont, H., Inventaire sommaire des mss de la Bibliothèque Nationale (Paris, 1886 and
1888).
Op de Hipt, D., Adjective auf —δης im Corpus Hippocraticum (Hamburg, 1972).
bibliography 35
Pardon, M., ‘Celsus and the Hippocratic Corpus: The Originality of a “Pla-
giarist”’, in Eijk, P.J. van der (ed.), Hippocrates in Context, CIH XI (Leiden,
2005), 403–411.
Pearlman, J.T., ‘Hippocrates and Ophthalmology’, American Journal of Ophthal-
mology 68. 6 (1969), 1069–1076.
Petrequin, J.E., Chirurgie d’Hippocrate (2 vols; Paris, 1877 and 1878)
Platnauer, M., ‘Greek Colour-Perception’, Classical Quarterly 15 (1921), 153–162.
Rocca, J., ‘Galen and the Uses of Trepanation’, in Arnott, Finger and Smith
(eds), 2003, 253–271.
Rodriguez, Alfageme Ignacio, ‘La atribución de Hipp. De Visu’, Cuadernos de
filologia clasica (G) 3 (1993), 57–65.
Roulière-Lambert, M.-J., ‘L’Oeil dans l’Antiquité Romaine’, in A.-S. de Co-
hën and G. Cluzeau (eds), L’Anatomie de l’oeil: un savoir en perpetuelle évolution
(Lons-le Saunier, 1994), 13–24.
Savage-Smith, E., ‘Hellenic and Byzantine Ophthalmology: Trachoma and
Sequelae’, 169–186 in Scarborough, J. (ed.) Symposium on Byzantine Medicine
(Dumbarton Oaks Papers 38, Washington, 1984).
———, ‘The Practice of Surgery in Islamic Lands: Myth and Reality’, Social
History of Medicine 13 (2000), 307–321.
Skoda, F., Médecine ancienne et métaphore (Paris, 1988).
Sorsby, A. (ed.), Modern Ophthalmology (London, 1963).
Spalton, D.J., Hitchings, R.A. and Hunter, P.A., Atlas of Clinical Ophthalmology
(3rd edn, Philadelphia etc., 2005)
Spencer, W.G., Celsus de Medicina: Loeb Classical Library (London and Cam-
bridge Mass., 1935).
Staden, H. von, Herophilus: The Art of Medicine in Early Alexandria (Cambridge,
1989).
Thivel, A., Cnide et Cos? Essai sur les doctrines médicales dans la collection hippocratique
(Paris, 1981).
Tower, P., Special Review: ‘The History of Trachoma. Its Military and Socio-
logical Implications,’ Archives of Ophthalmology 69, 123 (1963), 123–130.
Triller, D.W., Opuscula medica ac medico-philologica (Frankfurt & Leipzig, 1766–
1772).
Trobe, J.D. and Hackel, R.E., Field Guide to the Eyes (Philadelphia etc., 2002).
Vetch, J., A Practical Treatise on Diseases of the Eye (London, 1820).
Wood, C.A. and Woodruff, T.A., The Commoner Diseases of the Eye; How to Detect
and How to Treat Them (London, 1908).
Wood, C.A., A System of Ophthalmic Therapeutics (Chicago, 1909).
Wujastyk, D., The Roots of Ayurveda: Selections from Sanskrit Medical Writ-
ings (rev. edn, London, 2003).
CONSPECTUS SIGLORUM
memorantur in app. crit.:
M Marcianus gr. 269, s. X
H Parisinus gr. 2142, pars antiquior, s. XII
I Parisinus gr. 2140, s. XIII
R Vaticanus gr. 277, s. XIV
memorantur in comm.:
Ca Cantabrig. Caius Coll. 50, s. XV
E Parisinus gr. 2255, s. XV
F Parisinus gr. 2144, s. XIV
G Parisinus gr. 2141, s. XV
J Parisinus gr. 2143, s. XIV
K Parisinus gr. 2145, s. XV
Laur. Laurentianus 74, 1, s. XV
Mut. Mutinens. Estensis gr. 220, s. XV
O Baroccianus 204, s. XV
Q Vossianus fol. 10, s. XVI
U Urbinas 68, s. XIV
W Vaticanus gr. 278, a. 1512
Z Parisinus gr. 2148, s. XVI
non vidi:
Haun. Hauniens. Gl. Kgl. 224, s. XVI
Mo. Monacensis gr. 71, s. XV
TEXT
I
1. αl ðψιες αl διεφ0αρμrναι. α0τóματοι μrν κυανiτιδες γινóμεναι. rξαπiνης
γiνονται. καi rπειδoν γrνωνται. ο0κ rστιν iησις τοιαuτη. αl δr 0αλασσο-
ειδεtς γινóμεναι. κατo μικρòν rν πολλ_u χρóν_ω διαφ0εiρονται. καi πολ-
λoκις o rτερος oφ0αλμòς rν πολλ_u χρóν_ω Iστερον διεφ0oρη. τοuτου δr
5 χρj κα0αiρειν τjν κεφαλjν καi καiειν τoς φλrβας κjν 0ρχóμενος πo0¸η
τα0τα. iσταται τò κακòν καi ο0 χωρεt rπi τò φλαυρóτερον.
2. αl δr μεταξu τjς τε κυανiτιδος καi τjς 0αλασσοειδrος. jν μrν νr_ω róντι
γrνωνται. πρεσβυτrρ_ω γινομrν_ω κα0iστανται jν δr πρεσβυτrρ_ω róντι
γiνωνται rτrων rπτo. βrλτιον oρ¸j καi τo μεγoλα πoνυ καi λαμπρo. καi
10 0πò πρóσ0εν oρ¸j μrν. σαφrως δr οu καi o τι 0ν πoνυ πρòς α0τòν τòν
oφ0αλμòν προσ0¸j. καi το0το. 0λλως δr ο0δrν. συμφrρει δr τοuτ_ω κα0σις
καi κo0αρσις τjς κεφαλjς αiμα δr τοuτοισιν ο0 συμφrρει 0φιrναι. οuτε
τ¸j κυανiτιδι. οuτε τ¸j 0αλασσοειδεt.
II
1. τo λημiα rν τοtσιν oφ0αλμοtσι. τjς ðψιος íγιrος rοuσης τuν νεωτrρων
15 0ν0ρuπων. jν τε 0ηλεiα ¸ j. jν τε 0ρσην. ο0κ 0ν uφελοiης ποιrων ο0δrν.
1 `Ιπποκρoτους περi ðψιος fere codd. | α0τóματοι edd.: α0τóμαται codd. 2 τοιαuτη
codd.: τοιαuτ¸ησιν Heidel 4 rν πολλ_u χρóν_ω Iστερον διεφ0oρη M fere recc.: rν πολλ_ u
χρóν_ω διεφ0oρη Iστερον R: Iστερον om. Asulanus: rν πολλ_ u χρóν_ ω forsitan delendum
Joly 5 πo0¸η MHI: 0εραπεu0¸η H
2
R fere recc. 6 τα0τα codd.: τα0τo fortasse
novit Foesius | φλαυρóτερον M: φαυλóτερον recc. 8 πρεσβυτrρ_ ω γενομrν_ ω M H
2
I:
πρεσβυτrρ_ ω γινομrν_ ω H 9 γiνωνται (γiγνωνται. γrνωνται) recc: γiγνονται M | post
rπτo lacunam indicant Iugler et Sichel | oρ¸j καi τo μεγoλα πoνυ MH (sed del. καi H
2
):
oρ¸j τo μεγoλα δr πoνυ IR 10 α0τòν Ermerins: rωυτòν MIR: rαυτòν H fere recc.
11 0λλως MH: 0λλο H
2
IR fere recc. 11–12 κα0σις καi κo0αρσις MH: κo0αρσις καi
κα0σις H
2
: κo0αρσiς τε καi κα0σις IR fere recc. 13 0αλασσοειδεt edd.: 0αλασσοειδj
codd. 14 τo λημiα Craik: τò ðμμα MH: καi τò ðμμα IR fere recc. 15 0jλεια M (vel
0ηλεiα) recc.: 0jλυς Joly | jν τ’ 0ρσην MI fere recc.: εi τε 0ρσην HR | uφελοiης M:
uφελεiης recc.: uφελrοις Joly | ο0δrν van der Linden: ο00rν codd.
TRANSLATION
1
I
1. As for the visual parts, destroyed, when these become spontaneously
lapis-like, they become so all of a sudden, and once they do become
so, there is no such treatment. As for those which become sea-like, they
are destroyed gradually, over a long time, and often the second eye is
destroyed a long time later. Of this person, one should purge the head
and cauterise the vessels; and if he has this done at the beginning, the
trouble is arrested and does not go on to get worse.
2. In cases where the parts are intermediate between lapis-like and sea-
like: if they become so when someone is young, they settle down when
he gets older; if they become so when someone is older than seven
years, he sees quite well things which are really big and bright, and
he sees ahead, but not clearly, and whatever he sets right in front of
the eye, he sees that too, but nothing else. For this person, cautery and
purging the head is beneficial. It is not beneficial to let blood in these
people, either in the lapis-like or the sea-like case.
II
1. In the case of sores in the eyes, where the visual part is sound, in
younger people, whether the person is female or male, you could not
help by any action at all, as long as the body is still growing. But when it
1
(…) indicates addition of material to amplify translation; […] indicates editorial
deletion of intrusive content from text; … indicates editorial insertion to text
40 text
rως 0ν αuξηται τò σuμα rτι. oταν δr μηκrτι α0ξoνηται. α0τu τu oφ0αλ-
μu σκεψoμενος τo βλrφαρα λεπτuνειν. ξuων. jν δοκ¸j προσδεtσ0αι. καi
rπικαiων rνδο0εν μj διαφανrσιν.
III
1. rπειτα 0ναδjσας. τo σκrλεα rκτεiνας. δiφρον íπο0εiς 0φ’ οu στηρi-
5 ζηται τ¸jσι χερσi. μrσον δr τις rχrτω. rπειτα διασημjνασ0αι τoς νωτιαiας
φλrβας. σκοπεtν δr ðπισ0εν. rπειτα καiειν παχrσι σιδηρiοισι καi jσυχi¸η
δια0ερμαiνειν. oπως 0ν μj çαγ¸j αiμα καiοντι. προαφιrναι δr το0 αiματος.
jν δοκ¸j καιρòς εiναι. καiειν δr καi πρòς τò oστrον ðπισ0εν.
2. rπειτα rν0εiς σπóγγον jλαιωμrνον rγκατακαiειν. πλjν το0 πoνυ πρòς
10 α0τ_u τ_u oστr_ω jν δr προσδrχηται τ_u καυστηρi_ω τò σπογγiον. rτερον
λιπαρuτερον rν0εiς rγκατακαiειν. rπειτα το0 0ρου μrλιτι δεuων. rντι0rναι
τ¸jσιν rσχoρ¸ησιν.
3. oταν δr φλrβα παρακαuσ¸ης j διακαuσ¸ης. rπειδoν rκπrσ¸η j rσχoρη.
oμοiως τrταται j φλrψ καi πεφuσηται καi πλjρης φαiνεται. καi σφuζει oτε
15 0νω0εν τò rπιρρrον jν δr διακεκαυμrνος ¸j oτε κoτω0εν. τα0τα πoντα
jσσον πoσχει. διακαiειν δr χρj αuτις. jν μj τò πρuτον διακαuσ¸ης. τo τε
σπóγγια χρj iσχυρuς rγκατακαiειν. πρòς τjς çεοuσης φλεβòς μ0λλον.
4. αl rσχoραι αl μ0λλον oπτη0εtσαι τoχει rκπiπτουσιν. αl καιóμεναι ο0λαi
πρòς τò oστrον καλλiονες γiνονται. rπειδoν δr τo rλκεα íγιrα γrνωνται.
20 αuτις 0ναφυσuνται καi rπαiρονται. καi rρυ0ραi εiσι παρo τò 0λλο. καi
uσπερ 0ναιρησóμεναι φαiνονται. rως 0ν χρóνος rπιγrνηται καi κεφαλjς
καυ0εiσης καi στj0εος. oμοiως δr καi παντi τ_u σuματι oπου 0ν καυ0¸j.
1–2 α0τu τu oφ0αλμu Ermerins: α0τr_ ω τ_ u oφ0αλμ_ u codd. 2 λεπτuνειν MHIR:
λεπτuνει Asulanus | προσδεtσ0αι codd.: προσδrχεσ0αι Triller 4 0φ’ codd.: rφ’ van
der Linden 4–5 στηρiζηται MHIR: στηρiζεται fere recc. 5 rπειτα διασημjνασ0αι
codd.: διασημjνασ0αι (del. rπειτα) Ermerins 6 σιδηρiοισι fere recc.: σιδηρiοισιν M
8 καiειν … ðπισ0εν codd.: del. Ermerins 9 σπóγγον MHIR: σπογγiον Foesius ex
Fevr. ms novit | post rγκατακαiειν lac. in ras. I 11 μrλιτι MHR: rν μrλιτι I fere recc.
13 j διακαuσ¸ης del. Ermerins 14–15 oτε 0νω0εν … oτε κoτω0εν Craik: oτε κoτω0εν
… o κoτω0εν codd.: oτι κoτω0εν (del. o κoτω0εν) Ermerins: oτε κoτω0εν … (del. o)
κoτω0εν Joly 17 iσχυρuς MI: lκανuς HR, Foesius ex Fevr. ms novit 18 τoχει
HIR: τoχι aut ταχu M (?cum corr.): τoχι recc. nonnulli: τoχιστα Foesius ex Fevr. et
reg. mss novit 20 rρυ0ραi MHIR: rρυ0ρo Cornarius 21 0ναιρησóμεναι codd.:
0ναρρηξóμεναι Foesius ex Serv. ms novit: 0ναρραγησóμεναι Ermerins | φαiνονται recc.:
φαiνωνται M | rως 0ν fere recc.: rως jν M 22 oμοiως δr καi codd.: oμοiως καi (del.
δr) Joly | παντi codd.: rν παντi Ermerins | 0ν fere recc.: jν M
text 41
is no longer growing, considering the actual eyes, attenuate the eyelids,
scraping, if you think they need this too, and cauterising from the inner
part, but not with white-hot instruments.
III
1. Then (set the patient) on a couch from which he can lean with his
hands; get his legs outstretched; tie on (a ligature). Let someone hold his
waist. Then trace the vessels of (= running to) the back, and examine
from behind. Then cauterise with thick (metal) instruments and heat
gently, so that there is no haemorrhage as you cauterise. Let blood in
advance, if it seems the right course. Cauterise towards the bone (=
skull) from behind.
2. Then put in place a sponge soaked in olive oil. Cauterise over it,
but not right up to the bone. If the patient accepts the sponge with
the instrument, put in place another, better-oiled, and cauterise over it.
Then moisten arum (root?) with honey, and put this on the eschars (=
scabs).
3. When you have cauterised by or through a vessel, once the scab
has fallen off, the vessel is stretched and swollen and apparently full
just as before. And it beats when the flux comes from above, but if
the patient has been cauterised when the flux comes from below he
experiences all this to a lesser degree. You must cauterise through (the
vessel) again, if you did not cauterise through (it) the first time. You
should cauterise over sponges strongly, especially in the case of a vessel
which haemorrhages.
4. Scabs which are relatively well browned fall off quickly. Scars in
cautery towards the bone turn out better. When the sores are healed,
the scars are swollen and raised and red compared with the rest (of the
flesh) and look as if they will remain raised, until time has passed. It is
the same when the head is cauterised or the chest or in all the body,
wherever there is cautery.
42 text
IV
1. oταν δr ξu¸ης βλrφαρα oφ0αλμο0. ξuειν εiρi_ω Μιλησi_ω. οuλ_ω. κα0αρ_u.
περi 0τρακτον περιειλrων. α0τjν τjν στεφoνην το0 oφ0αλμο0 φυλασσó-
μενος μj διακαuσ¸ης πρòς τòν χóνδρον. σημεtον δr oταν 0ποχρ¸j τjς ξu-
σιος. ο0κ rτι λαμπρòν αiμα rρχεται. 0λλo iχuρ αlματuδης j íδατuδης.
5 τóτε δr χρj τινι τuν íγρuν φαρμoκων. oπου 0ν0ος rστi χαλκο0. τοuτ_ω
0νατρtψαι.
2. Iστερον δr τò τjς ξuσιος καi τò τjς καuσιος. oταν αl rσχoραι rκπr-
σωσι καi κεκα0αρμrνα ¸j τo rλκεα καi βλαστoν¸η. τoμνειν τομjν διo το0
βρrγματος. oταν δr τò αiμα 0πορρυ¸j. χρj διαχρiειν τ_u rναiμ_ω φαρμoκ_ω.
10 Iστερον δr τοuτου rργον καi πoντων τjν κεφαλjν κα0jραι.
V
1. τo βλrφαρα τo παχuτερα τjς φuσιος. τò κoτω 0ποταμuν τjν σoρκα
oκóσην ε0μαρrστατα δuν¸η. Iστερον δr τò βλrφαρον rπικα0σαι μj διαφα-
νrσι. φυλασσóμενος τjν φuσιν τuν τρiχων. j τ_u 0ν0ει oπτ_u λεπτ_u προσ-
τεtλαι. oταν δr 0ποπrσ¸η j rσχoρη. iητρεuειν τo λοιπo.
VI
15 1. oπóταν δr βλrφαρα ψωρι¸0 καi ξυσμòς rχ¸η. 0ν0εος χαλκο0 βuλιον
πρòς 0κóνην τρiψας, [rπειτα τò βλrφαρον 0ποτρiψας α0το0] καi τóτε
τjν φολiδα το0 χαλκο0 τρiβειν uς λεπτοτoτην. rπειτα χυλòν ðμφακος
διη0ημrνον παραχrας καi τρiψας λεtον. τò δr λοιπòν rν χαλκ_u rρυ0ρ_u
παραχrων. κατ’ oλiγον 0νατρiβειν. rως 0ν πoχος γrνηται uς μυσσωτóς
20 rπειτα. rπειδoν ξηραν0¸j. τρiψας λεtον χρjσ0αι.
1 ξuειν codd.: ξuειν εiτα καiειν Sichel: lacunam indicat Ermerins | μιλησi_ ω recc. non-
nulli: μηλησi_ ω MHIR 2 το0 oφ0αλμο0 del. Ermerins 3 πρòς τòν χóνδρον codd.:
πρòς τò oστrον Ermerins | oταν 0ποχρ¸j Anastassiou: oταν 0πóχρη codd.: oτε 0πóχρη
Ermerins 4 rρχεται MHR: rξrρχεται H
2
I fere recc. 5 χρj τινι fere codd.: τινι
om. R 5–6 τοuτ_ω 0νατρtψαι codd.: 0νατρtψαι (del. τοuτ_ ω) Ermerins 7 τò (bis)
codd.: del. Ermerins | ξuσιος M: κρiσιος fere recc. 9 τ_u rναiμ_ω φαρμoκ_ω codd.:
rναiμ_ω τινι φαρμoκ_ω Ermerins 10 τοuτου codd.: πoντων Ermerins | καi πoντων
codd.: del. Ermerins 11–12 σoρκα oκóσην codd.: σoρκα uς 0ν Joly 14 τo λοιπo
recc.: τo λυπiα M: uς τo λοιπo indicat Calvus 15 ξυσμòς MHR: κνησμòς I | 0ν0εος
Ermerins: 0ν0ος codd. 16 rπειτα τò βλrφαρον 0ποτρiψας α0το0 codd.: del. Craik |
τóτε codd.: τóδε Foesius 17 λεπτοτoτην MHR: λεπτοτoτον I: λεπτóτατα recc. nonnulli
text 43
IV
1. When you scrape the lids of the eye, scrape with soft clean Milesian
wool, winding it round the spindle(-shaped instrument), with care for
the actual eyeball; do not cauterise through, up to the cartilage. It is
a sign when there is enough scraping that it is no longer bright blood
which comes, but bloody or watery matter. Then you should rub on
one of the liquid drugs containing flower of copper.
2. Afterwards—with regard to the procedure of scraping and the pro-
cedure of cautery—when the scabs fall off and the wounds have been
cleaned and it is growing, then make a cut through the front of the
head. When the blood flows out, one should anoint the wound with a
drug to stop bleeding. Afterwards, it is appropriate also to purge the
head in all cases.
V
1. When the eyelids are thicker than is natural, cut away the flesh below,
as much you can, very gently and afterwards cauterise over the eyelid,
not with white-hot instruments, with care for the point where the lashes
grow, or apply heated very fine flower (of copper). When the scab falls
off, give the further treatment.
VI
1. Whenever the eyelids are itchy and there is an irritation, rub a piece
of flower of copper on a grindstone, [then rub the patient’s eyelid] and
at that time rub the flakes of copper as fine as possible. Then you must
pour alongside (the flakes) the strained juice of unripe grapes and rub
smooth; then pour the rest (of the grape pulp) alongside (the other
ingredients) into (a vessel of) red copper and gradually rub together
until it is like myssotos in consistency. Then, when it has dried, rub
smooth and apply.
44 text
VII
1. νυκτoλωπος φoρμακον πινrτω rλατjριον. καi τjν κεφαλjν κα0αιρr-
σ0ω. καi κατασχoσας τòν α0χrνα uς μoλιστα. πιrσας πλεtστον χρóνον.
rπανιεiς δr διδóναι rν μrλιτι βoπτων σκóροδα uμo καταπιεtν μrγιστα
uς 0ν δuνηται iν j δuο καi jπαρ βóος.
VIII
5 1. jν τι οl oφ0αλμοi íγιεtς róντες διαφ0εiρωνται τjν ðψιν. τοuτ_ω χρj
ταμóντα κατo τò βρrγμα. rπαναδεiραντα. rκπρiσαντα τò oστrον. 0φε-
λóντα τòν Iδρωπα. ijσ0αι καi οIτως íγιεtς γiνονται.
IX
1. oφ0αλμiης τjς rπετεiου καi rπιδημiου συμφrρει κo0αρσις κεφαλjς καi
τjς κoτω κοιλiης κo0αρσις. καi εi rχοι τò σuμα. αiματος 0φαiρεσις συμ-
10 φrρει πρòς rνια τuν τοιοuτων 0λγημoτων. καi σικuαι κατo τoς φλrβας.
σtτος oλiγος 0ρτος. καi Iδατος πóσις. κατακεtσ0αι δr rν σκóτ_ω. 0πó τε
καπνο0 καi πυρòς καi τuν 0λλων λαμπρuν. πλoγιον. 0λλοτε rπi τo δεξιo.
0λλοτε rπ’ 0ριστερo.
2. μj τrγγειν τjν κεφαλjν. ο0 γoρ συμφrρει. κατoπλασμα oδuνης μj rνε-
15 οuσης. 0λλ’ uς çεuματος rπrχοντος. ο0 συμφrρει. οiδημoτων 0νωδuνων.
καi rπειδoν τo δριμrα φoρμακα τjς oδuνης rναλειφóμενα διαχειρισ0¸j. j
τε oδuνη μj παuσηται μετo τjν rσoλειψιν το0 φαρμoκου. τóτε συμφrρει
καταπλoσσειν τuν καταπλασμoτων o τι 0ν δοκ¸j συμφrρειν.
1 νυκτoλωπος φoρμακον πινrτω IR: νυκτoλωπος φoρμακον πινrτω M fere recc.: νυκτo-
λωψ φoρμακον πινrτω Foesius ex Serv. ms novit | τjν κεφαλjν recc.: κεφαλjν M
2 κατασχoσας Foesius ex Serv. ms novit: κατoξας codd. 3–4 διδóναι rν μrλιτι βoπτων
σκóροδα uμo καταπιεtν μrγιστα uς 0ν δuνηται iν j δuο καi jπαρ βóος Craik: διδóναι rν
μrλιτι βoπτων jπαρ βóος uμòν καταπιεtν μrγιστον uς 0ν δuνηται iν j δuο codd. 5 jν τι
Craik: jν τινι codd.: εi τινι Joly | διαφ0εiρωνται Craik: διαφ0εiροιεν codd 8 rπετεiου
fere recc.: rπετiου H: rπετrου I: rπ’ αiτiου Μ 9 κοιλiης κo0αρσις MHR: κοιλiης I |
εi M: εi εu Ermerins 11 σκóτ_ ω fere codd.: σκóτοι Foesius ex Serv. ms novit 12 πλo-
γιον Foesius ex Serv. ms novit: πλαγiων MI: φυλαττóμενος HR: πλαγiως Cornarius:
πλoγιος Joly 14 ο0 γoρ συμφrρει MIR: rπειδj ο0 συμφrρει H 14–15 rνεοu-
σης codd.: rνιοuσης Asulanus 15 0λλ’ uς codd.: καi 0λλως Ermerins: 0λλως Joly |
rπrχοντος fere codd.: 0πrχοντος nonnulli 15–17 ο0 συμφrρει. οiδημoτων 0νωδuνων.
καi rπειδoν τo δριμrα φoρμακα τjς oδuνης rναλειφóμενα διαχειρισ0¸j. j τε oδuνη μj παu-
σηται μετo τjν rσoλειψιν Craik: ο0 συμφrρει. οiδημoτων 0νωδuνων καi μετo τo δριμrα
φoρμακα τjς oδuνης rναλειφóμενα rπειδoν j τε oδuνη παuσηται καi διαχωρισ0¸j μετo τjν
rσoλειψιν codd. 18 o τι 0ν R: o τι jν M: o τι jν H: o τι 0ν σοι Ι
text 45
VII
1. (Treatment for) night blindness: let him drink as drug elaterion and
let his head be purged; cut into the neck; exert as much pressure as
possible for a long time; release; dip in honey and give to swallow one
or two raw cloves of garlic as big as possible and ox liver.
VIII
1. If somehow the eyes, though sound, are destroyed in their visual
faculty, you should treat this case by cutting into the forehead, folding
back the skin, sawing the bone and removing the moisture. In this way,
they are cured.
IX
1. In the case of opthalmia recurring annually and locally, purging of
the head and purging of the lower belly are beneficial. If he should
have the physique, drawing blood is beneficial for some troubles of this
kind, and cupping vessels applied to the blood vessels. Food: a little
bread and water to drink. He should lie in the dark, away from smoke,
fire and other bright things, on his side, sometimes to the right and
sometimes to the left.
2. Do not moisten the head, for it is not beneficial. A poultice is not
beneficial if there is no pain, but apparently continuing flux, while the
swellings are not painful. And when astringent drugs have been used as
ointments for pain, and the pain does not abate after the application
of the drug, then it is beneficial to apply any of the poultices you think
may be beneficial.
46 text
3. ο0δr διαβλrπειν συμφrρει πολuν χρóνον. δoκρυον γoρ προκαλεtται.
ο0 δυνoμενος o oφ0αλμòς πονεtν πρòς τo λαμπρo ο0δr συμμuειν πολuν
χρóνον. jν rχ¸η çε0μα 0ερμòν μoλιστα 0ερμαiνει γoρ τò δoκρυον iσχó-
μενον. çεuματος δr μj rχοντος. μετo το0 ξηρο0 τjν íπoλειψιν συμφrρει
5 ποιεtσ0αι.
2 o oφ0αλμòς πονrειν MI fere recc.: πονrειν o oφ0αλμòς H | λαμπρo. ο0δr M: λαμπρo.
ο0 δr H: λαμπρo 0λλ’ ο0δr I 4 μετo το0 ξηρο0 MH fere recc.: μετo τε το0 ξηρο0
H
2
IR: μετo γε το0 ξηρο0 Cornarius 5 περi ðψιος vel τrλος τuν περi ðψιος vel τrλος
περi ðψιος `Ιπποκρoτους vel τrλος τuν περi oψiων habent nonnulli
text 47
3. It is not beneficial to gaze continuously for a long time, for the
eye, unable to contend with the brightness, summons a tear. It is not
beneficial either to keep the eyes closed for a long time, especially if
there is a hot flux. For pent-up tears cause heat. (Even) if the flux does
not persist, it is beneficial to apply as ointment a drying substance.
COMMENTARY
I
Three deleterious conditions are detailed, all with reference to per-
ceived change in the colour of the ψιες ‘visual parts’. (On the sense
of the term, see Introduction I.) No names are applied to these con-
ditions. In each case, description of the salient symptom in terms of
colour is followed by brief comment, outline prognosis and recom-
mended treatment, if any: (i) ‘lapis-like’, sudden unprovoked onset, no
treatment avails; (ii) ‘sea-like’, gradual onset, second eye often affected
later, early treatment by cautery and purging is effective; (iii) an inter-
mediate colour, the young recover within seven years but older people
do not, cautery and purging are palliatives. Attempts by commentators
to isolate and identify these conditions in modern terms are tentative
and inconclusive. Foesius notes qualis in suffusione aut glaucomate contingit,
‘such as happens in cataract or glaucoma’. Sichel suggests that (i) is
glaucoma and (ii) cataract, but finds the rest of the passage ‘très-obscur
et à peu près inintelligible’. Ermerins is uncertain about glaucoma,
favouring rather cataract in its different manifestations and different
stages. Joly outlines further candidates, but is ultimately non-committal:
(i) ‘… Il pourrait s’agir du glaucome, mais alors, c’est la cornée qui est
affectée … S’il s’agit de l’irits, c’est bien la pupille qui est en cause,
mais elle devient difforme et gris foncé’; (ii) ‘On pense à la cataracte
non reconnue comme telle et donc avec traitement hors de propos.
S’il s’agissait en réalité de la cornée, ce serait … une kératite’; (iii)
‘Distinction assez illusoire. Il faut songer soit à la cataracte soit à une
kératite …’
1
In truth, it is difficult to advance beyond these judgments. Condition
(i), coming on suddenly and without apparent cause, does not seem to
fit either cataract or glaucoma, as both usually come on slowly and
1
Foesius I 736, n. 1; Sichel 137–138; Ermerins Prolegomena XL; Joly 173 in successive
‘notes complémentaires’.
50 commentary
insidiously. (However, occasionally in cataract the second eye deterio-
rates rapidly after the first has done so slowly; and the onset of glau-
coma can be sudden, giving rise to the acute crisis of detached retina,
which manifests as greyness, the retina hanging into the eye like a grey
balloon.) Also, although glaucoma is marked by a greenish reflex in
the early stages, this passes and the cardinal sign is not the colour
of the pupil at all, but the fact that the eye is solid and hard. Con-
dition (ii), with its gradual development, one eye frequently following
the other, fits the common pathology of cataract. Condition (iii), with
its elusive ‘intermediate’ coloration and the subdivision according to
age of patient a, young and b, older is more complex. Condition (iii) b
again fits cataract, which is typically a disease of the elderly (though
it can present at any age, and can be congenital); condition (iii) a,
where recovery is said to occur, seems to correspond rather to intra-
ocular inflammation, whether inflammation of the cornea—keratitis—
or inflammation of the iris and ciliary body—iritis, iridocyclitis. (Kerati-
tis is a disease, usually short-lived, of youth and adolescence and iritis is
common in such systemic diseases as diabetes. In both, haziness of the
eye is a feature.)
2
It is surprising that γλαυκóς ‘grey’ does not feature in our author’s
choice of palette, as it does in Prorrhetic 2 (Prorrh. 2. 20 [9.48 L.]). Sim-
ilarly, in other treatments of the diseases of old age, both theoretical in
Aphorisms and practical in Epidemics, words of this root occur (0μβλυω-
πiαι ‘cases of dimness’ and γλαυκuσιες ‘cases of glaucous eyes’, Aph. 3.
31 [4.502 L.]; rγλαυκu0η j ðψις, ‘the eyes were glaucous’, case of an
old woman with miscellaneous other troubles, Epid. 4. 30 [5.174 L.]).
Of course, despite the term ‘glaucous’, none of these passages implies
the particular condition of glaucoma, which at this time could not have
been differentiated from cataract. Rufus is the first physician known
to have recognized the difference (frg. 116 DR), seen later in Oreiba-
sios, Paul of Aigina and others.
3
In practice, glaucoma and cataract fre-
quently coexist in the elderly, cataract being an almost inevitable ulti-
mate complication of glaucoma. In Galenic works the two conditions
are frequently discussed together; both are seen as affections arising
without external precipitating injury.
2
See Lawson, 1903, 134–136; Duke-Elder II 1938, 1877–1944, esp. 1879–1890; Bed-
ford, 1971, 50–51, figs 30, 31 and 90–91, figs 60, 61; Trobe and Hackel, 2002, 109–110,
180–181; Spalton et al., 2005, 350, fig. 11. 38, 225, fig. 8. 6 and 248, fig. 8. 55.
3
Marganne, 1979.
commentary 51
The author correctly observes that changes in colour are diagnosti-
cally significant and he makes a commendable effort to classify three
conditions, viewed by him as distinct and different, by adding further
information. This is a good methodological starting point, but it is only
a starting point. It is not clear even whether the perceived changes are
thought to affect pupil alone or pupil and iris or cornea or the eye more
generally. The modern potential for differential diagnosis is vast; for
instance if we suppose the reference to be to the area of the eyes, rather
than to the eyeball, a further candidate for (iii) is hemangioma, a soft
bluish swelling in the eyelid caused by a benign and often self-limiting
tumour. In any case, the coloration in the three conditions is so vaguely
described as to render them indistinguishable. Any physician would be
hard put to it to differentiate between conditions by verbal description
alone: colour photography is an invaluable adjunct in the modern text-
book or online database: thus, ‘haziness’ is a term commonly applied
to many different conditions, including cataract, glaucoma and kera-
titis.
The author of Prorrhetic 2 likewise lists three colour changes—spe-
cifically with reference to the κóρη ‘pupil’—but regards all three con-
ditions as hopeless: αl δr κóραι γλαυκοuμεναι j 0ργυροειδrες γινóμεναι
j κυoνεαι. ο0δrν χρηστóν ‘where pupils become grey or silvery or lapis-
colour, nothing can be done’, Prorrh. 2. 20 [9.48 L.]. The colour cor-
respondences are inexact: even the word translated ‘lapis-colour’ is not
identical in formation to the term ‘lapis-like’ in our case (i) and the cor-
respondence of ‘silvery’ and ‘grey’ to our cases (ii) and (iii) is at best
rudimentary (see further below). It may be that a single condition is
envisaged in Prorrhetic 2, and the author, striving for precision, offers
three alternative descriptions for a colour or range of colours which he
finds hard to describe. Certainly, when Celsus searches for colour words
to describe the pathology of the eye, it is in an attempt to discriminate
between different types or stages of suffusio ‘cataract’: the distinction is
an important determinant of whether particular cases are sanabiles ‘cur-
able’ and so of whether and when surgery should be attempted. In
Celsus’ scheme, again tri-partite, there is hope if the cataract is small
and has colorem … marinae aquae vel ferri nitentis ‘the colour of sea-water
or of gleaming metal’; the situation is worse if it is large and caeruleus
‘dark-blue’ (7.13–14). Broadly, Celsus’ scheme corresponds with that of
On Sight: (i) dark-blue in both is bad; (ii) sea-colour in both is not so
bad; (iii) intermediate in On Sight (? corresponding with metal-colour in
Celsus) is likewise not so bad.
52 commentary
The treatment prescribed here is consonant with that advocated
throughout the work. Purging the head (that is, irrigation by errhines,
drugs inserted in the nose) is recommended also at 4.2 and 7; cautery
(that is, application of heated instruments to the affected parts or to the
vessels) is advised also at 2, 4.1–2, 5, 7 as well as being the subject of
the long section 3; phlebotomy (that is, letting blood by cutting the
vessels) here abjured is the preferred treatment at 7 and cautiously
admitted at 9.1. From the stress on nasal purging, it can be seen
that the author of On Sight subscribes to the common view that in
disease noxious stuff might be diverted from one part of the body
(eyes) to an orifice (nose) for expulsion. Implicitly, the conditions so
treated are attributed to a flux of noxious matter descending from
the head and affecting the eye. It is notable that Celsus too regarded
letting blood from the forehead or the nostrils, cautery of the vessels in
the temples, and expulsion of phlegm by gargling, as well as smoke-
inhalations and acrid ointments, as beneficial in the early stages of
cataract, when it could be treated medicamentis ‘by drugs’ without need
for surgery, imperative later; significantly, he sums up victus optimus est
qui pituitam extenuat, ‘that regimen is best, which can thin down phlegm’
(6. 6. 35).
The author plunges in medias res, with asyndeton particularly remark-
able in the first sentence. The syntax is predominantly paratactic, bro-
ken by one temporal clause, one indefinite relative and three simi-
larly phrased conditional clauses. Antithetical sentences and clauses
are favoured: jν μrν νr_ω … jν δr πρεσβυτrρ_ ω and oρ¸j μrν. σαφr-
ως δr οu. The final οuτε … οuτε is similar in balanced effect. The
first sentence is clumsily repetitious in phrasing, γινóμεναι … γiνον-
ται … rπειδoν γrνωνται. The verb διαφ0εiρεσ0αι too is repeated three
times. There is conspicuous redundant repetition of pronouns, espe-
cially demonstrative pronouns: τοιαuτη (or, as commonly emended, τοι-
αuτ¸ησιν). τοuτου. τα0τα. καi το0το. τοuτ_ω. τοuτοισιν. The alliteration of
κα0αiρειν … κεφαλjν … καiειν and κα0σις καi κo0αρσις τjς κεφαλjς
suggests a mantra of the trainee physician, but may be simply fortu-
itous. The repetition πολλoκις … rν πολλ_u χρóν_ω seems to seek empha-
sis and διεφ0oρη is a gnomic aorist. In section 2, where an attempt is
made to describe precisely the nature and degree of sight loss, different
points are made in a jerky sequence: big bright things visible; vision
straight ahead impaired and peripheral vision lost; things brought close
visible.
commentary 53
1. διεφ0αρμrναι … διαφ0εiρονται … διεφ0oρη ‘destroyed … destroyed
… destroyed’ (or, perhaps, ‘damaged … damaged … damaged’): this
sense of διαφ0εiρεσ0αι (passive) indicates pathological decline to an
irretrievable point. Here of blindness (cf. 8 below; also Pl. R. 517a
and, of deafness, Hdt. 1. 38), the verb is common in the gynaecological
treatises of abortion or miscarriage; in Places of Man it is used of severe
pain (change and ‘destruction’ of the appropriate nature of any bodily
part is the origin of bodily pain, Loc. Hom. 42.1 [6.334 L.]) and in Koan
Prognoses, of facial collapse (‘destruction’ of the face a mortal sign, unless
caused by the reversible conditions sleeplessness, starvation or stomach
upset, Coac. 2. 209 [5.628 L.]).
α0τóματοι ‘spontaneously’, ‘without discernible precipitating cause’ (cf.
Foesius Oeconomia α0τομoτως sponte magisque naturae vi quam morbi, ‘spon-
taneously and more by action of nature than of disease’).
4
Both adjec-
tive and adverb are favoured in the HC (one hundred occurrences),
frequently opposed to expressions involving πρóφασις ‘cause’. The μrν
solitarium implies an opposition to damage where the cause can be
determined. All mss have the incorrect form α0τóμαται, evidence of the
mechanical copying which typifies the tradition of On Sight.
κυανiτιδες ‘lapis-like’, ‘like lapis lazuli’, ‘bluish’, ‘dark blue’: Greek col-
our terms are notoriously difficult to translate.
5
LSJ renders κυανtτις
‘bluish grey’ with the explicatory addition ‘in glaucoma’; the addition
begs the question. (On differentiation between cataract and glaucoma,
see Introduction V.) κυoνεος (contracted κυανο0ς) is the regular adjec-
tive indicating composition of, or more commonly similarity to, κuανος
a dark-blue enamel or lapis lazuli; Latin caeruleus is equivalent. Already
in Homer, usage is wide: of hair, ships, clouds, sea; later, the adjec-
tive was used to qualify minerals, flowers, birds, or objects of striking
blue colour. Sometimes sheen or texture, rather than hue, seems to be
implied. (See Demokritos, DK 68 A 135 = Thphr. de sens. 77; Aristotle
col. 796a18.) κυανο0ς coexisted with the less common form κυαν(ο)ει-
δjς, lit. ‘like κuανος’ (differentiated by Demokritos, loc. cit.); from Euripi-
dean usage of the sea (Hel. 179, cf. 1502; also κυαναυγjς, E. Alc. 261) it is
evident that the distinction made by the author from 0αλασσοειδjς ‘sea-
like’ will be hard to define. But, unlike 0αλασσοειδjς following, κυανtτις
4
See also Iugler, 1792, 50.
5
See Maxwell-Stuart, 1981, esp. 1–6; also Platnauer, 1921, 161.
54 commentary
is not a regular colour term and the formation of κυανtτις is itself pecu-
liar. The formation -tτις is an adjectival suffix (feminine) which in some
cases became substantival. In the HC, such adjectives are applied espe-
cially to φλrψ ‘vessel’ (e.g. αlματtτις. jπατtτις) and to types of νóσος ‘dis-
ease’, or in some cases to both (σπληνtτις ‘disease of the spleen’ Morb. 1.
3 [6.144 L.], but ‘vessel at the spleen’ Morb. 1. 26, 28 [6.194, 196 L.]; Aff.
20 [6.230 L.]). Some terms seem to bypass the adjectival stage, and are
found only as substantives: the transition can be seen in passages where
adjectival and substantival usage coexist (rς φ0iσιν νεφρiτιδα ‘to a wast-
ing disease of the kidney’, Int. 15 [7.204 L.] followed by 0πò δr νεφρi-
τιδος ‘from the kidney disease’, Int. 18 [7.210 L.]). Some names for ill-
nesses have no adjectival analogues: for example, φρενtτις. πλευρtτις. 0ρ-
0ρtτις, ‘phrenitis’, ‘pleuritis’ and ‘arthritis’. The first two were regarded
as traditional names for ‘acute’ diseases (given by the 0ρχαtοι ‘ancients’,
Acut. 5 [2.260 L.]); if the view that it is an old form is correct, later writ-
ers were adapting and extending pre-existing formations. The practice
had a long future, the suffix being firmly embedded in English and
other European languages to denote a disease with local inflammation
(tonsillitis etc.). The development in ancient usage is part of the gen-
eral development of technical terms, not only in medicine but in other
sciences also.
6
Another range of -tτις technical terms relates to miner-
als, and another still to plants. Both can be seen in the HC, especially
in the gynaecological treatises (minerals χαλκtτις. χρυσtτις and vegetable
matter oλοκωνtτις ‘earth-almond’). In some such formations, the idea of
similarity is apparent (e.g. σπογγtτις ‘sponge-like’ applied both to stone
and plant) but this similarity rarely relates to colour: thus, 0ργtτις, sc.
0μπελος, is a vine with white grapes, but the colour element is already
there initially, and so too with χλωρtτις. sc. λι0óς. a grass-green stone.
7
rξαπiνης ‘all of a sudden’, ‘suddenly’: this adverb is more common
in the HC than the synonymous rξαiφνης (eighty-eight versus fifty-
eight occurrences; there are also eight of the adjective rξαπiναιος).
Patterns of preference in such ordinary vocabulary, where choice may
be subconscious, can be significant in establishing groups of works of
common provenance. An author’s usage tends not to be for one or
the other exclusively but rξαπiνης is preferred in the gynaecological
6
For other such formations, see Kretschmer and Locker, 1963, 324–326.
7
See Langslow, 2000, 270–271, on the ‘lexicalist’ versus ‘derivationalist’ controversy
in the development of suffixes, and the argument, 274, that a suffix can exhibit a kind
of ‘polysemy’.
commentary 55
texts; and exclusively used in Internal Affections and Diseases 2 (ten and
five occurrences respectively).
8
ο0κ rστιν iησις τοιαuτη ‘there is so such treatment (sc. as that previously
described)’: M’s τοιαuτη, nominative singular with iησις, is altered by
editors following Heidel to τοιαuτ¸ησιν, dative plural, sc. with dative
plural of ðψις.
9
However, M’s reading can stand if we suppose, as is
intrinsically probable, that our text followed on prescriptive material
now lost. (But cf. τοιοuτων 0λγημoτων. 9.1, with reference to the topic of
ophthalmia, newly introduced.) Such a designation of treatment found
to be effective, in terms of same or similar treatment useful for different
cases, is prevalent in the surgical treatises Fractures and Articulations (Fract.
10 [3.450 L.]; Artic. 19, 31, 38, 62 [4.132, 146, 166, 268 L.]). Ermerins
keeps τοιαuτη but paraphrases in translation, non est curatio, quae malum
superare valeat, ‘there is no treatment effective to surmount the trouble’.
0αλασσοειδεtς ‘sea-like’: here the formation to express similitude is reg-
ular. The suffix -οειδjς occurs in the HC of likeness in a general or
abstract sense (0ν0ωποειδjς. 0εοειδjς ‘man-like’, ‘godlike’); also con-
cretely with regard to shape (κοτυλοειδjς ‘spoon-like’); or as perceived
by the sense of touch, with respect to hardness (λι0οειδjς ‘stone-like’),
texture (σπογγοειδjς ‘sponge-like’), or temperature (φλογοειδjς ‘fiery’);
or the sense of sight, especially with respect to colour (μολυβδοειδjς
‘lead-like’, σιδιοειδjς ‘like pomegranate peel’, íαλοειδjς ‘like glass’).
10
The incidence of the suffix is marked in the gynaecological treatises, in
Articulations and in Internal Affections, and several formations, like 0αλασ-
σοειδjς here, are unique to a single treatise: ταινιοειδjς ‘ribbon-like’
and δημιοειδjς ‘fat-like’ only in Articulations, κεφαλοειδjς ‘head-like’ only
in Internal Affections; κροτωνοειδjς a kind of root and δαφνοειδjς a kind
of plant only in Nature of Woman (Artic. 47, 78 [4.202, 312 L.]; Int. 6, 27
[7.180, 238 L.]; Nat. Mul. 32, 33 [7.358, 370 L.]). With this grouping
there is an outlier, 0υμοειδjς, unique to Airs, Waters and Places. Some-
times the -οειδjς suffix accompanies or replaces the -uδης suffix, which
seems to be a special medical variant on it, generally but not always
indicative of a pathological condition:
11
exceptionally, Xenophon uses
8
Cf. Craik, 1998, 189.
9
Heidel, 1914, 193.
10
See Kretschmer and Locker, 1963, 228–231.
11
Op de Hipt, 1972.
56 commentary
0ρ0ρuδης in the sense ‘well-jointed’ (X. Cyn. 4. 1). The Latin suffix -osus
which combines the characteristics of both Greek suffixes, expressing
both pathology and similitude may be compared.
12
The two formations
may coexist, as in the case of íδρωποειδjς and íδρωπιuδης: there are
twelve Hippocratic instances of each, the former in the gynaecological
works, Diseases 4, Regimen 3 and Drugs; the latter in Epidemics 2, 4, 5, 7
and Koan Prognoses.
κατo μικρòν rν πολλ_u χρóν_ω ‘gradually, over a long time’: the identical
pairing of adverbial phrases occurs in Prorrhetic 2 (Prorrh. 2. 43 [9.74 L.]),
of skin diseases.
τοuτου ‘of this person’: the demonstrative regularly refers to the patient,
especially in contexts where patients with different conditions, requiring
different treatment, are discussed.
κα0αiρειν τjν κεφαλjν καi καiειν τoς φλrβας ‘purge the head and
cauterise the vessels’: the physician is presumed to know what drug to
use in purging the head (for the recommendation cf. 4. 2 and 7. 1) and
where and how to perform cautery (cf. 2. 1, 4. 1–2, 5, 7. 1 and especially
3. 1–4). Purging the head was such a routine matter (commonly a
treatment for eye flux, as Loc. Hom. 13. 2, 4 [6.300 L.]) that specification
of drugs is rare; but it is known that celery juice, onion (juice), myrrh
and ‘flower of copper’ were among materials used (Morb. 2. 19, 22, 25
[7.34, 38, 40 L.]).
κjν 0ρχóμενος πo0¸η τα0τα ‘and if he has this done at the beginning’: sc.
the beginning of the treatment, or of the problem. In H πo0¸η is written
but corrected to 0εραπεu0¸η a synonymous lectio facilior; this reading (in
W, tr. Calvus si curetur ‘if treated’, followed also by Cornarius) prepon-
derates in the tradition. The expression τα0τα (or τoδε) πoσχειν is used
both in description of symptoms and (more rarely, as here) in descrip-
tion of treatment; the two senses can coincide in close proximity (Epid.
5. 8 [5.208 L.]). In the latter sense, it is used especially of postulated
treatment, which if followed would be or would have been successful
(cf. Epid. 5. 7 [5.208 L.]; Epid. 5. 26 [5.226 L.]; Nat. Mul. 13 [7.330 L.];
Mul. 2. 112 [8.242 L.]).
12
See Langslow, 2000, 340–342.
commentary 57
iσταται τò κακòν ‘the trouble is arrested’: the verb is used similarly, of
arresting phlegm (Morb. 3. 1 [7.118 L.]), bile (Int. 35 [7.252 L.]) or pain
(Int. 51 [7.292 L.]).
καi ο0 χωρεt rπi τò φλαυρóτερον ‘does not go on to get worse’: the
corollary expression rπi τò βελτiον (of amelioration) is used in the case
histories of Epidemics. φλαυρóς ‘bad’, a common enough word in Greek,
is considerably less common in the HC than might have been expected
(sixty-one occurrences, of which twenty-five are in Koan Prognoses; there
is a cluster also in Fractures and Articulations).
2. αl δr μεταξu ‘intermediate’: sc. ðψιες ‘the visual parts’.
νr_ω … πρεσβυτrρ_ω γενομrν_ω … πρεσβυτrρ_ω róντι … rτrων rπτo …
‘when someone is young … older … when someone is older than seven
years’: the genitive is comparative. A disease affecting the eyes, and
commonly recurring in the seventh or fourteenth year, is described in
Diseases 2 (Morb. 2. 12 [7.20 L.]). The period suggests a belief in the
importance of the number seven associated with ancient, especially
Pythagorean, numerology: seven days is commonly significant in the
description of fevers. Sichel, following Jugler, supposes a lacuna after
rτrων rπτo, but the fractured nature of the Greek precludes confidence.
There is probably some minor corruption: the mss punctuate variously
(some having a sense break after βrλτιον oρ¸j ‘sees quite well’) and
disagree on connectives (καi or δr or even, unidiomatically, both).
κα0iστανται ‘settle down’: the change from the simple iστασ0αι to the
compound κα0iστασ0αι seems to be merely stylistic variatio. For the
sense, cf. τò το0 oφ0αλμο0 κατrστη ‘the condition of the eye (bloodshot
and weeping) settled down’ (Epid. 7. 11 [5.384 L.]).
0πò πρóσ0εν ‘ahead’, ‘in front’: this is a slightly odd expression, the
preposition, lit. ‘from’, being otiose in conjunction with the suffix con-
veying the same sense, ‘from’. However, we may compare Plato εiς τò
πρóσ0εν rτι ζητjσαντες ‘still searching ahead’, lit. ‘to (the area) from
the front’ (Sph. 258c). The implication here is loss of peripheral vision:
the patient sees ahead, but only ahead and even that not well. A sec-
ond point is made in the next sentence: the patient is short-sighted.
Compare the description of the μuωψ ‘short-sighted person’ in the Aris-
totelian Problemata: he brings things up close towards him in order to see
58 commentary
them, whereas the πρεσβuτης ‘aged person’ removes things to a distance
from him (Probl. 31. 25, 959b).
τοuτοισιν ‘in these people’ or ‘patients’: demonstrative, as above.
Phlebotomy is more commonly expressed by 0φiεναι το0 αiματος
genitive (VC 18 [3.250 L.]; cf. Aff. 22 [6.234 L.]).
τ¸j 0αλασσοειδεt ‘in the sea-like case’: the dative is read for the unani-
mously incorrect accusative of the mss.
II
It is stated that a certain condition which may appear in childhood is
to be left alone until the sufferer is fully grown, then treated by surgery
to the eyelid. The first consideration is that the transmitted text gives
nonsense. The opening words τò ðμμα rν τοtσιν oφ0αλμοtσι ‘as to the
eye in the eyes’ are meaningless, and the ensuing genitive absolute,
introducing ðψις ‘sight’ merely compounds the difficulty. Sichel finds
the chapter ‘très-obscur’; he translates, ‘Quant à la vision des yeux, la
pupille ayant conservé son état normal …’ but notes that there is no
parallel for ðμμα in the sense of ‘vision’; his diagnosis is ‘une ambly-
opie amaurotique survenant sur des individus jeunes …’ Ermerins too
comments on the difficulty of the passage; following Foesius verbatim he
translates et oculorum visum, cum videndi acies sana fuerit … ‘and the vision
of the eyes, when the eyesight is sound …’, but notes that it is not at all
clear what is intended by the ðμμα, and declines to attempt identifica-
tion of the disease. Joly translates (but without justification) ‘Quant à la
vue elle-meme, la pupille étant saine …’ and comments that this prob-
lem might be ‘une myopie, laquelle … se stabilise après la croissance’;
he notes that the treatment envisaged might occasionally be effective in
serious cases, ‘en provoquant une vasodilation’.
13
The word ðμμα, said
by LSJ to be poetic and rare in prose, is in itself unexceptional, being
Ionic rather than poetic (seventy-three occurrences in the HC and in
some works, such as Prorrhetic 1, preferred to oφ0αλμóς).
A simple emendation, corroborated by Hippocratic parallels, notably
in Prorrhetic 2 (Prorrh. 2. 18 [9.44, 46 L.] discussed below), gives perfect
sense: τo λημiα rν τοtσιν oφ0αλμοtσι ‘as to sores in the eyes’. The
13
Sichel 138; Ermerins Prolegomena XL; Joly 173, ‘notes complémentaires’.
commentary 59
corruption is readily explained, on grounds both of visual similarity,
which would be especially marked at the majuscule stage,
14
and of
intrinsic plausibility, a technical term being supplanted by a common
word, apparently suitable in context. The emendation has the added
merit that it provides a quasi-heading at the start of a new topic, as is
common in such nosological accounts (cf. the emphatic first words of 1,
5, 7 and 9).
The term λjμη with the common diminutive form λημiον refers to
noxious matter collecting in or flowing from the eyes: ‘rheum’, ‘dis-
charge’, ‘secretions’. Properly speaking, ‘rheum’ is not a disease but a
symptom. Here, it can be viewed as a protracted irritation in the eye
which might lead to any one of a range of chronic conditions: the char-
acteristic symptoms of conjunctivitis (soreness, grittiness, eyelids sticking
together overnight with secretions at lid margins) and of blepharitis (red
eyelids with scaling along the margins) are essentially similar to condi-
tions such as entropion, where the lower lid is rolled over and the lashes
irritate the eye, and ectropion or eversion of the lids, where there is
similar concomitant irritation.
15
For the latter there is copious archaeo-
logical evidence.
16
In Prorrhetic 2 (Prorrh. 2. 18 [9.44, 46 L.]), echoed as λημiα σμικρo
περi α0τoς (sc. τoς ðψιας) ‘small sores around the sight’ in Koan Prog-
noses (Coac. 2. 214 [5.630 L.]) there is a long and detailed discussion
of oφ0αλμοi … λημuντες ‘eyes suffering sores’, where different develop-
ments of such a condition are considered. In this passage, λjμη (singu-
lar) is a key word, repeated eight times, cf. the diminutive λημiα (plural)
of Koan Prognoses. Throughout the passage, attention is paid to the
nature of the discharge, which may be mingled with tears, white and
soft (prognosis good) or yellow and livid (prognosis bad) or dry (prog-
nosis pain, but short-lived) and also to the type of swelling, with regard
to its size, pain and dryness, and to the type of tears, with regard to
their heat and salty quality. In sum, the doctor should consider τo rκ
το0 oφ0αλμο0 çrοντα ‘the stuff flowing from the eye’. The feared out-
come is rλκος ‘a lesion’, ‘ulceration’ which might affect both pupil and
lids (κiνδυνος τ¸j τε κóρ¸η rλκω0jναι καi τοtσι βλεφoροισι) and in extreme
cases çωγμj ‘rupture’ of the eye; this is described in the ensuing chapter
and is evidently prolapse of the eye contents, seen today only in major
14
Cf. Jouanna, 2000, 98 for such corruption in M and mss derived from M.
15
See Bedford, 1971, 42–43, figs 26, 26a, 44–45, figs 27, 27a and 136–137, fig. 94;
Trobe and Hackel, 2002, 3–4, 5–8, 63–64; Spalton et al., 2005, 107.
16
Chaviara-Karahaliou, 1990, 138; Gourevitch and Grmek, 1990, 58–60.
60 commentary
eye accidents. The account in Prorrhetic 2 is surely one of the sources,
and probably the main source, for Celsus’ account of the complications
of inflammation of the eye (see especially 6. 6. 10, 6. 6. 31). Celsus may
be familiar also with On Sight in listing many different types of vesicae
‘growths’ on the upper eyelids and allowing for some which generally
occur in children (7. 7. 3).
A precise prediction is made for cases where the swelling subsides
but tears persist and discharge continues: in the case of men there will
be ‘eversion’ of the eyelids (lit. ‘turning away’: the same verb rκτρrπειν
is commonly used of the womb leaving its proper place); in the case of
women and children, both ulceration and eversion of the lids (cf. the
differentiation between male and female patients in On Sight). Thus, the
constant shedding of teary matter, not in itself problematical, leads to
problematical complications. Similarly, the appearance of sores in the
region of the pupils is declared a bad sign in parallel passages of Prog-
nostic, a treatise possibly by the same author as Prorrhetic 2, as in Koan
Prognoses (λjμαι, Prog. 2 [2.116 L.] and λημiα, Coac. 2. 214 [5.630 L.]).
Symptoms of spring ophthalmias detailed in Epidemics 1 include stream-
ing, pain, and troublesome σμικρo λημiα ‘small sores’ (Epid. 1. 2. 4.
[2.616 L.]).
A succinct but clear description of eye troubles is found in Ancient
Medicine, there embedded in an account of the pathological effects of
flux to nose, eyes and throat, i.e. chest (VM 18–19 [1.612, 616 L.]).
The processes in the three fluxes are presented as parallel, with par-
allel features.
17
The account in Ancient Medicine has strong similarities
with material in Prorrhetic 2: emphasis on discharge called λjμη, ulcer-
ation of the eyelid (here clearly the lower lid, as it is stated that ulcer-
ation may extend to the cheek), ulceration in the eye (τòν 0μφi τjν
ðψιν χιτuνα ‘the tunic around the sight’, i.e. the sclerotic membrane);
symptoms of streaming, pain and inflammation. There is one salient
difference: in Ancient Medicine, the formation of a sore is viewed as the
resolution of the problem, release coming through ‘coction’ and ‘thick-
ening’ of the ‘streaming matter’ (μrχρι 0ν τo çεuματα πεφ0¸j καi γrνη-
ται παχuτερα καi λjμη 0π’ α0τuν ¸j). More commonly, as in On Sight
and Prorrhetic 2, the sores themselves are viewed as problematical or
potentially so. But in the Aristotelian Problemata, tears in eye pain are
described as cold, because τò μrν 0πεπτον ψυχρóν, ‘the unconcocted
17
On the sequence, see Craik, 1998, 138 and on parallelisms Jouanna, 1990, 199,
n. 3; 200, nn. 5, 6.
commentary 61
is cold’ (Probl. 31. 23, 959b20). The theory of flux follows similar lines
in many treatises. In Places in Man, treatment for flux to the eyes with
attendant ocular ulceration and rupture aims to remove δoκρυον συμ-
πεπηγóς ‘coagulated tear’ or τò συνεστηκóς ‘coagulated material’ from
the eye (Loc. Hom. 13.1, 7 [6.298, 302 L.]). In Glands, matter in flux from
the brain, causing disease if it is not removed, is uniquely designated
λuματα ‘impurities’, ‘purgations’ (Gland. 12 [8.564 L.]): it may be sus-
pected that this apparent hapax legomenon is in fact another corruption of
λημiα, this time by an aural error of a notoriously common type. (The
language is similar to that of VM: verb rλκοt below in 12 [8.566 L.] and
rως 0ποκρiσιος, a reference to coction, above in 11 [8.564 L.].) Dexip-
pos of Kos held similar views of disease-inducing flux: bile and phlegm
melt and in more liquid form lead to ichors and sweats which putrefy
and thicken, bringing jχον. μuξας. λjμας—troubles in ears, nose and
eyes (Anon. Lond. XII. 22–26).
In this section, strongly didactic, the pupil reader is directly ad-
dressed with second person singular verbs, as in the warning ο0κ 0ν
uφελοiης (where Joly needlessly emends to uφελrοις) but he must work
using his own discretion jν δοκ¸ j προσδεtσ0αι. Imperatival infinitives
and nominative participles again occur: σκεψoμενος … λεπτuνειν. ξuων
καi rπικαiων. The syntax is jerky, with conditional and temporal clauses
piled up, and with a genitive absolute (rare in this work) equivalent to a
conditional clause awkwardly preceding another genitive phrase.
1. τo λημiα ‘in the case of sores’: the term was widely used in a
metaphorical sense (most famously applied by Pericles to the island Aig-
ina seen in relation to the Peiraieus, Arist. Rh. 1411a15, Plu. Per. 8) and
proverbially (Ar. Nu. 327); the prevalence doubtless reflects a high inci-
dence of eye disease. Lexicographers (but not Erotian, who often fails
to help where help is most needed) explain. Hesychios glosses the plural
as αl περi τοuς καν0οuς τuν oφ0αλμuν πεπηγυtαι συστoσεις ‘collections
of matter fixed about the corners of the eyes’ and as rκρrουσαι τuν
oφ0αλμuν 0κα0αρσiαι ‘impurities flowing from the eyes’, and the singu-
lar as λευκòν íγρòν rν oφ0αλμοtς συνιστoμενον. 0κα0αρσiα ‘white moist
stuff gathered in the eyes, impure matter’ (Latte, 1953, 592, 593). The
terms γλoμων or γλαμυρóς are cognate, the latter used of bleary eyes (as
Mul. 2. 116, 119 [8.250, 258 L.] and Mul. 1. 105 [8.228 L.]), the former
used of blear-eyed people (cf. Hesychios on these forms). Galen glosses
γλαμυροi γλημuδεις καi íγροi ‘bleary: bleared and moist’ (linguarum Hip-
pocratis explicatio, 19. 91 K.). See also Pollux Onom. 2. 4. 65 and 4. 25. 184
62 commentary
for the inclusion of λjμη and λημ0ν in eye diseases and LSJ on cognate
forms from EM. Hesychios’ glosses γλoμος μuξα ‘blear: mucus’ and
γλαμυξι0ν γλαμ0ν. λημ0ν ‘to have bleary mucus: to be bleary, blear-
eyed’ (Latte, 1953, 378) are a telling indication that peccant matter from
eyes and nose was viewed as essentially the same; furthermore the gloss
λoμας μ0ς (Latte, 1953, 569) is probably an error for μuξας. This can
be seen too in the standard medical view that noxious stuff at the eyes
could be expelled through the nose. (But μuξα has a wider semantic
range than λjμη. Though generally used of nasal mucus, it can refer to
other body fluids also.)
18
τjς ðψιος íγιrος rοuσης ‘where the visual part is sound’: i.e. provided it
does not affect the sight or, in the terminology of 1 above, where the
organ is not ‘destroyed’.
τuν νεωτrρων 0ν0ρuπων ‘in younger people’: here, till mid teens, when
growth is complete. The change from plural to singular (ad sensum) is
readily acceptable.
jν τε 0ηλεiα ¸ j. jν τε 0ρσην ‘whether the person is female or male’: M’s
0ηλεiα can stand, as 0ν0ρωπος is common gender (cf. Lys. 1. 15). The
injunction to wait until adulthood before attempting surgery is sensible;
a similar policy, similarly expressed can be seen in Articulations (Artic. 62
[4.264 L.]).
α0τu τu oφ0αλμu σκεψoμενος ‘considering the actual eyes’: the dative
singular of the mss could be understood as ‘considering (the patient’s)
eyelids with his (the operator’s) eye’—but this is intolerably otiose—or
as ‘with (i.e. as well as) the eye, considering the eyelids’—but this is
cumbersome. Neither interpretation makes acceptable sense. Further,
the verb σκrπτεσ0αι ‘consider’ is invariably followed by the accusative
(or by a preposition) in the HC and the plural rather than singular
of ‘eye’ is required. For these reasons, Ermerins’ emendation of the
unidiomatic dative singular to the accusative dual is very attractive,
though the dual number is rare in the HC, occurring only in the
gynaecological works and in Epidemics 5. The verb is used in a similar
sense to φυλoσσεσ0αι below, 5.
18
See Craik, 1998, 19, 127.
commentary 63
τo βλrφαρα λεπτuνειν ‘attenuate (refine, reduce) the eyelids’: make λεπ-
τóς ‘thin’, as opposed to παχuς ‘thick’ (cf. 5 init.) On the recommended
procedures, ‘scraping’ if necessary (here perhaps with a needle rather
than a scalpel) and cautery, see on 4 below.
rνδο0εν ‘from the inner part’: here, from the inner part of the eyelid,
that is the inner corner of the eye (pace Joly ‘en dedans’; this would
require giving the sense ‘evert’ to λεπτuνειν). The author writes with
standard anatomical precision: with this term compare ðπισ0εν, 3.1 (bis)
and κoτω0εν, 3.3 of ‘directions’ in the body.
μj διαφανrσιν ‘not with white-hot instruments’: the injunction that
the instruments should not be too hot is sensible for the delicate eye
area; elsewhere instruments are to be very hot, for armpit (Artic. 11
[4.106 L.]) or rectum (Haem. 2 [6.436 L.]); cf. also Steril. 222 [8.430 L.].
Erotian (Δ 18) glosses διαφανrσι (same case as here and 5 below),
but probably with reference to Articulations (Artic. 11 [4.106 L.]); also
(T 34) τo διαφανrα σιδjρια ‘white-hot instruments’, but probably with
reference to Haemorrhoids (Haem. 2 [6.436 L.]).
19
III
The subject of this chapter is cautery of the vessels; but the crucial
information about which vessels, in which part of the body, are to
be cauterized is unclear, and the expected information about the rea-
sons for the procedure is lacking. It must be conceded that the tran-
sition from discussion of miscellaneous ways to address particular eye
problems in Chapters 1 and 2 above to detailed surgical instructions
for an unspecified general problem, where the eye is not even men-
tioned, in Chapter 3 is abrupt and the introductory word ‘then’ lacks
context. However, the immediately preceding phrase rπικαiων μj δια-
φανrσιν ‘cauterising, but not with white-hot instruments’ clearly leads
to, even if it does not actually introduce, the excursus on cautery; the
connection is clear enough in this author’s loose, almost stream of con-
sciousness, manner. It is possible that, if oral discourse was the orig-
inal medium, the mention of cautery prompted a learner’s question,
which is answered at length. Or, if we think in terms of written compo-
19
Nachmanson, 1917, 381, 645; 439, 484.
64 commentary
sition, it may be that the whole chapter has been lifted from a work
on cautery, without proper adaptation to its new position. That such
manuals existed is intrinsically probable. The close resemblance of
material here with passages of Places in Man (Loc. Hom. 13 and 40 [6.302
and 330 L.]) in both content and expression suggests at least a common
stock of lore, and possibly a common written source.
Sichel comments that we have ‘préceptes généraux sur le mode
d’exécution de l’ustion des veines’, asserting (wrongly, see below) that
cautery in the back is taken as an example, ‘comme applicable à
un plus grand nombre de maladies’ and (rightly) that cautery in all
parts of the body is believed to follow the same principles. He won-
ders, following Cornarius, whether the chapter is somehow misplaced.
Ermerins allows cautery to be relevant because of its use in ophthal-
mology, but finds the sense awkward and has recourse to some emen-
dation and extensive deletion. Joly sees no relevance in the chapter,
commenting dismissively ‘Ce chapitre semble égaré dans une oeuvre
d’ophtalmologie’.
20
It is here argued that cautery of the vessels in the
back of the head and neck is intended, and that the purpose is to arrest
a flux of noxious matter primarily affecting the eyes and secondarily
threatening lower parts of the body. Our surgeon, who clearly allows
for uniformity in the general practice of cautery at the end of the chap-
ter, was doubtless familiar with different procedures, for different con-
ditions, but his main concern is surely with ophthalmology.
The effects on the eyes of two types of flux (cf. Places in Man 1.3, 13.3
[6.276, 300 L.]) are here allusively indicated: flux A (superficial, mucus-
like in content, coursing from the scalp to the temples, with potential to
stray further, if unchecked) and flux B (deep, salty in content, coursing
from the brain to the inner corners of the eyes, with potential to
stray dangerously further if unchecked—and viewed as hard to arrest).
In ancient ophthalmology, cautery of the vessels of the temples was
a routine treatment for flux A; in the case of flux B, other vessels
were addressed, the aim always being to prevent peccant matter from
spreading further down the body. In Places in Man the vessels which
‘press on the eye, those which constantly beat and are situated between
ear and brow’ are cauterised (Loc. Hom. 13.7 [6.302 L.]). In Diseases 2
these vessels are cauterized, but treatment extends comprehensively to
six other vessels of the head: two alongside the ears, two at the inner
corners of the eyes, and two πισεν τς κεφαλς νεν κα νεν ν τ
20
Sichel 139; Ermerins Prolegomena XL and 280, n. 3; Joly 169, n. 1.
commentary 65
κóτιδι ‘behind the head on either side at the occiput’ (Morb. 2. 12. 6;
cf. 2. 1 and 2. 8 [7.22 L.; 7.8, 10 L.]). In addition, cautery of the neck
was practised in order to stop the progress of noxious matter to the
flesh ðπισ0εν ‘behind’ by the vertebrae and to divert it to the nose for
expulsion (Loc. Hom. 21.1 [6.312 L.]). The usage of ðπισ0εν ‘behind’ in
these passages to indicate the back of the head or neck, rather than the
back itself, parallels usage here; similarly a contrast between rμπροσ0εν
and ðπισ0εν with reference to the front and back of the head can be
seen in Head Wounds (VC 2, 3 [3.192, 194 L.]).
It is important to note that the adjective νωτιαtος with or without
the substantive μυελóς is commonly applied to the spinal fluid, rather
than to the blood vessels of the back (Artic. 45, 46, 47 etc. [4.190, 196,
202 L.]; Mochl. 1 [4.342 L.]; Gland. 11, 14 [8.564, 570 L.]); and while
oστrον may refer to the sacrum (usually as τò lερòν oστrον) it is not used
of the backbone generally. Thus, the vessels loosely designated ‘of the
back’ may be more precisely designated as the vessels which run from
head to neck and to back, that is those through which the νωτιαtος
μυελóς ‘marrow’ or ‘spinal fluid’ was believed to course from the brain
to the lower body. The simple term oστrον lit. ‘bone’ is commonly used
of the skull, where context makes it clear that the skull is intended (as
throughout Head Wounds): the term κρoνιον ‘cranium’ occurs only twice
in the HC (lower jaw joins the cranium at the temples, VC 2 [3.190 L.];
see also Epid. 7. 124 [5.468 L.]), though it may have been popularly used
(cf. E. Cy. 683). It may be added that the bones of the neck, the cervical
vertebrae, were recognised to be continuous with those of the back.
Confirmation that the author’s concern is with specialist matters of
ophthalmology comes from Celsus. Several points in Celsus’ account
of eye therapy pick up and illumine passages of On Sight, where the
narrative is compressed and allusive to the point of unintelligibility,
notably the phrases ‘having bound’ and ‘having traced’: Celsus explains
how a ligature is placed round the patient’s neck, and how the vessels
of the temples and the top of the head are marked with black ink (7. 7.
15 H). Further, Celsus’ leisurely explanation permits emendation of the
puzzling repeated phrase ‘from below’ in 3.4. In an extended discussion
of treatments for phlegm descending from the head to the eyes (7. 7. 15),
Celsus distinguishes between a flux of phlegm from the upper vessels
that lie between skull and scalp, i.e. above the skull; and a flux of
phlegm from the lower vessels that lie between skull and membrane
of the brain, i.e. below the skull. The first case is common and readily
treated, the second is serious and intractable. The reason for this is
66 commentary
that the vessels in the first case are accessible (above the skull, coursing
to the temples) whereas in the second they are inaccessible (below the
skull, coursing from brain to eye). Celsus allows for the possibility of
flux from both sources simultaneously.
Celsus is quite emphatic that this knowledge is widespread, and that
procedures to arrest the flow of phlegm by treating the vessels are
a matter of common and universal practice, ‘celebrated not only in
Greece but among other peoples too, to the extent that no part of
medicine is more widely practised throughout the world’. While the
aim was universal, a wide range of diverse procedures was used in
different communities and at different dates to attain it: some made
a series of incisions at various points in the scalp; some used cautery
at various points instead or as well. This considerable local variation
in the choice of the precise point to be targeted is corroborated by the
evidence of other medical authors, and by papyri of ophthalmological
content.
21
In some societies too the procedure was routinely applied to
neonates (among the Ethiopians, Severus ap. Aetius 7. 93) or to young
children (at the age of four years, among the Libyans, Hdt. 4. 187. 2),
while in others it was a response to a pathological state.
A Galenic work supplements and verifies the substance of Celsus’
account. In a late section of de methodo medendi, a vast compilation in 14
books occupying over 1, 000 pages in Kühn’s edition, similar views on
aetiology and therapy are propounded. As it is the head which sends
çε0μα ‘flux’ to the eyes, the head must be treated first; sometimes flux
comes from the brain and sometimes from the vessels; when it comes
from deep 0γγεtα ‘pockets’ (sc. in the brain) it is hard to treat; the
general treatment is by phlebotomy. Detailed instructions for this are
given: shave the head; carefully address the vessels oπiσω ‘behind’ and
those by the ears and those in the forehead and brows; cut those which
beat most; it is better to apply a rope (βρóχον, lit. ‘noose’) before cutting.
It is explicitly stated that some doctors cut out part of the vessels in the
belief that this is the only effective treatment (10. 937–942 K.). The
vessels treated are ‘those in the back of the head, in the region of the
ears, and those in the temples’. There is not much reference to cautery
in Galen; but he does recommend cautery rπi τuν çευματιζομrνων
oφ0αλμuν ‘for eye flux’ (introductio seu medicus 14. 782 K.).
Celsus gives an account of two positions adopted for eye surgery:
the patient may be seated on a chair facing the doctor (surgery on the
21
See Marganne, 1994, esp. 147–172, with figs 13–18.
commentary 67
right eye), or have his back to the doctor and his head resting on the
doctor’s lap (surgery on the left eye); the two positions are designed to
give good light and easy access for a right-handed practioner (7. 7. 4).
The second of these two positions resembles that of On Sight. In any
case, the general intent of our surgeon’s preparations is now clear and
the scene in the surgery can be visualized as follows. The patient lies
prone, legs extended, on a couch, probably leaning on the floor with
his hands in such a way that the head is below the level of the trunk,
causing the vessels in the head to become engorged and so more visible.
His waist is held—presumably to keep the patient in place, or to press
him hard down—by ‘someone’, who may be the doctor’s attendant or
perhaps a member of the patient’s household. The surgeon is sitting (or
standing, depending on the height of the couch) alongside or slightly in
front, where he can reach over the head of the patient, in such a way
that he can apply a ligature to the neck, trace the precise location of
the vessels of the head (in the crown and occiput; also beside the ears,
in the temples and in the neck)—or perhaps even the entire course of
the vessels is to be traced for purposes of didactic demonstration—and
then operate with instruments handed to him by an assistant.
The language is entirely in accord with the rest of the work. The
sentence structures are primarily paratactic. Nominative aorist partici-
ples are used in conjunction with jussive infinitives. There is asyndeton
(especially in 4). Triadic expressions are used of the swelling of the ves-
sels in 3 and, with variatio, in 4. Several unidiomatic or elliptical expres-
sions (πλjν το0 πoνυ πρòς α0τ_u τ_u oστr_ω. oμοiως τrταται. τα0τα πoντα
jσσον πoσχει. πρòς τjς çεοuσης φλεβòς μ0λλον. παρo τò 0λλο) may arise
simply from the functional nature of the work, or from distortion in
transmission, or may betray imperfect linguistic knowledge on the part
of the writer. Although the language is consistent, there is a certain
unevenness of content. Sections 1–2 are uncompromisingly surgical,
clearly indicating a series of steps to be followed by the doctor, each
introduced by rπειτα ‘next’. Sections 3–4 contain more general com-
ments and advice, some of it aphoristic in character. A similar uneven-
ness characterizes Chapter 9 below.
1. rπειτα ‘then’: editors agree in supposing a lacuna before the first
of the five ‘then’ conjunctions; but in this breathless composition the
Greek can readily be understood as it stands as a series of memos.
There is a double parenthesis after the first ‘then’ conjunction, which
is recapitulated in the second: ‘Then (having bound, having stretched
68 commentary
out the legs, having set below a couch from which he can lean with
his hands)—let someone hold his waist—then …’ The aorist participles
indicate preparatory actions, and the associated infinitives main pro-
cedures (in reverse order: see translation): 0ναδjσας. rκτεiνας. íπο0εiς
followed by διασημjνασ0αι. σκοπεtν then in section 2 rν0εiς followed
by rγκατακαiειν and δεuων by rντι0rναι. This is a series of technical
instructions, to be followed in a precise sequence. A similar use of piled
up participles can be seen at 7.1 and 8.1 below; a similar use of ‘then’
can be seen in 6 below (three times repeated). The use of τóτε in 4.1
and Iστερον in 4.2 is also sequential but less precise.
0ναδjσας lit. ‘having bound’: the verb applies not to the patient himself
but to the ligature. Similar expressions are used of attaching sponges
or swabs (as in preparations for succussion, Mul. 2. 144 [8.318 L.],
Steril. 248 [8.460 L.]) and of the related process of applying a bandage
as a tourniquet to arrest any uncontrolled bleeding after venesection
(see practical instructions on what to do if bleeding continues after
phlebotomy, Ulc. 26 [6.430 L.]; more theoretical comments on the use
of ligatures when cutting, especially in the arm, Medic. 8 [9.214 L.];
explanation of different types of ligatures either to accelerate or to
arrest bleeding, Epid. 2. 3. 14 [5.116 L.]). Hesychios glosses a range of
cognate words 0ναδrσμη. 0ναδjσομαι. 0νoδημα (0να ‘up’ with root δrω
‘bind’) all with reference to garlands etc. tied on the head (Latte, 1953,
149); the prefix may suggest attention to the upper part of the body.
rκτεiνας lit. ‘having outstretched’: cf. Mul. 2. 144 [8.316 L.]. These two
first instructions are reminiscent of the many passages in Fractures and
Articulations which specify that when bandaging is carried out the limbs
must be in a particular position for treatment; either straight, as in the
case of the leg, or flexed, as in the case of the arm (cf. Fract. 15 [3.470,
472 L.]).
δiφρον … 0φ’ οu στjριζηται ‘a couch from which he can lean’: editors
have unanimously disregarded the preposition 0πó ‘from’, understand-
ing it as, or even emending it to, rπi ‘on’; Joly, for example, following
Sichel verbatim, translates ‘… on lui fait prendre avec les mains un point
d’appui sur le siege où il est assis …’ However, it is clear that the patient
leans not on, but from, the couch. The couch is not here a special sur-
gical appliance, like an operating table; the word is the ordinary one for
a household seat. Other Hippocratic passages where a ‘couch’ is spec-
commentary 69
ified are in Physician (general requirements, Medic. 2 [9.206 L.]), Articu-
lations (for a patient with dislocated shoulder, Artic. 7 [4.92 L.]) and in
the gynaecological treatises (for birthing, fomentations and other proce-
dures).
μrσον δr τις rχrτω: ‘let someone hold his waist’: there may be an
implicit metaphor from wrestling (cf. Ar. Nu. 1043, with scholiast);
22
but
the literal sense predominates. Simply, the patient’s movements are to
be restrained. Explicit instructions that the patient be kept immobile
are given with regard to surgery for haemorrhoids (Haem. 2 [6.438 L.])
or where pus is to be expelled (Morb. 2. 47b. 4 [7.70 L.]). The mss
are at variance over punctuation, and the reference of τ¸jσι χερσi.
Instead of referring to the patient’s hands, leaning from the couch, this
would, with a comma after στηρiζηται, refer to the assistant’s hands,
holding the patient. For τις in the sense ‘(doctor’s) assistant’, cf. Artic. 16
[4.128 L.].
διασημjνασ0αι τoς νωτιαiας φλrβας. σκοπεtν δr ðπισ0εν ‘trace the ves-
sels of (= running to) the back, and examine from behind’: Sichel recog-
nises that the terse instruction intends ‘marquer avec une substance
colorante telle que l’encre’ but does not refer to the corroborative mat-
ter in Celsus (cited above). The tautology of the insistent stress on the
location ‘behind’ and on surgery ‘behind’ troubles Ermerins, who com-
ments testily that one would hardly look for these vessels rμπροσ0εν
‘from the front’; Joly finds that ‘les derniers mots ne semblent pas don-
ner un sens satisfaisant’. Foesius too found the reading obscure: he took
the passage to treat ustionem … venarum quae sunt in dorso ‘cautery of the
vessels of the back’ but he did perceptively note that this is an odd des-
ignation for the upper part of the back and seems to have understood
that the neck (rather than the back) is intended, in commenting that
in urendo venas … colli tendines et nervos vitari volunt ‘in cautery of the ves-
sels, they wish the tendons of the neck and the nerves to be avoided’;
Aristotle had warned of the dangers of hitting a neuron while cauteriz-
ing the vessels (HA 3. 5).
23
As Foesius notes, Calvus translates scapulares
and may have known a reading uμιαiας ‘in the shoulders’; however,
he, or an early emendator, may simply be trying to alleviate a per-
ceived problem. As argued above, the solution lies in the precise sense
22
See Iugler, 1792.
23
Sichel 139; Ermerins 280; Joly 169, n. 2; Foesius I 736, n. 4.
70 commentary
of νωτιαiας not ‘of the back’ but rather ‘coursing to the back’. The
verb διασημαiνειν occurs six times in the HC but only here in the mid-
dle form. The simple form is common, with over two hundred occur-
rences and the middle of the simple verb is used in a way similar to
use of the compound here in Fractures (Fract. 3 and 5 [3.422, 434 L.]).
The usage is in line with the author’s general preference for compound
verbs.
παχrσι σιδηρiοισι ‘with thick (or ‘wide’) instruments’: such instruments
are to be used, because of their slower and gentler action. It can
be seen from other passages describing the practice of cautery that
different types of instruments were regarded as appropriate in different
situations (see especially Artic. 11 [4.106 L.]; Int. 18, 28 [7.212, 242 L.]).
Cauterising instruments were most usually made of metal (as clearly
here, σιδjριον lit. ‘iron’; 3.2 καυστjριον lit. ‘burner’ is not inconsistent,
but simply a more general term). They might also be of wood dipped
in hot oil as in Internal Affections (‘boxwood spindles’, Int. 28 [7.242 L.])
or of vegetable matter of certain types (cf. the material used in oriental
moxibustion).
jσυχi¸η δια0ερμαiνειν ‘heat gently’: gentle application of heat would be
less likely to cause haemorrhage; compare the similar general passage
on the practice of cautery in Places in Man (Loc. Hom. 40 [6.330 L.]).
προαφιrναι δr το0 αiματος. jν δοκ¸j καιρòς εiναι ‘let blood in advance,
if it seems the right course’: a cautious approach to blood-letting is
apparent throughout this work. As cautery and phlebotomy fulfilled
broadly similar functions (to reduce unwanted bodily moisture or elim-
inate fleshy tissue), it seems that individual practitioners or corporate
groups favoured use of one or the other method. The use of the term
καιρóς ‘proper circumstances’ indicates adherence to the standard prac-
tice of studying the relevant circumstances of the patient’s condition (cf.
εi rχοι τò σuμα, 9.1 below; το0 αiματος 0φiεναι jν μj 0σ0ενjσ¸η, Morb. 2.
73 [7.112 L.]). After a discussion of kairos in medicine the author of Dis-
eases 1 gives examples of improper treatment. Cutting and burning are
included: the doctor should not use these methods inappropriately, and
if using them should not fall short in length and depth of surgery (Morb.
1. 5–6 [6.146, 148, 150 L.]). The prefix προ- ‘in advance’, ‘beforehand’ is
commonly used in expressions of preparatory surgical procedures, such
as προπυριoω ‘fumigate beforehand’.
commentary 71
καiειν δr πρòς τò oστrον ðπισ0εν ‘cauterise towards the bone from
behind’: this final instruction of section 1 is reminiscent of the most
effective treatment, according to Celsus, which was the Afrorum curatio
‘the therapy practised by the Africans’, in which verticem usque ad os
adurunt ‘they burn the crown of the head right through to the bone’.
However, perhaps the point to be targeted here is not the κορυφj
‘crown’, or top of the head; but rather the iνiον, ‘occiput’ or a point
at the base of the skull (cf. Morb. 2. 12 [7.22 L.], noted above).
2. This further phase of the treatment indicates how to continue cau-
tery by applying a sponge impregnated with olive oil. The purpose of
the sponge is not made clear. It might be interposed to protect the flesh
from the instrument (as a sponge is placed over a cauterized area in the
mouth for protection when the patient is eating, Morb. 2. 32 [7.50 L.]),
or used as absorbent material to mop up (cf. Artic. 38 [4.168 L.]), but
is more probably intended to allow deeper penetration by the oil.
Foesius supposes that the sponge is used alone as an alternative to
the metal (spongiam oleo fervente tinctam intelligo, qua ustio fiat ‘I understand
this as a sponge dipped in boiling oil, to carry out the cautery’) but
this ignores τ_ω καυστηρi_ω, a phrase certainly difficult in context and
deleted by Ermerins as an ‘absurd’ insertion.
24
Sichel, followed verbatim
by Joly, translates ‘si l’éponge adhère au cautère’, but ‘adhere’ would
be a very strange sense for προσδrχεσ0αι. The verb is common in
the sense ‘accept’ (LSJ I) or ‘admit’ (LSJ II) of a patient accepting or
tolerating a particular type of food or drink (especially in Epidemics;
see Epid. 7. 43 [5.410 L.] etc.); it is particularly used in the context of
a doctor experimenting and adapting treatment to a patient: o τι 0ν
μoλιστα προσδrχηται (with reference to the patient) πειρuμενος (with
reference to the doctor) ‘trying whatever she will tolerate’ (especially in
the gynaecological works; see Nat. Mul. 40 [7.384 L.] etc.). It is unclear
why the patient might not tolerate the sponge: perhaps it would make
the cautery more bulky and uncomfortable over a wider area; perhaps
hot oil would be more unbearable even than hot metal. There is a
(remote) possibility that ‘sponge’ refers to a special kind of fungus used
in cautery; it has been suggested that this fungus was known to have an
effect such as that of penicillin.
25
24
Foesius I 688 and 736, n. 6.
25
Nielsen, 1974, 83–86.
72 commentary
Later arum coated with honey is applied. Arum was used to close
wounds and in various eye troubles (Diosc. 2. 167). The telegraphic
prose fails to specify which part of the arum plant is to be used (proba-
bly the root, as usually elsewhere),
26
or in what form (probably ground
up, as usually elsewhere), or in what quantity. We may contrast a pas-
sage in Diseases 2, where the precise amount of pulverised arum root is
specified, to be used in combination with salt, honey and other ingre-
dients in an orally administered medicine for a lung complaint (Morb.
2. 47.2 [7.66 L.]). There are parallels in Affections for the use of fabric in
conjunction with the cauterising instrument (Aff. 29, 31 [6.242, 244 L.]).
σπóγγον ‘sponge’: the variant σπογγiον recorded by Foesius is doubtless
influenced by the diminutives following.
rγκατακαiειν ‘cauterise over’: the unusual double compound, lit. cau-
terise in and down’ shows the preference for compound forms already
noted. This type of compound has the following distribution: very
noticeable in Places in Man (rπαναρρjγνυμι. rπαναχρrμπτομαι and rπα-
νoχρεμψις, rπαναφrρω. rπαναχωρrω); marked in the gynaecological
works (rγκα0εψoω. rγκα0iννυμι. rγκα0iστημι. rγκατατiλλω) two occur-
rences in Acute Diseases (rγκατακλεiω. rγκαταλεiφω); one each in Epi-
demics 4 and Regimen 1 (rγκατακλεiω).
καυστjριον ‘(little) instrument’ (for cautery): the diminutive is hapax in
the HC, while σπογγiον ‘little sponge’ following is common. Diminu-
tives are especially frequent in the gynaecological works, but there is a
related crop in some of the surgical works; e.g. of nineteen Hippocratic
occurrences of μολυβδiον ‘lead’ all are gynaecological except for a few
in Articulations and Mochlicon, and one in Fistulas.
μrλιτι δεuων ‘moisten with honey’: The addition of rν (I and mss
derived from I) does not affect the sense. G has the typically unhelpful
gloss βρrχων.
rσχoρη ‘eschar’: throughout, 3. 2, 3. 4; 4. 2; 5, this word, lit. ‘hearth’ or
‘fire’ is used in a transferred sense of the scab or cicatrice formed on
wounds after cautery; cf. Celsus 5. 26. 33C.
27
26
See Petrequin I 1877, 377, n. 21.
27
See Chadwick, 1996, 114.
commentary 73
3. Section 3 begins with predictions for what can be expected after
cautery, when the cicatrice falls off. These instructions, with stress on
the need to διακαειν ‘cauterize thoroughly’ (or rather ‘right across’
or ‘right through’) are close to those of Places in Man (Loc. Hom. 40
[6.330 L.]). The verbs διακαειν and διατμνειν describe not incision
but section right through the vessel (and on the importance of the point
of section, see Haem. 5 [6.440 L.] and Artic. 68 [4.282 L.] with Mochl. 34
[4.376 L.]).
28
The latter part of section 3 returns to consider conditions
of cautery itself; after this intervention, section 4 continues discussion
of the aftermath of surgery in a somewhat repetitive fashion. The sense
of μοως lit. ‘in the same way’ is quite unclear (the same as before;
the same as it ought to be; the same as in some other unspecified case;
or perhaps ‘the same throughout’, i.e. ‘evenly’). Nor is it clear whether
the appearance of the vessels, described as stretched or extended and
full or swollen, is being presented as a desirable and normal or an
undesirable and abnormal state. The similar description in 4 seems to
be of a good condition, after healing. The verb is used of the vessels
both in health (Oss. etc.) and in sickness (in a type of phthisis, vessels
διαττανται and some are very red, Int. 12 [7.194 L.]; in a type of
dropsy, vessels διαττανται throughout the body, black and thick, Int. 26
[7.234 L.]; in a type of jaundice, vessels ττανται throughout the body,
pale and unnaturally big and thick, while other vessels ττανται blackish
in colour, Int. 36 [7.256 L.]; cf. also Acut. Sp. 5 and 7 [2.406 and 424 L.]).
Here, the beating of the pulse in the vessels seems to indicate conditions
requiring surgery, rather than the normal condition of the patient after
recovery. Abnormal beating of the pulse is commonly regarded as a
pathological symptom, as in Epidemics 7 (pulse in the brows a sign of
fever, Epid. 7. 3 [5.368 L.]) and especially in Diseases 2 (two passages
where, as here, swelling is mentioned in conjunction with beating, Morb.
2. 4.1, 2 and 15.1 [7.10 and 28 L.] and a passage where it is enjoined
that cautery should continue until the beating of the vessels is arrested,
Morb. 2. 12.6 [7.22 L.]). Pulsation with sight loss is a symptom displayed
by βλητο ‘stroke patients’ (Morb. 2. 8 and 25 [7.16 and 38 L.]; Morb. 3.
3 [7.120 L.]).
νωεν … κτωεν ‘from above … from below’: with the reading τε
κτωεν … κτωεν the repeated κτωεν ‘below’ is problematical.
28
See Petrequin I 1877, 351, n. 6.
74 commentary
Where we have two closely placed phrases, parallel in expression, we
expect them to be parallel in sense also. Ermerins emends the first
expression and deletes the second; he also reads διακεκαυμνη femi-
nine for masculine (sc. φλψ), and translates similiter vena tenditur, et inflata
est et pulsat, quia ab inferiore est id, quod influit; sin perusta est, haec omnia
minus patitur, ‘the vessel is similarly stretched and swollen and it beats
because the matter which flows in comes from below; but if it is thor-
oughly cauterised it suffes all this to a lesser degree’. Sichel does not
emend and translates very loosely: ‘lorsque le sang afflue de bas en
haut … à une partie inférieure du dos’. But the point of this is quite
unclear. Joly emends the second expression by deleting , then essen-
tially follows Sichel’s translation, ‘… elle bat lorsque le sang afflue de
bas en haut; si la cauterization profonde est faite en bas (du dos), tout
cela a lieu à un moindre degré …’; he explains, with acknowledge-
ment to Thivel, that cautery was being effected at as low a point as
possible in the body in order to prevent the upwards return of pec-
cant humours.
29
Certainly, the verb πιρρω frequently suggests the flow
of noxious stuff (Gland. 3 [8.558 L.], Ulc. 24 [6.428 L.] and VM 19.1
[1.616 L.]); certainly too, care was frequently taken in selection of the
best point for surgery, with a view to stopping disease going to another
point in the body (Int. 18 [7.210 L.]; cf. Morb. 3. 15 and 16 [7.140 and
142 L.]); and the supposed reference to a flux of peccant matter down-
wards in the body is consistent with the author’s pathological stance.
But if this is the point, the expression is unduly contorted, and there
remains a lack of parallelism between two apparently corollary expres-
sions.
With the emendation proposed the reference is to two opposed
locations, rather than to two identical locations. The reference is to flux
from the upper part of the head, or flux from the lower part. Flux from
the upper part runs to the temples, and so the pulse is a good diagnostic
indicator; flux from the lower part (the brain) runs to the inner corners
of the eyes, and so the pulse is not significant in diagnosis (Loc. Hom.
13.3 [6.300 L.]; Celsus 7. 7. 15).
4. General statements on the ideal conditions of the eschars or scabs
and on the healing process conclude this section on cautery. The first
two sentences break the flow somewhat and are rejected as marginal
29
Joly 169, n. 3.
commentary 75
notes by Ermerins. The terms rσχoραι ‘scabs’, ‘cicatrices’, rλκεα ‘le-
sions’, ‘wounds’ and ο0λαi ‘scars’ are interrelated, following one other
in sequence; in Places in Man, instructions are given for the use of drugs
to ensure that, after eye surgery, the lesion is drawn together, and the
final scar slight (Loc. Hom. 13.7 [6.302 L.]). From the gloss (Souda) of
eschars as κοtλα rλκη ‘hollow wounds’, it may be seen that following
cauterisation scabs tended to remain depressed.
τoχει ‘quickly’: the mss are oddly confused over the form of this com-
mon adverb. In M, the end of the word is blurred. While most recc.
read τoχει, there is evidence also for τoχι (Ca. Mut.) and τoχιστα (E).
Erotian’s gloss Τ 15 τoχα ταχrως related by Nachmanson to the lost
work on Wounds from Missiles may be related rather to On Sight.
30
rπειδoν τo rλκεα íγιrα γrνωνται ‘when the sores are healed’: the plural
verb after neuter plural subject may be a trace of Doric idiom.
31
rρυ0ραi εiσι … 0ναιρjσομεναι φαiνονται ‘are … red … look as if they
will remain raised’: the future participle is suspected by several editors,
on the grounds that it seems to make no sense; but Ermerins’ uσπερ
0ναρραγησóμεναι ‘as if about to break out’ and Foesius’ 0ναρρηξóμε-
ναι ‘about to break out’ are no better. Sichel takes the subject to be
φλrβες ‘vessels’; rather it is ο0λαi ‘wounds’ (sc. on vessels), there being
an easy mental transition from rλκεα ‘sores’ to ο0λαi ‘wounds’. The
expression is typically loose and the reference of the fem. adj. ‘red’ may
be to any of the fem. nouns in the vicinity—οuλαι, φλrβες or rσχα-
ραι.
oπου 0ν καυ0¸ j ‘wherever there is cautery’: some doctors who put their
faith in cautery seem to have practised it wholesale. Thus, Euryphon,
named as an archetypal practitioner, was mocked in comedy as burning
his patients all over the body (Pl. Com., fr. 652 K.). Comprehensive
cautery is recommended for several cases in Internal Affections. In the
case of a kidney disease believed to course from head to throat to spine
to feet and back again (with bloodshot eyes as one symptom), cautery
was indicated at shoulder, hip-joints, buttocks, thighs and various points
in the lower leg (Int. 18 [7.212 L.]). And to counter supposed dryness of
30
Nachmanson, 1917, 85 and 1918, 367.
31
Cf. Craik, 1998, 22–23.
76 commentary
the spinal fluid (attributed to blockage in the small vessels leading to
the ‘marrow’, and in the passage from the brain) the instructions are
to cauterise multiple regions of the body with multiple (some twenty
in all) eschars: sacrum, back and neck (Int. 13 [7.200 L.]). Cautery
of the chest or side was regularly undertaken to eliminate empyema,
a complication of many diseases affecting the lung. Cautery of the
back was relatively rare. Cautery of the upper back was indicated,
with cautery of the chest, in certain cases (Morb. 2. 53.4 [7.82 L.]; cf.
also Morb. 2. 62 [7.96 L.]); this was sometimes a last resort (Int. 1 and
cf. 2, 8 [7.172, 174, 186 L.]). Diseases supposedly affecting the back were
subject to much speculation: dropsy, phthisis and even pleurisy might
be canvassed (Morb. 3. 16 [7.144 L.] and Morb. 2. 56 [7.88 L.]; also,
more theoretical in slant, Loc. Hom. 15, 21–23 [6.308, 312, 314 L.] and
Gland. 14 [8.570 L.].) It was recognised that the nexus of blood vessels
in the back was complex (Oss. 14 [9.186 L.]). Celsus too viewed surgery
on the vessels as essentially the same, wherever in the body it had to be
practised (7. 31).
IV
In the first section, procedures to scrape and cauterise the eyelid are
outlined, precautions are indicated and drugs for post-operative treat-
ment are specified. The second section seems to specify follow-up pro-
cedures, cutting into the forehead and purging the head; the former
procedure is elsewhere prescribed as a drastic last resort, and the latter
is usually the first rather than the final recourse. It is strange that, after
the lids have healed, further surgery is proposed: it may be suspected
that the text is corrupt, and that part of the second section is misplaced
or intrusive. The treatment described in the first section is regarded by
Sichel, followed by Joly, as a response to ulceration caused by trachoma.
Sichel devotes much space to discussion of this chapter and the next,
which he takes with it: the subject is ‘un traitement chirurgical rationnel
des granulations palpébrales’ or ‘paupières trachomateuses’. Ermerins
is non-committal on the nature of the disease, allowing merely agitur
de palpebrarum rasione et ustione ‘the subject is scraping and cauterizing
the eyelids’; he links the chapter rather with what precedes in Chap-
ter 3. However, this is achieved at the expense of drastic emendation
(see below on στεφνην το φαλμο ‘eyeball’ and on χνδρον ‘carti-
lage’). Joly, like Sichel, finds the treatment impressive: ‘Tout ce chapitre
commentary 77
… qui traite indubitablement des granulations du trachoma, est très
judicieux dans sa précision et ses conseils’.
32
The term trachoma, in origin a general word for ‘roughness’, has
become a specific term applied to the highly contagious trachoma
virus and its ravages. Trachoma is a chronic destructive inflammation
of the conjunctiva, characterized by the formation of granules on the
eyelid; it typically starts in the conjunctival fold of the upper lid, but
eventually involves the cornea and the deeper tissues of the lid.
33
It
was probably endemic in ancient Egypt and familiar throughout the
Greco-Roman world. Trachoma, though now virtually unknown in
developed countries with good hygiene, remains the most common
cause of blindness in the world as a whole. It is unlikely that the Greek
doctors were able to distinguish between trachoma of this specific kind
and other kinds of inflammation or ulceration of the eyelids, viewed
as a concomitant of protracted eye disease. Certainly, they treated
the symptoms of the trouble without awareness of its viral origin (the
causative agent, chlamydia trachomatis, not being identified till 1962)
and contagious character. Sichel’s argument that condition and cure
were known in antiquity, rather than being ‘discovered’ by William
Adams in the nineteenth century is thus only partly valid.
There is no certain Hippocratic parallel to our passage. The term
τρχωμα, concrete ‘a rough condition’ does not occur in the HC,
though related forms are found: τρηχσματα ‘rough patches’ once (Epid.
2. 3. 1 [5.102 L.]), and τραχυσμς ‘irritation’ twice (Acut. 60 [= 16,
2.356 L.] and Mochl. 42 [= 41, 4.392 L.]). The abstract noun τραχ-
της ‘roughness’ occurs also, as does the adjective τραχς ‘rough’, but
most commonly of tongue or mouth and never of the eyelids. How-
ever, several passages may be relevant to the pathology of trachoma.
One is a rather vague description of the complications of a serious dis-
ease where there are pustules and rashes on the brow such that one
eyelid grows into the other and there is acute swelling (Acut. Sp. 26
[= 10, 2.446 L.]); another is a brief reference to trichiasis, which is a
recognized consequence of trachoma (Acut. Sp. 61 [= 29, 2.516 L.]); still
another is a description of a purulent eye disease, with deep sores and
ulceration of the eye (Epid. 4. 44 [5.184 L.]); finally a reference to pro-
32
Sichel 140–148, at 140 and 141; Ermerins Prolegomena XL and commentary 281;
Joly 170, n. 1. Iugler, 1792 devotes nine pages to 3 and a mere page to 4.
33
See Duke-Elder II 1934, 1593–1628; Spalton et al., 2005, general description 102–
103 and illustration of stages 103–104, figs 4. 36–41.
78 commentary
tracted ‘dry opthalmias’ causing internal and external growths on the
eyelids, affecting the sight and known as σ0κα ‘figs’ is reminiscent not
only of the effects of trachoma but also of the term σuκωσις, later used
of the disease (Epid. 3. 3. 7 [3.84 L.]; cf. Scribonius Largus 37).
34
There is no direct parallel, either, which might explain the ratio-
nale for the follow-up procedures described in the second section: cut-
ting into the forehead and purging the head. However, a comparison
with Places in Man (Loc. Hom. 13 [6.300 L.]) seems to show similar ideas
and practices to those implicit here, perhaps in response to the same
condition. In a discussion of flux to the eyes, the most extended treat-
ment (13.3–5) is of a condition where mucoid material has accumu-
lated between flesh and skull, leading to rλκεα ‘sores’ on the head. The
explicit statement that there is no ulceration on the eyelid (ο0χ rλκο0ν-
ται τo βλrφαρα) suggests that such ulceration might have been expected,
or perhaps that the condition is a variant on one where such ulceration
featured. The treatment is mild purging of the head and purging below;
if the noxious stuff is not eliminated through a natural orifice the doc-
tor is instructed to cut into the head, right up to the bone, with a view
to getting it out. There are similarities also with Diseases 2 (Morb. 2. 13
[7.22 L.], in a passage following the disease discussed above in rela-
tion to Vid. Ac. 3). For a disease where there are rλκεα ‘sores’ on the
head (cf. Loc. Hom. above) the treatment is to purge and if that fails to
καταταμεtν τομoς ‘cut cuts’ (cf. τoμνειν τομjν διo το0 βρrγματος here,
Vid. Ac. 4; ταμóντα κατo τò βρrγμα 8 below is different, being a pre-
lude to trephining) in the head, anoint, then plaster with wool, wine, oil
and cypress, that is, with anti-haemorrhaging drugs; similarly, to arrest
bleeding sawdust of cypress is one ingredient specified in Fistulas (Fist.
9.3 [6.456 L.]). The idea of the doctor in On Sight may be that removal
of nasty stuff from the top of the head will prevent its descent to the
eyes and so recurrence of trachoma.
It may be added that the supposed pathology of flux of peccant
matter from inner or outer parts of the head leads to treatment of
many diseases by various types of incision which show some features in
common with the treatment here: water in the head treated by cutting
into bregma and piercing bone (Morb. 2. 15; cf. 8.1 below [7.28, 30 L.]);
vessels overfull of blood treated by cutting into forehead and applying
a pad of ‘greasy wool’ (Morb. 2. 18 [7.32 L.]). Finally, we may compare
the treatment prescribed in Affections for a disease characterized by pain
34
See Pearlmann, 1969, 1072.
commentary 79
and dizziness in the head: the first recourse is to cleanse the head, and
let blood from the nostrils or from the forehead; if this brings no relief,
then the doctor must cut the head or cauterize the vessels ‘in a circular
motion’ (Aff. 2 [6.210 L.]). A passage in the Aristotelian Problemata shows
the universality of such treatments for ‘excess’ or ‘moisture’ leading
to flux to the eyes (Probl. 31). Later, the specific names periskythismos
and hypospathismos were given to surgical cutting at different points in
the head, to arrest flux (with a generally ‘circular’ configuration, as in
Affections).
35
Celsus was aware of many of the complexities of diseases affecting
the eyelids: carbuncles could arise from inflammation, sometimes on
the eyes, sometimes on the lids (6. 6. 10). And he treats of variations
in the development of trachoma: aspritudo ‘roughness’ (Greek trachoma)
follows inflammation but also induces inflammation (6. 6. 26). Celsus
subscribes to the view that a discharge of rheum is a concomitant of tra-
choma (7. 7. 15). A common treatment was to scrape the hard and thick
lids with a fig-leaf, a rasp or a scalpel, and then to rub medicaments
on the under-surface; but Celsus himself advocates rather appropriate
diet, exercise, baths and fomentations. Dioscorides recommends a series
of specifics for trachoma; these include fig leaves, unripe grape juice
and, in various forms, copper. Galen too addressed the problems of tra-
choma, which he regarded as a difficult condition, almost impossible to
treat, and outlined expedients of different doctors; these include cleans-
ing drugs, scraping and wiping away the oozing stuff with a sponge (de
compositione medicamentorum secundum locos, 12. 709–711 K.)
The language contains direct address to the doctor, in the second
person: oταν δr ξu¸ ης and μj διακαuσ¸ ης. As above, nominative par-
ticiples and infinitives are used, ξuων … περιειλrων. The demonstra-
tive pronoun is redundantly repeated, τοuτ_ω 0νατρtψαι (deleted by
Ermerins, who often fails to recognize this idiom) and Iστερον δr τοu-
του.
36
1. oταν δr ξu¸ ης … ξuειν ‘when you scrape … scrape’: after the tem-
poral clause and jussive infinitive, the ensuing words refer to proce-
dures not of scraping but of cautery. Editors have either postulated a
lacuna after ξuειν (Ermerins) or have inserted words to clarify the tran-
35
For full details of types of cutting, and late medical sources detailing these, see
Marganne, 1994, 152–167; for a succinct description, see Jackson, 1996, 2247.
36
See Craik, 1998, 23, n. 28.
80 commentary
sition from scraping to cautery: εiτα καiειν Sichel and ξuειν rπικαiων
Triller. However, perhaps the transmitted text can stand on the suppo-
sition that the general condensation and ellipse typical of this work has
led to a tacit move from scraping to cautery and so to an apparent
conflation of these techniques. The verb ξuω ‘scratch’, ‘scrape’, ‘saw’
occurs twenty-eight times in the HC, most frequently in the general
non-medical sense of ‘grate’, applied to recipe ingredients, especially
in the gynaecological treatises (fifteen occurrences) but also in technical
medical senses, applied to abrasions in the body causing discomfort (Aff.
23 [6.234 L.]; Morb. 3. 11 [7.130 L.]) or, as here, to the medical proce-
dure of abrading, especially bone (VC 14, 19 [3.236, 252 L.]; Morb. 2. 24
[7.38 L.]). The instrument ξυστjρ ‘rasp’ is typically used on bone (VC
14, 19 [3.236, 254 L.]).
εiρi_ω Μιλησi_ω οuλ_ω κα0αρ_u ‘with soft clean Milesian wool’: this mate-
rial was regarded as especially fine. Though specified only here and in
Infertile Women (Steril. 221 [8.426 L.]), it was nevertheless probably the
material of choice where it was available. Strabo remarks (12. 8. 16)
that Laodikeia remarkably produced wool superior in softness even to
that of Miletos. Egyptian cotton was similarly prized (Morb. 2. 33, cf. 35
[7.50, 52 L.]). Soft clean wool is required for bandages and poultices in
many passages of the surgical and gynaecological works. Although wool
was not generally used for the apparent purpose here (cf. specification
of linen for use on the eyes and sponges for use on wounds, Medic. 2
[9.208 L.]) whether swabbing (if cutting) or protection from direct con-
tact with the instrument (if cautery), the use of wool in bandaging after
surgery on the head may be parallel. Erotian’s gloss Ο 25 ο0λ_u rρi_ω
τ_u μαλακ_u related by Nachmanson to the lost work on Wounds from
Missiles may be related rather to On Sight: the case is the same, though
the ordering of words is different.
37
The most natural meaning of οuλος
applied to wool is ‘soft’; but an alternative sense is ‘fleecy’ or (apt to
the context) ‘compacted’; see LSJ s.v. οuλος (B) 3, perhaps cognate with
εiλλω ‘pack tightly together’. Hesychios glosses as both úπαλóν ‘soft’
and συνεστραμμrνον ‘compacted’ (Latte, 1953, 793).
περi 0τρακτον περιειλrων ‘winding it round the spindle(-shaped instru-
ment)’: the spindle is a spindle-shaped instrument for cautery (cf. κα0-
37
See Nachmanson, 1917, 365 and 1918, 66.
commentary 81
σαι δr rν πυξiνοισιν 0τρoκτοισι βoπτων rς rλαιον ζrον ‘cauterise with
boxwood spindles, dipping them in boiling oil’, Int. 28 [7.242 L.]).
Galen’s gloss 0τρακτον ο0 μóνον τòν εiς τò lερουργòν χρjσιμον. 0λλo
καi τò ξuλον το0 βrλους ‘not only that useful in weaving but also the
wood of the instrument’ (linguarum Hippocratis explicatio, 19. 86 K.) with
the same case as On Sight, not as Internal Affections, probably refers to
our treatise and so indicates that the work was known to Galen.
38
The
verb ‘winding’ is oddly suggestive of winding on wool for spinning. The
purpose of the action is the same as that of the ‘pledget of cotton-wool’
recommended by Duke-Elder.
A famous, or rather infamous, interpretation of 0τρακτος not as
‘spindle’ but as 0τρακτυλiς ‘spindle-thistle’ (on which see Thphr. HP 6.
46, etc.; cf. Hesychios 0τρακτυλλiς φυτòν 0καν0uδες ‘a prickly plant’,
Latte, 1953, 275) is discussed at length by the commentators Iugler and
Sichel; also by the learned medical authors Haller and Triller.
39
(See
also Introduction.) There is no real basis for the alternative interpreta-
tion; but an expression in Epidemics oσον σπóνδυλον 0τρoκτου (Epid. 5.
25 [5.224 L.]) was cited as corroboration for the sense ‘thistle’. The
expression there is ambiguous, as the word σπóνδυλος lit. ‘vertebra’
may be applied to anything which resembles a vertebra in shape; here,
a stone extracted from the vagina of an elderly patient (who had pre-
sumably put it there as a child) is described as ‘as big as the whorl of a
spindle’ or ‘as big as the head of a spindle-thistle’.
α0τjν τjν στεφoνην το0 oφ0αλμο0 φυλασσóμενος ‘with care for the
actual eyeball’: the verb is similarly used in 5 below; also, in the same
participial expression, in other treatises where delicate surgical proce-
dures are performed (trephining VC 18, cf. 21 [3.250, 258 L.], Mochl. 35
[4.378 L.]; vapour bath Morb. 2. 26.3, 47b. 3 [7.42, 68 L.]; fumigation
Mul. 1. 75 [8.164 L.]; incision Mul. 1. 70 [8.148 L.]) or hazardous pre-
scriptions made (Loc. Hom. 13 [6.300 L.], Aff. 33 [6.244 L.] and cf. Aff.
11, 12, 13 [6.218, 220 L.]).
40
More generally, it may be used, as below
9, of the patient guarding against such adverse weather conditions as
too much wind, sun etc. (Morb. 2. 15.3, 2. 50.5, 2. 51.5 [7.28, 78, 80 L.];
Morb. 3. 2 [7.120 L.]; Vict. 4. 90 [6.656 L.]; Int. 9 [7.188 L.]). The term
στεφoνη might be used of various ring-shaped bodily parts, such as the
38
See Iugler, 1792, 66; Anastassiou and Irmer, 1997, 458–459.
39
Iugler, 1792, 60–69; Haller, 1755, 315–338; Triller I 1766, 463–485.
40
See Petrequin I 1877, 509 with n. 8 and II 1878, 604 with n. 8.
82 commentary
sutura coronalis and the sphincter ani (Pollux 2. 39 and 211). Ermerins
deletes το0 oφ0αλμο0 ‘of the eye’ and understands the ‘ring’ to be the
coronal suture of the skull; he further reads below τò oστrον ‘bone’ (sc.
skull) for τòν χóνδρον ‘cartilage’. He then interprets the pasasage as
referring to cautery in the head, around the coronal suture. There are
indeed ancient parallels for such cautery (especially in Aretaeus); and
they may be relevant to Chapter 4.1, but not to this passage. Here the
στεφoνη is simply the ‘eyeball’ or ‘globe’ though in later authors it is
more specifically applied to the limbus, the rim of the cornea where it
joins the sclerotic (Gal. Commentary on Prognostic, 18 (2). 47 K. and Ruf.
Onom. 26).
41
μj διακαuσ¸ ης πρòς τòν χóνδρον ‘do not cauterize through, up to the
cartilage’: χóνδρος is used of any bodily cartilage, either general (Aph. 6.
19 [4.568 L.]) or particular, such as that in the chest in the area of the
breastbone (Epid. 7. 3 [5.370 L.]), in the nose (Loc. Hom. 3 [6.280 L.]),
or in the ear (Artic. 40 [4.176 L.]). Here, it refers to the tarsal plates,
dense connective tissue in the lids, curved to conform with the shape
of the globe of the eye; these resemble cartilage in consistency, being
composed of densely compacted collagen and elastic fibres.
42
In essence,
this means, ‘do not cauterize too deeply’ (verb διακαiειν) and Sichel
comments on the danger attending such surgical procedures on the eye,
‘danger qu’aujourd’hui nous connaissons suffisament’.
43
The syntax, μj
with aorist subjunctive, is a prohibition, not a subordinate final clause.
σjμεtον ‘it is a sign’: a guide to signs, especially bad or mortal signs, is
a standard feature of many Hippocratic treatises, especially Prognostic,
Prorrhetic 2 and Koan Prognoses.
oταν 0ποχρ¸j τjς ξuσιος ‘when there is enough scraping’: the subjunc-
tive is required.
44
The verb ‘be enough’ is usually, but not invariably,
impersonal and followed, as here, by the genitive case. It occurs only
eight times in the HC (elsewhere once each in Aer., Fract., Mochl., VC,
Mul. 1 and twice in Steril.).
41
See Magnus I 1998 (tr. Waugh), 47–48 on the possible translations ‘margin’, ‘rim’,
or ‘conjunctiva’ all finally rejected in favour of ‘eyeball’.
42
Duke-Elder I 1932, 207.
43
Sichel 141.
44
See Anastassiou, 1980 and cf. GMT § 192. 2.
commentary 83
λαμπρòν αiμα ‘bright blood’: the adjective λαμπρóς (‘bright’ of lights,
1.2; 9.1 and 3) is especially used of the fluids present in the healthy
eye, perhaps associated with the common belief that fire was present
in the eye. It is a bad sign when the eyes lack brightness (Mul. 2. 116
[8.250 L.]). The related idea of reflection in the eye is evident in the
verbs rμφαiνεται, Loc. Hom. 3.3 [6.280 L.] and καταφαiνεται, Morb. 2.
1 [7.8 L.]. In the latter passage, the adjective ‘bright’ is three times
repeated: when phlegm penetrates the vessels of the eye, the ‘brightness’
in the eye is not as ‘bright’ and there is not the same reflective quality
as when it was ‘bright’ and ‘pure’. Cf. also the explanation of sight as a
reflection of ‘light and all bright things’ and its corollary that anything
which is not bright is not so reflected, Carn. 17.1 [8.606 L.]. These ideas
may be related to those of Alkmaion (DK 24 A 5 = Thphr. de sens.
26; A 10 = Aet. 4. 13. 12) and Empedokles (DK 31 B 84 = Arist. de
sens. 437b23).
45
In Plato’s Timaios the eyes are said to conduct light by
means of the pure fire which flows through them, a fire which does
not burn but gives light to the eyes (Pl. Ti. 45b2–46a2; 58c), and in the
Aristotelian Problemata, there is fire in the eyes, but fire without heat,
and for this reason the eye has no sensation of cold (31.22, 959b15). The
bright eye is pure and healthy; and the bright blood of the eye is pure
and healthy. The adjective is applied to blood twice in Koan Prognoses
(7. 593 and 611 [5.722 and 726 L.]); it is applied also to urine, likewise
‘bright and pure’ in health (Epid. 7. 80; cf. 7. 78 [5.436, 434 L.]).
iχuρ αiματuδης j íδατuδης ‘bloody or watery matter’: ichor, in Homer
the blood of the gods, is in the HC body fluids altered in some way,
usually noxious in character. Here we might have expected the transi-
tion to be from (bad) oozing matter to (good) bright blood, not, as the
text has it, vice versa. Thus Foesius, though keeping the vulgate read-
ing, expresses reservations and notes, satis tamen derasam esse palpebram
apparet, si pro cruenta et aquosa sanie, sanguis sincerus et purus effluat, ‘the lid
seems to be sufficiently abraded if in place of bloody and watery stuff
clear pure blood flows out’.
46
It has been argued that ichor can describe
blood serum oozing from a wound after the flow of blood; and that
such usage, where ichor is not harmful (found also in Ulcers, Diseases of
Women and Heart) may indicate a later date for the work.
47
However, the
45
See Longrigg, 1993, 58–60 and 72.
46
Foesius I 736.
47
Duminil, 1977, 74 and 76.
84 commentary
distinction seems to me anachronistic, and alien to ancient ideas. Galen
glosses íδατuδεας íδρωπικoς (linguarum Hippocratis explicatio, 19. 148 K.).
τινι τuν íγρuν φαρμoκων. oπου 0ν0ος rστi χαλκο0. τοuτ_u 0νατρtψαι
‘rub on one of the liquid drugs (lotion, or a runny paste or ointment)
containing flower of copper’: the doctor is expected to be familiar with
the range of drugs available. Calvus’ translation liquido medicamento, in
quo aeris flos sit, ‘with a liquid drug containing flower of copper’, is fol-
lowed in essence by later translators and here. The expression, however,
is odd and the use of oπου ‘where’ is peculiar (hence Foesius’ comment
ποον fortasse legendum ‘“such as” should perhaps be read’);
48
also τοu-
τ_ω is tautologous. It may be that we should amplify the expression to
translate, rather, ‘rub on some liquid drug: where flower of copper is
available, use that’.
Lotions of copper salts (both sulphate of copper, popularly known as
‘blue stone’, and nitrate of copper) are powerful astringents and haemo-
statics, especially useful in eye diseases in antiquity and modern times
(Morb. 3, frequently and see also Dioscorides 5. 77; the Galenic de simpli-
cium medicamentorum temperamentis ac facultatibus 12. 242 K.; de compositione
medicamentorum secundum locos, 12. 701 K.). There is an extensive literature
on the subject of therapy by copper.
49
Flower of copper is oxidized cop-
per, or copper oxide, formed in the smelting process: water was poured
on the hot melted metal to make it set more quickly and the small par-
ticles which spattered out in response to sudden cooling were known as
‘flowers’.
50
The lack of specification of quantity or weight in the ingre-
dients is usual; in any case, minerals were liable to variation due to
inherent impurities and vagaries in processing.
0νατρtψαι ‘rub on’: Joly translates ‘faire une onction’; but the idea of
friction or massage is certainly present in the verb, by contrast with
διαχρiειν below (cf., in a similar context, Morb. 2. 13 [7.24 L.] and,
more generally, Off. 17, 23, 24 [3.322, 328, 332 L.]). The prefix 0να-
literally ‘throughout’ is semantically otiose, unless perhaps it implies
repetition and improvement (see LSJ on the prefix in composition of
verbal forms). The verb is repeated in 6 below, applied both to patient
48
Foesius I 736, n. 10.
49
See Majno, 1991, 490, n. 85; Douthwaite, 1963, 370ff.; Nielsen, 1974; Nutton,
1985, 143; BMD s.v. ‘copper’.
50
See Nielson, 1974, 42; cf. Majno, 1991, 490, n. 85.
commentary 85
(for which cf. Mul. 2. 185 [8.366 L.], Artic. 9 [4.102 L.], Morb. 3. 10
[7.130 L.]) and medication (for which cf. Mul. 1. 109 [8.232 L.], Morb. 3.
17 [7.156 L.], Ulc. 12 [6.412 L.]).
2. Iστερον δr ‘afterwards’, ‘later on’: the adverb, twice repeated here
(cf. 5 below), intends a different time-scale from rπειτα ‘then’ in 3 above.
The collocation is uncommon; Ermerins emends in 5 and tinkers in 4.
However the repetition of the demonstrative should be retained and
the extension to all cases is appropriate.
τò τjς ξuσιος καi τò τjς καuσιος ‘with regard to the procedure of
scraping and the procedure of cautery’: the expression, though peculiar
is readily understood.
oταν … κεκα0αρμrνα ¸j τo rλκεα καi βλαστoν¸η ‘when … the wounds
have been cleaned and it (sc. σoρξ ‘flesh’) is growing’: perfect partici-
ple is used with present subjunctive. This sentence is another instance
of the compression so evident throughout the work. The sense implicit
is that wounds must be properly cleaned to avoid premature forma-
tion of granulation tissue and with it premature closure over bulging
flesh. An explicit statement in Head Wounds elucidates: ‘When it has
been cleaned, the wound should become quite dry; for in this way it
would become sound most quickly, the growing flesh being dry and
not moist, and in this way the wound would have no excess flesh’ (VC
15 [3.244 L.]; cf. Ulc. 6, 8 [6.404, 406 L.] with Galen’s exposition in
de methodo medendi, 10. 281 K.; also Loc. Hom. 38 [6.328 L.] on tech-
niques to heal wounds which have closed prematurely).
51
Proper heal-
ing of wounds on the eyelids must have been particularly problematical:
trachoma was liable to leave permanent scarring. The language here
resembles that of Head Wounds and Ulcers: βλαστoνειν ‘grow’ occurs in
both as a technical term of knitting tissue.
τoμνειν τομjν διo το0 βρrγματος ‘make a cut (lit. ‘cut a cut’, cognate
accusative) through the front of the head’: the bregma, simply glossed
by Hesychios as ‘the middle of the head’ (Latte, 1953, 345), is the
point formed by the intersection of the sagittal and coronal sutures,
that is the anterior fontanelle, where the bones of the newborn do not
make full contact with each other. As it is the point in the vault of
51
See Petrequin I 1877, 274, n. 3; also Craik 1998, 193–195.
86 commentary
the skull where the bone is thinnest and weakest, and where there is
least and thinnest flesh, wounds there are especially dangerous (VC 2,
cf. 13 [3.188, 230 L.]). Incidence of the anatomical term bregma in
the HC (not in Loc. Hom.) is as follows: Morb. 2 (six times); Mul. 1 and
2 (twice each); VC (four times), also Epid. 5, 6, 7; Prorrh. 1 and Coac.
Foesius translates sectionem per sinciput facere ‘make an incision in the top
of the head’ and comments haec videtur esse quaedam íποσπα0ισμο0
species ‘this seems to be a sort of hypospathismos’; this reference to a
type of eye operation common in late antiquity was overlooked by later
commentators.
52
τ_u rναiμ_ω φαρμoκ_ω ‘with a drug to stop bleeding’: LSJ ‘for staunch-
ing blood’; Sichel ‘qu’on met sur les plaies récentes’ perhaps echoing
Foesius, medicamento quod cruentis vulneribus imponitur;
53
Joly, ‘qui l’arrête’.
The definite article suggests one particular drug and perhaps this is
intended, there being one par excellence (cypress favoured in the same
operation, Morb. 2. 13; but fine salt followed by compress, 18 [7.24,
32 L.]). Ermerins deletes the article, adding instead τινι. If we follow this
reasoning, τ_u understood as contracted τινι might be kept, with change
only in word order (cf. τινι τuν íγρuν φαρμoκων above, 4.1; also μετo
γε το0 ξηρο0 read by Cornarius below, 9.3). The blood is apparently
staunched as soon as the wound is made; similarly cutting and immedi-
ate healing is the treatment for the ‘stricken’ in the laconic instructions
of Diseases 2 (σχiσαι α0το0 τò βρrγμα καi rπjν 0πορρυ¸j τò αiμα συν-
0εiς τo χεiλεα i0σ0αι καi καταδjσαι ‘cut into the bregma and when
the blood flows bring the edges together and bind them up’, Morb. 2.
25 [7.40 L.]; cf. Morb. 3. 3 [7.122 L.]). The vasculature of the scalp is
such that bleeding from even shallow wounds is profuse, the blood ves-
sels tending to remain open when cut, especially in the arteries, which
anastomose freely with one another.
τjν κεφαλjν κα0jραι ‘purge the head’: the reason for this is to stop
further noxious matter descending from head to eyes, and to allow
noxious matter in the eyes to descend to and be eliminated from
the nose. Calvus, translating omnium ultimum negotium est, ‘last of all it
is appropriate’, regards πoντων as neuter (of treatments), rather than
masculine (of patients).
52
Foesius I 688, 736, n. 11.
53
Foesius I 689.
commentary 87
V
Corrective cutting and cautery are applied to the eyelid, when it is
‘thicker’ than is natural. Editors’ attempts to identify this condition
conflict. Foesius comments huic vitium simile πτλωσις medicis dicitur, ‘a
trouble similar to this is called ptilosis by doctors’. Sichel believes that
this chapter too relates to trachoma, ‘surtout aux granulations très-
volumineuses, fongiformes ou sarcomateuses’; if this is correct, the topic
may be loosely connected with the idea of excess tissue forming in
the healing process, 4.2. Ermerins remains agnostic: de palpebris iusto
crassioribus; sed quo vitio crassae factae sint, non constat, ‘on lids which are
quite thick; but it is not clear by what trouble they are made so’. Joly
takes the condition to be ‘une conjonctivite printanière bien décrite’
and understands the operation to be on the lower lid not, as in 4, to the
upper lid.
54
Indeed, the author’s vague description militates against precise iden-
tification. But perhaps pterygion (a fibro-vascular membrane arising at
the inner corner of the lower lid, sometimes growing over the cornea
and impeding vision) has more claim to consideration than Foesius’
ptilosis (a disease of the lids where the edges are swollen and inflamed
and the lashes fall off) as the former is a Hippocratic term and the lat-
ter is not. (But admittedly there is a paucity of Hippocratic, though a
multitude of Galenic, parallels.) The condition pterygion is briefly men-
tioned in Prorrhetic 2 (Prorrh. 2. 20 [9.48 L.]). Reference in Diseases 2 to
a condition where the eyelids seem to overhang, or be pendulous, and
where the vision is blurred is probably unrelated (Morb. 2. 19 [7.32 L.];
cf. also Int. 4 [7.178 L.]).
Celsus accurately describes the formation of a pterygion, Lat. unguis,
and recommends that it be cut out if it has become established and cras-
situdo ‘thickness’ has developed through time (7. 7. 4). Galenic sources
(many of doubtful attribution, but it is the date which is relevant here)
give a very long list of eye troubles, classified according to location:
affections inside the lids include ‘roughness’ and ‘thickness’, affections
outside the lids include ‘pustules’ and affections at the inner corners of
the lids include pterygion; there is also a trouble where the lids seem
‘rather swollen and constantly stream’ (introductio seu medicus, 14. 767 K,
771 K.; on pterygion cf. also de remediis parabilibus, 14. 410 K.; de tumoribus
54
Foesius I 736, n. 12; Sichel 143; Ermerins XL; Joly 173.
88 commentary
praeter naturam, 7. 732 K.; on ptilosis cf. de methodo medendi 10. 1004 K.)
In addition to pterygion many types of palpebro-conjunctival cysts or
lesions might be said to cause ‘thickness’ in the lid. Common conditions
of this type include conjunctival papilloma (typically lower lid), where
there is a tumour or an overgrowth of skin along the lid margin—such
growths are not harmful, but are usually removed for cosmetic rea-
sons by simple excision, not extending deeply into the tissues; and cha-
lazion (typically upper lid), which is a chronic inflammatory granuloma
caused primarily by the retention of secretion from a tarsal gland—the
regular treatment is incision and curettage.
55
The expression is inelegant and the connection jerky. The initial
words, with asyndeton, indicate the problem to be treated; a second
phrase in loose apposition indicates the treatment, expressed in two
phases by nominatives with infinitives in instructions. Finally, an adver-
bial clause is followed by general instruction for ongoing therapy. Once
again, nominative participles with jussive infinitives are employed to
express instructions, 0ποταμuν … rπικα0σαι … φυλασσóμενος … προσ-
τεtλαι.
1. παχuτερα τjς φuσιος ‘thicker than is natural’: the term φuσις ‘nature’,
ubiquitous in Hippocratic medicine, is used in two distinct ways in this
short section: first of the nature appropriate to a bodily part (the eye-
lid, its size) and second of the intrinsic character of a bodily part (the
eyelashes, their position or perhaps their delicacy). Sichel’s interpre-
tation of the second φuσις in a concrete sense recalling the root φuω
‘grow’, intending the point where the lashes grow or have their roots,
tr. ‘l’implantation des cils’, is here followed;
56
but a reference to the
delicacy of the eyelashes, in the sense that they are easily scorched,
would be appropriate also. The term βλrφαρις ‘eyelash’ (Ar., Arist., X.)
is unnecessary as in context ‘hair’ is clear.
τò κoτω 0ποταμuν τjν σoρκα oκóσην ε0μαρrστατα δuν¸η ‘cut away
the flesh below (lit. as to the area below) as much as you can, very
gently’. This is yet another instance of odd, compressed expression and
emendation is unnecessary. The location κoτω ‘below’ is ambiguous:
55
See Duke-Elder V 1952, 4976–4981, 5031–5033; Bedford, 1971, 166–167, figs 118–
120; Trobe and Hackel, 2002, 9, 98; Spalton et al., 2005, 48 with fig. 2. 36, 49 with fig. 2.
39, 51 with fig. 2. 45, 106 with fig. 4. 44.
56
Cf. already Foesius I 736, n. 13.
commentary 89
reference might be to the lower lid, or to the lower part of the upper lid,
or simply to the area below the growth. Caution is constantly enjoined:
the doctor must work ‘very gently’, with instruments which are not too
hot (clearly here metal; perhaps a reason not to link this chapter with
the preceding one on trachoma, treated by wooden instruments) and
‘taking care’ (see on 2 above for avoidance of ‘white-hot’ instruments,
and for ‘considering’).
rπικα0σαι ‘cauterise over’: the compound expresses a precise operation.
The variation between rπικαiω ‘cauterise over’, παρακαiω ‘cauterise by’
(3.3), διακαiω ‘cauterise through’ (3.3, four times repeated; 4.1) and the
simple verb καiω (1.1; 3.1, three times repeated) is not for stylistic effect
but has important semantic weight. Similarly, in Head Wounds there is
significant variation in the verbs used of trephination: πρiειν ‘trephine’
used without regard to depth, διαπρiειν ‘trephine through’ used to
indicate complete perforation of the bone to the dura and rκπρiειν
‘trephine out’ (commonly with 0φαιρεtν ‘take away’) used to indicate
‘trephine and remove’.
57
τ_u 0ν0ει oπτ_u λεπτ_u προστεtλαι ‘apply heated very fine flower (of
copper)’: the adjective λεπτóς (5 and 6) may refer to quality (‘fine’) or
quantity (‘slight’); here surely the former, in the sense ‘finely ground’.
58
The verb προστrλλω is used seven times in the HC but the only parallel
for the sense ‘apply’ is in Sores (rλατjριον λεπτòν προστεtλαι, Ulc. 14
[6.418 L.]).
iητρεuειν τo λοιπo ‘give the further treatment’: i.e. ‘continue the usual
treatment’. Foesius, following Cornarius, keeps this text, but translates
as if reading [uς] τo λοιπo sc. rλκεα, ‘treat like other lesions’.
59
The verb
iητρεuω is especially favoured in the surgical works Articulations, Fractures
and Head Wounds though not confined to these (cf. τo λοιπo iητρεuειν
τò rλκος. VC 14 [3.242 L.]). Similar expressions are: ijσ0αι uς καi τo
λοιπo, Int. 24 [7.228 L.]; τo λοιπo 0εωρεtν, Coac. 3. 483 [5.692 L.]; τo
λοιπo 0εραπεuειν, Mul. 2. 110 [8.238 L.].
57
Cf. Hanson 1999, 117.
58
See Petrequin II 1888, 180, n. 3 on Fract. 26 [3.502 L.].
59
Foesius I 689, 736, n. 13.
90 commentary
VI
Instructions are given on the preparation of a salve for irritation of
the eyelid. Sichel sums up the condition as ‘ophthalmie catarrhale
avec érosion’, having introduced it more elaborately as ‘conjonctivite
… fréquente, due aux vicissitudes de la température atmosphérique …
qui est accompagnée de démangeaisons, d’érosion des angles, etc. …’
Ermerins succinctly notes palpebrarum psoriasis et pruritus memorantur, ‘rash
and irritation of the lids are discussed’ and Joly simply states ‘bléphar-
ite’.
60
The interrelation of terminology for various forms of eye irrita-
tion can be clearly seen in the pseudo-Galenic definition of ξηροφαλ-
μα, lit. ‘dry ophthalmia’ as a condition where the inner corners of the
eye are rough and inflamed with red lids, acrid tears, ulcration, rough-
ness and, related to the term used here, are κνησμδεις ‘showing irri-
tation’ (introductio seu medicus, 14. 769 K.) Blepharitis, an extremely com-
mon disease, is now viewed as taking two main forms: simple squamous
(scaly) blepharitis and more complex purulent follicular blepharitis.
61
The ingredients and preparation of the recipe for this salve have
certain correspondences with those for eye-pastes detailed in Acute Dis-
eases and in Diseases of Women 1 (grape juice, ‘burnt copper’, grindstone
and phrase λεον τρψας, all in Acut. Sp. 65–66 [5.520 L.]; grape juice
in Mul. 1. 102–105 [8.224, 226, 228 L.]; cf., for lesions of the head,
grape juice, flower of copper, and use of red copper vessel, in Ulc. 12,
cf. 17 [6.412, 420 L.]); but there are some features peculiar to On Sight,
especially in vocabulary: the term βλιον ‘little lump’ is a Hippocratic
hapax legomenon, as is φολς ‘scale’. The extreme compression typical of
On Sight renders the sense obscure; but parallels permit the amplifi-
cation essential for comprehension. (See translation.) There is copious
evidence, especially from Roman antiquity, of a huge demand for eye-
salves and an extensive industry in their manufacture, marketing and
distribution. Celsus lists at length the recipes of many different doctors.
The section is carelessly written, with careless overuse of the verb
τρβειν, used alike of preparation of ingredients and application to the
patient: τρψας … ποτρψας … τρβειν … τρψας … νατρβειν …
τρψας. Various steps in the preparation are distinguished by use of
introductory πειτα ‘then’, ‘next’ (cf. 3.1 above). Nominative participles
60
Sichel 159, 148; Ermerins XL; Joly 170.
61
Duke-Elder V 1952, 4949–4968; Bedford, 1971, 42, figs 26 and 26a; Trobe and
Hackel, 2002, 3–4, 59–60; Spalton et al., 2005, 107.
commentary 91
and jussive infinitives are again prevalent, varied by the jussive sub-
junctive παραχrας ‘you must pour’. oπóταν ‘whenever’, introducing the
section, is used only here in On Sight; perhaps the conjunction indicates
the common incidence of blepharitis and the frequency with which the
physician would prescribe this treatment.
oπóταν δr βλrφαρα ψωρι¸0 καi ξυσμòς rχ¸η ‘whenever the eyelids are
itchy and there is an irritation’: elsewhere, the verb ψωρι0ν is used of
bladder discomfort (Aph. 4. 77 [4.530 L.]; Nat. Hom. 14 [6.66 L.]) and the
substantive ξυσμóς is used of lung conditions (Loc. Hom. 14.8 [6.306 L.];
Morb. 2. 58.1 [7.90 L.]). The synonymous κνησμóς seen in I and mss
derived from I may be an old variant. κνησμóς is more common in the
HC (twenty occurrences against eight of ξυσμóς and one of ξυσμj) and
is used in Prorrhetic 2, seen here to have many resonances with On Sight,
of irritation in the forehead associated with dim vision and redness in
the eyes (Prorrh. 2. 30 [9.60 L.]). However, the occurrence of ξυσμóς or
ξυσμj in works which have other affinities in vocabulary with On Sight
(Morb. 2, Loc. Hom., gynaecological treatises) is in its favour. Also, ξυσμóς
is difficilior being glossed by the more common κνησμóς by Erotian (Ξ 2,
from Epidemics 5), Galen (linguarum Hippocratis explicatio, 19. 125 K.; cf. 112
K.) and Hesychios (Latte II 730, 92).
62
0ν0εος χαλκο0 βuλιον πρòς 0κóνην τρiψας lit. ‘having rubbed a piece
of flower of copper on a grindstone’: the only other occurrence of
0κóνη ‘grindstone’ in the HC is in recipes for ‘watery’ eyes in the two
passages of Acute Diseases noted above—σποδòς ‘ash’ ground with fat
and oμφoκιον πικρjς ðμφακος ‘sour grape juice’; χαλκòς κεκαυμrνος
‘burnt copper’ mixed with saffron and sweet wine (Acut. Sp. 65 and 66
[= 32, 33, 2.520 L.]).
rπειτα τò βλrφαρον 0ποτρiψας α0το0 lit. ‘then having rubbed his eye-
lid’: this phrase should be deleted, as instructions for use of the paste
ought not to precede instructions for mixing it; also the reference of
α0το0 (? the patient) is unclear. Ermerins, who regards the passage as
hopelessly corrupt, suggests (but does not print) emendation of the verb
to rπιστρrψας ‘having turned over’ and deletion of α0το0 καi τóτε.
62
See Jouanna 1983, 110, 102; Craik 1998, 149.
92 commentary
καi τóτε τjν φολiδα το0 χαλκο0 τρiβειν uς λεπτοτoτην ‘and at that
time rub the flakes of copper as fine as possible’: the word for ‘flakes’
is hapax in the HC. Foesius in Oeconomia, in an aside s.v. φολλιδuδης
from Epidemics, relates Erotian Φ 13 φóλιδα χαλκο0 τjν λεπiδα to this
passage.
63
The accusative case and the placing of the gloss in Erotian
provide strong support for this judgment, which has gone unnoticed
by later commentators, including Nachmanson who is unjustifiably
sceptical that φóλιδα relates to On Sight on the grounds that the work
is not cited by Erotian: this is circular argument and general lack of
citations can be readily explained by the shortness of the work. Duminil
on Ulc. 13. 1 [6.416 L.] with no justification but citing Erotian reads
φολiδα for codd. λεπiδα.
64
Galen glosses λεπτo οIτως rνiοτε καλεt τo
0ραιo (linguarum Hippocratis explicatio, 19. 118 K.); that Galen cites usage
in Places in Man shows another instance of convergence in vocabulary.
rπειτα χυλòν ðμφακος διη0ημrνον παραχrας καi τρiψας λεtον ‘then you
must pour alongside (the flakes) the strained juice of unripe grapes, and
rub smooth’: that is, make a well in the dry ingredients and pour in
the liquid ones. The adjective ‘smooth’, twice repeated, is proleptic.
The phrase is formulaic in such instructions, seen especially in the
gynaecological and surgical treatises (Ulc., Fist., Haem.) and in Internal
Affections. The same form of the verb (χrω ‘pour’, aorist rχεα) can be
seen in Affections, in a recipe for an emetic mixing melicrat with vinegar,
and the same expression δòς πιεtν, ‘administer to drink’, occurs in
both works (Aff. 15 [6.224 L.], Vid. Ac. 7). In a salve mentioned by
Aristophanes, garlic, fig-juice and spurge are key ingredients (Ar. Pl.
665). Grape-juice, a mild astringent, is a standard ingredient in recipes
for eye salves. That Galen cites it as a Hippocratic specific for the eyes
may indicate familiarity with On Sight (de methodo medendi, 10. 940 K., de
compositione medicamentorum secundum locos, 12. 702 K.; cf. commentary on
Acut., 15. 916 K.) Dioskorides describes the process of pressing unripe
grapes to extract the juice in early summer, then leaving it in the
sun to evaporate; he regards it as a good treatment for rough eyelids.
Acetic acid was a common ingredient in collyria, frequently mixed with
copper compounds, then filtered and evaporated to form crystals.
65
63
See also Foesius I 736, n. 15 on aeris squamam ‘scale of copper’, as of a fish or a
serpent, used to treat ulceration of the lids.
64
Nachmanson 1917, 360; Duminil, 1998, 63; see also 43.
65
See Nielson, 1974, 26–28, 50.
commentary 93
τò δr λοιπòν rν χαλκ_u rρυ0ρ_u παραχrων ‘then pour the rest (of the
grape pulp) alongside (the other ingredients) into (a vessel of) red cop-
per’: red copper is frequently specified as the appropriate material for
mixing such salves, the intent being to enhance the copper content of
the mixture; there is an extended set of instructions in Galen and the
further injunction that the prepared mixture should be stored in a cop-
per box (de compositione medicamentorum secundum locos, 12. 709–711, 738).
μυσσωτóς ‘myssotos’: a savoury dish based on garlic or onion (Galen
linguarum Hippocratis explicatio, 19. 124 K.; Loc. Hom. 47. 5 [6.346 L.]; Epid.
2. 6. 28 [5.138 L.]); on its consistency cf. Ulc. 12, 17 [6.412, 420 L.].
rπειδoν ξηραν0¸j ‘when it has dried’: that the procedure, here tele-
scoped, would take several days is indicated in parallel passages.
VII
The treatment of ‘night blindness’, an anomaly of vision marked by
impairment of dark adaptation, is outlined. Night blindness takes two
main forms, distinguished in a modern account which could almost be
a translation of Galen’s formulation (introductio sive medicus, 14. 776 K.;
cf. linguarum Hippocratis explicatio, 19. 124 K.), as day-blindness, where
‘the patient sees poorly in good illuminations and normally in the dusk’
and night-blindness, where ‘vision in moderate illumination is good,
but in feeble illumination it is deficient’.
66
The converse formulation,
followed by Sichel—nyctalopie as ‘cécité de jour, vision de nuit’ and
héméralopie as ‘cécité de nuit, vision de jour’—is confusingly current
also.
67
Night blindness is not a substantive disease, but a symptom asso-
ciated with deficiency of vitamin A (sometimes called ‘the ophthalmic
vitamin’), which is present in animal fats such as milk, butter and eggs;
and, above all, in liver. Night blindness can occur both in individu-
als suffering from any condition which depletes blood vitamins, espe-
cially such febrile conditions as pneumonia, pulmonary tuberculosis or
malaria; and also in communities affected by famine or severe mal-
nutrition. In ancient medicine, symptoms such as night blindness and
even fever were frequently regarded and treated as diseases in their own
66
Duke-Elder I 1932, 973; see also II 1938, 1423 and Jayle et al., 1959.
67
See Sichel 149.
94 commentary
right. There was, however, much awareness of, and interest in, the ways
in which different ‘diseases’ might interact, developing or mutating into
something apparently different, and the Hippocratic doctors were fully
aware of the typical associative context of night blindness, recognizing
the ways in which it tended to accompany other illnesses; also, more
generally, the ways in which the eye might be affected by complications
in other apparently unrelated diseases.
68
The text of this short chapter is compressed, or, rather, truncated and
corrupt. There are two main problems, relating to two aspects of the
prescribed treatment, which is expressed in a series of superlatives: first
(surgical), two things are done to the patient’s neck ‘as much as possible’
and ‘for a very long time’, but M’s κατξας ‘having broken’ is nonsense
and πισας ‘having pressed’ is unclear; second (dietary), the patient is
to eat a lot of raw liver with honey, but this injunction is both intrin-
sically improbable and quite unparalleled, and further the expression
is unclear. Sichel keeps κατξας but describes the verb as obscure and
probably corrupt; he takes it in the sense of ‘l’appui des ventouses scari-
fiées’. Ermerins reads κατασχσας ‘having cut’ but leaves the entire sec-
tion untranslated, dismissing it as locus male scriptus ‘a badly transcribed
passage’ and more severely totus locus pessime se habet ‘the whole passage
is in a dreadful condition’; in the introduction he commits himself only
to the curt nyctalopis curatio describitur ‘a treatment for night-blindness
is described’. Joly marks the verb with daggers of corruption, and
attempts no translation.
69
The second problem has attracted consider-
able scholarly interest. The loosely appended expression ‘one or two’ is
unclear, as is the reference of μγιστον ‘very big’. Debate has centred on
whether one or two huge ox livers are to be eaten (so Joly, ‘il faut faire
avaler, crus et trempés dans du miel, un ou deux foies de boeuf, aussi
gros que possible’), whether one huge ox liver is to be eaten one or two
times (so Sichel, ‘il faut faire manger, une ou deux fois, un foie de boeuf
cru aussi gros que possible, trempé dans du miel’), or in one or two
portions (so Ermerins, who suggests the insertion of μρος ‘portion’).
70
The difficulties may be resolved by comparison with content in
other treatises (especially Diseases 2, Prorrhetic 2 and Epidemics 6; but
also Diseases 3, Epidemics 2, Koan Prognoses, Prognostic and Places in Man).
In particular, from the association of night blindness with the disease
68
See Grmek, 1980, 221.
69
Sichel 150; Ermerins XL; Joly 171.
70
See also Bier, 1928 and Gourevitch, 1980.
commentary 95
known as κυνγγχη ‘the choker’ it is possible to put the treatment here
prescribed in a wider context. (This disease is commonly likened to
diphtheria and frequently translated ‘angina’ or ‘quinsy’ but as its main
distinguishing symptom—and distinctive etymological derivation, lit.
‘dog-strangling’—is a sensation of choking, it is here designated simply
‘the choker’.)
71
We can emend and expand the text to give a sense
in accord with parallel treatments of night blindness and associated
conditions in the HC and other sources. However, while the text may
be satisfactorily explicated in this way, and it is clear that something has
been lost, restoration is offered for example only. It does, however, seem
certain that a reference to garlic has dropped out. The two aspects of
the therapy prescribed are: first, cupping (as Sichel perceived, on the
basis of medical probability, but without emendation or argument); and
second, a dietary régime of (raw) garlic and (cooked) liver.
The condition of night vision is discussed in Prorrhetic 2 (Prorrh. 2. 33
and 34 [9.64, 66 L.]) from a theoretical standpoint: it tends to affect
boys and young men, who sometimes recover spontaneously in seven
months time; elimination of noxious matter, especially downwards, is
beneficial; patients with this disease or a flux of tears of long dura-
tion should be asked if they suffered headache before these concretions.
As in On Sight, it is explicitly stated that purging is useful in therapy,
and implicitly supposed that bodily fixation is significant in aetiology.
A more pragmatic approach to the condition is found in Epidemics 6
(Epid. 6. 7.1 [5.332 L.]): night blindness is associated in a particular year
with painful ‘ophthalmias’ and with other symptoms or ailments, above
all, with coughs, pneumonia and ‘chokers’.
72
The doctor of Epidemics
6 found the array of symptoms intractable. Treatments essayed, with-
out great success, included laxatives, emetics and phlebotomy, includ-
ing surgery on the tongue. Among the patients some endured great
pain, especially those who suffered from swollen vessels in the tem-
ples and the neck. Night blindness is associated with a similar range
of unpleasant symptoms in a shorter account in Epidemics 4 (Epid. 4. 52
[5.192 L.]): ears and mouth are affected (toothache and mouth ulcers);
there is cough, fever and digestive disorders. The association between
eye trouble and ‘the choker’ appears also in Epidemics 2 (Epid. 2. 6. 12
[5.134 L.]), in the brief instructions ‘carry out phlebotomy for the chok-
71
See Grmek, 1989, 337–338; cf. Craik, 1998, 185–186.
72
Littré used the phrase ‘le toux de Périnthe’ for the pathology; see also Grmek,
1980.
96 commentary
ing disease and for opthalmia’. Also, there is a full clinical description
of symptoms apparent in ‘the choker’: the focus here is on appear-
ance of, and sensations in, neck, throat and jaws (Epid. 2. 2. 24 [5.94,
96 L.]).
There are many other references to the same disease, or rather,
perceived group of diseases. In Koan Prognoses (Coac. 2. 357–372 [5.660,
662 L.]), many bad or mortal signs are specified in the group of diseases
designated τo κυναγχικo ‘the choker types’: much attention is paid
to observation of throat (internal) and neck (external) and when the
disease ‘turns to’ the lung, sufferers either die in seven days or become
purulent; in Prognostic (Prog. 23 [2.174 L.]) ulceration of the throat is
a similarly bad sign. Bleeding from the neck is there regarded as the
safest and best course but it is recognized that there are dangers in the
treatment as well as in the condition itself. Writing on throat ulceration,
the author refers to the risks attendant in cutting the uvula; the verbs
used are 0ποτoμνεσ0αι and 0ποσχoζεσ0αι (discussed further below).
In Affections also (Aff. 4 [6.212 L.]), the verb σχoζειν is used of the
same operation: if the swelling of the uvula does not go down, the
treatment is ðπισ0εν ξυρjσαντα τjν κεφαλjν. σικuας προσβoλλειν δuο.
καi το0 αiματος 0φαιρrειν uς πλεtστον. καi 0νασπoσαι oπiσω τò çε0μα
το0 φλrγματος, ‘after shaving the back of the head, apply two cupping
vessels, draw off as much blood as possible and draw backwards the
flow of phlegm’; then, if there is still no amelioration, the knife is
applied, σχoσαντα μαχαιρi_ω … σχoζειν. ‘having cut with a knife …
cut’. In Diseases 3 (Morb. 3. 10 [7.128, 130 L.]) discussion of ‘the choker’
leads to treatment of παρακυνoγχη, ‘a variant on the choker’: for this,
phlebotomy of vessels in the chest, bleeding from the arms (if the
patient is strong enough), incision of the vessels under the tongue
and purging with elaterion are all prescribed; this meshes with material
following on treatment of ‘the choker’ in Diseases 2. Similarly, in Regimen
in Acute Diseases (Acut. Sp. 9–10 [= 6, 2.412 L.]) therapy of two forms
of ‘the choker’ is by phlebotomy of vessels in the arms and under
the tongue. Purgation by elaterion and bleeding from the arm are both
prescribed also in Places in Man (Loc. Hom. 30 [6.322 L.]).
In Diseases 2, several kinds of ‘choker’ are discussed and differenti-
ated. These passages provide illumination of the treatment adumbrated
in our treatise. In the first brief mention of ‘the choker’ in Diseases 2
(Morb. 2. 9 [7.16 L.]), only one type is noted. Its locus is in the jaws
and the area of the neck, sometimes also under the tongue or some-
what above the chest. In the ensuing section, the author proceeds to
commentary 97
discuss the clearly related disease σταφυλj ‘the grape’, where surgery
on the swollen uvula is imperative.
73
In the second part of Diseases
2, three different types of ‘the choker’ are discussed at some length
and followed by a discussion of ‘the grape’. In these three instances of
‘the choker’, the differences lie in symptoms, development and, accord-
ingly, therapy indicated, also to some extent in the supposed aetiol-
ogy and site of the trouble. The treatment in the first type (Morb. 2.
26.2 [7.40 L.]) is to apply a cupping vessel to the first cervical ver-
tebra, then after shaving the hair beside the ears, to apply cupping
there, and once pressure is established, to leave the cupping vessel in
place for as long a time as possible (πρòς τòν σφóνδυλον τòν rν τ_u τρα-
χjλ_ω τòν πρuτον … παραξυρjσας … καi rπjν 0ποσφiγξ¸η τjν σικuην
r0ν προσκεtσ0αι uς πλεtστον χρóνον).
74
Extensive follow-up treatment
includes purging by suppositories or enema. The treatment in the sec-
ond type (Morb. 2. 27 [7.42 L.]) is to apply a cupping vessel as in the
first, then to apply a sponge soaked in hot water to neck and jaws;
again, there are extensive further recommendations in which a new
element is the prescription, where empyema is developing, of a bedtime
snack of raw garlic, as many cloves as possible (σκóροδα uμo τρωγrτω
uς πλεtστα) accompanied by neat strong wine. In both cases, fumiga-
tion too is practised. The third type (Morb. 2. 28 [7.46 L.]) differs from
the others: it is less serious; treatment is by dietary manipulation and
application of poultices. Also, the ‘back of the tongue’ is affected.
75
In
this respect, it seems to serve as a transition to ‘the grape’, the sub-
ject of the ensuing section (Morb. 2. 29 [7.46 L.]); there too the jaws
are swollen but the main problem lies in the uvula, which must be
pressed against the palate and its extremity cut (0ποπιrσας διαταμεtν
0κρον).
From these parallels in the treatment of ‘the choker’, which in inci-
dence is associated with night blindness in Epidemics 6, it is evident that
the procedures so peremptorily indicated in our text are application
of cupping and consumption of raw garlic. Blood-letting (phlebotomy
or venesection) was a favoured Hippocratic recourse in many diseases;
but—in part because it was so familiar, in part because it was a tech-
nique learned by observation rather than by reading—few descrip-
tions of it survive. Celsus exceptionally gives a description, stressing
73
See Jouanna, 1983, 222–223, n. 6; 140, n. 8.
74
On the text, see Jouanna, 1983, 232–233, n. 1.
75
See Jouanna, 1983, 235, n. 7.
98 commentary
its importance in diseases which, like ‘the choker’, constrict the throat
(2. 10. 1–17). The use of honey-coated garlic—presumably the honey
intended to make the garlic more palatable, or easier to swallow, like
a sugar-coated pill—is repeated in a prescription to purge a strong
patient overcome by fever brought on by fatigue or by a journey in
the section on fevers in Diseases 2: σκóροδα δο0ναι rς μrλι βoπτων (Morb.
2. 43.3 [7.60 L.]). In a long series of cleaning-out prescriptions found in
Internal Affections, all vegetables save garlic are proscribed; of garlic the
patient is to eat as many (but it is not clear whether the plural indicates
cloves or heads) as possible, raw, baked or boiled: … uς πλεtστα τρω-
γrτω καi uμo καi oπτo καi rφ0o (Int. 21 [7.220 L.]). Garlic, especially
when eaten raw, was widely regarded as having laxative and diuretic
properties (Aff. 54[6.264 L.], Vict. 2. 54 [6.556 L.]; on honey cf. Aff.
58 [6.266 L.]). One element remains to be explained: the presence of
(?raw) ox liver.
I can discover no case of a patient being made to eat raw liver, with
or without honey. It is not used even in poultices or pessaries, though
various unlikely and unappealing animal applications are specified,
especially in the gynaecological works. Thus, bull bile is common (see
Mul. 1. 75 [= 84, 8.168, 206 L.], Nat. Mul. 32 [7.362 L.]) and in one
place we find the specification of dry bull bile with fine honey (Ulc.
12, 13 [6.414 L.]). Other parts used are ‘ox marrow’ with almonds
and flour boiled in water to form a paste for use as an ointment (Nat.
Mul. 100 [7.416 L.]; cf. Mul. 1. 34 [8.82 L.], and perhaps 90 [8.214 L.]
‘ox flesh’, an ingredient in a pessary). In another passage, a pessary
as emmenagogue includes pig and ox bile mixed with honey (Mul.
1. 74 [8.156 L.]). The poultices prescribed for ‘the choker’ were of
a less unpleasant type: flour boiled with wine and olive oil (Morb. 2.
28.3 [7.46 L.]) or a mixture including elaterion and honey (Mul. 1. 97
[8.224 L.], close in context to recipes for eye ointments at 102 and 105
[8.224, 228 L.]). Emendation such as δiδοναι rν μrλιτι βoπτων jπαρ
βοòς uμòν καταπλoσσειν (or καταπλoσμα) μrγιστον uς 0ν δuνηται iν j
δuο jμrρας ‘prescribe as a poultice raw ox liver, dipping it in honey,
as big as possible, for one or two days’ might be considered; but it is
unlikely that poultices are relevant here.
The regular treatment for night blindness, authenticated in a wide
range of later sources—Herophilos, Celsus, Paul of Aigina, Aretaeus,
Galen and Pliny—was to give a meal of liver, while using the cooking
steam or juices as an eye-lotion (gravy from roasting, de compositione
medicamentorum secundum locos, Gal. 12. 802 K; wine used in boiling, Plin.
commentary 99
NH 28. 47).
76
Frequently, goat’s liver is specified, perhaps because the
goat was supposed to have good night vision (billy-goat to be preferred,
Celsus 6. 6. 38). While there may be an element of sympathetic magic
in the prescription, there is also a sound nutritional basis, which could
not have been understood but which could have been appreciated
through years of empirical observation and pragmatic prescription.
Night-blindness is caused by a deficiency of vitamin A, and liver is
a rich source of that vitamin (hence the cod liver oil, once forced
into children). Liver is occasionally prescribed in the HC for other
conditions: in Diseases of Women foods prescribed to correct a ‘red flux’
include ox or goat liver cooked in the ashes (Mul. 2. 110 [8.236 L.]). A
prescription to control a flux of menstrual blood and one to control a
putative flux of some other kind of blood might be thought parallel.
The association here traced between ‘the choker’ and night-blind-
ness in the Hippocratic Corpus continued in later medical writers:
Aretaeus describes two forms and two methods of treatment of ‘the
choker’. As in On Sight, cupping and purging feature. Treatment is
drastic: to cut the vessel in the elbow and to make the incision quite
large (τμνειν … μζονα δ τν τομν σχζειν) so that the blood flows
freely—and he admits that some patients have died under the knife—
or incise similarly in the leg or elsewhere in the arm; then to administer
elaterion, said to be the drug of choice, to purge the patient (CA 7).
There is a slight awkwardness in that the subject of the first sentence,
with its two jussive clauses (a construction used only here in the work)
is the patient, while the subject of the second sentence, with three nom-
inative participles followed by an imperatival infinitive (with another
participle βπτων ‘dipping’ loosely attached and a further explanatory
infinitive καταπιεν ‘to swallow’ dependent on it), is the doctor; but the
sense is clear and the jerky Greek is characteristic of the work.
νυκτλωπος ‘(treatment for) night blindness’: the etymology of the
word, lit. ‘blind in vision at night’ involves a tautology. The punctua-
tion, which varies wildly in later mss, is managed differently by differ-
ent editors. Sichel reads νυκτλωπος φρμακον ‘a drug for the sufferer
from night blindness’. Ermerins objects, as not just drugs but all medendi
methodus ‘method of treatment’ is involved; he argues that some such
word as ητρεη ‘treatment’ must be understood after the initial genitive.
76
For a review of the evidence, see already Foesius I 736; also von Staden, 1989,
423–426; Gourevitch, 1980, 178–182.
100 commentary
Foesius, followed as frequently by Van der Linden, suggests emendation
to the nominative, to create a sentence, νυκτoλωψ φoρμακον πινrτω
rλατjριον.
77
φoρμακον … rλατjριον ‘drug elaterion’: the term (lit. ‘driver’) is used
generally of any drug with laxative properties; also specifically of one
such drug, based on an extract of wild cucumber (Galen linguarum Hip-
pocratis explicatio, 19. 97 K.)
78
The writer, usually concerned with surgery
and not with internal treatment, only here recommends purging of the
body (sc. by use of laxatives); purging of the head (sc. by nasal inser-
tions) is prescribed also 1.2 and 4.1. But, as noted above, purging is a
regular element in treatment recommended for ‘the choker’. Ermerins
regards the stress on treatment rather than prognosis as a suspicious
aspect of the section.
τjν κεφαλjν κα0αιρrσ0ω lit. ‘let him be purged as to his head’: the
patient is the subject of the verb which may be passive (as trans-
lated: doctor is agent) or middle (translate ‘purge his head for himself ’:
patient is agent).
κατασχoσας lit. ‘having cut’: M’s reading κατoξας ‘having broken’ (a
verb usually applied to fractures of bones) gives unacceptable sense. It
has been suggested that the aorist is not from κατoγνυμι ‘break’ but
from κατoγω ‘draw down’ (sc. the head, so that the patient could drink
juices from liver);
79
however aor. 1 κατjξα is implausibly rare for the
regular κατjγαγον and no 0γειν verb takes that form in the HC. The
reading κατασχoσας has some authority, being known to Foesius, who
however retains M’s reading, tr. pertundito ‘strike hard’.
80
That it is
correct is evident once the context (cutting the skin in preparation
for the application of cupping vessels in the process of wet cupping) is
understood. The simple verb σχoζειν is used for incision with a scalpel
in Affections (the head, Aff. 2; the uvula, Aff. 4 [6.210 L.]), Internal Affections
(vessels in the groin, Int. 21; the elbows, Int. 37 [7.220, 258 L.]) and
in the surgical treatise Sores (aor. part. pass. ‘the part incised’, Ulc. 24
[6.428 L.]). The simple verb σχiζειν ‘lance’ is similarly used (Morb. 2.
77
Ermerins 282; Foesius I 736, n. 16.
78
Cf. Craik, 1998, 172.
79
Montfort, 2003, 44.
80
Foesius I 736, n. 17.
commentary 101
18, 25, 36 [7.32, 40, 52 L.]), as is the compound 0ποσχoζειν (vessel in
the arm, Morb.1. 28 [6.196 L.]; uvula, Prog. 23 [2.178 L.]). While there
is no Hippocratic parallel for κατασχoζειν, the formation is similar to
κατατrμνειν (twelve occurrences, including Ulc. 22 [6.426 L.] and Morb.
2. 13, 15, 27 [7.24, 28, 44 L.]). The prefix κατα- is apt for the surgeon’s
hand bearing down on his patient; similar formations are κατακροuειν
(cut or lance swellings, varices etc., Ulc. 24, 25 [6.428, 430 L.]; break
the skin, avoided where dry-cupping is to be practised, Loc. Hom. 12.1
and 22 [6.298, 314 L.]), and κατασπ0ν (draw off blood, Loc. Hom. 30
[6.322 L.]).
81
uς μoλιστα ‘as much … as possible’: the phrase is common in prescrip-
tions or instructions for preparation (cf. VC 13 [3.228 L.], Loc. Hom. 27
[6.318 L.]).
πιrσας … rπανιεiς ‘exert pressure … release’: the pedestrian verb πιrζειν
‘press’ corresponds to the colourful 0ποσφiγγειν ‘squeeze tight’, ‘com-
press’ in one of the parallel passages of Diseases 2 (Morb. 2. 26 [7.40 L.]).
The corollary process, letting go, is expressed with the same verb rπανi-
ημι in Fractures, with reference to releasing the pressure of splints (Fract.
21 [3.486 L.]). Cornarius ingeniously but erroneously expands πιrσας
to λιμ_u πιrσας, supposing that the reference is to a regimen of light or
fasting diet.
82
καταπιεtν ‘to swallow’: the compound is rare, but occurs also in Diseases
of Women 1 and 2.
VIII
Trephining, or trephination, trepanation, is recommended for a case of
blindness not attributable, from the diagnostician’s point of view, to any
discernible problem in the eyes. Sichel, perhaps following Foesius’ des-
ignation (hoc vitium oculi μαρωσις Graecis dicitur cum oculis bene habentibus
videndi acies laborat, ‘this eye trouble, when, though the eyes are sound
the vision is affected, is called amaurosis by the Greeks’) summarises
81
See Iugler, 1792, 44 and 73 for ingenious suggestions: καταμuσσω. καταξuω. κατα-
ξαiνω.
82
See rebuttal, Foesius I 736, n. 17.
102 commentary
‘amaurose traitée par la trépanation’; Ermerins makes no judgement
on the nature of the disease: quis morbus sit, de quo agit, nescio, ‘I do not
know what is the disease concerned’; Joly, perhaps quoting Hérode, his
adviser on specialist ophthalmic matters, comments ‘utile dans les cas
de processus expansif intracranien, cette intervention énergique serait
néfaste dans les autres’.
83
It remains peculiarly difficult to diagnose and
treat the cause of deteriorating eyesight, there being many causes—
some hereditary, some age-related—for loss of vision in an eye which
remains normal in appearance. Our doctor’s first assumption is ocu-
lar flux: from the instruction, to trephine and remove ‘moisture’, it is
evident that the supposed cause is a flux of moisture from the head,
affecting the eyes; it is evident too that the moisture is envisaged to be
deep in the head, under the bone. (On two types of flux, see 3.3; on
treatment of superficial flux, see 4 above.)
The Hippocratic doctors had recourse to trephining, surgery in
which a sawing or piercing instrument was applied to the bone of the
skull, in a variety of circumstances. The most common was in cases of
fracture, or head injury (VC passim, especially 9 on indications and 21 on
technique [3.210, 256 L.]; Loc. Hom. 32 [6.324 L.]). In general, trephin-
ing has three broad motivations: first, to treat fractures by draining a
dangerous blood clot, or by disimpacting the fragments for removal;
second, to remove dead bone exposed in a wound; third, to look for
pus when fever and headache suggest its presence under the skull.
84
The
third is similar to that here, and to Galen’s use of trepanation to relieve
pressure by draining a phlegmatous lesion on the head (Hippocratis de
medici officina liber et Galeni in eum commentarius, 18B. 808 K.).
85
For other types of head surgery, cutting with a single incision or with
multiple incisions into the bregma, see above on 4. The procedures
applied here are readily paralleled in Diseases 2. In the first part of
that treatise (Morb. 2. 1 [7.8 L.]), the cause of disease is summarily
indicated in terms of the head overheating, causing phlegm to melt and
cause flux in various parts of the body, notably parts of the head (eyes,
throat etc.); several cases are outlined (Morb. 2. 1–11 [7.8–18 L.]), then
elaborated in the second, more developed, part of the work (Morb. 2. 12
83
Foesius I 736, n. 19; Sichel 159; Ermerins XL; Joly 174. Cf. also Hirschberg I 1982
(tr. Blodi), 133 on the ‘daring treatment of amaurosis by trephining the skull and draining
cerebrospinal fluid’.
84
Martin, 2003, 329–330.
85
See Rocca, 2003, 257.
commentary 103
[7.18 L.] onwards). In that part a patient who is suffering from pain
in the region of the eyes and disturbed vision (0μβλυuσσει) is given
the same treatment as the patient in On Sight 8, that is treatment to
pierce the bone, thereby releasing fluid pressing on the brain (Morb. 2.
15 [7.28 L.]; cf. Celsus 8. 3; Galen linguarum Hippocratis explicatio, 19. 129
K.).
86
In Places in Man, flux from the brain, that is flux of ‘salty’ fluid, by
contrast with the noxious mucoid matter involved in flux from the top
of the head is believed to cause blindness (Loc. Hom. 13.3; cf. 2.2 [6.300,
278 L.]); conversely, in On Sight the sight is unaffected.
As above, there is an accumulation of participles indicating stages in
treatment (cut, move skin, saw bone, remove moisture). At the same
time, there is a change from imperatival infinitives to χρj, expressed
or understood, with accusative and infinitive. The formula ‘so they
are cured’ is common to Places in Man and Diseases 2 (Loc. Hom. 13.5
[6.300 L.], Morb. 2. 32 [7.50 L.]). The same adjective ‘sound’ is used of
sight (similarly in 2) and of patient (similarly in 3.4).
1. jν τι οl oφ0αλμοi íγιεtς róντες διαφ0εiρωνται τjν ðψιν ‘if somehow the
eyes, though sound, are destroyed in their visual faculty’: Joly, retaining
τινι dative and διαφ0εiροιεν optative, emends jν to εi to correct the
syntax of the conditional clause, tr. ‘if someone’s eyes, though sound,
should destroy the visual faculty’. However, this formulation (εi with
optative, suggesting an unlikely case), though regular and almost for-
mulaic in the expression εi τινι … χρj … ijσ0αι in Places in Man, is odd
in the context of this work where the regular expression throughout
is jν with subjunctive, just as all temporal clauses are introduced with
rπειδoν or oταν. A further oddity is that τις would occur only here in
On Sight of the prospective patient and the statement that the healthy
eyes ‘destroy’ the eyesight is very awkward. The emendation suggested
here corrects these anomalies, and the verb διαφ0εiρεσ0αι is passive as
in 1 above.
rπαναδεiραντα ‘folding back’: the verb δrρω lit. ‘skin’, ‘flay’ suggests
skinning an animal, as, of a sheep, in Haemorrhoids (Haem. 4 [6.440 L.]).
But it is the mot juste for an operation such as this where tissues
are neatly separated from bone. Paul of Aigina uses the compound
íποδrρειν in describing a similar operation on the scalp (Paul Aeg. 6. 6;
86
For procedures of piercing vs sawing, see Jouanna, 1983, 228, n. 6.
104 commentary
see LSJ s.v. δρω 2, anat., ‘separate by avulsion’, Herophil. ap. Gal.
de anatomicis administrationibus 2. 349 K. and cf. ibid. 2. 719 K. for the
sense ‘strip off the scalp, expose, lay bare’, in dissection.) The formation
παναδρω, with its double prefix, is in keeping with this author’s
expression. Similar verbs in the surgical treatises are παναρργνυμι
‘rupture again’ in Fistulas and πανακλω where the sense of the prefix
is uncertain, in Fractures.
87
φελντα τν δρωπα ‘removing the moisture’: the ‘moisture’ is mois-
ture from the brain; cf. δωρ, lit. ‘water’, in the related procedure, Morb.
2. 15 [7.26 L.].
IX
The final chapter deals with ophthalmia as a seasonal disorder. Sichel
uses the expression ‘ophthalmie épidémique’ as a heading, and elab-
orates ‘Il s’agit ici des ophthalmies épidémiques, déterminées par les
variations brusques de la température atmosphérique, épidémies encore
si fréquentes de nos jours. Elles s’observent surtout lors des change-
ments des saisons.’ Ermerins, similarly, and with his usual strictures
against the character of the writing sums up the content as … de lip-
pitudine annua et epidemia; de tumore cum dolore et sine dolore in eo morbo; deinde
fluxionis absentia in illo. Puto saltem de his rebus agi in capite pessime descripto.
‘On seasonal and epidemic ophthalmia; on swelling with and without
pain in that disease; then on the absence of flux in it. At least, I think
these are the topics discussed in a very badly transcribed chapter.’ Joly
repeats Sichel’s ‘ophthalmie épidémique’, adding in a note, ‘Il pourrait
s’agir d’une allergie.’
88
The first two sections (of which the second has
suffered serious textual corruption, here addressed by comparison with
parallel passages in Galen and in Celsus) offer a series of general pre-
cepts for the treatment of cases of ophthalmia; 3 is more general still,
apparently moving from treatment of seasonal ophthalmia to aphoristic
comments applicable not only to this eye ailment but to many oth-
ers. These general comments seem out of place in the work, but they
may arise from an inherent ambiguity in the term ‘ophthalmia’, applied
equally to a specific or a general eye ailment.
87
See Petrequin II 1888, 139, n. 6 and 7, ‘tirer en bas’ or ‘en arrière’ or ‘à soi’.
88
Sichel 159, 150; Ermerins XLI; Joly 171, 174.
commentary 105
The ophthalmia of On Sight may correspond to the modern ‘hay
fever’ (allergic rhinitis characterized by a blocked, runny nose and itchy
watering eyes) brought on in sensitive people by histamine release on
exposure to the pollen of grasses, trees and other plants, and now rou-
tinely treated by antihistamines and steroid sprays. There are some
three million sufferers each year in the UK alone.
89
However, the
prevalence of allergic reaction as a diagnosis is a relatively recent phe-
nomenon; and it may be that we should here think more generally of
vernal and aestival conjunctivitis. The aetiology of this is uncertain,
and allergic reaction is only one theory; it is common, with a strik-
ing seasonal pattern, in the Mediterranean littoral, where it may be
attributed to such environmental factors as dusty conditions aggravated
by dry heat and where simple palliative measures to protect the eyes
from dust, heat and sun are the standard response.
90
‘Ophthalmia’, often used in the plural, is a general term for eye
ailments in the HC and other ancient medical texts. Thus, in Prorrhetic
2 the word is used of all types of eye disease, whether of long or short
duration (Prorrh. 2. 21 [9.48 L.]). In Glands, it is applied, in an all-
embracing way, to the condition which results from a flux to the eyes
and causes the visual parts to swell (Gland. 13 [8.568 L.]). In Diseases 1,
ophthalmia is included in a list of diseases which are not in themselves
fatal; in grouping eye affections with such joint diseases as kedmata,
podagre, ischias and arthritis the physician seems to show an awareness
of their inherent affinity (Morb. 1. 3 [6.144 L.]). Ophthalmias are linked
with flux or streaming eyes in Epidemics 1 (Epid. 1. 2. 4 [2.616 L.]) and
the term is used in various treatises of seasonal eye irritations, vernal
(Aph. 3. 12 [4.490 L.]), aestival (Aer. 10 [2.42 L.]) or autumnal (Aph. 3. 14
[4.492 L.]; Epid. 7. 45 [5.412 L.]: in the latter case, treatment includes
phlebotomy and purging the head, as in Vid. Ac.). The association
with the disease known as ‘the choker’ has already been noted and
the curative recommendation for both ophthalmia and the choker
in Epidemics 2 is, as here, phlebotomy (Epid. 2. 6. 12 [5.134 L.]). In
the Aristotelian Problemata the question of seasonal summer fevers and
ophthalmias is addressed (Probl. 1. 8, 859b). It is stated that ophthalmias
come about when excess stuff in the head melts (τηκομνης τς περ τν
89
See BMD, s. v.
90
Duke-Elder II 1938, 1697–1699, 1705; Trobe and Hackel, 2002, 63–68; Spalton et
al., 2005, 118, figs 5. 4 and 5. 5 for allergic conjunctivitis and 120, fig. 5. 6 for vernal
keratoconjunctivitis.
106 commentary
κεφαλν περιττσεως) and is followed by fever; for heat in the body is
fever and heat in the eyes is ophthalmia. Here again ophthalmia is a
key word for eye trouble from its most common source, flux. Also in the
Problemata the question is raised why some people ‘who have suffered
from ophthalmia’ see more clearly; and it is speculated that their eyes
have been cleansed through tears, as ‘the secretion which forms on the
eye covers the sight’ (31. 9, 958b; cf. also 2 above).
Ophthalmia is the first mentioned eye disease in the list of the lex-
icographer Pollux (Poll. 2. 4. 65; cf. 4. 25. 184). In Galenic texts, oph-
thalmia is discussed in many passages; the expression τας καλουμναις
φαλμαις ‘so-called ophthalmias’ suggests that it is regarded as a tech-
nical term or perhaps rather as a catch-all (de compositione medicamentorum
secundum locos, 12. 702 K.). These include a description of ophthalmia as
the most common eye disorder (ibid. 12. 711–714 K.); an account of its
symptoms as reddening of the white, swelling of the eyelids, and pain
when the eyes are closed, or touched; also a prescription (bathing the
eyes with rosewater) for summer ophthalmias and three prescriptions
(including flower of copper, softened in honey) for ointments to treat
protracted ophthalmia (de remediis parabilibus 14. 342, 343 K.; cf. introduc-
tio seu medicus, 14. 768 K.). Galen, adding material to the Hippocratic
account of unfavourable signs in the eye (Prog. 2 [2.114 L.]) instances
ophthalmia, with drunkenness, as causing reddening of the whites of
the eyes (in Hippocratis Prognosticon commentaria 1. 10 = Heeg, CMG 5. 9.
2, 222).
91
Celsus deals at great length with lippitudo (Greek ophthalmia, in both
a general and a specific sense), first named in a list of spring diseases
stemming from umoris motu ‘movement of moisture’ (2. 1. 6). In his
subsequent discussion of the notae ‘signs’ which allow prognosis: tumor
‘swelling’, pituita ‘discharge’, lacrima ‘tear’ and dolor ‘pain’ all feature
(6. 6. 1); he regards lippitudo as an illness with an obvious (unstated)
cause (proem 30). The ordering of topics is similar to that in On Sight:
where there is inflammation, the patient should lie in bed, in a dark
place, and take no food and even, if possible, no drink; bleeding is
recommended in appropriate cases (si in fronte venae tument, si firmo corpore
materies superest ‘if the vessels in the forehead are swollen; if there is
superfluous matter in a robust frame’); poultices may be applied to the
vessels (ut compressis venis pituitae impetum cohibeat ‘in order to control the
91
See Savage-Smith, 1984, 177 with n. 55.
commentary 107
surge of phlegm by compression of the vessels’) or to the surface of the
eye itself. It is recognized (6. 6. 8D) that failure to recover from the
pain, inflammation and flow of matter is a common eventuality.
In de remediis parabilibus (14. 342–344 K.) Galen has several sections
on eye troubles, including one on ‘summer’ ophthalmias, which are
protracted in character. The treatment for flux from the eyes (rπi τuν
κατo τοuς oφ0αλμοuς çευματισμuν) is in the first instance little to eat
and water to drink; avoidance of all company; avoidance also of strong
odours, dust, smoke and light from sun and lamp. If the flux persists
and there is additionally pain, phlebotomy and complete fasting is
prescribed, to be followed by applications (rπιτι0rμενα) and poultices
(καταπλoσματα) of plant matter such as green vine leaves mixed with
wine and fine flour. The ordering of topics is again similar to that here,
and there is the same stress on the appropriateness of poultices when
pain supervenes.
From these parallel passages in Celsus and Galen (neither necessarily
directly dependent on On Sight, but both drawing on a stock of mate-
rial, more or less homogeneous in character) the corruption in section 2
can be addressed. The first sentence is not problematical, but thereafter
the Greek is confused and the sense unclear. After this point, Ermerins
offers no translation, noting certum est hunc locum vitiis scatere ‘it is cer-
tain that this passage is full of errors’ and merely making tentative
suggestions for emendation. It is here argued that the main problem
is disruption in the ordering of the text and that the correct sequence
of words can be restored once the sequence of thought is appreciated.
The general drift of our passage is that the relation between pain, dis-
charge and swelling is important in diagnosis, a point stressed not only
by Celsus and Galen but also by the author of Prorrhetic 2 (Prorrh. 2.
18 [9.44 L.]), and that the relation between ointments and poultices is
important in therapy. The presence or absence of pain is given par-
ticular emphasis. However, there is an erratic move from the topic of
painless swellings (which should not be poulticed) and painful swellings
(which may be poulticed after ointments have been tried, if these prove
ineffective). Some manipulation of word order with slight alteration
of punctuation and modest emendation gives good sense, in accord
with that of Celsus and Galen. In palaeographical terms, the disrup-
tion can readily be explained: delete μετo (wrongly written because of
μετo following), read rπειδoν (misplaced by the intrusive μετo); read δια-
χειρισ0¸j for the meaningless διαχωρισ0¸j and insert negative μj before
παuσηται.
108 commentary
The style remains telegraphic, with simple sentence structure broken
by a few conditional or temporal subordinate clauses. Bald or incom-
plete sentences have the air of jottings, or rough notes. The verb συμφr-
ρει is used repeatedly (eight times; cf. 1 above, twice), without regard for
stylistic variation. As in 1 above, the alliteration of κo0αρσις … κοιλiης
may be consciously affected, or merely formulaic. The sudden end, like
the disconnected beginning, confirms the impression that the work was
not written as a co-ordinated whole, but is a series of notes intended for
personal use or limited circulation.
1. rπετεiου καi rπιδημiου ‘recurring annually and locally’: M’s nonsensi-
cal rπ’ αiτiου is evidently a corruption of rπετεiου, a reading known to
or originating with Cornarius. The adjective restored is otherwise not
found in the HC; but gains support from Plato’s rπrτεια νοσjματα ‘ill-
nesses recurring annually’ (Pl. R. 405c). The adjective rπιδjμιος is sur-
prisingly rare in the HC, and rare enough to be glossed by Hesychios.
It occurs most frequently (four times) in Internal Affections, a treatise seen
here to have certain other features in common with On Sight in both
content and expression, applied there to types of phlegm and to jaun-
dice; elsewhere it is found only in Epidemics 7 (Epid. 7. 59 [5.424 L.]) and
in one of the late letters (Ep. 17 [9.354 L.]).
92
κo0αρσις κεφαλjς καi τjς κoτω κοιλiης κo0αρσις ‘purging of the head
and purging of the lower belly’: the second κo0αρσις ‘purging’ found in
MHR is lost in I and mss descended from I.
εi rχοι τò σuμα ‘if he should have the physique’ (lit. ‘the body’): bleeding
is prescribed in addition to the less invasive purging of head and body
for those patients who are strong enough to withstand it. Foesius’
translation si corpus sanguine redundet ‘if the body has too much blood’
reflects the rationale of his own contemporary practice of bloodletting.
93
The phrase is odd in expression, but attention to the patient’s physique
is commonly recommended: with regard to administering food and
drink in Affections (Aff. 47 [6.258 L.]), to phlebotomy in Regimen in Acute
Diseases (Acut. Sp. 3 [= 2, 2.398 L.]) and to purging head and body, and
drawing blood from arms in Diseases 2 (Morb. 2. 73 [7.112 L.]). (The
previous section, Morb. 2. 72 [7.108, 110 L.], deals with ‘phrenitis’ a
92
Cf. Jouanna, 1974, 242, n. 2.
93
Foesius I 689.
commentary 109
condition where, as at Vid. Ac. 9 the patient shuns the light; also as at
Vid. Ac. 9 head and belly are to be purged and few foods allowed.) Such
variation in treatment, at the physician’s discretion, is a feature of the
practical and surgical treatises, commonly expressed in the formulation
συμφrρει πρóς ‘it is beneficial for’ (Epid. 5. 68, 7. 65 [5.244, 430 L.];
Fract. 4 [3.430 L.]; VC 19 [3.254 L.]).
πρòς rνια τuν τοιοuτων 0λγημoτων ‘for some troubles of this kind’: the
expression indicates that the author views opthalmia as having differ-
ent manifestations, which might respond differently to treatment; this
reflects a transition from ophthalmia as a specific condition, to oph-
thalmia as a general ailment. Galen glosses 0λγjματα ‘troubles’ as a
synonym for νοσjματα ‘diseases’ (linguarum Hippocratis explicatio, 19. 74
K.) The incidence in the HC is wide, with a particular concentration
in Koan Prognoses (seventy-one of one hundred and ninety-four occur-
rences).
σtτος ‘food’: the prescription of only a little bread and just water to
drink, in conjunction with the advice not to moisten the head, suggests
a regime of reducing the patient, the natural consequence of a supposi-
tion that the illness is precipitated by an excess of moisture accumulat-
ing in the head.
rν σκóτ_ω. 0πó τε καπνο0 καi πυρòς καi τuν 0λλων λαμπρuν ‘in the dark,
away from smoke, fire and other bright things’: the injunctions seem
sensible; on avoidance of light, cf. Hebd. 35 [8.657 L.]; of smoke, cf.
Morb. 3. 2 and 16 [7.120, 148 L.]. Joly follows Jouanna in remarking
that this instruction is unique to these works, but observes that the
context in Morb. 3 is not ophthalmological.
94
Avoidance of smoke as
an irritant to the eyes and of light as damaging the eyes feature also in
the Aristotelian Problemata (31. 21, 28, 959b).
πλoγιον ‘on his side’: the injunction that the patient lie on his side
seems otiose (but perhaps lying on the back would make it more dif-
ficult to avoid light). Joly reads πλoγιος, nominative in place of M’s
πλαγiων, genitive plural. Cornarius suggested πλαγiως, adverb and van
der Linden πλoγιον, accusative. This last gives most idiomatic Greek:
accusative and infinitive, in instructions to the patient (not nomina-
94
Joly 174; Jouanna, 1974, 491, n. 4.
110 commentary
tive and infinitive in address to the physician). The manuscript error
of omega for omicron is a common one, explicable both visually and
aurally. Foesius knew ms evidence for πλoγιον, but retained πλαγiων
translating ex obliquo ‘obliquely’.
95
Though the adjective is very com-
monly opposed to oρ0óς ‘straight’, there seems little point to this sense
here; we may contrast a passage in Articulations, where the patient must
sit ‘sideways’ on a high chair for the practical reason that his arm can
go over the back of the chair, in readiness for treatment of a dislocated
shoulder (Artic. 7 [4.92 L.]).
2. That the head should not be moistened (sc. with water, or oil, or
soothing lotions) again indicates the supposed presence of flux from
the head; this might be aggravated by addition of fluids, even exter-
nally, and the ensuing mention of swelling further suggests the pres-
ence of noxious or excessive or misplaced matter. But there are else-
where instructions not to wet the head, even when other parts are being
bathed (Morb. 3. 6, 16 [7.124, 148 L.]; Int. 7 [7.184 L.]; Aff. 26, 27 and
cf. 37 [6.238, 246 L.]). The injunction not to moisten head wounds
occurs categorically in Head Wounds (VC 13 [3.230 L.]) and, more gen-
erally, with reference to any wounds, in Sores (Ulc. 1 [6.400 L.]; cf. also
Artic. 40 [4.172 L.]). In these passages too, the context involves a move
from proscription of moisture to the question of poultices. The surgical
injunctions of Sores further resemble those of On Sight in recommending
a very light diet, with water to drink (oλιγοσιτrειν … Iδωρ ξυμφrρει,
Ulc. 1 [6.400 L.]; reiterated καi μj τεγγrτω καi oλιγοσιτεrτω καi πινrτω
Iδωρ, Ulc. 24 [6.428 L.]).
ο0 γoρ συμφrρει ‘for it is not beneficial’: the variant rπειδj ο0 συμ-
φrρει gives the same sense and is important only in establishing the
divergence in the later tradition between mss derived from H and mss
derived from I. Similarly below, the inclusion or omission of σοι is
indifferent semantically. Scribes were probably unconcerned with such
minor differences.
κατoπλασμα ‘poultice’ or ‘plaster’: the term embraces all kinds of cura-
tive materials plastered on the skin, sometimes but not always con-
tained in a fabric bandage.
96
95
Foesius I 689.
96
See Petrequin I 1887, 243, n. 1 and 483, n. 3; also Duminil, 1998, 51, n. 3.
commentary 111
oδυνjς μj rνεοuσης. 0λλ’ uς çεuματος rπrχοντος ‘if there is no pain, but
apparently continuing flux’: for the genitive absolute, cf. οiδjματος μj
προσεóντος ‘in the absence of swelling’, Ulc. 10 [6.408 L.]. Joly reads
0λλως, which might refer to a persistent, but useless, flow of discharge,
or of tears. The verb rπrχειν has two main senses (apparently rather
contradictory; but both involve a recognized usage of the prepositional
prefix and ambiguity is rare): ‘prevail’, ‘continue’ or ‘pause’, ‘stop’.
Both senses are found in the HC: the former is surely intended here.
The term çε0μα may be used both of flux (abstract) and of content
of flux such as discharge (concrete); sometimes there is a shift from
abstract to concrete (as Loc. Hom. 13 [6.298 L.], both generally of flux
to the eyes and particularly of a type of discharge). The phrase here
clearly anticipates the genitive absolute in the final sentence, possibly
misplaced, of 9.3.
οiδημoτων 0νωδuνων ‘while the swellings are not painful’: this phrase is
tautologous after oδυνjς μj rνεοuσης, but the repetition is not untoward
in the Greek of On Sight. Flux and pain go together in many contexts
(cf. 0πηλλαγμrνου το0 çεuματος καi τjς oδuνης, ‘when both flux and
pain have passed’, Morb. 2. 19 [7.34 L.].)
δριμrα φoρμακα ‘astringent drugs’: see VC 14 [3.236 L.] (vinegar); Aff.
38 [6.248 L.] (for suppuration); Mul. 1. 74 [8.158 L.] (0γοντα αiμα ‘to
draw blood’) and cf. Mul. 2. 165 [8.344 L.], Nat. Mul. 24 [7.342 L.],
Morb. 2. 47 [7.66 L.]. The doctor is supposed to know which drugs
would act in appropriate ways: astringent agents, as here, or drying
agents, as below.
The verb διαχωρiζεσ0αι ‘be separated’ is very rare and there is no
other Hippocratic usage; further the sense is inapposite. The proposed
διαχειρiζεσ0αι ‘treat’ gives the precise sense required. The verb occurs
in Affections, Prognostic and Diseases of Women 2 (Mul. 2. 111 [8.240 L.]),
while the related substantive διαχειρισμóς occurs in Epidemics 2 (Epid. 2.
3. 2 [5.104 L.]); the incidence is in accord with the general pattern of
vocabulary in On Sight.
μετo τjν rσoλειψιν ‘after the application’ (of ointment): the substantive
is a hapax. But the verb εiσαλεiφω is found in Nature of Woman. Similarly
we find íπoλειψις just below, 9.3; Galen glosses íπoλειπτον rγχριστον
φoρμακον (linguarum Hippocratis explicatio, 19. 148 K.). The otiose rσ- and
112 commentary
íπ- prefixes are in accord with the stylistic preferences of our writer;
and once again this preference links On Sight linguistically with a lim-
ited group of treatises. The following may be compared: εiσακοuω (Loc.
Hom.; Mul. 1 and 2; Prorrh. 2); εiσαναγκoζω (Artic.); εiσoπαξ (Mul. 1);
εiσαφoσσω (Nat. Mul. only, 14 occurrences); εiσβαiνω (Loc. Hom.); εiσ-
0λoω and εiσ0λασις (VC); εiστρυπoω (Oss.); εiσφοοιτoω (Morb. 2); εiσω-
0rω (Artic.; Fist.; gynaecological works). The suffix -ις or -σις is also of
interest. Medical terms of this formation describe the use of procedures
in treatment; whereas words of -μα formation denote the procedure
itself. Examples are ioσις and iαμα. 0υμiασις and 0υμiαμα, πυρiασις and
πυρiαμα. (Compare also the hapax íπερiνησις Loc. Hom. 47. 8 [6.346 L.],
and note the exception εiσ0λασις of a medical condition.) Where the
medical usage is not a coinage, but depends on a more general word
which predated it, that general word continues to exist and there is
no formation in -μα. Examples are μóχλευσις and μοχλóς, φαρμoκευσις
and φoρμακον. Similarly, in Latin, -tio as a suffix has some stylistic or
‘technical’ significance; and -tura is used in medical parlance.
97
3. προκαλεtται ‘summons’: the verb occurs only five times in the HC
(here, and in Fract., Epid. 6, Prorrh. 1, and Coac.). Advice to keep the eyes
neither open for too long nor shut for too long might seem to apply in
all circumstances, not just in the case of this ailment. However, Sichel
finds here a mark of the experienced practitioner and Joly a judicious
recommendation to avoid secondary infection.
98
The emphasis on the
nature of the matter in flux continues (cf. Prorrh. 2. 18 [9.44 L.], echoed
Celsus 6. 6. 1, hot is bad; Loc. Hom. 13 [6.300 L.], pent-up matter is
dangerous).
iσχóμενον ‘pent-up’: the verb occurs (passive, most often of urination)
in the surgical treatises, Epidemics and elsewhere (but not in theoretical
works on flux and fixation). The final sentence (on the presence of
discharge) seems to belong earlier (in 9. 2, see above); here it is a
tangential return to a previous topic.
μετo το0 ξηρο0 ‘a drying substance’: drying ointments would include
poultices intended to draw off noxious moisture. For a drying drug
applied in the case of slight flow, cf. Loc. Hom. 13.2 [6.300 L.].
97
Cf. Langslow, 2000, 292, 300.
98
Sichel 151; Joly 174.
GLOSSARY OF OPHTHALMOLOGICAL TERMS
Blepharitis inflammation of the lid margins
Canthus angle at outer (lateral) and inner (medial) corners of
eyelid
Cararact disease of the lens marked by opacity in the lens or lens
capsule
Chalazion painless cyst developing in tarsal gland
Choroid vascular layer between sclera and retina
Ciliary body part of the eye connecting iris and choroid
Conjunctiva mucous membrane lining the marginal edges and the
inner aspect of the lids and covering the cornea
Conjunctivitis inflammation of the conjunctiva
Cornea anterior transparent part of sclerotic membrane
Ectropion eversion of the lid margin (usually lower lid), condition
when the lid is turned away from the eyeball, exposing
the conjunctiva
Entropion inversion of the lid margin (usually lower lid), condition
when the lid is turned towards the eyeball, causing
irritation to the cornea from the lashes
Eyelids upper and lower tissue, serving to cover and protect the
eye, with lashes on their margin
Fundus point on retina, opposite pupil, through which nerve
fibres and blood vessels travel
Glaucoma disorder (or group of disorders) characterised by high
intraocular pressure due to build up of aqueous humour
in the eye
Iris the coloured portion of the eye, perforated by the pupil
Keratitis inflammation of the cornea
Lens colourless body contained in capsule behind iris, involved
in transmission of light to retina
Limbus junction between (opaque) sclera and (clear) cornea
Papilloma overgrowth of skin
Pterygium conjunctival lesion, triangular fold of tissue growing from
nasal area over the cornea
Pupil the central aperture (black to the naked eye) of the iris
Retina sensitive layer (innermost of three ‘coats’ of the eye)
involved in transmission of nerve impulses to the brain
Sclera, sclerotic the white portion of the eye, a tough encapsulating
fibrous membrane (outermost of three ‘coats’ of the eye)
Tarsus, tarsal plate plate of fibrous tissue supporting the eyelid
114 glossary of ophthalmological terms
Trachoma serious infectious keratoconjunctivitis
Trichiasis condition of ingrowing eyelashes, allied with entropion
Visual cortex part of the brain which processes information from the
eye
DIAGRAMS
Diagram 1. The Eye: anterior view
Diagram 2. The Head: lateral view
116 diagrams
Diagram 3. Section of the eyeball
part ii
ON ANATOMY
[page 135]
THE HIPPOCRATIC TREATISE ON ANATOMY
1
‘Anatomy is the basis of medical discourse’ (Hipp. Loc. Hom. 2 [6.278 L.])
Introduction
On Anatomy (Anat.) is the shortest treatise preserved in the Hippocratic
Corpus (HC). It describes the internal configuration of the human
trunk. The account is for the most part descriptive, function being
largely disregarded and speculation completely eschewed. Though sys-
tematic it is unsophisticated: two orifices for ingestion are linked by
miscellaneous organs, vesssels, and viscera to two orifices for evacua-
tion. There is a clear progression in two parallel sections: first, trachea
to lung, lung described, location of heart, heart described, kidneys to
bladder, bladder described, bladder to genitals, conclusion; and second,
oesophagus to belly, location of diaphragm, location of spleen, location
1
Appreciative thanks are due to the director and trustees of the Wellcome Trust
for the award of a research leave fellowship which released me from arduous teach-
ing duties at the University of St. Andrews to pursue work on the Hippocratic trea-
tise Places in Man (ed., tr., and comm., forthcoming, Oxford University Press). This
paper is a parergon of that work. I am most grateful to Professor Vivian Nutton (WIHM
and University College London), who first drew On Anatomy to my attention and who
commented most helpfully on drafts of this paper at successive stages. I am grate-
ful also to Mr James Longrigg (University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne) for advice on the
pre-Socratic background, to Sir Kenneth Dover (St. Andrews) for comments on the
‘style’ of the piece, and to Professor Jacques Jouanna (Sorbonne) for invaluable aid
in checking and communicating the readings of the ms V. Assistance of a different
but equally important kind was afforded by those who answered my countless (doubt-
less often silly) anatomical questions with great good sense and good humour; espe-
cially Dr Donald Coid, whose copy of Gray’s Anatomy has now become even more
thumbed and tattered; Dr Ann Dally, who introduced me to the ways of Wimpole
Street; and Dr Susan Whiten, who, with Mr Robin Clark, gave me an unforget-
table and highly instructive tour of visual aids in the Department of Anatomy at St.
Andrews. Without the encouragement and support of all these friends, I should never
have completed this paper. In the final stages, it was improved by the comments of
the referee (anonymous) and the editors (Stephen Heyworth and Christopher Col-
lard) of CQ. For any remaining errors or misapprehensions, I am alone responsible.
120 the hippocratic treatise on anatomy
[page 135 // page 136]
and description of belly (close to liver), belly to intestine/colon, colon
to rectum and anus, conclusion. The fragment offers good basic topo-
graphical or regional anatomy (the organs studied as they lie in rela-
tionship with one another in the different regions of the body). That
the work is concerned with human anatomy is certain from the precise
description of lung and liver, with features peculiar to human organs;
and is corroborated by frequent references to comparative anatomy,
with which familiarity is apparently assumed. Such anatomical knowl-
edge, based on extensive observation of animals (probably sacrificial
victims as well as laboratory specimens), may have been corroborated
by some human dissection, perhaps of the aborted foetus or exposed
infant, in conjunction with opportunistic observation of war wounded
and accident victims. While the syntax is bald, telegraphic, and asyn-
detic, the vocabulary is recondite, and poetic. There is erratic omis-
sion of the article and recurrent use of compendious comparisons.
These features suggest that Anat. may be an abridgement of a fuller
and more flowery account; this hypothesis is supported by several pas-
sages where erroneous or unclear information apparently results from
excessive compression or // imperfect comprehension of a source. The
vocabulary is markedly Demokritean and there are strong affinities with
Ep. 23, the supposititious letter of Demokritos to Hippocrates on ‘the
nature of man’. As there are similarities also, both in content and in
expression, with Oss., a composite work which is related in turn to Epid.
2, case histories of patients in Thrace and adjacent regions, and with
the similarly located Epid. 6, the putative earlier version(s) of Anat. may
plausibly be attributed to a North Greek strand of scientific and medi-
cal endeavour. In this paper a new text is presented, followed by trans-
lation, commentary, and discussion incorporating conclusions on origin
and date. At the same time, the paper has a wider thrust, concerning
the development of ancient anatomical knowledge and scientific ter-
minology. The conclusions have important implications for our under-
standing of the formation of the HC, both as originally composed and
as subsequently constituted.
the hippocratic treatise on anatomy 121
[page 136 // page 137]
References and Abbreviations
V Vatican gr. 276 twelfth century
Anat. is preserved in a further six mss, all recentiores and apparently without
independent value. See H. Diels, Die Handschriften der antiken Ärzte, Teil I (1905),
p. 31 and also B. Alexanderson, Die hippokratische Schrift Prognostikon (Göteborg,
1963), pp. 70, 77–78, 110. These are:
– Paris 2146 and Paris 2255 = C and E on which Littré relied.
– Bologna 3632.
– Holkham 282, now in Oxford (by the same hand as Paris 2146).
– Munich 71.
– Vatican, Palatine 192.
Calvus Latin translation of Hippocratic writings (1525, preceding
Aldine editio princeps of Asolanus, 1526).
Cornarius ed. and Latin trans. (Basle, 1538).
Foesius ed. and Latin trans. (Frankfurt, 1595; also Oeconomia,
Frankfurt, 1588).
van der Linden ed. and Latin trans. (Leiden, 1665).
Triller Opuscula Medica vol. 2, 1st edn (Leiden, 1728); and 2nd
edn (Leipzig, 1766): medico-philological commentary
on Anat., intended as specimen for complete Hippocratic
edition.
Littré ed. and French trans. (Paris, 1839–1861; Anat. occupies 8.
536–541, published 1853).
Ermerins ed. and Latin trans. (Utrecht, 1851–1864; Anat. occupies 3.
287–288, published 1864).
BVD Black’s Veterinary Dictionary (14th edn, 1982).
GA Gray’s Anatomy (30th edn, 1949).
DK H. Diels & W. Kranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker (10th edn,
1961).
DR C. Daremberg and E. Ruelle, Oeuvres de Rufus d’Éphèse (Paris,
1879).
HC Hippocratic Corpus.
Ibycus, TLG computer search of TLG database.
K. C.G. Kühn, Claudii Galeni Opera Omnia (Leipzig, 1821–1830).
Abbreviations for ancient authors and works (including Hippocratic treatises)
follow Liddell–Scott-Jones. //
The following modern works are referred to by author’s name and date:
M.-P. Duminil, ‘La description des vaisseaux dans les chapitres 11–19 du traité
de la Nature des Os’, Hippocratica (Paris, 1980), 135–148.
122 the hippocratic treatise on anatomy
[page 137]
L. Edelstein, ‘The History of Anatomy in Antiquity’, Ancient Medicine: Selected
Papers of Ludwig Edelstein, edd. O. and E.L. Temkin (Baltimore, 1967; first
German publication, 1932), pp. 247–301.
W.A. Greenhill, ‘Adversaria Medico-Philologica’, British and Foreign Medico-chi-
rurgical Review 34–38 (1864–1866).
C.R.S. Harris, The Heart and the Vascular System in Ancient Greek Medicine (Oxford,
1973).
J. Irigoin, ‘La formation du vocabulaire de l’anatomie en grec: du mycénien
aux principaux traités de la collection hippocratique’, Hippocratica (Paris,
1980), 247–257.
J. Jouanna, Hippocrate (Paris, 1992).
G.E.R. Lloyd, ‘The Development of Greek Anatomical Terminology’, Science,
Folklore and Ideology (Cambridge, 1983), pp. 149–167.
J. Longrigg, Greek Rational Medicine (London, 1993).
I.M. Lonie, The Hippocratic Treatises On Generation, On the Nature of the Child,
Diseases IV: A Commentary (Berlin and New York, 1981).
J. Mansfeld, The Pseudo-Hippocratic Tract περ βδομδων (Assen, 1971).
R.B. Onians, The Origins of European Thought (Cambridge, 1952).
F. Skoda, Médecine ancienne et métaphore (Paris, 1988).
W.D. Smith, The Hippocratic Tradition (Ithaca, NY and London, 1979).
W.D. Smith, Hippocrates: Pseudepigraphic Writings (Leiden, 1990).
H. von Staden, Herophilus. The Art of Medicine in Early Alexandria (Cambridge,
1989).
O. Temkin, ‘Hippocrates as the Physician of Democritus’, Gesnerus 42 (1985)
455–464.
ON ANATOMY
TEXT AND TRANSLATION
[page 138 // page 139]
TEXT
Περi 0νατομjς
2
I
1. 'Αρτηρiη rξ rκατrρου φαρυγγr0ρου τjν rκφυσιν ποιευμrνη rς 0κρον
πνεuμονος τελευτ¸0. κρiκοις ξυγκειμrνη oμορυσμοtς. τuν περιηγrων úπτο-
μrνων κατ’ rπiπεδον 0λλjλων.
5 2. Α0τòς δr o πνεuμων ξυνεξαναπληροt τjν χrλυν. τετραμμrνος rς τo
0ριστερo. πrντε íπερκορυφuσιας rχων. 0ς δj καλrουσι λοβοuς. τεφρiνης
χροιjς τυχuν. στiγμασιν oρφνuδεσι κεκεντημrνος. φuσει ruν τεν0ρηνιu-
δης.
3. Μrσ_ω δ’ α0τr_ω j καρδiη rγκα0iδρυται. στρογγυλωτrρη κα0εστεuσα
10 πoντων ζ_uων. 'Απò δr καρδiης rς jπαρ βρογχiη πολλj κα0jκει. καi μετo
βρογχiης φλrψ μεγoλη καλευμrνη. δι’ jς οuλον τò σκjνος τρrφεται.
4. Τò δr jπαρ oμορυσμiην μrν rχει τοtς 0λλοις 0πασιν. αlμορρωδrστερον
δr rστι τuν 0λλων. íπερκορυφuσιας rχον δuο. 0ς καλrουσι πuλας. rν
δεξiοις τóποις κεiμενον. 'Απò δr τουτrου σκαλjνη φλrψ rπi τo κoτω
15 νεφρuν 0ποτεiνουσα.
3 oμορυσμοtς V: oμοιορυσμοtς van der Linden 3–4 úπτομrνων Ermerins: úπτομrνη V
5 ξυνεξαναπληροt Ermerins: συνεξαναπληροt V 5–6 τετραμμrνος rς τo 0ριστερo V:
τετραμμrνος εiς τo 0μφóτερα vel 0μφiστερνα vel τo 0μφω στrρνα Cornarius: τετρημrνος
rς τε τo δεξιo καi τo 0ριστερo van der Linden: τετραμμrνος rς τo δεξιo καi rς τo
0ριστερo Ermerins 6 íπερκορυφuσιας Ermerins: íποκορυφuσιας V 7 oρφνuδεσι
Foesius: oρφοναγrσιν V: 0φρuδεσι van der Linden: oφρυóεσι Littré 7–8 τεν0ρηνιuδης
Foesius: ruν τr 0ρηνιuδης V 10–11 βρογχiη πολλj κα0jκει. καi μετo βρογχiης edd.:
μετo βρογχiη V: βρυχiη φλrψ κα0jκει. καi μετo τjς βρυχiης van der Linden 12
oμορυσμiην V: oμοιοιορυσμiην van der Linden | 0πασιν V: jπασιν Triller 14 κεiμενον
Ermerins: κειμrνας V 15 νεφρuν recc.: νεφρóν V
2
A Budé text by M.-P. Duminil is promised.
[page 140]
TRANSLATION
I
1. The trachea, taking its origin from each side of the throat, ends at
the top of the lung; it is composed of similar rings [to other creatures’],
the circular parts touching one another on the surface.
2. The actual lung, inclined towards the left, fills the chest cavity. The
lung has five projecting parts, which they call lobes; it has an ashen
colour, is punctuated by dark spots, and is in nature like a honey-comb.
3. In the middle of it the heart is situated: it is rounder than [that of] all
creatures. From the heart to the liver a large tube goes down, and with
the tube the vessel called the great vessel, by means of which the entire
frame is nourished.
4. The liver has a similarity to [that of] all other creatures, but is more
blood-suffused than [that of] others. It has two projecting parts, which
they call gates; it lies in the right part [of the body]. From the liver a
slanting vessel extends to the parts below the kidneys.
126 text
[page 138 // page 139]
5. Νεφροi δr oμοιορυσμοi. τjν χροιjν δr rναλiγκιοι μjλοισιν. 'Απò δr
τουτrων oχετοi σκαληνοειδrες rς 0κρην κορυφjν κuστιος κεtνται.
6. Κuστις δr νευρuδης οuλη καi μεγoλη. ¯Εκα0εν κuστιος μrσα oσχrα
πrφυκε.
5 7. Καi τo μrν rξ 0νo μrσον rντòς φuσις rκοσμj0η.
II
8. Οiσοφoγος δr 0πò γλuσσης τjν 0ρχjν ποιεuμενος rς κοιλiην τελευτ¸0.
oν δj καi rπi σηπτικjς κοιλiης στóμαχον καλrουσι.
9. Πρòς δr 0κoν0ης ðπισ0εν jπατος φρrνες πεφuκασι. 'Εκ δr πλευρjς
νó0ης. λrγω δr 0ριστερjς. σπλjν 0ρξoμενος rκτrταται oμοιóρυσμος iχνει
10 ποδóς.
10. Κοιλiη δr jπατι παρακειμrνη κατ’ ε0uνυμον μrρος ο0λομελjς rστi
νευρuδης. 'Απò δr κοιλiης πrφυκεν rντερον oμοιóρυσμον. μακρóν. πηχrων
ο0κ rλασσον δuδεκα. rλικηδòν rν κóλποις rνειλοuμενον. o καλrουσιν rνιοι
κóλον. δι’ οu j παραφορo τjς τροφjς γiγνεται.
15 11. 'Απò δr κóλου πrφυκεν 0ρχòς λοiσ0ιος. σoρκα περιπλη0rα rχων. rς
0κρον δακτυλiου τελευτuν.
12. Τo δr 0λλα j φuσις διετoξατο.
1 μjλοισιν V: μηλεiοισιν Triller 2 rς 0κρην van der Linden: 0κρην V 3 rκα0εν
κuστιος μrσα oσχrα Craik: rκα0ε κuστιος μεσοχj εiσα V: rκoστα0ε δr κuστιος μετοχj
εiσω recc.: rγκας δr κuστιος μετοχj εiσω Triller: rκα0εν δr κuστιος μετοχj εiς o Littré: rκ
δr τjς κuστιος μετοχrτευσις rξω Ermerins 5 φuσις V: φuσι Ermerins 7 rπi σηπτικjς
V: rπισημαντικuς vel rπισjμως Cornarius ap. Foesium | καλrουσιν edd.: καλrουσι V
8 πrφuκασιν edd.: πεφuκασι V 9 oμοιóρυσμος edd.: oμοιορυσμ_u V 11 ο0λομελjς V:
ο0λομrνη recc.: ο0λομελi¸ η van der Linden: ο0λουμrνη Triller 12 μακρòν ap. Foesium:
μικρòν V 13 rν κóλποις V: rς κóλπους van der Linden 14 κóλον V: κuλον recc. |
γiγνεται recc.: γiνεται V 15 κóλου V: κuλου recc. | περιπλη0rα V: πολυπλη0rα van
der Linden 15–16 rς 0κρον V: καi rς 0κρον van der Linden 17 Post διετoξατο
lacunae signa Ermerins: fortasse διετoσσετο Craik
text 127
[page 140]
5. The kidneys are similar [to other creatures’] and in colour are like
[those of] sheep. From them slanting ducts reach to the top edge of the
bladder.
6. The bladder is all sinewy and large. At a distance from the bladder
come, centrally, the genitals.
7. In these six parts [bodily] nature has been arranged internally in the
middle.
II
8. The oesophagus, taking its origin from the tongue, ends at the belly;
they call it ‘mouth’ for the putrefying belly.
9. From the backbone, behind the liver, comes the diaphragm. On the
false side, I mean the left, the spleen begins, and extends, similar to a
footprint.
10. The belly, lying beside the liver, on the left side, is all sinewy. From
the belly comes the intestine, which is similar [to other creatures’], long,
no less than twelve cubits, in coils entangled in folds. Some call it the
colon, and by it the passage of the food occurs.
11. From the colon comes last the rectum, which has fleshy tissue, and
which ends at the extremity of the anus.
12. The rest, nature has organized.
[page 141]
COMMENTARY
1. On the trachea see GA 1270, 1275: ‘The trachea, or windpipe, is
a cartilaginous and membranous tube … continued downward from
the lower part of the larynx … The cartilages … vary from sixteen
to twenty in number. Each is an imperfect ring which occupies the
anterior two-thirds or so of the circumference of the trachea. … Two or
more of the cartilages often unite, partially or completely’. The author,
then, is correct about the rings and about the rings ‘touching’ one
another. Nothing, however, is said about the branching of the windpipe
into the right and left extrapulmonary bronchi, which lead separately
to right and left lung.
ρτηρη: in Greek medicine, the term ρτηρη (or ρτηρη τραχεα,
whence trachea; cf. Celsus’ ‘arteria aspera’) eventually prevailed for the
trachea or windpipe. But in the HC the terminology of trachea and
bronchial tubes is ambiguous and inconsistent, even within individual
treatises and, at times, within individual sections of them (cf. Int. 1
[7.166 L.] on ρτηρη, φλβια, and σριγγες all connected with the
lung). The term βργχος is used not only of the bronchial tubes but
generally of the area between throat and lung and, conversely, ρτηρη
may be applied to the bronchial tubes; also the two terms may be found
together (as Loc. Hom. 3.5, 10.1, 14.2, 14.7 [6.282, 294, 304, 306 L.],
where βργχος is trachea and ρτηραι, or by tacit substitution ορτες,
are bronchial tubes). In the HC, the trachea is rarely simply ρτηρη
(but see Epid. 7.12 and 25 [5.388, 394 L.]). Most commonly, the term
ρτηραι is, like φλβες, applied to the important hollow bodily tubes,
ducts, or vessels through which fluids (not only blood) were believed
to course, and is analogous to the term νερα applied to the solid
links in the body, i.e. tendons, sinews, muscles, ligaments as well as
(occasionally) nerves. In some passages ρτηρη is ambiguously used,
both of trachea and of vessel (Epid. 2.4.1 [5.122 L.] ~ Oss. 5 [9.170 L.]).
In a later distinction, generally agreed to have been formalised by
Praxagoras, the arteries were believed to convey πνεμα and the veins
blood through the body. Thus, in accord with Rufus’ explanation (Anat.
130 commentary
[page 141 // page 142]
65, 183 DR) that the φλrβες carry blood and the 0ρτηρiαι blood to some
extent but rather πνε0μα ‘air’, Pollux (2.5) defines 0ρτηρiαι as paths for
air analogous to φλrβες, for blood. The connection between 0ρτηρiα as
trachea and as artery is probably that both were regarded (rightly in
the case of the former) as conveying air. The derivation is uncertain.
Possibilities are from αiρω ‘lift’, presumably because the lungs seemed
‘suspended’ by the trachea, and the heart by the aorta (which, however,
itself must be from 0ορτrω ‘suspend’); or from 0ραρiσκω ‘fit’, presum-
ably because the 0ρτηρiη seemed to ‘fit’ parts of the body together (and
for this notion, cf. Oss. 1 [9.168 L.], the intestines jρτηται); as did the
0ρ0ρα, ‘joints’.
3
rξ rκατrρου φαρυγγr0ρου: this term is not used elsewhere in the HC,
but is common in late medical writers.
4
It is glossed (s.v. φαρuγα0ρον) by
Hsch. As a technical locative term, it does not differ in sense from the
common term φoρυγξ (cf. Rufus φoρυξ δr j φαρuγε0ρον Onom. 62, 141
DR) or occasional term λoρυγξ this being the interior of the τρoχηλος
or α0χjν (but both of these are used for other narrow parts also, such as
the neck of the bladder or of the womb). Pollux differentiates between
φoρυγξ, start of oesophagus and λoρυγξ, of trachea (2.4.207). //
Unsurprisingly, the adjective rκoτερος, ‘each (of two)’ is especially
common in bodily description (legs, kidneys Carn. 5 [8.590 L.]); but the
usage here, of each [side of the] throat is unexpected. However, from
τρoχηλος τo μrρεα α0το0 rκoτερα rν0α καi rν0α 0δrνας rχει, Gland. 7
[8.560 L.] (cf. rκατrρω0εν, Gland. 4 [8.558 L.]), it seems that the throat
was regarded as essentially bipartite, possibly because of its connection,
in breathing, with the two nasal passages. (φoρυγγες is occasionally used
in the plural, as 0πò κεφαλjς κατo τoς φoρυγγας, Mochl. 39 [4.386 L.].)
τjν rκφυσιν ποιευμrνη: the technical expression rκφυσις with reference
to trachea has the same significance as the more general term 0ρχj in
the parallel description of oesophagus in 8 below, i.e. ‘starting-point’,
‘inception’. Like the related terms 0πóφυσις, ‘excrescence’, ‘protuber-
ance’ (for which rπiφυσις is a common manuscript variant) and παρo-
φυσις, it is common in anatomical contexts, especially in Artic., Fract.
and Mochl.; also Oss. (e.g. Artic. 45 [4.190 L.], Fract. 12 [3.460 L.], Mochl. 1
[4.340 L.]; Oss. passim). The terms are typically but not exclusively
3
See Greenhill (1864–1866), Irigoin (1980).
4
Ibycus, TLG: Aretaeus, Aetius, Galen, and Oribasius.
commentary 131
[page 142]
medical or biological. The circumlocution τjν rκφυσιν ποιευμrνη, with
abstract noun plus ποιεtσ0αι standing for verb with same root as the
noun, recurs in 8 below, τjν 0ρχjν ποιεuμενος = verb 0ρχóμενος, as 0ρ-
ξoμενος, 9. This is by stylistic preference, the verb being available as
alternative: as 0ποπrφυκε, Loc. Hom. 3.6 [6.282 L.] and rκπεφuκασιν,
Oss. 4 [9.170 L.].
rς 0κρον πνεuμονος: the substantival form ‘top point’, ‘extremity’,
‘edge’ is used again below, rς 0κρον δακτυλiου: this use is uncommon
in Attic Greek, but is a regular alternative in the HC, particularly for
bodily extremities, as in plural τo 0κρα, Acut. 30 [= 9, 2.290 L.]; and
repeatedly in Artic. The adjectival form is here used once (0κρην κορυ-
φjν, 5).
The singular form πνεuμων is dominant in the HC (and the rare
plural is both preceded and followed by the singular, Gland. 14 [8.568,
570 L.]). From the expression ‘the top of the lung’, and the use through-
out of the singular, it is evident that the author regarded the lung as a
single joined organ, as indeed did Aristotle (HA 1.16.495b; PA 669b).
The original form πλεuμων gave way to πνεuμων presumably because
of a supposed connection with πνε0μα: from the heroic age the lung
was known to be vital to life (Hom. Il. 4.528 etc.).
5
τελευτ¸0: this verb, repeated three times in this short piece (1, trachea
ending at lung; 8, oesophagus at belly; 11, rectum at anus) is regularly
used of the location of bodily parts in the anatomical treatises. For the
use of the preposition rς, cf. κεtσ0αι rς below, 5.
κρiκοις ξυγκειμrνη oμορυσμοtς: the sense of κρiκοις is evident, but the
expression, forerunner of the modern term ‘cricoid’ cartilage, is un-
usual in Greek. Pollux (1.94, on rings for ships’ hawsers) regards κρiκος
as poetic for κiρκος or κuκλος. Elsewhere in the HC, the noun occurs
only in Mochl. 41 [4.392 L.], where it denotes a ‘loop’ attached to a
piece of apparatus (0γκυλαι in the excerpted text, Fract. 30 [3.520 L.]).
The compound verb rγκρικóω occurs Oss. 18 [9.194 L.] in the phrase
rνεκρiκωσεν πρòς τjν 0καν0αν (glossed Erotian E 38 rνrδησεν). Celsus’
expression constat ex circulis quibusdam (4.1.3) shares the metaphor. For
the compound verb, of bodily composition, see Fract. 9 [3.448 L.] //
5
Maladies of the lung and respiratory tract occupy much space in the HC: see
especially Int. init. [7.166 L.] and Loc. Hom. 14 [6.302 L.].
132 commentary
[page 143]
(foot and hand composed of many small bones); and see κεtσ0αι below
(4, position of liver and 5, position of ureters; also παρακεtσ0αι (10, belly
in relation to liver).
The concatenation of terms oμορυσμοtς. oμορυσμiην. oμοιóρυσμοι.
oμοιóρυσμον. oμοιóρυσμον (connected respectively with rings of trachea,
1; with liver, 4; with kidneys, 5; with spleen, 9; with intestine, 10) is
arresting;
6
and we may add rναλiγκιοι (connected with the kidneys, 5):
throughout, the author is concerned with comparisons, expressed in
consistent terminology. In scientific writing, technical terms are liable
to be repeated; indeed, variation can be misleading and obscure the
sense. Suda (s.v. çυσμóς) glosses: κατo 'Αβδηριτικjν διoλεκτον σημαiνει τò
σχjμα. καi rτrραις δr λrξεσιν ο0χ rλληνικαtς οl περi τòν 'Αβδηρiτην Δημó-
κριτον χρuνται. Other late commentators (Philoponus, Eustathius), per-
haps using the same source, reiterate this information on the Abderite
sense of çυσμóς (σχjμα. rκτασις. 0rσις. διoστασις. τuπος), and there
is good evidence that çυσμóς and related words were favoured by
Demokritos; see further below. Whatever the authentic Hellenic char-
acter of the ‘other words’ allusively mentioned in the Suda, it seems
unduly harsh to imply that the semantic extension of çυσμóς (Ionic for
Attic çυ0μóς) ‘form’ is not admissible Greek. It seems rather to have
been a matter of stylistic preference; cf. E. El. 772 (in hendiadys with
τρóπος) also H.F. 130, Supp. 94. The sense ‘shape’ is dominant: see Arist.
Metaph. 985b16, identification with σχjμα, also Hdt. 5.58, of letters, and
Artic. 62 [4.268 L.], of boots; but coexists with more abstract usage, as
in Septim. passim. Hsch. glosses çυσμοδóσ0αι συγκρiνεσ0αι, ‘compare’,
precisely in line with the sense of the related words here.
τuν περιηγrων úπτομrνων κατ’ rπiπεδον 0λλjλων: neither περιηγjς ‘cir-
cular’ nor rπiπεδος ‘level’, ‘plane’ occurs elsewhere in the HC. The
former term, which Hsch. glosses as κυκλοτερrς. περιφερrς, is used
6
Following van der Linden, Triller emends the two occurrences of oμο- to oμοιο-.
However, this is unnecessary, as the difference between oμο- words (from oμóς ‘one
and the same’) and oμοιο- words (from oμοtος ‘like, resembling’) is not always strictly
maintained; except that whereas oμο- words can mean ‘similar’, oμοιο- words cannot
mean ‘the same’. Thus oμοειδjς (close in nuance to oμορυσμóς here) can mean either
‘of like form’ or ‘uniform’; and coexists with oμοιοειδjς, which must mean ‘of like
form’. In our passage, no instance of oμορυσμóς imperatively demands the sense of
sameness rather than similarity; and only one (the case of the spleen) demands the
sense of similarity rather than sameness. The Greek is ambiguous, but reference to
comparative anatomy (‘rings like [those in other animals]’) is more probable than to ‘a
series of rings’; see further below.
commentary 133
[page 143 // page 144]
by Empedokles (DK 31 B 27.4 = Plu. Mor. 926d; cited also Stob.).
7
The term rπiπεδος is common in many of the pre-Socratics, including
Philolaus, Pythagoras, Anaximander as well as Demokritos, typically in
mathematical contexts (as Demokritos DK 68 B 155 = Plu. Mor. 1079e).
The vocabulary of this phrase is somewhat alien to the HC, with tech-
nical terms of general scientific writing rather than of medicine. Rufus,
arguing for the primacy of medical terminology by analogy with learn-
ing methods in other skills, cites geometry, where the pupil first learns
στιγμjν καi γραμμjν καi rπiπεδον, ‘point, line, and plane’ (Onom. 5 =
133–134 DR).
The manuscript reading úπτομrνη is retained by early editors
(glossed jμμrνη. προσδεδεμrνη, i.e. ‘attached’). Without 0λλjλων this
would be acceptable Greek; but as the text stands it is impossibly awk-
ward. The nominative singular feminine of the // participle was doubt-
less scribal error, following ποιευμrνη … ξυγκειμrνη and failing to antic-
ipate the change to the genitive absolute construction.
2. On the colour, mottling and texture of the lung, see GA 1285: ‘The
substance of the lung is of a light, porous, spongy texture … in adult
life the colour is a dark slaty-grey, mottled in patches.’ (The lung is
rose-pink in all young creatures; the characteristic dark pigmentation,
in animals as in humans, is due to breathing an impure atmosphere.)
There can be no doubt that the author here describes human anatomi-
cal features: five lobes; in fact two (superior and inferior) in the left lung
and three (superior, middle and inferior) in the right. The configuration
of lobes in the lung is peculiar to different creatures: in the Equidae the
lung is not divided into lobes at all; in cattle the lungs are divided into
lobes by deep fissures, the left lung having three and the right lung four
or five lobes; in the pig the left lung is like that of the ox while the right
has an additional apical lobe, itself often in two parts; in the dog each
lung has three large lobes, but the right has a small extra lobe and there
may be one or more accessory lobes in either lung (BVD, s.v. ‘lung’).
α0τòς δr o πνεuμων: this initial expression contrasts with the bald
resumption of comment, often without even the article, on other organs
(liver, bladder, kidneys) picked up from preceding sentences. But cf.
α0τj δr (vessel), Oss. 12 [9.182 L.], bis.
7
Ibycus, TLG: 46 occurrences, most Hellenistic or later, but found in Hesiod,
Aischylos and Plato.
134 commentary
[page 144 // page 145]
ξυνεξαναπληροt τjν χrλυν: the triple compound is a remarkable for-
mation.
8
Double συν- compounds are common enough (32 instances,
many occurring several times over, in the HC); and πληρóω is a verb
commonly made compound (in the HC as 0ποπληρóω. rκπληρóω. rπι-
πληρóω. συμπληρóω). But the triple compound with συν- is unparalleled
in the medical treatises of the HC, though note συνεισκατοικrω Ep. 23
[9.394 L.].
χrλυς lit. ‘tortoise’ is used by extension of things of tortoise shell,
commonly the lyre; or of tortoise shape, as ‘arched’ parts of the body,
typically as here the chest and cf. E. El. 837 of a bull; cf. also Pollux
2.177 χελuνιον explained ‘arched part of the back’. See also χελuνειον
(of the chin), Ep. 23 [9.394 L.]. As ‘arched’ is a somewhat inappropriate
descriptive term for the chest (even the chest when a deep breath has
been taken), the metaphor may rather relate (i) to similarity with a
tortoise shell, protecting vital parts of the body; for the idea, though
coupled with anatomical misconceptions, cf. o 0uρηξ καλεóμενος. rν
_u τò jπαρ στεγoζεται de Arte 10 [6.18 L.]; or (ii) to similarity with the
lyre, through a realization that the voice comes from, and is somehow
amplified by, the chest: cf. the idea that the lung is hollow, with the
σuριγξ source of the voice, Morb. 4.56 [7.604 L.]. The usage of κi0αρος
‘chest’ throughout Loc. Hom. (3.6; 10.1, 2; 14.1, 5, 10 [6.282, 294, 302,
304, 308 L.]) shows the same metaphor.
τετραμμrνος rς τo 0ριστερo: the phrase ‘inclined (lit. turned) to the left’
9
seems at first sight to give an inaccurate description of the position
of the two lungs and to conflict with the author’s awareness (evident
in what ensues) of the central position of the heart. Ermerins sug-
gests ‘turned to the right and to the left’, on the supposition that
a phrase has been lost; Cornarius’ tentative emendations (see appa-
ratus) would give a similar sense, ‘turned to both sides’. Triller inge-
niously // moots τετραμμrνος rς τ’ 0ρυστjρα. ‘adapted to drawing’, on
the grounds that the purpose of the lungs is inhalation; it is not clear
whether he intended τ’ to be particle or elided neuter plural article;
but neither is possible Greek. (Van der Linden’s emendation τετρημrνος
‘pierced’, for τετραμμrνος, ‘turned’, is to be rejected, as it would antic-
ipate τεν0ρηνιuδης, ‘honey-combed’, if, as is likely, this is to be read
8
Hence Triller tr. ‘coadimplet’, following Cornarius in preference to Foesius’ ‘implet’.
9
Τρrπεσ0αι is a common verb of orientation in the body, not only of bodily parts;
but also of disease, pain, bile, phlegm, etc.
commentary 135
[page 145]
below; and description of the position of the lungs is more appropriate
here than description of their appearance.) Littré rejects any emenda-
tion, on the grounds that in ancient anatomical texts there is room for
‘les erreurs materielles et les fausses opinions’. But there are two other
possibilities. (i) The text is sound and the author not in error. As noted
above, the author implies there is only one lung; and viewed in this
way the lung may be regarded as ‘turned to the left’: there is a more
acute angle on the left side than on the right, due to the position of
the heart (see GA 1286), so that (GA 1290) the right lung is ‘shorter’—
though ‘broader’—than the left. We may then retain the manuscript
reading and translate ‘inclined towards the left’, ‘deflected to the left’.
(ii) A phrase describing the position of the heart has been misapplied to
the lungs, possibly through telescoping of a source. Cf. the description
of the human heart, contrasted with that of other creatures, μικρòν εiς
τo ε0uνυμα παρεκκλiνουσα, Arist. P.A. 665b–666b.
πrντε íπερκορυφuσιας: the term íπερκορυφuσις occurs only here ap-
plied to the eminences or elevations of the lung (λοβοi) and of the
liver (πuλαι); it implies a simple form κορυφuσις, not found either.
The word is thus doubly recondite, prefix being added to rare or
invented form. κορυφj occurs frequently in the HC as elsewhere with
the meaning ‘top’, as of bladder, 5 below; and especially as crown of
head, as Loc. Hom. 3 [6.280 L.]; but the only usage of κορυφj similar
to this passage, and the affinity is striking, is in the description of
vessels in the region of the liver, one said to pass διo τuν κορυφuν
καi το0 δrρματος ‘between the tops [of the lobes] and the skin’, Oss. 18
[9.194 L.].
0ς δj καλrουσι λóβους: this is the first of five comments on nomencla-
ture in Anat.: here, projections of lung; cf. projections of liver 0ς καλr-
ουσι πuλας, oesophagus oν δj καi rπi σηπτικjς κοιλiης στóμαχον καλrου-
σιν, intestine o καλrουσιν rνιοι κóλον, and the vessel μεγoλη καλουμrνη.
With this information there is clear awareness of possible variation in
terminology (rνιοι ‘some’) and perhaps of etymological rationale for ter-
minology (especially if the emendation rπισημαντικuς or rπισjμως is
adopted, 8). The author is setting out the accepted terminology, which
‘they’ use, with a slightly didactic tone (δj. δj καi).
τεφρiνης χροiης τυχuν. στiγμασιν oρφνuδεσι κεκεντημrνος. φuσει ruν
τεν0ρηνιuδης: the appearance of the lung is described in three succes-
136 commentary
[page 145 // page 146]
sive participial phrases loosely strung together, the first two relating to
colour and the third to ‘nature’, ‘character’ (here perhaps close to ‘tex-
ture’).
(i) The first description ‘ashen’ is clear. Although τrφρινος is a hapax,
the word τrφρη ‘ash’ occurs in the gynaecological treatises of the HC.
(ii) The second description is textually uncertain. The word στi-
γματα ‘spots’ (glossed Hsch. ποικiλματα) is not used elsewhere in the
HC and κεκεντημrνος, ‘punctuated’, lit. ‘pricked out’, is metaphori-
cal, though readily understood; it is used of the pricking of pain Morb.
2.59 [7.92 L.]. The adjective oρφοναγrσιν is not credible Greek; palaeo-
graphically, the slightest change mooted (by Triller) is to oρφναγενr-
σιν // or oρφνογενrσιν supposed to be equivalent to oρφνuδεσιν. But
Triller himself rejects these fanciful forms in favour of Foesius’ oρφνu-
δης. The various conjectures oρφνuδεσι (Foesius), 0φρuδεσι (van der
Linden), oφρυóεσι (Littré)—all reasonably close to the non-word oρφο-
ναγrσιν—mean, respectively, ‘dark’, ‘foamy’, and ‘protruding’. Of these
the first seems anatomically best and alone is paralleled in the HC,
Progn. 24 [2.184 L.], of darkness before the eyes.
10
(iii) In the third phrase, the word division τr 0ρηνιuδης has otiose
and misplaced τr; and the single word τε0ρηνιuδης ‘like ash’ merely
replicates ‘ashen’ just before. Foesius’ emendation τεν0ρηνιuδης ‘honey-
combed’ gives an unusual word, in keeping with the author’s elaborate
vocabulary. It is attributed to Demokritos, in zoological and embryolog-
ical writings (DK 68 A 155, citation from Ael. HN 12.20, on the for-
mation of horn). Hsch. glosses τε0ρηνιuδες πολu καi κενòν κηρiον. καi
0ραιóν. The most salient characteristic of the lung is generally thought
to be its spongy texture; cf. Oss. 13 [9.186 L.], V.M. 22 and many later
medical writers, including Celsus 4.1.3 [1.626 L.], ‘spongiosum’.
3. The author is correct that the heart is ‘in the middle of the lung’ (i.e.
between the lungs), but the allegation that the human heart is peculiarly
round cannot be sustained. The heart is in fact neither round, nor
heart-shaped; but rather amorphous, or somewhat pouch-shaped (GA
697 fig. 678). The reference to the two descending parts (βρογχiη πολλj
… καi φλrψ μεγoλη) is probably to the prominent vessels, the aorta and
vena cava: see GA 1415, fig. 1230.
10
As Foesius translated ‘notis cavernosis compunctus’, it seems that he finally elected to
emend with a word meaning ‘cavernous’, perhaps 0ντρuδης.
commentary 137
[page 146 // page 147]
rγκα0iδρυται: this compound does not occur elsewhere in the HC,
though the simple lδρuω is common, often used of a bone ‘sitting’ in
place, Fract., Artic.; and there are seventeen other Hippocratic rγκατα-
compounds.
11
The sense of the verb here is close to that in Ep. 23
[9.394 L.], συνiδρυται of eyes (cf. rγκα0jμενοι, of eyes, Epid. 2.2.24
[5.96 L.]), rνιδρυσμrνοι of kidneys and rνιδρυσμrνη of bladder,
12
and
also the notion of the heart as ‘ruler’, καρδiη βασιλiς. Cf. also the
descriptions of the heart rνiδρυται … uς rκ παντòς το0 σuματος τoς
jνiας rχουσα, Oss. 19 [9.196 L.]; and περi μrσον … rν γoρ τοtς τιμιωτr-
ροις τò τιμιuτατον κα0iδρυκεν j φuσις, Arist. P. A. 665b–666b.
13
στρογγυλωτrρη … πoντων ζ_uων: the Greek expression is slightly illogi-
cal; lit., ‘rounder than all creatures’. Hence Ermerins suggests πoντων
τuν rν ζ_u_ω (i.e. ‘of all animal organs’). But there is a compendious
comparison (cf. ‘hair like the graces’, sc. the graces’ hair); and in ‘all
creatures’, ‘other’ is readily understood, i.e. ‘rounder than that of any
other creature’. Similar comparisons are made below, 4 and 5. For this
universal anatomy, cf. τοσο0τον rς τòν 0ν0ρωπον 0ποδεiξω καi τo 0λλα
ζ_uα, Carn. 1 [8.584 L.]. The alleged roundness of the human heart
may be based simply on a view that roundness is a ‘good’ state; cf. Pl.
Ti. 33 b, c, the κóσμος is spherical because the // sphere is the most
perfect of shapes; circular motion is connected with rational activity.
Other descriptions of the heart are: σχjμα μrν oκοiη πυραμiς, Cord. 1
[9.80 L.] and κωνοειδjς Ep. 23 [9.394 L.]; but ‘somewhat rounded’,
Arist. H.A. 496.
βρογχiη πολλj … φλrψ μεγoλη: two links between heart and liver are
indicated. But the terminology is opaque and the brevity and baldness
of this text of uncertain date and context renders identification prob-
lematical. First, it must be stressed that there is no particular emphasis
on the links: the author is simply describing the area between heart
11
The verb rγκα0ιδρuω is common in post-classical, especially ecclesiastical, writers
(Ibycus, TLG: 47 occurrences, headed by 7 in Nicephorus Gregoras,); but there are good
fifth century antecedents. Euripides uses it of establishing a cult image, λαβεtν 0γαλμ’
'Α0ηνuν τ’ rγκα0ιδρ0σαι χ0ονi. I.T. 978 and employs κα0ιδρuειν with similar nuance,
I.T. 1481; cf. also Ba. 1339.
12
So earlier editors; but Smith (1990) corrects to rνδρασμrνοι and rνηδρασμrνη.
13
For the compound verb, there is a parallel in a Demokritean citation, with regard
to dream images ‘deeply penetrating’ the body rγκαταβυσσο0σ0αι τo εiδωλα διo τuν
πóρων εiς τo σuματα, DK 68 A 77 = Plu. Mor. 734f.
138 commentary
[page 147]
and liver. There is no indication that either heart or liver is peculiarly
important in bodily function. The two links are: (i) βρογχiη πολλj and
(ii) φλrψ μεγoλη καλευμrνη, by which the whole body is nurtured. βρογ-
χiη is any tube (commonly but by no means exclusively the aorta) or
system of tubes (commonly the bronchial tubes); and πολλj may mean
‘many a’ or ‘big’ (cf. Hsch. πολu γoρ 0ντi το0 μrγα). φλrψ μεγoλη com-
monly refers to the vena cava; but the term could be simply general and
descriptive rather than technical and specific. If j were to be added,
the technical use would be certain, but nothing can be deduced from
its omission in this terse work. On τρrφεται as a possible aid to identi-
fication, see below. Other descriptions (in different authors of different
dates) of the aorta are as 0ρτηρiη μεγoλη. μεγiστη. oρ0j. παχεtα. πνευ-
ματικj, and of the vena cava are as φλrψ κοiλη. κοιλοτoτη. jπατtτις.
But the vena cava is sometimes designated 0ρτηρiη, perceived to be dif-
ferent from the other φλrβες (by reason of its character, economically
described by Triller ‘cum ratione tunicae, tum ratione motus et pulsus’) and
Galen uses the term μεγoλη (with or without the addition πρòς πuλας)
for the portal vein, which is, after the vena cava, the body’s largest.
The identification which best fits the tenor of the treatise, with its
careful attention to location and strict paring down to essentials is
as follows: (i) =aorta and (ii) = vena cava, with πολλj and μεγoλη
synonymous, and the difference between the adjectives only a matter of
stylistic variatio. This seems the simplest interpretation, consonant both
with the Greek text and the salient anatomical ‘links’ in the thoracic
cavity. And cf. the very similar δuο γoρ εiσι κοtλαι φλrβες 0πò τjς
καρδiης τ¸j μrν οuνομα 0ρτηρiη τ¸j δr κοiλη φλrψ, Carn. 5 [8.590 L.].
Here too the statement that vessels ‘come from’ the heart may be
a matter of simple observation, not necessarily precluding the view
that (other) vessels ‘come from’ the head. Aristotle orders his material
similarly (transition from heart to vessels, P.A. 667b) but the tenor is very
different, as the fundamental importance of the heart is recognised; as
also in the sophistic treatise on nutriment, çiζωσις φλεβuν jπαρ. çiζωσις
0ρτηριuν καρδiη rκ τοuτων 0ποπλαν0ται rς πoντα αiμα καt πνε0μα καi
0ερμασiη διo τοuτων φοιτ¸0. Alim. 31 [9.110 L.].
14
//
14
But several other identifications have been canvassed:
1. (i) = ducts and (ii) = vena cava. The βρογχiη πολλj of the mss is taken by LSJ
to be an imaginary system of ducts connecting the heart with the liver; similarly Littré
translates ‘beaucoup de tuyaux’. Harris (1973), pp. 82–83 is impressed by the contrast
between βρογχiη πολλj and the great vein; and translates ‘many a bronchia [= artery?]’
finding here ‘a double system of blood vessels centred on the heart, with veins and
commentary 139
[page 148]
δι’ jς οuλον τò σκjνος τρrφεται: the word σκjνος is used four times
elsewhere in the treatises of the HC: 1, of premature infants (σκjνεα
rπτoμηνα—emendation of codd. σκινσα Septim. 1 [7.436 L.]), 2 = 3 of a
body after death (τò το0 σuματος σκjνος Hebd. 52 [8.673 L.] = Aph 8.8.
[1.402 L.]); 4, οl πóταμοι 0νo τò σuμα. τοtσιν 0ρδεται τò σκjνος Cord. 7
[9.84 L.], as well as in the [Demokritean] letter, Ep. 18 [9.384 L.], ο0λο-
μελiην το0 σκjνεος. In all these instances, the word is the body either in
the abstract or in its non-living state (before birth or after death).
The term is much used by Demokritos: DK 68 A 152 = Ael. N.H.
6.60 of the embryo; B 37, B 57, B 187, B 223, B 270, B 288 (all
Stobaios citations), of corporeal opposed to mental or spiritual being.
15
The statement that the whole frame is nourished or nurtured by the
great vessel opens up further problems. The verb may allude to the
common conception of blood passing to different parts of the body
and distributing nourishment as needed. For this common idea, cf.
[vessels] αl τρrφουσι τoς σoρκας, Loc. Hom. 3.6 [6.282 L.]; also the vessel
τρóφιμóς τε καi rναιμος which τρrφει τòν μυελóν, Oss. 16 [9.190 L.].
The conception that the vena cava played an important part in this
life-giving process might have arisen from the observation that the vena
cava collapses on death.
arteries clearly distinguished’. But the trouble with this is that even if βρογχiη may
represent a plurality, φλrψ (μεγoλη) does not; and it is hard to extract a ‘system’ from
a tube; also the vessels are not ‘centred on’ the heart, but merely leading from it. In
short, a distinction between veins and arteries cannot be read into this bald text.
2. (i) = vena cava and (ii) = aorta. Objection: aorta is rarely described as φλrψ,
though for this designation, cf. Carn. 5.2 [8.590 L.], quoted above.
3. (i) = vena cava and (ii) = portal vein. Triller compares Aristotle’s προσπεφuκασι
γoρ τ_u jπατι αuται δuο φλrβες μrγισται j μrν καλουμrνη πuλη. j δr κοiλη and, while
admitting that vena cava is usually that called μεγoλη, argues that πολλj (‘spatiosam,
amplam, maximam’) may here be a substituted descriptive term.
4. (i) = (ii), both refer to vena cava, with emendation of βρογχiη to βρυχiη (adj.,
‘deep’). This is the emendation of Caspar Hoffman adopted by van der Linden (see
apparatus). Objection: Greek is awkward, and anyway there is no real need to emend.
5. (i) = vena hepatica and (ii) = vena cava inferior. Ermerins (taking his starting
point from van der Linden, who however restricted the reference to a single deep vein,
the great vein) reads j μεγoλη and supposes the reference is to two veins, the vena
hepatica and the cava inferior.
Interpretations 3, 4, 5 seem open to the fundamental objection that the location is
too low in the body to be right; 2 is terminologically awkward; 1 presses the Greek into
excessively advanced anatomical knowledge.
15
It occurs many times in Ti. Locr., a précis of Pl. Ti. preserved in some Platonic
mss, apparently (so Taylor ed., 1928) in an attempt to give a superficial Pythagorean
colouring to the work. It becomes extremely common in post-classical Greek, for
instance in Eusebius (Ibycus, TLG).
140 commentary
[page 148 // page 149]
But if the author is here working from an aborted foetus, a particular
vessel which linked via umbilical cord to placenta, might seem to
‘nourish the frame’.
16
Cf. the notion expressed that nutriment is breath
in the lung, food in the belly while j δr 0ρχαιοτrρη τροφj διo το0
rπιγαστρiου ¸j o oμφαλóς, Alim. 30 [9.110 L.].
4. The author describes the situation and character of the liver, also the
number of lobes. Cf. GA 1400, ‘The liver … is situated in the upper and
right parts of the abdominal cavity … owing to its great vascularity,
wounds of the liver cause considerable haemorrhage. … The liver is
divided … into a large right and a much smaller left lobe.’ Once again,
there is no doubt that human anatomy is being discussed. The liver
varies greatly in character in different kinds of animal; the horse liver
has three lobes; the ox only one distinct lobe; the sheep is similar;
the pig has four main lobes and the dog six or seven lobes (BVD, s.v.
‘liver’). The slanting vessel // is probably to be identified with the portal
vein, which conveys blood to the liver from the intestines (GA 854 and
855, fig. 787); it follows the downward course here implied and overlies
(is anterior to) the vena cava. Another candidate is the splenic artery
which is ‘remarkable for the tortuosity of its course’ (GA 779), but this
goes across the body rather than downwards.
oμορυσμiην μrν rχει τοtς 0λλοις 0πασιν. αlμορρωδrστερον δr rστι τuν
0λλων: the second half of the sentence qualifies the first half; the liver
is similar (μrν) in general to the livers of all other animals, but different
(δr) in relative ‘bloodiness’.
17
Cf. Aristotle τo δr jπατα τuν τετραπóδων
καi τuν _uοτóκων καi τuν iχ0uων rνωχρα τuν πλεiστων, P.A. 673b29;
also Herophilos on the liver ο0χ oμοiως … ο0χ oμοιον … rν 0πασιν
16
Triller’s emendation (above n. 14.3) has some such rationale: the umbilical vein by
which ‘revera infantis corpusculum nutritur’ could readily be associated with the portal vein.
However, Triller does not exclude the vena cava in this connection; and the latter is
rendered likely by the fact that the course of blood from placenta is through umbilical
vein to ductus venosus to inferior vena cava; before, at birth, the ductus venosus
collapses with the collapse of the umbilical vein; see C.W.F. Burnett, The Anatomy and
Physiology of Obstetrics (London, 1953), pp. 129–134. It is not impossible that there was
some observation of this if the aborted foetus was examined (though observation of the
ductus venosus is not recorded until the sixteenth century).
17
Triller’s emendation jπασιν ‘to all other livers’ is made on the grounds that the
human liver, though resembling that of some animals, such as cow and sheep, is not
like that of all other creatures; but this objection seems to be met by the qualification in
the second part of the sentence.
commentary 141
[page 149]
(von Staden, 1989, 182–183). An alternative interpretation is possible:
‘to all other organs of the body’. Aristotle comments that heart and
other organs all have αlματικj φuσις and are αlματικo τjν μορφjν,
also that the spleen is αlματωδjς (P.A. 647a, 670b); but he regards the
heart as even more ‘bloody’ than the liver, τò δr jπαρ αlματικuτατον
μετo τjν καρδiαν τuν σπλoγχνων (P. A. 637b). In view of the author’s
stress on comparative anatomy, the former interpretation is preferable.
For the bloody character of the liver, cf. rναιμον, V.M. 22 [1.632 L.];
πολυαiματον, Empedokles DK 31 B 150 = Plu. Mor. 683e. The bloody
nature of the liver might be perceived without the theory that it was
crucial in the distribution of the blood through the body. The associated
vein is j αlμóρρους j παχεiη καλεομrνη φλrψ as Oss. 7 and 12 [9.172,
182 L.]. Of fifteen instances of αlμóρρους in the HC, four are in Oss. 7
and 12 [9.172, 182–184 L.]. αlματωδjς is more common, with seventy-
three occurrences in the HC; but is applied to wounds, not to vessels.
íπερκορυφuσιας rχον δuο. 0ς καλrουσι πuλας: the projecting parts here
called ‘gates’ are more commonly called ‘lobes’ (as in the case of the
lung), while the term ‘gate’ is normally applied not (as here) to an
eminence, but to a depression or indentation, especially the fissure
through which the portal vein enters (see von Staden, 1989, 229). There
are several such indentations, the two main ones being the points of
entry of the vena cava inferior and the portal vein (GA 1405, fig. 1221).
The term ‘gate’ is dismissed by Rufus as appropriate to augury, not to
human anatomy (and the distinguishing features of animal livers were
well known from minute examination in the course of augury follow-
ing animal sacrifice; of all the organs it must have been most generally
familiar—see e.g. E. El. 828sqq.); Rufus also states that the term ‘gates’
was applied by ‘old doctors’ to the attachment to the vena cava inferior
(Anat. 28, 175 DR). It is possible that the odd terminology is the result
of drastic summarization: the excrescences have been given the name
gates, instead of lobes, while some description of gates is lost. Differen-
tiation is clearly implied Oss. 10 [9.180 L.] = Epid. 2.4.1 [5.122 L.] rπi
πuλας καi λοβóν, and cf. Pl. Ti. 71c1–2 λοβóν … δοχoς … πuλας. Hsch.
has both terms: πuλας rκτροπoς and λóβιον τò 0κρον το0 jπατος.
The number of lobes is variously given. Rufus believed there were
four or five. Whereas in Oss. 10 [9.180 L.] a single lobe is envisaged, it is
clearly stated in Oss. 1 [9.168 L.] that there are five (jπατος πrντε λοβοi)
and in Oss. 18 [9.192 L.]—as here in Anat.—that there are two (in the
expressions τòν δεξιòν λοβòν τòν jπατιαtον and μεταξu δuο λοβuν). The
142 commentary
[page 149 // page 150]
minor // excrescences of the caudate lobe and the quadrate lobe (GA
1405, fig. 1221) perhaps confused the issue; but inspection of different
species would lead to different conclusions.
rν δεξiοις τóποις κεiμενον: κεiμενον (neut. sg.) is Ermerins’ emendation
of κειμrνας (fem. pl.) and makes the liver lie on the right of the body,
rather than the ‘gates’ on the right of the liver. The general statement
is in accord with the rudimentary anatomical description of the text.
18
σκαλjνη φλrψ rπi τo κoτω νεφρuν 0ποτεiνουσα: the adjective, not used
elsewhere in the HC, is used by Demokritos (so DK 68 A 37 = Simp.
in cael. 294.33, and, allegedly based on Aristotle, 132 = Thphr. C.P.
67.2); and is extremely common in a wide range of other authors of all
dates. Hsch. glosses by σκóλιον. πολuγωνον.
19
The expression τo κoτω
is compressed, sc. μrρη. The compound verb is used only twice in the
HC, here and (in a temporal sense) Epid. 4.7 [5.146 L.], though both
τεiνειν and 0ποτεiνειν are very common.
20
5. The author describes the kidneys, of which (GA 1418) ‘The corti-
cal substance is reddish-brown in colour’. The ureters are correctly
described as slanting, each being (GA 1422) ‘a thick-walled, narrow,
cylindrical tube which … runs downwards and medially’ and ‘crosses’
various parts before (1423) ‘finally the ureters run obliquely through
the wall of the bladder’. The position of the ureters relative to each
other varies from 2.5cm to about 5cm, according to whether the blad-
der is contracted or distended (GA 1429); and their position relative to
18
Triller, keeping κειμrνας, argues that the phrase does not relate to location at all,
either of the organ or of its gates, but to function: in his view δεξιóς means not ‘dexter’
but ‘receptorius, acceptorius’, from root δrχομαι and describes the place which receives
‘succum chylosum’ and puts it in the receptacle of the liver. There is some slight support
for this ingenious idea from Hsch. s.v. δεξiς τuν rν τ_u jπατι μερuν παρo τοtς 0uταις
καλουμrνη δóξη; and perhaps from Hsch. attribution to Demokritos of usage of the verb
to describe blood vessels δεξαμεναi rν τ_u σuματι φλrβες Δημοκρiτου (DK 68 B 135).
However, Triller’s interpretation is to be rejected for these reasons: δεξιóς is so familiar
in other senses, τóποι clearly suggests a definite location in the body (cf. title of Loc.
Hom.); and the writer of this treatise is concerned throughout with description, not with
function.
19
Triller regards this vessel as the descending vena cava (λοξjν Galen de ven et art
diss.); but a vessel other than the ‘great’ one, argued above to be the vena cava, seems
intended.
20
There is some usage of 0ποτεiνειν in Aristotle and Plato and much in later Greek;
it is favoured by Joannes Chrysostom, Galen, Eusebius, and Simplicius (Ibycus, TLG).
commentary 143
[page 150 // page 151]
the internal urethral orifice varies correspondingly. The author regards
the ureters as reaching the top of the bladder, in accord with his top-
to-bottom presentation of anatomy. As their actual position (GA 1425,
fig. 1243) is rather reaching the ‘edge’, the translation ‘top edge’ is
appropriate.
νεφροi δr oμοιορυσμοi. τjν χροιjν δr rναλiγκιοι μjλοισιν: as in the case
of the liver, it is not immediately clear what is meant by the ‘similarity’
of the kidneys; oμοιορυσμοi, sc. εiσι = (of the liver) oμορυσμiην rχει. In
view of the apparent stress on comparative anatomy, the most likely
explanation is ‘like the kidneys of other creatures’; cf. the observation of
Aristotle (correct only of the unborn infant in utero) that human kidneys
are oμοιοι … τοtς βοεiοις … ο0χ oμαλεtς uσπερ οl τuν προβoτων καi τuν
0λλων τuν τετραπóδων, P.A. 671b. But other possibilities are: ‘like each
other’ (as they obviously are) or ‘like other organs’; cf. καi εiδος καρδiης
οl νεφροi rχουσι καi οuτοι κοιλuδεες. Oss. 4 [9.170 L.]. Comments
on shape and colour are // pervasive in such descriptions; cf. Rufus,
σχjματι περιφερεtς. χροι¸0 φακuδεις, Anat. 51, 181 DR. Here, the ensuing
comparison helps to resolve the question. Whereas in the case of the
liver the ensuing phrase qualifies the likeness, in the case of the kidneys
it amplifies: the kidneys have a similarity to those of other creatures,
and further in colour they are like sheep, i.e. (in another compendious
or compressed comparison) the kidneys are like [those of] sheep in
colour. Cornarius, Foesius, and van der Linden all took τjν χροιjν with
oμοιορυσμοi, i.e. ‘renes vero colore inter se similes’ (Foesius tr.) and continued
by understanding the ensuing comparison with reference to apples,
‘malorum speciem prae se ferunt’ (Foesius tr.). Clearly, their translation is
based on the perception that the kidneys are like apples in shape, rather
than in colour; but necessitates deletion of δr. The interpretation of
the ambiguous μjλοισιν as ‘sheep’ not ‘apples’ begins with Triller;
21
it
greatly aids the sense and it may now be noted that in the HC the
sense ‘sheep’ predominates over the sense ‘apple’ (15 to 12). The noun
sometimes refers to animals generally, as Hsch. notes μjλα κοινuς μrν
πoντα τo τετρoποδα. κατ’ rπικρoτειαν δr τo πρóβατα καi αiγες. Erotian
refers the cognate adjective to sheep, Σ 56, στrατι μηλεi_ω 0ντi το0
προβατεi_ω. μjλα γoρ τo πρóβατα. Treatment by mutton fat, Nat. Mul. 32
21
The interpretation is commended by A. von Haller, Bibliotheca Anatomica (Zurich
1774–1777), vol. 1, p. 20. Triller’s emendation of μjλοισιν to μηλεiοισιν is not necessary;
though it would render the animal sense certain rather than probable.
144 commentary
[page 151 // page 152]
[7.366 L.] etc. and by boiled mutton, Morb. 2.69 [7.106 L.] etc. are
described by use of the word. rναλiγκιοι is epic and exclusively poetic,
cf. Parmenides DK 28 B 8. 43 = Simp. In Ph. 144.29. It serves as a
synonymous alternative to oμοιορυσμοi, also used in a simile, 9 below.
The variatio avoids immediate repetition in a single sentence.
oχετοi σκαληνοειδrες rς 0κρην κορυφjν κuστιος κεtνται: Hsch. and Suda
gloss oχετóς as σολjν. Elsewhere the ureters are πóροι or occasionally
φλrβες. The preposition, added by van der Linden, is required. In a
very similar expression of progress from larynx to bladder, fluid is said
to go rς 0κρην κuστιν, Oss. 1 [9.168 L.]; cf. also Rufus, πóροι κατo
κορυφjν κuστεως συνoπτουσι.
6. The author completes the downward description with a brief ac-
count of the bladder and its outlet.
νευρuδης οuλη καi μεγoλη: cf. ‘vesica nervosa’, Celsus 4.1.11. The adjective
οuλος is an epic and Ionic (though not in Herodotos) form for oλος
‘all’.
22
μrσα oσχrα: the emendation suggested is based on V’s reading, un-
known to Littré and others, who based emendations on the corrupt
recc.
23
It gives the required sense, completing the description of the
trunk (cf. Rufus, thorax extends 0πò κλειδuν // μεχρi τuν αiδοiων): some
reference to the final point outside the body is required, by analogy
with 11 below. ‘Centrally’ is in accord with the constant reference to
the position of the bodily parts throughout. oσχrα is palaeographically
close to V; but other candidates, giving similar content, might be ðρχεις
22
Triller punctuates κuστις δr νευρuδης. οuλη. καi μεγoλη, tr. ‘vesica quae nervosa,
constrictiva est et expansiva’. There is some force in his assertion that ‘res … ipsa id postulat’;
but the parallels for this extraordinary meaning attributed to οuλη are not altogether
convincing: Hsch. glosses s.v. οuλος συνεστραμμrνος and scholiast Ar. Ran. 1067 οuλον
associated with εiλειν. εiλεtν, viz. ‘coarctare, complicare, in angustum cogere’.
23
Earlier emendations (see apparatus) may be briefly considered: the interpretation
of Triller (with reference to the sphincter, tr. ‘The constriction of the bladder is deep
within’) involves a level of detail out of keeping with the rest of the treatise; that of Lit-
tré (tr. ‘From a distance is the working of the bladder for the purpose for which it exists’)
involves obscure sense and unidiomatic expression; that of Ermerins (tr. ‘From the blad-
der there is a channel outside’) gives good sense, but is very distant from the mss. (Triller
emends on the basis of Galen’s gloss rγκας rν βo0ει and interprets on the basis of the
Suda μετοχj o περiβολος—i.e. ‘ambitus, circulus, orbiculus’, commenting ‘in ima vesicae parte
sive cervice, orbiculus quidam, sive orbicularis est ambiens quidam musculus a natura formata est’.)
commentary 145
[page 152]
(cf. the course of the vessels rς τοuς ðρχιας καi rς τòν 0ρχóν, Oss.
17 [9.192 L.], and rκ δr σuματος κρεμαστοi rκτòς οiκiην νrμονται …
ðρχεις, Ep. 23 [9.396 L.]) or iσχιον, e.g. oρχεtς μrσοι πεφuκασιν or μετo
(‘after that’) iσχια πrφυκε (cf. iσχi_ω στóμα, Ep. 23 [9.396 L.]). Or if a
reference to the urinary tract is postulated, we might consider oχετóς,
e.g. 0νrκα0εν rκ κuστιος oχετòς πrφυκε. Or the adverb κoτω0εν may be
lost (cf. κoτω0εν το0 oμφoλου, Aff. 15 [6.224 L.]). In any case, reference
as throughout is primarily, and probably exclusively, to the male body.
7. The author sums up the previous description: the six parts are
apparently trachea, lung, heart, liver, kidneys, bladder; and τo μrν rξ
in 7 seems at first sight to correspond with τo δr 0λλα in 12. Seven,
not six, was a significant number for Pythagoreans and others. In the
numerology of anatomical lists, seven is regular; six is quite anomalous.
If not fortuitous, it may result from a deliberately paradoxical count,
or more probably from counting the kidneys as one, instead of as
two. The list of seven vital organs (σπλoγχνα) was typically tongue,
heart, lung, liver, spleen, two kidneys; the bladder included here would
normally belong rather in a list of organs transporting food and breath.
While this kind of listing is particularly common in post-Posidonian
literature,
24
there are pre-Socratic antecedents also; and in the HC
see especially Carn. (where heart, lung, liver, spleen, and kidneys form
a group, 5–9 [8.590–596 L.], as do trachea, oesophagus, belly, and
intestines, leading to bladder and rectum, 3 [8.586 L.]).
0να μrσον, rντóς: the two phrases are in apposition, and j rντòς φuσις
is not intended. Similar prepositional expressions are used in Oss.: κατo
μrσον, 10, κατo τò μrσον, 12, rς τò rντóς, 16 and cf. rντóς, 17 [9.180, 182,
190, 192 L.].
φuσις rκοσμj0η: the concepts κóσμος and φuσις are ubiquitous in philo-
sophical and scientific writing, with subtly changing senses and nu-
ances. One expects the allusive phrases φuσις rκοσμj0η, 7 and j φuσις
διετoξατο, 12 to be parallel statements, giving parallel conclusions. But
there are two differences: the omission of the article in 7, though this
may be insignificant in the context of this bald work, where the article
is commonly absent; and the change from the passive voice in 7 to the
24
On such lists, and their possible importance as a source for Hebd., see Mansfeld
(1971), pp. 197–202.
146 commentary
[page 152 // page 153]
middle in 12. (A small and tempting emendation from διετoξατο, which
must be aorist middle, to διετoσσετο, which is ambivalent as imper-
fect middle or passive, would eliminate the latter problem; the change
from aorist passive to imperfect passive would be much less trouble-
some to consistent sense than the change from passive to middle form.)
The sense in 7 seems to be ‘the body’, ‘the bodily organism’, concrete,
i.e. j rντòς φuσις sc. το0 σuματος; for which cf. τα0τα δr πoσχει διo
τjν φuσιν το0 σχjματος, VM 22 [1.630 L.] and especially two passages
αuται πηγαi φuσιος 0ν0ρuπου and rστι δr ðργανα τοtσιν j φuσις úρπo-
ζει τòν 0rρα, Cord. 7 and 8 [9.84 L.]. It approaches the somewhat more
abstract sense, ‘bodily nature’, evinced for example Hebd. 5 [8.636 L.] //
(human); Artic. 13 [4.116 L.] (human vs. animal); Nat. Mul. 1 [7.312 L.]
(female); and is at some great distance (though there is commonly a
microcosm ~ macrocosm analogy) from the wide sense of such pas-
sages as φuσιν δr πoντων 0εοi διεκóσμησαν, Vict. 1.11 [6.486 L.]. See
further on 12 below.
8. The author here starts again (similar descriptions of ‘origin’ and
‘end’ of oesophagus as of trachea); and goes on to give a rudimentary
description of the digestive process, 8–11. The description is anatomi-
cally correct. ‘The oesophagus, or gullet, is a muscular canal … extend-
ing from the pharynx to the stomach. It begins in the neck at the
lower border of the cricoid cartilage’ (GA 1340 and 1341, fig. 1167). The
implied physiology is, however, mistaken: the oesophagus is apparently
seen as the start of a parallel process of ingestion and excretion: air
(and, presumably, some fluid) via trachea ~ food via oesophagus.
οiσοφoγος: the term occurs also Loc. Hom. 3 and 20 [6.282, 312 L.];
but not elsewhere in the HC.
25
Galen’s gloss (19. 125 K.) probably
relates to Loc. Hom., not, as Foesius supposes, to Anat. The more usual
term for oesophagus is the second given here, στóμαχος. e.g. Cord. 2
[9.80 L.], Alim. 25 [9.106 L.], Morb. 4.56 [7.608 L.]. This occurs already
in Homer (κατo στομoχοιο 0rμε0λα ‘base of neck’, Il. 17.47; cf. Il. 3.292
and 19.266, throat of sacrificial victims). Rufus cites both terms _u δr τo
σiτια καi τo ποτo εiς τjν κοιλiαν κoτεισι. στóμαχος καi οiσοφoγος Onom.
157, 155 DR.
26
25
The derivation is doubtless (Irigoin, 1980) from οiσειν+φαγεtν, i.e. ‘transporting
what is eaten’.
26
In the HC, the term στóμαχος is applied also to the mouth of the womb. Only
commentary 147
[page 153 // page 154]
rς κοιλiην … rπi σηπτικjς κοιλiης: Erotian K 35 defines κοιλiη as π0σα
j το0 διoφραγμα ε0ρυχωρiα. καi j το0 0uρακος δr rνiοτε. καi j γαστjρ
α0τj. Usage with reference both to upper cavity (chest) and to lower
cavity (abdomen), these being separated by the diaphragm, is ubiqui-
tous in the HC. The sense of the preposition rπi is unclear; it is either
‘towards’ (LSJ I.3b and c), or ‘in respect of ’ (LSJ III.4). The idea that
digestion involved putrefaction—food being digested by a putrefying
process and nutriment then conveyed to the liver for conversion into
blood—was commonly associated with Empedokles (τoς πrψεις τjς τρο-
φjς φασι γiνεσ0αι … 'Εμπεδοκλjς δr σjψεις, DK 31 A 77 = Galen de
def.med., 19.372 K.); Galen regarded it as old-fashioned, δηλονóτι παλαιo
τις jν συνj0εια τοuτοις τοtς 0νδρoσιν 0σηπτα καλεtν 0περ jμεtς 0πεπτα
λrγομεν (DK ibid. = in Hipp. Aph. 6.1, 18A.8 K.; cf. also j δr πrψις rοικεν
εiναι σjψις uς 'Εμπεδοκλjς μαρτυρεt … DK 31 B 81 = Plu. Quaest.Nat.
912c; cf. DK 31 B 61 = Simplicius; and see Longrigg, 1993, 74). There
are further traces of this notion in the expression σiτια 0σηπτα ‘unputri-
fied food’ occurring in Aff., Vict. 3, Morb. 1. Emendations to rπισjμως or
rπισημαντικuς are therefore unnecessary. The idea of putrefaction was
important in early Greek attempts to explain change and development
of various kinds, including the formation of the world and animal life
(Demokritos, DK 68 B 5 = Diod. 1.7.3; cf. Carn. 3 [8.586 L.], also Pl.
Phd. 96b). In medicine, the proper healing of wounds and maturation
of illnesses depended on the formation and expulsion of pus or similar
matter (e.g. Loc. Hom.). //
9. The locations of diaphragm and of spleen are cursorily and some-
what inaccurately indicated. The author does not know, or does not
care, about the precise inter-relation of these anatomical features, being
concerned only with general proximity. ‘The diaphragm is a dome-
shaped, musculofibrous septum which separates the thoracic from the
abdominal cavity, its convex upper surface forming the floor of the for-
mer, and its concave upper surface the roof of the latter … The muscu-
lar fibres may be grouped according to their origins into three parts—
sternal, costal, and vertebral’ (GA 567). While the diaphragm might be
described as ‘coming from’ the backbone, in the sense that the verte-
bral part is linked with the lumbar vertebrae by two pillars or crura
(GA 568), this is scarcely its salient positional feature and it is connected
later, as in NT, Soranus, and Galen, did the word take over as ‘stomach’, a sense firmly
fixed in Latin and hence modern European languages.
148 commentary
[page 154]
equally with ribs and with sternum. Furthermore, the diaphragm cer-
tainly lies above, not behind, the liver. The spleen ‘is situated princi-
pally in the left hypochondriac region of the abdomen … lies between
the fundus of the stomach and the diaphragm’ and is ‘of an oblong flat-
tened form’ (GA 1476). With correction and amplification of the text we
might state that the diaphragm separates the spleen from the left lung
and pleura, and from the ninth, tenth, and eleventh ribs.
πρòς δr 0κoν0ης ðπισ0εν jπατος φρrνες πεφuκασι: the term 0καν0α is
properly the backbone or spine, for which the general çoχις ‘back’ is
commonly used. The former term occurs in Artic. and Mochl. but rarely
elsewhere in the HC (apart from Oss.—fin., but not init.—only in Morb.
2 and Mul. 1). Demokritos uses the word in a riddling sentence, rν γoρ
ξυν_u iχ0uι 0καν0αι ο0κ rνεισιν DK 68 B 151 = Plu. Sympos. 643c; cf. also
Diog. Apoll. DK 64 B 6 = Simp. In Ph. 153.13. The account in Anat.
seems to be a garbled version of material which is much more clearly
presented elsewhere in the HC: jπαρ … 0φωρμjκει σμικρòν κoτω0εν
φρενuν. φρrνες δr προσπεφuκασι τ_u jπατι 0ς ο0 çηiδιον χωρiσαι Epid.
2.4.1 [5.122 L.]; verbatim also in the account of Oss. 10 [9.180 L.]. The
liver was generally described as ‘below’ the diaphragm, as already by
Homer, jπαρ íπò πραπiδων (Il. 11.579; cf. von Staden, 1989, 228). The
term φρrνες, applied to the lung in Homer (Onians, 1952), later denotes
the diaphragm, important in the respiratory function, as well of course
as the thinking faculty.
rκ δr πλευρjς νó0ης. λrγω δr 0ριστερjς. σπλjν 0ρξoμενος τrταται: Aris-
totle linked the spleen with the liver, and described the location of both
with reference to the diaphragm: (liver below the diaphragm on the
right, spleen on the left) H.A. 496b15 and (spleen a false liver) P.A.
669b28. The two are treated as parallel also by Rufus (spleen and liver
below lung, liver on right and spleen rναντiως τrτακται τοuτ_ω) Anat. 28,
175 DR; cf. also the description of the spleen, 0πrναντι εIδει. πρ0γμα
μηδrν αiτοuμενος, Ep. 23 [9.396 L.].
This is the only instance where the first person is used in the passage,
and it may be contrasted with the third person used in the repeated
statements of nomenclature. The most likely explanation is that the
author is attempting personal exegesis of his source, ‘my interpreta-
tion is …’. In doing so, he introduces a misunderstanding, possibly
through compression or misunderstanding of his source, which prob-
ably referred to the false ribs, or to the spleen as a ‘false’ liver. The
commentary 149
[page 154 // page 155]
word νó0ος, ‘false’, lit. ‘bastard’, is regularly applied to the ‘false’ ribs,
the five ribs not connected with the sternum so called in contrast with
the seven ‘true’ ribs so connected, defined νó0αι δr πλευραi αl μj περαi-
νουσαι πρòς τò στrρνον Ruf. Onom. 94, 145 DR. Confusion can arise //
through the ambiguity of πλευρj, ‘rib’ or ‘side’. There is no instance
where the meaning ‘left’ is imperatively demanded for νó0ος (and LSJ
does not recognize this sense), but the expressions παρo τjν νó0ον πλευ-
ρjν, with reference to the direction of vessels, Oss. 14 [9.188 L.] and
περi τjν νó0ον πλευρjν, with reference to the site of pain, Judic. 51
[9.292 L.] are doubtful, as is the description by Pollux of the νjστις …
íπò τjν νó0ην πλευρoν. τjν rν 0ριστεροtς μεχρi τjς λαγóνος παρjκουσαν
(2.4.207). The spleen itself is described as ‘false’ by Aristotle, i.e. use-
less, by comparison with the concomitant liver (PA 669b and cf. πρ0γμα
μηδrν αiτοuμενος, Ep. 23 [9.396 L.]; somewhat similarly, the moon was
said to give a ‘bastard’ light, compared with the sun, Ph. 1.628).
oμοιóρυσμος iχνει ποδóς: Rufus uses the same analogy, with similar ter-
minology κεtται o σπλjν κατo τò ε0uνυμον íποχóνδριον. παρεκτεινó-
μενος rπi μjκος 0ν0ρωπiν_ω iχνει Anat. 28, 175 DR. Such similes are
common in anatomical contexts: Oss.; Cord. 1, 5, 10 [9.80, 84, 86 L.].
10. Belly (stomach) and intestine are described. Although the belly
might loosely be said to ‘lie beside the liver on the left’, more properly it
lies inclined to the left below both liver and spleen. ‘The stomach is the
most dilated part of the digestive tube, and is situated between the end
of the oesophagus and the beginning of the small intestine. It lies in the
epigastric, umbilical, and left hypochondriac regions of the abdomen,
and occupies a recess bounded by the upper abdominal viscera, and
completed in front and on the left side by the anterior abdominal wall
and the diaphragm’ (GA 1362–1363). The adjective ‘sinewy’ is apt: ‘the
wall of the stomach consists of four coats: serous, muscular, areolar and
mucous … and the muscular coat has three layers of muscular fibres’
(GA 1367).
κατ’ ε0uνυμον μrρος ο0λομελjς rστι νευρuδης: ε0uνυμος, lit. ‘good-
omened’ is used for ‘left’ by a common euphemism; cf., in an anatom-
ical context (embryology), Epid. 6.4.21 [5.312 L.] and also Empedokles
DK 31 A 83 = Athen. 3.78; cf. also Rufus, quoted above. The bladder is
similarly νευρuδης οuλη, 6 above. The sense of ‘sinewy’ is in both cases
probably ‘elastic’, ‘subject to dilatation’. Rufus uses the same adjective
150 commentary
[page 155 // page 156]
of parts of the belly, Anat. 10, 178 DR and 42, 179 DR. But the word
is appropriate also to appearance, as the empty stomach has promi-
nent folds and wrinkles.
27
The adjective ο0λομελjς has evidently the
same sense as οuλον above, 3. But it occurs elsewhere in the HC only
Cord. 8 [9.86 L.] (heart as a whole, opposed to its component parts).
The sbs. ο0λομελiη or ο0λομελεiη occurs Alim. 23 [9.106 L.] (with ref-
erence to the whole body, opposed to μrρος ‘part’ of it) and several
times in the phrase περi 0δrνων ο0λομελiης ‘on glands in general’. This
appears in the treatise Glands itself in 1 (the first sentence of the work)
and in 7 [8.556, 560 L.] as well as the version of the title given in
ms V; and with reference to a work on glands (possibly the surviving
Glands) in Artic. 11 [4.108 L.] and in Galen 18A.379 K. There is an
occurrence also in Ep. 18 [9.382 L.], where it is urged by Demokritos
that doctors should assess afflictions not only by inspection but by gaug-
ing τοuς çυ0μοuς and should treat τò πo0ος ο0λομελiην τε το0 σκjνεος.
It has a ‘scientific’ flavour in the Pythagorean equation of number τ¸j
ο0λομελεi¸α το0 // ο0ρανο0, ‘with the totality of the heavens’, DK 58
B 27 = Arist. Metaph. 1092b26. Hsch. glosses ο0λομελi¸η κα0óλου ‘on
the whole’.
rντερον oμοιóρυσμον: the term rντερον is applied to the entire lower
digestive tract, i.e. both the small intestine (comprising duodenum,
jejunum, ileum) and the large intestine (caecum, appendix, colon ter-
minating in rectum and anal canal); only occasionally is such an expres-
sion as τò κoτω μrρος το0 rντrρου used (as, with reference to an enema,
Acut. 19 [= 6, 2.264 L.]). Like words for ‘belly’, ‘stomach’, with which it
is commonly linked (γαστjρ, Carn. 3 and 6 [8.586, 594 L.]; νηδuς, Carn.
13 [8.600 L.]; κοιλiα Morb. 4.54 [7.596 L.]) it is extended in usage to
cover a large visceral region. Rufus regards the γαστjρ as the ‘upper
belly’ and the κóλον as the ‘lower’, Onom. 169–173, 156–157 DR. The
‘similarity’ is left unexplained, but is illumined by two parallel pas-
sages (again from Oss. and Epid.) where human and canine intestines
are compared: τo κóλα rχει κυνòς μεiζω. jρτηται δr rκ τuν μεσοκuλων.
τα0τα δr rκ νεuρων 0πò τjς çoχιος íπò τjν γαστrρα, Oss. 1 [9.168 L.]
(note compendious comparison, as Anat. 3, 4, 5); and with slight vari-
ation τo κóλα rχει οiα κυνóς. μεiζω δr, Epid. 6.4.6 [5.308 L.]. It seems
that, through compression of his source, the author fails to explain the
27
Triller’s emendation ο0λουμrνη, tr. ‘cicatricatus’ or ‘rugis incisus’ imports a needlessly
explicit reference to this aspect.
commentary 151
[page 156 // page 157]
similarity intended, namely to the viscera of the dog. Cf. BVD, ‘The
large intestine [of the dog] has a course somewhat like that of man’.
μακρóν. πηχrων ο0κ rλασσον δuδεκα: Foesius’ μακρóν for μικρóν is
guaranteed by the sense (as all the intestine is included) and the word
order (as description, not definition, is here required). The length of the
intestine is correctly estimated (twelve cubits being five to six metres)
and the description is accurate: ‘The small intestine is a convoluted
tube … about 6.5 metres long’ with ‘a short curved portion’ and ‘a long
greatly coiled part’. ‘The large intestine … is about 1.5 metres long’ (GA
1370, 1372, 1380).
28
rλικηδòν rν κóλποις rνειλοuμενον: rλικηδóν is a hapax in the HC
(though rλικοειδjς is found, Morb. 4.40 [7.560 L.], with reference to
‘convoluted’ vessels), and rνειλεtν too is a hapax (though εiλεtν is quite
common, used for instances of intestines, Mul. 2; of humours, Morb.
4; and various other compound forms occur). Hsch. glosses rλικηδuν
κυκλοειδjς συστροφj. The expression of Ep. 23 [9.396 L.] is close: εi-
λεtται περi κοιλiην rντερα. Cf. also καi τo rντερα καi τjν νηδuν rνειλi-
ξατο, Oss. 18 [9.194 L.]. Celsus’ expression is similar: ‘in sinus vehementer
implicitum’, 4.1.7. The term ‘folds’ is used in the HC only here and, of
the womb, Nat. Pue. (also verb κολπóω of membranes, ibid.). In literary
contexts, it is regularly applied to ‘folds’ of the female body, especially
the bosom and the womb.
o καλrουσιν rνιοι κóλον: there are similar comments on divergent ter-
minology Morb. Sacr. 17 [6.392 L.] (φρrνες a misnomer for diaphragm)
and Carn. 4 [8.588 L.] (μυελóς a misnomer for spinal marrow). That
κóλον, read by V, not κuλον, is the correct form is guaranteed by an
Aristophanic pun on the verb κολoζειν (future middle) παt’ α0τòν 0νδρι-
κuτατα καi γoστριζε καi τοtς rντrροις καi τοtς κóλοις oπως κολ¸0 τòν //
0νδρα, Eq. 455.
29
11. Colon, rectum and anus are briefly described.
28
Reference to the length of the intestine was a common element in lists of the seven
organs transporting food and breath; see Mansfeld (1971), p. 197.
29
Pollux finds an etymological link, involving digestive suffering, 2.209; for other
fanciful etymologies based on an original meaning τροφj ‘food’ for κóλον, see Ath.
262a.
152 commentary
[page 157]
πrφυκεν 0ρχòς λοiσ0ιος: the same verb is found as in 6, 9, 10. The
adjective λοiσ0ιος is exclusively poetic, though λοtσ0ος is used also in
prose. The term 0ρχóς occurs Oss. 3, 9, 14, 17 [9.170 L.]; also Carn. 3
[8.586 L.].
σoρκα περιπλη0rα rχων: lit. ‘having abundant flesh’. Van der Linden’s
emendation πολυπλη0rα (commonly adopted) is unnecessary, as περι-
πλη0jς is just as common as πολυπλη0jς and gives comparable sense
(Ibycus, TLG). His addition of καi would give a smoother connection,
but is not necessary in this telegraphic style. For the sense, cf. 0τε íγρο0
róντος το0 τε 0ρχο0 καi τjς σαρκòς μαλ0ακjς, Fist. 1 [6.448 L.].
rς 0κρον δακτυλiου τελευτuν: for the expression (neuter of adjective,
used substantivally, followed by genitive), cf. 1 above. In the HC, the
term δακτuλιον is used elsewhere only in Haem. Galen glosses κuκλος,
τροχiσκος, 19.92 K.
12. A summing up apparently parallel to that of 7 ends the second
part of the description. Ermerins’ belief that there is a lacuna ‘nam non
absolvitur sed abrumpitur periodus’ may be correct; but the abruptness does
not of itself necessarily indicate this, as the syntax is somewhat fractured
throughout.
τo δ’ 0λλα j φuσις διετoξατο: the sense of φuσις in 7 above is ‘[bodily]
nature’, a concrete and passive entity which is organized by something
external to itself, sc. perhaps universal nature; here the sense of j φuσις
is ‘[universal] nature’, an abstract and active principle which organizes
something, sc. apparently the body. (Cf. Rufus rκ0ησóμεσ0α jν παρrσχε
τοtς μrρεσιν j φuσις 0rσιν τε καi oνομασiαν Anat. 2, 169 DR; and the
view that men are rργα φuσιος, Ep. 11 [9.326 L.].) Neither sense is
difficult; but the switch from one to the other is generally felt to be
awkward; however, there is a similar shift in Ep. 23, discussed further
below. If the two passages are parallel, the ‘other parts’ of the body
(oesophagus, stomach, diaphragm, spleen, intestine, colon) described
8–11 are parallel to the six parts (trachea, lung, heart, liver, kidneys,
bladder) enumerated 1–6. But the phrase may refer to further material,
passed over (cf. Arist. Po. 1449a28). Or τo δ’ 0λλα might be adverbial,
‘as to other parts’ (not specified). Other possibilities are that a reference
to ‘other creatures’ or to ‘other works’ (cf. Carn. fin. [8.614 L.]) has
been lost; or even that φuσις in Anat. 7 and 12 is shorthand for ‘[sc. my
commentary 153
[page 157]
treatise on the] nature [of the body]’, with oblique reference to some
other work where he has explored other matters and reference in the
verb to his own embellished style.
[page 157 // page 158]
DISCUSSION
I. Background
The origins of Greek anatomy lie in the Homeric epics, which display
an extensive knowlege of the effects of battle wounds on different bodily
parts. Attempts at systematic description begin with the pre-Socratics,
still imbued with the attitudes and forms of early verse writing. Analysis
of the body into the different components skin, flesh, bones, and viscera
linked by hollow channels or vessels conveying fluids (primarily φλβες
conveying blood) and by solid threads (termed νερα and // including
cords, sinews, ligaments, nerves, muscles) had a long currency, with lit-
tle apparent consensus.
30
Outline surveys such as Anat. must have been
composed throughout antiquity, and constantly copied, corrected, imi-
tated, and excerpted.
It is always difficult to assess the extent and nature of influence
or interaction in such cases of common content of a factual nature,
especially where the very existence of direct contact (rather than the use
of common sources) must be in doubt. The brevity of the fragment adds
to the problem of the universality of its subject matter. Other writers
follow the same descriptive sequence from ‘top’ downwards, with the
trunk regularly treated as an entity. More specifically, discussion of the
organs regularly centres on location, size, and colour. Judgement must
rest not only on scrutiny of content but on an inevitably somewhat
subjective assessment of similarities in approach, arrangement, and
expression. The problem of intertextuality within the HC is acute;
and even more so when later authors, such as Celsus and Rufus, are
considered.
Indirect evidence for the presence of Anat. in versions of the HC
circulating in antiquity (or, rather, in the putative versions which can
30
Even in the Pneumatic school of medicine, influenced by Posidonius and the
Stoics, the seven ντς μρη and the seven καολικ μρη were defined in various ways;
see Mansfeld (1971).
156 discussion
[page 158 // page 159]
be reconstructed from the lists of glosses constructed by grammarians
and others) is scanty. The list of Erotian (dating from the time of
Nero, c. A.D. 50, and referring to many earlier authorities, including
Bakcheios, Epikles, and Herakleides) includes no words from Anat., but
the brevity of the treatise may account for this. Galen glosses no words
from Anat. either (unless οσοφγος relates to Anat.; but Loc. Hom., from
which many other terms are glossed, is a much more likely source). The
loss of Galen’s comments on Hippocratic anatomy (advertised De Plac.
Hipp. et Plat. 6.8) is unfortunate, but there is no doubt some truth in his
assertion that practical demonstration took the place of written treatises
on anatomy.
31
There is some reason to suppose that Celsus, writing an outline of
human anatomy (4.1.1–13) and Rufus of Ephesus, writing an account
of anatomical terminology (Onom.), knew the work. But the evidence is
not unequivocal. Celsus is concerned with ‘sedes’ of parts of the body;
and especially their relative positions. Thus, such terms as ‘incipiunt’,
‘fertur’ and ‘descendens’ are used, 3. And the description is practical,
stressing colour, the ureters being ‘albae’, 10; or texture, the lung being
‘spongiosus’, 4. Nomenclature features: ‘nominant’, 3; ‘Graeci vocant’, 10.
Celsus (like many others, including the author of Ep. 23) includes the
head, 2; before describing the parallel ‘itinera’ of ‘aspera arteria’ to lung
and of ‘stomachus’ to ‘ventriculus’, 3. Lung, heart, and diaphragm are
briefly mentioned, 4; then liver, gall-bladder, spleen, kidneys, 5. From
this outline of the ‘viscerum … sedes’, Celsus goes on to the digestive
process and the different parts from oesophagus and stomach, 6, to
bowels, 7. The course of the ureters from kidneys to bladder is outlined,
10, and the bladder itself described, 11. One salient difference of content
between Celsus and the writer of Anat. (but a feature in common with
Ep. 23) is that he pays attention to differences in male and female
anatomical layout: differences in bladder, 11, are mentioned before a
description of womb and reproductive system, 12–13. Several phrases in
Celsus are close enough to phrases in Anat. to qualify as translation or at
least paraphrase. The most striking parallels in phraseology are these:
‘constat ex circulis quibusdam’ (of // trachea: note metaphor, toned down
by ‘quibusdam’ and correspondence ‘circulus’ ~ κρκος); ‘is spongiosus’ (of
lung: note the initial pronoun); ‘in sinus vehementer implicitum’ (of intestine:
note correspondence ‘sinus’ ~ κλπος); ‘vesica … nervosa’ (of bladder).
31
On the tradition, see Smith (1979) and von Staden (1989); on terminology see
Lloyd (1983) and Skoda (1988).
discussion 157
[page 159]
Rufus aims at a correct account of anatomical terminology, rather
than at the consecutive description seen in Celsus. The closest parallels
to Anat. in expression are these: lung colour is τεφρòν καi íπóλευκον,
the spleen resembles a footprint, and the term φαρuγε0ρον is used.
Pollux provides no independent evidence and was probably utilising
Rufus directly in compiling the medical section of his great lexicon.
In the case of Hsch., several glosses suggest familiarity with Anat.,
or at least with a work or works employing similar diction: περιηγrς,
τεν0ρηνιuδες and oχετóς are glossed. There is, then, some reason to
suppose that Celsus and Rufus, as well as later lexicographers, knew
Anat.; but none to confirm that it was then regarded as Hippocratic.
II. Anat. and the HC: content
There is no parallel in the HC for the narrowly anatomical content
of Anat., with its exclusion of physiology and pathology. Elsewhere,
attempts at anatomy are incorporated in general schemes (Loc. Hom.),
or are allied with theory (Carn.) or address physical function (Cord., Oss.)
or are embedded in discussion of treatment (Epid., Artic., Fract., Mochl.).
But how, and indeed whether, the work continued is unknown; and the
similar precision of Oss. 1 [9.168 L.] and Loc. Hom. 6 [6.284 L.], which
list bones, gives way to more elaborate and leisurely expression. The
titles of treatises often give little clue to their actual content: the author
of Carn., a work primarily on the viscera, refers to his own earlier work
on the vessels, περi μrν οuν τuν φλεβuν εiρηταi μοι πρóτερον, Carn.
5 [8.590 L.]; and promises future work on the essential character of
the human constitution, based on the number seven, τjς δr φuσιος τjν
0νoγκην … rγu φρoσω rν 0λλοισιν, Carn. fin. [8.614 L.] The work itself
deals in a wide-ranging way with the formation of lungs, liver, spleen,
kidneys; also flesh, limbs, nails, teeth, hair and the senses hearing,
smell, sight, and speech. Mochl. begins oστrων φuσις [4.340 L.] and Oss.,
with implied comparative anatomy, 0 jμεtς α0τοi rξ 0ν0ρuπου oστrων
κατεμo0ομεν [9.168 L.]. But overall, the subject of Oss. is not bones at
all, but vessels.
The nature of many Hippocratic treatises raises fundamental ques-
tions of authorship: they may have been the common property of a
professional group, pooling ideas and information in an age innocent
of concepts of plagiarism and publication, though not immune from
professional rivalries. Oss. is a composite text, stitched together from
158 discussion
[page 159 // page 160]
heterogeneous and even inconsistent elements and some of its content
is identical with passages in Epid. 2.
32
The treatise is an amalgam of
bits, some of which are replicated elsewhere: Oss. 8 [9.174 L.] = Arist.
H.A. 3.3, where Aristotle gives his source as Syennesis of Cyprus; Oss.
9 [9.176 L.] = Nat. Hom. 11 [6.58 L.]; Oss. 4–7 and Oss. 10 [9.170, 172,
178 L.] = Epid. 2.4.1 [5.120 L.]. The last part of Oss. has been identi-
fied with the treatise on vessels mentioned by Galen as an appendage
to Mochl., rν τ_u περi φλεβuν o προκεtται τ_u Μοχλικ_u, Galen 19.128
K. However, it is likely that the first person throughout represents the
same editorial voice. In Epid. also there are repetitions and other ele-
ments which make unity of authorship highly unlikely and suggest a
process of redaction and compilation: either editorial activity carried
out by a single author or case notes from // different hands, recording
impressions of different doctors. Mochl. is a summary of Artic. and Fract.,
carefully executed and often keeping the original expression. Another
common element is the presence of disagreement (as Anat. 10, on termi-
nology) or polemic: 0λλος δ’ αu τις τuν iητρuν Fract. 3 [3.422 L.]; cf. also
polemic against Herodikos, Epid. 6.3.18 [5.302 L.]. It is in this scheme
that Anat. has some place. Anat. has affinities of content particularly with
Oss. (and confirms the relationship between Oss. and Epid. 2); also with
Epid. 6: see on 3, 4, 5, and especially on 9 (liver and diaphragm), and 10
(intestines).
Anat. comprises a description of the internal configuration of the
human trunk. The precision is exemplary. The continuous schematic
arrangement is evident in the repeated 0πó—six times, four with rς,
one with rπi and one alone; or rκ—twice, one with rς and one alone.
It is precise in its stress on start and finish (rκφυσις. 0ρχj. τελευτ0ν); on
situation, orientation, and extent (κεtσ0αι. τρrπεσ0αι. τεiνεσ0αι); on size,
shape, and colour; and particularly on relative position in the body—
top, bottom, front, back, right, left, or middle—cf. proximal, distal,
anterior, posterior etc. (0κρος. κoτω. ðπισ0εν. δεξιóς. 0ριστερóς. μrσος.
ε0uνυμος). The treatise records organs and viscera, i.e. in Greek terms
σπλoγχνα. Flesh, bones and cords are not mentioned at all, and ves-
sels are mentioned only incidentally, as links. The author is writing a
comparative study, expounding human anatomy by reference to the
anatomy of mammals in general, with which he takes his readers to
be familiar: see on 1, 3, 4, 5, and 10. Simply, he is following the proce-
32
This was already noted by Littré; see now Duminil (1980) for analysis of structure
and content.
discussion 159
[page 160 // page 161]
dure recommended by Aristotle (H.A. 1.16.494b21–24): in the absence
of dissection, it is necessary to refer to animals similar to man to
understand human anatomy. Aristotle examined many different mam-
mals (e.g. hare, deer, mouse, hyena, ass, leopard, weasel, all listed P.A.
667a; seal and ox, ibid., 671b) and Herophilos still depended largely on
comparative anatomy, despite the availability to him of humans (von
Staden, 1989, 182–183). Other Hippocratic authors refer to animals,
either in general, as τοσο0τον rς 0ν0ρωπον 0ποδεiξω καi τo 0λλα ζ_uα,
Carn. 1 [8.584 L.]; and uσπερ καi τοtσιν 0λλοισι ζ_uοις 0πασιν, with ref-
erence to two halves of the brain, Morb. Sacr. 3 [6.366 L.]; or with ref-
erence to particular animals: the ox (thighbone), Artic. 8 [4.94 L.]; the
pig (lung), Cord. 2 [9.80 L.]; the dog (intestines), Epid. 6.4.6 [5.308 L.]
and Oss. 1 [9.168 L.]; cf. also Demokritos’ study of dog and pig embry-
ology DK 68 A 151 = Ael. N.A. 12.16 (cf. Nat. Pue. 31 [7.540 L.]) and
the vignette of Demokritos at home, surrounded by heaps of animal
carcases, which he is laying out and dissecting in order to examine
their σπλoγχα, with a view to assessing the significance of χολj, Ep. 17
[9.350 L.].
It may be supposed that Anat. belongs to a period when dissection
was not practised on human cadavers, a period when knowledge was
gleaned from observation of butchered sacrificial victims (of which the
σπλoγχνα were particularly familiar) and from animal dissection; and
that knowledge of the interior of the human body would depend on
chance supplementary findings from observation of injuries to citizens
on the battlefield (cf. V.C.) or to slaves in industrial accidents, such
as must have occurred in mills and mines. That dissection of human
cadavers was not practised in mainland Greece in the fifth and fourth
centuries has been cogently argued often enough; but perhaps classi-
cal scholars make insufficient allowance for medical curiosity.
33
Exam-
ination of aborted foetuses or stillborn infants might have been rela-
tively easy (cf. on 3); and conventions obtaining in such semi-barbarous
regions as Thrace may have differed from those of Athens. Certainly
many // intellectuals, including Herodotos and Demokritos, travelled to
Egypt, where they had opportunities to observe the anatomical proce-
dures involved in mummification (cf. Hdt. 2.86). Theoretical modifica-
tion too might obtrude (cf. view of the heart, 3).
33
See Edelstein (1932, tr. 1967; but Edelstein suggests in a cryptic footnote that
Demokritos may have been an exception and this notion has a bearing on Anat.), Lloyd
(1975), Longrigg (1993).
160 discussion
[page 161]
Although Anat. is remarkably free from explicit theoretical comment
or doctrinal content, some views which are implicit can be extracted.
From the pathway postulated trachea-lung-kidneys-bladder, it seems
that the writer believes that some fluid enters the body via the tra-
chea. This view is explicitly and forcefully expounded by the author of
Cord., and supposedly corroborated by an experiment which involves
dissecting a pig, after giving it coloured fluid to drink (Cord. 2 [9.80 L.]).
The author of Oss. init. shares this view: πóτον δr διo φoρυγγος καi
στομoχου λoρυγξ rς πλεuμονα καi 0ρτηρiην 0πò δr τοuτων rς 0κρην
κuστιν, Oss. 1 [9.168 L.]; though a somewhat different (or perhaps
merely more detailed) route is postulated in the drink-kidneys-bladder
sequence which follows, Oss. 4 [9.170 L.]; similarly drink, air, and blood
all pass through the lung, Oss. 13 [9.184 L.]. The expression of Oss. 1
[9.168 L.] is close to that of Anat. 5; and the postulated route of fluids
is the same. The belief that fluid could enter the body via the trachea
seems to be implied in the medical orthodoxy regarding treatments for
lung disorders (among the most common of all Hippocratic ailments
and ranging from mild infections of the respiratory tract to pneumo-
nia): warm drinks are recommended to render the lung moist and so
to dislodge pus, Morb. 3.16 [7.142 L.]; drink is required to moisten
the lung and encourage expectoration, Morb. 1.28 [6.196 L.]; liquid
medicine is to be administered to clear pus when the lung dries out,
Aff. 9 [6.216 L.]; trouble ensues if the lung dries up íπò δiψης 0ναγκαi-
ης, Loc. Hom. 26 [6.316 L.]. (And the medical view was generally known:
Alcaeus frg. 94; Euripides frg. 983 N.) But the matter was controversial:
it is disputed by Aristotle (P.A. 664b) and with an emphatic introductory
verb rναντιuσομαι argued that fluids pass not to the lung but to the κοι-
λiη, Morb. 4.56 [7.606 L.].
34
The parallel working of bladder and belly
is similarly presented elsewhere in the HC and in other medical writ-
ings: e.g. κοιλiη and κuστις parallel Morb. 4.38 [7.556 L.] and Acut. Sp.
15 [2.474 L.]; κuστις and rντερον parallel Mul. 1.34 [8.80 L.] al.; 0ρχóς
and κuστις parallel Carn. 3 [8.586 L.]; δuο μrν γoρ αl τò σιτiον δεχóμε-
ναi τε καi 0φιεtσαι, de Arte 10 [6.16 L.]; also περi μrν τjς το0 πνεuματος
διοικjσεως τα0τα … περi δr τjς τροφjς 0ναγκαtον íπομιμνjσκειν μετo
τα0τα, Anon. Lond. 24.18–20 and the necessary parts ¸ j τε δrχονται τjν
τροφjν καi ¸j τò περiττωμα 0φι0σιν, also o τε φoρυγξ καi o καλοuμενος
οiσοφoγος, Arist. P.A. 655b and 664a.
34
See Lonie (1981), pp. 361 sqq.
discussion 161
[page 161 // page 162]
Despite the broad accuracy and precision of the work, it displays
only the most rudimentary knowledge of the body’s workings.
35
The
descriptions of the regions between heart and liver, liver and kidneys
are just that, descriptions; and there is no indication whatsoever that
the importance of heart and liver is recognised. There is no justification
for imputing to the author the perception that the heart has a peculiarly
important place as centre of the vascular system; see on 3. Despite
detailed reference to the lobes of the lung and of the liver (the latter
somewhat confused), there is nothing on the chambers of the heart and
no awareness of the heart’s complex structure. Similarly, the statement
that the liver is αμορρωδστερον may, but need not, imply a view
of the liver as producer of blood for the rest of the body; and the
interpretation of the vessel which ‘nurtures’ the body is problematical.
The references to the belly as σηπτικ takes a primitive view of the
digestive process, reminiscent of Empedokles; and the adjective applied
to the liver, αμορρος ‘blood-suffused’, has an Empedoklean analogue
also. //
Sometimes, the writer of Anat. seems to be at a loss or mistaken:
see on 2, 4, 9. These lapses might result from misunderstanding of a
technical source by a writer or excerptor without technical knowledge
or from hastily and carelessly executed summary. Compression seems
to lead to unclear exposition and even to the elision of essentials: see on
9 and 10, where the parallel versions of Oss., in conjunction with Epid. 2
and Epid. 6, help to elucidate the sense. The consistent use of the third
person may imply that the writer is not himself a medical expert, or is
distancing himself from other practitioners; the first person is used only
once and introduces an error: see on 9. Treatises evidently written by
practitioners tend to use the first person plural in giving nomenclature
for anatomical or diagnostic terms (V.M. 19 [1.618 L.]of yellow bile;
Carn. 17 of the tunic of the eye, cf. 2 [8.606, 584 L.]); whereas more
rhetorical treatises tend to use the third person (de Arte 10 [6.16 L.] of
muscle). But there is a wide range from firm to tentative expression and
the common use of the passive militates against generalization: veins
are described, as Anat. 3, in such expressions as αμρρους παχεη
καλεομνη φλψ, Oss. 7 [9.172 L.] and τν κολην φλβα καλεομνην, Loc.
Hom. 3.5 [6.282 L.].
35
Triller’s commentary constantly superimposes his own knowledge on the text.
162 discussion
[page 162]
There is nothing in the content to suggest any knowledge of the
advances made in Alexandria; and nothing to suggest familiarity even
with Aristotelian biology. In particular, the ignorance of the structure
and function of the heart suggests a date before the research activities
of the Lyceum.
III. Anat. and the HC: expression
The vocabulary of Anat. has many unusual features, which, like the con-
tent, show affinities with Oss. A common concentration of anatomical
terms in anatomical works has no implications for direct connections,
far less for common authorship or shared school of thought. However,
the use of different terms for the same parts of the body can be sig-
nificant; and it is noteable that the author of Anat. shares a preference
for 0καν0α with the author of Oss. fin. [9.182 sqq. L.] (ten instances
11–19: 12, 13, 14, 15, 16; five instances 18), as opposed to the author
of Oss. init. [9.168 sqq. L.], who like the author of Mochl. and Artic.
uses çoχις (nine instances 1–10; three instances 1, 3; two instances 7;
two instances 9, 10). In general usage, there are further parallels with
Oss. and with Epid. 2 and 6: see especially on 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10. Such
coincidences in general medical terms and in non-technical vocabu-
lary become cumulatively significant, especially when these are allied
with common ground in doctrinal content. On the basis of this ana-
lysis, Anat. can be firmly aligned with Oss., and with certain parts of
Epidemics; also to some extent with Mochl. and with Carn. Clearly the
author sought out a recondite vocabulary; and it is in the nature of
this that many words are not commonly found elsewhere. In some
instances, the parallel usage is entirely from verse; λοiσ0ιος ‘last’ is com-
mon but exclusively poetic and rναλiγκιος is epic.
The poetic texture is reinforced by the use of simile (see on 9) and
figurative language (κεκεντjμενος. rγκα0iδρυται); these devices how-
ever are typical of anatomical writing in general. There are runs of
dactylic rhythm (τuν περιηγrων, with synizesis, úπτομrνων κατ’ rπ- and
-τραμμrνος rς τo 0ριστερo), and some attempt seems to be made to
end sentences with spondees, molossi, or still longer sequences of long
syllables (0λλjλων. τεν0ρηνιuδης. πoντων ζ_uων. rκοσμj0η. νευρuδης).
These are all features of early prose style, influenced by epic patterns
of expression; and in material of this kind the rhythm (like the stress on
counting—lobes of lung, gates of liver, six key parts—and on naming—
discussion 163
[page 162 // page 163]
‘they call’) might originally have served as an aide-mémoire. Another fea-
ture of the stylistic register belonging to // early prose style is the use
of abstract noun plus verb rχειν, in preference to a verb of the same
root.
While the vocabulary is recondite, the syntax is uncontrived, with
compound rather than complex sentences. Such loosely connected
writing is typical of early prose. Connection is simple (δr and καi) after
asyndeton in the first sentence. Like Mochl., the terse summary Oss.
init., and the compressed annotations of Epid., it eschews words which
are semantically otiose, such as the definite article and the verb ‘to be’.
The general, apparently arbitrary, omission of the article in Anat. is
remarkable: it is usually omitted with such adjectives as 0κρος, μrσος,
π0ς, and, most obviously, in the case of the bodily parts.
36
This charac-
terizes summaries, but is a common feature also of the aphoristic style
affected by Herakleitos; and is seen also in certain Hippocratic texts,
such as Alim. Similarly the compendious comparisons recurrent in the
text characterize both terse and poetic writing styles. Anat. is bald, yet
still stylistically arresting.
Resemblances with Demokritos are explored in the next section.
However, there are certain resemblances too with other pre-Socratics:
περιηγjς and ε0uνυμος are certainly used by Empedokles; as are rναλiγ-
κιος and ο0λομrλης by Parmenides (both in the same fragment, DK 28
B 8, lines 43 and 5 = Simp. In Ph. 144.29); and rπiπεδον by many writers
on scientific subjects. However, these may be chance findings. Caution
may be induced by the reflection that two of the more colourful, and
apparently recondite, anatomical terms of Anat. occur in Euripides: χr-
λυς (El. 837) and 0καν0α (El. 492 and Tro. 117). Euripides shows some
precision in anatomical knowledge; the first datable use of the term
κοiλη φλrψ is in Ion 1011. As in the case of content, nothing in language
is incompatible with an early date, and the stylistic register is that of
early prose.
36
Comparison of usage in Mochl. shows that in paraphrasing Artic., the author often
repeats the base text almost verbatim while omitting such otiose words as the definite
article: e.g. Mochl. 8 [4.354 L.] (0κρος without article) ~ Artic. 18 [4.132 L.] (0κρος
with article). But it is omitted in both model and précis, Mochl. 12 [4.356 L.] ~ Artic.
22 [4.134 L.]; and in Fract. 4 0κρην τjν χεtρα is followed in the next section by rς
χεtρα 0κρην [4.430, 432 L.]. Similarly, in the compressed annotations of Epid., 0κρος is
commonly used without the article (6.1.3, 4.19 [5.266, 156 L.]); cf. also rς 0κρην κuστιν,
Oss. 1 and μrχρις 0κρων πλευρrων, Oss. 5 [9.168, 170 L.].
164 discussion
[page 163 // page 164]
IV. The Demokritean dimension
An affinity of Anat. with the work of Demokritos of Abdera
37
was long
ago noted.
38
Strong, and relatively early, traditions linked Demokritos
with Hippocrates: Celsus described Hippocrates as ‘pupil’ of Demokri-
tos (Proem 8; there are similar accounts in the later Vitae of Soranos,
Tzetzes, and Suda). Demokritos was a most prolific writer on a great
range of scientific subjects. Many of his works have titles similar to
those of Hippocratic treatises: περi 0ν0ρuπου φuσιος j περi σαρκóς.
περi διαιτjς j διαιτητικo.
39
He was much revered in later antiquity. But
there are pressing // problems of authenticity: many citations are not
of Demokritos but of Demokrates, and there were allegedly early forg-
eries, detected by Kallimachos.
40
The extant fragments indicate that
the style of Demokritos was sometimes functional, sometimes elabo-
rate, but certain recurrent distinctive features can be isolated: a liking
for compound words and compound verbs, and a tendency to poetic
idiom with neologisms.
41
Certain catchwords recurrent in the citations
suggest that he was a natural target for imitation, forgery, and pas-
tiche. The key idea of ‘similarity’, expressed in the root çυσμóς, may
be seen as peculiarly Demokritean. In addition to treatises on the sub-
ject περi τuν διαφερóντων çυσμuν and περi 0μειψιρρυσμιuν (‘on differ-
ent dispositions’ and ‘on changing dispositions’ DK 68 B 8a and 139;
37
This was a highly prosperous region, with an important trade in grain: evidently
it had its own cultural as well as economic vitality; but of this little direct evidence
survives. Like Demokritos, the ‘sophist’ Protagoras came from Abdera. (Demokritos is
never described as a sophist, though in many respects his intellectual activity corre-
sponds to that typical in the sophistic movement. For some reason, he did not interest
Plato.)
38
See already Triller (1766), p. 258, who regarded the author as ‘aut ipsum Democritum
aut alium Abderitum philosophum’; echoed more sceptically by Ermerins (1864), Prolegom-
ena to Anat., XLII, finding a sophistic attempt ‘Democriti personam induere’.
39
Cf. also the descriptions of Demokritos searching out 0λη0εiην 0ν0ρωπiνης φuσε-
ως, Ep. 17 [9.378 L.], as an interpreter of φuσις and κóσμος, Ep. 20 [9.386 L.], and as
the writer of περi φuσιος 0ν0ρuπου, Ep. 23 [9.394 L.]. There are some seventy titles,
according to Diogenes Laertius, DK 68 A 33 = D.L. 9.45–49; but on the sources of
D.L. see the sceptical remarks of W.K.C. Guthrie, History of Greek Philosophy (Cambridge,
1965), vol. II, p. 388, n. 1.
40
See RE s.v. Bolos of Mende on later attempts to lend respectability to spurious
writings by arrogating the name of Demokritos; cf. especially Plu. Sympos. 641b.
41
Roman critics admired Demokritos’ style, finding it poetic. Cicero describes him
as ‘ornate locutus’ (DK 68 A 34 = Cic. de orat. 1.11.49). There is considerable evidence that
he affected an arcane vocabulary: Kallimachos compiled a πiναξ τuν Δημοκρiτου γλωσ-
σuν καi συνταγμoτων and Hegesianax wrote a work περi τjς το0 Δημοκρiτου λrξεως.
discussion 165
[page 164 // page 165]
cf. also Ep. 18 fin. [9.382 L.]), there are incidental references in many
fragments—which cannot all be inventions of forgers or of writers of
pastiche—to the terms çυσμο0ν (DK 68 B 197 = Stob. 3.4.70), μεταρυ-
σμο0ν (B 33 = Clem.Strom. 4.151 = Stob. 2.31.65), and rπιρυσμiη (B 7
= Sext. 7.137). That çυσμóς is pervasive in his physical system may be
seen in the argument that colour arises from elements mixed διαταγ¸ j τε
καi çυ0μ_ u καi προτροπ¸ j (DK 68 A 125 = Aet. 1.15.8). Demokritos does
seem to have been preoccupied with the idea of form, and especially
of sameness in form; cf. oμοιοσχjμων, DK 68 A 128 = Aet. 4.19.13 and
oμοσχημονεtν A 135 = Thphr. de sens. 50; also oμοφυεtς A 61 = Simp.
in cael. 569, cf. παντοiας μορφoς καi σχjματα παντοtα καi κατo μrγε0ος
διαφορoς A 37 = Simp. ibid. 294; and oμοιóτης B 164 = S.E. M. 7.116;
note too his view that the μορφj of man is recognizable τ_ u τε σχjματι
καi τ_u χρuματι B 165 = Arist. PA 640b.
42
(See also on 2, 3, and 4 for
Demokritean usage.)
Supposed relations between Hippocrates and Demokritos are de-
scribed in the Hippocratic letters.
43
The letters fall into three distinct
groups: 10–17, 18–21 and 22–24. Ep. 23, the Demokritean letter to Hip-
pocrates περi φuσιος 0ν0ρuπου is particularly relevant to this discus-
sion; but there is much of significance also in 10–17, in 18, and in 20.
In Epp. 10–17, the main voice is that of Hippocrates, called to Abdera
to treat the supposedly mad Demokritos. There are several comments
on πλουσiην τjν φuσιν ‘the richness of nature’, and Ep. 17 ends with the
designation of Demokritos as 0λη0εiην 0ν0ρωπiνης φuσεως rξιχνεuσαν-
τος καi νοjσαντος, ‘tracking down and considering the true nature of
man’ [9.378 L.].
Epp. 18–21, which purport to be an exchange between Demokritos
and Hippocrates // (18 from Demokritos; the others from Hippocrates)
seem to have been composed for the express purpose of displaying
knowledge of the corpora of these two writers. In Ep. 18 the expression
βiβλοι íπ’ rμεtο γραφεtσαι [9.382 L.] is followed up by clear reference
42
Perhaps this preoccupation of Demokritos in some degree anticipates the Aris-
totelian attempt to distinguish parts of the body as oμοιομrρη or 0νομοιομrρη, the latter
being such as hand, face which do not by division become two of the same thing, HA
1.1 init. But we need not look beyond the HC to find similar ideas in circulation; cf.
oμοε0ηνiη Loc. Hom. 1 [6.278 L.] (of the organic unity of the body), oμóτροπος Vict.
1.6 [6.478 L.] and oμóφυλος Nat. Hom. 3 [6.38 L.]. Rather, the abstract principle of
sameness and difference, with respect to shape and colour, is here given pragmatic
implementation in study of the colour and shape of the bodily organs.
43
On the letters, see Smith (1990), edition with translation and commentary, espe-
cially pp. 102–105 on Ep. 23; see also Littré IX. 392; DK 68 C 6; Temkin (1985).
166 discussion
[page 165]
to the titles of works by Demokritos.
44
This letter ends with a posi-
tive concatenation of Demokritean vocabulary, in the recommendation
that the doctor should consider çυ0μοuς … ο0λομελiην τε το0 σκjνεος
[9.382 L.]. Ep. 19 (general statements on madness), Ep. 20 (on the place
of chance in medicine), and Ep. 21 (on the use of hellebore) have ele-
ments demonstrably lifted from the HC, with some misunderstandings
and additions imported by the excerptor;
45
and doubtless Demokritean
elements are similarly present throughout 18.
Epp. 22–24 have a different manuscript tradition from the other
letters.
46
The content is somewhat mixed: in Ep. 22 Hippocrates writes
to his son Thessalos, urging the study of mathematics on the grounds
that it is closely allied with medicine; Ep. 23 is the Demokritean letter
which concerns us here; in 24 Hippocrates writes to King Demetrios,
recommending ways to maintain health. Ep. 24 is prefaced by the
statement πρóτερον μrν σπουδoζοντες … περi τjς 0ν0ρωπiνης φuσιος
rν κεφαλαi_ω 0εωρjσαι τo μrρη τα0τα ξυγγρoψαντες … 0πεστεiλαμεν
[9.398 L.]. (It has been supposed that this is a reference to Ep. 23.
This seems unlikely, as Ep. 23, the odd one out in this rather ragged
sequence, is Demokritean. It may be rather that Anat., which has strong
affinities in content and expression with Ep. 23, was known and referred
to by the author of Ep. 24, who believed the work to be Hippocratic.)
The preamble of Ep. 23, leading in to the anatomical discourse, is
regarded by Smith as detachable.
47
This preamble justifies the study
of medicine by all, on the grounds that bodily malaise affects mental
function. The proem is taken to be Demokritean in the second to third
centuries A.D.: the words of the letter σοφiη μrν γoρ ψυχjν 0ναρuεται
πα0rων. iητρικj δr νοuσους σωμoτων 0φαιρεtται [9.394 L.] are reiter-
ated in iητρικj μrν γoρ κατo Δημóκριτον σuματος νóσους 0κrεται. σοφiη
δr ψυχjν πα0uν 0φαιρεtται (DK 68 B 31 = Clem. Paed. 1.6, conceiv-
ably an independent source drawing not on the letter but on a work
of Demokritos, the source also of the letter; the connection with Ep.
23 is noted DK ad loc.). There are some striking similarities in phrase-
ology between this letter and Anat.: συνiδρυται (of the faculty of sight)
~ rγκα0iδρυται (of the heart), χελuνειον (of the chin) ~ χrλυς (chest),
εlλεtται περi κοιλiην rντερα ~ rντερον … rλικηδòν rν κóλποις rνειλοuμε-
44
See Smith (1990), p. 93, n. 1.
45
See ibid., p. 95, n. 1 and p. 99, n. 1.
46
Ibid., p. 42.
47
The author ‘borrowed the anatomy and composed the proem’; cf. 32 ‘detachable
philosophic … proem’.
discussion 167
[page 165 // page 166]
νον (similar expressions of inestines), νευρuδης κuστις (both of bladder).
Similarities in spirit are even more striking. It is particularly remarkable
that the nuances of the concepts κóσμος and φuσις are parallel, and
allied with the pervasive concept of order in or aptness to bodily
function, and to the craft in design of the living organism. There is even
a parallel change in use of φuσις. At the beginning of the anatomical
description, we find φuσιος 0ν0ρωπiνης íπογραφj 0εωρiην rχει τοιjνδε
(same sense as Anat. 7); and at the end j δr 0σuματος rν μυχοtς φuσις
rξrτευξε παντoμορφα σπλoγχνων γrνη (same sense as Anat. 12 [9.394,
398 L.]). (In the latter passage, Ermerins reads σuματος, linking this
genitive with rν μυχοtς: this attractive emendation tones down but does
not alter the abstract sense of φuσις.) There is in Ep. 23 much stress on
the notion that the organs are fashioned or marshalled by ‘nature’ to
serve [the nature of] the body; φuσιος Iπο δεδημιοuργηται (sex organs)
and συν0rσεως δημιουργi¸η συνδεσμεuμενα // (stomach and intestines),
until death ends their service; cf. here rκοσμj0η and διετoξατο. In the
letter the nouns δημιουργóς and δημιουργi¸η, the verb rξrτευξε, and
the expressions of the bodily parts ε0κοσμi¸α χρuτα κοσμε0σι (hair),
jρμοσμrνοι 0λλjλοισι (trachea and oesophagus), συνηρμοσμrνον (chin)
are more elaborate than, but similar in spirit to, Anat. 7 and 12. These
ideas accord well with known Demokritean views of man ‘governed’ by
divinity, the two being microcosm and macrocosm, as rν τ_u 0ν0ρuπ_ω
μικρ_u κóσμ_ω ðντι κατo τòν Δημοκρiτον, and of origins in general as
rγκοσμοuμενον κατo λóγον where çυσμóς. τροπj. δια0ιγj play a part
(DK 68 B 34 = David Prol. 38.14 and A 38 = Simp. In Ph. 28.15).
However, with these similarities in phraseology and spirit, there are
fundamental divergences. The overall tenor is completely different:
the letter is mannered and pompous, whereas Anat., despite its poetic
touches, is spare and functional. There are differences too in attitude
to bodily function, and in anatomical sophistication. In the letter, the
organs are the seat of the emotions (the heart of anger, the liver of
desire). The letter is full of theoretical notions, whereas Anat. is prac-
tical and descriptive. Furthermore, whereas the anatomy of Anat. is
primitive, and contains no elements which suggest a post-classical date
(though, unlike the letter, Anat. gives such precise details as the number
of lobes in lungs and liver), that of Ep. 23 displays insights which seem
to follow the work of Herophilos and Erasistratos. These are listed by
Smith as: the comment on the uselessness of the spleen; the descrip-
tion of the bladder, woven from vessels; the concept that swallowing is
accompanied by a shove; the insight that the brain directs the limbs
168 discussion
[page 166 // page 167]
via the nerves.
48
To these may be added: it is πνεμα, not drink, which
enters by the trachea; the term lungs, not sg. lung, is used; the heart is
not ‘round’, but ‘conical’ and in general there is attention to, and some
understanding of, function.
The two texts, Ep. 23 and Anat., are related in a complex fashion.
The most plausible hypothesis is that both are derived, directly or
indirectly, from the same Demokritean text, but by writers with entirely
different purposes. That there are Demokritean elements in Anat. is
assured. But Demokritean need not mean ‘by Demokritos’. Nothing
militates against the supposition that this is an excerpt of a genuine
work by Demokritos; but it might be a pre-Alexandrian forgery (to
be linked with those allegedly detected by Kallimachos), or a later
pastiche (to be linked with the epistolary tradition). However, the theory
of guileless abridgement seems more probable. As the comparative
anatomy which features so prominently in Anat. belongs not with Ep.
23 (though cf. the presentation of Demokritos in Ep. 18) but with Oss.
and Epid. 2, it may be supposed that the writer is adapting more than
one text. The doctor(s) involved in the writing or compilation of Epid.
2, 4 and 6 practised at Abdera, Ainos, and other such northern centres.
The common elements in expression between these, Oss., Anat., and
the works of Demokritos is some indication of interaction between
Hippocratics and Demokriteans in fifth-century Thrace; and between
their later imitators. This can only be glimpsed, hardly reconstructed.
49
V. Conclusion
This extraordinary little piece has found its way into the HC by acci-
dent. It is an // unoriginal and uncritical summary of earlier anatom-
ical works, incorporating Demokritean material. There is a nexus of
related Hippocratic texts, most notably Oss. The date of the anony-
mous redactor is indeterminate, but may be as early as the fourth cen-
tury. The treatise is a unique testimonial to the nature and extent of
ancient anatomical knowledge, and an important document linking the
lost Demokritean corpus with certain Hippocratic texts.
48
Smith (1990), p. 33.
49
See Jouanna (1992), pp. 48–50 on Hippocrates’ connections with North Greece
and pp. 36–37 on Hippocrates and Demokritos; also Longrigg (1993), pp. 66–69, 93–97
on Demokritean ideas in the HC.
APPENDIX
M.-P. Duminil, Hippocrate: CUF t. 8, Ulc., Oss., Cor, Anat. (Paris, 1998)
appeared soon after the first publication of this article in Classical Quar-
terly. It is not uncommon in scholarship that a text or subject long
neglected is simultaneously the subject of more than one study. It is
proper that, on republication of my article, some account is taken of
Duminil’s work.
D’s text, as is conventional in the Budé series, is prefaced by a
short general introduction (‘Notice’) and accompanied by a translation,
with only a few notes. Accordingly, D’s treatment is necessarily much
less detailed than my own; on the whole it is descriptive rather than
evaluative. In the ‘Notice’, D discusses title (found to be inappropriate,
as the work gives a partial rather than a detailed study of anatomy)
and content (found to be biological rather than medical). Parallels with
Demokritos and others are noted; but D places more emphasis on
similarities with (pseudo-) Rufus of Ephesus. The manuscript tradition
is then briefly described.
I do not discuss differences which do not affect the sense, such as D’s
preference for contracted forms, e.g. τοuτου not τουτrου, and for ξυν-
rather than συν- forms. Otherwise, the main differences in the two texts
are as follows:
– (I. 1 = D’s 1) D keeps nominative singular úπτομrνη V while
I, following Ermerins, emend to genitive plural úπτομrνων (for
reasons, which I still think valid, see commentary 143–144). I note
that D translates as if reading the genitive plural.
– (I.4 = D’s 3) D keeps κεiμενας V while I, following Ermerins,
emend to κεiμενον (for reasons, which I still think valid, see com-
mentary 150).
– (I. 5 = D’s 4) D reads oχετοi σκαληνοειδεtς 0κρην [κορυφjν] κu-
στιος κεiαται while I read oχετοi σκαληνοειδrες rς 0κρην κορυφjν
κuστιος κεtνται. D’s deletion of the substantive on the grounds of
tautology seems odd, and it still seems to me that the preposition
170 appendix
is required; D’s preference for κεiαται a rare form of the third
person plural may be justified (κεiανται V).
– D reads rγκoς δr κuστιος μετοχj εiσω πrφυκε while I read rκα0εν
κuστιος μrσα oσχrα πrφυκε. D seems unaware that her emenda-
tion, based on a Galenic gloss, was anticipated by Triller (for full
discussion, see commentary 151–152).
– (II.10 = D’s 6) D keeps μικρóν V while I, following Foesius, emend
to μακρóν (for reasons, which I think compelling, see commentary
150).
– D fails to note that there are different manuscript readings of
adjectives and substantives beginning oμο- or oμοιο- (see commen-
tary 143, with n. 6).
Although there are some points of disagreement in interpretation (for
example, whether the word μjλοισιν refers to ‘apples’ as D believes, or
to ‘sheep’ as I prefer) there are points of agreement also (for example,
that the phrase βρογχiη πολλj refers to the aorta, and that the expres-
sion rπi σηππτικjς κοιλiης can stand).
INDEX OF AUTHORS AND TEXTS
Aetius 66
Alkaios 160
Alkmaion 18
DK 24 A 5 20, 83
Anaximander 133
Anonymus Londinensis
15, 160
XII 22–26
(Dexippos) 20, 61
Aretaios 82, 98, 99, 130
Aristophanes
Eccles. 254, 398 25
Eq. 455 151
Nu. 327 61
1043 69
Pl. 665 25, 92
717–725 25
Ra.
588 25
1067 144, n.
Aristotle
col. 796a 53
GA
5.1 20
6 20
HA
1.1 165, n.
1.16 131, 159
3.3 158
3.5 69
Metaph. 985b 132
PA
637b 141
647a 141
655b 160
664a 160
664b 160
667a 159
669b 131, 148, 149
670b 141
671b 143, 159
673b 140
Po. 1449a 152
Probl. 15, 21, 79
31.21 109
31.22 83
31.23 60–61
31.25 57–58
31.28 109
Rh. 1411a 61
Athenaios 262a 151, n.
Celsus 6, 11, 19, 21–22,
23, 60,
65–67, 69,
71, 79, 90,
97–98, 104,
106–107,
129, 155–157
proem 8 164
proem 30 106
2.1.6 106
2.10.1–17 98
4.1.1–13 156
4.1.3 131, 136
4.1.7 151
4.1.11 144
6.6.1 106, 112
6.6.8 107
6.6.10 60, 79
6.6.26 79
6.6.31 60
6.6.35 52
6.6.38 99
7.7.3 60
7.7.4 67, 87
172 index of authors and texts
7.7.13–14 51
7.7.15 65, 74, 79
7.7.31 76
8.3 103
Demokritos 19, 120, 132,
133, 136,
139, 150,
159, 164–168
DK 68 A 37 142, 165
DK 68 A 61 165
DK 68 A 77 137
DK 68 A 125 165
DK 68 A 128 165
DK 68 A 132 142
DK 68 A 135 53, 165
DK 68 A 151 159
DK 68 A 152 139
DK 68 A 155 136
DK 68 B 5 147
DK 68 B 7 165
DK 68 B 8 164
DK 68 B 31 166
DK 68 B 33 165
DK 68 B 34 167
DK 68 B 37 139
DK 68 B 57 139
DK 68 B 135 142, n.
DK 68 B 139 164
DK 68 B 151 148
DK 68 B 155 133
DK 68 B 164 165
DK 68 B 165 165
DK 68 B 187 139
DK 68 B 197 165
DK 68 B 223 139
DK 68 B 270 139
DK 68 B 288 139
Demosthenes Philalethes
19
Diokles
fr. 137 20
Dioskorides 72, 79, 84, 92
Empedokles 18, 161, 163
DK 31 A 77 147
DK 31 A 83 149
DK 31 B 27 133
DK 31 B 61 147
DK 31 B 81 147
DK 31 B 84 83
DK 31 B 150 141
Erotian 7, 61, 156
Δ 18 63
Ε 38 131
Κ 35 147
Ξ 2 91
Ο 25 80
Σ 56 143
Τ 15 75
Τ 34 63
Φ 13 92
Euripides
Alc. 261 53
Ba. 1339 137, n.
Cy. 683 65
El.
492 163
772 132
837 134, 163
Hel.
179 53
1502 53
HF 130 132
Ion 1011 163
IT
978 137, n.
1481 137
Supp. 94 132
Tro. 117 163
fr. 983 N. 160
Euryphon 18, 75
Galen 6, 7, 19–22, 50,
66, 87, 98,
102, 106–
107, 130, n.,
142, n., 147,
n., 156
de anatomicis administrationibus
2.349 K 104
2.719 K. 104
index of authors and texts 173
de compositione medicamentorum secundum
locos
12.701 K. 84
12.702 K. 92, 106
12.709–711 K. 79, 93
12.711–714 K. 106
12. 738 K. 93
12. 802 K. 98
de compositione medicamentorum
temperamentis et facultatibus
12.242 K. 84
Hippocratis de medici officina liber et
Galeni in eum commentarius
18 (2).808 K. 102
Hippocratis de articulis liber et Galeni in
eum commentarii
18 (1).379 K. 150
in Hippocratis Prognosticon commentarii
106
18 (2).47 K. 82
introductio seu medicus
14.742 K. 21
14.767–777 K. 20, 87, 93
14.768 K. 106
14.769 K. 90
14.782 K. 21, 66
linguarum Hippocratis explicatio
7, 144, n., 156,
170
19.74 K. 109
19.86 K. 81
19.91 K. 61
19.92 K. 152
19.97 K. 100
19.112 K. 91
19.118 K. 92
19.124 K. 93
19.125 K. 91, 146
19.128 K. 3, 158
19.148 K. 84, 111
de locis affectis
8.218 K. 20–21
de methodo medendi
10.281K. 85
10.937–942 K. 66
10.940 K. 92
10.1004 K. 88
de optimo medico cognoscendo
22
de placitis Hippocratis et Platonis
156
de remediis parabilibus
14.341 K. 22
14.342, 343, 344 K.
106, 107
14.410 K. 87
de simplicium medicamentorum
temperamentis et facultatibus
12.242 K. 84
de tumoribus praeter naturam
7.732 K. 88
Herakleitos 163
Herodotos
1.38 53
2.86 159
3.30 3
4.187 66
5.58 132
8.54 3
Herophilos 19, 98, 140, 159
Hesychios 7, 61–62, 68,
81, 85, 91,
108, 130,
132, 136,
138, 142,
143, 144,
150, 151,
157
Hippocrates, HC
Acut. 17, 72, 92
5 [2.260 L.] 54
19 [2.264 L.] 150
30 [2.290 L.] 131
60 [2.356 L.] 77
Acut. Sp.
3 [2.398 L.] 108
5 [2.406 L.] 73
7 [2.424 L.] 73
9–10 [2.412 L.] 54, 96
15 [2.474 L.] 160
26 [2.486 L.] 77
174 index of authors and texts
61 [2.516 L.] 77
65–66 [2.520 L.] 90, 91
Aer. 17, 55, 82
10 [2.42, 46 L.] 20, 105
Aff. 16, 17, 111, 147
2 [6.210 L.] 17, 79, 100
4 [6.212, 214 L.] 17, 96, 100
5 [6.214 L.] 17
9 [6.216 L.] 160
11, 12, 13 [6.218, 220 L.]
81
15 [6.224 L.] 17, 92, 145
18 [6.228 L.] 17
20 [6.230 L.] 54
22 [6.234 L.] 58
23 [6.234 L.] 17, 80
26 [6.238 L.] 110
27 [6.238 L.] 110
28 [6.240 L.] 17
29 [6.240, 242 L.]
17, 72
31 [6.244 L.] 72
33 [6.244 L.] 18, 81
37 [6.246 L.] 110
38 [6.248 L.] 111
40 [6.250 L.] 17
54 [6.264 L.] 98
58 [6.266 L.] 98
47 [6.258 L.] 108
Alim. 163
23 [9.106 L.] 150
25 [9.106 L.] 146
30 [9.110 L.] 140
31 [9.110 L.] 138
Aph. 17
Aph. 3
12 [4.490 L.] 20, 105
14 [4.492 L.] 105
31 [4.502 L.] 50
Aph. 4
77 [4.530 L.] 91
Aph. 6
19 [4.568 L.] 82
31 [4.570 L.] 22
de Arte
10 [6.16 L.] 134, 160, 161
11 [6.20 L.] 3
Artic. 7, 16, 18, 55,
57, 72, 89,
110, 112, 131,
137, 148,
157, 159,
162
7 [4.86, 92 L.] 12, 69, 110
8 [4.92, 94 L.] 159
2 9 [4.102 L.] 85
11 [4.106, 108 L.] 63, 70, 150
13 [4.116 L.] 146
16 [4.128 L.] 69
18 [4.132 L.] 163, n.
19 [4.132 L.] 55
22 [4.134 L.] 163, n.
31 [4.146 L.] 55
38 [4.166, 168 L.]
55, 71
40 [4.172–176 L.] 82, 110
45 [4.190–196 L.]
65, 130
46 [4.196 L.] 65
47 [4.202 L.] 55, 65
62 [4.264–268 L.]
55, 62, 132
68 [4.282 L.] 73
78 [4.312 L.] 55
Carn. 157, 162
1 [8.584 L.] 137, 159
2 [8.584 L.] 161
3 [8.586 L.] 145, 147, 150,
152, 160
4 [8.588 L.] 151
5–9 [8.590–596 L.]
145
5 [8.590 L.] 130, 138, 139,
n., 151, 155,
157
6 [8.594 L.] 150
13 [8.600 L.] 150
17 [8.604, 606 L.]
20, 83, 161
19 [8.614 L.] 152, 157
Coac. 18, 57, 82, 86,
94, 109, 112
2.209 [5.628 L.] 53
2.214 [5.630 L.] 59–60
index of authors and texts 175
2.220 [5.632 L.] 22
2.357–372 [5.660, 662 L.]
96
3.483 [5.692 L.] 89
5.502 [5.700 L.] 17
7.593 [5.722 L.] 83
7.611 [5.726 L.] 83
Cord. 83, 157
1 [9.80 L.] 137, 149
2 [9.80 L.] 146, 159, 160
5 [9.84 L.] 149
7 [9.84 L.] 139, 146
8 [9.84, 86 L.] 146, 150
10 [9.86 L.] 149
Epid. 17, 56, 71, 112
Epid. 1
1.2.4 [2.216 L.] 60, 105
Epid. 2 94, 120,
158, 161,
162–163,
168
2.2.24 [5.94, 96 L.]
96, 137
2.3.1 [5.102 L.] 77
2.3.2 [5.104 L.] 111
2.3.14 [5.116 L.] 68
2.4.1 [5.120, 122 L.]
129, 141, 148,
158
2.4.2 [5.126 L.] 20
2.6.12 [5.134 L.] 95, 105
2.6.28 [5.138 L.] 93
Epid. 3
3.3.7 [3.84 L.] 78
Epid. 4 72, 168
4.7 [5.146 L.] 142
4.19 [5.156 L.] 163, n.
4.30 [5.174 L.] 3, 50
4.44 [5.184 L.] 77
4.52 [5.192 L.] 95
Epid. 5 62, 86, 91
5.7, 8 [5.208 L.] 56
5.25 [5.224 L.] 81
5.26 [5.226 L.] 56
5.68 [5.244 L.] 109
Epid. 6 25, 86, 94,
112, 120,
158, 161,
162–163, 168
6.1.3 [5.266 L.] 163, n.
6.3.18 [5.302 L.] 158
6.4.6 [5.308 L.] 150, 159
6.4.21 [5.312 L.] 149
6.7.1 [5.332 L.] 95
Epid. 7 4, 86
7.3 [5.368, 370 L.]
73, 82
7.11 [5.384 L.] 57
7.12 [5.388 L.] 129
7.25 [5.394 L.] 129
7.43 [5.410 L.] 71
7.45 [5.412 L.] 105
7.59 [5.424 L.] 108
7.65 [5.430 L.] 109
7.78 [5.434 L.] 83
7.80 [5.436 L.] 83
7.124 [5.468 L.] 65
Epp.
10–17, 18–21, 22–24
165, 166
Ep. 11 [9.326 L.] 152
Ep. 17 [9.354–378 L.]
108, 159, 164,
n., 165
Ep. 18 [9.382 L.] 139, 150,
165–166
Ep. 19 [9.382 L.] 165–166
Epp. 20, 21, 22 164, n., 166
Ep. 23 [9.394, 396 L.]
120, 134, 137,
145, 148,
149, 151,
152, 164, n.,
166–168
Ep. 24 166
Fist. 72, 92, 104, 112
1 [6.448 L.] 152
9 [6.456 L.] 78
Fract. 7, 18, 57, 82,
89, 104, 112,
137, 157
3 [3.422 L.] 70, 158
4 [3.430, 432 L.] 109, 163, n.
5 [3.434 L.] 70, 163, n.
176 index of authors and texts
9 [3.448 L.] 131
10 [3.450 L.] 55
12 [3.460 L.] 130
15 [3.470, 472 L.] 68
21 [3.486 L.] 101
30 [3.520 L.] 131
Gland. 16, 17, 18
1 [8.556 L.] 150
3 [8.558 L.] 74
4 [8.558 L.] 130
7 [8.560 L.] 130, 150
11 [8.564 L.] 17, 65
12 [8.564 L.] 61
13 [8.568 L.] 105
14 [8.568, 570 L.]
17, 65, 76, 131
Haem. 92, 152
2 [6.436, 438 L.] 63, 69
4 [6.440 L.] 103
5 [6.440 L.] 73
Hebd.
5 [8.636 L.] 146
35 [8.657 L.] 109
52 [8.673 L.] 139
Int. 16–17, 55,
75–76, 81,
92, 108
1 [7.166, 172 L.] 76, 129, 131, n.
2 [7.174 L.] 76
4 [7.178 L.] 87
6 [7.180 L.] 55
7 [7.184 L.] 110
8 [7.186 L.] 76
9 [7.188 L.] 81
12 [7.192, 194 L.] 17, 73
13 [7.200 L.] 17, 76
15 [7.204 L.] 54
18 [7.210, 212 L.] 54, 70, 74, 75
21 [7.220 L.] 98, 100
24 [7.228 L.] 89
26 [7.234 L.] 73
27 [7.238 L.] 55
28 [7.242 L.] 70, 81
35 [7.252 L.] 57
36 [7.256 L.] 73
37 [7.258 L.] 100
51 [7.292 L.] 57
Iudic. 51 [9.292 L.] 149
Loc. Hom. 9, 16, 18, 21,
64–65, 72,
78, 86, 91,
94, 112, 156,
157
1 [6.276, 278 L.] 20, 64, 163, n.
2 [6.278, 280 L.] 20, 103, 119
3 [6.280, 282 L.] 82, 83, 129, 131,
134, 135,
139, 146, 161
6 [6.284 L.] 157
10 [6.294 L.] 129, 134
12 [6.298 L.] 101
13 [6.298, 300, 302 L.]
3, 16, 56, 61,
64, 74, 75,
78, 81, 103,
111, 112
14 [6.302–308 L.]
91, 129, 131, n.,
134
15 [6.308 L.] 76
20 [6.312 L.] 146
21–23 [6.312, 314 L.]
76
21 [6.312 L.] 17, 65
22 [6.314 L.] 101
26 [6.316 L.] 160
27 [6.318 L.] 101
30 [6.322 L.] 96, 101
32 [6.324 L.] 102
38 [6.328 L.] 85
40 [6.330 L.] 16, 64, 70, 73
42 [6.334 L.] 53
47 [6.346 L.] 93, 112
Medic.
2 [9.206, 208 L.] 69, 80
5 [9.212 L.] 17
8 [9.214 L.] 68
Mochl. 72, 82, 148,
158, 162, 163
1 [4.340, 342 L.] 65, 130, 157
8 [4.354 L.] 163, n.
12 [4.356 L.] 163, n.
34 [4.376 L.] 73
35 [4.378 L.] 81
index of authors and texts 177
39 [4.386 L.] 130
41 [4.392 L.] 131
42 [4.392 L.] 77
Morb. 1 147
3 [6.144 L.] 54, 105
5–6 [6.146–150 L.]
70
26 [6.194 L.] 54
28 [6.196 L.] 54, 101, 160
Morb. 2 16, 21, 86, 94,
96, 112, 148
1 [7.8 L.] 65, 83, 102
1–11 [7.8–18 L.] 102
2 [7.8, 10 L.] 64–65
4 [7.10 L.] 73
8 [7.16 L.] 73
9 [7.16 L.] 96
12 [7.18 L.] 57, 65, 71, 73
13 [7.22, 24 L.] 78, 84, 86, 101
15 [7.26, 28, 30 L.]
73, 78, 81, 101,
103, 104
18 [7.32 L.] 78, 86, 101
19 [7.32, 34 L.] 56, 87, 111
22 [7.38 L.] 56
24 [7.38 L.] 80
25 [7.38, 40 L.] 56, 73, 86, 101
26 [7.38, 40, 42 L.]
81, 97, 101
27 [7.42, 44 L.] 97, 101
28 [7.46 L.] 97, 98
29 [7.46 L.] 97
32 [7.50 L.] 71, 102, 103
33 [7.50 L.] 80
35 [7.52 L.] 80
36 [7.52 L.] 101
43 [7.60 L.] 98, 197
47 [7.66, 68, 70 L.]
69, 72, 81, 111
50 [7.78 L.] 81
51 [7.80 L.] 81
53 [7.82 L.] 76
56 [7.88 L.] 76
58 [7.90 L.] 91
59 [7.92 L.] 136
62 [7.96 L.] 76
69 [7.106 L.] 144
72 [7.108, 110 L.] 108
73 [7.112 L.] 70, 108
Morb. 3 84, 94
1 [7.118 L.] 57
2 [7.120 L.] 81, 109
3 [7.120 L.] 73, 86
6 [7.124 L.] 110
10 [7.128, 130 L.] 85, 96
11 [7.130 L.] 80
15 [7.140 L.] 74
16 [7.142–148 L.] 74, 76, 109, 110,
160
17 [7.156 L.] 85
Morb. 4 56, 151
38 [7.556 L.] 160
40 [7.560 L.] 151
54 [7.596 L.] 150
56 [7.604–608 L.]
134, 146, 160
Morb. Sacr.
3 [6.366 L.] 159
7 [6.374 L.] 20
17 [6.392 L.] 151
gynaecological works
54–55, 56, 69,
71, 72, 80,
91
Mul. 1 17, 82, 86, 101,
112, 148
34 [8.80, 82 L.] 98, 160
70 [8.148 L.] 81
74 [8.156, 158 L.] 98, 111
75 [8.164, 168 L.]
81, 98
90 [8.214 L.] 98
97 [8.224 L.] 98
102–105 [8.224–228 L.]
90
102 [8.224 L.] 98
105 [8.228 L.] 61, 98
109 [8.232 L.] 85
Mul. 2 86, 101, 112, 151
110 [8.236, 238 L.]
89, 99
111 [8.240 L.] 111
112 [8.242 L.] 56
116 [8.250 L. 61, 83
178 index of authors and texts
119 [8.228 L.] 61
144 [8.316, 318 L.]
68
165 [8.344 L.] 111
185 [8.366 L.] 85
Nat. Hom.
3 [6.38 L.] 165, n.
11 [6.58 L.] 158
14 [6.66 L.] 91
Nat. Mul. 112
1 [7.312 L.] 146
13 [7.330 L.] 56
24 [7.342 L.] 111
32 [7.358, 362, 366 L.]
55, 98, 143
33 [7.370 L.] 55
40 [7.384 L.] 71
100 [7.416 L.] 98
Nat. Pue. 151
31 [7.540 L.] 159
Off. 82
17 [7.322 L.] 84
23 [7.328 L.] 84
24 [7.332 L.] 84
Oss. 3, 73, 112,
120, 130,
148, 149,
157–163,
168
1 [9.168 L.] 130, 141, 144,
150, 157,
159, 160,
163, n.
3 [9.170 L.] 152
4–7 [9.170–172 L.]
158
4 [9.170 L.] 131, 143, 158,
160
5 [9.170 L.] 129, 163, n.
7 [9.172 L.] 141, 161
8 [9.174 L.] 158
9 [9.176 L.] 152, 158
10 [9.178, 180 L.] 141, 145, 148,
158
12 [9.182, 184 L.] 20, 133, 141,
145, 159
13 [9.184, 186 L.] 136, 160
14 [9.186, 188 L.]
76, 149, 152
16 [9.190 L.] 139, 145
17 [9.192 L.] 145, 152
18 [9.194 L.] 131, 135, 141,
151
19 [9.196 L.] 137
Prog. 82, 94, 111
2 [2.114, 116 L.] 21, 60, 106
23 [2.174, 178 L.] 96, 101
24 [2.184 L.] 136
Prorrh. 1 58, 86, 112
Prorrh. 2 17, 21, 25, 82,
94, 112
18–20 [9.44–48 L.]
17
18 [9.44, 46 L.] 58–59, 107,
112
20 [9.48 L.] 50, 51, 87
21 [9.48 L.] 105
30 [9.60 L.] 91
33 [9.64 L.] 95
34 [9.66 L.] 95
43 [9.74 L.] 56
Septim. 132
1 [7.436 L.] 139
Steril. 82
221 [8.426 L.] 80
222 [8.430 L.] 63
248 [8. 460 L.] 68
Ulc. 16, 83, 85, 92
1 [6.400 L.] 110
6 [6.404 L.] 85
8 [6.406 L.] 85
10 [6.408 L.] 111
12 [6.412 L.] 85, 90, 93, 98
13 [6.416 L.] 92, 98
14 [6.418 L.] 89
17 [6.420 L.] 90, 93
22 [6.426 L.] 101
24 [6.428 L.] 74, 100, 101,
110
25 [6.430 L.] 101
26 [6.430 L.] 68
Vict. 1 72
6 [6.478 L.] 165, n.
11 [6.486 L.] 146
index of authors and texts 179
Vict. 2
54 [6.556 L.] 98
Vict. 3 56, 147
Vict. 4
90 [6.656 L.] 81
VC 7, 9, 82, 86, 89,
102, 112
2 [3.188–192 L.] 65, 86
3 [3.194 L.] 65
9 [3.210 L.] 102
13 [3.228, 230 L.]
86, 101, 110
14 [3.236–242 L.]
80, 89, 111
15 [3.244 L.] 85
18 [3.250 L.] 58, 81
19 [3.252, 254 L.] 80, 109
21 [3.256, 258 L.]
81, 102
VM 61
18–19 [1.612–616 L.]
60–61
19 [1.616, 618 L.] 74, 161
22 [1.626–632 L.]
136, 141, 146
Homer 53, 83, 148, 155
Il. 3.292 146
4.528 131
11.579 148
17.47 146
19.266 146
Lysias 25, 62
Oreibasios 21, 50, 130, n.
Parmenides 143, 163
Paul of Aigina 12, 21, 23, 50,
98, 103
Philolaus 133
Plato 133, n., 142, n.,
164, n.
Phd. 96b 147
R. 405c 107
517a 53
Sph. 258c 57
Ti.
33b, c 137
45b–46a, 58c 82
71c 141
and Ti. Locr. 139, n.
Pliny 98–99
Plutarch 61
Pollux 61–62, 82, 106,
130, 131, 134,
151, n., 157
Poseidonios 155
Praxagoras 129
Protagoras 164
Pythagoras, Pythagoreans
57, 133, 139, n.,
145, 150
Rufus 23, 50, 129–130,
133, 141,
143, 144,
146, 148,
149–150,
152, 155–157,
169
Scribonius Largus 78
Strabo 80
Theophrastos 81
Xenophon 56
GENERAL INDEX
Abdera, 19, 132, 164, n., 165, 168
acupuncture, 26
anatomy
comparative, 120, 129–166
foetal, 140, n., 143
Homeric, 155
regional, 120, 155
arteries, see vessels
belly, 119–120, 149–150
bladder, 119, 144–145, 156, 167
body fluids, 129
bile, 17, 57, 61, 134, n.
blood, 10, 83, 96, 99, 129–130
ichor, 10, 61, 83–84
mualos, 65, 76
muxa, 61–62
phlegm, 10, 17, 21, 52, 57, 61, 65,
83, 96, 102, 105, 107, 108, 134,
n.
pus, empyema, 27, 69, 76, 97,
102, 147, 160
sweat, 61
tears, 59–61, 106
urine, 83
water, ‘moisture’, 10, 103
Calvus, 6, 56, 69, 84, 86
Cornarius, note also critical apparatus,
5, 6–7, 56, 64, 86, 89, 101, 108,
109, 134, 143
Demosthenes Philalethes, 19
diaphragm, 119, 147–148, 156
diseases, see also eye
‘choker’, 95–98, 105
dropsy, 73, 76
jaundice, 73, 108
joint diseases, 105
malaria, 93
phthisis, 73, 76
pleurisy, 76
pneumonia, 93, 95, 160
stroke, 73, 86
tuberculosis, 93
dissection, 120, 159
drugs, see medicaments
Egypt, 22, 24, 77, 80, 159
Erasistratos, 19
eye
anatomy, note also glossary and
diagrams,
cornea, 8, 19, 51, 82
fundus, 25
iris, 3, 8, 51
lash, 9, 88
lid, 9, 76–79, 87–89
limbus, 82
membranes, 8–9, 19, 60
opsis, 3–4, 49
optic nerves, 19, 26; cf. ducts,
20, 21
pupil, 3, 8, 51
retina, 19, 50
tarsal plates, 82, 88
diseases, note also glossary,
amaurosis, 9–10, 101
amblyopia, 9–10
blepharitis, 59, 90, 91
cataract, 8, 22, 23, 24, 49–51,
53
chalazion, 8, 22, 88
conjunctivitis, 8, 10, 22, 25, 59,
105
ectropion, 8, 59
entropion, 10, 59
glaucoma, 22, 23, 49–51, 53
iritis, 50
keratitis, 50, 51
182 general index
night blindness, 8, 9, 22, 23,
25, 27, 93–101
ophthalmia, 9, 13, 78, 94,
95–96, 104–112
papilloma, 8, 88
pterygion, 22, 87–88
ptilosis, 87
rheum, 25, 58–63
trachoma, 8, 10, 12, 19, 22, 23,
24, 27, 76–79, 85, 87–89
flux, 10, 16, 20, 52, 61, 64–65, 74, 110
ocular flux, 16, 19, 20–21, 61,
64–66, 78, 102, 107, 111
Foesius, note also critical apparatus,
7, 37, 49, 58, 69, 71, 72, 75, 83, 84,
86, 87, 89, 92, 100, 101, 108,
110, 136, 143, 151, 170
grammar, see style
head, note also diagram 2,
bregma, 9, 17, 19, 78, 85–86, 102
crown, vertex, 9, 71
inion, occiput, 9, 65, 67, 71
heart, 119, 135, 136–138, 145, 156,
161, 167
Herophilos, 19, 98, 140
kidneys, 119, 142–144, 145, 156, 157,
160
Knidos, Knidian, 18
Kos, 61
Kyrene, 19
language, see style, terminology
Libya, 19, 66
liver, 119–120, 135, 140–142, 145, 148,
154, 156, 167
lung, 20, 72, 76, 91, 96, 119–120, 129,
131, 133–140, 145, 156, 160, 161,
168
medicaments, see also therapy, 8, 11,
17
arum, 12, 72
bile (animal), 98
choice, dosage, 12, 56, 72, 84, 111
copper, 12, 22, 24, 56, 79, 84, 89,
90, 91–93, 106
cypress, 78, 86
elaterion, 12, 96, 100
fig (juice, leaves), 79, 92
fungus, 71
garlic, 11, 92, 95, 97–98
grape (juice), 79, 90, 91, 92
honey, 11, 22, 72, 94, 98, 106
industry, 90
liver, 22, 27, 95, 98–99
myssotos, 93
olive oil, 11, 71, 78
saffron, 91
salt, 72, 86
vinegar, 92, 111
wine, 12, 22, 78, 91, 97, 98, 107
Miletos, Milesian, 80
moxibustion, 26, 70
number, numerology, 57, 145, 150
oesophagus, 119, 146–147
ophthalmoscope, 25–26
pain, 11, 13, 22, 53, 57, 59–60, 78, 95,
103, 104, 106, 107, 111
papyri (ophthalmological), 66
Ebers, 22
Kahun, 22
pathology, see also diseases, 9–10
prognosis, 10, 17, 49, 59
pulse, 73, 74
Pythagoras, Pythagoreans, 57, 133,
145, 150
Sicily, 22
signs, 13, 21, 53, 60, 73, 82, 83, 96,
106
spleen, 54, 119, 132, 141, 145, 147,
148–149, 152, 156, 157, 167
sponge, 11, 22, 68, 72, 79, 80, 97
style, 8, 13–15
adverbial clauses
(conditional), 52, 61, 108
(temporal), 52, 61, 79, 106
general index 183
alliteration, 52, 108
antithetitical style, 52
aphoristic style, 67, 104, 108, 163
article, omitted, 120, 138, 145, 163
asyndeton, 14, 52, 67, 88, 120, 163
compendious comparison, 120,
137, 143, 150, 160
compound verbs, 14–15, 61, 70,
72, 89, 101, 103, 131, 134, 137,
141, n., 142, 151, 164
compression, ellipse, 6, 14, 15, 65,
67, 84, 85, 88, 90, 94, 120, 142,
148, 150, 161, 163
connective particles, 18, n., 57
dialect, Doric, 75
dialect, Ionic, 132, 144
didactic tone, 13, 15, 61, 67, 135
diminutives, 72
dual number, 62
epic expression, 144, 162
genitive absolute, 111, 133
jussive (imperatival) infinitive,
13–14, 61, 67, 68, 79, 88, 91,
99, 103
jussive subjunctive, 14, 91
metaphor, 69, 131, 134, 136, 156
oral discourse, 63
parataxis (compound sentences),
14, 52, 67, 163
participles, 13, 68, 81, 90–91, 99
poetic tone, 143, 164
prepositions, 14, 131
pronouns, demonstrative, 14, 52,
56, 58, 79, 84
rhythm, metrical elements, 162
simile, 15, 149, 162
suffix
(adjectival), 54, 55–56
(substantival), 112
triadic expression, 67
variatio, 67, 143
surgery
cautery, 10, 11, 12, 16, 17, 18, 22,
26, 27, 49, 52, 63, 64–67, 79,
89
cupping, 8, 11, 12, 16, 27, 96, 98,
100
cutting, 8, 11, 16, 21, 26, 66,
78–79, 85, 88, 102
instruments, 12, 63, 70, 79, 80–81,
89
phlebotomy, venesection, 16, 22,
52, 58, 70, 94, 95, 96, 97, 105,
108
scarification, 22, 24, 27
scraping, 12, 24, 63, 76, 79–80
trephining, trepanation, 8, 9, 12,
16, 22, 27, 78, 81, 101–104
Susruta, 22
syntax, see style
terminology, nomenclature, 120, 132,
135, 148, 151, 161
anatomical, 8–9
technical, 8, 12, 54, 112, 132
vocabulary, choice, 54–55, 120,
162–163
therapy, see also surgery
diet, 13, 79
environment, weather, 13, 22, 81
exercise, 79
fumigation, vapour bath, 81
ointments, salves, 8, 11, 12, 16, 22,
24, 52, 84, 98, 106, 107, 111, 112
poultices, 8, 12, 13, 107, 110
purging of head (errhines)
and body (emetics, enemas,
laxatives), 8, 10, 11, 12, 16, 22,
49, 52, 56, 76, 77, 78, 86, 95,
98, 100, 108, 109
Thrace, 120, 159, 168
throat, 130, 132
trachea, 119–120, 129–130, 145, 156,
160, 168
veins, see vessels
vessels, 10, 11, 63–66, 69, 73–74, 86,
95, 96, 129–130, 135, 137–140, 155
aorta, 136, 137–138, 155
portal vein, 140–141
splenic artery, 140
vena cava, 136, 137–138, 139, 141
wool, 11, 78, 80
STUDIES IN
ANCIENT MEDICINE
Recent volumes in this series
20. Philip J. van der Eijk (ed.). Ancient Histories of Medicine. Essays in Medical
Doxography and Historiography in Classical Antiquity. 1999.
ISBN 90 04 10555 7
21. Christine F. Salazar. The Treatment of War Wounds in Graeco-Roman Antiquity.
2000. ISBN 90 04 11479 3
22. Philip J. van der Eijk. Diocles of Carystus. A Collection of Fragments with
Translation and Commentary. Volume I: Text and Translation. 2000.
ISBN 90 04 10265 5, ISBN 90 04 12013 0 (Set)
23. Philip J. van der Eijk. Diocles of Carystus. A Collection of Fragments with
Translation and Commentary. Volume II: Commentary. 2001.
ISBN 90 04 12012 2, ISBN 90 04 12013 0 (Set)
24. Manuela Tecusan. The Fragments of the Methodists, Volume One. Methodism
outside Soranus. 2004. ISBN 90 04 12451 9
25. Julie Laskaris. The Art is Long. On the Sacred Disease and the Scientific
Tradition. 2002. ISBN 90 04 12152 8
26. Julius Rocca. Galen on the Brain. Anatomical Knowledge and Physiological
Speculation in the Second Century AD. 2003. ISBN 90 04 12512 4
27. H.F.J. Horstmanshoff & M. Stol (eds.). Magic and Rationality in Ancient Near
Eastern and Graeco-Roman Medicine. 2004. ISBN 90 04 13666 5
28. Mark J. Schiefsky. Hippocrates on Ancient Medicine. Translated with intro-
duction and commentary. 2005. ISBN 90 04 13758 0
29. Peter E. Pormann. The Oriental Tradition of Paul of Aegina’s Pragmateia. 2004.
ISBN 90 04 13757 2
30. Jennifer Clark Kosak. Heroic Measures. Hippocratic Medicine in the Making
of Euripidean Tragedy. 2004. ISBN 90 04 13993 1
31. Philip J. van der Eijk. Hippocrates in Context. Papers read at the XIth Inter-
national Hippocrates Colloquium (University of Newcastle upon Tyne, 27–31
August 2002). 2005. ISBN 90 04 14430 7
32. Marguerite Hirt Raj. Médecins et malades de l’Égypte romaine. Étude socio-
légale de la profession médicale et de ses praticiens du Ier au IVe siècle ap.
J.-C. 2006. ISBN 90 04 14846 9; 978 90 04 14846 8
33. Elizabeth M. Craik. Two Hippocratic Treatises On Sight and On Anatomy.
Edited and Translated with Introduction and Commentary. 2006.
ISBN 90 04 15396 9; 978 90 04 15396 7

TWO HIPPOCRATIC TREATISES ON SIGHT AND ON ANATOMY

STUDIES IN ANCIENT MEDICINE
EDITED BY

JOHN SCARBOROUGH PHILIP J. VAN DER EIJK ANN HANSON NANCY SIRAISI

VOLUME 33

TWO HIPPOCRATIC TREATISES ON SIGHT AND ON ANATOMY Edited and Translated with Introduction and Commentary BY ELIZABETH M. CRAIK LEIDEN • BOSTON 2006 .

electronic. photocopying. without prior written permission from the publisher. All rights reserved.P. Leiden. Fees are subject to change. or transmitted in any form or by any means. IDC Publishers. mechanical. Hotei Publishing. No part of this publication may be reproduced.I. translated. record for this book is available from the Library of Congress. ISSN 0925–1421 ISBN-13: 978-90-04-15396-7 ISBN-10: 90-04-15396-9 © Copyright 2006 by Koninklijke Brill NV. printed in the netherlands . recording or otherwise. stored in a retrieval system. The Netherlands Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill. Suite 910 Danvers MA 01923. USA.This book is printed on acid-free paper. 222 Rosewood Drive. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A C.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Place in the History of Ophthalmology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and the HC: content . . . . . . Section of the Eyeball . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Place in the Hippocratic Corpus: Provenance and Date. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CONTENTS Preface and Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conspectus Siglorum . The Demokritean dimension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and the HC: expression . . . . . . . . . Transmission and Reception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Content and Expression. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3 4 8 15 19 29 31 37 38 49 113 115 115 115 116 part ii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. . . . . . . . . . . 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Head: lateral view . . . . . . . . . . . I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii part i. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Anat. . . . . . . . . . References and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and Translation . 119 119 121 124 129 155 155 157 162 164 168 . . . . Diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . on sight Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V. . . . . . . . . III. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References and Abbreviations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Glossary of Ophthalmological Terms . Title . . . . . . . . . . . . Bibliography . . . . . Text and Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Eye: anterior view . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . on anatomy The Hippocratic Treatise On Anatomy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Commentary . . . Anat. . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 General Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .vi contents Appendix . 169 Index of Authors and Texts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Florence. Work on the treatise On Sight was begun in Kyoto just before retirement in 2002.. awarded by the Leverhulme Trust. Oxford. Modena. Ulc. Duminil.J. 2005). but wish to reiterate thanks to the Wellcome Trust for the award of a research leave fellowship. I need not repeat all the acknowledgements made in note 1 of On Anatomy. and On Anatomy an allusive account of basic human anatomy with evident Demokritean connections. (Paris. 135– 167. Oss. I took up a post at Kyoto University in 1997. which gave temporary relief from a demanding post at the University of St. Cor. edited by P. I have benefited from the comments of participants at several seminars in Japan. perhaps originating in North Africa. are very different in nature and origins. Paris. 8. After a brief return to St. I am most grateful to the Trust for their support. and facilitated a change in research direction. I express . van der Eijk (Leiden. to complete this book. 191–207. Andrews. I am very grateful to Cambridge University Press for permission to republish here with slight alterations in presentation my article ‘The Hippocratic Treatise On Anatomy’ from Classical Quarterly 48 (1998).-P. An Appendix has been added to take account of a new Budé text: M. The original pagination is indicated.PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The two short texts published here. Andrews. 1998). Rome and Venice to collate manuscripts. Hippocrate: CUF t. On Sight is a sketchy surgical manual on eye afflictions. who supported presentation of the work in its very first and very last stages at Kyushu University in spring 2002 and at Keio University in autumn 2005. which enabled me to spend some time in London at the Wellcome Trust Centre for the History of Medicine at UCL and to make brief visits to Cambridge. Andrews an Emeritus Research Fellowship. both transmitted in the Hippocratic Corpus but surely neither by the historical Hippocrates.. especially from those of Professor Noburu Notomi. From September 2003 to September 2005 I held at the University of St. The ‘background’ to On Sight is discussed in my paper ‘The Hippocratic Treatise Peri Opsios’ in Hippocrates in Context. Anat. I hope readers will refer to this for amplification.

viii

preface and acknowledgements

thanks to all the hard-working librarians who have given indispensable aid. I am particularly grateful to two scholars who made time to read and comment on a complete draft: Professor Vivian Nutton and Professor Philip van der Eijk. Professor Nutton saved me from Galenic error and Professor van der Eijk suggested that the work might be published in this series. I owe special thanks also to Dr Thomas Rütten who gave generous help with the manuscript tradition just when I most needed it. Professor Heinrich von Staden provided valuable bibliographical aid. In medical matters, I have been fortunate to be able to call on colleagues in the Bute Medical School, University of St. Andrews: Mr Robin Clark read sections of the commentary at various stages and gave much practical guidance and Dr David Sinclair organized and led a useful seminar on the anatomy of the eye. Above all, Dr Susan Whiten has provided essential information at many points and has very kindly supplied the diagrams, adapted from her book The Flesh and Bones of Anatomy (forthcoming, Elsevier Press). Mr David Spalton, a consultant ophthalmic surgeon in London with a special interest in cataract surgery, communicated his general views of the text. Finally, I wish to thank Dr John Ball of IT services, University of St. Andrews, for adroit rescue from several technological impasses, and to express my gratitude to all at Brill involved in the execution of this complex task.

part i
ON SIGHT

that is iris with pupil (the sense in 1. but the meticulous Foesius preferred ‘de videndi acie’. 8. Ac. attached to Mochlicon’ (linguarum Hippocratis explicatio 19. and was known to Galen as ‘Vessels. It can also mean ‘dream’. ‘eye(s)’ or to the central ‘seeing part’ of the eye. 4. Epid. we might have expected a plural rather than a singular for the title. The translation Organ of Sight conveys the full range of meaning. This range of meanings is paralleled by κ . 11 [6. The term ψις is more often abstract than concrete in the Hippocratic Corpus (as de Arte. with reference to the seeing organ.174 L. while in the latter it may be singular or plural. Hom. 128 K.6 [6.]. Most opt for a title based simply on vision such as. ‘de la vision’. some having τ λ ς τ ν περ ψ ων. In view of the initial plural. it was doubtless adopted because the first words are α ψιες and the word ψις is soon repeated. ‘ear’. the treatise now called Bones—though it begins with the word στ α ‘bones’ and with an enumeration of the bones in the body—is really about the vessels.20 L.). though for this the word κ ρ was available. it is always singular ‘vision’ (the sense in 2 and 8). and this choice of title is ossified in the standard modern abbreviation. Title The titles given to Hippocratic works seem in some cases to be based on later commentators’ superficial impressions of their content. The title περ ψι ς in itself gives little idea of the actual content of the treatise. a particular thing ‘seen’ (Hdt.INTRODUCTION I. Vid. 30. or perhaps pupil alone. Translators and commentators have wrestled with the sense. Loc. but become impossible when a plural is required. 54 etc. and indeed the manuscripts vary in the title given at the end. It is difficult to find a single translation acceptable throughout: ‘vision’ or ‘sight’ can serve for both abstract and concrete senses. 30 [5. ‘de visu’.). ‘sense of hearing’.]). 2 (singular) and 8 (singular)—can be either abstract or concrete in sense. 13. ‘something heard’. cf. 3. The term ψις used three times in the work—in 1 (plural). in 2. but is somewhat cumber- . Similarly.]).302 L. In the former case.

Epidemics 7. on the tenth century ms M (Marcianus 269). Joly 163. through readings communicated by Cobet. Ermerins Praefatio XL–XLI.4 The extant tradition depends entirely. the pervasive corruption lies in the technical nature of the work. Ermerins supplemented Sichel’s critical appa- See Craik. CUF 13. 3 Sichel 152. 168– 171 (1978). Ermerins 3.4 introduction some. 276.2 The treatise is brief and allusive in content. and liable to treat such a short piece as relatively unworthy of attention. 2146). the tradition is uniform and so uniformly corrupt. it lies simply in visual or aural error on the part of scribes. the deep-seated corruption in the text with its single medieval source is intractable. directly or indirectly. In part. Littré 9. in addition. 152–161 (1861). 2003. cf. much used by Littré (Parisinus gr. Montfort. but did not recognise M’s early date. We may contrast the tradition of. Joly. 2000. 279–283 (1864). for instance. Transmission and Reception On Sight occupies a mere four pages of Greek in the modern printed text. Joly concurs that ‘les problèmes … ne comportent pas de solution tranchée’. In the absence of evidence from the separate strand of the tradition represented by V (Vaticanus gr. 1 2 .3 A further problem is that.5 Sichel knew readings of M through information from Daremberg. while there is no shortage of mss containing the work. Sichel ap. liable to make mistakes when faced with difficult and unfamiliar material. with great thoroughness. 4 See Diels. priority and relative importance. 2005. the title is here rendered simply On Sight. 46–50. Sichel laments the ‘état de mutilation tel qu’il est impossible de reconstituer un texte irréprochable’. which deals with procedures naturally unfamiliar to scribes. Sichel collated and recorded the readings of the recentiores. In part. 1905 and 1907.1 II. the text is seriously corrupt. accordingly. especially the Parisian recentiores. Similarly Ermerins knew M only indirectly. Ermerins finds both the corrupt state of the text and its technical content such obstacles to comprehension that he declines to translate large parts of it. 5 But see Jouanna. for ease of reference. twelfth century) and mss descended from V such as C. 95–97 on closeness of M and V. as indeed to scholars.

αλασσ ειδ . I have not thought it worthwhile to record these different versions. 1. 7 and 8 and Laur. Scrutiny of the mss merely reinforces the impression of careless transmission. There is. 7.2. 9. δε ων glossed ρ ων.2. for γ γν νται rather than γ ν νται and for κως rather than πως are not recorded in the critical apparatus. λλ’ ‘but’ to be omitted. Anastassiou. however.3). Several minor mistakes in Joly’s representation of the text of M have been corrected (κα 1. This is unsurprising. then pioneered in his text by van der Linden. 3.3 and ends with the words πανιε ς δ . however.1.3. 1. only before 6 and 8.1. In M. has spacing before 4. On checking Sichel’s apparatus for the recentiores. I have seen almost all mss (see conspectus siglorum). 8 and 9 – R.1. .6 Such variations as preference in M for uncontracted verbal forms. There is an almost total lack of marginalia (even in mss where these abound for other works) and such glosses as do exist are banal in the extreme (in G. while there is not complete unanimity in the recentiores over the existence or placing of these sense divisions there is most general agreement over the start of our chapters 7. σ ι ‘you’ to be omitted. article τ ν to be omitted. It is remarkable that several obvious errors in M go almost universally uncorrected: α τ μαται. or apparent semantic units.1. a general regard for marking new topics: a red initial letter or a small space precedes a separation into ‘chapters’ similar to that adumbrated in notes by Cornarius. which have no interest except as a means of suggesting links among the recentiores. betraying a complete lack of comprehension on the part of scribes: there is a tendency to reduce the text to staccato bursts of short clauses. 212 starts with the words κ τω εν 3. article to be included. 9. 2. but has slight spaces before each of the repeated πειτα ‘then’ conjunctions in 3. At both points. f. the text is particularly problematical and can be understood 6 Cf. μηλησ ω. M has a sizeable space only before 7 init.2). 1980. I find many instances where the punctuation is wrongly recorded.1. For this edition. 4. which are devoid of overall syntactic sense. refined by Iugler and followed in modern editions. as versions of the punctuation vary greatly (especially in relation to headings or quasi introductory material) and are frequently awry. 7. Joly collated M and relied on Sichel for the rest. where scribal inattention is explicable. 3. τε.2.introduction 5 ratus with information from one further ms in the Netherlands.

1 etc. made the obvious correction of μηλησ ω to μιλησ ω. γ ρ συμ ρει. I. clues to the source and nature of corruption are sought in other Hippocratic works. There is no evidence from this treatise that R had access to significant material extraneous to the tradition of MHI. 7 . 9. a hazardous enterprise. they are in turn the basis of the later tradition. precise textual study is of no help whatsoever in retrieving the original lost text of this work. 1998. Both Calvus and Cornarius.1.7 (See further on π η. used translation as a means of explication and interpretation. 4. the general lines of affiliation are clear. rather to recovery of the lost gist expressed in wording which is possible and plausible. It must be stressed that.) Although the precise nature of the relation of the later mss to M and to one another is much debated and there is no agreement on details of classification. (See on 1. esp. In this edition and commentary. 2000. it may be suspected that scribes were more concerned with general fidelity to content than with an exact record.1. where emendations are suggested on this basis.) In the final analysis. 28. 4. source in turn of Z—is corroborated in the case of this work. or intelligent conjecture. Duminil.1. As elsewhere. using the ms W at Rome in 1512. 3. R. 9. H. In defence of the scribe of M—generally known to be faithful and reliable—it may be added that many readings emended by editors are perfectly acceptable in the context of the rough and elliptical Greek of this work. at the same time.1. υσμ ς.6 introduction only with substantial extension and emendation. 4.2. on H. 3. Calvus.1. κ ιλ ης κ αρσις. see esp. of course.1 and recorded the variant. generally conservative and literal. 1. Detail in the critical apparatus is confined to the readings of M. in line with their work on other Hippocratic treatises. Jouanna.1. and in parallel passages of Celsus and Galen. they lay no claim to verbatim restitution of the lost original. This is.3. The consensus view that I had a great influence on the later tradition—for instance being source of F. The only justification is that manifest nonsense is here converted to patent sense fitting its context. The mss H and I are both close to M. σι ς for κρ σι ς. 6.2.1. either through faithful copying or—as has been suggested—because they share a common (lost) source. 2. Earlier editors and translators made distinctive contributions. On M. shares several readings with I. πλ γι ν. That different sources can be seen in R is clear also: R agrees more often with H (and is familiar with the second hand in H) but. source in turn of G. σ υρ ς. 9. see also on the significance of the translation scapulares ‘scapulars’.

1.4. if at times recondite.). which would authenticate its place in the Hippocratic Corpus of antiquity. had access to three mss held in the royal library at Fontainebleau where they were transferred in 1544 and catalogued in 1550. who checked and recorded his notes in the copy at Göttingen. 8 9 10 11 See now the thorough treatment of Montfort. the sources they cite add little to our knowledge and do not mitigate our dependence on M. Nachmanson. relevant to 4. survive.10 This negative view has now been contested with regard to the Galenic gloss τρακτ ν. preface lectori candido. Anastassiou and Irmer. 3. Joly 163.introduction 7 Cornarius’ annotations. Therapeutics. 3 and 4). crit. between Head Wounds preceding and Fractures with Articulations following.9 Foesius printed a text in line with the current vulgate. 7 and 9). The philological value of these early printed texts lies primarily in the access of scholars then to a wider range of manuscript sources than we now possess (see app. for τ α. 4. he had also seen the Vatican ms now known as R. and for υσμ ς 6. Omont. In practice.8 Foesius. All contributors were practising doctors who had personal experience of bloodletting and cupping—and of such activities before Harvey’s work of 1628 changed our perception of the blood vessels and their course in the body. . character (see on 2. Both fall in the appropriate position in Erotian’s list: in the third category. Van der Linden followed Foesius but not slavishly. but permitted himself deviations from this in translation and comment. placed with the lost work On Wounds and Missiles. comprising both observations and corrections made in his personal copy of the Aldine text of 1526. Foesius. It has commonly been asserted that there is no ancient reference to On Sight. XIX. relevant to 6 and possibly also λ relevant to 4.1. see especially on 3. however.4). see also for δια αν σι 2 and 5. 2003. 1997. 1917. 3. he was familiar with Ermerins’ ms Q. That many words glossed by Galen are present in the treatise confirms that the vocabulary has a Hippocratic. see on 4 and 7. The medical value of these early printed texts is considerable. especially for such surgical works as On Sight. thanks to an influential patron.1.11 To this can certainly be added Erotian’s gloss λ δα. 1888. Hesychios too contains much of relevance to the work (see on 2. as was realised by Sichel. from this it is possible to see the use Cornarius made of further ms sources (as ρυ ρ for ρυ ρα .1. 6.

On Sight is a manual of surgery. 2. 4. some gentle and others drastic. is used for pupil. iris or cornea and there is no reference to the nature or number of μ νιγγες ‘membranes’ (coats or tunics) of the eye. weeping sores and their complication ectropion (2).1. trephination of the skull (8). 2. Where such elements as vocabulary. this contrasts with reference to three membranes in . apart from the repeated ψις already noted. 7. cutting and/or scraping of the eyelid (5). letting blood by phlebotomy or cupping (3. applying ointments and poultices (6. trachoma and its effects (4). our author displays no awareness of the complexity of the eye’s anatomy. to a lesser extent. papilloma or chalazion (5). Many associations in content can be explained simply by access to a common pool of knowledge. or grammatical and syntactical features. Language may be somewhat more reliable. 9). cutting the scalp (4. content is not a reliable indicator.1. We might expect this knowledge to be expressed in technical language. recurrent seasonal allergy or conjunctivitis (9). rather. but here the conditions can be more or less plausibly identified as follows: cataract (1). or use and frequency of particles and pronouns are shared—especially where these are distinctive or non-standard—they may be pointers to a common tradition. and to place in the wider context of the Hippocratic Corpus and other writings. However. for drugs to be applied in different ocular affections or diseases or. apart from ψις. 9). though here too caution in interpretation is imperative. ‘night vision’ (7). are boldly indicated. No word. 7.2). a conjunction of similar content and similar language is required. to treat different sets of ocular symptoms. Retrospective diagnosis of Hippocratic cases is always hazardous. The first requirement of a surgeon is a secure knowledge of the anatomy of the parts on which he operates. purging the head and/or the body generally (1. The procedures are: cautery of the vessels (1. Content and Expression Short works—we may compare the still shorter On Anatomy and the somewhat longer Dentition—are peculiarly difficult to interpret. To argue that different works of the Corpus belong together. giving instructions for surgical procedures to be followed and. from which items might be taken and reworked.8 introduction III. All these procedures. 3) or of the eyelid (4). Few technical terms are used. but care and caution are likewise enjoined. or there is a high concentration of coincident elements. Unless it is unusually esoteric. 9).

12 There is frequent reference to the λ αρ ν ‘eyelid’ (2. in general usage applied indiscriminately to eye trouble. and here his knowledge seems more extensive. or in order to gain access to the skull for trephination (4. Apart from bregma. our doctor was evidently familiar with the general anatomy of the head. The absence of such terms for sight impairment as μα ρωσις (appropriate to 1) and μ λυ12 13 See Craik. and νδ εν. though it is still not technical in expression. 8). 105. and that is unclear (3. it need not suggest ignorance of these. 1. with names for bodily parts.1). .1. and be able to trace the location of the sutures and of the inion. like his anatomy. 6 bis). 1). The λ ες ‘vessels’ are important to his practices (1. Hanson. 2). 99. no anatomical terms are used for parts of the head. 4. 4.1). rather vague terms are used for regions of the head: κ ρυ ‘top’ or ‘vertex’ is not a well-defined anatomical term.2. Cf. The rather vague στε νη ‘circle’. The paucity of anatomical terminology may indicate simply that the surgeon was not concerned. 2. 3. occipital protuberance. either in order to release blood. 1998. 3 ter. Even in Head Wounds. 8). far less inability to operate safely and effectively. is almost devoid of technical terminology and the lack of nosological specification is striking.introduction 9 Places in Man. The rather crude term δια ε ρεσ αι ‘be destroyed’ describes loss of sight (1. and ‘brows’ are somewhat vague also. 5 bis.1 bis. to this we may add a case designation ‘sufferer from night blindness’ (7). or not here concerned. 2. cf.1.13 Use of the term πισ εν ‘behind’ to indicate posterior orientation in the body seems to show a nascent striving for precision (3. πρ σ εν. knowing where to cut and how to trephine: he would know exactly where the bone of the skull was thickest and exactly where the flesh of the scalp was thinnest. he would have some idea of the course of the main blood vessels. He cuts into the ρ γμα ‘bregma’ or the vertex in two different procedures. but there is only one indication of particular vessels and their location. 8). The author operates not only on the eyelids but also on the head more generally.1. Despite the disconcerting absence of anatomical nomenclature. 1999. The skull is simply στ ν ‘the bone’ (3. ‘ring’ is used for the eyeball and the rather general νδρ ς ‘cartilage’ or σ ρ ‘flesh’ for the inside of the eyelid (4.1. The only abstract noun for a disease is ‘ophthalmia’ (9). 9. The author’s pathology.1. and the words for ‘forehead’. but no word except ρ ‘hair’ for eyelash (5).

is affected (8). it may be simply that the author is not concerned with nomenclature and that the modern quest for nomenclature and definitions is bound to be of limited success. The writer seems familiar with a wide range of problems. It is apparent that the author believes that an excess of matter in the head flows down through the vessels. is affected (2) and problems where the eyesight. purulent etc. or the scalp. If the author has any knowledge of terms for the diseases here described. 8) and ρ ‘ichor’ fluid with a watery or bloody appearance (4. The fluids mentioned. from the area under the skull. apart from blood. and deep lower flux. from the area above the skull. conjunctivitis—perhaps the most common of all eye diseases—may be classified as catarrhal. and that such matter concentrated at the eyes is the cause of the most common eye disorders. but not apparently the eye. even if he does not apply names to them. As to the actual effect. it must be supposed that he cured some of the people at least some of the time. is remarkable. postulating two different types of flux from two different parts of the head to two different locations in the body (here. it is evident from his practices—purging the head and body. the physician considers two broad categories: problems where the eye. for example. many eye conditions display similar symptoms. It is evident too that he subscribes to a refinement of this. but not the eyesight. cauterising the vessels—that he subscribes to this common theory: that flux of peccant matter (usually viewed as phlegm) from the head is the major cause of disease in general. This may be a merit: in practice. The author is no more concerned to expound his views on physiology than on anatomy and pathology. Diagnosis is by appearance (1) or by the patient’s report of discomfort (6) or of loss of vision (8). or the brain. and the absence of any reference to treatment of eye injuries. We cannot assume that names were unknown or unavailable. . prognosis is more important than diagnosis. In this practical work. two different regions of the eye): superficial upper flux.10 introduction ωπ α (appropriate to 8) common even in non-medical authors. are δρωψ ‘moisture’ (removed on trephination. There is some awareness of pulsation in the vessels (3). or take many forms. However.1). and that this noxious flux can be arrested by cautery or venesection. he differentiates between sudden and gradual loss of sight (1) and between child and adult patients (2). and trachoma has many complications. including trichiasis and entropion. In practice. as his practice would depend on his establishing a reputation and securing the respect of physicians and the trust of patients. he does not display it. This was the desired effect.

2) is one with a regular culinary nuance. to burn off excess tissues. in wet cautery. to lance abscesses and.1) apparently with the intent of actually breaking the wall of the vessel—surely vein. or to mop up blood (but see further on 3. to control the severity of the heat. physiology or pathology. In dry cautery.3). the instrument is used simply to apply gentle warmth to the body. applied (3. then. It may be that the doctor simply requisitioned items. the instrument is placed across them (διακα ειν ‘burn over’. possibly in an attempt to mitigate the pain. like cupping. from the patient’s kitchen. cf. Celsus too viewed these as alternative ways to eliminate noxious matter from the vessels. the cupping instrument is applied to the surface of the skin and left there. lit.1). treatment of the eyelids. not artery—or even severing it. 4. the simile conveys a homely atmosphere.2).3) apparently with a view to changing the consistency or the movement of their contents. but about surgery and therapy with especial emphasis on cautery. commonly but not always to the blood vessels. such as olive oil (3. 3.2) or ingested (7). In both wet and dry procedures. while in wet cupping the skin is broken or scarified in order to remove blood or noxious matter from a vessel or elsewhere.3 quater. with the aim of drawing out noxious stuff from the unbroken skin by suction. garlic (7) and honey. to stop flow by creating a barrier. far less branding and scarring. in dry cupping. The practices of cutting and cautery are often allied. the verb used of thoroughly heated cauterising instruments ‘well-roasted’ (3. as in On Sight.introduction 11 The text. sponges might inserted between the surgeon’s instrument and the patient’s skin ( γκατακα ειν ‘burn in and down’). ‘burn’. 3. a culinary paste (6). In preparation. might be dry (a less invasive treatment involving no break in the skin and no bleeding) or wet. Sponges and fine wool are also part of his stock-in-trade (3. such as sponges. it is simply ‘heat. Even when the instrument is used to address the vessels. the verb κα ειν. is not about anatomy. using a cauterising instrument’. ‘cauterise’ does not necessarily or always involve extreme heat. as alternative or successive ways to address a problem: to drain or burn out an excess of fluid. It would have the additional unappreciated benefit of combating infection. to eliminate noxious bodily moisture. Cautery. Cautery was commonly used to arrest haemorrhage. an ointment must be ‘in consistency like myssotos’. reducing it by incision or by application of heat. Similarly. med. Such improvisation is commended . Thus. Many elements in the doctor’s pharmacopoea are everyday items from the domestic store cupboard. it may just be placed alongside (παρακα ειν ‘burn beside’. Alternatively. Similarly. 4.

However. perennially favoured to treat certain ulcerative eye conditions.12 introduction in Articulations (Artic. A means of heating these would also be required. different instruments for cautery either of metal (3.1. scalpels would be required in order to let blood (3. specified without indication of quantities or proportions.1). 4. and a sawing instrument would be needed for trephination (8). Arum root. slightly different terminology in 5). evidently copper sulphate. The preparation of an eye ointment detailed (6) demands a ‘grindstone’ (or perhaps rather a pestle and mortar). 2.1) or of wood (4. and what drug will be effective to stop a flow of blood ( ναιμ ς. 9.2). 15 etc. ‘driver’ is once indicated for drastic purging (7).2). with such dedicated instruments as a λε αρ υστ ν ‘raspatory to treat the eyelids’ and πτερυγ τ μ ν ‘knife to excise a pterygium’ and many others (Paul 3. height and light source being important considerations. such as trachoma: ν ς αλκ ‘flower of copper’ (4.1) and to cut into the scalp (4. exceptionally. 1). When poultices are indicated. The eye surgery seen in Paul of Aigina is described in very different terms. The most commonly named specific is a derivative of copper. 1. A second ingredient in an eye salve. these are sometimes required to be delicate (‘not thick’. 7 [4. there is evidence too of specialist supplies. ‘continue to treat as appro- . 2) and another special blade is needed to ‘thin’ them (4. to preserve it for use throughout the year (6). such as ‘astringent’ (δριμ ς.1.2).1) would ideally be one regularly used by the doctor performing the operation and appropriately positioned. A scraping instrument or rasp. 9. 8). The ‘couch’ where the patient is positioned in preparation for surgery (3.]). elaterion lit. 23. is unripe grape juice. a strainer. It is assumed too that he will know which applications will have a particular effect. The absence of technical terms for instruments is as marked as the absence of anatomical and other medical terminology noted above. or material of some unspecified sort is needed to scrape the lids (2. 6. This is a seasonal item but there may have been procedures (?ancillary to wine manufacture). and a special container of red copper. 9.1) and required by implication elsewhere (7). Cupping vessels are explicitly mentioned once (9. 2. 7.e.2. used in cautery. but might be rather a piece of ordinary household furniture which came to hand. i. Finally.2). 6.1) are used. 4.86 L. their composition is left to the doctor’s discretion (9).1. The shorthand ‘give the further treatment’. would be more readily stored (3. 4.) The drugs to be used for the most routine treatments are not specified: it is taken for granted that the doctor will know how to purge the head by nasal insertions and the body by laxatives (1.

3.1) and poultices are helpful in certain specified circumstances (9.3). ητρε ειν. The clinical approach throughout is pragmatic. Instructions are confident. the patient’s report of symptoms may condition the choice of treatment deemed appropriate (presence or absence of pain. 7). and with or without apparent cause. Where injunctions are given for procedures to be followed. 6). ς μ λιστα ‘as much as possible’ in pressure for cupping.1. indicating successive . A favoured syntactical structure is a chain of loosely linked participles. The instructions given are often expressed in a peremptory and authoritative fashion. and know what follow-up procedures are appropriate (4. 3. 9).1. 5) presupposes practical experience. 2 quarter.1). 5.2). ‘you should pour’ (2. 6.1. hence repetition of the verb συμ ρει ‘it is beneficial’ (1. 2). The doctor’s concern is with what will or will not ‘work’. 3. Although the doctor must act decisively ( σ υρ ς ‘strongly’ in cautery. 5. thus the processes of vascular healing after cautery and of lid repair and regrowth after scraping seem to be monitored (3. though this is somewhat subjective in character (comments on different colours of the seeing part of the eye. 4. 9. 9). 8 and ησις. 5.1 bis. often expressed in terms of what ‘should’ be done ( ρ ‘one should’ 1. Long-term treatment seems to be envisaged. 7) he αλμ σκεψ μεν ς must also act with due care and caution (α τ τ ‘considering the actual eyes’.1.2 bis. 8). He must recognise the signs which indicate that it is time to stop scraping the lids (4. jussive infinitives with nominative participles are particularly common (2. 2. very gently’. ‘when you cauterise’. The doctor treats (π ιε ν. 4. τ ν σ ρκα κ σην ε μαρ στατα δ νη ‘the flesh … as much as you can.1. Some store is laid on seasonal factors (in ophthalmia. 5) and the patient is on the receiving end of treatment (π σ ειν. 3.3 bis. 3 bis). 1).1 and 2 repeatedly.1). υλασσ μεν ς ‘with care’. ‘when you scrape’. 2. 3. 3.1). 4. 4. that is of headache. 1.introduction 13 priate’ ( ητρε ειν τ λ ιπ . 2. also σ αι. in the second person: ‘you could not aid’. 2). συ δια ερμα νειν ‘heat gently’. 1). There is much room for discretion: letting blood helps in some cases of ophthalmia (9. 4.1. the doctor sets store by ‘signs’ (change in nature of discharge. 4. It is important to recognise cases where treatment would be useless ( κ ν ελ ης π ιων δ ν ‘you could not help by any action at all’. The patient’s diet may be restricted and his environment monitored (in ophthalmia. 1.2). the address is sometimes direct. There is some evidence also of careful interrogation of the patient (comments on whether the onset of the affection has been sudden or gradual. There is some evidence of observation.3. 9). 3.1.

once of an aide (3. the grammatical forms are rough.14 The vocabulary is functional. these are semantically significant.1). some major transitions in thought are unmarked (3 init. 3. where used. Overall. These features are typical of early Greek prose writing. 204–205. elliptical. surgical instructions sitting incongruously alongside general comments and advice: the presence of such disparate material is particularly marked in 3 and 9. and there may be a trace of Doric idiom (neuter plural noun with verb in plural. 2). The extent and nature of textual corruption is consonant with this possibility: there are lacunae even in the text as transmitted (especially in 3. 2005. a much larger work. Jussive subjunctives too are used: once of the practitioner (6). possibly an excerpt from. functional and unidiomatic to the point of solecism. but probably not between 2 and 3. 7 and 9. conveying precise surgical nuances (διακα ειν and γκατακα ειν discussed above). the work is a series of disconnected jottings. ργ ν 4. allusive. Although the sporadic use of headings or quasi-introductory phrases (the basis of the modern division into ‘chapters’) may be vestigial evidence of a degree of organisation. and the use of τ ια τη ‘such’ (sc. However one salient feature is a tendency to employ compound verbs. with asyndeton. especially repetition of the demonstrative pronoun (1. Paratactic sentence structures predominate. Within several chapters the content is uneven.4). The extreme brevity of the surviving text and the fact that it considers relatively few eye diseases add to the impression that we are dealing with a lacunose piece. with particular oddities in the use of prepositions. Verbal expressions ‘it is beneficial’ and ‘it is expedient’ are much used also (συμ ρει and ρ discussed above. cf.). used in conjunction with jussive infinitives. Subordinate clauses. 9). 14 . 6.1) and once of the patient (7. There is much use of the adverb πειτα ‘then’ to indicate clearly successive stages in procedures to be followed. or partial summary of. are not well integrated but appended in a loose agglomeration (2). such as before) indicates loss of context. pace Sichel and others). The end is similarly abrupt and the editorial thesis of Joly and others that the text is a mere disjointed fragment is plausible. In some instances. The syntax is primitive and inelegant. and telegraphic in expression.14 introduction steps in treatment or preparations for treatment. There is a marked tendency to careless or otiose repetition. in others See Craik. The work begins abruptly. In addition.

our treatise seems to mirror the attitudes of one giving.) It remains likely that there was direct interaction See Nutton. suggests the format of notes intended to accompany a set of lectures or demonstrations.introduction 15 the compound is used where the simple verb would suffice (δια λ πω. suggests a target audience of trainee physicians. the work we have may have originated as a relatively unimportant adjunct to the manual business. Surgery above all must be taught by demonstration and participation. not receiving. 61–66. 2004. instruction: the magisterial. such repetition is inevitable. and in fragments of the Presocratics. where it was impossible to establish prior claim by definitive publication. if any. and where medical scientists worked in collaborative or combative groups. δια ρ ω. see especially on 1. and that few. διασημα νω. Place in the Hippocratic Corpus. Even modern textbooks can be shown to parrot one another. receiving instruction from an experienced practitioner. (For Vid. Ac. The content. The form. 2 and 9. are original in an accepted literary sense: the words ‘redactor’ rather than ‘author’ and ‘compile’ rather than ‘compose’ are appropriate. it is possible to parallel much of the content of the Hippocratic Corpus in fragments of many medical authors. van der Eijk. as well as in the Aristotelian Corpus. IV. It may be said that all the Hippocratic works are mixed and derivative to some degree. Provenance and Date Much medical writing is essentially derivative and repetitive in character. with its strongly didactic tone. 15 . δια ωρ ω). While such notes may be made and kept by pupils as well as teachers. including those whose views are summarised in the papyrus known as Anonymus Londinensis. authoritative and abrupt expression seems to be directed at a learner. The integrity of the Hippocratic canon has been increasingly questioned. in conjunction with loosely juxtaposed clauses and truncated elliptical expression. to a point where it has been suggested that the very concept of a Corpus is flawed:15 while individual Hippocratic writings have much in common and can be regarded as groups or clusters. with its stress on practical instruction and disregard of matters not germane to that immediate concern. In antiquity. δια ερμα νω. especially where factual material is presented. forthcoming. and the Aristotelian Problemata. where the notion of plagiarism was lacking.

Treatment of the eyelids as prescribed in On Sight is by similar methods.]. In both Places in Man and .1. Ac. 4 [6. Internal Affections and Affections.302 L.]). that is. 7. purging the body by enemas and laxatives (13. 3). for instance. notably in Diseases 2. as is venesection or cupping. by surgical cutting and burning. also with the surgical procedures in the gynaecological and nosological treatises—though none of these works is so uncompromisingly surgical in content or so aggressively peremptory in expression as On Sight. purging the head (1. in different guises. according to type of symptoms. detailed instructions are given as to how cautery of the vessels should be performed. in other works which are concerned with symptoms and therapy of diseases stemming from the head. 2. there is no doubt that in both content (on eye flux and on cautery) and expression (style.300 L. in language similar to that of Glands. in an extreme case.7 [6. 40 [6. and notably where cautery is the preferred practice.]). There is also cautery almost up to the bone of the skull (3. These instructions are given in similar terminology and with a similar emphasis in content (Loc.2. The extreme brevity and rugged idiom of On Sight compound the difficulties of making such comparisons. 9.1. The author of Places in Man seems to have a particular interest in the eye: different kinds of ocular flux are classified at length and treatments are specified: eye salves (13. Similarly. The same theory can be seen.]).1–4) and incising the scalp (4. the term τρακτ ς for a cauterising instrument occurs only in On Sight and in Internal Affections.298. It is immediately evident that there are general similarities in On Sight with the practices and so with the expression and vocabulary of such surgical works as Articulations and Sores.]). In both works too. syntax and grammar) On Sight particularly resembles Places in Man. 2 [6. and by ointments or lotions. In both works. in On Sight. Vid. cautery of the vessels in the temples (13. 3. purging the head by errhines (13.1.1–2). cautery of the vessels (1.5 [6. 8).1. Unsurprisingly. is explicitly presented in Places in Man and implicitly present in On Sight (especially in 9. purging the body (7. and.298. The theory of flux from the head. 9. trephining is practised.16 introduction between some of the authors represented in the Hippocratic Corpus and the quest for affinities remains meaningful. 300 L.2.300 L.330 L. 3). 9. 2.1).1. However.1). Hom. underlying the therapy advocated for eye conditions.1. a treatise close in details of its theoretical stance to Places in Man). making incisions in the scalp to the bone (13. the treatments are: eye salves (6.]). 300 L. 4 [6. there are particular resemblances with works featuring cautery.2.

]) sometimes ta pharmaka (Aff. 240. multiple cuts in the scalp. 250 L. 14 [8. while if several are required. 48 L. pervasively evident in Airs. usually treatment for skull fracture but also to release unwanted moisture.) There are marked affinities also with Prorrhetic 2 (18–20 [9. he further. Affections is unusual in referring to a work on drugs sometimes called pharmakitis (Aff. cf.312 L. Waters and Places and seen intermittently in Epidemics and Aphorisms features in the treatment of ophthalmia at the end of On Sight. briefly: a single cut in order to saw or pierce the bone. Diseases of Women 1. in Koan Prognoses. the different modes of allusion seem to suggest a fluid body of material. 234.44. 570 L.]. The procedures of the treatise can be paralleled in various works: Hippocratic surgeons cut different parts of the head for different supposed conditions.]). 200 L. 240 L. a list of diseases not found before puberty includes κατ ρρ υς νωτια ς ‘flux in the back’ (Coac. 502 [5. Other passing or incidental similarities can be identified: belief in the importance of the seasons in the aetiology of disease. However. (It is usually supposed that a particular treatise is intended. to release excessive or noxious matter. Regimen in Acute Diseases. Affections. cautery of the neck is prescribed (Int.700 L. Hom. in different ways and with different follow-up procedures.212.564. 46. 5. 4. 23. the reader being enjoined to refer to his files on drugs. incision should be slow indicate a general interest in such surgery (Medic. The recommendations in Physician that if only one cut is required. the ‘marrow’ becomes filled with blood (or the hollow vessels filled with bile and phlegm) and in the other. while treating diseases of the belly.]).212 L. a single cut. 18. usually in the forehead or the bregma to release excessive or noxious matter. 12. 28. and as in Greek idiom the definite article is frequently used in place of a possessive pronoun. the ‘marrow’ becomes dry. 13 [7.214 L.]).].]). while discussing head diseases.introduction 17 Glands: it is the ‘marrow’ which carries noxious flux to lower parts of the body (Gland. 29 [6. 228.]). Loc. states his intention to write separately on diseases of the eye (Aff. it may be that the meaning is ‘your’— rather than ‘the’—recipe book. with blockage in the ‘small vessels’ from the brain—here. states his intention to . The main expedients are. 5 [9. with different purposes. 11. Similarly. There is a further nexus of associations with treatises which detail ingredients and preparation of recipe cures. two types of phthisis are related to abnormal functioning of the ‘marrow’: in one. 21 [6. 40 [6. The author of Affections. 5 [6.192. theoretical prognosis for eye conditions) and with certain passages of Epidemics (practical treatment of eye conditions).]) and in Internal Affections.224. incision should be swift. 15.

22. but cautery may more properly be regarded as an ancient practice. n. the severely practical tone of On Sight militates against direct comparison with these highly theoretical and philosophical writers.244 L. 16 2005. 2002. it is unlikely that this bears any relation to the activiSee Rodriguez Alfageme. and inevitably On Sight is a contender for the work supposedly projected on the eye. and the question of interrelated authorship between major and minor works resembles that between Articulations and Glands. 3. Although On Sight has some common content with Affections. chose to be versatile in their written output also. it may be suggested that On Sight has a similar date and provenance. 1993 on use of particles in Aff. of phthisis and of gynaecological ailments (Aff. although thinkers with an interest in the workings of the eye and doctors with an interest in diseases of the eye might well have found their activities complementary. Although Alkmaion was said to have dissected the eye. It is very likely that Hippocratic authors. 17 18 19 . Glands. traditionally associated with the name of Euryphon and regarded as a Knidian practice. especially the stress on cautery. esp. also Craik. It may then be conjectured that the author had affiliations with the west Greek thinkers Alkmaion of Kroton and Empedokles of Akragas. originating in Italy or in Sicily. However.18 It has been argued.]). there has been speculation on common authorship. 1998. Thivel. parts of Epidemics and some of the gynaecological works. 1981. But establishing common authorship—as opposed simply to common influence and interaction—is an elusive and perhaps ultimately impossible goal.18 introduction write on cases of suppuration. The abrupt manner is reminiscent of the aphoristic works. persisting in pockets everywhere.19 In view of the similarities noted. both known to have taken a particular interest in the eye. who had to be versatile in their clinical practice. Ac. 33. on the basis of language.16 The range of works proposed by the author of Affections resembles the range proposed by the author of Articulations.. Joly 164. especially of the unpolished Koan Prognoses and there are some similarities in vocabulary also with this collection. 28–29.17 The treatise is dated to the end of the fifth or beginning of the fourth century by Joly. Fractures. 288. also 2005. Inevitably. Craik. that Places in Man is an early work. 281–282. Articulations. and Vid. 33 [6. See Craik. on the basis of its supposed ‘Knidian’ content. common expression suggests rather a grouping with Places in Man.

a disease given much attention in On Sight. see Hirschberg. 1989. and thinks primarily in terms of ocular flux. cutting into the bregma. suggest that the first distinction should be between gradual and sudden loss of sight. despite awareness of the huge advances in ocular anatomy and physiology initiated by Herophilos and developed by Demosthenes Philalethes. papyri confirm an earlier specialist interest in ophthalmology. where he distinguished four membranes.23 But still. Place in the History of Ophthalmology Modern works. 570–576. the ancient practitioner uses a more crude yardstick. increasing anatomical knowledge is evident and well documented. see Craik. See von Staden.22 In the Hellenistic period great advances were made by Herophilos and Erasistratos: Herophilos had a particular interest in vision and the connections between eye and brain. and that each of these subdivisions should then be classified further on an anatomical basis. Unable to examine the inside of the eye and unaware of its full complexity. For general discussion. 2005. Libyan Kyrene was a prominent medical centre. And in ophthalmic pathology. topics are generally grouped together with reference to the part affected. has a peculiar association with Egypt. . Both Galen and Celsus. working posteriorly from cornea to retina to choroid and optic nerves.20 Another possible source for the work is north Africa: there is good fifth century evidence that ‘Egypt’ produced the best ophthalmologists. Trachoma. the dissection was doubtless of an animal (just as Demokritos from Thracian Abdera was said to have dissected animals. subscribe to the same general scheme of beliefs 20 21 22 23 Lloyd. For detailed argument.introduction 19 ties of our doctor: even if true. 1901. In the development of ophthalmology in antiquity. also in the structure of the eye. If the piece is based on the work of someone whose first language was not Greek and who was not entirely at home with the idiom. the theory of flux and therapy based on it continued to survive and pervade ancient ophthalmology centuries later.21 V. aimed to assist the hard-pressed family doctor in diagnosis of ocular problems. and despite practical advances in surgical techniques. the vagaries in expression are more explicable. 1975. with an interest in sense perception). 1899 and Magnus.

]). 744a8 and elsewhere).]. n. 2. 2.46 L. in this classification—though not in discussion of theory or description of treatment—the anatomical advances of the great Alexandrians are apparent. 54.]). 2 [5. cf. including channels linking the brain. Hom.]. while Galen tells us 24 On Aristotle.604 L.. 1). 2. though expressed in more sophisticated language. that the sight was affected if the ducts became blocked or flooded or conveyed peccant moisture to the diseased eye. see von Staden.]). that optical wellbeing depended on the proper functioning of the ducts. These theories are allied with the common general theory of a κατ ρρ υς ‘downward flux’ from the head to various parts of the body through various channels. 12 [9. and certainly it came to be envisaged that pneuma ‘breath’ was conveyed from brain to eye (as already supposed. Formulations in Galenic texts.182 L.126 L. 267. GA 5. ear. Anon. belong fundamentally to the same perception as that prevailing in the Hippocratic era. 767–777 K. Carn.20 introduction as their Hippocratic predecessors.]. 25) and similar concepts of psychophysiology can be seen not only in the Hippocratic Corpus (Loc. 280 L. Thus. 2001. Sacr. which conveyed pure moisture to the healthy eye.]). . Aph.276. and nose in Dexippos.280 L. to the lower body (Epid. significance. 3. Hom. via the cerebral or spinal fluid.374 L. Arist. 17 [8.]) and in related medical authors (eye. de sens. Effects on the eye are described both in the Hippocratic Corpus (eye and lungs.) Already Alkmaion put forward theories of sense perception based on the concept of ‘ducts’ leading from brain to eye (DK 24 A 5 = Thphr. see van der Eijk II.2 [6. can be seen pervasively in Greek medical texts of all eras. The related theories of physiology. 1989.24 Both the supposed route and the postulated function of these ‘ducts’ were variously understood. and pathology. 4. 12 [4. Oss. the author of Places in Man states that λ ια ‘little vessels’ from the brain nourish the eye with pure moisture but π σ ννυσι τ ς ψιας ‘extinguish the organs of sight’ if they happen to dry up (Loc. 157. but also in the works of Aristotle (GA B 6. (A rare attempt to classify eye troubles with reference to the parts affected survives in the pseudo-Galenic introductio seu medicus 14. But the theory of ducts or channels from the head has a much wider and simpler. XII. 10 [2. more material. eye and joints in Diokles fr. 137. 1. night blindness caused by ‘moisture and excess’. on Diokles. Aer. Certainly there was progress towards understanding of the location and importance of the optic nerve. Lond. 7 [6. Morb.2 [6.490 L. 22–26.3.

Adams I 1844.). 1994. See Marganne.26 Paul of Aigina describes attempts to dissipate or evacuate peccant matter by applying a cupping instrument to the back of the head. 8. by applying leeches to the temples and by poultices. between membrane and bone—ibid. below bone.]. 782 K.e. who describes the cause of eye ailments as an acrid defluxion and makes a clear distinction between types situated above or below the skull. other Hippocratic works and the Aristotelian Problemata (cautery of the vessels in the temples. Diseases 2 and Places in Man. the same theories with the same rationale persist. on various destinations of a defluxion the pseudo-Galenic introductio seu medicus 14.114 L. the cause is a νε ρ ν ‘a nerve’ or ‘a duct’ from the brain swelling. and on the different effects of moisture in different parts of the head—below skin.. cf. Further.25 Surgical procedures too remain constant over the centuries.introduction 21 that when. Galen—or contemporaries whose work has found its way into the Galenic corpus—favoured non-invasive procedures in treating the eye. Galen interprets through extensive paraphrase but still writes of ‘flux carried down from the head’ and gives its aetiology as πλ ς ‘excess’ or some kind of λεγμ ν ‘inflammation’ or ‘phlegmatic content’ in the brain. πυκν ντες τ ς τ ν γρ ν π ρ υς ‘thickening up—i. 25 26 27 28 See Adams I 1844. 1–14. 420–421. it happens that π λεσ αι τ ν πτικ ν α σ ησιν ‘the sense of sight is lost’. even in Paul of Aigina. 2 [2. rather than for direct influence of the earlier texts. reducing the width of—the channels of the fluids’ and scarification of the scalp) are paralleled in evidence from papyri for excising the temples and other areas of the scalp. Commenting on the Hippocratic Prognostic (Prog. . 6. damaged or blocked by a flux of moist matter (de locis affectis. 9) or have indirect corroborative relevance to it (see on 4. 14. esp. 411–412. in conjunction with such Hippocratic writers as the authors of Prorrhetic 2. The operations performed in On Sight.28 In general. 218 K. though it seems likely that Celsus drew directly at least on Prorrhetic 2. and especially 7). This is evidence for the long currency and inherent conservatism of the physiological theories and surgical procedures concerned. 742 K. 248.27 Galen and Celsus. See Pardon. 2005. by scarification. 3. III 1847. provide direct aid to understanding the abbreviated and allusive content of On Sight (see on 1. in spite of no apparent disease affecting the eye. perpetuated by Oreibasios and others. an account of ‘signs’ to be detected in the eyes of patients).

vapour baths. 1968. Künzl. purging (Aph. he lauded practitioners who cured by drugs alone.])—and regards the physician’s role as merely to aid nature (cf. in a gynaecological context. Wujastyk. but betrays several historical layers and different hands. glaucoma. on the find of 1975 see Feugère.31 The ophthalmologists of ancient Egypt (known from Ebers papyrus.632 L. c. 1985 and Jackson. trachoma. Like the surgeon of our treatise. 220 [5. 14. Susruta favoured the use of general purgatives before starting specific ocular treatment. recurrent conjunctivitis. the view that spontaneous diarrhoea gives relief in ophthalmia. use of copper sulphate for trachoma. dislodging the lens of the eye. Coac. 2249. not only growths such as pterygion and chalazion but also serious eye diseases such as cataract and trachoma (de optimo medico cognoscendo. Rocca. According to a later (Arabic) version. 1.570 L. baths. He approves the simple Hippocratic recommendations of the aphoristic texts—neat wine. In Kahun 1. 10.]). this composition has its origins several centuries BC. 31 [4. cautery in the temporal region. 2). CMG Suppl. n. including knowledge of how to couch cataracts. In Ebers 351. 2003.30 Most of the conditions addressed (though not by name) in On Sight are of central and perennial importance in the history of ophthalmology: cataract. 31 See Biyadhar. night blindness. especially from Roman Gaul.). Weisser. The works show formidable clinical skill. prescription of (cooked) goat or sheep liver eaten with honey for night blindness and prescription of unguents mixed in a copper vessel. Dolffus. 341 K. advice given by both is to avoid smoke. phlebotomy. 1996. to whom is attributed a series of works in classical Sanskrit. Archaeological finds of surgical kits. 29 30 . 1939.29 Celsus is much more interventionist. fire and bright lights.22 introduction Thus his remedy for accumulated rheum is simple: the problem is to be removed by a soft sponge with warm water (de remediis parabilibus. rather than by excision. Trepanation was known but rarely practised. a meal of ‘fresh’ (possibly raw) liver is prescribed for a patient suffering loss of vision and neck pain. 1500 BC) knew a similar range of diseases and practised some of the same responses. 63–64. 2003. All of these conditions were addressed by ‘Susruta’. 2. 266. Orientale 4. according to one modern ophthalmologist—writing before a further spectacular find near Lyon—these ‘could almost still be used’. 1947. 6. confirm the evidence of Celsus for the practice of eye surgery. venesection. treatments used by both include scarification.

33 Marganne. 1979. 1984. 2005. not of professional surgeons. 1996. 1–19. see Savage-Smith. see Fischer. on the designation ‘cataract’. they were frequently spoken of together. Failure in skill and purulent infection were long hazards.38 The condition became prevalent in England in the early nineteenth century. 1996.33 Paul of Aigina regarded cataract as sometimes curable. together with senile macular lesions and myopic chorioretinal atrophy. 38 For a general survey. Nunn. 2000. Celsus had attempted surgery for cataract in its early stages.32 The names of many ophthalmologists over the centuries are associated with advancements in the understanding of and controversies over therapeutic methods for cataract and glaucoma. regarded by some editors as night blindness. on late antiquity. Troops who had served in the Napoleonic wars were carriers and sufferers. 36 Kronfeld. 1963. Palliative couching remained the standard method until the middle of the eighteenth century. Even today glaucoma and senile cataract. 1996. In London. some declaring fragmentation or discission was always to be preferred to extraction. and not clearly differentiated.37 Trachoma too has generated a vast literature. Sorsby. Even after Rufus systematised the distinction between the two diseases. 2000.35 In the nineteenth century. a special institution for blind ex-army personnel suffering from ‘Egyptian ophthalmia’ (a misleading designation) was founded—this later developed into Moorfields Eye Hospital—and ophthalmologists 32 See for the evidence Hirschberg. glaucoma as always incurable. 420. can be viewed as major causes of blindness and it is conceded that the underlying aetiology of these and many other eye disorders remains obscure. see Tower. frequently the province of itinerant barbers. 34 Adams I 1844.36 However. controversy still centred on the true nature of cataract (a disease of the lens or a structure in front of the lens) and so on the rival methods. the annals of the new professional bodies concerned with ophthalmology continue to be dominated by the question of how best to treat these two dominant diseases.34 Cataract surgery was long a hit and miss affair. 37 Cf. 35 Blodi. 1993 and Craik. . 200 and for different estimates of its significance Marganne. 505. however. the initiation of iridectomy for glaucoma was a notable advance. when a cataract was first successfully extracted by Daviel (in 1752). 1899. 1963.introduction 23 roasted ox liver is to be pressed to the eyes for sharu disease.

he used a teasle or thistle-like plant to perform surgery which he termed technically ophthalmoxusis or more popularly ‘degourdissement’. or attack on groups of blebs by galvanocautery— essentially detergent and caustic substances. see Gorin. It may have been carried to Greece from Egypt. 1903. Lawson.39 Trachoma has a tendency to associations with military operations. hard brush or sandpaper. used as ‘blue stone’. 1622. Duke-Elder II 1938. 1766. 315–338 and Triller. According to Duke-Elder. Woolhouse was a successful but highly controversial oculist of France and England in the late seventeenth to early eighteenth century. and enemies who regarded him as a charlatan operating for personal profit. 41 See Haller. He attracted both disciples (most notably B. Other expedients were scarification with a knife and subsequent strong massage with antiseptics. ‘degonflement’ on the internal surface of upper and lower lids for trachoma and many other conditions. Treatment by scraping (to allow the release of noxious matter) and burning (to sterilize and accelerate wound closure) followed by application of a copper-based salve (as an astringent and haemostatic) remained standard until the twentieth century. John Cunningham Saunders and John Vetch. cf. 148. professor of ophthalmology at Tubingen) who followed his practices. 1755.40 A bizarre misinterpretation of a passage in On Sight led to a notorious dispute over the proper means of scarifying the eyelids. Mauchart. However. 535. or rubbing with a curette. copper still excelled.41 39 On William Adams (later knighted as Sir William Rawson). though this may be merely because of the overcrowding common in armies. Sichel adumbrates the history of medical fashions in recognising and addressing this condition and finds the method described in On Sight still ‘fort efficace et généralement usitée’. 1619. 73. His career embraced extremes of effectiveness in practical operation and failure in conceptual understanding: on the one hand he performed iridectomy and restored patients’ sight. writing on this ‘immense subject’. 72 for trenchant criticism.24 introduction vied with one another to discover a ‘cure’ for the condition. 1982.D. . it is not confined to these regions: there was an epidemic of Asian origin in Japan in 1897. Claiming a unique understanding of the Hippocratic method where a ‘spindle’ was employed. 40 Sichel 123. affecting soldiers of the recent Sino-Japanese war. a pointed crystal of copper sulphate held in a wooden holder and used for daily scouring of the lids. on the other he opposed the view that cataract was situated in the crystalline lens. 1593.

but may rather indicate vigilant observation.44 Many failed to capitalise on the new technology.1) is indicative of underlying infection. Archedamos too was characterized as ‘blear-eyed’ (Ar. Lys. where Neokleides is mercilessly and unsympathetically portrayed: in around 392 he is simply γλ μων ‘blear-eyed’ (Eccles. in the absence of good preventative hygiene and of drugs which could serve as antibiotics. 14. and in 388 he is completely blind. 1982. which might have many precipitating causes and which. hoping for a miracle cure from Asklepios (Ploutos 665. . The inexorable progress of chronic eye disease to complete loss of sight can be seen from successive plays of Aristophanes. Ran. 25). It is now recognised (first noted in 1870 and confirmed by further studies) that there is a type of purulent conjunctivitis typical of young girls in which there is an association between primary vulvo-vaginitis and secondary conjunctivitis. 398). exploration of the inner eye became possible for the first time.43 When Helmholtz in 1850 demonstrated the ophthalmoscope to the Physical Society of Berlin.. 1959. This completely altered understanding of the function of the eye and made obsolete the work of many—including Sichel. especially as the additional symptom ulceration is attributed by the author to women. is another important perennial condition. a deficiency disease affecting the sight. even among children. must have been common and incurable. See Duke-Elder II 1938. boys more prone than girls. in differentiating between the sexes. who had been working for many years on a book entitled Iconographie Ophthalmologique without knowledge of the fundus. 1579. though too categorical. Λ μαι ‘rheum’ in the eyes (2—on the term see on 2. the editor of On Sight for Littré. A differentiation is imputed to the eyes of males and females in On Sight. On Sichel as ‘a tragic person’ see Gorin. 176. in Epidemics 6. where night blindness is seen especially in children. This may not be altogether fanciful. or conjunctival gonorrhea. 717–725).introduction 25 Night blindness (7). 254. cf. and more explicitly in Prorrhetic 2. 84–85.42 Hippocratic authors knew this: the author of Prorrhetic 2 is correct. In general men are more susceptible to night blindness than women and. the different developments and mutations of the disease in men and women are noted. or that women were more confined indoors. and the author conjectures that the reasons for the relative incidence were that women were intrinsically less susceptible. which 42 43 44 Jayle et al. 588.

Some of the areas selected for cutting and cautery by the physician of On Sight (3) coincide with the points targeted by modern oriental practitioners treating eye disorders by acupuncture or (especially) moxibustion. where it acts not merely as a palliative but actually as a remedy. 8. the choice of scissors or knife for surgery and the choice of agents or procedures to treat 45 46 47 Duke-Elder. see Spalton et al. Even today. 674–675. but its workings. 1958.45 In modern ophthalmology the ‘slitlamp’ (a combination light and microscope for examination of the eye) is ubiquitous. especially in relation to particular diseases. For discussion. as were the pros and cons of dividing or opening the temporal artery. see also Charlevoix. that it stimulates the nervous system (perhaps through specific neurological reactions between parts treated and parts affected). Disputes over the proper methods in ophthalmology permeate works of the nineteenth century: even such an apparently simple question as the desirability of exclusion of light was still debated. 2005.46 Of course there is a ready explanation for these similarities in treatment: as human physiology is constant. the ocular blood circulation is fundamentally important and systemic diseases undoubtedly affect the complex physiology of the eye. see Craik. It has been suggested that acupuncture raises the red corpuscle count and enhances blood circulation. the treatment seems to stimulate the body to resist disease and to become stronger.47 In visual function.7 and 20. and their practices have a very long history. there is a direct link of cerebro-spinal fluid to the eyeball through the optic nerve. forthcoming. are mysterious. On the orbital blood supply.. but in the hope of a cure. and they do not advocate treatments which never work. doctors do not cut and burn for fun. it is intrinsically probable that doctors of different societies at different times should treat similar afflictions in a similar way simply because they separately have discovered an effective treatment on an empirical practical basis. or at least seem to work. fig. . 20. the reasons for the undoubted effectiveness of the practice of acumoxa is not understood. It is possible to review anatomical data seeming to vindicate some of our surgeon’s ideas and practices: there is an external blood supply to the skull by the temporal arteries. 1754. but of course our surgeon saw only what could be seen with the naked eye. that it provokes responses in the cerebral cortex which in turn react on the organs.26 introduction only gradually became accepted. After all.

Wood.50 For this reason. roughly a generation apart. a distinguished consultant ophthalmologist who was kind enough to scan this commentary in draft form. bleeding by leeches). The most modern authority noted is David Spalton. ‘grattage and swabbage’ for trachoma. through drainage of pus collected between bone and dura. He concluded: ‘It seems he described a number of diseases and one can only guess at what the modern diagnosis is. three times a day). goat or sheep fried in oil and well seasoned (5 to 10 ounces. 79–80. and for night blindness ingestion of liver of ox. with instruction to rub with gauze wrapped in a wooden spatula. 81 etc. 81. Hirschberg I 1982 (tr. after bleeding had completely stopped. Blodi). 1820. in some ways this does not seem important as the treatment was the same.introduction 27 the palpebral surface.49 In the early years of the twentieth century. . many of the procedures found in On Sight were still advocated: local blood-letting (scarification and cupping at the temples. 38–39. the selected reference books cited here are drawn from a range of dates. cautery by a ‘burnt wood’ needle. 83. 16–17. n. 93. 78–79.’ 48 49 50 Vetch. 801. 403.48 Trepanation was still sometimes practised to alleviate cerebral seizures accompanied by sight loss. 1909. application of heat.

.

praefatio XL–XLI Erotian (ed. Diels and W. London.) Colloque International Hippocratique Corpus Medicorum Graecorum Collection des Universités de France (Association G. Greek-English Lexicon ed.S. BMD CIH CMG CUF DK DR Duke-Elder Ermerins Erot.E. 1978). 1932–1954) ed. Goodwin. Scott. to C. London. to revised edn (Geneva. Jones. 3 (Utrecht. GMT HC Hsch. Nachmanson. cited with page ref. Kühn. vol. Foesius Gal. 1953) ed. 278–283. Text-Book of Ophthalmology (London. 163–171 H. Daremberg and C.. Oeuvres de Rufus d’Éphèse (Paris. 1889) Hippocratic Corpus Hesychios. Budé) H. Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker (6th edn. to K. and H. Ruelle. 1918) ed. Syntax of Moods and Tenses of the Greek Verb (London. R. 152–161 Abbreviations for ancient authors and works (including Hippocratic treatises) follow LSJ. cited with volume and page ref. ap.G. Liddell. Duke-Elder. Kranz. Joly LSJ Sichel Anonymus Londinensis (ed. Hesychii Alexandrini Lexicon (Copenhagen. 1947) Black’s Medical Dictionary (39th edn.W.S..] W. . 1861). Claudii Galeni Opera Omnia (Leipzig. Latte. 1657 and 1662) Galen. Lond. Littré ed. (Paris.G. cited with volume and page ref. 1821–1830) [K. 1864). Jones. 1952) C. vol. 1999 and repr.REFERENCES AND ABBREVIATIONS Anon. 9 (Paris. 1879) Sir W. Berlin and Zurich.

.

304–316. C. Anastassiou. 1959). (eds). D. R. and Irmer. D. 1996). Proceedings of the First European Meeting of the Society for Ancient Medicine (forthcoming). . Testimonien zum Corpus Hippocraticum Teil II Galen 1. London). 2003). (eds). 1998). 1754)... A History of Ophthalmology (NY.M. ‘Phlegmone normal and abnormal’. ‘Principles of Susrutian Ocular Therapy. ‘The Hippocratic treatise περ ψι ς (de videndi acie. Documenta Ophthalmologica 74 (1990).C. Hippocratis Coi … octoginta volumina (Rome. ‘Eye votives in the Asklepieion of Ancient Corinth’. 1978). — —. CIH XI (Leiden. Arrington. — —. — in Eijk. 135–139. in Albert and Edwards (eds).A.. ‘Cataract Surgery’.BIBLIOGRAPHY Adams. Bd Hippokrateszitate in den Kommentaren und im Glossar (Gottingen. Discovery.E. and Edwards. The Seven Books of Paulus Aegineta (3 vols. 528–628. Gnomon 52 (1980). Smith. Cornarius. A. Studia Graeca et Latina Gothoburgensia 17 (1963). Chadwick. Calvus. Trepanation: History. A Colour Atlas of Ophthalmological Diagnosis (London.K. Review of Hippocrate t. Die Hippokratische Schrift Prognostikon: Überlieferung und Text. P. 1995 and 2003). — Le normal et le pathologique dans la Collection hippocratique. A. ‘Some Aspects of Hippocratic Vascular Anatomy’.. I 1844. II 1846. R. S. (eds). The History of Ophthalmology (Cambridge Mass. Craik. Hippocratis Coi medici … libri omnes (Basle. F. — —. and — Dean-Jones. S.. G. Bidyadhar.M. J. Archives of Ophthalmology 25 (1947)...D. 191– 207. Blodi. 13 CUF (Joly. S. (eds). ‘Susruta and his Ophthalmic Operations’. 2002). E.J. Lexicographica Graeca (Oxford.M... Arnott. F.. interpreted in the light of — modern ophthalmic Science’.M.). A. 1767. — —. 285–301. Alexanderson. M. ‘Geschichtliches zur Behandlung mit Leber’. B.U. Charlevoix. Finger. D. le Père de.. F. 1525). 1997). Hippocrates in Context. Hippocrates Places in Man (Oxford. van der (ed. Archives of Ophthalmology 22 (1939).. A. in Thivel. Albert. 165–175. N.. On the Organ of Sight)’. Theory (Lisse. 1996).). 1538).. 2005). Bedford.. Anastassiou.. 1996. Bier. 550–574. and Zucker. 1971). Fluid Physiology and Pathology in Traditional Chinese Medicine (Elsevier Science. J. Münchene medizinische Wochenschrift 75 (1928). in Arnott. Clavey. Chaviara-Karahaliou. A. L. III 1847. CIH X (Nice. Histoire de Japon (Paris. (edd..

Cor. Corpus Hippocraticum.. — —. ‘Chirurgie conjunctivo-palpébrale à l’époque romaine d’après l’oeuvre — de Celse’.. 369–375. phil. Fischer. Klasse (Berlin. D. Magni Hippocratis … — opera omnia … nunc denuo Latina interpretatione & Annotationibus illustrata. H. 1657 and 1662). 2 vols (Geneva. B. Feugère. Konigl. — —.Z. Utrecht. (ed. in Grmek. — phil. London. — —. Problemata Physica (Berlin. van der. Hippocratica. Abh. 1980). J. ‘La Description des vaisseaux dans les chapitres 11–19 du traité de la — Nature des Os’. 436–508. ‘Die Klappe fällt—frühe Belege für lat. 1998). Hippocratis et aliorum veterum reliquiae (3 vols. Duke-Elder. Akad. Oeconomia Hippocratis (Frankfurt. Sir W.. Diller. and Lascaratos. 2000–2001). History of Ophthalmology (Delaware.. M. — Eijk. 1859–1864). Wiss.. A. III 1940. Medizinhistorisches Journal 35 (2000). CIH II (Mons. Documenta Ophthalmologica 77 (1991). P. Aristoteles. ‘Erster Nachtrag zu Die Handschriften’. Preuss. Filliozat.-D. VII 1954. — —. — —. Fronimopoulos. E...32 bibliography Daremberg. — —. — —. 1963). Hippocrate: CUF t. Preuss. CIH III (Paris. (eds). le coeur dans la collection hippocratique: anatomie et — physiologie (Paris. cataracta als Bezeichnung einer Augenkrankheit’..-P. I Teil: Hippokrates und Galenos’. and Robert. Akad. Anat. Douthwaite. M. 1905). M.D. ‘Les Sens de ichor dans les textes hippocratiques’. in Grmek.. 135–148. A Century of International Ophthalmology (London. Die hippokratische Schrift Prognostikon: Überlieferung und Text. ‘Die Handschriften der antiken Arzte. — Duminil... . Klasse (Berlin.. 1958).. les vaisseaux. 7 (1968).-hist. Konigl. Ses origines et ses parallèles grecs (Paris. Diels. 1907). Leiden. 1962).E. ‘Les aiguilles à cataracte de Montbellet’. Hippocratica. 1980). Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 32 (1985). A. H. K. 8. 883–888. G. 8 (1968). Archives d’Ophtalmologie 28. C. U. ‘The Terms Glaucoma and Cataract in the Ancient Greek and Byzan— tine Writers’. ‘Le dossier philologique du nyctalope’. 167–187. Oeuvres de Rufus d’Éphèse (Paris. Magni Hippocratis … opera omnia (Frankfurt. V 1952. Gourevitch. and Robert. Text-Book of Ophthalmology (7 vols... Flashar. IV 1949. Oss. London).). Review of Alexanderson. C. Documenta Ophthalmologica 74 (1990). 1977). ‘Eye References in the Homeric Epics’. 1588). F.. 125–133.. R. 1982). J. I 1932. 1595).. Le Sang. and Ruelle. 760–768.-hist. Diocles of Carystus: A Collection of the Fragments with Translation and Commentary (2 vols. H. 1983). II 1938. J.. (eds). Hale-White’s Materia Medica. M. M.. VI 1954. Gnomon 36 (1964). Abh. La Doctrine classique de la médecine indienne.D. 751–754. F. Ermerins.. (Paris. ‘Le Traitement des plaies cutanées et la réparation par greffe des plaies palpébrales à l’époque romaine’. Künzl. 65–76. F. Wiss. Studia Graeca et Latina Gothoburgensia 17 (1963). in Joly.H.S. Gorin.. 1949). Foesius. Pharmacology and Therapeutics (32nd edn.A. 127–147. CIH III (Paris. Dolffus. 1879). Weisser. — —.. Archives d’Ophtalmologie 28. Ulc.

A. 2.J. Gland. Hanson. 533): nouvelles obser— vations codicologiques et histoire du texte’. Night Vision (Eng. — — —. Haem. 13. 4. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 25 (1914).R. W.D. 2. Kretschmer. Loc. Heiberg... (Paris. Hippocratis de visu libellus (Helmstadt.. Aer. 3. Hippocrate: CUF t. C. (Berlin.bibliography 33 — —. 1924). 193–210... J. M. VM (Paris. ‘L’Hippocrate de Venise (Marcianus gr.U. Diseases in the Ancient Greek World (Baltimore and London. Hippocrate: CUF t. edn Springfield. Hippokrates–Fibel. 1899).H. W.. von. 1792). 1972). Joly. — Jouanna. Fist. (Paris. 10. — — —. 1982)..C. — Dent. . — — —. 2. (eds). 1 (Berlin.. — —. 37.. — — —. M. H. Harris. F. Hippocrate: CUF t.. CIH III (Paris. The Heart and the Vascular System in Ancient Greek Medicine (Oxford.. Découverte de la tombe d’un oculiste à Lyon. Grmek. Revue des Études Grecques 113 (2000). Liqu.. P. I. 11. Hippocrates. Jessop. Illinois. 1. ‘La description hippocratique de la “toux épidémique de Périnthe”’. and Grmek. 1974). 1 and 2. 1988). Hippocrate: CUF t.E. J. P. Gallia t. Disputationes chirurgicae selectae I (Lausanne.. Geschichte der Augenheilkunde im Alterthum (Leipzig.P. 2 (Paris. Iugler. E. Oct. 47 (Paris. 193–198. J. R. Io. — —. R. M. Hippocrate: CUF t. Heidel. CMG I.. 1990). and Unschuld. 1. Hippocrate: CUF t. tr. F. Acut. Jackson. 1963). Hippocrate: CMG 1. Sacr. 139–203. 1996).J. Carn.. 1967). 1. 2.. Hom. (Paris.L. 3 (Berlin and New York. 4. M. L. W. Ourgaud. R. 1970).G. — —.. 2228–2251. (Berlin. Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt II. 1990). in Grmek. (eds). 2. 1973).. — Kapferer. 4.. Hirschberg. Pue.. 1983). 2. 1975). Göttingen.. Blodi. Jayle. 6. 2.. 1989). Vict. On Head Wounds. Vid..F. ‘Eye Medicine in the Roman Empire’. — —.. Ac. 199–221.A. 2003). Hippocrate: CUF t.S. 57–60. Alim.H. 6.. Holmes. (Paris. Antiquité Classique 34 (1965). 1984). Marb. Acut. Hippocrate: CUF t. Art. 1999). Hippocrate: CUF t. Nat. Hippocratica. 1943). and Locker. CMG 9. coll. Rücklaüfiges Wörterbuch der griechischer Sprache (2nd edn. 1908). 1959. Hom. Hippocrate: CMG 1.. — — —. 1980). 1–4 (Paris. 1978). Genit. Morb. — et al. Auszüge aus der Schriftensammlung die Werke des Hippokrates (Stuttgart. Morb.D. The History of Ophthalmology In Antiquity (Bonn. Essential Subtleties on the Silver Sea: A Chinese Classic on Ophthalmology (Berkeley and Los Angeles. 1. — — —. (Paris. Hippocrate: Pour une archéologie de l’école de Cnide (Paris. and Robert. A. (Paris. Flat. — Haller. ‘Les yeux malades dans l’art antique’ in Boyer. 3. G.D. Manual of Ophthalmic Surgery and Medicine (2nd edn London. R. Paulus Aegineta (Leipzig and Berlin. Kovacs. 1996). Vict. — — —... ‘Notes sur trois recentiores hippocratiques’. — —. 269. French edn 1950). 5. 1998). — — —. ‘Hippocratea I’. Sp. Baisinger. 1755)... Nat.

Littré. 1986–1989). 1991). ‘Links between Egyptian and Greek Medicine’. 1981). India and China in Antiquity (Odense. G. Clinically Oriented Anatomy (4th edn.E. ‘Le traité hippocratique De videndi acie est-il d’époque impériale?’.. V. in Boehm. Marganne.. Magni Hippocratis Coi omnia opera … (Leiden. Martin. 164–193. Cologne.. the Countries of the — Near East. Langslow. 1994). Lawson. Nunn. Medicaments used in the Treatment of Eye Diseases in Egypt. 5 (1993). — Nielsen. repr. Philadelphia etc. I. Ancient Ophthalmological Agents (Odense. 1991–1994). — —.. K. 1886 and 1888). 1918). Mugler. Finger and Smith (eds). Methods and Problems in Greek Science (Cambridge. ‘Glaucome ou cataracte? Sur l’emploi des dérivés de γλαυκ ς en ophtalmologie antique’. Lloyd. ‘Glaucoma’. and Fleischer U. The Healing Hand (Cambridge. & P.-H. 2004). — Omont. 1953). Studies in Greek Colour Terminology 2 vols. ‘Die Nachtblindheit und ihre Behandlung in der griechisch-römischen Medizin’.. repr.. Ancient Medicine (London... . Erotianstudien (Uppsala. G. D. Lloyd. Hesychii Alexandrini Lexicon (Copenhagen.F. 113–147. Mani.. Ostend. Paris. Maxwell-Stuart.. D. Inventaire sommaire des mss de la Bibliothèque Nationale (Paris.. Erotiani vocum hippocraticum collectio cum fragmentis (Uppsala. 1991. and Dalley. Mnemosyne suppl. Diseases and Injuries of the Eye (6th edn. Les cinq Sens dans la médecine de l’époque impériale (Lyon.. 1991). Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 78 (1985). Sudhoffs Archiv 59 (1975).F. 2000). 1. 1996). 1972). H.L. P. Longrigg. New York. Latte. 2003).. 1987).. Linden. 2003.34 bibliography Kronfeld. in Lloyd. ‘The Drug Trade in Antiquity’. 1839–1861).R. 1903). 1974). Ophthalmology of the Ancients (2 vols. From Demokedes to Harvey: Studies in the History of Medicine (London.C. P. Kühn. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences. Nutton. Op de Hipt. Waugh.-L. J. P.E. 65 (Leiden. I–III (Paris. Forum 3. Greek Rational Medicine (London. L’ophtalmologie dans l’Égypte gréco-romaine d’apres les papyrus littéraires grecs — (Leiden.. Mass. 35– — 43.. 2 (1979).. M. Gesnerus 10 (1953).R. Luccioni (edd.. 1665).A. 1901).. — —. in Albert and Edwards (eds). — —. ‘Alcmaeon and the early History of Dissection’. H. IX in Nutton. G. J. 1917). tr. with new intro. G. E. J. ‘Why Trepan? Contributions from Medical History and the South Pacific’. Majno. Moore.. J. 1988. 1988). Die Augenheilkunde der Alten (Breslau. 138–145.).. 323–345. G.. Dictionnaire historique de la terminologie optique des Grecs (Paris. A. 1999). Ancient Egyptian Medicine (London.. — — —. Louis. Nachmanson. — —. 203–233. 1964). London. 199–214. Adjective auf — δης im Corpus Hippocraticum (Hamburg.. as Ch. Index Hippocraticus (Göttingen. Medical Latin in the Roman Empire (Oxford. Montfort.G.. E.. Magnus.H. K. in Arnott..L.R. N. 53–58. H. Oeuvres complètes d’Hippocrate (10 vols. 1993). 1998 and 1999). R. van der. Aristote Problèmes t. — —. 1996. C. M..

American Journal of Ophthalmology 68. The Commoner Diseases of the Eye.) Symposium on Byzantine Medicine (Dumbarton Oaks Papers 38. 13–24. Staden. 1909). M. — —. ‘L’Oeil dans l’Antiquité Romaine’. 169–186 in Scarborough. 1981). R.A.. J. 2003). 1984). Triller. E..A. ‘Hippocrates and Ophthalmology’. C.). Savage-Smith. Cuadernos de filologia clasica (G) 3 (1993). (ed.-S. C. Skoda. D. J. A Practical Treatise on Diseases of the Eye (London. Rocca. Its Military and Sociological Implications. de Cohën and G. Thivel. Celsus de Medicina: Loeb Classical Library (London and Cambridge Mass. London.... 1877 and 1878) Platnauer. The Roots of Ayurveda: Selections from Sanskrit Medical Writings (rev.. W. P. 2005). and Hackel. Rodriguez. D. 1069–1076. De Visu’. Médecine ancienne et métaphore (Paris. F.-J. 123–130. CIH XI (Leiden. 2005) Spencer.bibliography 35 Pardon.J.E. R.. A. and Woodruff. M. ‘Celsus and the Hippocratic Corpus: The Originality of a “Plagiarist”’. Vetch. 1989). How to Detect and How to Treat Them (London. Paris. A System of Ophthalmic Therapeutics (Chicago. D. 57–65. ‘La atribución de Hipp. 153–162. .A. L’Anatomie de l’oeil: un savoir en perpetuelle évolution (Lons-le Saunier. Special Review: ‘The History of Trachoma. 1908). Hitchings. Modern Ophthalmology (London. 403–411. 123 (1963). Petrequin.. Cnide et Cos? Essai sur les doctrines médicales dans la collection hippocratique (Paris.A. Chirurgie d’Hippocrate (2 vols.D. 1994).W.. 2002). Roulière-Lambert. M.’ Archives of Ophthalmology 69. Philadelphia etc. von. ‘Hellenic and Byzantine Ophthalmology: Trachoma and Sequelae’. in Arnott. A. Trobe.. 1988).. J. Atlas of Clinical Ophthalmology (3rd edn. Cluzeau (eds). in A. Wood. Opuscula medica ac medico-philologica (Frankfurt & Leipzig. Washington. Finger and Smith (eds). 1963)... J. J.J. Social — History of Medicine 13 (2000).E. Tower. P... Herophilus: The Art of Medicine in Early Alexandria (Cambridge. 1935). 307–321. in Eijk. Pearlman.. Alfageme Ignacio.T.A. 2003. 1766– 1772). Wujastyk. J. edn. T. Classical Quarterly 15 (1921).). Hippocrates in Context. 6 (1969). Field Guide to the Eyes (Philadelphia etc. Spalton. 253–271. ‘The Practice of Surgery in Islamic Lands: Myth and Reality’... Wood. 1820). (ed.. ‘Galen and the Uses of Trepanation’. and Hunter.. P. van der (ed.. H.. ‘Greek Colour-Perception’. Sorsby.G.

.

XV Parisinus gr. XII Parisinus gr. pars antiquior. 2141. 1512 Parisinus gr.: . s. s. s. 220.CONSPECTUS SIGLORUM memorantur in app. 10. s. XVI memorantur in comm. s. 2145. 2142. XV Baroccianus 204. Hauniens. 2143. XV Vossianus fol. XV Marcianus gr. X Parisinus gr. XIV Vaticanus gr. XV Parisinus gr. XIV Parisinus gr. XV Laurentianus 74. s. s. s. XVI Monacensis gr. Caius Coll. XV Mutinens. 269. XVI Urbinas 68. XV Parisinus gr. 2140. crit. s. s. 1.: M H I R Ca E F G J K Laur. s. s. s. s. XIII Vaticanus gr. 50. s. 71. O Q U W Z non vidi: Haun. s. 277. 278. Gl. 2144. Estensis gr. XIV Parisinus gr. s. Mo. XIV Cantabrig. s. Kgl. 2255. a. 224. 2148. Mut.

α δ αλασσ ειδε ς γιν μεναι. 14 τ λημ α Craik: τ μμα MH: κα τ μμα IR fere recc. πρεσ υτ ρω γιν μ νω H 9 γ νωνται (γ γνωνται. τ ς ψι ς γι ς σης τ ν νεωτ ρων ν ρ πων.: αλασσ ειδ κα σις H2: κ αρσ ς τε κα κα σις IR fere recc. α τ ματ ι μ ν κυαν τιδες γιν μεναι. κα π λλ κις τερ ς αλμ ς ν π λλ ρ νω στερ ν διε ρη. λλως δ δ ν.: τα τ fortasse Joly 5 π η MHI: εραπε η H2 R fere recc. κα τ τ . ν μ ν ν ω γ νωνται. codd. Asulanus: ν π λλ 6 τα τα codd. | α τ ματ ι edd. 2. σα ως δ κα τι ν π νυ πρ ς α τ ν αλμ ν πρ σ . λτι ν ρ κα τ μεγ λα π νυ κα λαμπρ . τ τ υ δ ρ κα α ρειν τ ν κε αλ ν κα κα ειν τ ς λ ας κ ν ρ μεν ς π η 5 τα τα. 11–12 κα σις κα κ αρσις MH: κ αρσις κα 13 αλασσ ειδε edd.: λυς Joly | ν τ’ ρσην MI fere recc. 11 λλως MH: λλ H2IR fere recc. ν τε ρσην. 15 1 Ιππ κρ τ υς περ ψι ς fere codd. α δ μετα τ ς τε κυαν τιδ ς κα τ ς αλασσ ειδ ς. κατ μικρ ν ν π λλ ρ νω δια ε ρ νται. κ στιν ησις τ ια τη. απ νης γ ν νται. τ λημ α ν τ σιν αλμ σι. 8 πρεσ υτ ρω γεν μ νω M H2I: novit Foesius | λαυρ τερ ν M: αυλ τερ ν recc.: α τ μαται codd.TEXT I 1. σταται τ κακ ν κα ωρε π τ λαυρ τερ ν. . τε τ αλασσ ειδε . γ νωνται) recc: γ γν νται M | post πτ lacunam indicant Iugler et Sichel | ρ κα τ μεγ λα π νυ MH (sed del.: τ ια τησιν Heidel 4 ν π λλ ρ νω στερ ν διε ρη M fere recc. α ψιες α διε αρμ ναι. κα πειδ ν γ νωνται. 15 λεια M (vel ηλε α) recc. ντι ντι κα τ ν 10 σις τε II 1. π πρ σ εν ρ μ ν. κα H2): ρ τ μεγ λα δ π νυ IR 10 α τ ν Ermerins: ωυτ ν MIR: αυτ ν H fere recc.: ελ ις Joly | δ ν van der Linden: ν codd. τ κυαν τιδι.: ν π λλ ρ νω forsitan delendum ρ νω διε ρη στερ ν R: στερ ν om.: ε τε ρσην HR | ελ ης M: ελε ης recc. 2 τ ια τη codd. ν τε ηλε α . κ ν ελ ης π ι ων δ ν. συμ ρει δ τ τω κα κα κ αρσις τ ς κε αλ ς α μα δ τ τ ισιν συμ ρει ι ναι. πρεσ υτ ρω γιν μ νω κα στανται ν δ πρεσ υτ ρω γ νωνται τ ων πτ .

and he sees ahead. they are destroyed gradually. and if he has this done at the beginning. destroyed. … indicates editorial insertion to text . and often the second eye is destroyed a long time later. where the visual part is sound. For this person. But when it 1 (…) indicates addition of material to amplify translation. one should purge the head and cauterise the vessels. if they become so when someone is older than seven years. Of this person. over a long time.TRANSLATION1 I 1. II 1. whether the person is female or male. As for those which become sea-like. there is no such treatment. As for the visual parts. they settle down when he gets older. and once they do become so. 2. they become so all of a sudden. he sees quite well things which are really big and bright. In the case of sores in the eyes. In cases where the parts are intermediate between lapis-like and sealike: if they become so when someone is young. in younger people. but not clearly. It is not beneficial to let blood in these people. when these become spontaneously lapis-like. cautery and purging the head is beneficial. but nothing else. and whatever he sets right in front of the eye. the trouble is arrested and does not go on to get worse. you could not help by any action at all. […] indicates editorial deletion of intrusive content from text. as long as the body is still growing. he sees that too. either in the lapis-like or the sea-like case.

: ν M 1–2 α τ .: ως ν M 22 μ ως δ κα codd.: πρ σδ εσ αι Triller 4 ’ codd. 4. ως ν ρ ν ς πιγ νηται κα κε αλ ς καυ ε σης κα στ ε ς. κα πικα ων νδ εν μ δια αν σιν. πειτα ναδ σας. τα τα π ντα 15 σσ ν π σ ει. ν μ τ πρ τ ν διακα σης. Ermerins Fevr. in ras. τ σκ λεα κτε νας. κα ειν δ κα πρ ς τ στ ν πισ εν.: ’ van der Linden 4–5 στηρ ηται MHIR: στηρ εται fere recc. κα σ ει τε νω εν τ πιρρ ν ν δ διακεκαυμ ν ς τε κ τω εν. 2. πρ α ι ναι δ τ α ματ ς. σκ πε ν δ δια ερμα νειν. ms novit 18 τ ει HIR: τ ι aut τα M (?cum corr. α τις να υσ νται κα πα ρ νται. δ ) Joly | παντ codd. ms novit: ναρραγησ μεναι Ermerins | α ν νται recc. mss novit 20 ρυ ρα MHIR: ρυ ρ Cornarius 21 ναιρησ μεναι codd. α τ τ αλμ σκεψ μεν ς τ λ αρα λεπτ νειν. πειδ ν κπ ση σ ρη.: ν παντ Ermerins | ν fere recc. ν δ κ πρ σδε σ αι. ms novit | post γκατακα ειν lac. πως ν δ κ καιρ ς ε ναι. 2 λεπτ νειν MHIR: λεπτ νει Asulanus | πρ σδε σ αι codd. τερ ν 10 λιπαρ τερ ν ν ε ς γκατακα ειν. δ ρ ν π ηται τ σι ερσ . πειτα κα ειν πα σι σιδηρ ισι κα συ η ν μ αγ α μα κα ντι.: α νωνται M | ως ν fere recc. 5 πειτα διασημ νασ αι codd. et reg. πειδ ν δ τ λκεα γι α γ νωνται. Ermerins 14–15 τε νω εν … τε κ τω εν Craik: τε κ τω εν … κ τω εν codd. πρ ς τ ς ε σης λε ς μ λλ ν. πειτα τ ρ υ μ λιτι δε ων.: μ ως κα (del. διακα ειν δ ρ α τις.: ναρρη μεναι Foesius ex Serv.: διασημ νασ αι (del. πλ ν τ π νυ πρ ς α τ τ στ ω ν δ πρ σδ ηται τ καυστηρ ω τ σπ γγ ν. κ τω εν) Ermerins: τε κ τω εν … (del. ντι ναι τ σιν σ ρησιν. τ τε σπ γγια ρ σ υρ ς γκατακα ειν. ες ’ στηρ ν δ τις τω.: σιδηρ ισιν M 9 σπ γγ ν MHIR: σπ γγ ν Foesius ex 8 κα ειν … πισ εν codd. μ ως τ ταται λ ψ κα πε σηται κα πλ ρης α νεται. πειτα ν ε ς σπ γγ ν λαιωμ ν ν γκατακα ειν.40 text ως ν α ηται τ σ μα τι. πειτα διασημ νασ αι τ ς νωτια ας 5 πισ εν. κα 20 σπερ ναιρησ μεναι α ν νται. α και μεναι λα πρ ς τ στ ν καλλ νες γ ν νται.: del. ταν δ λ α παρακα σης διακα σης. I 11 μ λιτι MHR: ν μ λιτι I fere recc. μ ως δ κα παντ τ σ ματι π υ ν καυ . μ σ λ ας. 3. ταν δ μηκ τι α νηται. 13 διακα σης del. κα ρυ ρα ε σι παρ τ λλ . Foesius ex Fevr. ων. πειτα) Ermerins 6 σιδηρ ισι fere recc.): τ ι recc. α σ ραι α μ λλ ν πτη ε σαι τ ει κπ πτ υσιν. nonnulli: τ ιστα Foesius ex Fevr. III 1. ) κ τω εν Joly 17 σ υρ ς MI: καν ς HR.: τι κ τω εν (del. τ αλμ Ermerins: α τ ω τ αλμ codd.

tie on (a ligature). especially in the case of a vessel which haemorrhages. 4. When you have cauterised by or through a vessel. and put this on the eschars (= scabs). You must cauterise through (the vessel) again. get his legs outstretched. You should cauterise over sponges strongly. if you did not cauterise through (it) the first time.text 41 is no longer growing. 3. if it seems the right course. . Then (set the patient) on a couch from which he can lean with his hands. put in place another. Then moisten arum (root?) with honey. once the scab has fallen off. the vessel is stretched and swollen and apparently full just as before. until time has passed. Scars in cautery towards the bone turn out better. and cauterise over it. III 1. but not right up to the bone. If the patient accepts the sponge with the instrument. Then trace the vessels of (= running to) the back. And it beats when the flux comes from above. the scars are swollen and raised and red compared with the rest (of the flesh) and look as if they will remain raised. Then cauterise with thick (metal) instruments and heat gently. When the sores are healed. better-oiled. but if the patient has been cauterised when the flux comes from below he experiences all this to a lesser degree. It is the same when the head is cauterised or the chest or in all the body. and examine from behind. but not with white-hot instruments. if you think they need this too. 2. scraping. Let blood in advance. Scabs which are relatively well browned fall off quickly. attenuate the eyelids. wherever there is cautery. Let someone hold his waist. Cauterise over it. Then put in place a sponge soaked in olive oil. considering the actual eyes. Cauterise towards the bone (= skull) from behind. so that there is no haemorrhage as you cauterise. and cauterising from the inner part.

Ermerins 11–12 σ ρκα κ σην codd. κα αρ . στερ ν δ τ τ ς σι ς κα τ τ ς κα σι ς. ταν δ ης λ αρα περ τρακτ ν περιειλ ων. nonnulli . ταν δ τ α μα π ρρυ . λω. τ τω 5 2.: τινι om.: del. ταν α σ ραι κπ σωσι κα κεκα αρμ να τ λκεα κα λαστ νη. ρ δια ρ ειν τ να μω αρμ κω.: del. Craik | τ τε codd. αλμ .: codd.: del. κ τι λαμπρ ν α μα τ τε δ ρ τινι τ ν γρ ν νατρ ψαι. 10 V λ αρα τ πα τερα τ ς σι ς.42 text IV 1. αρμ κων. Ermerins | σι ς M: κρ σι ς fere recc.: ειν ε τα κα ειν Sichel: lacunam indicat Ermerins | μιλησ ω recc.: τ λυπ α M: ς τ λ ιπ indicat Calvus 15 υσμ ς MHR: κνησμ ς I | ν ε ς Ermerins: ν ς codd.: π ντων Ermerins | κα π ντων codd.: τ δε Foesius 17 λεπτ τ την MHR: λεπτ τ τ ν I: λεπτ τατα recc. π ταν δ λ αρα ψωρι κα υσμ ς η. π υ ν ς στ αλκ . Ermerins 3 πρ ς τ ν νδρ ν codd. 5 ρ τινι fere codd. λλ ρ α ματ δης δατ δης. 20 1 ειν codd. ν ε ς αλκ λι ν 15 πρ ς κ νην τρ ψας. τ τω) Ermerins 7 τ (bis) 9 τ να μω αρμ κω codd. τ ν ει πτ λεπτ πρ στε λαι. πειδ ν ηραν . τ μνειν τ μ ν δι τ ρ γματ ς. τ κ τω π ταμ ν τ ν σ ρκα κ σην ε μαρ στατα δ νη. πειτα υλ ν μ ακ ς διη ημ ν ν παρα ας κα τρ ψας λε ν. R 5–6 τ τω νατρ ψαι codd. ως ν π ς γ νηται ς μυσσωτ ς πειτα. 1. στερ ν δ τ λ αρ ν πικα σαι μ δια αν σι. κατ’ λ γ ν νατρ ειν. ειν ε ρ ω Μιλησ ω.: νατρ ψαι (del. τ VI 1. nonαλμ del. [ πειτα τ λ αρ ν π τρ ψας α τ ] κα τ τε τ ν λ δα τ αλκ τρ ειν ς λεπτ τ την.: σ ρκα ς ν Joly 14 τ λ ιπ recc. τρ ψας λε ν ρ σ αι.: nulli: μηλησ ω MHIR 2 τ πρ ς τ στ ν Ermerins | ταν π ρ Anastassiou: ταν π ρη codd. σημε ν δ ταν π ρ τ ς ρ εται. στερ ν δ τ τ υ ργ ν κα π ντων τ ν κε αλ ν κα ραι. υλασσ μεν ς τ ν σιν τ ν τρ ων. ταν δ π π ση σ ρη. τ δ λ ιπ ν ν αλκ ρυ ρ παρα ων. ητρε ειν τ λ ιπ .: τε π ρη Ermerins 4 ρ εται MHR: ρ εται H2I fere recc. 16 πειτα τ λ αρ ν π τρ ψας α τ codd. τ ν τ ν στε νην τ αλμ υλασσ ν νδρ ν. α μεν ς μ διακα σης πρ ς τ σι ς. να μω τινι αρμ κω Ermerins 10 τ τ υ codd.

Then you must pour alongside (the flakes) the strained juice of unripe grapes and rub smooth. When the scab falls off. . rub smooth and apply. Then. very gently and afterwards cauterise over the eyelid. It is a sign when there is enough scraping that it is no longer bright blood which comes. up to the cartilage. it is appropriate also to purge the head in all cases.text IV 43 1. Whenever the eyelids are itchy and there is an irritation. cut away the flesh below. rub a piece of flower of copper on a grindstone. as much you can. give the further treatment. winding it round the spindle(-shaped instrument). when it has dried. but bloody or watery matter. with care for the point where the lashes grow. Afterwards. with care for the actual eyeball. VI 1. scrape with soft clean Milesian wool. do not cauterise through. Afterwards—with regard to the procedure of scraping and the procedure of cautery—when the scabs fall off and the wounds have been cleaned and it is growing. or apply heated very fine flower (of copper). then pour the rest (of the grape pulp) alongside (the other ingredients) into (a vessel of) red copper and gradually rub together until it is like myssotos in consistency. Then you should rub on one of the liquid drugs containing flower of copper. When you scrape the lids of the eye. not with white-hot instruments. [then rub the patient’s eyelid] and at that time rub the flakes of copper as fine as possible. V 1. When the blood flows out. then make a cut through the front of the head. one should anoint the wound with a drug to stop bleeding. 2. When the eyelids are thicker than is natural.

κα σικ αι κατ τ ς λ ας.: ε τινι Joly | δια ε ρωνται Craik: δια ε ρ ιεν codd 8 πετε υ fere recc. 10 σ τ ς λ γ ς ρτ ς. π τε καπν κα πυρ ς κα τ ν λλων λαμπρ ν. κα κατασ σας τ ν α να ς μ λιστα. α ματ ς α ρεσις συμρει πρ ς νια τ ν τ ι των λγημ των. κα τ ν κε αλ ν κα αιρ σ ω.: νι σης Asulanus π ντ ς fere codd. σ αι κα τως γιε ς γ ν νται. κατακε σ αι δ ν σκ τω. VIII 1. ρ 5 ε- IX αλμ ης τ ς πετε υ κα πιδημ υ συμ ρει κ αρσις κε αλ ς κα 1. δημ των νωδ νων. τε δ νη μ πα σηται μετ τ ν σ λειψιν τ αρμ κ υ.: νυκτ λωψ ρμακ ν πιν τω Foesius ex Serv. ν τι αλμ γιε ς ντες δια ε ρωνται τ ν ψιν. συμ ρει. ms novit | τ ν κε αλ ν recc. 15 κα πειδ ν τ δριμ α ρμακα τ ς δ νης ναλει μενα δια ειρισ .: κε αλ ν M 2 κατασ σας Foesius ex Serv.: πετ υ H: πετ υ I: π’ α τ υ Μ 9 κ ιλ ης κ αρσις MHR: κ ιλ ης I | ε M: ε ε Ermerins 11 σκ τω fere codd. κα ε ι τ σ μα. πι σας πλε στ ν ρ ν ν. κπρ σαντα τ στ λ ντα τ ν δρωπα. 5 ν τι Craik: ν τινι codd. κα δατ ς π σις. 18 1 νυκτ λωπ ς . λλ τε π’ ριστερ . τε δ νη μ πα συμ ρει. 2.: σκ τ ι Foesius ex Serv. δημ των νωδ νων κα μετ τ δριμ α σηται μετ τ ν σ λειψιν Craik: ρμακα τ ς δ νης ναλει μενα πειδ ν τε δ νη πα σηται κα δια ωρισ μετ τ ν τι ν R: τι ν M: τι ν H: τι ν σ ι Ι σ λειψιν codd. τ ταμ ντα κατ τ ρ γμα. πλ γι ν. γ ρ συμ ρει. νυκτ λωπ ς ρμακ ν πιν τω λατ ρι ν.44 text VII 1. κατ πλασμα δ νης μ νεσης. ms novit: κατ ας codd. παναδε ραντα. τ τε συμ ρει καταπλ σσειν τ ν καταπλασμ των τι ν δ κ συμ ρειν. λλ’ ς ε ματ ς π ντ ς.: κα λλως Ermerins: λλως Joly | σης codd. δημ των νωδ νων. λλ τε π τ δε ι . ρμακ ν πιν τω IR: νυκτ λωπ ς ρμακ ν πιν τω M fere recc.: π ντ ς nonnulli 15–17 συμ ρει. τ ς κ τω κ ιλ ης κ αρσις. κα πειδ ν τ δριμ α ρμακα τ ς δ νης ναλει μενα δια ειρισ . ms novit: πλαγ ων MI: υλαττ μεν ς HR: πλαγ ως Cornarius: πλ γι ς Joly 14 γ ρ συμ ρει MIR: πειδ συμ ρει H 14–15 νε 15 λλ’ ς codd. τω ν. ms novit 12 πλ γι ν Foesius ex Serv. πανιε ς δ διδ ναι ν μ λιτι πτων σκ ρ δα μ καταπιε ν μ γιστα ς ν δ νηται ν δ κα παρ ς. 3–4 διδ ναι ν μ λιτι πτων σκ ρ δα μ καταπιε ν μ γιστα ς ν δ νηται ν δ κα παρ ς Craik: διδ ναι ν μ λιτι πτων παρ ς μ ν καταπιε ν μ γιστ ν ς ν δ νηται ν δ codd. μ τ γγειν τ ν κε αλ ν.

but apparently continuing flux. they are cured. and cupping vessels applied to the blood vessels. (Treatment for) night blindness: let him drink as drug elaterion and let his head be purged. IX 1. purging of the head and purging of the lower belly are beneficial. In this way. . cut into the neck. are destroyed in their visual faculty. away from smoke. folding back the skin. for it is not beneficial.text VII 45 1. 2. Do not moisten the head. though sound. And when astringent drugs have been used as ointments for pain. sometimes to the right and sometimes to the left. release. In the case of opthalmia recurring annually and locally. If he should have the physique. on his side. you should treat this case by cutting into the forehead. drawing blood is beneficial for some troubles of this kind. and the pain does not abate after the application of the drug. He should lie in the dark. while the swellings are not painful. dip in honey and give to swallow one or two raw cloves of garlic as big as possible and ox liver. VIII 1. sawing the bone and removing the moisture. then it is beneficial to apply any of the poultices you think may be beneficial. If somehow the eyes. exert as much pressure as possible for a long time. Food: a little bread and water to drink. fire and other bright things. A poultice is not beneficial if there is no pain.

ν η ε μα ερμ ν μ λιστα ερμα νει γ μεν ν. λλ’ δ I 4 μετ τ ηρ MH fere recc. ε ματ ς δ μ ντ ς. δ συμμ ειν π λ ν ρ τ δ κρυ ν σ π λειψιν συμ ρει 5 δ δια λ πειν συμ ρει π λ ν ρ ν ν.: μετ τε τ ηρ ηρ Cornarius 5 περ ψι ς vel τ λ ς τ ν περ ψι ς vel τ λ ς τ υς vel τ λ ς τ ν περ ψ ων habent nonnulli .46 3. 2 αλμ ς π ν δ H: λαμπρ H2IR: μετ γε τ περ ψι ς Ιππ κρ ειν MI fere recc.: π ν ειν αλμ ς H | λαμπρ . μετ τ ηρ τ ν π ιε σ αι. δ M: λαμπρ . text ν γ ρ πρ καλε ται. δ κρυ δυν μεν ς αλμ ς π νε ν πρ ς τ λαμπρ ρ ν ν.

It is not beneficial either to keep the eyes closed for a long time. especially if there is a hot flux. . (Even) if the flux does not persist. it is beneficial to apply as ointment a drying substance. For pent-up tears cause heat.text 47 3. summons a tear. It is not beneficial to gaze continuously for a long time. for the eye. unable to contend with the brightness.

.

early treatment by cautery and purging is effective. gradual onset. does not seem to fit either cataract or glaucoma. mais elle devient difforme et gris foncé’. Ermerins Prolegomena XL. c’est la cornée qui est affectée … S’il s’agit de l’irits. Il faut songer soit à la cataracte soit à une kératite …’1 In truth. second eye often affected later. outline prognosis and recommended treatment. but finds the rest of the passage ‘très-obscur et à peu près inintelligible’. as both usually come on slowly and 1 Foesius I 736. coming on suddenly and without apparent cause. cautery and purging are palliatives.COMMENTARY I Three deleterious conditions are detailed. (iii) an intermediate colour. (iii) ‘Distinction assez illusoire. 1. (ii) ‘On pense à la cataracte non reconnue comme telle et donc avec traitement hors de propos. description of the salient symptom in terms of colour is followed by brief comment. ‘such as happens in cataract or glaucoma’. Sichel 137–138. it is difficult to advance beyond these judgments. see Introduction I. (ii) ‘sea-like’. if any: (i) ‘lapis-like’. c’est bien la pupille qui est en cause. Joly outlines further candidates. favouring rather cataract in its different manifestations and different stages.) No names are applied to these conditions. Joly 173 in successive ‘notes complémentaires’. Sichel suggests that (i) is glaucoma and (ii) cataract. . all with reference to perceived change in the colour of the ψιες ‘visual parts’. S’il s’agissait en réalité de la cornée. Condition (i). the young recover within seven years but older people do not. Foesius notes qualis in suffusione aut glaucomate contingit. (On the sense of the term. sudden unprovoked onset. n. Attempts by commentators to isolate and identify these conditions in modern terms are tentative and inconclusive. ce serait … une kératite’. but is ultimately non-committal: (i) ‘… Il pourrait s’agir du glaucome. Ermerins is uncertain about glaucoma. no treatment avails. mais alors. In each case.

Of course. the retina hanging into the eye like a grey balloon. seen later in Oreibasios. 6 and 248. 61. 1903. 38.)2 It is surprising that γλαυκ ς ‘grey’ does not feature in our author’s choice of palette. occasionally in cataract the second eye deteriorates rapidly after the first has done so slowly. 2005. of youth and adolescence and iritis is common in such systemic diseases as diabetes. with its gradual development. but the fact that the eye is solid and hard. γλαυκ η old woman with miscellaneous other troubles. which at this time could not have been differentiated from cataract. ψις. 11. 3 Marganne. Rufus is the first physician known to have recognized the difference (frg. 4. which manifests as greyness. and can be congenital). Trobe and Hackel. which is typically a disease of the elderly (though it can present at any age. glaucoma and cataract frequently coexist in the elderly. 8. cataract being an almost inevitable ultimate complication of glaucoma. 8. 50–51.. In Galenic works the two conditions are frequently discussed together. .50 commentary insidiously. 2. as it does in Prorrhetic 2 (Prorrh. 180–181. both theoretical in Aphorisms and practical in Epidemics. words of this root occur ( μ λυωπ αι ‘cases of dimness’ and γλαυκ σιες ‘cases of glaucous eyes’.48 L. figs 60. (However. figs 30. both are seen as affections arising without external precipitating injury. ‘the eyes were glaucous’. where recovery is said to occur. Bedford. 350. esp. 31 and 90–91.]. fig.502 L. In both. young and b. (Keratitis is a disease. with its elusive ‘intermediate’ coloration and the subdivision according to age of patient a. 134–136.]). fig. iridocyclitis. Duke-Elder II 1938. 225. Similarly.3 In practice. none of these passages implies the particular condition of glaucoma. 1877–1944. older is more complex. usually short-lived.174 L.) Also. Spalton et al. case of an 31 [4. 116 DR).]). fits the common pathology of cataract. condition (iii) a. 1879–1890. giving rise to the acute crisis of detached retina. 2 See Lawson. and the onset of glaucoma can be sudden. 3. 1971. 20 [9. seems to correspond rather to intraocular inflammation. Aph. 30 [5. Condition (iii) b again fits cataract. 2002. although glaucoma is marked by a greenish reflex in the early stages. this passes and the cardinal sign is not the colour of the pupil at all. 55. Paul of Aigina and others. one eye frequently following the other. haziness of the eye is a feature. 1979. Condition (ii). Epid. in other treatments of the diseases of old age. Condition (iii). fig. whether inflammation of the cornea—keratitis— or inflammation of the iris and ciliary body—iritis. despite the term ‘glaucous’. 109–110.

a further candidate for (iii) is hemangioma. when Celsus searches for colour words to describe the pathology of the eye. It may be that a single condition is envisaged in Prorrhetic 2. (iii) intermediate in On Sight (? corresponding with metal-colour in Celsus) is likewise not so bad. This is a good methodological starting point. again tri-partite. it is in an attempt to discriminate between different types or stages of suffusio ‘cataract’: the distinction is an important determinant of whether particular cases are sanabiles ‘curable’ and so of whether and when surgery should be attempted. the situation is worse if it is large and caeruleus ‘dark-blue’ (7. It is not clear even whether the perceived changes are thought to affect pupil alone or pupil and iris or cornea or the eye more generally. offers three alternative descriptions for a colour or range of colours which he finds hard to describe.48 L. by adding further information. The modern potential for differential diagnosis is vast. Broadly. . the coloration in the three conditions is so vaguely described as to render them indistinguishable. 2. glaucoma and keratitis. for instance if we suppose the reference to be to the area of the eyes.13–14). In Celsus’ scheme.]. Certainly. δ ν ρηστ ν ‘where pupils become grey or silvery or lapiscolour. In any case. viewed by him as distinct and different. 20 [9. including cataract. The author of Prorrhetic 2 likewise lists three colour changes—specifically with reference to the κ ρη ‘pupil’—but regards all three conργυρ ειδ ες γιν μεναι ditions as hopeless: α δ κ ραι γλαυκ μεναι κυ νεαι. and the author. Prorrh. a soft bluish swelling in the eyelid caused by a benign and often self-limiting tumour. there is hope if the cataract is small and has colorem … marinae aquae vel ferri nitentis ‘the colour of sea-water or of gleaming metal’. striving for precision.commentary 51 The author correctly observes that changes in colour are diagnostically significant and he makes a commendable effort to classify three conditions. nothing can be done’. Celsus’ scheme corresponds with that of On Sight: (i) dark-blue in both is bad. The colour correspondences are inexact: even the word translated ‘lapis-colour’ is not identical in formation to the term ‘lapis-like’ in our case (i) and the correspondence of ‘silvery’ and ‘grey’ to our cases (ii) and (iii) is at best rudimentary (see further below). (ii) sea-colour in both is not so bad. rather than to the eyeball. Any physician would be hard put to it to differentiate between conditions by verbal description alone: colour photography is an invaluable adjunct in the modern textbook or online database: thus. ‘haziness’ is a term commonly applied to many different conditions. but it is only a starting point.

the conditions so treated are attributed to a flux of noxious matter descending from the head and affecting the eye. phlebotomy (that is. different points are made in a jerky sequence: big bright things visible. drugs inserted in the nose) is recommended also at 4. 6. The author plunges in medias res. which can thin down phlegm’ (6. significantly. τ ια τησιν).52 commentary The treatment prescribed here is consonant with that advocated throughout the work. κα τ τ . he sums up victus optimus est qui pituitam extenuat. σα ως δ . The first sentence is clumsily repetitious in phrasing. The syntax is predominantly paratactic. as well as smokeinhalations and acrid ointments. Purging the head (that is. The final τε … τε is similar in balanced effect. letting blood by cutting the vessels) here abjured is the preferred treatment at 7 and cautiously admitted at 9.2 and 7. but may be simply fortuitous. when it could be treated medicamentis ‘by drugs’ without need for surgery.1–2. as commonly emended. Implicitly. where an attempt is sis and διε made to describe precisely the nature and degree of sight loss. ‘that regimen is best. things brought close visible. irrigation by errhines. Antithetical sentences and clauses are favoured: ν μ ν ν ω … ν δ πρεσ υτ ρω and ρ μ ν. τα τα. cautery of the vessels in the temples. especially demonstrative pronouns: τ ια τη (or. In section 2. as beneficial in the early stages of cataract. τ τ υ. It is notable that Celsus too regarded letting blood from the forehead or the nostrils. 5. 7 as well as being the subject of the long section 3. imperative later. 35). application of heated instruments to the affected parts or to the vessels) is advised also at 2. 4. γιν μεναι … γ ν νται … πειδ ν γ νωνται. it can be seen that the author of On Sight subscribes to the common view that in disease noxious stuff might be diverted from one part of the body (eyes) to an orifice (nose) for expulsion. The alliteration of κα α ρειν … κε αλ ν … κα ειν and κα σις κα κ αρσις τ ς κε αλ ς suggests a mantra of the trainee physician. cautery (that is. vision straight ahead impaired and peripheral vision lost. The repetition π λλ κις … ν π λλ ρ νω seems to seek emphaρη is a gnomic aorist. and expulsion of phlegm by gargling. broken by one temporal clause. From the stress on nasal purging. . τ τω. with asyndeton particularly remarkable in the first sentence. The verb δια ε ρεσ αι too is repeated three times.1. one indefinite relative and three similarly phrased conditional clauses. There is conspicuous redundant repetition of pronouns. τ τ ισιν.

‘without discernible precipitating cause’ (cf. . birds. 1.628 L. 1502. Hdt. All mss have the incorrect form α τ μαται. (On differentiation between cataract and glaucoma. See Maxwell-Stuart.]) and in Koan Prognoses. κ αν ς a dark-blue enamel or lapis lazuli. (See Demokritos. 161. Aristotle col. 2. Sometimes sheen or texture. clouds. ‘damaged … damaged … damaged’): this sense of δια ε ρεσ αι (passive) indicates pathological decline to an irretrievable point. ‘like κ αν ς’ (differentiated by Demokritos. ‘spon- taneously and more by action of nature than of disease’). R. 796a18. 50. unlike αλασσ ειδ ς following. κυαν τιδες ‘lapis-like’. Alc. seems to be implied. in Places of Man it is used of severe pain (change and ‘destruction’ of the appropriate nature of any bodily part is the origin of bodily pain.]).commentary 53 1. 1921.334 L. α τ ματ ι ‘spontaneously’.) κυ νε ς (contracted κυαν ς) is the regular adjective indicating composition of. of deafness. usage is wide: of hair. ships. flowers. cit.) κυαν ς coexisted with the less common form κυαν( )ειδ ς. de sens. rather than hue. esp. later. the addition begs the question. Hom. starvation or stomach upset. 1792.1 [6. sea. also Platnauer. Coac. ‘dark blue’: Greek colour terms are notoriously difficult to translate. 1981. διε αρμ ναι … δια ε ρ νται … διε ρη ‘destroyed … destroyed … destroyed’ (or. 42. ‘bluish’. 517a and. the adjective was used to qualify minerals. 179. 1–6. DK 68 A 135 = Thphr. frequently opposed to expressions involving πρ ασις ‘cause’.4 Both adjective and adverb are favoured in the HC (one hundred occurrences). perhaps. or more commonly similarity to. But. lit. Already in Homer. evidence of the mechanical copying which typifies the tradition of On Sight. also Pl. loc. The μ ν solitarium implies an opposition to damage where the cause can be determined. cf. or objects of striking blue colour. 209 [5. 261) it is evident that the distinction made by the author from αλασσ ειδ ς ‘sealike’ will be hard to define. of facial collapse (‘destruction’ of the face a mortal sign. E. unless caused by the reversible conditions sleeplessness. Latin caeruleus is equivalent. Here of blindness (cf.5 LSJ renders κυαν τις ‘bluish grey’ with the explicatory addition ‘in glaucoma’. 8 below. Loc. the verb is common in the gynaecological treatises of abortion or miscarriage. ‘like lapis lazuli’.). Foesius Oeconomia α τ μ τως sponte magisque naturae vi quam morbi. from Euripidean usage of the sea (Hel. 38). also κυαναυγ ς. 77. see Introduction V. κυαν τις 4 5 See also Iugler.

Some names for illnesses have no adjectival analogues: for example. 270–271. sc.194. 1. can be significant in establishing groups of works of common provenance.τις is an adjectival suffix (feminine) which in some cases became substantival. ρεν τις.54 commentary is not a regular colour term and the formation of κυαν τις is itself peculiar. ρρ τις. and are found only as substantives: the transition can be seen in passages where σιν νε ρ τιδα ‘to a wastadjectival and substantival usage coexist ( ς ing disease of the kidney’. α ματ τις. σπ γγ τις ‘sponge-like’ applied both to stone and plant) but this similarity rarely relates to colour: thus. Aff.7 απ νης ‘all of a sudden’. 274.]). 324–326. not only in medicine but in other sciences also.]. ργ τις. 15 [7. 18 [7. An author’s usage tends not to be for one or the other exclusively but απ νης is preferred in the gynaecological For other such formations. and so too with λωρ τις. later writers were adapting and extending pre-existing formations. ‘phrenitis’. πλευρ τις. a grass-green stone. 28 [6. such adjectives are applied especially to λ ψ ‘vessel’ (e. See Langslow.g. especially in the gynaecological treatises (minerals αλκ τις. λι ς.6 Another range of . 1963.260 L. 20 [6.τις technical terms relates to minerals.] followed by π δ νε ρ τιδ ς ‘from the kidney disease’. Int. there are also eight of the adjective απ ναι ς). or in some cases to both (σπλην τις ‘disease of the spleen’ Morb.]. The development in ancient usage is part of the general development of technical terms. ρυσ τις and vegetable matter λ κων τις ‘earth-almond’). Patterns of preference in such ordinary vocabulary. Acut. 5 [2.]). and the argument. Both can be seen in the HC. 3 [6. see Kretschmer and Locker. where choice may be subconscious. on the ‘lexicalist’ versus ‘derivationalist’ controversy in the development of suffixes. The first two were regarded as traditional names for ‘acute’ diseases (given by the ρ α ι ‘ancients’. and another still to plants. ‘suddenly’: this adverb is more common in the HC than the synonymous α νης (eighty-eight versus fiftyeight occurrences. the suffix being firmly embedded in English and other European languages to denote a disease with local inflammation (tonsillitis etc. 2000. In some such formations.210 L. The practice had a long future.144 L. that a suffix can exhibit a kind of ‘polysemy’. is a vine with white grapes.230 L. 26. The formation . In the HC. but ‘vessel at the spleen’ Morb.g. 1. Some terms seem to bypass the adjectival stage.). μπελ ς. Int. πατ τις) and to types of ν σ ς ‘disease’.204 L. the idea of similarity is apparent (e. 6 7 . ‘pleuritis’ and ‘arthritis’. sc. but the colour element is already there initially. if the view that it is an old form is correct.]). 196 L.

6. τ ι των λγημ των. αλ ειδ ς ‘like glass’). 78 [4. With this grouping there is an outlier. texture (σπ γγ ειδ ς ‘sponge-like’). is altered by editors following Heidel to τ ια τησιν. αλασσ ειδε ς ‘sea-like’: here the formation to express similitude is regular. (But cf. Heidel. like αλασσ ειδ ς here. Op de Hipt. 189. Craik. 370 L. 62 [4.ειδ ς suffix accompanies or replaces the . with respect to hardness (λι ειδ ς ‘stone-like’). 47. 31. or as perceived by the sense of touch. 1998. 166. newly introduced. is prevalent in the surgical treatises Fractures and Articulations (Fract. with reference to the topic of ophthalmia. also concretely with regard to shape (κ τυλ ειδ ς ‘spoon-like’). 9. unique to Airs.ειδ ς occurs in the HC of likeness in a general or abstract sense ( ν ωπ ειδ ς. σιδι ειδ ς ‘like pomegranate peel’. ‘godlike’).132. κρ των ειδ ς a kind of root and δα ν ειδ ς a kind of plant only in Nature of Woman (Artic. or the sense of sight.]. Artic. sc. are unique to a single treatise: ταινι ειδ ς ‘ribbon-like’ and δημι ειδ ς ‘fat-like’ only in Articulations. nominative singular with ησις. The suffix . quae malum superare valeat. 32. 312 L. Sometimes the . in Articulations and in Internal Affections. generally but not always indicative of a pathological condition:11 exceptionally.450 L. or temperature ( λ γ ειδ ς ‘fiery’). 228–231. κε αλ ειδ ς ‘head-like’ only in Internal Affections.]). and several formations. non est curatio.]). Mul. 1972. Nat. ‘there is no treatment effective to surmount the trouble’. 193.202.180. υμ ειδ ς.9 However. 1963. . especially with respect to colour (μ λυ δ ειδ ς ‘lead-like’. that our text followed on prescriptive material now lost.10 The incidence of the suffix is marked in the gynaecological treatises. ε ειδ ς ‘man-like’. as is intrinsically probable.8 κ στιν ησις τ ια τη ‘there is so such treatment (sc. which seems to be a special medical variant on it.1. See Kretschmer and Locker. with dative plural of ψις. Ermerins keeps τ ια τη but paraphrases in translation. and exclusively used in Internal Affections and Diseases 2 (ten and five occurrences respectively). 238 L.δης suffix. 38. 19.358. in terms of same or similar treatment useful for different cases. 268 L. 33 [7. 1914.]. 27 [7.) Such a designation of treatment found to be effective. 10 [3. M’s reading can stand if we suppose. Int.commentary 55 texts. Waters and Places. as that previously described)’: M’s τ ια τη.]. dative plural. Xenophon uses 8 9 10 11 Cf. 146.

7 [5. Calvus si curetur ‘if treated’.]). In H π η is written but corrected to εραπε η a synonymous lectio facilior.56 commentary ρ ρ δης in the sense ‘well-jointed’ (X. 26 [5. 1. as here) in description of treatment. the former in the gynaecological works. the two senses can coincide in close proximity (Epid. as Loc. the beginning of the treatment. 7. myrrh and ‘flower of copper’ were among materials used (Morb. τ τ υ ‘of this person’: the demonstrative regularly refers to the patient.]. 2. 5. 1) and where and how to perform cautery (cf. 112 [8.208 L. 2 and 7.74 L. 4. 7 and Koan Prognoses. as in the case of δρωπ ειδ ς and δρωπι δης: there are twelve Hippocratic instances of each. tr. over a long time’: the identical pairing of adverbial phrases occurs in Prorrhetic 2 (Prorrh. especially in contexts where patients with different conditions. 5. 2.]). it is used especially of postulated treatment.]). ρ νω ‘gradually. 2000. the latter in Epidemics 2. Cyn. 40 L.]) that specification of drugs is rare. 4. 43 [9. 2. of skin diseases. 4 [6. 1–2. Mul. 13 [7. followed also by Cornarius) preponderates in the tradition. requiring different treatment. 19. The Latin suffix -osus which combines the characteristics of both Greek suffixes.330 L. Hom. κα α ρειν τ ν κε αλ ν κα κα ειν τ ς λ ας ‘purge the head and cauterise the vessels’: the physician is presumed to know what drug to use in purging the head (for the recommendation cf.]. 2.242 L. 4. are discussed. this reading (in W. 340–342.]). 1–4). The expression τα τα (or τ δε) π σ ειν is used both in description of symptoms and (more rarely.34.300 L. expressing both pathology and similitude may be compared. 5. which if followed would be or would have been successful (cf.]. 1). but it is known that celery juice. 5. Epid. Nat. 2. Epid. In the latter sense. 5. 13.208 L.12 The two formations may coexist. 22. 25 [7.226 L. Regimen 3 and Drugs. 8 [5. Purging the head was such a routine matter (commonly a treatment for eye flux. 4. onion (juice). κατ μικρ ν ν π λλ κ ν ρ μεν ς π η τα τα ‘and if he has this done at the beginning’: sc. . or of the problem. 12 See Langslow. 38. Diseases 4. Mul. 1 and especially 3.

20 L. ‘in front’: this is a slightly odd expression. cf. but only ahead and even that not well. ‘to (the area) from the front’ (Sph.]). lit. A disease affecting the eyes. of arresting phlegm (Morb. 258c). For the αλμ κατ στη ‘the condition of the eye (bloodshot sense. κα στανται ‘settle down’: the change from the simple στασ αι to the compound κα στασ αι seems to be merely stylistic variatio. A second point is made in the next sentence: the patient is short-sighted. supposes a lacuna after τ ων πτ . there is a cluster also in Fractures and Articulations). both).]). ‘from’. bile (Int. is described in Diseases 2 (Morb. 7. following Jugler. 2. 35 [7. lit. τ τ and weeping) settled down’ (Epid. 12 [7. we may compare Plato ε ς τ πρ σ εν τι ητ σαντες ‘still searching ahead’. 3. is considerably less common in the HC than might have been expected (sixty-one occurrences. numerology: seven days is commonly significant in the description of fevers.252 L. The implication here is loss of peripheral vision: the patient sees ahead. 11 [5. κα ωρε π τ λαυρ τερ ν ‘does not go on to get worse’: the corollary expression π τ ελτ ν (of amelioration) is used in the case histories of Epidemics. ψιες ‘the visual parts’.118 L.]) or pain (Int.]). α δ μετα ‘intermediate’: sc. of which twenty-five are in Koan Prognoses. especially Pythagorean. unidiomatically.384 L. Sichel.commentary 57 σταται τ κακ ν ‘the trouble is arrested’: the verb is used similarly. The period suggests a belief in the importance of the number seven associated with ancient. There is probably some minor corruption: the mss punctuate variously (some having a sense break after λτι ν ρ ‘sees quite well’) and disagree on connectives (κα or δ or even. ‘from’. being otiose in conjunction with the suffix conveying the same sense. the preposition.]). However. 51 [7. ν ω … πρεσ υτ ρω γεν μ νω … πρεσ υτ ρω ντι … τ ων πτ … ‘when someone is young … older … when someone is older than seven years’: the genitive is comparative. but the fractured nature of the Greek precludes confidence. Compare the description of the μ ωψ ‘short-sighted person’ in the Aristotelian Problemata: he brings things up close towards him in order to see . a common enough word in Greek. π πρ σ εν ‘ahead’. 1 [7. and commonly recurring in the seventh or fourteenth year.292 L. 2. λαυρ ς ‘bad’.

25. 31. notably in Prorrhetic 2 (Prorrh. Joly 173. corroborated by Hippocratic parallels. Joly translates (but without justification) ‘Quant à la vue elle-meme.58 commentary them. cum videndi acies sana fuerit … ‘and the vision of the eyes. 959b). such as Prorrhetic 1.13 The word μμα. and the ensuing genitive absolute. as above.234 L.44. but notes that it is not at all clear what is intended by the μμα. ‘en provoquant une vasodilation’. introducing ψις ‘sight’ merely compounds the difficulty. 46 L. τ αλασσ ειδε ‘in the sea-like case’: the dative is read for the unani- mously incorrect accusative of the mss. 2. Ermerins Prolegomena XL. Aff. la pupille ayant conservé son état normal …’ but notes that there is no parallel for μμα in the sense of ‘vision’.]). said by LSJ to be poetic and rare in prose. gives perfect αλμ σι ‘as to sores in the eyes’. Sichel finds the chapter ‘très-obscur’. The opening words τ μμα ν τ σιν eye in the eyes’ are meaningless. whereas the πρεσ της ‘aged person’ removes things to a distance from him (Probl. The sense: τ λημ α ν τ σιν 13 Sichel 138. is in itself unexceptional. 22 [6. laquelle … se stabilise après la croissance’. τ τ ισιν ‘in these people’ or ‘patients’: demonstrative. . following Foesius verbatim he translates et oculorum visum. II It is stated that a certain condition which may appear in childhood is to be left alone until the sufferer is fully grown. his diagnosis is ‘une amblyopie amaurotique survenant sur des individus jeunes …’ Ermerins too comments on the difficulty of the passage. he notes that the treatment envisaged might occasionally be effective in serious cases. cf. then treated by surgery to the eyelid. being Ionic rather than poetic (seventy-three occurrences in the HC and in αλμ ς). some works.] discussed below). la pupille étant saine …’ and comments that this problem might be ‘une myopie. preferred to A simple emendation. εναι τ α ματ ς Phlebotomy is more commonly expressed by genitive (VC 18 [3.]. 18 [9.250 L. when the eyesight is sound …’. and declines to attempt identification of the disease. The first consideration is that the transmitted text gives αλμ σι ‘as to the nonsense. ‘Quant à la vision des yeux. he translates. ‘notes complémentaires’.

2002. 2005. on grounds both of visual similarity. as is common in such nosological accounts (cf. repeated eight times. the emphatic first words of 1. ‘discharge’. In sum. The feared outcome is λκ ς ‘a lesion’. See Bedford. with regard to their heat and salty quality. this is described in the ensuing chapter and is evidently prolapse of the eye contents. 2. white and soft (prognosis good) or yellow and livid (prognosis bad) or dry (prognosis pain. which may be mingled with tears. 7 and 9). echoed as λημ α σμικρ περ α τ ς (sc. where there is similar concomitant irritation. and to the type of tears. 44–45. 1971. seen today only in major Cf. figs 27. pain and dryness. 3–4. τ ς ψιας) ‘small sores around the sight’ in Koan Prognoses (Coac. 16 Chaviara-Karahaliou.]) there is a long and detailed discussion αλμ … λημ ντες ‘eyes suffering sores’. Spalton et al. The term λ μη with the common diminutive form λημ ν refers to noxious matter collecting in or flowing from the eyes: ‘rheum’. Throughout the passage. λ μη (singular) is a key word.. 18 [9. where different developof ments of such a condition are considered.630 L.44. but short-lived) and also to the type of swelling. where the lower lid is rolled over and the lashes irritate the eye.14 and of intrinsic plausibility. 26a. Gourevitch and Grmek. 94. 214 [5. apparently suitable in context. Trobe and Hackel. and ectropion or eversion of the lids. 1990. eyelids sticking together overnight with secretions at lid margins) and of blepharitis (red eyelids with scaling along the margins) are essentially similar to conditions such as entropion. 1990. a technical term being supplanted by a common word. the doctor should consider τ κ τ αλμ ντα ‘the stuff flowing from the eye’. grittiness. 27a and 136–137. In this passage. fig. it can be viewed as a protracted irritation in the eye which might lead to any one of a range of chronic conditions: the characteristic symptoms of conjunctivitis (soreness. with regard to its size. Here. ‘ulceration’ which might affect both pupil and lids (κ νδυν ς τ τε κ ρη λκω ναι κα τ σι λε ρ ισι) and in extreme cases ωγμ ‘rupture’ of the eye. 14 15 .15 For the latter there is copious archaeological evidence. 46 L. 2000.16 In Prorrhetic 2 (Prorrh. attention is paid to the nature of the discharge. the diminutive λημ α (plural) of Koan Prognoses. ‘rheum’ is not a disease but a symptom. 107. Properly speaking.]). 5. 98 for such corruption in M and mss derived from M. ‘secretions’.commentary 59 corruption is readily explained. which would be especially marked at the majuscule stage. 5–8. The emendation has the added merit that it provides a quasi-heading at the start of a new topic. cf. 2. 58–60. figs 26. Jouanna. 138. 63–64. 42–43.

a treatise possibly by the same author as Prorrhetic 2. in the case of women and children. A precise prediction is made for cases where the swelling subsides but tears persist and discharge continues: in the case of men there will be ‘eversion’ of the eyelids (lit. 6.630 L. ulceration in the eye (τ ν μ τ ν ψιν ιτ να ‘the tunic around the sight’. pain. the formation of a sore is viewed as the resolution of the problem. Symptoms of spring ophthalmias detailed in Epidemics 1 include streaming.e. . n. 199.]).]). The account in Prorrhetic 2 is surely one of the sources. There is one salient difference: in Ancient Medicine. A succinct but clear description of eye troubles is found in Ancient Medicine. 1. Thus. both ulceration and eversion of the lids (cf. ‘turning away’: the same verb κτρ πειν is commonly used of the womb leaving its proper place). 6. with parallel features. 1998. chest (VM 18–19 [1. tears in eye pain are described as cold. as in Koan Prognoses (λ μαι. and troublesome σμικρ λημ α ‘small sores’ (Epid. the sclerotic membrane).e. pain and inflammation. 3). eyes and throat. Coac.] and λημ α. 7. But in the Aristotelian Problemata. release coming through ‘coction’ and ‘thickκα γ νηening’ of the ‘streaming matter’ (μ ρι ν τ ε ματα πε ται πα τερα κα λ μη π’ α τ ν ). 2. 1990. 31). 138 and on parallelisms Jouanna. 6. the differentiation between male and female patients in On Sight ). symptoms of streaming. for Celsus’ account of the complications of inflammation of the eye (see especially 6.616 L. 10. More commonly. 2. the sores themselves are viewed as problematical or potentially so. 5. i. not in itself problematical.17 The account in Ancient Medicine has strong similarities with material in Prorrhetic 2: emphasis on discharge called λ μη. ‘the unconcocted 17 On the sequence. The processes in the three fluxes are presented as parallel. 4. 3. the constant shedding of teary matter. because τ μ ν πεπτ ν ψυ ρ ν. Prog. 200. leads to problematical complications. 214 [5. Celsus may be familiar also with On Sight in listing many different types of vesicae ‘growths’ on the upper eyelids and allowing for some which generally occur in children (7. [2.612. the appearance of sores in the region of the pupils is declared a bad sign in parallel passages of Prognostic. nn. 6.116 L. as it is stated that ulceration may extend to the cheek). Similarly. ulceration of the eyelid (here clearly the lower lid. as in On Sight and Prorrhetic 2.]).60 commentary eye accidents. see Craik. and probably the main source. 2 [2. i. there embedded in an account of the pathological effects of flux to nose. 616 L.

). the prevalence doubtless reflects a high incidence of eye disease. See also Pollux Onom. 13. Imperatival infinitives and nominative participles again occur: σκεψ μεν ς … λεπτ νειν. 19.564 L. 8) and proverbially (Ar. The syntax is jerky. In Glands. τ λημ α ‘in the case of sores’: the term was widely used in a metaphorical sense (most famously applied by Pericles to the island Aigina seen in relation to the Peiraieus. 23. 1953.1. The theory of flux follows similar lines in many treatises. λ μας—troubles in ears. who often fails to help where help is most needed) explain. 1.]). 2. The terms γλ μων or γλαμυρ ς are cognate. Lexicographers (but not Erotian. 116. Arist. XII. causing disease if it is not removed. Hom.]. with conditional and temporal clauses piled up. and the singuαλμ ς συνιστ μεν ν. In this section. impure matter’ (Latte. 31. treatment for flux to the eyes with attendant ocular ulceration and rupture aims to remove δ κρυ ν συμπεπηγ ς ‘coagulated tear’ or τ συνεστηκ ς ‘coagulated material’ from the eye (Loc.) Dexippos of Kos held similar views of disease-inducing flux: bile and phlegm melt and in more liquid form lead to ichors and sweats which putrefy ν.] and ως π κρ σι ς. ων κα πικα ων. ‘purgations’ (Gland. μ ας. Nu. 258 L. Rh.]). is uniquely designated λ ματα ‘impurities’. 12 [8. 302 L. 184 .commentary 61 is cold’ (Probl. the latter used of bleary eyes (as Mul. 105 [8. 2. strongly didactic. 1. Hesychios on these forms). 65 and 4. 1411a15. 593).564 L. matter in flux from the brain. 91 K. Lond. 959b20). (The language is similar to that of VM: verb λκ below in 12 [8. above in 11 [8.566 L.298. 592. the former used of blear-eyed people (cf. 4. 327). κα αρσ α ‘white moist lar as λευκ ν γρ ν ν stuff gathered in the eyes. and with a genitive absolute (rare in this work) equivalent to a conditional clause awkwardly preceding another genitive phrase. nose and and thicken.]): it may be suspected that this apparent hapax legomenon is in fact another corruption of λημ α. In Places in Man. a reference to coction. this time by an aural error of a notoriously common type. 119 [8. bringing eyes (Anon. 25.] and Mul. Hesychios glosses the plural αλμ ν πεπηγυ αι συστ σεις ‘collections as α περ τ ς καν ς τ ν of matter fixed about the corners of the eyes’ and as κρ υσαι τ ν αλμ ν κα αρσ αι ‘impurities flowing from the eyes’. Per. 22–26). the pupil reader is directly addressed with second person singular verbs. Plu.228 L. Galen glosses γλαμυρ γλημ δεις κα γρ ‘bleary: bleared and moist’ (linguarum Hippocratis explicatio. 7 [6.250. as in the warning κ ν ελ ης (where Joly needlessly emends to ελ ις) but he must work using his own discretion ν δ κ πρ σδε σ αι.

as well as) the eye. α τ τ αλμ σκεψ μεν ς ‘considering the actual eyes’: the dative singular of the mss could be understood as ‘considering (the patient’s) eyelids with his (the operator’s) eye’—but this is intolerably otiose—or as ‘with (i. 1998. 127. provided it growth is complete. though the dual number is rare in the HC. 19. Ermerins’ emendation of the unidiomatic dative singular to the accusative dual is very attractive. The verb is used in a similar sense to υλ σσεσ αι below. Lys.]).62 commentary for the inclusion of λ μη and λημ ν in eye diseases and LSJ on cognate forms from EM. Hesychios’ glosses γλ μ ς μ α ‘blear: mucus’ and γλαμυ ι ν γλαμ ν. 569) is probably an error for μ ας.264 L. For these reasons. 15). 18 See Craik. when τ ς ψι ς γι ς σης ‘where the visual part is sound’: i. considering the eyelids’—but this is cumbersome. a similar policy. 378) are a telling indication that peccant matter from eyes and nose was viewed as essentially the same. This can be seen too in the standard medical view that noxious stuff at the eyes could be expelled through the nose. it can refer to other body fluids also. 1.)18 does not affect the sight or. The change from plural to singular (ad sensum) is readily acceptable. in the terminology of 1 above. ν τε ηλε α . 1953. . occurring only in the gynaecological works and in Epidemics 5. 62 [4. till mid teens. furthermore the gloss λ μας μ ς (Latte. bleareyed’ (Latte. ν τε ρσην ‘whether the person is female or male’: M’s ηλε α can stand. Though generally used of nasal mucus. the verb σκ πτεσ αι ‘consider’ is invariably followed by the accusative (or by a preposition) in the HC and the plural rather than singular of ‘eye’ is required. 1953. Neither interpretation makes acceptable sense. similarly expressed can be seen in Articulations (Artic. 5. (But μ α has a wider semantic range than λ μη.e. Further. as ν ρωπ ς is common gender (cf. τ ν νεωτ ρων ν ρ πων ‘in younger people’: here. where the organ is not ‘destroyed’. The injunction to wait until adulthood before attempting surgery is sensible.e. λημ ν ‘to have bleary mucus: to be bleary.

which is answered at length. 2 [6.436 L. However. in Chapter 3 is abrupt and the introductory word ‘then’ lacks context. but not with white-hot instruments’ clearly leads to. from the inner part of the eyelid. if oral discourse was the original medium. and the expected information about the reasons for the procedure is lacking. Or. see on 4 below. that is the inner corner of the eye (pace Joly ‘en dedans’. Erotian (Δ 18) glosses δια αν σι (same case as here and 5 below). but the crucial information about which vessels. 381.]. μ δια αν σιν ‘not with white-hot instruments’: the injunction that the instruments should not be too hot is sensible for the delicate eye area. manner. but probably with reference to Articulations (Artic. 2 [6. in which part of the body. as opposed to πα ς ‘thick’ (cf. if we think in terms of written compo19 Nachmanson.1 (bis) and κ τω εν. 1917. this would require giving the sense ‘evert’ to λεπτ νειν). 3.commentary 63 τ λ αρα λεπτ νειν ‘attenuate (refine.19 III The subject of this chapter is cautery of the vessels.]).106 L. It is possible that. 484.) On the recommended procedures. 645. even if it does not actually introduce. for armpit (Artic.]).]) or rectum (Haem. 3. also Steril. The author writes with standard anatomical precision: with this term compare πισ εν. 11 [4.3 of ‘directions’ in the body. the connection is clear enough in this author’s loose.436 L. It must be conceded that the transition from discussion of miscellaneous ways to address particular eye problems in Chapters 1 and 2 above to detailed surgical instructions for an unspecified general problem. the excursus on cautery. .106 L. 439. reduce) the eyelids’: make λεπτ ς ‘thin’. 11 [4. also (T 34) τ δια αν α σιδ ρια ‘white-hot instruments’. νδ εν ‘from the inner part’: here.430 L. 222 [8. cf. but probably with reference to Haemorrhoids (Haem. ‘scraping’ if necessary (here perhaps with a needle rather than a scalpel) and cautery. elsewhere instruments are to be very hot. where the eye is not even mentioned. almost stream of consciousness.]). the immediately preceding phrase πικα ων μ διααν σιν ‘cauterising. the mention of cautery prompted a learner’s question. are to be cauterized is unclear. 5 init.

]).302 L. those which constantly beat and are situated between ear and brow’ are cauterised (Loc. He wonders. whether the chapter is somehow misplaced.3.7 [6. see below) that cautery in the back is taken as an example. for different conditions. ‘comme applicable à un plus grand nombre de maladies’ and (rightly) that cautery in all parts of the body is believed to follow the same principles. That such manuals existed is intrinsically probable. 1.302 and 330 L. Joly sees no relevance in the chapter. The effects on the eyes of two types of flux (cf. but finds the sense awkward and has recourse to some emendation and extensive deletion. salty in content. was doubtless familiar with different procedures. and that the purpose is to arrest a flux of noxious matter primarily affecting the eyes and secondarily threatening lower parts of the body. asserting (wrongly.276. Ermerins Prolegomena XL and 280. if unchecked) and flux B (deep. 13. Ermerins allows cautery to be relevant because of its use in ophthalmology. Joly 169. two at the inner corners of the eyes. the aim always being to prevent peccant matter from spreading further down the body. 13 and 40 [6. following Cornarius. with potential to stray dangerously further if unchecked—and viewed as hard to arrest). but treatment extends comprehensively to six other vessels of the head: two alongside the ears. n. The close resemblance of material here with passages of Places in Man (Loc. other vessels were addressed. Hom. coursing from the scalp to the temples. Our surgeon. cautery of the vessels of the temples was a routine treatment for flux A. it may be that the whole chapter has been lifted from a work on cautery. 13. In ancient ophthalmology. without proper adaptation to its new position.]) are here allusively indicated: flux A (superficial. Sichel comments that we have ‘préceptes généraux sur le mode d’exécution de l’ustion des veines’.20 It is here argued that cautery of the vessels in the back of the head and neck is intended. mucuslike in content. commenting dismissively ‘Ce chapitre semble égaré dans une oeuvre d’ophtalmologie’. but his main concern is surely with ophthalmology.3 [6. n. 3. in the case of flux B. Places in Man 1. and possibly a common written source. In Places in Man the vessels which ‘press on the eye. and two πισ εν τ ς κε αλ ς ν εν κα ν εν ν τ 20 Sichel 139. with potential to stray further. 300 L.]) in both content and expression suggests at least a common stock of lore. coursing from the brain to the inner corners of the eyes. who clearly allows for uniformity in the general practice of cautery at the end of the chapter.64 commentary sition. In Diseases 2 these vessels are cauterized. . Hom.

]. 1 [4. i. 6. Celsus’ leisurely explanation permits emendation of the puzzling repeated phrase ‘from below’ in 3. similarly a contrast between μπρ σ εν and πισ εν with reference to the front and back of the head can be seen in Head Wounds (VC 2.]. the second is serious and intractable. Confirmation that the author’s concern is with specialist matters of ophthalmology comes from Celsus. though it may have been popularly used (cf. 194 L. The simple term στ ν lit.. 12. the cervical vertebrae.564. see also Epid. and a flux of phlegm from the lower vessels that lie between skull and membrane of the brain.8. Gland.e.1 [6. 196.312 L.190. 7.].]). rather than to the blood vessels of the back (Artic.468 L. the vessels loosely designated ‘of the back’ may be more precisely designated as the vessels which run from head to neck and to back. 7.342 L. Cy. In addition.]). 7. 202 L. 10 L. cf. parallels usage here.4. 7. It is important to note that the adjective νωτια ς with or without the substantive μυελ ς is commonly applied to the spinal fluid. were recognised to be continuous with those of the back. VC 2 [3. 570 L. 47 etc. and while στ ν may refer to the sacrum (usually as τ ερ ν στ ν) it is not used of the backbone generally. 46. 11. below the skull.e. 683). that is those through which the νωτια ς μυελ ς ‘marrow’ or ‘spinal fluid’ was believed to course from the brain to the lower body. In an extended discussion of treatments for phlegm descending from the head to the eyes (7. 124 [5. i. 2. The first case is common and readily treated. Thus. 15). 8 [7.190 L. where the narrative is compressed and allusive to the point of unintelligibility. 21. [4. E. notably the phrases ‘having bound’ and ‘having traced’: Celsus explains how a ligature is placed round the patient’s neck. 2. where context makes it clear that the skull is intended (as throughout Head Wounds): the term κρ νι ν ‘cranium’ occurs only twice in the HC (lower jaw joins the cranium at the temples. The reason for this is . Hom.]). 1 and 2. 15 H). above the skull.]). and how the vessels of the temples and the top of the head are marked with black ink (7. Several points in Celsus’ account of eye therapy pick up and illumine passages of On Sight. Celsus distinguishes between a flux of phlegm from the upper vessels that lie between skull and scalp. 14 [8. 3 [3. It may be added that the bones of the neck. rather than the back itself. Further. 45. The usage of πισ εν ‘behind’ in these passages to indicate the back of the head or neck. cautery of the neck was practised in order to stop the progress of noxious matter to the flesh πισ εν ‘behind’ by the vertebrae and to divert it to the nose for expulsion (Loc.22 L.commentary 65 κ τιδι ‘behind the head on either side at the occiput’ (Morb. Mochl.]).192. ‘bone’ is commonly used of the skull.

and by papyri of ophthalmological content. 147–172. Detailed instructions for this are given: shave the head. to the extent that no part of medicine is more widely practised throughout the world’.). 782 K. among the Libyans. 187.21 In some societies too the procedure was routinely applied to neonates (among the Ethiopians. similar views on aetiology and therapy are propounded. but he does recommend cautery π τ ν ευματι μ νων αλμ ν ‘for eye flux’ (introductio seu medicus 14. In a late section of de methodo medendi. A Galenic work supplements and verifies the substance of Celsus’ account. . sometimes flux comes from the brain and sometimes from the vessels. and that procedures to arrest the flow of phlegm by treating the vessels are a matter of common and universal practice. when it comes from deep γγε α ‘pockets’ (sc. while in others it was a response to a pathological state. 93) or to young children (at the age of four years. a vast compilation in 14 books occupying over 1. lit. with figs 13–18. This considerable local variation in the choice of the precise point to be targeted is corroborated by the evidence of other medical authors. 1994.). The vessels treated are ‘those in the back of the head. It is explicitly stated that some doctors cut out part of the vessels in the belief that this is the only effective treatment (10. and those in the temples’. coursing from brain to eye). Hdt.66 commentary that the vessels in the first case are accessible (above the skull. ‘noose’) before cutting. Celsus allows for the possibility of flux from both sources simultaneously. 2). coursing to the temples) whereas in the second they are inaccessible (below the skull. There is not much reference to cautery in Galen. ‘celebrated not only in Greece but among other peoples too. While the aim was universal. As it is the head which sends ε μα ‘flux’ to the eyes. esp. 937–942 K. Celsus is quite emphatic that this knowledge is widespread. some used cautery at various points instead or as well. a wide range of diverse procedures was used in different communities and at different dates to attain it: some made a series of incisions at various points in the scalp. carefully address the vessels π σω ‘behind’ and those by the ears and those in the forehead and brows. cut those which beat most. in the brain) it is hard to treat. the head must be treated first. 000 pages in Kühn’s edition. the general treatment is by phlebotomy. it is better to apply a rope ( ρ ν. Severus ap. in the region of the ears. Celsus gives an account of two positions adopted for eye surgery: the patient may be seated on a chair facing the doctor (surgery on the 21 See Marganne. 4. Aetius 7.

trace the precise location of the vessels of the head (in the crown and occiput. There is asyndeton (especially in 4). παρ τ λλ ) may arise simply from the functional nature of the work. having stretched . in 4. Although the language is consistent. clearly indicating a series of steps to be followed by the doctor. on a couch. The surgeon is sitting (or standing. Sections 3–4 contain more general comments and advice. each introduced by πειτα ‘next’. μ ως τ ταται. probably leaning on the floor with his hands in such a way that the head is below the level of the trunk. also beside the ears. or may betray imperfect linguistic knowledge on the part of the writer. in the temples and in the neck)—or perhaps even the entire course of the vessels is to be traced for purposes of didactic demonstration—and then operate with instruments handed to him by an assistant. or from distortion in transmission. τα τα π ντα σσ ν π σ ει. but in this breathless composition the Greek can readily be understood as it stands as a series of memos. πρ ς τ ς ε σης λε ς μ λλ ν. there is a certain unevenness of content. some of it aphoristic in character. legs extended. 1. πειτα ‘then’: editors agree in supposing a lacuna before the first of the five ‘then’ conjunctions. 7. or to press him hard down—by ‘someone’. causing the vessels in the head to become engorged and so more visible. the two positions are designed to give good light and easy access for a right-handed practioner (7. which is recapitulated in the second: ‘Then (having bound. The sentence structures are primarily paratactic. The language is entirely in accord with the rest of the work. The second of these two positions resembles that of On Sight. His waist is held—presumably to keep the patient in place. The patient lies prone.commentary 67 right eye). Nominative aorist participles are used in conjunction with jussive infinitives. Sections 1–2 are uncompromisingly surgical. the general intent of our surgeon’s preparations is now clear and the scene in the surgery can be visualized as follows. There is a double parenthesis after the first ‘then’ conjunction. in such a way that he can apply a ligature to the neck. A similar unevenness characterizes Chapter 9 below. who may be the doctor’s attendant or perhaps a member of the patient’s household. or have his back to the doctor and his head resting on the doctor’s lap (surgery on the left eye). Several unidiomatic or elliptical expressions (πλ ν τ π νυ πρ ς α τ τ στ ω. Triadic expressions are used of the swelling of the vessels in 3 and. with variatio. where he can reach over the head of the patient. depending on the height of the couch) alongside or slightly in front. 4). In any case.

having set below a couch from which he can lean with his hands)—let someone hold his waist—then …’ The aorist participles indicate preparatory actions.470.]. as in the case of the arm (cf. 144 [8. explanation of different types of ligatures either to accelerate or to arrest bleeding. 1953. like an operating table. it is clear that the patient leans not on. Steril. Epid. Hesychios glosses a range of cognate words ναδ σμη. or flexed. The couch is not here a special surgical appliance. the couch. Fract. but from. 144 [8.318 L. Mul. These two first instructions are reminiscent of the many passages in Fractures and Articulations which specify that when bandaging is carried out the limbs must be in a particular position for treatment. ναδ σ μαι. δ ρ ν… στ ρι ηται ‘a couch from which he can lean’: editors have unanimously disregarded the preposition π ‘from’. σκ πε ν then in section 2 ν ε ς followed by γκατακα ειν and δε ων by ντι ναι. a similar use of ‘then’ can be seen in 6 below (three times repeated).460 L. following ’ Sichel verbatim.]) and of the related process of applying a bandage as a tourniquet to arrest any uncontrolled bleeding after venesection (see practical instructions on what to do if bleeding continues after phlebotomy. 2. and the associated infinitives main procedures (in reverse order: see translation): ναδ σας. π ‘on’.68 commentary out the legs.1 and στερ ν in 4.]). The use of τ τε in 4. especially in the arm. as in the case of the leg. 2. 26 [6. either straight. more theoretical comments on the use of ligatures when cutting.430 L. 248 [8. 14 [5. This is a series of technical instructions.]. π ε ς followed by διασημ νασ αι. understanding it as. Similar expressions are used of attaching sponges or swabs (as in preparations for succussion. for example. the prefix may suggest attention to the upper part of the body. κτε νας lit. κτε νας.]). 8 [9. the word is the ordinary one for a household seat. Joly.]. translates ‘… on lui fait prendre avec les mains un point d’appui sur le siege où il est assis …’ However. ‘having outstretched’: cf. Ulc. A similar use of piled up participles can be seen at 7.1 and 8. tied on the head (Latte. Mul. ‘having bound’: the verb applies not to the patient himself but to the ligature. to be followed in a precise sequence.316 L. Medic. 149).2 is also sequential but less precise. 15 [3. 472 L.1 below.]. ναδ σας lit. 2. ν δημα ( να ‘up’ with root δ ω ‘bind’) all with reference to garlands etc.214 L. 3. or even emending it to. Other Hippocratic passages where a ‘couch’ is spec- .116 L.

47b. Instead of referring to the patient’s hands.128 L.438 L. σκ πε ν δ πισ εν ‘trace the vessels of (= running to) the back. Aristotle had warned of the dangers of hitting a neuron while cauterizing the vessels (HA 3. The mss are at variance over punctuation. they wish the tendons of the neck and the nerves to be avoided’.92 L. 5). with a comma after στηρ ηται. Artic. the solution lies in the precise sense 22 23 διασημ νασ αι τ ς νωτια ας See Iugler. Explicit instructions that the patient be kept immobile are given with regard to surgery for haemorrhoids (Haem. Ermerins 280. 2 [6. 2. and the reference of τ σι ερσ .22 but the literal sense predominates. 2. Ar. Calvus translates scapulares and may have known a reading μια ας ‘in the shoulders’. n.commentary 69 ified are in Physician (general requirements.206 L. . 1043.70 L. n. Sichel 139. and examine from behind’: Sichel recognises that the terse instruction intends ‘marquer avec une substance colorante telle que l’encre’ but does not refer to the corroborative matter in Celsus (cited above). this would. Nu. however. Artic.]).]) or where pus is to be expelled (Morb. with scholiast). in commenting that in urendo venas … colli tendines et nervos vitari volunt ‘in cautery of the vessels. who comments testily that one would hardly look for these vessels μπρ σ εν ‘from the front’. refer to the assistant’s hands. 4. λ ας. Simply. 2 [9. Joly finds that ‘les derniers mots ne semblent pas donner un sens satisfaisant’. Foesius I 736.23 As Foesius notes. 7 [4. cf. holding the patient. The tautology of the insistent stress on the location ‘behind’ and on surgery ‘behind’ troubles Ermerins. Joly 169. As argued above. 16 [4. For τις in the sense ‘(doctor’s) assistant’. μ σ ν δ τις τω: ‘let someone hold his waist’: there may be an implicit metaphor from wrestling (cf. or an early emendator. Medic. the patient’s movements are to be restrained.]) and in the gynaecological treatises (for birthing. 4 [7. fomentations and other procedures).]). may simply be trying to alleviate a perceived problem.]. Foesius too found the reading obscure: he took the passage to treat ustionem … venarum quae sunt in dorso ‘cautery of the vessels of the back’ but he did perceptively note that this is an odd designation for the upper part of the back and seems to have understood that the neck (rather than the back) is intended. 1792. Articulations (for a patient with dislocated shoulder. leaning from the couch. he.

73 [7. συ η δια ερμα νειν ‘heat gently’: gentle application of heat would be less likely to cause haemorrhage. ε ι τ σ μα. The prefix πρ . σιδ ρι ν lit. As cautery and phlebotomy fulfilled broadly similar functions (to reduce unwanted bodily moisture or eliminate fleshy tissue). 434 L. 11 [4.422. if it seems the right course’: a cautious approach to blood-letting is apparent throughout this work.70 commentary of νωτια ας not ‘of the back’ but rather ‘coursing to the back’. 9.146. The usage is in line with the author’s general preference for compound verbs. 3 and 5 [3.‘in advance’. 5–6 [6. τ α ματ ς εναι ν μ σ εν ση. with over two hundred occurrences and the middle of the simple verb is used in a way similar to use of the compound here in Fractures (Fract. Int.1 below.]).112 L. ν δ κ καιρ ς ε ναι ‘let blood in advance. the material used in oriental moxibustion). Morb.106 L.]).]. 40 [6. ‘beforehand’ is commonly used in expressions of preparatory surgical procedures. It can be seen from other passages describing the practice of cautery that different types of instruments were regarded as appropriate in different situations (see especially Artic. πρ α ι ναι δ τ . because of their slower and gentler action. Hom.]). 2.]). ‘iron’.330 L. Cauterising instruments were most usually made of metal (as clearly here. compare the similar general passage on the practice of cautery in Places in Man (Loc.212. The verb διασημα νειν occurs six times in the HC but only here in the middle form. 242 L. 148. After a discussion of kairos in medicine the author of Diseases 1 gives examples of improper treatment. The simple form is common. 1.]). 3.242 L. and if using them should not fall short in length and depth of surgery (Morb. Cutting and burning are included: the doctor should not use these methods inappropriately. 28 [7. it seems that individual practitioners or corporate groups favoured use of one or the other method. They might also be of wood dipped in hot oil as in Internal Affections (‘boxwood spindles’. 18. but simply a more general term). The use of the term καιρ ς ‘proper circumstances’ indicates adherence to the standard practice of studying the relevant circumstances of the patient’s condition (cf. such as πρ πυρι ω ‘fumigate beforehand’. 150 L. ‘burner’ is not inconsistent. πα σι σιδηρ ισι ‘with thick (or ‘wide’) instruments’: such instruments are to be used.]) or of vegetable matter of certain types (cf. 28 [7. α ματ ς. Int.2 καυστ ρι ν lit.

6.] etc. ‘occiput’ or a point at the base of the skull (cf.]). see Nat. This further phase of the treatment indicates how to continue cautery by applying a sponge impregnated with olive oil. 40 [7. Nielsen. Morb. 12 [7. .]).). but is more probably intended to allow deeper penetration by the oil.410 L. noted above). a phrase certainly difficult in context and deleted by Ermerins as an ‘absurd’ insertion. 43 [5. The verb is common in the sense ‘accept’ (LSJ I) or ‘admit’ (LSJ II) of a patient accepting or tolerating a particular type of food or drink (especially in Epidemics. to carry out the cautery’) but this ignores τω καυστηρ ω.commentary κα ειν δ 71 πρ ς τ στ ν πισ εν ‘cauterise towards the bone from behind’: this final instruction of section 1 is reminiscent of the most effective treatment.50 L. but rather the ν ν. translates ‘si l’éponge adhère au cautère’. Artic.] etc.].25 24 25 Foesius I 688 and 736. followed verbatim by Joly. perhaps hot oil would be more unbearable even than hot metal. see Epid. 32 [7. However. it is particularly used in the context of a doctor experimenting and adapting treatment to a patient: τι ν μ λιστα πρ σδ ηται (with reference to the patient) πειρ μεν ς (with reference to the doctor) ‘trying whatever she will tolerate’ (especially in the gynaecological works. it has been suggested that this fungus was known to have an effect such as that of penicillin. 1974. The purpose of the sponge is not made clear. in which verticem usque ad os adurunt ‘they burn the crown of the head right through to the bone’. perhaps the point to be targeted here is not the κ ρυ ‘crown’. There is a (remote) possibility that ‘sponge’ refers to a special kind of fungus used in cautery.168 L. n. qua ustio fiat ‘I understand this as a sponge dipped in boiling oil. Mul.22 L. It is unclear why the patient might not tolerate the sponge: perhaps it would make the cautery more bulky and uncomfortable over a wider area. 7. 38 [4.384 L. 2. which was the Afrorum curatio ‘the therapy practised by the Africans’. Morb. but ‘adhere’ would be a very strange sense for πρ σδ εσ αι. or top of the head. Foesius supposes that the sponge is used alone as an alternative to the metal (spongiam oleo fervente tinctam intelligo.24 Sichel. 2. 2. or used as absorbent material to mop up (cf. according to Celsus.). 83–86. It might be interposed to protect the flesh from the instrument (as a sponge is placed over a cauterized area in the mouth for protection when the patient is eating.

γκα στημι. γκατακα ειν ‘cauterise over’: the unusual double compound. e. 29. n. See Chadwick.72 commentary Later arum coated with honey is applied. γκαταλε ω).]). πανα ρω. but there is a related crop in some of the surgical works. σπ γγ ν ‘sponge’: the variant σπ γγ ν recorded by Foesius is doubtless influenced by the diminutives following. 5. This type of compound has the following distribution: very noticeable in Places in Man ( παναρρ γνυμι.66 L. There are parallels in Affections for the use of fabric in conjunction with the cauterising instrument (Aff.242. 47. lit. marked in the gynaecological works ( γκα εψ ω. πανα ρ μπτ μαι and παν ρεμψις. ‘hearth’ or ‘fire’ is used in a transferred sense of the scab or cicatrice formed on wounds after cautery. cauterise in and down’ shows the preference for compound forms already noted. or in what quantity. where the precise amount of pulverised arum root is specified. 2. 167). Diminu- tives are especially frequent in the gynaecological works. 1996. 31 [6. 244 L. 3. to be used in combination with salt. μ λιτι δε ων ‘moisten with honey’: The addition of ν (I and mss derived from I) does not affect the sense. one each in Epidemics 4 and Regimen 1 ( γκατακλε ω). . 4. Celsus 5. lit. as usually elsewhere).2 [7.]). καυστ ρι ν ‘(little) instrument’ (for cautery): the diminutive is hapax in the HC. 114. 21. G has the typically unhelpful gloss ρ ων. 2. 26. γκατατ λλω) two occurrences in Acute Diseases ( γκατακλε ω. We may contrast a passage in Diseases 2. Arum was used to close wounds and in various eye troubles (Diosc.27 26 27 See Petrequin I 1877. 33C. 3. 2. while σπ γγ ν ‘little sponge’ following is common. honey and other ingredients in an orally administered medicine for a lung complaint (Morb. and one in Fistulas. σ ρη ‘eschar’: throughout.g. this word. πανα ωρ ω). The telegraphic prose fails to specify which part of the arum plant is to be used (probably the root. of nineteen Hippocratic occurrences of μ λυ δ ν ‘lead’ all are gynaecological except for a few in Articulations and Mochlicon. 377.26 or in what form (probably ground up. 2. cf. γκα ννυμι. as usually elsewhere). 4.

Abnormal beating of the pulse is commonly regarded as a pathological symptom. 3 [7. Nor is it clear whether the appearance of the vessels. 3.e. 8 and 25 [7. 12 [7. 2.22 L. Int. 3 [5.440 L.] with Mochl. black and thick. 68 [4.]).]). 6. The verb is used of the vessels both in health (Oss. These instructions.1. as here. while other vessels τ τανται blackish in colour. also Acut. vessels διατ τανται throughout the body.] and a passage where it is enjoined that cautery should continue until the beating of the vessels is arrested. 2.commentary 73 3. rather than the normal condition of the patient after recovery. Morb.28 The latter part of section 3 returns to consider conditions of cautery itself. 40 [6. pale and unnaturally big and thick. or perhaps ‘the same throughout’. swelling is mentioned in conjunction with beating.256 L.]).]). νω εν … κ τω εν ‘from above … from below’: with the reading τε κ τω εν … κ τω εν the repeated κ τω εν ‘below’ is problematical.10 and 28 L.194 L. 28 See Petrequin I 1877. Morb.120 L. 7.]. 26 [7. Section 3 begins with predictions for what can be expected after cautery. 34 [4. vessels διατ τανται and some are very red.]. in a type of dropsy. Int. Epid.406 and 424 L. i.]. ‘evenly’). section 4 continues discussion of the aftermath of surgery in a somewhat repetitive fashion. described as stretched or extended and full or swollen. after healing. in a type of jaundice. 12. .16 and 38 L. 5 and 7 [2. the same as in some other unspecified case. the same as it ought to be. the beating of the pulse in the vessels seems to indicate conditions requiring surgery. The verbs διακα ειν and διατ μνειν describe not incision but section right through the vessel (and on the importance of the point of section. 2 and 15. etc. cf. 351. 4.368 L.]) and especially in Diseases 2 (two passages where.] and Artic.]).376 L.6 [7. vessels τ τανται throughout the body. after this intervention. is being presented as a desirable and normal or an undesirable and abnormal state. ‘in the same way’ is quite unclear (the same as before. The similar description in 4 seems to be of a good condition. n.282 L.].234 L. Int. 36 [7. 5 [6.1 [7. Pulsation with sight loss is a symptom displayed by λητ ‘stroke patients’ (Morb. when the cicatrice falls off. Hom.) and in sickness (in a type of phthisis. as in Epidemics 7 (pulse in the brows a sign of fever. Here. see Haem. The sense of μ ως lit.330 L. Morb. with stress on the need to διακα ειν ‘cauterize thoroughly’ (or rather ‘right across’ or ‘right through’) are close to those of Places in Man (Loc. Sp. 2.

he explains. cf. and the supposed reference to a flux of peccant matter downwards in the body is consistent with the author’s pathological stance. The first two sentences break the flow somewhat and are rejected as marginal 29 Joly 169. and there remains a lack of parallelism between two apparently corollary expressions. But if this is the point. 4. with a view to stopping disease going to another point in the body (Int. General statements on the ideal conditions of the eschars or scabs and on the healing process conclude this section on cautery. quia ab inferiore est id.29 Certainly.] and VM 19. care was frequently taken in selection of the best point for surgery. 13. or flux from the lower part. Hom.3 [6.428 L.]. haec omnia minus patitur. With the emendation proposed the reference is to two opposed locations. 3. λ ψ). and so the pulse is not significant in diagnosis (Loc. flux from the lower part (the brain) runs to the inner corners of the eyes. certainly too. 3. 15). and translates similiter vena tenditur. he also reads διακεκαυμ νη feminine for masculine (sc.558 L. then essentially follows Sichel’s translation. quod influit. Sichel does not emend and translates very loosely: ‘lorsque le sang afflue de bas en haut … à une partie inférieure du dos’.300 L. but if it is thoroughly cauterised it suffes all this to a lesser degree’.1 [1. Ulc. with acknowledgement to Thivel. si la cauterization profonde est faite en bas (du dos). 24 [6.616 L. Ermerins emends the first expression and deletes the second. Joly emends the second expression by deleting . The reference is to flux from the upper part of the head. the verb πιρρ ω frequently suggests the flow of noxious stuff (Gland. Flux from the upper part runs to the temples. et inflata est et pulsat. rather than to two identical locations. sin perusta est. we expect them to be parallel in sense also.210 L.]). that cautery was being effected at as low a point as possible in the body in order to prevent the upwards return of peccant humours. and so the pulse is a good diagnostic indicator. tout cela a lieu à un moindre degré …’.]). Celsus 7.140 and 142 L. ‘the vessel is similarly stretched and swollen and it beats because the matter which flows in comes from below. parallel in expression.]. the expression is unduly contorted. But the point of this is quite unclear.]. 3 [8. Morb.74 commentary Where we have two closely placed phrases. 7. 15 and 16 [7. . 18 [7. ‘… elle bat lorsque le sang afflue de bas en haut. n.

).212 L. named as an archetypal practitioner. the end of the word is blurred. hip-joints.]). Erotian’s gloss Τ 15 τ α τα ως related by Nachmanson to the lost work on Wounds from Missiles may be related rather to On Sight. after eye surgery. λ ες or σ αραι. the lesion is drawn together.7 [6. rather it is λα ‘wounds’ (sc. fr. 1917. Cf. λκεα ‘lesions’. 367. but Ermerins’ σπερ ναρραγησ μεναι ‘as if about to break out’ and Foesius’ ναρρη μεναι ‘about to break out’ are no better.302 L. τ ει ‘quickly’: the mss are oddly confused over the form of this common adverb.. read τ ει. nouns in the vicinity— λαι. 1998. While most recc.]). In the case of a kidney disease believed to course from head to throat to spine to feet and back again (with bloodshot eyes as one symptom). and the final scar slight (Loc. on vessels). Comprehensive cautery is recommended for several cases in Internal Affections. it may be seen that following cauterisation scabs tended to remain depressed. thighs and various points in the lower leg (Int. following one other in sequence.30 πειδ ν τ λκεα γι α γ νωνται ‘when the sores are healed’: the plural verb after neuter plural subject may be a trace of Doric idiom. was mocked in comedy as burning his patients all over the body (Pl. in Places in Man. Craik. 85 and 1918. The terms σ ραι ‘scabs’. Euryphon. instructions are given for the use of drugs to ensure that.) and τ ιστα (E). 13. there is evidence also for τ ι (Ca. And to counter supposed dryness of 30 31 π υ ν καυ Nachmanson. buttocks. 18 [7. In M. there being an easy mental transition from λκεα ‘sores’ to λα ‘wounds’. Sichel takes the subject to be λ ες ‘vessels’. From the gloss (Souda) of eschars as κ λα λκη ‘hollow wounds’. Hom.commentary 75 notes by Ermerins. ‘wounds’ and λα ‘scars’ are interrelated. 22–23. Mut. Com. on the grounds that it seems to make no sense.31 ρυ ρα ε σι … ναιρ σ μεναι α ν νται ‘are … red … look as if they will remain raised’: the future participle is suspected by several editors. ‘red’ may be to any of the fem. 652 K. ‘wherever there is cautery’: some doctors who put their faith in cautery seem to have practised it wholesale. adj. Thus. . ‘cicatrices’. cautery was indicated at shoulder. The expression is typically loose and the reference of the fem.

16 [7. Ermerins is non-committal on the nature of the disease. 31). The treatment described in the first section is regarded by Sichel. Hom. 2. precautions are indicated and drugs for post-operative treatment are specified. Diseases supposedly affecting the back were subject to much speculation: dropsy. 8 [7.] and Gland. this was sometimes a last resort (Int.200 L.570 L.76 commentary the spinal fluid (attributed to blockage in the small vessels leading to the ‘marrow’. in certain cases (Morb. 1 and cf. after the lids have healed. this is achieved at the expense of drastic emendation αλμ ‘eyeball’ and on νδρ ν ‘carti(see below on στε νην τ lage’). 186 L. he links the chapter rather with what precedes in Chapter 3. 2. also. further surgery is proposed: it may be suspected that the text is corrupt.) It was recognised that the nexus of blood vessels in the back was complex (Oss. with cautery of the chest. back and neck (Int. a complication of many diseases affecting the lung.308.96 L. like Sichel. 21–23 [6. 2.144 L. cf. and that part of the second section is misplaced or intrusive.]).186 L.] and Morb. Joly. 14 [9. 174.172.]).]). 53. Cautery of the chest or side was regularly undertaken to eliminate empyema. 314 L. Loc. IV In the first section. Cautery of the upper back was indicated. allowing merely agitur de palpebrarum rasione et ustione ‘the subject is scraping and cauterizing the eyelids’. also Morb. Sichel devotes much space to discussion of this chapter and the next. 56 [7. 62 [7. phthisis and even pleurisy might be canvassed (Morb.82 L.]. as a response to ulceration caused by trachoma. more theoretical in slant.]. which he takes with it: the subject is ‘un traitement chirurgical rationnel des granulations palpébrales’ or ‘paupières trachomateuses’.]. However. finds the treatment impressive: ‘Tout ce chapitre . cutting into the forehead and purging the head. 3.88 L. Celsus too viewed surgery on the vessels as essentially the same. Cautery of the back was relatively rare. procedures to scrape and cauterise the eyelid are outlined. and in the passage from the brain) the instructions are to cauterise multiple regions of the body with multiple (some twenty in all) eschars: sacrum. followed by Joly. 14 [8. It is strange that.]).4 [7. wherever in the body it had to be practised (7. 13 [7. 2. the former procedure is elsewhere prescribed as a drastic last resort. 312. 15. The second section seems to specify follow-up procedures. and the latter is usually the first rather than the final recourse.

though related forms are found: τρη σματα ‘rough patches’ once (Epid.32 The term trachoma. 4. and τρα υσμ ς ‘irritation’ twice (Acut. though now virtually unknown in developed countries with good hygiene. Sp.]). viewed as a concomitant of protracted eye disease. as does the adjective τρα ς ‘rough’. with deep sores and ulceration of the eye (Epid. in origin a general word for ‘roughness’.]). but most commonly of tongue or mouth and never of the eyelids. Spalton et al.102 L. 1. 61 [= 29. 1 [5. 33 See Duke-Elder II 1934. 60 [= 16. The term τρ ωμα.. Trachoma is a chronic destructive inflammation of the conjunctiva. characterized by the formation of granules on the eyelid. There is no certain Hippocratic parallel to our passage. Ermerins Prolegomena XL and commentary 281.]). 2. . they treated the symptoms of the trouble without awareness of its viral origin (the causative agent. 2. still another is a description of a purulent eye disease. 1792 devotes nine pages to 3 and a mere page to 4.]). general description 102– 103 and illustration of stages 103–104. It is unlikely that the Greek doctors were able to distinguish between trachoma of this specific kind and other kinds of inflammation or ulceration of the eyelids. n. 42 [= 41. finally a reference to pro32 Sichel 140–148. Certainly. chlamydia trachomatis. Sichel’s argument that condition and cure were known in antiquity. Trachoma. 2.446 L. 26 [= 10. 2005. at 140 and 141.] and Mochl. 2. not being identified till 1962) and contagious character. Sp.commentary 77 … qui traite indubitablement des granulations du trachoma. 44 [5. rather than being ‘discovered’ by William Adams in the nineteenth century is thus only partly valid.356 L. The abstract noun τρα της ‘roughness’ occurs also. but eventually involves the cornea and the deeper tissues of the lid. 1593–1628. which is a recognized consequence of trachoma (Acut.184 L. 36–41. has become a specific term applied to the highly contagious trachoma virus and its ravages. several passages may be relevant to the pathology of trachoma.33 It was probably endemic in ancient Egypt and familiar throughout the Greco-Roman world. another is a brief reference to trichiasis. One is a rather vague description of the complications of a serious disease where there are pustules and rashes on the brow such that one eyelid grows into the other and there is acute swelling (Acut. remains the most common cause of blindness in the world as a whole. 4. Iugler.]). it typically starts in the conjunctival fold of the upper lid. 3. figs 4. est très judicieux dans sa précision et ses conseils’. However. Joly 170.516 L.392 L. concrete ‘a rough condition’ does not occur in the HC.

However. wine.1 below [7. then plaster with wool. τ μνειν τ μ ν δι τ ρ γματ ς here.]) seems to show similar ideas and practices to those implicit here. cf. or perhaps that the condition is a variant on one where such ulceration featured. 2. either. Ac. The λκ νexplicit statement that there is no ulceration on the eyelid ( ται τ λ αρα) suggests that such ulceration might have been expected. 13 [6. Loc. The treatment is mild purging of the head and purging below. 9. 30 L. cf. Ac. 2. 18 [7.3 [6. which might explain the rationale for the follow-up procedures described in the second section: cutting into the forehead and purging the head. The idea of the doctor in On Sight may be that removal of nasty stuff from the top of the head will prevent its descent to the eyes and so recurrence of trachoma. It may be added that the supposed pathology of flux of peccant matter from inner or outer parts of the head leads to treatment of many diseases by various types of incision which show some features in common with the treatment here: water in the head treated by cutting into bregma and piercing bone (Morb.]). vessels overfull of blood treated by cutting into forehead and applying a pad of ‘greasy wool’ (Morb. 3. being a prelude to trephining) in the head.78 commentary tracted ‘dry opthalmias’ causing internal and external growths on the eyelids. perhaps in response to the same condition. with anti-haemorrhaging drugs. a comparison with Places in Man (Loc. in a passage following the disease discussed above in relation to Vid.]). similarly.32 L. 3. Scribonius Largus 37). In a discussion of flux to the eyes.300 L. 8. 1072. if the noxious stuff is not eliminated through a natural orifice the doctor is instructed to cut into the head. 13 [7. oil and cypress.22 L. Vid. Hom.3–5) is of a condition where mucoid material has accumulated between flesh and skull. 3). we may compare the treatment prescribed in Affections for a disease characterized by pain 34 See Pearlmann.]).84 L. 1969. 15. leading to λκεα ‘sores’ on the head.].].456 L. Hom. There are similarities also with Diseases 2 (Morb.34 There is no direct parallel. anoint. 4. affecting the sight and known as σ κα ‘figs’ is reminiscent not only of the effects of trachoma but also of the term σ κωσις. above) the treatment is to purge and if that fails to καταταμε ν τ μ ς ‘cut cuts’ (cf.28. that is. 2. ταμ ντα κατ τ ρ γμα 8 below is different. later used of the disease (Epid. with a view to getting it out. Finally. to arrest bleeding sawdust of cypress is one ingredient specified in Fistulas (Fist. For a disease where there are λκεα ‘sores’ on the head (cf. . 7 [3. the most extended treatment (13. right up to the bone.

baths and fomentations.]). and then to rub medicaments on the under-surface. And he treats of variations in the development of trachoma: aspritudo ‘roughness’ (Greek trachoma) follows inflammation but also induces inflammation (6. 7. a rasp or a scalpel. these include fig leaves. but Celsus himself advocates rather appropriate diet. 6. 6. for a succinct description. 1996. see Marganne. τ τω νατρ ψαι (deleted by Ermerins. ταν δ poral clause dures not of lacuna after 35 ης … ειν ‘when you scrape … scrape’: after the tem- and jussive infinitive. Galen too addressed the problems of trachoma. almost impossible to treat. see Jackson. 12. 2 [6. as in Affections). 26).) The language contains direct address to the doctor. in various forms. copper. these include cleansing drugs. . 31). 10). and late medical sources detailing these. if this brings no relief. who often fails to recognize this idiom) and στερ ν δ τ τ υ. which he regarded as a difficult condition.35 Celsus was aware of many of the complexities of diseases affecting the eyelids: carbuncles could arise from inflammation. 28. 36 See Craik.36 1. 1998. unripe grape juice and. scraping and wiping away the oozing stuff with a sponge (de compositione medicamentorum secundum locos. nominative parperson: ταν δ ticiples and infinitives are used. ων … περιειλ ων. 2247. exercise. A passage in the Aristotelian Problemata shows the universality of such treatments for ‘excess’ or ‘moisture’ leading to flux to the eyes (Probl. Later. 23. Celsus subscribes to the view that a discharge of rheum is a concomitant of trachoma (7. the ensuing words refer to procescraping but of cautery. The demonstrative pronoun is redundantly repeated. and let blood from the nostrils or from the forehead.210 L. to arrest flux (with a generally ‘circular’ configuration. As above. 1994. n. sometimes on the lids (6. sometimes on the eyes. and outlined expedients of different doctors. then the doctor must cut the head or cauterize the vessels ‘in a circular motion’ (Aff. A common treatment was to scrape the hard and thick lids with a fig-leaf.commentary 79 and dizziness in the head: the first recourse is to cleanse the head. Dioscorides recommends a series of specifics for trachoma. 15). in the second ης and μ διακα σης. Editors have either postulated a ειν (Ermerins) or have inserted words to clarify the tran- For full details of types of cutting. the specific names periskythismos and hypospathismos were given to surgical cutting at different points in the head. 152–167. 709–711 K.

50.426 L. 254 L. perhaps the transmitted text can stand on the supposition that the general condensation and ellipse typical of this work has led to a tacit move from scraping to cautery and so to an apparent conflation of these techniques. 35 [7. 793). applied to abrasions in the body causing discomfort (Aff. 2.130 L. Though specified only here and in Infertile Women (Steril.208 L. ‘scrape’. Strabo remarks (12. 33. 2. 23 [6. However. Medic. though the ordering of words is different.80 commentary sition from scraping to cautery: ε τα κα ειν Sichel and ειν πικα ων Triller. 365 and 1918. specification of linen for use on the eyes and sponges for use on wounds.]. Although wool was not generally used for the apparent purpose here (cf.236. 2 [9. 8. 221 [8. especially bone (VC 14.236.]) or. it was nevertheless probably the material of choice where it was available. most frequently in the general non-medical sense of ‘grate’. The instrument υστ ρ ‘rasp’ is typically used on bone (VC 14. Morb.]). but an alternative sense is ‘fleecy’ or (apt to the context) ‘compacted’. λ ς (B) 3. 252 L. ‘saw’ occurs twenty-eight times in the HC. 66. to the medical procedure of abrading.]) whether swabbing (if cutting) or protection from direct contact with the instrument (if cautery). 1917.37 The most natural meaning of λ ς applied to wool is ‘soft’.]). κα - 37 See Nachmanson. 52 L. Egyptian cotton was similarly prized (Morb. The verb ω ‘scratch’. .v.234 L.38 L. see LSJ s. 3.]. especially in the gynaecological treatises (fifteen occurrences) but also in technical medical senses. Erotian’s gloss 25 λ ρ ω τ μαλακ related by Nachmanson to the lost work on Wounds from Missiles may be related rather to On Sight: the case is the same. the use of wool in bandaging after surgery on the head may be parallel. 11 [7. Soft clean wool is required for bandages and poultices in many passages of the surgical and gynaecological works. applied to recipe ingredients. as here. 19 [3. 1953. περ τρακτ ν περιειλ ων ‘winding it round the spindle(-shaped instrument)’: the spindle is a spindle-shaped instrument for cautery (cf. cf. Hesychios glosses as both παλ ν ‘soft’ and συνεστραμμ ν ν ‘compacted’ (Latte. 19 [3. ε ρ ω Μιλησ ω λω κα αρ ‘with soft clean Milesian wool’: this material was regarded as especially fine. Morb. perhaps cognate with ε λλω ‘pack tightly together’.]).]). 24 [7. 16) that Laodikeia remarkably produced wool superior in softness even to that of Miletos.

28. 1. Anastassiou and Irmer.]).378 L.656 L. also by the learned medical authors Haller and Triller. 1792. here. 35 [4. fumigation Mul.]). 13 [6. 1997. Triller I 1766. 28 [7. 1. 26. 47b. 68 L.242 L. μ ν ν τ ν ε ς τ ερ υργ ν ρ σιμ ν. Hesychios τρακτυλλ ς υτ ν καν δες ‘a prickly plant’.]. 11. 258 L. dipping them in boiling oil’.]) was cited as corroboration for the sense ‘thistle’. The expression there is ambiguous. The term στε νη might be used of various ring-shaped bodily parts. sun etc. 8. 60–69. 21 [3. incision Mul. 9 [7. Morb. A famous. . 66.]. 5. Aff. 220 L.5. 509 with n. 80 L. 51. 275) is discussed at length by the commentators Iugler and Sichel.218. Mochl.3. 46. 33 [6.164 L.224 L. See Petrequin I 1877.300 L. in other treatises where delicate surgical procedures are performed (trephining VC 18. 2. The purpose of the action is the same as that of the ‘pledget of cotton-wool’ recommended by Duke-Elder.]). such as the 38 39 40 α τ ν τ ν στε See Iugler. 8 and II 1878.120 L.]. 2 [7. 50. as below 9.244 L. 78.]) or hazardous prescriptions made (Loc.40 More generally. 1792. of the patient guarding against such adverse weather conditions as too much wind. 3.]. 15. Int.250. also. 13 [6. Aff. Haller. Hom. as the word σπ νδυλ ς lit. 315–338.) with the same case as On Sight.5 [7.]. 1953.) There is no real basis for the alternative interpretation.]. 458–459. or rather infamous.38 The verb ‘winding’ is oddly suggestive of winding on wool for spinning. but an expression in Epidemics σ ν σπ νδυλ ν τρ κτ υ (Epid.commentary 81 σαι δ ν πυ ν ισιν τρ κτ ισι πτων ς λαι ν ν ‘cauterise with boxwood spindles. Vict. νην τ αλμ υλασσ μεν ς ‘with care for the actual eyeball’: the verb is similarly used in 5 below. in the same participial expression. 463–485.] and cf. cf.3. not as Internal Affections. vapour bath Morb. 3 [7. 86 K. ‘vertebra’ may be applied to anything which resembles a vertebra in shape.188 L. 70 [8.]. 1755. 25 [5. (Morb. Iugler. λλ Galen’s gloss τρακτ ν κα τ λ ν τ λ υς ‘not only that useful in weaving but also the wood of the instrument’ (linguarum Hippocratis explicatio.148 L. 2. 75 [8. 604 with n. probably refers to our treatise and so indicates that the work was known to Galen. it may be used.39 (See also Introduction. 12. Latte. cf.42.]. 19. 2. HP 6. Int.. interpretation of τρακτ ς not as ‘spindle’ but as τρακτυλ ς ‘spindle-thistle’ (on which see Thphr. 90 [6. etc. 2. a stone extracted from the vagina of an elderly patient (who had presumably put it there as a child) is described as ‘as big as the whorl of a spindle’ or ‘as big as the head of a spindle-thistle’. 4.

but not to this passage.]) or particular. Fract. Here. 26).]). this means. 42 Duke-Elder I 1932. 207. impersonal and followed. There are indeed ancient parallels for such cautery (especially in Aretaeus). 2. Here the στε νη is simply the ‘eyeball’ or ‘globe’ though in later authors it is more specifically applied to the limbus. curved to conform with the shape of the globe of the eye. 6. Ermerins αλμ ‘of the eye’ and understands the ‘ring’ to be the deletes τ coronal suture of the skull.41 μ διακα σης πρ ς τ ν νδρ ν ‘do not cauterize through. Commentary on Prognostic.280 L.1. not a subordinate final clause. 3 [5.42 In essence. by the genitive case. or ‘conjunctiva’ all finally rejected in favour of ‘eyeball’. he further reads below τ στ ν ‘bone’ (sc.370 L. ‘danger qu’aujourd’hui nous connaissons suffisament’. up to the cartilage’: νδρ ς is used of any bodily cartilage. 1980 and cf. 18 (2).44 The verb ‘be enough’ is usually. 41 See Magnus I 1998 (tr. 43 Sichel 141. 44 See Anastassiou. ‘do not cauterize too deeply’ (verb διακα ειν) and Sichel comments on the danger attending such surgical procedures on the eye.. Waugh). especially bad or mortal signs. 47–48 on the possible translations ‘margin’.. either general (Aph. skull) for τ ν νδρ ν ‘cartilage’. and they may be relevant to Chapter 4. is a standard feature of many Hippocratic treatises. around the coronal suture. or in the ear (Artic. Prorrhetic 2 and Koan Prognoses. Onom.. σ με ν ‘it is a sign’: a guide to signs. 1 and twice in Steril. but not invariably.82 commentary sutura coronalis and the sphincter ani (Pollux 2. Hom. is a prohibition.43 The syntax. . 3 [6. He then interprets the pasasage as referring to cautery in the head. Mul. such as that in the chest in the area of the breastbone (Epid. 47 K. 40 [4. as here. 39 and 211). VC. being composed of densely compacted collagen and elastic fibres. ταν π ρ τ ς σι ς ‘when there is enough scraping’: the subjunctive is required.]).176 L. it refers to the tarsal plates. especially Prognostic. 7. ‘rim’. It occurs only eight times in the HC (elsewhere once each in Aer. Mochl. in the nose (Loc.).]). and Ruf. the rim of the cornea where it joins the sclerotic (Gal. dense connective tissue in the lids. μ with aorist subjunctive. GMT § 192.568 L. 19 [4. these resemble cartilage in consistency.

The bright eye is pure and healthy. it is applied also to urine. is in the HC body fluids altered in some way. not.]). 45b2–46a2. 9. Foesius I 736. 959b15). si pro cruenta et aquosa sanie.]. See Longrigg. 7.47 However. 3. 593 and 611 [5. the ‘brightness’ in the eye is not as ‘bright’ and there is not the same reflective quality as when it was ‘bright’ and ‘pure’. Ti. though keeping the vulgate reading. and for this reason the eye has no sensation of cold (31. Diseases of Women and Heart) may indicate a later date for the work. 17. 2. Cf. 80. perhaps associated with the common belief that fire was present in the eye.436.3 [6. de sens. de sens.]). Carn. 434 L.46 It has been argued that ichor can describe blood serum oozing from a wound after the flow of blood.1 and 3) is especially used of the fluids present in the healthy eye.250 L. These ideas may be related to those of Alkmaion (DK 24 A 5 = Thphr. expresses reservations and notes. 78 [5.] and κατα α νεται.commentary 83 1. 4. 437b23). Duminil. 1 [7. 58–60 and 72.22. 13. 1993. The adjective is applied to blood twice in Koan Prognoses (7. 74 and 76. 26.1 [8. 12) and Empedokles (DK 31 B 84 = Arist. Here we might have expected the transition to be from (bad) oozing matter to (good) bright blood. A 10 = Aet. as the text has it. and the bright blood of the eye is pure and healthy.722 and 726 L. a fire which does not burn but gives light to the eyes (Pl. Hom.606 L. likewise ‘bright and pure’ in health (Epid. It is a bad sign when the eyes lack brightness (Mul. 1977.45 In Plato’s Timaios the eyes are said to conduct light by means of the pure fire which flows through them. usually noxious in character. also the explanation of sight as a reflection of ‘light and all bright things’ and its corollary that anything which is not bright is not so reflected.2. Morb. ρ α ματ δης δατ δης ‘bloody or watery matter’: ichor.]). in Homer the blood of the gods. . there is fire in the eyes. and that such usage. 7. the adjective ‘bright’ is three times repeated: when phlegm penetrates the vessels of the eye. vice versa. where ichor is not harmful (found also in Ulcers. The related idea of reflection in the eye is evident in the verbs μ α νεται. but fire without heat. cf. 116 [8. In the latter passage. satis tamen derasam esse palpebram apparet. 58c). the 45 46 47 λαμπρ ν α μα ‘bright blood’: the adjective λαμπρ ς (‘bright’ of lights. ‘the lid seems to be sufficiently abraded if in place of bloody and watery stuff clear pure blood flows out’.8 L. and in the Aristotelian Problemata. 2. sanguis sincerus et purus effluat.].280 L. Loc. Thus Foesius.

242 K. 701 K. 3. 143. applied both to patient Foesius I 736. The verb is repeated in 6 below. 1985. minerals were liable to variation due to inherent impurities and vagaries in processing. 23. Nielsen. use that’..322. the Galenic de simplicium medicamentorum temperamentis ac facultatibus 12. and alien to ancient ideas. or copper oxide..49 Flower of copper is oxidized copper. 1974. 24 [3. Majno. νατρ ψαι ‘rub on’: Joly translates ‘faire une onction’. 85. 19. 1974.]). BMD s. 12. or a runny paste or ointment) containing flower of copper’: the doctor is expected to be familiar with the range of drugs available. 332 L. Lotions of copper salts (both sulphate of copper. by contrast with literally ‘throughout’ is semantically otiose. more generally. de compositione medicamentorum secundum locos. in any case. 490. Nutton. 2. 85. 148 K. Galen glosses δατ δεας δρωπικ ς (linguarum Hippocratis explicatio. and nitrate of copper) are powerful astringents and haemostatics. ‘copper’. rather. Calvus’ translation liquido medicamento. unless perhaps it implies repetition and improvement (see LSJ on the prefix in composition of verbal forms).). Morb. τ τ νατρ ψαι ‘rub on one of the liquid drugs (lotion. π υ ν ς στ αλκ . 13 [7. 48 49 . See Majno. 1991. cf. but the idea of δια ρ ειν below (cf.24 L. in quo aeris flos sit. ‘with a liquid drug containing flower of copper’. 17. n.v. formed in the smelting process: water was poured on the hot melted metal to make it set more quickly and the small particles which spattered out in response to sudden cooling were known as ‘flowers’. 77. ‘rub on some liquid drug: where flower of copper is available. popularly known as ‘blue stone’.). 1963. in a similar context.. 370 ff. n. Off. τινι τ ν γρ ν αρμ κων. is followed in essence by later translators and here. 1991.84 commentary distinction seems to me anachronistic. especially useful in eye diseases in antiquity and modern times (Morb.] and. is odd and the use of π υ ‘where’ is peculiar (hence Foesius’ comment π ν fortasse legendum ‘“such as” should perhaps be read’). The prefix να- friction or massage is certainly present in the verb. It may be that we should amplify the expression to translate.50 The lack of specification of quantity or weight in the ingredients is usual. frequently and see also Dioscorides 5. n. 490. 42. 50 See Nielson. 328. Douthwaite. There is an extensive literature on the subject of therapy by copper. The expression.48 also τ τω is tautologous. however. 10.

Morb. σ ρ ‘flesh’) is growing’: perfect participle is used with present subjunctive. 6.]. where the bones of the newborn do not make full contact with each other. 109 [8. cf. Ulc. 1953. This sentence is another instance of the compression so evident throughout the work. 17 [7. simply glossed by Hesychios as ‘the middle of the head’ (Latte. 10. 1. also Loc. Ermerins emends in 5 and tinkers in 4. ‘later on’: the adverb. cognate accusative) through the front of the head’: the bregma. Hom.]. 345). for in this way it would become sound most quickly.].412 L. τ τ ς σι ς κα τ τ ς κα σι ς ‘with regard to the procedure of scraping and the procedure of cautery’: the expression.51 Proper healing of wounds on the eyelids must have been particularly problematical: trachoma was liable to leave permanent scarring.].130 L. As it is the point in the vault of 51 See Petrequin I 1877. twice repeated here (cf. 10 [7. intends a different time-scale from πειτα ‘then’ in 3 above. 2.244 L.]). Ulc. Morb.] on techniques to heal wounds which have closed prematurely). 9 [4.]. 12 [6. 3. An explicit statement in Head Wounds elucidates: ‘When it has been cleaned. The sense implicit is that wounds must be properly cleaned to avoid premature formation of granulation tissue and with it premature closure over bulging flesh. 185 [8. However the repetition of the demonstrative should be retained and the extension to all cases is appropriate. στερ ν δ ‘afterwards’. 274. n. 406 L. 5 below). 2.328 L.commentary 85 (for which cf.232 L. the wound should become quite dry. 38 [6. Mul.] with Galen’s exposition in de methodo medendi.102 L. the growing flesh being dry and not moist. The collocation is uncommon. though peculiar is readily understood.366 L. The language here resembles that of Head Wounds and Ulcers: λαστ νειν ‘grow’ occurs in both as a technical term of knitting tissue. Mul. . and in this way the wound would have no excess flesh’ (VC 15 [3. is the point formed by the intersection of the sagittal and coronal sutures. Artic. also Craik 1998.404.]) and medication (for which cf. 8 [6. 3. ‘cut a cut’. that is the anterior fontanelle.156 L. ταν … κεκα αρμ να τ λκεα κα λαστ νη ‘when … the wounds have been cleaned and it (sc. 3. τ μνειν τ μ ν δι τ ρ γματ ς ‘make a cut (lit.. 193–195. 281 K.

this reference to a type of eye operation common in late antiquity was overlooked by later commentators. 13 [3.86 commentary the skull where the bone is thinnest and weakest. Mul. Morb. Foesius translates sectionem per sinciput facere ‘make an incision in the top of the head’ and comments haec videtur esse quaedam π σπα ισμ species ‘this seems to be a sort of hypospathismos’. 1 and 2 (twice each). and where there is least and thinnest flesh. similarly cutting and immediate healing is the treatment for the ‘stricken’ in the laconic instructions of Diseases 2 (σ σαι α τ τ ρ γμα κα π ν π ρρυ τ α μα συνες τ ε λεα σ αι κα καταδ σαι ‘cut into the bregma and when the blood flows bring the edges together and bind them up’. which anastomose freely with one another. 4. regards π ντων as neuter (of treatments).24. 6. 7. 1 and Coac. Foesius I 689. medicamento quod cruentis vulneribus imponitur.]). 5. Incidence of the anatomical term bregma in the HC (not in Loc.53 Joly.]). n. 3 [7. 2 (six times). The definite article suggests one particular drug and perhaps this is intended. and to allow noxious matter in the eyes to descend to and be eliminated from the nose.1. 25 [7. 32 L.]). but fine salt followed by compress. adding instead τινι. ‘last of all it is appropriate’. Hom. Morb. also μετ γε τ ηρ read by Cornarius below. The vasculature of the scalp is such that bleeding from even shallow wounds is profuse. wounds there are especially dangerous (VC 2. 9. ραι ‘purge the head’: the reason for this is to stop further noxious matter descending from head to eyes. 2. with change only in word order (cf. 736. Sichel ‘qu’on met sur les plaies récentes’ perhaps echoing Foesius.3).) is as follows: Morb. 11. 3. The blood is apparently staunched as soon as the wound is made. the blood vessels tending to remain open when cut. 13. Calvus.52 τ να μω αρμ κω ‘with a drug to stop bleeding’: LSJ ‘for staunch- ing blood’. . especially in the arteries. translating omnium ultimum negotium est. 230 L. 52 53 τ ν κε αλ ν κα Foesius I 688. 18 [7. Morb. Prorrh.188.122 L. cf. rather than masculine (of patients). τινι τ ν γρ ν αρμ κων above. cf. If we follow this reasoning.40 L. Ermerins deletes the article. 2. VC (four times). there being one par excellence (cypress favoured in the same operation. also Epid. τ understood as contracted τινι might be kept. ‘qui l’arrête’.].

Sichel 143. but it is not clear by what trouble they are made so’. cf. 2. 20 [9. 771 K.]). the topic may be loosely connected with the idea of excess tissue forming in the healing process. Ermerins remains agnostic: de palpebris iusto crassioribus. when it is ‘thicker’ than is natural.) The condition pterygion is briefly mentioned in Prorrhetic 2 (Prorrh. Foesius comments huic vitium simile πτ λωσις medicis dicitur. 54 . if this is correct. sometimes growing over the cornea and impeding vision) has more claim to consideration than Foesius’ ptilosis (a disease of the lids where the edges are swollen and inflamed and the lashes fall off) as the former is a Hippocratic term and the latter is not. 767 K.54 Indeed.]). 4 [7. the author’s vague description militates against precise identification. But perhaps pterygion (a fibro-vascular membrane arising at the inner corner of the lower lid. n. Editors’ attempts to identify this condition conflict. Joly 173. Joly takes the condition to be ‘une conjonctivite printanière bien décrite’ and understands the operation to be on the lower lid not. 7. fongiformes ou sarcomateuses’. affections outside the lids include ‘pustules’ and affections at the inner corners of the lids include pterygion. but it is the date which is relevant here) give a very long list of eye troubles. and recommends that it be cut out if it has become established and crassitudo ‘thickness’ has developed through time (7.2. there is also a trouble where the lids seem ‘rather swollen and constantly stream’ (introductio seu medicus.32 L.. 410 K. though a multitude of Galenic. Galenic sources (many of doubtful attribution. 4. classified according to location: affections inside the lids include ‘roughness’ and ‘thickness’. Reference in Diseases 2 to a condition where the eyelids seem to overhang.48 L. Sichel believes that this chapter too relates to trachoma. and where the vision is blurred is probably unrelated (Morb.178 L.. Lat. 4). on pterygion cf. as in 4. ‘surtout aux granulations trèsvolumineuses.commentary V 87 Corrective cutting and cautery are applied to the eyelid.]. ‘on lids which are quite thick. also Int. (But admittedly there is a paucity of Hippocratic. Ermerins XL. parallels. ‘a trouble similar to this is called ptilosis by doctors’. 14. or be pendulous. 12. 14. non constat. 2. Celsus accurately describes the formation of a pterygion. unguis. de tumoribus Foesius I 736. 19 [7. also de remediis parabilibus. to the upper lid. sed quo vitio crassae factae sint.

Arist. 106 with fig. is here followed. 5031–5033. with asyndeton. 98. Spalton et al. on ptilosis cf. The term λ αρις ‘eyelash’ (Ar.) In addition to pterygion many types of palpebro-conjunctival cysts or lesions might be said to cause ‘thickness’ in the lid. Bedford. ubiquitous in Hippocratic medicine. 56 Cf. Finally.88 commentary praeter naturam. n. but are usually removed for cosmetic reasons by simple excision. ‘l’implantation des cils’. π ταμ ν … πικα σαι … υλασσ μεν ς … πρ στε λαι. tr. very gently’. πα τερα τ ς σι ς ‘thicker than is natural’: the term σις ‘nature’. 36.. 4. . The location κ τω ‘below’ is ambiguous: 55 See Duke-Elder V 1952. 2. is used in two distinct ways in this short section: first of the nature appropriate to a bodily part (the eyelid. Trobe and Hackel. 51 with fig. compressed expression and emendation is unnecessary. would be appropriate also. 44. Common conditions of this type include conjunctival papilloma (typically lower lid). and chalazion (typically upper lid). figs 118– 120. intending the point where the lashes grow or have their roots. τ κ τω π ταμ ν τ ν σ ρκα κ σην ε μαρ στατα δ νη ‘cut away the flesh below (lit. an adverbial clause is followed by general instruction for ongoing therapy. which is a chronic inflammatory granuloma caused primarily by the retention of secretion from a tarsal gland—the regular treatment is incision and curettage. 48 with fig. their position or perhaps their delicacy). in the sense that they are easily scorched. a second phrase in loose apposition indicates the treatment.. 2002. as to the area below) as much as you can. nominative participles with jussive infinitives are employed to express instructions.. expressed in two phases by nominatives with infinitives in instructions. 1. Sichel’s interpretation of the second σις in a concrete sense recalling the root ω ‘grow’. 1004 K. The initial words. 45. de methodo medendi 10. 7.) is unnecessary as in context ‘hair’ is clear. This is yet another instance of odd. 166–167. 4976–4981. Once again. 13. its size) and second of the intrinsic character of a bodily part (the eyelashes. not extending deeply into the tissues. 9. 49 with fig. already Foesius I 736. 39. indicate the problem to be treated.56 but a reference to the delicacy of the eyelashes. 2005. 732 K. where there is a tumour or an overgrowth of skin along the lid margin—such growths are not harmful.55 The expression is inelegant and the connection jerky. X.. 1971. 2. 2.

418 L. Mul.]. τ λ ιπ εραπε ειν. See Petrequin II 1888. 14 [6. n. Similarly.692 L. τ λ ιπ εωρε ν. here surely the former.228 L. 117. ητρε ειν τ λ ιπ ‘give the further treatment’: i. and for ‘considering’). n. Int. Caution is constantly enjoined: the doctor must work ‘very gently’. Hanson 1999. but translates as if reading [ ς] τ λ ιπ sc.e. in Head Wounds there is significant variation in the verbs used of trephination: πρ ειν ‘trephine’ used without regard to depth. or to the lower part of the upper lid. four times repeated. Coac. τ λ ιπ ητρε ειν τ λκ ς. διακα ω ‘cauterise through’ (3. keeps this text. 736. Fractures and Head Wounds though not confined to these (cf.3. perhaps a reason not to link this chapter with the preceding one on trachoma. Ulc. λκεα. 3 on Fract. παρακα ω ‘cauterise by’ (3.]. Similar expressions are: σ αι ς κα τ λ ιπ . 180. in the sense ‘finely ground’.242 L.commentary 89 reference might be to the lower lid. treated by wooden instruments) and ‘taking care’ (see on 2 above for avoidance of ‘white-hot’ instruments. ‘treat like other lesions’. 2. 26 [3.59 The verb ητρε ω is especially favoured in the surgical works Articulations. or simply to the area below the growth. following Cornarius. 3. Foesius I 689. The variation between πικα ω ‘cauterise over’. with instruments which are not too hot (clearly here metal. 4. ‘continue the usual treatment’. 13. three times repeated) is not for stylistic effect but has important semantic weight.58 The verb πρ στ λλω is used seven times in the HC but the only parallel for the sense ‘apply’ is in Sores ( λατ ρι ν λεπτ ν πρ στε λαι. πικα σαι ‘cauterise over’: the compound expresses a precise operation. 3. 483 [5. VC 14 [3. . 57 58 59 Cf. 110 [8.1.57 πρ στε λαι ‘apply heated very fine flower (of copper)’: the adjective λεπτ ς (5 and 6) may refer to quality (‘fine’) or τ ν ει πτ λεπτ quantity (‘slight’).].].]).]). διαπρ ειν ‘trephine through’ used to indicate complete perforation of the bone to the dura and κπρ ειν ‘trephine out’ (commonly with αιρε ν ‘take away’) used to indicate ‘trephine and remove’.502 L.3).1) and the simple verb κα ω (1.238 L. 24 [7.1. Foesius.

3. The section is carelessly written. ‘burnt copper’. for lesions of the head. is now viewed as taking two main forms: simple squamous (scaly) blepharitis and more complex purulent follicular blepharitis. 17 [6. due aux vicissitudes de la température atmosphérique … qui est accompagnée de démangeaisons. 102–105 [8. in Ulc. but parallels permit the amplification essential for comprehension. cf.224. especially in vocabulary: the term λι ν ‘little lump’ is a Hippocratic hapax legomenon. grindstone and phrase λε ν τρ ψας. grape juice.) There is copious evidence.]. Nominative participles Sichel 159.60 The interrelation of terminology for various forms of eye irritaαλtion can be clearly seen in the pseudo-Galenic definition of ηρ μ α.520 L. marketing and distribution. acrid tears. 1.412. Sichel sums up the condition as ‘ophthalmie catarrhale avec érosion’. Spalton et al. lit. 12. 42. The extreme compression typical of On Sight renders the sense obscure.) Blepharitis. …’ Ermerins succinctly notes palpebrarum psoriasis et pruritus memorantur. as is λ ς ‘scale’.90 commentary VI Instructions are given on the preparation of a salve for irritation of the eyelid. especially from Roman antiquity. Celsus lists at length the recipes of many different doctors. Various steps in the preparation are distinguished by use of introductory πειτα ‘then’. 148. with careless overuse of the verb τρ ειν. Sp. 60 61 .. 420 L. ‘dry ophthalmia’ as a condition where the inner corners of the eye are rough and inflamed with red lids. 65–66 [5. grape juice in Mul.61 The ingredients and preparation of the recipe for this salve have certain correspondences with those for eye-pastes detailed in Acute Diseases and in Diseases of Women 1 (grape juice. figs 26 and 26a. 1971. 59–60. Bedford. 2002. cf. d’érosion des angles. 2005. Ermerins XL. having introduced it more elaborately as ‘conjonctivite … fréquente. ulcration. 14. all in Acut. are κνησμ δεις ‘showing irritation’ (introductio seu medicus. 228 L. etc. used alike of preparation of ingredients and application to the patient: τρ ψας … π τρ ψας … τρ ειν … τρ ψας … νατρ ειν … τρ ψας. related to the term used here. ‘rash and irritation of the lids are discussed’ and Joly simply states ‘blépharite’. Trobe and Hackel. 769 K. 226. 4949–4968. 3–4. flower of copper. (See translation. and use of red copper vessel. ‘next’ (cf.1 above). of a huge demand for eyesalves and an extensive industry in their manufacture.]).. but there are some features peculiar to On Sight.]. Duke-Elder V 1952. Joly 170. 107. an extremely common disease. roughness and.

1 [7.) and Hesychios (Latte II 730. αλκ ς κεκαυμ ν ς ‘burnt copper’ mixed with saffron and sweet wine (Acut. Craik 1998.]. 65 and 66 [= 32. ‘then having rubbed his eyelid’: this phrase should be deleted. gynaecological treatises) is in its favour. who regards the passage as hopelessly corrupt. υσμ ς is difficilior being glossed by the more common κνησμ ς by Erotian ( 2. 30 [9. 92). 2. Galen (linguarum Hippocratis explicatio.]. Sp.306 L.90 L.commentary 91 and jussive infinitives are again prevalent. 33. 125 K. Loc. Morb. introducing the section. 149. 112 K. The synonymous κνησμ ς seen in I and mss derived from I may be an old variant. 58. as instructions for use of the paste ought not to precede instructions for mixing it. Hom. 14 [6. Hom.. 62 See Jouanna 1983. the verb ψωρι ν is used of bladder discomfort (Aph.8 [6. Also. the occurrence of υσμ ς or υσμ in works which have other affinities in vocabulary with On Sight (Morb. 2. . cf.66 L. suggests (but does not print) emendation of the verb to πιστρ ψας ‘having turned over’ and deletion of α τ κα τ τε. 102. Nat. πειτα τ λ αρ ν π τρ ψας α τ lit. κνησμ ς is more common in the HC (twenty occurrences against eight of υσμ ς and one of υσμ ) and is used in Prorrhetic 2. varied by the jussive subjunctive παρα ας ‘you must pour’. 2.. 2.]). Ermerins. of irritation in the forehead associated with dim vision and redness in the eyes (Prorrh. 110.60 L.]) and the substantive υσμ ς is used of lung conditions (Loc. from Epidemics 5). However. is used only here in On Sight. 4.530 L.520 L. 14. seen here to have many resonances with On Sight. 77 [4.]). also the reference of α τ (? the patient) is unclear.]). π ταν ‘whenever’. 19. π ταν δ λ αρα ψωρι κα υσμ ς η ‘whenever the eyelids are itchy and there is an irritation’: elsewhere. ‘having rubbed a piece of flower of copper on a grindstone’: the only other occurrence of κ νη ‘grindstone’ in the HC is in recipes for ‘watery’ eyes in the two passages of Acute Diseases noted above—σπ δ ς ‘ash’ ground with fat and μ κι ν πικρ ς μ ακ ς ‘sour grape juice’. perhaps the conjunction indicates the common incidence of blepharitis and the frequency with which the physician would prescribe this treatment. Hom.62 ν ε ς αλκ λι ν πρ ς κ νην τρ ψας lit.

including Nachmanson who is unjustifiably sceptical that λιδα relates to On Sight on the grounds that the work is not cited by Erotian: this is circular argument and general lack of citations can be readily explained by the shortness of the work. aorist εα) can be seen in Affections. Foesius in Oeconomia. πειτα υλ ν μ ακ ς διη ημ ν ν παρα ας κα τρ ψας λε ν ‘then you must pour alongside (the flakes) the strained juice of unripe grapes. In a salve mentioned by Aristophanes.64 Galen glosses λεπτ τως ν τε καλε τ ραι (linguarum Hippocratis explicatio. is a standard ingredient in recipes for eye salves.) and in Internal Affections.224 L. 7). 1974. The adjective ‘smooth’. Haem.) Dioskorides describes the process of pressing unripe grapes to extract the juice in early summer. is proleptic. fig-juice and spurge are key ingredients (Ar. Ac. The same form of the verb ( ω ‘pour’. Grape-juice. commentary on Acut. 360. 1998. garlic. a mild astringent. in an aside s.] with no justification but citing Erotian reads λ δα for codd.. That Galen cites it as a Hippocratic specific for the eyes may indicate familiarity with On Sight (de methodo medendi. 15 on aeris squamam ‘scale of copper’. seen especially in the gynaecological and surgical treatises (Ulc.. .65 63 See also Foesius I 736. 916 K.63 The accusative case and the placing of the gloss in Erotian provide strong support for this judgment.v. twice repeated. make a well in the dry ingredients and pour in the liquid ones. 10. and the same expression δ ς πιε ν. 12. 13. 702 K. Fist. 50. in a recipe for an emetic mixing melicrat with vinegar. 118 K. then filtered and evaporated to form crystals. he regards it as a good treatment for rough eyelids. 19. Duminil on Ulc. Pl. 15. that Galen cites usage in Places in Man shows another instance of convergence in vocabulary. and rub smooth’: that is. relates Erotian Φ 13 λιδα αλκ τ ν λεπ δα to this passage. cf. frequently mixed with copper compounds.416 L. Duminil. 15 [6. Vid. n. 63. Acetic acid was a common ingredient in collyria. which has gone unnoticed by later commentators.92 commentary κα τ τε τ ν λ δα τ αλκ τρ ειν ς λεπτ τ την ‘and at that time rub the flakes of copper as fine as possible’: the word for ‘flakes’ is hapax in the HC. ‘administer to drink’. occurs in both works (Aff. used to treat ulceration of the lids.]. λλιδ δης from Epidemics... 65 See Nielson. as of a fish or a serpent.. 940 K. de compositione medicamentorum secundum locos. see also 43. 665). The phrase is formulaic in such instructions. then leaving it in the sun to evaporate. 64 Nachmanson 1917.). 1 [6. λεπ δα. 26–28.

2. πειδ ν ηραν ‘when it has dried’: that the procedure.. Epid.]).67 Night blindness is not a substantive disease. 738). 19. in liver. there is an extended set of instructions in Galen and the further injunction that the prepared mixture should be stored in a copper box (de compositione medicamentorum secundum locos. 973. 12.412. vision de jour’—is confusingly current also. 47. . an anomaly of vision marked by impairment of dark adaptation. 14. here telescoped.. 28 [5. but a symptom associated with deficiency of vitamin A (sometimes called ‘the ophthalmic vitamin’). Hom. 17 [6. 19. 1959. distinguished in a modern account which could almost be a translation of Galen’s formulation (introductio sive medicus. Ulc. 12. 124 K.). would take several days is indicated in parallel passages. vision de nuit’ and héméralopie as ‘cécité de nuit. See Sichel 149. as day-blindness. linguarum Hippocratis explicatio. 1423 and Jayle et al. 5 [6. μυσσωτ ς ‘myssotos’: a savoury dish based on garlic or onion (Galen linguarum Hippocratis explicatio.138 L.. and. Night blindness can occur both in individuals suffering from any condition which depletes blood vitamins. 6. Night blindness takes two main forms. In ancient medicine. but in feeble illumination it is deficient’. especially such febrile conditions as pneumonia. pulmonary tuberculosis or malaria. followed by Sichel—nyctalopie as ‘cécité de jour.].66 The converse formulation. above all. cf.].346 L. and also in communities affected by famine or severe malnutrition. where ‘the patient sees poorly in good illuminations and normally in the dusk’ and night-blindness. Loc. symptoms such as night blindness and even fever were frequently regarded and treated as diseases in their own 66 67 Duke-Elder I 1932. is outlined. butter and eggs.commentary τ 93 δ λ ιπ ν ν αλκ ρυ ρ παρα ων ‘then pour the rest (of the grape pulp) alongside (the other ingredients) into (a vessel of) red copper’: red copper is frequently specified as the appropriate material for mixing such salves. where ‘vision in moderate illumination is good. 776 K. VII The treatment of ‘night blindness’. 420 L. on its consistency cf. see also II 1938. which is present in animal fats such as milk. 124 K. the intent being to enhance the copper content of the mixture. 709–711.

‘il faut faire avaler. which is expressed in a series of superlatives: first (surgical). much awareness of. and the Hippocratic doctors were fully aware of the typical associative context of night blindness. Joly marks the verb with daggers of corruption. from the association of night blindness with the disease 68 69 70 See Grmek. but M’s κατ ας ‘having broken’ is nonsense and πι σας ‘having pressed’ is unclear. . 221. aussi gros que possible’). rather. Epidemics 2. Sichel 150. the patient is to eat a lot of raw liver with honey. Sichel keeps κατ ας but describes the verb as obscure and probably corrupt. and interest in. developing or mutating into something apparently different. 1980. and attempts no translation. as is the reference of μ γιστ ν ‘very big’. truncated and corrupt. but also Diseases 3. Joly 171. Debate has centred on whether one or two huge ox livers are to be eaten (so Joly. relating to two aspects of the prescribed treatment. There are two main problems. he takes it in the sense of ‘l’appui des ventouses scarifiées’. dismissing it as locus male scriptus ‘a badly transcribed passage’ and more severely totus locus pessime se habet ‘the whole passage is in a dreadful condition’. Prorrhetic 2 and Epidemics 6. or in one or two portions (so Ermerins. the ways in which the eye might be affected by complications in other apparently unrelated diseases. Prognostic and Places in Man). 1928 and Gourevitch.69 The second problem has attracted considerable scholarly interest. une ou deux fois. who suggests the insertion of μ ρ ς ‘portion’). Koan Prognoses.68 The text of this short chapter is compressed. 1980. un ou deux foies de boeuf. the ways in which different ‘diseases’ might interact. also. See also Bier. trempé dans du miel’). two things are done to the patient’s neck ‘as much as possible’ and ‘for a very long time’. and further the expression is unclear. second (dietary). There was. or. more generally.94 commentary right.70 The difficulties may be resolved by comparison with content in other treatises (especially Diseases 2. however. recognizing the ways in which it tended to accompany other illnesses. crus et trempés dans du miel. whether one huge ox liver is to be eaten one or two times (so Sichel. The loosely appended expression ‘one or two’ is unclear. Ermerins XL. Ermerins reads κατασ σας ‘having cut’ but leaves the entire section untranslated. In particular. un foie de boeuf cru aussi gros que possible. ‘il faut faire manger. but this injunction is both intrinsically improbable and quite unparalleled. in the introduction he commits himself only to the curt nyctalopis curatio describitur ‘a treatment for night-blindness is described’.

Craik. including surgery on the tongue. especially those who suffered from swollen vessels in the temples and the neck. 6. there is cough.]). 1998. It does.72 The doctor of Epidemics 6 found the array of symptoms intractable. The condition of night vision is discussed in Prorrhetic 2 (Prorrh. emetics and phlebotomy. lit. who sometimes recover spontaneously in seven months time.332 L. elimination of noxious matter. restoration is offered for example only. 4. and it is clear that something has been lost.]): ears and mouth are affected (toothache and mouth ulcers). especially downwards.]) from a theoretical standpoint: it tends to affect boys and young men. and implicitly supposed that bodily fixation is significant in aetiology. but without emendation or argument). However.)71 We can emend and expand the text to give a sense in accord with parallel treatments of night blindness and associated conditions in the HC and other sources. with coughs. Treatments essayed. 33 and 34 [9. it is here designated simply ‘the choker’. Night blindness is associated with a similar range of unpleasant symptoms in a shorter account in Epidemics 4 (Epid. 6. The two aspects of the therapy prescribed are: first. pneumonia and ‘chokers’. included laxatives. without great success.134 L. in the brief instructions ‘carry out phlebotomy for the chok71 72 1980. 2. see also Grmek. As in On Sight. however. 185–186. fever and digestive disorders.64.1 [5. patients with this disease or a flux of tears of long duration should be asked if they suffered headache before these concretions. The association between eye trouble and ‘the choker’ appears also in Epidemics 2 (Epid. 2.]): night blindness is associated in a particular year with painful ‘ophthalmias’ and with other symptoms or ailments. while the text may be satisfactorily explicated in this way. A more pragmatic approach to the condition is found in Epidemics 6 (Epid. Among the patients some endured great pain. 52 [5. Littré used the phrase ‘le toux de Périnthe’ for the pathology. it is explicitly stated that purging is useful in therapy. seem certain that a reference to garlic has dropped out. (This disease is commonly likened to diphtheria and frequently translated ‘angina’ or ‘quinsy’ but as its main distinguishing symptom—and distinctive etymological derivation. above all. See Grmek. ‘dog-strangling’—is a sensation of choking. and second. a dietary régime of (raw) garlic and (cooked) liver. is beneficial. .commentary 95 known as κυν γγ η ‘the choker’ it is possible to put the treatment here prescribed in a wider context. 12 [5.192 L. 7. 66 L. on the basis of medical probability. cf. 1989. 337–338. cupping (as Sichel perceived.

κα τ α ματ ς αιρ ειν ς πλε στ ν. ‘a variant on the choker’: for this.]). draw off as much blood as possible and draw backwards the flow of phlegm’. Similarly.]) ulceration of the throat is a similarly bad sign.412 L. incision of the vessels under the tongue and purging with elaterion are all prescribed. 24 [5. There are many other references to the same disease. 23 [2.322 L.128. Also. In the ensuing section. apply two cupping vessels. there is a full clinical description of symptoms apparent in ‘the choker’: the focus here is on appearance of.660. ‘after shaving the back of the head.212 L. 10 [7. and sensations in. neck. many bad or mortal signs are specified in the group of diseases designated τ κυναγ ικ ‘the choker types’: much attention is paid to observation of throat (internal) and neck (external) and when the disease ‘turns to’ the lung.]). These passages provide illumination of the treatment adumbrated in our treatise. 96 L. this meshes with material following on treatment of ‘the choker’ in Diseases 2. in Regimen in Acute Diseases (Acut. σ σαντα μα αιρ ω … σ ειν. throat and jaws (Epid. 4 [6. ‘having cut with a knife … cut’. 9–10 [= 6.]). then.]). In Diseases 2. the author refers to the risks attendant in cutting the uvula. In Affections also (Aff. phlebotomy of vessels in the chest. 2.174 L. Purgation by elaterion and bleeding from the arm are both prescribed also in Places in Man (Loc.]). or rather. sometimes also under the tongue or somewhat above the chest.16 L. In the first brief mention of ‘the choker’ in Diseases 2 (Morb. In Diseases 3 (Morb. Bleeding from the neck is there regarded as the safest and best course but it is recognized that there are dangers in the treatment as well as in the condition itself. Sp. σικ ας πρ σ λλειν δ . κα νασπ σαι π σω τ ε μα τ λ γματ ς. 30 [6. the treatment is πισ εν υρ σαντα τ ν κε αλ ν. Its locus is in the jaws and the area of the neck. In Koan Prognoses (Coac. 2. perceived group of diseases. Hom. 2. the verb σ ειν is used of the same operation: if the swelling of the uvula does not go down.]) discussion of ‘the choker’ leads to treatment of παρακυν γ η. 357–372 [5.94. 662 L. 2.]) therapy of two forms of ‘the choker’ is by phlebotomy of vessels in the arms and under the tongue. Writing on throat ulceration. 9 [7. 2. bleeding from the arms (if the patient is strong enough). if there is still no amelioration. several kinds of ‘choker’ are discussed and differentiated. the knife is applied. the verbs used are π τ μνεσ αι and π σ εσ αι (discussed further below). 3. only one type is noted. 130 L. the author proceeds to . in Prognostic (Prog. sufferers either die in seven days or become purulent.96 commentary ing disease and for opthalmia’.

Also. On the text. 8. The treatment in the first type (Morb.2 [7.46 L. treatment is by dietary manipulation and application of poultices. but—in part because it was so familiar. 140.73 In the second part of Diseases 2. then to apply a sponge soaked in hot water to neck and jaws. then after shaving the hair beside the ears. see Jouanna. 26. there too the jaws are swollen but the main problem lies in the uvula. 27 [7. and once pressure is established.]) is to apply a cupping vessel to the first cervical vertebra. 7.]) differs from the others: it is less serious. In both cases. n. again. 28 [7.40 L. three different types of ‘the choker’ are discussed at some length and followed by a discussion of ‘the grape’. the subject of the ensuing section (Morb. Blood-letting (phlebotomy or venesection) was a favoured Hippocratic recourse in many diseases. the ‘back of the tongue’ is affected. therapy indicated. 1983. 6. 222–223. . n.]). See Jouanna.75 In this respect. 29 [7.46 L. where empyema is developing. 1983. where surgery on the swollen uvula is imperative. in part because it was a technique learned by observation rather than by reading—few descriptions of it survive. n. which in incidence is associated with night blindness in Epidemics 6. of a bedtime snack of raw garlic. stressing 73 74 75 See Jouanna. also to some extent in the supposed aetiology and site of the trouble. 232–233. n. 2. as many cloves as possible (σκ ρ δα μ τρωγ τω ς πλε στα) accompanied by neat strong wine. which must be pressed against the palate and its extremity cut ( π πι σας διαταμε ν κρ ν). 2.commentary 97 discuss the clearly related disease στα υλ ‘the grape’. fumigation too is practised. accordingly. to apply cupping there. The third type (Morb. it is evident that the procedures so peremptorily indicated in our text are application of cupping and consumption of raw garlic. 1983. 2.42 L. From these parallels in the treatment of ‘the choker’. it seems to serve as a transition to ‘the grape’. Celsus exceptionally gives a description. development and. 1.]) is to apply a cupping vessel as in the first. 235.74 Extensive follow-up treatment includes purging by suppositories or enema. 2. to leave the cupping vessel in place for as long a time as possible (πρ ς τ ν σ νδυλ ν τ ν ν τ τραλω τ ν πρ τ ν … παρα υρ σας … κα π ν π σ γ η τ ν σικ ην ν πρ σκε σ αι ς πλε στ ν ρ ν ν). In these three instances of ‘the choker’. the differences lie in symptoms. The treatment in the second type (Morb. there are extensive further recommendations in which a new element is the prescription.

Vict.224 L. 58 [6.60 L.264 L.3 [7.]).]).156 L.362 L. I can discover no case of a patient being made to eat raw liver. constrict the throat (2. a pessary as emmenagogue includes pig and ox bile mixed with honey (Mul. 13 [6.414 L. 28. all vegetables save garlic are proscribed.3 [7. Aff. Paul of Aigina. 1. 802 K. though various unlikely and unappealing animal applications are specified.]). .556 L. baked or boiled: … ς πλε στα τρωγ τω κα μ κα πτ κα (Int. of garlic the patient is to eat as many (but it is not clear whether the plural indicates cloves or heads) as possible.214 L. cf.]. 228 L. de compositione medicamentorum secundum locos. 1. Plin.]. 2. Other parts used are ‘ox marrow’ with almonds and flour boiled in water to form a paste for use as an ointment (Nat. 21 [7. Mul. One element remains to be explained: the presence of (?raw) ox liver. 2.220 L.]) and in one place we find the specification of dry bull bile with fine honey (Ulc. while using the cooking steam or juices as an eye-lotion (gravy from roasting. The use of honey-coated garlic—presumably the honey intended to make the garlic more palatable. 97 [8. 1. on honey cf. dipping it in honey. bull bile is common (see Mul. 206 L. 1–17). but it is unlikely that poultices are relevant here. In a long series of cleaning-out prescriptions found in Internal Affections.] ‘ox flesh’. like ‘the choker’. 12. It is not used even in poultices or pessaries. 54 [6. was widely regarded as having laxative and diuretic properties (Aff.]) or a mixture including elaterion and honey (Mul. Garlic. 2. 54[6. 43. 34 [8. 100 [7.]. Mul. especially when eaten raw. 12.]).46 L. Thus. close in context to recipes for eye ointments at 102 and 105 [8. for one or two days’ might be considered.]. wine used in boiling. Celsus. raw. especially in the gynaecological works. like a sugar-coated pill—is repeated in a prescription to purge a strong patient overcome by fever brought on by fatigue or by a journey in the section on fevers in Diseases 2: σκ ρ δα δ ναι ς μ λι πτων (Morb. The poultices prescribed for ‘the choker’ were of a less unpleasant type: flour boiled with wine and olive oil (Morb. 1.82 L. In another passage. an ingredient in a pessary). as big as possible. Mul. 8.]). 10. or easier to swallow.266 L. 32 [7. Aretaeus. Galen and Pliny—was to give a meal of liver.]. Gal. and perhaps 90 [8. 75 [= 84. Nat.224. Emendation such as δ δ ναι ν μ λιτι πτων παρ ς μ ν καταπλ σσειν (or καταπλ σμα) μ γιστ ν ς ν δ νηται ν δ μ ρας ‘prescribe as a poultice raw ox liver. authenticated in a wide range of later sources—Herophilos.416 L.]).168.98 commentary its importance in diseases which.]. 74 [8. with or without honey. The regular treatment for night blindness.

Liver is occasionally prescribed in the HC for other conditions: in Diseases of Women foods prescribed to correct a ‘red flux’ include ox or goat liver cooked in the ashes (Mul. as not just drugs but all medendi methodus ‘method of treatment’ is involved.commentary 99 NH 28. goat’s liver is specified.76 Frequently. . also von Staden. 423–426. 2. Night-blindness is caused by a deficiency of vitamin A. once forced into children). Sichel reads νυκτ λωπ ς ρμακ ν ‘a drug for the sufferer from night blindness’. Treatment is drastic: to cut the vessel in the elbow and to make the incision quite large (τ μνειν … μ να δ τ ν τ μ ν σ ειν) so that the blood flows freely—and he admits that some patients have died under the knife— or incise similarly in the leg or elsewhere in the arm. which varies wildly in later mss. is managed differently by different editors. νυκτ λωπ ς ‘(treatment for) night blindness’: the etymology of the word. lit. As in On Sight. While there may be an element of sympathetic magic in the prescription. to purge the patient (CA 7). 1989.]). 47). cupping and purging feature. 110 [8. Celsus 6. there is also a sound nutritional basis. 6. The punctuation. he argues that some such word as ητρε η ‘treatment’ must be understood after the initial genitive. 38). 178–182. and liver is a rich source of that vitamin (hence the cod liver oil. while the subject of the second sentence. A prescription to control a flux of menstrual blood and one to control a putative flux of some other kind of blood might be thought parallel. The association here traced between ‘the choker’ and night-blindness in the Hippocratic Corpus continued in later medical writers: Aretaeus describes two forms and two methods of treatment of ‘the choker’. then to administer elaterion. which could not have been understood but which could have been appreciated through years of empirical observation and pragmatic prescription.236 L. see already Foesius I 736. 1980. with three nominative participles followed by an imperatival infinitive (with another participle πτων ‘dipping’ loosely attached and a further explanatory infinitive καταπιε ν ‘to swallow’ dependent on it). Gourevitch. perhaps because the goat was supposed to have good night vision (billy-goat to be preferred. 76 For a review of the evidence. is the doctor. with its two jussive clauses (a construction used only here in the work) is the patient. There is a slight awkwardness in that the subject of the first sentence. but the sense is clear and the jerky Greek is characteristic of the work. ‘blind in vision at night’ involves a tautology. said to be the drug of choice. Ermerins objects.

usually concerned with surgery and not with internal treatment. by use of laxatives). by nasal insertions) is prescribed also 1. 24 [6.220. Foesius I 736.]). Int. suggests emendation ρμακ ν πιν τω to the nominative. ‘the part incised’. Ulc. who however retains M’s reading. 37 [7.210 L. Cf. Aff.]) and in the surgical treatise Sores (aor. 2003. 19. 4 [6. 1998. followed as frequently by Van der Linden. the head. 2. 77 78 79 80 . Ermerins 282. the elbows. 21. The simple verb σ ειν ‘lance’ is similarly used (Morb. only here recommends purging of the body (sc. It has been suggested that the aorist is not from κατ γνυμι ‘break’ but from κατ γω ‘draw down’ (sc.80 That it is correct is evident once the context (cutting the skin in preparation for the application of cupping vessels in the process of wet cupping) is understood. Internal Affections (vessels in the groin. Montfort. the uvula. τ ν κε αλ ν κα αιρ σ ω lit. as noted above. also specifically of one such drug. so that the patient could drink juices from liver). 172.)78 The writer. pertundito ‘strike hard’.1. The reading κατασ σας has some authority. But. Int. 44.2 and 4. n. 97 K. 1 κατ α is implausibly rare for the regular κατ γαγ ν and no γειν verb takes that form in the HC. ‘let him be purged as to his head’: the patient is the subject of the verb which may be passive (as translated: doctor is agent) or middle (translate ‘purge his head for himself ’: patient is agent). purging is a regular element in treatment recommended for ‘the choker’. ‘driver’) is used generally of any drug with laxative properties. 17.]). to create a sentence. part. Craik. 16. being known to Foesius.79 however aor. purging of the head (sc. 2. νυκτ λωψ λατ ρι ν. κατασ σας lit. pass.77 ρμακ ν … λατ ρι ν ‘drug elaterion’: the term (lit. tr. Foesius I 736.100 commentary Foesius. based on an extract of wild cucumber (Galen linguarum Hippocratis explicatio. Aff. 258 L.428 L. ‘having cut’: M’s reading κατ ας ‘having broken’ (a verb usually applied to fractures of bones) gives unacceptable sense. n. Ermerins regards the stress on treatment rather than prognosis as a suspicious aspect of the section. The simple verb σ ειν is used for incision with a scalpel in Affections (the head.

the formation is similar to κατατ μνειν (twelve occurrences.318 L. Loc. though the eyes are sound the vision is affected. The corollary process. as is the compound π σ ειν (vessel in the arm. καταSee rebuttal. VC 13 [3. The prefix κατα. 28. is called amaurosis by the Greeks’) summarises 81 82 α νω. Prog. While there is no Hippocratic parallel for κατασ ειν. ‘comς μ λιστα ‘as much … as possible’: the phrase is common in prescrip- press’ in one of the parallel passages of Diseases 2 (Morb. Foesius I 736. 28 [6.82 καταπιε ν ‘to swallow’: the compound is rare. 21 [3. supposing that the reference is to a regimen of light or fasting diet. 30 [6. avoided where dry-cupping is to be practised. letting go.322 L.] and Morb. or trephination.]). Loc. to any discernible problem in the eyes.. Hom. 40. Hom. 36 [7. 25. Cornarius ingeniously but erroneously expands πι σας to λιμ πι σας. including Ulc. Hom. 314 L. perhaps following Foesius’ designation (hoc vitium oculi μα ρωσις Graecis dicitur cum oculis bene habentibus videndi acies laborat. 2. 12. 23 [2. but occurs also in Diseases of Women 1 and 2. 1792. ‘this eye trouble. See Iugler. Morb. Ulc.]). 25 [6. is recommended for a case of blindness not attributable. 15.]). 27 [6.40 L. 26 [7. n. when.178 L. Loc.]). 2. 44 and 73 for ingenious suggestions: καταμ σσω. and κατασπ ν (draw off blood. πι σας … πανιε ς ‘exert pressure … release’: the pedestrian verb πι ειν ‘press’ corresponds to the colourful π σ γγειν ‘squeeze tight’. Sichel. is expressed with the same verb παν ημι in Fractures. 44 L.426 L.]). 24. varices etc. break the skin. trepanation.].]). from the diagnostician’s point of view. uvula. 13.]).1.228 L. 22 [6.486 L.]). 430 L. κατα ω.32.24.298. with reference to releasing the pressure of splints (Fract.].1 and 22 [6.428. 17. 52 L. 27 [7.81 tions or instructions for preparation (cf. similar formations are κατακρ ειν (cut or lance swellings.is apt for the surgeon’s hand bearing down on his patient. VIII Trephining.]. .196 L.commentary 101 18.

Blodi).84 The third is similar to that here. ‘I do not know what is the disease concerned’. see above on 4. it is evident that the supposed cause is a flux of moisture from the head. several cases are outlined (Morb. trephining has three broad motivations: first. 85 See Rocca. In general. 2003.83 It remains peculiarly difficult to diagnose and treat the cause of deteriorating eyesight. de quo agit. more developed. Sichel 159. Ermerins XL.210. there being many causes— some hereditary.) The Hippocratic doctors had recourse to trephining. surgery in which a sawing or piercing instrument was applied to the bone of the skull.). Ermerins makes no judgement on the nature of the disease: quis morbus sit. it is evident too that the moisture is envisaged to be deep in the head. 329–330. to trephine and remove ‘moisture’. to look for pus when fever and headache suggest its presence under the skull. 2. 256 L.]. especially 9 on indications and 21 on technique [3. nescio. Hom. 2.]). in a variety of circumstances. Joly.]). Cf. also Hirschberg I 1982 (tr. 18B. Joly 174. on treatment of superficial flux. (On two types of flux.]). part of the work (Morb. notably parts of the head (eyes. cette intervention énergique serait néfaste dans les autres’.8 L. or head injury (VC passim.3.). 133 on the ‘daring treatment of amaurosis by trephining the skull and draining cerebrospinal fluid’. and to Galen’s use of trepanation to relieve pressure by draining a phlegmatous lesion on the head (Hippocratis de medici officina liber et Galeni in eum commentarius. 1 [7. perhaps quoting Hérode. affecting the eyes. 12 83 Foesius I 736. see 3. the cause of disease is summarily indicated in terms of the head overheating. 84 Martin. . comments ‘utile dans les cas de processus expansif intracranien. second. some age-related—for loss of vision in an eye which remains normal in appearance.8–18 L. Loc. The most common was in cases of fracture. 32 [6.102 commentary ‘amaurose traitée par la trépanation’. or by disimpacting the fragments for removal. The procedures applied here are readily paralleled in Diseases 2. third. In the first part of that treatise (Morb. 1–11 [7. 2003. 19. under the bone. to treat fractures by draining a dangerous blood clot. 257. cutting with a single incision or with multiple incisions into the bregma. then elaborated in the second. see 4 above. Our doctor’s first assumption is ocular flux: from the instruction. 808 K. causing phlegm to melt and cause flux in various parts of the body. n.324 L.85 For other types of head surgery. to remove dead bone exposed in a wound. 2. his adviser on specialist ophthalmic matters. throat etc.

At the same time. 6.28 L. is odd in the context of this work where the regular expression throughout is ν with subjunctive. thereby releasing fluid pressing on the brain (Morb.commentary 103 [7. by contrast with the noxious mucoid matter involved in flux from the top of the head is believed to cause blindness (Loc. 2. Paul of Aigina uses the compound π δ ρειν in describing a similar operation on the scalp (Paul Aeg.]). But it is the mot juste for an operation such as this where tissues are neatly separated from bone. 1983.]). tr. there is a change from imperatival infinitives to ρ . 32 [7. cf. ‘skin’. Celsus 8. Galen linguarum Hippocratis explicatio.]).4).18 L. As above. ‘if someone’s eyes. A further oddity is that τις would occur only here in On Sight of the prospective patient and the statement that the healthy eyes ‘destroy’ the eyesight is very awkward. in Haemorrhoids (Haem. In that part a patient who is suffering from pain in the region of the eyes and disturbed vision ( μ λυ σσει) is given the same treatment as the patient in On Sight 8.440 L. flux from the brain. should destroy the visual faculty’. are destroyed in their visual faculty’: Joly. 15 [7. though regular and almost formulaic in the expression ε τινι … ρ … σ αι in Places in Man. 13. as. saw bone.50 L. 6. The formula ‘so they are cured’ is common to Places in Man and Diseases 2 (Loc.]. n. cf. 3. and the verb δια ε ρεσ αι is passive as in 1 above.300 L. that is flux of ‘salty’ fluid. ‘flay’ suggests skinning an animal. 4 [6. remove moisture).2 [6. that is treatment to pierce the bone. there is an accumulation of participles indicating stages in treatment (cut.] onwards).86 In Places in Man. in On Sight the sight is unaffected. of a sheep. see Jouanna. retaining τινι dative and δια ε ρ ιεν optative. 2. expressed or understood. just as all temporal clauses are introduced with πειδ ν or ταν. with accusative and infinitive. conversely. παναδε ραντα ‘folding back’: the verb δ ρω lit. ν τι eyes. For procedures of piercing vs sawing. suggesting an unlikely case). 19. though sound.300. 86 . emends ν to ε to correct the syntax of the conditional clause.3. 228.). though sound. αλμ γιε ς ντες δια ε ρωνται τ ν ψιν ‘if somehow the 1. 2. 6. The emendation suggested here corrects these anomalies. 278 L. Hom. The same adjective ‘sound’ is used of sight (similarly in 2) and of patient (similarly in 3.]. 13. this formulation (ε with optative. move skin. Morb. However. 129 K.5 [6. Hom.

de anatomicis administrationibus 2. I think these are the topics discussed in a very badly transcribed chapter. lit. 150. Elles s’observent surtout lors des changements des saisons. Sichel uses the expression ‘ophthalmie épidémique’ as a heading. 3 is more general still. ‘On seasonal and epidemic ophthalmia.v.104 commentary see LSJ s.87 ελ ντα τ ν δρωπα ‘removing the moisture’: the ‘moisture’ is moisture from the brain. apparently moving from treatment of seasonal ophthalmia to aphoristic comments applicable not only to this eye ailment but to many others. cf. in the related procedure.’88 The first two sections (of which the second has suffered serious textual corruption. Herophil. 349 K.’ Joly repeats Sichel’s ‘ophthalmie épidémique’. in dissection. IX The final chapter deals with ophthalmia as a seasonal disorder. Morb.) The formation παναδ ρω. with its double prefix. and cf. ibid. 139. and elaborates ‘Il s’agit ici des ophthalmies épidémiques. 87 88 See Petrequin II 1888. on swelling with and without pain in that disease. 6 and 7. These general comments seem out of place in the work.’ Ermerins. de tumore cum dolore et sine dolore in eo morbo. Sichel 159.. deinde fluxionis absentia in illo. 174. Gal. Puto saltem de his rebus agi in capite pessime descripto. déterminées par les variations brusques de la température atmosphérique. for the sense ‘strip off the scalp.26 L. 15 [7. but they may arise from an inherent ambiguity in the term ‘ophthalmia’. Similar verbs in the surgical treatises are παναρρ γνυμι ‘rupture again’ in Fistulas and πανακλ ω where the sense of the prefix is uncertain. ‘separate by avulsion’. then on the absence of flux in it. is in keeping with this author’s expression. and with his usual strictures against the character of the writing sums up the content as … de lippitudine annua et epidemia. applied equally to a specific or a general eye ailment. ‘Il pourrait s’agir d’une allergie. At least. adding in a note. . n. δωρ. here addressed by comparison with parallel passages in Galen and in Celsus) offer a series of general precepts for the treatment of cases of ophthalmia. ‘tirer en bas’ or ‘en arrière’ or ‘à soi’. ‘water’. δ ρω 2. lay bare’. 719 K. Ermerins XLI. Joly 171. anat. expose. épidémies encore si fréquentes de nos jours. 2.]. 2. similarly. ap. in Fractures.

it is common. 12 [4. v. In the Aristotelian Problemata the question of seasonal summer fevers and ophthalmias is addressed (Probl. Thus. as in Vid. 118. and now routinely treated by antihistamines and steroid sprays. often used in the plural. 1. vernal (Aph. ophthalmia is included in a list of diseases which are not in themselves fatal. 7. 1.]) or autumnal (Aph.]).144 L. is a general term for eye ailments in the HC and other ancient medical texts. whether of long or short duration (Prorrh.]: in the latter case. 45 [5. Trobe and Hackel.490 L. 859b). in Prorrhetic 2 the word is used of all types of eye disease. 1705.89 However. trees and other plants. In Diseases 1.commentary 105 The ophthalmia of On Sight may correspond to the modern ‘hay fever’ (allergic rhinitis characterized by a blocked.]). 4 and 5. 6 for vernal keratoconjunctivitis. runny nose and itchy watering eyes) brought on in sensitive people by histamine release on exposure to the pollen of grasses.134 L. the prevalence of allergic reaction as a diagnosis is a relatively recent phenomenon. 90 89 . There are some three million sufferers each year in the UK alone. and it may be that we should here think more generally of vernal and aestival conjunctivitis. 4 [2. in grouping eye affections with such joint diseases as kedmata. 2005. 1697–1699. podagre. phlebotomy (Epid. 1. In Glands.412 L.]).).. 5 for allergic conjunctivitis and 120. The aetiology of this is uncertain. Spalton et al. The association with the disease known as ‘the choker’ has already been noted and the curative recommendation for both ophthalmia and the choker in Epidemics 2 is.]. 2. ischias and arthritis the physician seems to show an awareness of their inherent affinity (Morb. 3 [6. with a striking seasonal pattern. 63–68. 10 [2. 2. 8. treatment includes phlebotomy and purging the head.]).]) and the term is used in various treatises of seasonal eye irritations.616 L.48 L.492 L. to the condition which results from a flux to the eyes and causes the visual parts to swell (Gland. 3.568 L. aestival (Aer. 21 [9.]). It is stated that ophthalmias come about when excess stuff in the head melts (τηκ μ νης τ ς περ τ ν See BMD. Duke-Elder II 1938. in the Mediterranean littoral. as here. 13 [8. Ophthalmias are linked with flux or streaming eyes in Epidemics 1 (Epid. 12 [5. 3. 2. 6. s. 14 [4. in an allembracing way. Ac. it is applied. figs 5. fig.90 ‘Ophthalmia’. 2002. where it may be attributed to such environmental factors as dusty conditions aggravated by dry heat and where simple palliative measures to protect the eyes from dust. heat and sun are the standard response.42 L. and allergic reaction is only one theory. 5. Epid.

the expression τα ς καλ υμ ναις αλμ αις ‘so-called ophthalmias’ suggests that it is regarded as a technical term or perhaps rather as a catch-all (de compositione medicamentorum secundum locos. lacrima ‘tear’ and dolor ‘pain’ all feature (6. 12. first named in a list of spring diseases stemming from umoris motu ‘movement of moisture’ (2. Galen.). if possible. or touched. with drunkenness. in a dark place. These include a description of ophthalmia as the most common eye disorder (ibid. 10 = Heeg. and take no food and even. 55.. 1984. he regards lippitudo as an illness with an obvious (unstated) cause (proem 30). an account of its symptoms as reddening of the white. 4. 6). 4. In his subsequent discussion of the notae ‘signs’ which allow prognosis: tumor ‘swelling’. cf. 342. and pain when the eyes are closed. poultices may be applied to the vessels (ut compressis venis pituitae impetum cohibeat ‘in order to control the 91 See Savage-Smith. 711–714 K. for heat in the body is fever and heat in the eyes is ophthalmia. adding material to the Hippocratic account of unfavourable signs in the eye (Prog. 12. 1). softened in honey) for ointments to treat protracted ophthalmia (de remediis parabilibus 14. 1. cf. flux. if there is superfluous matter in a robust frame’). 9.91 Celsus deals at great length with lippitudo (Greek ophthalmia. as ‘the secretion which forms on the eye covers the sight’ (31. 184). 343 K. in both a general and a specific sense). swelling of the eyelids. 14. 2. . 65. and it is speculated that their eyes have been cleansed through tears.).). In Galenic texts. si firmo corpore materies superest ‘if the vessels in the forehead are swollen. as causing reddening of the whites of the eyes (in Hippocratis Prognosticon commentaria 1. The ordering of topics is similar to that in On Sight: where there is inflammation.]) instances ophthalmia.106 commentary κε αλ ν περιττ σεως) and is followed by fever. Ophthalmia is the first mentioned eye disease in the list of the lexicographer Pollux (Poll. the patient should lie in bed. 768 K. ophthalmia is discussed in many passages. 702 K.114 L. 177 with n. introductio seu medicus. 2 [2. 25. pituita ‘discharge’. cf. bleeding is recommended in appropriate cases (si in fronte venae tument. 6. Also in the Problemata the question is raised why some people ‘who have suffered from ophthalmia’ see more clearly. Here again ophthalmia is a key word for eye trouble from its most common source. also a prescription (bathing the eyes with rosewater) for summer ophthalmias and three prescriptions (including flower of copper. 9. also 2 above). 222). no drink. 2. CMG 5. 958b.

avoidance of all company. discharge and swelling is important in diagnosis.]). The presence or absence of pain is given particular emphasis. dust. including one on ‘summer’ ophthalmias. 342–344 K. The general drift of our passage is that the relation between pain. a point stressed not only by Celsus and Galen but also by the author of Prorrhetic 2 (Prorrh. After this point. in accord with that of Celsus and Galen. The treatment for flux from the eyes ( π τ ν κατ τ ς αλμ ς ευματισμ ν) is in the first instance little to eat and water to drink. read διαειρισ for the meaningless δια ωρισ and insert negative μ before πα σηται. noting certum est hunc locum vitiis scatere ‘it is certain that this passage is full of errors’ and merely making tentative suggestions for emendation. However. to be followed by applications ( πιτι μενα) and poultices (καταπλ σματα) of plant matter such as green vine leaves mixed with wine and fine flour. the disruption can readily be explained: delete μετ (wrongly written because of μετ following). The first sentence is not problematical. It is here argued that the main problem is disruption in the ordering of the text and that the correct sequence of words can be restored once the sequence of thought is appreciated. if these prove ineffective). there is an erratic move from the topic of painless swellings (which should not be poulticed) and painful swellings (which may be poulticed after ointments have been tried. If the flux persists and there is additionally pain. read πειδ ν (misplaced by the intrusive μετ ). avoidance also of strong odours. and there is the same stress on the appropriateness of poultices when pain supervenes. The ordering of topics is again similar to that here.44 L. which are protracted in character. more or less homogeneous in character) the corruption in section 2 can be addressed. and that the relation between ointments and poultices is important in therapy. From these parallel passages in Celsus and Galen (neither necessarily directly dependent on On Sight. . smoke and light from sun and lamp. phlebotomy and complete fasting is prescribed.) Galen has several sections on eye troubles.commentary 107 surge of phlegm by compression of the vessels’) or to the surface of the eye itself. 8D) that failure to recover from the pain. 2. 18 [9. It is recognized (6. but both drawing on a stock of material. 6. inflammation and flow of matter is a common eventuality. In de remediis parabilibus (14. Some manipulation of word order with slight alteration of punctuation and modest emendation gives good sense. Ermerins offers no translation. In palaeographical terms. but thereafter the Greek is confused and the sense unclear.

112 L.108. confirms the impression that the work was not written as a co-ordinated whole. Morb. n. πετε υ κα πιδημ υ ‘recurring annually and locally’: M’s nonsensical π’ α τ υ is evidently a corruption of πετε υ. It occurs most frequently (four times) in Internal Affections. 2. (The previous section.]) and to purging head and body. but gains support from Plato’s π τεια ν σ ματα ‘illnesses recurring annually’ (Pl.92 κ αρσις κε αλ ς κα τ ς κ τω κ ιλ ης κ and purging of the lower belly’: the second κ MHR is lost in I and mss descended from I.]). 1. 405c). deals with ‘phrenitis’ a 92 93 Cf. applied there to types of phlegm and to jaundice. 7. without regard for stylistic variation. and rare enough to be glossed by Hesychios. The adjective restored is otherwise not found in the HC. The sudden end. The verb συμ ρει is used repeatedly (eight times. Bald or incomplete sentences have the air of jottings. The adjective πιδ μι ς is surprisingly rare in the HC.]). but attention to the patient’s physique is commonly recommended: with regard to administering food and drink in Affections (Aff. ‘the body’): bleeding is prescribed in addition to the less invasive purging of head and body for those patients who are strong enough to withstand it. Foesius I 689. 73 [7. to phlebotomy in Regimen in Acute Diseases (Acut. Foesius’ translation si corpus sanguine redundet ‘if the body has too much blood’ reflects the rationale of his own contemporary practice of bloodletting.]). and drawing blood from arms in Diseases 2 (Morb.108 commentary The style remains telegraphic. 59 [5. or merely formulaic. αρσις ‘purging of the head αρσις ‘purging’ found in ε ι τ σ μα ‘if he should have the physique’ (lit. 242. . 2. Sp. 2.424 L. the alliteration of κ αρσις … κ ιλ ης may be consciously affected.]. a reading known to or originating with Cornarius. twice). like the disconnected beginning. 2. 1974. 3 [= 2. R. elsewhere it is found only in Epidemics 7 (Epid. or rough notes. 1 above.258 L. cf. with simple sentence structure broken by a few conditional or temporal subordinate clauses. 47 [6.398 L. 17 [9. As in 1 above. Jouanna. a treatise seen here to have certain other features in common with On Sight in both content and expression.354 L. 110 L. 72 [7.]) and in one of the late letters (Ep.93 The phrase is odd in expression. but is a series of notes intended for personal use or limited circulation.

4 [3. Jouanna.]. also as at Vid. to ophthalmia as a general ailment. 28. 19. πρ ς νια τ ν τ ι των λγημ των ‘for some troubles of this kind’: the expression indicates that the author views opthalmia as having different manifestations. of smoke. .94 Avoidance of smoke as an irritant to the eyes and of light as damaging the eyes feature also in the Aristotelian Problemata (31. is a feature of the practical and surgical treatises.]).]. in instructions to the patient (not nomina94 Joly 174.) Such variation in treatment. as at Vid. 3. Galen glosses λγ ματα ‘troubles’ as a synonym for ν σ ματα ‘diseases’ (linguarum Hippocratis explicatio. cf. Ac. suggests a regime of reducing the patient.120. 1974. n. σ τ ς ‘food’: the prescription of only a little bread and just water to drink. genitive plural. Joly reads πλ γι ς. 2 and 16 [7. this reflects a transition from ophthalmia as a specific condition. at the physician’s discretion. in conjunction with the advice not to moisten the head.657 L. which might respond differently to treatment.]. 430 L. but observes that the context in Morb. 68. Morb. 74 K. 35 [8. away from smoke. 491.430 L. nominative in place of M’s πλαγ ων.) The incidence in the HC is wide. πλ γι ν ‘on his side’: the injunction that the patient lie on his side seems otiose (but perhaps lying on the back would make it more difficult to avoid light). 959b). on avoidance of light. π τε καπν κα πυρ ς κα τ ν λλων λαμπρ ν ‘in the dark. Ac. commonly expressed in the formulation συμ ρει πρ ς ‘it is beneficial for’ (Epid. 5. cf. Joly follows Jouanna in remarking that this instruction is unique to these works. accusative. 7. fire and other bright things’: the injunctions seem sensible. 3 is not ophthalmological.244.254 L. 65 [5. 9 head and belly are to be purged and few foods allowed. 21. ν σκ τω. adverb and van der Linden πλ γι ν. Cornarius suggested πλαγ ως. the natural consequence of a supposition that the illness is precipitated by an excess of moisture accumulating in the head. VC 19 [3. Hebd.commentary 109 condition where. 9 the patient shuns the light. Fract. 148 L. with a particular concentration in Koan Prognoses (seventy-one of one hundred and ninety-four occurrences).]. This last gives most idiomatic Greek: accusative and infinitive. 4.

cf.]). n. 148 L. 3. but retained πλαγ ων translating ex obliquo ‘obliquely’. sometimes but not always contained in a fabric bandage. Aff.110 commentary tive and infinitive in address to the physician).]. Scribes were probably unconcerned with such minor differences. 1 [6. more generally.92 L.]). this might be aggravated by addition of fluids. with reference to any wounds.184 L. κατ πλασμα ‘poultice’ or ‘plaster’: the term embraces all kinds of cura- tive materials plastered on the skin. In these passages too. reiterated κα μ τεγγ τω κα λιγ σιτε τω κα πιν τω δωρ.]) and. But there are elsewhere instructions not to wet the head. See Petrequin I 1887. even externally. Int. 26. or oil. The surgical injunctions of Sores further resemble those of On Sight in recommending a very light diet.400 L.]).124.95 Though the adjective is very commonly opposed to ρ ς ‘straight’. Similarly below. 3. also Artic. That the head should not be moistened (sc. n. where the patient must sit ‘sideways’ on a high chair for the practical reason that his arm can go over the back of the chair. 246 L. 40 [4.172 L. with water to drink ( λιγ σιτ ειν … δωρ υμ ρει. explicable both visually and aurally.]). 51. with water. 27 and cf. also Duminil. The manuscript error of omega for omicron is a common one. 1 and 483.238. γ ρ συμ ρει ‘for it is not beneficial’: the variant πειδ συμρει gives the same sense and is important only in establishing the divergence in the later tradition between mss derived from H and mss derived from I. even when other parts are being bathed (Morb. 7 [7. 2.]. 24 [6. Ulc. Ulc. Foesius knew ms evidence for πλ γι ν. The injunction not to moisten head wounds occurs categorically in Head Wounds (VC 13 [3. the context involves a move from proscription of moisture to the question of poultices. 6. or soothing lotions) again indicates the supposed presence of flux from the head. and the ensuing mention of swelling further suggests the presence of noxious or excessive or misplaced matter.400 L. in readiness for treatment of a dislocated shoulder (Artic. the inclusion or omission of σ ι is indifferent semantically. we may contrast a passage in Articulations. 7 [4. 37 [6. 243. in Sores (Ulc. n. 1 [6.]. there seems little point to this sense here. .96 95 96 Foesius I 689.428 L. 1998. 16 [7.].230 L. 3.

]. 111 [8. Morb. as below.commentary 111 δυν ς μ νε σης.240 L.344 L. 165 [8. 10 [6. Both senses are found in the HC: the former is surely intended here. The doctor is supposed to know which drugs would act in appropriate ways: astringent agents. 2.408 L. but apparently continuing flux’: for the genitive absolute. flow of discharge. The proposed δια ειρ εσ αι ‘treat’ gives the precise sense required. 38 [6. Aff. Similarly we find π λειψις just below. sometimes there is a shift from abstract to concrete (as Loc. But the verb ε σαλε ω is found in Nature of Woman. 19. 2.3. 24 [7.]). as here.) δριμ α ρμακα ‘astringent drugs’: see VC 14 [3.236 L. Hom. Mul.]. The verb π ειν has two main senses (apparently rather contradictory. of 9. but the repetition is not untoward in the Greek of On Sight. 148 K. further the sense is inapposite.]). Joly reads λλως.]. Nat. but useless. 1.]. cf. λλ’ ς ε ματ ς π ντ ς ‘if there is no pain. Galen glosses π λειπτ ν γ ριστ ν ρμακ ν (linguarum Hippocratis explicatio. Flux and pain go together in many contexts ε ματ ς κα τ ς δ νης. 74 [8.]. ‘continue’ or ‘pause’.298 L.] (for suppuration). Ulc. 2. Morb. 2 [5. ‘stop’.and . The verb δια ωρ εσ αι ‘be separated’ is very rare and there is no other Hippocratic usage. or drying agents.] (vinegar).). 2. 3. the incidence is in accord with the general pattern of vocabulary in On Sight. Mul.] ( γ ντα α μα ‘to draw blood’) and cf. The otiose σ.104 L. 19 [7. which might refer to a persistent.158 L. 13 [6. Mul. but both involve a recognized usage of the prepositional prefix and ambiguity is rare): ‘prevail’. The term ε μα may be used both of flux (abstract) and of content of flux such as discharge (concrete). 2. πηλλαγμ ν υ τ pain have passed’. both generally of flux to the eyes and particularly of a type of discharge).]. The phrase here clearly anticipates the genitive absolute in the final sentence. 9.248 L. or of tears. Prognostic and Diseases of Women 2 (Mul. δ ματ ς μ πρ σε ντ ς ‘in the absence of swelling’.342 L.3. δημ των νωδ νων ‘while the swellings are not painful’: this phrase is tautologous after δυν ς μ νε σης. while the related substantive δια ειρισμ ς occurs in Epidemics 2 (Epid. 47 [7.34 L. μετ τ ν σ λειψιν ‘after the application’ (of ointment): the substantive is a hapax. possibly misplaced.66 L. ‘when both flux and (cf. The verb occurs in Affections.

97 3.). Sichel finds here a mark of the experienced practitioner and Joly a judicious recommendation to avoid secondary infection. 13 [6. υμ ασις and υμ αμα.98 The emphasis on the nature of the matter in flux continues (cf..). that general word continues to exist and there is no formation in -μα.]. pent-up matter is dangerous).]. but depends on a more general word which predated it. 2. Hom.2 [6. αρμ κευσις and ρμακ ν. 2000.]. Medical terms of this formation describe the use of procedures in treatment. Langslow. Hom. and in Fract. Sichel 151. Mul. in Latin. Similarly. not just in the case of this ailment. 1. Hom. πρ καλε ται ‘summons’: the verb occurs only five times in the HC (here. The following may be compared: ε σακ ω (Loc.300 L. πυρ ασις and πυρ αμα. Epid. 14 occurrences). only.44 L.]. 1 and 2. (Compare also the hapax περ νησις Loc.prefixes are in accord with the stylistic preferences of our writer. 97 98 Cf.. and note the exception ε σ λασις of a medical condition.). echoed Celsus 6. 2. ε σιτ ω (Morb. ε σ ω (Artic. However. ε σ πα (Mul.) Where the medical usage is not a coinage.. cf. ε σαναγκ ω (Artic.346 L. ε σα σσω (Nat. Loc. For a drying drug applied in the case of slight flow. 18 [9. ε στρυπ ω (Oss. Loc. μετ τ ηρ ‘a drying substance’: drying ointments would include poultices intended to draw off noxious moisture.). 2). Prorrh. and once again this preference links On Sight linguistically with a limited group of treatises. see above). 13. . 292. ε σ α νω (Loc. Joly 174. 47. 6.112 commentary π. here it is a tangential return to a previous topic. Epidemics and elsewhere (but not in theoretical works on flux and fixation). ε σωλ ω and ε σ λασις (VC).. 1). and -tura is used in medical parlance. Examples are σις and αμα. Mul. Hom. 8 [6. 6. Hom.300 L. Prorrh. Examples are μ λευσις and μ λ ς. most often of urination) in the surgical treatises. σ μεν ν ‘pent-up’: the verb occurs (passive. -tio as a suffix has some stylistic or ‘technical’ significance. The suffix -ις or -σις is also of interest. Prorrh. Fist. The final sentence (on the presence of discharge) seems to belong earlier (in 9. 1. Advice to keep the eyes neither open for too long nor shut for too long might seem to apply in all circumstances. 300. and Coac. gynaecological works). hot is bad. whereas words of -μα formation denote the procedure itself. 2).

with lashes on their margin Fundus point on retina. serving to cover and protect the eye. through which nerve fibres and blood vessels travel Glaucoma disorder (or group of disorders) characterised by high intraocular pressure due to build up of aqueous humour in the eye Iris the coloured portion of the eye. perforated by the pupil Keratitis inflammation of the cornea Lens colourless body contained in capsule behind iris. condition when the lid is turned away from the eyeball. causing irritation to the cornea from the lashes Eyelids upper and lower tissue. a tough encapsulating fibrous membrane (outermost of three ‘coats’ of the eye) Tarsus. opposite pupil.GLOSSARY OF OPHTHALMOLOGICAL TERMS Blepharitis Canthus inflammation of the lid margins angle at outer (lateral) and inner (medial) corners of eyelid Cararact disease of the lens marked by opacity in the lens or lens capsule Chalazion painless cyst developing in tarsal gland Choroid vascular layer between sclera and retina Ciliary body part of the eye connecting iris and choroid Conjunctiva mucous membrane lining the marginal edges and the inner aspect of the lids and covering the cornea Conjunctivitis inflammation of the conjunctiva Cornea anterior transparent part of sclerotic membrane Ectropion eversion of the lid margin (usually lower lid). sclerotic the white portion of the eye. triangular fold of tissue growing from nasal area over the cornea Pupil the central aperture (black to the naked eye) of the iris Retina sensitive layer (innermost of three ‘coats’ of the eye) involved in transmission of nerve impulses to the brain Sclera. tarsal plate plate of fibrous tissue supporting the eyelid . involved in transmission of light to retina Limbus junction between (opaque) sclera and (clear) cornea Papilloma overgrowth of skin Pterygium conjunctival lesion. condition when the lid is turned towards the eyeball. exposing the conjunctiva Entropion inversion of the lid margin (usually lower lid).

114 Trachoma Trichiasis Visual cortex glossary of ophthalmological terms serious infectious keratoconjunctivitis condition of ingrowing eyelashes. allied with entropion part of the brain which processes information from the eye .

The Head: lateral view . The Eye: anterior view Diagram 2.DIAGRAMS Diagram 1.

116 diagrams Diagram 3. Section of the eyeball .

part ii ON ANATOMY .

.

Loc. gave me an unforgettable and highly instructive tour of visual aids in the Department of Anatomy at St.. Without the encouragement and support of all these friends. I am grateful also to Mr James Longrigg (University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne) for advice on the pre-Socratic background. and to Professor Jacques Jouanna (Sorbonne) for invaluable aid in checking and communicating the readings of the ms V. and Dr Susan Whiten. 2 [6. location of spleen. There is a clear progression in two parallel sections: first. In the final stages. whose copy of Gray’s Anatomy has now become even more thumbed and tattered. bladder described. Andrews) for comments on the ‘style’ of the piece. kidneys to bladder. location of heart. Dr Ann Dally. function being largely disregarded and speculation completely eschewed. especially Dr Donald Coid. and viscera to two orifices for evacuation. trachea to lung. The account is for the most part descriptive. with Mr Robin Clark.THE HIPPOCRATIC TREATISE ON ANATOMY 1 ‘Anatomy is the basis of medical discourse’ (Hipp.]) Introduction On Anatomy (Anat. location of diaphragm. vesssels. For any remaining errors or misapprehensions. Oxford University Press). and comm. bladder to genitals.) is the shortest treatise preserved in the Hippocratic Corpus (HC). who first drew On Anatomy to my attention and who commented most helpfully on drafts of this paper at successive stages.278 L. heart described. Andrews. forthcoming. who. Andrews to pursue work on the Hippocratic treatise Places in Man (ed. conclusion. who introduced me to the ways of Wimpole Street. lung described. tr. [page 135] . Assistance of a different but equally important kind was afforded by those who answered my countless (doubtless often silly) anatomical questions with great good sense and good humour. oesophagus to belly. location 1 Appreciative thanks are due to the director and trustees of the Wellcome Trust for the award of a research leave fellowship which released me from arduous teaching duties at the University of St. I should never have completed this paper. It describes the internal configuration of the human trunk. This paper is a parergon of that work. Though systematic it is unsophisticated: two orifices for ingestion are linked by miscellaneous organs. Hom.. I am most grateful to Professor Vivian Nutton (WIHM and University College London).. I am alone responsible. it was improved by the comments of the referee (anonymous) and the editors (Stephen Heyworth and Christopher Collard) of CQ. to Sir Kenneth Dover (St. and second.

may plausibly be attributed to a North Greek strand of scientific and medical endeavour. and poetic. may be an abridgement of a fuller and more flowery account. the paper has a wider thrust.. based on extensive observation of animals (probably sacrificial victims as well as laboratory specimens). The / vocabulary is markedly Demokritean and there are strong affinities with Ep. followed by translation. colon to rectum and anus. At the same time. this hypothesis is supported by several passages where erroneous or unclear information apparently results from excessive compression or / imperfect comprehension of a source. a composite work which is related in turn to Epid. and asyndetic. the vocabulary is recondite. and discussion incorporating conclusions on origin and date. the putative earlier version(s) of Anat. and with the similarly located Epid. In this paper a new text is presented. the supposititious letter of Demokritos to Hippocrates on ‘the nature of man’. 23. with Oss. perhaps of the aborted foetus or exposed infant. with which familiarity is apparently assumed. These features suggest that Anat.120 the hippocratic treatise on anatomy and description of belly (close to liver). in conjunction with opportunistic observation of war wounded and accident victims. concerning the development of ancient anatomical knowledge and scientific terminology. and is corroborated by frequent references to comparative anatomy. 6. There is erratic omission of the article and recurrent use of compendious comparisons. may have been corroborated by some human dissection. both in content and in expression. both as originally composed and as subsequently constituted. belly to intestine/colon. [page 135 / page 136] / . As there are similarities also. The conclusions have important implications for our understanding of the formation of the HC. commentary. with features peculiar to human organs. conclusion. 2. Such anatomical knowledge. The fragment offers good basic topographical or regional anatomy (the organs studied as they lie in relationship with one another in the different regions of the body). While the syntax is bald. telegraphic. case histories of patients in Thrace and adjacent regions. That the work is concerned with human anatomy is certain from the precise description of lung and liver.

135–148. 1766): medico-philological commentary on Anat. (Frankfurt. Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker (10th edn. Cornarius ed. computer search of TLG database. Anat. Black’s Veterinary Dictionary (14th edn. Claudii Galeni Opera Omnia (Leipzig. Bologna 3632. ‘La description des vaisseaux dans les chapitres 11–19 du traité de la Nature des Os’. (Paris. occupies 8. now in Oxford (by the same hand as Paris 2146). and Latin trans. and French trans. Triller Opuscula Medica vol. 1851–1864. 287–288. occupies 3. Hippocratic Corpus. 1588). 1839–1861. 1st edn (Leiden. Kranz. Calvus Abbreviations for ancient authors and works (including Hippocratic treatises) follow Liddell–Scott-Jones. Anat. Ruelle. Kühn.-P. also Oeconomia. Gray’s Anatomy (30th edn. C. p. 1595. Alexanderson. Teil I (1905). and 2nd edn (Leipzig. published 1864). Daremberg and E. 110. 1961). published 1853). Die Handschriften der antiken Ärzte. van der Linden ed. 1980). (Utrecht. and Latin trans. Diels. 1728). Holkham 282. Foesius ed. pp. Vatican. 1982). TLG K. preceding Aldine editio princeps of Asolanus. [page 136 / page 137] / . C. 1879). all recentiores and apparently without independent value. H.the hippocratic treatise on anatomy References and Abbreviations V Vatican gr. 2. See H. Diels & W. (Basle. 1526). Palatine 192. / / The following modern works are referred to by author’s name and date: M. 1821–1830). Littré ed. Die hippokratische Schrift Prognostikon (Göteborg. is preserved in a further six mss. Munich 71. BVD GA DK DR HC Ibycus. 1949). Hippocratica (Paris. Frankfurt. 70. 77–78. Oeuvres de Rufus d’Éphèse (Paris. and Latin trans. and Latin trans. Latin translation of Hippocratic writings (1525. 536–541.. 1538). 276 twelfth century 121 Anat. intended as specimen for complete Hippocratic edition. Ermerins ed. (Leiden. 1963). Duminil.G. These are: – – – – – Paris 2146 and Paris 2255 = C and E on which Littré relied. 31 and also B. 1665).

Greenhill. O. G. [page 137] . 247–257. edd. Jouanna.S. Greek Rational Medicine (London.R.E. 149–167.D. 1980). Hippocrates: Pseudepigraphic Writings (Leiden.A. 1973). W. Hippocratica (Paris. Herophilus. J.D. ‘La formation du vocabulaire de l’anatomie en grec: du mycénien aux principaux traités de la collection hippocratique’. Edelstein. Médecine ancienne et métaphore (Paris. C. ‘The History of Anatomy in Antiquity’. NY and London. Smith. Smith.B. The Hippocratic Treatises On Generation. Ancient Medicine: Selected Papers of Ludwig Edelstein. 1990). O. Mansfeld. von Staden. Lonie. ‘Adversaria Medico-Philologica’. F. Gesnerus 42 (1985) 455–464. H. The Hippocratic Tradition (Ithaca. On the Nature of the Child. J. R. 1981). Temkin (Baltimore. pp. 1979). 1971). 1988). Onians. 1993). J. 247–301.L. W. Hippocrate (Paris. Folklore and Ideology (Cambridge. 1983). Skoda. Irigoin. Longrigg. The Origins of European Thought (Cambridge. and E. Diseases IV: A Commentary (Berlin and New York. 1992). The Heart and the Vascular System in Ancient Greek Medicine (Oxford.122 the hippocratic treatise on anatomy L. Harris.M. The Pseudo-Hippocratic Tract περ δ μ δων (Assen. W. The Art of Medicine in Early Alexandria (Cambridge. British and Foreign Medico-chirurgical Review 34–38 (1864–1866). 1967. J. Lloyd. I. Temkin. 1989). ‘Hippocrates as the Physician of Democritus’. 1952). 1932). ‘The Development of Greek Anatomical Terminology’. Science. pp.R. first German publication.

ON ANATOMY TEXT AND TRANSLATION .

: νε ρ ν V 2 A Budé text by M. τετραμμ ν ς ς τ 5 ριστερ .TEXT Περ νατ μ ς2 I 1. κα μετ 10 ρ γ ης λ ψ μεγ λη καλευμ νη. τ ν περιηγ ων πτ μ νων κατ’ π πεδ ν λλ λων. α μ ρρωδ στερ ν δ στι τ ν λλων. Απ δ τ υτ υ σκαλ νη λ ψ π τ κ τω νε ρ ν π τε ν υσα. στρ γγυλωτ ρη κα εστε σα π ντων ων. π ντε περκ ρυ σιας ων. Μ σω δ’ α τ ω καρδ η γκα δρυται. δι’ ς λ ν τ σκ ν ς τρ εται. 2. Απ δ καρδ ης ς παρ ρ γ η π λλ κα κει. περκ ρυ σιας ν δ . Τ δ παρ μ ρυσμ ην μ ν ει τ ς λλ ις πασιν. ς δ καλ υσι λ ς. Duminil is promised. Α τ ς δ 3. Αρτηρ η κατ ρ υ αρυγγ ρ υ τ ν κ υσιν π ιευμ νη ς κρ ν πνε μ ν ς τελευτ .: μετ ρ γ η V: ρυ η λ ψ κα κει. τε ρ νης ρ ι ς τυ ν. 4. κρ κ ις υγκειμ νη μ ρυσμ ς. πνε μων υνε αναπληρ τ ν λυν. σει ν τεν ρηνι δης. ς καλ υσι π λας. [page 138 / page 139] / . κα μετ ρ γ ης edd.-P. κα μετ τ ς ρυ ης van der Linden 12 μ ρυσμ ην V: μ ι ι ρυσμ ην van der Linden | πασιν V: πασιν Triller 14 κε μεν ν Ermerins: κειμ νας V 15 νε ρ ν recc. στ γμασιν ρ ν δεσι κεκεντημ ν ς. ν δε ις τ π ις κε μεν ν. 15 3 5 μ ρυσμ ς V: μ ι ρυσμ ς van der Linden 3–4 πτ μ νων Ermerins: πτ μ νη V υνε αναπληρ Ermerins: συνε αναπληρ V 5–6 τετραμμ ν ς ς τ ριστερ V: τετραμμ ν ς ε ς τ μ τερα vel μ στερνα vel τ μ ω στ ρνα Cornarius: τετρημ ν ς ριστερ van der Linden: τετραμμ ν ς ς τ δε ι κα ς τ ς τε τ δε ι κα τ 6 περκ ρυ σιας Ermerins: π κ ρυ σιας V 7 ρ ν δεσι ριστερ Ermerins Foesius: ρ ναγ σιν V: ρ δεσι van der Linden: ρυ εσι Littré 7–8 τεν ρηνι δης Foesius: ν τ ρηνι δης V 10–11 ρ γ η π λλ κα κει.

by means of which the entire frame is nourished. [page 140] . is punctuated by dark spots. it is composed of similar rings [to other creatures’]. the circular parts touching one another on the surface. It has two projecting parts. and with the tube the vessel called the great vessel.TRANSLATION I 1. From the heart to the liver a large tube goes down. The lung has five projecting parts. 2. 3. and is in nature like a honey-comb. The liver has a similarity to [that of] all other creatures. From the liver a slanting vessel extends to the parts below the kidneys. In the middle of it the heart is situated: it is rounder than [that of] all creatures. but is more blood-suffused than [that of] others. it has an ashen colour. which they call lobes. inclined towards the left. The actual lung. it lies in the right part [of the body]. taking its origin from each side of the throat. which they call gates. The trachea. ends at the top of the lung. 4. fills the chest cavity.

| γ γνεται recc. λη κα μεγ λη. Πρ ς δ κ ν ης πισ εν πατ ς ρ νες πε κασι. Απ δ κ λ υ π υκεν ρ ς λ σ ι ς. 1 μ λ ισιν V: μηλε ισιν Triller 2 ς κρην van der Linden: κρην V 3 κα εν ε σα V: κ στα ε δ κ στι ς μετ κ στι ς μ σα σ α Craik: κα ε κ στι ς μεσ ε σω Triller: κα εν δ κ στι ς μετ ε ς Littré: κ ε σω recc. 9. δι’ παρα ρ τ ς τρ ς γ γνεται. σ γ ς δ π γλ σσης τ ν ρ ν π ιε μεν ς ς κ ιλ ην τελευτ . πη ων κ λασσ ν δ δεκα. 10 10. σπλ ν ρ μεν ς κτ ταται μ ι ρυσμ ς νει π δ ς.: λ μελ η van der Linden: λ υμ νη Triller 12 μακρ ν ap. Κ ιλ η δ πατι παρακειμ νη κατ’ ε νυμ ν μ ρ ς λ μελ ς στ νευρ δης. Τ δ λλα σις διετ ατ . 11. | περιπλη α V: π λυπλη α van 17 Post διετ ατ der Linden 15–16 ς κρ ν V: κα ς κρ ν van der Linden lacunae signa Ermerins: fortasse διετ σσετ Craik [page 138 / page 139] / . Νε ρ τ υτ ων π υκε. ν μ σ ν ντ ς δ ετ text μ ι ρυσμ .: γκας δ κ στι ς μετ σις V: σι Ermerins 7 π σηπτικ ς δ τ ς κ στι ς μετ τευσις ω Ermerins 5 V: πισημαντικ ς vel πισ μως Cornarius ap. λικηδ ν ν κ λπ ις νειλ μεν ν. Απ σκαλην ειδ ες ς κρην κ ρυ ν κ στι ς κε νται. ν δ κα π σηπτικ ς κ ιλ ης στ μα ν καλ υσι. λ γω δ ριστερ ς. Εκ δ πλευρ ς ν ης.: μ ι ρυσμ V 11 λ μ νη recc. Foesium: μικρ ν V 13 ν κ λπ ις V: ς κ λπ υς van der Linden 14 κ λ ν V: κ λ ν recc.: γ νεται V 15 κ λ υ V: κ λ υ recc. σ ρκα περιπλη α 12. Foesium | καλ υσιν edd.126 5. Κα τ μ ν σ α 5 II 8.: πε κασι V 9 μ ι ρυσμ ς edd. μακρ ν. Κ στις δ νευρ δης 7.: καλ υσι V λ μελ ς V: 8 π κασιν edd. Απ δ κ ιλ ης π υκεν ντερ ν μ ι ρυσμ ν. καλ υσιν νι ι κ λ ν. ς 15 κρ ν δακτυλ υ τελευτ ν. δ 6. Εκα εν κ στι ς μ σα σις κ σμ η. ων. τ ν ρ ι ν δ ναλ γκι ι μ λ ισιν.

on the left side. comes the diaphragm. is all sinewy. 7. The belly. nature has organized. The bladder is all sinewy and large. 11. From the colon comes last the rectum. the genitals. in coils entangled in folds. the spleen begins. which has fleshy tissue. The kidneys are similar [to other creatures’] and in colour are like [those of] sheep. they call it ‘mouth’ for the putrefying belly. From the belly comes the intestine. 12. On the false side. 9. which is similar [to other creatures’]. ends at the belly.text 127 5. II 8. [page 140] . I mean the left. The oesophagus. The rest. and by it the passage of the food occurs. taking its origin from the tongue. In these six parts [bodily] nature has been arranged internally in the middle. centrally. 10. Some call it the colon. 6. From the backbone. At a distance from the bladder come. and extends. no less than twelve cubits. From them slanting ducts reach to the top edge of the bladder. behind the liver. similar to a footprint. and which ends at the extremity of the anus. long. lying beside the liver.

.

ρτηρ η may be applied to the bronchial tubes.]). or by tacit substitution ρτε ς.e. 14. even within individual treatises and.12 and 25 [5. i. [page 141] . 2. 294. both of trachea and of vessel (Epid. 5 [9. In a later distinction. ducts. is a cartilaginous and membranous tube … continued downward from the lower part of the larynx … The cartilages … vary from sixteen to twenty in number. Thus. Int. the term ρτηρ αι is.]).170 L. 394 L. applied to the important hollow bodily tubes. muscles. conversely. or vessels through which fluids (not only blood) were believed to course.] on ρτηρ η. In some passages ρτηρ η is ambiguously used. Most commonly. where ρ γ ς is trachea and ρτηρ αι. In the HC. 3.1. ligaments as well as (occasionally) nerves. or windpipe. whence trachea. 14. like λ ες. Each is an imperfect ring which occupies the anterior two-thirds or so of the circumference of the trachea.166 L. cf.4. then. The term ρ γ ς is used not only of the bronchial tubes but generally of the area between throat and lung and. Nothing. 306 L. also the two terms may be found together (as Loc. λ ια. are bronchial tubes).1 [5. ρτηρ η: in Greek medicine. generally agreed to have been formalised by Praxagoras. is correct about the rings and about the rings ‘touching’ one another. Hom. the arteries were believed to convey πνε μα and the veins blood through the body.282. is said about the branching of the windpipe into the right and left extrapulmonary bronchi. at times. 1 [7. 1275: ‘The trachea. But in the HC the terminology of trachea and bronchial tubes is ambiguous and inconsistent.5. and is analogous to the term νε ρα applied to the solid links in the body. tendons. and σ ριγγες all connected with the lung).122 L. the term ρτηρ η (or ρτηρ η τρα ε α. 10. sinews. On the trachea see GA 1270. however.388. 7. the trachea is rarely simply ρτηρ η (but see Epid.] ~ Oss. Celsus’ ‘arteria aspera’) eventually prevailed for the trachea or windpipe. partially or completely’.COMMENTARY 1. which lead separately to right and left lung. in accord with Rufus’ explanation (Anat.7 [6. within individual sections of them (cf. The author. … Two or more of the cartilages often unite. 304.2.].

the intestines ρτηται). Ibycus. Aetius.190 L. The derivation is uncertain. in breathing. Like the related terms π υσις.558 L.460 L. it is common in anatomical contexts.]. 4 [8. Fract. As a technical locative term. with the two nasal passages..590 L. Artic. possibly because of its connection. or from ραρ σκω ‘fit’.386 L. however. i. for blood.g. (e.130 commentary 65. Oss.]. / / Unsurprisingly. and the heart by the aorta (which.560 L. kidneys Carn. ‘protuberance’ (for which π υσις is a common manuscript variant) and παρ υσις. 5 [8.v. Oss. and Oribasius.]). presumably because the lungs seemed ‘suspended’ by the trachea.168 L. Pollux differentiates between ρυγ . from τρ ηλ ς τ μ ρεα α τ κ τερα ν α κα ν α δ νας ει.] (cf. presumably because the ρτηρ η seemed to ‘fit’ parts of the body together (and for this notion.) τ ν κ υσιν π ιευμ νη: the technical expression κ υσις with reference to trachea has the same significance as the more general term ρ in the parallel description of oesophagus in 8 below. of trachea (2. passim). Gland. The terms are typically but not exclusively 3 4 See Greenhill (1864–1866). Fract. ‘each (of two)’ is especially common in bodily description (legs.5) defines ρτηρ αι as paths for air analogous to λ ες. also Oss. 183 DR) that the λ ες carry blood and the ρτηρ αι blood to some extent but rather πνε μα ‘air’. However.]. but the usage here. it seems that the throat was regarded as essentially bipartite. Mochl. as π κε αλ ς κατ τ ς ρυγγας. Irigoin (1980). 45 [4. 7 [8. 141 common term ρυγ (cf. The connection between ρτηρ α as trachea and as artery is probably that both were regarded (rightly in the case of the former) as conveying air. but is common in late medical writers. the adjective κ τερ ς. it does not differ in sense from the αρ γε ρ ν Onom. 1 [9. Rufus ρυ δ DR) or occasional term λ ρυγ this being the interior of the τρ ηλ ς or α ν (but both of these are used for other narrow parts also. 39 [4.]. and Mochl. cf. κατ ρω εν. ‘excrescence’. Pollux (2.4 It is glossed (s. such as the neck of the bladder or of the womb). ‘inception’. of each [side of the] throat is unexpected.e. [page 141 / page 142] / . ‘starting-point’. ‘joints’.]).340 L. Gland.4. Galen. ( ρυγγες is occasionally used in the plural. αρ γα ρ ν) by Hsch. 12 [3. especially in Artic. 62. Mochl.3 κατ ρ υ αρυγγ ρ υ: this term is not used elsewhere in the HC. TLG: Aretaeus. start of oesophagus and λ ρυγ . 1 [4.].. itself must be from ρτ ω ‘suspend’).207). Possibilities are from α ρω ‘lift’. as did the ρ ρα.

] and Loc. 5. as in plural τ κρα. repeated three times in this short piece (1.]. PA 669b). 4 [9. where it denotes a ‘loop’ attached to a piece of apparatus ( γκυλαι in the excerpted text. and the use throughout of the singular. but the expression.1. 30 [3.6 [6. as indeed did Aristotle (HA 1. cf.94. it is evident that the author regarded the lung as a single joined organ. 30 [= 9.]. 14 [6.]). 14 [8.5 τελευτ : this verb. 570 L. ‘extremity’.] in the phrase νεκρ κωσεν πρ ς τ ν καν αν (glossed Erotian E 38 ν δησεν). For the use of the preposition ς. Il. For the compound verb.290 L. forerunner of the modern term ‘cricoid’ cartilage. on rings for ships’ hawsers) regards κρ κ ς as poetic for κ ρκ ς or κ κλ ς. 11.). 41 [4. init. see Fract.568. κρ ν πνε μ ν ς: the substantival form ‘top point’. Hom.166 L.528 etc.520 L. τ ν ρ ν π ιε μεν ς = verb ρ μεν ς. ‘edge’ is used again below. Acut.]). The adjectival form is here used once ( κρην κ ρυν. Pollux (1.]. The singular form πνε μων is dominant in the HC (and the rare plural is both preceded and followed by the singular. oesophagus at belly.194 L. as ρμεν ς. 5). κρ κ ις υγκειμ νη μ ρυσμ ς: the sense of κρ κ ις is evident. 2. recurs in 8 below. Elsewhere in the HC.392 L. This is by stylistic preference.commentary 131 medical or biological. [7. particularly for bodily extremities. [page 142] . ς κρ ν δακτυλ υ: this use is uncommon ς in Attic Greek. the noun occurs only in Mochl. with abstract noun plus π ιε σ αι standing for verb with same root as the noun. 9 [3.16.] / / 5 Maladies of the lung and respiratory tract occupy much space in the HC: see especially Int.495b.170 L. Hom.282 L.] and κπε κασιν.302 L. is unusual in Greek. Gland. From the expression ‘the top of the lung’. 3.3) shares the metaphor. Fract. rectum at anus) is regularly used of the location of bodily parts in the anatomical treatises. but is a regular alternative in the HC. of bodily composition. 8. The original form πλε μων gave way to πνε μων presumably because of a supposed connection with πνε μα: from the heroic age the lung was known to be vital to life (Hom. Celsus’ expression constat ex circulis quibusdam (4. 18 [9. The circumlocution τ ν κ υσιν π ιευμ νη. The compound verb γκρικ ω occurs Oss. trachea ending at lung. Oss. κε σ αι ς below.448 L.]. 9. Loc. and repeatedly in Artic. the verb being available as alternative: as π π υκε. 4.

130. with spleen.132 commentary (foot and hand composed of many small bones). the author is concerned with comparisons. The concatenation of terms μ ρυσμ ς. 1. τ π ς). σις. and Artic. of boots. 62 [4. expressed in consistent terminology. μ ι ρυσμ ν. with intestine.words can mean ‘similar’. except that whereas μ . as in Septim. see further below.words (from μ ς ‘like. with kidneys. which must mean ‘of like form’.words cannot mean ‘the same’. precisely in line with the sense of the related words here. identification with σ μα. glosses as κυκλ τερ ς. of letters. reiterate this information on the Abderite sense of υσμ ς (σ μα. 94. The Greek is ambiguous. δι στασις.268 L. and see κε σ αι below (4. ‘compare’. and only one (the case of the spleen) demands the sense of similarity rather than sameness. However. see further below.to μ ι -. and coexists with μ ι ειδ ς. no instance of μ ρυσμ ς imperatively demands the sense of sameness rather than similarity. In scientific writing. Whatever the authentic Hellenic character of the ‘other words’ allusively mentioned in the Suda. υσμ ς) glosses: κατ Α δηριτικ ν δι λεκτ ν σημα νει τ σ μα. Supp. it seems unduly harsh to imply that the semantic extension of υσμ ς (Ionic for Attic υ μ ς) ‘form’ is not admissible Greek. 985b16. variation can be misleading and obscure the sense. position of liver and 5. ‘plane’ occurs elsewhere in the HC. but reference to comparative anatomy (‘rings like [those in other animals]’) is more probable than to ‘a series of rings’. μ ι . 9. as the difference between μ . El.F. indeed. Triller emends the two occurrences of μ . κα τ ραις δ λ εσιν λληνικα ς περ τ ν Α δηρ την Δημ κριτ ν ρ νται. technical terms are liable to be repeated. passim. glosses υσμ δ σ αι συγκρ νεσ αι. Eustathius). also παρακε σ αι (10. μ ι ρυσμ ν (connected respectively with rings of trachea. is used 6 Following van der Linden. resembling’) is not always strictly maintained. per- haps using the same source. 5.6 and we may add ναλ γκι ι (connected with the kidneys. τ ν περιηγ ων πτ μ νων κατ’ π πεδ ν λλ λων: neither περιηγ ς ‘circular’ nor π πεδ ς ‘level’. Thus μ ειδ ς (close in nuance to μ ρυσμ ς here) can mean either ‘of like form’ or ‘uniform’.]. 772 (in hendiadys with τρ π ς) also H. 5. E. also Hdt. περι ερ ς. with liver. and there is good evidence that υσμ ς and related words were favoured by Demokritos. position of ureters. Suda (s.words (from μ ς ‘one and the same’) and μ ι . which Hsch. κτασις. belly in relation to liver). Other late commentators (Philoponus. The former term. but coexists with more abstract usage. 5): throughout. μ ρυσμ ην. It seems rather to have been a matter of stylistic preference. cf. [page 143] . In our passage.v. The sense ‘shape’ is dominant: see Arist. μ ι ρυσμ ι. Metaph.58. this is unnecessary. Hsch. 4. 10) is arresting.

bladder. line. often without even the article. The vocabulary of this phrase is somewhat alien to the HC. with technical terms of general scientific writing rather than of medicine.’ (The lung is rose-pink in all young creatures. s. but the right has a small extra lobe and there may be one or more accessory lobes in either lung (BVD. porous. middle and inferior) in the right. in fact two (superior and inferior) in the left lung and three (superior. [page 143 / page 144] / . πρ σδεδεμ νη. typically in mathematical contexts (as Demokritos DK 68 B 155 = Plu. ‘lung’). kidneys) picked up from preceding sentences. arguing for the primacy of medical terminology by analogy with learning methods in other skills. But cf. 7 Ibycus.commentary 133 by Empedokles (DK 31 B 27. i. cited also Stob.e. in cattle the lungs are divided into lobes by deep fissures. in the dog each lung has three large lobes. Aischylos and Plato. ‘attached’). The manuscript reading πτ μ νη is retained by early editors (glossed μμ νη. Oss. the characteristic dark pigmentation. in animals as in humans. but as the text stands it is impossibly awkward. α τ δ (vessel). The configuration of lobes in the lung is peculiar to different creatures: in the Equidae the lung is not divided into lobes at all. Anaximander as well as Demokritos. 12 [9. and plane’ (Onom. where the pupil first learns στιγμ ν κα γραμμ ν κα π πεδ ν. The nominative singular feminine of the / participle was doubt/ less scribal error.182 L. Rufus. 926d. but found in Hesiod. in the pig the left lung is like that of the ox while the right has an additional apical lobe.]. Mor. cites geometry.) There can be no doubt that the author here describes human anatomical features: five lobes. most Hellenistic or later. spongy texture … in adult life the colour is a dark slaty-grey.4 = Plu. including Philolaus. see GA 1285: ‘The substance of the lung is of a light. α τ ς δ πνε μων: this initial expression contrasts with the bald resumption of comment. 5 = 133–134 DR). on other organs (liver. bis. Mor. Without λλ λων this would be acceptable Greek. mottling and texture of the lung. On the colour.v. itself often in two parts. TLG: 46 occurrences. following π ιευμ νη … υγκειμ νη and failing to anticipate the change to the genitive absolute construction. ‘point. 1079e). Pythagoras.). 2. the left lung having three and the right lung four or five lobes. mottled in patches. is due to breathing an impure atmosphere.7 The term π πεδ ς is common in many of the pre-Socratics.

for τετραμμ ν ς.6. though note συνεισκατ ικ ω Ep. but also of disease. ‘honey-combed’. cf. See also ελ νει ν (of the chin). through a realization that the voice comes from. also Pollux 2. is to be rejected.56 [7. Morb. 837 of a bull. the idea that the lung is hollow.compounds are common enough (32 instances. and πληρ ω is a verb commonly made compound (in the HC as π πληρ ω.394 L. as ‘arched’ parts of the body. etc. this is to be read Hence Triller tr. συμπληρ ω). τετραμμ ν ς ς τ ριστερ : the phrase ‘inclined (lit. though ρη καλε μεν ς. not only of bodily parts. if. 10 [6. or (ii) to similarity with the lyre. typically as here the chest and cf. many occurring several times over. ‘adapted to drawing’.].8 Double συν. El. 4.394 L. 5. 23 [9. the chest: cf. 302. for the idea.282. πιπληρ ω. pain.]. as is likely. with the σ ριγ source of the voice.1. 2. ‘turned to both sides’.18 L. and is somehow amplified by. on / the grounds that the purpose of the lungs is inhalation. κπληρ ω. 308 L. 14.is unparalleled in the medical treatises of the HC. the metaphor may rather relate (i) to similarity with a tortoise shell. cf.1. it is not clear whether he intended τ’ to be particle or elided neuter plural article. 304. ‘turned’. Ep. Triller ingeniously / moots τετραμμ ν ς ς τ’ ρυστ ρα. or of tortoise shape. τ παρ στεγ εται de Arte 10 [6. as it would anticipate τεν ρηνι δης. commonly the lyre.134 commentary υνε αναπληρ τ ν λυν: the triple compound is a remarkable formation. Cornarius’ tentative emendations (see apparatus) would give a similar sense. in the HC). ν coupled with anatomical misconceptions. 9 8 [page 144 / page 145] / . following Cornarius in preference to Foesius’ ‘implet’. on the supposition that a phrase has been lost. As ‘arched’ is a somewhat inappropriate descriptive term for the chest (even the chest when a deep breath has been taken). 23 [9.604 L. (3.]) shows the same metaphor. Τρ πεσ αι is a common verb of orientation in the body.].177 ελ νι ν explained ‘arched part of the back’. 10. turned) to the left’9 seems at first sight to give an inaccurate description of the position of the two lungs and to conflict with the author’s awareness (evident in what ensues) of the central position of the heart. ‘coadimplet’. protecting vital parts of the body. E. phlegm.]. λυς lit. The usage of κ αρ ς ‘chest’ throughout Loc. bile. Hom. ‘tortoise’ is used by extension of things of tortoise shell. 294. Ermerins suggests ‘turned to the right and to the left’. but neither is possible Greek. (Van der Linden’s emendation τετρημ ν ς ‘pierced’. But the triple compound with συν.

18 [9.]. and viewed in this way the lung may be regarded as ‘turned to the left’: there is a more acute angle on the left side than on the right. σει ν τεν ρηνι δης: the appearance of the lung is described in three succes- [page 145] . As noted above. ς δ καλ υσι λ With this information there is clear awareness of possible variation in terminology ( νι ι ‘some’) and perhaps of etymological rationale for terminology (especially if the emendation πισημαντικ ς or πισ μως is adopted. (i) The text is sound and the author not in error. prefix being added to rare or invented form. and description of the position of the lungs is more appropriate here than description of their appearance. due to the position of the heart (see GA 1286). intestine καλ υσιν νι ι κ λ ν.commentary 135 below. not found either. one said to pass δι τ ν κ ρυ ν κα τ δ ρματ ς ‘between the tops [of the lobes] and the skin’. Oss. κ ρυ occurs frequently in the HC as elsewhere with the meaning ‘top’. στ γμασιν ρ ν δεσι κεκεντημ ν ς. υς: this is the first of five comments on nomenclature in Anat. 5 below. possibly through telescoping of a source. π ντε περκ ρυ σιας: the term περκ ρυ σις occurs only here ap) and of the plied to the eminences or elevations of the lung (λ liver (π λαι). The author is setting out the accepted terminology. The word is thus doubly recondite.: here. and the affinity is striking. δ κα ). ‘deflected to the left’. it implies a simple form κ ρυ σις. Arist. projections of lung. But there are two other possibilities. projections of liver ς καλ υσι π λας. is in the description of vessels in the region of the liver.]. as of bladder. 665b–666b. cf. Cf. with a slightly didactic tone (δ .A. on the grounds that in ancient anatomical texts there is room for ‘les erreurs materielles et les fausses opinions’. We may then retain the manuscript reading and translate ‘inclined towards the left’. as Loc.) Littré rejects any emendation. τε ρ νης ρ ης τυ ν.280 L. but the only usage of κ ρυ similar to this passage. P. μικρ ν ε ς τ ε νυμα παρεκκλ ν υσα. and especially as crown of head. the description of the human heart.194 L. 8). and the vessel μεγ λη καλ υμ νη. 3 [6. Hom. so that (GA 1290) the right lung is ‘shorter’— though ‘broader’—than the left. oesophagus ν δ κα π σηπτικ ς κ ιλ ης στ μα ν καλ υσιν. (ii) A phrase describing the position of the heart has been misapplied to the lungs. the author implies there is only one lung. contrasted with that of other creatures. which ‘they’ use.

though readily understood. the aorta and vena cava: see GA 1415. π ικ λματα) is not used elsewhere in the HC and κεκεντημ ν ς. [page 145 / page 146] / .]. is metaphorical. 22 and many later medical writers. The word στ γματα ‘spots’ (glossed Hsch. in keeping with the author’s elaborate vocabulary. Of these the first seems anatomically best and alone is paralleled in the HC. ρυ εσι (Littré)—all reasonably close to the non-word ρ ναγ σιν—mean.186 L.1. The various conjectures ρ ν δεσι (Foesius).3 [1.M. But / Triller himself rejects these fanciful forms in favour of Foesius’ ρ ν δης. Oss. The adjective ρ ναγ σιν is not credible Greek. or somewhat pouch-shaped (GA 697 fig. 2. including Celsus 4. the word division τ ρηνι δης has otiose and misplaced τ . ‘pricked out’. and the single word τε ρηνι δης ‘like ash’ merely replicates ‘ashen’ just before. of darkness before the eyes. nor heart-shaped. in zoological and embryological writings (DK 68 A 155. It is attributed to Demokritos. the first two relating to colour and the third to ‘nature’.]. ‘foamy’.92 L. on the formation of horn). (ii) The second description is textually uncertain. The reference to the two descending parts ( ρ γ η π λλ … κα λ ψ μεγ λη) is probably to the prominent vessels. 10 As Foesius translated ‘notis cavernosis compunctus’. ρ δεσι (van der Linden). between the lungs). 24 [2. ‘spongiosum’. 1230. lit. the word τ ρη ‘ash’ occurs in the gynaecological treatises of the HC.184 L.20. Foesius’ emendation τεν ρηνι δης ‘honeycombed’ gives an unusual word. glosses τε ρηνι δες π λ κα κεν ν κηρ ν. HN 12. ‘character’ (here perhaps close to ‘texture’). Hsch. cf. palaeographically. (i) The first description ‘ashen’ is clear.].e. Progn. 678). but rather amorphous.626 L. citation from Ael. Although τ ριν ς is a hapax. the slightest change mooted (by Triller) is to ρ ναγεν σιν / or ρ ν γεν σιν supposed to be equivalent to ρ ν δεσιν. The most salient characteristic of the lung is generally thought to be its spongy texture. respectively.]. 3. and ‘protruding’.59 [7. ‘dark’. 13 [9. The heart is in fact neither round. perhaps ντρ δης. it seems that he finally elected to emend with a word meaning ‘cavernous’.136 commentary sive participial phrases loosely strung together. fig. V. The author is correct that the heart is ‘in the middle of the lung’ (i. it is used of the pricking of pain Morb. κα ραι ν. but the allegation that the human heart is peculiarly round cannot be sustained.10 (iii) In the third phrase. ‘punctuated’.

But the terminology is opaque and the brevity and baldness of this text of uncertain date and context renders identification problematical. 12 So earlier editors. Oss. but ‘somewhat rounded’. A. λα ε ν γαλμ’ Α ην ν τ’ γκα ιδρ σαι ν . Carn. [page 146 / page 147] / . sc.24 [5.96 L.80 L. headed by 7 in Nicephorus Gregoras. 665b–666b. First. Fract. But there is a compendious στρ γγυλωτ ρη … π ντων comparison (cf. συν δρυται of eyes (cf. it must be stressed that there is no particular emphasis on the links: the author is simply describing the area between heart 11 The verb γκα ιδρ ω is common in post-classical.T. circular motion is connected with rational activity. also the descriptions of the heart ν δρυται … ς κ παντ ς τ σ ματ ς τ ς ν ας υσα. also Ba. Other descriptions of the heart are: σ μα μ ν κ η πυραμ ς. the κ σμ ς is spherical because the / sphere is the most perfect of shapes.T. 496.. 23 [9. ‘rounder than that of any other creature’. ‘of all animal organs’).].394 L.]. Artic. with regard to dream images ‘deeply penetrating’ the body γκατα υσσ σ αι τ ε δωλα δι τ ν π ρων ε ς τ σ ματα. 19 [9. The alleged roundness of the human heart may be based simply on a view that roundness is a ‘good’ state. Arist.] and κων ειδ ς Ep.e. Arist. lit.12 and also the notion of the heart as ‘ruler’. of eyes. Similar comparisons are made below. writers (Ibycus. For this universal anatomy. especially ecclesiastical. and there are seventeen other Hippocratic γκαταcompounds.11 The sense of the verb here is close to that in Ep. / Ti. Epid. TLG: 47 occurrences. DK 68 A 77 = Plu. often used of a bone ‘sitting’ in place. Euripides uses it of establishing a cult image.13 ων: the Greek expression is slightly illogical. the graces’ hair). Cord. 1339.].A.394 L.2. and περ μ σ ν … ν γ ρ τ ς τιμιωτ ρ ις τ τιμι τατ ν κα δρυκεν σις. c.]. i.584 L. but Smith (1990) corrects to νδρασμ ν ι and νηδρασμ νη. ‘other’ is readily understood. νιδρυσμ ν ι of kidneys and νιδρυσμ νη of bladder. 1 [8. cf. 33 b. καρδ η ασιλ ς. there is a parallel in a Demokritean citation. Cf. Hence Ermerins suggests π ντων τ ν ν ω (i. ‘rounder than all creatures’. Mor. 978 and employs κα ιδρ ειν with similar nuance. though the simple δρ ω is common.e. I. 23 [9. I. and in ‘all creatures’.. γκα μεν ι. P.]). Pl. ρ γ η π λλ … λ ψ μεγ λη: two links between heart and liver are indicated. H. cf. 1481. 4 and 5.commentary 137 γκα δρυται: this compound does not occur elsewhere in the HC. but there are good fifth century antecedents.). 1 [9. cf. 2. 734 f.196 L. 13 For the compound verb. ‘hair like the graces’. τ σ τ ν ς τ ν ν ρωπ ν π δε ω κα τ λλα α..

ωσις λε ν παρ. The two links are: (i) ρ γ η π λλ and (ii) λ ψ μεγ λη καλευμ νη. μεγ στη. Carn. If were to be added. Other descriptions (in different authors of different dates) of the aorta are as ρτηρ η μεγ λη. P. 31 [9. see below.14 / / But several other identifications have been canvassed: 1. economically described by Triller ‘cum ratione tunicae. κ ιλ τ τη. tum ratione motus et pulsus’) and Galen uses the term μεγ λη (with or without the addition πρ ς π λας) for the portal vein. λ ψ μεγ λη commonly refers to the vena cava. as also in the sophistic treatise on nutriment. the technical use would be certain.590 L. The ρ γ η π λλ of the mss is taken by LSJ to be an imaginary system of ducts connecting the heart with the liver. But the vena cava is sometimes designated ρτηρ η. similarly Littré translates ‘beaucoup de tuyaux’. and of the vena cava are as λ ψ κ λη. ωσις ρτηρι ν καρδ η κ τ των π πλαν ται ς π ντα α μα κα πνε μα κα ερμασ η δι τ των ιτ . There is no indication that either heart or liver is peculiarly important in bodily function. πα ε α. Harris (1973).]. On τρ εται as a possible aid to identification. (i) = ducts and (ii) = vena cava. after the vena cava. pp. πνευματικ . ρ .110 L. which is. consonant both with the Greek text and the salient anatomical ‘links’ in the thoracic cavity. with π λλ and μεγ λη synonymous. 82–83 is impressed by the contrast between ρ γ η π λλ and the great vein. and translates ‘many a bronchia [= artery?]’ finding here ‘a double system of blood vessels centred on the heart. 667b) but the tenor is very different.138 commentary and liver. π λ γ ρ ντ τ μ γα). Alim.]. The identification which best fits the tenor of the treatise. and π λλ may mean ‘many a’ or ‘big’ (cf. but the term could be simply general and descriptive rather than technical and specific. πατ τις. the very similar δ γ ρ ε σι κ λαι λ ες π τ ς καρδ ης τ μ ν ν μα ρτηρ η τ δ κ λη λ ψ. Here too the statement that vessels ‘come from’ the heart may be a matter of simple observation. with its careful attention to location and strict paring down to essentials is as follows: (i) =aorta and (ii) = vena cava. And cf. the body’s largest. This seems the simplest interpretation. perceived to be different from the other λ ες (by reason of its character. Hsch. ρ γη is any tube (commonly but by no means exclusively the aorta) or system of tubes (commonly the bronchial tubes). as the fundamental importance of the heart is recognised. Aristotle orders his material similarly (transition from heart to vessels. and the difference between the adjectives only a matter of stylistic variatio. with veins and 14 [page 147] . 5 [8.A. but nothing can be deduced from its omission in this terse work. not necessarily precluding the view that (other) vessels ‘come from’ the head. by which the whole body is nurtured.

δ κ λη and. the vena the great vein) reads hepatica and the cava inferior.402 L. For this common idea.] = Aph 8. of corporeal opposed to mental or spiritual being. 3. quoted above.]). 52 [8. Loc. (i) = vena cava and (ii) = aorta. [page 148] .384 L. 1 presses the Greek into excessively advanced anatomical knowledge. 6.84 L. a distinction between veins and arteries cannot be read into this bald text. Interpretations 3.6 [6. apparently (so Taylor ed. 4. arteries clearly distinguished’.. Ti. 4. with emendation of ρ γ η to ρυ η (adj. (i) = (ii). for instance in Eusebius (Ibycus. 2 = 3 of a body after death (τ τ σ ματ ς σκ ν ς Hebd. Hom. [vessels] α τρ υσι τ ς σ ρκας. a précis of Pl.282 L. also the vessel τρ ιμ ς τε κα ναιμ ς which τρ ει τ ν μυελ ν. 1928) in an attempt to give a superficial Pythagorean colouring to the work.673 L.. also the vessels are not ‘centred on’ the heart. Objection: Greek is awkward. In short. though for this designation.8. 18 [9. as well as in the [Demokritean] letter. both refer to vena cava.commentary 139 δι’ ς λ ν τ σκ ν ς τρ εται: the word σκ ν ς is used four times elsewhere in the treatises of the HC: 1. N. 15 It occurs many times in Ti. λ μελ ην τ σκ νε ς. It becomes extremely common in post-classical Greek. 16 [9. 1 [7. B 37. cf. 5 seem open to the fundamental objection that the location is too low in the body to be right.]. 5. (i) = vena hepatica and (ii) = vena cava inferior.]. who however restricted the reference to a single deep vein. TLG). π ταμ ι ν τ σ μα. and it is hard to extract a ‘system’ from a tube. This is the emendation of Caspar Hoffman adopted by van der Linden (see apparatus).436 L. maximam’) may here be a substituted descriptive term. 3.]). σκινσα Septim. 5. Carn. while admitting that vena cava is usually that called μεγ λη. In all these instances. 7 [9. (i) = vena cava and (ii) = portal vein. B 270. Ermerins (taking his starting point from van der Linden. But the trouble with this is that even if ρ γ η may represent a plurality. argues that π λλ (‘spatiosam. [1. the word is the body either in the abstract or in its non-living state (before birth or after death). 2 is terminologically awkward. τ σιν ρδεται τ σκ ν ς Cord.2 [8. cf. Locr. preserved in some Platonic mss. Triller compares Aristotle’s πρ σπε κασι γ ρ τ πατι α ται δ λ ες μ γισται μ ν καλ υμ νη π λη. Ep. B 57. amplam. Objection: aorta is rarely described as λ ψ. but merely leading from it.15 The statement that the whole frame is nourished or nurtured by the great vessel opens up further problems. The term is much used by Demokritos: DK 68 A 152 = Ael.].]. λ ψ (μεγ λη) does not. The conception that the vena cava played an important part in this life-giving process might have arisen from the observation that the vena cava collapses on death.H.590 L. μεγ λη and supposes the reference is to two veins.]. The verb may allude to the common conception of blood passing to different parts of the body and distributing nourishment as needed. B 288 (all Stobaios citations). Oss.60 of the embryo..190 L. and anyway there is no real need to emend. 2. of premature infants (σκ νεα πτ μηνα—emendation of codd. ‘deep’). B 223. B 187. 4.

A. is not like that of all other creatures. 129–134.]. the horse liver has three lobes. The author describes the situation and character of the liver. and the latter is rendered likely by the fact that the course of blood from placenta is through umbilical vein to ductus venosus to inferior vena cava. the pig has four main lobes and the dog six or seven lobes (BVD. at birth. P.3) has some such rationale: the umbilical vein by which ‘revera infantis corpusculum nutritur’ could readily be associated with the portal vein.110 L. which conveys blood to the liver from the intestines (GA 854 and 855. 1953). fig.F. a particular vessel which linked via umbilical cord to placenta. Alim. before. though resembling that of some animals. the notion expressed that nutriment is breath δι τ in the lung. also the number of lobes.v. α μ ρρωδ στερ ν δ στι τ ν λλων: the second half of the sentence qualifies the first half. It is not impossible that there was some observation of this if the aborted foetus was examined (though observation of the ductus venosus is not recorded until the sixteenth century). Aristotle τ δ πατα τ ν τετραπ δων κα τ ν τ κων κα τ ν ων νω ρα τ ν πλε στων. ‘The liver … is situated in the upper and right parts of the abdominal cavity … owing to its great vascularity. However. The liver varies greatly in character in different kinds of animal. Another candidate is the splenic artery which is ‘remarkable for the tortuosity of its course’ (GA 779). food in the belly while δ ρ αι τ ρη τρ πιγαστρ υ μ αλ ς. the sheep is similar. but this objection seems to be met by the qualification in the second part of the sentence. the ox only one distinct lobe. s. see C.’ Once again. 673b29.16 Cf. Cf. μ ως … μ ι ν … ν πασιν also Herophilos on the liver 16 Triller’s emendation (above n. … The liver is divided … into a large right and a much smaller left lobe. 787). might seem to ‘nourish the frame’. 14. 17 Triller’s emendation πασιν ‘to all other livers’ is made on the grounds that the human liver. Triller does not exclude the vena cava in this connection. GA 1400. The Anatomy and Physiology of Obstetrics (London. [page 148 / page 149] / .W. the ductus venosus collapses with the collapse of the umbilical vein.17 Cf.140 commentary But if the author is here working from an aborted foetus. wounds of the liver cause considerable haemorrhage. but this goes across the body rather than downwards. pp. The slanting vessel / is probably to be identified with the portal / vein. but different (δ ) in relative ‘bloodiness’. it follows the downward course here implied and overlies (is anterior to) the vena cava. the liver is similar (μ ν) in general to the livers of all other animals. Burnett. there is no doubt that human anatomy is being discussed. μ ρυσμ ην μ ν ει τ ς λλ ις πασιν. 30 [9. such as cow and sheep. 4. ‘liver’).

commentary

141

(von Staden, 1989, 182–183). An alternative interpretation is possible: ‘to all other organs of the body’. Aristotle comments that heart and σις and are α ματικ τ ν μ ρ ν, other organs all have α ματικ also that the spleen is α ματωδ ς (P.A. 647a, 670b); but he regards the heart as even more ‘bloody’ than the liver, τ δ παρ α ματικ τατ ν μετ τ ν καρδ αν τ ν σπλ γ νων (P. A. 637b). In view of the author’s stress on comparative anatomy, the former interpretation is preferable. For the bloody character of the liver, cf. ναιμ ν, V.M. 22 [1.632 L.]; π λυα ματ ν, Empedokles DK 31 B 150 = Plu. Mor. 683e. The bloody nature of the liver might be perceived without the theory that it was crucial in the distribution of the blood through the body. The associated vein is α μ ρρ υς πα ε η καλε μ νη λ ψ as Oss. 7 and 12 [9.172, 182 L.]. Of fifteen instances of α μ ρρ υς in the HC, four are in Oss. 7 and 12 [9.172, 182–184 L.]. α ματωδ ς is more common, with seventythree occurrences in the HC; but is applied to wounds, not to vessels.
περκ ρυ σιας ν δ , ς καλ υσι π λας: the projecting parts here called ‘gates’ are more commonly called ‘lobes’ (as in the case of the lung), while the term ‘gate’ is normally applied not (as here) to an eminence, but to a depression or indentation, especially the fissure through which the portal vein enters (see von Staden, 1989, 229). There are several such indentations, the two main ones being the points of entry of the vena cava inferior and the portal vein (GA 1405, fig. 1221). The term ‘gate’ is dismissed by Rufus as appropriate to augury, not to human anatomy (and the distinguishing features of animal livers were well known from minute examination in the course of augury following animal sacrifice; of all the organs it must have been most generally familiar—see e.g. E. El. 828 sqq.); Rufus also states that the term ‘gates’ was applied by ‘old doctors’ to the attachment to the vena cava inferior (Anat. 28, 175 DR). It is possible that the odd terminology is the result of drastic summarization: the excrescences have been given the name gates, instead of lobes, while some description of gates is lost. Differentiation is clearly implied Oss. 10 [9.180 L.] = Epid. 2.4.1 [5.122 L.] π ν…δ ς … π λας. Hsch. π λας κα λ ν, and cf. Pl. Ti. 71c1–2 λ πατ ς. has both terms: π λας κτρ π ς and λ ι ν τ κρ ν τ The number of lobes is variously given. Rufus believed there were four or five. Whereas in Oss. 10 [9.180 L.] a single lobe is envisaged, it is ) clearly stated in Oss. 1 [9.168 L.] that there are five ( πατ ς π ντε λ and in Oss. 18 [9.192 L.]—as here in Anat.—that there are two (in the ν). The expressions τ ν δε ι ν λ ν τ ν πατια ν and μετα δ λ

[page 149]

142

commentary

minor / excrescences of the caudate lobe and the quadrate lobe (GA / 1405, fig. 1221) perhaps confused the issue; but inspection of different species would lead to different conclusions.
ν δε ις τ π ις κε μεν ν: κε μεν ν (neut. sg.) is Ermerins’ emendation of κειμ νας (fem. pl.) and makes the liver lie on the right of the body, rather than the ‘gates’ on the right of the liver. The general statement is in accord with the rudimentary anatomical description of the text.18 σκαλ νη λ ψ π τ κ τω νε ρ ν π τε ν υσα: the adjective, not used elsewhere in the HC, is used by Demokritos (so DK 68 A 37 = Simp. in cael. 294.33, and, allegedly based on Aristotle, 132 = Thphr. C.P. 67.2); and is extremely common in a wide range of other authors of all dates. Hsch. glosses by σκ λι ν, π λ γων ν.19 The expression τ κ τω is compressed, sc. μ ρη. The compound verb is used only twice in the HC, here and (in a temporal sense) Epid. 4.7 [5.146 L.], though both τε νειν and π τε νειν are very common.20

5. The author describes the kidneys, of which (GA 1418) ‘The cortical substance is reddish-brown in colour’. The ureters are correctly described as slanting, each being (GA 1422) ‘a thick-walled, narrow, cylindrical tube which … runs downwards and medially’ and ‘crosses’ various parts before (1423) ‘finally the ureters run obliquely through the wall of the bladder’. The position of the ureters relative to each other varies from 2.5 cm to about 5 cm, according to whether the bladder is contracted or distended (GA 1429); and their position relative to
18 Triller, keeping κειμ νας, argues that the phrase does not relate to location at all, either of the organ or of its gates, but to function: in his view δε ι ς means not ‘dexter’ but ‘receptorius, acceptorius’, from root δ μαι and describes the place which receives ‘succum chylosum’ and puts it in the receptacle of the liver. There is some slight support for this ingenious idea from Hsch. s.v. δε ς τ ν ν τ πατι μερ ν παρ τ ς ταις καλ υμ νη δ η; and perhaps from Hsch. attribution to Demokritos of usage of the verb to describe blood vessels δε αμενα ν τ σ ματι λ ες Δημ κρ τ υ (DK 68 B 135). However, Triller’s interpretation is to be rejected for these reasons: δε ι ς is so familiar in other senses, τ π ι clearly suggests a definite location in the body (cf. title of Loc. Hom.); and the writer of this treatise is concerned throughout with description, not with function. 19 Triller regards this vessel as the descending vena cava (λ ν Galen de ven et art diss.); but a vessel other than the ‘great’ one, argued above to be the vena cava, seems intended. 20 There is some usage of π τε νειν in Aristotle and Plato and much in later Greek; it is favoured by Joannes Chrysostom, Galen, Eusebius, and Simplicius (Ibycus, TLG).

[page 149 / page 150] /

commentary

143

the internal urethral orifice varies correspondingly. The author regards the ureters as reaching the top of the bladder, in accord with his topto-bottom presentation of anatomy. As their actual position (GA 1425, fig. 1243) is rather reaching the ‘edge’, the translation ‘top edge’ is appropriate.
νε ρ δ μ ι ρυσμ , τ ν ρ ι ν δ ναλ γκι ι μ λ ισιν: as in the case of the liver, it is not immediately clear what is meant by the ‘similarity’ of the kidneys; μ ι ρυσμ , sc. ε σι = (of the liver) μ ρυσμ ην ει. In view of the apparent stress on comparative anatomy, the most likely explanation is ‘like the kidneys of other creatures’; cf. the observation of Aristotle (correct only of the unborn infant in utero) that human kidneys μαλε ς σπερ τ ν πρ των κα τ ν are μ ι ι … τ ς ε ις … λλων τ ν τετραπ δων, P.A. 671b. But other possibilities are: ‘like each other’ (as they obviously are) or ‘like other organs’; cf. κα ε δ ς καρδ ης νε ρ υσι κα τ ι κ ιλ δεες, Oss. 4 [9.170 L.]. Comments on shape and colour are / pervasive in such descriptions; cf. Rufus, / σ ματι περι ερε ς, ρ ι ακ δεις, Anat. 51, 181 DR. Here, the ensuing comparison helps to resolve the question. Whereas in the case of the liver the ensuing phrase qualifies the likeness, in the case of the kidneys it amplifies: the kidneys have a similarity to those of other creatures, and further in colour they are like sheep, i.e. (in another compendious or compressed comparison) the kidneys are like [those of] sheep in colour. Cornarius, Foesius, and van der Linden all took τ ν ρ ι ν with μ ι ρυσμ , i.e. ‘renes vero colore inter se similes’ (Foesius tr.) and continued by understanding the ensuing comparison with reference to apples, ‘malorum speciem prae se ferunt’ (Foesius tr.). Clearly, their translation is based on the perception that the kidneys are like apples in shape, rather than in colour; but necessitates deletion of δ . The interpretation of the ambiguous μ λ ισιν as ‘sheep’ not ‘apples’ begins with Triller;21 it greatly aids the sense and it may now be noted that in the HC the sense ‘sheep’ predominates over the sense ‘apple’ (15 to 12). The noun sometimes refers to animals generally, as Hsch. notes μ λα κ ιν ς μ ν π ντα τ τετρ π δα, κατ’ πικρ τειαν δ τ πρ ατα κα α γες. Erotian refers the cognate adjective to sheep, Σ 56, στ ατι μηλε ω ντ τ πρ ατε ω. μ λα γ ρ τ πρ ατα. Treatment by mutton fat, Nat. Mul. 32
The interpretation is commended by A. von Haller, Bibliotheca Anatomica (Zurich 1774–1777), vol. 1, p. 20. Triller’s emendation of μ λ ισιν to μηλε ισιν is not necessary; though it would render the animal sense certain rather than probable.
21

[page 150 / page 151] /

Morb. The preposition. in angustum cogere’. λ ς συνεστραμμ ν ς and scholiast Ar. circulus.]. orbiculus’. tr.366 L. thorax extends π κλειδ ν / με ρ τ ν α δ ων): some reference to the final point outside the body is required. cf. constrictiva est et expansiva’. The author completes the downward description with a brief account of the bladder and its outlet.106 L. orbiculus quidam. ‘ambitus. commenting ‘in ima vesicae parte Suda μετ sive cervice. fluid is said to go ς κρην κ στιν. The adjective λ ς is an epic and Ionic (though not in Herodotos) form for λ ς ‘all’. ‘From a distance is the working of the bladder for the purpose for which it exists’) involves obscure sense and unidiomatic expression. cf. ‘Centrally’ is in accord with the constant reference to the position of the bodily parts throughout. ‘vesica quae nervosa. Parmenides DK 28 B 8. There is some force in his assertion that ‘res … ipsa id postulat’.) [page 151 / page 152] / .23 It gives the required sense. π ρ ι κατ κ ρυ ν κ στεως συν πτ υσι. (Triller ει and interprets on the basis of the emends on the basis of Galen’s gloss γκας ν περ λ ς—i.11. νευρ δης λη κα μεγ λη: cf.1. is required. Rufus.168 L.69 [7. 6. ‘From the bladder there is a channel outside’) gives good sense. but other candidates.] etc. and by boiled mutton. also used in a simile. In a very similar expression of progress from larynx to bladder. giving similar content. ‘coarctare. tr. but the parallels for this extraordinary meaning attributed to λη are not altogether convincing: Hsch. 1067 λ ν associated with ε λειν. ετ σκαλην ειδ ες ς κρην κ ρυ ν κ στι ς κε νται: Hsch. that of Littré (tr. λη. might be ρ εις 22 Triller punctuates κ στις δ νευρ δης. ‘vesica nervosa’. 43 = Simp. Oss. viz. but is very distant from the mss. sive orbicularis est ambiens quidam musculus a natura formata est’. The variatio avoids immediate repetition in a single sentence. σ α is palaeographically close to V. κα μεγ λη. added by van der Linden. ναλ γκι ι is epic and exclusively poetic.29. Ran. 23 Earlier emendations (see apparatus) may be briefly considered: the interpretation of Triller (with reference to the sphincter. complicare. glosses s. In Ph. 9 below.e. and Suda ετ ς as σ λ ν. ε λε ν. who based emendations on the corrupt recc.] etc. are described by use of the word.v. It serves as a synonymous alternative to μ ι ρυσμ .144 commentary [7. Elsewhere the ureters are π ρ ι or occasionally gloss λ ες. completing the description of the / trunk (cf. Celsus 4. ‘The constriction of the bladder is deep within’) involves a level of detail out of keeping with the rest of the treatise. by analogy with 11 below. 2. also Rufus.22 μ σα σ α: the emendation suggested is based on V’s reading. 144. unknown to Littré and others. 1 [9. that of Ermerins (tr.

commentary

145

(cf. the course of the vessels ς τ ς ρ ιας κα ς τ ν ρ ν, Oss. κτ ς κ ην ν μ νται … 17 [9.192 L.], and κ δ σ ματ ς κρεμαστ ρ εις, Ep. 23 [9.396 L.]) or σ ι ν, e.g. ρ ε ς μ σ ι πε κασιν or μετ (‘after that’) σ ια π υκε (cf. σ ω στ μα, Ep. 23 [9.396 L.]). Or if a reference to the urinary tract is postulated, we might consider ετ ς, e.g. ν κα εν κ κ στι ς ετ ς π υκε. Or the adverb κ τω εν may be μ λ υ, Aff. 15 [6.224 L.]). In any case, reference lost (cf. κ τω εν τ as throughout is primarily, and probably exclusively, to the male body. 7. The author sums up the previous description: the six parts are apparently trachea, lung, heart, liver, kidneys, bladder; and τ μ ν in 7 seems at first sight to correspond with τ δ λλα in 12. Seven, not six, was a significant number for Pythagoreans and others. In the numerology of anatomical lists, seven is regular; six is quite anomalous. If not fortuitous, it may result from a deliberately paradoxical count, or more probably from counting the kidneys as one, instead of as two. The list of seven vital organs (σπλ γ να) was typically tongue, heart, lung, liver, spleen, two kidneys; the bladder included here would normally belong rather in a list of organs transporting food and breath. While this kind of listing is particularly common in post-Posidonian literature,24 there are pre-Socratic antecedents also; and in the HC see especially Carn. (where heart, lung, liver, spleen, and kidneys form a group, 5–9 [8.590–596 L.], as do trachea, oesophagus, belly, and intestines, leading to bladder and rectum, 3 [8.586 L.]).
να μ σ ν, ντ ς: the two phrases are in apposition, and ντ ς σις is not intended. Similar prepositional expressions are used in Oss.: κατ μ σ ν, 10, κατ τ μ σ ν, 12, ς τ ντ ς, 16 and cf. ντ ς, 17 [9.180, 182, 190, 192 L.]. σις κ σμ η: the concepts κ σμ ς and σις are ubiquitous in philosophical and scientific writing, with subtly changing senses and nuσις ances. One expects the allusive phrases σις κ σμ η, 7 and διετ ατ , 12 to be parallel statements, giving parallel conclusions. But there are two differences: the omission of the article in 7, though this may be insignificant in the context of this bald work, where the article is commonly absent; and the change from the passive voice in 7 to the
24 On such lists, and their possible importance as a source for Hebd., see Mansfeld (1971), pp. 197–202.

[page 152]

146

commentary

middle in 12. (A small and tempting emendation from διετ ατ , which must be aorist middle, to διετ σσετ , which is ambivalent as imperfect middle or passive, would eliminate the latter problem; the change from aorist passive to imperfect passive would be much less troublesome to consistent sense than the change from passive to middle form.) The sense in 7 seems to be ‘the body’, ‘the bodily organism’, concrete, ντ ς σις sc. τ σ ματ ς ; for which cf. τα τα δ π σ ει δι i.e. τ ν σιν τ σ ματ ς, VM 22 [1.630 L.] and especially two passages α ται πηγα σι ς ν ρ π υ and στι δ ργανα τ σιν σις ρπ ει τ ν ρα, Cord. 7 and 8 [9.84 L.]. It approaches the somewhat more abstract sense, ‘bodily nature’, evinced for example Hebd. 5 [8.636 L.] / / (human); Artic. 13 [4.116 L.] (human vs. animal); Nat. Mul. 1 [7.312 L.] (female); and is at some great distance (though there is commonly a microcosm ~ macrocosm analogy) from the wide sense of such passages as σιν δ π ντων ε διεκ σμησαν, Vict. 1.11 [6.486 L.]. See further on 12 below. 8. The author here starts again (similar descriptions of ‘origin’ and ‘end’ of oesophagus as of trachea); and goes on to give a rudimentary description of the digestive process, 8–11. The description is anatomically correct. ‘The oesophagus, or gullet, is a muscular canal … extending from the pharynx to the stomach. It begins in the neck at the lower border of the cricoid cartilage’ (GA 1340 and 1341, fig. 1167). The implied physiology is, however, mistaken: the oesophagus is apparently seen as the start of a parallel process of ingestion and excretion: air (and, presumably, some fluid) via trachea ~ food via oesophagus.
σ γ ς: the term occurs also Loc. Hom. 3 and 20 [6.282, 312 L.]; but not elsewhere in the HC.25 Galen’s gloss (19. 125 K.) probably relates to Loc. Hom., not, as Foesius supposes, to Anat. The more usual term for oesophagus is the second given here, στ μα ς, e.g. Cord. 2 [9.80 L.], Alim. 25 [9.106 L.], Morb. 4.56 [7.608 L.]. This occurs already με λα ‘base of neck’, Il. 17.47; cf. Il. 3.292 in Homer (κατ στ μ ι and 19.266, throat of sacrificial victims). Rufus cites both terms δ τ σ τια κα τ π τ ε ς τ ν κ ιλ αν κ τεισι, στ μα ς κα σ γ ς Onom. 157, 155 DR.26
The derivation is doubtless (Irigoin, 1980) from σειν + αγε ν, i.e. ‘transporting what is eaten’. 26 In the HC, the term στ μα ς is applied also to the mouth of the womb. Only
25

[page 152 / page 153] /

commentary

147

ς κ ιλ ην … π σηπτικ ς κ ιλ ης: Erotian K 35 defines κ ιλ η as π σα τ δι ραγμα ε ρυ ωρ α, κα τ ρακ ς δ ν τε. κα γαστ ρ α τ . Usage with reference both to upper cavity (chest) and to lower

cavity (abdomen), these being separated by the diaphragm, is ubiquitous in the HC. The sense of the preposition π is unclear; it is either ‘towards’ (LSJ I.3b and c), or ‘in respect of ’ (LSJ III.4). The idea that digestion involved putrefaction—food being digested by a putrefying process and nutriment then conveyed to the liver for conversion into blood—was commonly associated with Empedokles (τ ς π ψεις τ ς τρ ς ασι γ νεσ αι … Εμπεδ κλ ς δ σ ψεις, DK 31 A 77 = Galen de def.med., 19.372 K.); Galen regarded it as old-fashioned, δηλ ν τι παλαι
τις ν συν εια τ τ ις τ ς νδρ σιν σηπτα καλε ν περ με ς πεπτα λ γ μεν (DK ibid. = in Hipp. Aph. 6.1, 18A.8 K.; cf. also δ π ψις ικεν ε ναι σ ψις ς Εμπεδ κλ ς μαρτυρε … DK 31 B 81 = Plu. Quaest.Nat.

912c; cf. DK 31 B 61 = Simplicius; and see Longrigg, 1993, 74). There are further traces of this notion in the expression σ τια σηπτα ‘unputrified food’ occurring in Aff., Vict. 3, Morb. 1. Emendations to πισ μως or πισημαντικ ς are therefore unnecessary. The idea of putrefaction was important in early Greek attempts to explain change and development of various kinds, including the formation of the world and animal life (Demokritos, DK 68 B 5 = Diod. 1.7.3; cf. Carn. 3 [8.586 L.], also Pl. Phd. 96b). In medicine, the proper healing of wounds and maturation of illnesses depended on the formation and expulsion of pus or similar matter (e.g. Loc. Hom.). / / 9. The locations of diaphragm and of spleen are cursorily and somewhat inaccurately indicated. The author does not know, or does not care, about the precise inter-relation of these anatomical features, being concerned only with general proximity. ‘The diaphragm is a domeshaped, musculofibrous septum which separates the thoracic from the abdominal cavity, its convex upper surface forming the floor of the former, and its concave upper surface the roof of the latter … The muscular fibres may be grouped according to their origins into three parts— sternal, costal, and vertebral’ (GA 567). While the diaphragm might be described as ‘coming from’ the backbone, in the sense that the vertebral part is linked with the lumbar vertebrae by two pillars or crura (GA 568), this is scarcely its salient positional feature and it is connected
later, as in NT, Soranus, and Galen, did the word take over as ‘stomach’, a sense firmly fixed in Latin and hence modern European languages.

[page 153 / page 154] /

σπλ ν ρ μεν ς τ ταται: Aristotle linked the spleen with the liver. as well of course as the thinking faculty. also the description of the spleen. The former term occurs in Artic. ν γ ρ υν ι καν αι κ νεισιν DK 68 B 151 = Plu. 496b15 and (spleen a false liver) P. 175 DR. The πρ ς δ [page 154] . cf. and from the ninth. In Ph.A. or to the spleen as a ‘false’ liver.. λ γω δ ριστερ ς. 2. tenth.148 commentary equally with ribs and with sternum. spleen on the left) H. 1952). 153. 669b28. ρ νες δ πρ σπε κασι τ πατι ς η δι ν ωρ σαι Epid. the liver. 1).A.—fin.13. Demokritos uses the word in a riddling sentence. 228).]. The two are treated as parallel also by Rufus (spleen and liver below lung.122 L. not behind. π ναντι ε δει. but not init. 28. also Diog. With correction and amplification of the text we might state that the diaphragm separates the spleen from the left lung and pleura. later denotes the diaphragm. 11. important in the respiratory function. In doing so. 10 [9.]. Apoll. seems to be a garbled version of material which is much more clearly presented elsewhere in the HC: παρ … ωρμ κει σμικρ ν κ τω εν ρεν ν. The most likely explanation is that the author is attempting personal exegesis of his source. possibly through compression or misunderstanding of his source. liver on right and spleen ναντ ως τ τακται τ τω) Anat.180 L. cf.1 [5. cf. which probably referred to the false ribs. he introduces a misunderstanding. The spleen ‘is situated principally in the left hypochondriac region of the abdomen … lies between the fundus of the stomach and the diaphragm’ and is ‘of an oblong flattened form’ (GA 1476). κ δ πλευρ ς ν ης.4. Ep. verbatim also in the account of Oss. and Mochl.579. von Staden. ‘my interpretation is …’.—only in Morb. Sympos.396 L. πρ γμα μηδ ν α τ μεν ς. The liver was generally described as ‘below’ the diaphragm. as already by Homer. 643c. applied to the lung in Homer (Onians. The account in Anat. 1989. but rarely elsewhere in the HC (apart from Oss. for which the general commonly used. Furthermore. παρ π πραπ δων (Il. κ ν ης πισ εν πατ ς ρ νες πε κασι: the term καν α is ις ‘back’ is properly the backbone or spine. 2 and Mul. the diaphragm certainly lies above. 23 [9. and described the location of both with reference to the diaphragm: (liver below the diaphragm on the right. and eleventh ribs. This is the only instance where the first person is used in the passage.]. and it may be contrasted with the third person used in the repeated statements of nomenclature. The term ρ νες. DK 64 B 6 = Simp.

188 L.]. as is the description by Pollux of the ν στις … π τ νν ην πλευρ ν. 1.21 [5. Judic. νει π δ ς: Rufus uses the same analogy.] and also Empedokles DK 31 A 83 = Athen. It lies in the epigastric. The bladder is similarly νευρ δης λη. but the expressions παρ τ ν ν ν πλευρ ν. The sense of ‘sinewy’ is in both cases probably ‘elastic’. defined ν αι δ πλευρα α μ περα ν υσαι πρ ς τ στ ρν ν Ruf. umbilical. 28. 86 L. with reference to the site of pain. somewhat similarly. also Rufus. Belly (stomach) and intestine are described. 3. 145 DR. Oss. 14 [9.628).] and περ τ ν ν ν πλευρ ν. 84.80. cf.292 L. 5. πρ γμα μηδ ν α τ μεν ς. 23 [9. Cord. useless. ‘rib’ or ‘side’. νυμ ν μ ρ ς λ μελ ς στι νευρ δης: ε νυμ ς.e. There is no instance where the meaning ‘left’ is imperatively demanded for ν ς (and LSJ does not recognize this sense).312 L. 10. in an anatomical context (embryology). τ ν ν ριστερ ς με ρ τ ς λαγ ν ς παρ κ υσαν (2. and completed in front and on the left side by the anterior abdominal wall and the diaphragm’ (GA 1362–1363). the moon was said to give a ‘bastard’ light. muscular.4. with similar terσπλ ν κατ τ ε νυμ ν π νδρι ν.78. cf. The spleen itself is described as ‘false’ by Aristotle. 175 DR. The adjective ‘sinewy’ is apt: ‘the wall of the stomach consists of four coats: serous. Ep. lit. is regularly applied to the ‘false’ ribs. and is situated between the end of the oesophagus and the beginning of the small intestine. lit. Rufus uses the same adjective κατ’ ε [page 154 / page 155] / . 10 [9. ‘bastard’..] are doubtful. by comparison with the concomitant liver (PA 669b and cf. Such similes are μ ι ρυσμ ς minology κε ται common in anatomical contexts: Oss. Although the belly might loosely be said to ‘lie beside the liver on the left’. 51 [9. i. 6. ‘The stomach is the most dilated part of the digestive tube.207).].4. 94. and left hypochondriac regions of the abdomen. παρεκτειν μεν ς π μ κ ς ν ρωπ νω νει Anat.396 L. ‘subject to dilatation’. Epid. 6 above.commentary 149 word ν ς. Ph. quoted above. and occupies a recess bounded by the upper abdominal viscera.. ‘false’. 1. with reference to the direction of vessels. areolar and mucous … and the muscular coat has three layers of muscular fibres’ (GA 1367). Confusion can arise / / through the ambiguity of πλευρ . more properly it lies inclined to the left below both liver and spleen. Onom. compared with the sun. the five ribs not connected with the sternum so called in contrast with the seven ‘true’ ribs so connected. ‘goodomened’ is used for ‘left’ by a common euphemism.

But it occurs elsewhere in the HC only Cord. Rufus regards the γαστ ρ as the ‘upper belly’ and the κ λ ν as the ‘lower’. νηδ ς. with reference to an enema. 179 DR. 8 [9. ing τ ς υ μ ς and should treat τ π It has a ‘scientific’ flavour in the Pythagorean equation of number τ / / ραν . colon terminating in rectum and anal canal). It seems that.54 [7. glosses λ μελ η κα λ υ ‘on the whole’. Metaph. 169–173.]. 1 [9.4. Oss.e. με ω δ .27 The adjective λ μελ ς has evidently the same sense as λ ν above.] (heart as a whole.) where human and canine intestines are compared: τ κ λα ει κυν ς με ω.]. 2. DK 58 λ μελε α τ B 27 = Arist. only occasionally is such an expresντ ρ υ used (as. ρτηται δ κ τ ν μεσ κ λων.379 K. 4. the author fails to explain the 27 Triller’s emendation λ υμ νη.] as well as the version of the title given in ms V. opposed to μ ρ ς ‘part’ of it) and several times in the phrase περ δ νων λ μελ ης ‘on glands in general’. κ ιλ α Morb.264 L. ντερ ν μ ι ρυσμ ν: the term ντερ ν is applied to the entire lower digestive tract. 6. but is illumined by two parallel passages (again from Oss. 18 [9. tr.308 L.596 L. The ‘similarity’ is left unexplained. Anat. 1092b26. through compression of his source. This appears in the treatise Glands itself in 1 (the first sentence of the work) and in 7 [8. Like words for ‘belly’.86 L. 19 [= 6. i. 13 [8.600 L. The sbs. ‘cicatricatus’ or ‘rugis incisus’ imports a needlessly explicit reference to this aspect.106 L. 10.556.168 L. both the small intestine (comprising duodenum. ileum) and the large intestine (caecum. and Epid.] and in Galen 18A. 3.108 L. as Anat. and with slight variation τ κ λα ει α κυν ς.586. Onom. But the word is appropriate also to appearance. 11 [4. Carn. 5). There is an occurrence also in Ep. Epid. [page 155 / page 156] / .382 L. 4. where it is urged by Demokritos that doctors should assess afflictions not only by inspection but by gaugς λ μελ ην τε τ σκ νε ς.] (with reference to the whole body. jejunum.]. opposed to its component parts).]. 560 L. and with reference to a work on glands (possibly the surviving Glands) in Artic. 3. as the empty stomach has prominent folds and wrinkles.6 [5. 594 L. with which it is commonly linked (γαστ ρ.]) it is extended in usage to cover a large visceral region. 156–157 DR. ‘stomach’. appendix. sion as τ κ τω μ ρ ς τ Acut. τα τα δ κ νε ρων π τ ς ι ς π τ ν γαστ ρα. λ μελ η or λ μελε η occurs Alim. Hsch. 3 and 6 [8. Carn.] (note compendious comparison. 178 DR and 42.150 commentary of parts of the belly. 23 [9. ‘with the totality of the heavens’.]).

).209. ‘The large intestine … is about 1. 4. Nat. see Mansfeld (1971). with reference to ‘convoluted’ vessels). namely to the viscera of the dog.392 L. Cf.28 λικηδ ν ν κ λπ ις νειλ μεν ν: λικηδ ν is a hapax in the HC (though λικ ειδ ς is found. 2. 1380). [page 156 / page 157] / . 18 [9. read by V. 4.396 L. The length of the intestine is correctly estimated (twelve cubits being five to six metres) and the description is accurate: ‘The small intestine is a convoluted tube … about 6. That κ λ ν. 1372.] is close: ε λε ται περ κ ιλ ην ντερα. 23 [9. The expression of Ep. κ λασσ ν δ δεκα: Foesius’ μακρ ν for μικρ ν is guaranteed by the sense (as all the intestine is included) and the word order (as description.commentary 151 similarity intended. p.7.] ( ρ νες a misnomer for diaphragm) and Carn.] (μυελ ς a misnomer for spinal marrow). also κα τ ντερα κα τ ν νηδ ν νειλ ατ . καλ υσιν νι ι κ λ ν: there are similar comments on divergent terminology Morb.588 L. 29 Pollux finds an etymological link. πη ων 11. of humours.29 μακρ ν. see Ath. 2. and various other compound forms occur). involving digestive suffering. 197.194 L. Eq. Sacr. Hsch. Cf. ‘The large intestine [of the dog] has a course somewhat like that of man’.560 L.5 metres long’ (GA 1370. it is regularly applied to ‘folds’ of the female body. Celsus’ expression is similar: ‘in sinus vehementer implicitum’. (also verb κ λπ ω of membranes. Oss. Mul.5 metres long’ with ‘a short curved portion’ and ‘a long greatly coiled part’. glosses λικηδ ν κυκλ ειδ ς συστρ . not definition. The term ‘folds’ is used in the HC only here and. and νειλε ν too is a hapax (though ε λε ν is quite common. of the womb.1. Morb.]. Colon. BVD. for other ‘food’ for κ λ ν.]. is here required). 4 [8. Pue. used for instances of intestines. 4. 28 Reference to the length of the intestine was a common element in lists of the seven organs transporting food and breath. 17 [6. ibid.40 [7. fanciful etymologies based on an original meaning τρ 262a. 455. In literary contexts. rectum and anus are briefly described. not κ λ ν. is the correct form is guaranteed by an Aristophanic pun on the verb κ λ ειν (future middle) πα ’ α τ ν νδρι/ κ τατα κα γ στρι ε κα τ ς ντ ρ ις κα τ ς κ λ ις πως κ λ τ ν / νδρα. especially the bosom and the womb. Morb.

Or τ δ’ λλα might be adverbial. used substantivally. as περιπλη ς is just as common as π λυπλη ς and gives comparable sense (Ibycus. liver. sc. But the phrase may refer to further material. The adjective λ σ ι ς is exclusively poetic. His addition of κα would give a smoother connection. or even that σις in Anat. Fist. [8. 23. however. and the σι ς. 9. 14. cf. lung. The term ρ ς occurs Oss. σ ρκα περιπλη α ων: lit. sc.]. kidneys. stomach.448 L. ς κρ ν δακτυλ υ τελευτ ν: for the expression (neuter of adjective. If the two passages are parallel. TLG). τε γρ ντ ς τ τε ρ κα τ ς σαρκ ς μαλ ακ ς. 1449a28). 2. ‘having abundant flesh’. passed over (cf.170 L. Po. a concrete and passive entity which is organized by something σις external to itself. 9. followed by genitive). Rufus κ ησ μεσ α ν παρ σ ε τ ς μ ρεσιν σις σιν τε κα ν μασ αν Anat.]. heart. here the sense of is ‘[universal] nature’. also Carn. Ermerins’ belief that there is a lacuna ‘nam non absolvitur sed abrumpitur periodus’ may be correct. Other possibilities are that a reference to ‘other creatures’ or to ‘other works’ (cf.326 L. though λ σ ς is used also in prose. 17 [9. cf. but the abruptness does not of itself necessarily indicate this. Ep.92 K. diaphragm. but the switch from one to the other is generally felt to be awkward. an abstract and active principle which organizes something. 12. as the syntax is somewhat fractured throughout.614 L. Galen glosses κ κλ ς. 19. bladder) enumerated 1–6. τ δ’ λλα σις διετ ατ : the sense of σις in 7 above is ‘[bodily] nature’. 3 [8. my [page 157] . 7 and 12 is shorthand for ‘[sc. there is a similar shift in Ep.152 commentary π υκεν ρ ς λ σ ι ς: the same verb is found as in 6. (Cf. 11 [9. In the HC. A summing up apparently parallel to that of 7 ends the second part of the description. ‘as to other parts’ (not specified). perhaps universal nature.586 L.) Neither sense is view that men are ργα difficult. For the sense. τρ σκ ς.]. discussed further below. apparently the body.]. Van der Linden’s emendation π λυπλη α (commonly adopted) is unnecessary. Carn. the term δακτ λι ν is used elsewhere only in Haem. intestine. but is not necessary in this telegraphic style. spleen. 1 [6. Arist. 1 above. 3. colon) described 8–11 are parallel to the six parts (trachea.]) has been lost. the ‘other parts’ of the body (oesophagus. 169 DR. 10. fin.

[page 157] . with oblique reference to some other work where he has explored other matters and reference in the verb to his own embellished style.commentary 153 treatise on the] nature [of the body]’.

DISCUSSION

I. Background The origins of Greek anatomy lie in the Homeric epics, which display an extensive knowlege of the effects of battle wounds on different bodily parts. Attempts at systematic description begin with the pre-Socratics, still imbued with the attitudes and forms of early verse writing. Analysis of the body into the different components skin, flesh, bones, and viscera linked by hollow channels or vessels conveying fluids (primarily λ ες conveying blood) and by solid threads (termed νε ρα and / including / cords, sinews, ligaments, nerves, muscles) had a long currency, with little apparent consensus.30 Outline surveys such as Anat. must have been composed throughout antiquity, and constantly copied, corrected, imitated, and excerpted. It is always difficult to assess the extent and nature of influence or interaction in such cases of common content of a factual nature, especially where the very existence of direct contact (rather than the use of common sources) must be in doubt. The brevity of the fragment adds to the problem of the universality of its subject matter. Other writers follow the same descriptive sequence from ‘top’ downwards, with the trunk regularly treated as an entity. More specifically, discussion of the organs regularly centres on location, size, and colour. Judgement must rest not only on scrutiny of content but on an inevitably somewhat subjective assessment of similarities in approach, arrangement, and expression. The problem of intertextuality within the HC is acute; and even more so when later authors, such as Celsus and Rufus, are considered. Indirect evidence for the presence of Anat. in versions of the HC circulating in antiquity (or, rather, in the putative versions which can
Even in the Pneumatic school of medicine, influenced by Posidonius and the Stoics, the seven ντ ς μ ρη and the seven κα λικ μ ρη were defined in various ways; see Mansfeld (1971).
30

[page 157 / page 158] /

156

discussion

be reconstructed from the lists of glosses constructed by grammarians and others) is scanty. The list of Erotian (dating from the time of Nero, c. A.D. 50, and referring to many earlier authorities, including Bakcheios, Epikles, and Herakleides) includes no words from Anat., but the brevity of the treatise may account for this. Galen glosses no words γ ς relates to Anat.; but Loc. Hom., from from Anat. either (unless σ which many other terms are glossed, is a much more likely source). The loss of Galen’s comments on Hippocratic anatomy (advertised De Plac. Hipp. et Plat. 6.8) is unfortunate, but there is no doubt some truth in his assertion that practical demonstration took the place of written treatises on anatomy.31 There is some reason to suppose that Celsus, writing an outline of human anatomy (4.1.1–13) and Rufus of Ephesus, writing an account of anatomical terminology (Onom.), knew the work. But the evidence is not unequivocal. Celsus is concerned with ‘sedes’ of parts of the body; and especially their relative positions. Thus, such terms as ‘incipiunt’, ‘fertur’ and ‘descendens’ are used, 3. And the description is practical, stressing colour, the ureters being ‘albae’, 10; or texture, the lung being ‘spongiosus’, 4. Nomenclature features: ‘nominant’, 3; ‘Graeci vocant’, 10. Celsus (like many others, including the author of Ep. 23) includes the head, 2; before describing the parallel ‘itinera’ of ‘aspera arteria’ to lung and of ‘stomachus’ to ‘ventriculus’, 3. Lung, heart, and diaphragm are briefly mentioned, 4; then liver, gall-bladder, spleen, kidneys, 5. From this outline of the ‘viscerum … sedes’, Celsus goes on to the digestive process and the different parts from oesophagus and stomach, 6, to bowels, 7. The course of the ureters from kidneys to bladder is outlined, 10, and the bladder itself described, 11. One salient difference of content between Celsus and the writer of Anat. (but a feature in common with Ep. 23) is that he pays attention to differences in male and female anatomical layout: differences in bladder, 11, are mentioned before a description of womb and reproductive system, 12–13. Several phrases in Celsus are close enough to phrases in Anat. to qualify as translation or at least paraphrase. The most striking parallels in phraseology are these: ‘constat ex circulis quibusdam’ (of / trachea: note metaphor, toned down / by ‘quibusdam’ and correspondence ‘circulus’ ~ κρ κ ς); ‘is spongiosus’ (of lung: note the initial pronoun); ‘in sinus vehementer implicitum’ (of intestine: note correspondence ‘sinus’ ~ κ λπ ς); ‘vesica … nervosa’ (of bladder).
31 On the tradition, see Smith (1979) and von Staden (1989); on terminology see Lloyd (1983) and Skoda (1988).

[page 158 / page 159] /

begins στ ων σις [4. then. and the similar precision of Oss.614 L. Oss..) or address physical function (Cord.. με ς α τ ν ρ π υ στ ων with implied comparative anatomy.). spleen.. refers to his own earlier work on the vessels. some reason to suppose that Celsus and Rufus. The nature of many Hippocratic treatises raises fundamental questions of authorship: they may have been the common property of a professional group. the spleen resembles a footprint. several glosses suggest familiarity with Anat. [8. There is.. knew Anat. 6 [6..340 L.]. and promises future work on the essential character of σι ς τ ν the human constitution. τ ς δ ν γκην … γ ρ σω ν λλ ισιν. But how.168 L. the work continued is unknown. The titles of treatises often give little clue to their actual content: the author of Carn. but vessels.] The work itself deals in a wide-ranging way with the formation of lungs. the subject of Oss. but none to confirm that it was then regarded as Hippocratic. based on the number seven. τεν ρηνι δες and ετ ς are glossed.284 L. which list bones. with its exclusion of physiology and pathology. stitched together from [page 159] . nails. Mochl. is a composite text. kidneys. rather than at the consecutive description seen in Celsus.]. is not bones at all..). Carn. Hom.discussion 157 Rufus aims at a correct account of anatomical terminology. Carn. teeth. and the HC: content There is no parallel in the HC for the narrowly anatomical content of Anat. limbs. hair and the senses hearing. in expression are these: lung colour is τε ρ ν κα π λευκ ν. κατεμ μεν [9. liver.. The closest parallels to Anat. But overall. attempts at anatomy are incorporated in general schemes (Loc.. Hom. fin. Elsewhere. Artic. II. 5 [8.168 L.] and Oss. and speech. sight. Mochl.. a work primarily on the viscera. Anat. and indeed whether.590 L.]. also flesh. and the term αρ γε ρ ν is used.) or are embedded in discussion of treatment (Epid.. gives way to more elaborate and leisurely expression. Fract. περ μ ν ν τ ν λε ν ε ρητα μ ι πρ τερ ν. 1 [9. Pollux provides no independent evidence and was probably utilising Rufus directly in compiling the medical section of his great lexicon. smell. pooling ideas and information in an age innocent of concepts of plagiarism and publication. Oss. In the case of Hsch. as well as later lexicographers. or are allied with theory (Carn. or at least with a work or works employing similar diction: περιηγ ς.] and Loc. though not immune from professional rivalries.

δε ι ς.18 [5. ν τ περ λε ν πρ κε ται τ Μ λικ . H. four with ς. and Fract. has been identified with the treatise on vessels mentioned by Galen as an appendage to Mochl. posterior etc. and 10 (intestines). ρ . or middle—cf. and extent (κε σ αι. Epid. see now Duminil (1980) for analysis of structure and content. on size.]. 5. ριστερ ς. 6: see on 3. he is following the proce32 This was already noted by Littré. expounding human anatomy by reference to the anatomy of mammals in general. orientation. πισ εν.302 L. 10.120 L. The continuous schematic arrangement is evident in the repeated π —six times. and particularly on relative position in the body— top. and 10. has some place. and vessels are mentioned only incidentally. τε νεσ αι). 178 L.4.158 discussion heterogeneous and even inconsistent elements and some of its content is identical with passages in Epid. Another common element is the presence of disagreement (as Anat.]. μ σ ς. some of which are replicated elsewhere: Oss. 8 [9. where Aristotle gives his source as Syennesis of Cyprus. 2). bones and cords are not mentioned at all. also polemic against Herodikos. τρ πεσ αι. 2.]. recording / impressions of different doctors. anterior. and colour. it is likely that the first person throughout represents the same editorial voice. 3. left. also there are repetitions and other elements which make unity of authorship highly unlikely and suggest a process of redaction and compilation: either editorial activity carried out by a single author or case notes from / different hands. Galen 19.174 L.422 L.3. Flesh.3. The treatise records organs and viscera. and especially on 9 (liver and diaphragm). 3 [3. However. front. with which he takes his readers to be familiar: see on 1. proximal. In Epid. 11 [6. 4.58 L. or κ—twice. 9 [9.176 L. 4–7 and Oss. on terminology) or polemic: λλ ς δ’ α τις τ ν ητρ ν Fract. It is in this scheme that Anat. ε νυμ ς). 6.. Simply. Mochl. 4. ( κρ ς. distal.128 K. comprises a description of the internal configuration of the human trunk.] = Epid. i. Oss. 3.1 [5. has affinities of content particularly with Oss.] = Nat. [page 159 / page 160] / . (and confirms the relationship between Oss. also with Epid. is a summary of Artic. one with π and one alone. in Greek terms σπλ γ να.e. Anat. κ τω. It is precise in its stress on start and finish ( κ υσις. Hom. carefully executed and often keeping the original expression. back..170.A.]. right. 5. Oss. 2.32 The treatise is an amalgam of bits. on situation. The last part of Oss. 10 [9. as links. Anat. The author is writing a comparative study. and Epid. 172. bottom. shape. one with ς and one alone.] = Arist. The precision is exemplary. τελευτ ν). cf.

the dog (intestines). It may be supposed that Anat. mouse. leopard.33 Examination of aborted foetuses or stillborn infants might have been relatively easy (cf. also Demokritos’ study of dog and pig embryology DK 68 A 151 = Ael.350 L. 1.]) and the vignette of Demokritos at home.168 L.]. a period when knowledge was gleaned from observation of butchered sacrificial victims (of which the σπλ γ να were particularly familiar) and from animal dissection. 33 [page 160 / page 161] / . Sacr.A. 1 [8. 12. That dissection of human cadavers was not practised in mainland Greece in the fifth and fourth centuries has been cogently argued often enough. hyena. Longrigg (1993).6 [5. 667a. but perhaps classical scholars make insufficient allowance for medical curiosity. tr. with refCarn. Lloyd (1975). all listed P. view of the heart. Aristotle examined many different mammals (e. 2 [9. weasel. belongs to a period when dissection was not practised on human cadavers.308 L. N. hare.16.366 L. 1989.) or to slaves in industrial accidents.]. Artic. where they had opportunities to observe the anatomical procedures involved in mummification (cf. Theoretical modification too might obtrude (cf.584 L.C.A. as τ σ τ ν ς ν ρωπ ν π δε ω κα τ λλα α. 182–183). seal and ox.494b21–24): in the absence of dissection.].].. which he is laying out and dissecting in order to examine their σπλ γ α. such as must have occurred in mills and mines. travelled to / Egypt.]. and conventions obtaining in such semi-barbarous regions as Thrace may have differed from those of Athens. 31 [7. deer. on 3).540 L. 3 [6. including Herodotos and Demokritos.] and Oss.80 L. either in general. V. and σπερ κα τ σιν λλ ισι erence to two halves of the brain. the pig (lung).g. Other Hippocratic authors refer to animals. Ep. cf. Morb. 2.94 L.]. Epid.discussion 159 dure recommended by Aristotle (H. See Edelstein (1932. it is necessary to refer to animals similar to man to understand human anatomy. Certainly many / intellectuals. 671b) and Herophilos still depended largely on comparative anatomy. 1 [9. ibid. Nat.4. 3).A. ις πασιν. with a view to assessing the significance of λ . surrounded by heaps of animal carcases. 6. 1967. despite the availability to him of humans (von Staden. Cord. and that knowledge of the interior of the human body would depend on chance supplementary findings from observation of injuries to citizens on the battlefield (cf.16 (cf. or with reference to particular animals: the ox (thighbone). but Edelstein suggests in a cryptic footnote that Demokritos may have been an exception and this notion has a bearing on Anat. 8 [4.).86). 17 [9. Hdt. ass. Pue.

]. P.]. and supposedly corroborated by an experiment which involves dissecting a pig.56 [7. 1 [9..]. air.]. Morb.]).]. ρ ς and κ στις parallel Carn. similarly drink. Anon.160 discussion Although Anat. Oss. liquid medicine is to be administered to clear pus when the lung dries out.A. Oss.586 L. 1. shares this view: π τ ν δ δι στ μ υ λ ρυγ ς πλε μ να κα ρτηρ ην π δ τ των ς κρην κ στιν.] is close to that of Anat. and the postulated route of fluids is the same.474 L. Euripides frg. is remarkably free from explicit theoretical comment or doctrinal content. This view is explicitly and forcefully expounded by the author of Cord. κ στις and ντερ ν parallel Mul.38 [7. 1 [9. also περ μ ν τ ς τ πνε ματ ς ς ναγκα ν π μιμν σκειν μετ δι ικ σεως τα τα … περ δ τ ς τρ τα τα. 1. though a somewhat different (or perhaps merely more detailed) route is postulated in the drink-kidneys-bladder sequence which follows. 664b) and with an emphatic introductory verb ναντι σ μαι argued that fluids pass not to the lung but to the κ ιλ η. See Lonie (1981). pp. From the pathway postulated trachea-lung-kidneys-bladder. Hom. de Arte 10 [6. The belief that fluid could enter the body via the trachea seems to be implied in the medical orthodoxy regarding treatments for lung disorders (among the most common of all Hippocratic ailments and ranging from mild infections of the respiratory tract to pneumonia): warm drinks are recommended to render the lung moist and so to dislodge pus.34 [8. 24. 5. 4.184 L. 94. 4 [9. 34 [page 161] . 361 sqq.168 L. Lond.80 L. trouble ensues if the lung dries up π δ ψης ναγκα ης.606 L. Morb.] and Acut. 13 [9.]. 2 [9. also τε ρυγ κα καλ μεν ς σ γ ς.]. 15 [2. some views which are implicit can be extracted.170 L.216 L. 3 [8.. (And the medical view was generally known: Alcaeus frg.]. Oss.18–20 and the necessary parts τε δ νται τ ν τρ ν κα τ περ ττωμα ι σιν. The expression of Oss. after giving it coloured fluid to drink (Cord. 3.A. δ μ ν γ ρ α τ σιτ ν δε μενα τε κα ιε σαι. Aff.16 L. init. 4.34 The parallel working of bladder and belly is similarly presented elsewhere in the HC and in other medical writings: e.142 L. 983 N.316 L.16 [7. Loc.80 L.) But the matter was controversial: it is disputed by Aristotle (P. ρυγγ ς κα The author of Oss.28 [6.].168 L.556 L. Arist.g. κ ιλ η and κ στις parallel Morb. drink is required to moisten the lung and encourage expectoration. 655b and 664a. 9 [6.]. Morb.196 L. and blood all pass through the lung. Sp.]. it seems that the writer believes that some fluid enters the body via the trachea.] al. 26 [6.

there is nothing on the chambers of the heart and no awareness of the heart’s complex structure. 6. the writer of Anat. where the parallel versions of Oss. reminiscent of Empedokles. There is no justification for imputing to the author the perception that the heart has a peculiarly important place as centre of the vascular system. see on 3. the statement that the liver is α μ ρρωδ στερ ν may.606.]of yellow bile. and the adjective applied to the liver. imply a view of the liver as producer of blood for the rest of the body. But there is a wide range from firm to tentative expression and the common use of the passive militates against generalization: veins are described.] of muscle). it displays only the most rudimentary knowledge of the body’s workings. 35 Triller’s commentary constantly superimposes his own knowledge on the text. and there is no indication whatsoever that the importance of heart and liver is recognised. 19 [1.]). liver and kidneys are just that. 584 L. Oss. help to elucidate the sense.35 The descriptions of the regions between heart and liver. Despite detailed reference to the lobes of the lung and of the liver (the latter somewhat confused). but need not. The references to the belly as σηπτικ takes a primitive view of the digestive process.discussion 161 Despite the broad accuracy and precision of the work.].618 L. Similarly.172 L. 2 and Epid. the first person is used only once and introduces an error: see on 9.16 L.5 [6. 17 of the tunic of the eye. as Anat.282 L. whereas more rhetorical treatises tend to use the third person (de Arte 10 [6. cf. These lapses might result from misunderstanding of a technical source by a writer or excerptor without technical knowledge or from hastily and carelessly executed summary. 3. 4. or is distancing himself from other practitioners. 3. in such expressions as α μ ρρ υς πα ε η καλε μ νη λ ψ. The consistent use of the third person may imply that the writer is not himself a medical expert.] and τ ν κ λην λ α καλε μ νην. 2 [8. Hom. and the interpretation of the vessel which ‘nurtures’ the body is problematical. α μ ρρ ς ‘blood-suffused’. 7 [9. Compression seems to lead to unclear exposition and even to the elision of essentials: see on 9 and 10. seems to be at a loss or mistaken: see on 2.. descriptions. 9. Treatises evidently written by practitioners tend to use the first person plural in giving nomenclature for anatomical or diagnostic terms (V. / / Sometimes.M. [page 161 / page 162] / . in conjunction with Epid. Carn. Loc. has an Empedoklean analogue also.

influenced by epic patterns of expression.and -τραμμ ν ς ς τ ριστερ ). as opposed to the author of Oss. has many unusual features. the parallel usage is entirely from verse. Anat. and some attempt seems to be made to end sentences with spondees. III. There are runs of dactylic rhythm (τ ν περιηγ ων. also to some extent with Mochl. and it is in the nature of this that many words are not commonly found elsewhere. and it is noteable that the author of Anat. and with Carn. fin. and with certain parts of Epidemics. uses two instances 9. These are all features of early prose style. molossi. In general usage. 3. with synizesis. and nothing to suggest familiarity even with Aristotelian biology. Such coincidences in general medical terms and in non-technical vocabulary become cumulatively significant. the use of different terms for the same parts of the body can be significant. and with Epid. On the basis of this analysis. Anat. 10. πτ μ νων κατ’ π. 16. show affinities with Oss. init. three instances 1. 15. and Artic. like the content. However. the ignorance of the structure and function of the heart suggests a date before the research activities of the Lyceum. especially when these are allied with common ground in doctrinal content. who like the author of Mochl. six key parts—and on naming— [page 162] . and in material of this kind the rhythm (like the stress on counting—lobes of lung.. A common concentration of anatomical terms in anatomical works has no implications for direct connections. 13. In some instances. L. 14. 10). τεν ρηνι δης. 3. π ντων ων. γκα δρυται).]. L. gates of liver.162 discussion There is nothing in the content to suggest any knowledge of the advances made in Alexandria. The poetic texture is reinforced by the use of simile (see on 9) and figurative language (κεκεντ μεν ς.] (ten instances 11–19: 12. ις (nine instances 1–10. there are further parallels with Oss. or still longer sequences of long syllables ( λλ λων. Clearly the author sought out a recondite vocabulary. νευρ δης).168 sqq. 2 and 6: see especially on 2. 4. five instances 18). far less for common authorship or shared school of thought. shares a preference for καν α with the author of Oss. [9. λ σ ι ς ‘last’ is common but exclusively poetic and ναλ γκι ς is epic. which. these devices however are typical of anatomical writing in general. [9.182 sqq. and the HC: expression The vocabulary of Anat. two instances 7. In particular. 7. 9. can be firmly aligned with Oss. κ σμ η.

492 and Tro. also ς κρην κ στιν.354 L. and apparently recondite.19 [5. 837) and καν α (El. Oss.1. 12 [4. and π πεδ ν by many writers on scientific subjects. Oss.168. 22 [4.356 L.discussion 163 ‘they call’) might originally have served as an aide-mémoire. In Ph. Such loosely connected writing is typical of early prose. the first datable use of the term κ λη λ ψ is in Ion 1011. μ σ ς.] ( κρ ς without article) ~ Artic. the syntax is uncontrived. Similarly.. is bald. is remarkable: it is usually omitted with such adjectives as κρ ς. most obviously. But it is omitted in both model and précis. While the vocabulary is recondite.. such as the definite article and the verb ‘to be’. DK 28 B 8. and in Fract. but is a common feature also of the aphoristic style affected by Herakleitos. 1 and μ ρις κρων πλευρ ων. 8 [4. Resemblances with Demokritos are explored in the next section. init. the terse summary Oss. in the case of the bodily parts.]. As in the case of content. 4 κρην τ ν ε ρα is followed in the next section by ς ε ρα κρην [4. 4. Euripides shows some precision in anatomical knowledge. anatomical terms of Anat. 36 Comparison of usage in Mochl. Caution may be induced by the reflection that two of the more colourful. with compound rather than complex sentences.134 L. 156 L. Another feature of the stylistic register belonging to / early prose style is the use / of abstract noun plus verb ειν. apparently arbitrary. 18 [4. Anat. omission of the article in Anat. there are certain resemblances too with other pre-Socratics: περιηγ ς and ε νυμ ς are certainly used by Empedokles. 144. such as Alim.. [page 162 / page 163] / .266. 5 [9. in the compressed annotations of Epid. 170 L. cf. 117). the author often repeats the base text almost verbatim while omitting such otiose words as the definite article: e. Mochl.] ( κρ ς with article).29).3. lines 43 and 5 = Simp. and the compressed annotations of Epid.] ~ Artic.]. κρ ς is commonly used without the article (6. these may be chance findings. The general. 432 L. occur in Euripides: λυς (El.430. and is seen also in certain Hippocratic texts.132 L. Connection is simple (δ and κα ) after asyndeton in the first sentence.. as are ναλ γκι ς and λ μ λης by Parmenides (both in the same fragment. Mochl. in preference to a verb of the same root.]). Like Mochl. shows that in paraphrasing Artic.36 This characterizes summaries. However.]. Similarly the compendious comparisons recurrent in the text characterize both terse and poetic writing styles. it eschews words which are semantically otiose. and.. nothing in language is incompatible with an early date. and the stylistic register is that of early prose. π ς.g. However. yet still stylistically arresting.

37 This was a highly prosperous region. and relatively early. 17 [9. The Demokritean dimension An affinity of Anat. 1965).11. 1. and Suda). 258. XLII.. Cicero describes him as ‘ornate locutus’ (DK 68 A 34 = Cic. and a tendency to poetic idiom with neologisms. There are some seventy titles.38 Strong. Many of his works have titles similar to those of Hippocratic treatises: περ ν ρ π υ σι ς περ σαρκ ς. Prolegomena to Anat. II. the ‘sophist’ Protagoras came from Abdera.394 L. [page 163 / page 164] / . Demokritos was a most prolific writer on a great range of scientific subjects. p.]. detected by Kallimachos. and there were allegedly early forgeries. 40 See RE s. 23 [9. Ep. Ep. 388. History of Greek Philosophy (Cambridge. as an interpreter of σι ς ν ρ π υ.K. Like Demokritos.C. who regarded the author as ‘aut ipsum Democritum aut alium Abderitum philosophum’. de orat. see the sceptical remarks of W. 9. may be seen as peculiarly Demokritean. n. p. cf. περ διαιτ ς διαιτητικ . 20 [9. 41 Roman critics admired Demokritos’ style. Sympos. But there are pressing / problems of authenticity: many citations are not / of Demokritos but of Demokrates. there are similar accounts in the later Vitae of Soranos. finding it poetic. echoed more sceptically by Ermerins (1864). sometimes elaborate. expressed in the root υσμ ς. Guthrie. Tzetzes. with the work of Demokritos of Abdera37 was long ago noted.v. the writer of περ according to Diogenes Laertius. though in many respects his intellectual activity corresponds to that typical in the sophistic movement. vol.40 The extant fragments indicate that the style of Demokritos was sometimes functional.) 38 See already Triller (1766). DK 68 A 33 = D. but certain recurrent distinctive features can be isolated: a liking for compound words and compound verbs. traditions linked Demokritos with Hippocrates: Celsus described Hippocrates as ‘pupil’ of Demokritos (Proem 8. he did not interest Plato. and as ως. There is considerable evidence that he affected an arcane vocabulary: Kallimachos compiled a π να τ ν Δημ κρ τ υ γλωσσ ν κα συνταγμ των and Hegesianax wrote a work περ τ ς τ Δημ κρ τ υ λ εως. forgery.].41 Certain catchwords recurrent in the citations suggest that he was a natural target for imitation. also the descriptions of Demokritos searching out λη ε ην ν ρωπ νης σεσις and κ σμ ς.386 L. finding a sophistic attempt ‘Democriti personam induere’. (Demokritos is never described as a sophist. but of this little direct evidence survives. 1. Bolos of Mende on later attempts to lend respectability to spurious writings by arrogating the name of Demokritos.45–49. especially Plu.L. The key idea of ‘similarity’.49). In addition to treatises on the subject περ τ ν δια ερ ντων υσμ ν and περ μειψιρρυσμι ν (‘on different dispositions’ and ‘on changing dispositions’ DK 68 B 8a and 139.39 He was much revered in later antiquity. but on the sources of D. For some reason. Ep.164 discussion IV. with an important trade in grain: evidently it had its own cultural as well as economic vitality. 641b. and pastiche.378 L.]. 39 Cf.L.

also μ υε ς A 61 = Simp.43 The letters fall into three distinct groups: 10–17. 2.] (of the organic unity of the body). Epp. there are incidental references in many fragments—which cannot all be inventions of forgers or of writers of pastiche—to the terms υσμ ν (DK 68 B 197 = Stob. [page 164 / page 165] / . 18 the expression λ ι π’ με γρα ε σαι [9.151 = Stob.) Supposed relations between Hippocrates and Demokritos are described in the Hippocratic letters. face which do not by division become two of the same thing. ibid.137).Strom.278 L. Ep. 569. DK 68 A 128 = Aet.] is followed up by clear reference 42 Perhaps this preoccupation of Demokritos in some degree anticipates the Aristotelian attempt to distinguish parts of the body as μ ι μ ρη or ν μ ι μ ρη. 3 [6. 50. de sens. 4. and Ep. also Ep. ‘tracking down and considering the true nature of man’ [9. M. 23.65). 18–21. see Smith (1990). note too his view that the μ ρ of man is recognizable τ τε σ ματι κα τ ρ ματι B 165 = Arist. cf. Demokritos does seem to have been preoccupied with the idea of form. 17 ends with the designation of Demokritos as λη ε ην ν ρωπ νης σεως ι νε σαντ ς κα ν σαντ ς.8).116. cf. and μ ι της B 164 = S. μ ι σ μων.19. μ τρ π ς Vict. is here given pragmatic implementation in study of the colour and shape of the bodily organs. edition with translation and commentary. 10–17.]. παντ ας μ ρ ς κα σ ματα παντ α κα κατ μ γε ς δια ρ ς A 37 = Simp.70).1 init. the main voice is that of Hippocrates. 3. DK 68 C 6. 1 [6. 1.38 L. That υσμ ς is pervasive in his physical system may be seen in the argument that colour arises from elements mixed διαταγ τε κα υ μ κα πρ τρ π (DK 68 A 125 = Aet. 43 On the letters. cf.]. Rather. and especially of sameness in form. 294. 4.discussion 165 cf. 392. called to Abdera to treat the supposedly mad Demokritos. In Epp. especially pp. in cael. but there is much of significance also in 10–17.42 (See also on 2. the others from Hippocrates) / seem to have been composed for the express purpose of displaying knowledge of the corpora of these two writers. 18–21 and 22–24.E. 102–105 on Ep.382 L. the latter being such as hand. the Demokritean letter to Hipσι ς ν ρ π υ is particularly relevant to this discuspocrates περ sion. Hom. and in 20.378 L. in 18. μεταρυσμ ν (B 33 = Clem. 7. [9. 23. HA 1.15. and πιρυσμ η (B 7 = Sext.382 L.]).31. Hom.13 and μ σ ημ νε ν A 135 = Thphr. But we need not look beyond the HC to find similar ideas in circulation. 1. with respect to shape and colour.4. In Ep. Temkin (1985).478 L. 7. the abstract principle of sameness and difference. 3.] and μ υλ ς Nat. and 4 for Demokritean usage.6 [6. see also Littré IX. PA 640b. μ ε ην η Loc. There are several comments on πλ υσ ην τ ν σιν ‘the richness of nature’. 18 fin. which purport to be an exchange between Demokritos and Hippocrates / (18 from Demokritos.

22–24 have a different manuscript tradition from the other letters. 19 (general statements on madness).398 L. 22 Hippocrates writes to his son Thessalos. 44 45 [page 165] . conceivably an independent source drawing not on the letter but on a work of Demokritos. the source also of the letter. 24. Ep.) The preamble of Ep. n. 1 and p. 23. 23.166 discussion to the titles of works by Demokritos. n. There are some striking similarities in phraseology between this letter and Anat. 42. This seems unlikely. Epp. See ibid. ε λε ται περ κ ιλ ην ντερα ~ ντερ ν … λικηδ ν ν κ λπ ις νειλ μεSee Smith (1990). cf. 23. 99. as Ep. in 24 Hippocrates writes to King Demetrios. 1.382 L.. is Demokritean. urging the study of mathematics on the grounds that it is closely allied with medicine. The proem is taken to be Demokritean in the second to third centuries A. is regarded by Smith as detachable.] are reiterated in ητρικ μ ν γ ρ κατ Δημ κριτ ν σ ματ ς ν σ υς κ εται. 93. n. It may be rather that Anat.].47 This preamble justifies the study of medicine by all. Ep.46 The content is somewhat mixed: in Ep. in the recommendation that the doctor should consider υ μ ς … λ μελ ην τε τ σκ νε ς [9.: συν δρυται (of the faculty of sight) ~ γκα δρυται (of the heart)..6.). was known and referred to by the author of Ep. recommending ways to maintain health. 47 The author ‘borrowed the anatomy and composed the proem’.D. Ep. (It has been supposed that this is a reference to Ep. p.44 This letter ends with a positive concatenation of Demokritean vocabulary. who believed the work to be Hippocratic.: the words of the letter σ η μ ν γ ρ ψυ ν ναρ εται πα ων. the odd one out in this rather ragged sequence.45 and doubtless Demokritean elements are similarly present throughout 18. 46 Ibid. 23 is noted DK ad loc. 1. p. 20 (on the place of chance in medicine). ητρικ δ ν σ υς σωμ των αιρε ται [9. p. 23 is the Demokritean letter which concerns us here. 21 (on the use of hellebore) have elements demonstrably lifted from the HC. σ η δ ψυ ν πα ν αιρε ται (DK 68 B 31 = Clem.. 95. with some misunderstandings and additions imported by the excerptor. Ep. 24 is prefaced by the statement πρ τερ ν μ ν σπ υδ ντες … περ τ ς ν ρωπ νης σι ς ν κε αλα ω εωρ σαι τ μ ρη τα τα υγγρ ψαντες … πεστε λαμεν [9. the connection with Ep. ελ νει ν (of the chin) ~ λυς (chest). 1. 32 ‘detachable philosophic … proem’. which has strong affinities in content and expression with Ep. Paed. leading in to the anatomical discourse.].394 L. 23. and Ep. on the grounds that bodily malaise affects mental function.

In the letter. gives such precise details as the number of lobes in lungs and liver). συνηρμ σμ ν ν (chin) are more elaborate than. There are differences too in attitude to bodily function.) There is in Ep. the liver of desire).14 and A 38 = Simp. These are listed by Smith as: the comment on the uselessness of the spleen.discussion 167 ν ν (similar expressions of inestines). woven from vessels. and at the end δ σ ματ ς ν μυ ς σις τευ ε παντ μ ρ α σπλ γ νων γ νη (same sense as Anat. and letter the nouns δημι υργ ς and δημι υργ η. until death ends their service. that of Ep. 28. and of origins in general as γκ σμ μεν ν κατ λ γ ν where υσμ ς.]). we find σι ς ν ρωπ νης π γρα (same sense as Anat. 7). δια ιγ play a part (DK 68 B 34 = David Prol. These ideas accord well with known Demokritean views of man ‘governed’ by divinity. as ν τ ν ρ πω μικρ κ σμω ντι κατ τ ν Δημ κρ τ ν. The letter is full of theoretical notions. The overall tenor is completely different: the letter is mannered and pompous. whereas the anatomy of Anat. the insight that the brain directs the limbs [page 165 / page 166] / . is spare and functional. the concept that swallowing is accompanied by a shove. Furthermore.. 398 L. with these similarities in phraseology and spirit. here κ σμ η and διετ ατ . despite its poetic touches. σι ς π δεδημι ργηται (sex organs) / and συν σεως δημι υργ η συνδεσμε μενα / (stomach and intestines). It is particularly remarkable that the nuances of the concepts κ σμ ς and σις are parallel. 23 much stress on the notion that the organs are fashioned or marshalled by ‘nature’ to serve [the nature of] the body. Similarities in spirit are even more striking.15). ρμ σμ ν ι λλ λ ισι (trachea and oesophagus). is practical and descriptive. 23 displays insights which seem to follow the work of Herophilos and Erasistratos. 38. is primitive. Ermerins reads σ ματ ς. whereas Anat. τρ π . At the beginning of the anatomical εωρ ην ει τ ι νδε description. there are fundamental divergences. and to the craft in design of the living organism. In Ph. Anat. the two being microcosm and macrocosm. whereas Anat. the organs are the seat of the emotions (the heart of anger. linking this genitive with ν μυ ς: this attractive emendation tones down but does not alter the abstract sense of σις. Anat. νευρ δης κ στις (both of bladder). 12 [9. and contains no elements which suggest a post-classical date (though. 7 and 12.394. and in anatomical sophistication. cf. and allied with the pervasive concept of order in or aptness to bodily function. In the τευ ε. However. but similar in spirit to. (In the latter passage. There is even a parallel change in use of σις. unlike the letter. the description of the bladder. the verb the expressions of the bodily parts ε κ σμ α ρ τα κ σμε σι (hair).

is used. the theory of guileless abridgement seems more probable. The two texts. is assured. but ‘conical’ and in general there is attention to. 2. The treatise is a unique testimonial to the nature and extent of ancient anatomical knowledge. and the works of Demokritos is some indication of interaction between Hippocratics and Demokriteans in fifth-century Thrace. 18) but with Oss. As the comparative anatomy which features so prominently in Anat. which enters by the trachea.168 discussion via the nerves. Ep. Conclusion This extraordinary little piece has found its way into the HC by accident. hardly reconstructed. but it might be a pre-Alexandrian forgery (to be linked with those allegedly detected by Kallimachos). 48–50 on Hippocrates’ connections with North Greece and pp. not drink. Smith (1990). and some understanding of. and Epid. 66–69. p. Nothing militates against the supposition that this is an excerpt of a genuine work by Demokritos. function. This can only be glimpsed. There is a nexus of related Hippocratic texts. pp. The date of the anonymous redactor is indeterminate. It is an / unoriginal and uncritical summary of earlier anatom/ ical works. pp. belongs not with Ep. but may be as early as the fourth century. most notably Oss. But Demokritean need not mean ‘by Demokritos’.. 33. it may be supposed that the writer is adapting more than one text. 4 and 6 practised at Abdera. The doctor(s) involved in the writing or compilation of Epid. and between their later imitators. the term lungs. lung. from the same Demokritean text. not sg. and other such northern centres. Oss. 23 (though cf. and an important document linking the lost Demokritean corpus with certain Hippocratic texts.48 To these may be added: it is πνε μα. the presentation of Demokritos in Ep. also Longrigg (1993). the heart is not ‘round’. However. That there are Demokritean elements in Anat. 36–37 on Hippocrates and Demokritos. 2. incorporating Demokritean material. 93–97 on Demokritean ideas in the HC. but by writers with entirely different purposes.. The most plausible hypothesis is that both are derived. See Jouanna (1992). directly or indirectly. 23 and Anat. The common elements in expression between these. Ainos. 48 49 [page 166 / page 167] / . are related in a complex fashion. or a later pastiche (to be linked with the epistolary tradition)..49 V. Anat.

some account is taken of Duminil’s work.g. D’s text. 1998) appeared soon after the first publication of this article in Classical Quarterly. on the whole it is descriptive rather than evaluative. Duminil. It is not uncommon in scholarship that a text or subject long neglected is simultaneously the subject of more than one study. e. as the work gives a partial rather than a detailed study of anatomy) and content (found to be biological rather than medical). 5 = D’s 4) D reads ετ σκαλην ειδε ς κρην [κ ρυ ν] κ στι ς κε αται while I read ετ σκαλην ειδ ες ς κρην κ ρυ ν κ στι ς κε νται. It is proper that.forms. but D places more emphasis on similarities with (pseudo-) Rufus of Ephesus. Cor. Otherwise. see commentary 143–144). I do not discuss differences which do not affect the sense. Accordingly.-P. D’s treatment is necessarily much less detailed than my own. I note that D translates as if reading the genitive plural.4 = D’s 3) D keeps κε μενας V while I. – (I..APPENDIX M. is prefaced by a short general introduction (‘Notice’) and accompanied by a translation. Hippocrate: CUF t. the main differences in the two texts are as follows: – (I. Anat. Parallels with Demokritos and others are noted. which I still think valid. on republication of my article. emend to genitive plural πτ μ νων (for reasons. Oss. The manuscript tradition is then briefly described. such as D’s preference for contracted forms. and it still seems to me that the preposition . D discusses title (found to be inappropriate. D’s deletion of the substantive on the grounds of tautology seems odd. see commentary 150). and for υνrather than συν. following Ermerins. τ τ υ not τ υτ υ. with only a few notes. following Ermerins.. Ulc. – (I. 8. emend to κε μεν ν (for reasons. which I still think valid. 1 = D’s 1) D keeps nominative singular πτ μ νη V while I. In the ‘Notice’. (Paris. as is conventional in the Budé series.

was anticipated by Triller (for full discussion.10 = D’s 6) D keeps μικρ ν V while I. following Foesius. which I think compelling. D’s preference for κε αται a rare form of the third person plural may be justified (κε ανται V). whether the word μ λ ισιν refers to ‘apples’ as D believes. – D fails to note that there are different manuscript readings of adjectives and substantives beginning μ . D seems unaware that her emendation. . – (II. Although there are some points of disagreement in interpretation (for example.or μ ι . see commentary 151–152).(see commentary 143. or to ‘sheep’ as I prefer) there are points of agreement also (for example.170 appendix is required. and that the expression π σηππτικ ς κ ιλ ης can stand). see commentary 150). 6). based on a Galenic gloss. that the phrase ρ γ η π λλ refers to the aorta. with n. ε σω π υκε while I read κα εν – D reads γκ ς δ κ στι ς μετ κ στι ς μ σα σ α π υκε. emend to μακρ ν (for reasons.

11 6.6. 254. n.6.6.26 6.1. 79. 98. 1449a Probl.6. 129. 155–157 164 106 106 98 156 131. 99. n.1.4 .28 Rh.1–13 4.6.25 31. 19. 130 25 151 61 69 25.1 6 HA 1.7 4.7.1.1.23 31. 21. 21–22. 61 Aretaios Aristophanes Eccles. 327 1043 Pl. 104. 31.3 7.35 6. 665 717–725 Ra.1–17 4. 455 Nu. 149 141 143. 588 1067 Aristotle col.3 4. 53 20 20 165.10. 71. 79 109 83 60–61 57–58 109 61 151.6 2.10 6. 69. 398 Eq. 160 XII 22–26 (Dexippos) 20. 131.38 7. 90.INDEX OF AUTHORS AND TEXTS Aetius Alkaios Alkmaion DK 24 A 5 Anaximander 66 160 18 20.16 3.6. 79 79 60 52 99 60 67. 6. 97–98. 23. 148. 60.1. 1411a Athenaios 262a Celsus 160 159 131. 106–107. n.7.21 31. 796a GA 5.1 1.5 Metaph. 83 133 664b 667a 669b 670b 671b 673b Po.31 6. 87 Anonymus Londinensis 15.6.1 6.3 3. 112 107 60. 985b PA 637b 647a 655b 664a 82.22 31. 65–67. 136 151 144 106. 159 158 69 132 141 141 160 160 proem 8 proem 30 2. 159 140 152 15.8 6. 92 25 25 144. 11.

n.13–14 7. 156 de anatomicis administrationibus 2. 84. 106– 107. n.. n. 136. 102. 87. 163 147 6. 50.7. 92 18. 139.. 137 132 163 160 18. 683 El.15 7. 142.31 8. 79 76 103 19. 75 DK 68 A 37 DK 68 A 61 DK 68 A 77 DK 68 A 125 DK 68 A 128 DK 68 A 132 DK 68 A 135 DK 68 A 151 DK 68 A 152 DK 68 A 155 DK 68 B 5 DK 68 B 7 DK 68 B 8 DK 68 B 31 DK 68 B 33 DK 68 B 34 DK 68 B 37 DK 68 B 57 DK 68 B 135 DK 68 B 139 DK 68 B 151 DK 68 B 155 DK 68 B 164 DK 68 B 165 DK 68 B 187 DK 68 B 197 DK 68 B 223 DK 68 B 270 DK 68 B 288 Demosthenes Philalethes 19 Diokles fr. 94 Tro. 165 165 137 165 165 142 53. 165 159 139 136 147 165 164 166 165 167 139 139 142. 164–168 142. 130.719 K. 19–22.3 Demokritos index of authors and texts 51 65. 179 1502 HF 130 Ion 1011 IT 978 1481 Supp. 117 fr. 7.. 261 Ba. n. 133. 163 53 53 132 163 137. 147. n. 159.7. Euryphon Galen 149 133 147 147 83 141 7. 164 148 133 165 165 139 165 139 139 139 DK 31 A 83 DK 31 B 27 DK 31 B 61 DK 31 B 81 DK 31 B 84 DK 31 B 150 Erotian Δ 18 Ε 38 Κ 35 2 25 Σ 56 Τ 15 Τ 34 Φ 13 Euripides Alc.7. 79. 156 63 131 147 91 80 143 75 63 92 53 137. 98. 104 .172 7. 120. 137 Dioskorides Empedokles DK 31 A 77 20 72. 983 N. 1339 Cy. n. 61. 74. 492 772 837 Hel. 65 163 132 134.349 K 104 2. 66. 132. 161. 150.

66 linguarum Hippocratis explicatio 7. 20–21 de methodo medendi 10. 92 19.97 K. 87 de simplicium medicamentorum temperamentis et facultatibus 12. 91.86 K.264 L. 22 14.118 K. 106.30 4. 111 de locis affectis 8. 84.112 K.260 L.412 L. 3. 343. 92 10. 98. 91.128 K.711–714 K. 158 19. 61–62.1004 K. 85. 3 [2. 84 12. 68. 88 de optimo medico cognoscendo 22 de placitis Hippocratis et Platonis 156 de remediis parabilibus 14. 93 12. 92 54 150 131 77 108 73 73 54.47 K.474 L. 157 17. 85 10.406 L.782 K. 21 14. 87. 5 [2. 92.709–711 K. 90 14.91 K. 146 19. 108.58 8. 156. n. 151. 96 160 77 Hippocrates.486 L.124 K.356 L. 802 K.187 5.424 L.148 K. HC Acut. 144.281K.808 K.410 K.742 K. 72. 88 Herakleitos Herodotos 1.index of authors and texts de compositione medicamentorum secundum locos 12. 109 19.] Acut.218 K. 102 Hippocratis de articulis liber et Galeni in eum commentarii 18 (1). 138. 144.86 3. 106 12. 143.342.] 9–10 [2.] 30 [2.125 K.768 K. 738 K.379 K.92 K.702 K.] 15 [2. 344 K. 106 14. 100 19. 159 7. 66 10.74 K. 82 introductio seu medicus 14.] 7 [2.38 2. 81. 107 14. 79. 106 12. 98 de compositione medicamentorum temperamentis et facultatibus 12.242 K.] 5 [2. 61 19. 140.398 L. 81 19.701 K. 84 de tumoribus praeter naturam 7. 170 19.] . 130.937–942 K. 93 14.242 K.940 K.732 K. 150 in Hippocratis Prognosticon commentarii 106 18 (2).54 Herophilos Hesychios 163 53 159 3 66 132 3 173 19. Sp. 152 19. 136. 142. 20. 93 12. 91 19. 84 Hippocratis de medici officina liber et Galeni in eum commentarius 18 (2).767–777 K. 21. 132..769 K. 93 19.341 K.290 L.] 26 [2. 150.] 19 [2.] 60 [2.

] 77 65–66 [2.] 163. 131.604.590 L.] 110 38 [6.238 L.166.] 20.92.210 L.110 L. 157 6 [8.] 55. 220 L.] 11 [6. 13 [6. 151. 145 18 [6.] 152. 79.] 81 15 [6.614 L. 139.244 L.630 L.] 17 29 [6. 96.240.174 index of authors and texts 7.520 L.106. 132 68 [4. 55.106 L. 72 31 [6. 160.] 150 17 [8.246 L.] 146 30 [9.110 L. 16. 86.228 L.] 55. n. 112.] 159 2 9 [4. 91 Aer.248 L.] 55 22 [4.240 L. 70.] 69 18 [4.] 54 22 [6. 16.] 90.] 146 16 [4.586 L. 606 L. 105 Aff.106 L.] 58 [6. 109. 82 10 [2.] 2 [8. 137. 214 L. 159. 92. 162 137.] 138 Aph.] 50 Aph. 138. 168 L.86.] 63.282 L. 80 26 [6.] 160 11. 147.102 L.] 55. 112 2. 92 L. 18.] 82.] 18.] 73 78 [4.42.234 L. 157 Coac. 161 19 [8. 152.588 L.] 72 33 [6.] 17.146 L. 71 40 [4. 148.312 L.] 150 25 [9.. 69. 108 L. 6 19 [4. 157. 150 13 [4. n.116 L.] 163. 94.] 12. 160 4 [8.600 L.202 L. 147 2 [6. 12. 110 8 [4. 61 [2.] 17 98 54 [6. 81 37 [6.] 17.] 22 de Arte 134. 89.] 82 31 [4. 82.132 L.] 17. 155. 57.584 L.] 20.490 L.] 20.] 17. 83.230 L.] 17 20 [6. 62.132 L.212. 157.] 91 Aph. 105 14 [4.128 L. 100 4 [6. 65 62 [4.] 59–60 Artic.214 [5.] 130. 46 L. 161 10 [6.] 145. 159 1 [8. 72.20 L.590–596 L.172–176 L.266 L.134 L.216 L.196 L.] 140 31 [9.214 L.530 L. 4 77 [4.] 85 11 [4.250 L.628 L.238 L.218.] 55 Carn.568 L. 17. 111.] 3 . 162 7 [4.] 55 38 [4. 110.] 53 2. 150. 94 L.] 150 13 [8. 18.] 110 27 [6. 19 [4.] 110 28 [6.] 111 40 [6. 100 5 [6.584 L.502 L.594 L. 3 12 [4.258 L. 17 Aph.190–196 L.] 17 9 [6. n. 55. 163 23 [9.492 L. 31 [4.234 L.16 L.264 L.] 65.] 108 Alim.570 L.] 105 31 [4.264–268 L.516 L.] 151 5–9 [8.] 98 47 [6.209 [5. 110 45 [4.] 58 23 [6.] 161 3 [8.] 65 47 [4. 17.] 145 5 [8. 130 46 [4. 57.244 L. 242 L.224 L.] 17.

384 L.] 96 3.7. 150 10 [9.21 [5.] 95 Epid.388 L.24 [5.2.1. 148.25 [5.7 [5. 158 4 [3.483 [5. 6. 165–166 Ep.index of authors and texts 2.52 [5.3 [5. 4. 20.224 L. 112. 158 2.116 L. 8 [5. 7 4.611 [5. 10–17.192 L. n.] 70.25 [5. 17. 157 3 [3. 104.448 L.] 20 2. 22 164.84.3.424 L.94. 151.422 L.4. 105 2.692 L. 86.84 L. 18. 145.146 L. 141. n. 5 [3.43 [5. 56. 23 [9.468 L. n.] 149 Epid.] 73. 166 Ep.] 152 Ep. 160 5 [9.332 L. 166 Ep.660. 168 6. 120. 137.184 L. 2 94.] 57 7.208 L. 161.] 129. 17 [9.] 96.] 22 2.] 60.174 L.] 83 7.18 [5. 86.12 [5. 432 L. 164. 662 L.120.] 105 7.] 149 7 [9.1 [5.7 [3.] 152 9 [6. 164.84 L.394 L.6. 18 [9. 162–163.124 [5. n.] 139.226 L.] 146.] 78 Fract.65 [5. 120. 57.] 81 5.126 L. 5 62.354–378 L.216 L. 6 25.102 L.] 146.722 L.502 [5. 83.] 149 6.] Epid.7.] 70. 159.593 [5.] 95 Epid.] 3.. 24 166 Fist.] 150.3. 18–21. 148. 163.1 [5. 149 2 [9.456 L.430.726 L.] 108.3.2.308 L. 137.86 L.] 56 5. 1 1.104 L. 105 Epid. n.80 L.] 142 4. 159. 4 72.] 111 2.4 [2. 86 7.2 [5. 370 L.302 L.] 108 7.30 [5.394.357–372 [5.19 [5. 158.6. 94.] 68 2.244 L.45 [5. 168 4.382 L.1 [5.80 [5. 165 Ep.] 77 2. 159 6.3 [5. 82 7.312 L.26 [5.] 163.] 139.14 [5.2 [5. 21. 92. 89.68 [5.28 [5. 72. 86 L.] 77 4.] 109 7.] 83 Cord.] 17 7. n. 149.700 L. 3 78 3.] 129 7. 122 L. 396 L. 166–168 Ep. 150.. .11 [5. 112 1 [6.] 56 5.4. 175 158.] 163. 96 L. 134.326 L.156 L. 112.220 [5.430 L. 91 5. 137 2.6 [5.80 L.] 83 7. 168 2.] 89 5.44 [5.. 152.] 71 7. 146 8 [9.134 L. 50 4.4. 11 [9.78 [5.] 83 7.] 65 Epp. 163.12 [5.3. 71.434 L. 22–24 165.632 L.] 93 Epid.266 L.436 L. 19 [9. 112 Epid.410 L. 7.84 L.412 L.4.138 L. 162–163.] 129 7. n.382 L.] 95.3. 104. 82.368. 157 1 [9.] 120.59 [5. 161.] 109 Epid.] 158 6.] 109.434 L.] 165–166 Epp.] 137.

129. 139. 103. n.657 L.] 102 38 [6. 212 L.] 12 [3. 70.] 15 [3. 134 12 [6.174 L.] Int. 570 L.440 L. n. 112 Medic.] 101 30 [6.324 L.204 L. n. 100 24 [7.256 L.238 L. 81. 208 L.] 12 [8. 146.334 L. 83.440 L. 51 [9. 76.200 L.] 3 [8. 472 L. 5 [8.] 101 13 [6.673 L.] 160 27 [6. 150 17. 92. 134.486 L. 103.] 14 [8.176 9 [3.228 L. 148. 64.] 76 4 [7.] 98.212 L.] 13 [8. 131.308 L. 91.] 20.460 L. 82.] 110 8 [7. 134 15 [6. 1 [8.186 L. 74.] 4 [8. 64. 81.178 L.] 3. 342 L.] 53 47 [6.636 L. 70. 74. 112.] 89 26 [7.] 5 [6. Hom.206. 157 8 [4.328 L. 278 L.] 82.558 L.376 L.] 55 28 [7. 129.298. 2 [6. 75. 314 L. 56. 161 6 [6.] 17.252 L.210. 78. 65 61 105 17. 34 [4. 194 L.354 L.] 65.322 L.346 L.] Hebd.] 68 Mochl.568.] 73 35 [4.] 100 51 [7.] 4 [6.] 163. 282 L. 131. 72.564 L.356 L. 131 92. 72. 162.] 73 27 [7.. 75–76. n.436.] Gland.] 163.448 L. 101 32 [6. 78. 135. 146 109 139 16–17. 2 [7. 18 150 74 130 130.] Haem.] 17 8 [9.316 L.] 35 [8.292 L.] 54.] 76.470.184 L.192.214 L. 157 1 [6. 69 103 73 149 9. 73 13 [7. 12 [4. 80 5 [9.292 L. 302 L. 55.] 146 21–23 [6. 156. 108 1 [7.] 57 36 [7. 131.] 73 37 [7. 163.220 L.] 10 [3.] 52 [8.] 76 9 [7.302–308 L.] 20. 16.234 L. 16.564 L.] Loc. 17.] 157 10 [6.] 76 21 [6. 65.] 16.340.294 L. 94. 81 35 [7. 112 14 [6.558 L.284 L.] 7 [8.] 96. 300.378 L.] 87 6 [7.312 L. 111.312 L. 119 3 [6. 65 22 [6.278.276. 163 1 [4. 158.560 L.166.] 17. 21. 86.] 91. 61. 76 15 [7.258 L. 2 [6. 18.180 L.318 L.] 69.] 101 26 [6.] 54 18 [7. index of authors and texts 131 55 130 68 101 131 16. 280 L.] 81 Iudic.280. 130. n.] 11 [8.450 L. 75 21 [7. 152 63.] 57 .] 85 40 [6. 172 L.] 93.] 70.312.568 L.330 L. 129. 73 42 [6.556 L.188 L.] 21 [3. 438 L.314 L.] 76 20 [6. 64–65.242 L.520 L.298 L.] 30 [3. 64. 2 [9.] 55 7 [7.] 81 12 [7.] 129.] 17.

101.32.] 54.82 L.] Morb.392 L.38. 101 27 [7. 160 70 [8.144 L. 101 19 [7.] 81 74 [8. 81. 104 18 [7.] 102 2 [7. 158 L.] 56.] 85 Mul.] 6 [7. 3 1 [7.] 98 97 [8. 76. 82.236. Sacr. 101.] 78. 101 28 [7. 86.156. 73. 28. 109 73.38 L.120 L.] 40 [7.224–228 L.120 L. 86.80 L. 87.] 16 [7. 148 1 [7.] 144 72 [7. 102 1–11 [7.] 136 62 [7.194 L.index of authors and texts 39 [4.] 54.604–608 L.80. 68.118 L.] 57.] 97 32 [7.] 73. 82 L. 86 110 85.392 L.50 L.] 71.374 L.196 L.8–18 L. 101 26 [7. 21.124 L. 98 90 [8. 146. 30 L.214 L.] 76 58 [7.50 L.] 77 Morb. 4 38 [7.] 90 102 [8. 151 110 [8. 10 L.] 56 24 [7.140 L.596 L.] 64–65 4 [7.] 54 [7.18 L. 108 84.] 73 [7. 56. 148 34 [8. 42 L. 197 47 [7. 99 111 [8.] 101 43 [7.] 97.46 L.8.16 L. 94 57 81.] 96 12 [7.46 L. 97.] 76 69 [7.] 91 59 [7. 69. 101. 78. 24 L.] 73 8 [7.78 L. 44 L.10 L.] 98.] 76 56 [7. 71.386 L. 111 75 [8.] 177 108 70.242 L. 98 29 [7.224 L. 2 16. 81.560 L.] 98 102–105 [8. 1 17.] 89.146–150 L.38.142–148 L.] 81 51 [7. 83 .112 L.16 L.] 20 17 [6.228 L.42.] 130 41 [4.] 65.] 54 28 [6. 86. 130 L.] 151 gynaecological works 54–55. 71.] 73 9 [7.90 L. 168 L.] 81.32 L. 112.] 159 7 [6.] 70 26 [6.60 L.] 2 [7.366 L. 160 Morb.88 L. 70 L.96 L. 2 86.] 3 [7.38 L. 72.556 L. 86.240 L.] 98 105 [8. 103 80 33 [7. 40 L. 1 147 3 [6.] Morb.22.] 97.] 78.] 131 42 [4.224 L. 112. 105 5–6 [6. 80.52 L.] 80 25 [7. 96 80 74 74.26.] 56 116 [8.] 61. 151 160 151 150 134.92 L.66. 3 [6. 111 50 [7. 98 109 [8. 72.] 17 [7. 91 Mul.8 L.] 69.] 80 36 [7. 112. 65. 101. 103. 83. 109.52 L. 94.] 81 53 [7.392 L. 86. 96.] 81. 101 15 [7.156 L.130 L. 84.164.] 98. 102.] 56.] 35 [7.128.232 L.108.148 L. 238 L.] 111 112 [8. 73 13 [7.] 15 [7. 160 Morb. 110 L.] 11 [7. 110.106 L. 111 22 [7. 34 L. 40.] 98. 61.] 56 [7. 160 85 56.] 10 [7.250 L.

93. 60.178 index of authors and texts 76.] Nat. 158 10 [9. 94.74 L.412 L.184.] 136. 51.] 158 4 [9.330 L.] 85. 178 L. 85. 1 72 165.] 90.332 L.] 68 Ulc. 160.60 L. 143 33 [7.196 L.] 101 26 [6.312 L.] 92. 148. 98 14 [6.] 111 12 [6. 362.328 L. 106 23 [2. Hom.192 L. 110 25 [6.384 L. 163.366 L.] 85 Nat.] 95 34 [9.174 L. 98.] 111 185 [8.] 95 43 [9.] 89 17 [6.] 146 13 [7. 130. 160 5 [9.] Steril. 184 L.408 L. 93 22 [6.] 165. 151 31 [7. 460 L. n.] 158 9 [9.] 111 32 [7.44. 82. 83. 92 1 [6.176 L.] 68 Vict.182.] 55 40 [7. 101.322 L.48 L. 160 .] 141.426 L.] 71 98 100 [7. 112 1 [7. 168 1 [9. Mul. 73.436 L. 148. 1 58.] 84 23 [7. 82 221 [8. 158 12 [9. 163. 112 20 [9. 145. 98 13 [6. 94.404 L.58 L. n.] 91 33 [9. 152 131.64 L. 318 L. 188 L. 112 18–20 [9.] 137 Prog. 150.] 85 10 [6.] 61 144 [8.168 L. 158. 149.186. 152 139. 16.] 119 [8.178.170–172 L. 116 L. 82.194 L.170 L.418 L.] 136 Prorrh. 100.] 50. 111 2 [2.] 63 248 [8. 145 145. 149.44–48 L. 3 [6. 141. 7 [9. n. 180 L.] 85 8 [6. 143.174.228 L.400 L. 112.] 14 [9.] 58–59.] 141.426 L. 366 L. 133.] 91 Nat.] 146 16 [9.170 L.] 56 24 [7.] 131. 25. 157. 159 13 [9.370 L.38 L.316. 107.344 L.170 L.] 105 30 [9. Pue.172 L.540 L. 159.428 L.486 L.] 152. 3.] 84 24 [7.190 L.406 L.66 L. 145.] 152 4–7 [9. 161 8 [9.416 L. 86.420 L. 132 139 1 [7.114. 87 21 [9. 101 24 [2.430 L.] 17 [9. 135. 141. 120.66 L.] 101 24 [6.] 68 165 [8. 11 [6. 151 19 [9.] 158 14 [6.] 55.] 21.] 159 Off. 141. 6 [6.] 17 18 [9.] 20. 112 Prorrh. 186 L.] 130. 144.] 110 6 [6.] 74.430 L.] 11 [6.184 L.] 129. 2 17. 3 [9.] 84 Oss.] 80 222 [8. 21. 82 17 [7.430 L.] 56 Septim.358.478 L.48 L.] 18 [9. n.] 96. 90. 157–163. 46 L.342 L.416 L.

50. 81 19 [3. 230 L.292 4. 33b.] 80. 130. 82. 150 Rufus 23.228.] VC 98 56. n. n. 143. 144.index of authors and texts Vict. 148. 155 146 131 148 146 146 25. 141. 109 21 [3. 133. 62 21.] 102 13 [3. 142.194 L.] 65 9 [3.] 65. 405c 517a Sph. 145.] 136.] 58. 58c 71c and Ti. 254 L.579 17. 148.556 L. 134.250 L.256. 111 15 [3.188–192 L. 141. 112 2 [3.] 60–61 19 [1.. 131. Pythagoreans 57. 98–99 61 61–62. 101.] 74. 147 Plato Phd. 2 54 [6.. 164. n.626–632 L. 98. n. 96b R. 129–130. 86 3 [3.] Vict. 3.] 81. 86. 102 VM 61 18–19 [1.656 L.266 Lysias Oreibasios Parmenides Paul of Aigina Philolaus Scribonius Largus Strabo Theophrastos Xenophon ..244 L. 89. 23. 147 107 53 57 137 82 141 139. 50. 618 L. 258 L. n.252.] 80. 9. 146 53. 133. 82.47 19. 130. 157 155 129 164 81 7. 110 14 [3. 151. 21. 152. 50. 102.528 11. n.210 L. 169 78 80 81 56 Homer Il. Locr.612–616 L. 83.616. 149–150. 139. 103 133 Poseidonios Praxagoras Protagoras Pythagoras. 146. 143. c 45b–46a. Pliny Plutarch Pollux 179 133. 3 Vict. 163 12. 155–157. n. 89.] 86.236–242 L. 106.] 85 18 [3. 4 90 [6. 161 22 [1. 258c Ti..

.

see also eye ‘choker’. 82 fundus. 23. 143 Homeric. 69. 50 tarsal plates. 84. 10. 22. 91 cataract. 76 jaundice. 132. 83. 73. 147. 50 keratitis. n. 56. 49–51. 80. ducts. 129–130 ichor. 155 arteries. 9. empyema. 8. 160 stroke. 9–10. 129–166 foetal. 140. 8. 50. 101 amblyopia. 8–9. n. 102. 134. 88 conjunctivitis. 25 iris. 134. 19 eye anatomy. 24. 49–51. 120. 22. 73. 76–79. 168 acupuncture. 76. 26. 165. 88 diseases. 119. 73. 65. 64. 9–10 blepharitis. 134. 76 pneumonia. pus. 10. 107. 9. 105 dropsy. 120. 105 malaria. note also glossary. 93 dissection. 8. 53 iritis. 144–145. 10. 10. 22. note also glossary and diagrams. 19. 19 diaphragm. 53 chalazion. 76 pleurisy. 59 glaucoma. 147–148. 3. 73. 52. 96. 6–7. 119. 159 drugs. 164. 101. 8. 149–150 bladder. 120. 109. ‘moisture’. 22. 10. 86 tuberculosis. 96. 160 sweat. 22.. 88 lid. 19. 86. 103 Calvus. 97. 59–61. cornea. 108 joint diseases. 59. 51 retina. 105. 89. 156 diseases. see vessels belly. 102. 26 anatomy comparative. 61. 119–120. 51. 19. 24. 21 pupil. 10. 156. 86 Cornarius. 61. 167 body fluids. 143 Demosthenes Philalethes. amaurosis.. 19. 82 membranes. 61–62 phlegm. 129 bile. 8. 93 phthisis. 106 urine. 90. 19. 3–4. 69. 8. 56. 49 optic nerves. 27. 105 ectropion. see medicaments Egypt. 25. n. 83 water. 57.GENERAL INDEX Abdera. 76 muxa. 20. 83. 155 regional. 8. 3. 61 tears. n. 51 lash. 6. 61. 87–89 limbus. 5. 17. 51 . cf. 21. 17. 108. 77. 93. 23. 59. 108. 95. blood. note also critical apparatus. 60 opsis. 59 entropion. 65. 159 Erasistratos. 82. 83–84 mualos. 99. 57. 95–98.

25. 79. 131. 107. see style. 89. 82. 89. 83. 102 crown. 168 medicaments. 49. 156. 76–79. 13. 11. 58. 156. 146–147 ophthalmoscope. 19. 53. 22 signs. 78. 25–26 pain. 10. 88 pterygion. see also diseases. 19. 16. 22. 97. 110 ocular flux. 92 f