The Popes and Science: The History of the Papal Relations to Science During the Middle Ages and Down to Our Own TimeWalsh, James J. (James Joseph)
Religion
The Popes and Science: The History of the Papal Relations to Science During the Middle Ages and Down to Our Own Time
Walsh, James J. (James Joseph)
Popes; Religion and science -- History; Science -- History
"The changes have been rung by medical historians upon a casual
reference in Mondino's chapter on the uterus to the bodies of two
women and one sow which he had dissected, as if these were the first
and the only cadavers dissected by him. The context involved no such
construction. He is enforcing a statement that the size of the
uterus may vary, and to illustrate it remarks that, 'a woman whom I
anatomized in the month of January last year (1315 Anno Christi),
had a larger uterus than one whom I anatomized in the month of March
of the same year.' And further, he says, 'the uterus of a sow which
I dissected in 1316 (the year in which he was writing) was a hundred
times greater than any I had seen in the human female, for she was
pregnant, and contained thirteen pigs.' These happen to be the only
references to specific bodies that he makes in his treatise. But it
is a far cry to wring out of these references the conclusions that
these are the only dissections he made. It is quite true that if we
incline to enshroud his work in a cloud of mystery, and to figure it
as an unprecedented, awe-inspiring feature to break down the
prejudices of the ages, it is easy to think of him as having timidly
profaned the human body in his anatomizing zeal in but one or two
instances. His own language, however, throughout his book is that of
a man who was familiar with the differing conditions of the organs
found in many different bodies--a man who was habitually
dissecting."
{41}
As I think must be clear to any one who knows Mondino's book, no other
conclusion than this suggested by Prof. Pilcher can be drawn. This
opinion has been frankly stated, by every historian of anatomy in
recent years. Puschmann says it very clearly. Von Töply is evidently
of the same opinion. These are the latest authorities in the history
of anatomy. No other conclusion than this could well be reached by
anyone who has studied the question seriously. Pilcher confirms this
in the article already quoted in the following paragraph:
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