Repertory History TimeLine

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by ingrid wawra on March 23, 2010 at 4:39pm

great, Debby !
very nice impulse,
I hope on many contributions, for exampel from the discussion forum "Reliability of repertories", a subgroup of "Translating Language into Repertory Rubrics" - group, where the theme of history of repertory was touched in regard to what that history means to the reliability of repertories.

thank you
ingrid

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hans Weitbrecht on March 23, 2010 at 6:49pm

Dear Members
G.H.G.jahr published numerous repertories in the 1830 - 1860 which were nearly as popular as Boenninghausen's repertories.
Boger published the Synoptic Key in different editions and a few regional repertories.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DR. ARINDAM DUTTA on March 24, 2010 at 7:49am

Dear Debby & members,

I think a little bit modification is necessary.

The making of repertories started its journey as early as 1805 and covered a long way to reach the modern generation homoeopathic softwares. In this pathway there are several milestones -

A) Mere indexing of symptoms
B) Repertories backed by firm philosophies
C) More comprehensive repertories
D) Further improvements
E) Computer softwares


A) Mere indexing of symptoms

The earlier repertories were mere indices of symptoms. The works were compiled only as an alphabetical index, so that the symptoms could be found out easily at the time of need.

After very fragmentary provings of only 27 drugs, Hahnemann realized- there should be an index. Otherwise it is next to impossible to remember all the symptoms of even only one drug for a human brain.

Hahnemann compiled "Fragmenta de viribus medicamentorum..." in 1805.

So our journey starts from here.


B) Repertories backed by firm philosophies

Even Hahnemann did not realize there might be any philosophy behind a mere index. It was Boenninghausen who first showed us how to utilize these indices to find out our desired similimum by putting a firm philosophical background to these indices. The concept of REPERTORIZATION evolved.

That's why Boenninghausen is called "the Father of repertory", not Hahnemann or Hartlaub, Trinks, or any other whoever compiled repertories before Boenninghausen.

In 1832, Boenninghausen published “ Repertory of antipsoric medicines”. Hahnemann wholeheartedly accepted Boenninghausen's idea. Hahnemann gave a detailed foreword (not preface) for this book. Although the topic of that foreword was altogether different from the context; it was on dose & potency.

From this point Hahnemann started to discard Jahr and praise Boenninghausen regarding the making of repertories.


C) More comprehensive repertories

Hahnemann accepted Boenninghausen's philosophy and thereafter we see a number of repertories are emerging out from the pen of different stalwarts, but still a good portion of the profession could not understand the philosophy of Boenninghausen and started to think in a more comprehensible way. So from the mainstream an offshoot is coming out with a different philosophy through the hands of Jahr > Constantine Lippe > Edmund Jennings Lee and its final shape was given by James Tyler Kent.

Initially, Kent published his “The Repertory of Homoeopathic Materia Medica” in 12 fascicles ( first one was appeared in 1897). The complete work under one cover was published in 1899. The modern era of Homoeopathic repertory started from this point.

Viewing immense popularity of Kent's work different authors started to publish different repertories on the same line of thinking.

At the same time, inspite of huge popularity of Kent's repertory, Cyrus Maxwell Boger was a pure Boenninghausennian personality. He revived Boenninghausen's concept again with a few modifications in the light of modern medicine and published his “Boenninghausen's Characteristics and Repertory” in 1905.


D) Further improvements

The last or the sixth edition of Kent's repertory was published by Clara Louise Kent, widow of J. T. Kent in 1956. After a few decades the Kentians started to improve Kent's work further. They kept the basic construction and philosophy of Kent's repertory intact and added to it various data from various sources in terms of symptoms, medicines and the upgradation of the existing medicines. So, the repertories like- Synthetic, Synthesis, Kunzli's Repertorium Generale, Murphy's repertory, Thematic, Roger's Complete repertory, Universale, etc. are coming out.

Actually, we are going through a revolution, where we are adding anything and everything over Kent's repertory, but only the future can tell us the efficacy of these compilations after their verifications and reverifications in practice.


E) Computer Softwares

In modern generation homoeopathy, various softwares are coming out for successful and authentic repertorization with minimum labor and time. These softwares should be used only for the purpose of repertorization proper (tabulation & computations) and ultimate selection of similimum should be under the domain of physician's skill.


....................ARINDAM

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DR. ARINDAM DUTTA on March 24, 2010 at 10:00am

Dear members,

Knowing history is very important. We must know the root, otherwise we cannot fathom the nature of the whole tree. Same is true for repertory too. There are plenty of repertories around us with their respective utilities. Many a times we see a small, ' not so popular ' repertory proves wonders in our day to day practice.

So, to get best out of them we must know their origin, how they have grown, from which sources the authors have gathered data to enrich their compilations.

After all, YESTERDAY was there for sure, because of it we are enjoying TODAY; but TOMORROW is always predictive.

..........................ARINDAM

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dr Guillermo Zamora on March 25, 2010 at 10:42pm

Dear All:

Of course the first repertory was created by Hahnemann, the second repertory was entrusted to Dr. Jahr, although it seems to be that Dr. Hahnemann was not very satisfied with it, so he left the job to Dr. Boenninghausen ... It is known that even on his last days Dr. Hahnemann worked with Boenninghausen´s repertory.

We can find the recommendation of Hahnemann himself in the footnote number 109 (or 153 paragraph footnote) of the Organon 6th edition, which reads:

109 footnote: "Dr. von Bonninghausen, by the publication of the characteristic symptoms of homoeopathic medicines and his repertory has rendered a great service to Homoeopathy as well as Dr. J.H.G. Jahr in his handbook of principal symptoms."

We have many other important authors who undertook the arduous task of drawing up a repertory to facilitate the daily work of access to the Homeopathic Materia Medica, among others, these include C. Hering (1838), C. Lippe (1880) and Boger (1905), reaching J.T. Kent.

The Kent´s repertory has been the repertory of reference since the publication of its first edition in 1897, even Kent himself revised it and expanded it in three successive editions (1897, 1908, 1924), considering the 3rd edition as of better quality. Afterwards three more editions appeared (1935, 1945, 1957), edited by his followers and his wife, who joined a few variations.

After these American editions, several editions were published in India (1961).

Among modern writers of repertories, there are included:

• The Synthetic Repertory and Klunker Barthel (2 issues in 1973 and 1982)

• The Modern Repertory of Kent by Francisco X. Eizayaga (1979)

• The Kent's Repertorium Generale by Jost Künzli (1987), with additions of 73 authors.

• The Kent's Repertory of the Homoeopathic Materia Medica Expanded by Sivaraman (2 issues in 1994 and 1995), which includes corrections and additions from 24 other authors recognized

• The Homeopathic Medical Repertory by Robin Murphy (1996), which totally changes the structure of the repertory of Kent, organizations at all levels in alphabetical order, it is difficult to trace the sources of their additions.

From the more than 160 repertories publicly available, only a few exist in Castilian, whether original or translated, and almost all of them (in spanish) were published in Argentina.

Best wishes.
Dr. G

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DR. ARINDAM DUTTA on March 26, 2010 at 3:14am

HAHNEMANN & REPERTORY


The first homoeopaths built their materia medicas on an experimental basis, generally by experiments on themselves, by proving drugs. Therefore, most of them could remind themselves clearly of the different symptoms in their various shades.

As the volumes of homoeopathic materia medica expanded and the remedies multiplied, it became a real problem to apply this knowledge according to the directions laid down by Hahnemann.

In his own time Hahnemann too, became conscious about the need for the suitable index to the growing materia medica. In 1829, Hahnemann wrote to his friend and follower Rummel – “…how useful it will be a good alphabetical repertory, once it is completed ”.

During Hahnemann’s time, he and his disciples had proved about hundred drugs. In spite of this smaller number of drugs and their close intimacy with the details of their symptoms, Hahnemann and his followers to bend down the genius to the making of repertories.

The earliest repertory was born as early as 1805, when Hahnemann published in Latin his famous work “FRAGMENTA DE VIRIBUS MEDICAMENTORUM POSITIVIS SIVE IN SANO CORPORE HUMANO OBSERVATIS ”. The work was dealt with only twenty seven drugs and consisted of two parts.

Part 1- contained the symptoms observed (269 pages)

Part 2- formed the index (or repertory )(470 pages)

The publisher was Mr. Joh. Ambr. Barth., Publisher & Bookseller in Leipsic.

Hahnemann himself prepared a second edition with numerous additions, but never published and now preserved in Stuttgart museum of Dr. Richard Haehl. Later, Dr. F. F. Quin (Father of British Homoeopathy) reprinted the work in 1834.

Very recently, I have found the cover page of another edition (1824) of it published from Neapoli.

In 1817, Hahnemann already had prepared another repertory for his personal use. He used to consult it in his daily practice (until Rueckert’s repertory appeared), consisted of two large thick folio volumes. Here all the symptoms proved by himself and his pupils were arranged in an alphabetical order for easy to search out at need. One of his daughters, Charlotte Hahnemann gave him technical helps for its preparation.

She used to cut the symptoms from provers' logbook and paste them in the proper chapter of this newly projected repertory, obviously under the strict supervision of Hahnemann. The work had never been published and the manuscript you may find in the museum of Robert Bosch hospital, Stuttgart, Germany.

Then in 1828, Hahnemann’s “CHRONIC DISEASES” appeared in print. After its publication the author was busy for compiling a repertory of the antipsoric remedies contained in this work. He sought for cooperation among his friends and pupils for this work. He asked Rummel, Schweikert and Jahr for the help.To them Hahnemann’s advice was that the work must be written in the smallest form, so that it may not become too voluminous; all the symptoms must be written on only one side of the quarto-folio papers so that later on, Hahnemann himself can separate everyone of them by cutting and pasting them in an alphabetical order; they must also be written so that only the first line projects while the others recede by one syllable. Accordingly, Rummel started to work out. Hahnemann told him not to do it in a hurry. Schweikert also sent his work to Hahnemann. But, the projected repertory never appeared in print.

Dr. Ernst Ferdinand Rueckert who, from September, 1829 until the Easter, 1830 was a guest of Hahnemann at Kothen, utilized Jahr’s, Rummel’s and Schweikert’s preliminary works and completed the reference book of about 1500 pages. At that time, Hahnemann used to consult this volume in his day-to-day practice. Although Hahnemann had high esteem about Jahr’s work initially, but soon he realized and began to complain of Jahr’s hastiness. Jahr did not get Hahnemann’s recognition. Still he completed his work and published the repertory in German language. Year of its publication, was before 1854.

Meanwhile, repertories of Hartlaub, Weber, Boenninghausen, Glazor started to appear one by one.


.....................ARINDAM

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hans Weitbrecht on March 26, 2010 at 6:21am

Dear members
Nice write-up on repertories. G.H.G. Jahr moved to Pris shortly after Hahnemann and became hahnemann's scribe. he wrote the last editions of the Chronic disease, arranged the symptoms and also was helping with the organon 6th edition.

i have in my posession:
Hauptanzeigen der homeopathischen Heilmittel nebst Repertorium (Main indications for homeopathic medicines with repertory) 1835
I occasionally resort to both : repertory and Materia medica.

Besides listing all the repertories, it would be informative, who copied from whom and how accurately. I may write about this some other time.

Cheers, Hans

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DR. ARINDAM DUTTA on March 26, 2010 at 9:03am

Dear Hans,

Thanks for your contribution here.

"....Besides listing all the repertories, it would be informative, who copied from whom and how accurately. I may write about this some other time."

I am really appreciating your point and eagerly waiting for your words regarding this. Why "some other time"? Why not now ?

.......................ARINDAM

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DR. ARINDAM DUTTA on March 26, 2010 at 10:27pm

TITLE:
Systematische Darstellung der reinen Arzneiwirkungen zum practischen Gebrauch für homöopathische Ärtzte
(Systematic presentation of the pure effects of medicines to the practical use of homeopathic doctors)

AUTHOR:
Hartlaub, Carl Georg Christian

PUBLICATION:
First published in 1827 from Leipsic, Germany

PAGES: 750

ORIGINAL LANGUAGE: German

NOW PRESERVED IN : Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Library.

ONE OF THE PAGES :

...........................ARINDAM

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ingrid wawra on March 27, 2010 at 5:10am

thank you, Arindam !
for this nice old-master differentiation of waking with bad dreams.

nearly 200 years past along, and we work with exactly the same suffering, at least in this sphere.
it is not only global, but uniting us over time,
methods and medicin is still the same and still the most effective.
thanks to Hahnemann - and to you for reminding us
regards
ingrid

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DR. ARINDAM DUTTA on March 27, 2010 at 8:00am

Dear Ingrid,

Sorry to say, I actually could not follow your post- "...waking with bad dreams".

Probably you are talking about the page of Hartlaub's repertory, which I have posted. But I don't know German language. I have posted it at random from the book, without knowing what is written on it!- just to show everyone how it looked like.

Anyway, thanks for your reply and keep in touch.

...............................ARINDAM

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ingrid wawra on March 27, 2010 at 8:40am

hej Arindam !
a pitty, you cant read german (i dont blame you, i grew up with it,otherwise, i would never have learned it ;-)
the page, you so kindly posted, is a marvelous repertorypart about waking with mare-dreams, = dreams that frighten you and it describes ca. 15 detailed, very finely observed, different ways of waking from a bad dream.
my english is not good enough to be able to translate it, with the delicate distinctions.
people still wake of bad dreams the same diffenent ways. reading this document nearly 200 years old gives a peculiar impression of unity.
part of the experience is the print in old letters which my grandmothers books had too, but which nowadays not are used anymore and most people can not read them.
regards
ingrid

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page