1. On the Heart.
  2. On Aliment.
  3. On Fleshes.
  4. On the Weeks.
  5. Prorrhetic, ii.
  6. On the Glands.
  7. A fragment of the piece “On the Nature of Bones.”

Class IX.—Series of Treatises, of Fragments and of Compilations, which have not been quoted by any ancient critic.

  1. On the Physician.
  2. On Honorable Conduct.
  3. Precepts.
  4. On Anatomy.
  5. On the Sight.
  6. On Dentition.
  7. On the Nature of the Woman.
  8. On the Excision of the Fœtus.
  9. The eighth Section of the Aphorisms.
  10. On the Nature of the Bones.
  11. On Crisis.
  12. On Critical Days.
  13. On Purgative Medicines.

Class X.—Writings now lost, which once formed a part of the Collection:

  1. On dangerous Wounds.
  2. On Missiles and Wounds.
  3. The first Book of Doses—the Small.

Class XI.—Apocryphal pieces—Letters and Discourses.

Such is the classification of M. Littré, which he professes to have founded on the four following rules, or principles: firstly, on the authority of direct witnesses, that is to say, of authors who preceded the formation of the Alexandrian Library; secondly, on the consent of the ancient critics; thirdly, on the application of certain points in the history of medicine, which appear to him to offer a date, and consequently a positive determination; fourthly, on the concordance of the doctrines, the similitude of the writings, and the characters of the style. Of these rules, the one which he professes to have been most guided by is the first, all the others being of subordinate importance. From what has now been stated, the reader will not fail to remark that the principles upon which the classification of Littré is founded scarcely differ at all from those of Ackerman. The reasonableness of these rules, moreover, no one, I presume, will venture to call in question, whatever may be thought of the judgment with which they are applied in particular instances. My own opinions on this point I need not state here, as they will come out more properly in my own disquisition on the characters of the particular treatises.

But, before concluding this part of my task, I must not neglect to notice the learned labors of a much esteemed friend and countryman—the first, the last, the only, scholar (I lament to say) which England has produced in this department of ancient criticism—Dr. Greenhill, of Oxford, who, in his excellent article on Hippocrates in Smith’s “Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology,” enters into a very elaborate disquisition on the authenticity of the various works which compose the Collection. His general distribution appears to me to be very ingenious, and his judgment in particular cases most correct, but it is proper I should state that I, perhaps, am scarcely qualified to pronounce an impartial judgment on this point, having had the honor of being consulted by the author, as he himself candidly acknowledges, while he was employed on this task. On the following page is his tabular view of the different divisions and subdivisions of the Collection.

Having now finished this survey of the labors of preceding inquirers, I proceed to state the results of my own investigations in the same department; and in doing so, I shall give seriatim the evidence for and against the authenticity of the different treatises, along with my own decision in every instance. And, in order to add to the value of this disquisition, I mean to give an abstract of the contents of those works which I look upon as spurious, that the reader may be enabled to compare the doctrines contained in them with those which are delivered in the treatises which are recognized as genuine. Moreover, it is my object that the present volume should contain a summary of all the valuable matters to be found in the Hippocratic Treatises, whether genuine or not.