During the early Christian centuries much was owed to the ge

Produced by Suzanne Lybarger, Irma Spehar and the Online

Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This

file was produced from images generously made available

by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)

Old-Time Makers of Medicine

THE STORY OF THE STUDENTS AND TEACHERS

OF THE SCIENCES RELATED TO MEDICINE

DURING THE MIDDLE AGES

BY

James J. Walsh, K.C.St.G., M.D.

Ph.D., LL.D., Litt.D., Sc.D.

DEAN AND PROFESSOR OF NERVOUS DISEASES AND OF THE HISTORY OF MEDICINE AT

FORDHAM UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE; PROFESSOR OF PHYSIOLOGICAL

PSYCHOLOGY AT THE CATHEDRAL COLLEGE, NEW YORK

NEW YORK

FORDHAM UNIVERSITY PRESS

1911 COPYRIGHT 1911

JAMES J. WALSH

THE QUINN & GODEN CO. PRESS

RAHWAY, N.J.

TO

REVEREND DANIEL J. QUINN, S.J.

The historical material here presented was gathered for my classes at

Fordham University School of Medicine during your term as president of

the University. It seems only fitting then, that when put into more

permanent form it should appear under the patronage of your name and

tell of my cordial appreciation of more than a quarter of a century of

valued friendship.

"When we have thoroughly mastered contemporary science it is time to

turn to past science; nothing fortifies the judgment more than this

comparative study; impartiality of mind is developed thereby, the

uncertainties of any system become manifest. The authority of facts is

there confirmed, and we discover in the whole picture a philosophic

teaching which is in itself a lesson; in other words, we learn to know,

to understand, and to judge."--LITTRE: _OEuvres

d'Hippocrate_, T. I, p. 477.

"There is not a single development, even the most advanced of

contemporary medicine, which is not to be found in embryo in the

medicine of the olden time."--LITTRE: Introduction to the Works

of Hippocrates.

"How true it is that in reading this history one finds modern

discoveries that are anything but discoveries, unless one supposes that

they have been made twice."--DUJARDIN: _Histoire de la

Chirurgie_, Paris, 1774 (quoted by Gurlt on the post title-page of his

_Geschichte der Chirurgie_, Berlin, 1898).

PREFACE

The material for this book was gathered partly for lectures on the

history of medicine at Fordham University School of Medicine, and partly

for articles on a number of subjects in the Catholic Encyclopedia. Some

of it was developed for a series of addresses at commencements of

medical schools and before medical societies, on the general topic how

old the new is in surgery, medicine, dentistry, and pharmacy. The

information thus presented aroused so much interest, the accomplishments

of the physicians and surgeons of a period that is usually thought quite

sterile in medical science proved, indeed, so astonishing, that I was

tempted to connect the details for a volume in the Fordham University

Press series. There is no pretence to any original investigation in the

history of medicine, nor to any extended consultation of original

documents. I have had most of the great books that are mentioned in the

course of this volume in my hands, and have given as much time to the

study of them as could be afforded in the midst of a rather busy life,

but I owe my information mainly to the distinguished German and French

scholars who have in recent years made deep and serious studies of these

Old Makers of Medicine, and I have made my acknowledgments to them in

the text as opportunity presented itself.

There is just one feature of the book that may commend it to

present-day readers, and that is that our medieval medical colleagues,

when medicine embraced most of science, faced the problems of medicine

and surgery and the allied sciences that are now interesting us, in very

much the same temper of mind as we do, and very often anticipated our

solutions of them--much oftener, indeed, than most of us, unless we have

paid special attention to history, have any idea of. The volume does not

constitute, then, a contribution to that theme that has interested the

last few generations so much,--the supposed continuous progress of the

race and its marvellous advance,--but rather emphasizes that puzzling

question, how is it that men make important discoveries and inventions,

and then, after a time, forget about them so that they have to be made

over again? This is as true in medical science and in medical practice

as in every other department of human effort. It does not seem possible

that mankind should ever lose sight of the progress in medicine and

surgery that has been made in recent years, yet the history of the past

would seem to indicate that, in spite of its unlikelihood, it might well

come about. Whether this is the lesson of the book or not, I shall leave

readers to judge, for it was not intentionally put into it.

OUR LADY'S DAY IN HARVEST, 1911.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

I. INTRODUCTION 1

II. GREAT PHYSICIANS IN EARLY CHRISTIAN TIMES 23

III. GREAT JEWISH PHYSICIANS 61

IV. MAIMONIDES 90

V. GREAT ARABIAN PHYSICIANS 109

VI. THE MEDICAL SCHOOL AT SALERNO 141

VII. CONSTANTINE AFRICANUS 163

VIII. MEDIEVAL WOMEN PHYSICIANS 177

IX. MONDINO AND THE MEDICAL SCHOOL OF BOLOGNA 202

X. GREAT SURGEONS OF THE MEDIEVAL UNIVERSITIES 234

XI. GUY DE CHAULIAC 282

XII. MEDIEVAL DENTISTRY--GIOVANNI OF ARCOLI 313

XIII. CUSANUS AND THE FIRST SUGGESTION OF LABORATORY

METHODS IN MEDICINE 336

XIV. BASIL VALENTINE, LAST OF THE ALCHEMISTS,

FIRST OF THE CHEMISTS 349

APPENDICES

I. ST. LUKE THE PHYSICIAN 381

II. SCIENCE AT THE MEDIEVAL UNIVERSITIES 400

III. MEDIEVAL POPULARIZATION OF SCIENCE 427

"Of making many books there is no end."--_Eccles._ xii, 12 (circa 1000

B.C.).

"The little by-play between Socrates and Euthydemus suggests an advanced

condition of medical literature: 'Of course, you who have so many books

are going in for being a doctor,' says Socrates, and then he adds,

'there are so many books on medicine, you know.' As Dyer remarks,

whatever the quality of these books may have been, their number must

have been great to give point to this chaff."--_Aequanimitas_,

WILLIAM OSLER, M.D., F.R.S., Blakistons, Philadelphia, 1906.

"Augescunt aliae gentes, aliae minuuntur;

Inque brevi spatio mutantur saecla animantum,

Et, quasi cursores vitai lampada tradunt."

--OVID.

One nation rises to supreme power in the world, while another declines,

and, in a brief space of time, the sovereign people change,

transmitting, like racers, the lamp of life to some other that is to

succeed them.

"There is one Science of Medicine which is concerned with the inspection

of health equally in all times, present, past and future."

--PLATO.

I

INTRODUCTION

Under the term Old-Time Medicine most people probably think at once of

Greek medicine, since that developed in what we have called ancient

history, and is farthest away from us in date. As a matter of fact,

however, much more is known about Greek medical writers than those of

any other period except the last century or two. Our histories of

medicine discuss Greek medicine at considerable length and practically

all of the great makers of medicine in subsequent generations have been

influenced by the Greeks. Greek physicians whose works have come down to

us seem nearer to us than the medical writers of any but the last few

centuries. As a consequence we know and appreciate very well as a rule

how much Greek medicine accomplished, but in our admiration for the

diligent observation and breadth of view of the Greeks, we are sometimes

prone to think that most of the intervening generations down to

comparatively recent times made very little progress and, indeed,

scarcely retained what the Greeks had done. The Romans certainly justify

this assumption of non-accomplishment in medicine, but then in

everything intellectual Rome was never much better than a weak copy of

Greek thought. In science the Romans did nothing at all worth while

talking about. All their medicine they borrowed from the Greeks, adding

nothing of their own. What food for thought there is in the fact, that

in spite of all Rome's material greatness and wide empire, her world

dominance and vaunted prosperity, we have not a single great original

scientific thought from a Roman.

Though so much nearer in time medieval medicine seems much farther away

from us than is Greek medicine. Most of us are quite sure that the

impression of distance is due to its almost total lack of significance.

It is with the idea of showing that the medieval generations, as far as

was possible in their conditions, not only preserved the old Greek

medicine for us in spite of the most untoward circumstances, but also

tried to do whatever they could for its development, and actually did

much more than is usually thought, that this story of "Old-Time Makers

of Medicine" is written. It represents a period--that of the Middle

Ages--that is, or was until recently, probably more misunderstood than

any other in human history. The purpose of the book is to show at least

the important headlands that lie along the stream of medical thought

during the somewhat more than a thousand years from the fall of the

Roman Empire under Augustulus (476) until the discovery of America.

After that comes modern medicine, for with the sixteenth century the

names and achievements of the workers in medicine are

familiar--Paracelsus, Vesalius, Columbus, Servetus, Caesalpinus,

Eustachius, Varolius, Sylvius are men whose names are attached to great

discoveries with which even those who are without any pretence to

knowledge of medical history are not unacquainted. In spite of nearly

four centuries of distance in time these men seem very close to us.

Their lives will be reserved for a subsequent volume, "Our Forefathers

in Medicine."

It is usually the custom to contemn the Middle Ages for their lack of

interest in culture, in education, in literature, in a word, in

intellectual accomplishment of any and every kind, but especially in

science. There is no doubt about the occurrence of marked decadence in

the intellectual life of the first half of this period. This has

sometimes been attributed to what has been called the inhibitory effect

of Christianity on worldly interests. Religion is said to have occupied

people so much with thoughts of the other world that the beauties and

wonders, as well as much of the significance, of the world around them

were missed. Those who talk thus, however, forget entirely the

circumstances which brought about the serious decadence of interest in

culture and science at this time. The Roman Empire had been the guardian

of letters and education and science. While the Romans were not original

in themselves, at least they had shown intense interest in what was

accomplished by the Greeks and their imitation had often risen to

heights that made them worthy of consideration for themselves. They were

liberal patrons of Greek art and of Greek literature, and did not

neglect Greek science and Greek medicine. Galen's influence was due much

more to the prominence secured by him as the result of his stay in Rome

than would have been possible had he stayed in Asia. There are many

other examples of Roman patronage of literature and science that might

be mentioned. As we shall see, Rome drained Greece and Asia Minor of

their best, and appropriated to herself the genius products of the

Spanish Peninsula. Rome had a way of absorbing what was best in the

provinces for herself.

Just as soon as Rome was cut off from intimate relations with the

provinces by the inwandering of barbarians, intellectual decadence

began. The imperial city itself had never been the source of great

intellectual achievement, and the men whom we think of as important

contributors to Rome's literature and philosophy were usually not born

within the confines of the city. It is surprising to take a list of the

names of the Latin writers whom we are accustomed to set down simply as

Romans and note their birthplaces. Rome herself gave birth to but a very

small percentage of them. Virgil was born at Mantua, Cicero at Arpinum,

Horace out on the Sabine farm, the Plinys out of the city, Terence in

Africa, Persius up in Central Italy somewhere, Livy at Padua, Martial,

Quintilian, the Senecas, and Lucan in Spain. When the government of the

city ceased to be such as assured opportunity for those from outside who

wanted to make their way, decadence came to Roman literature. Large

cities have never in history been the fruitful mothers of men who did

great things. Genius, and even talent, has always been born out of the

cities in which it did its work. It is easy to understand, then, the

decadence of the intellectual life that took place as the Empire

degenerated.

For the sake of all that it meant in the Roman Empire to look towards

Rome at this time, however, it seemed better to the early Christians to

establish the centre of their jurisdiction there. Necessarily, then, in

all that related to the purely intellectual life, they came under the

influences that were at work at Rome at this time. During the first

centuries they suffered besides from the persecutions directed against

them by the Emperors at various times, and these effectually prevented

any external manifestations of the intellectual life on the part of

Christians. It took much to overcome this serious handicap, but

noteworthy progress was made in spite of obstacles, and by the time of

Constantine many important officials of the Empire, the educated

thinking classes of Rome, had become Christians. After the conversion of

the Emperor opportunities began to be afforded, but political

disturbances consequent upon barbarian influences still further weakened

the old civilization until much of the intellectual life of it almost

disappeared.

Gradually the barbarians, finding the Roman Empire decadent, crept in on

it, and though much more of the invasion was peaceful than we have been

accustomed to think, the Romans simply disappearing because family life

had been destroyed, children had become infrequent, and divorce had

become extremely common, it was not long before they replaced the Romans

almost entirely. These new peoples had no heritage of culture, no

interest in the intellectual life, no traditions of literature or

science, and they had to be gradually lifted up out of their barbarism.

This was the task that Christianity had to perform. That it succeeded in

accomplishing it is one of the marvels of history.

The Church's first grave duty was the preservation of the old records

of literature and of science. Fortunately the monasteries accomplished

this task, which would have been extremely perilous for the precious

treasures involved but for the favorable conditions thus afforded.

Libraries up to this time were situated mainly in cities, and were

subject to all the vicissitudes of fire and war and other modes of

destruction that came to cities in this disturbed period. Monasteries,

however, were usually situated in the country, were built very

substantially and very simply, and the life in them formed the best

possible safeguard against fire, which worked so much havoc in cities.

As we shall see, however, not only were the old records preserved, but

excerpts from them were collated and discussed and applied by means of

direct observation. This led the generations to realize more and more

the value of the old Greek medicine and made them take further

precautions for its preservation.

The decadence of the early Middle Ages was due to the natural shifting

of masses of population of this time, while the salvation of scientific

and literary traditions was due to the one stable element in all these

centuries--the Church. Far from Christianity inhibiting culture, it was

the most important factor for its preservation, and it provided the best

stimulus and incentive for its renewed development just as soon as the

barbarous peoples were brought to a state of mind to appreciate it.

Bearing this in mind, it is easier to understand the course of medical

traditions through the Middle Ages, and especially in the earlier

period, with regard to which our documents are comparatively scanty,

and during which the disturbed conditions made medical developments

impossible, and anything more than the preservation of the old authors

out of the question. The torch of medical illumination lighted at the

great Greek fires passes from people to people, never quenched, though

often burning low because of unfavorable conditions, but sometimes with

new fuel added to its flame by the contributions of genius. The early

Christians took it up and kept it lighted, and, with the Jewish

physicians, carried it through the troublous times of the end of the old

order, and then passed it on for a while to the Arabs. Then, when

favorable conditions had developed again, Christian schools and scholars

gave it the opportunity to burn brightly for several centuries at the

end of the Middle Ages. This medieval age is probably the most difficult

period of medical history to understand properly, but it is worth while

taking the trouble to follow out the thread of medical tradition from

the Greeks to the Renaissance medical writers, who practically begin

modern medicine for us.

It is easy to understand that Christianity's influence on medicine,

instead of hampering, was most favorable. The Founder of Christianity

Himself had gone about healing the sick, and care for the ailing became

a prominent feature of Christian work. One of the Evangelists, St. Luke,

was a physician. It was the custom a generation ago, and even later,

when the Higher Criticism became popular, to impugn the tradition as to

St. Luke having been a physician, but this has all been undone, and

Harnack's recent book, "Luke the Physician," makes it very clear that

not only the Third Gospel, but also the Acts, could only have been

written by a man thoroughly familiar with the Greek medical terms of his

time, and who had surely had the advantage of a training in the medical

sciences at Alexandria. This makes such an important link in medical

traditions that a special chapter has been devoted to it in the

Appendix.

Very early in Christianity care for the ailing poor was taken up, and

hospitals in our modern sense of the term became common in Christian

communities. There had been military hospitals before this, and places

where those who could afford to pay for service were kept during

illness. Our modern city hospital, however, is a Christian institution.

Besides, deformed and ailing children were cared for and homes for

foundlings were established. Before Christianity the power even of life

and death of the parents over their children was recognized, and

deformed or ailing children, or those that for some reason were not

wanted, were exposed until they died. Christianity put an end to this,

and in two classes of institutions, the hospitals and the asylums,

abundant opportunity for observation of illness was afforded. Just as

soon as Christianity came to be free to establish its institutions

publicly, hospitals became very common. The Emperor Julian, usually

known as the Apostate, who hoped to re-establish the old Roman Olympian

religion, wrote to Oribasius, one of the great physicians of this time,

who was also an important official of his household, that these

Christians had established everywhere hospitals in which not only their

own people, but also those who were not Christians, were received and

cared for, and that it would be idle to hope to counteract the influence

of Christianity until corresponding institutions could be erected by the

government.

From the very beginning, or, at least, just as soon as reasonable

freedom from persecution gave opportunity for study, Christian interest

in the medical sciences began to manifest itself. Nemesius, for

instance, a Bishop of Edessa in Syria, wrote toward the end of the

fourth century a little work in Greek on the nature of man, which is a

striking illustration of this. Nemesius was what in modern times would

be called a philosopher, that is, a speculative thinker and writer, with

regard to man's nature, rather than a physical scientist. He was

convinced, however, that true philosophy ought to be based on a complete

knowledge of man, body and soul, and that the anatomy of his body ought

to be a fundamental principle. It is in this little volume that some

enthusiastic students have found a description that is to them at least

much more than a hint of knowledge of the circulation of the blood.

Hyrtl doubts that the passage in question should be made to signify as

much as has been suggested, but the occurrence of any even distant

reference to such a subject at this time shows that, far from there

being neglect of physical scientific questions, men were thinking

seriously about them.

Just as soon as Christianity brought in a more peaceful state of affairs

and had so influenced the mass of the people that its place in the

intellectual life could be felt, there comes a period of cultural

development represented in philosophy by the Fathers of the Church, and

during which we have a series of important contributors to medical

literature. The first of these was Aetius, whose career and works are

treated more fully in the chapter on "Great Physicians in Early

Christian Times." He was followed by Alexander of Tralles, probably a

Christian, for his brother was the architect of Santa Sophia, and by

Paul of AEgina, with regard to whom we know only what is contained in his

medical writings, but whose contemporaries were nearly all Christians.

Their books are valuable to us, partly because they contain quotations

from great Greek writers on medicine, not always otherwise available,

but also because they were men who evidently knew the subject of

medicine broadly and thoroughly, made observations for themselves, and

controlled what they learned from the Greek forefathers in medicine by

their own experience. Just at the beginning of the Middle Ages, then,

under the fostering care of Christianity there is a period of

considerable importance in the history of medical literature. It is one

of the best proofs that we have not only that Christianity did not

hamper medical development, but that, directly and indirectly, by the

place that it gave to the care of the ailing in life as well as the

encouragement afforded to the intellectual life, it favored medical

study and writing.

A very interesting chapter in the story of the early Christian physician

is to be found in what we know of the existence of women physicians in

the fourth and fifth centuries. Theodosia, the mother of St. Procopius

the martyr, was, according to Carptzovius, looked upon as an excellent

physician in Rome in the early part of the fourth century. She suffered

martyrdom under Diocletian. There was also a Nicerata who practised at

Constantinople under the Emperor Arcadius. It is said that to her St.

John Chrysostom owed the cure of a serious illness. From the very

beginning Christian women acted as nurses, and deaconesses were put in

charge of hospitals. Fabiola, at Rome, is the foundress of the first

important hospital in that city. The story of these early Christian

women physicians has been touched upon in the chapter on "Medieval Women

Physicians," as an introduction to this interesting feature of

Salernitan medical education.

During the early Christian centuries much was owed to the genius and the

devotion to medicine of distinguished Jewish physicians. Their sacred

and rabbinical writers always concerned themselves closely with

medicine, and both the Old Testament and the Talmud must be considered

as containing chapters important for the medical history of the periods

in which they were written. At all times the Jews have been

distinguished for their knowledge of medicine, and all during the Middle

Ages they are to be found prominent as physicians. They were among the

teachers of the Arabs in the East and of the Moors in Spain. They were

probably among the first professors at Salerno as well as at

Montpellier. Many prominent rulers and ecclesiastics selected Jewish

physicians. Some of these made distinct contributions to medicine, and a

number of them deserve a place in any account of medicine in the making

during the Middle Ages. One of them, Maimonides, to whom a special

chapter is devoted, deserves a place among the great makers of medicine

of all time, because of the influence that he exerted on his own and

succeeding generations. Any story of the preservation and development of

medical teaching and medical practice during the Middle Ages would be

decidedly incomplete without due consideration of the work of Jewish

physicians.

Western medical literature followed Roman literature in other

departments, and had only the Greek traditions at second hand. During

the disturbance occasioned by the invasion of the barbarians there was

little opportunity for such leisure as would enable men to devote

themselves with tranquillity to medical study and writing. Medical

traditions were mainly preserved in the monasteries. Cassiodorus, who,

after having been Imperial Prime Minister, became a monk, recommended

particularly the study of medicine to the monastic brethren. With the

foundation of the Benedictines, medicine became one of the favorite

studies of the monks, partly for the sake of the health of the brethren

themselves, and partly in order that they might be helpful to the

villages that so often gathered round their monasteries. There is a

well-grounded tradition that at Monte Cassino medical teaching was one

of the features of the education provided there by the monks. It is

generally conceded that the Benedictines had much to do with the

foundation of Salerno. In the convents for women as well as the

monasteries for men serious attention was given to medicine. Women

studied medicine and were professors in the medical department of

Salerno. Other Italian universities followed the example thus set, and

so there is abundant material for the chapter on "Medieval Women

Physicians."

The next phase of medical history in the medieval period brings us to

the Arabs. Utterly uninterested in culture, education, or science before

the time of Mohammed, with the growth of their political power and the

foundation of their capitals, the Arab Caliphs took up the patronage of

education. They were the rulers of the cities of Asia Minor in which

Greek culture had taken so firm a hold, and captive Greece has always

led its captors captive. With the leisure that came for study, Arabians

took up the cultivation of the Greek philosophers, especially Aristotle,

and soon turned their attention also to the Greek physicians Hippocrates

and Galen. For some four hundred years then they were in the best

position to carry on medical traditions. Their teachers were the

Christian and Jewish physicians of the cities of Asia Minor, but soon

they themselves became distinguished for their attainments, and for

their medical writings. Interestingly enough, more of their

distinguished men flourished in Spain than in Asia Minor. We have

suggested an explanation for this in the fact that Spain had been one of

the most cultured provinces of the Roman Empire, providing practically

all the writers of the Silver Age of Latin literature, and evidently

possessing a widely cultured people. It was into this province, not yet

utterly decadent from the presence of the northern Goths, that the Moors

came and readily built up a magnificent structure of culture and

education on what had been the highest development of Roman

civilization.

The influence of the Arabs on Western civilization, and especially on

the development of science in Europe, has been much exaggerated by

certain writers. Closely in touch with Greek thought and Greek

literature during the eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries, it is easy to

understand that the Arabian writers were far ahead of the Christian

scholars of Europe of the same period, who were struggling up out of the

practical chaos that had been created by the coming of the barbarians,

and who, besides, had the chance for whatever Greek learning came to

them only through the secondary channels of the Latin writers. Rome had

been too occupied with politics and aggrandizement ever to become

cultured. In spite of this heritage from the Greeks, decadence took

place among the Arabs, and, as the centuries go on, what they do becomes

more and more trivial, and their writing has less significance. Just the

opposite happened in Europe. There, there was noteworthy progressive

development until the magnificent climax of thirteenth century

accomplishment was reached. It is often said that Europe owed much to

the Arabs for this, but careful analysis of the factors in that progress

shows that very little came from the Arabs that was good, while not a

little that was unfortunate in its influence was borrowed from them with

the translations of the Greek authors from that language, which

constituted the main, indeed often the only, reason why Arabian writers

were consulted.

With the foundation of the medical school of Salerno in the tenth

century, the modern history of medical education may be said to begin,

for it had many of the features that distinguish our modern university

medical schools. Its professors often came from a distance and had

travelled extensively for purposes of study; they attracted patients of

high rank from nearly every part of Europe, and these were generous in

their patronage of the school. Students came from all over, from Africa

and Asia, as well as Europe, and when abuses of medical practice began

to creep in, a series of laws were made creating a standard of medical

education and regulating the practice of medicine, that are interesting

anticipations of modern movements of the same kind. Finally a law was

passed requiring three years of preliminary work in logic and philosophy

before medicine might be taken up, and then four years at medicine, with

a subsequent year of practice with a physician before a license to

practise for one's self was issued. In addition to this there was a

still more surprising feature in the handing over of the department of

women's diseases to women professors, and the consequent opening up of

licensure to practise medicine to a great many women in the southern

part of Italy. The surprise that all this should have taken place in the

south of Italy is lessened by recalling the fact that the lower end of

the Italian peninsula had been early colonized by Greeks, that its name

in later times was Magna Graecia, and that the stimulus of Greek

tradition has always been especially favorable to the development of

scientific medicine.

Salerno's influence on Bologna is not difficult to trace, and the

precious tradition of surgery particularly, which was carried to the

northern university, served to initiate a period of surgery lasting

nearly two centuries, during which we have some of the greatest

contributions to this branch of medical science that were ever made. The

development of the medical school at Bologna anticipated by but a short

time that of a series of schools in the north Italian universities.

Padua, Piacenza, Pisa, and Vicenza had medical schools in the later

Middle Ages, the works of some of whose professors have attracted

attention. It was from these north Italian medical schools that the

tradition of close observation in medicine and of thoroughly scientific

surgery found its way to Paris. Lanfranc was the carrier of surgery, and

many French students who went to Italy came back with Italian methods.

In the fourteenth century Guy de Chauliac made the grand tour in Italy,

and then came back to write a text-book of surgery that is one of the

monuments in this department of medical science. Before his time,

Montpellier had attracted attention, but now it came to be looked upon

as a recognized centre of great medical teaching. The absence of the

Popes from Italy and the influence of their presence at Avignon made

itself felt. While culture and education declined in Italy in the midst

of political disturbances, they advanced materially at the south of

France.

For our generation undoubtedly the most interesting chapter in the

history of medieval medicine is that which tells of the marvellous

development of surgery that took place in the thirteenth and fourteenth

centuries. Considerable space has been devoted to this, because it

represents not only an important phase of the history of medicine, and

recalls the names and careers of great makers of medicine, but also

because it illustrates exquisitely the possibility of important

discoveries in medicine being made, applied successfully for years, and

then being lost or completely forgotten, though contained in important

medical books that were always available for study. The more we know of

this great period in the history of surgery, the more is the surprise at

how much was accomplished, and how many details of our modern surgery

were anticipated. Most of us have had some inkling of the fact that

anaesthesia is not new, and that at various times in the world's history

men have invented methods of producing states of sensibility in which

more or less painless operations were possible. Very few of us have

realized, however, the perfection to which anaesthesia was developed, and

the possibility this provided for the great surgeons of the later

medieval centuries to do operations in all the great cavities of the

body, the skull, the thorax, and the abdomen, quite as they are done in

our own time and apparently with no little degree of success.

Of course, any such extensive surgical intervention even for serious

affections would have been worse than useless under the septic

conditions that would surely have prevailed if certain principles of

antisepsis were not applied. Until comparatively recent years we have

been quite confident in our assurance that antisepsis and asepsis were

entirely modern developments of surgery. More knowledge, however, of

the history of surgery has given a serious set-back to this

self-complacency, and now we know that the later medieval surgeons

understood practical antisepsis very well, and applied it successfully.

They used strong wine as a dressing for their wounds, insisted on

keeping them clean, and not allowing any extraneous material of any

kind, ointments or the like, to be used on them. As a consequence they

were able to secure excellent results in the healing of wounds, and they

were inclined to boast of the fact that their incisions healed by first

intention and that, indeed, the scar left after them was scarcely

noticeable. We know that wine would make a good antiseptic dressing, but

until we actually read the reports of the results obtained by these old

surgeons, we had no idea that it could be used to such excellent

purpose. Antisepsis, like anaesthesia, was marvellously anticipated by

the surgical forefathers of the medieval period.

It has always seemed to me that the story of Medieval Dentistry

presented an even better illustration of a great anticipatory

development of surgery. This department represents only a small surgical

specialty, but one which even at that period was given over to

specialists, who were called dentatores. Guy de Chauliac's review of the

dentistry of his time and the state of the specialty, as pictured by

John of Arcoli, is likely to be particularly interesting, because if

there is any department of medical practice that we are sure is

comparatively recent in origin, it is dentistry. Here, however, we find

that practically all our dental manipulations, the filling of teeth,

artificial dentures, even orthodontia, were anticipated by the dentists

of the Middle Ages. We have only the compressed account of it which is

to be found in text-books of general surgery, and while in this they

give mainly a heritage from the past, yet even this suffices to give us

a picture very surprising in its detailed anticipation of much that we

have been inclined to think of as quite modern in invention and

discovery.

Medicine developed much more slowly than surgery, or, rather, lagged

behind it, as it seems nearly always prone to do. Surgical problems are

simple, and their solution belongs to a great extent to a handicraft.

That is, after all, what chirurgy, the old form of our word surgery,

means. Medical problems are more complex and involve both art and

science, so that solutions of them are often merely temporary and lack

finality. During the Middle Ages, however, and especially towards the

end of them, the most important branches of medicine, diagnosis and

therapeutics, took definite shape on the foundations that lie at the

basis of our modern medical science. We hear of percussion for abdominal

conditions, and of the most careful study of the pulse and the

respiration. There are charts for the varying color of the urine, and of

the tints of the skin. With Nicholas of Cusa there came the definite

suggestion of the need of exact methods of diagnosis. A mathematician

himself, he wished to introduce mathematical methods into medical

diagnosis, and suggested that the pulse should be counted in connection

with the water clock, the water that passed being weighed, in order to

get very definite comparative values for the pulse rate under varying

conditions, and also that the specific gravity of fluids from the body

should be ascertained in order to get another definite datum in the

knowledge of disease. It was long before these suggestions were to bear

much fruit, but it is interesting to find them so clearly expressed.

At the very end of the Middle Ages came the father of modern

pharmaceutical chemistry, Basil Valentine. Already the spirit that was

to mean so much for scientific investigation in the Renaissance period

was abroad. Valentine, however, owes little to anything except his own

investigations, and they were surprisingly successful, considering the

circumstances of time and place. His practical suggestions so far as

drugs were concerned did not prove to have enduring value, but then this

has been a fate shared by many of the masters of medicine. There were

many phases of medical practice, however, that he insisted on in his

works. He believed that the best agent for the cure of the disease was

nature, and that the physician's main business must be to find out how

nature worked, and then foster her efforts or endeavor to imitate them.

He insisted, also that personal observation, both of patients and drugs,

was more important than book knowledge. Indeed, he has some rather

strong expressions with regard to the utter valuelessness of book

information in subjects where actual experience and observation are

necessary. It gives a conceit of knowledge quite unjustified by what is

really known.

What is interesting about all these men is that they faced the same

problems in medicine that we have to, in much the same temper of mind

that we do ourselves, and that, indeed, they succeeded in solving them

almost as well as we have done, in spite of all that might be looked for

from the accumulation of knowledge ever since.

It was very fortunate for the after time that in the period now known as

the Renaissance, after the invention of printing, there were a number of

serious, unselfish scholars who devoted themselves to the publication in

fine printed editions of the works of these old-time makers of medicine.

If the neglect of them that characterized the eighteenth and early

nineteenth centuries had been the rule at the end of the fifteenth and

during the sixteenth century, we would almost surely have been without

the possibility of ever knowing that so many serious physicians lived

and studied and wrote large important tomes during the Middle Ages. For

our forefathers of a few generations ago had very little knowledge, and

almost less interest, as to the Middle Ages, which they dismissed simply

as the Dark Ages, quite sure that nothing worth while could possibly

have come out of the Nazareth of that time. What they knew about the

people who had lived during the thousand years before 1500 only seemed

to them to prove the ignorance and the depths of superstition in which

they were sunk. That medieval scholars should have written books not

only well worth preservation, but containing anticipations of modern

knowledge, and, though of course they could not have known that, even

significant advances over their own scientific conditions, would have

seemed to them quite absurd.

Fortunately for us, then, the editions of the early printed books, so

many of them monuments of learning and masterpieces of editorial work

with regard to medieval masters of medicine, were lying in libraries

waiting to be unearthed and restudied during the nineteenth century.

German and French scholars, especially during the last generation, have

recovered the knowledge of this thousand years of human activity, and we

know now and can sympathetically study how the men of these times faced

their problems, which were very much those of our own time, in almost

precisely the same spirit as we do ours at the present time, and that

their solutions of them are always interesting, often thorough and

practical, and more frequently than we would like to think possible,

resemble our own in many ways. For the possibility of this we are

largely indebted originally to the scholars of the Renaissance. Without

their work that of our investigators would have been quite unavailing.

It is to be hoped, however, that our recovery of this period will not be

followed by any further eclipse, though that seems to be almost the rule

of human history, but that we shall continue to broaden our sympathetic

knowledge of this wonderful medieval period, the study of which has had

so many surprises in store for us.

II

GREAT PHYSICIANS IN EARLY CHRISTIAN TIMES

What we know of the life of the Founder of Christianity and how much He

did for the ailing poor would make us expect that the religion that He

established would foster the care and the cure of suffering humanity. As

we have outlined in the Introduction, the first of the works of

Christian service that was organized was the care of the sick. At first

a portion of the bishop's house was given over to the shelter of the

ailing, and a special order of assistants to the clergy, the

deaconesses, took care of them. As Christians became more numerous,

special hospitals were founded, and these became public institutions

just as soon as freedom from persecution allowed the Christians the

liberty to give overt expression to their feelings for the poor. While

hospitals of limited capacity for such special purposes as the

sheltering of slaves or of soldiers and health establishments of various

kinds for the wealthy had been erected before Christianity, this was the

first time that anyone who was ill, no matter what the state of his

pecuniary resources, could be sure to find shelter and care. The

expression of the Emperor Julian the Apostate, that admission to these

hospitals was not limited to Christians, is the best possible evidence

of the liberal charity that inspired them.

The ordinary passing student of the history of medicine or of hospital

foundation and organization, can have no idea of the magnitude of some

of these institutions, and their importance in the life of the time,

unless it is especially pointed out. St. Basil, about the middle of the

fourth century, erected what was spoken of as "a city for the sick,"

before the gates of Caesarea. Gregory of Nazianzen, his friend, says

"that well built and furnished houses stood on both sides of streets

symmetrically laid out about the church, and contained rooms for the

sick, and the infirm of every variety were intrusted to the care of

doctors and nurses." There were separate buildings for strangers, for

the poor, and for the ailing, and comfortable dwellings for the

physicians and nurses. An important portion of the institution was set

apart for the care of lepers, which constituted a prominent feature in

Basil's work in which he himself took a special interest. Earlier in the

same century Helena, the mother of the Emperor Constantine, had built

similar institutions around Jerusalem, and during this same century

nearly everywhere we have evidence of organization of hospitals and of

care for the ailing poor.

Not only were hospitals erected, but arrangements were made for the care

of the ailing poor in their own homes and for the visitation of them,

and for the bringing to places adapted for their care and treatment of

such as were found on the street, or neglected in their homes. The

Church evidently considered itself bound to care for men's bodies as

well as their souls, and many of the expressions in common use among

Christians referred to this fact. Religion itself was spoken of as a

medicine of the soul and the body. Christianity was defined as the

religion of healing. The word salvation had a reference to both body and

soul. Baptism was spoken of as the bath of the soul, the holy Eucharist

as the elixir of immortal life, and penance as the medicine of the soul.

It is not surprising to find, then, that Harnack has found among the

texts that illustrate the history of early Christian literature this

one: "In every community there shall be at least one widow appointed to

assist women who are stricken with illness, and this widow shall be

trained in her duties, neat and careful in her ways, shall not be

self-seeking, must not indulge too freely in wine in order that she may

be able to take up her duties at night as well as by day, and shall

consider it her duty to keep the Church officials informed of all that

seems necessary."

The saving of deformed and ailing infants or children whose parents did

not care to have the trouble of rearing them, required the establishment

by the Christians of another set of institutions, Foundling Asylums and

Hospitals for Children. Until the coming of Christianity parents were

supposed to have the right of life and death over their children, and no

one questioned it. In every country in the world until the coming of

Christianity this had always been the case. Besides, there were

institutions for the care of the old. These are the classes of mankind

who are especially liable to suffer from disease, and the opportunity

to study human ailments in such institutions could scarcely help but

provide facilities for clinical observation such as had not existed

before. Unfortunately the work of Christianity was hampered, first by

the Roman persecutions, and then later by the invasion of the

barbarians, who had to be educated and lifted up to a higher plane of

civilization before they could be brought to appreciate the value of

medical science, much less contribute to its development.

Harnack, whose writings in the higher criticism of Scripture have

attracted so much attention in recent years, began his career in the

study of Christian antiquities with a monograph on Medical Features of

Early Christianity.[1] He mentions altogether some sixteen physicians

who reached distinction in the earliest days of Christianity. Some of

these were priests, some of them bishops, as Theodotos of Laodicea;

Eusebius, Bishop of Rome; Basilios, Bishop of Ancyra, and at least one,

Hierakas, was the founder of a religious order. The first Christian

physicians came mainly from Syria, as might be expected, for here the

old Greek medical traditions were active. Among them must be enumerated

Cosmas and Damian, physicians who were martyred in the persecution of

Diocletian, and who have been chosen as the patrons of the medical

profession. Justinian erected a famous church to them. It became the

scene of pilgrimages. Organizations of various kinds since, as the

College of St. Come, and medical societies, have been named after them.

Old-Time Makers of Medicine The Story of The Students And Teachers of the Sciences Related to Medicine During the Middle Ages · 第 1 / 31 段