Nutton V
Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine, London, England.
Sudhoffs Arch. 1997;81(2):158-70.
This paper aims to draw attention to some of the problems in traditional accounts of the revival of classical medicine in the Renaissance. The rediscovery of Galen from 1525 onwards, and the success of Vesalian anatomy in the 1540s, have encouraged historians to read back into the period from 1490 to 1530 ideas promoted by only a handful of individuals, and to assume that the rhetoric of the reformers was swiftly successful. This was rarely the case. Few could read Greek, the manifesto of Leoniceno in 1490 demanding a return to Greek as the basis of medicine was hardly implemented before the 1530s. Instead, it was Latin authors, both from the past and among the new Humanists, who were most important in the transformation of medical ideas in the first quarter of the sixteenth century.
本文旨在提请人们关注文艺复兴时期传统医学复兴描述中的一些问题。从1525年起盖伦著作的重新发现,以及16世纪40年代维萨里解剖学的成功,促使历史学家将仅由少数人推动的观念回溯到1490年至1530年这一时期,并假定改革者的言辞迅速取得了成功。但实际情况很少如此。很少有人能读懂希腊语,1490年莱奥尼切诺要求回归希腊语作为医学基础的宣言,直到16世纪30年代之前几乎都未得到实施。相反,在16世纪上半叶医学观念的转变中,无论是过去的还是新人文主义者中的拉丁作家才是最为重要的。