We do not enter into a minute examination of these works, which, taken

altogether, do not contain anything very new. We will only remark

that Lécluse treated in a succinct but correct manner the anatomy of

the mouth; invented some and perfected other instruments, the most

important of which is the elevator that still bears his name, and

finally, that he frequently performed the operation of replantation,

warmly recommended by him as an excellent means of cure in certain

cases of caries. The extracted tooth was stopped and afterward

replanted, and, says Lécluse, became fast within eight days, proving as

serviceable as a perfectly healthy tooth, and never again causing any

pain.

PHILIP PFAFF, dentist to Frederick the Great, King of Prussia, was

the first among the Germans who wrote a real treatise on dentistry.

His book[481] contains, in 184 succinctly but well-written pages, the

anatomical and physiological notions relative to the teeth, as well as

all that belongs to dental pathology, therapy, and prosthesis.

Besides a few observations about supernumerary teeth, Pfaff relates

several cases in which the incisors, inferior as well as superior,

were renewed (twice consecutively), that is, once at the usual epoch,

and the second time between the seventh and thirteenth years. He also

cites from the anatomical tables of Kulmus the following epitaph in low

Latin, that seems to allude to a case of third dentition:

“Decanus in Kirchberg, sine dente canus, ut anus

Interum dentescit, ter juvenescit, his requiescit.”

In cases of hemorrhage ensuing on the extraction of teeth, the best

hemostatic, according to Pfaff, is essence of turpentine, a remedy

which in these cases he had always found efficient. He introduced a

little ball of lint bathed in this essence as deeply as possible into

the alveolus, applying upon it some blotting paper reduced to pulp or

some dry lint that the patient compressed tightly by closing his teeth.

Gingival abscesses as well as fistulæ of the maxillary region almost

always owe their origin, says Pfaff, to decayed teeth, and can,

therefore, in general, not be cured except by the extraction of these

teeth.

The prosthetic methods described by this author are, for the most

part, identical with those of Fauchard and the other French dentists

already mentioned. As to the materials used for prosthesis at different

periods, Pfaff mentions, besides ivory, bone, hippopotamus tusk, teeth

of sea cow, and human teeth, also teeth made of silver, of mother of

pearl, and even of copper enamelled.

The chief merit one must concede to Philip Pfaff is that of having

been the first to make use of plaster models. It is, therefore, to

two Germans—Pfaff and Purmann, the latter who, as we have already

seen, used wax models—that one of the greatest progressive movements

in dental prosthesis is indebted, that is, the method of taking casts

and making models, of which method one finds no trace whatever in the

authors of antiquity, and which, it would appear, was not known even to

Fauchard himself. The wax casts of an entire jaw were taken by Pfaff

in two pieces, one of the right half of the jaw, and the other of the

left; which were then reunited, and one thus avoided spoiling the cast

in removing it from the mouth.

Another great merit of Philip Pfaff is that of having first carried out

the capping of an exposed dental pulp, previous to stopping a tooth.

Notwithstanding this, Pfaff is not the first who, as Geist-Jacobi is

inclined to believe,[482] _had dared to apply a filling over an exposed

dental pulp without first cauterizing it_. As we have already seen,

Fauchard did not hesitate in the least to fill a tooth when the dental

pulp had become exposed in scraping the carious cavity. But the French

dentist carried out, with much delicacy, a simple filling, whilst Pfaff

first capped the dental nerve.

JACOB CHRISTIAN SCHAFFER. In 1757 the evangelical pastor, J. Ch.

Schaffer (we do not know if he was at the same time a dentist, or

merely an amateur in odontology), wrote a little book[483] to disprove

the existence of worms in decayed teeth, and to show the fallacy of

believing that the supposed worms may be made to drop out by means of

fumigations of henbane seeds. His book appeared, as a matter of fact,

rather behind-hand, for in it Schaffer repeats in substance what

Houllier had already said two centuries earlier, and after him various

other authors, including Fauchard. At any rate, to coöperate in the

complete destruction of error and in the diffusion of truth is always

laudable. We feel, however, bound to add that in the very same year in

which Schaffer’s pamphlet was published, DUFOUR, a Frenchman, described

a worm that had been taken out of a decayed tooth, and called attention

to the fact that it was altogether different from the “dental worms”

described by Andry.[484]

BOURDET. An excellent book on dentistry[485] appeared in France in

the year 1757, the work of Bourdet, a celebrated dentist and elegant

writer, in whom the gifts of literary and scientific culture were

coupled with a vast experience and a profound spirit of observation.

His merits procured him the honor of being appointed dentist to the

King.

This author condemns as harmful the use of hard substances (such

as bone rings, etc.) that people are in the habit of putting into

children’s hands during the period of the first dentition, in the

idea that by pressing these objects between the gums, as children

instinctively do, they cut their teeth more easily. As to emollients,

he holds them to be completely useless, and prefers to all these

remedies the use of lemon juice.

According to Bourdet, the teeth are so apt to decay, partly because

of the frequent changes of temperature to which they are exposed, and

partly because, differently from the bones, they are not provided with

any protective organic covering.

In many cases of caries, Bourdet extracted the tooth, filled it with

lead or gold leaf, and replanted it; but if, in extracting, the

alveolus had been somewhat injured (a thing very likely to happen with

the instruments of the period), he replanted the tooth immediately, to

preserve the alveolus from the damaging action of the air, and carried

out the stopping at a later time.

Even in certain cases of violent toothache not depending on caries,

Bourdet luxated the tooth and replaced it in position directly. But as

some dentists had accused him of having passed off as new an operation

already made known by Mouton since the year 1746, Bourdet defended

himself by saying that whilst Mouton only shook the tooth, raising it a

little, simply to distend the nerve, he, instead, effected a complete

luxation, in order altogether to interrupt the continuity of the nerve.

Anyhow, this operation was not new, as it had already been recommended

and practised by Peter Foreest, in the sixteenth century, and in an

even more remote epoch by the Arabian surgeon Abulcasis.

Sometimes, when the permanent canine comes forth, it has not room

enough, and therefore grows outward. In this case Bourdet extracts the

first premolar; the canine then advances gradually of itself toward

the space left by the extracted tooth, until it occupies its place

exactly. He also counsels the extraction of the first premolar on the

opposite side of the jaw, in order to preserve the perfect symmetry of

the dental arch on both sides. When the arch formed by the jaws is too

large and of an ugly appearance, Bourdet advises extracting the first

upper and lower premolars, so that the maxillary arches may acquire a

more regular form. In cases in which the defect of form exists only in

the lower jaw, that is, in children who have protruding chins, Bourdet

corrects this deformity by extracting the first lower molars shortly

after their eruption, that is, toward seven years of age. In this

manner, says the author, the lower jaw grows smaller and the deformity

disappears. The inventor of this method, as Bourdet himself tells us,

was the dentist Capuron.

Bourdet made prosthetic pieces, whose base, representing the gums

and the alveoli, was made entirely of gold and covered over with

flesh-colored enamel on the outside, so as to simulate the natural

appearance of the gums; the teeth were adjusted into the artificial

alveoli and fixed with small pins. At other times he made use of a

single piece of hippopotamus tusk, in which he carved not only the

base, but also the three back teeth on each side, whilst the ten front

teeth were human teeth fixed to the base with rivets.

One of Bourdet’s principal merits is that of having brought artificial

plates to perfection by fixing them not, as heretofore, to the opening

of the palate or inside the nose, but by means of lateral clasps fitted

to the teeth.

In a special pamphlet, published in 1764,[486] Bourdet treats of the

diseases of Highmore’s antrum. To facilitate the exit of pathological

humors from the sinus, after the Cowper operation, he introduced a

small cannula, forked at one end, into the antrum and fixed the two

branches of the fork to the neighboring teeth by tying.

In some diseases of the maxillary sinus (polypus, sarcoma, etc.)

Bourdet recommends cauterizing.

Besides his principal work, the pamphlet on the diseases of Highmore’s

antrum, and some others of less importance, Bourdet wrote an excellent

book on dental hygiene,[487] which had the honor of two translations,

one German, the other Italian; the latter published in Venice in 1773.

This celebrated author inveighs bitterly against charlatans and quack

dentists, and throws light on all their impostures. It appears,

however, that in the midst of this despicable class, so justly

condemned by him, there existed a courageous though unscientific

operator, to whom posterity would have attributed due honor had his

name been handed down, for he was the first, in all probability, to

try the implanting of teeth in artificial alveoli. This is, at least,

what we deduce from a passage in one of Bourdet’s works, in which we

read that a charlatan sought to impose on the public the belief that

he could make a hole in the jawbone and plant therein an expressly

prepared artificial tooth, which in a brief space of time would become

perfectly firm and as useful as a natural one. Bourdet adds that an

attentive investigation led to the recognition of the said tooth being

simply that of a sheep. It would appear, therefore, that the operation

had been in reality performed, it matters but little whether with the

tooth of a sheep or with one of another kind.

JOURDAIN was another eminent writer on dental matters, at this period.

Rather than a true surgeon-dentist like Fauchard and Bourdet, Jourdain

was a general surgeon who had dedicated himself with particular

predilection to the study and treatment of oral and maxillary diseases.

And precisely for this reason his writings, although of great

scientific importance, are far from possessing for dental art, properly

so-called, the same value as the works of Fauchard, Bourdet, and other

great dentists of the eighteenth century. His works, as Geist-Jacobi

justly observes, give us the impression of his having been a theorist

rather than a practical dentist.

In 1759 Jourdain described in the _Journal de Médecine_[488] an

improved pelican and another instrument to be used for straightening

teeth inclined inward. Two years later he published his treatise on

the diseases of Highmore’s antrum and on fractures and caries of the

maxillary bone.[489] After this, appeared his book on the formation of

the teeth.[490] He therein describes with great accuracy the dental

follicle from its first appearing to the moment of birth, following

it throughout its evolution. This lengthy book is most interesting,

for it is not a mere compilation, but gives the results of personal

research and experience. But by far the most important of all the works

of this author is his treatise on the diseases and surgical operations

of the mouth.[491] This book went through several French editions,

was translated into German in 1784, and has had, besides, two English

editions in America of comparatively recent date, that is, at Baltimore

in 1849, and at Philadelphia in 1851; all of which proves the great

value of the work; it treats, however, much more of general surgery

of the mouth and neighboring regions than of dental art properly so

called. The first volume of 626 pages is almost entirely dedicated

to the diseases of the maxillary sinus, which, for this author, were

ever the object of favorite and particular study. He is not in favor

of carrying out irrigation of the antrum through the mouth, even when

an alveolar opening has resulted spontaneously through the extraction

of a decayed tooth; he prefers instead, whenever this is possible, the

reopening of the nasal orifice, by means of sounds and cannulæ adapted

for the purpose, that is, varying in thickness and in length, and

curved according to the necessities of the case. The natural opening of

the antrum being reëstablished, one irrigates the cavity through it by

means of a cannula to which a small syringe has been screwed. When the

teeth are sound, notwithstanding the diseased condition of the antrum,

Jourdain is absolutely contrary to the performing of the Cowper-Drake

operation. When, on the contrary, the malady owes its origin to decayed

teeth, Jourdain extracts them, but, as already said, carries out the

detersive and medicated injections through the natural opening.

The author divides the collections of the maxillary sinus into purulent

and lymphatic. The purulent are painful and corrode the bone, the

lymphatic are not painful and do not corrode the bone, but distend and

soften it, producing external tumefaction which yields to pressure,

and, on this being diminished, gave out a characteristic sound. These

so-called lymphatic gatherings referred to by Jourdain are none other

than mucous cysts of the maxillary sinus. Also the other diseases

of Highmore’s antrum (polypi, etc.) are taken by this author into

attentive and minute consideration.

The second part of the work is dedicated to the other diseases of the

maxillary bones (especially of the inferior one), as well as to those

of the lips, cheeks, salivary ducts, gums, frenum linguæ, etc. Dental

hemorrhage and difficult dentition are also spoken of in this volume.

The author relates, with regard to the latter subject, that he had

observed, in corpses of infants who had succumbed to a difficult

dentition, that the crowns of the erupting teeth were covered by the

alveolar margins folded upon them. This, according to him, must be the

reason why even lancing of the gums proves useless in some cases of

difficult dentition; it is therefore necessary, whenever it is possible

to recognize the existence of this state of things, to destroy the bony

margins that oppose the erupting of the teeth; the author declares that

he has frequently done this, with fortunate results.

In 1784 Jourdain published a treatise on artificial dentures.[492]

He therein specially speaks of a complete denture with four springs,

perfectly adapted to the purpose of mastication. The author attributes

the merit of its invention to MASSEZ, who had imagined it toward 1772.

If we may judge, however, by what Joseph Linderer says,[493] this

denture appears to have been too complicated, even when compared with

those described by Fauchard.

LAMORIER and RUSSEL, contemporaries of Jourdain, also studied the

diseases of the maxillary sinus, and published in the _Mémoires

de l’Académie de Chirurgie_, vol. iv, several important cases of

polypi and other diseases of the antrum. Lamorier is not in favor

of the Cowper-Drake operation. He recommends perforating the antrum

immediately above the first molars, or rather between it and the malar

bone. In this he seems to have been influenced by the considerations

that the wall of the cavity here presents the least thickness, and that

this is the most dependent part of the sinus. But he did not always

deem it necessary to make a perforation here, when a fistulous opening

had previously formed in some other place. His method of operating is

as follows: The jaws being closed, the angle of the mouth is drawn

outward and slightly upward with a curved instrument called by the

author a speculum; this done, the gum is incised below the molar

apophysis and the bone laid bare, and then pierced with a spear-pointed

punch. The opening is afterward enlarged if found necessary.

Several contributions to the knowledge of the diseases of the maxillary

sinus and their treatment were made about this time by Beaupréau,

Dubertrand, Caumont, Dupont, Chastanet, Doublet, David, and especially

by Thomas Bordenave, who published an important work on this subject,

collecting a great number of clinical cases of great interest. Speaking

of the Cowper-Drake operation, he expresses the opinion that the tooth

to be extracted is not the same in all cases, for if some one of the

teeth situated below the maxillary sinus should either show signs of

decay or be the seat of persistent pain, the choice should fall upon

that one. If, however, these teeth are all apparently sound, the one

should be chosen that, under percussion, is most sensible to pain. In

those cases in which the choice is altogether free, Bordenave prefers

the extraction of the first large molar, for the double reason that

it is generally situated in correspondence to the central part of the

cavity, and that it is separated from the antrum by a very thin osseous

lamina. In certain cases, the maxillary sinus is divided, by body

lamellæ, into various cavities, and then, as one easily understands,

it may be necessary to extract more than one tooth for the evacuation

of the pathological contents. When the teeth situated below the antrum

have fallen out, or have been extracted some time, and their alveoli

are in consequence obliterated, it will be better to have recourse

to Lamorier’s method. This method may besides be useful, according

to Bordenave, either when all the teeth are sound and it would

consequently be a pity to sacrifice any of them, or in special cases

(such as large polypi of Highmore’s antrum, extraneous bodies, etc.) in

which the Cowper-Drake operation would not afford sufficient space.

L. B. LENTIN, a German, in 1756, published a pamphlet[494] in which

he recommended electricity as a means of cure for toothache. Other

writers recommended the use of the magnet, which means of cure had

already been advised for various affections by Patacelus. During the

latter half of the seventeenth century, Talbot, J. J. Weckes, and P.

Borelli related several cures of headache and toothache by the use of

the magnet. In the eighteenth century F. W. Klaerich, a medical man

in Göttingen, wrote that he had used the magnet advantageously in not

less than 130 cases of toothache.[495] We find it recommended later by

others, Brunner, and particularly J. G. Teske, who, in 1765, wrote a

pamphlet entitled _New experiments for the curing of toothache by means

of magnetic steel_.[496]

He considers the use of the magnet as the most efficacious of all

remedies against toothache, and believes its action to be similar to

that of electricity.

In the following year, however, the belief in the new means of cure was

sensibly shaken by F. E. Glaubrecht, who declared that although the

magnet calms or causes the cessation of the pain at first, it returns

constantly and with much greater violence.[497] The curing efficacy

of the magnet in cases of toothache was highly vaunted in France by

Condamine.[498]

PASCH attributes the effects of the magnet to the chill produced in the

parts to which it is applied; in proof of this he adduces the fact that

if the magnet becomes heated by being kept some time in the hand, it

loses its efficacy altogether, whilst on the other side one may obtain

the very same beneficial results with a simple steel spatula, just on

account of the action of the cold; finally, he adds that the chill

produced by the magnet on the affected part explains very well not only

the good, but also the bad effects which it produces in many cases,

such as increase of the pain, inflammation, tumefaction, and even at

times spasmodic contractions.[499] Thenceforth the enthusiasm for the

magnetic cure diminished gradually, all the more so inasmuch as that

shortly after the celebrated English dentist Thomas Berdmore ridiculed

it by placing it in the same class as charms, exorcisms, and other

foolish and superstitious means of cure.[500]

ADAM ANTON BRUNNER. One of the most distinguished German dentists in

the second half of the eighteenth century was Adam Anton Brunner. His

two principal works are the _Introduction to the science necessary

for a dentist_,[501] and the _Treatise on the eruption of the milk

teeth_.[502]

This author falls into various errors with regard to deciduous teeth.

According to him they are twenty-four in number, and without roots; but

these may develop in those milk teeth which in exceptional cases remain

in their places after the period in which they generally are shed.

A milk tooth, says Brunner, ought never to be extracted unless there be

manifest signs of the presence of the corresponding permanent tooth, or

when it is painful and decayed. Badly grown teeth can often be put in

order solely by the pressure of the fingers frequently repeated, but

when this is not sufficient, one must have recourse to waxed threads or

to special contrivances.

In applying a pivot tooth, he screws the pivot to the artificial crown

and perforates the root canal only just sufficiently to admit the other

extremity, which he drives in by little strokes of a hammer upon the

crown, without its being necessary to use cement. We learn from this

author that in his time there were turners and other craftsmen who

occupied themselves with dental prosthesis.[503]

Brunner prefers gold for fillings to any other substance whatever.

J. G. PASCH, whose name we have already mentioned, relates the case of

a young maidservant becoming suddenly affected with deafness, and who

recovered her hearing completely on the eruption of one of her wisdom

teeth. From a passage of this author’s we learn that at that time

many had recourse to the crushing of the infra-orbital nerve as a cure

for certain cases of toothache. He, however, decidedly rejects such a

remedy, as it proves for the most part ineffectual and may, besides,

produce very serious consequences. This author carried out many

experiments as to the effects of acids on the teeth.[504]

C. A. GRÄBNER[505] recommends not deceiving children by extracting

their teeth unexpectedly, but rather to persuade them of the necessity

of the operation; for by deceiving them one loses their confidence, and

in many cases inspires them with an invincible aversion to the dentist.

This author invented a so-called “calendar of dentition,” for the

purpose of showing at a glance the period of eruption of each of

the deciduous and permanent teeth, and as well for noting down the

time at which the various teeth are changed, so as to avoid every

possible error in this respect. This calendar consists of a figure or

diagram representing the two dental arches, with transversal lines

that separate the different teeth one from the other, the relative

indications being also given.

The observations of this most sensible and conscientious dentist with

regard to the extraction of teeth are worthy of note: “The haphazard

pulling out of a tooth is an easy enough thing; the only requisites for

doing this are impudence and the audacity natural to the half-starved

charlatan. But to carry out the extraction of a tooth in such a manner

that, whatever be the circumstances of the case, no disgrace may accrue

to the operator or damage to the patient, requires serious knowledge,

ability, and prudence.”

RUEFF relates the case of a man, aged forty years, who, having made

use of fumigations of henbane seeds to relieve himself of violent

toothache, obtained the desired end, but at the same time lost his

virile power. He, however, reacquired his force by the care of the

author.[506]

THOMAS BERDMORE was the dentist of George III of England, and one of

the first and most eminent representatives of the dental art in that

country. Before him, no one had had the appointment of dentist to

the royal family. In the year 1768 he published an excellent work on

dentistry,[507] that was translated into various languages and went

through many editions; the last of these appeared in Baltimore in the

year 1844, that is, seventy-six years after the first English edition—a

splendid proof of the worth and fame of this work.

Berdmore contributed to the progress of dentistry in England not only

by his writings, but also by imparting theoretical and practical

instruction to many medical students desirous of practising dental art

as a specialty.[508] One of these was ROBERT WOOFFENDALE, who went to

America in the year 1766, and was the first dentist whose name is there

recorded.

Berdmore considers as the principal advantage of the application of

single artificial teeth the support they afford to the neighboring

ones. Although in no way an impassioned partisan of dental grafting,

like his contemporary, the celebrated surgeon Hunter, he, nevertheless,

sometimes had recourse to replantation, recognizing the advantages to

be derived from this operation, provided it be ably and opportunely

carried out; but he was decidedly averse to transplantation. Before

definitely inserting a gold filling, Berdmore considers it a good

practice to try the tolerance of the tooth with a temporary filling

of cement or some other like substance. His experiments as to the

action of acids on the teeth are most interesting. He found that nitric

acid destroys the enamel in a quarter of an hour; muriatic acid acts

almost as rapidly, but with the difference that it also alters the

color of the interior parts; sulphuric acid renders the teeth very

white, and, even if used for three or four days, only destroys a small

portion of the dental substance, but by reason of its action the enamel

becomes rough and can be easily scraped away with a knife. Remarkable

experiments on this subject were also made later by Kemme.[509]

PIERRE AUZEBI, a dentist at Lyons, published a treatise on odontology

in 1771, which is only remarkable for certain strange ideas that he

therein exposes, the entire book being in complete contradiction with

the great progress already realized, at that period, in dental science.

Auzebi likens the human body to a hydraulic machine, formed by the

union of solid and liquid parts. For him the bones are merely _folded

membranes_ and the teeth are _bones composed of small membranes_. The

author declares that he is unable to admit the theory of germs in the

genesis of the teeth because “these germs, being all in identical

conditions as to heat and moisture, ought all to develop at the same

time like the grains of corn in a field.” Rather than having their

origin from special germs, the teeth, he says, are derived from

lymph, this being, according to Auzebi, the fundamental substance

from which all the hard parts of the body are generated. A drop of

lymph gathered at the bottom of the alveolus hardens and constitutes

the first beginning in the formation of the teeth. Beneath this other

lymph is gradually collected, which pushes upward and the part of the

tooth already formed, surrounds the dental vessels, and thus becomes

the root of the tooth. To facilitate dentition he recommends, among

other things, rubbing the gums with hard, rough, and angular bodies.

He also maintains, as does Brunner, that the milk teeth have no roots,

contradicting, in this respect, the opinion of Fauchard, of Bunon, of

Bourdet, who decidedly affirm that the deciduous teeth are furnished

with roots, precisely the same as the permanent ones. According to

him, when it so happens that the milk teeth have roots, they are not

shed. To calm toothache, the author recommended a sedative elixir,

the aspirating of a few drops of which sufficed to obtain the desired

effect.[510]

JOHN AITKIN, in 1771, perfected the English key, so as to render the

extraction of the teeth easier and to avoid the danger of fracturing

the alveolus or the tooth itself, and of injuring the gums.[511]

FRÈRE CÔME, a celebrated French surgeon, also contributed to the

perfecting of this instrument.[512]

In 1771-72, Fr. L. Weyland and Henkel recorded some very important

cases of diseases of Highmore’s antrum.[513]

W. BROMFIELD, in a collection of surgical observations and cases

published in London in the year 1773, also speaks of affections of the

maxillary sinus. He says that he has had opportunity of persuading

himself that the purulent gatherings of this cavity not unfrequently

discharge spontaneously during the night, finding their exit through

the natural orifice of the antrum, when the body is in the horizontal

position.[514]

JOHN HUNTER, the celebrated surgeon, must be named among the most

illustrious champions of odontology in England. He was born February

13, 1728. His first instructor in medical studies was his brother,

William Hunter, a scientist of great merit, whose school of anatomy in

London was attended by numerous students from all parts of the British

Kingdom. Under so excellent a guide John Hunter made rapid progress,

and in less than twenty years became the most famous physiologist and

professor of surgery of that day. He was surgeon-general to the English

army.

His _Natural History of the Human Teeth_ (London, 1771) and his

_Practical Treatise on the Diseases of the Teeth_ (London, 1778)

initiated in England a new epoch for the dental art, which, abandoning

its blind empiricism, began to take its stand on the basis of rigorous

scientific observation.

But although Hunter’s merits were great with respect to the scientific

development of odontology, we must remember that he was a general

surgeon, and not a dentist, and that precisely for this reason he had

not, neither could he have, other than a restricted personal experience

relative to the treatment of dental diseases. This explains why the

anatomical and physiological part of Hunter’s works on the teeth is so

far superior to the part concerning practical treatment.

Indeed, in the field of practice, this author often falls into grave

contradictions, and is frequently hesitating and uncertain on important

points of dental therapeutics.

Hunter gives a very long and detailed description of all the parts

constituting the oral cavity and the masticatory apparatus. He sought

to establish a scientific nomenclature for the teeth, and in fact the

denominations of _cuspidati_ for the canine teeth and of _bicuspids_

or _bicuspidati_ for the small molars originated with him. Hunter says

that the enamel of the teeth is a fibrous structure, and that its

fibers depart from the body of the tooth like rays. He believes it

to be entirely inorganic, as it is absolutely impossible to convert

it into animal mucus. The tooth is constituted for the most part by

a long mass (it is thus he calls the dentine), which is, however,

much harder and denser than any other bone. This part of the tooth is

formed of concentric lamellæ, and is vascular, as is proved by the

exostosis of the roots and the adhesions that exist at times between

the roots and the alveoli. Hunter gives a good description of the

pulp cavity and of the pulp itself. He studied odontogeny with great

care, as is demonstrated by his special researches on this point. He

admits the existence of distinct germs for the enamel and for the

dentine. According to him the incisors are formed from three points

of ossification, the canines from one, and the molars from three

or four. The tooth after its eruption is an extraneous body “with

respect to a circulation through its substance, but they have most

certainly a living principle by which means they make part of the

body, and are capable of uniting with any part of a living body.” The

milk teeth, says Hunter, are not shed by a mechanical action of the

second teeth, but by an organizing law of Nature. The physiology of

the masticatory apparatus is treated by Hunter with great accuracy and

most extensively. This author combats, by many arguments, the opinion

that the teeth grow continually; he explains the apparent lengthening

of those teeth whose antagonists are wanting, by the tendency of

the alveoli to fill up, which, however, is not possible in normal

conditions, because of the constant pressure exercised upon the teeth

by their antagonists.

Caries, says Hunter, is a disease of altogether obscure origin; it is

not owing to external irritation or to chemical processes, and seems to

be a morbid form altogether peculiar to the teeth. Only in very rare

cases does it attack the roots of the teeth. It rarely appears after

fifty years of age. Hunter does not admit that this disease may be

communicated by one tooth to another. As to its treatment, the caries,

if superficial, may be completely removed by filing the decayed part

of the tooth before the disease penetrates to the cavity, and its

spreading will thus be arrested for a time at least. In cases where

the caries penetrates to some depth, without, however, the destruction

of the crown of the tooth being so extensive as to render it useless,

Hunter believed the best mode of treatment to be extraction and

replanting of the tooth after having subjected it to boiling in order

to cleanse it perfectly and to destroy its vitality entirely, this

being, according to him, the mode of preventing the further destruction

of the tooth, which once dead can no longer be the seat of any disease.

If, instead, one wishes to have recourse to cauterization of the

nerve, it is necessary to reach as far as the apex of the root; which,

however, is not always possible. This is a very important point, for no

one before Hunter had yet affirmed the necessity of entirely destroying

the diseased pulp as an indispensable condition of the success of the

filling to be later carried out in order to conserve the tooth.

Hunter is extremely concise when speaking of the filling of teeth;

considering the great importance of this argument, his conciseness can

only depend on his having had no personal experience in the matter. He

considers lead preferable for fillings.

The frequent occurrence of erosion of the teeth, whether of the

cuneiform variety or of other kinds, did not escape the attention of

this acute observer, but he was not able to give any explanation of it.

In cases of empyema of Highmore’s antrum, Hunter advises the opening of

the cavity through the alveolus of the first or second large molar.

Periodontitis is classified by the author among the diseases of the

alveolar process. He occupies himself with this affection at great

length, seeking to explain the mode in which it is produced. He

distinguishes two forms of the disease, according to whether or not

there be exit of pus from the alveolus. The alveolar process is,

in his opinion, the principal seat of the disease, to which, as a

complication, is added the retraction of the gums. For the diseased

alveolus the tooth becomes, in a certain manner, an extraneous body, of

which it tends to rid itself. The alveolar margins undergo absorption;

the bottom of the alveolus tends to fill up, analogously to what occurs

after extraction, and the falling out of the tooth ensues as a natural

consequence of this process. An altogether similar process, producing

the falling out of the teeth, is the normal consequence of senility.

The author considers that the malady in question has as its point of

departure an irritation caused by a tooth; and as almost a proof of

this he relates a case in which the extraction of the affected tooth,

an upper incisor which became too long, and the transplantation of

another tooth caused the cessation of the morbid process and the

perfect consolidation of the transplanted tooth. However, Hunter does

not draw from this isolated case the conclusion that transplantation

may be elevated to a method of cure for this malady. Indeed, he says

that, so far as is known to him, there is no means of prevention

or of cure for it. His treatment, therefore, is merely directed to

the curing, in so far as is possible, the phlogistic symptoms, by

scarifications of the gum and by the use of astringent remedies. He

does not exclude the possibility of a complete recovery, but the mode

in which this obtains seems to him as obscure as is the nature of the

disease itself.

In speaking of the correction of dental irregularities, Hunter advises

not to extract the milk teeth unless this be an absolute necessity.

He says, besides, that it is useless to extract any tooth whatever,

unless one endeavors at the same time to force the irregular tooth or

teeth into their normal position by exercising the requisite pressure

upon them. In young subjects the regulating of crooked teeth is an easy

matter, because of the softness of the maxillary bone. However, it

should not be undertaken before all the bicuspids have come through.

To correct protrusion of the upper jaw, the author recommends the

extraction of a bicuspid on each side. To regulate the incisors it is

sometimes necessary to make them rotate on their axis with the forceps.

In certain cases of protrusion of the lower jaw one may have recourse

with advantage to the inclined plane.

As a general rule, it is useless to lay bare a tooth with the

lancet before extracting it, although in certain cases this may be

advantageous in order to render its extraction easier and less painful.

Hunter was a strenuous partisan of replantation and transplantation of

the teeth; he made various experiments on animals, and treated this

important argument with particular fulness and much better than had

been done up to then by others.

In cases of difficult dentition he considered incision of the gums most

useful and, if necessary, to be had recourse to several times.

FOUCOU, the French dentist, in 1774, made known a compressor invented

by him for arresting hemorrhage ensuing on the extraction of teeth.

This instrument, which could be used for either jaw, exercised its

pressure not only in a vertical direction, but also laterally, and

did not give much inconvenience to the patient. Carabelli, who wrote

seventy years later, speaks with praise of Foucou’s compressor, which

he considers the best instrument of its kind.

COURTOIS, in his book published in 1775,[515] says that the enamel

of the teeth only reaches its perfection of development at twenty

to twenty-two years of age, and begins thenceforward to wear away

gradually. In speaking of the enamel, he advises avoiding the use of

the file as much as possible. This author’s book is interesting for the

many important clinical cases it contains.

WILLICH, in 1778, related a most curious case relating to a woman,

aged forty years, who had never had her menstrual function, but

had, nevertheless, given birth to two children; the extraction of a

tooth was followed by an alveolar hemorrhage that lasted an hour;

thenceforward, this hemorrhage recurred regularly each month, for the

space of eight years.

BÜCKING, in 1782, published a _Complete Guide to the Extraction of

the Teeth_,[516] wherein he minutely describes all the instruments,

their use, the position of the operator and of the patient, indicating

at the same time the instruments best adapted for the extraction of

each tooth. He declares himself averse to the practice of subluxation

as a means of cure for toothache, a method which, first recommended

by the Arab physician Avicenna, and later, in the sixteenth century,

by Peter Foreest, had fallen into oblivion for a long time, and was

again brought into credit by two celebrated French dentists, Mouton

and Bourdet, the latter of whom relates having had recourse to it

successfully in not less than six hundred cases.

Notwithstanding the high authority of this illustrious dentist, Bücking

does not consider this method of cure advisable, adducing, however,

in support of his opinion, arguments of no great value, viz., that

teeth after subluxation continue painful for a certain time, and that

they always remain in an oblique position. The method in question,

which has the effect of breaking the dental nerve, is, in our opinion,

practically equivalent to a replantation, or is, in point of fact, a

replantation, when the luxation of the tooth is complete. The arguments

that Bücking brings forward against it are futile; the first objection,

for the most part, does not subsist, and, in any case, the persistence

of pain for a short time would be of small importance compared with the

great advantage of preserving the tooth; as to the second, it is to be

understood of itself that subluxation performed by means of the pelican

(the instrument then used for the operation) would cause the tooth to

assume an oblique position; but even supposing it did not straighten

up of itself, there could not have been any difficulty for the good

dentists of that period in forcing the tooth again into normal position

and in maintaining it there. The weak side of the operation consisted

rather in the fact of its being probably carried out without due

consideration of the dangers resulting from the possible alterations of

the dental pulp.

At the time of which we are writing many believed that the enamel

of the teeth could be regenerated altogether or in part, and that,

therefore, it was of no great consequence that it should be worn

away by the use of the file or of abrasive dentifrice powders. Thus,

for example, the renowned surgeon Theden expressly recommended such

powders, as the best adapted for cleaning the teeth and for freeing

them from tartar.[517]

VAN WY,[518] the Dutch surgeon, in 1784, related two cases of

regeneration of the maxillary bones; other cases of the same kind were

related some years later by Percy and Boulet.[519]

CHOPART and DESAULT recommended, in cases of difficult dentition, the

excision of the gum in correspondence with the teeth that are to come

out, rather than simple incisions.[520]

[Illustration: Antonio Campani.]

[Illustration: FIG. 96

Pelican for extracting incisor, canine, and molar teeth (Campani,

1786).]

ANTONIO CAMPANI, of Florence, published in 1786 a treatise on

dentistry,[521] very elegantly printed, and illustrated with thirty-six

plates very neatly carried out. This book, however, contains nothing of

real importance for the development of dentistry.

BENJAMIN BELL, the English surgeon, a contemporary of Hunter, also

devoted much attention to diseases of the teeth, and, if it may be

argued from the clear and precise manner in which he expresses his

opinions on various questions relating to dental pathology and therapy,

it would seem that he had much greater experience in this field than

the celebrated Hunter.

[Illustration: FIG. 97

Pelicans for extracting wisdom teeth (Campani).]

With regard to incision of the gums, in cases of difficult dentition,

this author contradicts certain assertions of the German surgeon

Isenflamm (1782), who argued that when the tooth is already to be

perceived through the gum, the incisions are altogether useless, while

if the tooth be still at some depth, the gingival incision will soon

close again, so that the cicatrix will render the eruption of the

tooth still more difficult. Bell admits, too, that lancing the gum is

altogether superfluous when the tooth has pierced the tissue, all the

more so that the accidents provoked by the eruption are then generally

already passed and gone, but the operation ought, in his opinion, to

take place much earlier; and should the wound close again before the

tooth has erupted, the gum must be lanced a second time.

[Illustration: FIG. 98

Campani’s forceps: The first for molar teeth when loose or after having

been shaken with the pelican; the second for deciduous teeth.]

Bell contradicts the opinion of Jourdain and Hunter that the morbid

gatherings of Highmore’s antrum are generally consequent upon the

closing of the normal opening of the cavity in the middle meatus. In

many cases of disease of the maxillary sinus this orifice remains

open, the liquid therein collected discharging itself not unfrequently

through it, in certain positions of the body. Instead of penetrating

into the antrum through the nasal orifice, as Jourdain would have

it, Bell advises opening the cavity by Lamorier’s, or, better still,

by Drake’s method. Except in special cases, the first or second molar

ought to be extracted, but preferably the second. After trepanning the

alveolus and emptying the cavity, the opening should be closed with a

conically shaped peg to prevent its slipping into the cavity. From time

to time the liquid that tends to reaccumulate should be allowed exit,

and detersive injections should be made, preferably of lime water.

[Illustration: FIG. 99

Two key instruments with changeable hooks (Campani).]

Looseness of the teeth, which in old age may be considered a normal

condition, is always a disease when it occurs in youth. In certain

cases its cause is unknown, in others it depends on an affection of the

gums, either of a scorbutic nature or consequent on an accumulation of

tartar.

[Illustration: FIG. 100

An instrument especially destined to extract loose bicuspid teeth. The

screw in the interior of the instrument allowed the hook to be brought

to just the right point in each case (Campani).]

According to Bell, dental caries is generally owing to a bad condition

of the humors of the entire body and to a peculiar morbid disposition,

rather than to external causes acting locally, although these latter

may contribute, together with the general causes, to the producing of

the disease.

[Illustration: FIG. 101

Campani’s dental cauteries: The large ones for cases of post-extractive

hemorrhage; the small ones for the cauterization of carious cavities.]

[Illustration: Nicholas Dubois Dechémant.]

This author was decidedly averse to the use of the file. For stopping

carious cavities he advises the use of mastic, gum lac, or wax,

if the cavity is large and funnel-shaped; this stopping, however,

requires to be renewed frequently. But when the cavity, wider at the

bottom, narrows toward the surface, one ought to use gold or, still

better, tin-foil. The pulp ought always to be destroyed previously by

cauterization.

Bell advises great caution in carrying out transplantation, it having

been proved by many examples that contagious maladies of a serious

nature may easily be communicated in this way from one individual to

another.[522]

In the case of a young woman who had an upper incisor transplanted,

WATSON observed undoubted symptoms of syphilitic infection with

supervening accidents of exceptional gravity, which in spite of careful

treatment ended in death.[523]

Hunter also relates having observed, in seven cases of transplantation,

very serious accidents which, however, he did not believe to be owing

to syphilis, although bearing a certain symptomatic resemblance to it.

Contrariwise, the well-known German surgeon Richter not only admitted

the possibility of transmitting syphilis through a transplanted tooth,

but even that the transplantation of an altogether healthy tooth from

the mouth of a person undoubtedly free from syphilis might be followed

by serious accidents of a syphilitic nature, and this because the

possible existence of a latent syphilis in the person to whose mouth

the tooth was transplanted cannot be excluded; in which case the

abnormal stimulus exercised by the transplanted tooth might very well

give rise to syphilitic manifestations. Therefore, the fact that the

person who furnished the tooth was and continued to be in a state of

perfect health (as precisely in the case cited by Watson) would not

be sufficient proof that the accidents ensuing on the transplantation

might not be of a syphilitic nature.

LETTSON also observed, in certain cases of transplantation, accidents

of more or less gravity which he held to be due to syphilis, calling,

however, to mind a case cited by Kuhn, of Philadelphia, where the

possibility of syphilis was not to be thought of, as the morbid

symptoms disappeared entirely, without any treatment, as soon as the

transplanted tooth was removed.[524]

AUGUST G. RICHTER, the above-named German surgeon, in those portions

of his work dedicated to dental affections and diseases of Highmore’s

antrum, treated these subjects with admirable clearness and order,

without contributing, however, anything original to the development of

dental surgery.[525]

NICHOLAS DUBOIS DE CHEMANT, in 1788, of whom we shall later have

occasion to speak again, published in Paris his first pamphlet on

mineral teeth, entitled _Sur les avantages des nouvelles dents, et

rateliers artificiels, incorruptibles, sans odeur_.

JEAN JACQUES JOSEPH SERRE (1759 to 1830). Among the dentists of the

end of the eighteenth century and the beginning of the nineteenth, a

special mention is due to Jean Jacques Joseph Serre. He was born at

Mons, in Belgium, but his remarkable practical and scientific activity

was chiefly called into exercise in Vienna and in Berlin. He published

several works, the most important of which is a practical treatise on

dental operations.[526]

Among his minor works, one edited in Vienna, in 1788, treats of

toothache during pregnancy; another, printed in Leipsic in 1791, treats

most extensively of diseases of the gums; a third speaks of the mode of

maintaining the teeth and gums in good condition. This little book of

dental hygiene, like the rest of Serre’s books, met with great favor,

and went through two editions in a brief space of time (Berlin, 1809 to

1812).

The works of this author show great study, very wide practice, and an

admirable spirit of observation and research. They had the merit of

greatly contributing to raise the level of dental culture in Germany,

and one finds in them a pretty nearly complete account of the dentistry

of that period. Apart from this, they possess a special interest

because of the vast number of dates and important historical facts

therein contained.

As it would be useless here to enter into a minute analysis of the

contents of these books, we will limit ourselves to mentioning a few

ideas of which Serre was a strenuous supporter.

He combats an old prejudice that had recently been reinforced by the

authority of Jourdain, that is, that it does harm to extract a tooth

when the soft parts around it are inflamed and swollen. He likewise

combats the prejudice, also of very ancient date, that teeth ought not

to be extracted during pregnancy. Only, he considers it as well to

avoid the cauterization of the dental pulp in cases of gestation. In

extracting teeth, the forceps ought only to be used after the tooth has

been luxated by means of the pelican. Serre highly approves of this

instrument, although he recognizes it to be a dangerous one in the

hands of those who do not know how to make a proper use of it. This

author invented or perfected various extracting instruments, among

which a conical screw for extraction of roots hollowed out by caries

deserves particular mention, and which, under a somewhat modified form,

is still in use.

[Illustration: Jean Jacques Joseph Serre.]

One of the most interesting chapters of Serre’s great work is the one

in which he treats of affections of Highmore’s cavity.[527] He speaks

at length of the anatomy of the maxillary sinus, of its relation to the

teeth situated below it, of the various modes in which the diseases

of the antrum are produced, of their symptoms and treatment. He passes

in review the various operative methods, and finds that in general the

Cowper-Drake is the one to be preferred to all the others. He says

that to open the sinus the simple extraction of a molar suffices in

the greater number of cases, the trepanning of the alveolus not being

generally necessary.

J. ARNEMAN, in 1766, published at Göttingen a synopsis of surgical

instruments[528] that deserves mention in so far that the dental

instruments of that time as well as those of earlier periods are

therein taken into account with sufficient exactness.

A. F. HECKER attributed the accidents of difficult dentition to a

special alteration of the saliva caused by the irritation deriving

from the erupting teeth. In these cases the saliva is supposed by him

to acquire a high degree of acridness and to become almost similar to

the poison of rabies. Departing from this theory, the author declares

it to be necessary to mitigate the irritation produced on the gums

and other parts of the mouth by the altered condition of the saliva,

as well as to modify the quality of the saliva itself and to promote

the elimination of the same from the body by emetics and aperients.

According to him, liquid carbonate of potash administered in drops,

together with syrup of poppy heads, manna, etc., is a most useful

remedy, having specially for its effect to diminish the acridness of

the saliva.

Besides this remedy, the author extols the use of blisters behind the

ears, as also of tepid baths, which calm pain and spasms, favor the

excretions, and procure repose and sleep. He rejects the incision of

the gums as altogether useless, and is most opposed to the use of

opium, which he states renders children liable to apoplexy.

And here we will mention, rather by way of curiosity than for any real

historical interest which they possess, two pamphlets on _odontitis_,

published respectively in 1791 and 1794 by Ploucquet and Kappis, who

maintained that not only the dental pulp, but all the parts that form

the tooth are susceptible of inflammation.[529] In Kappis’ pamphlet

we find the following ideas developed, upon which we do not think

necessary to comment. The inflammatory process consists essentially

in the increased flow of humors to a given part and in a more or less

intense reaction of the vital force. Both of these things may take

place in the teeth. These are liable to swell, that is, to undergo

an increase of all their dimensions, in proof of which assertion the

author relates the case of an individual, who when attacked by a

violent toothache had found the spaces between his teeth so narrowed

that it was no longer possible to make use of his usual toothpick,

even if he had tried to do so regardless of pain. But when the

toothache was over, the same toothpick again became serviceable as

before. He says that there is no cause for wonder that in odontitis no

redness of the teeth is to be perceived, for in other inflammations

as well, redness is wanting, and, moreover, it exists in the interior

membrane of the tooth. As in other inflammations, so also in odontitis,

the usual issue is resolution. Dental fistulæ may derive from internal

suppuration. The impurities deposited on the teeth are by him supposed

to be owing to an increase of their secretion! According to the author,

caries, the breaking down of teeth apparently healthy, as well as

their falling out, is generally caused by an inflammation of these

organs, that is, by odontitis, an affection that, he says, may be of

very varied kind, the principal forms being the rheumatic, arthritic,

sympathetic, and gastric.

RANIERI GERBI.[530] In a book by this author we find recommended a

very singular cure for toothache, even of the most violent nature. It

is in no way scientific, and is besides not particularly pleasant,

notwithstanding that the author, professor at the University of Pisa,

was a scientist of merit, enjoying special esteem as a mathematician

and cultivator of natural sciences.

Under the name of _curculio anti-odontalgicus_ he describes an insect

living habitually inside the flowers of the _carduus spinosissimus_,

that could be used with great advantage against toothache, in the

following manner: One crushes fourteen or fifteen larvæ of the insect

between the thumb and forefinger, and then rubs the two fingers

together until the matter remaining upon them is entirely absorbed.

Instead of the larvæ (which, as is known, represent the first stage

of insect life) one may also use the fully developed insects. One

then applies the two fingers that have crushed the insects or their

larvæ upon the decayed and aching tooth. If the pain is of a nature

to be cured by this means, it diminishes almost instantaneously,

and ceases altogether in a few minutes. It is said that the fingers

preserve their healing power for a great length of time, even a whole

year, and in proof of these assertions Ranieri Gerbi speaks of no

less than six hundred cures performed! Other insects besides the

_curculio anti-odontalgicus_, used in the same manner, are said to

possess the same curative properties, among them the _curculio jaceæ_,

_carabus chrysocephalus_, and the _curculio Bacchus_, which last,

says Gerbi, has long been used for this purpose by the peasants of

Tuscany. The author also says that some German doctors and naturalists

experimented with success with several insects indigenous to Germany

as remedies against toothache. These insects, also mentioned in a

work published in Bayreuth in 1796, author unknown, are:[531] the

_coccinella septempunctata_, the _coccinella bipunctata_, the _carabus

ferrugineus_, the _chrysomela sanguinolenta_, the _chrysomela populi_,

the cantharis or Spanish fly, and others. Later on, Hirsch also

extolled the healing power of another insect, the _cynips rosarum_.

With regard to the mode of application, Gerbi says that instead of

crushing and rubbing these insects or their larvæ between the fingers,

one can use a piece of wash leather in a similar manner.

It is to be observed, however, that the insects that are found

generally in the ripe wild teasle—or more precisely their larvæ—had

already been used for a long time as a remedy against toothache;

indeed, we even find these means of cure recommended in the natural

history of Pliny. In a book entitled _Histoire d’un voyage aux îles

Malouines fait en 1763 et 1764_, by a certain Dom Pernetty, this

author speaks of some remedies made known to him by the Superior of

the Franciscan friars of Montevideo; and among others one finds the

following: “One draws out the worm that is generally found in the head

of the fuller’s teasle when this is ripe. One rolls this worm between

the index finger and the thumb, lightly pressing it until it dies

of languor. The one or the other of the two fingers applied on the

aching tooth will have the virtue, for a year at least, of making the

toothache cease.”[532]

HEINRICH CALLISEN, in an excellent treatise on surgery[533] published

at Copenhagen in 1788, writes at sufficient length and with great

accuracy on dental and maxillary diseases. According to this writer,

it rarely suffices to trepan one alveolus for the treatment of the

morbid collections of Highmore’s antrum, as the maxillary sinus is

very often divided by partitions into various cells, so that in order

to give exit to the pus contained in each of them, it is necessary to

extract several teeth and trepan their alveoli.[534] One ought not,

therefore, to give the preference to this method, unless in the case of

the teeth in question being decayed. But should they all be in a good

state, or should a large opening be necessary because of the nature

of the disease in the cavity, it will be better to follow Lamorier’s

method, that is, to incise the gum crosswise under the malar process

and then, after scraping away the periosteum, trepan the bone. Further,

in the case of the disease in the maxillary sinus having given rise to

tumefaction, softening of the bone, and fluctuation in the palatine

region, it is precisely there that the perforation ought to be carried

out. To prevent the reclosing of the opening before the cure is

completed, the author advises the use of pledgets, small bougies, a

piece of prepared sponge, or even a small tube. According to Callisen,

the injections through the nasal orifice of the maxillary sinus are

partly impracticable, and partly of no utility.

It always does more harm than good to file or to scrape the decayed

part of a tooth, without stopping it afterward, as by thus doing, says

the author, one only renders it still more liable to the access and

the action of harmful external influences. In preparing the cavity

for stopping, the bottom of it should be more ample than its external

aperture, that the filling may remain firm.

For extracting molars, he makes use either of the pelican or of the

key; for the incisors and the canines, of the forceps; and for roots,

of the goat’s foot.

Callisen treats incipient _idiopathic_ epulis by destroying it through

cauterization, after having covered the teeth with wax; if the epulis

be large and more or less hard, he removes it with the bistoury; as to

_symptomatic_ epulis, he holds the removal of the original cause to be

the best mode of treatment.

This author declares himself decidedly in favor of replantation and

transplantation, expressing the idea that these methods are always

to be preferred to the application of artificial teeth. He maintains

that after a tooth has been replanted, and its consolidation has taken

place, there is no possibility of any further pain, the nerve being

broken. The author relates a brilliant cure which he carried out upon

a lieutenant, who, during the siege of Copenhagen, had received a blow

that had sent all his front teeth into his mouth. Callisen immediately

put them all back in their places with such ability that they became

perfectly firm again. With reference to transplantation, he only

believes in its being possible for teeth with a single root.

In works published toward 1790, Lentin and Conradi, devoted their

particular attention to the morbid conditions that produce looseness

and spontaneous falling of the teeth. For the treatment of these

conditions Conradi recommended general and local remedies. The general

remedies were directed to the suppressing of acridness in the blood,

which he considered to be an etiological element of primary importance.

As to the local remedies, they ought specially to consist in keeping

the teeth clean by the use of a toothbrush, in painting the gums with

tincture of catechu and myrrh, and in rinsing the mouth frequently with

a decoction of cinchona or of willow bark. Against toothache caused by

caries, he particularly advises essence of cloves, introduced into the

carious cavity on a piece of cotton-wool.[535]

FRIEDRICH HIRSCH was much less disposed than were many of the preceding

writers to incision of the gums in cases of difficult dentition.

Against the accidents connected with this morbid condition, he

prefers, in general, the use of gentle aperients or of emetics, and

regards the scarification of the gums as opportune only in cases

where symptoms indicating a high degree of nervous tension manifest

themselves.

Against incipient caries, Hirsch used simple cauterization, which

he held to be capable of arresting the morbid process, at least in

many cases. He says, however, that when a real carious cavity exists,

it is absolutely necessary to stop it; and for this purpose, rather

than metallic or resinous fillings, he prefers a cement of turpentine

and quicklime, made into a paste with varnish of oil of linseed.

Nevertheless, when it is a case of the lower teeth, tin-foil is also,

according to him, an excellent filling material.

Like some of the preceding authors, Hirsch admitted the existence of

_interior caries_ in apparently healthy teeth, and was the first to

indicate a good mode of diagnosticating these occult dental affections.

It consists in tapping the suspected teeth with a sound until one finds

the one in which the percussion provokes pain, and this will be the

diseased tooth. One detaches the gum from the neck of this tooth, and

at the point, on the neck itself or on the beginning of the root, where

a small protrusion is found, one perforates the tooth with a chisel,

or some other fit instrument, so as to penetrate to the interior of

it. Through this passage one introduces into the tooth a fine, curved,

red-hot sound, repeating the operation several times. Lastly, one fills

the cavity with lead; and in this manner the tooth will be cured and no

longer painful.

In speaking of the correction of dental anomalies, Hirsch relates a

case in which the deformity consisted in the union of two central

incisors, which formed one single piece, resembling a paddle, and

spoiled the appearance of the face. He divided them with a saw,

cauterized the surfaces of the section, scarified the gum, and, to

gain a little space, introduced a small wedge, until the gum had grown

up within the new dental interstice, thus giving an altogether normal

appearance to the part.

It is noteworthy that Hirsch made use almost exclusively of the goat’s

foot for the extraction of teeth, of whatever kind they might be, the

instrument being rather longer, however, than that ordinarily known by

this name, and making his left hand serve as a lever rest.

To arrest strong hemorrhage ensuing from the extraction of teeth,

Hirsch used scraped parchment, which he introduced into the alveolus

and pressed with force into it by means of a sound; then he superposed

compresses and kept the jaws tight together with a bandage passed

around the head.

This author, too, was very favorable to replantation. As to

transplantation, he says that even when the gum and the alveolus are

quite healthy, the individual entirely free from scurvy and syphilis,

and not above fifty years of age, the transplanted teeth do not take

root perfectly except in an average of one case in three. For carrying

out this operation he never made use of teeth extracted from the mouth

of a living person, but, on the contrary, he used the teeth of young

and healthy subjects who had died a violent death; these were, besides,

carefully cleaned before transplanting them, and in this way the author

believed the transmission of disease to be nearly impossible.[536]

[Illustration: FIG. 102

Full lower set in hippopotamus ivory, with human front teeth;

seventeenth century. (From Guerini’s collection.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 103

Upper denture in ivory, at the end of the eighteenth century, for a

case in which the last molars and the front teeth were present. (From

Guerini’s collection.)]

J. E. WICHMANN combated energetically the practice, then pretty

general, of endeavoring to facilitate the eruption of the teeth

by incision of the gums. He considered this practice as one to be

absolutely rejected, supporting his opinion on the consideration that

dentition, being an altogether physiological process, which, moreover,

takes place in parts relatively of but little importance, never can

give rise of itself alone to serious accidents. Besides this, he says,

it is very difficult to say which tooth precisely is about to erupt

and at what point. The incisions would, therefore, have to be made

by chance, which would often render the morbid condition still more

serious.

K. A. BLUMENTHAL endeavored to confute Wichmann’s opinions, with but

little success; for, indeed, the same opinions, expressed later by J.

H. Sternberg in a more detailed manner and with ampler views of the

subject, met with ever-increasing approval. Thenceforth, the practice

of gingival incisions in cases of difficult dentition fell more and

more into discredit.[537]

ROBERT BUNON,[538] the French dentist, is one of the most illustrious

personalities to be met with in the history of our profession. He was

born at the beginning of the eighteenth century, and devoted himself

betimes to the dental art, gathering instruction therein partly from

different dentists and partly from the few odontological books he

was able to find. In this manner he learned pretty much all that was

known at that time by dentists in general. He then decided to travel,

in order to acquire further knowledge and experience. He practised

especially in the north of France and in what is now the state of

Belgium; at Antwerp, Brussels, Givet, Maubeuge, Cambrai. In his ardent

thirst for knowledge, when he happened to pass through a town where

some dentist of note resided, he never neglected to call on him, thus

acquiring fresh information and perfecting himself as well in the

practical exercise of his profession. At the same time, his desire to

learn all that was new concerning dental art and science was so intense

that he had translations made of the medical and surgical works of

Latin, Italian, German, and English authors. However, all this reading,

although it enlarged his general knowledge, taught him nothing, or

almost nothing, about those subjects that interested him above all the

others. His practical experiences, meanwhile, brought a great number of

patients to his notice, and, being by nature a very acute observer, he

was able to establish the existence of many facts up to then unknown.

At this time he commenced his studies on dental erosion, on the

development of the teeth, and on the prophylaxis of dental maladies,

his favorite subject. “I felt,” he writes, “that the necessity of

having recourse day by day to the extraction of teeth resulted from

deficient knowledge on our part, and I considered this extreme remedy

as one of the greatest evils to humanity.”[539] He therefore endeavored

to extend his own knowledge in every possible way, and as one means

of doing this he visited hospitals and schools; and, ardent champion

as he was of conservative dentistry and of prophylaxis, he succeeded

in interesting medical men and surgeons, midwives and schoolmasters,

and parish priests as well, in the question of the preservation of

the teeth. The teeth he extracted he kept for the purpose of studying

the conformation, the lesions, the dental anomalies; sometimes he

split them up to examine the dental pulp. And he never neglected an

opportunity of procuring anatomical pieces that appeared interesting to

him.

In 1728 Fauchard’s book, _Le Chirurgien Dentiste_, appeared. The fame

of this work reached Belgium, where Bunon then was, and he immediately

set about trying to get a copy of it. After searching in various towns,

he finally found one in Givet. He read it with the greatest interest,

and later, in one of his works, spoke of it in terms of highest praise.

It would seem, however, that he did not learn much that was new to

him by reading this book, which proves that he already possessed a

vast odontological culture and was also profoundly versed in technical

dentistry, which forms the most important part of Fauchard’s book. He

was somewhat astonished at finding in this celebrated author’s work

hardly anything on the subjects that principally interested him, that

is, the erosion, the development of the teeth, and the prophylaxis of

caries. This circumstance very clearly reveals the different mental

tendencies in these two great men, the one, drawn toward the practical

side of the profession which principally interests him and forms the

basis of his work, the other, an impassioned searcher into causes, and

student of prophylaxis.

After the perusal of Fauchard’s book, Bunon, who had already conceived

the idea of publishing the results of his observations and of his own

particular studies, felt more than ever the propriety and necessity

of doing so; and to realize his idea, he established himself toward

the year 1735 at Paris. Two years later, just when the manuscript of

his work was almost finished, Gerauldy’s book appeared. Bunon relates

that he opened this book in fear and trembling; its title, _The art of

preserving the teeth_, gave him reason to fear that Gerauldy might have

profited by some of the ideas and observations he had communicated to

various persons, to write a book similar to the one that he himself had

it in his mind to publish.[540] He was able, fortunately, to convince

himself immediately that his fears of being forestalled and plagiarized

were unfounded.

Notwithstanding, Bunon was determined not to publish his book until the

opportune moment and with all possible probability of success. With

this object in view, he made up his mind first to obtain the diploma

of surgeon-dentist. To reach this aim, he was obliged to conform to

the regulations of the _Edict of May_, 1699, which then regulated

the practising of dentistry, and this was as much as to say that he

was obliged to enter the College of Surgery, to undertake two years’

practice with a regularly licensed surgeon, to undergo theoretical

and practical examinations, and to take oath before the Chief Surgeon

of the Realm. Once in possession of the diploma of surgeon-dentist,

he was separated thenceforward from the vulgar crowd of charlatans

and invested with all the prestige which a degree, so rarely acquired

at that time, conferred upon its possessor; but before facing public

opinion he desired to make himself known, and, so to say, first to

try his ground, by making known some of his newer ideas, and see what

reception they might meet with from his colleagues and the public in

general. He, therefore, published, in January, 1741, in the newspaper

_Mercure de France_, a letter on the so-called _eye tooth_,[541]

combating the then widely diffused prejudice that the extraction of an

upper canine constituted a grave peril to the eye. He demonstrated the

absurdity of this idea by putting in evidence the anatomical fact that

the upper canines are innervated by the infra-orbital nerve, which has

no relation whatever with the visual organ.

Still better to further his object of making himself a name, he

published in the same year and in the aforementioned paper his

dissertation on the teeth of pregnant women.[542] There he demonstrated

the falseness of the idea that one ought never to extract teeth during

the state of gestation, and brought into relief the necessity of

treating the dental diseases of pregnant women with still more accuracy

than those of other persons.

These publications, bearing as they did the marks of good sense,

favorably interested the public opinion. The way was therefore

prepared, and Bunon judging the moment to have come for publishing

his work, placed it in the hands of a literary man for the necessary

corrections of style. He also showed his manuscript to several persons

of consideration, but was grieved to perceive that the new ideas put

forward in it were skeptically received. He now thought it might be as

well to appeal to the judgment of a highly competent authority, and

fixed on M. de la Peyronie, Head Surgeon of the Realm. This gentleman,

after reading the work, highly praised the author, and Bunon gained

permission to publish the book under his patronage, on consideration

that he should give his word to furnish the proof of the many

assertions made therein on all kinds of subjects.

The goal was now reached, and Bunon, on the strength of such

illustrious patronage, published his book in March of 1743, under the

title, _Essay on the maladies of the teeth, wherein are suggested the

means of obtaining their good conformation from the earliest age, and

of assuring their preservation during the whole course of life_.[543]

All the principal journals of the time (_Journal des Savants_, _Journal

de Trévoux_, _Journal de Verdun_, _Mercure de France_, etc.) published

extracts from the book and eulogized the author, who had even the high

satisfaction of receiving an honorable mention from the Royal Academy

of Surgery, in the public sitting held in 1743.

Bunon, therefore, was now famous, and had, besides, gained wealthy

clients, as we see from the perusal of his observations, where the best

names in France are to be met with, put in evidence by him without

the least thought of professional secrecy. He could now enjoy his

well-merited successes, in accordance with the thought expressed by him

in one of his books: “All those who labor for the progress of an art

have legitimate right to the honor and to all the recompenses to which

success is entitled.”[544]

The study of Bunon’s work proves, in fact, that he had good right to

be proud of having written it. The mere perusal of it, however, does

not suffice to enable the reader to judge of its merits, for to do this

properly, it is necessary to study at the same time his other book,

published in 1746, entitled _Experiences and demonstrations made at the

Hospital of Salpêtrière and at St. Côme, before the Royal Academy of

Surgery, serving as continuation and proof to the Essay on the maladies

of the teeth_.[545] The essay is, in fact, a small 12mo book of 212

pages, written in a concise style, and, strange to say, most concise in

the most important points.

Many facts of great moment are given under the form of rapid

indications, or of assertions without proof; thus their importance is

apt to pass completely unobserved by those who do not take the trouble

of studying this work thoroughly and with the help of the explanations,

illustrations, and comments contained in the second book we have

referred to.

M. A. Barden, of the École Odontotechnique of Paris, was the first

to undertake a serious and conscientious study of Bunon’s works. By

so doing he has thrown full light on the author’s great merits, and

brought forward the high scientific importance of his works.

One of the important questions studied by Bunon concerns the hygiene

to be observed in order to obtain the development of a good dentition.

On this question he rightly establishes the principle that hygiene and

dental prophylaxis should begin from the period of the formation of

the milk teeth. He works out this principle with rigorous logic, and

finishes by tracing the hygiene of the mother during pregnancy, of the

woman (be she mother or nurse) during the nursing period, and of the

nursling as well.

As to the accidents of first dentition, Bunon sets forth a highly

scientific opinion, fully coinciding with the ideas of modern writers,

that is, that dentition is not the sole cause, nor even the principal

cause, of such accidents, but simply a coöperating cause. He made the

observation that in healthy infants, children of healthy parents and

nursed by healthy women, the time of teething is gotten over without

difficulty, while serious accidents occur frequently in weak and sickly

children not brought up and nourished according to hygienic principles,

or born, as not often happens, with special hereditary predispositions.

One of Bunon’s merits is that of having attributed to the first

teeth all the importance they really have, and of having insisted

on the necessity of attentively curing their maladies. He also drew

attention to the dangers that may result from the eventual persistence

of the first teeth at the epoch of the second dentition, or from the

persistence of their roots after the destruction of the crown by

caries. These roots, he says, by their contact with the neighboring

permanent teeth may infect them, and cause them to decay.

Bunon’s researches into the development of the teeth enabled him to

describe precisely the position that the various teeth of the second

dentition occupy in the jaw with regard to the milk teeth, before these

are shed.

Bunon was, besides, the first author who studied accurately dental

hypoplasia, and it is greatly to his honor that his ideas and

observations about this pathological condition have been accepted and

confirmed in substance by the greater part of the authors who have come

after him, having remarkable worth even at the present day. According

to him, this congenital defect of the teeth is owing to infantile

maladies, such as hereditary syphilis, infantile scurvy, malignant

fevers, smallpox, or measles; the harmful effects of these maladies,

however, are limited to the teeth in progress of development, and have

no influence on those that have already come forth. Erosion, as this

defect was termed by Bunon, sometimes affects the first teeth, but is

to be found much more frequently in the second or permanent ones. Those

most often affected are the first molars, and in frequency follow the

incisors, the canines, the premolars; the second and third molars are

the most rarely affected.

Bunon studied with great accuracy the means of preventing anomalous

positions of the permanent teeth, owing, according to him, almost

always to want of space. In certain cases he advises the extraction of

the milk tooth in order to facilitate the eruption of the permanent

one, and, necessity urging, he does not hesitate to sacrifice one of

the permanent teeth to procure the advantage of a normal position of

the others. With regard to this subject, the following passage is

worthy of note, for in it we find sketched out the theory of preventive

extraction as a means of facilitating the eruption of the wisdom tooth:

“It is better to have the teeth incomplete as to number than to have

the ordinary number badly arranged; for the mouth will appear none the

less well furnished because of having one or two teeth the less; the

other teeth will be commodiously distributed, and the last molars will

find sufficient room when they come forth; thus, the disorders which

these teeth often occasion will be avoided.”[546]

After caries, Bunon considers dental tartar as the most potent enemy to

the vitality of the teeth. He distinguishes three principal species:

the black, the lemon or light yellow, and the brownish yellow; however,

he allows of two other varieties of less frequent occurrence, the red

and the green tartar.

At a period when an extraordinary confusion obtained with regard to

gingivitis, because of the great number of varieties allowed, Bunon

strongly affirms the unity of this morbid process, and considers tartar

as the constant cause of it, without denying, however, that other

causes of various kinds may contribute at the same time to produce it.

In cases of scorbutic stomatitis, Bunon advises, and very rightly, the

complete removal of tartar from the teeth before having recourse to any

other local treatment. He also insists on the necessity of attending to

the teeth and gums, and especially of freeing the former from tartar

before undertaking the specific treatment of syphilis, considering

the good state of the teeth and gums as one of the most important

prophylactic measures against mercurial stomatitis.

Anyone who takes the trouble of reading Bunon’s works attentively

cannot help admiring his depth of insight, his spirit of observation,

his exquisite clinical sense, and his ingenuity. As illustrating this

last quality of his, we may cite two cases of fracture of the lower jaw

that he succeeded in curing in a short time by the method of binding

the teeth, the preceding attempts of experienced surgeons having

entirely failed. One of these cases is particularly interesting. The

seat of the fracture corresponded with the bicuspids, which, however,

had fallen out from the effects of trauma; the neighboring teeth were

also loosened. Bunon filled the empty space left by the bicuspids

with a piece of ivory, provided with two holes; then, by an

ingenious crossing of threads passing from the second molar on the

one side to the second bicuspid on the other, very tightly tied, he

formed, so to speak, one single block, and succeeded in bringing about

the consolidation of the shaking teeth and the complete cure of the

fracture, which was effected in less than a month.

[Illustration: RUSPINI WITH HIS FAMILY IN A COUNTRY PLACE

_From an old painting in oil._]

[Illustration: _The Italian dentist Ruspini presenting the children of

his orphanage to the members of the Free Masons Hall in London with

whose aid the institution had been founded._]

The unfavorable judgments passed on Bunon by some writers result, in a

great measure, from the circumstance that one finds quoted in his books

certain modes of treatment that today appear positively ridiculous.

But those who, very wrongly and with deplorable levity, consider Bunon

as nothing more than a vulgar empiric, ought to reflect that even the

greatest men cannot altogether avoid the influence of the ideas and the

prejudices of their time. Some tribute they are almost fatally bound

to pay to these prejudices. It is, therefore, not to be wondered at,

if one finds in Bunon’s works, as well as in those of many other old

writers, indications given of more or less strange remedies. Thus, as

facilitating the eruption of teeth, he recommends among other remedies

the rubbing of the gums with a mixture of honey, fresh butter, hare’s

brains, and oil of lilies, or with the fat of an old cock, dog’s milk,

and pig’s brains. Against the disorders and dangers of the teething

period he also advises rubbing the nape of the infant’s neck, the

shoulders, the back, and the lower limbs, always taking care, however,

to rub from above downward, thus offering opposition to the flow of

humors toward the upper parts of the body.

These means and methods of treatment reflect, so to speak, the medical

ideas and the curative practices of that time, and come down, in part,

from remote ages, as evidently appears from what is said in different

parts of this book. But such small blemishes ought certainly not

to be taken into account in passing judgment on Bunon’s works, the

most substantial part of which is made up of very original ideas and

observations. The high intrinsic value of Bunon’s works gives him a

just right to be considered one of the most illustrious forerunners of

modern scientific dentistry.

BARTOLOMEO RUSPINI, an Italian dentist, exercised his profession in

London with great success for more than thirty years. He was patronized

by all the greatest personages of the Kingdom and also by the Royal

family, from whom he received special marks of distinction. He attained

a very conspicuous position, and with the aid of the London Freemasons’

Lodge, of which he was an influential member, but chiefly by the

results of his professional work, he was able to found an orphanage

that was called by his name, being moved to do this by his great love

for children, whose dental maladies and disorders had always been an

object of particular study for him. In 1768 he published _A Treatise

on the Teeth, Their Structure and Various Diseases_. This book was

remarkably well received and went through a number of editions, the

last in the year 1797. Ruspini did not, in reality, contribute very

much to the development of dental science. He is, however, to be

especially remembered as the inventor of a very good mouth mirror, a

means of examination which afterward gradually came into general use.

* * * * *

Having brought our history of dentistry up to the end of the eighteenth

century, in order to complete our work we must now speak of an

innovation in dental prosthesis, which, although gradually brought to

perfection in the following century, was first introduced at that time.

We allude to the

INVENTION OF MINERAL TEETH.

The merit of this invention is due, in part, to an individual outside

the dental profession, namely, to the French chemist Duchâteau, of

St. Germain en Laye, near Paris, who first had the idea of employing

porcelain as material for dental prosthesis. However, his idea would

not have yielded fruitful results had it not been for the coöperation

of the dentist Dubois de Chemant, who succeeded in putting it into

practice.

The circumstances connected with this invention were the following:

The chemist Duchâteau had for some time worn a denture of hippopotamus

ivory, but as usually happened with all the prosthetic pieces of that

time, which were made of organic material, and were, therefore, subject

to decay, this denture had acquired a very disagreeable odor, resulting

from the action of the buccal humors. Besides which, Duchâteau being

obliged, by reason of his profession, to continually taste pharmaceutic

preparations, his denture had gradually become impregnated with

medicinal substances that imparted a nauseous taste to everything he

ate. The unpleasantness of this was a subject of much consideration

with him, and thus it was that, to remedy the evil, he gradually

matured the idea of having a porcelain denture made, on the model of

the ivory one. In the year 1774 he applied to the porcelain manufactory

of M. Guerhard in Paris for the carrying out of his design. The first

trial was not successful, for in the baking the paste contracted so

much that the denture was no longer of the right dimensions. To remedy

this, he now had another and larger denture made, to allow for its

contraction in the baking. But the results did not correspond with

his wishes, and many trials were still necessary before Duchâteau

was able to obtain a denture which he judged fit for use, although

not without defects. As this denture, because of its dead whiteness,

produced an unpleasant effect, he had a yellowish tint, resembling that

of the natural teeth, given to it, and, as is usual with painting on

porcelain, fixed this color by baking a second time.

However, this denture proving unserviceable, Duchâteau was obliged to

put it aside and begin new experiments. These were made with a special

kind of porcelain paste used in France for the first time in 1740,

which vitrified in baking at 12° to 25° by Wedgwood’s pyrometer, whilst

the usual porcelain required a temperature of 72° to 75° by the same

test; but the results thus obtained were no better than the preceding

ones, and upon these new failures Duchâteau applied to the dentist

Dubois de Chemant, of Paris, for his collaboration. Together they made

fresh attempts, modifying the composition of the paste by adding a

certain quantity of pipe clay and other coloring earths to it. These

modifications enabled them to carry out the baking of the pieces at a

much lower temperature, and after various experiments the final result

was a denture that fitted the gums well enough, and which, in point of

fact, Duchâteau was able to wear.

Encouraged by this success, he tried to manufacture like dentures for

personages of high rank, hoping to gain money thereby, but his want

of knowledge of the dental art prevented him from succeeding in his

undertaking. However, in 1776 he laid this new process before the Royal

Academy of Surgeons in Paris, receiving the thanks of that body as well

as an honorable mention.

Whilst Duchâteau, discouraged by failure, was giving up all idea of

deriving profit from the practical application of his invention, Dubois

de Chemant, on the contrary, did not cease working for a moment, in

order to bring the new method of prosthesis to perfection. Little by

little he introduced important modifications into the composition

of the mineral paste used in the manufacture of the dentures,

incorporating therewith Fontainebleau sand, alicant soda, marl, red

oxide of iron, and cobalt. His experiments and researches aimed at

three principal ends, viz.:

1. The obtaining of mineral teeth offering all the gradations of color

presented by natural ones.

2. The arriving at a rigorous calculation of the contraction of the

mineral paste in the baking, so as to be able to make prosthetic pieces

of the desired form and dimensions.

3. The perfecting of the means of attachment of the prosthetic pieces,

and, in particular, of the springs.

By working with intelligence and perseverance, Dubois de Chemant

gradually obtained satisfactory results, and when, in 1788, he

published his first pamphlet on mineral teeth, he had already made

dentures and partial prosthetic pieces for a certain number of persons,

who wore them to great advantage.

As to the chemist Duchâteau, from 1776 to 1788, that is, during

the twelve years subsequent to his communication to the Academy of

Surgeons, he did absolutely nothing at all. He is, therefore, entitled

to the credit of having had a happy idea and of having endeavored

to put it into practice; but the merit of having given life to the

idea, abandoned for so many years by him with whom it originated, is

exclusively due to Dubois de Chemant; he is, therefore, with reason

considered the true inventor of mineral teeth.

Dubois de Chemant, however, was so unjust as to take the whole credit

of the invention for himself, declaring in his writings that the

original idea had been exclusively his own, and was in no way due to

Duchâteau.

In 1789 Dubois de Chemant made his invention known to the Academy of

Sciences and to the Faculty of Medicine of Paris; both pronounced in

favor of it, and in consequence of the opinion given by such high

authorities, he soon after obtained an inventor’s patent from Louis XVI.

Dubois’ successes now aroused the envy of many of his colleagues, and

especially of Dubois Foucou, the king’s dentist, who, together with

the greater part of the dentists of Paris and the chemist Duchâteau,

brought an action against him, accusing him of having usurped the

invention of Duchâteau, and demanding, for this reason, the annulment

of the inventor’s patent that had been granted him. But the law

courts, in an opinion dated January 26, 1792, rejected the demand for

annulment, recognized the patent of invention as fully valid, and

condemned Dubois Foucou, Duchâteau, and their confederates to the costs

of the judgment.

Paris being at that time in full revolution, Dubois de Chemant was

induced to emigrate to England. He established himself in London, and

there obtained a patent without much difficulty, according him the

exclusive right, for fourteen years, of manufacturing dentures of

mineral paste.

Dubois de Chemant wrote several pamphlets in order to make known to the

public this new kind of dental prosthesis and its advantages; some of

these were published in Paris (1788, 1790, 1824), and others during his

long residence in London, where he remained from 1792 to 1817. In these

pamphlets he upholds the great superiority of “the incorruptible teeth

of mineral paste” over all other kinds of artificial teeth; he calls

special attention to the fact that teeth of bone, ivory, and of every

other organic substance whatever gradually become spoilt through the

action of the saliva, of oral heat, of food and drink, etc., and not

only lose their primitive color and assume a dirty hue, most unpleasant

to the eye, but acquire a bad odor, at times quite insupportable,

becoming, besides, a cause of irritation to the gums and the mucous

membrane of the mouth, not to speak of their gradual softening and

wearing out, which renders them unserviceable after a certain time. All

these disadvantages were avoided by using the new prosthetic material,

this being incorruptible and inalterable.

The prosthetic appliances by Dubois de Chemant were made in one single

piece that represented the gums and teeth, whether in the case of

one or more teeth, or of whole dental sets. He used to take a cast

of the parts on which the prosthesis was to be applied, and by a

process, the details of which are not known; he succeeded in obtaining

prosthetic pieces that fitted the parts perfectly, notwithstanding

the difficulties resulting from the shrinking of the paste in baking.

If the piece required retouching, he did this by means of special

tools for grinding down porcelain. He could, besides, drill holes

in the porcelain for the application of the means of attachment. In

fact, Dubois de Chemant was the creator of a new method of prosthesis

applicable to any and every case, and which gained the praise and

admiration of the great doctors and scientists of that day, among whom

may be mentioned Geoffroy, Vicq d’Asyr, Descemet, Bajet, Petit Radel,

Darcet, Sabatier, Jenner, and others. The Paris Faculty of Medicine

gave it as their judgment that the prosthetic pieces manufactured by

Dubois de Chemant united the qualities of beauty, solidity, and comfort

to the exigencies of hygiene.

These eulogies must, however, be received with a certain reserve, as,

beyond doubt, the mineral teeth of that time still left much to be

desired. In England, where, as we have already said, they had been

introduced by the inventor, they at first obtained a great success,

which was, however, of short duration, and Maury[547] tells us that

toward 1814 they had fallen into great discredit and had been entirely

abandoned; this signifies that practically they did not fulfil the

expectations held out.

DUBOIS FOUCOU and FONZI. Among the first who occupied themselves

with the manufacturing of mineral teeth, contributing also to their

improvement, are to be named Dubois Foucou, to whom we have already

made reference, and Fonzi, an Italian by birth, who exercised the

profession of dentist in Paris. Dubois Foucou made some improvements in

the coloring of porcelain teeth, and in 1808 published a pamphlet in

which he explained his mode of proceeding in manufacturing them.[548]

In the same year Fonzi made known a new kind of teeth,[549] which he

called _terro-metallic_. These differed from those of Dubois de Chemant

in that they were all single teeth intended to be applied on a base by

means of small hooks of platina, with which each tooth was furnished.

In addition to this important innovation, Fonzi also discovered the

means of imitating in some degree the semitransparent tint peculiar to

natural teeth.

Notwithstanding this, the teeth made by Fonzi, of which there are

still some specimens in various dental museums, had anything but a good

appearance, and there still remained much to be done before mineral

teeth reached the height of perfection which they attained later on.

[Illustration: FIG. 104

Earliest specimens of mineral teeth.]

The credit of having introduced many new improvements in the

manufacture of mineral teeth belongs especially to the Americans. Among

those who particularly distinguished themselves in this department of

dental art, we may note Charles W. Peale, Samuel W. Stockton, James

Alcock, and Dr. Elias Wildman. But the most brilliant results, as is

well known, were obtained by the celebrated Samuel S. White, who, by

an intelligent and persevering activity, dedicated almost exclusively

to improving mineral teeth and to bringing them into general use,

contributed vastly to the progress of modern dental art. Samuel S.

White undoubtedly stands forth as one of the noblest and grandest

figures in the history of dentistry, and his name will ever be recorded

with honor and veneration by dentists of all ages.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] See Introduction to the German translation of the Ebers’ papyrus,

by Heinrich Joachim, Berlin, 1890.

[2] The Egyptians had three different kinds of writing: the

hieroglyphic, the hieratic, and the demotic. The hieroglyphic style,

which is the most ancient and is chiefly to be found on monuments and

in religious texts, consists of figures representing every kind of

object; the hieratic or sacerdotal style is an abbreviation of the

hieroglyphic writing; the demotic or popular style, the least ancient,

resulted from further abbreviations of the hieratic.

[3] See page 185 of the German translation of Dr. Joachim.

[4] See the German translation by Joachim, page 162.

[5] A fruit resembling cherries.

[6] On the Relations of the Human Teeth to those of the Lower Animals,

by John R. Mummery. Trans. Odontological Society of Great Britain, May,

1860.

[7] See German translation by Joachim, p. 120.

[8] Herodoti Halicarnassei historia, 1570 fol. Euterpe, page 53.

[9] Herodoti Halicarnassei historia, lib. vi.

[10] Die Zahnheilkunde, Erlangen, 1851, p. 348.

[11] G. B. Belzoni (1778 to 1823), a celebrated Italian traveller and

archeologist, visited Egypt and Nubia, and wrote, in English, a report

on his discoveries, which was published in 1821. We have not been able

to procure this book; we have, however, read the Italian version,

published in Naples in 1831, without coming across any mention of

artificial teeth found in Egyptian sarcophagi. Therefore, unless the

work has undergone some mutilation in the Italian translation, we do

not know whence Joseph Linderer can have taken the above notice.

[12] New England Journal of Dentistry, 1883, vol. ii, p. 162.

[13] According to Herodotus and Diodorus, there were three different

modes of embalming in use among the Egyptians; the most expensive of

these cost one talent (about 5600 francs), the second in order 20 minae

(about 1900 francs), while for the less wealthy there was a third

class, at a much more economical rate.

[14] See Giornale di Corrispondenza pei Dentisti, October, 1885, p. 227.

[15] [The oft-quoted statements of Mr. Purland with reference to

Egyptian dental art are recorded in the transactions of the first

monthly meeting of the College of Dentists, an extinct English dental

association, and published in the Quarterly Journal of Dental Science,

1857, vol. i, p. 49, where the following note by the secretary appears:

“Mr. Purland repudiated the idea of the Chinese having been the first

to manufacture teeth, and referred to numerous specimens in the British

Museum, manufactured between four thousand and five thousand years ago

by the Egyptians, who he considered were the original makers. On the

subject of flint, Mr. Purland said he had discovered pieces of wood

in the centre, and remarked upon the artificial teeth he had found in

mummies.”

Again, at page 63 of the same journal, in an article entitled “Dental

Memoranda,” by T. Purland, Dentist, Ph.D., the author says:

“Belzoni and others discovered rudely manufactured teeth in the

sarcophagi of the Egyptians. As regards the use of gold leaf, Sir

Gardner Wilkinson observes, as a singular fact, that the Egyptians

stopped teeth with gold.

“It is true that rudely manufactured teeth have been found in the

heads of Egyptian mummies, but it is equally true that teeth of a very

superior make and adaptation have also been found, some carved in

ivory, others in sycamore wood, and some have been found fixed upon

gold plates. Of these varieties, some are deposited in the valuable and

extensive museum belonging to Joseph Mayer, Esq., F.S.A., of Liverpool;

others are in the museums of Berlin and Paris, and I am in possession

of a tooth found pivoted to a stump in the head of a mummy in the

collection of a lamented friend.

“Of stopping with gold, several instances have come to my notice,

particularly in a mummy in the Salt collection, sold by Sotheby, in

1836, in which three teeth had been stopped. I have endeavored to trace

the mummy, but in vain.”—E. C. K.]

[16] Giornale di Corrispondenza pei Dentisti, October, 1885, p. 229.

[17] Geist-Jacobi, Geschichte der Zahnheilkunde, p. 9.

[18] Geist-Jacobi, Geschichte der Zahnheilkunde, p. 9.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Ibid.

[21] The incisors represented in the cut of Renan’s work do not at

all give the anatomical form of upper incisors, but of lower ones.

Therefore, either the figure itself has been badly drawn, or the

piece found by Dr. Gaillardot was part of the inferior and not of the

superior jaw. In the latter case, the figure in Renan’s book ought to

be reversed, in the manner here shown:

[Illustration: FIG. 4

The same figure reversed, as it ought to be if

the piece found at Sidon belonged to a lower jaw.]

[Illustration: FIG. 5, FIG. 6

Examples of dental prosthesis as practised by the

Hindus at the present time.]

Neither do we understand on what ground Dr. Gaillardot has based

his affirmation of the piece discovered having belonged to a female

skeleton, as it is well known that there is no characteristic

difference between a male and a female jaw.

[Interesting examples of the survival of this primitive type of dental

prosthesis are found among the Hindus at the present time. The two

illustrations (Figs. 5 and 6) are from photographs of specimens of work

done by native Hindu dentists. Fig. 5 is a roughly carved artificial

tooth of ivory attached by a gold wire ligature to the adjacent

natural teeth, all of which, with the artificial tooth attached, were

subsequently lost by alveolar disease. Fig. 6 is a similar carved

artificial tooth of ivory attached to the adjoining teeth by a thread

ligature, the supporting teeth with the attached ivory tooth also

having been lost by alveolar disease. These specimens were removed and

sent to the writer by Dr. H. B. Osborn, of Burma, during the present

year (1909).—E. C. K.]

[22] Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 472.

[23] The number varies according to the different translations. So,

instead of the Latin dentes elephantis, we find in English and in other

languages the word _ivory_.

[24] J. Bouillet, Précis d’histoire de la Médecine, Paris, 1883, p. 24.

[25] La médecine chez les Chinois, par le Capitaine P. P. Dabry, Consul

de France en Chine, Membre de la Société Asiatique de Paris, 1863.

[26] One of these books, Nuei-King, is said to have been written

twenty-seven centuries before the Christian era, by the Emperor

Houang-ty, the founder of Chinese medicine.

[27] See Bouillet, work quoted at p. 31.

[28] Dabry, op. cit., p. x (introduction), pp. 1, 2, 4, 10, 11.

[29] This author wrote toward the end of the seventeenth century; one

of his works is entitled De Acupunctura.

[30] Dabry, op. cit., p. 424.

[31] See Histoire de la Chirurgie depuis son origine, par MM. Dujardin

et Peyrihle, Paris, 1774 to 1780.

[32] London, 1811.

[33] Die Zahnheilkunde, etc., 1851, p. 347.

[34] J. Bontii, De medicina Indorum, 1642, lib. iv.

[35] Carabelli, Handbuch der Zahnheilkunde, 1844, i, 8.

[36] Linderer, op. cit.

[37] [The newer civilization of Japan has caused this custom to largely

fall into disuse.—E. C. K.]

[38] Carabelli, loc. cit.

[39] Linderer, loc. cit.

[40] Carabelli, op. cit., p. 17.

[41] The Greek name Asklepios became in the Latin, Æsculapius; the two

names are therefore equivalents.

[42] See Cicero, De Natura deorum, lib. iii, chap. xxii.

[43] [Homer speaks of them as “two excellent physicians,” and refers to

Machaon as “a blameless physician,” and admits that “a medical man is

equivalent to _many_ others.” Their renown was continued in a poem of

Arctinus, wherein one was represented as without a rival in surgery,

the other as sagacious in detecting morbid symptoms.—C. M.]

[44] Praktische Darstellung aller Operationen der Zahnarznei-kunst, von

Johann Jakob Joseph Serre, Berlin, pp. 7 to 13.

[45] Guardia, Histoire de la Médecine, p. 250.

[46] Hippocratis opera, Genevæ, 1657 to 1662, De natura hominis, p. 225.

[47] Page 251.

[48] Page 252.

[49] Page 253.

[50] De morbis mulierum, lib. ii, p. 666.

[51] The use of carbonate of lime or chalk as a dentifrice evidently

goes back to antiquity.

[52] Unwashed wool—that is, wool not cleansed of the fat secreted by

the skins of the animals from whom it is taken—was much in use by the

doctors of antiquity. One now obtains _lanolin_ from it.

[53] The obole was about three-quarters of a gram.

[54] The cotyle was a little more than a quarter of a liter.

[55] Page 507.

[56] Page 21.

[57] See Daremberg, Dictionnaire des Antiquités Grecques et Romaines,

article “Chirurgie.”

[58] The various editions here offer numerous variations, but the sense

is everywhere obscure.

[59] See Bouillet, Précis d’Histoire de la Médecine, p. 94.

[60] On Epidemics, lib. ii, section i, p. 1002.

[61] De morbis vulgaribus, lib. iv, p. 1131.

[62] That is a very short root.

[63] Page 1138.

[64] De morbis vulgaribus, lib. v, p. 1157.

[65] Page 1157.

[66] De morbis vulgaribus, lib. vi, section i, p. 1164.

[67] Ibid., vii, p. 1223.

[68] Page 1229.

[69] De morbis vulgaribus, lib. vii, p. 1238.

[70] The title of these seven books of Hippocrates might cause a false

idea to be conceived. They do not precisely treat of epidemics in the

sense given to the word in the present day; instead, they describe the

maladies which predominated during four years, in successive periods of

time, according with the variations of the atmospheric conditions. (See

Litré, Introduction to the books on Epidemics.)

[71] De morbis vulgaribus, lib. iii, p. 1009; lib. vi, section iii, p.

1176.

[72] De morbis vulgaribus, lib. iv, p. 1138; Aphorisms, lib. iv, No.

53, p. 1251.

[73] Coacæ prænotiones, No. 235, p. 157; Prædictorum, lib. i, No. 48,

p. 71.

[74] Coacæ prænotiones, No. 236, p. 157.

[75] Loc. cit., No. 237.

[76] Loc. cit., No. 239.

[77] Loc. cit., No. 241, p. 157; No. 648, p. 222.

[78] De morbis vulgaribus, lib. iii, p. 1083.

[79] Ibid., lib. iv, p. 1121.

[80] Prædictorum, lib. ii, p. 111.

[81] De affectionibus, p. 521.

[82] De internis affectionibus, p. 549.

[83] Paul Dubois, Aide-mémoire du chirurgien-dentiste, Paris, 1894, 2me

partie, pp. 415, 416.

[84] Prædictorum, lib. ii, p. 108.

[85] De internis affectionibus, p. 534.

[86] De humoribus, p. 49.

[87] De morbis vulgaribus, lib. ii, section vi, p. 1050.

[88] Prædictorum, lib. ii, p. 96.

[89] De articulis, p. 799.

[90] Loc. cit.

[91] De articulis, p. 800.

[92] Aphorism, lib. v, No. 18, p. 1253.

[93] De liquidorum usu, p. 426.

[94] De locis in homine, p. 419.

[95] De morbis vulgaribus, lib. i, p. 948.

[96] De partibus animalium, lib. iii, cap. i.

[97] Ctesias, of Cnydus, wrote various works, somewhat earlier than

Aristotle; one of which, the History of India, is very interesting, but

also contains not a few fables.

[98] This, as well as other errors of Aristotle, we shall find

repeated throughout the lapse of centuries by many authors, Galen not

excluded, who, in fact, by the authority of his name, gave them valid

confirmation.

[99] The distinction between arteries and veins was, at that time, not

yet well known, though we already find, in this passage of Aristotle,

allusion made to the relations between the teeth and the bloodvessels.

[100] According to the testimony of Celsus, a very serious author and

in every way worthy of belief, Herophilus and Erasistratus dissected

not only corpses, but also living men, namely, malefactors consigned to

them by the kings of Egypt, in order that they might make researches

into the normal conditions of the organs during life, and their mode of

functioning. See Cornel. Cels., De re medica, lib. i, Preface.

[101] Cœlii Aureliani de morbis acutis et chronicis, lib. viii,

Amstelædami, 1755, Pars ii, lib. ii, cap. iv, De dolore dentium.

[102] Herophilus et Heraclides Tarentinus mori quosdam detractione

dentis memoraverunt.

[103] Arretium, Cære, Clusium, Cortona, Fæsulæ, Falerii, Pisæ,

Russellæ, Tarquinii, Vetulonia, Volaterræ, Volsinii.

[104] Deneffe, La prothèse dentaire dans l’antiquité, p. 51.

[105] Dr. Cigrand in his book The Rise, Fall, and Revival of Dental

Prosthesis, after having spoken of the Phœnician dental appliance

described in Renan’s work, adds: “There are scores of specimens of

Phœnician dental art in home collections and also at the Columbian

World’s Fair.” However, until these specimens of Phœnician dental art

are described and their origin is exactly known, their authenticity

will always remain a matter of doubt. [Cigrand is in error. The

specimens he speaks of were mainly imagined.—W. H. TRUEMAN.]

[106] Deneffe, op. cit., pp. 60, 61.

[107] Deneffe, op. cit., p. 63.

[108] Plinius, lib. xxix, cap. v.

[109] This article forms part of the tenth table. The Law of the Twelve

Tables was lost, but citations and passages are to be found in Cicero

and in the works of other Roman jurisconsults, and by the aid of these

it has been possible to reconstruct, at least in part, this very

ancient code of laws. See Dionysii Gothofredi, Corpus juris civilis.

Amstelodami, 1663; and also Thesaurus juris romani cum prefat. Ottonis,

Tome iii, Trajecti ad Rhenum, 1733.

[110] Josef Serre, Zahnarznei kunst, Berlin, 1804, p. 6.

[111] Geist-Jacobi, Geschichte der Zahnheilkunde, p. 26.

[112] See note, p. 15, Hist. Relations of Medicine and Surgery,

Allbutt. (C. M.)

[113] A. Corn. Celsi de Medicina libri octo, Patavii, MDCCXXII.

[114] Celsus, lib. i, Preface.

[115] Wine with honey.

[116] [_Minium_ is an ancient name for red oxide of lead; it was also

applied to mercuric sulphide or vermilion, and the term vermilion was

also used as a designation for _granum tinctorum_ or _kermes_, the

_coccus ilicis_, a variety of cochineal extolled by Galen for its

medicinal properties. The exact nature of the meaning of minium in this

connection is not altogether clear.—E. C. K.]

[117] A species of herb (all-heal).

[118] Peucedanum officinale, hog’s fennel.

[119] A species of wild grape thus called because it is red like minium

(vermilion).

[120] Species of mineral. [An impure copper sulphide.—E. C. K.]

[121] Condensed juice of the seeds of the momordica elaterium, a

bitter, irritating, and drastic substance.

[122] According to De Giorgi (Sinonimia chimico-farmacotecnica, Milan,

1889), scissile alum is one of the many names for blue vitriol or

sulphate of copper.

[123] [The _cyperus rotundus_, recommended by Dioscorides in the

treatment of ulcers in the mouth. Esteemed also by the Arab medical

writers Serapion, Avicenna, and Rhazes. Not the cypress, _cupressus

sempervirens_.—E. C. K.]

[124] Here is meant the paper made of papyrus and called in Latin

charta.

[125] Trisulphide of arsenic.

[126] Celsus did not know of the upper maxillary bones as distinct

bones. The same may be said of the other bones of the head. Celsus

speaks of the osseous sutures and openings, but not of the different

bones of the skull and face.

[127] C. Plinii Secundi, Historiæ Mundi, lib. vii, cap. ii.

[128] Lib. xxiv, cap. cxi.

[129] Lib. xi, cap. lxiii.

[130] Lib. xi, cap. lxiv.

[131] Cap. cvi.

[132] Dipsacus fullonum.

[133] Cap. cviii.

[134] Lib. xxviii, cap. ii.

[135] Lib. xxviii, cap. xi.

[136] Lib. xxviii, cap. xiv.

[137] Ibid., cap. xxvii.

[138] Ibid., cap. xxix.

[139] Ibid., cap. xlix.

[140] Ibid., cap. lxxviii.

[141] Lib. xxix, cap. ix.

[142] Lib. xxix, cap. x.

[143] Lib. xxix, cap. xi.

[144] Lib. xxx, cap. viii.

[145] Lib. xxx, cap. ix.

[146] Lib. xxx, cap. xlvii.

[147] Lib. xxxi, cap. xlv, xlvi.

[148] Lib. xxxii, cap. xiv.

[149] Trygon pastinaca, a large fish whose tail is armed with sharp and

strong bones.

[150] A measure equal to 0.274 liter.

[151] [The sextarius was accorded different values, thus a sextary of

oil was ℥xviij, of wine ℥xx, and of honey, ℥xvij.—E. C. K.]

[152] [Lat., the purple fish, a carnivorous marine mollusk.—E. C. K.]

[153] Lib. xxxii, cap. xlviii.

[154] A kind of lignite, now called jet.

[155] Ignatius, because he has white teeth, is always laughing; if

he be present at the felon’s trial, whilst the counsel is moving all

to tears, he laughs; he laughs even when everyone is mourning at

the funeral pyre of a dutiful son, whilst the mother is weeping for

her only child. He laughs at everything, everywhere, and whatever

he be doing; this is his weakness, which methinks is neither polite

nor elegant. Wherefore, I must tell thee, O good Ignatius, even if

thou wert a citizen of Rome, or a Sabine, or of Tibur, or one of the

thrifty Umbrians, or of the fat Etruscans, or wert thou a black and

large-toothed Lanuvin, or a Transpadane, if I may speak of my own

people, or belonging to any people that cleanly wash their teeth; even

then I would not have thee be always laughing; for nothing is more

silly than a silly laugh. Now, O Celtiberian, in thy Celtiberian land,

each is accustomed, with the water he has himself emitted, to rub his

teeth and gums. Wherefore the cleaner are thy teeth, the more surely

stale dost thou accuse thyself of having drunk.

[156] Rerum geographicarum libri. Lutetiæ Parisiorum, 1620. Lib. iii,

p. 164; quippe qui urina in cisternis inveterata laventur, eaque cum

ipsi, tum eorum uxores dentes tergant; quod Cantabros facere et eorum

confines ajunt (Carabelli, Systematisches Handbuch der Zahnheilkunde,

Wien, 1844, i, 12).

[157] Handbuch der Zahnheilkunde, Berlin, 1848, ii, 412.

[158] Medio recumbit imus ille qui lecto, Calvam trifilem segmentatus

unguento, Foditque tonsis ora laxa lentiscis; Mentitur, Esculane; non

habet dentes.

[159] Lentiscum melius; sed si tibi frondea cuspis Defuerit, dentes penna

levare potest.

[160] Antiq. du Bosphore au Musée de l’Ermitage, pl. xxx, 8 et 9

(Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines, par Daremberg,

Saglio, etc.).

[161] Mittheilung. d. antiq. Gesellschaft in Zürich, xv, pl. xi, 32

(Daremberg and Saglio, ibid.)

[162] Caylus, vol. vi, pl. cxxx, 5.

[163] Dentifricium ad edentulam: Quid mecum est tibi? me puella sumat, Emptos

non soleo polire dentes.

[164] Lib. xii, epig. xxiii.

[165] Dentibus atque comis, nec te pudet, uteris emptis. Quid facies oculo,

Lælia? non emitur.

[166] Nostris versibus esse te poetam, Fidentine, putas, cupisque eredi? Sic

dentata sic videtur Ægle, Emptis ossibus, indicoque cornu. (Lib. i,

epig. lxxii.)

[167] Lib. ix, epig. xxxviii.

[168] Nec dentes aliter quam serica nocte reponas.

[169] Horat. Sat. viii, lib. i.

[170] Eximit aut reficit dentem Cascellius ægrum.

[171] Suffire autem oportet ore aperto alterci semine carbonibus

asperso, subinde os colluere aqua calida; interdum enim quasi vermiculi

quidam eiciuntur.

[172] Gum of the cedar tree.

[173] Dentifricium, quod splendidos facit dentes et confirmat, chap.

xi, lix.

[174] A Roman measure of capacity, equal to a little more than half a

liter.

[175] The origin of the theriac, according to what Galen writes in

his book De antidotis, is to be traced back to Mithridates, King of

Pontus, who lived from the year 132 to the year 63 B.C. This king,

patron of Art and Science, was, for his times, an eminent toxicologist.

By making experiments on condemned criminals he sought to discover

by what drugs the action of the various poisons, both mineral and

vegetable, and those inoculated by the bites of poisonous animals might

be counteracted. He afterward mixed the various antidotes together

for the purpose of obtaining a remedy that might prove a preservative

against the action of any poison whatever. This universal remedy,

the receipt of which was carried to Rome by Pompey, the conqueror of

that great king, was named _mithridatium_, after the name of him who

had composed it. Andromachus modified the mithridate; he took away

certain ingredients and added others, reducing the number of them from

about eighty to sixty-five. The principal modification was that of

introducing into the composition of this drug the flesh of the viper;

wherefore, Galen is of the opinion that the theriac (so called from the

Greek word _therion_, a noxious animal) was more efficacious than the

mithridate against the bite of the viper. The theriac still exists in

the French pharmacopeia, although considerably simplified. In every 4

grams it contains 5 centigrams of opium.

[176] A species of solanaceæ of the Physalis genus, probably the

Physalis alkekengi.

[177] Galeni de compositione medicamentorum secundum locos, liber v.

[178] J. R. Duval, Recherches historiques sur l’art du dentiste chez

les anciens, Paris, 1808, p. 19. (See Carabelli, p. 13.)

[179] Galen admits three kinds of nerves: soft or sensitive nerves,

originating from the brain; hard or motor nerves, originating from the

spinal marrow; medial nerves, motor-sensitive, originating from the

medulla oblongata.

[180] Galen distinguishes seven pairs of cerebral nerves; his third

pair corresponds to the trigeminus.

[181] Galeni de usu partium corporis humani, lib. xvi.

[182] Galeni de compositione medicamentorum secundum locos, lib. v.

[183] Medicus, chap. xix.

[184] Trigonella fœnum græcum, a papilionaceous plant.

[185] [About twenty-eight fluid ounces.—E. C. K.]

[186] Under the name of _root_, the ancients meant also the _neck_ of

the tooth.

[187] Swallow, I tell thee, as this water will not be again in my

mouth, even so my teeth will not ache for the whole year.

[188] The cure of teeth affected by warm painful disease; according to

Adamantius the sophist.

[189] Ætii tetrabibl., ii, sermo iv, cap. xxvii.

[190] Ibid., cap. xxxi.

[191] Ætii tetrabibl., ii, sermo iv, cap. xix.

[192] Ibid., i, sermo iv, cap. ix.

[193] Ibid., ii, sermo iv, cap. xxiv.

[194] Tetrabibl., ii, sermo iv, cap. xxv.

[195] Ibid., cap. xxvi.

[196] [The author quoted directs hydromel to be made from one part of

honey and eight parts of water boiled until it has ceased frothing.—E.

C. K.]

[197] Pauli Æginetæ de re medica, lib. vi, cap. xxvii.

[198] Lib. vi, cap. xxviii.

[199] Ibid., cap. ix.

[200] Ibid., cap. xxix.

[201] Rasis opera, Venetiis, 1508.

[202] Haly Abbas Pract., lib. v, cap. lxxviii.

[203] Ibid., cap. xxxiii.

[204] Serapionis practica, Venetiis, 1503.

[205] Avicennæ opera in re medica, Venetiis, 1564.

[206] Abulcasis de Chirurgia, lib. i, cap. xix, p. 47; Latin

translation by Channing with the Arabic text in front, Oxford, 1778.

[207] Cap. xx, p. 47.

[208] Cap. xxi, p. 49.

[209] Zegi was the name given by the Arabs to blue vitriol.

[210] Lib. ii, cap. xxviii, p. 181.

[211] Lib. ii, cap. xxix, pp. 181 to 183.