Introduction to Anatomy, 1532: With English translation and an introductory essay on anatomical studies in Tudor England by C.D. O'Malley and K.F. Russell.Edguard, David
History
Introduction to Anatomy, 1532: With English translation and an introductory essay on anatomical studies in Tudor England by C.D. O'Malley and K.F. Russell.
Edguard, David
Anatomy -- Study and teaching -- England -- History -- 16th century; Human anatomy -- Early works to 1800
It is of interest to note that very soon after the Charter had been
granted, Thomas Vicary approached the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of London
to make sure that the Barber-Surgeons should receive the bodies of the
felons for anatomical study. It would seem that the Court of Aldermen
were not sure how they should direct their Sheriffs, for the Minutes of
the Court for 14 December 1540 state:
... Item, Master Laxton & Master Bowes, Shreves of this Citye, prayed
the Advyse of this howse for & concernying the Delyuerye ouer of one
of the dedde bodyes of the Felons of late condempned to dethe within
this Citye, And requyred of the seyd Master Shreves by Master Vycary &
other the surgeons of this Citye for Annotamye, Accordyng to the
fourme of an Acte of parlyament thereof lately made. And Agreyd that
the same Acte be first seen & then Master Shreves to work ther
after.[39]
With human dissection material assured, the United Company proceeded to
appoint a Reader of Anatomy, the first perhaps being Thomas Vicary, and
although the intervening records of the company are not complete, it is
known that in 1546 Dr. John Caius, lately returned from Padua, where he
had been acquainted with and even lived for a time with the celebrated
anatomist Andreas Vesalius, was appointed and held the position of
Reader of Anatomy for the next seventeen years. In his brief
autobiography Caius refers to these dissections which he performed ‘for
almost twenty years’, and adds, ‘By the wish of the most illustrious
prince Henry VIII, King of England, I performed them in London before
the surgeons; among the physicians at that time there was no
dissection.’[40] It may be assumed, however, that by ‘physicians’ Caius
was referring to those of London rather than to those of the
universities. Nevertheless, his remark helps to explain the lack of
anatomical works which might have competed with those of the Continent.
The physicians, although better trained in languages than the surgeons
and, we may assume, literary exposition, were as yet not interested in
the subject of anatomy.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account