This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
666a6. A possibly spurious passage in the On Sleep contradicts this statement. The contradictory views will be discussed later in this article. Unless otherwise noted, all of the passages from Aristotle are from the Loeb Classical Library editions.
The problems connected with the analysis of what any observer “sees” are difficult philosophical issues which I make no claim to treat in this paper. However, it is extremely important at least to point out that the veridical nature of observation reports are especially problematic when we are talking about pioneer work in any science. As I shall continually emphasize in this paper, Aristotle had to formulate his own paradigms or models for cardiac structure. These models are based on what the observed, and he was observing for the first time. The relationship between the philosophical problems of observation and scientific discovery have been treated by Norwood RussellHanson in Patterns of Discovery (Cambridge: University Press, 1965), chap. 1. Also see Perception and Discovery: An Introduction to Scientific Discovery (San Francisco: Freeman, Cooper & Co., 1969), pt. II.
Parts of Animals, 665b28–666a10. Historia Animalium, 496a4–35 and 513a27–b13.
Such as this one in the Historia Animalium: “With regard to the regions above the heart, such is the disposition of the blood-vessels.” 514a28.
Practically every modern work on one or another of the biological treatises mentions this fact. See, for example, IngemarDüring, Aristotle's De Partibus Animalium Critical and Literary Commentaries (Goteborge, Sweden: Elanders Boktrycheri Aktiebolag, 1943), pp. 6–7. Questionable passages which present special difficulty will be noted at the appropriate places.
However on might define “scientific anatomy,” it certainly would include work based on extensive dissections. If such dissection was done before Aristotle, I am unaware of it. Ludwig Edelstein has treated this topic in his article, “The History of Anatomy in Antiquity” in OwseiTemkin and C. LilianTemkin, Ancient Medicine: Selected Papers of Ludwig Edelstein (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1967), pp. 247–302. Edelstein does not exclude the possibility that Anaxagoras and Democritus did dissection (p. 280, n. 40), but certainly Aristotle is the first to leave extensive records of dissection.
Chapter V, vol. 9 of Emile Littré (trans.), Oeuvres complètes d'Hippocrate (Paris, 10 vols., 1839–1861). Volume 9 was published in 1861.
As it appears, for example, in the Historia Animalium, 513b5. See al p. 376 of the text of this paper. This is only a very simple example of what Platt calls “desperately difficult Greek” (see p. 522 of the article cited below in n. 11).
“On Certain Errors Respecting the Structure of the Heart Attributed to Aristotel,” Nature, 21 (1879), no. 523 (Nov. 6), pp. 1–5.
“Aristotle's Anhomoeomeria and Their Functions,” chap. 10, pp. 118–147 of Aristotle's Researches in Natural Science (London: West, Newman and Co., 1912).
“Aristotle on the Heart,” vol. II, pp. 521–532, of CharlesSinger, ed., Studies in the History and Method of Science (London: W. Dawson, 1955).
Theodore JamesTracy, Physiological Theory and the Doctrine of the Mean in Plato and Aristotle (The Hague and Paris: Mouton, 1969). See esp. pp. 186–189.
Though anatomy and physiology are today recognized as separate disciplines, they are closely interconnected. Anatomy includes much more than a study of structure. According to an editorial in the Journal of American Medical Association, 193, (1965), pp. 175–176, in addition to physiology, anatomy also includes the study of genetics, anthropology, and many other disciplines. The history of the biological sciences shows, besides greater specialization, an increasing interpendence between the various disciplines. In stressing a real relationship between anatomy and physiology, Galen is far ahead of Aristotle.
Arthur SelzerM.D., The Heart: Its Function in Health and Disease (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1966), p. 20.
ErnestGardner, Donald J.Gray, and RonanO'Rahilly, Anatomy: A Regional Study of Human Structure, 3rd ed. (Philadelphia: Saunders, 1969), p. 323.
In this article I am, of course, using the word “model” in a very informal way, as a synonym for “metaphor.” For an illuminating discussion of the use of metaphors in the history of philosophy and science, see Colin MurrayTurbayne, The Myth of Metaphor, rev. ed., appendix by Rolf Eberle (Columbia, University of South Carolina Press, 1970). See esp. pp. 11–20 of the text and pp. 228–233 of the appendix.
This is also true of other systems in Aristotle's biological works, but the lack of close interconnection between cardiac anatomy and physiology is most striking.
Parts of Animals, 665b10–14.
Parts of Animals, 666a9. (The translation is mine, and I have altered the Greek text slightly according to Düring's suggestion, Aristotle's “De Partibus Animalium,” p. 160.)
Parts of Animals, 666b23.
Francis Josephcole, A History of Comparative Anatomy:From Aristotle to the Eighteenth Century (London: Macmillan, 1949), p. 41. Incredibly, Cole says that Aristotle tells us nothing about his methods of preparation!
583b14.
1335b20–21.
The only article I have found which is devoted to an explicit treatment of this problem is the one by M. P. Menetrier entitled “Comment Aristote et les anciens médecins hippocratiques ont-ils pu prendre connaissance de l'anatomie humaine”? in Bulletin de la Société francaise d'histoire de la médecine, 24 (1930), 254–262.
Aristotle's Researches, pp. 102–106.
Cf. Düring, p. 160. Also WernerJaeger, Aristotle: Fundamentals of the History of his Development 2nd ed., trans. Richard Robinson (New York: Oxford University Press, 1962. Originally published in 1934), p. 336.
Historia Animalium, 511b14.
Ibid., 511b19 and 20.
Ibid., 511b14.
Ibid., 513a12–15.
Ibid., 511b14–16.
Ibid., 496b5.
Ibid., 496a10.
Parts of Animals, 676b35.
Ibid., 667b1–12.
There are several discussions of the heart in relation to the respiration of fish. See, for example, Parts of Animals, 696b15 and 666b10.
On Youth and Old Age, 468b15.
Parts of Animals, 678b2.
Ibid., 666b18.
Parts of Animals, 645a29–31. It is not necessary to interpret this passage as a reflection of some peculiarly Greek belief about reticence in handling human remains. This fear appears to be universal and is found among those working in the most antiseptic and neat modern dissection laboratories. The entire question about whether or not Greek attitudes toward the adult human cadaver prevented them from dissecting needs investigation. A period of lying in state, with the corpse arranged on a bier, was observed. According to Plato (Timaeus, 81D), death was apparently a process that was only completed when the flesh was entirely rotted. Perhaps there was a peculiarly Greek attitude which prevented disturbing the remains until after the process was completed. Cf. Donna C. Kurtz & John Boardman, Greek Burial Customs (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1971).
See n. 10 above, p. 104.
On Youth and Old Age, 468b28.
Excepting the article by Menetrier (above, n. 24), the question of whether of not Aristotle dissected the human fetus is either passed over or its possibility is very cautiously mentioned. W. Ogle is the most forth-right of the modern commentators when he says “I am by no means so certain that Aristotle may not have sought to gratify his curiosity by dissection of the human foetus” (Aristotle on the Parts of Animals [London: Kegan Paul, 1882], p. 149). This translation with Ogle's excellent introduction and notes has been an invaluable guide in efforts to understand not only Aristotle's Parts of Animals but also his other biological opera. Unfortunately, the 1882 edition is difficult to obtain. In 1911 the translation was published as part of the Oxford English edition of Aristotle, but without the introduction and with the notes severely truncated.
Parts of Animals, 671b6.
Ibid., 676b30 (After Peck).
Historia Animalium, 506a25.
Ibid., 496a5.
Ibid., 406a15–17.
Parts of Animals, 666b7.
Ibid., 667a7.
Ogle (above, n. 43), p. 70. A. L. Peck (trans.), Aristotle: Parts of Animals the Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1968, originally published in 1937), p. 243.
677b19.
The fetal heart begins from a single primitive tube which very early in fetal life begins a series of configurational changes which culminate in the differentiated chambers we know. Cf. Leslie BrainerdArey, Developmental Anatomy: A Textbook and Laboratory Manual of Embryology seventh edition (Philadelphia: Saunders, 1966), pp. 376–389.
Ogle (above, n. 43), p. 201.
Ibid., p. 149.
Parts of Animals, 658b8; Generation of Animals, 744a28.
Ogle, (above, n. 43), p. 149.
A more thorough examination of this question is in order. The project is a difficult one, however, and is made more difficult because I have been unable to find a single general treatment of the gross fetal anatomy of the human. There are, of course, many textbooks on embryological development, but such works do not have detailed descriptions of structures which are relatively unimportant for giving a functional and developmental explanation.
Parts of Animals, 673b8–10.
This seems to be implied by Aristotle's whole discussion of external cardiac anatomy. This is also the opinion of Ogle (above, n. 43), p. 193.
Parts of Animals, 672b15 and 16.
Historia Animalium, 496a25 and 26.
On Breathing, 474b9.
Historia Animalium, 496a6 and 7.
Parts of Animals, 667a32.
665a16. Aristotle always speaks of the lung in the singular because he thinks of it as one organ.
496a4.
Historia Animalium, 496a8-12.
Parts of Animals, 667a20-23.
Above, n. 43, p. 200.
I have analyzed this practice of Aristotle in my master's thesis The Role of M€γαλoψυϰία in The Nicomachean Ethics, unpublished Master's Thesis, Ohio University, February 1963), see esp. pp. 46 and 47.
474b9.
Parts of Animals, 666b18. Generation of Animals, 787b18. Historia Animalium, 506a8.
496a20 and 21.
513a27-30.
However, cf. Parts of Animals, 667a1. This whole passage (667a1-6) might be an exception, but I do not think it is a point which ought to be stressed. There, Aristotle said that the blood in the middle cavity is the purest of all three. A clue to what Aristotle meant by pure blood is found in the Historia Animalium (520b18-20), where he said that pure blood was a red color and other blood was almost black. This might be a reference to the difference in color between arterial and venous blood. Though exposure to the oxygen in the atmosphere would, of course, make venous blood appear red almost immediately, still there would be a perceptible difference in the color of the blood in the right and left side of the heart as soon as the heart was opened up. Aristotle did open the heart and probably would have noticed the difference in color. If this is true, it provides further support for the interpretation that Aristotle was referring to the middle cavity (the left ventricle) which had the “purest” blood, that is the redcolored blood.
These answers are summarized by Platt, Aristotle on the Heart, pp. 523–525.
Ibid., p. 521.
Ibid.
Physiological Theory (above, n. 12), p. 188.
In a footnote, Tracy refers to an article by I. Düring, “Aristotle's Method in Biology,” Aristote et les problèmes de méthode (Louvain: Publications universitaires, 1961), pp. 213–221. Perhaps Tracy has been misled by the article. Düring's general claim is that in the biological works Aristotle remained theoretically committed to a deductivist methodology. Though there are problems with this claim (what are we to make of the passage in the Generation of Animals, 760b31: “credence must be given to the direct evidence of the senses more than to theories”?), it is certainly arguable. However, even if Düring is right about Aristotle's theoretical preference for a deductivist methodology, that certainly does not mean that in practice Aristotle was always a deductivist. His biological works are full of evidence to the contrary. It comes as no surprise to the historian of science to find any practicing scientist (ancient, medieval or modern), who does not follow his own directives for doing science.
Historia Animalium, 513b2. Also see 496a25.
See above, n. 9.
See above, n. 43.
Historia Animalium, 513a13 and 14.
Above, n. 9, p. 2.
Leonard G.Wilson, “Erasistratus, Galen and the Pneuma,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 33. (1959), 294.
Charles LovattEvans, Principles of Human Physiology (originally written by E. H. Starling) 12th ed. (Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger, 1956), pp. 664–668 and 684.
Historia Animalium, 515a28.
Ibid., 513b1-5 (my translation). Peck's translation makes it difficult to understand what Aristotle means. For peck translates “through the middle cavity,” implying that the superior vena cava issues from the left ventricle as the aorta. It is, of course, possible to translate it that way, but it seems better to translate it as “through the middle of the cavity.” This makes the whole passage more intelligible, and it is the way that Ogle understands it. He says, “through the center of the cavity” (Aristotle on the Parts of Animals, p. 198).
Historia Animalium, 513b5 and 6.
665b34.
Historia Animalium, 496a22 and 23.
458a15-19.
Aristotle on the Parts of Animals, p. 200.
Ogle means the left atrium. Writing in the nineteenth century, Ogle uses the older anatomical terminology.
See Sir David Ross's revised text: Aristotle: Parva Naturalia (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1955), p. 11.
Aristotle on the Parts of Animals, p. 200.
666b33.
667a8.
See above, n. 13.
On Youth, 469a6.
Parts of Animals, 670a24.
On Youth, 469a10.
On the Soul, 408b8.
On Life and Death, 479b18–20.
On Youth, 469a4.
Generation of Animals, 742b35.
Ibid., 766a36–b2.
See A. L.Peck (trans.), Aristotle: Generation of Animals, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1963 originally published in 1942), p. xlv.
Generation of Animals, 715a6.
See, e.g., Generation of Animals, 735a25 and 26; 741b18; 766a35. At 741b18, realizing that he had perhaps repeated this point too much, Aristotle said it again and added, “as I have said many times over.”
Generation of animals, 773a10-13.
De usu partium, chap. 3 bk. 8. See Margaret Tallmadge May, trans. Galen: On the Usefulness of the Parts of the Body, 2 vols. (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1968), I, 389–393.
Parts of Animals, 673b10 and 11.
Ibid., 647a25.
740a2-5.
743b26.
666a10.
666a20 and 21.
561a9-12 (D'Arcy Thompson translation).
743a1.
667a33-b14.
Ibid., 667a33.
Generation of Animals, 741b18 and 19.
Parts of Animals, 666a20 and 21; 667b17.
Ibid., 670a25 and 26.
Ibid., 666a9.
See Ross, (above, n. 97), p. 1.
Parts of Animals, 651a15.
Ibid., 678a33.
521a17.
Cf. Peck's Introduction to the Loeb edition of the Generation of Animals, pp. lxiii and lxiv; Ogle, p. 164, n. 7. See Generation of Animals, 737a15 and Parts of Animals, 652a10.
480a6.
Meteorology, 380a11-381b24.
On the Soul, 403a31.
On Life and Death, 480a5.
Ibid., 480a1.
Ibid., 480a10 and 11; Historia Animalium, 521a7.
De Motu Animalium, 703b5.
Parts of Animals, 666b17.
On Youth and Old Age, 469a2-5.
Parts of Animals, 667b17.
458a15-21.
Chapter III.
Parts of Animals, 666a6.
Platt, “Aristotle on the Heart” (above, n. 11).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shaw, J.R. Models for cardiac structure and function in Aristotle. Journal of the History of Biology 5, 355–388 (1972). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00346664
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00346664