102 PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY. 



which deals with the material cause, 86 and says that the majority of 

 the first philosophers regarded material causes as the sole causes of all 

 things. 87 Empedocles 88 uses <£*W of the substance contributed by 

 the parents to the birth of their offspring, and Hippocrates 89 does so 

 likewise in the same connexion. In another passage Hippocrates well 

 illustrates this force of <£t'o-is. He is engaged in a polemic against the 

 monists, who assert that all is one, and makes the point that a living 

 being does not arise from even a multiplicity of substances unless they 

 are mixed in the right proportions, 90 and hence a fortiori, could not 

 arise from a single substance. He then proceeds : 91 "Such being the 



attention to this usage, though I cannot but differ from him in the interpretation of 

 individual texts. It would serve no useful purpose to specify further instances. But 

 it should be noted that (pvcns in this sense means 'natural kind,' and hence is proba- 

 bly derived from III. A, 2. Cp. ibiai, n. 89, and eiSea, n. 113. 

 ' 86 Met. 983 b 20, interpreted by 983 b 7 foil. 



87 Met. 983 b 7 : tuiv 5q Trpuirwv (piXoao^rjcravTuiv ol ir\e?<TTOt rots ii> VXrjs eioei fx6va% 

 bj-fiOrjaav apxas elvai tt&vtuv. Proclus in Tim. (Diehl, I. p. 1) says to the same effect 

 ol fih iroXXol tQv wpb rov UXdruvos (pvaiKGiv irepl ri]v vXrjv bitTpiipav. Cp. Gilbert, 

 Aristoteles und die Vorsokratikcr, Fhilol. 68, 36S foil. 



88 Fr. 63 aXXd 8i{<nra<TTai /ueX^wv (ptais ■ i] p.h ev avSpbs. Diels renders : " der 

 Urspmng der Glieder liegt auseinander ; " Burnet : "the substance of (the child's) 

 limbs is divided between them, part of it in the man's and part in the woman's 

 (body)." Here I agree in the main with Burnet. The phrase fieXtwv <p6cris occurs 

 also in Farm., fr. 16, 3, where Burnet gives it the same sense, whereas Diels renders : 

 "die Beschaffenheit seiner Organe." In this case I agree with Diels. 



89 II. yovrjs, 11(7, 484 Littre) iir))v Si tL ol vb<jr]p.a trpocnricrrj nai rov vypov avrov, 

 d$' ov rb airipfxa ylverai, riaaapes ioiai iovaai, 6k6(Tcu iv cpvtrei virrip^au, ttjv yovr)v oi'x 

 SXrjv trapixovacv, kt\. 



90 II. </>t'(7ios dvdpwirov, 3 (6, 38 Littre). There is much in this discussion which 

 applies the reasoning of Empedocles, for the interpretation of whose thought it is of 

 extreme importance. It clearly presupposes and combats the theory of Diogenes 

 of Apollonia (cp. espec. fr. 3, beginning). For the interpretation of Empedocles the 

 statements regarding fit conditions of mixture for yiveais are of especial interest, 

 since they imply definite proportions and the admixture of all four elements. The 

 intimate relation of Empedocles to the medical schools should be constantly borne in 

 mind. Medicine, so far as it consisted in the ministration of medicaments, was 

 essentially the art of interfering in the microcosmic ■n-oXep.o's, which reproduced in 

 miniature the cosmic ir6Xep.os, and of preventing iwiKparcia of the several elements by 

 combatting the overbearing and assisting those which were in danger of succumbing. 

 One might be misled into supposing that Greek prescriptions were not precise, because 

 few such are found in Hippocrates. The reason, I believe, is that Hippocrates 

 insisted on a minute study of the individual case, for which precise prescriptions for 

 general distribution would be unsuitable. That prescriptions were given by formula 

 we know : cp. Hippocrates, II. evo~x 7 !l J - 00 ~v , 'VS> 10 (9, 238 Littre) TrpoxaTao-Kevao-dw Si 

 croi . . . noTrip.aTa rip.veiv Swdp-eva. ii; avay pa<f>rjs i<r Ktvac fxiva, icpbs to. yivea. 

 These are classified prescriptions. 



91 n. (pvatos avdpibTrov, 3 (6, 38 Littre). 



