beta
Materijalni opisIlustr.
Način izrade datotekeizvorno digitalna građa
Vrstačlanak
OpisThe correction of clubfoot as a subject of study is somewhat unusual, especially if one considers that up until the Renaissance only two authors dealt with the subject of this inherited disorder. On the one hand is Ambroise Pare, whose contributions to traumatology and orthopaedics are staggering, and on the other, Francisco Arceo de Fregenal, also known as the Ambroise Pare of Spain. Both men developed a method for treating this condition, and a special orthopaedic shoe. So, why is it that in the Spanish literature the French surgeon was considered the pioneer in the development of an orthopaedic boot from the start and not Arceo? Why was the work of the Spaniard not studied in depth, as it deserves to be? These questions troubled us and led us to write this paper, in which as the primary objective we decided to highlight Arceo’s contributions to the field of orthopaedics. Concrete arguments and works exist today that have led to common agreement among scholars of the subject that the Spanish surgeon was a Jewish convert. The social, economic and political conditions in Europe at that time may give us some idea of the difficulties for a Jewish convert in the sixteenth century, and clearly, it was difficult for a scientist to have followers who would defend his methods and technical ideas. Nevertheless, we believe that Francisco Arceo de Fregenal deserves more recognition and his work should continue to be studied in more depth.Ispravljanje prirođenog uvrnutog stopala (eng. clubfoot) nije uobičajena tema istraživanja, posebice uzme li se u obzir da se do razdoblja renesanse samo nekoliko autora bavilo tim naslijeđenim poremećajem. S jedne je strane Ambroise Pare, čiji su doprinosi traumatologiji i ortopediji zapanjujući, a s druge Francisco Arceo de Fregenal, poznat i kao španjolski Ambroise Pare. Obojica su razvili metodu liječenja ovog stanja i specijalne ortopedske cipele. Zašto je, dakle, u španjolskoj literaturi francuski kirurg od početka smatran pionirom koji je razvio ortopedske cipele, a ne Arceo? Zašto se rad Španjolca nije duboko proučavao, kao što zaslužuje? Ta su nas pitanja potaknula na pisanje rada u kojem smo kao glavni cilj odlučili istaknuti Arceov doprinos u ortopediji. Danas postoje konkretni argumenti i radovi koji su doveli do zajedničkog zaključka znanstvenika, koji se bave ovom temom, da je španjolski kirurg bio židovski obraćenik. Društveni, ekonomski i politički uvjeti u Europi u to doba mogu nam dati neke predodžbe o teškoćama prilikom židovske konverzije u 16. stoljeću pa je za znanstvenika, očito, bilo teško imati sljedbenike koji bi branili njegove metode i tehničke zamisli. Ipak, vjerujemo da je Francisco Arceo de Fregenal zavrijedio više priznanja i da njegov rad treba nastaviti proučavati.
  
rrep