Miks FaehlMannist ei saanud arstiteaduskonna proFessorit?
Why Faehlmann Never Became a Professor of the Medical Faculty

Summary/Abstract: the article investigates a mythologized detail from the life of Friedrich robert Faehlmann – physician, writer and Estonian philologist – in an attempt to find out why he never became a professor of the medical Faculty of the then dorpat university. according to the available biographical surveys, most of which rely on Faehlmann's obituary written by his friend F. r. kreutzwald (”dr. Friedrich robert Fählmann’s Leben”, dorpat, 1852), he had all the necessary qualifications and he was more than once recommended as a candidate to professor's vacancies at the faculty. due to the faculty's opposition, however, his desire for professorship was never realized. this has, for ideological reasons, been (mis)interpreted as an obvious injustice to Faehlmann, who was deterred by the Baltic German professors unwilling to admit a first Estonian colleague to their ranks. an examination of the minutes of the university Council and medical Faculty meetings kept at the Estonian Historical archives reveals that it was only once that Faehlmann was put up as a candidate for professorship; this happened in 1848/49, upon finishing his study on an epidemic of dysentery ”ruhrepidemie in dorpat im Herbst 1846” (1848). although Faehlmann had several supporters on the university Council and even the university curator G. v. Craffström tried to use his authority to Faehlmann's advantage, he was not elected, because the Faculty of medicine, headed by dean F. Bidder, judged his dissertation as scientifically obsolete. Of course, this need not have been the only reason for his elimination. For one thing, his case may have been a touchstone in the restriction of the autonomy of the university (including the medical Faculty) by the central state authority. In addition, he may have had personal contradictions or ideological dissensions with this or that member of the faculty, but those questions need further research, as the documents taken as the basis for the present article fail to prove any such circumstances. However, Faehlmann's study of dysentery was a product of a transition period when speculative and experiential medicine were beginning to be ousted by scientific experimental medicine, and it bears obvious signs thereof. similarly, repercussions of the conflict between different schools of medicine can be detected in the reception of his treatise. the Faculty of medicine was interested in having a medical scientist of a new generation, which rather puts Faehlmann (with his treatise) into the position of a victim of the transition period.

• Details
• Contents