[1] See Philo, _Quod omnis probus liber_, sec. 12 (ed. Mangey ii.
458; cf. ii. 630).
[2] Sozomen (_Hist. Eccl._ vii. 19) mentions that in Alexandria in
his day the bishop alone was in the custom of preaching; but this, he
implies, was a very exceptional state of matters, dating only from
the time of Arius.
[3] To the more strictly exegetical lectures the names [Greek:
exegeseis, exegemata, exegetika, ektheseis,] were sometimes applied.
But as no popular discourse delivered from the pulpit could ever be
exclusively expository and as on the other hand every sermon
professing to be based on Scripture required to be more or less
"exegetical" and "textual," it would obviously be sometimes very hard
to draw the line of distinction between [Greek: homilia] and [Greek:
logos]. It would be difficult to define very precisely the difference
in French between a "conference" and a "sermon"; and the same
difficulty seems to have been experienced in Greek by Photius, who
says of the eloquent pulpit orations of Chrysostom, that they were
[Greek: homiliai] rather than [Greek: logoi].
[4] Manuscript copies are preserved at Heidelberg, Darmstadt,
Frankfort, Giessen, Cassel and other places. It was first printed at
Spires in 1482. In the Cologne edition of 1530 the title
runs--_Homiliae seu mavis sermones sive conciones ad populum,
praestantissimorum ecclesiae doctorum Hieronymi, Augustini, Ambrosii,
Gregorii, Origenis, Chrysostomi, Bedae, &c., in hunc ordinem digestae
per Alchuinum levitam, idque injungente ei Carolo M. Rom. Imp. cui a
secretis fuit_. Though thus attributed here to Alcuin, who is known
to have revised the Lectionary or _Comes Hieronymi_, the compilation
of the _Homiliarium_ is in the emperor's own commission entrusted to
Paul, to whom it is assigned in the earlier printed editions also. A
comparison of different editions shows that the contents increased
with the ever-growing number of saints' days and festivals, new
discourses by later preachers like Bernard being constantly added.
[5] Neander, _Church History_, v. 174 (Eng. trans. of 1851).
[6] An ancient English metrical homiliarium is preserved in the
library of the university of Cambridge. Earlier versions of it have
existed, and a portion of perhaps the earliest copy, dating from
about the middle of the 13th century, was published in 1862 by Mr J.
Small, librarian to the university of Edinburgh.
HOMOEOPATHY (from the Greek [Greek: homoios], like, and [Greek: pathos],
feeling). The distinctive system of therapeutics which bears the name of
homoeopathy is based upon the law _similia similibus curentur_,[1] the
originator of which was S. C. F. Hahnemann, a native of Meissen in
Germany, who discovered his new principle while he was experimenting
with cinchona bark in 1790, and announced it in 1796.[2] The essential
tenets of homoeopathy--with which is contrasted the "allopathy" ([Greek:
allos], other) of the "orthodox" therapeutics--are that the cure of
disease is effected by drugs that are capable of producing in a healthy
individual symptoms similar to those of the disease to be treated, and
that to ascertain the curative virtues of any drug it must be "proved"
upon healthy persons--that is, taken by individuals of both sexes in a
state of health in gradually increasing doses. The manifestations of
drug action thus produced are carefully recorded, and this record of
"drug-diseases," after being verified by repetition on many "provers,"
constitutes the distinguishing feature of the homoeopathic materia
medica, which, while it embraces the sources, preparation and uses of
drugs as known to the orthodox pharmacopoeia, contains, in addition, the
various "provings" obtained in the manner above described.
Besides the promulgation of the doctrine of similars, Hahnemann also
enunciated a theory to account for the origin of all chronic diseases,
which he asserted were derived either directly or remotely from psora
(the itch), syphilis (venereal disease) or sycosis (fig-wart disease).
This doctrine, although at first adopted by some of the enthusiastic
followers of Hahnemann, was almost immediately discarded by very many
who had a firm belief in his law of cure. In the light of advancing
science such theories are entirely untenable, and it was unfortunate for
the system of medicine which he founded that Hahnemann should have
promulgated such an hypothesis. It served as a target for the shafts of
ridicule showered upon the system by those who were its opponents, and
even at the present time there still exists in the minds of many
misinformed persons the conviction that homoeopathy is a system of
medicine that bases the origin of all chronic disease on the itch or on
syphilis or fig-warts.
Another peculiar feature of homoeopathy is its posology or theory of
dose. It may be asserted that homoeopathic posology has nothing more to
do with the original law of cure than the psora (itch) theory has, and
that it was one of the later creations of Hahnemann's mind. Most
homoeopathists believe more or less in the action of minute doses of
medicine, but it must not be considered as an integral part of the
system. The dose is the corollary, not the principle. Yet in the minds of
many, infinitesimal doses of medicine stand for homoeopathy itself, the
real law of cure being completely put into the background. The question
of dose has also divided the members of the homoeopathic school into
bitter factions, and is therefore a matter for careful consideration.
Many employ low potencies,[3] i.e. mother tinctures, first, second,
sixth dilutions, &c., while others use hundred-thousandths and
millionths.
Some homoeopathists of the present day still believe with Hahnemann
that, even after the material medicinal particles of a drug have been
subdivided to the fullest extent, the continuation of the dynamization
or trituration or succussion develops a spiritual acurative agency, and
that the higher the potency, the more subtle and more powerful is the
curative action. Hahnemann says (_Organon_, 3rd American edition, p.
101), "It is only by means of the spiritual influence of a morbific
agent that our spiritual vital power can be diseased, and in like manner
only by the spiritual operation of medicine can health be restored."
This is absolutely denied by others. Thus there exist two schools among
the adherents of homoeopathy. On the one hand there are the
Hahnemannians, the "Purists" or "High Potency" men, who still profess to
regard the _Organon_ as their Bible, who believe in all the teachings of
Hahnemann, who adhere in their prescriptions to the single dose, the
single medicine, and the highest possible potency, and regard the
doctrine of the spiritual dynamization acquired by trituration and
succussion as indubitable. On the other side there are the "Rational" or
"Low Potency" men, who believe in the universality of the law of cure,
but think that it cannot always be applied, on account of an imperfect
materia medica and a lack of knowledge on the part of the physician.
They believe that in many cases of severe and acute pain palliatives are
required, and that they are free to use all the adjuvants at present
known to science for the relief of suffering humanity--massage,
balneology, electricity, hygiene, &c. The American Institute of
Homoeopathy, the national body of the United States, has adopted the
following resolution and ordered it to be published conspicuously in
each number of the _Transactions_ of the society: "A homoeopathic
physician is one who adds to his knowledge of medicine a special
knowledge of homoeopathic therapeutics. All that pertains to the great
field of medical learning is his by tradition, by inheritance, by
right."
It is claimed that the effect produced upon both the laity and the
general profession of medicine by the introduction of homoeopathy was
salutary in many ways. It diminished the quantity of medicine that was
formerly considered necessary for the eradication of disease, and thus
revealed the fact that the _vis medicatrix naturae_ is often sufficient,
with occasional and gentle assistance, to cure many diseases, especially
those fevers that run a definite and regular course. Corroboration of
the law _similia similibus curentur_ is seen, according to
homoeopathists, in the adoption of the serum therapy, which consists in
the treatment of the most malignant diseases (diphtheria, lock-jaw,
typhoid fever, tuberculosis, bubonic plague) by introducing into the
system a modified form (similar) of those poisons that produce them in
the healthy individual. Hahnemann undoubtedly deserves the credit of
being the first to break decidedly with the old school of medical
practice, in which, forgetful of the teachings of Hippocrates, nature
was either overlooked or rudely opposed by wrong and ungentle methods.
We can scarcely now estimate the force of character and of courage which
was implied in his abandoning the common lines of medicine. More than
this, he and his followers showed results in the treatment of disease
which compared very favourably with the results of contemporary orthodox
practice.
Homoeopathy has given prominence to the therapeutical side of medicine,
and has done much to stimulate the study of the physiological action of
drugs. It has done service in directing more special attention to
various powerful drugs, such as aconite, nux vomica, belladonna, and to
the advantage of giving them in simpler forms than were common before
the days of Hahnemann. But in the medical profession homoeopathy
nevertheless remains under the stigma of being a dissenting sect. It has
been publicly announced that if the homoeopathists would abolish the
name "homoeopathy," and remove it from their periodicals, colleges,
hospitals, dispensaries and asylums, they would be received within the
fold of the regular profession. These conditions have been accepted by a
few homoeopathists who have become members of the most prominent medical
association in the United States.
Homoeopathy as it exists to-day can, in the opinion of its adherents,
stand by itself, and its progress for a century in face of prolonged and
determined opposition appears to its upholders to be evidence of its
truth. There are still, indeed, in both schools of medical thought, men
who stand fast by their old principles. There are homoeopathists who can
see nothing but evil in the practice of their brothers of the orthodox
school, as there are allopathists who still regard homoeopathy as a
humbug and a sham. There are, however, liberal-minded men in both
schools, who look upon the adoption of any safe and efficient method of
curing disease as the birthright of the true physician, and who allow
every man to prescribe for his patients as his conscience may dictate,
and, provided he be educated in all the collateral branches of medical
science, are ready to exchange views for the good of suffering humanity.
_Great Britain._--Homoeopathy is not rapidly extending in Great
Britain, and its recognition has been slow. The first notice taken of
the new system of therapeutics was by the Medical Society of London in
1826. In 1827 the physician of Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg, Dr F. H.
F. Quin (1799-1878), who had previously studied homoeopathy in Germany
and practised it in Italy, came to England, and it was through his
efforts that the system was introduced. Three other physicians, Dr
Belluomini, Dr Romani and Dr Tagliani, claimed priority, but careful
research established Dr Quin's title. Quin was a successful man
professionally and socially, and brought upon himself in a short time
the anathema of the Royal College of Physicians. In 1844 Dr William
Henderson, professor of pathology in the university of Edinburgh,
embraced the Hahnemannian system. A storm of opposition arose, and
Professor J. Y. Simpson (the discoverer of chloroform anaesthesia)
published a volume, with the alliterative title, _Homoeopathy, its
Tenets and Tendencies, Theoretical, Theological, and Therapeutical_.
This brochure was answered by Professor Henderson, the title of his
book being _Homoeopathy Fairly Represented_. From 1827 to 1837 there
were but a dozen practitioners of homoeopathy in London, but during
1837 to 1847 the number increased to between seventy and eighty. In
1857 there were upwards of two hundred practitioners in the kingdom,
with thirty-three institutions in which the law of similars was used
as a basis of practice. In 1867 the increase was not so rapid, the
number being 261. A society was formed about this period for "the
protection of homoeopathic practitioners and students," which proved
of great value in binding the sect together. In 1870 congresses were
established, and annual meetings held, which have continued to the
present time. In 1901 there were over three hundred homoeopathic
physicians in the British Isles, of whom between seventy and eighty
were in London alone. There were seventy-nine chemists, of whom
seventeen were located in London, and eighty-two towns and cities in
the country contained from one to ten homoeopathic practitioners each,
together with many established chemists for dispensing homoeopathic
medicines. The British Homoeopathic Society was founded by Quin in
1844, and has numerous members and fellows, besides corresponding
members in all portions of the world, including Australia, India and
Tasmania. The London Homoeopathic Hospital was founded in 1850, also
largely through the efforts of Quin, and a few years afterwards moved
to Great Ormond Street. During the cholera epidemic of 1854 the
statistics of this hospital showed a mortality of 16.4%, against 51.8%
of other metropolitan charities. The London Homoeopathic Hospital has
a convalescent home under its management at Eastbourne. There are also
dispensaries in Ealing and West Middlesex, Kensington, Notting Hill
and Bayswater. Similar institutions are located in Bath, Birkenhead,
Birmingham, Bootle, Bournemouth, Brighton, Bristol, Bromley,
Cheltenham, Cheshire, Croydon, Dublin, Eastbourne, Edinburgh,
Folkestone, Hastings and St Leonards, Ipswich, Leeds, Leicester,
Liverpool, Newcastle, Northampton, Norwich, Oxford, Plymouth, Torquay,
Tunbridge Wells, Weston-super-Mare. The homoeopathic journals include
the _Homoeopathic World_, the _London Homoeopathic Hospital_
_Reports_, the _Journal of the British Homoeopathic Society_, and the
_British Homoeopathic Review_, the last being issued by the British
Homoeopathic Association, which was founded in 1902 for the purpose of
developing and extending homoeopathy in Great Britain. The _British
Journal of Homoeopathy_ was first published in 1843, and was edited by
Drs Drysdale, Russell and Black. For many years it was the foremost
homoeopathic journal in the world. Its motto was _In certis unitas, in
dubiis libertas, in omnibus charitas_. One reason why homoeopathy has
not advanced as rapidly in the British Isles as in America is said to
be the discrimination exercised against it by the General Medical
Council, and another is want of cohesion amongst the homoeopaths
themselves.
_United States._--Homoeopathy was introduced into the United States by
Dr Hans Birch Gram, who was born in Boston. His father being Danish,
Gram in his eighteenth year went to Copenhagen, where he graduated in
1814. In 1823 he became acquainted with homoeopathy, and brought a
knowledge of it to America in 1825 when he settled in New York. The
first homoeopathic association was formed in 1833 in Philadelphia, the
second in New York, 1834, and homoeopathy became known in the
different states somewhat in the following order: New York, 1825;
Pennsylvania, 1828; Louisiana, 1836; Connecticut, 1837; Massachusetts,
1837-1838; Maryland, 1837; Delaware, 1837; Kentucky, 1837; Vermont,
1838; Rhode Island, 1839; Ohio, 1839; New Jersey, 1840; Maine, 1840;
New Hampshire, 1840; Michigan, 1841; Georgia, 1842; Wisconsin, 1842;
Alabama, 1843; Illinois, 1843; Tennessee, 1844; Missouri, 1844; Texas,
1848; Minnesota, 1852; Nebraska, 1862; Colorado, 1863; Iowa, 1871.
After 1871 the spread of the system was rapid throughout every state
in the Union, and it is in the United States that homoeopathy
principally flourishes. There are thousands of homoeopathic
physicians, and their clients number several millions. It may be noted
that departments of homoeopathy are connected with the universities of
Boston, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota and Kansas City.
_Canada._--The early history of homoeopathy can be traced back nearly
to 1850 in the province of Quebec. In the Dominion of Canada the
various provinces control the licensing of physicians, excepting in
Quebec, which is the only province having a separate homoeopathic
board of examiners. This is under the control of the Montreal
homoeopathic Association, and is known as the College of Homoeopathic
Physicians and Surgeons of Montreal. Three examiners are annually
appointed by the association. Successful candidates receive the
diploma of the college, and are entitled to add to their degree the
letters M.C.H.P.S. A certificate of successful examination is
forwarded to the lieutenant-governor at Quebec, who, "if satisfied of
the loyalty, integrity and good morals of the applicant, may grant him
a license to practise surgery, physic and midwifery, or either of
them, in the province of Quebec." The word "loyalty" has been decided
by the provincial secretary to mean a British subject. This is the
only government medical license now issued in the British empire, the
others being by provincial boards or colleges of physicians and
surgeons. In 1894 there was no homoeopathic institution in the
province; at present the Montreal Homoeopathic Hospital is in active
operation. Two homoeopathic papers are published monthly--the
_Homoeopathic Record_ in Montreal, and the _Homoeopathic Messenger_ in
Toronto. In 1870, in the province of Ontario, the three schools,
allopathic, homoeopathic and eclectic, united for examining purposes
into one board called the medical council, seventeen members
representing the old school and five the other two systems. Finally
the eclectics were merged in the old school, the board appointing five
of Hahnemann's followers for examining purposes. Grace Hospital at
Toronto (erected 1892) was begun as a dispensary in 1887.
_Germany._--In 1810 Hahnemann published his _Organon_, which was the
starting-point of homoeopathy in Germany. In 1811 an endeavour was
made to found an institution in Leipzig in which practitioners might
learn the new method of treatment theoretically and practically, but
it was not a success, as the entire tide of professional opinion was
against the system. In 1829, at the celebration of the fiftieth
anniversary of Hahnemann's doctorate, the German Central Society was
organized, holding its first meeting in 1830. In the university
hospital of Munich some experiments were made to test the efficacy of
homoeopathic medicines, but these were not successful. In 1831 the
government prohibited homoeopathists from dispensing their own
medicines; this was a severe blow to the system. In 1834 there was a
division among the homoeopathists themselves, which much retarded the
progress of the school. A homoeopathic hospital was established about
this time (January 1833) in Leipzig, but there was such constant
wrangling among the physicians connected with it that its sphere of
usefulness was curtailed, and it was finally converted into a
dispensary. The Baden Homoeopathic Society was established in 1834.
The homoeopathic hospital in Munich was established in 1836, but
suffered a similar fate to that of Leipzig, and was converted into a
dispensary. The rather equivocal success of these hospitals in Saxony
and Bavaria was in direct contrast to the fate of two newly
established hospitals in Austria, one in Vienna and the other in Linz,
which were very successful, and aroused great interest both among
physicians and laymen. During the political confusion of 1846 and 1849
there was complete stagnation of everything medical in Germany. But
during all these years, though the public institutions were few, the
literature on homoeopathic subjects became very extensive, and
exercised a significant influence upon the system in all parts of the
world. Hahnemann died in 1843, and on the 10th of August 1851 a bronze
monument to him was unveiled at Leipzig. The Leipzig dispensary lived
thirty-three years. From 1842 to 1874 there were treated in this
institution 65,106 patients. In 1901 there were about 250 homoeopathic
physicians in Germany; they appeared to be strongest at Berlin, in the
province of Brandenburg, in Pomerania and Westphalia, Saxony, Hessen
and in Wurttemberg.
_Austria-Hungary._--Homoeopathy was introduced into Austria about
1817, and in 1819 its practice was forbidden by law. Shortly
afterwards the physician attending the archduke John became a
homoeopath. In 1825 the doctrine was introduced into Vienna. To test
the efficacy of the system Francis I. ordered that experiments be made
with homoeopathic medicines, and for this purpose a ward furnished
with twelve beds was allotted. The results were satisfactory to the
new system, and it made gigantic strides in Vienna. During the cholera
epidemic of 1836 an increased impetus was given to the new school by
the reported brilliant successes of the treatment. Societies were
founded and journals published. In 1846 a second hospital was founded.
In 1850 a third hospital was opened, and clinical lectures upon the
system were delivered. In 1873 the Society of Homoeopathic Physicians
was formed. Between the years 1873 and 1893 homoeopathy declined. In
1901, in thirty-seven cities and towns there were to be found about
fifty physicians and two hospitals, and it was estimated that about
seventy-five more were scattered in Moravia, Bohemia, Tirol, Salzburg
and the coast provinces. There is a professorship of homoeopathy at
the University of Budapest, and homoeopathic clinics are held at the
new Rochus Hospital in Ulloi Street, and also in the homoeopathic
department of the Hospital Bethesda of the Reformed Community. The
Elizabeth Hospital, exclusively homoeopathic, has existed for many
years.
_Russia._--The homoeopathic system was introduced into Russia in 1823.
In 1825 great impetus was given to the new doctrine by the conversion
of Dr Bigel, physician to the grand duke Constantine. In 1829 the
grand duke ordered a series of experiments to be conducted to prove
the truth or fallacy of homoeopathy, and they demonstrated the success
of the new school. In 1841 a hospital was established in Moscow, and
in 1849 similar institutions were founded in Nizhniy-Novgorod. Since
then homoeopathy has been steadily practised, and has penetrated to
the remotest parts of Russia. In 1881 the civil engineers proposed to
commemorate the virtues of the emperor Alexander II. by the erection
of a hospital; a committee for collecting funds was created, and
58,064 roubles were handed to the Charity Society of the followers of
homoeopathy at St Petersburg for the erection and founding of a
homoeopathic hospital. The foundation stone of the edifice was laid on
19th June 1893, the emperor Alexander III. giving 5000 roubles. The
inauguration of a new dispensary and a pharmacy took place on the 19th
of April 1898, and the hospital itself, intended originally for fifty
beds, was opened on the 1st of November 1898. There are sixteen free
beds, three of them being in the name of the emperor Nicholas, the
empress Maria Feodorovna, and the emperor Alexander III. On the 28th
of January 1899 an imperial edict was issued granting the rights of
public service to the doctors of the hospital and dispensaries of the
Charity Society, thus placing them on an equality with the doctors of
the prevailing medical school.
_France._--Homoeopathy was first introduced into France in 1830 by
Count de Guidi, doctor of medicine, doctor of science, and inspector
of the university, who practised in Lyons. About the same year Dr
Antoine Petroz, widely known by his _Grand dictionnaire des sciences
medicales_, began practising homoeopathy in Paris, and his
establishment became the headquarters of the new system there. In 1835
Hahnemann himself came to the capital. In 1832 the homoeopathic method
of treating disease was introduced into the Hospice de Choisy, and in
1842 into the hospital of Carentan. Tessier practised the new doctrine
in his wards in the Hospital St Marguerite, and in the Children's
Hospital up to the year 1862, when he retired. The first homoeopathic
society was established in 1832 (the Societe Gallicain), Hahnemann
becoming president in 1835; in 1845 the Societe de Medecine
Homeopathique was organized; and in 1860 the two were united for the
better interests of the school. In 1901 there were at Paris three
hospitals--the Hospital St Jacques with fifty-five beds, the Hahnemann
Hospital with thirty-five beds, and the new Protestant Hospital for
Children with twenty-five-beds. At Lyons there is the Hospital St Luc.
The medical journals include _L'Art medical, La Revue homeopathique
belge, Journal belge d'homeopathie, La Therapeutique Integrale, La
Revue homeopathique francaise_. In the year 1900 the medical officers
of the republic having supervision over the medical department of the
International Exhibition officially recognized the members of the
homoeopathic school, and arranged for the proper accommodation and
reception of the International Congress of Homoeopathic Physicians
held in June. On the 30th of that month, with appropriate ceremonies,
the remains of Hahnemann were removed from the cemetery of Montmartre
and deposited in Pere-la-Chaise, and a monument bearing a suitable
inscription was erected to the memory of the founder of homoeopathy.
_Italy._--The Austrians when they entered Naples in 1821 brought
homoeopathy into Italy, the general in command of the army being a
devoted friend of Hahnemann. In 1828 Dr Count Sebastian de Guidi came
from Lyons and assisted in spreading the doctrine. During the period
from 1830 to 1860 many physicians practised homoeopathy, and the
literature on the subject became extensive. A homoeopathic clinic was
established and a ward opened in Trinity Hospital at Naples, and a
homoeopathic physician was appointed to the count of Syracuse. During
the severe cholera epidemics of 1854, 1855, 1865 the success of
homoeopathic treatment of that disease was so marked under the care of
Dr Rubini that the attention of the authorities was directed to the
system. In 1860 the homoeopathic practice was introduced into the
Spedale della Cesarea, and since that period homoeopathy has been
recognized with more or less favour in most of the cities. The Italian
Homoeopathic Institute is recognized by royal warrant as an
established institution, and its regulations are approved by the
government. In Turin the legal seat of the Homoeopathic Institute,
there is a hospital under the management of the State Association. The
homoeopathic medical press consists of the _Revista Omiopatica_,
established in 1855, and _L'Omiopatico in Italia_, the organ of the
Italian Homoeopathic Institute, which first appeared in 1884.
_Spain._--Homoeopathy was introduced into Spain in 1829 by a physician
to the Royal Commission sent by the king of Naples to attend the
marriage of Maria Christina with Don Ferdinand VII. Shortly after
this, a merchant of Cadiz visited Hahnemann in Coethen, and was cured
of a serious disorder; he returned to Spain with a supply of
homoeopathic literature, and immediately sent a medical student to
Leipzig to study the new system. In 1843 many cases of cholera were
treated homoeopathically in Madrid. The civil war, which did not
terminate until 1840, arrested all medical investigation in Spain, but
in 1843 there still existed in Madrid five pharmacies and a number of
homoeopathic physicians. About this time Dr Tosi Nunez returned from
an investigation of the new system with Hahnemann, and owing to his
success in the treatment of disease was created one of the physicians
of the bedchamber to the queen, who soon afterwards conferred upon him
the title of marquis, with the grand crosses of the Charles III. and
of the Civil Order of Beneficiencia. This recognition by high
authority gave an impetus to homoeopathy which has continued ever
since.
_Denmark._--Homoeopathy was unknown in Denmark until the year 1821,
when Hans Christian Lund, a medical practitioner, adopted it.
Hahnemann, however, had been both before and after that time consulted
by Danes, and consequently homoeopathic therapeutics was recognized in
different parts of the country. Lund translated many of Hahnemann's
works into Danish, as well as those of other eminent members of the
new school. (W. T. H.)