0"T' LAERT> "! - USP

368 RECENT'TIMES.
structures arise from . distinct embrybnic layers. He
declared the ultimate constituents of the body to be
spherules or vesicles. May we not look upon this as a
foreboding of the discovery of the cell ?
PROGRESS IN THE OTHER BRANCHES OF
MEDICAL SCIENCE DURING THE SEVENTEENTH
AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES.
THE opposition between the Iatrophysicists and the Iatro- ; ,
chemists was manifested as much in pathology as in ,
physiology. They sought to explain diseases, on the one
hand by mechanical disturbances such as stagnation of the ,*
blood or of the contents of the nerves, on the other hand J
by chemical processes such as fermentation and decom- :f
position. Prominent thinkers among the doctors, like i'
BORELLI, PlTCAIRN, HELMONT, SYLVIUS, WlLLIS, BOER-,'j
HAAVE and F HOFFMANN built upon these theories f
elegant structures of pathological doctrine, the instability
of which became apparent as science advanced. The
deficiencies and mistakes and especially the one-sidedness
manifested by some of these medical systems led to the
blending of them with dynamic hypotheses : PARACELSUS J
had previously made this attempt and HELMONT and
WlLLIS had repeated it. But the dynamic theory, which
in many respects recalled the doctrines of the Pneumatists|
of antiquity—remodelled however, of course, in conformity
with the Christian faith—was at first only employed to
explain the ultimate causes of organic phenomena. STAHL
developed it into an animism which suggested the view
that all scientific investigation in medicine must be superfluous.
The same conclusion, at least in respect of the
theoretical foundation of medicine, was arrived at by those,
doctors who, like SYDENHAM, dissatisfied with attempts to
reconcile theory with practice, despaired of the solution of
the problem, and declared the final goal of their efforts to