The seven books of Paulus Ægineta, volume 2 (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 2 (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
Nicander (Theriaca et Alexipharmaca); Dioscorides (Liber de Venenis);
Celsus (v); Scribonius Largus (47, et seq.); Galen (Ther. ad Pison.;
Meth. Med., De Antid.); Aëtius (xiii); Pliny (Hist. Nat. pluries);
Oribasius (de Morb. Curat. iii); Solinus (Polyhist. 40); Serenus
Samonicus; Nonnus; Simeon Seth (de Alimentis pluries); Actuarius (Meth.
Med. v); Vegetius (de Mulo-medicina, iii, 77); Avicenna (iv, 6); Rhases
(ad Mansor. viii, and Cont. xxxv); Haly Abbas (Pract. iv, Theor. viii);
Alsaharavius (Pract. xxx); Serapion (pluries); Anonymi (Fragmentum apud
Bernardi Reliq.) The work of Ælius Promotus on Venomous Animals and
Poisonous substances, which exists in MS. in the Bibliotheca Vaticana,
has never been published as far as we know. It is quoted by Hieronymus
Mercurialis (Var. lect), and is noticed by Albertus Fabricius (Bibl.
Græc. xiii, 780.) Fabricius supposes it to be the production of Æschrion
Empiricus. It is proper to state that whenever we quote the work, it is
from the extracts given in Schneider’s Annotations on Nicander.
It is to be borne in mind that the work on Poisons, usually published as
the production of Dioscorides, is not held to be genuine by his latest
editor, Sprengel; still, however, it is acknowledged by all to be a
work of considerable antiquity and of great authority on the subject of
ancient Toxicology. The work ‘Euporistôn,’ which is also published with
the works of Dioscorides, is generally admitted not to be genuine. It
contains, however, some valuable matter on Toxicology and other medical
subjects.
These directions of our author for driving away reptiles are mostly taken
from Nicander, who recommends fumigations with hartshorn, gagate-stones,
sulphur, bitumen, galbanum, juniper, and other such articles. (Ther. 35.)
See also Dioscorides (M. M.); Orpheus (de Lapidibus); Geopon. (xiii, 8);
and Nonnus (Epit. 261); also Aristot. (H. N. iv, 8); and Pliny (H. N. x,
90).
Virgil makes mention of this practice:
“Disce et odoratam stabulis accendere cedrum,
Galbaneoque agitare graves nidore chelydros.”
_Georg._ iii, 314.
See a long list of substances used in fumigations for driving away
serpents in Lucan. (Pharsal. ix, 916.) It is different from that of
Nicander and our author. For example: it contains tamarix, costus,
thapsos, &c. Arsenic occurs among the articles mentioned by Rhases.
(Cont. xxxv.) It is also mentioned in the Geoponics (l. c.)
Nicander affirms, and it has been generally believed, that human saliva
proves destructive to serpents. Galen says that it will kill the
scorpion. Aristotle states, that it is destructive to most venomous
reptiles. (H. A. viii, 28.) Redi maintains that this is an ancient error;
but Andreas Laurentius declares that he knew from experience that the
human saliva is destructive to serpents.
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