Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T16:51:15.726Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pelagonius and Columella

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2015

J.N. Adams
J.N. Adams*
Affiliation:
University of Manchester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Horse doctors of the Roman period were often, but not always, of low social status. On the one hand we hear of ueterinarii I mulomedici who were slaves or freedmen, but on the other hand the Greek-speaking Theomnestus was the friend of an emperor (probably Licinius), and accompanied him on an expedition: note particularly Hipp. Ber. 34.12, CHG I, p. 183.22 f. . Apsyrtus too, whatever his date, was a of some status.

Type
Research Article
Information
Antichthon , Volume 25 , 1991 , pp. 72 - 95
Copyright
Copyright © Australasian Society for Classical Studies 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For some evidence, see Nutton, V., ‘Menocrates of Sosandra, doctor or vet?’, ZPE 22 (1976) 93 ffGoogle ScholarPubMed. Mulomedici in the cursus publicus were public slaves who were supplied by the state with uestes and annona (Cod. Theod. 8.5.31; cf. Seeck, RE 4.2.1856-57). See further Jones, A.H.M., The Later Roman Empire 284-602 (Oxford 1964) 833, and especially 1348 n.21Google Scholar.

2 On the date of Theomnestus, see Haupt, M., ‘Varia, IV’, Hermes 5 (1871) 23 ff.Google Scholar, Doyen-Higuet, A.-M., ‘The Hippiatrica and Byzantine veterinary medicine’, DOP 38 (1984) 112 fGoogle Scholar.

3 For a recent discussion of this problem, with bibliography, see Doyen-Higuet, loc. cit.

4 Apsyrtus presents himself as a horse doctor of some importance, constantly written to for advice by a variety of named persons (e.g. Hipp. Ber. 8.1Google Scholar, CHG I, p. 48, 24.1, p. 121, 36.1, p. 194, 44.1, p. 215, 68.1, p. 263, 75.1, p. 286Google Scholar). More interestingly, he often advises other (e.g. 10.6, p. 59, 12.1, p. 74, 19.1, p. 93, 20.1, p. 95, 22.1, p. 103, 26.3, p. 125, 26.18, p. 131, 27.1, p. 140), who had apparently written to him for information (note 42.1, p. 210, 50.1, p. 226, 101.1, p. 347). He was therefore no run-of-the-mill , but a man of acknowledged expertise within the profession, somewhat like a modern consultant.

5 See now for brief details Fischer, K.-D. in Herzog, R. (ed.), Restauration und Erneuerung. Die lateinische Literatur von 284 bis 374 n. Chr. (Munich 1989) 81Google Scholar.

6 Fischer (loc. cit.) finds this passage consistent with a dating of the work to the principates of Julian (361-63) or Valentinian I (364-75) and Valens, but nothing much can be made of it.

7 On the date of Vegetius (under Theodosius I, A.D. 379-95?), see Barnes, T.D., ‘The date of Vegetius’, Phoenix 33 (1979) 254 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar, Sabbah, G., ‘Pour la datation théodosienne du De re militari de Végèce’, Centre Jean Paterne, Mémoires 2 (Saint-Étienne 1980) 131 ffGoogle Scholar.

8 Full details can be found in my article, ‘The origin and meaning of Lat. ueterinus, ueterinarius’, Indogermanische Forschungen 97 (1992) 70–95Google Scholar.

9 See Fischer, loc. cit.; also Jones, A.H.M., Martindale, J.R., Morris, J., The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire 1 (Cambridge 1971) 686 f., 689Google Scholar.

10 See Fischer, K.-D., Pelagonii Ars Veterinaria (Leipzig 1980) p. 93 ad locGoogle Scholar.

11 See Fischer, Restauration und Erneuerung, loc. cit.

12 On the interpretation of this difficult passage, see Adams, , ‘Notes on Pelagonius’, CQ 40 (1990) 528 fCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 At 216 he claims to have examined Festianus himself, as well as his horses, and offers him medical advice. At 363 Festianus is portrayed as writing to Pelagonius for veterinary help.

14 These do not deal only with diseases of horses (for which see 6.30-34). but also with those of oxen (6.4-18). calves (6.25). mules (6.38). sheep (7.5) and goats (7.7).

15 For Eumelus' use of Columella, see Hipp. Ber. 18.3Google Scholar, CHG I, p. 93.10ffGoogle Scholar, = Col. 6.30.6, Hipp. Ber. 22.7Google Scholar, CHG I, p. 105Google Scholar.10 ff. = Col. 6.31.1. On Apsyrtus’ use of Columella, see Fisher, Elizabeth, ‘Greek translations of Latin literature in the fourth century A.D.’, YCS 27 (1982) 208 ffGoogle Scholar. For further details of the use made of Columella by later writers, see Adams, J.N., ‘Pelagonius, Eumelus and a lost Latin veterinary writer’, Centre Jean Paleme, Mémoires 5 (Saint-Étienne, 1984) 29 with notesGoogle Scholar.

16 A convenient list can be found in Fischer's edition, p. 145. Pelagonius’ quotations of Columella have been succinctly discussed by Hoppe, K., ‘Pelagoniusstudien’, Veterinärhistorisches Jahrbuch 4 (1928) 22–28Google Scholar.

17 This imitation has been briefly noted by Fischer: ‘Pelagonius on horse medicine’, Papers of the Liverpool Latin Seminar Third Volume, ed. Cairns, F. [ARCA Classical and Medieval Texts, Papers and Monographs, 7] (Liverpool 1981)289Google Scholar.

18 The identification of the parts of Pelagonius (some of them not found in R) contained in this codex is due to Corsetti, P.-P.: ‘Un nouveau témoin de l' Ars Veterinaria de Pelagonius’, Revue de l'Histoire des Textes 19 (1989) 31–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a list of the contents of E, see Corsetti, 42.

19 See in particular Fischer, , ‘Pelagonius on horse medicine’ (above, n. 17) 290 ffGoogle Scholar.

20 This is a complicated issue which I intend to deal with separately.

21 See Fischer, op. cit. 291.

22 See Adams, , ‘Filocalus as an epithet of horse owners in Pelagonius: its origin and meaning’, CP 85 (1990) 305–310Google Scholar.

23 This expression has been discussed briefly by Fischer, op.cit (above, n. 17) 289 with n.23.

24 Fischer (loc. cit., with n.25) does not allow for this possibility.

25 Fischer, (‘Das Auftreten von -que in Pferdebuch des Pelagonius und seine Bedeutung für die Quellenkritik’, Philologus 125 [1981] 155 ff.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar has argued that Pelagonius used an existing translation, but his case is not convincing: see my article ‘Pelagonius, Eumelus and a lost Latin veterinary writer’ (above, n.15), 11.1 intend to return to this topic elsewhere.

26 On the history of naturalia, see Adams, . The Latin Sexual Vocabulary (London 1982) 60 fGoogle Scholar. The Mitlomedicina has loca naturalia once, at 748.

27 Adams, op. cit. 52 f.

28 Note Mul. Chir. 146 ‘febricitantis et periclitantis morituri signa haec erunt’.

29 The last two of these addresses cannot be in the form in which Pelagonius originally wrote them.

30 This is a topic which I intend to deal with elsewhere.

31 In addition at 234 E has the expression fimo bubulo where R has stercore bubulo. In view of the consistent preference elsewhere for stercus (as displayed not only in R but also in E itself), I assume that Pelagonius wrote stercore and that a scribe here substituted a synonym.

32 This is not the place to digress on passages which seem to have been inserted in the text by a later redactor. A substantial section towards the end of the extant work seems to be of non-Pelagonian origin. I intend to discuss this question elsewhere.

33 See TLL s.v.fimwn; also s.v. eximo. V.2.1498.53 f.

34 Note that Palladius, who quotes the same passage of Columella (14.18.7-9). preserves no trace of Pelagonius’ additional sentence.

35 See further TLL V.2.1821.20 ffGoogle Scholar, citing also Cod. Theod. 13.5.38.prGoogle Scholar.

36 As is noted by editors.

37 The simplex luctor, as used occasionally of animals in various senses, seems to have been mainly poetic (see the few examples assembled at TLL VII.2.1731.35 ff, 1732.71 ffGoogle Scholar: e.g. Ovid, Her. 4.79Google Scholar ‘siue ferocis equi luctantia colla recuruas’).

38 At this point E has: ‘in piscina eum demitte ut natet’. The parallelism with Columella requires that demitto should be in the infinitive, and it is therefore clear that E is corrupt.

39 See Adams, ‘Pelagonius, Eumelus and a lost Latin veterinary writer’ (above. n.15)7ff.

40 On this lost source, see Adams, op. cit.

41 Adams, op. cit. 23 f., 29.

42 See TLL 1.648.44 ffGoogle Scholar.

43 Note, for example, 279.2 R ‘eoque additur exiguum picis liquidae’. E ‘eoque addatur exiguum picis liquide’, Col. 6.17.5 ‘eique adicitur exiguum picis liquidae’. At least one of the two manuscripts of Pelagonius has a corrupt verb form, but there is no saying which.

44 See Musurillo, H. (ed.). The Acts of the Christian Martyrs (Oxford 1972), text no. 19, 260 ffGoogle Scholar.

45 Where two alternative verb-forms had the same pronunciation in late antiquity, as was the case with the second person singular, present and future indicative (e.g. dilĭas/diluēs: see R and E respectively at 214). a scribe might obviously write either form with complete indifference. There are many places where R has one form and E the other. An editor cannot conceivably know what ‘Pelagonius’ wrote in any given case: he Can only state a principle of selection and follow it consistently.

46 It does not of course follow that in any individual case an editor can have any idea of what Pelagonius himself wrote.

47 See Löfstedt, E., Syntactica, Studien und Beiträge zur historischen Syntax des Lateins 2 (Lund 1956) 71Google Scholar; Väänänen, V., Introduction au latin vulgaire3 (Paris 1981) 129Google Scholar.

48 Such passives do not seem to occur in the Hippocratic corpus, but they are not uncommon in the recipes quoted by Galen from medical works of the period from the first century B.C. to the first century A.D. (on which quotations in general see Fabricius, C., Galens Exzerpte aus älteren Pharmakologen [Berlin 1972])CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Note, e.g. Heracleides of Tarentum (c. 75 B.C.) ap. Galen XIII, p. 717 (but the active imperative was the norm in Heracleides: e.g. p. 718 ; Heras (c. 20 B.C. - A.D. 20) ар. Galen XIII, p. 511 (contrast in another recipe of Heras at XIII, p. 432; with , cf. leuigantur at Col. 6.6.4, with cf. e.g. miscetur at Cels. 5.18.19, and with cf. e.g. coquitur at Cels. 5.19.23); Heras ap. Galen XIII, p. 549 (contrast the imperatives which Heras uses instead, ap. Galen XIII, pp. 914 f. ; Andromachus (first century A.D.) ap. Galen XIII, pp. 29-30 (p. 30) . It is not clear whether this usage originated in Greek, Latin, or both languages at roughly the same time.

49 Cf. e.g. 2.2.16. 2.2.18.2.2.19, 2.4.8. 2.11.7. 3.9.20, 3.10.5. 3.16.28.

50 See Adams, , ‘Pelagonius, Eumelus and a lost Latin veterinary writer’ (above, n.15)8ffGoogle Scholar.

51 See Svennung, J., ‘De auctoribus Palladii’, Eranos 25 (1927) 234 fGoogle Scholar.

52 See Adams, , CR 32 (1982) 182Google Scholar.

53 See Mras, K., ‘Anthimus und andere lateinische Ärzte im Lichte der Sprachforschung’, WS 61-2 (1943–1947) 115Google Scholar, quoting our passage; also Recueil Max Niedermann (Neuchâtel 1954) 154Google Scholar.

54 Cited by Hofmann-Szantyr, 593.

55 On Pelagonius’ use of -que, see Fischer, article cited above n.25; Adams, . ‘Pelagonius, Eumelus and a lost Latin veterinary writer’ (above, n. 15) 11Google Scholar.

56 Adams, loc. cit.

57 This may not be a change made by Pelagonius himself to the text of Columella, because it comes in a passage common to Pelagonius and Eumelus and therefore derived from the lost Latin veterinary writer, who must himself have used Columella as a source: see Adams. “Pelagonius. Eumelus and a lost Latin veterinary writer’ (above, n.15), 23. However it was not necessarily the lost writer who converted remedio into remedia.

58 Hofmann-Szantyr. 100.

59 Ibid.

60 See Hofmann-Szantyr, 168 f., with bibliography; also Adams, , The Vulgar Latin of the Letters of Claudius Terentianus (P. Mich. VIII, 467-72) (Manchester 1977) 58Google Scholar.

61 Adams, loc. cit. Note too Rustius Barbarus (ostraka from Wâdi Fawâkhir), CPL 304.17Google Scholar; also Wölfflin, E., Ausgewählte Schriften (Leipzig 1933) 175Google Scholar.

62 See the small number of examples collected at TLL VII. 1.855.18 ff.Google Scholar, some of them manifestly describing abnormal and careful types of movement: e.g. Plin, . Nat. 8.5Google Scholar ‘et per funes incessere (elephanti)’ (of elephants walking a tightrope), Nat. 8.78Google Scholar ‘(basiliscus) celsus et erectus in medio incedens’ (of a snake proceeding erect).

63 Note that boum is replaced by pecoris. Pelagonius was not concerned with oxen, but some of the material taken over from Columella deals with oxen in the original.

64 See the collection in the conspectus testimoniorwn found in Fischer's edition, p. 145.

65 Wölfflin, , Ausgewählte Schriften (above, n.61), 200 fGoogle Scholar. has shown that aeger. which had once been common in medical texts of the patient (Celsus. Scribonius Largus). fell out of use in later medical works. It must have had a recherché flavour by the time of Pelagonius.

66 Vegetius seems from his youth to have been interested in horse breeding: see 1.prol.6 ‘cum ab initio aetatis alendorum equorum studio flagrarem’.

67 For the medical use of inspicio, = ‘examine’, see TLL VII.1.1952.75 ffGoogle Scholar: e.g. Cels. 3.4.8 ‘ut aegri uires subinde adsidens medicus inspiciat’. In a veterinary context, note Col. 6.12.1 ‘sanguis demissus in pedes claudicationem adfert, quae cum accidit, statim ungulam inspicito’.

68 A summary of the tradition can be found in Reynolds, L.D. (ed.), Texts and Transmission, a Survey of the Latin Classics (Oxford 1983) 146 f.Google Scholar (M.D. Reeve).

69 Cf. 279.1 inlinis = Col. 6.17.5 linitur, 4 stimatati = Col. 6.30.3 extimulata, 30.1 fricetur = Col. 6.30.1 defricanda, 162 mixtum = Col. 6.30.4 immixtum, 30.4 uitamus = Col. 6.30.2 euitabimus. Cf. Hoppe, op. cit. (above, n.16) 23.