The Anatomical Exercises: De Motu Cordis and De Circulatione Sanguinis in English Translation

by William Harvey, Geoffrey L. Keynes (Editor)

El Prof. Dr. J. J. Izquierdo nació en 1893, hizo los estudios preparatorios y de medicina, y obtuvo el título profesional (1917) en la ciudad de Puebla. A poco de iniciado en las tareas de la fisiología en las Escuelas de Medicina Universitaria y Médico Militar, como desde 1920 reconociera que requerían especialización, de 1927 a 1930 fue a buscarla a los Estados Unidos, a Inglaterra, y a Alemania.
A su regreso, con apoyo en su libro Curso de Fisiología de Laboratorio (1929) quizo iniciar en México la correspondiente reforma, pero la viva oposición que encontró, lo obligó a definir y defender tal reforma, con base en sus antecedentes histórico-evolutivos, en la obra, Balance Cuatricentenario de la Fisiología en México (1934).
También para promoverla, publicó las obras: Harvey iniciador del método experimental (1936), cuyo contenido en parte vuelve a ser presentado en este volumen; Análisis experimental de los fenómenos fisiológicos fundamentales (1939): Bernard creador de la Medicina Científica (1942). Esta última, con su versión castellana de la famosa Introducción al estudio de la Medicina Experimental, reapareció en el tomo 21 de esta misma colección.
El sostenido propósito de señalar las bases históricas, científicas y filosóficas de la línea de pensamiento a que venía sirviendo, permitió al Dr. Izquierdo revelar aspectos antes desconocidos, o no analizados, ni interpretados, del pasado de las ciencias mexicanas, en las obras: Raudón cirujano poblano de 1810 (1949: Montaña y los orígenes del movimiento social y científico de México (1955); El Brownismo en México (1956); El Hipocratismo en México (1957); y La primera Casa de las Ciencias en México (1958).
El actual Departamento de Fisiología, de la Facultad de Medicina, en la Ciudad Universitaria, fue creado y organizado de acuerdo con un proyecto original presentado por Izquierdo en 1950.
Al serle otorgado recientemente, el grado de Profesor Emérito, se le calificó (Gaceta Universitaria, 21, dic. 1964) de "el precursor más ilustre que ha tenido la línea de pensamiento que tiende a que la medicina mexicana descanse sobre bases cada vez más científicas".

Genres: Science, Classics, Nonfiction, Philosophy, Biology, Medicine, History

240 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1628

About the author

Librarian Note: There is more than one author by this name in the Goodreads database.

William Harvey (1 April 1578 – 3 June 1657) was an English physician. He was the first to describe completely and in detail the systemic circulation and properties of blood being pumped to the brain and body by the heart, though earlier writers had provided precursors of the theory. After his death the William Harvey Hospital was constructed in the town of Ashford, several miles from his birthplace of Folkestone.

At the time of Harvey's publication, Galen had been an influential medical authority for several centuries. Galen believed that blood passed between the ventricles by means of invisible pores. According to Galen's views, the venous system was quite separate from the arterial system, except when they came in contact through the unseen pores. Arabic scholar Ibn al-Nafis had disputed aspects of Galen's views, providing a model that seems to imply a form of pulmonary circulation in his Commentary on Anatomy in Avicenna's Canon (1242). Al-Nafis stated that blood moved from the heart to the lungs, where it mixed with air, and then back to the heart, from which it spread to the rest of the body. Harvey's discoveries inevitably and historically came into conflict with Galen's teachings and the publication of his treatise De Motu Cordis incited considerable controversy within the medical community. Some doctors affirmed they would "rather err with Galen than proclaim the truth with Harvey." Galen incompletely perceived the function of the heart, believing it a "productor of heat", while the function of its affluents, the arteries, was that of cooling the blood as the lungs "...fanned and cooled the heart itself". Galen thought that during dilation the arteries sucked in air, while during their contraction they discharged vapours through pores in the flesh and skin.

Independently from Ibn Al-Nafis, Michael Servetus identified pulmonary circulation, but this discovery did not reach the public because it was written down for the first time in the Manuscript of Paris in 1546. It was later published in the theological work which caused his execution in 1553, almost all copies of which were destroyed. Pulmonary circulation was described by Renaldus Columbus, Andrea Cesalpino and Andreas Vesalius, before Harvey would provide a refined and complete description of the circulatory system.

Harvey's other major work was Exercitationes de generatione animalium, published in 1651.

The book starts with a description of development of the hen's egg. The major part is theoretical, dealing with Aristotle's theories and the work of the physicians following Galen and up to Fabricius. Finally he deals with embryogenesis in viviparous animals especially hinds and does. The treatment is generally Aristotelian and limited by use of a simple magnifying lens.

Needham claims the following achievements for this work.

His doctrine of omne vivum ex ovo (all life comes from the egg) was the first definite statement against the idea of spontaneous generation. He denied the possibility of generation from excrement and from mud, and pointed out that even worms have eggs.
He identified the citricula as the point in the yolk from which the embryo develops and the blastoderm surrounding the embryo.
He destroyed once and for all the Aristotelian (semen-blood) and Epicurean (semen-semen) theories of early embryogeny.
He settled the long controversy about which parts of the egg were nutritive and which was formative, by demonstrating the unreality of the distinction.
Wikipedia

Reviews

[Roy Lotz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good God! how should the mitral valves prevent the regurgitation of air and not of blood?

I have a friend who studied history, who likes to complain how about how unfairly maligned are the Middle Ages in the popular imagination. According to him, and according to much else I’ve heard, the characterization of that time period as consisting of incorrigible dogma and the absence of all free intellectual inquiry, is simply a bunch of lies concocted in the Renaissance and perpetuated to the modern day. I have no doubt that this is true; but still, I cannot help suspecting that there is, at least, a degree of truth in the negative characterizations of the Medieval period. For example, just before reading this book, I read a work of Galen, and came away very unimpressed with the Roman physician; so it is hard not to be dismayed to find Galen’s inaccurate theories still holding sway in 1628, almost 1,500 years after Galen’s death. This strikes me as very wrong.

In any case, this book is one of the classics of European science. Harvey is a tremendously impressive man; and this book is a product of deep learning and an inquisitive mind. That the heart pumps blood, and that blood circulates away from the heart in arteries and back to the heart in veins, seems obvious; so it is fascinating and strange to see somebody trying to prove just that. That European science could have gone on so long without such a basic anatomical understanding is frightening. I wonder if this is partly due to the engrained class divisions holding sway at that time. Doctors were considered a part of the learned gentility, akin to professors of other subjects; so would they have understood the workings of the body more quickly if they spent more time with farmers and butchers? Medicine isn’t a subject that should be taught in the ivory tower, after all.

So how did Harvey arise at this insight? Well, it was difficult; in his words:

When I first gave my mind to vivisections, as a means of discovering the motions and uses of the heart, and sought to discover these from actual inspection, and not from the writings of others, I found the task so truly arduous, so full of difficulties, that I was almost tempted to think, with Fracastorius, that the motion of the heart was only to be comprehended by God.

Thankfully, that didn’t turn out to be the case. Rather, Harvey performs numerous dissections and vivisections, not only on humans, but on a variety of other species. Here we see him observing an invisible shrimp:

We have a small shrimp in these countries, which is taken in the Thames and in the sea, the whole of whose body is transparent; this creature, placed in a little water, has frequently afforded myself and particular friends an opportunity of observing the motions of the heart with the greatest distinctness, the external parts of the body presenting no obstacle to our view, but the heart being perceived as though it had been seen through a window.

In perhaps the most famous experiment included in this book, Harvey manages to resuscitate a pigeon:

Experimenting with a pigeon upon one occasion, after the heart had wholly ceased to pulsate, and the auricles too had become motionless, I kept my finger wetted with saliva warm for a short time upon the heart, and observed that under the influence of this fomentation it recovered new strength and life, so that both ventricles and auricles pulsated, contracting and relaxing alternately, recalled as it were from death to life.

Apparently, the commonly held belief, that autopsies and dissections on humans were taboo in the Middle Ages, is untrue. So what prevented doctors from figuring out how the heart worked? It wasn’t that they weren’t dissecting humans, Harvey says, but that they were confining their attention solely to humans:

Had anatomists only been as conversant with the dissection of the lower animals as they are with that of the human body, the matters that have hitherto kept them in a perplexity of doubt would, in my opinion, have met them freed from every kind of difficulty.

(As a side note, the great similarities that Harvey notes in the bodies of fish, snakes, birds, and other mammals, reveals tantalizing evidence for evolution; otherwise, it’s hard to explain why all of these apparently unrelated animals are built on the same body plan, and share the same, or analogous, internal organs.)

In another fascinating experiment, Harvey uses a ligature (a binding to decrease the flow of blood to a limb, at that time used in amputations), first on animals, and then on humans, to observe the valves in veins that prevent blood from flowing backwards. By tying the cord tightly, Harvey could see the veins on the surface of the arm; then, with his finger, he tried to push the blood backward, but it wouldn’t go; but if he tried to push it forwards, up the arm, it was moved easily.

I must admit, however, that even though some parts were absolutely fascinating, much of Harvey’s points went over my head. In order to fully understand this book, you would need, I think, both a thorough understanding of the state of medical knowledge before Harvey, as well as a thorough understanding of the heart’s anatomy—both of which I lack. Still, there are some beautiful quotes in the book, which I want to include.

Here we have his manifesto:

My dear colleagues, I had no purpose to swell this treatise into a large volume by quoting the names and writings of anatomists, or to make a parade of the strengths of my memory, the extent of my reading, and the amount of my pains; because I profess both to learn and to teach anatomy, not from books but from dissections; not from the positions of philosophers but the fabric of nature; and then because I do not think it right or proper to strive to take from the ancients any honor that is their due, nor yet to dispute with the moderns, and enter into controversy with those who have excelled in anatomy and been my teachers. I would not charge with willful falsehood anyone who was sincerely anxious for truth, nor lay it to any one’s door as a crime that he had fallen into error. I avow myself the partisan of truth alone; and I can indeed say that I used all my endeavours, bestowed all my pains on an attempt to produce something that should be agreeable to the good, profitable to the learned, and useful to letters.

The heart as the sun of the body:

The heart, consequently, is the beginning of life; the sun of the microcosm, even as the sun in his turn might well be designated the heart of the world; for it is the heart by whose virtue and pulse the blood is moved, perfected, and made nutrient, and is preserved from corruption and coagulation; it is the household divinity which, discharging its function, nourishes, cherishes, quickens the whole body, and is indeed the foundation of life, the source of all action.

And, finally, a warning on the implacability of ancient doctrine:

Doctrine once sown strikes deep its root, and respect for antiquity influences all men.

[Benjamin Uke · Rating 3 out of 5]

William Harvery was an English physician and would go on to be the personal physician to both James I and Charles the first.

This is is work, published in Frankfurt, (I read the English translation) he discussed his discovery of the circulation of the blood. His discovered undermined a lot of what everyone thought the purpose of biology was, but still won remarkably quick and widespread acceptance.

[Ed · Rating 5 out of 5]

Who would have thought that Harvey would be so readable? I read the Chauncey D. Leake translation. Two things struck me most forcefully. First, Harvey uses strong logical arguments based on data to persuade others that his view of the motion of the blood makes more sense than the prevailing one. Second, there was evidence to support the older view of the motion of the blood. The Aorta was found to be empty on autopsy suggesting that it was not involved in transporting blood, but rather "spirit." This forced Harvey to explain why on his view the aorta was involved in carrying blood. Reading this book I was moved, as I was when I read the Origin of Species, by the feeling that I was in the presence, not only of a great intellectual achievement, but also of an act of great moral courage.

[Filip Klaučo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Classic. It is the work of a remarkably intellectual mind that after 1,400 years (finally) refuted an incorrect and illogical Galenic theory of blood circulation. I just wonder where we might be today if Christianity had not restricted research and if people had not clung to dogmas. Moreover, it is well-written and logically reasoned

[Paz Ortiz Santa Maria · Rating 5 out of 5]

just you wait til i get my scrubs

[Kate · Rating 3 out of 5]

The studies Harvey described here are quite extensive, and clearly the product of many years of close observations of human and animal anatomy. It's impressive how he observed every creature from lice to swans to shrimps, dissecting them to see how their hearts moved and how many valves their brains had.

Although his theories about the motion of the veins seemed enlightened, compared to what little knowledge existed before him, he still had no accurate idea what the lungs were for. He stumbled repeatedly while trying to describe the purpose of lungs. He seemed to know that lungs need air, but he had no idea why. His closest explanation was that lungs purified the blood.

Harvey got into quite a bit of detail on human fetuses at various developmental stages, and I'm not sure I want to know how he came about acquiring them for dissection. I briefly wondered about it while I read those sections, but I would rather not think about it.

Moving on. I'm ready for my next read now.

[Ionut-Amin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Am citit aceasta care de la Editura Științifică, ediția din 1957, tradusa după textul original în limba română. Are o introducere care aduce în discuție contextul vremii: începutul renașterii, lupta dintre biserica și progresul științific. Textele medicale se bazau pe observații de sute-mii de ani, în principal Galen, Hipocrate, Aristotel. Oamenii erau arși pe rug pentru erezie era dificil sa publici articole de cercetare. Apoi apare Harvey care doar prin observație și atenție la detalii (fără să folosească microscop!) deduce funcția inimii și descrie circulația sângelui în corp așa cum o știm și astăzi. O carte de primă mână care m-a făcut să mă întreb ce idei sau practici luăm ca atare în prezent și care sunt greșite?

[Hogfather · Rating 2 out of 5]

It's so funny that I can give two stars to one of the most important books ever written on an online review site. Harvey's work is the thing upon which our understanding of the circulatory system rests. Unfortunately, it is also torturously written. I probably had to reread every paragraph at least once, not because the language was difficult to understand, but because it was so boring that I couldn't stop my eyes from glazing over again, and again, and again.

[Adam C · Rating 3 out of 5]

Impressive they knew that much in the 16th century.

[Jackson Snyder · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is very cool it talks about its subject in a very easy to understand way but still has tons of substance

[Adele ledoux · Rating 4 out of 5]

Smart guy, had to stop to read it in the metro because it gave me a heartache

[Suzan Cumings · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some highlights of the seventeenth century vocabulary:
- morbific
- contusion
- expectoration
- putrefaction
- sanguineous

[Chris Hart · Rating 5 out of 5]

William Harvey is a GIANT in the history of medicine. In the 18th century, by observation and deduction, he almost singlehandedly advanced our knowledge of cardiac anatomy and physiology to almost modern levels. If he'd had a microscope available to him, there is no telling what he would have accomplished. Reading his (translated from Latin) words about the heart and circulatory system was thrilling to me, as I recognized his descriptions as how we know circulation today. I realized I was reading his own thinking process, as he demonstrated WHY circulation through the heart, arteries, and veins must be the way it is.

Then I belatedly realized when he described the action of the heart, the filling and ejection of blood from the atria and ventricles in animals, that he was describing vivisection. Oh, those poor animals. There was no effective anesthesia for humans in the 1700s, let alone animals. The medical professional in me recognizes the necessity at the time for experimentation on animals. Without that experimentation, we would not know what we now know. Standards in the eighteenth century were different; Harvey would not be permitted to run those experiments in any legitimate lab today. Those dogs and other animals gave their lives in the furtherance of medical knowledge.

[Maaz Muhammad · Rating 2 out of 5]

Huh?

Thus spoke my mind during the entire book.

I mean no disrespect to Harvey, to whom we owe our modern understanding of the circulatory system. However, this book was just totally unreadable. Though it is an English translation of the original Latin, the translation was made during Harvey’s time, and so it is rather Elizabethan. I don’t have the patience nor will to toil in the trenches of Elizabethan English when I could perhaps just learn about Harvey’s experiments from Wikipedia or some other secondary source. For myself, primary sources like Harvey’s are really only useful when they add “something more” than what I can learn from secondary sources, which are often better written and explain things better. Under this metric, I found this book totally useless. Perhaps I would have more enjoyed a more modern English translation.

Alas, I purchased this copy. I will be promptly donating it to some thrift store or the like, as I’ve no use for it in personal collection.

[JV · Rating 5 out of 5]

Um tratado cujo relativo desconhecimento do público contrasta fortemente com outros de Galileu e Copérnico, por exemplo. Não sei haver sequer tradução no vernáculo. Seus méritos surpassam expectativas: a descoberta da circulação do sangue dista de Hipócrates 19 séculos onde impediu o medo da novidade contradizer Galeno. Além disso é bem escrito e acessível ao leigo. Longe de quebrar uma tradição, a despeito de seus mais altos representantes, Harvey a redescobre filiando-a ao sistema aristotélico. O sangue circula como o fazem os elementos e os humores no planeta e está o coração para o homem como o sol para o mundo. Adivinha-se ser essa a causa de ter recebido menor resistência (contudo considerável) então e pouca fama hoje.

Um belo livro, demonstrações claras e ampla contextualização do estado da arte quando da publicação.

[JP · Rating 4 out of 5]

Clearly chosen for its value as scientific literature and historical context, Harvey's work also shows a better understanding of anatomy than one might otherwise expect from the mid 1600's. He refutes the then current view that the lungs connect directly to the right side of the heart, filling that cavity with air but only goes so far as suggesting the need for further investigation as to why the lungs could need so much blood supply. The path of blood, purpose and function of valves, differences between arteries and veins -- these were all discovered by that time. He also demonstrates a clear understanding of the full spectrum of animals in showing the differences and similarities in their circulatory systems.

[Alex · Rating 5 out of 5]

SJCA - Mathematics and Natural Science

Although he was not the first person to posit the idea of circulation, William Harvey was the first person to truly fulfill the need for experimental and intellectual vigor regarding the functioning of the heart and blood in animals. Harvey's theory of circulation is medically accurate down to the "anastomoses" that he predicted would connect the systolic and diastolic systems. Considering the fact that he had nothing more than a hand lens with which to make these observations, the process of reasoning described in his book is a fantastic exploration of a topic that we take for granted.

[Catherine · Rating 4 out of 5]

Rereading this for a St. John's Alumni Seminar made me realize just how much I had taken for granted when I read it as a Freshman. It also makes more sense now that I can remember doing the experiments that he describes and seeing for myself how the heart is put together. I was surprised at the range of our discussion though -- from the nature and definition of death, to the extent to which Harvey is an ancient or a modern, to the implications of the lungs essentially having their own circuit...

[Zac Thriffiley · Rating 5 out of 5]

While I’m not familiar with the original Latin text, this translation was easy to read, only using Harvey’s original phrases when paraphrasing them would have obscured meaning. This edition offers a helpful introduction that provides background information on Harvey’s life, politics, and Classical influences while providing footnotes explaining obscure references and pointing out problems that the text fails to account for. Depending on your field of study, not exactly the most fascinating read, but this edition is helpful for students of science, history, and literature.

[Iqra Tasmiae]

Pg152, part 7, chapter 6, "Of Woman Born". Harvey was the "first physician to dissect a female body and observe the reproductive organs at first hand, had described the postpartum uterus as resembling an "open wound"".

[L · Rating 3 out of 5]

Checked out from my local library. Translation by Gweneth Whitteridge, 1976. Amazing what this man discovered without the use of any technology. I also highly appreciated his experiences in animal dissection and embryology.

[Victoria · Rating 1 out of 5]

reading for my grad seminar. there's a movie too - woo hoo, can't wait... :\

[Christopher · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting. I like watching him figure things out without having access to an A&P textbook.

[Brian · Rating 3 out of 5]

I wish I knew more about the heart, but he was probably more right than a lot of people before him.

[Amit8907 · Rating 5 out of 5]

i want just read ..... plz help me

[Jim · Rating 4 out of 5]

While my background in life sciences is weak, I found this quite easy to understand. Edifying and worthwhile read, I recommend it.

[Bethany Sharon Moore · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not bad. Reading is a little dry, but it is 2 century old manuscript on the circulation of blood! Pretty good.

[Trey Kennedy · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great look at the development of our understanding of the circulatory system in the body.

[Lia McGrath · Rating 3 out of 5]

kinda dumb

[cam_omile · Rating 3 out of 5]

so. much. vivisection.