The Oriental Tradition of Paul of Aegina's Pragmateia 9004137572, 9789004137578

Citation preview

THE ORIENTAL TRADITION OF PAUL OF AEGINA’S PRAGMATEIA

STUDIES IN ANCIENT MEDICINE EDITED BY

JOHN SCARBOROUGH PHILIP J. VAN DER EIJK ANN HANSON NANCY SIRAISI

VOLUME 29

THE ORIENTAL TRADITION OF PAUL OF AEGINA’S PRAGMATEIA BY

PETER E. PORMANN

BRILL LEIDEN • BOSTON 2004

Cover illustration: this illustration is taken from a copy of János Zsámboki, Icones veterum aliquot, ac recentium medicorum, philosophorumque elegiolis suis editæ (Antwerp, 1574), sig. E5 recto, held at Merton College Library. The permission of the Warden and Fellows of Merton College Oxford to reproduce it here is gratefully acknowledged. This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Pormann, Peter E. The oriental tradition of Paul of Aegina’s Pragmateia / by Peter E. Pormann. p. cm. — (Studies in ancient medicine, 0925-1421 ; v. 29) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 90-04-13757-2 1. Paulus, Aegineta. De re medica. 2. Medicine, Greek and Roman. 3. Medicine, Arab. 4. Medicine, Medieval. I. Pormann, Peter E. II. Title. III. Series. R126.A-Z+ 2004 2004049319

ISSN 0925–1421 ISBN 90 04 13757 2 © Copyright 2004 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910 Danvers MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. printed in the netherlands

To Emilie Savage-Smith

CONTENTS Preface ............................................................................................ ix List of Abbreviations ...................................................................... xiii Weights and Measures.................................................................... xvii Transliteration................................................................................ xix Introduction....................................................................................

1

PART ONE: SOURCES

Contents to Part One ..................................................................... 11 Chapter OneSyriac Sources ...................................................... 13 Bar Bahlūl .................................................................................. 14 Ibn Sarābiyūn ............................................................................ 20 Chapter TwoArabic Sources...................................................... 47 Paris, BnF MS 2293 (fonds grec) .............................................. 48 Ar-Rāzī Kitāb al-āwī................................................................. 60 Al-Baladī .................................................................................... 92 unain ibn Isāq ...................................................................... 114 PART TWO: ANALYSIS

Contents to Part Two..................................................................... Introduction: Previous Scholarship ................................................ Chapter ThreeTerminology ...................................................... Ophthalmology.......................................................................... Simple Drugs ............................................................................ Chapter FourLexicography ........................................................ Chapter FiveSyntactical analysis: Greek into Arabic................. Chapter SixComparative Translation Studies .......................... Conclusions and Prospects .............................................................

125 127 135 135 205 223 239 259 285

PART THREE: INFLUENCE AND GENERAL CONCLUSIONS

Contents to Part Three .................................................................. 291 Chapter SevenInfluence............................................................. 293 General Conclusions ...................................................................... 311

viii

contents

Bibliography .................................................................................. Primary Sources......................................................................... Secondary Sources..................................................................... General Index................................................................................. Greek ......................................................................................... Arabic ........................................................................................ Syriac .........................................................................................

315 315 316 325 330 333 336

PREFACE The Latin poet Horace enjoins authors not to publish their work too quickly, saying (ars poetica 388): nonumque prematur in annum (and let it [sc. what you have written] be suppressed until the ninth year). It was in 1996 that my esteemed teacher Prof. M. Ullmann first suggested that I work on the Oriental tradition of Paul of Aegina, and made available to me his notes about this Alexandrian physician. Eight years have since passed, during which time I have worked on different aspects of Paul’s œuvre. The present book comprises a study of how his major work, the pragmateiva or ‘handbook’, was transmitted to, and used by, Syriac and Arabic medical authors during the early medieval period. Despite his importance for the medieval Latin, Byzantine and Islamic medical traditions, Paul of Aegina has attracted relatively little scholarly attention in the past, which meant that I had to tread mostly virgin territory. This made the subject so fascinating for me, since I was able to venture into the unknown and discover many surprising facts about Paul and the extent of his impact on medical theory and practice. Indeed, most of the texts discussed in this study are edited and translated here for the first time. I received help and support from many quarters, without which I would never have completed this monograph. The Evangelisches Studienwerk and the Rhodes Trust funded my studies in Hamburg, Tübingen, Leiden, and Oxford, as well as trips to different libraries in order to gather material. When replacing Prof. Ph. J. van der Eijk in Newcastle during the academic year 2000–1, I received much support from my colleagues. My gratitude also goes to the Warden and Fellows of Merton College, Oxford, who elected me to a Junior Research Fellowship, which provided me with the necessary leisure to finish the book. They also kindly gave permission to reproduce the cover illustration from a book in Merton College Library. Manuscripts and rare books are the basis for the present study, and I was fortunate enough to be granted access to some of the finest collections. Many happy hours were spent in the Oosterse afdeling of the Universiteitsbibliotheek Leiden, and the staff, notably H. van der Velde and the Interpres Legati Warneriani, Prof. J. J. Witkam, were always tremendously helpful. One of the most important sources for this study

x

preface

was a Parisian manuscript belonging to the Western collections of the Bibliothèque Nationale de France. I am grateful for having been allowed to consult it in the Salle de lecture des manuscrits orientaux; Monsieur M. Garel, Conservateur des Manuscrits hébreux, was particularly helpful and friendly to me. The former librarian of the École Normale Supérieure (rue d’Ulm, Paris), Monsieur P. Petitmengin, granted me access to his superb library, and I owe him and his institution a debt of tremendous gratitude. The Bibliothèque Royale in Brussels, the British Library, and the Wellcome Library for the History and Understanding of Medicine, both in London, possess, among their treasures, important material which I was able to consult. Last, but certainly not least, the Oriental Reading Room of the Bodleian Library, Oxford, is the place where most of this monograph was written; I am especially grateful to the Keeper of the Oriental Collections, L. Forbes, for accommodating me so kindly. I was allowed to present and discuss my findings about Paul of Aegina at a number of conferences and meetings. Prof. H. Cancik made it possible for me to speak at the Metageitnia, held in January 1997 in Basle. Prof. D. Harlfinger allowed me to participate in the Nachwuchsforum, organised by his Graduiertenkolleg Textüberlieferung at the University of Hamburg, where I gave a paper at the conference Varia lectio in October 1999. The Pybus Club of the University of Newcastle invited me in 2001 to talk about Paul, and I discussed my work in progress at student meetings organised by E.D.E.P.O.L (Leiden) and classic graduates at Oxford, respectively. Although it is impossible to name all those who have helped me in one way or another, there are some individuals whom I would like to thank specifically. Prof. M. Ullmann stimulated my interest in GraecoArabic Studies, and more specifically in Paul of Aegina; without him I would never have embarked on this topic. Dr S. Brock was kind enough to look over the Syriac material, and prevented me from many an error. Prof. R. Kruk, my supervisor in Leiden, and Dr E. SavageSmith and N. Wilson, my supervisors in Oxford, helped me beyond the call of duty. I would like to thank the editors of Studies in Ancient Medicine, and notably Prof. A. E. Hanson and Prof. Ph. J. van der Eijk, for incorporating this book into their series, and the desk editor, G. van Bedaf, and the commissioning editor, M. Klein Swormink, both of Koninklijke Brill, for their excellent work and support.

preface

xi

J. Dueck, Prof. A. E. Hanson, and Dr E. Savage-Smith did not shy away from the tedious task of proof-reading the manuscript, made many invaluable comments, and corrected numerous mistakes. Although I followed the Horatian advice to ‘suppress’ my work until the ninth year, I am acutely aware of its shortcomings and limitations, which are attributable to me alone. Horace warns in the next verse of his Art of Poetry (389–90): delere licebit/ quod non edideris; nescit uox missa reuerti It is possible to delete what you have not yet published. But once a word is sent out, it cannot be taken back.

Yet, it is hoped that the benevolent reader will be inclined to overlook whatever deficiencies are present here, and will derive some insight and interest from this book. May it serve as a foundation for future studies about Paul of Aegina and the Oriental medical tradition.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS The following list contains most of the abbreviations used in this book. Some classical Greek or Arabic texts which are mentioned only in passing are cited according to LSJ and WKAS, Vorläufiges Literatur- und Abkürzungsverzeichnis zum zweiten Band (Lām) (3rd ed., Wiesbaden, 1996), respectively. The works of Hippocrates and Galen are referred to and abbreviated according to G. Fichtner, Corpus Galenicum: Verzeichnis der galenischen und pseudogalenischen Schriften (Tübingen, 2002), and id., Corpus Hippocraticum: Verzeichnis der hippokratischen und pseudohippokratischen Schriften (Tübingen, 1996). Adams B Br Baladī abālā Bar Bahlūl Berendes, Paulos Bergsträsser Mā turǧima Bryson

Dietrich Diosc. Triumph.

DNP Dozy Durling, Dictionary EI 2 Gal. SM

F. Adams (tr.), The Seven Books of Paulus Ægineta (London, 1844–47), a translation of PAeg. Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale, MS 19891 Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS, Bruce 47 Kitāb Tadbīr al-abālā wa-l-afāl, ed. Mamd al-

Q sim Muammad (Beirut, 1980) Lexicon Syriacum auctore Hassano Bar Bahlule, ed. R. Duval, 3 vols. (Paris, 1901) J. Berendes, Paulos von Aegina. Des besten Arztes sieben Bücher (Leiden, 1914) G. Bergsträsser, unain ibn Isāq: Über die syrischen und arabischen Galenübersetzungen, Abhandlungen zur Kunde des Morgenlandes 17.2 (Leipzig, 1925) J. Bryson, ‘The Kitāb al-āwī of Rāzī (ca. 900 AD), Book One of the āwī on Brain, Nerve, and Mental Disorders: Studies in the transmission of medical texts from Greek into Arabic into Latin’, Ph.D. diss. (Yale University, 2000) A. Dietrich, Dioscurides Triumphans. Ein anonymer arabischer Kommentar (Ende 12. Jahrh. n. Chr.) zur Materia medica, AAWG phil.-hist. 3. Folge, no. 172–3 (Göttingen, 1988) H. Cancik, H. Scheider (eds.), Der neue Pauly: Enzyklopädie der Antike, 16 vols. (Stuttgart, 1996–2003) R. Dozy, Supplément aux Dictionnaires Arabes, 2 vols. (Leiden, 1881) R. J. Durling, A Dictionary of Medical Terms in Galen, Studies in Ancient Medicine 5 (Leiden etc., 1993) Encyclopaedia of Islam, 11 vols. (2nd ed., Leiden etc., 1960–2002) Arabic translations of Galen’s De simpl. medicament. temp.; Gal. SM A is by al-Birīq, while Gal. SM B is by unain ibn Isāq (see below pp. 204–5)

xiv

list of abbreviations

GAS

F. Sezgin, Geschichte des Arabischen Schrifttums, 12 vols. (vols. i–ix, Leiden etc., 1967–84; vols. x–xii, Frankfurt, 2000) G.W. Freytag, Lexicon Arabico-Latinum, 4 vols. (Halle, 1830–7) Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS, Hunt. 159 J. Hirschberg, Wörterbuch der Augenheilkunde (Leipzig, 1887) The readings in Rāzī āwī M. Meyerhof (ed.), The Book of the Ten Treatises on the Eye Ascribed to unain ibn Isāq (Cairo, 1928) M. Meyerhof, R.P.P. Sbath, Le livre des questions sur l’œil de unain ibn Isāq (Cairo, 1938) Kitāb Uyūn al-anbā fī abaqāt al-aibbā (The Sources of Information on the Classes of Physicians), ed. A. Müller, 2 vols. (Cairo and Königsberg, 1884) Claudii Galeni Opera Omnia, ed. K.G. Kühn, 20 vols. (Leipzig 1821–33) Leiden, Universiteitsbibliotheek, MS 2070 Leningrad MS C875 fº 77a–127b, containing unain Ain I. Löw, Aramaeische Pflanzennamen (Leipzig, 1881) I. Löw, review of R. Payne Smith, Thesaurus syriacus (fasc. 9, Oxford, 1893), in Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 47 (1893), 514–37 Greek-English Lexicon, ed. H. G. Liddell, R. Scott, H. S. Jones (9th ed., Oxford, 1940) Th. Nöldekes Belegwörterbuch zur klassischen arabischen Sprache, ed. J. Krämer, 2 fascicles (Berlin, 1952–4) L. Brown, (ed.), The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, 2 vols. (4th ed., Oxford, 1993) R. Payne Smith, Thesaurus Syriacus (Oxford, 1879–1901) I. L. Heiberg, Corpus Medicorum Graecorum 9.1–2, 2 vols. (Leipzig and Berlin, 1921/1924) Paris, BnF MS 2293 (fonds grec), a Greek-Arabic manuscript containing fragments of the first three books of Paul’s pragmateiva ; cf. pp. 48–60 The Arabic text in the right column of Par. gr. The Greek text in the left column of Par. gr. NB: a diplomatic transcript of the Greek text is given here; on occasion, Par. gr. (gr.) deviates from the text in Heiberg’s edition (PAeg.), which is generally speaking superior; cf. p. 49 Kitāb al-āwī fī -ibb, 23 vols. (1st ed., Hyderabad, 1955–70)1 H. Reckendorf, Arabische Syntax (Heidelberg, 1921) Sābūr ibn Sahl. Dispensatorium parvum (al-Aqrābādhīn aaghīr), ed. O. Kahl (Leiden etc., 1994)

Freytag H Hirschberg, Wörterbuch Hyd. unain Ain unain Mas. fī l-ain Ibn Abī Uaibi a Kühn L Len Löw, Pflanzennamen Löw, review LSJ Nöld. WB NSOED Payne Smith PAeg. Par. gr. Par. gr. (ar.) Par. gr. (gr.)

Rāzī āwī Reck. Synt. Sābūr

1

There is a second edition of Rāzī āwī, which appeared in Hyderabad from 1974 onwards, yet all references here are to the first edition, since it is the standard edition, and its pagination is also retained in margine in the reprint (Beirut, 2000); see also Bryson, 16.

list of abbreviations Savage-Smith, Nafīs Sezgin Augenheilkunde Sīnā Augenheilkunde b. Sīnā, Qānūn Ullmann, Admin. Ullmann, Launuhū Ullmann, Medizin Ullmann, N. gen. Ullmann, Wörterbuch Vullers WKAS Wright

xv

E. Savage-Smith, ‘Ibn an-Nafīs’s Perfected Book on Ophthalmology and his Treatment of Trachoma and Its Sequelae’, Journal for the History of Arabic Science 4.1 (1980), 147–206 F. Sezgin (ed.), Augenheilkunde im Islam. Texte, Studien und Übersetzungen, 4 vols. (Frankfurt, 1986) J. Hirschberg, J. Lippert, Die Augenheilkunde des Ibn Sina (Leipzig, 1902), in Sezgin Augenheilkunde i. 1–194 Ibn Sīnā, Qānūn fī -ibb (3 vols., Būlāq, 1294/1877)/ (5 vols., Beirut, 1408/1987) M. Ullmann, Adminiculum zur Grammatik des klassischen Arabisch (Wiesbaden, 1989) M. Ullmann, Launuhū ilā l-umrati mā huwa, BAW, ph.-hist. Klasse (München, 1994.4) M. Ullmann, Die Medizin im Islam, Handbuch der Orientalistik 1. Abt. Erg. 6.1 (Leiden etc., 1970) M. Ullmann, Das arabische Nomen generis, AAWG ph.-hist. 3. Folge no. 176 (Göttingen, 1989) M. Ullmann, Wörterbuch zu den griechisch-arabischen Übersetzungen des 9. Jahrhunderts (Wiesbaden, 2002) I. A. Vullers, Lexicon Persico-Latinum, 2 vols. (Bonn, 1855–64) M. Ullmann, Wörterbuch der Klassischen Arabischen Sprache (Wiesbaden, 1957 ff.) W. Wright, A Grammar of the Arabic Language, 2 vols. (3rd ed., Cambridge, 1896)

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES During the medieval period, medicinal weights and mesures were not standardised as they are nowadays. It is therefore impossible to give exact figures for them, since there is considerable variety over space and time. The following list aims at providing the reader with an approximation in order to give some impression of how large the quantities in the recipes were.1 dirham (bÓ×Ð ]bÓ×Ô¹ ÚÊÓ√ ÔsJÚLÔ¹ bÓ ÓË (it may be possible to define it differently; one may say etc.).

l. 30–137 Quote from Paul — The definition and description of the disease 30–35

Ìœ—UÓÐ ÆÆÆ “«eÔJ«] Except for the words ai an (also) and fa-innahū (therefore) the texts in ar-Rāzī and Par. gr. (ar.) run nearly the same, while

266

chapter six al-Baladī differs both in its terminology (see below) and in its syntactical structure.

30–1

The structure of Par. gr. (ar.) and ar-Rāzī is a nominal sentence (‘Tetanus is some sort of stretching.’) while al-Baladī has a relative clause introduced by mā (‘Tetanus is what comes to be because of …’).

31

ara a vs. kāna] There is a slight tendency in Par. gr. (ar.) and ar-Rāzī to use ara a (to happen) while al-Baladī has ÓÊUÓ (‘to be’, cf. ll. 45, 81).

32

badan] While Par. gr. (ar.) and ar-Rāzī always use badan (body) to render the Greek çw'ma, al-Baladī’s translation has ǧasad (body). a al] a al is a nomen generis signifying muscles in general. The nomen unitatis is a ala to which the plural a alāt is formed (see above pp. 256 f.). Now the Greek muveç is rendered by ar-Rāzī and Par. gr. (ar.) with n. gen. a al while al-Baladī always has a alāt. There seems to be no difference in sense, yet the expressions vary.

33

wðö«] The use of this very peculiar relative pronoun in Par. gr. (ar.) and ar-Rāzī, while al-Baladī has the standard w²]Ó«, points to the fact that ar-Rāzī and Par. gr. (ar.) are based on the same source.

34

kata; th;n rJavcin] is translated in al-Baladī as fī l-faqāri while the others

have alā l-faqāri. il] Here again, ar-Rāzī and Par. gr. (ar.) render a Greek term (in this case cumovç) in the same way, i.e. with il, while al-Baladī uses kaimūs. 35–6

çuçtavntoç] is rendered by the participle muǧtamiin in al-Baladī while

Par. gr. (ar.) has a relative clause introduced by the verb (yaǧtamiu). The formula in Par. gr. (ar.) dā ilan au min āriǧin seems slightly more precise than al-Baladī’s min dā ilin au min āriǧin although min dā ilin can just mean ‘internally’, too, so that eventually there is not much difference. 38

The vague plural subject ‘they’, i.e. the patients, not expressed in Greek, is rendered differently in all three versions: Par. gr. (ar.) ÔVŠUÓ rÓI]« «ÓcÓ¼ (somebody having this disease [saqam]), al-Baladī «ÓcÓ¼ ÔVŠUÓ ÷ÓdÓÚ*« (somebody having this ailment [mara ]) and ar-Rāzī ¡«]b« «ÓcÓ¼ ÔVŠUÓ (somebody having this malady [dā ]); note the three different ways of referring to an illness, but see below ad 60–1 and 123–6

39

Par. Gr. 2293 and ar-Rāzī use the seventh form (in≥anā ‘to bend’) to render the Greek expression, while al-Baladī has the second with the reflexive (≥annā nafsahū ‘to bend oneself’).

41–44

kuzāz min quddāmin; kuzāz min alfu] These terms are rather cumbersome attempts to render relatively complicated Greek compound nouns:

comparative translation studies

267

kuzāz min quddāmin (tetanus from the front) = ejmproçqovtonoç, kuzāz min alfu (tetanus from the back) = ojpiçqovtonoç ; ojpiçqotonikovç = man bihī l-kuzāzu min alfu (he in whom there is tetanus from the back). Bar Bahlūl (84, 9–10) gives a definition for the latter: ÍMkMxmJ‚∂th »b(« b{ Œe³« t½≈ ‰u √Ë nKš s «Î“«e vÒL¹Ë hj~J‚fv hJrb i ( ΔOpiçqovtonoç. The tetanus of the back. It is called ‘tetanus from the back’. I say: it is a ‘hollow back’, the opposite of ‘hunchback’.) 45–8

The very interesting Greek passage o{tan de; ijçoçqenw'ç ejfΔ eJkavtera teivnhtai is rendered differently in Par. gr. (ar.) and al-Baladī, yet both use imtidād in this context. Hence the remark by al-Baladī (l. 50–9) that Paul uses imtidād and kuzāz indiscriminately.

59–86

Quote from Pelops (Pevloy , an Alexandrian physician and one of the teachers of Galen; cf. RE 19.1, 391–2 [Deichgräber]). There is a slightly repetitive element in this citation since Paul has just set out what ojpiçqovtonoç, ejmproçqovtonoç, and tevtanoç are. The only new element is the location of the stretching: while Paul himself (l. 41–2) speaks of the stretching of the parts of the body, Pelops situates it in the muscles and nerves of the neck.

60–1

Both Par. gr. (ar.) and al-Baladī simplify the expression ‘tavçin … kai; çuntonivan’ into one word. While Par. gr. (ar.) has tamaddud, i.e. uses his standard translation for çpaçmovç and teivneçqai, al-Baladī renders it with imtidād. amrā ] pavqoç is translated here as in 123 as mara , so there is a certain uniformity between the three versions; but see above ad 38 in rendering the concept of disease.

61–2

The rendering of tw'n peri; to;n travchlon muw'n te kai; neuvrwn poses some problems for the translator both on the terminological and syntactical level. For the difference between a al and a alāt as translations of muveç see above ad 32. The term neu'ra poses a greater terminological problem. In the Greek, neu'ra has the standard meaning of sinews. This might have led the translator of Par. gr. (ar.) to render it by the relatively strange word maǧārin, while al-Baladī has the standard aab which in Arabic is as ambiguous as the Greek neu'ra, denoting both ‘sinews’ and ‘nerves’. On the syntactical level Par. gr. (ar.) has the simple li-l-unqi for peri; to;n travchlon; I would like to interpret this li as tO≈ ·UC*«Ë ·UC*« 5Ð WKš«b« Âö« (‘the lām inserted between the first and the second noun of the genitive construct’; cf. WKAS ii. 12 a 30 ff., esp. ii. 12b15 ff.) as used in Ps. Aris. Nabāt 267, 6: ¡UÓ*« lOLÓ' ÔdÔBÚMÔFÚ« Ów¼ Ô—UÓ×³ÚUÓ (The seas are the material of [li] all water), so that we would have to translate it as ‘the muscles and paths of the neck’. Al-Baladī, on the other hand, has the somewhat strange expression oMF« vL¹ Íc« (which are called ‘neck’).

268

chapter six

64–6

Except for the relative pronoun at the beginning, the two translations concur.

67–75

When comparing Pelops’ description of tetanus with Paul’s own (l. 39–48), one can make out the lengths to which the translator in al-Baladī went to vary the Arabic expression when there is variation in the Greek one: i.e. l. 39/42 ajllΔ o{te me;n … o{te de; is rendered as rubbamā … rubbamā, while l. 67 ajllΔ eij me;n … eij de; is wa-in … fa-in, yet the o{tan + subj. (l. 45) is translated as wa-iùā + perf. Then again the translation of ejfΔ eJkavtera (l. 46–7 min alfu wa-min quddāmin) is different from that of peri; ajmfotevrouç (l. 73 fī l-ǧihataini).

67–8

In al-Baladī the specification tou' trachvlou is left out, maybe in order to avoid complicated phrasing.

75–82

Except for the insignificant difference in the use of a alāt v.s. a al (see above ad 32), the two translations in Par. gr. (ar.) and al-Baladī run completely parallel.

91–92

The quote in ar-Rāzī is a rather abridged paraphrase.

97–8

This is a strong indication that Par. gr. (ar.) and al-Baladī go back to the same translation. The Greek term çtenagmwvdhç ajnapnohv, which only occurs as an item of terminology in Par. gr. (ar.), is rendered absolutely identically in the two versions.

99

Here we find a difference in rendering ajraiovç: Par. gr. (ar.) has al-mutafāwit, while al-Baladī uses al-muftariq.

101–2

The Greek gevlwç … çardovnioç is rendered in Par. gr. (ar.) as tO³Óý ¡ÚwÓý Ìp×ÓCÐ ÓfÚOÓÓË p×]CUÐ (something similar to laughter, while not being laughter), in al-Baladī as p×Ó{ ÓuÔ¼ ÓfÚOÓÓË p×]CUÐ tO³Óý (similar to laughter, while not being laughter), and in ar-Rāzī as Ì…Óœ«Ó—≈ dÚOÓGÐ p×]C« ÔtO³Óý (similar to laughter without volition). Bar Bahlūl quotes Paul is this context (Löw, review, nº 65/ Bar Bahlūl, 1295, 1–2): ÍMgMtv Wf ÍM∂khvnHs HœpMü (Çardovnioç : in a MS of Paul: laughter) and fO p×{ ÍM∂khvNs . p×CÐ (Çardovnioç [different spelling]; laughter which is not [really] laughter). Obviously, all four versions are slightly different, especially the one in ar-Rāzī; yet one can see that despite their difference, they could all go back to the same original translation, and are at least similar in terminology.

103–5

In this instance we have considerable differences between the three versions. First of all ar-Rāzī, unlike Par. gr. (ar.) and al-Baladī, states that there is no redness in the face. Then the phrase kai; ta; o[mmata aujtoi'ç ejn o[gkw/ meivzoni faivnetai posed some problems. As the text stands in Par. gr. (ar.), we would have to make al-umra (redness) the subject of the sentence and translate: ‘It [i.e. the redness] lets the eyes appear to be bigger than their normal size.’ Yet probably there

comparative translation studies

269

was some confusion between the nominative and the accusative of aināni (two eyes), so that we should translate: ‘The eyes appear to be bigger than their normal size.’ In al-Baladī the al-ainaini (i.e. the oblique case) must be wrong for al-aināni (i.e. the nominative) and this would translate as: ‘The eyes are bigger than they were before’. The phrase ejn o[gkw/ meivzoni was rendered differently: UÓL¼—«ÓbÚI Ús ÔrÓEÚŽÓ√ (greater [aam] than their [sc. the two eyes’] size) vs. XÓ½UÓ U]L ÔdÓ¦ÚÓ√ (bigger [ak≥ar] than they were). Ar-Rāzī only has an abridged paraphrase, yet the common use of the root m by Par. gr. (ar.) and ar-Rāzī while al-Baladī has k≥r underlines the fact that as far as terminology is concerned, the former two are close. 106–9

While the basic idea in al-Baladī and ar-Rāzī is the same, i.e. that the patients either do not urinate at all, or urinate something bloody with bubbles, they express it quite differently: the former uses the paraphrase ÔtÚM Ó¡Uł (to come out of it), while the latter has the more concise Ó‰UÐ (to urinate).

109

e[con tina;ç pomfovlugaç] The participle construction is rendered by a

āl-clause (waw + impf.) in al-Baladī, while ar-Rāzī has a relative clause. 110

In al-Baladī the ajpoxhraivnetai is rendered literally with wa-yakūnu … yābisan (it becomes dry) while ar-Rāzī has wa-yataqilu (and it is constipated); the difference is due to paraphrasing in the case of the latter.

110 ff.

The construction and the logic in al-Baladī seem to be disturbed. We have perhaps a textual problem. The Greek source and ar-Rāzī concur in that a) they suffer from insomnia, and b) often fall from their beds because of spasms. The text in al-Baladī as it stands suggests that they often suffer from insomnia, and hence fall in their beds. The saqaa fī (fell into) can hardly be right here, yet whether the difference in the general structure is due to a scribal mistake or not, cannot be determined with certitude, although the former seems much more likely.

115–7

Al-Baladī and ar-Rāzī have a nearly identical text but for the lack of fī (in) in the latter, which is a rather insignificant difference.

118–9

Here ar-Rāzī has a more complete text than al-Baladī which is one of the rare instances of this.

120

uJpovtromoi givnontai is rendered in al-Baladī with Ô‘UÓFðÚ—ô« ÔtÓ Ô÷dÚFÓ¹ (trem-

bling [irtiāš] befell him) while ar-Rāzī uses ÔWÓAÚŽ]d« ÔtÓ Ô÷dÚFÓ¹ (tremor [riša] befell him). 123–6

Ar-Rāzī and al-Baladī are quite similar here, but for the beginning where to; pavqoç is rendered by the more correct hāùā l-mara (this disease) in al-Baladī while ar-Rāzī has “«ÓeÔ (kuzāz), which probably

270

chapter six constitutes an editorial change rather than a difference in the source text.

127–8

Here ar-Rāzī differs from al-Baladī: he introduces the last items in the list of causes with li, although there is no real need for this. Al-Baladī uses itirāq while ar-Rāzī has the hendiadys kayyun wa-nārun.

130–1

tÚOÓKÓŽ VÓBÓFÚ« w ^dÔCÓð w²]«] seems corrupt.

132–5

Al-Baladī is slightly more literal in his translation while ar-Rāzī is freer.

l. 139–200 Paul 3.20.2 ff. — The treatment of the disease (al-Baladī absent) 139

One of the striking features of the translation in Par. gr. (ar.) is its use of the formula yanbaġī an (it is necessary that) while ar-Rāzī has the imperative (l. 140, 157.189), the simple imperfect (l. 154, 165, 179) or li (cf. WKAS ii. 18a12 ff.) with jussive (l. 198). This tendency to use yanbaġī an (it is necessary that), which can be observed throughout the Par. gr. (ar.), is one of the salient features of this translation.

143–4

ejlaiobrachvç] is rendered by ar-Rāzī here as ÌoO²ÓŽ XÚ¹Ó“ w ”uÔLÚGÓ (steeped [maġmūs] in old oil) while he and Par. gr. (ar.) have XÚ¹Ó“ w ‰uÔKÚ³Ó (immersed [mablūl] in oil) in l. 158.

146

Since there is a gap in Par. gr. (ar.), the syntax is not entirely clear: should we read yamla a or yamla u, i.e. make yamla a/u dependent on yanbaġī or take it as a new grammatical unit. Be that as it may, ar-Rāzī has the typical imperative, and thus the rest of the sentence is construed differently.

147

āra alā (come upon) is another typical expression of Par. gr. (ar.), a sort of passe-partout, for which ar-Rāzī uses wu ia (be placed) here and in other places.

148

Completely different syntax in al-Baladī (see above ad l. 139) and ar-Rāzī, although the sense does not vary.

155

„d×¹] seems to be a mistake in Par. gr. (ar.).

157

memeriçmevnwç] is rendered literally by Par. gr. (ar.), having mutafarriqan (separately), while ar-Rāzī uses the easier fī mirārin ka≥īratin (many times), which is probably triggered by the previous fī marratin (one time, once).

159

mh; lavqwçin yuvxanteç ] is translated by Adams as: ‘lest the patients happen to catch a cold’ which is not quite accurate since lanqavnw tina; poiw'n ti means ‘to escape s-o’s notice in doing s-th’. This nuance

comparative translation studies

271

of catching a cold secretly or without the physician’s noticing is also absent from the Arabic. 163

qKFð] is most certainly corrupt. An easy emendation would be to read ©ÒÊ√® p– (therefore) corresponding to the Greek gavr (for).

165–77 The question of the recipes is complicated, both because the text of Par. gr. (ar.) is not entirely clear, and because ar-Rāzī often abridges the recipes, as he clearly does here. 177–83 Ar-Rāzī only has a paraphrase here while Par. gr. (ar.) translates everything quite accurately. 184

rÓGÚKÓ³Ú« (phlegm)] is nearly certainly a mistake for lK³« (swallowing) as ar-Rāzī has it.

185

Êu dA¹] in Par. gr. (ar.) is very difficult, and probably not right. Yet, we can perceive the different versions well enough. Par. gr. (ar.) translates more accurately while ar-Rāzī paraphrases.

188

«uKOA¹Ë] vix recte.

189

…bF (stomach)] in ar-Rāzī is probably a scribal error for …ÓbÓFÚIÓ (anus) also found in Par. gr. (ar.) and corresponding to the Greek e{dra (buttocks).

191–2

Nearly identical in ar-Rāzī and Par. gr. (ar.); ar-Rāzī uses «ÎdÓDÓš tO ]Ê≈ (in it there is danger [ aar]), while Par. gr. (ar.) has Î…ÓdÓÞUÓÔ tO ]Ê≈ (in it there is peril [mu āara]) in order to translate tolmhrotavthn ou\çan (being very dangerous).

193

XŠ√Ë] vix recte. Here and in the following lines, ar-Rāzī and Par. gr. (ar.) have quite a different text.

198–200 Another example for Par. gr. (ar.) being quite exact while ar-Rāzī only paraphrases.

Conclusions The most important result from this comparison of the different translations is that there are many cases where either Par. gr. (ar.) and al-Baladī, or Par. gr. (ar.) and ar-Rāzī, or even all three translations are virtually the same. If one does not believe that these similarities can be explained in terms of coincidence, one is compelled to accept that all three sources basically represent the same translation. This result tallies with our findings so far, namely that despite some quite important differences in both terminology and syntax, there are sufficient instances

chapter six

272

of similarity or even identity between the three sources to suggest that they are based on the same translation. The question remains how one can explain the differences between the three texts; and especially the differences in terminology, an area which one would expect to be more resistant to change than, for example, the syntax of a text. Now, if the terminology in one’s source is not consistent, one is more likely to take liberties with that terminology and impose one’s own. This is what I believe happened in the case of the pragmateiva. In order to illustrate this, I shall investigate how two different concepts are rendered in Par. gr. (ar.) which are of central importance for the chapter on tetanus: the notion of humour (kaimūs vs. il), and the notion of spasm (imtidād vs. tamaddud). Cumovç and compound nouns and adjectives such as kakocumiva , eu[cumoç etc. are mostly translated in Par. gr. (ar.) by kaimūs or combinations involving this noun, while il occurs much less frequently: Instances where cumovç or derivations occur: 1) translated by il 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

fº 6a -4 fº 24a1 fº 24a -3–paen. fº 23b10 fº 24a -6 fº 49a5 fº 118b11 fº 66b -3 fº 154b6 fº 155a8

tw'n eujcumotavtwn kakocumiva th'ç kakocumivaç cumovn kakocumivan oJ cumovç ajcuvmwton to;n ejnoclou'nta cumovn colwvdh cumo;n ejçfhnwmevnwn ejn aujth'/ cumw'n

jK)« …œuL;« jK)« …¡«œ— ¡Íœd« jK)« jK)« ¡Íœ— jKš jK)« p– jKš tM bu²¹ U bŠ v≈ ›°¤ dOB¹ r Í–R*« jK)« Íd jKš W³²× ◊öš√ V³Ð

2) translated by kaimūs 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

fº 9b3 fº 30a8-9 fº 48b -8– -7 fº 51b -6 fº 53b -6 fº 53b -4 fº 53b paen. fº 54a2 fº 54b2 fº 37a13 f, fº 37b paen. fº 39a6/12

ta; eu[cuma mocqhroi; cumoi; kakocumivaç kakovcumoç tw'n wjmw'n cumw'n cumovn [pacuvcumon] kakovcumoi glivçcrou cumou' liparou' cumou' kakovcuma pacuvcuma

”uLOJ« …œuL; Wdײ*«  UÝuLOJ« ”uLOJ« ”uLOJ« ¡Íœ— W−H«  UÝuLOJ« UÝuLO ”uLOJ« WEOKž ”uLOJ« ¡Íœ— Ułe UÝuLO ULÝœ UÝuLO ”uOJ« ¡Íœ— ”uLOJ« kOKž

comparative translation studies

273

eu[cuma ”uLOJ« œuL× cumovn UÝuLO kakovcumon ”uLOJ« ¡Íœ— aJluko;n cumo;n U(U UÝuLO çklhra;n kai; duvçpepton kai; pacuvcumon e[couçi th;n çavrka

23 24 25 26 27

fº 39a14/19 fº 41a -6 fº 42a2 fº 42a paen. fº 43a4 ff.

28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

fº 45a5|44b paen. cumou;ç  UÝuLOJ« fº 128b3 cumw'n wjmw'n W¹œd«  UÝuLOJ« fº 123b ult. f. eu[cumon ›°¤ bOł UÝuLO bu¹ fº 108b ult. f. colwvdeiç cumou;ç W¹d*«  UÝuLOJ« fº 112b -8 leptoi'ç cumoi'ç WHOD  UÝuLO fº 114b ult. f. kakocumivaç ”uLO …¡«œ— fº 87b6–7 mocqhrou;ç cumou;ç W¾¹œ—  UÝuLO fº 87b9/11 tou' cumou'  UÝuLOJ« fº 94a4/6 cumo;n ”uLOJ« fº 94a paen. f. tou' melagcolikou' cumou' ¡«œu« …d*« ”uLOJ fº 82a paen. f. kakocumivaç ”uLO …¡«œ— fº 84b5 eujcuvmw/ ”uLOJ« bOł fº 82a7–8 [melagcolikw/]' cumw'/ …d*« ”uLO s fº 82a -5 th'ç oujçivaç tou' cumou' ”uLOJ« d¼uł fº 183a2 melagcoliko;n cumovn ¡«œu« …d*« ”uLO fº 214b8 ff. (hJ ga;r tw'n poikivlwn cumw'n ejpimixiva th;n diavgnwçin uJpotevmnetai) t²dF dF¹ «cNË …dO¦ ¡UOý√ s UDKš ”uLOJ« ÊU U0—Ë

ÂUCN½ô« …dŽ ”uLOJ« W¾¹œ— r×K« WEOKG

3) translated periphrastically 44 fº 123a ult. f-

1

divaita glukuvcumoç (an exhilarating diet) (a diet pleasing to the soul [ muī b li- n- nafsi]) fHMK VOD*« dOÐb²«

4) instances where the Arabic il does not translate cumovç or other expressions for the concept of mixture: 45 46 47 48

fº 124b7 fº 110a6 fº 149b4 fº 192a4/6

To;n ejpi; çhvyei pureto;n oJ mikto;ç ejx ajmfoi'n krokovmagma poluçuvnqetoç

◊öš_« W½uHŽ s ÊuJð w²«  UOL(« ULNK s jK)U Ê«dHŽe« jKš …dO¦ ◊öš√ s Vd*«

From this list we can see that Par. gr. (ar.) uses both il and kaimūs to render cumovç and its derivations. In 10 instances (1–10), il is used, while in 33 instances (11–43) the translator opted for kaimūs; there is one case (44) where both terms are absent, presumably because of the specific meaning of glukuvcumoç (lit.: ‘sweet-humoured’). In four instances il (45–8) is used to render the concept of mixture in a broader sense in which it appears less technical than kaimūs (cf. WKAS i. 510a45 ff.), Tr. Adams i. 230.

1

chapter six

274

kaimūs itself being a loan-word from the Greek cumovç.2 This means that there is no absolute consistency in the translation of the term cumovç and its derivations in Par. gr. (ar.). Let us now turn to the Arabic root mdd. There are twelve instances in which mdd is used in Par. gr. (ar.): 1) examples derived from the fifth form (tamaddada, tamaddud, etc.) 49 50 51 52 53 54

45a2 91a ult. 75b4 71a1 138b -8 152a3

çuntetamevnwn peri; çpaçmw'n u{ptioç ajpotetamevnoç eij çunevlkoito cei'loç diatavçeiç diatavçewç

…œbL²*« œbL²« w ÁdNþ vKŽ «œbL² WIA« w œbL²« ÊUË U¼œb9 œb9

2) examples derived from the eighth form (imtadda, imtidād, etc.) 55 117a2

h] tavçiç ajpo; flegmonh'ç h] çpaçmo;ç ejrgavzetai

56 57 58 59 60

çunteivnoito U œ«b²« ÊUË to; diatei'non œ«b²ô« qFH¹ Íc« ¡wA« e[ntaçiç œ«b²« diavtaçiç œ«b²« ei[wqen eijç pavreçin tw'n çpermatikw'n ajggeivwn h] çpaçmovn, kai; ajpovlluntai ojxevwç oiJ çpaçqevnteç

¿ ÷U³I½« UNM ÊuJ¹ …—UŠ «—Ë√ s œ«b²«Ë 111b -8 114b -6 104b -3 183b -3 189b10

v≈ dOB¹ Íc« pKN¹Ë œ«b²« v≈ Ë√ wM*« WOŽË√ lKš v≈ dOB¹ Ê√ tðœUŽ s UF¹dÝ œ«b²ô«

In 6 examples (49–54) tamaddud in its different forms is used, while in the other 6, we find imtidād, that is to say the instances are exactly divided in half. This difference in usage is not reflected in different underlying Greek terms, as can be seen for instance from 53–4 (diavtaçiç rendered as tamaddud) and 59 (diavtaçiç translated as imtidād). The analysis of mdd confirms what we have already observed for the translations of the concept of ‘humour’: there is no absolute consistency in Par. gr. (ar.). If we assume, as suggested above, that Par. gr. (ar.), ar-Rāzī, and al-Baladī are all based on the same translation, then the differences in terminology are easier to explain: since the source already did not observe a strict terminology, but rather uses different terms synonymously, it was much easier for al-Baladī and ar-Rāzī to change this terminology. That syntactical structures are sometimes changed, can be explained by the lack of modern standards for quoting a source: 2

It seems to be a direct loan from Greek rather than via the Syriac (kūmūs) because of the phonetics involved.

ÍMlMö

comparative translation studies

275

nowadays one ought to quote with great accuracy. Yet both al-Baladī and ar-Rāzī do not adhere to these standards; we have noticed that they frequently paraphrase. To sum up: it is most probable that al-Baladī, ar-Rāzī and the scribe of Par. gr. (ar.) all used the same Arabic translation. The question remains whether this translation was produced in unain ibn Isāq’s school. Comparison II: Par. gr. (a r .) and Ibn Sar biyn We have compared three versions of the same text in the previous section, namely Par. gr. (ar.), al-Baladī and ar-Rāzī. As a working hypothesis, we assumed that they all go back to the same translation of the pragmateiva. From the section on Ibn Sarābiyūn it is clear that he quoted Paul quite verbatim on a number of occasions, notably in his chapters on gynaecology. We also saw that Ibn Sarābiyūn, who wrote in Syriac during the second half of the ninth century, was translated into Arabic. Naturally, this translation is quite different from the one in Par. gr. (ar.) which, I have argued, best reflects the original source for ar-Rāzī and al-Baladī. M. Ullmann has characterized the Arabic translation of Ibn Sarābiyūn as follows3: The diction of the translator is ponderous. One can feel how he struggled to express himself and how he strived exactly to imitate the original written in a foreign language. … His use of the adjective ulbun to designate ‘strong, powerful’ wine (§ 23) is unusual. When employing min to designate the agent of the passive, he imitates Syriac: man lusia au nuhiša mina l-hawāmmi … is the text in § 16. In Arabic, this construction is non-standard, while it is usual in Syriac.

This statement is certainly correct in a general sense: one can describe the translation of Ibn Sarābiyūn as cumbersome and inelegant. One certainly also gets the impression that it was influenced by the Syriac to a great extent, which is not surprising. Yet the two unusual features mentioned by Ullmann in 1971 are not unusual at all, as he himself has since demonstrated. ulbun is a term used by unain ibn Isāq to render aujçthrovç.4 To introduce the agent for the passive with min is 3

Ullmann, ‘Sarābiyūn …’, 287 (my translation). Ullmann, Wörterbuch, 43.

4

276

chapter six

quite normal in classical Arabic.5 Therefore these features do not constitute distinctive stylistic criteria in themselves. We need to discover other linguistic characteristics which will allow us clearly to distinguish between the two translations. A good starting point for doing so is to compare the two versions. As mentioned above, we have the possibility to do this with some gynaecological chapters. There is not an overwhelming amount of material, but the following investigation certainly makes plain that these two versions, as one would expect, are fundamentally different in terminology, morphology, and syntax. In order to illustrate this, a synoptic table of these two versions together with the Greek source is given, followed by comments on points of linguistic interest. The Arabic version of Ibn Sarābiyūn is arranged around that of Par. gr. (ar.), and this led to some considerable omissions of text. In order to get a better impression of the original form, the reader may want to turn to the discussion of the relevant chapters above (p. 24 ff.). F 1 Fº 195b10; Ibn Sarābiyūn 5.30, corresponding to PAeg 3.61 (i. 275, 6 Heiberg): 6 Par. gr. (gr.) [2756] ΔEpevcetai hJ e[mmhnoç kavqarçiç pote; me;n o{lou tou' çwvmatoç ajrrwvçtwç diakeimevnou, pote; 5 de; th'ç uJçtevraç aujth'ç i[dion pavqoç ajnadedegmevnhç dia; yu'xin ejntovpion h] plhgh;n h] duçkraçivan ejk geneth'ç h] 10 [196a] ejpivkthton kavkwçin, wJç to; polu; de; ejk tw'n ajmblwvçewn kai; diav ti mevroç tw'n kuriwtevrwn prw15

topaqh'çan, oi|on h|par 5

Par. gr. (ar.) WOIM²« u¼Ë YLD« Ê≈ dNý q w ÊuJð w²« rIÝ s X³²Š« U0— b'« lOL' ÷dF¹ rI« p– ÊU U0—Ë rŠdK ÷dF¹ ›°¤ ’UŠ w½UJ œdÐ s tMOFÐ …¡«œ— Ë√ WÐd{ Ë√ bu*« s ëe W³Ó²J ÷«d√ Ë√ ÊuJ¹ p– d¦√Ë WÒMł_« jIÝ s WbI² WÒKF Ë√ ¡UCŽô« s ¡wý w b³J« q¦ WOOzd«

B

ÊU «–≈ iÚO(« f³²ÚŠ« U0— UŁU²KÔ tK ÔÊbÓ³« «–≈ f³²Š« U0—Ë rŠd« w ÊU —uU ’Uš ¡wý UÓNH½ ›ÆÆƤ

«dO¦ Àb%Ë  UIÝô« qł√ s ◊ UC¹√ iO(« Âœ f³²×¹Ë iÚFÐ w ÷dF¹ U ÷d qł√ s b³JU WÓOOzd« ¡UCŽ_«

Ullmann, Admin., pp. 76–84; see above p. 249. The text in the left and central columns reflect Par. gr., the text in the right column is taken from B and is identical to the one edited above p. 24 ff.; see there for further references. 6

comparative translation studies Par. gr. (gr.) h] koilivan h] qwvraka h[ ti tw'n toiouvtwn ejg cronivw/ gegono;ç pavqei

277

Par. gr. (ar.)

B

—bB« Ë√ sD³« Ë√ «c¼ q¦ dš¬ ¡wý Ë√ se rIÝ Ë√

…bF*« Ë√ …bŠ«uÐ ÓÊU «–≈ WÓMÚe WKŽ UÓLNM

1–11

Generally speaking, it is possible to see that Par. gr. (ar.) is more precise and closer to the Greek original than that of Ibn Sarābiyūn. This is not surprising at all; Par. gr. (ar.) contains an Arabic translation of a Greek original text, whilst Ibn Sarābiyūn excerpted Paul without acknowledgement. The Syriac influence is also more visible in Ibn Sarābiyūn’s case.

1/3

The first striking terminological difference between Par. gr. (ar.) and Ibn Sarābiyūn is that the former consistently uses am≥ as the technical term to refer to the menses (hJ e[mmhnoç kavqarçiç) while the latter always has ai . This, of course, is a significant difference. Bar Bahlūl gives both terms, although the latter one appears to be the standard one for him.7 Ullmann, Wörterbuch, does not list ai ; this suggests that this term does not belong to the vocabulary of the translation movement of the ninth century.

2–4

The Greek o{lou tou' çwvmatoç (of the whole body) is rendered as lOL' b'« (for the whole body [ǧasad]) in Par. gr. (ar.) while Ibn Sarābiyūn has tK Êb³« (the whole body [badan]). At first sight this seems to be a significant terminological difference. Yet we find the juncture tK Êb³« (the whole body [badan]) three times in Par. gr. (ar.), twice translating o{lon to; çw'ma (‘the whole body’, 26b9, 60b -3) and once tou' panto;ç çwvmatoç (‘of the whole body’, 78a11). Therefore this is not a distinctive criterion between the two translations.

4

The term multā≥, used in Ibn Sarābiyūn in the sense of ‘affected by disease’, does not occur in Par. gr. (ar.). It mostly occurs in poetry, but Ibn al-Ǧazzār uses it once. 8

6/7

raim (womb) which normally is feminine in Arabic, is always masculine in Par. gr. (ar.), maybe under the influence of Syriac H¬pn (ramā, ‘womb’) which is masculine. On the other hand, it is feminine in Ibn Sarābiyūn.

11/12

wJç to; poluv (mostly) is rendered differently in the two versions: Par. gr.

(ar.) has ak≥ara ùālika while Ibn Sarābiyūn renders it as ka≥īran. This

7 Bar Bahlūl 913, 17: YLD« Í“Ëd*« œ«“ ¨÷ËUŠ hJ∂Δ‚†ö ÆiOŠ H‚†ö (Menstruation [kefsā], menstruation [ai ]. Menstruous [kefsānī≥ā], menstruous [āwi ]; [Īšō ] of Merw added: menstruation [am≥ ].) 8 WKAS ii. 1679a17 ff., esp. ii. 1679b11–4.

chapter six

278

usage in Par. gr. (ar.) is for once consistent; whenever wJç to; poluv occurs, it is translated as ak≥ara ùālika (28a7, 44b11, 196a2, 214b -9); wJç ejpi; to; poluv is always rendered as fī ak≥ari l-amri (21b -4, 151a2). Because of this consistency, even if one might like a higher number of incidences, this may be a significant criterion. The juncture (wJç) 9 ejpi; to; poluv occurs three times in Galen’s Quod animi mor. and is translated twice as ak≥ara ùālika and once alā l-ak≥ari. Since the latter treatise is translated by ubaiš ibn al-asan al-A sam, does this preclude him as a translator of Par. gr. (ar.)? 13

The Greek preposition ejk, indicating a cause, is translated as min in Par. gr. (ar.) and min aǧli in Ibn Sarābiyūn. As already mentioned (see above p. 234), this latter rendering is extremely typical for Ibn Sarābiyūn. Yet it does also occur in Par. gr. (ar.) on two occasions (183a -6, 189a11). This demonstrates yet again that the number of occurrences is at least as important as the fact that they occur. Par. gr. (ar.) has saq here and suqū in l. 7 of the next text (F 2) for Greek a[mblwçiç (abortion), while Ibn Sarābiyūn has isqā in both cases.

17

ban vs. maida (both meaning ‘stomach’) for koiliva : there is a general preference in Par. gr. (ar.) to translate koiliva as ban, but maida also occurs (e.g. 60b8).

19

saqam vs. illa for ‘disease’: in this case, Par. gr. (ar.) has saqam which is one of the possibilities to convey the concept of disease. In general, illa occurs five times more often there than saqam, and it is therefore no criterion to place the translator.

F 2 Fº 200a2; Ibn Sarābiyūn 5.28, corresponding to PAeg 3.64 (i. 279, 27 Heiberg): Par. gr. (gr.) [27927] ÔH flegmonh; th'ç uJçtevraç ejk pleiovnwn aijtivwn givnetai: kai; ga;r ejk plhgh'ç kai; th'ç 5 tw'n ejmmhvnwn ejpoch'ç ajpov te yuvxewç kai; pneumatwvçewç, oujc h{kiçta de; kai; ejx ajmblwvçewç kai; ejk toketw'n dia; ka10 kh;n kuvhçin [2801] ojduvnh te th'ç kefalh'ç

Par. gr. (ar.)

B

÷dF¹ Ò—U(« —u« Ê≈ …dO¦ qKŽ s rŠdK WÐd{ s ÊuJ¹ t½√ p–Ë YLD« ”U³²Š« sË ÷dF¹ aH½Ë œdÐ sË UC¹√ «dO¦Ë t ◊uIÝ s ÊuJ¹ U œôu« bFÐ sË 5M'« ÃöŽ …¡«œd WKÐUI« ”«d« w lłË

Àb×¹ —u« Ê≈ …dO¦ Ì»U³Ý_ rŠd« w WÐd{ s wMŽ√ iO(« ”U³²Š« sË WÓDÚIÓÝË b¹bý œdÐ sË ¡ö²« sË ›ÆÆƤ ◊UIÚÝô« s ÀbŠ U0—Ë …Óœôu« bÚFÐ WKÐUI« XHŽ« «–≈ ›ÆÆƤ …√d*« vKŽ Ÿ«bË

4.796, 19; 802, 2.14 Kühn; cf. Biesterfeldt, Kräfte der Seele, 184, s.v. d¦√.

9

comparative translation studies Par. gr. (gr.)

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Par. gr. (ar.)

kai; tevnontoç oMF« VBŽ wË [2] karpovç rBF [2] karpw'n te kai; daktuvrUF*« w ¡Ušd²Ý« lwn kai; trachvlou kataoMF«Ë lÐU_«Ë [200b] çpaçmovç, parevgkliçiç œUË ejpi; tajnantiva, çto‚öG½«Ë …bF*« mavcou çumpavqeia, muvrŠd« r çiç tou' th'ç uJçtevraç çtomivou, [2807] eij de; mevroç flegmaivnoi, —u« ÊU Ê≈ U√Ë kata; tou'to ma'llon hJ ojduvnh bł lOLł w —U(« diaçhmaivnei: tw'n me;n ›¡ÚeÔ'«Ω¤ Ëeł øtOKË rŠd« ga;r o[piçqen aujth'ç movnon d¦√ ÊU Ê≈Ë tM flegmainovntwn to; a[lghp– w ÊuJ¹ lłu« ma kata; th;n ojçfu;n [givnetai, kai;]10 WOŠUM« pKðË ›¡ÚeÔ'«Ω¤ Ëe'« to; çkuvbalon ejpevcetai —U(« —u« Ê√ p–Ë qlibomevnou tou' ajpeuqurŠd« dšR w ÊU «–≈ çmevnou, tw'n de; e[mprow ÊuJ¹ lłu« ÊS çqen h{ te ojduvnh kata; to; h\ÃËdš V²×¹Ë VÚKÔB« tron kai; çtraggouriva h] dF³LK ÷dF¹ U* qH¦« duçouriva [givnetai] 10 th'ç ÊU «–≈Ë jGC« s kuvçtewç qlibomevnhç: ÊS tbI w —u« W½UF« w ÊuJ¹ lłu« ‰u³« dODIð dDI¹Ë ÷dF¹ U* ›tÝU³²Š«ËΩ¤ tÝU³²ŠË ¿ jGC« s W½U¦LK [201a] tw'n de; pleurw'n flegmai—u« ÊU «–«Ë novntwn oi{ te boubw'sÚOÓ²]OÐÚ—Ô_« ÊS V½«u'« w neç teivnontai, kai; ta; qI¦ðË b9 çkevlh baruvnontai: sÚOÓ U« tou' de; ptuvgmatoç flegmaiv—u« ÊU Ê≈ U√Ë nontoç kata; to;n ojmfaÊS rŠd« qHÝ√ w lo;n oJ povnoç mavliçta [givnetai]10 w ÊuJ¹ lłu« d¦√ çu;n o[gkw/: peri; de; to; çtovl …Òd« l{u mion ou[çhç th'ç flegmonh'ç «–≈ U√Ë Â—Ë kata; to; ejpigavçtrion —U(« —u« ÊU ÊS rŠd« r wK¹ U2 ojdunw'ntai, kai; tw'/ wK¹ ULO ÊuJ¹ lłu« daktuvlw/ kaqiemevnw/ Ê≈Ë dÐb« ]fÔłË l³≈ qšœÔ√

10

omitted in Par. gr. (gr.).

279 B …bŽ—Ë 5MOÓF« ‰u√ rQðË VBÓF« ZMAðÓË oMFÚ«ÓË lÐUÓô«ÓË ›ÆÆƤ

UNM Â—Ë Ê≈Ë lÓłÓuUÐ ÒfŠ «¡Úeł ¡e'« pÓ– w

Ô—u« ÊU Ê≈Ë UNM …dšÓR*« ¡«eł_« w w ÔlłÓu« ÊU qÐe« f³²Š«Ë VK^B« UF*« ◊UGC½« qł√ s X—Ë ÊS rOI²*« ÊU WbI*« Áƒ«eł« Ôl³²¹Ë 5ðÓdUÓ)« w ÔlłÓu« ‰u³« dODIð p– W½U¦*« Êô ÁdŽÓË —u« s jGCMð UNH½ rŠd« V½«Óuł ÚX—Ë «–«ÓË ÊU²Ð—ô«  Òb²« XKIŁÓË ÊU UÒ« Â—Ë «–«ÓË ÊU rŠd« dF w ÔlłÓu« «–«Ë …d^« U¼¡«eł√ ÊS UNL Â—Ë UÎ*√ ÔrQð …dšR*« «Îb¹bý «–«Ë l³ôUÐ XÒ

chapter six

280 Par. gr. (gr.) çklhro;n kai; ajphne;ç uJpopivptei to; çtovmion.

Par. gr. (ar.)

B

b& t½S l{u*« l³ù« X% rŠd« r

błÔË «Îd−ײ ö× UNL

1

For a discussion of waram and waram ārr as translations for flegmonhv see above p. 25. ara a vs. ada≥a: the verb ara a is very common in Par. gr. (ar.), occurring approximately twenty times as often as ada≥a. In Ibn Sarābiyūn they occur roughly with equal frequency; therefore the dominant use of ara a distinguishes Par. gr. (ar.) from Ibn Sarābiyūn.

2

illa vs. sabab for ai[tion (cause): in Syriac, hJ©u (‘ell≥ā ’, i.e. the etymological cognate) originally means ‘cause’, and only later and under the influence of the Arabic could it denote a ‘disease’ as well.11 Conversely, in Arabic illa originally meant ‘disease’, and it was under the influence of the Syriac that it came to mean ‘cause’ as well. Endress has shown that the standard way to translate aijtiva and ai[tion in the Kindī-circle was to use illa, presumably under the influence of the Syriac.12 In Par. gr. (ar.) illa is first and foremost used to translate the concept of disease; but there are also a number of cases where it renders aijtiva or ai[tion as it does here. Yet sabab is also used for the same purpose. That sabab and illa in the sense of ‘cause’ occur in the same translation with approximately equal frequency points at least to unain ibn Isāq’s circle and the time after him.

9–10

This is an extremely interesting case where we can still grasp a certain feature of the Syriac translation of Paul of Aegina. Par. gr. (ar.) has WKÐUI« ÃöŽ …¡«œd (because of the bad treatment of the midwife) which is not in the Greek original. Since we also have it, in modified form, in Ibn Sarābiyūn (…√d*« vKŽ WKÐUI« XHŽ√ «–≈, ‘if the midwife mistreats the woman’), it must have been in the Syriac translation.

11

waǧa ar-ra si vs. udā for ‘headache’: Par. gr. (ar.) imitates the Greek ojdunh; th'ç kefalh'ç, while Ibn Sarābiyūn has the term which normally translates kefalalgiva in Par. gr. (ar.).

31/2

aġ vs. in iġā (i.e. verbal noun in the first and seventh form respectively) for qlivbeçqai (to be pressured): verbal nouns are indifferent as to their voice, i.e. they can be active or passive.13 This is not the case in

Cf. Brock., Lex. Syr., 524a-b, s.v.

11

G. Endress, Proclus Arabus: Zwanzig Abschnitte aus der Institutio Theologica in arabischen Übersetzungen (Beirut, 1973), 141–3; cf. id. ‘The circle of al-Kindī: Early Arabic Translations from Greek and the Rise of Islamic Philosophy’ in id., Kruk (eds.), Ancient Tradition, 43–76. 13 Cf. Ullmann, Admin., pp. 11–13, the chapter being entitled: ‘Die Indifferenz des 12

comparative translation studies

281

Syriac, and maybe this is why we have the verbal noun of the seventh form here. mabar vs. miā mustaqīm for ajpeuquçmevnon: both terms occur once in Par. gr. (ar.) (203a10, 69b1) apart from the present quotation. 33/4

The apodosis of a conditional clause is frequently introduced in Par. gr. (ar.) with fa-inna plus a noun in the accusative followed by an imperfect. Generally speaking Ibn Sarābiyūn prefers the plain perfect as here (kāna). This said, in l. 47, we have the construction with fa-inna also in Ibn Sarābiyūn; but it is more frequent in Par. gr. (ar.).

F 3 Fº 204a10; Ibn Sarābiyūn 5.29, corresponding to PAeg 3.67 (i. 284, 9 Heiberg): Par. gr. (gr.) [2849] Tw'n ejn mhvtra/ karkivnwn oiJ me;n meqΔ eJlkwvçewç, oiJ de; cwri;ç e{lkouç çunivçtantai. ejpi; me;n 5 ou\n tw'n ajnelkovntwn o[gkoç euJrivçketai peri; to; çtovmion th'ç uJçtevraç çklhrovç, ajnwvmaloç, ojcqwvdhç, [204b] 10 crova/ trugwvdhç, ejnereuqhvç, pote; de; kai; uJpopevlioç:

Par. gr. (ar.)

B

w²« 5Þ«d« iFÐ Ê≈ l ÊuJð rŠd« w ÊuJð UNCFÐË ÕdłË dIŽ w²U Õdł dOž s ÊuJ¹ ÊuJ¹ Õdł dOž s ÊuJð rŠd« r wK¹ ULO Â—Ë d−ײ fKQÐ fO øU¾Oý t½u ÊuJ¹Ë

w²«  U½UÞdÒ« Ê≈ UÓ UNÚM rŠd« w ›°¤ ÊuJ¹ U UNMË ÕdIð Ól ÔÊuÔJ¹ ÕdIð dOGÐ ÔÊuJÓ¹ ÕdIð dOGÐ ÊuJ¹ w²« w błu¹Ë W—«Ë W³K rŠd« UNKJý w ÌW¹u² dOž ÊuJðË …—b

Íœ—b« ÊuK U0—Ë u¼ U …dL(« v≈ œ«u« v≈ ÊU

UN½u w X½U U0—Ë ¡«dLŠ …ÓdC)« v≈ WKzUÓ

1–12

In the beginning (1–6), the two versions are relatively similar, although there are still a number of differences in the rendering of the partitive genitive at the beginning (tw'n karkivnwn) with ba and minhā mā respectively; in the plurals of sarān (sarāīn vs. sarānāt); in o[gkoç being rendered as ǧur or taqarru and so on. Towards the end, there are some more substantial differences

12

The different translations of uJpopevlioç are interesting; Par. gr. (ar.) takes it to mean ‘slightly black’, ‘blackish’ (ilā s-sawādi) while Ibn Sarābiyūn has ‘slightly green’, ‘greenish’ (mā ilun ilā l- u rati), an ambiguity which is also contained in the Greek term (cf. LSJ: ‘somewhat black, wan, livid’).

Nomen actionis gegenüber dem Genus verbi’.

chapter six

282

F 4 Fº 206b6; Ibn Sarābiyūn 5.27, corresponding to PAeg 3.71 (i. 288, 8 Heiberg): Par. gr. (gr.)

Par. gr. (ar.)

[2888] ÔH uJçterikh; pni;x ajnadromh; th'ç uJçtevraç ejçti;n eijç çumpavqeian ajgouvçhç ta; kuriwvtata tw'n morivwn, 5 wJç karwtivdaç, kardivan, mhvniggaç. parevpetai de; tai'ç paçcouv çaiç ejggivzontoç me;n paroxuçmou' nwqrov10 thç dianoivaç, o[knoç, ajtoniva çkelw'n,

15

20

25

30

35

[207a] wjcrovthç proçwvpou, blevmma perilivparon, ejnçtavçhç de; th'ç pnigo;ç katafora; kai; paravnoia, katavlhyiç tw'n aijçqhthrivwn metæajfwnivaç, çkelw'n çunolkhv: ei\ta a[rcontai ejreuvqein aiJ gnavqoi, to; provçwpon uJpopivmpratai15: mellouvçhç de; ajniveçqai protrevcei tiç ejk tw'n gunaikeivwn tovpwn uJgraçivan pro;ç th;n aJfh;n kai; borborugmovç, kai; proodeuvei ti tw'n ejntevrwn, aujthv te cala'tai katΔ oj[207b] livgon hJ uJçtevra, kai; ou{twç ajpolambavnouçin tov te noei'n kai; to; aijçqavneçqai. kinei'tai de; to; novçhma kata; periovdouç kaqavper hJ ejpilhyiva, …

u¼ wLŠd« oM)« Ê≈ u¼ rŠd« ‚UM²š« Ê« ‚u v≈ rŠd« ÷U³I½« ‚u v≈ UÓ¼œuF ¡UCŽ_« r√ w t—UAðË WOU)« ¡UCŽ_« qF& v²Š ›°¤ «—Ë_« q¦ WOOzd« W*« WÒOÝUzd« ”bOÞË—U vLð w²« ”uD¹—U …UÒL*« s¹«dAU ´W³³²*«´ UN²LłdðË W dG*« U¼UMFË WOAž√Ë UC¹√ VKI«Ë wAG*« ¡UAG«Ë VKIUË Ác¼ tÐ s* ÷dF¹Ë ⁄Ub« WJ³A« ÁUMFË fOŽU vÒL*« ⁄UbK X Ë »d «–≈ WKF« p– ÔtU½ s o×K¹Ë ›ÆÆƤ dJH« w wÚ¼ÓË …b(« Í√d« ÔnÚFÔ{ WÐuM« ÓX Ë »d «–≈ nF{Ë qË qIF«Ë dJH« œUË qÓJ«Ë …dHË 5 U« w …dHÓË 5 UÒ« nF{Ë

WÐuÞ—Ë tłu« w rJײݫ «–≈ v²Š 5MOF« w wAž sN ÷dF¹ oM)« qD³ðË qIF« »U¼–Ë  uB« lDIM¹Ë ”«u(« 5 U« »c−²ðË14 √b³¹ rŁ wK¹ UË dL×¹ tłu« ÊuJ¹Ë UC¹√ sÚO]IA« «–≈ v²Š TK²L*U tłu« WŠ«d«  √b²Ð« WÐuÞ— ÊöOÝ ôË√ ÂbI²¹ WÝu× ¡UM« ¡UCŽ√ s sD³« w …d d sN ÷dF¹Ë ¡UCŽ_« WOŠU½ s ¡wý ¡w−¹Ë UC¹√ wšd²¹Ë rŠd«

tłÓu« sJ9 «Ó–UÓ  U³Ý ÀbŠ ÷d*« ”«u(« ÊöDÐË ◊ö²š«Ë  uB« ÊöDÐË 5 UÒ« ZMAðÓË …dLŠÓË 5²MłÓu« «–U WKFÚ« ‰ö×½« X Ë »d U WÐuÞ—  —œUÓÐ ¡UŠd²Ýô«Ë

v≈ tMOFÐ bMŽË öOK qHÝ√ lłdð p– sNO≈ sNÝ«uŠË sNuIŽ —«œË√ t ÊuJ¹ rIÝ u¼Ë ›ÆÆƤ ŸdB« q¦

14

leg. ÊU UÝ.

15

B

Par. gr. (gr.) has uJpopivmplatai; see below ad 23/4.

q³I« wŠ«u½ v≈ »u¦ð rŁ fLKUÐ f% sNŠ lłd¹Ë ÒsNuIŽ —«ËœQÐ „dײð WKF« Ác¼ Ê√ p–ÓË ŸdB« u¼Ë UOOLK³U UU

comparative translation studies

283

1

We have the same tendency to use the verbal noun of the seventh form in Ibn Sarābiyūn where Par. gr. (ar.) prefers the first (see above).

5/6

karwtivdaç : obviously, the linguistic explanation of this Greek term was in the Syriac translation of the pragmateiva, since it appears here

in both versions. cf. Bar Bahlūl 1705, 2–3: ¤MamNs Nf Ödh ÍiV∂xmnHr . W ÒdG*« HΔ¨ƒq≈l Kdv I (Karwtivdeç, according to Bar Serōšwai: i.e. the immersed ones; the immersed ones.) who essentially has the same explanation as Ibn Sarābiyūn. Something must have gone wrong in the manuscript tradition in Par. gr. (ar.). 16

6

mhvniggaç (meninges): standard

rendering in Par. gr. (ar.) aġšīyat addimāġi, while Ibn Sarābiyūn has another explanation which is similar to the entry in Bar Bahlūl17, except that the latter has ifāqāt instead of ġišā .

10

idda vs. nauba for paroxuçmovç (paroxysm): in Par. gr. (ar.) the standard term for the paroxysm of a disease is idda, yet the juncture waq an-naubati (time of paroxysm) occurs once (116b -3). wahyun fī l-fikrati wa-l-aqli (confusion [way] in the thinking and the intellect) vs. ufu r-ra yi (weakness of opinion) for nwqrovthç dianoivaç (numbness of thinking): one can see here how the translator of Par. gr. (ar.) has struggled to render the Greek faithfully, translating diavnoia with a hendiadys. Ibn Sarābiyūn is much plainer, if one does not take the fasād al-fikrati (corruption of thinking) in l. 11 as going with

ufu r-ra yi .

10–4

The whole sentence shows that the content of the source is rendered quite carefully and similarly in both sources, but the two translations are different on a syntactical level. For instance the order of the items is slightly different and Ibn Sarābiyūn employs the article where Par. gr. (ar.) does not.

15

istakama vs. tamakkana for ejnivçtaçqai in the sense of ‘become deeprooted’: istakama is the preferred term in Par. gr. (ar.), but tamakkana occurs once (25b paen.) to translate çthrivzeçqai.

16–20

As before, the content in the two versions is nearly identical, but the way of putting it varies, especially on the level of syntax. For instance,

Cf. Simon, Anatomie, 1.351, I. Garofalo, Anatomicarum administrationum libri qui supersunt novem earundem interpretatio arabice Hunaino Isaaci filio adscripta, 2 vols. (Naples, 1986–2000), ii. 674b s.v. 17 Bar Bahlūl 1074, 15: WOJ³A« hJ∂kVdWl Kdv JlHö mN s Nf Ödh S∂•∂Δ∂l WOJ³A« fOGMOMO*« dOHð `O ‰U ⁄Ub« › U UHΩ¤  U UHÝ ÍMgMt Ödh S∂•Δ∂Δ∂l Mhv niggeç according to Bar Serōšwai: indeed, [this means] net-like, net-like. Mhv niggeç according to Paul: the membranes of the brain. Masī said: The explanation of mhvniggeç is net-like. 16

284

chapter six while the apodosis has the imperfect (yari u) in Par. gr. (ar.), Ibn Sarābiyūn has the perfect (ada≥a). In Par. gr. (ar.) the finer nuances of the Greek metav are expressed through āl-clauses, where Ibn Sarābiyūn only has a list of nouns.

23

rāa vs. inilāl: the term inilāl is not used in Par. gr. (ar.); it may be therefore typical for Ibn Sarābiyūn.

23/4

wa-yakūnu l-waǧhu ka-l-mumtali i (the face becomes somewhat repleted) in Par. gr. (ar.): the Greek manuscript tradition has two conflicting readings here: uJpopivmplatai (ABELMa [K], also adopted by Par. gr. (gr.), meaning ‘to be [slightly] full’) and uJpopivmpratai (FG e corr. L [D], meaning ‘to be [slightly] burnt’). Par. gr. (ar.) clearly translates the former reading not adopted by Heiberg, and thus concurs with Par. gr. (gr.). Unfortunately Ibn Sarābiyūn leaves it out, so that we are unable to tell what his Syriac version read.

34/5

tarǧau uqūluhunna vs. ta≥ūbu uqūluhunna] The verb ≥āba, used in Ibn Sarābiyūn to translate ajpolambavnein, does not occur in Par. gr. (ar.), and may therefore be typical for the Arabic in Ibn Sarābiyūn. Note, however, that Ibn Sarābiyūn uses raǧaa in the next line.

37

ar and ejpilhyiva (epilepsy): Ibn Sarābiyūn has a corrupted version of the Greek term; Par. gr. (ar.) transcribes it as UO³KOÐ≈ (78a10, 80a -5, 91a9); see also the quotation above from Bar Bahlūl (p. 17).

Conclusions There are some significant differences on the lexicographical, morphological and syntactical level between Par. gr. (ar.) and Ibn Sarābiyūn, which were to be expected. The examination of these differences has provided us with a number of characteristics which seem to be distinctive and therefore may serve as a criterion in order to determine the translator’s style. The survey showed on many occasions that the number of occurrences of a word or grammatical phenomenon is an important piece of data which needs to be taken into consideration.

CONCLUSIONS AND PROSPECTS At the end of the translation survey, we are able to draw a number of conclusions, some of which can only be tentative. Firstly, it is beyond reasonable doubt that Par. gr. (ar.), ar-Rāzī, al-Baladī, Ibn Samaǧūn and Bar Bahlūl all used the same Arabic translation of Paul’s pragmateiva. Although quite a number of texts were translated more than once from Greek into Arabic, the fact that only one translation of Paul’s encyclopedia appears to have been made is not at all surprising. This translation, as we have seen at the very beginning of this study1, is said to be the work of unain ibn Isāq. When looking at this translation from various angles, we noted that it bears some of the hallmarks of translations produced during the ninth century. Furthermore we noted that it shared certain characteristics with translations of other works assumed to be the products of unain ibn Isāq and ubaiš ibn al-asan al-A sam. We also encountered a preoccupation of the translator with variant readings in different manuscripts, which tallies with unain ibn Isāq’s practice. For all these reasons, it is likely that this translation of the pragmateiva was produced in unain ibn Isāq’s school, either by himself or by one of his collaborators. There are also some more general results. Hitherto, the study of Greek-Arabic translation technique was mostly concerned either with lexicographical or morphological questions, or highlighted individual syntactical features. How an individual Greek term was sometimes rendered in Arabic was taken as a criterion for determining who drafted the translation. Single grammatical features, seen as indications of the personal style of a translator, often turned out to be quite common either to Greek-Arabic translations or even classical Arabic in general. In order to illustrate the problems encountered when basing an analysis on single terms, it is useful to take up the example of cumovç again. We have seen that it is translated both as il and kaimūs in the Arabic translation of the pragmateiva. Ullmann, Wörterbuch, p. 41, lists this term as one of the significant differences between al-Birīq and unain ibn Isāq: the former translates cumovç as kaimūs while the latter uses il. This may be so in general, but there are certainly cases where 1

See above p. 4.

286

part two

each author uses the other term. For instance, in the Arabic translation of the Hippocratic Peri; trofh'ç, kaimūs does occur thrice as a translation of cumovç, but il is also used once or twice.2 Ullmann assumes that the Arabic translation was produced by al-Birīq, which means that al-Birīq employed both terms. This highlights the need for statistical analysis. The frequency with which a term occurs may be much more revealing than the fact that it occurs. Likewise, the fact that a Greek construction is rendered by an Arabic one is in itself interesting, but does not always provide one with a distinctive criterion to judge who translated a text. How often a construction is used, is, again, immensely important when one wants to describe the style of an individual author. If we look at the related field of classical philology, which in many regards is far more advanced than classical Arabic linguistics, we see that statistical analysis has been fashionable for at least two hundred years. The vocabulary of single authors was analysed in special dictionaries in extenso, so that one knows how often a term, or a form occurs. Erasmus in his Ciceronianus even makes fun of people who will only use forms which can be found in Cicero, thus implicitly showing that the whole of this author had been lexified.3 Statistical analysis of the resolutions in Euripides led to an internal dating of his plays.4 The advent of electronic resources, especially searchable databases of texts like the TLG has further facilitated stylistic analysis. Even in other areas of Oriental Studies, there are some very promising projects aiming at giving a comprehensive analysis of certain texts. For instance Chr. Harbsmeier’s Synonyma Serica Comparata provides the user with all preBuddhist Chinese texts together with an English translation; every term is fully marked up, so that the user can search for certain gramCf. J. N. Mattock, Hippocrates: On Humours and Hippocrates: On Nutriment, Arabic Technical and Scientific Texts, vol. 6 (Cambridge, 1971), s.v. il (p. 49) and s.v. kaimūs (p. 59); and P.E. Pormann, review of: M. Ullmann, Wörterbuch zu den griechisch-arabischen Übersetzungen des 9. Jahrhunderts (Wiesbaden, 2002) in: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 13.1 (April 2003), 105–7, 106–7. 3 In the dialogue, Nosoponus states, full of pride [D. Erasmus, De recta Latini Graecique sermonis pronuntiatione … dialogus. … Dialogus cui titulus Ciceronianus, sive, De optimo genere dicendi. … (Basle, 1528), p. 227]: ‘Nulla est in omnibus diuini uiri [sc. Ciceronis] libris uocula, quam non in Lexicon alphabeticum digesserim.’ 4 J. G. Hermann, Observationes de Graecae linguae dialectis (Leipzig, 1807), § 9, repr. in id. Opuscula (vol. i, Leipzig, 1827), 129–147, 136, stated already nearly two hundred years ago: ‘Patet vero, vicissim e diligentia poetae vel negligentia aetatem fabulae eluscescere’; cf. E. B. Ceadel, ‘Resolved Feet in the Trimeters of Euripides and the Chronology of the Plays’, Classical Quarterly 35 (1941), 66–89. 2

conclusions and prospects

287

matical structures, contexts etc. The possibilities to use such information are nearly infinite, and go far beyond what one can present between the tried and tested two covers of a book. Two major and very important recent undertakings dealing with Arabic, GALex and Ullmann, Wörterbuch, do not exploit the possibilities of electronically analysing texts. Likewise, the syntactical analysis of Arabic translations, undertaken by previous scholars and reviewed above, for the most part does not take statistical analysis into consideration and the methods of computer linguistics remained largely unused. When writing this monograph, it was possible to search all the Greek and Arabic texts of the fragments discussed and to give some information about frequency through the preparation of an electronic version; yet the lack of comparative data as well as resources to design a fully fledged database limited the possibility to exploit this data. I firmly believe that far greater advances in the field of Greek-Arabic lexicography and translation syntax will be made by creating electronic resources such as searchable texts having hyperlinks between the Greek original and the Arabic translation as well as being marked up in both languages so as to include detailed information about syntactical features; a tool with these characteristics for a somewhat different material constitutes the Synonyma Serica Comparata, mentioned above. On the Greek side, the TLG contains most of the Greek texts translated into Arabic insofar as they are extant. And many Arabic publishers such as Dār al-kutub al-ilmīya are reprinting editions of Arabic source texts and always produce an electronic version, which they either market or are prepared to share with scholars. By collecting different relevant texts and compiling them into one database, it is probably relatively easy to produce a Thesaurus Linguae Arabicae (TLA), similar to the TLG, as a first step. At a second stage, one would mark up the Arabic texts and link them to the Greek sources. This latter task would be much slower and require skilled labour, but the results would be immediate. On the basis of the statistical analysis which would be made possible by such a database, one would be able to make more objective claims about the occurrence of a term or a translation unit. Statistical patterns would emerge which would allow one to attribute different translations more confidently than currently. Such a tool would, of course, not detract from the value and importance of previous scholarship. We all stand on the shoulders of giants;

288

part two

yet the advent of information technology as well as the fact that many of the initial problems, such as non-Latin scripts, are mostly solved through unicode may well provide a new dawn for Graeco-Arabic studies.

PART THREE

INFLUENCE AND GENERAL CONCLUSIONS

CONTENTS TO PART THREE Chapter SevenInfluence............................................................. Az-Zahrāwī ................................................................................ Al-Maǧūsī .................................................................................. Ibn Sīnā .....................................................................................

293 300 303 305

General Conclusions ...................................................................... 311

CHAPTER SEVEN

INFLUENCE The previous sections have illustrated how a number of relatively early Syriac and Arabic medical authors used Paul of Aegina. For this the focus was on direct quotations rather than Paul’s indirect influence. The term ‘influence’ is, of course, problematic at best. In former times, scholars often tried to ascertain the effect which, say, Horace had on medieval and Renaissance literature; his spirit (Geist), so to speak, was active through his writings. This concept betrayed a certain Hegelian leaning. Another problematic term is ‘reception’; while ‘influence’ puts the emphasis on the activity of the source, ‘reception’ makes the writer who uses the source the active participant: he selects and retains (recipere) whatever pleases him. Yet another way of looking at the relationship between two texts is to say that they influence each other, even if one was written before the other; the way we read the younger text impinges on our understanding of the older. This is then called intertextuality. But whatever one’s theoretical approach in this matter, the fact remains that a number of quite important younger texts such as Ibn Sīnā’s Qānūn (Canon) were influenced by, or used, Paul of Aegina’s pragmateiva. In the following I shall describe some of the aspects of these interrelationships by first looking at the question of genre and then at three extremely important books, all of which were translated into Latin and eagerly read during the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period. They are: Kitāb at-Tarīf li-man aǧiza an at-ta līf (The Book: the Arrangements [of Medical Knowledge] for One Who is Unable to Compile [a Manual for Himself]) by az-Zahrāwī 1, al-Maǧūsī’s Kitāb al-Malakī (Royal Book), and the already mentioned Kitāb al-Qānūn (Canon of Medicine) by Ibn Sīnā. While comprehensiveness could not be achieved in the previous part dealing with direct quotations, it is even less possible to give an account of all the different passages where a later author used Paul. I shall therefore concentrate my discussion on a number of problems which have already been discussed in scholarly literature and for which a fresh interpretation is offered. Cf. E. Savage-Smith, EI 2, xi. 398–9 (art. Zahrāwī).

1

294

chapter seven

If we look at the development of medical writing in the Greek world, we see that it started with monographs: Hippocrates 2 wrote a number of treatises dealing with one condition or one aspect of medicine, as for example his work on the falling sickness.3 This preference for monographs can still be seen some five hundred years later; Rufus of Ephesus dealt with many subjects in separate treatises. Galen, probably the most influential medical author of all time, wrote books on individual subjects such as On Wasting 4, but also more comprehensive works such as On the Affected Places or On the Usefulness of the Parts [of the Body].5 Galen, too, created his own canon by prescribing in which order his works should be read; he did this with his work On the Order of his Own Books to Eugenianus.6 The word ‘order’ (tavxiç) from the title indicates Galen’s intention: he wanted to arrange his work so that it formed a coherent whole; he provided, so to speak, a curriculum containing only his own books. What Galen did not attempt is to write a comprehensive account of the art of medicine in the form of an encyclopedia. The first major figure in this movement of encyclopaedic writers is Oribasius (326–403) who wrote two works which are of interest to us here: firstly his magnum opus Çunagwgai; ijatrikai; pro;ç ΔIoulianovn (Medical Collections for Julian), containing 70 volumes and hence called eJbdomhkontavbibloç (comprising 70 books) by Paul of Aegina.7 Oribasius draws on many different physicians in this work, most notably and prominently Galen and Dioscorides, and thus creates a magnificent compilation of which we still have a substantial part.8 Secondly, Oribasius composed a short version, which one might even call very short in comparison to the other work, called Çuvnoyiç pro;ç Eujçtavqion to;n uiJo;n aujtou' (Epitome for His Son Eustathius) in just one volume. There were, of course, other 2 I will not deal with the problem of the different authors of the Corpus Hippocraticum, which has already occupied Galen and is fervently discussed in the scholarly literature [cf. e.g. J. Jouanna, Hippocrate (Paris, 1992); tr. M. B. DeBevoise, Hippocrates (Baltimore/London, 1999)]. For our purpose it suffices to use the name ‘Hippocrates’ as shorthand for ‘the authors of the Hippocratic Corpus’. 3 De morbo sacro; vi. 352–396 ed. É. Littré, Œuvres complètes d’Hippocrate, 10 vols. (Paris, 1839–61); cf. O. Temkin, The Falling Sickness, 2nd ed. (Baltimore, 1971). 4 De marcore, Kühn 7.705–32. 5 De locis affectis, Kühn 8.1–452; De usu partium, Kühn 3.1–4.366. 6 De ordine librorum suorum ad Eugenianum, Kühn 2.8–48, I. Marquardt, Cl. Galeni Scripta minora (vol. 2, Leipzig, 1891), 91–124. 7 PAeg. Proœ. (i. 4, 6). 8 Ed. Raeder.

influence

295

encyclopaedic writers such as Alexander of Tralleis or Aëtius of Amida; yet they were less influential, and Paul used them to a much smaller degree as sources for his own encyclopedia. The medical literature after Galen is partly characterized by encyclopedias, as I said. But they were not the only genre used by physicians; the other great trend in late antiquity and especially in Alexandria is that of the commentary and the summary. Authors such as John of Alexandria9 or Stephen of Athens10 composed commentaries on both Hippocratic and Galenic writings.11 John of Alexandria is also the author of a summary of the sixteen books of Galen, a manuscript of the Arabic version of which is in the British Library, MS Or. Arund. 17.12 And there are, of course, the famous Alexandrian Summaries, not to be confused with the Canon of the Sixteen Books of Galen.13 Both these aspects of late antique medical literature were to influence the choices made by the Arabic writers from the time of unain ibn Isāq onwards. On the one hand, they wrote medical encyclopedias which were to become extremely famous not only in the Arabic speaking world but also far beyond, to the West in the Latin Middle Ages, and to the East 9 Cf. M. Duffy et al. (eds.), John of Alexandria: Commentary on Hippocrates’ Epidemics VI etc., CMG 11.1.4 (Berlin, 1997), 11–12; I. Garofalo, ‘La traduzione araba del commento di Ioannes Grammatikos al De pulsibus di Galeno’ in A. Garzya, J. Jouanna (eds), I testi greci, tradizione e ecdotica (Naples, 1999), 185–218, 187 ff.; and most recently Pormann, ‘Jean le grammarien …’. 10 Cf. W. Wolska-Conus, ‘Stéphanos d’Athènes et Stéphanos d’Alexandrie. Essai d’identification et de biographie’, Revue des Études Byzantines 47 (1989), 5–89; ead. ‘Les commentaires de Stéphanos d’Athènes au Prognostikon et aux Aphorismes d’Hippocrate: de Galien à la pratique scolaire Alexandrine’, ibid. 50 (1992), 5–86; and K. Dickson (ed.), Stephanus the Philosopher and Physician: Commentary of Galen’s Therapeutics to Glaucon, Studies in Ancient Medicine 19 (Leiden etc., 1998), especially pp. 1–3 where he discusses the bibliographical data. 11 Cf. O. Temkin, ‘Alexandrian Commentaries on Galen’s De Sectis ad Introducendos’, Bulletin for the History of Medicine 3 (1935), 405–30, reprinted in The Double Face of Janus (Baltimore and London, 1977), 178–97. 12 I. Garofalo has recently studied and described this manuscript (‘Il sunto …’); Pormann, ‘Jean le grammarien …’ contains an edition and translation of the first ‘summary’ of De Sectis. 13 Cf. E. Lieber, ‘Galen in Hebrew: the Transmission of Galen’s Works in the Mediaeval Islamic World’, in V. Nutton (ed.), Galen: Problems and Prospects (London, 1981), 167–186; E. Savage-Smith, ‘Galen’s Lost Ophthalmology and the Summaria Alexandrinorum’ in V. Nutton (ed.), The Unknown Galen, BICS, suppl. 77 (London, 2002), 121–38; and P.E. Pormann, ‘The Alexandrian Summary (Ǧawāmi) of Galen’s On the Sects for Beginners: Commentary or Abridgment’, in P.A. Adamson et al. (eds.), Philosophy, Science and Exegesis in Greek, Arabic and Latin Commentaries (London, 2004) [forthcoming].

chapter seven

296

in India, where Unani medicine existed next to Ayurvedic practice and theory.14 But unlike the field of philosophy where the commentary and the abridgement became the scholarly genre par excellence, the medical literature was largely dominated by encyclopedias. It is in this area, as I shall argue in the following, that Paul of Aegina had a tremendous impact. In his preface, Paul talks about the purpose of his work, and his relationship with his predecessors (or sources); he sets out his method as follows15: I have not joined here my own [intellectual] creations, apart from a few things which I have seen and tested during my practice of the art [of medicine]. I perused most of the famous [authors] and especially Oribasius, who himself composed a medical anthology in one whole book in which we have a complete sketch of medicine (he lived after Galen and belongs to the later authors); of these I have selected the best part, not leaving out any disease as far as possible. For the work in seventy volumes by the same Oribasius contains a description of the art [of medicine], but this compendium is not affordable to buy for all, since it is quite long. The epitome of this work, written to his son Eustathius, completely lacks many diseases and contains an incomplete theoretical description of the rest [i.e. those diseases which are included]; sometimes it is deficient in the aetiology, sometimes, in the diagnosis, and sometimes even in the necessary therapy, [not to speak of] other things which I only remember [but do not enumerate here]. The present work contains the diagnosis, aetiology and therapy of all diseases, whether they affect the homoeomerous parts or the organs, or are seen when a continuity is dissolved16, not only in a summary way, but with the necessary breadth. 14

Ullmann, Islamic Medicine (Edinburgh, 1978), 52. PAeg. Proœ. (1.3, ult.–4, 15; tr. Adams, vol. i, pp. xvi-xvii), since it is such an important passage, I quote it in full here: ou[te ga;r ejma; pareqev mhn ejn aujth'/ gennhvmata 15

plh;n ojl ivgwn dhv tinwn, o{çaper ejn toi'ç th'ç tev cnhç e[rgoiç ei\dov n te kai; ejpeiv raça: pleiv oçi de; tw'n ejndovxwn ejntetuchkw;ç kai; ma'llon ΔOribaçivw/ kai; aujtw'/ pa'çan ajpanqiv çanti biv blon, ejn w|/ pa'çan th;n uJgieinh;n dihvlqomen uJpotuv pwçin (tw'n ga;r meta; Galhno;n kai; e[ti newtevrwn ejgevneto), ta; kav lliçta touv twn ejpelex avmhn mhde;n wJç oi|ov n te nov çhma paradramwv n. hJ me;n ga;r eJbdomhkontavbibloç aujtou' tou' ΔOribaçiv ou pa'çan ejn eJauth'/ periev cei th'ç tev cnhç uJp ov qeçin, ajllΔ oujk eujpovriçtoç a{paçin hJ pragmateiv a poluv çticoç uJpavrcouça: hJ de; tauv thç ejpitomh; pro;ç Eujçtav qion to;n uiJo;n aujtou' grafei'ça pollw'n eijç to; pantele;ç leipomev nh noçhmav twn ajtelh' th;n tw'n loipw'n periev cei qewrivan ph' me;n aijtiw'n ph' de; diagnwv çewn ejn ivote de; kai; th'ç aujtavrkouç ejçterhmev nh qerapeivaç, w{çper ou\n eJtevrwn eijç mnhv mhn mov non ejlhluqovtwn. to; de; paro;n çuv ggramma diagnwvçeiç te kai; aijtiv aç kai; qerapeivaç aJpavntwn periev cei tw'n noçhmavtwn, oJmoiomerw'n, ojrganikw'n, ejn luvçei çuneceiv aç qewroumevnwn, ouj kefalaiwdw'ç mov non ajlla; kata; to; ejgcwrou'n plavtoç. 16

The expression ejn luv çei çuneceiv aç qewroumevnwn is slightly difficult.

influence

297

This means that Paul creates a manageable compendium in which everything a physician needs to know is assembled, yet it is not so gigantic that one cannot afford to buy it or is unable to find things easily. Paul was successful in this endeavour; this can be seen from the many Greek manuscripts of this text which were produced during the Middle Ages.17 Or, to put it differently, Paul established the medical encyclopedia firmly as the most popular genre in the discipline. Ibn Sarābiyūn wrote a compendium of his own, and we have seen that he drew heavily on his predecessor in a number of chapters. Yet this was not the only influence which Paul’s pragmateiva had on him. The way in which Ibn Sarābiyūn arranged his Small Compendium, setting a long seventh book aside for materia medica, is similar to Paul’s arrangement. Furthermore, Ibn Sarābiyūn continued the tradition of the medical compendium of a manageable size. It is not necessary, here, to enter the debate to what extent the Arab medical writers were innovative or whether they only preserved and transmitted medical knowledge; nor to ascertain how much of the procedures described in these theoretical works were actually used in the practice of medicine.18 Whatever one may think about the topic, one of the great achievements in terms of medical literature certainly consists in the ability of writers such as al-Maǧūsī (d. end of tenth century) or Ibn Sīnā (d. 1037) to arrange the subject matter in an intelligent and clear way. The former did this in his Royal Book (al-Kitāb al-Malakī) which was translated twice into Latin; once by Constantine the African under the title Liber Pantegni, and once by Stephen of Antioch, who, being more literal, called it Liber regius or Regalis dispositio. Ibn Sīnā wrote the famous Canon of Medicine (Qānūn fī -ibb), known in the Latin Middle Ages as the Liber Canonis; this work continued to be on the curriculum of medical students in some of the European medical faculties until the eighteenth century. Both authors, when composing their respective works, drew heavily on Paul of Aegina. Later, I shall demonstrate this on the level of content, taking the paediatric sections of their writings as an example. Yet, as with Ibn Sarābiyūn, Paul’s influence is Cf. Heiberg, ‘De codicibus’. For a discussion of some of these questions see E. Savage-Smith ‘The Practice of Surgery in Islamic Lands: Myth and Reality’, in P. Horden, ead., The Year 1000. Medical Practice at the End of the First Millennium, Social History of Medicine 13.2 (August 2000), 307–21, and C. Álvarez-Millán, ‘Practice versus Theory: Tenth-century Case Histories form the Islamic Middle East’, ibid., 293–306. 17 18

298

chapter seven

not limited only to content, but also extends to form. Al-Maǧūsī says the following in his introduction to the Royal book about Paul’s pragmateiva19: In his book, Paul, too [i.e. like Oribasius], has only a little to say about physiology. Aetiology [amr al-asbāb], semeiotics [alāmāt] and the other kinds of therapy [anwā al-mudāwāt] and surgery [al-ilāǧ bi-l-yad] are set out extremely meticulously, but he dealt with his matter without any didactic method.

So al-Maǧūsī praises Paul for the content of his book, but rejects the arrangement of the material for not being didactic enough. Al-Maǧūsī’s aim is to compose a comprehensive account of medicine as he himself says20: I wanted to compose for his [sc. Aud ad-Daula’s] library a comprehensive book on the art of medicine, containing all that physicians and others could need in order to preserve health in healthy people, and to restore it in sick people.

D. Jacquart aptly described the influence which Byzantine medical writers had on the Kitāb al-Malakī21: [I]l [sc. al-Maǧūsī] innove dans une certaine mesure. Mais son innovation s’inscrit dans une double tradition de la médecine byzantine. En premier lieu, celle des commentaires alexandrins des V e-VIe siècle, […]. La seconde tradition, à laquelle il se rattache, cette fois explicitement, est celle des encyclopédies byzantines, des compendia à visée pratique, qui rassemblent tout ce qui est nécessaire à la mise en œuvre d’un traitement.

So al-Maǧūsī was influenced by the Byzantine encyclopaedic tradition in general, and by Paul of Aegina in particular, not only as far as content is concerned (a point discussed later), but also on the level of literary genre. When Ibn Sīnā wrote his Qānūn, he was in turn influenced directly by al-Maǧūsī: Ibn Sīnā, too, wanted to write a comprehensive account 19 i. 3, paen.–4, 1 Būlāq/ i. 4, 10–12 Sezgin: WOFO³D« —u_« s tÐU² w dc¹ rK ”uu U√ w Ád– U dc¹ r t½√ ô≈ t½UOÐ w mUÐ bI bOUÐ ÃöF«Ë …«Ë«b*« Ÿ«u½√ dzUÝË  UöF«Ë »U³Ý_« d√ U√Ë …dOO« ô≈ rOUF²« ‚dÞ s o¹dÞ vKŽ tÐU²; cf. Ullmann, Medizin, 142. 20 i. 3, 13–14 Būlāq/ i. 3, -9– -8 Sezgin: w öU UÐU² ›WËb« bCŽ Í√¤ t²½«e) nM√ Ê√ X³³Š√ v{d*« vKŽ U¼œ—Ë ¡U×_« vKŽ W×B« kHŠ s r¼dOžË Êu³³D²*« tO≈ ÃU²×¹ U qJ UFUł VD« WŽUM; cf. Ullmann, Medizin, 141. 21 D. Jacquart, ‘Le sens donné par Constantin l’Africain à son œuvre: les chapitres introductifs en arabe et en latin’ in C. Burnett, ead., Constantine the African and Alī ibn al-Abbās al-Maǧūsī, Studies in Ancient Medicine 10 (Leiden etc., 1994), 71–89.

influence

299

of medicine, a book which systematically sets out the art. Incidentally, the two works were often compared with each other, and with time the Qānūn won the place and renown which the Kitāb al-Malakī previously enjoyed.22 In that sense one can say that Paul was an important milestone in the development of the literary genre of the medical encyclopedia, and that, on this level, he influenced writers such as Ibn Sarābiyūn, al-Maǧūsī and Ibn Sīnā. Given that all of the above were also extremely popular during the Middle Ages and beyond in the Latin West, Paul had a double impact: through the many copies of his work in Greek which were read and annotated, and (indirectly) through the medical encyclopedias translated from Arabic into Latin which proved so fashionable that Chaucer named them in his Canterbury Tales as authors which the physician has studied.23 This development towards medical encyclopedias, which in a way runs parallel to the emergence of scholasticism, was not agreeable to all. Some authors saw the dangers which the loss of an inquisitive mind-set bore for the progress of the art. In his Useful Book about How to Learn the Art of Medicine24, Ibn Riwān gives an overview of the history of medicine to his day, and complains that compendia [kunnāš] are more and more popular and threaten real research. But his was a lonely voice, and his warnings could not stop the triumph of the compendium as a literary genre, for which Paul is at least partly responsible. After these more general remarks about Paul’s influence on medical writing in the Arabic world and beyond, let us look in greater detail at three authors, all of whom used Paul as a source for their works.

Cf. Ullmann, Medizin, 146. General Prologue, 429–34: ‘Wel knew he the olde Esculapius,/ and Deyscorides, and eek Rufus,/ Olde Yprocras, Haly, and Galyen,/ Serapion, Razis, and Avycen,/ Averrois, Damascien, and Constantyn,/ Bernard, and Gatesden, and Gilbertyn.’ 24 Kitāb an-Nāfi fī kaifīyat talīm ināat a-ibb; cf. J. Schacht, M. Meyerhof, The Medico-Philosophical Controversy Between Ibn Butlan of Baghdad and Ibn Ridwan of Cairo (Cairo, 1937), 20 ff. and F. Rosenthal, The Technique and Approach of Muslim Scholarship, Analecta Orientalia 24 (Rome, 1947), 61. It has been edited by the Baghdad gynaecologist Kamāl as-Sāmarrāī (Baghdad, 1986). The passage discussed here is found on p. 66, -7 ff. in this edition, but the text is corrupt there, so I shall not quote it. 22 23

300

chapter seven Az-Zahr w

Abū l-Qāsim alaf ibn al- Abbās az-Zahrāwī 25 (d. shortly after 1009), the Andalusian physician, worked during the reign of Abd ar-Ramān III (300–350/912–961) in Córdoba. He wrote a great medical textbook entitled The Book: the Arrangements [of Medical Knowledge] for One Who is Unable to Compile [a Manual for Himself] 26; the thirtieth maqāla of this work, dealing with surgery, is by far the largest and most important.27 Az-Zahrāwī became known as Albucasis in the Latin West through the translation activity of Gerard of Cremona. In his maqāla on surgery, az-Zahrāwī draws heavily on Paul as one can see from the index of the edition by Spink and Lewis.28 This maqāla comprises three chapters (bāb); the first is on cautery, the second on ‘incisions and perforations’, and the third on bone-setting. Each chapter is sub-divided into numerous sections (fal). M. Tabanelli has devoted a chapter in flowery Italian to az-Zahrāwī in his work about surgery in the Byzantine world.29 In this chapter, he tries to compare az-Zahrāwī, to whom he had access only through the Latin translation, with Paul.30 He produces an Italian synoptical table of the two texts, yet because of the many omissions in both texts, he creates the false impression that az-Zahrāwī only quotes or plagiarises 25

Ullmann, Medizin, 149 ff., GAS iii. 323 ff. A good overview of az-Zahrāwī’s biography and the different manuscripts of his major work can be found in a recent contribution by Luisa María Arvide Cambra, Un tratado de oftalmología en Abulcasis (Almería, 2000), 9–18. See also E. Savage-Smith, EI 2, xi. 398–9 (art. Zahrāwī). 26 Kitāb at-Tarīf li-man aǧiza an at-ta līf ; facs. F. Sezgin, “A Presentation to Would-Be Authors” On Medicine, Publications of the Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science, Series C, vols. 31.1–2 (Frankfurt, 1986). 27 Ed. by M. S.Sprink G. L. Lewis, Albucasis On Surgery and Instruments. A Definitive Edition of the Arabic Text with English Translation and Commentary (Berkeley/Los Angeles, 1973); cf. Z.M. Buniiakov (униятов ..), Абу–-л-≥а–сим _алаф ибн Абба–с аз- ахра–ви–, рактат о хирургии и инструментах [Abū l-Qāsim alaf ibn al- Abbās azZahrāwī: Treatise on Surgery and Instruments] (Moscow, 1983); the apothecary turned Arabist J. Channing had edited this part of the Tarīf already in 1778; for more information about this interesting Orientalist cf. E. Savage-Smith, ‘John Channing: Eighteenth-Century Apothecary and Arabist’, Pharmacy in History 30 (1988), 61–116. 28 s.v. Paulus Aegineta p. 841. 29 M. Tabanelli, Studi sulla chirurgia bizantina. Paolo di Egina (Florence, 1964), 128 ff. 30 Cf. H. Hunger’s judgement [Die hochsprachliche profane Literatur der Byzantiner, 2 vols. (München 1978), ii, 302, n. 56] who called this work ‘wenig ergiebig’; or Ullmann, Medizin, 150, n. 2: ‘Das Buch ist im übrigen unkritisch und ohne Kenntnis des Arabischen geschrieben.’

influence

303

Al-Ma s Alī ibn al- Abbās al-Maǧūsī lived at the end of the tenth century and wrote the famous Kitāb al-Malakī (Royal Book), also called Kāmil a-ināa a-ibbīya (The Complete Medical Art), the preface of which we have already discussed above.35 Like Ibn Sīnā, to whom we shall return shortly, al-Maǧūsī has a chapter on the regimen of children in the second part of his work, dealing with the practice of medicine.36 In this chapter, al-Maǧūsī draws considerably on Paul of Aegina. This chapter has been translated and studied by E. Kahle, who believed that Soranus was al-Maǧūsī’s principal source.37 In order to show that this is not so, I shall enumerate some of the more striking similarities between this Arabic author and Paul. The section about aphthae (ii. 53, -12) mentions that black aphthae are deadly (ii. 53, -5– -4) as does Paul (1.10 [i. 12, 22–3]: kavkiçton de; to; mevlan kai; qanatwdevçtaton , ‘The worst and most deadly [variety] is the black one’). Against pain in the gums al-Maǧūsī prescribes chicken grease and hare brain (ii. 54, ult. f.) as does Paul (1.9 [i. 12, 2–3]: … ta; ou\la yhlafa'n kai; malavççein ojrniqeivw/ çtevati h] ejgkefavlw/ lagwou', ‘to feel and soften the gums with chicken grease and hare brain’). Because of the strong similarities, I would like to quote the section on siriasis in full38: 39

ÓhÓLÓ×Ú½« b tšuU¹ ÈÓdÔ¹ Ê√ p– WöŽË —UŠ ëe ¡uÝ Ë√ Â—Ë ⁄Ub« ¡UAž w w³BK ÷dF¹ b Ë WÐËdC iOÐ …dHBÐ ŒuUO« bLC¹ Ê√ ©tłöŽË® 40‘UDF« p– ¡UM« wLðË …dH tOMOŽ wË VKF¦« VMŽ ¡UË ¡UIL(« WKI³«Ë W³Þd« …ÓdÓHÚÔJ« ¡UË aOD³« —uA Ë ŸdI« …œ«dÔ−Ð Ë√ œ—Ë s¼bÐ œ—Ë s¼œË iO³« ÷UOÐ vKD¹ Ë√ œ—Ë s¼bÐ UÐËdC Sometimes the child suffers from an inflammation or a warm bad temperament in the meninx of the brain. This is indicated by the following signs: the fontanelle becomes emaciated and there is a yellow [colour] in the eyes. Women call this [disease] ‘insatiable thirst [uāš]’. The treatment consists in dressing the fontanelle with egg yolk, beaten together with oil 35

See above p. 298. 2.1.20 (ii. 52, -11–56, -9 Būlāq). 37 E. Kahle, Al-Maǧūsī (Haly Abbas) über Kinderkrankheiten im Kāmil a-ināa a-ibbīya (Erlangen, 1980). 38 ii. 55, -13 ff. Būlāq. 39 This is the reading of Instanbul University Library MS A.Y. 6375, reproduced in Sezgin’s facsimile (n. 39), ii.1 p. 74, 2; Būlāq has iH½« which does not make much sense. 40 Without dots in both Sezgin and Būlāq. 36

304

chapter seven of roses or pumpkin peels, melon peels, the juice of fresh coriander, purslane, and the juice of black nightshade, beaten with oil of roses; or rub in egg white and oil of roses.

Although the recipes are somewhat altered and the description of the disease is more concise in al-Maǧūsī, this clearly corresponds to PAeg. 1.13 (i.13, 5 ff. Heiberg): Peri; çeiriavçewç Çeirivaçivç ejçti flegmonh; tw'n peri; to;n ejgkevfalon kai; mhvniggaç merw'n: parakolouqei' de; tou' brevgmatoç koilovthç kai; tw'n ojfqalmw'n metΔ wjcriavçewç kai; xhrovthtoç tou' çwvmatoç. bohqei' de; aujtoi'ç wj/ou' to; ejruqro;n meta; rJodivnou tiqevmenon ejpi; tou' brevgmatoç ejn trovpw/ ptuvgmatoç çunecw'ç ajllaççovmenon. “Allo pro;ç çeiriavçeiç. kata; tou' brevgmatoç ejpitiqevnai crh; hJliotropivou tou' çkorpiouvrou kaloumevnou fuvlla, kolokuvnqhç xevçmata, çikuvou pevponoç to; perikeivmenon th'/ çarki; devrma h] çtruvcnou khpaivou to;n culo;n meta; rJodivnou.

On siriasis Siriasis is an inflammation of the parts of the body near the brain and the meninges. This is followed by hollowness of the fontanelle and the eyes accompanied by yellowness and dryness of the body. The following is beneficial for them: egg yolk with oil of roses put onto the fontanelle by way of a pledget which is constantly changed. Another [recipe] against siriasis: one has to put onto the fontanelle the leaves of heliotrope, also called ‘scorpion-tailed’, colocynth shavings, the skin surrounding the flesh of gourd, or hound’s berry juice with oil of roses.

One could, of course, argue that al-Maǧūsī’s source here is not so much Paul of Aegina, but rather Oribasius (Synops. 5.13) or Aëtius (4.13) on which Paul relies heavily when drafting this chapter. But in my opinion this is not very likely. The first paragraph in Paul (Çeirivaçivç … ajllaççovmenon) is an exact quotation of Oribasius’ entry in the Synopsis; yet Oribasius does not have the second recipe in the second paragraph which al-Maǧūsī quotes. Oribasius is therefore an unlikely source. Aëtius does have this second recipe, but he has much additional material, as for example some etymological explanations about the word çeirivaçiç coming from çirovç (pit). Al-Maǧūsī could, of course, have left out all this additional material, as not being relevant for his discussion. But again, it is more likely that Paul is al-Maǧūsī’s source. There is another reason in favour of this hypothesis: Paul of Aegina was more popular and prominent than Aëtius. Although the latter was translated into

influence

305

Arabic, according to al-Bīrūnī41, his influence was quite limited as can be seen from the fact that we have extremely few traces of his writings in Arabic medical literature. So it is most likely that al-Maǧūsī drew on Paul in this instance. Yet if one compares the language and the expressions of al-Baladī who quotes the same passage from Paul (see above F 7, p. 102) with that of al-Maǧūsī, one notices that even though the content is quite similar, the expression is significantly different. This indicates that al-Maǧūsī was more independent than al-Baladī and used his sources more freely. The section on intertrigo in al-Maǧūsī also resembles that in Paul somewhat42: œ—Ë s¼bÐ vKD¹ Ê√ bFÐ sÚOÓ u b*« œ—u«Ë ”ü« tOKŽ d¦M¹ Ê√ wG³MO tÚ¹Óc w Z×Ý qHDK ÷dŽ «–≈Ë œ—Ë s¼œË ZMÝ«œd0 vKD¹ Ë√ If the child suffers from intertrigo on his thighs, one ought to sprinkle onto it crushed myrtle and roses, after oil of roses has been rubbed into it, or litharge and oil of roses have been rubbed into it.

This is only a small glimpse of how al-Maǧūsī used Paul of Aegina, and a detailed analysis of the Kitāb al-Malakī would certainly yield many more instances, such as those found in the chapter on the regimen of children. It is apparent even from the few items discussed here, however, that Paul was a prominent source for al-Maǧūsī. Since Ibn Sīnā took al-Maǧūsī to a certain extent as his model when writing his Qānūn, it is not surprising that we find that he, too, used Paul when writing his famous work, as shown in the following. Ibn Sn Abū Alī al-usain ibn Abd Allāh ibn Sīnā was born in 370/980 in Afšāra near Buārā. At a very early age he displayed tremendous intellectual abilities and qualities which he was to develop fully during his studies of medicine and philosophy. Apart from numerous works on philosophical topics, he wrote his Qānūn fī -ibb or Canon medicinae for which he was known first and foremost. In this medical encyclopedia 41 Al-Bīrūnī, al-Ǧamāhir fī l-Ǧawāhir [Masses about Substances] (ed. Hyderadab, 1355/1936), 100, 2; ed. Yusof-el-Hādi (Tehran, 1995), 179, 5, esp. n. 2; cf. Ullmann, Medizin, 85; GAS iii. 165 is partly wrong. 42 ii. 56, 11 ff. Būlāq corresponding roughly to PAeg 1.11 (i. 12, 28–30).

306

chapter seven

he set out to give an all-encompassing account of the art of medicine. He died in 428/1037.43 As with al-Maǧūsī, I shall investigate to what extent Ibn Sīnā used Paul of Aegina in his section on paediatrics. This is found in book (kitāb) 1, fan (fann) 3, instruction (talīm) 1 of the Qānūn, and comprises 4 chapters (sg. fal); it is entitled: On Upbringing (WOÐd²« w).44 In this section there are many things which ultimately go back to Paul; yet this is no proof that Ibn Sīnā used Paul directly. Be that as it may, there are some clear similarities, as for example in the second chapter where Ibn Sīnā deals with breast-feeding and weaning. He talks about how to choose the wet-nurse, how to feed her and how to test the milk. For instance, Ibn Sīnā says that she should be between 25 and 35 years of age (i. 151,-4– -3 corresponding to PAeg. 1.2 [i. 9, 12–13]); that the milk should be of a homogenous consistency and a balanced colour (i. 152, 6 ff. corresponding to PAeg. 1.3 [i. 9, 24-5]); and he describes the same method for testing milk which we find in Paul (i. 152, 9 ff corresponding to PAeg. 1.3 [i. 9, 25 ff.], see also F 1, p. 95). The interdependence is even more obvious in the following chapter. Ibn Sīnā prescribes a similar recipe to the one in Paul’s chapter on dentition (1.9 [i. 12, 7–11 Heiberg; cf. F 4, p. 100])45: Ë√ fdJ« —eÐ Ë√ œ—u« —e³Ð tMDÐ bOLJ²Ð „—Ëbð ◊«d≈ ›sD³« ‚öD²Ý« sc.¤ p– s ÓnOš ÊS a« qš qOK l Œu³D ‘—ËU−Ð Ë√ qÐ sÚOÓuK³ œ—ËË ÊuLJÐ tMDÐ bLC¹ Ë√ ¨ ÊuLJ« Ë√ ÊuO½ô« If there is fear that it [sc. the diarrhoea] will become severe, then proceed to put onto the stomach of the patient warm compresses made of rose seed or celery seed, aniseed or cumin; alternatively, put onto the stomach Cf. Ullmann, Medizin, 152 ff., A.-M. Goichon Art. Ibn Sīnā (EI 2 iii. 941a ff.); see also the unpublished, but extremely informative and comprehensive thesis by F. Sanagustin, ‘Les doctrines médicales d’Avicenne (Ibn Sīnā) d’après le Canon de la médecine (al-Qānūn fīl-ibb): Pour une problématique générale’, thèse pour le doctorat d’État ès-lettres (Paris III, 1993). 44 i. 150 ff. (Būlāq), i. 199 ff. (Beirut, 1408/1987). These chapters have been translated and commented upon by E. Kahle, Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā) über Kinderkrankheiten im Kinderregimen seines Qānūn (Erlangen, 1979), and id., Das Ammenregimen des Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā) in seinem Qānūn (Erlangen, 1980). In both works, Kahle adduces numerous parallels from Soranus’ Gunaikei'a , yet it is doubtful whether a version of the work existed in Arabic (cf. Ullmann, Medizin, 77). As said before, it is much more likely that Ibn Sīnā used Paul rather than Soranus; the parallels between Soranus and Ibn Sīnā are best explained in terms of Paul having frequently used Soranus as a source when dealing with gynaecology and paediatrics. Quotations are according to the Būlāq printing, for its pagination is found in the margin of the new Beirut edition. 45 i. 154, -8 ff. Būlāq. 43

influence

307

of the patient a dressing made of cumin and roses, both soaked in vinegar; or millet mash cooked with a little bit of vinegar etc.

Likewise, what Ibn Sīnā says about coughing and catarrh appears to originate in Paul (1.7 [i. 11, 19–23 Heiberg]; cf. F 3 p. 99) 46: rNM pcÐ ÓVOÔ√ ÚsÓ ”«— vKŽ VB¹ dO¦ —UŠ ¡U0 p– w d√ b Ë ÂU“Ë ‰UFÝ rN ÷dF¹ b Ë vÓUÓFÔOÓ «dO¦ ULGKÐ QOI²O l³ôUÐ t½U q√ vKŽ eLG¹ rŁ dO¦ qFÐ t½U aDK¹Ë Small children sometimes have a cough or catarrh. In this case one orders that a lot of warm water be poured over the head of those afflicted by it. Smear onto the tongue of the patient a lot of honey, then press the root of the tongue with the finger, in order that he vomits a large amount of phlegm, so that he be cured.

In the section on aphthae, Ibn Sīnā says that the black ones are lethal, while the white and red ones are less dangerous (i. 155, 13), which can be paralleled in Paul (1.10, see above p. 303 the discussion about al-Maǧūsī). After that we have a discussion about otorrhoea (i. 155, -13 ff.) which, although containing some additions, essentially originates in Paul (1.12 [i. 13, 1–3 Heiberg]). The medication for siriasis, prescribed by Ibn Sīnā (i. 155, -8 ff.), can be matched in Paul (1.13 [i. 13, 11–14]). Furthermore the section on pustules (i. 156, 6 ff.) contains many similarities with the corresponding chapter in Paul (1.6). What Ibn Sīnā says about intertrigo (i. 157, 15 ff.) resembles Paul’s short chapter. I quote both extracts here in order to compare the three versions by Paul, al-Maǧūsī (see above p. 305), and Ibn Sīnā: Ë√ ‚u×*« sÝu« q√Ë ‚u×*« ”ü« tOKŽ —c¹ Ê√ V−O cH« w Z×Ý w³BK ÷dF¹ b Ë ”bF« oO œ Ë√ dOFA« oO œ Ë√ bF« Ë√ ‚u×*« œ—u« The child may also suffer from intertrigo on the thigh. One needs to sprinkle onto it crushed myrtle, crushed lily root, crushed roses, cyperus, barley flour or lentil flour.

Paul’s chapter on intertrigo (PAeg 1.11 [i. 12, 28–30]) runs as follows: Pro;ç ta; tw'n mhrw'n paratrivmmata. Ta; de; kata; tou;ç mhrou;ç paratrivmmata murçivnh/ xhra'/ diapavççein kai; kupevrw/ kai; rJovdoiç.

Against the intertrigo of the thighs. Sprinkle the intertrigo at the thighs with dry myrtle, cyperus and roses. 46

i. 155, 7 ff.

308

chapter seven

Paul thus prescribes three ingredients: myrtle (murçivnh, ās), cyperus (kuvreroç , sud ), and roses (rJovda, ward ). Ibn Sīnā lists all these ingredients as well as lily root (al as-sausan) and flour (daqīq) made either from barley (šaīr) or lentils (adas). This means that Ibn Sīnā extended and enlarged the recipe. Al-Maǧūsī, on the other hand, only lists two of the ingredients prescribed by Paul, namely myrtle (ās) and roses (ward), thus leaving out cyperus (sud); furthermore, unlike Ibn Sīnā, he enjoins to anoint the thighs with oil of roses either on its own or mixed with litharge before applying the myrtle and the roses. We can therefore see that both al-Maǧūsī and Ibn Sīnā modified the source recipe, presumably according to their own experience or by taking other medical texts into account. Linguistically, there are differences between these two authors, even where they express similar ideas; for instance, they employ different vocabulary to convey the notion of ‘child’ (al-Maǧūsī: ifl; Ibn Sīnā: abīy), ‘it is necessary’ (yanbaġī ; yaǧibu), ‘to sprinkle’ (na≥ara; ùarra), and ‘crushed’ (madqūq; masūq). Finally Ibn Sīnā, in the fourth and last chapter, deals with the subject of hydrocephalus; like az-Zahrāwī (see above p. 301) he draws heavily on Paul (PAeg. 6.3 [ii. 46, 9 ff.]). Yet, with all these similarities between Paul and Ibn Sīnā, there are, of course, also significant differences; and there is much material in Ibn Sīnā which does not originate or cannot be matched with what is contained in the pragmateiva. Ibn Sīnā uses Paul as a source; he does not just copy him. What intermediate source Ibn Sīnā may have used when he employed Pauline material is an open question. As with az-Zahrāwī and al-Maǧūsī, this is only a preliminary glimpse into the tantalising question of what sources Ibn Sīnā drew on. Although it cannot be answered here in full, the investigation of just one ‘instruction’ (talīm) reveals that Paul was a prominent source for certain parts. He is also often acknowledged in the Qānūn fī -ibb.47 To conclude: in the medical literature from the end of the first and the beginning of the second millennium, Paul of Aegina is an important, and hitherto underrated, source not only in content, but also in the 47

See the index medicorum (¡U³Þô« ”dN) of the Beirut edition s.v. fuÐ (vol. iv, p. 26). The present study focuses on the early authors quoting from the pragmateiva ; the analysis of all sources used in the Qānūn, be they Pauline or not, is a desideratum which would shed new light onto the debate about the extent of Ibn Sīnā’s originality as an author, and what contribution he made to furthering medical research and writing. This, however, is a subject beyond the scope of the present monograph.

influence

309

development of literary genre. Authors such as az-Zahrāwī, al-Maǧūsī and Ibn Sīnā use him extensively, often without acknowledging their source. But their approach towards their source does not consist in simple reproduction; rather they develop and adapt it according to their own needs. In any case, Paul had a tremendous impact on medical theory, going far beyond the borders of his home city of Alexandria.

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS The present monograph set out to investigate The Oriental Tradition of Paul of Aegina’s Pragmateiva. The pragmateiva was written in Alexandria during the seventh century; it was translated into Syriac in the eighth or ninth century. This Syriac translation was commented upon soon after it was produced, which indicates an active engagement with the text. The Syriac translation also served as a prominent source for Ibn Sarābiyūn in his Small Compendium, especially in the chapters on poison and gynaecology. The Syriac glossographer Bar Bahlūl used Paul: many ophthalmological and pharmacological explanations derived from the pragmateiva can be found in Bar Bahlūl’s glossary. However, Paul’s pragmateiva had a far greater influence in its Arabic guise. It was translated into this tongue in unain ibn Isāq’s school during the ninth century, as this monograph has attempted to demonstrate. Authors such as ar-Rāzī, al-Baladī, and Ibn Samaǧūn quoted the pragmateiva extensively when dealing with different aspects of medicine such as ophthalmology, paediatrics, gynaecology, and pharmacology. Furthermore the Arabic translation was used by a scribe, probably in Swabian Sicily, to produce a bilingual manuscript (Par. gr.) in which he compiled excerpts from the pragmateiva, giving the Greek text in the left, and the Arabic text in the right column. These different authors or, in the last case, scribes used the pragmateiva in different ways. Firstly their interests were divergent. While Bar Bahlūl and the scribe of Par. gr. were primarily interested in the definition and descriptions contained in the pragmateiva, others such as ar-Rāzī favoured the therapeutic advice and the recipes given by Paul. However, not only the content, but also the style of their quotations depended on the individual author: al-Baladī, for instance, is more accurate than ar-Rāzī. Both these authors sometimes altered their source, using their own terminology or paraphrases. Paul of Aegina was known as al-qawābilī (the obstetrician) among the Arabs. It is therefore not surprising that obstetrics was one of the subjects where authors such as Ibn Sarābiyūn and al-Baladī particularly relied on him. Another field of influence was ophthalmology: ar-Rāzī, for example, quotes not only from the chapter dealing with non-surgical treatment of ophthalmological conditions, but also relies on Paul for

312

general conclusions

surgery. unain ibn Isāq himself includes a number of recipes from the pragmateiva in his ophthalmological work. Yet, Paul’s impact on Arabic medical writing is not limited to quotations in the strict sense. Important medical authors such as al-Maǧūsī, Ibn Sīnā, and az-Zahrāwī use Paul extensively. While it is still possible to speak of direct influence in the case of quotations, one does not always know whether a certain recipe or a procedure which is included in both the pragmateiva and one of the later encyclopaedic Arabic authors indicates a direct link, or an intermediate source. Even so, Paul often was the ultimate source, and he therefore contributed immensely to the development of medicine in these later Arabic authors. This contribution is twofold: on the one hand, many descriptions and definitions of diseases, recipes, treatments, and so forth, which we find in these later authors, are ultimately derived from Paul. On the other hand, Paul promoted the genre of the medical encyclopaedic handbook which was to prove so popular among the Arabs. Ibn Sarābiyūn, al-Maǧūsī and Ibn Sīnā partly owe the way they organise their information in their medical handbooks to Paul. Thus both on the level of content and of genre, Paul had an influence on Arabic medical writing. Naturally, the authors which Paul directly influenced were in their turn sources for other medical writers. Ibn Sarābiyūn, al-Maǧūsī, Ibn Sīnā and az-Zahrāwī were to have a tremendous impact on the development of the Western Medical Tradition as defined by L.I. Conrad et al.1 Surgery is just one example of an area in which Paul particularly excelled: in the nineteenth century, the French surgeon R. Briau edited and translated Book Six, on surgery, from Paul’s pragmateiva.2 He did this not so much in order to promote the history of medicine, but because he thought that his fellow surgeons could benefit greatly from Paul’s account for the practice of their surgery. But the same Briau was also familiar with, or influenced by, the French surgeon of the fourteenth century, Guy de Chauliac, who in his turn used az-Zahrāwī extensively, when writing his Inventarium et Collectorium artis chirurgicalis medicinae, called Chirurgia magna.3 Az-Zahrāwī, as we have seen, used 1

The Western Medical Tradition (Cambridge, 1995). Chirurgie de Paul d’Égine. Texte grec restitué et collationné sur tous les manuscripts de la bibliothèque impériale … avec traduction française en regard, précédé d’une introduction (Paris, 1855). 3 Cf. M. R. McVaugh (ed.), Inventarium sive Chirurgia Magna Guigonis de Caulhiaco (Guy de Chaliac), Studies in Ancient Medicine 14, 2 vols. (Leiden etc., 1997), vol. i, p. 2

general conclusions

313

Paul extensively. So Paul had a double, if not triple, influence on the surgery of the nineteenth century; one indirect route that his writings took to the ninteenth century was via the ‘Oriental Tradition’. We have seen above that Paul’s pragmateiva enjoyed great popularity in the Byzantine world; this was, we argued, reflected in the fact that many Greek manuscripts of this medical encyclopedia were produced during the Middle Ages, a great number of which have come down to us.4 On the other hand, it emerges from the present monograph that the same pragmateiva was also widely used in Arabic; yet despite this popularity with Arabic writers, there is not a single complete Arabic manuscript of this text extant today. How can one explain this apparent discrepancy and the different fate which Paul’s text encountered in its Greek and its Arabic guise? The answer to this question may be the success of the pragmateiva itself in the Arabic world. It was absorbed and incorporated into the most important medical writings of the ninth to the eleventh centuries to such a degree that the need to consult it faded away. This, in turn, meant that fewer copies were produced, which led to the current situation where not a single complete Arabic manuscript survives. The Par. gr., in a way, confirms this hypothesis: it was not produced first and foremost in order to make the Arabic text accessible or with medical practice in mind, but for linguistic purposes which could not be satisfied by the great Arabic medical compilations. A parallel, if somewhat different, case is perhaps the textual history of Ptolemy’s ÔUfhvghçiç gewgrafikhv (Geography). While the text was extremely popular and influential in Arabic, not a single manuscript of any of the different Arabic translations survives.5 In both cases, the very success of the text may have been its undoing.

xiii; Ullmann, Medizin, 151, and W. von Brunn, ‘Die Stellung des Guy de Chauliac in der Chirurgie des Mittelalters’, Sudhoffs Archiv, 12 (1920), 85–100; 13 (1921), 65–106. 4 See above p. 8. 5 Cf. Ullmann, Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften, 282–5; Sezgin, GAS, vi. 83–96; EI 2 i. 1100a22, ii. 557b -17; J.B. Harley, D. Woodward, Cartography in the Traditional Islamic and South Asian Societies, The History of Cartography (vol. 2.1, Chicago and London, 1992), 10, and most recently Sezgin, GAS, x. 31–57. I cannot enter the discussion of the intricate and difficult questions of origin and authenticity of the text and the maps.

BIBLIOGRAPHY A. Primary Sources Aëtius Aristotle Al-Baladī Bar Bahlūl

Barhebraeus Al-Bīrūnī Erasmus, D. Al-Ġāfiqī Al-Ǧāwālīqī Galen Hippocrates unain ibn Isāq Ibn Abī Uaibi a Ibn Hišām Ibn an-Nadīm Ibn an-Nafīs Ibn Riwān Ibn Samaǧūn

Aetii Amideni libri medicinales, ed. A. Olivieri, CMG 8.1–2 (Leipzig 1935–50). Die arabische Übersetzung der Poetik des Aristoteles, ed. J. Tkatsch, 2 vols. (Vienna and Leipzig, 1928/32). Kitāb Tadbīr al-abālā wa-l-afāl, ed. Mamd al-

Q sim Muammad (Beirut, 1980). Kitāb ad-Dalāil, ed. Y. abb (Kuweit, 1987). Kitāb ad-Dalāil, facs. F. Sezgin, Publications of the Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science, Series C, vol. 10 (Frankfurt, 1985). K. Ta rī mu taar ad-duwal li-Abī l-Faraǧ b. al-Ibrī ( An Abbreviated History of the Nations by Bar Hebraeus), ed. Ann  li n (1st ed., Beirut, 1890); (2nd ed., Beirut, 1958). al-Ǧamāhir fī l-Ǧawāhir [Masses about Substances] (ed. Hyderadab, 1355/1936); ed. Yusof-el-Hādi (Tehran, 1995). De recta Latini Graecique sermonis pronuntiatione … dialogus. … Dialogus cui titulus Ciceronianus, sive, De optimo genere dicendi. … (Basle, 1528). q×J« w býd*« »U² Le guide d’oculistique, ed. M. Meyerhof (Barcelona, 1933). al-Muarrab min al-kalām al-aǧamī alā urūf al-muǧam (Damascus, 1990). Claudii Galeni Opera Omnia, ed. K.G. Kühn, 20 vols. (Leipzig 1821–33). Cl. Galeni Scripta minora, ed. I. Marquardt (vol. 2, Leipzig, 1891). Œuvres complètes d’Hippocrate, ed. É. Littré, 10 vols. (Paris, 1839–61). Kitāb al-ašr maqālāt fī l-ain, ed. Meyerhof (see below); Leningrad MS C875 fº 77a–127b (Len). Kitāb Uyūn al-anbā fī abaqāt al-aibbā (The Sources of Information on the Classes of Physicians), ed. A. Müller, 2 vols. (Cairo and Königsberg, 1884). Muġnī l-labīb, ed. . Ǧamad, I. Bad Yaqb (Beirut, 1998). Kitāb al-Fihrist, ed. G.Flügel, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1871–2).  fir al-Waf ī, Muammad Raww s Qala  (eds.), Kitāb alMuhaùùab fī l-kul al-muǧarrab ta līf … Ibn an-Nafīs (Riyadh, 1994). Kitāb an-Nāfi fī kaifīyat talīm ināat a-ibb, ed. Kamāl as-Sāmarrāī (Baghdad, 1986). Kitāb al-adwiya al-mufrada, Oxford, Bodleian Library, MSS Bruce 47 (B) and Hunt. 159 (H). Compendium of Simple Drugs … by Ibn Samaǧūn, facs. F. Sezgin, Publications of the Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science, Series C, vol. 54, 1–4 (Frankfurt, 1992).

316

bibliography

Ibn Sarābiyūn

Al-Kunnāš a-aġīr, Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale, MS 19891 (B). Leiden, MS 2070 (L). Latin translation by Gerald of Cremona: Practica Ioannis Serapionis aliter breviarium nuncupata (Lyons, 1525), revised by Andreas Alpagus, Serapionis … Practica studiosis medicinae utilissima … (Venice, 1550). Ibn Sīnā Qānūn fī -ibb, 3 vols. (Būlāq, 1294/1877). Qānūn fī -ibb, 5 vols. (Beirut, 1408/1987). Imrū-l-Qais Muallaqa, ed. Ch. J. Lyall, A Commentary on Ten Ancient Arabic Poems (Calcutta, 1894). Al-Kaskarī Book On Medicine. Kunnāš by Yaqūb al-Kaškarī, facs. F. Sezgin , Publications of the Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science, Series C, vol. 17 (Frankfurt, 1985). Mārī ibn Sulaimān Maris Amri Slibae De Patriarchis Nestorianorum Commentaria, ed. H. Gismondi, 2 vols. (Rome, 1899). Oribasius Oribasii collectionum medicarum reliquiae, ed. H. Raeder, CMG 6.1–2 (Leipzig, 1928–33). Paul of Aegina I. L. Heiberg (ed.), CMG 9.1–2, 2 vols. (Leipzig and Berlin, 1921/1924). F. Adams (tr.), The Seven Books of Paulus Ægineta (London, 1844–47). J. Berendes (tr.), Paulos von Aegina. Des besten Arztes sieben Bücher (Leiden, 1914). Paris, BnF MS 2293 (fonds grec). Al-Qifī Ta rī al-ukamā , ed. J. Lippert (Leipzig, 1903). Ar-Rāzī Kitāb al-āwī fī -ibb, 1st ed., 23 vols. (Hyderabad 1955–70). Sābūr ibn Sahl Sābūr ibn Sahl. Dispensatorium parvum (al-Aqrābādhīn a-aghīr), ed. O. Kahl (Leiden etc., 1994). Soranus Soranos d’Éphèse, Les Maladies des femmes, edd. P. Burguière, D. Gourevitch, Y. Malinas, 4 vols. (Paris, 1988–2000). Yāqūt Kitāb al-Buldān, ed. F. Wüstenfeld, 6 vols. (Leipzig, 1866–70). az-Zahrāwī Kitāb at-Tarīf li-man aǧiza an at-ta līf ; facs. F. Sezgin, “A Presentation to Would-Be Authors” On Medicine, Publications of the Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science, Series C, vols. 31, 1–2 (Frankfurt, 1986). Albucasis de chirurgia, ed. J. Channing, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1778). see also Spinks, Lewis

Secondary Sources C. Álvarez-Millán, ‘Practice versus Theory: Tenth-century Case Histories from the Islamic Middle East’ in Horden, Savage-Smith (eds.), The Year 1000, 293–306. A. M. Al-Dubayan, Galen: „Über die Anatomie der Nerven“. Originalschrift und alexandrinisches Kompendium in arabischer Überlieferung (Berlin, 2000). G. C. Anawati, ‘Les médicaments de l’œil’, Arabica 21 (1974), 232–44. J. Anderson, Plagiarism, Copyright Violation and Other Thefts of Intellectual Property: An Annotated Bibliography with a Lengthy Introdution ( Jefferson NC, 1998). A. Baumstark, Geschichte der syrischen Literatur (Bonn, 1922). G. Bartisch, ΔOfqalmodouleiv a, Das ist, Augendienst. Newer vnd wolgegründter Bericht von

secondary sources

317

vrsachen vnd erkentnüs aller Gebrechen, Schäden vnd Mängel der Augen vnd des Gesichtes [&c.] (Dresden, 1583). L. Berkowitz, Thesaurus Linguae Graecae: Canon of Greek Authors and Works (3rd ed., New York, Oxford, 1990). G. Bergsträsser, unain ibn Isā und seine Schule (Leiden, 1913). ——, unain ibn Isāq: Über die syrischen und arabischen Galenübersetzungen, Abhandlungen zur Kunde des Morgenlandes 17.2 (Leipzig, 1925). ——, Neue Materialien zu unain ibn Isāq’s Galenbibliographie, Abhandungen zur Kunde des Morgenlandes 19.2 (Leipzig, 1932). H. H. Biesterfeldt, Galens Traktat ,Daß die Kräfte der Seele den Mischungen des Körpers folgen‘, Abhandungen zur Kunde des Morgenlandes 40.4 (Wiesbaden, 1973). ——, ‘Zur medizinischen Terminologie des arabisch-islamischen Mittelalters’, in D. Jacquart (ed.), La formation du vocabulaire, 66–90 ——, ‘Kommunikation durch Übersetzung. Ziele und Methoden der griechischarabischen Übersetzungen des 9. Jahrhunderts’, in G. Binder, K. Ehlich (eds.), Kommunikation durch Zeichen und Wort (Trier, 1995), 137–192. J. Blau, Grammar of Christian Arabic, CSCO Subsidia, 3 vols. (Louvain, 1966–7). F. Bömer, ‘Der Commentarius: Zur Vorgeschichte und literarischen Form der Schriften Caesars’, Hermes 81 (1953), 210–50. T. Borg, ‘Quellenstudien zu William Wright, A Grammar of the Arabic Language’, Diss. (University of Munich, 1968). R. Briau, Chirurgie de Paul d’Égine. Texte grec restitué et collationné sur tous les manuscrits de la bibliothèque impériale … avec traduction française en regard, précédé d’une introduction (Paris, 1855). C. Brockelmann, Lexicon Syriacum, 2nd ed. (Halle, 1928). J. Bryson, ‘The Kitāb al-āwī of Rāzī (ca. 900 AD), Book One of the āwī on Brain, Nerve, and Mental Disorders: studies in the transmission of medical texts from Greek into Arabic into Latin’, Ph.D. diss. (Yale University, 2000). S. Brock, ‘Greek into Syriac and Syriac into Greek’, Journal of the Syriac Academy 3 (1977), 406–22, repr. in Syriac Perspectives, no. II. ——, ‘Aspects of Translation Technique in Antiquity’, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 20 (1979), 69–87, repr. in Syriac Perspectives, no. III. ——, Syriac Perspectives on Late Antiquity (London, 1984). ——, ‘The Syriac Background to unayn’s Translation Techniques’, Aram 3 (1991), 139–162, repr. in From Ephrem, no. XIV. ——, From Ephrem to Romanos (London, 1999). C. Brockelmann, Lexicon Syriacum, 2nd ed. (Halle, 1928). L. Brown,(ed.), The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, 2 vols. (4th ed., Oxford, 1993). W. von Brunn, ‘Die Stellung des Guy de Chauliac in der Chirurgie des Mittelalters’, Sudhoffs Archiv 12 (1920), 85–100; 13 (1921) 65–106. Z M. Buniiakov (униятов ..), Абу–-л-≥а–сим _алаф ибн Абба–с аз- ахра–ви–, рактат о хирургии и инструментах [ Abū l-Qāsim alaf ibn al- Abbās azZahrāwī: Treatise on Surgery and Instruments] (Moscow, 1983). L. M. A. Cambra, Un tratado de oftalmología en Abulcasis (Almería, 2000). E. B. Ceadel, ‘Resolved Feet in the Trimeters of Euripides and the Chronology of the Plays’, Classical Quarterly 35 (1941), 66–89. L. I. Conrad, et al., The Western Medical Tradition (Cambridge, 1995). R. Dagorn, ‘Al Baladi: Un Médecin obstétricien et pédiatre à l’époque des premiers Fatimides du Caire’, Mélanges de l’Institut Dominicain d’Études Orientales du Caire 9 (1969), 73–118.

318

bibliography

R. Degen, M. Ullmann, ‘Zum Dispensatorium des Sābūr ibn Sahl’, WO 7 (1973–4), 241–58. K. Dickson (ed.), Stephanus the Philosopher and Physician: Commentary of Galen’s Therapeutics to Glaucon, Studies in Ancient Medicine 19 (Leiden etc., 1998). P. Diepgen, Frau und Frauenheilkunde in der Kultur des Mittelalters (Stuttgart, 1963). A. Dietrich, Dioscurides Triumphans. Ein anonymer arabischer Kommentar (Ende 12. Jahrh. n. Chr.) zur Materia medica, AAWG phil.-hist. 3. Folge, nos. 172–3 (Göttingen, 1988). P. Dilg, ‘The Liber aggregatus in medicinis simplicibus of Pseudo-Serapion: An Influential Work of Medical Arabism’, in Ch. Burnett, A. Contadini (eds.), Islam and the Italian Renaissance, Warburg Institute Colloquia 5 (London, 1999), 221–31. M. W. Dols, Majnūn: The Madman in Medieval Islamic Society (Oxford, 1992). R. Dozy, Supplément aux Dictionnaires Arabes, 2 vols. (Leiden, 1881). H. J. Drossaart Lulofs, ‘The Syriac Translation of Theophrastus’ Meteorology’, in A. Mansion (ed.), Autour d’Aristote (Louvain, 1955), 433–49. J. Duffy, ‘Byzantine Medicine in the Sixth and Seventh Centuries: Aspects of Teaching and Practice’ in J. Scarborough (ed.), Symposium on Byzantine Medicine, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 38 (1983), (Washington DC, 1984), 21–27. —— et al. (eds.), John of Alexandria: Commentary on Hippocrates’ Epidemics VI etc., CMG 11.1.4 (Berlin, 1997). R. J. Durling, A Dictionary of Medical Terms in Galen, Studies in Ancient Medicine 5 (Leiden etc., 1993). R. Duval (ed.), Lexicon Syriacum auctore Hassano Bar Bahlule, 3 vols. (Paris, 1901). Ph. J. van der Eijk, Diocles of Carystus: A Collection of Fragments with Translation and Commentary, Studies in Ancient Medicine 22–3, 2 vols. (Leiden, etc., 2000–1). G. Endress, Proclus Arabus: Zwanzig Abschnitte aus der Institutio Theologica in arabischen Übersetzungen (Beirut, 1973). ——, ‘The circle of al-Kindī: Early Arabic Translations from Greek and the Rise of Islamic Philosophy’ in id., Kruk (eds.), Ancient Tradition, 43–76. ——, R. Kruk (eds.), The Ancient Tradition in Christian and Islamic Hellenism (Festschrift Drossaart Lulofs), (Leiden, 1997). ——, ‘Die griechisch-arabischen Übersetzungen und die Sprache der arabischen Wissenschaften’, in Symposium Graeco-Arabicum II (Amsterdam, 1989), repr. as ‘8.7 Die Entwicklung der Fachsprache’ in W. Fischer (ed.), Grundriß, iii. 3–23. ——, D. Gutas (eds.), A Greek and Arabic Lexicon (Leiden etc., 1992 ff.). G. Fichtner, Corpus Galenicum: Verzeichnis der galenischen und pseudogalenischen Schriften (Tübingen, 2002). ——, Corpus Hippocraticum: Verzeichnis der hippokratischen und pseudohippokratischen Schriften (Tübingen, 1996). W. Fischer, Grammatik des klassischen Arabisch (1st ed., Wiesbaden, 1972), and (2nd ed., Wiesbaden, 1987); tr. A Grammar of Classical Arabic (New Haven and London, 2001). ——, H. Gätje (eds.), Grundriß der Arabischen Philologie, 3 vols. (Wiesbaden, 1982–92). H. L. Fleischer, Kleinere Schriften, 3 vols. (Leipzig, 1885–8). S. Fraenkel, Die aramäischen Fremdwörter im Arabischen (Leiden, 1886). G. W. Freytag, Lexicon Arabico-Latinum, 4 vols. (Halle, 1830–7). I. Garofalo (ed.), Anatomicarum administrationum libri qui supersunt novem earundem interpretatio arabice Hunaino Isaaci filio adscripta, 2 vols. (Naples, 1986–2000). ——, ‘La traduzione araba del commento di Ioannes Grammatikos al De pulsibus di Galeno’ in A. Garzya, J. Jouanna (eds), I testi greci, tradizione e ecdotica (Naples, 1999), 185–218.

secondary sources

319

——, ‘Il sunto di Ioannes “Grammatikos” delle opere del canone di Galeno’, in D. Manetti (ed.), Studi su Galeno: Scienza, Filosofia, Retorica e Filologia (Florence, 2000), 135–151. W. Gesenius, Sacra Pentecostalia (Leipzig, 1834). A. Grohmann, Arabische Chronologie, Arabische Papyruskunde, Handbuch der Orientalistik 1. Abt. Erg. 2.1 (Leiden, 1966). D. Gutas, Greek Thought, Arabic Culture (London and New York, 1998). A. E. Hanson, S. P. Mattern (eds.), ‘Medical Catechism’ in I. Andorlini, Greek Medical Papyri I (Florence, 2001), 71–83. J. B. Harley and D. Woodward, Cartography in the Traditional Islamic and South Asian Societies, The History of Cartography (vol. 2.1, Chicago and London, 1992). J. L. Heiberg,‘De codicibus Pauli Aeginetae observationes’, Revue des Études Grecques, 26 (1919), 268–77. J. G. Hermann, Observationes de Graecae linguae dialectis (Leipzig, 1807), repr. in id. Opuscula (vol. i, Leipzig, 1827), 129–147. W. Hinz, Islamische Maße und Gewichte umgerechnet ins metrische System, Handbuch der Orientalistik 1. Abt. Erg. 1.1 (Leiden, 1955). J. Hirschberg, Wörterbuch der Augenheilkunde (Leipzig, 1887). —— and J. Lippert, Die Augenheilkunde des Ibn Sina (Leipzig, 1902), repr. Sezgin Augenheilkunde i. 1–194. —— —— (eds.), Ali ibn Isa. Erinnerungsbuch für Augenärzte (Leipzig, 1904), repr. Sezgin Augenheilkunde i. 196–556. P. Horden, E. Savage-Smith, The Year 1000. Medical Practice at the End of the First Millennium, Social History of Medicine 13.2 (August 2000). H. Hunger, Die hochsprachliche profane Literatur der Byzantiner, 2 vols. (München 1978). D. Jacquart, ‘Le sens donné par Constantin l’Africain à son œuvre: les chapitres introductifs en arabe et en latin’ in C. Burnett, ead., Constantine the African and Alī ibn al-Abbās al-Maǧūsī, Studies in Ancient Medicine 10 (Leiden etc., 1994). ——, La formation du vocabulaire scientifique et intellectuel dans le monde arabe, Civicima: Études sur le vocabulaire intellectuel du Moyen Âge 7 (Turnhout, 1994). Dimitri C. Joannidès, La gynécologie et obstétrique de Paul d’Égine et son influence sur la médecine arabe (Cairo 1940) [despite extensive bibliographical efforts, I was unable to consult this work]. J. Johns, E. Savage-Smith, ‘The Book of Curiosities: A Newly-Discovered Series of Islamic Maps’, Imago Mundi, 2003 (55), 7–24. E. Kahle, Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā) über Kinderkrankheiten im Kinderregimen seines Qānūn (Erlangen, 1979). ——, Das Ammenregimen des Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā) in seinem Qānūn (Erlangen, 1980). ——, Al-Maǧūsī (Haly Abbas) über Kinderkrankheiten im Kāmil a-ināa a-ibbīya (Erlangen, 1980). P. Kahle, ‘Ein Kapitel aus den Anfängen der arabischen Medizin’ in J. W. Fück (ed.), Documenta Islamica Inedita (Berlin 1952). P. Kewes (ed.), Plagiarism in Early Modern England (Houndsmills and New York, 2003). R. Klibansky, et al., Saturn and Melancholy (London, 1964). P. de Koning, Trois traités d’anatomie arabes (Leiden, 1903). J. Krämer (ed.), Th. Nöldekes Belegwörterbuch zur klassischen arabischen Sprache, 2 fascicles (Berlin, 1952–4). P. Kraus, R. Walzer, Compendium Timaei Platonis (London, 1951). J. Lameer, ‘From Alexandria to Baghdad: Reflections on the Genesis of a Problematical Tradition’ in G. Endress, R. Kruk (eds.), The Ancient Tradition, 181–91

320

bibliography

H. Lehmann, review of G. Sobhy’s The Book of Al Dakhîra (XÐUŁ nOQð VD« rKŽ w …dOšc« »U² Ád sÐ) (Cairo, 1928) in Orientalische Literaturzeitung 1929.11, 869–70, repr. in F. Sezgin, Åābit ibn Qurra (d. 288/901): Texts and Studies, Publications of the Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science: Islamic Medicine 32 (Frankfurt, 1996), 277–9. M. Levey, The Medical Formulary, or, Aqrābādhīn of al-Kindī (Madison, 1966). J. Johns, E. Savage-Smith, ‘The Book of Curiosities: A Newly-Discovered Series of Islamic Maps’ Imago Mundi, 2003 (55), 7–24. J.-H. Kühn, U. Fleischer , Index Hippocraticus (Göttingen, 1986–9). R. Kühner, B. Gerth, Ausführliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache, 2 vols. (3rd ed., Hannover and Leipzig, 1890–1904). J. Lameer, ‘From Alexandria to Baghdad: Reflections on the Genesis of a Problematical Tradition’ in Endress, Kruk (eds.), The Ancient Tradition, 181–91. E. W. Lane, Arabic-English Lexicon (London, 1863–93). E. Lieber, ‘Galen in Hebrew: the Transmission of Galen’s Works in the Mediaeval Islamic World’, in V. Nutton (ed.), Galen: Problems and Prospects (London, 1981), 167–186. H. G. Liddell, R. Scott, H. S. Jones (eds.), A Greek-English Lexicon (9th ed., Oxford, 1940). I. Löw, Aramaeische Pflanzennamen (Leipzig, 1881). ——, review of R. Payne Smith, Thesaurus syriacus (fasc. 9, Oxford, 1893), in Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 47 (1893), 514–37. D. Manetti, ‘23. Heliodorus, Chirurgumena’, in A. Carlini (ed.), Papiri letterari greci della Bayerische Staatsbibliothek di Monaco di Baviera (Stuttgart, 1986), 19–25. M.-H. Marganne, L’ophtalmologie dans l’Égypte Gréco-romaine d’après les papyrus littéraires grecs, Studies in Ancient Medicine 8 (Leiden etc., 1994). J. N. Mattock, Hippocrates: On Humours and Hippocrates: On Nutriment, Arabic Technical and Scientific Texts, vol. 6 (Cambridge, 1971). M. R. McVaugh (ed.), Inventarium sive Chirurgia Magna Guigonis de Caulhiaco (Guy de Chaliac), Studies in Ancient Medicine 14, 2 vols. (Leiden etc., 1997). A. Menge, Langenscheidts Großwörterbuch Griechisch-Deutsch (2nd ed., Berlin, 1913). A. Merx, ‘Proben der syrischen Uebersetzung von Galenus’ Schrift über die einfachen Heilmittel’, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 39 (1885), 237–305. M. Meyerhof (ed.), The Book of the Ten Treatises on the Eye Ascribed to unain ibn Isāq (Cairo, 1928), repr. Sezgin Augenheilkunde ii. 1–516. ———, ‘Von Alexandrien nach Bagdad. Ein Beitrag …’ Sitzungsberichte der preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist. Klasse 23 (1930), 387–429. ——, ‘Joannes Grammatikos (Philoponos) von Alexandrien’, Mitteil. Dt. Inst. Ägypt. Alterumskunde in Kairo, 2 (1932). ——, J. Schacht, Über die medizinischen Namen, Abhandlungen der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Klasse (Berlin, 1931.3). —— ——, The Medico-Philosophical Controversy Between Ibn Butlan of Baghdad and Ibn Ridwan of Cairo (Cairo, 1937). ——, R.P.P. Sbath, Le livre des questions sur l’œil de unain ibn Isāq (Cairo, 1938). S. L. Montgomery, Science in Translation (Chicago, 2000). M. Neuberger, J. Pagel (eds.), Handbuch der Geschichte der Medizin, founded by Puschmann, 3 vols. (Jena, 1902–5). J. Noret, ‘Trente-six grands folios onciaux palimpsestes (avec un fragment inédit) de Paul d’Égine’, Byzantion 49 (1979). E. Pandel, ‘Antike Vorstellungen vom Hydrocephalus’, Gesnerus 33 (1976), 30–47.

secondary sources

321

R. Payne Smith, Thesaurus syriacus (Oxford, 1879–1901). P. E. Pormann, ‘The Greek and Arabic Fragments of Paul of Aegina’s Therapy of Children’, M.Phil. thesis (University of Oxford, 1999). ——, review of Al-Dubayan, Galen: „Über die Anatomie der Nerven“ in: JRAS 12.2 ( July 2002), 198–201. ——, ‘Parisinus Graecus 2293 as a Document of Scientific Activity in Swabian Sicily’, Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 13.1 (2003), 137–161. ——, ‘Jean le grammarien et le De sectis dans la littérature médicale d’Alexandrie’, in I. Garofalo, A. Roselli (eds.), Galenismo e medicina tardoantica: fonti greche, latine e arabe (Naples, 2003), 233–63. ——, ‘Theory and Practice in the Early Hospitals in Baghdad—Al-Kaškarī On Rabies and Melancholy’, Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften 15 (2003), 197–248. ——, review of M. Ullmann, Wörterbuch zu den griechisch-arabischen Übersetzungen des 9. Jahrhunderts (Wiesbaden, 2002) in: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 13.1 (April 2003), 105–7. ——, ‘Yuannā ibn Sarābiyūn: Further Studies into the Transmission of his Works’, Arabic Sciences and Philosophy, 14.2 (2004) [forthcoming]. ——, ‘The Alexandrian Summary (Ǧawāmi) of Galen’s On the Sects for Beginners: Commentary or Abridgment’, in P.A. Adamson et al. (eds.), Philosophy, Science and Exegesis in Greek, Arabic and Latin Commentaries (London, 2004) [forthcoming]. ——, ‘La querelle des médecins arabistes et hellénistes et l’héritage oublié‘ in V. Boudon et al. (eds.), Éditer les textes médicaux grecs à la renaissance (Paris, 2004) [forthcoming]. J. Radden, The Nature of Melancholy: From Aristotle to Kristeva (Oxford, 2000). H. Reckendorf, Die Syntaktischen Verhältnisse des Arabischen (Leiden, 1895–8). ——, Arabische Syntax (Heidelberg, 1921). M. Rodinson, La fascination de l’Islam (Paris, 1993). F. Rosenthal, The Technique and Approach of Muslim Scholarship, Analecta Orientalia 24 (Rome, 1947). ——, Das Fortleben der Antike im Islam (Zürich and Stuttgart, 1965) [trans. E. & J. Marmorstein, The Classical Heritage in Islam (London, 1975).] E. Denison Ross, Catalogue of the Arabic and Persian Manuscripts in the Oriental Public Library at Bankipore (vol. 4, Calcutta, 1910). M. Roueché, ‘Did Medical Students Study Philosophy in Alexandria?’, Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies, 43 (1999), 153-69. M. Sachs, G. Varelis, ‘Der griechische Arzt und Chirurg Antyllos (2. Jh. n. Chr.) und seine Bedeutung für die Entwicklung der operativen Chirurgie’, Würzburger medizinhistorische Mitteilungen 20 (2001), 43–60. ——, —— ‘„ΔAntuvllou ceirourgouvmena“: die chirurgischen Schriften des Antyllos (2. Jh. n. Chr.)’, Würzburger medizinhistorische Mitteilungen 20 (2001), 61–86. E. Said, Orientalism (New York, 1978). F. Sanagustin, ‘Les doctrines médicales d’Avicenne (Ibn Sīnā) d’après le Canon de la médecine (al-Qānūn fīl-ibb): Pour une problématique générale’, thèse pour le doctorat d’État ès-lettres (Paris III, 1993). E. Savage-Smith, ‘Ibn an-Nafīs’s Perfected Book on Ophthalmology and his Treatment of Trachoma and Its Sequelae’, Journal for the History of Arabic Science 4.1 (1980), 147–206. ——, ‘John Channing: Eighteenth-Century Apothecary and Arabist’, Pharmacy in History 30 (1988), 61–116.

322

bibliography

——, ‘The Exchange of Medical and Surgical Ideas between Europe and Islam’ in J.A.C. Greppin et al. (eds.), The Diffusion of Greco-Roman Medicine into the Middle East and the Caucasus (New York, 1999), 27–55. ——, ‘The Practice of Surgery in Islamic Lands: Myth and Reality’, in Horden, ead., The Year 1000, 307–21. ——, ‘Galen’s Lost Ophthalmology and the Summaria Alexandrinorum’ in V. Nutton (ed.), The Unknown Galen, BICS, suppl. 77 (London, 2002), 121–38. W. Schmucker, Die pflanzliche und mineralische Materia Medica im Firdaus al-ikma des abarī, Bonner Orientalistische Studien 18 (Bonn, 1969). E. Schwyzer and A. Debrunner, Griechische Grammatik, 4 vols. (Munich, 1934–71). F. Sezgin, Geschichte des Arabischen Schrifttums, 12 vols. (vols. i–ix, Leiden etc., 1967–84; vols. x–xii, Frankfurt, 2000). —— (ed.), Augenheilkunde im Islam. Texte, Studien und Übersetzungen, 4 vols. (Frankfurt, 1986). M. Simon, Sieben Bücher Anatomie des Galen, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1906). B. Snell (ed.), Lexikon des früh-griechischen Epos (Göttingen, 1955 ff.). M. S. Sprink and G. L. Lewis, Albucasis On Surgery and Instruments. A Definitive Edition of the Arabic Text with English Translation and Commentary (Berkeley/ Los Angeles, 1973). H. von Staden, Herophilus: The Art of Medicine in Early Alexandria (Cambridge etc., 1989). G. Strohmaier (ed.), Galen, Über die Verschiedenheit der homoiomeren Körperteile, CMG Suppl. Or. 3 (Berlin, 1970). ——, ‘ “Von Alexandrien nach Bagdad”—eine fiktive Schultradition’ in J. Wiesner (ed.), Aristoteles, Werk und Wirkung (Festschrift P. Moraux), 2 vols. (New York, 1987). M. Tabanelli, Studi sulla chirurgia bizantina. Paolo di Egina (Florence, 1964). H. Takahashi, ‘Syriac Fragments of Theophrastean Meterology and Mineralogy’ in W. W. Fortenbaugh, G. Wöhrle (eds.), On the Opuscula of Theophrastus (Stuttgart, 2002), 191–224. ——, Aristotelian Meteorology in Syriac: Barhebraeus, Butyrum sapientiae, Books of Mineralogy and Meteorology, Aristoteles Semitico-latinus, vol. 15 (Leiden, 2004). O. Temkin, ‘Alexandrian Commentaries on Galen’s De Sectis ad Introducendos’, Bulletin for the History of Medicine 3 (1935), 405–30. ——, The Falling Sickness, 2nd ed. (Baltimore, 1971). G. Troupeau, ‘Du syriaque au latin par l’intermédiaire de l’arabe: le Kunnāš de Yuannā ibn Sarābiyūn’, Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 4.2 (1994), 267–78. M. Ullmann, Wörterbuch der Klassischen Arabischen Sprache (Wiesbaden, 1957 ff.). ——, ‘Bemerkungen zu den arabischen Übersetzungen der Menandersentenzen’, Der Islam 42 (1966), 79–88. ——, Die Medizin im Islam, Handbuch der Orientalistik 1. Abt. Erg. 6.1 (Leiden etc., 1970). ——, ‘Yūannā ibn Sarābiyūn: Untersuchungen zur Überlieferungsgeschichte seiner Werke’, Medizinhistorisches Journal 6.4 (1971), 278–96. ——, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften im Islam, Handbuch der Orientalistik 1. Abt., Erg. 6.2 (Leiden etc., 1972). ——, ‘Die Schrift des Rufus “De Infantium curatione” und das Problem der Autorenlemmata in den “Collectiones Medicae” des Oribasios’, Medizinhistorisches Journal 10 (1975), 165–90. ——, Islamic Medicine (Edinburgh, 1978). ——, ‘Vorklassisches Arabisch’ in R. Traini (ed.), Studi in onore di Francesco Gabrieli nel suo ottantesimo compleanno (Rome, 1984), 807–18.

secondary sources

323

——, review of I. Fellmann, Das Aqrabaùīn al-Qalānisī (Beirut, 1986) in: Welt des Orient 19 (1988), 204–5. ——, Aufs Wasser Schreiben, Beiträge zur Lexikographie des klassischen Arabisch Nr. 7, Sitz. BAW, ph.hist. Kl. (Munich, 1989.1). ——, Das arabische Nomen generis, AAWG ph.-hist. 3. Folge no. 176 (Göttingen, 1989). ——, Adminiculum zur Grammatik des klassischen Arabisch (Wiesbaden, 1989). ——, ‘Zur Problematik des arabischen nomen speciei’, Oriens 33 (1992), 181–214. ——, ‘Die arabische Überlieferung der Schriften des Rufus von Ephesos’, Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt, II 37.2 (Berlin/New York, 1994), 1293–1349. ——, Launuhū ilā l-umrati mā huwa, BAW, ph.-hist. Klasse (München, 1994.4). ——, Sätze mit lau, BAW, ph.-hist. Klasse (München, 1998.1). ——, Wörterbuch zu den griechisch-arabischen Übersetzungen des 9. Jahrhunderts (Wiesbaden, 2002). J. Uri, Bibliothecæ Bodleianæ codicum manuscriptorum orientalium … catalogus (vol. i, Oxford, 1787). I. A. Vullers, Lexicon Persico-Latinum, 2 vols. (Bonn, 1855–64). E. Wagner, Der syrische Auszug der Meteorologie des Theophrast, AAWLM (geist.-soz. Klasse), (Wiesbaden, 1964.1). U. Weisser, Zeugung, Vererbung und pränatale Entwicklung in der Medizin des arabisch-islamischen Mittelalters (Erlangen, 1983). ——, ‘Zitate aus De methodo medendi im āwī ’ in Endress, Kruk (eds.), Ancient Tradition, 279–318. W. Wolska-Conus, ‘Stéphanos d’Athènes et Stéphanos d’Alexandrie. Essai d’identification et de biographie’, Revue des Études Byzantines 47 (1989), 5–89. ——, ‘Les commentaires de Stéphanos d’Athènes au Prognostikon et aux Aphorismes d’Hippocrate: de Galien à la pratique scolaire Alexandrine’, ibid. 50 (1992), 5–86. W. Wright, A Grammar of the Arabic Language, 2 vols. (3rd ed., Cambridge, 1896). F. W. Zimmermann, review of Biesterfeldt, Galens Traktat ,Daß die Kräfte der Seele …, in: Der Islam 54 (1977), 345–7. ——, Al-Farabi’s Commentary and Short Treatise on Aristotle’s De Interpretatione (London, 1981).

GLOSSARIES

GENERAL INDEX The indices which follow are arranged according to the alphabets in question (Latin, Greek, Arabic, Syriac), with semitic words appearing according to their roots. The Arabic article (al- ‡«), the Latin de (on) in titles, and all diacritical marks are to be ignored. For Greek compound words look also under the simplex. Abd Īšū , 15 Abd ar-Ramān III, 300 abortifacient, 34 Abū l-Faraǧ Ya qūb ibn Yūsuf, 93 adjective, colour, 248–9, 281; relational, see nisba Aegina, 6 Aëtius of Amida, 137, 173, 295 translated into Arabic, 304–5 Afšāra, 305 agent in passive constructions, 250, 275–6 Amad ibn Abī l-Aš a≥, 93 Albucasis, see az-Zahrāwī Alexander of Tralleis, 5, 70, 295 Alexandria, 5–7, 267, 295, 309 alpha privative, 240 Amr ibn al- Ā, 5 (n.), 6 De anatomicis administrationibus (Galen), 131 anatomy, 135, 137, 236 Andreas Alpagus, 20 angina, 53, 246 annexation, proper, see status construct; improper, 242–4, 249 Antigonus, 49, 52 Antyllus, 185–6, aphthae, 303, 307 Apollonius Dyscolus, 129 apoplexy, 54, 73 in Bar Bahlūl, 19; in ar-Rāzī, 81–7; transliteration, 247 Archigenes’ hiera, 44 Aristotle, 42 (n.) four causes, 7 arithmetic, 104

arum, 207–8 atrophy, of the pupil of the eye, 190–3 Avicenna, see Ibn Sīnā Ayurvedic medicine, 296 al- Azīz bi-llāh, 93 Baghdad, 13, 15, 61, 89 Balad, 93 al-Baladī, 92–114 (passim) life, 93; see also abālā Bar Alī, 15 Bar Bahlūl, 57–8, 60 life, 14–15; glossographer, 15–16; ophthalmology, 135–205 (passim); pharmacology, 205–21 (passim); translator, 15; use of Paul, 20; Book of Indications, 15 Barhebraeus, 5 Bar Serōšwai, 25, 58, 283 ophthalmology, 140, 150, 157, 169, 177, 184–5, 195, 202–4 bed-wetting, 108–9 belles-lettres, 105 al-Bīrūnī, 305 al-Birīq, translator of Galen, 236, 258, 285–6 blepharitis, 152 ulcerative, 164–5 blindness, 53, 198–9 bloodspot, 150–1 bryony, 208 buckthorn, 215–16 Buārā, 305 burping, 55, 79 Būyids, 61

326

general index

cabbage, 213–215 calendar, 59 camel, 89 cancer, in the eye, 187–9; in the womb, 27–8 canthus, overgrowth and loss of flesh of, 167–9 capers, 211–12 carbuncle, 187–9 catalepsy, 72–3 cataracts, 195–7 catarrh, cause of headache, 91; Diocles on, 53, 55; in children, 99, 307 cephalalgia, 67; see also headache Chauliac, Guy de, 312 chickpeas, 209 Chios, 117 Christianity, 6, 13 Christian chronology, 59 Cicero, 286 citation, see quotation clauses, an, 234; conditional, 127, 240, 251–2, 281; consecutive, 215; āl, 251–2, 269, 284; independent, 251; relative, 240–3, 251–2, 266, 269 cobra, Egyptian, 35 cockle-shell (eye condition), 147–9 colic, 54, 58, 86, 88 collation, of manuscripts, 58, 113–15 collyria, 142–3, 157, 164, 185, 188, 226 Paul’s chapter on, 115; in unain Ain, 114–21; acrid, 192; ashen, 148; chian, 176; Cleo, 172; Erasistratus, 153; frankincense, 179–80; Libianovn , 171; myrrh, 179–80; preventive, 140, 146; Proteus, 197; rose-, 148; Çebhrianovn, 171; saffron, 159; ‘small chariot’, 159; swan, 159; wet, 143–4, 179–80 colocynths, 217–19 compendium, as genre, 294–9; Compendium of the Pleiades (Paul), 5 compounds, 239–45 adjectives, 236; verbs, 224–7 confusion, Diocles on, 54, 57; and hysteria, 31; sequela of rabies, 39; symptom of apoplexy, 84 Constantine, the African, 297 constipation, in children, 98, 100; and apoplexy, 86; and menstruation, 24; and dystocia, 33; drugs against, 56, 59

Continens, see al-āwī Córdoba, 300 coriander, 212–213 cough, 53, 219 in children, 99–100, 307; terminology, 246 Cradle-cap, 106 cramp, see spasm curriculum, medical, 6–7, 294 databases, 286–8 dentition 100–1 diarrhoea, 54, 98, 100, 306 dilatation of the pupil, 189–90 ad-Dimašqī, 254, 256 Diocles, author of ‘Porphylactic Epistle’ 48–60 Dionysius Thrax, 129 Dioscorides, 16, 209, 254, 294 discharge from the eye, 144 dizziness, 53, 74, 218 dropsy, 55, 89 drowsiness, 74 dysentery, 54, 216, 242 dyspnoea, 30, 53, 56 (n.), 219 education of children, 104–5, 306 Egypt, 6, 93, 210 embryology, 93 encyclopedia, as genre, 294–9 epilepsy, 31, 68, 80, 89 in Bar Bahlūl, 17–18; in ar-Rāzī, 75–8; terminology, 218–20, 284; transliteration, 247 Erasmus, 286 euphorbium, 217 eversion, 155 eyelashes, loss of, 162; superfluous growth of, 165 Faraǧ ibn Sālim (lat. Farraguth), 61 fever, Diocles on, 54, 56–7; Paul on, 8; symptom or sequela of different diseases: 84 (apoplexy), 87 (cramps), 64–5 (headaches), 27 (inflammation in womb), 72 (lethargy), 88 (limpness); terminology, 173, 229, 249–52 Fihrist (Ibn an-Nadīm), 4 al-Fīrūzābādī, 129 (n.) forgetfullness, 54, 57, 76, 246

general index al-Ġāfiqī, 193 al-Ǧāi, 236 Galen, 5, 16 teaching of in Late Antique Alexandria, 6–7; translated into Arabic, 12, 114–15, 131, 205, 220–1, 236; prestige, 47; in quotations, 29–30, 36, 46, 61–2, 70, 75, 89, 101, 109, 111, 265; Galen’s hiera, 44; and ophthalmology, 167, 201 (see also, De morbis oculorum et eorum curis); and genre, 294–5; see also De locis affectis al-Ǧauharī, 129 (n.) gender, 104, see also gynaecology, obstetrics genitive absolute, 250–1 genre, 293–9 geometry, 104 Gerard of Cremona, 20–2, 25, 300 Gesius, 7 Ǧibrīl ibn Butīšū , 15–16, 63, 209 glaucoma, 53, 150, 195–7 gout, 54, 207 grammar (discipline), 104; grammars (books), 128–30, 253–4 Ǧundīsābūr, 114 gynaecology, Ibn Sarābiyūn, 22–3, 275–85; Paul alleged author of book on, 4–5; gynaecological disorders: cancer in the womb, 27–9, 281; difficult delivery, 31–4; inflammation of the womb, 25–7, 278–81; retention of menses, 24–5, 276–8; suffocation of the womb (hysteria), 29, 282–4 abālā, nature of, 47, 93; manuscript tradition, 94–5 al-adī≥ī, see Mūsā ibn Ibrāhīm haematite, 159–60 haemorrhage, conjunctival, 149–52 haemorrhoids, 54 hailstone (eye condition), 160–1 Haly Abbas, see al-Maǧūsī al-āwī, nature of, 47 headache, Diocles on, 53; Ibn Sarābiyūn on, 20 (n.); ar-Rāzī on, 64–8, 76 (symptom of epilepsy), 90–1, 181 (ophthalmology); terminology of, 246, 280 heat-stroke, 103

327

hebdomad, 104–5 Hegel, 293 hemicrania, 67–8, 90–1 hemiplegia, 19, 80, 84, 86, 88–9 hendiadys, 244, 249, 257–8, 270, 283 Herophilus, 31–3 hiccups, 54, 57 hierai (holy remedies), 22, 43–5; pungent hiera, 77, 79–8; see also Rufus of Ephesos Hippocrates, in quotations, 19, 28, 111; influence on Arabic poetry, 237; teaching of in Late Antique Alexandria, 6–7; writer of monographs, 294 History of Learned Men (al-Qifī), 4–5 Hohenstaufen, 48 hospital, 21 (n.), 61, 185 ubaiš, pupil and nephew of unain, 114, 131; translation style, 254, 257, 278 humoral pathology, 2 unain ibn Isāq, passim and ophthalmoly 137–8, 140–205 (passim, see also Ten Treatises on the Eye); as glossographer, 15–16, 57–58; as translator, 13 (see also risāla), 130–2, 204–5, 253–5; as translator of Paul, 5, 47–8, 111–13, 218, 220–1 hydrocephalus, 301–2 hysteria, 29 Ibn A bī Uaibi a, unain translator of Paul, 115; on al-Baladī, 93; on Bar Bahlūl, 15; on Ibn Sarābiyūn, 21; on Paul, 5 Ibn al-Ǧazzār, 277 Ibn Killis, 93 Ibn Māsawaih, 218 Ibn an-Nadīm, 4, 47 Ibn an-Nafīs, 164 (n.), 192 Ibn Riwān, 299 Ibn ar-Rūmī, 237 Ibn Sahdā, 114 Ibn Samaǧūn, 205–221 (passim) life, 206 Ibn Sarābiyūn, 12–14, 20–46 (passim), 133, 234, 238 life and works, 21; use of Paul of Aegina, 22–3, 45–46; comparison with

328

general index

Par. gr. (ar.), 275–85; as writer of compendia, 297–9 Ibn Sīnā, life, 305–6; influence on Paul, 297–99; on paediatrics, 306–9; on ophthalmology, 136, 138, 151, 155–6, 165, 168, 178–80, 183, 189–90, 192, 194, 199, 201–3 Iwān a-afā, 104 imperative, 252–3 India, 296 inflammation, of the eye, 141–3; in the eyelid, 152 information technology, 286–8 insomnia, 53, 269 intelligence, effect of nutrition on, 90 intertextuality, 293 intertrigo, 305, 307 iotacism, 49 Īsā ibn Yayā ibn Ibrāhīm, 131 Isāq ibn Sulaimān, 214 Iafan ibn Basīl, 254 ivy, 209 John the Grammarian (Yayā an-Nawī, John of Alexandria ?), 5, 295–6 al-Kar, 114 al-Kaskarī, 21 lethargy, 57 (n.), 71–3, 246–7, 249 lexicography, 224–39 lice on the eyelids, 162 lientery, 54 literae humaniores, 105 literature, ar-Rāzī trained in, 60; teaching of, 105; Arabic, 217 loan-words, 173, 246, 274 loan translations, 2 (n.), 111, 135, 208, 217 (n.) De locis affectis (Galen), 29–30, 75, 293 Logadios’ hiera, 43 lycanthropy, 80–1 Lycus, 38 madness, 39, 78–79 al-Maǧūsī, 297–8, 303–5 Mārī ibn Sulaimān, 15 Masī, 99, 103, 283 (n.) materia medica, 89–90, 205–21 melancholy, 2, 56–7, 78–9, 81

rabies kind of melancholy, 39 Middle East, 2 Montpellier, 138 De morbis oculorum et eorum curis (Galen), 137, 173–4, 204–5 morphology, 128–30, 239, 246, 258, 276 morphemes, 246, 249 Mosul, 93 Mūsā ibn Ibrāhīm al-adī≥ī, 21–2, 25 Mutanabbī, 236–7 myopia, 202 night-blindness, 193–5 nightmare, 247 in Bar Bahlūl 18; in ar-Rāzī 79–80 nisba (relational adjective), 2 (n.), 15, 243, 249 nomen generis, 161, 256–7, 266 nomen speciei, 130–1 obstetrics, 31–34, 93 ophthalmia, 139–42 itching, 152–3, hard and dry, 153–5; Diocles on, 53; recipes against, 68, 115; chvmwçiç type of, 148; and pus in cornea, 179–81 ophthalmology, 135–205 Oribasius, source for Paul, 8, 296 in quotations, 39, 117–19, 121, 137, 201, 304; and genre, 294, 298 Orientalism, 1–2 orthopnoea, 218–19 otorrhoea, 307 Oxford, 138 paedagogy, see education, teaching pannus, 134 paraphrase, in quotations, 20, 61–5, 71–2, 79–81, 87, 92, 139, 147, 210–1, 268–9, 271, 301; as translation technique, 229, 232–3, 241, 245 parataxis, 252 paresis, facial, 86, 218–19 Paris, 138 paronomasy, 220–1 participle, 234–5, 241, 245, 249, 266 participlial construction, 251–2 Paul of Aegina, passim life and works, 4–8; and genre of encyclopaedia, 295–9

general index Pelops, 267 periphrase, 245, 273 peripneumonia, 56–7 Philagrianon, 31 philology, 128 classical, 286 philosophy, 237, 296 in Alexandria, 6–7; education in, 105; royal pursuit, 52; Ibn Sīnā trained in, 305; ar-Rāzī trained in, 60–1 phrenitis 56 (n.), 57, 69–72 pimples, 17 plagiarism, 22, 46, 300–1 Pleiades, 55–58 Compendium of the Pleiades, 5 pleurisy/pleuritis, 56–7, 70 (n.) poisons, see toxicology Polyarchion, 31 poplar, black, 207 prepositions, 250, 278 in compounds, 239–42; prepositional expressions, 59, 224, 233, 251–2 prolapse, of rectum, 109–10; of iris, 174–6, 203–4 proliferation, of flesh, 107 protrusion of the eyeball, 201 pterygium, 184–7 Ptolemy, 313 purging, of the head, 64; through: bryony, 208, camel brain, 89, hiera, 74, scammony, 194; for specific diseases: 190 (cataract), 146 (moisture in eyelid), 80 (nightmare), 140 (ophthalmia), 139 (pain in the eye); menstrual, 241; terminology of, 242 purism, 253 pus, in the cornea, 177 pustules, pterygium, 185; fluvktaina, 178, 181; yudravkia, 17; in children, 98, 307; wolf’s-milk remedy against, 217 al-Qifī, 4–5 Quod animi mores corporis temperamenta sequantur (Galen), 257, 278 quotations, problematic nature of, 61–3; embedded, 62, 89; acknowledged, 178; unacknowledged, 136, 179, 203 (see also plagiarism) rabies, 37–40

329

kind of melancholy, 39 Rasis, see ar-Rāzī Rayy, 60–1 ar-Rāzī, passim life, 60; see also al-āwī risāla (unain ibn Isāq), 13, 29 (n.), 113–114, 132, 137 (n.) Rufus of Ephesus, 39, 62, 198 Rufus’ hiera, 77, 80–1; paediatric treatise by, 98; writer of monographs, 294; mentioned by Chaucer, 299 (n.) Rukn ad-Daula, 61 scars, 181–4 scholasticism, 299 sciatica, 54, 219 scrofulae, 53 Sicily, 48, 311 siriasis, 102–4, 303–4, 307 Šīrīšū b. Qurub, 114 Sixteen Books of Galen, 295 sleeplessness, see insomnia Soranus, 31, 303 spasm, 17–18, 87, 269, 274–5 spurge, 217 squinting, 200–1 statistics, 234–5, 258, 286–7 status construct, 240–1, 244 Stephen, of Antioch, 297; of Athens, 297; son of Basil, 254 strangulation, 53 stye, 161 style, 131, 254 summary, ar-Rāzī’s use of, 63, 87, 186; unain wrote s. of Paul, 115; Alexandrian Summaries, 295 sunstroke, 103 suppuration, 53 surgery, Paul’s Book Six on, 8, 136, 156, 298; ar-Rāzī on, 74, 144; az-Zahrāwī on, 300–302 swelling, in the eyelid, 152 Syriac, passim role in translation movement, 13–14; glossography, 15–16 (see also Bar Bahlūl); ‘Syriac months’, 59 teaching of medicine, in Alexandria, 6–7; in Europe, 297–8 teething, 100–1

330

general index

tellins, 210–11 Ten Treatises on the Eye (unain ibn Isāq), 47, 135 tetanus, 107, 246, 259–275 (passim) Themison, 19 Theophrastus, Meteorology, 15 Therapy and Treatment of the Child (Paul of Aegina), 5, 7, 92 Tikrīt, 14

irhān, 14–15 toxicology, 23, 45–6 Paul alleged author of book on, 7; insect stings, 40–1; poisonous bites, 34–7; scorpions, 41–3 trachoma, 158–60, 165 transliteration, via Syriac 25, 203; of technical terms: 57, 241, 247 (diseases); 58, 101, 111 (plant names); 137, 151, 168, 187, 201, 203–4 (ophthalmology) trembling, 42, 72, 87–9, 269 ulcers, in children, 98; in the eye, 169–174; scars of in the eye, 182–3; cause of: eversion, 156, pus in the eye, 181; thrush form of, 101; cradle cap

form of, 106; carbuncle form of, 187–8; fig-like, 106, 158; stomach, 242–3; drugs against, 153, 176, 212, 214, 216–17; sequela of: cancer, 28, lycanthropy, 80 Unani medicine, 296 unicode, 288 universities, 138, 297–8 usage, ‘normal’, 128–32, 191–2, 253–7 variants, 58, 113 vertigo, 74, 84 warts, pendulous, 110–12; in the eye, 157, 174–6; remedies against, 217 wet-nurse, 96–8, 306 worms, in the ears, 107; remedies against, 212–13, 215 Yayā ibn al-Birīq, 15 Yayā ibn Miskawaih, 15 Yāqūt, 93 az-Zahrāwī, 300–2, 308

GREEK ajgcivlwy, 156–8 ajdavrkh, ajdavrkion, 35 (n.) ajeiv, 224 ai[geiroç, 207 aijgivlwy, 156–8 aiJmativthç livqoç, 159–60 aiJmorroi?deç, 247 ai[tion, aijtiva, 280 ajkrocordwvn, 111–12 ajmauvrwçiç, 198 ajmbluwpiva, 198 ajmpeli'tiç, 163 ajnakovllhma, 115 a[nqrax, 187–9 ajponucivzw, 117 ajpovplhktoç , 19 ajpoplhxiva, 19 ajpovçthma, 157, 172 a[rgemon , 168–72 aJrmavtion, 159 a[ron, 207–8

a[rcomai, 231 a[çqma, 246 ajçpivç, 35 (n.) ajçthvr, 145–6, 170–1 ajtrofiva, 190–3 au[xhçiç, 190 aujçthrovç, 275 a[crhçtoç, 97 ajyivnqion, 228 bhvx, 246 blefarovxuçton, 159, 245 boqrivon, 168–74 bolbovç, 187 boubwvn, 42 (n.) bruwniva, 208 glauvkwma, 195–7 dexamenhv, 228 diav, 234

general index diaivreçiç, 7 divaita, leptuvnouça, 236 duç-, 242–3 duçenteriva, 216, 243 ejgkanqivç, 167–8 e[gkauma, 173 eijleovç, 54, 57–8 ejkpieçmovç, 201 ejktrovpion, 155–6 e[leoç, 57 e{lkouç leuvkwma, 137, 184 eJlxivnh, 209 e[mbaçiç, 228 ejmfuvçhma, 152–3, 164–5 (n.), 241 e{neka, 234 ejpevcomai, 231 ejpivkauma, 168–72 ejpilhyiva, 17–18, 31 ejpipefukwvç, 142, 149–50, 181, 184–5,

203 ejpifavneia, 17 ejrevbinqoç, 209–10 ejçqivw, 229–30 ejçcavra, 168–72; ejçcarou'çqai, 107 (n.) euj-, 242–3 ejfiavlthç, 18–19, 79, 247 zwmovç, 210–11 hJgemonikovn, 17 hJliotrovpion, 100–1, 103, 111–12 h|loç, 174–5 hJmivkraira, 246 ijatroçofiçthvç, 6 iJerav, 22, 43–5, 84; iJera; pikrav, 77, 79–80; iJera; ÔRouvfou, 77, 81 i\riç, 168–72 ijçhmeriva ejarinhv, 59 kadmiva, 117 kanqarivdeç, 78 (n.) kavppariç, 211–212 kavrdamon, 56 (n.) karkivnwma, 187–9 karwtivdeç, 30, 282–3 kavtocoç, 73 kau'çoç lugmwvdhç, 56 keravçthç, 35 (n.)

331

kefalalgiva, 64, 246, 280 kivtrion, 228 klhmativç, 38 (n.) kokkiva, 68 koivlwma, 174 kolla'n, 224–5 kollouvrion, 115, 142, 145, 148, 170–1,

182, 196 kolovbwma, 156 kolokunqivç, 217–19 kovrh, 104 korivannon , 212–13 kovruza, 246 kravmbh, 214–16 kriqhv, 161 kruçtalloeiv dhç , 196 (n.) kuknavrion, 118–19, 121, 159 kuvknoç, 118, 170–1 lavdanon, 228 lambavnw, 229–30 lepi;ç calkh', 107 (n.) leptomerhvç, 236 leptopoiw', 236 leptuvnw, 236 leuvkwma, 181–3, see also e{lkouç leuvkwma lhvqargoç, 56, 57 (n.), 74, 246 linovzwçtiç, 54 (n.) luççovdhktoç, 37 madavrwçiç, 162 melagcoliva, 56 Mhdiakovn, 141–2 mhvlh, 143–4 mh'lon, 174–5 mhvniggeç, 30, 282–3 moluvbdaina, 109–10, 113 monhvmeron, 115–16, 141–2 Mouvça, 145–6 mudrivaçiç, 189–90 muiokevfalon, 174–5 murmhkiva, 112, 227 (n.) murçivnh, 97 muwpivaçiç, 202 mwvrwçiç, 246 navrdinon, 119, 141, 175–6 narkwtikovç , 141 Neapolivthç, 163 Nei'loç, 141–2

332

general index

nefevlh, 181–3 nefevlion tou' ajpoçthvmatoç, 137, 184 nuktavlwy, 193 xhrantikovç, 221 (n.) xhrofqalmiva, 153–4, 245 o[gkoç, 281 o[nux, 177–181, 251 ojnucivzw, 121 ojrqopnoi>kovç, 218 ojçtrakovdermon , 211 oujlaiv, 181–2 ou\lon, 227–8 ojfqalmiva, 139–140, 245 parakmavzw, 231 perdikiavç, 157 periodeuthvç, 6 peripneumoniva, 56 periçkufiçmovç, 146 piturivaçiç, 228 plavççw, 227 pleuri'tiç, 56 pneumoniva, , 56, 246 pnigalivwn, 18 Poluavrcion, 30 (n.) pragmateiva, 8 provptwçiç, 174–6, 204; provptwma , 176, 204; propivptwn ajrcovç, 109 ptivlwçiç, 164 puretovç, 64, 173 (n.); 251, 262, 273 pureto;ç diakahvç, 250; pureto;ç ojxuvç, 56; pureto;ç tritai'oç, 57 putiva, 97 rJeu'ma, 144 rJh'xiç, 151 rJuavç, 167–8 çardovnioç, 268 çeirivaçiç, 103, 304 çklhrofqalmiva , 153–4 çkorpivouron, 103 çkotwmatikovç, 218–20 çmurnei'on, 51, 55, 58 çmuvrnh, 51 (n.), 58, 180, 182, 187, 264 çpaçmovç, 265–7; çpaçmo;ç kunikovç, 218 to; dia; çpermavtwn, 30 (n.) çpodiakovn, 148

çtafulhv, 53 çtafuvlwma, 174 çtrabiçmovç, 200 çuvgcuçiç, 201–2 çu'ka, 106; çuvkh , 158; çuvkwçiç, 158 çunavgch, 246 çfakeliçmovç, 53, 57 çfeklavrion, 149 çfevklh, 82 (n.) tavmiçoç, 97 tavxiç, 206–7, 217, 294 tavraxiç, 139–40 teiniçmovç , 246 teivnw, 272–4 telli'nai, 210–11 tevtanoç, 246, 260–71 (passim) tiquvmalloi, 217 travcwma, 158–60 tricivaçiç, 165–6 troph; ceimerinhv, 59 trofovç, 97 tuvlwçiç, 158–60 uJgrokollouvrion, 143 uJdrokevfalon, 301–2 uJdrofobiko;n pavqoç, 37 uJpo-, 242–3; uJpov, 250 uJpovmnhma, 8 uJpovpuoç, 177 uJpoçpaqiçmovç, 146 uJpovçfagma, 149–51, 203, 205 uJpocondriakovç, 79 (n.) uJpovcuma, 186 (n.), 195–7 uJpwvpion, 177 fqeirivaçiç , 162 fqivçiç, 190–2 Filagrianovn, 30 (n.) flegmonhv, 25–6, 143 flegmonh; uJçtevraç , 25 fluvktaina, 177–81 freni'tiç, 57 (n.), 69–70, 72, 73 (n.), 246 calavzion, 160 chvmh, 147 chvmwçiç, 147 ciakovn, 117, 141–2, 171 citwvn, 181 cravomai, 229–32

general index crivw, 225–7 cumovç, 272–4

333

yudravkia, 17 yuchv, 56 (n.) ywrofqalmiva, 152, 245

ARABIC «ÎbÐ√, 224 W¹dÐ≈, 228 ÊeÐ√, 228 5²MÐ√, 228 UOIuЫ, 19 UuIOÐ≈, 170 Ãdð√, 228 —UŁ¬, 181–2 qł√ s, qł_, 234, 278 f³KOł≈, 157 ÓcÓš√, 228–32; cÒð«, 232–4 »«œ¬, 105; V¹œ√, 105 «–≈, 251–2 —«–¬, 52, 55, 59 WOЗ√, 42 (n.) ÊuUł—√, 170 Êu U¹œu³Ý≈, 148 dODÝ√, 170 ”ueUUHÝ≈, 50 wMOÚI≈, 209 ÊuOÐËdÞuO≈, 110 ”bO²OU³√, 163 fOÝ—u√, 198 ÚÊ≈, 251–2 ÊUG²½√, 50 f³KO½√, 157 fO¦MI½≈, 167 ÊuOÐuÐË√, 177 ULGHÝuÐË√, 149 ×U¹≈, 43–5 ”Ëö¹≈, 51 d¦Ð, 17, 98, 178, 201 (?) ÊbÐ , 17–18 œÓdÓÐ, 160 ÂUÝdÐ, 69–70 o¹dÐ [?], 81, 84 fOÝuDÐËdÐ, 175 dOÝ«uÐ, 51 fOÝuKODÐ, 164 vGÓ³Ú½«, 253, 258, 270, 308 jKÐ, 93 Êu¹dŁuÐ, 170, 174

÷UOÐ, 181–2, 303 ÊUÓ²ÚÝ—UÓLOÐ, 185 WŠUHð, 174–5 ‰uQŁ, 174–5; oKF² ‰uQŁ, 110, 112 U¹dŁ, 52; U¹d¦« ‘UM, 5 ÿu׳, 201 »ÓdÓł, 32, 152, 159, 245 Õdł, 170–2, 281 œd−, 159, 245 bł, 17 ¡Uł, 154 5MOF« ·UHł, 154; n=H−, 221 (n.) œuLł, 265 …dLł, 187–9 ÊuM−, 78–9 W³MF« W³Š, 174–6 sD³« ”U³²Š«, 52, 98, 100; ‰u³« ”U³²Š«, 69, 83; iO(« ”U³²Š«, 24, 26, 278 6Š, 88 ÀbŠ, 54 ·dÔŠ, 38, 50, 56 (n.) ‚d²Š«, 107 (n.) »UŠ, 104 iÓCÔŠ, 215–16 WJŠ, 152–4 vJŠ, 265 œuL×, 96–7; jK)« œuL×, 255, 272 …dLŠ, 213 hÒLŠ, 209–10 oÚLÔŠ, 246 vLŠ, 64, 71, 81, 87–8, 229, 251, 262, 273 …œUŠ vLŠ, 26; W d× vLŠ, 51, 250; WIO œ vLŠ, 51; lÐd« vLŠ, 51, 57; WMe vLŠ, 88; vLŠ WMO, 71; Âu¹ vLŠ, 252 ‰eMŠ, 217–19 wË— —ÓuÓŠ, 207 ‰ÓuÓŠ, 200 iOŠ, 24, 26, 29, 276–8 WCH« Y³š, 109–10

334

general index

—bš, 51, 66, 68–9, 141 ëdÔš, 171–3 bK'« weš, 210–11 5²HA« W½uAš, 158 dB²š«, 115 (n.) jÚKš, 266, 272–4, 285–6 ◊ö²š«, 29, 37, 282; qIF« ◊ö²š«, 51, 57 (n.), 71, 241 ·ö²š«, 51, 251, 262 d¹“UMš, 51 oMš, 18 rŠd« ‚UM²š«, 29 Êu UOš, 116–17, 141–2, 171 fOÝuLOš, 148–9 n=DK dOÐbð, 236 fMOœ, 210–11 œËœ, 107, 212–14 —«Ëœ, 29, 50, 81, 218, 282 œu« …dz«œ, 170 fOK u¹œ, 50 W×Ж, 50, 246 »—–, 51 »dIŽ V½–, 111 WÐUÐÔc« ”√—, 174–6 ”Ë«—, 167 rŠÓ—, 277 ¡Ušd²Ý«, 32, 82–3, 88, 108, 192, 257, 279 ¡Íœ—, 244; …¡«œ—, 244 fOK u¹œ WUÝ—, 49–52 WF{d, 95 WAŽ—, 88, 263, 269; ‘UFð—«, 269 WOÒ «d, 78–9 b—, 50, 67, 115, 136, 139–40, 142, 149, 179–80 ÊUC—, 59 (n.) dOŠÔ“, 246 W —“, 50, 150, 197 ŸUL _« nŽeM, 117 ÂU“, 50, 91, 99, 246, 307 ¡UF_« o“, 51 VÓ³ÓÝ, 280 Ÿu³Ý√, 104–5 qÓ³ÓÝ, 134 »U×Ý, 181–3 —bÝ, 74

ÂUÝdÝ, 69–70 ÊUÞdÝ, 281; rŠd« w, 27; 5F« w, 187–9 fOÝU¹dÝ, 102 WHFÝ, 106 ‰UFÔÝ, 50, 99, 219, 307 ÊuÞUdHÝ, 30 ¡UI²Ý«, 51 ”ËdO—uIÝ, 103 W²JÝ, 19, 51, 73; XJ, 81 ÒqÝ, 191–2 ‚öÔÝ, 164–5 f¹—ULÝ, 110 ÊuO½dLÝ, 51 ŸuM« rÝ«, 130; fM'« rÝ«, 161, 256–7, 266 5F« œ«uÝ, 170, 173 ÊöOÝ, 168 —uJ³ý/…dJ³ý, 193 (n.) …d²ý, 155–6, 241 ‚dý, 243; jÝË_« ‚dA«, 2 bz«“ dFý, 166 gHý, 38 ×U)« ‚UHB« ^oÓý, 149–51, 203 WIOIý, 67, 90–1, 219, 246 ZMAð, 26, 28, 37, 67, 87, 100, 191, 260, 263, 265, 274, 278, 282 WO½U¹dÝ —uNý, 59 –UЫdNý, 93 ·UOý, 32, 115–20, 140–3, 145, 148, 157, 159, 170–1, 175, 179–80, 182, 185, 188, 196 w³, 104–5 Ÿ«b, 26, 50, 64–8, 75 (n.), 91, 180, 246, 278 Ÿd, 29, 67, 75, 80 (n.), 89, 218–19, 282, 284 ‚UH, 151, 181, 244 WÐö, 154–5; VÚKÔ, 275 Uu¹ dU, 111 Ó—U, 221, vKŽ, 270 ÒV{, 183 p×Ó{, 268 dB³« nF{, 198–9 —uL{, 190–1 W b(« oO{, 192; fHM« oO{, 29, 50, 56, 69, 219, 242, 264 fMOUÞ, 210–11

general index fMOb« aO³Þ, 210–11 WI³Þ, 181 WdÞ, 149, 151 sD³« ‚öD²Ý«, 100, 306 YLÞ, 75, 209, 211–12, 241, 276–8 dÔHÔþ, 177–9, 184 …dÓHÓþ, 184–6 œÓbÓŽ, 240 dÓŽ, 240, 242 fÓHÓM« dÔŽ, 219; …œôu« dÔŽ, 31 UM« ‚dŽ, 51, 219 UÎAÓŽ, 193–5; vAŽ√, 194 ‘UDÔŽ, 303 WÒKŽ, 280 ÂuKŽ, 50, 105 oÚLÔŽ, 170 WO³MŽ, 50, 196–7 …ÒbÔž, 168 »ÓdÓž, 156, 158 pÓL]« ¡«dž, 244 ÊUHł_« w kKž, 159 Uu uKž, 195–7 ÂUMž, 181–3 ”uu dÒH, 16 fDO½«d, 69 r×K« …œU¹“ ◊«d≈, 167 qÓFÓ, 146; ‰UFÔ , 146, 165; ÔqÓFÚ√, 249 vF√, 35 (n.) ZU, 19, 80–3, 88, 219 WHK, 50; ·uKO, 105 U½UDIK, 178 ‚«u, 50–1, 262 ÊuOš—RuH«, 30 Êu½U¹džöO, 30 fšuÞU , 73 wKЫuI«, 4 …œôu« »d , 110 Õd , 24, 27, 50, 80, 98, 101, 106, 153, 156, 172–4, 212, 214, 216–17, 243 (n.); ÕdIð, 281 »dD , 80, 114 »öI½«, 148, 156, 250 Íu²ý »öI½«, 51–2; wHO »öI½«, 51–52 Ÿö , 101 vK , 82, 149, 226

335

UOLOK , 115, 117–20 s¹œUL , 160 jO³ÒM , 214 U¹U u ªUO u , 67, 68 (n.) Êu¹—UM u , 118, 159 ”uM u , 118 Ó‰U , 112–13, 265 ZMu , 51, 58, 83, 88 Uuu , 174 dÓ³Ó, 211–12 ”uÐU, 18, 80 qײ«, 226 p– ÓdÓ¦Ú√, 278; d_« d¦√ w, 278 —ÒbJð, 139–40 iOÐ√ Âd, 208 VÚ½ÓdÓ, 214 “«eÔ, 246, 260–71 (passim) …dÐe, 212–13 VKÓ VÚK, 37 …b*« WÓMÚLÔ, 180–1 ‰Ë_« Êu½U, 51, 55, 59 ‘UM, 4, 13, 16, 112–13, 298–9 U¹d¦« ‘UM, 5 ”uLO, 266, 272–4, 285–6 ‡, 252–3; 267 »ö³, 54 (n.), 209 W¦, 227–8 rײK, 150, 187, 203 q×M«Ë dOÐU½e« l, 40–1 »—UIF« l, 41–2 ÓoÓ‰√, 224–5 ÓaÓD, 225–7 Ón]DÓ, 235–6 kH, 265 …uI, 83, 218–19 ·u, 207–8 Êu, 248–9 ÊuO½U³O, 170 fžd¦O, 71, 74 ÓfÚOÓ, 254–5, 257 6K« ÊUײ«, 95 œb9, 18, 264, 274–5 œ«b²«, 17, 138 (n.), 264, 274–5 ‚UHB« X% …Òb, 178–9; ‚UHB« w …Òb , 184–5 ‚ÓdÓ, 210–11 s, 250–1 ¡U, 195–7, 205

general index

336 Wýu³O, 119 qO, 144

”dI½, 51, 207 dOUþ_UÐ vIM, 120–1 fÐuUD u½, 194

fDOuÐU½, 163 ÊUMÝô«  U³½, 100 5F« ¡u²½, 201 —UHý_« dFý n²½, 163 u×½, 104 We½, 51, 90–1, 144–5, 147 W³½, 2 (n.), 15, 243, 249 W½, 43, 58 —uÝU½, 156–7 ÊUO½, 51, 57 (n.), 75, 246 —UA²½«, 190 »UB²½«, 219, 264 ŒUH²½«, 152–3 —UHý_« —UI²½«, 163

‰«e¼, 190–3 WÝbM¼, 104 ZONð, 51, 55, 140 »UÒŁË, 18 5F« w lłË W œË, 150 Ò—UŠ —Ë, 25–6, 141, 143, 148; rŠd« —Ë, 26; W¦K« —Ë, 50, 56 (n.), 227 Èdš√ WH, 113 5F« w ÷—UF« f³O«, 154 ŸuÒ²¹, 217 SYRIAC

Drnvh, S∂rhnvh , 35 HdnM©gMrmNümh, 143 ÍMöMkmh, 177 H¬•†sHtmh, 150 hHtHtmh, 177 HlMöMtmh, 195 H∂¬ghJtmh, 139 H∂®∂kMlI•dh, 17 ÍmEdh, 58 ˆM∂tmNxM∂©dh, 112 SdNdh, 170 HdBp jM©∂gh , 198 S∂smnmHlh, 198 S∂sHdnvMlh, 189 S†sh, 35 (n.) H¬∂≈sMth, 156 H¬üH†sMth, 150 H∂‚œ∂gMtMth, 19 ÍIkmvMömNrh, 111 (n.) ˆMlIünh, 169 H∂l jmV∂ah , 195 ˆMdnjMf, 169 ˆM≈sM‚ömnHtI©f, hN‚f, 247 hN‚fv hnwMf , 167 hvNf, 160 HœpMü ,

268

159

HlMrmEü , 195 hjMsmN•l, hJ∂ΔsN•l, HdN≈Δsmv, 243 H∂pMgv, 139

35 (n.)

(n.)

ÍMtMgüi, 156 H¬∂sM†li, 152 Í~hmH†si, 170 H∂‚¬∂©∂ti, 17 HlmH®∂ti, 169 hjMrnb,

195

IΔ∂©gHx, 211 S∂‚öhnHx, 139 S∂sMgMx, 159 h›πx, 246 ÍM¬‚Δ∂x, 246 hN†x, 184 H≈lMöhNx , 158 S∂sH∂ömNx, 165 ˆMdBdeHö, 160 HåMƒö, 18, 247 Hƒ∂xn Eπö, 143 S∂sM¬∂ö, 148 E∂©ö, 173, 184; H¬ömhv E∂©ö, H∂«l jMå∂Δö , 195

170

general index H∂¬gJtmN∂‚ö, H‚†ö, 177

154

°©t, 247 DkM¬•©t, 25 H∂rhnvM‚t, 17 S∂sJt, 191

HkiVfMgMl, 110 S∂‚tM©∂l, 163 S∂•Δ∂Δ∂l, 283 Hƒ©pv HdVk, 184 HπtMk, 152 ÍM†gHxMrMk, 193 HdBp jMå∂åk , 189 h›lj nJk, 163

Hπpw, 43 HlMd Nlw,

(n.)

ÍM∂khvnHs, 268 H∂«kbD•s, 42 S∂sMrMs, 158 HΔ∂fMu, 25, 167; H¬∂¬p HΔ∂fMu , 25; hjM∂ƒu H†Q∂gjv, 164; hjMkMqüv HΔ∂fMu, 167 hjMtmBu, 158 hJ©u, 280 ˆmH∂ümnI≈t, 184 S∂sM©∂≈t, 164

337

111

ÍiV∂xmnHr, 283 ˆMdnHΔrMr, 119 S∂xH¬∂©r, 38 (n.) hjMfM‚r, 159 ÍmVdE≈smNr, 196 hN‚fv hj NdJd hJ∂fnj , Íhmn, 167 H¬pn, 277

(n.) 167

hJåƒa, hJå∂ƒa , 38 (n.) H∂«¨¬fv HΔpMa, 243 (n.) h›lN¬a, 193 (n.) HrjMa, 19 ÍMgMtv HΔ¬ünJl,

16

STUDIES IN ANCIENT MEDICINE 1. F. Kudlien and Richard J. Durling (eds.). Galen’s Method of Healing. Proceedings of the 2nd International Galen Symposium. 1991 ISBN 90 04 09272 2 2. Hippocrates. Pseudepigraphic Writings. Letters — Embassy — Speech from the Altar — Decree. Edited and translated by Wesley D. Smith. 1990. ISBN 90 04 09290 0 3. Robert I. Curtis. Garum and Salsamenta. Production and Commerce in Materia Medica. 1991. ISBN 90 04 09423 7 4. Jody Rubin Pinault. Hippocratic Lives and Legends. 1992. ISBN 90 04 09574 8 5. Richard J. Durling. A Dictionary of Medical Terms in Galen. 1993. ISBN 90 04 09754 6 6. Willem F. Daems. Nomina simplicium medicinarum ex Synonymariis Medii Aevi collecta. Semantische Untersuchungen zum Fachwortschatz hoch- und spätmittelalterlicher Drogenkunde. 1993. ISBN 90 04 09672 8 7. Irene and Walter Jacob (eds.). The Healing Past. Pharmaceuticals in the Biblical and Rabbinic World. 1993. ISBN 90 04 09643 4 8. Marie-Hélène Marganne. L’ophtalmologie dans l’Égypte gréco-romaine d’après les papyrus littéraires grecs. 1994. ISBN 90 04 09907 7 9. Samuel S. Kottek. Medicine and Hygiene in the Works of Flavius Josephus. 1994. ISBN 90 04 09941 7 10. Charles Burnett and Danielle Jacquart (eds.). Constantine the African and #AlÊ ibn al-#Abb§s al-MaÆåsÊ. The Pantegni and Related Texts. 1994. ISBN 90 04 10014 8 11. J.N. Adams. Pelagonius and Latin Veterinary Terminology in the Roman Empire. 1995. ISBN 90 04 10281 7 12. Ivan Garofalo (ed.). Anonymi medici De morbis acutis et chroniis. Translated into English by Brian Fuchs. 1997. ISBN 90 04 10227 2 13. Armelle Debru. Le corps respirant. La pensée physiologique chez Galien. 1996. ISBN 90 04 10436 4 14. Guigonis de Caulhiaco (Guy de Chauliac). Inventarium sive Chirurgia Magna. 2 volumes. Vol.I: Text. Edited by Michael R. McVaugh; Vol. II: Commentary. Prepared by Michael R. McVaugh & †Margaret S. Ogden. 1997. ISBN 90 04 10706 1 (I); ISBN 90 04 10784 3 (II); ISBN 90 04 10785 1(Set) 15. Mark Grant. Dieting for an Emperor. A Translation of Books 1 and 4 of Oribasius’ Medical Compilations with an Introduction and Commentary. 1997. ISBN 90 04 10790 8 16. Armelle Debru (ed.). Galen on Pharmacology. Philosophy, History and Medicine. Proceedings of the Vth International Galen Colloquium, Lille, 16-18 March 1995. 1997. ISBN 90 04 10403 8

17. Marie-Hélène Marganne. La chirurgie dans l’Égypte gréco-romaine d’après les papyrus littéraires grecs. 1998. ISBN 90 04 11134 4 18. Klaus-Dietrich Fischer, Diethard Nickel & Paul Potter (eds.). Text and Tradition. Studies in Ancient Medicine and its Transmission. Presented to Jutta Kollesch. 1998. ISBN 90 04 11052 6 19. Keith Dickson. Stephanus the Philosopher and Physician. Commentary on Galen’s Therapeutics to Glaucon. 1998. ISBN 90 04 10935 8 20. Philip J. van der Eijk (ed.). Ancient Histories of Medicine. Essays in Medical Doxography and Historiography in Classical Antiquity. 1999. ISBN 90 04 10555 7 21. Christine F. Salazar. The Treatment of War Wounds in Graeco-Roman Antiquity. 2000. ISBN 90 04 11479 3 22. Philip J. van der Eijk. Diocles of Carystus. A Collection of Fragments with Translation and Commentary. Volume I: Text and Translation. 2000. ISBN 90 04 10265 5, ISBN 90 04 12013 0 (Set) 23. Philip J. van der Eijk. Diocles of Carystus. A Collection of Fragments with Translation and Commentary. Volume II: Commentary. 2001. ISBN 90 04 12012 2, ISBN 90 04 12013 0 (Set) 24. Manuela Tecusan. The Fragments of the Methodists, Volume One. Methodism outside Soranus. 2004. ISBN 90 04 12451 9 25. Julie Laskaris. The Art is Long. On the Sacred Disease and the Scientific Tradition. 2002. ISBN 90 04 12152 8 26. Julius Rocca. Galen on the Brain. Anatomical Knowledge and Physiological Speculation in the Second Century AD. 2003. ISBN 90 04 12512 4 27. H.F.J. Horstmanshoff & M. Stoll, in collaboration with C.R. van Tilburg (eds.). Magic and Rationality in Ancient Near Eastern and Graeco-Roman Medicine. 2004. ISBN 90 04 13666 5 29. Peter E. Pormann. The Oriental Tradition of Paul of Aegina’s Pragmateia. 2004. ISBN 90 04 13757 2 30. Jennifer Clark Kosak. Heroic Measures. Hippocratic Medicine in the Making of Euripidean Tragedy. 2004. ISBN 90 04 13993 1