Once upon a time, before the age of enlightenment and rationality, there was natural philosophy. Natural philosophers took the entire world as their object of study and their methodology was any means imaginable. Without the restrictions of peer review and proof, any cockamamie theory was game. As a result, compared to Science today, natural philosophy was much more open to new ideas. "Bees are the smallest of birds and are born from the bodies of oxen or decaying flesh," Hrabanaus Maurus postulated in his 9th century encyclopedia De rerum naturis. ¹ However, many of these theories-some of which were alright, most of which are still interesting-have ended up in time's scrap heap. ²

The natural place to begin with natural philosophy is its death. Of course, natural philosophy didn't really die, but slowly transitioned into natural science and then, eventually, just Science. And to this day, every now and again, one of those crazy ideas stirs from its final resting place to venture forth into the minds of women and men. But if I had to inscribe the date of death on natural philosophy's tombstone, it would be 1543. ³

In that year three texts were published in Europe, inseminating the seed that would grow to be Science as we know it today: Andreas Vesalius's De Humanis Corporis Fabrica ("On the Workings of the Human Body"), Leonhart Fuchs's De historia stirpium commentarii insignes ("Notable commentaries on the history of plants"), and Nicolaus Copernicus's De revolutionibus orbium coelestium ("On the revolution of the heavenly spheres").

Collectively, these three magi brought three gifts of method. First and foremost, their findings relied on direct observation. Rather than beginning with preconceived notions from oral tradition and the classic texts of ancient Rome and Greece, the 1543 trio looked to their object of study for the answers they sought. Second, they repeated their observations, making sure that their findings were not anomalies but broadly applicable facts. Finally, they focused on a particular field; previously, natural philosophy's object and method had been an inchoate cloud. Together, these three methodological innovations became the foundation for the scientific method.

Yet, each book in its own way is a testament to the quirks and inconsistencies of natural philosophy. Vesalius's anatomically correct cadavers do not lie inert on the operating slab with their guts hanging out, but pose in gut-wrenching allegorical poses, holding their own guts out. ⁴ Most remarkably, some editions of the Fabrica were bound in human skin. ⁵

Fuchs's herbal, like Vesalius's Fabrica, is also famous for the accuracy of its drawings. But, as with most botanical guides, it could be viewed as an aesthetic accomplishment all of its own. Fuchs, in an uncommon move for his time, gives credit to the artists responsible for the exquisite imagery: Albrecht Meyer drew the initial illustrations, Heinrich Füllmaurer carved the woodblocks, and Vitus Rudolph Speckle printed the book. Though the Historia's images surpassed all predecessors for accuracy, the accompanying text did not. Nor did Fuchs devise a system of classification; that would have to wait until Linnaeus came along in the 18th century.

Copernicus's De revolutionibus is the most famous of the three tomes of 1543, as it literally revolutionized ⁶ the universe. Copernicus replaced the Ptolemaic system, in which the Earth was the center of the universe, with a heliocentric system, and he backed up his argument with centuries' worth of astronomical calculations. It first occurred to Copernicus that the Earth revolves around the Sun in 1510 or 1514 but it took him another thirty years to prove and publish the idea. That initial thought reflects the philosopher in Copernicus, but the reticence to publish until he had gathered proof is reflects the scientist. De revolutionibus is remarkable for its philosophical implications, literally turning the Church-approved, human-centric universe inside out. The gargantuan Church did not even notice Copernicus's heresy until 1616, when it added De revolutionibus to the list of banned books. ⁷

As with the deaths of most ideas, natural history flamed out in one final, glorious burst; these three books of 1543 were the fuel for that fire. In an age before disciplines, natural philosophy was the epitome of interdisciplinary studies. Fuchs was foremost a physician, but it was his interest in the pharmacological uses of plants that led him to be a famous botanist. In Vesalius's time barbers were surgeons and dentists, or surgeons were dentists and barbers. Copernicus considered astronomy one of his side endeavors, as, like most learned men of his time, he was also a physician, governor, soldier, mathematician, and classical scholar, among other professions. But what really separates the scientists of today from the natural philosophers of yesteryear is creativity. The geocentric universe was wide open for invention. Back then, scientists were the avant-garde.

_________
1. This theory is probably why "the birds and the bees" are often lumped together today.
2. Or in dusty corners of the internet.
3. And by no means am I the first to say so.
4. A practice continued today in the various exhibits of "plastinated" bodies.
5. Considering that Vesalius supplied his dissection table with criminals and paupers, this practice was not as unseemly to the 16th century sensibility as it is to the modern mind.
6. It is also responsible for this definition of the word "revolution."
7. Of course, the Church only noticed because the Copernican Galileo Galilei brought heliocentrism to their attention, and the Church's attention upon himself.

« Previous Next »