Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (1870) - Volume 2.djvu/496

482 the most celebrated medical writer of ancient or modern times, whose fame has probably been partly caused by the writings and actions of all the phy- sicians of the same name having been attributed to one individual, instead of several. This hypothesis is incapable of being proved to be correct; but it may be safely asserted, that it is quite impossible that all the stories told of Hippocrates (even if they are to be believed at all) can relate to the same in- dividual, and also that one man should have written all the works that now form part of the Hippocratic collection. More will be said on this subject in the article on Hippocrates II., but first it will be advisable to notice briefly the other physicians of this name, and as several of them belonged to the family of the Asclepiadae, the fol- lowing genealogical table will enable the reader to understand more clearly their relationship:—

Nebrus. I Gnosidicus. I I Hippocrates I. Phaenarete = Heracleides. Fodaleirius. Aeneius. Cadmus. Chrysus. I Elaphus. Hippolochus. HiPpocBATBS II. = Uxor. Thessalus. I ilia = Poljbus. Goigias. Hippocrates II I. Dracon I. I Hippocrates IV. (?) Hippocrates IV. (?) Dracon III.

I., the fifteenth in descent from Aesculapius, the eldest son of Gnosidicus, the brother of Podaleirius II. and Aeneius, and the father of Heracleides. He lived probably in the sixth and fifth centuries B. c. Some ancient critics attributed to him the two works De Fraduris, and De Articulis, while others contended that he wrote nothing at all. (, Chil. vii. Hist. 155., in Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. xii. p. 680; Poeti Epist. ad Artax., in Hippocr. Opera, vol. iii. p. 770; Suid. s.v. 'IinroKpdTTjs; Galen, Comment, in Hippocr. "De Rat. Vict, in Morh. Acut." i. 17, vol. XV. p. 456, Comment, in Hippocr. "De Fract." i. 1, vol. xviii. pt. ii. p. 324.)

2. II. See below.

3. III., the nineteenth of the family of the Asclepiadae, who lived probably in the fourth century B. c. He was the son of Thessalus, and the brother of Gorgias and Dracon II., and is said by Suidas to have written some medical works. (, Suidas, ll. cc.; Galen, Comment, in Hippocr. "De Humor." i. 1, vol. xvi. p. 5.)

4. IV. was, according to Galen (Comment, in Hippocr. "De Humor." i. 1, vol. xvi. p. 5), the son of Dracon I., and the grandson of the celebrated Hippocrates: he lived in the fourth century b. c, and is said to have written some medical works. Suidas (s. v. 'iTnroKpdrris, and ApaKwv), who, however, seems to have fallen into some confusion [], makes him the son of II. (and therefore the great grandson of the celebrated Hippocrates), the father of Dracon III. He is said to have been one of the physicians to Roxana, the wife of Alexander the Great, and to have died in the reign of Cassander, the son of Antipater.

5, 6. V. and VI. According to Suidas, Thymbraeus of Cos, of the family of the Asclej)iadae, had two sons named Hippocrates, each of whom wrote some medical works. Their date is unknown. (Suid. s.v, 'lincoKpdTTjs.)

7. VII., son of Praxianax of Cos, who belonged to the family of the Asclepiadae, and wrote some medical works. His date is unknown. (Suid. Ibid.)

8., a Greek writer on veterinary surgery, who is supposed to have lived about the middle of the fourth century after Christ, His remains are to be found in the collection of writers on this subject, first published in Latin by Ruel- lius, Paris, 1530, fol., and afterwards in Greek by Grynaeus, Basel, 1537, 4to. They are also added to the editions of Hippocrates published by Vander Linden, Lugd. Bat. 1665, 8vo., and that of Naples, 1757, 4to. They have been also pub- lished in a separate form, in Greek, Latin, and Italian, Rom. 1814, Bvo.; edited by P. A. Valen- tini. (See Choulant, Handb. der B'uclierkunde fiir die Aeltere Medicin.) [W. A. G.]  HIPPO'CRATES, the second of that name, and in some respects the most celebrated physician of ancient or modern times; for not only have his writings (or rather those which bear his name) been always held in the highest esteem, but his personal history (so far as it is known), and the literary criticism relating to his works, furnish so much matter for the consideration both of the scholar, the philologist, the philosopher, and the man of letters, that there are few authors of antiquity about whom so much has been written. Probably the readers of this work will care more for the literary than for the medical questions connected with Hippocrates; and accordingly (as it is quite impossible to discuss the whole subject fully in these pages) the strictly scientific portion of this article occupies less space than the critical; and this arrangement in this place the writer is inclined to adopt the more readily, because, while there are many works which contain a good account of the scientific merits of the Hippocratic writings, he is not aware of one where the many literary problems arising from them have been at once fully discussed and satisfactorily determined. This task he is far from thinking that he has himself accomplished, but it is right to give this reason for treating the scientific part of the subject much less fully than he would have done had he been writing for a professed medical work.

A parallel has more than once been drawn be- tween " the Father of Medicine " and " the Father of Poetry; " and, indeed, the resemblances between the two, both in their personal and literary historj', are so evident, that they could hardly fail to strike any one who was even moderately familiar with classical and medical literature. With respect to their personal history, the greatest uncertainty exists, and our real knowledge is next to nothing; although in the case of both personages, we have professed lives written by ancient authors, which, however, only tend to show still more plainly the ignorance that prevails on the subject. Accordingly, as might be expected, fable has been busy in sup- plying the deficiencies of history, and was for a time fully believed; till at length a re-action followed, and an unreasoning credulity was succeeded by an equally unreasonable scepticism, which reached its climax when it was boldly asserted that neither Homer nor Hippocrates had ever ex- 