Contesting religious and medical expertise: The therapeutai of Pergamum as religious and medical entrepreneurs

The paper focuses on the θεραπευτα ί of Imperial Pergamum, the religious entrepreneurs who operated within the complex of the healing sanctuary of Asclepius and who are usually seen as an innocuous cultic formation of elite patients. By contrast, this chapter argues that this group was one of the most dynamic, prolific groups of religious and to an extent medical experts. Examining this particular group of religious entrepreneurs has wider implications for both the history of medicine and the history of religion in the Imperial Era. Claims to a direct line of communication with Asclepius were made by both physicians and patients: the physicians craved divine legitimation of their methods, while the elite patients defied the need for expert intermediaries between god and knowledge and reclaimed ownership of their bodies. so. But you have me here as a lis-tener. Then contend with all zeal. Strength will be the God ’ s concern. How do you know whether your dream pertains to more than this? ” And at the same time, he told me a mar-vellous deed of the god, how he commanded some sick man to compete in this way, and by causing him to perspire through the exercise, brought an end to the whole disease. It seemed necessary to do this. (18) And while we were talking and taking counsel, Maximus the Libyan, ⁵ ² entered in the third place, one of the long-standing worshippers, and in a way keen on oratory. It was he who proposed the problem ( κα ὶ λαλο νων , γους . ο ὗ τος προβαλ ώ ν· ). And the problem was as follows, for I remember it, since it was the first I received: “ While Alexander ” , he said, “ is in India, Demosthenes advises that it is time to act ” . I immediately accepted the omen of Demosthenes speaking again and of the subject, which was about empire. And pausing a little, I compet-ed, and my new strength was such as is of the god ’ s devising, and the year seemed not to have passed in silence, but in training. ⁵ ³

Ia mp articularlyi nterestedi nt he group'sd istinct religious practicesa nd behaviours: the ways in which they related to other religious and medical professionals in the temple, how they contested the established monopolies of power (religious, medical and political), and how they dealt with the agonistic tendencies thatevidentlydeveloped within the group. To remain truthful to the principles of Lived AncientReligion (henceforth LAR), our innovative take on the study of religion in the Roman Empire which lays emphasis on the individual and the situational,³ Ilook at this group closelythrough the eyes and the experiences of two individuals who proudlyp roclaimed their alliance to it,n amely Galen, the celebrated physician, and Aristides, the conspicuous patient.
My analysis builds partlyonrecent scholarlyw ork on how elite peer-groups influenced the experience of illness and therapy in the first and second centuries CE, and partlyo nf ruitful applications of social-network theory to the classical world.⁴ These studies have alreadyu nderlined the integralr ole of networks and voluntary associationsi nc reating meaning and self-identity for their members. Thisp aper,h owever,l aysm oree mphasis on the competitiveness of these groups with existing power-structures (political and religious alike), rather than their congruence.
The first section provides ab rief account of the term therapeutes in the works of Aristides and Galen, and of its pivotal role in each author'ss elf-representation and self-identity.The second part discusses the cultic realities behind this religious group as attested by inscriptionsfrom the PergameneAsclepieion. The third and final part of the paper returns to the literary sources and explores how these cultic realitiesa re recast in Aristides' Hieroi Logoi (henceforth HL), and how they form an integralp art of Aristides' self-representation as the leading light of the group.
The hypothesis seems to be further buttressed by yeta nother tête-à-tête scene, this time between the eminent philosopher-emperora nd ac ontemporary man of letters,the renowned Pergamenep hysician and philosopher Galen.¹¹ In the second book of his De libris propriis (2.19 -19 = ScriptaM inora 2, p. 99,9 -11 Mueller), Galen recounts how his patrios theos Asklepios dissuadedhim from ac-ceptingM arcus Aurelius' invitation to join his military campaign against the Marcomanni; and how he vowed to servethe godashis therapeutes after Asclepius had cured him of al ife-threatening abscess:¹² As soon as Ia rrivedi nA quileia, the plaguea ttacked us as never before. Whereupon the emperors hastilyd eparted for Rome together with as mall force of men; but the majority of us barely survivedf or al ong period, sincep eople died not onlyb ecause of the plague but also because it was the middle of winter.S inceL ucius [Verus] had departed from the world of the livingw hilst en route to Rome, Antoninus [i. e. Marcus Aurelius] brought his bodyt herea nd performed the customary deification, and after that busied himself with  Beloved teacher: Aristides seems to have been extremelyfond of his teacher,ifweare to judge from the funeral oration he wroteinhis honour (Or. 33.6 -7K.with Humbel [1994,28-2]). From Lucian (Nigr. 21)w el earn that it was commona tR ome in the middle of the second century for eminent individuals to receive af orm of proskynesis. More on this topic in Jones (1972).  See Bowden (2013) for ac omprehensive account of the sourcest hat seem to attest to proskynesis involvingp rostration.  As Bowden points out,the term mayalso refertothe allegedlyobsequious behaviour of Persians towards figuresofauthority.Cf. Rhodes(1989,adAth. Pol. 14.4): "προσκυνεῖν was an act of homage paid by Persians to their human superiors (e. g. Hdt. 1.134.1)b ut by the Greeks onlyt o the gods; the original meaningofthe Greek word is 'to blow akiss',and this is the essentialpart of the act,but it might on occasions be accompanied by physical abasement".Onproskynēsis as related to the realm of divine timai,see Arrian, Anab. 4.12.3 -4; Plut., Alex. 54 =C hares of Mitylene, Histories of Alexander, FGrH 125, fr.1 4w ith Lane Fox( 1973,3 00 -301, 536-537) andvan Straten (1974). See also Pleket (1981,2 95)a nd Petridou (2015,77, 152, 174).  On Galen in Pergamum, see vand er Eijk (2011).  In all likelihood, the same illness that he describes in De bonis malisque sucis 1.16 -20 Helmreich [CMG V4 ,2]=6.756 -757K . his campaign against the Germans,m akinge very effort to takem ew ith him. But he was persuadedtoallow me to remain, on hearingthat Asclepius, the godofour forefathers,advised against it (πεισθεὶςδ 'ἀ φεῖναι λέγοντος ἀκούσας τἀναντίακ ελεύειν τὸν ‖ πάτριον θεὸν ᾿ Aσκληπιόν), onceIrevealed that Ih ad been his therapeutes (οὗ καὶ θεραπευτὴν ἀπέφαινον ἐμαυτόν)e vers inceh es aved me fromt he fatal disposition of an abcess.H e [viz. the emperor] performed proskynesis to the goda nd commanded me to wait for his own return (προσκυνήσας τὸνθ ε ὸ νκ α ὶπεριμεῖναί με τὴν ἐπάνοδον αὐτοῦ κελεύσας), for he was confident that he would end the war quickly. He then set off to war havingleft behind his son Commodus,who at that time was still onlyasmall child, and instructed his carers to try to keep him healthy, but,ifheeverfell ill, to call me in to treat him (καλεῖν ἐπὶ τὴνθ εραπείαν ἐμέ).
In his World'sC lassics version, Peter Singert ranslates τὸνπά τριον θεὸν ᾿ Aσκληπιόν here as "his personal patron godAsclepius",implying thatMarcus Aurelius was himself ad evotee of Asclepius.Tom ymind, however,the syntactical structure ho patrios theos (echoedi nh is recentlyd iscovered De propriis placitis,o n which seeb elow) is an unequivocal reference to Galen'sP ergamene origins and his close links to the Pergamene Asclepieion. Nonetheless, Singerm ay be right in seeing an intentional ambiguity,implying that Galen and Marcus shared common cultic interests and religious expertise.¹³ However that maybe, it seems clear thati nr eferringt oA sclepius as his patrios theos Galen is laying claim to shared religious expertise and experience, thus paving the wayf or his major claim, namelyh is status as therapeutes of the god. Marcus' reaction to this revelation is to offer proskynesis to the goda nd allow the Pergamene physician to disobeyh is orders and remain behind.
It will be noted that Galen offers no explanation of what it entailed to be a therapeutes of the god. The implication is that there was no need for such explanations ince both the emperora nd his physician shared the samel inguistic tropes,t he same 'speech norms',t hati ss yntactical structures thatm embers of ag roup weree xpected to hear and use frequently.¹⁴ Aristides usest he same expression 'therapeutes of the godA sclepius' to describe his devotional relationship with Asclepius in his oneiric meetingw ith Marcus Aurelius.I nt hatc ase, as we saw, Marcus endorsed Aristides' defiance of court etiquette by declaring that it was indeed better to serve( therapeuein)A sclepius than anyone else. This group of therapeutai seems to have developed what the sociologists Nina Eliasoph and Paul Lichterman have termed a 'group style' with its distinct 'group boundaries' (i. e. assumptions about the group'sr elationship with each  This is also consistent with Galen'sconstant effort to present himself as aclose friend of Marcus Aurelius. Cf., e. g. Praen.1 4.660 K.  Eliasoph and Lichterman (2003,7 39).

Contesting religious and medical expertise
other and with the healing god), 'group bonds' (i. e. assumptions about members' mutual responsibilities in the course of theirmeetings, formal and less formal), and, finally, 'speech norms'.¹⁵ During their sojourn in the Asclepieion, the therapeutai of Pergamum wereb oundt ogetherb yc o-residence and ritual interaction as well as by the focus on their bodies as the locus of divine communication. ¹⁶ We mayt hus infert hat Marcus shared the same culturalr eferences and spoke the same ritual languagew ith both Aristides and Galen, since he seems fullya ware of the privileges and obligations entailed by the cultic role of Asclepian therapeutes. Yeth istorians of ancient medicine have often stronglyr esisted the idea that Galen, the positivist physician, might be amemberofthe samereligious group as Aristides, the pliable patient; or,i ft hey had been, they would surelyh aveh ad quite different reactions to and functions within it.I n1 981 Fridolf Kudlien, for instance, protested vehementlya gainst such an idea, despite recognisingthat in the Imperial period there were physicians who werereported to have served in the Pergamene Asclepieion as ἱερεῖς or ζάκοροι: True, he called himself onceaθεραπευτὴς ᾿ Aσκληπιοῦ.B ut one should be cautious not to misinterprett his as,Ithink, Habicht has done whoc oncludedf romt his testimonya lone, that Galen had occasionally "to fulfil religious duties that requiredh is presence".T his would mean that Galen had an official function in the cult of Asclepius-an assumption for which therei s, to my knowledge,n oo ther foundation whatever.
The passageispart of along sequence of episodes that aim at self-promotion, by glorifyingG alen'se xpert knowledge in venesection. While other doctors have injured and some even killed their patientsb yt heir sheer ignorance, Galen has mastered the art of venesection to the extent that he employed it to cure his ownc hronic pain. Oberhelman wonders whereG alen'sd ream might have taken place, but the answer is in the text: it clearlyt ook place when the physician was in Pergamum as a therapeutes,asanerudite and privileged patient who soughtA sclepius' help when faced with chronic pain.¹⁹ Where else could Galen has become intimatelyf amiliar with the details of the divinely-ordained dream that urgedy et another therapeutes of Asclepius to cure his chronic pain on his side by enduringa na rteriotomy? It is interesting to see here that other fellow therapeutes of the godhas also no need of expert dream interpretation. He deciphers the dream by himself and proceeds with the recommendedc ourse of action.
Moreover,one could hardly miss the emphasis on the enargeia of these two dreams,t hat is, the clarity thatr enders other expert advice superfluous and at the same time guarantees theirdivine origin.²⁰ Most historians of medicine interof dream diagnosis in ancient medical practice,s ee Oberhelman (1983) and(1993); and Pearcy (2013). On medical dreams in Galen, see Hulskamp (2013,5 5-68), whoo ffers an excellent discussion of Galen's De Dignotione ex Insomniis (On Diagnosis from Dreams).  Oberhelman (1983, 38, n. 16). On Asclepius specialisingo nt reatment of chronic pain, see King( 1999) and van Schaik (2015).  On enargeia and enargēs as technical terms related to divine epiphanies,s ee Zanker( 1981, 297-311), Koch-Piettre(1999,11-21), Otto(2009), Chaniotis (2013, and Petridou (2015,3 and 98). Plett (2012) provides acomprehensive analysis of the semantic development of the term from Classical antiquity to early-moderntimes.Inapassage(4.2=8.227 K.) from his treatise De Locis Affectis (On the Affected Parts), Galen referst ovivid dreams as symptoms of phrenitis.On Contesting religious and medical expertise pret Galen'se mphasis on the fact that he also came to the same conclusion by himself (i. e. independentlyofthe divine message) as areluctance to relywholly on traditional means of treatment such as healing-divination. However,a ss een also in the case of Galen'sf ellow therapeutes,this revisionistic attitude towards established forms of authority was not restricted to Galen. In fact,i tw as very common among the members of the religious group of the Pergamene therapeutai,a nd it is not by mere chance that Pergamum gets special mention here.
More importantly, Galen'sr ole as ad evotee of his ancestral godA sclepius seems to have been as significant for construinghis self-identityasaPergamene physician as it had been for Aristides. In the second chapter of the recently-discovered Greek manuscript of De propriis placitis,e xpertlye dited by Véronique Boudon-Millot and Antoine Pietrobelli in 2005,G alen returns to his cure by Asclepius,the god, as he emphasises, to whom he offered cultic honours in Pergamum despite being ignorant of his ousia: ὁ δὲ παρ᾿ἐμοὶ τιμώμενος ἐνΠεργάμῳ θεὸς ἐπ᾿ἄλλων τε πολλῶντὴνἑαυτοῦ δύναμίντεκαὶ πρόνοιαν ἐνεδείξατο ἐμέ τε θεραπεύσας ποτέ. κατὰ θάλατταν δὲ Διοσκούρων ἔχω πεῖραν οὐ μὴνοὐδὲβλάπτεσθαί τι νομίζω τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ἀγνοοῦντας τὴνοὐσίαν τῶνθεῶν· τιμᾶνδ᾿ αὐτοὺς ἔγνωκα νόμῳ παλαιῷἑπόμενος Σωκράτους πείθεσθαι συμβουλεύοντος τοῖςτοῦΠυθ(ίου) προστάγμασιν·²¹ And the godi nP ergamum whom Ih onour has demonstrated his powera nd providence againa nd again,i ncluding on one occasion by healingm e. But,a lthough Ih avee xperienced the protection of the Dioscuri at sea, Istill think that people areignorant of the substanceofthe gods.Ihave learned to honour them according to ancient tradition, following Socrates' advice to obey the injunctions of the Pythian oracle.
Galen intended On my own opinions to be an authentication device, ak ind of philosophical testament to protect his medical treatises and philological commentariesf rom futuref orgeries.²² It is significant that he chooses here to stress his bond to Asclepius by introducing the godasὁδὲπαρ᾿ἐμοὶ τιμώμενος ἐνΠερmedical dreamsasdiagnostic tool in Galen, see his Commentaryonthe Hippocratic "Prorrhetics" 1.5=16.525 K.  De propriis placitis 2Boudon-Millot &Pietrobelli. The ThessalonicensisVlatadon 14 mss is the onlyGreek text we have of this particular Galenic work, which until its discovery by A. Pietrobelli, was preserved onlyi nL atin, Arabic and Hebrewt ranslations,a ll lacunate, which gave us a distorted view of the work'st heological premises (Pietrobelli [2013]). Cf. also Nutton (1987) and Strohmaier( 2012).  Nutton (1987); cf. his 1999 edition (CMG V3.2)ofall the survivingmanuscripts except for the Vlatadon text (see previous note). γάμῳ θεὸς,which recalls the phrase ho patrios theos of the De libris propriis,thus alludingt oG alen'sc ultic identity as therapeutes in Pergamum.
On the other hand, Kudlien correctlyn oted that therapeutes does not denote ap riestly role, certainlyn ot at raditionallyd efined one. Yeti tm ay still be comparable (albeit not identical) to hiereus or neōkoros.²³ There certainlyw ere individuals in the Pergamenetemple who professed both expert medicaland religious knowledge,and indeedserved the god'sclientèle in both roles:Asclepiacus, ac lose friend of Aristides, who is stated to have been both a neōkoros and an iatros,isafine example of such adual qualification.²⁴ Galen however did not belong to that category.Eventhough he was,like Aristides, a therapeutes of Pergamum, and justaskeen to flag his membership in the group both in describing his interview with the emperor and in some of his major medical treatises,h is relationship with Asclepius was undoubtedlyv ery different from Aristides'.Neither a δημιουργός nor a θεῖα ἀρχή feature in the latter'stheological universe, for instance, although at times it appears that his conception of Asclepius is not entirelyf ree from Platonic influence.²⁵ As Antoine Pietrobelli has convincingly argued, Galen seems to have found the perfect balance between paying homage to pre-existing religious schemata and practising an innovative and sophisticated type of agnosticism.²⁶ If that is so, the question must be: what did Aristides, Galen and possiblyM arcus Aurelius have in common,²⁷ and how did the reli- Cf. Aristid. Or.48.47 (where the therapeutai and the neōkoroi appear as two separate groups): οἵ τε γὰρν εωκόροι ἐντ ο ύ τ ῳὄ ντες ἡλικίας καὶ πάντες οἱ περὶ τὸνθ ε ὸ νθ εραπευταὶ καὶ τάξεις ἔχοντες ὡμολόγουν ἀεὶ δή ποτε μηδένα πω τῶνπ ά ντων συνειδέναι τοσαῦτα τμηθέντα κτλ. See further section 3b elow.  Doctor: Or.49. 25;t emple warden (neōkoros): Or. 47. 47-49,49.14 and 49.22.  Strohmaier (1965) employed the concept of 'Gebildetenreligion',i.e.religious behaviour typical of pepaideumenoi,i no rder to makes ense of Galen'si ndividualised response to traditional religious schemata. Kudlien (1981, 127) was rightlycritical, pointingt othe diversity in religious behaviour and writings of famous literati of the first and second centuries CE, such as Cicero, Rufus,S oranus, Aristides and Thessalus. Or. 50.55 -56,where Aristides converses with the Platonist philosopherPyrallianus,who was also counted amongst his intimatecircle of friends and intellectual companions (herairos), is one importantpassage in the HL that betraysNeoplatonic influence, cf. Remus (1996,151). More on Pyrallianus in Boys-Stones,G.Index of 'Middle' Platonists.  Pietrobelli (2013) is by far the most informative discussion of Galen'si ntricatet heological and philosophical views.H orstmanshoff (forthcoming) examines his religious attitudes as a case of cognitive dissonance.  Thereisadmittedlynoexplicit reference to Marcus Aurelius' membership of the cultic association of the therapeutai,but,asexplained above, this does not preclude the possibilitythat the emperor was aware of the deeper meaningconveyedbyt he term therapeutes of an intense personal relationship with the god, especiallyinview of the frequencywith which Marcus refersin  ( 1988) maintainedt hat the term was used to describe those who enjoyed aspecial relationship with the god, that these worshippers indeed grouped togethert of orm 'ac ult organisation' of sorts, and that Aristides was am embero ft his group.²⁹ Pearcyl inked this group of worshippers with the amply-attested group of therapeutai who honoured Sarapis,a nd recalled the close identificationb etween Sarapis and Asclepiusi nA ristides' conception.³⁰ Whatever one thinks of Aristides' or Galen'ss elf-representation as therapeutai,one cannot denythe fact that this group of worshippers was actively and enduringlypresent in the sanctuary.This is proved beyond doubt by anumber of inscriptions from the Asclepieion published by Christian Habicht, in which the therapeutai honour Asclepius and related healing deities (e. g. Coronis in AvP VIII 3, 122),p riests (AvP VIII 3, 152) and alsof ellow worshippers (AvP VIII 3, 28,7 1, 79,a nd 140). Dominique Brabant recentlyo ffered ac lose readingo fs ome of the literary evidence discussed so far,a nd argued that the therapeutai at Pergamum were his Meditations and his correspondencew ith Fronto both to dreams and to Asclepius. See e. g. Medit. 1.17.9 (where he thanks Asclepius for remedies prescribed in dreams); Fronto Ep. 1.2 (1 Hout; 1.80 Haines) and 5.13 (74H out; 1.200H aines), where we find detailed references to his dietary regime and ak eeni nterest in Fronto'st herapy.S ee further Bowersock( 1969, 71-75); Perkins (1992, 267-272); Brabant(2006,67) and Várhelyi (2010,88-89). Predictablyenough, some (e. g. Whitehorne [1977]) have accused him of hypochondria.  On the terminology used to describe this kind of religious group, see the introduction in Kloppenborga nd Wilson (1996) and Steinhauer (2014, 16 -18).  Pearcy (1988, 377).  On therapeutai in the cult of Sarapis, see, for instance IvP 338with Sokolowski (1973,412) = RICIS 301/1203. The inscription is adedication by acertain Titus T[--ofA pharos and is datedby ar eferencet ot he grammateus (the secretary) of the therapeutai in the Roman Imperial period. Fränkel, followed by Bricault, hesitantlyp roposed Sarapis as the name of the deity honoured, while allowingt hat the therapeutai mayh aveb een worshippers of Asclepius. not reallys eeking social recognition and distinction but longed rather for the close proximityt ot he divine that membership of this exclusive group of Asclepian devotees could offer.³¹ This view builds on Festugière'sdefinition of personal religion as 'closeness to God' and concludes that this was preciselyw hat the devotees gainedfrom their close association with the divine healer.³² In my view, although Brabant'sa nalysis rightlye mphasizes this intense and personal relationship with Asclepius,i tv ergeso nb eing 'over-realistic'.³³ Ican happilyenvis-ageGalen, Aristides and the other members of the socio-political and intellectual elite who frequented the Pergamene temple-complex bound togetheri na n intricate nexus of intimate relationships with the divine, but it seems inadequate to view the case whollyi nt erms of their emotional need for closeness with the god.³⁴ WhatA sclepius provided to all thosew ell-to-dog entlemen was legitimation, divine sanction for their chosen courses of action and, abovea ll, aj ustification for bypassing the intermediaries and claiming to access knowledge straight from the divine source.
One major factor in this group-cohesion must have been the performance of ritual duties. Asecond-century CE lex sacra (IvP III 161A)isofparticular interest here, since it stipulates the ritual protocol the incubants had to follow prior to enteringani ncubation-chamber (ἐγκοιμητήριον).³⁵ The document clearlydifferentiates between two groups of prospective incubants, the ones who werev isiting the temple complex for the first time and as econd group of returning incubants who wereresumingtheir theoric journeys to seek further consultations on the samematter.The first group had to offer expensive blood sacrifices and pay the fee prior to being directed to the largerincubatory chamber; while the second group of returning theōroi made modest sacrificial offerings and was directed to am uch smaller and intimate incubation chamber (ll.15 -17).³⁶ It is this second group of devotees,who in ll.23 -29 are called therapeuontes and are instructed to follow the god'sp riest and perform the rites of περιθύειν.The original editor, Michael Wörrle, suggested that perithyein denotes as acrifice offered peri,i .e.  Brabant( 2006,e sp. 63 -64) with Versnel (2011,138 n.421), who is right in thinkingt hat the one does not exclude the other.  Af ruitful reassessment of the concept 'personal religion' can be found in Kindt( 2015).  Ihaveborrowed this term fromPetsalis-Diomidis (2010), whoapplies it to scholars whoread Aristides' HL tool iterally.  Equally, Idisagreewith CoxMiller'sconception of Aristides as an emotionallyneedyindividual on aq uest for 'warmth' fromA sclepius.  IvP III 161A .F or ar ecent English translation, see Petsalis-Diomidis (2010,2 24-225).  With Sokolowski (1973,4 08). Cf. also Petsalis-Diomidis (2010,2 27-230), whoi ngeniously connects the ritual journey of the theōroi as stipulated in the lex sacra with the sacred landscape of the Pergamene sanctuary.M oreo nt his below.
'around',the altars.Sokolowski, however,pointed out that the prepositional prefix peri-may simplybeused as an intensifier,asinthe case of Plutarch'ssuperstitious man, who whenill (lypoumenos)sits around his house and feels compelled to spend his time continuallys acrificing (perithyomenos)a nd repeatedly wiping himself (perimattomenos).³⁷ Christian Habicht remarks that the cult title perithytēs (which derivesf rom the same verb) occurs in threeo ther inscriptions from the PergameneA sclepieion, in each case with reference to eminent theōroi,s uch as Claudius Pardalas (AvP VIII 3, 140), P. Afranius Favianus (AvP VIII 3, 79) and Juventianus Alexander of Nicomedia (AvP VIII 3, 152), who must have had some prominent role in cultic performances as did the prothytēs in the cult of the emperors. Significantly, in all threec ases the title of perithytēs is paired with that of therapeutes. In the case of the famous orator Pardalas, in particular, whose cultic activities in Pergamum are attested by af urther five inscriptions (MAMA IX 19,1 8, 20,2 1, and Kolbe, Att. Mitt.1 092, 133, n. 160),³⁸ these inscriptions reveal that Pardalas held an impressive array of cultic offices, including hiereus of Zeus and archiereus of Asia (Asiarch). Pardalas' membership of the group of the Pergamene therapeutai is confirmed by Aristides' repeated references to theirl ong-lasting friendship (e. g. Or. 50.27; 87). Moroever,a s Klaus-Dietrich Fischer has shown, Pardalas was alsoa na cquaintanceo f Galen.³⁹ The closer we look, the clearer this imageo ft he tightly-knit group of the therapeutai becomes.I ta lso becomes more obvious thatt his group waso peratingo nahigher level than the rest of the theōroi.
Let us now return to our lex sacra (IvP III 161A). Although the interpretation of the therapōntes of l.25a sr eferringt ot he well-known group of therapeutai is  De sup. 7, 168d (II pp.474 -475LCL): ἂνδ ᾽ἄριστα πράττῃ καὶ συνῇ πράῳ δεισιδαιμονίᾳ, περιθειούμενος οἴκοι κάθηται καὶ περιματτόμενος, αἱ δὲ γρᾶες 'καθάπερ παττάλῳ' φησὶν ὁ Βίων 'ὅ τι ἂντ ύ χωσιν αὐτῷ περιάπτουσι φέρουσαι καὶ περιαρτῶσι', "But if he is very fortunate, and but mildlyy okedw ith superstition, he sits in his house, subjectingh imself to fumigation, and smearingh imself with mud, and the old crones, as Bion says, "bring whateverc hanced irects and hang and fasteni to nh im as on ap eg" Transl. Babbit. Περιθειούμενος is Hercher'se mendation of περιθυόμενος,which Sokolowski would retain. This understandingofperithyō as 'sacrificingregularly' or 'sacrificingrepeatedly' is further supported by John Chrysostom'scommentary on Galatians and by an inscription fromA stypalaia (W.P eek, IvDorischen Inseln,4 8-49, no. 100), where three men ared escribeda sperithyontes in honour of theos Asklepios.  Puech, nos.192 -197.  Fischer (2009). Pardalas is mentioned in one of Galen'sp harmacological treatises partially preserved in the Latin codex Cassinensis 69 (p.2 61a -475b), and features prominentlyi nt he Latin version of De theriaca ad Pisonem preserved elsewhere in the same codex, no. 25, p. 281a -283a, where he is described as "magnus ille Pardalas".N utton( as quoted by Fischer) suggests that he maya lso have featured prominentlyi nt he De antidotis. not quite certain, it seems plausible to assume thatt he inscription does refert o the group'sr itual dutiesa nd privileges of al ess costlyc onsultation. Those consultingt he godf or the first time have to payahigher fee and are directed to a large incubation chamber,w hile the recurrent and/or frequent incubants pay less and are directed to as maller and perhaps more exclusive chamber. "Although the exact reasons for the distinction in the cost of incubation are elusive, the document makes it clear that the differentiation of worshippers is primarily envisaged in terms of the different routes takeni nt he sanctuary",P etsalis-Diomidis rightlysuggests.⁴⁰ Aprobable parallel to our lex sacra from Pergamum is to be found in an inscription from Epidaurus, wherethe therapeutai of the Epidaurian Asclepieion (the term is admittedlyanemendation by Sokolowski) are said to perithyein,i.e.perform regular sacrifices,and enter the shrine by adifferent entrance.⁴¹

The therapeutai of Asclepius at Pergamum in the Hieroi Logoi
By themselves, however,t he epigraphical sources do not give us much detail, so historians of medicine and religion need Aristides' works in order to glimpse the therapeutai group in action.N otwithstanding the various methodological problems involved in combinings ources from different literary genres and media, this section discusses threee xtracts from the HL,w hich illuminatet he group'si nternal dynamic, the agonistic tendencies among its members and the group'si nteraction with other religious professionals at Pergamum. Of these professionals, the two νεωκόροι ('temple-wardens, sacristans')a t the Pergamene Asclepieion appeart oh aveb een actively involved in the therapeutic procedures of the incubants, at least of the well-off ones, and even, if we are to judge from the HL,o ccasionallyf ormedc lose and congenial relationships with the patients. During Aristides' lengthyresidence in the sanctuary,we  Petsalis-Diomidis (2010,228-229): "The Lex Sacra in effect offered twoa lternative journeys through the sanctuary,o ne leadingt o' the incubation chamber' and the other to 'the small incubation chamber'.A lthough the identificationo ft hese buildings is not absolutelyc ertain, they probablyr efer to the incubation chamber in the basement of the southern portico … and the old incubation complex in the middle of the courtyardb yt he temple of Asklepios Sotēr respectively".  IG IV 2 1, 742C 25-29 with Sokolowski LSCG no. 25.

Contesting religious and medical expertise
hear of two such temple-wardens,P hiladelphus and Asclepiacus.A ristides appears to have been on good, even friendly, terms with both men.
The first passage( Or. 48.46 -49) comes from the beginning of Aristides' extended incubancy at the Asclepieion of Pergamum (summer of 145CE) and is of great interest not onlyi np roviding ac lose-up view of the therapeutai in action but alsoi nr evealing details of the competitive atmosphere within the group of long-term or frequent visitors.⁴² The text warrants full quotation: 46 Ih ad catarrhs and difficulty with my palate, and everythingw as full of hoar-frost and heat,and the sufferingaround my stomach was at its peak, and Iwas confined to the house during the summer season. 47 And these things happened in Pergamum, in the house of the temple warden Asclepiacus (καὶἐ γ ί γνετο ταῦτα ἐνΠ εργάμῳἐ ντ ῷτοῦ νεωκόρου τοῦ᾿ A σκληπιακοῦ). First he commanded that Ih aveb lood drawn from my elbow,a nd he added, as Ir emember, "ah undred and twenty liters".This was to show that therew ould be need of quiteafew phlebotomies,b ut that became manifestlyc lear frome vents that happened later on. Fort he temple wardens,b eingo facertain age, and all those who were therapeutai of the God and those whow ere of acertain rank (had acertain position), confessed that they knew of no-one else so far whoh ad been cut so much, except Ischyron,⁴³ and that his case was among the most incredible ones,b ut even so that mine surpassed it,without the other stranget hingsw hich were added to the phlebotomies (οἵ τε γὰρν εωκόροι ἐντ ο ύ τ ῳὄ ντες ἡλικίας καὶ πάντες οἱ περὶ τὸνθ ε ὸ νθ εραπευταὶ καὶ τάξεις ἔχοντες ὡμολόγουν ἀεὶ δή ποτε μηδένα πω τῶνπ ά ντων συνειδέναι τοσαῦτα τμηθέντα, πλήνγεἸσχύρωνος, εἶναι δ' ἐντοῖςπαραδόξοτατον τό γ' ἐκείνου, ἀλλὰ καὶὣςὑπερβάλλειν τὸ καθ' ἡμᾶς ἄνευ τῶν ἄλλων παραδόξων, ἃ προσῆντ α ῖ ςφ λεβοτομίαις), as for example happened almost immediatelya fterwards. 48 Foro ne, Ig uess, or two days later,h ec ommanded me to drawb lood fromm yf orehead. And he commanded also the same to one of the Roman senators, whow as consulting him very often,⁴⁴ and indicated (lit. 'he made signs')t hat the same had been orderedf or Aristides.H is name was Sedatus,m ost noble amongt he men, whor ecounted these thingst om ei np erson (Σηδᾶτος ὄνομα αὐτῷ, βέλτιστος ἀνδρῶν, ὃς ἐμοὶ ταῦτα αὐτὸςδιηγεῖτο). In the middle of the phlebotomies ('blood-letting'), he ordered me to bathe in the riverC aicus.A nd it was necessary to walk thereand bathe after havingcast away flocks of wool. 49 He said that Iwould see ahorse  Moreover Aristides uses the intimacyw ith Asclepiacus implied by the invitation to stayi ndefinitelya tt he latter'sr esidence to conveyh is own privileged status within the group.
Methods of bloodletting werew idelyk nown in Graeco-Roman medicine and wereu sed for the cure of numerous disorders( rangingf rom ophthalmic diseases, vertigo, and chronic headache to gangrene and epilepsy), caused by what they believetohavebeen an excess of humours in the body.⁴⁵ Thesuccessfulapplication of these techniques required advanced medicalskill and experience, as Galen tells us in De curandi ratione per venae sectionem 23 (11,312-315 K). In the same work, Galen reports cases in which patients died after severing the artery that underlies the inner vein in the inner part of the elbow (presumablyw here Aristides himself was cut), because the bandageu sed to stop the bleeding was infected, thus leading to gangrene. Other patients died duringo perations for aneurysm.⁴⁶ Bloodlettingswithin the temple must have made acompellingspectacle, especiallysince Aristides remembers surgicalprocedures as athing of the past.⁴⁷ Quite apart from theirvalue as spectacles, phlebotomies were regarded as  In the survivingc orpuso fG alenic works, threet reatises are devoted to exploringt he uses and abuses of bloodletting: De venae sectione adversus Erasistratum (11.147-186 K.); De venae sectione adversus Erasistrateos Romae degentes (11.187-249K.); De curandi ratione per venae sectionem (11.250 -316 K.). Moreo nt he art of bloodletting in Galen in Brain (1986), where at ranslation of the threeworks can also be found. Although Galen has us believethat bloodletting was as common amongst the Hippocratic doctors as it was in his day, this was not true. As King (2004,6 4 -65)h as argued, in the Hippocratic Corpus bloodletting as am edical practice is quitelimited (mentionedaround 70 times) and mainlyperformed on male patients,the implication beingt hat women bled naturallyv ia their monthlym enstruation.F or ab rief historical exposition of venesection as amedical practice,see Niki Papavramidou, N.,Thomaidis,V,Fiska, A. (2009).  In De cur.r at. per venae sect. 16 (11.298 K.), Galen informs us that there werethreedifferent ways to perform aphlebotomyinthe inner part of the elbow,internal, external and medial, each correspondingt od isorders in different parts of the human anatomy.  Cf. Or. 50.64Κeil with Behr ad loc: […] ταύτῃ μοι ἐδόκει ὁἱερεὺς ὁ τοῦ᾿ A σκληπιοῦ οὗτος ὁ ἔτι νῦν ὢν, καὶὁτούτου πάππος, ἐφ' οὗ τὰ πολλὰ καὶ μεγάλα ὡς ἐπυνθανόμεθα ἐχειρούργησεν ὁ θεὸς, καὶἔ στι δὴἐ νδοξότατος τῶνμ έ χρι τούτου. "[…]o nt hat daya ppeared to me the priest of Asclepius, the is now the priest of the godand his grandfather,inwhose time, as we learn, the godp erformed manyand great surgical procedures, and whoi seveni nn owadays very famous  .2 ).⁴⁸ Going back to our text,one is immediatelystruck by the absence of oneirocritai (dream-interpreters)⁴⁹ and medical experts (who administers the bloodletting?) and by the exclusive focus upon twop atients, Aristides himself and the consular M. Sedatus Severianus.⁵⁰ Even if Asclepiacus claimed for himself some medical expertise, he still seems to fade into the background emerging onlytofocalise the locations of the phlebotomies,oneiric and real, namelyadomestic setting and the riverbank. All eyes are upon Aristides' heroic feat of being drained of nearlys ixty 60 lbs. of blood,t hat is six times the total amount of blood in ag rown man -he carefullyn eglects to mention at ime-period -and then hasteningt ocomplyw ith the divinely-ordained baths, blind to the exhaustion anyo rdinary human being would have suffered at this stage. Thisi sv ery much as elf-service medical business which requires no professional expertise. The suggestion is that nothing more is required thant he skills of Aristides and his friend Sedatusi ni nterpreting dreams and theirk nowledge of bloodletting procedures. The narrative stress is laid not on the dreams of the two therapeutai but on Aristides' hermeneutics and the intimate relationship between the two elite patients, whose friendship seems to have been endorsed by Asclepius himself. Whye lse would the divine healer share intimate details about one patient'sc ourse of medical action with the other?A sclepius orders Sedatus to undergo aphlebotomyand adds he has prescribed the same treatment for Aristides. So much for the famousp atient-physician confidentiality. . On the often enthusiasticbelief on the part of laymen in the merits of phlebotomywellintothe nineteenth century,see e. g. Porter and Porter ( 1989,1 70).  On the cardinal roleo fs pecialists in dream interpretation (oneirocritai)i nh ealingi ncubation, see Renberg( 2015).  On M. Sedatius Severianus, cos.suff. 153,see Várhelyi (2010,83-84). Perhaps he is the same Roman consulwho allegedly(if we believeL ucian Alex. 27)c onsulted the oracle of Neos Asclepios-Glykonbeforeinvading Armenia in 161(acceptedbyBremmer in his contributiontothis volume). Plutarch'sessay Howthe young should listen to poetry (Mor. 14D, 15 A),isalso addressed to M. Sedatus or M. Sedatius,who has ason called Cleander.The identificationofthe twoindividuals (first proposed by Bowersock)h as been amatter of debate. Behr (1993Behr ( , 1157 n. 69)rejected Bowersock'sidea, though he did retain 'Sedatius' and, followingKeune in RE 2A(1921)1017-18 and Groagibid.1007lines 31-38, identified Aristides' friend as Sedatius Theophilus,ofpraetorian rank (the Greek strategos can mean propraetor as wella sp roconsul). Cf. also Halfmann (1979,8 6-87), whoa rgues that Bowersock'si dentification is impossible. But then again, as the next extract for the HL (Or. 50.14 -18) suggests, these patientss eem to have been quite keen themselveso ne xchangingp ersonal informationa nd discussing their physical ailments and the curativesA sclepius proposed to them.I nc hapter 16,wer ead thatt he discussion was basedo nt he similarityo ft hese patients' ailments: καὶ γάρπ ως ἔστιν ἃ καὶ παραπλήσια ἐκάμνομεν.U nless,w et ake this similaritya sareference to the duration of their ailments (i. e. they werea ll chronic illnesses), it is hard to imagine ac ommunity of patients with similar health problems.I ti sf ar more likelyt hatw hat Aristides has in mind are the similar circumstances under which these individuals consulted the god. More to the point,i nm oderns ociological terms,t his 'convergence' of symptoms is ap roduct of the discourse they are familiar with. Thisi s, in otherw ords, ag ood example of what Eliasopha nd Lichterman called 'speech norms'.
This extract relates to ac onversation that took place in the first year of Aristides' incubancy at Pergamum. The interlocutors are three of the most famous therapeutai of the temple (τῶνγνωριμωτέρων θεραπευτῶν), himself, M. Sedatius Severianus and Q. Tullius Maximus, afellow-incubant and futuresuffect-consul. Both of these individuals appear to contribute actively in Aristides' transformation from ap anting patient to ap owerful orator.⁵¹ Both of them adopt an extremelyhands-on approach when it comestothe interpretation of Aristides' difficulty in performing basic respiratory functions and his divinep rescription, which centres on scripting and publiclyp erforming an oration: While Iremained at Pergamumbecause of divine summons and my supplication, Ireceived from the godacommand and exhortation not to abandon rhetoric. (15) It is impossible to saysinceithappened manyy ears agowhich dream came first,orwhich was the nature of each of these dreamsindetail. But those which occurredatthe very beginningwereexhortatory dreams. "It befits yout os peak in the manner of Socrates,D emosthenes and Thucydides.And Iwas shown one of the distinguished orators who are older than I, in order that Iw ould be especiallym oved to speak. And the godc ommanded me to go to the Temple Stoa, which is at the Theatre, and to offer to him the very first fruits of these improvised and competitive orations (καὶ τό γε σφόδρα πρῶτον ἀπάρξασθαί με ἐκέλευεν ἑαυτῷ προσελθόντα εἰςτ ὴ νσ τοὰντ ο ῦἱ εροῦ τὴνπ ρ ὸ ςτ ῷθεάτρῳ τῶνα ὐ τοσχεδίων δὴ τούτων λόγων καὶἀγωνιστικῶν·). And so it happened. (16) Therewas avery magnificent spectacle in the amphitheatre, ab ull-hunt, Ithink, or some such thing. Everyone at the temple had rushed down there, and the whole city was agog.Wehad been left alone in the Temple, two of the mored istinguished worshippers,Iand aN icaean, am an of praetorian rank, called  This passage seems also to have been central in fashioningA ristides' group-identity.H e cross-references this passagei nh is An AddressR egarding Asclepius (Or. 42.8 Keil). Ir evisit this and other 'literary and rhetorical remedies' in af orthcominga rticle in Mètis. See Petridou (2017).
Sedatus,but originallyTheophilus.Weweresittinginthe temple of Hygieia, wherethe statue of Telesphorusis, and we were askingone another,aswewereaccustomed, whether the godhad prescribed anythingnew (καταλελείμμεθα δὲἐντῷἱερῷ τῶνγνωριμωτέρων θεραπευτῶνδύο,ἐγώτε καὶ Νικαεὺς, ἀνὴρτῶνἐστρατηγηκότων Ῥωμαίοις, Σηδᾶτος ὄνομα, τὸ δ' ἀρχαῖον Θεόφιλος. καθήμεθα οὖν ἐν Ὑγιείας, οὗὁΤελεσφόρος, καὶ διεπυνθανόμεθα ἀλλήλων ὥσπερ εἰώθειμεν εἴ τι καινότερον εἴηπ αρηγγελκὼς ὁ θεός). Fori nawaycertain of our diseases werea lso similar (καὶ γάρπ ως ἔστιν ἃ καὶ παραπλήσια ἐκάμνομεν). (17) I said that Idid not know what Is hould do, because what was prescribed to me was somethingasimpossible as flying: arhetorical exercise, when Icould not breathe, and [this exercise was to be accomplish] there-Im ean the Stoa-and Ir ecounted the dream to him. And when he heardi t, he said, "What will youd o, and how do youf eel about it?" "What else",Isaid "shall do whatever Ic an?A rrangeo nm yc lothes,s tand so, makea note of the problem to myself, begin some little thing, and then Is hall stop. And so my obligation has been fulfilled". "Not at all",hesaid "not so. But youh avemehereasalistener.Then contend with all zeal. Strengthw ill be the God'sc oncern.H ow do youk now whether your dream pertains to morethan this?" And at the same time, he told me amarvellous deed of the god, how he commanded some sick man to competeinthis way, and by causing him to perspiret hrough the exercise, brought an end to the whole disease. It seemed necessary to do this. (18) And while we were talkingand takingcounsel, Maximus the Libyan,⁵² entered in the third place, one of the long-standingworshippers,and in away keen on oratory.I tw as he whop roposed the problem (καὶ λαλούντων ἡμῶνκ α ὶβουλευομένων ἐπεισέρχεται Βύβλος ἐκτρίτων, θεραπευτὴςτῶνπαλαιῶνκαίτινα τρόπον πρόθυμος περὶ λόγους. οὗτος καὶ τὸ πρόβλημα ἦν ὁ προβαλών·). And the problem was as follows,for I remember it,since it was the first Ir eceived: "While Alexander",h es aid, "is in India, Demosthenes advises that it is time to act".Iimmediatelyaccepted the omen of Demosthenes speakingagain and of the subject, which was about empire. And pausingalittle, Icompeted, and my new strengthwas such as is of the god'sd evising, and the year seemed not to have passed in silence, but in training.⁵³ This divine prescription has at wofold aim: Aristides is prompted to perform in public and givenatechnique to improvehis delivery by assembling an audience predisposed in his favour,soastoboost his confidence and self-esteem. Predictablyenough, he involves the intimate group of therapeutai -his socially-powerful fellow-intellectuals -in remodelling his rhetorical career.⁵⁴ This time the Roman Senator Sedatus is joined by Q. Tullius Maximus the African, "af ellow  The mss read βύβλοσ or βίβλοσ;K eil adoptedt he former reading,a ssumingaproper name Byblos. Behr adopts the reading <Μάξιμος ὁ Λίβυς>, Maximus the African, on the basis of Aristides' referencet ot his senator in his ΠρὸςΚ απίτωνα 4.3K eil (47D indorf). See also RE 14.2 s.v. Maximus no. 27.  Transl. Behr with alterations.  This was aparticularlyimportant dream not onlyfor Aristides' rhetorical career,but also for his relationship with the godh imself, sincei tw as he who, by orderingt oA ristides to stayi n Pergamumi nt he first place, had thwarted his professional ambitions. incubant and aman who would laterreach the consulship".⁵⁵ Maximus seems to have been himself interested in oratoryand must have served as one of the oldest therapeutai. Herea gain Aristides stresses the socio-economic background of the members of the group. Harold Remus is surelyright in thinkingthat, even if men of lesser financial means werea lsoa dmitted to the group, Aristides would deliberatelyf ailt om ention them in such ac ontext.⁵⁶ Although Aristides claims to have forgotten most of the details of the oneiric prescription, he remembers vividlyhow the godordered him to go to the temple of Hygeia.Itwas there that he found his fellow-therapeutes Sedatus and revealed to him, not without acertain degree of incredulity,that the god'sr emedyfor his breathingd ifficulty consisted in urging him to proceed with af ull-fledgedr hetorical declamation. Aristides lays special emphasis on the difference (both quantitative and qualitative)between these select incubants and everyone else: while the other incubants have left the shrine to enjoy some crowd-pleasing spectacle (a beast-hunt or a theōria of some kind; the off-handedness maybeinterpreted as as ign of contempt), the select syntherapeutai opt for the lofty pleasures of oratory and passionate exchangeo fi nformation about their most intimate bodily cavities.⁵⁷ While the tight-knit group of therapeutai mayhaveb een looselyr elated to the rest of the patients who consulted the god, nonetheless, it was fairly distinct from them. One is reminded of the two different ritual pathways as well as the twod ifferent chambers of incubation in the lex sacra (IvP VIII 3, 161, see above) Aristides claims that Asclepius told him to go to the stoa by the small theatre of the Asclepieion and offer to him the first fruits of his extemporary,competitive orations. The term ἀπάρξασθαι implies thats acrificial languagew as part of the original dream. Onet hinks again back to the lex sacra and to the extremelydetailed stipulations about what was to be offered to the gods prior to ritual incubation. Rhetorical declamation is of course not one of them.⁵⁸ Ia mt empted to  Várhelyi (2010,156).  Remus (1996,156).  The term συνθεραπευτής (sing.) is attested in IvP VIII 3. 28 ( fig.1 ), dated between 172 -175CE. Forthe date,see Pflaum, Carrières procuratoriennes no.252 +additionsonTib.Cl. Vibianus Tertullus. The relevant textreads: Κλαύδιον Οὐιβιανὸν / Τέρτυλλον ἐπὶἐπιστο-/λῶνἙλληνικῶν {²vac.}² / Αὐτοκράτορος Καίσαρος / Μ. Αὐρηλίου ᾿ Aντωνείνου / Σεβαστοῦ Γερμανικοῦ,/ ψηφισαμένης τῆςβ ου-/λ ῆ ςκ α ὶτοῦ δήμου τῆς / μητροπόλεως τῆς / ᾿ Aσίας καὶ δὶςν εωκόρου / πρώτης Περγαμηνῶνπόλεως / Κειώνιοι Ἑρμογένης / καὶ Γάιος τὸν ἴδιον εὐεργέτην / καὶ συνθεραπευτὴν / στρατηγοῦντος Τι. Κλ. Ἰουλιανοῦ.  To be fair,none of the ritual offerings prescribed thereare intended for Asclepius.F or adetailed account of the list of divinities mentioned in the inscriptionand an explanationofAsclepius' absencef romt his list,s ee Petsalis-Diomidis (2010,2 22-238). interpret this substitution of rhetorical declamation for the prescribed offerings as one of the manywaysinwhich the Mysian orator chooses to manipulate preexisting ritual schemata and adapt them for his own purposes.
Nonetheless,i ti sn ot until he receivesathumbs-up from his fellow-patient Sedatus that Aristides finallyp roceeds with executing the divine prescription. Sedatus generouslyoffers to be the audience of Aristides' rhetorical agōn and encourages him to overcomehis initial disinclination. To be more precise, Sedatus offers an important corrective to Aristides' hermeneutics: a token oration (μίκρ' ἄττα)i sn ot adequate -af ull-fledgedr hetorical declamation is required. The senator from Nicaea corrects his syntherapeutes' interpretation of his dream and even emboldens him by citing an account of another patient'ss uccessful treatment of ap hysical ailment by means of agonistic rhetorical performance (δι' ἀγωνίαν λύσειε τὸ νόσημα πᾶν).⁵⁹ Sedatus' intervention reaffirms the efficacy of the 'wondrous' (thaumaston)r hetorical remedyp rescribed by Asclepius,a nd provides an explanation in medicalterms, namely, that declamation sets in motion at ype of mental and/or physical agitation, which in turn causes one to sweat.⁶⁰ The fellow therapeutes Maximus contributes to the discussion by suggesting the πρόβλημα,t he theme of Aristides' declamation, which, once mastered, provides our Mysian patientwith the crucial boost of confidencerequired to reshape his rhetorical career.
This dream and its geometric equation mayw ellcontain the keytoafull understanding of the revisionist attitudes of the Pergamene therapeutai. As far as Aristides was concerned, and not unlike Galen in his De curandi ratione per venae sectionem 4.23 (discussed above), therew as neither anyr eal need for dream-interpretation by accredited experts nor was there anyn eed for medical experts ('doctors'). Between them, the therapeutai,asknowledgeable, high-born individuals, could themselvess uccessfullyp laya ll the necessary roles and fulfila ll needs, provided, of course, that they had secured Asclepius' seal of approval (cf. Or. 50.1919: καὶ μέντοι καὶὕ παρ αὐτὸς ἐπεσφραγίσατο ὁ θεός), which had the power to enhance the relevant capacities of the most devoted of his worshippers.
That said, it is important to remember that Aristides was not alone in contestingthe knowledge and power of institutionalised experts, religious and medical alike. Physicians,d ream-interpreters and patients all claimedd irect access  In algebraic logic, one would say "if x=y,and if y=z, then x=z",i.e.things equal to the same thingare also equal to one another.B ut Aristides in thinkinghere in terms of Euclidean geometry: Eucl., Κοιναὶἔ ννοιαι 1.1: Τὰ τῷ αὐτῷἴ σα καὶἀ λλήλοις ἐστὶν ἴσα.
to Asclepius.AsP liny reminds us, the gods promise abetter outcome.⁶³ When it came to healthi ssues, no one could promise ab etter outcome than Asclepius could. Claims to religious or medical expertise provided directlyb yt he god, whether madebypatients or physicians such as Galen, appealed to higher,privileged, forms of knowledge and authority.Direct access of this kind was especially important for elite patients such as the therapeutai at Pergamum, authorising them to override the professionals' medical and religious expertise, contest the need for such intermediaries and so effectivelyreclaim command over their own bodies.⁶⁴