Philale ̄the ̄s’ doxographical work, at least for the doctrines of A P,
but he knows also discussions for and against single doctrines of H and E-
. The author freely selects and criticizes his sources; in the section of definitions he
sides with the Peripatetics against the Stoics, he corrects “Aristotle” on H’
theory of diseases, and emphasizes his account of P’s pathology much more than
the doxographical source. By his choice of the Aristotelian doxography addressing the
“ancients” (nothing is said about any Hellenistic theory of diseases), he seems to locate
himself purposely in a Platonic-Peripatetic tradition; as for the physiological discussion
he favors the He ̄rophilean tradition, against the “mechanistic” doctrines of Erasistratos
and Askle ̄piade ̄s.
Ed.: H. Diels, Anonymi Londinensis ex Aristotelicis Iatricis Menoniis et aliis medicis eclogae = CAG S.3.1 (1893);
W.H.S. Jones, The medical writing of Anonymus Londinensis (1947).
Daniela Manetti, “Autografi e incompiuti. Il caso dell’Anonimus Londinensis, Pap. Lit. Lond. 165,”
ZPE 100 (1994) 47–58; Daniela Manetti, “Aristotle and the role of doxography in the Anonymus
Londiniensis (P.Br.Libr. inv. 137),” in van der Eijk (1999) 95–141; BNP 1 (2002) 712–713, V. Nutton;
AML 52 – 53, H. Flashar.
Daniela Manetti
L ⇒ C L
Louka ̄s, pseudo (Alch.) (300 – 700 CE)
Listed among philosophers “of the science and sacred art,” at the beginning of MS Marcianus
gr. 299 (f.7V).
(*)
Cristina Viano
Louka ̄s, pseudo (Med.) (350 – 550 CE)
Byzantine MSS contain some brief texts supposedly by Saint Luke: an alation (salt; ed. Ideler
1 [1841/1963] 297); an Epistle on the Taxis of the Human Body (ed. Rose in Theod. Prisc., p. 463);
and unpublished remedia. These texts, none of which is authentic, are typical of the early-
Byzantine period. The alation, resembling a theriac, is compounded from 15 substances
(mainly vegetal) and supposedly treated a wide range of ailments. However, it is more a
miraculous treatment in curing the ailments of the elderly. A similar alation (ed. Ideler 2
[1842/1963] 297–298) is attributed to a Gregory identified only as a Saint and a Theologian
(G N?). The Epistle, extant only in Latin ( perhaps its original language),
resembles the writings on Christian anthropology by such authors as B C,
G N, and N; cf. also -L and M. The
Latin text might result from an adaptation in the West of Byzantine texts (e.g., the late 8th c.
medical volume of the German Abbey of Lorsch known as the Lorsch Arzneibuch) including a
Christian anthropology, a history of Greek medicine and other short texts summarizing
Greek written data. The works supposedly by Louka ̄s and other Byzantine writings witness
the reformulation of medicine occurring in the east in the early Christian centuries until
Justinian’s reign, aimed at absorbing ancient medical art and changing its inspiration in a
way that is best illustrated by the saints Kosma ̄s and Damianos (Latin texts, translations and
adaptations or original works, reflect the same process, although dating to the 8th c.).
LOUKA ̄S, PSEUDO (MED.)