This month, Elizabethanne Boran, librarian at the Edward Worth Library, Dublin, writes on treating measles in late seventeenth-century London and Dublin, with particular focus on the works of John Pechey (1654-1718), many of which were collected by the Irish physician Edward Worth (1678-1733).
A keen collector of medical works
Title page of John Pechey's Collections of Acute Diseases (1691) |
‘These Measles began very
early, as they use to do, to wit, at the beginning of January, 1670/1 and increasing daily, came to their height at the
Vernal Æquinox, i.e. the Tenth of March: afterwards they gradually decreas’d. and were totally
extinguish’d the following July’.
Thus begins John Pechey’s account of an outbreak of measles in his Collection of Acute Diseases (London , 1691), a book collected by the early
eighteenth-century Dublin
physician, Edward Worth (1676-1733). Worth was a keen collector of all kinds of
medical and scientific works and was particularly interested in infectious
diseases. As the Worth Library’s online exhibition on infectious diseases demonstrates, his main areas of concern were plague, smallpox, syphilis, and tuberculosis,
not to mention all kinds of fevers, but he was also avidly interested in books on
other infectious (and non-infectious) diseases.
John Pechey
Perhaps it was for this reason that Worth was drawn to the works of
John Pechey (1654-1718), for he collected no less than seven books by this
popular author: Pechey’s Collection of
Acute Diseases (London, 1691) had quickly been followed by his Collections of Chronical Diseases
(London, 1692). Three years later Pechey’s Storehouse
of physical practice was on the market and in the next two years he
produced a book a year: Treatise of
Women’s Diseases (London , 1696) and Treatise of Children’s Diseases (London , 1697). All of
these books were collected by Edward Worth who joined to them a 1700 edition of
Pechey’s Promptuarium praxeos medicae
(which had been a Latin translation of the Storehouse),
and, finally, in 1707, Pechey’s Compleat
Herbal of Physical Plants. Though these books didn’t not represent the
entire output of Pechey (which includes a host of pamphlets on the virtues of
his famous medical concoctions), it is clear that Worth was drawn to Pechey’s understanding
of disease, which was, in turn, heavily dependent on the works of the great English
physician, Thomas Sydenham (1624-1689), whose works were translated and
published by Pechey.
Portrait of Thomas Sydenham |
A fractious relationsip with medical authorities
Pechey was the son of William Pechey, aThe 'English Hippocrates'
The choice of Sydenham was a shrewd one – as the numerous editions of Pechey’s English translation of Sydenham’s complete works testify. But if Pechey hoped to win approval by translating Sydenham’s works his hopes were dashed for Sydenham’s own relationship with the Royal College of Physicians was problematic. It is at first sight surprising that so eminent a physician, one who was regarded as the ‘English Hippocrates’ due to his emphasis on clinical experience, was never made a Fellow of the College. However, it was precisely Sydenham’s advocacy of experience over theoretical medicine that threatened the status of the members of the College. Sydenham might have avoided publishing his most radical attacks on the medical establishment but there was sufficient criticism of them in his famous Methodus to ensure that they were less than attracted to the likely social implications of his health regime.Bleeding a patient |
'These Men blame me for Englishing their Mysteries'
So Pechey’s advocacy of Sydenham, though it fitted in perfectly with his own medical philosophy, was unlikely to endear him to the Royal College of Physicians who were already incensed by Pechey’s propensity for advertising his medical wares. Not only this, but, as Pechey explains to the reader in Worth’s 1691 edition of the Collection of Acute Diseases, the very method of his popularizing of Sydenham was criticised: ‘These Men blame me for Englishing their Mysteries, though they know that Hippocrates and Galen and Celsus, and many others wrote in their Mother-Tongue.’ That didn’t stop him for, as his preface to his father makes clear, his publications represented not only an opportunity for financial gain but more importantly were part of a crusade to defend the importance of practice and experience over theory, and, at the same time, to democratize medical knowledge by making the works of eminent doctors available in English to non medical readers. In this Pechey seems to have been following his medical hero, Sydenham, for the latter never joined the ranks of fashionable doctors and was more than happy to treat poor patients.Bleeding
Therefore, much of Pechey’s description and suggestions for treating measles comes directly from Thomas Sydenham. Certainly both men would have concurred that ‘the Patient be kept in his bed onely two or three days after the eruption, that the bloud may gently breath out, according to its own genius, through the pores of the skin, the inflam’d Particles that are easily separable which offend her; and that he have no more cloaths nor fire, than he is wont to have when he is well’. Though Sydenham in general opposed the treatment of bleeding in cases of fever and smallpox, he admitted that in some cases of measles the standard practice of bleeding should be implemented. Edward Worth’s collection of medical books demonstrate that this early eighteenth-century Dublin physician was a keen follower of the Pechey-Sydenham approach to infectious disease.
Elizabethanne Boran is librarian at the Edward Worth Library, Dublin. She may be contacted at elizabethanne "dot" boran "at" hse "dot" ie.