FIS Vesalius 17 Layout 1 14-05-24 10:30 AM Page 1 · 2 days ago · rEoALIqo Ap |ww an exhibition commemorating the ﬁve-hundredth anniversary of the birth of Andreas Vesalius Exhibition

FIS Vesalius 17_Layout 1 14-05-24 10:30 AM Page 1


VESALIUS AT 500

an exhibition commemorating the

five-hundredth anniversary of the birth of Andreas Vesalius

Exhibition and catalogue by Philip Oldfield

ThomAS FIShEr rArE book LIbrAry, UnIVErSITy oF ToronTo

23 May-29 August 2014


Catalogue by Philip OldfieldEdited by Pearce Carefoote, Anne Dondertman, Barry WalfishExhibition curated by Philip OldfieldMounted by Linda JoyDigital photography by Paul ArmstrongPrinted by Coach House Press, TorontoTypset in Goodchild, designed by Nick Shinn

Front cover: Portrait of Vesalius engraved by Jan Wan-delaar for Vesalius’s Opera omnia anatomica & chirur-gica. Leiden, 75.Back cover: the first skeletal figure from De humanicorporis fabrica. Basel. 543

Title page: the ornamental initial V was specially cutfor the 555 edition of De Humani corporis fabrica. Itdepicts Apollo flaying Marsyas, loser in a music con-test between the two, presided over by the Muses.

LIbrAry And ArchIVES cAnAdAcATALogUIng In PUbLIcATIon

Oldfield, Philip, authorVesalius at 500 : an exhibition commemorating the

five hundredth anniversary of the birth of AndreasVesalius / by Philip Oldfield.

A catalogue of an exhibition of rare books held at theThomas Fisher Rare Book Library,May 3 - August 9, 04, commemorating the 500th anniversary of the birth of Andreas Vesalius.The Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library ownsmost of the books in this exhibition, others are borrowed from private collectors.Includes bibliographical references.

ISbn 978-0-777-6-5 (pbk.)

. Vesalius, Andreas, 54-564–Exhibitions.. Human anatomy–Early works to

800–Bibliography–Exhibitions.3. Medicine–Early works to

800–Bibliography–Exhibitions.4. Rare books–Bibliography–Exhibitions.5. Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library–Exhibitions.

I. Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library, issuing body,host institution

II. Title.

Qm6.V5o44 04 6.009 c04-90347-


PrEFAcE

When we were first approached by DrVogrincic in 2011 about whether the FisherLibrary had an interest in being the repositoryfor a special copy of the second edition of Fab-rica, we little realized how momentous anopportunity was presenting itself. The confir-mation by Dr Vivian Nutton that the annota-tions in that 1555 copy were genuinely byVesalius, and the resulting scholarly interest inthat copy dovetailed with the plans we alreadyhad to commemorate the five-hundredthanniversary of Vesalius’s birth with a specialexhibition in 2014. The exhibition has been ablycurated by Philip Oldfield, History of Scienceand Medicine librarian at the Fisher Library,who has also written the accompanying cata-logue.

The Fisher Library’s medical holdings areimpressive, but we have been able to supple-ment our own resources in a most remarkableway for this exhibition. In addition to theextraordinarily important annotated copy ofthe second edition, made available to us ondeposit, we have been fortunate to collaboratewith other private collectors, as well asChristopher Lyons of the Osler Library atMcGill University. Our own collectionstogether with the works on loan have enabledus to situate Vesalius within the long traditionof anatomical knowledge and teaching up tohis time, as well as to present an almost com-plete set of Vesalius’s own work. For example,from the Fisher’s own collections the first edi-tion of Fabrica and the German edition of theEpitome of the same year are being displayedalongside the Latin edition of the Epitome onloan from Dr Eugene Flamm, who has con-tributed a number of other important works toour exhibition. Stuart Rose has kindly lent theonly other book known to have been anno-tated by Vesalius, Guenther’s Institutionesanatomicae. Dr Brian Morrison has lent anexample of one of the plates from a contempo-rary plagiarized edition of Tabulae anatomicaesex. In addition to the 1555 annotated copy ofFabrica, Dr Vogrincic has contributed otheritems from his collection including many of theportraits and the medals. When I saw theextremely scarce first edition of Mondino’sAnatomia on sale by distinguished booksellerJonathan A. Hill in New York earlier this year Iknew that it would be a fabulous addition toour exhibition. Jonathan has very generouslyallowed us to put it on display, along with a six-teenth-century edition on loan from the OslerLibrary. I would also like to acknowledge thesupport and encouragement of Dr Zlatko

Pozeg throughout the process of planning theexhibition. We are sincerely grateful to all thosewhose generosity has made it possible for us toput together what we hope is a fitting tributeto the life and work of ‘the prince ofanatomists’.

The influence of Vesalius continues to be felttoday not only by those with an interest in thehistory of medicine, but also by anyone whoadmires the beauty of image and text as com-bined on the handsome folio pages of his mostfamous work. Generations of medical illustra-tors, including each year’s new cohort from theUniversity of Toronto’s Biomedical Communi-cations Department, marvel anew at theexpressive portrayal of the human body, andVesalius’s passionate commitment to makingthat portrayal both accurate and beautiful.

Anne DondertmanDirector, Fisher Library



VESALIUS AT 500InTrodUcTIonThis year we are commemorating the five-hundredth anniversary of the birth of one ofthe great figures in the history of medicine. Thefame and significance of Andreas Vesalius restalmost entirely on one book, his monumentalDe humani corporis fabrica, first published in543. The Fabrica (as it is commonly referred to)is justifiably celebrated for its splendid wood-cuts that introduced art into the sphere ofanatomy, and set the standard for all futureanatomical illustration. The enduring signifi-cance of the illustrations is attested to by thefact that they were still being copied and imi-tated two hundred years after their firstappearance. In addition to its illustrations, theFabrica also conveys a vitally important text,universally regarded as the cornerstone for thestudy and teaching of human anatomy. Thenew approach Vesalius introduced to theformal instruction of anatomy, and themethodology he developed for presentinganatomical information based on direct andaccurate observation, were revolutionary intheir consequences. In addition to its othermerits, the Fabrica was also an excellent prac-tical manual on dissection. The beautifully ren-dered woodcuts blend elegantly with theprinted text, resulting in a masterpiece of theprinter’s art - the perfect marriage of text andillustration. The Fabrica is without doubt oneof the splendours of Renaissance scientific bookmaking.

Yet despite the book’s universal appeal, sur-prisingly little is known about its creator. Thebiography of Vesalius is somewhat sketchy, andthere are large gaps in the narrative, particu-larly during his formative years, and in the finalyears of his life. What little we do know abouthim, especially regarding his medical educationand career, is gleaned from his own remarksand observations found in his published writ-ings. The testimony of his contemporarieshelps to fill some of the gaps.

Andreas Vesalius was born André Van Weseleat the end of 54, the second son of Andreasand Isabel Van Wesele. The family’s originalsurname, Wijtinck or Witing, was subsequentlychanged to Wesele – a reflection of the geo-graphical origin of their predecessors. The com-mercial centre of Wesel is located at theconfluence of the Rhine and Lippe rivers in theDuchy of Clèves, a state within the HolyRoman Empire (modern North Rhine-West-phalia in Germany).

Vesalius was born into a family with a longmedical pedigree. His great-great-grandfather,Peter Witing, had assembled a large medicallibrary, and had written a commentary on thefourth fen of the encyclopaedic Latin version ofthe Canon of the Persian physician Avicenna. Inhis professional capacity Witing had attendedEmperor Friedrich III (45-493). Vesalius’sgreat-grandfather, Johannes (d. 476), had alsobeen in royal service as physician to Mary ofBurgundy (457-48), wife of the future HolyRoman Emperor Maximilian I (459-59).Johannes is recorded under the Latinized formof his name, Johannes de Wesalia, in the reg-ister of the University of Leuven [Louvain]where he taught medicine, before beingappointed city physician of Brussels around447. It was during Johannes’s lifetime that thefamily surname was changed from Witing toVan Wesele.

Johannes’s eldest son, Everard, followed in hisfather’s footsteps by becoming physician toMary of Burgundy, and to her husband theregent of the Netherlands, Archduke (from508 Emperor) Maximilian I, and their children.Everard also wrote a commentary on the med-ical writings of Rhazes, (Abu Bakr Muh.ammadibn Zakariya� Razı� (854-95)) and on the firstfour parts of the Aphorisms of Hippocrates.

Andreas, the father of Vesalius, was the illegiti-mate son of Everard. He was trained as anapothecary and entered the imperial service ofthe Holy Roman Emperor Charles V (500-558) in that capacity. At an unknown dateAndreas married Isabel, daughter of JacobCrabbe, a tax-collector of Brussels, andCatherine Sweerts. As part of his daughter’sdowry, Jacob Crabbe provided a house on HelleStraetken in the Haute Rue quarter, located inthe southern part of Brussels. It was here thatVesalius was born in 54. In the same househis elder brother Nicolas, his younger brotherFranciscus, and sister Anne were also born. Thehouse was demolished in 6. On its site nowstands L’église Saints-Jean-et-Étienne-aux-Min-imes. If we are to believe the testimony of thebrilliant mathematician, astrologer, and physi-cian, Girolamo Cardano (50-576), who castVesalius’s horoscope in 547, the anatomist wasborn at 05:45 on the morning of 30 December.At the time of Vesalius’s birth Brussels was oneof the principal cities of the renamed Duchy ofBrabant, which on the death of Mary of Bur-gundy in 48 became known as the HabsburgNetherlands.

7


EArLy EdUcATIonOn the details of Vesalius’s early life there ispractically no information. The family home inBrussels was close to a place known as GallowsHill (Galgenberg), where executed criminalswere exposed to the elements; the site is nowoccupied by the Palais de Justice. FromVesalius’s own testimony we know that as aboy he dissected small animals such as rats,mice, moles, and an occasional cat or dog. It islikely that the young Andreas attended the ele-mentary school run by the Brethren of theCommon Life (Fratres Vitae Communis), butthere is no documentary evidence to supportthis assumption. On completion of his elemen-tary schooling, Vesalius moved to Leuven inFebruary 530 to prepare himself for university.The University of Leuven at that time consistedof a group of colleges, known as pedagogia.Vesalius entered the college known as theCastle School (Pedagogium Castrense), wherethe curriculum was designed for studentstaking the degree of Master of Arts, a prerequi-site for entry into a professional school. Latinand Greek, rhetoric, and philosophy wereobligatory subjects. Among Vesalius’s fellowstudents was Antoine Perrenot de Granvelle(57-586), the future statesman and Primateof the Netherlands, who also became chan-cellor to the Emperor Charles V, and to KingPhilip II of Spain. While pursuing his studies atthe Castle School, Vesalius also attendedcourses at the College of Three Languages [Ped-agogium Trilingue], established in 57 by thehumanist Jeroen van Busleyden (470-57), aclose friend of Erasmus (466-536). At the Col-lege, Vesalius developed his competence inscholastic Latin, and mastered classical Greek,as well as acquiring a rudimentary knowledgeof Hebrew. From his schooldays Vesalius recalls

reading Aristotle’s De anima, and GregorReisch’s encyclopaedic compendium, the Mar-garita philosophica. In particular he recalls thediagram of the human brain indicating the fivesenses.

UnIVErSITy oF PArIS 533-537Vesalius’s decision to pursue a medical careerwas taken on the advice of a family friend,Nicolas Flourens, who had also studied atLeuven, before becoming physician to theEmperor Charles V. In his first published work,Paraphrasis in nonum librum Rhazae mediciarabis clariss. ad Regum Almansorem (537),Vesalius acknowledges his indebtedness toFlourens by dedicating the Paraphrasis, as wellas a later work, known as the Venesection Letterof 539, to the “patron of my early studies.” It isalso likely that Flourens urged the youngVesalius to pursue his medical studies at theprestigious University of Paris, considered atthat time to be the leading medical school out-side of Italy.

By September 533 Vesalius had arrived inParis, where he took up lodgings with an oldfriend from Leuven, Jean Sturm. Vesalius wasnineteen years of age – too young to beawarded the Masters of Arts, although he hadcompleted all the degree requirements. Undersuch circumstances the university administra-tion usually admitted the candidate, deferringaward of the degree until a later date. Vesaliusduly registered as a candidate (philiater) forthe baccalaureate in medicine.

The statutes of the medical faculty at the Uni-versity of Paris, established in 350, hadchanged little over the next two centuries.Members of the Faculty of Medicine who

8

Cardano’s horoscope of Vesalius


taught regular courses were known as regentdoctors; they also presided over academic dis-putations and theses. Students were expectedto follow a demanding curriculum. Courses ranevery day from early morning, except onThursdays and certain feast days, from thesecond week of November until 8 June, forthirty-six months spread over four years. Thecurriculum consisted of lectures in Latin cov-ering the main medical disciplines of pharmacy,physiology, surgery, pathology, botany (materiamedica), anatomy, hygiene, and therapeutics, asexpounded in the writings of Hippocrates,Galen, Avicenna, Averroes, Avenzoar, Rhazes,and the scholars of the Schola Medica Salerni-tana. In addition two specially elected regentdoctors, known as professors-in-ordinary, sup-plemented the so-called ordinary lectures withmore detailed daily lectures. Candidates for thebaccalaureate in medicine were also employedas instructors, who were required to give lec-tures or papers (cursus) on a variety of medicalthemes.

AnATomy AT PArISAlthough the study of anatomy became arequirement for medical candidates at Parisfrom the late fifteenth century, prior to 478very little dissection had actually taken place.Surviving records report a dissection being car-ried out in 407, but there are no further refer-ences until 478. Anatomy did not yet enjoy thestatus of an independent discipline, and wasregarded as a mere adjunct to surgery. As such,it came under the purview of the surgeon orbarber, rather than the physician, whoregarded dissection with some distaste. Mem-bers of the Guild of Surgeons of Paris and bar-bers, being excluded from the Faculty ofMedicine, had established their own schools,though they did attend and even participatedin dissections carried out at the University. Butthey were always considered subservient, anddid not enjoy the same status or privileges asthe physicians, and had no say in the teachingof anatomy at the University.

As a result, anatomical instruction in Parislagged behind the teaching of the subject inItaly, where surgeons were admitted into theuniversities. In general French medical practi-tioners were uninformed about Italian medi-cine, and there was a distinct lack of contactbetween the conservative French universitiesand their progressive Italian counterparts. Butthe tide was beginning to turn, as the spirit of anew classical scholarship took root.

gALEn And AnATomyFrom the third century right up to the seven-teenth century the study and practice of medi-

cine in all its branches were dominated by thewritings of Galen (9-ca. 6 CE), the spiritualsuccessor of Hippocrates (circa 470-360 bcE).

The extremely prolific Galen wrote on allaspects of medicine. Throughout the medievalperiod, it was mainly Galen’s works on physicalmedicine and therapeutics that were copied,circulated, and closely studied by Arab andByzantine scholars, resulting in a large numberof commentaries and translations into Syriac,Arabic, Hebrew, and Latin. At a time whenlittle importance was attached to the study ofthe body’s structure (despite Galen’s frequentexhortations about the crucial role of anatomyin the study of medicine), his anatomical writ-ings were of no practical interest to physicians,and were largely neglected and even forgotten.The resulting decline in anatomical investiga-tion was to persist throughout the medievalperiod. From the third century cE until thedawn of the Renaissance, dissection was littlepracticed in Byzantium or the Islamic lands,and had all but disappeared. Most physicianswere satisfied with a modicum of anatomicalknowledge in order to treat wounds, and toperform simple surgical procedures, disloca-tions, and fractures.

As Vesalius reminded readers of the Fabrica,anatomy had been an important subject ofstudy in ancient Alexandria in the third centurybcE, and human dissection had been widelypracticed. Herophilus (circa 335-circa 80 bcE),a member of the Alexandrine school, wasreputed to have been an expert dissector, andthe author of a number of medical works,including a treatise on anatomy, long since lost.Both he and Erasistratus of Ceos (active circa80 bcE) were believed to have performed dis-section and even vivisection on condemnedcriminals.

There is no evidence that Galen ever performedhuman dissections during his time in Alexan-dria. In his writings he urged practitioners toundertake dissections as frequently as theycould, even though this opportunity wasdenied to Galen himself, for in Asia Minorwhere he spent his early professional life, dis-section was forbidden by law. Elsewhere thepractice of human dissection was hampered byreligious scruples, legal restrictions, socialtaboos, and the general unavailability ofcadavers.

Contrary to common belief, the attitude of theChurch to dissection was one of tacit tolerancerather than outright condemnation. Providedthe corpse was treated with dignity, and wasgiven a Christian burial (if appropriate), the

9


Church raised no objections to the practice ofdissection. After all, viewed from a theologicalstandpoint, dissection revealed the wondrousdesign and wisdom of the Creator. The ecclesi-astical authorities, on the other hand, werequick to condemn as sacrilegious the robbing ofgraves to procure anatomical specimens.Human vivisection was also vigorously con-demned. The Islamic attitude to human dissec-tion was slightly more complex andinconclusive. Nowhere in the Qur’an is dissec-tion explicitly proscribed, though mutilationand the breaking of bones are forbidden, as isthe desecration of graves. Without specificinterdictions against dissection, the legalIslamic authorities acted indecisively. If thecadaver to be dissected was that of a non-Muslim, there was no opposition. But if thecorpse was that of a Muslim, the situation wasquite different, and the authorities could inter-vene, though there is no evidence that theyactually did.

Even though the religious authorities did notexplicitly condemn dissection, there was a gen-eral sense that opening a cadaver was a sacrile-gious and barbaric act. The sight of blood andgore, and the stench of putrefaction impededthe development of anatomical research. And ifconsiderations of morality and squeamishnesswere not major concerns, there was still theimagined threat of contagion.

Several alternative means for gatheringanatomical knowledge were available. Muchinformation could be gleaned from the livingbody, such as the eruption of the wisdom teeth,the pulse, nerve sensations, and anatomicalanomalies such as double joints. Vital anatom-ical information might also be acquiredthrough the examination of deep wounds indead and living bodies. As physician to theGladiator School in Pergamum, Galen hadample opportunity to examine wounds, but heregarded this as inadequate for the real studyof the human body, as it only provided detailsof surface anatomy. The dissection of animals,particularly the Barbary ape (Macaca sylvanus),whose anatomy, Galen claimed, closely resem-bled that of humans, provided the greatestsource of anatomical information. Other ani-mals exploited for dissection were dogs andpigs. A much rarer source of anatomical speci-mens was the unburied corpses of outlaws whohad been exposed on mountainsides, to bedevoured by birds or wild animals. Thecadavers of stillborn or aborted fetuses pro-vided yet another source of specimens.

AnATomy And dISSEcTIonWith the founding of universities in Europe in

the eleventh century, public dissections weregradually introduced into the curricula. Thefirst public dissection took place at the Univer-sity of Bologna in 307. Public dissections con-tinued at Bologna throughout the fourteenthcentury, and became a standard part of themedical curriculum thereafter, and were incor-porated into the university’s statutes in 405.The earliest recorded dissection to have takenplace at the University of Padua is 34. Thestatutes of 465 made provision for a public dis-section to take place annually before an audi-ence of teachers and a limited number ofstudents. At Venice public dissections began in368, at Florence in 388, and later in severalother Italian university cities. Outside of Italyofficially approved dissections were grantedevery other year to Montpellier in 340, andannually to Vienna in 404, Prague in 460,Paris in 478, and Tübingen in 485.

In Bologna, as in other institutions of medicaleducation, public anatomical demonstrationsfollowed a standard format that had been ineffect since the early fourteenth century. In atemporarily erected theatre, proceedings werepresided over by an instructor or lector, who satin his chair (cathedra) reading aloud the pre-scribed Latin text, and making the occasionaladditional comment. The specimen to be dis-sected, usually an executed criminal, was laidout supine on the dissecting table, while thosein attendance crowded around. The dissectionitself was often spread over three or four days,and was performed by a surgeon or barber,while an ostensor pointed out the parts beingdiscussed. The whole ritualized procedure wasdesigned to demonstrate anatomy in accor-dance with the writings of Galen; its purposewas not to verify the text against the evidenceof the body, or to discover new anatomicalstructures. The model made no allowance fordebate or close individual investigation by thestudents, and was more of a rigid academic cer-emony with little didactic benefit. The sheersize of the audience, which could number sev-eral hundred, disallowed any close intimatestudy. This format for dissection was main-tained right up to the time of Vesalius, andeven beyond. It is hardly surprising, therefore,that the teaching of anatomy stagnated.

For almost two thousand years anatomical pro-cedures were based on the doctrine of the threeventers, derived from the teachings of Plato(circa 48-circa 347 bcE). In the Timaeus Platoattempted to explain the nature and purpose ofthe physical world, and the creation of the uni-verse. He had neither interest nor experience inphysical anatomy, and was concerned only inthe philosophical significance of the body,

0


which for him was the vehicle of the soul, theresult of intentional design by a superior Being.

According to Plato, the body consists of threecavities, or venters, separated by the naturaldemarcations of neck and diaphragm. Thelower venter, extending downwards from thediaphragm to the pubic bone, contains theabdominal viscera. The middle venter, betweenthe neck and the diaphragm, is home to theheart and lungs. The higher region, above theneck, houses the brain. This arrangement ofabdomen, chest, and brain corresponds to thethree bodily functions – nutritive, vital, andsensitive - and was an integral part of thehumoral theory of medicine. The veins carriednutriment from the liver to the rest of the body;the arteries distributed blood and spirit fromthe heart, while the nerves carried senses to thebrain and motion from the brain to the mus-cles.

Although originally a philosophical doctrine,the three venter division also provided a prac-tical means for organizing anatomical proce-dures. In the context of dissection, it wasexpedient to open the lower venter first, as theviscera were the most susceptible to rapiddecomposition. Once the viscera had beendealt with, the organs of the middle venterwere examined, and finally the brain in theupper venter.

PrE-VESALIAn AnATomIcAL WorkS:mondIno dEI LUzzIAnatomical treatises were not unknown beforethe fourteenth century, but they merely formedpart of larger works of surgery. Anatomia, thetextbook prepared by Mondino de Luzzi (circa70–36) in 36 for use by his students, isregarded as the first book devoted entirely toanatomy, and became the standard manual ofanatomical dissection for the next two hun-dred years. The practical method of dissection,advocated by Galen, was followed byMondino, who in 306 became the inauguralProfessor of Practical Anatomy at the Univer-sity of Bologna.

Although Galen’s doctrines were well estab-lished in European universities by the start ofthe fourteenth century, the Galenic anatomicaltexts available to Mondino in preparing histextbook, were few and far between, and weremostly incomplete or corrupt. He had to rely onabridged versions of De usu partium [On theUse of Parts] and of De locis affectis [OnAffected Parts], and a few other fragmentarytexts.

By the end of the fifteenth century the fewanatomical illustrations that existed were oflittle significance. They were not intended to berealistic depictions of what was seen, but wererather mnemonic representations of what tra-dition demanded. Moreover, illustrations wereused haphazardly, with no direct relationshipto the text.

FAScIcULUS mEdIcInAEThis kind of illustration is evident in the Fasci-culus medicinae, sometimes attributed toJohannes de Ketham. First published at Venicein 49, it was reprinted several times duringthe final years of the fifteenth century and theearly decades of the sixteenth century. The Fas-ciculus is the earliest printed book to includeanatomical illustrations of any significance. Thefull-page woodcuts reveal the state of medicineat the end of the medieval period. They areschematic, and contributed little to theadvancement of anatomical knowledge. Theillustration in the Fasciculus of a dissection inprogress is of considerable interest, as it depictsthe format of anatomical demonstrationemployed throughout the fourteenth and fif-teenth centuries.

By the second decade of the sixteenth centuryother illustrated anatomical texts that dis-played a more sophisticated approach to thesubject were printed. The most importantworks were those by Jacopo Berengario daCarpi, and Johann Dryander.

depiction of the three venters from Gregor Reisch’s Mar-

garita philosophica, 508


JAcoPo bErEngArIo dA cArPIJacopo Berengario (460-530) completed hismonumental Commentaria cum amplissimisadditionibus super Anatomia Mundini in 5.This commentary on Mondino’s textbook pro-vided a complete guide to earlier anatomicalwritings, and was Berengario’s most significantcontribution to anatomical knowledge. A muchcondensed version of the Commentaria, enti-tled Isagogae breves, was issued in 5 in asmall quarto of eighty leaves, richly illustratedwith woodcuts. It was republished, withchanges and revisions, in 53, 530, and 535.In several respects Berengario anticipatedVesalius. He was one of the first to challenge

the ancient authority of Galen. He produced auseful manual of dissection that supersededMondino’s, and was the best work of its kindbefore the Fabrica. He was also a strong advo-cate of private dissection, and was one of thefirst anatomists to understand that verbaldescriptions were sometimes insufficient toclarify complex anatomical structures, whichwere best served through illustration. Some ofthe woodcuts are crudely rendered, but theywere adequate for Berengario’s purposes in the50s. As anatomical knowledge grew, the needfor more accurately drawn and minutelydetailed illustrations was acutely felt, and waseventually realized in the magnificent wood-cuts of Vesalius’s artist.

Woodcut of a dissection from the early sixteenth century, from the Fasciculus medicinae of 5. In the centre is the instructor

seated in an elevated chair, reading the prescribed anatomical textbook. In the lower centre the dissection is performed by a

barber or surgeon while the figure on the right, the ostensor, points to the various anatomical parts being discussed.


JohAnn dryAndErJohann Dryander (500-560) had planned acomprehensive treatise on the anatomy of thewhole human body, but only the first part,devoted to the head, was issued. It appeared inSeptember 536 with the title: Anatomia capitishumani. A second edition followed in June 537with the revised title Anatomiae, hoc est, cor-poris humani dissectionis pars prior. Twenty-three woodcut illustrations present asequential dissection of the head, along withthe tools necessary for the task. Dissection ofthe neck, the base of the skull, the jaw and theteeth are also depicted.

chArLES ESTIEnnEAnother precursor of Vesalius was Charles Esti-enne (circa 505-56), whose richly illustratedanatomical volume, De dissectione partium cor-poris humani libri tres, eventually appeared in545, following a six-year delay over a legal dis-pute between Estienne and his surgical assis-tant Etienne de la Riviere. The curiouswoodcuts of this beautifully printed book arenot as anatomically sophisticated as those inthe Fabrica, yet do display a certain artistry andoriginality.

ThE gALEnIc rEVIVALWhen Vesalius arrived in Paris, the recovery ofGalen’s texts, a trend that had begun in Italytowards the end of the fifteenth century, was infull swing. One of the leaders of the Galenicrevival in Italy was Niccolò Leoniceno (48-54), professor of medicine, mathematics, andphilosophy at the University of Ferrara, whosepersonal library was renowned for its rare andextensive collection of Greek medical and sci-entific manuscripts. Finding the Latin transla-tions of Galen to be riddled with errors andinaccuracies, Leoniceno strongly advocated areturn to original Greek sources.

As more of the writings of Galen were discov-ered in Greek manuscripts, and in Latin trans-lations of the numerous Arabic versions thatcirculated in manuscript, the restoration of theGalenic canon reached a highpoint in 55,when the first Greek edition of his known writ-ings was published by the heirs of AldoManuzio in Venice. Other editions in Greeksoon followed, including the important editionin seven volumes, printed by AndreasCratander at Basel in 538. New Latin transla-tions of Galen also began to proliferate. Initiallypublication focused on Galen’s writings onpractical medicine, therapeutics, and hygiene,which had been preserved in large numbers inArabic and Latin translations. But in the yearsimmediately prior to Vesalius’s arrival in theFrench capital, attention began to shift to

Galen’s hitherto unknown or forgotten writ-ings on anatomy. In 54 Leoniceno’s Latin translation of a smallcollection of Galen’s writings was printed byHenri Estienne in Paris, and in 58, Estienne’sson-in-law Simon de Colines, printed Leoni-ceno’s Latin version of De motu musculorum[On the Movement of the Muscles].

Of the twenty-six surviving Galenic worksdealing with anatomy and physiology, the mostimportant were De usu partium corporis humaniand De anatomicis administrationibus [Onanatomical procedures]. The former was avail-able throughout the Middle Ages in a variety ofabridged or corrupt copies. In the early four-teenth century it became better known thanksto the Latin translation by Niccolò da Reggio(b. 80) that was later printed at Paris bySimon de Colines in 58. De anatomicisadministrationibus was rediscovered only in58.

gALEn And PArISThe leading Galenists at the University of Parisin the 530s were Johann Guenther of Ander-nach (505-574), and Jacobus Sylvius (478-555), two of the most influential teachers ofanatomy during Vesalius’s student years atParis. Following Leoniceno’s lead, both menimmersed themselves in translating Galen intoLatin. Guenther alone translated more thanforty Galenic texts, including De anatomicisadministrationibus.

As the influence of the newly recovered Galenictexts began to spread, Galen’s anatomical writ-ings formed the basis for the study of anatomyat several European universities, including theUniversity of Paris. But the enthusiasm forGalen demonstrated in Paris soon developedinto a new conservatism. Members of the Fac-ulty, particularly Guenther and Sylvius, dis-played a blind enslavement to Galenicdoctrines, which put paid to any free academicenquiry in the sphere of anatomy. For thesezealots Galen was infallible, and his writingssacrosanct.

Significant changes in dissecting procedureswere soon introduced at Paris. Much moreattention was devoted to the bones and mus-cles in contrast to previous anatomical practice,which concentrated on the viscera of the threeventers. In De anatomicis administrationibusGalen again stressed the importance of theskeleton as the foundation of the structure ofthe body and the muscles as its moving agents.

One of Guenther’s most influential works wasInstitutionum anatomicarum secundum Galeni

3


sententiam ad candidatos medicinae libriquatuor, a succinct survey of Galen’s writingsfor medical students that at the same time pro-vided a manual for dissection. First publishedat Paris in 536, and again at Basel the sameyear, Guenther’s textbook was used by Vesaliusas a guide in preparing his 538 publication,Tabulae anatomicae sex. Vesalius found certaindiscrepancies between what Galen hadallegedly written, and the observable facts.Believing the errors to be Guenther’s and notGalen’s, Vesalius set about amending Guen-ther’s text, and correcting the large number oftypographical errors. The revised edition, withVesalius’s name on the title page, was pub-lished in Venice in 538. Although Vesalius’sname does not appear on the title page ofGuenther’s original edition of 536, in a passageconcerning the seminal vessels, the authorrefers to his student by name in glowing terms:

It [the seminal vessel] was only recentlyfound with the help of Andreas Vesalius, sonof the Emperor’s pharmacist, a young man,by Jove, of great promise, possessing a sin-gular knowledge of medicine, erudite in bothlanguages [Latin and Greek] and mostskilled in dissecting bodies …

But contrary to Guenther’s generous acknowl-edgement, the discovery was not in fact new,and had been known to Italian medicine forseveral hundred years. The vessels werefamiliar to Mondino, Berengario, and Massa,and had, moreover, been described by Galen inDe anatomicis administrationibus, which,although lost until the sixteenth century, had

survived in Arabic translations. Ignorance ofthis fact demonstrates the unfamiliarity inParis with Italian anatomical writings. Alsotelling is the fact that Vesalius did not correctthe erroneous attribution in his revised editionof the Institutiones anatomicae.

Sylvius, too, worked diligently on arranging,organizing, and abstracting the vast andgrowing corpus of the writings of Galen. Heproduced a series of synoptic tables and otheraids designed to help students navigate theirway through the newly published ancienttexts. His endeavours were much appreciatedby his students, including Vesalius. Despite arelatively late start in medicine, Sylvius becamean academic instructor at the age of fifty-three,and enjoyed both success and popularity. Twoof his works, Ordo, et ordinis ratio in legendisHippocratis et Galeni libris (54) and In Hip-pocrates et Galeni physiologiae partemanatomicam isagoge (54), although publishedafter Vesalius had left Paris, represent Sylvius’steaching from 53. Both Guenther and Sylviusalso played a major role in developing and pop-ularizing “new” Latin anatomical terminology.

Vesalius later criticized the conservative natureof anatomical instruction in Paris, but at first heenjoyed a cordial relationship with histeachers. On several occasions Vesalius claimsto have learned practically nothing fromSylvius on human anatomy, but he doesacknowledge his teacher’s superior knowledgeof the Galenic canon, and recognized the valueof his lectures on dissection. Vesalius was alsograteful to Guenther for teaching him the rudi-ments of dissection, even if Guenther did noneof the dissecting himself. Instead, he allowedhis students to carry out the work – an oppor-tunity seized upon by Vesalius, ever eager toimprove his dissecting skills, so admired byGuenther. At this point there were no obvioussigns of Vesalius’s later animosity towards histeachers or to Galen’s methods. He belongedvery much in the Galenic camp, and remainedso for several years after his departure from theFrench capital.

The formal dissections performed by Vesaliusunder supervision were supplemented by noc-turnal excursions to the cemeteries of Paris,where he often had to fend off vicious dogs torecover human bones for private study. Hisosteological knowledge became so proficient,that he claimed even when blindfolded, to beable to identify a bone by touch. Anothersource for anatomical specimens were executedcriminals whose corpses were left to rot on thegallows– a sight familiar to Vesalius since hischildhood at Gallows Hill. Vesalius conducted

4


private anatomical sessions in his own roomswith privileged colleagues. Sometimes bodieswere kept in his bedroom for several weeks.

bETWEEn PArIS And PAdUAVesalius was not destined to complete hisstudies at the University of Paris. In July 536,shortly after he had fulfilled the third year ofthe curriculum, French forces under KingFrancis I (494-547) invaded the Duchy ofSavoy, provoking a strong military responsefrom the forces of the Holy Roman Emperor,Charles V who sent two armies, one intoProvence, the other into northern France, todislodge the French. As an alien Fleming,Vesalius, fearing reprisals, decided to leaveParis, and return to the relative academic back-water of Leuven, where he was dismayed tofind that medical studies had stagnated. Mem-bers of the Faculty of Medicine, ignorant ofancient Greek medicine, were still entrenchedin the medieval doctrines of the Arabs. Onlyone teacher met with Vesalius’s approval –Johannes Heems of Armentières (d. 560) towhom he later dedicated his revised edition ofGuenther’s Institutiones anatomicae. Althoughno dissection had been undertaken at the Uni-versity since 58, the reputation Vesalius hadearned while studying in Paris had reachedLeuven, where he was granted permission toconduct his own anatomical demonstrations,including dissections. Vesalius also continuedto carry out his own private dissections. Herelated how once he came across a skeleton,stripped of its flesh by birds, in the ditch alonga country road. With the connivance of thecivic authorities, he succeeded in smuggling thebones into his lodgings where he re-assembledthe skeleton.

While at Leuven Vesalius completed therequirements for the degree of bachelor ofmedicine. In February 537 he published hisbachelor’s dissertation, Paraphrasis in nonumlibrum Rhazae medici arabis clariss. ad RegumAlmansorem, a revision and commentary of theLatin translations of the work written for KingAlmansur of Khurasan, by the Arab-Persionphysician, Rhazes. Vesalius undertook a revi-sion of the ninth book of the Ad Almansorem,making stylistic changes and improvements,and adding a commentary to the Latin transla-tion of Rhazes.

During the first few decades of the sixteenthcentury, scholars attempted to purge medicineof what were considered to be barbaric Arabinfluences, and to restore medicine to its “pure”ancient Greek roots. Part of Vesalius’s purposewas to re-write Rhazes’s text in a more elegantLatin, that would replace the coarse style and

“barbaric” words that Arab authors had intro-duced into their medical treatises. AlthoughVesalius was later to view Arab medicine morefavourably, for the time being he was preparedto acknowledge the contributions to medicineby Arab physicians, but only insofar as theywere in keeping with the writings of Galen.

PAdUARather than complete his degree of Doctor ofMedicine in Leuven, Vesalius chose to transferhis studies to the University of Padua, at thattime renowned as the primary medical schoolin Italy. In December 537 he successfullypassed his entry examinations, and within dayswas appointed demonstrator (ostensor) andlecturer in surgery and anatomy (explicatorchirurgiae) by the Senate of the Republic ofVenice, under whose rule Padua had been since406.

Although dissections at the University ofPadua had been performed since 34, theywere carried out infrequently, usually once ayear, and the number of students allowed toattend was strictly limited. Dissections, whichcould last several weeks, were usually per-formed in December, when the rate of decom-position was slower. Public anatomicaldemonstrations were performed in the mannerset out by Mondino at Bologna in the earlyfourteenth century, but Vesalius was about tochange all that. As lecturer in surgery andanatomy he was granted the freedom to revisethe procedures for anatomical demonstrationas he deemed fit. The fundamental changesthat he introduced totally transformed thepresentation of anatomical demonstrationshenceforth.

TAbULAE AnATomIcAE SEx, 538 A significant innovation introduced by Vesaliuswas the use of illustrations to accompany hislectures, and to serve as aides-mémoire. Thelarge illustrations in the form of charts were sosuccessful among the students, that Vesaliuswas encouraged to produce a set of charts thatbecame known as the Tabulae anatomicae sex.

Three of the figures were drawn by Jan Stefanvan Calcar (circa 499-circa 546), a fellowcountryman of Vesalius, who had migrated toVenice to study art in the school of Titian. Thetwo Flemings probably met in Venice whereVesalius had stayed during his journey toPadua. Stefan’s name appears in the colophonof the sixth Tabula – “sumptibus IoannisStephani Calcarensis,” suggesting that the artisthad either financed the enterprise, or was beingrecompensed for his labour with the proceedsfrom sales of the charts. Stefan’s skeletal draw-

5


ings, though not free from error, were a consid-erable advance on previous depictions by otherartists. Besides their directly practical purpose, theTabulae anatomicae were essentially a prelimi-nary trial for “something more considerable”that was taking shape in Vesalius’s mind: theDe humani corporis fabrica.

The innovative combination of text and illus-tration in the Tabulae anatomicae was a majormilestone in anatomical teaching. The Tabulaeanatomicae also represent a significant turningpoint in Vesalius’s career, as he begins to chal-lenge the authority of Galen for the first time. Itwas while he was checking Galen’s text againstthat of Guenther’s Institutiones anatomicae thatVesalius came to the realization that Galen hadbased his anatomical dissections on animals,usually apes, extending his conclusions byanalogy to human beings. This uncomfortablediscovery was not mentioned in the Tabulaeanatomicae, but five years later, a more confi-dent Vesalius wrote in the Fabrica

… it is just now known to us from thereborn art of dissection, from the carefulreading of Galen’s books, and from the wel-come restoration of many portions thereofthat he himself never dissected a humanbody, but in fact was deceived by his mon-keys … and often wrongly disputed ancientdoctors who had trained themselves inhuman dissections

Paradoxically, however, Vesalius himself hadrelied on the anatomy of the ape in his depic-tion of the liver, kidneys, heart, and retemirabile in the Tabulae anatomicae.

ThE VEnESEcTIon LETTEr 539 Vesalius sent a copy of the Tabulae anatomicaeto his mentor, Nicolas Flourens, the familyfriend who had advised the young Vesalius toenroll at the University of Paris in 533. In hiswritten acknowledgement, Flourens askedVesalius for his opinion about the proper pro-cedures for venesection. The result was the so-called Venesection Letter.

A dispute about the appropriate site of blood-letting in the treatment of pleurisy had beenraging for twenty years. Debate revolvedaround the method of bloodletting to be used.Arab physicians had bled at a point furthestaway from the site of infection, whereas theHippocratic and Galenic practice was to bleedat a point as close as possible to the site.Vesalius agreed with the ancient Greekmethod, but made certain modifications incases of pleurisy.

The Venesection Letter signals further dissocia-tion from traditional and authoritariananatomy in favour of independent investigationand judgment. For the second time Vesaliusexpresses disagreement with Galenic teaching.As in the Tabulae anatomicae, he is guardedlycritical of Galen, by correcting or clarifyingwhat is erroneous or obscure in the Galenictexts. Vesalius meant no disrespect to Galen,whom he refers to as the “Prince of physi-cians.” But he realized that a new exposition ofthe human body was needed, still based onGalenic principles, but affirmed or repudiatedon the evidence of direct observation.

Although Vesalius made his name in the field ofanatomy, the Venesection Letter demonstratesthat he was also interested in problems of clin-ical medicine. In the opinion of Vesalius thebloodletting controversy could be solved byusing a new anatomical basis for the requisiteprocedures of phlebotomy.

During his investigations, Vesalius had noticedthe peculiar shape of certain veins, which heinterpreted as thickenings that reinforced theveins. Charles Estienne, too, had seen them andhad interpreted them as baffles preventing therapid flow of blood. In the 540s GiambattistaCanano (55-579) and Amatus Lusitanus(5-568) correctly identified them as venousvalves, but misunderstood their function. Thediscovery of the valves would lead WilliamHarvey (578-657) to a full understanding oftheir true function in the circulation of theblood in 68.

6


boLognA LEcTUrES 540In January 540 Vesalius received an invitationfrom medical students of the University ofBologna to present a series of anatomicaldemonstrations to accompany lectures read byMatteo Corti (474 or 5-544). Vesalius hadspent a brief period in Bologna in 538, when hehad visited Corti. The two men argued over thequestion of fibres in the veins, which souredthe relationship. During the course of the 540lecture series, Corti, a staunch Galenist, readfrom Mondino’s Anatomia, confirming or cor-recting Mondino’s text through reference toGalen. Corti believed that dissection was ofdubious value, as it merely confirmed what hadalready been written by Galen. The two menwere on a collision course, and the tension waspalpable, according to one eyewitness presentat the occasion. When Corti interruptedVesalius, challenging his assertions that contra-dicted Galen, Vesalius demonstrated that itwas Galen who was in error. Perhaps irritatedby the patronizing attitude of the older mantowards a lowly “dissector,” or feeling moreaudacious and outspoken in his opinions,Vesalius fiercely debated with Corti and sub-jected him to public humiliation, much to thedelight of the student audience.

The Bologna lectures proved to be a testingground for the teaching techniques thatVesalius was developing. His usual course ofaction was first to dissect a human, and then adog, partly to provide a lesson in comparativeanatomy, and partly to show where Galen wasin error in believing animal anatomy could beapplied to humans. At Bologna he performed acomplete dissection of an ape and mounted theskeleton alongside that of a human to demon-strate that Galen had based his description ofhuman vertebrae on those of the ape, whichwere quite different.

The lectures also mark an important stage inVesalius’s intellectual development as ananatomist. He was now at an intermediatestage between the confident adherence toGalenism professed during his first public lec-ture at Padua in 537, the hesitant skepticismexpressed in Tabulae anatomicae, and the confi-dent, sometimes overstated criticism of Galenvoiced in the Fabrica. With his boldness andself-assuredness growing, Vesalius now turnedhis thoughts to the great project about whichhe had hinted in the Venesection Letter, andwhich would ensure his universal fame. At theclose of the letter, he reveals that work wasalready underway:

I have now almost completed two illustra-tions of the nerves … I feel that these mustbe held back until I have produced illustra-tions of the muscles and of all the internalparts … If bodies were available here asthey sometimes are elsewhere, not for longwould the students lack such a useful work,especially since many distinguished men areconstantly urging me to it … besides others,Marcantonio Genua, our distinguished pro-fessor of philosophy … has strongly urgedme to the task … if bodies become availableand Joannes Stephanus, the distinguishedcontemporary artist, does not refuse hisservices, I shall certainly undertake that task

gIUnTA EdITIon oF gALEn 54As he was embarking on his great project,Vesalius was invited to edit the manuscripts ofGalen’s anatomical treatises for an authorita-tive Latin edition to be printed by the GiuntaPress in Venice in 54.

The Giuntas had already published editions ofGalen in 5 and 58. Encouraged by thefinancial success of these editions, the firm’sfounder, Luca-Antonio Giunta (457-538),masterminded the project to produce a defini-tive edition of Galen’s writings that includedthe recently recovered texts, as well asimproved versions of Latin translations collatedagainst Greek manuscripts. Luca-Antonio didnot live to see the finished volumes, whichappeared in 54-54 in eleven volumes underthe editorship of Agostino Gadaldini (55-575). A team of scholar-physicians was mar-shalled to edit and translate individual works.In the introduction Gadaldini mentions severalof the contributors by name, including Vesalius,“the celebrated and distinguished contempo-rary professor of dissection.” From Gadaldiniwe discover that Vesalius was responsible forthe editing of De nervorum dissectione, Anto-nius Fortulus’s translation of De venarum arte-riarumque dissectione, and Guenther’s Latinversion of De anatomicis administrationibus.

It is evident from Gadaldini’s further remarksthat Vesalius was reluctant to revise Guenther’stranslation of De anatomicis administrationibus,for fear of offending his former teacher, perhapsfor a second time, so soon after his reworking ofGuenther’s Institutiones anatomicae.

So successful was the Giunta edition of Galenthat it was repeatedly reprinted, with as manyas nine coming from the press of Giunta, andthree from the house of Froben of Basel before65.

The three years and four months that elapsed

7


between the publication of the VenesectionLetter in April 539, and the shipment of manu-script and woodblocks of the Fabrica across theAlps from Italy to Basel, was a period of intenseand remarkable productivity for Vesalius. Inthat relatively short time he prepared his revi-sion of Guenther’s Institutiones anatomicae, hecontributed to the Giunta edition of Galen,gave a series of lectures in Bologna, wrote aparaphrase of all the books of Rhazes (whichhe later destroyed), and continued with histeaching and dissecting responsibilities inPadua. At some time during that freneticperiod he also managed to conceive, prepare,and compose the Fabrica.

dE hUmAnI corPorIS FAbrIcA, 543. The title of Vesalius great work De humani cor-poris fabrica was not original, and may havebeen suggested to Vesalius by a seventh-cen-tury Greek work by Theophilus Proto-sparatharius, based on Galen’s writings, andrecently translated into Latin under the sametitle by Giunio Paolo Grassi at Venice in 536. Itwas also the title chosen by Leonhart Fuchs(50-566) for the work published by him atTübingen in 55, and in two volumes at Lyonin 55-555. Felix Platter (536-64) entitledhis 583 work on anatomy which copied theillustrations from Vesalius’s work De corporishumani structura et usu. Adriaan van de Spiegel(578-65) also used the title for his anatom-ical treatise published at Venice in 67.

In his Dedication to the Emperor Charles V,Vesalius harks back to the Golden Age of Hip-pocrates, and laments the current state of med-icine, in particular the decline in the knowledgeand practice of human anatomy. He arguespassionately for the revival of the teaching ofanatomy in the universities, based on ancientmodels. Vesalius bitterly complains about theignorance of the “butcher-barbers” in the tech-niques of dissection, and urges that the task ofdissecting be restored to the professional edu-cated anatomist, who should be the ultimateauthority on human anatomy.

The letter of Vesalius to the Basel printerJohannes Oporinus (507-568), which accom-panied the woodblocks sent from Venice, isincluded in the prefatory matter. Vesalius goesinto considerable detail about the placement ofthe woodblock illustrations and their accompa-nying text, and how the indexing of the illustra-tions by letters should relate to the corres-ponding anatomical description contained inthe main text. Other directions to the printerinclude the choice of paper, which should besolid and smooth to ensure the best impressionfrom the blocks.

The Fabrica is divided into seven books, each ofwhich is subdivided into chapters. Arrange-ment of the text follows the scheme proposedby Galen in De anatomicis administrationibus.Book I treats the bones and cartilage, workingdownwards from the head to the feet. The finaltwo chapters provide careful instructions forarticulating a skeleton. The second Book isdevoted to the muscles and ligaments, andattempts to give the fullest possible descriptionof every muscle and its function. Books III andIV deal with the vascular system and thenerves. Book V is devoted to a description ofthe viscera, and includes a discussion of fetusesand the uterus. In Book VI the heart, lungs,diaphragm, trachea, and gland of the throat aredescribed. The final Book VII studies the brainand demonstrates the successive steps in itsdissection.

The humanist classical Latin in which the Fab-rica is written taxed the abilities of even themost accomplished Latinist. Some of Vesalius’scontemporaries, such as Fabricius ab Aquapen-dente (537–69), and Sylvius were critical ofhis Latin, which was described as unnecessarilyprolix, pretentious, pompous, and repetitious.Humanist Latin is characterized by a complexsentence structure of multiple long clauses,rhetorical literary flourishes, and a large wide-ranging vocabulary, all of which, by the stan-dards of the day, were regarded as essentialingredients of elegant Latin. But it is a brand ofLatin ill-suited to the lucid expression of scien-tific discourse, and one that requires consider-able concentration on the part of the reader tograsp Vesalius’s meaning. The elevated style,however, is occasionally relieved by a moreconversational idiom of homely metaphors andanecdotes.

The pictorial initial letters that introduce eachbook and chapter are of considerable interest,and invest the text with a touch of macabrehumour. There are two sets of initials, onelarge, the other small. All show the anatomistwith his naked putti assistants engaged in var-ious acts associated with dissection and sur-gery, such as the procurement of cadavers, andthe preparation of skeletons.

When Vesalius commenced teaching at Paduahe still accepted Galen’s word as sacrosanct,but the more he worked on cadavers, the morehe realized Galen had made mistakes. Hespoke out against Galen’s doctrines only whenhe felt that the facts demanded such action,and never went out of his way to disparageGalen or to attempt to undermine hisauthority. Instead Vesalius chose to take a freshapproach to the study and teaching of

8


anatomy, by establishing facts based on directrepeated observation and not on tradition. Others before Vesalius had pointed out errorsin Galen’s texts. Berengario had been one ofthe first to express in print the need to questiontextual authority:

… in this discipline nothing is to be believedthat is acquired either through the spokenvoice or through writing; since what isrequired is seeing and touching …

In testing Galen’s texts, Vesalius corrected ormodified as necessary. In the Fabrica there are65 references to Galen, mostly relating tomodifications or corrections. But even thoughhe was highly critical about some of Galen’sassertions, Vesalius still relied heavily on Galen.In the absence of alternative explanations,Vesalius accepts Galen’s version. At other timeshe deliberately draws attention to Galen’serrors by incorporating them into the illustra-tions.

Vesalius regarded his real enemies as thosewho blindly accepted Galen’s teachingswithout question, and who would not tolerateany challenge to Galen’s authority, or evenallow for the possibility that Galen had mademistakes, which might cast doubt on thatauthority.

EPITomEAn abridged version of the Fabrica, entitled Dehumani corporis fabrica librorum epitome, wasissued by Oporinus within weeks of theappearance of his larger work in June 543. TheEpitome consisted of twelve broadside leaves,and was intended for the use of students whocould not afford the large cost of the Fabrica. Itincluded most of the illustrations from the Fab-rica, and added several new ones, including“Adam and Eve” figures and woodcutsshowing the progressive dissection of the brain.Another illustration taken from the Fabrica isthe woodcut displaying the blood vessels andnervous system, accompanied by an additionalleaf of individual organs, which the reader isasked to cut out and paste to the master figure.

On 9 August, several days after Vesalius’sdeparture from Switzerland, a German versionof the Epitome translated by Alban Thorer(489-550), physician, professor, and Rector ofthe University of Basel, was published byOporinus.

coUrT PhySIcIAnOn 4 August 543, immediately after the publi-cation of the Fabrica and the Epitome, Vesaliusleft Basel to seek an audience with the EmperorCharles V, to present him with copies of his

new books. The real motive of Vesalius’s visit tothe Emperor, however, was to seek a positionon the imperial medical staff. Vesalius eventu-ally caught up with Charles V in Gelders at thebeginning of September, and was appointedphysician in ordinary (medicus familiaris ordi-narius) to the imperial household.

Prior to taking up official duties as physician tothe Emperor, during the latter months of 543and the early part of 544 Vesalius visitedPadua to settle his affairs, and to perform onefinal dissection. His next port of call wasBologna, where he was invited by the studentsto deliver a lecture on the venous system andto perform a dissection. His final destinationwas Pisa where, on the invitation of Cosimo de’Medici, Duke of Tuscany, he gave an inauguralcourse of lectures on anatomy at the newlyrenovated University, and prepared two femaleskeletons, one of a nun, the other of a younghunchback. He also performed an autopsy.Vesalius’s visit to Pisa was such a success, thatDuke Cosimo attempted to persuade Vesaliusto remain in Pisa by offering him a permanentacademic appointment. But having alreadycommitted his services to Charles V, Vesaliuswas obliged to reject the Duke’s offer.

The constant military skirmishes between theHoly Roman Empire and its troublesomeneighbour France and rebellions within theconfines of the Empire required Vesalius totravel around the battlefields in the Emperor’strain. In the summer of 544, outside thebesieged town of Saint-Dizier, he examined theviscera of René of Châlon, Prince of Orange(59-544), who had been mortally woundedduring the siege. Medical duties also includedthe treatment of soldiers’ wounds and amputa-tion, which at that time involved cauterizationwith boiling oil. These methods were soon tobe replaced by the application of antisepticointments, thanks to the reforms in field sur-gery introduced by Ambroise Paré (57-590),who, by an irony of history, was on theopposing side within the walls of Saint-Dizier.Eight years later during the siege of Metz, thetwo surgeons again found themselves on oppo-site sides. Although Vesalius and Paré were notto encounter each other on this occasion, theydid meet again later under different circum-stances.

In the winter of 544 Vesalius’s father died,leaving him a large inheritance, including thefamily house in Brussels. Towards the end ofthe year Vesalius travelled to Brussels, wherehe was married to Anne van Hamme. One yearlater the couple’s only child, a daughter Anne,was born.

9


Much of Vesalius’s time during the ensuingyears was spent treating an infirm Emperor,whose frequent attacks of gout incapacitatedhim for weeks on end. The situation was nothelped by the Emperor’s unbridled gluttony,and his unwillingness to accept his physicians’advice to exercise dietary restraint. TheEmperor also suffered from epilepsy, asthma, apersistent cough, an allergy to seafood, andinsomnia. A sedentary life without physicalexercise exacerbated his generally poor health.

Apart from the occasional dissection thatchance brought his way, Vesalius essentiallyturned his back on anatomical research. A fewyears later he was regretting his decision, asintrigues and jealousy among the court physi-cians, caused him to make the impulsive vowto renounce any further medical research. Atthis low point of his life he claims to havedestroyed manuscripts and drafts of severalunpublished works, including his annotatedcopies of Galenic texts, a commentary of thewhole text of Rhazes’s Ad Almansorem, andworking notes on a book on materia medica. Atthe same time he was gaining valuable experi-ence as a surgeon, and was consulted on manyoccasions by various dignitaries both withinand outside the Empire. In 546 he was calledto the bedside of the Venetian ambassador,Bernardino Navagero (507-565), who hadfallen seriously ill at Nijmegen. The ambas-sador’s stubborn illness dragged on, but he waseventually restored to health. That same yearVesalius successfully performed the potentiallydangerous surgical procedure of draining thepleural space between the lungs and the chestwall in a case of empyema. In 548 when exam-ining Maximilian of Egmont, Count of Buren(509–548), Vesalius predicted the exact hourof the count’s imminent death. When theprophecy was fulfilled with uncanny accuracy,it caused a sensation, which only served to addto Vesalius’s reputation. However, not all ofVesalius’s medical interventions were suc-cessful. There were also botched operations,such as that carried out on the foot of Cristo-foro Madruzzo, Cardinal of Trent (5-578).

ThE chInA rooT LETTEr AndconTroVErSIES The China Root Letter was written in responseto an enquiry from Joachim Roelants, physicianof Metz and an old friend of Vesalius, about thetherapeutic use of the root of the China smilaxplant, recently in vogue as a medication torelieve gout. Vesalius had used it to treat theEmperor’s gout, but was unsure about its effi-cacy.

Only about one-tenth of the letter was devotedto the China root. The rest is taken up with apugnacious defence of the Fabrica against theattacks of the Galenists, who, claimed Vesalius,had stifled the pursuit of scientific enquiryduring his student years in Paris. In particularthe China Root Letter was directed against hisold teacher Sylvius, who was at the forefront ofthe attacks. Sylvius had earlier warnedVesalius, that if he did not retract his lies aboutGalen, their friendship would be over. WhenVesalius refused to back down, the once cordialrelationship that existed between the two mendeteriorated into open hostility.

Sylvius wrote two further attacks on Vesalius:in 549 in Galenus De ossibus ad tyrones versusquidem a Ferdinado Balamio Siculo, a revisededition of Balamio’s translation of Galen’s text-book on osteology; and in 55 in Vaesanicuiusdam calumniarum in HippocratisGalenique rem anatomicam depulsio. AlthoughSylvius does not mention Vesalius by name, herefers to him as “vaesanus”, meaning madman

0


– an obvious and demeaning pun on his name.His attack on Vesalius had now become per-sonal, bitter, almost hysterical, and ultimatelydamaging to Sylvius’s reputation. When heexhorted the Emperor to intervene and punish“this traitor”, even his fellow Galenist col-leagues realized he had gone too far, and recog-nizing that these were the maliciousoutpourings of an angry old man, began to dis-tance themselves from him. By acceptingGalen’s anatomy as an article of orthodox faith,Sylvius could not bring himself to contemplatethe possibility that Galen might have been inerror, and that he may never have performeddissections on human subjects. For if thesecharges were true, Sylvius’s reputation andcredibility as a teacher would be brought intoquestion. He was fighting not only for Galen’shonour, but also his own. Desperatelyclutching at straws, Sylvius tried to explain theanatomical discrepancies between Galen’sdescriptions and those by sixteenth-centuryanatomists as the result of morphologicalchanges that had occurred in the human bodysince the second century. Sylvius’s death in 554spared him the misery of having to confront thesecond edition of the Fabrica, published thefollowing year.

Although Vesalius made no written responseto this latest attack, a former student acquain-tance from Paris, René Hener [RenatusHenerus] of Lindau, answered on his behalf inAdversus Jacobi Sylvii depulsionum anatomi-corum calumnias pro Andrea Vesalio, publishedat Venice in 555. He described Sylvius’s invec-tive as tragic, extremely abusive, and unworthyof its author’s years and accomplishments, andattributes his behaviour to envy towards theyounger Vesalius.

PLAgIArISmS And UnAUThorIzEd coPIESThe illustrations of the Fabrica were openlycopied almost immediately. In his publishedwritings Vesalius makes several references toplagiarism of his work. In its modern connota-tion, plagiarism is defined as the unlawful act ofcopying somebody else’s work and passing itoff, without acknowledgment, as one’s own. InVesalius’s day, the term had a broader applica-tion to refer to any unauthorized copying, evenif the original author is named. In anticipationof the illustrations of the Fabrica being copied,Vesalius had taken the precaution of securinglicenses to protect his intellectual property inthe territories of the Republic of Venice, thePapal States, and the Holy Roman Empire. Butin sixteenth-century Europe, where legal copy-right did not exist, outside these areas Vesaliuswas powerless to stop the pirates.

ThomAS gEmInUS The first person to copy the illustrations of theFabrica without Vesalius’s permission wasThomas Geminus (d. 56), whose Compen-diosa totius anatomie delineatio first appeared in545. An English edition was issued in 553with a completely different text, followed by asecond English edition in 559.

Despite Vesalius’s bitter complaints about thepoor quality of the reproductions, which, heclaimed, misrepresented him, and did him adisservice, it is unlikely that he ever actuallysaw a copy of the Compendiosa. To reproducethe Vesalian woodcut illustrations Geminusresorted to engravings, which were accom-plished with great skill. Indeed, Geminus’sillustrations may be interpreted as a tribute toVesalius’s anonymous artist, who, ironically,was not acknowledged by Vesalius in the Fab-rica. Geminus’s fine engravings contrast starklywith the text printed in an inelegant blackletter, that is punctuated with many typo-graphical errors and misreadings.

As with most imitators of the Fabrica, Geminusfailed to grasp the significance of the close rela-tionship between text and illustration thatVesalius had striven to achieve. Nevertheless,his Compendiosa contributed to the spread ofVesalius’s renown, particularly in England. Butas an anatomical treatise, without the Vesaliantext, it was of questionable value, though itprobably had its use in assisting barber-surgeons to acquire some basic knowledge ofanatomy and dissection skills.

Geminus’s original copper plates were subse-quently taken to France by the poet and doctorJacques Grevin (circa 539-570). Through hisefforts, a Latin edition was published in Parisby André Wechel in 564, entitled Anatomestotius, aere insculpta delineatio, cui addita estepitome innumeris mendis repurgata … perIacobum Grevinum. Although Vesalius’s nameappears quite prominently on the title page,there is no mention of Geminus. Another Latinversion appeared in 565, and a French transla-tion was issued in 569 entitled Les portraictsanatomiques de toutes les parties du corpshumain.

A different kind of plagiarism is manifest in thetwo-volume edition of the Fabrica produced inLyon in 55 by Jean de Tournes. It is unusual inthat it plagiarises only the text of the Fabrica,and omits the illustrations, apart from foursmall woodcuts of the cranium.

In February 553, on the eve of Epiphany,Emperor Charles V announced his intention to


abdicate in stages over the next five years. TheSpanish crown was inherited by his son PhilipII of Spain, and the crown of the Holy RomanEmpire was handed over to his brother Ferdi-nand I. Charles eventually retreated to theHieronymite convent of Juste in the SpanishExtremadura. As a reward for his faithfulservice, Vesalius was granted a life pension, andwas created a Count Palatine, but he had lost acourteous and generous master. In June 556 hewas named as a physician to the household ofKing Philip II.

dE hUmAnI corPorIS FAbrIcA. 555.In 546 during a prolonged stay in Ulm, whilethe Emperor recovered from his latest attack ofgout, Vesalius had made a visit to Basel, pos-sibly to discuss publication of a second editionof the Fabrica with Oporinus. Between the endof August 550 and October 55, duringanother long sojourn, this time in Augsburg,Vesalius began making preparations for thenew edition. The entire text was reset in largertype, and a new woodcut title page was sup-plied. Most of the woodcut illustrations used inthe 543 edition, except for the title page, werereused in the new edition. Textually, there wereseveral substantive changes, such as additionsmade in the light of new findings, deletions,and a large number of stylistic changes made inan effort to produce a more elegant Latin.

At the same time as the second edition of theFabrica was published, a new edition of theEpitome, with the final leaf reset, also appeared.

VESALIUS ThE PhySIcIAnBetween 553 and 556 Vesalius spent consider-able time with his family in Brussels, where heestablished a lucrative private practice as aconsultant physician, and acquired a reputa-tion throughout Europe, though not everyonewas convinced of Vesalius’s abilities as a physi-cian. Cardinal Granville remarked sarcasticallythat Vesalius always declared his patients’ mal-adies to be mortal, so that in the event ofdeath, he would be exonerated from anyblame, but if the patient were to live, he wouldbe said to have brought about a miraculouscure.

In 558 he was called on to attend Anna vanEgmont, Princess of Orange (533-558), whodied despite Vesalius’s ministrations. The fol-lowing year he was called urgently to Paris tothe court of King Henry II who had been mor-tally wounded when a piece of his opponent’sbroken lance lodged in his eye socket during atournament. The King subsequently died fromcomplications from his injuries. The post-mortem examination was conducted by

Vesalius. A woodcut of the King’s death byJacques Tortorel, after the design of Jean Per-rissin, shows Vesalius in consultation with thecourt surgeon Ambroise Paré at the king’s bed-side.

On his return to Brussels in mid-July 559,Vesalius made preparations to move with hisfamily to Spain with Philip’s retinue. Badweather delayed departure, and finally on 3August Vesalius left Brussels with his family.His official title was not protomedicus to PhilipII, as he would probably have wished, but thelesser post of “physician to the Netherlandersat the court of Madrid.” In Spain medicine hadnot quite reached the standards of the rest ofEurope, and Vesalius later complained aboutthe stultifying atmosphere of medicine there.Nevertheless, his services were sought after bya number of foreign embassies in Madrid.

In the spring of 56, while convalescing from along illness in Alcalá, the seventeen-year oldDon Carlos (545–568), Philip II’s eldest son,and heir to the Spanish throne, while pursuinga young woman, fell down a set of stone stepsand caused serious injuries to his head. Thewound festered and developed into an abscessthat covered his entire face, neck, chest, andupper arms. The physicians in attendancetreated the heir with cupping and applied var-ious restoratives, but to no avail, as DonCarlos’s condition deteriorated. On theeleventh day the king was sent for, and withVesalius made the thirty-five kilometre journeyfrom Madrid to Alcalá. As a last resort, the cen-tury-old relics of the Blessed Fray Diego, aFranciscan friar, were brought from a nearbymonastery and placed alongside Don Carlos.Meanwhile Philip retreated to a monastery topray for his son. The following morning therehad been a remarkable improvement in DonCarlos’s condition, which was attributed to themiraculous relics of Fray Diego, while thephysicians believed the credit for healingshould have gone to them.

In 56 Giovanni d’Arragona, marquis de Terra-nova, was wounded in the chest during a tour-nament, and developed a traumatic lungempyema. Vesalius, who had enjoyed somerecent successes in the treatment of the condi-tion, was consulted by the Palermo physicianand anatomist Giovanni Filippo Ingrassia(50-580). Ingrassia followed Vesalius’sinstructions for draining the thoracic space, andthe marquis eventually made a full recovery.The grateful and much relieved Ingrassia wroteup and published Vesalius’s “consilia”.Between October 563 and January 564, whenthe Spanish court was in Monzón, the English


ambassador, Sir Thomas Chaloner (5-565)was successfully treated by Vesalius for kidneystones with a concoction of liquorice andbarley.

rEcEPTIon oF ThE FAbrIcA: SUPPorTErSAnd dETrAcTorSFollowing the successful publication of thesecond edition of the Fabrica, and the death ofSylvius, Vesalius may have anticipated a periodof respite from the controversies that hisanatomical writings had provoked. It musthave come as something of an unpleasant sur-prise, when in 56, nineteen years after thepublication of the Fabrica, there appeared abook entitled Apologia in anatome pro Galenocontra Andream Vessalium [sic] Bruxellensem, byone Francesco dal Pozzo [Franciscus Puteus], apracticing physician from Vercelli, who hadattended Vesalius’s lecture at Bologna in 544.This outrageously hostile tirade againstVesalius repeated most of the accusationsmade by Sylvius – that Vesalius had falsifiedGalen’s words, while deliberately ignoringsome of Galen’s assertions. The worst ofVesalius’s crimes was his assertion that Galenhad never dissected a human cadaver. Fewwould have paid much attention to this latestattempt to defame Vesalius, had Pozzo notrashly named the anatomists who he claimedwere opposed to Vesalius. One of those namedwas Gabriel Cuneus, professor of anatomy atthe University of Pavia, who indignantlysprang to Vesalius’s defence in his ApologiaeFrancisci Putei pro Galeno in anatome examen,published at Venice in 564, in which heaccused Pozzo of mendacity and professionaljealousy. It was erroneously thought by many,including Girolamo Cardano and the editors ofthe 75 Leiden edition of Vesalius’s Operaomnia, Boerhaave and Albinus, that Cuneuswas a pseudonym of Vesalius himself.

One of Vesalius’s greatest admirers was GabrielFalloppio (53?-56), whose only book pub-lished during his lifetime was Observationesanatomicae in 56. Falloppio pointed out thatVesalius had failed to observe a third ossicle ofthe ear, first discovered by Giovanni FilippoIngrassia. Vesalius had claimed the sacrumconsisted of six pieces, whereas the normalnumber was five. Falloppio contested Vesalius’sbelief that the veins contained three kinds offibres that controlled the flow of blood.Vesalius accepted these corrections, as well asFalloppio’s account of dentition, which headmitted was far superior to his own. He alsoaccepted, though only conditionally until hewas able to verify it for himself, Falloppio’saccount of the levator palpebrae, the muscleresponsible for raising the eyelid, which Fal-

loppio had discovered. Among Falloppio’sother discoveries were the uterine tubesshaped like trumpets, which were named afterhim.

Vesalius was probably glad to receive Fal-loppio’s calm, rational, and scientifically irre-proachable critique to his Fabrica, after years offighting implacable and emotional Galenistapologists. He took no offence at Falloppio, andin fact commended him as a seeker of truth.The only sign of irritation came in Vesalius’s

3


published reply to Falloppio, his AnatomicarumGabrielis Falloppii Observationum examen, inwhich he delivers a damning assessment ofValverde for whom he had a strong dislike, andwhom Falloppio, perhaps imprudently, hadpraised. Unfortunately Falloppio died before hewas able to read Vesalius’s response.

Another anatomist who was critical of Vesaliuswas Matteo Realdo Colombo (circa 56-559).A former student of Vesalius’s, Colombo suc-ceeded him as chair of anatomy at Padua in543. Although Vesalius has been muchmaligned for criticizing Galen, Colombo wasthe first to point out Vesalius’s own mistakes inapplying animal anatomy to humans – the veryfallacy of which Vesalius had accused Galen.When he returned to Padua, an outragedVesalius publicly ridiculed Colombo, callinghim an “ignoramus” and stating that “whatmeagre knowledge [Colombo] has of anatomyhe learned from me.” In 545 Colombo trans-ferred to the University of Pisa, and finally in548 to the Collegia della Sapienza in Rome.Colombo’s only published work was De reanatomica, which appeared in 559 shortlybefore his death.

Another of Vesalius’s critics was BartolomeoEustachi (d. 574), papal physician andColombo’s successor at the Collegia dellaSapienza. In his Opuscula anatomica, publishedat Venice in 563, Eustachi chastised Vesaliusfor the severity of his attack on Galen, sug-gesting that he was motivated by a desire todraw attention to himself through controversy.Galen, claimed Eustachi, had been misquoted,taken out of context, and deliberately misinter-preted by Vesalius, who also ascribed to Galenwords he did not write. Eustachi concedes thatGalen may have made mistakes, but assertsthat he never did so deliberately in order todeceive, and is offended by the suggestion thatGalen had intentionally passed off animalanatomy as human. He goes on to point outthat Vesalius himself had relied on animals inhis treatment of the eyes, tongue, larynx, andkidneys. For Eustachi many of Vesalius’s criti-cisms were trivial, and served to maskVesalius’s ambitious nature and his jealousy ofGalen.

Not all Galenists were opposed to Vesalius.Hieronymus Gemusaeus (505-544), Professorof Medicine at Basel, and one of the editors ofthe Greek edition of Galen published at Baselin 538, declared the Fabrica a masterpiece. Inthe second edition of his Commentarius deanima of 545 Philipp Melanchthon (497-560)adopted many of Vesalius’s conclusions, andaffirms that Vesalius had been working within

the Galenic tradition, performing in practicethe methodology that Galen had only beenable to suggest in theory.

FInAL yEArS And dEAThEarly in 564 Vesalius petitioned Philip for per-mission to be absent from court in order tomake a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. The reason forthe pilgrimage is not known for sure, butnumerous rumours have circulated since 564.According to a letter written by the Frenchdiplomat and religious reformer HubertLanguet (55-58) to the Wittenberg pro-fessor of mathematics and medicine CasparPeucer (55-60), Vesalius had been per-forming an autopsy on a Spanish grandee, whowas presumed dead. Upon opening the chest,Vesalius saw that the subject’s heart was stillbeating. Vesalius was reported to the Inquisi-tion who found him guilty of vivisection andsentenced him to death. On the king’s interces-sion the death sentence was overturned oncondition that Vesalius make a trip toJerusalem and Mount Sinai to expiate thecrime. There is no evidence to support thisstory, nor a similar account by Ambroise Paré,which substitutes a woman for the grandee.The story is probably apocryphal, though quitefeasible, as human vivisection was consideredto be a most serious crime.

According to another account, Vesalius decidedto leave Spain because of the hostile treatmenthe had received at the hands of the Spanishmedical fraternity – a repetition of the kind ofreception he had been given in Brussels andelsewhere while serving the Emperor CharlesV. His lack of popularity, coupled with the factthat revolt was brewing in the Netherlandsagainst Spanish rule, resulting in Flemingsbeing regarded with suspicion and hostility,persuaded him to leave Spain. Yet anotheraccount, by the Flemish botanist Charles del’Écluse (56-609), relates that Vesalius hadbeen suffering from a long illness, which hadbeen followed by a slow and difficult period ofrecovery. His pilgrimage was made as a peni-tent Christian giving thanks for his deliveryfrom death. While the reasons for Vesalius’sdeparture remain obscure, his death during hisreturn journey from the Holy Land is shroudedin even greater mystery.

Vesalius set off for Palestine with a letter fromPhilip requesting unimpeded passage acrossborders. On the initial part of the journey hewas accompanied by his wife and daughter, butin France, possibly after an explosive quarrel,they parted company. While the wife anddaughter went on to Brussels, Vesalius madefor Marseilles where he took a boat to Venice. It

4


is quite possible that while he was in Venice hemade the short trip to Padua, for by this timeFalloppio had died, leaving the chair ofanatomy at Padua vacant. Vesalius may havecontemplated applying for the post, as he hadearlier shown indications that he would havewelcomed a return to academic life. Accordingto one Pietro Bizzari, Vesalius received an offerfrom the Venetian Senate to take up the poston his return from his pilgrimage.

Vesalius eventually reached Jerusalem safely,but the return journey was catastrophic.During a stormy passage during which supplieson board ran low, Vesalius fell ill, and was putoff the ship onto the Ionian island of Zante(present day Zakynthos) where within a shorttime he passed away. The precise place of hisdeath is unknown, but it is believed that hewas buried in the churchyard of Santa Mariadelle Grazie in the main town of Zante. Thechurch and its graveyard were destroyed in anearthquake in 893, but a project to locate theremains of Vesalius is currently underway.Some accounts blame his premature death onhis parsimony, for had he travelled on a vesselof the Venetian fleet and not on a cheap anddisreputable pilgrim ship, he might have sur-vived the voyage.

concLUSIonDespite the wealth of material written aboutVesalius the anatomist, we still know very littleabout Vesalius the man. It is, therefore, verydifficult to make any kind of accurate assess-ment of the kind of person he was. Evidencewould strongly suggest, however, that he wasnot a particularly likeable person. He had manyfaults, some of which were embedded in hiscomplex personality, and for which he cannotbe held fully responsible. Like many other intel-lectuals of his age he was ambitious and self-serving, quick to anger, and completelyunforgiving to those who had opposed oroffended him. The inability to forgive andforget caused him much criticism in his ownlifetime and still taints his reputation. For aman who expressed himself so passionatelyabout plagiarism, Vesalius himself appropri-ated the work of others without acknowledg-ment. It should also be pointed out that it wasnot Vesalius’s writings that were plagiarized,but the majestic illustrations that informed histexts. Yet nowhere, except in the Tabulaeanatomicae, does he acknowledge his artistsand blockcutters, even anonymously.

We know a little about the many acquain-tances he encountered during his life, mostlypersons from the upper echelons of society aswell as professional colleagues. But his difficult

personality made him few close friends, and hisaggressive manner alienated many colleagues.His lonely death on a remote island far fromhome, his burial in an unmarked grave, with nogrand funeral at home to celebrate his achieve-ments, make his personal life all the moretragic.

Yet Vesalius should not be judged on his per-sonal shortcomings, most of which are conjec-tural, but on his achievements as anextraordinary anatomist. His vanity anddriving ambition, seen by many as faults, pro-vided the motivation and single-mindednessrequired to produce the Fabrica, and to lay outa new path for the study and teaching ofanatomy.

The special chapters of the Fabrica thatexplained the method of dissection were aninnovation. Vesalius insisted that the anatomisttake charge by undertaking his own dissectionswithout the assistance of a barber. He consis-tently stressed the necessity of a purely scien-tific approach to anatomy, based on repeateddirect observation. There was nothing new inthis, as it had been professed on many occa-sions by Galen, and later by others. ButVesalius demonstrated this belief through per-sonal example. He not only raised the standardof anatomical dissection to new heights, healso redefined the status of the anatomist, byelevating him from his hitherto lowly station tothat of the physician. He helped make anatomyrespectable.

Vesalius transformed the teaching of anatomyin a number of significant ways. Wherever helectured, he always had a skeleton at hand forthe fundamental study of the bones, and todemonstrate and reinforce in the memory thelocation of various structures in the body.

Like other medical men of the early sixteenthcentury, Vesalius made a major contribution tothe reform and development of anatomical ter-minology, which had been in a state of disarray.Vesalius often provided medical terms in sev-eral languages for ease of comprehension, buthis preference was a return to the Latin, or Lat-inized version of the original Greek.

His most important pedagogical innovation,however, was the introduction of illustrationinto the classroom, and, more significantly, intothe printed book. Vesalius realized the enor-mous potential of the printed book as amedium for the spread of scientific knowledge.At the same time he understood the role playedby good illustrations. Where words were inad-equate to express a particular idea, an illustra-

5


tion could demonstrate the point much moreeloquently and directly. The close association ofimage and text was relatively new, with Leon-hart Fuchs’s De historia stirpium, published byIsingrin the year before the Fabrica, being anobvious precursor. In the Fabrica Vesalius takesthe use of illustration one step further: byemploying an outstanding artist and block-cutter to create anatomically accurate images,he is responsible for bringing art into medicine.

Others had questioned the validity of some ofGalen’s statements before Vesalius, if onlytimidly. Vesalius’s approach was more aggres-sive, even arrogant, but never disrespectful,despite what his critics claimed. Indeed,Vesalius relied on Galen for much of the com-position of the Fabrica, and unwittingly re-peated many of Galen’s erroneous assertions.His real achievement was to force others to re-examine Galen, and to affirm or repudiate hisstatements on the evidence of personal directobservation. Wherever Galen was in error, itwas the responsibility of the anatomist to makethe requisite corrections.

Vesalius made no major anatomical discov-eries, and the Fabrica was not without errors ofits own, as Vesalius’s critics were quick to pointout. But its merits far outweigh its deficiencies,and most importantly, it laid the foundation fora new exposition of the human body thatothers could build on, improve and refine.

6


THE EXHIBITION

1 Girolamo Cardano. “De exempliscentum geniturarum: XCIII” in Operaomnia. Lyon: J.A. Huguetan & M.A.Ravaud, 563. Vol. 5.

Vesalius’s horoscope was cast in 547 by themathematician, astrologer, and physician,Girolamo Cardano (50-576), and was firstpublished at Nuremberg in his Libri quinque.Cardano foresaw a great future for Vesalius:

Most admirable expert in dissectingcadavers, comparable in merit to theancients, he wrote a work which whilst hisfirst yet is so excellent as to solve all difficul-ties; celebrated in life, now already Imperialphysician, he is bound to be celebrated afterhis death. If this is his birth-date, everythingin it is up to the measure, for Mars is thesquare of the mighty Moon in its eighthexhibits zeal and skill of hands. Mercury inthe triple of Jupiter and Venus in the squareexhibit an admirable mind and an eloquencenot only up to the mark, but even above it –he is, indeed, an eminent physician. TheMoon in opposition to the Sun givesmemory and knowledge, and many enemies,indicating an illustrious person, seeing thebirth-date is a nocturnal one. Saturn withthe heart of Scorpio, in the sixth of Mercury,indicates a profound mind, memory, andzeal. Spica Virginis in the heart of the skyindicates a glory due to skill as great asanyone’s. One must consider also Marsfacing the Sun in his exaltation while the

Moon is her domicile – denoting favour withprinces. The only thing missing, according toour decisions, is that no planet dominatesthe horoscope.

However, the astrological prognostication waswritten with the benefit of hindsight, afterVesalius had already become famous.

2 Gregor Reisch, (d. 55). Margaritaphilosophica, cu additionibus nouis, abauctore suo studiosissima reuisiõe tertiosupadditis. Basel: Johann Schott, 508.

After receiving his master’s degree in 489 fromthe University of Freiburg, Gregor Reischentered the Carthusian Order. As an authorand pedagogue he is principally rememberedfor his Margarita philosophica, an encyclopaedicwork, illustrated with numerous woodcuts,covering all branches of knowledge. The bookwas intended for young students preparing foruniversity, and was extremely popular. Firstpublished in 503, it was re-issued many times.Each of its twelve books treats a separate sub-ject: Latin grammar, dialectics, rhetoric, arith-metic, music, geometry, astronomy, physics,natural history, physiology, psychology, andethics. The Margarita philosophica was one ofthe books recalled by Vesalius from his schoolyears in Leuven. In particular he specificallyremembered the image of the human head,indicating the sites and central connections ofthe sense organs. This image was copied manytimes for over a century.

Another striking image from the book is theschematic male figure showing the division ofthe body into the three cavities or venters.(see above p. )

7

EUroPE cIrcA 550

•Wesel

Brussels • • Leuven

• Paris• Augsburg

• Basel

• VenicePadua •

• Bologna

• Madrid

hoLy romAnEmPIrE

SWISSconFEdErATIon

PAPAL STATES

rEPUbLIc oF VEnIcEBorders of the Holy Roman EmpireInner borders


3 Galen. “Περι ανατομικων εγχειρη-σεων βιβλιον ά[-θ]”: in Γαληνουαπαντα Galeni Pergameni Operaomnia. Basel: Andreas Cratander, 538.Vol. , p. 9-97.

4 Galen. De anatomicis administra-tionibus libri novem. Ioanne GuentherioAndernaco medico interprete. Paris:Simon de Colines, 53.

Galen’s most significant contribution to thestudy of anatomy was his De anatomicis admin-istrationibus, the text of which was lostduring the Middle Ages. It was not until theearly 500s that the first nine books of the orig-inal Greek text were recovered (the final sixbooks were not discovered until the twentiethcentury), and were published in this Greek edi-tion of Galen’s works, edited by Joachim Cam-erarius the Elder (500-574), Leonhart Fuchs(50-566), and Hieronymus Gemusaeus

8


(54-60). A Latin translation was preparedby Demetrio Calcondila (43-5), butremained unpublished until 59 when it wasissued with the title De anatomicis aggression-ibus in a collection of Galenic texts edited byBerengario da Carpi. In February 53 Guen-ther’s revision of Calcondila’s translation,renamed De anatomicis administrationibus, wasfinely printed by Simon de Colines in Paris. Onits publication it became one of the founda-tions of anatomical study, and brought about

the wholesale restructuring of anatomicalinvestigation.

The illustrated title page of Guenther’s Latintranslation is the same as that used by Colinesthe previous year for the translation byThomas Linacre (460-54) of Galen’sMethodus medendi, vel de morbis curandis libriquatuordecim. The title page illustration isdivided into three parts, each with its owntheme. At the top right is the figure of the

9


physician Saint Cosmas holding a book, signi-fying the study of medical theory. On the left isSaint Damian examining a phial of urine, sym-bolizing medical practice as a Christian exercise.Between the two saints is the allegorical figureof Christ the physician, miraculously healing aleper. In the middle section are representationsof the authorities of medicine: in the centralpanel Aesculapius and Dioscorides, symbolizingthe healing arts, and materia medica respec-tively, are shown as full figures. Between the pil-lars are portraits of four of the founding fathersof medicine: Hippocrates, Galen, PaulusAegineta (65-690), and Oribasius (35-403),each with a book in his hands. At the foot of thetitle page a heated debate is taking placearound the dissection table. Significantly thereis no lector, and two men (possibly students)are handling anatomical parts. No single figuredominates this animated scene, which marks abreak from the formality of previous publicanatomical demonstrations. In several respectsthe scene foreshadows the title page of the Fab-rica.

5 Mondino dei Luzzi. Anatomia. Padua:Petrus Maufer, [circa 475]

A native of Bologna, and the son of an apothe-cary, Mondino dei Luzzi studied medicine at theUniversity of Bologna under Taddeo Alderotti(circa 0–95), receiving his degree in 300.Completed in 36, Anatomia owes its greatpopularity to the simple, concise, and system-atic arrangement of its contents. Manuscriptcopies of Anatomia circulated widely during thefourteenth and fifteenth centuries, becomingthe textbook of choice at most universities forthe teaching of anatomy for over two hundredyears. The first printed edition, displayed here,was issued in Padua around 475. It is a tall folioof twenty-two leaves, printed in rotunda type.Today it is very rare, with only three copiesknown. At least four other editions were pub-lished before the end of the fifteenth century,and many more in the sixteenth century.

Compiled as a practical teaching manual forstudents and surgeons, Anatomia is regarded as

30


the first textbook devoted exclusively toanatomical dissection, and therefore the firstwork to treat anatomy as a distinct discipline,even though Mondino, by his own admission,had only ever dissected two cadavers, bothfemale. The brief text, with no scholastic appa-ratus, is organized around the processes of dis-section, from the abdomen, to the thorax, andfinally to the head.

on LoAn From JonAThAn A. hILL

6 Mondino dei Luzzi. Anatomia Mundiniper Carpum castigate, & post modumcum apostillis ornata, ac noviterimpressa. Venice: Sessa, 57. Boundwith Anatomia, quam de partibushumani corporis inscripsit [Paris:Simon Du Bois], 53.

Mondino’s Anatomia was republished manytimes during the late fifteenth and early six-teenth centuries. This pocket size copy actuallycontains two editions of the Anatomia, bothedited by Berengario da Carpi.

on LoAn FromThE oSLEr LIbrAry, mcgILL UnIVErSITy

7 Fasciculus medicinae. Venice: CaesarArrivabene, 5.

Before its first printing at Venice in 49, theFasciculus medicinae circulated in manuscriptduring the fifteenth century. It consists of threeindependent medieval treatises, and wasintended as a manual for medical students andbarbers. The identity of the compiler has oftenbeen attributed to Johannes de Ketham, aboutwhom nothing is known beyond the fact thathe was a German physician. He has sometimesbeen identified as a Johan von Kirchheim, whowas active at the University of Vienna between455 and 470, but a precise identificationcannot be established. In fact some believe thatKetham had nothing to do with the Fasciculus,but was merely an owner of one of the manu-scripts. However, his name does appear in theexplicit to the 49 edition, though it is missingfrom the 493 Italian translation. The Fasciculusincludes short treatises on uroscopy and phle-botomy by Pietro da Montagnana, advice onpestilence by Pietro da Tossignano, andMondino’s important textbook on anatomy.

The Fasciculus is the earliest printed book toinclude anatomical illustrations of any signifi-cance. Each section has a traditional diagram:urine glasses arranged in a circle helped thephysician determine the nature of disease; amale figure is marked with the sites for blood-

letting; the “zodiacal man” reflects thecommon belief that medicine was controlled byastrological phenomena; the “wound man”illustrates the various possible sites for injury,with the thorax and abdomen showing theoutlines of internal organs; the pregnantwoman is depicted in a frog-like squattingposition – a common image in the late MiddleAges. All of the woodcuts were stock illustra-tions widely used in Europe for didactic pur-poses in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Of particular interest is the woodcut of a dis-section in progress. The instructor sits in hischair presiding over proceedings, while readingfrom a textbook of anatomy. Below is a surgeonor barber performing the dissection on acadaver laid out on the dissection table. Anostensor points out the various bodily partsbeing discussed to the audience of students.This was the standard format for dissectionfrom the early fourteenth century right up tothe time of Vesalius. (see dissection sceneabove p. )

8 Jacopo Berengario da Carpi. Commen-taria cum amplissimis additionibussuper Anatomia Mundini : una cumtextu ejusdem in pristinum et verumnitorem redacto. Bologna, 5.9Jacopo Berengario da Carpi. Isagogaebreues, p[er]lucide� ac uberrime�, inanatomiã humani corporis a cõmunimedicoru� academia usitatã a Carpo inalmo Bononiesi gymnasio ordinariãchirurgie� docete, ad suoru� scholasticorup� ces in lucem date. Bologna, 53.

Jacopo Berengario (460-530) taught anatomyat the University of Bologna after obtaining hismedical degree there in 489. His birth namewas Barigazzi, but for unknown reasons hechanged his name to Berengario, adding thesuffix of his birthplace, Carpi.

He learned anatomy and dissection from hissurgeon-barber father, whom he often assisted.As a youth he was tutored by the great printer-scholar Aldo Manuzio (449-55), who spentfrom 469 to 477 teaching in Carpi. After com-pleting his medical training, Berengario prac-ticed for a time in Rome, where he amassed afortune treating syphilis sufferers with mercury,frequently with dire consequences for hispatients. His reputation badly tarnished, he leftRome in a hurry. In 50 he moved to Bolognaand became a lecturer in surgery at the univer-sity, where he was very popular with his stu-dents. At the outbreak of plague in Bologna in508 he became the city’s Commissioner ofHealth, a post he held until 5. With friendsin high places, the avaricious and sometimes

3


violent Berengario escaped punishment for anumber of incidents of assault and robbery. Yethe earned the reputation of being a good sur-geon and developed a large clientele of wealthypatrons. In 57 Lorenzo di Piero de’ Medici,Duke of Urbino (49–59) received a headwound in battle, and Berengario was one of thepractitioners summoned to attend to him.After a failed operation performed by anothersurgeon, Berengario tended the Duke andbrought about a complete recovery. Herecorded this experience in his Tractatus de frac-tura calve sive cranei (Bologna, 58), which hededicated to the Duke. The treatise wasreprinted many times until well into the seven-teenth century.

In 54 Berengario produced an edition ofMondino’s Anatomia, a work he admired for itspracticality and brevity. Examining previouseditions of Mondino, he found that parts of theoriginal text were missing, while other partswere expanded or altered, and set aboutrestoring Mondino’s text to its original purity.Seven years later, in 5 Berengario completedhis monumental Commentaria. This lengthy

folio of over a thousand pages was Berengario’smost significant contribution to anatomicalknowledge, and provided a complete guide toearlier anatomical writings. It was also one ofthe first printed anatomical works to containillustrations.

In 5 Berengario published a condensed ver-sion of the Commentaria, entitled Isagogaebreves, a small quarto of eighty leaves, richlyillustrated with woodcuts. It was republished,with changes and revisions, in 53, 530, and535, at Bologna, Strasbourg, and Venicerespectively. Isagogae breves provides a conciseyet thorough description of human anatomy,based on the evidence of the senses. The func-tion of each part and its relation to the body asa whole are discussed, as well as the diseases towhich each part is subject. Although anadmirer of Mondino, Berengario often chal-lenges his statements, and thereby by implica-tion, the teachings of Galen. He is, therefore,one of the first sixteenth-century commenta-tors to voice distrust of authority. Regardinganatomy as a progressive accumulation ofknowledge, he reminds his readers not to

3


accept the word of others without independentverification.

Berengario was the first to describe severalanatomical structures, including the ossicle ofthe middle ear, anastomosis between the portalvein and the inferior vena cava, the existence of asingle umbilical vein, the tympanic membrane,and the vermiform appendix. He contradictsGalen’s claim that the rete mirabile, which is tobe found only in certain animals, exists inhumans. He also lay to rest the persistent fallacythat the uterus consists of seven cells.

Berengario was one of the first to advocate pri-vate dissections, which, he reasoned, allowedinvestigation into those parts of the body, suchas the bones, muscles, nerves, veins, andarteries, which could not be easily observedduring a public dissection.

Among the most striking of Berengario’s illus-trations are six figures displaying the abdom-inal muscles, one of them surrounded by an

aureole of sunbeams. There are five skeletal fig-ures, some of them poorly drawn. Severalimprovements were introduced in the 53 edi-tion of the Isagogae. Illustrations of the heartand the brain especially were the best pro-duced to that date.The identity of the artist of the illustrations isunknown, though several candidates havebeen suggested, including Rosso de Rossi(496-54) of Florence, whose name has occa-sionally been associated with some of the illus-trations in Charles Estienne’s anatomical work(see below). The name of Ugo da Carpi whowas known to be working in Bologna in the50s, has been suggested as the blockcutter.

An English translation by Henry Jackson withthe title �Μηκροκοσμογραφια, or A Descriptionof the Little World or Body of Man, being a Prac-tical Anatomy, was issued in 660 – 5 yearsafter the publication of the last Latin version.

COMMENTARIA on LoAn From drEUgEnE S. FLAmm

33


10 Johann Dryander. Anatomiae, hoc est,corporis humani dissectionis pars prior : inqua singula quae ad caput spectantrecensentur membra, atq; singulae partes,singulis suis ad uiuum commodissimèexpressis figuris, deliniantur : omnia recensnata. Marburg, 537.

A contemporary of Vesalius, Johann Eichmann(500-560), better known under his adoptedHellenized name of Dryander, was a native ofWetter in Upper Hesse (Germany). Afterobtaining his M.A. from the University of Erfurtin 54, he continued his studies in medicine atBourges, before moving to the University ofParis in 58. Dryander left Paris in 533 – theyear in which Vesalius enrolled at the sameinstitution. There is no evidence that the twomen ever met each other. After Paris Dryander

completed his medical degree at Mainz, and in534 was appointed royal physician of Koblenzand Trier.

The University of Marburg, founded in 57 byPhilip I, Landgrave of Hesse (504-567), wasthe first Protestant university. In 535 Dryanderwas appointed as the chair of medicine, andspent the rest of his academic life in Marburg,becoming Rector of the University from 547 to554. He was also appointed physician to Philipof Hesse, but found that his duties at courtbrought in a reduced salary, and also preventedhim from devoting his full attention toteaching. Dryander also published a number ofbooks on mathematics.

As in other European universities the medicalcurriculum at Marburg was based on the writ-

34


ings of Galen, the Aphorisms of Hippocrates,and the Canon of Avicenna. To supplementthese works, Dryander planned a comprehen-sive treatise on the anatomy of the wholehuman body. The plan was not realized, butthe first part, devoted to the head, was issuedin September 536 with the title: Anatomiacapitis humani. The book was essentially a col-lection of woodcut illustrations with explana-tory captions. A second edition followed, inJune 537 with the revised title Anatomiae, hocest, corporis humani dissectionis pars prior. Thenew edition, a quarto of seventy-two pages,had a longer introduction, more detailed illus-trations, and new figures of the thorax, heart,and lungs, increasing the number of illustra-tions to twenty-three. The book concludeswith a six-page section containing briefextracts from a thirteenth-century text attrib-

uted to Copho, entitled Anatomia porci, and Degeneratione embrionis written by GabrieleZerbi (445-505), late professor of medicine atthe University of Bologna.

In the dedication to Philip of Hesse, Dryanderstresses the fundamental importance ofanatomy to medicine, and like Berengario,encourages his students to conduct their owndissections. He emphasizes the application of anatomy in surgery and pathology to deter-mine the cause of death and the nature of dis-ease.

The woodcut illustrations, the sketches forwhich were drawn by Dryander himself, werecut by a local Marburg blockcutter, GeorgThomas, whose cipher of a compass (the symbol of Saint Thomas) appears on sev-

35


eral illustrations. The woodcuts present asequential dissection of the head, and displaythe surgical instruments necessary for the task,along with instructions on their use. Dryanderprovides accurate depictions of all parts of thebrain. Other illustrations depict a dissection ofthe neck, the base of the skull, the jaw, and theteeth. Four additional illustrations, copied fromBerengario, describe the skull and its sutures.With each part of the brain Dryander associ-ates a particular faculty or sense. For instance,multiple cavities in the pia mater fill with air togive us our sense of smell.

Dryander, like Berengario, felt a close affinitywith Mondino, and in 54 published an anno-tated version of Mondino’s text, amended inthe light of the recently recovered Deanatomicis administrationibus of Galen.Dryander acknowledges Vesalius, and others“who grace the subject of anatomy.”

He also borrowed without permission certainillustrations from Vesalius’s Tabulae anatomicaesex. Vesalius mentions the “plagiarist” in hisletter to his printer Johannes Oporinus in theFabrica, chastising him as a “slave to the sordidprinter at Marburg and Frankfurt,” withoutknowing his true identity. In the introductionto the Fabrica, Vesalius gives Dryander afavourable mention, but when he found outthat Dryander had privately criticized him forhis lack of respect towards his former teacherJohann Guenther, Dryander’s name wasdeleted from the 555 edition of the Fabrica.

11 Charles Estienne. De dissectione par-tium corporis humani libri tres. Paris:Simon de Colines, 545.

Charles Estienne (circa 505-56), also knownby his Latin name Carolus Stephanus, was amember of a distinguished family of printer-scholars. He studied medicine under Sylvius atthe University of Paris, receiving his degree inmedicine in 540. Between 544 and 547 hewas a lecturer of anatomy at the Faculty ofMedicine, Paris, but in 55 resigned from hispost in order to devote his energies to thefamily’s printing business. In 56 he wasimprisoned for debt, and spent the final twoyears of his life in jail.

Although the imprint of Estienne’s volumepost-dates that of the Fabrica, the book wasactually completed in 539, but publication wasdelayed by a legal wrangle between Estienneand Etienne de la Rivière [Stephanus Riverius],until then a relatively unknown barber-surgeonand artist employed by Estienne. Rivière had

sought an injunction to compel Estienne to dis-play his name as co-author. The court eventu-ally decided in favour of Rivière, whose nameduly appeared on the title page. A French trans-lation, containing two plates not included in theLatin edition, was issued in 546. De dissectione partium corporis humani is a goodexample of fine Parisian sixteenth-centuryprinting by Estienne’s stepfather Simon de Col-ines. The sixty-two full-page woodcut illustra-tions printed from fifty-six blocks are strikingworks of art, full of mannerist conceits andmacabre touches. One block is signed “S.R”[i.e. Stephanus Riverius]. Several blocks aremarked with the name of the artist Jean Jollat(active 530-545), and are variously dated530, 53 or 53. Others bear the emblem ofthe Lorraine cross, thought to be the mono-gram of the blockcutter Jacquemin Woeiriot.

The illustrations in Estienne’s book vary inquality, but overall they display considerableartistry and originality. The outlines of blocksinserted into a number of the figures depictinginternal structures, are clearly visible in some ofthe impressions. It has been suggested that theblocks were originally prepared for a com-pletely different purpose, and that the anatom-ical element was added later. The femalefigures were modelled on a series of eroticmythological engravings, entitled Loves of thegods by the Italian artist Giovanni JacopoCaraglio (d. 565). The images have beenaltered by the insertion of anatomical blocks

36


which disguise their original erotic intention.

The text of De dissectione is written in the spiritof the Galenic tradition, but Estienne occasion-ally contradicts Galen and at other times sup-plements what Galen had written. When he isnot in agreement with Galenic teaching, Esti-enne is conciliatory in his approach, in contrastto the much more aggressive Vesalius. LikeBerengario da Carpi and Vesalius, Estienneaffirms that the rete mirabile is absent inhumans.

12 Andreas Vesalius. Paraphrasis innonum librum Rhazae medici arabisclariss. ad Regum Almansorem de affec-tuum singularum corporis partiumcuratione. Basel: Robert Winter, 537.

In February 537 Vesalius published his bach-elor’s dissertation, a paraphrase of the ninthbook of the compendium of therapeutics by theArab-Persian physician, Rhazes, written forKing Al-Mansu�r of Khurasan.

The Kitab al-Mansurı, which was translatedinto Latin by Gherardo da Cremona (3 or4-87) in the twelfth century as Liber adAlmansorem, was based mainly on the texts ofHippocrates and Galen. The first printed ver-sion of Gherardo’s translation of Ad Alman-sorem (as the book is commonly referred to)appeared in Milan in 48; it was reprinted inVenice in 497, and in Lyon in 50.

Observing that Rhazes’s text had over theyears become corrupt through mistranslationsand misreadings, compounded by an unintelli-gible lexicon, Vesalius saw a need to reviseRhazes, not in the form of a literal translation,but as a paraphrase, in which obscure passageswere explained. In addition, stylistic improve-ments were made, glosses and marginalia wereadded, and the confusing names of drugs andmedications were clarified. The subject of thedissertation was probably suggested toVesalius by his teachers in Paris, although themanuscript of his grandfather’s commentary of

37


Rhazes which was in his possession, may havecontributed to his choice of topic.

Vesalius was dissatisfied with the undistin-guished printing of his dissertation when it firstappeared in Leuven in February 537, for inMarch of the same year he had the workreprinted in Basel by Robert Winter. Mostnoticeable was the change in the spelling of“Galen” from block capitals in the first printing,to regular spelling in the second. Vesalius’s para-phrase was also later included in Heinrich Petri’sedition of Rhazes published in Basel in 544.

13 Johann Guenther. Institutionumanatomicarum secundum Galeni senten-tiam ad candidatos medicinae libri quatuor… ab Andrea Vesalio Bruxellensi, auctiores

& emendatiores redditi. Venice: D. Bernar-dini, 538.

One month after the publication of the Tabulaeanatomicae sex in 538, Vesalius completed arevision of Johann Guenther’s Institutionumanatomicarum secundum Galeni sententiam,which served as a digest of Galen’s writingsand as a textbook on dissection. Originallypublished in Paris in 536, and again in Baselthe same year, the Institutiones anatomicaeenjoyed great success with Guenther’s stu-dents, including Vesalius. In the flattering prefatory letter addressed toJohannes Heems of Armentières (Armenteri-anus), Professor of Medicine at the Universityof Leuven, dated 5 May 538, Vesalius revealshis reasons for revising Guenther’s text a mere

38

Annotations in Vesalius’s hand


two years after the original publication, andwithout Guenther’s authorization. Because ofthe careless negligence of the printers who pro-duced the 536 edition, and as many peoplehad asked him to undertake the revision,Vesalius acceded to the request “for the benefitof many”, and is confident that “the most lib-eral and most learned” Guenther would not beoffended. In republishing Guenther’s workVesalius corrected and expanded Guenther’stext with his own anatomical findings. In thisregard the edition resembles an annotatedcopy of Guenther’s original. Seen in anotherlight, it was an opportunity for Vesalius toexpress his personal vanity and to display hisconsiderable learning.

The revised version was printed by Bernardino

dei Vitali in Venice in June 538. An undatededition was reprinted around 540, also atVenice. Both of these editions mention Vesaliuson their title pages, as does a later Wittenbergedition of 585, but his name is omitted fromthe edition printed at Pisa in 550.

The copy on display is Vesalius’s own copy,which is richly annotated, evidently with anew edition in mind. The annotations correctmore errors in typography and layout, andmake significant emendations to the text,through additions, deletions, and revisions.Although the Institutiones anatomicae wererepublished at least four times, no editionincorporates the changes made by Vesalius inhis copy.

on LoAn From STUArT roSE

39


14 Jacobus Sylvius. Ordo, et ordinis ratio inlegendis Hippocratis et Galeni libris.Paris: A. Wechel, 54.

This work, together with In Hippocrates etGaleni physiologiae partem anatomicam isagoge,published in 54, represent Sylvius’s pedagog-ical activity in Paris during Vesalius’s studentyears in the French capital. Both works weresignificant contributions as student aids inarranging, organizing, and abstracting the vastcorpus of Galen. His efforts, which were muchappreciated by his students, brought him suc-cess and popularity.

15 [Andreas Vesalius. Tabulae anatomicaesex.]

Jost de Negker. Arteria magna haorti ex sinistrocordis sinu oriens, & vitalem spiritum toti corporideferens, naturalemq; calorem per contractionum& dilatationem temperans. [Augsburg, circa540]

On 6 December 537 Vesalius performed hisfirst official dissection on a nineteen-year oldyouth. A surviving notebook written by VitusTritonius, a student who attended one ofVesalius ’s classes, records the event. It notesthat Vesalius abandoned the old format, estab-lished by Mondino in the early fourteenthcentury, by combining the roles of lecturer,dissector, and ostensor. Vesalius also recom-mended his students to discard Mondino’s text

in favour of the anatomical writings of Galen,and Guenther’s dissection manual, Institutionesanatomicae.

The Tabulae anatomicae sex were first printedin Venice in 538 by Bernardino dei Vitali, whohad also been responsible for Berengario daCarpi’s Isagogae breves of 535, and Guenther’sInstitutiones anatomicae in 538. The Tabulaeanatomicae were printed without a title page,in the form of six large broadsides, with dimen-sions of approximately 5 x 34 cm. Thewoodcut illustrations are surrounded by text,explaining the lettered references on the fig-ures.

The first three tables, drawn by Vesalius him-self, depict the portal, caval, and arterial sys-tems. Each part is named in Latin and Greek,and occasionally also in Arabic and Hebrew.Many of the Latin terms, which had beencoined by Sylvius and Guenther, often in Hell-enized forms, were designed to replace theArabic “barbarisms” about which Vesalius andother humanists frequently complained. The second table shows the “azygos” vein, aterm coined by Guenther, meaning literally “avein without a partner.” In discussing this vein,Vesalius enters the controversy on bloodletting,on which he subsequently elaborates in hisVenesection Letter (see below #6).

The three remaining figures, of a skeleton of aneighteen-year old youth that Vesalius himselfhad prepared (Tabulae IV-VI), were drawn byJan Stefan van Calcar (circa 499-circa 546), aFlemish artist from the studio of Titian.In spite of their undoubted popularity, the Tab-ulae anatomicae are today extremely rare; onlytwo complete copies are known to have sur-vived, one at the Biblioteca Nazionale Marcianain Venice, the other at the Hunterian Library atthe University of Glasgow. A number of facsim-iles have been published, firstly in London in874, secondly in Leipzig in 90. The plateswere also reproduced in Icones anatomicae,jointly published in 934 by the New YorkAcademy of Medicine and the University ofMunich.

In his letter to the printer Johann Oporinuswhich introduces the Fabrica, Vesalius com-plains about certain plagiarisms of his Tabulaeanatomicae, identifying them by their place oforigin, rather than by the names of the perpe-trators, which were probably unknown to himat that time. The plagiarist identified as the“babbler of Augsburg” was Jost de Negker(circa 485-circa 544), also known as Jobst deNecker, a Flemish woodcutter who was activein Augsburg.

40


Negker’s copies of the figures are scarcely dis-tinguishable from the originals. In the text thataccompanies the first table Negker acknowl-edges Vesalius as the author, and justifies theaddition of a German text to accompany theLatin original:

because this artistic description of all thevessels and bones of the body is extremelynecessary for every surgeon, and since inGermany surgeons only rarely understandLatin, I, Jobst de Necker, as a lover of theGerman nation have translated these artistic

plates to the advantage of the Germans andhave so far as possible transformed fromgood Latin into the unregulated Germantongue the principal matters which neverbefore have been described in German

The problem of an inadequate Germananatomical terminology was also faced byAlban Thorer in his German translation of theEpitome of 543.

4


The chart displayed here corresponds to TableIII of the Tabulae anatomicae sex. It shows theheart and aorta and 47 of its branches,including the rete mirabile, which despiteGalen’s assertions, does not in fact exist inhumans. The fact that it is depicted inVesalius’s work is an indication that he was stillvery much under the influence of Galen’steachings.

on LoAn From dr brIAn morrISon

16 Andreas Vesalius. Epistola, docensvenam axillarem dextri cubiti in dolorelaterali secandam melancholicumsuccum ex venae portae ramis ad sedempertinentibus, purgari. Basel: RobertWinter, 539.

Bloodletting (phlebotomy) had been used as afundamental therapeutic measure in the treat-ment of certain ailments since the time of Hip-pocrates, and was embedded in Greek humoralpathology. The practice, which used lancets,cupping glasses, or leeches, was still being per-formed until well into the twentieth century.

In 54 an outbreak of pleurisy, or “pain in theside” (dolor lateralis), as it was called, struckParis. A local physician, Pierre Brissot, claimedto have had great success in treating the dis-ease by venesection. Brissot’s account triggereda torrent of controversy, which raged for severalyears. While enthusiastically endorsing theancient Greek procedures for bloodletting,Brissot in true humanist fashion, takes theopportunity to denigrate Arab methods ofbloodletting, which he claimed had deviatedfrom the teachings of Hippocrates and Galen. The dispute revolved around the method ofbloodletting to be used: revulsion or derivation.In ancient medicine, infection was believed tobe the result of local humours that had escapedfrom the blood stream. The direction of flow ofthe humour could be induced to proceed in theopposite direction towards a spot where itcould be evacuated from the body. The issue ofwhether to draw blood from the same or oppo-site side to the infection became a major boneof contention for sixteenth-century practi-tioners.

The Arab method of bloodletting was almostexclusively revulsive. Blood was taken from avein as distant as possible from the infection.Bleeding close to the infection, it was believed,would increase the flow of toxic blood to thesite of the infection, and thereby aggravate thedisease. As the controversy escalated, argu-ments for and against the two positionsbecame increasingly heated.

In the Paraphrasis of Rhazes, Vesalius made fre-quent references to bloodletting. In 538 hereturned to the subject briefly in the Tabulaeanatomicae sex. The following year he takes upthe question at greater length in his Epistola,docens venam axillarem dextri cubiti in dolorelaterali secandam melancholicum succum exvenae portae ramis ad sedem pertinentibus, pur-gari [A letter, teaching that in cases of pain inthe side, the axillary vein of the right elbow becut, and that the melancholic juice is purgedfrom the branches of the portal vein extendingto the fundament] known, for the sake ofbrevity, as the Venesection Letter. It was firstpublished by Robert Winter at Basel in 539,and again five years later, by Heinrich Petri in544.

In the Venesection Letter Vesalius placed himselfin the Brissot camp. Still a disciple of Galen,Vesalius based his rationale for the site of vene-section on an understanding of the significanceof the azygos system. He agreed with the Hip-pocratic and Galenic view that venesectionshould normally be employed at a point asclose as possible to the site of the pain, but headds that this procedure should only be carriedout in cases of pleurisy, and not for other kindsof pains in the side. He concurs with Hip-pocrates that in cases of thoracic pain beneaththe diaphragm, purgatives should be used. Butin cases of inflammation of the chest above thediaphragm, Vesalius warns that noxious bloodshould never be drawn through a vital organlike the heart. Because of the position of theazygos vein, which issues from the right of thevena cava above the heart, in line with the

4


veins of the right arm, blood should be drawnfrom the axillary vein of the right elbow.

Vesalius supports his argument with a roughsketch showing the veins that nourish thethorax, and those that are connected to thearms. The drawing was not intended to be arealistic representation, as is evident from theexaggerated size and configuration, but as ateaching device to be used in his lectures.

43


dE hUmAnI corPUS FAbrIcA 543

17 Andreas Vesalius. De humani corporisfabrica libri septem. Basel: J. Oporinus,543.

PrInTIng In bASELThe question has frequently been raised as towhy Vesalius chose to have the Fabrica printedin Basel instead of nearby Venice, which wouldhave been the logical choice, as one-fifth of thetotal number of medical books published in thefifteenth and early sixteenth centuries hadbeen produced there. The first collected editionof Galen’s works in Latin was issued in 490and in Greek in 55. The Venetian pressescould boast a host of other famous medicalworks.

Venice had earned a reputation for the fineprinting of scholarly editions. In terms of thenumber of books printed, and the number ofprinters and publishers active in the city-state,Venice occupied a predominant position withinthe European book trade. But in the first threedecades of the sixteenth century political tur-moil, French invasions, and defeat by theLeague of Cambrai, resulted in the widespreaddisruption of commerce in the Republic. TheVenetian printing and publishing industry wasdeeply affected. As a direct result of the dwin-dling Venetian market, commercial opportuni-ties were seized upon by printers north of theAlps, as the main centres of printing shiftedaway from Northern Italy to Paris, Lyon,Antwerp, and Basel.

The growing reputation of Basel for scholarlyprinting was largely due to the patronage ofDesiderius Erasmus (466-536), who in 55transferred publication of his Greek translationof the New Testament from Aldus in Venice toJohann Froben (circa 460-57) in Basel. Verysoon the Swiss city became the leading centreof publishing in the scholarly languages, partic-ularly in the disciplines of theology and science.The tradition that had been begun by JohannAmerbach (d. 53) and Andreas Cratander(circa 490-circa 540) was continued by theFroben dynasty, and, from 54, by JohannesOporinus (507-568). Basel had also earned aplace of preeminence in the printing ofwoodcut illustrations, mainly through the col-laboration of Hans Holbein the younger (497-543) with the Froben printing house. Thatreputation was further enhanced by the publi-cation in 54 of Leonard Fuchs’s magnificentbotanical treatise De historia stirpium.

Other factors, too, contributed to Basel’s rise toprominence. It was home to one of the leadinguniversities in Europe. Founded in 460, itplayed a prominent role in the Protestant Ref-ormation. The city provided refuge to suchhumanist scholars as Erasmus, Hans Holbein,Huldrych Zwingli (484-53), Johannes Oeco-lampadius (48-53), and other leading intel-lectuals who added to the city’s reputation forreligious tolerance and scholarship. Situated onthe Rhine, the city was ideally placed geo-graphically on the main European trade routes,with convenient access to France, Germany,and Italy as well as northern markets.

ThE PrInTErJohannes Oporinus (507-568), who was bornJohan Herbst, had a multi-faceted career. Froma family of painters, his first inclination was tofollow in his father’s footsteps. But he excelledat school and instead was sent to boarding-school in Strasbourg where he studied Latinand Greek for four years. Returning to Basel,and with insufficient means to enter university,he supplemented his income from teaching bycopying Greek theological manuscripts in theFroben printing house. One of his tasks was tohelp with the preparation of the text ofErasmus’s edition of Irenaeus. It was at thistime, that, following the fashion of the day, heHellenized his name to Oporinus, meaning“autumn”. He now began to study law, andlearned Hebrew.

In 56 his employer Johannes Froben badlyinjured his foot and faced the prospect ofamputation. Philippus Aureolus TheophrastusBombastus von Hohenheim (493-54), betterknown as Paracelsus, was sent for and suc-ceeded in healing Froben. Paracelsus stayed onin Basel and gave lectures at the University ofBasel, which were attended by Oporinus, whonow turned his thoughts towards a career inmedicine. He became Paracelsus’s secretary,laboratory assistant, and valet, but finding itimpossible to work for the highly eccentric andunpredictable physician, he eventually left hisemployment and, disillusioned, abandoned allthoughts of a medical career. He returned toteaching and, as his reputation as a classicistgrew, he was rewarded with successive profes-sorships in Latin and Greek in 533 and 537respectively. In 536, while still holding his uni-versity position, he purchased the Cratanderprinting house in partnership with three otherlocal printers, Robert Winter, Thomas Platter(499-58), and Balthasar Lasius (active 536-543). One of the books issued under their jointimprint was Guenther’s Institutiones anatom-icae. After several years the partnership began

44


to deteriorate, and was eventually dissolved.Oporinus, having already resigned his univer-sity position, struck out on his own, and in 54established his own printing house, whichflourished for the next twenty-four years. Hebecame the foremost printer of his generationin Basel, acquiring a deserved reputation forthe accuracy of his printing.

Among his stocks in trade were editions of theclassics, many of which he himself edited. Heprinted more than fifty Greek texts. Alsoprominent among his output were works bythe Church Fathers and the ProtestantReformers of his own day. John Foxe (56-587) worked as a corrector in Oporinus’sprinting shop between 555 and 559, and hadthe original Latin version of the Book of Martyrspublished by Oporinus in 559. Because of hisclose association with the Reformers, Oporinuswas placed on the first Index librorum pro-hibitorum issued by Pope Paul IV in 559. Healso fell afoul of Protestant censorship over theprinting of Theodore Bibliander’s Latin transla-tion of the Qur’an, for which he was brieflyimprisoned.

His scholarly background in medicine, theancient languages, and his fine printing recordmade Oporinus the ideal choice of printer forVesalius’s great work. Besides the two editionsof Fabrica, and the two versions of the Epitome,in Latin and German, Oporinus also printedthe second edition of Vesalius’s Paraphrase ofRhazes, the Venesection Letter, and the ChinaRoot Letter.

On 4 August 54 Vesalius wrote to Oporinusthat the woodblocks for the Fabrica were readyfor shipment to Basel; they arrived safely in themiddle of September. The blocks were accom-panied by proofs and detailed instructions fortheir placement. Vesalius stated his intention totravel to Basel for the duration of printing, andwould bring with him the privilege granted bythe Senate of Venice against unlawful printing.A second privilege, from the Holy RomanEmpire, would arrive from Brussels. Finally athird privilege, from the King of France, hadbeen promised. Work on the monumentalvolume began probably on October 54. InJanuary 543 Vesalius arrived in Basel to com-mence the arduous task of proof-reading. Fab-rica was completed by the end of July 543. Itwas printed on demy-size paper, probablymanufactured locally. Each gathering consistsof three quired folio sheets, producing twelvepages. There is total number of 7 pages. Thetext is printed mainly from sixteen-pointroman type. Italicized passages are composedin “Basel italic” which had replaced Aldine

italic in popularity. Each line of text measures8.5 centimetres, the average number of linesper page being fifty-seven. There are about fivethousand characters to the page, excludingspaces.

TITLE PAgEThe famous woodcut title page of the Fabrica,depicting the tumultuous scene of a publicanatomy conducted by Vesalius in Padua, hasreceived extensive commentary, and a widerange of interpretations. The outdoor location,probably in the courtyard of the university, isreminiscent of a theatrical spectacle. At thesame time it is a pictorial representation of arevolutionary new method of expressing andcommunicating knowledge. In calculated con-trast to the traditional dissection scene asdepicted in the Fasciculus medicinae, in thecentre is the figure of the leading actor,Vesalius, performing a dissection on a femalecadaver, opened to display the abdominalcavity with some of the organs removed. Tow-ering above the dissection scene is an articu-lated skeleton, reflecting Vesalius’s custom ofdisplaying a skeleton at his anatomy demon-strations and symbolizing the importance ofosteology to the study of anatomy. In this sceneVesalius has taken the initiative and is per-forming the combined roles of instructor, dis-sector, and ostensor – one of the basic tenets ofthe “new” anatomy he was promoting. Gone isthe isolated lector in his elevated chair lookingdown on what is taking place. Meanwhile thesquabbling barber-surgeons have been rele-gated to a subservient role of sharpening thetools of dissection beneath the table.

Also richly symbolic is the depiction of theaudience of about seventy to eighty peoplecrowded around the dissection table, hangingfrom pillars, and peering through archways andwindows. The onlookers are from all walks oflife, as is evident from their costume, rangingfrom university dignitaries, professors, clerics,physicians, midwives, to the curious public. Inaccordance with Vesalius’s pedagogical creed,students are assisting the anatomist with hiswork. The two figures in the foreground oneach side of the table are given special promi-nence. It is possible that the figure on the leftrepresents Wolfgang Herwart of Augsburg (b.54), while the man on the right, admonishingthe barking dog, may be the Paduan philoso-pher, Marcantonio Genua (49-563); bothmen had encouraged Vesalius not to lose heartwith his project during moments of doubt, andare hereby acknowledged. Another interpreta-tion is that the latter figure represents Galen,who having never dissected a human body, iseagerly watching and learning. It has been sug-

45


gested that the bearded man on the rightlooking down from a balcony is the printerJohannes Oporinus. Much more interesting isthe identification of the beardless head, seem-ingly suspended in space, immediately to theleft of Vesalius, and looking over his shoulder,as the artist Jan Stefan van Calcar. The curi-ously naked figure holding on to a pillar to theleft of the scene may represent surfaceanatomy, or he may be looking on in horror atthe fate that awaits him. One student isreading a book with the initials “C.G.”, signi-fying “Claudius Galenus”,stamped on thecover. In contrast, another student holding aclosed book points at the dissection suggestingthat there is more to be learned from observa-tion than from books. The monkey and thedog, obligatory victims at a public anatomy,await their turn to be dissected. They have alsobeen interpreted as oblique references toGalen’s reliance on animal anatomy.

At the top of the picture are the punning coat-of arms of the Wesel family (“three weaselscourant”), flanked by the Lion of St. Mark rep-resenting the Republic of Venice. The ox’s headon the entablature is the emblem of “Il bò,” thepopular student name for the Hospitum bovis,acquired by the University of Padua in 539.

The title page to the Fabrica soon became theprototype for other representations of publicanatomy lessons for over a century.

PorTrAITThe portrait of Vesalius at the age of twenty-eight that appears at the end of the introduc-tory matter, is said to be the only authenticrepresentation of the anatomist. Dressed in thesame rich garments as on the title page – a sure

sign of his elevated status – he is engaged in thedissection of the flexor muscles of the fingersand their tendons of a large woman, undoubt-edly the same woman that is being dissectedon the title page.

On the table lies a variety of instruments, acandle, an ink-well and a sheet of paper – thesame objects as on the title page. The textinscribed on the paper is from Chapter 43 of theFabrica, describing the very procedure thatVesalius is performing. The edge of the tabledeclares Vesalius’s age as twenty-eight, and theyear 54 in roman numerals. On the revealbeneath the table top is the phrase “ocyUSIUcUndE ET TUTo”, paraphrased from Ascle-piades by Celsus, meaning “swiftly, pleasantlyand safely” which the Vesalius family adoptedas its personal motto.

The seemingly disproportionate representationof Vesalius’s body parts, in particular the largehead and the short arms, has puzzled manycommentators. Yet the fact that the portraitwas also used both in the 555 edition of theFabrica and in the China Root Letter, suggeststhat it is an accurate representation ofVesalius’s physical appearance. It has beenspeculated that Vesalius manifested signs ofhypochondroplasia, a kind of short-limbeddwarfism, though he never made any referenceto this condition.

ThE ArTISTSThe identification of the artist or artists of theillustrations of the Fabrica, has confounded his-torians since the time of the book’s publication.Many names have been put forward, but themost likely candidate is Jan Stefan van Calcar,who executed the three skeletal figures forVesalius’s Tabulae anatomicae sex in 539.Those who challenge this attribution point tothe fact that the skeletons in the Tabulaeanatomicae are markedly inferior to the skeletalfigures and muscle men of the Fabrica. Thismay be true, but working with a poorly articu-lated skeleton, the artist was merely drawingwhat he saw. Secondly, the inferior quality ofthe earlier plates may be due to the block-cutter’s lack of technical skill. Unfortunately,Vesalius never acknowledged his artist, but atthe end of the Venesection Letter of 539, withhis thoughts on a large anatomical work, hemakes reference to Jan Stefan, “the distin-guished contemporary artist”, whom he hopesto engage in his grand venture. But any collab-oration between anatomist and artist is alwayslikely to be fraught with tension and difficul-ties, and there is the strong probability thatVesalius and Stefan fell out at some stagebetween the publication of the Tabulae

46


anatomicae and the Fabrica. Later in the ChinaRoot Letter, in a telling admission, Vesalius saysthat he no longer had “to put up with the badtemper of artists and cutters who made memore miserable than the bodies I was dis-secting.” By not acknowledging his artist,Vesalius was acting in a manner that was trueto his complex character. Quick to take offence,and unable to forgive those who has offendedhim, Vesalius takes his revenge by remainingsilent about his collaborators. The art criticGiorgio Vasari (5-574) in the second editionof his Vite de piu eccelenti pittori (568), declaresunequivocably that Jan Stefan was the artist of

the Fabrica. While evidence strongly points to the blocksbeing prepared in the Venetian workshop ofTitian, some commentators have gone so far asto attribute the illustrations to Titian himself.Indeed, an edition of the Fabrica produced in706 by the Augsburg publisher AndreasMaschenbauer from the original woodblocks,confidently declares on its title page that thefigures were designed by Titian. There are sev-eral objections to this attribution. Firstly, by the540s Titian was at the height of his powers,and his paintings were commanding hugesums. It is, therefore, extremely unlikely that he

47


would take on such a utilitarian task as illus-trating a book of anatomy. Secondly, if Vesaliuscould afford to hire such an eminent artist asTitian, whose collaboration would have addedenormous prestige to the book, why was hisname not mentioned in the Fabrica? It has evenbeen suggested that the Fabrica was an elabo-rate plagiarism of the anatomical drawings ofLeonardo da Vinci.

The identity of the artist may never beresolved, as new evidence is unlikely to becomeavailable. Stylistic analysis of the illustrationshas produced nothing definitive. Vesalius was

quite an accomplished artist, and may havedone some of the smaller illustrations himself,though the larger illustrations were probablybeyond his artistic capabilities. The most likelyexplanation is that Vesalius employed severalartists and blockcutters, including Jan Stefanvan Calcar. It is also likely that the best of theillustrations, the three skeletal figures and thefourteen muscle men, were drawn by Stefan,and transferred to woodblocks by a highly tal-ented but unnamed blockcutter. Recentresearch has unearthed evidence suggestingthat the blockcutters were Francesco Marcolinida Forli and one of his workmen, a German,Johann Britt.

48


ThE ILLUSTrATIonSIn portraying the three skeletons, the artist suc-ceeds in imbuing them with emotion, as theyconsider their mortal destiny.

The fourteen large ecorchés figures, the“muscle men,” are unquestionably the out-standing artistic achievement of the Fabrica.The series is arranged sequentially to demon-strate a progressive dissection, layer by layer,beginning with surface of the whole body, andending with a forlorn figure leaning against awall, the remaining flesh hanging from hisbody. The figures may be divided into two cate-gories: those in which the figures are repre-sented as dead, supported by pulleys, ropes,and other devices, and those in which the fig-ures appear to be alive and dynamic, flexingtheir muscles and moving under their ownlocomotion. Despite the naturalism of the fig-ures, they represent an idealized human formthat in reality does not exist. The artists invitethe observer to enter their world through theapplication of the imagination.

The smaller woodcuts of individual parts donot represent the idealized body, but are partic-ular to the cadaver being dissected, such as theillustration showing a human skull with amissing tooth, propped up by a dog’s skull.

It was not until 904 that it was realized thatthe rural backgrounds to the muscle men fig-ures form a continuous panorama of theEuganean Hills along the river route fromPadua to Venice – a journey that Vesalius mademany times. Placed in a natural setting, strewnwith ruins and other memento mori, the figuresseem to inhabit a twilight zone between theliving and the dead. The backgrounds aredelineated with the same precision as themuscle men themselves. The use of landscapegives the image a sense of reality and perspec-tive, and became a standard trope for anatom-ical illustration for the next few hundred years.

One of the most remarkable features of theFabrica is the series of pictorial initial lettersthat introduce each book and chapter. Thiskind of embellishment had long been used inmanuscripts as well as in printed books. Theletters, which show the anatomist with hisnaked putti assistants engaged in various actsassociated with his trade, provide glimpses ofpractical anatomy and surgery of the time. Careis taken to strike a harmonious balance betweenthe form of the letter and the background scene,which enliven the text with a degree of macabrehumour, and provide an ironic commentary onthe activities of Vesalius. They serve as a kind ofpictorial footnote.

49


The letters fall into two groups. There are fourlarge initials – I O Q T – used at the beginningof each of the seven books into which the Fab-rica is divided; and seventeen smaller letters atthe head of each chapter. Small L and O depict the body of an executedcriminal being handed over to students underofficial supervision; an ecclesiastical figureholding a crucifix watches as putti remove thebody of a female from the scaffold, while sol-dier guards stand by. Large O and I show a noc-turnal disinterment.

SUrVIVALS And LoSSESIt has been estimated that between eight hun-dred and one thousand copies of the 543 Fab-rica were printed. In a census carried out in984, 54 copies had been located, though theactual number of surviving copies is probablygreater. The largest concentration is in institu-tional libraries in the United States, with fifty-seven examples. The United Kingdom hastwenty-six copies, Germany eight, the Nether-lands six, and Canada four. A further thirty-oneare spread across Europe, leaving twentycopies known from auction records, but whosewhereabouts are unknown. Many copies havedisappeared or have been destroyed over thecenturies. Two copies once at the University ofLeuven were destroyed by fire when the librarywas deliberately set alight by German troops in94. Another casualty of enemy action inLeuven occurred during the Second World War,when the woodblock of the title page to the555 edition of the Fabrica was destroyed. Inthe same war, books from the LeopoldinaLibrary in Halle that had been buried in a minefor safe-keeping were plundered by Soviettroops, including a copy of the Fabrica. Anothercopy, once in the possession of the Belgianroyal family, has also vanished.

One of the copies destroyed at Leuven in 94was for many years mistakenly thought to havebeen the dedication copy to Emperor Charles V.The real hand-coloured dedication copy wasuntil recently owned by Dr Haskell Norman ofSan Francisco. It was sold at auction by Chris-ties of New York on 8 March 998, and is nowin the possession of a private collector.

18 Andreas Vesalius. De humani corporisfabrica librorum epitome. Basel: J.Oporinus, 543.

The Epitome was completed two weeks afterthe Fabrica on 3 August 54, and was pub-lished in June 543. It was dedicated to theEmperor’s son, Philip II, the future King of

Spain, on whose medical staff Vesalius wouldlater serve.

The Epitome was intended as a much con-densed version of the Fabrica, for the use ofstudents. Vesalius refers to it as a semita(gateway) to the Fabrica. The sheer bulk andprice of the Fabrica make it clear that the bookwas not aimed at the student market, butrather at a wealthier class of reader, perhapspracticing physicians and teaching faculty. TheEpitome was better suited to students’ needs,as, in contrast to the Fabrica, it could be conve-niently carried to lectures, and cost one-sixth ofthe price of the Fabrica.

Consisting of twelve folio leaves measuring 56 x40 cm, the Epitome returns to the earlier modelof the Tabulae anatomicae sex, where the illus-trations take on greater significance than thetext. The delineations of the distribution of theblood vessels, and the figure of a skeletonleaning against a tomb are the same as thoseused in the Fabrica, except for the removal ofthe epitaph “vivitur ingenio, caetera mortiserunt” (genius lives on, the rest is mortal) fromthe side of the tomb. The newly introduced“Adam and Eve” figures represent surfaceanatomy, with explanatory text describingexternal aspects of the body.Other new illustrations display stages of thedissection of the brain. For the sake ofeconomy, smaller anatomical parts are spreadat the feet of the figures. The two illustrationsdisplaying the blood vessels, nerves, and vis-cera, invite the reader to cut out certainanatomical parts from the leaf supplied, backthem with thicker paper, and paste them uponthe larger figure to form multi-layeredmanikins.

on LoAn From dr EUgEnE S. FLAmm

19 Andreas Vesalius. Von des MenschenCörpers Anatomey, ein kurtzer, abervastnützer Asszug. Basel: J. Oporinus,543.

Concerned about plagiarism and unauthorizedcopies in the German-speaking lands, Vesaliuscommissioned Alban Thorer (489-550),physician, professor, and Rector of the Univer-sity of Basel, to produce a German version ofthe Epitome, using the original woodcuts,under his direction. It was published by Opor-inus on 9 August, several days after Vesalius’sdeparture from Switzerland. It is the only workof Vesalius to be translated into a vernacularlanguage during his lifetime. The translationhas more illustrations than the Latin version,and adds a second dedication, to Ulrich, Duke

50


of Württemberg (487-550). The text is setmainly in schwabacher type. The Germantranslation is considerably rarer than the Latinversion. Since the sheets were probablyintended to be used as wall charts, full sets ofthe sheets are extremely rare, with only twocopies recorded. Two incomplete copies arealso known.

Thorer had translated a number of ByzantineGreek medical texts into Latin, and a treatiseon the plague, an outbreak of which struckBasel in 539. When Vesalius arrived in Basel in54, Thorer was engaged in preparing a Latin

edition of Rhazes, based on a reexamination ofearlier translations. Vesalius’s Paraphrase ofRhazes was incorporated into Thorer’s edition,which was published in Basel by Heinrich Petriin 544.

Translation of scientific texts into German wasespecially difficult, as few German anatomicalworks existed, and consequently there waslittle in the way of a specialized anatomicalvocabulary. Thorer had to coin new words, andmany phrases required parenthetic explana-tions or paraphrase to make their meaningclear.

5


5


53


54


20 Andreas Vesalius. Epistola rationemmodumque propinandi radices Chynaededocti. Basel: J. Oporinus, 546.

In 546 Vesalius travelled to Ratisbon. On hisarrival a letter from his friend Joachim Roe-lants, a physician of Mechlin, was awaiting him,asking for his opinion about the preparation,use, and therapeutic value of the root of theChina smilax. China root, a relative of sarsapa-rilla, had recently become popular as a replace-ment for guaiac wood - a medication employedin the treatment of muscle pain and gout. In hisreply Vesalius claimed little knowledge of theroot. He had tried it to treat the Emperor’sgout, but only with limited effectiveness. Heconcluded that he saw no reason to replaceguaiac wood with China root.

Earlier, Vesalius had interceded on behalf ofRoelants’s son who had gone to Paris to studymedicine. Vesalius wrote to several professors atParis, including his old teacher Sylvius. In hisletter Vesalius asked Sylvius in passing hisopinion about the Fabrica. Sylvius admitted thatwhile there was much merit in the Fabrica, heregretted that Vesalius had not treated Galenwith more respect. He attributed Vesalius’smanner to his youth and the negative influenceof those Italians opposed to Galen. Whatoffended Sylvius most of all was Vesalius’s state-ment that Galen had never dissected humanbodies. He ended the letter with an ultimatum,that unless Vesalius withdrew his “false state-ments” regarding Galen, he would no longer beable to remain on amicable terms.

Sylvius’s accusations and ultimatum provoked abelligerent response from Vesalius. Word of theletter reached Roelants who asked Vesaliuswhat he had written to Sylvius. Vesalius had notkept a copy of the letter, but remembered thecontents. He penned a lengthy reply to Roelants,explaining what had passed between him andhis old teacher. The letter was intended to be aprivate communication to Roelants, but ascopies of it were beginning to circulate,Vesalius’s brother Franciscus, who was studyingmedicine at Ferrara, took it on himself to havethe letter published in Basel by Oporinus, inorder to forestall unauthorized versions. Onhearing about his brother’s intentions, Vesaliusrewrote the original letter and sent it to hisbrother along with instructions to Oporinus onprinting requirements. The letter was publishedin 546 under the title Epistola rationem mod-umque propinandi radices Chynae dedocti.

The short discussion on the China root occu-pies only about one-tenth of the letter, the restis taken up with Vesalius’s defence of the Fab-

rica against the attacks of the Galenists.Vesalius railed against the conservative forceshe encountered during his years in Paris thathad stifled the pursuit of scientific enquiry.Mentioning Sylvius by name, Vesalius repeatshis assertion that traditional authority mustyield to the evidence of the senses, particularlyin the case of Galen who, claimed Vesalius, hadprobably never performed a human dissection,having based his anatomical knowledge on thedissection of monkeys, not humans.


21 Thomas Geminus. Compendiosa totiusanatomie delineatio. London: JohnHerford, 545.

22 Thomas Geminus. Compendiosa totiusanatomie delineatio. London: T.Geminus, 559.

The first unauthorized reproductions of theplates of the Fabrica were done by ThomasLambrechts, better known by the name ofThomas Geminus (d. 56). Engraver, printer,and scientific instrument maker, Geminus wasa native of Lixhe in the principality of Liège inFlanders, and may have arrived in Englandaround 54 as a refugee from religious perse-cution. In 545 he issued the Compendiosa totiusanatomie delineatio, which translated thewoodcut illustrations of the Fabrica and theEpitome into copperplate engravings, whichwere accompanied by the Latin text of theEpitome.

Publication of the Compendiosa so enraged

55

A variety of the smilax plant. P.A. Mattioli. Commentarii in

sex libros Pedacii Dioscoridis Anazarbei de medica materia.

Venice: Ex officio Valgrisiana, 565


Vesalius, that in the China Root Letter he wrote:

Just now in England … the illustrations ofmy Epitome have been copied so poorly andwithout artistic skill … that I should beashamed if anyone were to believe meresponsible for them … Everything has beenshamefully reduced, although figures of thissort can never be exhibited large enough …I should much prefer to provide printerswith the illustrations than have them copiedunskillfully … with the favour of the gods, Ishall spare no efforts to vanquish those pla-giarists who are wont to seize upon thelabours of others since they are unable tosteal anything original from one another

But in fact, far from ignoring Vesalius, Geminusgives high praise to the author of the Fabrica in

his introduction:

In my delineation of the whole bodyaccording to its parts, I have followedAndreas Vesalius of Brussels, who is by farthe most skilled man of our times in this art.I have followed him and, if I am not mis-taken, have kept pace with him, but by ashort cut. For what he produced at greatlength in many verbose books, I, in so far as Iwas able, collected into a kind of com-pendium, engraved by me on copper andpublished for the general use of students

The Compendiosa was dedicated to Henry VIII.As Geminus informs us, he had been com-manded by the King, who wished to improvethe practice of surgery in England, to issue anew edition of the Fabrica.

56


In addition to their engraved title pages, eachedition of the Compendiosa contained forty-onepages of engravings printed from fifty plates,including all the large plates from the Fabrica,most of the important smaller plates, and theAdam and Eve figures from the Epitome. Insome instances the figures are reversed, as is allthe lettering. The background to the musclemen figures has been removed, and replacedwith tufts of grass and small stones.

Sales of the Compendiosa appeared to havegone well in England especially as its produc-tion was underwritten by the monarch. Butperhaps mindful of the fact that the surgeonsand barbers of England were considered to beinferior to the university-trained physicians,Geminus decided that an English version of the

Compendiosa would be of benefit to those whowere performing surgery but who had no Latin.Accordingly, in 553 he produced an Englishversion. The plates remained the same, but thecaptions accompanying were translated intoEnglish by Nicholas Udall (505-556), poet,playwright, and translator of Erasmus.Although the title page retains the Latin title ofthe original, the work was given a new textwith the caption title A Treatyse of Anatomiewherin is conteyned a Compendious or BriefeRehersal of al and singular the Partes of MansBody, which was compiled from several earlierworks. There are close resemblances betweenthis text provided by Geminus and ThomasVicary’s Anatomie of Mans Bodie, first publishedin 548, no copies of which have survived; asecond edition appeared in 577 which allows a

57


comparison with the text of the Compendiosa.Vicary’s work was itself a compilation gleanedfrom a late fourteenth-century manuscriptbased on the writings of Henri de Mondevilleand Guy de Chauliac. In 559 Geminus pub-lished a second English version, a reprint of the553 edition. Each version of the Compendiosawas dedicated to a different monarch – HenryVIII, Edward VI, and Elizabeth. The 545 edi-tion has the distinction of being the first bookin England to have an engraved title page. Thetitle page of the 559 edition features a portraitof Elizabeth which is thought to be the firstdepiction of the newly crowned queen fol-lowing her accession to the throne.

545 EdITIon on LoAn Fromdr EUgEnE S. FLAmm

23 Juan de Valverde de Amusco (circa55-circa 588). Anatomia del corpohumano. Rome: Ant. Salamanca,&Antonio Lafreri, 560.

Another so-called “plagiarism” appeared inRome in 556. The work, written in Spanish byJuan Valverde de Amusco (circa 55-circa588), was entitled Historia de la composicion delcuerpo humano. The book proved to be verypopular and was translated into Italian sixtimes between 559 and 68, into Latin fourtimes, and twice into Dutch. Two of the Latin(566 and 57), and one of the Dutch editions(568), printed in Antwerp by ChristophPlantin (circa 50-589), were unauthorized.

58


Valverde had studied medicine in Padua andRome under Vesalius’s rivals, Realdo Columboand Bartolomeo Eustachi. Almost all of thebook’s forty-three plates were taken directlyfrom the Fabrica; only four were original illus-trations. Like Geminus, Valverde preferred themedium of engraving on copper. The designswere drawn by Gaspar Becerra (50?-568?), acontemporary of Michelangelo (475-564), andthe engravings are thought to have been car-ried out by Niccolò Beatrici (507?-570?),whose monogram “NB” appears on several ofthe plates.

One of the most striking original plates is thatof an ecorché figure holding up its own skin in

one hand and a knife in the other. The imagehas been compared to Michelangelo’s paintingin the Sistine Chapel of Saint Bartholomew inthe Last Judgment. Other illustrations, rich inmannerist excesses, include two figures holdingtheir flayed bodies open; a dissected figure dis-secting a cadaver; and a torso encased inarmour displaying its abdominal organs.Valverde also made several alterations to theVesalian originals, including the skeletons, themuscles of the eye, nose, and larynx. Moreover,although Valverde’s text relied heavily onVesalius’s, he makes about sixty textual correc-tions and additions, mostly in the captions tothe illustrations.

59


The title page of the Latin edition, published atRome in 560 with the title Anatomia del corpohumano, shows two skeletons supporting anelliptical shield bearing the title. Above are amonkey and a pig, frequently used in dissec-tions, either as substitutes for human subjects,or for purposes of comparative anatomy. Thetitle page also includes the standard mementomori of bones, skulls, and hour-glass. Thescenes in the lower part reflect differentmoments from the anatomical demonstration.On the left the anatomist teaches a studenthow to articulate a skeleton. In the centre is adissection being performed by teachers andstudents. On the right a dissection of a womanis underway. This title page design wasreprinted several times with minor modifica-tions.

Valverde regarded himself as a faithful followerof Vesalius by constantly stressing the impor-tance of direct observation, the leading role ofthe anatomist, and the use of illustration.Vesalius, on the other hand, had little tolerancefor Valverde, and regarded him as an imposter.Later he wrote to Falloppio:

Valverde who never put his hand to a dissec-tion and is ignorant of medicine as well as ofthe primary disciplines, undertook toexpound our art in the Spanish languageonly for the sake of shameful profit …

There are innumerable things in the Spanishcompendium of Valverde from which it canbe readily seen that neither he nor histeacher Colombo was even superficiallyversed in the writings of Galen and others.

Vesalius argued that the copying of the illustra-tions from the Fabrica produced a distortion ofthe originals. Looked at from another point ofview, it could be argued that Valverde’s (andGeminus’s) versions of Vesalius’s anatomy,were in fact a tribute to the genius of its creator.Indirectly, through their efforts, the dissemina-tion of Vesalius’s ideas reached a wider audi-ence. In this sense plagiarism may be seen as aform of homage to the original creator.

24 Andreas Vesalius. De humani corporisfabrica, lib. VII. Lyon: J. de Tournes,55. volumes.

This two-volume unauthorized edition of theFabrica, produced in Lyon in 55 by Jean deTournes, represents a different kind of plagia-rism. Because the principal appeal of the Fab-rica was in its illustrations, this edition is mostunusual, in that it reproduces only the text ofthe Fabrica, and none of the illustrations, apart

from four small woodcuts of the cranium.

In the sixteenth century Lyon became a centrefor pirated editions of popular works. Realisingthat the 543 Fabrica was beyond the pocket ofall but a few wealthy students, the printer-scholar Jean de Tournes tried to capitalize onthis gap in the market, by producing a smallformat (sixteenmo) pocket size version aimedat the lower end of the book-buying public.The two volumes stand in stark contrast to theimpressive folio of 543.

60


dE hUmAnI corPorIS FAbrIcA 555

25 Andreas Vesalius. De humani corporisfabrica libri septem. Basel: J. Oporinus,555.

Copies of the 543 Fabrica were still available in547 from Oporinus, who was probably reluc-tant to embark on printing a second edition,while sheets of the first edition remainedunsold. But at some point between the end ofAugust 550 and October 55, during a longsojourn in Augsburg, Vesalius began makingpreparations for a second edition. Type for therevised edition had been cast in moulds bor-rowed from Francisco de Enzinas, but after theprinting of five books the type became tooworn for subsequent use. New type was there-fore required, but unfortunately Enzinas haddied. Eventually Oporinus had the opportunityto buy the moulds outright and printingresumed. It was completed in August 555.

The text of the new edition brought majortypographical improvements. It was set inlarger type than the 543 edition, with morespace between the lines, and fewer words perline. Among the textual changes was the dele-tion of the names of people with whomVesalius had quarreled, such as Sylvius, Fuchs,Dryander, and Colombo, or people who haddied since the original printing of 543. Even the“divine Galen” of 543 had by 555 becomesimply “Galen.”

Some material was revised in the light of newfindings. The chapter dealing with the fetalcovering, for example, was greatly improved,and a long passage refuting Galen’s assertionthat the intraventricular septum was perme-able, was added. Several chapters wererearranged, while a new chapter on instru-ments was inserted. Reference to students ille-gally bringing bones home for study wasdropped.

Most of the textual changes were purely sty-listic and did not alter the overall meaning. Inmany cases a word or phrase has beenexchanged for a more eloquent or accurateexpression, thus demonstrating that Vesaliuswas as much concerned with verbal detail aswith anatomical. Sentences were altered invarious ways, such as the rearrangement ofclauses, change of word order – all in anattempt to write a more elegant humanistLatin. There is a new index, and a long list oferrata – strong evidence that Vesalius was notpresent in Basel during the printing.

Perhaps the most notable difference betweenthe two editions is the woodcut title page. The555 title page is much inferior to the 543, andclearly was not executed under Vesalius’ssupervision. The new title page is heavy andflat, the lines more coarse. The head of theanatomist has become enlarged, the number ofrings on his fingers has been reduced to one.Gone are the plants and foliage growing out ofthe masonry. The folds and wrinkles of the gar-ments have also disappeared. The nude figureholding on to the pillar is now fully clothed.One of the dogs has been replaced by a goat.The skeleton supported by a staff in the 543edition, now holds a scythe, transforming itinto the grim reaper. Oporinus’s name nolonger appears in the imprint.

Many of the illustrations that had appearedcrowded in the first edition, are now spacedfurther apart, and the accompanying text hasbeen rearranged. Index letters that had beendifficult or impossible to see have had some ofthe hatching removed to make them more vis-ible. Several illustrations were removed, whileothers were extensively reworked, and stillothers replaced by completely different images.

The initial letters are substantially the same,except for the introduction of a large V for thebeginning of the dedication to Charles V, andthe beginning of book V. It differs from theother pictorial letters in that it depicts amythological theme - the story of Marsyas,who challenges Apollo to a music contest, withthe winner choosing a penalty for the loser. Thecontest is presided over by the Muses. Apollo isthe victor and decrees that Marsyas is to beskinned alive. On the left of the image sit theMuses in judgment; on the right Apollo isabout to flay Marsyas. This has been inter-preted by some as an allegory of Vesaliusflaying his Galenist adversaries. The small setof initials was redesigned.

VESALIUS’S oWn AnnoTATEd coPyThe story behind the remarkable discovery ofVesalius’s own annotated copy of the 1555 edi-tion of the Fabrica is best told by its owner:

I am sure that most serious collectors, what-ever their field of interest, dream of discov-ering or acquiring one very special item. Inthe field of rare books in science and medi-cine, a copy of De humani corporisfabrica owned and extensively annotated byAndreas Vesalius is truly unique! That theannotations were most likely meant for athird edition of this book, which was neverpublished, makes this discovery even moreincredible and important.

6


As a collector of rare books, I have alwaysbeen attracted to books with annotations. Iam fascinated by the handwritten notes ofpast readers, some of them written hun-dreds of years ago. Who were they? Wherewere they when they wrote them? Why didthey write them? Lastly, there is always thehighly unlikely possibility that they werewritten by a significant figure, someone wewould still know today.

I find it very fortunate that most collectorsseem to view annotations as defects and putmore value on non-annotated copies. This

was certainly the case with the 555 editionof De humani corporis fabrica that I pur-chased at auction in 007. I am convincedthat the extensive annotations throughoutthis particular copy made it unattractive toother collectors, and the book did not attractmuch attention at auction.

It was soon after I acquired the book that Ibegan to examine it thoroughly. Initially, itwas the extent of the annotations thatintrigued me most. The 555 edition of Dehumani corporis fabrica is a large folio of over800 pages, and the annotations cropped up

6


throughout the book, from the beginning toalmost the last page. I have many otherannotated books in my collection, and noneof them have as many annotations as thisone.

I also found the nature of the annotations tobe very unusual. In many cases sentencesand even paragraphs had been crossed outand rewritten in the margin. On some pages,these marginal notes had also been crossedout and rewritten. Although I could not readthem, I could see that they were written inLatin and it was clear that the annotator

was rewriting sentences and paragraphsrather than making notes. In other anno-tated books I own, sentences are underlinedand there are marginal notes, but nothinglike the rewriting of paragraphs I was seeinghere.

I could also see that this person had read theentire book very carefully. There werenumerous corrections to the smallest detailsthroughout the book… spelling errors,commas to periods, colons to semicolons.Not an easy task for such a large volume ofdifficult Latin reading. I also noticed that the

63


name of Vesalius’ father, Andreas, wascrossed out in the introduction… curiousindeed!

These annotations were clearly not those ofa typical student or casual reader, and to me,they raised the possibility that they weremade by Vesalius himself. But how does onego about determining if the annotationswere by really written by Vesalius?

An obvious place to start would be to com-pare the handwriting of the annotationswith known specimens of Vesalius’ hand-

writing. Examples of handwriting byVesalius are extremely rare, largely becausehe burned his early books and papers, asrelated in his book Epistle on the China Rootpublished in 546. There are fewer than tenknown existing letters that had been writtenby Vesalius, but after an extensive search onthe internet, I was able to get hold of excel-lent photocopies of two Vesalius letters from

64


the Waller Manuscript Collection at UppsalaUniversity.

When I received the copies of these lettersand compared them with the annotations, Ihad by far my most exciting experience everas a collector. The handwriting of the anno-tations was absolutely identical to the hand-writing in the letters. There was match aftermatch… between words, letters, spacing,flourishes at the end of words… everythingmatched! I was then certain that this was anannotated copy of Vesalius’ De humani cor-poris fabrica written by his own hand.

Even though I could neither read nor under-stand the annotations, I knew that this wasa book of great significance and value, notjust to collectors, but also to many others,including scholars and historians. What wasVesalius writing, and why? The annotationshad to be translated.

It was clear to me that a discovery of such

65


great importance would require a worldclass scholar in medical history to interpretthe contents, but who? I have always beeninterested in the history of medicine, andone name I was very familiar with was Dr.Vivian Nutton, Emeritus Professor at theUCL Center for the History of Medicine.When I emailed Dr. Nutton and told himwhat I thought I had, he responded withinterest, but also cautioned that I should notbe too hopeful that the annotations were byVesalius himself. He requested that I sendhim some images of the annotated pages,and he would then get back to me with hisopinion.

It was only after Dr. Nutton saw the imagesand began translating the annotations thathe became as excited as I was. It was alsoclear to him, based on his translation of theannotations, that they could only have beenwritten by Vesalius. This was confirmed byDr. Nutton when he came to thoroughlyexamine the book in person. I was amazedat Dr. Nutton’s talent after I received histranscript of the annotations and read hisfantastic paper giving the first scholarly dis-cussion of them. It was a thrilling experiencefor me to watch a world class historian atwork, and I could see that he was at least asif not more thrilled than I was at this spec-tacular discovery.

Andreas Vesalius’ own copy of De humanicorporis fabrica… one of the most importantbooks in history, extensively annotated byits own author, undiscovered for centuries.The word incredible doesn’t even begin todescribe it!

By Dr. Gerard Vogrincic MD, FRCPC

The volume has been on deposit at the FisherLibrary since 0.

There are 3 recorded copies of the second edi-tion of the Fabrica. Most of them are in institu-tional or university libraries, with forty-five inthe United States, thirty-three in the UnitedKingdom, and thirty-five in the rest of Europe.There are at least three copies in Canada.

on LoAn From dr gErArd VogrIncIc

26 Jean Perrissin and Jacques Tortorel “Lamort du Roy Henry deuxieme auxtournelles a Paris le x iullet. 559”.[Geneva: J. de Laon, circa 570.]

In the summer of 559 Vesalius was summonedto Paris to attend to Henry II, King of France,who had been grievously wounded in a tourna-ment. The contest was part of the three-daydouble wedding celebrations in honour ofEmmanuel Philibert, Duke of Savoy, and Mar-guerite, sister of Henry II, and between Philip IIand Marguerite, daughter of Henry II. Theweddings had been arranged as part of thePeace of Cateau-Cambrésis of 559, endinghostilities between Spain and a Franco-Papalalliance. On 30 June a joust between KingHenry and Gabriel, comte de Montgomery,seigneur de Lorges (530-574) took place,despite dire warnings from Michel de Nos-tradamus (503-566) about the outcome of thecontest. In the ensuing exchange a piece of deMontgomery’s shattered lance penetrated theking’s visor and lodged itself just above hisright eye. The royal physicians, who includedAmbroise Paré, managed to extract severalsplinters from the king’s eye socket, but Henry

66


fell into a fever watched over by an anxiouscourt that feared the worst. As the king’s con-dition deteriorated, all medical measures weretried, including thrusts into the heads of exe-cuted criminals in an attempt to determinewhether the lance might have penetrated thebrain. With further medical consultationurgently required, word was sent to Philip II todispatch Vesalius to Paris immediately. Vesaliusarrived on 3 July, and after examining the king,realized that Henry would not survive theinjury. The king, in pain and delirious, lingeredon another week. On 0 July at o’clock in theafternoon, at the age of forty, and in the twelfthyear of his reign, Henry II, King of France, died.A post-mortem examination was conducted onthe king’s body by Vesalius, who determinedthe cause of death as cerebral compressionwith subdural haemorrhage.

The dramatic death of Henry II is captured inthis woodcut by Jacques Tortorel, after thedesign of Jean Perrissin. Around the King’sdeathbed is gathered a host of dignitaries. Inthe centre of the scene are the figures ofVesalius and Ambroise Paré standing side byside, with Vesalius on the left.

27 Gabriel Falloppio. Observationesanatomicae. Venice: Marc AntonioUlm, 56.

Gabriel Falloppio (53?-56) of Modenabecame the chair of anatomy at the Universityof Pisa in 548, before assuming Vesalius’sformer position at Padua in 55. In Padua hesucceeded in restoring some of the medical fac-ulty’s former prestige that had been lost sinceVesalius’s departure eight years earlier.Although the two men never met, Falloppioheld Vesalius in high esteem, referring to him as“the prince of anatomists, an admirable physi-cian, and a divine teacher.” He considered him-self Vesalius’s disciple, and confessed to usingthe Fabrica as the basic guide for his ownresearch.

Reputed to be an excellent anatomist andresearcher, Falloppio published only one bookduring his lifetime: Observationes anatomicae,published at Venice in 56. Other works pub-lished posthumously under his name, are prob-ably spurious. In Observationes anatomicae,Falloppio gave notice of his plan to write acomprehensive and illustrated work on humanand comparative anatomy, but it was neverpublished.

on LoAn From oSLEr LIbrAry, mcgILL UnIVErSITy

28 Andreas Vesalius. AnatomicarumGabrielis Falloppii Observationumexamen. Venice: Francisco de Fran-ciscis, 564.

The purpose of Observationes anatomicae wasto correct some of the errors contained in theFabrica, and to present new anatomical mate-rial in the cause of research. A copy was sent toVesalius, who acknowledged receipt of the giftin a letter that he gave to Paolo Tiepolo, Vene-tian ambassador to Philip II, to convey to Fal-loppio. But as Tiepolo was delayed for severalmonths in Spain, by the time he reachedVenice, Falloppio was already dead. Threeyears later Vesalius’s letter was published inVenice as Anatomicarum Gabrielis FalloppiiObservationum examen, by which timeVesalius, too, was dead.


29 Andreas Vesalius. Opera omniaanatomica & chirurgica; cura Her-manni Boerhaave ... & BernhardiSiegfried Albini. Leiden: J. du Vivie, etJ. & H. Verbeek, 75. volumes.

One hundred and eighty-two years after thedeath of Vesalius, the first collected edition ofhis works appeared in two large folio volumes,published at Leiden, under the editorial guid-ance of Hermann Boerhaave (668-738), andBernard Siegfried Albinus (697-770), two ofthe leading lights of the University of Leiden inthe eighteenth century. The collection omitsthe Tabulae anatomicae sex, the Paraphrasis ofRhazes, and the Venesection Letter, but includesthe spurious Chirurgia magna. It also includestwo other works not written by Vesalius - Fal-loppio’s Observationes anatomicae, and theApologiae Francisci Putei pro Galeno in anatome,examen, which the editors believed waswritten by Vesalius under the pseudonym ofGabriel Cuneus.

The survival of the original woodblocks of thefirst and second editions of the Fabrica (seebelow) was unknown to the editors, whoemployed the great Dutch artist Jan Wandelaar(690-759) to copy the illustrations and havethem engraved in copper. Wandelaar was amaster of scientific illustration and was respon-sible for the plates of several anatomical worksby Albinus, including his spectacular Tabulaesceleti et musculorum corporis humani, pub-lished at Leiden in 74. Wandelaar also did thebotanical plates for Carl von Linné’s Hortus Clif-fortianus in 738.

Capital for the production of this edition was

67


raised by subscription. According to the sub-scription list there were 09 copies ordered by80 individuals and institutions. Assuming thatextra copies were printed for the regular bookmarket, an estimated print run of 50-300copies is probable. The Fisher Library has twocopies.

30 [Prospero Borgarucci]. Andreae VessaliiBruxellensis Chirurgia magna in septemlibros digesta. Venice: Vincenzo Val-grisi, 568.

In addition to the numerous plagiarisms andunauthorized copying of the Vesalian illustra-tions, other unscrupulous operators took

advantage of Vesalius’s reputation. In 568there appeared in Venice under his name anoctavo volume of over five hundred pages withthe title Chirurgia magna, allegedly edited byProspero Borgarucci, professor of the Univer-sity of Padua. Borgarucci claimed to have dis-covered the manuscript in 567 in Paris. Therewere two issues of Chirurgia magna publishedthe same year, the first with a dedication ofthirty pages, is dated September 568, thesecond with the dedication reduced to fourpages, is dated October; the latter issue sup-pressed the claim concerning the discovery ofthe manuscript. Three further editions came in569. The text was accompanied by three

woodcut illustrations copied from De chirurgicainstitutione, written by Jean Tagault (d. 545),and published by the same printer, VincenzoValgrisi, in 544. Tagault’s illustrations werepoor renditions of the skeletal figures from theTabulae anatomicae sex, while a fourth skeletonwas lifted from the Fabrica.

There is little doubt that, though feasible, thiscollection of surgical notes is spurious. After all,Vesalius had taught surgery at Padua and hadacquired valuable practical experience as a fieldsurgeon in the service of Charles V, and duringthe last twenty years of his life had been regu-larly consulted on surgical matters. Moreover,in Book IV of the Fabrica Vesalius hadexpressed the intention of writing a book on

surgery. But in trying to pass off the work asVesalius’s, Borgarucci erred by including quota-tions from books that were published after thedeath of Vesalius. Despite the obvious lack ofauthentication, Chirurgia magna was includedin the 74 Leiden Opera omnia edited by Boer-haave and Albinus.

on LoAn From dr gErArd VogrIncIc

31 Andreas Vesalius. Icones anatomicae.Ediderunt Academia medicinae nova-eboracensis et Bibliotheca Universi-tatis monacensis. Munich: BremerPresse, 934.

68


Following the publication of the 555 edition ofthe Fabrica, the woodblocks used to producethe illustrations, remained in the possession ofOporinus. According to Felix Platter (536-64) they were offered for sale in Basel in 583.Platter himself had considered buying theblocks to illustrate his anatomical treatise Decorporis humani structura et usu, printed byFroben at Basel in 583, but decided against thepurchase, as the inclusion of the woodblockillustrations would have made his book incon-veniently large for his students. Instead Platterchose to illustrate his book with engravedplates reduced in size. It is likely that the wood-blocks were purchased by Ambrose Froben,and that they remained in the possession of thefamily until 603 when the firm went out ofbusiness. The whereabouts of the blocksduring the seventeenth century is unknown,but they resurfaced in Augsburg at the begin-ning of the eighteenth century, when theprinter/publisher Andreas Maschenbauer usedthem for abridged versions of the Fabrica, in706 and again in 73, in which he attributesthe drawing of the blocks to Titian.

The blocks remained in Augsburg until about770, when the physician Johann Anton vonWoltter (7-778) rediscovered them, andtook them to Ingolstadt. His intention was toinclude the woodcut illustrations in a largerwork in German for the benefit of Bavarian sur-geons, but ill health forced him to hand thetask over to the anatomist and surgeon Hein-rich Palmaz von Leveling (74-798), who hadthem printed in Ingolstadt in 78 and again in783.

After Leveling’s death the blocks were in alllikelihood deposited in the University of Ingol-stadt and, in the wake of the French invasion of800, were transferred to the University ofLandshut. In 86 they were again relocated,this time to the University of Munich, wherethey disappeared from sight until 893, when59 of the blocks were once more rediscoveredin a cupboard in the University Library. Thesurviving blocks were examined and listed in895 by Professor Moritz Roth of Basel,Vesalius’s first biographer. For the next thirty-odd years they were again forgotten, until 93when Dr S.W. Lambert of New York wanted tomake a study on the ornamental initials. Asearch was undertaken, and although the ini-tial letters were not found, the large blocks,which had been stored separately, unexpect-edly turned up. Of the 7 original woodblocks,fifty had perished, including the eighth muscleman, the portrait of Vesalius, thirty-nine of thesmaller blocks, as well as the initial ornamentalletters. In 934 the New York Academy of Med-

icine, in collaboration with the University ofMunich, commissioned Dr Willy Wiegand ofthe Bremer Presse of Munich to produce adeluxe edition from the surviving blocks of theFabrica and the Epitome, using a modern hand-press. The new book, which excluded the textof the Fabrica, was given the title Iconesanatomicae. The missing plates were repro-duced in collotype. The title page of the 55edition of Fabrica was not among the blocksdiscovered at Munich, but was traced to theLibrary of the University of Leuven. The collo-type illustrations lack the three-dimensionalquality of impressions taken from the originalblocks, which because of considerableimprovements in printing techniques since thesixteenth century, could at last be seen in alltheir glory. This is evident when one comparesthe eighth muscle man, reproduced from aphotographic impression from the 543 editionof the Fabrica, with the ninth plate, producedfrom the original block. Also included in thevolume were a full-size reproduction of thesingle woodcut from the Venesection Letter andthe six sheets of the Tabulae anatomicae. TheIcones thus became the only complete reposi-tory of the Vesalian illustrations.

But the story does not have a happy conclu-sion. During the Allied bombing of Munichduring the Second World War, the wonderfulwoodblocks were tragically lost to the worldforever.

32 Andreas Vesalius. The Fabric of theHuman Body. An Annotated Transla-tion of the 1543 and 1555 Editions of “Dehumani corporis fabrica”. Basel: Karger,03. volumes.

Given the enormous significance of the Fabrica,it is extraordinary that Vesalius’s magnum opushas only recently been translated into Englishin its entirety - four hundred and seventy yearsafter its publication in Latin in 543. Parts of theFabrica had been published and cited in Eng-lish prior to 03, but never the whole text.With impeccable timing on the part of theKarger publishing house, the first full Englishtranslation of the Fabrica made its appearancelast year – just in time to coincide with the fivehundredth anniversary of the birth of Vesalius.Appropriately, the book was published inBasel.

The principal reason for such a long delayundoubtedly lies in the problems of translatingVesalius’s Latin, which, as mentioned above,was notoriously verbose and difficult to com-prehend. The translator’s introduction by

69


Daniel H. Garrison discusses the characteristicsof Vesalius’s Latin, and the difficulties involvedwith translating it into modern English, whileattempting to retain as much of the flavour ofthe original as possible.

The two enormous volumes are brilliantly con-ceived and beautifully printed, and are pro-vided with a wealth of illuminating scholarlyapparatus. Daniel H. Garrison and Malcolm H.Hast are to be highly commended for their dili-gence over many years in preparing the transla-tion of this complex book. The translation isbased on the 543 edition of the Fabrica, col-lated against the 555 edition, and Vesalius’sown annotated copy of the 555 edition on dis-play in this exhibition. A system of colour-coded typography is employed to highlight thetextual differences between the three versions,which are displayed either in footnotes, or inthe appendix. Other typographical featuresprovide an elaborate system of cross refer-encing. Icons of Vesalius’s head refer the readerto the original Latin text of 543. To assist thereader in understanding the anatomical termsused, certain words are printed in goldenbrown type within brackets to refer the user tomodern anatomical dictionaries. Thumbnailsof the illustrations in the margins signal otherplaces in the text where a particular feature isdiscussed.

The prefatory matter provides a rich mine ofinformation about Vesalius and the Fabrica.The excellent Historical Introduction by VivianNutton, and the Introduction to Book Two byNancy C. Siraisi provide thorough and succinctaccounts on Vesalius and on the background,production, reception, and significance of theFabrica.

33 George Stanley Terence Cavanagh.The panorama of Vesalius : a ‘lost’design from Titian’s studio. Athens, Ga.: Sacrum Press, 996.

In 90 it was first noticed that the back-grounds to the fourteen muscle men formed acontinuous panorama. Cavanagh experi-mented with the figures by photographingthem and developing the negatives in reverse.The first two plates were transposed in order tomaintain the correct sequence.

The muscle men are here joined and arrangedto form two panoramic sequences: “The frontviews”, and “The back views.”

70


SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

Many sources have been consulted during thewriting of this catalogue. The following werefound to be the most useful.

Carlino, Andrea. Books of the Body: AnatomicalRitual and Renaissance Learning. Translatedby John Tedeschi and Anne C. Tedeschi.Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 994.

Castiglioni, Arturo. “The Attack of FranciscusPuteus on Andreas Vesalius and the Defenceby Gabriel Cuneus.” Yale Journal of Biologyand Medicine, v. 6 (943), 35-48.

Cazort, Mimi, Monique Kornell, and KennethB. Roberts. The Ingenious Machine of Nature:Four Centuries of Art and Anatomy. Ottawa:National Gallery of Canada, 996.

Choulant, Johann Ludwig. History andBibliography of Anatomic Illustration in itsRelation to Anatomic Science and the GraphicArts. Translated and edited by FrankMortimer. Chicago: University of ChicagoPress, 90.

Clark, Harry. “Foiling the Pirates: thePreparation and Publication of AndreasVesalius’s De humani corporis fabrica.”Library Quarterly, v. 5 (98), 30-3.

Compier, Abdul Haq. “Rhazes in theRenaissance of Andreas Vesalius.” MedicalHistory, v. 56 (0), 3-5.

Cunningham, Andrew. The AnatomicalRenaissance: the Resurrection of theAnatomical Projects of the Ancients.Brookfield, Vt.: Ashgate Publishing, 997.

Cushing, Harvey W. A Bio-Bibliography ofAndreas Vesalius. New York: Schuman’s,943.

Donaldson, I.M.L. “Andreae VesaliiBruxellensis Icones anatomicae.” Journal ofthe Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh, v.4 (0), 84-86, 80-8.

Fisch, Max H. “The Printer of Vesalius’sFabrica.” Bulletin of the Medical LibraryAssociation, v. 3 (943), 40-59.

Fisch, Max H. “Vesalius and his Book.”Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, v.3 (943), 08-.

Francis, Henry Sayles. “The woodcut initials ofthe Fabrica.” Journal of the Medical LibraryAssociation, v. 3 (943), 8-37.

French, Roger. Dissection and Vivisection in theEuropean Renaissance. Aldershot: Ashgate,999.

Guerra, Francisco. “The Identity of the ArtistsInvolved in Vesalius’s Fabrica 543.” MedicalHistory, v. 3 (969), 37-50.

Hanigan, William C., W. Ragen, and R. Foster.“Dryander of Marburg and the FirstTextbook of Neuroanatomy.” Neurosurgery, v.6, no. 3 (990), 489-498.

Horowitz, Michael, and Jack Collins. “ACensus of Copies of the First Edition ofAndreas Vesalius’ De humani corporis fabrica(543), with a Note on the RecentlyDiscovered Variant Issue.” Journal of theHistory of Medicine and Allied Sciences, v. 39(984), 98-.

Ivins, William M., Jr. “What about the Fabricaof Vesalius?” in: Three Vesalian Essays toAccompany the Icones Anatomicae of 1934.New York: Macmillan, 95, p. 43-9.

Joffe, Stephan N. “A Census of the Edition of555 of Andreas Vesalius’ De humani corporisfabrica.” International Archives of Medicine, v. (009), -6.

Kellett, C. E. “Sylvius and the Reform ofAnatomy.” Medical History, v. 5 (96), 0-6.

Kusukawa, Sachiko. Picturing the Book ofNature: Image, Text, and Argument inSixteenth-Century Human Anatomy andMedical Botany. Chicago: University ofChicago Press, 0.

Lambert, Samuel W. “The Initial Letters of theAnatomical Treatise, De humani corporisfabrica, of Vesalius” in: Three Vesalian Essaysto Accompany the Icones Anatomicae of 1934.New York: Macmillan, 95, p. -4.

Lind, Levi R. Studies in Pre-Vesalian Anatomy:Biography, Translations, Documents.Philadelphia: American PhilosophicalSociety, 975.

Meyer, A. W. and Sheldon K. Wirt. “TheAmuscan Illustrations.” Bulletin of theHistory of Medicine, v. 4 (943), 667-680.

Nutton, Vivian. “The Fortunes of Galen” in:

7


The Cambridge Companion to Galen. Editedby R.J. Hankinson. Cambridge: UniversityPress, 008, p. 355-390.

Nutton, Vivian. “Vesalius Revised: HisAnnotations to the 555 Fabrica.” MedicalHistory, v. 56, no. 4 (0), 45-443.

Nutton, Vivian. “Historical Introduction.”Andreas Vesalius The Fabric of the HumanBody: an Annotated Translation of the 543and 555 Editions by Daniel H. Garrison andMalcolm H. Hast. Basel: Karger, 04, p.lxxv-ciii.

O’Malley, Charles Donald. “Andreas Vesalius54-564 in memoriam.” Medical History, v.8 (964), 99-308.

O’Malley, Charles Donald. Andreas Vesalius ofBrussels, 1514-1564. Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press, 964.

Pettegree, Andrew. The Book in theRenaissance. New Haven: Yale UniversityPress, 00.

Proper, Robert. “Jan Stephan van Calcar –Portraits of the Artist.” Journal of the Historyof Medicine and Allied Sciences, v. 4 (959),59-5.

Richardson, W.F., and J.B. Carman. “OnTranslating Vesalius.” Medical History, v. 38(994), 8-30.

Rocca, Julius. “Anatomy” in: The CambridgeCompanion to Galen. Edited by R.J.Hankinson. Cambridge: University Press,008, p. 4-6.

Rollins, Carl Purington. “Oporinus and thePublication of the Fabrica.” Yale Journal ofBiology and Medicine, v. 6, no. (943), 9-34.

Roth, Moritz. Andreas Vesalius Bruxellensis.Berlin: G. Reimer, 89.

Saunders, John Bertrand de C.M., and CharlesDonald O’Malley. Andreas VesaliusBruxellensis: The Bloodletting Letter of 1539:An Annotated Translation and Study of theEvolution of Vesalius’ Scientific Development.New York: Schuman, 947.

Saunders, John Bertrand de C.M., and CharlesDonald O’Malley. The Illustrations from theWorks of Andreas Vesalius of Brussels.Cleveland and New York: World PublishingCo., 950.

Sigerist, Henry E. “Albanus Torinus and theGerman edition of the Epitome of Vesalius,”Bulletin of the History of Medicine, v. 4 (943),65-666.

Singer, Charles Joseph, and Coleman B. Rabin.A Prelude to Modern Science: Being aDiscussion of the History, Sources, andCircumstances of the “Tabulae anatomicaesex” of Vesalius. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 946.

Siraisi, Nancy G. The Clock and the Mirror:Girolamo Cardano and Renaissance Medicine.Princeton: Princeton University Press, 997.

Siraisi, Nancy G. “Vesalius and the Reading ofGalen’s Teleology.” Renaissance Quarterly, v.50 (997), -37.

Siraisi, Nancy G. History, Medicine, and theTradition of Renaissance Learning. AnnArbor: University of Michigan Press, 007.

Siraisi, Nancy G. “Introduction to Book Two.”Andreas Vesalius The Fabric of the HumanBody: an Annotated Translation of the 543and 555 Editions by Daniel H. Garrison andMalcolm H. Hast. Basel: Karger, 04, p. civ-cix.

Spielmann, Marion H. The Iconography ofAndreas Vesalius (André Vésale), Anatomistand Physician, 1514-1564. London: J. Bale &Danielsson, 95.

Steeno, Omer, and Maurits Biesbrouck.“Stolen and Lost Copies of Vesalius’sFabrica.” Acta medico-historica Adriatica, v. 0(0), 3-36.

Tubbs, R. Shane, and E. George Salter.“Charles Estienne (Carolus Stephanus) (ca.504-564): Physician and Anatomist.”Clinical Anatomy, v. 9 (006), 4-7.

“Vesalius the man.” British Medical Journal, 3September 944, 407-409.

Wear, A., Roger K. French, and Iain M. Lonie.The Medical Renaissance of the SixteenthCentury. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 985.

Wiegand, Willy. “Marginal Notes by thePrinter of the Icones” in: Three VesalianEssays to Accompany the Icones Anatomicaeof 1934. New York: Macmillan, 95, p. 5-4.

7


The woodcut title page to the 1543 edition of De humani corporis fabricaThe redesigned woodcut title page to the 1555 edition of De humani corporis fabrica

The engraved title page of the 1725 edition of Vesalius’s Opera omnia anatomica and chirurgica