"Why isn't the Greco-Roman era considered part of the Dark Ages? Only a tiny elite was 'enlightened' or even educated, much less scientific"
Well the Greeks had their own Dark Ages--sometime around 1000 BC for a few hundred years. Nevertheless, every citizen of Athens was educated to the age of 14 and then introduced to trades unless they had the wealth to pursue higher learning. Western culture owes her art, her sculpture, her literature, much of her science, her democracy, her theatre, her Olympics, her philosophy, her spirit of inquiry, and her concepts of human rights to Greek culture (Roman culture stealing much of what was good from the Greeks). That is why if you walk through any university bookstore or library you will see numerous texts assessing the contributions made by Greek culture to our western civilization whereas any texts found on the Middle Ages are invariably of a different sort.
Can you imagine ANY OF THOSE GREAT CREATORS OF OUR WESTERN CULTURE MAKING ANY CONTRIBUTION WHATSOEVER UNDER THE SAVAGE MENTALITIES THAT BURNED PEOPLE ALIVE FOR THINKING??? Does the culture that wrote the Hippocratic Oath bear comparison to these savages who cut off tongues and murdered human beings?? I think not and I hope that answers your question...
"It has been stated that the period which intervened between the birth of Pericles and the death of Aristotle is undoubtedly the most memorable in the history of the world with regard to its influence on the subsequent destinies of civilized man. In the centuries from 500 to 300 B.C. the little barren country of Attica produced twenty-five lustrious men, a greater number than has ever been seen in the whole world in any two centuries since that time. It has been a severe misfortune to humanity that the high Athenian breed decayed and disappeared, for if it had maintained its excellence and had spread over the earth it is hard to imagine what great things it would have accomplished for the good of human civilization."
For instance, in medicine...
THE GREEK CONTRIBUTION TO MEDICINE
BY J. W. AULD, M.D.
Calgary
There is every evidence to prove that man has evolved from a natural or wild state, and his existence as a human type can be traced far back into the dim mists of time. The grades of culture represented during the process of his evolution mav be classified as animal instinct, savagery, barbarism and civilization. Our general outlook upon the world contains a great mass of ideas and knowledge of which the origin is so remote and obscure that they may be described for the greater part as merely instinctive notions, and as far back as we can find any trace of man's existence we see evidence of some method of treating the sick. All through the ages man has been endeavouring to maintain his health and prolong his days upon the earth.
The idea of disease and the manner of its treatment varied with the social and intellectual development of the race. The greater number of mankind, even until a very recent date,regarded Nature as being peopled with demons and spirits. Primitive man recognized many superhuman beings who might control the agencies of disease. In ancient times the world was peopled with spiritual beings, and objects of Nature were deified and malign influences were assigned to them. Primitive priest, physician, and philosopher were one and worked together to control the dark mysteries of life. On account of the erroneous views of its nature the knowledge of disease remained very crude and primitive until a comparatively late date. Magicamulets, charms, and incantations were the chief weapons of defence against a malignant Nature,and he who presumed to treat the sick must first discover the nature of he spirit in possession,and could only succeed in driving it out or destroying it if he were powerful in magic or an expert in reciting incantations.
What we are accustomed to call civilization is of very recent date compared to man's existence here upon earth. Our known civilization begins with the Chaldeans and Egyptians, and was carried to its highest point by the ancient Greeks. It is said that about six thousand years ago man appeared on the banks of the Nile in a high state of civilization, and, for many centuries, to be "learned in the wisdom of the Egyptians" meant the possession of all knowledge. Here we see the beginning of many of man's most cherished beliefs, and among other things we find a growth in the knowledge of practical medicine. Passing on through the great civilizations of Egypt, Babylon, and Greece to our own time the knowledge of the agencies of disease has gradually been unfolded, and we thus come to the science of medicine as we see it to-day.
All peoples have had their methods of treating disease, but the Greeks alone among the ancients practised a system of medicine, based not on theory but on observations accumulated systematically as time went on. They alone among the peoples of antiquity could look upon their healers as physicians; they were the first to grasp the conception of medicine as an art based on scientific principles, and an integral part of the science of man. The scientific principle first appeared among the Greeks, and was spoken of as the art. Out of mysticism, superstition, and religious ritual they went directly to ature, and were the first to recognize its healing powers.
They found that Nature contributes to the healing of our minds as well as of our bodies. They laid down the principle that all diseases are natural in origin, and to be cured not with charms or miracles but by natural means. With primitive man and in the great civilizations of Egypt and Babylon the hysician evolved from the priest: in Greece he had a dual origin, philosophy and religion. The sources of Greek medicine have been associated with a few great figures such as Hippocrates and Galen, but we must recognize that these men were the representatives of a widely extended system. Greek medicine had many roots, the chief of which were in Egypt, Assyria, and Babylon. The foundation of Greek medicine is associated with the name of Hippocrates, but Greek medicine was by no means the product of a few great men. It was the result of centuries of carefully recorded and progressive experience. Even in Hippocrates' time the art of medicine had a long and rational tradition behind it. As an art medicine had made great progress even before his day. Great minds had been studying the problems of Nature and of men long before Hippocrates, but he seems to have gathered all that was sound in the past history of medicine; his influence tended to the cquisition of all that was new and valuable, and to the casting off of all that was useless and superstitious.
Hippocrates was called " the Father of Medicine,"not altogether for his discoveries but because he laid down the principle on which that art was founded. In order to appreciate what he did, it is only necessary to glance at Babylonian and Egyptian medicine, or to become acquainted with the many systems common in his timne. He rejected all that was useless, and founded a system based on reason and common sense. He recognized that diseases are part of the processes of Nature, that there is nothing divine or sacred about them; he was the first to recognize the healing powers of Nature, and was a great advocate of rest, pure air, exercise, and proper diet. He was a keen observer, and an active physician. He used few drugs, but placed his confidence in the restorative powers of Nature. The great contribution of ippocrates to medicine was the art of careful observation. One of the first medical schools of antiquity was established at Cos, an island of Greece, and here in the health temple Hippocrates practised the art. He decided that all diseases are abnormal natural conditions; he found that Nature alone often terminates disease and works a cure with a few simple medicines, and often enough with no medicine at all. The Greek health temples were quiet retreats where the sick,exhausted, and convalescent might gain the benefits to be obtained from pure air, fine scenery, sunlight, and regulated life. They were not unlike our modern sanatoria, and it is likely that cases of tuberculosis were benefited at such places. The Asklepieion or health temple in which he laboured was situated about two miles from the sea, at a point where the mountains rise gently from the gradual slope of the plains. The environment was both beautiful and exhilarating. A group of noble buildings erected in the unequalled architecture of Greece took nothing from Nature, but made her resources better available for man. Here the foundations of modern medicine were laid; here the modern process of careful record, ase-taking, bed-side instruction and clinical lectures were practised, much in the manner in which we see it to-day. The methods of Hippocrates have formed the basis of many departments of modern advance. His dietetic principles, especially in fevers, are substantially those of the present day, and in many ways we have returned to his simple and natural methods of treating disease.
For sixteen centuries the civilized world thought that to retain health periodic bleedings were necessary, but for the last two centuries we have gradually been getting back to the teaching of the great master. We have discovered that the best results are obtained when we leave something to Nature. Modern medical science includes bacteriology, chemio-therapy, and many other things which Hippocrates never thought of, and we would be foolish to abandon any one of our modern discoveries which go to make medicine what it is to-day, yet in some respects we might do well to take a glance back at Hippocrates.
We in our age are apt to lay too much stress on bacteriological findings, and at the same time pay too little attention to the more vital part, the dissociation of the functional unity of the whole body. Unlike Hippocrates, we forget the human organism in our zeal to find out all about the enemy attacking that organism. It might be well at times to pay a little less attention to bacteria, and to give more thought to the raising of the individual immunity, both by artificial and by natural methods. We have learned that the invader finds it hard to gain a foothold when the defences are well organized; he flourishes when these are weak or temporarily inadequate.
The Greeks believed in Nature as the healer of disease. They believed that human bodies are and normally remain in a state of health, and that on the whole they tend to recover from isease. In favour of this belief is the fact that there are not more than two or three microbic diseases in natural conditions, and there are no constitutional diseases in the system of wild Nature.
Modern medicine may be truly described as in essence a creation of the Greeks. They gave us our first start in rational medicine. But for ancient Greece the art of medicine could not have advanced as we see it to-day. It is hard to imagine what the state of medicine would be to-day without the works of these great men.
The Greeks were the beginners of nearly everything; they were creators in the true sense of the word, and as no other people have been. The small country of Attica has given an art which all the world since has not surpassed. We are apt to wonder at times what these great intellects would have accomplished if their labours had been conducted under the same advantages which we in our time have the good fortune to enjoy. Handicapped as they were, in many departments they were unsurpassed until the nineteenth century. They were not only successful ractitioners of medicine, but they were also advanced in the art of surgery. Descriptions are found in the Hippocratic writings for such surgical procedures as opening the chest for empyaema, and for trephining the skull in cases of fracture, two important operations of modern surgery. These operations, we are told, were often successful, for they were performed with skill and conducted in the pure air of the islands of Greece, far from the crowded centres, where the natural conditions were at their best. Many have wondered why the Greeks having achieved so much did not achieve a little more and anticipate modern science. One reason is that they were handicapped by the lack of the microscope, and other instruments of modern research; another is that Greek public opinion was hostile to dissection of the human body. It is the wonder of our age that the physicians of antiquity, though ignorant of the nature and but dimly aware of the existence of infection, could have accomplished so much. Without dissection, without any experimental physiology or pathology, and without any instrumental aid, the ancient Greeks advanced the knowledge of the cause of disease as far as it is conceivable that men in their position could do it. We thus come to realize the wonderful genius and vitality of mind of those whose works still live after twenty-five centuries, and the thought comes to our minds that it would be a great loss to the Medicine of our day of we were to forget the works of these great men. While we are employing our modern methods and testing out our present day inventions, let us at times look back to them; it may be that even yet they have something to give that might be useful to us. We do not realize how difficult it was for these great intellects, living in a world of superstition and traditional beliefs, to rise above them, and yet it has been stated that the period which intervened between the birth of Pericles and the death of Aristotle is undoubtedly the most memorable in the history of the world with regard to its influence on the subsequent destinies of civilized man. In the centuries from 500 to 300 B.C. the little barren country of Attica produced twentv five illustrious men, a greater number than has ever been seen in the whole world in any two centuries since that time. It has been a severe misfortune to humanity that the high Athenian breed decayed and disappeared, for if it had maintained its excellence and had spread over the earth it is hard to imagine what great things it would have accomplished for the good of human civilization. In the glorious days of Pericles the Greeks were remarkable for their constancy of purpose, and the steadfastness of their ideals. Their business was to carry everything they undertook forward to perfection; their aim was to lead the mind of man toward a knowledge of the truth, to spread sound and healthy ideas, to draw human beings from the paths of prejudice and passion, and to make reason the supreme road to public opinion. The idea of service to the community was deeply rooted in the Greeks. Their aim was to be useful, to be helpful. The aim for the enrichment of life was exhibited in them as in no other people.
Medicine among the Greeks was a progressive study for a far longer period than has been the case in the Western world. Greek medicine first took on a rational spirit with the Ionian and Italo-Greek philosophers at the beginning of the sixth century B.C., and continued to make progress until the death of Galen at the beginning of the third century of the Christian era. It thus lasted eight hundred years. Our own system of scientific medicine has only lasted three centuries, at most, less than half the time that Greek rational medicine endured.
The earliest works that have come down to us are medical in character and bear the name of Hippocrates. The noblest expression of early Greek medical science is to be found in the so called Hippocratic collection, which contained much material of the most scientific type. The greater part of Greek medical writings was founded on a rational basis. They endeavoured to explain the origin of disease on rational grounds and to apply remedies when possible on a reasoned basis, and, despite serious and irreparable losses, we are still in possession of some of the finest products of the Greek medical intellect. Practically all the works of ancient medicine were produced by Greek physicians. There are said to be fifty-three works in all in the famous Hippocratic collection, but of all these works not one can be definitely stated to have been written by Hippocrates himself; the books which compose this collection were probably written by different authors at dates widely separated from each other. The Aphorisms is the most famous book associated with the name of Hippocrates, probably the greatest medical work ever written, and is the most likely of all the collection to have been written by the "Father of Medicine" himself.
The works of Hippocrates, and later of Galen, formed the main medical legacy of Greece to the world. Galen, like the great master, was a voluminous writer. His works alone form about half the mass of surviving Greek medical literature. They cover every department of medicine; anatomy, physiology, pathology, medical theory, therapeutics, as well as ethical medicine and surgery. Galen's views of disease in general are those of Hippocrates, but in treatment he differed, for he placed great confidence in drugs.
He was the greatest biologist of the late Greek period, perhaps the greatest of all time. His views prevailed in medicine until Harvey and even later. There is no ancient physician in whose writings are contained so many indications of modern methods of research. His knowledge of the heart and arteries was such that it is difficult to understand how he missed discovering the circulation of the blood. All through later antiquity and the Middle Ages the science of medicine was based on the writings of Hippocrates and Galen. With the death of Galen in the second century of the Christian era the creative period of the Greek medicine terminated, and for more than a thousand years the wonderful accomplishments of the Greeks were almost forgotten.
In the beginning of the Christian era Galen and Celsus flourished. These two famous men were educated at Alexandria. In their medical practice they both took advantage of the curative powers of the sun, but after them all persons were treated alike in physical and intellectual night, and for a thousand years the practice of medicine was but a corrupt imitation of the teachings of the great master. The wisdom of the Greeks was in this age considered foolishness; knowledge other than that which made a man wise unto salvation was considered useless. With the advance of the sixteenth century the western world again turned its eyes to the old Greek intellectuals for instruction, and at this time the works of Aristotle and Galen became the great stimulus to the foundations of a new biological science. It is now recognized that Aristotle was one of the very greatest investigators of living Nature; he was perhaps the greatest naturalist of antiquity. His biological works excited little interest during the Middle Ages, but from the sixteenth century on they have been closely followed by naturalists. He was always found in the van of progress. For two thousand years, and throughout all lands, men have come to him and found information. While the western world sat in darkness, Arab and Moor, Syrian and Jew cherished his books. The oldest of the universities were based on his teaching and his influence still remains. It is said that no man has ever swayed such an intellectual empire as he in logic, metaphysics,rhetoric, physiology, ethics, poetry, politics, and natural history; in all a creator and in all a master.
So far as we know, there was no biology worth looking at before him. The history of the human mind offers no parallel to his career, and it is the universal wonder how one man could have accomplished so much. The activities of the Ancient Greeks are for the most part imperishable, their works are still with us, and their spirit is eternal. During the last six thousand years we have changed our form of belief, we have changed our form of clothing and our dwelling-places, but in brain and body we have changed only in minor details. We are in advance of the ancient Greeks in many ways, but yet there still remains a world beyond our senses of which we can form no conception." |
