NOTESTOBOOK VIII.
1.Morgagni[ JR ], with Paaw, thinks it probable, that there is some chasm in the text, because Celsus does not describe the coronal suture, which he could not be ignorant of.2.Over these muscles too, &c.Super bos quoque musculos, qui tempora contegunt, os medium, in exteriorem partem inclinatam, positum est.) ThusLinden and Almeloveen. All the other copies have,sub his musculis, qui tempora connectunt; in the following words they differ, which Ronsseus would read thus,os medium in interiorem partem inclinatam; in this he was followed by Paaw, who was of opinion, that Celsus intended here theprocessus petrosus; which Morgagni thinks quite foreign to the question. It is probable, says the same author, that Linden changedsub his musculisintosuper hos musculos, to make the description answer to theprocessus zygomaticus, which our author describes a little after, under the name ofjugale. His own conjecture is, that Celsus wrotesub his musculis, qui tempora continent, and that he meant that part of the temporal bone which is covered by the crotaphite muscle. Morgag. Ep. 7. p. 212. 214. But as this description of a bone is inserted in the midst of the sutures, there is some foundation to suspect the whole to be an interpolation.3.The maxilla is a soft bone.Maxilla vero est molle os.) Thus all the editions read, butMorgagni[ JS ]suspectsmolleshould bemobile, a moveable bone; for Celsus himself calls the sternum a strong and hard bone, which is not to be compared in that respect with the maxilla.—It is no objection to this reading, that the author adds,solaque ea movetur, for that is to exclude the upper jaw-bone. The reader will please to observe, that maxilla, by our author, is applied only to the lower jaw-bone, for he includes the upper jaw-bones under the malæ.4.Is broader below.) I have here followed the proposed emendation of Morgagni,infraforintra. Ep. 1. p. 40.5.And all the vertebræ.) What follows relating to the structure and connection of the vertebræ, appears to be very much corrupted, in so much, that the reading in all the copies makes our author contradict himself. I shall be content with mentioning some observations of Morgagni’s upon the reading of Linden. The words in the parenthesis (says he)exceptis tribus summis,except the three uppermost, were surely never wrote by Celsus, at least not as they stand; for if the three first vertebræ want depressions in their superior surfaces, how comes the first to receive into its depressions the two small processes of the head, as our author immediately adds?The adding ofparvistotuberibushe judges to be superfluous, because Celsus had said just beforeexiguis ejus processibus. He conjectures thatsecunda superioris parti inferiori inserituris interpolated, because the connection is more natural without these words. A little after followstertia eodem modo secundam excipit, as if a process stood out from the inferior part of the second vertebra, to be surrounded by the third in the same manner, that its processus dentatus is surrounded by the first; so that all these five words he seems with justice inclined to expunge.After these Linden adds,Jamque vertebra tertia tubercula, quæ inferiori inserantur, excipit; which at first view must appear highly absurd. I therefore have followed, in the translation, the reading of Nicolaus, Pachel, Pinzi, Stephens, and Morgagni’s manuscript,exigitforexcipit.—See Morgagni Ep. vii. from 173 to 177.6.The six inferior ones.) Almeloveen and Linden read heresepteminferiores, others writeundecim, as if the following description related to all the ribs. But that is false, as appears by the sequel, and it is plain, from the whole passage, our author could write nothing else thansex.7.But at the first rib, &c.) This whole paragraph is extremely obscure. The variation of reading in the older copies does not in the least lessen the difficulty. If we were allowed to understand byjugulum,the neck, the whole description, lame as it is, could then answer no bone but theclavicle; butjugulumin no other place of this work seems to be used for any thing else but theclavicle, so thatid ipsum, &c.would appear to be the beginning of the description of that bone.—Morgagni thinks, that though the description is far from just, yet that most of the words, as they now stand, relate to thespine of the scapula, which may be said to sustain the clavicle; and it is observable, that if our author does not intend thespina scapulæhere, he makes no mention of it at all. Vide Morgagni, Ep. vii. p. 177. I must own the reading appears to me so much depraved, that it is impossible to determine, precisely, what our author has had in view.8.Is a little concave, &c.) This translation follows Linden and Almeloveen. In all the other copies the reading isleniter gibbus, et in priorem et posteriorem, interiorem et exteriorem partem, as if the bone was concave on no side.Morgagni[ JT ]therefore proposes a reading agreeable to truth.Leniter gibbus in priorem et posteriorem et interiorem, cavus in exteriorem;i. e.gently convex in its fore and posterior, and internal part; concave externally.9.The two bones of the fore arm at first, &c.) The reading in Linden and Almeloveen isprimo vero duo radii et brachii ossa, &c.which at once appears to be wrong, because Celsus had said before,quæ res sedem brachio præstat, quod constat ex duobus ossibus, to which two he immediately gives the names of Radius and Cubitus, so that it would be sufficient, as Morgagni observes, to have wroteduo brachii ossa, or if they must be namedduo radii et cubiti ossaaccording to the first of which I have translated. The other editions haveprimo vero duobus radiis brachii ossa. See Morgagni, Ep. i. p. 28.10.Properly enough, &c.)Surawas the Roman name for the calf of the leg, whence our author says, that name is properly enough given to the fibula.11.The same may be collected.)Colligi idem potest.Morgagni[ JU ]would have the old reading restored here,nigrities colligi quidem potest.A blackness may be discovered, &c. because these words in the next chapter,sive autem nigrities quam terebra detexit, &c.make it plain the terebra was only used in sounding the blackness.12.But if the blackness goes thorough.) Sin autem nigrities, and then there followsest aut si caries, which appears a manifest error by reasonof what follows. With Constantine and Ronsseus, I therefore judge these words should be expunged, and have taken no notice of them in the translation.13.Is made by the angle of a chisel.) I here take the reading of the older editions,angulo scalpri sinus exiguus fit. I supposesitin Linden and the later copies has been a typographical error. See Morgagni, Ep. vi. p. 162.14.Being raised in the same.) I have here translated agreeably to the old readingexcitatæ nares, instead of which, by a palpable error, Linden and Almeloveen hadexercitatæ nares. Morgagni, Ep. i. p. 29.15.The swelled part.) In Almeloveen and Linden it istumens locus, instead of which the old reading was better,tum is locus,then this part; because our author had not mentioned any swelling before. Vid. Morgagni, Ep. v. p. 140.16.For if any part is separated from a vertebra, or is any way broken.) This is according to the reading of Linden and Almeloveen; but several of the older copies haveSi id, quod ex vertebra excedit, aliquo modo fractum est; that is,If the part, that stands out from a vertebra (the spinal process) is any way fractured. This agrees very well with what is said afterwards of the fragments being spinous.17.Which should be rolled about the fracture.Quæ circa fracturam ter voluta.) I find no various reading in any of the editions, but I think I can produce one from our author himself, who is far from a profusion of words and repetitions, and thinks this circumstance of importance enough to make a rule bcsy itself in the following words;Satisque est eam ter hoc quoque modo circuere. Upon his authority I have therefore ventured to omit the firstter.18.And if means only are found, &c.) The period in Linden and Almeloveen runs thus,Ac, si nihil aliud quam dolori occurrendum est, idem, qui fuit, ejus usus est; that is, ‘And if nothing else is to be done but to remove the pain, its use continues the same as before.’ As it is evident this cannot be our author’s meaning, I have followed in the translation the old readingoccursumforoccurrendum.19.Broader than the wound.) I follow here the old readinglatioribusforlaxioribusin Linden, of which I could find no proper sense. In the following words I have also removed the point atvulnus potestas the ancient editions have it, and the connection seems to require.20.Must be applied with that part, &c.) This is according to Linden’s edition.—None of the more ancient seem to give the true reading of this whole passage taken together, but some of them afford hints. Instead ofAcutæ ossis prominentis cuspidi, Pinzi hasRecte se habendi capiti; othersRecte se habenti capiti. Upon the whole I think Morgagni’s[ JV ]reflections upon this passage extremely probable; our author had before ordered a sharp point of a fragment to be either cut off or filed downand smoothed: he is now considering how the fragment itself is to be replaced. If we read it thus, the sense seems to be pretty clear:Vulsella, quali fabri utuntur, injicienda est capiti ossis recte habenti, ab ea parte, qua sima est, &c.that is, ‘A workman’s vulsella should be applied with that part, which turns inward, to the sound end of the bone, that by its convex part the prominent bone may be thrust into its place.’21.Unite obliquely.Solent tamen interdum adversa inter se ossa confervere.) Thus Linden and Almeloveen.—But by what follows it is plainadversawas never wrote by our author in this place. Many editions havetransversa; othersdiversa, which I think is the only probable reading, and have taken it in the same sense as Morgagni does.—Ep. vi. p. 164.22.Of the scapula recedes from the humerus.Os scapularum ab humero recedit.) Morgagni very ingeniously suspects that instead ofab humeroour author wroteab jugulo, because the clavicle is joined with the scapula, as the tibia with the fibula. Ep. vii. p. 209. As it now standsab humero, it would come under the second head;Modo articuli suis sedibus excidunt.23.Yet it is of no use.Et ut aliquid decoris eo loco, sic nihil usus admittitur.) Thus Linden and Almeloveen, and I find no other variation in any of the copies, exceptsitforsic, which does not alter the sense. Our author had said immediately before, ‘That bones thus separated never come together again,’ which makes it improbable he would add, ‘That some comeliness would remain.’ For this reason I suspect we should readamittiturforadmittitur, and then the meaning will be quite opposite, thus, ‘And though their comeliness is impaired, yet their use continues the same as before.’24.Is less firmly held after it is reduced.) In a luxation of the humerus from a lax habit Hippocrates advises the use of the actual cautery, but with great caution, for fear of injuring the blood vessels or tendons; and when the ulcers are clean and fit for cicatrizing, to bind the arm close down to the side, and allow no motion, that the cicatrix may contract the part the more, and strengthen the joint. He censures the practice of his predecessors, who cauterized on the external and anterior side, which ever way the bone had been luxated, and observes that when the humerus is liable to slip into the arm-pit, this would rather push it downward, than prevent its luxation. He proposed therefore the new method of applying the cautery to that part, toward which the bone is liable to be protruded. Hippocrat. de Articul. p. 787, 788, and 789.25.That even frequent speaking, by the motion of the mouth, hurts the nerves of the temples.) This is according to the reading of Linden and Almeloveen. The old editions haveadeo ut sermo quoque frequens motu oris per nervos lædat; that is,that even frequent speaking, by the motion of the mouth by the nerves, hurts. See Morgagni, ep. v. p. 130.26.Tone of the nerves be restored.) I follow here the old editions in readingrestitutafordestituta.27.That the finger may be restored, &c.) In Linden and Almeloveen,ut ita in locum, unde lapsus est digitus, restituatur.[ JW ]Morgagniobserves, that our author had said, there were as many different cases and the same signs as in the hands; but according to this reading he takes no notice of the cure of lateral luxations. Whereas the whole is set right by restoring the old reading, which was, instead of these words, that are quoted from the original,Atque id, quod in latus elapsum est, digitis restitui,i. e.“and that which is luxated laterally ought to be reduced by the fingers.”28.Having treated of the humerus.)Cum de humeris dixerim.We might here (says Morgagni) have takenhumerisfor the superior extremities ascruribusfor the inferior, but the MS. and all my editions havecum de his dixerim: de his quoque(or as Stephens has itde iis quoque)quæ in cruribus, &c.Ep. vi. p. 167.29.By keeping the middle or upper part of the joint in some canaliculus.) This whole sentencePotest tamen conditus articulus medius aut summus canaliculo aliquo contineri, in all the old editions is placed at the end of the24thchap. and not here.—But[ JX ]Morgagnisuspects, and as it appears to me, very justly, it should be rather referred to luxated fingers than toes, and that Linden guided by some MS. had transferred it from the24thto the19th, from whence it was transposed to this place by the carelessness of the copiers, where it stands very improperly.
1.Morgagni[ JR ], with Paaw, thinks it probable, that there is some chasm in the text, because Celsus does not describe the coronal suture, which he could not be ignorant of.
2.Over these muscles too, &c.Super bos quoque musculos, qui tempora contegunt, os medium, in exteriorem partem inclinatam, positum est.) ThusLinden and Almeloveen. All the other copies have,sub his musculis, qui tempora connectunt; in the following words they differ, which Ronsseus would read thus,os medium in interiorem partem inclinatam; in this he was followed by Paaw, who was of opinion, that Celsus intended here theprocessus petrosus; which Morgagni thinks quite foreign to the question. It is probable, says the same author, that Linden changedsub his musculisintosuper hos musculos, to make the description answer to theprocessus zygomaticus, which our author describes a little after, under the name ofjugale. His own conjecture is, that Celsus wrotesub his musculis, qui tempora continent, and that he meant that part of the temporal bone which is covered by the crotaphite muscle. Morgag. Ep. 7. p. 212. 214. But as this description of a bone is inserted in the midst of the sutures, there is some foundation to suspect the whole to be an interpolation.
3.The maxilla is a soft bone.Maxilla vero est molle os.) Thus all the editions read, butMorgagni[ JS ]suspectsmolleshould bemobile, a moveable bone; for Celsus himself calls the sternum a strong and hard bone, which is not to be compared in that respect with the maxilla.—It is no objection to this reading, that the author adds,solaque ea movetur, for that is to exclude the upper jaw-bone. The reader will please to observe, that maxilla, by our author, is applied only to the lower jaw-bone, for he includes the upper jaw-bones under the malæ.
4.Is broader below.) I have here followed the proposed emendation of Morgagni,infraforintra. Ep. 1. p. 40.
5.And all the vertebræ.) What follows relating to the structure and connection of the vertebræ, appears to be very much corrupted, in so much, that the reading in all the copies makes our author contradict himself. I shall be content with mentioning some observations of Morgagni’s upon the reading of Linden. The words in the parenthesis (says he)exceptis tribus summis,except the three uppermost, were surely never wrote by Celsus, at least not as they stand; for if the three first vertebræ want depressions in their superior surfaces, how comes the first to receive into its depressions the two small processes of the head, as our author immediately adds?
The adding ofparvistotuberibushe judges to be superfluous, because Celsus had said just beforeexiguis ejus processibus. He conjectures thatsecunda superioris parti inferiori inserituris interpolated, because the connection is more natural without these words. A little after followstertia eodem modo secundam excipit, as if a process stood out from the inferior part of the second vertebra, to be surrounded by the third in the same manner, that its processus dentatus is surrounded by the first; so that all these five words he seems with justice inclined to expunge.
After these Linden adds,Jamque vertebra tertia tubercula, quæ inferiori inserantur, excipit; which at first view must appear highly absurd. I therefore have followed, in the translation, the reading of Nicolaus, Pachel, Pinzi, Stephens, and Morgagni’s manuscript,exigitforexcipit.—See Morgagni Ep. vii. from 173 to 177.
6.The six inferior ones.) Almeloveen and Linden read heresepteminferiores, others writeundecim, as if the following description related to all the ribs. But that is false, as appears by the sequel, and it is plain, from the whole passage, our author could write nothing else thansex.
7.But at the first rib, &c.) This whole paragraph is extremely obscure. The variation of reading in the older copies does not in the least lessen the difficulty. If we were allowed to understand byjugulum,the neck, the whole description, lame as it is, could then answer no bone but theclavicle; butjugulumin no other place of this work seems to be used for any thing else but theclavicle, so thatid ipsum, &c.would appear to be the beginning of the description of that bone.—Morgagni thinks, that though the description is far from just, yet that most of the words, as they now stand, relate to thespine of the scapula, which may be said to sustain the clavicle; and it is observable, that if our author does not intend thespina scapulæhere, he makes no mention of it at all. Vide Morgagni, Ep. vii. p. 177. I must own the reading appears to me so much depraved, that it is impossible to determine, precisely, what our author has had in view.
8.Is a little concave, &c.) This translation follows Linden and Almeloveen. In all the other copies the reading isleniter gibbus, et in priorem et posteriorem, interiorem et exteriorem partem, as if the bone was concave on no side.Morgagni[ JT ]therefore proposes a reading agreeable to truth.Leniter gibbus in priorem et posteriorem et interiorem, cavus in exteriorem;i. e.gently convex in its fore and posterior, and internal part; concave externally.
9.The two bones of the fore arm at first, &c.) The reading in Linden and Almeloveen isprimo vero duo radii et brachii ossa, &c.which at once appears to be wrong, because Celsus had said before,quæ res sedem brachio præstat, quod constat ex duobus ossibus, to which two he immediately gives the names of Radius and Cubitus, so that it would be sufficient, as Morgagni observes, to have wroteduo brachii ossa, or if they must be namedduo radii et cubiti ossaaccording to the first of which I have translated. The other editions haveprimo vero duobus radiis brachii ossa. See Morgagni, Ep. i. p. 28.
10.Properly enough, &c.)Surawas the Roman name for the calf of the leg, whence our author says, that name is properly enough given to the fibula.
11.The same may be collected.)Colligi idem potest.Morgagni[ JU ]would have the old reading restored here,nigrities colligi quidem potest.A blackness may be discovered, &c. because these words in the next chapter,sive autem nigrities quam terebra detexit, &c.make it plain the terebra was only used in sounding the blackness.
12.But if the blackness goes thorough.) Sin autem nigrities, and then there followsest aut si caries, which appears a manifest error by reasonof what follows. With Constantine and Ronsseus, I therefore judge these words should be expunged, and have taken no notice of them in the translation.
13.Is made by the angle of a chisel.) I here take the reading of the older editions,angulo scalpri sinus exiguus fit. I supposesitin Linden and the later copies has been a typographical error. See Morgagni, Ep. vi. p. 162.
14.Being raised in the same.) I have here translated agreeably to the old readingexcitatæ nares, instead of which, by a palpable error, Linden and Almeloveen hadexercitatæ nares. Morgagni, Ep. i. p. 29.
15.The swelled part.) In Almeloveen and Linden it istumens locus, instead of which the old reading was better,tum is locus,then this part; because our author had not mentioned any swelling before. Vid. Morgagni, Ep. v. p. 140.
16.For if any part is separated from a vertebra, or is any way broken.) This is according to the reading of Linden and Almeloveen; but several of the older copies haveSi id, quod ex vertebra excedit, aliquo modo fractum est; that is,If the part, that stands out from a vertebra (the spinal process) is any way fractured. This agrees very well with what is said afterwards of the fragments being spinous.
17.Which should be rolled about the fracture.Quæ circa fracturam ter voluta.) I find no various reading in any of the editions, but I think I can produce one from our author himself, who is far from a profusion of words and repetitions, and thinks this circumstance of importance enough to make a rule bcsy itself in the following words;Satisque est eam ter hoc quoque modo circuere. Upon his authority I have therefore ventured to omit the firstter.
18.And if means only are found, &c.) The period in Linden and Almeloveen runs thus,Ac, si nihil aliud quam dolori occurrendum est, idem, qui fuit, ejus usus est; that is, ‘And if nothing else is to be done but to remove the pain, its use continues the same as before.’ As it is evident this cannot be our author’s meaning, I have followed in the translation the old readingoccursumforoccurrendum.
19.Broader than the wound.) I follow here the old readinglatioribusforlaxioribusin Linden, of which I could find no proper sense. In the following words I have also removed the point atvulnus potestas the ancient editions have it, and the connection seems to require.
20.Must be applied with that part, &c.) This is according to Linden’s edition.—None of the more ancient seem to give the true reading of this whole passage taken together, but some of them afford hints. Instead ofAcutæ ossis prominentis cuspidi, Pinzi hasRecte se habendi capiti; othersRecte se habenti capiti. Upon the whole I think Morgagni’s[ JV ]reflections upon this passage extremely probable; our author had before ordered a sharp point of a fragment to be either cut off or filed downand smoothed: he is now considering how the fragment itself is to be replaced. If we read it thus, the sense seems to be pretty clear:Vulsella, quali fabri utuntur, injicienda est capiti ossis recte habenti, ab ea parte, qua sima est, &c.that is, ‘A workman’s vulsella should be applied with that part, which turns inward, to the sound end of the bone, that by its convex part the prominent bone may be thrust into its place.’
21.Unite obliquely.Solent tamen interdum adversa inter se ossa confervere.) Thus Linden and Almeloveen.—But by what follows it is plainadversawas never wrote by our author in this place. Many editions havetransversa; othersdiversa, which I think is the only probable reading, and have taken it in the same sense as Morgagni does.—Ep. vi. p. 164.
22.Of the scapula recedes from the humerus.Os scapularum ab humero recedit.) Morgagni very ingeniously suspects that instead ofab humeroour author wroteab jugulo, because the clavicle is joined with the scapula, as the tibia with the fibula. Ep. vii. p. 209. As it now standsab humero, it would come under the second head;Modo articuli suis sedibus excidunt.
23.Yet it is of no use.Et ut aliquid decoris eo loco, sic nihil usus admittitur.) Thus Linden and Almeloveen, and I find no other variation in any of the copies, exceptsitforsic, which does not alter the sense. Our author had said immediately before, ‘That bones thus separated never come together again,’ which makes it improbable he would add, ‘That some comeliness would remain.’ For this reason I suspect we should readamittiturforadmittitur, and then the meaning will be quite opposite, thus, ‘And though their comeliness is impaired, yet their use continues the same as before.’
24.Is less firmly held after it is reduced.) In a luxation of the humerus from a lax habit Hippocrates advises the use of the actual cautery, but with great caution, for fear of injuring the blood vessels or tendons; and when the ulcers are clean and fit for cicatrizing, to bind the arm close down to the side, and allow no motion, that the cicatrix may contract the part the more, and strengthen the joint. He censures the practice of his predecessors, who cauterized on the external and anterior side, which ever way the bone had been luxated, and observes that when the humerus is liable to slip into the arm-pit, this would rather push it downward, than prevent its luxation. He proposed therefore the new method of applying the cautery to that part, toward which the bone is liable to be protruded. Hippocrat. de Articul. p. 787, 788, and 789.
25.That even frequent speaking, by the motion of the mouth, hurts the nerves of the temples.) This is according to the reading of Linden and Almeloveen. The old editions haveadeo ut sermo quoque frequens motu oris per nervos lædat; that is,that even frequent speaking, by the motion of the mouth by the nerves, hurts. See Morgagni, ep. v. p. 130.
26.Tone of the nerves be restored.) I follow here the old editions in readingrestitutafordestituta.
27.That the finger may be restored, &c.) In Linden and Almeloveen,ut ita in locum, unde lapsus est digitus, restituatur.[ JW ]Morgagniobserves, that our author had said, there were as many different cases and the same signs as in the hands; but according to this reading he takes no notice of the cure of lateral luxations. Whereas the whole is set right by restoring the old reading, which was, instead of these words, that are quoted from the original,Atque id, quod in latus elapsum est, digitis restitui,i. e.“and that which is luxated laterally ought to be reduced by the fingers.”
28.Having treated of the humerus.)Cum de humeris dixerim.We might here (says Morgagni) have takenhumerisfor the superior extremities ascruribusfor the inferior, but the MS. and all my editions havecum de his dixerim: de his quoque(or as Stephens has itde iis quoque)quæ in cruribus, &c.Ep. vi. p. 167.
29.By keeping the middle or upper part of the joint in some canaliculus.) This whole sentencePotest tamen conditus articulus medius aut summus canaliculo aliquo contineri, in all the old editions is placed at the end of the24thchap. and not here.—But[ JX ]Morgagnisuspects, and as it appears to me, very justly, it should be rather referred to luxated fingers than toes, and that Linden guided by some MS. had transferred it from the24thto the19th, from whence it was transposed to this place by the carelessness of the copiers, where it stands very improperly.
THEI N D E X.
N.B.—n.refers to the notes.
alpha-table
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
A.Abstinence, too great, hurtful,18── of two kinds,71Acopon what, n.,26Acorum, n.,21Actions, natural what,4Æsculapius, why deified,1── register kept at his temple, its use, n.,1Ages, the proper regimen for each,25── what reasons favourable or hurtful to each,36── the peculiar disorders of each,37Alica, n.,12Allum, n.,27Alopecia,263Ammoniacum thymiama, n.,31Ammonius Alexandrinus, an improver of surgery,309Andreas,186Antimony, n.,30── washed, n.,38Aphronitre, n.,28Apollonius, an empiric,3Apollonius Mus,186Apollonii, two surgeons,309Apples (poma) what, n.,6Asclepiades alters the method of practice,3── finds a man carried to burial alive,45── his book upon general remedies,68── account of the duty of a physician,91── practice in a tertian,111Autumn the most dangerous season, and why,34── its usual distempers,35B.Balsam, n.,20Baths, ancient described, n.,4── their use,72── cautions concerning them,72── whether proper in fevers,72Beef sometimes most easily concocted,160Berry gnidian, n.,28Bleeding, the proper subjects for it,60-61── how to be performed, and where,62── dangers attending the operation,63Boys to be differently treated from men in distempers,103C.Cachexia, its causes,129Cachrys, n.,31Cadmia, n.,29Cardamomum, n.,20Caries, its depth how known,389Cassia black, n.,33Cassius an ingenious physician in Celsus’s time,14-172Catapotia what, n.,20Causes of diseases occult and evident,3Cedria, n.,31Celsus his opinion in the controversy between the rationalists and empiricks,9-11── of the methodists,12── use of dissections,15── his complaints of the conduct of patients,71── says one physician cannot attend many patients,93── his practice with regard to food in continued fevers, n.,16── in a tertian,111── opinion of the paracentesis,128── practice in a jaundice,136── whether the drink should be cold or hot in a purging,177Cerastes, n.,35Ceruss burnt, n.,32Chalk Cimolian, n.,14Chalcitis, n.,27Changes in the way of life to be gradual,19── of place,19Changing a disease, sometimes useful,106Chersydrus,239Chirurgery the most ancient branch of medicine,2── its effects the most evident,308── its province,309Chrysippus a physician,2Chrysocolla, n.,28Cleophantus his practice in a tertian,111Clibanum, n.,10Clysters, when proper,65── their kinds and management,66── for nourishing,122Coition, when to be used,16Cold, to whom useful, and hurtful,30Coldness what,90Collyrium what, and how used, n.,37── of Nileus the best of all,271Colour, what portends an approaching illness,38Conchylia, n.,11Concoction, various opinions about it,5Copper, scales of, n.,10── calcined, n.,28── flower of, n.,29Crocomagma what, n.,31Cupping, its uses,64Cutiliæ, n.,24Cyperus long and round, n.,21Cytisus, n.,24D.Days critical,94Defrutum, n.,7Delirium, in the paroxysm of an intermittent, not dangerous,114Democritus skilled in medicine,2── declared the marks of death fallacious,45Dietetice a part of physic,3── differently treated by the rationalists and empirics,4Digestion what, n.,2Diocles the Carystian,2── his graphiscus for extracting weapons,318Diphryges, n.,29Dipsas, n.,35Diseases attributed to the anger of the gods,1── unknown, instance of one,10── increasing and declining, their marks,87Diuretics not good in disorders of the fauces,154Drink, astringent, what,178Dropsy, more easily cured in slaves than free men,124E.Ears, the danger of their disorders,281Earth, Eretrian, n.,30Empedocles, skilled in medicine,2Empirics, their doctrine and arguments,6-11Erasistratus, a physician,2── dissected living bodies,5── his opinion about drinking in fevers,92Euelpistus, an improver of surgery,309Excess, small, less dangerous in drinking than eating,18Exercises proper for the valetudinary after employment,17── what and how long,18F.Far, what, n.,15Fatigue, management after,19-21Ferula, n.,24Fevers, what not dangerous,39── bad,40── prognostics of their continuance,41── not easily known from the pulse, or heat,100Fevers, marks of their presence,101── what discharges necessary in them, and when,102Fibula, n.,34Fistula, opposite to the intestines, dangerous,315Fomentations, warm, what their effects,74Food, when given in fevers by the ancients,92── a variety of it when useful,101Foramina, in the head, how many,382Frankincense, n.,23── soot of, n.,28Fractures of the skull how discovered,393-394Friction, its various effects all depending on one principle,68── the proper times for using it, and its degrees,69G.Garum, n.,13Gestation, when proper,70── its various kinds,70Glaucias, an empiric,3Gorgias, an improver of surgery,309Gum, n.,27── in the eyes, n.,38Gypsum, what, n.,15H.Habits of body, different regimen for them,22── corpulent and slender, diseases of,38Heat, to whom useful and hurtful,31Hæmorrhois, n.,35Hellebore, white, when properly used for purging,65Heraclides of Tarentum, an empiric,3── his practice in a quartan condemned,112Heron, two of that name improvers of surgery,309Herophilus an empiric,2── dissected living bodies,5Hippocrates, the first that separated medicine from philosophy,2── said to be the disciple of Democritus,2── delivers the best prognostics,33── gives short and full directions for friction,68── his doctrine of critical days refuted by Celsus,94── deceived by the sutures,394Hours, the Roman, n.,8Hydromel, how made, n.,10Hypocistis, n.,29Hyssop, how used for a vomit, by Hippocrates, n.,6I.Iatrolipta, what, n.,4Ignis sacer, n.,33Infibulating boys, the method,361Inflammation, its marks,107Incisions, general rules for them,312Intrita, what, n.,16Intestines, their wounds, whether curable,345Issues, general rule about them,181L.Laser, what, n.,17Lead, calcined, n.,27── dross of, n.,30── washed, n.,31Lithotomy, the proper age, &c. for it,363── patient’s posture,363Lithotomy, the transverse wound, n.,44── Meges’s improvement in the operation,366Lotus, n.,6Lycium, n.,23M.Machaon,1Madness of Ajax and Orestes, what, n.,18Malabathrum, n.,33Malagma, n.,20Matter, n.,30Medicine, its design and rise,1── by whom improved, &c.,2── how divided,2── a conjectural art,10-46Meges, the most learned surgeon,309── his account of the coat of an abscess censured,311Melinum, n.,27Methodists, their doctrine,11Metrodorus, his management under a dropsy,125Milk, when hurtful and where proper,131Mind, to be kept easy in sickness,99Minium, what, n.,25Misy, n.,27Mulse, n.,6Myrrh, called stacte, n.,33N.Nard, n.,20── ointment of, n.,31Nature, its great power,55Navel, a tumour of, its causes,342Nitre, n.,15O.Oesypum, n.,32Oil, cicine, n.,32── cyprine, n.,15── of iris, n.,15── of laurel, n.,31── of myrtle, n.,14── of quinces,14── of roses,14── Syrian, n.,23Ointment, Susine, n.,32Omphacium, n.,28Operations, chirurgical, the proper season for them,324Ophiasis,263P.Palate, to be often consulted in medicines,175Panaces, n.,20Panus,248Passum, how prepared, n.,12Paper, burnt, n.,30Pastinaca fish,239Pestilence,2-31Petron, remarkable for using contrary methods,106Phacia,264Phalangium, n.,36Philosophers studied physic, and why,2Philoxenus, an improver of surgery,309Phrenitic patients, whether to be kept in the light or in the dark,116── whether to be bled,116Phymosis, its chirurgical cure,360Podalirius,1Polenta, what, n.,19Poppy tears, n.,30Poison swallowed, more dangerous than a venomous bite or sting,240Praxagoras,2Prepuce, the operation for bringing that over the glans,360Preserves, hurtful,19Prognostics, certain,44Propolis, n.,28Psoricum, n.,38Psylli,237Pthisis, incident to the strongest age,131Ptisan, how prepared, n.,10Pulse, pulticula, n.,12Purging, when useful,24-66── when improper,41-66Pythagoras, skilled in physic,2R.Rationalists, their doctrine and arguments,3-6Remedies, their operation,59── contrary, sometimes successful,105── but rash,105Rhus, Syrian, n.,39Root, Pontic, n.,43S.Salamander, n.,29Salsamentum, n.,11Sansucus, n.,30Seasons, the regimen for each,25── considered with regard to health,34Serapion, author of the empiric sect,3Sesamum, n.,24Shuddering, a common cause of it,109Siligo, what, n.,11Sleep, a good or bad sign,38Sory, n.,39Sostratus, an improver of surgery,309Specillum asperatum,276── oricularium,286Spitting, what it indicates,55Spleen, contracted by smith’s forge water, how discovered,165Spodium, n.,29Spring, its distempers,34Strigil, n.,38Struthium, n.,30Stone in the bladder, symptoms of,48── sarcophagus, n.,26── Asian,26── Phrygian, n.,29── scissile,30Stools good,40── bad,42-46Subruinæ, n.,24Summer, its diseases,34Suppurations, their several causes,50── not yet visible how known,51── good and bad kinds,55Surgeon, qualifications of,309Sutures in the head,382── how they may deceive,394Sweats, what they indicate,39── how procured,72T.Teda, n.,39Thapsia, n.,31Tharrias, his opinion and practice in a lethargy,123── practice in an ascites,128Themison a follower of Asclepiades,3── departs from him in his old age,3Tragum, n.,12Tryphon, the father, an improver of surgery,309U.Urine in sickness good,40── bad,42── its appearances, if a fever is to be tedious,42── various indications from it,48── how discharged by a catheter,362V.Veins cauterized, their treatment after,334Verdigrease rasile, n.,32Vervains what,85Vomits rejected by Asclepiades,20── when useful,20Vulsella, n.,39W.Water, its trial,77── cold, useful to the head,27Weather more or less healthful,34── the effects of the several kinds,35Winds, their effects upon the body,35── what most healthful,35Wine Aminæan, n.,22── Allobrogic, n.,24── Rhetic,24── Signine,24── salt, n.,6── resinated, n.,13
FINIS.
Printed by C. Stewart.