Home Classical, Ancient Near Eastern & Egyptian Studies Medicine and the paradox in the Hippocratic Corpus and Beyond
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Medicine and the paradox in the Hippocratic Corpus and Beyond

  • George Kazantzidis
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to address the almost complete absence of human oddities in early paradoxography and to trace the developments which gradually transform the human body, in later collections, into a source of paradox and wonder. In my investigation, Hippocratic medicine occupies a central position. I argue that the main reason why paradoxography, in its early stages, excludes the human subject from its material has to do with the fact that in previous medical texts human nature has been studied thoroughly and systematically, so much so that it leaves, as it were, little room for imagination and paradoxographical exploitation. This strict line between medicine and the paradox collapses in later collections from the Roman imperial period. Phlegon of Tralles not only includes stories of humans in his marvellous accounts, but he seems to be drawing some of his material from medicine in order to describe anatomical oddities, deformities, monstrous births, sex changes and so on, which to him qualify perfectly as paradoxographical material. My aim in this section is to illustrate how for the first time medicine and paradox converge in the Hippocratic Corpus with almost exclusive reference to the female body, and how essentially Phlegon’s emphasis on women’s bodies can be situated in this tradition. While excluding the idea of paradox from its epistemological spectrum, early Greek medicine leaves the door open for it when it comes to women, and this selective treatment helps to put into perspective the dominant presence of female oddities in later paradoxography.

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to address the almost complete absence of human oddities in early paradoxography and to trace the developments which gradually transform the human body, in later collections, into a source of paradox and wonder. In my investigation, Hippocratic medicine occupies a central position. I argue that the main reason why paradoxography, in its early stages, excludes the human subject from its material has to do with the fact that in previous medical texts human nature has been studied thoroughly and systematically, so much so that it leaves, as it were, little room for imagination and paradoxographical exploitation. This strict line between medicine and the paradox collapses in later collections from the Roman imperial period. Phlegon of Tralles not only includes stories of humans in his marvellous accounts, but he seems to be drawing some of his material from medicine in order to describe anatomical oddities, deformities, monstrous births, sex changes and so on, which to him qualify perfectly as paradoxographical material. My aim in this section is to illustrate how for the first time medicine and paradox converge in the Hippocratic Corpus with almost exclusive reference to the female body, and how essentially Phlegon’s emphasis on women’s bodies can be situated in this tradition. While excluding the idea of paradox from its epistemological spectrum, early Greek medicine leaves the door open for it when it comes to women, and this selective treatment helps to put into perspective the dominant presence of female oddities in later paradoxography.

Downloaded on 24.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110563559-005/html?lang=en
Scroll to top button