دورية أكاديمية
[Vesalius and De humani corporis fabrica: Galen's errors and the change of anatomy in the sixteenth century].
| العنوان: | [Vesalius and De humani corporis fabrica: Galen's errors and the change of anatomy in the sixteenth century]. |
|---|---|
| عنوان ترانسليتريتد: | Vesalius ja De humani corporis fabrica: Galenoksen erehdykset ja anatomian murros 1500-luvulla. |
| المؤلفون: | Joutsivuo T |
| المصدر: | Hippokrates (Helsinki, Finland) [Hippokrates (Helsinki)] 1997, pp. 98-112. |
| نوع المنشور: | Biography; Historical Article; Journal Article; Portrait |
| اللغة: | Finnish |
| بيانات الدورية: | Publisher: Suomen Laaketieteen Historian Seura Country of Publication: Finland NLM ID: 9305624 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Print ISSN: 0781-5859 (Print) Linking ISSN: 07815859 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Hippokrates (Helsinki) |
| أسماء مطبوعة: | Publication: Helsinki : Suomen Laaketieteen Historian Seura Original Publication: Helsinki : Suomen lääketieteen historian seura, 1984- |
| مواضيع طبية MeSH: | Anatomy/*history , Dissection/*history, Europe ; Greek World ; History, Ancient ; History, Early Modern 1451-1600 ; History, Medieval |
| Personal Name as Subject: | Galen; Vesalius A |
| مستخلص: | In medieval universities, human dissections were in general unusual, and public dissections were moreover strictly standardized. At public anatomical lessons three persons were needed to perform an autopsy. The Lector (a lecturer) read and commented on an authoritative text, which usually was Mondino dei Liuzzi's Anatomy. The Ostensor pointed out to the sector, normally a surgeon or a barber, the part of the body to be dissected. The procedure followed the text, the truth of which was not, questioned, and what was seen in a dissected body only confirmed what was stated in the text. In his De Humani corporis fabrica Vesalius criticized both the medieval method of dissection and the dependence of anatomy on authoritative texts. Vesalius wanted to unite the roles of lector, ostensor and sector. In Vesalius's view, a lecturer on anatomy must be able to dissect a cadaver himself and trust his own eyes more than authoritative text. Relying on his own eyes Vesalius gradually began to doubt the truth of various anatomical statements found in Galen's anatomical treatises. Galen (ca. 130-200) was the greatest medical authority during the Renaissance, and he was regarded as almost infallible. In Galen's person culminated the idealism of Renaissance humanism, according to which medical truth rested solely on ancient, especially Greek, heritage. The primary task of the medical humanist was to return to the ideas of the ancients. Vesalius's attitude toward this idealism was somewhat ambiguous. On one hand he found antique evidence for the view that anatomy should be based on one's own experience achieved by dissection of human cadavers. On the other hand he was forced to question the infallibility of Galen. Vesalius solved the discrepancy between the proof of his own eyes and the humanistic ideal by pointing out that anatomy had occupied a much higher level before Galen, in ancient Alexandria, and that Galen in his anatomical works had relied too much on animal dissection.... |
| تواريخ الأحداث: | Date Created: 19970101 Date Completed: 19971230 Latest Revision: 20181201 |
| رمز التحديث: | 20231215 |
| PMID: | 11625189 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | MEDLINE |
| تدمد: | 0781-5859 |
|---|