HISTORY OF PHARMACY. 
51 
that already at this epoch they believed in the efficacy of 
certain foreign superstitious remedies in epilepsy, as Sera- 
pio recommended in this case, in addition to castoreum,' 
the employment of which still continues, the brain and gall 
of the camel, the rennet of the seal, the excrements of the 
crocodile, the heart and kidneys of the hare, turtle's blood, 
and ram's testicles, or those of the bear, cock, or wildboar. 
It is to Ccelius Aurelianus we owe these details. 
Apollonius, of Antioch, wrote a treatise upon the prepa- 
ration of ointments, and another upon the composition of 
extemporaneous medicines. 
Heraclides, of Sarentum, a student of Mantias, greatly 
improved the Materia Medica, and was the author of a 
complete work upon medicines. This book is lost at the 
present day. He likewise interested himself with antidotes. 
Cicuta, opium, and hyosciamus were the bases of these an- 
tidotes, the experiments of which he always made upon 
himself. 
Opium was one of his favorite remedies,* also some of 
the then newly imported Eastern aromatics, such as the 
costus, long pepper, canella, opobalsamum, and assafoetida. 
Cleophanthus, who was the preceptor of Asclepiades, left 
behind him a learned description of medicinal plants. Lo- 
pyrus, who resided at the court of the Ptolemies, prepared 
an antidote to which he gave the name of Ambrosia. 
Galen says that he suggested to Mithridates to make a trial 
of it upon a criminal who should be previously poisoned, 
assuring him that his antidote would destroy the effect of 
* The origin of opium is unknown. If it is true that under the name 
of nepenthes it was intended to designate the juice of poppy, the discovery 
of its calming property would be carried back to a great antiquity. Hip- 
pocrates speaks of the poppy juice, and the poppy itself, as being 
somniferous. Diagoras, who was the slave of Democrites, and con- 
sequently contemporary with Hippocrates, cited opium as a dangerous 
thing in inflammations of the eyes and ears. The empirics repudiated 
this statement and encouraged its use. 
