To compare the work with the teachings of modern medicine is not only to expect of the writer a miraculous prescience, but to minimize the advances of medical science within the last seven hundred years.

Even Freind and Sprengel, admirable historians, though more thoughtful and judicious in their criticisms, seem for the moment to have forgotten or overlooked the true character of the Compendium.

Freind says: 

“I believe we may even say with justice that he (Gilbert) has written as well as any of his contemporaries of other nations, and has merely followed their example in borrowing very largely from the Arabians,” and Sprengel writes:  “Here and there, though only very rarely, the author offers some remarks of his own, which merit special attention.”

Now, what precisely is Gilbert’s Compendium designed to be?  In the words of its author it is

“A book of general and special diseases, selected and extracted from the writings of all authors and the practice of the professors (magistrorum), edited by Gilbert of England and entitled a Compendium of Medicine.”

and a few pages later he adds: 

“It is our habit to select the best sayings of the best authorities, and where any doubt exists, to insert the different opinions, so that each reader may choose for himself what he prefers to maintain.”

The author does not claim for his work any considerable originality, but presents it as a compendium proper of the teachings of other writers.  Naturally his own part in the book is not obtruded upon our notice.

Now the desiderata of such a compendium are: 

1.  That it shall be based upon the best attainable authorities.

2.  That these authorities shall be accurately represented.

3.  That the compendium shall be reasonably comprehensive.

In neither of these respects is the compendium of Gilbert liable, I think, to adverse criticism.

The book is, undoubtedly, the work of a famous and strictly orthodox physician, possessed of exceptional education in the science of his day, a man of wide reading, broadened by extensive travel and endowed with the knowledge acquired by a long experience, honest, truthful and simple minded, yet not uncritical in regard to novelties, firm in his own opinions but not arrogant, sympathetic, possessed of a high sense of professional honor, a firm believer in authority and therefore credulous, superstitious after the manner of his age, yet harboring, too, a germ of that healthy skepticism which Roger Bacon, his great contemporary, developed and illustrated.

I believe, therefore, that we may justly award to the medical pages of the Compendium not only the rather negative praise of being written as well as the work of any of Gilbert’s contemporaries, but the more positive credit of being thoroughly abreast of the medical science of its age and country, an “Abstract and brief chronicle of the time.”