Kapronczay Károly szerk.: Orvostörténeti Közlemények 186-187. (Budapest, 2004)
KÖZLEMÉNYEK — COMMUNICATIONS - JUTTE, Robert: The historiography of homoeopathy in Germany. — A homeopátiatörténetírás Németországban
Homoeopathy" 12 Hering was, of course, aware of the fact that not only legends and anecdotes about Hahnemann could blur the truthfulness of a biography but also a partisan view. He therefore postulates: "// will he necessary throughout not to pass judgement, or to give a mosaic pieced together of pros and cons, which would only satisfy the superficial reader. Causes must be given in their original form, progress and growth must be demonstrated without any reference to possible errors."^ It was not the historian's task to pass judgment but the readers should judge themselves, or in Hering's flowery words: "Then let the estimate follow, not penned by the the laborious biographer, but formed in the inmost soul of him who shall have read and weighed the whole" u Hahnemann, rightly or wrongly, has been acclaimed as the founder a new principle of healing, the keen observer and humane physician. Biographical accounts of his life and works written in the 19th century have either enthusiastically upheld this picture or tried to debunk his halo. For the medical orthodoxy Hahnemann personified all that was bad and ridiculous in homoeopathic therapeutics. Early historians of orthodox medicine, such as CA. Wunderlich (1815-1877), included a chapter on homoeopathy and on Hahnemann in their history of medicine in order to evaluate this therapeutic system for the "truth" it contained. "By showing the genesis of certain theories, medical maxims, and assumptions, thoughtlessly accepted". Wunderlich claims, "their hollowness could be demonstrated."^ . A short outline of Hahnemann's life and works is followed by a detailed discussion of the tenets of this medical sect in Wunderlich's history of medicine which is based upon lectures he held at the University of Leipzig in 1858. The treatment is not only chronological but also shows the clash of opinions. It does not present, however, Wunderlich's own judgment. He believes that this kind of historical study, presenting just the "facts", would be sufficient to convince the attentive reader: "A critic of Hahnemann's teachings seemsto be unnecessary. The straightforward, unvarnished representation of the doctrine is taking himself to task, so that there is no need for sharp criticism"^ . Or as Charles Webster once put it: "Wunderlich exhibited no patience with historical figures departing from what he regarded as the progressive line." 11 Heinrich Haeser (1811-1884), whose handbook first appeared in 1845 and was revised and expanded twice, also lent himself to party purposes. 18 It was, however, the first history of medicine to be fully documented. His historical writing manifests that he was a partisan of Röschlaub, Schönlein and other leading figures of the natural history school of German 12 Constantin Hering: Erfordernisse zur gerechten Beurtheilung Hahnemanns. In: Hygea, 1847, 22, 296-300, on p. 298, English translation quoted from Thomas Eindsley Bradford: Life and letters of Dr Samuel Hahnemann. Philadelphia, Boericke & Tafel, 1895, p. v. 13 Hering: op.cit., see note 15 above, 298. ff., English translation quoted from Haehl: op. cit., see note 12 above, vol. i, p. ix. 14 Ibid., 300., English translation quoted from Bradford: op. cit., see note 15 above, p. vi. " English translation by Owsei Temkin: The Historiography of Ideas in Medicine. In: Edwin Clarke (ed): Modern Methods in the History of Medicine. London, Athlone Press, 1971, 1 -21, on p. 4. 16 Carl August Wunderlich: Geschichte der Medicin. Vorlesungen gehalten zu Leipzig im Sommersemester 1858. Stuttgart, Ebner & Seubcrt, 1859, 279. 17 Webster: op. cit., see note 3 above, 34. 18 Heinrich Haeser: Lehrbuch der Medicin und der Volkskrankheiten. 1st ed., Jena, F. Mauke, 1845. The abridged version entitled Grundriss der Geschichte der Medicin. Jena, Fischer, 1 884, contains seven pages on the history of homoeopathy.
