The Hippocratic treatise peri opsios (de Videndi Acie, On the organof sight)

LAAVK = PERI OPSIOS THE HIPPOCRATIC TREATISE AN OF SIGHT)! (DE VIDENDI ACIE, ON THE ORG Elizabeth Craik Summary addressed. The closest affinities in The nature and affiliations of the work are cautery), linguistic expression (feamedical subject matter (details of eye flux and and stylistic tone (didactic and magtures of syntax, grammar and vocabulary) es in Man. The inference that the isterial aspects) are seen to be with Plac provenance, and that the author may work has an ‘early’ date and west Greek , both known to have taken an have interacted with Alcmaeon or Empedocles an ‘Egyptian’ or ‘Libyan’ (North interest in the eye, is examined. Evidence for made for input from Cyrene. African) connection is adduced, and a case four pages of Greek in the modThe work on sight occupies a mere also both techThe treatise is not only brief; it is ern printed text.’ has been paid to it in recent nical and corrupt. Little attention may compare the still shorter On decades. Such short works—we ition—are peculiarly difficult Anatomy and the somewhat longer Dent r context of the Hippocratic to interpret, and to place in the wide made. To argue other writings. Here this attempt is Corpus and tic Corpus belong together, a that different works of the Hippocra similar language is required. Many conjunction of similar content and d simply by access to a common associations in content can be explaine s might be taken and reworked. pool of knowledge, from which item too caution in interpretation indicator. e is a high concentration of Unless it is unusually esoteric, or ther Language may be somewhat more reliable, though here a reliable coincident elements, content is not ented on this paper at the conference, ! I am most grateful to those who comm provided additional bibliographical mateor afterwards, and especially to those who ni and Christopher Tuplin. rial: Paul Demont, Maria Elena Gorri ) ; Ermerins 3.279-283 (1864); Joly (1978 és Sichel ap. Littré 9.152-161 (1861)

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. The title (not, of course, original) may have arisen from a compiler’s glance at the first words. The term wig, used three times in the work—in 1 (plural), 2 (singular) and 8 (singular)—can be either abstract or concrete in sense (9.152 and 158 L.). In the former case Corpus), it is always singular, ‘vision’. In the latter case (the sense (the sense in 2 and 8, and the sense more common in the Hippocratic in 1), it may be singular or plural, with reference to the seeing organ; that is to the ‘eye(s)’ or to the central ‘seeing part’ of the eye, iris with pupil or perhaps pupil alone, though for this the word kopf was available. We might translate ‘On Vision’ or ‘On Sight’; but a general title ‘On the Eye’ is more apt to the actual content and the rather cumbersome ‘On the Organ of Sight’ conveys the dual sense, abstract and concrete, of the word dyic. . THE HIPPOCRATIC TREATISE PERI OPSIOS 193 The practice of cautery, which features prominently in Organ of Sight, features also in Places in Man, Diseases 2, Affections, Internal Affections, Articulations and Mochlicon, as well as certain parts of Epidemics and a few other works. It is argued below that the closest connections, in this as in other respects, are with Places in Man.* Cautery has traditionally been associated with the name of Euryphon and regarded as a ‘Cnidian’ practice. However, it may more properly be regarded as an ancient practice, persisting in pockets everywhere. The author of Affections states his intention to write a treatise on expression of the future perfect tense, that he will treat eye diseases diseases of the eyes, and inevitably, speculation has centred on whether our fragment represents this work.‘ Having treated other diseases arising from the head, the author declares, in the rather grandiose separately (Aff. 5 [6.214 L.]). He also regards diseases as arising from the senses of smell, hearing, sight and from venery as well as propounding the more conventional aetiologies of hot, cold, wet, dry, food, drink, exertions and wounds (Af. 1 [6.208 L.]). However, his treatment of other head diseases is very, very general and entirely different from the surgical works; and, if we are investigating possible common authorship, we must note that he says he will write The work, written in a didactic and magisterial style, is a surgical manual; or more probably, in view of its excessive brevity, its abrupt asyndetic beginning and equally abrupt ending, and its marked omissions of common eye afflictions (such as the classic symptom ‘inflammation’ and the serious condition ‘rupture’, leading to prothat proposed by the author of Articulations, and the question of interrelated authorship resembles that between Articulations and Glands, > See Thivel (1981) 281-282. $ An affirmative answer is given, on the basis of a scrutiny of particles only, by Rodriguez Alfageme (1993). 7 See Craik (1998) esp. 23, 137-138; (2002) 285-287, ® See Craik (2002) 287-288, esp. 288 n. 3. including to Littré, see Craik (1998) x-xiv. * For Places in Man (Loc. Hom.), see Craik (1998): also Joly (1978) and Littré 6. 273-349. For references to editions of other Hippocratic works cited in this paper, and expression common to Organ of Sight and the gynaecological writings are explored below. For the moment, it may be noted that one peculiarity of Affections is that the author refers to a work on Epidemics and the gynaecological works. Organ of Sight may now be added to this broad grouping, while Afections is an outlier. Vocabulary also on suppuration, phthisis and gynaecology (Af. 33 [6.244 L.j). The range of works projected by the author of Affctions resembles trusion of the eyeball) an excerpt from, or notes on, a surgical manual. Procedures are detailed for a series of eye complaints; these can which is closely connected with Places in Man.’ There are coincident elements in the treatises Articulations, Glands, Regimen in Acute Diseases, effects of trachoma, night blindness and seasonal ophthalmia. The be identified with a degree of plausibility as glaucoma, cataract, exclusively surgical content makes comparison with non-surgical treatises difficult. There are some general resonances with the practices, and so with the vocabulary, of such surgical works as Ulcers and Articulations; also with surgical procedures in the gynaecological treatises. Other affinities can be traced with works which are primarily theoretical (especially with Places in Man) or primarily nosological (especially with Diseases 2 and Internal Affections) or primarily prognostic (especially with Prorrhetic 2) but the emphasis is naturally different. , 3 An instance of context-dependent vocabulary is inoıg, regularly used of handson surgical treatment; an instance of context-dependent expression is the repetition of such “next” conjunctions as rea and Üctepov indicating successive stages in a series of instructions.

drugs, called pharmakitis at 15, 23, 28, 40 (6.224, 234, 240 and 250 L.) or ta pharmaka at 4, 18, 27, 29 (6.212, 228, 238 and 240 L). The content seems to have some association with the recipes in Organ of Sight for an eye ointment. Both groups of recipes, those in Affections and those in Organ of Sight, coincide in part with recipes in the gynaecological works (Mul. 1.102-105 [8.224-228 L.]) and in Regumen in Acute Diseases (Acut. Sp. 65-66 [2.520 L.]). The author of Places in Man regards the aetiology of illness as flux has generally been dismissed as out of place in a work on the eye." from the head to various parts of the body, including the eyes. Different kinds of ocular flux are classified and appropriate treatments for each specified.” The treatments are: eye salves (13.1,2 [6.300 L.]); purging the body by enemas and laxatives (13.1,4 [6.300 L.]); purging the head by nasal insertions (13. 2,4 [6.300 L.J); cautery of the vessels in the temples (13.7 [6.300 L.]); and, in an extreme case, making incisions in the scalp to the bone (13. 5 [6.300 L.]). Similarly, in Organ of Sight, according to type of symptoms, the treatments are: eye salves (9.2,3 [9.160 L.]); purging the body (7.1 [9.158 L]; 9.1 [9.160 LJ); purging the head (1.1,2 [9.152 LJ; 7.1; 9.1); 195 However, it is entirely apposite: although it concludes with the general statement that the principles of cautery are the same everywhere in the body, it commences with instructions relating to the eye in particular, as becomes evident when the brief and allusive content of Organ of Sight is compared with Celsus’ extended and clear account of treatments for eye afflictions (7.7.15). Although some elements in the instructions recur elsewhere in the Corpus where cautery is recommended, the strictly surgical stance is unique to Places in Man and Organ of Sight. The technical term diaxatew “cauterise” is similarly used; and procedures are similarly outlined. The same salient elements are present in both and it is hard to resist the conclusion that they derive from a common stock of lore or a common written source. In addition, and perhaps more significantly, a close comparison between the practical instructions given in the two works for treatment of the eye shows a clear and striking coincidence in theoretical approach. In Organ of Sight, a distinction is made between eye cautery of the vessels (1.1,2; 3.1-4) and incising the scalp (4.2; 8). There is also cautery almost up to the bone in the skull (3. 1-2). In flux “from above” and eye flux “from below” (ävobev . .. kátobev, both treatises too, trephining is practised (Loc, Hom. 32 [6.324 L.]; fluid flowing from between flesh and bone (that is, between scalp Vid. Ac. 8), as is venesection or cupping (Vid. Ac. 3.1, 9.1). Treatment of the eyelids, as prescribed in Organ of Sight (2.1; 4.1-2; 5.1; 6.1), is by similar methods; that is, by surgical cutting and burning, and by ointments. The author of Organ of Sight specifies flux only once (9); and skull) and fluid flowing from brain (that is, from below skull). Flux “from above” (flux A, common) is from the top of the head, from the area below the scalp and above the skull; flux “from below” this passage recalls the description of eye flux in Glands, a treatise already seen to be closely parallel to Places in Man. In these works, ophthalmia is associated with flux and swellings (Gland. 13 [8.586 L.]; Vid. Ac. 7 [9.158 Ll). One striking common element between the treatises Places in Man inside the head, below the skull. These passages too are illumined by the long and full discussion of Gelsus (7.7.15). Celsus’ source here 3.3 [9.156 L.]). In Places in Man, a similar distinction is made between (flux B, exceptional and serious) is flux from the brain, from deep is probably Organ of Sight: in addition to features already remarked, both works prescribe binding with ligatures and marking the vessels and Organ of Sight is that detailed instructions are given as to how When the passages relating to two types of eye flux are viewed cautery of the vessels should be performed. These instructions are for instance with procedures to arrest haemorrhage. In. addition to in conjunction with the description of the vascular system in Places in Man (3.1-2 [6.280 L.]), it appears that flux A is envisaged as passing from the head to the vessels in the temples and so to the outer the passages with reference to the eyes, discussed above, both treacorners of the eyes, and flux B envisaged as passing from the head tises have sections dedicated to the subject of cautery (Loc. Hom. 40 through vessels in the forehead to the imner corners of the eye. given in similar terminology and with a similar emphasis in content, [6.330 L.] ~ Vid. Ac. 3 [9.154-156 L.]). This section of Organ of Sight 9 See Craik (1998) 147-151 on Loc. Hom. 13 (6.300 L.). '0 Joly (1978) 169 n. 1 comments “ce chapitre semble égaré dans une oeuvre d’ophthalmologie”.

Treatment of A is routinely effected by cautery of the temporal vessels, or if this fails by incising (Loc. Hom. 13. 3-6 [6.300 L.]) or cauterising (Vid. Ac.) the scalp. The therapy applied in other treatises may point to a similar underlying, though there not explicit, set of beliefs: at Diseases 2.12-13 (7.18-24 L.), the treatment of flux from the head and elimination of peccant matter by eight eschars at different points on the head (beside ears, at temples, on the back of the head, at inner point of eyes); and at Afections 2 (6.210 L.), the instruction to incise the scalp or to cauterise the vessels. The text, often obscure, is elliptical and allusive. The expression is disconnected, asyndetic and without stylistic pretension. The language is rough, functional and unidiomatic. The syntactic structures are primitive, with compound sentences lacking subordinate clauses and a marked tendency to otiose or careless repetition, especially repetition of the demonstrative pronoun. (See 1, toredtqow, tobtov, zodra, Kai todto, tobtw, tobtorow, and 6, verb tpiBew “rub”: repeated and its application to the patient.) Occasional alliteration is not a six times, to describe both preparation of ingredients in an eyesalve, of the trainee physician; or it may simply be fortuitous. (See 1, mannered stylistic device but suggests rather a mantra, mnemonic These features occur in Places in Man, and in a few other works. xoBoipew ... repaññv . .. kater ... Kaborg kai KéBapois tc Kepaañc.) Second person address is used and instructions are most commonly given by jussive infinitives, conjoined with nominative participles. There are two more unusual features in common with Places in Man: firstly the use of plural verb with neuter plural subject, perhaps a trace of Doric idiom, and secondly causal &ç for regular &te with THE HIPPOCRATIC TREATISE PERI OPSIOS 197 as aspects of precise surgical instruction and description: with the three times repeated éykataxoiew, “burn in and down” in the highly technical context of Organ of Sight 3, cf. Énavaräuvewv “cut over and up” of equally technical contexts in Head Wounds.'? Similarly, the the same verb occurs followed by the genitive in Affections and in zpo- verbal prefix is frequently used of surgical procedures: Organ of Sight 3, rpoopinm, “let [blood] before” has parallels in such verbs as npokadoipe, “purge before” and rpoAobe, “wash before”, However, in Organ of Sight the following d1a- compounds are preferred where the simple verbs would suffice: ötaBAéro, Siabeppaivo, ôtaxaio, 8taonuotvo, Siaypio, Siaywpitw. Another instance of overlap is the expression aina dipievan (so used only in these two works, though Diseases 2). The diminutive onoyytov, “little sponge” (twice in Organ of Sight) occurs clsewhere only in Places in Man (once) and in Diseases 2 (three times); elsewhere oröyyog is invariably used. Use of diminutive forms is in general a feature of gynaecological writing. As noted above, Organ of Sight has particular links with the gynaecological works; we may add here therapy by the laxative £Aathpiov, use of the cream wucowrög and specification of wool as ‘Milesian’. Linguistic peculiarities common to Organ of Sight and the gynaecological works are these: firstly, adjectives with -e1dñç termination (such as BaAattoetàtg, which occurs three times in Organ of Sight, cf. Diseases of Women 2.116 (8.236 L.), where three separate such adjectives occur, perhaps coincidentally in a description of ocular pathology); secondly, use of the dual number (if we accept Ermerins’ persuasive emendation from the dative singular to the dual at 2.1 (9.154 L), very rare in the Hippocratic Corpus even where duality is stressed: it occurs only in again) nepietAéw “wind around” and ovuudw “close [the eyes]”. This is little more than an impressionistic survey: much more the gynaecological works and Epidemics 5. There are common idiosyncrasies in vocabulary also; for example the rare verbs (compounds philological work is required. As a caveat, it must be noted that this participle."! (See 3.4, énevdav tà E\xea dyıda yévovrar and 9.2, dc pebpatog EXEXOVTOG.) Organ of Sight and Places in Man.): this is striking, as, in other respects, In linguistic, as in syntactical aspects, there are several points of overlap. For instance a preference for compound verbs is apparent (such as the verb rapaxateıv “cauterise beside” occurring only in argument for a particular different nexus of connections would require refinement if other elements were introduced and a comprehensive 13 Cf. Hanson (1999), 4 The dual of d@QaAudg occurs only in Epid. 5 and Mul. 1; of oxéXog only in Mul, 2 and Poet. Ex; of xeip only in Epid. 5, Mul. 2, Nat. Pue. the language is so plain." Some of these formations may originate !© Such usage may have been emended away as a solecism by ancient scribes or modern editors in other, more studied, treatises; the irregular dg is here emended by Ermerins. 2 On such compounds, esp. of dua- and érava- verbs, cf. Craik (1998) 100-101,

199 doctor of Organ of Sight: even if the story is true, the dissection was study made. The term &tpaxtoc for a cauterising instrument occurs only in Organ of Sight and in Internal Affections. There are a few coinalmost certainly of an animal.” There is evidence that Democritus cidences also with the language of Coan Prognoses: the adjective Aapnpdéy too took an interest in sense perception and dissected animals, cutting into the Bpéyua, “forehead”. “bright” is applied to aia “blood” only in that collection apart from Organ of Sight and the common pejorative term Aavpdg (as in Organ of Sight 1), which one might have expected to be ubiquitous, is more It has already been argued that Places in Man shows some Egyptian influence. Organ of Sight surely does also, and to a greater degree. We should say rather that there may be input from various regions in north Africa; from Libya as well as Egypt. These terms were not always used with precision: Strabo used “Libya” for all of the African common in Coan Prognoses than anywhere else with twenty-five of sixty-one occurrences in the Hippocratic Corpus; there is a cluster also in Fractures and Articulations, observed above to be aligned on continent in stating that the inhabited world had three continents: Libya (the smallest), Europe and Asia (17.3.1). The evidence for other grounds with Organ of Sight. However, it is clear that in both content (on eye flux and on Egyptian or Libyan input is varied and cumulatively compelling. particularly resembles Places in Man. It has been argued that Places in Man is an early work, originating in Italy or in Sicily, a region Above all, there is the good fifth century evidence of Herodotus, who visited Egypt around 430 BCE." From Herodotus we learn that where there were many distinguished medical practitioners, notably Democedes. It may be suggested that this treatise has a similar date there was a degree of medical specialisation in Egypt: among specialist practitioners he mentions ophthalmologists as well as dentists and provenance; and that the author had affiliations with Alcmaeon of Croton (floruit around 500 BCE) and Empedocles of Acragas (floruit around 480 BCE), both known to have taken a particular interest in the eye.’ However, the severely surgical tone of Organ of Sight militates against direct comparison with these more theoretical and philosophical writers. Although precise connections are hard to establish, it is plausible that thinkers with an interest in the workings of the eye and doctors with an interest in diseases of the eye and others (2.84). Further, he tells us that the Persian king Cyrus— might have found their activities complementary; just as exponents of secular and of sacred medicine coexisted in Cos, Epidaurus and Pergamum. Both Alcmaeon and Empedocles, like the medical writers, wrote of the ‘bright’, or fiery, element in the eye, and Alcmaeon viewed this as the part on which clarity of vision depended; language as well as thought has Hippocratic resonances (DK 24 A 5 = Theophrastus, De sensibus 25).'° And, like the Hippocratic writers, Alcmaeon observed that eye and brain were linked by poroi “ducts”, tte cautery) and expression (style, syntax and grammar) Organ of Sight seeking the best treatment—recruited an eye doctor from Egypt through the Pharaoh Amasis (3.1). Herodotus regarded the doctors of Libyan Cyrene as most famous after those of Croton: those of Cos and Cnidus do not rate a mention (3.131). In an unrelated passage (4.187.2) Herodotus informs us that cautery of the vessels in the crown and temples was regularly practised in Libya, with a view to ensuring health by the prevention of downward flow of phlegm. Such cautery, as a therapeutic rather than preventive measure, is readily paralleled in the many Hippocratic works which prescribe treatment for conditions arising from flux from the head, especially to the eyes but also to ears, nose and elsewhere in the body. These practices were widespread in antiquity. Celsus, writing in the first century CE, regards this aspect of medicine as part of universal practice, though with local variations: the Afrorum curatio was to burn the crown of the scalp to the bone, whereas in Gaul the vessels in the temples and the crown of the head were probably to be regarded as the optic nerves. Alcmaeon was said to have dissected the eye (DK 24 A 10 = Chalcidius, In Timaeum. 279), but it is unlikely that this bears any relation to the activities of the 5 See Longrigg (1993) 58-60 on Alcmaeon and 72 on Empedocles. 6 Cf. Jouanna (1983) 215, n. 3. In an important paper on this subject, Lloyd (1975) discusses the evidence of Loc. Hom., Af. and Morb. 2, but curiously makes no mention of Vid. Ac. B See Althoff (1993). 1 The appended statement on Cyrene has been deleted by Stein and a few others, in the belief that it is a scribe’s chronological note; but most editors retain the text in its transmitted form, which was that known to Eustathius.

treated. The “African” procedure is exactly that detailed in Organ of Sight (3.1-2 [9.154 L.]). The second category of evidence is that of papyri, especially the Ebers papyrus, which deals with different diseases of the eyes and recommended treatments. Although this of a much earlier date, two types of flux to the eye, upper and lower: the anatomy of the head was well known, as in mummification procedures the contents of the brain were removed through the nose. And the suggestion of a remedy, three times repeated in the Ebers papyrus, to drive out blood, or “vessels of blood”, from the eyes recalls the problem of c. 1500 BCE, medical conservatism makes it acceptable as evidence. aipatddéc t1...bypdv “a bloody sort of moisture” at Places in Man 200 The Ebers papyrus (opthalmology) prescribes for one case, sharu disease, treatment by roasted ox liver pressed on the eye; further, at 201 13.6 (6.302 L.). There is much general evidence for communications between the the beginning of the Kahun papyrus (gynaecology) a patient suffering regions. Egypt was known to Greeks already in the seventh century, from an eye disorder is prescribed, after treatment of both uterus when mercenaries served under the pharaohs, and there were soon and eyes by fumigation, a meal of fresh (?raw) ass liver.?! These passages in Ebers and Kahun may be considered with the treatment of night blindness in Organ of Sight 8, where the patient is apparently exhorted to “gulp down” one or two large raw ox livers.” The reading “raw” ought probably to be emended. However, the gynaecological element is of interest, as in two Hippocratic passages, (cooked) liver is prescribed for gynaecological patients: Diseases of Women 1.34 (8.80 L.), sheep or goat liver in cases where, near parturition, the uterus fills with “wind” and 2.110 (8.236 L.), sheep or ox liver to control unnatural flow of menstrual blood. There are parallels in Herophilus, Celsus, Paul of Aegina, Aretaeus, Galen and Pliny for treatment of night blindness by (always cooked) liver of various animals; sometimes the cooking juices are used as a lotion as well as the meat for consumption.” . Another parallel between early Egyptian medicine and the medicine of Places ın Man is in the supposed system of the blood vessels. The distribution of the vessels, as described in the Egyptian “vessel book” is: to the back of the head, to the forehead, to the eye, to the eyebrow and to the temples; the vessels to the temples had as their contents blood and water, carried to the eye. Also, the distinction made between the bones in the head, perhaps skull and temporal bone, indicates an anatomy similar to that of exponents of Greek and Carian settlers (Hdt. 2.61). Homer mentions Egypt incidentally as a source of pharmaka “drugs” (Odyssey 4.227-232, Helen had drugs from Egypt, a fertile land and a rich source); in the classical era, Theophrastus regarded Egypt as a prime source of drugs (History of Plants 9.15; cf. HP 4, list of plants peculiar to regions: 4.2.1 ff Egypt; 4.3.1 ff. Libya; 4.4.1 ff. Asia). This is corroborated by references in the Hippocratic Corpus itself to Egyptian, Libyan, and Ethiopian specifics. The adjective “Egyptian” occurs seventy-six times in the Hippocratic Corpus, with reference to perfume, soda, linen and so on. Ethiopian cumin too was prescribed. Most of these references are in the surgical and gynaecological works; also in Epidemics 2, 5 and 7, in Internal Affections and in Regimen in Acute Diseases. There was a regular trade route to the mainland from Egypt and from Sicily; grain especially was an important commodity, which had to be imported to the Greek mainland. In addition to grain, Egypt exported linen and papyrus; the main imports were wine, oil and pottery. Cyrene, which was founded on the Libyan coast by Dorians from Thera in around 630 BCE, and which had a further influx of immigrants from Greece around 570 BCE, rapidly became an important Greek city: culturally cosmopolitan, intellectually vibrant, and prosperous both agriculturally and economically. Relations between Cyrene and the surrounding peoples, largely nomadic, were complex, as were U See Nunn (1996) 199-200 on Ebers papyrus, 119 on sielae corroborating that ophthalmology existed as a recognised specialisation, and 206 on lack of evidence for any major change in the format or content of Egyptian medicine over the long period 2600 to 525 BCE, U See Nunn (1996) 200 on Kahun papyrus 1: “then you shall cause her to eat fresh liver of ass”. 2 The passage is discussed by Gourevich (1980). 2 Cf. von Staden (1989) 425-6. relations with the greater powers of Egypt and Persia. When the # See Nunn (1996) 45 and diagram, 50. ® Laronde (1990) describes a situation of contacts and change, as well as conflicts. Sec also Schafer (1952) and, especially, the palmary survey of Hornblower (1983) 59-65, “Cyrene, Africa and Egypt in the fifth century”. Strabo 17.3.21 gives a useful potted history.

to coexist Persians conquered Egypt in 525 BCE, Cyrene was able Persian the of part e independently for a time, though it later becam empire; it was free again in the middle of the fifth century, about ed its earthe time its monarchy finally collapsed, but never regain lier importance. hub ne hub, It may be conjectured that Cyrene was an interconnecting Italy. and n Aegea the n betwee ns icatio an intermediary in commun Aegean Sea communications with both were good. The route to the favourby d reache readily and Cyrene of north was via Crete, due ing winds; to reach Sicily, voyagers could either take the direct route g on or hug the north African coast before making a short crossin of te the open sea. Various pointers corroborate Herodotus estima major a was It the importance of Libyan Cyrene as a medical centre. healcentre of Asclepius worship. It was the centre of trade in the ly. ing plant silphion, of which the local monarchy had a monopo Although the plant is familiar from illustrations on the coins of the canregion, it has not been certainly identified. One identification nal medici had sap the and stalk vassed is Thapsia Garganica. The rastus, properties as a binding agent, or styptic. According to Theoph an Strabo to ing accord though ica, Cyrena to ar the plant was peculi inferior variety grew in “Media”. The medicament is mentioned forty-six times in the Hippocratic Corpus. Exactly half of these occurthe surrences are in the gynaecological works; there are some in in gical works as well as Internal Affections (seven occurrences); Regimen s 4 Acute Diseases (four); Diseases 2 and Diseases 3 (four each); Disease Epidemics 7 (two). ; ne and idee n well as goods, surely travelled these routes. ed Although, as usual, names are elusive it is clear that Egypt produc ideas of notable doctors, some known to mainland Greeks. The Ninyas of Egypt about disease-inducing flux are among those cited, with those of Euryphon of Cnidus and many others, including many from Italy and Sicily, in the ‘Menoneia’ (Anon. Lond. IX 37-44). There is a tradition of a visit to Cyrene as well as to Italy by Plato, who had pronounced medical interests. Tamblichus begins his cataorus logue of Pythagoreans with men of Cyrene (DK 58 A 1). Theod 203 of Cyrene, whose name was used to signify an archetypal mathematician, speaks briefly, as an old man who was teacher of Theaetetus in Plato’s dialogue of that name (Pl. Theaetetus 146 B). The career of the eye doctor who went to Persia, like that of Democedes (Hat. 3.1, 125, 131-132), is evidence of interaction between distant regions and of considerable professional mobility; also of the tendency for the best doctors to gravitate to places where they could find power, prestige and patronage; that is, to royal courts or to wealthy aristocratic households. Similarly, Roman emperors employed distinguished physicians; among them Oribasius, a most prolific medical writer. A parallel may be suggested. Poets as well as doctors depended on potentates and their patronage. Even the tragic dramatists, whose work is often taken to epitomise democratic Athens at its zenith, travelled to foreign courts: in old age, Aeschylus lived in Sicily and Euripides in Macedon, while Sophocles was regarded as unusual in not leaving the city. The career of the top poet Pindar is analagous in its locale to that of the top doctor Democedes, both being peripatetic. Both were active at Aegina and neither at Athens: a quarter of all Pindar’s epinicians are for Aeginetans, only two for Athenians. Pindar had patrons in Sicily (centre, with the south Italian cities, of west Greek medicine), in Thessaly (where the doctors of the Epidemics practised) and in Cyrene (also a medical centre). The travels of Pindar can be plausibly reconstructed by inference from the content of his poems, in conjunction with information in the ancient vita. Chronologically, Pindar’s career is as follows: around 498 BCE, patrons Aleuadae of Thessaly (Pythian 10); around 474-466 BCE, patrons Hieron and Theron in Sicily (Olympians 1 and 3; Pythian 1); 474 BCE, patron Telesicrates of Cyrene (Pythian 9); 462 BCE, patron Arcesilas, king of Cyrene (Pythians 4 and 5). The ancient vita tells of a stay at the court of Hieron, ruler of Syracuse. Scepticism about the information given by ancient biographers, and about biographical information implicit in an author’s work, has been current for some time; but this scepticism—in any case rather exaggerated—is inappropriate in the case of a lyric poet evidently naming and praising his patrons. It is impossible to be certain that Pindar went personally to Cyrene to hear his odes performed, but it is highly probable. Pyihian 5 seems to display familiarity with the topography of Cyrene as well with its antiquarian traditions. In Pythian 4, a vast virtuoso 2 See Presicce (1991). (1954), 2” See Theophrastus, HP 4.3.1 and also 9.1, 4, 7, on which see Capelle s 4.169. Herodotu esp. 178-183, and Strabo 11.13.7 and cf. 2.2.3; 2.5.33; also work of thirteen triads, there is a concatenation of medical imagery. King Arcesilas is likened to an iarhp émixaipétatoc, “a most apt

healer”, honoured by Paian, and one who must apply a gentle hand 6 ep to treat a sore from a wound (270-271); then it is added that a brief Karpds npdg cvOpdnav Bpaxd pérpov Eger, “time for man has of Coronis, mother by Apollo of Asclepius (2ythian 3). Thessaly is span” (286). This is not a mere cliché. The word kazros (present already in the adjective applied to “healer”) had been appropriated by the medical profession, and the sentiment has close verbal as well as semantic parallels in the corpus. Further, in a typical Pindaric patterning, the myth of Cyrene, the eponymous nymph of the city, mother by Apollo of Aristaeus (Pythian 9) is a doublet of the myth the locale for both myths; the centaur Cheiron is involved in both as observer, adviser or more active participant (Pythian 3.63; 9.29, 38-39). Cheiron, son of Kronos and Philyra, belongs in an ancient stratum of Greek myth (genealogies, Apollodorus 3.10.3). It was he THE HIPPOCRATIC TREATISE PERI OPSIOS 205 slightly unusual expressions from 9.1: coppéper mpdc (found also Epid. 5 and 7, Fract., VC) and cixdarkatà ths phéBas (found also Acut. and to the library in Alexandria where the Hippocratic Corpus took the Epid. 2 for the regular oucbar npdc). Organ of Sight is not cited by ancient compilers of glossaries, despite the presence of some unusual features in vocabulary.” The work is not mentioned by any ancient source. It may have had a different tradition, and a different route form which became definitive. It may even have remained in Cyrene, a short step from Alexandria. Prominent Alexandrian scholars from Cyrene include Callimachus. Alternatively, one might speculate that a doctor from another region visited Cyrene to further his knowledge of eye diseases and treatments and that his notes, preserving the local idiom, have survived.?° What can we conclude? The closest affinities in content and in language are with Places in Man (and, with it, Glands). The case for common authorship with Afections is uncertain. While Affections has resemblances with Places in Man?! and Places in Man has resemblances who taught medicine to the heroes: not only to Asclepius, his star pupil, but also to Achilles (Homer, Iliad 4.219; 1 1.831-832). Centaurs with Organ of Sight, it is less easy to find significant common ground between Affections and Organ of Sight, and the language (particles excepted) is quite different. Although the content quite closely resembles the content of the section on eye diseases in Prorrhetic 2, the language and style are in no way similar. When we turn to other works in the Hippocratic Corpus, various elements of common content can be traced. The closest is the account of “diseases affecting the head” the name Cheiron (JG 12.3.360). The importance of Cheiron surare usually disparaged in Greek verse; but Pindar uses complimentary epithets of Cheiron, suggesting an ancient and powerful divinity (Pythian 4.119, “divine”; 9.38 “mighty”; Nemean 3.5455, wise ). That Thessaly is important in the origins of Asclepius cult is well known: the diffusion of the cult is more uncertain.” It is, however, certain that Cheiron pre-dated Asclepius in cult as well as in myth. A primitive rock inscription from Thera, mother city of Cyrene, has of Diseases 2: several sections show strong similarities and the arrangement by headings is the same. There is a further nexus of associafoods, and on other similar passages. 3 See Craik (1998) 234-235 on Af, 61 — Loc. Hom. 41, different effects of same # An exception may be &tpaxtov, glossed by Galen in the accusative; the only other known occurrence, Int. 28 (7.242 L.) is dative plural. See Anastassiou and Irmer (1997) 458-459. ® See Staden (1989) 206 T 90 on the “bad Greek” allegedly spoken by many in Alexandria and other regions in later times. arately or together; there are also some elements peculiar to our tions with treatises which give recipes (Diseases of Women 1, Regimen vives in names for various kinds of all-heal, known as Cheironeion, | Asklepieion, Herakleion (Theophrastus, HP 9.11). Considering the marked roughness of Organ of Sight, it may be conjectured that this whole treatise is based on the work of someone in Acute Diseases); and still another with treatises where cautery is employed (Affections, Internal Affections, Articulations in addition to Places in Man and Diseases 2). In language, the most striking recurrent parallels are with Places in Man and with the gynaecological works, sepwhose first language was not Greek and who was not entirely at home with the idiom. Particular oddities in use of prepositions are unlikely to come from vagaries in transmission; the idiomatic use of prepositions is peculiarly difficult for foreigners to master. Examples are: év ROAA® ypévo borepov (1.1); xwpet èrì tò pAavpotepov (1.1); dato rpöodev (1.2); nAñv tod révu npög vt tH dotto (2.1); mapa tò AAO (3.4); Gorepov tobtov (4.2); pete tod Enpod (9.3). We may add two the seemingly otiose cult title Jatros, doctor. 2 Thus, one tradition had it that Cyrene acquired the cult from Epidaurus and gave it to Cretan Lebena (Pausanias 2.26). It is odd that. at Cyrene Asclepius

treatise and Internal Affections. Particular passages of the short work particularly resemble passages from the treatises mentioned: Prorrhetic 2 (1, 2 and 9), Internal Affections (3 and 5), Diseases 2 (4, 6 and 8), Regimen in Acute Diseases (6). There is some resemblance with some elements in Epidemics (6 and 9). Although in two cases, these similarities may facilitate emendation of Organ of Sight, where the transmitted text is problematical to the point of being meaningless,” the nexus of interrelations must induce caution. Once again, the complex intertextuality of the tradition is demonstrated. The interrelacommonly supposed. tion of its geographical origins may also be more complex than BIBLIOGRAPHY G. Althoff, J. (1993), ‘Herodot und die griechische Medizin’, in: K. Déring and Wöhrle (eds.), Antike Naturwissenschaft und ihre Rezeption 3, Bamberg, 1-16. Anastassiou, A. and Irmer, D. (1997), Testimonien zum Corpus Hippocraticum, Teil 2 Galen, Göttingen. Capelle, W. (1954), ‘Theophrast in Kyrene?’, Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 97, 169-189. Craik, E.M. (1998), Hippocrates: Places in Man, Oxford. Robert (eds), Hippocratica, Paris, 167-187. Craik, E.M. (2002), ‘Phlegmone normal and abnormal’, in: A. Thivel and A. Zucker (eds.), Le normal et le pathologique dans la collection hippocratique, Nice, 285-301. Ermerins, F.Z. (1859-1864), Hippocratis et aliorum medicorum veterum reliquiae (3 vols.), Utrecht. Gourevich, D. (1980), ‘Le dossier philologique du nyctalope’, in: M.D. Grmek, F. Hanson, M. (1999), Hippocrates On Head Wounds (CMG 1.4.1), Berlin. Hornblower, S. (1983), The Greek World 479-323 BC, London. Populations, Oxford, 169-180. Joly, R. (1978), Hippocrate t. XIII: Des Lieux dans l'homme. Du système des glandes. Des fistules. Des hémorroides. De la vision. Des chairs. De la dentition, Paris. Jouanna, J. (1983), Hippocrate t. X.2: Maladies II, Paris. Laronde, A. (1990), ‘Greeks and Libyans in Cyrenaica’, in: Greek Colonists and Native Ramene 9, 147-166. Littré, E. (1839-61), Oeuvres completes d’Hippocrate (10 vols.), Paris. Lloyd, G. (1975 and 1991), ‘Alcmaeon and the early history of dissection’, Sudhofs Archiv 59, 113-147 (reprinted with new introduction in Methods and Problems in Greek Science, Cambridge, 164-193). Longrigg. J. (1993), Greek Rational Medicine, London. Nunn, J.F, (1996), Ancient Egyptian Medicine, London. Presicce, C.P. (1991), ‘Panakeia, Jatros e le altre divinita asclepiadi a Cirene’, Africa Rodriguez Alfageme, 1. (1993), ‘La atribucion de Hipp. de Visu’, Cuadernos de filologia clasica (G) 3, 57-63. 32 A new edition of the text is projected. THE HIPPOCRATIC TREATISE PERI OPSIOS 207 Schafer, H. (1952), “Die Verfassungsgeschichtliche Entwicklung Cyrenes im ersten Cyrer ing . dung’ Jahrhundert nach seiner Begrün _ Philo g’, Rheinisches Musi 4 bridge. DD NN MEDICINE ES lus: the Esai Art of Medicine FI. von earı Al M Cem ne inu car Staden, A. Cos? e Cos? Cnide Herophi (1981),(1989), Thivel, poca, (1901) Cnide et Essai sur les doctrines médicales dans la collection hip- ANC Ew