Chapter 8

Footnotes:[1]The wordBiologywas introduced by Gottfried Reinhold Treviranus (1776-1837) in hisBiologie oder die Philosophie der lebenden Natur, 6 vols., Göttingen, 1802-22, and was adopted by J.-B. de Lamarck (1744-1829) in hisHydrogéologie, Paris, 1802. It is probable that the first English use of the word in its modern sense is by Sir William Lawrence (1783-1867) in his workOn the Physiology, Zoology, and Natural History of Man, London, 1819; there are earlier English uses of the word, however, contrasted withbiography.[2]The remains of Alcmaeon are given in H. Diels’Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, Berlin, 1903, p. 103. Alcmaeon is considered in the companion chapter onGreek Medicine.[3]Especially the περὶ γυναικείης φύσιος,On the nature of woman, and the περὶ γυναικείων,On (the diseases of) women.[4]περὶ ἑβδομάδων. The Greek text is lost. We have, however, an early and barbarous Latin translation, and there has recently been printed an Arabic commentary. G. Bergsträsser,Pseudogaleni in Hippocratis de septimanis commentarium ab Hunaino Q. F. arabice versum, Leipzig, 1914.[5]περὶ νούσων δ’.[6]περὶ καρδίης.[7]Especially in the περὶ γονῆς.[8]The three works περὶ γονῆς, περὶ φὐσιος παιδίον, περὶ νούσων δ’,On generation,on the nature of the embryo,on diseases, book IV, form really one treatise on generation.[9]περὶ φὐσιος παιδίον,On the nature of the embryo, § 13. The same experience is described in the περὶ σαρκῶν,On the muscles.[10]περὶ φὐσιος παιδίον,On the nature of the embryo, § 29.[11]περὶ φὐσιος παιδίον,On the nature of the embryo, § 22.[12]Ibid. § 23.[13]See a valuable note by D’Arcy W. Thompson prefixed to his translation of theHistoria Animalium, Oxford, 1910.[14]Pliny,Naturalis historia, viii. 17.[15]Athenaeus,Deipnosophistae, ix. 58.[16]Aelian,Variae historiae, iv. 19.[17]The statement of the relation of Callisthenes to Aristotle rests on the somewhat unsatisfactory evidence of Simplicius (sixth century) who states that Callisthenes sent Aristotle certain astronomical observations from Babylon. Simplicius,Commentarii(Karsten), p. 226.[18]Plutarch,Alexander, lv.[19]The subject is well discussed by W. Ogle in the introduction to hisAristotle on the Parts of Animals, London, 1882.[20]The problem of genuineness is discussed in detail by R. Shute,On the history of the process by which the Aristotelian writings arrived at their present form, Oxford, 1888.[21]I have somewhat abbreviated this and the previous sentence.[22]De partibus animalium, i. 5; 644ᵇ 21.[23]De partibus animalium, i. 1; 641ᵇ 12.[24]Physics, ii. 8, 3; 198ᵇ 6. This passage is considerably abbreviated and slightly paraphrased.[25]De partibus animalium, i. 1; 641ᵅ 7.[26]Historia animalium, viii. 1; 588ᵇ 4.[27]De partibus animalium, iv. 5; 681ᵅ 15.[28]De partibus animalium, iv. 5; 681ᵅ 36.[29]De partibus animalium, iv. 5; 681ᵅ 10.[30]De generatione animalium, i. 21; 729ᵅ 21.[31]De generations animalium, i. 18; 725ᵅ 22.[32]De generatione animalium, i. 19; 727ᵅ 31.[33]De generatione animalium, i. 22; 730ᵇ 10.[34]De generatione animalium, i. 22; 730ᵅ 34.[35]Historia animalium, vi. 3; 561ᵅ 4.[36]Cor primum movens ultimum moriens.This famous sentence is the sense though not the phrasing ofDe generatione animalium, ii. 1 and 4.[37]Historia animalium, vi. 3; 561ᵅ 18.[38]De generatione animalium, iii. 9; 758ᵅ 37.[39]Historia animalium, i. 5; 489ᵅ 35.[40]Historia animalium, vi. 10; 565ᵇ 2.[41]The history of this discovery is given by Charles Singer,Studies in the History and Method of Science, vol. ii, Oxford, 1921, pp. 32 ff.[42]Johannes Müller,Ueber den glatten Hai des Aristoteles, Berlin, 1842.[43]De generatione animalium, ii. 1; 733ᵅ 6.[44]Metaphysics, i. 4.De generatione et corruptione, ii. 1.[45]De anima, ii. 1, ii.[46]De anima, ii. 2, ii; 413ᵅ 22.[47]The question of Aristotle’s meaning in connexion with this topic, of primary importance for all thought, has a vast literature. An authoritative work is R. D. Hicks,Aristotle, De anima, Cambridge, 1907.[48]De partibus animalium, i. 4; 644ᵅ 22.[49]De partibus animalium, i. 4; 644ᵅ 27.[50]De partibus animalium, i. 4; 644ᵅ 16.[51]The classificatory system of Aristotle and its history are discussed in great detail by J. B. Meyer,Aristoteles’ Thierkunde: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Zoologie, Physiologie und alten Philosophie, Berlin, 1855.[52]The work by which Wotton is known is hisDe differentiis animalium, Paris, 1552.[53]There is a valuable chapter on the subject of the Aristotelian classificatory system as based on the method of reproduction in W. Ogle,Aristotle on the Parts of Animals, London, 1882.[54]The rediscovery and verification of this and other Aristotelian observations is detailed by C. Singer, ‘Greek Biology and the Rise of Modern Biology,’Studies in the History and Method of Science, vol. ii, Oxford, 1921.[55]Historia animalium, ii. 17; 507ᵅ 33.[56]De partibus animalium, ii. 17; 507ᵇ 12.[57]Historia animalium, ii. 17; 507ᵇ 12.[58]Historia animalium, v. 6; 541ᵇ 1. The hectocotylization of the cephalopod arm which is here recorded as an element in the reproductive process of these animals is denied in theDe generatione animalium, i. 15; 720ᵇ 32, where we read that ‘the insertion of the arm of the male into the funnel of the female ... is only for the sake of attachment, and it is not an organ useful for generation, for it is outside the passage in the male and indeed outside the body of the male altogether.‘ Yet even here Aristotle knows of the physical relationship of the arm. See note on this point in the translation of the passage by A. Platt, Oxford, 1910.[59]J. B. Verany,Mollusques méditerranéens, Genoa, 1851.[60]E. Racovitza.Archives de zoologie experimentale, Paris, 1894.[61]The paragraphs concerning the fishing-frog and torpedo are made up of sentences rearranged from theDe partibus animalium, iv. 13; 696ᵅ 26, and theHistoria animalium, ix. 37; 620ᵇ 15.[62]De partibus animalium, ii. 1; 646ᵅ 12.[63]De partibus animalium, ii. 10.[64]It is possible that Theophrastus derived the word pericarp from Aristotle. Cp.De anima, ii. 1, 412ᵇ 2. In the passage τὸ φύλλον περικαρπίου σκέπασμα, τὸ δὲ περικάρπιον καρποῦ, in theDe animathe word does not, however, seem to have the full technical force that Theophrastus gives to it.[65]Historia plantarum, i. 2, vi.[66]Ibid.i. 1, iv.[67]Historia plantarum, ii. 1, i.[68]Historia plantarum, viii. 1, i.[69]Nathaniel Highmore,A History of Generation, London, 1651.[70]Marcello Malpighi,Anatome plantarum, London, 1675.[71]Nehemiah Grew,Anatomy of Vegetables begun, London, 1672.[72]Pliny,Naturalis historia, xiii. 4.[73]The curious word ὀλυνθάζειν, here translatedto use the wild fig, is from ὄλυνθος, a kind of wild fig which seldom ripens. The special meaning here given to the word is explained in another work of Theophrastus,De causis plantarum, ii. 9, xv. After describing caprification in figs, he says τὸ δὲ ἐπὶ τῶν φοινίκων συμβαῖνον οὐ ταὐτὸν μέν, ἔχει δέ τινα ὁμοιότητα τούτω δι’ ὁ καλοῦσιν ὀλυνθάζειν αὐτούς. ‘The same thing is not done with dates, but something analogous to it, whence this is called ὀλυνθάζειν’.[74]Historia plantarum, ii. 8, iv.[75]Herodotus i. 193.[76]Historia plantarum, ii. 8, i.[77]Ibid.ii. 8, ii.[78]Historia plantarum, ii. 8, iv.[79]Ibid.i. 1, ix.[80]Ibid.iii. 18, x.[81]De causis plantarum, ii. 23.[82]Historia plantarum, i. 13, iii.[83]See the companion chapter onGreek Medicine.[84]The works of Crateuas have recently been printed by M. Wellmann as an appendix to the text of Dioscorides,De re medica, 3 vols., Berlin, 1906-17. The source and fate of his plant drawings are discussed in the same author’sKrateuas, Berlin, 1897.[85]The manuscript in question is Med. Graec. 1 at what was the Royal Library at Vienna. It is known as theConstantinopolitanus. After the war it was taken to St. Mark’s at Venice, but either has been or is about to be restored to Vienna. A facsimile of this grand manuscript was published by Sijthoff, Leyden, 1906.[86]The lady in question was Juliana Anicia, daughter of Anicius Olybrius, Emperor of the West in 472, and his wife Placidia, daughter of Valentinian III. Juliana was betrothed in 479 by the Eastern Emperor Zeno to Theodoric the Ostrogoth, but was married, probably in 487 when the manuscript was presented to her, to Areobindus, a high military officer under the Byzantine Emperor Anastasius.[87]The importance of this manuscript as well as the position of Dioscorides as medical botanist is discussed by Charles Singer in an article ‘Greek Biology and the Rise of Modern Biology’;Studies in the History and Method of Science, vol. ii, Oxford, 1921.[88]This manuscript is at the University Library at Leyden, where it is numbered Voss Q 9.[89]A good instance of Galen’s teleological point of view is afforded by his classical description ofthe handin the περὶ χρείας τῶν ἐν ἀνθρώπου σώματι μορίων,On the uses of the parts of the body of man, i. 1. This passage is available in English in a tract by Thomas Bellott, London, 1840.[90]C. H. Haskins, ‘The reception of Arabic science in England,’English Historical Review, London, 1915, p. 56.[91]The latest and best work on the Aristotelian translations of Scott is an inaugural dissertation by A. H. Querfeld,Michael Scottus und seine Schrift, De secretis naturae, Leipzig, 1919.[92]J. G. Schneider,Aristotelis de animalibus historiae, Leipzig, 1811, p. cxxvi. L. Dittmeyer,Guilelmi Moerbekensis translatio commentationis Aristotelicae de generatione animalium, Dillingen, 1915. L. Dittmeyer,De animalibus historia, Leipzig, 1907.[93]The subject of the Latin translations of Aristotle is traversed by A. and C. Jourdain,Recherches critiques sur l’âge des traductions latines d’Aristote, 2nd ed., Paris, 1843; M. Grabmann,Forschungen über die lateinischen Aristoteles-Übersetzungen des XIII. Jahrhunderts, Münster i/W., 1916; and F. Wüstenfeld,Die Übersetzungen arabischer Werke in das Lateinische seit dem XI. Jahrhundert, Göttingen, 1877.[94]The enormousDe Animalibusof Albert of Cologne is now available in an edition by H. Stadler,Albertus Magnus De Animalibus Libri XXVI nach der cölner Urschrift, 2 vols., Münster i/W., 1916-21. The quotation is translated from vol. i, pp. 465-6.[95]Conrad’s work is conveniently edited by H. Schultz,Das Buch der Natur von Conrad von Megenberg, die erste Naturgeschichte in deutscher Sprache, in Neu-Hochdeutsche Sprache bearbeitet, Greifswald, 1897. Conrad’s work is based on that of Thomas of Cantimpré (1201-70).[96]Hieronimo Fabrizio of Acquapendente,De formato foetu, Padua, 1604.[97]William Harvey,Exercitationes de generatione animalium, London, 1651.[98]Karl Ernst von Baer,Ueber die Entwickelungsgeschichte der Thiere, Königsberg, 1828-37.[99]The works of Herophilus are lost. This fine passage has been preserved for us by Sextus Empiricus, a third century physician, in his πρὸς τοὺς μαθηματικοὺς ἀντιρῥητικοί, which is in essence an attack on all positive philosophy. It is an entertaining fact that we should have to go to such a work for remains of the greatest anatomist of antiquity. The passage is in the section directed against ethical writers, xi. 50.[100]The word φυσικός, though it passed over into Latin (Cicero) with the meaningnaturalist, acquired the connotation ofsorcereramong the later Greek writers. Perhaps the wordphysicianuswas introduced to make a distinction from the charm-mongeringphysicus. In later Latinphysicusandmedicusare almost always interchangeable.[101]This fragment has been published in vol. iii, part 1, of theSupplementum Aristotelicumby H. Diels asAnonymi Londinensis ex Aristotelis Iatricis Menonis et Aliis Medicis Eclogae, Berlin, 1893. See also H. Bekh and F. Spät,Anonymus Londinensis, Auszüge eines Unbekannten aus Aristoteles-Menons Handbuch der Medizin, Berlin, 1896.[102]It is tempting, also, to connect the Asclepian snake cult with the prominence of the serpent in Minoan religion.[103]This wordpronoia, as Galen explains (εἰς τὸ Ἱπποκράτους προγνωστικόν, K. xviii, B. p. 10), is not used in the philosophic sense, as when we ask whether the universe was made by chance or bypronoia, nor is it used quite in the modern sense ofprognosis, though it includes that too.Pronoiain Hippocrates means knowing things about a patient before you are told them. See E. T. Withington, ‘Some Greek medical terms with reference to Luke and Liddell and Scott,’Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine(Section of the History of Medicine), xiii, p. 124, London, 1920.[104]Prognostics1.[105]There is a discussion of the relation of the Asclepiadae to temple practice in an article by E. T. Withington, ‘The Asclepiadae and the Priest of Asclepius,’ inStudies in the History and Method of Science, edited by Charles Singer, vol. ii, Oxford, 1921.[106]The works of Anaximenes are lost. This phrase of his, however, is preserved by the later writer Aetios.[107]For the work of these physicians see especially M.Wellmann,Fragmentsammlung der griechischen Aerzte, Bd. I, Berlin, 1901.[108]Galen, περὶ ἀνατομικῶν ἐγχειρήσεων,On anatomical preparations, § 1, K. II, p. 282.[109]Historia animalium, iii. 3, where it is ascribed to Polybus. The same passage is, however, repeated twice in the Hippocratic writings, viz. in the περὶ φύσιος ἀνθρώπου,On the nature of man, Littré, vi. 58, and in the περὶ ὀστέων φύσιος,On the nature of bones, Littré, ix. 174.[110]Παραγγελίαι, § 6.[111]It must, however, be admitted that even in the Hippocratic collection itself are cases of breach of the oath. Such, for instance, is the induction of abortion related in περὶ φύσιος παιδίον,On the nature of the embryo. There is evidence, however, that the author of this work was not a medical practitioner.[112]Rome Urbinas 64, fo. 116.[113]Kühlewein, i. 79, regards this as an interpolated passage.[114]Littré, ii. 112; Kühlewein, i. 79. The texts vary: Kühlewein is followed except in the last sentence.[115]Περὶ τέχνες, § 3.[116]Περὶ νούσων α’, § 6.[117]A reference to dissection in the περὶ ἄρθρων,On thejoints, § 1, appears of the present writer to be of Alexandrian date.[118]They are to be found as an Appendix to Books I and III of theEpidemicsand embedded in Book III.[119]John Cheyne (1777-1836) described this type of respiration in theDublin Hospital Reports, 1818, ii, p. 216. An extreme case of this condition had been described by Cheyne’s namesake George Cheyne (1671-1743) as the famous ‘Case of the Hon. Col. Townshend’ in hisEnglish Malady, London, 1733. William Stokes (1804-78) published his account of Cheyne-Stokes breathing in theDublin Quarterly Journal of the Medical Sciences, 1846, ii, p. 73.[120]The Epidaurian inscriptions are given by M. Fraenkel in theCorpus Inscriptionum GraecarumIV, 951-6, and are discussed by Mary Hamilton (Mrs. Guy Dickins),Incubation, St. Andrews, 1906, from whose translation I have quoted. Further inscriptions are given by Cavvadias in theArchaiologike Ephemeris, 1918, p. 155 (issued 1921).[121]We are almost told as much in the apocryphalGospel ofNicodemus, § 1, a work probably composed about the end of the fourth century.[122]Astley Paston Cooper,Treatise on Dislocations and Fractures of the Joints, London, 1822, andObservations on Fractures of the Neck and the Thighbone, &c., London, 1823.[123]This famous manuscript is known as Laurentian, Plutarch 74, 7, and its figures have been reproduced by H. Schöne,Apollonius von Kitium, Leipzig, 1896.[124]The first lines are the source of the famous lines in Goethe’sFaust:‘Ach Gott! die Kunst ist langUnd kurz ist unser Leben,Mir wird bei meinem kritischen BestrebenDoch oft um Kopf und Busen bang.’[125]The extreme of treatment refers in the original to the extreme restriction of diet, ἐς ἀκριβείην, but the meaning of the Aphorism has always been taken as more generalized.[126]The ancients knew almost nothing of infection asapplied specificallyto disease. All early peoples—including Greeks and Romans—believed in the transmission of qualities from object to object. Thus purity and impurity and good and bad luck were infections, and diseases were held to be infections in that sense. But there is little evidence in the belief of the special infectivity ofdisease as suchin antiquity. Some few diseases are, however, unequivocally referred to as infectious in a limited number of passages, e. g. ophthalmia, scabies, and phthisis in the περὶ διαφορᾶς πυρετῶν,On the differentiae of fevers, K. vii, p. 279. The references to infection in antiquity are detailed by C. and D. Singer, ‘The scientific position of Girolamo Fracastoro’,Annals of Medical History, vol. i, New York, 1917.[127]K. F. H. Marx,Herophilus, ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Medizin, Karlsruhe, 1838.[128]Galen, περὶ ἀνατομικῶν ἐγχειρήσεων,On anatomical preparations, ix. 5 (last sentence).[129]Galen, περὶ φλεβῶν καὶ ἀρτηριων ανατομῆς,On the anatomy of veins and arteries, i.[130]The quotation is from chapter xxxiii, line 44 of theAnonymus Londinensis. H. Diels,Anonymus Londinensisin theSupplementum Aristotelicum, vol. iii, pars 1, Berlin, 1893.[131]Sanctorio Santorio,Oratio in archilyceo patavino anno 1612 habita; de medicina statica aphorismi. Venice, 1614.[132]This is the only passage of Hegetor’s writing that has survived. It has been preserved in the work of Apollonius of Citium.[133]Leyden Voss 4ᵒ 9*of the sixth century is a fragment of this work.[134]V. Rose,Sorani Ephesii vetus translatio Latina cum additis Graeci textus reliquiis, Leipzig, 1882; F. Weindler,Geschichte der gynäkologisch-anatomischen Abbildung, Dresden, 1908.[135]The discovery and attribution of these figures is the work of K. Sudhoff. A bibliography of his writings on the subject will be found in a ‘Study in Early Renaissance Anatomy’ in C. Singer’sStudies in the History and Method of Science, vol. i, Oxford, 1917.[136]First Latin edition Venice, 1552; first Greek edition Paris, 1554.[137]e. g. περὶ κράσεως καὶ δυνάμεως τῶν ἁπάντων φαρμάκων and the φάρμακα.[138]e. g.De dynamidiis Galeni,Secreta Hippocratisand many astrological tracts.[139]Dissection of animals was practised at Salerno as early as the eleventh century.[140]The sources of the anatomical knowledge of the Middle Ages are discussed in detail in the following works: R. R. von Töply,Studien zur Geschichte der Anatomie im Mittelalter, Vienna, 1898; K. Sudhoff,Tradition und Naturbeobachtung, Leipzig, 1907; and also numerous articles in theArchiv für Geschichte der Medizin und Naturwissenschaften; Charles Singer, ‘A Study in Early Renaissance Anatomy’, inStudies in the History and Method of Science, vol. i, Oxford, 1917.[141]Benivieni’s notes were published posthumously. Some of the spurious Greek works of the Hippocratic collection have also case notes.

Footnotes:

[1]The wordBiologywas introduced by Gottfried Reinhold Treviranus (1776-1837) in hisBiologie oder die Philosophie der lebenden Natur, 6 vols., Göttingen, 1802-22, and was adopted by J.-B. de Lamarck (1744-1829) in hisHydrogéologie, Paris, 1802. It is probable that the first English use of the word in its modern sense is by Sir William Lawrence (1783-1867) in his workOn the Physiology, Zoology, and Natural History of Man, London, 1819; there are earlier English uses of the word, however, contrasted withbiography.

[2]The remains of Alcmaeon are given in H. Diels’Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, Berlin, 1903, p. 103. Alcmaeon is considered in the companion chapter onGreek Medicine.

[3]Especially the περὶ γυναικείης φύσιος,On the nature of woman, and the περὶ γυναικείων,On (the diseases of) women.

[4]περὶ ἑβδομάδων. The Greek text is lost. We have, however, an early and barbarous Latin translation, and there has recently been printed an Arabic commentary. G. Bergsträsser,Pseudogaleni in Hippocratis de septimanis commentarium ab Hunaino Q. F. arabice versum, Leipzig, 1914.

[5]περὶ νούσων δ’.

[6]περὶ καρδίης.

[7]Especially in the περὶ γονῆς.

[8]The three works περὶ γονῆς, περὶ φὐσιος παιδίον, περὶ νούσων δ’,On generation,on the nature of the embryo,on diseases, book IV, form really one treatise on generation.

[9]περὶ φὐσιος παιδίον,On the nature of the embryo, § 13. The same experience is described in the περὶ σαρκῶν,On the muscles.

[10]περὶ φὐσιος παιδίον,On the nature of the embryo, § 29.

[11]περὶ φὐσιος παιδίον,On the nature of the embryo, § 22.

[12]Ibid. § 23.

[13]See a valuable note by D’Arcy W. Thompson prefixed to his translation of theHistoria Animalium, Oxford, 1910.

[14]Pliny,Naturalis historia, viii. 17.

[15]Athenaeus,Deipnosophistae, ix. 58.

[16]Aelian,Variae historiae, iv. 19.

[17]The statement of the relation of Callisthenes to Aristotle rests on the somewhat unsatisfactory evidence of Simplicius (sixth century) who states that Callisthenes sent Aristotle certain astronomical observations from Babylon. Simplicius,Commentarii(Karsten), p. 226.

[18]Plutarch,Alexander, lv.

[19]The subject is well discussed by W. Ogle in the introduction to hisAristotle on the Parts of Animals, London, 1882.

[20]The problem of genuineness is discussed in detail by R. Shute,On the history of the process by which the Aristotelian writings arrived at their present form, Oxford, 1888.

[21]I have somewhat abbreviated this and the previous sentence.

[22]De partibus animalium, i. 5; 644ᵇ 21.

[23]De partibus animalium, i. 1; 641ᵇ 12.

[24]Physics, ii. 8, 3; 198ᵇ 6. This passage is considerably abbreviated and slightly paraphrased.

[25]De partibus animalium, i. 1; 641ᵅ 7.

[26]Historia animalium, viii. 1; 588ᵇ 4.

[27]De partibus animalium, iv. 5; 681ᵅ 15.

[28]De partibus animalium, iv. 5; 681ᵅ 36.

[29]De partibus animalium, iv. 5; 681ᵅ 10.

[30]De generatione animalium, i. 21; 729ᵅ 21.

[31]De generations animalium, i. 18; 725ᵅ 22.

[32]De generatione animalium, i. 19; 727ᵅ 31.

[33]De generatione animalium, i. 22; 730ᵇ 10.[34]De generatione animalium, i. 22; 730ᵅ 34.[35]Historia animalium, vi. 3; 561ᵅ 4.[36]Cor primum movens ultimum moriens.This famous sentence is the sense though not the phrasing ofDe generatione animalium, ii. 1 and 4.[37]Historia animalium, vi. 3; 561ᵅ 18.[38]De generatione animalium, iii. 9; 758ᵅ 37.[39]Historia animalium, i. 5; 489ᵅ 35.[40]Historia animalium, vi. 10; 565ᵇ 2.[41]The history of this discovery is given by Charles Singer,Studies in the History and Method of Science, vol. ii, Oxford, 1921, pp. 32 ff.[42]Johannes Müller,Ueber den glatten Hai des Aristoteles, Berlin, 1842.[43]De generatione animalium, ii. 1; 733ᵅ 6.[44]Metaphysics, i. 4.De generatione et corruptione, ii. 1.[45]De anima, ii. 1, ii.[46]De anima, ii. 2, ii; 413ᵅ 22.[47]The question of Aristotle’s meaning in connexion with this topic, of primary importance for all thought, has a vast literature. An authoritative work is R. D. Hicks,Aristotle, De anima, Cambridge, 1907.[48]De partibus animalium, i. 4; 644ᵅ 22.[49]De partibus animalium, i. 4; 644ᵅ 27.[50]De partibus animalium, i. 4; 644ᵅ 16.[51]The classificatory system of Aristotle and its history are discussed in great detail by J. B. Meyer,Aristoteles’ Thierkunde: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Zoologie, Physiologie und alten Philosophie, Berlin, 1855.[52]The work by which Wotton is known is hisDe differentiis animalium, Paris, 1552.[53]There is a valuable chapter on the subject of the Aristotelian classificatory system as based on the method of reproduction in W. Ogle,Aristotle on the Parts of Animals, London, 1882.[54]The rediscovery and verification of this and other Aristotelian observations is detailed by C. Singer, ‘Greek Biology and the Rise of Modern Biology,’Studies in the History and Method of Science, vol. ii, Oxford, 1921.[55]Historia animalium, ii. 17; 507ᵅ 33.[56]De partibus animalium, ii. 17; 507ᵇ 12.[57]Historia animalium, ii. 17; 507ᵇ 12.[58]Historia animalium, v. 6; 541ᵇ 1. The hectocotylization of the cephalopod arm which is here recorded as an element in the reproductive process of these animals is denied in theDe generatione animalium, i. 15; 720ᵇ 32, where we read that ‘the insertion of the arm of the male into the funnel of the female ... is only for the sake of attachment, and it is not an organ useful for generation, for it is outside the passage in the male and indeed outside the body of the male altogether.‘ Yet even here Aristotle knows of the physical relationship of the arm. See note on this point in the translation of the passage by A. Platt, Oxford, 1910.[59]J. B. Verany,Mollusques méditerranéens, Genoa, 1851.[60]E. Racovitza.Archives de zoologie experimentale, Paris, 1894.[61]The paragraphs concerning the fishing-frog and torpedo are made up of sentences rearranged from theDe partibus animalium, iv. 13; 696ᵅ 26, and theHistoria animalium, ix. 37; 620ᵇ 15.[62]De partibus animalium, ii. 1; 646ᵅ 12.[63]De partibus animalium, ii. 10.[64]It is possible that Theophrastus derived the word pericarp from Aristotle. Cp.De anima, ii. 1, 412ᵇ 2. In the passage τὸ φύλλον περικαρπίου σκέπασμα, τὸ δὲ περικάρπιον καρποῦ, in theDe animathe word does not, however, seem to have the full technical force that Theophrastus gives to it.[65]Historia plantarum, i. 2, vi.[66]Ibid.i. 1, iv.[67]Historia plantarum, ii. 1, i.[68]Historia plantarum, viii. 1, i.[69]Nathaniel Highmore,A History of Generation, London, 1651.[70]Marcello Malpighi,Anatome plantarum, London, 1675.[71]Nehemiah Grew,Anatomy of Vegetables begun, London, 1672.[72]Pliny,Naturalis historia, xiii. 4.[73]The curious word ὀλυνθάζειν, here translatedto use the wild fig, is from ὄλυνθος, a kind of wild fig which seldom ripens. The special meaning here given to the word is explained in another work of Theophrastus,De causis plantarum, ii. 9, xv. After describing caprification in figs, he says τὸ δὲ ἐπὶ τῶν φοινίκων συμβαῖνον οὐ ταὐτὸν μέν, ἔχει δέ τινα ὁμοιότητα τούτω δι’ ὁ καλοῦσιν ὀλυνθάζειν αὐτούς. ‘The same thing is not done with dates, but something analogous to it, whence this is called ὀλυνθάζειν’.[74]Historia plantarum, ii. 8, iv.[75]Herodotus i. 193.[76]Historia plantarum, ii. 8, i.[77]Ibid.ii. 8, ii.[78]Historia plantarum, ii. 8, iv.[79]Ibid.i. 1, ix.[80]Ibid.iii. 18, x.[81]De causis plantarum, ii. 23.[82]Historia plantarum, i. 13, iii.[83]See the companion chapter onGreek Medicine.[84]The works of Crateuas have recently been printed by M. Wellmann as an appendix to the text of Dioscorides,De re medica, 3 vols., Berlin, 1906-17. The source and fate of his plant drawings are discussed in the same author’sKrateuas, Berlin, 1897.[85]The manuscript in question is Med. Graec. 1 at what was the Royal Library at Vienna. It is known as theConstantinopolitanus. After the war it was taken to St. Mark’s at Venice, but either has been or is about to be restored to Vienna. A facsimile of this grand manuscript was published by Sijthoff, Leyden, 1906.[86]The lady in question was Juliana Anicia, daughter of Anicius Olybrius, Emperor of the West in 472, and his wife Placidia, daughter of Valentinian III. Juliana was betrothed in 479 by the Eastern Emperor Zeno to Theodoric the Ostrogoth, but was married, probably in 487 when the manuscript was presented to her, to Areobindus, a high military officer under the Byzantine Emperor Anastasius.[87]The importance of this manuscript as well as the position of Dioscorides as medical botanist is discussed by Charles Singer in an article ‘Greek Biology and the Rise of Modern Biology’;Studies in the History and Method of Science, vol. ii, Oxford, 1921.[88]This manuscript is at the University Library at Leyden, where it is numbered Voss Q 9.[89]A good instance of Galen’s teleological point of view is afforded by his classical description ofthe handin the περὶ χρείας τῶν ἐν ἀνθρώπου σώματι μορίων,On the uses of the parts of the body of man, i. 1. This passage is available in English in a tract by Thomas Bellott, London, 1840.[90]C. H. Haskins, ‘The reception of Arabic science in England,’English Historical Review, London, 1915, p. 56.[91]The latest and best work on the Aristotelian translations of Scott is an inaugural dissertation by A. H. Querfeld,Michael Scottus und seine Schrift, De secretis naturae, Leipzig, 1919.[92]J. G. Schneider,Aristotelis de animalibus historiae, Leipzig, 1811, p. cxxvi. L. Dittmeyer,Guilelmi Moerbekensis translatio commentationis Aristotelicae de generatione animalium, Dillingen, 1915. L. Dittmeyer,De animalibus historia, Leipzig, 1907.[93]The subject of the Latin translations of Aristotle is traversed by A. and C. Jourdain,Recherches critiques sur l’âge des traductions latines d’Aristote, 2nd ed., Paris, 1843; M. Grabmann,Forschungen über die lateinischen Aristoteles-Übersetzungen des XIII. Jahrhunderts, Münster i/W., 1916; and F. Wüstenfeld,Die Übersetzungen arabischer Werke in das Lateinische seit dem XI. Jahrhundert, Göttingen, 1877.[94]The enormousDe Animalibusof Albert of Cologne is now available in an edition by H. Stadler,Albertus Magnus De Animalibus Libri XXVI nach der cölner Urschrift, 2 vols., Münster i/W., 1916-21. The quotation is translated from vol. i, pp. 465-6.[95]Conrad’s work is conveniently edited by H. Schultz,Das Buch der Natur von Conrad von Megenberg, die erste Naturgeschichte in deutscher Sprache, in Neu-Hochdeutsche Sprache bearbeitet, Greifswald, 1897. Conrad’s work is based on that of Thomas of Cantimpré (1201-70).[96]Hieronimo Fabrizio of Acquapendente,De formato foetu, Padua, 1604.[97]William Harvey,Exercitationes de generatione animalium, London, 1651.[98]Karl Ernst von Baer,Ueber die Entwickelungsgeschichte der Thiere, Königsberg, 1828-37.[99]The works of Herophilus are lost. This fine passage has been preserved for us by Sextus Empiricus, a third century physician, in his πρὸς τοὺς μαθηματικοὺς ἀντιρῥητικοί, which is in essence an attack on all positive philosophy. It is an entertaining fact that we should have to go to such a work for remains of the greatest anatomist of antiquity. The passage is in the section directed against ethical writers, xi. 50.[100]The word φυσικός, though it passed over into Latin (Cicero) with the meaningnaturalist, acquired the connotation ofsorcereramong the later Greek writers. Perhaps the wordphysicianuswas introduced to make a distinction from the charm-mongeringphysicus. In later Latinphysicusandmedicusare almost always interchangeable.[101]This fragment has been published in vol. iii, part 1, of theSupplementum Aristotelicumby H. Diels asAnonymi Londinensis ex Aristotelis Iatricis Menonis et Aliis Medicis Eclogae, Berlin, 1893. See also H. Bekh and F. Spät,Anonymus Londinensis, Auszüge eines Unbekannten aus Aristoteles-Menons Handbuch der Medizin, Berlin, 1896.[102]It is tempting, also, to connect the Asclepian snake cult with the prominence of the serpent in Minoan religion.[103]This wordpronoia, as Galen explains (εἰς τὸ Ἱπποκράτους προγνωστικόν, K. xviii, B. p. 10), is not used in the philosophic sense, as when we ask whether the universe was made by chance or bypronoia, nor is it used quite in the modern sense ofprognosis, though it includes that too.Pronoiain Hippocrates means knowing things about a patient before you are told them. See E. T. Withington, ‘Some Greek medical terms with reference to Luke and Liddell and Scott,’Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine(Section of the History of Medicine), xiii, p. 124, London, 1920.[104]Prognostics1.[105]There is a discussion of the relation of the Asclepiadae to temple practice in an article by E. T. Withington, ‘The Asclepiadae and the Priest of Asclepius,’ inStudies in the History and Method of Science, edited by Charles Singer, vol. ii, Oxford, 1921.[106]The works of Anaximenes are lost. This phrase of his, however, is preserved by the later writer Aetios.[107]For the work of these physicians see especially M.Wellmann,Fragmentsammlung der griechischen Aerzte, Bd. I, Berlin, 1901.[108]Galen, περὶ ἀνατομικῶν ἐγχειρήσεων,On anatomical preparations, § 1, K. II, p. 282.[109]Historia animalium, iii. 3, where it is ascribed to Polybus. The same passage is, however, repeated twice in the Hippocratic writings, viz. in the περὶ φύσιος ἀνθρώπου,On the nature of man, Littré, vi. 58, and in the περὶ ὀστέων φύσιος,On the nature of bones, Littré, ix. 174.[110]Παραγγελίαι, § 6.[111]It must, however, be admitted that even in the Hippocratic collection itself are cases of breach of the oath. Such, for instance, is the induction of abortion related in περὶ φύσιος παιδίον,On the nature of the embryo. There is evidence, however, that the author of this work was not a medical practitioner.[112]Rome Urbinas 64, fo. 116.[113]Kühlewein, i. 79, regards this as an interpolated passage.[114]Littré, ii. 112; Kühlewein, i. 79. The texts vary: Kühlewein is followed except in the last sentence.[115]Περὶ τέχνες, § 3.[116]Περὶ νούσων α’, § 6.[117]A reference to dissection in the περὶ ἄρθρων,On thejoints, § 1, appears of the present writer to be of Alexandrian date.[118]They are to be found as an Appendix to Books I and III of theEpidemicsand embedded in Book III.[119]John Cheyne (1777-1836) described this type of respiration in theDublin Hospital Reports, 1818, ii, p. 216. An extreme case of this condition had been described by Cheyne’s namesake George Cheyne (1671-1743) as the famous ‘Case of the Hon. Col. Townshend’ in hisEnglish Malady, London, 1733. William Stokes (1804-78) published his account of Cheyne-Stokes breathing in theDublin Quarterly Journal of the Medical Sciences, 1846, ii, p. 73.[120]The Epidaurian inscriptions are given by M. Fraenkel in theCorpus Inscriptionum GraecarumIV, 951-6, and are discussed by Mary Hamilton (Mrs. Guy Dickins),Incubation, St. Andrews, 1906, from whose translation I have quoted. Further inscriptions are given by Cavvadias in theArchaiologike Ephemeris, 1918, p. 155 (issued 1921).[121]We are almost told as much in the apocryphalGospel ofNicodemus, § 1, a work probably composed about the end of the fourth century.[122]Astley Paston Cooper,Treatise on Dislocations and Fractures of the Joints, London, 1822, andObservations on Fractures of the Neck and the Thighbone, &c., London, 1823.[123]This famous manuscript is known as Laurentian, Plutarch 74, 7, and its figures have been reproduced by H. Schöne,Apollonius von Kitium, Leipzig, 1896.[124]The first lines are the source of the famous lines in Goethe’sFaust:‘Ach Gott! die Kunst ist langUnd kurz ist unser Leben,Mir wird bei meinem kritischen BestrebenDoch oft um Kopf und Busen bang.’[125]The extreme of treatment refers in the original to the extreme restriction of diet, ἐς ἀκριβείην, but the meaning of the Aphorism has always been taken as more generalized.[126]The ancients knew almost nothing of infection asapplied specificallyto disease. All early peoples—including Greeks and Romans—believed in the transmission of qualities from object to object. Thus purity and impurity and good and bad luck were infections, and diseases were held to be infections in that sense. But there is little evidence in the belief of the special infectivity ofdisease as suchin antiquity. Some few diseases are, however, unequivocally referred to as infectious in a limited number of passages, e. g. ophthalmia, scabies, and phthisis in the περὶ διαφορᾶς πυρετῶν,On the differentiae of fevers, K. vii, p. 279. The references to infection in antiquity are detailed by C. and D. Singer, ‘The scientific position of Girolamo Fracastoro’,Annals of Medical History, vol. i, New York, 1917.[127]K. F. H. Marx,Herophilus, ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Medizin, Karlsruhe, 1838.[128]Galen, περὶ ἀνατομικῶν ἐγχειρήσεων,On anatomical preparations, ix. 5 (last sentence).[129]Galen, περὶ φλεβῶν καὶ ἀρτηριων ανατομῆς,On the anatomy of veins and arteries, i.[130]The quotation is from chapter xxxiii, line 44 of theAnonymus Londinensis. H. Diels,Anonymus Londinensisin theSupplementum Aristotelicum, vol. iii, pars 1, Berlin, 1893.[131]Sanctorio Santorio,Oratio in archilyceo patavino anno 1612 habita; de medicina statica aphorismi. Venice, 1614.[132]This is the only passage of Hegetor’s writing that has survived. It has been preserved in the work of Apollonius of Citium.[133]Leyden Voss 4ᵒ 9*of the sixth century is a fragment of this work.[134]V. Rose,Sorani Ephesii vetus translatio Latina cum additis Graeci textus reliquiis, Leipzig, 1882; F. Weindler,Geschichte der gynäkologisch-anatomischen Abbildung, Dresden, 1908.[135]The discovery and attribution of these figures is the work of K. Sudhoff. A bibliography of his writings on the subject will be found in a ‘Study in Early Renaissance Anatomy’ in C. Singer’sStudies in the History and Method of Science, vol. i, Oxford, 1917.[136]First Latin edition Venice, 1552; first Greek edition Paris, 1554.[137]e. g. περὶ κράσεως καὶ δυνάμεως τῶν ἁπάντων φαρμάκων and the φάρμακα.[138]e. g.De dynamidiis Galeni,Secreta Hippocratisand many astrological tracts.[139]Dissection of animals was practised at Salerno as early as the eleventh century.[140]The sources of the anatomical knowledge of the Middle Ages are discussed in detail in the following works: R. R. von Töply,Studien zur Geschichte der Anatomie im Mittelalter, Vienna, 1898; K. Sudhoff,Tradition und Naturbeobachtung, Leipzig, 1907; and also numerous articles in theArchiv für Geschichte der Medizin und Naturwissenschaften; Charles Singer, ‘A Study in Early Renaissance Anatomy’, inStudies in the History and Method of Science, vol. i, Oxford, 1917.[141]Benivieni’s notes were published posthumously. Some of the spurious Greek works of the Hippocratic collection have also case notes.

[33]De generatione animalium, i. 22; 730ᵇ 10.

[34]De generatione animalium, i. 22; 730ᵅ 34.

[35]Historia animalium, vi. 3; 561ᵅ 4.

[36]Cor primum movens ultimum moriens.This famous sentence is the sense though not the phrasing ofDe generatione animalium, ii. 1 and 4.

[37]Historia animalium, vi. 3; 561ᵅ 18.

[38]De generatione animalium, iii. 9; 758ᵅ 37.

[39]Historia animalium, i. 5; 489ᵅ 35.

[40]Historia animalium, vi. 10; 565ᵇ 2.

[41]The history of this discovery is given by Charles Singer,Studies in the History and Method of Science, vol. ii, Oxford, 1921, pp. 32 ff.

[42]Johannes Müller,Ueber den glatten Hai des Aristoteles, Berlin, 1842.

[43]De generatione animalium, ii. 1; 733ᵅ 6.

[44]Metaphysics, i. 4.De generatione et corruptione, ii. 1.

[45]De anima, ii. 1, ii.

[46]De anima, ii. 2, ii; 413ᵅ 22.

[47]The question of Aristotle’s meaning in connexion with this topic, of primary importance for all thought, has a vast literature. An authoritative work is R. D. Hicks,Aristotle, De anima, Cambridge, 1907.

[48]De partibus animalium, i. 4; 644ᵅ 22.

[49]De partibus animalium, i. 4; 644ᵅ 27.

[50]De partibus animalium, i. 4; 644ᵅ 16.

[51]The classificatory system of Aristotle and its history are discussed in great detail by J. B. Meyer,Aristoteles’ Thierkunde: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Zoologie, Physiologie und alten Philosophie, Berlin, 1855.

[52]The work by which Wotton is known is hisDe differentiis animalium, Paris, 1552.

[53]There is a valuable chapter on the subject of the Aristotelian classificatory system as based on the method of reproduction in W. Ogle,Aristotle on the Parts of Animals, London, 1882.

[54]The rediscovery and verification of this and other Aristotelian observations is detailed by C. Singer, ‘Greek Biology and the Rise of Modern Biology,’Studies in the History and Method of Science, vol. ii, Oxford, 1921.

[55]Historia animalium, ii. 17; 507ᵅ 33.

[56]De partibus animalium, ii. 17; 507ᵇ 12.

[57]Historia animalium, ii. 17; 507ᵇ 12.

[58]Historia animalium, v. 6; 541ᵇ 1. The hectocotylization of the cephalopod arm which is here recorded as an element in the reproductive process of these animals is denied in theDe generatione animalium, i. 15; 720ᵇ 32, where we read that ‘the insertion of the arm of the male into the funnel of the female ... is only for the sake of attachment, and it is not an organ useful for generation, for it is outside the passage in the male and indeed outside the body of the male altogether.‘ Yet even here Aristotle knows of the physical relationship of the arm. See note on this point in the translation of the passage by A. Platt, Oxford, 1910.

[59]J. B. Verany,Mollusques méditerranéens, Genoa, 1851.

[60]E. Racovitza.Archives de zoologie experimentale, Paris, 1894.

[61]The paragraphs concerning the fishing-frog and torpedo are made up of sentences rearranged from theDe partibus animalium, iv. 13; 696ᵅ 26, and theHistoria animalium, ix. 37; 620ᵇ 15.

[62]De partibus animalium, ii. 1; 646ᵅ 12.

[63]De partibus animalium, ii. 10.

[64]It is possible that Theophrastus derived the word pericarp from Aristotle. Cp.De anima, ii. 1, 412ᵇ 2. In the passage τὸ φύλλον περικαρπίου σκέπασμα, τὸ δὲ περικάρπιον καρποῦ, in theDe animathe word does not, however, seem to have the full technical force that Theophrastus gives to it.

[65]Historia plantarum, i. 2, vi.

[66]Ibid.i. 1, iv.

[67]Historia plantarum, ii. 1, i.

[68]Historia plantarum, viii. 1, i.

[69]Nathaniel Highmore,A History of Generation, London, 1651.

[70]Marcello Malpighi,Anatome plantarum, London, 1675.

[71]Nehemiah Grew,Anatomy of Vegetables begun, London, 1672.

[72]Pliny,Naturalis historia, xiii. 4.

[73]The curious word ὀλυνθάζειν, here translatedto use the wild fig, is from ὄλυνθος, a kind of wild fig which seldom ripens. The special meaning here given to the word is explained in another work of Theophrastus,De causis plantarum, ii. 9, xv. After describing caprification in figs, he says τὸ δὲ ἐπὶ τῶν φοινίκων συμβαῖνον οὐ ταὐτὸν μέν, ἔχει δέ τινα ὁμοιότητα τούτω δι’ ὁ καλοῦσιν ὀλυνθάζειν αὐτούς. ‘The same thing is not done with dates, but something analogous to it, whence this is called ὀλυνθάζειν’.

[74]Historia plantarum, ii. 8, iv.

[75]Herodotus i. 193.

[76]Historia plantarum, ii. 8, i.

[77]Ibid.ii. 8, ii.

[78]Historia plantarum, ii. 8, iv.

[79]Ibid.i. 1, ix.

[80]Ibid.iii. 18, x.

[81]De causis plantarum, ii. 23.

[82]Historia plantarum, i. 13, iii.

[83]See the companion chapter onGreek Medicine.

[84]The works of Crateuas have recently been printed by M. Wellmann as an appendix to the text of Dioscorides,De re medica, 3 vols., Berlin, 1906-17. The source and fate of his plant drawings are discussed in the same author’sKrateuas, Berlin, 1897.

[85]The manuscript in question is Med. Graec. 1 at what was the Royal Library at Vienna. It is known as theConstantinopolitanus. After the war it was taken to St. Mark’s at Venice, but either has been or is about to be restored to Vienna. A facsimile of this grand manuscript was published by Sijthoff, Leyden, 1906.

[86]The lady in question was Juliana Anicia, daughter of Anicius Olybrius, Emperor of the West in 472, and his wife Placidia, daughter of Valentinian III. Juliana was betrothed in 479 by the Eastern Emperor Zeno to Theodoric the Ostrogoth, but was married, probably in 487 when the manuscript was presented to her, to Areobindus, a high military officer under the Byzantine Emperor Anastasius.

[87]The importance of this manuscript as well as the position of Dioscorides as medical botanist is discussed by Charles Singer in an article ‘Greek Biology and the Rise of Modern Biology’;Studies in the History and Method of Science, vol. ii, Oxford, 1921.

[88]This manuscript is at the University Library at Leyden, where it is numbered Voss Q 9.

[89]A good instance of Galen’s teleological point of view is afforded by his classical description ofthe handin the περὶ χρείας τῶν ἐν ἀνθρώπου σώματι μορίων,On the uses of the parts of the body of man, i. 1. This passage is available in English in a tract by Thomas Bellott, London, 1840.

[90]C. H. Haskins, ‘The reception of Arabic science in England,’English Historical Review, London, 1915, p. 56.

[91]The latest and best work on the Aristotelian translations of Scott is an inaugural dissertation by A. H. Querfeld,Michael Scottus und seine Schrift, De secretis naturae, Leipzig, 1919.

[92]J. G. Schneider,Aristotelis de animalibus historiae, Leipzig, 1811, p. cxxvi. L. Dittmeyer,Guilelmi Moerbekensis translatio commentationis Aristotelicae de generatione animalium, Dillingen, 1915. L. Dittmeyer,De animalibus historia, Leipzig, 1907.

[93]The subject of the Latin translations of Aristotle is traversed by A. and C. Jourdain,Recherches critiques sur l’âge des traductions latines d’Aristote, 2nd ed., Paris, 1843; M. Grabmann,Forschungen über die lateinischen Aristoteles-Übersetzungen des XIII. Jahrhunderts, Münster i/W., 1916; and F. Wüstenfeld,Die Übersetzungen arabischer Werke in das Lateinische seit dem XI. Jahrhundert, Göttingen, 1877.

[94]The enormousDe Animalibusof Albert of Cologne is now available in an edition by H. Stadler,Albertus Magnus De Animalibus Libri XXVI nach der cölner Urschrift, 2 vols., Münster i/W., 1916-21. The quotation is translated from vol. i, pp. 465-6.

[95]Conrad’s work is conveniently edited by H. Schultz,Das Buch der Natur von Conrad von Megenberg, die erste Naturgeschichte in deutscher Sprache, in Neu-Hochdeutsche Sprache bearbeitet, Greifswald, 1897. Conrad’s work is based on that of Thomas of Cantimpré (1201-70).

[96]Hieronimo Fabrizio of Acquapendente,De formato foetu, Padua, 1604.

[97]William Harvey,Exercitationes de generatione animalium, London, 1651.

[98]Karl Ernst von Baer,Ueber die Entwickelungsgeschichte der Thiere, Königsberg, 1828-37.

[99]The works of Herophilus are lost. This fine passage has been preserved for us by Sextus Empiricus, a third century physician, in his πρὸς τοὺς μαθηματικοὺς ἀντιρῥητικοί, which is in essence an attack on all positive philosophy. It is an entertaining fact that we should have to go to such a work for remains of the greatest anatomist of antiquity. The passage is in the section directed against ethical writers, xi. 50.

[100]The word φυσικός, though it passed over into Latin (Cicero) with the meaningnaturalist, acquired the connotation ofsorcereramong the later Greek writers. Perhaps the wordphysicianuswas introduced to make a distinction from the charm-mongeringphysicus. In later Latinphysicusandmedicusare almost always interchangeable.

[101]This fragment has been published in vol. iii, part 1, of theSupplementum Aristotelicumby H. Diels asAnonymi Londinensis ex Aristotelis Iatricis Menonis et Aliis Medicis Eclogae, Berlin, 1893. See also H. Bekh and F. Spät,Anonymus Londinensis, Auszüge eines Unbekannten aus Aristoteles-Menons Handbuch der Medizin, Berlin, 1896.

[102]It is tempting, also, to connect the Asclepian snake cult with the prominence of the serpent in Minoan religion.

[103]This wordpronoia, as Galen explains (εἰς τὸ Ἱπποκράτους προγνωστικόν, K. xviii, B. p. 10), is not used in the philosophic sense, as when we ask whether the universe was made by chance or bypronoia, nor is it used quite in the modern sense ofprognosis, though it includes that too.Pronoiain Hippocrates means knowing things about a patient before you are told them. See E. T. Withington, ‘Some Greek medical terms with reference to Luke and Liddell and Scott,’Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine(Section of the History of Medicine), xiii, p. 124, London, 1920.

[104]Prognostics1.

[105]There is a discussion of the relation of the Asclepiadae to temple practice in an article by E. T. Withington, ‘The Asclepiadae and the Priest of Asclepius,’ inStudies in the History and Method of Science, edited by Charles Singer, vol. ii, Oxford, 1921.

[106]The works of Anaximenes are lost. This phrase of his, however, is preserved by the later writer Aetios.

[107]For the work of these physicians see especially M.Wellmann,Fragmentsammlung der griechischen Aerzte, Bd. I, Berlin, 1901.

[108]Galen, περὶ ἀνατομικῶν ἐγχειρήσεων,On anatomical preparations, § 1, K. II, p. 282.

[109]Historia animalium, iii. 3, where it is ascribed to Polybus. The same passage is, however, repeated twice in the Hippocratic writings, viz. in the περὶ φύσιος ἀνθρώπου,On the nature of man, Littré, vi. 58, and in the περὶ ὀστέων φύσιος,On the nature of bones, Littré, ix. 174.

[110]Παραγγελίαι, § 6.

[111]It must, however, be admitted that even in the Hippocratic collection itself are cases of breach of the oath. Such, for instance, is the induction of abortion related in περὶ φύσιος παιδίον,On the nature of the embryo. There is evidence, however, that the author of this work was not a medical practitioner.

[112]Rome Urbinas 64, fo. 116.

[113]Kühlewein, i. 79, regards this as an interpolated passage.

[114]Littré, ii. 112; Kühlewein, i. 79. The texts vary: Kühlewein is followed except in the last sentence.

[115]Περὶ τέχνες, § 3.

[116]Περὶ νούσων α’, § 6.

[117]A reference to dissection in the περὶ ἄρθρων,On thejoints, § 1, appears of the present writer to be of Alexandrian date.

[118]They are to be found as an Appendix to Books I and III of theEpidemicsand embedded in Book III.

[119]John Cheyne (1777-1836) described this type of respiration in theDublin Hospital Reports, 1818, ii, p. 216. An extreme case of this condition had been described by Cheyne’s namesake George Cheyne (1671-1743) as the famous ‘Case of the Hon. Col. Townshend’ in hisEnglish Malady, London, 1733. William Stokes (1804-78) published his account of Cheyne-Stokes breathing in theDublin Quarterly Journal of the Medical Sciences, 1846, ii, p. 73.

[120]The Epidaurian inscriptions are given by M. Fraenkel in theCorpus Inscriptionum GraecarumIV, 951-6, and are discussed by Mary Hamilton (Mrs. Guy Dickins),Incubation, St. Andrews, 1906, from whose translation I have quoted. Further inscriptions are given by Cavvadias in theArchaiologike Ephemeris, 1918, p. 155 (issued 1921).

[121]We are almost told as much in the apocryphalGospel ofNicodemus, § 1, a work probably composed about the end of the fourth century.

[122]Astley Paston Cooper,Treatise on Dislocations and Fractures of the Joints, London, 1822, andObservations on Fractures of the Neck and the Thighbone, &c., London, 1823.

[123]This famous manuscript is known as Laurentian, Plutarch 74, 7, and its figures have been reproduced by H. Schöne,Apollonius von Kitium, Leipzig, 1896.

[124]The first lines are the source of the famous lines in Goethe’sFaust:‘Ach Gott! die Kunst ist langUnd kurz ist unser Leben,Mir wird bei meinem kritischen BestrebenDoch oft um Kopf und Busen bang.’

[124]The first lines are the source of the famous lines in Goethe’sFaust:

‘Ach Gott! die Kunst ist langUnd kurz ist unser Leben,Mir wird bei meinem kritischen BestrebenDoch oft um Kopf und Busen bang.’

[125]The extreme of treatment refers in the original to the extreme restriction of diet, ἐς ἀκριβείην, but the meaning of the Aphorism has always been taken as more generalized.

[126]The ancients knew almost nothing of infection asapplied specificallyto disease. All early peoples—including Greeks and Romans—believed in the transmission of qualities from object to object. Thus purity and impurity and good and bad luck were infections, and diseases were held to be infections in that sense. But there is little evidence in the belief of the special infectivity ofdisease as suchin antiquity. Some few diseases are, however, unequivocally referred to as infectious in a limited number of passages, e. g. ophthalmia, scabies, and phthisis in the περὶ διαφορᾶς πυρετῶν,On the differentiae of fevers, K. vii, p. 279. The references to infection in antiquity are detailed by C. and D. Singer, ‘The scientific position of Girolamo Fracastoro’,Annals of Medical History, vol. i, New York, 1917.

[127]K. F. H. Marx,Herophilus, ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Medizin, Karlsruhe, 1838.

[128]Galen, περὶ ἀνατομικῶν ἐγχειρήσεων,On anatomical preparations, ix. 5 (last sentence).

[129]Galen, περὶ φλεβῶν καὶ ἀρτηριων ανατομῆς,On the anatomy of veins and arteries, i.

[130]The quotation is from chapter xxxiii, line 44 of theAnonymus Londinensis. H. Diels,Anonymus Londinensisin theSupplementum Aristotelicum, vol. iii, pars 1, Berlin, 1893.

[131]Sanctorio Santorio,Oratio in archilyceo patavino anno 1612 habita; de medicina statica aphorismi. Venice, 1614.

[132]This is the only passage of Hegetor’s writing that has survived. It has been preserved in the work of Apollonius of Citium.

[133]Leyden Voss 4ᵒ 9*of the sixth century is a fragment of this work.

[134]V. Rose,Sorani Ephesii vetus translatio Latina cum additis Graeci textus reliquiis, Leipzig, 1882; F. Weindler,Geschichte der gynäkologisch-anatomischen Abbildung, Dresden, 1908.

[135]The discovery and attribution of these figures is the work of K. Sudhoff. A bibliography of his writings on the subject will be found in a ‘Study in Early Renaissance Anatomy’ in C. Singer’sStudies in the History and Method of Science, vol. i, Oxford, 1917.

[136]First Latin edition Venice, 1552; first Greek edition Paris, 1554.

[137]e. g. περὶ κράσεως καὶ δυνάμεως τῶν ἁπάντων φαρμάκων and the φάρμακα.

[138]e. g.De dynamidiis Galeni,Secreta Hippocratisand many astrological tracts.

[139]Dissection of animals was practised at Salerno as early as the eleventh century.

[140]The sources of the anatomical knowledge of the Middle Ages are discussed in detail in the following works: R. R. von Töply,Studien zur Geschichte der Anatomie im Mittelalter, Vienna, 1898; K. Sudhoff,Tradition und Naturbeobachtung, Leipzig, 1907; and also numerous articles in theArchiv für Geschichte der Medizin und Naturwissenschaften; Charles Singer, ‘A Study in Early Renaissance Anatomy’, inStudies in the History and Method of Science, vol. i, Oxford, 1917.

[141]Benivieni’s notes were published posthumously. Some of the spurious Greek works of the Hippocratic collection have also case notes.

Back to Index Next