De Gruyter

ASPECTS OF THE INTERRELATIONS OF MEDICINE, MAGIC AND PHILOSOPHY IN ANCIENT GREECE Author(s): G.E.R. Lloyd Reviewed work(s): Source: Apeiron: A Journal for Ancient Philosophy and Science, Vol. 9, No. 1 (May 1975), pp. 1-16 Published by: De Gruyter Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40913353 . Accessed: 15/03/2012 11:25
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

De Gruyter is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Apeiron: A Journal for Ancient Philosophy and Science.

http://www.jstor.org

INANCIENT OF MEDICINE, AND THE OF ASPECTS INTERRELATIONS MAGICPHILOSOPHY GREECE.1

The status of medicine, advisedly defined in the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary as is an ambivalent one. both a science and an art, Although it calls on the natural sciences of physiology, anatomy, chemistry, biochemistry and so on, unlike them it has pracand cure of disease and the ends in view, the alleviation tical, as well as theoretical, it is concerned with the indiviand restoration of health. Being practical, preservation It studies health and disease in general, to be sure, but, as Aristotle put it in a dual. well-known passage, it considers not just the health of man in general, but the health of Yet although medicine stands to the life sciences in this man: xaS* ixaaiov yap uaTpe'5eu. as engineering, for instance, to some of the physical ones , it is at a similar relationship the same time unlike engineering, in turn, in that the end of medicine, health, and its conOne finds, of course, verse, disease, are, in important respects, matters of dispute. 4 concerning many large areas of agreement, among doctors trained in the same tradition, But it is not only in types of diseases at least on this point that they are diseases. that there remain important areas of doubt the field of mental health and mental illness conditions and concerning how, what are to be deemed abnormal or pathological concerning conversely and by exclusion, health is to be defined. But that is not the only, nor for my purposes the most important, aspect of the ambiIn much of modern medicine treatment and diagnosis have a firm valent status of medicine. Mot and definite basis in one or other well-established department of the natural sciences. the chemical composition of a particular drug, but its precise effect on the organism, only may be known, as also may the causes of a disease: thus, to take an example relevant to the study of ancient medicine, we can nowadays distinguish unambiguously between malaria (caused by a parasite hosted by the anopheles mosquito) , and typhoid fever (caused by a bacillus), although both diseases may show very similar symptoms. It remains true, however, that in many cases the doctor cannot be said to possess anything that can be described as hard-edged scientific In their efforts to combat diseases, doctors knowledge. have always used, and will no doubt always continue to use, empirical treatments, that is treatments which are claimed, on the basis of experience, to be efficacious, but whose effects are not fully understood. This is so not only where little is known concerning the side-effects of a treatment (where the Thalidomide disaster was merely one particularly and particularly terrible example of an all too commonproblem) but also well-publicised where we do not understand exactly how the specific effects that a treatment produces are brought about. Again when we reflect that any therapy involves not just a remedy prebut also a patient treated, and that, even if we cannot define precisely what scribed, effect a patient's own beliefs and expectations may have, it is clear from the study of the use of placebos that they may have a not inconsiderable effect, this introduces yet another element of indeterminacy in many attempted cures. For these and other reasons, the relations between the strictly 'scientific1, and elements in modern medicine are complex, and it should be acknowledged (even if some other, membersof the medical profession are not very ready to do so) that large areas of 20th

ApeironVol. IX (1975) No. 1

than folk medicine. Incentury European medicine have no stronger claims to be 'scientific' deed when we discount the use of the term 'folk medicine* as a mere term of abuse, to convey of arriving at a simple criterion to distinguish judgement, the difficulty and modern medicine reveals the point I wish to make. the two cannot Obviously be differentiated that is in terms of their effects (for many folk merely operationally, between it remedies are efficacious) or absence of a theoretical frame; nor can they by the presence work (for folk medical beliefs often form part of elaborate and highly systematic doctrines); nor even by their methods of verification, at least not straightforwardly since folk remedies are often the fruit of, and checked by, deliberate if not trial and error procedures, with a purely sociological differentof factors, and perhaps principally on the possibility of an ultimate to a body of positive appeal knowledge - that is, as I that the modern doctor can call on the natural But the unsatissciences. put it before, nature of this distinction is obvious. First it is as an ultimate, and not imfactory iation. on a combination mediate, that this criterion will appeal determining what is to count as 'positive in Secondly there is a major difficulty for what is accepted as such will alknowledge1, or found to need qualification. rejected Thirdly and will still a part, not the whole, of distinguish only operate. The overlap between to, is large. let the two, or the area where no controlled nor finally experiments; The distinction must rest can we be content an adverse value

views that are later ways include most importantly, such a criterion modern medicine from folk medicine. firm or neat criterion of labouring the interpntration of folk At the risk

can be appealed this point,

and scientific

to verify the persistence of beliefs left at the birth of my second son,

me give two brief anecdotal illustrations of o I had occasion in the 20th century. beliefs in the importance of the distinction between right and who was delivered a fully qualified midwife in Camby

I was present at the birth, which was in my own home, and was surprised bridge in 1962. when a little while before the birth took place the midwife announced that the baby would be a boy. When I asked her afterwards on what basis she had said this, she replied that the baby was on the right side of the womb and that it was usually a boy when the baby is 9 on the right. That idea, as I have indicated can be traced right back to Parmelsewhere, enides and was undoubtedly far older than him. Some association between males and right, whether right have the usual the right side of the womb, or the right Greece eye, is extremely common in ancient or the right testicle, or the breast, as in many modern societies. Where you as with the Chinese, who consider the left to be Yang

associations reversed, and strong, the right to be Yin and weak, you also find the belief on the left that babies are more likely to be males, an exception that for once does prove the rule. Yet evidentbeliefs with the best modern training in midwifery. ly similar may coexist But midwives, it might be thought, are peripheral not full members of the medfigures, ical

that Osier, whose Prinprofession. My second example comes from no less an authority and Practice of Medicine was for long one of the chief text-books from which medical ciples students learned their clinical Osier is a mine of information for the persistmedicine. ence, well into the 20th century, of medical beliefs One such case concerns an application of the notion adays, in antiquity. many of which originated of critical Nowdfiys to pneumonia.

when high fevers in what the Greeks called 'acute diseases' are controlled by antiit is rare for a case of pneumonia to reach a crisis. But before antibiotics biotics, had to content themselves with observing the course of the conwere introduced, physicians dition and using their knowledge of the periodicity 2 of the disease to make their patients

as comfortable as possible. But they firmly believed, or at least they were firmly taught, In the latest edthat the crisis in pneumonia is more likely to occur on the uneven days. ition of Osier's book we read: 'from the time of Hippocrates (the crisis in pneumonia) has the fifth and seventh; the been thought to be more frequent on the uneven days, particularly Theories based on a distand Norris) . ' latter has the largest number of cases (Musser inction between odd and even days again have a very long history and this pair of opposites too (like right and left, up and down, front and back and many others) figures in many conNow I am not questioning the evidence and medical doctrines. texts in Greek philosophical Drs . Musser and Norris to support their view: rather the important point is brought by of a general schema which itself is part of a that they chose to investigate an application complex of beliefs with ramifications that spread far beyond even the most hospitable definition of 'the art of medicine.' These have been lengthy, but necessary, preliminaries to the topic I wish to discuss in this paper, namely the relations between medicine, magic and philosophy (that is systematic The Greek material is particularly natural philosophy) in ancient Greece. important for basis and the light it throws on the very first attempts to place medicine on a scientific from magic. to distinguish medicine explicitly Unfortunately, however, the analysis of the development of Greek medicine has been bedevilled by a number of preconceptions and the Thus W.H.S. Jones on several occasions insisted on radical, use of over-simple categories. between medicine and folk-belief and indeed one might almost say absolute, distinctions In the superstition on the one hand, and between medicine and philosophy on the other. introduction (p. xiv) to the first volume of his Loeb edition of Hippocrates (1923) he we find that in no treatise is there any 'Now if we take the Hippocratic collection wrote: in 'a possible exception is Decorum that point there is a footnote: ...'I, [at superstition the others some are many there is much "philosophy" with some sophistic rhetoric, and among merely technical handbooks, while others show signs of a great mind, dignified and reserved with all the severity of the Periclean period, which, without being distinctively original, transformed the best tendencies in Greek medicine into something which has ever since been Elsewhere Jones wrote: was men.' the admiration of doctors and scientific 'Superstition It is true rampant in the ancient world, and even doctors were infected by the taint. but it is attacked in two that there is no superstition in the Hippocratic collection, This attack implies that superstition was still a real danger ... But the worst treatises. of rational medicine lay in its connections with philosophy and rhetoric . . . Medical enemy which, though it has its place in the progress practice must not be based upon speculation, of medicine, must be put to the test, not in ordinary practice, but on and by "martyrs to Jones thus drew hard and fast distinctions between (1) 'superstition1, science".' (2) Medicine had to combat both superstition and philosophy and medicine and (3) philosophy. was, in Jones' view, largely successful in doing so and in freeing itself from both kinds of contaminating influence. It is not Now this is a subject on which we do not need to rely on pure speculation. a question of guessing, nor one of working out on a priori principles what the relationship between these three factors must have been, since we have evidence on the problem. Even if this is not as extensive as we might wish, we must first see how far it will take us. Two texts are particularly the treatises On the Sacred Disease and On Ancient instructive,

14 Medicine, especially At first sight ist

the

former.

appears to provide solid support for Jones1 positivto which what the Hippocratic doctors achieved was the refutaccording interpretation At the very of rational or scientific medicine. ation of superstition and the substitution 'I am about to discuss the disease called beginning of the work the writer says: On the Sacred Disease but has not, in my opinion, any more divine or more sacred than other diseases, is due to cause (cpauv .. mclupdcpaauv), and its supposed divine origin men's inexperience, and to their wonder at its peculiar character.1 Shortly afterwards = ch. 1 Littr VI 354 12 ff.) the writer says: (ch. 2 Jones 'my own view is that those who to this malady were like the magicians first attributed a sacred character , (ydtyou) purif"sacred". It is a natural (xaSpxau) , charlatans (Xaves) of our own day, men who claim (ayupxau) and quacks and having no treatment which would and superior at a loss, great piety knowledge. Being 18 this illand called behind superstition, and sheltered themselves concealed help, they 19 in order that their utter ignorance ness sacred, might not be manifest.' iers he acinto three main kinds: criticisms of his opponents can be divided As an example of of inconsistency, (2) of impiety and (3) of dishonesty. is considered he argues at VI 352 8ff. that if this disease the first type of criticism, which are just as amazing, it is wonderful, then many other diseases divine because too, he argues that More tellingly, whereas this is not the case. should be considered sacred, The author's them (1) cuses the treatments his opponents that the disease turn implies and magic can take fications use is imply that not divine. they can control the disease As he puts it at 358 Uff., and that this in 'he who by purimeans bring it on,

can also by similar away such an affection ' of certain the action of godhead is disproved. so that by this argument Again he attacks came to be an argument of the type that later in a passage that implies their prohibitions The quacks forbade eatnot A. therefore if A, then B; but not B; known as modus tollerisi the writer says 'So I suppose,1 ing the flesh of goats or lying on or wearing goatskins. since they can enjoy good health, in the interior 'that no Libyan dwelling (VI 356 15ff.), nor cloak nor footgear neither coverlet and eat goats' lie on goat-skins flesh, possessing to that at 358 Uff: with an argument similar And he continues that is not from the goat. ' while to refrain the disease, and increases 'but if to eat or apply these things engenders it is beneficial: works a cure, then neither is godhead to blame nor are the purifications and the power of godhead disappears.' he also carries of his opponents' the consistency But apart from attacking position, The their notion of the divine. the fight into their camp, so to speak, by criticising main argument here is that it is positively impious to suggest that a god would pollute anyI hold that a man's body is not he remarks: for instance, At 362 16ff., 'however, thing. the foods that cure or hurt, Again at 358 holy.' corrupt the other perfectly by a god, the one being utterly not piety (eaeBeun) , as they think, but imdiscussions he argues that 'their 16ff. show, and what they call piety and the divine implying that the gods do not exist, piety rather, is, as I shall prove, impious and unholy.' the sohe accuses them of dishonesty. They do not in fact know what causes Finally defiled called sacred with ignorance and they do not know how to treat it correctly. disease, 'in order that their utter ignorance talk of the divine

their They conceal might not be mani-

and deceive fest.1 (354 17) knowledge, 'By these sayings and devices they claim superior most of their talk turning on the for them purifications and cleansings, men by prescribing As for their motive, he goes intervention of gods and spirits (x cxluvlov) ' (358 13ff.). this as money: on to identify (360 10) , because they are they do what they do, he suggests 'in need of a livelihood1 The writer are not medical over it is ( 3uou eyevou) . thus engages in a many-pronged attack and some of his at all: and not just they attack the men themselves, to recognise that diseases are. the writer's arguments, at least, their practices. More-

is not that no disease own position is but that all His main aim is to show that the sacred disease divine, is, as he puts it at the beginning of ch. 5 (Jones = ch. 2 Littr*, VI 364 9ff.), 'no more divine than any other.' In his final chapter 394 12ff.) he expresses (21 Jones = ch. 18 Littr, himself and to consider 'there is no need to put the disease in a special class it than the others; are all divine Each has a nature and all human. (<p'5aus) they and power ( 6v5vayts) of its own; or incapable of treatment. ' His attitnone is hopeless ude here is not one of conventional it was certainly not part of traditional or poppiety: 22 ular Greek religious belief to consider all diseases Rather the writer's divine. equally are from his conception of the divinity of the whole of nature, an idea whose origins 23 to be sought not in popular religion, but in philosophy. On the question of the relevance of the category of 'the divine' to medicine, the authus:

essential

more divine

view stems

thor of On the Sacred Disease may be said to outflank his opponents by broadening that notion: the category is rendered innocuous, if not vacuous, not by being denied, but by being asserted universally. Then a second point at which we must be careful not to exaggerate or misconstrue the differences between the Hippocratic writer and his opponents concerns the treatments incantations their ination advice they used. It is clear from his account that but also made suggestions, (uyat) alone, here was negative, about what to avoid, and they did not rely on spells for example, about diet, even if rather than what to take. The comb-

abo'ut diet in the opponents of On the Sacred Disease coro,f charms and suggestions to what we should expect if we compare the data collected conresponds by anthropologists 24 25 or the evidence for ancient cerning primitive medicine. medicine, Egyptian or Babylonian The response to disease is often a complex one: when spells and the like are used, this is often in conjunction with other treatments that may include drugs, dietary prescriptions natural remedies. That is not to say, of types of what we should consider that those remedies were viewed as such, or that any distinction course, between 'natural' and 'non-natural' was drawn, by those who used them. On the contrary, we have only to reflect on the use of the Greek terms xaSaupw and xctapa^s (covering both purely ritual, and or 'purgings') and of the term cppyaxov (for 'medicines' purely medical of all 'cleansings' the Greeks themselves kinds, including charms) to see that the categories used are some27 times such as to span or blur such distinctions. Yet it remains the case that the author not only has no objection in principle to some of the dietary recommendations proposed by his opponents, but even endorses of his own them, adding glosses that give naturalistic accounts of why certain foods should be avoided.28 But to understand the position of this treatise it is not enough merely to analyse the he brings against his opponents: we must consider the nature of the explanations objections he offers in place of the ideas which he rejects. How does he explain the 'sacred disease' of On the Sacred Disease and other

'The cause of this detailed and, in parts, surprising. His account is explicit, affection,1 he states at the beginning of ch . 6 (Jones = ch. 3 Littr, VI 366 5ff.), 'as of There are <pXees leading up to the brain the more serious diseases generally, is the brain.1 and he proceeds to give a quite detailed account of these, identifrom all over the body, important ones coming from the liver and the spleen respectively. Thus fying two particularly the upper part goes upthe lower part of the one from the liver is called the hollow <pA<|>: wards through the right side of the diaphragm and the lung , and has a branch going to the heart and the right arm. Concerning a branch of it that goes to the brain he says (VI 366 and here it branches, the thickest, largest and the ear it hides itself, 19ff.): 'right by most capacious part ending in the brain, another in the right ear, another in the right eye, and the last in the nostril.1 Meanwhile the y'<'>from the spleen is said to be similar on 29 the left hand side of the body 'but thinner and weaker. ' Now in the writer's view, the role of these cpAeec, though potentially conventionally, is normally to carry air through the body, this air rather misleadingly , translated 'veins', But when the for, among other things, both sensation and consciousness. being essential air in the veins is obstructed, especially by phlegm, the result is, first of all, that He describes a variety 'that part of the body where it rests becomes paralysed' (368 5f.). of other conditions that may arise if the obstruction caused by the flux of phlegm is not (372 removed, and then applies a similar idea to the particular case of the sacred disease 'If the phlegm be cut off from these passages, but makes its descent into the veins 4ff.): I have mentioned above, the patient becomes speechless and chokes; froth flows from the the eyes roll and intelligence fails, mouth; he gnashes his teeth and twists his hands; and in some cases excrement is discharged. . . ' and he goes on to offer a more detailed exThus he prefaces his remarks about speechlessness planation of each symptomin turn. (VI 372 lOff.) by explaining that air inhaled through the mouth or nostrils goes first to 'then most of it goes to the belly, though some goes to the lungs and some to the brain: The porFrom these parts it disperses, by way of the veins, into the others. the veins. but the air that goes into tion that goes into the belly cools it, but has no further use; and the brain, thus causing the lungs and the veins is of use when it enters the cavities and movementof the limbs, so that when the veins are cut off from the air by intelligence Simthe phlegm and admit none of it, the patient is rendered speechless and senseless.' Thus accounts are given of the other symptons he had mentioned. ilar, though briefer, 'for when the breath fails to enter them they foaming at the mouth comes from the lungs; foam and boil as though death were near' (374 4ff.). The writer supports his account of the causes at work with references to observed or supposed differences in the incidence of the sacred disease among different sections of the Thus he suggests that the disease attacks those of a phlegmatic, but not those population. He notes that older people are not killed by an constitution of a bilious, (368 lOff.). of the disease (376 17ff.) and that young people are particularly attack prone (378 12ff.). than to the left because the veins are He maintains that 'the flux is to the right rather At 384 4ff. he says that more capacious and more in number than on the left1 (378 lOff.). the disease occurs at the changes of the winds, 'most often when the south wind blows, then the north wind, and then the others.' Finally at the end of his work he advances a general 'This disease styled sacred comes from the same causes as of diseases (394 9ff.): aetiology himself?

others, from the things that come to and go from the body, from cold, sun, and from the of winds ... Most [diseases] . are cured by the same things as caused changing restlessness them... So the physician must know how, by distinguishing the seasons for individual things, he may assign to one thing nutriment and growth, and to another diminution and harm ... Whoever knows how to cause in men by regimen moist or dry, hot or cold, he can cure this disease also, if he distinguish the seasons for useful treatment, without having recourse to and magic ( yotyeun)' . purifications The writer's theory is comprehensive and detailed and several features of it are, surely most remarkable. First there is the extraordinary confidence with which he puts forward his One example of this from the passage just quoted is the statement that 'most disideas. eases are cured by the same things as caused them. ' and Secondly, while his physiological anatomical theories (that is his ideas concerning vital functions and the interactions of the constituent substances in the body, and his account of the vascular system) are quite full, they are also very largely imaginary. Thirdly, there is the frequent use of schemata involving such pairs of opposites as phlegm and bile, hot, cold, wet, dry, old and All of these pairs can be paralleled young, north wind and south wind, and right and left. in other Hippocratic writers and many of them figure in the Presocratic philosophers also.33 Some of them again figure prominently in various contexts outside the domain of the inquiry But the author of On the Sacred Disease evidently makes extensive use of concerning nature. such schemata. What this writer offers by way of an explanation of the 'sacred disease' as an alternative to the doctrines of the purifiers and quacks is, then, a highly dogmatic, speculative and schematic construct. Where, one may ask, was there any evidence for the theories he 34 presented? Amongthe occasions when he attempts to establish his points by direct evidence two are worth considering especially. At VI 384 17ff. when he is discussing the effect of the south wind, he suggests that this can be seen by studying its effects on As he puts it, 'vessels of pottery too kept in rooms or underthings outside the body. ground, which are full of wine or other liquid always feel the effects of the south wind and change their appearance to a different form. ' Quite what the writer has in mind here is not fully clear. But this is evidently an attempt (even if perhaps an unsuccessful one) to point to observable evidence outside the body in support of a theory about what happens inside it.36 At 382 2ff. the writer sets out to support My second example is even more striking. his suggestion that the sacred disease is due to the brain being flooded with phlegm. In an attack, he says, 'the brain is unnaturally moist, and flooded with phlegm, so that not only do fluxes occur more frequently but the phlegm can no longer separate, nor the brain be dried ... The truth of this,1 he continues, 'is best shown by the cattle that are attacked this disease, especially by If you cut by the goats, which are the most commonvictims. open the head you will find the brain moist, very full of dropsy and of an evil odour, whereby you may learn that it is not a god but the disease which injures the body.' It is clear from this passage that the idea of carrying out a post-mortem examination on an animal had occurred to this writer, and that is quite exceptional not only for the period at which the treatise was composed, but for any period in antiquity, since although from the fourth century onwards, at least, there is a good deal of evidence, in Aristotle and other writers,

and some also for the vivisection, for the dissection, of animals, post-mortem examination to establish the cause of death or to throw light on the aetiology of diseases never became a regular procedure in the ancient world. 39 Now it is not absolutely certain that the writer of On the Sacred Disease actually out the inspection carried he suggests: if he did not, that nor the last time that a test that could be carried out in practice - a thought experiment. exercise But if by an ancient writer as a hypothetical we assume, as perhaps we may, that he did do the test he describes, the result is as interThe statement that 'you will find the esting for what is omitted as for what is included. was treated brain moist, very full of dropsy and of an evil odour1 does indeed achieve what the writer that the 'sacred was the result disease1 of natural causes: 'it wanted, namely to establish is not a god but the disease which injures the body. ' At the same time we should observe that it apparently did not occur to the writer to check any of the description of the veins leading (Jones should to the brain that he confidently set out in chapter 6 (not to say dogmatically) = ch. 3 Littr, see pp. Yet much of what he presents 5-6 above) . by way of what we call anatomical theories could have been checked by observation. Although the possis mentioned in this one context, at observation, using dissection, tested very few, if any, of his general anatomical doctrines clearly least, by would not be the first

of direct ibility in fact the writer this place method. If it port, from his of his is

the writer offers in as it surely must be, that many of the theories granted, ideas are largely and have little or no observational fanciful supopponents' is unlikely to have stemmed with which he refutes his adversaries then the confidence use

Rather he is convinced on general of empirical grounds that they procedures. His twin key concepts are those of nature are wrong. (where he uses both ( <p'5aus) and cause 40 and blame, and Ttpoqxxaus) . The the term cxutlos connected with the ideas of responsibility can be ruled out on a priori grounds , as a catenotion that gods might bring about diseases diseases are a matter of nature, gory mistake: as we have seen, he implies effect. Although, the notion of the divine into move he collapses a regularity of cause and implies is also divine, what is natural by that and still leaves no room for any the natural and nature that

His main weapon is not empirical natural to non-natural causes to explain events. appeal I have already menthe examples of this we have given) but argument. evidence (despite of the type later known as modus tollens in the of an implicit tioned one instance argument Another comes at methods of treatment at 358 Uff. (pp. 4 f.). exposure of the purifiers1 364 20ff. other is that where he says: it affects is no more divine 'another strong proof that this disease but does not attack the bilious. the naturally phlegmatic, all equally, this disease than others, ought to have attacked than any Yet, without

if it were more divine

the argument, and reand phlegmatic' between bilious Formalising making any difference but not B; therefore not 'if A, then B; we have: the order of the propositions, versing of cause of the regularity if we seek the origins both of the idea of nature But A.' (and and of modes of argument such as that just referred to, and effect that that notion implies) A simthe most likely answer. then again the work of the Presocratic provides philosophers in s*o far as they can be reconstthe ideas of the Milesians, ilar notion of <paus underlies of hypothetical and the first systematic informal) ructed: arguexploitation (though still in the work of the ments of the type we find used in On the Sacred Disease comes, probably, Eleatics.

Our analysis suggests three main conclusions concerning On the Sacred Disease each of to a greater or lesser degree, with the general thesis that Jones proposed which conflicts, the Hippocratics . (1) First, the contrast between this writer and his opponconcerning ents is less than Jones would appear to allow (a) in that his opponents do not rely exclusbut also made dietary recommendations, and (b) in that ively on charms and purifications, the writer's own theories share both a certain dogmatism and a use of polar schemata with the ideas of his opponents. (2) Secondly, empirical procedures have less to contribute to the refutation of his opponents than has abstract argument. (3) Thirdly, the writer's confidence in his own position stems ultimately from his confidence in the notion of <p'5ats. So far from saying, then, with Jones, that 'the worst enemy of rational medicine lay in its one might argue, in this, admittedly restricted, connections with philosophy (and rhetoric)1, context at least, that in the refutation of superstition medicine rightly allied itself with philosophy, both (a) taking its weapons of argument from philosophy, and (b) building much of its case upon a conception of nature that first began to be made explicit by the Ionian 42 natural philosophers . But while On the Sacred Disease suggests certain important respects in which medicine seems indebted to philosophy, there is another side to the question of the relationship beFor this we may turn briefly to On AncientMedicine. Throughout this treattween these two. both in the refutation of the use of uodeaeus or postulates in medicine in ch. 1 and ise, chh. 13 ff., and in the attack on those who had claimed that to study medicine it was essential also to study such natural philosophical questions as the fundamental constituents of man in ch. 20, this writer argues against what he represents as the invasion of medicine by Thus in ch. 1 he writes: 'All who, having taken in hand to speak ideas. philosophical or write about medicine, have postulated for their argument a postulate of their own - heat or cold, or moisture or dryness, or any other thing they fancy - narrowing down the primary cause of men's diseases and death by postulating one thing or two as the same cause for all, these make obvious errors in many of their novelties. But they deserve most censure because they are dealing with an art ( xe'xvn) that really exists ... Wherefore, I considered 44 that it has no need of an empty postulate, as do insoluble mysteries, which necessarily if an attempt be made to discuss them, for instance the myrequire the use of a postulate, steries of heaven and of the regions below. If anyone were to express his opinion about the condition of these, it would not be plain either to the speaker himself or to the audience whether the statements were true or not. For there is no test the application of' which would bring certain knowledge.' in ch. 20 he argues that those who said that Again a knowledge of what man consists of is an essential preliminary for the practice of medicine 'raise a matter for philosophy1. He names Empedocles in particular as one who had written on nature 45 and says that what physicians and 'sophists' had said on this subject 'has less to do with medicine than it has with the art of writing'. His own view on the matter is that 'clear knowledge of nature can be derived from no source except medicine.' At first sight this too seems to endorse Jones' interpretation of the resistance of medicine to philosophy. Yet in practice (as I have argued elsewhere) the actual theories we find in OnAncientMedicine such topics as the constituents of man or the origins of dison eases turn out to be much closer to the ideas of his opponents, which he says are based on than one might expect in view of his apparent total rejection of such arbitrary postulates, 9

Thus his own view of the constituents of the body is that there are many postulates. things such as salt and bitter, sweet and acid, astringent and insipid, in us - and he is But if, once even prepared to allot a minor role to hot, cold, wet and dry themselves. with his opponents, the contrast betwen On again, as with On the Sacred Disease's arguments AncientMedicineand those he refutes is less great than he makes out, it is nevertheless the case that this treatise has an argument with philosophy, both on the question of methods and In chapter 9 on that of the limitations of the knowledge that can be attained in medicine. 'wherefore these ills are much more complex than we the writer has this to say: especially, For it is necessary to aim at some measure. realize, requiring greater accuracy of method. But no measure, neither number nor weight, can be found, reference to which would give accurate knowledge, other than the feeling of the body... Exactness is rarely to be seen.' Here, as in chapter 1, the writer resists the demand for certain knowledge and insists that medicine is an art where, as he puts it, 'exactness is rarely to be seen.1 He is evidently alive to the practical complexities of medicine and clear that, while medicine must seek the only measure of 'exactness1 is bodily feeling. the greatest degree of accuracy possible, The main points that emerge from a study of the aspects of these two works that we have First we must recognise the importance of the fact that considered may now be summarised. The polemics of On the of the type we have been discussing took place at all. arguments Sacred Disease against the purifiers and quacks, and those of On AncientMedicine against those who used postulates in medicine, are important evidence of a growing awareness, in Greek With science, of problems of methods and of the boundaries between different inquiries. different opponents in mind, both Hippocratic writers advance towards clearer conceptions of 49 the nature and proper methods of medicine itself. Secondly the actual differences between the positions of these Hippocratic writers and when we take into account their own their opponents are less than they make out (especially On the Sacred actual theories, as well as their methodological or programmatic statements). Disease rejects the supernaturalism of the purifiers, but engages in schematic and dogmatic The writer of On AncientMedicine repudiates the new method speculations on its own account. I On the Sacred Disease, of ddeais, but has to use certain arbitrary assumptions himself. modes of argument and the concept of cpuaus suggested, used philosophy (that is philosophical One could hardly say that On Ancient to refute magic. first developed by the Milesians) but one might put it that in his needed magic to refute philosophy: Medicine, conversely, of the notion that medicine can be exact he makes use of one idea that the purirefutation fiers would presumably have shared, namely that of the practical complexities of the art of healing. Thirdly, we may try to define the stage that these works represent in the development of Greek thought, while fully acknowledging that Greek thought did not develop by neat and On the Sacred Disease rejects the notion of divine intervention in clearly defined stages. The boundbut of course no refutation of supernaturalism is ever complete. diseases: aries of the supernatural were and remained a battleground throughout ancient science. Hard-hitting as his arguments are, his rejection of divine intervention did not mean that he Nor did it mean adoptalso rejected other types of dogmatic and schematic speculation. It is true that sustained and metia rigorously empirical, positivistic, methodology. ing culous observations are recorded in some Hippocratic works, the prime example being books I

10

which set out detailed descriptions of individual medical caseand III of the Epidemics histories. But in On the Sacred Disease the chief weapon is argument. Although observation was, in principle, possible on many questions touched on in this work, the actual appeals to The attack on supernaturalism and the substitution of a principle empirical data are rare. of the regularity of nature were extremely important: but once the principle of the regularity of nature was firmly accepted, it (in turn) provided a framework for theories many, or most, of which were not (in some cases could not be) brought to the test of observation and experiment. The 'rationality1 of early Greek medicine, as seen in On the Sacred Disease at least, implies a fundamental philosophical assumption about natural phenomena, but did not entail (though in some cases it could be combined with) an insistence on the need for empirical research. On the Sacred Disease and OnAncientMedicine mark the beginnings of an epistemological battle that was to continue right through ancient medicine. Medicine was caught between scepticism and dogmatism, between the scepticism implied by the irreducible individuality of each individual case (as each individual case is unique, there can be no generalisations, no conception of a type of disease, even, in medicine) and the dogmatism of excessive rationalism and schematism. It was not for nothing that one of the main medical sects of the Hellenistic period - and the one that numbered Hippocrates among its founding fathers - was called the Dogmatists or Rationalists, or were not so much ooyyaTLxoL Aoylxol: while the eyueuptMou what we should call 'empiricists' as (in certain respects at least) sceptics.52 Yet if the history of certain elements in later Greek medicine is one of a recurrent epistemological the major achievement of some of the Hippocratic texts is to have brought some of crisis, those epistemological As so often with Greek science, certain fundamental problems out. came to be identified early in the classical problems period, and in some respects, at least, later discussions in antiquity had little to add to the arguments already advanced in On the Sacred Disease and OnAncientMedicinein their attempts to define medicine as a-rex^n. In the modern period, to be sure - as we began by noting - the scientific credentials of branches (at least) of medicine are more firmly grounded, in that, for instance, the pathologist can call on the results of biochemistry and chemistry. But that still leaves, we said, large areas of medicine, both of medical theory and of medical practice, unclaimed by science, or where the claims to be scientific have a different function and would be justified in ways that are not so completely different from those available to, and used by, ancient Greek Thus Jones' picture of a fully scientific doctors. medicine and of a fully scientific medical man has its implausibilities when applied to the twentieth century A.D., let alone the fifth century B.C., and just as one should not exaggerate the difference between On the Sacred Disease and his opponents, so one should not exaggerate the difference between On the Sacred Disease and (for example) Osier. So far as the ancient That, however, is another story. world is concerned, the texts we have considered are, as I said, among the first in which the relations between medicine, magic and philosophy are explicitly discussed. They help to throw light on what happened when those relations became an issue and they show how comIt was indeed partly by contrasting itself with magic and philplex those relations were. osophy that medicine began to define its own identity and methods: but if it is important to see what was new in that development, it is equally important not to misconstrue or overstate the nature of that contrast or to neglect the continuing links of medicine with both. G.E.R. Lloyd King's College, Cambridge 11

Notes 1. Earlier versions of this paper were given on these to the History occasions. alleviation and prevention of disease, and with the resuaws xnv xoQe* may not conin a and Philosophy of Science Seminar at Cambridge I am most grateful for and to groups at the Universities the comments made by my audiences 2. 3. fThe science toration xad' sist 4. and art concerned and preservation yp uaxpeeu. of Bristol, with the cure, London, Newcastle and Southampton.

of health.1 aX xnv vSpwnou, ySXXov 6' that Aristotle still insisting 13, 1968, allows that it will p. 76. and, for example, interest in as a popular, theories. Convulsive Treatment. for gout (a treatf .Puschmann) . modern mednot their of 'positive with the NE 1097a Uff. It is notable while cf. that health

<pauvexau yv yap o xnv vyCeLctv ouxws eTiuaxoueCv o uaxps, exaaxov in the same state disposition or disposition in each case, in every case, NE 1173a 23ff,

consist

particular Chinese Chinese 5.

Phronesis

I am not competent to comment on the relative medicine, therapeutic

strengths

and weaknesses professional, is is

of European as well

but the layman may note an increasing methods such as acupuncture, example, treatment and controversial,

if not in Chinese condition

pathological

One remarkable,

from psychiatry, e.g. Alexander

the use of Electric the use of colchicum between a man with,

An example of an empirical ment which can be traced 6. However important medical ical 7. activities

for a somatic

back to antiquity, us, strictly

of Tralles

Book 12,Vol.2,pp.563f the agents, account

it may be in other contexts, enables as such.

the distinction

and one without,

qualifications constitutes claim

speaking,

merely to differentiate

and procedures

Yet if this knowledge1, more aodest

a difficulty

for any attempt to give a full that notion at all, of chemistry

and definitive

that does not mean that we cannot use that certain propositions concerning carried Journal 1973, of folk beliefs the report 1950. in Greek Philosophy1, and Practice disease

for example in connection

and anatomy may be accepted in M. Bouteiller, 82, 1962,

as firmly established. see,

8.

The survival for example, magique,

in 20th century Europe has often been documented: out in France of Hellenic Chamanisme et gurison pp. 56-66, reprinted

of field-work

Paris and Left ed.

9. 10. 11.

'Right

Studies edited

in Right I.

and Left, W. Osier,

Rodney Needham, Chicago p. 49. modern general Bulletin ed. 0.

pp. 167-86,

and cf.

Polarity

and Analogy, Christian,

Cambridge 1966, Part New York and in its 201-46, Medicina relation to

The Principles

of Medicine,

16th ed.,

by H.A.

London 1947, religion

The most helpful in Ancient

discussions of the Institute

are L. Edelstein1 of the History 1967,

s paper,

'Greek medicine 5, 1937, pp.

and magic1, Medicine,

of Medicine pp. 205-46, similar

reprinted Magica e

and C.L.

Temkin, Baltimore .

and G. Lanata, views

12.

Religione Popolare in Grecia, Rome 1967. Loeb Hippocrates , Vol. 2, 1923, pp. xxxviiif in Ancient W.A. Heidel, 17 Heidel ation la chose Greece (Suppl. 8 to the Bulletin Medicine, its and in The Medical notes Writings

Jones expressed

in Philosophy 1946, pp. Cf. also, and 125f. p. 9: les

and Medicine 23 and 26ff., for example (though on p. Observet courants ailleurs,

of the History

of Medicine), pp.

Baltimore 157ff . pp. 62, 1953,

of Anonymus Londinensis spirit de la connection mdecins

, Cambridge 1947, and natural on ne relve

Hippocratic

and method, New York 1941, collection plus encore, Hippocratique, de superstition Paris

an 'intimate chez les aucune is

between medicine

philosophy'), pas travers ou de magie.' Sohrift

and L. Bourgey, 'Par multiples

et exprience laque

se trouve peut-tre edition

extraordinaire trace, 1968. fut-elle Cf. also

de la mdecine 13. The most recent Ars Medica II Das Gttliche

lgre,

that of H. Grensemann, Die hippokratische the extensive ber die heilige Krankheit,

"ber die heilige

Krankheit" ,

Band 1, Berlin

comments on the treatise Bonn 1968.

in H.-W. Nrenberg,

und die Natur in der Schrift

12

14. 15. 16.

The two most important n.12 above) and A.J. I shall

recent

editions

are

those

in Jones,

Philosophy

and Medicine

in Ancient

Greece

(see

Festugire, of this

Hippocrate, disease, see

L'ancienne noting 0.

mdecine, points

tudes

et Commentaires IV, Paris where necessary. on epilepsy

1948.

use Jones1 own translations and fThe doctrine 1, 1933, 15ff.: of epilepsy

throughout,

of disagreement Bulletin Sickness,

On the identification period1 tory of Medicine don 1971, pp.

especially 211-322, fvarious

Temkin, 'Views writings1,

in the Hippocratic of the Hisand Lonas layBaltimore as well

in the Hippocratic

of the Institute 2nd ed. disease"

pp. 41-4 and pp. of cases

and The Falling diseases

at p. 19 Temkin notes

were called

"sacred

in Antiquity1

but fin the great majority men. f 17. Cf. also brief Places 18. 19. the discussion ch. 22. literally

"the sacred

disease"

meant epilepsy treatise afflicting

for physicians

rejection

of the sacred disease in the short of the fsacred* character of the impotence fthe divine1. of the opponents 1922, p. 232, pp.

On the Diseases certain

of Girls

and the Waters

Scythians

in Airs

to Setov, e.g., grecs, tote,

The question Pythagore

of the identification

of On the Sacred Berlin 1901,

Disease p.

has been much discussed: La vie de philosophes dans la Lore und

see,

M. Wellmann, Die Fragmente der sikelischen de Diogene 1937, Larce, 106f., Brussels Paris Paris tudes pp. L. Moulinier,

Arzte,

29 n. 1, A. Delatte, des muses chez les

P. Boyanc*, Le culte J. Jouanna, translated 176ff., 211.

Le pur et l'impur 134ff., Guillaume

dans la pense Bud 1961, pp.

des Grecs d'Homre Arisd'Empdocle 460ff., W. Burkert,

et Commentaires XII, , Bulletin in Ancient

1952, (English is

'Prsence

Collection and Science

Hippocratique1

de l'Association

Pythagoreanism 'temple-medicine1 thesis (Die

edition, 1972, pp.

with revisions The idea

from Weisheit risease

Wissenschaft, priests although

Nrnberg 1962) contrary

Cambridge Mass.

that they are, Suppl. is should his XXII,

or include, itself, from Leipzig

who practised Herzog 's

not supported himself

by any evidence von Epidauros

in On the Sacred a faulty

Wunderheilungen

, Philologus opponents (that

writer 1931, p. 149) that the Hippocratic ch. 4 (Jones = ch. 1 Littr VI 362 lOff.) patients the gods) (354 19ff.) sources into the temples that the writer are, himself rejects.

approves and based

of temple medicine on a premise

inference is caused

where the argument that his Some of the procedures

have brought their by as using VIII 33,

is purely hypothetical strikingly similar

the disease

he describes and rules

opponents Laertius

to be sure,

either

to practices certain kinds

ascribed

in our late in general 112 he to be

to the Pythagoreans (e.g.

abstention

from eating poem is kinds Disease

of fish, Diogenes

Porphyry VP ch.45 ,cf .Burkert ,op.cit and of Empedocles says he is able identify gested) flect to control followers popular in particular(whose the weather, cf. consulted

. ,pp. 176f )or religious all

to the claims of diseases';

of other Greek wonder-workers cf. Fr. Ill

entitled'Purifications' 358 19ff.).

,xa%ap'ioL : in Fr. where he claims or (as

for the 'word to heal of On the Sacred

On the Sacred Disease

Yet much as they have in common, to as Pythagoreans Wellmann Sugmerely reas Boyanc, illness, (2) in several cases

the opponents

straightforwardly (1)

of Empedocles e.g. whereas rules by blood

would be a mistake. concerning for general 136-7, cf. writer's

The similarities of black suggest (3) himself, Fr. 5). the idea remedies

Greek beliefs,

the association opponents behaviour; also Heraclitus baths

with misfortune; that sufferers

for one, noted, the Pythagoreans' may be purified 20. 21. Purifications Cf. e.g. bei 22.

the Hippocratic are rules (362 8ff.)

for a particular

from the disease

is one that Empedocles prohibit pp.

would have repudiated H.W. Miller,

with his horror of blood-shedding, foods. and Proceedings of the Denkens

(Frr.

128,

and incantations: Association 1967, Disease

they also 84, 1953,

and the use of certain

'The concept

of the divine

in De Morbo Sacro1 , Transactions 1-15, lOff.), F. Kudlien, op. cit., pp. 68ff.

American Philological den Griechen, According

Der Beginn des medizinischen

Zurich

p. 58 and H.-W. Nrenberg, itself (352

to On the Sacred

no one wondered at such diseases

as quotidian

13

fevers, lar all 23. 24.

tertians

or quartans, (e.g. Hesiod, because

or considered Works 102ff.), all Fr. on Thaes

them sacred. in bringing

The popular about diseases,

ideas

according

to which particuthemselves view that of writer's

deities diseases

were thought of as instrumental are divine

or certain

diseases

were personified See e.g. See, eases 467-97. 25. See, for example, ('Medicine Aristotle

must be contrasted

with the Hippocratic

are natural. and Ph. 203bl3ff. in E.E. Bulletin Vol. on Anaximander fs Boundless; of Apollonia Evans-Pr it chard, in E.H. of the History 1, New York 1951, medicine* (e.g. Fr. 5). Oracles 'Natural 19, 1946, by H.G. and dispp. GterWitchcraft, of Medicine the articles pp. 97-108), of Medicine the divinity 6) and of air and cf. in Diogenes

de An. 411a8 (e.g. the full

the elements

in Empedocles

for example, and rational

account

of Zande medicine

Magic among the Azande,

Oxford 1937,

the general

discussion

Ackerknecht,

treatment H.E.

in primitive A History

medicine1, of Medicine all

Sigerist, pp.

bock ('Hittite Wilson 26. P. Ghalioungui,

medicine1

109-13), Egypt',

A.Leo pp.

Oppenheim ('Mesopotamian in Bulletin

and J.A. 36, 1962, and and usop. 2 Vol.

in ancient

114-23)

of the History

Magic and Medical medicine', and cf.

Science

in Ancient

Egypt, London 1963. as making recommendations kind) to effect , 2 Vols., Kult, Baltimore about diet, 1945, e.g. cures, see Herzog,

So too in Greek 'temple ing drugs and surgery cit. pp. 43 and 75f., p. 153.

the God is

represented

(though the latter E.J.

usually

of a miraculous Asclepius

and L. Edelstein,

27.

See,

for example, Leipzig 43ff.,

T. Wchter, Reinheitsvorschriften IX, Giessen 1937, E.R. L. Moulinier, 1910-1, op.cit., W. Artelt, Dodds,

im griechischen Studien

Religionsgeschichtliche der Begriffe "Heilmittel" Press of California contain

Ver-

suche und Vorarbeiten und "Gift", pp. 35ff., 28. own views: obliqua. 29. The doctrine ferior

zur Geschichte pp. 51ff.

The Greeks and the Irrational, and G. Lanata, op. cit., clauses

University

1951,

The indicatives

in the parenthetical the infinitive

at 356 2, 3f . and 6 indicate one of his

that these

the writer's

contrast

at 356 9 where he gives and the 'spleen-vein', knowledge empirical

opponent's

beliefs

in oratio on anatomy, may and the inoften overlaid symmetry

of the 'liver-vein' But whatever based of a pair

so common in early

Greek writers this is

in some instances vena cava. by schematic appears left Disease. Medicine, 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. the air It

be seen as reflecting on right/left of veins, see

of the main trunks of the abdominal the doctrine, Thus the overfondness the right and Polybus as well

aorta

knowledge may underlie distinctions. one connecting Harris,

notions

for bilateral

in the notion

arm with the liver,

the other the Greek fit is by Osier

with the spleen, Oxford 1973.

which occurs

in Diogenes C.R.S.

of Apollonia

as in On the Sacred System in Ancient 15ff.) and that

On the whole subject, that the brain is

The Heart and the Vascular and intelligence the 'sacred

Thus he holds

the seat (390

of consciousness 12f.). of the symptons of

(386 disease'

that gives p. 1364,

it intelligence' in his description

is noteworthy that this Le niveau that is,

description

is paraphrased

op.cit.,

of Grand Mai, hippocratique, pp. of, 15-26.

or major epilepsy. Paris 1966, pp. 21 Iff. disease itself. shape to the Hippopp. 338ff . of Apollothan

Cf. R. Joly, Cf. Polarity As opposed, cratic

de la science

and Analogy,

Cambridge 1966,

to his descriptions difficult,

for example,

the sacred that pots e.g.

Jones translates writer Cf. Anaxagoras' The date nia may serve

yoptpnv 'shape'. seems unnecessarily

But to attribute

the idea

change their

when the term may mean, more simply, Polarity treatises, is disputed.

appearance.

dictum o<'>l$ nXcov toi cpotuvyeva on which see, as a terminus post quern, we have no reliable

and Analogy,

of this work, as of most other Hippocratic

While Diogenes

means of dating

the work more precisely

14

within 38.

the broad

limits

of the period subjects pp.

from about

420 to 380. and probably also vivisected See, in Alexandria e.g., in the third nor at other times. Disease my Greek Science told in Plutarch that

Human, as well century B.C., after Aristotle,

as animal,

were dissected 86ff.

though this was never common elsewhere London 1973, to this 75ff., parallel passage in On the Sacred

39.

The nearest Pericles its

is, while

perhaps, possible,

the story

ch. 6, in which Anaxagoras K. Deichgraber, Heidelberg of course, so called

had the head of a one-horned Such a procedure, terminologische 1933, 32ff., therefore agreed a disease in particular. is adopted III pp. 4, Berlin 8ff.,

ram opened in order to demonstrate was no doubt exceptional. und Studien op.cit.,

deformity was due to natural

causes.

40.

See especially kratischen

IIPO$AEIE, Eine 1954,

Studie ,Quellen K. Weidauer,

zur Geschichte Hippo61ff. on

der Naturwissenschaften Schriften, all 41. 42. fIf divine, diseases

und der Medizin but not all

Thukydides

und die

and H.-W. Nrenbere, not divine.1

pp. 49ff,

equally:

equally; disease it

This is not to say, in general is is quite xevs: red disease 85ab),

that the doctors because

with the views put forward by the philosophers Thus Plato1 s rationalisation, of the sacred and Medicine Mcavfis. Museum Helveticum 20, 1963, pp. substance in Ancient in the head (see Greece. Disease itself (Timaeus 4f.)

or on the sacred

that the sacabove pp.

rightly

different

from the position

in On the Sacred

43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50.

Once again Reading The text is,

I use Jones1 own translation or fnewf reading, confused

from Philosophy

with Festugire

and others,

however,

and may be corrupt,

see A. Dihle,

145ff.

Tj ypacpuxfl, which may mean (as but 'painting*. Polarity and Analogy, pp. 69f . On this writer's conception however, outside

Jones in the Loeb translation

took it

to mean) not 'the

art of writing1,

of Te'xvn, see, 18, 1961, medical medicine itself, in late pp.

for example, adopt

F. Heinimann, the same views

'Eine either

vorplatonische on the nature

Theorie

der in

TExvn1, Museum Helveticum That is not to say, general, The chief alchemy. period examples or on particular Within medicine diseases 168bc) well increased

105-30. of medicine and

that both treatises problems. are astrology there is

(and the whole field that a belief as non-educated is alluded as well

of the 'art'

of divination)

ample evidence

in the possibility Greeks long after

of gods or the classical Plutarch

demons causing {De superstitione were sufficiently interpreting, II 112 5ff., andria,

continued

among educated antiquity. (Enneads 205f. Hippocrates trained II

and indeed

Such a belief

to by (among others)

and Plotinus

mentary on the Prognostic

(CMG V 9, 2 pp. insists,

9 14) and it is clear from a passage in Galen's ComHeeg, - XVIII B 17f Khn) that it was shared by some who himself as an authority schools for their at Cos, view (doing and later the medical so by misch.l at Alexthemselves writers (acceptby Galei} to considering 'what is divine' Cnidos in Prognostic

read to cite

as Galen himself Littr).

the reference

The physicians

in the medical

Pergamum and elsewhere there were continuing and, among later

were always folk-medicine disputes writers, treatise

in competition on such questions

with (though they sometimes allied Moreover within as the value for instance, Aristides Fr.

to) both those who practised themselves

and the temple doctors. On Regimen IV,

of dreams in diagnosis who developed cases and Artemidorus, but also

ed by the author of the Hippocratic on the subject, and even of that of amulets istic bidden writer. of their (accepted, effect:

a complex theory by Galen, not be fordown to to to

not only by Aelius by Rufus,

for example,

9 and in certain

though at On the mixing and power of simple explanation since they make patients 'magical' in particular,

drugs VI 2, 10, XI 859 Khn, for example, who rejects them suggests 10 42). Gyn. I 19 63, III

he adds a naturalwriters

even Soranus

that they should While medical varied the real,

more cheerful, practices,

Galen commonly reject Galen,

what they include

under that heading

from writer

was much exercised

by the problem of determining

as opposed

15

the supposed, glauben cited 51. 52.

effects

of the mass of natural see especially

remedies

used and of evaluating Versuche , Vol.

popular VIII,

beliefs dessen 1961.

about

them.

On the whole question, der Griecher L Thorndike, above The survival Kudlien, See e.g. Studien icism pp. A History (p. 12 n.ll),

0. Weinreich,

Antike Heilungswunder , Untersuchungen und Vorarbeiten 3rd ed. 305-36. Empirikerschule, 1933, Medicine, 1, New York 1923,

zum Wunder1909-10, of Edelstein by F. und 'Empir1967,

und Rmer, Religionsgeschichtliche of Magic and Experimental Dodds, op. cit., medicine', und Skepsis and folk-medical beliefs Clio Science and A. Delatte, Medica

the article

Herbarius9 3, 1968, pp. III

Brussels

of primitive

in other Hippocratic

works has been studied

'Early

Greek primitive Empirie

L. Edelstein, zur Geschichte

in der Lehre der griechischen und der Medizin School',

Quellen as Baltimore

der Naturwissenschaften in the teaching

4, Berlin

translated

and Skepticism

of the Greek Empiricist

in Ancient

195-203.

16