874 FRIEDRICH DAXIEL VON RECKLINGHAUSEN. 



suchungen uber Rachitis und Osteomalacic" with 127 illustrations 

 and 41 plates, appeared in 1910, the year of his death. 



In addition to the great number of medical publications he found 

 time for several important addresses, he attended medical societies 

 and associations and took part in discussions. He was never con- 

 troversial, although critical of all that seemed to lack in scientific 

 accuracy. He was equally great as a teacher; many of the men who 

 hold important positions in pathology received their first inspiration 

 and training from him, as Friedlander, Zahn, Schmidt, Koster, Foa, 

 Stilling, Perteck, Aschoff, Murpiergo, Griflfini and Sacordotti. His 

 laboratory was sought by both German and foreigners, and there was 

 a constant flow of publications from his students. As a lecturer he 

 was simple and direct, using specimens freely in illustration; his 

 style in writing however was the reverse of simple, and he was difficult 

 to follow. The laboratory was constructed on the cell system, the 

 students were given a small room, a subject for work, and material, 

 and he inculcated independence of observation with simplicity of 

 method. In all of his work he used the simple methods with which 

 he had begun to work, and it is amazing what he was able to do with 

 scalpel, scissors and microscope. ^Yhen I worked in his laboratory 

 in 18S3 there was not a microtome in it, and this instrument had long 

 been regarded as indispensable for microscopic work. Sections were 

 stained with picrocarmine and mounted in glycerine, and he was 

 suspicious of all the newer methods which were coming into use and 

 which have led to enormous advance in knowledge of structure. I 

 found his demonstrations in pathological anatomy, which were held 

 three times in the week, of great interest and value. The students, 

 each with a microscope and a few reagents, were seated at long tables 

 along which the specimens were passed after the professor had ex- 

 plained them, and each student took pieces for study as they went 

 along. The disadvantage of the method was that the progress of the 

 material was so slow that in the two hours of the exercise the specimens 

 rarely reached the last fourth of the class. 



Although in his great work on the diseases of the circulation he 

 treated the pathology of function as well as structure, his conclusions 

 are based more on his rich anatomical knowledge than on experi- 

 mental evidence. He was, by nature conservative, and though he 

 welcomed each advance in knowledge, he did not seem to realize the 

 great change in the point of view which came into pathology with the 

 discovery of the methods of bacteriological investigation, although his 

 obser\ations on bacterial emboli are among the fundamental studies 

 in bacteriology. He was essentially a pathological anatomist, his 



