ἐν χρόνῳ δὲ ὀλίγῳ μετὰ ταῦτα τάδε ἄλλα συνήνεικε γενέσθαι. Ἀτόσσῃ τῇ Κύρου μὲν θυγατρὶ Δαρείου δὲ γυναικὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ μαστοῦ ἔφυ φῦμα, μετὰ δὲ ἐκραγὲν ἐνέμετο πρόσω. ὅσον μὲν δὴ χρόνον ἦν ἔλασσον, ἣ δὲ κρύπτουσα καὶ αἰσχυνομένη ἔφραζε οὐδενί: ἐπείτε δὲ ἐν κακῷ ἦν, μετεπέμψατο τὸν Δημοκήδεα καί οἱ ἐπέδεξε. ὁ δὲ φὰς ὑγιέα ποιήσειν ἐξορκοῖ μιν ἦ μέν οἱ ἀντυπουργήσειν ἐκείνην τοῦτο τὸ ἂν αὐτῆς δεηθῇ: δεήσεσθαι δὲ οὐδενὸς τῶν ὅσα ἐς αἰσχύνην ἐστὶ φέροντα.
Atossa, Darius’ wife, develops a lump in her breast, which first was small and then bursted and spread. Once her condition had badly deteriorated, she called the physician Democedes, who naturally promised to cure her (which he did), under certain conditions.
Now Asheri’s commentary note’s that φῦμα is “an inflammatory or apostemic tumor, but certainly benign; breast cancer should be excluded. Others have suggested acute superficial mastitis with suppuration and cellulite.” I’ve never heard “apostemic tumor” before, but apparently it means an abscess. Now I think Asheri is misguided here. Without looking any references, I assume that the reason why Asheri excludes breast cancer is simply that Democedes was able to cure her – that would have been impossible in the case of an advanced breast cancer (a breast cancer that ulcerates is already quite advanced). But here, as in many other places in Herodotus, I think you should look into this from a narratological point of view.
Now breast cancer is a quite common disease, lifetime incidence in women is about 10 % nowadays; besides, unlike a tumor in an internal organ, a breast tumor at an advanced stage is easy enough to appreciate from the surface. The natural course of the disease before modern treatment was often quite horrible, as beside painful metastases, many patients developed ulcers in their breast which in most extensive cases destroyed the entire breast and excavated the thoracic wall. Without looking for the evidence myself, I’ve been told that even before generalized access to doctors, average people (or at least average older women, I suppose) used to know that this disease existed and that it was bad, even if they didn’t call it with a modern name. In Herodotus’ time likewise many people probably knew enough about this disease to appreciate that an ulcerating lump in the breast typically meant a slow and painful death, except of course when it was something else than a cancer, like an abscess, in which case the patient usually got better – but for the average 5th century BC person, it was just a case of someone dying and someone getting better. What mattered for Herodotus is that his physician Democedes is the archetypal skilled doctor who, if anyone, is able to cure even the ugliest and deadliest affliction. It’s just a story, you can’t just say that since she was cured, she couldn’t have had breast cancer. And how was Herodotus supposed to know so precisely the nature of Atossa’s illness? Did he have access to her medical files?
