EARLY THIRTEENTH CENTURY MEDICINE: GILBERT OF ENGLAND AND WILLIAM OF
ENGLAND
Representatives of thirteenth century medicine--Question of
Gilbert’s date--Works ascribed to Gilbert--The _Compendium
medicinae_--General character of his medicine--An
estimate of it by a modern physician--Picturesque
compounds--_Empirica_ and an old wife’s remedy--Use of
red for small-pox; occult virtue--Magical treatment of
epilepsy--Poisons and snake-oil--Eye cures--Influence
of the stars--The soul, number, and geometry;
physiognomy--Astrological medicine in William of England’s
_De urina non visa_--Other works by William of England or by
other Williams.
[Sidenote: Representatives of thirteenth century medicine.]
Medical writers of the thirteenth and early fourteenth century are
so numerous and their writings so similar, that it will be advisable
to treat of only two or three of them as examples of the rest. At
the close of the thirteenth century Peter of Abano and Arnald of
Villanova were such important personalities and so addicted, the one
to astrology, and the other to occult science, that we must devote an
entire chapter to each. Of the writers before them it will perhaps be
sufficient if we consider in some detail, first Gilbert of England, who
seems to have flourished in the first half of the thirteenth century
and who was much cited by the later medical writers; next, a brief
but significant work in astrological medicine composed in 1219 by a
William of England (or of Aragon?); and finally in a second chapter
Petrus Hispanus, who terminated his brilliant career in 1277 as Pope
John XXI, and to whose account of “the way of experience” we shall
add briefly something concerning the similar discussion of medical
experiment in John of St. Amand who seems to have written between 1262
and 1280.[1567]
[Sidenote: Question of Gilbert’s date.]
It seems certain from the citation of Gilbert by Petrus Hispanus and
other writers--possibly by Bartholomew of England--that he must have
written rather early in the thirteenth century.[1568] Haeser,[1569] who
dated him about 1290, and Freind, who dated him about 1270, are both
certainly wrong. But his date has not yet been fixed with exactness,
and it is doubted whether he was physician to Hubert Walter who died in
1205, as Bale, Pits, and Leland tell us. It is also disputed whether a
Master Richard whom he cites was Richard of Salerno, who flourished at
the close of the twelfth century, or Richard of Wendover and Paris, who
was physician to Pope Gregory IX (1227-1241) and died himself in 1252
or 1256. Because our Gilbert cites Averroes it has been argued[1570]
that he did not flourish until the middle of the thirteenth century but
Michael Scot had translated Averroes’ commentary on the metaphysics of
Aristotle early in the century.
[Sidenote: Works ascribed to Gilbert.]
A manuscript in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris contains
_Experiments of Master Gilbert, Chancellor of Montpellier_,[1571] and
there was a chancellor of that university named _Gillibertus_ in 1250.
It remains uncertain, however, whether he was the same as Gilbert of
England, and whether the _Experiments_ are by Gilbert of England or
perhaps a later compilation made partly from his _Compendium_ and
partly from other sources. The _Dictionary of National Biography_
describes the _Experiments_ as “a collection of receipts, many of which
bear Gilbert’s name and are certainly his, for they agree closely with
passages in his _Compendium_ without being identical.” If “Experiments
of a Chancellor and Cardinal” in a manuscript at Madrid[1572] were the
same work, there would be reason for thinking that Gilbert of England
became a cardinal. “A secret of Gilbert the cardinal” is contained in
an alchemistic manuscript of the fifteenth century at Cambridge.[1573]
We also hear of a Gilbertus Anglicus who was a great theologian and
wrote a commentary upon the oracle of Cyril the Carmelite.[1574]
It would not be strange to have in the course of a century or two
more than one writer from England named Gilbert. But it also at that
time would not be strange to have the same man write on medicine and
theology, and such a man is just the one who might be expected to fill
both the posts of chancellor at Montpellier and cardinal at the papal
court. We shall see that Peter of Spain wrote on logic as well as
medicine and became pope. But to note one or two other treatises that
have been ascribed to Gilbert of England. An _Antidotarium_ which is
ascribed to him in a thirteenth century manuscript[1575] is perhaps
a portion of the _Compendium_, but the commentary of Gilbert on the
_Verses of Giles concerning Urines_ was an independent and well-known
work.[1576]
[Sidenote: The _Compendium medicinae_.]
Gilbert’s chief work, and the one which we shall discuss, is the
_Compendium medicinae_,[1577] a medical compilation in seven books. Its
quotations from the _Surgery_ (_Chirurgia_) of Roger of Parma inclined
Dr. Handerson to date it about 1240 and not before 1230.[1578] It
seems to have set the style for such works as the _Lilium medicinae_
of Bernard Gordon and the _Rosa medicinae_ of John of Gaddesden.[1579]
The first book deals with fevers, the second begins with the hair,
the third treats of diseases of the eyes, the fourth of ills of the
neck and throat, the fifth discusses the appetite, the sixth the
liver, and the seventh the private parts. The seven books of Gordon’s
_Lilium_ cover the same ground respectively, except that Gordon omits
the surgical passages which Gilbert incorporated in his work.[1580] E.
Littré in the _Histoire Littéraire_ has described Gilbert’s work as
“abounding in superstitious or ridiculous or childish formulas.” To
these Gilbert often adds such expressions as “This has been proved,”
or copies the accounts in his authorities even to such phrases as “in
our presence.” But we have already seen this to be the practice in the
far-off days of Aëtius of Amida. Gilbert also often calls this or that
assertion false, but here again the scepticism probably does not always
originate with him. His work is of course professedly a compilation.
Gilbert nevertheless seems at times to speak from his own experience
and medical practice.
[Sidenote: General character of his medicine.]
If one were to attempt a brief general characterization of Gilbert’s
medicine, it would be that he combines Aristotelian principles and
reasoning, and the hypothesis of four elements and four qualities,
with a practical regimen of bathing, diet, bleeding, plasters, rubbing
with ointments, and the like--which is perhaps largely Salernitan.
His procedure is vitiated by a large residuum from early magic as
well as by incorrect scientific hypotheses handed down from the Greek
philosophers. His pharmacy, however, makes more use of herbs than of
gems or of parts of animals. But his recipes are legion and many of
them include an absurdly large number of ingredients. He also discusses
the signs of diseases, their course and character, and the processes of
the human body.
[Sidenote: An estimate of it by a modern physician.]
Since I wrote the preceding paragraph, a rather detailed presentation
of the contents of Gilbert’s _Compendium_ has fortunately been
published in English from the pen of one better fitted than I to
judge its medical defects and merits. Dr. Handerson’s eminently sane
conclusions may be briefly indicated by two quotations. “It is not
difficult, of course, to select from the Compendium a charm or two,
a few impossible etymologies and a few silly statements, to display
these with a witty emphasis and to draw therefrom the easy conclusion
that the book is a mass of crass superstition and absurd nonsense.
This, however, is not criticism. It is mere caricature.”[1581] “The
book is, undoubtedly, the work of a famous and strictly orthodox
physician, possessed of exceptional education in the science of his
day, a man of wide reading, broadened by extensive travel and endowed
by the knowledge acquired by a long experience, honest, truthful, and
simple minded, yet not uncritical in regard to novelties, firm in his
own opinions but not arrogant, sympathetic, possessed of a high sense
of professional honor, a firm believer in authority and therefore
credulous, superstitious after the manner of his age, yet harboring,
too, a germ of ... healthy scepticism.”[1582]
[Sidenote: Picturesque compounds.]
Some of Gilbert’s over-elaborate compounds possess picturesque names
as well, for instance, the potion of St. Paul and the ladder of
Hermes.[1583] The latter was composed at Heliopolis on the altar of
the sun and written not in letters but figures. It consists of sixty
different simples and is called a ladder because the amount of these
simples used in the compound is increased step by step. First one takes
one ounce each of four simples, then two ounces each of four more, and
so on for four species at a time, until the quantity of fifteen ounces
is reached and the list of sixty simples is exhausted. This compound is
asserted to be beneficial for rather more than fifteen ailments.[1584]
Gilbert employs various Salernitan pills and they usually contain from
ten to twenty ingredients each.
[Sidenote: _Empirica_ and an old-wife’s remedy.]
When other remedies fail Gilbert has recourse, like Marcellus, to
_empirica_. One by which many “under our charge” (_in manu nostra_)
who were thought sterile have borne children is as follows.[1585] In
the vigil of St. John the Baptist[1586] dig certain herbs by the roots
from the earth before the third hour, repeating the Lord’s Prayer
thrice and not speaking to anyone going or returning. In silence, too,
extract the juice from the herbs and write on a piece of parchment
these words, “The Lord said, ‘Increase’ x Uthiboth x ‘and multiply’
x thabechay x ‘and fill the earth’ x amath x.” If the man wears this
writing about his neck, a boy will be born; if the woman wears it, a
girl. Other _empirica_ employ suffumigations with a tooth of a dead
man and an herb that has grown through a hole in a stone. In another
passage to aid child-bearing Gilbert recommends the water in which a
murderer has washed his hands.[1587] He repeats the good old remedies
for gout of binding frogs’ legs or asses’ hoofs or tortoises’ feet
upon the patient’s extremities, right on right and left on left, but
cites therefor the mysterious authority “Torror,” while “Funeius” is
his source for the use of the magnet in the same way. Gilbert states,
however, that he has little inclination towards these things, but that
it is just as well not to omit what the ancients have said.[1588]
In another passage he tells that a certain old woman has freed many
persons from jaundice with the cooked juice of the plantagenet.[1589]
[Sidenote: Use of red for small-pox: occult virtue.]
Gilbert is credited with being the first to mention the employment of
red colors in the treatment of small-pox.[1590] It is interesting to
note that the passage in which he does this has to do also with the
practices of old-wives and with the conception of occult virtue. He
writes, “Old women of the countryside give burnt purple in drink, for
it has the occult nature of curing _variolae_. The same is true of dyed
cloths.”[1591] Here again therefore we seem to have a real discovery
developed from or concealed beneath a bit of experimental magic. John
of Gaddesden is said to have used scarlet cloths to cure a son of
Edward I of small-pox.
[Sidenote: Magical treatment of epilepsy.]
The following very magical procedure is used for epilepsy and is called
_expertissimum_.[1592] At the first access of the disease, when the
patient falls to the ground, all his clothes except his shirt should be
removed and placed at his feet. The nails of all his fingers and toes
should next be clipped and wrapped in a cloth. A long white thorn is
then to be split and the patient dragged feet first through the cleft
as far as his middle. The thorn should then be cut into small bits and
placed with the nail parings. Next the patient’s hair should be cut
in three places. These clippings of hair and the knife used in the
operation are then to be added to the other paraphernalia wrapped in
the cloth, and the whole is to be buried underground, and the following
words uttered. In the patient’s right ear, “Christ conquers”; in his
left ear, “Christ reigns”; and to his face, “Christ commands.” Others
perform the ceremony differently, cutting the patient’s shoe latchet
into four pieces and burying them in the form of a cross at his head,
feet, and either hand with some of his nails and hair. And the names of
the three kings--that is, the Magi who came to adore Christ--should be
worn about his neck.
[Sidenote: Poisons and snake oil.]
Gilbert’s account of poisons repeats such usual statements as that the
saliva of a fasting man is poison for snakes,[1593] that the viper
deposits its venom on a stone by the shore when entering the water to
have commerce with the fish, and that there was a girl fed on poison
who caused the deaths of kings who loved her and whose saliva killed
animals who approached her.[1594] Gilbert cites for the last “Ruffus,”
however, and not the _Secret of Secrets_. A medicinal unguent is made
by cutting off the heads and tails of snakes, as in Galen’s directions
for preparing theriac, and distilling an oil from them.[1595]
[Sidenote: Eye cures.]
Parts of animals are much employed in corrosives for eye complaints.
Green lizards, all gall, but especially that of birds of prey, _omne
stercus_ but human especially, all salts but especially nitrates, the
inner skin of a hen’s liver, the blood of a black fly, and many other
similar substances are recommended.[1596] For spots in the eyes Gilbert
suggests administering whole in drink the little worms with many feet
which are found between the bark and trunk of trees. “But they should
be taken with the Lord’s Prayer.”[1597]
[Sidenote: Influence of the stars.]
Occasionally a passage evinces Gilbert’s belief in the influence of the
stars. He speaks of the participation of the heavens in the process
of human generation[1598] and of the influence of the various planets
on the formation of the embryo in the womb.[1599] In arguing that a
poisonous compound multiplies its potency through the union of the
species composing it, and that it “has a stronger action than if it
were simple”[1600]--a passage in which there is a close approach to
our conception of chemical change--Gilbert adduces the influence of
the heavens as a factor in increasing the strength of the compound. He
holds that the celestial bodies resemble terrestrial mineral substances
in not feeling pain, but that unlike them they are sentient, sensible,
and unchangeable. They are bodies, but uncorruptible.[1601] Arnald
of Villanova[1602] at the end of the century cites Gilbert’s warning
in his first book on fevers against bleeding the patient during dog
days or the Egyptian days or when the moon is in conjunction with
a malevolent planet. Gilbert adds that the wise doctor will always
observe the moon.
[Sidenote: The soul, number, and geometry; physiognomy.]
In the midst of his discussion of dropsy Gilbert digresses to treat
of the soul, “because ignorance gives birth to shame and stupidity
to poverty.” Some traces of numerical and geometrical mysticism are
seen in his discussion.[1603] He represents Pythagoras as saying that
the soul is number moving itself, and that of its four properties or
functions intellect is like the number one because it comprehends
simple matters and so is compared to a point. Reason is like two or
a line since it comprehends form as it exists in bodies. Opinion is
like four or a surface because it comprehends form as form. Science is
like eight or a cube because it comprehends form _ut est in subiecto_.
Gilbert further explains that the three souls assigned to man by
Aristotle are really the triple power of one soul.[1604] He compares
the vegetative soul to a triangle, the sensible soul to a square, and
the rational soul to a circle. Gilbert regards the disagreement between
Aristotle and Plato concerning the movement of the soul as verbal
rather than real. “Aristotle discusses matters truly, essentially, and
philosophically; Plato, figuratively, casually, and mathematically.”
Gilbert occasionally embodies the dicta of the physiognomists in his
_Compendium_, for instance: “He whose eyes are large and tremulous is
lazy and a braggart and fond of women”; and “He who has large ears is
stolid and long lived.”[1605]
[Sidenote: Astrological medicine in William of England’s _De urina non
visa_.]
Because perhaps of Gilbert’s commentary upon the verses of Giles
concerning urines, a Master G. of England who is the author of “a
book in which he tells how to know the character of the urine without
inspecting it and many other things by means of astrology,” in a Vienna
manuscript is called in the catalogue Gilbertus instead of Guilelmus
Anglicus.[1606] As many other manuscripts[1607] of the treatise show,
the work is really the _Of Urine Unseen_ written in 1219 by William
of England, a citizen of Marseilles, by profession a medical man, by
merit of science an astronomer, as he himself states. Indeed, there
are extant other astronomical works by him, one of which is dated
1231.[1608] The object of the brief treatise is how to tell the nature
of the patient’s disease and the outcome of it from the stars and signs
of the zodiac without inspection of the patient’s urine. The nine
chapters deal with (1) “the quadruple way of astrological speculation,”
that is, nativities, revolutions, interrogations, and elections; (2)
“the comprehension of the effects of superior bodies” on the human body
for each sign of the zodiac and the use of astrology in medicine; (3)
the division of the human body among the planets and their natures and
properties with the diseases appropriate to them; (4) the houses of
the planets; (5) the distribution of the parts of the body among the
planets and signs with an accompanying chart of eighty-four squares
arranged in seven columns and twelve rows; (6) how to arrive at a
judgment in any particular case by finding the ruling planet;[1609] (7)
“of the place of the liver and its significator and the virtues of the
same”; (8) of the color and substance of the urine; (9) of the outcome
of the sickness and its end. William mentions in closing a case where
he correctly predicted that the patient would die in exactly two months
and eight days.
[Sidenote: Other works by William of England or by other Williams.]
We have already alluded elsewhere[1610] to “the very great secret
of Catenus, king of the Persians, concerning the virtue of the
eagle” which William of England is credited with having translated
from the Arabic. And we have suggested that a William of Aragon who
commented upon the _Centiloquium_ ascribed to Ptolemy and wrote a
treatise on the interpretation of dreams might possibly have been
the same man.[1611] We also hear of a “William, master of medicine,
of Provençal nationality,” who translated from Greek into Latin the
life of the philosopher Secundus, which work he brought with him from
Constantinople. Afterwards, we are told, this William became a monk
of St. Denis and finally the abbot of that monastery. Secundus is
described as a philosopher who observed the rule of silence and led
the life of a Pythagorean, and who was associated with the emperor
Hadrian.[1612] He appears to have broken his silence enough to give
forth _Sententiae_ which were treasured up by that emperor.[1613]
FOOTNOTES:
[1567] HL, XXI, 541.
[1568] On the life of Gilbert, besides the articles in DNB and HL 21
(1847), 393-403, see J. F. Payne, _British Medical Journal_ (Nov. 12,
1904), 1282, and H. E. Handerson, _Gilbertus Anglicus_, 1918 (published
posthumously for private distribution by the Cleveland Medical Library
Association, Cleveland, Ohio), 18-24.
[1569] Haeser, _Lehrbuch d. Gesch. d. Medicin_, I, 711.
[1570] DNB, article on Gilbert.
[1571] BN 7056, fols. 93r-95r, “Experimenta magistri Gilberti
Cancellarii Montepessulani”; many of them open, “Gilbert said”; they
have been published with a discussion of their authorship by P.
Pansier, in _Janus_, (1903).
[1572] Escorial P-II-5. 14th century, fols. 69v-74, Incipiunt
experimenta Cancellarii et Cardinalis.
[1573] Trinity 1120 III, 15th century, fols. 19-21.
[1574] Gonville and Caius 388, 14-15th century, fol. 103, “Gilbertus
Anglicus super oraculum Cyrilli Carmelitae. Frater Gilbertus anglicus,
magnus ille theologus....”
[1575] Gonville and Caius 379, 13th century, fols. 134-41r, headed in
an old hand, “Inc. Antitodus Gileberti ... / ... Expl. Antidotarium
Guilberti.”
[1576] Many copies of it are listed in the 15th century catalogue of
MSS of St. Augustine’s Abbey at Canterbury. An extant 13th century MS
at Cambridge is St. John’s 99, fols. 11-22v, “Versus Egidi de urinis
cum commento gilberti.”
[1577] The following citations will be to the edition of Lyons, 1510.
[1578] Handerson (1918), pp. 22-24.
[1579] For a treatment of him in English see H. P. Cholmeley, _John
of Gaddesden and the Rosa Medicinae_, Oxford, 1912. The _Rosa_ was
printed at Pavia, 1492 (the John Crerar Library, Chicago, has a copy
of this edition), and again in 1516 and 1595. Gordon’s _Lilium_ was
printed at Venice in 1496 (also in the John Crerar Library); it had
previously been translated into French and Spanish. See HL. 25, 329ff.
for Gordon’s life and other writings.
[1580] “Gordon’s work does not contain a single chapter on surgery
proper,” Handerson (1918), 77.
[1581] Handerson (1918), p. 75.
[1582] _Ibid._, 76.
[1583] _Compendium medicinae_, fols. 119v. and 357r.
[1584] Possibly there is some connection between the 15 steps of this
ladder of Hermes and the 15 fixed stars of first magnitude and the
treatise ascribed to Enoch or Hermes on 15 stars, 15 herbs, and 15
stones.
[1585] fol. 287r.
[1586] Or Midsummer eve.
[1587] fol. 307r. “Lotio manuum alicuius interfectoris detur.”
[1588] fol. 327r. “Quamvis ego declino ad has res parum, tamen est
bonum scribere in libro nostro ut non remaneat tractatus sine eis qui
(?) dixerunt antiqui.”
[1589] fol. 260v.
[1590] Handerson (1918), 52.
[1591] fol. 348. “Vetule provinciales dant purpuram combustam in potu,
habet enim occultam naturam curandi variolas. Similiter pannus tinctus
de grano.”
[1592] fol. IIIv.
[1593] fol. 349r.
[1594] fol. 348v.
[1595] fol. 120v.
[1596] fol. 134.
[1597] fol. 136r.
[1598] fol. 284v.
[1599] fol. 305v.
[1600] fol. 350v.
[1601] fol. 304r.
[1602] _Regule Generales Curationis Morborum_, Doctrina IV. “Item ille
Gilbertus anglicus in prima parte sui libri in cura ethice.” That is,
in that portion of the first book of the _Compendium_ devoted to the
fever called “ethica.” This passage in Gilbert is also referred to by
Handerson (1918), 29.
[1603] fol. 243r.
[1604] fol. 244r.
[1605] From Handerson (1918), 34-36 where further illustrations are
given.
[1606] Vienna 5207, 1342 A. D., fols. 208-10, “Incipit liber magistri
G(ilberti) Anglici in quo docet cognoscere disposicionem urine non vise
et multa alia secundum astrologiam.”
[1607] Some MSS are: Cotton Appendix VI, fols. 2-5; Sloane 3281,
13th-14th century, fols. 76v-79; Harleian 2269, a paper folio, fol.
88; Ashmole, 345, 14th century, fols. 70-74; Ashmole 393, 15th century
(?), fols. 56-57v, “Explicit liber Anglici nationis quondam civis
Marsiliensis de urina non visa editus 1219”; Canon. Misc. 46, 15th
century, fols. 61-67; CU Trinity 1406, 15th century, fols. 173-6;
BN 7298, 14th century #17; BN 7328, 7413, 7416, 7440; CLM 267, 14th
century, fols. 46-8; CLM 588, 14th century, fols. 93-6; Berlin 963,
14-15th century, fols. 74-6; Vienna 5311, 14-15th century, fols. 42-52;
Amplon. Folio 37, fols. 49-51, de urina non visa, followed at fol. 52
by “de pactis secundum astrologiam,” which would seem to be another
treatise; Amplon. Quarto 196, 361, and 391; Amplon. Quarto 345, 14th
century, fols. 53-4 astrologia de iudiciis medicine, is probably the
_De urina non visa_; but Amplon. Quarto 357, 13-14th century, fols.
1-21, astrologia, seems rather long for it.
I have read the treatise in Cotton Appendix VI, Canon. Misc. 46, and
Ashmole 345. It opens, “Ne ignorancie vel pocius invidie redarguar, mi
Germane, qui quandoque apud Masciliam aliquando mecum studuisti ...”
but the wording of this opening sentence varies a little in different
MSS.
Duhem, III (1915), 287-91, suggests that “mi Germane” may refer to
Gilbert of England who would thus be William’s brother or cousin.
[1608] They will be found listed with references to MSS and such
portions as have been printed in Duhem, III (1915), pp. 287-91.
[1609] “de inventione iudicis cui nomen almutaz.”
[1610] See above, p. 93.
[1611] See above, p. 301. I realize that William would have to be
indeed a cosmopolitan to come from both England and Aragon as well as
being a citizen of Marseilles; but copyists may have confused Aragon
and Anglicus, although it does not seem very likely.
[1612] CUL 186, 13-14th century, fols. 66-67, “Incipit vita Secundi
philosophi de Greco in Latinum translata a Magistro Willelmo medico
natione Provinciali. Hanc secum de Constantinopoli detulit; post factus
monachus in cenobio Sancti Dionisii; ac postremo perficitur Abbas
eiusdem loci.” Opens, “(S)ecundus fuit philosophus: hic philosophatus
est omni tempore silentium conservans, et Pitagoricam ducens vitam.”
Ends, “precepit eius libro sacre bibliothece inseri et intitulari.”
CUL 1391, 14th century, fol. 214v, “De Secundo philosofo,” has the same
Incipit.
Other MSS are CLM 9528, 13th century, fol. 33-, “Erat quidam
philosophus Secundus dictus”; and CLM 18757, 15th century, fol. 22-25.
There are doubtless many more MSS. Manitius (1911), p. 285, states that
“Der lateinische Secundus findet sich übrigens in alten Katalogen von
s. XIII an nicht selten, ... nämlich in Canterbury (Christ-Church und
St. Augustin), Dover, Peterborough, Prüfening, Durham, bei Benedikt
XIII, Amplonius von Ratinck, Borso d’Este und in Leicester.”
[1613] The _Dicta_ or _Sententiae_ of Secundus were printed with
the _Altercatio Hadriani Aug. et Epicteti philosophi_, in 1628; see
Manitius (1911), pp. 268 and 284.