‘At times these ancient facts seem to lie before me like a patient on a hospital bed’—Retrospective Diagnosis and Ancient Medical History

Abstract

Research in ancient medical history, Greek and Roman as well as Mesopotamian and Egyptian, is usually done by philologically trained scholars; the ability to read texts in their original language is fundamental (though not sufficient) for any substantial work. There is, however, in such works the notion that something may be missing in fully understanding medicine of a certain time and culture. Does a medical historian of ancient medicine need, in addition to his philological and historical skills, a medical education? And in what way is a 'medical approach' to ancient medicine useful? Is it possible to stand at the bedside of a Hippocratic patient as a clinician or reconstruct the 'pathocoenosis', as Mirko D. Grmek (+ 2000) coined it, of ancient Greece? The present paper outlines the problem of applying present medical knowledge to ancient sources and touches on the topic of primary perception of disease and illness. An important aspect is that disease entities change in their socio-cultural setting. Examples ranging from the supposed Lupus erythematodes of the Assyrian king Esarhaddon to cases in the Hippocratic Epidemiae and plague descriptions of Greek authors illustrate the problem of retrospective diagnosis.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 26 citations exist upstream.