HISTORY.] ANATOMY 813 was substituted for that of the human body; and the descriptions of the organs of the latter were too often derived from the former. The obloquy and contempt in which this abuse involved the study of animal anatomy caused it to be neglected, or pursued with indifference, for more than two centuries, during which anatomists confined their descriptions, at least very much, to the parts of the human body. At this period, however, the prejudice against Comparative Anatomy began to subside ; and animal dissection, though not substituted for that of the human body, was employed, as it ought always to have been, to illustrate obscurities, to determine doubts, and to explain difficulties, and, in short, to enlarge and rectify the knowledge of the structure of animal bodies generally. For this revolution in its favour, Comparative Anatomy was in a great measure indebted to the learned societies which were established about this time in the different countries of Europe. Among these, the Royal Society of London, embodied by charter by Charles II. in 1663, and the Academy of Sciences of Paris, founded in 1665 by Colbert, are undoubtedly entitled to the first rank. Though later in establishment, the latter institution was distinguished by making the first great efforts in favour of Comparative Anatomy ; and Perrault, Pecquet, Duverney, and Mery, by the dissections of rare animals obtained from the royal menagerie, speedily supplied valuable materials for the anatomical naturalist. In England, Nehemiah Grew, Edward Tyson, and Samuel Collins cultivated the same department with diligence and success. Grew has left an interesting account of the anatomical peculiarities of the intestinal canal in various animals ; Tyson in the dissection of a porpoise, an opossum, and an ourang outang, adduces some valuable illustrations of the comparative differences between the structure of the human body and that of the lower animals ; Collins has the merit of con ceiving, and executing on an enlarged plan, a comprehensive system, embodying all the information then extant. With the aid of Tyson and his own researches, which were both extensive and accurate, he composed a system of anato mical knowledge in which he not only gives ample and accurate descriptions of the structure of the human body, and the various morbid changes to which the organs are liable, but illustrates the whole by accurate and interesting sketches of the peculiarities of the lower animals. The matter of this work is so excellent that it can only be ascribed to ignorance that it has received so little attention. Though regarded as a compilation, and though indeed much of the human anatomy is derived from Vesalius, it has the advantage of the works published on the Continent at that time, that it embodies most of the valuable facts derived from Malpighi, Willis, and Vieussens. The Com parative Anatomy is almost all original, the result of personal research and dissection ; and the pathological observations, though occasionally tinged with the spirit of the times, show the author to have been endowed with the powers of observation and judicious reflection in no ordinary degree. About this time also we recognise the first attempts to study the minute constitution of the tissues, by the combination of the microscope and the effects of chemical agents. Bone furnished the first instance in which this method was put in use ; and though Gagliardi, who undertook the inquiry, had fallen into some mistakes which it required the observation of Malpighi to rectify, this did not deter Clopton Havers and Nesbitt, in England, and Courtial, Du Hamel, and Delasone, and afterwards Heris- sant, in France, from resuming (the same train of investi gation. The mistakes into which these anatomists fell belong to the imperfect method of inquiry. The facts which they ascertained have been verified by rsccnt experi ment, and constitute no unessential part of our knowledge of the structure of bone. Ten years after the publication of the work of Collins, 1095. Henry Ridley, another English anatomist, distinguished himself by a monograph on the brain, which, though not free from errors, contains, nevertheless, some valuable observa tions. Ridley is the first who distinguishes by name the restiform processes, or the posterior pyramidal eminences. He recognised the figure of the four eminences in the human subject ; he remarked the mammillary bodies ; and he discovered the sinus which passes under his name. Raymond Vieussens, by the publication of his great work Vieussens on neurography in 1684, threw new light on the configura tion and structure of the brain, the spinal chord, and the nerves ; and gave a description of the arrangement and distribution of the latter more precise than heretofore. Of the formation and connections of the sympathetic nerve especially he gave views which have been generally adopted by subsequent anatomists. His new arrangement of the vessels, published in 1705, contains several curious opinions. His observations on the structure of the heart, published in 1706, and enlarged in 1715, exhibit the first correct views of the intimate structure of an organ which afterwards was most fully developed by the labours of Lancisi and Senac. To the same period belong the rival publications of 1685-97. Godfrey Bidloo and William Cowper, the latter of whom, however, stained a reputation otherwise good by publishing as his own the engravings of the former. Cowper further distinguished himself by a minute account of the urethral glands, already known to Columbus and Mery ; a good description of the intestinal glands, discovered by Brunner and Peyer ; and by demonstrating the communication of the arteries and veins of the mesentery. The anatomical genius of Italy, which had slumbered since the death of Malpighi, was destined once more to revive in Lancisi, Valsalva, and his illustrious pupils Santorini and Morgagni. Valsalva especially distinguished himself by his description of the structure of the ear, 1 which, in possessing still greater precision and minuteness than that of Duverney, is valuable in setting the example of rendering anatomy altogether a science of description. Santorini, who was professor at Venice, was no unworthy Santorini. friend of Valsalva and Morgagni. His anatomical observa- tions, which relate to the muscles of the face, the brain, and several of the nerves, the ducts of the lacrymal gland, the nose and its cavities, the larynx, the viscera of the chest and belly, and the organs of generation in the two sexes, furnish beautiful models of essays, distinguished for perspicuity, precision, and novelty, above anything which had then appeared. These observations, indeed, which bear the impress of accurate observation and clear con ception, may be safely compared with any anatomical writings which have appeared since. Those on the brain are particularly interesting. Morgagni, though chiefly Morsagrn. known as a pathological anatomist, did not neglect the healthy structure. His Adversaria, which appeared between 1706 and 1719, and his Epistles, published in 1728, contain a series of observations to rectify the mistakes of previous anatomists, and to determine the characters of the healthy structure of many parts of the human body. Many parts he describes anew, and indicates facts not previously observed. All his remarks show how well he knew what true anatomical description ought to be. In this respect, indeed, the three anatomists now mentioned may be said to have anticipated their contemporaries nearly a century ; for, while other authors were satisfied with giving loose and inaccurate or meagre notices of parts, with much fanciful supposition, Valsalva, Santorini, and Morgagni laboured to determine with precision the ana
tomical characters of the parts which they describe.
