Produced by Don Kostuch
[Transcriber's note]
This is derived from a copy on the Internet Archive:
http://www.archive.org/details/popesscienceOOwals
Page numbers in this book are indicated by numbers enclosed in curly
braces, e.g. {99}. They have been located where page breaks occurred
in the original book.
Obvious spelling errors have been corrected but "inventive" and
inconsistent spelling is left unchanged. Unusual use of quotation
marks is also unchanged.
Extended quotations and citations are indented.
Two sections in the Table of Contents and several entries in the
Index have been placed in the correct order.
Footnotes have been renumbered to avoid ambiguity, and relocated
to the end of the enclosing paragraph.
[End Transcriber's note]
SOME OPINIONS
THE POPES AND SCIENCE--The story of the Papal Relations to Science
from the Middle Ages down to the Nineteenth Century. By James J.
Walsh, M. D., Ph. D., LL. D. 540 pp. Price, $2.00 net.
Prof. Pagel, Professor of History at the University of Berlin: "This
book represents the most serious contribution to the history of
medicine that has ever come out of America."
Sir Clifford Allbutt, Regius Professor of Physic at the University of
Cambridge (England): "The book as a whole is a fair as well as a
scholarly argument."
_The Evening Post_ (New York) says: "However strong the reader's
prejudice * * * * he cannot lay down Prof. Walsh's volume without at
least conceding that the author has driven his pen hard and deep into
the 'academic superstition' about Papal Opposition to science." In a
previous issue it had said: "We venture to prophesy that all who swear
by Dr. Andrew D. White's History of the Warfare of Science with
Theology in Christendom will find their hands full, if they attempt to
answer Dr. James J. Walsh's The Popes and Science."
_The Literary Digest_ said: "The book is well worth reading for its
extensive learning and the vigor of its style."
_The Southern Messenger_ says: "Books like this make it clear that it is
ignorance alone that makes people, even supposedly educated people,
still cling to the old calumnies."
_The Nation_ (New York) says: "The learned Fordham Physician has at
command an enormous mass of facts, and he orders them with logic,
force and literary ease. Prof. Walsh convicts his opponents of hasty
generalizing if not anti-clerical zeal."
_The Pittsburg Post_ says: "With the fair attitude of mind and
influenced only by the student's desire to procure knowledge, this
book becomes at once something to fascinate. On every page
authoritative facts confute the stereotyped statement of the purely
theological publications."
Prof. Welch, of Johns Hopkins, quoting Martial, said: "It is pleasant
indeed to drink at the living fountain-heads of knowledge after
previously having had only the stagnant pools of second-hand
authority."
Prof. Piersol, Professor of Anatomy at the University of Pennsylvania,
said: "I have been reading the book with the keenest interest, for it
indeed presents many subjects in what to me at least is a new light.
Every man of science looks to the beacon--truth--as his guiding mark,
and every opportunity to replace even time-honored misconceptions by
what is really the truth must be welcomed."
_The Independent_ (New York) said: "Dr. Walsh's books should be read in
connection with attacks upon the Popes in the matter of science by
those who want to get both sides."
BY THE SAME AUTHOR
FORDHAM UNIVERSITY PRESS SERIES
MAKERS OF MODERN MEDICINE
Lives of the men to whom nineteenth century medical science owes most.
Second Edition. New York, 1910. $2.00 net.
THE POPES AND SCIENCE
The story of Papal patronage of the sciences and especially medicine.
45th thousand. New York, 1911. $2.00 net.
MAKERS OF ELECTRICITY
Lives of the men to whom important advances in electricity are due. In
collaboration with Brother Potamian, F. S. C, Sc.D. (London),
Professor of Physics at Manhattan College. New York, 1909. $2.00 net.
EDUCATION, HOW OLD THE NEW
Addresses in the history of education on various occasions. 3rd
thousand. New York, 1911. $2.00 net.
OLD-TIME MAKERS OF MEDICINE
The story of the students and teachers of the sciences related to
medicine during the Middle Ages. New York, 1911. $2.00 net.
MODERN PROGRESS AND HISTORY
Academic addresses on How Old the New. New York, 1912. $2.00 net.
THE THIRTEENTH GREATEST OF CENTURIES
5th edition (50,000). 116 illustrations, 600 pages. Catholic Summer
School Press, 1912. Postpaid $3.50.
THE CENTURY OF COLUMBUS
Why Columbus Discovered America in 1492. Catholic Summer School Press,
1914. Postpaid $3.50.
THE DOLPHIN PRESS SERIES
CATHOLIC CHURCHMEN IN SCIENCE
First and second series, each $1.00 net.
PSYCHOTHERAPY
Lectures on The Influence of the Mind on the Body delivered at Fordham
University School of Medicine. Appletons, New York, 1912. $6.00 net.
[Illustration: Portrait]
GUY DE CHAULIAC
"The Prince of surgeons" (John Freund). "The Modern Hippocrates"
(Fallopius). "His work is of infinite price" (Portal). "A masterpiece
of learned and luminous writing" (Malgaigne). "It is rich, aphoristic,
orderly, and precise" (Clifford Allbutt). "Chauliac laid the
foundation of that primacy in surgery which the French maintained down
to the nineteenth century" (Pagel).
Chauliac is a good type of a medieval papal physician. Two of his
well-known expressions were:
"Sciences are made by addition and it is not possible that the same
man should begin and finish them."
"We are like infants at the neck of a giant, for we can see all that
the giant sees and something more."
[End Illustration]
The Popes and Science
THE HISTORY OF THE PAPAL RELATIONS TO SCIENCE
DURING THE MIDDLE AGES AND DOWN TO OUR OWN TIME
BY
JAMES J. WALSH
K.C. St.G., M.D., Ph.D., LL.D. Litt.D. (Georgetown),
Sc. D. (Notre Dame)
PROFESSOR OF PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY AT THE CATHEDRAL COLLEGE, NEW YORK;
MEMBER OF THE GERMAN, FRENCH AND ITALIAN
SOCIETIES OF THE HISTORY OF MEDICINE,
THE ST. LOUIS HISTORY CLUB,
NEW ORLEANS PARISH MEDICAL SOCIETY,
NEW YORK ACADEMY OF MEDICINE,
NEW YORK HISTORICAL SOCIETY,
A.M.A., A.A.A.S., ETC.
NOTRE DAME EDITION
_ILLUSTRATED_
FIFTIETH THOUSAND
NEW YORK
FORDHAM UNIVERSITY PRESS
1915
Copyright, 1908
James J. Walsh
First edition, 2,000 copies.
Second edition, 45,000 copies, 1910.
Third (English) edition, 2,000 copies, 1912.
Fourth (Notre Dame) edition, 1915,
enlarged and illustrated.
To
Professor ETTORE MARCHIAFAVA
_Papal Physician_
The worthy living representative of the great series of Papal
Physicians, the most distinguished list of names connected by any bond
in the history of science.
"Great additions have of late been made to our knowledge of the
past; the long conspiracy against the revelation of truth has
gradually given way, and competing historians all over the civilized
world have been zealous to take advantage of the change. The
printing of archives has kept pace with the admission of enquirers;
and the total mass of new matter, which the last half-century has
accumulated, amounts to many thousands of volumes. In view of
changes and of gains such as these, it has become impossible for the
historical writer of the present age to trust without reserve even
to the most respected secondary authorities. The honest student
finds himself continually deserted, retarded, misled by the classics
of historical literature, and has to hew his own way through
multitudinous transactions, periodicals and official publications in
order to reach the truth.
"Ultimate history cannot be obtained in this generation; but, so far
as documentary evidence is at command, conventional history can be
discarded, and the point can be shown that has been reached on the
road from one to the other." (Preface of _Cambridge Modern
History_.)
{iii}
PREFACE
_A new edition of this volume being called for, I take the occasion to
place it under the aegis of the University of Notre Dame as a slight
token of gratitude for the formal recognition of the work by the
faculty of that institution, and bind this Notre Dame edition in the
University colors, blue and gold._
There is much more readiness at the present time to accept the
conclusions with regard to the relations of the Popes and science here
suggested than there was when the book was first published. Knowledge
of the general history of science has grown very materially in the
last ten years. Every increase in historical knowledge has shown more
and more clearly how utterly without foundation were many ideas which
had been very commonly accepted, particularly in English-speaking
countries, on the subjects here discussed. The supposed opposition to
the development of science on the part of the Popes and the Church is
now readily seen to have had no existence in reality, and popular
notions on the subject were due entirely to ignorance of the history
of science. There was supposed to be no scientific development and no
nature study until quite recent times. The generations immediately
preceding ours knew of none, and therefore concluded there must have
been none. They went even farther, and felt that since there had been
none, there must be some special reason for this lacuna in human
progress. The Church and the Popes were the favorite scapegoats for
human failings, so they were blamed. Now we know that there was a
magnificent development of science, not only in the Renaissance period
under the fostering care of the Popes and ecclesiastics, but also
during the old university times. What has come above all to be
recognized is that the medieval universities were _scientific
universities_. They paid more attention to the ethical and
philosophical sciences than we do, but they devoted a great deal of
time to mathematics and the physical sciences. Mr. Huxley, in his
inaugural address as Rector of the University of Aberdeen, declared
thirty years ago that the curriculum of these old universities was
better calculated to develop the many-sided mind of man than the
curriculum of any modern university. Above all, in surgery and in
medicine they did magnificent work. Anaesthesia, antisepsis, and the
natural methods of cure were all anticipated in the medieval time. At
the International Congress of Medicine last summer, a section on the
history of medicine was organized because it has come to be recognized
that very much that is even of practical value can be learned from
medical history.
The fact of the matter is that during the eighteenth and early
nineteenth centuries there was a great decadence of interest in
scholarship and true education. There is a distinct descent in human
culture at this time. Education was at its lowest ebb, hospitals {iv}
were the worst ever built, art and architecture were neglected, and
human liberty was so shackled that the French Revolution was needed to
lift the fetters from men's minds as well as bodies. They, in their
ignorance, spoke slightingly of old-time scholars. During the past
century we have come to a better knowledge of the Middle Ages, and he
is indeed a backward student of history who now thinks of them as
"dark." Our millionaires have gathered, at immense expense,
magnificent examples of the arts and crafts and beautiful books of the
medieval and Renaissance periods. Our binders imitate their books, our
artists study their works, we have revived their architecture and
literature, are imitating their social ideas until, instead of "the
dark ages," we have come to think of them as "the bright ages." What
is not generally realized is that they are just as bright in science
as they were in art, architecture, literature, and the arts and
crafts.
Literally, the Popes were as much the patrons of science as they were
of the arts. Professor White's book, "The Warfare of Science with
Theology," like Professor Draper's "History of the Conflict Between
Religion and Science," are now seen to represent simply an interesting
evidence of the lack of real knowledge of the history of science and,
above all, complete ignorance of details as to the genuine
accomplishment of the olden time on the part of the generation by
which they were taken seriously. Being quite sure that there was no
science to speak of in the older times, these writers gathered every
possible reference, found anywhere in secondary authorities, for they
almost never went to the original documents, as evidence for their
preconceived conviction that the Church must have suppressed science
whenever that was possible. The real history of science was ignored.
As soon as that is known there is no further question of Church
opposition, but, on the contrary, of the extent of ecclesiastical
patronage and encouragement of science.
Some of this very different story is told only too incompletely in
this volume. It would take many volumes to give all the details of it.
Readers will find here at least such references to the actual
documentary history as will form a good basis for definite knowledge
of the genuine relations of the Popes to science. The series of new
appendices in this edition, especially those on Papal Physicians,
Science in America, and the original Papal documents so often quoted,
but seldom seen entire, is meant to supply material for the correction
of many false notions that are unfortunately prevalent. They present
historical matter that has not been readily available hitherto in
English-speaking countries and that has nowhere been easy of access in
the form here given.
Appendix VII by Rev. Father Leahy on _The Fathers of The Church and
Science_ presents a controverted point of history to persuasion.
Appendix IX shows how amusing and amazing was Professor Draper's lack
of knowledge of the history of science and above all of medicine and
surgery when he wrote his "histories" that were so widely read and
accepted because we in America knew no better for the moment.
{v}
PREFACE
For years, as a student and physician, I listened to remarks from
teachers and professional friends as to the opposition of the Popes to
science, until finally, much against my will, I came to believe that
there had been many Papal documents issued, which intentionally or
otherwise hampered the progress of science. Interest in the history of
medicine led me to investigate the subject for myself. To my surprise,
I found that the supposed Papal opposition to science was practically
all founded on an exaggeration of the significance of the Galileo
incident. As a matter of history, the Popes were as liberal patrons of
science as of art. In the Renaissance period, when their patronage of
Raphael and Michel Angelo and other great artists did so much for art,
similar relations to Columbus, Eustachius, and Caesalpinus, and later
to Steno and Malpighi, our greatest medical discoverers, had like
results for science. The Papal Medical School was for centuries the
greatest medical school in Europe, and its professors were the most
distinguished medical scientists of the time. This is a perfectly
simple bit of history that anyone may find for himself in any reliable
history of medicine. The medical schools were the scientific
departments of the universities practically down to the nineteenth
century. In them were studied botany, zoology and the biological
sciences generally, chemistry, physics, mineralogy and even astronomy,
because of the belief that the stars influenced human constitutions.
The Popes in fostering medical schools (there were four of them in the
Papal dominions, and two of them, Bologna and Rome, were the greatest
medical schools for several centuries) were acting as wise and
beneficent patrons of science. Many of the greatest scientists of the
Middle Ages were clergymen. Some of the greatest of them were
canonized as saints. Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas are typical
examples. At least one Pope had been a distinguished scientist before
being elected to the Papacy. For seven centuries the Popes selected as
their physicians the greatest medical scientists of the {vi} time, and
the list of Papal physicians is the worthiest series of names
connected by any bond in the history of medicine, far surpassing in
scientific import even the roll of the faculty of any medical school.
In a word, I failed to find any trace of Papal opposition to true
science in any form. On the contrary, I found abundant evidence of
their having been just as liberal and judicious patrons of science as
they were of art and education in all forms. I found also that those
who write most emphatically about Papal opposition to science, know
nothing at all of the history of science, and above all of medicine
and of surgery, during three very precious centuries. Because they
know nothing about it they think there was none, and go out of their
way to find a reason for its absence, while all the time there is a
wondrous series of chapters of science for those who care to look for
them. This is the story that I have tried to tell in this book.
This material is, I think, gathered into compact form for the first
time. No one knows better than I do how many defects are probably in
the volume. What I have tried to do is to present a large subject in a
popular way, and at the same time with such references to readily
available authorities as would make the collection of further
information comparatively easy. I am sorry that the book has had to
take on a controversial tone. No one feels more than I do that
controversy seldom advances truth. There are certain false notions,
however, which have the prestige of prominent names behind them, which
simply must be flatly contradicted. I did not seek the controversy,
for when I began to publish the original documents in the subject I
mentioned no names. Controversy was forced on me, but not until I had
made it a point to meet and spend many pleasant hours with the writer
whose statements I must impugn, because they so flagrantly contradict
the simple facts of medical history.
{vii}
CONTENTS.
INTRODUCTION. 1
May Catholics dissect?
Supposed prohibition of dissection.
Twenty medical schools in Catholic Europe.
Medieval universities and medical education.
Allbutt on medicine down to the sixteenth century.
William of Salicet and Lanfranc, the great medieval surgeons.
The nearer to Rome the better the medical school.
The state of medical teaching and discovery.
The relation of the Popes to medical progress.
Supposed Papal prohibitions.
Ignorance of medieval medicine the reason for misrepresentation.
The Popes did not hamper medicine nor any other science.
Galileo's case an incident, not the index of a policy.
The Papal Medical School the greatest in the world.
The Papal Physicians leaders in science.
The Church did for science as much as for art and literature.
History a conspiracy against the truth. (Cambridge Modern History.)
THE SUPPOSED PAPAL PROHIBITION OF DISSECTION. 28
A new Catholic medical school and dissection.
Supposed Papal prohibitions of anatomy and of chemistry.
The bull of Pope Boniface VIII., De Sepulturis.
Reason for the ball.
Supposed misinterpretation.
Misuse of word infallibility.
Some history of dissection.
Date of bull important in history.
Mondino's work.
Body-snatching.
Dissections elsewhere.
How Mondino prepared his bodies for dissection.
Guy de Chauliac at Bologna sees many dissections.
Mondino's assistants, Otto and Alessandra.
Papal permissions to dissect.
The Church granting anatomical privileges
where civil authorities refused.
How the tradition of this Papal prohibition originated.
M. Daunou as an authority.
Reply of Pope Benedict XIV. as to bull.
This subject a type of certain kinds of history
THE STORY OF ANATOMY DOWN TO THE RENAISSANCE. 61
Presumed failure of anatomy during the Middle Ages a myth.
Famous Law of Frederick II.
Dissections at Salerno.
Taddeo and anatomy.
Salicet and Lanfranc.
A famous medico-legal autopsy.
{viii}
Mondino in the history of anatomy.
Roth's story of dissection.
Guy de Chauliac's experience at Bologna.
The story of dissection during the fourteenth century without a break.
Continued in next century.
The work of Berengar of Carpi, Achillini, Matthew of Gradi.
Pathological anatomy born with Benivieni.
Pres. White's attitude to the evidence for dissection at this time.
THE GOLDEN AGE OF ANATOMY.--VESALIUS. 90
The golden age of anatomy as of letters and art in Italy.
Not origin, but wonderful development.
Great predecessors of Raphael and Michel Angelo,
as of Vesalius and Columbus.
Legitimate culmination of anatomical development.
The pre-Vesalians, Mondino, Bertrucci, Chauliac,
Achillini, Berengar and Benivieni.
The English students, Linacre, Caius, Phreas.
Italy the Mecca of anatomical investigators.
Harvey and Steno.
Graduate work in Italy then as in Germany now.
Vesalius's career.
The University of Louvain.
Vesalius in Paris, in Italy.
The Father of Modern Anatomy.
Royal Physician to Charles V.
Some historical misconstructions.
What the Popes did for anatomy in the sixteenth century.
THE SUPPOSED PAPAL PROHIBITION OF CHEMISTRY. 120
False impression prevalent just as in anatomy.
Striking similarity of history-lie.
American writers.
The Papal decree.
Its purpose.
The gold-brick industry.
Fines to be distributed to the poor.
Pope John's bull, _Super Illius specula._
Appeal to historians of chemistry.
Chemistry in later Middle Ages.
Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas, Roger Bacon, Raymond Lully,
Arnold of Villanova, the two Hollanduses, Basil Valentine,
Paracelsus and his ecclesiastical teachers.
Pope John XXII. a patron of science and of education
A PAPAL PATRON OF EDUCATION AND OF SCIENCE. 138
Pope John XXII. distinguished for his administrative abilities,
his learning and his abstemiousness.
Avarice and the Papal revenues.
Educational foundations from Papal revenues.
Modern educators and this old-time patron of education.
All great Popes subject of slander.
The personality of Pope John XXII.
Pres. White's astonishing declarations as to the
bull _Super Illius specula._
Pope John XXII. "a kindly and rational scholar."
His bull for the University {ix} of Perugia.
Perugia and the history of culture.
Standards in education.
Seven years for the doctorate in medicine.
Foundation of the University of Cahors.
Modern requirements.
Why the Pope favored education
THE CHURCH AND SURGERY DURING THE MIDDLE AGES. 167
Mistaken notions as to medieval surgery.
Supposed Church discouragement of surgery.
Misinterpreted ecclesiastical documents once more.
Gurlt on surgery during the Middle Ages.
Wonderful developments of surgery, when ignorantly said not to exist.
Allbutt and Pagel on the great surgeons of the Middle Ages.
Salicet.
Lanfranc.
Surprising anticipations of modern surgery.
Mondeville.
Surgical common sense.
Yperman.
Illustrations of surgical instruments.
Hydrophobia.
Chauliac the Father of Modern Surgery.
Place in surgery.
Chamberlain of the Pope.
Technics of surgery.
Chauliac's career.
Ardern, the English surgeon.
His works.
False impressions with regard to surgical history.
Professional jealousy not ecclesiastical persecution.
The college of St. Come and its lessons.
False traditions as to the Church and surgery and their meaning
PAPAL PHYSICIANS. 199
Belief in miracles and progress in medicine.
Prayer and healing.
The men the Popes chose as their medical advisers.
Names greater than those of the medical faculty of any university.
Guy of Montpelier, Richard the Englishman, Pope John XXI.,
Simon Januensis and the first medical dictionary.
Arnold of Villanova.
Guy de Chauliac.
Cecco di Ascolo.
Joannes de Tornamira.
Francis of Siena.
Baverius of Imola.
John de Vigo.
Columbus.
Eustachius.
Varolius.
Piccolomini.
Caesalpinus.
Malpighi.
Tozzi.
Lancisi.
Morgagni.
Contributions to the biological sciences from Papal Physicians.
THE POPES AND MEDICAL EDUCATION AND THE PAPAL MEDICAL SCHOOL. 222
Papal Medical School at Rome since 1300.
Supported by revenues from Popes at Avignon.
Previous Papal relations to medicine.
Monte Cassino and Salerno.
Pope Sylvester II. and medicine.
Medical schools and the ecclesiastical authorities.
A great physician made Pope.
The Renaissance and the re-established Papal Medical School.
Columbus original discoverer and practical teacher.
Attendance at his lessons.
His book dedicated to Pope.
Other medical dedications to Popes.
Eustachius's work.
Piccolomini as a great teacher.
Caesalpinus the probable discoverer of the circulation of the blood.
Father Kircher's work at Rome.
Malpighi the Father of Comparative Anatomy.
Tozzi the best teacher of his time.
Lancisi as a founder in clinical medicine.
On Sudden Death.
Morgagni's place as an adviser.
Bologna in the Papal dominions.
Medical schools at Ferrara and Perugia.
Protestant traditions with regard to the Popes and medicine.
{x}
THE FOUNDATION OF CITY HOSPITALS. 248
Pope Innocent III., the Father of City Hospitals.
Santo Spirito at Rome.
Virchow on the effect of this in Germany.
French hospitals and the Hotel Dieu.
English hospitals.
The five royal hospitals.
Virchow's tribute to Pope Innocent III.
Hospital regulation.
Care for the poor.
Longings of patients.
Religious nurses and modern nursing.
Virchow's opinion.
Contemporaries on hospital accomplishment.
Magnificent hospital building.
Models for all future time.
A modern architects's opinion.
Hospital decoration.
Siena Hospital.
Hospital abuses.
Problem of malingerers.
Leper hospitals.
The eradication of leprosy.
Lesson for our generation as to tuberculosis.
Special hospitals for erysipelas.
Benefit of segregation.
The religious dress and its anticipation of aseptic needs.
Hospitals ruined when taken from the Church and the religious.
THE CHURCH AND THE EXPERIMENTAL METHOD. 281
The doubting mood so important for science supposed to preclude faith.
Most great scientists Catholics.
Francis Bacon, the supposed Father of Inductive Science.
Only the popularizer of the experimental method.
Bacon and Copernicus.
Gilbert of Colchester before Bacon.
Friar Bacon on the experimental method.
Peregrinus and the value of experiments.
Bacon's four grounds of human ignorance.
Bacon's great teacher, Albertus Magnus, and the experimental method.
Christian tradition as to scientific inquiry as begun by Augustine.
Albert's place in the history of inductive science.
Interest of the Middle Ages in physical science.
{xi}
CHURCHMEN AND PHYSICAL SCIENCE IN THE MEDIEVAL UNIVERSITIES. 302
The Popes and the medieval universities.
What the scholastic philosophers did for science.
Scientific teaching at the early universities.
"Foundations of knowledge for Galileo, Harvey,
Newton and Darwin." (Allbutt.)
Magnetics.
Philosopher's stone and the transmutation of metals.
Constitution of matter.
Matter and form.
Indestructibility of matter.
Conservation of energy.
Albertus Magnus on the antipodes.
Humboldt's appreciation of Albert.
Albert's scientific accomplishments.
Astronomy, botany, geography and biological sciences.
Roger Bacon and explosives; achievements in optics and astronomy.
Aquinas and chemistry.
The relations of these men to the Popes.
Bacon's difficulties.
Medieval accomplishments in applied science.
Scientific applications in medieval cities (Kropotkin).
Decadence in science after Middle Ages.
The place of the reformation so-called.
The first encyclopedia.
Vincent of Beauvais and interest in his work.
Thomas of Cantimprato and Bartholomaeus Anglicus.
Craving for information in natural science.
THE MEDIEVAL UNIVERSITY MAN AND SCIENCE. 340
Dante a type of the medieval university student.
His knowledge a proof of how he was taught.
Dante as a student of nature.
Ruskin's opinion.
Trobridge's suggestions.
Dante's early education.
Azarias and Kropotkin on the public schools of Florence and Nuremberg.
Kuhns on Dante's science.
Optics.
Astronomy.
Humboldt's praise of Dante's scientific knowledge.
Dante the observer, phosphorescence, flies, bees and ants.
Dante knew more science than any modern poet.
His contribution to the science of education.
THE CHURCH AND THE MENTALLY AFFLICTED. 363
Disease and supernatural agency.
Denial of disease.
Scientists and spiritualism.
Reaction in recent years.
Anticipations in psychiatry.
Supposed evolution of treatment of the mentally diseased.
Medieval care of the insane.
Psychopathic wards in hospitals.
The open door treatment.
After-care of the insane.
The colony system.
Religious suggestion and cure--ancient and modern.
Prayer and mental disease.
Care of the insane at Gheel.
Neglect {xii} of insane not exclusively medieval.
Milder measures quite modern.
Spiritual agencies in life.
Alfred Russell Wallace, Sir William Crookes, Sir Oliver Lodge,
Prof. Charles Richet, Lombroso.
APPENDIX I.
OPPOSITION TO SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS. 390
The Popes as patrons of scientific education.
Swift on genius and assinine opposition.
Allston on truth in unusual form.
"Nonsense" and "absurd" on scientists' tongues.
Jordan on human conservatism.
Galileo's letter to Kepler, on "logic" and science.
Huxley on Galileo.
De Morgan on other cases.
Dogmatism and folly.
Persecution of scientists.
Harvey, Vesalius, Servetus, Steno.
Not confined to old times, Jenner, Auenbrugger, Laennec,
Thomas Young, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Semmelweiss.
Opposition in other sciences.
Ohm.
Young men and discoveries.
Pasteur and rabies.
Our universities and economics.
Conservatism still active.
The lesson.
APPENDIX II.
LATIN TEXT OF PAPAL BULLS AND DECREES. 413
_De Sepulturis._
_De Crimine Falsi._
_Super Illius specula._
Bulls for erection of Universities of Perugia and Cahors.
APPENDIX III. 419
Emperor Frederick's Law Regulating the Practice of Medicine (1231)
APPENDIX IV.
CHURCH DECREES RELATING TO MEDICINE. 424
Prohibition of the study and practice of medicine and law to
members of religious orders.
Text of the decrees.
Significance of the prohibition.
Not all priests, but only members of religious orders involved.
Church decrees as to the physician's duty in securing the last
rites of the Church for his patients when in danger of death.
Text of the decrees.
Misunderstanding.
APPENDIX V.
PAPAL PHYSICIANS. 431
The principal Papal Physicians, their careers, and their chief
works. Ursus, Guy of Montpellier, Ricardus Anglicus, Taddeo {xiii}
Florentinus, Simon Januensis, William of Brescia, Arnold of
Villanova, Petrus Aichspadius, Gentilis Gentilis, Dino del Garbo,
Guy de Chauliac, Jean de Tornemire, Francis Casinus, John Baptist
Verallus, Ludovicus Scarampus, Bernard Garzonius, Laurentius
Roverella, Joannes Serninus, Simon Tebaldi, Jacobus Gottifredus,
Joannes Burgius, Sanctes Floccus, Sebastianus Veteranus, Onofrio de
Onofriis, John Philip de Lignamine, Benedict of Nursia, Petrus
Leonius, Alexander de Espinosa, Gaspar Torella, Petrus Pintor,
Horatio and Scipio Lancillotti, Joannes Bodier, Samuel Sarfati,
Antonius Petrutius, Dioscorides da Velletri, Bartholomeo of Pisa,
Bernardinus Speronius, Jerome Sessa, Clementius Clementinus,
Bartholomeo Montagnana, Giovanni Antracino, John de Vigo, Francesco
Fusconi, Andreas Cibbo, Andrea Turini, Ludovico Augeni, Paulus
Jovius, Matteo Corti (Curtius), Antonio Musa Brasavola, Silvius
Zeffiri, Jacobus Bonacossus, Joannes Manovelli, Thomas Cadimustus,
Tiberius Palella, Alfonso Ferri, Franciscus Frigimelica, Maggi, John
Baptist Cananus, Augustino Ricchi, Altamare, Bianchi, Simon Pasqua,
Pompeius Barba, Franciscus Gymnasius, Jerome Cardan, Mercurialis,
Placidus Fuscus, Andreas Baccius, Demetrius Canevarius, Malpighi,
Jerome Provenzalis, Jerome Rubeus, Jerome Cordella, Zecchius,
Caesalpinus, Michael Mercatus, Nicholas Masinus, Jacobus
Bonaventura, Julius de Angelis, Pompeius Caimus, Vincentius Crucius,
Giovanni and Bernardino Castellani, Julius Mancinus, Sylvester and
Thaddeus Collicola, Baldus Baldi, Paul Zacchias, Gabriel Fonseca,
Matthias Naldius, Borelli, Lancisi, Salvatorius, Romulus Spezioli,
Lucas Tozzi, Morgagni, Cotugno, Giambattista Bomba, Antonio
Baccelli, Flajani, Paolo Baroni, Pier Luigi Valentini, Giuseppe
Constantini, Castracane, Lapponi, Marchiafava.
APPENDIX VI.
ASTRONOMY AND THE CHURCH; SOME ROMAN ASTRONOMERS. 469
No formal list of Papal astronomers available. The roll of names in
astronomy connected in some way with the Popes almost as distinguished
as that of Papal Physicians: Roger Bacon, Albertus Magnus, Nicholas of
Cusa, Regiomontanus, Toscanelli, Archbishop Antoninus, Clavius, the
Roman College, Scheiner, Ricci, Athanasius Kircher, Thomas Leseur,
Franz Jacquier, Boscovitch, Le Maire, Gilii, Beccaria, Piazzi, Secchi,
De Vico, Sestini, Denza, Lais, Rodriguez, Hagan.
{xiv}
APPENDIX VII.
THE FATHERS OF THE CHURCH AND SCIENCE. 484
Supposed opposition of the Fathers of the Church to science.
Father Leahy on the true relations.
Defence of the Fathers.
Supposed opposition to science.
No opposition to true science.
Position as regards astrology.
What the Fathers did for science.
APPENDIX VIII.
SCIENCE IN AMERICA. 492
Spanish Catholic America far outdistanced English Protestant
America in the cultivation of science before our time.
Professor Bourne, on science at the Spanish-American Universities,
"Spanish-American science of the sixteenth century only reached
in English America in the nineteenth."
Dr. Chanca's letter.
Priority in medical education.
Bourne on Spanish-American anticipations.
Reasons for decadence.
APPENDIX IX.
THE DANGER OF A LITTLE KNOWLEDGE. 500
Professor Draper's "History of the Conflict Between Religion
and Science."
The tradition of Church opposition to science founded on
ignorance of the Middle Ages.
The "Bright," not the "Dark" Ages.
Draper's career.
"History of the Intellectual Development of Europe."
Acceptance of his writings as authoritative.
Lack of scholarship.
Medieval achievements.
"Lazy monks."
Wonderful work of the monks.
Monasteries as agricultural colleges.
The Arabs in science.
Medieval prophylaxis.
Magnificent hospitals.
Halley's comet.
The Popes of the beginning of the Renaissance: Nicholas V,
Calixtus III, Pius II (AEneas Sylvius Piccolomini).
Draper's summaries of history, caricatures.
Contrast between Spanish and English America.
Professor Bourne.
Sir Sidney Lee.
Professor Draper's philosophy of history.
The Church and social conditions.
Draper's surprising ignorance of the history of medicine.
Objections to the Church in her relations to science
always founded on lack of knowledge.
{xv}
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Guy de Chauliac _Frontispiece_
FACING PAGE
Guy de Chauliac's cauteries 182
Guy de Chauliac's cauteries 183
Guy de Chauliac's instruments 186
Guy de Chauliac's instruments 187
Hospital at Luebeck 252
Hospital at Tonnerre 268
Hospital, Mexico 272
Ferri's instruments _Page_ 447
Maggi's instruments _Page_ 448
Maggi's instruments _Page_ 449
Maggi's instruments _Page_ 450
Hospital, Mexico _Opp. Page_ 495
{1}
INTRODUCTION.
When, some years ago, the announcement of the prospective opening of
the medical school at Fordham University, New York City, was made, the
preliminary faculty were rather astonished to find that a number of
intelligent physicians expressed surprise that there should be any
question of the establishment of a medical school in connection with a
Catholic institution of learning, since, as they understood, the
Church forbade the practice of dissection, and in general was
distinctly unfavorable to the development of medical science. Most of
us had already known of the false persuasion existing in some minds,
that by a Papal decree the practice of dissection had been forbidden
during the Middle Ages, but it was hard to understand how men should
think, in this day of general information, that Catholics were not
free to pursue the study of any true science, and above all medical
science, without let or hindrance from ecclesiastical authorities. In
a word, though we live in what we are pleased to call an enlightened
age with the schoolmaster abroad in the land, as is so proudly
proclaimed, we encountered the most childish simplicity of belief in a
number of old-time prejudices as to the position of the Church with
regard to the study of science.
We found such a curious state of positive ignorance and such an
erroneous, pretentious knowledge with regard to the supposed attitude
of the Church to medicine especially, that we realized that the first
thing that the {2} new medical department would have to do would be to
set about correcting authoritatively the false notions which existed
with regard to the Popes and medical science. Most of the
misinformation in this matter in American minds, we soon found, had
its origin in Dr. Andrew D. White's volumes, "On the History of the
Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom." It is impossible for
anyone to read Dr. White's chapter on from Miracles to Medicine in
this work without coming to the conclusion that the constant policy of
the Church for all the centuries down practically to our own time was
to prevent the progress of medicine as far as possible. The reason for
this policy, presumably, must be taken to be that it was to the
interest of the ecclesiastics to have people apply to them for
healing. Sufferers were to look to miracles rather than to drugs for
their relief from ailments of any and every kind. Prayers were to be
considered as much more efficacious than powders, and Masses much more
likely to do good than the most careful nursing. These ecclesiastical
offices had to be paid for. Accordingly, people had to be discouraged
from applying to physicians, medical schools were kept under an
ecclesiastical ban, "dissection was prohibited," anatomy declared "a
sin against the Holy Ghost," "chemistry forbidden under the severest
penalties," "the medieval miracles of healing checked medical
science," "the practice of surgery was relegated mainly to the lowest
orders of practitioners and confined strictly to them," "as the grasp
of theology upon education tightened, medicine declined," and every
possible means was employed to keep the popular mind in subjection to
the clergy, and to prevent physicians from getting so much knowledge
as would enable them {3} to help free the people from the bondage of
superstition, of which they were the victims and the slaves.
We do not think that we exaggerate the impression likely to be
obtained from Dr. White's book in stating the ordinarily accepted
opinions thus baldly, and as a matter of fact, as the quotation marks
are intended to show, most of the strongest phrases that we have used
are Dr. White's own. For those who can take such statements in good
faith, it must be a very genuine surprise to learn a few facts from
the history of medicine in the Middle Ages. Before the beginning of
the sixteenth century, that is, before the religious revolt in
Germany, which has been dignified by the name of reformation,
altogether some twenty medical schools were founded in various parts
of Europe. Of these, the best known in the order of their foundation
were Salerno, Bologna, Naples, Montpelier, Paris, Padua and Pisa.
Excellent schools, however, were established also at Oxford, Rome,
Salamanca, Orleans and Coimbra. Even early in the fourteenth century
such unimportant towns as Perugia, Cahors and Lerida had medical
schools. These schools were usually established in connection with the
universities. It was realized that this would make the teaching of
medicine more serious and keep the practical side of medicine from
obscuring too much the scientific and cultural aspects of the medical
training. In modern times in America we made the mistake of having our
medical schools independent of universities, but with the advance in
education and culture we have come to imitate the custom of the
thirteenth and the fourteenth century in this regard.
The universities, as is well known, were the outgrowth of cathedral
schools. Practically all those in authority {4} in them, by far the
greater number of teachers and most of the pupils, were of the
clerical order, that is, had assumed some ecclesiastical obligations
and were considered to be churchmen. At these universities, if we can
trust the example of England as applicable to the Continent also,
there were, according to trustworthy, conservative statistics, more
students in attendance in proportion to the population than there has
been at any period since, or than there are even at the present time
in the twentieth century in any country of the civilized world. From
this we can readily appreciate the enthusiastic ardor of those seeking
education. Of these large numbers, the medical schools had their due
proportion. [Footnote 1]
[Footnote 1: This subject of the attendance at the universities of the
Middle Ages is discussed, and authorities quoted, in my book "The
Thirteenth, Greatest of Centuries," published by the Catholic Summer
School Press, N. Y.]
Of course it will be said at once that though there were medical
schools and medical professors and students, what was taught and
studied at this time was so far distant from anything like practical
knowledge of medicine, that it does not tell against the argument that
medical education was practically non-existent. Some people will
perhaps harbor the thought, if they do not frankly express it, that
very probably these schools were organized under ecclesiastical
authority, only in order to enable the Church and the clergy to
maintain their control of medical education and keep the people from
knowledge that might prove dangerous to Church authority. They were
thus able to satisfy some of men's cravings for information in these
matters, and yet prevent them from making such advances as would
endanger the Church's policy of having them apply for prayers and
Masses rather than for more physical remedies, {5} except possibly for
certain minor ailments. We do not doubt that there are many educated
people who would be quite satisfied to accept this as a complete
explanation of the situation in medical education at the medieval
universities. Those who have read Dr. White's "History of the Warfare
of Theology with Science" and have placed any faith in his really
amusing excursions into a realm of which apparently he knows nothing--
the history of medicine--must believe something like this. For them a
little glance at even a few of the realities of medical teaching in
the thirteenth century will show at once what a castle of the
imagination they have been living in.
Only those who are thoroughly and completely ignorant of the real
status of medical teaching in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries
continue to hold these absurd opinions as to the nullity of medieval
medicine and surgery. The reading of a single short recent
contribution to medical history, the address of Professor Clifford
Allbutt, Regius Professor of Physic at the University of Cambridge,
England, before the Congress of Arts and Sciences at the Exposition
held in St. Louis in 1904, "On the Historical Relations of Medicine
and Surgery down to the Sixteenth Century," would suffice to eradicate
completely such traditional errors. He pointed out some surprising
anticipations of what is most modern in medicine and surgery in the
teachings of William of Salicet and his pupil Lanfranc, Professors of
Medicine and Surgery in the Italian Universities and in Paris during
the thirteenth century. As these two professors were the most
distinguished teachers of surgery of the period and the acknowledged
leaders of thought in their time, their teaching may fairly be taken
as {6} representative of the curricula of medieval medical schools.
William of Salicet, according to Professor Allbutt, taught that dropsy
was due to a hardening of the kidneys; _durities renum_ are his exact
words. He insisted on the danger of wounds of the neck. He taught the
suture of divided nerves and gave explicit directions how to find the
severed ends. He made a special study of suppurative disease of the
hip and taught many practical things with regard to it. He taught,
though this is a bit of knowledge supposed to come three centuries
later into medicine and history, the true origin of chancre and
phagedena. Most surprising of all, however, remains. William
substituted the use of the knife for the abuse of the cautery, which
had been introduced by the Arabs because they feared hemorrhage, and
he insisted that hemorrhage could be controlled by proper means
without searing the tissues, and that the wounds made by the knife
healed ever so much more kindly and with less danger to the patient.
In the matter of wound healing, he investigated the causes of the
failure of healing by first intention, and expressed on this subject
some marvelous ideas that are supposed to be of late nineteenth
century origin.