I regret that I am unable to pursue this subject much further; but there
is one point I should mention. In Harvey's time, the microscope was hardly
invented. It is quite true that in some of his embryological researches he
speaks of having made use of a hand glass; but that was the most that he
seems to have known anything about, or that was accessible to him at that
day. And so it came about, that, although he examined the course of the
blood in many of the lower animals—watched the pulsation of the
heart in shrimps, and animals of that kind—he never could put the
final coping-stone on his edifice. He did not know to the day of his
death, although quite clear about the fact that the arteries and the veins
do communicate, how it is that they communicate—how it was that the
blood of the arteries passed into the veins. One is grieved to think that
the grand old man should have gone down to his tomb without the vast
satisfaction it would have given to him to see what the Italian naturalist
Malpighi showed only seven years later, in 1664, when he demonstrated, in
a living frog, the actual passage of the blood from the ultimate
ramifications of the arteries into the veins. But that absolute ocular
demonstration of the truth of the views he had maintained throughout his
life it was not granted to Harvey to see. What he did experience was this:
that on the publication of his doctrines, they were met with the greatest
possible opposition; and I have no doubt savage things were uttered in
those old controversies, and that a great many people said that these
new-fangled doctrines, reducing living processes to mere mechanism, would
sap the foundations of religion and morality. I do not know for certain
that they did, but they said things very like it. The first point was to
show that Harvey's views were absolutely untrue; and not being able to
succeed in that, opponents said they were not new; and not being able to
succeed in that, that they didn't matter. That is the usual course with
all new discoveries. But Harvey troubled himself very little about these
things. He remained perfectly quiet; for although reputed a hot-tempered
man, he never would have anything to do with controversy if he could help
it; and he only replied to one of his antagonists after twenty years'
interval, and then in the most charming spirit of candour and moderation.
But he had the great satisfaction of living to see his doctrine accepted
upon all sides. At the time of his death, there was not an anatomical
school in Europe in which the doctrine of the circulation of the blood was
not taught in the way in which Harvey had laid it down. In that respect he
had a happiness which is granted to very few men.
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