The Canon of Medicine (Canon Medicinae), Vol. II

† B. And in putrid fever it is the opposite.
a B. equity.

And the pulse indeed returns after its eradication to its natural habit in that body, and this is a good sign, and know thoroughly that as often as the urine and pulse are good, they signify that the fever is ephemera; and when they are not good, it does not mean it cannot be ephemera, for often in it there is discolored urine and a diverse, weak, and small pulse. And among those things which signify that it is an ephemera fever is that its beginning is easy and light, and its increase does not add beyond two hours, and vehement accidents are not associated with its state. † [ nothing? ] And that wicked accidents do not occur in it, and there is not in it a vehement h [boiling] of heat, and pains are diminished with it. But if pain of the head occurs with it, or another pain that is not fixed or inseparable after its eradication, this signifies that it is indeed an ephemera; and for the most part its eradication happens through sweat, and a humidity similar to natural sweat, not a humorous one, and there is not a vehement excess again in its quantity, rather it approaches natural sweat in its quantity, just as it is close to it in its quality. For if you see much sweat, then the fever is not ephemera. And of those things by which ephemera fever is tested, one is that the patient should enter a bath; and when he has stayed a while, if a sort of unusual horripilation occurs in him, it is known that the fever is a putrid fever; and let him exit the bath at once, and if nothing is altered from his disposition, then the fever is ephemera.

Chap. 7.

About their properties, etc.] The same is above. And Galen also, Book 1 on the Differences of Fevers, says it is proper and inseparable of ephemera fevers that they are caused by a procatarctic cause. But that this sign is not inseparable is argued by the fact that this fever is also accustomed to occur from anger, swelling, and flux of the belly. That it is not proper is evident by the fact that it also agrees with others: which is proven both by reason and by the authority of Galen; by reason indeed, since all diseases, not only fevers, occur from a procatarctic cause, since every disease is either common or dispersed, and the common one is from the air, but the dispersed one occurs from diet.

Chap. 3.

The authority of Galen is Book 1 on the Differences of Fevers, where in the constitution of all fevers he testifies that causes exist beforehand, which are manifest to all. But as to this, that no daily fever occurs without a procatarctic cause, it was also explained above. But whether this is a proper sign of these fevers, it is not to be doubted that rather the words of Galen should be weighed exactly, who (which we know was noted by the most diligent Paternus) did not leave written that ephemera fevers are caused by a procatarctic cause absolutely, but by a recent procatarctic cause. Wherefore, although all diseases (as the reason previously objected) and all fevers occur from manifest, i.e., pre-beginning causes, which Galen affirms, they do not however occur from recent ones, which is the property of ephemera fevers.

Chap. 9.

And it is that it, etc.] He understands the incompressing annotation a clinical sign where the pulse and heat do not change as expected, in which (Galen says, Book 1 on the Differences of Fevers) neither any horror, nor cooling of the extremities has occurred: nor a certain sleepiness, nor any significant sluggishness, or any inequality at all, either in heat, or in pulse, nor smallness or weakness. Galen, in the same Book 1 on the Differences of Fevers, says this sign is inseparable and proper to hectic fevers. Therefore it should not agree with any fever other than hectic. Yet the same man, in the same place, hands down that it is inseparable also from ephemera fevers; and therefore, since it agrees also with daily fevers, with Avicenna also testifying, he seems to be accused of inconsistency. But Galen truly explains this matter in the same book: there is indeed an incompressing annotation in hectic fevers, but in them, when food is brought, the febrile heat is ignited, which does not happen in ephemera fevers. Therefore, the proper sign of hectic fevers is that entire concurrence of signs, not one sign alone by itself. But except for the fact that they heat up when food is brought, the rest are inseparable from ephemera fevers, as Galen says. Yet our author limits the opinion of Galen here; for although neither true cooling, nor horror, rigor, and other signs of that kind occur, ignited spirits and vapors can nevertheless make something similar to them while they are carried into sensitive and fleshy particles. But again someone will ask how, then, are ephemera fevers distinguished from putrid ones, and a true incompressing annotation diagnosed from a non-true one. I would believe it is distinguished by the vehemence of the horror and cold, which certainly must be less in such ignited spirits than in humors. Add also the pulses, which will be far different in an ephemera than in a putrid fever.

Chap. 9.

cap. 7.
cap 25.
cap 17.

And when the urine, etc.] The same is in Galen, Book 1 on the Differences of Fevers, namely, he testifies that these two are proper and inseparable signs of ephemera fevers; which Averroes also [testifies] in Colliget, Book 4. Contra, however, Galen describes that sometimes there is concoction in the urine with putrid fevers in the first days: which, indeed, has been observed many times in tertian fevers. Truly, regarding this doubt, although in other intermittent fevers besides ephemera, concocted urine may appear in the first days, in which, specifically, a common putrefaction has not yet occurred with internal vessels, yet it cannot be truly called concocted urine, which does not appear such for the whole time. And thus true concoction will be a proper note of daily fevers, and will not agree with others. But if we have said this, I do not see how, again, ephemera can be distinguished from others in the first days from the concoction of urine, as Galen says; unless perhaps we say that the other signs must then be explored.

cap. 7.

And the pulse is inclined toward thickness, etc.] Galen, Book 1 on the Differences of Fevers, says that in ephemera fevers, the pulses are approaching magnitude, speed, and frequency. Avicenna, however, when he speaks of frequency and magnitude, says nothing of speed; but here he adds vehemence, about which Galen says nothing. Truly, we are not unaware that more can be said on this matter; and it is not difficult to show that in daily fevers, because the forces are strong, with a more vehement heat driving, both larger pulses, and clearer and more frequent ones, often occur, so that on that account speed can also be added, about which Galen [speaks], and vehemence, about which Avicenna [speaks]. When, however, magnitude and vehemence of pulses are not always followed by frequency and velocity: for in men, which Galen testifies in his book on Pulses for Beginners, although the pulses are larger and stronger, at the same time they become slower and more infrequent. Therefore, at my own risk, I would affirm that there is a mistake in this code: and "speed" should be put in place of "strength," so that this author agrees with Galen here. Let others judge this matter. The author adds more about the signs of daily fevers, for which seek Galen, Book 1 on the Differences of Fevers and Book 1 to Glaucon.

cap. 7. cap. 2.

Permutation of ephemera fever. Chap. 7.

a B. & ignited.

When it is necessary that a patient with ephemera fever be fed, and the physician errs regarding it and does not feed him, the fever is permuted in choleric bodies to hectic fever ignited/wasting a [ignited], and in fleshy bodies to fynocha a continuous fever, which is without putrefaction. And perhaps it is permuted to that which is with putrefaction. And similarly...