On the Natural Faculties.

On the Natural Faculties.
By Galen
Translated by: A.J. Brock
Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University Press 1916


Digital Hippocrates Collection Table of Contents



ON THE NATURAL FACULTIES Book I
   PART 1
   PART 2
   PART 3
   PART 4
   PART 5
   PART 6
   PART 7
   PART 8
   PART 9
   PART 10
   PART 11
   PART 12
   PART 13
   PART 14
   PART 15
   PART 16
   PART 17

BOOK TWO
   PART 1
   PART 2
   PART 3
   PART 4
   PART 5
   PART 6
   PART 7
   PART 8
   PART 9

BOOK THREE
   PART 1
   PART 2
   PART 3
   PART 4
   PART 5
   PART 6
   PART 7
   PART 8
   PART 9
   PART 10
   PART 11
   PART 12
   PART 13
   PART 14
   PART 15


This electronic edition is funded by the National Library of Medicine History of Medicine Division. This text has been proofread to a high degree of accuracy. It was converted to electronic form using Data Entry.
(Medical Information Disclaimer: It is not the intention of NLM to provide specific medical advice but rather to provide users with information to better understand their health and their diagnosed disorders. Specific medical advice will not be provided, and NLM urges you to consult with a qualified physician for diagnosis and for answers to your personal questions.)

ON THE NATURAL FACULTIES Book I

PART 17

 [p. 107]or try any shift in order to find some plausible explanation which does not demand the principle of attraction.

Now those near the times of Erasistratus maintain that the parts above the kidneys receive pure blood, whilst the watery residue, being heavy, tends to run downwards; that this, after percolating through the kidneys themselves, is thus rendered serviceable, and is sent, as blood, to all the parts below the kidneys.

For a certain period at least this view also found favour and flourished, and was held to be true; after a time, however, it became suspect to the Erasistrateans themselves, and at last they abandoned it. For apparently the following two points were assumed, neither of which is conceded by anyone, nor is even capable of being proved. The first is the heaviness of the serous fluid, which was said to be produced in the vena cava, and which did not exist, apparently, at the beginning, when this fluid was being carried up from the stomach to the liver. Why, then, did it not at once run downwards when it was in these situations? And if the watery fluid is so heavy, what plausibility can anyone find in the statement that it assists in the process of anadosis?

In the second place there is this absurdity, that even if it be agreed that all the watery fluid does fall downwards, and only when it is in the vena cava,
Not at an earlier stage, when it is still on its way from the alimentary canal to the liver.
still it is difficult, or, rather, impossible, to say through what means it is going to fall into the kidneys, seeing that these are not situated below, but on either side of the vena cava, and that the vena cava is not inserted into them, but merely sends a branch
i.e. a renal vein.