PATHOLOGY. 
local inflammation. Indeed, in his writings, the term 
fever is only applied to that clafs which we call idiopathic ; 
and there feems good reafon to fuppofe, that, in the com¬ 
mencement of a fever ariling out of vilceral inflammation, 
he bled very copioufly. He likewife performed cupping 
■with fcarificators; and occafionally ufed the femicupium, 
which he fuppofed would draw the humours from the 
affeCted part by means of aUrudiion. 
As molt of the purgatives in ufe in the time of Hip¬ 
pocrates were very violent in their operation, often pro¬ 
ducing ficknefs, he prefcribed them with great caution. 
He did not give them to pregnant women, old people, or 
children; nor during the dog-days. He ufed them more 
frequently in chronic than acute difeafes, and chiefly with 
a view to the expulfion of fome particular humour; to 
each of thel'e humours he applied a leparate kind of pur¬ 
gative ; hence the diltinCtion of thofe fubftances into hy- 
d-ragogues, cholagogues, &c. now juflly exploded. Hip¬ 
pocrates likewife ufed errhines, which he laid relieved 
pain in the head by drawing the phlegm from the brain; 
i'udoriflcs and diuretics, which were likewife for the pur- 
pofe of evacuating fome peccant humour, and narcotics, 
or, as he called them, hypnotics, to produce fleep. But 
of thefe laft he was very lparing. To medicines which ex¬ 
perience had proved to be efficacious, but of which the 
operation was inexplicable by this humoral pathology, he 
applied the term Jpecifics. He ufed fomentations, in which 
different herbs were boiled, either by direCt application or 
in the form of vapour. Nor did he neglect cataplafms, 
ointments, cauftics, and collyria ; all of which he pre¬ 
pared himfelf, or caufed to be made by his fervants un¬ 
der his own immediate infpeCtion. The pharmaceutical 
diftinCtions of medicines into mixtures, powders, and 
pills, were obferved in this time, and likewife fomething 
analogous to our lozenge was ufed ; it was called a lum- 
lative, was of a foft confidence, and was retained in the 
patient’s mouth until flowly diffolved. The practice of 
Hippocrates was beneficial to himfelf; for it is generally 
underftood that he reached the age of a hundred years, 
and died about 360 years before the birth of Chrift. 
Soon after the death of Hippocrates, the profeffors of 
medicine became divided into two feCts; the Dogmatifts 
and the Empirics. 
The feed of the Dogmatists was founded by Theffalus 
and Draco the fons, and Polybus the fon-in-law, of Hip¬ 
pocrates. Their leading tenets are recorded in the book 
“On the Nature of Man,” which has falfely been attri¬ 
buted to Hippocrates. Ariftotle conjedtures that it was 
written by Polybus. The Dogmatilts were fometimes 
coiled logici, or logicians, from their ufing the rules of 
logic and reafon in the fubjedts of their profeflion. They 
fet out with the rule, that, “when experience fails, rea¬ 
fon mayfuffice.” Unfortunately, however, they took lit¬ 
tle pains to confult experience, but were perpetually oc¬ 
cupied with endeavouring to trace difeafe to its fecret 
and remote caufes. 
The fyftem of the Empirics, as the term imports, was 
founded altogether upon experience-, and thofe who be¬ 
longed to this fedt have remarked, that there are three 
modes by which we learn, from experience, to diltinguith 
what is advantageous and what is prejudicial, in regard 
to our health. 1. The firlt of thefe, and the molt Ample, 
arifes from accident. A perfon, for example, having a 
violent pain in the head,'happens to fall, and divides a 
veffel in the forehead ; and it is obferved that, having 
loll blood, his pain is relieved, Under the fame mode, 
they include the experience which is acquired by obfer- 
ving the fpontaneous operations of the conftitution, 
where no remedy has been applied, as in the following 
cafe : a perfon labouring under a fever, finds his difeafe 
mitigated, after a hemorrhagy from the nofe, a profufe 
perfpiration, or a diarrhoea. 2. The fecond mode of 
gaining experience is, that in which fomething is done by 
deftgn , with a view to afeertain what will be the fuccels 
of it; as, for inftance, when a perfon, having been bitten 
? 
by a ferpent, or other venomous creature, applies to the 
bite the firft herb that he finds ; or when a mart' attempts 
to alleviate the fymptoms of an acute and burning fever, 
by drinking as copioufly as he is able of cold water ; or 
when a perfon tries a remedy, fuggefted tohimby a dream, 
as was frequently done in heathenilh times. 3. The 
third mode of experimenting is, that which the empirics 
termed imitative; W'hicb is purfued in cafes, when, after 
having remarked the efleets refulting from accident, or 
the fpontaneous aCtions of the fyftem, on the one hand, 
or from dejign on the other, we make an attempt to ac- 
complilh afimilar refult by imitating that which u ! as done 
on thofe occafions. 
This laft fort of experience, they contend, is that which 
peculiarly conftitutes the art of medicine, when it lias 
been frequently repeated. They call that obj'ervation 
(r'/5p7j(7K,) or autopfia, (avr ottcicc,) which each individual 
fees himfelf; and ufe the term hijlory or record, (i{Topi:t,) 
for fuch obfervation, when committed to writing; that is, 
the autopfia, or perfonal experience, confifts of the obfer- 
vations which each perfon has made, by his attention to 
the progrefs of a difeafe, whether in regard to its fymp¬ 
toms and changes, or to the remedies employed ; while 
the record is a fort of narration or regifter of all that was 
obferved by thofe individuals ; which regifter being com¬ 
pleted, (i. e. including all the difeafes incident to man¬ 
kind, and the remedies adminiftered for their alleviation,) 
the art of medicine w'ould be eftabliflied with a confider- 
able degree of certainty. But, as new difeafes fometimes 
occur, in regard to which neither our perfonal experience, 
nor the obfervations of others, can furnilh us with any 
afliftance; and we meet with diforders in particular fitua- 
tions, where the means of relief, fanCtioned by experience 
elfewhere, are not within our reach ; we mull neceffariiy 
have recourfe to fome other expedient in order to allevi¬ 
ate the bufferings of the patient. The empirics were pro¬ 
vided againfl this particular difficulty, in what they 
termed a J'ubjiitution of fimilar means, ( tranjltus adfimile , 
as the Latins have tranflated it.) This was a new experi¬ 
ment, which they inftituted, after having compared one 
difeafe with another ; or one part of the body with ano¬ 
ther, of fimilar ftruCture; or, lartly, one remedy, the na¬ 
ture of which was afeertained by experiment, with ano¬ 
ther which refembled it. “ They tried, for example, in 
herpetic eruptions the remedies which had relieved eryji- 
pelus ; and, in the difeafes of the arms, they employed the 
expedients which had been praCtifed in thofe of the /egs; 
&c. & c.” Obfervation, then, record, and the j'ubjiitution of 
fimilar means, were the three fundamental refources of the 
art of medicine, according to the empirics: and thefe 
were denominated, by Glaucias and others, “ the tripod 
of medicine.” 
There is obvioufly a great deal of good fenfe and found 
philofophy in this doctrine of empincifm. It points out 
the true mode of invelfigating the phenomena of nature 
by unwearied experiment; the mode which Bacon la¬ 
boured to inculcate, which Newton fuccefsfully purfued, 
and which has led the philofophers of later times to the 
development of that fund of natural knowledge in the 
fciences of electricity, chemiltry, mechanical, and every 
branch of natural, philolophy, by which modern inquiry 
is diftinguifhed. Compared with this fpecies of invefti- 
gation, how futile are the lpeculations, mifnamed philo- 
lophy in the fchools, relative to elements and ellences, 
which had no exiftence except in the imagination of the 
difputants. 
At firft much rancour and animofity fubfifted between 
thefe two parties ; but, in procefs of time, their practice 
was found to coincide in many material points; for, 
though the dogmatifts were much addicted to hypothefis, 
they could not fail to make clinical obfervations when en¬ 
gaged in practice; and the empirics did not entirely con- 
tine tliemlelves to their profeffed mode of acquiring know¬ 
ledge, but occafionally indulged in that paflion for the¬ 
ory and generalization which is fo common in a philofa- 
phic. 
