this story, in spite of a careful search of the text
of the edition of 1510. But, admitting the existence of the passage in
question, it proves nothing as to the date of this alleged Syrian sojourn.
Tripoli was captured by the Crusaders in 1109, and continued under
their control until its recapture by the Saracens in 1289, a period of
nearly two hundred years. Gilbert's travels in Syria may then have
occurred at almost any time during this long period, and his fortuitous
meeting with Archbishop Walter has very much the appearance of a
story evolved entirely from the consciousness of the biographer.
On the other hand, Mr. Kingsford bases his theory of Gilbert's sojourn
in Syria upon a story adopted, I think, from Littré and found in the
Histoire litéraire de la France. The Compendium of Gilbert contains (f.
137a) a chapter giving the composition of a complex collyrium with
which he professes to have cured the almost total blindness of Bertram,
son of Hugo de Jubilet, after the disease had baffled the skill of the
Saracen and Christian-Syrian physicians of his day. Now Littré avers
that a certain Hugo de Jubilet was involved in an ambuscade in Syria in
the year 1227, and that he had a son named Bertram. It is very natural,
of course, to conclude that this Bertram was the patient recorded in the
book of Gilbert. Kingsford says that Gilbert "met" Bertram in Syria, but
the text of the Compendium says nothing of the locality of their
meeting, which might have taken place almost anywhere in Europe,
perhaps even at Salernum, a favorite resort of the invalided Crusaders
in these times. Finally, Dr. Payne disposes effectually of the
authenticity of the entire story by calling attention to the fact that the
chapter referred to in the Compendium is marked plainly "Additio,"
without indicating whether this addition is from the pen of Gilbert or
some later glossator.
Finally, I may suggest another line of argument, which, so far as I
know, has not yet been advanced for the determination of the period of
Gilbert.
The Compendium Medicinae of Gilbert is, of course, a compendium of
internal medicine. But the book is also something more. Not less than
fifty chapters are devoted to a comparatively full discussion of wounds,
fractures and dislocations, lithotomy, herniotomy, fistulae and the
various diseases on the border line between medicine and surgery. Not
a single surgical writer, however, is quoted by name. Nevertheless the
major part of these surgical chapters are either literal copies, or very
close paraphrases, of the similar chapters of the "_Chirurgia_" of Roger
of Parma, a distinguished professor in Salernum and the pioneer of
modern surgery. The precise period of Roger is not definitely settled by
the unanimous agreement of modern historians, but in the "_Epilogus_"
of the "_Glosulae Quatuor Magistrorum_" it is said that Roger's
"_Chirurgia_" was "_in lucem et ordinem redactum_" by Guido
Arietinus, in the year of our Lord 1230. This date, while perhaps not
unquestionable, is also adopted by De Renzi, the Italian historian of
Medicine. The original MS. of Roger's work is said to be still in
existence in the Magliabechian Library in Florence, but it has never
been published in its original form.[5] Roland of Parma, however, a
pupil of Roger, published in 1264 what purports to be a copy of Roger's
"_Chirurgia_" with some notes and additions of his own, and it is from
this MS. of Roland that all our copies of Roger's work have been
printed. Roger's "_Chirurgia_" was popularly known as the
"_Rogerina_;" the edition of Roland as the "Rolandina." They are
frequently confounded, but are not identical, though the additions of
Roland are usually regarded as of little importance. In the absence of
Roger's manuscript, however, they lead often to considerable confusion,
as it is not always easy to determine in the printed copies of the
"_Rolandina_" just what belongs to Roger and what to his pupil and
editor. Now a careful comparison of the surgical chapters of Gilbert of
England with the published text of the "_Rolandina_" leads me to the
conviction that Gilbert had before him the text of Roger, rather than
that of Roland, his pupil. If such is the fact, Gilbert's Compendium
must have been written between 1230 and 1264, the dates respectively
of the "_Rogerina_" and "Rolandina."
[Footnote 5: Haeser says that this MS. of Roger's "Chirurgia," made by
Guido Arenitensium, was discovered by Puccinoti in the
Magliabechian library, and that an old Italian translation of the same
work is also found there. The latter was the work of a certain
Bartollomeo.
The text used to represent Roger in the present paper is that published
by De Renzi (Collectio Salernitana, tom. II, pp. 426-493) and entitled
"Rogerii, Medici Celeberrimi Chirurgia." It is
Continue reading on your phone by scaning this QR Code
Tip: The current page has been bookmarked automatically. If you wish to continue reading later, just open the
Dertz Homepage, and click on the 'continue reading' link at the bottom of the page.