De tuenda sanitate praecepta

Plutarch had more than a casual interest in medicine, for, besides this essay on keeping well, his other works abound in references to the behaviour of the sick and their treatment, and the medical practices of his day. Long before the time of Plutarch the art of medicine, always empirical, had been put on a solid foundation, and the acute observations of Hippocrates and his school had been set down in writing; and this body of Hippocratic medical writings, along with others, was in circulation, and had undoubtedly been read by Plutarch.

That medicine has made very great advances since Plutarch’s time is, of course, self-evident; aseptic, antiseptic, and sterilize are now household words, and the germ theory of disease has, in recent times, shed light on much which before was dark. But Plutarch is not dealing with the technical side of medicine; he is only giving some common-sense advice on rational living, and much that he has to say in regard to rest, exercise, and diet is in accord with the best medical practice of the present day. In fact, it is doubtful if any physician would take exception to anything that Plutarch advises (his advice is meant for men whose work is done with their heads rather than their hands), and one might name men in public life to-day, well on in years, who have followed many of his suggestions, unwittingly, no doubt, but to their own advantage.

The essay seems, at the first glance, to be put in the form of a dialogue, but it is about as much of a dialogue as Quiller-Couch’s Foe-Farrell. The dialogue form is merely a literary subterfuge to present an essay in a slightly more attractive form, and the third person of the dialogue, only occasionally recalled to the reader by the parsimonious interjection of he said, may be presumed to be Plutarch, the author. The two speakers in the brief dialogue at the beginning of the essay are Moschion, a physician, whom Plutarch introduces also into the Symposiacs (Moralia, 658 a), and Zeuxippus, a friend of Plutarch’s, who is introduced also as a speaking character in two other essays of Plutarch’s (Moralia, 748 e and 1086 c), besides being mentioned several times in other essays.

That the essay was written some time after a.d. 81 is clear from the reference to the death of the Roman Emperor Titus (123 d).

The title of the essay is included in Lamprias’ list of Plutarch’s works, and Stobaeus, in his Florilegium, has several quotations from it, sometimes with a slightly different reading, but none of these readings changes the meaning of the passage at all, and rarely is one to be preferred to the reading found in the mss. of Plutarch (see Vol. I. Introd. p. xxi).

Indeed, the text of this essay has suffered more at the hands of modern editors than from the ancient copyists, for a glance at the foot-notes in Bernardakis’s edition will show that the gratuitous and unnecessary changes introduced into the text by modern editors outnumber their corrections of the minor errors in spelling, and the like, made by the ancient copyists.

MOSCHION. So, Zeuxippus, yesterday you drove away Glaucus, the physician, when he wished to join in your philosophical discussions.

ZEUXIPPUS. No, my dear Moschion, I did not drive him away, nor did he wish to join in philosophical discussion, but I avoided him and feared giving an opening to a man fond of contention. In medicine the man is, as Homer [*](Homer, Il. xi. 514.) puts it, Worth many others together, but he is not kindly disposed towards philosophy, and there is always a certain harshness and ill-nature inherent in his remarks. And just then he was coming at us full tilt, crying out, even before he came near us, that it was no small or suitable task, amounting in fact to a confusion of all bounds, which had been boldly assumed by us in discussing a healthful manner of living. For he asserted that the subjects of philosophy and medicine are as far remote from each other as are the boundaries of any Mysians and Phrygians [*](Proverbial; cf. Nauck, Trag. Graec. Frag., Adespota, No. 560.); and thereupon, as he had at the tip of his tongue some statements of ours, which, though not very carefully formulated, are certainly not without utility, he proceeded to tear them to pieces.

MOSCHION. Well, in this and in other matters,

ZEUXIPPUS. That is because you, Moschion, have a natural gift for philosophy, and you feel incensed at the philosopher who does not take an interest in medicine, and you are indignant that such a man should imagine it more becoming for him, in the eyes of mankind, to profess some knowledge of geometry, logical discussion, and music, than to desire to seek out and know

All that of evil and good may have chanced to betide in the dwelling [*](Homer, Od. iv, 392.)

MOSCHION. Well, Zeuxippus, let us say no more about Glaucus, who is so self-important that he wants to be a law unto himself, needing no help from philosophy; but do you tell us in detail the whole discussion; or, if you prefer, just those statements [*](Homer, Od. iv. 392.)

ZEUXIPPUS. Well, our companion [*](Plutarch himself presumably.) asserted that he had heard somebody say that keeping the hands always warm, and never allowing them to get cold, is in no small measure conducive to health, and, conversely, the chilling of the extremities, by concentrating the warmth in the interior of the body, creates, as it were, a habit or a predisposition towards feverishness; and for a man to divert the substances in his body toward the surface, and to conduct and distribute them, along with the warmth, to all parts of his body, is healthful. [*](Cf.Moralia, 635 C.) If therefore we happen to be doing something with our hands and using them, the motion itself brings the warmth to these parts, and keeps it there; but when not engaged in such activities we must by no means allow the cold to find lodgement in our extremities.

ZEUXIPPUS. This, then, was one of the things ridiculed. The second, I think, concerned the food which you people serve to the sick. For he urged that we should partake of it and taste it from time to time, and get ourselves used to it in time of health, and not abhor and detest such a regimen, like little children, but gradually make it familiar and congenial to our appetites, so that in sickness we may not be disaffected over our fare as if it were so much medicine, and may not show impatience at receiving something simple, unappetising, and savourless. [*](Cf. Moralia, 661 B.) For this reason, too, omitting the bath now and then before going to a meal is not a thing to be avoided, nor drinking only water when wine is at hand, nor drinking anything lukewarm in the summer-time when there is snow on the table; and while dismissing

ZEUXIPPUS. Well has it been said, Choose the life that is best, and constant habit will make it pleasant, [*](A precept of Pythagoras according to Plutarch, Moralia, 466 F, and other writers who quote it; cf. also Moralia, 602 B.) and, in particular, it is profitable for a man, experimenting with each several department of life and especially with those which have to do with the practices which affect the body, to inculcate a fixed habit during periods of soundest health, so thus to make these things agreeable, familiar, and congenial to his nature, [*](Cf. Plato, Laws, p. 797 E.) bearing in mind how some men feel and act in times of sickness, being angry and fretful when hot water and gruel, or plain bread, is served to them, calling these things abominable and unpleasant, and abominable and hard-hearted also those who would force such things upon them. A bath has proved to be the death of many men who at the outset had not much the matter with them, save only that they could not and would not bear to taste food unless they had first had their bath; of whom Titus the Emperor [*](There are varying accounts regarding the manner of Titus’s death, poisoning or drowning being also alleged.) was one, as those who attended him in his illness affirm.