Chapter XXIV: Section III: Constitution 2.699 (3)

15. You must be upon your guard lest the bone sustain any injury from the fleshy parts if not properly treated. When the bone has been sawed and otherwise denuded, whether it be actually sound, or only appears to be so, but has sustained some injury from the blow, there may be danger of its suppurating (although it would not otherwise have done so), if the flesh which surrounds the bone be ill cured, and become inflamed and strangled; for it gets into a febrile state, and becomes much inflamed.[804] For the bone acquires heat and inflammation from the surrounding flesh, along with irritation and throbbing, and the other mischiefs which are in the flesh itself, and from these it gets into a state of suppuration. It is a bad thing for the flesh (_granulations?_) in an ulcer to be moist and mouldy, and to require a long time to become clean. But the wound should be made to suppurate as quickly as possible; for, thus the parts surrounding the wound would be the least disposed to inflammation, and would become the soonest clean; for the flesh which has been chopped and bruised by the blow, must necessarily suppurate and slough away. But when cleaned the wound must be dried, for thus the wound will most speedily become whole, when flesh devoid of humors grows up, and thus there will be no fungous flesh in the sore. The same thing applies to the membrane which surrounds the brain: for when, by sawing the bone, and removing it from the meninx, you lay the latter bare, you must make it clean and dry as quickly as possible, lest being in a moist state for a considerable time, it become soaked therewith and swelled; for when these things occur, there is danger of its mortifying.[805]

16. A piece of bone that must separate from the rest of the bone, in consequence of a wound in the head, either from the indentation (_hedra_) of a blow in the bone, or from the bone being otherwise denuded for a long time, separates mostly by becoming exsanguous. For the bone becomes dried up and loses its blood by time and a multiplicity of medicines which are used; and the separation will take place most quickly, if one having cleaned the wound as quickly as possible will next dry it, and the piece of bone, whether larger or smaller. For a piece of bone which is quickly dried and converted, as it were, into a shell, is most readily separated from the rest of the bone which retains its blood and vitality; for, the part having become exsanguous and dry, more readily drops off from that which retains its blood and is alive.[806]

17. Such pieces of bone as are depressed from their natural position, either being broken off or chopped off to a considerable extent, are attended with less danger, provided the membrane be safe; and bones which are broken by numerous and broader fractures are still less dangerous and more easily extracted.[807] And you must not trepan any of them, nor run any risks in attempting to extract the pieces of bone, until they rise up of their own accord, upon the subsidence of the swelling. They rise up when the flesh (_granulations_) grows below, and it grows from the diploe of the bone, and from the sound portion, provided the upper table alone be in a state of necrosis. And the flesh will shoot up and grow below the more quickly, and the pieces of bone ascend, if one will get the wound to suppurate and make it clean as quickly as possible. And when both the tables of the bone are driven in upon the membrane, I mean the upper and lower, the wound, if treated in the same way, will very soon get well, and the depressed bones will quickly rise up.[808]

18. The bones of children are thinner and softer, for this reason, that they contain more blood [than those of adults]; and they are porous and spongy, and neither dense nor hard. And when wounded to a similar or inferior degree by weapons of the same or even of an inferior power, the bone of a young person more readily and quickly suppurates, and that in less time than the bone of an older person; and in accidents, which are to prove fatal, the younger person will die sooner than the elder. But if the bone is laid bare of flesh, one must attend and try to find out, what even is not obvious to the sight, and discover whether the bone be broken and contused, or only contused; and if, when there is an indentation in the bone, whether contusion, or fracture, or both be joined to it; and if the bone has sustained any of these injuries, we must give issue to the blood by perforating the bone with a small trepan, observing the greatest precautions, for the bone of young persons is thinner and more superficial than that of elder persons.[809]

19. When a person has sustained a mortal wound on the head, which cannot be cured, nor his life preserved, you may form an opinion of his approaching dissolution, and foretell what is to happen from the following symptoms which such a person experiences.[810] When a bone is broken, or cleft, or contused, or otherwise injured, and when by mistake it has not been discovered, and neither the raspatory nor trepan has been applied as required, but the case has been neglected as if the bone were sound, fever will generally come on before the fourteenth day if in winter, and in summer the fever usually seizes after seven days. And when this happens, the wound loses its color, and the inflammation dies in it; and it becomes glutinous, and appears like a pickle, being of a tawny and somewhat livid color; and the bone then begins to sphacelate, and turns black where it was white before, and at last becomes pale and blanched. But when suppuration is fairly established in it, small blisters form on the tongue and he dies delirious. And, for the most part, convulsions seize the other side of the body; for, if the wound be situated on the left side, the convulsions will seize the right side of the body; or if the wound be on the right side of the head, the convulsion attacks the left side of the body.[811] And some become apoplectic. And thus they die before the end of seven days, if in summer; and before fourteen, if in winter. And these symptoms indicate, in the same manner, whether the wound be older or more recent. But if you perceive that fever is coming on, and that any of these symptoms accompany it, you must not put off, but having sawed the bone to the membrane (_meninx_), or scraped it with a raspatory, (and it is then easily sawed or scraped,) you must apply the other treatment as may seem proper, attention being paid to circumstances.[812]

20. When in any wound of the head, whether the man has been trepanned or not, but the bone has been laid bare, a red and erysipelatous swelling supervenes in the face, and in both eyes, or in either of them, and if the swelling be painful to the touch, and if fever and rigor come on, and if the wound look well, whether as regards the flesh or the bone, and if the parts surrounding the wound be well, except the swelling in the face, and if the swelling be not connected with any error in the regimen, you must purge the bowels in such a case with a medicine which will evacuate bile; and when thus purged the fever goes off, the swelling subsides, and the patient gets well. In giving the medicine you must pay attention to the strength of the patient.[813]

21. With regard to trepanning, when there is a necessity for it, the following particulars should be known. If you have had the management of the case from the first, you must not at once saw the bone down to the meninx; for it is not proper that the membrane should be laid bare and exposed to injuries for a length of time, as in the end it may become fungous. And there is another danger if you saw the bone down to the meninx and remove it at once, lest in the act of sawing you should wound the meninx. But in trepanning, when only a very little of the bone remains to be sawed through, and the bone can be moved, you must desist from sawing, and leave the bone to fall out of itself.[814] For to a bone not sawed through, and where a portion is left of the sawing, no mischief can happen; for the portion now left is sufficiently thin. In other respects you must conduct the treatment as may appear suitable to the wound. And in trepanning you must frequently remove the trepan, on account of the heat in the bone, and plunge it in cold water. For the trepan being heated by running round, and heating and drying the bone, burns it and makes a larger piece of bone around the sawing to drop off, than would otherwise do. And if you wish to saw at once down to the membrane, and then remove the bone, you must also, in like manner, frequently take out the trepan and dip it in cold water. But if you have not charge of the treatment from the first, but undertake it from another after a time, you must saw the bone at once down to the meninx with a serrated trepan,[815] and in doing so must frequently take out the trepan and examine with a sound (specillum), and otherwise along the tract of the instrument.[816] For the bone is much sooner sawn through, provided there be matter below it and in it, and it often happens that the bone is more superficial,[817] especially if the wound is situated in that part of the head where the bone is rather thinner than in other parts. But you must take care where you apply the trepan, and see that you do so only where it appears to be particularly thick, and having fixed the instrument there, that you frequently make examinations and endeavor by moving the bone to bring it up. Having removed it, you must apply the other suitable remedies to the wound. And if, when you have the management of the treatment from the first, you wish to saw through the bone at once, and remove it from the membrane, you must, in like manner, examine the tract of the instrument frequently with the sound, and see that it is fixed on the thickest part of the bone, and endeavor to remove the bone by moving it about. But if you use a perforator (_trepan?_), you must not penetrate to the membrane, if you operate on a case which you have had the charge of from the first, but must leave a thin scale of bone, as described in the process of sawing.

END OF VOL. I.

EXPLANATION OF THE PLATES TO VOL. I.

FIG. 1. The Saw used by carpenters. (Taken from
_Chirurgia è Græco in Latinum conversa, Vido Vidio interprete
Lutetiæ Parisiorum_, p. 115.)

2. A small Saw. (_Ibid._)

3. The Modiolus, _or_ ancient Trephine. (_Ibid._)

4. The Terebra, _or_ Trepan, called Abaptiston.
(_Ibid._ p. 116.)

5. The Auger used by carpenters. (_Ibid._ p. 116.)

6. The Terebra, _or_ Trepan, which is turned round by a
thong bound tight about its middle. (_Ibid._ p. 117.)

7. The Auger, _or_ Trepan, which is turned round by a bow.
(_Ibid._ p. 118.)

8. A Terebra, _or_ Trepan, which is turned round by a
thong on a cross-beam. (_Ibid._ p. 119.)

9. A Terebra, _or_ Trepan, which has a ball in its upper
end, by which it is turned round. (_Ibid._ p. 120.)

10. A Terebra, _or_ Trepan, which is turned round by
a cross piece of wood, _or_ handle, on its upper end.
(_Ibid._ p. 120.)]

FIG. 1. A Terebra, _or_ Trepan, turned round by a
handle in its middle. (_Ibid._ p. 122.) It resembles the
centre-bit of modern artisans.

1. A hole into which the iron head is fixed.
2. Upright part, three inches long.
3. Cross part, one inch long.
4. The part which is grasped in turning the instrument.
5. Cross part, an inch long.
6. Upright part.
7. A ball fixed to the top.
A. B. C. Different forms of the iron head fixed in the hole 1.

FIG. 2. Scalper rectus, _or_ straight Raspatory.
(_Ibid._ p. 123.)

3. Scalper in medio recurvatus, _or_ bent Raspatory.
(_Ibid._ p. 123.)

4, 5, 6. Ancient Modioli, as represented by Pott (_Injuries
of the Head_, p. 153).]

FIGS. 1 and 2. A Scalper, _or_ Raspatory, with
which the moderns scrape the bone. (_Chirurgia è Græco,
&c._, p. 125.)

3. Scalper cavus _or_ scooped Raspatory. (_Ibid._ p.
126.)

4. A Lenticular. (_Ibid._ p. 127.)

5. A Malleolus, _or_ Mallet. (_Ibid._ p. 126.)

6. A Lever, by which modern surgeons protect the dura mater,
and raise a depressed bone. (_Ibid._ p. 128.)

7. The ancient Meningophylax. (_Ibid._ p. 128.)

8. Forfex excisoria, _or_ Cutting Scissors. (_Ibid._
p. 129.)

9. A Forceps, used for extracting bones. (_Ibid._ p. 130.)]

FOOTNOTES:

[1] It is necessary to inform my readers in this place, that, owing to its bulk, it has been judged expedient by the Council of the Sydenham Society to divide the work into two separate parts or volumes.

[2] This is the view which is taken regarding the origin of Grecian medicine by Schulze, in his Historia Medicinæ. He is a most learned and trustworthy authority on the history of medicine, but in the present instance his judgment is biassed by the opinion which was generally held in his age with respect to the origin of Grecian philosophy. At that time it was customary to follow the later Platonists in tracing the rise of philosophy to Egypt. Lord Monboddo, in his work on Ancient Metaphysics, strongly espouses this opinion, which, in fact, was the established belief of learned men down to a late period. Kant advocated the views which are here adopted.

[3] See in particular the introductory chapters to Ritter’s History of Ancient Philosophy; Thirlwall’s History of Greece, c. xii.; Grote’s History of Greece, P. I., c. xvii. The opinion now generally held on this subject may be explained in few words. The Homeric poems are beyond all doubt of Grecian origin, for it cannot be shown that the ancient Egyptians or Babylonians had anything resembling a regular epos. Now, as Mr. Grote well observes, “from the poetry of Homer to the history of Thucydides, and the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle, was a prodigious step, but it was the native growth of the Hellenic youth into the Hellenic man, and what is of still greater moment, it was brought about without breaking the thread either of religious or poetic tradition--without any coercive innovation or violent change in the mental feelings. The transition of Grecian mind from its poetical to its comparatively positive state was self-operated, and accomplished by its own inherent and expansive force--aided indeed, but by no means either impressed or provoked, from without.”--L. c.

[4] Plato, Menex.

[5] Celsus mentions Pythagoras, Empedocles, and Democritus, as the most distinguished of the philosophers who cultivated medicine.--Præfat.

[6] “Hippocrates primus ab studio sapientiæ disciplinam hanc separavit.”--Præfat.

[7] See the authorities quoted at PAULUS ÆGINETA, Vol. I., p. 73, Syd. Soc. edition; also in particular Xenophon’s Memorabilia, iii., 13; and Pausanias, ii., 2. The most complete list which is anywhere given of the ancient Asclepia, is that contained in Schulze’s History of Medicine, i., 24. It is to be regretted, however, that the references to Pausanias are made according to the pages of an old edition, instead of books and chapters, so that one experiences some difficulty in finding the passages referred to. The number of Asclepia in Greece noticed by him is sixty-four. Plutarch states in positive terms that all the Temples of Health were erected in high situations, and where the air was wholesome.--(Quæst. Rom.) On the practice of medicine in the Ancient Temples of Health, see further Sprengel, Hist. de la Méd., e. v. Sprengel, however, does not acknowledge so candidly as he ought to have done his obligations to his predecessor Schulze.

[8] Philostratus, Vita Apollonii, i., 9; Strabo, Geogr., xiv.

[9] Pausanias, vii., 21.

[10] This I have reason to know is the belief of the learned and estimable author of the Isis Revelata.

[11] Aristides, Orat. in Æsculap., viii. It may be proper to state that Sprengel, in referring to this passage (Hist. de la Méd., p. 160. French edition), falls into the mistake of saying that these medicines were prescribed to Aristides himself.

[12] Galen, de Administ, Anatom., ii.

[13] Censura Operum Hippocrat., p. 184.

[14] Hist. de la Méd., i., 5, p. 175, French edit. Schulze, in like manner, depreciates the anatomical knowledge of the Asclepiadæ, and holds that it had been overrated by Galen.--Hist. Med., i., 2, 5.

[15] Comment, in Libr. de Artie, iii., 28; de Decret. Hippocrat. et Platon., viii., I.

[16] Polit., iii., 399; ed. Tauchnitz.

[17] Geograph., xiv., 2.

[18] De Sanitate tuenda, i.

[19] L. c.

[20] Galen, Opera, tom. iv., ed. Basil, 35.

[21] Aristotle, Polit., vii., 4. Notwithstanding the high compliment which Aristotle here pays to the professional reputation of Hippocrates, there can be no doubt that he does not always make proper acknowledgment for the many obligations which he lies under to the Coan sage. Galen states repeatedly that the greater part of Aristotle’s physiology is derived from Hippocrates.

[22] See some ingenious observations on these mythical genealogies in Grote’s History of Greece., vol. i., p. 593. He holds that they are altogether unworthy of credit, or at least that there is no test whereby one can separate the true from the false in them. Clinton, indeed, in his Fasti Hellenici, attaches more importance to them; but apparently Mr. Grote’s judgment on them is perfectly just. See further vol. ii., p. 53, etc.

[23] Noctes Atticæ, xvii., 21.

[24] That Hippocrates drew the rudiments of his medical knowledge from the reports of cases collected in the Asclepion of Cos, is attested by good authorities. See Strabo, Geogr., xiv.; Pliny, H. N., xxix., 2.

[25] On the introduction of the gymnastic exercises into the practice of medicine, see Schulze, Hist. Med., i., 2, 8. The author of the VI. Epidem. condemns Herodicus for using exercises in the treatment of acute diseases. Herodicus is frequently mentioned in the Dialogues of Plato. See Protagoras, § 20; and de Repub., iii. Plato says, that being in ill health, he wore out first himself and afterwards many others, by combining gymnastics with medicine.

[26] Somnus alludes to this fiction, and quotes Andreas as an authority for it. See also Pliny, H. N., xxix., 2. Tzetzes calls it the Temple of Cos, and not of Cnidos, which was burned.

[27] See Plato, Protagoras.

[28] Galen, Comment. in Libr. de Nat. Human.

[29] Suidas in voce Hippocrates.

[30] It was a common practice in ancient times to kindle great fires as _disinfectants_ or _deodorizers_. We have entered pretty fully upon this subject in our Commentary on PAULUS ÆGINETA, Vol. I., p. 274. There can be no doubt that it was the established practice of the profession in the days of Hippocrates. The names of Acron, Empedocles, and Hippocrates are particularly famous as having successfully adopted the practice. See Aëtius, v., 94; Paulus Ægineta, l. c.; Pliny, H. N., xxxvi., 69; and Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride.

[31] Hist., iii., 87.

[32] It deserves to be mentioned further, as adding probability to the present narrative, that it was quite common in ancient times for the Asclepiadæ to be publicly consulted by cities and States respecting the general health of the inhabitants, and this both for the prevention and cure of diseases. See Aristid. Opera, i., p. 81.

[33] Galen, in many parts of his works, alludes to the professional services of Hippocrates during the great plague described by Thucydides. He mentions decidedly that Thucydides gives only those symptoms which would strike a common, that is to say, a non-professional man; whereas Hippocrates describes the disease accurately like a professional man, but gives few of those symptoms which appeared most interesting to Thucydides.--De Difficult. Respir., ii., 7.

[34] Thucydides mentions that the mortality of the plague was greatly aggravated by the influx of the people from the country into the city, and the crowding of them in ill-ventilated huts. (ii., 52.) Mitford, in describing the plague of Athens, remarks that the want of sewers in ancient times must have contributed very much to the severity of the disease. (Hist. of Greece, vol. ii., p. 195.) He refers (l. c.) to Strabo (Geogr. v.) for proof that the Romans were the first people who constructed sewers.

[35] See Xenophon, Cyropæd., i. and viii.

[36] Galen, Comment in libr. de Artic. iii.

[37] Xenophon, Anabasis, i. It has never been clearly determined whether he was in the suite of Artaxerxes the king, or of his brother Cyrus, before the battle of Cunaxa, in which the latter was killed, and the former being severely wounded, was attended professionally by Ctesias. Diodorus Siculus, indeed, says decidedly that he was taken prisoner on the occasion. (Bibl. ii., 32.) But we are certain, from the authentic narrative of Xenophon, that he was not taken prisoner in the battle, nor is it likely that he was one of those who were kidnapped afterwards, otherwise the historian would certainly not have omitted the name of so distinguished a personage. Besides, had he been brought to Babylon in this way, as a captive, Artaxerxes was not likely to have intrusted his royal life to a person who had been so lately the professional attendant on his rebel brother.

[38] See Thucyd., ii., 48.

[39] De Prisca Medicina.

[40] See in the next section, under xxiii. Though I have not admitted the treatise here referred to into the list of genuine works, it will be seen below that it possesses considerable evidence in its favor, and that beyond doubt it is very ancient.

[41] Aphor., I., 1.

[42] See Galen, Opera, tom. v., p. 488; ed. Basil.

[43] This is clearly defined and stated by Aristotle, Phys., i. See also Boethius in Præd., p. 113; ed. Basil.

[44] This is the more remarkable, as it does not appear to have been the established creed of the greatest literary men and philosophers of the age, who still adhered or professed to adhere to the popular belief in the extraordinary interference of the gods with the works of Nature and the affairs of mankind. This at least was remarkably the case with Socrates, whose mind, like that of most men who make a great impression on the religious feelings of their age, had evidently a deep tinge of mysticism. See Xenoph. Memor., i., 1, 6–9; Ibid. iv., 7, 7; also Grote’s History of Greece, vol. i., p. 499. The latter remarks, “Physical and astronomical phenomena are classified by Socrates among the divine class, interdicted to human study.” (Mem., i. 1, 13.) He adds, in reference to Hippocrates, “On the other hand, Hippocrates, the contemporary of Socrates, denied the discrepancy, and merged into one the two classes of phenomena--the divine and the scientifically determinable,--which the latter had put asunder. Hippocrates treated all phenomena as at once both divine and scientifically determinable.” (p. 499.) He then quotes the memorable passage in the treatise “On Airs,” etc. It does not appear, however, that in ancient times the charge of Atheism was ever brought against him. It has been urged against him by modern fanatics, but scarcely deserves a serious refutation. See Schulze (Hist. Med., i., 3, 2), and Ackerman (Hist. Lit. Hippocr., pp. xii, xiii; ed. Kühn). By such persons, whoever does not join in their anthropomorphical notions of a first cause is held up for an Atheist.

[45] For the medicine of the ancient Jews, Egyptians, and Babylonians, see the introductory chapters of Sprengel’s Hist. de la Méd. The medicine of the Hindoos, as given in the “Susruta” of D’Hanvantare, abounds in superstitious practices.

[46] Epidem., vi.

[47] Epidem., i.

[48] De Diæta in Morb. Acut., Prognost., 15. See the argument to the Appendix to the former work.

[49] See Galen, Oper. tom. v., p. 106; ed. Basil.

[50] See De Morbis, pluries; de Prisca, Med., 22.

[51] De Superfœt. et pluries.

[52] De Ratione Victus in Acut. There is some doubt, however, whether the σκαμμώνιον of Dioscorides be the _Convolvulus scammonia_. Some rather take it for the _C. sagittifolius_.

[53] De Superfœt. et alibi.

[54] De Morb. Mulier.

[55] De Fract., Aphor. et alibi.

[56] Galen, Meth. Med., v., 3; Comment. in Libr. de Humor. See further in illustration, Œconom. Hippocrat. under Παροχετεύειν and 'Αντίσπασις; and Schulze, Hist. Med., i., 3, 4, 10.

[57] See Epidem., i, and iii.; Aphor., i., 16; and De Diæta Acutor., passim.

[58] See de Morbis, ii.; and Le Clerc, Hist. Med., 1, 3, 20.

[59] See the work “On the Articulations,” pluries.

[60] See in particular Venesect. adv. Erasistrat., Comment. in Lib. de Offic. Medic.

[61] De Dyspn., ii., p. 181; ed. Basil. This brevity of style, Galen, in another passage of the same work, pronounces to be characteristic of all the old writings. In fact, when the materials of writing were scarce and dear, it is not likely that authors would indulge in an extravagant use of them.

[62] Coray, Traité de Hippocrat. des Airs, etc., Discours préliminaire, pp. l., lvii.

[63] Dionysius Halicarnassensis de iis quæ Thucyd. propria sunt, et de Platon. judicium.

[64] Opus supra laudatum, p. clxxiv.

[65] See the editions of Horace by Bentley and Tate, pluries.

[66] See in Bentley’s Horace. The poet himself in several of his pieces, alludes to the separate publication of the various books, as i., 97; vi., 1; ii., præfat.; et pluries.

[67] See Middleton’s Life of Cicero, pluries.

[68] See the editions by Ast, Bekker, and Stallbaum, and the ancient authorities there referred to.

[69] See the preliminary dissertation prefixed to Buhle’s edition; also Schneider’s edition of the Historia Animalium, Epimetrum iii.

[70] He mentions, in his commentary on the treatises entitled “On Regimen in Acute Diseases,” that, from the marks of confused arrangement about it, he was persuaded the author had left it in an unfinished state, and that it had been published after his death. See Opera, tom. v., p. 70; ed. Basil.

[71] See Galen, de Crisibus, i., 6.

[72] Galen, Gloss., tom. v., p. 705; ed. Basil. As frequent mention of the commentators will occur in the course of this work, I will here subjoin a complete list of them, with a few brief notices of them, more especially of a chronological nature, derived principally from the following sources: Ackerman, Bibliotheca Græca; Dietz, Præfatio in Scholia Apollonii, etc.; Littré, Op. Hippocrat., tom. i., pp. 80–132; Daremberg, Cours sur l’Histoire et la Littérature des Sciences Médicales.

Herophilus, the famous anatomist of Alexandria; flourished
about from 310–280 A.C.

Xenocrates of Cos, quoted by Erotian as an authority on the
Prognostics; nearly contemporary with Herophilus.

Philinus of Cos, contemporary with Herophilus, and probably a
disciple.

Bacchius, contemporary with Philinus.

Glaucias immediately after Bacchius; flourished probably
between 290–260 A.C.

Zeuxis the Empiric, immediately after Glaucias and before Zeno;
probably from 270–240 A.C. See Daremberg.

Heraclides Tarentinus, somewhat later than Bacchius, probably
between 260–240 A.C.

Zeno the Herophilean, the contemporary and rival of Heraclides;
probably the same as Zeno of Laodicea.

Apollonius Biblas, the contemporary and rival of Zeno.

Callimachus, according to Daremberg, an immediate disciple of
Herophilus.

Epiceleustus of Crete, of uncertain date.

Apollonius Ophis, of uncertain date.

Lysimachus of Cos, uncertain.

Euphorion, uncertain.

Heraclides the Erythrean, rather uncertain; but, according to
Daremberg, a contemporary with Heraclides Tarentinus. The same
as Heraclides the Herophilean. (Strabo, Geogr., xiv.)

Epicles, uncertain.

Eurycles, uncertain.

Philonides of Sicily, uncertain.

Ischomachus, uncertain.

Cydias, uncertain.

Cinesias, uncertain.

Demetrius, the Epicurean.

Diagoras, uncertain.

Nicander the Poet of Colophon, from 150–120 A.C.

Apollonius Citiensis; Daremberg places him between 80–52
A.C. See also Dietz and Littré.

Asclepiades of Bithynia, contemporary with Pompey the Great;
about 60–40 A.C.

Thessalus, the famous Methodist; about 50–70 P.C.

Erotian flourished in the reign of Nero, from 50–70
P.C. His Glossary still preserved.

Sabinus, of uncertain date, but probably not long anterior to
Galen, by whom he is frequently quoted. (Op., tom. v., p. 433.)

Metrodorus, disciple of Sabinus.

Rufus _or_ Ruffus Ephesius, contemporary with Sabinus.
Several of his works remain, but no portion of his Commentaries
on Hippocrates.

Marinus, the celebrated anatomist, about the beginning of the
second century P.C.

Quintus, the Empiric, probably about from 110–130 P.C.

Lycus, the Macedonian, the disciple of Quintus; from 120–140
P.C. See Daremberg.

Lycus, of Naples, date rather uncertain.

Artemidorus, a favorite of the Emperor Hadrian; often blamed
by Galen for his alterations of the text; about 120–140
P.C.

Dioscorides (_not_ the author of the Materia Medica), an
associate of Artemidorus.

Numesianus, somewhat later than Dioscorides.

Dionysius, about the time of the last.

Pelops, the disciple of Numesianus.

Satyrus, the disciple of Quintus.

Phecianus, the disciple of Quintus.

Julian the Alexandrian, the immediate predecessor of Galen, who
frequently animadverts on his writings.

GALEN, flourished between 150–190 P.C.;
wrote Commentaries, still in existence, on the following
works:--On the Nature of Man; on Regimen in Health; on Regimen
in Acute Diseases; on the Prognostics; on the First Book of the
Prorrhetics; on the Aphorisms; on the First, the Third, and the
Sixth Books of the Epidemics; on the Treatise on Fractures; on
the Articulations; on the Physicians’ Establishment or Surgery;
on the Humours; fragments of the Commentaries on Airs, Waters,
Places, and on the Aliment. Besides these, he wrote several
other Commentaries, which are lost.

Domnus, of uncertain date, after Galen.

Attalion, like the last, cited in the Commentary attributed to
Oribasius.

Philagrius, of uncertain date, quoted by Theophilus.

Gesius, of uncertain date.

Asclepius, of uncertain date, quoted by Theophilus. (Dietz,
tom. ii., p. 458.)

Stephanus, the Athenian, supposed by Dietz to have lived in the
reign of Heraclius, that is to say, in the earlier part of the
seventh century. According to Dietz, not the same as Stephanus
Alexandrinus.

Palladius, probably about the seventh century; his Commentary
on the book “On Fractures,” published by Foës, and a
considerable portion of his Commentary “On the Sixth Epidemic,”
by Dietz.

Joannes Alexandrinus, probably near the time of Palladius; part
of his Commentary “On the Nature of the Young Man,” published
by Dietz.

Theophilus, or Philotheus, surnamed Protospatharius, probably
flourished in the seventh century P.C. See the
Annotations of Dr. Greenhill, in his excellent edition of the
work “De Corporis Humani Fabrica;” Oxford, 1842. Several of his
Commentaries on the Aphorisms, published by Dietz.

Meletius, of uncertain date; part of his Commentaries on the
Aphorisms, published by Dietz. See also Anec. Gr., ed. Cramer.

Damascius, of uncertain date; a few of his Commentaries on the
Aphorisms, published by Dietz.

[73] Œuvres d’Hippocrat., tom. i., p. 171.

[74] See Schulze, Hist. Med., i., 3, 1.

[75] It will be proper to give this Class:--

1. De Aëre, Aquis, et Locis.
2. De Natura Hominis.
3. De Locis in Homine.
4. De Humoribus.
5. De Alimento.
6. De Morbis popularibus.
7. Prognosticon.
8. Prædictionum, ii.
9. De Victu Acutorum.
10. De Fracturis.
11. De Articulis.
12. Mochlicus.
13. De Vulneribus Capitis.
14. Officina Medici.
15. Aphorismi.

[76] Censura Librorum Hippocrateorum, Vratislaviæ, 1772.

[77] De Elementis, i., 9.

[78] Tom. v., p. 442; ed. Basil.

[79] Galen, who is a most unexceptionable judge in such a case, says that the language of Hippocrates inclines to the Attic, and that some had held it to be Old Attic. (Tom. v., p. 525; ed. Basil.) Dionysius of Halicarnassus, another admirable critic, says that Herodotus is the most excellent standard of the Ionic (and so, by the way, Photius also says, under the head of _Ctesias_) and Thucydides of the Attic. (De Platon. Judicium.) Now, since we have already made it appear that there is a most striking similarity between the language of Hippocrates and Thucydides, the judgment of Dionysius is evidently in accordance with that of Galen on this point. Indeed, as briefly stated in the text, the Attic was nothing more than a new development of the Ionic, and scarcely more different from it than the English language in the age of Pope is from the same in the age of Milton. It is to be borne in mind that the name Ionian was originally applied to the Thracians and the inhabitants of Attica, who were evidently closely allied to one another in consanguinity. It was in Thrace that learning and civilization first sprang up under the auspices of Thamyris, Orpheus, and Musæus, by whom the elegant arts were transplanted to Athens. (See Hesychius, in voce Iones; Eustathius, ad Iliad., ii.; Diogenes Laertius, _Prœfat_.; also Hermes Philologus, p. 23, by the author of this disquisition, whose mind now reverts with great delight, _ad studia quæ adolescentiam alebant_.) The inhabitants of Asiatic Ionia and the adjoining islands were colonists from Attica. (Thucyd., i., 12; Herodotus, viii., 44; Heraclides, de Polit.) From what has been stated it will readily be understood that the only standard of polite Greek was the Ionic, with its offspring the Attic. The Æolic and Doric dialects, although used in certain scientific and popular compositions, such as Bucolics and certain philosophical treatises, were never looked upon as being fashionable and learned dialects.

[80] De Artic., i.

[81] See his Historia Literaria Hippocratis, in the Bibliotheca Græca of Albertus Fabricius, or in vol. i. of Kühn’s edition of Hippocrates.

[82] Galen, tom. v., p. 17; ed. Basil.

[83] Apologie, etc.

[84] Hippocratis nomine quæ circumferuntur scripta ad temporis rationes disposuit Christianus Petersen, p. prior. Hamburgi, 1839.

[85] Prædict., i.; Coacæ Prænot.; de Loc. in Hom.

[86] De Carne.; de Part. Sept.; de Part. Oct.; de Superf.; de Dent.

[87] De Flat.

[88] De Morb. Popul., i., iii.; de Morb., i.; de Affect.; de Morbo Sacro; de Insan.; de Veratr. Usu; de Victu Acut.; de Victu Sal.; Præn.; Prædict., ii.; Aphor.; de Aëre, Locis, et Aq.; de Insom.; de Hæmorrh.; de Fistul.

[89] De Nat. Puer.

[90] De Prisca Med.

[91] De Nat. Hom.; de Humor.; de Nat. Oss.; de Corde; de Corp. Sect.; de Gland.; de Visu; de Alim.; de Usu Liquid.; de Affect. Intern.; de Morb. Popul., ii., iv., etc.; de Morb., ii., iii.; de Morb. Mulier.; de Nat. Mulieb.; de his quæ ad Virg. Spect.; de Steril.; de Vulner.; de Judic.; de Dieb. Judic.

[92] De Morb., iv.; de Genitura; de Remed. Purgant.

[93] De Victu Sanor. libri tres.

[94] Tom. ii., pp. 32, 33.

[95] Œuvres d’Hippocrate, tom. i., p. 263.

[96] See Stephanus, Comment. in Prognost. Hippocrat., tom. ii., p. 61, ed. Dietz.; and Galen, tom. v., p. 328, ed. Basil.

[97] The well known story regarding the concealment of Aristotle’s library by his heir, Neleus of Scepsis, and its restoration by Apellicon, is faithfully related by Strabo, Geograph., ix. In this passage Strabo states, that before the restoration of the library by Apellicon, there were but few of Aristotle’s works in the hands of the peripatetic philosophers, and these principally his exoteric works. But that the treatise “On the History of Animals” was an exoteric work, can admit of no question. This is confidently maintained by the learned Schneider in the prolegomena to his edition of this work. Indeed, as he suggests, there is no good reason for doubting that the treatise “On the History of Animals” had been published by Aristotle in his lifetime. (Epimetrum, ii.) See also Buhle’s dissertation prefixed to his edition of Aristotle’s works. I need scarcely add that, it being thus shown that all the most learned authorities on the literature of Aristotle’s works are agreed that the History of Animals, in which is contained this disputed fragment on the veins, was published before the time when the Hippocratic Collection is supposed to have been made, M. Littré’s conclusions on this head must fall to the ground.

[98] The death of Aristotle is referred to A.C. 321. Now this is just about the date of the foundation of the Royal Library at Alexandria, and very near the age when Herophilus flourished. These (M. Littré’s) positions clearly made out, it would follow that the dates of the treatises in the Collection come down very near to the foundation of the Alexandrian Library.

[99] See Hengstenberg’s Commentary on the Psalms, pluries.

[100] Although this piece be admitted into the first class, it also merits a place here.

[101] Prænotiones or Prognostica; Aphorismi; Epidemiorum, i., iii.; de Diæta Acutorum; de Aëre, Aquis, et Locis; de Capitis Vulneribus.

[102] De Prisca Medicina; de Articulis; de Fracturis; Mochlicus; Jusjurandum; Lex; de Ulceribus; de Fistulis; de Hæmorrhoidibus; de Officina Medici; de Morbo Sacro.

[103] Prorrhetica, i.; Coacæ Prænotiones.

[104] De Natura Hominis; de Salubri Victus Ratione; de Natura Muliebri; de Morbis, ii., iii.; de Superfœtatione.

[105] De Flatibus; de Locis in Homine; de Arte; de Diæta; de Insomniis; de Affectionibus; de Internis Affectionibus; de Morbis, i.; de Septimestri Partu; de Octimestri Partu; Epidemiorum, ii., iv., vii.; de Humoribus; de Usu Liquidorum.

[106] Epistolæ; Thessali Legati Oratio; Oratio ad Aram; Atheniensium Senatus-Consultum.

[107] De Genitura; de Natura Pueri; de Morbis, iv.; de Mulierum Morbis; de Virginum Morbis; de Sterilibus.

[108] Epidemiorum, v., vii.; de Corde; de Alimento; de Carnibus; de Septimanis; de Natura Ossium; de Glandulis; de Medico; de Decenti habitu; Præceptiones; de Anatomia; de Dentitione; de Exsectione Fœtus; de Visu; de Crisibus; de Diebus Criticis; de Medicamentis Purgativis.

[109] Hippocrat. Coi Comment. etc., Theod. Zuingeri studio. Basil, 1579.

[110] See his additions to Ackerman’s Dissertation, in his edition of the Works of Hippocrates.

[111] § 122, tom. i., p. 172 (ed. Bekker), where see the note of Heindorf.

[112] Galeni Opera, tom. v., pp. 2, 16; ed. Basil.

[113] Œuvres Complètes, etc., tom. i., p. 320.

[114] The argument turns principally on the meaning of the expression, τι πότε λέγει Ἱπποκράτης τε καὶ ὁ ἀληθὴ λόγος, which M. Littré contends signifies, “ce qu’Hippocrate et la raison _pourraient dire_.” Now I must say that, to me, the words of Plato here quoted do not warrant the interpretation which M. Littré puts upon them; and, not satisfied with my own judgment on this point, which happens in the present instance to be an important one, I applied to one of the best authorities in Britain on the minutiæ of the Greek language for his opinion, and was happy to find that it entirely corresponded with my own. Having alluded in the text to the prolixity of the discussion which M. Littré enters into on this occasion, I trust that eminent scholar will not be offended (provided these pages ever meet his eyes) if I introduce here an anecdote of the celebrated Kuster. Having been shown a work in which the quantity of argumentation and reflection greatly over-balanced the amount of facts and references, he laid it aside with the remark, “I find nothing here but reasoning: _non sic itur ad astra_.”

[115] Galeni Opera, tom. v., p. 119; ed. Basil.

[116] Comment. vii.; et sect. vii., 53 et seq.

[117] See under _Hippocrates_ in Smith’s Greek and Roman Biographical and Mythological Dictionary.

[118] “In all paroxysms, or sharp fits of intermitting diseases, we must take away meat, for then to give it is hurtful.”

[119] “The belly is naturally hottest in winter and the spring, and most addicted to rest. Consequently in these seasons a greater proportion of food is to be allowed, because the inward heat is stronger, which is the reason that a more plentiful food is necessary. This difference may be seen in such as are old, and in such as are lusty and well-grown bodies.”

[120] “Those things that are or have been justly determined by nature, ought not to be moved or altered, either by purging or other irritating medicines; but should be left alone.”

[121] “Things evacuated and purged are not to be estimated by the multitude and quantity, but by their fitness to be avoided and sent forth; and must be such as are not too troublesome to the patient to bear. Though, where it is necessary, we must proceed in evacuating, even to swooning and fainting, if the patient can bear it.”

[122] “Those who are grieved in any part of the body, and are scarce sensible of their grief, have a distempered mind.”

[123] “When the upper parts of the throat or gullet are sore, or a breaking out of small tumours does arise in the body, we ought to look upon the excrements; for if they are choleric, the body is also sick; but if they are like the excrements of sound persons, the body may be nourished without danger.”

[124] “When that which ought to be evacuated is discharged by spontaneous vomiting and diarrhœa, it is useful and easily endured; but when otherwise, the contrary. _This is equally true with regard to every vessel_,” etc.

[125] “They in whom the greatest vigor of the disease is immediately perceived, are to be immediately sparingly supplied with food; but from those in whom it occurs later, the food must at that time, or a little earlier, be abstracted. Previously, however, we must nourish more freely, that the sick may be supported.”

[126] “Whilst the crisis is forming, and when it is complete, nothing ought to be moved or to be introduced, whether by purgatives or other irritants; but all should be left at rest.”

[127] “They who are accustomed to daily labor, although even weak or old, endure it more easily than the robust or young, who are even accustomed to it.”

[128] “In regard to the seasons, if the winter has been dry and cold, and the spring moist and warm, in summer acute fevers, ophthalmias, and dysenteries must necessarily occur, chiefly, however, among females and men of pituitous temperament.”

[129] Tom. v., p. 399; ed, Basil.

[130] “The state of the air being, upon the whole, dry, with a south wind, which was just contrary to what happened the year before, when the north chiefly prevailed; there were but few inflammatory fevers, and these were of a mild disposition, very few being attended with hemorrhages, and much fewer, if any, with death.” (p. 4.)

“They affected children, young persons, and those who were arrived at years of maturity, and especially those who used much exercise, yet but few women.” (Ibid.)

“Before the summer, and even during that season, nay, in winter likewise, there were many who had been disposed to a phthisis who were now afflicted with that disease,” etc. (Ibid.)

“The extremities were generally very cold, there was seldom any heat in them.” (p 3.)

[131] Præfat. Gloss.

[132] Comment. in Libr. de Fract.

[133] In Lib. Prognos. Comment.

[134] Tom. v., p. 89; ed. Basil.

[135] Comment. in Lib. de Fract.

[136] Deipnos, ii., 7.

[137] De Propr. Lib., in III. Epid., Comm. ii., Præf.

[138] Bibl. Med., p. 1, 29, 59.

[139] The inhabitants of Asiatic Ionia, and the islands adjoining, were all colonists from Attica. (See in particular Thucyd., i., 12; and also Herodot. viii., 44; and Heraclides, de Politiis.) Dr. Coray supposes that Hippocrates represents himself as being a European, in consequence of his having composed this treatise in Europe, at a distance from his native country. But there is no necessity for this supposition, as Hippocrates, being of Grecian descent, would naturally enough consider himself a European, since the great body of the Greeks were Europeans. Coray mentions a striking instance of Haller’s incapacity to form a correct judgment on the works of Hippocrates, from want of a proper acquaintance with the Greek language.--Discours Préliminaire, etc., p. lvi.

[140] De Placit. Hippocr., et Platon. ix.; de Diff. Resp., iii., 7.

[141] Ap. Foës., p. 197.

[142] Galeni Opera, tom. v., p. 652; ed. Basil.

[143] Opera, tom. v., p, 578; ed. Basil.

[144] Ibid., p. 170.

[145] In Prædict. i., Comm. i., 4.

[146] V. Galen, in Exeges. in vocibus ἐκλούσθω, σφάκερος, etc.

[147] Præfat. Gloss. Hippocrat.

[148] Gynæc., tom. i., P. I., p. 13.

[149] In vita Hippocrat.

[150] Ad Nepotian. de vita Cleric., Ep. ii., p. 13, tom. i.; ed. Paris, 1643.

[151] Orat. Funebr., in Cæsarium Fratrem.

[152] Sub voce Hippocrates.

[153] Epist. ad C. Jal. Callistum.

[154] Thesmophor., l. 240.

[155] De Legg. iv., l. vi., p. 134; ed. Tauchnitz.

[156] Tom. ii., p. xlviii.; Add. et Corrig.

[157] Tom. v., p. 526; ed. Basil, etc. Elsewhere he quotes it as being undoubtedly genuine.--De Placit. Hippoc. etc., ix., 1.

[158] Hist. Med., p. 283.

[159] See Polybius, as quoted by Littré, l., c.; also section iii. of the Preliminary Discourse.

[160] Saturnal., vii., 6.

[161] Hist. Animal., iii., 3.

[162] In Boerhaav., Meth. Stud. Med.

[163] De Placit. Hippocrat. et Plat., vi., 3; et Opera, tom. v., p. 22; ed. Basil.

[164] De Nat. Facult., tom. i., p. 87.

[165] Opera, tom. v., p. 329; ed. Basil.

[166] See English translation of PAULUS ÆGINETA, Book I., p. 549.

[167] See Galen, tom. v., p. 2.

[168] See further, under No. 1.

[169] Opera, tom. v., pp. 17, 29.

[170] See PAULUS ÆGINETA, I., 50.

[171] I., 3.

[172] Sect. ii., near the beginning.

[173] Comment. in III. Epidem.

[174] Ad Hippocrat. de Aëre, Aquis, Locis, § 65.

[175] De Vulneribus superciliis allatis. Lips., 1741.

[176] Lehre von den Augen-krankheiten. Wien, 1813.

[177] In VI. Aphor., 3, Comm. vi.; Meth. Med., iv., 6.

[178] Hist. Med., i., 3, 4, 60. His language is particularly strong: “Maximè genuinus ab omnibus judicatur.”

[179] In his Commentary on this work.

[180] Book iv., 44. See the authorities quoted in the Commentary on this chapter in the English edition. Schulze properly remarks, that the composition which he recommends as an application to certain sores resembles the Ægyptiacum of modern times.--Hist. Med., i., 3, 4, 63.

[181] Comment in Lib. de Nat. Human.

[182] They are as follows: “Continuari cum libello de hæmorrhoidis manifeste spurio, ideoque ipsum esse spurium, Galenus jam notat in Gloss., s. v. πήρινα et στρυβλήν.” Now, as stated above, Galen does not say a word against the authenticity of these works.

[183] Comment i., in Hipp. Prognost. The quotation prefixed to this work in the editions of Vander-linden and Frobenius, in which Galen is stated to have held this work not to be genuine, is admitted by Littré to be of no authority.

[184] Morb. Diuturn., i., 4.

[185] See Menage in Diogen. Laert., p. 241.

[186] See § 66, tom. vii., p. 359: ed. Bekker.

[187] See all these authorities as quoted by Ackerman.

[188] Hist. de la Méd., i., iii., 4.

[189] It may appear a singular idea that the earth is supported on air, and yet it was very generally held by the learned men of antiquity. The poet Lucan thus alludes to this doctrine:

“Dum terra fretum terramque levabit
Aer.” Pharsal., i., 89.

And in like manner Ovid:

“Nec circumfuso pendebat in aere tellus
Ponderibus librata suis.” Met., I., 11.

Bentley remarks, in his note on the passage in Lucan, “Omnis poetarum chorus hoc prædicat ut et philosophorum veterum.”

[190] Morb. Chron., i.

[191] Corp. Human. Appell., ii., 1.

[192] See under θήριον and κρημνόι.

[193] They refer apparently to Deipnos, ii., 7, where Athenæus quotes a treatise of Hippocrates περὶ τόπων, but he evidently means by it the work “de Aëre, Aquis, Locis.” It is to be borne in mind that Athenæus often makes his references in a loose manner.

[194] De Facult. Natur., ii.

[195] Censura Libr. Hippocrat., p. 115.

[196] Comment. in Epidem., ii., 3. See also Le Clerc, Hist. de la Méd., iii., 17; and Sprengel, Hist. de la Méd., tom. i., p. 325, etc. A passage, which we shall see below, in the Prognostics (§ 15) puts it beyond a doubt that venesection was part of the routine of practice pursued by Hippocrates in cases of pneumonia. See also (and this passage is very decisive) de Diæta in Morb. Acut., § 5; and Galen’s Commentary, pluries.

[197] The strongest argument in favor of its being a production of the Cnidian school is the mode of treating pneumonia here laid down, which certainly in so far agrees with what Galen says of Cnidian practice in such cases, namely, that those authorities omitted bleeding and purging. See Opera, tom. v., p. 87.

[198] See under Ἱππωκράτης. The meaning of the passage, however, is somewhat doubtful.

[199] Comment, in Lib. Vict. Acut., i., p. 43; ed. Basil.

[200] Zuinger, however, stands up for its genuineness. Hippocratis Vigenti duo Comment., etc., p. 386. He gives a most elaborate analysis of it.

[201] These dreamy views of human life look very much like an anticipation of the Fourierism of the present day. So true is the hackneyed saying, “there is nothing new under the sun!”

[202] Hist. de la Méd., i., iii., 13.

[203] Hippocrates, in his treatise ‘On Diet in Acute Diseases,’ says decidedly that the ancients--that is to say, his predecessors--had written nothing of any value on the subject of Dietetics (§ 1). From this we may infer that the present work was not known in his days; for it can scarcely be supposed that he would have spoken so disparagingly of it.

[204] Galen quotes it as a portion of the work on Diet. See Opera, tom. v., p. 377; ed. Basil.

[205] This idea is well explained and enlarged upon by Alexander Aphrodisiensis.--Probl. i., 118. This writer must not be confounded with the commentator on Aristotle.

[206] Zuinger points out a striking mark of the connection between it and the work ‘On Diet:’ op. sup. laud. p. 549.

[207] Amstel., 1658.

[208] Oneirocritica, etc. Lutetiæ, 1603.

[209] Σκιᾱς ὄναρ ἄνθρωποι. Pind. Pyth., viii.

[210] Comment. in Libr. de Diæt. Acut., i.

[211] Tom. v., pp. 306, 614, etc.; ed. Basil.

[212] See the Syd. Soc. edition of PAULUS ÆGINETA, Vol. I., p. 264.

[213] Galen, by the way, mentions that Euryphon, the celebrated Cnidian physician in the days of Hippocrates, was in the practice of treating empyema with the actual cautery.--Comment. in Aphor., vii., 44. This is a strong confirmation of the opinion that this treatise must have emanated from the Cnidian school.

[214] See the Syd. Soc. edition of PAULUS ÆGINETA, Vol. I., p. 354.

[215] I presume it was the rib itself that was perforated, and not the intercostal space. The term τρύπανον was generally applied to the trepan. The epithet τρυγλητήριον, or, as Foës proposes to read it, τρωλοδυτήριων, is probably derived from τρώγλη, a hole, and δύω, to penetrate; joined together, they would signify a trepan for boring holes.

[216] Morb. Acut., iii., 17.

[217] De Humor., Comment. in VI. Epidem.

[218] Opera, tom. v., p. 456; ed. Basil.

[219] The silphium, indeed, is mentioned among the remedies for this case in the treatise “On Regimen in Acute Diseases” (7), but not the other articles.

[220] Ad Epidem., vi., 6, 27.

[221] Hippocrat. Opera, i., p. 318.

[222] The opinions on this subject are given very fully by Aulus Gellius. Noctes Atticæ, iii., 10.

[223] I should mention that Zuinger pronounces, without the slightest hesitation, in favor of their genuineness: op. sup. laud. pp. 188, 199.

[224] De Difficult. Respir., ii., 8; ibid., iii., 1.

[225] Comm. Epid., vi., 2, 15.

[226] Opera, tom. v., p. 24; ed. Basil.

[227] See series of papers in illustration of it, published in the Medical Gazette for the year 1847, by Dr. Wardel. On one point I cannot agree with this writer; he says, the fever was of a continued character, whereas in all the cases which I met with it was decidedly remittent.

[228] VIII., 4.

[229] Institut., Orat. iii.

[230] De Perfect. in Virt.

[231] § 27.

[232] It cannot but appear singular that so distinguished a person as Robert Boyle should have found fault with Hippocrates for relating so many cases of which the issue was fatal. He says, “Revera penes me non parum Hippocratis auctoritate decedit, quod in scriptis suis tot ægrotorum epiphonema _ipsos mortuos esse_ legerem.”--Exer. v., de Utilitate Philosoph. Exper., p. 192. On the other hand, Mart. Lister justly defends Hippocrates: “A me sane absit illa quorundam nuperorum scriptorum jactantia, qui nihil exhibent, nisi quod bonum eventum habuit; errores et infortunia caute abscondunt, aliter autem nobis profuit magnus Hippocrates, apud quem fere non nisi casus funesti occurrunt, ac si iidem potioris doctrinæ essent.”--Exercit. de Hydrope.

[233] Acut. Morb., iii., 17.

[234] Perspiratio dicta Hippocrati.