WOBO: Search for words and phrases in the texts here...

In 1725, his first publication appeared under the modest title of “Index supellectilis anatomies Ravianae,” Leyden, 4to, in which he pays a handsome tribute to the memory of his learned master and predecessor, Rau, whose labours only he pretends to give in this work, although it contains many observations the result of his own experience. In 1726 he published a history of the bones, “De Ossibus corporis humani,” Leyden, 8vo; but this he reprinted in, 1762, in a more complete edition, and with plates of great beauty and accuracy. In 1734 appeared his “Historia musculorum hominis,” ibid. 4to, the plates of which were prepared with uncommon care, as he employed his artists to multiply copies until they had attained a close resemblance to the muscle in all its connexions and insertions. Haller, whose testimony will not be suspected after the many angry disputes between him and Albinus, pronounces it the best executed work in anatomy; if it has any fault, it is that all the muscles are drawn upon the same scale, which creates some confusion in estimating the proportions of the smaller ones. He afterwards published treatises on the vascular system of the intestines, on the bones of the foetus, seven plates of the natural position of the foetus in the womb, 4 vols. 4to of “Annotationes Academicae,” all illustrated with plates of great beauty. While thus labouring on original works, he became not less distinguished as an editor, and published very correct editions of the works of Harvey, the anatomy of Vesalius, and Fabricius of Aquapendente, and lastly, the fine anatomical plates of Eustachius. This very eminent anatomist died Sept, 9, 1770, at Leyden, where he had filled the professor’s chair nearly fifty years.

, a celebrated Italian anatomist, was born at Bologna, about the year 1530. He studied under Vesalius and his uncle Bartholomew Maggius, took his doctor’s degree at Bologna, and was soon after appointed professor of surgery and anatomy, which office he held for thirty-two years, and until his death, April 7, 1589. He studied with most attention the anatomy of the muscles, and arrived at some knowledge of the doctrine of the circulation of the blood. He wrote, 1. “De humano foetu liber,” Venice, 1571, 8vo, Basil, 1579, and Leyden, 1664. In this work he explains at great length the structure of the uterus, the placenta, &c. The Venice editions of 1587 and 1595, 4to, have the addition of some anatomical observations, and an essay on tumours by Arantius. 2. “In Hippocratis librum de vulneribus capitis commentarius brevis, ex ejus lectionibus collectus,” Lyons, 1580, Leyden, 1639, 1641, 12mo.

, a surgeon and anatomist of considerable reputation, was born at Bremen in 1690, whence, in 1713, he went to Halle, and studied medicine under the ablest professors. In 1715 he removed to Strasburgh, and afterwards to Basle, where he confined his researches entirely to anatomy and surgery. In 1718 he took his doctor’s degree at Halle, and some time after was appointed professor extraordinary of anatomy and surgery, which office he held until his death, in 1754, He published: 1. “Disputatio de Fistula ani feliciter curanda,” Halle, 1718. This was his inaugural thesis, and Haller thought it so excellent a performance that he inserted it among his “Theses,” and Macquart translated it into French, Paris, 1759, 12mo. In this treatise he discovers a considerable degree of conformity between the practice of the ancients and moderns in the cure of the fistula, 2. “Grundlicher Beritcht oon bandagen,” Leipsic, 1720, and 1723, 8vo, and translated into Dutch. 3. “ Observationes anatomico-chirurgico-medicoe,” Halle, 1731, 8vo, In this there are many judicious reflections and cases, accompanied by figures descriptive of some instruments of his invention. 4. “Tractatus de morbis venereis,” Leipsic, 1764, 8vo, a posthumous work. Bassius published also in German, “Notes on the Surgery of Nuck,” Halle, 1728, 8vo.

, was born in the year 1706, at Kingston in Surrey. He received his education at Eton; and discovering an inclination for surgery, was bound apprentice to Mr. Cheselden, by far the most eminent man of his profession. Under this great master, who used to say, that of all the apprentices he ever had Mr. Belchier was the most industrious and assiduous, he soon became an accurate anatomist. His preparations were esteemed next to' Dr. NichohVs, and allowed to exceed all others of that time. Thus qualified, his practice soon became extensive; and in 1736 he succeeded his fellow-apprentice Mr. Craddock, as surgeon to Guy’s hospital. In this situation, which afforded such ample opportunity of displaying his abilities, he, by his remarkably tender and kind attention to his pauper patients, became as eminent for his humanity as his superior skill in his profession. Like his master Cheselden, he was very reluctant before an operation, yet quite as successful as that great operator. He was particularly expert in the reduction of the humerus; which, though a very simple operation, is frequently productive of great trouble to the surgeon, as well as excruciating pain to the patient. Being elected fellow of the royal society, he communicated to that learned body several curious cases that fell within his cognizance; particularly a remarkable case of an hydrops ovarii, published in the Philosophical Transactions, No. 423; an account of the miller whose arm was torn off by a mill, August 15, 1737, No. 449; and a remarkable instance of the bones of animals being turned red by aliment only, No. 442. The greatest discoveries frequently are owing to trifling and accidental causes. Such was the ease in the last-mentioned circumstance, Mr. Belchier being led to make his inquiries on that subject, by the bone of a boiled leg of pork being discovered to be perfectly red, though the meat was well-flavoured, and of the usual colour. On his resignation as surgeon of Guy’s, he was made governor both of that and St. Thomas’s hospital, to which he was particularly serviceable, having recommended not less than 140 governors. Mr. Belchier in private life was a man of strict integrity, warm and zealous in his attachments, sparing neither labour nor time to serve those for whom he professed a friendship. Of this he gave a strong proof, in becoming himself a governor of the London hospital, purposely to serve a gentleman who had been his pupil. Indeed, he on every occasion was particularly desirous of serving those who had been under his care. A man of such a disposition could not fail of being caressed and beloved by all that really knew him. In convervation he was entertaining, and remarkable for bons mots, which he uttered with a dry laconic bluntness peculiar to himself; yet under this rough exterior he was possessed of a feeling and compassionate heart. Of the latter, his constantly sending a plate of victuals every day, during his confinement, to a man, who, having gained admittance to him, presented a pistol with an intent to rob him, and whom he seized and secured, is an unquestionable proof, as well as of his personal courage. Such were his gratitude and friendship too for those of his acquaintance, that on several sheets he has mentioned their names with some legacy as a token of remembrance, as medals, pictures, books, &c. trinkets and preparations, and on another paper says he could not do more, having a family of children. Whenever he spoke of Mr. Guy, the founder of the hospital, it was in a strain of enthusiasm, which he even carried so far as to saint him. A gentleman having on one of those occasions begged leave to relnark, that he had never before heard of St. Guy, Mr. Belchier, in his sentimental way, replied, “No, sir: perhaps you may not find his name in 'the calendar, but give me leave to tell you, that he has a better title to canonization than nine-tenths of those whose names are there; some of them may, perhaps, have given sight to the blind, or enabled the lame to walk; but can you quote me an instance of one of them bestowing one hundred and fifty thousand pounds sterling for the purpose of relieving his fellow creatures?” Mr. Belchier was a great admirer of the fine arts, and lived in habits of intimacy with the principal artists of his time. He enjoyed a great share of health, though far advanced in years. A friend of his being some time since attacked with epileptic fits, he exclaimed, “I am extremely sorry for him, but when I fall I hope it will be to rise no more;” and he succeeded in a great measure in his wish, for being taken with a shivering fit at Batson’s coffee-house, he returned home and went to bed. The next day he thought himself better, got up, and attempted to come down stairs, but complained to those who were assisting him, that they hurried him, and immediately alter exclaiming, “It is all over!” fell back and expired. His body was interred in the chapel at Guy’s hospiial. He died in 1785.

, a physician and anatomist of the sixteenth century, was a native of Carpi in Modena, whence some biographers have called him by the name of Carpius, or Carpensis. He took his doctor’s degree at Bologna, and first taught anatomy and surgery at Pavia. He afterwards returned to Bologna in 1520, and taught the same studies. He was there, however, accused of having intended to dissect two Spaniards who had the venereal disorder, and had applied to him for advice, which, it was said, he meant to perform while they were alive, partly out of his hatred to that nation, and partly for his own instruction. Whatever may be in this report, it is certain that he was obliged to leave Bologna, and retire to Ferrara, where he died in 1550. By his indefatigable attention to the appearances of disease, and especially by his frequent dissections, which in his time, were quite sufficient, without any other demerit, to raise popular prejudices against him, he was enabled to advance the knowledge of anatomy by many important discoveries. His works were, 1. “Commentaria, cum amplissimis additionibus, super anatomia Mundini,” Bologna, 1521, 1552, 4to, and translated into English by Jackson, London, 1664. 2. “Isagogtc breves in anatomiam corporis humani, cum aliquot figuris anatomicis,” Bologna, 1522, 4to, and often reprinted. 3. “De Cranii fractura, tractatus,” Bologna, 1518, 4to, also often reprinted. He was one of the first who employed mercury in the cure of the venereal disease.

, a German anatomist and botanist, was born August 11, 1704, at Francfort on the Oder. His father, John George Bergen, was professor of anatomy and botany in that university. After his early studies, his father gave him some instructions in the principles of medicine, and then sent him to Leyden, where he studied under Boerhaave and Albinus. He also went to Paris for farther improvement in anatomy. The reputation of Saltzman and Nicolai next induced him to pass some time at Strasburgh, and after visiting other celebrated universities in Germany, he returned to Francfort, and took his doctor’s degree in 1731. The following year he was appointed professor-extraordinary, and, in 1738, succeeded, on the death of his father, to the chair of anatomy and botany. In 1744 he became professor of therapeutics and pathology, in room of Goelicke, which he retained with high credit until his death, October 7, 1760, on which occasion his life, in the form of an eloge, was published in the Leipsic Medical Commentaries, vol. IX.

, an eminent French anatomist, was born at Tremblay in Britanny, Sept. 21, 1712. At the age of three he was left an orphan, yet learned Latin almost without a master, and was sent afterwards to Rennes to complete his education. He then went to Paris, and studied medicine with such success, that, in 1737, he took his doctor’s degree at Rheims, and in 1741 was admitted a regent member of the faculty of Paris. About the end of that year he accepted the place of physician to the prince of Moldavia, but after two years returned to France. The academy of sciences which had in his absence chosen him a corresponding member, now, in 1744, admitted him to the honour of being an associate without the intermediate rank of adjunct. The fatigues, however, which he had encountered in Moldavia, and his assiduous application to anatomical studies, had at this time impaired his health, and, joined to a nervous temperament, threw him into a state of mental debility which interrupted his studies for three years. He was afterwards recommended to travel, and it was not until the year 1750 that he recovered his health and spirits, and was enabled to resume his studies at Gahard, a retired spot near Rennes. There also he employed some part of his time in the education of his children, and his reputation brought him extensive practice. On Feb. 21, 1781, he was seized with a complaint in his breast, which carried him off in four days. Before and after his long illness, he had furnished several valuable papers to the memoirs of the academy of sciences, particularly three on the circulation in the foetus. His principal publications were, 1. “Traite d'Osteologie,” 1754, 4 vols. 12mo, a very popular work at that time, and still deserving of perusal. It was intended as the first part of a general course of anatomy. 2. “Lettre au D sur le nouveau systeme de la Voix,” Hague, 1745, 8vo. This being answered by Ferrein, or his pupil Montagnat, our author, without putting his name to it, defended his doctrine in “Lettres sur le nouveau systeme de la Voix, et sur les arteres lymphatiques,” 1748. 3. “Consultation sur la legitimite' des naissances tardives,” 1764 and 1765, 8vo. His chief argument here seems to be the simple position that if there are early births, there may also be late births. 4. “Memoire sur les consequences relatives a la pratique, deduites de la structure des os parietaux,” inserted in the Journal de Medicine, 1756. He left in manuscript Memoirs on Moldavia, which his son Rene Joseph, an eminent physician of Paris, intends to publish.

, an eminent anatomist and surgeon, was born at Turin, Oct. 18, 1723. His father, who was only a poor phlebotomist and barber, contrived to give him an education, and intended to bring him up to the church, which was thought most likely to afford him a maintenance, but one of their friends Sebastian Klingher, then professor of surgery, induced him to study that branch, in which he soon evinced great talents. He was only twenty- two when he read a dissertation on Ophthalmography, on which Haller and Portal bestowed the highest praise. The celebrated Bianchi connected himself with him, but after a few years their friendship was interrupted by the literary disputes which took place between Bianchi and Morgagni, and Bertrandi preferring“what he thought truth to a friendship which was of great importance to him, was obliged to leave Bianchi. In 1747 he was elected an associate of the college of surgery, and the same year published his” Dissertation on the Liver,“which, Haller says, contains many useful observations. In, 1752, the king, Charles Emmanuel, offered to bear his expenses to Paris and London. He accordingly went to Paris, where he increased his knowledge and practice of the art of surgery, and in consequence of his two papers read in the academy,” De Hydrocele,“and” De hepatis abscessibus qui vulneribus capitis superveniunt,“was admitted as a foreign member. In 1754 he went to London, and lodged for a year with sir William Bromfield, our late eminent surgeon, during which time, as at Paris, he studied hospital practice, and cultivated the acquaintance of men of science. On his return to Turin, the king founded for his sake a new professorship of practical surgery and anatomy, and at Bertrandi’s request, built a handsome amphitheatre in the hospital of St. John. He was afterwards appointed first surgeon to the king, and professor of chemistry in the university. Surgery now, which had been practised in Piedmont only by regimental surgeons, began to wear a new face and a literary society, which was afterwards completely established under the title of the” Royal Academy of Sciences,“began now to hold its meetings, and Bertrandi contributed some valuable papers to the first volume of their Memoirs. His principal publication was his” Trattato delle operazioni di Chirurgia," Nice, 1763, 2 vols. 8vo, which was afterwards translated into French and German. He was employed on a treatise on anatomy and a comparative history of ancient and modern surgery, when death deprived science and humanity of his valuable labours, in 1765, in his forty-second year. His works already published, and his posthumous works, edited by Penchienati and Brugnone form 13 vols. 8vo.

a celebrated Italian anatomist, was born at Turin, Sept. 12, 1681, and at the age of seventeen was honoured with a doctor’s degree. He was a long time professor of anatomy at Turin, where the king of Sardinia, in 1715, caused a very commodious amphitheatre to be built for his lectures. In 1718 he also taught pharmacy, chemistry, and the practice of physic, He was offered a professor’s chair in the university of Bologna, but refused it from an attachment to his native place, Turin. He died much esteemed, Jan. 2, 1761. He wrote a great many works; among which were, 1. “Ductus lacrymalis, &c. anatome,” Turin, 1715, 4to, Leyden, 1723. 2. “De lacteorum vasorum positionibus et fabrica,” Turin, 1743, 4to. 3. “Storia del mostro di due corpi,” Turin, 1719, 8vo. 4. “Lettera sull' insensibilita,” Turin, 1755, 3vo, in which he attacks Haller’s notions on sensibility. But Bianchi’s most celebrated works are, 5. His “Histofia hepatica, seu de Hepatis structura, usibus et morbis,” Turin, 1710, 4to. 1716, and again at Geneva, 1725, 2 vols. 4to. with plates, and six anatomical essays. 6. “De natural! in humane corpore, vitiosa, morbosaque generatione historia,” ibid. 1761, 8vo. Manget has some dissertations by Bianchi in his Theatrum Anatomicum, and the collection of fifty-four plates, containing two hundred and seventy anatomical subjects, published at Turin in 1757, was the work of Bianchi. He was unquestionably a man of learning and skill in his profession; but Morgagni, in his Adversaria, has pointed out many of his mistakes, and those which occur in his history of the liver, have been severely animadverted on by that able anatomist in his “Epistolas Anatomicse duse,” printed in 1727, but without his consent, by the friend to whom they were written. In this work Bianchi is charged with bad Latin, want of judgment, care, memory, and honour. These charges, however severe as they seem, were not thought to affect the general merit of Bianchi’s great work.

, an ingenious Scotch botanist, was a practitioner of physic and surgery at Dundee, where he made himself first known as an anatomist, by the dissection of an elephant, which died near that place, in 1706. He was a nonjuror, and for his attachment to the exiled family of Stuart, was imprisoned, in the rebellion in 1715, as a suspected person. He afterwards removed to London,

, regius professor and director of the academy of surgery, veteran associate of the academy of sciences of Paris, and member of the imperial academy of Florence, was born at Paris April 10, 1728. His father, who was also a surgeon, destined him for the same profession, which had long been followed by the branches of his family, but began with giving him the ordinary course of a learned education that he might acquire the languages in which the most celebrated anatomists of former ages wrote, and some of those principles of philosophy which are the foundation of all sciences and arts. Young Bordenave’s proficiency fully answered his father’s expectations, and he soon fdled the distinguished situations already mentioned, and contributed many valuable papers to the Memoirs of the academy of surgery, on extraordinary cases which occurred in his practice: the treatment of gunshot wounds, and anatomical subjects. He also in 1757 made some experiments to illustrate Haller’s opinion on the difference between sensible or irritable parts, and wrote a work in defence of that celebrated anatomist’s opinion on the formation of the bones, against that of Duhamel. He also, in 1768, translated Haller’s Elements of Physiology for the use of his students, but he had previously, in 1756, published a new work on the same subject, admired for precision of method. Bordenave had long wished for a place in the academy of sciences, and in 1774 was elected a veteran associate. This title, it seems, indicates that the party has been chosen contrary to the statutes, and that the academy did not choose him of their own will; but for this he was not to blame, as such an election was totally contrary to his wish. In a short time, however, the academicians were reconciled, and Bordenave enriched their memoirs with some important papers. Bordenave also became echevin, or sheriff, of Paris, an office never before conferred on a surgeon, but. which he filled in a manner highly creditable, and directed his attention, as a magistrate, chiefly to the health of the city. On the birth of Louis XVII. he was honoured with the ribbon of the order of St. Michael, in consideration of his talents and services, but did not long enjoy this honour, being seized with an apoplexy, which after eight days proved fatal, March 12, 1782. Besides the works already noticed, he published, “Dissertations sur les Antiseptiques,” 1769, 8vo; and “Memoires sur le danger des Caustiques pour la cure radicale des Hernies,” 1774.

, an eminent physician, was son of Augustine Briggs, esq. who was descended of an ancient family in Norfolk, and had been four times member of parliament for the city of Norwich, where this son was born about the year 1650, although his biographers differ very widely on this point. At thirteen years of age he was sent to Bene't-college in Cambridge, and placed under the care of Dr. Thomas Tenison, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, whom he succeeded in his fellowship. He took both his degrees in arts, and was chosen fellow of his college, Nov. 1668. His genius leading him to the study of physic, he travelled into France, where he attended the lectures of the famous anatomist Mons. Vieussens at Montpelier; and, after his return, published his “Ophthalmographia” in 1676. The year following he was created M. D. at Cambridge, and soon after made fellow of the college of physicians of London. In 1682 he quitted his fellowship to his brother; and the same year his “Theory of Vision” was published by Hooke. In 1683 he sent to the royal society a continuation of that discourse, which was published in their Transactions; and the same year was by Charles II. appointed physician to St. Thomas’s hospital. In 1684 he communicated to the royal society two remarkable cases relating to vision, which were likewise printed in their Transactions; and in 1685 published a Latin version of his “Theory of Vision,” at the desire of Mr. (afterwards sir) Isaac Newton, with a recommendatory epistle from him prefixed to it. And for completing this curious and useful subject relating to the eye, he promised, in the preface, two other treatises, one “De usu partium oculi;” and the other “De ejusdem affectibus;” neither of which', however, appears to have been ever published: but, in 1687, came out a second edition of his “Ophthalmographia.” He was afterwards made physician in ordinary to king William, and continued in great esteem for his skill in his profession till he died at Town-Malling in Kent, Sept. 4, 1704, and was there buried, although a cenotaph is erected to his memory in the church of Holt in Norfolk. He married Hannah, sole daughter and heiress of Edmund Hobart, grandson to sir Henry Hobart, lord chief justice of the common pleas in the reign of James I. by whom he left three children, Mary, Henry, and Hannah. Henry died in 1748, rector of Hoit.

, a Swiss physician and anatomist of eminence, was born at Diessenhofen, the 16th of January, 1653. After passing through the usual school education, he was sent, at the age of sixteen, to Strasburgh, where, applying assiduously to the study of physic and anatomy, he was created doctor in medicine in 1672. For his thesis, he gave the anatomy of a child with two heads, which he met with. He now went to Paris, and attended the schools and hospitals there with such assiduity, as to attract the notice, and gain him the intimacy of Dionis and du Verny, who were present while he made the experiments on the pancreas, which enabled him, some years after, to publish a more accurate description of that viscus, than had been before given, under the title of “Experimenta nova circa Pancreas. Accedit Diatribe de Lympha et genuine Pancreatis usu,” Leidse, 1682, 8vo. He proved that the fluid secreted by the pancreas is not necessary to digestion, and that an animal may live after that viscus is taken out of the body, having tried the experiment upon a dog, which perfectly recovered from the operation. On quitting Paris, he came to London, and was introduced to Dr. Willis, Lower, and Henry Oldenburg, secretary to the royal society. From England he passed to Holland, and studied for some months at Leyden. At Amsterdam he visited Swammerdam and Ruysch, with whom he afterwards corresponded. Returning home he was made professor of medicine at Heidelberg, and first physician to the elector palatine, who conferred on him the title of baron de Brunn in Hamerstein. About the same time, he niarried one of the daughters of the celebrated Wepfer, and was elected honorary member of the academia naturae curios, in return for some ingenious dissertations which he had communicated to them. In 1688 he publised “Dissertatio Anatomica de Glandula pituitaria,” Heidelb. 4to. From this time he became in such great request for his knowledge and success in practice, that he was, in succession, consulted by most of the princes in Germany. Among others, in 1720, he was sent for to Hanover, to attend the prince of Wales, afterwards king George II. In 1715 he published at Heidelberg, “Glandula Duodeni sen Pancreas secundum detectum,” 4to, which was only an improved edition of his “De Glandulis in Duodeno Intestino detectis,” which had been before twice printed. There are some other lesser works, the titles and accounts of which are given by Haller, in his Bib. Anat. In the latter edition of Wepfer’s works are given dissections by our author, of the heads of some persons who died of apoplexy, of whom he had had the care. Though early afflicted with gravel, and in the latter part of his life with gout, he continued to attend to the calls of his patients, though living a great distance from his residence. When in his 74th year, he went in great haste to Munich, to attend the elector Maximilian Emanuel; on his return, he was seized with a fever, which, in a few days, put an end to his life, October 2, 1727.

At length these three painters, having made all the advantages they could by observation and practice, formed a plan of association, and continued henceforward almost always together. Lewis communicated his discoveries freely to his cousins; and proposed to them that they should unite their sentiments and their manner, and act as it were in confederacy. The proposal was accepted: they painted various pictures in several places; and finding their credit to increase, they laid the foundation of that celebrated school, which ever since has gone by the name of the Caracci’s academy. Hither all the young students, who had a view of becoming masters, resorted to be instructed in the rudiments of painting; and here the Caracci taught freely and without reserve to all that came. Lewis’s charge was to make a collection of antique statues and bas-reliefs. They had designs of the best masters, and a collection of curious books on all subjects relating to their art: and they had a skilful anatomist always ready to teach what belonged to the knitting and motion of the muscles, &c. There were often disputations in the academy; and not only painters but men of learning proposed questions, which were always decided by Lewis. Every body was well received; and though stated hours were allotted to treat of different matters, yet improvements might be made at all hours by the antiquities and the designs which were to be seen.

, a distinguished anatomist, of humble parentage, but of great talents, was born at Placentia in1545. His genius leading him to the study of anatomy, he went to Padua, and became a servant to Fabricius, who made him his pupil and assistant, and at length, coadjutor in the professorship of anatomy. This office, to which he was preferred in 1609, he continued to fill with credit until 1616, when he died. As his diligence and industry equalled his genius, he became in a few years more knowing and skilful in his profession than his preceptor. Fabricius, in the opinion of Douglas, excelled in philosophy, Casserius in anatomy. This excited, however, no jealousy. Fabricius, who was far advanced in years, was well pleased with the prospect of leaving a successor so well qualified to advance the knowledge of the art; but in this he was disappointed, as he survived his pupil by more than three years. Of Casserius’s anxious desire to leave behind him a name, we have numerous proofs. Almost the whole of the revenue he obtained by teaching anatomy was expended in procuring subjects for dissection, and in paying draughtsmen and engravers to delineate figures of such parts of the body as he either discovered, or thought he had juster conceptions of than his predecessors. In the prefaces to his anatomical works he is not backward in affirming that he has furnished future anatomists with delineations of the parts of human and animal bodies, exceeding in elegance, perspicuity, and correctness, all that had preceded them. It will be observed he made use of animals, not as succedanea, but only to enable him to discover minute parts which were not easily distinguishable in the human body. The title of his first work, published in 1600, is “De Vocis Auditusque Organis Historia Anatomica, &c. Tractatibus duobus explicata,” Ferrara, fol. He here lays claim to the discovery of a muscle, moving the malleus, one of the ossiculae auditus. He also improved, Haller says, the anatomy of the larynx. “Pentaesthesejon, id est, de quinque Sensibus Liber, Organorum Fabricam, Actionem, et Usum continens,” Venet. 1609, fol. This is an extension of the former work to the rest of the senses, executed with equal skill. They have both been several times reprinted. It was not until some years after the death of Spigelius, his successor, which happened in 1622, that the remainder of Casserius’s works, consisting of 78 anatomical plates, with the explanations, was published. Bucretius, to whom Spigelius had left the care of his productions, incorporated the works of Casserius with them, and published them together at Venice, 1627, royal folio. Two of the plates by Casserius, viz. one representing the placenta, and another the hymen, are printed with Spigelius’s work, “De Formato Fcetu,” 1627, folio.

, an eminent surgeon and anatomist, and a celebrated writer, was born Oct. 19, 1688, at Burrow-on-the-Hill, near Somerby in Leicestershire. After having received a classical education, and been instructed in the rudiments of his profession at Leicester, he was placed about 1703, under the immediate tuition of the celebrated anatomist Cowper, and resided in his house, and at the same time studied surgery under Mr. Feme, the head surgeon of St. Thomas’s hospital. Such was the proficiency he made under these able masters, that he himself began, at the age of twenty-two, to read lectures in anatomy, a syllabus of which, in 4to, was first printed in 1711. Lectures of this kind were then, somewhat new in this country, having been introduced, not many years before, by M. Bussiere, a French refugee, and a surgeon of high note in the reign of queen Anne. Till then, the popular prejudices had run so high against the practice of dissection, that the civil power found it difficult to accommodate the lecturers with proper subjects; and pupils were obliged to attend the universities, or other public seminaries, where, likewise, the procuring of bodies was no easy task. It is an extraordinary proof of Mr. Cheselden’s early reputation, that he had the honour of being chosen a member of the royal society in 1711, when he could be little more than twenty- three years of age but he soon justified their choice, by a variety of curious and useful communications. Nor were his contributions limited to the royal society, but are to be found in the memoirs of the royal academy of surgeons at Paris, and in other valuable repositories. In 1713 Mr. Cheselden published in 8vo, his “Anatomy of the Human Body,” reprinted in 1722, 1726, 1732; in folio in 1734, and in 8vo, 1740, and an eleventh edition aslate as 1778. During the course of twenty years, in which Mr. Cheselden carried on his anatomical lectures, he was continually rising in reputation and practice, and upon Mr. Feme’s retiring from business, he was elected head surgeon of St. Thomas’s hospital. At two other hospitals, St. George’s, and the Westminster Infirmary, he was chosen consulting surgeon; and at length had the honour of being appointed principal surgeon to queen Caroline, by whom he was highly esteemed; and was indeed generally regarded as the first man in his profession.

The connections of our eminent surgeon and anatomist were not confined to persons whose studies and pursuits were congenial to those of his own profession. He was fond of the polite arts, and cultivated an acquaintance with men of genius and taste. He was honoured, in particular, with the friendship of Pope, who frequently speaks of dining with him, but once had an interview rather of an unpleasing kind. In 1742, Mr. Cheselden, in a conversation with Mr. Pope at Mr. Dodsley’s, expressed his surprize at the folly of those who could imagine that the fourth book of the Dunciad had the least resemblance in stylo, wit, humour, or fancy, to the three preceding books. Though he was not, perhaps, altogether singular in this opinion, which is indeed a very just one, it was no small mortification to him to be informed by Pope, tbat he himself was the author of it, and was sorry that Mr. Cheselden did not like the poem. Mr. Cheseklen is understood to have too highly valued himself upon his taste in poetry and architecture, considering the different nature of his real accomplishments and pursuits. His skill in the latter art is said not to have been displayed to the best advantage in Surgeons’ -hall, in the Old Bailey, which was principally built under his direction. These, however, are trifling shades in eminent characters.

, a celebrated surgeon and anatomist, the youngest son of Richard Cowper of Hampshire, esq. was born in 1666, probably at Bishop’s Sutton, near Alresford in that county, where he lies interred. After a medical education, he practised in London, where his first work, “Myotomia reformata, or a new administration of all the Muscles of the Human Body,” was published in 1694, 8vo, and reprinted in a splendid folio, by Dr. Mead in 1724, several years after the death of the author, with an introductory discourse on muscular motion, and some additions; but the figares, although elegant, are said to be somewhat deficient in correctness. In 1697, the author published at Oxford, in folio, “The Anatomy of Human Bodies,” many of the plates of which were purchased by some London booksellers in Holland, and belonged to Bidloo’s anatomy. The dispute which this occasioned, we have already noticed (see Bidloo), and may now add that it terminated very little to Cowper’s credit. Bidloo complained of the theft to the royal society, and wrote a very severe pamphlet, entitled “Gul. Cowperus citatus coram tribunali.” Cowper, instead of acknowledging the impropriety of his conduct, published a virulent pamphlet, entitled “Vindiciae;” in which he endeavours to shew that they were not really Bidloo’s figures, but hacl been engraved by Swammerdam, and purchased by Bidloo from Swammerdam’s widow, a malicious charge which some subsequent writers have been malevolent enough to propagate and defend. Cowper has the merit of giving a description of some glands, seated near the neck of the bladder, which have obtained the name of Cowper’s mucous glands. He was also author of several communications to the royal society, on the subjects of anatomy and surgery, which are printed in their Transactions, and of some observations inserted in the “Anthropologia” of Drake. He is said to have ruined his constitution by severe labour and watchings, and was seized at first with an asthmatic complaint, and afterwards with the dropsy, of which he died March 8, 1709.

, an eminent surgeon and anatomist, was born in 1745 at Edinburgh, where his father was examiner in the Excise-office, and had him christened William Cumberland in compliment to the hero of Culloden, but the latter name our anatomist seldom used. The earlier part of his life was spent in Scotland, and at the age of fourteen he went to the university of Edinburgh, with a view of studying divinity. Feeling, however, a strong propensity for anatomy and physic, he studied those sciences, with great assiduity, for eight years at the university of Glasgow. In 1771 he came to London, and by the recommendation of Dr. D. Pitcairn he became librarian to the late Dr. Hunter, who had applied to the professors of Glasgow for a young man of talents to succeed Mr. Hewson; and this connection was the principal means of raising Mr. Cruikshank to that conspicuous situation which he afterwards so well merited. During the life of Dr. Hunter, Mr. Cruikshank became successively his pupil, anatomical assistant, and partner in anatomy; and on the death of that celebrated man, Mr. Cruikshank and Dr. Baillie received an address from a large proportion of Dr. Hunter’s students, full of affection and esteem; which induced them to continue in Windmill-street the superintendance of that anatomical school which has produced so many excellent scholars. Mr. Cruikshank, besides supporting with great reputation his share in this undertaking, made himself known to the world by some excellent publications, which have insured to him a high character as a perfect anatomist, and a very acute and ingenious physiologist. In 1780 he published his principal work, the “Anatomy of the Absorbent Vessels in the Human Body,” in which he not only demonstrated, in the clearest manner, the structure and situation of these vessels, but collected, under one point of view, and enriched with many valuable observations, all that was known concerning this important system in the human body. Besides this work, the merit of which has been fully acknowledged by translations into foreign languages, he wrote a paper, which was presented to the royal society several years ago, entitled, “Experiments on the Nerves of Living Animals,” in which is shewn the important fact of the regeneration of nerves, after portions of them have been cut out; illustrated by actual experiments on animals. This paper was read before the society, but not then printed, owing, as was said, to the interference of the late sir John Pringle, who conceived that it controverted some of the opinions of Haller, his intimate friend. It appeared, however, in the Society’s Transactions for 1794. In 1779 he made several experiments on the subject of “Insensible Perspiration,” which were added to the first editions of his work on the “Absorbent Vessels;” and were collected and published in a separate pamphlet in 1795. In 1797, the year in which he was elected F. R. S. he published an account of appearances in the ovaria of rabbits, in different stages of pregnancy; but his fame rests upon, and is best supported by, his “Anatomy of the Absorbents,” which continues to be considered as the most correct and valuable work on the subject now extant.

, a very eminent mathematician, was born May 14, 1701, at Hurvvorth, a village about three miles south of Darlington, on the borders of the county of Durham, at least it is certain he resided here from his childhood. His father, Dutlly Emerson, taught a school, and was a tolerable proficient in the mathematics; and without his books and instructions perhaps his son’s genius might might never have been unfolded. Besides his father’s instructions, our author was assisted in the learned languages by a young clergyman, then curate of Hurworth, who was boarded at his father’s house. In the early part of his life, he attempted to teach a few scholars; but whether from his concise method (for he was not happy in expressing his ideas), or the warmth of his natural temper, he made no progress in his school; he therefore Sood left it oft', and satisfied with a small paternal estate of about 60l. or 70l. a year, devoted himself to study, which he closely pursued in his native place through the course of a long life, being mostly very healthy, till towards the latter part of his days, when he was much afflicted with the stone: towards the close of the year 1781, being sensible of his approaching dissolution, he disposed of the whole of his mathematical library to a bookseller at York, and on May the 26th, 1782, his lingering and painful disorder put an end to his life at his native village, in the eighty-first year of his age. In his person he was rather short, but strong and well-made, with an open countenance and ruddy complexion. He was never known to ask a favour, or seek the acquaintance of a rich man, unless he possessed some eminent qualities of the mind. He was a very good classical scholar, and a tolerable physician, so far as it could be combined with mathematical principles, according to the plan of Keil and Morton. The latter he esteemed above all others as a physician the former as the best anatomist. He was very singular in his behaviour, dress, and conversation. His manners and appearance were that of a rude and rather boorish countryman, he wasof very plain conversation, and indeed seemingly rude, commonly mixing oaths in his sentences. He had strong natural parts, and could discourse sensibly on any subject; but was always positive and impatient of any contradiction. He spent his whole life in close study and writing books; with the profits of which he redeemed his little patrimony from some original incumbrance. He had but one coat, which he always wore open before, except the lower button no waistcoat; his shirt quite the reverse of one in. common use, no opening before, but buttoned close at the collar behind; a kind of flaxen wig which had not a crooked hair in it; and probably had never been tortured with a comb from the time of its being made. This was his dress when he went into company. One hat he made to last him the best part of his lifetime, gradually lessening the flaps, bit by bit, as it lost its elasticity and hung down, till little or nothing but the crown remained. He never rode although he kept a horse, but was frequently seen to lead the horse, with a kind of wallet stuffed with the provisions he had bought at the market. He always walked up to London when he had any thing to publish, revising sheet by sheet himself; trusting no eyes but his own, which was always a favourite maxim with him. He never advanced any mathematical proposition that he had not first tried in practice, constantly making all the different parts himself on a small scale, so that his house was filled with all kinds of mechanical instruments together or disjointed. He would frequently stand up to his middle in water while fishing; a diversion he was remarkably fond of. He used to study incessantly for some time, and then for relaxation take a ramble to any pot ale-house where he could get any body to drink with and talk to. The duke of Manchester was highly pleased with his company, and used often to come to him in the fields and accompany him home, but could never persuade him to get into a carriage. When he wrote his sinall treatise on navigation, he and some of his scholars took a small vessel from Hurworth, and the whole crew soon gotswampt; when Emerson, smiling and alluding to his treatise, said “They must not do as I do, but as I say.” He was a married man; and his wife used to spin on an old-fashioned wheel, of which a very accurate drawing is given in his mechanics. He was deeply skilled in the science of music, the theory of sounds, and the various scales both ancient and modern, but was a very poor performer. He carried that singularity which marked all his actions even into this science. He had, if we may be allowed the expression, two first strings to his violin, which, he said, made the E more melodious when they were drawn up to a perfect unison. His virginal, which is a species of instrument like the modern spinnet, he had cut and twisted into various shapes in the keys, by adding some occasional half-tones in order to regulate the present scale, and to rectify some fraction of discord that will always remain in the tuning. He never could get this regulated to his fancy, and generally concluded by saying, 4< It was a bad instrument, and a foolish thing to be vexed with."

, a most celebrated physician and anatomist of Italy, was descended from a noble family, and born at Modena, most probably in 1523, although some make him born in 1490. He enjoyed a strong and vigorous constitution, with vast abilities of mind, which he cultivated by an intense application to his studies in philosophy, physic, botany, and anatomy. In this last he made some discoveries, and, among the rest, that of the tubes by which the ova descend from the ovarium, and which from him are called the “Fallopian tubes.” He travelled through the greatest part of Europe, and penetrated by his labour the most abstruse mysteries of nature. He practised physic with great success, and gained the character of one of the ablest physicians of his age. He was made professor of anatomy at Pisa in 1548, and was promoted to the same office at Padua in 1551; at which last place he died October 9, 1563, according to the common opinion, in the prime of life, but not so, if born in 1490.

, an eminent French anatomist and surgeon, was born Oct. 27, 1693, at Frepech in Agenois. He practised at Montpellier, and was a member of the faculty of that city and of Paris, member of the academy of sciences, and professor of physic in the royal colllege. He was the author of two works; one entitled “Lectures on Medicine,” the other, “Lectures on the Materia Medica” each in three volumes, 12ino, which were published in 1783, and proved the soundness of his knowledge. He held, however, some peculiar notions as to the formation of the voice, which he was not able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of his contemporaries. He died at Paris Feb. 28, 1769.

The works of Phineas Fletcher, including the “Purple Island, or the Isle of Man;” the * Piscatory Eclogues;“and Miscellanies, were published at Cambridge in 1633, 4to. The only part that has been correctly reprinted is the” Piscatory Eclogues,“published at Edinburgh in 1771, by an anonymous editor. There are few of the old poets whom Mr. Headley seems more anxious to revive than Phinean Fletcher, and he has examined his claims to lasting fame with much acuteness, yet, perhaps, not without bomewhat of that peculiar prejudice which seems to pervade many of the critical essays of this truly ingenious and amiable young man. Having at a very early period of life commenced the perusal of the ancient English poets, his enthusiasm carried him back to their times, their imbits, and their language. Froai pardoning their quaintnesses, he proceeded to admire them, and has in some instances placed among the most striking proofs of invention, many of those antitheses and conceits which modern refinement does not easily tolerate. Stiil, taste and judgment are generally predominant in the following criticism.” Were the celebrated Mr. Pott compelled to read a lecture upon the anatomy of the human frame at large, in a regular set of stanzas, it is much to be questioned whether he could make himself understood by the most apprehensive author, without the advantage of professional knowledge. FJetrher seems to have undertaken a nearly similar task, as the rive first cantos of The Purple Island are almost entirely taken up with an explanation of the title; in the course of which the reader forgets the poet, and is sickened' with the anatomist. Such minute attention to this part of the subject was a material error in judgment; for which, however, ample amends is made in what follows. Nor is Fletcher wholly undeserving of praise for the intelligibility with which he has struggled through his difficulties, for his uncommon command of words, and facility of metre. After describing the body, he proceeds to personify the passions and intellectual faculties. Here fatigued attention is not merely relieved, but fascinated and enraptured; and notwithstanding his figures, in many instances, are too arbitrary and fantastic in their habiliments, often disproportioned and over-done, sometimes lost in a superfluity of glaring colours, and the several characters, in general, by no means sufficiently kept apart; yet, amid such a profusion of images, many are distinguished by a boldness of outline, a majesty of manner, a brilliancy of colouring, a distinctness and propriety of attribute, and an air of life, that we look for in vain in modern productions, and that rival, if not surpass, what we meet with of the kind even in Spenser, from whom our author caught his inspiration. After exerting his creative powers on this department of his subject, the virtues and better qualities of the heart, under their leader Eclecta, or Intellect, are attacked by the vices: a battle ensues, and the latter are vanquished, after a vigorous opposition, through the interference of an angel, who appears at the prayers of Eclecta. The poet here abruptly takes an opportunity of paying a fulsome, and unpardonable compliment to James the First (stanza 55, canto 12), on that account perhaps the most unpalatable passage in the book. From Fletcher’s dedication of this his poem, with the Piscatory Eclogues and Miscellanies, to his friend Edmund Beniowes, it seems that they were written very early? as he calls them ' raw essays of ray very unripe years, and almost childhood.* It is to his honour that Milton read and imitated him, as every attentive reader or* both poets must soon discover. He is eminently entitled to a very high rank among our old English classics. Quarles, in his verses prefixed to The Purple Island, hints that he had a poem on a similar subject in agitation, but was prevented from pursuing it by finding it had got into other hands. In a map to one of his Emblems are these names of places, London, Finchfield, Roxwell, and Httgay: edit. 1669."

, the first and most universal vegetable anatomist and physiologist of this country, the son of the preceding, was born at Coventry. The year of his birth is not mentioned, but from some circumstances appears to have been 1628. He was brought up a presbyterian, his father having taken the covenant; and on the change of the national form of religion, at the restoration of Charles II. he was sent to study in some foreign university, where he took his degree of doctor of physic. He settled first at Coventry, and probably resided there in 1664, when, as he informs us in tht 1 preface to his Anatomy of Plants, he first directed his thoughts to the subject of that work, “upon reading some of the many and curious inventions of learned men, in the bodies of animals. For considering that both of them came at first out of the same hand, and were therefore the contrivances of the same wisdom; I thence,” says he, “fully assured myself, that it could not be a vain design to seek it in both. That so I might put somewhat upon that side the leaf which the best botanicks had left bare and empty.” Four years afterwards he consulted his brother-in-law, Dr. Henry Sampson, who encouraged him to go on, by pointing out a passage in Glisson’s book “De Hepate,” chap. 1, in which the anatomy of plants is hinted at as an unexplored, but very promising line of study for a practical observer. For some time he resided at Coventry, but determining to settle in London, he came thither about 1672. Before this his first essay on the anatomy of plants was communicated to the royal society in 1670, by bishop Wilkins, under the title of an “Idea of a Philosophical History of Plants.” It was received with the honour and attention it deserved, being ordered to be printed, and its author, in that year also, on the recommendation of the same learned divine, became a fellow of the royal society. He was appointed secretary in 1677, in which capacity he published the Philosophical Transactions from Jan. 1677-8, to Feb. in the following year. In 1680 he was made an honorary fellovr of the college of physicians. He is said to have attained to considerable practice in his profession, nor did his being a nonconformist deprive him of the credit justly due to his piety and philosophical merit, even in the worst times. He lived indeed to see various changes of opinions and professions, apparently with the tranquillity becoming a philosopher and a good man, and died suddenly, March 25, 1711.

, a French anatomist, was born 1487, at Andermach. He was physician to Francis I. and retired to Strasburg, to avoid the troubles which arose about religion, and became professor of Greek there, as he had been at Louvain; and also practised physic, but was afterwards obliged to resign his professorship. He died Oct. 4, 1574. Guintier translated several treatises from Galen and other authors, and published some tracts in Latin “On the Plague,” 8vo and “On Pregnant Women and Children,” 8vo. He is sard to have been the first who gave the name of pancreas to the glandular substance which is fixed to the peritonaeum; and made some other discoveries, for which Winslow praises him highly, but Vesalius speaks contemptuously of his anatomical skill.

, a celebrated physician, surgeon, anatomist, and botanist, was born at Frankfort on the Maine, in 1683. He was educated in several German universities, and in 1706 spent some time in the study of anatomy and surgery at Amsterdam under Ruysch, then so famous for his dissections and anatomical preparations. In the following year he went to serve as a surgeon in the Dutch camp in Brabant; devoting the subsequent winter to further improvement, under Boerhaave and his eminent colleagues, who at that time attracted students from all parts to the university of Leyden, where Heister took his degree. Returning afterwards to the camp, he was, in 1709, appointed physician -general to the Dutch military hospital. The experience he thus acquired, raised him to a distinguished rank in the theory and practice of surgery, especially as he had a genius for mechanics, and was by that means enabled to bring about great improvements in the instrumental branch of his art. In 1710 he became professor of anatomy and surgery at Altorf, in the little canton of Uri, and rendered himself celebrated by his lectures and writings. Ten years afterwards a more advantageous situation offered itself to him at Helmstad, where he became physician, with the title of Aulic counsellor, as usual, to the duke of Brunswick, as well as professor of medicine, and afterwards of surgery and botany, in that university. Here he continued till his death, which happened in 1758, at the age of seventy-five. The czar Peter invited him to Russia, but he was too comfortably situated in Germany, where the favour of several sovereigns already shone upon him at an early period, to accept the invitation.

, an ancient physician, flourished almost five hundred years before Christ. Cicero, Pliny, and Plutarch, mention him. Fallopius says, that he was the greater anatomist, and understood the sirucu.e of the human body better, and made more discoveries than Erasistratus his contemporary. He is also said to have discovered the lacteal vessels; and gave names to the various parts of the body, which they retain to this day. He was a great lover of botany, as wells physic and surgery and is said to have made some considerable improvement in each. Galen calls him a consummate physician, and a very great anatomist; and says, that these two great anatomists dissected many human bodies at Alexandria in Egypt; Tertullian says 600, and calls him “Herophilus ille Medicus aut Lanius;” as they are said to have dis^c ued condemned criminals alive. He is said also to have discovered the nerves, and their use. He makes three sorts of them; the first to convey sensation, the second to move the bones, and the third the muscles. He also mentions the optic nerves, the retina, and the tunica arachnoirles, and choroides the lacteals, mesenteric glands, and the glandulae prostatae and is the first that wrote any thing distinctly with exactness on the pulse.

, an eminent anatomist, was born at Hexham, in Northumberland, November 14, 1739. He attended the grammar school of that town until he was apprenticed to his father, a surgeon and apothecary of reputation; after which he resided some time with Mr. Lambert, surgeon, at Newcastle. In 1759 he was sent to London, and resided with that distinguished anatomist, Mr. John Hunter, attending the lectures of his no less celebrated brother, Dr. Wm. Hunter. Young Hewson’s assiduity and skill having attracted the attention of the teachers, he was appointed to superintend the dissecting room, while Mr. Hunter went abroad with the army in 1760; and in 1762, after studying a year at Edinburgh, he became associated with Dr. Hunter, and occasionally delivered the anatomical lectures; and when Dr. Hunter’s spacious establishment was completed in Windmill-street, Mr. Hewson was allotted an apartment in the house. Here he pursued his anatomical investigations, and “his experimental inquiries into the properties of the blood;” an account of which he published in 1771, and he communicated to the royal society several papers containing an account of his discoveries of the lymphatic system in birds and fishes, for which he received the Copleyan medal, and was soon after elected a fellow of that body. In 1770, his connection with Dr. Hunter was dissolved, and he began a course of anatomical lectures alone in September 1772, in Craven-street; and published a second edition of his “Experimental Inquiry,” which he dedicated to sir John Pringle, as a testimony of gratitude for the undeviating friendship of that illustrious physician. In the spring of 1774, he published his work On the “Lymphatic system.” At this time his anatomical theatre was crowded with pupils, his practice was daily increasing, and his ardour for experimental research undiminished, when he was seized with a fever, occasioned by a wound received in dissecting a morbid body, which terminated fatally on the 1st of May 1774, in the thirty-fifth year of his age. His papers, which were afterwards collected together, were originally published in the 23d, 24th, 25th, and 28th volumes of the Philosophical Transactions, annis 1768 73.

, a physician and anatomist, mentioned in the preceding lite, was born at Fordingbridge, in Hampshire, Feb. 6, 1613, and educated at Oxford, where he was elected a scholar of Trinity college in 1632, and took his degree of M. D. in 1642. After this he practised at Sherbourne, in Dorsetshire, with a considerable share of reputation, and died there March 21, 1684. He was buried at Candle Purse in that county, of which place his lather had been rector. Though wiih limited opportunities of dissection, he pursued the study of anatomy with zeal, and his name has been given to some discoveries not strictly his; as that of the ant mm inaxillare, of which he obtained a view from an extracted tooth, which suggested the operation of piercing into it from the jaw, practised by Cowper. Casserius had mentioned the cavity under the name of ant rum gente. His principal work is, “Corporis Humani Disquisitio Anatomica,” printed at the Hague in 1651, in folio, the descriptions in which are too. brief, the reasonings unnecessarily copious, and the figures chiefly copied from Vesalins. His other writings are, “Exercitationes cliuc, quanun prior de passione hysterica, altera de affectione hypochondnaca,” Oxon. 1660, abounding with physiological remarks and hypotheses, some of which are ingenious, but being attacked by Dr. Willis, Highmore printed, in H,70, “De hysterica et hypochondriaca passione, Responsio Epistolaris ad Willisium.” “A History of Generation,” 8vo, 1651, which has some good figures of the embryo in the egg, during the state of incubation; “Considerations on the Scarborough Spa,” and “Accounts of the Springs at FarinHon r.nd East Chennock,” both in the Philosophical Transactions.

, a physician, was born of a good family, at Furstenwalde, in the electorate of Brandenbourg, Sept. 20, 1621; and was driven early from his native country by the plague, and also by the war that followed it. His parents, having little idea of letters or sciences, contented themselves with having him taught writing and arithmetic; but Hoffman’s taste for books and study made him very impatient under this confined instruction, and he was resolved, at all events, to be a scholar. He first gained over his mother to his scheme; but she died when he was only fifteen. This, however, fortunately proved no impediment to his purpose; for the schoolmaster of Furstenwalde, to which place after many removals he had now returned, was so struck with his talents and laudable ambition, that he instructed him carefully in secret. His father, convinced at length of his uncommon abilities, permitted him to follow his inclinations; and, in 1637, sent him to study in the college of Cologne. Famine and the plague drove him from hence to Kopnik, where he buried his father; and, in 1638, he went to Altdorf, to an uncle by his mother’s side, who was a professor of physic. Here he finished his studies in classical learning and philosophy, and then applied himself, with the utmost ardour, to physic. In 1641, when he had made some progress, he went to the university of Padua, which then abounded with men very learned in all sciences. Anatomy and botany were the great objects of his pursuit; and he became very deeply skilled in both. Baitholin tells us, that Hoffman, having dissected a turkey-cock, discovered the panacreatic duct, and shewed it to Versungus, a celebrated anatomist of Padua, with whom he lodged; who, taking the hint, demonstrated afterwards the same vessel in the human body. When he had been at Padua about three years, he returned to Altdorf, to assist his uncle, now growing infirm, in his business; and taking the degree of doctor, he applied himself very diligently to practice, in. which he had abundant success, and acquired great fame. In 1648, he was made professor extraordinary in anatomy and surgery; in 1649, professor of physic, and soon after member of the college of physicians; in 1653, professor of botany, and director of the physic-garden. He acquitted himself very ably in these various employments, not neglecting in the mean tiaie the business of his profession; in which his reputation was so extensive, that many princes of Gtrmany appointed him their physician. He died of an apoplexy in 1698, after having published several botanical works, and married three wives, by whom he had eighteen children. His works are, 1. “Altdorfi deliciae hortenses,” 1677, 4to. 2. “Appendix ad Catalogum Plantarum hortensium,” 16D1, 4to. 3. “Deliciae silvestres,” 1677, 4to. 4. “Florilegium Altdorfinum,” 1676, &c. 4to.

In the year 1726, when the affair of Mary Tofts, the rabbit-breeder of Godalming, engaged the public attention, a few of the principal surgeons subscribed their guinea a-piece to Hogarth, for an engraving from a ludicrous sketch he had made on that very popular subject. This plate, amongst other portraits, contains that of St. Andre, then anatomist to the royal household, and in high credit as a surgeon.

, a distinguished anatomist and physician, was born at Amsterdam in 1621, and educated at the university of Utrecht, where he went through his medical studies with honour. With a view to farther improvement he visited Italy; but on his arrival in that country he entered the Venetian army, in which he served for some time. Subsequently, however, his taste for science returned; and having studied under the most eminent professors of Italy, he went to the universities of Basil, Montpellier, and Orleans, in the first of which he received the degree of M. D. On his return he was appointed professor of anatomy and surgery at Amsterdam; and in 1653 he was made professor of the same sciences in the university of Leyden, where he died January 1670.

, a celebrated anatomist, was born at Basle, in 1707. He was a pupil of Haller at Berne, in 1730, after which he studied at Strasburgh, and in 1733 took the degree of M. D. at his native place. He visited Paris in 1735, and in the same year was appointed physician to the court of Baden Dourlach. At the request of Haller, he examined the Graubund mountains, in Switzerland, and transmitted to him his collection of plants found in that district, previous to the publication of Haller’s work on the botany of Switzerland. Haller then invited him to Gottingen in 1738, to be dissector, where, having acquired considerable reputation, he was made extraordinary professor of anatomy in that city in 1739; professor in the Caroline college at Cassel, with the rank of court-physician, in 1742; and counsellor of state and body-physician to the prince in 1748. He died in 1778. His principal works are entitled, “Commentatio de Medulla Spinali, speciatim de Nervis ab ea provenientibus,” cum icon. Goett. 1741, 4to. “Commentatio de Vaginas Uteri structura rugosa, necnon *de Hymene,” 1742, 4to. He published a letter in the Philos. Transactions, vol. XLVI, “De cadavere aperto in quo non existit vesica fellea, et de Sterno gibboso.”

, an eminent anatomist and physician, was born at Chateau- Briant, in February 1701. His father was a physician, and practised at St. Malo. He studied first at Rennes, and afterwards at Angers and Paris, and received the degree of M. D. at Rheims in 1722. On his return to Paris he studied anatomy and surgery with great assiduity, under the celebrated teachers Winslow and Du Verney, and was admitted into the academy of sciences in 1724. Having been honoured with the appointment of physician to the duke of Richelieu, he accompanied rliat nobleman in his embassy to the court of the emperor Charles VI. at Vienna, and ever afterwards retained his entire confidence, and had apartments in his house. On the death of Du Verney, in 1730, Hunauld was appointed his successor, as professor of anatomy in the king’s garden, where he soon acquired a reputation little short of that of his predecessor, and found the spacious theatre overflowing with pupils. Having been admitted a member of the faculty of medicine of Paris, he practised with great success, and attracted the notice of the court. He took a journey into Holland, where he became acquainted with the celebrated Boerhaave, with whom he ever afterwards maintained a friendly correspondence; and, in 1735, he visited London, where he was elected a member of the royal society, at one of the meetings of which he read some “Reflections on the operation for Fistula Lacrymalis,” which were printed in the Transactions. He was cut off in the vigour of life by a putrid fever, in December 1742, being in his forty-second year. The greater part of his writings consist of papers, which were published in various volumes of the memoirs of the academy of sciences, between 1729 and 1742 inclusive. Osteology was a favourite subject of his enquiry, and some of the most curious of his observations relate to the formation and growth of the bones of the skull. He likewise traced with great accuracy the lymphatics of the lungs to the thoracic duct, and the progress of some of the nerves of the thoracic viscera. He published anonymously, in 1726, a critique, in the form of a letter, on the book of Petit, relative to the diseases of the bones, which occasioned some controversy, and received the formal disapproval of the academy. Hunauld had collected a considerable anatomical museum, which was especially rich in preparations illustrative of osteology and the diseases of the bones, and which came into the possession of the academy after his death.

, an eminent anatomist and physician, was born May 23, 1718, at Kilbride in the county of Lanark. He was the seventh of ten children of John and Agnes Hunter, who resided on a small estate in that parish, called Long Calderwood, which had long been in the possession of his family. His great grandfather, by iiis fatner’s side, was a youoger son of Hunter of Hunterston, chief of the family of that name. At the age of fourteen, his father sent him to the college of Glasgow; where he passed five years, and by nis prudent behaviour and diligence acquired the esteem of the professors, and the reputation of being a good scholar. His father had designed him for the church, but the necessity of subscribing to articles of faith was to him a strong objection. In this state of mind he happened to become acquainted with Dr Cullen, who was then just established in practice at Hamilton, under the patronage of the duke of Hamilton. By the conversation of Dr. Cullen, ha was soon determined to devote himself to th^ profession of pbysic. His father’s consent having been previously obtained, he went, in 1737. to reside with Dr. Cullen. In the family of this excellent friend and preceptor he passed nearly three years, and these, as he has been often heard to acknowledge, were the happiest years of his life. It was then agreed, that he should prosecute his medical studies at Edinburgh and London, and afterwards return to settle at Hamilton, in partnership with Dr. Cullen.

, an eminent French physician, was born at Carpentras, on the 3d of July, 1717. He was removed for education to Paris, but in his early years he was less remarkable for his perseverance in study, than for a propensity which he shewed for the gay pleasures of youth; yet even then he raised the hopes of his friends by some ingenious performances, which merited academic honours. At length he applied with seriousness to study, and devoted himself wholly to the pursuits of anatomy, in which he made such rapid progress, that, at the age of twenty-five, he was received into the academy of sciences as associate-anatomist. An extraordinary event, however, put a period to his anatomical pursuits. In selecting among some dead bodies a proper subject for dissection, he fancied he perceived in one of them some very doubtful signs of death, and endeavoured to re-animate it: his efforts were for a long time vain; but his first persuasion induced him to persist, and he ultimately succeeded in bringing his patient to life, who proved to be a poor peasant. This circumstance impressed so deep a sense of horror on the mind of the anatomist, that he declined these pursuits in future. Natural history succeeded the study of anatomy, and mineralogy becoming a favourite object of his pursuit, he published his observations on the crystallized tree-stones of Fotuainbleau; but chemistry finally became the beloved occupation of M. de Lassone. His numerous memoirs, which were read before the royal academy of sciences, presented a valuable train of new observations, useful both to the progress of that study, and to the art of compounding remedies; and in every part of these he evinced the sagacity of an attentive observer, and of an ingenious experimentalist. After having practised medicine for a long time in the hospitals and cloisters, he was sent for to court; and held the office of first physician at Versailles. He lived in friendship with Fontenelle, Winslow, D'Alembert, Buffon, and other scientific characters; and the affability of his manners, and his ardent zeal for the advancement of knowledge, among the young scholars, whose industry he encouraged, and whose reputation was become one of his most satisfactory enjoyments, gained him general respect. When from a natural delicacy of constitution, M. cle Lassone began to experience the inconveniences of a premature old age, he became sorrowful and fond of solitude; yet, reconciled to his situation, he calmly observed his death approaching, and expired on Dec. 8, 1788. Lassone, at the time of his death, held the appointment of first physician to Louis XVL and his queen; he was counsellor of state, doctor-regent of the faculty of medicine at Paris, and pensionary-veteran of the academy of sciences, member of the academy of medicine at Madrid, and honorary associate of the college of medicine at Nancy.

, a Prusian anatomist, was bnrn at Berlin in 1711. His inclinations led him early to cultivate philosophy and anatomy: but it was not until he was about his twenty-fifth year that he was permitted entirely to indulge them. His acquisitions before that period had, indeed, been considerable; and after it he pursued his studies at Hall, Jena, Leyden, Paris, and London. In 1740, he was elected a member of the royal society of London, and of other learned societies on the continent. He returned to Berlin in that year, by the express command of the king of Prussia, and became celebrated for his anatomical researches, and a fine museum of anatomical preparations which he accumulated. He died at Berlin of a peripneumony, in 1756. The only works he left were reprinted at London, in 1782, by John Sheldon, esq. lecturer on anatomy, 4to, under the title of “Dissertationes quatuor.” The first is the author’s thesis on the structure of the valve of the colon, and the use of the processus vermicularis; the second, on the structure and action of the villi of the small intestines of the human body: the third, on the proper methods of discovering the structure of the viscera: the fourth, on the anatomical microscope. It is said that his eye-sight had almost the power of a microscope, and that he could perceive with the naked eye objects to which other men were obliged to apply microscopes and magnifiers. This account may perhaps have been a little exaggerated, but we cannot doubt that a description of his anatomical microscope will affect every humane mind with horror. To it belongs an apparatus for the purpose of crucifying living animals, and fixing them and their bowels in such a manner, with pointed hooks, as that they cannot move, in the midst of their protracted tortures, so as to disturb the operator, after he has opened their bellies, and dragged out their intestines, for his deliberate inspection. We have no words to express our detestation of such cruelty, nor, we trust, are any necessary. 1

LflEUTAUD (Joseph), a celebrated physician and anatomist, was born at Aix, in Provence, June 21, 1703. His family, long established at Aix, had produced many distinguished officers, ecclesiastics, lawyers, &c. He was at first intended by his parents for the church; but the reputation of his maternal uncle Garidel, the professor of medicine at Aix, gave him a bias to the study of medicine, and particularly botany, in which his researches and skill soon occasioned him to be promoted to the chairs of botany and anatomy at Aix, which his uncle had long filled. His lectures on anatomy were much attended, and by an audience comprising many persons not engaged in the study of medicine, and among others, the marquis d'Argens, the intimate friend of the king. M. Lieutaud published, in 1742, a syllabus of anatomy for the use of his pupils, entitled “Essais auatomiques, contenant l'Histoire exacte de toutes les parties qui composent le corps humaine;” it was several times reprinted, with improvements, and in 1777 was edited by M. Portal, in 2 volumes. He communicated also several papers on morbid anatomy, and on physiology, to the academy of sciences, of which he was elected a corresponding member. In 1749, however, he quitted his post at Aix, and went to Versailles, at the instance of the celebrated Senac, who then held the highest appointment at court, and who obtained for Lieutaud the appointment of physician to the royal infirmary. This act of friendship is said to have originated from the private communication of some errors, which Lieutaud had detected in a work of M. Senac, and which he did not deem it proper to publish. At Versailles he continued his anatomical investigations with unabated zeal, and was soon after his arrival elected assistant anatomist to the royal academy, to which he continued to present many valuable memoirs. He also printed a volume entitled “Elementa Physiologice,” &c. Paris, 1749, which had been composed for the use of his class at Aix. In 1755, he was nominated physician to the royal family; and twenty years afterwards, he obtained the place of first physician to the king, Louis XVI. In 1759 he published a system of the practice of medicine, under the title of *' Precis de la Medicine pratique,“which underwent several editions, with great augmentations, the best of which is that of Paris, 1770, in 2 vols. 4to. In 1766, he published a” Precis de la Matiere medicale,“in 8vo, afterwards reprinted in 2 vols. But his most important work, which still ranks high in the estimation of physicians, is that which treats of the seats and causes of diseases, ascertained by his innumerable dissections. It was entitled” Historia Anatomico-medica, sistens numerosissima cadaverum humanorum extispicia," Paris, 1767, in 2 vols. 4to. M. Lieutaud died September 6, 1780, after an illness of five days.

, an eminent physician and anatomist, was born at Tremere, in Cornwall, about 1631. He was descended from a good family, and received a liberal education, being admitted as king’s scholar at Westminster school, and thence elected to Christ-church college, Oxford, in 1649, where he took the degree of M. A. in 1655, and then studied medicine. The celebrated Dr. Willis, who employed him as coadjutor in his dissections, found him so able an assistant, that he afterwards became his steady friend and patron, and introduced him into practice. In 1665, Lower took the degree of M. D.; and in the same year published a defence of Dr. Willis’s work on fevers, entitled “Diatribae Thomae Willisii M. D. et Prof. Oxon. de Febribus Vindicatio adversus Edm. de Meara Ormondiensem Hibern. M. D.” 8vo, a work of considerable learning and force of argument, but not without some fallacies, as he afterwards himself admitted. But his most important work was, his “Tractatus de Corde, item de motu et calore Sanguinis, et Chyli in eum transitu,” which was first printed in London in 1669. In this work the structure of the heart, the origin and course of its fibres, and the nature of its action, were pointed out with much accuracy and ingenuity. He likewise demonstrated the dependance of its motions upon the nervous influence, referred the red colour of the arterial blood to the action of the air upon it in the lungs, and calculated the force of the circulation, and the quantity and velocity of the blood passing through it. The work excited particular notice, in consequence of the chapter on the transfusion of blood from the vessels of one living animal to those of another, which the author had first performed experimentally at Oxford, in February 1665, and subsequently practised upon an insane person before the royal society. Lower claims the merit of originality in this matter; but the experiment had certainly been suggested long before by Ia­bavius (see Libavius), and experience having soon decided, that the operation was attended with pernicious consequences, it was justly exploded. Lower had removed to London soon after the commencement of these experiments, and in 1667 had been a fellow of the royal society, and of the college of physicians. The reputation acquired by his publications brought him into extensive practice and after the death of Dr.- Willis,. he was considered as one of the ablest physicians in London. But his attachment to the Whig party, at the time of the Popish plot, brought bun iufao discredit at court, so that his practice dedlned considerably before his death, Jan 17, 1690-91. He was buried at St. Tudy, near his native place, in Cornwall, where he had purchased an estate. In addition to the writings above-mentioned, he communicated some papers containing accounts of anatomical experiments to the royal society; a small tract on catarrh, which was added, as a new chapter, to the edition of the treatise de Corde of 1680; and a letter on the state of medicine in England. He is said to have been the first discoverer of Astrop Wells.

, an Italian physician and anatomist, was born March 10, 1628, at Crevalcuore, near Bologna, in Italy, where he was taught Latin and studied philosophy. In 1649, losing his parents, and being obliged to choose his own method of life, he determined to apply himself to physic. The university of Bologna was then supplied with very learned professors in that science, particularly Bartholomew Massari, and Andrew Mariano, under whose instructions Malpighi in a short time made great progress in physic and anatomy. After he had finished the usual course, he was admitted doctor of physic, April 6, 1653, In 1655 Massari died, a loss which Malpighi severely felt, as independent of his esteem for him as a master, he had become more nearly related to him by marrying his sister. In 1656, the senate of Bologna gave him a professorship, which he did not long hold; for the same year the grand duke of Tuscany invited him to Pisa, to be professor of physic there. Here he contracted a strict friendship with Borelli, whom he subsequently owned for his master in philosophy, and to whom he ascribed all the discoveries which he afterwards made. They dissected animals together, and it was in this employment that he found the heart to consist of spiral fibres; a discovery, which has been ascribed to Borelli in his posthumous works. The air of Pisa not agreeing with Malpighi, be continued there but three years: and, in 1659, returned to Bologna, to resume his former posts, notwithstanding the advantageous offers which were made him to stay at Pisa. In 1662 he was sent for to Messina, in order to succeed Peter Castello, first professor of physic, who was just dead. It. was with reluctance that he went thither, though the stipend was great; and although he was prevailed on at last by his friend Borelli, to accept it, yet in 1666 he returned to Bologna. In 1669 he was elected a member of the royal society of London, with which he ever after kept a correspondence by letters, and communicated his discoveries in anatomy. Cardinal Pignatelli, who had known him while he was legate at Bologna, being chosen pope in 1691, under the name of Innocent XII. immediately sent for him to Rome, and appointed him his physician. In 1694 he was admitted into the academy of the Arcadians at Rome. July the 25th, of the same year, he had a fit, which struck half his body with a paralysis; and, November the 29th following, he had another, of which he died the same day, in his 67th year. His remains were embalmed, and conveyed to Bologna, where they were interred with great funeral honours in the chureh of St. Gregory, and a statue was erected to his memory. Malpighi is described as a man of a serious and melancholy temperament, which is confirmed by his portrait in the meeting-room of the royal society at Somerset-house. He was indefatigable in the pursuit of knowledge, on the sure ground of experience and observation, ever candid in his acknowledgments to those who had given him any information, and devoid of all ostentation or pretension on the score of his own merits. He ranks very high among the philosophers of the physiological age in which he lived, when nature began to be studied instead of books, and the dreams of the schools. Hence arose the discoveries of the circulation of the blood, the absorbent system of the animal body, and the true theory of generation. To such improvements the investigations of Malpighi, relative to the anatomy and transformation of insects, particularly the silk-worm, and the developement of the chick in the egg, lent no small aid. From these inquiries he was led to the anatomy and physiology of plants, in which he is altogether an original, as well as a very profound, observer. His line of study was the same as that of Grew, but these philosophers laboured independent of each other, and their frequent coincidence evinces the accuracy of both.

, a late eminent anatomist and physician, was born in Fifeshire, in 1742, at Park-hill, a large farm on the side of the Tay, near Newburgh, held by his father, Mr. John Marshal, of the earl of Rothes. His lather had received a classical education himself; and being desirous that his son should enjoy a similar advantage, sent him first to the grammar-school at Newburgh, and afterwards tothat of Abernethy, then the most celebrated place of education among the Seceders, of which religious sect he was a most zealous member. Here he was regarded as a quick and apt scholar. From his childhood he had taken great delight in rural scenery. One day, while under the influence of feelings of this kind, being then about fourteen years old, he told his father that he wished to leave school, and be a farmer, but he soon shewed that it had not arisen from any fondness for ordinary country labours. In the following harvest-time, for instance, having been appointed to follow the reapers, and bind up the cut corn into sheaves, he would frequently lay himself down in some shady part of the field, and taking a book from his pocket, begin to read, -utterly forgetful of his task. About two years after, however, he resumed his studies, with the intention of becoming a minister: and soon after, he was admitted a student of philosophy at Abernethy; and next became a student of divinity. In his nineteenth year he went to Glasgow, and divided his ­time between teaching a school, and attending lectures in the university. The branches of learning which he chiefly cultivated were Greek and morals. At the end of two years passed in this way, he became (through the interest of the celebrated Dr. Reid, to whom his talents and diligence had recommended him), tutor in a gentleman’s family, of the name of Campbell, in the Island of Islay. He remained here four years, and removed to the university of Edinburgh, with Mr. -Campbell’s son, whom the following year he carried back to his father. Having surrendered his charge, he returned to Edinburgh, where he subsisted himself by reading Greek and Latin privately with students of the university; in the mean time taking no recreation, but giving up all his leisure to the acquisition of knowledge. He still considered himself a student of divinity, in which capacity he delivered two discourses in the divinity-hall; and from motives of curiosity began in 1769 to attend lectures on medicine. While thus employed, he was chosen1 member of the Speculative society, where, in the beginning of 1772, he became acquainted with lord Balgonie, who was so much pleased with the display which he made of genius and learning in that society, that he requested they“should read together; and in the autumn of the following year made a proposal for their going to the Continent, which was readily accepted. They travelled slowly through Flanders to Paris, where they stayed a month, and then proceeded to Tours, where they resided eight months, in the house of a man of letters, under whose tuition they strove to acquire a correct knowledge of the French language and government. They became acquainted here with several persons of rank, among whom were a prince of Rohan, and the dukes of Clioiseul and Aguilon, at whose seats in the neighbourhood they were sometimes received as gnests. An acquaintance with such people would make Marshal feel pain on account of his want of external accomplishments; and this, probably, was the reason of his labouring” to learn to dance and to fence while he was at Tours, though he was then more than thirty years old. He returned to England in the summer of 1774; and proceeded soon after to Edinburgh, where he resumed the employment of reading Latin and Greek with young men. Hitherto he seems to have formed no settled plan of life, but to have bounded his views almost entirely to the acquisition of knowledge, and a present subsistence. His friends, however, had been induced to hope that he would at some time be advanced to a professor’s cl; ir and it is possible that he entertained the same hope himself. In the spring of 1775, this hope appeared to be strengthened by his being requested by Mr. Stewart, the professor of humanity at Edinburgh, to officiate for him, as he was then unwell: Marshal complied, but soon after appears to have given up all hopes of a professorship, and studied medicine with a determination to practise it. In the spring of 1777, he was enabled by the assistance of a friend, Mr. John Campbell of Edinburgh, to come to London for professional improvement; and studied anatomy under Dr. W. Hunter, and surgery under Mr. J, Hunter. After he had been here a twelvemonth, he was appointed surgeon to the S3rd, or Glasgow regiment, through the interest of the earl of Leverv, the father of his late pupil, lord Balgonie. The first year after was passed with his regiment, in Scotland. In the following he accompanied it to Jersey, where he remained with it almost constantly till the conclusion of the war in the beginning of 1783, when it was disbanded. In this situation he enjoyed, almost for the first time, the pleasures best suited to a man of independent mind. His income was more than sufficient for his support; his industry and knowledge rendered him useful; and his character for integrity and honour procured him general esteem. From Jersey he came to London, seeking for a settlement, and was advised by Dr. D. Pitcairn (with whom he had formed a friendship while a student at Glasgow) to practise surgery here, though he had taken the degree of doctor of physic the preceding year at Edinburgh; and to teach anatomy at St. Bartholomew’s hospital, it being at the same time proposed, that the physicians to that hospital (of whom Dr. Pitcairn was one) should lecture on other branches of medical learning. He took a house, in consequence, in the neighbourhood of the hospital; and proceeded to prepare for the execution of his part of the scheme. This proving abortive, he began to teach anatomy, the following year, at his own house; and at length succeeded in procuring annually a considerable number of pupils, attracted to him solely by the reputation of his being a most diligent and able teacher. In 1788 he quitted the practice of surgery, and commenced that of medicine, having previously become a member of the London college oF physicians. In the ensuing year a dispute arose between John Hunter and him, which it is proper to relate, as it had influence on his after-life. When Marshal returned to London, he renewed his acquaintance with Mr. Hunter, who thought so well of him, that he requested his attendance at a committee of his friends, to whose correction he submitted his work on the venereal disease, before it was published. He became also a member of a small society, instituted by Dr. Fordyce and Mr. Hunter, for the improvement of medical and surgical knowledge. Having mentioned at a meeting of this society, that, in the dissection of those who had died insane, he had always found marks of disease in the head, Mr. Hunter denied the truth of this in very coarse language. The other members interfering, Mr. Hunter agreed to say, that his expressions did not refer to Dr. Marshal’s veracity, but to the accuracy of his observation. Marshal, not being satisfied with this declaration, at the next meeting of the society demanded a.i ample apology; but Mr. Hunter, instead of making one, repeated the offensive expressions; on which Marshal poured some water over his head out of a bottle which had stood near them. A scuffle ensued, which was immediately stopped by the other members, and no father personal contention between them ever occurred. But Marshal, conceiving that their common friends in the society had, from the superior rank of Mr. Hunter, favoured him more in this matter than justice permitted, soon after estranged himself from them. He continued the teaching of anatomy till 1800, in which year, during a tedious illness, the favourable termination of which appeared doubtful to him, he resolved, rather suddenly, to give it up. While he taught anatomy, almost the whole of the fore-part of the day, during eight months in the year, was spent by him in his dissecting and lecture rooms. He had, therefore, but little time for seeing sick persons, except at hours frequently inconvenient to them; and was by this means prevented from enjoying much medical practice; but as soon as he had recovered his health, after ceasing to lecture, his practice began to increase. The following year it was so far increased as to render it proper that he should keep a carriage. From this time to within a few months of his death, an interval of twelve years, his life flowed on in nearly an equable stream. He had business enough in the way he conducted it to give him employment during the greater part of the day; and his professional profits were sufficient to enable him to live in the manner he chose, and provide for the wants of sickness and old age. After having appeared somewhat feeble for two or three years, he made known, for the first time, in the beginning of last November, that he laboured under a disease of his bladder, though he must then have been several years affected with it. His ailment was incurable, and scarcely admitted of palliation. For several months he was almost constantly in great pain, which he bore manfully. At length, exhausted by his sufferings, he died on the 2nd of April, 1813, at his house in Bartlett’s buildings, Holborn, being then in the seventy-first year of his age. Agreeably to his own desire, his body was interred in the church-yard of the parish of St. Pancras. His fortune, amounting to about bOOO/. was, for the most part, bequeathed to sisters and nephews.

By the time he had taken the degree of master of arts, which was in 1610, he had made such progress in all kinds of academical study, that he was universally esteemed an accomplished scholar. He was an acute logician, an accurate philosopher, a skilful mathematician, an excellent anatomist, a great philologer, a master of many languages, and a good proficient in history and chronology. His first public effort was an address that he made to bishop Andrews, in a Latin tract “De sanctitate relativa;” which, in his maturer years, he censured as a juvenile performance, and therefore never published it. That great prelate, however, who was a good judge and patron of learning, liked it so well, that he not only was the author’s firm friend upon an occasion that offered soon after, but also then desired him to be his domestic chaplain. This Mede very civilly refused; valuing the liberty of his studies above any hopes of preferment, wnd esteeming that freedom which he enjoyed in his cell, so he used to call it, as the haven of all his wishes. These thoughts, indeed, had possessed him. betimes: for, when he was a school-boy, he was invited by his uncle, Mr. Richard Mede, a merchant, who, being then without children, offered to adopt him for his son, if he would live with him: but he refused the offer, preferring, as it should seem, a life of study to a life of gain.

, an eminent anatomist, and the father of the medical school of Edinburgh, was descended both by his paternal and maternal parents from distinguished families in the north of Scotland. He was born in London, in September 1697, where his father, then a surgeon in the army of king William in Flanders, resided upon leave of absence in the winter. On quitting the army, Mr. Monro settled in Edinburgh; and perceiving early indications of talent in Alexander, he gave him the best instruction which Edinburgh then afforded, and afterwards sent him to London, where he attended the anatomical courses of Cheselden, and while here, laid the foundation of his most important work on the bones. He then pursued his studies at Paris and Leyden, where his industry and promising talents recommended him to the particular notice of Boerhaave. On iiis return to Edinburgh, in the autumn of 1719, he was appointed professor and demonstrator of anatomy to the company of surgeons, the joint demonstrators having spontaneously resigned in his favour, and soon after began also to give public lectures on anatomy, aided by the preparations which he had made when abroad; and at the same time Dr. Alston, then a young man, united with him in the plan, and began a course of lectures on the materia medica and botany. These courses may be regarded as the opening of that medical school, which has since extended its fame, not only throughout Europe, but over the new world. Mr. Monro suggested this plan; and by the following circumstance, probably, contributed to lead his son into a mode of lecturing, which subsequently carried him to excellence. Without the young teacher’s knowledge, he invited the president and fellows of the College of Physicians, and the whole company of surgeons, to honour the first day’s lecture with their presence. This unexpected company threw the doctor into such confusion, that he forgot the words of the discourse, which he had written and committed to memory. Having left his papers at home, he was at a loss for a little time what to do: but, with much presence of mind, he immediately began to shew some of the anatomical preparations, in order to gain time for recollection; and very soon resolved not to attempt to repeat the discourse which he had prepared, but to express himself in such language as should occur to him from the subject, which he was confident that he understood. The experiment succeeded: he delivered himself well, and gained great applause as a good and ready speaker. Thus discovering his own strength, he resolved henceforth never to recite any written discourse in teaching, and acquired a free and elegant style of delivering lectures.

, an eminent pbysiciain and anatomist, was born at Forli, in Rornagna, in February 1682. After a careful education, in which he displayed a proficiency in classical and philosophical acquire ments beyond his years, he studied medicine at Bologna with great ardour, and soon attracted the attention and esteem of his able masters, Valsalva and Albertini; the former of whom availed himself of his assistance in the researches into the organ of hearing, which he was at that time prosecuting, and in drawing up his memoirs upon that subject. Morgagni also acted as substitute during the absence of professor Valsalva on a journey to Parma, and llustrated his lectures by numerous anatomical preparations. Soon after he travelled for improvement, going first to Venice, where he cultivated several branches of physics, with the assistance of Poleni, Zanicheili, and other scientific men; and afterwards he visited Padua, where he attended the schools, under the direction of distinguished professors, with his accustomed industry. After his return he settled for a short time at his native place, and then by the advice of Guglielmini, returned to Paduaa, where he was appointed professor, in 1711, and taught the theory of physic. He became the intimate friend of the celebrated Lancisi, whom he assisted in preparing for publication the dawings of Eustachius, which appeared in 1714. He had already distinguished himself by the publication of the first part of his own work, the “Adversaria Anatomica,” Bonon. 1706, 4to, which was remarkable for the originality of its execution, and for the accuracy, as well as the novelty, of the observations which it contained. He published, successively, from this time to 1719, five other parts of ths important work, which contains a great many discoveries in different parts of the human body, most correctly detailed.

, a physician and anatomist of eminence, was born in London in 1699, where his father was a barrister. After receiving the rudiments of his education at a private school in the country, where his docility and sweetness of temper endeared him to his master and school- fellows, he was in a few years removed to Westminster, and thence to Oxford, where he was admitted a commoner of Exeter college, under the tuition of Mr. John Haviland, in 1714. He applied himself to the usual academical exercises with great assiduity, and took his degrees in arts at the accustomed periods, that of M. A. in 1721. He paid his greatest attention to natural philosophy, and after reading a few books on anatomy, engaged in dissections, which he pursued with so much reputation as to be chosen reader of anatomy in the university in 1726, about two years after taking his degree of B. M. In this office he used his utmost endeavours to introduce a zeal for this neglected study, and obtained a high and well merited reputation. His residence at Oxford, however, was only temporary; for at the close of his course he returned to London, where he bad determined to settle, after having made a short trial of practice in Cornwall, and a subsequent visit to the principal schools of France and Italy. At Paris, by conversing freely with the learned, he soon recommended himself to their notice and esteem. Winslow’s was the only good system of physiology at that time known in France, and Morgagni’s and Santorini’s, of Venice, in Italy. On his return to England he resumed his anatomical and physiological lectures in London, and they were frequented, not only by students from both the universities, but by many surgeons, apothecaries, and others. His reputation rapidly extended, and in 1728 he was elected a fellow of the royal society, to which he communicated several papers, which were published in the Philosophical Transactions, especially some observations on the nature of aneurisms, in which he controverted the opinion of Dr. Freind; and a description of a singular disease, in which the pulmonary vein was coughed up. He also made observations on a treatise by Helvetius, on the lungs. In 1729, he received the degree of M. D at Oxford, and became a fellow of the college of physicians in. 1732. In 1734 he was appointed to read the Gulstonian lectures at the college, and chose the structure of the heart, and the circulation of the blood, for his subjects. At the request of the president, Dr. Nichols again read the Gulstonian lectures in 1736, choosing for his topics the urinary organs, and the nature and treatment of calculous diseases; and in 1739 he delivered the anniversary Harveian oration. In 1743 he married one of the daughters of the celebrated Dr. Mead, by whom he had a son and daughter, both living.

, a distinguished Dutch physician and anatomist, but a German by birth, was greatly distinguished by his anatomical labours, both at the Hague and at Leyclen, in the latter part of the seventeenth cenr tury. He filled the office of professor of anatomy and surgery in the university of Leyden, and was also president of the college of surgeons. He pursued his dissections with great ardour, cultivating both human and comparative anatomy at every opportunity. In these pursuits, within eight years he dissected above sixty human bodies, besides those of the animal creation, and made many discoveries by means of injections, but at that time this art had not attained its full perfection, quicksilver being the only substance used. He died about 1692. The following is a catalogue of his publications: “De Vasis aquosis Oculi,” Leid. 1685;“De Ductu salivali novo, Salivfi, ductibus aquosis et humore aqueo oculorum,” ibid. 1686. Some subsequent editions of this work were entitled “Sialographia, et ductuum aquosorum Anatome nova;” “Adenographia curiosa, et Uteri foeminei Anatome nova, cum Epistola ad Amicum de Inventis novis,” ibid. 1692, &c. “Operationes et Experirnenta Chirurgica,” ibid. 1692, and frequently reprinted. The three last mentioned works were published together in 3 vols. 12 mo, at Lyons, in 1722. There are some Mss. under his name in the British Museum, in Ayscough’s Catalogue, but they do not appear to be originals.

, or in Latin Pavius, a physician and anatomist, born at Amsterdam in 1564, was educated in medical studies at Leyden, whence he proceeded to Paris for farther improvement. He afterwards spent some time in Denmark, and at Rostock, where he received the degree of doctor in 1587, and at Padua. On his return to Leyden, he was appointed professor of medicine in 15S9, in which office he acquired the approbation and esteem both of the public and his colleagues, and died universally regretted, in August 1617, at the age of fifty-four. Anatomy and botany were the departments which he most ardently cultivated; and he was the founder of the botanic garden of Leyden. His works are, 1. “Tractatus de Exercitiis, Lacticim'is, et Bellariis.” Rost. 2. “Notse in Galen urn, de cibis boni et mali succi,” ibid. These two pieces appear to. have been his inaugural exercises. 3. “Hortus publi-, cus Academiae Lugduno-Batavae, ejus Ichnographia, descriptio, usus, &c.” Lugd. Bat. 1601. 4. “Primitioe Anatomicae de humani corporis Ossibus,” ibid. 1615. 5. “Succenturiatus Anatomicus, continens Commentaria in Hip-. pocratem de Capitis Vulneribus. Additae sunt Anuotationes in aliquot Capita Librioctavi C. Celsi,” ibid. 1616. 6. “Notae et Commentarii in Epitomen Anatomicum Aridresa Vesalii, ibid, 1616. To these we may add some works which appeared after his death. 7.” De Valvula Intestini Epistolaa du33.“Oppenheim, 1619, together with the first century of the Epistles of Fabric-ills Hildanus. 3.” De Peste Tractatus, cum Henrici Florentii additamentis.“Lug. Bat. 1636. 9.” Anatomicae Observationes selectiores.“Hafniae, 1657, inserted in the third and fourth centuries of the anatomical and medical histories of T. Bartholin. He also left in ms. a” Methodus Anatomica," which was in the library of M. de Vick of Amsterdam.

, a surgeon of eminence, was born at Ghent in Flanders in 1649; and, being made anatomist and reader in surgery in that city, was much distinguished by his lectures as well as practice, and wrote upon several subjects with learning and judgment. He died at Ghent, about eighty years old, in 1730. He paid various visits to London, Paris, and Leyden, where he formed an acquaintance with the most eminent surgeons of his time, profited by their discoveries, and was himself the inventor of some instruments. His first publication was a “System of Osteology,” in Flemish, which he afterwards translated into French, and which was often reprinted. In 1708, he published his “Description Anatomique des Parties de la Femme qui servent a la Generation,” together with Licetus’ treatise on monsters, and a description of one born at Ghent in 1703. In 1710, he printed his “Anatomic Chirurgicale, ou description exacte des Parties du Corps humain, avec des remarques miles aux Chirurgiens dans la pratique de leur art,” in French; and in 1718, reprinted it in Flemish. It was regarded as a valuable work, and was republished after his death, in France, Italy, and Germany. Palfin also translated the treatise of Anthony Petit on “Diseases of the Eyes,” into Flemish, adding several other tracts on the same subject.

On his arrival in London, by the recommendation of his Paris friends, he was introduced to the acquaintance of Dr. Mead, sir Hans Sloane, and Dr. James Douglas. This great anatomist made use of his assistance, not only in his anatomical preparations, but also in his representations of morbid and other appearances, a list of several of which was in the hands of his friend Dr. Maty; who had prepared an eloge on Dr. Parsons, which was never used, but which, by the favour of Mrs. Parsons, Mr. Nichols has preserved at large. Though Dr. Parsons cultivated the several branches of the profession of physic, he was principally employed in midwifery. In 1738, by the interest of his friend Dr. Douglas, he was appointed physician to the public infirmary in St. Giles’s. In 1739 he married miss Elizabeth Reynolds, by whom he had two sons and a daughter, who all died young. Dr. Parsons resided for many years in Red Lion-square, where he frequently enjoyed the company and conversation of Dr. Stukeley, bishop Lyttleton, Mr. Henry Baker, Dr. Knight, and many other of the most distinguished members of the royal and antiquarian societies, and that of arts, manufactures, and commerce; giving weekly an elegant dinner to a large but select party. He enjoyed also the literary correspondence of D'Argenville, Button, Le Cat, Beccaria, Amb. Bertrand, Valltravers, Ascanius, Turberville Needham, Dr. Garden, and others of the most distinguished rank in science. As a practitioner he was judicious, careful, honest, and remarkably humane to the poor; as a friend, obliging and communicative; cheerful and decent in conversation; severe and strict in his morals, and attentive to fill with propriety all the various duties of life. In 1769, finding his health impaired, he proposed to retire from business and from London, and with that view disposed of a considerable number of his books and fossils, and went to Bristol. But he returned soon after to his old house, and died in it after a week’s illness, on the 4th of April, 1770, much lamented by his family and friends. By his last will, dated in October 1766, he gave his whole property to Mrs. Parsons; and, in case of her death before him, to miss Mary Reynolds, her only sister, “in recompence for her affectionate attention to him and to his wife, for a long course of years, in sickness and in health.” It was his particular request that he should not be buried till some change should appear in his corpse; a request which occasioned him to be kept unburied 17 days, and even then scarce the slightest alterution was perceivable. He was buried at Hen don, in a vault which he had caused to be built on the ground purchased on the death of his son James, where his tomb had a very commendatory inscription. A portrait of Dr. Parsons, by Mr. Wilson, is now in the British Museum; another, by Wells, left in the hands of his widow, who died in 1786; with a third unfinished; and one of his son James; also a family piece, in which the same son is introduced, with the doctor and his lady, accompanied by her sister. Among many other portraits, Mrs. Parsons had some that were very fine of the illustrious Harvey, of bishop Burnet, and of Dr. John Freind; a beautiful miniature of Dr. Stukeley; some good paintings, by her husband’s own hand, particularly the rhinoceros which he described in the “Philosophical Transactions.” She possessed also his Mss. and some capital printed books; a large folio volume entitled “Figure quaedam Miscellaneae qu0e ad rem Anatomicam Historiamque Naturalem spectant quas propria adumbravit manu Jacobus Parsons, M. D. S S. R. Ant.” &c. another, called “Drawings of curious Fossils, Shells,” &c. in Dr. Parsons’s Collection, drawn by himself;" &c. &c. Mrs. Parsons professed herself ready to give, on proper application, either to the royal or antiquarian society, a portrait of her husband, and a sum of money to found a lecture to perpetuate his memory, similar to that established by his friend Mr. Henry Baker.

, a learned anatomist, and a native of Dieppe, a considerable author of the seventeenth century, has rendered his name famous by his discovery of the thoracic duct, and the receptacle of the chyle; with which, however, some alledge that Bartholomeus Eustachius was acquainted before him. But the world is obliged to Pecquet for shewing, beyond all contradiction, that the lacteal vessels convey the chyle to this receptacle; and for proving that it is thence carried, by particular vessels, through the thorax, almost as high as the left shoulder, and there thrown into the left subclavian vein, and so directly carried to the heart. He died at Paris, in February 1674. The work in which he published the discovery was entitled “Experimenta nova Anatomica, quibus incognitnm hactenus Chyli Receptaculum, et ab eo per Thoracem in Kamos usque subclavios Vasa lactea deleguntur;” to which was subjoined a dissertation, “De Circulatione Sanguinis et Chyli Motu,” 1651. It was reprinted in 1654, together with an essay “De Thoracis lacteis,” in answer to Kiolan and many subsequent editions have appeared.

It would be endless to enumerate all the various establishments, for which the Russians are indebted to this great emperor: Fontenelle has recorded some of the principal, which are, 1. A body of 100,000 foot, under as regular a discipline as any in Europe. 2. A navy of forty ships of the line, and 200 gallies. 3. Fortifications in all main towns, and an excellent civil government in the great cities, which before were as dangerous in the night, as the most unfrequented deserts. 4. An academy for naval affairs and navigation, where all the nobility are obliged to send some of their children. 5. Colleges at Moscow, Petersburgh, and Kiof, for languages, polite literature, and mathematics; and schools in the villages, where the children of the peasants are taught to read and write. 6. A college of physicians, and a noble dispensatory at Moscow, which furnishes medicines to the great cities, and to the armies; whereas before there was no physician but the czar’s, and no apothecary in all his dominions. 7. Public lectures in anatomy, a word never heard before in Russia. Voltaire relates, that the czar had studied this branch of knowledge under Ruysch at Amsterdam; and made such improvements under this master, as to perform even chirurgical operations himself. He afterwards purchased the cabinet of that anatomist, which contained an immense collection of the most curious, instructive, and uncommon preparations. 8. An observatory, not only for the use of astronomers, but as a repository for natural curiosities. 9. A physic garden, to be stocked with plants, not only from all parts of Europe, but from Asia, Persia, and even the distant parts of China. 10. Printing-houses, where he abolished their old barbarous characters, which, through the great number of abbreviations, were almost become unintelligible. 11. Interpreters for all the languages of Europe; and likewise for the Latin, Greek, Turkish, Kalmuc, Mogul, and Chinese. 12. A royal library, composed of three very large collections, which he purchased in England, Holstein, and Germany.

, a celebrated French anatomist, was born in 1708, at Orleans, and received the degree of doctor of physic at Paris, in November 1746. He was elected a member of the royal academy of sciences in 1760. His talents in the practice of his profession procured for him the appointment of inspector of military hospitals in 1768; and in the following year he was appointed professor of anatomy and surgery at the king’s garden, where his science and eloquence attracted a crowd of auditors. In 1775 he was succeeded byM.Vicq d'Azyr in the duties of this chair, while he remained titular professor. He died in 1794. He was author of the following works viz. “Lettre d'un Medecin de Montpellier, au sujet de rexameii public que le Sieur Louis a subi à saint Côme, en 1749, pour servir d‘Eclaircissement a ce qu’en dit M. Fréron,” 1749, 4to. “Discours sur la Chirurgie,” an introductory lecture delivered at the schools of medicine, 1757 “Consultation en faveur des Naissances tardives,” 1764, 8vo “Premier et seconde Rapport en faveur de l'Inoculation,” 1766, 8vo “Deux Consultations Medico-iegales,” relative to a case of supposed self-murder, and to a supposed infanticide, 1767. He also edited “Anatomic Chirurgicale publié cidevant par Jean Palfin,” 1753, 2 tom. 8vo.

, a celebrated surgeon, was born at Paris, March 13, 1674. From his childhood he displayed uncommon acuteness, and received his first instructions in anatomy from M. de Littre, a celebrated anatomist, who resided in his father’s house. Under this master he made such rapid progress, that he had scarcely attained the age of twelve, when M. de Littre found that he might be intrusted with the care of his anatomical theatre. He afterwards studied surgery under Castel and Mareschal, and was admitted master in 1700. In the course of no long time he became the first practitioner in Paris, and was “consulted in all cases of importance; and there were few operations of difficulty and delicacy which he did not superintend, or actually perform; and his hand and his counsels were alike successful. Such a reputation soon extended throughout Europe. In 1726 he was sent for by the king of Poland, and again in 1734 by Don Ferdinand, afterwards king of Spain: he re-established the health of both these princes, who endeavoured to retain him near their persons with the offer of great rewards, but could not overcome his attachment to his native place. Among his professional honours was that of member of the academy of ^ciences, director of the academy of surgery, censor and royal professor at the schools, and fellow of the royal society of London. He died at Paris, April 20, 1750, aged 76, regretted as much for his private virtues as his public services. He communicated many memoirs to the academy of sciences, and several to the academy of surgery, which were printed in their first volume. His only separate publication was his” Traite des Maladies des Os,“printed at Paris in 1705, in 12mo, and frequently reprinted, with additions. An edition in 1758, in two volumes, 12mo, was published by M. Ant. Louis, with an historical and critical essay respecting it subjoined; and his pupil, M. Leslie, published his posthumous works in 1774, with the title of” Traite des Maladies Chirurgicales et des Operations qui leur conviennent," in three vols. 8vo, with many plates of chirurgical instruments. His treatise on the bones involved him in several controversies; but the only chagrin which he felt arose from finding Winslow, who, as censor royal, had approved the work, retract his approbation, in a letter inserted in the Journal des Savans for May 1725.

, a celebrated anatomist and physician, was born at Mans, and after receiving some education under the fathers of oratory, went to Paris, where he applied himself, with great assiduity, to natural history and philosophy. In the study of the former he had been led to the examination and dissection of insects, which turned his mind to anatomy and surgery, as the means of support for which purpose he presented himself at the Hotel Dieu, and passed his examinations with great applause, which occasioned the more surprise, as he avowed that he had had no opportunity of obtaining practical information, and knew no more of surgery than to let blood. He subsequently received the degree of doctor in medicine at Rheims, in 1699, and was admitted a member of the Academy of Sciences. He did not long survive to receive the rewards of his industry; for he died at Paris, in October 1708, in a state of considerable poverty, which he supported with cheerfulness. His success in anatomical investigation may be estimated from the transmission of his name, attached to an important ligament. The Memoirs of the Academy comprize many of his papers, besides a “Dissertation sur la Sangue,” published in the Journal des Savans viz. a “Me*moire sur les Insectes Hermaphrodites” “L'Histoire du Formica Leo” that of the “Forrnica Pulex” “Observations sur les Monies;” “Dissertation sur PApparition des Esprits,” on the occasion of the adventure of St. Maur, and some other papers. He is also considered as the editor of a “Chirurgie complette,” which is a compilation from many works upon that art.

Though not a great practical anatomist, or dissector, Rivinus is said to have discovered a new salivary duct. He Jeft a son, John Augustus Rivinus, who succeeded him as professor, and under whose presidency was published a dissertation, in 1723, on “Medicinal Earths.” This gentleman died in 1725, aged thirty-three, having survived his father but two years. His premature death seems to have prevented the publication of the fourth part of his father’s great botanical work, at least for some time. Haller says, Ludwig afterwards edited the plates of the Orchidece, without any letter-press; but this publication has never come under our inspection.

, the Ephesian, a physician and anatomist in the reign of the emperor Trajan, obtained great reputation by his extensive knowledge and experience. Galen esteemed him one of the most able of the physicians who had preceded bin:-. Rufus appears to have cultivated anatomy, by dissecting brutes, with great zeal and success. He traced the origin of the nerves in the brain, and considered some of them as contributing to motion, and others to sensation. He even observed the capsule of the crystalline lens in the eye. He considered the heart as the seat of life, and of the animal heat, and as the origin of the pulse, which he ascribed to the spirit of its left ventricle and of the arteries; and he remarked the difference in the capacity and thickness of the two ventricles. He deemed the spleen to be a very useless viscus, and his successors have never discovered its use. He examined very fully the organs of generation, and the kidnies and bladder; he has left, indeed, a very good treatise on the diseases of the urinary organs, and the methods of cure. He also wrote a work on purgative medicines, mentioning their different qualities, the countries from which they were obtained; and a little treatise on the names given by the Greeks to the different parts of the body. Galen affirms also that Rufus was the author of an essay on the tnateria medica, written in verse; and Suidas mentions a treatise of his on the ' atra bilis, with some other essays; but these are lost. What remains of his works are to be found in the “Artis medicse principes” of Stephens, and printed separately at London, Gr. and Lat. 4to, by W. Clinch, 172G.

, a celebrated anatomist and physician, was born at the Hague, in the month of March 1638, where his father was commissary of the States-general. Being sent to the university of Leyden, he devoted himself to the study of anatomy, botany, and chemistry, especially to the practical investigation of these sciences, having conceived an early bias to the profession of medicine. He repaired also to Franeker, for the farther pursuit of his studies; but received the degree of doctor at Leyden, in 1664. Even during his pupilage at Leyden, he was applied to by Sylvius and Van Home, to assist them in combating the vanity of Bilsius, who came thither to exhibit his boasted method of preserving dead bodies.

After taking his degree, Ruysch returned to the Hague, where he married, and began practice. In 1665 he published his treatise on the lacteal and lymphatic vessels, which contained the result of his inquiries while engaged in the dispute with Bilsiu*. In this work he does not deny that the existence of valves in the lymphatic had been noticed before, but he claims the honour of having first demonstrated them, and taught the method of discovering them. This ingenious tract immediately procured him reputation; and he was invited the year after to the chair of anatomy at Amsterdam; an invitation which he gl-adly accepted; and anatomy, both human and comparative, henceforth constituted the principal object of his life: he spared neither time, labour, nor expence, for the attainment of his purposes; he was almost continually employed in dissection, and not only examined with the most minute exactness every organ of the human body, but devised means by which to facilitate the detection and demonstration of the different parts, and to preserve and exhibit them thus demonstrated. If he were not the discoverer of the use of injections, for the display of vascular and other structure, he contributed, together with the suggestions of De Graaf and Swammerdam, by his own ingenuity and industry, to introduce that important practice among anatomists. His collection of injected bodies is described, indeed, as marvellous; the 6nest tissue of capillary vessels being filled with the coloured fluids, so as to represent the freshness of youth, and to imitate sleep rather than death. In this way he had preserved foetuses in regular gradation, as well as young and adult subjects, and innumerable animals of all sorts and countries. His museum, indeed, both in the extent, variety, and arrangement of its contents, became ultimately the most magnificent that any private individual had ever accumulated, and was the resort of visitors of every description; generals, ambassadors, princes, and even kings, were happy in the opportunity of examining it. The czar Peter, in his journey through Holland in 1698, frequently dined at the frugal table of Ruysch, in order to spend whole days in his cabinet; and in 1717, on his return to Holland, the czar purchased it of him for 30,000 florins, and sent it to Petersburg. The indefatigable anatomist immediately commenced the labour of supplying its place by a new collection.

, an anatomist, well known in this country on account of the imposture of the Rabbit-woman, and for various eccentricities of conduct, was a native of Switzerland, but, on coming over to England, was placed by some friends under a surgeon of eminence, in which profession he became skilful. He, for a time, read public lectures on anatomy, and obtained considerable reputation; which was ruined by the part he took in the affair of Mary Tofts, as well as by many other irregularities of character. He died in 1776, after having been for many years the subject of more curiosity and conversation than any of his contemporaries, though without any extraordinary talents, or claims to distinction. They who are curious to know more of his character may have their curiosity gratified in the “Anecdotes of Hogarth” by Nichols.

, a late learned physician, and physician extraordinary to the king, was born March 17, 1750, at Sandwich, in Kent, where his father, who followed the profession of the law, was so respected, that, at the coronation of their present majesties, he was deputed by the cinque ports one of their barons to support the king’s canopy, according to ancient custom. His mother, whose maiden name was Foart, and whose family was likewise of Sandwich, died when he was an infant. He was educated at a seminary in France, where he not only improved himself in the learned languages, but acquired such a perfect knowledge of the French tongue, as to be able to write and speak it with the same facility as his own. He pursued his medical studies for nearly three years at Edinburgh, and afterwards went to Holland, and studied during a season at Leyden, where he was admitted to the degree of doctor of physic: he chose the measles for the subject of his inaugural discourse, which he inscribed to Cullen, and to Gaubius, both of whom hud shewn him particular regard. After taking his degree at Leyden, he visited and became acquainted with professor Camper in InesKuul, who had at that time one of the finest anatomical museums in Kurope. From thence he proceeded to Aix-lct-Chapelle and the Spa, and afterwards visited different parts of Germany; stopped for some time at the principal universities; and wherever he went cultivated the acquaintance of learned men, especially those of his own profession, in which he was ever anxious to impr >ve himself. At Berne, in Switzerland, he became known to the celebrated Haller, who afterwards ranked him among his friends and correspondents. He came to reside in London towards the close of 1778, being then in his 2Stii year, and was admitted a member of the College of Physicians, and was elected a fellow of the Royal Society 1779, and of the Society of Antiquaries 1791, as he had been before of different foreign academies at Nantz, Montpellier, and Madrid: he was afterwards admitted an honorary member of the Literary and Philosophical Society at Manchester, and of the Royal Society of Medicine at Paris, at which place he was elected one of the Associes Etrangers de l‘Ecole de Medicine; and in 1807, Correspondant de la Premiere Classe de I’Institut Imperial. Previous to 1778, he had written an elementary work on Anatomy, which was greatly enlarged and improved in its second edition, 1781: and he had communicated to the Royal Society the History of a curious case, which was afterwards published in their Transactions, “Phil. Trans.” vol. LXIV. He became also the sole editor of the London “Medical Journal;” a work which, after going through several volumes, was resumed under the title of “Medical Facts and Observations’.” these two works have ever been distinguished for their correctness, their judicious arrangement, and their candour. About this time he published an account of the Tape-worm, in which he made known the specific for this disease, purchased by the king of France. This account has been enlarged in a subsequent edition. — He likewise distinguished himself by a practical work on “Consumptions,” which, at the time, became the means of introducing him to considerable practice in pulmonary complaints. In 1780, he was elected physician to the Westminster General Dispensary; a situation he held for many years, and which afforded him ample scope for observation and experience in the knowledge of disease. These opportunities he did not neglect; and though, from his appointment soon after to St. Luke’s Hosr he was led to decline general practice, and to attach himself more particularly to the diseases of th mi-.;, continued to communicate to the publick such facts and remarks as he considered likely to promote the extension of any branch of professional science. With this view, he published some remarks on the treatment of Hydrocephalus internus (“Med. Comment, of Edinburgh, vol. V.”), and in the same work a case of Ulceration of the Œsophagus and Ossification of the Heart. He wrote also an account of a species of Hydrocephalus, which sometimes takes place in cases of Mania (London Med. Journal, vol. VI.) and an account of the Epidemic Catarrh of the year 1788, vol. IX. He had given an account also of the “Life of Dr. William Hunter,” with whom he was personally acquainted, a work abounding in interesting anecdote, and displaying an ingenuous and impartial review of the writings and discoveries of that illustrious anatomist. From the time of his being elected physician to St. Luke’s Hospital to the period of his death, he devoted himself, nearly exclusively, to the care and treatment of Insanity; and his skill in this melancholy department of human disease, became so generally acknowledged, that few, if any, could be considered his superiors. In the year 1803, it was deemed expedient to have recourse to Dr. Simmons, to alleviate the mournful malady of his sovereign, of whom he had the care for nearly six months, assisted by his son: the result was as favourable as the public could have wished; and on taking their leave, his majesty was pleased to confer a public testimony of his approbation, by appointing Dr. Simmons one of his physicians extraordinary, which took place in May 1804. — In the unfortunate relapse, which occurred in 1811, Dr. Simmons again attended; and, in conjunction with the other physicians, suggested those remedies and plans which seemed most likely to effect a cure. In February of that year he resigned the office of physician to St. Luke’s, in a very elegant letter, in which he assigned his age and state of health as the reasons for his resignation. The governors were so sensible of the value of his past services, and the respect due to him, as immediately to elect him a governor of the charity. They also proposed his being one of the committee; and, expressly on his account, created the office of Consulting Physician, in order to have the advantage of his opinion, not merely in the medical arrangement, but in the domestic ceconomy of the hospital. His last illness began on the evening of the 10th. of April, 1813, when he was seized with sickness, and a violent vomiting of bile, accompanied with a prostration of strength so sudden, and so severe, that on the second day of the attack he was barely able to stand; and a dissolution of the powers of life seeming to be rapidly coming on, he prepared for his departure with methodical accuracy, anticipated the event with great calmness, and, on the evening of the 23d of the same month, expired in the arms of his son. He was buried May 2, at Sandwich in Kent, and, according to the directions expressed in his will, his remains were deposited in a vault in the church-yard of St. Clement, next to those of his mother. In private life, Dr. Simmons was punctiliously correct in all his dealings; mild and unassuming in his manners, and of rather retired habits, passing Ins time chiefly in his study and in his professional avocations. He was one of the earliest proprietors of the Roy;d Institution and, in 1806, became an hereditary governor of the British Institution for the promotion of the Fine Arts. He has left one son, who is unmarried, and a widow, to deplore his loss.

In the exercise of his function as a physician, sir Hans Sloane is said to have been remarkable for the certainty of his prognostics; and the hand of the anatomist verified, in a signal manner, the truth of his predictions relating to the seat of diseases. By his practice he not only confirmed the efHcacy of the Peruvian bark in intermittents, but exied its use in favour of other denominations, in nervous disorders, and in gangrenes and hemorrhages. The sanction he gave to inoculation, by performing that operation on some of the royal family, encouraged, and much accelerated its progress throughout the kingdom. His ointment for the leucoma has not yet lost its credit with many reputable names in physic. He published only the works already mentioned, except his papers in the Philosophical Transactions, which are considerably numerous, and may be found in the volumes XVII to XLIX. His valuable museum, it is well known, formed the foundation of that vast national repository known by the name of the British Museum. Sir Hans was naturally very desirous to prevent his collection being dissipated after his death, and bequeathed it to the public on condition that 20,000l. should be paid by parliament to his family. Parliament accordingly passed an act, in 1753, for the purchase of sir Hans Sloane’s collection, and of the Harleian collection of Mss, and for procuring one general repository for their reception, along with the Cottonian collection, &c. Montague-house, in Russel- street Bloomsbury, was purchased as the repository, and statutes and rules having been formed for the use of the collection, and proper officers appointed, the British Museum was opened for the public in 1759. It were unnecessary to expatiate on the utility of an institution, so well known, so easily accessible, and so highly important to the interests of science and general literature. From the vast additions made of late years, however, it may be worthy of the parliament, as soon as the national finances will permit, to consider of the propriety of an entire new building for this immense collection, the present being much decayed, and, as a national ornament, bearing no proportion to its invaluable contents.

, a Danish anatomist, was born at Copenhagen, Jan. 10, 1C38. His father was a Lutheran, and goldsmith to Christian IV. He himself studied under Bartholin, who considered him as one of the best of his pupils. To complete his knowledge he travelled in Germany, Holland, France, and Italy, and in the latter place obtained a pension from Ferdinand II. grand duke of Tuscany. In 1669 he abjured the protestant persuasion, having been nearly converted before by Bossuet at Paris. Christian V. who wished to fix him at Copenhagen, made him professor of anatomy, and gave him permission to exercise the religion he had adopted. But his change produced disagreeable effects in his own conntry, and he returned to Italy: where, after a time, he became an ecclesiastic, and was named by the pope his apostolical vicar for the North, with the title of bishop of Titiopolis in Greece. He became now a missionary in Germany, and died at Swerin in 1686. He made several discoveries in anatomy, and his works that are extant are chiefly on medical subjects, as 1. “EJementorum Myologist; Specimen,” Leyden, 1667, 12mo. 2. “A Treatise on the Anatomy of the Brain,” in Latin, Paris, 1669; and Leyden, 1671. He also wrote a part of the Anatomical Exposition of Winslow, to whom he was great uncle.

, a celebrated anatomist and painter of animals, was born at Liverpool in 1724-, and at the age of thirty went to Rome for improvement in his studies, but why is not easily accounted for; London was the best theatre to exercise his talents for the dissection and the portraiture of animals, of horses (which he chiefly excelled in) especially, and in London he fixed his residence. That his skill in comparative anatomy never suggested to him the propriety of style in forms, if it were not eminently proved by his Phaeton with the Horses of the Sun, would be evident from all his other figures, which, when human, are seldom more than the attendants of some animal, whilst the style of the animals themselves depended entirely on the individual before him: his tiger for grandeur has never been equalled; his lions are to those of Rubens what jackals are to lions; but none ever did greater justice to the peculiar structure of that artificial animal, the race courser, and to all the mysteries of turf- tactics, though, unfortunately for the artist, they depend more on the fac-similist’s precision than the painter’s spirit. Stubbs was perhaps the first who painted in enamel on a large scale. He was an associate of the Royal Academy, and died in 1806. He published a work, completed in 1766, under the title of “The Anatomy of the Horse including a particular description of the bones, cartilages, muscles, fascias, ligaments, nerves, arteries, veins, and glands; in eighteen tables from nature:” and before his death three numbers of another work, which was to have consisted of six, entitled “A Comparative Anatomical Exposition of the structure of the Human Body with that of a Tiger and a common Fowl, in thirty tables.”!

, an eminent naturalist and anatomist, was born at Amsterdam in 1637, where his father was an apothecary, and had a museum of natural history. He intended his son for the church, and with this view gave him a classical education, but the boy prevailed upon him to let him apply to physic. He was therefore kept at home, till he should be prpperly qualified to engage in that study, and frequently employed in cleaning, and arranging the articles of his father’s collection. From this occupation he acquired a taste for natural history, and soon began to form a museum of his own. Entomology having particularly struck his fancy, be became indefatigable in discovering, catching, and examining, the flying insects, not only in the province of Holland, but in those of Gueldreland and Utrecht. In 1661 he went to Leydeu, to pursue his studies, which he did with so much success, that, in 1663, he was admitted a candidate of physic, after undergoing the examinations prescribed on that occasion. On his arrival at Leyden, he contracted a friendship with the great anatomist Nicolas Steno, and ever after lived with him in intimacy.

The works of this celebrated anatomist and naturalist, are, 1. “Tractatus Physico-Anatomico-Medicus de Respiratione,” Leyden, 1667, 1677, and 1679, in 8vo, and 1738, 4to. 2. “General History of Insects,” Utrecht, 1669, 4to, in Dutch, but published there in 1685, 4to, in French, and at Leyden, in Latin, 1685, with fine engravings. 3. “Miraculuai Naturae, seu, nteri rnuliebris fetbrica,” Leyden, 1672, 1679, 1717, 1729, 4to, with plates. He was impelled to this publication by Van Home, who had claimed some of his discoveries. 4. “Historia Insectorum generalis; adjicitur dilucidatio, qua specialia cujusvis ordinis exempla figuris accuratissime, tarn naturali magnitudine, quam ope microscopii aucta, illustrantur,” Leyd. 1733, 4to. This translation of his history of insects is by Henninius, but the best edition of this valuable work is that which appeared at Leyden in 1737, 2 vols. folio, under the title “Biblia Naturae, sive, Historia Insectorum in classes certas redncta, &c.” The learned owe this to Boerhaave, for the manuscript having been left by the author to his executors, had been handed about till it was difficult to be traced. Of this an English translation was published in 1757, folio, by sir John Hill and others, and with Boerhaave’s plates.

, a learned physician, the son of Edward Tyson, of Clevedon, in Somersetshire, gent, was born in 1649, and admitted commoner of Magdalen Hall, Oxford, in 1667, where, after taking the degree of M. A. he entered on the study of medicine, was made fellow of the royal society, and proceeded M. D. at Cambridge in 1680. Soon after this he became fellow of the college of physicians, reader of the anatomical lecture in surgeons’ ­ball, and physician to the hospitals of Bethlevn and Bridewell, London, in which station he died Aug. 1, 1708. He was a skilful anatomist, and an ingenious writer, as appears by his essays in the Philosophical Transactions, and Mr. Hook’s collections. He published also “The anatomy of a Porpoise dissected at Gresham college,” Lond. 1680. “The anatomy of a Pigmy, compared with that of a Monkey, an Ape, and a Man,” Lond. 4to, with a “Philosophical essay concerning the Pygmies of the ancients,” ibid.

, an eminent French naturalist, was bora at Rouen, Sept. 17, 1731, and had his classical education in the Jesuits’ college there, where he was principally distinguished for the proficiency he made in the Greek language. He afterwards became a pupil of the celebrated anatomist Lecat, and after studying pharmacy came to Paris in 1750. His father, who was an advocate of the parliament of Normandy, intended him for the bar, but his predilection for natural history was too strong for any prospects which that profession might yield. Having obtained from the duke d'Argenson, the war minister, a kind of commission to travel in the name of the government, he spent some years in. visiting the principal cabinets and collections of natural history in Europe, and in inspecting the mines, volcanos, and other interesting phenomena of nature. On his return to Paris in 1756, he began a course of lectures on natural history, which he regularly continued until 1788, and acquired so much reputation as to be admitted an honorary member of most of the learned societies of Europe, and had liberal offers from the courts of Russia and Portugal to settle in those countries; but he rejected these at the very time that he was in vain soliciting to be reimbursed the expences he had contracted in serving his own nation. He appears to have escaped the revolutionary storms, and died at Paris Aug. 24, 1807, in the seventy-sixth year of his age. He first appeared as an author in 1758, at which time he published his “Catalogue d‘un cabinet d’histoire naturelle,” 12mo. This was followed next year by a sketch of a complete system of mineralogy; and two years after by his “Nouvelle exposition du regne minerale,” 2 vols. 8vo, reprinted in 1774; but his greatest work, on which his reputation is chiefly built, was his “Dictionnaire raisonne” universe! d'histoire naturelle," which has passed through many editions both in 4to and 8vo, the last of which was published at Lyons in 1800, 15 vols. 8vo.

, an able anatomist, was horn at Bologna in 1542. He taught surgery in his native place, until pope Gregory XIII. soon after his elevation to the pontificate in 1572, invited him to Rome, and appointed him his first physician. Here he lectured on anatomy, and acquired very great reputation, not only for his discoveries in that branch, but for his skill in lithotomy and other surgical operations; and he promised to have attained the highest rank in his profession, when a premature death deprived the world of his services. He died in 1575, at the age of thirty-two. The Pons Varolii, which still perpetuates his name, and his other discoveries in the ceconomy of the brain and nerves, are contained in his “Anatomise, sive de resolutione corporis hurnani, libri quatuor,” Padua, 1573, 8vo, and “De Nervis opticis Epistola,” ibid.

, a physician and anatomist, was born in 1643 at Vesbrouck, in the county of Waes. He was descended of a family who had many years subsisted from the profits arising from the cultivation of the earth; and he had himself worked with the spade to the age of twenty-two years; when the curate of his village, taking notice of him, gave him the first rudiments of learning. He afterwards obtained a place in the college of the Trinity at Louvain, where he was made professor of anatomy in 16y, and afterwards doctor in medicine. He died there in Feb. 1710, aged 62. The following epitaph was found after his decease, written with his own hand: “Philippus Vt-rheyen Medicina; Doctor & Professor, partem sui materialem hie in Cremeterio condi voluit, ne Templum dehonestaret, am nocivis halitibus inficeret. Requiescat in pace.”

, an eminent French anatomist, was born Aug. 15, 1648, at Feurs en Fores, where his father was a physician. He studied medicine for five years at Avignon, and soon acquired fame for skill in anatomy, on which subject he read lectures with great accuracy and perspicuity. In 1676 he became a member of the royal academy of sciences at Paris, and was appointed to give lessons on anatomy to the dauphin. In 167U he was appointed professor of anatomy, and attracted a great concourse of pupils, especially from foreign countries. He died Sept. 10, 1730, aged eighty-two, and had continued to the last his anatomical pursuits. He published in his life-time only one work, “Traite de I‘organe de I’ouie,” but which is said to have been enough for his fame. This appeared first in 1683, and was soon reprinted and translated into Latin and German. From his manuscripts was published in 1751, “Traite des maladies des os,” and published in English in 1762; and his “Oeuvresanatomiques,” in 2 vols. 4to, edited by his pupil Senac. He contributed a great many observations to the Memoirs of the Academy, and the Journal des Savans.

, a celebrated anatomist and physician, was descended from a family which had abounded with physicians. John Vesalius, his great-grandfather, was physician to Mary of Burgundy, first wife of Maximilian I.; and went and. settled at Louvain when he was old. Everard, his grandfather, wrote commentaries upon the books of Rhases, and upon Hippocrates’s “Aphorisms:” and his father Andrew was apothecary to the emperor Charles V. Our Vesalius was born at Brussels, but in what year seems to be uncertain; Vander-Linden finding his birth in 1514, while others place it in 1512. He was instructed in the languages and philosophy at Louvain, and there gave early tokens of his love for anatomy, and of his future skill in the knowledge of the human body; for, he was often amusing himself with dissecting rats, moles, dogs, and cats, and with inspecting their viscera.

Afterwards he went to Paris, and studied physic under James Sylvius; but applied himself chiefly to anatomy, which was then a science very little known. For, though dissections had been made formerly, yet they had long been discontinued as an unlawful and impious usage; and Charles V. had a consultation of divines at Salamanca, to know, if, in good conscience, a human body might be dissected for the sake of comprehending its structure. He perfected himself in this science very early, as we may know from his work “De Humani Corporis Fabrica:” which, though then the best book of anatomy in the world, and what justly gave him the title of “the Father of Anatomy,” was yet composed by him at eighteen years of age. Afterwards he went to Louvain, and began to communicate the knowledge he had acquired: then he travelled into Italy, read lectures, and made anatomical demonstrations at Pisa, Bologna, and several other cities there. About 1537, the republic of Venice made him professor in the university of Padua, where he taught anatomy seven years, and was the first anatomist to whom a salary was given; and Charles V. called him to be his physician, as he was also to Philip II. king of Spain. He acquired a prodigious reputation at those courts by his sagacity and skill in his profession, of which Thuanus has recorded this very singular proof. He tells us, that Maximilian d'Egmont, count of Buren, grand general, and a favourite of the emperor, being ill, Vesalius declared to him, that he could not recover; and also told him, that he could not hold out beyond such a day and hour. The count, firmly persuaded that the event would answer the prediction, invited all his friends to a grand entertainment at the time after which he made them presents, took a final leave of them, and then expired precisely at the moment Vesalius had mentioned. If this account be not true, it shews at least the vast reputation Vesalius must have risen to, where such stories were invented to do him honour.

, an able anatomist, was born in 1598, at Minden, in Westphalia, and studied the classics, philosophy, and medicine, at Vienna. After he had applied to thelatter for some time, he undertook a voyage to the Levant, in pursuit of natural history, remained a considerable time at Egypt, and finished by going to Jerusalem, where he was made a knight of the holy sepulchre. He then returned to Venice, and in 1608 gave private lectures on anatomy and botany, with such success that the regular professors were soon deserted. The republic, sensible of the services of so able a man, made him, in 1632, first professor of anatomy at Padua, a chair which was then vacant, and which he Ijded with increasing reputation, although he was a little deaf, and had impediments of speech which rendered him rather difficult to be understood. But these defects were soon overlooked, and he was also appointed to lecture on surgery and botany, until finding so many labours too much for his health, he obtained leave, in 1638, to con* fine himself to surgery and botany only, with the care of the botanic garden. Here he was in his element, for botany had always been his favourite study; and in order to render the garden at Padua the best in Europe, he solicited permission to pay another visit to the Levant, in 1648. The fatigues of this voyage, however, undermined, his constitution, and soon after his return he died, Aug. 30, 1649. His works, all of which were esteemed valuable, are, 1. “Observationes et notse ad Prosperi Alpini librum de plantis Ægyptii, cum additamentis aliarum plantarum ejusdem regionis,” Padua, 1638, 4 to. Of this work, Ray availed himself. 2 “Syntagma Anatomicum,” his principal work, of which there Inve been many editions, the best by Blasius, at Utrecht, 1696, 4to. It was also translated into Dutch and German, and into English by Culpepper, 1653, fol. 3. “Catalogns plantarum horti Patavini,” Padua, 1642, 12mo, reprinted with additions in 1644. 4. “Opobalsami veteribus cogniti vmdicias,” ibid. 1644, 8vo. 5. “A very curious work, compiled from his Mss. after his death,” De pullitione vEgyptioruin, et alias Observationes Anatomicae, et Epistolae medics posthurme," Hafnise, (Copenhagen), 1664, 8vo.

, a physician and anatomist, was born in 1641, at the village of Rovergue, and after studying and taking his degrees in medicine at Montpellier, settled there as a practitioner. In 1671, he was appointed physician to the hospital of St. Eloy, where from frequent opportunities of anatomical dissection, he was led to pay particular attention to the subject of neurology, which, notwithstanding what the celebrated Dr. Willis had published, was a part of the animal economy very little known. After ten years study of the nerves, he published the work which has redounded most to his honour, “Neurologia universalis, hoc est, omnium huniani corporis nervorum, simul ac cerebri, medullaeque spinalis, descriptio anatomica,” Leyden, 1685, fol. Even of this work, however, the anatomical part is the most valuable, for what respects the physiology, which forms a considerable part of the volume, deserves very little regard, as being founded on wrong principles. He afterwards published other anatomical works, but does not appear to have advanced his reputation by them. Astruc and Senac have given a very unfavourable account of his genius and judgment, yet neither can deny that his anatomical researches have been of service. In 1690 he was sent for to be physician to mademoiselle de Montpensier, but at her death returned to Montpellier, where he died in 1716.

Da Vinci now set up for himself; and executed many pictures at Florence of great credit, and the universality of his genius soon appeared. He had a perfect knowledge of the theory of his art. He was, by far, the best anatomist and physiologist of his time, the first who raised a spirit for anatomical study, and gave it credit, and certainly the first man we know of who introduced the practice of making anatomical drawings. His first attempt, according to Vasari, was a book of the anatomy of a horse; he afterwards applied with more diligence to the human anatomy, in which study he reciprocally received and communicated assistance to Marc. Antonio della Torra, an excellent philosopher, who then read lectures in Pavia, and wrote upon this subject. For him Da Vinci made a book of studies, drawn with red chalk, and touched with a pen, with great diligence, of such subjects as he had himself dissected: where he made all the bones, and to those he joined, in their order, all the nerves, and covered them with the muscles. And concerning those, from part to part, he wrote remarks in letters of an ugly form, which are written by the left hand, backwards, and not to be understood but by those who know the method of reading them. These very drawings and writings are now in his majesty’s collection of drawings. After inspecting them some years ago, Dr. Hunter expressed his full persuasion that Da Vinci was the best anatomist, at that time, in the world , Lionardo was also well skilled in optics and geometry, almost every branch of literature, and the arts. He was a good architect, an able carver, and extremely well versed in the mechanics: he had a fine voice, and understood music, and both played and sang with taste and skill. Having also the advantage of a well-formed person, he excelled in all the manly exercises. He understood the management of a horse, and took delight in appearing well mounted: and he was very dextrous in the use of arms’. His behaviour also was polite, and his conversation so engaging, that no man ever partook of it without pleasure, or left it without regret.

Lionardo da Vinci broke forth with a splendour which eclipsed all his predecessors: made up of all the elements of genius, favoured by form, education, and circumstances, all ear, all eye, all grasp painter, poet, sculptor, anatomist, architect, engineer,chemist, machinist, musician, philosopher, and sometimes empiric he laid hold of every beauty in the enchanted circle, but, without exclusive attachment to one, dismissed in her turn each. Fitter to scatter hints than to teach by example, he wasted life insatiate in experiment. To a capacity which at once penetrated the principle and real aim of the art, he joined an inequality of fancy that at one moment lent him wings for the pursuit of beauty, and the next flung him on the ground to crawl after deformity. We owe to him chiaroscuro with all its magic, but character was his favourite study; character he has often raised from an individual to a species, and as often depressed to a monster from an individual. His notion of the most elaborate finish, and his want of perseverance, were at least equal. Want of perseverance alone could make him abandon his cartoon designed for the great council-chamber at Florence, of which the celebrated contest of horsemen was but one group; for to him who could organize that composition, Michael Angelo himself might be an object of emulation, but could not be one of fear. His line was free from meagreness, and his forms presented beauties; but he appears not to have been very much acquainted with the antique. The strength of his conception lay in the delineation of male heads; those of his females owe nearly all their charms to chiaroscuro; they are seldom more discriminated than the children they follow; they are sisters of one family.

A Dutch physician, named Schelhammer, in a book “De Auditu,” printed at Leyden in 1684, took occasion to animadvert upon a passage in Dr. Willis’s book “de Anima Brutorum,” printed in 1672; and in such a manner as reflected not only upon his skill, but also upon his integrity. But Dr. Derham observes, “that this is a severe and unjust censure of our truly-famous countryman, a man of known probity, who hath manifested himself to have been as curious and sagacious an anatomist, as great a philosopher, and as learned and skilful a physician as any of his censurers; and his reputation for veracity and integrity was no less than any of theirs too.” It remains to be noticed, that his “Cerebri Anatome” had an elegant copy of verses written in it by Mr. Phillip Fell, and the drawings for the plates were done by his friend Dr. Christopher Wren, the celebrated architect.

, a skilful anatomist who settled in France, was born in 1669, at Odensee, in Denmark, where his father was minister of the place, and intended him for his own profession, but he preferred that of medicine, which he studied in various universities in Europe. In 1698 he was at Paris, studying under the celebrated Duverney, and here he was induced by the writings of Bossuet to renounce the protestant religion, a change which, it is rather singular, happened to his granduncle Stenonius (See Stenonius) by the same influence. He now settled at Paris, was elected one of the college of physicians, lecturer at the royal garden, expounder of the Teutonic language at the royal library, and member of the academy of sciences. According to Haller, who had been his pupil, his genius was not so remarkable as his industry, but by dint of assiduity he became an excellent anatomist; and his system of anatomy, or “Exposition Anatomique,” has long been considered as a work of the first reputation and utility, and has been translated into almost all the European languages, and into English by Douglas, 1734, 2 vols. 4to. He was also the author of a great number of anatomical dissertations, some of which were published separately, but they mostly -appeared in the Memoirs of the French academy. He died in 1760, at the advanced age of ninety-one.

, an eminent physician and miscellaneous writer, was born December 8, 1728, at Brugg, a town in the German part of the canton of Bern. His father, the senator Zimmermann, was descended from a family which had been distinguished, during several ages, for the merit and integrity with which they passed through the first offices of the government. His mother, of the name of Pache, was the daughter of a celebrated counsellor at Morges, in the French part of the same canton; which accounts for the circumstance of the two languages, German and French, being equally familiar to him, although he had spent only a very short time in France. Young Zimmermann was educated at home till Jie had attained the age of fourteen, when he was sent to study the belles lettres at Bern. After three years had been thus employed, he was transferred to the school of philosophy, where the prolix comments on the metaphysics of Wolf seem to have much disgusted, without much enlightening, him. The death of both his parents leaving him at liberty to choose his destination in life, he determined to embrace the medical profession, and went to the university of Gottingen, in 1747. Here his countryman^ the illustrious Haller, took him into his own house^ directed his studies, and treated him as a son and a friend. Besides the proper medical professors, Zimmermann attended the mathematical and physical lectures, and acquired a knowledge of English literature. He spent four years in thiuniversity, part of the last of which he employed in experiments on the doctrine of irritability^ first proposed by the English anatomist Giisson, and afterward pursued with so much success by Haller. Zimmermann made this principle the subject of his inaugural thesis, in 1751; and the clearness of the style and method with which he explained the doctrine, with the strength of the experimental proofs by which he supported it, gained him great reputation.