In the Corpus Medicorum Graecorum edition of Oribasius’ Libri ad Eunapium by J. Raeder, the text of 3.13.4 (= CMG 6.3.406.33–7) reads as follows:

Although witnesses of the direct tradition agree in reading κράμβης,Footnote ² the indirect tradition provides a variant reading which puts μηλέας after κράμβης, as we see in the apparatus. Thus in the parallel text of Oribasius’ Synopsis ad Eustathium (7.1.4 = CMG 6.3.211.17–20), the sentence underlined above reads as follows:

The two versions disagree over the plant which τε ὁ καρπὸς καὶ τὰ φύλλα καὶ ὁ χυλὸς καὶ ὁ φλοιὸς τῆς αὐστηροτέρας καὶ ὀξυτέρας should refer to: according to the Libri ad Eunapium the plant should be cabbage (κράμβης), while the Synopsis ad Eustathium suggests instead the apple tree (μηλέας). The latter reading is correct and finds support in at least two parallel texts. The first can be found in Paulus Aegineta's Epitomae medicae 4.37.1 (= CMG 9.1.358.1–3), in which μηλέας also appears after κράμβης:

The second can now be found in a Syriac pharmacopeia, preserved in three Syriac manuscripts (BNF syr. 423, Ming. syr. 594, BJI 00013) and newly edited by GignouxFootnote ³:

Although the Syriac text is not identical to the Greek original, an affinity can still be recognized.Footnote ⁴ Two main differences deserve attention: 1. the plant that comes after willow is ‘vine’ (), not cabbage; 2. the plant that comes after cabbage/vine is ‘quince and apple trees’ (), not merely apple trees.Footnote ⁵ The differences can be explained if we consider 1. that the reading ‘vine’ probably results from a scribal error which confuses (cabbage) and (vine);Footnote ⁶ and 2. that μηλέα refers to apple trees which includes quince trees, as can be found in Dioscorides’ De materia medica 1.115.1 (= 1.107.5–6 Wellmann): μηλέας πάσης τὰ φύλλα καὶ τὰ ἄνθη καὶ οἱ βλαστοὶ στύφουσι, μάλιστα δὲ τῆς Κυδωνίας ‘The leaves, flowers, and shoots of all apple trees are astringent but especially those of the quince tree’.Footnote ⁷ In the same entry Dioscorides further explains that besides the leaves, flowers, and shoots of apple trees, their fruits are also astringent when unripe (καὶ ὁ καρπὸς ἔνωμος μὲν στυπτικὸς καθέστηκε, πεπανθεὶς δὲ οὐχ ὁμοίως, 1.107.6–7 Wellmann). This confirms that ὁ καρπὸς καὶ τὰ φύλλα καὶ ὁ χυλὸς καὶ ὁ φλοιὸς in our text should indeed be ascribed to μηλέας. Further evidence is found in the entry Περὶ μηλέας in Galen's pharmacological treatise De simplicium medicamentorum temperamentis ac facultatibus (7.12.16 = 12.75.3–76.6 Κ.). In this entry, after an analysis of different fruits including the bitter ones (αὐστηρά), Galen further comments on the medical effect of the leaves, the juice and the bark of the apple trees, and reveals that they could help to join wounds, especially those which are more bitter and sharper (οὕτω δὲ καὶ τὰ φύλλα καὶ οἱ χυλοὶ καὶ οἱ φλοιοὶ τῶν δένδρων ἀλλήλων διαφέρουσιν, ὥστ’ ἔχοις αὐτοῖς μὲν αὐστηροτέροις τε καὶ ὀξυτέροις τραύματά τε κολλᾷν …, 12.75.10–13 Κ.). As for the cabbage, in the entry on κράμβη ἀγρία ‘wild cabbage’ (2.121 = 1.194.12–17 Wellmann) Dioscorides explains the medical effect of its leaves as follows: δύναμιν δὲ ἔχει τὰ φύλλα καταπλασσόμενα κολλητικὴν τραυμάτων καὶ διαφορητικὴν οἰδημάτων καὶ φλεγμονῶν ‘Its leaves, applied as a plaster, have the ability to close wounds and to disperse swellings and inflammations’ (1.194.16–17 Wellmann).Footnote ⁸ This indicates that κράμβης in our text should be read as a genitive related to the earlier φύλλα καταπλασσόμενα, as is the case with the preceding δρυός and ἰτέας.

In short, both the parallel texts in Paulus, the Syriac pharmacopeia, and the medical analysis in Dioscorides and Galen provide good evidence for the reading in Synopsis. The reading in Synopsis should therefore be adopted as that of the original text.