Dreams
On madness the Hippocratics generally refused to be moved by those who would have celebrated it in one or another of its forms. On the topic of dreams,[90] however, many of them were persuaded by, or at least accepted, common Greek beliefs. Among those beliefs was a realisation that not all dreams are significant, not all are veridical: there is the Gate of Horn, but there is also the Gate of Ivory.[91] Yet it was widely held that many dreams contain a message, even if not necessarily an obvious or direct one, but one needing interpretation. From the Hippocratics down to Galen and beyond many doctors, including some of the foremost spokesmen for the anti-irrationalist point of view, accept some role for dreams in diagnosis, even if they do not endorse particular practices such as that of temple incubation, the soliciting, as it were, of dreams from the god, including, especially, dreams relating to
[90] Among important recent discussions of aspects of ancient dream theories the following may be noted especially: Dambska 1961, Kessels 1969, 1978, Wijsenbeek-Wijler 1978, Huby 1979, Cambiano 1980a, 1980b, van Lieshout 1980.
[91] Od. 19.560ff. Among the notable examples from ancient literature where the question of the fulfilment or otherwise of a dream or prophecy becomes a matter of remark are Od. 2.201f., Aeschylus Agamemnon 249, Choephori 523–34.
the dreamers' illnesses or containing instructions about their cure.[92] Thus Epidemics 1.10 includes "dreams, their nature and their time" among the items in the general list of factors to be considered in diagnosis.[93] In the Hellenistic period Herophilus even includes "god-sent" dreams in his classification of the three main types.[94] Galen not only tells us that his father was guided by a dream in deciding that Galen himself should take up a medical career, but also refers to therapies that he says were suggested to him by dreams.[95]
In time,[96] as is well known, complex theories were developed not
[92] The classic study of temple incubation remains Deubner 1900. One of the most extensive ancient sources for the practice is Aelius Aristides Orationes (Or.) 47–49.
[94] Aetius 5.2.3, discussed in von Staden, forthcoming; cf. Kessels 1969, pp. 414ff. Cf. also the attention paid to dreams in Rufus Quaestiones medicinales 5, CMG Suppl. 4.34.13ff. For later discussion and elaboration of the idea of "god-sent" dreams, see, for example, Artemidorus Onirocritica 1.6.15.19–16.9, who disagrees with the view expressed by Aristotle in the text cited below, n. 103, lamblichus De mysteriis (Myst.) 3.2.103.8ff. It is particularly striking that among the Hellenistic philosophers the aggressively naturalistic Epicureans allow that simulacra may come to humans from the divine, for example in dreams, though such simulacra are to be explained not as portents but as effluences: see Epicurus Ep.Hdt. 10.51, cf. Cicero De natura Deorum (ND) 1.18.46ff., D.L. 10.32, Lucretius 5.1169ff., cf. 4.757ff. Cf. Clay 1980, Schrijvers 1980.
[95] Galen mentions his father's dream at (K) 10.609.8ff., CMG 5.8.1.76.29ff. ([K] 14.608.15ff.), (K) 19.59.9ff. At (K) 11.314.18ff., cf. (K) 16.222.10ff., Galen confides in his reader that he was led to a treatment involving arteriotomy by a dream, and he discusses diagnosis from dreams at some length in his commentary on book 1 of the Epidemics, CMG 5.10.1.108.1ff. ([K] 17A.214.7ff.) (cf. what is generally considered the spurious compilation at [K] 6.832.1ff.), Subfiguratio empirica (Subf.Emp.) 78.26ff., cf. (K) 12.315.10ff.: see most recently Oberhelman 1983, cf. Demuth 1972, Guidorizzi 1973.
only distinguishing the various types of dreams—predictive and non-predictive, allegorical and non-allegorical—but also setting out in detail how they should be interpreted. Many of the writers in question, such as Artemidorus,[97] are sophisticated, at points quite cautious, restrained, even self-deprecatory. Many topics of interest might be pursued here. One we may note in passing is the extent to which the importance of wish-fulfilment is recognised by Greek dream-theorists: Freud himself remarked, rather defensively, in the 1914 edition of Die Traumdeutung , that those who attach any importance to such anticipations can go back to classical antiquity, and he cited Herophilus in particular in this connection, while he still insisted that no one before him had held that every dream is a wish-fulfilment.[98] However, our chief concern here must be with the kinds of theories and explanations our early would-be rationalists offered to account for the phenomena.
Once again we have a whole Hippocratic treatise devoted to the subject, the fourth book of On Regimen (sometimes called On Dreams ), as well as an important discussion in Aristotle which (whether or not he knew On Regimen 4) develops a similar theory.[99] Since Aristotle con-
[98] Freud 1953, vol. 4, p. 132 n. 2.
fines himself largely to providing a general framework of explanation, it will be convenient to reverse the chronological order and take him first.[100]
Dreams correspond to movements in the body, notably in the sense organs themselves, these movements being transmitted to the soul.[101] During the day many of these movements go unnoticed in the welter of impressions the soul receives. But at night, when the soul is less preoccupied, traces of some of the daytime impressions may be registered in it, provided the soul is itself in a stable condition.[102] No dreams are sent by the gods, though Aristotle says that they are
[100] On the date of Vict. views have differed widely, and no precision is possible. Internal evidence shows that the author of Vict. 1.4–5 is familiar with the work of Heraclitus, Empedocles, and especially Anaxagoras, but the use made of their ideas is compatible with a fourth- as well as a late fifth-century date. W. D. Smith's recent attempt (1979) to establish that this is an authentic work of Hippocrates himself has not won wide agreement. The work shows no signs of Hellenistic influence, however, and a date before Aristotle's treatises De somno et vigilia (Somn. Vig.), De insomniis (Insomn.) and De divinatione per somnia (Div.Somn.) seems likely.
[101] Insomn. 459a11ff., 24ff.
revered.[104] Most of what were believed to be prophetic dreams are mere coincidences, but some are signs, some causes, of future events:[105] they are causes in that they may suggest a course of action that the dreamer then puts into effect; they are signs in the manner Aristotle has explained, when they provide information about movements and changes in the body—though even here, if the soul is not itself stable, the information will be garbled. It is skill in recognising similarities that makes the best interpreter of dreams.[106]
That dreams may thus indicate points relevant to the health of the dreamer is a view that Aristotle ascribes to the "more discerning doctors," and one he endorses himself.[107] Whether or not it was written by one of those "discerning doctors," On Regimen 4 offers an elaborate working-out of that idea.[108] After first setting out a psychological theory according to which (as in Aristotle) the soul is distracted by waking impressions but while asleep "it becomes master in its own house,"[109] the writer takes pains to differentiate himself from others in the field:
As for the god-given dreams which give to cities and to individuals fore-knowledge of bad things and of good, there are interpreters with their own art in these matters. Such people also interpret the signs derived from the soul which indicate bodily affections in advance: excess, whether of repletion or depletion, of what is natural, or some unusual change. In such matters they are sometimes right and sometimes wrong,
[104] Cf. PA 645a16–23.
[105] Div.Somn. 462b26ff., 463a21ff., 30ff., b29ff.
[106] Div.Somn. 464b5ff., 10ff.
[107] Div.Somn. 463a4ff.
[109] Vict. 4.86 (L) 6.640.2ff., 6ff., cf. Pindar fr. 116, mentioned above, n. 99.
but in neither case do they know why it happens, neither when they are right nor when they are wrong. But they give advice to beware of taking harm: and yet they do not teach you how you ought to beware, but merely instruct you to pray to the gods. Prayer is a good thing, but one should take on part of the burden oneself and call on the gods only to help.[110]
In fact, in the subsequent discussion, prayer is recommended from time to time, and even the gods to whom it should be addressed are specified. "Pray to Earth, Hermes, and the Heroes," for instance, when the dream is of the earth looking black and scorched—which indicates excessive dehydration in the body.[111] However, the writer is scrupulously agnostic about whether to go beyond prayer and engage in apotropaic rituals: when dreams are contrary to the acts of the day, this indicates disturbance in the body which may be severe or mild, but "on whether or not you ought to avert the act [that is, by appropriate rites], I pass no judgement."[112] The burden of his thesis throughout is that each kind of dream corresponds to a particular physical illness or malfunction which steps can be taken to remedy.
While he dismisses rival interpreters with his curt "they do not know why it happens," no arguments are here offered for his own the-
[111] Vict. 4.90 (L) 6.656.22ff., cf. 4.89 (L) 6.652.17ff.
ory, only assertions, although some of the underlying assumptions, and his use of symbolism, are transparent, and traditional, enough.[113] Broadly and simplemindedly, to see good things in dreams is good, and bad things bad, and again it is good to see things that correspond to daytime thoughts and actions and that represent them as occurring in an orderly fashion.[114] More specifically we are told that it is a sign of health if, in the dream, when a star seems to fall out of its orbit, it appears pure and bright and moves eastwards.[115] Conversely, "when [a star] seems dark or dim or to move westwards, or towards the sea, or towards the earth, or upwards, these signify diseases. Upward movements indicate fluxes in the head; movements towards the sea, diseases of the bowels; and those towards the earth, usually tumors growing in the flesh."[116]
Moreover, confident recommendations for treatment match confident diagnoses:
Should one of the stars seem to be injured, or to disappear, or to be obstructed in its orbit, if this happens because one sees it affected by mist or cloud, this is a weak sign, but it is a more severe one if by water or hail. It signifies that an excretion of moisture and phlegm has occurred in the body, and has fallen towards the outermost circuit.[117] In such cases it is beneficial for the patient to take long runs, well wrapped up: they should gradually be increased to cause as much sweating as possible. The exercise should be followed by long walks and the patient
[113] As, for example, in the use of black-white symbolism in Vict. 4.91–92 (L) 6.658.8, 10, 13, 18.
[114] As, for example, at Vict. 4.88 (L) 6.642.11ff., cf. 4.93 (L) 6.660.15f., which suggests that seeing customary things indicates a desire of the soul.
[115] Vict. 4.89 (L) 6.650.4ff.
[117] The writer has a theory of three main circuits or orbits of the heavenly bodies, the stars outermost, the sun in the middle, and the moon below that (Vict. 4.89 [L] 6.644.18ff.), and he assumes that the main parts of the human body are disposed in three corresponding circuits (cf. Vict. 1.10 [L] 6.486.3ff.).
should go without breakfast. Food should be cut by a third and the normal diet restored gradually over five days. If the disorder appears more severe, prescribe steam baths in addition.[118]
Analogies with more modern health faddists are not hard to suggest.
The limitations of this rationalist takeover are twofold. First, the field of what is taken over is restricted. This writer is not concerned (though Aristotle was) with the whole range of predictive dreams, about some of which he is quite indifferent; he concentrates, rather, on what can be discovered about the state of health of patients from their dreams. He has an entirely naturalistic theory of the correlations between the two. No god sends these signs; they are the natural by-products of physical disturbances, a theory he elaborates with some persistence. But it is limited also in a second sense, in that, although superior knowledge is claimed, in practice the theory draws heavily on, and at points is merely a rationalisation of, popular beliefs. Yet the ambition to go one better than traditional views and even than specialist interpretations is evident from those claims to superior knowledge.[119] The specialists are said not to know what they are talking about—whereas the Hippocratic writer, armed with his naturalistic theory of physical-psychical correlations, can, if you believe him, put the whole "science" on a firm footing.