(tlg0057 files) Galen or pseudo-Galen attribution

[lcerrato]

A correspondent reports that
-tlg0057.tlg040.1st1K-grc1.xml (vol. 6, p. 832–835) [De dignotione ex insomniis]
-tlg0057.tlg079.1st1K-grc1.xml (vol. 14, p. 210–294) [De theriaca ad Pisonem]
are thought to be pseudo-Galen rather than Galen

Opening this for investigation and to see if we want to make further notations in the headers or the catalog.

[AlisonBabeu]

Hi @lcerrato I've looked up both of these works in question in the online TLG and they still attribute them to Galen using this edition. This does not of course mean that they might not have been attributed to Pseudo-Galen under newer scholarship, I just haven't been in the habit of creating new TLG IDs for works, or changing the attributed author if the TLG does not. We certainly could add Pseudo-Galen as an additional author in catalog records or to the headers, or both.

[lcerrato]

@AlisonBabeu I checked the TLG prior to the issue creation in the course of the correspondence but I figured we could open this for discussion for the larger group.

[etymologika]

Dear colleagues, Thank you! Concerning the attribution of Galenic treatises, the state of the art is there:
« Gesamtübersicht » of the Berlin Corpus Medicorum Graecorum : http://cmg.bbaw.de/epubl/online/galges.html
And the more comprehensive "Fichtner-Bibliography", especially for information on collection of extracts in Kühn's edition, that should not be considered as Galenic treatises: http://cmg.bbaw.de/epubl/online/online-publikationen/Galen-Bibliographie_2019-12y.pdf

[ThomasK81]

Hi all, just as a clarification while workgroups often coincide with author information, they are not equal pieces of information. For being in the same workgroup it is enough that the works have something in common. The association in the same workgroup does per se not mean that they have the same author. A joined tradition of the works or a historic grouping might already be enough. In general, workgroup urns shouldn't change. That's one way of making sure that we can maintain past references to them.

That all being said, the metadata in the XML files could be updated to reflect recent scholarship (it just can't happen through the workgroup).

[lcerrato]

@ThomasK81 @AlisonBabeu
We need a committee or another mechanism to approve or disapprove these types of changes. It's not something I alone want to (or should decide).
I'm sure this won't be the first or last request/suggestion along these lines.