THE LIGA LETTER • Vol. 19 • Review 2013 • www.lmhi.net 1

THE

HOMOEOPATHIC PHYSICIAN

LMHI Publication devoted to Hahnemannian Medicine

Vol. 1, Issue 3, November 2020

Editor Dr. Renzo Galassi M.D.

Published by LMHI – Liga Medicorum Homoeopathica Internationalis

IMPRINT THE HOMOEOPATHIC PHYSICIAN • No. 1 / Issue : 3 • Pictures: Archive & Web • Editor: Dr. Renzo Galassi (Italy) • Team: Dr. Altunay Agaoglu (Turkey), Dr. Gustavo Cataldi (Argentina), Dr. Daniel C. Cook (USA), Dr. Ulrich D. Fischer (Germany), , Dr Andrea Flores Sanchez (Mexico), Dr. Pietro Gulia (Italy), Dr. Klaus-Henning Gypser (Germany), Dr. Josè Matuk Kanan (Mexico), Dr. Bernardo Merizalde (USA), Dr. Aditya Pareek (India) Dr Bernhard Zauner (Austria) . • Editorial Support: Dr. Daniel Cook • Lay Out & Design : Evin Turkay (LMHI Secretariat) • Publisher: LMHI • Internet: www.lmhi.org • Contact: lmhi.assistant@gmail.com & secretary@ligamedicorum.org • Frequency: three times a year The articles reflect the opinion of the authors, not necessarily that of the editors or publishers. All contributions and illustrations are protected by copyright. Any duplication, translation, transfer to electronic data carriers or any other use requires the approval of the editors. The author is responsible for the protection of data privacy, especially with regard to the medical history and information of patients. No liability is assumed for unsolicited manuscripts. The publishers and editors reserve the right to make any necessary changes and reductions after consultation with the author. The Guideline for Authors can be consulted at the editorial office and is available to authors. The editor/publisher accepts no liability for information on dosage and therapeutic instructions. Every user is required to research the information or consult a specialist. No liability is assumed for printing errors. There is no financial compensation for the articles published. If the report is paid for, this will be stated. All authors are obliged to disclose conflicts of interest. In principle the journal will not publish papers that have been simultaneously submitted to other journals.

Vol. 1 , Issue 3 2

Index to The Homoeopathic Physician n.3, 2020

3 Vol 1, Issue 3

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Editorial Board

Dr. Altunay Agaoglu, Turkey Dr, Gustavo Cataldi, Argentina

Dr. Renzo Galassi, Italy

Dr. Daniel Cook, USA

Dr. Ulrich Fischer, Germany Dr. Andrea Flores Sanchez, Mexico

Dr. Pietro Gulia, Italy Dr. Klaus-Henning Gypser, Germany

Dr. Jose Matuk Kanan, Mexico

Dr. Bernardo Merizalde, USA

Dr. Aditya Pareek, India Dr. Bernhard Zauner, Austria

Some words from the Editor Dr. Renzo Galassi (pg. 4) Editorial of the LMHI president Dr. Gustavo Cataldi (pg.5) History • CLEMENS MARIA FRANZ von BOENNINGHAUSEN. (1785-1864) his life and his legacy to the Homoeopathic

fraternity, by Renzo Galassi (pg. 7) • The correspondence between Samuel Hahnemann and Clemens von Bönninghausen, by Dr. Ulrich FISCHER, LMHI President of Honor(pg.23) •Clemens von Boenninghausen and Homeopathic Remedies, by Heike Gypser, LMHI secretary for pharmacy.(pg.32) Clinical cases •Boenninghausen Revival - A Chronological Treatise on History and Practice, By Klaus-Henning Gypser(pg.34) • Using the Boenninghausen Method, by Dr. med. Gertraud Roos, Germany. (pg.41) • Using the Boenninghausen's Therapeutic Pocket Book, by Dr. Pierluigi Clauser, Trento, Italy.(pg. 43) •A CASE OF ADHD. Comparison of the analysis with Boenninghausen and Kent’s methods. By Renzo Galassi, THP editor. (pg. 46) Obituary • OBITUARY TO DR JACQUES IMBERECHTS by José Matuk Kanan(pg.50) and by Ashley Ross (52) • DR JORGE BUFFA (1955-2020), (pg. 53) Quiz Corner • Quiz corner, by Dr. Pietro Gulia (pg. 54) • Solutions of the Quiz corner of LMHI News n 25, by Dr. Pietro Gulia (pg. 56) Next Congress • LMHI world congress 2021, Istanbul, by Dr. Altunay Agaoglu (pg.57)

4 Vol 1 , Issue 3

Introduction of the Editor Dr. Renzo Galassi.

Dear friends, we meet again with the fall issue of our THP. After Hahnemann and Hering, me and the members of the Working Group on Newsletter have decided to dedicate this third issue to another Pioneer of our Medicine and great contributor to our methodology of healing and to our Literature: Clemens Maria Franz von Boenninghausen (1785-1864). As we can see in the present issue he was inspirer of many great Masters of the past, both in Europe and USA, with his writings and with his repertories. Every good doctor of the American homeopathic Golden Age, for example, was able to use his Therapeutic Pocket Book, especially at the patient’s bedside. I have to say that since a few years I am analyzing some of my cases with the Boenninghausen Therapeutic Pocket Book, especially those ones poor of symptoms and I can state that, with great surprise, I have resolved difficult situations that, otherwise, have not been improved with other tools. Considering that this theme is important and of great interest over the last years, I have invited experienced colleagues in this field, to give their contribution and I hope that this effort will be of some interest and help for you. Of course Boenninghausen doesn’t means another repertory more, but a method full of knowledge, especially of the Materia Medica and its use in the daily practice. Boenninghausen focused his activity in the study and discovery of the most important symptoms of each remedy, the so called Genius of a remedy, and his endless effort to improve every aspect of our Medicine made him one of the few Immortal Masters of our system of healing. I think that avoiding the study of the work of this great man could be an unforgivable sin of omission. So, good reading, Renzo Galassi, the Editor.

Vol 1, Issue 3

5

EDITORIAL OF LMHI PRESIDENT: WRITING IN A CONTINUED PANDEMIC

This is the third issue of the new cycle of our magazine, The Homeopathic Physician, dedicated this time to Clemens Maria Franz von Boenninghausen (1785–1864), the faithful follower of the principles of the founder of Homeopathy, Samuel Hahnemann (1755–1843), with whom he exchanged correspondence in which their mutual esteem is evident. It is my turn to write this editorial at a time when the global alarm continues over the SARS-CoV-2 virus pandemic, and particularly in Argentina, a quarantine that has already been in its different phases for more than seven months. In its course, I have treated numerous cases with the success that homeopaths know we can produce when an acute miasm appears in our patients.

Dr. Gustavo Cataldi

Each patient who recovers with homeopathic treatment highlights the depressing lack of official recognition that our therapy should have in many countries of the world, as well as the consideration that it should have at a global level. The LMHI offered its advice to WHO in a letter addressed on April 5, with no response so far. The day will come when homeopathy will be given its well-deserved recognition for its benefit to people and justice for those of us who practice it. I must clarify that I do not consider that the recovery of my patients gives me the status of master of the practice. Surely you, dear reader, will have had the same results if you have applied the principles established by the classical masters of Homeopathy. We simply must be faithful followers of their teachings, both in the management of chronic disease and the appearance of an acute miasm, in this case epidemic. Hahnemann already shows us how to deal with a collective disease, and how symptoms should be collected for the search for what later to the founder of homeopathy will be known as “genus epidemicus”. We must take into account that the genus epidemicus does not replace the individualized taking of each clinical case: the symptomatic totality and individuality as guiding principles for practice must also be respected when taking the acute case. In this regard, Clemens von Boenninghausen was the one who contributed many of the concepts that we currently use in our practice. Although Hahnemann had already mentioned it, it was the Dutch homeopath descended from a noble German family and specialized in law and botany who systematized the way to characterize the symptoms to obtain the most characteristic of the disease picture. I must highlight here the exegesis he did about characteristic symptoms, as well as the mastery he exercised in determining how to characterize a symptom. His systematized "interrogation" extracted from scholasticism (Quis? Quid? Ubi? Quibus auxiliis? Cur? Quomodo? Quando?) allows to perfectly characterize the symptoms in a patient and compare it with the characteristic symptoms of a remedy. In turn, Boenninghausen was one of the greatest experts in Materia Medica of his time, a quality that allowed him to recognize the most characteristic symptoms of each remedy, the so-called genius of medicine. In our times, currents have appeared in which the taking of symptoms is left aside in taking the case, or characteristics (symptoms?) are assigned to the remedies according to a classification made by some author, who doesn’t consider provings to do so. In the face of so many therapeutic successes provided by Boenninghausen and by followers who have adopted the system of taking characteristic symptoms to medicate, the question we must ask ourselves is why deviate from that path? I don’t reject any new contribution that adds to the classical knowledge, as long as it does not try to supplant a methodology that is admittedly successful. In this regard, the method of repertorizing the most characteristic symptoms presented by the patient and comparing them with the characteristic symptoms of a remedy cannot be set aside since it corresponds to a basic principle of taking the clinical case.

Vol 1, Issue 3 6

This is how in The choice of the remedy, Boenninghausen tells us: “The choice of the remedy in any concrete case of disease cannot be made too carefully or too cautiously (…) Many failures occur, especially with unpracticed beginners, because in examining the symptoms the one or the other was overlooked. Even with older and more experienced homeopathic physicians, especially such as very busy, such an occurrence occasionally takes place.” Let us remember the advice of this great master of homeopathy and let us not deviate from this proven successful method. Likewise, let us be careful in taking the true symptoms, without making fanciful interpretations of them. It is good to add new knowledge, but always with the solid basis that the taking of the characteristic symptoms in the patient gives us and comparing them with the proving symptoms of the remedy. I hope you enjoy reading this magazine, just as I have reviewed old concepts used by new prescribers. ¹Von BOENNINGHAUSEN, C.M.F. (1908); The Lesser Writings, compiled by Thomas Bradford, B. Jain Publishers, N. Delhi, Ed. 1994, p. 94..

Vol 1, Issue 3

7

This article comes from the book written by the most important historian of our Medicine, Dr. Thomas Lindsley Bradford (1847-1918 ), titled “The Pioneers of Homoeopathy”, Philadelphia, 1897.

In the A. H. Z. vol. 68, p. 56 appears the following note: "As we send our journal to the press, we receive the very sad news that on the 26th of January, 1864, our C. von Boenninghausen succumbed, in his seventy-ninth year, to a stroke of apoplexy.

World Hahnemann Day, Philadelphia, April 2019

Dr.

Under the first impression of this news, which will find among all our colleagues an equally sad echo, we are only able to exclaim today a farewell to the noble departed. Our science has lost in him one of its first leaders, our journal one of its best co-laborers, the Society of the Physicians of the Rhineland and Westphalia its head and its pillar, our Central Society a much honored member, and we, personally—a faithful friend and loving teacher. May the earth rest light upon him!" And in the following number this biography: Our sense of fervent gratitude and high esteem for our departed friend and colleague C. von Boenninghausen, the constant and esteemed contributor to our journal, lays upon us the sad duty of accompanying his bier with a few words of love and acknowledgment, and to set him a monument which no one who has come to know and comprehend his efforts and labors may pass without feeling the deepest sadness and the greatest respect.

Dr. Thomas Lindsley Bradford

It is a biography of Boenninghausen taken from the Allgemeine Homoopathische Zeitung, signed by Meyer and written on the death of the great Master. I added here and there some hints on his teaching and clinical experience, coming from different sources, in order to give a picture of his huge work, done for the advance of our Medicine. All the photos regarding Boenninghausen come from the private collection of Dr. Klaus Henning GYPSER. The handwritten documents are located in the Institute of History of Medicine of the Robert-Bosch-Foundation, Stuttgart/Germany. Renzo Galassi, Editor.

Dr. Renzo Galassi

Clemens von Boenninghausen

Vol 1, Issue 3

8

Let us not delay, therefore, to bring before our readers this life, faithfully and truly, as the deceased himself described it to us about two years ago. Clemens Maria Franz von Boenninghausen, Doctor of Laws and of Medicine, was born on the 12th of March, 1785, at Heringhaven, an estate belonging to his parents in Overyssel, a province of the Netherlands.

His ancestors whose name and coat of arms are found even in the thirteenth century, and one of whom as an Austrian General Field Marshal was raised by Emperor Ferdinand, by a diploma dated May 20th, 1632, to the estate of imperial baronet, belong to the oldest nobility of Westphalia and the Rhineland. Since nearly all the Boenninghausens in the last 300 years had devoted themselves to the military career, their possessions were only of moderate extent. The first years of his youth Boenninghausen constantly lived in the country, where his body, indeed, was well developed by riding, swimming, hunting and similar bodily exercises, but his mind was only sparingly developed by his tutor. When he, therefore, in his twelfth year came to the gymnasium (High School) in Munster, he received a place very near the bottom of the class, but he worked his way up even in the first term, so as to rise to the first bench, a place which he continued to hold. After attending the gymnasium at Munster for six years, he entered the Dutch University of Groningen, where he spent three years, attending not only the judicial lectures but with especial predilection the more important lectures in natural history and medicine. On the 30th of August, 1806, he defended his inaugural dissertation, De Jure venandi, and received the diploma of Doctor utrinsque juris. On the 1st of October of the same year he was appointed lawyer at the Supreme Court at Deventer, and thus entered on his judicial career, which was, however, a brief one. In the autumn of 1807 he accompanied his father to Utrecht, whither his father was deputed as the representative of the Electoral Committee of Oberyssel to Louis Napoleon, who was then King of Holland and residing at Utrecht. The son was admitted to the audience as the speaker, he being better acquainted with the French language. A consequence of this was the undesired nomination of Auditor of the Privy Counsel; this nomination arrived afterwards very unexpectedly. His career at the Dutch Court from that time on took a very unusually rapid course. Leaping over his colleagues who were in part older, he was within a year nominated to be Auditor to the King, aid hardly fourteen days afterwards as General Secretary des requetés. In this position, influential but very laborious, which was rendered more burdensome during his last half year through his function as Royal Librarian and Chief of the Topographical Bureau, as well as by the treasurership des secours, Boenninghausen remained until the resignation of the King of Holland, on the 1st of July, 1810.

House Herinkhave in the Netherlands where Boenninghausen was born

His father, Ludwig Ernst von Boenninghausen, lieutenant colonel and chamberlain of the Prince of Munster, Knight of a Dutch Order, died as early as May 5th, 1812; his mother, Theresia, nee baroness of Weichs on the Wenne, died April 7th, 1828. Of his five sisters and brothers, among whom there was only one older, one a half-brother, all have preceded him for several years.

Boenninghausen as a child

Vol 1, Issue 3

9

When Boenninghausen through this act which caused him the severest grief, had lost his extremely kind and benevolent master, he refused all further employment in the Dutch Civil Service, and in September, 1810, he returned to the paternal hearth, to devote himself to the study of agriculture and of the sciences more closely connected therewith, and especially to botany, which gradually became his favorite study. Having married in the autumn of 1812, he in the spring of 1814 removed to his hereditary estate of Darup, to develop its resources,

At the reorganization of the Prussian Provinces, Rhineland and Westphalia, he was offered, in the year 1816, the position of President of the Provincial Court of Justice for the Westphalia district, in Coesfeld, where his estate of Darup was situated; he accepted the position and retained it till 1822. During this period the necessity of registering the surveyed lands in the provinces of Rhineland and Westphalia was recognized, and Boenninghausen as the sole Judicial President was called to the conferences held about it at Godesberg near Bonn, so as to give in his opinion, as a practical and theoretically cultivated agriculturist, with respect to the technical part of the valuations. In consequence, Boenninghausen and Mr. Bolshausen were appointed General Commissaries for the registration for these provinces. This new office caused almost continual travels in the communities to be registered, but at the same time an increased opportunity of investigating the Flora of these provinces, which was diligently made use of and enabled Boenninghausen to publish as the first fruit a " Prodromus Florae Monasteriensis" concerning the abundant floral riches of these provinces. House of Boenninghausen in Darup/Westphalia (picture taken by Dr.

Gypser in May 1997)

and he gradually entered on correspondence with the most prominent agriculturists of Germany, especially with Thaer and Schwerz. This gave occasion to several contributors to the " Maeglinsche Annalen" among which his article on "the Culture of Rye according to Twent," seems to call for especial mention, as Thaer caused a separate edition of it to be printed (Berlin, A. Ruecker, 1820); by his counsel and example, he continued to labor for the improvement of agriculture in Westphalia. […]

Heraldic figure at the stable of Boenninghausen´s Estate in Darup/Westphalia (picture taken in May 1997)

This contained much that was new and showed the similarity of our Flora to that of England. About this time the direction of the Botanical Gardens at Munster was transferred to him; this he conducted for a number of years and it brought him into communication with many of the first botanists of Europe.

Vol 1, Issue 3

10

His agricultural and botanical writings found sufficient applause, to cause him to be honored not only with the diplomas of many learned societies, but to receive also the highest botanical distinction, as C. Sprengel (Syst. veg. Ill, p. 245), and Reichenbach (Uebers des Gewaechsreichs, p. 197), each named a genus of plants after him, like the Boenninghausenia albiflora, (photo)

Only two of the most aged of the physicians, Drs. Lutterbeck and Tuisting, whose attention had become fixed on Homoeopathy, owing to some surprising cures of their own patients, who eventually had turned to Boenninghausen for aid, became converted to Homoeopathy, continually sought counsel and instruction from Boenninghausen, and remained faithful to the newly-found truth even till their death. Some foreign physicians of France, Holland, America, etc., were also attracted by Boenninghausen's growing fame, and were gained for the new doctrine. But not being an approved physician, and, therefore, not entitled to a medical practice, he had to fear great trouble and obstruction in his career; he, therefore, during his first year directed his activity chiefly to literary work by which he endeavored to make more easy and thus to further the practice of Homoeopathy; finally, however, by a royal order of King Friedrich Wilhelm IV, dated July 11th, 1843, he was empowered to practice without any restraint. (Exactly a few days after Hahnemann death!) Boeninghausia vincentina and a genus of

the Rutaceae, Boenninghausenia.

A serious derangement of his health, hitherto so firm, took place in the fall of 1827; this was declared by two of the most celebrated physicians to be the purulent tuberculosis and became even more desperate in the spring of 1828; this was the first occasion of his becoming acquainted with Homoeopathy. For when all hope for his recovery was given up, he wrote a farewell letter to his old and never forgotten botanical friend A. Weihe, M. D., at Herford, who was the first homoeopathic physician in the whole of the provinces of Rhineland and Westphalia, though Boenninghausen was ignorant of it, since their frequent correspondence had only touched botanical subjects. Weihe, deeply moved by the news, answered at once and requested an exact and detailed description of the disease and its concomitants and expressed the hope that he might be enabled by the newly discovered curative method to save a friend whom he valued so highly. Boenninghausen of course followed most conscientiously the kindly advice given him and received medicine from Weihe and gradually recovered, so that at the expiration of the summer he could be considered as cured. From this time onward Boenninghausen was not only a firm believer, but also an active promoter of Homoeopathy. After exhorting and attempting in vain to create an interest among the physicians of Munster, with whom he came into frequent contact as being himself a member and one of the founders of the Medical Society, he himself put his hand to the work, refreshing with industry and zeal the half- forgotten medical lore acquired at the University of Groningen, and had the pleasure of becoming of use to many a one who sought his aid.

Permission from King Frederich Wilhelm IV of Prussia to practice as a

medical doctor

Most of the works of Boenninghausen date from this first period, works which were then in the hands of all German Homoeopaths, and were used exclusively even by Hahnemann till his death, and which have found many imitators, translators and plagiarists.

Vol 1, Issue 3 11

For he soon recognized the fact that the foundation of all true healing rests on an exact knowledge of the virtues of the medicines; he, therefore, made it his chief aim to discover the characteristics of the remedies and to place these side by side so that the investigator could without great loss of time either refresh his memory or find in the original sources what was needed. Boenninghausen in the beginning devoted to this work his winter months when he was more at leisure, but after completing the registry of the surveys and having requested and received his dismissal from Civil Service, he devoted all his leisure to these literary works and to his homoeopathic practice. This is fully proved by his independent works, as well as by his communications in the Archiv and in the Zeitung and in the Homoeopathe belge. We start now to see some of his wonderful advice and lectures about the application of Homeopathy to the patients. I put a synthesis of his ideas regards the way of taking the case. It’s part of an article published in the Allg. Hom. Zeit., vol 60 pg 73. It’s a marvelous collection of hints about the Characteristic value of the symptoms.

[..] After looking about in the whole of the medical writings , allopathic as well as homeopathic, for an aid, I remembered that in the middle ages they were accustomed to bring all such matters into the form of verses, in order that the memory might thus be assisted. The modern learned world knows, e. g . , the diet of the Schola Salernitana, dating from the beginning of the twelfth century, drawn up in leonine verses as is supposed, by a certain John of Milan, from which some parts are quoted even to this day. But though I did not find here anything for the present purpose, I yet found something which, as it seemed, might prove useful with writers of quite a different doctrine. There is, namely, a hexameter dating from this same period but from, the theologic scholastics ; this is, indeed. of a somewhat jolting construction, nevertheless it contains briefly and completely the various momenta according to which a moral disease is to be judged as to its peculiarity and grievousness. The verse is the following : "Quis? Quid ? Ubi? Quibus auxiliis? Cur ? Quomodo? Quando?” The seven rubrics designated in this maxim seem to contain all the essential momenta which are required in the list of the complete image of a disease. May I be allowed, therefore, to attach my remarks to this scheme with the desire that this hexameter. which was formerly used only by theologians, may now be also impressed on the memory of home opaths and be put to use by them. 1. Quis? — As a matter of course the personality, the individuality of the patient, must stand at the head of the image of the disease, for the natural disposition rests on it. To this belongs first of all the sex and the age; then the bodily constitution and the temperament ; both if possible, separated, according to his sick and his well days i.e., in so far as an appreciable difference has appeared in them. In all these peculiarities whatever differs little or not at all from the usual natural state needs little attention; but everything that differs in a striking or rare way therefrom deserves a proportionate notice. The greatest and most important variations are here found mostly in the states of the mind and spirit, which must be scanned all the more carefully, if they are not only sharply distinct , but also of rare occurrence and, therefore, correspond to only few remedies. [...] 2. Quid? – […] Homeopaths can make only a very limited use of the great advance made by the dominant school in diagnostics, since their generality excludes every special direction as to the suitable remedy. […]

Letter from the pen of Boenninghausen

Vol 1, Issue 3 12

Here I can only say so much about it: a-That the most penetrating and most indubitable diagnostic as offered by the best allopathic manuals is rarely if ever sufficient for the Homeopath, so as to anable him to make a sure selection of the remedy, and that: b-Such a diagnostic at most, and even then not always , may serve to exclude all those remedies from the competition which do not correspond with the common genius of the disease, but seem to act chiefly on other parts of the organism. 3. Ubi? —The seat of the disease […] deserves to be more particularly emphasized, as it frequently furnishes a characteristic symptom, since almost every medicine acts more and also more decidedly on certain particular parts of the living organism. […] Of course, the exact individualization of the ubi is most necessary in local ailments. Every Homeopath knows from experience how necessary it is, e.g., in treating toothache. to select a remedy which in accordance with its provings on healthy persons has shown its action on t he especial tooth to be treated. Among the most striking and decisive phenomena in this respect we should especially number the sores on the upper side of the joints of fingers and toes, which under allopathic treatment frequently prove very obstinate, and not unfrequently become malignant , and necessitate an amputation, and, as I had an opportunity of witnessing here in two cases, may even have a fatal result. Every Homeopath knows the efficacy of Sepia in these ulcers of the joints, which have no otherwise distinguishable features when this remedy is taken internally; without any external medication it will have a sure effect . Medicines which correspond to similar ulcers on other parts of the body in such cases are utterly useless. 4. Quibus auxiliis? – […] the concomitant ailments are to be regarded when we select a remedy according to the motto: Similia Similibus. Thence it is evident that the rare, striking and peculiar symptoms which present themselves demand a more prominent place than the common ones, because on them chiefly though not exclusively the similitude depends. From this it naturally follows that the value of such concomitant symptoms for the purpose intended varies widely. But it would too far transcend the purpose of this contribution if I should adduce and explain all the categories of value.

I shall therefore limit myself to the presentation of the most important points here involved: First of all, those symptoms which are found in almost all diseases may be left out of our count, unless they manifest themselves in a striking manner. The same obtains as to those ailments which are wont to appear as constant concomitants or at least as usual in the disease under consideration, unless they should be distinguished by some rare peculiarity and in this respect offer something characteristic. On the other hand, all those attendant symptoms should be carefully noted which a-Rarely appear in connection with the leading disease, and are, therefore, also found rarely among the proving; b-Those which belong to another sphere of disease than the chief ailment, and c-Lastly, those which have more or less of the characteristic signs of one of the medicines, even in case they have not before been noticed in the present juxtaposition. Now if besides this among the last mentioned concomitant symptoms there should be one or another in which the genius of one of the remedies should be plainly and definitely portrayed, so that it would be plainly pointed out, this one symptom thereby would acquire such an importance that it would even outweigh those of the chief ailment, and may then be at once considered as the most suitable. Such a symptom would be included among those which Hahnemann calls “striking, strange, unusual and peculiar (characteristic) signs, “and which are then “almost alone to be considered” because they preeminently give to the whole disease its individual character. […] 5.Cur? - The causes of diseases are most generally and, indeed , very properly divided into external and internal. The internal causes properly refer only to the general natural disposition, which in some cases amounts to a peculiar supersensitiveness ( idiosyncrasy). The external causes or occasional causes embrace everything which, where there is such an internal disposition to disease, may produce disease. The general natural disposition which is also called the proximate cause, really belongs to the first question (Quis?) which respects the individuality of the patient. It only belongs here in so far as the consequences of a former disease may have modified the original natural disposition, and thus it deserves mention. The occasional cause, however, is the matter with which the present question occupies itself and which deserves to be more closely considered.

Vol 1, Issue 3 13

As to the natural disposition notified through previous diseases, this either depends on the miasmatic-chronic nature of those diseases as yet unexterminated, among which in agreement with the teachings of Hahnemann many homeopaths even at this day count psora, syphilis and sycosis. or it is derived from the remains and after- effects of acute diseases, which when they do not belong to the former, as is frequently the case, constitute the numerous class of medicinal diseases or poisonings. Not unfrequently, however, we meet with cases where both these momenta have cooperated to undermine the natural health, thus producing a monster of a disease which is even more deeply inrooted and more difficult to combat. 6.Quomodo? – If we compare the lists of symptoms of the medicines which have been proved somewhat fully, even a superficial survey will show that we find in almost every one of them the general indications of almost every disease; headache, colic, pain in the chest, diarrhea, constipation, as well as dyspnea, pains in the limbs, fever and cutaneous ailments, etc., are in no case quite absent. But if we study these indications somewhat more closely, with respect to the special parts of the body and the different sensations, then, indeed, differences will appear, and we frequently discover symptoms which appear more or less frequently in one remedy and are totally lacking in another. But the number continues too large to bring the decision to a sure and indubitable point, and we soon feel the need of securing additional points in order that we may find the true and suitable simile among the competing medicines. But the Quomodo with the Quando generally solves the riddle in the most satisfactory manner, and not only removes every doubt , but also furnishes the proof for the solution which we may have before supposed to be the right one. That in such investigations and comparisons we must also, as in what precedes, occupy the special standpoint, is a matter of course. It is not sufficient, e.g., to merely consider motion in general in contrast with rest in the body, or in the part affected, we must also consider incipient and continuous motion, as well as the different kinds and degrees of motion. The same applies to lying down, we must not only consider the kind of position (on the back, on the side, doubled up, horizontal, but also aggravation or improvement in the parts affected by lying on the painful part, or the part not painful; all this is to be found out accurately and adapted to the remedy. Quite a prominent part in this rubric is occupied by the partaking of food and drink, and this not only in diseases of the digestive organs, but also in fevers and other internal and external affections.

But especially the dislike or the desire for particular kinds of food and drink, and more especially also the change of condition after partaking of one or another article of food that often gives the most important hints as to the medicine to be selected. All experienced Homeopaths have therefore always given the greatest attention to this subject, and it is very much to be desired that whatever different persons have discovered in this direction should be collected and published. It was mentioned above, in passing, that even negative signs, so far as they belong to this rubric, should not be neglected. An example will show best what is meant by this : when a patient, for whose condition Pulsatilla seems suitable according to the five preceding questions, feels best while at rest in a warm room, while he feels uncomfortable in the open cool air, and also is fond of fat foods and bears them well, or offers other peculiarities which are in conflict with the characteristics of Pulsatilla, this would give an urgent cause to doubt the applicability of it to his case and to look for another remedy which also in these points corresponds with the symptoms. 7.Quando? -[…] Homeopathy intends something quite different in this question, having nothing in common with what precedes. But it is concerned with two momenta which have an immediate effect on the choice of the remedies, namely: a) - the periodical return of morbid symptoms after a longer or shorter cessation, and b) - the aggravations and alleviations depending on the time of the day. These two will require but a few words. The periodical return of morbid phenomena often coincides with periods of time which carry with them particular occasional causes. Among these are to be numbered the menstrual ailments, as well as those which are conditioned by the seasons, the weather, etc. Where such definite secondary causes cannot be discovered, and where as is mostly the case, the attacks are not closely bound to any sharply defined periods, they have no therapeutic value for homeopaths as they lack the quality of a useful indication. But of the greater importance are the aggravations and alleviations at particular times of the day, and this with respect to those which refer to single symptoms as well as those that refer to the general health. In this respect Homeopathy possesses a great and valuable treasury of well proved experiences which are being more and more enlarged by careful observations. For there is hardly any disease, from the malignant internal fevers down to local ailments, in which during the different times of the day there doesn’t manifest itself a more or less decided and distinct aggravation or alleviation. […]

Vol 1, Issue 3 14

As Boenninghausen had formerly corresponded with Thaer and Schwerz and later with Sprengel, Koch, Link, Decandolle, etc., so since 1830 he had regularly and constantly corresponded with Hahnemann himself and with Stapf, Gross, Muhlenbein, Weihe, etc., till their death. After the decease of the venerable founder of our school and of the " Veterans of the Old Guard," he continued his correspondence with the celebrities of this science both in his native land and in foreign parts. In the year 1848, he instituted a yearly assembly of the homoeopathic physicians in Rhineland and Westphalia; this continues to the present time. In consequence he was elected member of most of the homoeopathic societies still in existence, as well as of the few that have already passed away; the Homoeopathic Medical College at Cleveland (North America) made him Medicines Doctoris by a diploma dated March 1st, 1854, and the Emperor of France appointed him a knight of the Legion of Honor, April 20, 1861. In spite of his having already entered on his 78th year, his health, thanks to Homoeopathy, leaves nothing to be wished for, and his mental as well as his physical powers permit his constant activity in a science to which he has dedicated the remainder of his life of continued action. Of his seven sons two have followed the example of their father. The older (Carl, born November 5, 1826,) has for several years been living at Paris, and, indeed, in the most prosperous surroundings, having married the amiable adopted daughter of the highly respected widow of Hahnemann, with whom he lives, and by his access to the library legacy of this celebrated man he will soon be able to communicate to his colleagues much of interest from the manuscripts and diaries left behind. The younger son (Friedrich, born April 14, 1828,) had first entered the judicial career, and after completing his studies at the University, he had passed with honor through the first two examinations, first for the Auscultatur and then for the Referendariat; when he determined to devote himself to the medical career. He accordingly passed through the required university course in this department and through the official examination. As is right and proper he desired first to see with his own eyes the success achieved by both schools before he will decide for the one or the other. The result is even now, however, no more a question, and Boenninghausen may confidently count on having two thorough and faithful successors in Homoeopathy, as he also, from his other five sons, has only joy, such as is rarely the portion of a father of so large a family.

This is the image of the long and rich life of our excellent Boenninghausen, as he himself sketched it down, full of thankfulness to fate which preserved him from external misfortune, and full of the highest reverence to our teacher and master, to whose grand creation he consecrated half of his life. From the moment when he saw his shattered health restored by means of the then little known Homoeopathy, he vowed to himself that he would study the new curative method, in order to be able to work for its diffusion. And how well he fulfilled this vow ! Surely not in the manner of most men, but with an unselfishness and strength of character such as is found but rarely nowadays among men. Having received a truly classic education, intimately familiar with the natural sciences, he found no difficulty in spite of his advanced age in acquiring the necessary medical knowledge to successfully begin the study of Homoeopathy. Soon he had received its principles “in succum et sanguinem" and with the clearness of his insight, he had felt that the Materia Medica of Hahnemann forms the basis and most important element of the whole of Homoeopathy. In consequence he made this domain the almost exclusive subject of his studies. With what zeal and with what success he devoted himself to it is shown by his extensive, exceedingly successful practice, as well as by his many literary works and labors. His knowledge of the effects of the remedies became ever more enlarged and deep, so that after the death of Hahnemann there was no one who could vie with him in this knowledge. Let’s see his deep knowledge of the Materia Medica reading a short paragraph with an advice to his friends the hunters and also to the pediatricians as regards a detail of the action of Borax. It was published in the Allg. Hom. Zeit. Vol 53: “[…] No less characteristic appears to be symptom seven with respect to being violently frightened at a shot, even when heard at a distance, and I only mention it, as it were, in passing, because, according to my experience, it is an excellent remedy for hunting dogs who shy at a shot, a fault which, as my colleagues who are fond of hunting-dogs know, occurs not infrequently and is difficult to correct. But there are also children who shrink at every shot and have a great and unnatural fear from it. The over-great fear of thunder also would seem to belong here.” .

Vol 1, Issue 3 15

Thus our departed friend labored for half a century with restless activity for our Homoeopathy with an energy which belongs to a man who has devoted his life to a holy truth. As such he considered the doctrine of Hahnemann, as a precious inalienable jewel, which must be carefully cherished and guarded from every impure admixture. […] He would not deviate an inch from the doctrine and rules of Homoeopathy, and only within it and through it he thought and found the way for its development and perfection. As such a rule he also viewed the minimizing of the dose and its rare repetition. In consequence, during his last decennium he used only the high potencies, usually the 200th, prepared by Lehrmann in Schoeningen. He did not endeavor to theoretically explain the efficacy of these minimized doses, but he endeavored to prove it by brilliant successes. We would here only mention the cures of animals communicated by him in the last volume of this journal; these he told in the most unassuming manner, but they indubitably prove anew the excellent efficacy of these high potencies. He combatted the principle laid down by many Homoeopaths, that acute diseases called for stronger doses than chronic diseases, and showed the inconclusiveness of this assertion by his many cures of croup with these same high potencies; the same fact has also been lately demonstrated in many cases by practice. This operation with such very small doses is not a matter for everybody to indulge in, for it requires a special and exact knowledge of remedies, such as the deceased possessed and such as not everybody else has at his disposal. […] In this manner Boenninghausen, following in the footsteps of the Master, has benefitted Homoeopathy by confirming and perfecting it; and by this means he has contributed not a little to the more general reception of the homoeopathic doctrine. […] Seldom, therefore, have the leisure hours of a learned man given birth to a fairer work than the one left us by the deceased, namely: "Notes to the Aphorisms of Hippocrates." This forms a treasury of his learning and classic culture, and a testimony to his unassuming modesty. These qualities, indeed, were the ornament of his whole life and activity. He never desired to impose with the fullness of his knowledge, nor to impose on others his convictions, no matter how fully he was permeated by them. […] Never an expression or a word flowed from his pen which in any way violated social propriety or the respect due to a colleague. Chivalrous in the true sense of the word, he hated all discord, and he early accustomed himself to honor the merits even of his opponents.

Very often in our extended correspondence with the deceased we had occasion to admire, yea, to be amazed at his mastery in this respect. Distinguishing clearly, even to a hair's breadth, was his diagnosis of the remedies, and this was not based on mere external and secondary symptoms, but it seized upon the internal and the totality of the effects of the remedies. A brilliant example of this he gave, in his parallel between Causticum and Calcarea, contributed to this journal. He was well aware of the fact, that a number of those Homoeopaths, who by all means wish to reform Homoeopathy, without possessing the knowledge and the true comprehension of the subject necessary thereto, were opposed to his endeavors, and in many ways defamed him; but neither reviling nor sarcasm were able to turn him from the path after he once had seen it to be the right one. From the beginning of his activity for Homoeopathy he stepped in the footsteps of Hahnemann, and he followed the same path most strictly and conscientiously to his last breath. But he did not follow the maxims and doctrines of the master blindly or without free determination.

Document from Hahnemann that in case of disease he would nobody but Boenninghausen entrust his treatment

Honoring him above all and protecting him from every defamation, he, nevertheless, did not consider him infallible in every point, while he recognized his great discovery as without blemish and perfect. Therefore all his endeavors were expended toward making the practical side of Homoeopathy perfect and to facilitate its practice at the sick-bed. The greater number of his independent works, as well as his more numerous articles and treatises, with which he furnished especially Stapf's Archiv and our journal, especially aim at this one point. As the first and highest commandment in the successful homoeopathic treatment of a patient, he with Hahnemann considered the strict and exact individualization; the accurate examination of patients and the detailed sketching of the image of the disease, which he shortly before his death warmly recommended to all the younger physicians in a special treatise. Even in the last years of his life he published a second edition of his Therapy of Intermittent Fever, the first part of which has just now appeared in a totally revised and augmented form.

Vol 1, Issue 3 16

The energy of the respiratory organs steadily diminished, the oedema gradually spread over a larger extent of the lungs, the rattling and the stertorous breathing rose up higher and became louder. Notwithstanding there remained a pretty clear consciousness even to his dissolution, which took place almost imperceptibly after a steadily progressive diminution of the respiration, in a quiet and gentle manner, at 3.45 A. M., on January 26th. “Thus the dearly beloved head was taken from the midst of his family, the head around which all the members had gathered in joy and love; thus the aged champion of the only true method of curing, to which for half a century he had devoted almost all his powers, and who a few days before had still been so sturdy and endowed with youthful vigor of spirit, suddenly and unexpectedly lay before us a corpse. What feelings and thoughts surged within me as I again and again, and finally viewed the face of my good father, still so kindly and tranquil, even in death, for he had not only been my father but also a grand teacher and master. Both his science and his family have lost in him their most noble father!"

As in science so in general, he loved truth above all things; this shining pearl of his life was encircled by a rare honesty and gratefulness, amiability, and goodness of heart. And, as if heaven desired to reward these virtues already here, it granted him a long life, free from care, a sturdy health, and a vigor enduring even to an advanced age, and it also granted his desire for a brief and painless death-bed.

" It was only since the beginning of the last winter," as his son, Dr. Friedrich v. Boenninghausen, writes us, " that my dear father suffered from phlegm on the chest, causing from time to time an increased cough, and during the expectoration, which was loosened with difficulty, asthma. About New Year, owing to a cold, caused by the prevailing cold north-east wind, there was an aggravation, causing some apprehension. But owing to the excellent effect of the rightly chosen remedy, his health improved from day to day, so that he could again without trouble take up his customary occupation and manner of living. On Friday, the 23d of January, he seemed vigorous and complained of nothing. His appetite was good, his walk had agreed with him, and he could attend to his work and his correspondence without any exertion or fatigue. The greater was my surprise and grief when I was called next morning to my dear father and found that he had had a stroke. Even the first examination yielded a sad prognosis. He was completely paralyzed on his left side, and the whole left side of the body was without sensation or motion. More distressing yet was the state of the lungs; also no action could be perceived on the left side, so that the respiration was continued but with difficulty and weakly by the right lung. The pupil of the left eye was very much contracted and insensible to the light. Despite the congestion to the head, the sensory was almost undisturbed, so that he himself, with his customary acute distinction of symptoms, emphasizing clearly and correctly the characteristic signs, took part in the selection of the remedies and in his own treatment. Though the selected medicines very soon manifested their favorable action, and improved the paralytic symptoms, causing a beneficient warm perspiration, the state of the lungs did not allow us to entertain any serious hopes.

Boenninghausen’s signature

But this noble father will never be forgotten, we proclaim to the mourning family, to lamenting science. Even though his body may have returned to dust, his spirit will continue to live in his works, the memory of his life will be an encouraging example for all of us, and we all should determine to work just as sedulously, as honestly and as faithfully on this great creation of Hahnemann. May many such be found, so that the loss we have suffered may not be felt too keenly! And so receive, O, dear one, once more our heartfelt thanks for your faithfulness, your loyalty and your self-sacrifice and from us personally our thanks for your affection which in your great love you granted us. We knew how to value it and were proud of it. Rest in peace. — Meyer.

Vol 1, Issue 3 17

For us remain, for those who were his personal friends, a deep and abiding sense of a great loss, for the profession in general, the ripe fruits of his experience and scholarship in his published works, and the bright example of his busy life. […] The theories and speculations and system-making, which have charms for many Homeopathists, seemed to Boenninghausen to have but a secondary importance. He perceived that the matter of prime necessity was such a study of the Materia Medica as should bring out into bold relief the characteristic peculiarities of each individual remedy, so that the practitioner might easily and surely single out that remedy which might be most similar in its symptoms to the disease under treatment. To such a study he devoted himself. […] In the Allg. horn Zeitung {vol. 68, p. 133) is the

following: Pulsatilla was the remedy through which the late Boeninghausen was cured from a severe pulmonic disease, and which converted him to Homoeopathy. — Dr Gross. The undersigned is especially personally grateful to B., for through his labors alone was he enabled to establish the distinguishing characteristics of the remedies of our Materia Medica which are akin in their actions in comparative diagnoses. — Dr. H. Gross. Dr. Dunham, who was a great friend of Boenninghausen published the following in the American Homoeopathic Review for April, 1864: With deep sorrow we record the death of this distinguished physician. For many years he was a warm personal friend of Hahnemann. He was associated with Hahnemann's immediate pupils, Stapf, Gross, Muhlenbein, Hartmann and Ruckert, in those early labors which placed Homoeopathy on an immoveable foundation as a practical method, he survived an indefatigable laborer in the good cause, long after Hahnemann and his pupils had all passed away. To the day of his death he was in constant intercourse, by correspondence or through the journals, with all the earnest hard working younger homoeopathic practitioners. He was, therefore, the link connecting the past generation of the Master, and the active generation of today, at once the venerable relic of the former and a trusted leader of the latter. And now this link is broken. The last "Veteran of the Old Guard" has gone to his rest. The genial voice is hushed forever. The clear, serene and honest eye is closed. The sagacious judgment which so rarely erred, the ever active brain have ceased from their labors on earth. The kindly heart, whose even beat no selfish impulse ever quickened, pulsates no longer.

Boenninghausen monument in Muenster/Westphalia

He published also a " Repertory of the Materia Medica," and which is on the whole the best yet constructed. In these works Boenninghausen brings prominently into view, the great importance of the characteristic symptoms and the value of the conditions and concomitants of the symptoms, as marks of individualization. […] It’s interesting to see that Carrol Dunham (1828-1877) underlines the importance of Modalities and Concomitant symptoms that Boenninghausen gave to the search of the most similar remedy. I put some sentences from an article published in tha Allg. Hom. Zeit. Vol. 65, to see how important was for him to make clear the condition of amelioration or aggravation with REST or MOTION:

Vol 1, Issue 3 18

Among the former motions (stretching) we would also reckon extending and stretching oneself, which also has its own remedies indicated, i.e., Ammon. carb., Ran. bulb., and Rhus t. as also drawing up the limb, which frequently points to Ant. tart. , Rhus t., or Secale corn. Also lifting up the limb for which Arnica, Baryta, Belladonna, Ferrum, Kali carb, Ledum, Rhus t. and Silicea are suitable. Then especially for spraining in lifting for which Arnica, Borax, Bryonia, Calcarea, Cocculus, Graph , Ignat. , Lycop. , Natr. carb., Nux vom., Phosph. ac., Rhus t. , Sepia, Sulphur, and Silicea are indicated in the first place. All these belong here and they, together with some other remedies which though more rarely used, are still among those to be selected. […] The article is very long and we have not space for it, so you can read it in full also in the “Lesser writings” compiled by Dr. Bradford. We go on with the tribute to Boenninghausen written by Dr. Carrol Duhnam (1828-1877), New York,

“[…]But it may not be without its use to touch on one especial point which is generally left unnoticed by allopaths, because they know not how to use it, but which with us is used constantly, because it always shows a great influence on internal as well as external ailments and therefore deserves a great deal of attention as a necessary constituent of the simile. I mean the influence of motion and rest on the aggravation of diseases. But in addition it is necessary to note that the kind of motion also offers its additional indications. We have e.g., for aggravation when raising oneself: Aconitum, Belladonna, Bryonia, Ignatia, Nux vom., Opium, Rhus, Staph., and Sulphur, while aggravation from stooping down corresponds more to Alum., Ammon. carb., Arnica, Calcarea, Lachesis, Mang., Sepia , Spigelia, Thuja and Valer., although we may also hope for results from some of the other medicines, especially from such as have reciprocal actions when there is a Homeopathic suitableness in the other symptoms. Something Similar may be said about rising up, first from a seat for which Aconite, Apis mell., Caps., Conium, Fluor. ac, Lycopodium, Phosph., Pulsatilla, Rhus t., Spigelia, and then again from bed, for which Apis mell., Bryonia, Carbo veg ., Conium, Lachesis, Sulphur are especially appropriate. It is of course to be understood that the beginning of the motions as well as the rising up, and in the latter not least of all the aggravation after sleeping, and thence also numerous other remedies are to be considered. Besides this with both the first varieties it is to be noted whether the aggravation of symptoms comes at the time or after the time of rising from the bed or seat , because in both these cases, as has been mentioned above of motion in general, different remedies come into competition. Furthermore, it is to be noted that the kind of motion shown in an aggravation from stretching out the part affected gives an indication for Alum. , Calcarea, Colocynth, Rhus t., Sepia, Staph, Sulphur and Thuja and the motion of bending or turning of the same, Ammon. mur ., Cicuta vir ., Ignatia, Kali carb., Lycopod., Nux vom., Spigelia, Pulsatilla and Spongia, with the latter there is besides a considerable difference whether this bending takes place in an outward direction (Capsicum, Causticum) , or inwards (Ignatia, Staphysagria) or backwards (Calcarea, Kali carb, Pulsatilla, Sepia, Sulphur ), or sideways (Belladonna, Natr.Mur., or forwards ( Coffea, Thuja), or finally, from maintaining a bent position (Hyosc., Spongia, Valer).

who visited Boenninghausen in Germany receiving teachings and friendship: […] When the high potencies were first introduced, he, at the instigation of Gross, began very cautiously to make experiments with them, first upon domestic animals and afterwards, when encouraged by the results, very cautiously upon his patients. Seven years was devoted to these experiments, the results of which were always recorded and carefully collated. Finally he became convinced of the superiority of the higher over the lower potencies and for twenty-two years, up to the time of his death, he used only the high potencies, at last exclusively the 200th in all cases. It was his custom to record every case for which he prescribed. In 1862, he informed the writer that he had just begun the 112th volume of his "Clinical Record." Of these 112 volumes, it is safe to estimate that at least eighty contain records of cases treated almost exclusively with high potencies. A rich mine of experience for the conscientious and intelligent explorer! Boenninghausen adhered closely to Hahnemann's practical rules in prescribing. He was careful never to repeat the remedy until the effects of the dose already given were exhausted. He thoroughly disapproved of alternation of remedies.

Vol 1, Issue 3 19

Especially was he interested in its development in America, a country from which he had received many tokens of esteem and admiration. On receiving a copy of the volume of "Transactions of the Homoeopathic Medical Society of the State of New York," published in 1863 by the Legislature of the State, he expressed great pleasure, using the following language: “I have been very agreeably surprised by the progress of Homoeopathy in your country. Your Government, indeed, does not cease to favor everything which is truly salutary to mankind. In truth it may well serve as a model for all other Governments. Its merit is all the greater, in that the calamity of war does not hinder it from extending a protecting hand over the public weal." Thus, active, earnest in every good work, filling with honor positions of high public trust, but devoting his faculties with equally conscientious fidelity to the cure of peasant and noble, indifferent to nothing that concerns the welfare of mankind, ever ready to point out to the seeker after knowledge the paths which he had himself so successfully trodden, thus lived, trusted, honored and beloved this distinguished physician and Christian gentleman who has now gone to his rest.— Carrol Dunham. In the same copy of the Review, 1864 Dr. Adolph Lippe, (1812-1888) Philadelphia, Pa, writes of his friend:

In a work on "Domestic Practice" by Lutze, Boenninghausen has been referred to as recommending a combination of remedies. This is utterly false. The writer has in his possession, and will ere long publish, a letter in which he utterly denies any such recommendation, expresses most hearty reprobation of the practice and gives a history of the origin of the proposition to combine two or more remedies in a single prescription. On resigning the offices which he held under the Prussian Government, Boenninghausen removed to Munster, where he built the house in which he lived when the writer visited him and in which he died.

In this house it was his custom to receive patients daily from 9 A. m. to 2 p. m. From 2 to 5 p. m., he spent in diversion, generally in walking about the suburbs, or along the beautiful promenade which surrounds the city, occupying the site of the former ramparts, or else in the Botanical Garden attached to the Ducal Residence. It was in these hours of relaxation that his genial social qualities, his wit and his full and varied knowledge were seen to best advantage. The writer will ever remember how, in course of one of these walks, Boenninghausen, having gently rallied him on some evidences of home sickness which he thought he had detected, gravely told him that he would take him to see a compatriot who resided in Munster. He accordingly led the way to the Botanical Garden, and there, with charming courtly ceremony, presented the writer to a stately Tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera), which he said he had imported from America forty years ago, and which he said he believed was the only immigrant from the United States in Westphalia. His interest in the history and progress of Homoeopathy in all parts of the world was very great.

The sad news has reached us that again one of the veterans of Homoeopathy has left. On the 26th day of February, the good and noble Baron Clemens Maria Franz von Boenninghausen, died at Munster, at the age of 79 years. How can we prepare a merited monument to our departed colleague ? Boenninghausen leaves as a legacy to posterity his manifold writings and elaborated works. Among these he has given us, before closing his earthly career, a lasting evidence of his vast learning and acquirements, of his very thorough appreciation and understanding of Homoeopathy, in his last and great gift, his "Aphorisms of Hippocrates," with notes by a Homoeopathist.

Boennighausen´s place in Muenster/Westphalia - it was destroyed in World War I

Vol 1, Issue 3 20

As one allopath will have in almost every prescription Quinine, the other a preparation of Iodine, and the third continually Natrum bicarbonicum, or some other modern fashionable remedy, so many a homeopath not unfrequently tries Aconite, Nux vom., Pulsat. or some other one of our polychrests without any sufficient indication. And where that is done, we may be sure that we find a routine practice, ”which in no way keeps pace with the advance of the science. In such cases the physician has devoted his leisure hours merely to pleasure, or filled it with an employment which is foreign to his profession. There is, however, for many physicians of both schools a frequent excuse in the fact that their means have been largely consumed by their studies at the university, and their means do not permit them to purchase a library which is sufficient to furnish them the requisite aids for progressive studies. The young homeopath has the additional disadvantage that the works which first appeared in his department of study are mostly out of print, and cannot therefore be purchased, and thus he is unable to study the gradual development of Homeopathy which is very instructive. The most indispensable works in this direction are the oldest works of the founder of Homeopathy, which later appeared in new, improved and more complete editions: these are especially the Organon, ”the Materia Medica Pura”, the Chronic Diseases, and we might also number among them the “ Fragmenta de Viribus Medicamentorum Positivis. As is well known, there are now five editions of the Organon, three editions of the first two volumes of the Materia Medica, two editions of the last four volumes, and also two editions of the Chronic Diseases, all published by the author himself. Only a person who is in possession of all these various editions, and can compare them with each other, will be able to see fully how in a few years (as was the case with botany through the labors of Linné) the material useful for Homoeopathy has been increased in a really unexpected manner by the genial Hahnemann , and has also been at the same time sifted, and how the first construction which showed some poverty gradually has gained a form which is astonishing. Some admirers of this new method of healing, which is still making such fine progress, might be interested in finding in these remarks on the Old and the New some points which are frequently overlooked in these times; and this may induce them also to devote to the subject some of their leisure hours. May these labors therefore find a modest place assigned to them.”

So overwhelming was the effusion of his learning throughout this work that even the medical journals of the opposition found themselves compelled to praise his profound abilities. Boenninghausen devoted his whole life to Homoeopathy and the further development of the science. As a friend and pupil of Hahnemann his unbounded admiration increased daily by his intercourse with him, and after the great Master's death he studied all his writings, and by these he became still more penetrated by and convinced of the truth of Hahnemann's observations and the great work accomplished by him. Following Hahnemann's doctrines and guided by them he developed Homoeopathy. His intimate knowledge of our Materia Medica is evident and indisputably proved in every page of his "Relations," “Repertory” and “Pocket Book”. His great conscientious accuracy is admired by all who consult his writings and valuable works, and those who, like myself, have had the honor and happiness of a delightful intimacy with him will often recall the charm of his ever instructive conversation, his unparalleled simplicity of manner and the goodness of heart of this most excellent man. I want to put here some words of Boenninghausen about the necessity of commitment of the homeopathic doctors. It is more important nowadays, being most of us involved in many interests that come from the environment, mainly Internet and TV that cause a huge loss of time. Time that could be used in a better way, such as study the truth written in the most important books and magazines of our Medicine. Let’s listen to Boenninghausen concerns: “It would be very unjust to object to a busy physician, because he, as a recuperation from his toilsome day’s work, in the evening may drink a glass of wine in company with his friends or play a rubber of whist . There may be, indeed, some recreations still more suitable for a man of education than the bottle and cards; still no one should be put under compulsion, but every one should be allowed to follow his own taste. But outside of these regular hours of recreation now and then, according as his time is more or less occupied by those seeking his aid, he now and then will find some moments of leisure, which his profession makes i t his duty to employ in enlarging and perfecting his knowledge of his self-selected calling. This would seem with the physician to be all the more a holy matter of conscience. as it is not only a fact , that his science is continually progressing, but there is also a very considerable part of the work which is a matter of memory and needs repeated freshening up. We may with considerable certainty recognize from their prescriptions those physicians who slight their calling.

Vol 1, Issue 3 21

While he leaves us all these gifts we may well ask ourselves what would be the best mode of preparing the monument which this great man has merited by the service he has rendered to progressive Homoeopathy, and thereby to suffering humanity? Our departed colleague has pointed out how he had wished to prepare the well deserved monument of our master—Hahnemann— and I here quote from one of his excellent articles, written soon after Hahnemann's death and translated for and published in the Homoeopathic Examiner, for 1846, Vol. IV. His text is on " The Three Precautionary Rules of Hahnemann," he says, "unless the signs deceive me, we are now at the commencement of a new epoch, marked by the death of our Master, whose genius hovers around us, an epoch when the excrescences shall have been chopped off and the genuine metal separated from the dross. Let us henceforth be more firmly united, all of us who desire the good, but let us exclude from our ranks with unrelenting severity anyone who sneers at the good cause, schismatics and all those who attempt substantiating opinions and hypotheses for careful observations. But let us at the same time honor the memory of the great reformer in medicine, by subjecting his doctrines, results of fifty years' observations to repeated and comprehensive examinations and trials, and by candidly communicating our experience one to another. This would be the best mode of preparing the monument which the great man has merited by the services he has rendered to suffering humanity." Boenninghausen by this illustrates and endorses the three precautionary rules of Hahnemann. The happy epoch which he then anticipated has not yet come, the conditions he points out by which this epoch may be ushered in with certainty, " the chopping off of the excrescences, the separation of the genuine metal from the dross with unrelenting severity," these have not yet been fulfilled, but unless the signs of the times deceive me, this condition is now being consummated, and the desired happy epoch must soon come. The three precautionary rules of Hahnemann, the results of fifty years' experience, and now also the rules of Boenninghausen, would form a good basis for experiments to be subjected to repeated and comprehensive examinations, and trials, and the results thereof candidly communicated one to another; by so doing we can prepare the best and lasting monument to this great and good man, and thus by a desired and decided union, meet his wishes and honor his memory by honoring the memory of our great master.

I want to close this biography of Boenninghausen with a letter of introduction to his last article, written for the Allgemeine Hom. Zeitung few days before his death. It’s a letter full of wisdom and advice about what to do and what to avoid in order to don’t damage our beloved system of Healing. Thank you so much dear Baron Clemens Maria Franz von Boenninghausen! “Honored Friend and Colleague! “By gìving the preference in the order of printing to my little article on the ‘Physicians’ Record’, and giving it a more prominent place in your valued Allgemeine homōopathische Zeitung, than the one naturally belonging to it, as an ‘appendix’, you have proved to me that you are in sympathy with the warning contained in it. I need not tell you, the zealous advancer and cultivator of our young and most promising science, how much your recognition of my endeavors in the same direction have rejoiced me. The more our pseudo-teachers increase, and the louder they raise their voices, to allow their wisdom to shine forth in a matter of mere experience, in which they themselves have not had a mature experience the more urgently is it, as I think, the duty of us old adherents who have, as it were, grown up with the science, not to let our hands hang down inactive, but unabashed to raise our warning, advising and instructive voices. “I have the full consciousness of this duty, because I am nearly the only one still remaining of the oldest pupils of our departed Master and because my days are numbered. For with the beginning of next March I shall be entering my 80th year, and you know that Pythagoras does not count people of that age among the living, even if they are not as yet dead. The brief time, therefore, which is still before me I must use as well as I may, I have, on that account, used the present long evenings for a new article for your journal, and herewith forward it to you. Under the heading of ‘Old and New Matters’, I endeavor to present from sources at our disposal a part of the progress made in our science since its origin, and which most of the younger homoeopaths are endeavoring to undo. Perhaps this may be the very time to again point to these undeniable facts, and to call the attention of our younger colleagues (and also perhaps of some of the older ones) to a chapter of the history of Homoeopathy which is not unessential. May these lines also find some impartial listeners!”

Vol 1, Issue 3 22

The literary works of Boenninghausen. "The Cure of Cholera and its Preventatives," according to Hahnemann's latest communication to the author. 1831. "Repertory of the Antipsoric Medicines," with a preface by Hahnemann with respect to the repetition of the dose of a remedy. 1832. "Summary View of the Chief Sphere of Operation of the Antipsoric Remedies and of their Characteristic Peculiarities, as an Appendix to their Repertory." 1833. "An Attempt at a Homoeopathic Therapy of Intermittent Fever." 1833. “Contributions to a Knowledge of the Peculiarities of Homoeopathic Remedies." 1833. "Homoeopathic Diet and a Complete Image of a Disease." For the non-professional public. 1833. " Homoeopathy, a Manual for the Non-Medical Public." 1834. "Repertory of the Medicines which are not Anti-Psoric." 1835. "Attempt at Showing the Relative Kinship of Homoeopathic Medicines." 1836. "Therapeutic Manual for Homoeopathic Physicians," for use at the sick-bed and in the study of the Materia Medica Pura. 1846. " Brief Instruction for Non-Physicians as to the Prevention and Cure of Cholera." 1849. "The Two Sides of the Human Body and Relationships." Homoeopathic studies. 1853. "The Horn. Domestic Physician in Brief Therapeutic Diagnoses." An attempt. 1853. "The Homoeopathic Treatment of Whooping Cough in its Various Forms." 1860. "The Aphorisms of Hippocrates, with Notes by a Homoeopath." 1863. "Attempt at a Homoeopathic Therapy of Intermittent and Other Fevers," especially for would-be Homoeopaths. Second augmented and revised edition. Part 1. The Pyrexy. 1864.

Vol 1, Issue 3 23

Key words: Hahnemann, Bönninghausen, repertories, consecutive remedies, olfaction of remedies, repetition of remedies, clinical cases Summary The relationship between Hahnemann and Bönninghausen was essentially a pure letter friendship, which is why the letters can be read today as documents of the relationship between the two. Studying the correspondence we are able to explore various aspects of their communication, such as the practical work in their offices, the development of repertories, the olfaction of medicines, the use of double remedies and, among other things, the homeopathic treatment of specific diseases. The supporting element of this friendship was homeopathy, or rather the common desire to treat sick people successfully with homeopathy. Introduction When Melanie Hahnemann died in 1877, Sophie von Bönninghausen had become the sole heir to Hahnemann's legacy. But already in 1870, when all Germans had to leave France, during the Franco-Prussian war of 1870/71, part of the Hahnemann legacy had been moved to Darup/Germany, to Bönninghausen's family estate. It was here that the German homeopathic researcher Haehl found Hahnemann's legacy. With financial support, among others from W. Boericke, Haehl was able to acquire this legacy. In 1926 he handed over the heritage to the Robert Bosch, who assured him to preserve the collection for the future. Nowadays we find Hahnemanns and Bönninghausens patient files and letters in the Robert Bosch Institute, Stuttgart, Germany. After studying the correspondence between Hahnemann and Bönninghausen, Haehl judged: "In the homeopathic world, next to Hahnemann, his most outstanding disciple and friend, the old man von Bönninghausen, will be remembered for all time". (R. Haehl, 1922, Vol. I) According to Haehl, the relationship between the two homeopaths can be considered an intimate and cordial friendship, which was carried by a high mutual esteem. Hahnemann's letters are characterized by a „…soothing warmth and the trust expressed in them is almost unlimited and could hardly be surpassed.“ (R. Haehl, 1921)

The relationship between Hahnemann and Boenninghausen was essentially a pure letter friendship, which is why the letters can be read today as documents of the relationship between the two. The supporting element of this friendship is homeopathy, or rather the common desire to treat sick people successfully with homeopathy. The patients and their life circumstances as well as the further development of homeopathy thus determined the beginning and development of the friendship. Hahnemann was open-minded towards Bönninghausen and involved him in the further development of homeopathy after he had proven his willingness and skills. Hahnemann accepted also the innovative activity which was promoted by Boenninghausen, unlike that of many other homeopaths. (M. Stahl 1997) The letters Especially the existing letters from the correspondence between Hahnemann and Bönninghausen, in the years 1832 and 1840, suggest that both had over many years a regular correspondence. Unfortunately many letters from Boenninghausen to Hahnemann got lost. Bönninghausen mentions a period of 13 years with a regular exchange of letters. Starting with Bönninghausen and Haehl, various authors have transcribed and published single letters from the correspondence between Bönninghausen and Hahnmann. In 1997 Martin Stahl published for the first time the complete transcription of all preserved letters from the correspondence of both homeopathic colleagues. At the end of Hahnemanns life the frequency of the letters written by Hahnemann decreased (excess of work), but the intensity of the letters and their friendship increased enormously until the death of Hahnemann.

The correspondence between Samuel Hahnemann and Clemens von Bönninghausen, by Dr. Ulrich FISCHER, LMHI President of Honor.

Vol 1, Issue 3 24

The contents of the letters In almost all letters we find Hahnemann commenting his fights with his German homeopathic colleagues from Leipzig, especially with Müller, Trinks, Griesselich and others. Like a red threat through all his letters Hahnemann expressed his anger and displeasure about the „Half“-Homeopaths of Leipzig who practised homeopathy according to allopathic rules. Again and again Hahnemann described the requirements of good homeopathic practise and emphasizes: „Only those medical doctors are able to leave allopathic practice who are financially independant, who have a philantropic heart and who are characterized by high self -control,….who would rather suffer from poverty than betray their conviction. „(SH 29.10.1830) In 1833 Hahnemann was isolated and very much alone in his fighting against the German „unpure“ allopathic homeopaths. Latest at this point Bönninghausen turned out to be his closest confidant and friend. Hahnemann wrote to Bönninghausen: „I know you are friendly taking part and sharing my grief … “ (SH 1833 without date) Boenninghausen supported Hahnemanns polarization: „ …there is no reason to mix homeopathy with allopathy,…the strong rules of Hahnemann always have been helpful to me.“ (CvB 25.11.1837) In this way, the jointly experienced resentment becomes one of many constituent characteristics of the relationship between the two. The practise of Hahnemann and Bönninghausen What can be said about the everyday practise from Hahnemann and Bönninghausen when reading their letters ? During his time in Köthen Hahnemann seldom talked about the number of patients he had to treat. From the year 1835 he started -in his letters to Bönnghausen- talking about retiring from work. It was the time when Melanie arrived in Köthen and Hahnemanns assistant Lehmann was integrated in Hahnemanns practise, taking more and more of Hahnemanns patients. Arriving in Paris Hahnemann started again working much more hours. He worked until 6:00 pm in his house, followed by house visits. It was the time when he called Bönninghausen to follow him to Paris, with the idea to share his practice with him. „…I wish to have you close to me, nobody else…only you would be here at the right place, everybody else would be just a load for me.“ (SH 18.9.1836)

„I am convinced that you heal faithfully and diligently and with more success than any of my followers. The only person who would get close to your dedicated work is my dear wife, who in a different room treats 30 to 40 poor people a day and does so happily, to my amazement.“ (SH 3.6.1839) In the years before 1836 Bönninghausen treated an increasing number of patients mostly during his business trips when he traveled as land registrar. Patients where waiting for him or followed him on his trips. He was a kind of country doctor, a traveling public doctor. Important was that for a long time he didn´t accept payment for his work. As baron, estate owner and government representative Bönninghausen was surely for many people an interesting person, besides the fact that the he offered a new healing system and included many noble and upper class people among his patients. The letters between Hahnemann and Bönninghausen prove that they treated patients from all social levels. Members of the nobless enjoyed certain benefits. Hahnemann mentions that Melanie took care of the poor patients. Boenninghausen describes in his letters mostly patients of higher social classes and asks Hahnemann for advice especially in regard to those patients. In regard to all other patients both discussed only the indicated remedies. Until 1836 Bönninghausen took care of an enormous amount of patients and had only little time for each patient. This means in contrast to Hahnemann who documented the symptoms in the words of his patients (in his patients journals), Bönninghausen simplified his documentation and mentions in a reduced way in his journals the rubrics: name , date, the name of the disease, individual aspects, success of the treatment and new symptoms. When traveling on country side Bönninghausen most probably had only a few minutes for each patient. Often he mentions just the remedy, the main- and concomitant symptoms and in most of the cases he never saw the patients again or maybe at an indefinite point in time. This was probably the reason why he prescribed consecutive remedies which he handed over to the patients so that they could take them one after the other. E.g. in 1835 Boenninghausen prescribed -among others- 1: Sulfur, 2. Mercurius sol.,3. Sulfur or 1. Phosphorus, 2. Sulfur, 3. Silicea or 1. Calcarea carbonica, 2. Placebo, 3. Lycopodium cl. From 1837 on forward he prescribed sometimes up to 4 or 5 successive remedies. In between such sequences of remedies he also prescribed single remedies. He informed his patients to take each medicine separately and defined the time interval between the remedies. Different to Hahnemann Bönninghausen documented the instructions for the time of taking the medicine and how to take it much less detailed in his journals.

Vol 1, Issue 3 25

In later journals, after 1851, he defined those instructions with much more detail: “1 dose every 5 th evening” or in acute diseases “1 powder every 5 hours”. Very early in his homeopathic career Bönninghausen proved his skills in the area of systematic analysis and methodology, which was repeatedly praised and emphasized by Hahnemann. When he started working on his repertories and later on with the „Genius“ symptoms he was able to recognize that many remedies have „relatives“ between them and follow each other in the homeopathic treatment. One reason why he was able to prescribe successive remedies with great success and -as he realized- with much shorter time of recovery. He was even able to predict which remedies follow each other. In this context we find a famous example for the relationship existing between the homeopathic remedies in the letters from both colleagues. Bönninghausen informed Hahnemann that after excessive mental exertions, too much sedentary occupation, and nightwatches in the course of the winter, caused by multiple official duties he developped a serious case of Ileus. He first tried to change his mode of living and his diet, but without help. He tried smelling Nux vomica C 30, afterwards he got adviced to take Nux vomica C 12 repeatedly, but in vain. He ended up in an aggravation. Also Cocculus 6th didn´t change anything. He then decided to sit down and read his Materia Medica until he would really find a SIMILAR remedy. Towards midnight he found THUJA. He smelled one globuli with C 30 and within 5 minutes the pains decreased, after 10 minutes he had a most copious discharge of the bowels, after a constipation of 13 days. Bönninghausen shared this experience in a letter to Hahnemann. It was also Hahnemann who proved the possibility to predict the remedies following each other in the cure of a patient. In his letter to his friend from 28.4.1833 Hahnemann recommended him -without knowing- the remedies Bönninghausen had already taken to cure his Ileus, to continue the treatment with Lycopodium and Conium.A few days after sending his letter to Hahnemann, Bönninghausen already had taken the homeopathically indicated Lycopodium and some time later Conium, each in a minimal and single dose,

…“after which every trace of this ailment forever disappeared.“ Bönninghausen expressed his astonishment: „ What a mass of observations and of experience was required, together with what a rare divining power, in order to give in advance (in a disease which had only been communicated as to its leading characteristics and as to the mere naming of the first remedy used) TWO remedies which only subsequently, through their symptoms, were so distinctly and determinedly indicated, as homeopathically suitable, that of all the other remedies none could come into competition and the result has already proved the correctness of the advice, before it had become known to me !“ (CvB, KMS, 205) In the same letter Hahnemann reports about his own threatening serious illness (presumably asthmatoid bronchitis) with shortness of breath, exhaustion, inability to work, drowsiness and presentiment of death. He healed himself by smelling Coffea, Calcium carbonicum and Ambra twice, each in C 30. This example shows that the fundament of their correspondence was certainly a friendly mutual affection, combined with a great interest in the further development of homeopathy through mutual learning. Therapeutical questions and common projects REPERTORY The letters between Hahnemann and Bönninghausen had an important function in the development of the first significant repertory. Hahnemann started 1817 the preliminary work for a repertory and informed his friend: „My repertory is just an alphabetical register, which only in the greatest perfection can offer many services in the search for the necessary remedy symptoms. It is far from being perfect. So it is not a pity that it is not published.“ (SH 16.1.1831) In Boenninghausen he found the perfect partner to continue this work. Especially Hahnemanns letter from 20.7.1831 shows the details of their collaboration.

Vol 1, Issue 3 26

Hahnemann talks about „the organizing spirit, the incredibly hard work and rare homeopathic eagerness“ of Bönninghausen. Bönninghausen worked 1830 and in the following years on his publication: „Contributions to the knowledge of the characteristics of all proven homeopathic remedies“ and had plans for an own repertory. He had sent Hahnemann his proposals and the progress of his work. In the letter from July 1831 and in the following years they discussed concrete questions. Hahnemann gave Bönninghausen recommendations in regard to the listing of the modalities and the titles of the rubrics. E.g. he suggested to add the rubric amelioration and aggravation by touching.Further they discussed the link of each symptom with the associated modalities or how to order symptoms and subrubrics in an alphabetical order in the repertory. Regarding the existing structure in Bönninghausens Repertories of the Antipsoric and socalled Non- antisporic Remedies, Hahnemann discussed the question: „What if the modalities were referred directly to the complaint?“ (SH 6.4.1834) Hahnemann also recommended -in various letters- to publish both repertories (antipsoric and non-antipsoric) in 1 volume. In his letter from 24.9.1843 Hahnemann praises the further development of Boenninghausen's repertory and in particular the classification of 4 different grades in the typesetting. Interesting are the recommendations of Hahnemann in regard to mind and mental symptoms. He suggested to add the rubric irresolution (different from changeable mood) and to think about giving sadness and despondency or despair each an own rubric or combining them under one rubric.Further he argumented that fear and fright can be classified under one rubric („fear consists of fright conceptions of our phantasy“). Further 2 different rubrics for irritability („general excitement of the nervs“) and anger should be included in the repertory. Hahnemann emphasizes that he gives only recommendations and no regulations to his friend ! In the same letter Hahnemann apologizes that he is unable to contribute more to the development of Bönninghausens repertory. „The exchange of letters with students, colleagues or patients, the amount of patients in my office, the contacts with my 4 daughters don´t allow me to invest more time. The only time I take for myself are twice 15 minutes for eating and 1 hour walking in my garden.“

He closes his letter from 20.7.1831 with a comment about the tonic and clonic convulsions of the Cholera and includes a little brochure about the homeopathic treatment of the Cholera and 1 dose of Cuprum met.C 30. Another example for a constructive collaboration in almost all their letters are the considerations about the classification of the antipsoric and non-antipsoric remedies. Boenninghausen asked Hahnemann repeatedly about more concrete criteria for the classification of sycotic and syphilitic remedies. „Alone excessive workloads prevented further recommendations of Hahnemann“. Bönninghausen asked Hahnemann about the classification of certain antipsoric remedies and Hahnemann answered in his letter from 11.12.1831: „As Natrium muriaticum and Natrium carbonicum can be considered antipsoric remedies, also Acidum muriaticum, Acidum phosphoricum, Ammonium carbonicum and muriaticum are antipsoric medicines …“ And on 9.3.1833 he recommended Boenninghausen to add Hepar sulphuris, Calcium carbonicum and Calcium sulphuricum among the antipsoric remedies. TWO MEDICINES PRESCRIBED AT THE SAME TIME Hahnemann informed Bönninghausen that he had planned to include the administration of two remedies at the same time in his Organon 5 th edition. From 1832 onwards also Boenninghausen had experimented with double remedies. Hahnemann wrote: „I, too, have started experimenting with two drugs that fit together and are administered at once, by smelling them and I hope for good success. In the 5th edition of the Organon, which is now to be published in print, I have also dedicated a paragraph to this method and thus brought it to the attention of the world.“ (SH 17.6.1833) When this change became known prematurely and was commented on negatively, he had the manuscript, which already had been sent to the printer, sent back and, out of concern about a possible misinterpretation by the allopaths and alloeo-homeopaths, he removed the mentioned paragraph…“to restore everything ad integrum…“.He said that even if a double remedy prescription would be advantageous for one or the other sick person, the disadvantages of making this type of prescription known to the world would clearly outweigh the advantages. (SH 15.9.1833)

Vol 1, Issue 3 27

Hahnemann admitted that he still had too little experience with this methodology and that he had only succeeded in 1 or 2 cases in this way so far... "too little for an apodictic formulation of a new doctrine." (SH 16.10.1833) He hoped to find Bönninghausens acceptance on this point. Later, in a letter to Carroll Dunham (March 25, 1865), Bönninghausen confirmed that he had worked with double remedies and that the successes were sometimes surprisingly good. He also confirmed that together with Hahnemann he came to the conclusion that such an innovation would be detrimental to homeopathy. "It was I myself who prompted Hahnemann to warn against the use of double remedies in a note to § 272 in the 5th edition of his Organon. Since that time neither Hahnemann nor I have prescribed medicines in mixtures." OLFACTION OF THE REMEDIES Boenninghausen received clear preference over other colleagues in the notification of new developments in homeopathy, for example in regard to the administration of the remedies by smelling the remedies. „…the correctly chosen medication should always be used only in the highest dilution for both chronically and acutely ill patients. In the most difficult and life-threatening cases of illness, even the mere olfaction of a humidified mustard seed-sized globule is preferable.“ (SH 13.5.1832) In the journals of Bönninghausen we find an „R“ when he applied his remedies by olfaction. In the same letter Hahnemann included the preface he wrote for Bönninghausens Systematic-Alphabetic Repertory of the Antipsoric Remedies, in regard to the repetition of remedies. THE REPETITION OF REMEDIES „I am not ashamed to admit that I did not know yesterday what experience could teach me only today. I am not ashamed of a doctrine that I was not able to put together more completely when I completed the Organon 4th edition. Through repeated attempts and experiences I am now able to tell the medical world that it is not necessary to administer only one single dose of the medicine (for acute and chronic diseases) and let it take effect until another remedy is needed, as described in § 242 and following, but that it is often necessary and of great advantage to administer several doses of the same medicine before another medicine is needed ….especially in chronic, long-term diseases and diseases complicated by incorrect treatment…“ (SH 13.5.1832)

In 2 consecutive letters he still added a few sentences to his preface: For example in the letter from 15.6.1832 he points out that in the treatment of chronic diseases with Sulphur, it happens again and again that despite the similarity of symptoms, patients react with Sulphur symptoms. When this happens, Hahnemann recommends a break and a dose of Nux vomica C 30, which should act for 8-10 days and afterwards to continue with Sulphur again.If this is not successful, and especially in desperate cases where Sulphur has already been administered allopathically in large doses, the patient should be given a single dose of Mercurius metall. C 30 to make his life energy sensitive to Sulphur again. But then only by smelling it. „Don´t laugh about me that I ask you to add a third comment to the mentioned preface. „Only recently I have been able to convince myself that even the most serious cases of chronic illness can only be overcome by olfaction of the medicine. And this in an incredibly short time. I promise that it will be the last thing I bother you with this preface.“ (SH 21.8.1832) A NEW SYSTEM OF DYNAMIZATION (Q-Potencies) In his last letter to Bönninghausen from April 24, 1843, Hahnemann added 2 cured cases. "In this enclosure, which I preserved as well as many other letters from him with the utmost care, he communicated to me at my request two of his latest cures." (CvB, KMS 796) From the following descriptions of the remedy administration one can conclude that the "well-kept secret of the Q-potencies" was known to Bönninghausen. (K-H. Gypser preface KMS) In the way Hahnemann prescribed Belladonna and Hyoscyamus to a 14-year-old girl, we recognize Hahnemann's recommendations from the Organon 6th edition for the use of Q-potencies. Hahnemann used first Belladonna and Hyoscyamus C 30, using the dose of one little pellet as the lowest dynamization, but that besides this, the single pellet was dissolved in seven tablespoonfuls of water and shaken, and of this solution one tablespoonful was stirred into a tumblerful of water, and from this only once a day (in the morning) a teaspoonful was to be taken. After a few days there was taken from this first tumblerful one teaspoonful, and this was stirred into a second tumblerful of water……increasing by one spoonful every day…“

Vol 1, Issue 3 28

Bönninghausen wrote: "Of the other remedies used in these two cures (sulphur, mercur s. and acid. nitricum), new dynamizations are used, which will be described in the next edition of the Organon. The peculiar preparation of which is known to me and which requires less time and trouble, but essentially presents our present high and highest potencies, but having given my word of honor, I am not as yet at liberty to publish the same.“ (CvB, KMS 796) MISCELLANEOUS As soon as Hahnemann learned about Bönninghausens publication „Homeopathy, a reading book for the educated non-medical people“ he recommended this book instead of the Organon to his patients at the beginning of their homeopathic treatment. „I can´t tell you how much I enjoyed reading this masterpiece…God bless you, your beloved family and all your descendants for this wonderful book.“ (SH 11.2.1834) An example for the fact that Hahnemann continously reconsidered his specifications we find in his letter from 16.3.1831. He informs Bönninghausen that besides coffee and tea no other type of food is capable to disturb the homeopathic treatment or the effect of high potencies. Each case and recommendation should be adapted to the individual situation. Sometimes he considered regular walking or movement more important than any diet In his letter from 30.6.1834 Hahnemann commented the plans of G.H.G. Jahr to publish a repertory which contains references to the proving symptoms. „Only a dictionary of symptoms will give more complete information to the prescriber…“Bönninghausen ansers „I am glad you agree with the plans for a new repertory, published by Jahr. Hopefully all that which has proven its utility in the practice will be marked with a special icon…“. „The lack of a repertory is the main obstacle for a wider dissemination of our doctrine,...a complete and useful symptom lexicon for easy reference would facilitate the access to homeopathy for every occupied physician…“ (CvB 9.7.1834) Boenninghausen had planned to visit Hahnemann on the 10.of august 1834 in Köthen. But official business prevented this visit. „Really, there is no existence more miserable than that of a civil servant…“ He was very unhappy to miss Hahnemanns birthday. His birthday wishes: „god save you for us and all mankind for many more years…“ (CvB 7.8.1834)

In the same letter he announces the publishing of the repertory of the non-antipsoric remedies and complained that his overview of the main sphere of action of the antipsoric, antisycotic qand antisyphilitic remedies and their characteristics was not included in Jahr´s Handbook. He was disapointed about the nonconformity of the overview and repertory in Jahr´s Handbook and critized the printing mistakes and remedy mistakes. When Hahnemann received from Bönninghausen the second part of his repertory, he answered: „With pleasure and admiration for the unbelievable effort you have put into the elaboration of the apsoric medicines, I received the second part of your repertory…“. „I thank you very much for this beautiful gift…“ „…in the preface you have perfectly described its application in the practice…“ (SH 22.5.1835) In his letter from 25.11.1837: Bönninghausen responds to Hahnemann's invitation to move to Paris and reports about many illnesses in his family. „Fate imposed many things on me that caused me much grief and worry and a lot of sorrow. Homeopathy always helped and even my 2 year old child who was thought to be lost is now gradually recovering. You can imagine that under these circumstances my wife does not want to know about my departure to Paris.“„The old luck, which I have in the practice of homeopathy, has not left me and also this I can only attribute to the care with which I always make the exact choice of the medicine. I give only the smallest dosage in the most economical repetitions. I have often found that when, due to larger and more frequent dosages, an improvement was forced, especially in chronic diseases, this improvement was not permanent. “Which diseases were mentioned more often in the letters of Hahnemann and Bönninghausen The most discussed disease was the Cholera which was in the focus of many homeopathic medical doctors in 1830 and the following years. Bönninghausen was among the first colleagues who received Hahnemanns brochure: „Curing of the asiatic cholera and the protection from it“. (included in a letter from SH 20.07.31 together with 20 gran Cuprum met. C 30). Boenninghausen got regularly informed about cures and modifications in the homeopathic treatment of the Cholera. In regard to the homeopathic treatment of bone ulcers Hahnemann confirmed: „Unfortunately bone ulcers heal only slowly and with difficulty. Angustura has helped again and again. One group with this disease is helped by Calcium carbonicum and Hepar sulfuris, another more by the acids like Acidum phos., Acidum nitric. and Silicea. Asa foetida has rarely helped me. With completely flabby bodies one must not forget Arnica.“ In the treatment of tinea, Staphisagria in high potencies rarely left me in the lurch.“ (SH 23.10.1840)

Vol 1, Issue 3 29

Both colleagues discussed also the homeopathic treatment of gastroenteritis (the German Ruhr), carcincoma of mamma, whooping cough, tumor of bones, epileptic convulsions, tuberculosis, metrorrhagias, influenza, cancer of lips and others. Hahnemann always praised Bönninghausen for his cures and had no problems to describe own failures. Both complained repeatedly about the problematic treatment of cases with allopathic pre-treatment or about failures in homeopathic pre - treatments. „Also I received vastly spoiled patients who had been treated with homeopathic remedies in too big and too often repeated doses who are much more difficult to cure than patients mistreated by allopathic measures.“ (SH 8.2.1835) Both colleagues shared their homeopathic experiences regularly. Bönninghausen: „Last winter and spring I had the good fortune to cure some cases of tuberculosis. My experience was, that those patients who received -according to their symptoms- Nux vomica, later on got cured with Phosphor in repeated dosis,…..and those who first had received Pulsatilla got cured with Stannum also in repeated dosis…“ (CvB July 1832) „Intermittent fevers I treated in different regions. Often they need various remedies. At the moment I use Calcarea carbonica, Carbo vegetabilis and Natrium muriaticum… (CvB July 1832) Hahnemann: „… also in our region we see cases of intermitent fevers. Initially I had success with Carbo vegetabilis, at the moment I prescribe more often Natrium muriaticum….(SH 13.5.1832)„Quite interesting is your successful treatment of the cataract with Magnesium carb. And the tapeworm with Phosphor. Thank you very much for this information. I am struggling with cases of young patients with tuberculosis -mistreated with bloodletting. Sometimes Sulfur, Pulsatilla and Stannum are helpful. Did you find something better ?“ (SH 21.8.1832) Also the cases with epilepsy and its manyfolds forms, especially the old ones cause many problems. Olfaction on Sulfur, Calcarea and Silicea sometimes helped.“ (SH 21.8.1832) Bönninghausen often treated animals with homeopathy -especially when he was traveling on countryside and as farmer on his country estate. Bönninghausen informed Hahnemann about the successful homeopathic treatment of chronic nasal mucus of military horses. „At least there is no accusation of conceit.“ (CvB 9.7.1834)Hahnemann answers excited: „the homeopathic treatment of animals must bring glamour and support to homeopathy…“ (SH 21.8.1834) In the letter from 7.8.1834 Hahnemann shared his experience with epidemic remedies for the gastrotenteritis they experienced during those weeks. „Sulfur when the diarrhea was the leading symptom and Ipecac.

and Nux vomica in the cases of vomiting plus diarrhea…only one case of Veratrum album…“ Boenninghausen seems to have been more in the role of a questioner or seeker of advice in regard to the treatment of his own patients. However, he was never rebuked by his master in his suppositions or ideas, but rather confirmed without exception. At least until 1835 the discussion of therapeutical questions, it means the desire to cure their patients, was the main motivation of their exchange of letters. The essence of their friendship, language and communication Already in the beginning of their communication Hahnemann expressed towards Bönninghausen recognition for his ever increasing eagerness, his devotional love for homeopathy and especially his capacity to inspire other physicians for homeopathy. Another sign of his appreciation was the fact that on Hahnemanns suggestion, Stapf, the publisher of the „Archives“ invited Bönninghausen tu publish clinical cases in the „Archives“. Despite his self-doubts Bönninghausen submitted some cases and got the highest praise from Stapf and Hahnemann. He was not any longer competitor, but much more he belonged now to closest circle of outstanding homeopathic colleagues and was from this moment on member of the co-creators of the new doctrine. (SH 16.3.1831) As of 1831 Hahnemann shared more and more private matters with his friend. In between their discussion about the rubrics of the new repertory Hahnemann mentions „that he himself, as the founder of homeopathy, has to pay tribute to the old age“…and that he has „to delegate his work“…and „that homeopathy could not remain exclusively his own work…“ (SH 20.7.1831) In the following letters he communicated more every day and family matters. „Not even 1 hour remains to go for a walk…“I have to be content with my little garden at home…“ (SH 13.5.1832) Hahnemann did not inform his friend about the death of his first wife Henriette Küchler, but in his letter from 8.2.1835 -after talking about the regulation of the heritage for his children and grand children- he mentions the marriage with Melanie „an excellent lady of the purest morals, of many knowledge, bright mind and the best heart…for whom I feel the most perfect love…“.

Vol 1, Issue 3 30

After Hahnemann had setteled in Paris his encouragement was far more empathetic and personal towards Bönninghausen. „I was very pleased with your practical work, as you can imagine, but I am sorry that you are overburdened with patients, although I have just enough of that myself. We also need to be able to rest from this hard work, although it is very beneficial to the heart.“ (SH 23.10.1840) „Dear friend, …I repeat that we, that is to say I and my dear wife Melanie, have locked you and your dear wife in our hearts steadfastly and have kept the memory of you in friendship…“ (SH 1.4.1838) 1834 Hahnemann sent a bust from himself to Bönninghausen. Bönninhausen thanked Hahnemann with the words: „Dearest friend and benefactor, there is no hand in the world I would rather take than yours to thank…unfortunately I can only write the little cold word <thanks>. But I hope you are convinced that my heart is not cold and my eyes are not dry when I write these words. Thank you venerable wonderful father, my dearest, warmest thanks…“ (CvB 9.7.1834) Hahnemann answered: „…what have you, dear friend, done for our art ! I never flatter, and I don't flatter you either, when I confess with conviction that you, more than any other follower, have rendered outstanding services to our art.“ (SH 22.5.1835) The mutual welcome in their letters was always first the title of the person and afterwards Hahnemann called Bönninghausen: „Dear lord governer“ or „most dear lord governor“, „loyal friend“ or „friend and benefactor…“. Boenninghausen called Hahnemann: „Most esteemed lord courtier and afterwards loyal friend and benefactor“. In the friendship between both of them, Bönninghausen was the younger one and the student, but despite Hahnemanns celebrity, Bönninghausen was a noble person and lord governer and was more privileged. In this field of tension both always remained faithful friends. Hahnemann and Boenninghausen cultivated a scholarly friendship in the tradition of their time. For Bönninghausen values like dignity, reliability and diligence, love of truth as well as his merits for homeopathy, e.g. the common fight against allopathic doctors or „half-homeopaths“ were much more important to Hahnemann than a university degree in medical science. It was never important to Hahnemann that his friend was not a medical doctor . Hahnemann even asked him to come to Paris to practice homeopathy on his side.

He also suggested that Bönninghausen buys a doctoral degree in Germany to be able to practice in France. Further we know the testimony from Hahnemann for Bönninghausen. All that served to help him to pratice homeopathy in Germnay. Testimony (SH 1.9.1833) „Baron von Boenninghausen in Münster has studied my homeopathic therapeutic method so thoroughly and made it his own in such a way that he, as a perfect homeopathic healer, deserves such perfect trust that, if I myself were ill and could not help myself, I would not entrust myself to any doctor apart from him.“ SH, Cöthen, 1.9.1833 The fundamental element of friendship between the two was homeopathy and their desire to cure their patients successfully.Once Boenninghausen proved his eagerness and skills Hahnemann included him in the further development of his therapeutical method. He was literally a hope for the future of homeopathy. Hahnemann accepted also his innovative work for homeopathy. He specially praised him for the „conversion“ of allopathic doctors towards homeopathy. Hahnemann received from Bönninghausen recognition and confirmation for his life work. Especially after the loss of his first wife Henriette the friendship with Bönninghausen opened for him the foundation of a new strong relationship for a scientific discussion, for an exchange of their work experience with patients, the relationship with other colleagues or their private life conditions. In regard to the homeopathic practice, especially concerning the time of case taking and the administration of the remedies in their daily practice differences could be observed. But Boenninghausen had the advantage to refer to Hahnemanns work and could invest lots of time in the further practical development of homeopathy with new technics of case taking, case analisis and administration. There are various indications in their written communication that Bönninghausen was seriously trying to move to Paris. Among others in the letter from 3.1.1840. Bönninghausen writes that he tried twice (in Jena and Giessen) to obtain a doctorate and failed twice with his application.Because of these hurtful decisions he informed Hahnemann „that he lost the courage to repeat such a step for the time being. I have to wait for a more favourable moment or a happy turn of events for homeopathy in France before I can look forward to practising homeopathy next to you (Paris) and under your special guidance.. . “In the same letter he informed Hahnemann that through the successful homeopathic treatment of some distinguished people homeopathy experienced a significant upswing…“ and further „…that his homeopathic successes led more and more famous colleagues to ask him for his advice…“

Vol 1, Issue 3 31

Boenninghausen attached inestimable value to Hahnemann's letters to him. This resulted mainly from the fact that, through the recognition he received in these letters, he felt a duty to spread and defend the principles of Hahnemann's homeopathy. "I have full awareness of this duty because I am almost the only remaining eldest disciple of our immortalized master and because my days are numbered," (CvB KMS, 1864) Literature Bönninghausens Kleine medizinische Schriften (KMS), Hrsg. Klaus-Henning Gypser, Arkana Verlag Heidelberg, 1984 Bönninghausen, C.v., Systematisch-Alphabetisches Repertorium der Homöopathischen Arzneien, 1. und 2. Teil, Verlag der Coppenrathschen Buch- und Kunsthandlung, Münster 1833/35 Bönninghausen, C.v., Therapeutisches Taschenbuch, Ausgabe 1846, Verlag der Coppenrathschen Buch- und Kunsthandlung, Münster 1846 Haehl, R., Samuel Hahnemann, Sein Leben und Schaffen, Dr. Willmar Schwabe, Leipzig 1922, Bd. 1 Haehl, R., Neuaufgefundene Briefe Hahnemanns an Dr. von Bönninghausen, Homöopathische Monatsblätter 46, 1921 Hahnemann, S., Organon der Heilkunst 6. Auflage, Verlag Dr. Willmar Schwabe, Leipzig 1921 Stahl, M., Der Briefwechsel zwischen Samuel Hahnemann und Clemens von Bönninghausen, Karl F. Haug Verlag, Heidelberg, 1997

Vol 1, Issue 3 32

After Samuel Hahnemann (1755–1843) had developed the new healing system called homeopathy he saw the necessity for a different type of medicines. Due to his great knowledge in the field of chemistry and pharmacy it was easy for him to develop and prepare the remedies he needed, although this was a lifelong process for him. Hahnemann shared all these experiences with his students and colleagues. So, it is known that Clemens von Boenninghausen (1785–1864) being one of his greatest and most respected pupils was very well informed about Hahnemann’s process of preparing remedies.¹ In the beginning Boenninghausen prepared the remedies by himself just as demanded in the Organon, aphorism 265. He was also in favour of self-dispensing the medicines reasoning the simplicity of preparation, since the medicine is not a combined one and no technical support is needed if the raw material comes directly from a pharmacist². In later years Boenninghausen was in contact with the pharmacist W. Lehrmann from Schoeningen and he got all his remedies from him. After having found chemically pure Aluminum in Great Britain Boenninghausen had it potentized by Lehrmann and found it far better than all other preparations³. He also ordered the preparation of globules by a confectioner in a little bigger size than usual so that 17 to 19 globules in a row are one inch long and 100 pieces weight 3 grains⁴; they also should be light, simple to crush, absorbing easily the liquid and not being sticky⁵. In addition to that Boenninghausen explained that it is possible to keep the homeopathic medicine in stock, because they will not get spoiled and can be kept for years without losing their activity⁶. But more important to Boenninghausen seemed the potency question than preparation of remedies itself. He started using higher potencies than Hahnemann regularly, e.g. C 60 and C 120 and he started in 1843 to use C 200 for the treatment of animals. One year later he used the C 200 in severe chronic diseases and it can be read in 1857 that he is using this potency since years almost exclusively and also in acute cases⁷. In those days a tendency in using

Clemens von Boenninghausen and Homeopathic Remedies, by Heike Gypser, LMHI secretary for pharmacy.

higher potencies can be observed anyway: Semen Nikolaevich Korsakov (1789–1853) had introduced the so-called one-glass-method which made it possible to prepare higher potencies easily, and Caspar Julius Jenichen (1787–1849)⁸ with whom Boenninghausen was in contact, prepared very high potencies such as Chamomilla 4,000 and Arsenicum 8,000. Boenninghausen even knew about Jenichen’s 40,000 and Phosphorus 19,000⁹. Later Boenninghausen stated that he has seen clear effects with remedies prepared following Korsakov’s method. In addition to that he found that it is not possible to put Korsakov’s and Jenichen’s “remedies on one same level in regard to efficacy”¹⁰. Boenninghausen has written an essay about the potencies of Jenichen and he stated that the remedies are true centesimal potencies and that several cures had been possible only with Jenichen’s high potencies after the failure with the C 200. ¹¹ It is interesting to realize that Boenninghausen was also aware of the remedies prepared by Bernhard Fincke (1821–1906)¹² who was a pioneer in the manufacture of high potencies in the United States of America. Both have met during a meeting of the Zentralverein homoeopathischer Aerzte in Leipzig 1851 where Boenninghausen recommended to Fincke to go to America, “the promised land for homeopathy”, to complete his studies¹³. Boenninghausen wrote another essay entitled “The Appreciation of High Potencies”. Here he stated that Fincke’s experience is not contradictory to Hahnemann’s and he presents 19 theses about the use of high potencies including theoretical considerations¹⁴. Boenninghausen has made the experience that an excessive succussion during potentization can do harm¹⁵. It has to be said that high potencies are usually made without very strong succussions. Probably these and other experiences lead him to the use of high potencies. He remarked that the “high and highest dynamisations give the most benefit”¹⁶.

Vol 1, Issue 3 33

Finally, Boenninghausen had knowledge of a new type of potencies developed by Hahnemann (the Q-potencies) which was made public in the last edition of the Organon in 1921. Boenninghausen wrote in 1864 that he knows about a new type of dynamisations and that he “knows the peculiar preparation which does not cost a lot of time and trouble and they depict essentially our current high and highest potencies” but he has promised to maintain silence on it¹⁷. Concluding it can be said that Boenninghausen was not a great pioneer in the field of homeopathic remedy preparation but he was aware of the need of remedies of good standard, he was open-minded to use various dynamisations and he paved the way for the use of high potencies.

¹Boenninghausen, Clemens von. Die Aphorismen des Hippokrates. (Reprint) Goettingen 1979; p. 380. ²Boenninghausen, Clemens von. Die Aphorismen des Hippokrates. (Reprint) Goettingen 1979; p. 14–16. ³Boenninghausens Kleine medizinische Schriften (Ed. K.-H. Gypser) Heidelberg 1984 [KMS]; p. 530–531. ⁴Hahnemann used different sizes of globules but stated in Organon, aphorism 270 that 100 globules weight one grain. ⁵KMS, p. 451. ⁶Boenninghausen, von Clemens. Populäre Homoeopathische Zeitung 2(1856), p. 53. ⁷KMS, p. 363, p. 530, p. 778. ⁸The remedies of Jenichen were a bit controversial since they were made in secret an only Constantin Hering (1800–1880) who used them with great success knew about the preparation. This was made public in detail after the death of Hering. ⁹KMS, p. 658, p. 677. ¹⁰KMS, p. 268, p. 383. ¹¹Boenninghausen also did not accept decimal potencies. KMS, p. 661, p. 662, p.666. ¹²Fincke developed the very high potencies, the so-called continuous-fluxion potencies which are prepared without any succussion. This means the potentization occurs by a very heavy perturbation when the dilution takes place and this substitutes the succussion. ¹³Kluge, R. Dr. med. Bernhard Fincke. Allgemeine homoeopathische Zeitung. 155 (1907), p. 141–142. ¹⁴KMS, p. 675–688. ¹⁵Boenninghausen reported two cases of dogs having rabies. They died after the dog-owner gave the correct remedy but had succussed it too heavily. KMS, p. 407-–408. ¹⁶Boenninghausen, von Clemens. Die Aphorismen des Hippokrates. (Reprint) Goettingen 1979; p. 235. ¹⁷KMS, p. 797.

Vol 1, Issue 3 34

Boenninghausen Revival - A Chronological Treatise on History and Practice¹ , By Klaus-Henning Gypser

Introduction Clemens Maria Franz von Boenninghausen (1785 - 1864) who was cured by one dose of Pulsatilla C 30 followed four weeks later by Sulphur C 30 in 1828 by his botanical friend and homoeopathic physician Dr. Carl Ernst August Weihe (1779 - 1834) was one of the most prominent followers of Hahnemann. The founder of the homoeopathic healing art wrote in 1833²: “Government Counselor Baron von Boenninghausen of Muenster has studied and grasped my homoeopathic system of treatment so thoroughly that as a homoeopath he deserves to be fully trusted, and if I should be ill myself and unable to help myself I would not entrust myself to any other physician.”

Boenninghausen published a lot of contributions to homoeopathic literature. Unfortunately not all have been translated into English. He was the founder of two different lines of repertorial tradition: The arrangement taken up by C.M. Boger (1861 - 1935) in his “Boenninghausen´s Characteristics and Repertory” (Parkersburg 1905) which is based on his translation entitled “A Systematic Alphabetic Repertory of Homoeopathic Remedies” (Philadelphia 1900) of Boenninghausens´s “Systematisch-alphabetisches Repertorium der antipsorischen Arzneien“ (2nd Ed. Muenster 1833) The „Therapeutic Pocket Book“ (1st Ed. Muenster 1846) In the 19th century and early decades of the 20th century the Pocket Book was extensively used by the profession. Several editions in German, English and French were available. Some of the best American practitioners claimed in the 1920´s and 1930´s to solve difficult chronic case better with this repertory than with Kent´s. Even during the speedy decline of American homoeopathy Herbert Albert Roberts (1868 - 1950) published in 1935 „The Principles and Practicability of Boenninghausens Therapeutic Pocket Book“. In spite of this, the tradition to of practicing according to Boenninghausen was more or less forgotten especially in Europe including Germany.

Clemens Maria Franz von Boenninghausen (1785 - 1864)

Roberts, „The Principles and Practicability of Boenninghausens Therapeutic Pocket Book“

Vol 1, Issue 3 35

In 1979 the German publisher Ulrich Burgdorf made reprints of two of Boenninghausen´s works available to the profession: •Die Aphorismen des Hippokrates •Die Homoeopathie The first book being written in ripe old age contains a great many practical hints. Unfortunately it has never been translated into English. The second was compiled in his younger days and informs educated laymen and patients about homoeopathy. Both reprints were met with no great interest probably because of lack of direct methodological approach. In 1982 my teacher Dr. Will Klunker (1923 - 2002) of Heiden, Switzerland, became interested in Boenninghausen and after pointing out the “Lesser Writings” edited by Thomas Lindsley Bradford (1847 - 1918) requested me to prepare a collection of all of Boenninghausen´s original articles published in different periodicals, including those in English and French. This book, in chronological arrangement appeared in public under the title “Boenninghausen´s kleine medizinische Schriften” in 1984 and included the contributions Bradford had omitted. A close study of this over the next years was followed by a detailed insight into Boenninghausen´s method of case-taking and especially case-analysis as well as his mode of remedy application including intercurrent remedies etc. This led to the •use of the “Therapeutic Pocket Book” in my practice, and •reading of all of his other writings being obtained from antiquarian book dealers edition of an index to important subjects in all of his publications³ In 1983 a medical thesis on the life and work of Boenninghausen was published by Friedrich Kottwitz at the University of Berlin⁴. A study published two years later⁵ of the sources of our repertories inspired me to a comparison of Kent´s “Generalities” with corresponding rubrics of the “Therapeutic Pocket Book”. This showed that Kent´s repertory contains many entries from the Pocket Book. From 1987 until 1995 several works of Boenninghausen have been reprinted in Germany, e.g. his Repertory of Antipsoric Remedies.

During a seminar on repertories in Lucerne, Switzerland, in September 1991 I compared this method of repertorization with Kent´s and others. This was followed by an invitation of the “Schweizerische Aerztegesellschaft fuer Homoeopathie und Phytotherapie” (“Swiss Medical Society for Homoeopathy and Plant Therapies”, SAHP) to deliver seminars on the Boenninghausen method which started in 1992 and took place for several years. They included also the repertorization with the so-called Lieth card index repertory published in 1989. This covers 551 perforated cards and is based primarily on entries having 3rd and 4th grade in the “Therapeutic Pocket Book”, and the repertorial part of Boger´s “Synoptic Key”. Fortunately for German practitioners the publisher Bernd von der Lieth reprinted the original edition (1846) of the “Therapeutic Pocket Book” in 1985 on the occasion of Boenninghausen´s 200th anniversary. Thanks to the availability of this tool it was possible now to teach the so-called Boenninghausen method.

Lieth card index repertory

In February 1993 a group of 5 or 6 colleagues came to me to get instructed in regard to the Boenninghausen method. This led to the foundation of the “Boenninghausen Study Group”. Soon the number of attendants increased to 30 - 35. George Dimitriadis invited me to Syndey to present a seminar for his colleagues comparing Kent´s and Boenninghausen´s method in Spring 1995. As a consequence of this a co-operation with him and our Boenninghausen-Group resulted. In the year 2000 the revised edition of the Pocket Book entitled “Boenninghausen´s Therapeutisches Taschenbuch - Revidierte Ausgabe 2000” (Stuttgart 2000) was published as well as a corresponding software⁶. It included the •“Pocket Book” of 1846 and •all entries from other (later) works of Boenninghausen being in harmony with the general plan of the “Pocket Book” as well as •the additions Boenninghausen made up until his death that he sent to Carroll Dunham (1828 - 1877).

Vol 1, Issue 3 36

Until now there are four German editions of this revised “Pocket Book”. Starting in June 2000 Bernhard Moeller delivered many seminars in German speaking countries explaining the method of using the revised Pocket Book including its corresponding program.

title page “Revised Therapeutic Pocket Book”

In 1995 Raimund Friedrich Kastner published a materia medica compilation of Boenninghausen, using all works of Boenninghausen dealing with materia medica known to this date in one huge volume entitled “Boenninghausens Physiognomik der homoeopathischen Arzneimittel“. In the same year Martin Stahl made public a medical thesis on the letters between Hahnemann and Boenninghausen entitled “The Correspondence between Samuel Hahnemann (1755 - 1843) and Clemens von Boenninghausen (1785 - 1864)”. In the year 1997 Bernhard Moeller published a very detailed introduction into the methodology of Boenninghausen entitled “Einfuehrung in die Methodik Clemens von Boenninghausen´s“⁷. In the year 1997 during a meeting of the Boenninghausen Study Group in Darup, Westfalia, where Boenninghausen lived, his great grand-son Lothar von Boenninghausen presented to me the personal interleafed copy of a materia medica Boenninghausen had published in 1836⁸ and used until his death. It contained many handwritten additions from his pen. Our colleague Andreas Jansen took up the task and transcribed and edited this manuscript very carefully in 1999. It was published by Bernd van der Lieth⁹.

In 1998 it was again Raimund Friedrich Kastner who presented to the homoeopathic community a repertory compiled of all repertorial rubrics Boenninghausen had published in his various works¹⁰. In the same year the “Deutscher Zentralverein homoeopathischer Aerzte” invited me to present a paper on its 150th annual meeting about “The Basic Principles of the So-called Method of Boenninghausen“. Dr. Heiner Frei of Laupen, Switzerland, who was deeply impressed by the Boenninghausen method since my early seminars delivered before the SAHP made use especially of the Lieth card index and since 2000 of the software of the revised Pocket Book edition 2000. In consequence to his successful case-analysis by this method he published three very valuable books full of cases demonstrating the principle: •Die homoeopathische Behandlung von Kindern mit ADS/ADHS. Stuttgart 2005 (The Homoeopathic Treatment of Children with ADS/ADHS). •Effiziente homoeopathische Behandlung. (Efficient Homoeopathic Treatment) Stuttgart 2008. Homoeopathische Behandlung multimorbider Patienten. (Homoeopathic Treatment of Multi-morbid Patients) Stuttgart 2010. Pratical Application Boenninghausen himself has never written any contribution to explain his method in full detail. But his various writings contain a lot of remarks giving hints to his method. Taken together they form the so-called “Boenninghausen method”. Some basics have to be lined out to make possible a proper understanding of Boenninghausen´s intentions. In first instance he was a practitioner - working in the early times of homoeopathy. In those days a successful prescription depended mainly upon a proper knowledge of the remedies. Repertories gave hints only for the selection of a remedy. Therefore the study of the materia medica was Boenninghausen´s favourite subject in homoeopathy during his lifetime. Arnold Lorbacher (1818 - 1899) wrote in 1879: “Boenninghausen … we can call with no exaggeration the best well-founded and greatest expert of our materia medica¹¹.

Vol 1, Issue 3 37

What is the most important subject in his study of materia medica? The “Goldkoerner” (gold nuggets) being single symptoms generally related to one remedy only, and the “genius” of the remedy. To cut a long study (first published in 1992¹²) short concerning the latter: With reference to Asa foetida Boenninghausen pointed to the remedy´s stitching pains from inward to outward. These occurred in the proving in several parts of the body. He discovered the following: If these characteristic pains occur in any other part in the sick than those displayed in the proving, they can be employed. The definition of a so-called genius symptom is the following: 1- It has to occur often in different parts of the body in the provings. 2- It has to be clear and not vague. A genius symptom is quite often only a part of a complete symptom. With reference to Constantine Hering (1800 - 1880) a complete symptom is composed of: •locality (including extension) •sensation (including findings) •modality in regard to time and circumstances •concomitants.

From Boenninghausen´s original case-books the division in main and side symptoms is apparent. He even had special sheets of paper printed in that line. With reference to Boenninghausen this classification of symptoms has to be extended:

The genius symptom is often met within the sensations or modalities, and rarely among the concomitants - e.g. the red face or cheeks of Capsicum is concomitant to many of its symptoms, and therefore it can be classified as genius. Returning to Boenninghausen it is important to understand his idea of a genius symptom being represented in the third and fourth (and rare fifth) grade of his “Pocket Book” otherwise its general plan cannot be grasped completely. Another part of the above-mentioned basics deals with the procedure of case-taking by Boenninghausen. With reference to the Organon VI section 95 he divided the patient´s symptoms into two groups: 1- The main symptom - the symptom being the motive to consult the doctor, e.g. a headache with its sensations, modalities and concomitans; 2- The side symptoms - bearing obviously no relation to the main symptom, e.g. a change in regard to appetite or thirst, sleep, mental condition or whatever. The totality of symptoms consists of all more or less persistent symptoms from the beginning of the main symptoms, the suffering of the patient, until the first consultation.

Boenninghausen´s Case-book¹³

First in regard to causation. If there is really a causa occasionalis in the meaning of Hahnemann it has to be used but a warning of Boenninghausen¹⁴ has to be taken into account: If cold is the causa occasionalis perhaps of an acute disease and at the time of consultation the patient reports an amelioration of his complaints from cold the causa “cold” is no longer of any worth and its use for the selection of the remedy is forbidden. The present state of the patient is ameliorated by cold, and therefore this modality has to be considered. •Second in regard to mental symptoms. With reference to the Organon VI section 210 and 212 the change of the mental disposition has to be considered. In Boenninghausen´s weighting of symptoms it comes last to decide between two or three final remedies. Here we deal with broader dispositions like irritability, sadness, changing mood, despair, indifference etc. Of course the mental state might also be the main symptom, e.g. the patient comes for consultation because of his attacks of anxiety occurring in crowded rooms being accompanied by profuse sweat. Then it is of first importance.

Vol 1, Issue 3 38

Third in regard to the polarities. Taking into account the genius (compare the example of Asa foetida) there are symptoms or parts of symptoms in our remedies running through their pathogenesis, e.g. for Pulsatilla the thirstlessness, the aggravation in the evening or in warm rooms, the ameliorations in cool open air. If one arrives in his repertorization at Pulsatilla one has to consider the patient´s symptoms being not in contradiction to these (and other) genius symptoms of Pulsatilla. Of course the patient must not have these genius symptoms at all but he should not present their contrary. This is more detailed outlined in the foreword to the revised edition of Boenninghausen´s Therapeutic Pocket Book 2000, p. XXXIII-XXXIV. At least to me the polarities¹⁵ were one of the most important re-discoveries I made studying Boenninghausen in the 80´s, and they were of immense practical use to me right after re-discovery. From what has been outlined before an order (weighting, arrangement, hierarchy) of symptoms for repertorization follows: 1- Causation (if there is any at all) 2- Main symptom 3- Side symptoms 4- Mental disposition (change in) 5- Polarities. Boenninghausen gave us two exceptions from this rule of arranging symptoms: 1- If a remedy corresponds very well to the side symptoms and not at all to the main symptom, in spite of this that the remedy should be given and will cure. Boenninghausen reasoned that the lacking symptom (in this case, the main symptom) had not yet been displayed by a sensitive prover. 2- Finally there are two remedies at equal disposal: One (A) corresponds better to the main symptom, the other (B) to the side symptoms. Then he applied A, after a couple of days B, and after some days A again (in chronic cases; in acute the intervals were shorter, hours only). This procedure is somewhat connected with the subject of intercurrent remedies he used very often. This is a very detailed matter and cannot be outlined in this survey more extensively. But this can be said: In a study I made choosing at random 55 chronic cases of his practice the average time of cure by this mode of prescribing remedies was two and a half months.

The general plan of the “Therapeutic Pocket-Book” was necessary to Boenninghausen because another type of repertory would have required many volumes. Hahnemann agreed to his idea as shown by their correspondence dated 24 September 1842¹⁶. Having in mind Hering´s definition of a complete symptom and Boenninghausen´s idea of a genius symptom one understands the plan of the Pocket Book: It divides every symptom into its elements and lists the entries of remedies in their corresponding grades. This opens the possibility of re-combining the symptoms and enlarged the therapeutic sphere of our remedies enormously. All rubrics are spread over six chapters and various subchapters. A short case history from my practice taken from the introduction of the revised Pocket Book¹⁷ will demonstrate the use of this tool: The 43 year old female patient G.N. suffered from drawing pains in her left shoulder blade as a result of long stooping for two weeks. These pains extend from time to time to the heart like a cramp. They are decidedly aggravated by sitting and especially by sitting bent as well as by deep breathing, and they are ameliorated by stretching, standing and lying. In this minor case of acute disease there were no side symptoms. According to the hint of Boenninghausen the remedy must accord first and foremost to the result and not to the cause, so prolonged stooping was not taken into account. Furthermore the quality of pain was not considered as there were a lot of clear modalities. Here are the titles of rubrics with their corresponding rubric code numbers (If these are put into the software program the whole process of repertorization is done automatically. Of course they can also be found by word searching.): Shoulderblades - 793 Back, left - 792 < Sitting bent - 2383 < Breathing deep - 1994 > Standing - 2613 > Lying - 2553

Vol 1, Issue 3 39

This resulted in three remedies covering all symptoms in high grades, Scilla (6/17, P 14), Bry. (6/17, P 9), and Rhus tox. (6/15, P 0). The first number indicates how many symptoms are covered by the remedy, the second number the addition of grades, and P the differences of polarity. If the number is high, there is a great difference, and therefore one has not to face contradictions. Consequently Rhus tox. was eliminated at once, and finally Bry. as well because of lower grades in two important modalities. The patient obtained a single dose of Scilla C 200 (ISO). By next morning the pains had disappeared never to return. Dr. Heiner Frei has been fascinated by the idea of polarities since the revised Therapeutic Pocket Book appeared in print. He developed a special method of case-analysis based on polarity rubrics marked “P”. We are fortune that he enriched our literature with the book entitled “Polarity Analysis” (in English) demonstrating case histories¹⁸. It is very useful in cases with strong modalities. One remark has to be made concerning T.F. Allen´s (1837 - 1902) edition of “Boenninghausen's Therapeutic Pocket Book“, first published in Philadelphia in 1891 being followed by four American and many Indian reprints and even a German edition dating back to 1897. In comparison with the edition of 1846 it has been mainly enlarged by the addition of new remedies. It is not known whether T.F. Allen really understood the exact plan of grading by Boenninghausen. Boenninghausen never gave exact details on how he arrived at his grades, but only faint hints. Maybe T.F. Allen learned more about Boenninghausen´s system of determining grades from Carroll Dunham (with whom he was acquainted) who had visited Boenninghausen twice in 1851 and 1854/1855. But this is absolutely not sure, and therefore it would be wise to be very careful with these added remedies. Epilogue It was intended to give a short overview about the revival of practising homoeopathy according to Boenninghausen in the German speaking countries within the last decades. Much more could have been said, and of course many colleagues not mentioned here have contributed by seminars and publications to spread Boenninghausen´s hints and method.

One should always keep in mind the method of Boenninghausen being one approach only among others to arrive at the proper remedy. The method applied - Boenninghausen´s, Boger´s, Kent´s or others - to obtain the simillimum in a given disease depends completely upon the symptoms of the patient. We have to adjust the method of case-analysis to the symptoms and not reverse! To summarize Boenninghausen´s major contributions to homoeopathy we arrive at the following: •author of the first repertory in homoeopathy •development of a grading system •remedy relationship •the first to use high potencies regularly in his practice •introduction of the genius of a remedy •case-analysis by dividing the symptomatology into main and side symptom •intercurrent remedy •late symptoms (those appearing in the later part of a proving being of highest value) •gold nuggets

The following is a list of all publications of Boenninghausen not yet translated into English (to my knowledge): •Abgekuerzte Uebersicht der Eigenthuemlichkeiten und Hauptwirkungen der homoeopathischen Arzneien. Hrsg. A. Jansen. Hamburg 1999. •Beitraege zur Kenntnis der Eigenthuemlichkeiten aller bisher vollstaendiger geprueften homoeopathischen Arzneien. 2. Aufl. Muenster 1833. •Der homoeopathische Hausarzt. Muenster 1853. •Die Aphorismen des Hippokrates. Leipzig 1863. •Die Heilung der asiatischen Cholera. Muenster 1831. •Die Homoeopathie. Muenster 1834. •Die homoeopathische Diaet. 2. Aufl. Muenster 1833. Kurze Belehrung fuer Nicht-Aerzte ueber die Verhuetung und Behandlung der asiatischen Cholera. Muenster 1849. •Uebersicht der Haupt-Wirkungs-Sphaere der Antipsorischen Arzneien. Muenster 1833. •Versuch einer homoeopathischen Therapie der Wechselfieber. Leipzig 1833.

My thanks go to Daniel Cook MD of Dallas,Texas who kindly helped to improve the style of this article.

Vol 1, Issue 3 40

References Allen, T. F. Boenninghausen's Therapeutic Pocket Book. Philadelphia 1891. Boenninghausen, C.v. A Systematic Alphabetic Repertory of Homoeopathic Remedies. Ed. C.M. Boger. Philadelphia 1900. Boenninghausens, C.v. Systematisch-alphabetisches Repertorium der antipsorischen Arzneien. 2nd Ed. Muenster 1833 (11832). Boenninghausen, C. v. Abgekuerzte Uebersicht der Eigenthuemlichkeiten und Hauptwirkungen der homoeopathischen Arzneien. Hrsg. A. Jansen. Hamburg 1999. Boenninghausen, C. v. Die Aphorismen des Hippokrates. Leipzig 1863. Boenninghausen, C. v. Die Aphorismen des Hippokrates. Nachdr. Goettingen 1979 (11863). Boenninghausen, C. v. Die Homoeopathie. Nachdr. Goettingen 1979 (11834). Boenninghausen, C. v. Manual of Homoeopathic Therapeutics. Transl. J. Laurie. London 1847. Boenninghausen, C. v. Therapeutisches Taschenbuch. Muenster 1846. Boenninghausen, C. v. Therapeutic Pocket-Book. Muenster 1846. Boenninghausen, C. v. Therapeutic Pocket Book. Ed. C. J. Hempel. New York, London 1847. Boger, C.M. Boenninghausen´s Characteristics and Repertory. Parkersburg 1905. Boger, C. M. A Synoptic Key of the Materia Medica. Parkersburg 1915. Bradford, T. L. The Lesser Writings of C. M. F. von Boenninghausen. Philadelphia 1908. Frei, H. Die homoeopathische Behandlung von Kindern mit ADS/ADHS. Stuttgart 2005. Frei, H. Effiziente homoeopathische Behandlung. Stuttgart 2008. Frei, H. Homoeopathische Behandlung multimorbider Patienten. Stuttgart 2010. Frei, H. Polarity Analysis in Homoeopathy. Kandern 2013. Gypser, K.-H. Boenninghausens Therapeutisches Taschenbuch als Quelle der "Generalities" in Kents Repertorium. ZKH 29(1985)223-227. Gypser, K. -H. Boenninghausens kleine medizinische Schriften. Heidelberg 1984. Gypser, K.-H. Boenninghausens Therapeutisches Taschenbuch. Revidierte Ausgabe 2000. Stuttgart 2000. Gypser, K.-H. Der „Genius der Arznei“ bei Boenninghausen. Zeitschrift fuer klassische Homoeopathie, 36(1992)224 - 230. Gypser, K. -H. Generalregister zu den Werken Boenning-hausens. Heppenheim 1992.

Hahnemann, S. Organon der Heilkunst. 6. Aufl. Leipzig 1921. Kastner, R. F. Boenninghausens Physiognomik der homoeopathischen Arzneimittel. Heidelberg 1995. Kastner, R.F. Boenninghausens Repertorium der homoeopathischen Arz-neimittel. Heidelberg 1998. Kottwitz, F. Clemens Maria Franz von Boenninghausen (1785-1864). Med. dent. Diss. Berlin 1983. Lieth, B.v.d. Therapeutische Taschenkartei fuer homoeopathische Aerzte. Hamburg 1989. Lorbacher, A. Die Reihenfolge der Arzneimittel. Allgemeine homoeopathische Zeitung, 99(1879)129-131. Moeller, B. Einfuehrung in die Methodik Clemens von Boenninghausen´s. Archiv fuer Homoeopathik, 6(1897)7 - 21, 53-80, 149-168. Roberts, H. A. and A. C. Wilson. The Principles and Practicability of Boenninghausens Therapeutic Pocket Book. Philadelphia 1935. Stahl, M. Der Briefwechsel zwischen Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843) und Clemens von Boenninghausen (1785-1864). Med. Diss. Goettingen 1995. ------------------------------------------------------------- ¹Dedicated to Dr. Renzo Galassi of Macerata, Italy, for his devotion to homoeopathy ²Gypser, K. -H. Boenninghausens kleine medizinische Schriften. Heidelberg 1984, p. 811 ³Gypser, K. -H. Generalregister zu den Werken Boenning-hausens. Heppenheim 1992. ⁴Kottwitz, F. Clemens Maria Franz von Boenninghausen (1785-1864). Med. dent. Diss. Berlin 1983. ⁵Boenninghausens Therapeutisches Taschenbuch als Quelle der "Generalities" in Kents Repertorium. ZKH 29(1985)223-227. ⁶www.boenninghausen.de ⁷Moeller, B. Archiv fuer Homoeopathik, 6(1897)7 - 21, 53-80, 101-108, 149-168. ⁸Boenninghausen, C. v. Versuch ueber die Verwandtschaften der homoeopathischen Arzneien nebst einer abgekuerzten Uebersicht ihrer Eigentuemlichkeiten und Hauptwirkungen. Muenster 1836. ⁹Boenninghausen, C. v. Abgekuerzte Uebersicht der Eigenthuemlichkeiten und Hauptwirkungen der homoeopathischen Arzneien. Hrsg. A. Jansen. Hamburg 1999. ¹⁰Kastner, R.F. Boenninghausens Repertorium der homoeopathischen Arz-neimittel. Heidelberg 1998. ¹¹Lorbacher, A. AHZ 99(1879)130 ¹²Gypser, K.-H. Der „Genius der Arznei“ bei Boenninghausen. Zeitschrift fuer klassische Homoeopathie, 36(1992)224 - 230. ¹³Gypser, K. -H. Boenninghausens kleine medizinische Schriften. Heidelberg 1984, p. 774 - 775. ¹⁴Boenninghausen, C. v. Die Aphorismen des Hippokrates. Leipzig 1863, p. 303. ¹⁵In lack of a better term I choose “polarity”. Boenninghausen had never used it but described the fact in his publication “Die Aphorismen des Hippokrates”, Leipzig 1863, p. 215, 341, 408, 447. ¹⁶Stahl, 1995, p. 154-155. ¹⁷Boenninghausen´s Therapeutisches Taschenbuch 2000. Ed. K.-H. Gypser. Stuttgart 2000, p. XXXVI-XXXVII. ¹⁸Frei, H. Polarity Analysis in Homoeopathy. Kandern 2013.

Vol 1, Issue 3 41

Case presentation

8 years old girl with Herpes zoster Clinic: blisters, staying in groups at the navel, left side, from the back annularly pulling forward, they came within 4-5 days. She has stinging, burning pains, she is crying with the pains. The pains are exacerbated by water and washing, by pressure of the cloth, by undressing and after exercise. She asks for a hot water bottle to put it on the affected area. During movement she feels better, she is physically restless. In addition, she complains of mild nausea, which is improved by eating. She is not very thirsty, like she always is. 2 weeks before the appearance of the blisters, mildly diarrhea. Sleep: waking up at midnight and 2 o'clock since the deseas. Using Boenninghausen Method, we have to look for: 1. Is there a complete symptom? A symptom with location, sensation, modality and concomitant symptoms? Location: skin, blisters around the navel Sensation: stinging, burning pains Modality: Aggravation: water and washing pressure of cloth undressing etc. Amelioration: hot water bottle during movement etc. Concomitant Symptoms: crying with the pains restlessness mild nausea

2. Is there a Main symptom [MS] (pathognomonic symptom)? The Main Symptom is the actual suffering or disease of the patient, the reason of consulting the doctor. Even there are many complaints from the patient, there is always a main disorder. These are the pathognomonic symptoms or the diagnosis. The Main symptom here is the Herpes zoster 3. Is there, are there secondary symptoms (non-pathognomonic symptoms)?

What is a secondary symptom? You can find the explanation in Org VI § 95[1] and in Boenninghausen “Kleine Medizinische Schriften” [KMS, p. 331][2].

Org VI § 95: In chronic disease the investigation of the signs of disease .... must be pursued as carefully and circumstantially as possible, .... because the patients become so used to their long sufferings that they pay little or no heed to the lesser accessory symptoms, which are often very pregnant with meaning (characteristic) - often very useful in determining the choice of the remedy - .....” Boenninghausen [KMS, p. 331]

"..... the choice for the right remedy,....., must be made that the remedy corresponds not only in general to the pathological character of the disease, but also as possible as much to the by-effects and by-circumstances. Here: Secondary symptoms are the sleep and the nausea.

Using the Boenninghausen Method, by Dr. med. Gertraud Roos, Germany. This paper was presented during the last LMHI world Congress in Sorrento, Italy, september 2019.

Vol 1, Issue 3 42

Case Analysis:

Main Symptoms: 1) Skin zoster, shingles

2) Symptom: stitching, burning pain: Skin eruptions stitching, pricking Skin eruptions burning Skin ulcerative pain

Secondary. Sympt.: 1) crying because of the pain 2) Modalities, Agg.: touch [worse] after movement [worse] undressing [worse] 3) Modalities, Amel.: pressure of the hot water bottle warmth, in general [better] resting [better] movement [better] resting [better] 3) thirstless, like she allways is 4) nausea in general 5) physically restlessness

For repertorization the program of Heiner Frei was used, polaritiy-analysis.com[3], was used. Rhus-toxicodendron and Arsenicum-album have both 12 hits. Silicea and Mercurius-solubilis only have 11 hits, you can´t find them in all rubrics, which were used. The sum of Rhus-toxicodendron is with 43 points, higher than the one of Arsenicum-album, which is 34. It is hard to decide, which remedy is the right one. But considering the symptoms diarrhea and waking up frequent after midnight, we know, that Arsenicum album is the right remedy.

Therapy and follow up: Arsenicum album XM, dry on the tongue late evening

First day: - very tired - ceasing pains in the evening - again awakening at 2 o'clock in the morning with pain, ameliorated by a hot water bottle - no new bubbles

Second day: - no pains at all - still very tired - the bubbles are drying with bluish scab Summary: We looked at the scheme Boenninghausen used, to find the right remedy. Complete Symptom, Main and Secondary Symptom were explained. With these basics it was demonstrated, how to analyze a case by this method, including repertorization and follow up. Author: Dr. med. Gertraud Roos, living in Andernach, one of the oldest cities in the middle west of Germany, close Cologne and Bonn, beside the river Rhine. Started training for Homoeopathy in 2000 with the DZVhAe and the Gleeser Akademie of homoeoepathic doctors. Dr. med. Klaus-Henning Gypser was my honest teacher. Own consulting room since 2003. Lectures at the University of Bonn for medical students from 2008 to 2017, lectures at the LMHI Congress 2016 in Buenos Aires and 2019 in Sorrent. Publications with the MMRH project of Dr. K.H. Gypser (Laur, Ran-b, Ran-s, Zinc). Homepage: homoeopathie-dr-roos.de praxis-roos@web.de Literature: [1] Hahnemann, S. Organon of Medicine, 6th Ed. http://homeoint.org/books/hahorgan/index.htm, §95 [2] Boenninghausen, C. In: Gypser, K-H, Boenninghausens Kleine medizinische Schriften. Heidelberg 1984, p. 331. [3] Frei, H. https://polarity-analysis.com

Vol 1, Issue 3 43

Hahnemann himself in the first Volume of Chronic Diseases warns us about the exclusive use of the repertories for the choice of the remedy because he says: "the repertoires can only give us some indications on the possible remedies to choose, but they will never make it unnecessary to consult the sources." In the introduction of his TPB, Boenninghausen again repeats the same concept: "it is beyond any doubt that the diligent and careful study of the Pure Materia Medica cannot be replaced by any repertoire whatever it may be. Also it was never my intention to make the study of pure Materia Medica useless; indeed I consider all the works that have this purpose absolutely harmful. On the other hand, it cannot be doubted that the homeopathic doctor who can dedicate himself to this study only in the few scraps of time he has left, needs in practice a small summary of the symptoms that can be easily consulted and that highlights the characteristic, all this as an aid to his memory ...... " Among the advantages of the Boenninghausen’s TPB there is the great reliability since it is one of the few repertories that refers directly to the sources; furthermore, even in cases with few symptoms it makes a repertorization possible and through the combination of parts of symptoms (Zeichen) remedies that would have been excluded in other repertories are taken into consideration. Historical case taken from Stapf Archiv, Band 22.1845, Communications from practice: “Schlehhahn, a wealthy farmer, aged 63, when he turned to me for help in July 1844, had been suffering from the following ailments for more than a year: after the slightest ingestion of any food or drink, often before they have even reached the stomach, he is seized by a strong retching for which he vomits everything he has ingested, and this vomiting is followed by thick mucus and often bile. Even outside of meals, he is often struck by violent acid and bitter belching followed by vomiting of mucus and bile.

In the stomach area he has almost continually a severe burning pain which sometimes becomes so powerful that he has to double over; all this accompanied by anxiety and restlessness. He is constantly thirsty. The abdomen is tight, the liver area is not particularly swollen. Defecation only once in 24 hours, often even more infrequently and also very hard. Usually every other day there are chills that pass immediately and this even in hot weather. This shiver is followed by heat and then strong sweating occurs accompanied by great weakness and nausea. Every other night he has a very restless sleep with fears, full of dreams and profuse sweating. This patient who was previously very strong in constitution is now weakened, thin and pale. His state of mind is depressed, anxious and hopeless. “Boenninghausen's cases are extremely short, sometimes 2,3 lines since he recommends purging the anamnesis of all that is superfluous; so let's see how this case is an example since Dr. Stapf reports the important symptoms and limits himself to the essential. Probably the dr. Stapf arrives at the prescription of the correct remedy through his knowledge of the pure Materia Medica without consulting repertoires. If we repertorize the totality of these symptoms with the Boenninghausen TPB, appears in first place Arsenicum which not only covers all symptoms, but also most of them with a characteristic degree. If we consult Hahnemann's pure Materia Medica we can see that these symptoms appear repeatedly and are therefore characteristic, i.e. they represent the genius of Ars. For example, the anxiety and restlessness that accompany burning pains in the stomach correspond to the genius of Ars. as well as the periodicity of the chills but above all the changed mood of the patient who in the disease has become depressed, anxious, restless and hopeless and physically pale and weak and thin.

Using the Boenninghausen's Therapeutic Pocket Book, by Dr. Pierluigi Clauser, Trento, Italy.

Vol 1, Issue 3 44

Symptoms of Ars. from Hahnemann's Chronic Diseases: Symp. n. : depressed and melancholy “ : 517: violent pains in the abdomen with such anxiety as to find no peace in any place, rolled on the ground and hope in life failed. “ : 266: pale face with sunken eyes “ : 269: pale as a corpse

Arsenicum album was the remedy prescribed by Stapf, who comments on the case as follows: “Of all the known remedies it seemed to me that none corresponded to this state better than Arsenic, of which I administered some globules of C 400 directly on the tongue. There was nothing relevant to change in diet and lifestyle. After 4 weeks, the patient came to see me again and his appearance had changed so much that I could hardly recognize him. He told me very satisfied that a few days after taking the remedy his condition had improved considerably; in particular the heartburn had subsided a little at a time and was gone; both the excruciating nausea and the urge to vomit were also gone so that he could eat and drink without vomiting. But after 15 days the vomiting had returned but in a much lighter form and the typical chills he had were gone. Now he felt stronger, his mood was cheerful and full of hope, his appearance was much improved. Therefore, to remove what was left of the chronic disease, the patient received 4 weeks after the first dose of C 400 a second administration of the same remedy but at C 800, after which total recovery followed as I was able to verify after a few months.

Vol 1, Issue 3 45

Case n.2,oktober 2019, A 60-year-old lady comes in complaining of severe lumbago that has already lasted for several weeks, so we are already in the chronic form. It immediately stands out that she walks bent over and is inclined to the right. She complains of strong pulling pains on the right that radiate from the lumbar region to the thigh and lower limb; feels muscle hard and contracted as if muscle had shortened. Because of these pains, she can no longer sleep. Her doctor has prescribed various painkiller for her and anti-inflammatory drugs that not only no longer acted but caused gastric disturbances. Only the massage, the hot pack and lying on her back bring her relief.

We have 7 remedies that cover these symptoms. I excluded Causticum because it has 2 symptoms with opposite polarity as well as Anac., Nux-vom, Phos and Sulfur and I prescribed Kali-c, which, however, after various administrations even changing potencies does not give any results. So I decided to consult Hahnemann's pure Materia Medica after having made the 2nd mistake that Hahnemann underlines that is to prescribe based on the Repertory without consulting the sources. If we consult Hahnemann's Materia Medica we see that the pulling pains on the right are characteristic of Nat-c, while in Kali- c they are predominantly on the left and above all the improvement of the same with the massage is characteristic and therefore it is part of the genius of Nat-c and not of Kali-c. See in Hahnemanns Chronic Diseases Nat-c: Symptom n: 807: Pulling pains in several fingers and on the back of the same that disappear with the massage Sympt. n: 179,189,203,764,765 Then consulting G. Jahr's SymptomenKodex which is one of the few medical books that draw directly from the sources, I found the following symptoms reported in bold and with an asterisk, all this means that these are symptoms that not only appear in the provings but also have been verified several times in practice: - * in the right thigh tearing, contractures and pulling pains ... - * pulling pains in the leg from the right knee to the foot - * shortening of the tendons - ° rheumatic disorders also with shortening of the tendons and muscles I therefore prescribed Nat-c, LM 6, 2 drops a day and after 20 days all the symptoms disappeared and after a year they never came back.

Vol 1, ıssue 3 46

A CASE OF ADHD. Comparison of the analysis with Boenninghausen and Kent’s methods. By Renzo Galassi, THP editor. Special thanks to Daniel Cook, MD, Dallas, Texas for the revision of the English version. This clinical case was presented by the Author, during the Mexican Congress on the Centenary of the birth of Dr. Proceso Sanchez Ortega in Mexico City on July 2019, organized by Homeopatia de Mexico a.c.

In the Orphanage she also was informed that her father died. After this they gave her Allopathic drugs for an aggravation of her restless behavior. Past history Born on the 26th week of pregnancy she was under artificial respiration for 40 days.... She received all vaccinations without any reaction, she had a kind of Bronchopneumonia when she was 5 years old, cured with Antibiotics ..., she had an Angioma on the left shoulder operated at the age of 6. The appetite is good. The mother only reports aversion for sweets and dislike to milk, but during the last 9 months with the new family she grew 10 cm! She had Constipation when she arrived in Italy, she could evacuate every 4-5 days. Sleep is good she falls asleep fast. She feels heat in the bed so that she throws off the blankets. In general she is WARM and she has perspiration with some smell in the armpit and in the head. She presents a swelling of nipples as the first signs of puberty......Sometimes her mouth has a bad SMELL. Itching in the bed. MIND She has a strong character, sometimes obstinate and capricious. Very clever. She already started to read and write in Italian language, but she is always provoking and disturbing the other children in the classroom, she pushes them and has a quarrelsome attitude.

Dr. Proceso Sanchez Ortega (1919-2005)and Dr. Galassi

It’s an interesting case, especially useful in showing two different approaches to the patient following the Kentian and the Boenninghausen path. A little girl, 9 years old – adopted from an Orphanage in Hungary. Allopathic diagnosis of ADHD. Some information given by the tutors of the Orphanage: •Father died for rupture of Aortic ANEURISM. He was an Indian. •Mother Hungarian, alcoholic and using psychotropic drugs She comes because the adoptive mother, who is my patient, says that the child is so nervous and restless. When they received the child in Hungary she was in this nervous condition and in the orphanage were giving the syrup of Strattera (Atomoxetine) for the ADHD syndrome. Now in the home in Italy the little girl is starting to ask questions such as: “Why my MOTHER abandoned me at the age of 4?”

Vol 1, ıssue 3 47

She doesn’t like rules and cannot stay quiet in her place, she always moves around. She has difficulty of concentration especially if they impose to sit still. She alternates this behavior with desire for being cuddled and embraced. She wants to dominate others and give orders, she looks proud, a Leader. But she avoids RULES, fear of storms and earthquake..... The first prescription was Mercurius solubilis 10.000 korsakov. Follow up after 2 months …… The mother says that the child is very much better, both in general and also regarding behavior, amelioration of the constipation and the itching. The mother says that she is surprised because now the child obeys her! Also the teachers say that the child is very much better, she studies, does homework without complaining and she sits still more of the time. She had a fever but improved without any medicines. Mercurius 50.000 korsakov, 3 doses, one dose every 40 days, each one in water with 10, 20, 30 succussions. Follow up after 4 months Mother says that she was doing better, but starting one month ago she (mother) started to work again in different shifts and the child was shocked by this, maybe feeling abandoned. The reaction was to be MISCHIEVOUS, being spiteful, aversion to homework, throws things away, and an attitude as a contrary.... Again constipation now every 2-3 days, she is hot and perspiration again offensive, sometimes Urination involuntary if anxious....... Mercurius 6 lm, 1 drop in a glass of water, one teaspoonful every 7 days Follow up after 4 months MOTHER says that she saw the child quieter, and “normal”. Now she looks tired of the school, but slowly is improving in every aspect. Appetite is good, now she doesn’t like meat. The constipation is better but she goes every 2 days. Sometimes urination involuntary during the day, asking for help and attention. With other children is quiet and no longer aggressive. Often thinks about her birth, mother and the way she was ABANDONED by her, asks frequently if the new mother loves her and looks for consolation and affection. Continues with heat of the body and offensive perspiration, thirst scanty. Wants the mother organizing meetings with her friends, at school she can sit still in her place. Pulsatilla 3 lm, once a week one drop in a glass of water a teaspoonful

Again after 4 months MOTHER alone, says to me that the summer was good and quiet, but she had a change of teacher and the new one is nervous and shrieks all the time, the child is afraid of him, anxious, and started biting her nails. The appetite is good, eats everything and grow regularly. Desire for salt and farinaceous food, scanty thirst, perspiration is still a little offensive. She only has urination involuntary during the day as a spite or as a call for attention. Now is very strong the idea of being ABANDONED by her mother, she feels sad for this. Alternates sweet behavior with an aggressive one. Dwells on past. Now is time to go to the past emotional TRAUMA. Natrum muriaticum 3 lm every week. Last visit, after 4 months. She looks very quiet, balanced, with less ideas of the past, of the Trauma. She is integrated in the classroom, clever and quiet. She eats well, no more constipation, Apparently recovered. The pediatric neuro-psychiatrist declared that the diagnosis of ADHD was probably a mistake, because she is very well!!!!!!!!!! Natr Mur 6 lm every 2-4 weeks if needed Why this kind of prescriptions? Let's now analyze the case, With a good biopathographic history, you can see where the patient comes from, what she has developed in the miasmatic sense up to the day of the consultation and what must be cured first, following the evolution from the last to the first. In this case, the syphilitic inheritance received by the patient is evident, and logically the need to start treating her with a medicine that could cover the inheritance and the actuality of the syphilis. My prescription for Mercury at first was a prescription without repertorization, only made on the basis of personal knowledge of Materia Medica and miasmatic vision. Now, wanting to make the taking of the case more didactic, we would have to see if studying the first consultation more carefully, it would be possible to arrive at the same prescription with the help of the repertories. In order to do that, we have to know what to look for in each case. Any classical teacher wrote something about the “Relative value of symptoms”, that is, the importance to identify the symptoms that we have to take into account for the prescription, in order to cure what is worthy of being cured in each patient (§ 3 of the Organon).

Vol 1, ıssue 3 48

Let’s see the case with the two main methods of analysis that have existed in our homeopathic medical history, that is, the method of generalization established by Baron Clemens Maria von Boenninghausen

or the method of analysis from the General to the particular established by the repertoires of Jahr , Lippe, Lee, Kent… ..that in our time, we very wrongly define simply Kent.

If we are to read the symptoms of the first consultation again and we take into account the sure and evident symptoms, not elucidated by psychoanalytic interpretations, we get clear symptoms that in the two repertoires appear as follows:

Avers. Sweets

< gen warm bed agg

Perspiration odor offensive

Mouth odor offensive

Mischievous

Disobedience

(Anarchist)

Sweets avers

< warmth in general

< warm, becoming heat in bed

Perspiration odorous offensive

Mouth bad breath

KENT Boenninghausen

Here we can see the screen with the Boenninghausen’s repertorization

Vol 1, ıssue 3 49

And below the repertorization with the kent’s method:

Having doubts about choosing between 2 or 3 remedies, it is clear that in the clinical history under examination where everything speaks of hereditary syphilis, the choice should be for a mainly syphilitic drug such as Mercurius. Secondly, when the syphilis has shown to fade a little, the focus has moved towards an emotional existential theme of the girl, to the trauma to be abandoned she experienced, which clearly had to be resolved until a clearly good and stable state of balance was achieved. As seen in the comparison of the two repertorizations: in Boenninghausen's there are no mental symptoms, but rather Generals and clear Modalities, because this is what this method of analysis requires, as we can read in the other articles of this issue dedicated to the Baron Clemens von Boenninghausen. Renzo Galassi Macerata, Italy Renzogalassi3@gmail.com

As can be seen from the repertorizations, using the two methods we arrive at the same drug that is Mercurius, notwithstanding the results between Kent and Boenninghausen do not coincide so frequently. Nux Vomica also comes out, but my choice of remedy was made using the simple, but very practical notions of miasmatic classification that any colleague can find while studying Hahnemann's Doctrine of Chronic Miasms, also synthesized in a practical overview in Master Proceso Sanchez Ortega’s book, titled Notes on Miasms.

Dr. Proceso S. Ortega (photo Galassi, Tulancingo, Mexico, 1999)

Vol 1, ıssue 3 50

Dr. Jacques Imberetchs (1937-2020),

by Dr.Josè Matuk Kanan – LMHI Past- President

In Memoriam. A bit of his history. Dr. Jacques was born in the city of Gembloux, Belgium, on August 7, 1937. He had 9 siblings, his father was called Joseph Imberetchs, and his mother Theresa Grootaers. He had a very healthy childhood, and he always told us that he was part of a working family. He studied Medicine at the University of Leuven, where he finished his studies and devoted himself to Anatomic Pathology, later he was director of the Parker Laboratory for all of Europe. His encounter with Homeopathy was through readings, he traveled by train from Brussels to Geneve to study with Dr. Pierre Schmidt, who was his first great teacher who introduced him to Homeopathy. Jacques spoke more than ten languages: French, Flemish, Walloon, English, Spanish, German, Japanese, Russian, Italian, an Indu dialect, which gave him a lot of knowledge and a great openness to the world and the desire to teach and show everything as a true pioneer, and the Master that he always was. He married Simone, who died of a terminal illness, they had no descendants, but he was always close to her brothers and sisters. He was an innate student and researcher, always modest tireless worker, and he set out to know in depth the homeopathic medical world and travel through many countries to get to know homeopathy well. His first journey in the homeopathic world was to humbly sit in the offices of the most recognized doctors in the world, for his clinical practice and practice of homeopathy, regardless of the country or distance or language. He studied in India, Argentina, Mexico, Brazil, the United States and all of Europe, with the most prestigious doctors in the practice of homeopathic medicine, professors such as Dr. Chan, Dr. Ortega and Dr. Paschero among others. He humbly visited their offices to learn from them. He always had the idea of improving the homeopathic physician and unifying the Hahnemanian knowledge and removing false knowledge, noting that there was so much perversion in the practice of homeopathy. Always with the conviction of protecting homeopathic unicism; when he had meetings in pluralistic groups he mentioned that they all had something in common: the Organon, in which no remedies were combined and that they had to follow its principles. It showed the Pure Materia Medica, and Hahnemann's Chronic Diseases. Its objective was to UNIFY THE HAHNEMANIAN KNOWLEDGE and to practice unicism. A teacher in every sense of the word, he first started at the Belgian School of Homeopathy, and he was always an active member of the Belgian Society for Homeopathy. But more than charges, his criteria was to teach. He never cared about the charges, he cared about the results. The way to transmit the unification of the knowledge that he acquired throughout the world was with the creation of study groups in Europe, and Latin America and other parts of the world. Seminars were held with doctors, and the first requirement to enter was to obtain the extraction of a remedy from the repertoire, and there the group took the name; for example, group Lycopodium, Pulsatilla, Argentum nitricum, Mercuriius, etc., in short, that's how the group was called to study the different titles of the classic books of homeopathy.

Vol 1, ıssue 3 51

The repertoire that Dr. Jacques used was the repertoire of Dr. Kent, which was full of his pencil annotations in many areas, these annotations were of a clinical order, obtained from his observations, in the clinic of his patients, and so on. teaching us that many symptoms we used were not pathogenetic but clinical. I always thought that many functions of computer programs were his ideas, for example, the extraction of remedies from the repertoire. He showed more than 26 approach techniques to find the similibum, always busy, reading, he knew the Organon like no one else, as well as Chronic Diseases and Pure Materia Medica. He was a pioneer in research. On one occasion, he went to perform a homeopathic proving in Mexico City where more than 50 students participated, but his lesson was teaching how to carry out the proving. He interviewed the students and instructed the doctors on how to carry it out. Always teaching. He completed the steps of the biopathography of the patient. He fought for more investigations to be carried out, so for many years, after leaving the Presidency of the LMHI, he dedicated himself to continue investigating with the charge of the Provings Committee. Research doctor; we can say that he unified homeopathic knowledge worldwide. Anyway, we could go on saying all the achievements of Dr. Imberetchs. Unification of homeopathic physicians in Hahnemanian orthodoxy, clarifying for future generations the path of homeopathic science. He was a member of the London Homeopathic Faculty, and member of the LMHI and held some secretariats, he was President of the LMHI from 1998 to 2001, then he was granted the Honorary Presidency of the LMHI,

Dr. Jacques, with other Past Presidents of the LMHI from left, Dr. Ulrich Fischer, Dr. Alok Pareek, Dr. Josè Matuk and Dr. Renzo Galassi

he founded the ECH which he thought that it would be a support for the LMHI, which he later mentioned was not. He was president of the ECH for many years unifying homeopathy practically throughout Europe. It implemented CLIFICOL, a collection of clinical data, which exists to date. In the last years of his life, he married Marie Laurence, the companion of his life until his last days. He died on November 2, 2020. His rest are in Sart-Risbart cementery. In Brussles. You leave us a unique trace of what you managed to achieve in all your more than 60 years working for homeopathy, Jacques rest in peace and we will continue to nurture homeopathy as you always taught us, you left a deep mark on so many current doctors that you trained around the world. I will miss you with your unique bow ties, old man. Dr. José Matuk Translation from Spanish to English Dr. Andrea Flores (Mexico)

Vol 1, ıssue 3 52

OBITUARY TO DR JACQUES IMBERECHTS by Prof. Ashley Ross

It is with great sadness that the Liga Medicorum Homoeopathica Internationalis (LMHI) honours the passing of Dr Jacques Imberechts on 02 November 2020, in Brussels. Dr Imberechts (1937-2020) was a stalwart of the homoeopathic profession, having studied under Dr Pierre Schmidt in Geneva, and practiced and taught homoeopathy across the globe in a medical career that spanned nearly 60 years. Dr Imberechts was one of the early teachers at the “Ecole Belge d’Homéopathie” and an active member of the Board of the “Société Royale Belge d’Homéopathie”. On the international stage, Dr Imberechts was unrelenting in his commitment to homeopathy and to the homeopathic profession. Dr Imberechts was recognised by the LMHI as one of its Presidents of Honour, having servers as President of the LMHI from 1998-2001 and as Prime Vice-President between 1995-1998. Furthermore, he was instrumental in the development of a clinical data collection initiative which ultimately found expression in the international Clificol project, as well as being one of the founders of the European Committee for Homoeopathy (ECH). Dr Imberechts was a true champion of truth who devoted his entire life to the treatment and management of patients through classical homeopathy of the highest order. His charismatic personality and joie de vivre was an inspiration for an entire generation of homeopathic doctors, who appreciated the importance of tradition, scientific rigour and community as hallmarks of the homeopathic life. May his gentle soul rest in eternal peace. Non inutilis vixi

Vol 1, ıssue 3 53

DR JORGE BUFFA (1955-2020), by Dr. Rafael Munoz With profound sadness, we have to announce the death of Dr. Jorge Buffa. He was born in Rafaela, Argentina, on January 14th, 1955. He died on October 17th, 2020 in the same city. According to his studies, he obtained his medical degree in 1981 dedicating his first years to anesthesiology. Due to a chronic ailment that he was suffering from, he met Dr. Cesar Cremonini who, through his homeopathic treatment, helped him to recover from that illness. From that moment on, he stopped working as an anaesthetist and dedicated to the study of Homeopathy with much zeal and effort at the Centro de Estudios Medicos Homeopaticos Hahnemanniano located in Cordoba, Argentina and founded by Dr. Cesar Luis Cremonini. Buffa was co-founder and an active worker of the Homeopathic Medical Library Dr. Samuel Hahnemann of the LMHI from 2003 to this year. Furthermore, he attended the successive Congresses of the LMHI since 1993 and practised this wonderful science until his last days. He was also a vice-president for Argentina at the LMHI in 1998. He was very much loved not only by many of his friends, colleagues and relatives but also by many of his patients. He will always be remembered for his friendship ideals and his cheerful personality. HAVE A GOOD TRIP, FRIEND.

Vol 1, ıssue 3 54

Dr. Pietro Gulia Medico-Chirurgo Omeopata pietrogulia@alice.it

QUIZ CORNER … for our younger colleagues. 1) Clinical case n.1 – Summer 2020. Man, 65yrs old, strong constitution (homeopathic treatment since 45 years), deep psychophysical stress, oppressed by business worries and life’s injustices. In the afternoon he felt a pain in his testes; this pain hour after hour increased. Painful and swollen testes, more on left side and, in the same time, perimalleolar swelling on both sides: intense drawing pain with a feeling of heaviness in testes, better lying on the bed and worse as soon as he rises and stands but much better if he walks slowly, above all if he walks slowly in the fresh air of the evening, where he feels much better. He gave himself Lycopodium 30 CH, plus method, every 3 hours (Lyc many times helped him in the past): after two days no improvement. Which is the remedy, that caused immediate aggravation and soon after strong improvement? 2) Do you remember – or can you find – the aphorism where Hahnemann states there is a difference between so-called homeopathic aggravation of diseases of a more acute character and of recent origin and a malady of, considerable or of very long standing? What is the difference? 3) Quoted from Materia Medica Pura (third edition) by Hahnemann (bold type by Hahnemann): 5 – Attacks.of vertigo, as if turned round in a circle in the brain, with momentary loss of consciousness. 35 – In the morning, drunken, giddy heaviness of the head. 46 – Aching pain in the occiput in the morning immediately after rising from bed. 164 – Noise in the ears as from a fulling-mill, at night. 690- Cough which causes bruised pain in the epigastric region. 1272 – Over-sensitiveness to impressions of the senses; he cannot bear strong odors and bright light. The remedy is …

4) Clinical case n.2 – July 1995 - The patient is a strong 52yrs old trader (affected from eczema, arthrosis, hypertension. Since 1989 homeopathic treatment: strong amelioration by Nux-vomica, Sulphur, Thuya). Twenty days before, a violent fright caused by an armed robbery. Since then, hypertension again (160-100) with tachycardia (85-90 heartbeats); sleepless, falling asleep is very difficult and, after a short sleep, he wakes at 2 a.m; sleepiness all day long. He continuously yawns (even during examination). He feels dull and confused, cannot remember what he has to do; the head is too heavy. Usually he is a very active and witty man but, today, he is sad, discouraged, tired, so tired that he desires to die. His expression is confused and frightened and his pupils are small, too small. The remedy is … 5) According to Lippe in his Keynotes and Red Lines Symptoms of Materia Medica it is better to give Sulphur in the morning, when it acts best; according to him, which is the remedy that acts best when given at night, during repose of mind and body? 6) Dr. Hering gave us Lachesis: we know Lachesis’s symptoms can go from left to right side. Nash and Lippe state: “rheumatism begins below and travels upward. Could you find which remedy it is? – and which one gets the opposite symptom = pain which descends? 7) Clinical case n. 3 A healthy 30-year old man, he is calm, quiet and a good-eater man. Acute gums inflammation with fever (38°C = 100.4 F ). His gums are very red, swollen, painful, burning. He feels worse lying, better by local warm and warm in general. His mood has changed: morose, irritable, harsh if someone ask him for something, impatient … The remedy is.

QUIZ CORNER

Vol 1, ıssue 3 55

8) In my opinion, the case n.2 recalls what Hahnemann wrote in an aphorism: which one? Aph 84, 87, 89, 93? And, precisely what does the case recall? 9) Perspiration without relief is a keynote of: a) Gelsemium; b) Mercurius solubilis; c) Natrum muriaticum; d) Psorinum? Which one? 10) What is a keynote?

Vol 1, ıssue 3 56

1) Clinical case n. 1 = GENERALS, Air, open air, aversion to; Cold air, agg; Air, draft, agg; Warm, amel; MIND Sensitive, pain to; Despair, pains, with the; GENERALS – Food & drinks, Coffee, agg, overuse; Neurological complaints; Touch agg (Osteopathic treatment made things worse). The patient was prescribed Coffea cruda 200K and she was ordered to stop drinking coffee. Wonderful effect. 2) Aph. 53: true cures are obtained by homeopathic method, rested upon laws of nature, in quickest, sure, permanent way. 3) Clinical case n.2 – GENERALS – Cold, becoming cold. MIND – Indifference – Inactivity. STOMACH – Thirstless. GENERALS – Air open >. NOSE – Discharge, yellow. Pulsatilla 200 K , one dose: quick improvement; totally cured in 48 hrs. 4) Actually, in all of the four aphorisms. In the note of aph.285, Hahnemann is very clear: “A fundamental principle of the homoeopathic physician (which distinguishes him from every physician of all older schools) is this, that he never employs for any patient a medicine, whose effects on the healthy human has not previously been carefully proven and thus made known to him (§§ 20,21). To prescribe for the sick on mere conjecture of some possible usefulness for some similar disease or from hearsay that a remedy has helped in such and such a disease - such conscienceless venture the philanthropic homoeopathist will leave to the allopath.” 5) Aph. 100-101-102. 6) Keynotes by Lippe:. MIND – Sensitive, noise to. Sadness. HEAD – Pain, bursting. Pulsating; difficult. FEVER – Intermittent. STOMACH – Thirstless, fever during. Thirst, chill, after – heat, before. MIND – Indifference. Taciturn. The remedy is China.

THE HOMOEOPATHIC PHYSICIAN N.2 Solutions QUIZ CORNER … for our younger colleagues.

7) Clinical case n. 3: GENERALS – Weakness, fever, during. Lie down, desire to. FEVER – Insidious fever. CHILL – Chilliness - MIND – Quiet, wants to be. MOUTH – Salvation, profuse. ABDOMEN – Distension, flatus, passing with - flatus, passing of, amel, not amel, by China 30 CH: plus method, a spoonful every 3 hrs, >> in 24 hrs. 8) Quoted Quoted from Materia Medica Pura (third edition) by Hahnemann: MOUTH – Salivation, profuse. Salivation, accompanied by nausea. 418 – ABDOMEN – Distension, flatus; passing off, with. 869 – GENERALS – Lie down, desire to. 875 – Weakness, rising, seat, from a. Sitting, impulse to sit. 876 – Weakness, walking. Weakness, paralytic. EXTREMITIES – Heaviness, thigh. Paralysis, Thighs, sensation of. 883 – GENERALS - Relaxation physical. 983 – CHILL – Chilliness. EXTREMITIES – Coldness, Foot, icy cold. The remedy is China. 9) Clinical case n. 4 – GENERALS - Lassitude - Sluggishness of the body. Noise agg. MIND – Indifference – Slowness – Sensitive, noise to. CHILL – Chilliness. STOMACH – Thirstless – GENERALS – Food & Drinks, cold drinks, cold water, desire. The remedy is China: 30 CH, plus method, a spoonful every 3 hrs: >>> in few hours. 10) Cina.

Congress Venue Hilton İstanbul Maslak https://lmhi2021.com/en/THE-VENUE.html

Important Dates Abstract submission opens July 6, 2020 Abstract submission deadline January 25, 2021 Notification of abstract outcomes February 15, 2021 Early registration deadline March 8, 2021 LMHI Executive Council Meeting 13th June 2021 at 9:30-18:00

Congress Venue (Hilton İstanbul Maslak) LMHI International Council Meeting 14th June 2021 at 9:30-18:00

Congress Venue (Hilton İstanbul Maslak) LMHI Working groups 14th June 2021 at 9:00-13:00

Congress Venue (Hilton İstanbul Maslak)

Congress Topics

Historical development of Homeopathy

Hahnemann and Organon

Provings in Homeopathy

Homeopathy in clinical practice

New methods and approaches in Homeopathy

Homeopathy and research

Integration of Homeopathy: - Pharmacy - Veterinary - Dentistry - Agro-Homeopathy

- Health care systems

New Topic for LMHI 2021 Istanbul Homeopathy and Covid19