Pub Date : 2022-08-03DOI: 10.1080/0964704x.2022.2105115
S. Finger
{"title":"The Dome of Thought: Phrenology and the Nineteenth-Century Popular Imagination","authors":"S. Finger","doi":"10.1080/0964704x.2022.2105115","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704x.2022.2105115","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"32 1","pages":"57 - 58"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48710553","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-27DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2022.2076506
D. Lanska
{"title":"The Birth of Modern Neuroscience in Turin.","authors":"D. Lanska","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2022.2076506","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2022.2076506","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"32 1","pages":"384 - 387"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41633565","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-22DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2022.2076503
D. Lanska
{"title":"“All Manner of Industry and Ingenuity”: A Bio-Bibliography of Dr Thomas Willis 1621–1675","authors":"D. Lanska","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2022.2076503","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2022.2076503","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"32 1","pages":"65 - 68"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41698363","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-20DOI: 10.1080/0964704x.2022.2076502
D. Lanska
{"title":"Radical Treatment: Wilder Penfield’s Life in Neuroscience","authors":"D. Lanska","doi":"10.1080/0964704x.2022.2076502","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704x.2022.2076502","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"32 1","pages":"59 - 64"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47741576","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-18DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2022.2067718
D. Lanska
“The brain is in the skull. The brain is in the skull.” When I was a fledgling medical student at the Medical College of Wisconsin in 1981, this was the mind-numbing daily mantra intoned as a microphone check before neuroanatomy lectures by research neuroscientist Robin L. Curtis (1926–2020). Curtis would then show image after image of the nervous system, describing elaborate neural pathways and often waxing eloquent about such thenstrange and esoteric topics as “the fields of Forel” (Forel 1877; Horisawa et al 2021; see Figure 1). Many of the images were difficult for neophyte medical students to fully grasp, and some of the material seemed unlikely to have any potential clinical application (or so I thought at the time). Less than four decades later, the fields of Forel are being increasingly considered as potential targets for stereotactic interventions in the treatment of movement disorders, behavioral disorders, and epilepsy (Neudorfer et al. 2017; Neudorfer and Maarouf 2018). Our current multifaceted and multilayered “picture” of the brain developed from the gradual evolution of graphic representations, particularly over the past 500 years, through recursive observation, abstraction, and conceptual interpretation. How such images are presented, even today, varies considerably among different scholars and when presenting material to different audiences. In 2016, the editorial board of the Journal of the History of the Neurosciences charged me with the responsibility for developing a special issue on the evolution of graphic representations of the brain. I had begun work on this topic in 2012 with studies related to plagiarisms of Andreas Vesalii’s (1543) by Juan Valverde de Hamusco and Geminus (Thomas Lambert or Lambrit); followed in 2014 by studies of the evolution of Vesalius’s representations of the brain in the period from 1538 to 1555; and then, finally, from 2016 to the present, by a much-expanded survey of the development of neuroanatomy and depictions of the brain (Lanska 2014a, 2014b, 2014c, 2015, 2018a, 2018b, 2018c, 2018d, 2018e; Lanska and Lanska 2013a, 2013b, 2014). Some aspects of this program of study were presented as special museum exhibits at the Dittrick Medical History Center for the 2018 meeting of the International Society for the History of the Neurosciences (ISHN), which was held in
“大脑在头骨里。大脑在头骨里。”1981年，当我还是威斯康星医学院(medical College of Wisconsin)一名刚出道的医科学生时，这是神经科学家罗宾·l·柯蒂斯(Robin L. Curtis, 1926-2020)在神经解剖学讲座开始前检查麦克风时每天念叨的一句让人头脑发麻的咒语。柯蒂斯随后会展示一张又一张神经系统的图像，描述复杂的神经通路，并经常对当时奇怪而深奥的话题侃侃而上，如“佛瑞尔的领域”(佛瑞尔1877;Horisawa等2021;(见图1)。许多图像对于医学新生来说很难完全掌握，而且一些材料似乎不太可能有任何潜在的临床应用(至少我当时是这么认为的)。不到四十年后，Forel领域越来越多地被认为是立体定向干预治疗运动障碍、行为障碍和癫痫的潜在靶点(Neudorfer等人，2017;Neudorfer and Maarouf 2018)。我们目前的多面和多层次的大脑“图像”是从图形表示的逐渐演变中发展而来的，特别是在过去的500年里，通过递归观察、抽象和概念解释。即使在今天，这些图像的呈现方式在不同的学者之间以及在向不同的受众呈现材料时也有很大的不同。2016年，《神经科学史杂志》(Journal of the History of the Neurosciences)的编辑委员会让我负责制作一期关于大脑图形表征进化的特刊。我从2012年开始研究这个话题，研究Juan Valverde de Hamusco和Geminus (Thomas Lambert或Lambrit)对Andreas Vesalii(1543)的抄袭;随后在2014年，维萨里对1538年至1555年期间大脑表征的演变进行了研究;然后，最后，从2016年到现在，通过对神经解剖学发展和大脑描述的广泛调查(Lanska 2014a, 2014b, 2014c, 2015, 2018a, 2018b, 2018c, 2018d, 2018e;Lanska and Lanska 2013a, 2013b, 2014)。该研究计划的某些方面在迪特里克医学史中心作为特别博物馆展品，为2018年国际神经科学史学会(ISHN)会议提供了展示
{"title":"Changing graphic representations of the brain from the late middle ages to the present","authors":"D. Lanska","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2022.2067718","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2022.2067718","url":null,"abstract":"“The brain is in the skull. The brain is in the skull.” When I was a fledgling medical student at the Medical College of Wisconsin in 1981, this was the mind-numbing daily mantra intoned as a microphone check before neuroanatomy lectures by research neuroscientist Robin L. Curtis (1926–2020). Curtis would then show image after image of the nervous system, describing elaborate neural pathways and often waxing eloquent about such thenstrange and esoteric topics as “the fields of Forel” (Forel 1877; Horisawa et al 2021; see Figure 1). Many of the images were difficult for neophyte medical students to fully grasp, and some of the material seemed unlikely to have any potential clinical application (or so I thought at the time). Less than four decades later, the fields of Forel are being increasingly considered as potential targets for stereotactic interventions in the treatment of movement disorders, behavioral disorders, and epilepsy (Neudorfer et al. 2017; Neudorfer and Maarouf 2018). Our current multifaceted and multilayered “picture” of the brain developed from the gradual evolution of graphic representations, particularly over the past 500 years, through recursive observation, abstraction, and conceptual interpretation. How such images are presented, even today, varies considerably among different scholars and when presenting material to different audiences. In 2016, the editorial board of the Journal of the History of the Neurosciences charged me with the responsibility for developing a special issue on the evolution of graphic representations of the brain. I had begun work on this topic in 2012 with studies related to plagiarisms of Andreas Vesalii’s (1543) by Juan Valverde de Hamusco and Geminus (Thomas Lambert or Lambrit); followed in 2014 by studies of the evolution of Vesalius’s representations of the brain in the period from 1538 to 1555; and then, finally, from 2016 to the present, by a much-expanded survey of the development of neuroanatomy and depictions of the brain (Lanska 2014a, 2014b, 2014c, 2015, 2018a, 2018b, 2018c, 2018d, 2018e; Lanska and Lanska 2013a, 2013b, 2014). Some aspects of this program of study were presented as special museum exhibits at the Dittrick Medical History Center for the 2018 meeting of the International Society for the History of the Neurosciences (ISHN), which was held in","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"31 1","pages":"109 - 114"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44736765","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-18DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2022.2066409
J. Lazar
ABSTRACT This article is an outline of the transition in “brain maps” used to illustrate locations of cortical “centers” associated with movements, sensations, and language beginning with images from Gall and Spurzheim in the nineteenth century through those of functional magnetic resonance imaging in the twenty-first century. During the intervening years, new approaches required new brain maps to illustrate them, and brain maps helped to objectify and naturalize mental processes. One approach, electrical stimulation of the cerebral cortex—exemplified by Fritsch and Hitzig in 1870, Ferrier in 1873, and Penfield by 1937—required brain maps showing functional centers with expanded and overlapping boundaries. In another approach, brain maps that linked cortical centers to account for the complex syndromes of aphasia, apraxia, alexia, and agraphia were initially constructed by Baginsky in 1871, Wernicke in 1874, and Lichtheim in 1885, then later by Lissauer in 1890, Dejerine in 1892, and Liepmann in 1920, and eventually by Geschwind in 1965 and others through the late twentieth century. Over that intervening time, brain maps changed from illustrations of points on the cerebral cortex where movements and sensations were elicited to illustrations of areas (centers) associated with recognizable functions to illustrations of connections between those areas that account for complex symptoms occurring in clinical patients. By the end of this period, advancements in physics, mathematics, and cognitive science resulted in inventions that allowed brain maps of cortical locations derived from cognitive manipulations rather than from the usual electrical or ablative manipulations. “Mental” dependent variables became “cognitive” independent variables.
{"title":"Nineteenth- and twentieth-century brain maps relating to locations and constructions of brain functions","authors":"J. Lazar","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2022.2066409","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2022.2066409","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article is an outline of the transition in “brain maps” used to illustrate locations of cortical “centers” associated with movements, sensations, and language beginning with images from Gall and Spurzheim in the nineteenth century through those of functional magnetic resonance imaging in the twenty-first century. During the intervening years, new approaches required new brain maps to illustrate them, and brain maps helped to objectify and naturalize mental processes. One approach, electrical stimulation of the cerebral cortex—exemplified by Fritsch and Hitzig in 1870, Ferrier in 1873, and Penfield by 1937—required brain maps showing functional centers with expanded and overlapping boundaries. In another approach, brain maps that linked cortical centers to account for the complex syndromes of aphasia, apraxia, alexia, and agraphia were initially constructed by Baginsky in 1871, Wernicke in 1874, and Lichtheim in 1885, then later by Lissauer in 1890, Dejerine in 1892, and Liepmann in 1920, and eventually by Geschwind in 1965 and others through the late twentieth century. Over that intervening time, brain maps changed from illustrations of points on the cerebral cortex where movements and sensations were elicited to illustrations of areas (centers) associated with recognizable functions to illustrations of connections between those areas that account for complex symptoms occurring in clinical patients. By the end of this period, advancements in physics, mathematics, and cognitive science resulted in inventions that allowed brain maps of cortical locations derived from cognitive manipulations rather than from the usual electrical or ablative manipulations. “Mental” dependent variables became “cognitive” independent variables.","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"31 1","pages":"368 - 393"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49218514","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-29DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2022.2050643
D. Lanska
ABSTRACT French surgeon and anatomist Eugène-Louis Doyen (1859–1916) was a focus of controversy and scandal throughout his career, an innovative surgeon of great technical skill whose unsurpassed abilities were offset by narcissistic and frequently unethical behavior. Doyen produced the most controversial atlas of human anatomy of the early-twentieth century, his Atlas d’Anatomie Topographique. He used a chemical process to fix whole cadavers, then used a motorized band saw with a sliding table to precisely cut sequential slices in all three anatomic planes. His intentionally arresting images of the nervous system in situ (using heliotypes in his atlas and projected images of prepared specimens in his lectures) made for gruesome theater, directed more at the public than the medical profession, which Doyen disdained and delighted in antagonizing. Although photography and photomechanical reproduction facilitated the rapid production of Doyen’s atlas, many of the fine details were lost. In addition, although he developed tissue fixation techniques that preserved the natural colors of tissues, this was not evident in the monochrome images of the printed atlas. Doyen’s atlas is compared with other anatomic atlases of the late-nineteenth century that included serial sections of the central nervous system, either from sections of entire cadavers, the isolated head, or the excised brain. In retrospect, Doyen’s fevered activity, including his efforts to depict the topographic anatomy of the nervous system, produced only modest benefits, and often produced significant costs for his patients, his colleagues, the medical profession, and his own reputation.
{"title":"Eugène-Louis Doyen and his Atlas d’Anatomie Topographique (1911): Sensationalism and gruesome theater","authors":"D. Lanska","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2022.2050643","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2022.2050643","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT French surgeon and anatomist Eugène-Louis Doyen (1859–1916) was a focus of controversy and scandal throughout his career, an innovative surgeon of great technical skill whose unsurpassed abilities were offset by narcissistic and frequently unethical behavior. Doyen produced the most controversial atlas of human anatomy of the early-twentieth century, his Atlas d’Anatomie Topographique. He used a chemical process to fix whole cadavers, then used a motorized band saw with a sliding table to precisely cut sequential slices in all three anatomic planes. His intentionally arresting images of the nervous system in situ (using heliotypes in his atlas and projected images of prepared specimens in his lectures) made for gruesome theater, directed more at the public than the medical profession, which Doyen disdained and delighted in antagonizing. Although photography and photomechanical reproduction facilitated the rapid production of Doyen’s atlas, many of the fine details were lost. In addition, although he developed tissue fixation techniques that preserved the natural colors of tissues, this was not evident in the monochrome images of the printed atlas. Doyen’s atlas is compared with other anatomic atlases of the late-nineteenth century that included serial sections of the central nervous system, either from sections of entire cadavers, the isolated head, or the excised brain. In retrospect, Doyen’s fevered activity, including his efforts to depict the topographic anatomy of the nervous system, produced only modest benefits, and often produced significant costs for his patients, his colleagues, the medical profession, and his own reputation.","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"31 1","pages":"334 - 350"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59840184","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-15DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2022.2046917
P. Koehler, D. Lanska
ABSTRACT In the period between Morgagni’s De Sedibus (1761) and Cruveilhier’s Anatomie pathologique (1829–1842), six pathology atlases were published, in which neuropathological subjects were discussed and depicted. It was a period of transition in medical, technical, and publishing areas. The first three (by Matthew Baillie, Robert Hooper, and Richard Bright) were mainly atlases derived from pathological museum specimens. They were selective rather than comprehensive. Of the other three (by Jean Cruveilhier, James Hope, and Robert Carswell), most of the observations were made during autopsies. These illustrations required special arrangements so they could be executed during the autopsies. These were available in Paris rather than in London, which is the reason why Hope and Carswell made many of the drawings in France. The plates in these three were color lithographs. Baillie’s book contains only figure descriptions. Bright’s and Cruveilhier’s atlases provide case descriptions. Hooper and Hope provide theoretical texts and figure legends. Carswell’s book has 12 theoretical sections, each followed by plates. The relative cost of the atlases varied with the number of plates. Although the authors made use of artists and engravers, several were talented artists themselves. Many common neurological diseases were depicted.
{"title":"Neuropathological images in the great pathology atlases","authors":"P. Koehler, D. Lanska","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2022.2046917","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2022.2046917","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In the period between Morgagni’s De Sedibus (1761) and Cruveilhier’s Anatomie pathologique (1829–1842), six pathology atlases were published, in which neuropathological subjects were discussed and depicted. It was a period of transition in medical, technical, and publishing areas. The first three (by Matthew Baillie, Robert Hooper, and Richard Bright) were mainly atlases derived from pathological museum specimens. They were selective rather than comprehensive. Of the other three (by Jean Cruveilhier, James Hope, and Robert Carswell), most of the observations were made during autopsies. These illustrations required special arrangements so they could be executed during the autopsies. These were available in Paris rather than in London, which is the reason why Hope and Carswell made many of the drawings in France. The plates in these three were color lithographs. Baillie’s book contains only figure descriptions. Bright’s and Cruveilhier’s atlases provide case descriptions. Hooper and Hope provide theoretical texts and figure legends. Carswell’s book has 12 theoretical sections, each followed by plates. The relative cost of the atlases varied with the number of plates. Although the authors made use of artists and engravers, several were talented artists themselves. Many common neurological diseases were depicted.","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"31 1","pages":"279 - 311"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44342718","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-12DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2022.2046440
S. Finger, P. Eling
ABSTRACT Whereas some of Gall’s critics were quick to assail his organology as materialistic and fatalistic, others questioned his methods and scientific assumptions, especially his craniological tenets. The idea that the skull does not faithfully reflect the features of small, underlying brain areas was repeatedly brought up in the scientific debates. Critics pointed to the frontal sinuses above the eye orbits as evidence for the interior and exterior plates of the cranium not being in parallel—hence, for several or many phrenological organs being unknowable. This article traces the origins of the frontal sinus arguments and how Gall, Spurzheim, and later phrenologists responded to it. It reveals how the two sides fought and remained divided about the significance of the sinuses throughout the nineteenth century—that is, on whether the frontal sinus “problem” was an insurmountable obstacle or one that was merely an inconvenience.
{"title":"Phrenology’s frontal sinus problem: An insurmountable obstruction?","authors":"S. Finger, P. Eling","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2022.2046440","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2022.2046440","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Whereas some of Gall’s critics were quick to assail his organology as materialistic and fatalistic, others questioned his methods and scientific assumptions, especially his craniological tenets. The idea that the skull does not faithfully reflect the features of small, underlying brain areas was repeatedly brought up in the scientific debates. Critics pointed to the frontal sinuses above the eye orbits as evidence for the interior and exterior plates of the cranium not being in parallel—hence, for several or many phrenological organs being unknowable. This article traces the origins of the frontal sinus arguments and how Gall, Spurzheim, and later phrenologists responded to it. It reveals how the two sides fought and remained divided about the significance of the sinuses throughout the nineteenth century—that is, on whether the frontal sinus “problem” was an insurmountable obstacle or one that was merely an inconvenience.","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"31 1","pages":"524 - 557"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43632956","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-12DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2022.2050642
B. Lichterman, D. Lanska
ABSTRACT Russian surgeon Nikolay Ivanovich Pirogov (Pirogoff; 1810–1881) introduced the teaching of applied topographical anatomy in Russia. Pirogov’s monumental four-part atlas, Anatome topographica sectionibus per corporis humanum congelatum triplici directione ductis illustrate (An Illustrated Topographic Anatomy of Saw Cuts Made in Three Dimensions Across the Frozen Human Body), colloquially known as the “Ice Anatomy,” was published in Latin in folio in the 1850s. Pirogov sought to investigate “the normal and pathological positions of different organs and body parts using sections made in the three principal directions [anatomical planes] … throughout all regions.” To accomplish this, he froze cadavers “to the density of the thickest wood” and then cut them into thin plates with a special mechanical saw. His approach was reportedly inspired by his observations of butchers sawing across frozen pig carcasses at the meat market in St. Petersburg during winter. Pirogov systemically obtained full-size representations of more than 1,000 sections. A painter made a representative copy of the cross-sectional contours of each section, using ruled glass overlain on the sections. The final lithographs were of high artistic quality and execution, resembling modern high-resolution medical imaging (i.e., CT or MRI). Moreover, structures were serially sectioned and systematically illustrated along all three anatomical planes, something that had never previously been attempted. This allowed clinicians and anatomists to scrutinize the spatial relationships of structures from multiple perspectives and at a much more detailed level than was previously possible, although the cost, massiveness, and complexity of the completed work precluded wide dissemination.
{"title":"Cross-sectional representations of the central nervous system in Pirogov’s “Ice Anatomy”","authors":"B. Lichterman, D. Lanska","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2022.2050642","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2022.2050642","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Russian surgeon Nikolay Ivanovich Pirogov (Pirogoff; 1810–1881) introduced the teaching of applied topographical anatomy in Russia. Pirogov’s monumental four-part atlas, Anatome topographica sectionibus per corporis humanum congelatum triplici directione ductis illustrate (An Illustrated Topographic Anatomy of Saw Cuts Made in Three Dimensions Across the Frozen Human Body), colloquially known as the “Ice Anatomy,” was published in Latin in folio in the 1850s. Pirogov sought to investigate “the normal and pathological positions of different organs and body parts using sections made in the three principal directions [anatomical planes] … throughout all regions.” To accomplish this, he froze cadavers “to the density of the thickest wood” and then cut them into thin plates with a special mechanical saw. His approach was reportedly inspired by his observations of butchers sawing across frozen pig carcasses at the meat market in St. Petersburg during winter. Pirogov systemically obtained full-size representations of more than 1,000 sections. A painter made a representative copy of the cross-sectional contours of each section, using ruled glass overlain on the sections. The final lithographs were of high artistic quality and execution, resembling modern high-resolution medical imaging (i.e., CT or MRI). Moreover, structures were serially sectioned and systematically illustrated along all three anatomical planes, something that had never previously been attempted. This allowed clinicians and anatomists to scrutinize the spatial relationships of structures from multiple perspectives and at a much more detailed level than was previously possible, although the cost, massiveness, and complexity of the completed work precluded wide dissemination.","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"31 1","pages":"312 - 333"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48556770","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：