Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 1.djvu/850

Rh 806 ANATOMY [HISTORY. both. In speaking of the intestines he treats first of the rectum, then the colon, the left or sigmoid flexure of which, as well as the transverse arch and its connection with the stomach, he particularly remarks ; then the caecum or monoculus, after this the small intestines in general under the heads of ileum and jejunum, and latterly the duodenum, making in all six bowels. The liver and its vessels are minutely, if not accurately, examined ; and the cava, under the name chilis, a corruption from the Greek KoiX-ij, is treated at length, with the emulgents and kidneys. His anatomy of the heart is wonderfully accurate ; and it is a remarkable fact, which seems to be omitted by all subsequent authors, that his description contains the rudi ments of the circulation of the blood. &quot; Postea vero versus pulmonem est aliud orificium vense arterialis, quse portal sanguinem ad pulmonem a corde ; quia cum pulrno deserviat cordi secundum modum dictum, ut ei recompenset, cor ei transmittit sanguinem per hanc venam, quse vocatur vena arterialis; est vena, quia portat sanguinem, et arterialis, quia habet duas tunicas ; et habet duas tunicas, primo quia vadit ad rnembruin quod existit in continue rnotu, et secundo quia portat sanguinem valde subtilem et choleri- cum.&quot; The merit of these distinctions, however, he after wards destroys by repeating the old assertion that the left ventricle ought to contain spirit or air, which it generates from the blood. His osteology of the skull is erroneous. In his account of the cerebral membranes, though short, he notices the principal characters of the dura mater. He describes shortly the lateral ventricles, with their anterior and posterior cornua, and the choroid plexus as a blood-red substance like a long worm. He then speaks of the third or middle ventricle, and one posterior, which seems to correspond with the fourth ; and describes the infundibulum under the names of lacuna and emboton. In the base of the organ he remarks, first, two mammillary caruncles, the optic nerves, which he reckons the first pair ; the oculo- muscular, which he accounts the second ; the third, which appears to be the sixth of the moderns ; the fourth ; the fifth, evidently the seventh ; a sixth, the nervus vagus ; and a seventh, which is the ninth of the moderns. Not withstanding the misrepresentations into which this early anatomist was betrayed, his book is valuable, and has been illustrated by the successive commentaries of Achillini, Berenger, and Dryander. 1480. Matthew de Gradibus, a native of Gradi, a town in Friuli, near Milan, distinguished himself by composing a series of treatises on the anatomy of various parts of the human body. He is the first who represents the ovaries of the female in the correct light in which they were subsequently regarded by Steno. Objections similar to those already urged in speaking of Mondino apply to another eminent anatomist of those 1495, times. Gabriel de Zerbis, who flourished at Verona towards the conclusion of the 15th century, is celebrated as the author of a system in which he is obviously more .anxious to astonish his readers by the wonders of a verbose &amp;gt;and complicated style than to instruct by precise and faithful Description. In the vanity of his heart he assumed the ^derived his information from the dissection of the human ^ubject, he is not entitled to the merit either of describing truly or of adding to the knowledge previously acquired. He is superior to Mondino, however, in knowing the olfactory nerves. Achillini. Eminent in the history of the science, and more distin- 1463-1512. guished than any of this age in the history of cerebral anatomy, Alexander Achillini of Bologna, the pupil and commentator of Mondino, appeared at the close of the 15th century. Though a follower of the Arabian school, the assiduity with which he cultivated anatomy has rescued his name from the inglorious obscurity in which the Arabian doctors have in general slumbered. He is known in the history of anatomical discovery as the first who described the two tympanal bones, termed malleus and incus. In 1503 he showed that the tarsus consists of seven bones ; he rediscovered the fornix and the infuudi- bulum ; and he was fortunate enough to observe the course of the cerebral cavities into the inferior cornua, and to remark peculiarities to which the anatomists of a future age did not advert. He mentions the orifices of the ducts, afterwards described by Wharton. He knew the ileo-c?ecal valve ; and his description of the duodenum, ileum, and colon shows that he was better acquainted with the site and disposition of these bowels than any of his predecessors or contemporaries. Not long after, the science boasts of one of its most Beveng* distinguished founders. James Berenger of Carpi, in the 1518. Modenese territory, flourished at Bologna at the beginning of the IGth century. In the annals of medicine his name will be remembered not only as the most zealous and eminent in cultivating the anatomy of the human body, but as the first physician who was fortunate enough to calm the alarms of Europe, suffering under the ravages of syphilis, then raging with uncontrollable virulence. In the former character he surpassed both predecessors and contemporaries ; and it was long before the anatomists of the following age could boast of equalling him. His assiduity was indefatigable ; and he declares that he dissected above one hundred human bodies. He is the author of a compendium, of several treatises which he names Introductions (Isagoyce), and of commentaries or. the treatise of Mondiuo, in which he not only rectifies the mistakes of that anatomist, but gives minute and in general accurate anatomical descriptions. He is the first who undertakes a systematic view of the several textures of which the human body is composed ; and in a preliminary commentary he treats successively of the anatomical characters and properties of fat, of mem brane in general (panniculus], of flesh, of nerve, of villus or fibre (filum), of ligament, of sinew or tendon, and of muscle in general. He then proceeds to describe with considerable precision the muscles of the abdomen, and illustrates their site and connections by woodcuts, which, though rude, are spirited, and show that anatomical drawing was in that early age beginning to be understood. In his account of the peritoneum he admits only the intestinal division of that membrane, and is at some pains to prove that Gentilis, who justly admits the muscular division also, is in error. In his account of the intestines he is the first who mentions_the vermiform process of the csecurn ; he remarks the yellow tint communicated to the duodenum by the gall-bladder; and he recognises the opening of the common biliary duct into the duodenum (quidam porus portans choleram). la the account of the stomach he describes the several tissues of which that organ is composed, and which, after Alman- sor, he represents to be three, and a fourth from the peritoneum; and afterwards notices the rugw of its villons surface. He is at considerable pains to explain the organs of generation in both sexes, and gives a long account of the anatomy of the fcetus. He was the first who recognised the larger proportional size of the chest in the male than in the female, and conversely the greater capacity of the female than of the male pelvis. In the larynx he dis covered the two arytenoid cartilages. He gives the first good description of the thymus ; distinguishes the oblique situation of the heart ; describes the pericardium, and maintains the uniform presence of pericardial liquor. He then describes the cavities of the heart ; but perplexes him self, as did all the anatomists of that age, about the spirit supposed to be contained. The aorta he properly makes
 * title of Mediciis Theoricus ; but though, like Mondino, he