Civility, Comportment, and the Anatomy Theater: Girolamo Fabrici and His Medical Students in Renaissance Padua Author(s): Cynthia Klestinec Reviewed work(s): Source: Renaissance Quarterly, Vol. 60, No. 2 (Summer 2007), pp. 434-463 Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Renaissance Society of America Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1353/ren.2007.0225 . Accessed: 11/01/2012 15:57 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The University of Chicago Press and Renaissance Society of America are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Renaissance Quarterly. http://www.jstor.org Civility, Comportment, and the Anatomy Theater: Girolamo Fabrici and His Medical Students in Renaissance Padua* by CYNTHIA KLESTINEC Publicanatomieshavebeencharacterizedascarnivalesqueevents:liketheCarnival,theytook place in January and February and celebrated bodily existence. However, in late sixteenth- century Padua and in its famous anatomy theater, the annual, public anatomy was a formal, ceremonialevent.GirolamoFabrici,theleadinganatomist,gaveaphilosophicalpresentationof hisresearch,apresentationorganizedbytopicratherthanbythegradualdissectionofcorpses.For medicalstudents,theannualanatomyandthetheateritselfencouragedsilence,obedience,and docility, reinforcing the virtues of civility that permeated the late humanist environment of RenaissancePadua. 1. INTRODUCTION Between January and April 1590, a transalpine student in Padua wrote to the Riformatori dello studio, a group of two to four magistrates appointedbytheVenetianSenatetooverseetheactivitiesoftheuniversity. In his letter, he requests more opportunities to study anatomy.1 The an- nual,publicanatomydemonstration,heexplains,wasa“mostcivil”event; itraisedthe“honorandfame”notonlyofhistransalpinenationbutofthe entire university.2 He then draws attention to private dissection as a nec- essary exercise in the study of “particulars.”3 While he goes on to lament *ThisessayisanextensionofapaperpresentedattheUSC-Huntingtonsymposium on early modern anatomies, November 2006. In addition to the anonymous reviewers, I wishtothankthesymposiumparticipants,MaryFissell,AnitaGuerrini,DeborahHarkness, andKatharinePark.TheresearchforthisstudywasfundedbytheGladysKriebleDelmas Foundation,theHuntingtonLibrary,andtheNationalEndowmentfortheHumanities.All translationsaremyownexceptwherenoted. 1Epistolariodellanazioneartisti,1565–1647,n.476–77:Epistolaritedeschi,Archivio AnticoUniversitàdiPadova(AAUP),January–April1590,82–83. 2Ibid.: “la publica Anatomia con nostro grandiss. civile et non senza singular honor, fama,etaugmentationedetuttovostroillustriss.Studio.”Astheyhadearlierandelsewhere, studentsmatriculatedintospecificnationsattheuniversity.Thesenationsweregeographi- cally designated and in Padua included cisalpine and transalpine areas. On the student nationsinBolognaandPadua,seeKibre,3–64,116–22;onforeignstudentsinPadua,see Fedalto,271–78. 3Epistolario della nazione artisti, 1565–1647, n. 476–77, Epistolari tedeschi, AAUP: Anonymous,January–April1590,82–83:“chesemprehannohavutocommodamdiesser- citarsiliannipassatiemolteprivateetparticulariAnatomie.” RenaissanceQuarterly60(2007):434–463 [434] CIVILITY AND THE ANATOMY THEATER 435 that the public event was frequently postponed and the private exercises were too infrequently conducted, he characterizes the public anatomy demonstration in terms of civility, honor, and fame. This descriptive triad hints at the formality that would come to define the Paduan tradition of public anatomy and to distinguish it from its European and early modern counterparts. Influenced by the work of Mikhail Bakhtin, current scholarship has emphasized the relationship between public anatomies and carnivalesque celebrationsofcorporeality.4Publicanatomies,thestorygoes,weresitesof disruption, raucous outburst, and bawdy display. These events revealed potentially subversive reactions to the death and violence that dissection would seem to demand. This account, now suspiciously universal, derives from the particular case of Bologna and the anatomical practices and procedures at its university. In her classic study, Giovanna Ferrari notes that in Bologna by the 1640s, the annual anatomy demonstration and the Carnival overlapped: both occurred in the winter months; more impor- tantly, spectators came to the anatomy theater wearing carnival masks.5 This conflation, Ferrari goes on to explain, was intentional: the administration was aware that fewer foreign students were coming to the university—matriculationlevelswereindecline,severelyby1640—and to advertise both the new anatomy theater (ca. 1638) and the institutional innovation it heralded, the administration promoted the association be- tween the annual public anatomy and the Carnival.6 In Padua, however, the tradition of public anatomy evolved under a different set of circumstances. The number of foreign students did not begin to decline rapidly until the first decades of the seventeenth century, long after the anatomy theater was built and in regular use.7 Stable matriculation patterns and the holding of the annual anatomy demonstra- tioninthewintermonthsbeforetheCarnivalbeganmeantthatprofessors, administrators,andstudentsattachedadifferentsetofideastotheanatomy theater:thesewereorganizedaroundtheimportanceofnaturalphilosophy 4FollowingFoucault,3–72;Sawday,54–84,providesanaccountofanatomyinrela- tion to penal codes and infamy; Ferrari, 50–106, offers a richly historical reading of Bologna’sanatomytheaterinrelationtotheCarnival.Mostrecently,Lazzeriniprovidesan accountofPisanpracticesthatincludestheanatomydemonstrationaswellastheritualof burial.OnCarnival,seeBakhtin,4–41. 5Ferrari,52. 6Ibid.,74–82. 7ThedangeroftheCounter-Reformationtoforeignstudentsdevelopedmoreslowlyin PaduathaninBologna.Forthisreason,Paduacontinuedtoattractforeignstudents:Kagan; Saibante,Vivarini,andVoghera. 436 RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY andthecivicrecognitionthatthestudyofanatomyreceived.InPadua,the annual anatomy demonstration was not explicitly — or implicitly — linked to the annual events of the Carnival or to its ritualized celebration ofthebody.Inthewordsofthestudentquotedabove,itwasa“mostcivil” event. The Paduan tradition of anatomy was shaped by a number of factors: thecleardistinctionbetweenpublicdemonstrationsandprivatedissections, as well as steady matriculation, institutional support, the research agenda, and the established reputation of the leading anatomist, Girolamo Fabrici (Hieronymus Fabricius of Aquapendente, 1533–1619) and the construc- tion of the permanent anatomy theater (1594–95). Each factor played a vital role in the evolution of the public anatomy demonstration and its intellectual and cultural import. This essay focuses on the research and pedagogical habits of Fabrici, and on the behavior required of medical studentsattheanatomydemonstrationand,eventually,insidetheanatomy theater. It shows first that the natural-philosophical impulses of Fabrici connected the study of anatomy to the wider pedagogical and humanist cultureoftheuniversity;and,secondly,thattheanatomytheaterhelpedto endorsethecodesofcivilitythatpermeatedthelatehumanistenvironment of Renaissance Padua. Fabriciunderstoodanatomyasadomainofresearch,differentfromthe practice and refinement of surgical techniques. His research developed the Aristoteliantopicsofmotion,sensation,digestion,respiration,andgenera- tion. For example, inside the anatomy theater, he would isolate the organs of the senses and in the course of his demonstration, treat only them. Moldingtheannualpublicdemonstrationaroundhisresearch,heusedthe public forum to explore the connections between anatomy and natural philosophy.8 Under Fabrici’s guidance, the anatomy demonstration focused on the philosophical dimensions of anatomy rather than solely on the physical features and dissection of the corpse. Fabrici did not organize the demon- stration around the gradual process of dissection, the opening of multiple cadavers and animals. Instead, he considered the initial question — How arestructuresshaped?—inordertoexplorethemoreimportantquestion: Why are structures shaped as they are? If the first question could be answered relatively quickly and descriptively, the second question took longertoanswer,foritrequiredateleologicalunderstandingofnatureand a sophisticated system of causal explanation that incorporated aspects of 8Carlino, 3–4, distinguishes between public and private dissections in terms of cer- emonial and didactic ones. This essay argues that the ceremonial features of the public anatomywerealsodidactic. CIVILITY AND THE ANATOMY THEATER 437 material composition, function, form, and purpose. It was this second questionwhichoccupiedAristotle,excitedFabrici,andbecamethesubject matter of the public anatomy demonstration. The anatomy theater became a place for Fabrici to develop and to publicize his innovative research on the philosophical causes (rather than physical structures) of anatomy. For his students as well, the demonstration was defined not by manual activity but rather by philo- sophical weight — that is, not by a physicality that might bleed into the Carnival season but rather by conceptual rigor. This distinction, however, ledstudentstoreconsidertheanatomydemonstrationasanintegralpartof their wider university education. They associated it with natural philoso- phy. As we shall see, once it took place in the specialized theater, students began to see the public demonstration as a civic event. They called atten- tiontotheirpresenceinthetheaterinattemptstoaugmenttheirreputation attheuniversityandinthewidercontextoftheVenetianRepublic.Inside the anatomy theater, medical students became keenly aware of their be- havior and of the newfound virtue of silence.9 Tracing the late sixteenth-century history of anatomy from the per- spective of the students enables us to characterize the growing significance of the anatomy demonstration and the anatomy theater. While the anatomy theater helped to solidify the boundary between anatomy and surgery,italsobecameaplacewhereknowledgewascreatedandpresented rather than disputed, where hearing the presentation was as important, if not more important, than seeing the dissected specimens. The theater allowed the study of anatomy, now more clearly weighted toward the philosophical, to intersect boldly with other features of the university and of the students’ education. It displayed civic importance, and it reinforced the virtues of silence and docility that were then emerging in the late humanist environment of the university. In 1590, when the student re- marked on the great civility of the anatomy demonstration, he implicitly recognizedthecivilizingrolethattheanatomytheaterwouldcometoplay. 2. UNIVERSITY ANATOMY Throughout the sixteenth century, the academic study of anatomy took place in both public and private venues. The public anatomy demonstra- tionwasofferedonceayear,privatedissectionsmorefrequentlyduringthe 9In1590,inalettertotheRiformatoridellostudio,VittorioMerulliodaSaxoferrato, the Vice-Rector of the Artisti students, acknowledged that alternative lessons or private anatomieswere“moreuseful”thanthepublicdemonstrations.Theletteristranscribedin Sterzi,19:74–75. 438 RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY academic year. Before 1595, when the anatomy theater was in use, public and private dissections included disputation: students tended to dispute points more frequently in private, professors in public.10 But there were many kinds of exchange between the public and the private. In the early sixteenth century, public demonstrations of anatomy were given as intro- ductions to inexperienced students. For example, Berengario da Carpi (ca. 1460–1530) called the public demonstration a common anatomy, signal- ing its introductory function; in contrast, he preferred the private demonstration because he liked to emphasize the importance of sight and touch and to develop a specialized understanding of human anatomy from human corpses, animal remains, and vivisected animals.11 Although Andreas Vesalius (1514–64) argued in the 1540s that the public demon- strationshouldincludehands-onpractice,participation,anddisputation,it was the private dissection that eventually developed into a venue for these features and the pursuit of research and specialized knowledge.12 As one might expect, private dissections gave professors a chance to pursue anatomical particulars as well as anomalies. These were subjects for research.Privatedissectionsalsoaffordedstudentsaneducationnotonlyin particulars but also in the manual techniques of dissection. In university halls, hospital rooms, and pharmacies, students would learn to dissect human and animal corpses in various stages of decay, and studying mus- culatureandbones,toidentifyandsetfractures.13Insimilarvenues,lessons on general surgery were offered and, though less frequent, they too reinforced the practical nature of anatomical knowledge. Students appre- ciatedtheselessonsasmuchfortheirpracticalorientationasforthechance to participate in them by dissecting specimens and holding, touching, and asking questions about the dissected parts.14 A letter from April 1590 praisedthestudentJohannesConradusZinnforhishandiworkandforhis ability to “talk familiarly about surgical operations.”15 Another letter from June 1597 praised Johannes Richter for pursuing practical medicine, 10For an example of a formal disputation during an anatomy demonstration, see Falloppio,86v–87r. 11French,96–98. 12SeeVesalius,1543,dedicationtoCharlesV.Evenearlier,Vesaliusmadethispoint inhisdemonstrationsinBologna.SeeHeseler,290–93. 13Carlino,188–94. 14Klestinec,394–99. 15Epistolariodellanazioneartisti,1565–1647,n.476–77,Epistolaritedeschi,AAUP: Anonymous, letter on Johann Conradus Zinn (Lectori Salutem), April 1590, 119r–120v: “publicisacprivatisadministrationibusanatomicis;herbariordisquisitionibusgravis;opera- tionibuschirurgicis...familianterconversabatur;etquemismanumoperediligebatur.” CIVILITY AND THE ANATOMY THEATER 439 debatingtheartsofmedicine,and“devotinghimselftothelaboriouswork of the administrations of anatomy and surgery.”16 Richter’s handiwork, moreover, “caused the eyes of all to turn on him” and earned him the sup- port of the transalpine nation “one by one and as a whole.”17 Especially for students, the key to anatomical knowledge was located in the manual and practical activities associated with private dissection and surgical training. While the practical dimensions of anatomy remained popular with some students, a debate between the practical and natural-philosophical orientation of anatomical knowledge emerged.18 This debate is best exem- plifiedintherivalrybetweenGiulioCasseri(IuliusCasserius,1561–1619) and Fabrici. As early as 1583 the academic roster distinguished lessons on anatomy from those on surgery and made Fabrici responsible for both; in practice, however, Casseri taught the extraordinary — that is, less eminent — lessons in surgery.19 Holding a post at the hospital of San Francesco, Casseri came to the study of anatomy with practical concerns and practical expertise.20 It was Fabrici, Casseri’s former teacher and later 16Epistolariodellanazioneartisti,1565–1647,n.476–77,Epistolaritedeschi,AAUP: Anonymous,letterJohannesRichterOppaviensis,June1597,141r–142v:“IsenimScholar ExcellentiumVirorumfrequentando,praximmedicamsectando,quaequevelintellectuvel visu dignior occurrerunt diligenter persequendo, de gravioribus artis medicae controversii saepe cum aliis dissertando, demum anatomicis et chirurgias administrationibus operam indefessamnavando,tantumingeniiatqueeruditionisfamamacquisivitutomniumoculos animosque mi se converteret et singulare nationis Germanicae ornamentum a plurimis haberetur.” As Bylebyl, 350–51, notes, clinicians, surgeons, and anatomists could be one andthesame,andmedicalstudents,especiallyforeignstudents,soughtpracticaltrainingin clinicaldiagnosisaswellassurgery. 17Epistolariodellanazioneartisti,1565–1647,n.476–77,Epistolaritedeschi,AAUP: Anonymous,letterJohannesRichterOppaviensis,June1597,141r–142v. 18French, 232–38, distinguishes between philosophical and medical (sometimes me- chanical)anatomy.WilliamHarvey,followingFabrici,pursuedtheformer,whileParisian anatomistssuchasJeanRiolanpursuedthelatter. 19On 5 February 1583, Fabrici was given a salary of 400 fiorini for the annual demonstrationandanadditional200forgenerallessonsinsurgery.Fromthe1580stothe firstdecadeofthesixteenthcentury,Casseriofferedlessonsonsurgery,whichfurtherfueled therivalrybetweenthetwo:seeSterzi.Aswithprivatedissections,lessonsonsurgerywere frequently noted for their attention to cutting and to the techniques of dissection: see RaccoltaMinato,n.56,AAUP. 20Students often criticized the annual anatomy demonstrations for failing to include lessons on dissection per se, and on surgery and a general (rather than comprehensive) treatmentofhumananatomy.TheActanationisgermanicaeincludemultiplereferencesto medical students’ dissatisfaction with Fabrici and their satisfaction with Casseri as well as minor anatomists such as Paolo Galeotto (Paulus Galeotus). For Fabrici’s tumultuous relationshipwithhisstudents,seeFavaro,120–25;onCasseri,seeSterzi;forthestudents’ responsestoFabrici,Casseri,andGaleotto,seeKlestinec,375–412. 440 RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY rival, who taught the ordinary — that is, more eminent — lessons in anatomy. Well-established and highly regarded at the university, Fabrici took a special interest in the philosophical dimensions of anatomy, using the venue of the anatomy demonstration as a vehicle for his research. The ensuing rivalry between these two anatomists encouraged Fabrici to sharpenthedifferencesbetweensurgeryandresearch-orientedanatomyand to maintain control over the annual, public anatomy demonstration. Using the public forum of the demonstration to present his research, Fabriciredefinedtheusesofpublicandprivateanatomicalexercises.Rather than conduct and discuss his research in private, by the 1590s Fabrici had begun to pursue his research in the more public anatomy demonstra- tion. His research, as Andrew Cunningham has explained, depended on Aristotle’s studies of nature and animals: that is, on Aristotelian methods and topics.21 Fabrici extended the study of anatomy from the scrutiny of human, structural anatomy to a survey of structures present, present in alteredform,orabsentinarangeofanimals.22Findingthesedifferences,he would explain them as essential or as environmentally conditioned. From essential differences between animals, he would formulate the incidence of apart,thewayitoccurredinarangeofanimals,withrespecttothewhole animal. For Fabrici, the whole animal was a composite formed from his many inquiries. His method isolated structures, identified their functions, and explored their uses and usefulness. In his work on vision, De visione, he explains this method and its textual origins.23 Drawing on Aristotle’s On the Soul and On Generation and on Galen’s On the Natural Faculties, hedefinesactionasthefunctionofthepartforitselfandfortheorganism; drawing on Galen’s On the Uses of the Parts and on Aristotle’s Parts of Animals, he defines use as the explanation of why a part exists as it does in the animals surveyed, including humans. As this suggests, Fabrici’s explanations were increasingly general and related to ideas of the organic soul. The organic soul was the principle responsible for the life functions of the body, the vital operations of digestion, respiration, and reproduction, as well as sensation.24 With this understanding of soul, Fabrici organized his research topics to follow Aristotle’s course of study. Where Aristotle studied the rational soul, Fabrici produced an account of speech; where Aristotle studied the motile soul, Fabrici produced a work on locomotion; 21Cunningham,1985;Cunningham,1997,167–90. 22Cunningham,1997,172–80. 23Fabrici,1738,dedicationtoDevisione(originallypublishedin1600). 24Park,1988,464–73. CIVILITY AND THE ANATOMY THEATER 441 where Aristotle developed his ideas on the sensitive soul, Fabrici wrote on vision and hearing; and from Aristotle’s studies of the vegetative soul, Fabrici published on digestion, respiration, and generation.25 The topical nature of Fabrici’s inquiry was also reflected in the topical organization of his demonstrations. In contrast to Berengario da Carpi, who called the annual demonstration common because it was meant to be a general intro- duction to anatomy, Fabrici called his annual demonstrations exact: they were topical rather than comprehensive; they were limited to the organs and structures associated with a specific topic.26 Fabriciwasnottroubledbytheissueofcomprehensiveness—theneed toprovideageneralintroductiontoanatomy—ortheneedtoletstudents see and touch the anatomical parts and practice the techniques of dissec- tion.Thesewereallfeaturesoftheprivatedissectionandthesurgerylesson: they were associated with Casseri’s teaching. In November 1597, the aca- demic roster clarified this set of distinctions, assigning Fabrici the more eminent chair in anatomy and surgery but noting that anatomy was supe- rior to surgery by virtue of its philosophical basis.27 Fabrici’sphilosophicalapproachtoanatomywasfirmlygroundedinits Paduan environment, where Jacopo Zabarella (1533–89) and Cesare Cremonini(1550–1631),amongothers,intensifiedthestudyofAristotle’s works. From the perspective of the institution and the hierarchy of disci- plines, Fabrici’s program elevated the study of anatomy to a philosophical inquiry. It allowed Fabrici to respond to the idea that anatomy was only a tool for collecting particulars. Giving voice to this critique, Cremonini 25Ibid. 26InOctober1595,Fabricipromisedtogiveacompletedemonstration,“anexplication of the parts, actions, and uses,” where actions and uses point directly to his interest in Aristoteliannaturalphilosophy:seeActanationisgermanica(hereaftercitedasActa,followed by the year), 1595–96: “Octobris 29 vocata Universitas in aulam Capitanei ob Rotuli, ut vocant,lectionumpraesentisannipublicationem;quodveroRectoresmultisessentdistricti negotiis, nihil actum. Incepere tunc ad Ixbris diem tertium lectiones maximo scholarium applausuetconcursu,inDoctoribusnilnisisummareperiebaturdiligentia,praesertimExc. Aquapendente,quiasectionestatimexordiumsumens,huicacpartiumactionumetutili- tatumexplicationiexactissimetotahyemeoperamsedaturumnonsemelpollicebatur.” 27Acta, 1597: “Volo hic Eccellentissimum Aquapendentem, non tam perstringere quamexcusare,siquidemcaussamquodbisinRotuloposituscernituraliquisposcerepossit: cupiebatissimpliciter(adexemplum,utaiunt,Fallopii)Philosophisetiamprimariisprae- poni; verum aegre ferentibus iis, ipsos quod Chirurgus antecedere deberet, Syndicus ei proximum ab illis locum assignare statuebat, quo tamen non contentus senex, maiorem Syndicocuraminiicit,quiutomnibusgratificaretur,tandemsimultatemistamsicdirimit, utFabriciumceleberrimumutAnatomicumscilicetsuperiorem,utiChirurgumveroinfe- rioremPhilosophiaeantesignanisfecerit.” 442 RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY wrote:“Itisforthefooltocollecttrivia,notforthephilosophicalgenius.”28 Whereaspreviousanatomists—suchasVesalius,RealdoColumbo(1516– 59),andGabrieleFalloppio(1523–63)—soughttoisolatenewstructures, Fabrici sought to extend a set of normative structures associated with a topicbyprovidingaphilosophicallysubstantialaccountoftheminrelation to the whole animal. While the Renaissance university privileged abstract, conceptual knowledge over its manual or technical counterpart, equally important was the legitimacy it lent to natural philosophical endeavors, a legitimacy that often translated into tangible support for professors who pursued these endeavors. It is a mark of Fabrici’s success that in 1594–95 the university built a special anatomy theater that had Fabrici’s name engraved above the entrance. For Fabrici, novelty resided in the conceptual framework he brought from Aristotle to the study of anatomy. Both initiates and experienced studentsweremeanttofocusonhearingthedemonstrationofhisresearch rather than seeing the anatomical particulars. As Cremonini said to the studentson27January1591,itwasnotenoughtoparrotthemottosKnow thyselfandManisamicrocosm.29Studentshadtorevealtheirknowledgeof thedeeperstructuresofphilosophicalthoughtmademanifestbysuchdicta. Fabrici’s philosophical program and the anatomy theater, as it turns out, could assist that enterprise. 3. THE ANATOMY THEATER The didactic agendas of Casseri and Fabrici reveal several aspects of the specialized field of anatomical inquiry in the late sixteenth century. Where Casseri’s private dissections and lessons on surgery made tactile and visual modes of apprehension central to the students’ education in practical anatomy, Fabrici’s demonstrations tended to emphasize the auditory ap- prehensionofphilosophicalanatomy.Insidetheanatomytheater,students listenedtohiscausalexplanationsandcontemplatedwhattheseventeenth- century chronicler, Jacopo Filippo Tomasini (1595–1655) called “the mysteriesofnature.”30ThepermanentanatomytheaterenhancedFabrici’s philosophical program by separating the preparatory dissection from the demonstration; coincident with this separation, the theater encouraged good, orderly behavior as well as silence from the medical students. In the far right chamber of Palazzo del Bò, the anatomy theater was 28Bylebyl,363,n.128;Cremonini,1627,50,beginshiscritique. 29Cremonini,1948,13–43. 30Tomasini,78:“naturaearcana.”