jeanflop/post_ocr_correction2 huggingface dataset:
a phlegmatic fever, and the reason of that is that it disperses the light matter and leaves the heavy matter undispersed, so baths should not be taken in every fever. Then Galenus says that everything that increases the corruption and preserves it should not be done, and Galenus says corruption is increased and preserved by bathing, so it should not be done in fevers. Then Galenus says in the commentary of the fourth particle of Aphorisms that one should not bathe in hot water in a fever accompanied by ulcers, so bathing is not suitable in every fever. Then Galenus says in the commentary of this aphorism: "Sub caute.", and Aristotle says these words: Balneum, i.e. bathing in fevers is opposed to the evacuation of the matter, so bathing is not suitable in fevers. This is opposed according to Galenus in the eighth book of De ingenio Sanitatis, for he says bathing is suitable in ephemeral fever, and in the tenth book that it is suitable in hectic fever, and in the eleventh book that it is suitable in putrid fever, so bathing is suitable in every fever. Then Galenus says in the tenth book of De Ingenio Sanitatis that everything that cools the body and moistens it is suitable in corrupt fever, and bathing cools and moistens the body, so it should be given in putrid fever. Then Galenus says that everything which digests the offending matter and expels it and cools the body is suitable to give in fevers, and Galenus says bathing in sweet water does those things, so it should be given in every fever. We answer that and say that bathing is serviceable in ephemeral fever in every period, and it should not be given in hectic fever, for there are three reasons for hindering it in the hectic, i.e. because it is dispersing, and because it is hot, and because it is purgative, for those three things are directly opposed to hectic fever. The giving of baths in putrid fever is understood in two ways, i.e. with regard to the aliment and with regard
everything that cools the body and moistens it is suitable in corrupt fever, and bathing cools and moistens the body, so it should be given in putrid fever. Then Galenus says that everything which digests the offending matter and expels it and cools the body is suitable to give in fevers, and Galenus says bathing in sweet water does those things, so it should be given in every fever. We answer that and say that bathing is serviceable in ephemeral fever in every period, and it should not be given in hectic fever, for there are three reasons for hindering it in the hectic, i.e. because it is dispersing, and because it is hot, and because it is purgative, for those three things are directly opposed to hectic fever. The giving of baths in putrid fever is understood in two ways, i.e. with regard to the aliment and with regard to the fever itself. With regard to the aliment, there are six conditions for hindering bathing. The first condition, i.e. a bath should not be given if the fever patient has abdominal flux, for if the flux is checked, the matter is drawn to the principal members and causes then an increase of the injury. The second condition, i.e. a bath should not be given if the fever patient suffers from constipation, for it would make the body too dry. The third condition, i.e. if the energy is weak, a bath should not be given. The fourth condition, a bath should not be given to people who suffer habitually from nausea and vomiting. The fifth condition, people in choleric delirium would not be put in a bath. The sixth condition, i.e. people with a flux of blood, or ready for it, should not be put in a bath. Let it be asked here whether cold moist diet should be given in fevers; it seems not, for Avicenna says the food given to fever patients should be easily digested, and penetrating, and moist, and cold moist diet is not so, so it should not be given in fevers. Then Galenus says
an increase of the injury. The second condition, i.e. a bath should not be given if the fever patient suffers from constipation, for it would make the body too dry. The third condition, i.e. if the energy is weak, a bath should not be given. The fourth condition, a bath should not be given to people who suffer habitually from nausea and vomiting. The fifth condition, people in choleric delirium would not be put in a bath. The sixth condition, i.e. people with a flux of blood, or ready for it, should not be put in a bath. Let it be asked here whether cold moist diet should be given in fevers; it seems not, for Avicenna says the food given to fever patients should be easily digested, and penetrating, and moist, and cold moist diet is not so, so it should not be given in fevers. Then Galenus says in De Ingenio Sanitatis that the diet should be given with regard to the complexion and not with regard to the fever, so, if a man of sanguine bile suffers from tertian fever, a diet to increase sanguine bile should then be given, if so, cold moist diet should not be given in fevers. Then Galenus says there are three things to be examined in giving diet in fevers, i.e. age and complexion and habit, so cold moist diet should not be given in fevers. Then Galenus says in the commentary to the Aphorisms that humidity is the mother of corruption, and Isaac says the same thing in the book on fevers: Omne quod, i.e. everything that takes to corruption is moist, so cold moist diet should not be given in fevers. Then Isaac says in the book on fevers these words: Frigidum auget, i.e. coldness increases the constrictions, and the constrictions are the matter of corruption, so cold moist diets are not suitable to give in fevers. This is opposed according to Hippocrates who says fever patients should have cold moist diet. Let it be asked here whether sleep injures more in the beginning of the paroxysm than in
be given in fevers. Then Galenus says there are three things to be examined in giving diet in fevers, i.e. age and complexion and habit, so cold moist diet should not be given in fevers. Then Galenus says in the commentary to the Aphorisms that humidity is the mother of corruption, and Isaac says the same thing in the book on fevers: Omne quod, i.e. everything that takes to corruption is moist, so cold moist diet should not be given in fevers. Then Isaac says in the book on fevers these words: Frigidum auget, i.e. coldness increases the constrictions, and the constrictions are the matter of corruption, so cold moist diets are not suitable to give in fevers. This is opposed according to Hippocrates who says fever patients should have cold moist diet. Let it be asked here whether sleep injures more in the beginning of the paroxysm than in the other periods; it seems it does more in the beginning, for Galenus says that every injury done in the beginning of the paroxysm continues throughout the three other periods, so sleep does more harm in the beginning of the paroxysm than in every other period of it. This is opposed according to Galenus in the second particle of Aphorisms II saying that if sleep injures in the decrease it is a sign of death, and it is not so in the beginning, so sleep does more harm in the decrease of the paroxysm than in its beginning. We answer that and say that there are three classes of sleep, i.e. sleep which is altogether natural, unnatural sleep, and sleep which is neither natural nor unnatural. And sleep which is altogether natural is as Avicenna says: Maximus, i.e. great sleep which is called maximus, and deep sleep which is called profundus, and extensive deep which is called multus. And unnatural sleep is as subeth and the like. And sleep neither natural nor unnatural is as the sleep one has after walking or great labour or work, for Galenus says this sleep is neither natural nor unnatural. And Galenus says sleep
opposed according to Galenus in the second particle of Aphorisms II saying that if sleep injures in the decrease it is a sign of death, and it is not so in the beginning, so sleep does more harm in the decrease of the paroxysm than in its beginning. We answer that and say that there are three classes of sleep, i.e. sleep which is altogether natural, unnatural sleep, and sleep which is neither natural nor unnatural. And sleep which is altogether natural is as Avicenna says: Maximus, i.e. great sleep which is called maximus, and deep sleep which is called profundus, and extensive deep which is called multus. And unnatural sleep is as subeth and the like. And sleep neither natural nor unnatural is as the sleep one has after walking or great labour or work, for Galenus says this sleep is neither natural nor unnatural. And Galenus says sleep is understood in two ways, i.e. directly and indirectly, and Avicenna gives this conclusion, that direct sleep is altogether natural and beneficial, and accidental sleep is injurious and unprofitable. And Galenus says the sleep taken in the decrease of the illness injures more than in every other period of the paroxysm. Let it be asked here whether crude humours are generated from food given in the paroxysm. It seems they are not, for Galen says in the aphorism of paroxysm that the ebullition is strongest then, and when the ebullition is greatest it is then easiest to boil and digest the food, so for that reason crude humours are not generated from the food given in the paroxysm. Constantinus opposes this, for he says if food is given in the paroxysm at the time of these three faults (or called, qualifies'), namely frigus, rigor, and oripilacio, that crude humours are generated from them and one is in danger from those humours, so crude humours are generated from food given in the paroxysm. And crude humours are formed from two causes, i.e. from weakness of the natural heat, from which an increase of phlegm is created in the complexion by a
paroxysm. Let it be asked here whether crude humours are generated from food given in the paroxysm. It seems they are not, for Galen says in the aphorism of paroxysm that the ebullition is strongest then, and when the ebullition is greatest it is then easiest to boil and digest the food, so for that reason crude humours are not generated from the food given in the paroxysm. Constantinus opposes this, for he says if food is given in the paroxysm at the time of these three faults (or called, qualifies'), namely frigus, rigor, and oripilacio, that crude humours are generated from them and one is in danger from those humours, so crude humours are generated from food given in the paroxysm. And crude humours are formed from two causes, i.e. from weakness of the natural heat, from which an increase of phlegm is created in the complexion by a humour leaving its own measure and becoming immoderate, as reddish bile offending in quantity, and black bile likewise. We answer that and say that crude viscous humours are generated by the food given in the paroxysm. Let it be asked here whether food should be given more in the beginning of acute illnesses than in every other period. It seems food should not be given at the beginning, for Hippocrates says in the first book of Remedia Acutorum that food should not be given to pleurisy patients until the nutritiveness and moisture of the lips is evident, and Galen says that that sign is not evident until after the digestion of the matter in the increase or in the status, so food should not be given to patients in acute illnesses at the beginning. Then Hippocrates says in the first book of Remedia Acutorum that barley water should be given at the beginning of the illness and the solid part should be given in the increase and in the other periods, so food should not be given in the beginning of acute illnesses. Then Galen says in De Ingenio Sanitatis that wine should not be given in acute illnesses until
of acute illnesses than in every other period. It seems food should not be given at the beginning, for Hippocrates says in the first book of Remedia Acutorum that food should not be given to pleurisy patients until the nutritiveness and moisture of the lips is evident, and Galen says that that sign is not evident until after the digestion of the matter in the increase or in the status, so food should not be given to patients in acute illnesses at the beginning. Then Hippocrates says in the first book of Remedia Acutorum that barley water should be given at the beginning of the illness and the solid part should be given in the increase and in the other periods, so food should not be given in the beginning of acute illnesses. Then Galen says in De Ingenio Sanitatis that wine should not be given in acute illnesses until the matter be digested, from that it is understood that more solid food than wine should not be given till the matter be digested, and the matter is not digested in the beginning of acute illnesses, so food should not be given in the beginning. Then Galen says that food should least be given at every period where the burden and labor of nature is greatest, and the period where the labor and burden of nature is greatest is when the matter is undigested, so since the matter is undigested in the beginning of the illness food should not be given then. Then Avicenna says in the chapter of syncope, in the kind called epistaxis, that food should not be given in the beginning, for it is a fever that is habitually decreasing, and the unfavorable ailments are stronger at the beginning than in every other period of it, so food should not be given at the beginning of acute illnesses. Hippocrates opposes that in this canon: Quibus est... We answer these questions and say according to Galen that there are two static periods in every acute illness, i.e. a status of the matter, and a status of the accidental
should least be given at every period where the burden and labor of nature is greatest, and the period where the labor and burden of nature is greatest is when the matter is undigested, so since the matter is undigested in the beginning of the illness food should not be given then. Then Avicenna says in the chapter of syncope, in the kind called epistaxis, that food should not be given in the beginning, for it is a fever that is habitually decreasing, and the unfavorable ailments are stronger at the beginning than in every other period of it, so food should not be given at the beginning of acute illnesses. Hippocrates opposes that in this canon: Quibus est... We answer these questions and say according to Galen that there are two static periods in every acute illness, i.e. a status of the matter, and a status of the accidental ailment. The status of its matter, indeed, i.e. every time the matter is completely digested we call it the status of the illness then, as Galen says in the first De Crisi. The status of the accidental ailment, indeed, i.e. every time the accidental ailments are strongest is called the status of the illness as is evident in pleurisy patients, for every time the pain is greatest, and the breathing most difficult, and the cough hardest, we say the pleurisy is at the status, and this status can be at the beginning of the pleurisy according to Galen. Note that the unfavorable ailments can be violent and the matter digested at the same time. And understand that the digestion and expulsion can be at the same time, as is evident in pleurisy patients, and in other ulcers expelled by obscure dispersion, and we say the unfavorable ailments are diminished then by the digestion of the matter. And Galen says there are other illnesses when the matter is digested it is increased by them, until it be expelled along with the disease, as is evident in the ulcers that break of themselves. And diet is divided likewise, i.e. complete and partial
status of the illness as is evident in pleurisy patients, for every time the pain is greatest, and the breathing most difficult, and the cough hardest, we say the pleurisy is at the status, and this status can be at the beginning of the pleurisy according to Galen. Note that the unfavorable ailments can be violent and the matter digested at the same time. And understand that the digestion and expulsion can be at the same time, as is evident in pleurisy patients, and in other ulcers expelled by obscure dispersion, and we say the unfavorable ailments are diminished then by the digestion of the matter. And Galen says there are other illnesses when the matter is digested it is increased by them, until it be expelled along with the disease, as is evident in the ulcers that break of themselves. And diet is divided likewise, i.e. complete and partial diet. Complete diet is the diet ordered from the beginning of the illness till the day it ends. Partial diet is diet ordered in the four periods of the illness. And Galen says that, every time the energy is strong and uncorrupted from the beginning of acute illnesses to the status, food should not be given then until the status, and, when the energy is weak and the unfavorable ailments violent in the beginning of the illness, food should be given then to maintain the energy. Let it be asked here whether continuous fever is created by internal ulcers, or intermittent fever. It seems it is continuous fever, for Galen says there are three matters of disease in the ulcer alone, i.e. unfavorable complexion, and offending matter, and continuous dispersal, and Galen says continuous fever can be caused by the unfavorable complexion alone, if so; it can the more be caused with the other two causes, so it is continuous fever which is created by internal ulcers. Almusor opposes this and says oripilacio is the sole cause there, and oripilacio occurs only in intermittent fever, and an ulcer is formed only outside the veins in the pores of the members,
status, food should not be given then until the status, and, when the energy is weak and the unfavorable ailments violent in the beginning of the illness, food should be given then to maintain the energy. Let it be asked here whether continuous fever is created by internal ulcers, or intermittent fever. It seems it is continuous fever, for Galen says there are three matters of disease in the ulcer alone, i.e. unfavorable complexion, and offending matter, and continuous dispersal, and Galen says continuous fever can be caused by the unfavorable complexion alone, if so; it can the more be caused with the other two causes, so it is continuous fever which is created by internal ulcers. Almusor opposes this and says oripilacio is the sole cause there, and oripilacio occurs only in intermittent fever, and an ulcer is formed only outside the veins in the pores of the members, the proper place of intermittent fever, so it is intermittent fever which is created from internal ulcers. And an abscess is the swelling of a member unnaturally due to flatulence or an offending humour, and an abscess is created from two causes, i.e. when a strong member expels its excess to a weak member forming an ulcer in the member, and Avicenna calls this condition abscess divergencias, i.e. an ulcer which comes from the diverting of the excess of a strong member to a weak member. The second cause, when nature leaves an excess of nourishment in a member without evacuating it, it stays viscously bound in the member, and from that are generated unfavorable complexion and continuous dispersal, and after that the ulcer called abscess congestiones, i.e. an ulcer caused by choking and viscosity of the matter. We answer this question and say that every corrupt ulcer in the neighbourhood of the heart must cause continuous fever, for that ulcer sends horrible corrupt vapours to the heart, and the heart moves to expel that vapour, and that movement inflames the natural heat causing continuous fever. And Isaac says in the book of fevers, when the ulcer is on the
to a weak member forming an ulcer in the member, and Avicenna calls this condition abscess divergencias, i.e. an ulcer which comes from the diverting of the excess of a strong member to a weak member. The second cause, when nature leaves an excess of nourishment in a member without evacuating it, it stays viscously bound in the member, and from that are generated unfavorable complexion and continuous dispersal, and after that the ulcer called abscess congestiones, i.e. an ulcer caused by choking and viscosity of the matter. We answer this question and say that every corrupt ulcer in the neighbourhood of the heart must cause continuous fever, for that ulcer sends horrible corrupt vapours to the heart, and the heart moves to expel that vapour, and that movement inflames the natural heat causing continuous fever. And Isaac says in the book of fevers, when the ulcer is on the spleen intermittent fever is created by it, and its access occurs from the fourth day on as in quartana. And he says in the same place that ephemeral fever is created by an ulcer of the internal members, and again by an ulcer of the external members, and so we leave that question. Let it be asked here whether the coming of rigor and bleeding from the nose are a good symptom in causon. It seems the coming of rigor at first is a good symptom, for Hippocrates says in the fourth particle of Aphorisms this canon: Quabsone, i.e. that causon is cured when rigor ensues. Nose-bleeding coming in it is a good symptom according to Avicenna, who says if vomiting, or delirium, or nose-bleeding, or perspiration come in causon, the causon is cured by them, so the coming of rigor and nose-bleeding is a good symptom in causon. Isaac opposes this in the fourth chapter of the book of fevers, saying that the coming of rigor in causon is a bad symptom. And causon is a fever caused by choleric blood in the veins adjoining the principal members. Then Isaac says causon is a continuous fever created by reddish
leave that question. Let it be asked here whether the coming of rigor and bleeding from the nose are a good symptom in causon. It seems the coming of rigor at first is a good symptom, for Hippocrates says in the fourth particle of Aphorisms this canon: Quabsone, i.e. that causon is cured when rigor ensues. Nose-bleeding coming in it is a good symptom according to Avicenna, who says if vomiting, or delirium, or nose-bleeding, or perspiration come in causon, the causon is cured by them, so the coming of rigor and nose-bleeding is a good symptom in causon. Isaac opposes this in the fourth chapter of the book of fevers, saying that the coming of rigor in causon is a bad symptom. And causon is a fever caused by choleric blood in the veins adjoining the principal members. Then Isaac says causon is a continuous fever created by reddish bile or salt phlegm in the veins of the whole body, and especially in the veins adjoining the heart and stomach and liver. And rigor according to Avicenna is a bad disposition of the whole body together with inordinate movement and trembling. We answer these questions and say that, if rigor comes in causon, without the coming of nose-bleeding, the sign of digestion is evident and its coming on the day of crisis announces recovery according to Avicenna in the chapter of rigor. Then Isaac says in the book of febris, if nose-bleeding comes in causon on the day of crisis it announces recovery without doubt. And Galenus says, if rigor comes contrary to those conditions we have mentioned, it announces death. Let it be asked here whether disease can be contagious. It seems it cannot, for Aristotle says these words: Accidens autem, i.e. the accident does not pass from subject to subject, and disease is an accident, so it does not affect one person from another. Avicenna opposes this in the first canon, and Hippocrates in the sixth particle of Aphorisms and Avicenna in the twenty-seventh canon, saying "arteitica, i.e. arthritis and gout are hereditary contagious diseases, so disease