of theories and admission of the differences. This form of the status quaestionis of existing
theories constitutes one of the most scientific aspects (in the modern sense) of Stephanos’
work. Aristotelian, Platonic, and Neo-Platonic doctrines play a fundamental role in his
concept of alchemy. In particular, his concept of the nature and transformation of metals is
one of the most interesting in the alchemical corpus, because it seems to rely both upon the
geometrical theory of Plato’s Timaios and the theory of “exhalations” in the Aristotelian
Meteorologika.
Stephanos’ corpus was well-known to the Arabs. According to the Arabo-Latin work
transmitted in the Morienus (Stavenhagen), one of Stephanos’ students, the monk “Morienus”
(i.e., Marianus), spread alchemy in the Arab world by initiating the Ummayad prince Khalid
ibn Yazid, ca 675 – 700.
Ed.: Ideler 2 (1842/1963) 199–253; repr. with Engl. trans. (praxeis 1 – 3), F.S. Taylor, “The alchemical
works of Stephanus of Alexandria,” Ambix 1 (1937) 116–139, 2 (1938) 39–49.
L. Stavenhagen, ed., A testament of alchemy. Being the revelation of Morienus to Khalid ibn Yazid (1972);
Wolska-Conus (1989); M. Papathanassiou, “Stephanus of Alexandria: pharmaceutical notions and
cosmology in his alchemical work,” Ambix 37 (1990) 121–133; Eadem, “Stephanus of Alexandria: on
the structure and date of his alchemical work,” Medicina nei secoli 8.2 (1996) 247–266; Eadem,
“L’œuvre alchimique de Stéphanos d’Alexandrie: structures et transformations de la matière, unité
et pluralité, l’énigme des philosophes,” in Cristina Viano, ed., L’alchimie et ses racines philosophiques. La
tradition grecque et la tradition arabe (2005) 113–133; NDSB 6.516–518, M. Papathanassiou.
Cristina Viano
Stephanos of Athens (ca 540 – 680 CE?)
Greek Christian physician and professor of medicine, born in Athens, studied in Alexandria
under “Askle ̄pios” (i.e., T?), and later taught there. Three works survive under
his name, given in some MSS as “Stephanos the Philosopher.” These are commentaries
on (1) the Aphorisms of H (CMG 11.1.3.1–2), (2) Hippokrate ̄s’ Prognostics (CMG
11.1.2) and (3) Book 1 of G’s Therapeutics to Glaukon (Dickson 1998). All reflect trad-
itional Alexandrian pedagogy in their division into “lectures” (praxeis) and “discussions”
(theoriai), a format originally developed in the philosophical school of A
A. There also survives a tract on uroscopy (Peri ouro ̄n) and the redaction
(attributed to “S A”) of a commentary by P on the
Hippokratic text De fracturis. Lost works include On pulses. His position is strongly Gale ̄nic.
His familiarity with philosophy, not deep but sounder than most, supports the hypothesis
that he pursued both vocations: not unusual in this era. Although not implausible, the
perennially argued identity between Stephanos of Athens and the philosopher S
A, whose dates and sphere of activity roughly match those of the Athenian,
still awaits satisfactory demonstration (Wolska-Conus; Roueché).
Ed.: J. Duffy, Stephanus the Philosopher. A Commentary on the Prognosticon of Hippocrates (1983) = CMG 11.1–2;
L.G. Westerink, Stephanus of Athens. Commentary on Hippocrates’ Aphorisms 2 vv. (1985/1992) = CMG
11.1.3.1–2; Dickson (1998).
RE 3A.2 (1929) 2404–2405 (#20), F.E. Kind; KP 5.360 (#9), F. Kudlien; DSB 13.37–38, K. Dannenfeldt;
Wolska-Conus (1989); Roueché (1990); ODB 1953, A. Kazhdan; L. Angeletti and B. Cavarra, “The
Peri ouron Treatise of Stephanus of Athens: Byzantine Uroscopy of the 6th–7th Centuries AD,”
American Journal of Nephrology 17 (1997) 228–232; BBKL 10.1406–1409, A. Lumpe; NP 11.960 (#9),
V. Nutton; NDSB 6.516–518, M. Papathanassiou.
Keith Dickson
STEPHANOS OF ATHENS