A Short History of Medicine

by Erwin H. Ackerknecht

Since it was first published in 1955, A Short History of Medicine has been hailed as the best available book of its a concise and readable introduction to the history of medicine, written for students and professionals alike. This revised edition of Erwin H. Ackerknecht's classic volume is now available in paperback, making the book especially suitable for classroom use.

Genres: Medicine, History, History Of Medicine, Science, Nonfiction, Biology

304 pages, Paperback

First published March 1, 1982

About the author

Erwin Heinz Ackerknecht

Reviews

[heptagrammaton]

Usually, if an author's name has some kind of academic title appended to it, this is an indication you should run.
   That degree is dubious, or irrelevant, or else betrayed within the pages.
   'Doctor' is a ritual inscription, a magical trick for a more 'civilized' age, which – like most of the other things a cover – aims to desperately convince you the thing in-between is worth knowing, worth being bought. Shiny, sure, like that many medals pinned on the expansive breast of a geriatric Politburo member.
   This is not the case with Erwin H. Ackerknecht. He was a respectable medical historian, thus far his credentials should be implicit. My best guess as to why John Hopkins Univ. Press slapped the 'M.D.' on there as a warning/clarification: that A Short History of Medicine reflects the preoccupations and perspectives of a clinician and might be, especially by the time of its revised edition in the 1980s, lacking in critical historiographical approach.
   And this is very much a history of medicine by a man of medicine: focused at how Western medicine got to its place, its tools and technologies and institutions. Ackerknecht shows a keen attention to social conditions, but his place from within a scientific discipline turns him into something of an apologist for the spectres of empiricism and the Enlightenment. His discussions of 'primitive' medicine are problematic and overly preoccupied with delineating religion apart from other types of knowledge, which I find to be a meaningless gripe in a historical context.
   Interesting as a snapshot of a certain kind of scientific sensibility, and can be fruitfully picked apart as such. Also a good springboard for digging further into the history of medicine, and although the sheer quantity of names is a bit much and, that is a strength. (Indices are good, but they also take up shelf space and make me feel like I am cheating on my GR page count. Grumble-grumble.)

[Louise]

This was my absolute most favourite text at uni. Hands down. The only text I ever read cover to cover. And then read it again. I must dig it out, and read it again.

[Anxhela]

I read it for school. It was really fun and full of interesting facts. I think it’s really good as an introduction to history of medicine but after the chapter on 19th century medicine I felt like it dragged on and on. Also I wish there was more information about Hippocrates, Fracastorus and some other figures. There were 3 separate chapters about ancient Greek medicine that felt like they were missing in information.

[rags]

picked this up from a library sale. it was all annotated in, so cute. it was revised in 1982, from the original written in 1955. the author gives you what's promised in the title and leave you in awe of how much medicine has changed. even has extra readings for each chapter~

Chapter 4: For a good survey of Hindu medicine, consult HR Zimmer, Hindu Medicine and also see Hindu medical classic Susruta Samhita, translated by Bhishagratna and Charaka Samhita, translated by Chandra Kaowarte.

[Rainer]

obviously dated by this point but in a way I think it's all the better for it. An enjoyable read that didn't treat you like an outsider. Keep your search engine handy to look up the occasional terms and you'll move along just fine.
This from a guy that is no medical student at uni.

[Ashley]

Only read some of it for school. It dragged on a lot.