For 1,600 years Dioscorides (ca. AD 40–80) was regarded as the foremost authority on drugs. He knew mild laxatives and strong purgatives, analgesics for headaches, antiseptics for wounds, emetics to rid one of ingested poisons, chemotherapy agents for cancer treatments, and even oral contraceptives. Why, then, have his works remained obscure in recent centuries? Because of one small oversight (Dioscorides himself thought it was self-evident): he failed to describe his method for organizing drugs by their affinities. This omission led medical authorities to use his materials as a guide to pharmacy while overlooking Dioscorides' most valuable contribution—his empirically derived method for observing and classifying drugs by clinical testing.

Dioscorides' De materia medica, a five-volume work, was written in the first century. Here revealed for the first time is the thesis that Dioscorides wrote more than a lengthy guide book. He wrote a great work of science. He had said that he discovered the natural order and would demonstrate it by his arrangement of drugs from plants, minerals, and animals. Until John M. Riddle's pathfinding study, no one saw the genius of his system. Botanists from the eighteenth century often attempted to find his unexplained method by identifying the sequences of his plants according to the Linnean system but, while there are certain patterns, there remained inexplicable incoherencies. However, Dioscorides' natural order as set down in De materia medica was determined by drug affinities as detected by his acute, clinical ability to observe drug reactions in and on the body. So remarkable was his ability to see relationships that, in some cases, he saw what we know to be common chemicals shared by plants of the same and related species and other natural product drugs from animal and mineral sources.

Western European and Islamic medicine considered Dioscorides the foremost authority on drugs, just as Hippocrates is regarded as the Father of Medicine. They saw him point the way but only described the end of his finger, despite the fact that in the sixteenth century alone there were over one hundred books published on him. If he had explained what he thought to be self-evident, then science, especially chemistry and medicine, would almost certainly have developed differently. In this culmination of over twenty years of research, Riddle employs modern science and anthropological studies innovatively and cautiously to demonstrate the substance to Dioscorides' authority in medicine.

A revelatory account of the “wonder drug” theriac, which became a powerful tool in the hands of medical and political authorities at the height of the Italian Renaissance.

From the 1490s, one of the most influential remedies to circulate in Europe was the “wonder drug” theriac. Although it had been in use for centuries, theriac gained special importance in the Renaissance, when Italy became a major hub of its production and export. A quintessential example of Galenic pharmacy, theriac was used to treat everything from venomous bites and poisons to headaches, sore throats, fevers, palsy, and heart problems. Examining this pivotal period in the history of medicine, Barbara Di Gennaro Splendore shows how a panacea became a vehicle for political power as well as intellectual and commercial competition.

So essential was theriac to good health that regimes in Bologna and Venice could secure popular support by asserting regulatory control over this “state drug.” Likewise, medical authorities relied on theriac to solidify their own legitimacy, through public ceremonies replete with music and choreography. Apothecaries and physicians engaged in spirited rivalry over branding and control of production, as well as disputes over optimal recipes, which included opium and viper flesh as well as dozens of other ingredients. Yet as Galenic science came into question in the late seventeenth century, the alliance between politics and pharmacy weakened. Physicians, in particular, grew hesitant over whether to continue promoting theriac at all. While the drug remained beloved, especially among the poor, its political power was significantly diminished by the nineteenth century.

Offering a vivid window into the political history of medicine, The State Drug sheds new light on the fraught, age-old intersection of power and pharmacy.