MEDICINE AND PHILOSOPHY IN CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY

(Ron) #1
312 Late antiquity

And even if this were hidden in the parts, this would pose no problem for the


Methodists, who have proposed general treatments appropriate to diseases, even


medicaments with which particularly the hidden parts are to be treated. One should


know, then, that this disease [sc. catalepsy] originates from the same antecedent


causes by which the other diseases are brought about, indigestion, drunkenness, the


eating of meat and things similar to these., whose views are expounded


here, which we have humbly intended to put into Latin, tells that he has seen many


young children being laid low by this disease as a result of untimely or excessive


eating. Yet he says that it is not necessary to take account of a difference in preceding


causes for the treatment, as it is the present Methodists ought to observe.


( 13 ) nos autem superfluum fuisse causas passionis dicere iudicamus, cum sit nec-
essarium id, quod ex causis conficitur, edocere. multo autem ac magis superfluum


dicimus etiam causas antecedentes diffinitionibus adiungi. (Acut. 3. 19. 190 )


We however judge that it was superfluous to state the causes of a disease, when it


is necessary to set forth what is brought about by [these] causes. Yet even much


more superfluous we consider the inclusion of preceding causes in the definitions.


( 14 ) una est enim atque eadem passio ex qualibet veniens causa, quae una atque


eadem indigeat curatione. (Acut. 2. 13. 87 )


For the disease is one and the same, from whatever cause it comes, and it calls for


one and the same treatment.


( 15 ) sed non secundum has differentias erit efficacia curationis mutanda, siqui-


dem antecedentes causae, quamquam diuersae, unam facere passionem uideantur.


(Chron. 2. 14. 196 )


But the effectiveness of the treatment ought not to be changed in accordance with


these differences, as preceding causes, diverse though they are, seem to bring about


one [and the same] disease.


( 16 ) sunt autem passionis [sc. sanguinis fluoris] antecedentes causae, ut saepe appro-


batum est, percussio uel casus... sed non erit secundum has differentias curationis


regula commutanda. (Chron. 2. 9. 118 )


The preceding causes of this disease [sc. haemorrhage] are, as has often been


established, a blow, a fall... but the mode of treatment ought not to be changed


according to these differences.


All these passages (and there are several more in Caelius’ work making the

same point)^58 are in unison and confirm the disregard for causal explana-

tions of diseases which seems so characteristic of Methodism.

However, we frequently find Caelius engaged in the causal explanation

of a disease without any explicit reservation, usually in thesignificatioof the

disease, where he lists the antecedent causes of the disease (in the majority

(^58) E.g.Acut. 1. 1. 23 ; 3. 6. 64 ; 3. 22. 221.

Free download pdf