§1## ΓΑΛΗΝΟΥ ΠΕΡΙ ΧΡΕΙΑΣ ΑΝΑΠΝΟΗΣ ΒΙΒΛΙΟΝ.
Τίς ἡ τῆς ἀναπνοῆς χρεία;
GALEN'S BOOK ON THE UTILITY OF RESPIRATION. What is the utility of respiration?
ὅτι γὰρ οὐχ ἡ τυχοῦσα, φανερὸν ἐκ τοῦ μηδὲ βραχύτατον ἡμᾶς χρόνον ἀρκεῖν δύνασθαι, ἀπολλυμένης αὐτῆς.
For that it is not of ordinary importance is clear from the fact that we cannot survive for even the briefest time when it is lost.
ᾧ καὶ δῆλον, ὅτι πρὸς οὐδεμίαν τῶν κατὰ μέρος ἐνεργειῶν, ἀλλ’ εἰς αὐτὴν τὴν ζωὴν διαφέρει.
By which it is also clear that it makes a difference not to any of the partial activities, but to life itself.
ὥσπερ γὰρ, ὅσα γέγονε πρὸς τὸ βαδίζειν, τούτων στερηθέντες εἰς τὸ βαδίζειν βλαπτόμεθα, καὶ ὅσα πρὸς τὸ βλέπειν χρήσιμα, τούτων στερηθέντες οὐ βλέπομεν, οὕτως, ὅσα πρὸς τὸ ζῇν ἀναγκαῖα, τούτων στερηθέντες ἀποθνήσκομεν.
For just as, if we are deprived of those things that have come to be for walking, we are harmed with respect to walking, and if we are deprived of those useful for seeing, we do not see, so, if we are deprived of those necessary for living, we die.
τί ποτε οὖν τηλικοῦτόν ἐστι τὸ παρὰ τῆς ἀναπνοῆς ἡμῖν χρηστόν;
What then is this so great a benefit that comes to us from respiration?
ἆρά γε τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτῆς ἐστι γένεσις, ὡς Ἀσκληπιάδης φησίν;
Is it indeed the generation of the soul itself, as Asclepiades says?
ἢ γένεσις μὲν οὐχὶ, ῥῶσις δέ τις, ὡς τοῦ Νικάρχου Πραξαγόρας;
Or not generation, but a certain strengthening, as Praxagoras the son of Nicarchus says?
ἢ τῆς ἐμφύτου θερμασίας ἀνάψυξίς τις, ὡς Φιλιστίων τε καὶ Διοκλῆς ἔλεγον;
Or a certain cooling of the innate heat, as Philistion and Diocles used to say?
ἢ καὶ θρέψις καὶ ἔμψυξις, ὡς Ἱπποκράτης;
Or both nourishment and cooling, as Hippocrates says?
ἢ τούτων μὲν οὐδὲν, ἐπιπληρώσεως δὲ ἕνεκεν ἀρτηριῶν ἀναπνέομεν, ὡς Ἐρασίστρατος οἴεται;
Or none of these, but we breathe for the sake of filling the arteries, as Erasistratus thinks?
σχεδὸν γὰρ τοσαῦται γεγόνασιν αἱρέσεις περὶ χρείας ἀναπνοῆς, εἰ καί τινες τῶν εἰρημένων δοκοῖεν μὴ διαφέρειν, ὥσπερ ἥ τε τῶν λεγόντων ῥώννυσθαι τὴν ἔμφυτον θερμασίαν ὑπὸ τῆς ἀναπνοῆς, καὶ ἡ τῶν ῥιπίζεσθαι.
For almost so many schools of thought have arisen concerning the utility of respiration, even if some of those mentioned might seem not to differ, just like the opinion of those who say that the innate heat is fanned and that of those who say it is fanned.
διαφέρουσι γὰρ οὐδὲν αὗται τῆς λεγούσης ἐμψύχεσθαι· πλὴν οὐ τὴν λέξιν χρὴ, ἀλλὰ τὴν διάνοιαν σκοπεῖν, ἥτις ἐν ἁπάσαις ἐστὶ μία.
For these differ in no way from the opinion that says it is cooled; except that one must examine not the word, but the thought, which in all of them is one.
τὴν γὰρ ψύξιν οὐκ αὐτὴν δήπου δι’ αὑτὴν, ὥσπερ οὐδὲ τὴν ῥίπισιν, ἢ τὴν ῥῶσιν, ἀλλ’ ὅτι φυλάττουσι τὴν ἔμφυτον θερμότητα, διὰ τοῦτο εἶναί φασι χρησίμους.
For they certainly do not say that the cooling itself is useful for its own sake, nor the fanning, nor the strengthening, but because they preserve the innate heat, they say that they are useful.
καὶ εἰ τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ κοινὸν ταῖς τρισὶ δόξαις, ἡ φυλακὴ τῆς ἐμφύτου θερμασίας, χαλεπὸς ὁ περὶ πασῶν αὐτῶν γίνεται λόγος καὶ δυσδιαίρετος, ὅτι ψυχῆς οὐσίαν οὐκ ἴσμεν.
And if this is the common element in the three opinions, namely the preservation of the innate heat, the discourse concerning all of them becomes difficult and hard to distinguish, because we do not know the substance of the soul.
εἴπερ οὖν ἐνέργεια μὲν ψυχῆς ἡ ζωὴ, μεγάλα δ’ αὐτὴ φαίνεται πρὸς τῆς ἀναπνοῆς ὠφελεῖσθαι, μέχρι πόσου τὸν τρόπον τῆς ὠφελείας ἀγνοεῖν εἰκός ἐστιν ἡμᾶς;
If, then, life is an activity of the soul, and life itself appears to be greatly benefited by respiration, how long is it reasonable for us to be ignorant of the manner of this benefit?
μέχρις ἂν, οἶμαι, τὴν οὐσίαν τῆς ψυχῆς ἀγνοῶμεν.
Until, I think, we are ignorant of the substance of the soul.
ἀλλ’ ὅμως τολμητέον τε καὶ ζητητέον τὸ ἀληθές.
But nevertheless, we must dare and seek the truth.
εἰ γὰρ καὶ μὴ τύχωμεν αὐτοῦ, πάντως δήπου πλησιέστερον, ἢ νῦν ἐσμεν, ἀφιξόμεθα.
For even if we do not attain it, we shall certainly arrive closer to it than we are now.
καὶ πρῶτόν γε δύο κεφάλαια πασῶν τῶν εἰρημένων αἱρέσεων ποιησάμενοι, πότερον αὐτῶν ἀληθέστερόν ἐστιν, εὑρεῖν πειραθῶμεν.
And first, having made two main categories of all the mentioned schools, let us try to find which of them is more true.
ἐοίκασι γὰρ αἱ μὲν εἰς τὴν οὐσίαν ἀποβλέπειν τοῦ εἰσπνεομένου ἀέρος, αἱ δὲ εἰς τὴν ποιότητα.
For some seem to look to the substance of the inhaled air, and others to its quality.
τὸ μὲν οὖν γεννᾶσθαι λέγειν τὴν ψυχὴν, καὶ τὸ τρέφεσθαι, καὶ τὸ τὰς ἀρτηρίας ἐπιπληροῦσθαι, τὴν οὐσίαν ἐστὶ μόνον αἰτιωμένων, τὸ δὲ ῥιπίζεσθαι, καὶ ῥώννυσθαι, καὶ ψύχεσθαι, τὴν ποιότητα· καθ’ ὃν, οἶμαι, λόγον καὶ σιτίον ὁ μὲν ὡς γλυκὺ προσφερόμενος, ἢ αὐστηρὸν, ἢ θερμὸν, ἢ ψυχρὸν, τὴν ποιότητα μόνον, ὁ δ’ ὡς τρέφον, εἰς τὴν οὐσίαν ἀποβλέπων αἴρεται.
To say, then, that the soul is generated, and nourished, and that the arteries are filled, belongs to those who attribute it to the substance alone, while to be fanned, and strengthened, and cooled, belongs to the quality; by which same principle, I think, also with respect to food, one who takes it as sweet, or bitter, or hot, or cold, looks to the quality alone, while another who takes it as nourishing, looks to the substance and chooses it.
τοῦτ’ οὖν πρῶτον διορισόμεθα, πότερον αὐτῆς τῆς οὐσίας χρῄζομεν τοῦ κατὰ τὴν εἰσπνοὴν ἐρχομένου ἀέρος, ἢ τῆς ποιότητος, ἢ ἀμφοτέρων.
First, therefore, we shall determine this: whether we need the very substance of the air entering during inhalation, or its quality, or both.