Kapronczay Károly szerk.: Orvostörténeti Közlemények 186-187. (Budapest, 2004)

KÖZLEMÉNYEK — COMMUNICATIONS - JUTTE, Robert: The historiography of homoeopathy in Germany. — A homeopátiatörténetírás Németországban

medicine. Haeser deals with homoeopathy in eleven pages. Despite his frequent reference to historical works written or published by people in favour of homoeopathy, Haeser's bias and inaccuracy of description was criticized by the homoeopathic physician Wilhelm Ameke (1847-1886) who himself wrote a detailed history of homoeopathy but made a point in writing it from a "non hostile point of view"}

9 Ameke even reminded Haeser of his famous predecessor, the medical historian Kurt Sprengel (1766-1833), who purposely avoided writing his history of medicine in a strongly partisan spirit. The interesting thing is that the revised and enlarged edition of Kurt Sprengel's Versuch einer pragmatischen Geschichte der Heilkunst, one of the great textbooks of the history of medicine of the late 18th century, also contains a chapter on homoeopathy which contradicts Ameke's favourable comparison. Unlike Sprengel, the person in charge of the 2nd edition, Burkard Eble, did not confine himself to presenting a history of medicine with much information about the lives and works of the authors mentioned. He also commented on the truth or falsity of their opinions. He claimed, for example, that homoeopathy is based upon tenets which are either false and blown up or already well known in medicine. The only positive word he has to say about this new art of healing is that is useful to stir up medical opinion, thus serving as kind of "ferment in a viscous leaven."

20 Pragmatic history versus the exigencies of scientific history It was a long way until the history of medical sects "in its own right" as opposed to pragmatic history useful to the followers and critics finally made its appearance in the first half of the 20th century. Following in the historiographical tradition of the early 19th century the later works written in the 1880s pursued what R.E. Dudgeon called the "indictment of the medical profession" 2

^ The most comprehensive history of homeopathy written at the end of the 19th century is the book by Wilhelm Ameke (1847-1886). His study exhibited significant differences from the earlier histories: the balance was shifted decisively from the biographical account of Hahnemann's life to "the methods used in combating the new doctrine"

22

. The traditional outline of the life of the great master was replaced by discussion of school of thoughts in which there was more realistic appreciation of the strained relationship between regulars, derisively dubbed "allopaths" by sectarians, and physicians who were looked upon with disdain and even ridiculed by their professional bethren, for advocating and practicing homoeopathy. The third part of the book is a short sketch of the condition of medicine at the German university in the 1880s. Ameke concludes his "non hostile-view" of homoeopathy with a look into the not-distant future: "History will then recall the remarkable circumstance that the truth in therapeutics was discovered by medical practitioners who received no State-support, and that the universities which were established in order to search out truth trampled upon this truth for many years [...J"

21, 1

J Ibid., p. xi. For his criticism of Haeser, see ibid., 345. 20 Quoted in Allgemeine Homöopathische Zeitung 1841, 20, 138. 21 Editor's preface to Ameke: op. cit., see note 22 above, p. iii. 22 Ameke: op. cit., see note 22 above, p. xi 23 Ibid., 431.