Nutton Vivian
The Wellcome Trust Centre for the History of Medicine, University College London, England.
Med Secoli. 2005;17(2):421-42.
The history of the medical book in the Renaissance is only just beginning: there still are enormous gaps in our knowledge. Some general points may be emphasised: doctors, surgeons and apothecaries were often literate; the culture of the doctor was founded at least as much upon the book as upon practical experience. Much is known about the history of the printing press: but in focusing on expensive, luxury books such as Vesalius' Fabrica we often leave out average products such as the many other anatomy books printed in the 16th century. The most significant feature of printing is perhaps the increase of the amount and variety of what was available and accessible to readers. Looking specifically at one type of book, the plague treatise, the amalgamation of public and private allowed by the printing press becomes apparent. Knowledge was disseminated from universities to the general public: plague texts are scattered in many different private and public libraries, and any attempt at a general survey is bound to be provisional.
我们的认知仍存在巨大空白。可以强调一些总体要点：医生、外科医生和药剂师往往有文化；医生的文化至少同样建立在书本之上，而非仅仅基于实践经验。我们对印刷术的历史了解很多：但在关注诸如维萨里的《人体的构造》这类昂贵的豪华书籍时，我们常常忽略了16世纪印刷的许多其他解剖学书籍等普通产品。印刷术最显著的特点或许是可供读者获取的数量和种类的增加。具体来看一种书籍，即鼠疫论文，印刷术所允许的公共与私人的融合便显而易见。知识从大学传播到了普通大众：鼠疫相关文本散布在许多不同的私人和公共图书馆中，任何全面调查的尝试都必然是临时的。
