91 on Page 91 of His Brilliant Book, Domenico Bertoloni Meli Presents
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
_full_journalsubtitle: A Journal for the Study of Science, Technology and Medicine in the Pre-modern Period _full_abbrevjournaltitle: ESM _full_ppubnumber: ISSN 1383-7427 (print version) _full_epubnumber: ISSN 1573-3823 (online version) _full_issue: 1 _full_issuetitle: The Body Politic from Medieval Lombardy to the Dutch Republic _full_alt_author_running_head (neem stramien J2 voor dit article en vul alleen 0 in hierna): Book Reviews _full_alt_articletitle_running_head (rechter kopregel - mag alles zijn): Book Reviews _full_is_advance_article: 0 _full_article_language: en indien anders: engelse articletitle: 0 Early Science and Medicine 25 (2020) 91-93 Book Reviews 91 Domenico Bertoloni Meli (2019), Mechanism: A Visual, Lexical, and Conceptual History (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press), pp. xii + 188, illus., $45.00 (hardcover), ISBN 978 0 8229 4547 5. On page 91 of his brilliant book, Domenico Bertoloni Meli presents Robert Hooke’s investigation of the striking phenomenon of the beard of wild oats as an example of the latter’s attempt to tie together natural and artificial devices: not only could plants be mechanized and explained through mechanical in- struments, but “Hooke was [also] inspired by this mechanism occurring in na- ture to construct a hybrid device to measure humidity” (pp. 91-92). By contrast, several years after the publication of Hooke’s Micrographia, with its explana- tions of the wild oat or the sensitive herb, Leibniz continued questioning the possibility of mechanizing plants insofar as these have no motion. In fact, within the all-pervasive paradigm of the mechanical philosophy, early modern attempts at mechanizing all natural phenomena appear to have been much more contested and problematic than one might have expected. In his accu- rate analysis of the debates over the possibility of a thorough mechanization, Bertoloni Meli sheds much light on a range of aspects that were discussed in the realms of early modern medicine, natural philosophy, and the life sciences. With the aim of reconstructing the history of ‘mechanism,’ and of assessing the relevance of this notion for an understanding of the transformations in these fields, he chooses three focal areas, namely: (1) visual representations, (2) a lexical study of the terminology used, and (3) a conceptual framework that at- tempts to frame ‘mechanism’ in relation to specific projects of enquiry. In the first chapter, the author starts from the problem of terminology, “namely, the study of how the term mechanism and its cognates can be used in historical narratives” (p. 3). Providing a normative conceptual clarity to ‘mech- anism’ seems to be anything but easy. Its complexity appears from the blurred line that divides what was considered a mechanism at the time from what was not. For example, William Harvey, Nicolaus Steno, Robert Hooke, and Robert Boyle all accepted a teleological notion of mechanism, and even René Des- cartes did not take a consistently mechanical approach. Additionally, different scholars and schools employed notions such as “soul” or “plastic force” vari- ously to refer to an immaterial principle, a material one, or a combination of the two. An interesting intermezzo in the first chapter is devoted to Galen. Within his generally teleological system, we encounter conceptual and terminological problems as well as ambiguities whenever he describes medical issues through mechanical analogies or by relying on mechanical explanations (pp. 11-16). More generally, but on a related note, Bertoloni Meli draws attention to the gap © KoninklijkeEarly Science Brill and MedicineNV, Leiden, 252020 | doi:10.1163/15733823-00251P10 (2020) 91-93 92 Book Reviews to be found in the early modern period between machines (human artefacts) and nature. According to the author’s interpretation, mechanistic accounts of- fered plausible, but limited explanations, and ultimately developed more as “an investigative project rather than an ontological dogma” (p. 23). In chapter 2, the author investigates the visual representation of mecha- nisms in early modern culture, and especially in anatomical treatises. Bertoloni Meli first revisits Andreas Vesalius’ De humani corporis fabrica, whose images served a variety of different purposes; in fact, his images both “opposed a mechanistic understanding of the body” and yet revealed “extensive mechani- cal ingenuity” (p. 40). Second, he explores the animal-plant analogies in ana tomi cal texts (p. 46). Thirdly, he deals with the challenges Cartesian mech- anization raised (especially for Marcello Malpighi, pp. 65-67); and fourth, he analyses the use of microscopes to facilitate visualization (pp. 70-71). While Aristotelian and Galenic faculties cannot be represented visually, a mechanis- tic interpretation of life functions could benefit from the use of images in ana- tomical texts as well as from the development of microscopes, as the author documents by means of several well-chosen images. In chapter 3, Bertoloni Meli focuses on the lexical study of the term ‘mecha- nism,’ which is a puzzling topic insofar as early modern scholars related ma- chines to the activity of an artificer (and sometimes even to an immaterial archeus), or conceived of artificial machines as alive (p. 80). As the author stresses, the indeterminacy of the situation can be seen in the tension between mechanism and the soul, as outlined in a remarkable section of the chapter, or in the divergent uses of the concept of ‘mechanism’ by philosophers in theological discussions. This confusing constellation gradually resulted in an understanding of the body as an internal organization of parts, which was connected to the notion of organism. In the Divine History of the Genesis of the World (1670), Samuel Gott, for example, employs both “mechanism” and “organism,” tying the latter to the vegetative spirit or plastic forces (p. 103). In listing the divergent occurrences of the term “mechanism,” Bertoloni Meli shows, on the one hand, how very difficult it is to fix its meaning, and, on the other, how pervasive and yet flexible its use was in the hands of early modern scholars. In chapter 4, the author combines the themes of his earlier chapters and examines Malpighi’s study of generation and fecundation so as to shed light on ‘mechanism’ as an investigative project. The tension he finds between immaterial and material agents, and between machines and organic bodies dominates this final chapter, just as it has pervaded the earlier chapters. Fecun- dation emerges as a crucial field in which the connection between mechanism and agency takes place, whether in the form of a plastic virtue, of a force of Early Science and Medicine 25 (2020) 91-93.