THE EDINBURGH MEDICAL AND SURGICAL JOURNAL. 1. OCTOBER, 1816. PART I. ORIGINAL COMMUNICATIONS.. İ. Critical Review of the State of Medicine during the last Ten Years.* WHEN we review with impartiality the history of medicine during its last period, its progressive advancement is undeniable, notwithstanding the despotic obstacles opposed to the For this valuable communication we are indebted to a Hanoverian friend, who had promised to send us an account of the latest German medical literature. When preparing to fulfil his promise, the article, of which this is the commencement, appeared in one of the most esteemed literary journals of Leipzig, and fuperfeded the neceffity of proceeding in his undertaking. It is faid to be written by the celebrated Kurt Sprengel, Profeffor at Halle, and author of the History of Medicine, and of the Critical Review of the State of Mcdicine during the last ten years of the 19th century, of which this is properly a continuation. As Profeffor Sprengel does not confine himself to the progrefs of medicine in Germany, many additions and corrections might be made in regard to the medical literature of other countries, especially our own, with which there was almoft no correfpondence during the period of his history; but we have preferred leaving the article unaltered, for many reafons, and fhall attempt, on a future occafion, to compofe fuch a view of the recent literature of Great Britain, connected with our profeffion, as may more effectually correct the errors, and supply the defects unavoidably exifting in the production of the learned German. In our tranflation we have only endeavoured to be faithful; and we fear that we have not always fucceeded in rendering the meaning intelligible to thofe unacquainted with the language of fome of the philofophical sects prevalent in Germany, whose tenets are here alluded to. Bb VOL, XII. No. 48. free correspondence between civilized nations, and innumerable errors of the human understanding. The Germans, in particular, have reason to rejoice that the ignominious chains laid upon them by rapacious foreigners, could not hinder the unfettered mind from labouring incessantly to extend the empire of truth; nay, that the very circumstance of external oppression seems only to have had the effect of exciting greater efforts towards mental improvement. The scientific part of medicine acquired, in Germany and France, great additions of new materials, which, though treated in very different ways, and even prematurely formed into systems, never lose their value, however preposterously applied in some instances. But we shall facilitate this review, by tracing the progress of each branch of medicine separately. I. History and Literature of Medicine. The frequently repeated complaint of the neglect of the study of the history of medicine seems to be unfounded during this period. For, at least in Germany, Italy, and France, its history and literature were more generally studied than in earlier times. Sprengel's larger work was translated into French, indifferently by Geiger, and better by Jourdan; in a masterly manner into Italian by Arrigoni, and into English anonymously. J. C. Nicolaia published an abridgment of Sprengel's work, (a) which the author himself had previously done in 1804. C. Windischmann's attempt to give the mystical views of medicine a historical dress, is truly ridiculous. (b) K. F. Lutheritz's view of the older systems, (c) as well as A. F. Hecker's similar work, (d) have no pretensions to originality. In France, the laudable desire of historical knowledge displayed itself in the most distinguished manner in Prunelle's (e) excellent view of the influence of medicine on the restoration of the sciences in the middle ages, but in a less degree in P.J. G. Cubanis's sketch. (f) a) Das Merkwürdigste aus der Gefchichte der Medicin. Th. 1. Rudolft. 1808. 8. b) Verfuch über den Gang der Bildung in der heilenden Kunst. Frkf. a. M. 1809. 8. c) Die Systeme der Aerzte von Hippokrates bis auf Brown. Th. 1, 2. Drefden, 1810, 1811. 8. d) Die Heilkunde auf ihren Wegen zur Gewifcheit. Dritte Auflage. Erf. 1808. 8. e) De l'influence exercée par la médécine fur la renaiffance des lettres. Montpellier, 1809. 4. f) Coup d'oeil fur les révolutions et la réforme de la médecine. Paris, 1804. 8. Even single points of the history of medicine were more accurately investigated, the history of diseases and of their treatment ascertained, and the fathers of physic re-edited. Schaufus promulgated a profound hypothesis on the origin of syphilis among the Hindoos; (a) and C. G. Gruner described the progress of the sweating fever in the 15th and 16th centuries. (b) Gruner's son showed, as J. Barker had done 60 years before him, the coincidence of the medicine of the ancients and of the moderns. (c) A similar title, (d) given to another work, is deceitful. Quercetanus also formerly wrote De Priscorum Philosophorum Veræ Medicinæ Materia; and Tachenius published a Hippocrates Chymicus. And. Ign. Wanruch again recommended the study of the ancients, (e) and published a learned inquiry on the antiquities of Typhus. (f) W. Falconer compared the nervous fever with the Morbus Cardiacus of the ancients. (g) Ant. Jos. Testa illustrated the latter disease, as also an obscure passage in Aretäus. (h) E. Wichelhauzen described and recommended the baths of the ancient Romans. (i) D. P. Assalini and J. Eyerel translated the classical description of the Athenian plague during the Peloponnesian war. (k) G. F. J. Nöldeke gave a masterly translation of the beginning of Galen's most celebrated work. (1) On the other hand, A. H. Hinze was unsuccessful in his attempt to translate the aphorisms of Hippocrates. (m) The medical passages in Cicero were merely collected, without illustration, by A. M. Birkholz. (n) An excellent critical edition of Rufus of Ephesus was published by C. F. Matthäi of Moscow; but J. F. Pierer reprinted Fue's translation of Hippocrates without any commentary. (0) a) Neueste Entdeckungen über das Vaterland und die Verbreitung der Pocken u. der Luftscuche. Leipz. 1805. 8. b) Itinerarium fudoris Anglici ex actis defignatum. Jen. 1805. 8. <) Concordia medicinae veteris et novae vindicata. Jen. 1806. 8. d) J. N. Ringseis de doctrina Hippocratica et Browniana inter fe confentiente et fe mutuo explente tentamen. Norib. 1812. 8. e) De prifcorum Graeciae ac Latii medicorum ftudio restaurando. 1808. 4. f) Antiquitates typhi contagiofi. Bas. 1812. 4. g) Memoirs of the Med. Soc. of Lond. Vol. VI. p. 1. b) Delle malattie del cuore, Vol. I.-III. 1811. i) Ueber die Bäder des Alterthums. Mannh. 1807. 8. Viennae, k) Thucydides von der Pest. in Athen. Aus dem Griechischen. Wien, 1810. 8. 1) Galen vom Nutzen der Theile des menschl. Körpers. Aus dem Griechischen. Oldenburg, 1805. m) Proben einer Ueberfetzung der Aphorifmen des Hippokrates. Stendal, 1807.8. a) Cicero medicus. Leipz. 1806. 8. Bibliotheca iatrica, Vol, I-III. Altenb. 1806. 8. The antiquities of Materia Medica were investigated by Kurt Sprengel in his history of botany, (a) and by J. Stackhouse in his last edition of Theophrastus; (b) and S. Hahnemann published a profound inquiry into the Hellebore of the ancients and its employment. (c) Very recently we were unexpectedly gratified by an inquiry into the history of medicine in Russia. (d) Medical bibliography has been enriched with some valuable works. Those of K. F. Burdach (e) and J. S. Ersch (f) are unquestionably the most complete. But the former has diminished the utility of his work by the want of an index, and the latter confines himself exclusively to the works published in Germany during the last half century. The publications of J. Mayer (g) and C. F. Ludwig (h) cannot bear a comparison with either of these in any respect. On the contrary, Ploucquet's great work in its last form (i) has become exceedingly useful. But K. A. Kortum has published a very insignificant production. (4) Among the periodical publications embracing medicine in general, Hecker's Journal of Discoveries acquired celebrity, and even consideration, by controverting boldly, but often arrogantly, the opinions of the day. It was continued in this manner until the 20th Number of what was called the New Journal in 1809; then some anonymous young men at Leipzig followed Hecker's example, and gave, in the Newest Journal of Discoveries,' some useful enough views: But the old nervous opposition no longer existed, and it lost its attraction for the public. The Salzburgh Medical Journal continues to be of great importance, on account of its early notices, and full extracts from medical works. But since Hartenkeil's death, (7th January 1808), its affected style, unfortunately common in the south of Germany, its fondness for new, high sounding, metaphorical expressions, and sometimes its want of knowledge and judgment, are no recommendations. The Altenburgh Annals of Medicine,' published by a) Hiftoria rei herbariae, Vol. I. II. Amfterd. 1807, 1808. 8. c) De helleborismo veterum. Leipz. 1812. d) Wilh. Mich. Richter's Gefchichte der Medecin in Russland. Th. I. Mofc. 1813. 8. e) Die Literatur der Heilwiffenfchaft, B. I, 2. Gotha, 1810, 1811. 8. f) Literatur der Medicin, Amft. 1812. 8. g) Repertorium der gefammten Medicin, Literatur. B. I, 2. b) Einleitung in die Bücherkunde der praktischen Medicin. Berl. 1809. 8. Leipz. 1806. 8. A) Skizze einer Zeit-und-Literär-Geschichte der Arzneykunst. Unna. 1809. &. Pierer, might almost be dispensed with, as they seldom contain any thing not to be found in other works. Hecker published before his death (1811) three volumes of the General Annals of Medicine,' which were intended as a substitute for the Journal of Discoveries; but alas, Nihil est, quod senio non exolescat; Petrarch.-C. W. Hufeland's Journal, even up to the last or 39th volume, continues to be universally acknowledged as valuable, not only to the practical physician, but in every department of medicine. The same praise may be given to Reil's and Autenrieth's archives of physiology (ten volumes), and Horn's archives of practical medicine. Harle's very useful Journal of Foreign Medical Literature, which was afterwards published under the title of Annals of English Medicine and Surgery, was succeeded by his Annals of German Medicine and Surgery, with an addition of the newest and best foreign literature. The Medical Annals of the Austrian States (Vol. I. & II. Vienna, 1813, 1814) have begun excellently. F. W. J. Schelling's Annals of Medicine as a science, of which A. F. Marcus published the third volume alone, at first contained many valuable papers; but the last editor, on account of his incredible partiality and prejudices, could not give general interest to it, any more than to his Ephemerides of the healing art. K. Wolfart, the publisher of Asklepeion, rivals Marcus in partiality, and surpasses him in want of solid knowledge. Among the French periodical publications, and general literary works upon medical subjects, the Dictionnaire des Sciences Medicales, published by a society of the most esteemed physicians, maintains the first rank. The others are chiefly practical Journals; the two best are those published by Corvisart (a) and by Sedillot. (b) The Society of Emulation at Paris also published periodically; (c) likewise the Medical Society at Montpellier. (d) For foreign literature, the French had during this period three journals in the Bibliotheque Medicale; in Kluysken's of Ghent's Annales de literature medicale étrangère; and in Gallot's Nouvelle Bibliotheque Germanique de médécine. In Great Britain, the excellent old London Medical Journal, Duncan's Annals of Medicine, and the Edinburgh Medical and Surgical Journal, were continued. Bradley's Physical and Medical Journal also contains a rich store of observations, as well a) Journal de Médecine et Chirurgie. b) Journal Général de la Société de Médécine à Paris, ou Recueil périodique, etc., e) Mémoires de la Société Médicale d'Emulation. d) Annales de la Société de Médécine pratique à Montpellier, |