February 29, iqi2] 



NATURE 



^77 



oven although the infallible forecaster may never arise, 

 the advance of knowledge by the method of research 

 cannot fail to repay many times over the wisely 

 y administered expenditure of the public money en- 

 trusted to the Meteorological Committee. 



Hugh Robert Mill. 



THE HISTORY OF MEDICINE. 



History of Medicine. By Prof. M. Neuburger. 

 Vol. i. Translated by E. Playfair. Pp. x+404. 

 (London : H. Frowde and Hodder and Stoughton, 

 1910.) Price 25s. net. 



THE first volume of this history of medicine by 

 the professor of the subject in the University 

 of Vienna deals with the period ah initio mundi to 

 the end of the Middle Ages. A somewhat confused 

 preface by Sir William Osier introduces the work, 

 asserting on the first page that professorships on the 

 subject have been established in English universities, 

 and on the second page that " there is not in this 

 country a single chair of the history of medicine." 

 The Fitzpatrick lectureship on the history of medicine 

 in the Royal College of Physicians of London is men- 

 tioned, but Sir William Osier fails to perceive that 

 it was established with the obvious intention that the 

 lecturer should always be a physician learned in 

 medicine, as well as in tPie part of its history which 

 he might select for his lectures. The courses which 

 have been delivered during the past nine years by 

 three members of the University of Oxford and two 

 of the University of Cambridge have shown the use- 

 fulness of such a provision. They have been worthy 

 ■xamples of the same school as "The History of 

 Physick from the time of Galen to the beginning of 

 the Sixteenth Century," written by Dr. John Freind 

 in 1723, a book which is at once pleasant reading, 

 sound medicine, and good history. 



The history of medicine as written by men ignorant 

 of its practice and inexperienced in the observation of 

 disease is rarely of the first order. Littr^, whose 

 writings are a valuable contribution to medical history, 

 is no example to the contrary, for he had completed 

 his medical education and had meditated deeply on all 

 he had seen in the wards, though, in consequence of 

 his poverty, he did not actually take a medical degree. 

 It is the fact that the late Dr. J. F. Payne was a 

 physician of wide attainments in his profession, as 

 well as a scholar deeply read in medical books, 

 which makes his writings such valuable contributions 

 to the history of medicine. Van Swieten was the 

 chief physician of Vienna, and his commentaries on 

 the aphorisms of Boerhaave contain a better history 

 of the growth of the knowledge of disease up to about 

 1760 than can easily be found anywhere else. If a 

 medical faculty has not in it a physician willing to 

 add to the history of medicine, his place can never be 

 suonlied by what this preface calls "archivists" and 

 "backstairs men." 



Prof. Neuburger's first volume begins with primi- 

 tive medicine as illustrated by the trephine holes in 

 Neolithic skulls and by the proceedings of modern 

 NO. 2 20g, VOL. 88] 



savages. He then gives some account of medicine 

 among the Sumerians, Babylonians, and Assyrians, 

 sufficient to show that scarcely anything is known of 

 it. The next chapter, on the medicine of the ancient 

 Egyptians, contains some interesting fragments of 

 information, but would have been more valuable had 

 its statements been illustrated by descriptions of the 

 actual specimens to be seen at Cairo and in other 

 Egyptian collections. The writings of Eliot Smith 

 are far more illuminating on the subject of the 

 Egyptian knowledge of anatomy, pathology, and 

 surgery. A chapter on the ancient Persians contains 

 scarcely enough information to rouse curiosity. 



The well-known passage in Ecclesiastlcus on the 

 physician is quoted, and cannot be quoted too often, 

 but the medicine of the Old Testament Is very Im- 

 perfectly discussed. Robertson Smith's acute remarks 

 on the trolden emerods and mice in relation to an early 

 epidemic of plague, for example, are not mentioned. 

 The medicine of Hindustan and that of the Chinese 

 and Japanese are treated In two longer chapters, and 

 the reader anxious for first-hand Information then 

 passes on with relief to medicine in classic antiquity, 

 to the Homeric healing art, to the Greek physicians, 

 theories, and medical schools, and to two Interesting 

 chapters on Hippocrates. Prof. Neuburger venerates 

 the Father of Medicine, and says that he is 

 "Admired by all, really understood by few, imitated 

 bv many, equalled by none; he was the master of 

 rnedicine for all time." 



Wh2n It Is remembered that the HIppocratic school 

 practised, as indeed Is well described in this book, 

 palpation and auscultation, It Is scarcely correct to 

 say that "Prognosis gives to the mental attitude of 

 the Hippocratlst Its characteristic colouring, and 

 leaves diagnosis far behind it In Importance," though, 

 of course. It is true that the HIppocratic view of 

 prognosis required the practice of an almost hourly 

 meditation on the course of the disease pari passu 

 with observation of the symptoms. The transplanta- 

 tion of Greek medicine to Rome, Asclepiades the 

 friend of Cicero, as well as several later physicians 

 and schools, are discussed. Galen Is dealt with In a 

 long chapter, and the general character of his writings 

 is justly presented to the reader. It is certainly true 

 that by him "special pathology Is well represented, 

 and In the chaff of Irresponsible speculation there is 

 hidden many a grain of genuine observation and sur- 

 prisingly clear insight." Medicine In the decline of 

 antiquity is then described, with a somewhat dis- 

 appointing chapter on Byzantine medicine and one on 

 Arabic medicine, which adds little if anything to the 

 account of the Arabian physicians published by Fer- 

 dinand Wustenfeld in 1840. The second volume is to 

 deal with the medicine of the Renaissance and of 

 modern times. 



The defect of the book Is a desire to mention too 

 many facts, with the result that few parts of the 

 history are set forth at sufficient length to be clear 

 or to be interesting. Prof. Neuburger's style is often 

 rhetorical, but he generally fails to e«cite In his 

 reader a living interest in the men of whom he tells or 

 in the books which he describes, and there is the more 



