The seven books of Paulus Ægineta, volume 1 (of 3) : $b translated from the Greek: with a commentary embracing a complete view of the knowledge possessed by the Greeks, Romans, and Arabians on all subjects connected with medicine and surgeryPaulus, Aegineta
History
The seven books of Paulus Ægineta, volume 1 (of 3) : $b translated from the Greek: with a commentary embracing a complete view of the knowledge possessed by the Greeks, Romans, and Arabians on all subjects connected with medicine and surgery
Paulus, Aegineta
Medicine; Medicine, Arab; Medicine, Greek and Roman
Among quadrupeds, swine’s flesh is more nourishing than any other food,
because it is most nearly allied to the human in taste and smell, as
some have declared who have tasted human flesh by mistake. But the
nourishment derived from it is viscid and imperspirable. That from sheep
is excrementitious, and supplies bad juices. That from goats is acrid,
and has bad juices. But the worst of all is the flesh of the buck-goat
as to the quality of its juices and to digestion. That of oxen forms
melancholic humours; that of hares has thick juices, but less so than
that of sheep and oxen. That of roes is hard and of difficult digestion.
In general, the flesh of young beasts is more humid, more tender, and
more digestible than that of the aged; of gelded animals than of those
having testicles; and of the well-fed than of the lean.
* * * * *
COMMENTARY. Athenæus remarks that the flesh of beasts, especially oxen,
formed the principal part of men’s food in the heroic ages, as appears
from Homer. From one passage in the Iliad (xxiv, 263), and another in
the Odyssey (ix, 220), it may be reasonably conjectured that they also
lived upon lambs and kids. (Deipn. i, 19.) We may add, that Sophocles
represents Philoctetes as living, while in Lemnos, upon the birds which
he killed with his fatal bow. It is generally supposed that Pythagoras
interdicted his disciples entirely from the flesh of animals; but the
truth of the matter seems to be, that he recommended a spare use of
it, and allowed to eat such animals only as were used for sacrifices.
See Iamblichus and Porphyrius (De Vitâ Pythagoræ.) Plutarch, in two
treatises, discusses the propriety of eating flesh.
Hippocrates states the particular characters of the different kinds
of flesh very correctly. He remarks that the flesh of wild animals is
lighter than that of domesticated.
According to Aristotle, the flesh of beasts which have been reared upon
marsh pasture is less wholesome than that of beasts brought up on higher
grounds. (Hist. An. viii, 12.)
The general remarks of Celsus may best be given in his own words:
“Quadrupes omne animal, si lactens est, minus alimenti præstat. Omne
etiam ferum animal domestico levius; et quodcunque humido cœlo, quam quod
sicco natum est. Deinde eadem omnia pinguia, quam macra; recentia quam
salsa; nova quam vetusta, plus alimenti habent. Tum res eadem magis alit
jurulenta, quam assa; magis assa, quam elixa.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account