Parker 2012 Galen and The Girls

Classical Quarterly 62.1 359386 (2012) Printed in Great Britain doi:10.
1017/S0009838811000619
HOLT N. PARKER GALEN AND THE GIRLS
359
GALEN AND THE GIRLS: SOURCES FOR WOMEN MEDICAL WRITERS REVISITED 1
1. INTRODUCTION Where did women doctors stand in the great tradition of ancient medicine? Is such a question even answerable, when our glimpses of women doctors are so widely scattered in both time and space, and our sources so limited in kind and extent?2 Yet considerable progress has been made in finding and interpreting these fragmentary sources (as my somewhat question-begging first question shows), for Rebecca Flemming can begin a recent and important contribution in these pages with the sentence, It is now a well-established fact that women practised medicine in the ancient world.3 It was not always thus, and perhaps is not thus in all quarters. Despite some early acknowledgement that woman doctors were part of daily life in antiquity,4 it was not until Sarah B. Pomeroys groundbreaking article of 1978, Plato and the female physician (Republic 454d2), that the fact entered into the mainstream
1 All citations of Galen follow the ed. of Khn, and will be given in the form CMGen. 7.12, 13.1013, etc., using the abbreviations of P.T. Keyser and G.L. Irby-Massie (edd.), The Encyclopedia of Ancient Natural Scientists: The Greek Tradition and Its Many Heirs (New York, 2008): On Compound Medicines according to Place (CMLoc.), On Compound Medicines according to Type (CMGen.) and Antidotes (Antid.). Khns text of these books, in the places I have spot-checked, copies the Greek text and Latin translation of R. Chartier (ed.), Operum Hippocratis Coi et Galeni Pergameni (Paris, 1649), which in turn repeats the Basel edn. of 1538, J. Cornarius (ed.), Galeni Pergameni opera omnia. A new edition is a clear desideratum but no Chalcenterus has risen to the challenge. 2 Similar questions, of course, can be asked about the status of women (see S. Pomeroys warning in Goddesses, Whores, Wives, and Slaves: Women in Classical Antiquity [New York, 1975], 60) and about The social status of physicians in the Graeco-Roman world, H.W. Pleket, in Ancient Medicine in Its Socio-Cultural Context, ed. P.J. van der Eijk et al., 2 vols. (Amsterdam, 1995), 1.2734. The problem lies in the definite article. See V. Nutton, The medical meeting place, ibid. 1.325; Healers in the medical market place: towards a social history of Graeco-Roman medicine, in A. Wear (ed.), Medicine in Society: Historical Essays (Cambridge, 1992), 1558; All sorts and conditions of (mainly) men, in V. Nutton, Ancient Medicine (London, 2004), 24871; F. Kudlien, Der griechische Arzt im Zeitalter des Hellenismus. Seine Stellung in Staat und Gesellschaft (Wiesbaden, 1979); Die Stellung des Arztes in der rmischen Gesellschaft: Freigeborene Rmer, Eingebrgerte, Peregrine, Sklaven, Freigelassene als rzte (Stuttgart, 1986); S.P. Mattern, Physicians and the Roman imperial aristocracy: the patronage of therapeutics, Bulletin of the History of Medicine 73 (1999), 118; a similar argument to Matterns is made by H. Chang, Rationalizing medicine and the social ambitions of physicians in classical Greece, Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 63 (2008), 21744. 3 R. Flemming, Women, writing and medicine in the classical world, CQ 57 (2007), 25779. 4 J. Rouyer, tudes mdicales sur lancienne Rome (Paris, 1859), 13943; J. Marquardt, Das Privatleben der Rmer (Leipzig, 1886), 1.779; M. Lipinska, Histoire des femmes mdecins depuis lantiquit jusqu nos jours (Paris, 1900); C. Daremberg, Dictionnaire des antiquits grecques et romaines (Paris, 1904), 3.16823; J. Oehler, Epigraphische Beitrage zur Geschichte des Aerztestandes, Janus 14 (1909), 420; H. Gummerus, Der rztestand im rmischen Reiche nach dem Inschriften (Helsinki, 1932).
360
H O LT N . PA R K E R
of classics.5 Yet there still seems to be a certain reluctance on the part of some scholars to believe that there really were women doctors or perhaps rather that women were ever real doctors.6 And though the fact that women practised medicine in the ancient world is clear, there seems to be a certain reluctance to accept that women wrote about medicine in the ancient world. Our sources for the history of women doctors in antiquity are three.7 There are a few passing references in literary sources. The most common source is epigraphic: tombstones and dedicatory inscriptions. The third is mention of women as practitioners in medical writings. It is to this that I turn. Nearly all the references to women in the practice of medicine in medical writings come from Galen.8 Furthermore they are limited to his large pharmacological works.9 However, an examination of Galen and how he used his sources can lead to interesting insights not only into the status and writings of women doctors but into the ways in which medical knowledge was transmitted more generally, a focus of much current scholarship.10 In her article, Flemming sounds a note of proper caution. She warns that the mere mention of a womans name associated with a recipe in the works of Galen should not be taken uncritically as an indication of her status as a medical professional or as a medical author. She calls for a more measured and nuanced assessment of the different cases and provides a detailed and searching examination.11 Flemming accurately sums up the wide variety of Galens principles of organization, though, as she notes, Galen is not consistent.12 Furthermore, his method of quotation, paraphrase, rewriting, commentary and addition can sometimes make it uncertain exactly where one source has ended and another begun.13
AJPh 99 (1978), 496500. e.g. J. Korpela, Das Medizinpersonal im antiken Rom: Eine sozialgeschichtliche Untersuchung (Helsinki, 1987), 1820. 7 For the data, see H. Parker, Women doctors in Greece, Rome, and the Byzantine empire, in L.R. Furst (ed.), Women Healers and Physicians: Climbing a Long Hill (Lexington, KY, 1997), 13150; R. Flemming, Medicine and the Making of Roman Women: Gender, Nature, and Authority from Celsus to Galen (Oxford, 2000), 38391; and ead. (n. 3); . Samama, Les mdecins dans le monde grec: sources pigraphiques sur la naissance dun corps medical (Geneva, 2003). 8 Authorities other than Galen: Pliny refers to Elephantis and Lais (HN 1.ind.28; 28.21), Salpe, obstetrix (HN 1.ind.28, 32; 28.38, 66, 82, 262; 32.135, 140), Sotira, obstetrix (NH 1.ind.28; 28.83). Galen and Ps.-Galen refer to a Cleopatra (not necessarily the same writer in each case); so, too, Paulus Aegineta, Aetius and Michael Italicus. Aetius quotes extensively from the works of an Aspasia: 16.12 (care during pregnancy), 15 (sickness during pregnancy), 18 (abortion), 22 (causes of difficult delivery), 25 (care after embryotomy), 50 (suppression of the menses: Aspasia and Rufus), 72 (displacements of the uterus), 104b (uterine ulcers), 109 (uterine hemorrhoids), 112 (edemous tumors), 114 (varicose hernia); see Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 173 (P. T. Keyser). These are discussed below. 9 On Compound Medicines according to Place (CMLoc.), On Compound Medicines according to Type (CMGen.) and Antidotes (Antid.). 10 L.M.V. Totelin, Hippocratic Recipes: Oral and Written Transmission of Pharmacological Knowledge in Fifth- and Fourth-century Greece (Leiden, 2009). 11 Flemming (n. 3), 258. 12 Ibid. 264, 265. 13 The transition from CMLoc. 5.5, 12.884.34 is a good example. Galen has been quoting Crito, but is what follows still Crito or Galen now speaking in propria persona? See C. Fabricius, Galens Exzerpte aus lteren Pharmakologen (Berlin, 1972), 131, 147.
6
G ALEN A N D TH E G I R L S
361
However, in the course of her argument, Flemming claims that Galen makes a fairly consistent distinction between two forms of citation in the pharmacological works:
One is literary, as in the reference to a remedy from the books of Aphrodisis [Gal. CMGen. 7.12, 13.1013]; the other suggesting a more practical relationship between medicament and the name attached to it. These are variously (and variedly) composed/suneteth, prepared/ eskeuasth, used/echrsato, proven/epiteteugmenon or altered/parapepoimenon by the individuals concerned; and the implication is that those described simply as belonging to x (where the name appears in the genitive without further qualification) also fall within this latter category.14
Flemming thus wishes to distinguish an actual author from a practical author15 and to divide Galens sources broadly into two groups. On the one hand there are substantial and structured pharmacological treatises, the polished or published treatise that is one which circulated as a stable text attached to a specific author who had created it as such.16 On the other hand lies a physicians more personal accumulation and organisation of recipes, or something less formal still the more messy, unstable, majority of medical writing, where remedies may have authors, but textual attributions make little sense.17 She concludes that all the women cited by Galen are likely to fall into the lesser category and questions whether Spendousa, Aquilia, Antiochis, or any of the other women mentioned, actually wrote down their recipes for themselves, or rather allowed, or encouraged, others to do it for them.18 I want to re-examine this distinction. I confess I do not find it very helpful or convincing, and the implication claimed that bare names indicate some undefined but lesser and messier order of authorship does not seem to be the case in Galen or his sources. Further, I do not think that the conclusion which insists that the women were confined to the less prestigious, more workaday, portion of medicines literary culture follows from the evidence.19
2. COMPOSED, PREPARED, USED, PROVEN, ALTERED There are two problems with these words being taken to indicate a lesser type of practical authorship. First, they are a matter less of Galens usage than of his sources.20 Second, they are not used by any of the authors in anything approachFlemming (n. 3), 265. Ibid. 266. 16 Ibid. 258. 17 Ibid. 267. We have an example, perhaps, of this type of more informal noting from Asclepiades, External Medicines Book 1, in Gal. CMLoc. 4.7, 12.776.10: , (A different form of the Phoenix of Apollonius [an eye medicine], as Areus the Asclepiadean wrote it in his private collection of drugs). This appears to be something like the research notebook of a leading physician. For Areus, see below. Galen, too, copies a recipe found by his friend Claudianus in the leather notebook of a dead doctor (CMLoc. 1.1, 12.423.13155). Even these private collections are open to publication. 18 Flemming (n. 3), 267. 19 Ibid. 267. 20 This point is not made as clearly as it might have been until Flemming (n. 3), 266.
15 14
362
ing a consistent fashion. Flemming, however, is partially correct in two of her categories. We can make a test with the forms she cites, taking plus the passive participles (, etc.) as a sample. On examination they turn out to be confined to only two authors: Asclepiades and Galen himself.21 Asclepiades is something of a name dropper: all six composers are Romans and bear non-medical names.22 Flemming is probably right to say, Certainly Aquilia is credited with composition in the practical rather than literary sense.23 But Galen uses exactly the same expressions to make boasts about his own compositions. For example, Galen in one of the passages refers to the dry collyria composed by doctors generally, then to his own composition: This drug was composed by me, and because of that is in use by many others in nearly every nation the Romans rule.24 Galen is the author and authority for his own mixture; he is not relegating himself to the role of prep-chef in someone elses kitchen. He is claiming worldwide fame for his own creation. One other passage deserves to be quoted in full to show that does not imply merely following someone elses recipe. Galen writes with a combination of self-promotion and Pergamene pride (CMGen. 1.13, 13.416.1017):
, , , . , , . This drug is not one of the ones first composed by me but many years ago by our own King Attalus of Pergamum, a serious scholar about all sorts of drugs. It follows the principles I have laid out above, and I would be amazed if anything of the same kind could be composed. Heras also records it in his book of drugs, which some entitle The Medicine Cabinet (Narthex) and others The Power of Forces.25
One can see clearly that here means something much closer to invent, discover, create, synthesize than merely prepare (following someones directions). So too for and the other passive forms of . Again, all but one of the seven occurrences with proper names turn out to come from Asclepiades, four from the same passage of Book 4 of External Medicines; all again are Roman,
21 To spare us having to go through all 315 forms of listed by TLG in the pharmacological works. 22 All the Roman names come from Book 4 of his External Medicines, and the last five from a single passage on (Gal. CMGen. 7.12, 13.1009.151031.17). The mixture of Antiochis, as compounded by a certain Fabilla (CMLoc. 9.2, 13.250.9 and 341.9; see below). Patroclus, freedman of (Augustus) Caesar (CMGen. 7.12, 13.1019.15); Domitius Nigrinus (13.1021.3); Orphitus (13.1029.17); Agrippa (13.1030.5); Aquilia Secundilla (13.1031.12). Apart from Agrippa, none of the others are known from any other source (see RE and PIR2 s.vv. There is no entry for Fabilla). 23 Flemming (n. 3), 265. Parker (n. 7), 145 (no. 48) incorrectly credits her directly. 24 CMLoc. 4.6 (eyes), 12.725.7: ; 12.729.18: , , `R; 12.727.5. The other examples are: CMLoc. 2.3, 12.570.4; CMLoc. 3.3 (nose), 12.690.18; CMLoc. 5.5 (teeth), 12.884.5 (Galen or Crito); CMGen. 1.3, 13.374.17; CMGen. 1.4, 13.377.6. 25 On Heras and his Narthex, see Fabricius (n. 13), 1835.
363
no doubt worthy persons but non-medical as far as we can tell.26 We do seem to have some kind of hierarchy when the term is combined with another name in the genitive: , , , , (mixture of Antiochis for diseases of the spleen, dropsy, sciatica and arthritis prepared by Fabilla).27 Antiochis is the author, the source of the recipe (a point we will return to); Fabilla, the preparer. She prepares () Antiochis recipe but she composes () the anonymous recipe which follows immediately and it is hard to see any firm difference between the terms.28 So too for CMGen. 7.6, 13.976.8: , (another of Gaius of Naples, prepared by Aquilia Secundilla).29 Flemming rightly questions the status of Fabilla and Aquilia as medical professionals, and the other passages seem to bear out her interpretation of .30 Asclepiades records that various mixtures were prepared (, etc.) by a certain Aburnius Valens and Celer the primipilarius (13.1031.8).31 However, even here we should not be too quick to assume that , etc. always or even usually denote an intermediary rather than an originator. In the one example from Galen, he introduces the poem-recipe of Themisons famed poppy concoction (CMLoc. 7.2, 13.40.442.8):
, . , , , , . . The [bronchitis medicine] made from poppies, as [recorded by] Damocrates. This drug was first prepared by Themison, as Damocrates says, writing as follows in the book entitled The Doctors Friend by Damocrates. We know that it was written in verse. They say that Themison prepared this drug first for wet coughs and problems with the bronchi and throat.
CMLoc. 7.12, 13.1009.1531.17. CMLoc. 9.2 (spleen), 13.250.38 = CMLoc. 10.2 (sciatica), 13.341.28, called Libyan the second time. For these repeated passages, see Fabricius (n. 13), 946, 1024, 11417. For Fabilla, see I.M. Plant, Women Writers of Ancient Greece and Rome: An Anthology (London, 2004), 15960; Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 327 (P.T. Keyser), s.v. Fauilla. is unlikely to represent Lat. favilla ash (suggested as a possibility by Keyser), but is rather a fem. diminutive of Fabius, Fabilla. Flemming (n. 3), 265, transliterates the name as Fabylla; Fabulla is an attested name but probably not the one intended here. is probably attested at Akrai (Sicily), A.D. 35, SEG 42 (1992), 833.12: [] (LGPN) right after a ; cf. Fabillus, RE 6.2 (1909), 1739 (Stein). 28 CMLoc. 9.2 (spleen), 13.250.918 = CMLoc. 10.2 (sciatica), 13.341.9: , . Another prepared by Fabilla, very excellent for the same conditions. 29 For Gaius of Naples, see below. A correction to Parker (n. 7), 145 and Flemming (n. 3), 265: not a plaster called the neapolitos or another (malagma), of the Neapolitan (type), but of [Gaius] of Naples. 30 Flemming (n. 3), 265. 31 CMGen. 7.12, 13.1021.17, 1027.8 and 1031.8 respectively. These passages allow us to check on carefulness with names in manuscripts, and the editions of Chartier and Khn; rather poor, alas. (CMGen. 7.12, 13.1027.12) becomes (ibid. 13.1021.17). The name is rightly Aburinus Valens as seen by Stein, RE 1A.2 (1920), 1569; also RE Suppl. 6 (1935), 1 (Groag) and RE Suppl. 12 (1970), 1 (Hanslick). Stein and the later authors, however, wanted to identify our man as L. Fulvius Aburinus Valens, son of the cos. suff. of A.D. 109. This is too late for Asclepiades, so we are probably dealing with an ancestor. See Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 684 (P.T. Keyser). For the texts, see below.
27
26
364
Here, denotes the written authority for the recipe and the actual first inventor and not some lesser/more practical relationship.32 For and , it turns out that what was identified as a type of ranking by Galen is more a stylistic nuance of Asclepiades. Flemming is right to mark out preparations which are merely said to have been used by someone famous.33 However, even here a sharp distinction cannot be made: the frequent phrase in Galen and his sources and the like most often refers not to personal consumption (by the patient) but to clinical application (by the physician). It is a mark of personal recommendation, especially frequent in Andromachus.34 Fabricius, after a thorough examination of proven, demonstrated that far from pointing to a secondary status for the drug or its prescriber, it functions as a term of praise, amounting to anointing something as ein effektives Heilmittel.35 Furthermore, it is never used (in its 93 occurrences) with the dative (or equivalent) to mean proven by someone else. Finally, altered is used only once with a proper name, by Asclepiades, in the long passage on , which teems with Roman names (CMGen. 7.12, 13.1026.2; see n. 12): . (another of Halieus, as modified by Valerius Paulinus). Here, Valerius Paulinus seems the epigonos, but it is his recipe that Asclepiades gives, not the earlier version, and Paulinus appears as Halieus editor.36 In sum, it seems that Asclepiades and the other authors are less interested in presenting a hierarchy of responsibility than a genealogy of authority. Far from being indications of a less formal, more messy, unstable or subliterary origin, the various phrases serve as stamps of authenticity, a comfort to the reader, a guarantee to the practitioner.37
32 For Themison, see Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 7823 (J. Scarborough). For Servilius Damocrates, see Fabricius (n. 13), 18990; Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 226 (S. Stock). 33 Flemming (n. 3), 265 and n. 61. See e.g. CMGen. 5.12, 13.836.8: ascribed simply of Tiberius Caesar. 34 Fabricius (n. 13), 1749 for a complete discussion. 35 Ibid. 16974, esp. 170 and n. 21. 36 CMGen. 7.12, 13.1025.7: , . Other recipes by Valerius Paulinus: Asclepiades ap. Gal. 13.1027.3 (same excerpt) and CMLoc. 8.8 (liver), 13.211.13. He may be the prefect of Egypt under Hadrian. See Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 822 (P.T. Keyser). 37 We can see this by comparing two labels for the same recipe mentioning Aburnius Valens: Asclepiades ap. Gal. CMGen. 7.12, 13.1027.12: , . (another of Pompeius Sabinus, entitled the Expensive, prepared by Aburnius Valens). Here Sabinus is the source, Valens the mere composer. But a few pages earlier in the same excerpt, we had (13.1021.171022.1): [i.e. ] , (the preceding preparation should be used after the gout medicine prepared by Aburnius Valens, entitled Pompeius Expensive). Here, though the words are much the same, Valens moves into first place, while Pompeius relation (inventor, prescriber, transmitter, celebrity endorser?) is less clear. In either case, they are two names to trust. For Pompeius, see PIR2 P 648, who may be the procurator of Epirus in the next entry (PIR2 P 649); Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 684 (P.T. Keyser).
365
3. CHERCHEZ LES FEMMES The problem of the bare name in the genitive has also been dealt with by Fabricius. He outlines the usual parts of Galens entries in his drug books. Recipes begin with a (heading, rubric) which consists of various parts, not present in all cases, but which usually appear in this order: 1) the type of drug (drink, pill, plaster); 2) its name; 3) the name of the authority, that is the doctor, with whom the recipe is primarily associated; this is usually in the genitive. It does not necessarily refer to the inventor of the medicine. The name refers to the person who introduced the relevant recipe as inventor or not into the general pharmacopoeia;38 4) the source (if known); 5) the doctor who has successfully used it; 6) the patient whom he cured. That is, the simple genitive does not refer to some lesser rank of practitioner but simply to the doctor who has the greatest claim on it, and the name may subsume any number of other roles including inventor, source, authority or practitioner. The metaphor of cookery books may make the conflicting claims easier to understand. The question before us is not whether Julia Child or Nigella Lawson created such and such a dish (in cookery as in medicine often a meaningless question, as Flemming rightly points out), but rather, whether Julia Child and Nigella Lawson are accorded a roughly similar status to Gordon Ramsay and Jamie Oliver when it comes to sourcing recipes. We cannot go through every passage in Galens works or even in just his pharmacological books, but we can test Flemmings hypothesis that [recipes] described simply as belonging to x (where the name appears in the genitive without further qualification) also fall within this latter category of a more practical relationship between medicament and the name attached to it by making a literary sondage of all the passages that contain womens names. Galen gives recipes from Antiochis and Cleopatra (attested elsewhere) and is our sole source for Eugerasia, Originea, Samithra, Spendusa and Xanite.39 There are two questions then before us. Do Galens sources make an identifiable difference in quoting real vs. practical authors (or famous vs. obscure or primary vs. secondary)? And do Galens sources make an identifiable difference in quoting female vs. male authorities? As it turns out, one cannot draw any reliable inferences from the failure of Galens sources to specify the exact form of their sources. The first point to notice is that all but one of the women whose works are cited by Galen are found embedded in the writings of just two authors: Andromachus the Younger and Asclepiades. The exception is Cleopatra, whose material Galen
38 Fabricius (n. 13), 27: ber den Namen des Urhebers, d. h. des Artzes, der mit dem Rezept primr in Verbindung gebracht wird; dieser steht in der Regel im Genitiv. Es handelt sich dabei nicht notwendig um den Erfinder des Heilmittles. Die Angabe bezieht sich auf denjenigen, der das betreffende Rezept ob als Erfinder oder nicht in das bekannte Heilgut eingefhrt hat. 39 For Elephantides (?), see Appendix. Gal. CMGen.13, 13.840.3 quotes Andromachus for a remedy for condylomas ascribed (capitalized in Littr). Maia is attested as a proper name (rightly Flemming [n. 3], 265 n. 42), e.g., Attica: IG II2.1201920, SEG 37 (1987), 184; Agora XIX: Leases L 4a (SEG 21 [1965], 527); IG IX.1 2:379, etc. However, the use of the definite article would point to some rather famous, well-recognized name, and I suspect we have simply The Midwifes Dry Remedy; for a similar heading, see n. 69. See Parker (n. 7), 146; Plant (n. 27), 161.
366
seems to have taken directly from her book.40 Thus again for the most part we are dealing not with Galens presentation but that of his sources. Second, as Flemming rightly notes, all these forms of citation suggest literary transmission.41 Galen makes it clear that Asclepiades and Andromachus drew on written sources; Galen praises Asclepiades for having included the titles and details of preparation and use, and censures Andromachus for omitting the same things.42 I see no evidence that Galen or these two authors were drawing extensively on oral or subliterary forms of transmission.43 Nor does it seem correct to conclude that unless the source explicitly specifies a book with the words or the like that the recipe is likely to come from something more along the lines of the vade mecums represented by the Michigan Medical Codex.44 Third, I see no good reason to assume less formal transmission in the case of the women than in the case of similar simple names of men, some of whom turn out to be rather prominent practitioners. Let us look closely at all the passages that contain womens names and see how the men around them are cited.
4. ANDROMACHUS We may begin with the older of the two main sources, Andromachus of Crete (the Younger), who flourished c. A.D. 7090.45 There are two passages to examine. A. Galen quotes a long excerpt from Andromachus, with 24 recipes for diseases of the ear. Galen specifies the exact form of his authority and vouches for his faithful transcription.46 He introduces the first thirteen recipes, adding his own commentary, then rushes through the rest. Andromachus mixes anonymous recipes with names famous and names otherwise unknown, in no obvious order. Just as Galen has many ways of saying he has written down the text exactly, Andromachus seems to delight in stylistic variation for its own sake. We can organize his list by the citation formulas, the number of times the formula is used, and the authors position in the list: a. anonymous (10 recipes): 4, 7, 9, 11, 14, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23. b. (2): Gallus 1 and Apollonius 24.
See below. Flemming (n. 3), 267. 42 CMGen. 1.16, 13.441.9442.2; cf. CMGen. 2.1, 13.463.417; CMGen. 3.9, 13.649.57. 43 Despite the suggestion at Flemming (n. 3), 2667. Further, written transmission had been the case right from the start. For the Hippocratic corpus, see A. Hanson, Talking recipes in the gynaecological texts of the Hippocratic Corpus, in M. Wyke (ed.), Parchments of Gender (Oxford, 1998), 746 with nn. 11 and 14 and the extensive bibliography cited there, and Totelin (n. 10). 44 This seems to be the thrust of Flemming (n. 3), 267: So, presumably the sourcing of a remedy, from the books of Apollonius, or similar, is, very precisely, a reference to a published text; as distinct from the more messy, unstable, majority of medical writing. L. Youtie (ed.), Michigan Medical Codex (P.Mich. XVII), American Studies in Papyrology 35 (Atlanta, GA, 1996). 45 RE 1.2 (1894), 2154 (no. 18, M. Wellmann). Fabricius (n. 13), 1859, 201; Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 7980 (A. Touwaide). 46 CMLoc. 3.1, 12.624.15633.16. On this excerpt, given as an example of the A-class (the most authoritative), see Fabricius (n. 13), 71, 186.
41 40
367
c. (2): Solon 12, Zoilus 22. d. (2): Xenocrates 5, Prytanis 6. e. (4): Harpocration 10, Spendusa 15, Harpocras 16, Chrysanthus Gratianus 20. f. simple genitives (6): Gallus 2, King Laodicus 3, Harpalus 6 (mentioned with Prytanis), Gaius 7, and Antipater 13. If we look at the names under each of the formulas, we find that Spendusa has been keeping some dubious as well as distinguished company. None of these formulas can be used with any confidence to divide the authors into lesser or greater camps within Andromachus.47 So: a. The majority of recipes (ten) have no author.48 b. (2 recipes): These words, of course, explicitly state the form of the source (from the works of), and might seem to serve as a framing device. However, as we can see, the other formulas also refer to written works. The authors are: 1. Gallus (12.625.2): (from the books of Gallus), with the remark , (one which I use). This is Aelius Gallus (RE s.v. Aelius 59) friend of Strabo, prefect of Egypt (2524 B.C.), invader of Arabia. Here we can see one difficulty of deciding who was or was not a professional. Gallus was not merely an amateur with an occasional interest in medicine, but an authoritative writer, whose books ( ) Andromachus the Elder cites elsewhere.49 24. Apollonius (633.11): (ear medicine, very good and proven, from the books of Apollonius). This is almost certainly Apollonius Mys (late first c. B.C.), Alexandrian physician, follower of Herophilus, and voluminous author. The work in question is probably his (Easily Obtainable Drugs).50 Andromachus cites him eighteen times with a variety of introductory phrases: seven times with a genitive, six times with , four times with , once with .51 We cannot therefore conclude that
47 Though one can detect a certain chronological hierarchy of sources (though not value of authors) when some of the terms are combined, e.g. Gal. Antid. 2.10, 14.164.17165.1: , , (a Mithridatium antidote, as [written by] Xenocrates, [written/given/adapted/improved/prepared/ used] by Nicostratus, good against all deadly poisons). 48 In the list, no. 4 (626.13), 8 (628.12), 9 (628.14, with the comment Another that I have used), 11 (628.11: [ear medicine suitable for many conditions]); 14 (630.15: [another, very good]), 17 (631.10), 18 (631.13), 19 (631.15), 21 (632.6), 23 (633.6). 49 Gal. CMLoc. 7.2 (bronchitis), 13.28.10; CMLoc. 7.3 (coughs), 13.77.13. Keyser and IrbyMassie (n. 1), 345 (J. Scarborough). Cited by Asclepiades in the nom. (as giver: Antid. 2.13, 14.189.9), and three times in gen. (CMLoc. 4.7 [eyes], 12.738.7, 784.12; Antid. 2.10, 14.158.5). 50 Fabricius (n. 13), 1803; H. von Staden, Herophilus: The Art of Medicine in Early Alexandria (Cambridge, 1988), 54051, esp. 543, 5468 for a cautious assessment of the case for identity; this text = p. 553, testimonium AM 49). Brills New Pauly 1 (2002), 8823 (no. 17, Nutton). Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 11112 (G.L. Irby-Massie). 51 von Staden (n. 50), 5534, no. AM 4966. Genitive: CMLoc. 7.3 (coughs), 13.65.1, 68.16, 70.3; CMLoc. 7.4 (drawing up blood), 13.76.5; CMLoc. 8.2 (stomach), 13.136.15; CMLoc. 9.4 (colic), 13.279.8; CMGen. 7.7, 13.981.13. : CMLoc. 7.3 (coughs), 13.72.9; CMLoc. 7.6 (difficulty breathing), 13.114.2; CMLoc. 9.1 (jaundice), 13.231.9; CMLoc. 9.5 (dysentery), 13.295.10; CMLoc. 9.6 (anus), 13.308.3; CMLoc. 9.1 (kidneys), 13.326.3.
368
when Andromachus used he was drawing on written works, but when he used any other form or a simple genitive, he was now designating Apollonius Mys as a mere practical author.52 c. Two authors are cited with : 12. Solon of Smyrna (630.8). (as [written by, found in the works of] Solon the dietician). Cited only here by Andromachus, but quoted as an authority by Pliny.53 22. Zoilus of Macedon (632.15).54 , (ear medicine for hopeless cases, as [written by/practised by] Zoilus the ophthalmologist). Cited only here by Andromachus, but Zoilus was quoted as a written authority by Pliny and Asclepiades.55 His nardion collyrium was quoted by Cassius Felix, Aetius and Alexander of Tralles.56 clearly indicates the author of a written work. d. There seems to be little distinction between the use of and . For , there are two cases: 5. Xenocrates (627.10). , (another from Xenocrates, which I have used often). This is Xenocrates of Aphrodisias (fl. A.D. 5070), another extensive author whose extremely influential books were used by Pliny, and used and criticized by Galen.57 Andromachus quotes him elsewhere with and as the modifier of an anonymous recipe, .58 6. Prytanis (627.17). (another from Prytanis, that agrees with one of Harpalus). Prytanis is obscure.59 Andromachus quotes another recipe of his, this time using (CMLoc. 3.1, 13.73.5). Harpalus himself is cited three more times, only by Andromachus, twice with genitive, once with .60 e. For we have four authors:
: CMLoc. 3.1 (ears), 12.633.11 (our passage); CMLoc. 7.2 (bronchitis), 13.31.8; CMLoc. 7.3 (coughs), 13.70.11; CMLoc. 7.4 (haemorrhage), 13.78.1. : CMLoc. 9.4 (colic), 13.281.10 = von Staden (n. 50), 554, A 62: (a cure for colic as [formulated by] Publius [found] in [the books of] Potiolius and Apollonius). 52 So e.g., within 8 lines of each other, CMLoc. 7.3 (coughs), 13.70.3: ; 13.70.11: . 53 Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 748 (P.T. Keyser). Pliny HN 1.ind.207; 20.220, 235. 54 Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 850 (S. Vogt). 55 Pliny, HN 1.ind.1213; Asclepiades ap. Gal. CMLoc. 4.7, 12.752.4, 763.13 and 17, 771.14; Antid. 2.12, 14.178.13. 56 Cassius Felix 29.13 (CUF, p. 63), Aetius 7.117 (CMG 8.2, pp. 3923), and Alexander of Tralles (2.3941 Puschmann). 57 Galen: e.g. Simp. 6.praef. (11.793.13), 10.1 (12.248.10251.1). See M. Wellmann, Xenokrates aus Aphrodisias, Hermes 42 (1907), 61429; RE 9A.2 (1967), 152931 (no. 8, F. Kudlien); OCD3 1628 (W.D. Ross); Der Neue Pauly 12.2 (2002), 623 (Touwaide); Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 8367 (A. Zucker). 58 : CMLoc. 7.9 (anodynes), 13.90.17; ibid. 13.91.18 < . , . 59 RE 23.1 (1957), 1158 (no. 6, H. Diller); Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 703 (G.L. IrbyMassie). 60 CMGen. 6.14, 13.928.15, 929.1 (gen.); Antid. 2.10, 14.167.6 (). Fabricius (n. 13), 143, 23742, argues that Harpalus recipe in Antid. is part of the preceding section from Andromachus.
369
15. Spendusa (631.3): rr (for purulent ears, from Spendusa). Found only here. As Keyser notes, The glass vessel may suggest a terminus post of ca 50 BCE. The rare name is attested from the 1st c. BCE.61 16. Harpocras (631.5) of Alexandria and uncertain date.62 Andromachus cites him for five other recipes, all with .63 10. The similarly named Harpocration (629.1). Asclepiades also quotes a cure for flux apparently named after him and Theodotus (Gal. CMLoc. 4.7, 12.754.10). Irby-Massie points out that the name is unattested before the first c. A.D. and rare in the second or third. So he may be a contemporary of Andromachus.64 20. Chrysanthus Gratianus (631.17) is found only here.65 f. The six instances of a simple genitive are also a mixed bag. 2. Andromachus second mention of Gallus (625.13) is a genitive with his nomen added ( ), but this may be simply because his books have already been mentioned. 3. King Laodicus (626.6).66 , (ear medicine of King Laodicus, which I have used constantly). King Laodicus is otherwise unknown and we may suspect textual corruption.67 However, the next two doctors cited by bare genitives are important sources: 7. Gaius (628.9). (another of the divine Gaius, suitable). The divine Gaius is Gaius of Naples, cited only here by Andromachus, but cited in sixteen other recipes quoted by Asclepiades and twice by Galen himself, only in the genitive.68 13. Antipater the Pharmacologist (630.11); probably a contemporary of Augustus.69 Andromachus cites him seven times, only in the genitive.70 Yet he is an important author, whom Galen labels as a doctor (), whose published books he cites, whose antidotes he quotes and uses, and whose collected letters on medical topics in at least three volumes are used by Caelius Aurelianus.71
Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 756 (P.T. Keyser). RE 3A.2 (1929), 1610 (F. E. Kind). RE 7.2 (1912), 2410 (no. 4, H. Gossen and A. Stein); Fabricius (n. 13), 226; Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 356 (A. Touwaide). 63 CMLoc. 6.6 (12.943.6); CMGen. 4.8 (13.729.11), CMGen. 5.13 (13.838.8 and 840.18), CMGen. 7.7 (13.978.14). 64 RE 7.2 (1912), 2416 (no. 9, Gossen). Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 357 (G.L. IrbyMassie). 65 Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 473 (G.L. Irby-Massie) 66 Galen guarantees the accuracy of his citation: (number three [Andromachus] writes word for word as follows). On these forms of attestation to exactness, see Fabricius (n. 13), 7580. 67 Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 501 (G.L. Irby-Massie) for possibilities. Might the name be hiding Zeno of Laodicea, whose famous theriac Andromachus cites elsewhere (Antid. 2.9, 14.163) or Themison of Laodicea (in Syria), called the founder of the Methodist sect (see below)? 68 Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 334 (G.L. Irby-Massie) and 3345 (F. Stok). He may be identical with Gaius the follower of Herophilus; von Staden (n. 50), 5669. 69 On the various Antipaters and their possible overlap, see Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 967 (A. Touwaide) and 97 (G.L. Irby-Massie). RE 1.2 (1894), 2517 (no. 32, Wellmann). G. Watson, Theriac and Mithridatium. A Study in Therapeutics (London, 1966), 3743. 70 CMLoc. 7.3 (coughs), 13.66.11; CMLoc. 8.2 (stomach), 13.136.11; CMLoc. 9.2 (spleen), 13.239.9; CMGen. 6.13, 13.841.15; CMGen. 6.14, 13.931.4 and 11; CMGen. 7.7, 13.983.15. 71 : Loc. aff. 8.293.8, 297.7. Books ( ): 13.292.1. Antidotes: Antid. 2.1, 14.1089; 2.10, 14.160. Caelius, Chron. 2.157 (CML 6.1.1, p. 640.1112); 2.187 (CML 6.1.1, p. 658.14).
62 61
370
B. We can perform a similar exercise on the second passage from Andromachus, which contains the references to Samithra and Xanite. Galen copies a long extract on cures for diseases of the anus: (CMLoc. 9.6, 13.307.18312.5), listing 21 cures. Famous names seem to cluster at the start, but they are randomly interspersed with anonymous recipes. It is interesting to see the same variety of names and forms of citation. a. Here we have eight anonymous recipes: 1 (13.308.1, which I use), 3 (308.5), 6 (308.15), 7 (309.2, ), 8 (309.7), 13 (310.7), 16 (310.15), 18 (311.5), 19 (311.7), 21 (312.1). b. None are identified as , but we cannot draw the conclusion that all the authorities in this passage did not write books or were at best mere practical authors. c. includes many famous names: 2. Apollonius Mys (308.3), see above. 4. Nicostratus, probably first c. A.D. (308.8).72 Andromachus cites him eight more times, five with , twice with , once with the genitive.73 5. Herophilus, fl. c. 280260 B.C. (308.10). One of the most famous and influential physicians of the ancient world.74 Andromachus cites him only one other time, with .75 10. Heras of Cappadocia, probably contemporary with Augustus (309.17).76 A major source for Galen, who preserves some two dozen extracts, yet here in Andromachus (who feels free to alter some of the ingredients) he is marked by the simple genitive. Elsewhere Andromachus cites him with (three times), (twice), and plain genitive (once).77 A papyrus containing a scrap of his work survives and may show something of his popularity.78 d. Two with : 9. Rusticus (309.12). `R, (the anal medicine from Rusticus, which I use). This is Rusticus Ambrosius of Puteoli (c. A.D. 40 80), a pupil/associate () of Isidore of Antioch, who was in turn a pupil/
Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 582 (P.T. Keyser). : CMLoc. 8.2, 13.139; CMLoc. 9.4, 13.279.14; CMLoc. 9.5, 13.299.15; CMLoc. 9.6, 13.308.8; Antid. 2.1, 14.112.9. : Antid. 2.10, 14.165.1; Antid. 2.17, 14.208.5. Genitive: CMGen 7.7, 13.985.7. 74 This recipe is von Staden (n. 50), 423, no. 259. See also Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 38790 (J. Scarborough). 75 CMLoc 7.4, 13.79.2. 76 RE 8.1 (1912), 529 (no. 4, Gossen); Fabricius (n. 13), 1835, 2426; Brills New Pauly 6 (2005), 1834 (A. Touwaide); Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 374 (A. Touwaide); Korpela (n. 6), 169, no. 81. 77 : CMLoc. 7.3 (cough), 13.63.9; CMGen. 1.15, 13.430.12 (an alteration of standard recipe); CMGen. 2.15, 13.533.3. : CMLoc. 10.2 (sciatica), 13.338.11; CMGen. 7.7, 13.986.16. Genitive: CMLoc. 9.5 (dysentery), 13.297.12. 78 For the papyrus (Pack2 2382), see I. Andorlini, Ricette mediche nei papiri, Atti e memorie dellAccademia toscana di scienze e lettere La Colombaria 46 (1981), 3380, at 415, and Lapporto dei papiri alla conoscenza della scienza medica antica, ANRW 2.37.1 (1993), 458562, at 478 (no. 10). M.-H. Marganne, Inventaire analytique des papyrus grecs de mdecine (Geneva, 1981), 1345 (no. 71).
73
72
371
associate of Andromachus himself. Scribonius Largus quotes him.79 Andromachus quotes him in two other places: once for a substitution in a recipe, with ; once, expressing some doubt about the magical rituals which accompany the recipe of his (second-hand) disciple, using .80 11. Tyrannus (310.2). Tyrannus is attested as a medical professional only here, and though the name is not uncommon in the Roman world, it is possible that this man was the doctor to the empress Livia.81 e. The plain genitives are a mixed bag: 12. Samithra (310.45), with the note (very useful). The name seems not otherwise attested.82 14. Gallus again (310.9: 14). We cannot conclude that Gallus was a real author at CMLoc. 3.1, 12.625.2 ( ) but a lesser source here. 15. Cleophantus (310.12) with the note (which I use). Cleophantus might be the physician mentioned by Cicero in the poisoning case of Pro Cluentio 47.83 Andromachus cites him for two other recipes: a cure for hydropsy (genitive) and a Mithridatium he created with Antipater ().84 17. Xanite (311.2), with the note (very useful). The name is otherwise unattested (though not ill-formed).85 20. , (311.10, of Icodotus by which Astanus was cured). Neither name appears to be attested elsewhere.86 What do we see in Andromachus forms of citation? 1) That Andromachus uses a variety of citation forms even for the same author; 2) that all of them refer to written texts; 3) that none of them is especially privileged over the others. For his citations of women, we can safely say that, in the text of Andromachus, Spendusa (whoever she may be) with her is set out as the equal of Chrysanthus Gratianus (whoever he may be) with his , or Harpocras of Alexandria with his and . She is not marked in any way as the inferior of Antipater or the divine Gaius (mere genitives). We might also conclude that if Andromachus perhaps did not consider Samithra and Xanite (in the genitive) to be
79 RE 1.2 (1894), 1812 (no. 3, Wellmann); Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 64 (P.T. Keyser). Scribonius Largus 152. Chartiers Latin version of Asclepiades ap. Gal. Antid. 2.14, 14.184 reads Medicamentum Rustici a vipera morsi, but the potentially misleading capital letter is simply for (the cure of the farmer who was bitten by a viper). 80 CMGen. 2.7, 13.507.18: `R . CMLoc. 10.1, 13.325.7: `R . 81 CIL 6.3985; Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 819 (P.T. Keyser). 82 Parker (n. 7), 145; Plant (n. 27), 162. P.T. Keyser in Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 725 speculates that the name might be Ta-nitr- with the usual Ta- prefix forming Coptic feminine names (She of the goddess) or . Neither seems likely. There are hundreds of singleton names in LGPN. 83 Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 4823 (A. Touwaide). Probably not the same as Cleophanus of Ceos (c. 270240 B.C.). 84 CMLoc 9.3 (hydropsy), 13.262.9 and Antid. 2.1, 14.108.9. 85 Parker (n. 7), 145. Keyser speculates that the name may be a brand-name, a distortion of Azanites, Ponanites, or else emendable to Naxites, i.e. a remedy from Naxos. However, the name, if not correct, might equally be an error for any of the numerous names in -, or the like: Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 835; Plant (n. 27). 163. 86 See Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 360 for speculation that Icodotus may be an error for Herodotus (though this name, too, is not known as that of a physician) and his patient Astanus may be the general Aristaenus (fl. 198186 B.C.). Perhaps a mistake for Herodotus the Pneumaticist (Gal. 13.789.1)?
372
in the same class as Apollonius Mys, Nicostratus, Herophilus or Heras (with ), he thought them worthy sources to be mentioned alongside such authors as the professional Cleophantus and the studious amateur Gallus (in the mere genitive). It does not seem correct to consign them to the less prestigious, more workaday, portion of medicines literary culture (Flemming [n. 3], 267) merely on the form or infrequency of citation in Galen or his sources.
5. ASCLEPIADES Three other womens names are found embedded in the text of Asclepiades Pharmacin (fl. c. A.D. 90100). Galen praises him for his careful cataloguing of recipes (according to place), which he drew from Andromachus and many others.87 A. Eugerasia and Antiochis show up in Galens chapter on diseases of the spleen (CMLoc. 9.2, 13.236.15256.10). Galen has taken material from Asclepiades and arranged it by type, first internal: drinks, then pills; then external: poultices, etc.88 First come five drinks without authors (13.241.14242.11), followed by one labelled The paeonion of Andreas (13.242.11). This simple genitive denotes Andreas of Carystus (d. 217 B.C.), pupil of Soranus, personal physician to Ptolemy IV Philopator, and voluminous author.89 In the section on pills (13.242.14244.11), he begins with two anonymous recipes, then one of Chrysermus (13.243.12244.4), followed immediately by another of Eugerasia (13.244.411). The first bare genitive refers to Chrysermus of Alexandria, follower of Herophilus, teacher of Heraclides of Erythrae and Apollonius Mys, whose books were one of Plinys sources.90 This is his only recipe in Galen.91 Therefore infrequency of citation cannot be used to argue lower status or estimation. The other bare genitive is the otherwise unknown Eugerasia.92 However, there is nothing in the form of citation that allows us to claim that one was a real author, while the other merely allowed, or encouraged, others to do it for her. This is followed by two anonymous plasters and then various drugs and mixtures. The first belongs to a certain Idius (in the genitive, 245.310).93 Two anonymous preparations are followed by one which Andromachus himself used ( : 246.17) and then one used by Trypho of Gortyn (246.818). Trypho (fl. c. 15 B.C. A.D. 20) was a famed doctor. Scribonius Largus called him teacher and surgeon. His drugs, especially his plasters (some for gladiators wounds), were frequently quoted by other authorities and found imperial favour.94 Elsewhere, Asclepiades
87 Fabricius (n. 13), 1928, 24653. J.-M. Jacques, La mthode de Galien pharmacologue dans les traits sur les mdicaments composs, in A. Debru (ed.), Galen on Pharmacology (Leiden, 1997), 10328. 88 Fabricius (n. 13), 196. 89 von Staden (n. 50), 4727; Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 473 (G.L. Irby-Massie). 90 Pliny HN 1.ind.22, 32.71. See von Staden (n. 50), 5238; Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 778 (G.L. Irby-Massie). 91 Though his pulse theories are discussed at Diff. puls. 4.9, 8.7413. 92 Parker (n. 7), 145; Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 316 (P.T. Keyser). 93 Emending to with Keyser: Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 432. Andromachus cites an enema : CMLoc. 9.5 (dysentery), 13.297.3. 94 Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 817 (J. Scarborough).
373
cites him with the simple genitive (13.153.3, see below; 13.847.5). An anonymous cure guaranteed to work in one day (247.115) is followed by one of Areus of Tarsus (247.15248.5). The simple genitive refers to the celebrated teacher (fl. c. A.D. 5477), dedicatee of Dioscorides (Pr. 1), leading expert on medicinal minerals, cited ten other times in Galen, and author of a Life of Hippocrates, praised by Soranus.95 B. Antiochis Next, Galen quotes a section of Book 4 of Asclepiades External Medicines (dedicated to Marcella) with fourteen cures for diseases of the spleen and dropsy, one of which belongs to Antiochis (CMLoc. 9.2, 13.248.6254.7).96 Galen vouches for the word for word accuracy of his transcription.97 Nearly all the other recipes in this section are anonymous (nos. 16, 8, 1011, 1314), though 10 was used by Andromachus (251.1017). Antiochis own recipe (250.38) is introduced with the bare genitive: , , , , (mixture of Antiochis for diseases of the spleen, dropsy, sciatica and arthritis prepared by Fabilla). The eighth recipe (250.918), anonymous, was also prepared by Fabilla, as we have seen (nn. 22, 27). Antiochis shares this section with a recipe (251.19) either created or extensively altered by Asclepiades himself all the verbs are first person plural.98 The other recipe with an author (no. 12, 253.39) is also marked with a simple genitive: (another drug of Trypho from Gortyn in Crete, which has proved successful). Here the relatively well-known Antiochis stands beside the positively famous Trypho, both with recipes denoted by their names in the genitive. We are lucky enough to know a good deal about Antiochis of Tlos (a moderatesized town in Lycia). A statue base, dated to the first half of the first century B.C., reads:
[] . Antiochis of Tlos, daughter of Diodotus, commended by the council and the people of Tlos for her experience in the doctors art, has set up this statue of herself.99
95 In Asclepiades, genitive: CMLoc. 3.1 (ears), 12.636.13; CMGen. 5.11, 13.827.14; CMLoc. 8.5 (stomach), 13.182.1; CMGen. 5.11, 13.829.9; CMGen. 5.14, 13.852.12; : CMLoc. 10.2 (sciatica), 13.347.4. In Andromachus, genitive: CMGen. 5.13, 13.840.7. In Crito, genitive: CMLoc. 5.3 (face), 12.829.11. Note the differing citation styles not only between but within authors. We can catch a glimpse of the passing on of recipes, where Dioscorides gives a recipe to his teacher, Areus, which is included by Asclepiades in Book 5 of External Medicines (CMGen. 5.15, 13.857.1213: ). See above (n. 17), for Areus private collection. 96 Antiochis recipe and the following three (nos. 710) are repeated at CMLoc. 10.2 (sciatica), 13.341.2343.3, with additional headings and a note by Galen. 97 CMLoc. 9.2 (spleen), 13.248.8: . 98 (a mixture that we call Golden), etc. 99 TAM 2.595; N. Fratl and L. Robert, Les stles funraires de Byzance grco-romaine (Paris, 1964), 175, 178; M. Guarducci, Epigrafia greca (Rome, 1967) 3.1034, fig. 44, and Lepigrafia greca dalle origini al tardo impero (Rome, 1987), 1623; H.W. Pleket, Epigraphica, vol. 2 Texts on the Social History of the Greek World (Leiden, 1969), 278 (no. 12); RE Suppl. 14 (1974), 489 (J. Benedum, Antiochis 8); Korpela (n. 6), 160 (no. 28); Parker (n. 7), 1345, 141; M.R. Lefkowitz and M.B. Fant, Womens Life in Greece and Rome (Baltimore, 20053), 264 (no.
374
Though brief, this inscription tells us a number of things. First, her father is almost certainly the Diodotus cited as an authority in the Materia medica of Dioscorides (first c. A.D.; pr. 2). Antiochis was therefore the daughter of a famous physician and like many learned women of the past probably received her first encouragement and education from her father. Second, Antiochis received official honours from her city. Such awards were made only to those who had been recognized by a vote of the city as public benefactors. This honour and the general reference to the healing art probably indicates a city-wide medical practice, not necessarily then confined to women nor to childbirth.100 The language of the inscription is similar to that on a statue base set up for her fellow citizen and rough contemporary, Moschus:
. The people of Tlos consecrated this to Moschus Bellerophonteus, son of Philinus, who served as a doctor to the citizenry, a hero.101
Comparison to similar inscriptions shows that she, too, might have held the office of city physician. Such doctors were appointed by the city, paid a regular fee and given exemption from taxes and other public duties.102 Third, she was well off. Such statues were usually allowed only to major civic benefactors and the donor not infrequently specified the cost. Besides her recipe, we are lucky enough to know more about Antiochis from other sources. Galen quotes from the set of books that Heraclides of Tarentum dedicated to her.103 In this case, the fact that there
369); Flemming (n. 7), 391 (no. 29); F. Ferrandini Troisi, La donna nella societ ellenistica: testimonianze epigrafiche (Bari, 2000), 1718; Samama (n. 7), 38990 (no. 280); Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 94 (P.T. Keyser). 100 Kudlien (n. 2 [1979]), 89. 101 TAM 2.595; Oehler (n. 4), 9; Samama (n. 7), 389 (no. 279); first c. B.C. Moschus received posthumous heroization. 102 V. Nutton, Two notes on immunities, JRS 61 (1971), 5263; id., Archiatri and the medical profession in antiquity, PBSR 45 (1977), 191226; R. Jackson, Doctors and Diseases in the Roman Empire (London, 1988), 57; E. Fischer-Homberger, Krankheit der Frau und andere Arbeiten zur Medizingeschichte der Frau (Berne, 1979), 166. For a woman as archiatrin, see the tombstone of Auguste, from Gdanmaa in Lycaonia (esmeli Zebir), fourth to sixth c. A.D. MAMA 7 (1956), 566; Fratl and Robert (n. 99), 177; Nutton, Archiatri, 198, 219 (no. 24); Parker (n. 7), 1357, 144 (no. 41); Flemming (n. 7), 390 (no. 28); Samama (n. 7), 4423 (no. 342): . <> , <> [] [] [] [, ] [() ()] () [ ] (I, Aurelius Gaius, chief-physician, set up this stele for my lifes companion, Auguste, chief-physician, who gave healing to the bodies of many sick people, in exchange for which Jesus Christ the Saviour will give her ). = (epenthetic -/ -; <> = (gen. for dat.); for ; = . Cf. Mk. 3:13 and I Tim. 5.4. A similar statue was set up by Aurelius [Ponto]ni[a]nos Asclepiades, undoubtedly a doctor, to his wife, Aurelia Alexandria Zosime, [] [][] (because of her medical knowledge). Adada in Pisidia, third c. A.D. See J.R.S. Sterrett, The Wolfe Expedition to Asia Minor (Boston, 1888), 3.3023 (no. 424); IGRR 3.376; Oehler (n. 4), 8; Fratl and Robert (n. 99), 175; Samama (n. 7), 4378 (no. 339). 103 Fabricius (n. 13), 200; Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 3701 (F. Stok). Samama (n. 7), 390 n. 14, doubts Antiochis of Tlos is the same as Heraclides of Tarentums dedicatee because of the distance between Tarentum and Tlos, but this argument carries little weight: proximity is not needed for dedication, and ethnics do not limit residence. Heraclides also dedicated a set of books to one Astydamas, about whom we know nothing (CMGen. 4.7, 13.717.6; Antid. 2.13, 14.181.13). So, Agathinus of Sparta dedicated his book on the pulse to his pupil Herodotus
375
is only a single recipe in Galen cannot be taken as a sign of marginal status in the medical world. C. Origeneia 1. Asclepiades records three recipes for Origeneia.104 The first is in an excerpt from Book 1 of Internal Medicines (CMLoc. 7.2 [runny nose], 13.56.1461.18).105 Most of the nineteen recipes are anonymous; the ones with authors all have their names in the simple genitive. These include Antonius Musa (3, 57.36), Pantaenus (6, 57.1658.4), Plato (13, 60.46: [another entitled Platos]; 15, 60.113), Bassus (14, 60.611: ), and Proxenus (19, 61.1118). Antonius Musa needs little introduction: physician to Augustus, one of the most frequently cited authors in both Greek and Latin.106 The others are obscure. Pantainos is also attested by Celsus 5.18.12.107 This Plato is the author of On Phlebotomy, surviving only in a Latin translation.108 Bassus is unknown as a medical name.109 We know nothing else about Proxenus, except that Antonius Musa employed his cough medicine. 2. Galen CMLoc. 7.4 (spitting up blood), 13.82.988.14 preserves a lengthy chunk of Asclepiades in his own words ( ). Of the nineteen recipes, eleven are anonymous, one was used by Charixenes (13.85.58), one has (Nicaretus, 87.610) and the remaining six have just the genitive. Nicaretus was a famous Asclepiadean physican, a fragment of whose work is quoted in papyrus.110 He was castigated by Dioscorides (who none the less cited his observations), but praised
(possibly of Tarsus) (Gal. Diff. puls. 4.10, 8.749.19751.4); Dioscorides of Anazarbus dedicated a work to Areus of Tarsus (see above); Oribasius of Pergamum dedicated books to Eunapius of Sardis. See Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 423 (A. Touwaide), 3834 (A. Touwaide) and 5956 (J. Scarborough). Heraclides and Antiochis may have met at any point or known each other only by reputation. Benedum (n. 99), 48 assumes (on no clear basis) that Antiochis worked at Rome. Nothing argues against the identification, and three (or two) different women, all involved in medicine at the same time, all with the same name, is a less likely scenario. Pleket dated the inscription to the first c. A.D. (giving no reasons), but it was rightly placed in the first c. B.C. by Guarducci, Benedum and Samama. The broken-bar alpha and the form of omega (closed circle with a bar under) point to the earlier date, though of course there can be no certainty in these matters (for the difficulties of dating, see B.H. McLean, An Introduction to Greek Epigraphy of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods from Alexander the Great down to the Reign of Constantine (323 B.C.A.D. 337) [Ann Arbor, 2002], 415). Nutton was originally cautious because of Plekets dating (Roman medicine: tradition, confrontation, assimilation, in ANRW 2.37.1 [1993], 72 n. 102) but now accepts the identification (n. 2 [2004], 1968). See Flemming (n. 3), 2656 for a cautious summing up. 104 Parker (n. 7), 145; Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 596 (P.T. Keyser). 105 Fabricius (n. 13), 196. 106 RE 1.2 (1896), 26334 (Wellmann); M. Michler, Principis medicus: Antonius Musa, ANRW 2.37.1 (1993), 75785; Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 101 (J. Scarborough). 107 See Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 610 (P.T. Keyser) for the proper form of the name. 108 H. Diels, Die Handschriften der antiken rzte (Berlin, 19057), 2.86; RE 20.2 (1950), 2542 (no. 10, J. Schmidt); Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 667 (G.L. Irby-Massie); possibly later than Diogenes Laertius, since he is not mentioned in 3.109. 109 Here the genitive might indicate possession rather that authorship, if the Bassus is C. Laecanius Bassus, consul in A.D. 64 and patron of Areus of Tarsus. 110 Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 5756 (J. Scarborough). Papyrus: Pack2 2388. V. Gazza, Prescrizioni mediche nei papyri dellEgitto grecoromano, Aegyptus 35 (1955), 86110, at 967 (improved readings), and Aegyptus 36 (1956) 73114. Marganne (n. 78), 291 (no. 157).
376
by Soranus for his book on seizures.111 He was quoted by Asclepiades for seven other recipes for a variety of ailments in a variety of ways, and his cure for rabies was versified by Damocrates.112 The authors in the simple genitive are: a. Charixenes again (2, 82.1783.3): a major source for Asclepiades, who cites ten other recipes, two with , the other eight with simple genitives.113 Note that Charixenes makes his appearance twice in the same list, once as a user/prescriber, once as the author/authority/possessor (gen.). It is hard to see a substantially different relationship between name and drug based on the different forms of citation. b. Arrabaeus (3, 83.48): Only here with any certainty.114 c. Amarantus (9, 84.1085.1): Amarantus of Alexandria (c. first c. A.D.), grammarian, who wrote a commentary on Theocritus and On the Theatre. Also cited by Galen for a recipe for sore feet (Antid. 2.17, 14.208.15209.8).115 Not apparently primarily a medical professional. d. Origeneia (10, 85.14). e. The Neapolitan, i.e. Gaius of Naples (16, 86.1787.6): see above. f. Diocles of Chalcedon (18, 87.1114): only here.116 3. Galen CMLoc. 8, 13.140.367.2, copies word for word ( , 142.2) a large section of Asclepiades, Internal Medicines Book 1 on stomach problems interspersed with his own lengthy commentary. Of eighteen recipes, only three have names, Origeneia (143.13145.2) and Themison (158.15162.16) are in the genitive; but Mantias (162.16164.10) has an actual title (from The Powers of Plants by Mantias). This is Mantias the Herophilean (c. 16590 B.C.), teacher of Heraclides of Tarentum, hailed by Galen as virtually the founder of pharmacology,117 author of the and (The Pharmacist or In the Doctors Office), and yet only two of his recipes make it into Galen.118 Origeneia here shares her simple genitive with Themison, yet this famous student of Asclepiades of Bithynia was considered by many to be the founder of the Methodist sect, and was the author of On Chronic Diseases (three volumes), Acute
111 Diosc. pr. 2. and 1.73.2; see G.A. Gerhard, Dai papiri della Societ Italiana. Frammento medico sulle propriet terapeutiche dell asfalto, in SIFC NS 12 (1935), 934. For Soranus, see Cael. Aur. Chron. 2.86 (620 Drabkin; CML 6.1.1, p. 596). 112 Asclepiades ap. Gal. CMLoc. 3.1 (migraine), 12.634.1: (cf. Scrib. 39); CMLoc 7.1 (bronchitis), 13.96.11 (), 13.98.3 (gen.), 13.110.3 (gen.); CMLoc. 8.5 (stomach), 13.180.11 (gen.); CMLoc 9.1 (jaundice), 13.232.13 (gen.), 13.233.12 (gen.). Damocrates ap. Gal. Antid. 2.15, 14.196201. 113 Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 471 (A. Touwaide). : CMLoc. 8.4 (bringing up blood), 13.85.6; CMLoc. 9.1 (jaundice), 13.233.8. Genitive: CMLoc. 3.1 (ears), 12.635.4, 638.1; CMLoc. 3.3 (nose), 12.685.3; CMLoc. 7.2 (bronchitis), 13.48.9, 49.1, 50.4; CMLoc. 7.5 (anodynes), 13.102.3; CMLoc. 7.5 (difficult breathing), 13.108.16. Also cited by Crito ap. Gal. CMLoc. 5.3 (face), 12.829.4: ; also twice by Aetius 8.56 (429.22 Olivier). 114 Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 1623 (P.T. Keyser). Khn gives the name as Arrabianus, but the attested form is Arrabaeus. It originates in the royal house of Lyncus (N. Macedonia) but is widely attested. The name is probably hidden in the of Gal. Antid, 2.12, 14.179.17 and the Arabis cuiusdam of Cel. 5.18.16. 115 Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 623 (G.L. Irby-Massie). 116 Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 257 (P.T. Keyser). 117 Gal. CMGen. 2.1, 13.462.1015; CMGen. 2.5, 13.502.712. 118 This and CMGen. 4.14, 13.751.14 (gen.): notice here how Galen can quote the title of the authors book and then simply list the recipe with the genitive.
377
Diseases, Hygiene and Letters.119 Galen cites his poem for the antidote he made () with opium poppy as recorded by () Damocrates.120 But from this one cannot conclude that Mantias was a real author and that Themison was merely a manufacturer. Both are clearly medical scholars of the first rank and the difference in citation form does not indicate a difference in their merits or status as authorities for Asclepiades or Galen. Origeneia is cited in the genitive, which puts her in the company of virtual unknowns such as Proxenus, Arrabaeus and Diocles of Chalcedon, but it also puts her among major authors such as Antonius Musa, Charixenes, Gaius of Naples and Themison. The mere form of citation in Asclepiades, therefore, tells us very little.
6. CLEOPATRA Cleopatra represents a different form of citation. Galen quotes three healthy extracts from Cleopatras book () (one volume, the title is in the singular).121 Each is introduced with the same sort of formulas that he uses for similar extracts from Andromachus, Asclepiades, Archigenes and his other primary authors, each time naming the book and asserting that he is scrupulously following her diction. The passages are: A. Gal. CMLoc. 1.2 (alopecia), 12.403.15405.17.122 Eight recipes with Galens commentary.123
119 Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 7823 (J. Scarborough). Galen cites him as using a drug: CMGen. 7.12, 13.1009.17. 120 See above, n. 32. 121 The other sources are Paul. 3.2 ( : a work on hairdressing); Aetius 8.6 (2.408.1821 CMG: body lotion). See Plant (n. 27), 13544 (translations and notes). There is a later mention of (Cleopatras Art of Hairdressing), perhaps a title, by Michael Italicus, Bp. of Philippopolis, Oration 15 (between 1118 and 1138) to Irene Doukaina (p. 149.6, ed. Gautier; previously printed in Anecd. Ox. 3.164.15). There is also a set of weights and measures taken , where Galens title in the singular has become plural. This circulated as part of a collection of similar tables under the name of Galen ( ), [Gal.] 19.76771 = Hultsch, Metrologicorum scriptorum reliquiae 18646/1971: fr. 60, pp. 2336). However, the table is more often found in a large number of alchemical MSS, some of which also feature a magical diagram for making gold inscribed , or the Book of Comarius, Philosopher and High Priest Who Was Teaching Cleopatra the Divine the Sacred Art of the Philosophers Stone or the Dialogue of the Philosophers and Cleopatra (G. Luck, Arcana Mundi: Magic and the Occult in the Greek and Roman Worlds [Baltimore, 2006], 44854). M. Berthelot, Les origines de lalchimie (Paris, 1886), 5364, 111, 129, 13940, 1724; F.S. Taylor, A survey of Greek alchemy, JHS (1930), 113 accordingly attributed the set of weights and measures to the alchemical tradition. Gautier (this note), 149 n. 13, also attributes Michael Italicus mention to Cleopatra the Alchemist. See Plant (n. 27), 1457. The text was translated and circulated in the Arabic world: B. Dodge (ed. and tr.), The Fihrist of al-Nadim; A Tenth-century Survey of Muslim Culture, 2 vols. (New York, 1970), 2.852. 122 .] , . 123 The article in Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 482 (M. de Nardis) needs correction: Galen records three of Kleopatras recipes; rather three excerpts with a total of eighteen recipes. It also assumes that the Cleopatra mentioned was the Egyptian queen.
378
B. ibid. 1.2 bis (hair loss), 12.432.12434.2.124 Five recipes with Galens commentary. C. ibid. 1.7, 12.492.6493.12.125 Five recipes with Galens commentary. Fabricius suggested that Galen might have used an intermediary source, in this case Crito, physician to Trajan and author of a four-volume .126 In this he is followed by Flemming and de Nardis. Fabricius did not include these passages from Cleopatra in his list of Galens excerpts from Crito, but he noted that each section from Cleopatra is immediately preceded or followed by one from Crito and suspected Crito as the immediate source.127 This, however, is not quite correct. In the first section, dealing with alopecia (12.381.11421.3), the order is Heras, Crito, Heraclides (taken from Crito),128 Cleopatra, Archigenes, Asclepiades of Bithynia (who devoted an entire book to it) and Soranus, ending with a miscellany. In the second section, devoted to hair loss (426.9439.3), the order is Heras, Archigenes, Cleopatra, Galens paragraph on the distinction between (properly a part of the art of medicine) and (which is not), then Crito.129 In the third passage, on dandruff (463.15496.5), the order is Archigenes, Apollonius, Crito, Cleopatra and Soranus. A passage of Galen in this section on cosmetics has been used to argue for Crito as the source (12.445.14446.3):
, . , . , . Although Archigenes did not blush to write such things, one might grant greater indulgence to Crito who practised medicine in the imperial court. Heraclides of Tarentum appears to have written about many well-tested drugs in the theory of make-up, even though luxury did not preoccupy women as much as it now does. But Crito gathered all the drugs of Heraclides and Cleopatra and all the other doctors in the years after them.
Rather than showing Galens dependency on Crito for his knowledge of the other writers on cosmetics, this seems to advertise the fact that Galen views Crito as a later and lesser source. Galen carefully points out both when he is quoting a section of Heraclides embedded in Crito, and when he is citing Heraclides works directly,
124 .] . 125 .] . 126 Fabricius (n. 13), 2002, who makes the same sort of argument about Galens quotations from Asclepiades of Prusa, which he may have taken from Soranus. For Crito, see J. Scarborough, Crito, physician to Trajan: historian and pharmacist, in J. Eadie and J. Ober (edd.), The Craft of the Ancient Historian (Lanham, MD, 1985), 387405. 127 Fabricius (n. 13), 1902 (Crito), 2012 (Cleopatra); Flemming (n. 3), 268. 128 CMLoc. 1.2 (alopecia), 12.402.39, where at least the first recipe must be cited from Crito. The preceding selection from Crito (401.413) begins with a recipe from Heraclides. Fabricius (n. 13), 80, 122, 200. 129 Cf. CMLoc. 1.4 (depilatories), 12.45053 and Gal. Thras. 910, 5.8212.
379
which he marks with the title of the book. He does the same for Cleopatra.130 If Galen were dependent on Crito as an intermediary source for Cleopatra, we would expect the citations to resemble more closely the format where he cites Heraclides ap. Crito vs. Heraclides directly or Asclepiades of Bithynia ap. Soranus vs. Asclepiades directly.131 We are justified in assuming that, as in the other cases where he cites a book by title, he is citing that book itself. In sum, while it is not impossible that Galen drew on Crito as an intermediary source for Cleopatra, there is little to recommend the idea, any more than there is for suggesting Crito as an intermediary for any of the other writers.132 Flemmings summary for the position of Cleopatra is correct: She remains active sometime in the first century B.C. or A.D., and, at least for Galen, stands, without comment, alongside various male medical writers. Not only is it clear that Galen thought that Cleopatra was an authority on the level of Heraclides, but so did Crito.
7. NAMES The name Cleopatra creates a problem for some, but there is nothing to show that the first name that leaps to our minds leapt to Galens. Instead, there is good reason not to identify the medical author with the famous queen of Egypt. The name is one of the most common,133 and no source identifies the medical writer with the queen before Aetius in the sixth century. Galen never does so.134 He knows, of course, all about the Egyptian queen and famously describes her death by spitting-cobra bite (Ther.Pis. 8, 14.235). It would be odd, if he thought that these recipes came from so interesting a source, that he made no mention of it.135 Certain other names of women writing on medical matters have been subject to suspicion. So Dean-Jones on the Aspasia quoted at length by Aetius:
However, when Aetius attributes several chapters on gynaecological matters to Aspasia, the famous companion of Pericles in the fifth century BC, it is probable the attribution is apocryphal, though the work could be by a later Aspasia who was equated with Pericles
Fabricius (n. 13), 200. CMLoc. 1.1 (alopecia), 12.410.8414.16 and 12.416.26; see n. 128 above and n. 149 below. 132 It is odd that scholars have been quick to cook Cleopatras goose while not applying the same sauce to Heraclides. For an exception, see Fabricius (n. 13), 80, 122, 200. 133 163 times in the five vols. of LGPN published so far. 134 Flemming (n. 3), 268: He gives no indication that either he, or anyone else, thought that a royal author was involved here whether Cleopatra VII or any of her predecessors but rather places Cleopatra alongside Heracleides of Tarentum, and other later iatroi, whose medicaments were collected by Crito. 135 Contrast his encomium on Attalus. Some scholars have thought that these recipes, though not actually from the hand of the most famous bearer of this name, might still have some connection with her court; so Fabricius (n. 13), 202, comparing the pharmacological interests of other Hellenistic monarchs (Attalus, Antiochus Philometor, Mithridates). However, I am sceptical of some of these traditions as well; see L. Totelin, Mithradates antidote a pharmacological ghost, Early Science and Medicine 9 (2004), 119. A. Hanson, A title tag: PCtYBR inv. 4006, in I. Andorlini (ed.), Testi medici su papiro (Florence, 2004), 20919, has suggested that a book label reading might be assigned to Cleopatras personal physician, called Olympus in Plut. Ant. 82. Even if () means daily regimen and even if we can identify an Olympius with this specific Olympus (both very common names), this still is some way from a book of cosmetics from the queen herself.
131 130
380
Aspasia because the latter was the only woman renowned for her intelligence during the time of Hippocrates.136
It is just assumed that Aetius must be thinking of the Aspasia best known to us. However, Aetius nowhere makes such an identification. Aspasia is also quite a common name (as is the masculine, Aspasius),137 and there is no reason to presuppose that Aetius could only have been thinking of Pericles Aspasia. In short, we have no more reason to doubt the name Aspasia for a woman writing about medicine than we have for an Alexander (the name of a famous king), Antigonus (another famous king), Antiochus (again), or Apollodorus (gift of Apollo, the name of many medical writers), or Apollonius (again), or Apollophanes, or Asclepius or Asclepiades (surely, too much of a coincidence?) for a man writing about medicine.138 This is an important methodological point: feminine names are subject to a level of disbelief that is never visited on male names. Yet why should this happen, unless one is beginning from the (unstated) premise that there were no women practising medicine? So, for example, from its first publication, providing an impossible etymology for the name Metrodora, the author of (from the books of Metrodora: On Womens Diseases of the Womb) has become a trope repeated from work to work.139 This is one of the numerous cases where feminist criticism and old-fashioned philology meet. In fact, of course, Metrodora is simply the feminine form of Metrodorus, a well-attested and well-formed theophoric of the type Apollo-dora/us, Hermo-dora/ us, Theo-dora/us, etc.140 Nor could such a compound mean gift of the womb,
136 L. Dean-Jones, Womens Bodies in Classical Greek Science (Oxford, 1994), 33, followed by Flemming (n. 3), 270. Even so, Aspasia, seems a poor choice. Why not Socrates mother Phaenarete, whom he claimed was a midwife (Tht. 148e151d), or Phaenarete the mother of Hippocrates (according to some; see J.R. Pinault, Hippocratic Lives and Legends [Leiden, 1992], 7, 212, 145) or Platos mother Perictione, or any of the other Pythagoreans, since pseudepigraphic traditions grow up around them; H. Thesleff, The Pythagorean Texts of the Hellenistic Period (bo, 1965). 137 From Classical Greek into Late Roman times (e.g. SB 14, 11717, fourth c. A.D.). Aspasius was a famed commentator on Aristotle. 138 Things might even be the other way around. Asclepiades Pharmacus, CMLoc 9.5, 13.302 records a remedy for dysentery under the name Aspasius (not otherwise attested as a medical writer). Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 174 (P.T. Keyser), has suggested that perhaps the reference was originally to Aspasia. 139 A.P. Kousis [also transliterated as Kuzes], Metrodoras work On the feminine diseases of the womb according to the Greek codex 75, 3 of the Laurentian Library, 20 (1945 [appeared 1949]), 4668 speculated (in his own English), Her very name Metrodora is her real name or only a simple nickname, in connection to her gynecological praxis and work ( = womb and from = make a present)? The speculation continues in G. Del Guerra, Il libro di Metrodora (Milan, 1953), unaltered ed. Metrodora: Medicina e cosmesi ad uso delle donne (Milan, 1994), 20; E. Kislinger, Frauenheilkunde and Metrodora, in R. Auty et al. (edd.), Lexikon des Mittelalters, vol. 4 (Munich and Zurich, 1989), 87580 and vol. 6 (Munich and Zurich, 1993), 583; H. Hunger, Medizin, in Die hochsprachliche profane Literatur der Byzantiner (Munich, 1978), 2.287320; Flemming (n. 3), 258: possibly derived from a common Greek word for womb; Touwaide, Metrodora, in Brills New Pauly 8 (2006), 836. 140 Flemming (n. 3), 278: Her name may share its first four letters with the Greek for womb, but it is very respectable none the less. It is the feminine of Metrodorus and well-attested in the epigraphical and historical record. Fifteen individuals in LGPN dating from fourth c. B.C. to first c. A.D.; also well attested at Rome: CIL 6.22472, 29722, 34883.
381
since the thematic stem -- is built to the root mother not womb.141 No one wonders if Metrodor-us is merely a Spitzname meaning gift of the womb or if the works of various Metrodori are merely erroneous interpretation of the title of a collection of advice given to young women of marriageable age by their mothers.142
8. CANON We can summarize the results of our sondage in a chart for each author. The womens names are in bold, and an asterisk (*) marks those for whom we have explicit evidence for books.143
*Antipater *Apollonius Mys Chrysanthus Gratianus Cleophantus Eikodotos (Icodotus) Gaius of Naples *Gallus Harpalus Harpocras Harpocration *Heras of Cappadocia *Herophilus King Laodicus Nicostratus Prytanis Rusticus Ambrosius of Puteoli Samithra *Solon of Smyrna Spendusa Tyrannus Xanite *Xenocrates of Aphrosidias *Zoilus of Macedon ANDROMACHUS gen. (7) (4), gen. (7), (6), (1) gen. (2), gen. gen. , gen. (2) gen. (3), , (5) (4), (2), gen. (2) gen. (6), (2), gen. , , , gen. gen. , ASCLEPIADES gen. gen.
Amarantus of Alexandria *Andreas of Carystus
141 The stem -- is frequent in forming both masc. and fem. names: - ()-, -, -, -, -, -, -; - ()-, -, -/, -, -, -, -, -, -/, -, -, -, -, -. 142 Touwaide (n. 139). In fact, of course, having a Spitzname does not debar a person from existence. Theophrastus wrote what he wrote despite having been born Tyrtamus. Note, too, Eugerasia, and the epigraphically attested Empeiria; Parker (n. 7), 141. For these types of Berufsnamen, see H. Solin, Die sogenannten Berufsnamen der antiker rzte, in van der Eijk et al. (n. 2), 11942. 143 That is, with , titles or the like found in Galen, Pliny or other sources. I have excluded , although its use as marking quotation from a written source is clear. Thus Gaius of Naples, despite his 19 recipes, does not make the cut.
382
*Andromachus Antiochis *Antonius Musa *Areus of Tarsus Arrabaeus Bassus Charixenes *Chrysermus Diocles of Chalcedon Eugerasia Idius *Mantias *Nicaretus Origeneia Pantaenus *Plato Proxenus *Themison *Trypho of Gortyn
(2) gen. gen. gen. (2), (3), gen. gen. (3), gen. (8) gen. gen. gen. gen. , , gen. (5) gen. (3) gen. gen. gen. gen. , gen. (2)
As we can see, a bare genitive is by far the most common type of citation, predominating in both authors. Great names jostle with obscurer personages, many authors are cited by a given source in different ways and the womens names are mixed in with the rest and not given any distinction. What then accounts for this feeling that the women authors belong to some kind of second tier? There seem to be two reasons. One is simply that they are not cited as often as some male authorities. But as we have seen some of the greatest names in the history of medicine are as infrequent in the pharmacological books of Galen. The other is that they are cited only for recipes, not for grand theories or diagnosis. But here, too, we can point to important names that only make it into Galen for a recipe or two.144 The problem, therefore, is simply the old problem of women in the canon. It is hardly surprising that women poets turn up less often in the Greek Anthology than men: there were fewer of them. It is hardly surprising that women doctors are cited less often than male: there were fewer of them. What is interesting is that they are cited at all. The real question before us is why any of these womens names were preserved in the first place. The majority of recipes in Galen and his sources are anonymous. It would have been easy for Galen or Andromachus or Asclepiades to have stripped away the names from the headings. That they did not do so tells us that at least a womans name was no detriment to a recipes acceptance and that a womans name could serve as a pedigree for a compound as well as a mans. Sabine Vogts perceptive overview of Galens system of evaluating and selecting his sources can help us see the role of women in the great tradition:
The principles of selection regarding the references to other doctors relate to the qualification of their evaluation: Galen, for instance, explicitly states that he more often quotes younger pharmacologists than older ones (Comp.Med.Gen. II 5: XIII 502). The reason he gives is that tradition works like a process of selecting the best remedies. The longer a
144 Rufus of Ephesus is a prime example: a single recipe: CMLoc. 7.5 (anodynes), 13.92.14 (gen.), and he uses another CMGen. 7.12, 13.1010.11; Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 7201 (J. Scarborough). Whatever diagnostics or aetiologies there may have been were removed by Andromachus in any case.
383
remedy could be tried out, the more secure is the evaluation of its quality, for the simple reason that there have been more experts who were able to experience it (cf. Comp.Med. Loc. VI 9: XII 988f. and VII 1: XIII 14). This notion of validation by frequent experience is central to Galens view on efficacy.145
For Galen, it is clear, women counted as experts along with men. Galen draws heavily on a handful of favourite authors as his entry points: Apollonius Mys, Andromachus, Archigenes, Asclepiades, Crito, Damocrates, Heras and Hippocrates, plus assorted lesser-used sources.146 Of the women authors, only Cleopatra makes it even into the occasional-use class. Yet we find two of his major sources, Andromachus and Archigenes, quoting from the written works of women doctors, citing their drug formulas with the same variety of markers with which they cite men, and intermixing their contributions with those of the great and famous, the (now) obscure and uncertain, the anonymous. We need not exaggerate their status. The women were not the first place Galen turned to. But then neither was Soranus.147 At the same time, it is best not to presume that women as a class were confined to the less formal more messy, unstable, majority of medical writing. Galen cites eighteen recipes from three passages of Cleopatras book. He cites Asclepiades for three recipes from Origeneia. He cites Andromachus the Elder for just one recipe.148 But it would be a mistake to make the inventor of a world-famous panacea, the personal physician of the emperor Nero, part of the less prestigious, more workaday, portion of medicines literary culture. University of Cincinnati H O LT N . PA R K E R holt.parker@uc.edu
APPENDIX: THE ELEPHANTIS (?) IN THE ROOM The case of Elephantides/Elephantis/Elephantine is a problem, for we have three names and three functions and how they are all related is unclear. a. Elephantides, a famous authority on cosmetics. Galen cites a passage of Soranus (CMLoc 1.1, 12.415.2417.3), in the course of which he provides a brief linking passage (12.416.26):
, , , . Many other cures, he [Soranus] says, have been written by Asclepiades and Heraclides of Tarentum and Elephantides and Moschion in the Cosmetics, of which he personally wrote
145 S. Vogt, Drugs and pharmacology, in R.J. Hankinson (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Galen (Cambridge, 2008), 31617. 146 Fabricius (n. 13), 180205. 147 Fabricius (n. 13), 202. 148 Antid. 1.6, 14.32.1142.8, cf. Ther. Pis. 14.233 (text omitted by Khn); J.L. Ideler, Physici et medici Graeci minores, 2 vols. (Berlin, 18412; repr. Amsterdam, 1963), 1.13843. Keyser and Irby-Massie (n. 1), 79 (A. Touwaide).
384
out the ones by Asclepiades transcribed above [12.410.8414.16] and certain others which I shall record in the order in which they appeared.149
The name, if correct, is the masculine Elephantides, who is clearly a major author, ranking with the most important writers on cosmetics.150 The name also occurs in the list of medical authorities which follows the text of Celsus in one of the main manuscripts.151 The name is otherwise unattested, but well formed (son of Elephas, itself a reasonably common name), and names with only a single attestation in LGPN run into the hundreds. Crusius wished to emend to to bring the text in line with the following names,152 and this reading has been tacitly assumed by many,153 but it seems clear that an Elephantis in Galen is a phantom. b. Elephantis, a unreliable expert on reproduction. Pliny lists an Elephantis as an authority for Book 28 and cites her opinion in a passage on the uses of menstrual blood (HN 28.81):
quae Lais et Elephantis inter se contraria prodidere de abortivo carbone e radice brassicae vel myrti vel tamaricis in eo sanguine extincto, itemque asinas tot annis non concipere, quot grana hordei contacta ederint, quaeque alia nuncupavere monstrifica aut inter ipsa pugnantia, cum haec fecunditatem fieri isdem modis, quibus sterilitatem illa, praenuntiaret, melius est non credere. It is better not to believe the contradictory opinions which Lais and Elephantis have given about whether the roots of cabbage or myrtle or tamarisk, burnt to a ember and then extinguished with menstrual blood, serves as an abortifacient; or whether a she-ass will fail to conceive for the same number of years as it has eaten individual grains of barley tinged with menstrual blood; and in all the other monstrous and contradictory things they have announced, since the one declares that fertility is produced by the same things that the other declares produce sterility.
Elephantis is attested epigraphically.154 However, the names reputation in Pliny is soiled not only by the topic, but by its association with Lais (who shares the
149 Note that here Galen has two sources for the same material, Asclepiades himself and Asclepiades as recorded by Soranus. Galen naturally cites from the primary source. 150 Khns text copies the Basel edn. of 1538 (n. 1), 2.158, line 40 and Chartiers edn. of 1649 (n. 1), 13.332. 151 F, Laur. 73.1 f. 143r: Elefantides; M. Wellmann, Zur Geschichte der Medizin im Altertum, Hermes 35 (1900), 34984, at 370; id., RE 5.2 (1903), 2321; M. Tecusan, The Fragments of the Methodists (Leiden, 2004), 1.1348, who labels it the Anonymus Laurentianus. For the history of the manuscript, see G. Billanovich, Milano, Nonantolo, Briscia, in La cultura antica nellOccidente latino dal VII allXI secolo (Spoleto, 1975), 1.32156, esp. 3234. The author possesses what Wellmann (367) called eine nicht verchtliche Kenntniss der medicinischen Litteratur der besten Zeit. The source for the name is unlikely to be just this single passage in Galen, but our confidence is shaken by the listing of the Egyptians Hermes Trismegistus, Manetho, Nechepso and Cleopatra Regina. 152 Only a few columns after Wellmanns entry for Elephantides: RE 5.2 (1903), 2324 (no. 3). 153 Including me: Parker (n. 7), 145, 149 n. 35; and H. Parker, Loves body anatomized: the ancient erotic manuals and the rhetoric of sexuality, in A. Richlin (ed.), Pornography and Representation in Greece and Rome (Oxford, 1992), 111 n. 40. 154 IG I.1086 (Beazley ARV2.1533; SEG 39 [1989] 53), IG II.7171/2, IG II.11254; Clara Rhodos 3 (1939), 61.28. Cf. Apollod. 2.1.5, where Elephantis is the name of a wife of Danaus in mythology.
385
name of the famous hetaira; though the name is very popular), who in turn is associated with Salpe, whom Pliny labels an obstetrix and to whom he attributes various semi-magical cures.155 c. Elephantis, a pornographer. Mentioned by Suetonius Tib. 43, Martial 12.43.14 and Priapea 4.2 (cf. Tat. Ad Graecos 33.4) as the author of an illustrated manual of sexual positions.156 d. Elephantine, a pornographer. The only source for Elephantine as a womans name is Suda (A 4261 Adler):
, : : , . Astyanassa: the maid of Helen, the wife of Menelaus. She was the first to discover the ways of lying in bed for intercourse, and wrote On the Postures for Intercourse, which Philaenis and Elephantine later imitated, who carried out similar licentious acts.157
Here at least we can be sure that Elephantine is just an error for the better attested Elephantis, but the connection between the male expert Elephantides, the female dubious expert Elephantis, and the female pornographer Elephantis is anything but clear. Nothing links cosmetics (Elephantides) with folk-magic beliefs about menstrual blood (Plinys Elephantis). Assuming cosmetics was somehow a part of womens medicine is anachronistic.158 Nothing links the powers of menstrual blood with a book on sexual positions, while Pliny (who is hostile to Elephantis) cites
155 Pliny HN 1.ind.28; 28.38 (numbness), 66 (weak eyes), 82 (hydrophobia; agrees with Lais), 262 (an aphrodisiac); 32.135 (hair removal; Salpe called an obstetrix), 140 (stopping dogs barking by putting a live frog in their food). See J. Davidson, Dont try this at home: Plinys Salpe, Salpes Paignia and magic, CQ 45 (1995), 5902; D. Bain, Salpes : Athenaeus 322A and Plin. H.N. 28.38, CQ 48 (1998), 2628. Plinys sources and purposes are quite different from Galens, and Flemming (n. 3), 2716 is right to question the authorial status of Elephantis, Lais and the obstetrices, Salpe and Sotira, citing Wellmann (n. 57) for Xenocrates (which in turn goes back to Diphilus of Siphnus) as a possible intermediary for the references to Elephantis, Lais and Sotira (confined to Pliny Book 28). Salpe (also quoted in Book 32 for a depilatory made with blood, gall and liver of tuna) may have been cited from Xenocrates (in Orib. Coll. med. 2.58 = CMG 6.1.1 47.157.14 Raeder). At most one can say that this is not impossible, but it merely pushes the question of authorship back: What then is Xenocrates source for Salpe & Co. if not written works? Wellmann (n. 57), 614 refers to them as medizinische Schriftsteller untergeordneten Ranges, sogar schriftstellernde Hebeamme. 156 Parker (n. 153), 106; M. Meyerowitz, The domestication of desire: Ovids parva tabella and the theater of love, in the same volume, 148. 157 On Philaenis see Parker (n. 153), where I too easily took Elephantine and Elephantis as interchangeable. The blending of Philaenis and Elephantis runs deeper still: the lemmata to both Aeschrion, Anth. Pal. 7.345 and Dioscorides Anth. Pal. 7.450 identify Philaenis as a hetaira of Elephantine, apparently by confusion with the name Elephantis. 158 For cosmetics as part of medicine, see B. Grillet, Les femmes et les fards dans lAntiquit grecque (Paris, 1975); Kudlien (n. 1 [1979]), 10411; also J. Scarborough, Early Byzantine pharmacology, in J. Scarborough (ed.), Symposium on Byzantine Medicine (Washington, DC, 1984), 218; P. Faure, Parfums et aromates de lAntiquit (Paris, 1987); Jackson (n. 102), 545; von Staden (n. 50), 543; Flemming (n. 7), 40, 138, 172, 26970; Nutton (n. 1), 142, 178.
386
the works of Elephantis solely for what might be labelled reproductive medicine and makes no mention of Elephantis the sex educator.159 On the whole, I am inclined to think that the text of Soranus ap. Galen was correct in giving the name of the writer on cosmetics as Elephantides, and that the Elephantis in Pliny reflects a name associated with quasi-magical gynaecological works, which in turn served as a useful cover name for the pillow books.160
159 One senses a certain disparity of treatment. Scholars seem eager to separate Antiochis the medical author from her respectable homonyms, Antiochis of Tlos and Antiochis the dedicatee of Heraclides, but eager to fuse Elephantides the author on cosmetics with his disreputable doublets: Elephantis the abortionist and Elephantis the pornographer. 160 I may not have been as clear as I should, since Flemming writes (n. 3), 274 n. 90: The drive to distinguish the medical from the pornographic is manifest, for example, in the two articles on Salpe in RE 1A (Stuttgart, 1920), 20067; and in Parker (n. 83), 106. Rather in that article (Loves body [n. 153], 106) I tried to make exactly Flemmings point: Each [Salpe and Elephantis] is the name of a famous midwife and writer on her craft, and each has a doublet who is a whore and a writer on her craft. The gynecological and obstetric works are confounded with the pornographic works to such an extent that it is impossible to separate out the realities of authorship. So Pliny, in a remarkably revealing passage (HN 28.70) about the magic powers of menstrual blood, gives as his authorities not only midwives but prostitutes themselves, equating the two as the only sources of knowledge about womens sexuality.

Parker 2012 Galen and The Girls

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Parker 2012 Galen and The Girls

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Classical Quarterly 62.1 359386 (2012) Printed in Great Britain doi:10.

Amarantus of Alexandria *Andreas of Carystus

You might also like