176 homilies arranged in order for all the Sundays and festivals

of the ecclesiastical year; and probably was completed before the year 780. Though written in Latin, its discourses were doubtless intended to be delivered in the vulgar tongue; the clergy, however, were often too indolent or too ignorant for this, although by more than one provincial council they were enjoined to exert themselves so that they might be able to /do so.1 Hence an important form of literary activity came to be the translation of the homilies approved by the church into the vernacular. Thus we find Alfred the Great translating the homihes of Bede, and in a similar manner arose /Elfr1c's Anglo-Saxon H omzlies and the German H ormlzarium of Ottfried of Weissenburg. Such H omzlzaria as were in use in England down to the end of the 15th century were at the time of the Reformation eagerly sought for and destroyed, so that they are now extremely rare, and the few copies which have been preserved are generally in a mutilated or imperfect form 2

The Books of Homzlzes referred to in the 35th article of the Church of England originated at a convocation in 1542, at which it was agreed “ to make certain homilies for stay of such errors as were then by ignorant preachers sparkled among the people ” Certain homilies, accordingly, composed by dignitaries of the lower house, were in the following year produced by the prolocutor, and after some delay a volume was published in 1547 entitled Certaut sermons or homilzes appomted by the Kzng's Majesty to be declared and read by all parsons, vicars, or curates every Sunday ut thezr churches where they have cure. In 1563 a second Book of Homzlzes was submitted along with the gg Articles to convocation, it was issued the same year under the title The second Tome of Homzl1es of such matters as were promrsed and irzstttuted in the former part of H omzlies, set out by the authority of the Queerfs Majesty, and to be read in every Parzsh Church agreeably. Of the twelve homilies contained in the first book, four (the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th) are probably to be attributed to Cranmer, and one (the 12th) possibly to Latimer, one (the 6th) is by Bonner; another (the 5th) is by John Harpsheld, archdeacon of London, and another (the 11th) by Thomas Becon, one of Cranmer's chaplains. The author ship of the others is unknown. The second book consists of tw enty-one homilies, of which the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 7th, 8th, 9th, 16th and 17th have been assigned to Jewel, the 4th to Grindal, the 5th and 6th to Pilkington and the 18th to Parker. See the critical edition by Griffiths, Oxford, 1869. The homilies are not now read publicly, though they are sometimes appealed to in controversies affecting the doctrines of the Anglican Church.

HOMOEOPATHY (from the Greek 5MOLOS, like, and vrddos, feeling) The distinctive system of therapeutics which bears the name of homoeopathy is based upon the law simzlza similibus farentur. 3 the originator of which was S C. F. Hahnemann, a of the Homzlzanum is in the emperor's own commission entrusted to Paul, to whom It 1s assigned in the earlier printed editions also. A comparison of different editions shows that the contents increased with the ever growing number of saints' days and festivals, new discourses by later preachers like Bernard being constantly added. eander, Church History, V 17 (En trans of 1851) 2 An ancient English metrical Aliomlliarlum IS preserved in the library of the un1vers1t of Cambridge Earlier Versions of it have ested and a portion ol/perhaps the earliest copy, dating from about the middle of the 13th century, was published in 1862 by Mr Small, librarian to the university of Edinburgh. interesting controversy has been carried on between the members of the homoeopathic school as to the proper construction of the Latln motto which constitutes its acknowledged basis For many years the erb at the conclusion of the sentence was used in the lI'1(llC€ltlC mood, curantur, thus making the sentence a positive one. After etcnded research it has been discovered that Hahnemann himself never employ ed the word curantur as descriptive of his law of cure, but alw ay s wiote curentar, which reatly modifies the meaning of the phrase. If the sub1unct1ve mom? be used, the motto reads, “ Let srfnilars be treated by slmrlars, " or “ simllars should be treated by sinnlars ” The reading szmzlza szmrlzbus curentur was officially adopted as the correct reading of the sentence by the American Institute of Homoeopathy at its session held in Atlantic City, N L., on the 20th of June 1899. and the words are so inscribed on t e monument erected to the memory of Hahnemann and unveiled in Washington, D C, on the 23rd of June 1900, and also are those -"ary ed upon the tomb of Hahnemann in Pere-la-Chaise, Paris. native of Meissen in Germany, who discovered his new principle while he was experimenting with cinchona bark in 1700, and announced it in 1796.4 The essential tenets of homoeopathy with which is contrasted the “allopathy ” (ii}}os, other) of the “ orthodox ” therapeutics-are that the cure of disease is effected by drugs that are capable of producing in a healthy individual symptoms similar to those of the disease to be treated, and that to ascertain the curative virtues of any drug it must be “proved ” upon healthy persons-that is, taken by individuals of both sexes in a state of health in gradually increasing doses The manifestations of drug action thus produced are carefully recorded, and this record of “ drug-diseases, ” after being verified by repetition on many “ provers, " constitutes the distinguishing feature of the homoeopathic materia med1ca, which, wlule it embraces the sources, preparation and uses of drugs as known to the orthodox pharmacopoeia, contains, in addition, the various “ provings ” obtained in the manner above described. Besides the promulgation of the doctrine of similars, Hahnemann also enunciated a theory to account for the origin of all chronic diseases, which he asserted were derived either directly or remotely from psora (the itch), syphilis (venereal disease) or sycosis (fig-wart disease). This doctrine, although at first adopted by some of the enthusiastic followers of Hahnemann, was almost immediately discarded by very many who had a firm belief in his law of cure. In the light of advancing science such theories are entirely untenable, and it was unfortunate for the system of medicine which he founded that Hahnemann should have promulgated such an hypothesis. It served as a target for the shafts of ridicule showered upon the system by those who were its opponents, and even at the present time there still exists in the minds of many misinformed persons the conviction that homoeopathy is a system of medicine that bases the origin of all chronic disease on the itch or on syphilis or fig-warts.

Another peculiar feature of homoeopathy is its posology or theory of dose. It may be asserted that homoeopathic posology has nothing more to do with the original law of cure than the psora (itch) theory has, and that it was one of the later creations of Hahnemann's mind. Most homoeopathists believe more or less in the action of minute doses of medicine, but it must not be considered as an integral part of the system. The dose is the corollary, not the principle. Yet in the minds of many, infinitesimal doses of medicine stand for homoeopathy itself, the real law of cure being completely put into the background. The question of dose has also divided the members of the homoeopathic school into bitter factions, and is therefore a matter for careful consideration. Many employ low potenc1es,5 i.e mother 4 Some points of Hahnemann's system were borrowed from previous writers—as he himself, though imperfectly, admits. Not to mention others, he was anticipated by Hlppocrates, and especially by Paracelsus (1495-1541) The identical words stmzlza stmzlzbus curantur occur in the Geneva edition (1658) of the works of Paracelsus, as a marginal heading of one of the paragraphs; and in the “ Frag» menta Medica, " Up Omma, 1 168, 169, occurs the following passage:

Szmzle szrmlzs aura, non corltrarzum.

“ Quisquis enim cum laude agere Medicum volet, is has nugas longe valere Jubeat. Nec enim ullus unquam morbus calidus per frlglda sanatus fult. nec frigldus per calida Simile autem suum simile frequenter cuiavit, scllicet Mercurlus sulphur, et sulphur Mercurlum; et sal illa, velut et 1lla sal lnterdum quidem cum proprletate junctum frlgidum sanavlt calidum; sed id non factum est ratione frlgidl, verum ratione naturae alterius. quam a prlmo 1llo omnino diversam facimus ” r

lt 1s very remarkable that in Hahnemann's enumeration of authors who anticipated him in regard to the doctrine of Szrmlza, he makes no mention of the views of Paracelsus, though the very words seem to be taken from the works of that physician The other point in Hahnemann's doctrine-that medicines should be tried first on healthy persons-he admits to have been enunciated by Haller. Roughly it has been acted on by physicians in all ages, but certainly more systematically since Hahnemann's time In the most characteristic feature of Hahnemann's practice-“ the [)Ot€I'1[lZl]lg, n “ dynamizin, ” of medicinal substances-he appears to have been original. 5gl'wo methods of preparing medicines are recognized, one on the decimal, the other on the centesimal scale The pure tinctures are denominated “ mother tinctures, " and represented by the Greek ¢. To