Hippokratische Medizin und antike Philosophie Verhandlungen des VIII. Internationalen Hippokrates-Kolloquiums in Kloster Banz/Staffelstein vom 23. bis 28. September 1993 herausgegeben von Renate Wittern und Pierre Pellegrin Olms WeidmannDie Deutsche Bibliothek — CIP-Einheitsaufnahme Hippokratische Medizin und antike Philosophie: Verhandlungen des VIII. Internationalen Hippokrates-Kolloquiums in Kloster Banz/Staffelstein vom 23. bis 28. September 1993/hrsg. von Renate Wittern und Pierre Pellegrin. —Hildesheim: Olms-Weidmann, 1996 (Medizin der Antike; Bd. 1) ISBN 3~-487-10037-1 © Georg Olms AG, Hildesheim - Ziirich - New York 1996 Alle Rechte vorbehalten Printed in Germany Herstellung: Weihert Druck, Darmstadt Gestaltung und Satz: Sebastian Beck, Erlangen Gedruckt auf sdurefreiem, alterungsbestandigem Papier ISBN 3-487-10037-1Analysis and Synthesis of Reality in the Presocratics, the Corpus Hippocraticum and Plato Ersa Garcia Novo ‘To G.E.R. Lloyd 1. I suggest that, as children do, Greek people at the beginning (say in the third and second millennium B.C.), reinterpreted two related enti- ties A-B that were more than 50% alike as “equivalent” (A=B), and two related entities C-D that were less than 50% alike as “opposite” (C<>D). It is easy to oversimplify the relationship between two different and related things seeing them as opposite, and to oversimplify the relati- onship between two alike and related things seeing them as equivalent. To see two related entities as non-equal and non-opposite, but just dif- ferent, is more difficult — but this is the way to science. I would like to present some linguistic facts that reflect, in my opini- on, that Greek people went gradually from the oversimplification of opposite (C<>D) and equivalent entities (A=B), to understand A and B, Cand D, as different things, and so they pushed knowledge forward. 2.1. From analogy to differentiation: the loss of the dual number. Having in mind that a thought needs the appropriate signs to be ex- pressed, and can remain unexpressed if the person who is thinking does not possess them, let us review some features of the Greek lan- guage. The first hint to the fact that Greek people reinterpreted two entities A and B that were more than fifty per cent alike as “equivalent” is, in my opinion, the dual number. The dual number,’ inherited from the In- doeuropean, was an expression of two entities conceived together 1. For the use of the dual number in Greek, cf, in general Cuny: 1906, See also KiuNer- GeRTH, II 1: 19-20; ScHWYZER-DEBRUNNER, 1950: 46f£; Humbert, 19608 16f; CHan- TRAINE, 1968; 22ff.; Lasso DE LA VEGA, 1968: 221-238.38 Bisa Garcia Novo (A=B). If this is not surprising in the noun, where in fact it was concise and synthetic to say AUkoo instead of “two loops’, it is astonishing in the verb because that means that two people are considered so similar as to need a way to express “you-two” or “they-two” with an ending (dual ending) different from the employed when the two persons are unrelated (plural ending). Dual verbal endings were used in Greek in the second and third per- sons. Greek people needed a way to say “do not go on fighting-you- two” ... pNdé waxeo8ov (in Iiad 7, 279), or “only Deiphobus and king Helenus have departed-the-two of them” ofca AnipoBds te Bin 8 “Edévoio Gvaktos olxecbov (in Iiad 13, 781ff.). I suppose that they did not have a true ending of the first person in dual? because we-two, that is, “you and me”, were for Greek people intuitively different:* “I” am different from “you” when I am speaking. While continental Greeks employed the dual number in historical times, colonial Greeks did not use it: The Eastern Greeks — the Ionians of Asia Minor and the Greeks nearby —, and the main Western Greeks — most of the people living in Graecia Magna and Sicily —, did not use the dual number in inscriptions.’ | suggest that they started to consider “you-two” (and “they-two”) as two different entities, you-A and you-B, and so they stopped oversimplifying them as a pair of equivalent enti- ties (A=B):° the dual number was no longer necessary. 8 The (middle-voice) ending -ueBov was very scarcely used (five times according to Cuanrrame, 1964: 307). CE. Rix, 1976: 255. This ending of the first dual person is not inherited from the Indocuropean, but analogical to the middle ending for the se- cond and third person -a8ov. Other Indoeuropean languages do show endings for the first dual person (in active as well as in middle voice), mainly Vedic, Avestic, Go- thic, Lithuanian, Ancient Ecclesiastic Slavonic. Cf. Szemenény1, 1970 (Spanish tr. 1978: 231ff.). However other Indoeuropean languages used it (and some of them up to the xx cen- tury). See preceding note, and specially, Schwyzer-Deprunner, 1950: 46, Dual num- ber also appears in other languages outside the Indocuropean group, such as Arabic, “Cest un fait constamment observe que le duel disparait @ mesure qu'une société se développe intellectuellement’ (Humperr, 1960’: 16), HuMBotpr (1827) was the first scholar to notice the archaic character of the dual number. Cf.Lasso pe La Veca, 1968: 229. 5. Cf. Scuwyzer-DesruNNeER, 1950: 46-47 (Cf. also Scuwyzer [, 545). For the dual num- ber in Mycenaean language, cf. Rurjcrt, 1967: 78ff., 83ff The Ionian dialects present several innovations in Phonetics and Morphology (cf. L6vez EiRF, 1970: passim); the loss of the dual number is certainly an innovation e 2sAnalysis and Synthesis of Reality 39 At the same time, their analytical minds made an analogical use of number “two”. They added number “two” to a pair of substantives: “two men”, as they did with numbers three and four (“three men”, “four men”),’ as in the case of “three” or “four men”, they used the noun and the verb in plural, not in dual.® In this way, 2, 3 and 4 fell under the same category: the plural number.” The Homeric poems, that wonderful mixture of old and new, show sorne passages where the dual ending and number “two” appear side by side, with a redundant use, like in ktipuxe Buco, “two messengers- two” (in Iliad 9, 689), or Aiavte Sica, “two Ajax-two” (in Hiad 5, 519). The Athenians and other Greeks of the Continent did keep using the dual number for some centuries."’ The pioneers on a new earth, east- wards and westwards, were, as so often in History, ahead of the several metropolis. That creative people who started to see the “differences”, are the fathers of rationalism, the founders of science and philosophy. 2.2. From analogy to differentiation. From ve kat to te kat..kai (...Kai) A second hint at the Greek reinterpretation of two alike entities, qua- lities or processes as “equivalent” is the use of te kal. According to Kiihner-Gerth (I 2: 249), “re...cal () driicken aus, dass das erstere und das durch kai hinzugefiigte Glied in einer innigen oder notwendigen Verbindung mit einander stehen”. \n fact a pair of items joined by te kai could be the subject of a verb with dual ending, like in Iltad 2, 864 yijoow al MéabAns te Kai “Avtipos ryynodobny. “Both Mesthles and 7. Keep in mind that it was not necessary for them to say “2 men”; using the dual num- ber, they said “man-both" (avépe). 8. This analytical way of expressing a group of two items, so early used by Ionians and other colonial Greeks, did not reach Attic inscriptions until 409 B.C. In Attic inscrip- lions the dual number is frequent up to that date. Since then, “two” with a noun in plural started to be used instead. The dual number lasted in Attic inscriptions for another century (afterwards, only in formulae such as roo Sec). Cf. Scart, 1977: 110. The literary use was more conservative. Cf. HuMBERT, 1960": 17 9. Probably the use of the ordinal adjective added to the last item of a row: A, B, and € (as) third, that we find in the Epic poems, is, in my opinion, old. 10. Let us hear one out of the many Platonic passages in dual number. Phdr, 254a7-9 reo Bi Kat’ &PXaS uev dvritelverov yavaKtoUTe, cos Bewar kal Tapévoucr évaryxaCoudves. teheutéovre 8¢, Stav unBév fj Tépas KaKow, Tropeleafov ayoud- veo, eEavte Kal Ouooyrjoavte Tontjoet TO KeAeusuevoy. (The “good” horse and the charioteer of the soul under the strain of the “bad” horse.)40 Esa Gancfs Novo Antiphos commanded-the-two-of them the Maeonians.” That is, te kat was a connection for two entities functionally equivalent.” Te kai happened to be an invaluable link for the expression of Greek science and philosophy. Interestingly, te kal started to join a pair of opposite things when thinkers like Heraclitus’* considered opposite entities as a unity. Heraclitus fr.49a D-K motapois Tois avTois EuBai- vouev Te Kal ovK euBaivouev, eluév Te kal ouK eluev. “In die gleichen Stréme steigen wir und steigen wir nicht; wir sind es und sind es nicht”. This secondary use of Te Kai shows us that opposite things for Greek people of the Archaic and Classical epoch were in fact related things. A dog and a stone were not thought as real opposites; opposites were established between complementary and related entities," quali- ties or actions (good man/bad man, to die/to live, friend/enemy).* Pairs of similar or of opposite entities: in every case Te kal worked for pairs. It was developed afterwards from te kai another link, te kai kai (... kai), that was employed to unite groups consisting of three (or four) entities. '° In the Archaic Epic Poetry we find many enumerations, series and catalogues.”’ In many ways, the action, the character of the people and 11. Ruyex understands the function of te in ve Kai as *coordonnant préparatif” (1971: 143). For the use of Te Kai, cf. also KOHNER-GeRTH (II 2: 249); HOEFFER, 1882: 9; Hamer, 1904: 15ff., 51fF., 77ff., 92£; Scuwvznr-Deprunner, 1950: 574; DenisToN, 1950": S11ff.; Humpent, 1960°: 436f. 12. In Iliad 10, 121 we find roAhae yap pebiei Te kal ov EBEAEt TOVvEEGBaN. “For many times be neglects to and does not want to work.” An affirmative sentence is coupled with a negative, but the actions are similar, not opposite. It seems that Heraclitus fr. 49a D-K is the first passage where two opposite things are joined by te kat (Vide infra, for the text of the fragment), 13, Translated by Swett, 1989": 19. 14. For this notion in Heraclitus, vide infra note 48. 15. Specially Plato and Aristotle, in the IV century, will bring clarity into contrary and contradictory oppositions, as Lov remarked in 1966. 16. This construction is reviewed in Herodotus, Thucydides and Kenophon by HamMER, 1904: 21 ff., 51 ff., 81 fF. Cf also KiHNer-Genty, Il 2: 251, Sometimes Te kat... Kai is used to link two entities A te kai B, adding a third unrelated entity by means of the second kai: A te kai B, kai C (C can even be a new sentence). Besides, te and kai can be side by side or separated by one or more words; [ am just referring here to a construction where ve kat are side by side, and the third member Cis closely related to the first two items, A and B. This particular construction has not been stu- died as something different from the others. 17. For the catalogue as a compositional device in the Epic poetry cf. for example the KaTaAoyos Tddv vedsy in Iliad 2, 483ff. aAnalysis and Synthesis of Reality 4l the qualities, are shown by means of accumulation. Nevertheless a no- tion of the unity of a whole (the world, a character, an action) was in itself partially missing."* An enumeration of three different things, qua- lities or actions is not a description of a whole, but of its parts. It is just a catalogue. It could be a series, i. e. an ordered array.” In order to reach the idea of a group of three related things forming a whole, it is helpful to reach some notion of a system, i. e. a group of entities related in a dynamic way. In my opinion, the idea of system was alive when Greek people started to see man as a unity, and the outer world as a unity.” We could say that the Homeric heroes did not act by themselves in two aspects: Firstly because gods took part in their acts and decisions, but also because pain and sorrow “happened” to them, and orders were given to the warrior by his mind or his soul: he was not a whole which was acting by itself.” Besides, the heroes were, in my opinion, prototypes, anyone of them a personified quality: they were not single characters, but generalizations.” When Hesiod started to write in his own name,” he was considering himself a unity. That explains that he could write the first treatise on 18. T am not dealing with the unity of the poems themselves, but with a non-existent unitary conception of the world or man. 19. 1am referring to language. Also in the compositional technique of the Archaic age we find devices similar to the enumeration and to the series, We can relate the enu- meration with “la juxtaposition” de Van GroniNcEN (1960%: 29ff.), the series with ‘le raccord” (ibid, 34ff.) Another example of enumeration is the catalogue (see above, note 17) 20. Referring to the scientific approach of the Greeks to the study of nature, SAMBURSKY (1956: 4) wrote: “The object aimed at was giving yeneral validity to the experience obiained from regarding the world as.a single orderly unity...” 21. For the non-conception of the human body as a unity in the Homeric poetry and in the Art of the epoch, cf. SNeLt, 1963 (Spanish tr. 1965: 17-44.) Ibid. for the non-exi- stence of human decisions in the Homeric poetry (41 fF). 22.1 think that the “epithets” in the Epic poetry are not just ornamental, as they are usually called (M. Parry); they are a necessary mark of the heroes in order to be always recognized as such by the audience. They have a function similar to the masks in the Drama, which are a mari for the audience in order to recognize at first glance if the character is woman or man (all the actors being men), good or bad, king or slave, old or young. Masks are, in my opinion, the distinctive feature of a prototype, and the main heroes of the Epic poetry are prototypes as well, ive., ge- neralizations. 23. The consideration of Hesiod as the first personality of a poet that can be clearly per ceived in Greek literature is explained by Nestir (1944; Spanish tr. 1975: 38).42 Esa Garcia Novo, Natural History: the cosmogony” included in his poem Theogony, and a first didactic book, Works and Days. Man and world were no longer a multiplicity of events directed by outer forces. They started to have their raison d’étre in themselves. Change, unity of a multiplicity, unity of opposites are different per- ceptions of the notion of system. The Presocratic thinkers”® certainly grasped the notion of system.”° Plato's vision of the world as a unity based upon three elements and four elements (Ji. 31a 1-32c3), where number two is excluded because a third thing (or a fourth thing) is necessary in order to rightly combine (guviotao8at) two entities,” is a perfect conception of a dynamic sy- stem of three or four elements. Coming back to language, we find Te xai...kat... in a time when the notion of system has been reached,” i. e. when three or more different entities are brought into relationship to form a whole,” three or more different qualities are defining an object, and three or more different actions are used to describe a process. In relation with a group of entities forming a whole, let us hear firstly Empedocles fr. 146 D-K,1: udvteis te kal UnvorrdédAoi Kat intpoi Kal mpsuot “Seber und Sénger und Arzte und Fiirsien”™ are the four kinds of people that constitute the class of excellent persons who attain ho- nour. Shall we relate this first sample of a group of four entities linked in a system by means of Te kat...kat...kal... with the bias to see number four in nature that Empedocles showed us in his four pileapata? In Ancient Medicine (VM), ch. 3 (L.1,578,6-7 = Jouanna 123, 1ff., we find mdvous te kal vovaous kal Baveérous ... Tpopry Te Kal aVEN- 24, I mean that Hesiod grasped the notion of man as a unity and thus he understood the world as a unity as well. This way he wrote a treatise on the beginnings of the world. For the notion of change that underlies several presocratic theories, se¢LLovp , 1970 36 26. The moment Kéouos is applied to world, world is a system. When a system keeps balance, it is fine: thus Koopos means order, afterwards it means world in order, i.e., a unity and a system that keeps balance, and then it means adornment, Also the poets were feeling it, when Pindar is applying kéouos to the world. 27. Pl, Ti. 31b9 Biica BE Sve Karas auvictaabai tpitou Xeapis ob Suvarrév. 28, | cannot find this construction before Empedocles. See below, in the text. 29. For the importance of number three as the number of the synthesis, see Scum, 1993: 58. Number three is the first real plural, number two expressing a pair of si- milar or opposite entities. 30. Diets-Kranz I 370. 2 & SsAnalysis and Synthesis of Reality 4B aw kal Uyieiav: “souffrances, maladies et mort”, in the translation by Jouanna™, are the whole result of foods that the nature of man is not able to control; on the other side “nourriture, accroissement et santé”, are the whole result of foods that nature is able to control and profit from. Similarly, in Predictions I, ch. 2 (L.9,8,12f.) we find 6avdtous te kal voorjuata Kai uavias,* the triad of false predictions addressed to merchants, “death next to illness and madness”, a threefold predic- tion probably suggesting to the reader a typical threefold curse, taking into account the ironical mood of the author.*’ In the Platonic Republic (Resp. 1X 582a) Socrates is describing the basis of a correct judgeme: gutreipia te kal ppovrjor Kal Adyqo: “experiencia, talento y racioci- nio”, in the translation by Pabon and Fernandez Galiano.* * Te kai...kai (...Kat) is the result of the mental process of an analytical mind that can tell more than two qualities of an entity, more than two actions of a process, more than two components of a whole, stating them in close relationship. After writing a first constituent (A) the writer introduces not just a mark of a loose series, kai, but a mark of relati- onship “A close to B and C (and D)”. As te has to be postponed to the first coordinated entity/word, because it is an enclitic, the employment of A te kai B kai C with Te kai side by side, makes this construction to usually link single words, not groups.” The coordinated words are usually single nouns, adjectives or verbs,* that is, entities, qualities or processes. 3 32. Jouanna (1990: 123, n. 4) underlines the existence of those two tiads. He also points out the use of the “liaison ve kai” in the whole treatise (1990: 13) . Text checked with the preliminary edition by Monprar, 1984: 3. For the personality of the author, cf. Garcia Novo, 1995 . Cf. Pas6n-GaLiano 1948: Vol. HII, 120. 35. Cf. also Plato. Resp. 1 332c BAAov Sti, pn, 1] Topaow PappaKe te kal ortia kat rota (Tr08iSoU0a TéxvN iaTpiKi) Kaheiral). Phaedr. 251b iBdvra bE, avtov lov & THs pplins HETaBOAA Te Kai IBpdas Kai BepuStHS arfOns AauBdvel, . Hammer (1904) does not take into account the difference between Te...Kotin.Katin., and Te Kal...kat.. 37. On the contrary te...kat..xatl..., with Te and the first kai separated, can relate syn- tagms such as adjective + noun, article + noun, preposition + noun: te splitting the first syntagm, However sometimes the group article + noun, preposition + noun ap- pears undivided before ve karl, the article and the preposition being proclitics or analogically understood as such. re (...) Ka..xai connects specially nouns in Thucydides, as Hammer points out (1904: 54 f.). i aR & st44 Etsa Garcia Novo We have seen before some examples of groups of entities that for- med a whole. Let us consider now a group _of qualities The way | see it, in the Homeric poems usually only one quality was ascribed to one entity (which we would call the predominant quality). Afterwards, when three® or four qualities were ascribed to a single ob- ject, people were really seeing differences among objects, not oversim- plifying them. If three different qualities can be applied to an object, the scale of differences between this object and a second, a third or a fourth one, related to the first, will not easily produce a relationship of equivalence or opposition; it will just provide a ground to differentiate the one from the other. Some examples will illustrate my point. Ancient Medicine, ch. 9 (L.1,590,14-15 = Jouanna 129,10-11): pe- yade@ Te kai ioxupa® Kal émiopadei voorjuati, “sur une maladie im- portante, violente et dangereuse” (Jouanna, ibid.). Predictions I] begins this way: (L.9,6,1-2) Tedv intpeév mpoppriois atayyeAAovtar oux- vat te kal Kadai kai Oauuaorai...” “From the physicians predictions are mentioned as profuse, splendid and astonishing ...” Plato, Phaedrus 2476-7 yap axpadyatos Te kai doxNUaTIOTOS Kai avagris ovala OvTa@s ovom “For the colourless, shapeless and intangible reality, which really is ...” In any of those cases, many diseases (VM), predictions (Prorrh. ID or souls (PI. Phd.) can be pointed out as different from the mentioned ones, because all of them are described by several features. The Platonic Phaedrus is prominent in its use of number three (and number nine):*' the link te xat...Kail..., expressing the three parts of a whole, is also important in this dialogue. | will take another passage from it to illustrate how a_process can be analyzed into three different actions. Phdr. 2514-5; Cet Te kai Gyavaktel kai yapyadiletat puou- oa Ta TrTEpa. “When it is growing the wings, the soul bubbles, is ill-at- ease, feels a tickling”. Those sensations form the whole process of gro- wing the wings. Going back to the Hippocratic Corpus, in Nature of Man (Nat. Hom/ Salubr.) we find a nice passage with a tetrad. Polybe is the prototype of a physician who thinks of a system of four humours, and who loves 39. When two adjectives are ascribed to an entity they usually express one quality ex- plained by two words, as in KaAds kal éryai8ds referring {o the Athenian citizens. 40, Text checked with Monpramy: 1984, 41, See now EsTEBAN: 1992 and (specially) 1994, for the composition and the contents of this dialogue, pointing out the importance of number three and number nine.Analysis and Synthesis of Reality 45 number four as Jouanna suggests.” Nat. Hom./Salubr. 1.6,36,1-4 = Jouanna 168,7-8: ToAAd yap éoTiv év TQ ocpati évedvta, a, STav Um’ GhAnAwy Tapa puol Bepuaivytat Te Kai puxnTat Kal Enpaivn- Tat (Enpatuntat te MV Littré: kal Enpaivytat nonnulli codd., Jouan- na) kal Uypaivntat, vodaous Tikte. “Crest qu'il existe, dans le corps, plusieurs éléments qui, par une action réciproque, peuvent s’echauffer, se refroidir, se dessécher ou s humidifier anormalement, et ainsi produi- re des maladies” (Jjouanna, ibid. 169). Interestingly, Galen still uses this construction. The treatise De in- aequali intemperie will provide us with two examples. An arm can be dissected “in arm, forearm and hand”: Bpaxlova te kai mHixuv Kai dxpav xeipa (VII 735,3-4 K). Although the use of single te had de- creased a lot in Galen’s time, we find te kat...kai and even te Gua kai...kai with the same sense, the second being a variatio of the first in the following sentence: (VII 737,8-11 K) cai yap évodev umd Tol pev- yatos Oepuaivovtat te Kal Siateivovtat Kai Siaomavrai, KaK THY eabev Oepyatvovral te (te codd. nonnulli: om. Kihn) Gua xai O\iBovrat kai Bapyvovtat.” “For not only from inside, through the ac- tion of the flux, they are beated and at the same time strained and torn, but also from outside they are heated and simultaneously compressed and oppressed”. The construction of te kat...kai (...«a1) is unusual when te and the first kat are side by side, the main Classical exceptions being Xenophon the historian and Plato the philosopher; the use in Herodotus and Thu- cydides is restricted. No monograph is dedicated to it. Probably the extended use of Te kat...kat... in Ancient Medicine hints at the epoch of Kenophon and Plato more than at Thucydides’ time. Besides, the author uses some combinations of te and kat that also have parallels in Xenophon and Plato. 42. JOUANNA, 1975: 32 43. uc is already coupled with te kai in Herodotus; see Hammer, 1904: 16f. 44, Data in Kienver-Genruy, I 2: 249-251; Honrren, 1882: 9; Hamer, 1904: 21ff., 51ff., Sif. 45, Interestingly Xenophon uses in percentage much more Te katl..katl (...kat() than He- rodotus and Thucydides, while the use of the simple-te kal decreases in this author when compared with the other two historians. Data in Hammer: 1904. 46. For the date of VAf see JouaNna, 1990: 83-86 and 1992: 530.46 Eisa Garcfa Novo Infrequently attested in Greek literature,*” I see the link te Kal... kal... in Empedocles, in the Hippocratic Corpus, in Plato and afterwards in Galen, as a way of expressing that three (four) qualities, objects or pro- cesses are linked in a system; they are no longer a series of three (four) elements, i. e. an addition: they turn out to be a whole formed by three (or four) related units, a triad (or a tetrad). It expresses reality by way of a synthesis achieved after analysis. 3. From polarity to graduation of differences: the relationship _esta- blished by_means of the link #}. Up to now I have considered the mental process that led from pairs of alike entities reinterpreted as equivalent, to a graduation of differences, that is, from analogy to differentiation; this happens when the notion of system is alive. I shall consider now the way from the reinterpretati- on of two related entities that were less than fifty per cent alike as op- posite, to a graduation of differences, that is, from polarization to differentiation. The relationships inside a system, not the system itself, will be enhanced this way. I remarked before that for Greek people, at least until the V century B.C., only entities that have something in common can be opposite, as Lloyd points out in Heraclitus.* Greek language used two different ways of expressing the second term of a construction after an adjective or an adverb in comparative degree: the analytic construction with #j, and the synthetic with Geniti- ve. The construction with the link 1) was at the beginning not an ap- proach or a comparison, as it was in Latin quam: it was a separation of two mentally related items. Greeks were stressing a quality in A and ex- cluding it from B.® 47. This construction is sporadically attested in the conditions that [ underline in note 16, i. e., Te kal being side by side, and the word (C) linked by the second kai being related to the word (A) that precedes Te kal (A Te Kal B kat C) 48. Cf. Lioyn, 1966: 99. 49. Kiuner-Gentu remarked: dritckt tberhaupt den Begriff der Verschiedenheit aus” (Ul 2, 296), Cl. Benveniste, 1948: 137; CHANTRAINE, 1953: 152. Bibliography in SCHWYZER-DEBRUNNER, 1950: 565 and Lasso pe LA Veca, 1968: 510fF. See now Brraup, 1984: 172ff.Analysis and Synthesis of Reality 47 A is good in contrast to (-tTepos) } excluding B GB)” A is good indeed (-icov, *yos) It was a polarization. “A is good indeed/B is absolutely not”, It was a hyperbole, and so a very expressive way of enhancing the marked term (A) in opposition to the non marked (B). It was not a “compari- son’, it was an opposition between two entities that, being related, were less than 50% alike. This meaning of opposites inside the compa- rative is still occasionally present in the V-IV centuries and will be pre- sent afterwards in the construction, stressing the Mediterranean bias to state oppositions.” However as time went by, Greek people started to consider the dif- ferences between two things not in the easy (and emphatic) terms of opposites, but at the deeper level of a scale of differences: A is x-quality+++ / B is x-quality+ = A is more x-quality than B. This way the construction could express not only a yes/no opposition, “A is good indeed excluding B”, but a contrast: “A is better than B”, [ imagine that only when this construction started to express diffe- rences, not just opposition, could it be used to stress a temporal relati- onship between two processes. Thus “A happened before (= Tpiv 7}, trpdabev ij, TPSTEpOV 1) B happened” probably arose when qualitative and quantitative relationships stressing differences, not opposition, were formulated between two entities, by means of 7 preceded by UGAAov (ijTTov) or any comparative form of an adjective/adverb. The temporal sentences, that we find so often in the Corpus Hippo- craticum, are in fact a formulation of the relationship between two pro- cesses. This relationship can be an approach, as in: “when A happens B happens’, “while A happens, B happens", “since A happened B hap- pened”; or a contrast, a difference: “A happens before B happens”, ‘ happens after A happens’. In the approach both processes are conver- gent, while in the contrast they do not converge, they are settled in a series, and a priority is set between them. 50. If the construction with #} is often considered by the scholars as intended initially to exclude the second term, in the construction with the genitive the second term is usually considered as a pattern of the quality, and so the construction as an ade- quation, starting from such cases as uéAtTos yAuxicov péev aBx Mia 1,294: “sweeter than honey flowed his voice”. In my opinion this could be initially interpreted as “in- tensely sweet separated from honey”, that is, a hyperbole (his voice was sweet, honey is not when opposed to his voice). . See now Sturrer, 1988, for uGAAov/irrov FF in Ancient Stoicism.48 E1sa Garcia Novo The relationship established in “A happened before B happened”, where A-process and B-process are settled in a series, is analogical to the relationship “A is better than B" or “A flows quicker than B (flows)”. In both cases there is a mental priority of A, i. e. a scale where A is mentally placed before B, not excluding it. The contrasting relationship could be reversed (“A is more good than B”, so “B is less good than A”); in the same way, the temporal relationship of contrast could usual- ly be reversed (“A happened before B”, so “B happened after A”, if, in fact, B happened). Once again the innovative colonial Greeks, who took advantage of the analytical expression with # after an adjective or adverb in compa- tative degree, are the people who started to say Tplv t or Tpdobev i or TIpdétepov 7}. Tpiv 7 is firstly attested in Homer (only in iad 5,288 = 22,266), mpdabev #j in Heraclitus,” mpdtepov H in Herodotus. The three syntactic units, exceptional in Attic dialect, are present in the Hip- pocratic Corpus. | suppose that those innovations took place when the construction with 1 after an adjective in comparative degree started to express differences besides opposition, i.e. “A is beter than B” not excluding B from the quality. Heraclitus, Empedocles, Democritus, the authors of the Hippocratic Corpus, and Plato, profited from all kind of expressions that established a relationship of priority by means of tf), both in the temporal and in the qualitative/quantitative™ sense. It provided them with a perfect instru- ment to establish new relationships inside a re-analyzed world. In this field, an exceptional syntagma as Tpdo8ev Hj, used in Greek of the first millennium B.C. less than 30 times, is attested twice in Hera- clitus, and recorded in the Hippocratic Corpus some 13 times,” especi- ally as a stylistic feature of the author of De octimestri partu who uses it some 6 times () in a short text — an unparalleled feature in Greek literature. tpdoBev 7 is a perfect bridge between temporal and qualita- 52. It is attested twice in Heraclitus fr.1 and 31 (this one with a variant, vide infra). 53. Notice that piv, mpéo€ev and mpétepov are used as adverbs when coupled with i}, they are not “conjunctions”. 54. For the reduction of quality to quantity, ef. Sampursky, 1956: 11fF. 55. When I say “some 13 times” I am referring to the existence of lectiones variantes. The passages are the following: Fist. L. 6,450,26. Morb. IT L. 7,20,10. Mul. 1 L.8, 106,8. Nat. Mul. L. 7,348,14, Oct. 1. 7,436,12; 438,7 Mp. ¥ voorjaai Ta Lrrrré, edd: Tip. fv 6 ons al Te M: Tp. voaricaca T& V; 444,8; 450,21; 450,22; 458,1 npdobev M, edd.: mpds V. Decent. L. 9,230,4 (corrected by Lrrmes). Eumpocbev i: Prorrb, IT L. 9,58,11. Morb.JIL. 7,108,21Analysis and Synthesis of Reality 49 tive priority, because it can be used to express both of them. Heraclitus and the Hippocratic Corpus preferred the temporal meaning. Heraclitus fr.1 D-K, 5: Tod 5¢ Adyou ToS" édvtos del a€Uveror yivovtai dvOpao- Toi Kai TEGabeEv 1} dkooat kal dxoUcavtes TO Mp@tov. “Diese Lebre bier, ibren Sinn, der Wirklichkeit hat, zu versteben, werden immer die Menschen zu toricht sein, so ehe sie gehort, wie wenn sie erst gebdrt ha- ben” (Snell, 1989": 7). (See also fr. 31 D-K, 13: var. Tp@Tov). Oct. Gren- semann 94,21=Joly 168,22 = L. 7,444,8: doa 5’ dv ta&v éuBpvoov év GAdew xpdvae ioxupars voorjon, amdéAAutai Tpdobev aUTa aTrd- otaaw yevéobai. “Alle Embryonen aber, die zu einer anderen Zeit schwer erkrankien, gehen zugrunde, bevor bei ihnen eine Apostase er- folgte” (Grensemann, tbid.). As far as | know, the construction éumpoo8ev i}, a variant of tpd0- Gev 7, is attested in the first millennium B.C. only in Predictions II and Diseases II Predictions I, 25 (L. 9,58, 11) xivduvos a&troAda8ai THv yu- vaika éumpoabev i} T6 alua éuéoau,” “... la femme court le danger de mourir avant d'avoir vomi le sang” (Mondrain, 1984: 43). Another bridge between temporal and qualitative relationship is the expression “more than before”, pointing out time as the element that makes the difference inside a changing process. We find several ways to say “more than before” in the Hippocratic Corpus, one of them being 1) €v T@ Tpiv xdvep after a comparative adjective or adverb, used by the author of layer C six times out of the seven that we find this syn- tagma in the Corpus.* As Plato does, some physicians of the Hippocratic Corpus introduce in the second term of the construction with 4 even a hypotactic sent- ence: ... f] doTe-sentence, Tpiv-sentence, aas-sentence, olov-sentence, ei-sentence, and so on. This use means a great evolution and develop- ment of the construction. Predictions 17, ch. 3 (L. 9,10,25-26) 5oKéa ... tous atrayyéAAovtas Tepatmdectépws Sinyeiabai 1} as éyéveto.” ‘Je crois ... que ceux qui rapportent les faits les présentent plus prodi- gieux quiils n’ont 66” (Mondrain, ibid. 5). Ch. 4 (L. 9,18,5) doa Sé Uypétepa coti Tadv Siaxcopnudtoov 7H cddote exTuTOVoOa! ev TH Sie Ed8e0," “... les selles trop humides pour se mouler dans le passage” 56. Morb. Il, ch. 71, Potter V, 324,25 = L. 7,108,21. 57. Text checked with Monpratn, 1984: 43. 58. See Garcia Novo: 1993, for the exceptional use of the adverb mpiv in the author C. 59. Cf. Monprain, 1984: 5. 60, Cf. Monpram, 1984; 10,50 Ersa Garcia Novo (Mondrain, ibid. 10). Ch. 4 (L. 9,18,19-20) ovpov... xpn ... SloupgecGat «. pot] GAiyov (Odiyov THRFOK Mondrain: oAiyeo J Littré) mayuTepov 1} olov émd6n. “L’urine doit étre éliminée ... et étre un peu plus épaisse que le liquide bu” (Mondrain, ibid. 11). Diseases of Women I, ch.1 (Grensemann, 1982: 88,18-20 = L. 8,12,1-3) a@Tékep 6¢ éovan Tol TE oa@patos ov ouvrGeos édvtos Emi TAnpwén, ioxupou Kai oTe- peaitépou kal muKvotépou edvtos, ij ef (Ev M) Aoxlasy épreipos yévoito. “Da aber einer Frau, die noch nicht geboren hat, der Kérper nicht daran gewohnt ist, angeftillt zu werden, (vielmebr) stark und fest und dichter ist, als wenn die Frau Erfabrung mit dem Wochenflupgs bat ...” (Grensemann, ibid. 89). Sometimes this feature settles a probable terminus post quem for an author of the CH. The construction “wa&AAov i Tpiv-sentence” is not at- tested before Xenophon, and we find it in Predictions IT ch. 2 (L. 9,8, 7f£.), and in the (parallel) passages Diseases of Women I (Mul. II) ch, 154 and Nature of Woman (Nat. Mul.) ch. 41. Nat. Mul. ch, 41 (Trapp 106, 22=L. 7,384,22) otever (oTével TE M: OTEVETEI V: OTEVELTAL 8) te kat SuaOuper (coni. Corn.) u&AAov Ff mrpiv payeiv. “She complains more and is in greater distress than before eating.” Mul. Il, ch. 154 (Grensemann 1987: 82,22-24, author A = L.8,328,20) oréver kai d6u- uéet uGAAov fF} mpiv payeiv. Exceptional testimony of the Classical Greek prose, the Hippocratic Corpus offers us the hapax construction Tpiv f Skov..., something like “before than when...”, in Diseases IV. Morb. IV ch. 51 (110,28-111,4 Joly =L. 7,588,22-25) oftca 5é kal émrjv Td TAgiov Uypdv év TH a0d- Lat! UTS THS Tapaxtis xwpiov AdBnTat kai WAnon Tas PABas, oUK ét1 amépxetat £€ avitécov mpiv 1} Skou éoti TS xwpiov Kevedv, THS Tpopiis €Eavadioxopevys Ti volo. “De méme, quand une humeur surabondante dans le corps se tient par Veffet du trouble a un endroit et remplit les veines, elle n'en sort pas avant que ne se fasse un vide dii ala maladie qui consomme la nourriture” Joly, ibid.). This construc- tion could have a parallel in the Homeric mpl y’ Ste, but it is not an archaism; the tendency to variatio of this author C makes him to use seven different constructions, this one included, in two Budé pages, to express similar meanings.” 61, The Tpiv-sentence in the Corpus Hippocraticum is studied by Garcta Novo: 1992 62. Cf. Garcia Novo, 1993; 134ff.Analysis and Synthesis of Reality 51 All the quoted passages using the link 1) stress differences by means of analysis and state relationships inside a system. They are a result of the analytical mind that pushes the Greek rationalism forward. 4, In conclusion, duality in each of the two aspects, opposition or equi- valence, gives way to a scale of differences. Now each entity is by itself, and so is described by itself, and at the same time it has to be related to the other parts of the system, any entity being a part of a bigger who- le, be it the human body, the cosmos, the triangle, or the city-state. Borrowing the motto from Professor LLoyd, ‘polarity and anala- gy” essential as they were for Greek people, are enriched by means of an analytical insight that opens pairs into triads and tetrads, that turns opposites into scales of priority, describing in this way systems and the relationships inside them. BipiocKarHy E. BENVENISTE, Noms d’agent et noms d'action en Indo-Europeenne, Paris 1948. M. Binaun, “Les expressions de l'idée comparative en Grec classique: coréference et dis- junction”, Glotta 61, 1984, 167-182. J. Burnett, Platonts opera, Oxford 1900-1907. P. Cutanraaine, Morphologie historique du grec, Paris 1964". Dens. Grammaire homérique. Il Syntaxe, Paris 1953. A.Cuny, le nombre duel en Gree, Paris 1906 J.D. Denniston, The Greek Particles, Oxford 1950*. H, Digts-W, Kranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, hrsg., tibertr. von ..., Berlin 1951- 19526 (3 vols.) A. ESTERAN SANTOS, “Interior/exterior: antitesis en la tematica y en la estructura del Fe- dro", Cuadernos de Filologia Clisica (Estudios griegos e indoeuropeos), n. s. 2, 1992, 165-185, Dies., “Dialogo en la yerba: funci6n de la introduccién y del escenario del Fedro", XAPIE AIAASKAAIAS. Homenaje a Luis Gil, Madrid 1994, 289-304. E. Garcia Novo, “Relacién entre infinitivo y modos en la oracién de Tpiv tomando como ejemplo el Corpus Hippocraticum’, Cuadernos de Filologia Clasica (Estudios grie- 80s @ indoeuuropeos), n,s. 2, 1992, 137-164. Duss., “El adverbio piv y el autor C del Corpus Hippocraticum’’, Cuadernos de Pilologia Clasica (Estudios griegos e indoeuropeos), n. s. 3, 1993, 129-139. Dies., “Structure and style in the Hippocratic treatise Prorrbetikon 2”, Ancient Medicine in its Socio-Cultural Context, ed. by Ph. J. van per Eyk, H. B. J. Horstmanstorr und P. HL, Scrintyvers, Amsterdam 1995, vol. 2, 537-554. 63. Cf. Luoyp: 1966.52 Exsa Garcia Novo H, GrENseMANN, Hippokrates, Ueber Achtmonatskinder. Ueber das Siebenmonatskind (unecht), hrsg., iberte,, erliut. yon ..., Berlin 1968. Ders., Hippokratiscbe Gynédkologie. Die Gynitkologischen Texte des Autors C nach den psoucio-hippokratischen Schrifien De muliebribus I, II und De sterilibus, Wiesbaden 1982. Ders., Knidische Medizin. Teil IL, Stuttgart 1987. B.A. Van GRONINGEN, La composition litieraire archaique grecque. Procédés et réalisa- tions, Amsterdam 1960*. B. HAMMER, De Te particulae usu Herodoteo Thucydideo Xenopbonteo, Leipzig 1904. H. Hoerer, De particulis Platonts capita selecta, Bonn 1882. J. Humperr, Syniaxe grecque, Paris 1960". R. Jory, Hippocrate, XI. De la génération. De la nature de Venfant. Des maladies IV. Du foetus de butt mots, éd. wad. par ... Paris 1970 (Budé). J. Jouasna, Hippocrate, La nature de Vhomme, éd. wad. comm. pat..., Berlin 1975 (CMG 11,3). Ders., Hippocrate. De l'ancienme médecine, éd, trad. par..., Paris 1990 (Bude). Ders., Hippocrate, Paris 1992 R. Kinner-B. Gens, Griechische Grammatik. II Saizlebre. 2, Leipzig 1904", repr. 1983. J.8. Lasso De La Visa, Sintaxis griega, Madrid 1968. E. Lirme, Oeuvres completes d’Hippocrate, Paris 1839-1861. G.E.R. Luovn, Polarity and Analogy, Cambridge 1966, repr. Bristol 1987. Ders., Early Greek Science: Thales to Aristotle, New York-London 1970, ‘A. L6vez Eire, Innovaciones del jGnico-atico, Salamanca 1970. B, Monpratn, Prorrbétique I, éd., trad., comm. par ..., diss, Paris 1984. W. NestLe, Griechische Geistesgeschichte, Stuttgart 1944 (Spanish tr. Barcelona 1975). JM. PanON-M, FERNANDEZ GaLiano, Platon. La Reptiblica, Spanish tr, Madrid 1949. P. Porrer, Hippocrates, vol. V, Cambridge (Mass.)-London 1988. H. Rix, Historische Grammatik des Griechischen: Laut- und Formenlebre, Darmstadt 1976. C.J. Ruyou, Ltudes du grec mycénien, Amsterdam 1967. Denrs., Autour du ve épique, Amsterdam 1971 S. SAMBURSKY, The Physical World of the Greeks, London 1956, repr. London 1987, A.Scuimmet, The Mystery of Numbers, Oxford 1993. R. Scrinarr, Einfilbrung in die griecbischen Dialekte, Darmstadt 1977. E. Scuwrzer, Griechische Grammatik, 1. Allgemeiner Teil. Lautlebre. Worthildung, Fle- scion, Miinchen 1939, E. Scirwyzer-A. DEBRUNNER, Griechische Grammatth, II. Syntax und syntaktische Stili- stik, Minchen 1950, repr. Manchen 1975, L Sturrer, “On # Stacagntixés and propositions containing w&Ahov/irrov", Mnemo- syne 41, 1988, 46-66. B, Seu, Die Enideckung des Geistes, Hamburg 1963 (Spanish tr, Madrid 1965). Ders., Heraklit, Fragmente, griech. u. dt. hrsg. von..., Miinchen und Ziirich 1989" O. Szemerényl, Einfithrung in die Vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft, Darmstadt 1970 (Spanish tr. Madrid 1978), H. Tuapr, Die bippokratische Schrift De natura muliebri, diss. Hamburg 1967.