Chapter XXXIV: Marbod, Bishop of Rennes, 1035—1123 (4)

[61] Although Schiaparelli, _Astronomy in the Old Testament_, 1905, pp. v, 5, 49-51, 135, denies that “the frequent use of the number seven in the Old Testament is in any way connected with the planets.” I have not seen F. von Andrian, _Die Siebenzahl im Geistesleben der Völker_, in _Mitteil, d. anthrop. Gesellsch. in Wien_, XXI (1901), 225-74; see also Hehn, _Siebenzahl und Sabbat bei den Babyloniern und im alten Testament_, 1907. J. G. Frazer (1918), I, 140, has an interesting passage on the prominence of the number seven “alike in the Jehovistic and in the Babylonian narrative” of the flood.

[62] Webster, _Rest Days_, pp. 211-2. Professor Webster, who kindly read this chapter in manuscript, stated in a letter to me of 2 July 1921 that he remained convinced that “the mystic properties ascribed to the number seven” can only in part be accounted for by the seven planets; “Our American Indians, for example, hold seven in great respect, yet have no knowledge of seven planets.” But it may be noted that the poet-philosophers of ancient Peru composed verses on the subject of astrology, according to Garcilasso (cited by W. I. Thomas, _Source Book for Social Origins_, 1909, p. 293).

[63] L. W. King, _History of Babylon_, 1915, p. 299.

[64] Fossey (1902), pp. 2-3.

[65] Farnell, _Greece and Babylon_, pp. 301-2. On liver divination see Frothingham, “Ancient Orientalism Unveiled,” _American Journal of Archaeology_, XXI (1917) 55, 187, 313, 420.

[66] Fossey, p. 66.

[67] Fossey, p. 16.

[68] Lenormant, pp. 35, 147, 158.

[69] Thompson, _Semitic Magic_, pp. xxxviii-xxxix.

[70] _Greece and Babylon_, p. 296.

[71] Lenormant, pp. 146-7.

[72] _Ibid._, p. 158.

[73] Jastrow, _Religion of Babylon and Assyria_, pp. 283-4.

[74] Zimmern, _Beiträge_, p. 173.

[75] _Ibid._, p. 161.

[76] Fossey, p. 399.

[77] Fossey, p. 83.

[78] _Ibid._, pp. 89-91. F. Küchler, _Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Assyr.-Babyl. Medizin; Texte mit Umschrift, Uebersetzung und Kommentar_, Leipzig, 1904, treats of twenty facsimile pages of cuneiform.

[79] Lenormant, p. 190.

[80] _Ibid._, p. 159.

[81] So enlightened in fact that they spoke with some scorn of the “levity” and “lies” of the Greeks.

[82] _Oriental Religions in Roman Paganism_, Chicago, 1911, p. 189.

[83] Thorndike (1905), p. 63.

[84] E. E. Sikes, _Folk-lore in the Works and Days of Hesiod_, in _The Classical Review_, VII (1893). 390.

[85] Freeman, _History of Sicily_, I, 101-3, citing Herodotus VII, 153.

[86] Butler and Owen, _Apulei Apologia_, note on 30, 30.

[87] For details concerning operative or vulgar magic among the ancient Greeks see Hubert, _Magia_, in Daremberg-Saglio; Abt, _Die Apologie des Apuleius von Madaura und die antike Zauberei_, Giessen, 1908; and F. B. Jevons, “Græco-Italian Magic,” p. 93-, in _Anthropology and the Classics_, ed. R. Marett; and the article “Magic” in ERE.

[88] I think that this sentence is an approximate quotation from some ancient author, possibly Diogenes Laertius, but I have not been able to find it.

[89] J. E. Harrison, _Themis_, Cambridge, 1912. The chapter headings briefly suggest the argument: “1. Hymn of the Kouretes; 2. Dithyramb, Δρώμενον, and Drama; 3. Kouretes, Thunder-Rites and Mana; 4. a. Magic and Tabu, b. Medicine-bird and Medicine-king; 5. Totemism, Sacrament, and Sacrifice; 6. Dithyramb, Spring Festival, and Hagia Triada Sarcophagus; 7. Origin of the Olympic Games (about a year-daimon); 8. Daimon and Hero, with Excursus on Ritual Forms preserved in Greek tragedy; 9. Daimon to Olympian; 10. The Olympians; 11. Themis.”

[90] F. M. Cornford, _Origin of Attic Comedy_, 1914, see especially pp. 10, 13, 55, 157, 202, 233.

[91] A. B. Cook, _Zeus_, Cambridge, 1914, pp. 134-5, 12-14, 66-76.

[92] Rendel Harris, _Picus who is also Zeus_, 1916; _The Ascent of Olympus_, 1917.

[93] Farnell, _Greece and Babylon_, pp. 292, 178-9.

[94] See Ernest Riess, _Superstitions and Popular Beliefs in Greek Tragedy_, in _Transactions of the American Philological Association_, vol. 27 (1896), pp. 5-34; and _On Ancient superstition_, _ibid._ 26 (1895), 40-55. Also J. G. Frazer, _Some Popular Superstitions of the Ancients_, in _Folk-lore_, 1890, and E. H. Klatsche, _The Supernatural in the Tragedies of Euripides_, in _University of Nebraska Studies_, 1919.

[95] See Zeller, _Pre-Socratic Philosophy_, II (1881), 119-20, for further boasts by Empedocles himself and other marvels attributed to him by later authors.

[96] _Laws_, XI, 933 (Steph.).

[97] _Timaeus_, p. 71 (Steph.).

[98] _Symposium_, p. 188 (Steph.); in Jowett’s translation, I, 558.

[99] _Timaeus_, p. 40 (Steph.); Jowett, III, 459.

[100] _Ibid._, pp. 41-42 (Steph.).

[101] _Timaeus_, p. 39 (Steph.); Jowett, III, 458.

[102] W. Windelband, _History of Philosophy_, English translation by J. H. Tufts, 1898, p. 147.

[103] Windelband, _History of Ancient Philosophy_, English translation by H. E. Cushman, 1899.

[104] For a number of examples, which might be considerably multiplied if books VII-X are not rejected as spurious, see Thorndike (1905), pp. 62-3. T. E. Lones, _Aristotle’s Researches in Natural Science_, London, 1912, 274 pp., discusses “Aristotle’s method of investigating the natural sciences,” and a large number of Aristotle’s specific statements showing whether they were correct or incorrect. The best translation of the _History of Animals_ is by D’Arcy W. Thompson, Oxford 1910, with valuable notes.

[105] See the edition of the _History of Animals_ by Dittmeyer (1907), p. vii, where various monographs will be found mentioned.

[106] Perhaps pure literature was over-emphasized in the Museum at Alexandria, and magic texts in the library of Assurbanipal.

[107] A list of magic papyri and of publications up to about 1900 dealing with the same is given in Hubert’s article on _Magia_ in Daremberg-Saglio, pp. 1503-4. See also Sir Herbert Thompson and F. L. Griffith, _The Magical Demotic Papyrus of London and Leiden_, 3 vols., 1909-1921; _Catalogue of Demotic Papyri in the John Rylands Library, Manchester, with facsimiles and complete translations_, 1909, 3 vols. Grenfell (1921), p. 159, says, “A corpus of the magical papyri was projected in Germany by K. Preisendanz before the war, and a Czech scholar, Dr. Hopfner, is engaged upon the difficult task of elucidating them.”

[108] W. C. Battle, _Magical Curses Written on Lead Tablets_, in _Transactions of the American Philological Association_, XXVI (1895), pp. liv-lviii, a synopsis of a Harvard dissertation. Audollent, _Defixionum tabulae_, etc., Paris, 1904, 568 pp. R. Wünsch, _Defixionum Tabellae Atticae_, 1897, and _Sethianische Verfluchungstafeln aus Rom_ (390-420 A. D.), Leipzig, 1898.

[109] Since 1898 various volumes and parts have appeared under the editorship of Cumont, Kroll, Boll, Olivieri, Bassi, and others. Much of the material noted is of course post-classical and Byzantine, and of Christian authorship or Arabic origin.

[110] For example, see R. Wünsch, _Antikes Zaubergerät aus Pergamon_, in _Jahrb. d. kaiserl. deutsch. archæol. Instit., suppl._ VI (1905), p. 19.

[111] T. L. Heath, _The Works of Archimedes_, Cambridge, 1897, pp. xxxix-xl.

[112] On “Aristotle as a Biologist” see the Herbert Spencer lecture by D’Arcy W. Thompson, Oxford, 1913, 31 pp. Also T. E. Lones, _Aristotle’s Researches in Natural Science_, London, 1912. Professor W. A. Locy, author of _Biology and Its Makers_, writes me (May 9, 1921) that in his opinion G. H. Lewes, _Aristotle; a Chapter from the History of Science_, London, 1864, “dwells too much on Aristotle’s errors and imperfections, and in several instances omits the quotation of important positive observations, occurring in the chapters from which he makes his quotations of errors.” Professor Locy also disagrees with Lewes’ estimate of _De generatione_ as Aristotle’s masterpiece and thinks that “naturalists will get more satisfaction out of reading the _Historia animalium_” than either the _De generatione_ or _De partibus_. Thompson (1913), p. 14, calls Aristotle “a very great naturalist.”

[113] This quotation is from Professor Locy’s letter of May 9, 1921.

[114] The quotations are from a note by Professor D’Arcy W. Thompson on his translation of the _Historia animalium_, III, 3. The note gives so good a glimpse of both the merits and defects of the Aristotelian text as it has reached us that I will quote it here more fully:

“The Aristotelian account of the vascular system is remarkable for its wealth of details, for its great accuracy in many particulars, and for its extreme obscurity in others. It is so far true to nature that it is clear evidence of minute inquiry, but here and there so remote from fact as to suggest that things once seen have been half forgotten, or that superstition was in conflict with the result of observation. The account of the vessels connecting the left arm with the liver and the right with the spleen ... is a surviving example of mystical or superstitious belief. It is possible that the ascription of three chambers to the heart was also influenced by tradition or mysticism, much in the same way as Plato’s notion of the three corporeal faculties.”

[115] Professor Locy called my attention to it in a letter of May 17, 1921. See also Thompson (1913), p. 14.

[116] Thompson (1913), p. 19.

[117] L. C. Karpinski, “Hindu Science,” in _The American Mathematical Monthly_, XXVI (1919), 298-300.

[118] Sir Thomas Heath, _Aristarchus of Samos, the Ancient Copernicus: a history of Greek astronomy to Aristarchus together with Aristarchus’s treatise, “On the Sizes and Distances of the Sun and Moon,” a new Greek text with translation and notes_, Oxford, 1913, admits that “our treatise does not contain any suggestion of any but the geocentric view of the universe, whereas Archimedes tells us that Aristarchus wrote a book of hypotheses, one of which was that the sun and the fixed stars remain unmoved and that the earth revolves round the sun in the circumference of a circle.” Such evidence seems scarcely to warrant applying the title of “The Ancient Copernicus” to Aristarchus. And Heath thinks that Schiaparelli (_I precursori di Copernico nell’antichità_, and other papers) went too far in ascribing the Copernican hypothesis to Heraclides of Pontus. On Aristotle’s answer to Pythagoreans who denied the geocentric theory see Orr (1913), pp. 100-2.

[119] “Farewell, Nature, parent of all things, and in thy manifold multiplicity bless me who, alone of the Romans, has sung thy praise.”

[120] For the Latin text of the _Naturalis Historia_ I have used the editions of D. Detlefsen, Berlin, 1866-1882, and L. Janus, Leipzig, 1870, 6 vols. in 3; 5 vols. in 3. There is, however, a good English translation of the _Natural History_, with an introductory essay, by J. Bostock and H. T. Riley, London, 1855, 6 vols. (Bohn Library), which is superior to both the German editions in its explanatory notes and subject index, and which also apparently antedates them in some readings suggested for doubtful passages in the text. Three modes of dividing the _Natural History_ into chapters are indicated in the editions of Janus and Detlefsen. I shall employ that found in the earlier editions of Hardouin, Valpy, Lemaire, and Ajasson, and preferred in the English translation of Bostock and Riley.

[121] Bostock and Riley (1855), I, xvi.

[122] NH, Preface.

[123] NH, Preface.

[124] NH, XXII, 7.

[125] NH, II, 6.

[126] NH, II, 46.

[127] NH, II, 5. “Deus est mortali iuvare mortalem....”

[128] NH, VII, 56.

[129] Letter to Macer, Ep. III, 5, ed. Keil. Leipzig, 1896.

[130] NH, VII, 1; XXIII, 60; XXV, 1; XXVII, 1.

[131] XXVI, 76.

[132] XXXVII, 11.

[133] XXI, 88.

[134] XXXII, 24.

[135] Yet C. W. King, _Natural History of Precious Stones_, p. 2, deplores the loss of Juba’s treatise, which he says, “considering his position and opportunities for exact information, is perhaps the greatest we have to deplore in this sad catalogue of _desiderata_.”

[136] NH, XXXII, 4.

[137] XXX, 30.

[138] Bouché-Leclercq (1899), p. 519, notes, however, that Aulus Gellius (X, 12) protested against Pliny’s credulity in accepting such works as genuine and that “Columelle (VII, 5) cite un certain Bolus de Mendes comme l’auteur des ὑπομνήματα attribués à Démocrite.” Bouché-Leclercq adds, however, “Rien n’y fit: Démocrite devint le grand docteur de la magie.”

[139] NH, VII, 21.

[140] G. H. Lewes, _Aristotle; a Chapter from the History of Science_, London. 1864.

[141] _Letters of Pliny the Younger_, III, 5, ed. Keil, Leipzig, 1896.

[142] NH, VIII, 34.

[143] XXVIII, 1.

[144] Rück, _Die Naturalis Historia des Plinius im Mittelalter_, in _Sitzb. Bayer. Akad. Philos-Philol. Classe_ (1908) pp. 203-318. For citations of Pliny by writers of the late Roman empire and early middle ages, see Panckoucke, _Bibliothèque Latine-Française_, vol. CVI.

[145] Concerning the MSS see Detlefsen’s prefaces in each of his first five volumes and his fuller dissertations in Jahn’s _Neue Jahrb._, 77, 653ff, _Rhein. Mus._, XV, 265ff; XVIII, 227ff, 327.

Detlefsen seems to have made no use of English MSS, but a folio of the close of the 12th century at New College, Oxford, contains the first nineteen books of the _Natural History_ and is described by Coxe as “very well written and preserved.”

Nor does Detlefsen mention Le Mans 263, 12th century, containing all 37 books except that the last book is incomplete, and with a full page miniature (fol. 10v) showing Pliny in the act of presenting his work to Vespasian. Escorial Q-I-4 and R-I-5 are two other practically complete texts of the fourteenth century which Detlefsen failed to use.

[146] See M. R. James, Eton Manuscripts, p. 63, MS 134, Bl. 4. 7., Roberti Crikeladensis Prioris Oxoniensis excerpta ex Plinii Historia Naturali, 12-13th century, in a large English hand, giving extracts extending from Book II to Book IX.

Of Balliol 124, fols. 1-138, _Cosmographia mundi_, by John Free, born at Bristol or London, fellow at Balliol College, Oxford, later professor of medicine at Padua and a doctor at Rome, also well instructed in civil law and Greek, Coxe writes, “This work is nothing but a series of excerpts from Pliny’s _Natural History_, beginning with the second and leaving off with the twentieth.” I wonder if John Free may not have used the very MS of the first nineteen books mentioned in the foregoing note, since the second book of the _Natural History_ is often reckoned as the first.

In Balliol 146A, 15th century, fol. 3-, the _Natural History_ appears in epitome, with a prologue opening, “I, Reginald (_Retinaldus_), servant of Christ, perusing the books of Pliny....”

[147] Bologna, 952, 15th century, fols. 157-60, “Tractatus optimus in quo exposuit et aperte declaravit plinius philosophus quid sit lapis philosophicus et ex qua materia debet fieri et quomodo.”

[148] Fossi, _Catalogus codicum saeculo XV impressorum qui in publica Bibliotheca Magliabechiana Florentiae adservantur_, 1793-1795, II, 374-81.

[149] _De erroribus Plinii et aliorum in medicina_, Ferrara, 1492.

[150] _Pliniana defensio_, 1494.

[151] Escorial Q-I-4, and R-I-5, both of the 14th century.

[152] NH, V, 1, 12.

[153] XXVI, 6, “usu efficacissimo rerum omnium magistro”; XVII, 2, 12, “quare experimentis optime creditur.”

[154] II, 66.

[155] XXIX, 23.

[156] XXIX, 11.

[157] XXV, 54, “coramque nobis”; XXV, 106, “nos eam Romanis experimentis per usus digeremus.”

[158] Sometimes another term, as _usus_ in note 2 above, is employed.

[159] See II, 41, 1-2; II, 108; VII, 41; VII, 56; VIII, 7; XIV, 8; XVI, 1; XVI, 64; XVII, 2; XVII, 35; XXII, 1; XXII, 43; XXII, 49; XXII, 51; XXV, 7; XXXIV, 39 and 51. Experience is also the idea in the two following passages, although the word _experimentum_ could not smoothly be rendered as “experience” in a literal translation: VII, 50, “Accedunt experimenta et exempla recentissimi census ...”; XXVIII, 45, “Nec uros aut bisontes habuerunt Graeci in experimentis.”

[160] XVI, 24; XXII, 57; XXVI, 60.

[161] X, 75.

[162] XXXV, 30.

[163] VII, 35

[164] XIII, 3.

[165] XIV, 25.

[166] XVII, 4; XX, 3 and 76; XXII, 23; XXIX, 12; XXXIII, 19 and 43 and 44 and 57; XXXIV, 26 and 48; XXXVI, 38 and 55; XXXVII, 22 and 76; such phrases as _sinceri experimentum_ and _veri experimentum_ are used for “test of genuineness.”

[167] XXIII, 31; XXXI, 28.

[168] XXXI, 27.

[169] XVII, 26.

[170] II, 75.

[171] IX, 7.

[172] XXVIII, 6.

[173] XXVIII, 14.

[174] XXIX, 8. “Discunt periculis nostris et experimenta per mortes agunt.” Bostock and Riley translate the last clause, “And they experimentalize by putting us to death.” Another possible translation is, “And their experiments cost lives.“

[175] XXV, 17. ” ... adeo nullo omnia experiendi fine ut cogerentur etiam venena prodesse.“

[176] XXIX, 4 ” ... ab experimentis se cognominans empiricen.“

[177] IX, 86.

[178] XXXVII, 15.

[179] According to Galen, as we shall hear later, the Empirics relied a good deal upon chance experience and dreams.

[180] XXV, 6.

[181] XX, 52.

[182] XXV, 20.

[183] XXIII, 27.

[184] Among other virtues of vinegar, besides its supposed property of breaking rocks, Pliny mentions that if one holds some in the mouth, it will prevent one from feeling the heat in the baths.

[185] XXV, 6 and 21 and 50; XXVII, 2.

[186] XVI, 24; XXVI, 60.

[187] XXIII, 59.

[188] XXVIII, 7.

[189] In the opening chapters of Book XXX, unless otherwise indicated by specific citation.

[190] Aulus Gellius, X, 12, and Columella, VII, 5, dispute this (Bouché-Leclercq, _L’Astrologie grecque_, p. 519). Berthelot (_Origines de l’alchimie_, p. 145) believes in a Democritan school at the beginning of the Christian era which wrote the works of alchemy attributed to Democritus as well as the books of medical and magical recipes which are quoted in the _Geoponica_ and the _Natural History_.

[191] XVI, 95.

[192] XXX, 2. ” ... quamquam animadverto summam litterarum claritatem gloriamque ex ea scientia antiquitus et paene semper petitam.”

[193] Examples are: XXV, 59, “Sed magi utique circa hanc insaniunt”; XXIX, 20, “magorum mendacia”; XXXVII, 60, “magorum inpudentiae vel manifestissimum ... exemplum”; XXXVII, 73, “dira mendacia magorum.”

[194] See XXII, 9; XXVI, 9; XXVII, 65; XXVIII, 23 and 27; XXIX, 26; XXX, 7; XXXVII, 14.

[195] XXXVII, 40.

[196] XXX, 5-6.

[197] XXX, 6. “Proinde ita persuasum sit, intestabilem, inritam, inanem esse, habentem tamen quasdam veritatis umbras, sed in his veneficas artis pollere, non magicas.”

[198] XXV, 7.

[199] XXVIII, 23.

[200] XXVIII, 2.

[201] XXX, 4.

[202] XXVIII, 19; XXX, 6.

[203] XXVIII, 29.

[204] XXX, 7.

[205] XXIX, 26.

[206] For instance, XXX, 27, he mentions the magi, but not in XXX, 28. Nor are they mentioned in XXX, 29, but in XXX, 30 “plura eorum remedia ponemus” seems to refer to them, although we must look back three chapters for the antecedent of _eorum_.

[207] XXXVII, 14, he says that he is going to confute “the unspeakable nonsense of the magicians” concerning gems, but makes no specific citation from them until the thirty-seventh chapter on jasper.

[208] XXX, 47.

[209] XXXVII, 11.

[210] XX, 30; XXI, 38, 94, 104; XXII, 24, 29.

[211] XXI, 36; XXIV, 99.

[212] XXV, 5.

[213] XXIV, 99-102.

[214] See XX, 30; XXI, 36, 38, 94, 104; XXII, 9, 24, 29; XXIV, 99, 102; XXV, 59, 65, 80-81; XXVI, 9.

[215] XXI, 38.

[216] XXI, 104; XXII, 24.

[217] XXI, 94.

[218] XXII, 29.

[219] XX, 30.

[220] XXI, 38.

[221] XXIV, 99 and 102.

[222] XXV, 5.

[223] XXV, 59.

[224] XXVI, 9.

[225] XXX, 6.

[226] XXX, 7.

[227] XXVIII, 27.

[228] XXVIII, 25.

[229] XXX, 24.

[230] XXIX, 39.

[231] XXIX, 12.

[232] XXX, 6.

[233] XXVIII, 57; XXX, 17.

[234] Use of goat, XXVIII, 56, 63, 78-79; cat, XXVIII, 66; puppy, XXIX, 38; dog, XXX, 24.

[235] XXVIII, 60, 66, 77; XXIX, 26.

[236] XXVIII, 66; XXIX, 15; XXX, 7; XXX, 27; XXXII, 38.

[237] XXX, 8 and 36; see also XXVIII, 60; XXXII, 19 and 24.

[238] XXIX, 23; XXX, 18, 20, 30, 49; XXXII, 14, 18, 24.

[239] XXX, 27.

[240] XXX, 24.

[241] XXX, 24.

[242] XXVIII, 27.

[243] XXVIII, 66; and see XXIX, 12.

[244] XXVIII, 60.

[245] XXVIII, 68.

[246] XXVIII, 78.

[247] XXX, 17.

[248] XXX, 18.

[249] XXXII, 38.

[250] XXIX, 26.

[251] XXVIII, 63.

[252] XXVIII, 56; XXIX, 15.

[253] XXIX, 19.

[254] XXIX, 20.

[255] XXIX, 26; XXX, 7.

[256] Pliny ascribes statements concerning stones to the _magi_ in the following chapters: XXXVI, 34; XXXVII, 37, 40, 49, 51, 54, 56, 60, 70, 73.

[257] XXXVII, 54 and 40.

[258] XXXVII, 40, 60, 56, 73.

[259] XXVIII, 12, “Magorum haec commenta sunt....“

[260] XXVIII, 23.

[261] Some works upon animals in antiquity and Greece are:

Aubert und Wimmer, _Aristoteles Thierkunde_, 2 vols., Leipzig, 1868.

Baethgen, _De vi et significatione galli in religione et artibus Graecorum et Romanorum_, Diss. Inaug., Göttingen, 1887.

Bernays, _Theophrasts Schrift über Frömmigkeit_.

Bikélas, O., _La nomenclature de la Faune grecque_, Paris, 1879.

Billerbeck, _De locis nonnullis Arist. Hist. Animal. difficilioribus_, Hildesheim, 1806.

Dryoff, A., _Die Tierpsychologie des Plutarchs_, Progr. Würzburg, 1897. _Über die stoische Tierpsychologie_, in _Bl. f. bayr. Gymn._, 33 (1897) 399ff.; 34 (1898) 416.

Erhard, _Fauna der Cykladen_, Leipzig, 1858.

Fowler, W. W., _A Year with the Birds_, 1895.

Hopf, L., _Thierorakel und Orakelthiere in alter und neuer Zeit_, Stuttgart, 1888.

Hopfner, T., _Der Tierkult der alten Ægypter nach den griechisch-römischen Berichten und den wichtigen Denkmälern_, in _Denkschr. d. Akad. Wien_, 1913, ii Abh.

Imhoof-Blumer, F., und Keller, O., _Tier-und Pflanzenbilder auf Münzen und Gemmen des klassischen Altertums_. illustrated, 1889.

Keller, O., _Thiere des class. Altertums_.

Krüper, _Zeiten des Gehens und Kommens und des Brütens der Vögel in Griechenland und Ionien_, in Mommsen’s _Griech. Jahreszeiten_, 1875.

Küster, E., _Die Schlange in der griechischen Kunst und Religion_, Giessen, 1913.

Lebour, _Zoologist_, 1866.

Lewysohn, _Zoologie des Talmuds_.

Lindermayer, A., _Die Vögel Griechenlands_, Passau, 1860.

Locard, _Histoire des mollusques dans l’antiquité_, Lyon, 1884.

Lorenz, _Die Taube im Alterthume_, 1886.

Marx, A., _Griech. Märchen von dankbaren Tieren_, Stuttgart, 1889.

Mühle, H. v. d., _Beiträge zur Ornithologie Griechenlands_, Leipzig, 1844.

Sundevall, _Thierarten des Aristoteles_, Stockholm, 1863.

Thompson, D’Arcy W., _A Glossary of Greek Birds_, 1895. _Aristotle as a Biologist_, 1913. Also the notes to his translation of the _Historia animalium_.

Westermarck, E., _The Origin and Development of Moral Ideas_, I (1906) 251-60, gives further bibliography on the subjects of animals as witnesses and the punishment of animal culprits.

[262] VIII, 1-12.

[263] VIII, 17-21.

[264] XXXII, 5.

[265] VIII, 37.

[266] VIII, 11-12.

[267] XXVII, 2; XVIII, 1.

[268] XXVII, 2; VIII, 41.

[269] XX, 51 and 61; XXII, 37 and 45.

[270] XX, 26.

[271] VIII, 41; XX, 95.

[272] XXIX, 39.

[273] XXV, 50.

[274] XXV, 5.

[275] VIII, 40; XXVIII, 31.

[276] For further remedies used by animals see VIII, 41; XXIX, 14, 38; XXV, 52-53; XXVIII, 81.

[277] XXVII, 2. “ ... quod certe casu repertum quis dubitet et quotiens fiat etiam nunc ut novom nasci quoniam feris ratio et usus inter se tradi non possit?” Perhaps Pliny would have denied the inheritance of acquired characteristics.

[278] XXV, 51.

[279] XXXVII, 57.

[280] VIII, 4.

[281] VIII, 33.

[282] XXIX, 34; XXX, 10, 19; XXVIII, 46; XXIX, 11; XXX, 16.

[283] XXX, 46.

[284] XXXII, 14.

[285] XXVIII, 37.

[286] A recent work on the general theme is Joret, _Les plantes dans l’antiquité_, Paris, 1904; see also F. Mentz, _De plantis quas ad rem magicam facere crediderunt veteres_, Leipzig, 1705, 28 pp.; F. Unger, _Die Pflanze als Zaubermittel_, Vienna, 1859.

[287] XXII, 3; XXV, 59; XXVII, 28.

[288] XXI, 105. “Halicacabi radicem bibunt qui vaticinari gallantesque vere ad confirmandas superstitiones aspici se volunt.”

[289] XXV, 43-44.

[290] XXI, 21, 84.

[291] XXV, 5.

[292] XXIII, 64.

[293] XXV, 35.

[294] XXII, 36.

[295] XXIV, 94.

[296] XXV, 46.

[297] XXV, 54.

[298] XXV, 78.

[299] XXIII, 75.

[300] XXIV, 56-57.

[301] XXV, 18; XXVII, 100.

[302] XX, 14; XXIV, 82; XXV, 92.

[303] XXV, 10; XXVII, 60.

[304] XXIV, 6, 93.

[305] XXV, 6.

[306] XX, 49; XXI, 83; XXIII, 54; XXIV, 63; XXV, 59; XXVI, 12.

[307] XXIII, 59.

[308] XXIV, 62.

[309] XXV, 21, 94.

[310] XXIV, 63 and 118.

[311] XXI, 19.

[312] XXIV, 62; XXIII, 59.

[313] XXIII, 81; XXIV, 6, 62, 116.

[314] XXVI, 12.

[315] XXI, 19; XXV, 21, 94.

[316] XXIII, 71, 81; XXIV, 6; XXVII, 62.

[317] XXI, 83; XXV, 109; XXVI, 12.

[318] XXII, 16; XXIII, 54; XXIV, 82; XXVII, 113.

[319] XXIV, 116.

[320] XXV, 92.

[321] XXI, 19; XXV, 11.

[322] XXIV, 62; XXV, 21.

[323] XXIV, 62-63.

[324] XVI, 95.

[325] See XXIV, 6, for other methods of plucking the mistletoe.

[326] XVIII, 45.

[327] See also XXV, 6.

[328] XIX, 58.

[329] XVIII, 70.

[330] XVIII, 73.

[331] XXVIII, 81.

[332] XVIII, 8.

[333] XXXVII, 14, 73.

[334] XXXVII, 55-56.

[335] XXXVII, 13.

[336] For instance, XXXVII, 12 amber, 37 jasper, 39 aetites, 55 “baroptenus.”

[337] XXXVI, 31.

[338] XXXVII, 15, 58, 67.

[339] XXXVI, 25, 39.

[340] XVI, 20.

[341] XXXIII, 25.

[342] XXX, 12, 25.

[343] XX, 3; XXVIII, 6, 9; etc.

[344] II, 63; XXIX, 23.

[345] XXXIII, 34

[346] XX, 51; XXVIII, 21.

[347] VII, 13; XXVIII, 23.

[348] XX, 33; XXII, 30; XXVIII, 18-19.

[349] XXVIII, 8.

[350] XXVIII, 9.

[351] XXVIII, 9-11.

[352] XXVIII, 7.

[353] VII, 2.

[354] XXVIII, 6.

[355] XXII, 49.

[356] XXIV, 102.

[357] In this paragraph I have combined views expressed by Pliny in three different passages: XXII, 49 and 56; XXIV, 1.

[358] IX, 88; XXIV, 1; XXVIII, 23; XXXII, 12; XXXVII, 15; etc.

[359] XXIV, 1; XXIX, 17.

[360] VIII, 50; XXVIII, 42.

[361] XXIX, 17 and 23.

[362] XXVIII, 43.

[363] XX, 1. “Odia amicitiaque rerum surdarum ac sensu carentium ... quod Graeci sympathiam appellavere.” XXIV, 1. “Surdis etiam rerum sua cuique sunt venena ac minimis quoque ... Concordia valent.”

[364] XXVIII, 41; XXXVII, 15. Yet a note in Bostock and Riley’s translation, IV, 207, asserts, “Pliny is the only author who makes mention of this singularly absurd notion.”

[365] “Nunc quod totis voluminibus his docere conati summus de discordia rerum concordiaque quam antipathiam Graeci vocavere ac sympathiam non aliter clarius intelligi potest.”

[366] XXIV, 41.

[367] XXI, 47.

[368] XX, 36.

[369] XVI, 24.

[370] XXV, 55.

[371] XXXVII, 54.

[372] XXIII, 62; XXIV, 1.

[373] XXVIII, 41.

[374] XXIX, 32.

[375] XXVIII, 61.

[376] XXIX, 27.

[377] XXVII, 74.

[378] XXXVI, 11.

[379] XXV, 3.

[380] XXII, 29.

[381] XXVIII, 9.

[382] XXVIII, 17.

[383] XXVIII, 47.

[384] XXIX, 38.

[385] XXX, 20.

[386] XXVIII, 49.

[387] XXXII, 52.

[388] XXIX, 27.

[389] XXX, 7.

[390] XXXII, 14.

[391] XXX, 20 and 14.

[392] XXXII, 29; XXX, 11.

[393] XXVIII, 42.

[394] XXII, 65.

[395] XXII, 72.

[396] XXII, 32.

[397] XXX, 12.

[398] XXV, 106.

[399] XX, 81.

[400] XXVIII, 47.

[401] XXX, 12, 15.

[402] XXVII, 62.

[403] XXIX, 17.

[404] XXIX, 24.

[405] XXVI, 89.

[406] XXXII, 16; also XX, 39.

[407] XXII, 30.

[408] XXIV, 32, 38.

[409] XX, 72, 82.

[410] XXVI, 69.

[411] XXIX, 36.

[412] XXX, 8.

[413] XXVIII, 10.

[414] XXXII, 24.

[415] XXX, 18.

[416] See also XXX, 8.

[417] XXIV, 106 and 109.

[418] XXIV, 107 and 110.

[419] Some examples are: XVIII, 75, 79; XXII, 72; XXIII, 71; XXVIII, 47; XXIX, 36; XXXII, 14, 25, 38, 46.

[420] XXXII, 14.

[421] XXX, 12.

[422] XXIV, 112.

[423] VIII, 50.

[424] XXVIII, 6.

[425] XXIV, 17.

[426] XXX, 15.

[427] XXIX, 34.

[428] XXXII, 24.

[429] XXXII, 38.

[430] XVII, 47.

[431] XIX, 36.

[432] XVIII, 35.

[433] XXVI, 60.

[434] XXVIII, 7.

[435] XXVII, 75.

[436] XXVII, 106.

[437] XXVIII, 3-4.

[438] XXVII, 35. “Catanancen Thessalam herbam qualis sit describi a nobis supervacuum est, cum sit usus eius ad amatoria tantum.” XXVII, 99. “Phyteuma quale sit describere supervacuum habeo cum sit usus eius tantum ad amatoria.”

[439] XXV, 7. “Ego nec abortiva dico ac ne amatoria quidem, memor Lucullum imperatorem clarissimum amatorio perisse....”

[440] A few examples are: XX, 15, 84, 92; XXIV, 11, 42; XXVI, 64; XXVII, 42, 99; XXVIII, 77, 80; XXX, 49; XXXII, 50.

[441] XXII, 9.

[442] XXV, 7.

[443] XXIX, 27.

[444] XXX, 1. On the general attitude to astrology of the preceding Augustan Age and its poets see H. W. Garrod, _Manili Astronomicon Liber II_, Oxford, 1911, pp. lxv-lxxiii, but I think he overestimates the probable effect of the edict of 16 A. D. upon the poem of Manilius.

[445] II, 5. “Astroque suo eventus adsignat nascendi legibus semelque in omnes futuros umquam deo decretum in reliquom vero otium datur.”

[446] VII, 37.

[447] VII, 50.

[448] VII, 57.

[449] II, 24.

[450] II, 6, “Non tanta caelo societas nobiscum est ut nostro fato mortalis sit ibi quoque siderum fulgor.”

[451] II, 9.

[452] II, 18.

[453] II, 23.

[454] II, 30.

[455] XXV, 5.

[456] II, 1.

[457] II, 4.

[458] II, 16.

[459] II, 13.

[460] II, 6; and see II, 39.

[461] II, 6. “Potentia autem ad terram magnopere eorum pertinens.”

[462] II, 6.

[463] XVIII, 5, 57, 69.

[464] XVIII, 68. Other authorities tell the story of Thales; see Cicero, _De divinatione_, II, 201; Aristotle, _Polit._ I, 7; and Diogenes Laertius.

[465] XVIII, 78.

[466] II, 81.

[467] XXXVII, 28.

[468] XXXVII, 59.

[469] XXIX, 5.

[470] XXX, 29.

[471] II, 40.

[472] II, 102.

[473] II, 41.

[474] XXXII, 19.

[475] _L. Annaei Senecae Naturalium Quaestionum Libri Septem_, VI, 4, “Aliquando de motu terrarum volumen iuvenis ediderim.” The edition by G. D. Koeler, Göttingen, 1819, devotes several hundred pages to a _Disquisitio_ and _Animadversiones_ upon Seneca’s work. I have also used the more recent Teubner edition, ed. Haase, 1881, and the English translation in Clark and Geikie, _Physical Science in the Time of Nero_, 1910. In Panckoucke’s _Library_, vol. 147, a French translation accompanies the text.

[476] VII, 25.

[477] VII, 31.

[478] III, 26.

[479] V, 6, for animals generated in flames; II, 31, for snakes struck by lightning; III, _passim_ for marvelous fountains.

[480] III, 25.

[481] IV, 7.

[482] II, 32.

[483] II, 46.

[484] I, 1.

[485] VII, 30.

[486] II, 10.

[487] VII, 28.

[488] That is to say, five in addition to the sun and the moon.

[489] II, 32.

[490] III, 29.

[491] II, 31-50.

[492] II, 32.

[493] A complete edition of Ptolemy’s works has been in process of publication since 1898 in the Teubner library by J. L. Heiberg and Franz Boll. They are also the authors of the most important recent researches concerning Ptolemy. See Heiberg’s discussion of the MSS in the volumes of the above edition which have thus far appeared; his articles on the Latin translations of Ptolemy in _Hermes_ XLV (1910) 57ff, and XLVI (1911) 206ff; but especially Boll, _Studien über Claudius Ptolemäus. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der griechischen Philosophie und Astrologie_, 1894, in _Jahrb. f. Philol. u. Pädagogik_, Neue Folge, Suppl. Bd. 21. A recent summary of investigation and bibliography concerning Ptolemy is W. Schmid, _Die Nachklassische Periode der Griechischen Litteratur_, 1913, pp. 717-24, in the fifth edition of Christ, _Gesch. d. Griech. Litt._

[494] Some strictures upon Ptolemy as a geographer are made by Sir W. M. Ramsay, _The Historical Geography of Asia Minor_, 1890, pp. 69-73.

[495] Schmid would appear to be mistaken in saying that the _Geography_ was already known in Latin and Arabic translation in the time of Frederick II (p. 718, “Seine in erster Linie die Astronomie, dann auch die Geographie und Harmonik betreffenden Schriften haben sich nicht bloss im Originaltext erhalten; sie wurden auch frühzeitig von den Arabern übersetzt und sind dann, ähnlich wie die Werke des Aristoteles, schon zur Zeit des Kaisers Friedrich II, noch ehe man sie im Urtext kennen lernte, durch lateinische, nach dem Arabischen gemachte Übersetzungen ins Abendland gelangt”), for in his own bibliography (p. 723) we read, “_Geographie_ ... Frühste latein. Übersetzung des Jacobus Angelus gedruckt Bologna, 1462.” Apparently Schmid did not know the date of Angelus’ translation.

However, Duhem, III (1915) 417, also speaks as if the _Geography_ were known in the thirteenth century: “les considérations empruntées à la Géographie de Ptolémée fournissent à Robert de Lincoln une objection contre le mouvement de précession des équinoxes tel qu’il est définé dans l’Almageste.” See also C. A. Nallino, _Al-Huwarizmi e il suo rifacimento della geografia di Tolomeo_, 1894, cited by Suter (1914) viii-ix, for a geography in Arabic preserved at Strasburg which is based on Ptolemy’s _Geography_.

[496] In this Latin translation it is often entitled _Cosmographia_. Some MSS are: CLM 14583, 15th century, fols. 81-215, Cosmographia Ptolomei a Jacobo Angelo translata. Also BN 4801, 4802, 4803, 4804, 4838. Arsenal 981, in an Italian hand, is presumably incorrectly dated as of the 14th century.

This Jacobus Angelus was chancellor of the faculty of Montpellier in 1433 and is censured by Gerson in a letter for his superstitious observance of days.

[497] The several editions printed before 1500 seem to have consisted simply of this Latin translation, such as that of Bologna, 1462, and Vincentiae, 1475, and the Greek text to have been first published in 1507. See Justin Winsor, _A Bibliography of Ptolemy’s Geography_, 1884, in _Library of Harvard University, Bibliographical Contributions_, No. 18:—a bibliography which deals only with printed editions and not with the MSS. According to Schmid, however, the _editio princeps_ of the Greek text was that of Basel, 1533. C. Müller’s modern edition (Didot, 1883 and 1901) gives an unsatisfactory bare list of 38 MSS. See also G. M. Raidel, _Commentatio critico-literaria de Claudii Ptolemaei Geographia eiusque codicibus_, 1737.

[498] _L’ottica di Claudio Tolomeo da Eugenio ammiraglio di Sicilia ridotta in latino_, ed. Gilberto Govi, Turin, 1885.

[499] Schmid (1913) still cites it without qualification. Hammer-Jensen has an article, _Ptolemaios und Heron_, in _Hermes_, XLVIII (1913) 224, _et seq._

[500] Haskins and Lockwood, _The Sicilian Translators of the Twelfth Century_, in _Harvard Studies in Classical Philology_, XXI (1910), 89.

[501] _Ibid._, 89-94.

[502] A. Heller, _Geschichte der Physik von Aristoteles bis auf die neueste Zeit_, 2 vols., Stuttgart, 1882-1884. The statement sounds a trifle improbable in view of the number of MSS still in existence.

[503] _Opus Maius_, II, 7.

[504] The _Dioptra_ of Hero is really geodetical.

[505] Govi (1885), p. 151.

[506] _Ptolemy_ in Smith’s _Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography_.

[507] It was also so printed in _Sphera cum commentis_, 1518: “Explicit secundus et ultimus liber Ptolomei de Speculis. Completa fuit eius translatio ultimo Decembris anno Christi 1269.”

[508] C. H. Haskins and D. P. Lockwood, _The Sicilian Translators of the Twelfth Century and the First Latin Version of Ptolemy’s Almagest_, in _Harvard Studies in Classical Philology_, XXI (1910) 75-102.

C. H. Haskins, _Further Notes on Sicilian Translations of the Twelfth Century_, _Ibid._, XXIII, 155-66.

J. L. Heiberg, _Eine mittelalterliche Uebersetzung der Syntaxis des Ptolemaios_, in _Hermes_ XLV (1910) 57-66; and _Noch einmal die mittelalterliche Ptolemaios-Uebersetzung_, _Ibid._, XLVI, 207-16.

[509] Digby 51, 13th Century, fols. 79-114, “Liber iiii tractatuum Batolomei Alfalisobi in sciencia judiciorum astrorum.... Et perfectus est eius translatio de Arabico in Latinum a Tiburtino Platone cui Deus parcat die Veneris hora tertia XXa die mensis Octobris anno Domini MCXXVIII (_sic_) XV die mensis Saphar anno Arabum DXXXIII (_sic_) in civitate Barchinona....” The date of translation is given as October 2, 1138, in CUL 1767, 1276 A. D., fols. 240-76, “Liber 4 Partium Ptholomei Auburtino Palatone.”

[510] It is found in an edition printed at Venice in 1493, “per Bonetum locatellum impensis nobilis viri Octaviani scoti civis Modoetiensis.”

[511] In the British Museum are editions of Venice, 1484, 1493, 1519; Paris, 1519; Basel, 1533; Louvain, 1548; it was also printed in 1551, 1555, 1578.

[512] In the British Museum are but three editions of the Greek text, all with an accompanying Latin translation: Nürnberg, 1535; Basel, 1553; and 1583.

[513] _Studien über Claudius Ptolemäus_, 1894.

[514] “C’était la capitulation de la science.” Bouché-Leclercq in _Rev. Hist._, LXV, 257, note 3.

[515] In the medieval Latin translation the Slavs replace the Scythians of Ptolemy’s text.

[516] Indeed, Hephaestion’s first two books are nothing but Ptolemy repeated. About contemporary with Ptolemy seems to have been Vettius Valens whose astrological work is extant: Vettius Valens, _Anthologiarum libri primum edidit_ Guilelmus Kroll, Berlin, 1908. See also CCAG _passim_ concerning both Hephaestion and Vettius Valens, and Engelbrecht, _Hephästion von Theben und sein astrologisches Compendium_, Vienna, 1887.

[517] James Finlayson, _Galen: Two Bibliographical Demonstrations in the Library of the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow_, 1895. Since then I believe that the only work of Galen to be translated into English is _On the Natural Faculties_, ed. A. J. Brock, 1916 (Loeb Library).

[518] J. F. Payne, _The Relation of Harvey to his Predecessors and especially to Galen_: Harveian Oration of 1896, in _The Lancet_, Oct. 24, 1896, p. 1136.

[519] In the Teubner texts: _Scriptora minora_, 1-3, ed. I. Marquardt, I. Mueller, G. Helmreich, 1884-1893; _De victu_, ed. Helmreich, 1898; _De temperamentis_, ed. Helmreich, 1904; _De usu partium_, ed. Helmreich, 1907, 1909.

In _Corpus Medicorum Graecorum_, V, 9, 1-2, 1914-1915, _The Hippocratic Commentaries_, ed. Mewaldt, Helmreich, Westenberger, Diels, Hieg.

[520] Carolus Gottlob Kühn, _Claudii Galeni Opera Omnia_, Leipzig, 1821-1833, 21 vols. My citations will be to this edition, unless otherwise specified. An older edition which is often cited is that of Renatus Charterius, Paris, 1679, 13 vols.

[521] The article on Galen in PW regards some of the treatises as printed in Kühn as almost unreadable.

[522] Although Kühn’s Index fills a volume, it is far from dependable.

[523] Liddell and Scott often fail to allude to germane passages in Galen’s works, even when they include, with citation of some other author, the word he uses.

[524] Perhaps at this point a similarly candid confession by the present writer is in order. I have tried to do a little more than Dr. Payne in his modesty seems ready to admit of himself, and to look over carefully enough not to miss anything of importance those works which seemed at all likely to bear upon my particular interest, the history of science and magic. In consequence I have examined long stretches of text from which I have got nothing. For the most part, I thought it better not to take time to read the Hippocratic commentaries. At first I was inclined to depend upon others for Galen’s treatises on anatomy and physiology, but finally I read most of them in order to learn at first hand of his argument from design and his attitude towards dissection. Further than this the reader can probably judge for himself from my citations as to the extent and depth of my reading. My first draft was completed before I discovered that Puschmann had made considerable use of Galen for medical conditions in the Roman Empire in his _History of Medical Education_, English translation, London, 1891, pp. 93-113. For the sake of a complete and well-rounded survey I have thought it best to retain those passages where I cover about the same ground. I have been unable to procure T. Meyer-Steineg, _Ein Tag im Leben des Galen_, Jena, 1913. 63 pp.

[525] For an account of the MSS see H. Diels, _Berl. Akad. Abh._ (1905), 58ff. Some fragments of Galen’s work on medicinal simples exist in a fifth century MS of Dioscorides at Constantinople and have been reproduced by M. Wellmann in _Hermes_, XXXVIII (1903), 292ff. The first two books of his περὶ τῶν ἐν ταῖς τροφαῖς δυνάμεων were discovered in a Wolfenbüttel palimpsest of the fifth or sixth century by K. Koch; see _Berl. Akad. Sitzb._ (1907), 103ff.

[526] _Lancet_ (1896), p. 1135.

[527] For these see V. Rose, _Analecta Graeca et Latina_, Berlin, 1864. As a specimen of these medieval Latin translations may be mentioned a collection of some twenty-six treatises in one huge volume which I have seen in the library of Balliol College, Oxford: Balliol 231, a large folio, early 14th century (a note of ownership was added in 1334 at Canterbury) fols. 437, double columned pages. For the titles and _incipits_ of the individual treatises see Coxe (1852).

[528] A. Merx, “Proben der syrischen Uebersetzung von Galenus’ Schrift über die einfachen Heilmittel,” _Zeitsch. d. Deutsch. Morgendl. Gesell._ XXXIX (1885), 237-305.

[529] Payne, _Lancet_ (1896), p. 1136.

[530] Ch. V. Daremberg, _Exposition des connaissances de Galien sur l’anatomie, la physiologie, et la pathologie du système nerveux_, Paris, 1841.

[531] _Lancet_ (1896), p. 1140.

[532] Brock (1916), p. xvi, says in 131 A. D. Clinton, _Fasti Romani_, placed it in 130.

[533] These details are from the _De cognoscendis curandisque animi morbis_, cap. 8, Kühn, V, 40-44.

[534] _De naturalibus facultatibus_, III, 10, Kühn, II, 179.

[535] Kühn, X, 609 (_De methodo medendi_); also XVI, 223; and XIX, 59.

[536] _De anatom. administ._, Kühn, II, 217, 224-25, 660. See also XV, 136; XIX, 57.

[537] His recorded astronomical observations extend from 127 to 151 A. D.

[538] Kühn, X, 16.

[539] _Fragments du commentaire de Galien sur le Timée de Platon_, were published for the first time, both in Greek and a French translation, together with an _Essai sur Galien considéré comme philosophe_, by Ch. Daremberg, Paris, 1848.

[540] Kühn, XIII, 599-600.

[541] Clinton, _Fasti Romani_, I, 151 and 155, speaks of a first visit of Galen to Rome in 162 and a second in 164, but he has misinterpreted Galen’s statements. When Galen speaks of his second visit to Rome, he means his return after the plague.

[542] Kühn, XIX, 15.

[543] Kühn, XIV, 622, 625, 648; see also I, 54-57. and XII, 263.

[544] Kühn, XIV, 649-50.

[545] R. M. Briau, _L’Archiatrie Romaine_, Paris, 1877, however, held that Galen never received the official title, _archiater_; see p. 24, “il est difficile de comprendre pourquoi le médecin de Pergame qui donnait des soins à l’empereur Marc Aurèle, ne fut jamais honoré de ce titre.” But he is given the title in at least one medieval MS—Merton 219, early 14th century, fol. 36_v_—“Incipit liber Galieni archistratos medicorum de malitia complexionis diversae.”

[546] _De venae sectione_, Kühn, XIX, 524.

[547] Kühn, XIII, 362-63; for another allusion to this fire see XIV, 66. Also II, 216; XIX, 19 and 41.

[548] For the statements of this paragraph see Kühn, XIV, 603-5, 620-23.

[549] Kühn, X, 114.

[550] Kühn, XIV, 599-600.

[551] Kühn, X, 1, 76.

[552] Kühn, X, 609.

[553] Kühn, X, 4-5.

[554] Kühn, X, 10.

[555] Kühn, XII, 909, 916, and in vol. XIV the entire treatise _De remediis parabilibus_.

[556] Kühn, X, 560.

[557] Kühn, X, 1010-11.

[558] Kühn, XIII, 571-72.

[559] Kühn, XIV, 62, and see Puschmann, _History of Medical Education_ (1891), p. 108.

[560] Kühn, XIV, 10, 30, 79; and see Puschmann (1891), 109-11, where there is bibliography of the subject.

[561] Kühn, X, 792.

[562] Kühn, XIV, 26.

[563] The meaning of the word “apothecary” is explained as follows in a fourteenth century manuscript at Chartres which is a miscellany of religious treatises with a bestiary and lapidary and bears the title, “Apothecarius moralis monasterii S. Petri Carnotensis.”

“Apothecarius est, secundum Hugucium, qui nonnullas diversarum rerum species in apothecis suis aggregat.. .. Apothecarius dicitur is qui species aromaticas et res quacunque arti medicine et cirurgie necessarias habet penes se et venales exponit,” fol. 3. “According to Hugutius an apothecary is one who collects samples of various commodities in his stores. An apothecary is called one who has at hand and exposes for sale aromatic species and all sorts of things needful in medicine and surgery.”

[564] The nest of the fabled cinnamon bird was supposed to contain supplies of the spice, which Herodotus (III, 111) tells us the Arabian merchants procured by leaving heavy pieces of flesh for the birds to carry to their nests, which then broke down under the excessive weight. In Aristotle’s _History of Animals_ (IX, 13) the nests are shot down with arrows tipped with lead. For other allusions to the cinnamon bird in classical literature see D’Arcy W. Thompson, _A Glossary of Greek Birds_, Oxford, 1895, p. 82.

[565] Kühn, XIV, 64-66.

[566] _Ad Pisonem de theriaca_, Kühn, XIV, 217.

[567] Kühn, XIII, 704.

[568] Kühn, XII, 168-78.

[569] M. Berthelot, “Sur les voyages de Galien et de Zosime dans l’Archipel et en Asie, et sur la matière médicale dans l’antiquité,” in _Journal des Savants_ (1895), pp. 382-7. The article is chiefly devoted to showing that an alchemistic treatise attributed to Zosimus copies Galen’s account of his trips to Lemnos and Cyprus. Of such future copying of Galen we shall encounter many more instances.

As for the _terra sigillata_, C. J. S. Thompson, in a paper on “Terra Sigillata, a famous medicament of ancient times,” published in the _Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Congress of Medical Sciences_, London, 1913, Section XXIII, pp. 433-44, tells of various medieval substitutes for the Lemnian earth from other places, and of the interesting religious ceremony, performed in the presence of the Turkish officials on only one day in the year by Greek monks who had replaced the priestess of Diana. Pierre Belon witnessed it on August 6th, 1533. By that time there were many varieties of the tablets, “because each lord of Lemnos had a distinct seal.” When Tozer visited Lemnos in 1890 the ceremony was still performed annually on August sixth and must be completed before sunrise or the earth would lose its efficacy. Mohammedan khodjas now shared in the religious ceremony, sacrificing a lamb. But in the twentieth century the entire ceremony was abandoned. Through the early modern centuries the _terra sigillata_ continued to be held in high esteem in western Europe also, and was included in pharmacopeias as late as 1833 and 1848. Thompson gives a chemical analysis of a sixteenth century tablet of the Lemnian earth and finds no evidence therein of its possessing any medicinal property. Agricola in the sixteenth century wrote in his work on mining (_De re metal._, ed. Hoover, 1912, II, 31), “It is, however, very little to be wondered at that the hill in the Island of Lemnos was excavated, for the whole is of a reddish-yellow color which furnishes for the inhabitants that valuable clay so especially beneficial to mankind.”

[570] Kühn, XIV, 72.

[571] Kühn, XII, 226-9. See the article of Berthelot just cited in a preceding note for an explanation of the three names and of Galen’s experience. Mr. Hoover, in his translation of Agricola’s work on metallurgy (1912), pp. 573-4, says, “It is desirable here to enquire into the nature of the substances given by all of the old mineralogists under the Latinized Greek terms, chalcitis, misy, sory, and melanteria.” He cites Dioscorides (V, 75-77) and Pliny (NH, XXXIV, 29-31) on the subject, but not Galen. Yule (1903) I, 126, notes that Marco Polo’s account of _Tutia_ and _Spodium_ “reads almost like a condensed translation of Galen’s account of _Pompholyx_ and _Spodos_.”

[572] Kühn, XIV, 7-8; XIII, 411-2; XII, 215-6.

[573] Kühn, XIV, 22-23, 77-78; XIII, 119.

[574] Kühn, XIV, 255-56. The beasts of course were also in demand for the arena.

[575] Kühn, X, 456-57, opening passage of the seventh book.

[576] περὶ τῶν ἰδίων βιβλίων, Kühn, XIX, 8ff.; and περὶ τῆς τάξεως τῶν ἰδίων βιβλίων, XIX, 49 ff.

[577] See, for instance, in the _De methodo medendi_ itself, X, 895-96 and 955.

[578] Kühn, XIV, 651: henceforth this text will generally be cited without name.

[579] XIX, 8.

[580] II, 217.

[581] XIX, 9.

[582] XIX, 41.

[583] II, 283.

[584] XIV, 630.

[585] XIX, 34.

[586] XV, 109.

[587] XIII, 995-96; XIV, 31-32.

[588] X, 633. Duruy refers to the passage in his _History of Rome_ (ed. J. P. Mahaffy, Boston, 1886, V, i, 273), but says, “Extensive sanitary works were undertaken throughout all Italy, and the celebrated Galen, who was almost a contemporary, extols their happy effects upon the public health.” But Galen does not have sanitary considerations especially in mind, since he mentions Trajan’s road-building only by way of illustration, comparing his own systematic treatment of medicine to the emperor’s great work in repairing and improving the roads, straightening them by cut-offs that saved distance, but sometimes abandoning an old road that went straight over hills for an easier route that avoided them, filling in wet and marshy spots with stone or crossing them by causeways, bridging impassable rivers, and altering routes that led through places now deserted and beset by wild beasts so that they would pass through populous towns and more frequented areas. The passage thus bears witness to a shifting of population.

[589] V, 49.

[590] V, 17-19.

[591] Mentioned in _Acts_, xviii, 18, “ ... having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow.”

[592] V, 46-47.

[593] X, 3-4.

[594] X, 831-36; XIII, 513; XIV, 27-29, and 14-19 on the heating and storage of wine.

[595] IV, 777-79.

[596] Similarly Milward (1733), p. 102, wrote of Alexander of Tralles, “He has in most distempers a separate article concerning wine and I much doubt whether there be in all nature a more excellent medicine than this in the hands of a skillful and judicious practitioner.”

[597] IV, 821.

[598] Kühn, VIII, 579, ὡς εἰς Μωϋσοῦ καὶ Χριστοῦ διατριβὴν ἀφιγμένος νόμων ἀναποδεἍκίτων ἀκούη

[599] _Ibid._, p. 657, θᾶττον γὰρ ἄν τις τοὺς ἀπὸ Μωϋσοῦ καὶ Χριστοῦ μεταδιδάξειεν I have been unable to find a passage in which, according to Moses Maimonides of the twelfth century in his _Aphorisms_ from Galen, Galen said that the wealthy physicians and philosophers of his time were not prepared for discipline as were the followers of Moses and Christ. Perhaps it is a mistranslation of one of the above passages. Particula 24 (56), “medici et philosophi cum aere augmentati non sunt preparati ad disciplinam sicut parati fuerunt ad disciplinam moysis et christi socii predictorum. decimotercio megapulsus.”

[600] Kühn, III, 905-7.

[601] Kühn, XI, 690-4; XII, 372-5.

[602] Finlayson (1895); pp. 8-9; Harnack, _Medicinisches aus der ältesten Kirchengeschichte_, Leipzig, 1892.

[603] Wellmann (1914), p. 16 note.

[604] Kühn, IV, 816.

[605] Kühn, IV, 815.

[606] Quoted by Eusebius, V, 28, and reproduced by Harnack, _Medicinisches aus der ältesten Kirchengeschichte_, 1892, p. 41, and by Finlayson (1895), pp. 9-10.

[607] Kühn, X, 16-17. J. Leminne, _Les quatre éléments_, in _Mémoires couronnés par l’Académie de Belgique_, vol. 65, Brussels, 1903, traces the influence of the theory in medieval thought.

[608] Kuhn, XIII, 763-4.

[609] Kühn, I, 428.

[610] Kühn, X, 111.

[611] Kühn, XII, 166.

[612] I, 417.

[613] XIV, 250-53.

[614] XIII, 948.

[615] X, 657.

[616] X, 872.

[617] XIX, 344-45.

[618] More recently Galen’s _Materia medica_ has been treated of in a German doctoral dissertation by L. Israelson, _Die materia medica des Klaudios Galenos_, 1894, 204 pp.

[619] X, 624.

[620] XIV, 253-54.

[621] V, 911.

[622] X, 817-19.

[623] X, 843.

[624] XIV, 281.

[625] XII, 270-71.

[626] X, 368-71.

[627] Kühn, VIII, 363. Finlayson (1895), pp. 39-40, gives an English translation of Galen’s full account of the case.

[628] Puschmann (1891), pp. 105-6. Vitruvius, too, however (V, iii), states that sound spreads in waves like eddies in a pond.

[629] XIII, 435, 893, are two instances.

[630] V, 80; XIV, 670.

[631] Various treatises on the pulse by Galen will be found in vols. V, IX, and X of Kühn’s edition.

[632] Galen’s contributions to the arts of clock-making and time-keeping have been dealt with in an article which I have not had access to and of which I cannot now find even the author and title.

[633] XIV, 631-34.

[634] C. V. Daremberg, _Exposition des connaissances de Galien sur l’anatomie, la physiologie, et la pathologie du système nerveux_, Paris, 1841. J. S. Milne discussed “Galen’s Knowledge of Muscular Anatomy” at the International Congress of Medical Sciences held at London in 1913; see pp. 389-400 of the volume devoted to the history of medicine, Section XXIII.

[635] _Lancet_ (1896), p. 1139.

[636] I have failed to obtain K. F. H. Mark, _Herophilus, ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Medizin_, Carlsruhe, 1838.

[637] D’Arcy W. Thompson (1913), 22-23, thinks that the precedence of the heart over all other organs in appearing in the embryo of the chick led Aristotle to locate in it the central seat of the soul.

[638] XIV, 626-30.

[639] II, 683, 696. This and the other quotations in this paragraph are from Dr. Payne’s Harveian Oration as printed in _The Lancet_ (1896), pp. 1137-39.

[640] Kühn, V, 216, cited by Payne.

[641] Kühn, II, 642-49; IV, 703-36, “An in arteriis natura sanguis contineatur.” J. Kidd, _A Cursory Analysis of the Works of Galen so far as they relate to Anatomy and Physiology_, in _Transactions of the Provincial Medical and Surgical Association_, VI (1837), 299-336.

[642] _Lancet_ (1896), p. 1137, where Payne states that Colombo (_De re anatomica_, Venet. 1559, XIV, 261) was the first to prove by experiment on the living heart that these veins conveyed blood from the lungs.

[643] II, 146-47.

[644] II, 384-86.

[645] II, 220-21.

[646] Augustine testifies in two passages of his _De anima et eius origine_ (Migne PL 44, 475-548), that vivisection of human beings was practiced as late as his time, the early fifth century: IV, 3, “Medici tamen qui appellantur anatomici per membra per venas per nervos per ossa per medullas per interiora vitalia etiam vivos homines quamdiu inter manus rimantium vivere potuerunt dissiciendo scrutati sunt ut naturam corporis nossent”; and IV, 6 (Migne, PL 44, 528-9).

[647] II, 537.

[648] II, 619-20.

[649] II, 701.

[650] II, 631 ff.

[651] XIII, 599-600. Galen states that the pontifex’s term of office was seven months, a fact which perhaps had some astrological bearing.

[652] X, 454-55.

[653] II, 682.

[654] II, 291.

[655] IV, 360, _et passim_.

[656] IV, 687.

[657] IV, 694, 696.

[658] IV, 688.

[659] IV, 700.

[660] IV, 692; II, 537. Others contend, he says (IV, 693), that one soul constructs the parts and another soul incites them to voluntary motion.

[661] IV, 701.

[662] II, 28.

[663] XVIII B, 17ff.

[664] _De usu partium_, XI, 14 (Kühn, III, 905-7). The passage seems to me an integral part of the work and not a later interpolation. Moses Maimonides in the twelfth century took exception at some length, in the 25th _Particula_ of his _Aphorisms_ from Galen, to this criticism of his national law-giver.