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

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

The first attempt to write a history of a medical sect from a more objective than subjective point of view is Richard Haehl'

's (1873-1932) seminal study of Hahnemann's life and work published in 1922. It is still the best documented biography of the founder of homoeopathy. The author, a homeopathic physician from Stuttgart, does not only claim in the preface that he has refrained from expressing his own opinions. He also stresses the fact that he was "anxious to give an actual representation of Hahnemann's own development and of his therapeutic reform, and to allow the facts to speak for themselves."

24

. Haehl makes quite clear that his monumental historical study was not "intended to be a manual of homoeopathic therapeutics"

25

. Among his readers the more practical-minded homoeopath gets what he most probably needs according to Haehl, namely a "reliable and clearly outlined information regarding the nature of homoeopathy as a therapeutic reform, about its origin, development and ultimate form, and in addition the intimate connection with, and accurate description of the life of Hahnemann."

26 Haehl'

s biography which is divided into two parts, one volume containing the text, the other the documents, represents therefor a landmark in the historiography of homoeopathy. During Haehl's life-time it had no sequel in other branches of sectarian medicine. The interest in a more "scientific" history of irregular medical sects reached its first zenith in the years 1933 to 1945, when the Nationalsocialists encouraged research in alternative medicine or what they labelled "Neue Deutsche Heilkunde." In 1939 Rudolf Tischner (1879-1961) published the final part of his seminal work on the history of homoeopathy.

27 In the preface he refrained, astonishingly enough, from paying tribute to the Zeitgeist. Only from casual remarks we learn that he was rather gratified at the fact that times have changed for the medical fringe, but he never explicitly refers to the open support the Nazi regime gave to folk medicine, homoeopathy and other branches of natural healing.

28 Being a historian as well as a physician he remained sceptical about how long this favourable climate would last. Tischner also gave expression to his satisfaction about the increased interest in the history of homoeopathy. He himself had written on the history of other medical sects such as mesmerists

29 and parapsychologists

30 before he wrote a rather comprehensive historical account of homoeopathy from its beginnings to the 1930s, including also rather factual chapters on the spread of the homoeopathic movement in various countries. Haehl: op. cit., see note 12 above, vol. i, p. xiv. Ibid., vol. i, p. XV. Ibid., vol. i, p. XV. Rudolf Tischner: Geschichte der Homöopathie. Leipzig, Schwabe, 1939. On naturopathy and Nationalsocialism, see Lars Endrik Sievert: Naturheilkunde und Medizinethik im Nationalsozialismus. Frankfurt/Main, M abuse-Verlag, 1996. Rudolf Tischner: Franz Anton Mesmer. Leben, Werk und Wirkungen^ Munich, Verlag der Münchner Drucke, 1928. Geschichte der Parapsychologie von August Ludwig (1922), revised by Rudolf Tischner, Tittmonig, Pustet, 1960.