Bection of the lbtitorp of fDebicine.

President-Dr. ARNOLD CHAPLIN.

A Manuscript of the "Christianismi Restitutio " of Servetus,i placing the Discovery of the Pulmonary Circulation Anterior to 1546. By LEONARD L. MACKALL, Savannah, Ga., U.S.A.
EVER since William Wotton's "iReflections upon Ancient and Modern Learning" appeared in 1694,2 it has been well known that the earliest printed description of the circulation of the blood is that of the pulmonary circulation in Servetus's " Christianismi Restitutio," printed at Vienne in 1553. This striking description has been often quoted. From time to time, however, various more or less elaborate attempts have been made to claim actual priority of discovery for others. Thus Achiille Chbreau, Librarian of the Faculty of Medicine of Paris, even went so far as to assert boldly that Servetus was a mere " copiste "' of Realdo Colombo, whose book was not published until 1559, six years after that of Servetus. Needless to say, Ch6reau could adduce no real reason to justify this extraordinary charge, based in fact on mere unwarranted assumption. Ch6reau was promptly answered by Charles Dardier.4
1 The best and most accessible English account of Servetuis based on original documents is that by Sir William Osler, Michael Servetus (Oxford University Press, 1909, and Johnm Hopkins Hospital Bulletin for January, 1910). It was read at the Johns Hopkins Hospital Historical Club on May 10, 1909, and at the Oxford Sn;mmer Extension Course on August 10, 1909. The present writer has treated the suibject of Servetus in Contributions to Medical and Biological Research, Dedicated to Sir Williamw Osler, in Honour of his Seventieth Birthday, N.Y., 1919, ii, 767-777, espec. 772f. A serious mistake in the printing may be corrected here: the Latin note printed in the text on p. 774 is of couirse Muirr's own note to " illato* " and should have followed the line ending " 1790 8 mai." Also the words " a. 1786 . . . illato," added later by Murr, should follow " exemplo " I find that Murr's raie repriut of the "Christianismi Restitutio" of Servetus was listed for the first and onily time in the second Mess-Katalog for 1791 (" Allgemeines Verzeichniss der Biicher welche in der Frankfurter und Leipziger Michaelismesse des 1791 Jahres . . . neii gedrnckt . " Leipzig, Weidmann, p. 259, under " Fertig oder . . . wieder aufgelegt worden sind gewordene Schriften ") as " Serveti, Mich., Christianismi Restitutio, 8 maj., MDL1II," without stating that it was a reprint, and without naming any place, printer, publisher or agent. Probably the date of the Mess-Katalog accounts for the similar wrong date given by the Jena Allg. Lit. Ztg. for November 20, 1792, mentioned in my " Servetus Notes," p. 774. Both ignored the minute "1790 " at the end. 2 P. 230, quotiLng the " circulation " passage from a transcript supplied by Charles Bernard. The Postscript to the Preface in the second edition, 1697, explains that Bernard had obtained it from Abraham Hill, who had himself transcribed it from Bishop John Moore's transcript (now inl Cambridge University Library) from the book formerly at Cassel. Mosheim's " Anderw. Versuch einer . . . Ketzergeschichte." 1748, p. 254, says that Servetus " war schon hundert Jahre verbrannt, da dieses Stuick seiner Verdienste um die Arzneykunst und Natarlehre erst der Welt geoffenibaret ward. Thomas Bartholin ist, so viel ich weiss, der erste der es entdeckt hat," and in the margin he refers to "Bartholin. Anatom. reform., p. 594," but I have been unable to find in Batholinius any mention of Servetus. s " Servet n'en est que le copiste sotivent infidele, parfois maladroit, toujours mystique," Ch6reau's " Histoire d'utiLivre, Michael Servet, Paris, 1879, p. 30, previously in Bull. de l'Acad. dle Med. de Paris, 1879, viii, 785. 4 Appenidix to " Michel Servet par Henri Tollin, trad. par Mme. Picheral-Dardier."
Paris 1879; not in the German original. M-H 1

[October 17, 1923.

36

Mackall: Manuscript of the " Christianismi Restitutio"

The similarity in the statements by Servetus and Colombo need not be denied.' It is also probable that Colombo and the other Italians may never have seen or even heard of the passage in the rare theological work of the heretic Servetus. But if the great idea could occur to Colombo and others independently of Servetus, why could it not occur to Servetus independently of Colombo? Here Ch6reau's logic, such as it is, breaks down completely, and he finally takes refuge in a strange quotation from the theological bibliographer Schelhorn, to the effect that Servetus was practically insane, and in his own conclusion " ce n'est pas le bourreau qu'il fallait a Servet, mais bien le m6decin." Ch6reau (p. 32) emphasizes the fact that Colombo's dedication of his book to Pope Paul IV (1555-59) expressly states that it had been begun many years before C' quod abhinc multos annos inchoaveram "), but there is apparently nothing at all to indicate in any way wvhen the circulation passage was written, or the discovery made by him. On the other hand, Ch6reau is obliged to mention the inconvenient fact that the " Christianismi Restitutio " of Servetus was circulated in manuscript in 1546, and that some such manuscript appeared successively in the sales of the libraries of du Fay (1725), Count d'Hoym (1738) and the Duke de la Valliere (sale 1784), and that Tollin states that he himself had actually seen it. Ch6reau (p. 39) says " Nous ne savons par qui il a 6t alors achetO, ni dans quel cabinet il est pass6. Tollin assure l'avoir vt . . . Nous l'avons, nous, cherch. en vain." Without repeating the other references in my printed Servetus Notes I may say that this elusive manuscript had been officially listed in print by Delisle in 1871. Moreover, in 1878, the Rev. Alexander Gordon, the chief living authority on Servetus, printed in the Theological Review (July, p. 417f.) a careful collation of the circulation passage based on a transcript made by the Rev. S. A. Steinthal. In this article Mr. Gordon states that the MS. in question " contains what answers to pp. 92-247 of the printed text. Of this portion it presents no mere draft, but a copy of the prepared text, that would have been printed had Calvin returned the manuscript. Some passages which occur only in this recension are in the author's best manner. The circulation-section exhibits fewer various readings than any other part; showing that it was fully matured in the original draft from which the recensions of 1546, and that printed in 1553, were successively prepared." This, then, is the most interesting and important manuscript, of which, after various elaborate but unsuccessful attempts, I finally succeeded in obtaining the photograph shown for the first time to the Royal Society of Medicine. Later I was able to examine the original in the Bibliotheque Nationale (MS. Latin 18212). It is written on paper (ca. 7T x 51 in. in size) and consists of 73 leaves or 143 pages, besides the preliminary leaf. Pages 36, 67, 70, 102 and 103 are blank. The " circulation " passage is on pp. 8ff. The dark-blue morocco binding bears the well-known arms of the famous bibliophile, Count d'Hoym. There are no other marks of ownership or indications of the history of the manuscript, except du Fay's Latin note on the fly-leaf (printed in the du Fay,
' Cf. Charles Singer's " The Discovery of the Circulation of the Blood," (London, Bell, 1922), p. 37f. (Classics of Scientific Method), and W. Preyer's note in Tollin's "Die Entdeckung des Blutkreislaufs durch M. Servet " (Jena 1876), p. 39 (Preyer's Samml. Physiol. Abhandl.).

Section of the History of Medicine

37

&c., catalogues' and in De Bure's "Bibliographie Instructive"). This note states that it had formerly belonged to the Basel bookseller Caelius Horatius Curio, and that it is an autograph first draft or sketch of the "Christianismi Restitutio." Tollin (" Entdeckung," &c., 1876, p. 33) thought that the writing was that of Curio himself. Certainly it is not that of Servetus, though it was evidently transcribed in the 16th century from the 1546 draft, corresponding to the pages in manuscript in the Edinburgh incomplete copy of the original printed 1553 book. Hence it is of great importance as "setting back the date of the formulation of Servetus's discovery by at least seven years" (Gordon). It well deserves printing accurately, or better still, reproduction in facsimile. The authorities of the Biblioth6que Nationale recently granted me the unusual privilege of carefully examining their famous copy of the original printed " Christianismi Restitutio " itself, and of comparing it with the description of it in the 1783 La Valli6re catalogue. Thus I found that Colladon's manuscript " Eorum quse in impurissimo hocce opere continentur Index" on two leaves at the end, is in fact merely a list of the headings of the books or chapters into which the printed volume is divided. The volume is marked in various places, and various passages are underlined. On a leaf facing the title-page is written in calligraphic imitation of print: " Ex Dono Eruditissimi & Amicissimi Doat, Ric. Mead Magnae Brittaniae Regis Medici Primarij. De Boze." AppaLcntly this has not hitherto been printed, though the La Valli6re catalogue prints in full Mead's Latin no'*e on the fly-leaf.' At the Biblioth6que Nationale I saw also tixb Paris de Meyzieu (1779)La Valli6re copy of the suppressed 1723 London reprint of the "Christianismi Restitutio." It bears no mark of ownership whatever, but there is no reason to doubt the statement in the La Valli6re catalogue that it was Mead's copy3which I find described in the "Bibliotheca Meadiana," London 1755, p. 238, as: " Servetus de Trinitate, Liber partim impressus, partim scriptus, 2 vol. 4to." (sold for 8 18s. 6d.), the title-page, contents, and pp. 253-1050 (corresponding to pp. 293-734 of the original) being in MS., transcribed from the

printed original. In my printed "Servetus Notes" I stated that such documents relating to the seizure of this London reprint as I could find in the Public Record Office did not refer to Mead even indirectly. In fact, original documents there signed by Samuel Palmer and Isaac Dalton, respectively, show that Palmer printed the first five sheets only (i.e., pp. 1-20; the book being in twos, on half-sheets) from copy received from one Gysbert Dummer (a Dutchman), to whom he sent the sheets for correction; and from the appearance of the corrections he supposed them to have been made by one Patrick; and that Dalton printed the rest, employed by Dummer. Part of the copy was brought to Dalton from Palmer's house by Peter Paris, a Frenchman, who composed from it in Dalton's house. Dalton carried the sheets for correction to Patrick in Hand Alley. It was this Patrick who first called the attention of the authorities to the

i La Valliere catalogtue, 1783, I, no. 912: "Forsan ipsius authoris autographuis, codex hic manuscriptus, qui fuit percelebris bibliopolte Basiliensis CEelii Horatii Curionis, uidetur prima conceptio (uilgo l'esqnisse en termes de peinture ou le dessein) libri ualde fumigerati Mic aelis Serueti a Joan. Caluino cum ipso Serueto combusti cui titulns: Christianismi Restituitio," &c. 2 Mead's note really reads of couirse: "Vid, la lettre . . . prefixam sue editioni" not as printed; and the date at the end of it should read: 1740. Thus Mead must have presented the book between 1740 and 1745, when it appears in de Boze's own rare quarto catalogue of his library. 3 Dr. George C. Peachey kindly calls my attention to the fact that Mead certainly never used a bookplate. See his new handsome and valuable edition (London, Kimpton, 1923) of Macmichael's " Gold-headed Cane."

38

Mackall: Manuscript of the " Christianismi Restitutio"

reprinting, perhaps as soon as he found it too heretical. He kept a school in Moor-fields then, and he is probably identical with the classical scholar and lexicographer, Samuel Patrick (1684-1748) at one time usher at Charterhouse. Thus Des Maizeaux was right when he wrote to Mosheim (l.c., p. 373), on July 30, 1730, that it was "un Hollandais " who "entreprit de faire imprimer ici un gros Recueil d'Ouvrages de Servet," though probably only a reprint of the " Christianismi Restitutio" was really contemplated.