Therefore have patients with me, if I cannot yet give my book into your hands, and try and do as much good as you can with what you know and have.
In a previous letter of December 18th, 1826, Hahnemann wrote while treating Stapf’s daughter:
The frequently repeated doses of Spongia, although small, became in your daughter’s case, a wrong and therefore injurious medicine, on account of the repetition.
(I am sorry that I gave it again); especially the Iodine ointment may have affected her, and now the psora develops through all the parts that act, physically and psychologically on the nerves; it is no wonder therefore that this happened to your daughter.
The new symptoms which have arisen belong therefore to Calcarea, as they still occur during the time of its effects. It has not acted quite wrongly, not with obvious disadvantage. You do well to let it work for 36 days, and on the 37th day to give her the enclosed powder (2 globules of IV. Lycopod.), again moistened with 2, or 3 drops of water.
And then on July 19th, 1827, immediately before the letters above communicated, Hahnemann wrote to Dr. Stapf:
In glandular swellings Silicea is probably the chief remedy, but highly diluted at least VI. Next comes Calcarea, in certain cases alternated with O (sign for Acidum Nitricum-R.H.), next to that comes Lycopodium as a great scrofula remedy.
In flooding, a minimum of Calcarea is the chief remedy. By carefully watching the symptoms when using the antipsoric remedies, after 12 to 18 days you can easily see what will happen. If it causes many few discomforts it is perhaps advisable to replace it by another antipsoric remedy, if it excessively aggravates the symptoms homoeopathically that were to be treated, then the cause lay in a too strong dose, this also can be perceived within 12 to 18 days. Another antipsoric remedy has to be given in its place and do not be surprised if even then the aggravation will continue for some time.
The excessive homoeopathic aggravation of the symptoms is to be feared most in Silicea.
I have not yet searched for an antidote (counter remedy- R.H.) to Silicea, nor have I come across one.
In these last two letters Hahnemann has communicated the remedies for Chronic Diseases, which he mentions in the letter published on the previous page (antipsorics) and pointed out at the same time, the period during which they continue to act, making it always a matter of the first consideration to give high dilution.
Also in a letter to Mr. von Gersdorff, of September 4th, 1828 (“Allg. hom. Ztg.,” Vol. 134, page 187), Hahnemann wrote on the question of psora, and the doubts expressed even by his pupils in regard to this teaching :
In your other patient you have a very important case, bungled in Berlin, no doubt by the administration of unsuitable remedies. You will, if you go slowly and carefully to work, certainly improve him. Apart from what the wrong treatment in Berlin has added to his troubles, you can take my word for it, that it is nothing but psora. Do not think that with such a patient it is always possible to trace back to its origin the history of psora.
Of ten chronic patients free from venereal disease, there always two, in whom the psoric miasm cannot be ascertained from the history of the case, although they show all the signs of psora, can and only be cured by antipsorics. If your patient had used nothing wrong in Berlin, and what is more if he had been taken in hand at the beginning when hoarseness appeared, it would have indeed been possible to do very much more for him, and possibly cure him completely. Yet in his case it would be easy to prove the psoric origin from the way in which the symptoms would yield more or less easily to the use of antipsorics even when a history of the case was missing. This can be accomplished even more easily with patients who have not been wrongly treated from the first. I know that people will still doubt for years my axiom, that chronic diseases, which are not of venereal origin, are only the result of psora. (No one after me will have such an opportunity to make these observations as I have had.) Seeing that there are physicians, who doubt it let them find another origin for them, let them prove another miasm-negantis est, probare (who denies must prove-R.H.)-let them teach how such non- venereal chronic diseases may be cured by other than antipsoric medicines, I shall be the first to copy them if they convince me, not otherwise. Situ novisti rectius illis, candidus imperti; si non bis utere mecum. (If you know better than they, communicate it to us openly and honestly; if not, rest all the more firmly on me-R.H.) What risks do those run who copy me, when they can achieve with my precepts what they could do in not other way in this world? My true followers will always have a better time, than those who shake their heads doubtingly and are unable to cure chronic diseases.
I must allow these to leave their patients uncured. I do not ask in my lifetime for recognition of the beneficent truth, Which have imparted disinterestedly; that which I have done, I have done for the world from higher motives.
I think that I am right in presuming that doubters will be fond even among my pupils. Is it envy? It certainly is not because they are sure of the contrary.
HAHNEMANN’S LETTERS TO DR. SCHWEIKERT CONCERNING A REPERTORY FOR “CHRONIC DISEASES”.
In the year 1828, Hahnemann’s “Chronic Diseases” appeared in print. After its publication the author was busy compiling a repertory of the antipsoric remedies contained in this work, which comprised your volumes. He sought for co-operators among hi friends and pupils for this work; and he wrote the following letters to Dr. Schweikert:
Dear Colleague,
Dr. Rummel has given me hope that you might be so kind as to help with the compiling of an alphabetical repertory of the anti- psoric remedies. The honorarium we will then share in a friendly way between ourselves. The book must be printed in the smallest type possible, so that it may not become too voluminous. For the same reason, we must be careful only to choose words which express conception of value, to use as heading for our reversed symptoms; so that whichever way the sentence may be turned by our German syntax, it will still convey the made meaning it originally had and yet every word be omitted which is not necessary.
All symptoms must be written in such a way (on quartfolio and only written on one side) that I can separate every one of them by cutting them up and pasting them in alphabetical order for the purpose of printing. They must also be written so that only the first line projects while the other recede by one syllable. I take the liberty to hand Phosphorus over to you (Calcarea, Sulphur, Silicea, Sepia and Lycopodium have already been dealt with) and to show you the elaboration of Lycopodium have already dealt with) and to show you he elaboration of some symptoms in the enclosed. I hope that this may meet with your approval.
I remain, with kindest intentions, Yours faithfully, SAMUEL HAHNEMANN.
Kothen, July 9th, 1828.
P.S.- The preceding words, which do not follow alphabetically, are written in small letters.
Dear Colleague,
I am sorry that you have been so ailing and hope that you may be better during the remainder of this very hard winter, until the time comes when I may be useful to you.
Your work of registering Phosphorus does not appear at all bad to me; but I retain the right of remembering something more definite about it and to exhort you to further co-operation, when I have received from Arnold, in Dresden, the agreement to publish the repertory. Hartlaub had complied for him only a systematic representation of the anti-psoric remedies exactly like his previous work on the six volumes of Materia Medica Pura and given them to him for publication, which will not interfere with our repertory. Therefore the continuation of our work depends upon Arnold accepting the publication. Although I do not doubt that he will, yet, I must first wait for it in order to be certain, please proceed meanwhile. I am letting Hartlaub co-operate as he offered to do so.
There follows a long explanation about the “half homoeopaths.” Hahnemann thinks that too strong measures would never attain the desired end, but only produce a public uproar, “which we as wise men must avoid.”
There years later his “wisdom” deserted him when he provoked a public uproar and most violent dispute in his own camp by a sharp attack on the “half homoeopaths” of Leipsic (see Vol. I, Chapter 6).
The remainder of letter deals with provings of remedies and reads : It is a very good idea of yours to have Lactuca virosa proved, but the juice must be given to the provers by the physician himself, because he has the required knowledge of botany and will give them the right tincture and not the tincture of Lactuca scariola, etc. You, dear colleague, would be the right man for it. Suggest the matter to your homoeopathic friends.
I have prepared my tincture of Helleborus niger at the present season, when the plant is about to flower, or is just flowering. I consider this the best method. I did the same with the tincture of Cyclamen Europeum; the root has attained perfection at this season. If you require any such prepared tinctures they are at your disposal.
Richard Haehl was also an editor and publisher of the homeopathic journal Allgemcine, and other homeopathic publications.
Haehl was responsible for saving many of the valuable artifacts of Samuel Hahnemann and retrieving the 6th edition of the Organon and publishing it in 1921.
Richard Haehl was the author of - Life and Work of Samuel Hahnemann