On Medical Matters

AD DIOSCORIDEM To Dioscorides

however, more things also occur that had been omitted in the printed text due to carelessness or negligence.

Marcellus Vergilius repeated the same text as it was, but he provided an excellent interpretation and corrections worthy of being read. I, however, use the Cologne edition of 1529 in folio.

In the same year, Janus Cornarius edited Dioscorides at Basel in octavo format, with the Asulanus text mostly repeated, although occasionally corrected. But there is no trace that he used manuscripts.

More commendable is the study of Jacobus Goupylus, who edited our author in Paris in 1549, likewise in octavo format, with the version of Ruellius. Various readings from the Parisian manuscripts are attached.

The last edition, finally, is that of Janus Saracenus, a physician of Lyon, at Frankfurt in 1598, in a larger format. It is altogether excellent, since, as far as was in his power, he contributed to correcting the text, since he himself quite acutely guessed true readings sometimes, and bestowed laudable effort in comparing both the ancient monuments that follow Dioscorides and the early interpreters.

X.

Concerning other aids.

Among the ancients, however, who are excellently employed to emend and here and there restore our text, Pliny is indeed first in age, but he must be compared most circumspectly, since it is certain that Pliny read many things with a listless mind and in excessive haste; he also often used a corrupt text, and often did not understand the authors at all.

Besides Galen, who should be used more safely, Oribasius comes into consideration, who, since he transcribed the materia medica medical material of Dioscorides almost word-for-word in his eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth books, would be greatly useful for restoring the text, were it not that we only have