Am.  Jour.  Pharm. 
July,  1904. 
The  History  of  Pathology. 
331 
covery.  Pathology  consisted  of  dogma  after  dogma,  system  after 
system,  each  one  having  vital  defects  of  basis  or  conclusion,  and  no 
radical  change  was  possible  until,  in  the  eighteenth  century,  patho- 
logical anatomy  was  cultivated  with  all  the  enthusiasm  of  the  early 
collectors,  but  with  the  definite  aim  of  throwing  light  on  medicine. 
Lancisi  and  Senac,  in  the  first  part  of  the  century,  are  still  quoted 
by  modern  writers,  but  it  was  Morgagni  (1682-1771)  who  gave  the 
first  important  impetus  to  pathology.  In  his  epoch-making  work 
on  "The  Seats  and  Causes  of  Diseases  Investigated  by  Anatomy" 
(1761-1767) — how  significant  the  title! — the  result  of  inexhaustible 
energy  and  keen  reflection  during  half  a  century — he  began  the 
systematic  investigation  of  the  differences  between  normal  and 
morbid  conditions,  and  the  relation  of  diseased  organs  to  clinical 
phenomena,  including  diagnosis  and  prognosis.  The  visit  of  John 
Morgan  to  the  venerable  author  and  the  presentation  to  him, 
his  relative  — "  affini  suo  "  —  as  the  old  man  playfully  called  the 
Philadelphian,  form  an  interesting  link  between  the  origin  of 
modern  pathology  and  the  University  of  Pennsylvania.  Morgagni 
examined  not  merely  rare  and  curious  cases,  but  especially  diseases 
of  common  occurrence,  and  in  all  his  descriptions  and  conclusions 
he  showed  such  accuracy  and  judgment  that  he  not  only  made 
pathological  anatomy  the  basis  of  medicine,  but  served  as  a  guide 
and  model  to  all  who  followed  him.  By  an  interesting  coincidence, 
in  the  same  year  in  which  the  first  volume  of  Morgagni's  work 
appeared,  Leopold  Auenbrugger  published  his  book  of  percussion, 
opening  the  way  to  anatomic  diagnosis,  but  the  world  was  not  yet 
ready  for  so  great  a  discovery  and  could  not  use  it  for  fifty  years. 
Morgagni,  however,  great  as  his  influence  was,  was  not  a  pathologist, 
but  a  clinician  with  a  firm  anatomical  basis  for  his  reasoning.  The 
broader  field  was  soon  occupied  by  John  Hunter  (1728-1793)  and 
Xavier  Bichat  (1771-1802).  Not  less  indefatigable  than  the  Italian, 
and  with  a  matchless  fertility  of  mind  and  precision  of  observation 
and  experimentation,  Hunter  included  comparative  pathology  in  his 
search,  and  so  influenced  men's  minds  that  ever  since  his  time  dis- 
eases have  been  studied  as  biologists  study  other  natural  phenomena. 
The  marvelous  insight  of  Bichat  made  it  clear  that  the  seats  of  dis- 
ease were  to  be  sought  not  merely  in  organs,  but  in  the  tissues  that 
make  up  the  organs,  and  also  that  the  fluids  of  the  body  have  an 
important  part  in  pathology,  at  least  as  carriers  of  disease.  During 
