Pupils and Friends of Hahnemann

Regierungsrath Baron von Boenninghausen of Munster 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….



SOMEONE named “D.R.” wrote in the “Allg. hom. Ztg./” of the year 1847 (Vol. 32, P. 224.)

In order to assist and show his gratitude to the widow of Dr. Langhammer, a homoeopath,. and once a pupil of Hahnemann, who was living ion very poor circumstances, and also, if possible, to procure cheaply a home medicine chest for a poor homoeopathic physician abroad, M. Lux of Leipsic took over the 432 homoeopathic medicines prepared by Dr. Langhammer and offered them for sale through the newspapers.

Through this the Medical Officer of Health for leipsic, Hofrath Dr. Guntz, was induced to seize this store of medicines; this was carried out by the Actuary Iphofen and his assistant by virtue of the Act of November 19th,1846, which regulated the welfare of the community. On November 25th, the 432 medicinal substances were buried with the bottles, corks and labels. I do not know if they were interred in the cemetery of Paul where twenty-five years previously the medicines of the genial Hornburg were buried.

The opponents of homoeopathy wee always asserting, on other occasions that homoeopathic remedies were “nothing” and therefore ineffective. The wisdom of the Saxon State Medical Faculty and State Police, therefore, buried ineffectual nothings. Why, we wonder?



1. Systematic description of all homoeopathic medicines known up to the present. (2nd Edition, 1835)

2. A brief summary of the effects of homoeopathic medicines on the human body (1834)

3. Fundamental outlines of a future special homoeopathic therapy (1837)

4. The effects of homoeopathic medicines under certain conditions in scheduled form.

5. Diseases of the skin.

6. Translation from the English: Jacob James’ “Practical experience in the field of Homoeopathy.” (1842)

7. Recognition and cure of the most important diseases of the horse, cattle, sheep, pigs, goat and dogs.

8. Description of the most frequent wild and cultivated plants, ferns, some official mosses, and fungi or Saxony, with a description of their injurious properties.



Dr. Aegidi to Dr. Hahnemann (see also Supplement 103):

Dusseldorf, August 6th, 1834.

You will have heard from Jahr that I am still corresponding with a clairvoyant in Nurnberg. Of course she is incapable of writing, yet I receive from time to time a fairly complete diary of what has happened through a young painter, a staid, honest and very truthful man who is always in close touch with her. The sensitiveness of this girl to medicinal influences is extremely great. Here are a few examples: One day she was complaining of a pain on a particular part of then tongue; her brother, whom she asked to look at it and see what was there, could not discover anything abnormal, touched the spot with his finger, but even in this way could not find anything. But from that moment the patient had a taste as of Sulphur, began to eject saliva and suffered from salivation which lasted several days. The next day she told her brother of her discomfort and was told that she had taken some globules of the highest Sulphur potency the previous day.

A merchant from Berlin called on her. After a few days, during which time this man had touched the girl’s hand several times and held it in his own, she began to eject saliva and became afflicted with a continuous and excessive flow of saliva, very similar in appearance to quicksilver, so that on the first day she evacuated a large bowl of thick, tough saliva. She attributed it immediately to the influence of that man, who, after some thought, admitted that fifteen years ago he had undergone a cure with Mercury of such a nature that even the apothecary showed surprise at the enormously large -prescribed doses. This merchant said that he could still feel the poison in his blood. As he also was suffering from a chronic condition this girl ordered him, when he returned to Berlin, to take a few doses of highly potentised Arum maculatum, which is said to have restored him considerably in a few weeks.

Still more remarkable is the effect of creosote upon the girl. One day when the young painter visited her, he had in his pocket a small bottle containing creosote in the 3 potency. From the moment when he approached the patient she could not fight against the harmful influence and was most violently affected. The symptoms which she described herself, during her sufferings, make a good beginning for the proving of this important medicinal substance.

A list of symptoms is added concerning the effect of creosote in the 3rd potency from the first to the seventh day.

Dr. Aegidi to Dr. Gisevius of Berlin:

From the correspondence of Dr. Aegidi with his friend and colleague, Dr. Bruno Gisevius, which was published in the “Homoop. Zeitschrift” of Berlin, (1911, Vol.II, page 75, ff.) we communicate the following passages which show Aegidi’s conception and attitude to the most important and sometimes disputed questions in homoeopathy.

In a quarterly journal by Clotar Muller, III part, of the year 1856, the treatment and cure of a hydrocele was communicated, concerning which Aegidi pronounced that it was “a remarkable case.”

The following words of Dr. Aegidi refer to this case:

I return once more to the famous hydrocele. We can there see quite clearly what the higher potencies can do, and I hope the gentlemen of the Homoeopathic Clinic in Leipsic will learn the lesson that it is not always necessary to use low dilution.

Many well proved remedies are entirely neglected in homoeopathic practice. In my professional occupation, extending over many years, I have frequently

The present-day opponents of the Hahnemannian spirit among the homoeopaths distinguish themselves from their predecessors, the followers of Grisselich, etc., only by effecting great piety for the master and by hypocritically praising his services, whilst the former openly slandered him. But both are agreed upon this, that apart from the Hahnemannian Similia Similibus and some provings of remedies, all other things created by the old master were mere patchwork and caricature. These people, blinded by prejudice, have to taste and smell the medicinal substance if they are to believe in its efficacy. That is why everything that goes beyond the first dilution is a miracle for them, and to-day we may no longer believe in miracles if we wish to be an enlightened Jew. The modern synagogue of this guild is in Dresden; the high priest, Trinks; the Rabbi, Hirschel.

You are studying Hahnemann’s “Chronic Diseases”? That is good. Only one remedy well worked out in every four weeks; that is ore interesting than the most exciting novel. In earlier days, when there was nothing but Hahnemann’s works, we learned how to cure properly; since we have thrown ourselves upon the lazy habits of repertories, we have forgotten much, and the younger generation who only use these latter not possessing or knowing their source, will never accomplish great cures. The best of all I know I leave learned from the “Materia, Medica Pura,” from Stapf’s “Archives,” in which are to be found some excellent provings by the older indefatigable and diligent pupils of Hahnemann, and from provings by the order indefatigable and diligent pupils of Hahnemann, and from the “Chronic Diseases.” Of courses it was hard work, but the gain s incalculable. Let us only read attentively through one remedy and we shall thereby gain a very different insight, than from the dissection of the repertories. If we cut a good portrait into a thousand pieces we cannot acquire a conception of the character of the whole from the heap of fragments. I state that the repertories are a cause to the progress of homoeopathy; they stand in the way of all great cures. Just as with the Bible we must read the originals and again and, investigate, and we shall always find new properties of the remedies and new points of view.

Since I know that even to-day little globules prove active which I received from Hahnemann in the year 1823, one may be certain that your preparations by Starke must still the effective. I, who value Hahnemann’s great discovery as a great treasure and consider myself rich in its possession, still hold that the exclusive pure homoeopathy, the strict observance of the so-called “pure” homoeopaths is stupid, because it is obvious and has been proved by experiments that there are various ways of healing and we have no right to assert that a cure is only possible through the homoeopathic principle when actually and visibly a cure has been effected by other means, by magnetism, composital, etc. Such an assertion is foolish. I treat severe inflammations of the eye with zinc water; indurations of the glands with Nurnberg plaster; croup with tartar emetic solution in doses which produce nausea; scrofulous caries of the bones with a decoction of walnuts; penaritium diffusum (finger worm?) with camphor oil; secondary syphilis according to Zittmann’s method (although in much smaller doses than allopathy prescribes, etc.). All this is not homoeopathy, and yet it effects a certain cure, and since it is not homoeopathic it arouses objections? No, I am not of that opinion. I, also, preserve for myself freedom in the homoeopathic scale of doses. From the mother tincture to the highest potencies, all degrees are useful according to the individual case. So-called pure homoeopathy as an exclusive fact, is a weakness.

It would be sad if all homoeopathic remedies should remain positively without effect if coffee were taken simultaneously…The same condition applies here as it does in Natrum muriaticum in the potencies which we always prescribe, without forbidding the use of salt in cooking our food. I had many an argument on his subject with Papa Hahnemann and convinced him. He agreed with me but his authority demanded that he should not withdraw the laws which he had once established.

I can prove this to you from passages in his latter writings which show his compliance and tolerance. The same with the double remedies.

I think it is better to dispense from solutions than from globules, unless the latter are freshened up from time to time a by impregnating them with the corresponding solution. If this be done every fourth week then they too can be relied upon. If we omit to do this it is probable that we are frequently using globules which have dried up, and being devoid of any medicinal spirit are quite ineffective, and we thus deceive ourselves. To dispense fluids involves more trouble, of course, but it is safer. I press the moistened cork into the sugar of milk, that is sufficient and is safer. I press the moistened cork into the sugar of milk, that is sufficient and is quickly done. Powders prepared in this way are much more effective than those containing globules.

I have since (since Jenichen recommended a special method- R.H.) given the remedies in high potencies (Bellad. 3,000, morning and evening, I teaspoonful) and certainly improvement took place immediately…. This case has established my faith in high potencies…. which I could not quite make up my mind accept before, and therefore, as is now obvious not have this confession printed, however, otherwise Trinks will again seem me and I d not want to get in touch with him again…. It is possible that the genius epidemicus at present favours the effects of high potencies and that at other.

May the devil take all the repertories? They destroy that which belongs together, and unite points which are foreign to each other, only for the sake of adhering to the A.B.C. of the children’s reading books. In order to be able to to carry in one’s head the whole Materia Medica pura ready for use, and then the repertories would be of less value than ever.



Treatment of Cholera and Preventative Remedies, according Hahnemann’s latest letters to the author, 1831.

Repertory of Antipsoric Remedies, with Introduction by Hahnemann, on the Repetition of the Dose of a Homoeopathic Remedy, 1832.

Summary of the Chief Sphere of Activity of Antipsoric Remedies and their Characteristic Peculiarities, as a Supplement to the Repertory dealing with them, 1833.

An Attempt at an Homoeopathic Therapy for Intermittent Fevers, Chiefly for Beginners in Homoeopathy, 1833.

Contributions to the Knowledge of the Peculiarities of Homoeopathic Medicines, 1833.

Homoeopathic Diet and the drawing up of a Complete Disease Picture for the Lay Public, 1833.

Homoeopathy, a Manual for the Lay Public, 1834.

Repertory of the Medicine which are not Antipsorics, 1835.

Experiments on the Relationships of the Homoeopathic Medicines, 1836.

Therapeutic Pocket Book for Homoeopathic Physicians for use at the Bedside and the Study of Materia Medica Pura, 1846.

Brief Instructions for Lay People on the Prevention of Cholera, 1849.

The Parts of the Body and their Relationships. Homoeopathic Studies, 1853.

The Homoeopathic Family Physician in Brief Therapeutic Diagnosis. An attempt, 1853.

The Homoeopathic Treatment of Whooping-Cough in its Various Forms, 1860.

The Aphorisms of Hippocrates. With comments by a Homoeopath., 1863.

An Attempt to Compile a Homoeopathic Therapy of Intermittent and Other Fevers, Chiefly for Beginners in Homoeopathy; second amplified and improved edition; first part; Pyrexia, 1864.


Dr. von Boenninghausen to Hahnemann:

Munster, July 4th, 1832.

The printing of my repertory is now making good progress, and I may hope to see it finished by the 10th August. the published himself has begun to take a keen interest in it after seeing what an enormous quantity of positive experience we possess and when (I accomplished) the cure of one of his secretaries, who was obviously suffering from phthisis, the correctness of our method was actually proved. The public generally favours the new method of treatment more and more, particularly as I had the good luck to cue two cases of severe and complicated nerve fever before my departure, which is still talked of in the town among all classes. I had a peculiar time during my last journey in the Duchy of Westphalia, where I was daily only able to cover a short distance (2 to 3 miles). The knowledge of my presence spread constantly like flash of lightning, and when I got up in the morning there were at least ten patients from the last place where I had slept, waiting to ask for my advice. All this is the result of many cases treated with good results, and a consequently undeserved celebrity acquired last winter and further increased by the rapid curing of a child (suffering from a serious attack of whooping-cough and scrofulous inflammation of the eyes.). It belonged to the family of a Government official in Arnsburg, where two brothers-in-law were doctors and had given the child up. One of these to whom I spoke recently in that locality is converted, but he still lacks the leisure to study the subjects

The following testimony shows how highly Hahnemann appreciated Boenninghausen’s achievements in homoeopathy.


Regierungsrath Baron von Boenninghausen of Munster 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.


Cothen. September 1st, 1853.


From the correspondence of Hahnemann and Boenninghausen:

Dear Regierungsrath (Councillor of law), Among the pleasure of my old age I may rightly place my acquaintance with men who, like you, occupy an honourable position and are therefore not drawn by any ulterior motives towards homoeopathy but solely from their love of humanity and truth, and who have progressed so far that they can help the unfortunate and in this way they are able to convince many doctors of a better thing.

You are at the top of that list, dear Councillor, together with friend the Regierungsrath Baron von Gersdorff of Eisenach. I marvel at the zeal with which you devote yourself to this noble profession which requires so much thought. I rejoice at having stirred, by my teaching, worthy men who come to the aid of our fellow beings in their sufferings as powerful tools sent by the All-good great Spirit, Who seems to have resolved that the most deplorable and harmful mistakes made by allopathy are to be brought to an end by the revelation of the helpful truths shall come to light.

I am happy to have lived to see the beautiful dawn before my work here o earth has been completed.

Cothen. June 20th, 1830.

the sacrifices you have made in the good cause are incredible; only the most beautiful consciousness which a man can acquire, namely, the knowledge of having saved unfortunate people who would have hastened to disaster, can recompense you for such sacrifice.

But in my opinion the greatest service you render us is the conversion of allopathic physicians. These poor men, amongst whom there are still some honest souls-friends of humanity their work renders them callous and devoid of conscience, however well they have learned to simulate sympathy for their patients, yet those who are honest deserve our pity and are worthy of being drawn from the darkness into the kind light. It still remains difficult to bring about such a conversion as you know, because these poor men are so crammed full of erroneous teachings that it requires the greatest effort on their part to expel from their minds these wrong ideas and the systematically taught nonsense… Through such striking re-educative work you certainly do us the greatest service-for you know that homoeopathic physicians are in great demand in many places, and that I as well as several of my best pupils have been asked to procure a good homoeopath for this or that city or for some influential house of the aristocracy.

Cothen. Jam. 16, 1831.

Cothen, April 24th, 1831.

You seem to have been providentially sent to us to wield your pen successfully and energetically for our splendid science. The other homoeopaths are either too lazy or too dull or they are prevented by their circumstances.

You surprise me most by your untiring zeal and your skill in converting allopathic physicians.

Cothen, November 30th, 1831.

Your report of the progress you are making in winning Munster over to homoeopathy and (mirabile dictu) of winning over the physician of that city has given me great pleasure. In this respect you are far in advance of others, nor have you been equalled by any of my other followers.

Also the apostle whom you have placed in the chair to teach homoeopathy will not remain without good influence for the emancipation of our school so that in the end the medical Sanhedrin (Jewish lawcourt-R.H.) of Berlin will be ashamed because a far-distant province has excellent it in rank in the initiation of the science which is the only one that is beneficent at the present time.

Cothen, March 9th, 1833.

None of my pupils has hitherto done our science such great service as you have done, of which your last summary bears testimony. With the exception of one or two the majority only use what has been discovered, or they argue on this or that point, and frequently try to persuade us that the deviation from the right path which they favour, are better than everything that was done previously.

Cothen, April 28th, 1833.

Your excellent book on Intermittent Fevers as far as I can see now (because I wish to answer you quickly) is classical; none of my other pupils this gift to suffering humanity

Cothen, February 11th, 1824.

I did expect that you manual of our science would turn our useful to the lay public, but I have fount hat you have achieved a masterpiece which will teach anyone with only average education all he needs to know, to enable him to form a thorough judgment of homoeopathy, to recognise its value and to enable him to silence the objections, slanders, and lies of the allopaths, to decide for himself whether in the future he will continue to trust the life and health of his dear ones to that old, dangerous, baseless, and unconsidered method of treatment or to the new, well-considered, gentle and true science of healing.

You have not only accomplished their instruction, but you, more than anyone hitherto, have put before homoeopathic physicians the salient point required from science in our Art, more comprehensively and completely than has ever been done before. I cannot tell you sufficiently how I have delighted in reading through this masterpiece of yours.

My colleague, Dr. Lehmann, agrees with me wholeheartedly in all I have said, and thanks you very much for the copy you have presented to him and he wishes to be remembered to you.

Cothen, June 30th, 1834.

I would have answered you esteemed letter of May 25th before if I had received a little note from you acknowledge the arrival of my bust, which the sculptor Steinhauser of Berlin (who modelled it) states that he posted to you on June 4th by J.F.A. Preuss, free of charge. This cannot have reached you yet. I wished to give you a little pleasure with it



The family of Gersdorff possesses letters of Hahnemann to Baron von Gersdorff from the years 1824-1836, which Dr. Goullon of Weimar has published in the “Journal of the Berlin Society of Homoeopathic Physicians” (1897, Vol. 16, pages 382-413). We herewith publish a selection from them:

Richard Haehl
Richard M Haehl 1873 - 1932 MD, a German orthodox physician from Stuttgart and Kirchheim who converted to homeopathy, travelled to America to study homeopathy at the Hahnemann College of Philadelphia, to become the biographer of Samuel Hahnemann, and the Secretary of the German Homeopathic Society, the Hahnemannia.

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