Galen on whether healthy living belongs to medicine or physical training

“That’s why it amazes me when I hear athletes’ trainers these days arguing that healthy living is a part of their own art. In fact, it’s not a part of true physical training at all; rather, it’s the other way around: physical training is a part of healthy living. So why should we dispute about their false art, which is not at all a part of the art concerning the body and which sells a practice that’s held in contempt not only by Plato and Hippocrates, but also by all the other doctors and philosophers?”

ᾗ καὶ θαυμάζειν ἐπέρχεταί μοι τῶν νῦν τοὺς ἀθλητὰς γυμναζόντων, ὅταν ἀμφισβητούντων ἀκούσω μέρος εἶναι τῆς ἑαυτῶν τέχνης τὸ ὑγιεινόν. ὅπου γὰρ οὐδὲ τῆς ὄντως γυμναστικῆς μέρος ἐστὶν ἀλλ' ἔμπαλιν ἐκείνη μέρος ὑγιεινοῦ, τί χρὴ περὶ τῆς τούτων κακοτεχνίας ἀμφιβάλλειν, ἣ μήτε μέρος ἐστὶν ὅλως τῆς περὶ τὸ σῶμα τέχνης ἐπιτηδεύματός τε προέστηκεν οὐχ ὑπὸ Πλάτωνος μόνον ἢ Ἱπποκράτους, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων ἰατρῶν τε καὶ φιλοσόφων ἀτιμαζομένου;

Galen, Thrasybulus: whether healthy living belongs to medicine or to gymnastics 47 (5.898 K. = 99,26-100,9 Helmreich)

Bedside manner in Rome: some sayings attributed to the physician, Quintus

“We still have to go through the subject of morning and evening massage—but oh my god not in the way Quintus did. They say that when a personal trainer asked him what virtue an oil massage has, he replied, ‘getting their clothes off.’ Those words—the ones I just used—they say are a direct quote of the trainer’s question and Quintus’ answer. There’s a similar saying attributed to Quintus that’s been going around, this one about urine: that ‘learning about it is a fuller’s job.’ Then there’s the one about hot, cold, dry and wet: that ‘those are words for bathhouse attendants.’ Now, I find it hard to believe even Thessalus, never mind Quintus, would say anything like these things. They’re all just stupid jokes, in no way appropriate for a man so educated in a serious art.”

Λείπεται οὖν ἔτι περὶ τῶν ἑωθινῶν τε καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἑσπέραν τρίψεων διελθεῖν, οὐ μὰ Δία οὕτως, ὥς φασιν ἀποκρίνασθαι Κόιντον ἐρομένῳ τινὶ γυμναστῇ, τίνα δύναμιν ἔχει τὸ ὑποσυγχρίεσθαι, φάμενον ἀφανίζειν τὰ ἱμάτια. τούτοις γὰρ τοῖς ὀνόμασιν, οἷς ἐγὼ νῦν ἐχρησάμην, ἐρέσθαι τε λέγουσι τὸν γυμναστὴν ἀποκρίνασθαί τε τὸν Κόιντον. ὅμοιόν τι τοῦ Κοίντου περιφέρεται ἀπόφθεγμα τό τε περὶ τῶν οὔρων, ὡς γναφέως ἐστὶ καταμανθάνειν αὐτά, καὶ τὸ περὶ θερμοῦ, ψυχροῦ, ξηροῦ καὶ ὑγροῦ, διότι βαλανέων ἐστὶν ὀνόματα ταῦτα. ἃ ἐγὼ μὲν οὐκ ἂν πεισθείην, μὴ ὅτι Κόιντον, ἀλλ' οὐδὲ τῶν ἀπὸ Θεσσαλοῦ τινα φθέγξασθαι· βωμολοχικὰ γὰρ ἅπαντ' ἐστὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα κομψεύματα καὶ οὐδαμῶς ἀνδρὶ προσήκοντα σεμνῆς οὕτω τέχνης ἐπιστήμονι.

Galen, On Matters of Health 3.13, (6.228 K. = 100,27–101,5 Koch)

Do truffles come from thunder and other questions

1. Aristotle (4th century BCE, dubious)

Attributed to Aristotle in some 19th century collections of fragments, but I have no idea why. Maybe because of a tendency to assign to Aristotle things said by his student? Or maybe the collection includes the early Peripatos? Found it with a TLG search, but I didn’t find the edition it comes from. σκληρότερα might be a corruption, see e.g. the Athenaeus text below where he says that there are more truffles when the storms are σκληραί / severe.

“Truffles become harder when there is continuous thunder, as Theophrastus has said in his works on plants.”

τὰ ὕδνα βροντῶν συνεχῶν γιγνομένων σκληρότερα γίγνεται, καθάπερ Θεόφραστος ἐν τοῖς περὶ φυτῶν εἴρηκεν.

2. Diocles of Carystus (4th century BCE)

‘Diocles of Carystus says in the first book of Matters of Health: “wild plants to be boiled are beet, mallow, monk’s rhubarb, stinging nettle, orach, grape hyacinths, truffles, mushrooms.”’

Διοκλῆς ὁ Καρύστιος ἐν αʹ Ὑγιεινῶν φησιν· ‘ἄγρια ἑψήματα τεῦτλον, μαλάχη, λάπαθον, ἀκαλήφη, ἀνδράφαξυς, βολβοί, ὕδνα, μύκαι.

Athenaeus, The Sophists’ at Dinner, 2.57, 61c = Diocles Fragment 195 van der Eijk

3. Theophrastus (4th century BCE)

“The same differences (in the roots) exist among undershrubs, herbs and the rest, except that some have no roots at all, like the truffle, the mushroom, the bullfist, and the keraunion .*”

αἱ αὐταὶ δὲ διαφοραὶ καὶ τῶν φρυγανικῶν καὶ τῶν ποιωδῶν καὶ τῶν ἄλλων· πλὴν εἰ ὅλως ἔνια μὴ ἔχει, καθάπερ ὕδνον μύκης πέζις κεραύνιον.

Theophrastus, History of Plants, 1.6.5

*Keraunion (κεραύνιον), from the word for thunderbolt, keraunos, perhaps another kind of truffle.

“For it is not correct to call everything underground a root. For in that case the stem of the grape hyacinth and of the long onion and generally any part which is underground would be a root, also the truffle and what some people call askhios and the ouignon and any other underground plants, of which none are roots—for we must distinguish things by natural capacity and not by place.”

τὸ γὰρ δὴ πᾶν λέγειν τὸ κατὰ γῆς ῥίζαν οὐκ ὀρθόν· καὶ γὰρ ἂν ὁ καυλὸς τοῦ βολβοῦ καὶ ὁ τοῦ γηθύου καὶ ὅλως ὅσα κατὰ βάθους ἐστὶν εἴησαν ἂν ῥίζαι, καὶ τὸ ὕδνον δὲ καὶ ὃ καλοῦσί τινες ἀσχίον καὶ τὸ οὔϊγγον καὶ εἴ τι ἄλλο ὑπόγειόν ἐστιν· ὧν οὐδέν ἐστι ῥίζα· δυνάμει γὰρ δεῖ φυσικῇ διαιρεῖν καὶ οὐ τόπῳ.

Theophrastus, History of Plants, 1.6.9

4. Dioscorides (1st century)

“Truffle is a root that is round with no leaves, no stem, light brown, dug up in the spring. It is both edible when raw and eaten when boiled.”

ὕδνον ῥίζα ἐστὶ περιφερής, ἄφυλλος, ἄκαυλος, ὑπόξανθος, ἔαρος ὀρυττομένη. ἐδώδιμος δέ ἐστιν ὠμή τε καὶ ἑφθὴ ἐσθιομένη.

Dioscorides, On Medical Materials, 2.145 (1.212,18–213,2 Wellmann)

5. Plutarch (1st century)

Why do some people think truffles are produced by thunder, and why do they think sleeping people are not struck by lightning?

‘Agemachos once offered us giant truffles while we were dining in Elis. Everyone there was amazed, and one person said with a smirk, “they’re surely worth the thunderstorms we’ve been having lately,” clearly poking fun at those who say truffles are produced by thunder. Indeed, there are some people who say that the earth is split by thunder, the air operating like a spike, and afterwards the truffle hunters use the cracks in the ground as a sign. From this arose a popular belief that truffles are produced by thunder rather than uncovered, as if someone were to think that snails were produced by rain instead of being lead out and made visible. Agemachos, however, held on stubbornly to the story and asked us not to think that what is wondrous is implausible. For there are many other wondrous things that come from thunder, lightning and related divine signs—things that have causes that are difficult or altogether impossible to discover.’

Διὰ τί τὰ ὕδνα δοκεῖ τῇ βροντῇ γίνεσθαι, καὶ διὰ τί τοὺς καθεύδοντας οἴονται μὴ κεραυνοῦσθαι.

Ὕδνα παμμεγέθη δειπνοῦσιν ἡμῖν Ἀγέμαχος παρέθηκεν ἐν Ἤλιδι. θαυμαζόντων δὲ τῶν παρόντων, ἔφη τις ὑπομειδιάσας ‘ἄξιά γε τῶν βροντῶν τῶν ἔναγχος γενομένων,’ ὡς δὴ καταγελῶν τῶν λεγόντων τὰ ὕδνα τὴν γένεσιν ἐκ βροντῆς λαμβάνειν. ἦσαν οὖν οἱ φάσκοντες ὑπὸ βροντῆς τὴν γῆν διίστασθαι καθάπερ ἥλῳ τῷ ἀέρι χρωμένης, εἶτα ταῖς ῥωγμαῖς τεκμαίρεσθαι τοὺς τὰ ὕδνα μετιόντας· ἐκ δὲ τούτου δόξαν ἐγγενέσθαι τοῖς πολλοῖς, ὅτι τὸ ὕδνον αἱ βρονταὶ γεννῶσιν οὐ δεικνύουσιν, ὥσπερ εἴ τις οἴοιτο τοὺς κοχλίας ποιεῖν τὸν ὄμβρον ἀλλὰ μὴ προάγειν μηδ' ἀναφαίνειν. ὁ δ' Ἀγέμαχος ἰσχυρίζετο τῇ ἱστορίᾳ καὶ τὸ θαυμαστὸν ἠξίου μὴ ἄπιστον ἡγεῖσθαι. καὶ γὰρ ἄλλα πολλὰ θαυμάσια βροντῆς ἔργα καὶ κεραυνοῦ καὶ τῶν περὶ ταῦτα διοσημιῶν εἶναι, χαλεπὰς καταμαθεῖν ἢ παντελῶς ἀδυνάτους τὰς αἰτίας ἔχοντα.

Plutarch, Table Talk (quaestiones convivales) 4.2, Moralia 664B–C

6. Galen (2nd century)

“On truffles. It is necessary to include these among the roots and vegetables, although they have no evident quality. That’s why people use them as a base for seasonings, just like they use the other ones they call bland, harmless and watery in taste. They all share in common that their nutriment, when it gets distributed to the body, has no remarkable property. Instead, the nutriment is a bit cool, while in thickness it is itself similar in quality to whatever was eaten, thicker when it comes from truffle, more watery and thinner when comes from colocynth and likewise in the case of the others.”

Περὶ ὕδνων. Ἐν ῥίζαις ἢ βολβοῖς ἀριθμεῖν ἀναγκαῖόν ἐστι καὶ ταῦτα μηδεμίαν ἔχοντα σαφῆ ποιότητα. χρῶνται τοιγαροῦν αὐτοῖς οἱ χρώμενοι πρὸς ὑποδοχὴν ἀρτυμάτων, ὥσπερ καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις, ὅσα καλοῦσιν ἄποια καὶ ἀβλαβῆ καὶ ὑδατώδη κατὰ τὴν γεῦσιν. ἔστι δ' ἁπάντων αὐτῶν κοινόν, ὡς μηδὲ τὴν ἀναδιδομένην εἰς τὸ σῶμα τροφὴν ἐξαίρετόν τινα δύναμιν ἔχειν, ἀλλ' ὑπόψυχρον μὲν εἶναι, τῷ πάχει δ', ὁποῖον ἄν τι καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ ἐδηδεσμένον ᾖ, παχυτέραν μὲν ἐξ ὕδνου, ὑγροτέραν δὲ καὶ λεπτοτέραν ἐκ κολοκύνθης ἐπί τε τῶν ἄλλων ἀνὰ λόγον.

Galen, On the Properties of Foods, 2.66 (6.655 Kühn = 327,16–328,3 Helmreich)

“On Truffle. Truffles are known to everyone to have a predominantly earthy substance, possessing a small number of fine particles that have been mixed in to their composition.”

Περὶ ὕδνου. Ὕδνα πᾶσι γνώριμα γεωδεστέραν οὐσίαν ἐπικρατοῦσαν, ἐν τῇ συστάσει κέκτηται βραχέος τινὸς αὐτῇ μεμιγμένου τοῦ λεπτομεροῦς.

Galen, Simple Drugs 9.19, 12.147 Kühn

7. Athenaeus of Naucratis (2nd/3rd century)

‘Truffles. These are also produced spontaneously from the ground especially in sandy places. Theophrastus says about them: “the truffle, which some call geraneion* and any other subterranean plant.” And again: “this is the creation and nature of these earth-born plants, like the truffle and the thing that grows near Cyrene which people call misy. This is considered very sweet and has the scent of meat, like the oiton that is produced in Thrace. Something peculiar is said about these. For they say that they are produced when the autumn rains occur with strong thunder, and more when there is more thunder, as this is more their proper cause. They are not perennials, but annuals. They are useful and at their peak in the spring. Nevertheless, some people suppose that they start from seed. In any case, on the shores of Mytilene they say they do not grow before there is a heavy rain that washes the seed down from Tiarai, while this is a region in which many grow. They are produced especially on the shores and wherever the land is sandy, for Tiarai is also like this. They also grow in the Abarnis around Lampsakos and in Alopekonnesos and in Elis.” Lynkeus of Samos says: “the sea sends up sea-anemone, the earth truffles.” And Matron the parodist in The Banquet: “he has sent up oysters, the truffles of Thetis the Nereid.” Diphilos says truffles are difficult to digest, but juicy and relaxing, besides being laxative, and some of them can cause you to choke, in a similar way to mushrooms. Hegesandros of Delphi says that in the Hellespont there are no truffles, no glaukiskos, and no thyme. For this reason Nausikleides said “neither spring nor friend.” Pamphilos in Dialects says that truffle-grass is the herb that grows on top of truffles, by which the truffle is discovered.’

ΥΔΝΑ. γίνεται καὶ ταῦτα αὐτόματα ἀπὸ γῆς μάλιστα περὶ τοὺς ἀμμώδεις τόπους. λέγει δὲ περὶ αὐτῶν Θεόφραστος (1, 6, 9)· ‘τὸ ὕδνον (ὃ καλοῦσί τινες γεράνειον) καὶ εἴ τι ἄλλο ὑπόγειον.’ καὶ πάλιν (fr. 167 W)· ‘καὶ ἡ τῶν ἐγγεοτόκων τούτων γένεσις ἅμα καὶ φύσις, οἷον τοῦ τε ὕδνου καὶ τοῦ φυομένου περὶ Κυρήνην ὃ καλοῦσι μίσυ. δοκεῖ δ' ἡδὺ σφόδρα τοῦτ' εἶναι καὶ τὴν ὀσμὴν ἔχειν κρεώδη, καὶ τὸ ἐν τῇ Θρᾴκῃ δὲ γενόμενον οἰτόν. περὶ δὲ τούτων ἴδιόν τι λέγεται· φασὶ γάρ, ὅταν ὕδατα μετοπωρινὰ καὶ βρονταὶ γίνωνται σκληραί, τότε γίνεσθαι, καὶ μᾶλλον ὅταν αἱ βρονταί, ὡς ταύτης αἰτιωτέρας οὔσης. οὐ διετίζειν δέ, ἀλλ' ἐπέτειον εἶναι· τὴν δὲ χρείαν καὶ τὴν ἀκμὴν ἔχειν τοῦ ἦρος. οὐ μὴν ἀλλ' ἔνιοί γε ὡς σπερματικῆς οὔσης τῆς ἀρχῆς ὑπολαμβάνουσιν. ἐν γοῦν τῷ αἰγιαλῷ τῶν Μιτυληναίων οὔ φασι πρότερον εἶναι πρὶν ἢ γενομένης ἐπομβρίας τὸ σπέρμα κατενεχθῇ ἀπὸ Τιαρῶν· τοῦτο δ' ἐστὶ χωρίον ἐν ᾧ πολλὰ γίνεται. γίνεται δὲ ἔν τε τοῖς αἰγιαλοῖς μάλιστα καὶ ὅπου χώρα ὕπαμμος· καὶ γὰρ αἱ Τιάραι τοιαῦται. φύεται δὲ καὶ περὶ Λάμψακον ἐν τῇ Ἀβαρνίδι καὶ ἐν Ἀλωπεκοννήσῳ κἀν τῇ Ἠλείων.’ Λυγκεὺς ὁ Σάμιός φησιν· ‘ἀκαλήφην ἡ θάλασσα ἀνίησιν, ἡ δὲ γῆ ὕδνα.’ καὶ Μάτρων ὁ παρῳδὸς ἐν τῷ Δείπνῳ· ὄστρεά τ' ἤνεικεν, Θέτιδος Νηρηίδος ὕδνα. Δίφιλος δὲ δύσπεπτά φησιν εἶναι τὰ ὕδνα, εὔχυλα δὲ καὶ παραλεαντικά, προσέτι δὲ διαχωρητικά, καὶ ἔνια αὐτῶν ὁμοίως τοῖς μύκαις πνιγώδη εἶναι. Ἡγήσανδρος δ' ὁ Δελφὸς ἐν Ἑλλησπόντῳ φησὶν οὔτε ὕδνον γίνεσθαι οὔτε γλαυκίσκον οὔτε θύμον· διὸ Ναυσικλείδην εἰρηκέναι μήτε ἔαρ μήτε φίλους. ὑδνόφυλλον δέ φησι Πάμφιλος ἐν Γλώσσαις τὴν φυομένην τῶν ὕδνων ὕπερθε πόαν, ἀφ' ἧς τὸ ὕδνον γινώσκεσθαι.

Athenaeus of Naucratis, The Sophists at Dinner, 2.62

*γεράνειον geraneion – perhaps from geras = “old” and neios = “fallow land”?

8. Oribasius (4th century)

“On Truffles. They have no evident quality. That’s why people use them as a base for seasonings, just as they also use the other ones they call bland and watery in taste. They all share in common that their nutriment, when it gets distributed to the body, does not heat; instead, the nutriment is a bit cool, while in thickness it is similar to whatever was eaten, thicker when it comes from truffle, relatively more watery and thinner when it comes from the others.”

Περὶ ὕδνων. Οὐδεμίαν ἔχει σαφῆ ποιότητα· χρῶνται τοιγαροῦν αὐτοῖς πρὸς ὑποδοχὴν ἀρτυμάτων, ὥσπερ καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ὅσα καλοῦσιν ἄποια καὶ ὑδατώδη κατὰ τὴν γεῦσιν. ἔστι δ' ἁπάντων αὐτῶν κοινὸν ὡς μηδὲ τὴν ἀναδιδομένην τροφὴν εἰς τὸ σῶμα θερμαίνειν, ἀλλ' ὑπόψυχρον μὲν εἶναι, τῷ πάχει δ' ὁποῖον ἄν τι καὶ τὸ ἐδηδεσμένον <ᾖ>, παχύτερον μὲν ἐξ ὕδνου, ὑγρότερον δὲ καὶ λεπτότερον ἐκ τῶν ἄλλων ἀνάλογον.

Oribasius, Medical Collections, 2.24.1 (35,5–11 Raeder)

9. Aetius of Amida (6th century)

“Truffles possess a prevalent, quite earthy substance, with some fine material in with it.”

Ὕδνα γεωδεστέραν μὲν οὐσίαν ἐπικρατοῦσαν κέκτηται, βραχέος τινὸς αὐτῇ μιγνυμένου λεπτομεροῦς.

Aetius of Amida, Medical Books, 1.397 (142,6-7 Olivieri)

10. Paul of Aegina (7th century)

“On truffles (hydna) and mushrooms (mycetai). The truffle produces a quality-less humour, but it is rather cool and thick. Mushrooms are cold and produce phlegm and bad humours. From this group, the boleti are less harmful and quality-less when they are properly boiled, while the amanitai are of the second order.* One should stay away from the other mushrooms, since many people have died from them. Even the boleti themselves are often hazardous when eaten if they are not properly boiled.”

Περὶ ὕδνων καὶ μυκήτων. Τὸ ὕδνον ἄποιον μὲν ἔχει τὸν ἀναδιδόμενον ἐξ αὐτοῦ χυμόν, ψυχρότερον δὲ καὶ παχύχυμον. οἱ δὲ μυκῆται ψυχροί τέ εἰσι καὶ φλεγματώδεις καὶ κακόχυμοι· τούτων δὲ αὐτῶν οἱ μὲν βωλῖται ἀβλαβέστεροι καὶ ἄποιοι καλῶς ἑψηθέντες, οἱ δὲ ἀμανῖται δευτέρας εἰσὶ τάξεως. τῶν δὲ ἄλλων μυκήτων ἀπέχεσθαι δεῖ· πολλοὶ γὰρ ἐξ αὐτῶν ἀπέθανον. καὶ αὐτοὶ δὲ οἱ βωλῖται ἀνεφθότεροι ἐσθιόμενοι κινδύνου παραίτιοι πολλάκις γίνονται.

Paul of Aegina, 1.77 (56,1–8 Heiberg)

Commentary by Adams. On mushroom varieties, see Athenaeus, The Sophists at Dinner, 2.56–57

11. Anonymous (late byzantine source)

“On truffles. They are quality-less and watery in taste. They are similar to amanitai. The nutriment from them produce phlegm and is cold, and if someone eats too many it produces bad humour.”

Περὶ ὕδνων. Ἄποιά εἰσι καὶ ὑδατώδη κατὰ τὴν γεῦσιν. εἰσὶ δὲ παραπλήσια τοῖς ἀμανίταις. φλεγματώδης δέ ἐστιν ἡ ἐξ αὐτῶν τροφὴ καὶ ψυχρά, καὶ εἰ πλεονάσει τις ἐν αὐτοῖς κακόχυμος.

Anonymous, On Food, chapter 74

12. Pseudo-Hippocrates (late byzantine source)

“On vegetables. Truffles and amanitai and the artichoke are productive of bad humours, difficult to digest and productive of black bile.”

Περὶ λαχάνων. […] τὰ ὕδνα καὶ οἱ ἀμανῖται καὶ ἡ κινάρα κακόχυμα καὶ δύσπεπτα καὶ μελαγχολικά.

Pseudo-Hippocrates, On the Differences of Foods to Ptolemy (De alimentorum differentiis ad Ptolemaeum), 491,9–10 Delatte (in Anecdota Atheniensia 1939)

Galen’s Commentary on Hippocrates’ Fractures

It’s almost impossible to find English translations of Galen’s Hippocratic commentaries. There’s an English translation by W. J. Lewis of Galen’s commentary on the Nature of the Human Being available at the Society for Ancient Medicine site at Cambridge; and there are English translations by Uwe Vagelpohl of Arabic translations of some of Galen’s commentaries for the Corpus Medicorum Graecorum. That’s about it for English. The situation is only marginally better for French, German, Italian and Spanish (see the CMG’s Galen catalogue).

It is frustrating because Galen’s commentaries contain a huge amount of material on Greek scholarship of the second century—not only philosophy and medicine, but literature and philology as well. They are also important parts of the reception of earlier philosophy, medicine, literature and philology, since many later scholars drew from and responded to them in Syriac, Arabic, Latin and Greek traditions. Making them more widely available in modern language translations would help to open the field up quite a bit.

As for the texts themselves, some of Galen’s commentaries have modern critical editions and are available online in Greek and / or in Arabic at the Corpus Medicorum Graecorum of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences. Some are in preparation (like Airs, Waters, Places in Arabic). Others are still to be edited, like much of the Aphorisms commentary.

A lot of in-depth scholarship is still behind paywalls. The most important study, for instance, is the 1994 contribution, “Galeno commentatore di Ippocrate” by Daniela Manetti and Amneris Roselli, to the Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt (I see De Gruyter sells the article for 30 EUR). There’s also great new work by Manetti and Roselli in a few recent volumes, as well as work by (and the following are merely examples) Hans Diller, Georg Harig and Jutta Kollesch, Geoffrey Lloyd, Mario Vegetti, Paola Manuli, Heinrich von Staden and P. N. Singer. I’d add Glenn Most’s work on ancient Greco-Roman scholarship and David Sedley’s work on commentary and philosophical allegiance to the list of important resources that are not always easy to find online (less of a necessity for now while the pandemic restrictions are being relaxed). There are surely many others.

There is however a scholarly and open-access discussion of Galen’s Hippocratic commentary and Hippocratism in a piece by Jacques Jouanna called “Galen’s Reading of the Hippocratic Treatise The Nature of Man: The Foundations of Hippocratism in Galen” from the 2012 volume of his collected papers published by Brill. And there’s the wonderful 1979 book The Hippocratic Tradition by Wesley Smith that’s available online in a special electronic edition Smith revised for BIU Santé in 2002.

Lately, I’ve been posting translations of the more programmatic or weird bits of Galen’s commentaries to try to make them a bit more accessible (also to motivate me while I write a chapter on them for a handbook). This time it’s the preface to Galen’s commentary on Hippocrates’ Fractures.

Galen’s commentary on Hippocrates’ Fractures belongs to an earlier period of Galen’s Hippocratic scholarship, when he was writing mainly at the request of friends (as in last week’s post). The period includes commentaries on Aphorisms, Fractures, Joints, Prognosis, Regimen in Acute Diseases, Wounds, Injuries of the Head, and Epidemics 1. Eventually, he says he started producing commentaries for wider publication, after he came across some particularly bad but popular commentaries written by a couple of physicians named Lycos and Julian. These are commentaries on Nature of the Human Being, Epidemics 2, Epidemics 3, Epidemics 6, Humours, Nutriment, Prorrhetic, Surgery and Airs, Waters, Places.

The preface to the commentary on Fractures is unique because it contains a summary of Galen’s reflection on interpretation (exegesis) from his lost essay On Interpretation.* In that work, Galen says he defined interpretation as the ability to make what is obscure in written texts clear. He also distinguishes two kinds of interpretation according to a distinction between two kinds of obscurity: obscurity per se and obscurity relative to the audience (perhaps drawing on Platonist categorial distinction between things that exist kath’auto and pros ti). Something is obscure per se when it implies a contradiction. Something is obscure relative to an audience when the audience is unfamiliar with the subject of the discussion.

Galen thinks the result is that interpreting something that is obscure per se will be different from interpreting something that is only obscure relative to the audience. In the latter case, Galen says he’ll nearly always clarify what is relatively obscure in the case of anatomical claims, but for the most part he’ll target people who are already fairly well trained in philosophy, literature and medicine. We also find Galen’s views on what teaching at different levels consists in.

Comments on the translation welcome.

Galen’s Commentary on Hippocrates’ Fractures, preface

“Before going on to individual interpretations, it is better to have an understanding of interpretation in general: that its capacity is to make clear whatever in written treatises is obscure. To demonstrate something written down as true, or to refute it as false—even if someone alleges [the position] was defended sophistically—is distinct from interpretation, although it is customary for just about everyone who writes commentaries to do this. And, by god, there is nothing to prevent the interpreter from touching on this in moderation, but to be completely contentious about the opinions of the author is to exceed the boundaries of interpretation. Therefore, since I am not making this my aim, but what has been mentioned, I will make concise additions to the actual interpretation for the sake of making what was said plausible.

“Nevertheless, there are two different kinds of interpretation, because obscurity itself has two kinds. I think it is better to speak about this in advance; however, I will only speak briefly about these things, like a kind of summary, since they have been discussed at length in my essay On Interpretation. In that work I showed what is actually obscure being such itself through itself, and what in itself did not arise at first, but when there happened to be many differences among readers of the discussion, either in being educated and trained in argument or completely untrained, or with respect to some people being naturally sharp and intelligent, others dull and unintelligent.

“For example, in the book under discussion, On Fractures, where Hippocrates says ‘it must then be stated which of the errors of doctors one wishes to teach, which to unteach’, the passage is obscure itself through itself, since we do not expect there to be any errors that should be taught. Similar also is this one: ‘and the extension of the joint in this configuration has been bent.’ For he is saying the bent configuration of the outstretched arm has the joint at the elbow, but it seems absurd to say that the straight has been bent.

“Nevertheless, what has been said in the following way: ‘if the hinge-like part of the humerus in the cavity of the ulna is fixed in this kind of position, it makes a line with the bones of the ulna and humerus, as if the whole were one’—if someone had observed what the bones under discussion are like, there would be no obscurity; but to someone who does not know the nature of the articulation at the elbow, the passage reasonably appears obscure.

“I think it is better to interpret all such passages, because the majority of the book's readers have not learned anatomy. Nevertheless, it is fitting to pass over what is not like this, saying to those reading this book only this much about them: if you think one of the passages I have interpreted is obscure, first look into whether your book has mistakes by comparing and collating it with the most trustworthy copies. If it appears to be correct, read the same passage a second and a third time paying precise attention to it. For when I read a book together with someone in person, I am able to target the appropriate interpretation precisely, considering on each occasion the ability of the student. But when I am writing for everyone, I do not target those who are best or worst prepared. For in the former case, the interpretation will be obscure for most people; in the latter, it will be irritating for those who have to spend a long time on things that are clear.

“I think what is best, therefore, is to target one whose ability is in the middle; but when I miss this, I rather look to those who are more capable. For in general I do not think it is valuable for those whose ability is less than mediocre to read commentaries: they must be content to understand what has been said by listening many times to their teacher give the same explanations in passage after passage.”

Πρὸ τῆς τῶν κατὰ μέρος ἐξηγήσεως ἄμεινον ἀκηκοέναι καθόλου περὶ πάσης ἐξηγήσεως, ὡς ἔστιν ἡ δύναμις αὐτῆς, ὅσα τῶν ἐν τοῖς συγγράμμασίν ἐστιν ἀσαφῆ, ταῦτ' ἐργάσασθαι σαφῆ. τὸ δ' ἀποδεῖξαί τι τῶν γεγραμμένων ὡς ἀληθὲς ἢ ὡς ψεῦδος ἐλέγξαι, καὶ εἰ κατηγόρησέ τις σοφιστικῶς ἀπολογήσασθαι, κεχώρισται μὲν ἐξηγήσεως, εἴθισται δὲ γίγνεσθαι πρὸς ἁπάντων ὡς εἰπεῖν τῶν γραφόντων ὑπομνήματα. καὶ νὴ Δία οὐδὲν κωλύει καὶ τούτου μετρίως ἅπτεσθαι τὸν ἐξηγητήν. τὸ δ' ἀγωνίζεσθαι τελέως ὑπὲρ τῶν τοῦ γράφοντος δογμάτων ἐκπέπτωκε τὸν ὅρον τῆς ἐξηγήσεως. οὐ πρὸς τοῦτον οὖν τὸν σκοπὸν, ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸν εἰρημένον ἀποβλέπων ἐγὼ προσθήσω ταῖς ὄντως ἐξηγήσεσιν ἑκάστοτε βραχέα τῆς πίστεως ἕνεκα τῶν εἰρημένων.

οὔσης μέντοι καὶ κατὰ ταύτην τὴν ἐξήγησιν διαφορᾶς διττῆς, ὅτι καὶ τὸ ἀσαφὲς αὐτὸ διττόν ἐστιν, ἄμεινον εἶναί μοι δοκεῖ καὶ περὶ τούτου προειπεῖν, εἰρήσεται δὲ καὶ αὐτὰ ταῦτα διὰ βραχέων, οἷον ἐπιτομή τις, ὧν ἰδίᾳ λέλεκται διὰ μακροτέρων ἐν τῷ περὶ ἐξηγήσεως ὑπομνήματι. δέδεικται δὲ ἐν ἐκείνῳ τὸ μὲν ὄντως ἀσαφὲς αὐτὸ δι' ἑαυτὸ τοιοῦτον ὑπάρχον, τὸ δὲ ἐν αὐτῷ πρότερον τὴν γένεσιν οὐκ ἔχον, ἐπειδὴ τῶν ἀκουόντων τοῦ λόγου διαφοραὶ πάμπολλαι τυγχάνουσιν οὖσαι κατά τε τὸ προπαιδεύεσθαι καὶ γεγυμνάσθαι περὶ λόγους ἢ παντάπασί γε ἀγυμνάστους ὑπάρχειν, εἶναί τε φύσει τοὺς μὲν ὀξεῖς τε καὶ συνετοὺς, τοὺς δὲ ἀμβλεῖς καὶ ἀσυνέτους.

αὐτίκα γοῦν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ προκειμένῳ βιβλίῳ τῷ περὶ τῶν καταγμάτων, ἔνθα μέν φησιν ὁ Ἱπποκράτης· ῥητέον οὖν ὁκόσας ἂν ἐθέλει τῶν ἁμαρτάδων τῶν ἰητρῶν τὰς μὲν διδάξαι, τὰς δὲ ἀποδιδάξαι, τὴν ἀσάφειαν ἔχει αὐτὴ δι' ἑαυτὴν ἡ λέξις, οὐ προσδεχομένων ἡμῶν εἶναί τινας ἁμαρτίας, ἃς διδάξαι χρὴ, τοιοῦτόν ἐστι κἀκεῖνο· καὶ ἡ ἀνάτασις τοῦ ἄρθρου κέκλασται ἐν τουτέῳ τῷ σχήματι. τὸ γὰρ ἐκτεταμένης τῆς χειρὸς σχῆμα κεκλασμένον, φησὶν, ἔχει τὸ ἄρθρον τὸ κατ' ἀγκῶνα. δοκεῖ δὲ τοῦτ' ἄτοπον εἶναι κεκλάσθαι φάναι τὸ εὐθύ.

τὸ μέντοι λελεγμένον οὕτως· εἰ τοῦ βραχίονος τὸ γιγγλυμοειδὲς ἐν τῇ τοῦ πήχεος βαθμίδι, ἐν τοιουτέῳ τῷ σχήματι ἐρεῖδον, ἰθυωρίην ποιέει τοῖσιν ὀστέοισι τοῦ πήχεος καὶ τοῦ βραχίονος, ὡς ἓν εἴη τὸ πᾶν. εἰ μέντοι τις ἑώρακεν ὁποῖόν ἐστι τῶν ὀστῶν ἑκάτερον, ὑπὲρ ὧν ὁ λόγος ἐστὶν, οὐδεμίαν ἀσάφειαν ἔχει. τῷ δ' ἀγνοοῦντι τῆς κατ' ἀγκῶνα διαρθρώσεως τὴν φύσιν ἀσαφὴς εἰκότως ἡ λέξις φαίνεται.

δοκεῖ δέ μοι βέλτιον εἶναι καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα πάντα ἐξηγεῖσθαι, διὰ τὸ τοὺς πλείστους τῶν ἀναγινωσκόντων τὸ βιβλίον ἀμαθεῖς ἀνατομῆς εἶναι. τὰ μέντοι μηδὲν ἐχόντων τοιοῦτον παρέρχεσθαι προσήκει, τοσοῦτον προειπόντα περὶ αὐτῶν ἔτι τοῖς ἀναγνωσομένοις τὸ βιβλίον, ἐάν τινα λέξιν ὧν ἐξηγησάμην ἀσαφὲς ἔχειν τι νομίσῃς, ἐπίσκεψαι μὲν πρῶτον εἰ μὲν τὸ βιβλίον ἡμάρτηταί σου παραβάλλων τε καὶ ἀντεξετάζων τοῖς ἀξιοπίστοις ἀντιγράφοις· εἶτ' ἂν ὀρθῶς ἔχειν φαίνηται, δεύτερόν τε καὶ τρίτον ἀνάγνωθι τὴν αὐτὴν λέξιν προσέχων ἀκριβῶς αὐτῇ τὸν νοῦν. ἐγὼ γὰρ ὅταν μὲν παρὼν παρόντι συναναγινώσκω τι βιβλίον, ἀκριβῶς στοχάζεσθαι δύναμαι τοῦ μέτρου τῆς ἐξηγήσεως, ἀποβλέπων ἑκάστοτε πρὸς τὴν τοῦ μανθάνοντος ἕξιν. ὅταν δὲ γράφω πᾶσιν, οὔτε τοῦ ἄριστα παρεσκευασμένου οὔτε τοῦ χείριστα στοχάζομαι. τὸ μὲν γὰρ τοῖς πλείστοις ἀσαφὲς ἔσται, τὸ δὲ ἀνιᾶται χρονίζοντας ἐν τοῖς σαφέσιν.

ἄριστον οὖν ἡγοῦμαι τῶν μέσην ἕξιν ἐχόντων στοχάζεσθαι· τούτου δὲ ἀποτυγχάνων ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκτικωτέρους ἐπόπτειν μᾶλλον. οὐδὲ γὰρ ὅλως ὑπομνήμασιν ἐντυγχάνειν ἀξιῶ, τοὺς κατωτέρους τῆς μέσης ἕξεως, οἷς ἀγαπητόν ἐστι παρὰ διδασκάλων ἀκούσασι πολλάκις τὰ αὐτὰ κατ' ἄλλην καὶ ἄλλην λέξιν ἑρμηνευόμενα συνιέναι τῶν λεγομένων.

Gal. Hipp. Frac. 18B 318–322 K.

Two reasons Galen wrote commentaries

Because his friends asked him to.

“You have two treatises [by me] which contain everything to do with critical days and crises—for I’m saying this to you, my friends, who compelled me against my better judgment to write commentaries on the works of Hippocrates. Keep in mind that I also wrote those works (sc. on critical days and crises) not intending that they would be distributed, but that they would be for you alone, but they happened to get out and into the hands of many people, just like many others I’ve written for you. That’s why I preferred not to interpret any of Hippocrates’ books in written commentaries. For whatever one needs to learn from him that is useful for the art has been written down by me in many treatises along with the appropriate interpretations [of Hippocrates].

“But since some of the passages that were not expressed very clearly [in Hippocrates’ writings] received a bad interpretation, so that none of those who wrote commentaries satisfied you, and you thought I was better than they were at figuring out Hippocrates’ thought, for this reason you asked me to provide for you in writing what you heard me say in my lectures. And I said the same thing to you earlier, that the interpretations will necessarily be uneven, since I won’t be interpreting all the passages equally, but I will speak more thoroughly about those that I haven’t mentioned in any of my other treatises, while I will speak in summary about those I’ve already gone through in detail elsewhere, so that I’m not forced to write about the same things many times.”

Δύο πραγματείας ἔχετε (πρὸς ὑμᾶς γὰρ λέγω τοῦτο τοὺς ἑταίρους, ὅσοι κατηναγκάσατέ με μὴ προῃρημένον ἐξηγήσεις γράψαι τῶν Ἱπποκράτους συγγραμμάτων), ἐν αἷς ἅπαντα περί τε κρισίμων ἡμερῶν εἴρηται καὶ κρίσεων. ἴστε δ’ ὅτι καὶ αὐτὰς οὐχ ὡς ἐκδοθησομένας, ἀλλ’ ὡς παρ’ ὑμῖν μόνοις ἐσομένας ἔγραψα. συνέβη δ’ ἐκπεσεῖν αὐτὰς καὶ παρὰ πολλοῖς εἶναι, καθάπερ καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τῶν ὑμῖν γενομένων. ὅθεν οὐδ’ ἐξηγεῖσθαι προῃρούμην ἐν ὑπομνήμασιν οὐδὲν τῶν Ἱπποκράτους βιβλίων. ὅσα γὰρ εἰς τὴν τέχνην χρήσιμα παρ’ αὐτοῦ μαθεῖν ἔδει, γέγραπταί μοι κατὰ πολλὰς πραγματείας ἅμα ταῖς οἰκείαις ἐξηγήσεσιν.

ἐπεὶ δ’ ἔνιαι τῶν λέξεων ἀσαφέστερον εἰρημέναι μοχθηρᾶς ἐξηγήσεως ἔτυχον, ὡς ἀρέσκειν ὑμῖν μηδένα τῶν γραψάντων ὑπομνήματα, βέλτιον δὲ αὐτῶν στοχάσασθαι τῆς Ἱπποκράτους γνώμης ἐδόκουν ὑμῖν ἐγώ, διὰ τοῦτό με καὶ διὰ γραμμάτων ἠξιώσατε, παρασχεῖν ὑμῖν, ἅπερ ἐν ταῖς διὰ λόγων συνουσίαις ἠκούσατε. κἀγὼ τοῦτ’ αὐτὸ προεῖπον ὑμῖν, ὡς ἀναγκαῖον ἔσται τὰς ἐξηγήσεις ἀνωμάλους ἔσεσθαι μὴ πάσας ὁμοίως ἐξηγουμένου μου τὰς λέξεις, ἀλλὰ τελεώτερον μέν, ὑπὲρ ὧν οὐδαμόθι τῶν ἐμῶν πραγματειῶν ἐμνημόνευσα, διὰ κεφαλαίων δέ, περὶ ὧν ἤδη τελέως ἐν ἐκείναις διῆλθον, ἵνα μὴ πολλάκις ὑπὲρ τῶν αὐτῶν πραγμάτων ἀναγκάζωμαι γράφειν.

Gal. Hipp. Prog. 3.6, 18B.229–231 K. = 328,4–22 Heeg

Because he would be criticized if he didn’t.

“Well, let them say these things, but let them not falsely accuse Herophilus, nor intimidate with a sacred name those who are ignorant of Herophilus’ writings, nor use it to contrive trust in their argument. For it is shameful to dispute something on the basis of witnesses as if one were in a court of law. If you are able to argue towards a demonstration, I’ll gladly listen to you, but to call on Herophilus and the Herophileans as witnesses is to run away from a direct dispute and argument, and for fear of refutation invent evasions and deceptions.

“Clearly, false witnesses are brought in for the sake of a story, not in order to inquire into the matter further. ‘Does Herophilus say this?’ ‘Certainly not.’ ‘But doesn’t that mean you are lying?’ ‘Why don’t you show that I’m lying, show what he says.’ And then some kind of ambiguous passage is presented and there is a fight about what the passage says and what it means. Suddenly, rhetorical exercises on language and meaning are being rolled out, then others on ambiguity and, by Zeus, on inference. But they even apply the whole theory of rhetoric, as if they were practicing a speech, not bringing the subject to a conclusion. For what hasn’t been said by modern doctors about this question, some maintaining that Herophilus also knows this differentia of the pulse, others trying to show that he does not know it?

“Well, both groups have had a hard life and deserve to be pitied, the first for their ignorance, the second for their competitiveness. But we also have a hard life, since it is not enough for us to practice the proper theoretical study of the art, but we want to know what Herophilus said, what Heraclides, Chrysermus, and Hegetor interpreted incorrectly, and what Apollonius and Bacchius and Aristoxenus said. And even if we do not want to, at any rate we are forced to do it and we get to enjoy both troubles: that we get involved in this nonsense when it is unnecessary and that we unwillingly act like they do. Now it turns out that I must do one of two things: either appear to say the opposite of Archigenes, Herophilus and countless others, or show that there is no full pulse according to Herophilus.

“If, therefore, I had chosen this task, I would be just as blameworthy as they are for the vanity of the study; however, as the case stands, having refuted their opinion according to the actual truth of the matter, I will let those people leave who are interested in the practice of the art itself, since we’ve already completed our inquiry into the subject. Anyone who wants and has time to learn about ancient history, I will add the whole thing, showing that Herophilus does not use the term ‘the full pulse’ anywhere for anything.”

ταῦτ’ οὖν αὐτοὶ μὲν λεγέτωσαν, Ἡροφίλου δὲ μὴ καταψευδέσθωσαν, μηδὲ δυσωπείτωσαν ὀνόματι σεμνῷ τοὺς ἀμαθεῖς τῶν Ἡροφίλου γραμμάτων, μηδ’ ἐκ τούτου τὴν πίστιν τῷ λόγῳ ποριζέσθωσαν. αἰσχρὸν γὰρ ἐπὶ μαρτύρων ἀγωνίζεσθαι, καθάπερ ἐν δικαστηρίῳ. εἰ λέγειν ἔχεις εἰς ἀπόδειξιν, ἡδέως ἀκουσόμεθά σου. τὸ δ’ Ἡρόφιλόν τε καὶ Ἡροφιλείους καλεῖν μάρτυρας, ἀποδιδράσκοντός ἐστι τὸν ἐξ εὐθείας ἀγῶνα καὶ λόγον καὶ διαδύσεις τε καὶ μηχανὰς ἐξευρίσκοντος ἐλέγχου φόβῳ.

δῆλον, ὡς ἕνεκα τοῦ μὴ περὶ πράγματος ἔτι ζητεῖν, ἀλλ’ ἱστορίας οἱ κατεψευσμένοι μάρτυρες ἐπεισάγονται. λέγει τοῦθ’ Ἡρόφιλος; οὐ μὲν οὖν. ἀλλὰ οὐδὲ ψεύσῃ; δεῖξον πῶς ψεύδομαι, δεῖξον πῶς λέγει. κᾄπειτα λέξις, εἰ οὕτως ἔτυχεν, ἀμφίβολος προβάλλεται καὶ πόλεμος ἄμφ’ αὐτῇ συνίσταται, τί ποθ’ ἡ λέξις λέγει καὶ τί ποτε βούλεται, καὶ κατὰ ῥητὸν ἤδη καὶ διάνοιαν ἐπιχειρήματα ῥητορικὰ καλινδεῖται, καὶ κατ’ ἀμφιβολίαν ἕτερα καὶ κατὰ συλλογισμοὺς νὴ Δία. ἀλλὰ καὶ πᾶσαν οὕτω μεταφέρουσιν τὴν ῥητορικὴν, ὥσπερ ὑπόθεσιν μελετῶντες, οὐ τὸ προκείμενον περαίνοντες. τί γὰρ οὐκ εἴρηται τοῖς νεωτέροις ἰατροῖς εἰς τὸ πρόβλημα, τοῖς μὲν κατασκευάζουσιν ἐπίστασθαι τὸν Ἡρόφιλον καὶ ταύτην τοῦ σφυγμοῦ τὴν διαφορὰν, τοῖς δ’ ὡς οὐκ οἶδεν ἐγχειροῦσι δεικνύειν;

ἀταλαίπωροι μὲν οὖν ἑκάτεροι καὶ ἐλεεῖσθαι δίκαιοι, τῆς μὲν ἀμαθείας οἱ πρότεροι, τῆς φιλονεικίας δ’ οἱ δεύτεροι. ἀταλαίπωροι δὲ καὶ ἡμεῖς, οἷς γε οὐκ ἀρκεῖ τὴν ἰδίαν ἀσκεῖν θεωρίαν τῆς τέχνης, ἀλλὰ τί μὲν Ἡρόφιλος εἶπεν, τί δ’ Ἡρακλείδης τε καὶ Χρύσερμος καὶ Ἡγήτωρ οὐκ ὀρθῶς ἐξηγήσαντο, τί δ’ ἂν εἶπεν Ἀπολλώνιός τε καὶ Βακχεῖος καὶ Ἀριστόξενος εἰδέναι βουλόμεθα. καὶ εἰ μὴ βουλόμεθα δὲ, πάντως ἀναγκαζόμεθα καὶ διττῶν ἀπολαύομεν κακῶν, ὅτι τε φλυαροῦμεν οὐδὲν δέον ὅτι τε μὴ βουλόμενοι τοῦτο δρῶμεν, ὥσπερ ἐκεῖνοι· νῦν γοῦν ἐμὲ δεῖ δυοῖν θάτερον, ἢ δοκεῖν Ἀρχιγένει τε καὶ Ἡροφίλῳ καὶ μυρίοις ἄλλοις τἀναντία λέγειν, ἢ δεικνύειν, ὅτι καθ’ Ἡρόφιλον οὐδείς ἐστι πλήρης σφυγμός.

εἰ μὲν οὖν ὡς ἔργον αὐτὸ προὐχειρισάμην, ἦν ἂν ὁμοίως ἐκείνοις ἄξιος μέμψεως ἐπὶ τῇ ματαίᾳ σπουδῇ· νυνὶ δὲ κατ’ αὐτὴν τῶν πραγμάτων τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἐξελέγξας αὐτῶν τὴν δόξαν, τοὺς μὲν πρὸς αὐτὰ τὰ ἔργα τῆς τέχνης σπεύδοντας ἀπολύσω πρὸς ἐκεῖνα, συντετελεσμένης ἡμῖν ἤδη τῆς προκειμένης ζητήσεως. ὅσοι δὲ καὶ ἱστορίαν ἐκμανθάνειν παλαιὰν ἐθέλουσι, καὶ χρόνον εἰς τοῦτ’ ἔχουσιν, ἅπαντα προσθήσω, δεικνὺς ὅτι μηδαμοῦ χρῆται πρὸς μηδὲν Ἡρόφιλος τῷ πλήρει σφυγμῷ.

Gal. Dig. Puls. 4.3, 8.954–956 K.

Bathing with Galen's Friend

“In fact, someone recently asked me why we urinate cold urine in the baths, but hot outside them. He did not understand that urine itself is equally warm both in the baths and out of them, and that it is the surface of one's body that is not in the same state while bathing and before. For when we are bathing, our body's surface is warmer than the urine, but outside it is colder, so it's reasonable that the urine seems hot to it when outside the bath, but cold inside.”

καί τις ἔναγχος ἡμῖν προὔβαλε διὰ τί ψυχρὸν μὲν ἐν τοῖς βαλανείοις οὐροῦμεν, ἔξω δὲ θερμὸν, οὐ παρακολουθῶν ὅτι τὸ μὲν οὖρον αὐτὸ χλιαρὸν ὁμοίως ἐστὶν ἔν τε τοῖς βαλανείοις κᾀκτὸς, ἡμεῖς δὲ οὐχ ὡσαύτως διακείμεθα τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν τοῦ σώματος ἔν τε τῷ λούεσθαι καὶ πρὸ τούτου. λουόμενοι μὲν γὰρ θερμοτέραν ἔχομεν αὐτὴν ἢ κατὰ τὸ οὖρον, ἔξω δὲ ψυχροτέραν· ὥστε εὐλόγως αὐτῇ καὶ τὸ οὖρον ἔξω μὲν τοῦ βαλανείου θερμὸν, ἔνδον δὲ ψυχρὸν φαίνεται.

Galen, Simple Drugs 3.8, 11.554–555 Kühn

Aristotle on wine-drunk vs. beer-drunk

“Hellanikos says the grape vine was first discovered in Plinthine, a city in Egypt, which is why Dio from the Academy says the Egyptians became lovers of wine and drinking. They also discovered a remedy for those who, because of poverty, couldn’t afford wine, by giving them a drink made from barley. And the people who took this were given such pleasure that they sang and danced and acted in every way like those who drank lots of wine. Aristotle, however, says that those who get drunk on wine fall forward onto their faces, while those who have been drinking beer fall back onto their heads, for wine makes one’s head heavy, while beer causes stupor.”

Ἑλλάνικος δέ φησιν ἐν τῇ Πλινθίνῃ πόλει Αἰγύπτου πρώτῃ εὑρεθῆναι τὴν ἄμπελον. διὸ καὶ Δίων ὁ ἐξ Ἀκαδημίας φιλοίνους καὶ φιλοπότας τοὺς Αἰγυπτίους γενέσθαι: εὑρεθῆναί τε βοήθημα παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς ὥστε τοὺς διὰ πενίαν ἀποροῦντας οἴνου τὸν ἐκ τῶν κριθῶν γενόμενον πίνειν: καὶ οὕτως ἥδεσθαι τοὺς τοῦτον προσφερομένους ὡς καὶ ᾁδειν καὶ ὀρχεῖσθαι καὶ πάντα ποιεῖν ὅσα τοὺς ἐξοίνους γινομένους. Ἀριστοτέλης δέ φησιν ὅτι οἱ μὲν ὑπ᾽ οἴνου μεθυσθέντες ἐπὶ πρόσωπον φέρονται, οἱ δὲ τὸν κρίθινον πεπωκότες ἐξυπτιάζονται τὴν κεφαλήν: ὁ μὲν γὰρ οἶνος καρηβαρικός, ὁ δὲ κρίθινος καρωτικός.

Athenaeus, The Sophists at Dinner, 1.61

Two Texts on Scent: Aristotle and Theophrastus

“Since there is an odd number of senses, and since an odd number always has a middle, it seems the sense of smell is itself in the middle between the haptic senses, i.e. touch and taste, and the mediated senses, i.e. sight and hearing. For this reason smell is also a certain affection both of things that are nourishing (for these are in the class of haptic things) and of things that are audible and visible, which is why [animals] smell in both air and water. Thus, the object of smell is something common to both of these classes, belonging to the haptic, and to the audible and transparent. That’s also why scent has reasonably been compared to a kind of dye-bath and a washing of the dry in the moist and liquid.”

ἔοικε δ' ἡ αἴσθησις ἡ τοῦ ὀσφραίνεσθαι, περιττῶν οὐσῶν τῶν αἰσθήσεων καὶ τοῦ ἀριθμοῦ ἔχοντος μέσον τοῦ περιττοῦ, καὶ αὐτὴ μέση εἶναι τῶν τε ἁπτικῶν, οἷον ἁφῆς καὶ γεύσεως, καὶ τῶν δι' ἄλλου αἰσθητικῶν, οἷον ὄψεως καὶ ἀκοῆς. διὸ καὶ τὸ ὀσφραντὸν τῶν θρεπτικῶν ἐστὶ πάθος τι (ταῦτα δ' ἐν τῷ ἁπτῷ γένει), καὶ τοῦ ἀκουστοῦ δὲ καὶ τοῦ ὁρατοῦ, διὸ καὶ ἐν ἀέρι καὶ ἐν ὕδατι ὀσμῶνται. ὥστ' ἐστὶ τὸ ὀσφραντὸν κοινόν τι τούτων ἀμφοτέρων, καὶ τῷ τε ἁπτῷ ὑπάρχει καὶ τῷ ἀκουστῷ καὶ τῷ διαφανεῖ· διὸ καὶ εὐλόγως παρείκασται ξηρότητος ἐν ὑγρῷ καὶ χυτῷ οἷον βαφή τις εἶναι καὶ πλύσις.

Aristotle, On Sense and Sensible Objects, 5.27–28, 445a4–445a14

“They use aromatics for all perfumes. With some they treat the oil as with a mordant [ἐπιστύφοντες], with others they impart the scent derived from them. For in all cases they treat the oil as with a mordant [ὑποστύφουσι] in order that the oil might become more receptive to the scent, just like wool into a dye-bath. They use the weaker of the aromatics as a mordant, then later they add the one whose scent they wish to preserve. For the last one added always dominates, even if it is not much in quantity. For example, if someone were to add a mna of myrrh into a kotyle of oil, and later add two drachmas of cinnamon, the two drachmas of cinnamon would dominate.'“

Χρῶνται δὲ πρὸς πάντα τοῖς ἀρώμασι, τοῖς μὲν ἐπιστύφοντες τὸ ἔλαιον τοῖς δὲ καὶ τὴν ὀσμὴν ἐκ τούτων ἐμποιοῦντες. Ὑποστύφουσι γὰρ πᾶν εἰς τὸ δέξασθαι μᾶλλον τὴν ὀσμὴν ὥσπερ τὰ ἔρια εἰς τὴν βαφήν. Ὑποστύφεται δὲ τοῖς ἀσθενεστέροις τῶν ἀρωμάτων, εἶθ' ὕστερον ἐμβάλλουσιν ἀφ' οὗ ἂν βούλωνται τὴν ὀσμὴν λαβεῖν· ἐπικρατεῖ γὰρ ἀεὶ τὸ ἔσχατον ἐμβαλλόμενον καὶ ἂν ἔλαττον ᾖ· οἷον ἐὰν εἰς κοτύλην σμύρνης ἐμβληθῇ μνᾶ καὶ ὕστερον ἐμβληθῶσι κιναμώμου δραχμαὶ δύο, κρατοῦσιν αἱ τοῦ κιναμώμου δύο δραχμαί.

Theophrastus, On Scents, 4.17

What doctors say they saw

“For instance, I have seen people who, having slit their own throats, have completely severed the windpipe. Sometimes they live, but they cannot speak unless someone closes their windpipe—then they can speak.”

εἶδον δὲ ἤδη οἳ, σφάξαντες ἑωυτοὺς, ἀπέταμον τὸν φάρυγγα παντάπασιν· οὗτοι ζῶσι μὲν, φθέγγονται δὲ οὐδὲν, εἰ μή τις συλλάβῃ τὸν φάρυγγα· οὕτω δὲ φθέγγονται·

Fleshes 18

“Firstly, when the seed enters the womb, after seven days it develops all the parts the body is going to have. Now, you might wonder how I know this, but I have seen many things in the following way. The common prostitutes who have a lot of experience with these things, when they have had sex with a man, know when they’ve conceived in the womb, and then they destroy it. When it is actually destroyed, it falls out as flesh. When you put this flesh into water and examine it in the water, you will find it has all its parts: the eye sockets, the ears and limbs, also the fingers of the hands, the legs, the feet and the toes and the genitals and the whole rest of the body is evident.”

ὁ δὲ αἰών ἐστι τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἑπταήμερος. πρῶτον μὲν ἐπὴν ἐς τὰς μήτρας ἔλθῃ ὁ γόνος, ἐν ἑπτὰ ἡμέρῃσιν ἔχει ὁκόσα περ ἐστὶν ἔχειν τοῦ σώματος· τοῦτο δέ τις ἂν θαυμάσειεν ὅκως ἐγὼ οἶδα· πολλὰ δὲ εἶδον τρόπῳ τοιῷδε· αἱ ἑταῖραι αἱ δημόσιαι, αἵτινες αὐτέων πεπείρηνται πολλάκις, ὁκόταν παρὰ ἄνδρα ἔλθῃ, γινώσκουσιν ὁκόταν λάβωσιν ἐν γαστρί· κἄπειτ' ἐνδιαφθείρουσιν· ἐπειδὰν δὲ ἤδη διαφθαρῇ, ἐκπίπτει ὥσπερ σάρξ· ταύτην τὴν σάρκα ἐς ὕδωρ ἐμβαλὼν, σκεπτόμενος ἐν τῷ ὕδατι, εὑρήσεις ἔχειν πάντα μέλεα καὶ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν τὰς χώρας καὶ τὰ οὔατα καὶ τὰ γυῖα· καὶ τῶν χειρῶν οἱ δάκτυλοι καὶ τὰ σκέλεα καὶ οἱ πόδες καὶ οἱ δάκτυλοι τῶν ποδῶν, καὶ τὸ αἰδοῖον καὶ τὸ ἄλλο πᾶν σῶμα δῆλον.

Fleshes 19

“And clothes that are tied up together and fixed tightly with a stick are burnt up by themselves, as I have actually seen, as if they were burnt up by fire.”

καὶ ἱμάτια συνδεδεμένα καὶ κατεσφηνωμένα ἰσχυρῶς δορὶ κατακαίεται ὑπὸ σφέων αὐτῶν, ὡς ἐγὼ ἤδη εἶδον, ὥσπερ ὑπὸ πυρὸς ἐκκαέντα.

Nature of the Child 24

Galen on Sleep, Health and Heartbreak

More of Galen’s comments on the aphorism attributed to Hippocrates:

“The kinds of habits that influence our health: diet, shelter, work, sleep, sex, thought.”

ἔθος δὲ, ἐξ οἵων ὑγιαίνομεν, διαίτῃσι, σκέπῃσι, πόνοισιν, ὕπνοισιν, ἀφροδισίοισι, γνώμῃ.

Epidemics 6.8.23

Other cases: Maiandros, the augur who predicted his own death; a Cappadocian man who thought the sky would fall.

“In Rome, I recently saw a grammarian named Kallistos whose books were destroyed in the Great Fire that had burned the Temple of Peace. He grieved about this and could no longer sleep. First, he was taken with fever, and then, in just a short time, he wasted away until he died. I have seen quite a number of people like this—whose bodies waste away, be it from grief or from a bad mental state. I will limit myself to a few cases, because their number is too large. First, I mention the story of the mother of the lawyer Nasutus. The story of this woman is as follows. She received news that a woman she loved very much, who was seventy years old, was going by invitation to another place. She arrived there and returned home after having made the long journey. When she returned, she lay down on the bed and asked for some water to drink. The servant replied, “I'll bring it to you right away,” but she fell asleep before the servant returned with the water. By then, some time had passed without the people around the woman noticing anything. When, however, they called to her, she gave no answer. The servants were then compelled to shake her, but she did not wake up. They examined her and touched her body to see what had happened. Her whole body was cold and it was clear that she was dead. They covered her with the clothes in which she had died. When the mother of Nasutus found out about this, it went to her heart so much that she could no longer sleep the way she usually used to do, and eventually she could no longer sleep at all. Her body wasted away from insomnia. She began to have a fever and four days after the news of her friend’s death, she too passed away.”

In Rom sah ich vor kurzem einen Grammatiker, namens Kallistos, dem seine Bücher bei dem großen Brand in Rom, bei dem der Tempel, der “Tempel des Friedens” heißt, verbrannte, vernichtet wurden. Darüber grämte er sich und fand keinen Schlaf mehr. Zuerst begannen bei ihm Fieber, und dann in nicht langer Zeit siechte er dahin, bis er starb. Ich habe noch eine ganze Anzahl derartiger Menschen gesehen, deren Körper dahinsiechte, sei es aus Gram oder einer schlechten Geistesverfassung. Ich beschränke mich auf ein paar Fälle, da ihre Zahl ja zu groß ist. Zuerst erwähne ich die Geschichte der Mutter des Rechtsgelehrten Nasutus. Die Geschichte dieser Frau ist folgende: Sie erhielt die Nachricht, daß eine Frau, die sie sehr liebte und die siebzig Jahre alt war, nach einem anderen Orte auf eine Einladung hin ging. Sie war dort eingetroffen und auch wieder zurückgekehrt, nachdem sie den weiten Weg gemacht hatte. Nach ihrer Rückkehr hatte sie sich auf das Bett gelegt und verlangte etwas Wasser zu trinken. Der Diener hatte geantwortet: “Ich bringe es dir sofort.” Sie schlief aber ein, bevor der Diener mit dem Wasser zurück war. Es verging nun einige Zeit, ohne daß die Leute um die Frau etwas gemerkt hatten. Dann aber riefen sie sie an, aber sie gab keine Antwort. Die Diener sahen sich deshalb gezwungen, sie zu rütteln. Sie wachte aber nicht auf. Sie machten sich nun daran, die Sache zu untersuchen, und befühlten sie, um zu sehen, was mit ihr vorgegangen war. Ihr ganzer Körper war kalt, und es war klar, daß sie tot war. Sie deckten sie mit dem Kleid zu, in dem sie gestorben war. Als die Mutter des Nasutus dies erfuhr, ging es ihr so zu Herzen, daß sie sich nicht mehr zum Schlafen niederlegen konnte, wie sie es sonst gewöhnt war, und überhaupt keinen Schlaf mehr finden konnte. Da siechte auch ihr Körper infolge der Schlaflosigkeit dahin. Sie begann zu fiebern, und schon nach vier Tagen seit der Todesnachricht verschied auch sie.*

Galen, Commentary on Hippocrates‘ Epidemics 6.8, 486,19-487,12 Wenkebach/Pfaff

*Pfaff’s German translation of Hunayn’s school’s Arabic translation (the Greek is lost).