Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T03:21:21.850Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Methods of the Greek Physiognomists

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2009

Extract

Physiognomy (φυσιογνωμονία), the systematic diagnosis of a man's character from his bodily features, originated as a branch of Greek medicine. True, it had antecedents in Babylonia, but the Babylonian science was more concerned with the prediction of the vicissitudes of a man's life than with deciphering his mental and moral qualities, and even deliverances dealing with such qualities were couched in the omen form. Prophetic physiognomists or metoposcopi held their ground throughout classical antiquity, but it was recognized that there were two classes of physiognomist, the seers and the physicians. The medical science of physiognomy was an attempt to extend the idea of treating a man's visible conditions as signs or symptoms of his invisible state, and to produce a list of signs such that the mind's construction could be inferred when it was not transparent. According to Galen this science was invented by Hippocrates himself, which is likely enough, for physiognomical observations occur in probably authentic Hippo-cratic treatises, and there seem to be none in earlier Greek authors. It was introduced into Athens about the time of Socrates, for the philosopher Antisthenes devoted a treatise to it, and there was a story of a visiting expert's diagnosing Socrates as stupid and fond of women.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1958

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

page 52 note 1 Gadd, C. J., Ideas of Divine Rule in the Ancient East (London, 1948), 80.Google Scholar

page 52 note 2 Clem. Alex. Strom, i. 21. 135.Google Scholar

page 52 note 3 Anim, mar. corp. temp. 7.Google Scholar

page 52 note 4 Diog. Laert. vi. 16.

page 52 note 5 Cic. De Fato v. 10Google Scholar, Tuse. iv. 37.Google Scholar

page 53 note 1 Rose, Valentin, Anecdota (Berlin, 18641870), i. 72 ff.Google Scholar

page 53 note 2 Foerster, R., Rhein. Mus. xliii (1888), 505–11.Google Scholar

page 53 note 3 Schol. Iliad, xxiii. 65.Google Scholar

page 53 note 4 The technical term for ‘general appearance’ is έΠιΠρέΠεια, which has been a stumbling-block to translators and to Liddell & Scott, but Apuleius speaks expressly of omnis aspectus qui ex omni circumstantia et qualitate carporis accurrit, quern Groen έΠιΠρέΠειαν dicunt (45; cf. Adamantius B I).

page 55 note 1 Arist. Physiogn. 4Google Scholar, An. Pr. ii. 27.Google Scholar

page 56 note 1 Aul. Gell. N.A. i. 9Google Scholar; Porph. Vita Pyth. 13Google Scholar