PART 5
V. Let us consider also whether the acknowledged
art of medicine, that was discovered for the treatment
of the sick and has both a name and artists,
has the same object as the other art,
1 and what its
origin was. In my opinion, as I said at the beginning,
nobody would have even sought for medicine,
if the same ways of life had suited both the sick and
those in health. At any rate even at the present day
such as do not use medical science, foreigners and
some Greeks, live as do those in health, just as they
please, and would neither forgo nor restrict the satisfaction
of any of their desires. But those who sought
for and discovered medicine, having the same intention
as the men I discussed above, in the first place,
I think, lessened the bulk of the foods, and, without
altering their character, greatly diminished their
quantity. But they found that this treatment was
[p. 23]
sufficient only occasionally, and although clearly
beneficial with some patients, it was not so in all
cases, as some were in such a condition that they
could not assimilate even small quantities of food.
As such patients were thought to need weaker nutriment,
slops were invented by mixing with much
water small quantities of strong foods, and by taking
away from their strength by compounding and
boiling. Those that were not able to assimilate them
were refused even these slops, and were reduced to
taking liquids, these moreover being so regulated in
composition and quantity as to be moderate, and
nothing was administered that was either more or
less, or less compounded, than it ought to be.
