It is an established Hellenistic topos that philosophy is the ‘medicine’ of the soul, in charge of ‘healing’ the soul in the same way as medicine is in charge of healing the body. The ‘diseases’ of the soul deemed to be in need of healing are its passions, that is, its fears and desires, and the moral ‘health’ that philosophers pledge to grant their followers is freedom from passions and hence peace of mind.

Frédéric Le Blay René Théophile Hyacinthe Laennec entreprit la traduction des Traités des maladies aiguës et des maladies chroniques du médecin romain Caelius Aurelianus. À partir de l’édition des manuscrits établie en 2009, je propose une analyse interprétative de la démarche du clinicien. Au-delà de la curiosité érudite d’un amoureux des classiques, je cherche à montrer que l’exercice de lecture et de traduction des textes constitutifs d’une histoire de la clinique s’intègre dans la méthode de Laennec et contribue (...) à fonder son épistémologie médicale, à une époque où les pratiques sont soumises à des redéfinitions majeures. Une telle entreprise, qui fait du texte, constituant d’une littérature, une donnée d’expérience en vue du diagnostic, n’est pas sans présenter quelque analogie avec certaines orientations contemporaines. (shrink)

This work brings together Philip van der Eijk's previously published essays on the close connections that existed between medicine and philosophy throughout antiquity. Medical authors such as the Hippocratic writers, Diocles, Galen, Soranus and Caelius Aurelianus elaborated on philosophical methods such as causal explanation, definition and division and applied key concepts such as the notion of nature to their understanding of the human body. Similarly, philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle were highly valued for their contributions to medicine. (...) This interaction was particularly striking in the study of the human soul in its relation to the body, as illustrated by approaches to specific topics such as intellect, sleep and dreams, and diet and drugs. With a detailed introduction surveying the subject as a whole and an essay on Aristotle's treatment of sleep, this wide-ranging and accessible collection is essential reading for the student of ancient philosophy and science. (shrink)

It can be argued that there was no intellectual figure at work in Rome in the period of the late Republic who had more originality and influence than the Bithynian doctor Asclepiades, who founded an important medical school and was still being attacked nearly three hundred years after his death by Galen, and two hundred years later still by Caelius Aurelianus. His claims to originality rested both on his theory of the causes of disease, and on his methods (...) of treatment. Turning away from the Empiricism recently fashionable, he argued that experience without λόγoς, theory or reason, was useless. His own theory was based on the scientific ideas of the late fourth-century philosopher Heraclides Ponticus, and seems to have postulated not τoμα, tiny indivisible particles, but γκoι, masses, which are continually in motion and splitting into innumerable fragments, θραύσματα, of different shapes and sizes, which re-form to create perceptible bodies. The particles were separated by invisible gaps, πόρoι or pores; friction between particles created the heat of the human body, but jamming of its pores was often the cause of pain and disease. This purely mechanistic doctrine was anathema to Galen because of its insufficient reverence for the doctrines of Hippocrates, and above all for the belief in the sympathy of the various parts of the body, the purposive character of Nature's creation, and her own healing effort; and also for the doctrine of the four, or more, humours. (shrink)

The seven books of the Diuinae institutiones, the most important work by Lactantius, the Christian author and contemporary of Constantine the Great, are an apologetic treatise that includes a defense of Christianity and a criticism of pagan religion, philosophy and morals.

An interesting phrase in a letter of Caelius to Cicero in 51 BC, especially relevant to the standing of injured socii or their non-Roman representatives in the quaestio de repetundis at this time, has been frequently misinterpreted by commentators on Cicero. Caelius is telling Cicero of the outcome of the condemnation of C. Claudius Pulcher after his governorship of Asia and the effect this had on an associate of Claudius, M. Servilius.

This essay offers three arguments concerning the ancient tradition about the mons Caelius. (1) Tacitus’ digression on the name of the mons Caelius at Annals 4.65 provides a useful framework for interpreting the complexity of the tradition: Caeles Vibenna should be regarded as a constant feature, his chronological context as an unstable feature that was recognised as such. (2) Claudius’ report of Etruscan auctores on the naming of the mons Caelius in his speech of A. D. 48 (...) about the Gauls, correctly emended, offers a unique etymology that cannot be reconciled with Roman accounts. (3) The presence of appellitare in Tacitus’ digression and Claudius' speech is normally assumed to prove Tacitus’ debt to Claudius, but this assumption cannot be sustained in the face of their fundamentally irreconcilable treatments of Caeles Vibenna. Tacitus used appellitare independently of Claudius, who was not a source of Ann. 4.65. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Cicero the Advocate, and: The Roman World of Cicero's De OratoreAnthony CorbeillJonathan Powell and Jeremy Paterson, eds. Cicero the Advocate. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. xii + 448 pp. Cloth, $150.Elaine Fantham. The Roman World of Cicero's De Oratore. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. x + 354 pp. Cloth, $120.Emphasis falls emphatically on "advocate" in the fine Powell and Paterson collection. Each essay concentrates on the forensic speeches (...) and the various strategies that Cicero employs "to ensure that the person he represents is acquitted or that the person he is prosecuting is found guilty" (from the dust jacket, the only place advocacy is defined). Well-organized and unusually coherent (given the genre), all of Cicero the Advocate can be read with profit.The book has three parts: an "editorial introduction," "themes," and "case studies." The concise and accurate introduction (1–57) provides a context for understanding Roman forensic oratory. Topics include a helpful comparison between Greek, Roman, and modern expectations; the mechanics of the Roman courts; the role of rhetorical theory in the construction of Cicero's orations; and, [End Page 144] finally, a review of the possible relationship between Cicero's published and original speeches. Indeed, the coverage is so comprehensive that it occasionally overlaps unnecessarily with the treatment of individual contributors (e.g., Lintott, Burnand, Laws).Needless polemics, however, tend to mar the introduction's tone. In advocating advocacy, the editors adopt a Ciceronian rhetoric of deniability, attacking a position that a subsequent statement grudgingly acknowledges. For example, the editors note early on: "Reading the work of some recent scholars [one relevant eighteen-page essay is cited], one might think that a Roman law court was a place in which all kinds of considerations, personal, social, or political, mattered more than the legal and factual points that the court was supposed to be deciding" (3). Before one can ponder this assessment of recent scholarship on Cicero (characteristic of "the individualistic 1980s" [3, n. 11]), the next paragraph begins, "Nobody, of course [my emphasis], denies that the outcome of a trial—in any legal system—can sometimes be affected by extraneous (especially political) issues." So perhaps these "recent scholars" are worth reading after all; indeed, the study of the cultural background that contributes to persuasion certainly warrants consideration in a book on advocacy. Fortunately, the individual contributions that follow adopt a more conciliatory tone.The range and number of essays preclude active engagement, so in what follows I will summarize key issues. After a survey of "Legal Procedure in Cicero's Time" (61–78) by Andrew Lintott, Jeremy Paterson's "Self-Reference in Cicero's Forensic Speeches" (79–95) assesses the oratorical function of self-praise. Attributing this practice to the original role of the patronus (80), Paterson identifies the advertisement of wealth and status as an important element of Roman advocacy, necessarily changing in tone for Cicero as his own status increases. Paterson's fine analysis, however, would need to change if applied to non-forensic speeches, in which Ciceronian self-praise is particularly pronounced. This surely would affect his conclusion that "Cicero never forgot what he was about, which was to win the case for his client" (95). In the dramatically titled "A Volscian Mafia? Cicero and his Italian Clients in the Forensic Speeches" (97–116; "mafia" refers simply to "local networks of obligations and contacts," 114), Kathryn Lomas surveys the role of Italian communities in five of Cicero's works (Pro Roscio Amerino, Pro Cluentio, Pro Caecina, Pro Caelio, Pro Plancio) to try to discover why there is a "relatively low level of visibility" of Italians even in those cases in which such connections are vital (98). The Italians defended by Cicero fall into two categories: municipals who, like Cicero, seek prominence in Rome (Caelius, Plancius), and the wealthy who have key connections within the capital but do not seek political office in Rome (Roscius, Cluentius, Oppianicus). Lomas convincingly demonstrates that Cicero defends clients from regions where he could hope for political support (especially in southern Latium). In "Reading Cicero's Narratives" (117–46), D. S. Levene employs a reader-response approach to the narrationes of three speeches (Pro Roscio... (shrink)

Originally published in 1967 Medieval Minds looks at the Middle Ages as a period with changing attitudes towards mental health and its treatment. The book argues that it was a period that that bridged the ancient with the modern, ignorance with knowledge and superstition with science. The Middle Ages spanned almost a millennium in the history of the humanities and provided the people of this period with the benefit of this knowledge. The book looks at the promise and progress which (...) was reflected by thinkers such as Augustin and Aurelianus, Alexander of Tralles and Paul of Aegina. The book also looks at martyrs like Valentine and Dympna, and the patrons of those afflicted with illnesses such as epilepsy and insanity. Written by the psychologist Thomas Francis Graham, this book provides a distinct and unique insight into the mind of those living in the medieval period and will be of interest to academics of history and literature alike. (shrink)

The figure of the Palmyrean queen Zenobia plays an important part in three vitae of the Historia Augusta. The discrepancy in her representation was attributed to different sources or different authors. Since the representation of Zenobia even changes within one vita, there is no need to assume different authors. Being a counterpart to Gallienus, Odaenathus and Aurelianus, the figure of Zenobia changes correspondingly to these male figures. Her voluntary submission to the real – male – emperor finds an equivalent (...) in the nation's voluntary submission to the real – male – ruler. The category of gender proves valuable in the analysis of characterisation and text intention. The vita Aureliani is interpreted as deconstructing the panegyric tones of the vitae Gallieni and triginta tyrannorum. (shrink)

Our limited evidence for the formula of the Roman sponsio is enough to clear up lingering controversy about two otherwise obscure speeches preserved only in testimonia and fragments. The elder Cato wrote a speech whose title is variously cited by our sources: ‘si se Caelius tribunus plebis appellasset’; ‘in M. Caelium si se appellasset’; ‘contra M. Caelium’ ; ‘in Marcum Cae[ci]lium’. On the reasonable postulate that these are variations on a single original, the fullest expression is relatively easy to (...) reconstruct: ‘si se M. Caelius tribunus plebis appellasset’.Doubts about the sense of these words have led to more radical proposals which have little to recommend them, especially in view of the new analysis I intend to offer. The conclusion among those who have attempted to explain the obvious reading has been that the title of the speech is a condition contrary to fact referring to a hypothetical situation to which the speech responded: some have suggested that Cato wrote the speech against the possibility that Caelius might make an accusation against him; Antonio Cima suggested that Caelius had made a speech against Cato without naming him and that Cato had responded, ‘if Caelius had meant to refer to me… ’. (shrink)

This is the third edition, with updated notes and appendices, of Cicero's speech defending Caelius Rufus. It gives an insight into the political events of the period, and also helps to reconstruct the 'social background' of Catullus. It is of particular interest to the literary historian.

'But I must stop now. I can no longer speak for tears - and my client has ordered that tears are not to be used in his defence.' Cicero was the greatest orator of the ancient world: he dominated the Roman courts, usually appearing for the defence. His speeches are masterpieces of persuasion: compellingly written, emotionally powerful, and somtimes hilariously funny. This book presents five of his most famous defences: of Roscius, falsely accused of murdering his father; of the consul-elect (...) Murena, accused of electoral bribery; of the poet Archias, on a citizenshiup charge; of Caelius, ex-lover of Clodia Metelli, on charges of violence; and of Milo, for mudering Cicero's hated enemy Clodius. Cicero's clients were rarely whiter-than-white; but so seductive is his oratory that the reader cannot help taking his side. In these speeches we are plunged into some of the most exciting courtroom dramas of all time. These new translations preserve Cicero's literary artistry and emotional force, and achieve new standards of accuracy. Each speech has its own introduction, and a general introduction discusses Cicero's public career and the criminal courts. The substantial explanatory notes guide the reader through the speeches, and offer new scholarship presented in a clear way. (shrink)

Boethius and Alcuin of York -- Boethius and Amalrius Symphosius Metensis -- Boethius and Charles II "the Bald" -- Boethius and Iohannes Scottus Eriugena -- Boethius and the cognitive process (De musica I, 1) -- Boethius and Aurelianus Reomensis -- Boethius and Hucbaldus Elnonensis -- Boethii Consolatio Philosophiae -- Boethius and Hrotsvitha Gandersheimensis -- Boethius and Gerbertus Aureliacensis, Boethius and Abbo Floriacensis, Boethius and Notker Labeo seu Teutonicus -- Boethius and Fulbertus Carnotensis -- Boethius and Theodoricus Carnotensis.