Maravela-Solbakk - Leith: A Medical Catechism on Tumours 2007

A medical catechism on tumours from the collection of the Oslo University Library*

Anastasia Maravela-Solbakk David Leith

P.Oslo inv. 1576v1 3 x 16 cm Plate XXXI Oxyrhynchite ? III AD (doc.) A strip of light brown papyrus preserving remains of a single column of text as well as parts of the upper and lower margin (1,5 and 0,75 cm respectively). The column comprises 23 ll., all lacking beginnings and ends. The text in the upper ten lines amounts to 4-9 letters per line, while in the rest of the column an average of 3 letters per line has been preserved. The writing, penned with black ink, goes against the fibres (). In ll. 2 and 8 the scriptio continua is interrupted by spaces (ca. 0,75 cm wide), the first filled with a space filler and the second blank. The scanty and hardly legible remains of the text on the other () side a handful of letters from ends of eight different lines appear to belong to a document.2

The vocabulary in particular the terms ] in l. 3, [ in l. 5, [ in l. 6 and in l. 7 identifies the medical content of the fragment, while the formatblank spaces followed by questions in ll. 2 and 8 narrows down its generic identity to a single genre of medical literature, the ertapokriseis,3 medical manuals in the form of a dialogue of questions and answers (usually referred to as medical catechisms).

* The authors are greatly indebted to Prof. C. E. Rmer and Dr. I. Andorlini for their

kind advice and constructive criticism as well as to G. Haaland (Oslo University Library) for permission to publish and Andrea Gasparini (Oslo Univ. Library) for technical assistance.

1 LDAB 10246. Purchased by S. Eitrem in 1936 in Egypt. Part of a lot of fragments, a fair number of which proved to come from Oxyrhynchus and the Oxyrhynchite villages.

2 The abbreviation sign d (= ) is visible in the penultimate line; perhaps the text was an account or register of some sort.

3 The term is Byzantine, coined by 12th cent. grammarians, cf. Drrie and Drries 1966, 342.

A. MARAVELA-SOLBAKK D. LEITH 638

Medical catechisms on papyrus

To date, nineteen witnesses of the genre have been identified on papyri from Egypt:

P.Ashm.Mus. s. n. (II BC) [2370 M-P3; LDAB 6884] PSI inv. CNR 85/86 (I/II AD) [2373.01 M-P3; LDAB 4449] P.Aberd. 11 (II AD) [2342 M-P3; LDAB 4539] P.Ross.Georg. I 20 (II AD) [2343 M-P3; LDAB 4778] P.Turner 14 (II AD) [2340.1 M-P3; LDAB 4769] P.Genve inv. 111v (II/III AD) [2373 M-P3; LDAB 5032] P.PisaLit. 6 (= P.Alex inv. 614) (II/III AD) [2373.1 M-P3; LDAB 4959] P.CtYBR inv. 109v (II/III AD) [M-P3 2340.01; LDAB 10278] PSI III 252 (III AD) [2364 M-P3; LDAB 5017] PSI XV 1510 (III AD) [2364.01 M-P3; LDAB 5239] P.Golenischeff (III AD) [2347 M-P3; LDAB 5435] P.Aberd. 125 (III/IV AD Turner; 2nd half of III AD Andorlini) [2353 M- P3; LDAB 5482] P.Lund I 7 (III/IV AD) [2341 M-P3; LDAB 5537] P.Mil.Vogl. I 15 (IV AD Andorlini/ II ed. pr.) [2340 M-P3; LDAB 5698] P.Strasb.gr. inv. 849v (IV AD) [2343.01 M-P3; LDAB 10299].

Sporadic ertapokriseis obtain in the medical treatise transmitted on P.Oxy. LII 3654, fr. 1+5+3 and 8 (IIex./IIIin.)4 [2360.2 M-P3; LDAB 0245]. In addition to the Oslo fragment, another catechism from Oxyrhynchus (assigned to the 2nd cent. AD and dealing with a division of surgery and of its aims) is being prepared for publication.5 P.AshmLibr. inv. 28 (Petrie Box A3) [M-P3 2353.8] 6 on the causes, diagnosis and treatment of expectoration of blood may be added to this list.

Expert discussions of the known medical catechisms7 which, with a single exception (P.Ashm.Mus. s.n. = 2370 M-P3, II BC), span the period from the 2nd to the 4th cent. AD, agree that they all derive from handbooks8 intended

4 It comes from the same roll as P.Oxy. II 234, a collection of prescriptions; cf. Andorlini 1992, esp. pp. 382-84.

5 In D. Leiths PhD thesis. 6 Assigned to J. Bingen. 7 The following draws heavily on Kollesch 1973, 35-46, Ieraci Bio 1995, Andorlini 1992

& 1999 and Hanson 2003. 8 On the main traits of medical manuals cf. Andorlini 1992, 375-76 and 384-86; Ieraci

Bio 1995, 187-98.

Comm. Hum. Litt. Vol. 122

639

for the dissemination of medical knowledge to aspiring or even practising physicians. They constituted, along with collections of medical definitions and , a type of isagogic medical literature directed primarily at novices in the field.9 Their shared trait is compression of basic information within a brief space and, compared with specialised medical treatises, the greatest possible simplification of the information imparted.10 Among the extant fragments, the content of which appears to have been arranged thematically, we encounter remains of handbooks containing information on: (a) anatomy (PSI XV 1510, P.Lund I 7), (b) pathology (their particular subject being diseases of the head: P.CtYBR inv. 109v; of the hair: P.Aberd. 125; of the eye: P.Aberd. 11, P.Ross. Georg. I 20, P.Strasb.gr. inv. 849v; chronic diseases: P.Ashm.Mus s. n., P.Mil.Vogl. I 15; women's diseases: P.Golenischeff; diseases of the scrotum: PSI III 252; tumours of the body: P.PisaLit. 6;) and (c) surgery (P.Genve inv. 111v) & therapeutics (P.Turner 14, PSI inv. CNR 85/86). The composition of the catechistic manuals is thought to be the result of compilation of information derived from diverse sources, resulting each time in an individual formal and textual outlook. As regards their format, the samples recovered so far show great qualitative discrepancies, ranging from professionally executed copies (e.g. P.Turner 14, PSI III 252) to hastily penned private copies (e.g. P.Genve inv. 111v; P.Aberd. 125). Furthermore, whereas most samples share the setting off of each new section from the preceding one and, within each section, of

9 Cf. the introductory remarks of Ps.Galen Def. Med. (XIX 346, 1-4 K.)

, , (...) (...), the anonymous author of PSI XII 1275v (II AD) |2 , (...) -|8 | (...) and Ps.Soranus Quaest. Med. (...) et tanquam visibilis facta est doctrina, ut per eam utiliores fiant et astutiores qui introducuntur ad medicinam quos Graeci appellant. quapropter exordiar id ipsum vobis dicere (...) (p. 243 Rose) & (...) et quoniam utilior videtur eis qui ad medicinam introducuntur interrogationum et responsionum modus, quoniam format quodammodo sensus iuvenum, brevi in controversia isagoga tradenda est illis (...) (p. 247 Rose).

Zalateo (1964) endeavoured to connect the emergence of the genre with the institution of the , an examination for physicians wishing to become , apparently introduced in the 2nd cent. AD, but a scholarly majority trace its origins in medical education of the Hellenistic period.

10 Cf. Def. Med. XIX 346, 7-8 K. ... ' .


the question from the answer, the formal means by which this is achieved vary: blank spaces preceding and/ or following questions (P.Ashm.Mus. s.n., P.Turner 14, P.PisaLit. 6, PCtYBR inv. 109v, PSI inv. CNR 85/86) which are often written in eisthesis,11 sometimes also centred in the line (P.Aberd. 11, P.Ross.Georg. I 20, P.Genve 111v, PSI III 252, PSI XV 1510, P.Aberd. 125, P.Golenischeff, P.Strasb. gr. inv. 849); paragraphos (P.Aberd. 11, P.Lund I 7, PSI inv. CNR 85/86), dipl (PSI III 252, P.Lund I 7, P.Mil.Vogl. I 15) combined with colon (P.Turner 14) or high dots (PCtYBR inv. 109v) are also employed as markers of transition. The textual variation becomes evident in cases of catechisms which have been shown to treat the same diseases: P.Aberd. 11 and P.Ross.Georg. I 20 overlap in their treatment of , its typological variation and surgery, but not in the exact phrasing; the description of restored in P.Strasb. gr. inv. 846v, though being very close to that offered by P.Ross.Georg. I 20, presents minor divergences of formulation;12 the discussion of the cause of apoplexy in P.Ashm.Mus. s.n. l. 3ff. cannot be matched with its equivalent in P.Mil.Vogl. I 15r, 20ff. Since medical catechisms do not go back to a single original, supplements are not readily available, but have to be deduced on the basis of parallel formulations in earlier or later medical writings discussing the same diseases. Affinities have been detected on the Greek side with the Ps.Galenic treatise (Def. Med. in XIX 346-462 K.) dated by J. Kollesch to the end of the 1st cent. AD, but also with formulations in the treatises of Rufus, Oribasius, Aetius, Paul of Aegina et al., and on the Latin side with the catechistic work Quaestiones Medicinales transmitted under the name of Soranus (Quaest. Med.),13 but thought to trace its origins to a translation of the Ps.Galenic treatise in the 5th or 6th cent. AD.

The Oslo catechism

The Oslo fragment also belonged to such a manual, which occupied the back of a recycled documentary roll, as do seven other catechistic fragments

11 The only case of question in ekthesis obtains in P.Oxy. LII 3654. 12 Magdelaine 2004, 77. 13 Ed. pr. on the basis of a single manuscript by V. Rose Anecdota Graeca et

Graecolatina. Mitteilungen aus Handschriften zur Geschichte der griechischen Wissenschaft, Zweites Heft (Berlin) 1870, 241-274. An edition based on all three surviving manuscripts is in preparation by K.-D. Fischer, cf. Fischer 1998.


641

(P.Aberd. 11, P.Genve 111v, PSI XV 1510, P.Aberd. 125, P.Strasb. gr. inv. 849, P.Oxy. LII 3654 and the unpublished Oxyrhynchite fragment).

It preserves the following text (owing to the speculative nature of our restoration, we include suggested supplements, with discussion only in the commentary):

. ][ ] [ ][ ]..[ ][ 5 ][ ][ ]. (vac.) [ ][ ].[ 10 ][ ].[ ][ ][ ].[ 15 ][ ].[ ].[ ].[ ][ 20 ][ ][ ][

A trace of ink in the upper margin might indicate the presence there of a

column number, a parallel being the column number in P.Turner 14, but it is too obliterated to allow certainty. Each new lemma was evidenced by blank space, once filled with a diagonal stroke (l. 2) and once empty (l. 8). As no end of question/ beginning of answer is to be seen in the preserved portion of the text, it must remain uncertain how the transition from question to answer was evidenced formally. Traces of horizontal strokes, the first barely visible


above l. 18 (a paragraphos ?) and the second, a much longer one (right part of a dipl ?), above l. 20, may have functioned as section dividers.

A major impediment to the task of supplying the missing portions of text is the lack of firm evidence concerning line length. The supplementing proposals put forward in the present edition are informed by the following assumptions: a) that owing to the modular variation of letters a certain degree of variation in the number of letters per line should be expected and

b) that the possible presence of a paragraphos and a dipl above ll. 18 and 20 suggests that the amount of text lost in the lacuna at left was relatively little (2-4 letters). Finally, as all transitions between question and answer have been lost in the lacunae (ll. 2, 5 and 8), the manner of evidencing answer beginning cannot be definitely decided. In our supplementing proposals we have assumed that answer beginning either followed directly after the question without much of a space or was separated from it by a blank space (see comm. on ll. 2 and 5, and cf. P.Turner 14.17 and P.Migl.Vogl. 1.15 verso 9).

The content and structure of the text is, in our opinion, likely to have been as follows, with four ertapokriseis partly identifiable in the upper and better preserved part of the text:

L. 1: Part of answer to a question enquiring after the nature of haemorrhage.

Ll. 2-4: An ertapokrisis enquiring after the nature of enterokl, the prolapse of the intestine (inguinal hernia).

Ll. 4-7: An ertapokrisis about the nature of hydrokl, a fluid-filled sack in the scrotum.

L. 8-?: New ertapokrisis, perhaps requesting the definition of a tumour-like formation (see comm. on l. 8).

Thereafter the extensive loss of text renders the reconstruction of the content difficult. A new question may be posed in l. 13 (of the type what is ...?) and another in l. 18 (of the type what is the cause of ...?). The assumption is corroborated by the possible presence of a lectional sign (paragraphos ?) above l. 18. L. 23 may have been occupied by a question concerning a hernia in the area of the navel.

The above suggests that the Oslo fragment dealt with a variety of different afflictions which were not systematically arranged according to the area of the body affected as the transition from haemorrhage to a hernia and tumour in the area of the groin would seem to make clear. This sequence


643

shows freedom and independence from that found in the Ps.Galenic Def. Med. (in which haemorrhage is definition no. 460, enterokl no. 425 and hydrokl no. 424) and the Ps.Soranian Quaest. Med. (which includes no definition of haemorrhage, while enterokl and hydrokl occupy nos. 431 and 430 respectively). The Oslo fragment also displays important textual differences from the Def. Med., especially in the level of detail incorporated (see comm., especially on ll. 5-8). Its textual relation, on the other hand, to the Quaest. Med. cannot be fully unveiled due to the loss of the definition of hydrokl in ms. L (Lincoloniensis 220, 12th cent. AD) transmitting the latter work,14 though what can be compared implies no close affinity. The material on also appears to differ in structure and content from the only other catechistic fragment treating diseases in this area of the body, PSI III 252.15

Simplicity of format and wording appear to be characteristic of the Oslo manual. The questions posed were apparently short, calling mostly for a definition; the answers were equally concise and simple. The absence of any clearly therapeutic material should also be noted. Evidencing of lemmas was achieved in the simplest manner, by blank spaces occasionally accompanied by a space-filler or combined with a paragraphos/ dipl.

The script is an informal, inelegant semi-cursive. The letters are fair-sized, upright capitals of irregular module, some taller and some broader. Some are occasionally joined, but not in distorting ligatures. The impression of inelegance is reinforced by the use of an unsharpened pen. The hand, which bears remote reminiscences of the chancery (note the hanging at l. 5, the ligature , the hanging from the horizontal stroke of at l. 7) and of the formal mixed style (modular contrast and the often straight left side of and C), is datable to the third cent. AD; cf. P.Oxy. VIII 1100 (AD 209) in Roberts 1955, pl. 20b and PSI XII 1240 (AD 222) in Pap. Flor. XII, pl. XXVII.

14 On this manuscript see Fischer 1998, 4. We are gratefully indebted to Professor K.-D.

Fischer, who very kindly and readily made available to us the relevant sections from his unpublished transcripts of the Ps. Soranian Quaestiones Medicinales, as preserved in its so-called insular tradition.

15 Ed. pr. L. Di Stefani; ed. post. D. Fausti in Pap. Flor. VII, 61-65. Substantial revisions in Mavroudis 1986. A similar affection seems to be dealt with in a small papyrus fragment preserving a recipe, P. Acad. inv. 6d, l. 3 where we find the sequence ] [, cf. Fournet 2004, 177-179.


Format, script and the simplicity of wording suggest that the present fragment is likely to derive from a privately copied catechistic manual, comparable in quality with the rather humble witnesses of the genre.

Commentary

1 The syntagm occurs twice in the definition of in Def. Med. no. 460 (XIX 456, 14-17 K.): , . (...) , , (...). The adj. profuse (about accentuation see Herod. De Prosodia Catholica vol. 3, 1, pp. 202.25-203.2) qualifies in other medical texts, e.g. Hipp. De Glandulis 1.4, Gal. De Meth. Med. xiv (X 616, 10 K.), Aet. Iatr. v 71.7 etc. There seems little doubt that the same affliction is under discussion here, with the question ; having appeared in the previous column.

If we take the text of the Def. Med. as our guide for supplementing the missing text, the genitive may have preceded the predicate [, while the predicate may have been followed and complemented by an adverbial phrase further describing the manner of haemorrhage (e.g. vel sim. or perhaps part of this for reasons of space). The text may have run as follows: End of previous col.: [ -]| L. 1 [] [ ]

2 Diagonal stroke functioning as a space-filler, and marking a new question. This extensive space suggests that there may have been no text lost at line beginning.

2-4 The question is posed in l. 2 and the answer is concluded in the missing right part of l. 4. The name of the affliction is lost, but it is defined in part by the noun [ ] prolapse (l. 2). is the technical term used almost exclusively for the prolapse of the intestine into the scrotal sack () involved in the condition named , or inguinal hernia (cf. e.g. Ps.Gal. Def. Med. XIX 447.13-16 K.; Sor. Gyn. 2.39.2.1; Gal. De Comp. Med. sec. Loc. XII 449.4-5 K.; Orib. Coll. Med.


645

50.48.1, Ecl. Med. 59.2.1; Paul. Aeg. Epit. Med. 3.44.1.5-6, 6.65.1; Aet. Iatr. ix 28.143-146). It is used once in the Def. Med. also in the definition of hydrenterokl, a combined condition which involves the association of the inguinal hernia with an acquaeous cyst (Def. Med. XIX 448.1-2 K.). The term is also used shortly afterwards in the Def. Med. to describe the prolapse of the omentum in the condition , and of both the intestine and the omentum in another hybrid condition, (Def. Med. XIX 448.10-13 K.). The overwhelming association of the term among medical writers with the condition , however, strongly suggests that this is the subject of the ertapokrisis in the Oslo fragment. should be rejected also on the grounds of illogicality the question that occupies ll. 2-4 is followed by another on (ll. 5-8), so that discussion of the combined condition is unlikely to have preceded a definition of one of its constituent conditions. Unfortunately, the anatomical details of the definition have been lost, but the presence of at l. 4 (which may indicate the presence of a / or in the first part of the definition, as in Gal. De Sanit. Tuend. VI 336.12-14 K., De Aliment. Fac. VI 620.11-13 K., De Loc. Affect. VIII 348.5-7 K.; Ps.Gal. De Remed. Parab. XVI 385.9-11 K.; Aet. Iatr. vi 1.24-26, xi 4.15-17 etc.) must refer to a chronological development of the condition, most likely detailing the extent of the prolapse. None of the extant definitions or discussions of in medical literature (in Greek: Gal. De Caus. Morb. VII 36.8-15 K., Ps.Gal. Def. Med. XIX 447.13-16 K., Poll. Onom. 4.203.3-4, Orib. Coll. Med. 50.41.1-43.4, Paul. Aeg. Epit. Med. 3.53.1.1-9 and 6.65.1, Leo Consp. Med. 6.11 and Joh. Act. De Diagn. 1.55.3-9; in Latin: Ps.Soranus Quaest. Medic. no. 431L recedens aut extensio loci aut percussio aut eruptio membranae according to K.-D. Fischers transcription of Lincoloniensis 220) explicitly refers to such distinct chronological stages, which offers further evidence for the independence of the tradition represented by the Oslo fragment, but we might speculate that this later stage (introduced in some descriptions by , cf. Gal. De Caus. Morb. VII 36.8-15; Joh. Act. De Diagn. 1.55.3-9) referred to a full prolapse of the intestine into the scrotal sack, preceded perhaps by an intermediate stage in the extent of the prolapse, or the original bursting or stretching of the peritoneum.

A possible restoration of ll. 2-4 may be as follows:


[ ; ] [] [ -] [], [ (vac.) ] The proposed supplement at l. 2 suggests that there may not have been a

blank space, or not much of one, after the question.

5-8 The question is: [ ] [; ]. is defined in medical literature as collection of fluid in the

area of the groin. As to its precise location, medical authors are more or less specific: Celsus discusses the tumours of the groin in De Medicina 7. 18, prefacing it by a detailed description of the structure of the area and of the membranes of the testicles. He tells us firstly that the testicles and the cord as well as the veins and arteries to which the latter is attached, are encased by the elytroeids tunic (ibid. 18, 1-2). This in turn is surrounded by the dartos tunic (ibid. 18, 2). Between these, as well as under the elytroeids, are found numerous membranulae encasing the veins, arteries and the cord already mentioned. Encompassing both testicles and both their respective tunics, is the scrotal sack, the outer covering visible to the eye (ibid. 18, 2). Celsus refers to the elytroeids, dartos and oscheos as the ima, media and summa tunica respectively. In the ensuing discussion of hydrokl (ibid. 18, 6-7) Celsus informs us that the fluid can be collected either in the two locations between the three tunics or in the membranes under the elytroeids: Integris vero membranis interdum eam partem umor distringit. Atque eius quoque species duae sunt: nam vel inter tunicas is increscit vel in membranis, quae ibi circa venas et arterias sunt, ubi eae gravatae occalluerunt. Ac ne ei quidem umori, qui inter tunicas est, una sedes est: nam modo inter summam et mediam, modo inter mediam et imam constitit. Graeci communi nomine, quicquid est, hydrocelen appellant (...). A less detailed description of the structure of the area is to be found in the Ps.Galenic treatise Introductio seu Medicus (XIV 719, 5-10 K.) , , . . , . . Galen at De Tumoribus praeter Naturam 15 (...) , (VII 729, 11-13 K.) locates hydrokl in the tunics around the testicle; Ps.Galen Def. Med. no. 424 (XIX 447, 11-12 K.) merely


647

locates the collection of fluid in a part of the scrotum; Poll. Onom. 4. 203, 4-5 , locates it between the second and fourth membrane; Paul of Aegina tells us that the fluid is most commonly found inside the elytroeids around the testicle, but also under the dartos or under the oscheos, Epit. Med. 6. 62.1, 1-23 (...). , , . , . (...) , . (...). Other, less useful in this context, discussions of hydrokl are to be found at: Orib. Coll. Med. 50 43.4, 3ff., Aetius Iatr. xvi 112; Steph. In Hipp. 2.1.60ff.; Joh. Act. De Diagn. 1.55, 11-13; Leo Consp. Med. 6.12, while scribal error has caused the definition of hydrokl in ms. L of the Ps.Soranian Quaest. Med. to be replaced by that of enterokl.

It should be noted that the reference to the elytroeids and the oscheos in the Oslo fragment suggest a level of detail more in line with the passages of Celsus and Paulus. It therefore seems likely that also the dartos was referred to in the lacuna of l. 6. A possible reconstruction of the text of ll. 5-8 is:

[ ] ; [ ]| [ ] [ ]| [ ] [ ?? [] (vac.) Again, if the proposed supplement in l. 5 is correct, there may not have

been much of a blank space between question and answer. If, on the other hand, the adjective did not form part of the definition, the presence of a blank space may be postulated.

8-9 New question occupying the rest or part of l. 8. It is impossible to be certain how many lines its corresponding answer which began either at the end of l. 8 or at the beginning of l. 9 occupied.

As regards the content of the ertapokrisis: Rather than reading the genitive at l. 9, it gives much better sense to divide ] .[, in which case the disease in question would be described as a contortion, a tumour of some sort (cf. Gal. In Hipp. De Vict. Acut. Comm. iv, XV 773.2-5


K.; Gal. Linguarum seu Dictionum exoletarum Hippocratis Explicatio XIX 143.17 K. , ). The following diseases are defined in terms of contortions in the Def. Med.: the ophthalmic tumour (no. 354, XIX 437.7-8 K.), as: (no. 380, XIX 441.6-7 K.) and gland as: (no. 396, XIX 443.14-15 K.). Comparable descriptions of are offered at Paul. Aeg. Epit. Med. 4.16.1.1ff., Aet. Iatr. vii 85.5, Hesych. s.v., Joh. Act. De Diagn. 2. 29.1ff. and the same tumourous formation is described as ] [ in the catechistic text preserved on P.PisaLit. 6.12-14 (= P.Alex. inv. 614.12-14; cf. Andorlini 1999, 12-15). This hard tumour, occurring mostly in the head and limbs, is however less compatible with the context in this papyrus. The glands, on the contrary, described as to a certain extent fatty and fleshy contortions at Rufus De Partibus Corporis Humani 67 , , , (cf. also Hipp. De Glandulis 1, 5 & 9; Hesych. s.v. and EM s.v. ) are a suitable candidate. Another possibility is that by fleshy contortion is meant quite literally , described by Celsus as growth of flesh between the tunics (caro ... inter tunicas increscit De Medicina 7.18.10), its prime symptom being, according to Greek medical writers (Gal. De Tumoribus praeter Naturam VII 729, 10-11 K.; Poll. Onom. 4.203.6-7; Paul Aeg. Epit. Med. 6. 63. 1; Leo Consp. Med. 6. 15) that the testicle(s) become varicose. , described at Aetius Iatr. xv 5 as and , are also possible in this context (cf. Ps.Galen Def. Med. no. 397 , Ps.Soran. Quaest. Med. no. 406 L quid est cirada? Caro indurata. et indisolubilis facta (...). 10 - - ? 13-14 New ertapokrisis ([ ] [). The affliction involved either change of colour from white to ... (] [) or something being/ turning utterly white (a form of )?


649

18-19 Question and answer on aetiology? A possible reconstruction: [(vac.)] [ ] or [(vac.) [ ] [ ] [ ] or [ ] [ ]

20 The letter constellation - tempts us to assume that the question concerned a disease of the head, perhaps , defined by medical writers as collection of watery or blood-like fluid in the head and located variously, cf. Celsus De Medicina 4. 2. 4; Ps.Galen Def. Med. no. 390 (XIX 442, 15-17 K.); Paul. Aeg. Epit. Med. 6. 3. 1-2; Ps.Soran. Quaest. Med. no. 250 (p. 273 Rose). The extremely varied meanings of terms incorporating the sequence --, however, preclude any certainty on this question. It should be noted that the medical catechism PCtYBR inv. 109v.4-6 asks for the definition of , an affliction involving collection of fluid in the head. The collection of fluid is a feature shared between this affliction and , mentioned earlier in our fragment. Its presence may, thus, not be totally out of context in the Oslo fragment. 23 The consonant combination - makes attractive the hypothesis that the missing part of the line contained a question concerning an umbilical hernia, though other supplements e.g. a variant of cannot be excluded. Hernias of the umbilicus , , , , , , - are described in Ps.Gal. Def. Med. nos. 404-410 (XIX 444, 11-445, 4 K.) and in Ps.Soranus Quaest. Med. nos. 408 & 412-415 L. The question is likely to have been posed in l. 22.

Bibliography

ANDORLINI, I. (1992) Papiri e Medicina: POxy II 234 + POxy LII 3654 in EL

MOSALLAMY, A.H.S. (ed.) Proceedings of the XIX International Congress of Papyrology, Cairo 2-9 September 1989, (Cairo), vol. I, 375-390.

ANDORLINI, I. (1999) Testi medici per la scuola: Raccolte di definizioni e questionari nei papiri in GARZYA, A. and J. JOUANNA (eds.) Les Textes Mdicaux Grecs. Tradition et Ecdotique, (Naples), 7-15.

DRRIE, H. and H. DRRIES (1966) Erotapokriseis RAC 6, 342-370. FISCHER, K.-D. (1998) Beitrge zu den pseudosoranischen Quaestiones medicinales in

FISCHER K.-D., D. NICKEL and P. POTTER (eds.) Text and Tradition. Studies in Ancient Medicine and its Transmission presented to Jutta Kollesch, (Leiden-Boston-Kln), 1-54.


FOURNET, J.-L. (2004) Le bibliothque d un mdecin ou d un apothicaire de Lycopolis? in ANDORLINI, I. (ed.) Testi Medici su Papiro. Atti del Seminario di Studio, Firenze, 3-4 giugno 2002, (Florence), 175-197.

HANSON, A. E. (2003) Text and Context in Papyrus Catechisms on Afflictions of the Head in GARZYA, A. and J. JOUANNA (eds). Trasmissione e Ecdotica dei Testi Medici Graeci. Atti del IV Convegno Internazionale, Parigi 17-19 maggio 2001, (Naples), 199-217.

IERACI BIO, A. M. (1995) L' nella letteratura medica in MORESCHINI, C. (ed.) Esegesi, Parafrasi e Compilazione in eta tardoantica, (Naples), 187-207.

KOLLESCH, J. (1973) Untersuchungen zu den Pseudogalenischen Definitiones Medicae, (Berlin).

MAGDELAINE, C. (2004) Un nouveau questionnaire ophthalmologique (PStrasb gr. inv. 849v in ANDORLINI, I. (ed.) Testi Medici su Papiro. Atti del Seminario di Studio, Firenze, 3-4 giugno 2002, (Florence), 63-77.

MAVROUDIS, A. D. (1986) Critical Notes on a Medical Papyrus (PSI III 252) Annual of the Medical School, Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki 16, 187-209.

ZALATEO, G. (1964) Papiri di argomento medico redatti in forma di domanda e risposta Aegyptus 44, 52-57.

Maravela-Solbakk - Leith: A Medical Catechism on Tumours 2007

Documents

Transcript of Maravela-Solbakk - Leith: A Medical Catechism on Tumours 2007