This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Harry K. Messenger, MD
140 Marlborough St Boston, Mass 02116

Arch Ophthalmol. 1964;71(6):880.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Dr. Mark's letter was referred to Dr. Messenger, who offers the following reply.

To the Editor:

Dr. Mark dislikes my article on "Glaukoma and Glaucoma" because I "rebuked" American ophthalmologists. I said that the ancients knew nothing of pathology as we know it and that the ancient Greeks had no concept whatever of cataract as such, and—most offensively of all—I disesteemed the (apparently his) Germanic pronunciation of the English word glaucoma. I am propagating errors, says Dr. Mark, of which he will correct "a few."

If to undervalue a deviant pronunciation is to rebuke American ophthalmologists I am guilty.

If it is conceded that the ancient Greeks were far behind us in knowledge of gross anatomy, physiology, and histology (they had no microscopes), it seems overgenerous to say they knew pathology as we know it. Certainly in their own way they knew much about the eye and its diseases.

Evidence . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?