Chapter XIII: Part 13

Either of the following things must take place, that this fever may terminate completely; the bilious humours must either be evacuated or extinguished. They are evacuated then by sweating, vomiting, or purging downwards; but they are extinguished by cold drink, with which we have entirely cured ardent fevers. For diet, those in causus should not take water alone, nor mead alone, but boiled mead much diluted with water; for the food of such persons ought to consist entirely of drinks. The bath will suit with those only affected with causus who are free from all inflammatory and erysipelatous swelling. And if they exhibit signs of concoction, it will suit still better with them; but not so if the fever be occasioned by a saltish humour. These should be supported with the juice of ptisan.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. Our author’s directions respecting the treatment are mostly taken from Hippocrates (de Rat. Vict. Acut.) Hippocrates allows venesection only when the attack is violent. He approves of the application of cold water to the surface. Archigenes, as Aëtius informs us, sponged the head and chest with cold water during the acme of ardent fevers. (iii. 159.) His own treatment, which is borrowed from Philumenus and Galen, consisted of cooling remedies internally and externally, such as drinking cold water and other things of a refrigerant nature, using cold applications, and the cold bath, (v, 28.) Alexander, Oribasius, Synesius, and Constantinus Africanus treat the causus upon the same plan as our author. They say nothing of bleeding. Celsus likewise omits to make mention of venesection, but recommends refrigerants, and especially cold water to be given, even to satiety. He forbids it, however, when there is any affection of the internal viscera, and when there is a cough. He informs us that Asclepiades, of Bithynia, strongly recommended gestation for the cure of this fever.

Averrhoes abstracts blood when there are symptoms of plethora, gives gentle purgatives, such as tamarinds, and allows the patient cool drink and cool air. Haly Abbas treats the causus entirely upon the refrigerant plan, with cold drink, cooling fruits, fresh air, gentle laxatives, such as prunes, and by cold applications to the skin. Alsaharavius conducts the treatment upon much the same principles. When the patient is troubled with protracted watchfulness, he directs us to rub the temples with the juice of poppies, lettuces, and coriander. Avicenna also speaks favorably of these soporifics, but does not in general approve of bleeding. The treatment recommended by Rhases is altogether refrigerant. He directs us to clear away the asperities of the tongue, and then to give cooling and acid drinks. When there is no inflammation of any internal viscus, he permits water cooled with snow. He says nothing of venesection. However, some of his authorities, as quoted in his ‘Continens,’ recommend bleeding. They seem in general to have approved of keeping the patient in a cool room perfumed with aromatic and fragrant herbs. One of them approves of applying over the stomach a robe moistened with a fluid prepared from camphor, rose oil, &c.

We omitted to mention that Hippocrates states that children at the breast are subject to attacks of causus, by which of course he meant the infantile remittent fever, first well described some years ago by Dr. Butter.

SECT. XXXI.—DIAGNOSIS AND CURE OF FEVERS WITH AN ERYSIPELATOUS AFFECTION.

Fevers accompanied with an erysipelatous affection about the viscera, may be known by the vehement effervescence and violent pain in the part, also, by the thirst and inordinate burning; in a word, by the symptoms of very acrid bile putrefied along with a deficient blood. They are to be treated in this manner: the patient must abstain altogether from the bath, and at the acme of the complaint, use very cold water in the most decided manner. Yet it must not be used at the commencement, but cold things are to be applied externally; and if this is not sufficient, they must be taken internally. Lettuces and such like things are particularly befitting. The juice of the lettuce is likewise a seasonable application externally, also, that of the house-leek (_semper-vivum_), and such like cooling things. We may use the following application, which is an excellent one: Squeezing out the juice of some cooling thing, we put it into a mortar with purslain, then pound and strain it; at the time of using, we mix a little polenta with it, and place it in cold water to cool it. A piece of cloth folded double is to be put into it, and afterwards applied to the hypochondrium, and not suffered to remain, but another cold one must be substituted. We sometimes mix the oil of unripe olives.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. This section is mostly taken from Oribasius, (Synops. vi, 20.) On erysipelas of the lungs consult Hippocrates, (De Morbis, i, 13, and ii, 53.) Hippocrates says in one of his aphorisms (vi, 25), that it is dangerous when an external erysipelas is determined internally, but favorable when an internal erysipelas is determined externally. He describes an epidemical erysipelas which was attended with extensive gangrene of the limbs, but did not often prove fatal. (Epid. i.)

The following are the symptoms of fever connected with erysipelatous inflammation, as detailed by Alexander: The patient experiences thirst more strikingly than in any other case, throws the clothes off his body, has exacerbations every third day, with bilious and ichorous discharges from the bowels; those in whom the erysipelatous inflammation is seated in the lungs have not so intense thirst, but breathe thick and large, their cheeks are red, tongue rough, they are delirious, and long rather for cool air, and are more benefited by it than by cool drink, which ought rather to be given to those who have erysipelatous inflammation in any other part, whereas those in whom the lungs are affected ought to be supplied with cool air. In ordinary cases he approves of giving cold water to extinguish the fever, but says that he has seen patients brought to imminent danger by the unseasonable application of cold cataplasms and clysters.

Aëtius states that fevers are kindled by the parts about the bowels, liver, and lungs, being attacked with erysipelas. Like our author, he approves of cold drink, cool air, and cold applications to the part affected. (v, 88.)

The acute affection of the vena cava, which is minutely described by Aretæus, ought probably to be ranked with the diseases which we are now treating of. He himself is in doubt whether to consider it as a species of causus. Like the latter, he says, it has a tendency to pass into syncope. (De Sign. Morb. Acut. iii, 8.) He recommends for it venesection and the refrigerant plan of treatment. (Cur. Morb. Acut. ii, 7.) We have stated in the xxixth section that Palladius refers one variety of ardent fever to erysipelas of the lungs.

A similar account of these affections is given by Avicenna, (iv, i, 4, c. 13, 14, and 15); and by Rhases (ad Mansor. x, 15, _alibique_.)

We can draw no information from modern works to illustrate the opinions of the ancients respecting the febrile affections treated of in this section. It does not seem to be suspected now that erysipelas ever attacks the lungs or bowels; and yet, as this disease when it occurs externally is known to be seated principally in the epidermis, and as the epithelium, or membrane which lines the internal cavities, is admitted to be a prolongation of it, (see Kaau Boerhaave, Perspiratio Dicta Hippocrati,) it would seem probable _a priori_, that the diseases of both portions of it should be alike. That fevers are often complicated with ardent affections of the lungs and bowels, and bilious symptoms, we all admit; and it was, no doubt, to such febrile affections that the ancients gave the name of fevers from erysipelas—erysipelas, as we shall see afterwards, being referred by them to the state of the bile. One cannot but admire the sagacity of Hippocrates in tracing the connexion and resemblance between the diseases of the epidermis and those of the epithelium. (See Littré’s Hippocrat. t. iv, 419.)

SECT. XXXII.—DIAGNOSIS OF HECTIC FEVERS.

The hectic fever is not only seated in the fluids and spirits, but also in the solid parts. It is unaccompanied with pain, and those affected with this fever imagine that they have no fever at all, for they are sensible of no heat, all the parts being heated equally. There are two kinds of hectic fevers, the one for the most part supervening upon ardent fevers which have been protracted so long as to consume in time all the juices in the body of the heart; the other may come on while it remains plentiful. The former constitute not only hectic but marasmus. Those that come on while the juices of the heart remain, seize upon the body of the heart, and hence the febrile flame is kindled, like the flame of a lamp from its wick. This is one of the modes of formation. The other mode is, when they make their attack originally, commencing like ephemeral fevers, from grief, anger, or much fatigue attended with heat. These may be cured without difficulty; but those of them which have terminated in marasmus, it is impossible to cure. A hectic fever which is running into marasmus may be easily recognized. You may see the patients’ eyes immeasurably hollow, dry rheums determined to them, and they have a certain squalid appearance. The vital bloom of their colour is gone; their forehead is parched and stretched; they constantly wink as if asleep, and yet the affection is not sleep, but an inability to keep awake; their temples are collapsed; and what remains, but the bones and skin alone? If you lay bare, and examine the parts about the abdomen, you will fancy that none of the entrails and intestines remain, and that the hypochondrium is forcibly drawn upwards. The skin is parched in the last extreme, the pulse slender, dense, and hard. The heat on the first application of the hand seems faint, but soon afterwards feels acrid and pungent. While, therefore, any of the natural moisture remains, the fever is only hectic; but when the humidity runs the risk of being altogether consumed, a true marasmus is formed.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. Our author has copied from Oribasius (Synops. vi, 21), who in his turn is indebted to Galen (de Diff. Feb. i, 11.) A similar account is given in somewhat fuller terms by Aëtius (v, 92.) See also Alexander (xii, 4.) We shall merely give his explanation of the characters of the pulse. It is hard and small, because the vessels have become dry and contracted; it is dense (frequent?) because the necessities of the system require it to be so, (namely, in order to make up for the reduced expansion of the artery); it is feeble, owing to the weakness of the vital powers; and slender, because the vessel does not admit of being stretched in breadth. Nonnus and Actuarius derive their views from Galen. According to the latter, hectic fever is a very dangerous disease when it arises from the conversion of any other fever, but when connected with inflammation or scirrhus of any vital organ it is almost incurable. Palladius says that the hectic is an unceasing fever, wasting and consuming the natural humidity of all the members, and supervening for the most part upon acute and ardent fevers, but sometimes arising from sympathy with some vital organ. He states it as a characteristic of the hectic fever, that food increases the febrile heat, in like manner as water poured upon unslacked lime enkindles heat. This comparison is borrowed from Galen, and is repeated also by Alexander and Nonnus. Palladius, like our author, represents marasmus as the termination of the hectic fever. It is distinguished, he says, by prostration of the natural faculties, aridity, and wasting of the body, which becomes dried and parched like a tree deprived of its juices by exposure to excessive heat.

According to Haly Abbas, hectic fevers commonly arise either from the conversion of semi-tertians, or from abscesses of the lungs, whence heat is sent to the heart, and from it is diffused over the system. (Theor. viii, 7.) Alsaharavius states that hectic fevers arise from protracted ephemeral or putrid fevers, or from sympathy of the system with ulceration of the lungs, bladder, or liver, or from any chronic and prolonged disease. (Pract. xxxii.) Averrhoes represents the hectic as supervening upon ephemeral and putrid fevers. He ridicules the comparison of the effects of food on the febrile heat to those of water poured upon lime. (Collig. iv, 33.) Avenzoar gives the same account of hectic as our author. (iii. 3, c. 13.) Serapion’s account, although borrowed from the Greeks, is distinct and curious (vi, 11.) See also Rhases (ad Mansor. x, 3, _alibique_.) He and Haly Abbas repeat the graphic delineation of a person in the last stage of hectic fever, borrowed by our author from Galen, who seems to have had in view a similar description of a person sinking of consumption, given by Aretæus. (De Morb. Chron. i, 8.) Avicenna’s account of the nature and causes of hectic fevers is so ample, that we regret our limits will not permit us to do justice to it. The principal causes of them which he enumerates are ephemeral and putrid fevers, and abscesses of the lungs and liver. The pulse, he says, is hard, small, frequent, and weak, and may become _myurus_, if the fever pass into the state of marasmus. He gives, principally from Galen (de Marasmo), an interesting description of what he calls the _hectic of old age_, but which Galen calls _old age from disease_. Its symptoms, as described by these authors, are coldness and aridity of the body; the pulse slow, small, and rare, unless very weak; the urine white, thin, and watery. (iv, 1, 3.) Franciscus de Pedemontio, a writer of the fourteenth century, in like manner pronounces the hectic of old age to be a dry intemperament of the system, and recommends for it a calefacient and moistening regimen.

SECT. XXXIII.—THE CURE OF HECTIC FEVERS.

Those affected with hectic fevers should be well supplied with food from the commencement, on account of the pungency of the humours. The best cure is a moistening diet. You ought therefore to give for nourishment the juice of ptisan, and broths of chondrus, with a little bread in addition; and to treat the patient with a draught, of moderately cold water, when neither inflammation nor putrefaction of the humours is present. But if you conclude that the lesion is great, you must proscribe the cold water, and have recourse to the cooling applications externally. To those affected in this manner, baths are at all times proper.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. This section is taken from Oribasius (Synops. vi, 22.) It will be remarked that our author’s treatment consists of diluents and refrigerants internally, with cold applications and baths. It is entirely derived from Galen. Galen defends, in very strong terms, the use of the cold bath, which had been condemned by a celebrated physician of the name of Philip. (Meth. Med. x.) He admits, indeed, that an inflammatory or erysipelatous affection of a vital organ, and a redundance of crude and putrid humours in the body, may compel us to abstain from the bath; but, in all other circumstances of hectic fever, he insists that it is the _remedium unicum_. He also recommends cold drink and cold applications to the part primarily affected. He speaks favorably also of the internal administration of refrigerants, such as lettuces, which may also be applied externally. (De Marasmo.) For diet, he recommends articles of a diluent and cooling nature, such as ptisan, bread steeped in cold water, and the milk of asses. (Meth. Med. l. c.)

Aëtius, in like manner, recommends the bath, unless the use of it be contraindicated by the inflammation of some vital organ, or a fever enkindled by the putrescency of the humours. He gives minute directions for the application of the bath, the amount of which is this, that, under certain circumstances, it will be most prudent to use the tepid bath before the cold. In all cases he directs the body to be rubbed with oil before going into the bath, and to be gently rubbed with towels after coming out of it. He greatly praises the milk of asses, which he recommends to be drunk warm.

Alexander also forbids the use of the bath, when inflammation of any vital part is present. He approves greatly of the milk of asses for food. He allows wine only when the patient is of a cold and dry intemperament. He inculcates the necessity of ascertaining whether the hectic fever and marasmus be connected with chronic inflammation of any internal organ, such as the stomach, mesentery, colon, liver, kidneys, womb, lungs, or diaphragm, in order that the remedies may be applied to the seat of the disease. We need not go over the practice of the subsequent Greek authors, as they follow servilely the doctrines of Galen.

According to Avicenna, the great indications of cure are dilution and refrigeration. To the class of refrigerant remedies he refers barley-water, the milk of asses, and trochisks of camphor, with cooling epithemes and ointments. To the class of diluents he refers the bath, about the administration of which he is very particular. He directs us to use the tepid bath at first, and gradually bring the patient to bear the cold. When it can be borne, he says, the cold bath should be taken immediately after the hot. He also speaks favorably of the affusion of tepid water.

Haly Abbas directs us, when the symptoms of consumption are fairly set in, to administer before sunrise trochisks containing camphor, poppies, &c. to mitigate the cough. Like most of the other authorities, he speaks favorably of the milk of asses and of women for food. But, upon the whole, his greatest dependence seems to have been upon camphor. (Pr. iii, 26.)

Alsaharavius directs us first to make the patient go into the warm bath, and immediately afterwards to plunge him into the cold. (Pract. xxxii.)

What Avenzoar most particularly recommends is the tepid bath of fresh water, which he directs to be taken several times in the day. He speaks favorably of goat’s milk. (iii, 1, 13.)

Averrhoes recommends nearly the same practice; but he says that the bath ought to be gradually applied. He approves of the milk of women, asses, and goats, and also of refrigerant herbs. (Colliget. vii, 15.)

Serapion is very minute in his directions about the asses’ milk. He says the animals should be fed upon juicy and cooling herbs, such as grow by the side of rivers. He also directs us to medicate the bath, by previously boiling in it refrigerant herbs, such as gourds, barley, and violets. (vi, 11.)

Rhases’ directions, although they possess, perhaps, little originality, are in the highest degree interesting. He recommends for food fishes, cooling herbs, such as mallows, lettuces, citrons, cucumbers, &c. and the milk of asses or of goats. He especially commends the tepid bath, and rubbing with oil afterwards. He also speaks of applying to the chest cloths soaked in rose-water, which has been cooled in snow. When these cold applications bring on shivering, he directs them to be somewhat warmed. He forbids copious draughts of cold water. He recommends cool and humid air, and cautions to avoid smoke. When the belly is constipated, he gives opening medicines, such as prunes and manna. When, on the other hand, the belly is loose, he recommends astringents. He particularly commends trochisks of camphor, which, he says, will cool the heat of the heart, liver, or chest. (Ad Mansor. x, 3; see also Contin. xxxi.) In the latter work he informs us that physicians were divided in opinion regarding the use of the bath in hectic fever. He forbids the cold bath and cold drink when the patient is much wasted, because the cold penetrates to the vital organs and impairs them.

SECT. XXXIV.—ON SEMI-TERTIANS.

As a tertian paroxysm commences with a rigor, and a quotidian without one, the fever composed of both brings on a degree of shivering, which is less than a rigor, and greater than chillness, as being a mixture of these two extremes. Whence, this fever has not improperly got the name of semi-tertian. These fevers are formed in two ways, either the two paroxysms uniting into one, or being mixed together from the commencement. When, therefore, the tertian prevails, the fever is attended with a strong shivering, and has even a certain degree of rigor at the attack. Such a fever also soon becomes hotter and more ardent, and brings on some vomiting of bile, or a discharge of it downwards, or by a sweat. When the other, the pituitous, prevails, there is coldness of the extremities, but little shivering; neither are they accompanied with thirst, nor are they ardent. But when the tertian intermittent and continual quotidian are equal in magnitude, the commencement of the paroxysm is with shivering; and when that from phlegm prevails, there are contractions and shiverings; but if the hotter species prevail, they soon acquire heat. This is the true semi-tertian, being a fever formed from an equal combination of both, a tertian intermittent, and a continual quotidian. But that which is not the true semi-tertian has either more of the bilious, or of the pituitous character; which species is of easiest cure, the smaller humour being readily overcome by the prevalence of the greater, or by the aid of art. When the pituitous state prevails, we must use especially the remedies mentioned for the quotidian; or, if yellow bile, those for the tertian, always bestowing most attention upon that which is most urgent, but not neglecting the other entirely.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. The reader may find histories of the semi-tertian in the Epidemics of Hippocrates, where see the Commentary of Galen. Our author’s account is condensed from Galen (de Diff. Febr. ii, 2, and de Typis, 4.) See Aëtius (v, 81); Actuarius (Morb. Dig. ii, 1); Nonnus (142); Celsus (iii, 8); Palladius (21.) Celsus describes it as the second species of tertian in the following terms: “Alterum longe perniciosius, quod tertio quidem die revertitur, ex octo autem et quadraginta horis fere sex et triginta per accessionem occupat, interdum etiam vel minus, vel plus; neque ex toto in remissione desistit, sed tantum levius est. Id genus plerique medici ἠμιτριτᾶιον appellant.” He approves of bleeding at the commencement, and of a diet that is nutritive without being heating.

Palladius says that the semi-tertian is compounded of a tertian intermittent, and a continual quotidian, the quotidian paroxysm taking place every day, and the tertian every alternate day. He ascribes their origin to a mixture of putrid bile and phlegm. (21.) Haly Abbas gives a similar account of it. He calls it a fever compounded of a tertian and quotidian, and remarks that it has a tendency to pass into hectic. He treats it with diluents and refrigerants. (Pract. iii, 17.) Avicenna gives a very detailed account of the symptoms and cure of the semi-tertians. He remarks that the fever is apt to be protracted and to pass into the hectic. (iv, 1, 4.) See Rhases (Cont. xxxi.) All his authorities agree in describing it as a compound of the tertian and quotidian, having a severe paroxysm the one day and a slighter the following. It is said to be generally protracted to the fortieth day.

Platearius, and the other earlier modern writers, describe the semi-tertian in nearly the same terms as the ancients. It is a species of fever still occasionally met with in warm climates. (See Littré’s Hippocrates, t. ii, 569.)

SECT. XXXV.—ON EPIDEMIC DISEASES.

We call those diseases epidemic and common, that attack many persons together; which, having a common origin, have also a common cause. Common diseases are produced by common food of a bad quality, drinking of bad water, inordinate fatigue, the want of the customary exercise, deprivation or repletion from the prevalence either of a famine or of great abundance. The nature of the country will also often occasion common diseases, either from its lying adjacent to marshes, or to some deep pit, which emits a deleterious and pernicious exhalation. These things are constantly occurring. But the atmosphere which surrounds us may alter the temperaments, by being hotter, colder, or more humid than ordinary. For to other causes we are not all exposed together, nor do we come in contact with them for the whole day; but the ambient air is diffused around all, and is inhaled by respiration. Now, the bodies of animals must undergo a change along with these changes as to temperature. He, therefore, who is acquainted with these matters, will not only be able to predict the diseases which are to arise from every state of the atmosphere, but will be able also to prevent them by substituting a counteracting regimen to the intemperament of the air. Wherefore, those bodies which are disposed to a certain disease, from a peculiar intemperament, will be affected by a similar temperature of the surrounding air. But those of an opposite temperament to the atmosphere will not only not be hurt but will be improved; the excess of their intemperament being overcome by the opposite excess. He that is acquainted with these things will preserve the health, by superinducing the contraries to the constitution of the body; sometimes perhaps using refrigerants, and sometimes heating things, cooling with water, using restricted exercise and food, and plenty of dilution; and warming, by means of increased clothing, exercise, more food and less drink. And, by kindling a great pile, one may change the air from a humid state to that which is dry and hot, as they say was done by Acron of Agrigentum.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. This Section is mostly taken from Oribasius (Synops. vi, 24, and Euporist. 1.)

The works of Hippocrates contain many interesting remarks on the origin and nature of epidemics. He states that diseases in general may be said to arise either from the food we eat or the air we breathe. When, therefore, a disease seizes on a multitude of persons of different ages, sexes, and habits, he justly infers that it must arise from the latter cause. (See de Flatibus, Epidem. cum Commentariis Galeni.) The fevers described by Hippocrates, in his ‘Books of Epidemics,’ are in general intermittent and remittent fevers. In his first and third books he describes forty-two cases of fever, twenty-five of which had a fatal termination. They had evidently been selected from a larger number. The descriptions are rigidly confined to a detail of the characters of the season and the symptoms of the epidemic. In general, scarcely any remedial means are mentioned. In some of the cases slight exanthemata speedily disappearing are mentioned among the symptoms. These are more likely to have been _petechiæ_ than the typhous eruption. It is reported of Hippocrates, that, like Acron of Agrigentum, he changed the morbific state of the atmosphere at Athens by kindling fires. (Galen, Therap. ad Pison; Aëtius, v, 94.) Acron’s method of purifying the atmosphere is mentioned by Plutarch (de Iside et Osiride.) For an account of Acron, see Fabricii (Biblioth. Græc. xiii, 32); Conringii (Introduct.) and Mangeti (Bibl. Med.) Pliny says of fire as a corrective of the state of the atmosphere, “Est et ipsis ignibus medica vis. Pestilentiæ, quæ solis obscuratione contrahitur, ignis suffitu multiformiter auxiliari, certum est. Empedocles et Hippocrates id demonstravere diversis locis.” (H. N. xxxvi, 69.) With the same intention Simeon Seth proposes fumigations with frankincense. The historian Herodian relates that fumigations with aromatics were recommended as a preventive of the plague. (i.)

Galen, in like manner, attributes the origin of epidemics to the state of the atmosphere in a great measure, but also holds that the nature of the country may contribute; as, for example, its vicinity to a gulf like the Charonian, from which miasmata are exhaled that taint the air and occasion diseases. In many passages of his ‘Commentary on the Epidemics’ of Hippocrates, he states that epidemical diseases arise from the condition of the country in which they prevail. Lucretius accounts for the prevalence of epidemical diseases upon similar principles:

“Atque ea vis omnis morborum, pestilitasque,
Aut extrinsicus, ut nubes nebulæque superne
Per cœlum veniunt, aut ipsâ sæpe coorta
_De terrâ surgunt_, ubi putrorem humida nacta est,
Intempestivis pluviisque, et solibus icta.”

(De Rerum Nat. vi, 1100.)

Silius Italicus appears to refer an epidemical fever to the same cause. (xiv.)

In his work, on the ‘Varieties of Fever,’ Galen expresses his opinion on this subject very fully. He remarks that an atmosphere of a hot constitution, such as generally prevails at the time of the rising of the dog-star, having been inhaled by the heart, increases the heat in it, from which it is diffused all over the system, and enkindles a febrile affection. In pestilential constitutions, he adds, it is principally by the respiration that the disease is contracted, although sometimes it may arise from the fluids of the body being disposed to putrescency, which is increased by the condition of the atmosphere; but for the most part epidemical complaints derive their origin from the atmosphere being tainted with putrid exhalations. The putridity of the atmosphere may be occasioned either by a multitude of dead bodies which have not been burnt, as is apt to happen in wars, or it may arise from the exhalations of certain marshes or lakes in the summer season, or sometimes the inordinate heat of the atmosphere may give rise to them, as happened in the case of the Athenian plague, according to the testimony of Thucydides. And here we must digress to remark, that Homer evidently ascribes the plague which attacked the Grecian army to the great heat of the sun. See the Commentary of Eustathius on the beginning of the Iliad; Ammianus Marcellinus (xix); Heraclides Ponticus (Allegor); and Macrobius (Saturn. vii, 5.) Galen, however, inculcates that the constitution of the atmosphere alone is not sufficient to produce disease without a peculiar disposition of the body to admit it; for that, otherwise, all without exception would be seized with the prevailing epidemic. This leads him to give directions to correct the intemperament of the body when it is such as disposes it to be readily affected by the constitution of the atmosphere. His directions are similar to those of our author. Besides the causes of epidemical diseases which we have mentioned, he states that unwholesome food and drink may sometimes, though rarely, give rise to them. Of this he relates a striking instance. (De Rebus boni et mali Succi, c. i.) He remarks that the most common epidemical diseases are pestilential fevers. We shall have occasion to state his opinion of them in the next Section.

Of the Greek authors posterior to Galen, Oribasius and Aëtius give the same account of epidemical diseases as our author; and the others either do not treat of them at all, or class them with the subject of our next Section.

Avenzoar has given us an elaborate treatise on epidemical complaints. (iii.) The first cause of them which he mentions is a humid and warm state of the atmosphere, such as that to which Hippocrates ascribed the pestilence which afflicted Thasus in his time. (Epid. iii.) The other causes enumerated by him are the effluvia from dead bodies, stagnant air, the miasmata from stagnant and corrupted waters, and unwholesome food. (iii, 3, 1.)

On the origin of epidemical diseases, especially the pestilence, see, in particular, Haly Abbas (Theor. v, 11.) The principal causes of the change of the atmosphere to a pestilential state, according to Haly, are the nature of the country and the season of the year. The former cause operates owing to the putrid effluvia arising from corrupted fruit, pot-herbs, &c., or the miasmata from marshes, cloacæ, or dead bodies, whether of men or cattle. It was from such causes, he remarks, that the plague of Athens derived its origin. The nature of the season, as it produces diseases in the vegetable, so does it also in the animal creation. As epidemical complaints, he mentions ephemerals, cynanche, smallpox, acute fevers, and other fatal diseases.

Avicenna’s account of the origin of pestilential and epidemic diseases is taken almost entirely from Galen; he therefore enumerates as causes of them, a humid and warm state of the atmosphere, the stagnant air of caverns, the miasmata of lakes and marshes, and the effluvia from dead bodies. (iv, i, 4.) Alsaharavius enumerates exactly the same causes. (32.) Rhases’ account is mostly taken from Hippocrates and Galen. (Contin. xxx.)

The historian Ammianus Marcellinus gives an ingenious disquisition on the origin of these diseases; but the distinction which he endeavours to establish in the following passage is not acknowledged by the medical authors in general: “Prima species luis _Pandemus_ appellatur, quæ efficit in aridioribus locis agentes caloribus crebris interpellari; secunda, _Epidemus_ quæ tempore ingruens acies hebetat luminum, et concitat periculosos humores; tertia, _Lœmodes_, quæ itidem temporaria est, sed volucri velocitate letabilis.” (xix, 4.) The causes of these complaints, as enumerated by him, are excessive heat, cold, drought, or moisture, effluvia from putrid bodies, and exhalations from the earth.

According to Diodorus Siculus, the causes which gave rise to the pestilential epidemic which attacked the Carthaginian army in Sicily were the marshy nature of the country in which they were encamped, the bodies of the dead lying unburied, and the excessive heat of the season. (xiv.) He ascribes the plague of Athens to similar causes. (xii. 58.)

SECT. XXXVI.—ON THE PLAGUE, FROM THE WORKS OF RUFFUS.

In the plague there is everything which is dreadful, and nothing of this kind is wanting as in other diseases. For there are delirium, vomitings of bile, distension of the hypochondrium, pains, much sweatings, cold of the extremities, bilious diarrhœas, which are thin and flatulent; the urine watery, thin, bilious, black, having bad sediments, and the substances floating on it most unfavorable; trickling of blood from the nose, heat in the chest, tongue parched, thirst, restlessness, insomnolency, strong convulsions, and many other things which are unfavorable. Should a person foresee that the plague is coming, by attending to the badness of the season, and the unhealthy occupations of the inhabitants, and from observing other animals perishing; when one observes these things, let him also observe this—what is the character of the present season, and what that of the whole year, for you will be able thereby to find out the best regimen; such, for example, as if the temperature of the season ought to have been dry, but has become humid; in that case, it will be necessary, by a drying diet, to consume the superabundant moisture. Care also must be had of the belly, and when there is phlegm in the stomach it must be evacuated by emetics. And when a fulness of blood prevails, a vein should be opened. Purgings also by urine, and otherwise by the whole body, are proper. But, if the patient is affected with ardent fever, and has a fiery heat about the breast, it will not be improper to apply cold things to the breast, and to give cold drink, not in small quantities, for it only makes the flame burn more; but in full draughts, so as to extinguish it. But if an ardent fever prevails within, and the extremities are cold, and the skin cold, the hypochondrium distended, and the stomach sends the matters which have been melted, some upwards, and others downwards; if watchfulness, delirium, and roughness of the tongue, are present; in these cases, calefacient remedies are wanted to diffuse the heat all over the body, and every other means ought to be tried, in order to determine the heat from the internal to the external parts. The following propoma may be used: of aloes, two parts; of ammoniac perfume, two parts; of myrrh, one part; pound these in fragrant wine, and give every day to the quantity of half a cyathus (ʒv.) I never knew a person, says Ruffus, who did not recover from the plague after this draught. So says Ruffus: but Galen says, concerning pestilential putrefactions, that to drink Armenian bole, and, in like manner, the theriac from vipers, is of great service; and that, in the plague which prevailed in Rome, all died who were not benefited by either of these things.

* * * * *

COMMENTARY. By the plague, as Galen explains in his ‘Commentary on Hippocrates,’ is to be understood an epidemical fever of a fatal nature. Hippocrates has related several histories of diseases which came under this description in his ‘Epidemics,’ but they present such variety of symptoms, that we cannot undertake to give their general characters. It is deserving of remark, however, that he several times makes mention of fevers accompanied with buboes. (Aphor. iv. 54, Epidem. &c.) According to M. Littré, buboes are noticed among the symptoms of plague by Ruffus, and also by Dioscorides and Posidonius in an extract given in the following publication: ‘Classicorum auctorum e Vaticanis codicibus editorum,’ tomus iv, curante Angelo Maio, p. 11, Romæ, 1834. See Littré’s Hippocrates (ii, p. 585.) Aretæus mentions incidentally that pestilential buboes are connected with the liver. (Morb. acut. ii, 3.) Under Sect. XVI will be found several passages from ancient authors, in which pestilential buboes are incidentally mentioned. It must be admitted they are very insufficient materials for illustrating the ancient history of the glandular plague, and it may justly excite surprise that the historian Procopius, in the sixth century, P. C., should be the first writer who has given a complete description of this disease. At the same time we cannot agree with M. Nauman, M. Pariset, and other late writers on the plague, who maintain that the epidemic which devastated the world in the reign of Justinian was a new disease. The frequent mention of pestilential buboes by previous authors, although vague, is sufficient to mark the existence of the disease. In this light, at all events, they are viewed by the commentators on Hippocrates, who lived after the glandular plague was properly described. (See Pallad. Comment. in Hippoc. Ep. t. ii, p. 47, ed. Dietz.)

We shall now begin our exposition of the ancient opinions regarding the plague, with a brief notice of the celebrated description of it given by Thucydides, the Greek historian. The more prominent symptoms mentioned by him are the following: Strong heat of the head; redness and inflammation of the eyes; the mouth and internal fauces turgid with blood; breath fetid; sneezing, hoarseness, and afterwards violent cough; vomiting of bile, retching, and convulsions; the heat of skin not much increased, but the internal parts glowing with heat; the skin reddish, or livid, and covered with minute phyletænæ and ulcers; despondency, restlessness, and intense thirst; and, towards the conclusion, diarrhœa, ulceration of the bowels, and various symptoms of putrefaction. Those who survived the febrile attack were subject to blindness, fatuity, and mortification of the testicles and extremities. The disease generally proved fatal on the ninth or seventh day. The historian affirms that the plague never attacked the same person more than once. This opinion, by the way, has been advocated in modern times by Massarius, Diomedes Amicus, Heurnius, and Sir William Pym, but general experience seems to be against it. Evagrius relates of the plague which prevailed in the reign of Justinian, that many persons who recovered from the first attack sunk under a second. Ficinus, Montisianus, Joubertus, and many late authorities, hold this opinion. He mentions that the disease was supposed to originate in Ethiopia, and from thence to spread to Egypt, Lybia, and the Persian empire; that in Athens it made its first appearance in the Piræus, where it was at first suspected that the Peloponnesians had poisoned the wells. He says the previous summer was remarkably healthy. Thucydides’ celebrated description of the plague is given in a poetical form by Lucretius (de Rerum Natura, _apud finem_), and by Ovid (Metamorphoseon, vii, 528.) Sophocles, the tragedian, appears also to have had the same plague in view. (Œdip. Tyran. _ap. initium_.) The Latin poet Silius Italicus evidently copies his images from it. (xiv.) See also Lucanus (Pharsal. vi), and Manilius (Astronom. i.)

Our next great authority on this subject is Celsus. In his account of the plague, we have to regret, however, that, although he dwells rather minutely on the prophylaxis and treatment, he has omitted to give us a description of the disease; and it is not easy to perceive the principles upon which some of his directions as to the prophylaxis and treatment are given. He recommends a journey to a distant place, or a sea voyage; when this cannot be accomplished, gestation and gentle exercise in the open air, but he forbids all excess. He also forbids early rising, exercise with naked feet after a meal or the bath, also emetics, laxatives, and sudorifics. He directs people to drink, by turns, first water and then wine. (i, 10.) With regard to the treatment, he disapproves, in general, of abstinence and purgative medicines, recommends bleeding, if the strength permit, more especially if the fever be attended with pain; but, if venesection cannot be practised, he directs emetics to be given. At an earlier period than in ordinary fevers the patient is to be put into the bath, and is afterwards to get hot undiluted wine, and everything of a glutinous nature, and flesh of this description. In the case of young persons, he directs these remedies to be administered with great caution. (iii, 7.)

The historian Appian, Lucian, Pliny, and Plutarch, mention wine as an antidote to the plague. Livy and other ancient writers say that the plague is sometimes occasioned by excessive cold. (Histor. v.)

It is greatly to be regretted that Galen has given us no description of the dreadful plague which prevailed in his time. It appears that he fled from Rome for fear of infection. He alludes to it, indeed, in several parts of his works, but in very brief terms, only mentioning that it put on the appearance of dysentery; and in one place he strongly commends the celebrated theriac as a most efficacious remedy for the prevention and cure of pestilential disorders; and elsewhere he speaks favorably of the Armenian bole. Of the writers on medicine posterior to him, Oribasius and Aëtius, like our author, give no further information on this important subject than what is contained in the brief extract from the works of Ruffus; and the others, with the exception of Nonnus and Psellus, do not treat of the disease at all, unless in an incidental manner. Nonnus, after briefly stating the causes of the plague, proceeds to lay down the principles for conducting the treatment. He recommends clysters, and, if the stomach be loaded with phlegm, emetics: if there be a fulness of blood, he approves of venesection; and also speaks well of giving diuretics. When symptoms of ardent fever are present, he directs cold drink to be given freely, in order to extinguish the febrile heat. He also recommends apomel, the water of ptisan with the seed of bastard saffron, or Armenian bole, or lapis lazuli. Psellus merely mentions, in very general terms, a few of the common symptoms of the plague. (Opus Medicum.) Actuarius, treating of anthrax, mentions that it sometimes take place in epidemical affections. (Meth. Med. ii, 36.)

Before proceeding to the Arabian authorities, we shall give a brief abstract of Procopius’ description of the dreadful plague which desolated the Roman empire in the reign of Justinian. Its usual precursors were certain delirious fantasies and disturbed dreams, after which the fever made its attack suddenly. The early symptoms, however, were not well marked, for there was neither increased heat nor discoloration of the skin, nor did the patient apprehend danger. Generally on the first or second day, but in a few instances somewhat later, buboes appeared not only in the groin, but also in the armpits and below the ears. Some were affected with deep coma, and others with wild delirium. Some died from sphacelus of the buboes, which, when inspected by the physicians after death, presented the appearance of a _coal_ or _carbuncle_ (anthrax). Some died at the commencement, and others after the lapse of several days. In certain cases the skin was covered over with black phlyctænæ of the size of a lentil, which were usually succeeded by sudden death. Others were unexpectedly cut off by a discharge of blood. To women in the puerperal state it proved particularly fatal. When the buboes came to a proper suppuration, they generally proved a favorable crisis; but when they did not suppurate, they were commonly followed by a wasting of the thigh. One of the common consequences of the fever was an affection of the organs of speech. All the usual prognostics proved fallacious, and the effects of the common remedies were uncertain. In some cases the bath proved beneficial, and in others it had a contrary effect. At one time the amount of deaths in Constantinople ranged from five to ten thousand each day. (De Bello Pers. 22, 23.) This pestilence is described likewise by Agathias (v), and by Evagrius (Hist. Eccles. iv, 29.) It resembled the plague of Avignon, described by Guy of Cauliac.

The symptoms of the plague, as enumerated by Avicenna, are as follows: Heat, and strong inflammation within, but which are not perceived outwardly; respiration large, fetid, and frequent; intense thirst, dryness of the tongue, with nausea and loss of appetite, such as, if not contended against, will prove fatal; enlarged spleen, great anxiety and restlessness, dry cough, prostration of the powers approaching to syncope; delirium, retraction of the hypochondria, insomnolency, with tepid heat of the body. Sometimes there are yellow, whitish, or red eruptions on the skin, which are of short continuance; or else aphthæ and ulcers in the mouth. The pulse is generally frequent, small, and becomes stronger towards night. Occasionally there are dropsical swellings. The discharges from the bowels are bilious, mixed, fetid, unnatural, and sometimes contain black bile; at other times they are frothy and fetid, or unctuous, being produced by melting of the fat. The urine is watery, bilious, and melancholic. There is sometimes vomiting of black, but more frequently of yellow bile. There are often fetid sweats. The disease usually terminates with syncope, coldness of the extremities, lethargy, spasms, and convulsions. Some of the most fatal varieties of the plague are not marked by any striking symptoms, neither the heat, pulse, nor urine being much affected. Fetid breath, as indicating putrefaction about the heart, is a most mortal symptom. The treatment must commence with venesection, if there be a plethora of blood, or with purging, if the body be loaded with other humours. The apartments of the sick are to be cooled, and the air of them corrected: they are to be cooled by cold odoriferous fruits, camphor, rose-water, or, if possible, by introducing a stream of water into them. The fetid air may be corrected by fumigations with camphor, myrtles, quinces, ebony, &c.; by sprinkling the apartments with vinegar and assafœtida, and correcting the putridity with lignum aloes, frankincense, musk, storax, _sandarach_, mastich, juniper, bays, and the like. (It may be proper to mention that arsenical fumigations are approved of by Muratori, Lind, and Russel, but condemned by Mead.) As a preservative from the plague, he recommends, in particular, exercise and restricted diet. Haly evidently copies his description. (Theor. v, 11.)

Rhases agrees with Hippocrates in stating, that pestilential fevers are distinguished by great heat internally, while the surface of the body is cool. The symptoms, as detailed by him, are vomiting and diarrhœa, pain and distension of the belly, coldness of the extremities, urine showing a tendency to putrefaction, discharge of blood from the nose, heat about the breast, singultus tendinum, blackness of the tongue, bulimia, &c. He particularly states that a black discharge from the bowels is a most fatal symptom. Like Avicenna, he gives directions to perform fumigations with camphor, musk, myrrh, bdellium, frankincense, and the like. He mentions that, during the prevalence of a certain pestilence, it was found that hunters escaped the contagion. Like Avicenna, he approves of bloodletting. See Continens (xxx.) He also recommends cold drink and the cold bath. Calefacients and wine, unless diluted with much cold water, he disapproves of. He, like the other Arabian authorities, joins Galen in speaking favorably of Armenian bole and the theriac. (Ad Mansor. iv, 25.)

The belief that the plague is preceded by extraordinary phenomena in the earth and sky is very ancient. Thucydides concludes his brief account of the last attack of the plague on Athens with the remark, that at that time there were many earthquakes at Athens and other places. (iii, 87.) Manilius says such plagues as that of Athens are commonly prognosticated by comets and other celestial fires. Diodorus Siculus mentions that the Athenian plague was preceded by earthquakes of extraordinary severity. (xii, 59.)

While explaining the symptoms and treatment of the plague, as detailed in the works of the ancient authors, we have purposely omitted to notice its contagious nature, as we wished to give one connected view of the ancient opinions regarding CONTAGION. Before entering upon this disquisition, we think it proper to acknowledge the assistance which we have derived from the writings of Fracastorius, Paulinus, Mead, Marx, Omodei, and Winterbottom, leaving it to the reader to determine, after comparing our humble attempt with their learned labours, whether or not our industry and research have contributed in anywise to throw additional light upon this important subject.

The earlier ancient authors appear to have entertained no suspicions of contagion as a cause of febrile or of other complaints. Homer, as formerly stated, evidently refers the origin of the plague which prevailed in the Grecian army during the siege of Troy to the heat of the sun. The works of the fathers of History and of Medicine have likewise been ransacked in vain, for any traces of the doctrine of contagion. Thucydides, therefore, appears to be the first author (if we except the Mosaic description of leprosy) who makes any positive allusion to the contagious nature of diseases. From his description of the plague of Athens, there can be no doubt that he wishes it to be understood, that the disease was transmitted from one person to another; for he mentions that physicians were more attacked by it than any others, as having most intercourse with the sick; and he afterwards describes the terror which the citizens felt to approach those labouring under the disease, and intimates that it was often contracted by such intercourse. The language of Lucretius, who copies his description, and gives it a poetical form, is still more precise:—

“——nullo cessabant tempore apisci
Ex aliis alios avidi contagia morbi.”

(L. 1235.)

And afterwards,

“Qui fuerant autem præsto contagibus ibant.”

(L. 1241.)

Ovid, in like manner, says of the dead bodies:

“Afflatuque nocent et agunt contagia latè.”

(Metam. v, 551.)

And so also, Silius Italicus:

“Et posuere avidæ mortis contagia pestes.”

(Lib. xiv.)

The historians we must dismiss in a few words, with stating that allusions to the infectious nature of certain diseases are to be met with in Livy, Dionysius the Halicarnassian, Diodorus Siculus, Appian, Plutarch, Quintus Curtius, Dio Cassius, Eusebius, Gregory of Nyssa, and Evagrius. Procopius was a non-contagionist.

The philosopher Aristotle, in one of his problems, makes it a question why the plague is the only disease which infects those who approach the sick. (Probl. i.) There is a curious passage in the works of the orator Isocrates, which shows that consumption was reckoned contagious in his days. (Æginet.) The elder Pliny mentions the contagion of the pestilence. (Hist. Nat. xxxiii, 80.)

Virgil mentions the infectious nature of certain diseases of cattle. (Ecl. i, Georg. iii, 464.) The ancient writers on veterinary surgery and agriculture in like manner state that the plague and scabies of cattle are infectious. See Columella (vi, 5); Vegetius (Mulomed. iii, 23.)

The philosopher Marcus Antoninus alludes to the plague as being contagious. (ix, 2.) Chrysostom does the same. (In Joan. Orat. lvii.) The language of Seneca is very precise: “Itaque ut in pestilentiâ cavendum est ne corruptis jam corporibus et morbo flagrantibus assideamus, quia pericula trahemus, afflatuque ipso laborabimus.” (De Tranquil. vii.) To these we may join Isidorus Hispalensis, a much later writer: “Pestilentia est contagium quod quum unum apprehenderit celeriter ad plures transit.” And, in another place: “Pestilentia est morbus latè vagans et contagio suo quæ contigerit interimens.” Alexander Aphrodisiensis intimates that pestilential fevers are contagious, but common fevers not so. (Probl. ii, 42.)