THE ÆSCULAPIAN SERPENT.
It is not to be presumed that many in our day would seriously believe
that Æsculapius assumed the form of a large serpent, in the famous
legendary voyage to Rome; but it is hardly to be doubted, as I have
already remarked, that there was actually a serpent brought from
Epidaurus on the occasion. It is very probable that the Roman embassy
deliberately brought one with them; still, the coming of the reptile on
board the ship may have been accidental.[36] The latter was the case,
according to one tradition. At any rate, there was sufficient ground
on which a superstitious people could easily construct a mythical
superstructure to please their fancy.
The assumption of the form of a serpent by the god of medicine was not an
extraordinary thing, according to ancient beliefs. Plenty of instances
might be cited. I may give one. Alexander the Great was believed by many
to have been not the son of Philip, but of Jupiter Ammon, who appeared to
Olympias in reptilian shape. Plutarch tells the story. It is amusingly
related of Philip that “he lost one of his eyes as he applied it to the
chink of the door, when he saw the god, in the form of a serpent, in
his wife’s embraces.”[37] The ability to take on at pleasure any animal
or other form was regarded as one of the distinguishing prerogatives of
divinity.
Taking it for granted, then, that there was really a serpent transferred
from Epidaurus to Rome, which was regarded as Æsculapius, the interesting
question arises, of what species was it? A very conclusive answer may be
given.
It is known that at the Epidaurian Asclepion a species of serpent existed
in considerable numbers by permission. After stating that all serpents,
“but particularly those of a more yellow color, are considered as sacred
to Æsculapius, and are gentle and harmless toward men,” Pausanias says:
“They are alone nourished in the land of the Epidaurians; and I find
that the same circumstance takes place in other regions.”[38] Here,
then, is proof that there was a species of serpent which deserved to be
characterized as Æsculapian.
[Illustration: FIG. 2.—THE ÆSCULAPIAN SERPENT.]
It being reasonably certain that only one kind of serpent “was nourished
in the land of the Epidaurians,” and regarded as sacred to Æsculapius,
the following passage from Pliny is interesting: “The Æsculapian snake
was first brought to Rome from Epidaurus, but at the present day it is
very commonly reared, in our houses even; so much so, indeed, that, if
the breed were not kept down by the frequent conflagrations, it would
be impossible to make head against the rapid increase of them.”[39]
It is evident from this statement that the serpent in question was
not venomous, that its presence was prized, and that people would not
wilfully kill it.
Now, a pretty species of oviparous, non-venomous serpent, still common
in Italy, is believed to be the “Æsculapian snake” of Pliny, called
_Paroas_ by Greek writers.[40] I have examined a number of specimens.
Several are to be seen in the museum of the Academy of Natural Sciences,
Philadelphia. It has been described by Shaw under the name of _Coluber
Æsculapii_, but it is now often called _Elaphis Æsculapii_. A cut of it
is given in Brehm’s great popular work,[41] which is very good, except
that it gives one the impression that the animal is decidedly large. The
Æsculapian serpent is comparatively small, being from three to four and
one-half feet in length, and about as thick as a stout walking-cane. It
is orange-brown above, or, as Shaw puts it, “rufous colour on the upper
parts, more or less deep in different individuals.”[42] Beneath it is of
a straw color. The scales of the back are oval and carinated, and those
of the sides are smooth. The tapering tail measures about nine inches.
Movement takes place through vertical waves or swellings. It is very
active and can climb trees with facility. When attacked it will defend
itself; but it is by nature gentle and is easily tamed.
In his brief description of it, Cuvier follows Shaw. He adds: “It is that
which the ancients have represented in their statues of Æsculapius; and
it is probable that the serpent of Epidaurus was of this species. (The
_Coluber Æsculapii_ of Linnæus[43] is of a totally different species, and
belongs to America.)”[44]
The Æsculapian serpent is closely related to the ringed snake (_Natrix
torquata_), the only British member of the family; and the common black
snake (_Coluber constrictor_) of America is of the same genus; but
it should not be classed, as was done by Linnæus, with the decidedly
venomous viperine serpent, the _Viper communis_, or _Pelias berus_, of
which Figuier says: “It is not improbable that it is the _echis_ (εχις)
of Aristotle and the _vipera_ of Virgil, as it is the _manasso_ of the
Italians, the _adder_ of the country-people of England and Scotland, and
the _vipère_ of France. It is found in all these countries and in Europe
generally.”[45]
In an article contributed to a medical journal[46] I have said, in
reference to the Æsculapian serpent, that it is the one “which should
always be shown in medical symbolism.” This would hardly be questioned by
many; yet I am disposed to think that the restriction is too exclusive.
Another species of coluber, the uræus, or asp, has played a significant
rôle, as a symbol of life and healing, especially in Egypt, as will be
seen later. Our medical traditions, however, being mainly derived from
the Greeks, it would therefore seem but right that we should confine
ourselves very exclusively to the symbolism in use by them.