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
Simeon copies freely from Galen and our author. Upon the whole, he says,
the blood which fishes form is thinner than that from land animals. Fish,
he says, is the most proper food of invalids and convalescents.
Alexander Aphrodisiensis discusses the question why rock fishes are
peculiarly excellent, and decides that it is because the water about
rocks is constantly in motion, which keeps the fishes there in perpetual
exercise. (Prob. ii, 82.) He would appear to have had in view Galen, (de
Facult. Alim. iii, 20.) Considering that rock fishes are particularly
commended by all the authorities on dietetics, both Greek and Arabian,
it has justly excited the wonder of Joannes Bruyerinus Campegius and
Ludovicus Nonnius, two very learned writers on the _Res Alimentaria_ of
the ancients, that Celsus should rank the “pisces saxatiles” among the
“res mali succi.” (ii. 21.) This appears the more remarkable, as he had
previously (18) classed “omnes sexatiles” among the “res leviores,” and
had said again of them, “levior piscis inter saxa editus, quam in arena.”
Taking all this into consideration, we cannot hesitate in coming to the
conclusion that in the passage first quoted the text must be in fault.
We beg to offer, as a conjectural emendation, “fluviatiles.” Galen,
Xenocrates, Psellus, Seth, and other authorities, agree in condemning
river fishes, with the exception of those that run up from the sea. We
may further mention, as tending to confirm this conjecture, that the same
character of river fishes is given by the great Italian authority on
dietetics, Domenico Romoli. (See Singulare Dottrina, &c. vii, 50.)
Rhases states that sea and river fishes are the best, especially such
as have rough scales, are not mucilaginous, and are naturally of a
white colour. Those, he adds, which are of a black or red colour should
be abstained from. He says that all fish remains long in the stomach
undigested. It is now generally admitted that it is less digestible than
the tender flesh of quadrupeds.
Avicenna delivers the general characters of fishes in the same terms as
Galen. He says that the best are those the flesh of which is neither too
hard and dry; nor, on the other hand, too mucilaginous; and which are
neither very large nor very small. Averrhoes repeats this account of
them. Haly Abbas, in like manner, abridges Galen. He says that fresh fish
is of a cold and humid nature, and engenders phlegm.
The ancients ate their fish either roasted, boiled, fried, or in soups.
Invalids were recommended to take them boiled. The fried were believed to
suit only with persons of a strong constitution.
We shall now offer a few remarks upon the fishes which were in most
request at the tables of the ancients.
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