Interpreting dreams for corrective regimen: Diagnostic dreams in Greco-Roman medicine

Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences

Volumn 56, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 382-399

  Holowchak, M Andrew ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; DREAM; HISTORY; HISTORY OF MEDICINE; HUMAN; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT;

DREAMS; GREEK WORLD; HISTORY OF MEDICINE, ANCIENT; HUMAN; ROMAN WORLD;

EID: 0035490447     PISSN: 00225045     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jhmas/56.4.382     Document Type: Article

References (104)

1. Owsei Temkin, Hippocrates in a World of Pagans and Christians (Baltimore, Md.: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991), ix-xii, 5-6, 39-75.
2. Ibid., xi; G. E. R. Lloyd, "Introduction," Hippocratic Writings (New York: Penguin Books, 1983), pp. 9-59.
3. Ibid., xi; G. E. R. Lloyd, "Introduction," Hippocratic Writings (New York: Penguin Books, 1983), pp. 9-59.
4. Hippocrates The Science of Medicine III in G. E. R. Lloyd, ed., trans. J. Chadwick and W. N. Mann, eds., Hippocratic Writings (New York: Penguin Books, 1983), pp. 139-147. All subsequent translations, unless otherwise specified, are my own.
5. Perhaps this is a means of showing medicine to be a science greater than divination. Hippocrates, On Prognosis I in W. H. S. Jones, trans., Hippocrates, vol. II, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1923), pp. 6-9 [hereafter cited as Hippocrates].
6. Hippocrates, The Oath and Precepts in Hippocrates, I, 1923, 289-332.
7. Hippocrates, Ancient Medicine III in Hippocrates, I, 1923, 16-19; Hippocrates, Airs, Waters, Places in ibid., pp. 65-138.
8. Hippocrates, Ancient Medicine III in Hippocrates, I, 1923, 16-19; Hippocrates, Airs, Waters, Places in ibid., pp. 65-138.
9. Hippocrates, Decorum in Hippocrates, II, 1923, 278-301;
10. The Canon in Lloyd, (n. 3) Writings, pp. 68-69.
11. Galen believed that the majority of the treatises we now have were indeed written by Hippocrates and ascribes the theory of the four humors to Hippocrates. See Galen, On the Natural Faculties 1.2, Arthur John Brock, trans. (Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., 1952), p. 168.
12. The author of Regimen mentions only fire (hot and dry) and water (cold and wet). See Hippocrates, Regimen in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 246-47. The most important of these humors for disease were bile and phlegm (On Illness I & Disease II in Paul Potter, trans., Hippocrates, V, 1988, 6-7, 190-333. Ancient Medicine XVI states that the hot and the cold are the weakest of the four powers (Hippocrates, I, 1923, 42-43). The notion of elemental balance (here, the humors) is certainly influenced by Heraclitean ethics, epistemology, and metaphysics and is characteristic of Greco-Roman ethics, especially Aristotle's Nicomachcan Ethics.
13. The author of Regimen mentions only fire (hot and dry) and water (cold and wet). See Hippocrates, Regimen in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 246-47. The most important of these humors for disease were bile and phlegm (On Illness I & Disease II in Paul Potter, trans., Hippocrates, V, 1988, 6-7, 190-333. Ancient Medicine XVI states that the hot and the cold are the weakest of the four powers (Hippocrates, I, 1923, 42-43). The notion of elemental balance (here, the humors) is certainly influenced by Heraclitean ethics, epistemology, and metaphysics and is characteristic of Greco-Roman ethics, especially Aristotle's Nicomachcan Ethics.
14. The author of Regimen mentions only fire (hot and dry) and water (cold and wet). See Hippocrates, Regimen in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 246-47. The most important of these humors for disease were bile and phlegm (On Illness I & Disease II in Paul Potter, trans., Hippocrates, V, 1988, 6-7, 190-333. Ancient Medicine XVI states that the hot and the cold are the weakest of the four powers (Hippocrates, I, 1923, 42-43). The notion of elemental balance (here, the humors) is certainly influenced by Heraclitean ethics, epistemology, and metaphysics and is characteristic of Greco-Roman ethics, especially Aristotle's Nicomachcan Ethics.
15. The author of Regimen mentions only fire (hot and dry) and water (cold and wet). See Hippocrates, Regimen in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 246-47. The most important of these humors for disease were bile and phlegm (On Illness I & Disease II in Paul Potter, trans., Hippocrates, V, 1988, 6-7, 190-333. Ancient Medicine XVI states that the hot and the cold are the weakest of the four powers (Hippocrates, I, 1923, 42-43). The notion of elemental balance (here, the humors) is certainly influenced by Heraclitean ethics, epistemology, and metaphysics and is characteristic of Greco-Roman ethics, especially Aristotle's Nicomachcan Ethics.
16. Shown by the case histories documented in Epidemics III (Hippocrates, I, 1923, 218-89). Ancient Medicine XI-XII cautions that the many failures of medicine should not count against its scientific status, since over the years of investigation great discoveries had been made (Hippocrates, I, 1923, 30-33. The Art III and On Prognosis I flatly advise physicians not to take up hopeless cases (Hippocrates, II, 1923, 6-8, 192-95).
17. Shown by the case histories documented in Epidemics III (Hippocrates, I, 1923, 218-89). Ancient Medicine XI-XII cautions that the many failures of medicine should not count against its scientific status, since over the years of investigation great discoveries had been made (Hippocrates, I, 1923, 30-33. The Art III and On Prognosis I flatly advise physicians not to take up hopeless cases (Hippocrates, II, 1923, 6-8, 192-95).
18. Shown by the case histories documented in Epidemics III (Hippocrates, I, 1923, 218-89). Ancient Medicine XI-XII cautions that the many failures of medicine should not count against its scientific status, since over the years of investigation great discoveries had been made (Hippocrates, I, 1923, 30-33. The Art III and On Prognosis I flatly advise physicians not to take up hopeless cases (Hippocrates, II, 1923, 6-8, 192-95).
19. Such healing sanctuaries existed in Egypt as early as 1500 BCE.
20. Fredrich and, more recently, Joly argue that it was written sometime between the end of the fifth century BCE and the beginning of the fourth. C. Fredrich, Hippokratische Untersuchungen (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1899), 217-30; Robert Joly, Recherches sur le Traité Pseudo-hippacratiqite du Régime, (Paris: "Les Belles lettres," 1960), 206-9; Robert Joly, trans., Hippocrate: Du Régime (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. 1984), p. 49. Lieshout, seeing the influence of Xenophon, narrows the date to the first quarter of the fourth century BCE (R. G. A. van Lieshout, Greeks on Dreams (Utrecht: Hes Publishers, 1980), pp. 187-88. Jones gives 400 BCE as a good approximation (Hippocrates, I, 1923, xlvi.). Rehm, arguing that the work was influenced by Eudoxus, believes that it was written around 370 BCE. A. Rehm, Parapegmastudien, mit einem Anhang Enktemor und das Buch de Signis (Munchen: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1941), pp. 38-40. Kirk thinks the work could not have been written before 350 BCE. G. S. Kirk, Heraclitus, the Cosmic Fragments (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954), pp. 27-29. Diller gives an approximate date of the midfourth century. H. Diller, "Hippokratische Medizin und attische Philosophie," Hermes, 1952, 80, 408. Jaeger dates the work around 320 BCE. W. Jaeger, Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture, vol. III (New York: Oxford University Press, 1944), 33-40.
21. Fredrich and, more recently, Joly argue that it was written sometime between the end of the fifth century BCE and the beginning of the fourth. C. Fredrich, Hippokratische Untersuchungen (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1899), 217-30; Robert Joly, Recherches sur le Traité Pseudo-hippacratiqite du Régime, (Paris: "Les Belles lettres," 1960), 206-9; Robert Joly, trans., Hippocrate: Du Régime (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. 1984), p. 49. Lieshout, seeing the influence of Xenophon, narrows the date to the first quarter of the fourth century BCE (R. G. A. van Lieshout, Greeks on Dreams (Utrecht: Hes Publishers, 1980), pp. 187-88. Jones gives 400 BCE as a good approximation (Hippocrates, I, 1923, xlvi.). Rehm, arguing that the work was influenced by Eudoxus, believes that it was written around 370 BCE. A. Rehm, Parapegmastudien, mit einem Anhang Enktemor und das Buch de Signis (Munchen: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1941), pp. 38-40. Kirk thinks the work could not have been written before 350 BCE. G. S. Kirk, Heraclitus, the Cosmic Fragments (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954), pp. 27-29. Diller gives an approximate date of the midfourth century. H. Diller, "Hippokratische Medizin und attische Philosophie," Hermes, 1952, 80, 408. Jaeger dates the work around 320 BCE. W. Jaeger, Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture, vol. III (New York: Oxford University Press, 1944), 33-40.
22. Fredrich and, more recently, Joly argue that it was written sometime between the end of the fifth century BCE and the beginning of the fourth. C. Fredrich, Hippokratische Untersuchungen (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1899), 217-30; Robert Joly, Recherches sur le Traité Pseudo-hippacratiqite du Régime, (Paris: "Les Belles lettres," 1960), 206-9; Robert Joly, trans., Hippocrate: Du Régime (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. 1984), p. 49. Lieshout, seeing the influence of Xenophon, narrows the date to the first quarter of the fourth century BCE (R. G. A. van Lieshout, Greeks on Dreams (Utrecht: Hes Publishers, 1980), pp. 187-88. Jones gives 400 BCE as a good approximation (Hippocrates, I, 1923, xlvi.). Rehm, arguing that the work was influenced by Eudoxus, believes that it was written around 370 BCE. A. Rehm, Parapegmastudien, mit einem Anhang Enktemor und das Buch de Signis (Munchen: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1941), pp. 38-40. Kirk thinks the work could not have been written before 350 BCE. G. S. Kirk, Heraclitus, the Cosmic Fragments (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954), pp. 27-29. Diller gives an approximate date of the midfourth century. H. Diller, "Hippokratische Medizin und attische Philosophie," Hermes, 1952, 80, 408. Jaeger dates the work around 320 BCE. W. Jaeger, Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture, vol. III (New York: Oxford University Press, 1944), 33-40.
23. Fredrich and, more recently, Joly argue that it was written sometime between the end of the fifth century BCE and the beginning of the fourth. C. Fredrich, Hippokratische Untersuchungen (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1899), 217-30; Robert Joly, Recherches sur le Traité Pseudo-hippacratiqite du Régime, (Paris: "Les Belles lettres," 1960), 206-9; Robert Joly, trans., Hippocrate: Du Régime (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. 1984), p. 49. Lieshout, seeing the influence of Xenophon, narrows the date to the first quarter of the fourth century BCE (R. G. A. van Lieshout, Greeks on Dreams (Utrecht: Hes Publishers, 1980), pp. 187-88. Jones gives 400 BCE as a good approximation (Hippocrates, I, 1923, xlvi.). Rehm, arguing that the work was influenced by Eudoxus, believes that it was written around 370 BCE. A. Rehm, Parapegmastudien, mit einem Anhang Enktemor und das Buch de Signis (Munchen: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1941), pp. 38-40. Kirk thinks the work could not have been written before 350 BCE. G. S. Kirk, Heraclitus, the Cosmic Fragments (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954), pp. 27-29. Diller gives an approximate date of the midfourth century. H. Diller, "Hippokratische Medizin und attische Philosophie," Hermes, 1952, 80, 408. Jaeger dates the work around 320 BCE. W. Jaeger, Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture, vol. III (New York: Oxford University Press, 1944), 33-40.
24. Fredrich and, more recently, Joly argue that it was written sometime between the end of the fifth century BCE and the beginning of the fourth. C. Fredrich, Hippokratische Untersuchungen (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1899), 217-30; Robert Joly, Recherches sur le Traité Pseudo-hippacratiqite du Régime, (Paris: "Les Belles lettres," 1960), 206-9; Robert Joly, trans., Hippocrate: Du Régime (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. 1984), p. 49. Lieshout, seeing the influence of Xenophon, narrows the date to the first quarter of the fourth century BCE (R. G. A. van Lieshout, Greeks on Dreams (Utrecht: Hes Publishers, 1980), pp. 187-88. Jones gives 400 BCE as a good approximation (Hippocrates, I, 1923, xlvi.). Rehm, arguing that the work was influenced by Eudoxus, believes that it was written around 370 BCE. A. Rehm, Parapegmastudien, mit einem Anhang Enktemor und das Buch de Signis (Munchen: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1941), pp. 38-40. Kirk thinks the work could not have been written before 350 BCE. G. S. Kirk, Heraclitus, the Cosmic Fragments (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954), pp. 27-29. Diller gives an approximate date of the midfourth century. H. Diller, "Hippokratische Medizin und attische Philosophie," Hermes, 1952, 80, 408. Jaeger dates the work around 320 BCE. W. Jaeger, Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture, vol. III (New York: Oxford University Press, 1944), 33-40.
25. Fredrich and, more recently, Joly argue that it was written sometime between the end of the fifth century BCE and the beginning of the fourth. C. Fredrich, Hippokratische Untersuchungen (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1899), 217-30; Robert Joly, Recherches sur le Traité Pseudo-hippacratiqite du Régime, (Paris: "Les Belles lettres," 1960), 206-9; Robert Joly, trans., Hippocrate: Du Régime (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. 1984), p. 49. Lieshout, seeing the influence of Xenophon, narrows the date to the first quarter of the fourth century BCE (R. G. A. van Lieshout, Greeks on Dreams (Utrecht: Hes Publishers, 1980), pp. 187-88. Jones gives 400 BCE as a good approximation (Hippocrates, I, 1923, xlvi.). Rehm, arguing that the work was influenced by Eudoxus, believes that it was written around 370 BCE. A. Rehm, Parapegmastudien, mit einem Anhang Enktemor und das Buch de Signis (Munchen: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1941), pp. 38-40. Kirk thinks the work could not have been written before 350 BCE. G. S. Kirk, Heraclitus, the Cosmic Fragments (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954), pp. 27-29. Diller gives an approximate date of the midfourth century. H. Diller, "Hippokratische Medizin und attische Philosophie," Hermes, 1952, 80, 408. Jaeger dates the work around 320 BCE. W. Jaeger, Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture, vol. III (New York: Oxford University Press, 1944), 33-40.
26. Fredrich and, more recently, Joly argue that it was written sometime between the end of the fifth century BCE and the beginning of the fourth. C. Fredrich, Hippokratische Untersuchungen (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1899), 217-30; Robert Joly, Recherches sur le Traité Pseudo-hippacratiqite du Régime, (Paris: "Les Belles lettres," 1960), 206-9; Robert Joly, trans., Hippocrate: Du Régime (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. 1984), p. 49. Lieshout, seeing the influence of Xenophon, narrows the date to the first quarter of the fourth century BCE (R. G. A. van Lieshout, Greeks on Dreams (Utrecht: Hes Publishers, 1980), pp. 187-88. Jones gives 400 BCE as a good approximation (Hippocrates, I, 1923, xlvi.). Rehm, arguing that the work was influenced by Eudoxus, believes that it was written around 370 BCE. A. Rehm, Parapegmastudien, mit einem Anhang Enktemor und das Buch de Signis (Munchen: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1941), pp. 38-40. Kirk thinks the work could not have been written before 350 BCE. G. S. Kirk, Heraclitus, the Cosmic Fragments (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954), pp. 27-29. Diller gives an approximate date of the midfourth century. H. Diller, "Hippokratische Medizin und attische Philosophie," Hermes, 1952, 80, 408. Jaeger dates the work around 320 BCE. W. Jaeger, Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture, vol. III (New York: Oxford University Press, 1944), 33-40.
27. Fredrich and, more recently, Joly argue that it was written sometime between the end of the fifth century BCE and the beginning of the fourth. C. Fredrich, Hippokratische Untersuchungen (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1899), 217-30; Robert Joly, Recherches sur le Traité Pseudo-hippacratiqite du Régime, (Paris: "Les Belles lettres," 1960), 206-9; Robert Joly, trans., Hippocrate: Du Régime (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. 1984), p. 49. Lieshout, seeing the influence of Xenophon, narrows the date to the first quarter of the fourth century BCE (R. G. A. van Lieshout, Greeks on Dreams (Utrecht: Hes Publishers, 1980), pp. 187-88. Jones gives 400 BCE as a good approximation (Hippocrates, I, 1923, xlvi.). Rehm, arguing that the work was influenced by Eudoxus, believes that it was written around 370 BCE. A. Rehm, Parapegmastudien, mit einem Anhang Enktemor und das Buch de Signis (Munchen: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1941), pp. 38-40. Kirk thinks the work could not have been written before 350 BCE. G. S. Kirk, Heraclitus, the Cosmic Fragments (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954), pp. 27-29. Diller gives an approximate date of the midfourth century. H. Diller, "Hippokratische Medizin und attische Philosophie," Hermes, 1952, 80, 408. Jaeger dates the work around 320 BCE. W. Jaeger, Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture, vol. III (New York: Oxford University Press, 1944), 33-40.
28. Fredrich and, more recently, Joly argue that it was written sometime between the end of the fifth century BCE and the beginning of the fourth. C. Fredrich, Hippokratische Untersuchungen (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1899), 217-30; Robert Joly, Recherches sur le Traité Pseudo-hippacratiqite du Régime, (Paris: "Les Belles lettres," 1960), 206-9; Robert Joly, trans., Hippocrate: Du Régime (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. 1984), p. 49. Lieshout, seeing the influence of Xenophon, narrows the date to the first quarter of the fourth century BCE (R. G. A. van Lieshout, Greeks on Dreams (Utrecht: Hes Publishers, 1980), pp. 187-88. Jones gives 400 BCE as a good approximation (Hippocrates, I, 1923, xlvi.). Rehm, arguing that the work was influenced by Eudoxus, believes that it was written around 370 BCE. A. Rehm, Parapegmastudien, mit einem Anhang Enktemor und das Buch de Signis (Munchen: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1941), pp. 38-40. Kirk thinks the work could not have been written before 350 BCE. G. S. Kirk, Heraclitus, the Cosmic Fragments (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954), pp. 27-29. Diller gives an approximate date of the midfourth century. H. Diller, "Hippokratische Medizin und attische Philosophie," Hermes, 1952, 80, 408. Jaeger dates the work around 320 BCE. W. Jaeger, Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture, vol. III (New York: Oxford University Press, 1944), 33-40.
29. Regimen I.ii, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 226-31. This is similar to Rationalist medical practice as Galen describes it in On Sects for Beginners III [in R. Waltzer and M. Frede, trans., Three Treatises on the Nature of Science (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1985). PP- 5-6]. See also Regimen III.lxvii, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 366-69 and Epidemics I.23, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 180-83.
30. Regimen I.ii, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 226-31. This is similar to Rationalist medical practice as Galen describes it in On Sects for Beginners III [in R. Waltzer and M. Frede, trans., Three Treatises on the Nature of Science (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1985). PP- 5-6]. See also Regimen III.lxvii, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 366-69 and Epidemics I.23, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 180-83.
31. Regimen I.ii, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 226-31. This is similar to Rationalist medical practice as Galen describes it in On Sects for Beginners III [in R. Waltzer and M. Frede, trans., Three Treatises on the Nature of Science (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1985). PP- 5-6]. See also Regimen III.lxvii, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 366-69 and Epidemics I.23, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 180-83.
32. Regimen I.ii, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 226-31. This is similar to Rationalist medical practice as Galen describes it in On Sects for Beginners III [in R. Waltzer and M. Frede, trans., Three Treatises on the Nature of Science (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1985). PP- 5-6]. See also Regimen III.lxvii, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 366-69 and Epidemics I.23, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 180-83.
33. Regimen I.iii-iv, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 230-37; Regimen I.iv-xxxi, Hippocrates, ibid., pp. 232-93; Regimen III.lxvii, lxix, ibid., pp. 268-69, 380-83; Regimen III.lxx-lxxxiii, III.lxxxiv-lxxxv, ibid., pp. 382-99.
34. Regimen I.iii-iv, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 230-37; Regimen I.iv-xxxi, Hippocrates, ibid., pp. 232-93; Regimen III.lxvii, lxix, ibid., pp. 268-69, 380-83; Regimen III.lxx-lxxxiii, III.lxxxiv-lxxxv, ibid., pp. 382-99.
35. Regimen I.iii-iv, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 230-37; Regimen I.iv-xxxi, Hippocrates, ibid., pp. 232-93; Regimen III.lxvii, lxix, ibid., pp. 268-69, 380-83; Regimen III.lxx-lxxxiii, III.lxxxiv-lxxxv, ibid., pp. 382-99.
36. Regimen I.iii-iv, Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 230-37; Regimen I.iv-xxxi, Hippocrates, ibid., pp. 232-93; Regimen III.lxvii, lxix, ibid., pp. 268-69, 380-83; Regimen III.lxx-lxxxiii, III.lxxxiv-lxxxv, ibid., pp. 382-99.
37. There is concern about the originality of Book IV. Overall, there seems sufficient agreement on certain details to indicate that whoever wrote the earlier books also wrote the final one (e.g., mention of bodily circuits at I.x and IV.lxxxix, talk of surfeit and depletion throughout, and similarities in the manner of regimen in Books I-III and Book IV, etc.). However, Fredrich ([n. 12] Hippokratische, p. 206), Joly ([n. 12] Recherches, pp. 168-71), and van Lieshout ([n.12], Greeks, pp. 185-87) have convincingly argued that there must have been a book of dreams from which this author drew the material for Book IV. From their arguments, the following points are worth noting. First, the authors assessment of good and bad to dreams indicates a preexisting compilation. Second and most importantly, the infusion of religious ritual is unique to Regimen IV (lxxxvii, lxxxviii, lxxxix, and xc) and cannot be the brainchild of the author of the other three books. Third, the change from great to scant detail of presentation that begins at IV.xc suggests that this author is copying from another work and hurriedly trying to finish his presentation, leaving out his own comments, which are clearly present in the chapters of the book prior to IV.xc. Concerning this, Joly ([n.12] Hippocrate, p. 105, fn. 4) writes: "Comme à la fin du livre III, l'auteur semble ici pressé d'en finir: il se fait avare de détails dans la description du régime; il multiplie les rêves, mais abrège son commentaire sur chacun d'eux."
38. There is concern about the originality of Book IV. Overall, there seems sufficient agreement on certain details to indicate that whoever wrote the earlier books also wrote the final one (e.g., mention of bodily circuits at I.x and IV.lxxxix, talk of surfeit and depletion throughout, and similarities in the manner of regimen in Books I-III and Book IV, etc.). However, Fredrich ([n. 12] Hippokratische, p. 206), Joly ([n. 12] Recherches, pp. 168-71), and van Lieshout ([n.12], Greeks, pp. 185-87) have convincingly argued that there must have been a book of dreams from which this author drew the material for Book IV. From their arguments, the following points are worth noting. First, the authors assessment of good and bad to dreams indicates a preexisting compilation. Second and most importantly, the infusion of religious ritual is unique to Regimen IV (lxxxvii, lxxxviii, lxxxix, and xc) and cannot be the brainchild of the author of the other three books. Third, the change from great to scant detail of presentation that begins at IV.xc suggests that this author is copying from another work and hurriedly trying to finish his presentation, leaving out his own comments, which are clearly present in the chapters of the book prior to IV.xc. Concerning this, Joly ([n.12] Hippocrate, p. 105, fn. 4) writes: "Comme à la fin du livre III, l'auteur semble ici pressé d'en finir: il se fait avare de détails dans la description du régime; il multiplie les rêves, mais abrège son commentaire sur chacun d'eux."
39. There is concern about the originality of Book IV. Overall, there seems sufficient agreement on certain details to indicate that whoever wrote the earlier books also wrote the final one (e.g., mention of bodily circuits at I.x and IV.lxxxix, talk of surfeit and depletion throughout, and similarities in the manner of regimen in Books I-III and Book IV, etc.). However, Fredrich ([n. 12] Hippokratische, p. 206), Joly ([n. 12] Recherches, pp. 168-71), and van Lieshout ([n.12], Greeks, pp. 185-87) have convincingly argued that there must have been a book of dreams from which this author drew the material for Book IV. From their arguments, the following points are worth noting. First, the authors assessment of good and bad to dreams indicates a preexisting compilation. Second and most importantly, the infusion of religious ritual is unique to Regimen IV (lxxxvii, lxxxviii, lxxxix, and xc) and cannot be the brainchild of the author of the other three books. Third, the change from great to scant detail of presentation that begins at IV.xc suggests that this author is copying from another work and hurriedly trying to finish his presentation, leaving out his own comments, which are clearly present in the chapters of the book prior to IV.xc. Concerning this, Joly ([n.12] Hippocrate, p. 105, fn. 4) writes: "Comme à la fin du livre III, l'auteur semble ici pressé d'en finir: il se fait avare de détails dans la description du régime; il multiplie les rêves, mais abrège son commentaire sur chacun d'eux."
40. There is concern about the originality of Book IV. Overall, there seems sufficient agreement on certain details to indicate that whoever wrote the earlier books also wrote the final one (e.g., mention of bodily circuits at I.x and IV.lxxxix, talk of surfeit and depletion throughout, and similarities in the manner of regimen in Books I-III and Book IV, etc.). However, Fredrich ([n. 12] Hippokratische, p. 206), Joly ([n. 12] Recherches, pp. 168-71), and van Lieshout ([n.12], Greeks, pp. 185-87) have convincingly argued that there must have been a book of dreams from which this author drew the material for Book IV. From their arguments, the following points are worth noting. First, the authors assessment of good and bad to dreams indicates a preexisting compilation. Second and most importantly, the infusion of religious ritual is unique to Regimen IV (lxxxvii, lxxxviii, lxxxix, and xc) and cannot be the brainchild of the author of the other three books. Third, the change from great to scant detail of presentation that begins at IV.xc suggests that this author is copying from another work and hurriedly trying to finish his presentation, leaving out his own comments, which are clearly present in the chapters of the book prior to IV.xc. Concerning this, Joly ([n.12] Hippocrate, p. 105, fn. 4) writes: "Comme à la fin du livre III, l'auteur semble ici pressé d'en finir: il se fait avare de détails dans la description du régime; il multiplie les rêves, mais abrège son commentaire sur chacun d'eux."
41. Regimen IV.lxxxvi.1-3 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 420-21.
42. Cf. Galen who writes, "For the soul - having slipped into the depths of the body and having withdrawn from external, sensible things - seems to perceive the condition throughout the body. And it receives an image of all the things that it desire as if these things were truly present." On Diagnosis from Dreams 16-20 in C.G. Kühn, ed., Opera Omnia VI (Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1821-1833), p. 834, lines 39-43. See also Plato's Timacus 45b-d, Francis M. Cornford, trans. (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1987), p. 42; Aristotle, On Dreams 458b30-459a6 in W. S. Hett, trans., Aristotle, vol. VIII (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1986), pp. 350-51); Cicero, De Divinatione I.114-115 in William Armistead Falconer, trans., Cicero, vol. XX (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1992), pp. 346-40; and Lucretius De Renim Natura IV.949, Cyril Bailey, trans. (London: Oxford University Press, 1947), p. 410-11.
43. Cf. Galen who writes, "For the soul - having slipped into the depths of the body and having withdrawn from external, sensible things - seems to perceive the condition throughout the body. And it receives an image of all the things that it desire as if these things were truly present." On Diagnosis from Dreams 16-20 in C.G. Kühn, ed., Opera Omnia VI (Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1821-1833), p. 834, lines 39-43. See also Plato's Timacus 45b-d, Francis M. Cornford, trans. (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1987), p. 42; Aristotle, On Dreams 458b30-459a6 in W. S. Hett, trans., Aristotle, vol. VIII (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1986), pp. 350-51); Cicero, De Divinatione I.114-115 in William Armistead Falconer, trans., Cicero, vol. XX (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1992), pp. 346-40; and Lucretius De Renim Natura IV.949, Cyril Bailey, trans. (London: Oxford University Press, 1947), p. 410-11.
44. Cf. Galen who writes, "For the soul - having slipped into the depths of the body and having withdrawn from external, sensible things - seems to perceive the condition throughout the body. And it receives an image of all the things that it desire as if these things were truly present." On Diagnosis from Dreams 16-20 in C.G. Kühn, ed., Opera Omnia VI (Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1821-1833), p. 834, lines 39-43. See also Plato's Timacus 45b-d, Francis M. Cornford, trans. (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1987), p. 42; Aristotle, On Dreams 458b30-459a6 in W. S. Hett, trans., Aristotle, vol. VIII (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1986), pp. 350-51); Cicero, De Divinatione I.114-115 in William Armistead Falconer, trans., Cicero, vol. XX (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1992), pp. 346-40; and Lucretius De Renim Natura IV.949, Cyril Bailey, trans. (London: Oxford University Press, 1947), p. 410-11.
45. Cf. Galen who writes, "For the soul - having slipped into the depths of the body and having withdrawn from external, sensible things - seems to perceive the condition throughout the body. And it receives an image of all the things that it desire as if these things were truly present." On Diagnosis from Dreams 16-20 in C.G. Kühn, ed., Opera Omnia VI (Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1821-1833), p. 834, lines 39-43. See also Plato's Timacus 45b-d, Francis M. Cornford, trans. (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1987), p. 42; Aristotle, On Dreams 458b30-459a6 in W. S. Hett, trans., Aristotle, vol. VIII (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1986), pp. 350-51); Cicero, De Divinatione I.114-115 in William Armistead Falconer, trans., Cicero, vol. XX (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1992), pp. 346-40; and Lucretius De Renim Natura IV.949, Cyril Bailey, trans. (London: Oxford University Press, 1947), p. 410-11.
46. Cf. Galen who writes, "For the soul - having slipped into the depths of the body and having withdrawn from external, sensible things - seems to perceive the condition throughout the body. And it receives an image of all the things that it desire as if these things were truly present." On Diagnosis from Dreams 16-20 in C.G. Kühn, ed., Opera Omnia VI (Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1821-1833), p. 834, lines 39-43. See also Plato's Timacus 45b-d, Francis M. Cornford, trans. (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1987), p. 42; Aristotle, On Dreams 458b30-459a6 in W. S. Hett, trans., Aristotle, vol. VIII (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1986), pp. 350-51); Cicero, De Divinatione I.114-115 in William Armistead Falconer, trans., Cicero, vol. XX (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1992), pp. 346-40; and Lucretius De Renim Natura IV.949, Cyril Bailey, trans. (London: Oxford University Press, 1947), p. 410-11.
47. Regimen IV, lxxxvii in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 422-23. Praying to the gods is also suggested at IV.lxxxviii.30, IV.lxxxix.28-33, and IV.xc.63 (pp. 426-27, 428-29, 440-41. Concerning the Hippocratic corpus, the emphasis on prayer as complementing regimen is unique to Regimen IV. Decorum VI talks of the gods as the real physicians for cures and physicians merely as their instruments (Hippocrates, II, 1923, 288-89). Prognosis I (line 21) has a passing reference to something divine in diseases in all manuscripts (ibid., pp. 8-9), which, however, is regarded by most scholars today as an interpolation. Sacred Disease considers, then rejects, any direct divine cause for seizures. Seizures are explained by natural causes (cold, sun, wind) and thus are only divine insofar as the things that cause them are divine (ibid., pp. 138-89).
48. Regimen IV, lxxxvii in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 422-23. Praying to the gods is also suggested at IV.lxxxviii.30, IV.lxxxix.28-33, and IV.xc.63 (pp. 426-27, 428-29, 440-41. Concerning the Hippocratic corpus, the emphasis on prayer as complementing regimen is unique to Regimen IV. Decorum VI talks of the gods as the real physicians for cures and physicians merely as their instruments (Hippocrates, II, 1923, 288-89). Prognosis I (line 21) has a passing reference to something divine in diseases in all manuscripts (ibid., pp. 8-9), which, however, is regarded by most scholars today as an interpolation. Sacred Disease considers, then rejects, any direct divine cause for seizures. Seizures are explained by natural causes (cold, sun, wind) and thus are only divine insofar as the things that cause them are divine (ibid., pp. 138-89).
49. Regimen IV, lxxxvii in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 422-23. Praying to the gods is also suggested at IV.lxxxviii.30, IV.lxxxix.28-33, and IV.xc.63 (pp. 426-27, 428-29, 440-41. Concerning the Hippocratic corpus, the emphasis on prayer as complementing regimen is unique to Regimen IV. Decorum VI talks of the gods as the real physicians for cures and physicians merely as their instruments (Hippocrates, II, 1923, 288-89). Prognosis I (line 21) has a passing reference to something divine in diseases in all manuscripts (ibid., pp. 8-9), which, however, is regarded by most scholars today as an interpolation. Sacred Disease considers, then rejects, any direct divine cause for seizures. Seizures are explained by natural causes (cold, sun, wind) and thus are only divine insofar as the things that cause them are divine (ibid., pp. 138-89).
50. Regimen IV, lxxxvii in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 422-23. Praying to the gods is also suggested at IV.lxxxviii.30, IV.lxxxix.28-33, and IV.xc.63 (pp. 426-27, 428-29, 440-41. Concerning the Hippocratic corpus, the emphasis on prayer as complementing regimen is unique to Regimen IV. Decorum VI talks of the gods as the real physicians for cures and physicians merely as their instruments (Hippocrates, II, 1923, 288-89). Prognosis I (line 21) has a passing reference to something divine in diseases in all manuscripts (ibid., pp. 8-9), which, however, is regarded by most scholars today as an interpolation. Sacred Disease considers, then rejects, any direct divine cause for seizures. Seizures are explained by natural causes (cold, sun, wind) and thus are only divine insofar as the things that cause them are divine (ibid., pp. 138-89).
51. The author probably had in mind that, by praying to the gods to rectify a certain illness, one was in a sense attributing a divine and unnatural cause to the disease. Ludwig Edelstein argues that there existed a reticence, even a renunciation, concerning prayers in medical practice that in no way reflected a belief in the ineffectuality of prayer. See "Greek medicine in its relation to religion and magic" in O. Temkin and C. L. Temkin, eds., Ancient Medicine: Selected Papers of Ludwig Edelstein (Baltimore, Md.: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1967), pp. 240-41.
52. Regimen IV.lxxxviii.2-10 in Hinpocrates, IV, 1931, 422-25.
53. In Greek,Jones (ibid., p. 425), who translates in the normal act.
54. and Joly ([n.12] Hippocrate, p. 98
55. ) ("à propos d'une affaire convenable") are certainly correct in not attributing any moral significance to the terms as E. Littré (Oeuvres Complètes D'Hippocrate (Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, [1849] 1962), p. 643) ("dans une just affaire") and Ermerins ("in re iusta") do.
56. See Jones's commentary on Regimen IV in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 425ni.
57. Regimen IV.lxxxviii.10-14 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 424-25.
58. Spelled out as at IV.lxxxix. 105. These refer to illness brought on by excess or want of food or excess or want of exercise. Cf. Artemidorus, Onirocriticon Libri V, Roger Pack, ed. (Leipzig: Teubner, 1963), IV.2, p. 242-47.
59. Regimen IV.lxxxix.9-11 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 426-27; Regimen IV.lxxxix.6-9 in ibid.
60. Regimen IV.lxxxix.9-11 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 426-27; Regimen IV.lxxxix.6-9 in ibid.
61. Regimen IV.lxxxix.14-17 in ibid.; Regimen IV.lxxxix.14-23 in ibid., pp. 426-29; Regimen IV.lxxxix.23-29 in ibid., pp. 428-29 (following the Hippocratic therapeutic principle in On Breaths I.33-34 in Hippocrates, II, 1923, pp. 228-29 Regimen IV.lxxxix.29-38, 38-45 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 428-31.
62. Regimen IV.lxxxix.14-17 in ibid.; Regimen IV.lxxxix.14-23 in ibid., pp. 426-29; Regimen IV.lxxxix.23-29 in ibid., pp. 428-29 (following the Hippocratic therapeutic principle in On Breaths I.33-34 in Hippocrates, II, 1923, pp. 228-29 Regimen IV.lxxxix.29-38, 38-45 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 428-31.
63. Regimen IV.lxxxix.14-17 in ibid.; Regimen IV.lxxxix.14-23 in ibid., pp. 426-29; Regimen IV.lxxxix.23-29 in ibid., pp. 428-29 (following the Hippocratic therapeutic principle in On Breaths I.33-34 in Hippocrates, II, 1923, pp. 228-29 Regimen IV.lxxxix.29-38, 38-45 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 428-31.
64. Regimen IV.lxxxix.14-17 in ibid.; Regimen IV.lxxxix.14-23 in ibid., pp. 426-29; Regimen IV.lxxxix.23-29 in ibid., pp. 428-29 (following the Hippocratic therapeutic principle in On Breaths I.33-34 in Hippocrates, II, 1923, pp. 228-29 Regimen IV.lxxxix.29-38, 38-45 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 428-31.
65. Regimen IV.lxxxix.14-17 in ibid.; Regimen IV.lxxxix.14-23 in ibid., pp. 426-29; Regimen IV.lxxxix.23-29 in ibid., pp. 428-29 (following the Hippocratic therapeutic principle in On Breaths I.33-34 in Hippocrates, II, 1923, pp. 228-29 Regimen IV.lxxxix.29-38, 38-45 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 428-31.
66. Regimen IV.xc.2-13 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 436-37.
67. Regimen IV.xc.23-25, 25-26, 29-31 in ibid., pp. 438-39.
68. Cf. Artemidorus, Onirocriticon I.8-9, 1V.2, 4, 59, (n.22), pp. 17-19, 242-47, 283-85.
69. Regimen IV.xc.40-48 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 438-41.
70. Joly argues that this section refers exclusively to clothing and footwear ([n. 12] Hippocrate, p. 107n3). He is probably correct, though the Greek is too imprecise for a definite answer.
71. Regimen IV.xciii.34-41 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 446-47.
72. Onirocriticon II.33-39. (n. 22), pp. 155-76.
73. For example, Onirocriticon I.12, III.66, (n. 22), pp. 20-21, 233-35.
74. An interesting exception is dreams of incubation and the appearance of a healing god to assist or administer a cure.
75. Regimen IV.ciii.39-41 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, 446-47.
76. Onirocriticon I.8-9, (n.22), pp. 17-19. See also ibid., I.13, II.36, 45, IV.2, 4, 67 on pp. 21-22, 160-67, 179-80, 242-48, 289-90, respectively.
77. Onirocriticon I.8-9, (n.22), pp. 17-19. See also ibid., I.13, II.36, 45, IV.2, 4, 67 on pp. 21-22, 160-67, 179-80, 242-48, 289-90, respectively.
78. Principles = Greek: I.8-9 and IV.2 explain that there are both general and idiosyncratic customs. The former include sacred mysteries, festivals, national games, and marriage; the latter involve clothing, food, and hairstyle (Onirocriticon, [n. 22], pp. 17-19, 242-47). These principles, he warns, are not universal in application. He illustrates, in Book IV, by mentioning a certain potter's dream of beating his mother.
79. Though this activity is against the law the dream meant profit for him because his craft is, in a sense, one of beating his mother Onirocriticon IV.2, (n. 22) Onirocriticon, p. 245). In other words, the principle of considering the personal circumstances of the dreamer at the time of the dream (his craft) predominated over a general circumstance concerning the dream (the law).
80. This is perhaps what Artemidorus means when he says cryptically: "the interpretation of dreams is nothing other than the juxtaposition of what is similar" (II.25, Onirocriticon, (n. 22), p. 145).
81. Aetius, Maxims V.ii.3 in Hermann Diels, ed., Daxographi Graeci (Berlin: W. De Gruyter et socios, 1879), p. 416b.14-22). The first category is in Aetius and Plutarch, in Ps.-Galen; the second is. For a fuller account of this last classification, see Herophiliu: The Art of Medicine in Early Alexandria (Cambridge, Mass.: Cambridge University Press, 1989).
82. Aetius, Maxims V.ii.3 in Hermann Diels, ed., Daxographi Graeci (Berlin: W. De Gruyter et socios, 1879), p. 416b.14-22). The first category is Aetius and Plutarch, in Ps.-Galen; the second is. For a fuller account of this last classification, see Herophiliu: The Art of Medicine in Early Alexandria (Cambridge, Mass.: Cambridge University Press, 1989).
83. On Diagnosis from Dreams 20-27 in Kühn (n. 17) Opera, p. 833.
84. On thought-based dreams, compare Aristotle's Prophecy during Sleep 463324-26 in Hett, (n. 17) Aristotle, pp. 378-79); Artemidorus, Onirocriticon I.1 in (n. 22), pp. 3-4); Macrobius, Commentary on the Dream of Scipio I.iii.2-5, William Harris Stahl, trans. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990), pp. 87-89; and Iamblichus, De Mysteriis Aegytionim III.2, Thomas Taylor and Alexander Wilder, trans. (Hastings: Chthonios Books, 1989), p. 65. On prophetic dreams, note that Galen does not call these dreams "divine" as does the author of Regimen IV.
85. On thought-based dreams, compare Aristotle's Prophecy during Sleep 463324-26 in Hett, (n. 17) Aristotle, pp. 378-79); Artemidorus, Onirocriticon I.1 in (n. 22), pp. 3-4); Macrobius, Commentary on the Dream of Scipio I.iii.2-5, William Harris Stahl, trans. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990), pp. 87-89; and Iamblichus, De Mysteriis Aegytionim III.2, Thomas Taylor and Alexander Wilder, trans. (Hastings: Chthonios Books, 1989), p. 65. On prophetic dreams, note that Galen does not call these dreams "divine" as does the author of Regimen IV.
86. On thought-based dreams, compare Aristotle's Prophecy during Sleep 463324-26 in Hett, (n. 17) Aristotle, pp. 378-79); Artemidorus, Onirocriticon I.1 in (n. 22), pp. 3-4); Macrobius, Commentary on the Dream of Scipio I.iii.2-5, William Harris Stahl, trans. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990), pp. 87-89; and Iamblichus, De Mysteriis Aegytionim III.2, Thomas Taylor and Alexander Wilder, trans. (Hastings: Chthonios Books, 1989), p. 65. On prophetic dreams, note that Galen does not call these dreams "divine" as does the author of Regimen IV.
87. On thought-based dreams, compare Aristotle's Prophecy during Sleep 463324-26 in Hett, (n. 17) Aristotle, pp. 378-79); Artemidorus, Onirocriticon I.1 in (n. 22), pp. 3-4); Macrobius, Commentary on the Dream of Scipio I.iii.2-5, William Harris Stahl, trans. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990), pp. 87-89; and Iamblichus, De Mysteriis Aegytionim III.2, Thomas Taylor and Alexander Wilder, trans. (Hastings: Chthonios Books, 1989), p. 65. On prophetic dreams, note that Galen does not call these dreams "divine" as does the author of Regimen IV.
88. On Diagnosis from Dreams 20-27 in Kühn (n. 17) Opera, p. 833). Greek: Steven M. Oberhelman translates: "For if it were necessary to base our interpretations of dreams only on what we do and think each day." "Galen: On Diagnosis from Dreams," J. Hist. Med. Alied Sci., 1983, 38, 44.
89. On Diagnosis from Dreams 20-27 in Kühn (n. 17) Opera, p. 833). Greek: Steven M. Oberhelman translates: "For if it were necessary to base our interpretations of dreams only on what we do and think each day." "Galen: On Diagnosis from Dreams," J. Hist. Med. Alied Sci., 1983, 38, 44.
90. The Greek reads: principally means "divide," "separate," or "make a distinction," as I translate here, not "interpret a dream" as Oberhelman has it. See Henry Liddell, Robert Scott, and Henry Stuart Jones, A Greek-English Dictionary (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968). The sense throughout this passage is differentiating between types or functions of dreams, not interpreting. Moreover, since it is in the singular, I take adverbially ("merely"), as does Oberhelman, and not as the direct object of which precedes it. Thus, the object for the verb must be understood implicitly as "diagnostic dreams."
91. On Diagnosis from Dreams 27-31 in Kühn (n. 17) Opera, p. 834.
92. On Diagnosis from Dreams 32-54 in ibid.
93. Cf. Lucretius, De Rerum Natura IV.1024-1025, (n. 17), pp. 414-15 and Artemidorus, Oneirocriticon I.1 in Pack, (n. 22), p. 3.
94. Cf. Lucretius, De Rerum Natura IV.1024-1025, (n. 17), pp. 414-15 and Artemidorus, Oneirocriticon I.1 in Pack, (n. 22), p. 3.
95. On Diagnosis from Dreams 34-39 in Kühn, (n. 17) Opera, p. 834; Dc Rerum Natura IV.1030-1036, (n. 17) Rerum, pp. 414-15.
96. On Diagnosis from Dreams 34-39 in Kühn, (n. 17) Opera, p. 834; Dc Rerum Natura IV.1030-1036, (n. 17) Rerum, pp. 414-15.
97. On Diagnosis from Dreams 56-59 in Kühn, (n. 17) Opera, p. 835.
98. On Diagnosis from Dream, in Kühn, (n. 17) Opera, p. 832. Cf. Regimen lV.lxxxix.52 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, pp. 430-31.
99. On Diagnosis from Dream, in Kühn, (n. 17) Opera, p. 832. Cf. Regimen lV.lxxxix.52 in Hippocrates, IV, 1931, pp. 430-31.
100. Quaestiones Medicinales V.28-33. He writes, "And so, it is not possible to write all things for all people, but I can point out enough by argument to remind the doctor not to neglect such matters." Rufus of Ephesus, Quaestiones Medicinales, Hans Gartner, ed. (Leipzig: B.G. Teubner, 1970), V. 29, p. 7.
101. Quaestiones Medicinales V.28-33. He writes, "And so, it is not possible to write all things for all people, but I can point out enough by argument to remind the doctor not to neglect such matters." Rufus of Ephesus, Quaestiones Medicinales, Hans Gartner, ed. (Leipzig: B.G. Teubner, 1970), V. 29, p. 7.
102. Quaestiones Mediciinales V.29-30 in Gartner, (n. 47), pp. 7-8; Quaestiones Medicinales V.31, ibid. p. 8; Quaestiones Medicinales V.32, ibid.
103. Quaestiones Mediciinales V.29-30 in Gartner, (n. 47), pp. 7-8; Quaestiones Medicinales V.31, ibid. p. 8; Quaestiones Medicinales V.32, ibid.
104. Quaestiones Mediciinales V.29-30 in Gartner, (n. 47), pp. 7-8; Quaestiones Medicinales V.31, ibid. p. 8; Quaestiones Medicinales V.32, ibid.