66);
De Prisca Medicina (vol.
De Prisca Medicina (vol.
William Smith - 1844 - Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities - b
Liter.
through a period of more than two thousand years Hippocr. (from Harless's ed. of Fabr. Bill. Gr. ) in
to the present day. The first person who is known the first vol. , and the noticing on each page the cor-
to have commented on any of the works of the responding pagination of the editions of Foës,
Hippocratic Collection is Herophilus. (HEROPHI- Chartier, and Vander Linden. By far the best
Lus. ] The most ancient commentary still in ex- edition in every respect is one which is now in
istence is that on the treatise “ De Articulis,” by the course of publication at Paris, under the super-
A pollonius Citiensis. (APOLLONIUS CITIENSIS. ] intendence of E. Littré, of which the first vol. ap-
By far the most voluminous, and at the same time peared in 1839, and the fourth in 1844. It
by far the most valuable commentaries that remain, contains a new text, founded upon a collation of
are those of Galen, who wrote several works in the MSS. in the Royal Library at Paris; a French
illustration of the writings of Hippocrates, besides translation; an interesting and learned general In-
those which we now possess. His Commentaries, troduction, and a copious argument prefixed to each
which are still extant, are those on the “De Na- treatise ; and numerous scientific and philological
tura Hominis," “ De Salubri Victus Ratione," " De notes. It is a work quite indispensable to every
Ratione Victus in Morbis Acutis," " Praenotiones," physician, critic, and philologist, who wishes to
"Praedictiones I. ," “ Aphorismi,” “ De Morbis study in detail the works of the Hippocratic Col-
Vulgaribus I. II. III. VI,” “ De Fracturis," “ De lection, and it has already done much more to-
Articulis," " De Officina Medici,” and “ De Hu- wards settling the text than any edition that has
moribus," with a glossary of difficult and obsolete preceded it; but at the same time it must not be
words, and fragments on the “ De Aëre, Aquis, et concealed that the editor does not seem to have
Locis," and "De Alimento. " The other ancient always made the best use of the materials that he
commentaries that remain are those of Palladius, has had at his command, and that the classical
Joannes Alexandrinus, Stephanus Atheniensis, reader cannot help now and then noticing a mani-
Meletius, Theophilus Protospatharius, and Damas fest want of critical (and even at times of gram-
cius ; besides å spurious work attributed to Ori- matical) scholarship.
basius, a glossary of obsolete and difficult words by The Hippocratic Collection consists of more
Erotianus, and some Arabic Commentaries that than sixty works; and the classification of these,
have never been published. (Brit. and For. Med. and assigning each (as far as possible) to its
Rev. p. 461. )
proper author, constitutes by far the most diffi-
His writings were held in the highest esteem by cult question connected with the ancient medical
the ancient Greek and Latin physicians, and most writers. Various have been the classifications
of them were translated into Arabic. (See Wen- proposed both in ancient and modern times, and
rich, De Auct. Graec. Vers. et Comment. Syr. various the rules by which their authors were
Arab. , &c. ) In the middle ages, however, they guided; some contenting themselves with following
were not so much studied as those of some other implicitly the opinions of Galen and Erotianus,
authors, whose works are of a more practical cha- others arguing chiefly from peculiarities of style,
racter, and better fitted for being made a class-book while a third class distinguished the books accord-
and manual of instruction. In more modern times, ing to the medical and philosophical doctrines
on the contrary, the works of the Hippocratic Col- contained in them. An account of each of these
lection have been valued more according to their classifications cannot be given here, much less can
real worth, while many of the most popular medical the objections that may be brought against each be
writers of the middle ages have fallen into complete pointed out: upon the whole, the writer is inclined
neglect. The number of works written in illustra- to think M. Littré's superior to any that has pre-
tion or explanation of the Collection is very great, ceded it; but by no means so unexceptionable as
as is also that of the editions of the whole or any to do away with the necessity of a new one. The
part of the treatises composing it. Of these only a following classification, though far enough from
very few can be here mentioned : a fuller account supplying the desideratum, differs in several in-
may be found in Fabric. Bibl. Graec. ; Haller, stances from any former one: it is impossible here
Bibl. Medic. Pract. ; the first vol. of Kühn's edi- for the writer to give more than the results of his
tion of Hippocrates ; Choulant's Handb. der Bü- | investigation, referring for the data on which his
113
y of Hippocrates, :
ngs that go under in
ler will be still mare
ases se find a number
and, in some respect
kind, wbich, though
e the same rame, et
ursory examination, to
sal ditierent persius
on which has far 1978
I acuteness of schols
both cases still far from
With respect to the
ic Collection the first
l. i. p. 44), shows that
mselves, while otbers are
, which follow each other
nich are sometimes hardy
omplete and fragmenty
ollection particular series
me ideas and the be
werer little we refata
✓
erous writings, we are led
: not the work of one and
remark has in all ages
10 have given their ate?
pocrates; and even at the
inted on them in the Ales-
ready disputed about their
ly from internal eridesa
would be sufficiently com
that the Hippocratie Cola
Hippocrates alone, far it s
instinces we find a passo
very early times as farming
quoted as belonging to :
leed if we had nothing to
## p. 486 (#502) ############################################
486
HIPPOCRATES.
HIPPOCRATES.
I
Forte; Fue in
reness take
master
The Hippocratic Collection consists of
Works
perhape
:
Works certainly
written by Hip-
pocrales. (Class
1. )
Works certainly
not written by
Hippocrates.
pocrates. (Class
11. )
sca are
to be acceea iz
Hippocrates
are an
Worts earlier
than Hippo
crates. (Class
Works later
than Hippo.
crates.
Works
contemporary
with Hippo-
crates.
1
τοιι τα
focus taken in
lection
one perse
mata se
from those of of
but not genuine,
i. e. not wilful
Works whose Worts whose
author
author is
conjectured. unknown.
(Class IV. )
genuine nor
authentic, 1. e.
Ties.
VIII. )
Works by the
same author.
(Class VI. )
Works by va-
rious authors.
(Class V11. )
he was the ab
mase, and
te on
pats, not
peccan to sat,
Dedical writers
was, it is
may have been
no longer in es
prasable, rego
opinion in each particular case is founded to the Tvlw, De Insomniis (vol. ii. p. 1); Nepi Natøv, De
works of Gruner, Ackermann, and Littré, of which Affectionibus (vol. ii. p. 380); nepi Twv &VTOS
he has, of course, made free use. * Perhaps a tabular Nabw, De Internis Affectionibus (vol. ii. p. 427);
or genealogical view of the different divisions and Tepl Novow A, De Morbis i. (vol. ii
. p. 165); Népl
subdivisions of the Collection will be the best cal- | 'Entautvov, De Septimestri Partu (vol. i. p. 414);
i,
culated to put the reader at unce in possession of Tepl 'Okraunvou, De Octimestri Partu (vol. i. p.
the whole bearings of the subject.
455); 'Επιδημίων Βιβλία Β, Δ, Ζ, Epidemiorum,
or De Morbis Popularibus, ii. iv. vi. (vol. iii. pp.
428, 511, 583); Περί Χυμών, De IHumoribus (vol.
1. p. 120); Περί Υγρών Χρήσιος, De Usu Liqui-
written by Hip- dorum (vol. ii. p. 153).
Class VI. , containing Nepl Tovſis, De Genitura
(vol. i. p. 371); Περί Φύσιος Παιδίου, De Natura
about Pueri (vol. i. p. 382); Nepi Notown A, De Morbis
iv. (vol. ii. p. 324); Περί Γυναικείων, De Mu-
111. )
lierum fortis (vol. ii. p. 606); Περί Παρθενίων,
De Virginum Morbis (vol. ii. p. 526); Nepl’Apá
Works authentic, Works neither
pwv, De Sterilibus (vol. iii. p. 1).
Class VII. , containing 'Enridnulw Bienla E, H,
forgeries.
wilful forke-
(Class V. )
(Class
Epidemiorum, or De Morbis Popularibus v. vii.
(vol. iii. pp. 545, 631); Nepi Kapdins, De Corde
(vol. i. p. 485); Nepi Tpoçîs, De Alimento (vol. ii.
p. 17); Tepl Sáprwv, De Carnibus (vol. i. p. 424);
Περί Εβδομάδων, De Septimanis, a work which no
Class I. , containing MpoyvwoTiKÓv, Praenotiones longer exists in Greek, but of which M. Littré
or Prognosticon (vol. i. p. 88, ed. Kühn); 'Apo- has found a Latin translation ; IpopontiróY B,
prouol, Aphorismi (vol. iii. p. 706); 'Erionuiwv Prorrhetica (or Praedictiones) ii. (vol. i. p. 185);
Bibnía A, r, De Morbis Popularibus (or Epidemi- nepl 'Ootéwv súvios, De Natura Ossium, a work
orum), lib. i. and iii. (vol. i. pp. 382, 467); Tepl composed entirely of extracts from other treatises
Alaitns 'Océwy, De Ratione Victus in Morbis of the Hippocratic Collection, and from other an-
Acutis, or De Diaeta Acutorum (vol. ii. p. 25); cient authors, and which therefore M. Littré is
Περί Αέρων, Υδάτων, Τόπων, De Aire, Aquis, et going to suppress entirely (vol. 1. p. 502) ; Περί
Locis (vol. i. p. 523); Tepl TW v Kepalń Tpar l'Adévwv, De Glandulis (vol. i. p. 491); Tepl
Mátwv, De Capitis Vulneribus (vol. iii. p. 316). 'Int poû, De Medico (vol. i. p. 56); Depl Eú-
Class II. , containing Iepl Apxalns 'Intoikas, oxnuosúvns, De Decenti Habitu (vol. i. p.
66);
De Prisca Medicina (vol. i. p. 22); llepl "Apopwv, mapaygenlai, Praeceptiones (vol. i. p. 77); Nepl
De Articulis (vol. iii
. p. 135); Nepi 'Ayuâv, De 'Avatouñs, De Anatomia (or De Resectione Cor-
Fractis (vol. iii. p. 64); MoxAixós, Mochlicus or porum) (vol. iii. p. 379); Tepl 'Odovropuins, De
Vectiarius (vol. iii. p. 270); "Opkos, Jusjurandum Dentitione (vol. i. p. 482); Nep! Eykatatouſs 'Eu-
i
(vol. i. p. 1); Nõuos, Lex (vol. i. p. 3); Iep? Spúov, De Resectione Foetus (vol. iii
. p. 376); Nep?
'Elxwv, De Ulceribus (vol. iii. p. 307); Liep? Oylos, De Visu (vol. iii. p. 42); Nepi Kpioiwv, De
Evpiyywv, De Fistulis (vol. iii. p. 329); lepi Crisibus (or De Judicationibus) (vol. i. p. 136);
Ajuoppožbwe, De Haemorrhoidibus (vol. iii. p. 340); Nepl Kploiuwv, De Diebus Criticis (or De Diebus
Kar 'Intpelov, De Officina Medici (vol. iii. p. 48); Judicatoriis) (vol. i. p. 149); Plepi papuárwv, De
Ilepl 'Ipñs Novoov, De Morbo Sacro (vol. i. Medicamentis Purgatiris (vol. iii. p. 855).
p. 587).
Class VIII. , containing 'ETIOTOAal, Epistolae
Class III. , containing Ipop ntiKÓVA, Pror (vol. iii. p. 769); Mpeo6EUTIKÒS Deogaloû, Thes-
rhetica, or Praedictiones i. (vol. i. p. 157); Kwakal sali Legati Oratio (vol. iii. p. 831); 'ETIBÁLios,
Ipoyvarers, Coacae Praenotiones (vol. i. p. 234). Oratio ad Aram (vol. iii. p. 830); Abyua 'Aon-
Class IV. , containing repl púcios_’Avēputov, valwv, Atheniensium Senatus Consultum (vol. iii. p.
De Natura Hominis (vol. i. p. 348); Tepl Atalans 829).
'Tyleivís, De Salubri Victus Ratione (? ) (vol. i. Each of these classes requires a few words of
p. 616); lepl ruvaikeins þúolos, De Natura Mu- explanation. The first class will probably be con-
liebri(? ) (vol. ii. p. 529); Nepl Novow B, F, De sidered by many persons to be rather small ; but
Morbis, ii. iii(? ) (vol. ii. p. 212); IIepà ’ETIKUMOLOS, it seemed safer and better to include in it only
De Superfoetatione (? ) (vol. i. p. 460).
those works of whose genuineness there has never
Class V. , containing Tepl prowv, De Flatibus been any doubt. To this there is perhaps one ex-
(vol. 1. p. 569) ; Περί Τόπων των κατ''Ανθρωπον, ception, and that relating to the very work whose
p.
De Locis in Homine (vol. ii. p. 101); Tepl Téxuns, genuineness one would perhaps least expect to find
De Arte(? ) (vol. i. p. 5); Tepl Alaltos, De Diaeta, called in question, as it is certainly that by which
or De Victus Ratione (vol. i. p. 625); Tepl 'Evu- Hippocrates is most popularly known. Some doubts
have arisen in the minds of several eminent critics
Some of the readers of this work may perhaps as to the origin of the Aphorisms, and indeed the
be interested to hear that a strictly philological clas- discussion of the genuineness of this work may be
sification of the works of the Hippocratic Collection said to be an epitome of the questions relating to
is still a desideratum ; and that, as this is in fact the whole Hippocratic Collection. We find here a
almost the only question connected with the subject very celebrated work, which has from early times
which has not by this time been thoroughly ex- borne the name of Hippocrates, but of which some
amined, any scholar who will undertake the work parts have always been condemned as spurious.
will be doing good service to the cause of ancient Upon examining those portions that are considered
medical literature.
to be genuine, we observe that the greater part of
Ibe secera
3
the same time
sringer
non ec
ine, ugon satt
we of woon
Eician in Great
best medicale
Tsed by the e
fer them (
Was eerd
Tbe amount of
less of a2 tt
Eml;e g. the
ed the La
be the rock
beag to din
the simpudtr.
taquis, the is
3
Evet, as all of
be reruine by
wanned better
been written
The two
stich are
est erist, ha
bute tot
the Totive
bains by tho
tie ertain
which the med
## p. 487 (#503) ############################################
HIPPOCRATES.
487
HIPPOCRATES.
Jeg 1
+p ris -
;(:. af . ܐܶܐܬ=
- D. 163; Jedi
vol i B HA! ,
ate (velis
Epidement
vi. (volim
assorilor
De la liste
S, De Gear
**, De laten
A, De Vote
eier, De leer
Jepad ladies,
6); Περί 'Αρη-
* BABAIE,
slania T. ri
pilns, De Corte
lizeno (reli
(rol i. 3. 124);
work which is
hich 1. Lint
Προφητείν και
vol. 1 D. 131;
Ooxsa, a radi
other treaties
from other =
re N. Litre i
p. 502); la
B 4917; Die
55); litar Es
the first three sections agrees almost word for word In the fourth class are placed those works which
with passages to be found in his acknowledged were certainly not written by Hippocrates himself,
works ; while in the remaining sections we find which were probably either contemporary or but
sentences taken apparently from spurious or doubt little posterior to him, and whose authors have
ful treatises ; thus adding greatly to our difficulties, been, with more or less degree of certainty, dis-
inasmuch as they sometimes contain doctrines and covered. The works De Natura Hominis, and De
theories opposed to those which we find in the Salubri Victus Ratione, are supposed by M. Littré
works acknowledged to be genuine. And these to have been written by the same auttor, because
facts are (in the opinion of the critics alluded to) it is said by Galen that in many old editions these
to be accounted for in one of two ways: either two treatises formed but one ; and this author he
Hippocrates himself in his old age (for the Apho- concludes to have been Polybus, the son-in-law of
risms have always been attributed to this period of Hippocrates (vol. i. pp. 46, 346, &c. ), because a
his life) put together certain extracts from his own passage is quoted by Aristotle (Hist. Anim. jii 3),
works, to which were afterwards added other sen- and attributed to Polybus, which is found word for
tences taken from later authors ; or else the col word in the work De Natura llominis (vol. i. p.
lection was not formed by Hippocrates himself, but 364). For somewhat similar reasons, Euryphon
by some person or persons after his death, who has been supposed to be the author of the second
made aphoristical extracts from his works, and and third books De Morbis, and the work De
from those of other writers of a later date, and the Natura Muliebri (EURYPHON]; and also (though
whole was then attributed to Hippocrates, because with much less show of reason) a certain Leo-
he was the author of the sentences that were most phanes, or Cleophanes (of whom nothing whatever
valuable, and came first in order. This account of is known), to have written the treatise De Super-
the formation of the Aphorisms appears extremely foetatione (Littré, vol. i. p. 380).
plausible, nor does it seem to be any
decisive ob In the fifth class there is one treatise (De Di-
jection to say, that we find among them sentences aeta) in which an astronomical coincidence with
which are not to be met with elsewhere ; for, the calendar of Eudoxus has been pointed to the
when we recollect how many works of the old writer by a friend, which (as far as he is aware)
medical writers, and perhaps of Hippocrates himself, has never been noticed by any commentator on
are lost, it is easy to conceive that these sentences Hippocrates, and which seems in some degree to
may have been extracted from some treatise that is fix the date of the work in question. If the ca-
no longer in existence. It must however be con- lendar of Eudoxus, as preserved in the Apparentiae
fessed that this conjecture, however plausible and of Ptolemy and the calendar of Geminus (see
probable, requires further proof and examination Petav. Uranol
. pp. 64, 71), be compared with part
before it can be received as true.
of the third book De Diueta (vol. i. pp. 711-715),
The second class is one of the most unsatisfac- it will be found that the periods correspond so
tory in the writer's own opinion, and affords at exactly, that there being no other solar calendar
the same time a curious instance of the impossibility of antiquity in which these intervals coincide so
of satisfying even those few persons in Europe whose closely,and all through, but that of Eudoxus), it seems
opinion on such a matter is really worth asking; a reasonable inference that the writer of the work
for, upon submitting the classification to two friends, De Diaeta took them from the calendar in ques-
one of whom is decidedly the most learned phy- tion. If this be granted, it will follow that the
sician in Great Britain, and the other one of the author must have written this work after the year
best medical critics on the continent, he was ad- B. C. 381, which is the date of the calendar of Eu-
vised by the one to call this class “Works probably doxus ; and, as Hippocrates must have been at
written by Hippocrates," and by the other to trans- least eighty years old at that time, this conclusion
fer them (with one exception) to the class of will agree quite well with the general opinion of
“Works certainly not written by Hippocrates. " ancient and modern critics, that the treatise in
The amount of probability in favour of the genuine-question was probably written by one of his im-
Dess of all these works is certainly by no means mediate followers.
equal; e. g. the two little pieces called the “Oath," The sixth class agrees with the sixth class of
and the Law," though commonly considered to M. Littré, who, with great appearance of proba-
be the work of the same author, and to be in- bility, supposes it to form a connected series of
timately connected with each other, seem rather to works written by the same author, whose name is
belong to different periods, the former having all quite unknown, and of whose date it can only be
the simplicity, honesty, and religious feeling of an- determined from internal evidence that he must
tiquity, the latter somewhat of the affectation and have lived later than Hippocrates, and before the
declamatory grandiloquence of a sophist. How-time of Aristotle.
ever, as all of these books have been considered to The works contained in this and the serenth
be genuine by some critics of more or less note, it class have for many centuries formed part of the
seemed better to defer to their authority at least Hippocratic Collection without having any right to
80 far as to allow that they might perhaps have such an honour, and therefore are not genuine ;
been written by Hippocrates himself.
but, as it does not appear that their authors were
The two works which constitute the third class, guilty of assuming the name of Hippocrates, or
and which are probably the oldest medical writings that they have represented the state of medical
that exist, have been supposed with some proba- science as in any respect different from what it
bility to consist, at least in part, of the inscriptions really was in the times in which they wrote, there
on the votive tablets placed in the temple of Aescu- is no reason for denying their authenticity. And
Japius by those who had recovered their health, in this respect they are to be regarded with a very
which certainly constituted one of the sources from different eye from the pieces which form the last
which the medical knowledge of Hippocrates was class, which are neither genuine nor authentic, but
derived.
mere forgeries ; which display indeed here and
M14
FOL i R 60);
į p. 77); lita
P-
Rozdze (
Portadas. De
ܬ ܕ݁ܬ݂ܶykarare
11. p. 376); Ilse
Περί Κρισαν.
(rol i. p. 136);
is (or De Derechos
på terasini,
F. 855).
στολαί, Ετα
Det
salca, The
131); Eriés
0); Δόγμα '
Αη-
sultys (Foi i
1
J
es a few words of
Il probably be can
: rather gall; be:
include in it at
ess there has been
. is perdaps one era
ne rers Fork
least expect to bad
Linly that by rid
nonn. Some dechts
reral eminent critics
sms, and indeed Line
of this work may be
questions relaties
on.
We find bere
has from early tisos
's, boat of which is
demned as spanies
is that are considered
at the greater part de
## p. 488 (#504) ############################################
488
HIPPOCRATES.
through a period of more than two thousand years Hippocr. (from Harless's ed. of Fabr. Bill. Gr. ) in
to the present day. The first person who is known the first vol. , and the noticing on each page the cor-
to have commented on any of the works of the responding pagination of the editions of Foës,
Hippocratic Collection is Herophilus. (HEROPHI- Chartier, and Vander Linden. By far the best
Lus. ] The most ancient commentary still in ex- edition in every respect is one which is now in
istence is that on the treatise “ De Articulis,” by the course of publication at Paris, under the super-
A pollonius Citiensis. (APOLLONIUS CITIENSIS. ] intendence of E. Littré, of which the first vol. ap-
By far the most voluminous, and at the same time peared in 1839, and the fourth in 1844. It
by far the most valuable commentaries that remain, contains a new text, founded upon a collation of
are those of Galen, who wrote several works in the MSS. in the Royal Library at Paris; a French
illustration of the writings of Hippocrates, besides translation; an interesting and learned general In-
those which we now possess. His Commentaries, troduction, and a copious argument prefixed to each
which are still extant, are those on the “De Na- treatise ; and numerous scientific and philological
tura Hominis," “ De Salubri Victus Ratione," " De notes. It is a work quite indispensable to every
Ratione Victus in Morbis Acutis," " Praenotiones," physician, critic, and philologist, who wishes to
"Praedictiones I. ," “ Aphorismi,” “ De Morbis study in detail the works of the Hippocratic Col-
Vulgaribus I. II. III. VI,” “ De Fracturis," “ De lection, and it has already done much more to-
Articulis," " De Officina Medici,” and “ De Hu- wards settling the text than any edition that has
moribus," with a glossary of difficult and obsolete preceded it; but at the same time it must not be
words, and fragments on the “ De Aëre, Aquis, et concealed that the editor does not seem to have
Locis," and "De Alimento. " The other ancient always made the best use of the materials that he
commentaries that remain are those of Palladius, has had at his command, and that the classical
Joannes Alexandrinus, Stephanus Atheniensis, reader cannot help now and then noticing a mani-
Meletius, Theophilus Protospatharius, and Damas fest want of critical (and even at times of gram-
cius ; besides å spurious work attributed to Ori- matical) scholarship.
basius, a glossary of obsolete and difficult words by The Hippocratic Collection consists of more
Erotianus, and some Arabic Commentaries that than sixty works; and the classification of these,
have never been published. (Brit. and For. Med. and assigning each (as far as possible) to its
Rev. p. 461. )
proper author, constitutes by far the most diffi-
His writings were held in the highest esteem by cult question connected with the ancient medical
the ancient Greek and Latin physicians, and most writers. Various have been the classifications
of them were translated into Arabic. (See Wen- proposed both in ancient and modern times, and
rich, De Auct. Graec. Vers. et Comment. Syr. various the rules by which their authors were
Arab. , &c. ) In the middle ages, however, they guided; some contenting themselves with following
were not so much studied as those of some other implicitly the opinions of Galen and Erotianus,
authors, whose works are of a more practical cha- others arguing chiefly from peculiarities of style,
racter, and better fitted for being made a class-book while a third class distinguished the books accord-
and manual of instruction. In more modern times, ing to the medical and philosophical doctrines
on the contrary, the works of the Hippocratic Col- contained in them. An account of each of these
lection have been valued more according to their classifications cannot be given here, much less can
real worth, while many of the most popular medical the objections that may be brought against each be
writers of the middle ages have fallen into complete pointed out: upon the whole, the writer is inclined
neglect. The number of works written in illustra- to think M. Littré's superior to any that has pre-
tion or explanation of the Collection is very great, ceded it; but by no means so unexceptionable as
as is also that of the editions of the whole or any to do away with the necessity of a new one. The
part of the treatises composing it. Of these only a following classification, though far enough from
very few can be here mentioned : a fuller account supplying the desideratum, differs in several in-
may be found in Fabric. Bibl. Graec. ; Haller, stances from any former one: it is impossible here
Bibl. Medic. Pract. ; the first vol. of Kühn's edi- for the writer to give more than the results of his
tion of Hippocrates ; Choulant's Handb. der Bü- | investigation, referring for the data on which his
113
y of Hippocrates, :
ngs that go under in
ler will be still mare
ases se find a number
and, in some respect
kind, wbich, though
e the same rame, et
ursory examination, to
sal ditierent persius
on which has far 1978
I acuteness of schols
both cases still far from
With respect to the
ic Collection the first
l. i. p. 44), shows that
mselves, while otbers are
, which follow each other
nich are sometimes hardy
omplete and fragmenty
ollection particular series
me ideas and the be
werer little we refata
✓
erous writings, we are led
: not the work of one and
remark has in all ages
10 have given their ate?
pocrates; and even at the
inted on them in the Ales-
ready disputed about their
ly from internal eridesa
would be sufficiently com
that the Hippocratie Cola
Hippocrates alone, far it s
instinces we find a passo
very early times as farming
quoted as belonging to :
leed if we had nothing to
## p. 486 (#502) ############################################
486
HIPPOCRATES.
HIPPOCRATES.
I
Forte; Fue in
reness take
master
The Hippocratic Collection consists of
Works
perhape
:
Works certainly
written by Hip-
pocrales. (Class
1. )
Works certainly
not written by
Hippocrates.
pocrates. (Class
11. )
sca are
to be acceea iz
Hippocrates
are an
Worts earlier
than Hippo
crates. (Class
Works later
than Hippo.
crates.
Works
contemporary
with Hippo-
crates.
1
τοιι τα
focus taken in
lection
one perse
mata se
from those of of
but not genuine,
i. e. not wilful
Works whose Worts whose
author
author is
conjectured. unknown.
(Class IV. )
genuine nor
authentic, 1. e.
Ties.
VIII. )
Works by the
same author.
(Class VI. )
Works by va-
rious authors.
(Class V11. )
he was the ab
mase, and
te on
pats, not
peccan to sat,
Dedical writers
was, it is
may have been
no longer in es
prasable, rego
opinion in each particular case is founded to the Tvlw, De Insomniis (vol. ii. p. 1); Nepi Natøv, De
works of Gruner, Ackermann, and Littré, of which Affectionibus (vol. ii. p. 380); nepi Twv &VTOS
he has, of course, made free use. * Perhaps a tabular Nabw, De Internis Affectionibus (vol. ii. p. 427);
or genealogical view of the different divisions and Tepl Novow A, De Morbis i. (vol. ii
. p. 165); Népl
subdivisions of the Collection will be the best cal- | 'Entautvov, De Septimestri Partu (vol. i. p. 414);
i,
culated to put the reader at unce in possession of Tepl 'Okraunvou, De Octimestri Partu (vol. i. p.
the whole bearings of the subject.
455); 'Επιδημίων Βιβλία Β, Δ, Ζ, Epidemiorum,
or De Morbis Popularibus, ii. iv. vi. (vol. iii. pp.
428, 511, 583); Περί Χυμών, De IHumoribus (vol.
1. p. 120); Περί Υγρών Χρήσιος, De Usu Liqui-
written by Hip- dorum (vol. ii. p. 153).
Class VI. , containing Nepl Tovſis, De Genitura
(vol. i. p. 371); Περί Φύσιος Παιδίου, De Natura
about Pueri (vol. i. p. 382); Nepi Notown A, De Morbis
iv. (vol. ii. p. 324); Περί Γυναικείων, De Mu-
111. )
lierum fortis (vol. ii. p. 606); Περί Παρθενίων,
De Virginum Morbis (vol. ii. p. 526); Nepl’Apá
Works authentic, Works neither
pwv, De Sterilibus (vol. iii. p. 1).
Class VII. , containing 'Enridnulw Bienla E, H,
forgeries.
wilful forke-
(Class V. )
(Class
Epidemiorum, or De Morbis Popularibus v. vii.
(vol. iii. pp. 545, 631); Nepi Kapdins, De Corde
(vol. i. p. 485); Nepi Tpoçîs, De Alimento (vol. ii.
p. 17); Tepl Sáprwv, De Carnibus (vol. i. p. 424);
Περί Εβδομάδων, De Septimanis, a work which no
Class I. , containing MpoyvwoTiKÓv, Praenotiones longer exists in Greek, but of which M. Littré
or Prognosticon (vol. i. p. 88, ed. Kühn); 'Apo- has found a Latin translation ; IpopontiróY B,
prouol, Aphorismi (vol. iii. p. 706); 'Erionuiwv Prorrhetica (or Praedictiones) ii. (vol. i. p. 185);
Bibnía A, r, De Morbis Popularibus (or Epidemi- nepl 'Ootéwv súvios, De Natura Ossium, a work
orum), lib. i. and iii. (vol. i. pp. 382, 467); Tepl composed entirely of extracts from other treatises
Alaitns 'Océwy, De Ratione Victus in Morbis of the Hippocratic Collection, and from other an-
Acutis, or De Diaeta Acutorum (vol. ii. p. 25); cient authors, and which therefore M. Littré is
Περί Αέρων, Υδάτων, Τόπων, De Aire, Aquis, et going to suppress entirely (vol. 1. p. 502) ; Περί
Locis (vol. i. p. 523); Tepl TW v Kepalń Tpar l'Adévwv, De Glandulis (vol. i. p. 491); Tepl
Mátwv, De Capitis Vulneribus (vol. iii. p. 316). 'Int poû, De Medico (vol. i. p. 56); Depl Eú-
Class II. , containing Iepl Apxalns 'Intoikas, oxnuosúvns, De Decenti Habitu (vol. i. p.
66);
De Prisca Medicina (vol. i. p. 22); llepl "Apopwv, mapaygenlai, Praeceptiones (vol. i. p. 77); Nepl
De Articulis (vol. iii
. p. 135); Nepi 'Ayuâv, De 'Avatouñs, De Anatomia (or De Resectione Cor-
Fractis (vol. iii. p. 64); MoxAixós, Mochlicus or porum) (vol. iii. p. 379); Tepl 'Odovropuins, De
Vectiarius (vol. iii. p. 270); "Opkos, Jusjurandum Dentitione (vol. i. p. 482); Nep! Eykatatouſs 'Eu-
i
(vol. i. p. 1); Nõuos, Lex (vol. i. p. 3); Iep? Spúov, De Resectione Foetus (vol. iii
. p. 376); Nep?
'Elxwv, De Ulceribus (vol. iii. p. 307); Liep? Oylos, De Visu (vol. iii. p. 42); Nepi Kpioiwv, De
Evpiyywv, De Fistulis (vol. iii. p. 329); lepi Crisibus (or De Judicationibus) (vol. i. p. 136);
Ajuoppožbwe, De Haemorrhoidibus (vol. iii. p. 340); Nepl Kploiuwv, De Diebus Criticis (or De Diebus
Kar 'Intpelov, De Officina Medici (vol. iii. p. 48); Judicatoriis) (vol. i. p. 149); Plepi papuárwv, De
Ilepl 'Ipñs Novoov, De Morbo Sacro (vol. i. Medicamentis Purgatiris (vol. iii. p. 855).
p. 587).
Class VIII. , containing 'ETIOTOAal, Epistolae
Class III. , containing Ipop ntiKÓVA, Pror (vol. iii. p. 769); Mpeo6EUTIKÒS Deogaloû, Thes-
rhetica, or Praedictiones i. (vol. i. p. 157); Kwakal sali Legati Oratio (vol. iii. p. 831); 'ETIBÁLios,
Ipoyvarers, Coacae Praenotiones (vol. i. p. 234). Oratio ad Aram (vol. iii. p. 830); Abyua 'Aon-
Class IV. , containing repl púcios_’Avēputov, valwv, Atheniensium Senatus Consultum (vol. iii. p.
De Natura Hominis (vol. i. p. 348); Tepl Atalans 829).
'Tyleivís, De Salubri Victus Ratione (? ) (vol. i. Each of these classes requires a few words of
p. 616); lepl ruvaikeins þúolos, De Natura Mu- explanation. The first class will probably be con-
liebri(? ) (vol. ii. p. 529); Nepl Novow B, F, De sidered by many persons to be rather small ; but
Morbis, ii. iii(? ) (vol. ii. p. 212); IIepà ’ETIKUMOLOS, it seemed safer and better to include in it only
De Superfoetatione (? ) (vol. i. p. 460).
those works of whose genuineness there has never
Class V. , containing Tepl prowv, De Flatibus been any doubt. To this there is perhaps one ex-
(vol. 1. p. 569) ; Περί Τόπων των κατ''Ανθρωπον, ception, and that relating to the very work whose
p.
De Locis in Homine (vol. ii. p. 101); Tepl Téxuns, genuineness one would perhaps least expect to find
De Arte(? ) (vol. i. p. 5); Tepl Alaltos, De Diaeta, called in question, as it is certainly that by which
or De Victus Ratione (vol. i. p. 625); Tepl 'Evu- Hippocrates is most popularly known. Some doubts
have arisen in the minds of several eminent critics
Some of the readers of this work may perhaps as to the origin of the Aphorisms, and indeed the
be interested to hear that a strictly philological clas- discussion of the genuineness of this work may be
sification of the works of the Hippocratic Collection said to be an epitome of the questions relating to
is still a desideratum ; and that, as this is in fact the whole Hippocratic Collection. We find here a
almost the only question connected with the subject very celebrated work, which has from early times
which has not by this time been thoroughly ex- borne the name of Hippocrates, but of which some
amined, any scholar who will undertake the work parts have always been condemned as spurious.
will be doing good service to the cause of ancient Upon examining those portions that are considered
medical literature.
to be genuine, we observe that the greater part of
Ibe secera
3
the same time
sringer
non ec
ine, ugon satt
we of woon
Eician in Great
best medicale
Tsed by the e
fer them (
Was eerd
Tbe amount of
less of a2 tt
Eml;e g. the
ed the La
be the rock
beag to din
the simpudtr.
taquis, the is
3
Evet, as all of
be reruine by
wanned better
been written
The two
stich are
est erist, ha
bute tot
the Totive
bains by tho
tie ertain
which the med
## p. 487 (#503) ############################################
HIPPOCRATES.
487
HIPPOCRATES.
Jeg 1
+p ris -
;(:. af . ܐܶܐܬ=
- D. 163; Jedi
vol i B HA! ,
ate (velis
Epidement
vi. (volim
assorilor
De la liste
S, De Gear
**, De laten
A, De Vote
eier, De leer
Jepad ladies,
6); Περί 'Αρη-
* BABAIE,
slania T. ri
pilns, De Corte
lizeno (reli
(rol i. 3. 124);
work which is
hich 1. Lint
Προφητείν και
vol. 1 D. 131;
Ooxsa, a radi
other treaties
from other =
re N. Litre i
p. 502); la
B 4917; Die
55); litar Es
the first three sections agrees almost word for word In the fourth class are placed those works which
with passages to be found in his acknowledged were certainly not written by Hippocrates himself,
works ; while in the remaining sections we find which were probably either contemporary or but
sentences taken apparently from spurious or doubt little posterior to him, and whose authors have
ful treatises ; thus adding greatly to our difficulties, been, with more or less degree of certainty, dis-
inasmuch as they sometimes contain doctrines and covered. The works De Natura Hominis, and De
theories opposed to those which we find in the Salubri Victus Ratione, are supposed by M. Littré
works acknowledged to be genuine. And these to have been written by the same auttor, because
facts are (in the opinion of the critics alluded to) it is said by Galen that in many old editions these
to be accounted for in one of two ways: either two treatises formed but one ; and this author he
Hippocrates himself in his old age (for the Apho- concludes to have been Polybus, the son-in-law of
risms have always been attributed to this period of Hippocrates (vol. i. pp. 46, 346, &c. ), because a
his life) put together certain extracts from his own passage is quoted by Aristotle (Hist. Anim. jii 3),
works, to which were afterwards added other sen- and attributed to Polybus, which is found word for
tences taken from later authors ; or else the col word in the work De Natura llominis (vol. i. p.
lection was not formed by Hippocrates himself, but 364). For somewhat similar reasons, Euryphon
by some person or persons after his death, who has been supposed to be the author of the second
made aphoristical extracts from his works, and and third books De Morbis, and the work De
from those of other writers of a later date, and the Natura Muliebri (EURYPHON]; and also (though
whole was then attributed to Hippocrates, because with much less show of reason) a certain Leo-
he was the author of the sentences that were most phanes, or Cleophanes (of whom nothing whatever
valuable, and came first in order. This account of is known), to have written the treatise De Super-
the formation of the Aphorisms appears extremely foetatione (Littré, vol. i. p. 380).
plausible, nor does it seem to be any
decisive ob In the fifth class there is one treatise (De Di-
jection to say, that we find among them sentences aeta) in which an astronomical coincidence with
which are not to be met with elsewhere ; for, the calendar of Eudoxus has been pointed to the
when we recollect how many works of the old writer by a friend, which (as far as he is aware)
medical writers, and perhaps of Hippocrates himself, has never been noticed by any commentator on
are lost, it is easy to conceive that these sentences Hippocrates, and which seems in some degree to
may have been extracted from some treatise that is fix the date of the work in question. If the ca-
no longer in existence. It must however be con- lendar of Eudoxus, as preserved in the Apparentiae
fessed that this conjecture, however plausible and of Ptolemy and the calendar of Geminus (see
probable, requires further proof and examination Petav. Uranol
. pp. 64, 71), be compared with part
before it can be received as true.
of the third book De Diueta (vol. i. pp. 711-715),
The second class is one of the most unsatisfac- it will be found that the periods correspond so
tory in the writer's own opinion, and affords at exactly, that there being no other solar calendar
the same time a curious instance of the impossibility of antiquity in which these intervals coincide so
of satisfying even those few persons in Europe whose closely,and all through, but that of Eudoxus), it seems
opinion on such a matter is really worth asking; a reasonable inference that the writer of the work
for, upon submitting the classification to two friends, De Diaeta took them from the calendar in ques-
one of whom is decidedly the most learned phy- tion. If this be granted, it will follow that the
sician in Great Britain, and the other one of the author must have written this work after the year
best medical critics on the continent, he was ad- B. C. 381, which is the date of the calendar of Eu-
vised by the one to call this class “Works probably doxus ; and, as Hippocrates must have been at
written by Hippocrates," and by the other to trans- least eighty years old at that time, this conclusion
fer them (with one exception) to the class of will agree quite well with the general opinion of
“Works certainly not written by Hippocrates. " ancient and modern critics, that the treatise in
The amount of probability in favour of the genuine-question was probably written by one of his im-
Dess of all these works is certainly by no means mediate followers.
equal; e. g. the two little pieces called the “Oath," The sixth class agrees with the sixth class of
and the Law," though commonly considered to M. Littré, who, with great appearance of proba-
be the work of the same author, and to be in- bility, supposes it to form a connected series of
timately connected with each other, seem rather to works written by the same author, whose name is
belong to different periods, the former having all quite unknown, and of whose date it can only be
the simplicity, honesty, and religious feeling of an- determined from internal evidence that he must
tiquity, the latter somewhat of the affectation and have lived later than Hippocrates, and before the
declamatory grandiloquence of a sophist. How-time of Aristotle.
ever, as all of these books have been considered to The works contained in this and the serenth
be genuine by some critics of more or less note, it class have for many centuries formed part of the
seemed better to defer to their authority at least Hippocratic Collection without having any right to
80 far as to allow that they might perhaps have such an honour, and therefore are not genuine ;
been written by Hippocrates himself.
but, as it does not appear that their authors were
The two works which constitute the third class, guilty of assuming the name of Hippocrates, or
and which are probably the oldest medical writings that they have represented the state of medical
that exist, have been supposed with some proba- science as in any respect different from what it
bility to consist, at least in part, of the inscriptions really was in the times in which they wrote, there
on the votive tablets placed in the temple of Aescu- is no reason for denying their authenticity. And
Japius by those who had recovered their health, in this respect they are to be regarded with a very
which certainly constituted one of the sources from different eye from the pieces which form the last
which the medical knowledge of Hippocrates was class, which are neither genuine nor authentic, but
derived.
mere forgeries ; which display indeed here and
M14
FOL i R 60);
į p. 77); lita
P-
Rozdze (
Portadas. De
ܬ ܕ݁ܬ݂ܶykarare
11. p. 376); Ilse
Περί Κρισαν.
(rol i. p. 136);
is (or De Derechos
på terasini,
F. 855).
στολαί, Ετα
Det
salca, The
131); Eriés
0); Δόγμα '
Αη-
sultys (Foi i
1
J
es a few words of
Il probably be can
: rather gall; be:
include in it at
ess there has been
. is perdaps one era
ne rers Fork
least expect to bad
Linly that by rid
nonn. Some dechts
reral eminent critics
sms, and indeed Line
of this work may be
questions relaties
on.
We find bere
has from early tisos
's, boat of which is
demned as spanies
is that are considered
at the greater part de
## p. 488 (#504) ############################################
488
HIPPOCRATES.
