「고대 의학에 관하여」의 연구사
The History of the Study of On Ancient Medicine
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The treatise On Ancient Medicine is nowadays one of the most admired, and most studied, of those making up the Corpus Hippocraticum. But this favored position is not a ancient phenomenon, but a modern phenomenon. The treatise contributed to the establishment of the Empiric school of medicine. Empiricists seem to have written commentaries of Hippocratic works. But the attention paid to this work in antiquity was short-lived. In the second century A.D., Galen knew the work, but he did not devote a commentary to it. He almost totally ignored it and his powerful influence made the treatise drop out of sight from later antiquity to early modern times. On Ancient Medicine was not regarded as one of the major works of the Corpus Hippocraticum until in 1939, Émile Littré was a strong advocate of the view that the work was a genuine work of Hippocrates, and placed it first in his ten-volume edition of 1839-1861. Later, some scholars advocated Littré' view, but much more scholars rose against his position. Most of studies of the work motivated by the desire to answer the Hippocratic question reached conclusions that was vague. After all to conclude that Hippocrates was the author of this work would be rash.
Abstract
The treatise On Ancient Medicine is nowadays one of the most admired, and most studied, of those making up the Corpus Hippocraticum. But this favored position is not a ancient phenomenon, but a modern phenomenon. The treatise contributed to the establishment of the Empiric school of medicine. Empiricists seem to have written commentaries of Hippocratic works. But the attention paid to this work in antiquity was short-lived. In the second century A.D., Galen knew the work, but he did not devote a commentary to it. He almost totally ignored it and his powerful influence made the treatise drop out of sight from later antiquity to early modern times. On Ancient Medicine was not regarded as one of the major works of the Corpus Hippocraticum until in 1939, Émile Littré was a strong advocate of the view that the work was a genuine work of Hippocrates, and placed it first in his ten-volume edition of 1839-1861. Later, some scholars advocated Littré' view, but much more scholars rose against his position. Most of studies of the work motivated by the desire to answer the Hippocratic question reached conclusions that was vague. After all to conclude that Hippocrates was the author of this work would be rash.
참고문헌 (18)
- Celsus, "De Medicina prooemium", ~
- Cooper J, "Knowledge, nature and the good: essays on ancient philosophy" (2004), Princeton University Press
- Festugière AJ, "Hippocrate, l'ancienne médecine. Études et Commentaires 4" (1948), Klincksieck
- Huffman CA, "Philolaus of Croton: Pythagorean and Presocratic" (1993), Cambridge University Press
- Jones WHS, "Hippocrates Ⅰ. Loeb Classical Library" (1923), Harvard University Press
- Jones WHS, "Philosophy and medicine in ancient Grece" (1946), Johns Hopkins
- Jouanna J, "Hippocrate Ⅱ, 1: De l'ancient médecine" (2003), Les Belles Lettres
- Littré MPE, "Oeuvres Complètes d'Hippocrate Ⅰ" (1839), Ballière
- Longrigg J, "Greek Rational Medicine: Philosophy and medicine from Alcmaeon to the Alexandrians" (1993), Routledge
- Nachmanson E, "Erotiani vocum Hippocraticarum collectio cum fragmentis" (1918), Uppsala
- Potter P, "Hippocrates Ⅷ. Loeb Classical Library" (1995), Harvard University Press
- Schiefsky MJ, "Hippocrates On Ancient Medicine" (2005), Brill
- Smith WD, "The Hippocratic Tradition" (1979), Cornell University Press
- von Staden H, "Herophilus: The Art of Medicine in Early Alexandria" (1989), Cambridge University Press
- Capelle W, "Zur Hippokratischen Frage", pp.57~ (1922), Hermes
- Gomperz T, "Die hippokratische Frage und der Ausgangspunkt ihrer Lösung", pp.70~ (1911), Philologus
- Pohlenz M, "Das zwanzigste Kapitel von Hippokrates de prisca medicina", pp.53~ (1918), Hermes
- Lloyd GER, "Who is attacked in On Ancient Medicine?", Phronesis, 8 (1963)