yllus.(3) There are other
important cases which show that he was a dexterous and fearless surgeon.
But the special interest of the work for us is that, for the first time
in modern literature, we have reports of post-mortem examinations made
specifically with a view to finding out the exact cause of death. Among
the 111 cases, there are post-mortem records of cases of gallstones,
abscess of the mesentery, thrombosis of the mesenteric veins, several
cases of heart disease, senile gangrene and one of cor villosum. From no
other book do we get so good an idea of a practitioner's experience at
this period; the notes are plain and straightforward, and singularly
free from all theoretical and therapeutic vagaries. He gives several
remarkable instances of faith healing.
(2) De abditis nonnullis ac mirandis morborum et sanationum
causis. 8th, Florence, Gandhi, 1507.
(3) Possibly it was only a case of angina Ludovici, or
retro-pharyngeal abscess.
To know accurately the anatomical changes that take place in disease is
of importance both for diagnosis and for treatment. The man who created
the science, who taught us to think anatomically of disease,
was Morgagni, whose "De sedibus et causis morborum per anatomen
indagatis"(4) is one of the great books in our literature. During the
seventeenth century, the practice of making post-mortem examinations
had extended greatly, and in the "Sepulchretum anatomicum" of Bonetus
(1679), these scattered fragments are collected.(5) But the work
of Morgagni is of a different type, for in it are the clinical and
anatomical observations of an able physician during a long and active
life. The work had an interesting origin. A young friend interested in
science and in medicine was fond of discoursing with Morgagni about his
preceptors, particularly Valsalva and Albertini, and sometimes the young
man inquired about Morgagni's own observations and thoughts. Yielding
to a strong wish, Morgagni consented to write his young friend familiar
letters describing his experiences. I am sorry that Morgagni does not
mention the name of the man to whom we are so much indebted, and who,
he states, was so pleased with the letters that he continually solicited
him to send more and more "till he drew me on so far as the seventieth;
. . . when I begged them of him in order to revise their contents; he
did not return them, till he had made me solemnly promise, that I would
not abridge any part
|