This library is built in the open.
If you spot an error, have a suggestion, or just want to say hello — we’d love to hear from you.

When reference is made to the Cnidian physicians, there is a great possibility of error—an error which, as a matter of fact, is always liable to occur with designations of this type. Do we mean by a "Cnidian" a doctor trained at Cnidos, or a physician with views of a peculiar kind? The two are by no means the same; a Cnidos-trained man might hold some Coan views, and a Cos-trained man might adopt some Cnidian opinions. So we must not suppose either (a) that all Cnidians necessarily held the same theories, or (b) that treatises containing doctrines which we know to have been popular at Cnidos were written by authors trained in that school. All we can say is that such and such an opinion is in harmony with the teaching known to have been in favor with the Cnidian School of a certain period.
Practically all we know about the Cnidians is the criticism of Cnidian Sentences put forward by the author of Regimen in Acute Diseases, ¹ Chapters I—III. supplemented by a few remarks in Galen. ² See, for example, Kühn, XV. 363, 419, 427, 428, and V. 760, 761. Littré II. 198—200 gives the chief passages in translation. We are told that the book had been re-edited, and that the second edition...