Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T00:11:18.611Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Galen's de Constitutione Artis Medicae in the Renaissance*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Stefania Fortuna
Stefania Fortuna
Affiliation:
The Wellcome Institute, London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

During the sixteenth century Galen's De constitutione artis medicae (i.224–304 Kühn) enjoyed a great success: in about fifty years it received four different Latin translations and three commentaries. Certainly this is also true of other medical classical texts, but such success is surprising for a treatise which did not have a wide circulation either in the Middle Ages or in the seventeenth century and later. In fact it is preserved in its entirety in only one Greek manuscript (Florence, Laur. plut. 74.3 = L of the twelfth or thirteenth century, with later corrections = L) and in a Latin translation by Niccolò of Reggio, who worked mainly for King Robert I in Naples in the first half of the fourteenth century. Furthermore, in his edition of 1679 René Chartier made a mistake, which the humanistic editors of the Greek Galen had avoided. The last part of the De const, art. med. itself enjoyed a considerable fortuna as an independent tract on prognosis in the Greek and Latin manuscript tradition. The editors of the Aldine and the Basle editions knew such an excerptum, at least in the manuscript Par. gr. 2165 (= P) of the sixteenth century, and rightly decided not to print it. Chartier found it in the manuscript Par. gr. 2269 of the fifteenth or sixteenth century, and published it in the wrong belief that it was a new treatise of Galen's (vol. ii. 170–95 = viii.891–5). He was followed by Carl Gottlob Kühn in his edition of 1821, who printed the De const, art. med. in the first volume (289–304) and the De praesagitura in vol. xix.497–511. The error was not publicly detected until Kalbfleisch in 1896.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 43 , Issue 1 , May 1993 , pp. 302 - 319
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1993

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 On the Renaissance Latin translations of Galen, see Durling, R. J., ‘A Chronological Census of Renaissance Editions and Translations of Galen’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 24 (1961), 230–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Only few of them have received a critical examination: Thomas Linacre's translations by R. J. Durling, ‘Linacre and Medical Humanism’, inMadisson, F., Pelling, M. and Webster, C. (eds.), Linacre Studies, Essays on the Life and Work of Thomas Linacre, c. 1460–1524 (Oxford, 1977), pp. 76–106Google Scholar, and those of the treatise on prognosis byNutton, V., Galen, On Prognosis, CMG v.8.1 (Berlin, 1979), pp. 41–2Google Scholar. A reliable catalogue of commentaries on Galen is not available; there is only that of J. Ch. G. Ackermann, ‘Historia literaria Claudii Galeni’, in C. G. Kühn, Claudii Galeni opera omnia, vol. i (Leipzig, 1821, repr. Hildesheim, 1964), pp. lxvii-clxxxvi. Leonhart Fuchs' commentaries on Galen were philologically studied byDurling, R. J., ‘Leonhart Fuchs and his Cbmmentaries on Galen’, Medizinhistorisches Journal 24 (1989), 42–7Google ScholarPubMed. On the history of Galen's text in the Renaissance and the philological activities of some medical humanists, seeNutton, V., John Cains and the Manuscripts of Galen (the Cambridge Philological Society, Supplementary volume no. 13, 1987)Google Scholar. On Galen's influence on Renaissance medicine, seeWear, A., ‘Galen in the Renaissance’, in Nutton, V. (ed.), Galen: Problems and Prospects (the Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine, 1981), pp. 226–62Google Scholar.

2 Kalbfleisch, K., ‘Zu Galenos’, Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift 16 (1896), 59–60Google Scholar. There are ten Greek manuscripts of the excerptum on prognosis, from the twelfth to the Sixteenth century, and four or five of them (Rome, Vat. gr. 1063 = B, 12th or 13th cent.; Vat. gr. 283 = V, 13th cent.; Leiden, Voss. gr. Q 45 = Q, 15th cent.; and Venice, Marc. Ven. app. cl. v, 5 = M, 15th or 16th cent.; and in some passages, Paris, Par. gr. 2332 = N, 15th cent., which contains some short excerpta of the part on prognosis), are useful for reconstructing their common source (z), which is independent of L. On the tradition of the De const, art. med., seeFortuna, S., ‘La tradizione del De constitutione artis medicae di Galeno’, Bollettino dei classici, s. 3, 11 (1990) 48–77Google Scholar. In that paper I do not consider manuscripts of Niccolò's Latin translation, but recently Vivian Nutton has pointed out to me that it is preserved in a manuscript of the Bibliothèque de 1'Académie de Médecine, Par. Acad. 53, 15th cent, (seeBoinet, A., Catalogue des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque de l'Académie de Médecine (Paris, 1908), pp. 21–2)Google Scholar, which is a twin of that of Dresden, Db 92, seriously damaged in the second world war; seeNutton, V., ‘A Forgotten Manuscript of Galenus Latinus’, in Treu, K. (ed.), Studia Codicologica (Berlin, 1977), pp. 330–40Google Scholar.

3 With regard to Niccolò's translation of the De const, art. med., Surianus' edition and the Giuntine of 1522 are not mentioned by Durling, ‘A Chronological Census’, 284. On the existence of Bernardus Benalius' edition, seeMackinney, L. C., “The Third Printing of Galen's Opera Omnia’, Isis 41 (1950), 199–201Google Scholar, quoted by Durling, ‘A Chronological Census’, 279. On the other Latin editions of Galen, seeNutton, , John Caius, pp. 21–2Google Scholar.

4 On the philological preparation of the Aldine and its importance in the history of Galen's text, seeNutton, , John Caius, pp. 38–42Google Scholar.

5 The date is not given in the edition, and the precise year is uncertain; see Fortuna, op. cit. (n. 2), 73.

6 On Guinther's life, seeBietenholz, P. G. and Th. Deutscher, B., Contemporaries of Erasmus, vol. ii (Toronto–Buffalo–London, 1986), pp. 152–4Google Scholar; on his first period until 1527, seeBroemer, F., ‘Zur Biographie Johann Winters aus Andernach (1505–1574) bis zum Jahre 1527’, Landeskundliche Vierteljahres-Blätter 31 (1985), 137–45Google Scholar; on Guinther's stay in Strasbourg and his treatise on the plague, seeWust, S., ‘Le Docteur Jean Guinther d'Andernach, médecin strasbourgeois de la Renaissance et la peste’, Histoire des sciences médicales 21 (1987), 43–4Google Scholar. On Guinther's anatomy and his relations with Vesalius, who was his student, seeO'Malley, C. D., Andreas Vesalius of Brussels (1514–1564) (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1964), pp. 54–61Google Scholar; on his compromise with Paracelsus’ new medicine, seeDebus, A. G., ‘Guintherius, Libarius, and Sennert: The Chemical Compromise in Early Modern Medicine’, in Debus, A. G. (ed.), Science, Medicine and Society in the Renaissance, Essays to Honour Walter Pagel (New York, 1972), pp. 151–4Google Scholar; The French Paracelsismus: The Chemical Challenge to Medical and Scientific Tradition in Early Modern France (Cambridge–New York–Port Chester–Melbourne–Sydney, 1991), pp. 1–5, 19–21Google Scholar; and also Weimann, K. H., ‘Der Renaissance-Arzt Johann Winther von Andernach. Seine Beziehungen zum oberrheinischen Paracelsismus und zum Paracelsus–Lexikon des Michael Toxites’, Würzburger medizinhistorische Mitteilungen 7 (1989), 215–32Google Scholar.

7 On the relationship of the Renaissance translators with the medieval ones and on their unjust contempt for previous versions, see Durling, ‘A Chronological Census’, 231–45; ‘Linacre’, pp. 76–106.

8 On Josephus Struthius’ accusation that Guinther did not undertake the task of finding Greek manuscripts, see Durling, ‘A Chronological Census’, 237 n. 37.

9 On the relation of Guinther's translations to Niccolò's and the Aldine, seeNutton, , On Prognosis, pp. 41–2Google Scholar; and on their negligible philological value, seeNutton, , John Caius, pp. 43, 50–1Google Scholar.

10 On Chartier's Greek based on Latin translations, see Fortuna, op. cit. (n. 2), 75–6.

11 See Durling, ‘A Chronological Census’, 284.

12 On the Basle edition and its philological importance, seeNutton, , John Caius, pp. 43–4Google Scholar.

13 Basle edition, vol. ii, a 2r; seeNutton, , John Caius, p. 44Google Scholar.

14 See Fortuna, , op. cit. (n. 2), 53–4, 59–60, 73–4Google Scholar.

15 On the Giuntine of 1541–2, seeNutton, , John Caius, p. 50Google Scholar; and O'Malley, , op. cit. (n. 6), pp. 101–2Google Scholar; on the edition of Ricci and Trincavelli, seeNutton, , John Caius, pp. 50–1Google Scholar; and Durling, ‘Linacre’, p. 105.

16 On Vettore Trincavelli's life, see Nutton, , John Caius, p. 68 n. 28Google Scholar; and Siraisi, N. G., Avicenna in the Renaissance Italy (Princeton, 1987), p. 93 n. 55Google Scholar, with the bibliography quoted.

17 Gadaldino's preface was not reprinted in the subsequent Giuntines, and I have read it in the copy of the library of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge. On Gadaldino's preface, see O'Malley, , op. cit. (n. 6), pp. 102–4Google Scholar, where there is an English translation of a part of it.

18 See correctlyBruniati, G., Dizionarietto degli uomini illustri delta Riviera di Salò (Milano, 1837), p. 136Google Scholar, and Peroni, V., Biblioteca Bresciana, vol. iii (Brescia, 1823), p. 224Google Scholar, both quoted byFerrari, L., Onomastikon. Repertorio biobibliografico degli scrittori italiani dal 1501 al 1850 (Milano, 1947), p. 629Google Scholar. Probably relying on the Giuntine, Durling, ‘A Chronological Census’, 298, writes: ‘Bartholomeus Silvanius of Salo’. InCosenza, M. E., Biographical and Bibliographical Dictionary of the Italian Humanists and of the World of Classical Scholarship in Italy, 1300–1800 (Boston, 1962), vol. iv, p. 3356Google Scholar, and vol. v (Synopsis and Bibliography), p. 442, which depends on Kestner, C. W., Medicinisches Gelehrten-Lexicon (Jena, 1740Google Scholar, repr. Hildesheim and New York, 1971), p. 825, Salona is indicated as Bartolomeo Silvani's town, on the basis of the most frequent meaning of the adjective Salonensis; seePerin, J., Onomastikon totius latinitatis (Patavii, 1920), ii. 584Google Scholar.

19 Ammonii Hermae in Praedicamenta Aristotelis Commentarii, per Bartholomeum Sylvanium Salonensem nuper latine conversi (Venice, 1541Google Scholar, repr. Paris, 1542, with Gastonus Sala's revision). On Ludovico Madruzzo's life, see Enciclopedia Italiana, vol. xxi (Rome, 1951), pp. 854–5Google Scholar; and New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. ix (the Catholic University of America, Washington, 1981 2), pp. 54–5Google Scholar, in which there is a misprint: Ludovico Madruzzo became bishop of Trento in 1539, not 1529; see van Gunk, G. and Eubel, C., Hierarchia Catholica Medii Aevi, vol. iii (sumptibus et typis Librariae Regensbergianae, 1910), p. 339Google Scholar. On the cardinal's role in the council of Trento, seeAlberigo, G., I vescovi italiani al concilio di Trento (1545–1547) (Florence, 1959)Google Scholar. On his contacts with literary and scientific circles, seeCorradini, S., Le satire di Giovanni Agostino Cazza, Tesi di laurea (Università di Trento, 1990–1991)Google Scholar. I have received this bibliographical reference from Marcello Bonagga of the Istituto Storico Italo-Germanico in Trento.

20 See Melot, A., Catalogus codicum manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Regiae, pars III, vol. iv (Paris, 1744), p. 315Google Scholar. In Diels, H., ‘Die Handschriften der antiken Ärzte, Griechische Abteilung I’, Abhandlungen der königl. – preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.–hist. Klasse 3 (1905Google Scholar, repr. Leipzig, 1970), 60, there is a misprint: the manuscript is Par. lat. 7120, not 7023.

21 See Balteau, J., Barroux, M. and Prevost, M., Dictionnaire de biographie française, i (Paris, 1933), p. 1056Google Scholar.

22 See Durling, , ‘A Chronological Census’, 289Google Scholar; and Fortuna, , op. cit. (n. 2), 67Google Scholar.

23 See, for example, the following note present in the index of Galen's Latin edition, published by Froben in Basle in 1542: ‘libellus De praesagitura finis est libri De constitutione artis medicae’.

24 On Giorgio Valla and his significance in the history of Galen's text, seeNutton, , John Caius, pp. 25, 33 nn. 41–4Google Scholar.

25 Nutton, , John Caius, especially pp. 5–11, 51–76Google Scholar.

26 See Nutton, V., “The Galenic Codices of Theodore Goulston’, Revue d'histoire des textes 22 (1992), 259–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar; also ‘Harvey, Goulston and Galen’, Koroth 8 (1985), 112–22Google Scholar; and John Caius, pp. 52–4, 61–3, 96–7.

27 See Nutton, , ‘The Galenic Codices', 259Google Scholar; also John Caius, p. 75 n. 81.

28 See Nutton, , John Caius, pp. 13, 55, 70 n. 35Google Scholar.

29 See Nutton, , John Caius, pp. 106–9Google Scholar.

30 Nutton, , “The Galenic Codices', 263–5Google Scholar. On codex Adelphi as a printed edition with marginalia and on Adelphus’ identification, see Barigazzi, A., Galeno, Sullottima maniera d'insegnare, Esortazione alla medicina, CMG v, 1, 1 (Berlin, 1991), pp. 30–7, 73–85Google Scholar, where Adelphus is identified with Johannes Muhling of Strasbourg (fl. 1500–23); see also D. Béguin, ‘L'Edition Goulston et les pretendus manuscrits perdus de Galien’,Revue d'histoire des textes 19 (1989), 341–9Google Scholar; a discussion is inNutton, , John Caius, pp. 60–4Google Scholar.

31 Barigazzi, , op. cit. (n. 30), p. 83Google Scholar.

32 Nutton, , John Caius, pp. 58–9Google Scholar.

33 See Fortuna, , op. cit. (n. 2), 53–4, 59–60Google Scholar.

34 Nutton, , John Caius, pp. 52–4Google Scholar.

35 See Nutton, , ‘The Galenic Codices’, 259–61Google Scholar; John Caius, p. 54. On Theodore Goulston's edition, Claudii Galeni Pergameni Opuscula varia (London, 1640)Google Scholar, see Appendix..

36 The philologists of last century and later, asMarquardt, I., Scripta minora, vol. i (Lipsiae, 1884), pp. v–viGoogle Scholar, and De Boer, W., Praefatio in Galeni de atra bile libellum, CMG v, 4, 1, 1 (Berlin, 1937), p. viiGoogle Scholar, thought that the codex Venetus was a manuscript; seeNutton, , John Caius, pp. 52–4, 107Google Scholar, where it is taken to be a manuscript of a private library in Venice. But Béguin, , op. cit. (n. 30), 349Google Scholar, suggests that it is an edition with marginalia.

37 Nutton, , ‘The Galenic Codices', 261Google Scholar.

38 An example of Gadaldino as a corrector of Greek texts is in Vat. gr. 1908, f. 16r, quoted byNutton, , John Caius, p. 66 n. 6Google Scholar; see also Dickson, K. M., ‘Gadaldini's Hand (Ms. Hauniensis Bibl. Univ. e donat. var. fol. 29)’, Mnemosyne 43 (1990), 441–5Google Scholar.

39 On Caius' relation with Vesalius, seeNutton, , John Caius, pp. 54, 66 n. 6Google Scholar.

40 Nutton, , John Caius, p. 6Google Scholar.

41 On Janus Cornarius’ life and activity, see the bibliography quoted byNutton, , On Prognosis, p. 45Google Scholar n. 1. His notes on Galen were published byGruner, G., Coniecturae et emendationes Galenicae (Jena, 1789)Google Scholar, but not entirely accurately.

42 See Nutton, , John Caius, p. 87Google Scholar; and, differently, Barigazzi, , op. cit. (n. 30), pp. 32–3, 35Google Scholar.

43 See Milchsack, G., Die Handschriften der Herzoglichen Bibliothek zu Wolfenbüttel. IV. Die Gudischen Handschriften, Die lateinischen Handschriften (Wolfenbüttel, 1913), p. 81Google Scholar.

44 Nutton, V., ‘Ancient Medicine in East German Libraries’, Newsletter, Society for Ancient Medicine and Pharmacy 19 (1991), 16Google Scholar.

45 I have read the copy in the British Library in London, 541. c. 22.

46 On Christopher Heyll's life and works, see the introduction to the catalogue of his library,Sokól, S. and Pelczarowa, M., Ksiegozbiór Gdańskich Lekarzy Krzysztofa i Henyka Heyllów (Gdańsk, 1963)Google Scholar, with an English summary.

47 Only Prosper Calanus wrote paraphrases on Galen, in the volumeParaphrasis in librum Galeni de inaequali intemperi (Lyons, 1538)Google Scholar, according to the unreliable catalogue by Ackermann, , op. cit. (n. 1), p. lxxviiiGoogle Scholar, where Calanus is wrongly written Alcucanus. John Symons, Curator of the early printed books in the Wellcome Library, has corrected Ackermann's mistake.

48 Th. Zwinger, , In Artem medicinalem Galeni tabulae et commentarii (Basileae, 1561), β 2rGoogle Scholar.

49 The most complete monography on Theodor Zwinger is that of C. Gilly, ‘Zwischen Erfahrung und Speculation. I Teil: Theodor Zwinger und die Krise seiner Zeit’; ‘Il Teil: Zwingers Philosophic’,Basler Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Altertumskunde 77 (1977), 57–137Google Scholar; 79 (1979), 123–223, which renews the studies of Rotondò, A., Pietro Perna e la vita culturale e religiosa di Basilea fra il 1570 e il 1580, in Studi e ricerche di storia ereticale italiana del Cinquecento (Pubblicazioni dell'Istituto di Scienze politiche dell'Universita di Torino, 31, Turin, 1974), pp. 273–391Google Scholar. For a brief and useful survey, see Portmann, M. L., ‘Theodor Zwinger (1533–1588) ein Basler Humanistenarzt’, Praxis 11 (1988), 1110–13Google Scholar.

50 A debatable analysis of Zwinger's introductions to the commentaries is inGilly, , ‘Zwischen Erfahrung und Spekulation, II’, 138–42Google Scholar. On Niccolò Leoniceno's position, seeCarrara, D. Mugnai, ‘Una polemica umanistico-scolastica circa l'interpretazione delle tre dottrine ordinate di Galeno’, Annali dell'Istituto e Museo di Storia della Scienza di Firenze 8 (1983), 31–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar, with a discussion of the interpretation of Edwards, W. F., ‘Niccolò Leoniceno and the Origins of Humanist Discussion of Method’, in Mahoney, E. P. (ed.), Philosophy and Humanism, Renaissance Essays in Honour of Paul Oskar Kristeller (Leiden, 1976), pp. 283–305Google Scholar. On the subsequent debate, see Wear, , op. cit. (n. 1), pp. 238–45Google Scholar.

51 Th. Zwinger, , Viginti duo commentarii tabulis illustrati (Basileae, 1579)Google Scholar; Aristotelis De moribus ad Nicomachum libri decem (Basileae, 1566)Google Scholar; Aristotelis Ethicorum Nicomachiorum libri decem (Basileae, 1582)Google Scholar; Aristotelis Politicorum libri octo (Basileae, 1582)Google Scholar; Theatrum vitae humanae (Basileae, 1565). 52Google Scholar.

52 Zwinger, , In Artem medicinalem, p. a 6vGoogle Scholar.

53 Th. Zwinger, , In Galeni librum De constitution artis medicae tabulae et commentarii (Basileae, 1561), a 4rGoogle Scholar.

54 Zwinger, , In Artem medicinalem, p. α 6vGoogle Scholar.

55 Zwinger, , In Galeni librum De constitutione, α 4rGoogle Scholar.

56 Zwinger, , In Artem medicinalem, p. β 2rGoogle Scholar.

57 See Höltgen, K. J., ‘Synoptische Tabellen in der medizinischen Literatur und die Logik Agricolas und Ramus’, Sudhoff Archiv für Geschichte der Medizin und der Naturwissenschaften 49 (1965), 371–90Google Scholar. For previous medieval examples, see Siraisi, , op. cit. (n. 16), p. 165 n. 108Google Scholar, and the already quoted bibliography therein.

58 Gilly, , ‘Zwischen Erfahrung und Spekulation, II’, 141Google Scholar. For the interpretation of Zwinger's methodological debt to Ramus, Gilly depends on the research of Höltgen, , op. cit. (n. 57), 383–4Google Scholar. See also Portmann, , op. cit. (n. 49), 1110Google Scholar; and A. Segal, J. Masson and A. Pecker, ‘Propos sur le commentaire d'Hippocrate par Theodor Zwinger, médecin humaniste bâlois', in ‘Hippocrate et sa héritage', Colloque franco-héllenique de Lyon (1985, unpublished).

59 There are no reliable catalogues of medical commentaries, and there is no real research on them inBuck, A. and Herdin, O., Der Kommentar in der Renaissance (Boppard, 1975)Google Scholar; see only Buck's introduction, pp. 14–15. The best study on medical commentaries is that of Siraisi, op. cit. (n. 16), part III, chap. 6, who deals with the commentaries on the Canon of Avicenna and gives a very useful general introduction (pp. 175–87).

60 Montanus, G. B., Typus trium librorum artis parvae Galeni (Venice, 1546)Google Scholar, with the information that the table on the corporum affectus was published for the first time in Venice, in 1543.

61 Many references to Giovanni Battista Da Monte and his medical teaching are in Siraisi, op. cit. (n. 16), in particular pp. 98–103, 194. In the sixteenth century, in Padua University, the curriculum of theoretical medicine was organized in the following way: Avicenna's Canon in the first year, Hippocrates' Aphorisms in the second year, and Galen's Articella in the third year; see Bertolaso, B., ’Ricerche d'archivio su alcuni aspetti dell'insegnamento medico presso l'Universita di Padova nel Cinque- e Seicento’, Ada Medicae Historiae Patavina 6 (1959–1960), 22–3Google Scholar.

62 On François Vallériole's life, seeCuvelier, E., ‘A Treatise of the Plague de Thomas Lodge (1603), traduction d'un ouvrage médical francais’, Études Anglaises 21 (1968), 395–6Google Scholar, which is imprecise; andDulieu, L., La Médecine á Montpellier, II. La Renaissance (Avignon, 1979), p. 427Google Scholar. On his commentary, Commentarii in librum Galeni De constitutione artis medicae, heirs of Bevilacqua, N. (Turin, 1576)Google Scholar, repr. A. Rivery (Geneva, 1577), Ch. Pesnot (Lyons, 1577), see Durling, R. J., A Catalogue of Sixteenth Century Printed Books in the National Library of Medicine, (US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland, 1967), p. 582Google Scholar; the catalogue of Ackermann, , op. cit. (n. 1), p. lxxivGoogle Scholar, is wrong.

63 Guinther's translation was printed three times before Vallériole's commentary: the first two editions in 1531, by Simon de Colines in Paris and by Andreas Cratander in Basle, and the third one in 1534 by Simon de Colines. This last edition has some errors in comparison with that of 1531 published by the same printer, for example an omission in 299.4–14: εἰ – ⋯κκενο⋯ν Vallériole's text follows the edition of 1531 by Simon de Colines; see 259.17: κατ⋯λοιπον δ’ ἔοτι. διελθεȋν restat vero percensere Guin. 1531 Vall.: reliquum vero est ut percenseamus Guin. 1534. But I have not seen the edition published by Andreas Cratander in Basle in 1531.

64 The quoted bibliography is not coherent on this point, and I am not able to verify it. Did Vallériole study in Montpellier in 1522, as Cuvelier suggests, or did he have a degree honoris causa after 1572, as Dulieu writes?

65 See Dulieu, , op. cit. (n. 62), p. 139Google Scholar. In this book there are many references to Jean Schyron; on his life, see in particular pp. 349–51, and also, briefly, Kestner, , op. cit. (n. 18), pp. 771–2Google Scholar.

66 See Dulieu, , op. cit. (n. 62), p. 143Google Scholar.

67 See Molinier, A., Catalogue général des manuscrits des Bibliothèques Publiques de France, vol. xxxi (Paris, 1898), pp. 346–7Google Scholar, where it is indicated that the hand is the same as in another manuscript, Andec. 460 (445), which contains notes of lectures of 1577 on Hippocrates' Aphorisms..

68 On Jean Riolan's life and works, seeTabuteau, R., Deux anatomistes français les Riolan (Paris, 1929)Google Scholar; and more syntheticallyBiographie universelle ancienne et moderne (Michaud), vol. xxxv, pp. 45–6Google Scholar.

69 See Béguin, D., ‘L'Édition Goulston et les pretendus manuscrits perdus de Galien’, Revue d'histoire des textes 19 (1989), 341–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Nutton, V., ‘The Galenic Codices of Theodore Goulston’, Revue d'historie des texts 22 (1992), 261–8Google Scholar.

70 See Kaibel, G., Claudii Galeni Protreptici quae supersunt (Berlin, 1894Google Scholar, repr. Berlin, 1963), p. v;Marquardt, I., Scripta minora, vol. i (Lipsiae, 1884), pp. v–viGoogle Scholar; and also De Boer, W., Praefatio in Galeni de atra bile libellum, CMG v, 4, 1, 1 (Berlin, 1937), p. viiGoogle Scholar. On Goulston as editor and translator, not much is inBinns, J. W.,’Latin Translations from Greek in the English Renaissance’, Humanistica Lovaniensia 28 (1978), 154–5Google Scholar.

71 Béguin, op. cit. (n. 69), 349.

72 Barigazzi, A., Galeno, Sull'ottima maniera d'insegnare, Esortazione alla medicina, CMG v, 1, 1 (Berlin, 1991), pp. 30–7Google Scholar.

73 Ibid. p. 35.

74 These two readings are not in the Giuntine of 1556, and hence it is unlikely that they are in the previous editions of 1541 and 1550, which I have not seen.

75 Nutton, V., John Caius and the Manuscripts of Galen (the Cambridge Philological Society, Supplementary volume no. 13, 1987), pp. 52–4, 61–3,96–7Google Scholar; ‘The Galenic Codices’, 259–61; also ‘Harvey, Goulston and Galen’, Koroth 8 (1985), 113–15Google Scholar.