E-text prepared by Suzanne Lybarger, William Flis, and the Project
Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team (https://www.pgdp.net/) from
page images generously made available by Internet Archive and Canadian
Libraries (http://www.archive.org/details/toronto)
Note: Images of the original pages are available through the Internet
Archive and Canadian Libraries. See
http://www.archive.org/details/gilbertusanglicu00handuoft
GILBERTUS ANGLICUS
Medicine of the Thirteenth Century
by
HENRY E. HANDERSON, A.M., M.D.
With a Biography of the Author
Published Posthumously for Private Distribution by
the Cleveland Medical Library Association
Cleveland, Ohio
1918
CONTENTS
Page
Frontispiece 5
Explanatory Foreword 7
Biography 9-14
Resolutions of the Cleveland Medical Library Ass'n 15
Gilbertus Anglicus--A Study of Medicine in the
Thirteenth Century 17-78
[Illustration: HENRY E. HANDERSON]
EXPLANATORY FOREWORD
In the summer of 1916 the librarian of the Cleveland Medical Library
received a manuscript from Dr. Henry E. Handerson with the request
that it be filed for reference in the archives of the library. The
librarian at once recognized the value of the paper and referred it
to the editorial board of the Cleveland Medical Journal, who sought
the privilege of publishing it. Dr. Handerson's consent was secured
and the article was set in type. However, when the time came for its
publication the author was reluctant to have it appear since he was
unable then to read the proof, and because he felt that the material
present might not be suitable for publication in a clinical journal.
To those who knew him, this painstaking attention to detail and desire
for accuracy presents itself as a familiar characteristic. Though
actual publication was postponed, the type forms were held, and when
the Cleveland Medical Journal suspended publication, its editorial
board informed the Council of the Cleveland Medical Library
Association of the valuable material which it had been unable to
give to the medical world. In the meantime Dr. Handerson's death
had occurred, but the Council obtained the generous consent of the
author's family to make this posthumous publication. It is hoped that
those who read will bear this fact in mind and will be lenient in
the consideration of typographical errors, of which the author was so
fearful.
The Cleveland Medical Library Association feels that it is fortunate
in being enabled to present to its members and to others of the
profession this work of Dr. Handerson's and to create from his own
labors a memorial to him who was once its president.
SAMUEL W. KELLEY.
CLYDE L. CUMMER.
Committee on Publication.
BIOGRAPHY
HENRY EBENEZER HANDERSON
Owing to Dr. Handerson's modesty, even we who were for years
associated with him in medical college, in organization, and
professional work, knew but little of him. He would much rather
discuss some fact or theory of medical science or some ancient worthy
of the profession than his own life. Seeing this tall venerable
gentleman, sedate in manner and philosophical in mind, presiding over
the Cuyahoga County Medical Society or the Cleveland Medical Library
Association, few of the members ever pictured him as a fiery, youthful
Confederate officer, leading a charge at a run up-hill over fallen
logs and brush, sounding the "Rebel yell," leaping a hedge and
alighting in a ten-foot ditch among Federal troopers who surrendered
to him and his comrades. Yet this is history. We could perhaps more
easily have recognized him even though in a military prison-pen, on
finding him dispelling the tedium by teaching his fellow prisoners
Latin and Greek, or perusing a precious volume of Herodotus.
Henry Ebenezer Handerson was born on March 21, 1837, here in Cuyahoga
county, in the township of Orange, near the point now known as
"Handerson's Cross-Roads," on the Chagrin river. His mother's maiden
name was Catharine Potts. His father was Thomas Handerson, son of Ira
Handerson. The family immigrated to Ohio from Columbia county, New
York, in 1834. Thos. Handerson died as the result of an accident in
1839, leaving the widow with five children, the eldest thirteen years
of age, to support. Henry and a sister were adopted by an uncle, Lewis
Handerson, a druggist, of Cleveland. In spite of a sickly childhood
the boy went to school a part of the time and at the age of fourteen
was sent to a boarding school, Sanger Hall, at New-Hartford, Oneida
county, New York. Henry's poor health compelled him to withdraw from
school. No one at that time would have predicted that the delicate
youth would live to be the sage of four score years and one. With his
foster father and family he moved to Beersheba Springs, Grundy county,
Tennessee.
In 1854, in good health, the boy returned to Cleveland, prepared
for college, and entered Hobart College, Geneva, New York, where he
graduated as A.B. in 1858. Returning to Tennessee, he occupied himself
for about a year with surveying land and in other work and then
became private tutor in the family of Mr. Washington Compton on a
cotton plantation near Alexandria, Louisiana. There he remained a
year or more, then in the autumn of 1860 matriculated in the Medical
Department of the University of Louisiana (now Tulane University),
where he studied through the winter, and also heard much of the
political oratory of that exciting period.
The bombardment of Fort Sumter, April 12, 1861, followed by the call
of President Lincoln for 75,000 troops to suppress the rebellion,
found young Handerson again employed as tutor, this time in the family
of General G. Mason Graham, a veteran of the Mexican war.
With his friends and acquaintances, Handerson joined a company of
"homeguards" consisting mostly of planters and their sons, formed
for the purpose of maintaining "order among the negroes and other
suspicious characters of the vicinity."
Many years afterward Dr. Handerson wrote, in a narrative for his
family, concerning this period of his life: "Without any disposition
to violent partisanship, I had favored the party of which the
standard-bearers were Bell and Everett and the battle cry 'The
Constitution and the Union,' and I had grieved sincerely over the
defeat by the Radicals of the North, aided by the 'fire-eaters' of
the South."
And again: "Born and educated in the North, I did not share in
any degree the fears of the Southerners over the election to the
Presidency of Mr. Lincoln. I could not but think the action of the
seceding States unwise and dangerous to their future prosperity. On
the other hand, this action had already been taken, and without any
prospect of its revocation. Indeed, in the present frame of mind of
the North, any steps toward recession seemed likely to precipitate
the very evils which the secession of the states had been designed
to anticipate. I believed slavery a disadvantage to the South, but
no sin, and, in any event, an institution for which the Southerners
of the present day were not responsible. An inheritance from their
fore-fathers, properly administered, it was by no means an unmitigated
evil, and it was one, moreover, in which the North but a few years
before had shared. All my interests, present and future, apparently
lay in the South and with Southerners, and if the seceding States, in
one of which I resided, chose deliberately to try the experiment of
self-government, I felt quite willing to give them such aid as lay
in my feeble power. When I add to this that I was 24 years of age,
and naturally affected largely by the ideas, the enthusiasm and
the excitement of my surroundings, it is easy to understand to what
conclusions I was led."
So on June 17, 1861, he volunteered in the Stafford Guards under Capt.
(afterward Brigadier General) L.A. Stafford. The Guards became company
B of the 9th Regiment of Louisiana Volunteers, Confederate States of
America, Colonel (later Brigadier General) "Dick" Taylor (son of
"Old Zach," the President of the U.S.), in command. During the year
that followed until the close of the war, Handerson experienced the
adventures and trials of a soldier's life. He knew picket, scouting,
and skirmishing duty, the bivouac, the attack and defense in battle
formation, the charge, the retreat, hunger and thirst, the wearisome
march in heat and dust, in cold, in rain, through swamps and stony
wildernesses. He was shot through the hat and clothing and once
through the muscles of the shoulder and neck within half inch of the
carotid artery, lay in a hospital, and had secondary hemorrhage. At
another time he survived weeks of typhoid fever.
He was successively private soldier and accountant for his company,
quarter-master, 2nd Lieutenant of the line, Captain of the line, and
finally Adjutant General of the 2nd Louisiana Brigade, A. N. Va.,
under Lee and Jackson, with rank of Major. On May 4, 1864, Adjutant
General Handerson was taken prisoner, and from May 17th until August
20th he was imprisoned at Fort Delaware in the Delaware river. He
was then confined in a stockade enclosure on the beach between Forts
Wagner and Gregg on Morris Island, until about the end of October,
when he was transferred to Fort Pulaski at the mouth of the Savannah
river, and in March, 1865, back to Fort Delaware. In April, after
Lee's surrender, many of the prisoners were liberated on taking the
oath of allegiance to the Federal Government. But Handerson did not
consider his allegiance to the Southern Confederacy ended until
after the capture of President Davis, and it was not until June 17,
1865, that he signed the oath of allegiance and was liberated in
Philadelphia.
Since that time, with that spirit of tolerance and openness to truth
which characterized the man, he has said, "in the triumph of the
Union, the war ended as it should have ended."
Mr. Handerson then resumed his medical studies, this time in the
College of Physicians and Surgeons of New York, Medical Department of
Columbia University, taking the degree of M.D. in 1867. Hobart College
conferred the A.M. in 1868. On October 16, 1872, he married Juliet
Alice Root, who died leaving him a daughter.
February 25, 1878, Dr. Handerson read before the Medical Society of
the County of New York an article entitled, "The School of Salernum,
an Historical Sketch of Mediæval Medicine." This essay attracted wide
attention to his scholarly attainments and love of laborious research.
For example, Professor Edward Schaer of the chair of Pharmacology
and Pharmaceutical Chemistry, of Neumünster-Zürich, pronounces
this pamphlet "a valuable gift ... a remarkable addition to other
historical materials ... in connection with the history of pharmacy
and of pharmaceutical drugs"; that he found in it "a great deal of
information which will be sought for in vain in many even renowned
literary works."
Dr. Handerson practiced medicine in New York City, from 1867 to 1885,
removing to Cleveland in 1885.
On June 12, 1888, he married Clara Corlett of Cleveland.
Then in 1889 appeared the American edition of the "History of Medicine
and the Medical Profession, by Joh. Hermann Baas, M.D.," which was
translated, revised and enlarged by Dr. Handerson, to whom, in the
words of Dr. Baas, "we are indebted for considerable amplification,
particularly in the section on English and American medicine, with
which he was, of course, better acquainted than the author, and
for numerous corrections." ... As a matter of fact, the learning
and judgment, and the conscientious industry of the translator and
American editor of this work are evident throughout the book.
Concerning Dr. Handerson's writings, Dr. Fielding H. Garrison
writes (Medical Pickwick, March, 1915, P. 118): "The earliest of Dr.
Handerson's papers recorded in the Index Medicus is 'An unusual case
of intussusception' (1880). Most of his other medical papers, few in
number, have dealt with the sanitation, vital statistics, diseases
and medical history of Cleveland, and have the accuracy which
characterizes slow and careful work. This is especially true of his
historical essays of which that on 'The School of Salernum' (1883) is
a solid piece of original investigation, worthy to be placed beside
such things as Holmes on homoeopathy, Weir Mitchell on instrumental
precision, or Kelly on American gynecology.
"To the cognoscenti, Dr. Handerson's translation of 'Baas' History of
Medicine' (1889) is known as 'Handerson's Book.' He modestly describes
himself as its 'editor,' but he is more than that. As the witty and
effective translator of a witty and effective work, he has added
sections in brackets on English and American history which are
based on original investigation and of permanent value to all future
historians. Handerson's Baas is thus more complete and valuable than
the Rhinelander's original text."
As listed in the Index Medicus, the publications and writings of Dr.
Handerson appear as follows:
An unusual case of intussusception. Medical Record, 1880,
xviii, 698.
The School of Salernum. An historical sketch of mediæval
medicine. 1883.
Outlines of the history of medicine (Baas). Translated, and in
conjunction with the author, revised and enlarged, 1887.
Clinical history of a case of abdominal cancer. Cleveland
Medical Gazette, 1891-2, vii, 315-321.
The Sanitary topography of Cleveland. Cleveland Medical
Gazette, 1895-6, xi, 651-659.
Cleveland in the Census Reports. Cleveland Medical Gazette,
1896-7, xii, 257-264.
The earliest contribution to medical literature in the United
States. Janus, 1899, p. 540.
A review of the Vital Statistics of Cleveland during the last
decennium. Cleveland Medical Journal, 1902, i, 71-76.
Epidemics of typhoid fever in Cleveland. Cleveland Medical
Journal, 1904, iii, 208-210.
The mortality statistics of the twelfth census. Cleveland
Medical Journal, 1905, iv, 425-431.
Co-operative sanitation. Ohio Medical Journal, 1905, i,
278-281.
The medical code of Hammurabi, King of Babylon. Cleveland
Medical Journal, 1908, vii, 72-75.
Carcinoma in high life. Cleveland Medical Journal, 1908, vii,
472-476.
Medical Cleveland in the nineteenth (19th) Century. Cleveland
Medical Journal, 1909, viii, 59, 146, 208.
Gilbert of England and his "Compendium Medicine." Medical
Pickwick, 1915, i, 118-120.
Dr. Handerson was Professor of Hygiene and Sanitary Science in the
Medical Department of the University of Wooster, 1894-96, and the
same in the Cleveland College of Physicians and Surgeons (Medical
Department of Ohio Wesleyan University), 1896 to 1907, and filled that
chair with eminent ability. Thus it came about that the ex-Confederate
officer taught sanitary science in a college standing upon ground
donated by the survivors of an organization of abolitionists.
Dr. Handerson was a member of the Cuyahoga County Medical Society,
and its President in 1895; also a member of the Cleveland Academy
of Medicine, of the Ohio State Medical Society, and of the American
Medical Association. He was one of the founders and an active worker
in the Cleveland Medical Library Association and its President from
1896 to 1902.
He was all his life devoted to the Episcopal Church, was Warden of
Grace Episcopal Church, Cleveland, for many years, and Treasurer of
the Diocese of Ohio during fourteen years.
During his later years Dr. Handerson withdrew entirely from active
practice and spent a great deal of time in his library. His papers
abound in carefully prepared manuscripts, some of them running into
hundreds of pages.
Two years before his death Dr. Handerson became totally blind.
This grievous affliction was borne with unvarying patience and
cheerfulness. He still loved to recite from memory the classic
authors, to relate and discuss episodes of world history and events
of the present, to solve difficult mathematical problems, and to have
his data on all subjects verified. He retained his faculties perfectly
until April 23, 1918, when he died from cerebral hemorrhage.
He is survived by a daughter, two sons by the second marriage, and his
devoted wife.
Among numerous letters received from prominent physicians and authors
appreciative of Dr. Handerson's medico-historical labors, one from Dr.
Oliver Wendell Holmes expresses high praise and requests to have sent
to him everything which Dr. Handerson might in future write.
It seems eminently appropriate that the essay on "Gilbertus Anglicus."
the last from the pen of Dr. Handerson, should be put in book form,
together with a sketch, however brief, of its author's earnest life,
his sterling character, his geniality and imperturbable equanimity,
and thus preserved in testimony of the high esteem in which he was
held by his contemporaries.
SAMUEL WALTER KELLEY.
* * * * *
RESOLUTIONS
At a meeting of the Council of the Cleveland Medical Library
Association, held on May 14, the following resolutions were adopted:
_Resolved_, That in the death of Dr. Henry E. Handerson the Cleveland
Medical Library Association has sustained the loss of one of its most
honored and devoted members. His scholarly acquirements were notable,
and his eminence as a medical historian generally recognized. His deep
interest in the welfare of the Library and his thorough attention to
every detail of his official duties were always evident, while his
lovable personal qualities endeared him to all.
The Association desires to express its high appreciation of his long
and valued services, and extends to his bereaved family its heartfelt
and sincere sympathy.
C.A. HAMANN,
WM. EVANS BRUNER,
J.B. McGEE.
* * * * *
GILBERTUS ANGLICUS (GILBERT OF ENGLAND)
A STUDY OF ENGLISH MEDICINE IN THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY.
BY H.E. HANDERSON, A.M., M.D.
CLEVELAND
* * * * *
"Nothing in the past is dead to the man who would learn how
the present came to be what it is."--Stubbs--_Constitutional
Hist. of England_.
* * * * *
Among the literary monuments of early English medicine the "Compendium
Medicinae" of Gilbertus Anglicus merits a prominent position as the
earliest complete treatise on general medicine by an English author
which has been preserved to our day, and equally because it forms in
itself a very complete mirror of the medical science of its age and
its country.
Gilbert was undoubtedly one of the most famous physicians of his time.
His reputation is recognized in those well-known lines of Chaucer
which catalogue the "authorities" of his Doctor of Phisik:
"Wel knew he the olde Esculapius
And Deyscorides and eek Rufus,
Olde Ypocras, Haly and Galyen,
Serapion, Razis and Avycen,
Averrois, Damascien and Constantyn,
Bernard and Gatesden and Gilbertyn."
He is also quoted with frequency and respect by the medical writers
of many succeeding ages, and the Compendium, first printed in 1510,
enjoyed the honor of a second edition as late as the seventeenth
century (1608). The surname "Anglicus" in itself testifies to the
European reputation of our author, for as Dr. Payne sensibly
remarks, no one in England would speak of an English writer as "the
Englishman."
Yet, in spite of his reputation, we know almost no details of the life
of Gilbert, and are forced to content ourselves with the few facts
to be gleaned from the scanty biographies of early writers and the
inferences drawn from the pages of the Compendium itself. The date
and place of his birth and death, and even the field of his medical
activities are equally unknown. Bale, Pits and Leland, the earliest
English biographers, tell us that Gilbert, after the completion of
his studies in England, proceeded to the Continent to enlarge his
education, and finally became physician to the great Justiciar, Hubert
Walter, archbishop of Canterbury, who died in the year 1205. This
would place him under the reign of King John, in the early part of the
thirteenth century.
Dr. John Freind, however, the famous English physician and medical
historian (1725), observing that Gilbert quotes the Arabian
philosopher Averroës (who died in 1198), and believing that he also
quotes a work of Roger Bacon and the surgical writings of Theodorius
(Borgognoni) of Cervia (1266), was inclined to fix his period in the
latter half of the thirteenth century, probably under the reign of
Edward I. Most of the later historians of medicine have followed the
views of Freind. Thus Eloy adopts the date 1272, Sprengel gives 1290,
Haeser the same date, Hirsch says Gilbert lived towards the close of
the thirteenth century, Baas adopts the figures 1290, etc.
The most recent biographers of Gilbert, however, Mr. C.L.
Kingsford[1], and the late Dr. Joseph Frank Payne[2], after an
apparently careful and independent investigation of his life, have
reached conclusions which vary materially from each other and from
those of the historians mentioned. Mr. Kingsford fixes the date of
Gilbert at about 1250, while Dr. Payne reverts to the views of Bale
and Pits and suggests as approximate figures for the birth and death
of Gilbert the years 1170-80 to 1230. This discrepancy of twenty-five
or thirty years between the views of two competent and unprejudiced
investigators, as a mere question of erudition and interpretation,
is perhaps scarcely worthy of prolonged discussion. But as both
biographers argue from substantially the same data, the arguments
reveal so many interesting and pertinent facts, and the numerous
difficulties attending the interpretation of these facts, that
some comparison of the different views of the biographers and some
criticism of their varying conclusions may not be unwelcome.
[Footnote 1: In Leslie Stephen's "Dictionary of Biography."]
[Footnote 2: _British Medical Journal_, Nov. 12, 1904, p. 1282.]
In the first place then we must say that, as Gilbert is frequently
quoted in the "Thesaurus Pauperum," a work ascribed to Petrus
Hispanus, who (under the title Pope John XXI) died in 1277, this date
determines definitely the _latest_ period to which the Compendium can
be referred. If, as held by some historians, the "Thesaurus" is the
work of Julian, the father of Petrus, the Compendium can be referred
to an earlier date only.
Now Gilbert in his Compendium (f. 259a) refers to the writings of
Averroës (Ibn Roschd) regarding the color of the iris of the eye.
Averroës died in the year 1198. There is no pretense that Gilbert was
familiar with the Arabic tongue, and the earliest translations into
Latin of the writings of Averroës are ascribed by Bacon to the famous
Michael Scot, though Bacon says they were chiefly the work of a
certain Jew named Andrew, who made the translations for Scot. Bacon
also says that these translations were made "_nostris temporibus_,"
in our time, a loose expression, which may, perhaps, be fairly
interpreted to include the period 1230-1250. But if, as Dr. Payne
believes, Gilbert died about 1230, it seems improbable that he could
have been familiar with the translations of Michael Scot. Accordingly
Dr. Payne suggests that, after the death of his patron in 1205,
Gilbert returned to the Continent, and, perhaps in Paris or at
Montpellier, met with earlier Latin versions of the writings of the
Arabian physician and philosopher. This is, of course, possible, but
there is no historical warrant for the hypothesis, which must, for
the present at least, be regarded as merely a happy conjecture of
Dr. Payne. The presence of Gilbert upon the Continent, probably as a
teacher of reputation, seems, however, quite probable. Littre has even
unearthed the fact that during the 14th century a street in Paris near
the medical schools, bore the name of the Rue Gilbert l'Anglois. A
MS. in the Bibliotheque Nationale entitled "_Experimenta Magistri
Gilliberti, Cancellarii Montepessulani_" has suggested also the idea
that Gilbert may have been at one time chancellor of the University
of Montpellier. Dr. P. Pansier, of Avignon, however, who has carefully
examined and published this manuscript[3], reports that while it
contains some formulae found also in the Compendium of Gilbert, it
contains many others from apparently other sources, and he was unable
to convince himself that the compilation was in fact the work of
Gilbertus Anglicus. Dr. Pansier also furnishes us with a list of
the chancellors of Montpellier, which contains the name of a certain
"Gillibertus," chancellor of the university in 1250. He could find,
however, no evidence that this Gillibertus was Gilbertus Anglicus,
author of the Compendium Medicinae. On the whole then the visit of
Gilbert to France early in the 13th century, and his access in
this way to early translations of Averroës, while a convenient and
plausible conjecture on the part of Dr. Payne, does not seem supported
by any trustworthy historical evidence.
[Footnote 3: Janus, 1903, p. 20.]
The "_Liber de speculis_" mentioned by Gilbert (f. 126 c), and since
the time of Freind generally accepted as the work of Bacon, is almost
certainly not from the pen of that eminent philosopher. In addition
to the fact that Bacon himself says he had (for obvious reasons)
written nothing except a few tracts (_capitula quaedam_) prior to the
composition of his Opus Magnum in 1267, the real author of the Liber
de speculis is probably mentioned by Bacon in the following passage
from the Opus Tertium:
"_Nam in hoc ostenditur specialiter bonitas naturae, ut dicit auctor
libri de speculis comburentibus._"[4]
[Footnote 4: Cap. XXXVI, p. 116, edition of Brewer.]
We must therefore agree with Dr. Payne that the _Liber de speculis_ of
Gilbert was at least not the work of Roger Bacon.
Dr. Freind regards the chapters of Gilbert on the subject of leprosy
as borrowed substantially from the "Chirurgia" of Theodorius of
Cervia, who wrote about the year 1266. This view has also been
generally accepted by later writers. But Dr. Payne boldly challenges
the view of Freind, declares that Theodorius copied _his_ chapters
from Gilbert, and asserts that Theodorius was a notorious plagiarist.
Now, while the bold assertion of Dr. Payne cannot, of course, be
accepted as _proof_ of Gilbert's precedence in chronological order,
if that precedence is otherwise established, it will explain the
similarity of the chapters of the two writers very satisfactorily. For
the present, however, this similarity can be adduced as evidence on
neither side.
Again, Gilbert, with the enthusiasm of a loyal pupil, speaks (f. 47 b)
of a certain Magister Ricardus, "_omnium doctorum doctissimus_," whose
views on uroscopy certainly indicate a mind superior to his age. Now
there were about this period at least two eminent physicians who bore
the name of Ricardus. Of these the senior, a Frenchman, known also
as Ricardus Salednitanus, is highly praised by Aegidius of Corbeil
(Gilles de Corbeil, Aegidius Corboliensis), physician to King Philip
Augustus of France (1180-1223). This Ricardus was a famous teacher at
Salernum when Aegidius was in attendance at that famous university,
therefore probably about the close of the 12th century. The second
Ricardus, called Parisiensis, has been recently identified by Toply
with Richard of Wendover, an English canon of St. Paul's, and at one
time physician to Pope Gregory IX, who died in 1241. Toply believes
him to have been also the author of the "_Anatomia Ricardi_," recently
published. This Ricardus died in 1252.
Now to which of these Ricardi does the eulogistic language of Gilbert
refer? Dr. Payne believes it to be the senior, Ricardus Salernitanus.
Mr. Kingsford, on the other hand, thinks it to be Ricardus
Parisiensis, who died in 1252. A _Liber de urinis_ has been ascribed
to each of them, but, it seems to me, with greater probability to
Ricardus Salernitanus. If too the author of the "_Anatomia Ricardi_"
was a contemporary of Gilbert, we might reasonably expect to find
in the Compendium some evidences of Gilbert's acquaintance with that
work. But Gilbert's discussion of anatomical questions is totally
unlike that of the author of the "_Anatomia_," and betrays not the
slightest evidence of knowledge of such a treatise. On the whole
then I am inclined to agree in this question with Dr. Payne, and to
consider the Ricardus of Gilbert identical with Ricardus Salernitanus,
the famous professor of the School of Salernum. This conclusion
is further justified by the fact, generally accepted by all modern
writers, that Gilbert was himself a pupil of Salernum.
Singularly enough, both Dr. Payne and Mr. Kingsford profess to find
in the Compendium some evidence that Gilbert sojourned in Syria for
a certain period, though the circumstances of this sojourn are
viewed differently by the two biographers. Dr. Payne thinks that the
physician, after completing his education in England, proceeded to the
Continent and extended his travels as far as Syrian Tripoli, where he
met Archbishop Walter and became attached to his staff. As the prelate
returned to England in 1192, this sojourn of Gilbert in Syria must
have been about 1190-91, when, according to Dr. Payne's chronology,
Gilbert could have been not more than about twenty years of age.
Dr. Payne bases his story upon a certain passage in the Compendium,
in which Gilbert says that he met in Syrian Tripoli "a _canonicus_
suffering from rheumatic symptoms." I have been entirely unable to
find the passage referred to in this story, in spite of a careful
search of the text of the edition of 1510. But, admitting the
existence of the passage in question, it proves nothing as to the
_date_ of this alleged Syrian sojourn. Tripoli was captured by
the Crusaders in 1109, and continued under their control until its
recapture by the Saracens in 1289, a period of nearly two hundred
years. Gilbert's travels in Syria may then have occurred at almost
any time during this long period, and his fortuitous meeting with
Archbishop Walter has very much the appearance of a story evolved
entirely from the consciousness of the biographer.
On the other hand, Mr. Kingsford bases his theory of Gilbert's sojourn
in Syria upon a story adopted, I think, from Littré and found in the
Histoire litéraire de la France. The Compendium of Gilbert contains
(f. 137a) a chapter giving the composition of a complex collyrium
with which he professes to have cured the almost total blindness of
Bertram, son of Hugo de Jubilet, after the disease had baffled the
skill of the Saracen and Christian-Syrian physicians of his day.
Now Littré avers that a certain Hugo de Jubilet was involved in an
ambuscade in Syria in the year 1227, and that he had a son named
Bertram. It is very natural, of course, to conclude that this Bertram
was the patient recorded in the book of Gilbert. Kingsford says that
Gilbert "met" Bertram in Syria, but the text of the Compendium says
nothing of the locality of their meeting, which might have taken place
almost anywhere in Europe, perhaps even at Salernum, a favorite resort
of the invalided Crusaders in these times. Finally, Dr. Payne disposes
effectually of the authenticity of the entire story by calling
attention to the fact that the chapter referred to in the Compendium
is marked plainly "_Additio_," without indicating whether this
addition is from the pen of Gilbert or some later glossator.
Finally, I may suggest another line of argument, which, so far as I
know, has not yet been advanced for the determination of the period of
Gilbert.
The Compendium Medicinae of Gilbert is, of course, a compendium of
internal medicine. But the book is also something more. Not less
than fifty chapters are devoted to a comparatively full discussion of
wounds, fractures and dislocations, lithotomy, herniotomy, fistulae
and the various diseases on the border line between medicine and
surgery. Not a single surgical writer, however, is quoted by name.
Nevertheless the major part of these surgical chapters are either
literal copies, or very close paraphrases, of the similar chapters
of the "_Chirurgia_" of Roger of Parma, a distinguished professor
in Salernum and the pioneer of modern surgery. The precise period
of Roger is not definitely settled by the unanimous agreement of
modern historians, but in the "_Epilogus_" of the "_Glosulae Quatuor
Magistrorum_" it is said that Roger's "_Chirurgia_" was "_in lucem et
ordinem redactum_" by Guido Arietinus, in the year of our Lord 1230.
This date, while perhaps not unquestionable, is also adopted by De
Renzi, the Italian historian of Medicine. The original MS. of Roger's
work is said to be still in existence in the Magliabechian Library
in Florence, but it has never been published in its original form.[5]
Roland of Parma, however, a pupil of Roger, published in 1264 what
purports to be a copy of Roger's "_Chirurgia_" with some notes and
additions of his own, and it is from this MS. of Roland that all our
copies of Roger's work have been printed. Roger's "_Chirurgia_" was
popularly known as the "_Rogerina_;" the edition of Roland as the
"_Rolandina_." They are frequently confounded, but are not identical,
though the additions of Roland are usually regarded as of little
importance. In the absence of Roger's manuscript, however, they lead
often to considerable confusion, as it is not always easy to determine
in the printed copies of the "_Rolandina_" just what belongs to Roger
and what to his pupil and editor. Now a careful comparison of the
surgical chapters of Gilbert of England with the published text of the
"_Rolandina_" leads me to the conviction that Gilbert had before him
the text of Roger, rather than that of Roland, his pupil. If such is
the fact, Gilbert's Compendium must have been written between 1230 and
1264, the dates respectively of the "_Rogerina_" and "_Rolandina_."
[Footnote 5: Haeser says that this MS. of Roger's "Chirurgia," made by
Guido Arenitensium, was discovered by Puccinoti in the Magliabechian
library, and that an old Italian translation of the same work is also
found there. The latter was the work of a certain Bartollomeo.
The text used to represent Roger in the present paper is that
published by De Renzi (Collectio Salernitana, tom. II, pp. 426-493)
and entitled "Rogerii, Medici Celeberrimi Chirurgia." It is really
the text published originally in the "Collectio Chirurgica Veneta" of
1546, of which the preface says:
"_His acceserunt Rogerii ac Guil. Saliceti chirurgiae, quarum prior
quibusdam decorata adnotationibus nunc primum in lucem exit, etc._,"
and adds further on:
"_Addidimus etiam quasdam in Rogerium veluti explanationes, in
antiquissimo codice inventas, et ab ipso fortasse Rolando factas._"
While I may recognize gratefully the surgical enthusiasm which led the
editor to the publication of these "_veluti explanationes_," for my
present purpose he would have earned more grateful recognition if he
had left them unprinted. As the text now stands it is merely a garbled
edition of the Rolandina. However, it is the best representative of
the "Chirurgia" of Roger at present available. See De Renzi, op. cit.,
p. 425.]
From a careful review of the data thus presented we may epitomize,
somewhat conjecturally, the life of Gilbert substantially as follows:
He was probably born about 1180 and received his early education in
England. On the completion of this education, about the close of the
12th century, he proceeded to the Continent to complete his studies,
and spent some time in the school of Salernum, where it is probable
that he enjoyed the instruction of Roger of Parma, Ricardus
Salernitanus, and may have had among his fellow-students Aegidius of
Corbeil. Probably after his return to England he served for a brief
period on the staff of Archbishop Hubert Walter, after whose death
in 1205, but at an unknown period, Gilbert returned once more to the
Continent, where it seems probable he spent the remainder of his life.
This comports best with his extensive European reputation, his surname
"Anglicus" and the comparative dearth in England of any facts relating
to his life. The date of the Compendium I am inclined to place about
1240, prior to the literary activity of Ricardus Parisiensis or
Richard of Wendover, Roland of Parma, Roger Bacon and Theodorius of
Cervia. We may place his death, conjecturally, at about 1250.
The first edition of the Compendium is a small quarto of 362 folios
(724 modern pages), five by seven inches in size, printed in double
narrow columns, in black letter, perfectly legible and clear. The
pagination shows some errors, but the text itself is remarkably
accurate, though the presence of a multiplicity of contractions
and ligatures renders the reading somewhat difficult to the modern
student. On the last page we find the following colophon:
_Explicit compendium medicine Gilberti Anglici correctum et bene
emendatum per dominum Michaelem de Capella artium et medicine
doctorem: ac Lugduni Impressum per Jacobum Saccon: expensis
Vincentii de Portonariis. Anno Domini M.D.x. die vero vigesima mensis
Novembris._
_Deo Gratias._
The second edition (which I have not seen) is said to bear the title:
"Laurea anglicana, sive compendium totius medicinae, etc," Geneva,
1608.
It should be noticed that the title "Laurea anglicana" is not
mentioned in the original edition of 1510, but is apparently due to
the exuberance of enthusiasm of the editor of the later edition, whose
taste seems to have been more flamboyant.
Various manuscript works of greater or less authenticity are ascribed
to Gilbert by different authorities. Of these Mr. Kingsford furnishes
the following list:
1. "Commentarii in Versus Aegidii de Urinis," quoted by John
Gaddesden and probably authentic.
2. "Practica Medicinae," mentioned by Pits, but of doubtful
authenticity.
3. "Experimenta Magistri Gilliberti, Cancellarii Montepessulani,"
noticed on page 2, but authenticity doubtful.
4. "Compendium super Librum Aphorismorum Hippocratis."
MS. in Bodleian.
5. "Eorundem Expositio." MS. in Bodleian.
6. "Antidotarium." MS. in Caius College.
To these he adds, on the authority of Bale and Pits:
7. "De Viribus Aquarum et Specierum."
8. "De Proportione Fistularum."
9. "De Judicio Patientis."
10. "De Re Herbaria."
11. "De Tuenda Valentudine."
12. "De Particularibus Morbis."
13. "Thesaurus Pauperum."
All of these latter may be regarded as doubtful.
The authorities named by Gilbert are Pythagoras, Hippocrates, Plato,
Aristotle, Galen, Rufus, Maerobius, Boetius, Alexander of Tralles,
Theodorus Priscianus, Theophilus Philaretes, Stephanon (of Athens?),
the Arabians Haly Abbas, Rhazes, Isaac Judaeus, Joannitius, Janus
Damascenus, Jacobus Alucindi, Avicenna and Averroës; the Salernian
writers, quoted generally as Salernitani and specifically Constantino
Africanus, Nicholas Praepositus, Romoaldus Ricardus and Maurus, and
two otherwise unknown authors, Torror and Funcius, classed by Gilbert
as "_antiqui_." The latter author is also said to have written a
"_Liber de lapidibus_." Certainly this list suggests a pretty good
medical library for a practitioner of the 13th century.
Dr. Payne calls attention to the fact that all these writers antedate
the 13th century, and thus limit the period of Gilbert in antiquity.
This is undoubtedly true with reference to authorities actually named,
but does not exclude from consideration other writers quoted, but not
named, whom we shall have occasion to refer to hereafter.
The Compendium opens with a very brief and modest foreword, couched in
the following terms:
"_Incipit liber morborum tam universalium quam particularium a
magistro Gilberto anglico editus ab omnibus autoribus et practicis
magistrorum extractus et exceptus, qui compendium medicine
intitulatur._"
It will be observed that no claim whatever for originality is
presented by the author. He calls his book a compendium extracted from
all authors and the practice of the professors, and edited only by
himself. The same idea is more fully emphasized later (f. 55c), where
he says:
"_Sed consuetudo nostra est ex dictis meliorum meliora aggregare, et
ubi dubitatio est, opiniones diversas interserere; ut quisque sibi
eligat quam velit retinere._"
The self-abnegation implied in these extracts must not, however, be
interpreted too literally, for the editorial "_dico_" on numerous
pages, and even an occasional chapter marked "_Propria opinio_,"
testify to the fact that Gilbert had opinions of his own, and was
ready on occasion to furnish them to the profession. On the whole,
however, the "Compendium" is properly classified by the author as a
compilation, rather than an original work.
The Compendium is divided into seven books, and the general
classification of diseases is from head to foot--the usual method
of that day. The modern reader will probably be surprised at the
comprehensiveness of the work, which, besides general diseases,
includes considerable portions of physiology, physiognomy,
ophthalmology, laryngology, otology, gynecology, neurology,
dermatology, embryology, obstetrics, dietetics, urinary and venereal
diseases, therapeutics, toxicology, operative surgery, cosmetics and
even the hygiene of travel and the prevention of sea-sickness. Some of
these subjects too are discussed with an acuteness and a common sense
quite unexpected. Of course, scholastic speculations, superstition,
charms, polypharmacy and the use of popular and disgusting remedies
are not wanting. Even the mind of a philosopher like Roger Bacon was
unable to rise entirely above the superstition of his age. But the
charms and popular specifics of Gilbert are often introduced with a
sort of apology, implying his slight belief in their efficacy. Thus in
his chapter on the general treatment of wounds (f. 87a) he introduces
a popular charm with the following words:
"_Alio modo, solo divino carmine confisi, quidam experti posse curari
omnes plagas hoc._
"_Carmine._
"_Tres boni fratres per viam unam ibant, et obviavit eis noster dominus
jesus christus et dixit eis, tres boni fratres quo itis_, etc."
And again, in his discussion of the treatment of gout and rheumatism
(f. 327b), Gilbert adds, under the title
_Emperica_
"_Quamvis ego declino ad has res parum, tamen est bonum scribere in
libro nostro, ut non remaneat tractatus sine eis quas dixrunt antiqui.
Dico igitur quod dixit torror: Si scinderis pedem rane viridis et
ligaveris supra pendem podagrici per tres dies, curatur; ita quod
dextrum pedum rane ponas supra dextrum pedem patientis, et e converso.
Et dixit Funcius, qui composuit librum de lapidibus, quod magnes,
si ligatus fuerit in pedem podagrici, curatur. Et alius philosophus
dixit. Si accipiatur calcancus asine et ponatur ligatus supra pedem
egri, curatur, ita quod dexter supra dextrum, et e converso. Et
juravit quod sit verum. Et dixit torror quod si ponatur pes testudinis
dexter supra dextrum pedem podagrici, et e converso, curatur._"
We may believe, indeed, that Gilbert would have preferred to follow
in the therapeutic footsteps of Hippocrates, had he not disliked to be
regarded by his colleagues as eccentric and opinionated. For he says
in his treatment of thoracic diseases (f. 193c):
"_Etenim eleganter dedit Ipo. (Hippocrates) modum curationis, sed ne
a medicis nostri temporis videamur dissidere, secundum eos curam
assignemus._"
Gilbert was a scholastic-humoralistic physician _par excellence_,
delighting in superfine distinctions and hair-splitting definitions,
and deriving even pediculi from a superfluity of the humors (f. 81d).
Of course he was also a polypharmacist, and the complexity, ingenuity,
and comprehensiveness of his prescriptions would put to shame even
the "accomplished therapeutist" of these modern days. In dietetics
too Gilbert was careful and intelligent, and upon this branch of
therapeutics he justly laid great emphasis.
The first book of the Compendium, comprising no less than 75 folios,
is devoted entirely to the discussion of fevers. Beginning with the
definition of Joannicius (Honain ebn Ishak):
"Fever is a heat unnatural and surpassing the course of nature,
proceeding from the heart into the arteries and injuring the patient
by its effects."
Gilbert launches out with genuine scholastic finesse and verbosity
into a discussion of the questions whether this definition is based
upon the essentia or the differentia of fever; whether the heat of
fever is natural or unnatural, and other similar subtle speculations,
and finally arrives at a classification of fevers so elaborate and
complex as to be practically almost unintelligible to the modern
reader.
The more important of these fevers or febrile conditions are:
Ephemeral
Hemitertian
Double quartan
Interpolated
Synocha
Causon synochides
Epilala
Quotidian
Double tertian
Quintan
Continued
Causon
Putrid
Lipparia
Tertian
Quartan
Sextan
Synochus
Synochus causonides
Ethica
Erratica
Some of these names are still preserved in our nosologies of the
present day; others will be recalled by the memories of our older
physicians, and a few have totally disappeared from our modern medical
nomenclature.
Interpolated fevers are characterized by intermissions and remissions,
and thus include our intermittent and remittent fevers; synochus
depended theoretically upon putrefaction of the blood in the vessels,
and was a continued fever. Synocha, on the other hand, was occasioned
by a mere superabundance of hot blood, hence the verse:
"_Synocha de multo, sed synochus de putrefacto._"
Causon was due to putrefaction of bile in the smaller vessels of
the heart, diaphragm, stomach or liver, and was an acute fever
characterized by furred tongue, intolerable frontal headache, tinnitus
aurium, constant thirst, delirium, an olive-colored face, redness and
twitching of the eyes and a full, frequent and rapid pulse. Epiala
and lipparia were febrile conditions concerning which there seems to
have been much difference of opinion, even in the days of Gilbert.
Apparently they were distinguished by variations of external and
internal temperature, or by chills combined with fever. Febris ethica
is our modern hectic fever. In the discussion of this last variety we
are introduced to the "_ros_" and "_cambium_" of Avicenna, apparently
varieties of hypothetical humors.
All these fevers are regarded from the standpoint of Humoralism,
and depend upon variations in the quantity, quality, mixture or
location of the four humors, blood, phlegm, bile and black-bile
(_melancholia_).
In the general treatment of febrile diseases, so-called preparatives
and digestives are first employed to ripen the humors, after which
evacuatives (emetics, cathartics, sudorifics, and occasionally even
venesection) are utilized for the discharge of these peccant humors.
Much emphasis is laid upon the dietetics of fevers, and this branch of
treatment is highly elaborated. Complications are met by more or less
appropriate treatment, and the condition of the urine is studied with
great diligence. Venesection is recommended rather sparingly, and is
never to be employed during the _dies caniculares_ (dog-days) or _dies
Aegyptiaci_, nor during conjunctions of the moon and planets, nor upon
the 5th, 15th, 17th, 25th, 26th, or 27th days thereafter, etc.
Among the complications of fevers discussed by Gilbert, two seem
sufficiently important to justify special attention. On folio 74b we
find a section entitled "_De fluxu materie per parotidas venas_,"
in which he remarks that "Sometimes matter flows through the parotid
veins behind the ears down to the neck and nares, and obstructs the
passages for air, food and drink, so as to threaten suffocation." He
cautions us against the use of repressives, "lest the matter may run
to the heart," and recommends mollitives and dissolvents, such
as butter, dyaltea, hyssop and especially newly shorn wool (_lana
succida_), which, he says, is a strong solvent. Is this a reference
to the septic parotitis not unfrequently seen in low fevers?