David Little's Evidence in his Dual Remedy Account

[Evidence in Verspoor/Decker Account]

1. Provision of part of published letter by Hahnemann to Aegidi on 15 June 1833 (but provides us only with the year).

[Full published text of 15 June 1833 letter from Hahnemann to Aegidi.]

2. Provision of the disputed paragraph on dual remedies for the 5th Edition of the Organon as published by Lutze (no date given for the publication).

[Full published version from Bradford and from Lutze of disputed new paragraph on dual remedies for the 5th edition of the Organon.]

3. Provision of letter of 15th September 1833 from Hahnemann to Boenninghausen (but no mention of date).

[Provision of letter of 15th September 1833 from Hahnemann to Boenninghausen with date.]

4. Provision of letter of 16 October 1833 from Hahnemann to Boenninghausen.

[Provision of letter of 16 October 1833 from Hahnemann to Boenninghausen.]

5. Quote from Haehl on meeting of August 1833 which telescopes various critical events.

[Full sequence of events relating to events before, during and after the August 1833 meeting in Köthen.]

6. Provision of part of the published letter by Boenninghausen to Dunham (no acknowledgment that date of letter is after writer's death).

[Full published text of the published letter by Boenninghausen to Dunham (with analysis of problem with date being after writer's death).]

7. Part of published comments from Aegidi in 1865 regarding dual remedies.

[Full published text of comments from Aegidi in 1865 regarding dual remedies.]

8. Part of letter by Hahnemann to Boenninghausen of 18 September 1836 (but no date given).

[Full published text of letter by Hahnemann to Boenninghausen of 18 September 1836.]

Assertions by David Little with no Evidence

1. that the use of dual remedies in mixture began with Aegidi (no date given and no evidence).

2. that Hahnemann held a meeting in August 1833 in Köthen to discuss dual remedies (no evidence that meeting was called for this purpose).

3. that meeting agreed that clinical trials on dual remedies had failed (no evidence).

4. that Boenninghausen did not start until after Hahnemann wrote to him in 1833, and both started to use dual remedies at the same time (no evidence provided).

Additional Evidence in Verspoor/Decker Account (but Not in David Little's Account)

1. Full published text of 17 June 1833 letter from Hahnemann to Aegidi.

2. Full published text of 19 August 1833 letter from Hahnemann to Aegidi.

3. Full published letter from Boenninghausen to Hahnemann from Bradford. (p. 492)

4. Full published letter of 28 April 1833 from Hahnemann to Aegidi.

5. Full published text of Hahnemann's letter to Boenninghausen of 28 April 1833.

6. Full published text of Boenninghausen's case of dual remedies of April 1833. (Lesser Writings, p. 205-6)

7. Editorial in British Journal of Homeopathy of July 1865 on the Aegidi affair (from Haehl).

8. Reference to Hahnemann's use of two remedies in short intervals on himself in 1830 (paper by O. A. Julian in 1984 referred to in article by De Ruyter, Homeopathy On-line, Vol. 6).

9. Full text of agreement signed by Hahnemann and other homeopaths at 11 August 1833 meeting on Pillars of Homeopathy.

10. Full published text of 13 September 1833 letter from Hahnemann to Hering.

11. Full published text of 28 April 1833 letter from Hahnemann to Aegidi.

12. Full published text of 30 April 1833 letter from Hahnemann to Aegidi.

13. Full published text of 9 January 1834 from Hahnemann to Aegidi.

14. Full published text of letter from Hahnemann to Boenninghausen of 18 September 1836.

15. Full text of Aegidi's article on dual remedies for Stapf's Archives of 1834 (translated from the German by SRD).

16. Full text of chapter on dual remedies from Lutze's book on homeopathy of 1865 (translated from the German by SRD).

[ Back to Articles ] [ Top of page ]