23 
PATHOLOGY. 
fate gland and the bladder with his guarded knife (cou- 
teuu en rondaclie); and the immortal Schmucker of Ber¬ 
lin was uncommonly fuccefsful in ufing the great appa¬ 
ratus for lithotomy in that improved ftate. 
The difcovery of the high operation was the work of 
necefiity and accident. Peter Franco, of Turrieres in 
Provence, furgeon at Berne, Laufanne, and Orange, was 
requefted in the year 1560 to perform this operation for 
lithotomy, at Laufanne, on a child two years of age. He 
had already begun to operate with the fmall apparatus, 
when he found that the Hone was of the fize of a hen’s 
egg, and confequently too large to be removed in that 
manner. The child’s parents infilled that the operation 
Ihould neverthelefs be finilhed; and, as the bladder very 
much projefted above the ofla pubis, he determined 
upon making the incifion above thefe bones. Although 
he eventually fucceeded in this bold attempt, yet he pru¬ 
dently diffuades his brethren from imitating that practice; 
and indeed the danger to be apprehended from the effu- 
fion of the urine into the abdomen is fo great, that even 
the improvements made by Douglas, on the high appa¬ 
ratus of Franco, have not much diminilhed it. In order 
to remove the lione from female patients, Franco rejefts 
both the large and fmaller apparatus, while he propofes 
merely the dilatation of the urethra, by means of an in- 
ilrument invented by himfelf; after which he extracts 
the Hone with the forceps, without difiefting the parts. 
He likewife invented a gorgeret, and a forceps, the arms 
of which expand in the bladder; but the ufe of thefe 
inftraments has been fuperfeded by others that are more 
convenient. 
A very painful but curious operation excited great at¬ 
tention during this century, although it had been pre- 
vioufly performed. The reader will perhaps fmile at an 
attempt to repair and reftore that prominent part of the 
human face, the nofe, when mutilated by accident. 
Barri, an Italian author, in his “ Italia illuftrata,” 1600, 
ccmfiders Vincent Vianeo as the inventor of this lingular 
pra&ice. However that may be, two Sicilian furgeons 
of the name of Branca, father and fon, had, fo early as 
the latter end of the fifteenth century, acquired celebrity 
by the fuccefsful renovation of nofes; an art which be¬ 
came hereditary in the family of the Bojani. But Caf- 
par Tagliacozzi, profefl'or at Bologna, railed this art to 
fuch high perfe&ion, as to render it one of the principal 
branches of furgery: he became fo celebrated by his ope¬ 
rations, that his contemporaries erefted a public monu¬ 
ment at Bologna, where he is reprefented with a nofe in 
his hand. This operation is defcribed in an interefting 
work, intitled, “ Tagliacot. de Curtor Chirurg.” fol. 
Venet. 1597 ; in which he compares it to the ingrafting of 
trees, expatiates on the dignity and ornament of the nofe, 
and endeavours to prove that there is not the leaf! danger 
in cutting out a piece from the biceps mufcle of the arm. 
With refpeft to the diet to be obferved during the ope¬ 
ration, he gives ample and rigid inftrudlions, while he 
maintains that the inoculated nofe is poflefled of a more 
acute fra ell, and that it generally grows much larger and 
ftrcmger than the organ which had been accidentally loft. 
We may fuppofe that this operation became lefs fuccefs¬ 
ful in the hands of other furgeons, and fo fell into difufe 
and contempt, as we find it ridiculed by Butler in the 
s 7th century: 
So learned Taliacotius from 
The brawny part of porter’s bum 
Cut fupplemental nofes, which 
Would laft as long as parent-breech; 
And, when the date of that vras out, 
Off dropt the fympathetic fnout. Hudibras, Canto i. 
It has, however, been revived in the prefent day; and 
has been praftifed with greatfuccefs by Mr. Carpue, Mr. 
Linn, and others. 
We might here mention the names of other practitioners 
who improved and illuftrated the ufeful art of furgery : as 
John de Vigo, Jacob Berenger de Carpi, and Mariano Santo 
de Berletta ; tile latter of whom abolifhed the aftual cau¬ 
tery in haemorrhages, and urged the fuperiority of a pro¬ 
per ligature. The anatomift Fallopius, likewife culti¬ 
vated furgery with fuccefs, as did moft of the anatomifts 
of his age; and among them we might enumerate many 
who have contributed important improvements, would 
our limits permit. 
The obftetric art, that important branch of furgery, 
began to emerge from its barbarity during the fixteenth 
century, and to excite the attention of furgeons more 
than it had hitherto done. There appeared feveral in¬ 
troductions to midwifery, the greater number of which, 
however, contained much ufelefs and abftrufe reafoning 
on the generation of man, and the vitality of the em¬ 
bryo in certain months, while they were extremely defi¬ 
cient in well founded and practical rules for facilitating 
delivery. See the article Parturition in the preceding 
volume. 
The military furgeons of ancient times are very little 
mentioned in hiftory. Perhaps they were not in very 
great eftimation 3 as feems probable from the perfons 
with whom they are claffed in the military code made at 
Mans by Henry V. where, under the head of the perfons 
fubjeCt to the conftable and marfiial, the mediei are intro¬ 
duced in the following company : “ Whether foldiers, 
flioemakers, taylors, barbers, phyficians, or ■wajher-wo- 
men.” See Upton de Re Militari. 
The low ftate of military furgery in France, even fo late 
as the time of Francis I. (contemporary with our Henry 
VIII.) may be gathered from the following extraft from 
an old and fcarce book called TreuJ'ure of Ancient and 
Modern Times: “In the year of our Lord 1536, the vic¬ 
torious king Fraunces fent a great army into Piedmont 
to vitaile Thurin, &c. I was at that time but a young 
chirurgion, and but little experienced in the art, becaufe 
I never had as yet feen the curation of wounds made by 
gun-fhot. True it is, I had read John de Vigo, his firfte 
booke of wounds in general!, chap. 8. where he faith, 
that thofe wounds made by fiery engines do participate 
of venenofity, becaufe of the powder 5 and for their cura¬ 
tion he commands to cauterize them with the oile of 
elders, mixed with a little treacle. Yet nevertheleffe, 
becaufe I would not be deceived, before I made ufe of 
the faid boyiing oile, knowing that it brought extreme 
paine to the patient, I obferved the method of other chi- 
rurgeons in the firft drefiinge of fuch wounds, which 
was by the application and infufion of the aforefaid oile, 
as hot as poflibly they could fuffer it, with tents and 
fetons; wherefore I became emboldened to do as they 
did. But in the end ray oile failed me, fo that I was 
conftrained to ufe, inftead thereof, a digeftive made of the 
yolk of an egge, oil of rofes, and terebinth. The night 
following I could hardly deep at mine eafe, fearing left 
that, for want of cauterizing, I ftiould find my patients, 
on whom I had not ufed the aforefaid oile, dead and em- 
poyfoned; which made me rife early in the morning to 
vifit them, where, beyond my expectation, I found them 
on whom I had ufed the digeftive medicine, to feele but 
little paine, and their wounds without inflammation or 
tumour, having refted well all that night; the reft, on 
whom the aforefaid oile was applied, I found them incli¬ 
ning to feavers, with greate paine, tumour, and inflam¬ 
mation, about their wounds ; then I refolved with my- 
felfe, never to burne fo cruelly the wounded patients by 
gun-fliot any more. A famous chirurgion at Turin, 
propofed a balm for gun-lhot wounds as follows: Two 
young whelps, one pound of earth-worms, two pounds 
of the oil of lilies, fix ounces of the terebinth of Venice, 
and one ounce of aqua vitae. In my prefence he boiled 
the w'helps alive in the faid oile, untill the flelh deferted 
from the bonesafterwards he took the worms, having 
before killed and purified them in white wine, to purge 
themfelves of the earth which they have always in their 
bodies; being fo prepared, he boiled them alfo in the 
3 
