It is said that 'An apple a day keeps the dentist away.

' This has become a commo n saying among Society today. We do not stop to think of how it reflects our outlook of M edicine in our lives. We have come to understand the value of simple practices in order to keep ourselves healthy. This is not, however, the case of Medieval England. Most 'med ical practices' of the time were based upon superstition, ancient texts, myth, or the direction of the church. Medical practices of Medieval England often based upon nothing mo re than superstition proved unbeneficial if not harmful to the people of England. Part of the obvious problem was the fact that the common person had litt le care or sense for improving their own health. The life and livelihood of an average pers on was less than desirable even from the time of birth. In the villages chronic inbreeding must have produced many children who started life with a built in weakness, either mental or physical. Many would die in childhood, but others who grew into manhood, might drag out a useless ex istance, dependent on charity for their sustenance. In general, infant mort ality was extremely heavy....Once the child was free to crawl about am ong the unsanitary rushes, with a child's natural instinct to put everything int o its mouth, it is a wonder that any survived. Fromt then on disease and accident would provide ample scope for a medical service, which was virtuall y non-existent. (Tomkeieff 119). Furthermore, the collective knowledge (what little there was) was held and pract iced by Monks in Monasteries. In summary of medical practice to the end of 1400, it may be said medici ne was practiced mostly by the clerics in monasteries and the laity whose l ocus of operation was the apothecary shop. The physician thought surgery was beneath his dignity (to have blood on his hands and clothes) and left th is to uneducated 'barbers' The practitioner carried the title 'Master,' where as teachers carried the title 'Doctor' The physician was little advanced o ver the knowledge of Galen's time. They still believed in the Doctrine of f our humours, making diagnoses by inspection of the blood and urine. Most of the therapeutic measures included blood letting, steam baths, amulets, spell s, hexes, prayers, the king's touch, and polypharmacy known as theriaca. (S

nyder 1). The problem is furthered by the fact that these 'practices' proved of little ben efit. Most of these had no scientific basis and were instead rooted in superstition and/or the church. "The concern of Christian theology, on the other hand, was to cure the soul rath er than the body; disease usually was considered supernatural in origin and cured by re ligious means. As a result, scientific investigation was inhibited during this time. Br others of various monasteries copied and preserved those scientific manuscripts and documents whic h were thought to be consistent with prevailing religious thought...." Ency To sum it up, "For England, as far as the twelfth century was concerne d, medicine was traditional, composed of a mixture of herbal lore and popular magic, while s urgery was brutal-and must often have been fatal." (Tokeieff 120). This now brings us t o another point, the fact of the severe and unsophisticated nature of surgery. "Two twelft h-century manuscripts, one early, show medical treatment, and in both cauterizing looms la rge. The earlier one shows the physician cauterizing a shorn head, while an attendant in a room below is heating a relay of instruments in a furnace. The second manuscript show s cauterizing for trouble in the head and in the stomach-a painful remedy!" (Tokei eff 120). More is written of this, "Two of the manuscripts show the doctor in his drug st ore, instructing his apprentice in the compounding of medicines. It was here that the medieval superstition reigned supreme. The ingredients heated in the furnace and pounded in the mortar could contain anything from crushed rocks to the entrails of animals and dead insects. " (Tokeieff 122). Lepers, cripples, and the blind were not uncommon in Medieval England. "Cripples were everywhere. When the only known way to deal with a leg wound, or other leg ailment, was to amputate, it stands to reason that anyone strong enough to s urvive the primitive and unanaesthetised severance of the limb would be joining a numerous band." (Tokeieff 123).Yet, they, along with other sick people had (often times) nowhere to turn. Most could not afford medical attention, and Hospitals were nothing like that of now. "Provision for lepers, who were the outcasts of society, was the motive for the foundation of many of the earliest hospitals, which were intended not for the cure of the s ick but as refuge for the incurable and the dying." (Tokeieff 122-123). "...In regard to the malign or beneficent influence...one is driven to t he conclusion that the surest way to survive was to keep away from the doctor." It should be c

lear that the health conditions for people in England of this time would be so unbearable that it would not be desirable by anybody. It is hard to imagine that anyone could see any ben efit to the practices of the time. Yet thus is the case of any era: something commonly accep ted of one age is looked down upon by the next. Perhaps a century or two down the histo rical road mankind will be simply disgusted by the way we live.

Works Cited Tomkeieff, O.G. Life in Norman England. New York: Capricorn Books, 1967. Snyder, M.D., Clifford C. "Summary of Medieval Medicine." [http://indy.radiology.uiowa.edu/Providers/Textbooks/SnyderMedHx/093MedivalMedic i ne.html]. August 01, 1996 "History of Medicine." Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia. CD-ROM. IBM, 1995.