- Email: [email protected]
The First International Congress of Ophthalmology—1857
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY® FRANK W. NEWELL, Publisher and Editor-in-Chief Tribune Tower, Suite 1415, 435 North Michigan Ave., Chicago, Illinois 60611 EDITORIAL BOARD
Thomas M. Aaberg, Milwaukee Mathea R. Allansmith, Boston Douglas R. Anderson, Miami Charles J. Campbell, New York Ronald E. Carr, New York Claes H. Dohlman, Boston Fred Ederer, Bethesda Eugene Helveston, Indianapolis Frederick A. Jakobiec, New York
Herbert E. Kaufman, New Orleans Steven C. Kramer, San Francisco Carl Kupfer, Bethesda Irving H. Leopold, Irvine Robert Machemer, Durham A. Edward Maumenee, Baltimore Irene H. Maumenee, Baltimore Edward W. D . Norton, Miami G. Richard O'Connor, San Francisco Amall Pätz, Baltimore
Deborah Pavan-Langston, Boston Steven M. Podos, New York Stephen J. Ryan, Los Angeles David Shoch, Chicago Bruce E. Spivey, San Francisco Bradley R. Straatsma, Los Angeles H. Stanley Thompson, Iowa City Gunter K. von Noorden, Houston George O. Waring, Atlanta
Published monthly by the Ophthalmic Publishing Company Tribune Tower, Suite 1415, 435 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60611 Directors: A. E D W A R D M A U M E N E E , President; DAVID Secretary and Treasurer; E D W A R D W. D . NORTON,
T H E F I R S T INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF OPHTHALMOLOGY—1857 The First International Congress of Ophthalmology met Sept. 13-16, 1857, in Brussels. The distinguished S. L. Fallot, president of the Royal Academy of Medicine of Belgium, presided. Thanks to the editorial talents of A. M. Warlomont, editor of the Annales d'Oculistique and secretary-general of the Congress, a comprehensive Proceedings is available. This was the first congress of specialists ever held as well as the first international congress. It was an immediate success. Over 250 were registered as members, including 150 of the greatest eye specialists of the day. Invitations to the Congress had been sent to many countries through diplomatic channels and the meeting was recognized by the Belgian government and formally opened by the Belgian Minister of the Interior. The objectives of the Congress were the examination and analysis of collected observations, the exposition of new theor-
SHOCH,
Vice President;
B R U C E E . SPIVEY, B R A D L E Y
FRANK
R.
W.
NEWELL,
STRAATSMA
ies, the comparison of results obtained by different practical processes, and the determination of the actual state of ophthalmologic science in various countries. In the published program the committee of organization addressed the following series of questions to the members: Section 1. The transmissibility of purulent ophthalmia being demonstrated. A. Can its mode of transmission be exactly determined? B. What part in the transmission of ophthalmia can be assigned to granulations? What is the nature of these? C. Is there any one formula of which experience has sanctioned the superiority in the treatment of military ophthalmia? D. What measures are best to take for preventing the appearance and spread of ophthalmia? Section II. A. What has been the influence of the discovery of the ophthalmoscope on the diagnosis and treatment of diseases of the eye? B. What agents concur in or preside over the accommodation of the eye to distances? C. Does the present state of science authorize the
129
130
JANUARY, 1982
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
admission of specific ophthalmiae? If so, what is to be understood by this term, and to how many species of ophthalmia is it applicable? D. Is the specificity capable of being recognized by anatomical and physical characters of the eye? E. Can a radical cure be obtained by simple local applications? Or is general treatment always demanded? Section III. A. Has experience established that certain forms of cataract may be cured without operation? If so, what are these forms? And what are the means that may be substituted for surgical treatment? B. Of what utility is closure of the eyelids in the treatment of diseases of the eye? What are the affections that demand its employment; and what is the best method of effecting it? C. Is there an advantage in special establishments for the treatment of diseases of the eye? If so, what are the conditions which they ought to realize? The list of those attending the Congress reads like an eponymic register of ocular diseases and operations: Ammon, Arlt, Bowman, Desmarres, Donders, von Graefe, Horner, Jaeger, Pagenstecher, and Stellwag. The only representative present from the New World was Ortiz of Caracas. Gross, Hays, Lazarus, Littel, all of Philadelphia, are listed as members although they did not attend. Littel described ophthalmology in America and mentioned the use of silver nitrate solution (10 grains to 1 ounce of water) for the treatment of eyelid granulations and in the treatment of purulent conjunctivitis (2.5 grains to 1 ounce of water). Gross described ophthalmic care available in Philadelphia, New York, and Boston, but "dans l'intérieur des terres, ces maladies sont ou fort négligées, ou traitées exclusivement par les charlatans (cuacqs)." On the final day of the Congress von Graefe was asked to describe iridectomy for glaucoma. His modest remarks were
followed by "applaudissements unanimes et répètes, nouveaux applaudissements, applaudissements pepetes dans toutes les parties de la salle, et applaudisements unanimes." A few moments later the Congress ended. The First International Congress established a pattern for subsequent Congresses. It brought together physicians who shared an interest in the eye and it provided an opportunity for informal meetings and visits (the first Congress featured three receptions and an official banquet with ten toasts). It was the occasion for bringing to worldwide attention a new treatment or diagnostic method. It established a company of ophthalmologists whose concern for the prevention and cure of blindness has extended beyond national boundaries. FRANK W.
NEWELL
OBITUARY Louis Paufique, M.D. 1899-1981 Professor Louis Paufique's death marked the end of an epoch, for his outstanding qualities had made him the uncontested master of ophthalmology in France. It is difficult to summarize his personality in a few phrases. Everyone recognized his original turn of mind, always tending to research, his skilled performance of the latest techniques, his sense of organization, and his natural kindness that brought personal, generous, and often anonymous help to all. Anyone who met Professor Paufique never forgot him. His slim and elegant figure, his deep and direct look, gave him, despite his years, an air of youth. He was more than a leader; he was a "seigneur," not only to the famous persons he met, but also to the simplest patient
Thomas M. Aaberg, Milwaukee Mathea R. Allansmith, Boston Douglas R. Anderson, Miami Charles J. Campbell, New York Ronald E. Carr, New York Claes H. Dohlman, Boston Fred Ederer, Bethesda Eugene Helveston, Indianapolis Frederick A. Jakobiec, New York
Herbert E. Kaufman, New Orleans Steven C. Kramer, San Francisco Carl Kupfer, Bethesda Irving H. Leopold, Irvine Robert Machemer, Durham A. Edward Maumenee, Baltimore Irene H. Maumenee, Baltimore Edward W. D . Norton, Miami G. Richard O'Connor, San Francisco Amall Pätz, Baltimore
Deborah Pavan-Langston, Boston Steven M. Podos, New York Stephen J. Ryan, Los Angeles David Shoch, Chicago Bruce E. Spivey, San Francisco Bradley R. Straatsma, Los Angeles H. Stanley Thompson, Iowa City Gunter K. von Noorden, Houston George O. Waring, Atlanta
Published monthly by the Ophthalmic Publishing Company Tribune Tower, Suite 1415, 435 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60611 Directors: A. E D W A R D M A U M E N E E , President; DAVID Secretary and Treasurer; E D W A R D W. D . NORTON,
T H E F I R S T INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF OPHTHALMOLOGY—1857 The First International Congress of Ophthalmology met Sept. 13-16, 1857, in Brussels. The distinguished S. L. Fallot, president of the Royal Academy of Medicine of Belgium, presided. Thanks to the editorial talents of A. M. Warlomont, editor of the Annales d'Oculistique and secretary-general of the Congress, a comprehensive Proceedings is available. This was the first congress of specialists ever held as well as the first international congress. It was an immediate success. Over 250 were registered as members, including 150 of the greatest eye specialists of the day. Invitations to the Congress had been sent to many countries through diplomatic channels and the meeting was recognized by the Belgian government and formally opened by the Belgian Minister of the Interior. The objectives of the Congress were the examination and analysis of collected observations, the exposition of new theor-
SHOCH,
Vice President;
B R U C E E . SPIVEY, B R A D L E Y
FRANK
R.
W.
NEWELL,
STRAATSMA
ies, the comparison of results obtained by different practical processes, and the determination of the actual state of ophthalmologic science in various countries. In the published program the committee of organization addressed the following series of questions to the members: Section 1. The transmissibility of purulent ophthalmia being demonstrated. A. Can its mode of transmission be exactly determined? B. What part in the transmission of ophthalmia can be assigned to granulations? What is the nature of these? C. Is there any one formula of which experience has sanctioned the superiority in the treatment of military ophthalmia? D. What measures are best to take for preventing the appearance and spread of ophthalmia? Section II. A. What has been the influence of the discovery of the ophthalmoscope on the diagnosis and treatment of diseases of the eye? B. What agents concur in or preside over the accommodation of the eye to distances? C. Does the present state of science authorize the
129
130
JANUARY, 1982
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
admission of specific ophthalmiae? If so, what is to be understood by this term, and to how many species of ophthalmia is it applicable? D. Is the specificity capable of being recognized by anatomical and physical characters of the eye? E. Can a radical cure be obtained by simple local applications? Or is general treatment always demanded? Section III. A. Has experience established that certain forms of cataract may be cured without operation? If so, what are these forms? And what are the means that may be substituted for surgical treatment? B. Of what utility is closure of the eyelids in the treatment of diseases of the eye? What are the affections that demand its employment; and what is the best method of effecting it? C. Is there an advantage in special establishments for the treatment of diseases of the eye? If so, what are the conditions which they ought to realize? The list of those attending the Congress reads like an eponymic register of ocular diseases and operations: Ammon, Arlt, Bowman, Desmarres, Donders, von Graefe, Horner, Jaeger, Pagenstecher, and Stellwag. The only representative present from the New World was Ortiz of Caracas. Gross, Hays, Lazarus, Littel, all of Philadelphia, are listed as members although they did not attend. Littel described ophthalmology in America and mentioned the use of silver nitrate solution (10 grains to 1 ounce of water) for the treatment of eyelid granulations and in the treatment of purulent conjunctivitis (2.5 grains to 1 ounce of water). Gross described ophthalmic care available in Philadelphia, New York, and Boston, but "dans l'intérieur des terres, ces maladies sont ou fort négligées, ou traitées exclusivement par les charlatans (cuacqs)." On the final day of the Congress von Graefe was asked to describe iridectomy for glaucoma. His modest remarks were
followed by "applaudissements unanimes et répètes, nouveaux applaudissements, applaudissements pepetes dans toutes les parties de la salle, et applaudisements unanimes." A few moments later the Congress ended. The First International Congress established a pattern for subsequent Congresses. It brought together physicians who shared an interest in the eye and it provided an opportunity for informal meetings and visits (the first Congress featured three receptions and an official banquet with ten toasts). It was the occasion for bringing to worldwide attention a new treatment or diagnostic method. It established a company of ophthalmologists whose concern for the prevention and cure of blindness has extended beyond national boundaries. FRANK W.
NEWELL
OBITUARY Louis Paufique, M.D. 1899-1981 Professor Louis Paufique's death marked the end of an epoch, for his outstanding qualities had made him the uncontested master of ophthalmology in France. It is difficult to summarize his personality in a few phrases. Everyone recognized his original turn of mind, always tending to research, his skilled performance of the latest techniques, his sense of organization, and his natural kindness that brought personal, generous, and often anonymous help to all. Anyone who met Professor Paufique never forgot him. His slim and elegant figure, his deep and direct look, gave him, despite his years, an air of youth. He was more than a leader; he was a "seigneur," not only to the famous persons he met, but also to the simplest patient