§6#1Νυνὶ δὲ τοῖς περὶ τὸν Ἐρασίστρατον ἐνδείξασθαι τὸ σφάλμα πειράσομαι.
Now I will try to show the error of those around Erasistratus.
οὐ γὰρ ἐξ οἰκείων ἀποδείξεων αἵματος κενὰς τὰς ἀρτηρίας ἀπεφήναντο, ἀλλ’ ἐξ ὧν ἠπόρησαν ἐν ἑτέροις, ἀπιστήσαντες τῷ ἐναργῶς, παραπλήσιόν τι παθόντες τοῖς τὴν κίνησιν ἀνελοῦσιν, ὅτι τὸν κατ’ αὐτῶν λόγον ἠπόρησαν διαλύσασθαι.
For they did not declare the arteries to be empty of blood on the basis of proofs appropriate to the matter, but on the basis of what they were puzzled by in other matters, disbelieving what is manifest, having suffered something very similar to those who did away with motion, because they were puzzled to refute the argument against them.
βέλτιον δ’ οἶμαι τὴν μὲν κίνησιν ὡς ἐναργὲς πρᾶγμα τιθέναι, τὸν δὲ κατ’ αὐτοὺς λόγον ἐπὶ σχολῆς πειρᾶσθαι διαλύεσθαι· ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ τὰς ἀρτηρίας, ὅτι μὲν αἷμα περιέχουσιν, ἐκ τοῦ, κᾂν λεπτοτάτῃ τρωθεῖεν βελόνῃ, παραχρῆμα φαίνεσθαι προχεόμενον αὐτὸ συγχωρεῖν, διὰ τί δὲ μηδὲν ἡ φύσις εἰκῆ ποιοῦσα διττὸν τῶν ἀγγείων γένος ἐδημιούργησεν μιᾶς ὕλης περιεκτικὸν, ἰδίᾳ ζητεῖν· οὕτω δὴ καὶ τὸ, πῶς εἰς ἅπαν τὸ σῶμα κομισθήσεται τὸ διὰ τῆς εἰσπνοῆς ἑλκόμενον πνεῦμα, τῶν ἀρτηριῶν αἷμα περιεχουσῶν, ἢ μὴ κομιζομένων, πῶς αἱ κατὰ προαίρεσιν κινήσεις ἔσονται, ἢ πῶς ἡ κατ’ αὐτὰς τὰς ἀρτηρίας κίνησις ἀπαραπόδιστος μένει, μὴ δυναμένη συνοικεῖν ἀμάχως πνεύματι ὑγρῷ.
But I think it is better to posit motion as a manifest fact, and to try to refute the argument against them at leisure; and in the same way with the arteries, to agree that they contain blood, from the fact that even if they are wounded by the thinnest needle, blood is immediately seen pouring out of them, and to seek privately why nature, which does nothing in vain, created a double class of vessels containing one and the same substance; and so indeed also the question of how the pneuma drawn in through inspiration will be carried to the whole body if the arteries contain blood, or if it is not carried, how voluntary movements will occur, or how the movement in the arteries themselves remains unimpeded, being unable to coexist without conflict with wet pneuma.
τὰ γὰρ τοιαῦτα προβλήματα μέν ἐστιν ἴδιά τε καὶ καθ’ ἑαυτὰ προβάλλεσθαί τε καὶ ζητεῖσθαι δίκαια, καὶ τάχ’ ἂν τῶν καὶ ἄπειρα νομισθέντι, οὐ μὴν ἱκανά γε τὸ ἐναργὲς ἀνατρέπειν.
For such problems are indeed special and proper to be proposed and investigated by themselves, and might perhaps be considered among those that are infinite, yet they are certainly not sufficient to overturn what is manifest.
αὐτίκα γέ τοι τὸ πρῶτον αὐτῶν εἰρημένον ὁμοιότατόν ἐστιν, ὡς εἰ καὶ τοῖς μηρυκάζουσι ζώοις θεασάμενος πλέονας κοιλίας, τὴν μὲν τῆς τροφῆς ὑποδεκτικὴν εἶναι λέγοι, τὴν δὲ τοῦ πόματος, τὴν δὲ τοῦ πνεύματος, οὐ γὰρ τὴν μηδὲν εἰκῆ ποιοῦσαν φύσιν ὑποδοχῆς ἕνεκα μιᾶς ὕλης πολλὰς ἐργάσασθαι τὰς γαστέρας.
For example, the first of them mentioned is very similar to as if someone, having observed multiple stomachs in ruminant animals, should say that one is receptive of food, another of drink, and another of pneuma, on the ground that nature, which does nothing in vain, would not have made many stomachs for the sake of receiving a single substance.
ὡς γὰρ κᾀνταῦθα χρεία τίς ἐστιν ἑτέρα, δι’ ἣν αἱ πολλαὶ γεγόνασι, καίτοι γε τὴν αὐτὴν ὕλην ὑποδεχόμεναι, οὕτως ἔχει καὶ περὶ τῶν ἀρτηριῶν καὶ τῶν φλεβῶν.
For just as here there is some other utility for which the many have come to be, although they receive the same substance, so it is also regarding the arteries and the veins.
αἷμα γὰρ ἀμφότεραι περιέχουσιν, ὡς ὁ πρόσθεν λόγος ἀπέδειξε.
For both contain blood, as the previous argument demonstrated.
διάφοροι δὲ τῇ κατασκευῇ γεγόνασι χρείας τινὸς ἕνεκεν, ἣν ἐν ἑτέροις ὑπομνήμασιν διέξιμεν. αἱ κατὰ προαίρεσιν ἔσονται κινήσεις, ἢ πῶς αἱ τῶν ἀρτηριῶν τεταγμέναι φυλαχθήσονται, καὶ πῶς ἀμαχεὶ δύναται συνεῖναι τὸ αἷμα τῷ πνεύματι.
But they have become different in structure for the sake of some utility, which we discuss in other treatises. [And how] voluntary movements will occur, or how the regular movements of the arteries will be preserved, and how blood can coexist without conflict with pneuma.
ὥσπερ γὰρ ὁμολογούμενον λαμβάνοντες, τὸ δεῖν ἀπὸ τῆς καρδίας αὐταῖς ἐπιπέμπεσθαι τὸ πνεῦμα, τὰ λοιπὰ συμπεραίνουσιν, οὐκ εἰδότες, ὡς καὶ τοῦτ’ αὐτὸ μοχθηρόν ἐστιν, καὶ ῥᾳδίως ὅπη παρακρούεται φωραθῆναι δύναται.
For taking as agreed, as it were, that the pneuma must be sent to them from the heart, they conclude the rest, not knowing that this very premise is faulty and can easily be detected where it goes astray.
γυμνοῦντες οὖν ἡμεῖς ἑκάστοτε μεγάλας ἀρτηρίας, ἃς ἐνδέχεται, μάλιστα δ’ ἐνδέχεται τὰς κατὰ κῶλα, τοὺς Ἐρασιστρατείους ἐρωτῶμεν, εἰ κᾂν νῦν γοῦν, ὁπότε γεγύμνωνται, δοκοῦσιν ἐν αὐταῖς ἔχειν αἷμα.
Therefore, exposing on each occasion the large arteries that can be, and most of all those of the limbs, we ask the followers of Erasistratus if, at least now when they have been exposed, they think they have blood in them.
οἱ δ’ ἐξ ἀνάγκης ὁμολογοῦσιν, ἅμα μὲν ὅτι καὶ αὐτὸς Ἐρασίστρατος αὐτὰς ἐν τῷ διαιρεῖσθαι τὸ δέρμα παρέμπτωσιν αἵματος ἐκ τῆς ἀρτηρίας γίγνεσθαί φησιν, ἅμα δ’ ὅτι καὶ τὸ φαινόμενον οὕτως ἔχει.
And they of necessity agree, both because Erasistratus himself says that when the skin is divided, an intrusion of blood into the artery occurs, and because what is seen is also thus.
βρόχῳ γὰρ ἡμεῖς ἑκατέρωθεν τὰς γεγυμνωμένας ἀρτηρίας διαλαμβάνοντες, εἶτ’ ἐκτέμνοντες τοὐν μέσῳ, δείκνυμεν αἵματος μεστάς.
For grasping the exposed arteries on both sides with a ligature, and then cutting out the middle part, we show them to be full of blood.
ἀλλὰ πῶς, φασὶν, εἰς ὅλον τὸ σῶμα κομισθήσεται τὸ διὰ τῆς ἀναπνοῆς ἑλκόμενον πνεῦμα τῶν ἀρτηριῶν αἷμα περιεχουσῶν; τίς δ’ ἀνάγκη τοῦτο γίγνεσθαι;
"But how," they say, "will the pneuma drawn in through respiration be carried to the whole body if the arteries contain blood?" But what necessity is there for this to happen?