DCLP Transcription [xml]
Introduction
Medical treatise. This piece of unknown provenance (11.5 x 17.2 cm) is written on the recto along the fibers (on the verso P.Lond.Lit. 172: fragment of medical astrology). The papyrus preserves the upper parts of two columns of 15 lines each and a wide upper margin of 7 cm. Lines which can be restored with certainty contain 20-27 letters; the probable width of column is 8 cm. The treatise offers one of the rare and detailed ancient descriptions of the tarsus (astragalus, calcaneus, cuneiform bones or cuboid bone) and its articulations. Later discussions about the same topic are Gal. De ossibus 24 (2, 776-7 K), Ps.Gal., Introduct. 12 (14, 724-5 K), Orib. Coll.med. 25.22-25 (CMG 6.2.1, 61-2 Raed.). The unknown author of P.Lond.Lit. 167 is more or less a contemporary of the medical school of Pergamus and his work is largely indebted to the Alexandrian anatomy. The handwriting is a rather large upright compressed uncial without ligatures and assignable to the 1st cent. BC - 1st cent. AD.
[στράγαλος -ca.?- ]πος· τὸ δὲ τῆς
[ -ca.?- ]ν(*) ποσῶς ὑπο
[ -ca.?- ]ι̣(*) καὶ ὐπο̣τετ̣ρά-
5[γωνον -ca.?- ὀ]πίσθιον ἑαυ-
[τ -ca.?- ]ν ἔχει οὔτε στρογ-
[γύλον οὔτε -ca.?- τετρ]άγωνον μέ-
[ρος -ca.?- τ]ῷ σχήματι
[ -ca.?- ]ν εἰλικρινῶς̣
10[ -ca.?- ἔμπ]ροσθεν λ̣ε̣-
[γομ -ca.?- ](*)αὐτῷ ἀστ̣[ρα-]
[γαλ -ca.?- ]κοιλ[ ̣]
[ -ca.?- ]ἐπιτρι-
[ῶν -ca.?- ]λ̣ου ̣ ̣ ν̣
15[ -ca.?- ] ̣ε ̣
ὀστέου ὅπερ ἐστιν τ[έλος πτέρ-]
νης ἥρμοσται χόνδ[ροις]
τῷ κατὰ σύμφυσιν τ̣[ρόπῳ],
5τῶν ἐν αὐτοῖς τοῖς δυ̣[οῖν ὀστέ-]
οις τούτοις ἀνωμαλιῶ[ν καὶ κοι-]
λοτήτων ἐναλλὰξ ἔ̣μ̣[παλιν](*)
παρατιθεμένων· τὸ δ[ὲ πρό-]
σθιον τοῦ ἀστραγάλου μ[έρος σφαι-]
10ρικῷ κεχρημένον ὄγκ[ῳ καθά-]
περ εἶπον ἐναρμοσθὲν ἑ̣[νὶ ὀστέ-]
ῳ τῶν τοῦ ταρσοῦ σκαφώ̣[δει](*)
καλουμένῳ τῷ καθ’ἁρμ̣[ονί-]
αν ὑποπέπτωκεν τρόπ[ῳ· ὁ]
15δὲ ὀπίσθιος τῆς πτέρνης [ὄγκος]
Apparatus
Notes
- Col. i, l. 6.
At the end of the line, the smaller sequence στρογ is probably a later addition of the scribe.
- 7-8.
See col. II, l. 9.
- 13-4.
For ἐπιτρι[ῶν] see Ruf. De oss. 38 (193 D.-R.).
- Coll. ii, l. 1.
[χα]λ̣κοειδοῦς does not fit very well in the context: ancient medical texts normally refer to all three cuneiforms bones and not just to one of them (contra P.Lond.Lit. 167: χαλκοειδοῦς καλουμένου ὀστέου); secondly, no cuneiform bone is jointed with calcaneus. Probably, the scribe has confused χαλκοειδοῦς with κυβοειδοῦς (‘cuboid bone’), which is in fact jointed with it.
- 3.
It is doubtful whether the subject of ἥρμοσται is either the calcaneus or the astragalus.
- 4.
It is hard to assess which kind of articulation is designed by σύμφυσις: a number of different and often unspecified meanings has come to be attached to this term before Galen. The same applies to ἀρμονία (l. 13-14)
- 5.
The two bones could be either astragalus and calcaneus (see Gal. De ossibus 24 [2, 776 K]) or cuboid and calcaneus.