#uroscopy

[upennmanuscripts]

LJS 463 is a collection of astrological and medical texts, written in Germany in 1443. The illustrations are vibrant, and they include these four illustrations in the medical section of the text: Bloodletting on f. 52r, bathing on f. 59r, a doctor examining a vial of liquid (probably urine) on f. 69v, and the Zodiac Man on f. 54v. The Zodiac Man illustrates where various signs of the zodiac affect the human body - a common belief from the ancient Greeks through the Middle Ages.

🔗:

[othmeralia]

Rare Book Thursday

Eyn kunstreichs warhafftigs und wolgegründtes Urteil und Secret Büchlin des Harns (1538) by Heinrich Vogtherr.

If you read German, yes you read that right. This is a book about uroscopy. This 16th century book teaches the medical practice of visually examining a patient's urine for pus, blood, or other symptoms of disease.

[cuties-in-codices]

uroscopy (doctors examining a patient's urine for symptoms of disease)

in a medical manuscript, southern germany, c. 1450-1470

source: Heidelberg, UB, Cod. Pal. germ. 644, fol. 100v, fol. 102r, fol. 108r and fol. 94v

[astriiformes]

One reason I love my history of science classes is that sitting in a lecture and scribbling down notes on humoral theory and uroscopy makes me feel directly emotionally connected to the medical students a thousand years ago trying to commit the exact same ideas to memory -- albeit as the medical science of their day, not a history lesson, but still.

[sanjaylodh]

since human evolution took place

since human evolution took place

Human species were aware of the disease since then

How were patients identified in ancient times?

Medieval Europe

Uroscopy was most widely used for diagnosing illness. Physicians would collect patients urine in a flask called “matula”. The matula was specific in shape and had four regions – circulus, superficies, substantia, and fundus – that corresponded to regions of the body.

University of Exeter

https://classics.exeter.ac.uk › research › projects › diagn...

Diagnosis Matters: Reading the Body in the Ancient World

Diagnosis sits at the intersection of science, culture, and the body. It was the centrepiece of ancient medicine, but it also lay at point where scientific knowledge was brought to bear on the individual, their body, and their understanding of illness and disease. This project lays bare the architecture of a cultural discourse which shaped the lives of sick individuals throughout the Roman Empire. Broadly defined as the recognition of the body's physical and psychological condition or the illnesses a patient experiences, diagnosis was practiced in all ancient medical sects, and many health-care contexts. Despite its importance, however, there is no major scholarly study dedicated to this aspect of ancient culture. This fellowship will address that critical gap in classical scholarship by providing a cultural history of diagnosis in medicine during the Roman Empire.

The research combines four related areas of investigation. I start by probing how ancient doctors understood the concept of diagnosis. I question how Roman doctors from different medical sects drew on (and supplemented) philosophical and scientific thinking from the Hellenistic and Classical periods. I also investigate how Roman doctors adopted ideas from contemporary thinkers and practitioners in order to show how theories of diagnosis were, during this period, characterised by cross-fertilization between different sects and medical contexts. Additionally, I probe how diagnosis was seen in relation to other forms of recognition: I ask how doctors understood, defined, and justified their activity, and how they understood their practices of diagnosis, in relation to other discourses of knowledge in this period. Secondly, I scrutinise the way diagnosis was represented as a practical activity. I investigate the case-histories and accounts of diagnosis contained in a range of Imperial doctors (e.g. Galen, Rufus of Ephesus, Achigenes, Soranus of Ephesus). I investigate what methods are used to evaluate the patient, how those methods relate to explicit theoretical or methodological statements by doctors, how different diseases (gout) and symptoms (pulse or pain) are incorporated into effective diagnoses, and what acts of evaluation are brought to bear on the patient's body in the process of diagnostic recognition and explanation. I also interrogate how social context and personal relationships inflect diagnosis: I continually draw out how interpersonal interaction, social connections and relationships, interpersonal issues such as emotion and the psychological impact of disease underpin ancient diagnostic practices. How do these factors influence and how are they managed within, the clinical encounter? Finally, I locate this medical discourse within Roman culture, more broadly. I probe how diagnosis was discussed or represented in other cultural contexts, such as Lucian and Fronto (who both wrote extensively about gout) and the Greco-Roman novels. I examine how these texts represent diagnostic activity and disease explanation, particularly in cases where similar diseases or conditions are represented by literary figures. I also ask, at this level, how these writers construct the authority and importance of medical recognition. I probe, then, the way scientific and literary cultures intersect, and the extent to which medical views of diagnosis are reflected in other cultural contexts.

How did people cure diseases in ancient times?

In ancient times the diseases were treated through medicines derived from natural source such as from plants, leaf, wood, roots, fruit extracts, acupuncture, animal parts and minerals.

How did doctors diagnose?

The information required for diagnosis is typically collected from a history and physical examination of the person seeking medical care. Often, one or more diagnostic procedures, such as medical tests, are also done during the process. Sometimes the posthumous diagnosis is considered a kind of medical diagnosis.

Translate Hindi

जबसे ह्यूमन इवोल्यूशन हो चुका था

तब से ही ह्यूमन स्पेसिस रोग से परिचित थे

पूराना जमाने में मरीज को कैसे चिह्नित किया जाता था

मध्ययुगीन यूरोप

बीमारी के निदान के लिए यूरोस्कोपी का सबसे अधिक उपयोग किया गया। चिकित्सक मरीजों के मूत्र को "मटुला" नामक फ्लास्क में एकत्र करते थे। माटुला आकार में विशिष्ट था और इसमें चार क्षेत्र थे - सर्कुलस, सतही, मूल, और फ़ंडस - जो शरीर के क्षेत्रों के अनुरूप थे।

एक्सेटर विश्वविद्यालय

https://classics.exeter.ac.uk › अनुसंधान › परियोजनाएं › निदान...

निदान के मामले: प्राचीन विश्व में शरीर को पढ़ना

निदान विज्ञान, संस्कृति और शरीर के चौराहे पर बैठता है। यह प्राचीन चिकित्सा का केंद्रबिंदु था, लेकिन यह उस बिंदु पर भी था जहां वैज्ञानिक ज्ञान को व्यक्ति, उनके शरीर और बीमारी और बीमारी के बारे में उनकी समझ पर लागू किया गया था। यह परियोजना सांस्कृतिक प्रवचन की वास्तुकला को उजागर करती है जिसने पूरे रोमन साम्राज्य में बीमार व्यक्तियों के जीवन को आकार दिया। मोटे तौर पर इसे शरीर की शारीरिक और मनोवैज्ञानिक स्थिति या रोगी द्वारा अनुभव की जाने वाली बीमारियों की पहचान के रूप में परिभाषित किया गया है, निदान का अभ्यास सभी प्राचीन चिकित्सा संप्रदायों और कई स्वास्थ्य देखभाल संदर्भों में किया जाता था। हालाँकि, इसके महत्व के बावजूद, प्राचीन संस्कृति के इस पहलू को समर्पित कोई बड़ा विद्वान अध्ययन नहीं है। यह फ़ेलोशिप रोमन साम्राज्य के दौरान चिकित्सा में निदान का सांस्कृतिक इतिहास प्रदान करके शास्त्रीय विद्वता में उस महत्वपूर्ण अंतर को संबोधित करेगी।

अनुसंधान जांच के चार संबंधित क्षेत्रों को जोड़ता है। मैं इसकी जांच से शुरुआत करता हूं कि प्राचीन डॉक्टरों ने निदान की अवधारणा को कैसे समझा। मैं सवाल करता हूं कि विभिन्न चिकित्सा संप्रदायों के रोमन डॉक्टरों ने हेलेनिस्टिक और शास्त्रीय काल से दार्शनिक और वैज्ञानिक सोच को कैसे आकर्षित (और पूरक) किया। मैं यह भी जांचता हूं कि कैसे रोमन डॉक्टरों ने समकालीन विचारकों और ��िकित्सकों के विचारों को अपनाया ताकि यह दिखाया जा सके कि इस अवधि के दौरान निदान के सिद्धांत विभिन्न संप्रदायों और चिकित्सा संदर्भों के बीच क्रॉस-निषेचन द्वारा कैसे चित्रित किए गए थे। इसके अतिरिक्त, मैं जांच करता हूं कि निदान को मान्यता के अन्य रूपों के संबंध में कैसे देखा गया था: मैं पूछता हूं कि डॉक्टरों ने इस अवधि में ज्ञान के अन्य प्रवचनों के संबंध में अपनी गतिविधि को कैसे समझा, परिभाषित और उचित ठहराया, और उन्होंने निदान की अपनी प्रथाओं को कैसे समझा। दूसरे, मैं इस बात की जांच करता हूं कि निदान को एक व्यावहारिक गतिविधि के रूप में कैसे प्रस्तुत किया गया। मैं कई शाही डॉक्टरों (उदाहरण के लिए गैलेन, इफिसस के रूफस, अचिजीनस, इफिसस के सोरेनस) में निहित केस-इतिहास और निदान के खातों की जांच करता हूं। मैं जांच करता हूं कि रोगी का मूल्यांकन करने के लिए किन तरीकों का उपयोग किया जाता है, वे तरीके डॉक्टरों के स्पष्ट सैद्धांतिक या पद्धति संबंधी बयानों से कैसे संबंधित हैं, विभिन्न बीमारियों (गाउट) और लक्षणों (नाड़ी या दर्द) को प्रभावी निदान में कैसे शामिल किया जाता है, और मूल्यांकन के कौन से कार्य लाए जाते हैं नैदानिक पहचान और स्पष्टीकरण की प्रक्रिया में रोगी के शरीर पर प्रभाव डालना। मैं यह भी पूछताछ करता हूं कि कैसे सामाजिक संदर्भ और व्यक्तिगत संबंध निदान को प्रभावित करते हैं: मैं लगातार यह पता लगाता हूं कि कैसे पारस्परिक संपर्क, सामाजिक संबंध और रिश्ते, भावना जैसे पारस्परिक मुद्दे और रोग के मनोवैज्ञानिक प्रभाव प्राचीन निदान प्रथाओं को रेखांकित करते हैं। ये कारक नैदानिक मुठभेड़ को कैसे प्रभावित करते हैं और उन्हें कैसे प्रबंधित किया जाता है? अंत में, मैं इस चिकित्सा प्रवचन को रोमन संस्कृति के भीतर अधिक व्यापक रूप से पाता हूँ। मैं जांच करता हूं कि अन्य सांस्कृतिक संदर्भों में निदान पर कैसे चर्चा की गई या उसका प्रतिनिधित्व किया गया, जैसे लूसियन और फ्रोंटो (जिन्होंने गाउट के बारे में बड़े पैमाने पर लिखा) और ग्रीको-रोमन उपन्यासों में। मैं जांच करता हूं कि ये ग्रंथ नैदानिक गतिविधि और रोग स्पष्टीकरण का प्रतिनिधित्व कैसे करते हैं, खासकर उन मामलों में जहां साहित्यिक हस्तियों द्वारा समान बीमारियों या स्थितियों का प्रतिनिधित्व किया जाता है। मैं इस स्तर पर यह भी पूछता हूं कि ये लेखक चिकित्सा मान्यता के अधिकार और महत्व का निर्माण कैसे करते हैं। फिर, मैं इस बात की जांच करता हूं कि वैज्ञानिक और साहित्यिक संस्कृतियां किस तरह से मिलती हैं, और निदान के चिकित्सा संबंधी विचार किस हद तक अन्य सांस्कृतिक संदर्भों में परिलक्षित होते हैं।

प्राचीन काल में लोग बीमारियों का इलाज कैसे करते थे?

प्राचीन समय में रोगों का इलाज प्राकृतिक स्रोतों जैसे पौधों, पत्तियों, लकड़ी, जड़ों, फलों के अर्क, एक्यूपंक्चर, जानवरों के अंगों ��र खनिजों से प्राप्त दवाओं के माध्यम से किया जाता था।

डॉक्टरों ने कैसे निदान किया?

निदान के लिए आवश्यक जानकारी आमतौर पर चिकित्सा देखभाल चाहने वाले व्यक्ति के इतिहास और शारीरिक परीक्षण से एकत्र की जाती है। अक्सर, प्रक्रिया के दौरान एक या अधिक नैदानिक प्रक्रियाएं, जैसे चिकित्सा परीक्षण भी किए जाते हैं। कभी-कभी मरणोपरांत निदान को एक प्रकार का चिकित्सीय निदान माना जाता है।

[boccadorata]

i just love seeing all the different hands, especially with the different note takers are all writing under and around each other or in the margins (on some pages there's at least 4 different hands) .... i love looking at the calendar where a later user has written a bunch of other things into the blank days / spaces .... and let us not forget the pee color section

im kind of in love with this late 14th century medical miscellany im having to transcribe

[drrobertpuffphd]

Jan Steen Leiden 1626-1679 “The Uroscopist” c. 1663 - 1665 oil on panel Photo is taken by: @robertpuffjr Jan Havickszoon Steen was a Dutch Golden Age painter, one of the leading genre painters of the 17th century. His works are known for their psychological insight, sense of humour and abundance of colour. The Uroscopist, or uroscopy, is the medical examination of the urine in order to facilitate the diagnosis of a disease or disorder. Examining the urine is one of the oldest forms of diagnostic testing, extending back to the days of the ancient Greek physician Hippocrates. (This writeup is taken from the description at Wikipedia.) Museum de Lakenhal, Leiden, the Netherlands 🇳🇱 #historyofart #arthistory #greatworksofart #artmuseum #art #artist #masterpiece #painting #museumvisit #artlover #artists #artblogger #jan #steen #jansteen (at Museum De Lakenhal) https://www.instagram.com/p/CmIVvCjLCMV/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

[upennmanuscripts]

Today's #MedicalMonday is LJS 449, a 15th century German medical and astronomical miscellany. It has sections on medicine, astrology, and astronomy, including texts on the zodiac. Also includes a great urine chart, and many bleeding charts.

Online:

[shakespearenews]

One example of Shakespeare’s in-depth medical knowledge was his apparent references to the theory of the circulation of the blood. This discovery is usually attributed to William Harvey and was first described by him in a lecture he gave in 1616 (although Harvey didn’t publish his theory until 1628, after the playwright’s death). However, the theory was certainly known before 1616 by a few medical men in mainland Europe and is hinted at in several Shakespeare plays, decades before it was accepted by the English medical establishment. 

Lines such as, “You are my true and honourable wife; / As dear to me as are those ruddy drops / That visit my sad heart” (Julius Caesar) and “The tide of blood in me / Hath proudly flow’d in vanity till now” (Henry IV, Part II) certainly suggest an appreciation of blood flowing, even if Shakespeare didn’t explicitly state that blood flows in a continuous circuit.

[nickysfacts]

When you into palm readings, but wish they were more gross!

🤢

[discardingimages]

doctor monkey examining an owl

book of hours, Arras ca. 1296-1311

Cambrai, BM, ms. 87, fol. 138r

[titleleaf]

[cw: talk of partner abuse, sexual violence]

It feels as if people are overcorrecting from “these pseudo-historical political- or economically-motivated marriages were always loveless prisons and literally worse than being dead, except our heroine is smart and spirited enough to know she should marry for love” to “arranged marriage would be awesome actually if your heroine were a clever and ambitious woman who knew how to WIELD THAT TO HER ADVANTAGE” instead of: some of the real marriages these fictional are (roughly) analogous to were functional and affectionate and mutually advantageous, some were absolute hell on earth, and neither extreme is acceptable or desirable when a woman does not have any sort of meaningful legal rights or freedoms comparable to those of her husband. Like come on now here. I don’t want to have to depend on my imaginary shitty husband’s imaginary shitty goodwill, because in real life there’s no guarantee of any such thing, or even that my imaginary mostly-indifferent generally-inoffensive and businesslike spouse doesn’t occasionally exercise his legally enshrined right to physical and sexual violence against me. 

Like this is all fun and great as a fictional trope but I need you to display an understanding of the considerations and dynamics of historical marriage norms* that’s more nuanced than “systematic legal and societal disenfranchisement isn’t so bad if you’re a girlboss about it”. 

*: for the entire swath of what’s being referred to as “history” here, which seems to be... pseudo-western European + late medieval + aristocratic? maybe Early Modern? I’m not being any more precise here because that post circulating sure wasn’t and I need to brush my teeth and go to bed on account of being old. 

EDIT: I swear I will stop harping on this but one of my friends brought up the very good point that this lack of legal enfranchisement was hardly limited to just arranged marriages. I don’t remotely have the cultural competency to talk about contemporary arranged marriages, but I assume for a huge swath of Western readers and viewers they seem as unfamiliar and unsettling as hennins and uroscopy, and so they get a lot of the heat when really if I walk fully clear-eyed and willing into a marriage of my own initiation with a guy who’s a piece of shit and can treat me like property with impunity, that’s also a feminist nightmare, you know? 

[unsanctixned-vtm]

At this point I can taste the heart disease in people and am regressing back to the days of medieval uroscopy but with blood instead.

[randomfacts-aboutthatsubject]

"Uroscopy was the mirror of medicine for thousands of years. From a liquid window through which physicians felt they could view the body's inner workings. Numerous, somewhat accurate, physiologic theories arose from uroscopy. Then the importance of urinary diagnosis became exaggerated, and increasingly complex, until physicians required only the presence of urine, not patients, to diagnose disease. Uroscopy then escaped medical control, becoming first a home health aid and then a tool of uneducated practitioners. Thomas Brian led a medical rebellion against all uses of uroscopy and published the Pisse Prophet, a book that devastated uroscopy."

(J.A. Armstrong, Urinalysis in Western culture: A brief history, Kidney International, Volume 71, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 384-387)

doctor tells me to pee in a cup, looks at it, says “gross” and pours it out