women, writing and medicine in the classical world

23 Pages·2007·0.5 MB·English

ClassicalQuarterly57.1257–279(2007)PrintedinGreatBritain 257
doi:10.1017/S0009838807000225
WOMEN, WRITING AND MEDICINE IN THREE CBLEACSCSAIC FALLE MWOMRINLDG
WOMEN, WRITING AND MEDICINE IN THE
CLASSICAL WORLD
Itisnowawell-establishedfactthatwomenpractisedmedicineintheancientworld.
Themedicaoriatrine—thespecificallyfemaleversionof thephysician,themedicus
or iatros—as well as the obstetrix or maia—the midwife—along with a number of
linguisticvariantsontheseterms,allappearregularlyinarangeofliterary,epigraph-
ical and papyrological sources, as scholars have repeatedly observed.1 How these
appearancesshouldbeinterpreted,ontheotherhand,remainsmorecontentious.In
particular,twoalternativeunderstandingsof thefigureof themedicaoriatrinehave
emerged,andcontinuetobevariouslyelaborated.Forsomesheistheprofessional
colleague of the male medicus or iatros, perhaps not his exact equal, but certainly
operatingonroughlythesameterms,andillustrative,therefore,of amoreinclusive,
lesssexuallysegregated,approachtothepracticeof medicineinantiquitythanwas
toemergeinlatertimes.2Othersholdhertobesynonymous,notwiththemedicusbut
themidwife,andsotoillustratearatherdifferenthistoricalprinciple:‘thatwomen’s
healthiswomen’sbusiness’,andtodemonstrateaclearsexualdivisionof labourin
theclassicalworldratherthananyblurring.3
This is a discussion, moreover, that extends beyond medical practice into the
literary field, into the formation of classical medical culture more broadly. For, not
only are various recipes and remedies attributed to women contained within the
extant pharmacological compilations of several male writers of the Roman empire,
withfemaleauthoredworkscitedinasimilarcontext,butasetofLatinmedicaltexts
survivesattachedtothenameof Cleopatra,andasingleGreekmanuscriptpreserves
whatitdescribesasextracts‘fromtheworksofMetrodora’.4Againscholarlyopinion
isdividedontheauthenticityandsignificanceofthismaterial.HoltParkeristhemost
optimistic,assumingthat,asageneralrule,thesefemalenamesrepresentrealwomen
who at least practised medicine, and often wrote about it too.5 Others are more
sceptical, particularly about the likelihood of female authorship. This scepticism is
* MythankstoaudiencesatYale,DukeandtheUniversityofNorthCarolina(ChapelHill),
andtoCQ’sanonymousreader,fortheircommentsonvarious,oralandwritten,versionsofthis
article.Theresearchandwritingof thisarticlewascompletedwhileonaperiodof academic
leave made possible by the award ofa Philip Leverhulme Prize.
1 The observation goes back to J. Marquardt, Das Privatleben der Römer (Leipzig, 1886),
1.779;andseealsoJ.Oehler,‘EpigraphischeBeitragezurGeschichtedesAerztestandes’,Janus14
(1909), 4–20; and H. Gummerus, Der Ärztestand im römischen Reiche nach dem Inschriften
(Helsinki, 1932).
2 ThiswastheimplicitapproachofbothOehler(n.1)andGummerus(n.1);morerecentand
explicitadvocatesincludeL.Robert,‘L’indexcommentédesépitaphes’,inN.Firatli,Lesstèles
funerairesdeByzancegréco-romaine(Paris,1964),175–8;H.Parker,‘WomendoctorsinGreece,
Rome,andtheByzantineempire’,inL.R.Furst(ed.),WomenHealersandPhysicians:Climbinga
LongHill(Lexington,KY, 1997),131–50;R. Flemming,MedicineandtheMakingof Roman
Women:Gender,Nature,andAuthorityfromCelsustoGalen(Oxford,2000),35–7;and(alittle
more hesitantly) E. Samama,Les médecins dans le monde Grec(Geneva, 2003), 15–16.
3 Arguedbye.g.J. Korpela,Das Medizinpersonalim antikenRom: Einesozialgeschichtliche
Untersuchung(Helsinki, 1987), 18–20, following Marquardt (n. 1).
4 See e.g. Parker (n. 2), 145–6, for a listing ofmost ofthe relevant material.
5 Parker (n. 2), 137–40.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838807000225 Published online by Cambridge University Press
258 REBECCA FLEMMING
much encouraged by some of the names in question: Cleopatra, Aspasia (quoted
extensively by the sixth-century A.D. medical encyclopaedist Aetius of Amida on
gynaecologicalmatters),andevenMetrodora(notahistoricallynotoriousname,but
possibly derived from a common Greek word for womb—metra).6
Thematterrequiresafurtherlook,therefore,toseeifthedebatecanberesolved,or
atleastadvancedbeyonditscurrentimpasse.Amoremeasuredandnuancedassess-
ment of the different cases and types of cultural contribution at issue would be
helpful,withinthecontextof awiderunderstandingof,ontheonehand,theoverall
dynamics and contours of ancient medical literature, and, on the other, of general
female literacy, learning, and authority in the classical world. This would then
establishafirmerempiricalandanalyticalbasefromwhichtodrawmorefar-reaching
conclusionsaboutthebroadersocietalimplicationsof therelationsbetweenwomen,
medicine, and literary culture thus revealed.
Thisarticleaimstoprovidesuchananalysis,andsomesuggestionsaboutthelarger
historicalpictureintowhichitfits.Itbeginswithabrief examinationof thekindsof
relationshipwithmedicalliteraryculture—withbook-learning,using,andwriting—
thatareindicated,orsuggested,bythemainlyepigraphicevidencerelatingtofemale
medicalpersonnel.Thisthenprovidesthebackgroundforamoredetailed,in-depth,
discussion of the literary material that refers to, cites, or indeed claims, female
authorship.Since this literarymaterial stretches backtoaround thesecond century
B.C,butnotreallymuchfurther(oratleastitbecomesveryhardtofollowthereafter),
a similar Hellenistic starting point will be adopted for the epigraphic and archaeo-
logical evidence.7 Most testimonies of either kind come, however, from the Roman
empire.
LEARNING, LITERACY AND FEMALE MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS
Women appear in the epigraphic, literary, and papyrological records as medical
practitionersinfourmainguises(orperhapsfourandahalf).Theyoccurexplicitly
labelledasiatrinai/medicae(orinonecaseasanarchiatrine),orasmaiai/obstetrices,
orasahybridizationof thetwo—asiatromaeae—ortheyhavetheirmedicalachieve-
ments described in a more general way.8 As has already been mentioned, opinion
divides on whether all these named categories are to be seen as synonymous, or
whetherthedifferenttermsareintendedtodistinguishbetweengroupsofpractition-
ers, with the iatrine/medica to be understood as the feminine version of the iatros/
medicus,thephysician,orgeneralmedicalpractitionerof antiquity.Therecertainly
seemstobeaverystrongprimafacieargument,however,thatwomenwholayclaim
to the title of iatrine/medica, or have it claimed on their behalf, are attempting to
movethemselvesupthemedicalhierarchy;tostressthemoreencompassingquality
of their art rather than its limitations.9 For, though obstetrices and maiai provided
medical services to women that extended well beyond childbirth, and associated
matters,theywerestillconsideredspecialistsinanagethatvaluedgenerality.Their
6 Fordoubtsseee.g.L.Dean-Jones,Women’sBodiesinClassicalGreekScience(Oxford,1994),
33.
7 Not,itshouldbesaid,thatmuchisexcludedthereby:exceptPhanostrate,thefourth-century
B.C. ‘midwife and physician’/ ,IG226873 (Samama [n. 2], no. 002).
8 Seee.g.Parker(n.2),140–4;Flemming(n.2),383–91;Samama(n.2);forcollectionsof
relevantevidence,theobstetricesandmaiairemainlesswellservedthantheothersintermsof
comprehensive study.
9 See Flemming (n. 2), 35–7.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838807000225 Published online by Cambridge University Press
WOMEN, WRITING AND MEDICINE IN THE CLASSICAL WORLD 259
expertiseandactivities,howeverwellrespected,weresubjecttocertainrestrictions,in
contrasttothoseof theirmasters—themediciandiatroi—whohadoversightof all
medicaldomains.10
It was these boundaries that iatrinai and medicae challenged; and, though the
extent to which they were successful in distinguishing themselves from midwives in
termsof theiractualpractice(inparticularinprovidingmedicalservicestobothmen
andwomen)islessclear,thischallengeneedstobeappreciatednonetheless.Indeeda
claim to universality also characterizes many of the commemorative formulations
usedtodescribemedicalwomennotexplicitlyreferredtoasmedicaeoriatrinai.So,
forexample,aNorthAfricanwoman,Gemina,iscommemoratedas‘saviourof all,
through her medical art’, on her third-century A.D. tomb in Avitta Bibba; while a
roughly contemporary woman (perhaps named Domnina) from Asia Minor is
described as having ‘protected her fatherland from disease’.11 There are other am-
bitionsandaspirationsexpressedintherepresentationsof someof thenon-midwife
contingent of female practitioners which also bear examination in this context,
serving not only to bring the discussion directly round to issues of literary culture,
andtounderlinethegapbetweenobstetrixandmedica,butalsotoemphasizethatthis
last category itself should not be taken to be homogeneous.
Differentiationbothbetween,andwithin,groupsof medicalpractitionerscharac-
terizesmaleprofessionalpatternsinantiquity,andthewomenshowsignsoffollowing
suit.Thus,whiletherearefamousexamplesof maleauthorshipthatfalloutsidethe
circleof theiatroiandmedici—thenotedworkonmedicalmaterialsbyCrateuasthe
Rootcutter, for example—it is physicians who head the list of medical writers, and
whoshowthegreatestengagementwithliterateactivitiesmorebroadly.12Thatisnot
tosay,however,thatall,ormost,iatroiormedici madeanyliterarycontributionto
medicallearningatall.Theprofessionof thephysicianranged,atleastintheRoman
world, from those who rank with cobblers and shop-keepers to those who earned
enough from attending on the emperor to virtually rebuild their native city; from
thosewithnoliteraryabilityorinclination,tothosewhoseworkscanbecountedin
the hundreds.13
Themuchsmallerbodyof evidenceforfemalemedicalpractitionersdemonstrates
a similar patterning; though not reaching the same heights.14 The majority of the
inscriptions recording female medical personnel and practice are, like their male
equivalents,funeraryincharacter,andtheyoftenplacemoreemphasisonthefamily
relationshipsandvirtuesthatledtotheirerectionthanontheprofessionallifeof the
deceased. So,forexample,asecond-century A.D.inscription fromacolumbarium in
Rome reads:
10 Seee.g.H.King,‘Agnodikeandtheprofessionofmedicine’,PCPhSn.s.32(1986),53–77,
for discussion of the midwife’s purview; Soranus’Gynaecology is clear about the hierarchical
relationshipbetweenphysicianandmidwife;andseealsoe.g.legaldescriptionsofobstetricesas
practising ‘a kind ofmedicine’/utique medicinam(Dig.50.13.1.2).
11 CIL8.806:salus omnium medicin(a)e; Samama (n. 2),no. 324: .
12 OnCrateuasseeE.Kind,‘Krateuas(2)’,RE11.2(Stuttgart,1922),1644–6;laymensuchas
Celsus also wrote medical works in antiquity.
13 Ondoctorsandcobblers,seeOv.Fast.3.809–21;forsomeofthemostrichlyrewarded,see
Plin.HN29.7–9;thisvariabilityisaconstantthemeofVivianNutton’sworkonancientmedical
practitioners,boththeessaysinhiscollectedvolumeFromDemocedestoHarvey(London,1988),
and his more recent bookAncient Medicine(London, 2004).
14 Women make up only about 5 per cent ofthe published inscriptions ofancient physicians.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838807000225 Published online by Cambridge University Press
260 REBECCA FLEMMING
TothesacredspiritsofmyPrimilla,physician,daughterofL.VibiusMelito,shelivedforty-four
years,thirtyofthemwithL.CocceiusAphthorus,withoutcomplaint.Aphthorusmadethisfor
hisbestandchastewifeandhimself.15
Similarly,afuneraryinscriptionfromRomanimperialBithyniastatesthat:
GaiusIuliusVettianus,whilealive,erectedthisforhimself andEmpeiria,physician,hiswife,
wholivedforforty-nineyears.16
Still terser are other tituli from Roman columbaria commemorating, for example,
‘VenuleiaSosis,freedwomenof awoman,physician’,or‘SallustiaAthenais,midwife,
freedwomanof Artemidorus’.17
Whileallof theepigraphicmidwivesarereferredtointheseterms,someepitaphs
of other female practitioners, like some of those for men, also stress their learning,
experience, and professional success. The funerary stele of ‘Mousa, physician,
daughterofAgathocles’,fromHellenisticByzantium,forexample,showsherholding
a book-roll (as do a handful of representations of male physicians); and, in early
imperial Rome, the freedwoman Naevia Clara is labelled ‘physician and scholar’
(medica philologa) on the stele that commemorates both her and her husband
L.Naevius,alsoafreedman,and‘physicianandsurgeon’(medicuschirurgus).18Inthis
medical partnership she seems the more theoretically minded, while he has a more
practicalfocus.Whileathird-centuryA.D.statuebasefromAdadainPisidiarecordsa
family group, set up by Aurelius Pontonianos(?) Asclepiades, of himself, his wife
Aurelia Alexandra Zosime, ‘on account of her medical knowledge’, and their
daughter.19
A further pair of inscriptions, one funerary, one honorific, celebrate women’s
accomplishmentintheart—thetechne—of medicineinformswhichclearlyindicate,
if not actually insist on, their education and social status. An impressive metrical
epitaph from early imperial Pergamum praises the numerous virtues of Pantheia,
brideof Glycon,inflowerylanguage.20Shecombinedthequalitiesof idealwifeand
motherwiththoseof theidealmedicalpartner:contributingequallytothecouple’s
shared‘fame’(kleos)inhealing, for,‘thoughawoman’shematchedherhusbandin
thetechne.21Whileanearlierstatuebase,intheforumof Tlos(inLycia),informsthe
viewer that:
15 CIL 6.7581, Deae sanctae meae Primillae medicae L. Vibi Melitonis f(iliae) vixit annis
xxxxiiiiexeiscumL.CocceioApthoroxxxsinequerelafecitApthorusconiug(i)optimaecastaeet
sibi.
16 CIG 2.3736:
(Samama [n. 2], no. 304).
17 CIL 6.9617: Venuleia (mulieris) l(iberta) Sosis medica, and 8192: Sallustia Artemodori
l(iberta) Athenais opstetrix,respectively. A freedman is commemorated with Sallustia.
18 E.PfuhlandH.Möbius,DieostgriechischenGrabreliefs(MainzamRhein,1977),1.151(no.
467): (Samama[n.2],no.310);andforNaeviaseeFlemming
(n. 2), 386 (no. 9); for visual depictions of physicians more broadly see A. Hillert, Antike
Ärztedarstellungen(Frankfurt am Main, 1990).
19 IGRR 3.376:
(Samama[n. 2], no. 339);see alsoe.g. CIL 10.3980(from
Capua) for another epigraphic reference to female medical learning.
20 IGRR4.507;Samama(n.2),no.188;thisinscriptionwasaccompaniedbyanother(also
metrical) dedicated to Glycon’s father, Philadelphus, also a physician (Samama no. 187).
21 .
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838807000225 Published online by Cambridge University Press
WOMEN, WRITING AND MEDICINE IN THE CLASSICAL WORLD 261
Antiochis,daughterof Diadotos,of Tlos,markedbythecouncilandpeopleof Tlosforher
achievementinthemedicalart,erectedthisstatueofherself.22
Midwivesare,however,connectedwithliteracyinadifferentsource.TheGynaecol-
ogy of the noted Methodic physician Soranus, written in early second-century A.D.
Rome,definesandorganizesitssubjectmatterinrelationtothefigureof themaia.23
It covers both the midwife herself—how to recognize those persons who are fit to
becomemidwivesandtodeterminewhicharethebestpractitioners—andthemedical
matters—female health and disease, normal and abnormal childbirth, the care of
infants—with which she is faced, thus clearly asserting the higher authority of the
iatrosoverthesedomains.Basicliteracyis,accordingtoSoranus,aqualityrequired
bythepotentialmaia,sincehertrainingshouldencompassbothbook-learning and
more practical instruction.24 Book-learning, a good grasp of theory, is also a key
factorinjudgingthebestmidwife.25Thequestionthenarises,givenSoranus’purposes
inproducingthiswork,andthemanifestlyidealizingprescriptionsheoffers,whether
many,indeedany,actual,practisingmidwivesinRomefulfilledhistestingcriteria.As
alreadymentioned, noclaimsforbook-learning, orindeed literacy,aremadeby,or
for,theobstetricesandmaiaithemselvesintheirsurvivingfuneraryepigraphy,despite
the clear incentives Soranus’ views provide. This should not, however, be taken as
proving that no ancient midwife was literate, a point which would seem to be sup-
portedbythelateantiquelatiniserof Soranus’Gynaecology,Muscio.26Inthepreface
to his text he explains that, despite the importance of midwives’activities, and the
benefitstheywouldgainfrombeingacquaintedwithSoranus’writings,theylackthe
necessary language skills, and so require his translation and abridgement. The
resulting text is thus not only Latin, but also shorter and simpler than the original:
Iusedwomen’swordssothatevenilleducatedobstetriceswouldeasilybeabletounderstandthe
meaning,albeitwhenreadtothembyanotherwomen.27
Theimplicationwouldseemtobethat,thougheducationallevelsvaried,andmany
midwivescouldnotread,sufficientnumberscoulddosoforMuscio’sliteraryproject
tomakesense.
Muscio is writing perhaps as late as the sixth century A.D., and certainly outside
Rome,inNorthAfricaorpossiblynorthernItaly,butitseemslikelythathispictureof
minority literacy amongst female medical practitioners holds good for earlier times
andotherplacestoo.Also,thoughhisdisparagingremarksaboutwomen’slanguage
should not be taken simply at face value, they do serve to emphasize an important
generalpoint,frequentlymadeinstudiesof ancientliteracy,thatthelinebetweenthe
literateandilliterateisnotaclearone,astherearenumerousdegreesof both.28Itis
22 TAM 2.595:
(Samama [n. 2], 280).
23 On Soranus see A. Ellis Hanson and M. H. Green, ‘Soranus: methodicorum princeps’,
ANRW2.37.2 (Berlin, 1994), 968–1075, and also Flemming (n. 2), 228–46.
24 Sor.Gyn.1.3.
25 Sor.Gyn.1.4.
26 On Muscio see Hanson and Green (n. 23), 1046–7.
27 Muscio,Geneciapr.:muliebribusverbisusussum,utetiaminperitaeobstetriceslicetabaltera
sibi lectam rationem facile intellegere possint(Rose, 3).
28 A.EllisHanson,‘Ancientilliteracy’,inM.Beardetal.(edd.),LiteracyintheAncientWorld
(Ann Arbor, MI, 1991),159–98,elaborates on this point,alsomadein W. V. Harris, Ancient
Literacy(Cambridge, MA, 1989).
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838807000225 Published online by Cambridge University Press
262 REBECCA FLEMMING
possibletobeabletoread,butnottowrite,tobeabletosignyournamebutlittleelse,
to be a ‘slow writer’ (bradeos grapheus) as some papyri rather endearing put it, or
more functionallyliterate, without having mastered anycanons of style, and so on.
The situation is further complicated by the extensive use of scribes in the classical
world, by both the literate and illiterate, not to mention composition by dictation,
and,of course,widespreadmultilingualism.Puttingasidethemedicalmaterialfora
moment,otherancientevidencelocateswomenrightacrossthisspectrum,fromtotal
illiteracy to authorship of poetry, carefully crafted epistles, and personal memoirs,
and including various positions in between.29 These women tend to follow, rather
haltingly, their men-folk in terms of education and literary skills. In social circles
where the men were expected to have completed the full rhetorical schooling, and
acquiredthevariousliteraryandoratoricalskillsthustaught,thewomentoowould
have acquired at least some letters, some cultural formation, and sometimes they
would attain much more than that. In circumstances where the men of the family
transactedtheirbusinessinwriting,thebusinessoflarge-scaleestatemanagement,or
small-scalebureaucracy,thewomanmightwellfollowsuit,thoughperhapswithless
assurance,andalesspractisedhand.Wherethemencanbarelysigntheirnames,the
women will probably be entirely unlettered.30
That female medical practitioners should follow, in a similarly uneven way, their
malecolleaguesinrespecttoliteracyis,therefore,hardlysurprising.Especiallysince,
astheepigraphydemonstrates,theywereoftenthewives,daughtersorfreedwomen,
of these men. Moreover, medicine was a field in which written texts played an
importantrole—asvehiclesof knowledgeandauthority,asitemsof practicalutility
and social prestige—and the levels of literacy within the associated professions are
likelytohavereflectedthis.Ashasoftenbeenremarkedforsocietiesinwhichreading
and writing skills are restricted, the social groups in which they are commonly
concentratedaretheeliteandtheprofessionallyliterate:scribesontheonehand,and
teachers,doctors,lawyers,architects,andvariousskilledcraftspeopleontheother.31
The Hellenistic and Roman worlds were no exception.
In conclusion, therefore,the generalreferences to,andrepresentations of,female
medicalpractitionersintheHellenisticandRomanimperialperiodsdoindicatesome
engagementwithliteraryculture.Soranusnotwithstanding,itisamongstthemedicae
and iatrinai that claims to book-learning, to literary formation, are concentrated;
underliningagainissuesof medicalhierarchy.Thereisthenenoughheretosupport
thepossibilityof femaleauthorshipinthemedicalfield,soitisnowtimetoturnto
the evidence more specifically related to this question.
29 Onancientfemaleliteracyseee.g.S.Cole,‘CouldGreekwomenreadandwrite?’,inH.
Foley(ed.),Reflectionsof WomeninAntiquity(Philadelphia,PA,1981),219–45;E.Hemelrijk,
MatronaDocta:EducatedWomenintheRomanElite(London,1999),aswellasHarris(n.28).
On female scribes more particularly see also K. Haines-Eitzen, ‘ “Girls trained in beautiful
writing”: female scribes in Roman antiquity and early Christianity’,JECS6 (1998), 629–46.
30 POxy.12.1463istheonecounterexampletothisprinciple,illustratingthecaseofaliterate
wife with an illiterate husband.
31 This is discussed by Harris (n. 28), in his introduction (3–24). He cites, for example,
scholarlyestimatesthat,inseventeenth-centuryEngland,whenoverallliteracywasrunningat
about 20 per cent, even skilled craftsmen like goldsmiths and bakers were over 70 per cent
signature-literate (22).
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838807000225 Published online by Cambridge University Press
WOMEN, WRITING AND MEDICINE IN THE CLASSICAL WORLD 263
MEDICAL WRITING AND WOMEN
Theevidenceforfemaleparticipationinclassicalmedicalwritingcanbedividedinto
twoseparatetypes:survivingtexts(orpartialtexts)thatclaimfemaleauthorshipand
references to, or citations of, women’s works, and words, in extant male authored
texts.Thislatterisalargerandmorecomplexcategorythantheformer,andwillbe
examined first. Importantly, this examination follows the previous discussion in its
awarenessof thespectrumof ancientliteracy.Femaleauthorshipof entiremedical
treatisesliesatoneendof awholerangeof possiblefemalecontributionstoclassical
medicalculturewhichwillbeworkedalongsystematically.
These variables also interact with an additional set of complexities that charac-
terizethefieldofancientmedicalliterature.Forthisdomainissubject,notonlytothe
general vagaries of creation, ‘publication’, transmission, and survival that attend
on any body of classical writings, but also exhibits some more specific historical
dynamicsof itsown.Itisworthremembering,forexample,thattheearliest,andin
somesensesmostauthoritative,Greekmedicaltexts—thosethatwerecollectedinto
the Hippocratic Corpus—were all anonymous compositions; and their subsequent
ascription tothelegendary Hippocratesthenservedtoestablishalargecategoryof
pseudonymous works.32 Following these precedents, and in response to a range of
other professional and compositional pressures, anonymity and pseudonymity con-
tinued to feature prominently in the literary landscape of ancient medicine. A
situationthatwasfurthercomplicatedbyfrequentborrowing,orsharing,ofmaterial;
bythecommonpracticesoftextualreuse,reorganization,andre-presentation;sothat
somescholarsspeakof‘collective’or‘successive’,morethanindividual,authorshipin
classicalmedicine,orfindthewholeconceptof authorshipinadequateinthecircum-
stances.33
Recipes,remediesandwomen’swriting
Many of these complexities are illustrated, and, indeed, underlined, by the main
witnesstofemale(andindeedmale)participationintheliterarycultureof classical
medicine:thatisthegreatimperialphysicianGalenof Pergamum.Galen,itshould
bestressed,dominatestheremainsof thiscultureinallrespectsanditisnosurprise
that he features so prominently in this area also. The two key texts here are his
monumentalworksoncompoundremedies—thetenbooksOnCompoundPharmaka
accordingtoPlace(thatiscompoundmedicamentsorganizedaccordingtothepart
of thebodytheytreat)andsevenbooksOnCompoundPharmakaaccordingtoKind
(where the organization follows the generic classification of the medicaments
themselves)—whichwerewrittenrelativelylateoninhissuccessfulcareer,probably
in the reign of Septimius Severus, when an aging Galen was well settled and
established in Rome, continuing to attend on the imperial court and to add to his
32 TherewerelivelyongoingdebatesinantiquityaboutwhichHippocraticwritingswerebythe
great Hippocrates himself; which might be attributed to his sons and pupils—such as
Polybus—orcouldatleastbeconsideredtobeinlinewithHippocraticteaching;andwhichwere
justplainfrauds:seee.g.J.Jouanna,Hippocrates,trans.M.B.DeBevoise(Baltimore,1997),esp.
56–65, for a summary ofthis situation. The debate has become even livelier in modern times.
33 See e.g. V. Langholf, ‘Structure andgenesisof someHippocratic treatises’, in H. Horst-
manshoffandM.Stol(edd.),MagicandRationalityinAncientNearEasternandGraeco-Roman
Medicine(Leiden, 2004), 219–75, for discussion ofthese issues, mostly in a Hippocratic context.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838807000225 Published online by Cambridge University Press
264 REBECCA FLEMMING
already prodigious literary output.34 Despite their organizational distinction, they
sharethesamecompositionaltechnique:displayingacomplexlayering,ornesting,
of sources, authorities and information, which must be understood as a whole in
ordertoassessthesignificanceof anysingleunit,orgroupof units,withinit.Much
rests,inthisentireinvestigation,onakindofliteraryarchaeology,withdueattention
paidtobothtextualstratigraphyandassemblages.
Thesetractsbothconsistmainlyof extractsfromthewritingsof themoreeminent
amongstGalen’srecentpredecessorsinthepharmacologicalfield—suchasHerasthe
Cappadocian,AsclepiadesPharmacion,AndromachustheYounger,andCrito(allof
whom worked in the early imperial period, from Augustus to Trajan)—arranged
accordingtohisownparticularorganizationalschemes,andinterspersedwithvarious
passages of critique, commentary and explanation.35 The more discursive sections
appearmostconsistentlyandextensivelyatthebeginningof abookortopic,butare
alsoscatteredthroughoutthetexts.Theextractsthemselves,moreover,arebasically
collections of recipes, commonly anonymous, but also often given names, titles, or
other attributions and descriptions; indeed, they mayactuallyconsist of aseries of
sub-extracts, each bringing together various individual remedies. This layering, or
nesting, principle,complicatedandraggedasitisinplaces,canbeeasilyillustrated
withanexampleinwhichafemalenameappears,andthatalsodemonstratessomeof
the underlying issues of authority and literacy.
ThefinalbookofCompoundPharmakaaccordingtoKindcoversarangeofextern-
ally applied softening, relaxing and pain-relieving medicaments, such as malagmata
andakopa(emollient andrefreshing pharmaka respectively).Chapter 12consists of
thirty-eightrecipesforakopaandtheirclosestrelatives,taken,asthechapterheading
explicitlystates,fromthefourthbookof Asclepiades’workOnExternalPharmaka,
written sometime in the late first century A.D.36 The individual prescriptions them-
selvesarethenveryvariouslyintroduced:anakopon‘calledlexopyreton’,forexample,
isfollowedby‘another,fromthe(books)of Aphrodisis’,and‘another,foul-smelling
akopon’, with the most frequent opening being simply ‘another’.37 More fulsome
descriptionsinclude,‘another,aprovenpharmakonof Bassus,whichhehimself first
used to release paralysis’; and, ‘another, of Pompeius Sabinus, entitled “very valu-
able”, prepared by Aburnius Valerius, it helps those suffering from sciatica, joint
problems, gout, trembling, and all nervous conditions’; and a sunkrisma ‘com-
pounded byPatroclusthefreedmanof Caesar’,whichprovidesgeneralrelief,being
applied on a daily basis, as an ointment rubbed onto the feet, or around bruises.38
34 ThebasicworkonthechronologyofGalen’sliteraryoutputisthatofJ.Ilberg,‘Ueberdie
Schriftstellerei des Klaudios Galenos I–IV’, RhM 44 (1889), 207–39; 47 (1892), 489–514; 51
(1896),165–96;52(1897),561–623;see alsoV. Nutton,‘Galenadmultosannos’, Dynamis 15
(1995), 25–39 for discussion ofGalen’s later years.
35 This is clearly established and discussed in C. Fabricius, Galens Excerpte aus älteren
Pharmakologen(Berlin, 1972);seealsoJ.-M. Jacques, ‘La méthodedeGalienpharmacologue
danslestraitssurlesmédicamentscomposés’,inA.Debru(ed.),GalenonPharmacology(Leiden,
1997), 103–28.
36 Gal. Comp. med. gen. 7.12 (13.1009–1032 K); on Asclepiades see e.g. Fabricius (n. 35),
192–8.
37 Gal. Comp. med. gen. 7.12 (13.1013 K): …
… … (bibliônis understood to follow theek tônformula).
38 Gal.Comp.med.gen.7.12(13.1017K):
… (13.1027K):
… (13.1019 K):
.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838807000225 Published online by Cambridge University Press
WOMEN, WRITING AND MEDICINE IN THE CLASSICAL WORLD 265
Other interesting attributions include an akopon ‘of Haleius, altered slightly by
Valerius Paulinus’, and, finally, a myrakopon (a myrrh based refreshing unguent)
‘compounded by Aquilia Secundilla’.39 This is a recipe as complex, and costly, as
those which surround it:
Ofspurge,balsam,oilofmyrrh,twoouncesofeach;offoamingnatron,threeounces;ofwax,
one ounce; of oil of the cinnamon-tree leaf, one pound; of foliata, saffron, spikenard oil, a
fragrantperfume,andamaracus,half-a-pound;prepareinthecustomarymanner.40
The chapter concludes with some Galenic carpings about Asclepiades’ lack of
systematizationinvariousrespects.
Galen’s citational practice is, therefore, clear and unequivocal about the written
qualities of his lead source. Asclepiades’work On External Pharmaka is a medical
treatise much likehis own, except notasgood, of course.After thatthings become
more complicated, filtered as they are through this first text. None the less, as the
recipes are presented in their Galenic guise, named attributions seem to take two
forms.Oneisliterary,asinthereferencetoaremedyfromthebooksof Aphrodisis;
theothersuggestingamorepracticalrelationshipbetweenmedicamentandthename
attached to it. These are variously (and variedly) ‘composed/sunetethe’, ‘prepared/
eskeuasthe’, ‘used/echresato’, ‘proven/epiteteugmenon’ or ‘altered/parapepoiemenon’
by the individuals concerned; and the implication is that those described simply as
belongingtox(wherethenameappearsinthegenitivewithoutfurtherqualification)
also fall within this latter category.
Certainly Aquilia, in the passage discussed, is credited with composition in the
practicalratherthanliterarysense.Herearlierappearanceinthesamebook,withina
chapterconsistingof emollientsfromtheworksof Asclepiades,takesasimilarform:
there appears ‘another (malagma), of the Neapolitan (type), prepared by Aquilia
Secundilla’.41 Most of the other female names associated with remedies in Galenic
pharmacologyaresimplythat—namestowhicharangeof remediesbelong,without
furthercomment.42Onenameisworthyofattentioninthiscontext,however,andthat
is ‘Antiochis’, whose malagma for conditions of the spleen and joints, dropsy, and
sciatica, occurs twice in Compound Pharmaka according to Place, as prepared by
Fabylla of Libya, who also composed another medicament along the same lines.43
ThisAntiochisisgenerallyconsideredtobethesameAntiochistowhomapharmaco-
logical treatise by the notable Empiric physician of the early first century B.C.,
Heracleides of Tarentum, was dedicated (a treatise excerpted by Galen on half a
39 Gal. Comp. med. gen. 7.12 (13.1026):
(13.1031 K): .
40
.
41 Gal. Comp. med. gen. 7.6 (13.976 K):
.
42 See Gal. Comp. med. loc. 7.2, 4 and 8.3 (13.58, 85 and 143 K): Origenia’s remedies for
coughs, bringingupblood,andfor thestomach;Comp. med. loc. 9.2(13.244K):Eugerasia’s
remedyforthespleen;Comp.med.loc.9.6(13.310and311K):Samithra’sanalapplicationand
Xanthite’sveryusefulhaemorrhoidremedy;Comp.med.gen.5.13(13.840):Maia’sexcellentdry
applicationforcallusedandcrackedskin(ItakeMaiaasa—rarebutattestedelsewhere—name
notaprofessionhere).Thoughthispossessionimpliesamoreproductiverelationshipwiththese
remediesthanifthewomenwerereferredtoassimply‘using’them:asaree.g.variouswomenof
the Julio-Claudian family in Scrib. Larg.Comp.(e.g. 59, 60, 70, 271).
43 Gal.Comp. med. loc.9.2 and 10.2 (13.250–1 and 13.341 K).
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838807000225 Published online by Cambridge University Press
266 REBECCA FLEMMING
dozenoccasions),andsheisalsoidentifiedasAntiochisof Tlos.44Thereis,itshould
be said, nothing that explicitly links these three bearers of the same name.45 Still,
giventheexcellentfitbetweengainingpublicrecognitionandesteemfor‘achievement
inthemedicalart’andbeingthededicateeofatherapeuticworkbyoneoftheleading
medicalauthorsoftheday,theassertionthathereisawomanwhosetextualexistence
andculturalachievementsareconfirmedbyarchaeologicalevidence(andviceversa)
is a very attractive one.
While the level of Antiochis’participation in medical culture is certainly height-
enedinsomerespectsbyHeracleides,thereisstillnodirectevidenceinGalenthatshe
was anything other than the practical author of her malagma. Just as with all the
women mentioned so far. This, of course, raises the question of Asclepiades’ own
workofcompositionagain.Indeed,itisnotjustAsclepiades’approachtopharmaco-
logicalwritingthatisatissue,butalsothatof hiscontemporary,Andromachusthe
Younger. For, between them, the pair account for all the female names attached to
recipesinGalen,withthemajoritytheresponsibilityof theformer.46Andromachus,
moreover,introducestheindividualremediessomewhatdifferentlyfromAsclepiades,
at least in some cases. Thus, for example, amongst Andromachus’ collection of
relativelysimpletreatmentsforauralailmentscontainedintheappropriatesegment
ofCompoundPharmakaaccordingtoPlaceisaremedyforpurulentears,‘from(para)
Spendousa’:
Twopartsbileofayoung,castratedpig,onepartAttichoney.Placetogetherinaglassvesselon
hotashesandheatuntilreducedbyhalf;thenuse.47
This para with the genitive construction is common in Andromachean extracts—
Spendousa’s recipe is immediately followed by one (also for the ears) ‘from
Harpocras’in the same manner, for example—but it is hard to find in the Asclep-
iadean passages.48 On the other hand, Andromachus recognizes the more literary
origins of a medicament exactly as Asclepiades does, with an excellent and proven
(earremedy)‘fromthe(books)of Apollonius’completinghisauralassortment.49
While it is notable that none of the female attributions in Galen advertise their
literary parentage in this way, the story does not end there. For it seems highly
probablethatAsclepiadesandAndromachus’useofwrittensourcesextendedbeyond
thoseflaggedassuch:onboththebasisof thesimpleexigencies of producingsuch
substantial and structured pharmacological treatises (as also demonstrated by
Galen),andthesenseof theirrecordedhistorythatthevariousremediesbringwith
44 TheGaleniccitationsof thistreatisebeginat:12.691,847,957and983K;13.726–7and
812K.Itisreferredtosimplyasthework ;seeA.Guardasole(ed.),Eraclidedi
Tarento: Frammenti(Naples, 1997), 83–106 and 108–18.
45 Thoughthereisalsonothingthatstandsinthewayof suchalink:for,whileH.W.Pleket
datedtheLycianinscriptiontothefirstcenturyA.D.,whichwouldprecludethehonorandfrom
anykindof relationshipwithHeracleides(EpigraphicaII[Leiden,1969],12),themoretradi-
tionalfirst-centuryB.C.datehasbeenreassertedbyGuardasole(n.44),83,andisfollowedby
Samama (n. 2), 389.
46 Thismonopolyis,inpart,simplyaproductof theiroveralldominanceintheworks,but
might also relate to the fact that they are amongst the chronologically closest to Galen.
47 Gal.Comp.med.loc.3.1(12.631K):
.
48 Gal.Comp.med.loc.3.1(12.631K): ;andonAndromachussee
e.g. Fabricius (n. 35), 185–9.
49 Gal.Comp. med. loc.3.1 (12.633 K): .
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838807000225 Published online by Cambridge University Press