L'Âme et ses passions

Commentarius), which is frequently mentioned in his other writings. The latter work, too, is preserved only in fragments. A long passage from the third book was initially published by Daremberg in 1848 and was subsequently edited in the CMG in 1934 by Schroder and Kahle. In this book Larrain demonstrates that the reading of MS. scor. graec. 4-HI-l 1 (Revilla 230) pp. 123w -126w, whose subjectmatter is concerned with problems regarding the soul, contains some thirty-five fragments derived from the first and second books of the Commentary. This excerpt reveals many correspondences with the De Placitis Hippocratis et Platonis. Larrain raises, only firmly to reject, the possibility that it was perhaps based on a 77maeus commentary by another author, who incorporated elements taken from the PHP (elements that the excerptor later separated out again). He points out that the excerpt contains throughout several sections statements that do not appear in this treatise and adds that correspondences with it should not in any case themselves occasion surprise because Galen, in places where he mentions his limaeus commentary, himself refers to such parallels. The excerpt itself follows the thematic arrangement of the dialogue, i.e. Fragments 2-27, from the first book, are concerned with Tim. 42e8-46c, and Fragments 28-34, from the second, with lim. 64a-e. In his commentary upon these fragments Larrain provides an impressively wide range of references to other ancient authors ranging from Homer to Chalcidius and the Arab translators. It is difficult, therefore, to understand why the medical authors are themselves accorded such extremely sketchy treatment (Galen himself and Oribasius apart), which at times diminishes the value of the commentary. To take a single example, in his discussion of those fragments (13-17) treated together by him under the general heading of 'Das Nervensystem', surely references to the Alexandrians, at least, would have provided valuable historical perspective?