At Alexipharmaca 472–5, Nicander compares the sea hare to the cuttlefish and describes the latter's defensive mechanism of ink emission before turning to a symptom of sea hare poisoning, a change of skin colour:Footnote 1
[the sea hare also resembles] the cowardly cuttlefish, which blackens the swell with its bile upon learning of the fisherman's crafty attack. A dark green, indeed, runs over the limbs of [those who ingest sea hare], similar to that of jaundice.Footnote 2
Greek medical literature recognizes multiple types of jaundice, usually two.Footnote 3 In addition to the expected range of light colours characterizing one type,Footnote 4 there are also references to a darker form, often related to problems of the spleen.Footnote 5 This second type of jaundice is associated with black bile, for example by GalenFootnote 6 and Aretaeus.Footnote 7 The connection is never expressed explicitly in the extant Hippocratic corpus, but a testimonium for such a passage allows for the possibility that it was known to medical authorities of Nicander's day (Codex Parisinus Supplementum Graecum 636, 33.1.4 Garofalo):Footnote 8
Ἱπποκράτης δὲ δισσὸν οἴεται εἶναι τὸν ἴκτερον, ὅτι καὶ δισσὴν τὴν χολήν, καὶ τὸν μὲν ἐπὶ ἥπατος φλεγμονῇ γίνεσθαι, ὃν καὶ χρυσοειδῆ ὀνομάζει, τὸν δὲ σπληνός, ὅν περ ὠχρομέλανα καὶ ἰοειδῆ κέκληκεν⋅ ἄμφω δὲ κατὰ ἀνάχυσιν τῶν χολῶν σὺν τῷ αἵματί φησι γίνεσθαι.
Since descriptions of the darker form of jaundice are consistent with Nicander's colour––compare especially ζοφόεις χλόος to Aretaeus’ μελάγχλωρος (n. 7)––it is remarkable that ‘black bile’ makes an appearance in lines 472–3. The poet's choice of χολή (dependent on μελαίνω) to describe the ink of the cuttlefish elicits the comment in Eutecnius’ paraphrase that χολὴ μέντοι παρ’ ἐνίων ὁ ἐξ αὐτῶν ὠνόμασται γιγνόμενος θολός (17). The absence of such a use of χολή elsewhereFootnote 9 suggests that those who called ink bile were few, and it is possible that Eutecnius is simply making an inference from Nicander's text. The poet was presumably aware of Aristotle's account of the cuttlefish's ink secretion at Hist. an. 524b,Footnote 10 and his decision to refer to the ink as bile in place of the metrically possible dative form of θολός, the mot juste, may be designed to engineer a connection between the ink of the cuttlefish and the colour change caused by sea hare poisoning.Footnote 11 Knowledgeable readers of Nicander's day could have seen the ‘black bile’ and the dark jaundice in close proximity as a sort of learned joke.Footnote 12 For us, the connection can demonstrate the extent of Nicander's medical knowledge beyond the strict requirements of his material.Footnote 13
The Alexipharmaca is a structurally simple poem: for the most part, the symptoms of each substance or creature are described, followed by suggested remedies. Monotony is avoided by the inclusion of a number of small-scale digressions, similes, and so on. This example demonstrates the care which Nicander has the capacity to take over his deployment of such material: in the preceding lines we have moved from the sea hare to other creatures based on a similarity of appearance, and now the apparent abruptness of the return to the ‘primary’ subject is softened by a different sort of connection.Footnote 14 Another point worth noting is the key role of word choice in the creation of the connection. Readers of Nicander could be forgiven for the occasional feeling that he revels in obscurity for its own sake by the use of words other than the most obvious, but here we can see something a little more sophisticated: the connection requires χολή rather than θολός, and this can explain the poet's choice. In context, of course, χολή, which is occasionally applied to fluids other than bile elsewhere,Footnote 15 is hardly likely to have given many readers interminable difficulties. Certainly, however, the unusual word choice gives us pause, and allows for another layer of appreciation of the lines over and above their straightforward content. There is no denying that, per se, Nicander's peculiar lexicon is an important aspect of his style, but perhaps this passage, in combination with Ther. 62 (see n. 12), should encourage us to give more thought to why particular words are deployed in particular places.Footnote 16