Memoir on leprosy in Syria / by John Wortabet.

  • Wortabet, John, 1827-1908.
Date:
1873
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Memoir on leprosy in Syria / by John Wortabet. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    26/28 (page 24)
    3. In the Septuagint, the Hebrew name of the disease (tsora’ath, a stroke) was translated Atnpa (a scale), from which comes the English word leprosy. This translation is wholly unjustifiable on philo- logical grounds, and appeals to have been the means of confounding the Jewish with the modern leprosy. Had it not been for this version of the Hebrew word, it is not at all probable that the two diseases would have been joined together under the same name and classifi- cation. 4. The principal form of Jewish leprosy seems to correspond most to the leuce of the Greeks, the boras of the Arabs, and the vitiligo of modern writers on diseases of the skin. It is needless to add that this has nothing in common with the disease known now as leprosy, except that the cicatrices of ulceration in the latter are white, and that it sometimes begins in the form of darkish patches, the black boras of the Arabs. ■ 5. Maimonides, a rabbi, philosopher and physician of the middle ages, evidently includes the modern leprosy as one of the forms of the Jewish; for he mentions dropping of the hair as one of its characteristics,! and seems to consider Job's disease to have been that of leprosy, which is certainly very probable.2 6. The leprosy of houses and garments, mentioned in Leviticus, is supposed to have been nitrous incrustations or mildew, a suppo- sition which'cannot well be replaced by another, and which seems sufficiently probable. Treatment.—Is leprosy ever capable of a cure spontaneous or by remedial agents ? To this important and highly practical question, the answer from every quarter is extremely guarded. The collected evidence of both ancient and modern writers would indicate that it is occasionally curable, and that it is generally more or less benefited by proper treatment. Dr. Danielssen and Boeck, whose special and extensive study of 1 “ De variis lepra specicbus videatur Maymon in Hilclioth Tummeat Tzor. Inter alia ibi hmchabemus. Tsora’ath cst nonien quod oyoia^wg dicitur, et com- plectitur species multas, quorum nulla similis est alteri. Nani 1. Albedo cutis vocatur tsora'ath. 2. Casus pilorum quorundani capitis aut barb® vocatur tsora’ath. 3. Mutationem in vestibus et sedibus lex etiam tsora’ath vocat; ilia autem non fuit res ordinaria in niundo, sed miraculum et porteutum in Israele. (J. II. Othonis, ‘ Lexicon Itabbinico-Philologicum,’ Geneva), 1675, pp. 324, 325, Leprosus.) . __ , T_ = “Addamus liic illud quod in Jalkut in Jobum 28, 25 legitur. Homo constat ex dimidia aqua ct dimidio sauguine. Quamdiu juste vivit, non plus est aquae in hominc quam sanguinis. Quando pcccat tunc vel aqua exuberat et fit liydropicus, vel sanguis superat aquam, et fit leprosus” (Id.), the disease of Job is generally considered to have been leprosy. Mr. Carey, in bis commentary on Job (chap, li, v. 7), has collected many incidental allusions and notices of the disease that occur in the book, and certainly their correspondence to the symptoms of modern leprosy is very striking. He has also given much valuable information on notice of this disease by ancient and modern writers.