M. Rippa Bonati, Some traditions regarding the old Anatomy Theatre of Padua University
Just over four hundred years ago, on the 16th of January 1594, the Anatomy Theatre of the University of Padua was inaugurated. Still today, it arouses both curiosity and admiration among the numerous visitors to the Palazzo Bo. It is easy to understand this reaction both now and in the past: the chronicler of the Nazio Germanica (one of the `nations', or groups, students were organised into), who was usually not given to effusions, proudly wrote that "almost everyone in the city" had hastened to take part in the celebrations 1. We do know though, that the impressive wooden structure can only accommodate about two hundred people, thus, can reasonably assume that in reality, on that auspicious day, very few `ordinary' Paduans had the rare chance of entering the hallowed, exclusive, academic precincts of this unique Anatomy Theatre itself. Probably, however, few people outside the academic world were really able to understand the aims and the significance of the various phases of this disquieting, perhaps threatening, "operation".
Portal, when discussing the more obscure and controversial aspects of anatomical research, observed that "the public exaggerates everything and it considers anything it doesn't understand to be a marvel" 2. If this is true then it is not difficult to suppose that any event which excited interest will have fed popular myths rumours and credences, many of which still survive. Indeed, today there are many traditions and tales told, regarding the construction and use of the Anatomy Theatre 3, whose origins are difficult to trace, even though they are much less exaggerated than they might have been seeing that the Anatomy Theatre was in use for almost three centuries 4, and that the dissection of human bodies, autopsy, is always surrounded by an air of understandable secrecy and superstition. The rumours and traditions, the "metropolitan legends", described here offer a balanced mixture of reality and imagination, a cocktail, that explains people's continuing interest in the vicissitudes of the Anatomy Theatre which today, after long and careful restoration work, is once again open to visitors 5.
Tradition, says: the Anatomy Theatre of Padua University is the oldest in the world. It was built, and paid for, by Girolamus Fabricius ab Acquapendente who, at the time, was Professor of Anatomy and Surgery. The structure was designed by Fra' Paolo Sarpi. Dissection was carried out in secret as it contravened both the civil and religious Laws of the period.
The first commonly accepted `fact', that the Anatomy Theatre `is the oldest in the world', is neither right nor wrong, but should be qualified: it is the oldest permanent Anatomy Theatre, still in existence today. `Permanent' and `still in existence' must be specified. On the one hand because we know that temporary anatomy theatres were in use in Padua from the mid-15th century on and, on the other, because Padua is not the only University that claims to have been the first to construct a permanent classroom-laboratory. In the first case, however, the `Theatre' was a simple, frame structure which was only assembled when a practical lesson was given and then dismantled immediately after use. These temporary structures are known today thanks to both Alessandro Benedetti (c. 1455 - 1525) 6, who, in his work De Anatomia, published in the early 16th century, describes the uses and usefulness of such a theatre for autopsies and to Andrea Vesalio (1514 - 1564), who chose a frontispiece for his work De humani corporis fabrica which offers a lively representation of just such a structure 7. This image , which has been elaborated so as to eliminate the one hundred-odd onlookers, is, currently, the only existing pictorial evidence of early anatomy theatres.
The two authors above both mention that tiers became necessary when more people wished to attend the autopsy than could comfortably be accomodated around the dissecting table. This problem first arose in Padua in the 1470s, when Paduan academic life was, both quantitatively and qualitatively, flourishing 8, It arose again in the 1550s when, after the Cambrai crisis, the student population in Padua grew to a remarkable size for those days 1,300 students 9 and, it seems, these students all attended Professor Vesalio's anatomy lessons 10.
The passage from a temporary to a permanent structure is less clear, particularly if one remembers that teaching autopsies could only be carried out in the colder months of the year and, furthermore, only lasted for two or three weeks. However, even though it is hard to know whether the descriptions we have are simply accounts of projects which were never carried out or are accounts of structures that really existed, from the mid-16th century on there are increasingly detailed and frequent references to permanent anatomy theatres but, there is no concrete proof. For example, both the Frenchman, Charles Estienne (Carolus Stephanus) 11 and the Tuscan, Guido Guidi (Vidus Vidius) 12, wrote of theatres but they offer descriptions that are as full of details as they are lacking in any documentary confirmation. Currently, the earliest documented structures are the "House of Anatomy" in Zaragoza which was built in 1586 13 and a theatre in Ferrara, even though, in this latter case, the theatre is not directly described but merely mentioned in passing in documents concerning the Palazzo del Paradiso inside which, in 1588, there was such a structure 14. However, in Padua, in January 1584, there was already an anatomy theatre functioning "certainly not in a provisional manner, but a permanent structure" 15 and this is the earliest of all the structures we have reliable evidence about at present 16.
The statement that the Anatomy Theatre was paid for by Girolamus Fabricius ab Acquapendente (1533- 1619) is probably the most widely accepted popular `truth': it is also the most easily disproved. Both the first and the second Anatomy Theatres, like any other public building of the day, were paid for by public or `state' funds. The belief that it was Aquapendente who paid for the structure probably gained ground because the name of the famous anatomist is inscribed above the door of the Theatre 17 or, maybe, because his coat of arms is partially preserved in the room next door, today, the Hall of Medicine 18. Furthermore, the connection between Girolamus Fabricius ab Acquapendente and the Anatomy Theatre is logical: he was the only Professor of Anatomy and Surgery for almost 30 years and he was famous everywhere: he was considered to be the best anatomist of his day. Indeed, it is no mere accident that when Pietro Damiani painted his famous work showing the miracles of St. Anthony of Padua, he used Girolamus Fabricius ab Acquapendente as the `model' for "the surgeon in the Miracle of the Miser's heart" 19.
But, even though it is not true that Acquapendente personally paid for the Anatomy Theatre out of his own pocket, it is possible that a rich and famous Professor, aware of his professional image, should have, in some way or another, participated in such a major project. For example, in the same period as the Anatomy Theatre was being planned and built, Acquapendente paid for a series of anatomical drawings, in colour, by gifted artists. At the same time his ex-pupil and subsequent rival, Giulio Casseri (c. 1552 - 1616), who had an anatomy theatre in his own house in Via del Pozzo dipinto and later, in 1614, was to construct another, "built largely at his own expense in a room in the Palazzo del Capitaniato" 20
also commissioned similar scientific drawings .
Even more interesting, but harder to explain, is the fact that the design has been attributed to Fra' Paolo Sarpi (1552 - 1623). Unfortunately the origins of this popular credence are obsure but, by the 18th century, this attribution had already been widely accepted even among the teaching staff: Domenico Cotugno for example in his Iter Italicum 21,attributes the design to Sarpi and he probably received the information, in 1765, from Leopoldo Marc'Antonio Caldani or, perhaps, from the great Giambattista Morgagni in person.
In reality, notwithstanding long and patient research, nothing has been found that has made it possible to identify, with certainty, the person who designed the Padua Anatomy Theatre. The same is true for that other great 16th century scientific project in Padua: the Botanical Garden. However, the fact that neither of these works has a definite author could suggest that they were co-operatively designed, using the "internal" skills available in and around the University at the time. It is fairly certain that Andrea Moroni had a hand in the design for the Botanical Garden. At that time, 1545, he was overseer of St Justina, of the Palazzo Podestarile and had probably already been selected to oversee the restoration of the Palazzo Bo' buildings 22. The `technician' involved in the design of the Anatomy Theatre could have been the architect and painter Dario Varotari (1542 - 1596) 23, summoned, perhaps informally, by Aquapendente himself. Varotari had already designed Aquapendente's country house and had executed some of the anatomical paintings mentioned earlier 24. The same, however, could be true of Paolo Sarpi (1552 - 1623). He was a friend, a patient, and, although less well known, a scientist who worked with Aquapendente and worked so well that the anatomist, who was usually very sparing with his praise, congratulated Sarpi in public for his contribution to the understanding of pupillary contraction 25. But this is guesswork, and Paolo Sarpi's role, if he had one, in designing the theatre would remain pure conjecture but for two other coincidences. Firstly, we know that Aquapendente began to study the anatomy of the eye again 26 in 1592, precisely when the first permanent theatre 27 had to be replaced and, secondly, a drawing of an ox's eyeball inserted into his work on sense organs, is very like a bird's eye view of the theatre itself. This coincidence makes us bold enough to suggest that the design for the anatomy theatre could have been developed during the period when the two friends were working on the anatomy of the eye. There may even be a hint of irony in the design, given the old Professor's character 28; But the problem the theatre design had to solve, and did solve, was how to create a structure that would allow the maximum number of people to have the best possible conditions when participating in an unrepeatable experiment: the dissection of a corpse.
So much for the origins of the Anatomy Theatre, now let us turn to the `proof' that autopsies, even if not explicitly forbidden, were still something that was better done in secret. There are many rumours to investigate here: that there is a canal under the Palazzo Bo' which ensured that the bodies could at least enter and leave the Anatomy Theatre discreetly, that the windows of the Theatre were bricked up so that there could be no casual onlookers and, lastly, that the dissecting table could be turned over so that the human body would disappear fast and an animal appear in its place.
But before dismissing these popular myths out of hand it should be remembered that human dissection was never explicitly forbidden even though the Religious authorities, at different times and in different places, interpreted the instructions issued by Boniface VIII in 1300 in very different ways. However, the Papal Bull De sepulturis , was really more concerned with certain "ferocious" practises during funerals, which damaged the corpse, than with postmortem operations to establish the cause of death or to add to knowledge about human anatomy.
As regards Padua, proof that human dissections were not illegal lies in the fact that part of the money destined for such dissections was used to celebrate funerals in the Church of San Martino 29, which was near the Palazzo Bo', and there is also a rare commemorative document 30, published in relation to the Church of Santa Maria dei Servi regarding such funerals. The public nature of these religious ceremonies serves to discredit the idea of a secret underground canal, which, in fact, has never existed. The tradition of the secret canal may have arisen because of student pranks that went too far: for example, one night in 1582, students did not only steal the corpse but "indignis modis dilaniatum, in perfluenten Brentam proiecerunt" 31. (briefly: they threw it in the nearby River Brenta!). But the real reason for the canal myth is probably the fact that the corpses were, indeed, brought to the Bo' by canal, the main Naviglio Interno (Inner Canal), which ran through the city and passed quite close to the University buildings before going underground.
The question of the bricked up windows may have a practical explanation too, in that all the windows were bricked up, but only because the wooden theatre structure functioned best when lit from above since the focus of interest, the dissecting table, lies at the bottom of the inverted cone.
Lastly, as regards the use of a table designed to be turned over quickly, hiding the corpse and revealing an animal, this can be explained because of the former custom of carrying out both human and animal dissections during the same lesson so as to offer a comparative anatomy lesson. Indeed, in 1584, when the first permanent theatre came into use, it was soon established that animal dissections could be carried out in any, and not only the usual, period. This custom of animal dissection was a very old one and, to cite the case of 16th century Padua, one only has to remember the text and illustrations in De humani corporis fabrica by Vesalio and the activities of Gabriele Falloppio (1523 - 1562) who, in February 1553, won the applause of his exacting student spectators by dissecting a monkey instead of the usual dog or pig and again, in December of the same year, dissected a "caput phocae", probably a Dolphin, to see that animal dissections were a part of normal University practise.
In 1556, animals were, once again, the subject of a request Falloppio sent to the Riformatori in which he splendidly sums up the didactic and, indirectly, the social importance of dissection lessons. To summarise his request: since the times that "invite anatomy" were getting mear, the magistrates were encouraged to provide a "soggetto" as quickly as possible because, if there were no such subject available soon, there was a risk that many students would leave Padua and go to Bologna or Ferrara to study. In the meantime he proposed to fill the gap and "far con gl'orsi e la simia una bellissima Anatomia" (carry out beautiful Anatomy with bears and monkeys), lessons he invited the Riformatori themselves to attend 32.
To conclude with a doubly curious observation that, once again, demonstrates the strange logic of myth, rumour and tradition. The one thing that is never mentioned, indeed seems to have been entirely forgotten, is that in the 16th and 17th centuries music was often performed in the Anatomy Theatre. Once again we have to thank the record keeper of the Natio Germanicus 33, for this information. He tells that this music was used both to keep the students calm while they waited for the teacher and to create a relaxed atmosphere in breaks during a practical lesson. It seems very strange that in the city, which was certainly much queiter than it is today, this music did not attract any attention at all. It seems equally strange that speculation about the music did not fuel yet another intriguing, metropolitan legend about the Anatomy Theatre of Padua.
Posting Komentar