1895. Since then I believe that the only work of Galen to be translated

into English is _On the Natural Faculties_, ed. A. J. Brock, 1916 (Loeb Library). [518] J. F. Payne, _The Relation of Harvey to his Predecessors and especially to Galen_: Harveian Oration of 1896, in _The Lancet_, Oct. 24, 1896, p. 1136. [519] In the Teubner texts: _Scriptora minora_, 1-3, ed. I. Marquardt, I. Mueller, G. Helmreich, 1884-1893; _De victu_, ed. Helmreich, 1898; _De temperamentis_, ed. Helmreich, 1904; _De usu partium_, ed. Helmreich, 1907, 1909. In _Corpus Medicorum Graecorum_, V, 9, 1-2, 1914-1915, _The Hippocratic Commentaries_, ed. Mewaldt, Helmreich, Westenberger, Diels, Hieg. [520] Carolus Gottlob Kühn, _Claudii Galeni Opera Omnia_, Leipzig, 1821-1833, 21 vols. My citations will be to this edition, unless otherwise specified. An older edition which is often cited is that of Renatus Charterius, Paris, 1679, 13 vols. [521] The article on Galen in PW regards some of the treatises as printed in Kühn as almost unreadable. [522] Although Kühn’s Index fills a volume, it is far from dependable. [523] Liddell and Scott often fail to allude to germane passages in Galen’s works, even when they include, with citation of some other author, the word he uses. [524] Perhaps at this point a similarly candid confession by the present writer is in order. I have tried to do a little more than Dr. Payne in his modesty seems ready to admit of himself, and to look over carefully enough not to miss anything of importance those works which seemed at all likely to bear upon my particular interest, the history of science and magic. In consequence I have examined long stretches of text from which I have got nothing. For the most part, I thought it better not to take time to read the Hippocratic commentaries. At first I was inclined to depend upon others for Galen’s treatises on anatomy and physiology, but finally I read most of them in order to learn at first hand of his argument from design and his attitude towards dissection. Further than this the reader can probably judge for himself from my citations as to the extent and depth of my reading. My first draft was completed before I discovered that Puschmann had made considerable use of Galen for medical conditions in the Roman Empire in his _History of Medical Education_, English translation, London, 1891, pp. 93-113. For the sake of a complete and well-rounded survey I have thought it best to retain those passages where I cover about the same ground. I have been unable to procure T. Meyer-Steineg, _Ein Tag im Leben des Galen_, Jena, 1913. 63 pp. [525] For an account of the MSS see H. Diels, _Berl. Akad. Abh._ (1905), 58ff. Some fragments of Galen’s work on medicinal simples exist in a fifth century MS of Dioscorides at Constantinople and have been reproduced by M. Wellmann in _Hermes_, XXXVIII (1903), 292ff. The first two books of his περὶ τῶν ἐν ταῖς τροφαῖς δυνάμεων were discovered in a Wolfenbüttel palimpsest of the fifth or sixth century by K. Koch; see _Berl. Akad. Sitzb._ (1907), 103ff. [526] _Lancet_ (1896), p. 1135. [527] For these see V. Rose, _Analecta Graeca et Latina_, Berlin, 1864. As a specimen of these medieval Latin translations may be mentioned a collection of some twenty-six treatises in one huge volume which I have seen in the library of Balliol College, Oxford: Balliol 231, a large folio, early 14th century (a note of ownership was added in 1334 at Canterbury) fols. 437, double columned pages. For the titles and _incipits_ of the individual treatises see Coxe (1852). [528] A. Merx, “Proben der syrischen Uebersetzung von Galenus’ Schrift über die einfachen Heilmittel,” _Zeitsch. d. Deutsch. Morgendl. Gesell._ XXXIX (1885), 237-305. [529] Payne, _Lancet_ (1896), p. 1136. [530] Ch. V. Daremberg, _Exposition des connaissances de Galien sur l’anatomie, la physiologie, et la pathologie du système nerveux_, Paris, 1841. [531] _Lancet_ (1896), p. 1140. [532] Brock (1916), p. xvi, says in 131 A. D. Clinton, _Fasti Romani_, placed it in 130. [533] These details are from the _De cognoscendis curandisque animi morbis_, cap. 8, Kühn, V, 40-44. [534] _De naturalibus facultatibus_, III, 10, Kühn, II, 179. [535] Kühn, X, 609 (_De methodo medendi_); also XVI, 223; and XIX, 59. [536] _De anatom. administ._, Kühn, II, 217, 224-25, 660. See also XV, 136; XIX, 57. [537] His recorded astronomical observations extend from 127 to 151 A. D. [538] Kühn, X, 16. [539] _Fragments du commentaire de Galien sur le Timée de Platon_, were published for the first time, both in Greek and a French translation, together with an _Essai sur Galien considéré comme philosophe_, by Ch. Daremberg, Paris, 1848. [540] Kühn, XIII, 599-600. [541] Clinton, _Fasti Romani_, I, 151 and 155, speaks of a first visit of Galen to Rome in 162 and a second in 164, but he has misinterpreted Galen’s statements. When Galen speaks of his second visit to Rome, he means his return after the plague. [542] Kühn, XIX, 15. [543] Kühn, XIV, 622, 625, 648; see also I, 54-57. and XII, 263. [544] Kühn, XIV, 649-50. [545] R. M. Briau, _L’Archiatrie Romaine_, Paris, 1877, however, held that Galen never received the official title, _archiater_; see p. 24, “il est difficile de comprendre pourquoi le médecin de Pergame qui donnait des soins à l’empereur Marc Aurèle, ne fut jamais honoré de ce titre.” But he is given the title in at least one medieval MS—Merton 219, early 14th century, fol. 36_v_—“Incipit liber Galieni archistratos medicorum de malitia complexionis diversae.” [546] _De venae sectione_, Kühn, XIX, 524. [547] Kühn, XIII, 362-63; for another allusion to this fire see XIV,