Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_5300_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
theory are specifically focused on the evidence of the location of the
psychic pneuma. The study in this chapter explores the overlap of the
domains of nervous and cardiac systems, thus building on the conclusions
on Galen’s understanding of vitality in Chapter and laying the ground
for the understanding of the overall unity of Galenic physiology.
This chapter consists of four large sections. Section . is dedicated to a
study of the many ways in which Galen differentiates breathing, including
respiration and transpiration, forced and unforced breathing. The aim of
this section is to distinguish and clarify the ways in which, according to
him, breathing takes place and which parts participate in which kinds of
breathing. The other three sections are, broadly speaking, dedicated to the
question of the physiological significance of breathing. They are organised
around the three types of pneuma, although some subsections involve
studies of other pertinent notions. Section . is, broadly speaking, dedi-
cated to the study of the vital pneuma, and its leading preoccupation is the
question of how, according to Galen, breathing maintains vitality or,
alternatively, why animals die when deprived of breath. Apart from the
study of Galen’s position on this matter, this section also addresses the
notion of the innate heat and discusses the significance of a rarely discussed
division of parts into solids, fluids and pneumata. Section . focuses on
the generation and activities of the psychic pneuma, including its role as an
instrument of the soul. Section . briefly addresses the question of the so-
called natural pneuma, of whose existence Galen was uncertain, before
turning to the discussion of the significance of the cardiac system for the
unity of the animal body.
. Anatomy of the Breathing Process
In order to understand why breathing is the hallmark of animal vitality,
we need to answer the question of what purpose it serves in the body, and
Galen does provide an extensive discussion of this matter. However,
before turning to this issue, it is worth spending a little time on the
process of breathing itself. The anatomy of breathing can c ome across as
a slightl y tedious subject, but it hides a number of significant insights
about Galen’s attempts to theorise neatly a phenomenon that he recog-
nises as complex and multifaceted.
windpipe, speech would not be immediately destroyed when certain nerves have been cut in the neck
or the head.’
Respiration and Transpiration
It is evident that breathing consists of different motions: animals can
hold their breath, slow it down or speed it up, make it deeper or shallower
and so on. These are just some types of conscious breathing, but most of
the time, humans are not aware of their breathing at all. Such a range of
motion was well observed by ancient theorists of the human body too.
Doxographical sources offer a valuable glimpse into the popular explan-
ations.
Galen’s account of breathing survives in by far the most elaborate
form, with multiple classifications.
The key distinction is between respiration (ἀναπνοή) and transpiration
(διαπνοή). The former is defined as breathing via the larynx, the latter via
the skin of the whole body.
Respiration is further divided into forced and
unforced kinds, and this distinction, anatomical in nature, will be dis-
cussed later. The fundamental distinction in the theory of breathing,
however, concerns voluntary and involuntary motion. According to him,
breathing mostly falls under the dominion of the heart,
by and large, and
therefore it is involuntary. He also argues that the intelligent design of the
human body providently allowed for some control of breath via voluntary
motion. This type of motion occurs in virtue of the soul, while the
involuntary type occurs owing to nature, and they originate from the
nervous and the cardiac systems, respectively.
The discussion of nutri-
tion in Chapter also produced a very similar kind of division, only in that
case, the motions of nature were attributed to the vegetative soul. While in
the case of nutrition, the distinction served to differentiate between the
lack of nutriment in tissues and the perception of that lack, in this case, it
differentiates between voluntary and involuntary breathing. The relevant
background here is the Timaeus’ tripartition of the souls that notably
describes the two lower souls as a subdivision of the irrational soul.
In denoting both lower souls as ‘nature’, however, Galen applies the Stoic
nomenclature to the Platonic concept.
The contrast between the nature and the soul is a useful heuristic tool
that helps to distinguish between the roles different organs play in any
physiological process and therefore it is not entirely surprising that ‘nature’
See, for example, Aëtius .. Mansfeld and Runia, containing accounts of both voluntary and
involuntary types of breathing put forth by Empedocles, Asclepiades and Herophilus.
Comp. Med. Loc. . (.K); Hipp. Epid. . (b.–K); Hipp. Vict. (.K); Plat.
Tim. Fr. (Larrain); Symp. Diff. . Gundert (.K).
UP . (., – Helmreich¼.K). See Debru (: –) for the metaphorical language
(and its historic background) Galen uses to describe the heart.
The voluntary motion is discussed in greater detail in Chapter .
Ti. C–D.
See Hankinson (a:n); see also von Staden (: ) for a suggestion that the Stoic
terminology might have been inspired by the Alexandrian doctors.
. Anatomy of the Breathing Process
applies to both the vegetative and the spirited domains. Furthermore, it is
worth noting that Galen models these two domains in very similar ways
too. One pertinent example is his account of respiration, outlined in On
the Causes of Respiration as follows: when an animal breathes in through the
nose, the air (ἀήρ) is drawn in, and a small part of it goes to the brain while
the larger part of it is taken via the trachea to the lungs.
Nothing else is
said of what happens to this portion of air in this treatise, but his other
texts explain that it nourishes the psychic pneuma, and this point will be
discussed later. The larger portion of air goes into the lungs via the trachea.
The lungs are described as the great stomach of pneuma (ὁ δὲ πνεύμων οἷα
βαθὺς γαστὴρ ὑπόκειται τῷ πνεύματι).
The language is evocative
enough: the lungs process air just like the stomach crushes food. But the
similarity does not end here. Galen continues by noting that the thorax
steers (οἰακίζει) the lungs. Thus, both the stomach and the lungs are under
dominion of other organs and recipients of external motion.
The position of the lungs, however, is more complex than the position
of the stomach, which simply belongs to the system controlled by the liver.
To the extent that the lungs are subordinate to the heart, they resemble the
stomach.
But the fact that the lungs are steered by the thorax also
indicates that they are subordinate to the nervous system too, since the
thorax itself is moved by muscles and articulated by bones.
Strikingly, for
Galen, the organ peculiar to respiration neither initiates nor controls
respiratory motions.
An indirect target of this Galenic point might be Herophilus’ view.
Although little survives of the Herophilean account, the extant evidence
highlights that he maintained that the lungs have their own innate
motion.
His account is an alternative to the Aristotelian account that
Caus. Resp. ( Furley and Wilkie¼.K). For the distinction of the surrounding air and the
air that is breathed in, see also Thras. (, – Helmreich¼.K).
This language most likely predates Galen, because Ps. Aristotle’s De Spiritu a– reports
Aristogenes as claiming that pneuma is nourished by respiration, when air is digested in the lungs
(Ἀριστογένης ...τροφὴνγὰροἴεται καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα πεττομένου τοῦἀέρος ἐντῷ πνεύμονι). For the
authorship and medical significance of this treatise, see Lewis and Gregoric ().
Even to the extent that it is not an absolutely vital organ. It is worth remembering that some of the
breathing takes place as transpiration (discussed later in greater detail), which forgoes the lungs
completely. Galen also describes an experiment of covering the mouth of a boy, thus preventing
him from lung respiration, and the boy staying alive, owing to respiration through skin; Ut. Resp.
. ( Furley and Wilkie¼.–K).
Caus. Resp. ( Furley and Wilkie¼.K).
In Ut. Resp. . ( Furley and Wilkie¼.K), Galen states that the lungs are the first organ of
respiration, but in so far as it is moved by the thorax, it is, properly speaking, second.
Aëtius .. Mansfeld and Runia; Ps. Galen Hist. Phil. ¼Tc von Staden, see also von
Staden (: –).
Respiration and Transpiration
posits the rise and fall of the innate heat as the source of respiratory
motion.
In a sense, Galen goes back to the Aristotelian model in making
the lungs subject to the external mover, although this mover now is the
nerves and the muscles, rather than the heart. This naturally renders
respiration voluntary. The strength of Galen’s account is that it can explain
very easily how animals are able to modify the breath, including holding it,
deepening it, slowing it down and so on. When accounting for such a
range of motions, he uses both philosophical and anatomical knowledge.
The overall conceptualisation of the phenomenon is built on a famous
philosophical motif.
Galen outlines the causes of respiration in the treatise On the Causes of
Respiration as follows: the capacity of choice, the instruments (organs) that
aid this capacity and the purpose (chreia) for which the former two are
necessary.
He comes back to this tripartite formula at the very end of the
treatise, reiterating it with a rather poetic simile: ‘Choice is like a charioteer
who moves the reins and the horses; the nerves are like the reins, and the
muscles are like the horses; similarly the use is the desired end of respir-
ation, as victory is of chariot racing.’
This imagery appears to be built on
the famous chariot simile in Plato’s Phaedrus.
This dialogue is of great
importance to Galen,
so it is no wonder he uses this motif here too.
Yet there are clear differences between the Platonic and the Galenic
chariots. The key aspect of Plato’s simile is the conflict between the horses,
leading to the disorderly and painful motion of the chariot.
A Galenic
charioteer, by contrast, would be enjoying a leisurely ride most of the time
as there is no conflict between muscles.
The parts do not have different
I am following von Staden (: –), on the basis of Aristotle’s Resp. –
(b–b).
Caus. Resp. ( Furley and Wilkie¼.–K). This appears to be a formulaic claim, cf., for
example, Diff. Puls. . (.K), for the same type of formulation but in reference to the causes of
the pulse. See also the discussion of the significance of this formulation in Chapter . For a
discussion of the notion of chreia and how it differs from activities, see Furley and Wilkie (:
–).
Caus. Resp. ( Furley and Wilkie¼.K), tr. Furley and Wilkie (: ): ἡ μὲνγὰρ
προαίρεσις ἔοικε τῷ κινοῦντι τὰς ἡνίας καὶ τοὺς ἵππους ἀναβάτῃ· ταῖςδ’ ἡνίαις τὰ νεῦρα ἐοίκασι,
καθάπερ καὶἵπποις οἱ μύες· οὕτω δὲ καὶἡχρεία τὸἔσχατον ὀρεκτὸν καθέστηκε τῆς ἀναπνοῆς,
ὥσπερ ἡ νίκη τῆς ἡνιοχικῆς.
See esp. Phdr. D–A. On the importance of the Phaedrus to Galen, see Rocca (: esp.
–) and Tieleman ().
For a more thorough discussion, see Rocca ( ), and more recently, Tieleman ().
Phdr. A–B.
In principle, there is room for such a conflict, because respiration involves organs from different
systems, which, in the Platonic model in the Phaedrus, have conflicting desires. Galen makes no
note of such a conflict here, and it is quite clear why: it is hard to see how respiration could be
explained by a presence of a conflict. Furthermore, Galen generally seems to think of human nature,
. Anatomy of the Breathing Process
desires that might pull them in different directions. Only a disease or an
injury to one of the parts would disrupt the physiological process carried
out in this manner.
The emphasis on the muscles is undoubtedly intentional, because in
another treatise, On Problematical Movements, Galen explains the signifi-
cance of the intercostal muscles for respiration, which he describes as the
discovery made by his recent predecessors to which he himself added.
According to him, until the time of his teachers, the diaphragm was
considered to be the most important organ of respiration.
Galen, how-
ever, claims he discovered the importance of the intercostal muscles by
means of dissection. He explains how he showed that the upper part of the
thorax is moved by muscles stretching down from the neck, and the
middle parts by the intercostals. These paired muscles expand and contract
the thorax, while other muscles only make it expand. He experimented
with ligating the nerves moving these muscles, thus depriving the thorax of
motion without opening it.
He notes that this demonstration, which he
taught to his friends too,
is the best proof for respiration being voluntary:
‘For the thorax immediately becomes immobile and the animal soon dies
with its head thrown back, since, although it wishes to breathe, it cannot
move its thorax.’
.. Forced and Unforced Respiration
These muscles, then, play the role of the horses in the chariot simile.
As already mentioned, Galenic horses are not in conflict with one another.
The reason for this is the fact that each muscle is assigned a different
at least on the physiological level, as consisting of parts cooperating in harmony. This problem is
addressed more extensively in Chapters and .
See van der Eijk (: esp. ) for the Galenic concept of disease as merely a possible – but not
unavoidable – interruption of the overall well-designed human physiology.
Mot. Dub. .– (, –, Nutton). This treatise survives only in Latin and Arabic
translations. For an in-depth discussion of the textual tradition and translations, see Nutton and
Bos (: –). I will be citing the Latin translation.
Mot. Dub. . (, – Nutton).
The procedure, including advice on the choice of surgical instruments, is covered in detail in AA .
(– Garofalo¼.–K).
On the public nature of Galen’s demonstrations of these dissections, see Salas (: –).
Mot. Dub. .– (, Nutton) tr. Nutton and Bos (: ): inmobilis enim fit thorax
confestim et animal mox moritur curvatum quidem quia desiderans inspirare, non potens autem movere
thoracem. The claim is followed by a remark stating that these things were discovered by Galen’s
predecessors, although he was able to add to them. Among these predecessors are certainly the
Alexandrian doctors, especially Herophilus (see also Chapter ). For a biographic discussion of
Galen’s engagement with the topic, see Debru (: –).
Respiration and Transpiration
movement and thus is responsible for a different kind of respiration. This
becomes especially clear in Galen’s account of forced (βίαιος) and unforced
(ἀβίαστος) respiration in On Causes of Respiration.InOn the Doctrines of
Hippocrates and Plato, he describes the former as occurring in sickness or
during intense physical exercise and the latter as occurring in a healthy and
calm state of the body.
The two types of respiration have two parts each,
so there are four parts altogether as well as four groups of muscles
performing these motions.
They are as follows: in the case of unforced
respiration, the diaphragm is responsible for breathing in and the abdomen
muscles for breathing out.
In the case of forced respiration, the muscles
around the hollows of the shoulder blades and the inner intercostal
muscles are responsible for breathing in. The outer intercostal muscles,
meanwhile, are the proper organs for forced breathing out.
As already noted, Galen’s choice to adopt the Phaedrian chariot motif
might seem not entirely fitting. The key point of the original is to
exemplify the conflict, but the conflict in the case of respiration is hardly
possible, as muscle motions cannot be at odds with each other per se.
A closer look at the way in which Galen describes the forced and unforced
motions shows that his use of the simile is more likely motivated by the
need for a uni fied explanatory device. He is using the simile not as an
illustration of a conflict but as an illustration of a control mechanism. The
question of control is, after all, key to the account of respiration.
However, the scope of the controlled motion is not always clear. The
unforced respiration especially does not seem to sit easily in the category of
voluntary action. Much breathing via the lungs is done, after all, without
intention or any thought at all. Galen himself notes that some people think
that breathing during sleep shows respiration to be involuntary.
He does
not agree with this view, as the description of the dissection at the end of
Section . shows: nerve ligature in muscles stretching from the neck
down evidently stops respiration, making it a voluntary act. However, he
does not entirely dismiss the ancient knowledge of assigning the key role to
the diaphragmatic breathing either. The key passage here comes from
PHP ..– de Lacy (.– K); this brief discussion also makes a reference to Causes of
Respiration at .. de Lacy (.K).
Caus. Resp. ( Furley and Wilkie¼.K).
The diaphragm is full of nervous tissue, so it moves like a muscle; Caus. Resp. ( Furley and
Wilkie¼.K). See Us. Puls. . ( Furley and Wilkie¼.K), where breathing out is
described as a passive relaxation of the expanded thorax. See also UP . (.
Helmreich¼.K).
Caus. Resp. ( Furley and Wilkie¼.K).
Mot. Dub. . (, – Nutton).
. Anatomy of the Breathing Process
Anatomical Procedures, which states that the movement of breathing is
initiated from below by the diaphragm, which expands and contracts in
accordance to its own tension and relaxation, thus initiating respiration.
The respiration in the lower thorax, therefore, is said to be a physical, not a
psychic act.
Although this claim appears to contradict the demonstration cited at the
end of Section . (showing that once certain nerves are ligated, the
dissected animal dies of suffocation, which demonstrates that nerves
control respiration), it is not entirely the case. The key point here is the
relationship between the motions of the diaphragm and the organs con-
trolling respiration. While Galen highlights the significance of the dia-
phragm for breathing (also praising anatomists for discovering it), this
organ is not fully responsible for respiration according to him: it causes
movement only in the lower part of the thorax, while the upper part and
the intermediate parts are moved by the intercostal and the neck
muscles.
This leads to two possibilities: the unforced respiration via the dia-
phragm is, in fact, involuntary. If this is the case, then the question arises
as to why the vivisected animal dies: why does the involuntary respiration
via the diaphragm not continue when the nerves of the upper muscles are
ligated, keeping the animal alive? Evidently, the movement of the lower
thorax cannot be sufficient for a full breath. But if that is the case, then
how can animals breathe while asleep?
A solution can be found by employing the differentiation of parts. The
diaphragm has its own motion, which is called physical rather than
psychic. It is, therefore, a self-managing part, whose activities are enabled
by its own innate natural capacities. It also has muscles and nerves
connecting it to the governing part of the nervous system, the brain.
The diaphragm, therefore, belongs to the category of parts that are both
self-managing and governed by the principal parts.
The tension and relaxation of the diaphragm originate in its natural
capacities (just like ‘drawing’ in the veins and the stomach; the account of
AA . ( Garofalo¼.K): Τῆςδ’ ὅλης αὐτοῦ κινήσεως ἐναργῶς ἐξηγοῦνται κάτω μὲναἱ
φρένες αὐταὶ [τε] κατὰ τὴν ἑαυτῶν ἔντασίν τε καὶ χάλασιν ἐναλλὰξ γιγνομένην εὐρύνουσαί τε καὶ
συστέλλουσαι τὸ ταύτῃ πέρας, ἐπισπώμεναί τε κάτω μὲνδιὰ τοῦ ξιφοειδοῦς χόνδρου τὸ στέρνον,
ἄνω δέ πως ἀτρέμα καὶ πρόσω τὰς νόθας. καὶ τήν γε δόξασαν εἶναι φυσικὸν ἔργον, οὐ ψυχικὸν,
ἀναπνοὴν.
Mot. Dub. . (, – Nutton).
The tissues of the diaphragm are described in AA . ( Garofalo¼.–K) and . (–
Garofalo¼.–K).
Respiration and Transpiration
hunger, which also consists of both physical and psychic motions, serves as
a useful analogy here). The nerves ‘sense’ it, producing a psychic reaction
in the brain, which in turn triggers the motion of the motor nerves in the
neck and intercostal muscles. This reaction is voluntary, but it need not be
a product of intent, just like, for example, raising one’s arm to shield the
eye from bright light or pulling away from a barking dog. The motions of
the diaphragm, thus, trigger the motion in the nerves that move the upper
thorax. In this way, the entire thorax can move even during sleep. Once
the nerves in the muscles controlling the upper thorax are ligated, these
muscles cannot move, and the vivisected animal suffocates, indicating that
the diaphragmatic motion cannot compensate for the loss of motion in the
upper thorax. Thus, even unforced respiration belongs to the genus of
voluntary motion. Furthermore, the presence of the nerves, the reigns of
muscles,
means that unforced breathing can be altered and changed by
will. This activity does require intent, and it is an important part of the
overall human design that certain activities can be controlled intentionally.
Presumably, both forced and unforced respiration is voluntary not because
it requires an act of will to initiate it but because it can be subjected to the
will. This activity fundamentally differentiates any subtype of respiration
from the fully involuntary breathing that takes place in the arteries.
Transpiration, the involuntary arterial breathing, will be discussed in
Section ...
.. Transpiration
Transpiration, breathing through the whole body, is an important
example of the body’s innate ability to intake the air without deliberate
action, via pulsating arteries. Tr ans piration is somewhat less prominently
discussed than r espiration, and there are few side-by-side comparisons
between them, but the existing ones show that they share many key
features.
In On the Usefulness o f the Pulse, Galen argues that ‘what
respiration does for the heart alone is done by the pulse for the warmth that
This discussion, as well as the whole treatise, ends with a brief examination of the nerves involved in
respiration, all of which grow from the spinal medulla; Caus. Resp. ( Furley and
Wilkie¼.–K). The nervous system will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter .
On the Usefulness of the Pulse begins with the question of whether the purpose of the pulse is the
same as that of respiration or something else. Many doctors maintain it, yet, Galen warns, it is
important not to accept such claims uncritically; after all, the ceasing of pulse will not result in
death, unlike the ceasing of respiration; Us. Puls. . ( Furley and Wilkie¼.K).
. Anatomy of the Breathing Process
is all over the body’.
The purpose of transpiration and the attendant
notion of the innate heat will be discussed in Section ., together with
the purpose of respiration. Before turning to this discussion, it is important
to briefly cover the physiological process of transpiration.
Whereas respiration, as discussed earlier, is governed by the nervous
system,
the expansion and contraction of arteries is prompted by the
heart.
Both processes follow the same pattern: just like in respiration, so
too in the pulsation of arteries, expansion draws in pneuma, while con-
traction expels the residues of burning humours. The significant difference
is the involuntary nature of the cardiac motion and the voluntary nature of
the nervous motion. Galen presents the discussion of the origin of the
former in a polemical context.
Just as in the case of respiration, Galen presents his account as an
alternative to the flawed Erasistratean view that mechanistic processes
account for the activities of the arteries, emphatically maintaining that
arteries ‘do not expand because they are filled; they are filled because they
expand’.
The innate capacities of tissues, rather than mechanistic pro-
cesses, govern transpiration. Delving into the precise nature of the motion
of arteries, Galen further seeks to determine whether expansion or con-
traction, or both expansion and contraction, ought to be considered the
activities of the arteries. He concludes that both respiratory and transpira-
tory organs have innate contrary capacities.
They are used when the
residues from the burning of the humours build up, causing a desire in the
animal to blow out the breath forcefully. In a healthy state of the body,
breathing out is sufficient.
These motions are just like those of respir-
ation, the only difference being the source: pulse is moved by the physical
(or vital) capacity, respiration by the psychic.
A more extensive critique of the mechanistic account of transpiration
can be found in Book of On the Doctrines of Hippocrates and Plato, and
this attack is especially notable because it concerns one of Galen’s two
intellectual inspirations, Plato. In a fairly rare instance of criticism, Galen
Us. Puls. . ( Furley and Wilkie¼.K), tr. Furley and Wilkie (: ), slightly altered
replacing ‘breathing’ with ‘respiration’. See also the reiteration of this point at . ( Furley and
Wilkie¼.K).
Us. Puls. . ( Furley and Wilkie¼.K).
Us. Puls. . ( Furley and Wilkie¼.K).
Us. Puls. . ( Furley and Wilkie¼.K), tr. Furley and Wilkie (: ). For a discussion
of Erasistratus’ views, see von Staden (: –)
Us. Puls. . ( Furley and Wilkie¼.–K).
Us. Puls. . ( Furley and Wilkie¼.K).
Us. Puls. . ( Furley and Wilkie¼.K).
Respiration and Transpiration
points out that Plato made a mistake in conflating the causes of transpiration
for respiration and not following Hippocrates in this respect.
According to
him, Plato also did not recognise the role that the capacity of attraction
(which can also be observed while sucking water via a reed) plays in the
process of transpiration. Galen cites a long passage from the Timaeus with
the following faulty account: all breathing occurs via a circular pattern of
motion that takes place when one substance (a certain amount of pneuma)
pushes out another substance (another amount of pneuma). As there is no
void, the third substance is necessarily drawn in, and so the cycle con-
tinues.
This explanation is mechanistic, as Galen notes, it does away with
the capacity of attraction as an explanatory device.
The example of sucking water via the reed hints that the critique of
Plato is, indirectly, also a critique of the atomist doctors. This example is
not mentioned in the Timaeus.
Sucking through a reed is the standard
example found at the beginning of the treatises on pneumatics by Hero of
Alexandria and Philo of Byzantium.
It demonstrates the working
principle of a siphon, a foundational mechanism of pneumatic devices.
The account of respiration in the Timaeus uses the principle of horror
vacui, just like the operation of a siphon, as the central explanatory tool
for respiration.
Galen himself, meanwhile, makes the attractive capacity the key
explanatory tool. Respiration, Galen explains, is due to the sucking and
pushing motion exercised by the thorax and muscles. Whereas the motion
of the thorax is voluntary, the motion of the heart and arteries – pulsation –
is not,
and ‘by their dilation the arteries draw into the body the outside
air through the openings that extend to the skin, for three purposes: to
cool, to fan, and to generate psychic pneuma’.
When they contract, the
arteries squeeze out smoky and sooty humours.
PHP ..– de Lacy (.K) and .. de Lacy (.K). The target passage here is presumably
Ti. B–C; see Furley and Wilkie (: –). See also de Lacy (: –) for an overview of
Platonic errors and the grounds for his inferiority to Hippocrates, according to Galen.
PHP ..– de Lacy (.–K)¼Ti. A–C.
The difference between the two will be discussed in the process of examining the pneumatic system.
See Section . for the conclusion regarding this.
There is, however, a mention of cupping in the Timaeus (Ti. E–A). Both practices are often
used as examples when arguing for the existence of horror vacui (see, for example, Ps. Alexander of
Aphrodisias Pr. .; for further discussion of this passage, see Meeusen (: )). Perhaps Galen
misremembered which one was mentioned in the Timaeus.
Hero Spir. proem. – Schmidt. Philo of Byzantium’s Pneumatica survives in fragments and
translations; Arabic translation of .a describes wine tasting via a tube; see Prager (: ).
UP . (., – Helmreich¼.K), see also Chapter .
PHP .. de Lacy (.K), tr. de Lacy (–: ).
. Anatomy of the Breathing Process