Commentary on Hippocrates' Regimen for Health

(together with...) to strengthen the strength, of which he seems to care most in the case of the lean. Then, he says, let them eat all kinds of food. Not all those who commented on the book wrote the same reasoning for this. For to some of them he seems to give all kinds of food because those that disagree with one another more easily impel toward vomit, while to others it is for the sake of taking in more. For simple and uniform foods quickly satisfy, and he does not allow them to drink immediately, so that the food may not quickly float to the top, which he does not want. To prevent this from happening, he also defines a certain interval of time sufficient for nourishment, and he stated that time itself to be as much as to walk four stades. In addition to these things, for those who are thus managed, he gives the drink, three wines differing from one another in quality. For he commands that one of the wines be dry, another sweet, and another sour, without stating here either the reason for which he so commanded. But those who guess at his intention say that he gives the dry for the sake of the strength of the organs through which the vomit will take place, the sweet so that it may impel toward vomit and because sweet wine melts the humors, and the sour so that it may wash away what is clogged in the stomach. Perhaps indeed he also commanded them to take all kinds of food according to their qualities, so that some might strengthen the stomach, others provoke vomit, and others wash away the clogged humors. And what I often say in gatherings with my companions and other friends, I will say now too. Those who champion the dogmatic sect seem to me to err in no small way, declaring their advice like royal decrees, without stating the reasoning for what they advise. For it would have been better for the writer of the book himself to state the power of each thing done, as Hippocrates did in ‘On Regimen in Acute Diseases,’ speaking of the barley-gruel: ‘For its stickiness is smooth, gentle, continuous, slippery, moderately moist, thirst-quenching, and easy to wash out, if there should be any need of this, and having neither astringency, nor bad agitation, nor does it swell up in the belly.’ And in this way he also wrote about honey-mixture, wine, oxymel, and further of baths, so that we have a starting point of the path along which we may add some things, following the author, of those not spoken of by him. And now therefore, since he has spoken of the other things without the reasoning of the cause, and indeed that it is possible to drink the wine first more unmixed, in small amounts, and at long intervals, and then more diluted, more quickly, and in large amounts, we must guess at his intention with which he wrote. Indeed, all guessing is otherwise an uncertain thing, but especially when the intention of the man is still unknown. Therefore, drinking the wine more diluted, more quickly, and in large amounts would reasonably seem to be spoken of for those who wish to vomit, since indeed the opposite things are suitable for those who wish to retain and digest the food, namely, the more unmixed, in small amounts, and at long intervals. But why on earth he first employed the things fitting for retaining for the one who is about to vomit a little later, we cannot say anything persuasive. Perhaps to that writer of these things, what pleased some of the commentators seemed persuasive. Since he wishes that the strength of the lean men, for whom he writes these things, be not destroyed, for this reason indeed he first strengthens that, and then in this way comes to the things that provoke vomit. But for the strength to be strengthened, the time spent on the taking of food was sufficient. But one thing is persuasive to one and another to another, as I said, not cut off as some single thing, like the necessary, which is established by scientific proofs. ’And whoever is accustomed to vomit twice a month, it is better to perform the vomits consecutively on two days rather than at intervals of fifteen days. But people do the exact opposite.’ [q.1] And the writer himself ought especially to have added the reasoning for these things, since he spoke without distinction about those who vomit twice in the month. For I see some vomiting for the sake of evacuation, just as others fast one day in the month. And some to clean out the humor, either sticky or thick, that has settled in the stomach; and nothing prevents them from doing these very things at intervals, and not on two consecutive days. ‘For all those for whom it is unsuitable to vomit up their food, or whose bellies are not easy of passage, it is beneficial to eat many times a day and to use all kinds of foods and relishes prepared in every way, and to drink two or three kinds of wine.’ [q.2]