The Judgment of Animals in Classical Greece: Animal Sculpture and ...

flesh as medicinal food notwithstanding, his statement suggests that, in the fifth century,
dog flesh was both eaten and observed for its effect on the human body.
The discussion of dog flesh and its effect on the human body is seen elsewhere is
the Hippocratic treatises. In the Regimen, (late fifth/early fourth century B.C.), 326 a clear
distinction is made between the effects of the meat of an adult dog and that of a puppy,
again on the digestive system:
Dogs’ flesh (ku&neia) dries, heats, and affords strength, but does not pass by stool.
The flesh of puppies (skula&keia) moistens and passes by stool, still more by
urine. (Vict. 2.46) [122]
The passage clearly states that the flesh of adult dogs (ku&neia) causes constipation,
whereas that of puppies (skula&keia) is a laxative. The passage indicates that that the age
of the animal had a direct effect on its assessment as medicinal food. Also, by noting that
“dogs’ flesh dries” the passage presents itself as a possible source of Galen’s previously
seen remark on the dryness of dog flesh.
The flesh of an adult dog was not only thought of as causing constipation; its
curative effect on the human body was also known. In the Internal Affections, (400-390
B.C.), 327 for example, it features as a suitable food for dropsy. The instructions provided
to the physician run as follows:
It benefits the patient if you dry out his cavity (belly) by giving him fresh warm
dark whole-wheat bread, and as main dish the meat of ass, mature dog (kuno_j
telei/ou), swine, and sheep, these very fat and boiled, or meat of fowl, roasted
and warm.” (Int. 22.10-22.13) [112]
326 Jouanna, Hippocrates 409.
327 Jouanna, Hippocrates 395.
207