Of the Rhodian and Italian schools, established by the descendants or priests of AEsculapius, we have few-remains: of the existence of the latter .we find only some imperfect hints in Galen. The former was more distinguished, but its remaining vestiges are few. The medals bear a branch of Balaustines; but this mark is rather referable to the arts than to medicine, as the plant was then almost exclusively used in dying.

The fame of these schools and of the philosophers, for medicine seems hitherto to have been cultivated only as a branch of philosophy, was soon eclipsed by Hippocrates, who seems to have been the first to whom the appellation of physician, in its modern acceptation, is due. He first separated it from philosophy, gave it the form of a distinct science, and personally observed the progress of diseases, as well as the effects of remedies; on this account he is styled the inventor of the medicina clinica. Yet perhaps the philosophers who preceded him must not be wholly omitted. We are reminded of Pythagorus by the Climacterics, by the Critical days, and his recommendation of the vinegar of squills, in deafness; of his scholar Alcmaeon, who first described the eye; of Empedocles, who, before any other anatomist, dissected with accuracy the ear; and of Timaeus Locrus, who taught that the nervous system was the basis of the whole body, on which the nutritious substance was gradually extended. Democritus was rather a philosopher and a chemist than a physician, and might have ranked with credit in each class were the various hints of his labours collected.

Of Hippocrates it is difficult to speak with impartiality in a manner that will satisfy his warm admirers, or those who reject every thing which is not of a modern aera. If we look at him as a physician, when medicine had scarcely escaped from the trammels of superstition, the refinements of philosophy, or the dictates of antiquated tradition, our admiration will rise almost to enthusiasm; for we shall perceive sound judgment, accuracy of reasoning, and acuteness of observation, superior to his aera, or the state of science at that period. But to study and admire Hippocrates at this time is very different. Science has opened newer and more extensive views; diseases are distinguished with greater accuracy; and the remedies, as they are more numerous, may be more appropriately adapted to the circumstances. If we find a striking description in Hippocrates, we admire it as a mark of superior genius, and wonder how the same event could have happened both in Greece and England. Yet strip the fact of the disguise of system, and it will be found that patient observation would alone have taught it. He fills, however, so vast a space in the medical scene, that some further notice of him and his doctrines will be necessary.

Hippocrates was born in the first year of the 80th Olympiad, 460 years before the birth of Christ, and was descended from a line of physicians, inheriting the instructions of his father and grandfather, themselves descendants from the Asclepiadae, while his mother traced her origin from the Heraclidae. He died at La-rissa, it is said, at the age of ninety. He first practised physic at Thasus, afterwards at Abdera, and at last in Thessaly; but his chief residence was at Cos, whence the Coan school became for a long time the successful rival of the Gnidian. All that has been added to these few events is doubtful. That his instructors were He-rodicus (or Prodicus) and Democritus, rests only on the attention which he has paid to the gymnastic art, as well as to anatomy; and the philosophy of Hippocrates is more nearly allied to the tenets of Heraclitus than of the Abderite. As Hippocrates was a great traveller, he might have attended the lessons of Prodicus in Athens, where he chiefly taught, and might there have been acquainted with his brother Gorgias, whom he afterwards attended in his medical capacity in Thessalv, when worn down with old age; but we have no records of his having ever practised at Athens.

The other tales either to his honour or discredit are too idle to detain us. Had he violated or burnt a temple, Greece could have afforded him no asylum. Had he been greatly instrumental in relieving those affected with the plague at Athens, Thucydides could not have stated that medicine was of no advantage in that epidemic. The oration of Thessalus the son of Hippocrates on the subject of the honours decreed to him, must be spurious; for at that time the sage was but thirty-one years old. The request of Artaxerxes, which he is said to have refused, is also wholly inconsistent with the crime supposed to have driven him from Cos. The tale of his being sent to Democritus by the inhabitants of Abdera seems only one of the many sneers the stupidity of the Abderites scattered in ancient history; and Reland has shown, that the imputed letter was written by Epictetus. The time of his death is equally uncertain.

Under the name of Hippocrates we have received works of very different value. Those of his predecessors and successors are confounded with his, partly from his having appropriated some of their remarks, in part from the high character he had acquired; and from several of his descendants having retained his name. The chief cause, however, of the many spurious works attributed to him, is the avarice of the collectors of Ptolemy, who, when he founded the library of Alexandria, endeavoured to obtain, at the most extravagant rates, the. works of every author of reputation. Every thing under the name of Hippocrates was eagerly received, and it was thought of little importance whether they proceeded from the first, second, or third

6 D 2 of that name: the reports were not sifted with minute discrimination. To distinguish the real works of Hippocrates has been consequently a problem of no little difficulty. At the expiration of 500 years, this task was attempted by Galen, who, to an intimate knowledge of what the successors of Hippocrates had written, possessed a discriminating genius, and a critical discernment of the style and manner of the Coan sage, which peculiarly fitted him for the task. Mercurialis, a man of the most extensive erudition, Haller, a physician of vast information, capable of the most incredible labour, and Grafter, possessed of all the indefatigable diligence of his nation, have laboured in the same field. They have assumed, as a principle, that Hippocrates was a man of singular abilities, extensive information, consummate candour, and modesty. By these tests they have tried every imputed work. Though perhaps the principles might not be readily conceded, yet, as they will certainly point out to our attention the most valuable works, we shall give the result of their labours.