Ethnopharmacological relevance: The debate on the food-drug continuum could benefit from a historical\ndimension. This study aims at showing this through one case: the food-drug continuum in Greece in the\nfifth- and fourth-century BCE. I suggest that at the time the boundary between food and drug ââ?¬â?? and that\nbetween dietetics and pharmacology ââ?¬â?? was rather blurred.\nMaterials and methods: I study definitions of ââ?¬Ë?foodââ?¬â?¢ and ââ?¬Ë?medicineââ?¬â?¢ in texts from the fifth- and fourthcentury\nBCE: the Hippocratic texts, the botanical treatises of Theophrastus and the pseudo-Aristotelian\nProblems. To illustrate these abstract definitions, I focus on two substances: garlic and silphium.\nResults and discussion: The Hippocratics were writing in a context of increased professionalization and\nmasculinization of medicine, a context in which dietetics became the most prestigious branch of\nmedicine, praised above pharmacology and surgery. While medicine was becoming more specialised,\nprofessionalised and masculine, it avoided becoming too conspicuously so. The Hippocratic authors\nsometimes noted that medical discoveries are serendipitous and can be made by anyone, whether\nmedically trained or not. By doing so, they allowed themselves to integrate common knowledge and\npractice into their writings.\nConclusion: In the context of the professionalization of ancient medicine, the Hippocratic authors started\nto address the difference between food and medicine. They saw, however, some advantage in acknowledging\nthe continuum between food and medicine. Scholars should avoid drawing too strict a boundary\nbetween ancient dietetics and pharmacology and should instead adopt a multi-disciplinary approach to\nthe therapeutics of the Hippocratic texts.
Loading....