Medicine_18th_Century

By the end of the 18th century the way in which people pursued anatomical knowledge had changed substantially. How and why did this happen' Medicine is for ever changing and new discoveries being made even today, however by the 18th century the way in which anatomical knowledge was pursued changed massively. At the centre of the argument as to why and how this happened is probably the changing place of anatomical knowledge in medical education. However, more detailed exploration in to body parts as well as the growth of new and old medical tools should not be overlooked. Prior to the 18th century medical education was a grey area that had no real regulations with no necessary requirements needed to study medicine. One of the fundamental changes to licensed medicine during the 18th century was that of the structure and the way in which practitioners were trained. Originally one of the vital differences between practitioners and that of apothecaries and surgeons was the level of educational experience they received. Practitioners had a lengthy and varied educational path compared to that of the apothecaries and surgeons who had no or little education at all, they learned mainly on the job first as apprentices moving on to journeymen. Yet from 1700 there was a break down, in particular surgeons, of this traditional way of education and a more formal education was provided. As J. Barbot explains in his articles how the new structure of medical studies was conducted. (Article I) “Those who are to study in the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Toulouse in order to take a degree will be required to register in their own hand….” (Article II) “During the first year, students shall take physiology and hygiene; they shall attend demonstrations of anatomy, chemistry and botany. They shall enrol with the following professors.” The extract from J. Barbot shows that there is a clear structure to the medical education system, the growth of Medical Universities had begun along with the introduction of a real structure in lessons, “During the first year, students shall take physiology and hygiene”. Furth more J. Barbot illustrates to a certain extent in his articles how the medical students learnt, for example using anatomy and chemistry. As well as how J. Barbot also expresses in Article 1 that if the students wished to enrol at the university to undertake the degree they had enrol by registering with the Faculty something that was new and almost never heard of. Secondly from the beginning of the 18th century it became apparent that instructions in the ancillary medical arts should be accepted as an important part of the medical curriculum. With the growing number of anatomical discoveries, from the 15th century, from the likes of William Harvey it became increasingly hard for faculty professors to stop this close inspection of the human body. In the words of Roy Porter. “The ogres of error and blind authority had already been challenged by heroes like Vesalius and William Harvey; further progress would make medicine yet more scientific.” As well as people coming to accept the idea that medicine was scientific rather than pre-determined, something that the enlightenment had a massive influence in, there was an emphasis on proving medical knowledge with empirical knowledge. Something else they were coming round to was the idea that the past greats such as Galen may have been wrong in some of their diagnosis, could this be why anatomical knowledge started to change. Giovanni Battista Morgagni (1682-1771) worked on the linking together of particular diseases with certain internal lesions in the body. In general around 80% of the population in 18th century Britain were poor, with inadequate living conditions, food shortages and the widespread of killer diseases such as small pox, typhus and dysentery the population only slowly increased. People began to demand answers and cures to these wide spread diseases. Galen’s ideas were becoming old and outdated and more and more physicians were discrediting his theories. Anatomical knowledge was at the forefront of medical breakthroughs. This was able to happen due to the expansion of universities, they began to pop up across Europe as well as the advances in equipping anatomy theatres with all the tools needed. “It might have been the case that Vesalius gained interest in anatomy at Paris, but the Paris medical faculty made little effort to encourage the science. The faculty did not have a properly constructed anatomy theatre until 1749.” Up until the 17th century it was difficult to examine some body parts in finer detail however with the growth of the universities and properly equipped anatomy rooms such as Brockliss expresses these experiments and dissections were able to take place, producing a whole world of new and unseen entities within the body and organs. A prime example is probably that of Marcello Malpighi definition of the glands. Malpighi used the newly invented microscope, which allowed him to dissect a piece of organ and put it on a firmer observational ground giving him a more detailed, closer look at how the organs and body worked. “As different types of microscopes were made available over the next hundred years, anatomists increasingly turned their attention to the fine rather that the gross structure of the body” Although giving anatomists the capabilities to look in to the finer details of the human body the invention of the microscope and different lenses also made room for new polished techniques. For example Malpighi employed new and sophisticated techniques in preparing samples for examination, these included boiling, dying sections of flesh, and this could only have been done if there were the advanced tools available. Education in medicine, as stated to begin was the pivotal catalyst for change in the way people pursued anatomical knowledge, in part this maybe be seen to have something to do with the encouragement physicians were given to become experts in surgery and pharmacy. Additionally in part was down to the cultural shift during the enlightenment that gave dignity to manual work. Moreover however this transformation was eased greatly by the alteration of the art of pharmacy into chemistry around 1700. “A machine that winds its own springs” is a quote from La Mettrie, one of many men inspired by the new way of thinking in the 18th century. This way of thinking was more mathematical, expressing the view that the body was more of a machine mathematically understandable, however disease was something that affected the soul something natural. “..disease was the effort by nature or the soul to expel morbific matter, and physiology was the science of that struggle” Through this new way of thinking more and more questions arose surrounding the body and disease, physicians became curious and with the help of the new educational system, new tools and better understanding anatomical education started to be pursued in a whole new light by the 18th century. “Great expectations, disappointing results” is a way many historians describe the enlightenment period of medical science. With over ambitious theories wanting to be proved by any number of physicians it is no wonder that by the 18th century the way in which anatomical knowledge was pursued had change so substantially. The key reason for this, it would seem is down to the new structure of the educational system at universities. Prior to this there had been no real regulations and almost anyone could have studied medicine. Additionally the structure of the course gave physicians a better insight in to the body and the way it works, providing many with the question why' Anatomy was introduced as a teaching method and proved very successful, teamed with new technological advances, such as the microscope, and the introduction of illustrations to anatomy classes deemed it very successful. Bibliography Brockliss (2004) ‘Organization, Training and the Medical Marketplace in the Enlightenmnet Century’ in Elmer, P. (ed) The Healing Arts: disease and society in Europe 1500-1800, Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp.344-378 Borbot. J ‘Les Chroniques de la Faculte de Medecine de Toulouse du XVIIIe au XIXe Siecle’ in Elmer, P. (ed) Health, disease and society in Europe 1500-1800 A source book’ Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp.344-378 De Renzi (2004) ‘Old and New Models of the Body’ in Elmer, P. (ed) The Healing Arts: disease and society in Europe 1500-1800, Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp.344-378 Porter, R. (1997) ‘The Greatest Benefit to Mankind. A medical history of humanity from antiquity to the present’, London: Harper Press http://www.uk.filo.pl/uk_history_8.htm [accessed 27/1/2013] The Eighteenth Century -------------------------------------------- [ 1 ]. Brockliss,(2004) pp.356-357 [ 2 ]. Borbot (1905) pp.270-2 [ 3 ]. Porter (1997) p.246 [ 4 ]. http://www.uk.filo.pl/uk_history_8.htm [ 5 ]. Brockliss,(2004) p357 [ 6 ]. Brockliss (2004) p176 [ 7 ]. Brockliss (2004) p358 [ 8 ]. Porter (1997) p248 [ 9 ]. Porter (1997) p248 [ 10 ]. Porter (1997) p248