{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.040676863000325414, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008460787504067686, 'mean_word_length': 4.855238095238096, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Medicine and Philosophy

This collection of thirty-nine papers is the first volume in the series Medizin der Antike. (The second, J. C. Wilmanns, Der romische Sanitatsdienst, has already been reviewed in CR 47 [1997], 381-2.) It is subdivided into three parts: Part I deals with interrelations between the Hippocratic Corpus and ancient philosophy, Part II with 'interpretations', and Part III with textual tradition. Most of the contributions are in German, French, and English, three are in Italian, and one is in Spanish. Of the two editors, W. has not contributed a paper herself. P.'s is 'Aristote, Hippocrate, Oedipe' (pp. 183-98), in which he investigates Aristotle's knowledge and concept of medicine. He starts from the premiss that, although Aristotle's father was a doctor (allegedly physician to the Macedonian king Amyntas), he only mentions Hippocrates once, and only two other doctors—Syennesis of Cyprus and Polybus— by name. Although medicine is present both in Aristotle's family background and as a classical example for philosophers since Plato, Aristotle's attitude towards it has not been the subject of extensive research so far. In his paper, P. looks at Aristotle's Politico and Ethica Nicomachea as well as de Sensu and de Respiratione. In EN, Aristotle emphasizes the role of the unforeseen in medicine, but also the importance of practical experience, e.g. in his remark that one does not become a doctor from reading the avyypdixixara. P. then discusses the nature of the latter, suggesting that they may include some of the best-known works in the Hippocratic Corpus. Deploying passages from Sens, and Resp., P. discusses the question of the subordination of one science to another. Thus medicine fulfils one criterion for a subordinate science, insofar as its principles are derived from natural philosophy, and it is the physicist who makes the principles of health and illness intelligible. However, since diseases are not natural realities, being against nature, medicine is not subordinate to physics. It is a practical science, and its principles can be explained by their relation to the theoretical science of physics, of which medicine is not a part. The argument of the last section of P.'s paper, regarding relations between the lineage of Hippocrates and the Macedonian court, is less convincing. First of all, it is questionable whether various later traditions about descendants of Hippocrates can be taken as serious evidence. Moreover, Hippocrates' grandson, supposedly doctor to Alexander's wife Roxana, is not mentioned by the main sources on Alexander, and Critobulus is mentioned—though not as a Coan Asclepiad—by Q. Curtius (9.5.25), not Arrian (8.18.7). (There is no eighth book in Arrian's Anabasis.) He is the same doctor as the one whom Arrian (6.11) calls Critodemus. P. argues that, given the links the descendants of Hippocrates had with the kings of Macedon, Aristotle's father would have been an outsider at the court. Therefore, he suggests, the absence of Hippocratic medicine from Aristotle's writings could be