the end of the section, “pain in the temples... is alleviated with compresses made from
small poppy-heads... and some added saffron and women’s milk.” De ̄mosthene ̄s’ oph-
thalmology remained the most meticulous and successful type of treatment available until
the 14th c., and even in the late 19th and early 20th cc., De ̄mosthene ̄s still gained praise from
medical practitioners (Hirschberg 1919).
Fragments (46): von Staden (1989) 576–578, enumerated but not edited; extensive extracts in Aëtios
7 (CMG 8.2, pp. 250–399); German translation (1–90 only, of 117): J. Hirschberg, Die Augenheilkunde
des Aëtius aus Amida (1899).
M. Wellmann, “Demosthenes’ ΠΕPI ΟΦΘΑΛΜΩΝ,” Hermes 38 (1903) 546–566; J. Hirschberg, “Die
Bruchstücke der Augenheilkunde des Demosthenes,” AGM 11 (1919) 183–188; von Staden (1989)
570 – 578.
John Scarborough
D ⇒ D
De ̄motele ̄s (ca 100 BCE – 20 CE?)
Wrote a geographical or paradoxographical work on Egyptian antiquities, cited by P
36.79, for the pyramids, and 36.84, for the labyrinth.
FGrHist 656.
PTK
Demotic Scientific Texts (650 BCE – 450 CE)
The Demotic stage of Egyptian is the fourth of five stages distinguished in the history of
ancient Egyptian (a language attested from ca 3000 BCE to after 1000 CE) and is written in a
cursive hieroglyphic variant analogous to shorthand. Texts are inscribed typically either on
papyrus or ostraka. Writings date from ca 650 BCE to ca 450 CE, a period in which Greek
became an Egyptian language and a rival linguistic medium used especially in the upper
classes. The Demotic period is divided into Early (Saïte and Persian) Demotic (ca 650 BCE to
ca 300 BCE), Ptolemaic Demotic (ca 300 BCE to ca 30 BCE), and Roman Demotic (ca 30 BCE
to ca 450 CE). The vast majority of Demotic texts remain unpublished.
Scientific Demotic texts are often short, hardly ever completely preserved, and always
anonymous, and neither distinct authors nor the place and time of composition are recog-
nizable. Moreover, due to the Persian conquest (ca 525 BCE) and then Greek conquest and
immigration (332 BCE and after), Babylonian and Greek influence on Egyptian science is
both plausible and rarely verifiable. When hieroglyphic writing was dominant, Egyptian
science never significantly lagged behind any other nation’s science. A certain level of
sophistication is absent from Demotic scientific texts: but a proper historical perspective,
namely the fact that Greek had become Egypt’s preferred linguistic vehicle for scientific
discourse, shows that it would be wrong to expect such a presence.
The most basic expression of knowledge is collecting and listing objects by name (ono-
mastics), and such lists are preserved in Demotic. E.g., P. Cairo CG 31168+31169 (found
at Saqqara and dating to Ptolemaic times) lists place-names and gods, the early Roman
ostrakon Ashmolean Museum D.O. 956 lists southern Egyptian place-names, and P. Carlsberg 230
lists plants. Lists of words suggest that the script was not learned sign by sign but word by
word. Thus, P. Saqqara 27 lists birds in an alphabetical order that begins with H.
DE ̄MOTELE ̄S