Λέυκη,
Populus alba, the White Poplar; the tree being composed of a watery, tepid, and terrene substance, has detergent properties.
Commentary. There can be no doubt of its being the Populus alba, L. Dioscorides says of it, that its bark, when taken in a draught, cures sciatica and strangury; that it is said to prevent conception; and that it is a remedy for earache and other complaints. (i, 109.) Our author copies from Galen. The Arabians, under this head, are servile copyists from the Greeks. See Serapion (c. 30); Avicenna (ii, 2, 333); and Ebn Baithar (i, 340.)
Λιβανωτὶς,
Rosmarinus, Rosemary; there are three varieties of it, one of which is sterile, and the other two bear fruit. They are possessed of detergent, incisive, discutient, and emollient powers. The juice of them, with honey, cures dimness of sight occasioned by thick humours. A decoction of that variety, which is used for garlands, proves serviceable in jaundice.
Commentary. Dioscorides, like our author, describes three species, of which the first bears a fruit called cachrys, a term previously used by Theophrastus and Nicander, and from which the plant has now got the scientific appellation of Cachrys Libanotis. The root of this plant is still kept by our apothecaries, although it has long ceased to hold a place in our Dispensatory. See Gray’s Suppl. to the Pharmacop. (80.) The second species is probably the Ferula nodiflora. The third cannot be satisfactorily determined. Our old English herbalists give the libanotis the name of “herb frankincense.” (See Parkinson and Gerard.) These libanotides, however, must be distinguished from “the libanotis, called rosmarinus by the Romans,” which was the well-known Rosmarinus officinalis, and of which the flower, known by the name of anthos, was in frequent use as a medicine in the age of Sydenham, and still retains a place in our Dispensatory. We have been obliged to enter with more length than usual into the general literature of this subject, to prevent the mistake of confounding the cachrys with the rosmarinus, which might be readily done, if the distinction now adverted to had not been clearly pointed out. Dioscorides recommends the libanotides for various medicinal purposes, as being emmenagogue, diuretic, and discutient. Our author’s character of them is mostly taken from Galen. The Arabians treat obscurely and confusedly of this subject. See particularly Avicenna (ii, 2, 67); Rhases (Cont. l. ult. i, 71); Serapion (c. 327.) Rhases says of the rosemary, that it is calefacient and attenuant, and hence proves carminative, diuretic, and emmenagogue. In the modern Greek Pharmacopœia the Rosmarinus officinalis stands as the representative of the λιβανωτὶς. (Athens, 1837.)
Λιβανωτὸς,
Thus, Frankincense is heating in the second order, and desiccative in the first. It has also a slight sub-astringency. The bark of it is perceptibly astringent. It is, therefore, desiccative in the second degree complete. Consisting of thicker matter than the frankincense, and being less acrid, it cures hæmoptysis, dysentery, cæliac and stomachic affections, both externally and when taken internally. The green shoot of it is heating and desiccative in the third degree. It is also somewhat detergent, by which property it cleanses and fills ulcers in the eyes.
Commentary. It is still by no means satisfactorily determined what tree it is which produces the frankincense; but the best authorities are now inclined to think that it is the Boswellia turifera. See Pereira (Mat. Med., 1185); Ainslie (Mat. Ind. 78); and Lindley (Veg. Kingd. 459.) Dioscorides says the best kind of incense is “the male,” by which the ancients meant the purest kind of it, or that consisting of the larger grains. See Gray (Pharmacop. 200.) The Indian is of an inferior quality. He calls it heating, astringent, and cleansing; and recommends it in hemorrhages, recent wounds, burns, chilblains, and other diseases of a like nature. He gives minute directions for the use of it in fumigations. The bark of the frankincense tree he recommends in fluxes and hemorrhages, and in ulcers of the eyes. The manna of frankincense will be explained by us under that head. (Mat. Med. i, 81-3.) Oribasius gives a perfectly similar account of the frankincense; indeed, he avowedly copies from Dioscorides. (Med. Collect. xi.) Our author’s account is mostly taken from Galen. On the Thus see further Pliny (H. N. xii, 30) and Rhases (Contin. xxxvii, § 716.) Most of the ancient authorities affirm that it acts beneficially in mental disease, that it sharpens perception, and improves the memory. They also recommend it in fumigations for removing the pestilential constitution of the atmosphere, as we have stated in the [Second Book]. Symeon Seth, mostly borrowing from Galen and our author, says, under the head of frankincense, that it is of a drying nature, with a certain astringent quality; that it binds the bowels; in fumigations helps coughs and defluxions; is emmenagogue both when drunk and applied per vaginam; that in fumigations it is possessed of powers for averting the pestilence; and hence in a pestilential season that houses should be diligently fumigated with it, in order to correct the pernicious quality of the air. The Arabians used it very freely as an ingredient in their applications to ulcers, including those of the eyes. See Avicenna (ii, 2, 525) and Serapion (c. 278.) Averrhoes, like preceding authorities, recommends the bark in fluxes, hæmoptysis, and ulceration of the intestines. (Collig. v. 42.) The frankincense occurs frequently in the treatises contained in the Hippocratic collection, and in the works of Celsus. The latter used all the kinds mentioned by the Greeks, such as, “thus masculum,” “fuligo thuris,” and “cortex thuris.” These he uses for the same purposes as the Greeks, that is to say, for suppressing bleeding, concocting pus, cleansing sores, and so forth.