Project v. Boenninghausen

Explanations -- How to read the journals

The easiest way to understand the journals is to read them as if they were a continuous text.

As an example here the first entries for patient Nr 1, Klostermann

Complaint:

Painless paralysis of the right thigh, which is shortened, without swelling, with sensation of coldness.

Individual:

Exertion aggravates, - habitual constipation and hard stools, - liking for warm room, - vertigo looking upwards, dizziness walking outside, - (calm mind (?) - peevish and angry moods

( Caust 3, Sep. 1 Sil 3 - Plumb Puls.) ??

Date	Prescriptions	Success and new signs
1835
21 Apr.	Cocc C 30 2 G	little better. - During the night dreams again.
23 ---	Oleand. C 30 2 G	Bowels better. Walking better, dreams gone.

This would read something like

On 21st April 1835, I prescibed on the basis of the above signs and symptoms Cocc. C 30 2 globules. After that it got little better and the dreams recurred. On April 23 I prescribed Oleander C 30 2 globules, after that bowel movement was better, walking better, dreams gone. On April 24 [etc]

I. e. the entries in „Success and new signs“ under a certain date always refer to the effect of the remedy that was prescribed at the previous appointment.

Concerning the abbreviations

G should mean globules, gta or gutta means drop, R means smell = olfaction, (some abbreviations have been changed to the modern notation already, in accordance with the standards set by IGM-Bosch.This mainly concerns the potencies and doses)

The abbreviation of the remedies should be obvious, although I left them the way v. Boenninghausen wrote them. An exception seems to be Adyn - it also appears in Hahnemann's journals, but I could not find out what it is.

?? means that I could not decipher the word or phrase, a few times it means that I could read but not translate it (as I do not know what it means)

In his article „Das Krankenjournal“ -- I do not know how this title was translated for the Lesser Writings,but it means „The Case Journal“ -- v. Boenninghausen published the scheme/layout of his patients records (which, with some slight altertions, I have used). He added some remarks concerning his abbreviations: [The „Remarks“ below are my translation]

Remarks

1. The notations n.v. (non vidi) or v.v. (vidi verum), which are taken from botany, indicate whether one has seen the patient in person or not.

2. The notations Nr 3. and Nr. 4 in the first column (date) indicate the numbers of the lithographed „directions for use“, of which I have 5, but more on that perhaps later.

3. The letters u.a. (uli ante) mean that these powders are to be taken the same way as the ones immediately previous.

4. The paragraph sign (§) means Sacch. lactis, a notation that Hahnemann also used and which I adopted for piety's sake.

The first or last narrow columns in my records are in lieu of a margin, i. e. anything in them (before the “date” column or after the column “Success and new signs”) show something v. Boenninghausen wrote into his margins.

Concerning the translation

As always in translation, there was the choice of translating into „good English useage“ or staying as close as possible to the original text. As long as that did not make it „hard to understand“ or even change the meaning, I chose the latter, trying to put into my translation as much as possible of the „v Boenninghausen style“ (or lack of it). The main reason for doing so was that often it cannot really be decided what exactly v. Boenninghausen meant. By staying close to the original text, the possibility of changing the meaning in the translation is kept to a minimum. Please also note that the original German version is also available on this site.

Should there be abbreviations not listed above, I do not know what they mean.

It also should be remarked that -- at least in the first years of his practice, and perhaps this never changed, (I do not know yet, since I so far have only read the cases published below), strict adherence to the homeopathic diet and lifestyle was a conditio sine qua non for v. Boenninghausen. This diet and lifestyle is equivalent to that called for by Hahnemann in his Chronic Diseases. As far as coffeee is concerned, v. Boenninghausen seems to be even stricter than Hahnemann. Especially important is to him avoiding all medicinal substances. This especially means all kinds of herbs then in use by the allopaths (and now by the herbalists and naturopaths), but also includes kitchen herbs, spices, several food items, etc. This regimen was a firm rule for all of v. Boenninghausen's patients during an antipsoric course of treatment, or even possibly during any course of treatment, as he mentioned again and again in his first, detailed, case journal of 1829/1830, There he mentions, for example, in one case that the effects of Sulphur were negated because a patient had drunk coffee and eaten an anise-flavored apple. Another time he considered a remedy ineffective because the patient had prepared some chamomile tea for her mother.

In this connection the following records show entries similar to the detailed reports in the first casebook, though because of their brevitiy it is not always obvious what is meant -- unless we consider the background as delineated above. In the case of the patient named Offermann, for example, „the painters had been in the house (i.e. he had inhaled the fumes) and he had eaten asparagus“. Therefore v. Boenninghausen concluded that the remedy probably had been “disturbed” and thus probably ineffective.

We also need to realize that he considered it contraindicated to give a remedy during the menses. Furthermore we have to know that in his opinion practically anything, be it falling into cold water (so no swimming allowed --of course no hot bath, that goes without saying), a fright, excitement etc. can interfere with the action of the remedy.

With this knowledge in the back of our minds, his patients' records should be quite easy to understand.