scholarly journals Owies w greckich traktatach medycznych starożytności i Bizancjum (V w. prz. Chr. - XI w. po Chr.)

Vox Patrum ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 59 ◽  
pp. 421-447
Author(s):  
Maciej Kokoszko ◽  
Krzysztof Jagusiak ◽  
Zofia Rzeźnicka

The common oat (Avena sativa) is a kind of cereal which is fairly well attested in the ancient and Byzantine Greek sources. It is to be noted that medical litera­ture of the abovementioned periods is especially informative as far as the subject in question is concerned. The body of evidence shows that both in Antiquity as well as over the Byzantine period (i.e. between the Vth and the XIth centuries) oats belonged to the crops which did not enjoy much appreciation nor special attention on the part of both mass consumers as well as medical specialists. Generally the cereal was thought to be worse than other crops and therefore lending itself to being animal fodder. It was made use of almost exclusively as an emergency food in case of shortages of other cereals. Though there are very few recipes that refer directly to the ways of preparing oats as food, some guidelines can be formulated on the basis of information per­taining to other cereals. The analyzed sources appear to suggest that it was used to prepare thin soups (on the basis of oats cooking liquor). Moreover, the cereal was also cooked into gruel-like soups. Having been finely ground, it could also be utilized to prepare bread, which, however, was not highly appreciated for its taste nor dietetic value. Medical sources characterize oats in reasonable detail. The cereal is said to be not very appealing in its flavour (which reveals unbalanced humours), characteris­tic of limited wholesomeness, slightly astringent (and therefore slowing down the work of the alimentary tract), hard to digest, delicately desiccating, heating and cooling at the same time. The same material suggests that oats were used for therapeutic purposes. Mainly they were profited from to treat diarrhea, stomach problems, liver ail­ments, prepare cataplasms to stimulate diaphoresis, help remove mucus from the bronchi and feed the feverish.

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 36-43
Author(s):  
Evgeniy P. FIGURNOV ◽  
◽  
Yury I. ZHARKOV ◽  
Valeriy I. KHARCHEVNIKOV ◽  
◽  
...  

Methodology provided summarizes published, original and foreign theoretic and experimental data on the subject of heating and cooling of standard and shaped conductors of overhead power transmission line and uses those of them which are most affected to fundamental heat-transfer laws. Computation surface area of standard and shaped wire formulas are given. The common formula of convection heat transfer coefficient is provided, based on wind speed and direction, concerning antiicing mode. Parameters of this formula do not coincide with those existing, as they are based on experimental data on standard and shaped conductors but not on round tubes. Formula of computation of heat transfer power under the influence of solar radiation is given. Summarized formula of admissible continuous current computation is given, all the components have detailed description in the article.


Author(s):  
Oyuna Tsydendambaeva ◽  
Olga Dorzheeva

This article is dedicated to the examination of euphemisms in the various-system languages – English and Buryat that contain view of the world by a human, and the ways of their conceptualization. Euphemisms remain insufficiently studied. Whereupon, examination of linguistic expression of the key concepts of culture is among the paramount programs of modern linguistics, need for the linguoculturological approach towards analysis of euphemisms in the languages, viewing it in light of the current sociocultural transformations, which are refer to euphemisms and values reflected by them. The subject of this research is the euphemisms in the English and Buryat languages, representing the semiosphere “corporeal and spiritual”. The scientific novelty consists in introduction of the previously unexamined euphemism in Buryat language that comprise semiosphere “corporeal and spiritual” into the scientific discourse. The analysis of language material testifies to the fact that in various cultures the topic of intimacy and sex is euphemized differently. The lexis indicating the intimate parts of the body is vividly presented in the West, while in Buryat language – rather reserved. The author also determines the common, universal, and nationally marked components elucidating the linguistic worldview of different ethnoses and cultures.


2019 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 371-377
Author(s):  
Judith Wambacq ◽  

Avec son livre La machine sensible, Stefan Kristensen réalise, de façon magistrale, deux objectifs. D’abord, il met en lien la pensée de deux philosophes qui sont à première vue très éloignés l’un de l’autre. Il s’agit de Félix Guattari et de Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Traditionnellement, Merleau-Ponty est considéré comme le philosophe du corps, tandis que Guattari est connu comme le philosophe du corps sans organes. Merleau-Ponty est un phénoménologue, tandis que Guattari prétend abandonner le point de vue du sujet. Kristensen démontre avec succès quel est le terrain commun des deux auteurs : la critique de la conception psychanalytique du sujet.Le deuxième objectif du livre découle directement du premier : présenter au lecteur une alternative à la conception intimiste de la subjectivité, soit comprendre la subjectivité comme fondamentalement parcourue par une altérité. Merleau-Ponty a été l’un des premiers, à l’instar de Paul Schilder, à mettre l’accent sur le caractère collectif et intersubjectif de cette altérité. Guattari a compris que cette altérité possède des sédiments politiques et historiques.With his book La machine sensible, Stefan Kristensen accomplishes two goals in a masterly way. First, he links the works of two philosophers who are very different at first sight: Maurice Merleau-Ponty and Félix Guattari. Traditionally, Merleau-Ponty is considered the philosopher of the body, whereas Guattari is known as the philosopher of the body without organs. Merleau-Ponty is a phenomenologist, whereas Guattari pretends to abandon the point of view of the subject. Kristensen identifies the common ground of the two authors: the criticism of the psychoanalytical conception of the subject.The second goal of the book derives directly from the first: present the reader with an alternative for the intimate conception of subjectivity, that is, present him or her with the idea that subjectivity is always characterized by an alterity. Merleau-Ponty, following the example of Paul Schilder, has been one of the first to stress the collective and intersubjective nature of this alterity. Guattari has understood that this alterity has political and historical sediments.Con il suo libro La machine sensible, Stefan Kristensen realizza magistralmente due obiettivi. Innanzitutto, egli mette in relazione il pensiero di due filosofi a prima vista molto distanti tra loro: Félix Guattari e Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Se tradizionalmente Merleau-Ponty è considerato il filosofo del corpo, Guattari è invece noto come il filosofo del corpo senza organi. Merleau-Ponty è un fenomenologo, mentre il pensiero di Guattari intende abbandonare il punto di vista del soggetto. Kristensen propone allora di leggere la critica della concezione psicoanalitica del soggetto come terreno comune tra i due autori. Il secondo obiettivo del libro discende direttamente dal primo: presentare al lettore un’alternativa alla concezione intimista della soggettività, ovvero concepire la soggettività come fondamentalmente percorsa da un’alterità. Merleau-Ponty è tra i primi, sulla scorta di Paul Schilder, a porre l’accento sul carattere collettivo e intersoggettivo di questa alterità. Dal canto suo, Guattari ha compreso che questa alterità possiede dei sedimenti politici e storici.


Parasitology ◽  
1912 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Strickland

The parasite forming the subject of the present paper was discovered inhabiting the alimentary tract of larvae of the common rat-flea of this country, Ceratophyllus fasciatus Bosc. (see Pl. IV).


Author(s):  
Sema Yaman Fırıncıoğlu ◽  
Hatice Nur Kılıç

Despite positive effects on nutrition, it has been reported that milk causes allergic reactions and many health problems. Allergic reaction to milk is called lactose intolerance, but it is estimated that this is not caused by lactose, but by the β -casein structure of milk, which varies depending on animal species. Although there are many fractions of β-casein in the structure of milk, especially A1 and A2 casein attract attention. A1 β -casein causes many health problems because it plays a role in the formation of the bioactive opioid peptide β-casomorphin-7 (β-CM-7). These health problems are allergic reactions, weakening of the immune system and slowing down of the gastro-intestinal system and some systemic diseases (cardiovascular disease, type 1 diabetes, autism, schizophrenia). The underdevelopment of gastro-intestinal system, especially in newborns, causes us to encounter these health problems more frequently. For this reason, the consumption of milk containing A1 β-casein, especially cow’s milk from culture breeds, is not recommended. Since BKM-7 (β-casomorphin-7) formed by A1 β-casein cannot occur in A2 β-casein, these health problems cannot be expected to be observed. However, A2 β-casein causes DPP4 (dipeptidyl peptidase 4) enzymes to be regulated in the body and a non-opioid effect is observed. It is recommended to consume goat’s milk and dairy products containing A2 β-casein in newborns, people with celiac disease and stomach disorders. Despite the lack of studies on the subject of A1 and A2 β-casein and the ongoing discussions, in this review, the importance and differences of A1 and A2 β-caseins in cow and goat milk were discussed and their effects on human health.


1992 ◽  
Vol 61 (4) ◽  
pp. 382-393
Author(s):  
F. E. Beemon

With the publication of his Den Byencorf der H. Roomische Kercke (The Beehive of the Holy Roman Church) in 1569, the Netherlandic Calvinist Marnix of Saint Aldegonde launched a satirical attack onthe clergy, polity, and sacramental practice of Catholicism. Though the fame of the book and its author have been eclipsed, they were both well known during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuriesas shown by the frequency of publication. Marnix's task, in common with other sixteenth-century religious propagandists, was to communicate a theological message to a popular audience. The success of this effort depended on reaching across the separation between systematic theology and folk religiosity. The object was not original theology, nor even doctrinal subtleties, but the creativeuse of common terms to explain divergent schemes of basic dogma. Because the subject was more religious than theological, the separation between Latin and the vernacular cultures could be bridged by the use of metaphors common to both high and popular culture. In this, Marnix's work is distinguished by his use of the metaphors of beehive, honey, and manna to explain the differences between the Catholic Eucharist and the Calvinist Lord's Supper. The use of manna is not surprising as one would expect it to be a common image; however, the metaphors of hive and honey are less expected. While the former is clearly biblical in origin, the apiary metaphors are not. Thus, Marnix relies on the common sociocultural context of the beehive to instruct a popular Dutch audience in a fundamental difference between Calvinism and Catholicism. By identifying the Catholic host with polluted honey, Marnix defends the necessary presence of the Word for the Calvinist Lord's Supper, which he portrays as pure manna. Rather than feeding on the body of Christ, Marnix argues, the true Church feeds on the Word of God, which is present in the Calvinist wafer.


Author(s):  
Miranda Levanat-Peričić

Publication of a book of literary reviews Romani krize (The Novels of Crisis) by Igor Mandić in Belgrade in 1996, as well as the book promotion in Serbia, have been the subject of sharp attacks on its author in the Croatian media. In this “case,” which Mandić himself called “the chase of the collegial choir of elite commentators” for an “insignificant book of literary reviews,” several peripheral levels that are attempted to impose as dominant or to compete for a more favorable discursive position can be distinguished. First of all, the complex of peripheral is in the very status of literary criticism, the marginal letter, inferior to the prestigious discourses of belletristic and literary theory. However, as Mandić underlined in the foreword to The Novels of Crisis, this “by status wholly devalued writing, no matter how small, could always be used as a ‘symptom’ to raise some sort of ward-heeler’s alarm.” Regardless of the ironic modus of this attitude, the “ward-heeler alarm” that followed completely departed from the subject of this Mandić’s collection, or a decade of Serbian and Croatian literary productions, from the 80’s to the 90’s. Finally, precisely this literary period, which Mandić defined as a decade after the death of J. B. Tito and M. Krleža until the break-up of the SFRY, as the last decade of literary and cultural life in a common state, after its disintegration remained on the historical periphery of newly established national canons. However, the most important peripheral level of the whole of this “case” is concerned with the approach to the body of texts that this book deals with, i.e. a comparative study of Serbian and Croatian literature. At the time it was published in 1996, from peripheral cultural positions the comparative approach to the Croatian and Serbian literature was perceived as a radical political provocation that comes from the common past, in the wake of its renewal. In this work special attention is given to Mandić’s choice of Serbian and Croatian literary titles, hence to the very content of the Novels of Crisis. However, since the cultural context of this book goes beyond the literary criticism of the decade to which it relates, its significance is looked into from the aspect of polemical discourses this book produced, even at the periphery of the Croatian nineties.


The organism which forms the subject of this paper is a small flagellate Protozoön occurring in the alimentary tract of the body louse, Pediculus vestimenti (P. corporis) . The flagellate belongs to the genus Herpetomonas, and is, I believe, now recorded for the first time. I propose for it the name Herpetomonas pediculi , using the name Herpetomonas in the sense of Saville-Kent (1881), the founder of the genus.


1992 ◽  
Vol 43 ◽  
pp. 353-382

I am desird by the Court & in the Absence of the Recorder it is my Duty to give you in Charge those Matters referr'd to in ye Oath you have just now taken & to remind you of the Duty & nature of ye Service you are now ingag'd in, & of such Parts of our Constitution as relate thereto & this present [p.1 v] Assembly in Conformity to an Ancient Custom which does great Honour to his Majesty & his Government by permitting thus publickly & in his own Courts the Equity Justice & Extent of it to be inquir'd into, & a Sort of Appeal to be made to you & all here present for the Reasonableness of our Subjection & Correspondance betwixt the Government & Governed People [f. 2.] not to be found in any other Country or indeed practicable in any, but where the Extent of ye Royal Prerogative & the Obedience of the Subject is Limitted & Ascertain'd by the Law of the Land & where the King holds his Authority by the glorious noblest Tenure that of Protecting the Rights & Liberty's of his People, that this was always intended by our [f. 2 v] Constitution is Evident from the Nature of it, but never three together hardly two & seldom any one of our former Kings or rather their profligate Minions have been contented with this Sacred & Most Honorable Post appears from all our Historys agree in so that it is owing to the Glorious Brave Struggles of our Ancestors in former Ages particularly in the last & more especially in the latter part of it [f.3] that we have had this happiness during four successive Reigns & ever Since the Revolution continu'd in this happy Situation for they When on this Condition and for this very purpose they gave the Crown to our Glorious Deliverer and such of the then Royal Family as were coud answer this End & in default of the Issue by them to his Majesty & his descendants being the next Protestants in the Royal Line By that Act of Settlement referr'd to in our Oath of Allegiance and by which [f. 3 v] this Succession became & is the first Principle of our Constitution in Church & State, which can be preserv'd under none, if not under a Race of Kings made so for this express purpose, By our Constitution in Church I mean as well those Laws made for Restoring & preserving to our Dissenting Brethren the common Rights of Mankind to [f. 4] Worship Almighty God in such manner as appears to them most worthy of him, so as their principles and & practice be not dangerous to Society, & which are now happily a part of our Constitution, as well, as those made for the Honour & Protection of the Established ye most Excellent & pious Form of Worship Establish'd in our National Churches, By our Constitution in State no Body [f. 4. v] can mistake me that I mean the Body of Laws by which this Nation under his Majesty is Govern'd in its Civil consider'd distinct from its Religious concerns & particularly that part of them call'd the Crown Law which we are here assembled to inforce in this Jurisdiction as a Court of Oyer & Terminer & General Gaol Delivery.


Dialogue ◽  
1964 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 452-453
Author(s):  
P. Rowntree Clifford

Professor Sellars has invited comment on his recent article in Dialogue dealing with the problem of perception. In brief, I believe that he has formulated the question in the right way, but has reached too facile an answer to it. To begin with the area of agreement, Sellars is surely correct in rejecting the empiricism of Locke, Hume, Dewey, Russell and the rest because they either end up with sensations or ideas from which we cannot get back to the real world or else have to reduce the latter to a bewildering proliferation of sensibilia. Second, no theory of perception can be regarded as satisfactory which leaves out of account the physiological data. In this Sellars echoes the complaint of the distinguished neurologist, Russell Brain, that realist philosophers have notably neglected the part played by the body in our perception of the external world. Third, perception results from the dynamic interplay of subject and object in which sensation performs a key role. Sellars recognizes the weakness in most empiricist theories that the activity of the subject is virtually read out of the situation in order to preserve something like the common sense account of the external world.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document