The University of Naples was founded in 1224, by the Emperor Frederick II. Originally all the faculties were represented, but in 1231 medicine was forbidden, as by Imperial decree it could only be taught at Salerno.
The University of Prague was founded in 1348 by Charles IV. of Bohemia, as a complete university from the outset.
School of Montpellier.
The origin of the medical school of Montpellier is obscure. Probably it originated in the tenth century, and there is little doubt that the Jews of Spain were concerned in its foundation. The Arabs found firm friends in the Jewish people of Spain, their monotheism proving a bond of union which ensured the sympathy of each, and the school of Montpellier became the rallying-point of Arabian and Jewish learning. Europe has rendered too little gratitude for the intellectual blessings bestowed on her by the Hebrews. A nation of Eastern origin, and having very extensive relations with Eastern commerce, the Israelites acted as the medium for transmitting the intellectual and material wealth of Eastern countries to Western peoples. We owe to them much of our acquaintance with Saracenic medicine and pharmacy. They translated for us Arabic books, and they introduced to Western markets the precious drugs of far-distant Eastern lands. The school of medicine of Montpellier first became famous in the beginning of the twelfth century. Averroism prevailed, and a practical empirical spirit distinguished the school from the dogmatic and scholastic teaching of other universities. It has been attempted to show that a Jewish doctor from Narbonne first taught medicine at Montpellier. When Benjamin of Tudela went to the university in 1160, he says that he found many Jews amongst the inhabitants. Adalbert, Bishop of Mayence, went to Montpellier in 1137 to learn medicine from the doctors, “that he might understand the deeply hidden meaning of things.” In 1153 the Archbishop of Lyons went there for treatment, and John of Salisbury said that medicine was to be acquired either at Salerno or Montpellier. Men called the school the “Fountain of Medical Wisdom,” and it soon rose to great importance on account of its unlimited freedom in teaching.[731]
Cardinal Conrad made a law that no one should act as a teacher of medicine in the university who had not been examined in it and received a licence to teach. In 1230 it was ordered that no one should practise medicine until he had been examined, and that to the satisfaction of two masters in medical science chosen as examiners by the bishop. To engage in practice without the certificate of the examiners and the bishop was to incur the sentence of excommunication.[732] Surgeons, however, were not compelled to undergo examination. Medicine flourished at Montpellier with great independence; it was not merged with the other faculties, and it was not subjected to clerical influences.[733] Even Louis XIV. was obliged to withdraw a decree ordering the union of the medical with the other faculties.[734]
Every student was compelled (1308) to attend medical lectures for at least five years, and to practise medicine for eight months, before being allowed to graduate. In 1350 the degree of Magister had to be taken in addition.[735]
The most brilliant period in the history of the medical school of Montpellier was that of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Its fame was sounded throughout the world. From all parts invalids went to Montpellier to seek its famous physicians. King John of Bohemia, and the Bishop of Hereford, were of the number.
Divorce of Medicine from Surgery.
Surgery became separated from medicine in Alexandria, but it was not until the middle of the twelfth century that the ecclesiastics were restrained from undertaking any bloody operations. The universities rejected surgery under the pretext, “ecclesia abhorret a sanguine” (the church abhors the shedding of blood). It is therefore to this epoch, as Mr. Cooper says,[736] that we must refer the true separation of medicine from surgery; the latter was entirely abandoned to the ignorant laity.
At the Council of Tours, A.D. 1163, the practice of surgery was denounced as unfit for the hands of priests and men of literature, the consequence being that the surgeon became little better than a sort of professional servant to the physician, the latter not only having the sole privilege of prescribing internal medicines, but even that of judging and directing when surgical operations should be performed. Then the subordinate surgeon was only called upon to execute with his knife, or his hand, duties which the more exalted physician did not choose to undertake; and, in fact, he visited the patient, did what was required to be done, and took his leave of the case, altogether under the orders of his master.[737]