Rufus of Ephesus: a historical perspective on his contributions to neuroanatomy

Abstract

Rufus of Ephesus (circa 1–2 AD) lived in the ancient city of Ephesus, Izmir Province of Turkey. He made significant contributions to many branches of sciences including neuroanatomy. This historical perspective manuscript focuses mainly on his neuroanatomical contributions. He described several structures, such as the pericranium, meninges, encephalon, parencephalon, varicosities, and the anatomy of the sellar region and the eye. He also coined essential terms in the nervous system such as tunica prima (dura mater), tunica altera (pia mater), spinal marrow (spinal cord), base of brain (brainstem), and choroid tunic (choroid plexus). Because of the limited number of extant works, he is not as well-known as his contemporaries. Yet, Rufus of Ephesus deserves to be recognized to the fullest for his precious and numerous contributions to neuroanatomy.

Keywords

• history of science
• neuroanatomy
• Rufus of Ephesus

References

1. Acıduman A, Arıtürk I, Ilgili O. Efesli Rufus’un nöroanatomi çalışmaları. Türk Nöroşirürji Dergisi 2010;20:64–9.
2. Eknoyan G. Rufus of Ephesus and his “diseases of the kidneys”. Nephron 2002;91:383–90.
3. Pearce JMS. Early contribution of Alexandria medical school to the anatomy, physiology and pathology of the nervous system. Rev Neurol 2019;175:119–25.
4. Bujalkova M. Rufus of Ephesus and his contribution to the development of anatomical nomenclature. Acta Med Hist Adriat 2011;9:89–100.
5. Leffler CT, Hadi TM, Udupa A, Schwartz SG, Schwartz D. A medieval fallacy: the crystalline lens in the center of the eye. Clin Ophthalmol 2016;10:649–62.
6. Candar E, Şengül G. Rufus of Ephesus – the precious historical insight into neuroscience. Anatomy 2019;13:S78–79.
7. Pormann PE. New fragments from Rufus of Ephesus’ on melancholy (24a-d) and on preferring fresh poppies. Classical Quarterly 2019;69:355–62.
8. Rey R. The history of pain. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1995. 394 p.

9. Aretaeus of C, Rufus of E. Ruffi Ephesii de corporis humani partium appellationibus libri tres. Grassi GP, editor. Venetiis: Apud Juntas; 1552. 240 p.
10. Aretaeus of C, Rufus of E. Aretaei Cappadocis medici libri VIII / Ruffi Ephesii de hominis partibus libri III. Crasso IP, editor. Paris: Apud Guilielmum Morelium & Jacobum Puteanum; 1554. 600 p.
11. Rufus of E. De vesicae renumque morbis: de purgantibus medicamentis, de partibus corporis humani. Clinch G, editor. Cornhill: J. Bettenham; 1726. 72 p.
12. Rufus of E, Soranos of E. Ruffi Ephesii de vesicae renumque morbis; de purgantibus medicamentis; de partibus corporis humani; Sorani de utero & muliebri pudendo. Goupyl J, Turnèbe A, editors. Paris: Apud Adr. Turnebum Typographum Regium; 1554. 60 p.
13. Daremberg C. Traité sur le pouls, attribué à Rufus d’Éphese, public pour la premiere bois en grec et en Francis, avec une introduction et des notes. London: J. Bettenham; 1846. 47 p.
14. Daremberg C, Ruelle E. Oeuvres de Rufus d’Ephèse: texte collationné sur les manuscrits, traduit pour la première fois en Français, avec une introduction. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale; 1879. 678 p. [Internet] [retrieved on March 18, 2021]. Available from: https://www.biusante.parisdescartes.fr/histmed/medica/cote?36058
15. Bloom DA, McGuire EJ, Lapides J. A brief history of urethral catheterization. J Urol 1994;151:317–25.
16. Kachlik D, Baca V, Bozdechova I, Cech P, Musil V. Anatomical terminology and nomenclature: past, present and highlights. Surg Radiol Anat 2008;30:459–66.
17. Pormann PE. Rufus of Ephesus: on melancholy. Darmstadt: Mohr Siebeck Tübingen; 2008. 331 p.
18. Ullmann M. Die Schrift des Rufus von Ephesos über die Gelbsucht: in Arabischer und Lateinischer Übersetzung. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht; 1983. p. 87.
19. Welcome Library. Seven named physicians and botanists of the classical world. Watercolour painting. Public Domain. London: Wellcome Library no. 543397i. [Internet] [retrieved on July 27, 2021]. Available from: https://wellcomecollection.org/works/ggeuzb48
20. Janick J, Stolarczyk J. Ancient Greek illustrated dioscoridean herbals: origins and impact of the Juliana Anicia Codex and the Codex neopolitanus. Not Bot Horti Agrobo 2012;40:9–17.
21. Osler W. Remarks on arterio-venous aneurysm. Lancet 1915;185: 949–55.
22. Meyermann R, Yasargil MG. Ultrastructural studies of cerebral berry aneurysms obtained operatively. Schiefer W, Klinger M, Brock M, editors. Brain abscess and meningitis advances in neurosurgery. Vol 9. Berlin: Springer; 1981. p. 174–81.
23. Costea CF, Turliuc Ş, Buzduga C, Cucu AI, Dumitrescu GF, Sava A, et al. The history of optic chiasm from antiquity to the twentieth century. Childs Nerv Syst 2017;33:1889–98.
24. Rose FC. The neurology of ancient Greece – an overview. J Hist Neurosci 1994;3:237–60.
25. Gersh CJ. Naming the body: a translation with commentary and interpretive essays of three anatomical works attributed to Rufus of Ephesus [Doctorate]. Michigan: University of Michigan; 2012. p. 210.
26. Rose FC. Cerebral localization in antiquity. J Hist Neurosci 2009;18: 239–47.
27. Swanson LW. Quest for the basic plan of nervous system circuitry. Brain Res Rev 2007;55:356–72.
28. Elhadi AM, Kalb S, Perez-Orribo L, Little AS, Spetzler RF, Preul MC. The journey of discovering skull base anatomy in ancient Egypt and the special influence of Alexandria. Neurosurg Focus 2012;33:1–13.
29. Federative International Programme for Anatomical Terminology (FIPAT). Terminologia anatomica. 2nd ed. 2019. [Internet]. [revised on August 16, 2021]. Available from: http://www.FIPAT.library.dal.ca
30. Swanson LW. Neuroanatomical terminology: a lexicon of classical origins and historical foundations. New York: Oxford University Press; 2014. 1054 p.
31. Goodrich JT. Landmarks in the history of neurosurgery. Ellenbogen RG, Sekhar LN, Kitchen ND, Silva HB, editors. Principles of neurological surgery. 4th ed. Philadelphia (PA): Elsevier; 2018. p. 1–37.e3.
32. Liddelow SA. Development of the choroid plexus and blood-CSF barrier. Front Neurosci 2015;9:1–13.
33. Mark HH. Aqueous humor dynamics in historical perspective. Surv Ophthalmol 2010;55:89–100.