Introduction

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Introduction Introduction About fourteen hundred years ago, one or several professors of medicine in Egypt prepared epitomes in Greek to accompany the sixteen works of Galen that constituted the larger part of the standard syllabus of medi- cine in the medical schools of Alexandria. These epitomes were study guides, similar to the CliffsNotes of modern American students. In con- trast to the rambling and argumentative style of Galen’s original works, the epitomes are full of the lists, tables, and systematic categorizations of concepts, symptoms, diseases, and organs that medical students have always had to memorize. Besides the Alexandrian students, others must have found them useful, for they were translated into Arabic—suppos- edly by the famous Christian translator Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq—and then into Hebrew. Arabic manuscripts of these epitomes are about as com- mon as manuscripts of the Arabic versions of the corresponding original works of Galen. Citations of them, or signs of their influence, are not difficult to find in Arabic medical literature. Thus they are historically important and worthy of closer study than they have received so far. They are also an admirably clear, if sometimes tedious, survey of Galenism as it was understood at the very end of antiquity. The Alexandrian medical curriculum The medical school in Alexandria Greek medical education probably took place most often in the con- text of a master-apprentice relationship, commonly within a family. In the Hippocratic oath, the physician vows to pass on the art only to his sons, the sons of his own master, and sworn apprentices. Nevertheless, the oath itself is evidence that this system was changing, at least to the extent that those wishing to acquire a medical education could do so by – xix – xx Introduction paying a teacher and attending his classes. In all likelihood, the most common pattern was for aspiring doctors to study locally, either in their family or with local teachers, and then—if their ambition, talent, and financial resources allowed—go on to attend lectures of internationally known teachers at one or more of the famous centers of medicine. This was how Galen himself acquired his education. He was the son of what today we might call a real estate developer, who was able to pay for his son to become a doctor. Galen studied with local teachers in Pergamon and Smyrna before going off for several years of advanced study in Alexandria.1 From the time of the Ptolemies up to the fall of the city to the Arabs, Alexandria had a reputation as the best place for advanced medical edu- cation. Since we do not know the institutional details of medical instruc- tion, it is wise to resist reifying the “Medical School of Alexandria,” as has been done with the “University of Gondeshapur.” Certainly, instruc- tion was offered there under something like official auspices, with one or more salaried professors; but beyond that we know little. When Galen was there in the middle of the second century, Alexandria was still living off its reputation for instruction in anatomy, acquired four centuries earlier.2 We know still less about Alexandrian medical instruc- tion in the century or two before the Arab conquest, when even the names of the teachers are unknown, garbled, or unhelpfully common. The medi- cal textbooks do not say much about actual medical practice, so the social role of doctors and medical students has to be pieced together from frag- mentary data—notably from the smug accounts of Christian saints whose miraculous cures humiliated proud pagan doctors.3 By the fifth and sixth centuries, the triumph of Galenism in the Roman world was complete.4 Galen had successfully tilted with his rivals: Empiricists, Methodists, Pneumatists, and other Rationalists. 1. On the role of formal medical instruction, see Duffy, “Byzantine Medicine.” 2. Galen, On Anatomical Procedures, trans. Singer, 3; cited in Iskandar, “Attempted Reconstruction,” 235. 3. Nutton, “From Galen to Alexander,” 5–7. 4. On medicine in late antiquity and Byzantium, see Nutton, Ancient Medicine; Nutton, “From Galen to Alexander”; Prioreschi, History of Medicine, vols. 3–4. Documentation for the period is fragmentary. On the philosophical rele- vance of Galenic medicine, see Pellegrin, “Ancient Medicine.” On the increasing Introduction xxi The professors of medicine in Alexandria had now settled down to ex- pounding a common system based mainly on the works of Galen, with his characteristic polemics largely removed and inconsistencies ironed out by drawing together passages from across his writings. This instruc- tion seems to have had a decidedly bookish quality, leading to the pro- fessors being called “iatrosophists.” The best evidence for instructional practices in late antique Alexandria comes from Arabic sources, which in turn allow us to make sense of the fragmentary instructional litera- ture in Greek. Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq reports: They read only these books [the sixteen books of the Alexandrian curriculum] in the place of medical instruction in Alexandria. They read them in the order that I have mentioned them, assembling each day to hear one of the authoritative texts read and explained, just as our Christian brethren do to this day in the places of instruction called schole, where they read from the book of one of the authorities, either one of the Ancients or one of the other books. [The Alexandrians] would read the specialized books individually after study of these books that we have mentioned, just as our brethren today read com- mentaries on the books of the Ancients. Galen, however, did not intend for his books to be read in this order. Instead, he specified that after his book The Medical Sects, his books on anatomy should be read.5 In a chapter on judging the qualifications of physicians, the ninth-century physician Isḥāq ibn ʿAlī al-Ruḥāwī writes: Galen undertook to determine each one of these natural principles, without which there can be no real knowledge of the states of the human body. Having distinguished them, he wrote a book about each one of these principles, attributing it to that principle and naming the book by it, seeing that it contained that principle and its branches. He continued in this manner until he had covered all the principles of medicine. Now, the Alexandrians were those most knowledgeable about this art, and when they met and gathered the students of the art of medicine, they realized that most of the young men of their day lacked the enthusiasm to read all of these books, especially those that Galen had composed. Wishing to make the art of medicine accessible tendency for philosophers and medical professors to be the same people, see Westerink, “Philosophy and Medicine.” 5. Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq, “Risālah,” 18–19. xxii Introduction to the students, they selected sixteen of Galen’s books, also making epitomes of most of them, seeking greater concision thereby. They introduced them into the schole—that is, the place that they had for teaching. Thus it is that nowadays anyone who claims to know the nature of the human body and that he is able to preserve health and treat diseases must know these books well in their order and must have read them with a knowledgeable teacher. Anyone who claims to know them ought to be questioned about the first of them, which is Galen’s On the Medical Sects [ for Beginners].6 The thirteenth-century medical historian Ibn Abī Uṣaybiʿah says much the same: These Alexandrians confined themselves to reading sixteen books of Galen in the medical school in Alexandria ( fī mawḍiʿ taʿlīm al-ṭibb bi-al-Iskandarīya). They read them systematically (ʿalá al-tartīb) and met every day to read and understand a part of them. Then they turned to abridgments and epitomes (al-jumal wa-al-jawāmiʿ) to make it easier to memorize and understand them, each one of them being assigned to comment on the sixteen books.7 The medical autodidact ʿAlī ibn Riḍwān (d. 453/1061) condemned the popularity of the resulting compendia and commentaries for having made them substitutes for the original texts of Hippocrates and Galen: In the time of Oribasius, when kingdoms had become dominated by Christianity, Oribasius thought of reviving the art [of medicine] and compiled his popular Compendium [Kunnāsh] for the laity, thus familiarizing the Christian kings with medicine. Paul [of Aegina] fol- lowed his path, and when their successors saw these two compendia, they continued to compile their own up to the present day. Even Abū Bakr al-Rāzī ordered each physician to compile a compendium for himself! Accordingly, medical books became abundant, and each doctor acquired a compendium for his own use. Galen wrote his commentaries in order to bring the medical works of Hippocrates to perfection. His abstracts and commentaries have left nothing out. Consequently, later books are superfluous, and 6. MS Edirne, Selimiye 1658, 97a–b, reprinted in facsimile in al-Ruḥāwī, Conduct of the Physician, 193–94; al-Ruḥāwī, Adab al-ṭabīb, 255–56, trans. M. Levey in al-Ruḥāwī, Medical Ethics of Medieval Islam, 84; and Gutas, Greek Thought, Arabic Culture, 93. 7. Ibn Abī Uṣaybiʿah, 1:103–4. Introduction xxiii to transcribe or reflect on their contents would hinder students from studying medicine. Studied closely, later compendia and similar works are found to represent the doctrine of the Methodists, whose art was rejected by Galen, for he informed us of their harmful influ- ence on medicine. According to their tradition, the Methodists described each disease, saying that it ought to be treated with a spe- cial [group of] drugs. This is precisely what is done by the compilers of compendia, which are, therefore, as harmful to medicine as the doctrine of the Methodists.
Recommended publications
  • Appendix 1: Greek and Islamicate Physicians
    Appendix 1: Greek and Islamicate Physicians Few of the ancient and medieval physicians and philosophers referred to in this book are household names. As in the underlying works of Galen, the epitomes mention various ancient physicians and philoso- phers by name; Galen, indeed, is our most important source of informa- tion for the doctrines of Hellenistic physicians. The individuals mentioned in connection with the composition of the epitomes are even more obscure. The following are the ancient physicians mentioned in the text of the epitome of On the Sects, including a few names given only in cer- tain manuscripts or mentioned elsewhere in the text. I have also included those mentioned in historical sources in connection with the composition of the epitomes and a few Islamicate physicians (most of whom are actually Christians) who appear in the historical documenta- tion of the epitomes or in the manuscripts. In most cases, I have given references only to standard reference sources, notably Pauly-Wissowa and its recent updates (RE, BNP), The Complete Dictionary of Scientific Biography (CDSB), Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques (DPA), The Encyclopaedia of Islam (EI), and Geschichte des arabischen Schriftums (GAS). Readers needing access to primary sources can easily trace them through these references. Acron of Agrigentum (fifth centuryBCE ). Physician, contemporary and fellow-townsman of Empedocles. Later Empiricists traced the origin of their school to him. He was known to Islamicate physicians through quotations as an authority on dietetics and as the first in the succession of physicians between Parmenides and Plato the Physician. BNP 1:113; DPA 1:50–51; GAS 3:22; RE 1:1199.
    [Show full text]
  • The Antinoopolis Medical Papyri: a Case Study in Late Antique Medicine
    The Antinoopolis Medical Papyri: a Case Study in Late Antique Medicine DISSERTATION zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doktorin der Philosophiae (Dr. Phil.) eingereicht an der Philosophischen Fakultät II der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin von MA Francesca Corazza Präsidentin der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin: Prof. Dr. Sabine Kunst Dekanin der Philosophischen Fakultät II: Prof. Dr. Ulrike Vedder Gutachter: 1. Prof. Dr. Philip van der Eijk 2. Prof. Dr. Fabian Reiter Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 15. Dezember 2016 ABSTRACT The main aim of my research project was to re-examine the Greek medical papyri from the Egyptian site of Antinoopolis dating between late 3rd up to 7th century AD, discovered mostly in a single area between 1913 and 1914. Antinoopolis offers the potential for putting documents into an archaeological context, and this geographical and chronological consistency facilitates a close comparison between the data preserved in these sources. The interest in Antinoopolis, as far as the medical tradition is concerned, lies in the diverse healing practices attested by documentary, literary and archaeological evidence whose quantity and range is altogether exceptional among Egyptian villages. The objective of my research is both papyrological-philological and cultural- historical. Firstly, I have tried to present the manuscripts and discuss their peculiarities, characteristics and functions. I have sought to improve our understanding of these fragments through the identification of new portions of text, the integration of supplements and a better assessment of their formal arrangement, which resulted in the revised edition of a few outstanding papyri. In addition to this, I have tried to contribute to the evaluation of the general context of this Egyptian community, particularly as regards religious healing practices connected to the sanctuary of Collouthus, and to explore the historical and cultural circumstances in which these texts were used.
    [Show full text]
  • Christian Physicians in the Roman Empire
    OBC Christian Physicians in the Roman Empire Benevolence and Sacrifice Contact Information: Email: [email protected] in Proclaiming the Gospels Website: www.greenscholarsinitiative.com Series website: www.explorepassages.com Phone: 765-677-2170 GSI Lecture Series Passages Exhibit Hall Charlotte, NC December 11, 2012 Jerry Pattengale IFC popular pagan healers rested with popular healing saints. We have seen in general, and in the cases of some saints in particular, that the pervasive preoccupation with healing in late Roman society made the anargyroi prime candidates for such substitutions. 13 12 part because of the well-established ethic of Hippocratic medicine. Patrons attended the shrines after consulting physicians who practiced with the Church’s blessing and who exhibited a professional ethic resembling the saints’ Christian Physicians in the Roman Empire standards. Although the anargyros was depicted in the role of alter Christus, evidence supports the notion that Benevolence and Sacrifice in Proclaiming the Gospels1 his virtues were just as likely rooted in a pre-Christian Hippocratic ethic. Spyros G. Marketos and Constantin Papaeconomou assert that in Ancient Greece, the relationship between the Hippocratic physician and his or her patients “was dictated by human, rather than religious, concepts... practiced in accordance with scientific laws and Jerry Pattengale, Ph.D. 70 felt bound by ethical and humane precepts of his [or her] profession.” The implication is that the same is true for Green Scholars Initiative, Exec. Dir.; Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, Research Scholar; Tyndale House, Cambridge, Research modern physicians—that is, an incompatibility exists between religious and “human” concepts, or at least that they Associate; Baylor University, Dist.
    [Show full text]
  • A TIMELINE of the HISTORY of NEPHROLOGY a Joint
    A TIMELINE OF THE HISTORY OF NEPHROLOGY A joint project of The International Association for the History of Nephrology The ERA/EDTA And the Panhellenic Society for the History and Archaeology of Medicine By Athansios Diamandopoulos “We have come to understand that we are who we are is also who we were” John Quincy Adams (1767-1848) AUTHOR INDEX 1. Hippocrates, 5th cent. BC 2. Aristotle, 4th cent. BC 3. Erasistratus, 3rd cent. BC 4. Philo Judeus 1st cent. BC-1st cent. AD 5. Dioscurides, 1st cent. AD 6. Galen, 1st - 2nd cent. BC 7. Rufus Ephesus, 1st - 2nd cent. AD 8. Arêtes Cappadociensis, 2nd cent. AD 9. Pseudo-Galen, 2nd cent. AD 10. Alexander Aphrodisiensis, 2nd-3rd cent. AD 11. Oribasius Pergamenus, 4th cent. AD 12. Nemesius of Emesa, 4thcent. AD 13. Palladius, 5th cent. AD 14. Alexander of Tralles, 6th cent. AD 15. Aetius Amidenous, 6th cent. AD 16. Stephanus of Alexandria, 7th cent. AD 17. Paul of Aegina, 7th cet. AD 18. Theophilus Protospatharius, 7th cent AD (?) 19. Stephanus of Athens, 9th-10th cent AD (?) 20. Damascius, 9th-10th cent AD (?) 21. Michael Psellus, 11th cent. AD 22. Symeon Seth, 11th cent. AD 23. Johannes Apocaucus, 13th cent. AD 24. Nicolaus Myrepsus, 13th cent. AD 25. Johannes Zacharias Actuarius, 13th cent. AD 26. Nicephorus Vlemmydes, 14th cent. AD Before reporting the topics of Nephrology that were dealt with by Ancient Greek and Byzantine writers, it would be worth commenting on the etymogy of the two commonest words used by them in their relevant treatises a) The word Urology has been explained as a compound name of the Latin word urine and the Greek word logos, the latter meaning "knowledge".
    [Show full text]