Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 1.djvu/846

Rh 802 ANATOMY [HISTORY. mature of tlio nerves, which he made issue from the brain ; and that he discovered lymphatic vessels in the mesentery, first in brute animals, and afterwards, it is said, in man. He appears also to have distinguished the nerves into those of sensation and those of motion. Hero- Of Herophilus it is said that he had extensive anatomical philus. knowledge, acquired by dissecting not only brutes but human bodies. Of these he probably dissecfed more than any of his predecessors or contemporaries. Devoted to the assiduous cultivation of anatomy, he appears to have studied with particular attention those parts which were least understood. He recognised the nature of the pul monary artery, which he denominates arterious vein ; he knew the vessels of the mesentery, and showed that they did not go to the vena portoe, but to certain glandular bodies ; and he first applied the name of twelve-inch or duodenum (SuSeKaSciKTiAos) to that part of the alimentary canal which is next to the stomach. Like Erasistratus, he appears to have studied carefully the configuration of the brain ; and though, like him, he distinguishes the nerves into those of sensation and those of voluntary motion, he acids to them the ligaments and tendons. A tolerable description of the liver by this anatomist is preserved in the writings of Galen. He first applied the name of choroid or vascular membrane to that which is found in the cerebral ventricles ; he knew the straight venous sinus which still bears his name ; and to him the linear furrow at the bottom of the fourth ventricle is indebted for its name of calamus scriptorius. The celebrity of these two great anatomists appears to have thrown into the shade for a long period the names of all other inquirers ; for, among their numerous and rather celebrated successors in the Alexandrian school, it is impossible to recognise a name which is entitled to dis tinction in the history of anatomy. In a chasm so wide it is not uninteresting to find, in one who combined the characters of the greatest orator and philosopher of Rome, the most distinct traces of attention to anatomical know ledge. Cicero, in his treatise De Natura Deorum, in a 44. short sketch of physiology, such as it was taught by Aristotle and his disciples, introduces various anatomical notices, from which the classical reader may form some idea of the state of anatomy at that time. The Roman orator appears to have formed a pretty distinct idea of the shape and connections of the windpipe and lungs; and though he informs his readers that he knows the alimentary canal, he omits the details through motives of delicacy. [n imitation of Aristotle, he talks of the blood being con veyed by the veins (venae), that is, blood-vessels, through the body at large ; and, like Praxagoras, of the air inhaled by the lungs being conveyed through the arteries. Aretasus, though chiefly known as a medical author, makes some observations on the lung and the pleura, maintains the glandular structure of the kidney, and describes the anastomosis or communications of the capil lary extremities of the vena cava with those of the portal vein. Oelsus. The most valuable depository of the anatomical know- 53 B..C. ledge of these times is the work of Celsus, one of the most judicious medical authors of antiquity. He left, indeed, no express anatomical treatise ; but from the introductions to the 4th and 8th books of his work, De Medidna, with incidental remarks in the 7th, the modern reader may form very just ideas of his anatomical attain ments. From these it appears that Celsus was well acquainted with the windpipe and lungs and the heart ; with the difference between the windpipe and oeso phagus (stomachus), which leads to the stomach (ventri- culus) ; and with the shape, situation, and relations of the diaphragm. He enumerates also the principal facts relating 7 A.D. to the situation of the liver, the spleen, the kidneys, and the stomach. He appears, however, to have been unaware of the distinction of duodenum or twelve-inch bowel, already admitted by Herophilus, and represents the stomach as directly connected by means of the pylorus with tho jejunum or upper part of the small intestine. The 7th and 8th books, which are devoted to tho consideration of those diseases which are treated by manual operation, contain sundry anatomical notices necessary to explain the nature of the diseases or mode of treatment. Of these, indeed, the merit is unequal ; and it is not wonderful that the ignorance of the day prevented Celsus from understanding rightly the mechanism of the pathology of hernia. He appears, however, to have formed a tolerably just idea of the mode of cutting into the urinary- bladder ; and even his obstetrical instructions show that his knowledge of the uterus, vagina, and appendages was not contemptible. It is in osteology, however, that the information of Celsus is chiefly conspicuous. He enume rates the sutures and several of the holes of the cranium, and describes at great length the superior and inferior maxillary bones and the teeth. With a good deal of care he describes the vertebrae and the ribs, and gives very briefly the situation and shape of the scapula, humerus, radius, and ulna, and even of the carpal and rnetacarpal bones, and then of the different bones of the pelvis and lower extremities. He had formed a just idea of the articular connections, and is desirous to impress the fact that none is formed without cartilage. From his mention of many minute holes (multa et tenuia foramina), in the recess of the nasal cavities, it is evident that he was acquainted with the perforated plate of the ethmoid bone ; and from saying that the straight part of the auditory canal becomes ilexuous, and terminates in numerous minute cavities (multa et tenuia foramina diducitur), it is inferred by Portal that he knew the semicircular canals. Though tho writings of Celsus show that he cultivated anatomical knowledge, it does not appear that the science was much studied by the Romans ; and there is reason to believe that, after the decay of the school of Alexandria, it languished in neglect and obscurity. It is at least certain that the appearance of Marinus during the reign of Nero is mentioned by authors as an era remarkable for anatomical inquiry, and that this person is distinguished by Galen as the restorer of a branch of knowledge which had been before him suffered to fall into undeserved neglect. From Galen also we learn that Marinus gave an accurate account of the muscles, that he studied particularly the glands, and that he discovered those of the, mesentery-. He fixed the number of nerves at seven ; he observed the palatine nerves, which he rated as the fourth pair; and described as the fifth the auditory and facial, which he regards as one pair, and the hypoglossal as the sixth. Not long after Marinus appeared Ruffus of Ephesus, a Ruffus Greek physician, who in the reign of Trajan was much attached to physiology, and as a means of cultivating this science studied Comparative Anatomy, and made sundry experiments on living animals. Of the anatomical writings of this author there remains only a list or catalogue of names of different regions and parts of the animal body. He appears, however, to 1 have directed attention particu larly to the tortuous course of the uterine vessels, and to have recognised even at this early period the Fallopian tube. He distinguishes the nerves into those of sensation and those of motion. He knew the recurrent nerve. His name is further associated with the ancient experiment of compressing in the situation of the carotid arteries the pneumogastric nerve, and thereby inducing insensibility and loss of voice. Of all the authors of antiquity, however, none possesses