GMP_II_7_con_tavola-libre (1) (1).pdf

7. Two prescriptions for ophthalmic remedies on apapyrus from the collection of the Oslo UniversityLibrary∗1

POslo inv. 1654 → and ↓ Fourth–fifth century ADUnknown provenance2 5.3 x 3.3 cm Plate VIII

A small papyrus fragment, broken off on all sides.On the → side, of medium brown colour, remains of 6 ll. of text

and small portions of the upper3 and right margin are visible. The textis identifiable, on account of the heading at l. 1, as an ophthalmic pre-scription for a kollÊrion monoÆmeron, an eye-salve purporting to effectrelief after a single day's application. This is the first direct papyrolo-gical witness for this type of eye-salve, hitherto known only from themedical literature and, indirectly, from the pilaria prescriptions on aMichigan papyrus (see comm. on l. 1). Lines 2–6, once accommodatingthe ingredients and their respective dosages, are so damaged orsloppily written that the identification of some among the ingredients,and consequently the identification of the present with known monohe-mera, is uncertain (see comm. on ll. 2–3 and 5–6). Provided that theproposed identification of the ingredients is correct, the present pre-

Cons.: Oslo University Library (inv. 1654)

Edd.: unpublished

∗ The major part of the research on this fragment was carried out in the course of a two-

weeks' research stay at the Istituto Papirologico ‘G. Vitelli’ in Florence, under the experienced

supervision of Prof. Isabella Andorlini who generously offered expert advice and technical

assistance. I wish to express my gratitude to her as well as to the participants of the seminar of

the Progetto Corpus dei Papiri Greci di Medicina for helpful comments.1 For books and articles referred to by author's surname and date of publication, see

Bibliography (at the end of this Volume).2 The fragment, donated to the collection of the Oslo University Library in 1940, originally

belonged to the private collection of the Egyptologist J.D.C. Lieblein, the provenance of which is

unknown.3 Theoretically however nothing precludes that what now appears to be the upper margin

was once blank space left between the present text and a text written above.

112 7. Two prescriptions for ophthalmic remedies

scription shows some similarity with the composition of the so-calledpilaria salves (on which cf. Youtie 1975, 556ff.).

The ↓ side, which is somewhat darker in colour and rougher intexture, preserves remains of a prescription for an ophthalmic remedyin dry form. The heading has been partly preserved (l. 1 jhr¤onÙfyalmi [), followed by sorry remains, mostly ends or middle parts,of 6 ll. with ingredients and their respective dosages. The remainingmargins – to the left of and above the right part of l. 1 and to the rightof l. 5 – are tiny. The nature of the ingredients (three metallic anderica) points towards a remedy for the treatment of either trachoma orrheumy discharges, cf. Ps.Gal. Introd. 15 (XIV 766.1–4 K).

The small dosages of the ingredients in both prescriptions mayindicate that the remedies were intended for individual use.

The writing appears to have been executed by one and the samehand on both sides, although it is difficult to determine with certaintywhich side was written first. The neatness of the writing on the ↓ sideas opposed to its ‘breaking down’ especially in the two last ll. of the→ side suggest that the former might have been the side written first.Apart from the general crude impression, individual letters are drawnin the same manner (cf. h in ll. 1 → and 1 ↓, k in ll. 4 ↓ and 4 →, e inll. 4 → and 3 ↓, a in ll. 4 → and 6 ↓), although letter forms exhibit acertain degree of inconsistency, normal for this type of sloppy hand.The script is an upright semi-cursive, penned at a good pace. Its primecharacteristic is crudity and not fully developed writing skill. Thisimpression is accentuated by the use of a blunt pen – a feature which,combined with the crudity of the handwriting, makes deciphermentuncertain at places. The scribe was neither at ease when writing – notethat at l. 6 → he wrote the same letter twice, while at l. 1 ↓ he drew anabbreviation stroke, before he continued to write the word out in full –nor particularly skilled in his handling of the pen, as indicated by athick blob of ink in the margin to the right of l. 2 → and an ink smudgeat the ends of ll. 5 → and 6 →. The hand is datable to the 4th or 5th

cent. AD by comparison with PSI I 22 + VIII 988 in Roberts 1955, no.24a and PBerol 5003 in Seider 1970, pl. XXXIII.

It appears that we are dealing with a single papyrus sheet,possibly of small dimensions, on either side of which a single personscribbled prescriptions for ophthalmic remedies4 intended for indi-

4 A list of ophthalmic prescriptions on papyrus is to be found in Marganne 1994, 174. To

this add: PKell 89 [MP3 2400.1]; GMP I 10 fr. B, col. I, 20ff. [MP3 2394]; GMP I 13 [MP3 2391.61];

Greek Medical Papyri II 113

vidual use. The format is known from other medical prescriptionsfrom Egypt (PGrenf I 52 [MP3 2396]; OBodl II 2184 [MP3 2427]; OBodlII 2186 [MP3 2429]; OBodl II 2188 [MP3 2431]; PPrinc III 155 [MP3

2379.2] etc.), see Andorlini 2006, 165–6. A safe indication that we aredealing with a single sheet with prescriptions (as opposed to a pagefrom a codex) is the correspondence of the position of the headings oneither side of the sheet. The loss of the left part of the ingredient linesnotwithstanding, another aspect of the mise en page of the text may beadduced: on both sides of the sheet the left margin appears to havebeen justified, the heading not being set off from the ensuing ingredientlines. This format is also known from other medical prescriptions onpapyrus (e.g. PPrinc III 155 [MP3 2379.2], a complete papyrus sheet,measuring only 3 x 6 cm, that preserves one prescription on eitherside).

As to the style of the two prescriptions, the parts preservedindicate that both texts presented a style common in medical recipesintended for practical execution, consisting of juxtaposed nominalelements (in the heading as well as the ingredients part) without averbal part, see Andorlini 2006, 160–1.

→<upper (?) margin>

kol(lÊrion) monoÆmeron <margin>

[ ±4 ] ` (dr.) *d <margin>

[ max. 7 ] (dr.) *d

[xa]lkoË kekau[m(°nou) (dr.) .]

5 [ ±1 ]omeo! (dr.) *y <margin>

[é]mÊlou (dr.) *b <margin>

— — — — —

‘An eye-salve effecting relief within a single day. 4 drs of [x]; 4drs. of [x]; [x] drs. of burnt copper; 9 drs. of gum arabic (?); 2 drs. ofstarch (?)’.

GMP I 14 [MP3 2400.11]; PHorak 14 and 15 [MP3 2394.11]; PKöln X 410 [MP3 2400.02]; PAcad

inv. 4.16-28 [MP3 2410.12].


1. kol(lÊrion) monoÆmeron. The third letter is a clumsily drawn l (rather than a d)with its lower right part curving to the left. It is followed by an abbreviation strokedrawn from left to right instead of the opposite. The term indicating the type of remedy(kollÊrion) is noted in abbreviated form as it belonged to a technical ‘jargon’ familiarto physicians, pharmacists and patients alike and recurrent in prescriptions, seeAndorlini 2006, 153–67 (esp. 153 and 164–5). If my transcription of the heading iscorrect, this is the first direct papyrological attestation of this type of ophthalmicremedy, the name of which reflects its efficiency, hitherto known from the medicalliterature and indirectly, through the three pilaria recipes on PMich inv. 482 [MP3

2379.1] (for a collective table of the monohemera recipes cf. the Appendix to thisedition). The earliest reference by a medical author to kollÊria monoÆmera is to befound in the fourth book of Galen's Comp. sec. loc. in the discussion of the treatment ofÙfyalm¤a (XII 711.6–15 K), an inflammation of the so-called §pipefuk≈! (xit≈n orÍmÆn), the outermost tunic enveloping all the other tunics of the eye and connecting itwith its surrounding bone structure. Galen prescribes egg-white combined withkollÊria monoÆmera for common cases of this disease not involving severe pain,inflammation and abundance of secretion (XII 712.16–8 K). He then proceeds todescribe the effect of this type of eye-salves, i.e. to relieve eye inflammation overnight(XII 712.18–3.4 K oÈk Ùligãki! taËta megãla! flegmonå! §prã#nen oÏtv!, …! efi!•!p°ran m¢n loutr“ xrÆ!a!yai tÚn ênyrvpon, §p‹ d¢ t∞! Í!tera¤a! t“ kaloum°nƒnard¤nƒ kollur¤ƒ, prÚ! épokatã!ta!¤n te ka‹ tÒnv!in Ípale¤ca!yai) and enumeratetheir most common ingredients: gum of the acacia tree (ékak¤a), copper flakes (lep‹!xalkoË), burnt copper (xalkÚ! kekaum°no!), saffron (krÒko!), myrrh (!mÊrna), Indianlycium (lÊkion ÉIndikÒn), castor (ka!tÒreion) and frankincense (libanvtÒ!) (XII713.10–4.5 K). Galen offers no prescriptions (with the single exception of the eye-salveascribed to an eye-doctor under the name Sergius, XII 751.4–11 K), but distinguishesbetween two basic types of monohemera: (a) the so called trug≈dh (i.e. thick inconsistency) which contained high amounts of acacia (Cels. med. VI 6.8A [CML I 263Marx] records the trygodes collyrium attributed to Euelpides) and (b) those which,while containing little or no acacia, had either copper flakes or burnt copper as theirbasic metallic ingredient along with ingredients with moderately astringent, softeningand dissipating action (XII 713.9–714.5 K). Five recipes for monohemera are reportedby Aetius in a section entitled Per‹ monohm°rvn kollur¤vn GalhnoË (Iatr. VII 103 [CMGVIII.2, 358.60 Oliv.]), allegedly coming from Galen. Some of these recipes bear thespecial name phlãria, the inclusion of which in the group of monohemera has beenargued for by Youtie 1975, 556–8. Of the three prescriptions offered by the Hippiatriccorpus (Hipp. Cantabr. VIII 3–4, II 136 Oder-Hoppe; Add. Londin. ad Hippiatr. Cantabr.XVII, II 258 Oder-Hoppe), two coincide with prescriptions cited by Aetius. Alexanderof Tralles in the second book of his Therapeutica reports sixteen prescriptions in asection entitled Per‹ kollour¤vn épokrou!tik«n ka‹ monohm°rvn kaloum°nvn ‘on eye-salves called apokroustika (dispelling) and monohemera’ (ed. Puschmann, vol. II11.22–5.10). It appears that the monohemera formed a particularly efficient sub-groupof the apokroustika with greater dispelling and astringent action (ibid., 16.18–20 […]e‡pvmen ka‹ per‹ t«n kay' ßteron trÒpon legom°nvn monohm°rvn, œn ≤ dÊnam¤! §!tinfi!xurot°ra ka‹ mçllon ¶xou!a tÚ épokroÊein ka‹ !tÊfein …). When, however, Paulreports individual recipes, he qualifies certain milder apokroustika also as monohemera(ibid. 13.8ff.).


The so-called authemerum (gr. aÈyÆmeron) salve, attested through the seals forkollyria, recovered in the western part of the Roman Empire, is likely to haverepresented a latinised version of the monohemeron. It was administered to treatophthalmia as well as the on-set of trachoma; cf. CIL XIII.3.II (ed. E. Espérandieu) 10021no. 4b Cn. Albini Natalis authemerum ad impetus; 10021 no. 23a; 10021 no. 28aauthemer(um) len(e) ex ov(o), acr(e) et aqu(a); 10021 no. 46d; 10021 no. 54 KÒ!mouaÈyÆmeron (cf. Nielsen 1974, 58–81 esp. 74–5); 10021 no. 82 penicillum authemer. exov(o); 10021 no. 112 Iuni Tauri authemerum ad epiphor(as) et omnem lippitud(inem);10021 no. 178; AnEp 53 (1941) no. 85d Dec(imi) Varen(ii) Bitiae authemerum addolo(res).

A survey of the recipes cited by medical authors shows that the most commoningredients of the monohemera were: calamine (kadme¤a), copper (xalkÒ!), saffron(krÒko!), opium (ˆpion), acacia (ékak¤a), gum arabic (kÒmmi), tragacanth (tragãkanya),myrrh (!mÊrnh) and starch (êmulon). Less frequent ingredients were: zinc oxide(pomfÒluj), copper flower (xãlkanyo!/-h), rock-alum (xalk›ti!), pepper corns(pep°rev! kÒkkoi), honey (m°li), white lead (cimÊyion), Persian gum (!arkokÒlla),copper flakes (lep‹! xalkoË), spikenard (nardÒ!taxu!), red-iron ore (l¤yo! aflmat¤th!),Indian lycium (lÊkion ÉIndikÒn), juice of the horned poppy (glaÊkion), roses (=Òda), aloe(élÒh) and powdered antimony (!t¤mmi); cf. Appendix.

The extensive loss of text of the Oslo prescription entails that the presence ofacacia must remain uncertain. The question therefore in which of the two groupsdistinguished by Galen the present monohemeron recipe might have belonged cannot beanswered. The presence of the starch points in the direction of the so-called pilariarecipes (cf. Appendix): Aet. (2), (3) & (4); Alex. Trall. (9) and PMich inv. 482 [MP3

2379.1] (1) and (3), but a secure identification would require the preservation of moreingredients. The dosages on the Oslo fragment do not match any of the knownmonohemera.

2. The available space suggests a max. 5 letters long ingredient. Ùp¤ou and élÒh!,both featuring in monohemera prescriptions, possess the required length, but theseingredients do not usually come first. An abbreviated longer ingredient is also apossibility.

3. A ca. 7 letters long ingredient has gone missing in the lacuna. Kadm¤a! (l.kadme¤a!) and ékak¤a! fit both the available space and the make-up of the monohemerarecorded in medical literature.

4. [xa]lkoË kekau[m(°nou). Reasons of space suggest the occurrence of anabbreviation after the lacuna. Burnt copper is mentioned as an ingredient ofmonohemera by Galen who specifies that its dosage must be lower in relation to theother ingredients (XII 713.12–13 K). In the monohemera prescriptions cited by Galen,Aetius, the Hippiatric Corpus and Alexander of Tralles copper – burnt and/ orwashed – is a recurrent ingredient. Its dosage in these prescriptions is often equal to orlower than that of the other main ingredients, in accordance with Galen's observation.The ingredient appears in abbreviated form in other medical prescriptions (e.g. PSICongr. XXI 3, II.14 [MP3 2419.2]), an indication of the writer's and the recipients'familiarity with it, see Andorlini 2006, 160. Burnt copper is mentioned as an ingredientof ophthalmic remedies already in the Hippocratic Corpus (e.g. Mul. I 102 [VIII 224Littré]). The pharmaceutical preparation of the copper is described by Dioscorides


(Mat. med. V 76.1 [III 45.5–8 W]) who describes its action as astringent, desiccating,attenuating, absorbing, cleansing and cicatrising, in particular in relation to affectionsof the eye, as well as arresting the spreading of ulceration (ibid. V 76.3 [III 45.17–6.3W] dÊnatai d¢ !tÊfein, jhra¤nein, leptÊnein, kata!t°llein, §pi!pç!yai, énakaya¤reinßlkh ka‹ épouloËn, !mÆxein tå §n Ùfyalmo›!, tÆkein tå Íper!arkoËnta, nomå! fl!tãnein…). Galen lists it among the astringents (De alim. fac. I 1 [VI 476.2–5 K]), but stressesalso its efficiency as a detergent (Comp. sec. loc. IV 1; 5 [XII 701.8–9 and 720.16–7 K]).On burnt copper in medical prescriptions cf. Préaux 1956, 140–1; Nielsen 1974, 28; onits occurrence on papyri cf. Gazza 1956, 105.

5. [±1 ]omeo!. If letter identification is tenable, the word written might have been[k]Òmeo! (l. kÒmmev!). The presence of this ingredient here is highly likely as the gum ofthe acacia tree (gum arabic) appears to be the most common ingredient of themonohemera cited by medical writers (cf. Appendix). Its cohesive action which made thegum an indispensable ingredient of eye-salves is noted by Celsus (med. VI 6.3 [CML I262 Marx] [...] cummi cum quasdam alias facultates habeat, hoc maxime praestare, ut, ubicollyria facta inaruerunt, glutinata sint neque frientur ‘while it also has otherproperties, the gum has this particular advantage, that when eye-salves made of it havedried, they are glued together and do not break up’). This property, along with itsdrying effect, are stressed by Galen (Simpl. VII 40 [XII 34.16–5.1 K] ¶!ti d¢ jhrantik∞!te ka‹ §mpla!tik∞! dunãmev! ka‹ d∞lon ˜ti ka‹ traxutÆtvn fiatikÆ; cf. also Aet. Iatr. I214 [CMG VIII.1, 92.7–8 Oliv.] and Paul. Aeg. Epit. med. VII 3.10 [CMG IX.2, 245f.Heib.]). If the identification of the ingredient is correct, it is worth noting that it doesnot feature as the last ingredient, as is often the case in other ophthalmic prescriptionson papyrus, cf. Youtie 1976, 561. On the kÒmmi in medical recipes cf. Gazza 1956, 77;Préaux 1956, 141; Fournet and Magdelaine in GMP I 14 ad l. 8.

6. [é]mÊlou. The ligature of the m and the u is odd, but the presence of êmulon(triticum sativum) here is very likely. Although the starch is not listed by Galen amongthe basic ingredients of the monohemera, it features in four of the prescriptions offeredby Aetius (Iatr. VII 103 [CMG VIII.2, 358–60 Oliv.]) and twice in those reported byAlexander of Tralles (II 15.8–17 and 23.19–25.8 Puschm.). Its preparation is describedby Dioscorides (Mat. med. II 101.1–2 [I 175–6 W]) who asserts its efficiency againstsecretions and later by Paul of Aegina (Epit. med. VII 3 [CMG IX.2, 202–6 Heib.]).According to Galen, the starch has a mild desiccating action at the same time as it doesnot allow the extra-humours in the tunics of the eyes to dry out totally (Comp. sec. loc.IV 1 [XII 700.2–5 K] tÚ êmulon ëma m¢n ka‹ jhra¤nein metr¤v! ÍgrÒthta!, ëma d¢ ka‹kvlË!ai kenoË!yai diå t«n xit≈nvn tØn §n to›! tele¤oi! égge¤oi! aÈt«n periexom°nhnÍgrÒthta perittÆn …), while Paul attributes to it mild cooling and desiccatingproperties as well as a soothing effect in cases of pungent afflictions (Epit. med. VII 3.1[CMG IX.2, 206–7 Heib.] dÊnamin d¢ ¶xei cuktikÆn te metr¤v! ka‹ jhrantikØn ka‹pra#ntikØn t«n drim°vn). Its employment for the treatment of ophthalmic afflictions isabundantly attested by the papyri. It features in all three prescriptions for pilaria ofPMich inv. 482 [MP3 2379.1], col. I, 9 and 18; col. II, 29, in two ophtalmic prescriptionspreserved in POxy VIII 1088, col. I, 5 and 10, in the ophtalmic prescriptions in PHorak15.5, 12 and 23. On the medical use of the starch in general cf. Andorlini 1995, 145 adVII 11; Durling 1984, 210 and Durling 1988, 154.


↓ side

<upper (?) margin>

<margin> jh{( )}r¤on Ùfyalmi` `[

[ka]dm¤a! (dr.) a

[xalk¤]t`ev[! (dr.) .]

[xalko]Ë kek[aum(°nou) (dr.)

5 [§re¤]kh! (dr.) a <margin>

[nar]to{!}!tãx<u>o! (dr.) a

[ ±4 ]!` (dr.) `

— — — — —

‘A dry powder [for ophthalmic use/ against ophthalmia ?]. 1 dr.of calamine; [x dr(s).] of rock-alum; [x dr(s).] of burnt copper; 1 dr. ofheather; 1 dr. of spikenard; [x] dr. of [x]’.

1. The third graphic sign is possibly an abbreviation stroke, which the scribefailed to cancel, although he continued to write the word out in full.

The term jhr¤on (on the place of the accent cf. Herod. De pros. cath. 13 = Gramm.Graec. vol. III 1.1, 356.14 Lentz and Theogn. Canon. sive De orthogr. = J.A. Cramer,Anecdota Graeca e codd. manuscriptis bibliothecarum Oxoniensium, II (Oxford 1835,repr. Amsterdam 1963) 122.9–11) signifies a remedy in the form of dry, desiccatingpowder. Remedies in powder form were employed by both ancient physicians andveterinarians. The powder was either used as a remedy in itself or as a sort of basismedicament preserved by the pharmacist and mixed with other ingredients whennecessary to prepare the remedy to be administered, cf. Ps. Gal. Remed. parab. III (XIV495.8f. K). The overwhelming number of attestations of the word with ending in -ionpost-date Galen, in whose work form jhr¤on is attested only once (in Comp. sec. loc. IX 5[XIII 297.14 K]). The common form up to Galen's time was jhrÒn (cf. Hp. Acut. 32 [II 520Littré] a dry powder used as ophthalmic remedy; Id. Ulc. 13 [VI 416 Littré]; Gal. Comp.per gen. IV 8 [XIII 728.7 K etc.]). That form continued to be used side by side withjhr¤on in the post-Galenic medical literature, cf. Orib. Syn. ad Eustath. III 147 (CMG VI3, 105.1 Raed.) JhrÚn kallibl°faron poioËn nhp¤oi! mãli!ta vs. ibid. 148 (CMG VI 3,105.7–8 Raed.) Jhr¤on prÚ! cvrofyalm¤an ka‹ !Êkv!in ka‹ !hpedÒna! ka‹ Íper-!ark≈mata. The Coptic equivalent is JURON, cf. KSB I 6.33 (VII AD).

The majority of the papyrological attestations of jhr¤on reflect a medico-pharmaceutical use: MPER XIII 7 [MP3 2423.5], a jhr¤on ÙdÒnt(vn) leuk(«n) ka‹ébr≈t(vn), in connection with dental hygiene and care; PAnt III 127.2(a).4–7 [MP3

2362.4] a jhr¤on kefa|likÚn =eumatizom°nh! | [ke]fal∞! for application to the head;


PAnt III 126a.13 [MP3 2362.3] for the treatment of tonsillitis; MPER XIII 12 [MP3

2422.5] 1 zirion (l. jhr¤on) tÚ monaidvn (l. monãzon), 5 zirion tÚ ényurÒn (l. ényhrÒn), 12zirion !arkvfãgon (l. !arkofãgon), 17 z¤rion apa!xaron (l. épe!xaroËn), for the treatmentof ulcers. The word also occurs in an order list of commodities datable to the late 3rd

cent. AD (POxy VIII 1142.7 the recipient is asked to buy jhr¤on at a weight of 12 drs.)as well as in a clumsily penned and for this reason at places difficult to decipher letter(BGU VII 1668.3) where reference is made to provisions (mostly food and drink),including ˆrbia p la | jhrin kouain lãxana !tefãnin (...). In none of these two contexts isits intended use clear and in the second case the context in which the word occurs needsfurther clarification. The alternative form, jhrÒn, occurs in OBodl II 2186v, 8–9 [MP3

2429] jhrÚn !arko`[tikÚn] (l. !arkvtikÚn) | ka‹ !unoulouti[kÒn] (l. !unoulvtikÒn), inconnection with the treatment of ulcers. In the Michigan medical codex the term occurstwice abbreviated (PMich XVII 758 [inv. 21.G.5–6 and 21.Hv.3–4 in marg.]), the secondtime in connection with the treatment of hard-to-cicatrise ulcers.

An abundance of attestations come from works of medicine, veterinary medicine,alchemy and astrology. A summary of areas of application followed by a collection ofrecipes is attempted by Paul of Aegina (Epit. med. VII 13 [CMG IX.2, 322–7 Heib.) in asection headed per‹ jhr¤vn ka‹ !mhgmãtvn (‘on dry powders and unguents’). There Paulmentions two main areas of application: (a) ßlkh, open sores in need of cicatrising, and(b) affections of the skin. He describes the effect of the former in the following terms: (i)!arkvtikå t«n ko¤lvn, assisting regrowth of flesh in the hollow sores; (ii) kata-!taltikå t«n Íper!arkoÊntvn, arresting the excessive growth of flesh; (iii) kau!tikåka‹ !hptikã, purging and putrefactive and (iv) ‡!xaima, checking the flow of blood. Asfor the second group, some have detergent and some drying effect (... tå m¢n =Êptei te ka‹!mÆxei ... tå d¢ tª kefalª pro!f°retai diå tÚ jhra¤nein tÚ §piferÒmenon §j aÈt∞! =eËma).An examination of the instances of the term in the medical and veterinary corpus showsthat the body parts treated by jhr¤a ranged from the head and its parts, to feet affectedby podagra, the bladder, the stomach etc. Jhr¤a for the eyes are listed at: Orib. Syn. adEustath. III 148.1–2 ([CMG VI 3, 105.7ff. Raed.] Jhr¤on prÚ! cvrofyalm¤an ka‹ !Êkv!inka‹ !hpedÒna! ka‹ Íper!ark≈mata); the same recipe is given by Paul. Aeg. Epit. med. VII16.54 (ibid., 346.1ff. Heib.) as jhr¤on prÚ! jhrofyalm¤an etc.; Aet. Iatr. VII 87 [CMGVIII.2, 334.3-4 Oliv.] recommends an ÙrÒbvn jhr¤on metå m°lito! against the eye diseaseafig¤lvc. Orib. Syn. ad Eustath. 1 [CMG VI 3, 3. 12–3 mentions jhrokollÊria, partlyrelated but not identical to jhr¤a. Jhr¤a against diseases of the eyes and the teeth arereported by Alex. Trall. Therap., vol. II 45–47; 49.27ff.; 67.8ff. Puschm.; Leo, Consp.med. III 19 mentions jhr¤a puknvtikã used to heal the eye ailment =uã!. A veryinteresting collection of jhr¤a for the eye, some labelled jhr¤on ÙfyalmikÒn are listed inthe treatises of the Hippiatric Corpus (cf. Hippiatr. Berol. XI 52, I 74 Oder – Hoppe;Hippiatr. Paris. 351–4, II 56 Oder – Hoppe; Hippiatr. Paris. 422 prÚ! tå! §n Ùfyalmo›!oÈlã!, ibid. 62; Add. Lond. ad Hippiatr. Cantabr. 19, ibid. 257).

Possible supplements for the missing end of line are: (a) j. Ùfyalmik[Òn ‘a drypowder for ophthalmic use’. This construction finds direct support in the recipes fromthe Hippiatric Corpus cited above and in PAnt III 127, and is in my opinion the mostlikely; (b) j. Ùfyalmik[«n ‘a dry powder administered to those affected by ophthalmia’

is also possible in the light of POxy VIII 1088 col. III 63 (pÒthma Ídrvpik«n...); cf.Gazza 1956, 103 (under i); (c) j. Ùfyalm«n ‘a dry powder for the eyes’, a parallel forthe construction of the heading being MPER XIII 7.1 j. ÙdÒntvn (...), cf. also Gazza 1956,


102 (under c), is possible if the graphic sign following the m is taken to be anabbreviation stroke, cf. the third graphic sign. In this case, the last visible letter wouldbelong to a new word further qualifying Ùfyalm(«n). Whatever the appropriatesupplement, there is little doubt that we are dealing with the prescription for thepreparation of a dry powder for use as an ophthalmic remedy.

2. [ka]d`m`¤`a! (l. kadme¤a!). The calamine, a zinc oxide, is a metallic ingredientemployed frequently in ophthalmic remedies. Its astringent, cicatrising and detergentaction is noted by Dioscorides (Mat. med. V 74.2 [III 38.11–14 W] dÊnamin d¢ ¶xei!tuptikÆn, koilvmãtvn plhrvtikÆn, kayartikØn =upari«n. paremplã!!ei d¢ ka‹jhra¤nei ka‹ §jipo›, ka‹ !t°llei tå §k!ark≈mata, ka‹ tå kakoÆyh t«n •lk«n époulo›; onits use against specific affections of the eye, cf. Dsc. Eup. vel Simpl. I 44.1 [III 167.4ff.W]). The same properties are mentioned by later medical authors: cf. Gal. Simpl. IV 5and IX 3 (XI 634.4ff. and XII 219–21 K, esp. 220.13ff. K; Id. Comp. sec. loc. IV 1 (XII704.3–10 K); Aet. Iatr. II 57 (CMG VIII.1, 173.3–8 Oliv.); Paul. Aeg. Epit. med. VII 3.10(CMG IX.2, 219.4–9 Heib.). Cf. Gazza 1956, 102; Préaux 1956, 140. Here it occupies thefirst place in the ingredients' list, as is often the case in medical prescriptions recoveredon papyrus, cf. Youtie 1975, 559 ad l. 1.

3. [xalk¤]t`ev!. The rock-alum is a metallic ingredient with warming, mildastringent, cicatrising and detergent action. According to Dioscorides, in ophthalmicremedies the rock-alum is employed in burnt form, in combination with honey, cf. Dsc.Mat. med. V 99 (III 69.17–70.5 W) dÊnamin d¢ ¶xei !tuptikÆn, yermantikÆn, §!xarvtikÆn,t«n per‹ kanyoÁ! ka‹ ˆmmata épokayartikÆn: ¶!ti d¢ t«n metr¤v! !tufÒntvn. (…)kekaum°nh d¢ prÚ! tå Ùfyalmikå mçllon xrh!imeÊei le¤a !Án m°liti, tetulvm°nabl°fara ka‹ trax°a épotÆkou!a, !Êriggã! te a‡rei §n kollour¤ou !xÆmati §ntiyem°nh; cf.also Gal. Simpl. IX 3 (XII 228.10–7 and 241.8–2.5 K) and Id., Comp. sec. loc. IV 1 (XII701.6–10 and XII 721.1–2 K); Aet. Iatr. II 78 (CMG VIII.1, 177.6ff. Oliv.); Paul. Aeg.Epit. med. VII 3 (X); 16.1 and 17.1 (CMG IX.2, 271.5–7; 334.4–5; 347.16–8 Heib.).Oribasius lists the rock-alum among the ingredients which remove moisture from theeyes (Coll. med. XIV 45.4 [CMG VI 1.2, 217.22ff. Raed.] épÚ d¢ t«n Ùfyalm«n Ígra!¤anêgei ...), cf. also ibid. XIV 57.1 and 61.2; XIV 57.1 [CMG VI 1.2, 226.15ff.; 231.25–8;289.18–25 Raed.]. The ingredient is not infrequent in medical recipes on papyrus, cf.PHorak 14v.8 [MP3 2394.11] (in an achariston); MPER XIII 8.30 [MP3 2422.7] (in aremedy against fistulous abscesses or ulcers) and MPER XIII 12.2 and 18 [MP3 2422.5](in a pair of dry powders). On its nature and properties cf. Nielsen 1974, 36–7; Fischer1982, 121–2.

4. Perhaps [xalko]Ë kek[au(m°nou) with the last part of the adjective abbreviated.On this ingredient cf. comm. on l. 4 ↓.

5. The remains of the first visible letter after the break resemble very much the firstk in the line above and indicate the presence of §re¤kh, heather (erica arborea). Galen(Comp. med. sec. loc. IV 1 [XII 703.8 K]) lists the seeds of the heather among theastringents. According to him, mild astringents are efficient in cases of ophthalmia aswell as in almost all other affections as ulcers, pustulae and secretions. It is a frequent(yet dispensable) component of the eye-salves called éxãri!ta (cf. Andorlini 1981,10–11 and 15) and §rikhrã, for a recently published example of which see GMP I13.6–9 [MP3 2391.61], cf. Hanson ad ll. 6–7. On erica in the papyri cf. Gazza 1956, 81;on erica in medicine cf. Prèaux 1956, 137.


6. l. nardo!tãx<u>o! (For d > t, cf. Gignac 1976, 80). Perhaps the scribe had in mindthe anomalous nominative formation nardo!tãxo! (cf. Gignac 1981, 79 § 7 a.1). Thefaint remains of the three first visible letters suggest that the scribe ran out of ink andrefilled his pen after the first !. He then redrew the same letter and continued with therest of the word.

The spikenard or valeriana (Nardostachys jatamansi) is a vegetal ingredient withwarming, desiccating and diuretic action (cf. Diosc. Mat. med. I 7, esp. I 7.3 [I 12.11ff.W]; Gal. Simpl. VIII 13 (XII 84.11–85.3 K). It is the basic component in a group of eyesalves called nardina. Dioscorides recommends their use in cases of purulent blepharitis(Mat. med. I 7.4 [I 12.17ff. W] poioË!i ka‹ prÚ! tå! §n Ùfyalmo›! mudÆ!ei! t«n blefãrvn...). Cf. also Gal. Comp. med. sec. loc. IV 1 (XII 701.15–702.14 K); Paul. Epit. med. VII16.1.14ff. (CMG IX.2, 334.9–10 Heib.). On its occurrence in medical papyri cf. Gazza1956, 89–90; Fournet 1994, 319 ad l. 23.

Appendix

Recipes for monohemera in the medical corpus and the papyri

Galen (Comp. sec. loc. IV 7 [XII 751.4–11 K])

kadme¤a! kek. ka‹ peplum. d!podoË pomfÒlugo! peplum. dxalkoË kek. k. peplum. dkrÒkou bÙp¤ou békak¤a! ıkÒmmev! ı

Aetius (Iatr. VII 103 [CMG VIII.2,360.1–3; 3–9; 9–12; 12–5 Oliv.]) Corp. Hippiatr. (vol. II 136

and 258 Oder – Hoppe)(1) (2)5 (3)6 (4)7 (5) (1) (2) (3)

kadm¤a! kd iı kd g iı oÈg. g g dxalkãnyou ib oÈg. axalk¤tev! Ùpt∞! ib oÈg. aÙp¤ou ib kd ih a d oÈg. a bpep°rev! kÒkkoi kd kam°lito! a oÈg. akÒmmev! kd ib y h b oÈg. g a dcimiy¤ou mh kd e h g

5 KollÊrion phlãrion.6 ÜEteron phlãrion ı ÉAntvne›no!.7 ÜEteron phlãrion ˘ kaloË!in !un°kdhmon.


ékak¤a! kd h h b b démÊlou ib y ı b atragakãnyh! ib y g b axalkoË g a d a ı!mÊrnh! g g h bkrÒkou a a d a dpomfÒlugo! g!arkokÒllh! blep›do! anardo!tãxuo! dl¤you aflmat¤tou dluk¤ou ÉIndikoË d

PMich inv. 482 (MP3 2379.1)

(1) (2) (3)

kadme¤a! kd h iıcimiy¤ou kd mh mhxalkoË ı b glep‹! xalkoË a!mÊrnh! d d gÙp¤ou d kdékak¤a! b k kdtragakãnyh! h ib ibémÊlou h ib ibkÒmmev! kd ibpep°rev! bkrÒkou a

Alexander Trallianus (Therap. II [vol. II 11ff., ed. Puschmann)

Apokroustika

(1)8 (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

!arkokÒllh! a ih d oÈg. b d aglauk¤ou a h h oÈg. d h akrÒkou a ib h b oÈg. a b atragakãnyh! a a z aÙp¤ou ı b oÈg. a/d e=Òdvn ie9 aÎtarke!10

8 Heading: KolloÊrion épokroËon metr¤v! monoÆmeron. (...)


nardo!tãxuo! bkÒmmev! h b oÈg. aémÊlou ie!mÊrnh! aélÒh! a

Monohemera

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)11

xalkoË kek. kd iı iı d d h ı iı bkadme¤a! iı k iı iı h h ı k bÙpoË mÆkvno! h dkrÒkou h h iı d/a d/a!mÊrnh! h d (d) b/ib d a/a/ı gkÒmmev! h/m kd kd iı ı/k lb ibÙp¤ou h g a d gékak¤a! kd kd iı knãrdou ÉIndik∞! d!t¤mmev! pefrugm. hélÒh! b hékak¤a! kirrç! ib genardo!tãxuo! a/ıluk¤ou ÉIndikoË békak¤a! kÒmmev! a§la¤ou palaioË d/btoË farmãkou lıcimiy¤ou ı/ıémÊlou ibtragakãnyh! ib

University of Oslo,

Dept. of Philosophy, Classics,

History of Art and Ideas ANASTASIA MARAVELA-SOLBAKK

9 =. èpal«n.10 =. xlvr«n xuloË.11 Heading: ÖAllo tÚ phlãrion kaloÊmenon [II 23–24].

VIII

VIII

Oslo University Library (inv. 1654)

7. Two prescriptions for ophthalmic remedies(A. Maravela-Solbakk, 111–22)

→→→→

↓↓↓↓

GMP_II_7_con_tavola-libre (1) (1).pdf

Documents

Transcript of GMP_II_7_con_tavola-libre (1) (1).pdf