526 SCIENCE PROGRESS 



departments of the field, and will be found of considerable value to the inquirer, 

 more particularly as regards the mediaeval and modern departments of the subject. 



Egypt and Greece are of more importance than any other countries in regard 

 to the early history of medicine, and here Dr. Buck is somewhat defective. For 

 example, he makes no reference to I-em-hotep, the Egyptian god of medicine, 

 nor has he a word about his temples where the work of healing was carried on, as, 

 for instance, Memphis. At Philae such a temple is still in existence. 



Nearly all his information on Greece and Egypt has been gathered from 

 German or Austrian sources. Meyer-Steineg, Neuburger, and Puschmann are his 

 main authorities. They are of value, but one rather misses acknowledgment of 

 the work done by modern Greeks, such as Cavvadias and Stais, of various French 

 writers, such as Defrass and Girard, also of certain Italian, American, and English 

 investigators. 



The most interesting Asklepieia hitherto examined are those at Epidaurus and 

 Cos. The former under Meyer-Steineg's guidance is here treated in a very 

 cavalier manner, while the same author's illustrations of Cos can only be said by 

 those who know Cos intimately to show more imagination than accuracy. Still, 

 with these defects, there is much of value in the account given of Greek medicine, 

 and the interest and importance of the narrative increase as the writer passes on 

 to Roman and Christian times, and to the saving of ancient medical manuscripts 

 by the monks during the decadence of learning. His account of Galen and the 

 great Roman physicians is of special interest. He shows the great debt we owe 

 to the Arabians, who were the first nation in the west and middle east to possess 

 paper, and cheapen manuscripts, also the influence of the Moslem University of 

 El Azhar, and the diligence of the learned Arabians in making translations of the 

 Greek classics. (Alas to what an abyss have El Azar and Moslem learning 

 descended since those days !) Our author is interesting in regard to Salerno and 

 Montpellier. 



He notes the facts that in 1140 Roger, king of Naples, prohibited the practice 

 of medicine by unqualified persons ; and also the decree of the Emperor Frederick 

 in 1240 that medical study should occupy at least five years. The account of the 

 rise of the great medical schools in Europe, the establishment, after great difficul- 

 ties, of teaching in practical anatomy in Italy, and the fact that when Charles V 

 endeavoured to prohibit all dissection the Theological Faculty of Salamanca 

 maintained its necessity, are all interesting items of history. 



In his criticism of Paracelsus (perhaps too favourable) he speaks of the 

 advocacy of mercury for syphilis by that charlatan. 



After reference to Harvey and Linacre, he speaks of the Dutch physicians 

 Boerhaave and others, and of the establishment of systematic bedside teaching in 

 the hospitals at Leyden. This is probably the reason why so many British 

 students of medicine repaired to Leyden in the seventeenth and eighteenth 

 centuries. 



The author has collected a large amount of interesting information relating to 

 medicine in all ages, so that we can strongly recommend the book to the 

 practitioner who in his leisure moments (at present, alas ! very few) desires to 

 acquaint himself with Roman, mediaeval, and early modern medicine. Perhaps 

 in a later edition the author may be able to add certain important details which 

 modern research has disclosed in regard to the rise of our great calling in Egypt 

 and in Greece and as to the difficulties and the superstitions which for so long 

 barred its progress. 



Richard Caton. 



