But, as has been frequently said already, the one starting-point of all this is a thorough-going enquiry into the question of the Warm, Cold, Dry and Moist; this Aristotle carried out in the second of his books “On Genesis and Destruction,” where he shows that all the transmutations and alterations throughout the body take place as a result of these principles. Erasistratus, however, advanced nothing against these or anything else that has been said above, but occupied himself merely with the word “boiling.”
ἀλλʼ, ὡς ἤδη λέλεκται πολλάκις, ἀρχὴ τούτων ἁπάντων ἐστὶ μία τὸ περὶ θερμοῦ καὶ ψυχροῦ καὶ ξηροῦ καὶ ὑγροῦ διασκέψασθαι, καθάπερ Ἀριστοτέλης ἐποίησεν ἐν τῷ δευτέρῳ περὶ γενέσεως καὶ φθορᾶς, ἀποδείξας ἁπάσας τὰς κατὰ τὰ σώματα μεταβολὰς καὶ ἀλλοιώσεις ὑπὸ τούτων γίγνεσθαι. ἀλλʼ Ἐρασίστρατος οὔτε τούτοις οὔτʼ ἄλλῳ τινὶ τῶν προειρημένων ἀντειπὼν ἐπὶ τοὔνομα μόνον ἐτράπετο τῆς ἑψήσεως.
8. Thus, as regards digestion, even though he neglected everything else, he did at least attempt to prove his point — namely, that digestion in animals differs from boiling carried on outside; in regard to the question of deglutition, however, he did not go even so far as this. What are his words? “The stomach does not appear to exercise any traction.”
8. ἐπὶ μὲν οὖν τῆς πέψεως, εἰ καὶ τἆλλα πάντα παρέλιπε, τὸ γοῦν ὅτι διαφέρει τῆς ἐκτὸς ἑψήσεως ἡ ἐν τοῖς ζῴοις πέψις, ἐπειράθη δεικνύναι, περὶ δὲ τῆς καταπόσεως οὐδʼ ἄχρι τοσούτου. τί γάρ φησιν; "Ὁλκὴ μὲν οὖν τῆς κοιλίας οὐδεμία φαίνεται εἶναι."
Now the fact is that the stomach possesses two coats, which certainly exist for some purpose; they extend as far as the mouth, the internal one remaining throughout similar to what it is in the stomach, and the other one tending to become of a more fleshy nature in the gullet. Now simple observation will testify that these coats have their fibres inserted in contrary directions. And, although Erasistratus did not attempt to say for what reason they are like this, I am going to do so.
καὶ μὴν δύο χιτῶνας ἡ γαστὴρ ἔχει πάντως ἕνεκά του γεγονότας καὶ διήκουσιν οὗτοι μέχρι τοῦ στόματος, ὁ μὲν ἔνδον, οἷός ἐστι κατὰ τὴν γαστέρα, τοιοῦτος διαμένων, ὁ δʼ ἕτερος ἐπὶ τὸ σαρκωδέστερον ἐν τῷ στομάχῳ τρεπόμενος. ὅτι μὲν οὖν ἐναντίας ἀλλήλαις τὰς ἐπιβολὰς τῶν ἰνῶν ἔχουσιν οἱ χιτῶνες οὗτοι, τὸ φαινόμενον αὐτὸ μαρτυρεῖ. τίνος δʼ ἕνεκα τοιοῦτοι γεγόνασιν, Ἐρασίστρατος μὲν οὐδʼ ἐπεχείρησεν εἰπεῖν, ἡμεῖς δʼ ἐροῦμεν.
The inner coat has its fibres straight, since it exists for the purpose of traction. The outer coat has its fibres transverse, for the purpose of peristalsis. In fact, the movements of each of the mobile organs of the body depend on the setting of the fibres. Now please test this assertion first in the muscles themselves; in these the fibres are most distinct, and their movements visible owing to their vigour. And after the muscles, pass to the physical organs, and you will see that they all move in correspondence with their fibres. This is why the fibres throughout the intestines are circular in both coats — they only contract peristaltically, they do not exercise traction. The stomach, again, has some of its fibres longitudinal for the purpose of traction and the others transverse for the purpose of peristalsis. For just as the movements in the muscles take place when each of the fibres becomes tightened and drawn towards its origin, such also is what happens in the stomach; when the transverse fibres tighten, the breadth of the cavity contained by them becomes less; and when the longitudinal fibres contract and draw in upon themselves, the length must necessarily be curtailed. This curtailment of length, indeed, is well seen in the act of swallowing: the larynx is seen to rise upwards to exactly the same degree that the gullet is drawn downwards; while, after the process of swallowing has been completed and the gullet is released from tension, the larynx can be clearly seen to again. This is because the inner coat of the stomach, which has the longitudinal fibres and which also lines the gullet and the mouth, extends to the interior of the larynx, and it is thus impossible for it to be drawn down by the stomach without the larynx being involved in the traction.
ὁ μὲν ἔνδον εὐθείας ἔχει τὰς ἶνας, ὁλκῆς γὰρ ἕνεκα γέγονεν· ὁ δʼ ἔξωθεν ἐγκαρσίας ὑπὲρ τοῦ κατὰ κύκλον περιστέλλεσθαι· ἑκάστῳ γὰρ τῶν κινουμένων ὀργάνων ἐν τοῖς σώμασι κατὰ τὰς τῶν ἰνῶν θέσεις αἱ κινήσεις εἰσίν. ἐπʼ αὐτῶν δὲ πρῶτον τῶν μυῶν, εἰ βούλει, βασάνισον τὸν λόγον, ἐφʼ ὧν καὶ αἱ ἶνες ἐναργέσταται καὶ αἱ κινήσεις αὐτῶν ὁρῶνται διὰ σφοδρότητα. μετὰ δὲ τοὺς μῦς ἐπὶ τὰ φυσικὰ τῶν ὀργάνων ἴθι καὶ πάντʼ ὄψει κατὰ τὰς ἶνας κινούμενα καὶ διὰ τοῦθʼ ἑκάστῳ μὲν τῶν ἐντέρων στρογγύλαι καθʼ ἑκάτερον τῶν χιτώνων αἱ ἶνές εἰσι· περιστέλλονται γὰρ μόνον, ἕλκουσι δʼ οὐδέν. ἡ γαστὴρ δὲ τῶν ἰνῶν τὰς μὲν εὐθείας ἔχει χάριν ὁλκῆς, τὰς δʼ ἐγκαρσίας ἕνεκα περιστολῆς· ὥσπερ γὰρ ἐν τοῖς μυσὶν ἑκάστης τῶν ἰνῶν τεινομένης τε καὶ πρὸς τὴν ἀρχὴν ἑλκομένης αἱ κινήσεις γίγνονται, κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν λόγον κἀν τῇ γαστρί· τῶν μὲν οὖν ἐγκαρσίων ἰνῶν τεινομένων ἔλαττον ἀνάγκη γίγνεσθαι τὸ εὖρος τῆς περιεχομένης ὑπʼ αὐτῶν κοιλότητος, τῶν δʼ εὐθειῶν ἑλκομένων τε καὶ εἰς ἑαυτὰς συναγομένων οὐκ ἐνδέχεται μὴ οὐ συναιρεῖσθαι τὸ μῆκος. ἀλλὰ μὴν ἐναργῶς γε φαίνεται καταπινόντων συναιρούμενον καὶ τοσοῦτον ὁ λάρυγξ ἀνατρέχων, ὅσον ὁ στόμαχος κατασπᾶται, καὶ ὅταν γε συμπληρωθείσης τῆς ἐν τῷ καταπίνειν ἐνεργείας ἀφεθῇ τῆς τάσεως ὁ στόμαχος, ἐναργῶς πάλιν φαίνεται καταφερόμενος ὁ λάρυγξ· ὁ γὰρ ἔνδον χιτὼν τῆς γαστρὸς ὁ τὰς εὐθείας ἶνας ἔχων ὁ καὶ τὸν στόμαχον ὑπαλείφων καὶ τὸ στόμα τοῖς ἐντὸς μέρεσιν ἐπεκτείνεται τοῦ λάρυγγος, ὥστʼ οὐκ ἐνδέχεται κατασπώμενον αὐτὸν ὑπὸ τῆς κοιλίας μὴ οὐ συνεπισπᾶσθαι καὶ τὸν λάρυγγα.
Further, it will be found acknowledged in Erasistratus's own writings that the circular fibres (by which the stomach as well as other parts performs its contractions) do not curtail its length, but contract and lessen its breadth. For he says that the stomach contracts peristaltically round the food during the whole period of digestion. But if it contracts, without in any way being diminished in length, this is because downward traction of the gullet is not a property of the movement of circular peristalsis. For what alone happens, as Erasistratus himself said, is that when the upper parts contract the lower ones dilate. And everyone knows that this can be plainly seen happening even in a dead man, if water be poured down his throat; this symptom results from the passage of matter through a narrow channel; it would be extraordinary if the channel did not dilate when a mass was passing through it. Obviously then the dilatation of the lower parts along with the contraction of the upper is common both to dead bodies, when anything whatsoever is passing through them, and to living ones, whether they contract peristaltically round their contents or attract them.
ὅτι δʼ αἱ περιφερεῖς ἶνες, αἷς περιστέλλεται τά τʼ ἄλλα μόρια καὶ ἡ γαστήρ, οὐ συναιροῦσι τὸ μῆκος, ἀλλὰ συστέλλουσι καὶ στενοῦσι τὴν εὐρύτητα, καὶ παρʼ αὐτοῦ λαβεῖν ἔστιν ὁμολογούμενον Ἐρασιστράτου· περιστέλλεσθαι γάρ φησι τοῖς σιτίοις τὴν γαστέρα κατὰ τὸν τῆς πέψεως ἅπαντα χρόνον. ἀλλʼ εἰ περιστέλλεται μέν, οὐδὲν δὲ τοῦ μήκους ἀφαιρεῖται τῆς κοιλίας, οὐκ ἔστι τῆς περισταλτικῆς κινήσεως ἴδιον τὸ κατασπᾶν κάτω τὸν στόμαχον. ὅπερ γὰρ αὐτὸς ὁ Ἐρασίστρατος εἶπε, τοῦτο μόνον αὐτὸ συμβήσεται τὸ τῶν ἄνω συστελλομένων διαστέλλεσθαι τὰ κάτω. τοῦτο δʼ ὅτι, κἂν εἰς νεκροῦ τὸν στόμαχον ὕδατος ἐγχέῃς, φαίνεται γιγνόμενον, οὐδεὶς ἀγνοεῖ. ταῖς γὰρ τῶν ὑλῶν διὰ στενοῦ σώματος ὁδοιπορίαις ἀκόλουθόν ἐστι τὸ σύμπτωμα· θαυμαστὸν γάρ, εἰ διερχομένου τινὸς αὐτὸν ὄγκου μὴ διασταλήσεται. οὐκοῦν τὸ μὲν τῶν ἄνω συστελλομένων διαστέλλεσθαι τὰ κάτω κοινόν ἐστι καὶ τοῖς νεκροῖς σώμασι, διʼ ὧν ὁπωσοῦν τι διεξέρχεται, καὶ τοῖς ζῶσιν, εἴτε περιστέλλοιτο τοῖς διερχομένοις εἴθʼ ἕλκοιτο.
Curtailment of length, on the other hand, is peculiar to organs which possess longitudinal fibres for the purpose of attraction. But the gullet was shown to be pulled down; for otherwise it would not have drawn upon the larynx. It is therefore clear that the stomach attracts food by the gullet.
τὸ δὲ τῆς τοῦ μήκους συναιρέσεως ἴδιον τῶν τὰς εὐθείας ἶνας ἐχόντων ὀργάνων, ἵνʼ ἐπισπάσωνταί τι. ἀλλὰ μὴν ἐδείχθη κατασπώμενος ὁ στόμαχος, οὐ γὰρ ἂν εἷλκε τὸν λάρυγγα·
Further, in vomiting, the mere passive conveyance of rejected matter up to the mouth will certainly itself suffice to keep open those parts of the oesophagus which are distended by the returned food; as it occupies each part in front [above], it first dilates this, and of course leaves the part behind [below] contracted. Thus, in this respect at least, the condition of the gullet is precisely similar to what it is in the act of swallowing. But there being no traction, the whole length remains equal in such cases.
δῆλον οὖν, ὡς ἡ γαστὴρ ἕλκει τὰ σιτία διὰ τοῦ στομάχου. καὶ ἡ κατὰ τὸν ἔμετον δὲ τῶν ἐμουμένων ἄχρι τοῦ στόματος φορὰ πάντως μέν που καὶ αὐτὴ τὰ μὲν ὑπὸ τῶν ἀναφερομένων διατεινόμενα μέρη τοῦ στομάχου διεστῶτα κέκτηται, τῶν πρόσω δʼ ὅ τι ἂν ἑκάστοτʼ ἐπιλαμβάνηται, τοῦτʼ ἀρχόμενον διαστέλλεται, τὸ δʼ ὄπισθεν καταλείπει δηλονότι συστελλόμενον, ὥσθʼ ὁμοίαν εἶναι πάντη τὴν διάθεσιν τοῦ στομάχου κατά γε τοῦτο τῇ τῶν καταπινόντων·
And for this reason it is easier to swallow than to vomit, for deglutition results from both coats of the stomach being brought into action, the inner one exerting a pull and the outer one helping by peristalsis and propulsion, whereas emesis occurs from the outer coat alone functioning, without there being any kind of pull towards the mouth. For, although the swallowing of food is ordinarily preceded by a feeling of desire on the part of the stomach, there is in the case of vomiting no corresponding desire from the mouth-parts for the experience; the two are opposite dispositions of the stomach itself; it yearns after and tends towards what is advantageous and proper to it, it loathes and rids itself of what is foreign. Thus the actual process of swallowing occurs very quickly in those who have a good appetite for such foods as are proper to the stomach; this organ obviously draws them in and down before they are masticated; whereas in the case of those who are forced to take a medicinal draught or who take food as medicine, the swallowing of these articles is accomplished with distress and difficulty.
ἀλλὰ τῆς ὁλκῆς μὴ παρούσης τὸ μῆκος ὅλον ἴσον ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις συμπτώμασι διαφυλάττεται. διὰ τοῦτο δὲ καὶ καταπίνειν Ῥᾷόν ἐστιν ἢ ἐμεῖν, ὅτι καταπίνεται μὲν ἀμφοῖν τῆς γαστρὸς τῶν χιτώνων ἐνεργούντων, τοῦ μὲν ἐντὸς ἕλκοντος, τοῦ δʼ ἐκτὸς περιστελλομένου τε καὶ συνεπωθοῦντος, ἐμεῖται δὲ θατέρου μόνου τοῦ ἔξωθεν ἐνεργοῦντος, οὐδενὸς ἕλκοντος εἰς τὸ στόμα. οὐ γὰρ δὴ ὥσπερ ἡ τῆς γαστρὸς ὄρεξις προηγεῖτο τοῦ καταπίνειν τὰ σιτία, τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον κἀν τοῖς ἐμέτοις ἐπιθυμεῖ τι τῶν κατὰ τὸ στόμα μορίων τοῦ γιγνομένου παθήματος, ἀλλʼ ἄμφω τῆς γαστρὸς αὐτῆς εἰσιν ἐναντίαι διαθέσεις, ὀρεγομένης μὲν καὶ προσιεμένης τὰ χρήσιμά τε καὶ οἰκεῖα, δυσχεραινούσης δὲ καὶ ἀποτριβομένης τὰ ἀλλότρια. διὸ καὶ τὸ καταπίνειν αὐτὸ τοῖς μὲν ἱκανῶς ὀρεγομένοις τῶν οἰκείων ἐδεσμάτων τῇ γαστρὶ τάχιστα γίγνεται, σαφῶς ἑλκούσης αὐτὰ καὶ κατασπώσης πρὶν ἢ μασηθῆναι, τοῖς δʼ ἤτοι φάρμακόν τι κατʼ ἀνάγκην πίνουσιν ἢ σιτίον ἐν χώρᾳ φαρμάκου προσφερομένοις ἀνιαρὰ καὶ μόγις ἡ κατάποσις αὐτῶν ἐπιτελεῖται.
From what has been said, then, it is clear that the inner coat of the stomach (that containing longitudinal fibres) exists for the purpose of exerting a pull the from to stomach, and that it is only in deglutition that it is active, whereas the external coat, which contains transverse fibres, has been so constituted in order that it may contract upon its contents and propel them forward; this coat furthermore, functions in vomiting no less than in swallowing. The truth of my statement is also borne out by what happens in the channae and synodonts; the stomachs of these animals are sometimes found in their mouths, as also Aristotle writes in his History of Animals; he also adds the cause of this: he says that it is owing to their voracity.
δῆλος οὖν ἐστιν ἐκ τῶν εἰρημένων ὁ μὲν ἔνδον χιτὼν τῆς γαστρὸς ὁ τὰς εὐθείας ἔχων ἶνας τῆς ἐκ τοῦ στόματος εἰς αὐτὴν ὁλκῆς ἕνεκα γεγονὼς καὶ διὰ τοῦτʼ ἐν ταῖς καταπόσεσι μόναις ἐνεργῶν, ὁ δʼ ἔξωθεν ὁ τὰς ἐγκαρσίας ἔχων ἕνεκα μὲν τοῦ περιστέλλεσθαι τοῖς ἐνυπάρχουσι καὶ προωθεῖν αὐτὰ τοιοῦτος ἀποτελεσθείς, ἐνεργῶν δʼ οὐδὲν ἧττον ἐν τοῖς ἐμέτοις ἢ ταῖς καταπόσεσιν. ἐναργέστατα δὲ μαρτυρεῖ τῷ λεγομένῳ καὶ τὸ κατὰ τὰς χάννας τε καὶ τοὺς συνόδοντας γιγνόμενον·
The facts are as follows. In all animals, when the appetite is very intense, the stomach rises up, so that some people who have a clear perception of this condition say that their stomach “creeps out” of them; in others, who are still masticating their food and have not yet worked it up properly in the mouth, the stomach obviously snatches away the food from them against their will. In those animals, therefore, which are naturally voracious, in whom the mouth cavity is of generous proportions, and the stomach situated close to it (as in the case of the synodont and channae), it is in no way surprising that, when they are sufficiently hungry and are pursuing one of the smaller animals, and are just on the point of catching it, the stomach should, under the impulse of desire, spring into the mouth. And this cannot possibly take place in any other way than by the stomach drawing the food to itself by means of the gullet, as though by a hand. In fact, just as we ourselves, in our eagerness to grasp more quickly something lying before us, sometimes stretch out our whole bodies along with our hands, so also the stomach stretches itself forward along with the gullet, which is, as it were, its hand. And thus, in these animals in whom those three factors co-exist — an excessive propensity for food, a small gullet, and ample mouth proportions — in these, any slight tendency to movement forwards brings the whole stomach into the mouth.
εὑρίσκεται γὰρ ἐνίοτε τούτων ἡ γαστὴρ ἐν τῷ στόματι καθάπερ καὶ ὁ Ἀριστοτέλης ἐν ταῖς περὶ ζῴων ἔγραψεν ἱστορίαις καὶ προστίθησί γε τὴν αἰτίαν ὑπὸ λαιμαργίας αὐτοῖς τοῦτο συμβαίνειν φάσκων. ἔχει γὰρ ὧδε· κατὰ τὰς σφοδροτέρας ὀρέξεις ἄνω προστρέχει πᾶσι τοῖς ζῴοις ἡ γαστήρ, ὥστε τινὲς τοῦ πάθους αἴσθησιν ἐναργῆ σχόντες ἐξέρπειν αὑτοῖς φασι τὴν κοιλίαν, ἐνίων δὲ μασωμένων ἔτι καὶ μήπω καλῶς ἐν τῷ στόματι τὰ σιτία κατεργασαμένων ἐξαρπάζει φανερῶς ἀκόντων. ἐφʼ ὧν οὖν ζῴων φύσει λαιμάργων ὑπαρχόντων ἥ τʼ εὐρυχωρία τοῦ στόματός ἐστι δαψιλὴς ἥ τε τῆς γαστρὸς θέσις ἐγγύς, ὡς ἐπὶ συνόδοντός τε καὶ χάννης, οὐδὲν θαυμαστόν, ὅταν ἱκανῶς πεινάσαντα διώκῃ τι τῶν μικροτέρων ζῴων, εἶτʼ ἤδη πλησίον ᾖ τοῦ συλλαβεῖν, ἀνατρέχειν ἐπειγούσης τῆς ἐπιθυμίας εἰς τὸ στόμα τὴν γαστέρα. γενέσθαι δʼ ἄλλως ἀμήχανον τοῦτο μὴ οὐχ ὥσπερ διὰ χειρὸς τοῦ στομάχου τῆς γαστρὸς ἐπισπωμένης εἰς ἑαυτὴν τὰ σιτία. καθάπερ γὰρ καὶ ἡμεῖς ὑπὸ προθυμίας ἐνίοτε τῇ χειρὶ συνεπεκτείνομεν ὅλους ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς ἕνεκα τοῦ θᾶττον ἐπιδράξασθαι τοῦ προκειμένου σώματος, οὕτω καὶ ἡ γαστὴρ οἷον χειρὶ τῷ στομάχῳ συνεπεκτείνεται. καὶ διὰ τοῦτʼ ἐφʼ ὧν ζῴων ἅμα τὰ τρία ταυτὶ συνέπεσεν, ἔφεσίς τε σφοδρὰ τῆς τροφῆς ὅ τε στόμαχος μικρὸς ἥ τʼ εὐρυχωρία τοῦ στόματος δαψιλής, ἐπὶ τούτων ὀλίγη Ῥοπὴ τῆς ἐπεκτάσεως εἰς τὸ στόμα τὴν κοιλίαν ὅλην ἀναφέρει.
Now the constitution of the organs might itself suffice to give a naturalist an indication of their functions. For Nature would never have purposelessly constructed the oesophagus of two coats with contrary dispositions; they must also have each been meant to have a different action. The Erasistratean school, however, are capable of anything rather than of recognizing the effects of Nature. Come, therefore, let us demonstrate to them by animal dissection as well that each of the two coats does exercise the activity which I have stated. Take an animal, then; lay bare the structures surrounding the gullet, without severing any of the nerves, arteries, or veins which are there situated; next divide with vertical incisions, from the lower jaw to the thorax, the outer coat of the oesophagus (that containing transverse fibres); then give the animal food and you will see that it still swallows although the peristaltic function has been abolished. If, again, in another animal, you cut through both coats with transverse incisions, you will observe that this animal also swallows although the inner coat is no longer functioning. From this it is clear that the animal can also swallow by either of the two coats, although not so well as by both. For the following also, in addition to other points, may be distinctly observed in the dissection which I have described — that during deglutition the gullet becomes slightly filled with air which is swallowed along with the food, and that, when the outer coat is contracting, this air is easily forced with the food into the stomach, but that, when there only exists an inner coat, the air impedes the conveyance of food, by distending this coat and hindering its action.
ἤρκει μὲν οὖν ἴσως ἀνδρὶ φυσικῷ παρʼ αὐτῆς μόνης τῆς κατασκευῆς τῶν ὀργάνων τὴν ἔνδειξιν τῆς ἐνεργείας λαμβάνειν. οὐ γὰρ δὴ μάτην γʼ ἂν ἡ φύσις ἐκ δυοῖν χιτώνων ἐναντίως ἀλλήλοις ἐχόντων ἀπειργάσατο τὸν οἰσοφάγον, εἰ μὴ καὶ διαφόρως ἑκάτερος αὐτῶν ἐνεργεῖν ἔμελλεν. ἀλλʼ ἐπεὶ πάντα μᾶλλον ἢ τὰ τῆς φύσεως ἔργα διαγιγνώσκειν οἱ περὶ τὸν Ἐρασίστρατόν εἰσιν ἱκανοί, φέρε κἀκ τῆς τῶν ζῴων ἀνατομῆς ἐπιδείξωμεν αὐτοῖς, ὡς ἑκάτερος τῶν χιτώνων ἐνεργεῖ τὴν εἰρημένην ἐνέργειαν. εἰ δή τι λαβὼν ζῷον, εἶτα γυμνώσας αὐτοῦ τὰ περικείμενα τῷ στομάχῳ σώματα χωρὶς τοῦ διατεμεῖν τινα τῶν νεύρων ἢ τῶν ἀρτηριῶν ἢ τῶν φλεβῶν τῶν αὐτόθι τεταγμένων ἐθέλοις ἀπὸ τῆς γένυος ἕως τοῦ θώρακος εὐθείαις τομαῖς διελεῖν τὸν ἔξω χιτῶνα τὸν τὰς ἐγκαρσίας ἶνας ἔχοντα κἄπειτα τῷ ζῴῳ τροφὴν προσενέγκοις, ὄψει καταπῖνον αὐτὸ καίτοι τῆς περισταλτικῆς ἐνεργείας ἀπολωλυίας. εἰ δʼ αὖ πάλιν ἐφʼ ἑτέρου ζῴου διατέμοις ἀμφοτέρους τοὺς χιτῶνας τομαῖς ἐγκαρσίαις, θεάσῃ καὶ τοῦτο καταπῖνον οὐκέτʼ ἐνεργοῦντος τοῦ ἐντός. ᾧ δῆλον, ὅτι καὶ διὰ θατέρου μὲν αὐτῶν καταπίνειν οἷόν τʼ ἐστίν, ἀλλὰ χεῖρον ἢ διʼ ἀμφοτέρων. πρὸς γὰρ αὖ τοῖς ἄλλοις καὶ τοῦτʼ ἔστι θεάσασθαι σαφῶς ἐπὶ τῆς εἰρημένης ἀνατομῆς, ὡς ἐν τῷ καταπίνειν ὑποπίμπλαται πνεύματος ὁ στόμαχος τοῦ συγκαταπινομένου τοῖς σιτίοις, ὃ περιστελλομένου μὲν τοῦ ἔξωθεν χιτῶνος ὠθεῖται Ῥαδίως εἰς τὴν γαστέρα σὺν τοῖς ἐδέσμασι, μόνου δὲ τοῦ ἔνδον ὑπάρχοντος ἐμποδὼν ἵσταται τῇ φορᾷ τῶν σιτίων διατεῖνόν τʼ αὐτὸν καὶ τὴν ἐνέργειαν ἐμποδίζον.
But Erasistratus said nothing about this, nor did he point out that the oblique situation of the gullet clearly confutes the teaching of those who hold that it is simply by virtue of the impulse from above that food which is swallowed reaches the stomach. The only correct thing he said was that many of the longnecked animals bend down to swallow. Hence, clearly, the observed fact does not show how we swallow but how we do not swallow. For from this observation it is clear that swallowing is not due merely to the impulse from above; it is yet, however, not clear whether it results from the food being attracted by the stomach, or conducted by the gullet. For our part, however, having enumerated all the different considerations — those based on the constitution of the organs, as well as those based on the other symptoms which, as just mentioned, occur both before and after the gullet has been exposed — we have thus sufficiently proved that the inner coast exists for the purpose of attraction and the outer for the purpose of propulsion.
ἀλλʼ οὔτε τούτων οὐδὲν Ἐρασίστρατος εἶπεν οὔθʼ ὡς ἡ σκολιὰ θέσις τοῦ στομάχου διαβάλλει σαφῶς τὸ δόγμα τῶν νομιζόντων ὑπὸ τῆς ἄνωθεν βολῆς μόνης ποδηγούμενα μέχρι τῆς γαστρὸς ἰέναι τὰ καταπινόμενα. μόνον δʼ ὅτι πολλὰ τῶν μακροτραχήλων ζῴων ἐπικεκυφότα καταπίνει, καλῶς εἶπεν. ᾧ δῆλον, ὅτι τὸ φαινόμενον οὐ τὸ πῶς καταπίνομεν ἀποδείκνυσιν, ἀλλὰ τὸ πῶς οὐ καταπίνομεν· ὅτι γὰρ μὴ διὰ μόνης τῆς ἄνωθεν βολῆς, ἐκ τούτου δῆλον· οὐ μὴν εἴθʼ ἑλκούσης τῆς κοιλίας εἴτε παράγοντος αὐτὰ τοῦ στομάχου, δῆλον ἤδη πω. ἀλλʼ ἡμεῖς γε πάντας τοὺς λογισμοὺς εἰπόντες τούς τʼ ἐκ τῆς κατασκευῆς τῶν ὀργάνων ὁρμωμένους καὶ τοὺς ἀπὸ τῶν ἄλλων συμπτωμάτων τῶν τε πρὸ τοῦ γυμνωθῆναι τὸν στόμαχον καὶ γυμνωθέντος, ὡς ὀλίγῳ πρόσθεν ἐλέγομεν, ἱκανῶς ἐνεδειξάμεθα τοῦ μὲν ἕλκειν ἕνεκα τὸν ἐντὸς χιτῶνα, τοῦ δʼ ἀπωθεῖν τὸν ἐκτὸς γεγονέναι.
Now the original task we set before ourselves was to demonstrate that the retentive faculty exists in every one of the organs, just as in the previous book we proved the existence of the attractive, and, over and above this, the alterative faculty. Thus, in the natural course of our argument, we have demonstrated these four faculties existing in the stomach — the attractive faculty in connection with swallowing, the retentive with digestion, the expulsive with vomiting and with the descent of digested food into the small intestine — and digestion itself we have shown to be a process of alteration.
προὐθέμεθα μὲν οὖν ἀποδεῖξαι τὴν καθεκτικὴν δύναμιν ἐν ἑκάστῳ τῶν ὀργάνων οὖσαν, ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ πρόσθεν λόγῳ τὴν ἑλκτικήν τε καὶ προσέτι τὴν ἀλλοιωτικήν. ὑπὸ δὲ τῆς ἀκολουθίας τοῦ λόγου τὰς τέτταρας ἀπεδείξαμεν ὑπαρχούσας τῇ γαστρί, τὴν ἑλκτικὴν μὲν ἐν τῷ καταπίνειν, τὴν καθεκτικὴν δʼ ἐν τῷ πέττειν, τὴν ἀπωστικὴν δʼ ἐν τοῖς ἐμέτοις καὶ ταῖς τῶν πεπεμμένων σιτίων εἰς τὸ λεπτὸν ἔντερον ὑποχωρήσεσιν, αὐτὴν δὲ τὴν πέψιν ἀλλοίωσιν ὑπάρχειν.
9. Concerning the spleen, also, we shall therefore have no further doubts as to whether it attracts what is proper to it, rejects what is foreign, and has a natural power of altering and retaining all that it attracts; nor shall we be in any doubt as to the liver, veins, arteries, heart, or any other organ. For these four faculties have been shown to be necessary for every part which is to be nourished; this is why we have called these faculties the handmaids of nutrition. For just as human faeces are most pleasing to dogs, so the residual matters from the liver are, some of them, proper to the spleen, others to the gall-bladder, and others to the kidneys.
9. οὔκουν ἔτʼ ἀπορήσομεν οὐδὲ περὶ τοῦ σπληνός, εἰ ἕλκει μὲν τὸ οἰκεῖον, ἀποκρίνει δὲ τὸ ἀλλότριον, ἀλλοιοῦν δὲ καὶ κατέχειν, ὅσον ἂν ἐπισπάσηται, πέφυκεν, οὐδὲ περὶ ἥπατος ἢ φλεβὸς ἢ ἀρτηρίας ἢ καρδίας ἢ τῶν ἄλλων τινός· ἀναγκαῖαι γὰρ ἐδείχθησαν αἱ τέτταρες αὗται δυνάμεις ἅπαντι μορίῳ τῷ μέλλοντι θρέψεσθαι καὶ διὰ τοῦτʼ αὐτὰς ὑπηρέτιδας εἶναι θρέψεως ἔφαμεν· ὡς γὰρ τὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἀποπάτημα τοῖς κυσὶν ἥδιστον, οὕτω καὶ τὰ τοῦ ἥπατος περιττώματα τὸ μὲν τῷ σπληνί, τὸ δὲ τῇ χοληδόχῳ κύστει, τὸ δὲ τοῖς νεφροῖς οἰκεῖον.
10. I should not have cared to say anything further as to the origin of these [surplus substances] after Hippocrates, Plato, Aristotle, Diocles, Praxagoras, and Philotimus, nor indeed should I even have said anything about the faculties, if any of our predecessors had worked out this subject thoroughly. While, however, the statements which the Ancients made on these points were correct, they yet omitted to defend their arguments with logical proofs; of course they never suspected that there could be sophists so shameless as to try to contradict obvious facts. More recent physicians, again, have been partly conquered by the sophistries of these fellows and have given credence to them; whilst others who attempted to argue with them appear to me to lack to a great extent the power of the Ancients. For this reason I have attempted to put together my arguments in the way in which it seems to me the Ancients, had any of them been still alive, would have done, in opposition to those who would overturn the finest doctrines of our art. I am not, however, unaware that I shall achieve either nothing at all or else very little. For I find that a great many things which have been conclusively demonstrated by the Ancients are unintelligible to the bulk of the Moderns owing to their ignorance — nay, that, by reason of their laziness, they will not even make an attempt to comprehend them; and even if any of them have understood them, they have not given them impartial examination. The fact is that he whose purpose is to know anything better than the multitude do must far surpass all others both as regards his nature and his early training. And when he reaches early adolescence he must become possessed with an ardent love for truth, like one inspired; neither day nor night may he cease to urge and strain himself in order to learn thoroughly all that has been said by the most illustrious of the Ancients. And when he has learnt this, then for a prolonged period he must test and prove it, observing what part of it is in agreement, and what in disagreement with obvious fact; thus he will choose this and turn away from that. To such an one my hope has been that my treatise would prove of the very greatest assistance.... Still, such people may be expected to be quite few in number, while, as for the others, this book will be as superfluous to them as a tale told to an ass.
10. καὶ λέγειν ἔτι περὶ τῆς τούτων γενέσεως οὐκ ἂν ἐθέλοιμι μεθʼ Ἱπποκράτην καὶ Πλάτωνα καὶ Ἀριστοτέλην καὶ Διοκλέα καὶ Πραξαγόραν καὶ Φιλότιμον· οὐδὲ γὰρ οὐδὲ περὶ τῶν δυνάμεων εἶπον ἄν, εἴ τις τῶν ἔμπροσθεν ἀκριβῶς ἐξειργάσατο τὸν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν λόγον. ἐπεὶ δʼ οἱ μὲν παλαιοὶ καλῶς ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν ἀποφηνάμενοι παρέλιπον ἀγωνίσασθαι τῷ λόγῳ, μηδʼ ὑπονοήσαντες ἔσεσθαί τινας εἰς τοσοῦτον ἀναισχύντους σοφιστάς, ὡς ἀντιλέγειν ἐπιχειρῆσαι τοῖς ἐναργέσιν, οἱ νεώτεροι δὲ τὸ μέν τι νικηθέντες ὑπὸ τῶν σοφισμάτων ἐπείσθησαν αὐτοῖς, τὸ δέ τι καὶ ἀντιλέγειν ἐπιχειρήσαντες ἀποδεῖν μοι πολὺ τῆς τῶν παλαιῶν ἔδοξαν δυνάμεως, διὰ τοῦθʼ, ὡς ἂν ἐκείνων αὐτῶν, εἴπερ ἔτʼ ἦν τις, ἀγωνίσασθαί μοι δοκεῖ πρὸς τοὺς ἀνατρέποντας τῆς τέχνης τὰ κάλλιστα, καὶ αὐτὸς οὕτως ἐπειράθην συνθεῖναι τοὺς λόγους. ὅτι δʼ ἢ οὐδὲν ἢ παντάπασιν ἀνύσω τι σμικρόν, οὐκ ἀγνοῶ· πάμπολλα γὰρ εὑρίσκω τελέως μὲν ἀποδεδειγμένα τοῖς παλαιοῖς, οὔτε δὲ συνετὰ τοῖς πολλοῖς τῶν νῦν διʼ ἀμαθίαν ἀλλʼ οὐδʼ ἐπιχειρούμενα γιγνώσκεσθαι διὰ Ῥᾳθυμίαν, οὔτʼ, εἰ καὶ γνωσθείη τινί, δικαίως ἐξεταζόμενα. χρὴ γὰρ τὸν μέλλοντα γνώσεσθαί τι τῶν πολλῶν ἄμεινον εὐθὺς μὲν καὶ τῇ φύσει καὶ τῇ πρώτῃ διδασκαλίᾳ πολὺ τῶν ἄλλων διενεγκεῖν· ἐπειδὰν δὲ γένηται μειράκιον, ἀληθείας τινὰ σχεῖν ἐρωτικὴν μανίαν, ὥσπερ ἐνθουσιῶντα καὶ μήθʼ ἡμέρας μήτε νυκτὸς διαλείπειν σπεύδοντά τε καὶ συντεταμένον ἐκμαθεῖν, ὅσα τοῖς ἐνδοξοτάτοις εἴρηται τῶν παλαιῶν· ἐπειδὰν δʼ ἐκμάθῃ, κρίνειν αὐτὰ καὶ βασανίζειν χρόνῳ παμπόλλῳ καὶ σκοπεῖν, πόσα μὲν ὁμολογεῖ τοῖς ἐναργῶς φαινομένοις, πόσα δὲ διαφέρεται, καὶ οὕτω τὰ μὲν αἱρεῖσθαι, τὰ δʼ ἀποστρέφεσθαι. τῷ μὲν δὴ τοιούτῳ πάνυ σφόδρα χρησίμους ἤλπικα τοὺς ἡμετέρους ἔσεσθαι λόγους· εἶεν δʼ ἂν ὀλίγοι παντάπασιν οὗτοι· τοῖς δʼ ἄλλοις οὕτω γενήσεται τὸ γράμμα περιττόν, ὡς εἰ καὶ μῦθον ὄνῳ τις λέγοι.
11. For the sake, then, of those who are aiming at truth, we must complete this treatise by adding what is still wanting in it. Now, in people who are very hungry, the stomach obviously attracts or draws down the food before it has been thoroughly softened in the mouth, whilst in those who have no appetite or who are being forced to eat, the stomach is displeased and rejects the food. And in a similar way of the other organs possesses both faculties — that of attracting what is proper to it, and that of rejecting what is foreign. Thus, even if there be any organ which consists of only one coat (such as the two bladders, the uterus, and the veins), it yet possesses both kinds of fibres, the longitudinal and the transverse. But further, there are fibres of a third kind — the oblique — which are much fewer in number than the two kinds already spoken of. In the organs consisting of two coats this kind of fibre is found in the one coat only, mixed with the longitudinal fibres; but in the organs composed of one coat it is found along with the other two kinds. Now, these are of the greatest help to the action of the faculty which we have named retentive. For during this period the part needs to be tightly contracted and stretched over its contents at every point — the stomach during the whole period of digestion, and the uterus during that of gestation. Thus too, the coat of a vein, being single, consists of various kinds of fibres; whilst the outer coat of an artery consists of circular fibres, and its inner coat mostly of longitudinal fibres, but with a few oblique ones also amongst them. Veins thus resemble the uterus or the bladder as regards the arrangement of their fibres, even though they are deficient in thickness; similarly arteries resemble the stomach. Alone of all organs the intestines consist of two coats of which both have their fibres transverse. Now the proof that it was for the best that all the organs should be naturally such as they are (that, for instance, the intestines should be composed of two coats) belongs to the subject of the use of parts; thus we must not now desire to hear about matters of this kind nor why the anatomists are at variance regarding the number of coats in each organ. For these questions have been sufficiently discussed in the treatise “On Disagreement in Anatomy.” And the problem as to why each organ has such and such a character will be discussed in the treatise “On the Use of Parts.”
11. Συμπεραντέον οὖν ἡμῖν τὸν λόγον ἕνεκα τῶν τῆς ἀληθείας ἐφιεμένων ὅσα λείπει κατʼ αὐτὸν ἔτι προσθεῖσιν. ὡς γὰρ ἡ γαστὴρ ἕλκει μὲν ἐναργῶς καὶ κατασπᾷ τὰ σιτία τοῖς σφόδρα πεινώδεσι, πρὶν ἀκριβῶς ἐν τῷ στόματι λειωθῆναι, δυσχεραίνει δὲ καὶ ἀπωθεῖται τοῖς ἀποσίτοις τε καὶ πρὸς ἀνάγκην ἐσθίουσιν, οὕτω καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ὀργάνων ἕκαστον ἀμφοτέρας ἔχει τὰς δυνάμεις, τήν τε τῶν οἰκείων ἑλκτικὴν καὶ τὴν τῶν ἀλλοτρίων ἀποκριτικήν. καὶ διὰ τοῦτο, κἂν ἐξ ἑνὸς ᾖ χιτῶνος ὄργανόν τι συνεστώς, ὥσπερ καὶ αἱ κύστεις ἀμφότεραι καὶ αἱ μῆτραι καὶ αἱ φλέβες, ἀμφότερα τῶν ἰνῶν ἔχει τὰ γένη, τῶν εὐθειῶν τε καὶ τῶν ἐγκαρσίων. Καὶ μέν γε καὶ τρίτον τι γένος ἰνῶν ἐστι τῶν λοξῶν, ἔλαττον πολὺ τῷ πλήθει τῶν προειρημένων δύο γενῶν. εὑρίσκεται δʼ ἐν μὲν τοῖς ἐκ δυοῖν χιτώνων συνεστηκόσιν ὀργάνοις ἐν θατέρῳ μόνῳ ταῖς εὐθείαις ἰσὶν ἀναμεμιγμένον, ἐν δὲ τοῖς ἐξ ἑνὸς ἅμα τοῖς ἄλλοις δύο γένεσι. συνεπιλαμβάνουσι δʼ αὗται μέγιστον τῇ τῆς καθεκτικῆς ὀνομασθείσης δυνάμεως ἐνεργείᾳ· δεῖται γὰρ ἐν τούτῳ τῷ χρόνῳ πανταχόθεν ἐσφίγχθαι καὶ περιτετάσθαι τοῖς ἐνυπάρχουσι τὸ μόριον, ἡ μὲν γαστὴρ ἐν τῷ τῆς πέψεως, αἱ μῆτραι δʼ ἐν τῷ τῆς κυήσεως χρόνῳ παντί. ταῦτʼ ἄρα καὶ ὁ τῆς φλεβὸς χιτὼν εἷς ὢν ἐκ πολυειδῶν ἰνῶν ἐγένετο καὶ τῶν τῆς ἀρτηρίας ὁ μὲν ἔξωθεν ἐκ τῶν στρογγύλων, ὁ δʼ ἔσωθεν ἐκ μὲν τῶν εὐθειῶν πλείστων, ὀλίγων δέ τινων σὺν αὐταῖς καὶ τῶν λοξῶν, ὥστε τὰς μὲν φλέβας ταῖς μήτραις καὶ ταῖς κύστεσιν ἐοικέναι κατά γε τὴν τῶν ἰνῶν σύνθεσιν, εἰ καὶ τῷ πάχει λείπονται, τὰς δʼ ἀρτηρίας τῇ γαστρί. μόνα δὲ πάντων ὀργάνων ἐκ δυοῖν θʼ ἅμα καὶ ἀμφοτέρων ἐγκαρσίας ἐχόντων τὰς ἶνας ἐγένετο τὰ ἔντερα. τὸ δʼ ὅτι βέλτιον ἦν τῶν τʼ ἄλλων ἑκάστῳ τοιούτῳ τὴν φύσιν ὑπάρχειν, οἷόνπερ καὶ νῦν ἐστι, τοῖς τʼ ἐντέροις ἐκ δυοῖν ὁμοίων χιτώνων συγκεῖσθαι, τῆς περὶ χρείας μορίων πραγματείας ἐστίν. οὔκουν νῦν χρὴ ποθεῖν ἀκούειν περὶ τῶν τοιούτων, ὥσπερ οὐδὲ διὰ τί περὶ τοῦ πλήθους τῶν χιτώνων ἑκάστου τῶν ὀργάνων διαπεφώνηται τοῖς ἀνατομικοῖς ἀνδράσιν. ὑπὲρ μὲν γὰρ τούτων αὐτάρκως ἐν τοῖς περὶ τῆς ἀνατομικῆς διαφωνίας εἴρηται· περὶ δὲ τοῦ διότι τοιοῦτον ἕκαστον ἐγένετο τῶν ὀργάνων, ἐν τοῖς περὶ χρείας μορίων εἰρήσεται.
12. It is not, however, our business to discuss either of these questions here, but to consider duly the natural faculties, which, to the number of four, exist in each organ. Returning then, to this point, let us recall what has already been said, and set a crown to the whole subject by adding what is still wanting. For when every part of the animal has been shewn to draw into itself the juice which is proper to it (this being practically the first of the natural faculties ), the next point to realise is that the part does not get rid either of this attracted nutriment as a whole, or even of any superfluous portion of it, until either the organ itself, or the major part of its contents also have their condition reversed. Thus, when the stomach is sufficiently filled with the food and has absorbed and stored away the most useful part of it in its own coats, it then rejects the rest like an alien burden. The same happens to the bladders, when the matter attracted into them begins to give trouble either because it distends them through its quantity or irritates them by its quality. And this also happens in the case of the uterus; for it is either because it can no longer bear to be stretched that it strives to relieve itself of its annoyance, or else because it is irritated by the quality of the fluids poured out into it. Now both of these conditions sometimes occur with actual violence, and then miscarriage takes place. But for the most part they happen in a normal way, this being then called not miscarriage but delivery or parturition. Now abortifacient drugs or certain other conditions which destroy the embryo or rupture certain of its membranes are followed by abortion, and similarly also when the uterus is in pain from being in a bad state of tension; and, as has been well said by Hippocrates, excessive movement on the part of the embryo itself brings on labour. Now pain is common to all these conditions, and of this there are three possible causes — either excessive bulk, or weight, or irritation; bulk when the uterus can no longer support the stretching, weight when the contents surpass its strength, and irritation when the fluids which had previously been pent up in the membranes, flow out, on the rupture of these, into the uterus itself, or else when the whole foetus perishes, putrefies, and is resolved into pernicious ichors, and so irritates and bites the coat of the uterus. In all organs, then, both their natural effects and their disorders and maladies plainly take place on analogous lines, some so clearly and manifestly as to need no demonstration, and others less plainly, although not entirely unrecognizable to those who are willing to pay attention. Thus, to take the case of the stomach: the irritation is evident here because this organ possesses most sensibility, and among its other affections those producing nausea and the so-called heartburn clearly demonstrate the eliminative faculty which expels foreign matter. So also in the case of the uterus and the urinary bladder; this latter also may be plainly observed to receive and accumulate fluid until it is so stretched by the amount of this as to be incapable of enduring the pain; or it may be the quality of the urine which irritates it; for every superfluous substance which lingers in the body must obviously putrefy, some in a shorter, and some in a longer time, and thus it becomes pungent, acrid, and burdensome to the organ which contains it. This does not apply, however, in the case of the bladder alongside the liver, whence it is clear that it possesses fewer nerves than do the other organs. Here too, however, at least the physiologist must discover an analogy. For since it was shown that the gall-bladder attracts its own special juice, so as to be often found full, and that it discharges it soon after, this desire to discharge must be either due to the fact that it is burdened by the quantity or that the bile has changed in quality to pungent and acrid. For while food does not change its original quality so fast that it is already ordure as soon as it falls into the small intestine, on the other hand the bile even more readily than the urine becomes altered in quality as soon as ever it leaves the veins, and rapidly undergoes change and putrefaction. Now, if there be clear evidence in relation to the uterus, stomach, and intestines, as well as to the urinary bladder, that there is either some distention, irritation, or burden inciting each of these organs to elimination, there is no difficulty in imagining this in the case of the gall-bladder also, as well as in the other organs, — to which obviously the arteries and veins also belong.
12. νυνὶ δʼ οὐδέτερον τούτων πρόκειται λέγειν, ἀλλὰ τὰς φυσικὰς δυνάμεις μόνας ἀποδεικνύειν ἐν ἑκάστῳ τῶν ὀργάνων τέτταρας ὑπαρχούσας. ἐπὶ τοῦτʼ οὖν πάλιν ἐπανελθόντες ἀναμνήσωμέν τε τῶν ἔμπροσθεν εἰρημένων ἐπιθῶμέν τε κεφαλὴν ἤδη τῷ λόγῳ παντὶ τὸ λεῖπον ἔτι προσθέντες. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἕκαστον τῶν ἐν τῷ ζῴῳ μορίων ἕλκειν εἰς ἑαυτὸ τὸν οἰκεῖον χυμὸν ἀποδέδεικται καὶ πρώτη σχεδὸν αὕτη τῶν φυσικῶν ἐστι δυνάμεων, ἐφεξῆς ἐκείνῳ γνωστέον, ὡς οὐ πρότερον ἀποτρίβεται τὴν ἑλχθεῖσαν τροφὴν ἤτοι σύμπασαν ἢ καί τι περίττωμα αὐτῆς, πρὶν ἂν εἰς ἐναντίαν μεταπέσῃ διάθεσιν ἢ αὐτὸ τὸ ὄργανον ἢ καὶ τῶν περιεχομένων ἐν αὐτῷ τὰ πλεῖστα. ἡ μὲν οὖν γαστήρ, ἐπειδὰν μὲν ἱκανῶς ἐμπλησθῇ τῶν σιτίων καὶ τὸ χρηστότατον αὐτῶν εἰς τοὺς ἑαυτῆς χιτῶνας ἐναπόθηται βδάλλουσα, τηνικαῦτʼ ἤδη τὸ λοιπὸν ἀποτρίβεται καθάπερ ἄχθος ἀλλότριον· αἱ κύστεις δʼ, ἐπειδὰν ἕκαστον τῶν ἑλχθέντων ἢ τῷ πλήθει διατεῖνον ἢ τῇ ποιότητι δάκνον ἀνιαρὸν γένηται. τῷ δʼ αὐτῷ τρόπῳ καὶ αἱ μῆτραι· ἤτοι γάρ, ἐπειδὰν μηκέτι φέρωσι διατεινόμεναι, τὸ λυποῦν ἀποθέσθαι σπεύδουσιν ἢ τῇ ποιότητι δακνόμεναι τῶν ἐκχυθέντων εἰς αὐτὰς ὑγρῶν. ἑκάτερον δὲ τῶν εἰρημένων γίγνεται μὲν καὶ βιαίως ἔστιν ὅτε καὶ ἀμβλώσκουσι τηνικαῦτα, γίγνεται δʼ ὡς τὰ πολλὰ καὶ προσηκόντως, ὅπερ οὐκ ἀμβλώσκειν ἀλλʼ ἀποκυΐσκειν τε καὶ τίκτειν ὀνομάζεται. τοῖς μὲν οὖν ἀμβλωθριδίοις φαρμάκοις ἤ τισιν ἄλλοις παθήμασι διαφθείρουσι τὸ ἔμβρυον ἤ τινας τῶν ὑμένων αὐτοῦ Ῥηγνύουσιν αἱ ἀμβλώσεις ἕπονται, οὕτω δὲ κἀπειδὰν ἀνιαθῶσί ποθʼ αἱ μῆτραι κακῶς ἔχουσαι τῇ διατάσει, ταῖς δὲ τῶν ἐμβρύων αὐτῶν κινήσεσι ταῖς σφοδροτάταις οἱ τόκοι, καθάπερ καὶ τοῦθʼ Ἱπποκράτει καλῶς εἴρηται. κοινὸν δʼ ἁπασῶν τῶν διαθέσεων ἡ ἀνία καὶ ταύτης αἴτιον τριττὸν ἢ ὄγκος περιττὸς ἤ τι βάρος ἢ δῆξις· ὄγκος μέν, ἐπειδὰν μηκέτι φέρωσι διατεινόμεναι, βάρος δʼ, ἐπειδὰν ὑπὲρ τὴν Ῥώμην αὐτῶν ᾖ τὸ περιεχόμενον, δῆξις δʼ, ἐπειδὰν ἤτοι τὰ πρότερον ἐν τοῖς ὑμέσιν ὑγρὰ στεγόμενα Ῥαγέντων αὐτῶν εἰς αὐτὰς ἐκχυθῇ τὰς μήτρας ἢ καὶ σύμπαν ἀποφθαρὲν τὸ κύημα σηπόμενόν τε καὶ διαλυόμενον εἰς μοχθηροὺς ἰχῶρας οὕτως ἐρεθίζῃ τε καὶ δάκνῃ τὸν χιτῶνα τῶν ὑστερῶν. ἀνάλογον οὖν ἐν ἅπασι τοῖς ὀργάνοις ἕκαστα τῶν τʼ ἔργων αὐτῶν τῶν φυσικῶν καὶ μέντοι τῶν παθημάτων τε καὶ νοσημάτων φαίνεται γιγνόμενα, τὰ μὲν ἐναργῶς καὶ σαφῶς οὕτως, ὡς ἀποδείξεως δεῖσθαι μηδέν, τὰ δʼ ἧττον μὲν ἐναργῶς, οὐ μὴν ἄγνωστά γε παντάπασι τοῖς ἐθέλουσι προσέχειν τὸν νοῦν. ἐπὶ μὲν οὖν τῆς γαστρὸς αἵ τε δήξεις ἐναργεῖς, διότι πλείστης αἰσθήσεως μετέχει, τά τʼ ἄλλα παθήματα τά τε ναυτίαν ἐμποιοῦντα καὶ οἱ καλούμενοι καρδιωγμοὶ σαφῶς ἐνδείκνυνται τὴν ἀποκριτικήν τε καὶ ἀπωστικὴν τῶν ἀλλοτρίων δύναμιν, οὕτω δὲ κἀπὶ τῶν ὑστερῶν τε καὶ τῆς κύστεως τῆς τὸ οὖρον ὑποδεχομένης· ἐναργῶς γὰρ οὖν καὶ αὕτη φαίνεται μέχρι τοσούτου τὸ ὑγρὸν ὑποδεχομένη τε καὶ ἀθροίζουσα, ἄχρις ἂν ἤτοι πρὸς τοῦ πλήθους αὐτοῦ διατεινομένη μηκέτι φέρῃ τὴν ἀνίαν ἢ πρὸς τῆς ποιότητος δακνομένη· χρονίζον γὰρ ἕκαστον τῶν περιττωμάτων ἐν τῷ σώματι σήπεται δηλονότι, τὸ μὲν ἐλάττονι, τὸ δὲ πλείονι χρόνῳ, καὶ οὕτω δακνῶδές τε καὶ δριμὺ καὶ ἀνιαρὸν τοῖς περιέχουσι γίγνεται. οὐ μὴν ἐπί γε τῆς ἐπὶ τῷ ἥπατι κύστεως ὁμοίως. ἔχει· ᾧ δῆλον, ὅτι νεύρων ἥκιστα μετέχει. χρὴ δὲ κἀνταῦθα τόν γε φυσικὸν ἄνδρα τὸ ἀνάλογον ἐξευρίσκειν. εἰ γὰρ ἕλκειν τε τὸν οἰκεῖον ἀπεδείχθη χυμόν, ὡς φαίνεσθαι πολλάκις μεστήν, ἀποκρίνειν τε τὸν αὐτὸν τοῦτον οὐκ εἰς μακράν, ἀναγκαῖόν ἐστιν αὐτὴν ἢ διὰ τὸ πλῆθος βαρυνομένην ἢ τῆς ποιότητος μεταβαλλούσης ἐπὶ τὸ δακνῶδές τε καὶ δριμὺ τῆς ἀποκρίσεως ἐφίεσθαι. οὐ γὰρ δὴ τὰ μὲν σιτία τὴν ἀρχαίαν ὑπαλλάττει ποιότητα ταχέως οὕτως, ὥστʼ, ἐπειδὰν ἐμπέσῃ τοῖς λεπτοῖς ἐντέροις, εὐθὺς εἶναι κόπρον, ἡ χολὴ δʼ οὐ πολὺ μᾶλλον ἢ τὸ οὖρον, ἐπειδὰν ἅπαξ ἐκπέσῃ τῶν φλεβῶν, ἐξαλλάττει τὴν ποιότητα, τάχιστα μεταβάλλοντα καὶ σηπόμενα. καὶ μὴν εἴπερ ἐπί τε τῶν κατὰ τὰς ὑστέρας καὶ τὴν κοιλίαν καὶ τὰ ἔντερα καὶ προσέτι τὴν τὸ οὖρον ὑποδεχομένην κύστιν ἐναργῶς φαίνεται διάτασίς τις ἢ δῆξις ἢ ἄχθος ἐπεγεῖρον ἕκαστον τῶν ὀργάνων εἰς ἀπόκρισιν, οὐδὲν χαλεπὸν κἀπὶ τῆς χοληδόχου κύστεως ταὐτὸ τοῦτʼ ἐννοεῖν ἐπί τε τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων ὀργάνων, ἐξ ὧν δηλονότι καὶ αἱ ἀρτηρίαι καὶ αἱ φλέβες εἰσίν.
13. Nor is there any further difficulty in ascertaining that it is through the same channel that both attraction and discharge take place at different times. For obviously the inlet to the stomach does not merely conduct food and drink into this organ, but in the condition of nausea it performs the neck of the bladder which is beside the liver, albeit single, both fills and empties the bladder. Similarly the canal of the uterus affords an entrance to the semen and an exit to the foetus. But in this latter case, again, whilst the eliminative faculty is evident, the attractive faculty is not so obvious to most people.
13. οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ τὸ διὰ τοῦ αὐτοῦ πόρου τήν θʼ ὁλκὴν γίγνεσθαι καὶ τὴν ἀπόκρισιν ἐν διαφέρουσι χρόνοις οὐδὲν ἔτι χαλεπὸν ἐξευρεῖν, εἴ γε καὶ τῆς γαστρὸς ὁ στόμαχος οὐ μόνον ἐδέσματα καὶ πόματα παράγων εἰς αὐτήν, ἀλλὰ κἀν ταῖς ναυτίαις τὴν ἐναντίαν ὑπηρεσίαν ὑπηρετῶν ἐναργῶς φαίνεται, καὶ τῆς ἐπὶ τῷ ἥπατι κύστεως ὁ αὐχὴν εἷς ὢν ἅμα μὲν πληροῖ διʼ αὑτοῦ τὴν κύστιν, ἅμα δʼ ἐκκενοῖ, καὶ τῶν μητρῶν ὁ στόμαχος ὡσαύτως ὁδός ἐστιν εἴσω μὲν τοῦ σπέρματος, ἔξω δὲ τοῦ κυήματος.
It is, however, the cervix which Hippocrates blames for inertia of the uterus when he says: — “Its orifice has no power of attracting semen.”
ἀλλὰ κἀνταῦθα πάλιν ἡ μὲν ἐκκριτικὴ δύναμις ἐναργής, οὐ μὴν ὁμοίως γʼ αὐτῇ σαφὴς τοῖς πολλοῖς ἡ ἑλκτική· ἀλλʼ Ἱπποκράτης μὲν ἀρρώστου μήτρας αἰτιώμενος αὐχένα φησί· "Οὐ γὰρ δύναται αὐτέης ὁ στόμαχος εἰρύσαι τὴν γονήν."
Erasistratus, however, and Asclepiades reached such heights of wisdom that they deprived not merely the stomach and the womb of this faculty but also the bladder by the liver, and the kidneys as well. I have, however, pointed out in the first book that it is impossible to assign any other cause for the secretion of urine or bile.
Ἐρασίστρατος δὲ καὶ Ἀσκληπιάδης εἰς τοσοῦτον ἥκουσι σοφίας, ὥστʼ οὐ μόνον τὴν κοιλίαν καὶ τὰς μήτρας ἀποστεροῦσι τῆς τοιαύτης δυνάμεως ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν ἐπὶ τῷ ἥπατι κύστιν ἅμα τοῖς νεφροῖς. καίτοι γʼ ὅτι μηδʼ εἰπεῖν δυνατὸν ἕτερον αἴτιον ἢ οὔρων ἢ χολῆς διακρίσεως, ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ δέδεικται λόγῳ.
Now, when we find that the uterus, the stomach and the bladder by the liver carry out attraction and expulsion through one and the same duct, we need no longer feel surprised that Nature should also frequently discharge waste-substances into the stomach through the veins. Still less need we be astonished if a certain amount of the food should, during long fasts, be drawn back from the liver into the stomach through the same veins by which it was yielded up to the liver during absorption of nutriment. To disbelieve such things would of course be like refusing to believe that purgative drugs draw their appropriate humours from all over the body by the same stomata through which absorption previously takes place, and to look for separate stomata for absorption and purgation respectively. As a matter of fact one and the same stoma subserves two distinct faculties, and these exercise their pull at different times in opposite directions — first it subserves the pull of the liver and, during catharsis, that of the drug. What is there surprising, then, in the fact that the veins situated between the liver and the region of the stomach fulfil a double service or purpose? Thus, when there is abundance of nutriment contained in the food-canal, it is carried up to the liver by the veins mentioned; and when the canal is empty and in need of nutriment, this is again attracted from the liver by the same veins. For everything appears to attract from and to go shares with everything else, and, as the most divine Hippocrates has said, there would seem to be a consensus in the movements of fluids and vapours.
καὶ μήτραν οὖν καὶ γαστέρα καὶ τὴν ἐπὶ τῷ ἥπατι κύστιν διʼ ἑνὸς καὶ ταὐτοῦ στομάχου τήν θʼ ὁλκὴν καὶ τὴν ἀπόκρισιν εὑρίσκοντες ποιουμένας μηκέτι θαυμάζωμεν, εἰ καὶ διὰ τῶν φλεβῶν ἡ φύσις ἐκκρίνει πολλάκις εἰς τὴν γαστέρα περιττώματα. τούτου δʼ ἔτι μᾶλλον οὐ χρὴ θαυμάζειν, εἰ, διʼ ὧν εἰς ἧπαρ ἀνεδόθη φλεβῶν ἐκ γαστρός, αὖθις εἰς αὐτὴν ἐξ ἥπατος ἐν ταῖς μακροτέραις ἀσιτίαις ἕλκεσθαί τις δύναται τροφή. τὸ γὰρ τοῖς τοιούτοις ἀπιστεῖν ὅμοιόν ἐστι δήπου τῷ μηκέτι πιστεύειν μηδʼ ὅτι τὰ καθαίροντα φάρμακα διὰ τῶν αὐτῶν στομάτων ἐξ ὅλου τοῦ σώματος εἰς τὴν γαστέρα τοὺς οἰκείους ἐπισπᾶται χυμούς, διʼ ὧν ἔμπροσθεν ἡ ἀνάδοσις ἐγένετο, ἀλλʼ ἕτερα μὲν ζητεῖν ἀναδόσεως, ἕτερα δὲ καθάρσεως στόματα. καὶ μὴν εἴπερ ἓν καὶ ταὐτὸ στόμα διτταῖς ὑπηρετεῖ δυνάμεσιν, ἐν διαφόροις χρόνοις εἰς τἀναντία τὴν ὁλκὴν ποιουμέναις, ἔμπροσθεν μὲν τῇ κατὰ τὸ ἧπαρ, ἐν δὲ τῷ τῆς καθάρσεως καιρῷ τῇ τοῦ φαρμάκου, τί θαυμαστόν ἐστι διττὴν ὑπηρεσίαν τε καὶ χρείαν εἶναι ταῖς φλεψὶ ταῖς ἐν τῷ μέσῳ τεταγμέναις ἥπατός τε καὶ τῶν κατὰ τὴν κοιλίαν, ὥσθʼ, ὁπότε μὲν ἐν τούτοις ἄφθονος εἴη περιεχομένη τροφή, διὰ τῶν εἰρημένων εἰς ἧπαρ ἀναφέρεσθαι φλεβῶν, ὁπότε δʼ εἴη κενὰ καὶ δεόμενα τρέφεσθαι, διὰ τῶν αὐτῶν αὖθις ἐξ ἥπατος ἕλκεσθαι;
Thus the stronger draws and the weaker is evacuated. Now, one part is weaker or stronger than another either absolutely, by nature, and in all cases, or else it becomes so in such and such a particular instance.
πᾶν γὰρ ἐκ παντὸς ἕλκειν φαίνεται καὶ παντὶ μεταδιδόναι καὶ μία τις εἶναι σύρροια καὶ σύμπνοια πάντων, καθάπερ καὶ τοῦθʼ ὁ θειότατος Ἱπποκράτης εἶπεν. ἕλκει μὲν οὖν τὸ ἰσχυρότερον, ἐκκενοῦται δὲ τὸ ἀσθενέστερον.
Thus, by nature and in all men alike, the heart is stronger than the liver at attracting what is serviceable to it and rejecting what is not so; similarly the liver i s stronger than the intestines and stomach, and the arteries than the veins. In each of us personally, however, liver has stronger drawing power at one time, and the stomach at another. For when there is much nutriment contained in the alimentary canal and the appetite and craving of the liver is violent, then the viscus exerts far the strongest traction. Again, when the liver is full and distended and the stomach empty and in need, then the force of the traction shifts to the latter. Suppose we had some food in our hands and were snatching it from one another; if we were equally in want, the stronger would be likely to prevail, but if he had satisfied his appetite, and was holding what was over carelessly, or was anxious to share it with somebody, and if the weaker was excessively desirous of it, there would be nothing to prevent the latter from getting it all.
ἰσχυρότερον δὲ καὶ ἀσθενέστερον ἕτερον ἑτέρου μόριον ἢ ἁπλῶς καὶ φύσει καὶ κοινῇ πᾶσίν ἐστιν ἢ ἰδίως τῷδέ τινι γίγνεται. φύσει μὲν καὶ κοινῇ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις θʼ ἅμα καὶ ζώοις ἡ μὲν καρδία τοῦ ἥπατος, τὸ δʼ ἧπαρ τῶν ἐντέρων τε καὶ τῆς γαστρός, αἱ δʼ ἀρτηρίαι τῶν φλεβῶν ἑλκύσαι τε τὸ χρήσιμον ἑαυταῖς ἀποκρῖναί τε τὸ μὴ τοιοῦτον ἰσχυρότεραι. καθʼ ἕκαστον δʼ ἡμῶν ἰδίως ἐν μὲν τῷδε τῷ καιρῷ τὸ ἧπαρ ἰσχυρότερον ἕλκειν, ἡ γαστὴρ δʼ ἐν τῷδε. πολλῆς μὲν γὰρ ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ περιεχομένης τροφῆς καὶ σφοδρῶς ὀρεγομένου τε καὶ χρῄζοντος τοῦ ἥπατος, πάντως ἰσχυρότερον ἕλκει τὸ σπλάγχνον· ἔμπαλιν δὲ τοῦ μὲν ἥπατος ἐμπεπλησμένου τε καὶ διατεταμένου, τῆς γαστρὸς δʼ ὀρεγομένης καὶ κενῆς ὑπαρχούσης ἡ τῆς ὁλκῆς ἰσχὺς εἰς ἐκείνην μεθίσταται.
In a similar manner the stomach easily attracts nutriment from the liver when it [the stomach] has a sufficiently strong craving for it, and the appetite of the viscus is satisfied. And sometimes the surplusage of nutriment in the liver is a reason why the animal is not hungry; for when the stomach has better and more available food it requires nothing from extraneous sources, but if ever it is in need and is at a loss how to supply the need, it becomes filled with waste-matters; these are certain biliary, phlegmatic [mucous] and serous fluids, and are the only substances that the liver yields in response to the traction of the stomach, on the occasions when the latter too is in want of nutriment. Now, just as the parts draw food from each other, so also they sometimes deposit their excess substances in each other, and just as the stronger prevailed when the two were exercising traction, so it is also when they are depositing;
ὡς γάρ, εἰ κἂν ταῖς χερσί τινα σιτία κατέχοντες ἀλλήλων ἁρπάζοιμεν, εἰ μὲν ὁμοίως εἴημεν δεόμενοι, περιγίγνεσθαι τὸν ἰσχυρότερον εἰκός, εἰ δʼ οὗτος μὲν ἐμπεπλησμένος εἴη καὶ διὰ τοῦτʼ ἀμελῶς κατέχων τὰ περιττὰ ἢ καί τινι μεταδοῦναι ποθῶν, ὁ δʼ ἀσθενέστερος ὀρέγοιτο δεινῶς, οὐδὲν ἂν εἴη κώλυμα τοῦ μὴ πάντα λαβεῖν αὐτόν, οὕτω καὶ ἡ γαστὴρ ἐκ τοῦ ἥπατος ἐπισπᾶται Ῥᾳδίως, ὅταν αὐτὴ μὲν ἱκανῶς ὀρέγηται τροφῆς, ἐμπεπλησμένον δʼ ᾖ τὸ σπλάγχνον. καὶ τοῦ γε μὴ πεινῆν ἐνίοτε τὸ ζῷον ἡ περιουσία τῆς ἐν ἥπατι τροφῆς αἰτία· κρείττονα γὰρ ἔχουσα καὶ ἑτοιμοτέραν ἡ γαστὴρ τροφὴν οὐδὲν δεῖται τῆς ἔξωθεν· εἰ δέ γέ ποτε δέοιτο μέν, ἀποροίη δέ, πληροῦται περιττωμάτων. ἰχῶρες δέ τινές εἰσι ταῦτα χολώδεις τε καὶ φλεγματώδεις καὶ ὀρρώδεις, οὓς μόνους ἑλκούσῃ μεθίησιν αὐτῇ τὸ ἧπαρ, ὅταν ποτὲ καὶ αὐτὴ δέηται τροφῆς.
this is the cause of the so-called fluxions, for every part has a definite inborn tension, by virtue of which it expels its superfluities, and, therefore, when one of these parts, — owing, of course, to some special condition — becomes weaker, there will necessarily be a confluence into it of the superfluities from all the other parts. The strongest part deposits its surplus matter in all the parts near it; these again in other parts which are weaker; these next into yet others; and this goes on for a long time, until the superfluity, being driven from one part into another, comes to rest in one of the weakest of all; it cannot flow from this into another part, because none of the stronger ones will receive it, while the affected part is unable to drive it away. When, however, we come to deal again with the origin and cure of disease, it will be possible to find there also abundant proofs of all that we have correctly indicated in this book.
ὥσπερ οὖν ἐξ ἀλλήλων ἕλκει τὰ μόρια τροφήν, οὕτω καὶ ἀποτίθεταί ποτʼ εἰς ἄλληλα τὸ περιττὸν καὶ ὥσπερ ἑλκόντων ἐπλεονέκτει τὸ ἰσχυρότερον, οὕτω καὶ ἀποτιθεμένων καὶ τῶν γε καλουμένων Ῥευμάτων ἥδε ἡ πρόφασις. ἕκαστον γὰρ τῶν μορίων ἔχει τινὰ τόνον σύμφυτον, ᾧ διωθεῖται τὸ περιττόν. ὅταν οὖν ἓν ἐξ αὐτῶν ἀρρωστότερον γένηται κατὰ δή τινα διάθεσιν, ἐξ ἁπάντων εἰς ἐκεῖνο συρρεῖν ἀνάγκη τὰ περιττώματα. τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἰσχυρότατον ἐναποτίθεται τοῖς πλησίον ἅπασιν, ἐκείνων δʼ αὖ πάλιν ἕκαστον εἰς ἕτερʼ ἄττα τῶν ἀσθενεστέρων, εἶτʼ αὖθις ἐκείνων ἕκαστον εἰς ἄλλα καὶ τοῦτʼ ἐπὶ πλεῖστον γίγνεται, μέχρι περ ἂν ἐξ ἁπάντων ἐλαυνόμενον τὸ περίττωμα καθʼ ἕν τι μείνῃ τῶν ἀσθενεστάτων· ἐντεῦθεν γὰρ οὐκέτʼ εἰς ἄλλο δύναται μεταρρεῖν, ὡς· ἂν μήτε δεχομένου τινὸς αὐτὸ τῶν ἰσχυροτέρων μήτʼ ἀπώσασθαι δυναμένου τοῦ πεπονθότος.