Aretaeus, The Extant Works of Aretaeus, The Cappadocian.
Francis Adams LL.D., Ed.

1 i have ventured to read ἢ instead of ἢν, on my own authority; and have substituted τινι in place of τι, on the authority of Ermerins; but have rejected his alteration of μὴν into μὴ, which I think spoils the passage; and have preferred μὲν, which has the authority of the Vatican ms.

2 Θρὶξ here is used in an unusual sense. The literal translation of the expression would be, “They are not pained a hair,” or “a hair's-breadth,” i.e. in the slightest degree. Ermerins refers to Theocritus, Idyll. xiv. 9, for an example of this usage. See further Liddel and Seott's Lexicon, under the word. This usage of it appears very forced in the present instance, and I suspect the reading to be corrupt.

3 in the common editions, and I believe in all the mss., we find γύϊος, which is obviously at fault, at least as regards accentuation. Ermerins, accordingly, does not hesitate to expunge the term altogether. But to γυιὸς I can see no objection. It is thus explained in the Lexicon of Hesychius: Γυιὸς, χωλὸς, νοσώδης, πηρώδης. This is sufficient authority for the word, although it is not in common use. See also Liddel and Scott's Lexicon, under the term. There are other difficulties in the remaining part of the sentence, which I cannot bring myself to remove by expunging all the difficult words, after the example of Ermerins.

4 Though the text be not in quite a satisfactory state, I prefer leaving it as it stands, rather than adopt the slashing alterations made in it by Ermerins. He reads the last clause thus: ἐπὶ δὲ τοῖσι κοτύλῃσι περίστροφος: ἤδη μετάβασις ἐς νώτου μύας καὶ θώρηκος. Wigan merely proposes to read περίστροφοι ἠδὲ.

5 the following most extraordinary reading occurs in all the mss.: καὶ ξυμπάντω ν τε ὁ βοῦς, ὄνος, καὶ ἡ ἰδέη ( ἰδίη, Harl.) ἑκάστου ὀδύνη; which words, in the old translation of Crassus, are rendered literally, — “Simulque omnium bos, asinus, et proprius cujusque dolor.” What can an ox or an ass have to do with an attack of Schiatica?

Fortunately the Askew ms. belonging to the Medical Society of London, has guided me to what I do not hesitate to pronounce the true reading. In the margin of this ms., opposite the corrupted words, stand the following characters, apparently in the handwriting of the amanuensis: —

ἴσβουβῶν

That is to say, ἴσως, βουβῶνος. Now, that “pain of the groin” is a constant attendant of Schiatica, every practical physician is well aware; and, in fact, this is one of the symptoms enumerated in the best descriptions of the disease furnished by the ancient authorities. For example, Cælius Aurelianus has the following words in his chapter on Schiatica and Lumbago: “Et primo, in vertebra dolor sentitur, dehinc partis suæ penetrans loca usque ad mediam natem, ac superius ad inguen,” etc. Tard. Pass. v ... In like manner, Aetius describes the symptoms as follows: πολλοῖς δὲ ἡ ὀδύνη ἐρείδεται κατὰ τοῦ βουβῶνος ὅτε καὶ ἡ κύστις μεταλαμβάνουσα τῆς δυσκολίας δυσουρίαν ἐπιφέρει. Ex. ms. in Bibl. Bodl. Cod. Canon. Græc. cix.

In a word, the substitution of τοῦ βουβῶνος for τε ὁ βοῦς, ὄνος, is so natural, that I feel persuaded no reasonable critic will demur to adopt it. Some other slight changes, however, are requisite in this passage, which might be effected in two or three different ways. I subjoin a few of my own attempts, some of which may perhaps be thought superior to the reading I have adopted: —

1. kai\ cumpa/ntwn tou= boubw=nos [ to/pwn] kai\ h( i)di/h e(ka/stou o)du/nh.

2. kai\ cumpa/ntwn te boubw=nos kai\ i)di/h| h( e(ka/stou o)du/nh.

3. kai\ cu/mpantos tou= boubw=nos kai\ h( i)di/h| e(ka/stou o)du/nh.

4. kai\ e)s cu/mpantw=n tou= boubw=nos kai\ i)di/h e(ka/stou o)du/nh.

Every one of these specimens of an emended text brings out an appropriate meaning; namely, that “there is a general pain of the whole inguinal region, and a particular pain of every part situated therein”.

I have now to state briefly the emendations of this passage proposed by preceding editors and commentators. Wigan, while he retains the vitiated reading of the mss., adds in a note at the end: “Cert legendum ὁμοῦ πόνος. Ita eleganter vehementia doloris describitur, Vertebroe et dolore torquentur, qui omnes oequ.occupare proecipitur, et alium etiam insuper sentiunt, qui singulis suus et proprius videtur.” Petit's emendation is very nearly the same: καὶ ξυμπάντων τε ὁμοῦ πόνος, καὶ ἡ ἰδίη ἑκάστου ὀδύνη. It is adopted by Ermerins with a slight change: καὶ ξυμπάντων τε ὁμοῦ πόνος καὶ ἰδίῃ ἑκάστου ὀδύνη.

6 the common reading, καὶ γὰρ οἷσι τῶν εὖ βδελυκτέων ἡδονή, has evidently no meaning. Petit and Ermerins try their hands at conjectural emendations, but in such a style as I cannot approve. Petit suggests the following as a probable substitute for the vitiated text: καὶ γὰρ οἶσι τῶν θερμῶν, εὔτε δὲ ψυκτικῶν ἡδονή. Ermerins boldly substitutes the following sentence for the words he expunges: καὶ γὰρ οἱ μέν τινα τουτέων φεύγουσι, τοῖσι δὲ αὖ ἐκ τῶν ἄλλοισι βδελυκτῶν ἡδονή.

7 ermerins ventures to introduce οὐκ before αὖθις; and it seems to be required.