DUNCHURCH, COW, AND CALF.
To the Editor.
Sir,—I am confidently assured, that the following coincidences really occur. You may not perhaps deem them unworthy of the very small space they will occupy in your amusing columns, of which I have ever been a constant reader. T. R.
At Dunchurch, near Coventry, is an inn, or public-house, called the Dun Cow, which supplies its landlord with the milk of existence. He is actually named Duncalf; the product of his barrels may be, therefore, not unaptly termed,—mother’s milk.
Discoveries
OF THE
ANCIENTS AND MODERNS.
No. XIV.
The Circulation of the Blood, &c.
Two thousand years have elapsed since the time of Hippocrates, and there has scarcely been added a new aphorism to those of that great man, notwithstanding all the care and application of so many ingenious men as have since studied medicine.
There exist evident proofs that Hippocrates was acquainted with the circulation of the blood. Almelooven, in vindication of this father of medicine not having more amply treated of this subject in his works, assigns this reason, that Hippocrates having many other important matters to discuss, judged that to enlarge upon what was so well known, and had been so well explained by others, was as needless as it would have been to have written an Iliad after Homer. It is less requisite here to cite passages as proofs of Hippocrates’s knowledge on this vital principle in the animal economy, than to state the fact of his acquaintance with it. Briefly it may suffice to mention, that Hippocrates compares the course of rivers, which return to their sources in an unaccountable and extraordinary manner, to the circulation of the blood. He says, that “when the bile enters into the blood it breaks its consistence, and disorders its regular course.” He compares the admirable mechanism of the blood “to clues of thread, whose filaments overlap each other;” and he says, that “in the body it performs just such a circuit, always terminating where it began.”
Mr. Dutens is of opinion that Plato, Aristotle, Julius Pollux, Apuleius, and other ancients, treat the circulation of the blood as well known in their time. To that end he cites passages from their writings, and proceeds to affirm, that what reduces to a very small degree the honour of Harvey’s claim to the discovery is, that Servetus had treated of it very distinctly before him, in the fifth part of his book De Christianismi Restitutione; a work so very scarce, that there are but few who can boast of having seen it in print. Mr. Wotton, in his Reflections upon the Ancients and Moderns, cites this passage of Servetus entire. In this passage Servetus distinguishes three sorts of spirits in the human body, and says that blood, “which he calls a vital spirit, is dispersed through the body by the anastomosis, or mutual insertion of two vessels, at their extremities, into one another.” Here it deserves observation, that Servetus is the first who employed that term to express the communication between the veins and arteries. He makes “the expanded air in the lungs contribute to the formation of blood, which comes to them from the right ventricle of the heart, by the canal of the pulmonary artery.” He says, that “the blood is there refined and perfected by the action of the air, which subtilises it and blends itself with that vital spirit, which the expanded heart then receives as a fluid proper to carry life every where.” He maintains that “this conveyance and manner of preparing the blood in the lungs is evident from the junction of the veins with the arteries in this viscera.” And he concludes with saying, that “the heart having received the blood thus prepared by the lungs sends it forth again by the artery of its left ventricle, called the aorta, which distributes it into all parts of the body.” Andreas Cesalpinus, who lived likewise in the sixteenth century, has two passages which completely contain all that we know about the circulation of the blood. He explains at length “how the blood, gushing from the right ventricle of the heart through the pulmonary artery to pass into the lungs, enters anastomosically into the pulmonary veins, to be conveyed to the left ventricle of the heart, and afterwards distributed by the aorta into all parts of the body.” Let it be remarked, that, according to Boerhaave, the first edition of Cesalpin’s book was at Venice in 1571; that is, almost sixty years before Harvey’s work appeared, who studied at Padua, which is not far from Venice; and spent a considerable part of his time there.
Johannes Leonicenus says, that the famous Paul Sarpi, otherwise known by the name of Father Paul, was he who discovered the circulation of the blood, and first discerned “the valves of the veins, which, like the suckers of a pump, open to let the blood pass, but shut to prevent its return;” and that he communicated this secret to Fabricius ab Aquapendente, professor of medicine at Padoua in the sixteenth century, and successor to Fallopius, who discovered it to Harvey, at that time studying physic under him in the university of Padoua.
SERVETUS.
His Books—Christianismi Restitutio—De Trinitate Erroribus—De Trinitate Dialogorum.
Mr. Dutens, in the course of his remarks on Servetus’s discourse concerning the circulation of the blood, observes as follows:—
“Servetus published on this subject two different books. That for which he was burnt at Geneva, in 1553, is entitled Christianismi Restitutio, and had been printed but a month before his death. The care they took to burn all the copies of it at Vienne in Dauphiny, at Geneva, and at Frankfort, rendered it a book of the greatest scarcity. Mention is made of one copy of it in the catalogue of Mr. de Boze’s books, p. 40, which has been regarded as the only one extant. I have had in my hands a surreptitious copy of it, published at London, which formerly belonged to Dr. Friend; in the 143d, 144th, and 145th pages of which occurs the passage (on the circulation.) The book is in quarto, but without the name of the place where it was printed, or the time when, and is incomplete, the bishop of London having put a stop to the impression, which, if I mistake not, was about the year 1730. Care should be taken not to confound this with another work of his, printed in 12mo. in 1531, without mention of the place where, but supposed to be at Lyons. It is entitled De Trinitatis Erroribus Libri Septem, per Michaelem Serveto, alias Reves, ab Aragonia Hispanum; and there is along with it another treatise, printed in 1532, entitled Dialogorum de Trinitate, Lib. 2. de Justitia Regni Christi, Capitula 4. per Michaelem Serveto, alias Reves, ab Aragonià Hispanum. This last, which is very scarce, and sold once for one hundred pistoles, (that is 40l. sterl.) is in the library of the duke of Roxburgh at London, where I have seen it, but it contains not the passage referred to, which is only to be met with in the corrected and enlarged edition of that work, published in 1553, and entitled Christianismi Restitutio.”
Dr. Sigmond, in a recent work, entitled “The Unnoticed Theories of Servetus,” speaks of a Life of Servetus in the Historical Dictionary;[502] another, ascribed to M. de la Roche, in the “Bibliothèque Angloise,” with extracts relating to Servetus’s Theory of the Circulation of the Blood; and a third, by M. D’Artigny, in the “Mémoires des Hommes Illustres,” who extracted the history of the trial from the archives of the archbishop of Vienne in Dauphine. “And I have lately read with considerable pleasure,” says Dr. Sigmond, “an Apology for the Life of Servetus, by Richard Wright; not because he adds any thing to our previous knowledge of his life and conduct, but that a spirit of candour and liberality entitles the volume to much consideration. He has evidently not met with the Christianismi Restitutio.”
In relation to this latter work by Servetus, Dr. Sigmond says, “The late Dr. Sims, for many years president of the Medical Society of London, bequeathed to me his copy of Servetus, to which he has prefixed the following note:—‘The fate of this work has been not a little singular; all the copies, except one, were burned along with the author by the implacable Calvin. This copy was secreted by D. Colladon, one of the judges. After passing through the library of the landgrave of Hesse Cassel, it came into the hands of Dr. Mead, who endeavoured to give a quarto edition of it; but before it was nearly completed, it was seized by John Kent, messenger of the press, and William Squire, messenger in ordinary, on the 29th of May, 1723, at the instance of Dr. Gibson, bishop of London, and burnt, a very few copies excepted. The late duke de Valliere gave near 400 guineas for this copy, and at his sale it brought 3810 livres. It contains the first account of the circulation of the blood, above 70 years before the immortal Harvey published his discovery.’”
“In justice to the memory of my late valued friend,” says Dr. Sigmond, “I must state my conviction that this copy is not the original one; at the same time, I firmly believe he imagined it to be that which he has described. Yet he was well known as an accurate man, as a judicious collector of books: and, indeed, to him is the Medical Society of London indebted for its valuable and admirable library.” Dr. Sigmond’s correction of Dr. Sims’s note is substantial; but it may be corrected still further. Dr. Sims mistook as to the book having brought 3810 livres at the duke de Valliere’s sale. The duke gave that sum for the book at the sale of M. Gaignat in 1769, and when the duke’s library was sold in 1784, it produced 4120 livres. There is a particular account of it in the catalogue of that collection, by De Bure, tom. i. p. 289. That copy has hitherto been deemed unique. Is Dr. Sigmond’s another copy of Servetus’s own edition?
Dr. Sigmond’s own work, printed last year, is itself scarce, in consequence of having been suppressed or withdrawn from publication.[503] This circumstance, and the curiosity of its purpose, may render an exemplifying extract from it agreeable:—
“I have quoted,” says Dr. S., “the whole of Servetus’s theories verbatim. Those that relate to the phenomena of mind, as produced by the brain, will at this time have an additional interest, when Gall and Spurzheim have attracted the attention of philosophers to the subject. With some degree of boldness he has fixed upon the ventricles of the brain, and the choroid plexus, as the seat of that ray divine which an immortal Creator has shed upon man, and man alone. The awe and veneration with which such a subject must be approached, are increased by the conviction that though we may flatter our fond hopes with the idea that some knowledge has been gained, we are still lost in the same labyrinth of doubt and uncertainty that we ever were.
“After giving his description of the passage of the blood from the right ventricle of the heart through the lungs, to the left ventricle of the heart, he gives his reasons for his belief in his doctrine of the circulation, and observes that Galen was unacquainted with the truth. He then commences that most extraordinary passage upon the seat of the mind. The blood, he supposes, having received in its passage through the lungs the breath of life, is sent by the left ventricle into the arteries; the purest part ascends to the base of the brain, where it is more refined, especially in the retiform plexus. It is still more perfected in the small vessels, the capillary arteries, and the choroid plexus, which penetrate every part of the brain, enter into the ventricles, and closely surround the origin of the nerves. From the vital spirit it is now changed into the animal spirit, and acts upon the mass of brain, which is incapable of reasoning without this stimulus. In the two ventricles of the brain is placed the power of receiving impressions from external objects; in the third is that of reasoning upon them; in the fourth is that of remembering them. From the communication through the foramina of the ethmoid bone, the two ventricles receive a portion of external air to refresh the spirit, and to give new animation to the soul. If these ventricles are oppressed by the introduction of noxious vapour, epilepsy is produced, if a fluid presses on the choroid plexus, apoplexy; and whatever affects this part of the brain causes loss of mental power.
“I have transcribed his notions on vegetable and animal life: they are more curious than correct. They are contained in the second Dialogue on the Trinity, which is remarkable from its being the best proof that the doctrines of Servetus were completely at variance with the Unitarianism of which he was accused. It is a dialogue between Peter and Michael, ‘modum generationis Christi docens, quod ipse non sit creatura, nec finitæ potentiæ, sed vere adorandus, verusque Deus.’
“He here enters very minutely into the soul, as the breath of life; and the whole of the theories he has advanced are in support of the passages in the Bible, relative to the Almighty pouring into the nostrils of man the breath of life. A long metaphysical and theological discussion, difficult to be understood, follows; but not one syllable can be found contrary to the precepts of Christianity, or to the pure faith he wished to instil into the mind. In another part of the work there is a dissertation upon the heart as the origin of faith, which he believes, on the authorities he cites from the Bible, to be the seat of some degree of mental power. The heart, he supposes, deliberates upon the will, but the will obeys the brain.”
Persons disposed to inquiries of the nature last adverted to, may peruse a remarkable paper on the functions of the heart, as connected with volition, by sir James Mackintosh; it was drawn up in consequence of a table conversation with Mr. Benjamin Travers, and is inserted by that gentleman in an appendix to his work on Constitutional Irritation.[504]
It remains further to be observed respecting Servetus, that, according to Dr. Sigmond, another of his theories was, that “in the blood is the life.” His notions “on vegetable and animal life,” are in his work “De Trinitatis Erroribus, Libri VII.” 12mo. 1531. This book appears in the “Bibliotheca Parriana,” by Mr. Bohn, with the following MS. remarks on it by Dr. Parr.
“Liber rarissimus. I gave two guineas for this book.” S. P.
“Servetus was burnt for this book. He might be a heretic, but he was not an infidel. I have his life, in Latin, written by Allwoerden, which should be read by all scholars and true Christians.” S. P.
Dr. Sigmond’s opinion of Servetus evidently concurs with Dr. Parr’s. Towards the close of Dr. Sigmond’s Introduction to his “Dissertatio, quædam de Serveto complectens,” he says, “Of his religious opinions I have but little to say: the bitter prejudices, the violent hatred, the unmanly persecutions that disgraced the early introduction of a reformed religion, have fortunately given place to the milder charities of true Christianity. The penalty of death, by the most cruel torture, would not now be inflicted on a man who offered to the world crude and undigested dreams, or the visionary fancies of a disturbed imagination; and these, to say the very worst, are the sins for which Servetus expired at the stake, surrounded by the books his ardent and unconquerable spirit had dared to compose.
A sincere love of Christianity beams forth in every page of the work I have before me. His great anxiety was to restore religion to that purity, which he believed it to have lost. The doctrine he opposed was not that of Christ; it was that of the churchmen who had established, in his name, their own vain and fleeting opinions. The best proof that Calvin and Melancthon had deserted the mild, the charitable, the peaceful religion of truth, and that they followed not the divine precepts of their gentle Master, was, and is, that they pursued, even unto death, a helpless, poor, and learned man.”
It is well known that Servetus was denounced by Calvin to the government of Geneva, and that the civil authorities referred the case back to Calvin. “At the instance of Mr. Calvin and his associates he was condemned to be burnt alive; which sentence was executed October 27, 1553. He was upwards of two hours in the fire; the wood being green, little in quantity, and the wind unfavourable.”[505] It is not now the fashion to burn a man for heresy: the modern mode is to exaggerate and distort his declared opinions; drive him from society by forging upon him those which he disclaims; wound his spirit, and break his heart by continued aspersions; and, when he is in his grave, award him the reputation of having been an amiable and mistaken man.
*
[502] Of which there is an English translation in 8vo.
[503] It is entitled “The Unnoticed Theories of Servetus, a Dissertation addressed to the Medical Society of Stockholm. By George Sigmond, M.D. late of Jesus College, Cambridge, and formerly President of the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh. London, 1826.” 8vo. pp. 80.
[504] “An Inquiry concerning that disturbed State of the Vital Functions, usually denominated Constitutional Irritation. By Benjamin Travers, F.R.S. Senior Surgeon to St. Thomas’s Hospital, and President of the Medico-Chirurgical and Hunterian Societies of London, &c. second edition. London, 1827.” 8vo.
[505] Dr. Adam Clarke; Bibliographical Dict. vol. vi.
LINES,
On seeing in the Table Book the Signature
of a brother, W. W. K.
Where’er those well-known characters I see,
They are, and ever will be, dear to me!
How oft in that green field, beneath the shade
Of beechen-boughs, whilst other youngsters play’d,
Have I, a happy schoolboy, o’er and o’er,
Conn’d those dear signs, which now I read once more!
How oft, as on the daisied grass I laid,
Full pleas’d, the W. W. K. I’ve read!—
When once espied, how tedious ’twas to wait
The crippled postman’s well-known shuffling gait,
As, slowly creeping down the winding lane,
With such a sluggish pace he onward came;
Or if in school,—his ring no sooner heard,
Than home, with all its sweets, to mind recurr’d;
And whilst the letter’s page its news reveal’d,
The gath’ring drop my boyish sight conceal’d!
Something then whisper’d, Bill, that life begun
So well, the same still happily would run;
That tho’ for years the briny sea divide,
Or be it good, or ill, that each betide,
The same fond heart would throb in either’s breast,
Fondness by years and stealing time increas’d!
So, as in early days it first became,
Shall it in riper life, be still the same,
That by and by, when we’re together laid
’Neath the green moss-grown pile—it may be said,
As lonely footsteps tow’rds our hillock turn,
“They were in life and death together one!”