SECT. XLVII.—ON EPHEMERON, OR MEADOW SAFFRON.
When one swallows ephemeron (which some call colchicum, because it grows in Colchis, or bulbus silvestris), pruritus takes place over the whole body, as if stung by nettle or squill; there is a gnawing pain within, and great heat of the stomach, with considerable heaviness; but when the affection gains strength, blood is discharged from the bowels, mixed with the scrapings thereof. The same remedies are to be applied as to those who have drunk salamander, in vomits and clysters. But before the medicine gain ground we must give a decoction of oak-leaves, or of acorns, or of the rind of pomegranate, or of wild thyme with milk, or the juice of bloodwort, or of vine-tops, or of brambles, or of the medulla of fennel-giant, or of myrtle berries, with wine; and when levigated myrtles themselves are pounded and macerated in water, the liquor thereof may be taken with advantage. And, in like manner, the middle pellicle of the chesnuts, called Sardian, may be taken with the aforesaid juices, and marjoram may be drunk with lye. Those affected are manifestly relieved by drinking hot cow’s milk, and retaining it in the mouth, so that they who have plenty of it do not stand in need of any other remedy.
Commentary. Our author’s detail of the symptoms is taken entirely from Nicander, and his treatment also is mostly derived from the same source. They seem to have depended principally upon vegetable astringents, such as oak-bark, pomegranate-rind, and chesnuts, for checking the hypercatharsis. Pliny, like our author, strongly commends milk (H. N. xxvii, 33.) Dioscorides recommends emetics, clysters, vegetable astringents, and demulcents. Alsaharavius says, that hermodactylus occasions pruritus of the whole body, swelling of the palate, pains of the stomach, and the like. He recommends emetics, clysters, cows’ milk, and vegetable astringents, such as acorns with wine. This, it will be remarked, is similar to the account which the Greeks give of the symptoms and treatment of ephemeron, which is undoubtedly the colchicum autumnale; and this circumstance tends strongly to prove the identity of the ephemeron and the hermodactylus. We agree with Schulze, Prosper Alpinus, and Humelbergius, that they were unquestionably the same plant, notwithstanding that Sprengel, Matthiolus, and Dr. Murray are of a different opinion. Dr. Paris considers that there is no doubt of their identity. (See a learned dissertation on the Ephemeron in a note by Schneider, on Nicander’s Alexipharmics.) We shall only further add, in this place, that the learned Ardoyn, in his elaborate work on Poisons, contends, that there is no doubt of the identity of the colchicum and the hermodactylus. We, in fact, are surprised that this should have been ever questioned.