Picturing the book of nature : image, text, and argument in sixteenth-century human anatomy and medical botany
Picturing the book of nature : image, text, and argument in sixteenth-century human anatomy and medical botany
复制标题
描绘自然之书：十六世纪人体解剖学和药用植物学中的图像、文本和论证
DOI：
10.5860/choice.50-2054
复制
发表时间：
2012
影响因子：
0.2
通讯作者：
楠川 幸子
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
楠川 幸子
由于它们壮观的、自然主义的植物和人体图片，莱昂哈特·富克斯的《植物史》和安德烈亚斯·维萨里的《人类的身体构造》是印刷书籍历史上具有里程碑意义的出版物。但正如《描绘自然之书》所明确指出的那样，它们不仅见证了文艺复兴时期图书出版的发展，也见证了欧洲医学中医用植物学和解剖学领域的突出地位。佐知子Kusukawa检查这些文本，以及康拉德Gessner的未出版的“植物史”，并证明他们的插图是如何在这一时期出现一种新的论点-自然科学研究的视觉论据。Kusukawa首先调查了文艺复兴时期印刷书籍生产的技术，财政，艺术和政治条件。在16世纪上半叶，博学的作家开始在研究和写作中使用图像，但由于这项技术是如此之新，关于图像到底能做什么，人们有很多不同的想法，而且往往存在分歧。Kusukawa根据这些争论调查了Fuchs，Gessner和Vesalius的作品，仔细检查了科学家对插图的处理，并追踪了他们将插图纳入作品的动机。其结果是对十六世纪科学知识的视觉维度进行了引人入胜的原创性研究。
Because of their spectacular, naturalistic pictures of plants and the human body, Leonhart Fuchs' "De historia stirpium" and Andreas Vesalius' "De humani corporis fabrica" are landmark publications in the history of the printed book. But as "Picturing the Book of Nature" makes clear, they do more than bear witness to the development of book publishing during the Renaissance and to the prominence attained by the fields of medical botany and anatomy in European medicine. Sachiko Kusukawa examines these texts, as well as Conrad Gessner's unpublished "Historia plantarum", and demonstrates how their illustrations were integral to the emergence of a new type of argument during this period - a visual argument for the scientific study of nature. Kusukawa begins with a survey of the technical, financial, artistic, and political conditions that governed the production of printed books during the Renaissance. It was during the first half of the sixteenth century that learned authors began using images in their research and writing, but because the technology was so new, there was a great deal of variety of thought - and often disagreement - about exactly what images could do. Kusukawa investigates the works of Fuchs, Gessner, and Vesalius in light of these debates, scrutinizing the scientists' treatment of illustrations and tracing their motivation for including them in their works. What results is a fascinating and original study of the visual dimension of scientific knowledge in the sixteenth century.