The Nightborn Isabel Cooper

Visit to download the full and correct content document:

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-nightborn-isabel-cooper/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

The Nightborn Isabel Cooper

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-nightborn-isabel-cooper-2/

The Stormbringer Isabel Cooper [Cooper

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-stormbringer-isabel-cooper-
cooper/

The Stormbringer Isabel Cooper [Cooper

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-stormbringer-isabel-cooper-
cooper-2/

The Stormbringer Isabel Cooper

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-stormbringer-isabel-cooper-2/
The Stormbringer Isabel Cooper

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-stormbringer-isabel-cooper/

The Stormbringer 1st Edition Isabel Cooper

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-stormbringer-1st-edition-
isabel-cooper/

Blood and Ember Isabel Cooper

https://ebookmass.com/product/blood-and-ember-isabel-cooper-3/

Blood and Ember Isabel Cooper

https://ebookmass.com/product/blood-and-ember-isabel-cooper/

Blood and Ember Isabel Cooper

https://ebookmass.com/product/blood-and-ember-isabel-cooper-2/
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 18 Sprengel, ii. 359.

19 Cuv. Leçons sur l’Hist. des Sc. Nat. p. 25.

I shall now proceed to the history of the discovery of another and

less obvious function, the circulation of the blood, which belongs to
modern times.
 CHAPTER II.

Discovery of the Circulation of the Blood.

Sect. 1.—Prelude to the Discovery.

T HE blood-vessels, the veins and arteries, are as evident and

peculiar in their appearance as the muscles; but their function is
by no means so obvious. Hippocrates 20 did not discriminate Veins
and Arteries; both are called by the same name (φλέβες) and the
word from which artery comes (ἀρτηρίη) means, in his works, the
windpipe. Aristotle, scanty as was his knowledge of the vessels of
the body, has yet the merit of having traced the origin of all the veins
to the heart. He expressly contradicts those of his predecessors who
had derived the veins from the head; 21 and refers to dissection for
the proof. If the book On the Breath be genuine (which is doubted),
Aristotle was aware of the distinction between veins and arteries.
“Every artery,” 445 it is there asserted, “is accompanied by a vein; the
former are filled only with breath or air.” 22 But whether or no this
passage be Aristotle’s, he held opinions equally erroneous; as, that
the windpipe conveys air into the heart. 23 Galen 24 was far from
having views respecting the blood-vessels, as sound as those which
he entertained concerning the muscles. He held the liver to be the
origin of the veins, and the heart of the arteries. He was, however,
acquainted with their junctions, or anastomoses. But we find no
material advance in the knowledge of this subject, till we overleap
the blank of the middle ages, and reach the dawn of modern
science.
20 Sprengel, i. 383.
 21 Hist. Animal. iii. 3.

22 De Spiritu, v. 1078.

23 Spr. i. 501.

24 Ib. ii. 152.

The father of modern anatomy is held to be Mondino, 25 who

dissected and taught at Bologna in 1315. Some writers have traced
in him the rudiments of the doctrine of the circulation of the blood; for
he says that the heart transmits blood to the lungs. But it is allowed,
that he afterwards destroys the merit of his remark, by repeating the
old assertion that the left ventricle ought to contain spirit or air, which
it generates from the blood.
25 Encyc. Brit. 692. Anatomy.

Anatomy was cultivated with great diligence and talent in Italy by

Achillini, Carpa, and Messa, and in France by Sylvius and
Stephanus (Dubois and Etienne). Yet still these empty assumptions
respecting the heart and blood-vessels kept their ground. Vesalius, a
native of Brussels, has been termed the founder of human anatomy,
and his great work De Humani Corporis Fabricâ is, even yet, a
splendid monument of art, as well as science. It is said that his
figures were designed by Titian; and if this be not exactly true, says
Cuvier, 26 they must, at least, be from the pencil of one of the most
distinguished pupils of the great painter; for to this day, though we
have more finished drawings, we have no designs that are more
artist-like. Fallopius, who succeeded Vesalius at Padua, made some
additions to the researches of his predecessor; but in his treatise De
Principio Venarum, it is clearly seen 27 that the circulation of the
blood was unknown to him. Eustachius also, whom Cuvier groups
with Vesalius and Fallopius, as the three great founders of modern
anatomy, wrote a treatise on the vein azygos 28 which is a little
treatise on comparative anatomy; but the discovery of the functions
of the veins came from a different quarter.
26 Leçons sur l’Hist. des Sc. Nat. p. 21.

27 Cuv. Sc. Nat. p. 32.

28 Ib. p. 34.

446 The unfortunate Servetus, who was burnt at Geneva as a

heretic in 1553, is the first person who speaks distinctly of the small
circulation, or that which carries the blood from the heart to the
lungs, and back again to the heart. His work entitled Christianismi
Restitutio was also burnt; and only two copies are known to have
escaped the flames. It is in this work that he asserts the doctrine in
question, as a collateral argument or illustration of his subject. “The
communication between the right and left ventricle of the heart, is
made,” he says, “not as is commonly believed, through the partition
of the heart, but by a remarkable artifice (magno artificio) the blood is
carried from the right ventricle by a long circuit through the lungs; is
elaborated by the lungs, made yellow, and transfused from the vena
arteriosa into the arteria venosa.” This truth is, however, mixed with
various of the traditional fancies concerning the “vital spirit, which
has its origin in the left ventricle.” It may be doubted, also, how far
Servetus formed his opinion upon conjecture, and on a hypothetical
view of the formation of this vital spirit. And we may, perhaps, more
justly ascribe the real establishment of the pulmonary circulation as
an inductive truth, to Realdus Columbus, a pupil and successor of
Vesalius at Padua, who published a work De Re Anatomicâ in 1559,
in which he claims this discovery as his own. 29
 29 Encyc. Brit.

Andrew Cæsalpinus, who has already come under our notice as

one of the fathers of modern inductive science, both by his
metaphysical and his physical speculations, described the
pulmonary circulation still more completely in his Quæstiones
Peripateticæ, and even seemed to be on the eve of discovering the
great circulation; for he remarked the swelling of veins below
ligatures, and inferred from it a refluent motion of blood in these
vessels. 30 But another discovery of structure was needed, to
prepare the way for this discovery of function; and this was made by
Fabricius of Acquapendente, who succeeded in the grand list of
great professors at Padua, and taught there for fifty years. 31 Sylvius
had discovered the existence of the valves of the veins; but Fabricius
remarked that they are all turned towards the heart. Combining this
disposition with that of the valves of the heart, and with the absence
of valves in the arteries, he might have come to the conclusion 32 that
the blood moves in a different direction in the arteries and in the
veins, and might thus have discovered the circulation: but this glory
was reserved for William Harvey: so true 447 is it, observes Cuvier,
that we are often on the brink of a discovery without suspecting that
we are so;—so true is it, we may add, that a certain succession of
time and of persons is generally necessary to familiarize men with
one thought, before they can advance to that which is the next in
order.
30 Ib.

31 Cuv. p. 44.

32 p. 45.
 Sect. 2.—The Discovery of the Circulation made by Harvey.

William Harvey was born in 1578, at Folkestone in Kent. 33 He first

studied at Cambridge: he afterwards went to Padua, where the
celebrity of Fabricius of Acquapendente attracted from all parts those
who wished to be instructed in anatomy and physiology. In this city,
excited by the discovery of the valves of the veins, which his master
had recently made, and reflecting on the direction of the valves
which are at the entrance of the veins into the heart, and at the exit
of the arteries from it, he conceived the idea of making experiments,
in order to determine what is the course of the blood in its vessels.
He found that when he tied up veins in various animals, they swelled
below the ligature, or in the part furthest from the heart; while
arteries, with a like ligature, swelled on the side next the heart.
Combining these facts with the direction of the valves, he came to
the conclusion that the blood is impelled, by the left side of the heart,
in the arteries to the extremities, and thence returns by the veins into
the right side of the heart. He showed, too, how this was confirmed
by the phenomena of the pulse, and by the results of opening the
vessels. He proved, also, that the circulation of the lungs is a
continuation of the larger circulation; and thus the whole doctrine of
the double circulation was established.
33 Cuv. p. 51.

Harvey’s experiments had been made in 1616 and 1618; it is

commonly said that he first promulgated his opinion in 1619; but the
manuscript of the lectures, delivered by him as lecturer to the
College of Physicians, is extant in the British Museum, and,
containing the propositions on which the doctrine is founded, refers
them to April, 1616. It was not till 1628 that he published, at
Frankfort, his Exercitatio Anatomica de Motu Cordis et Sanguinis;
but he there observes that he had for above nine years confirmed
and illustrated his opinion in his lectures, by arguments grounded
upon ocular demonstrations. 448

Sect. 3.—Reception of the Discovery.

Without dwelling long upon the circumstances of the general

reception of this doctrine, we may observe that it was, for the most
part, readily accepted by his countrymen, but that abroad it had to
encounter considerable opposition. Although, as we have seen, his
predecessors had approached so near to the discovery, men’s minds
were by no means as yet prepared to receive it. Several physicians
denied the truth of the opinion, among whom the most eminent was
Riolan, professor at the Collège de France. Other writers, as usually
happens in the case of great discoveries, asserted that the doctrine
was ancient, and even that it was known to Hippocrates. Harvey
defended his opinion with spirit and temper; yet he appears to have
retained a lively recollection of the disagreeable nature of the
struggles in which he was thus involved. At a later period of his life,
Ent, 34 one of his admirers, who visited him, and urged him to publish
the researches on generation, on which he had long been engaged,
gives this account of the manner in which he received the proposal:
“And would you then advise me, (smilingly replies the doctor,) to quit
the tranquillity of this haven, wherein I now calmly spend my days,
and again commit myself to the unfaithful ocean? You are not
ignorant how great troubles my lucubrations, formerly published,
have raised. Better it is, certainly, at some time, to endeavor to grow
wise at home in private, than by the hasty divulgation of such things
to the knowledge whereof you have attained with vast labor, to stir
up tempests that may deprive you of your leisure and quiet for the
future.”
34 Epist. Dedic. to Anatom. Exercit.

His merits were, however, soon generally recognized. He was 35

made physician to James the First, and afterwards to Charles the
First, and attended that unfortunate monarch in the civil war. He had
the permission of the parliament to accompany the king on his
leaving London; but this did not protect him from having his house
plundered in his absence, not only of its furniture, but, which he felt
more, of the records of his experiments. In 1652, his brethren of the
College of Physicians placed a marble bust of him in their hall, with
an inscription recording his discoveries; and two years later, he was
nominated to the office of President of the College, which however
he 449 declined in consequence of his age and infirmities. His
doctrine soon acquired popular currency; it was, for instance, taken
by Descartes 36 as the basis of his physiology in his work On Man;
and Harvey had the pleasure, which is often denied to discoverers,
of seeing his discovery generally adopted during his lifetime.
35 Biog. Brit.

36 Cuv. 53.

Sect. 4.—Bearing of the Discovery on the Progress of Physiology.

In considering the intellectual processes by which Harvey’s

discoveries were made, it is impossible not to notice, that the
recognition of a creative purpose, which, as we have said, appears
in all sound physiological reasonings, prevails eminently here. “I
remember,” says Boyle, “that when I asked our famous Harvey what
were the things that induced him to think of a circulation of the blood,
he answered me, that when he took notice that the valves in the
veins of so many parts of the body were so placed, that they gave a
free passage to the blood towards the heart, but opposed the
passage of the venal blood the contrary way; he was incited to
imagine that so provident a cause as Nature had not placed so many
valves without design; and no design seemed more probable than
that the blood should be sent through the arteries, and return
through the veins, whose valves did not oppose its course that way.”

We may notice further, that this discovery implied the usual

conditions, distinct general notions, careful observation of many
facts, and the mental act of bringing together these elements of truth.
Harvey must have possessed clear views of the motions and
pressures of a fluid circulating in ramifying tubes, to enable him to
see how the position of valves, the pulsation of the heart, the effects
of ligatures, of bleeding, and of other circumstances, ought to
manifest themselves in order to confirm his view. That he referred to
a multiplied and varied experience for the evidence that it was so
confirmed, we have already said. Like all the best philosophers of his
time, he insists rigidly upon the necessity of such experience. “In
every science,” he says, 37 “be it what it will, a diligent observation is
requisite, and sense itself must be frequently consulted. We must not
rely upon other men’s experience, but our own, without which no
man is a proper disciple of any part of natural knowledge.” And by
publishing his experiments, he trusts, he adds, that he has enabled
his reader “to be an equitable 450 umpire between Aristotle and
Galen;” or rather, he might have said, to see how, in the promotion of
science, sense and reason, observation and invention, have a
mutual need of each other.
 37 Generation of Animals, Pref.

We may observe further, that though Harvey’s glory, in the case

now before us, rested upon his having proved the reality of certain
mechanical movements and actions in the blood, this discovery, and
all other physiological truths, necessarily involved the assumption of
some peculiar agency belonging to living things, different both from
mechanical agency, and from chemical; and in short, something vital,
and not physical merely. For when it was seen that the pulsation of
the heart, its systole and diastole, caused the circulation of the
blood, it might still be asked, what force caused this constantly-
recurring contraction and expansion. And again, circulation is closely
connected with respiration; the blood is, by the circulation, carried to
the lungs, and is there, according to the expression of Columbus and
Harvey, mixed with air. But by what mechanism does this mixture
take place, and what is the real nature of it? And when succeeding
researches had enabled physiologists to give an answer to this
question, as far as chemical relations go, and to say, that the change
consists in the abstraction of the carbon from the blood by means of
the oxygen of the atmosphere; they were still only led to ask further,
how this chemical change was effected, and how such a change of
the blood fitted it for its uses. Every function of which we explain the
course, the mechanism, or the chemistry, is connected with other
functions,—is subservient to them, and they to it; and all together are
parts of the general vital system of the animal, ministering to its life,
but deriving their activity from the life. Life is not a collection of
forces, or polarities, or affinities, such as any of the physical or
chemical sciences contemplate; it has powers of its own, which often
supersede those subordinate relations; and in the cases where men
have traced such agents in the animal frame, they have always
seen, and usually acknowledged, that these agents were ministerial
to some higher agency, more difficult to trace than these, but more
truly the cause of the phenomena.

The discovery of the mechanical and chemical conditions of the

vital functions, as a step in physiology, may be compared to the
discovery of the laws of phenomena in the heavens by Kepler and
his predecessors, while the discovery of the force by which they
were produced was still reserved in mystery for Newton to bring to
light. The subordinate relation of the facts, their dependence on
space and time, their reduction to order and cycle, had been fully
performed; but the 451 reference of them to distinct ideas of
causation, their interpretation as the results of mechanical force, was
omitted or attempted in vain. The very notion of such Force, and of
the manner in which motions were determined by it, was in the
highest degree vague and vacillating; and a century was requisite,
as we have seen, to give to the notion that clearness and fixity which
made the Mechanics of the Heavens a possible science. In like
manner, the notion of Life, and of Vital Forces, is still too obscure to
be steadily held. We cannot connect it distinctly with severe
inductions from facts. We can trace the motions of the animal fluids
as Kepler traced the motions of the planets; but when we seek to
render a reason for these motions, like him, we recur to terms of a
wide and profound, but mysterious import; to Virtues, Influences,
undefined Powers. Yet we are not on this account to despair. The
very instance to which I am referring shows us how rich is the
promise of the future. Why, says Cuvier, 38 may not Natural History
one day have its Newton? The idea of the vital forces may gradually
become so clear and definite as to be available in science; and
future generations may include, in their physiology, propositions
elevated as far above the circulation of the blood, as the doctrine of
universal gravitation goes beyond the explanation of the heavenly
motions by epicycles.
38 Ossem. Foss. Introd.

If, by what has been said, I have exemplified sufficiently the nature
of those steps in physiology, which, like the discovery of the
Circulation, give an explanation of the process of some of the animal
functions, it is not necessary for me to dwell longer on the subject;
for to write a history, or even a sketch of the history of Physiology,
would suit neither my powers nor my purpose. Some further analysis
of the general views which have been promulgated by the most
eminent physiologists, may perhaps be attempted in treating of the
Philosophy of Inductive Science; but the estimation of the value of
recent speculations and investigations must be left to those who
have made this vast subject the study of their lives. A few brief
notices may, however, be here introduced. 452
 CHAPTER III.

Discovery of the Motion of the Chyle, and consequent Speculations.

Sect. 1.—The Discovery of the Motion of the Chyle.

I TthemaySciences,
have been observed in the previous course of this History of
that the discoveries in each science have a peculiar
physiognomy: something of a common type may be traced in the
progress of each of the theories belonging to the same department
of knowledge. We may notice something of this common form in the
various branches of physiological speculation. In most, or all of them,
we have, as we have noticed the case to be with respect to the
circulation of the blood, clear and certain discoveries of mechanical
and chemical processes, succeeded by speculations far more
obscure, doubtful, and vague, respecting the relation of these
changes to the laws of life. This feature in the history of physiology
may be further instanced, (it shall be done very briefly), in one or two
other cases. And we may observe, that the lesson which we are to
collect from this narrative, is by no means that we are to confine
ourselves to the positive discovery, and reject all the less clear and
certain speculations. To do this, would be to lose most of the
chances of ulterior progress; for though it may be, that our
conceptions of the nature of organic life are not yet sufficiently
precise and steady to become the guides to positive inductive truths,
still the only way in which these peculiar physiological ideas can be
made more distinct and precise, and thus brought more nearly into a
scientific form, is by this struggle with our ignorance or imperfect
knowledge. This is the lesson we have learnt from the history of
physical astronomy and other sciences. We must strive to refer facts
which are known and understood, to higher principles, of which we
cannot doubt the existence, and of which, in some degree, we can
see the place; however dim and shadowy may be the glimpses we
have hitherto been able to obtain of their forms. We may often fail in
such attempts, but without the attempt we can never succeed. 453

That the food is received into the stomach, there undergoes a

change of its consistence, and is then propelled along the intestines,
are obvious facts in the animal economy. But a discovery made in
the course of the seventeenth century brought into clearer light the
sequel of this series of processes, and its connexion with other
functions. In the year 1622, Asellius or Aselli 39 discovered certain
minute vessels, termed lacteals, which absorb a white liquid (the
chyle) from the bowels, and pour it into the blood. These vessels
had, in fact, been discovered by Eristratus, in the ancient world, 40 in
the time of Ptolemy; but Aselli was the first modern who attended to
them. He described them in a treatise entitled De Venis Lacteis, cum
figuris elegantissimis, printed at Milan in 1627, the year after the
death of the author. The work is remarkable as the first which
exhibits colored anatomical figures; the arteries and veins are
represented in red, the lacteals in black.
39 Mayo, Physiology, p. 156.

40 Cuv. Hist. Sc. p. 50.

Eustachius, 41 at an earlier period, had described (in the horse) the

thoracic duct by which the chyle is poured into the subclavian vein,
on the right side of the neck. But this description did not excite so
much notice as to prevent its being forgotten, and rediscovered in
1550, after the knowledge of the circulation of the blood had given
more importance to such a discovery. Up to this time, 42 it had been
supposed that the lacteals carried the chyle to the liver, and that the
blood was manufactured there. This opinion had prevailed in all the
works of the ancients and moderns; its falsity was discovered by
Pecquet, a French physician, and published in 1651, in his New
Anatomical Experiments; in which are discovered a receptacle of the
chyle, unknown till then, and the vessel which conveys it to the
subclavian vein. Pecquet himself and other anatomists, soon
connected this discovery with the doctrine, then recently
promulgated, of the circulation of the blood. In 1665, these vessels,
and the lymphatics which are connected with them, were further
illustrated by Ruysch in his exhibition of their valves. (Dilucidatio
valvularum in vasis lymphaticis et lacteis.)
41 Cuv. Hist. p. 34.

42 Ib. p. 365.

Sect. 2.—The Consequent Speculations. Hypotheses of Digestion.

Thus it was shown that aliments taken into the stomach are, by its
action, made to produce chyme; from the chyme, gradually changed
454 in its progress through the intestines, chyle is absorbed by the
lacteals; and this, poured into the blood by the thoracic duct, repairs
the waste and nourishes the growth of the animal. But by what
powers is the food made to undergo these transformations? Can we
explain them on mechanical or on chemical principles? Here we
come to a part of physiology less certain than the discovery of
vessels, or of the motion of fluids. We have a number of opinions on
this subject, but no universally acknowledged truth. We have a
collection of Hypotheses of Digestion and Nutrition.
 I shall confine myself to the former class; and without dwelling long
upon these, I shall mention some of them. The philosophers of the
Academy del Cimento, and several others, having experimented on
the stomach of gallinaceous birds, and observed the astonishing
force with which it breaks and grinds substances, were led to
consider the digestion which takes place in the stomach as a kind of
trituration. 43 Other writers thought it was more properly described as
fermentation; others again spoke of it as a putrefaction. Varignon
gave a merely physical account of the first part of the process,
maintaining that the division of the aliments was the effect of the
disengagement of the air introduced into the stomach, and dilated by
the heat of the body. The opinion that digestion is a solution of the
food by the gastric juice has been more extensively entertained.
43 Bourdon, Physiol. Comp. p. 514.

Spallanzani and others made many experiments on this subject.

Yet it is denied by the best physiologists, that the changes of
digestion can be adequately represented as chemical changes only.
The nerves of the stomach (the pneumo-gastric) are said to be
essential to digestion. Dr. Wilson Philip has asserted that the
influence of these nerves, when they are destroyed, may be
replaced by a galvanic current. 44 This might give rise to a
supposition that digestion depends on galvanism. Yet we cannot
doubt that all these hypotheses,—mechanical, physical, chemical,
galvanic—are altogether insufficient. “The stomach must have,” as
Dr. Prout says, 45 “the power of 455 organizing and vitalizing the
different elementary substances. It is impossible to imagine that this
organizing agency of the stomach can be chemical. This agency is
vital, and its nature completely unknown.”
44 Müller (Manual of Physiology, B. iii. Sect. 1, Chap. iii.) speaks
of Dr. Wilson Philip’s assertion that the nerves of the stomach
being cut, and a galvanic current kept up in them, digestion is still
accomplished. He states that he and other physiologists have
repeated such experiments on an extensive scale, and have
found no effect of this kind.

45 Bridgewater Tr. p. 493.

 CHAPTER IV.

Examination of the Process of Reproduction in Animals and Plants, and

Consequent Speculations.

Sect. 1.—The Examination of the Process of Reproduction in

Animals.

I T would not, perhaps, be necessary to give any more examples of

what has hitherto been the general process of investigations on
each branch of physiology; or to illustrate further the combination
which such researches present, of certain with uncertain knowledge;
—of solid discoveries of organs and processes, succeeded by
indefinite and doubtful speculation concerning vital forces. But the
reproduction of organized beings is not only a subject of so much
interest as to require some notice, but also offers to us laws and
principles which include both the vegetable and the animal kingdom;
and which, therefore, are requisite to render intelligible the most
general views to which we can attain, respecting the world of
organization.

The facts and laws of reproduction were first studied in detail in

animals. The subject appears to have attracted the attention of some
of the philosophers of antiquity in an extraordinary degree: and
indeed we may easily imagine that they hoped, by following this
path, if any, to solve the mystery of creation. Aristotle appears to
have pursued it with peculiar complacency; and his great work On
animals contains 46 an extraordinary collection of curious
observations relative to this subject. He had learnt the modes of
reproduction of most of the animals with which he was acquainted;
and his work is still, as a writer of our own times has said, 47 “original
after so many copies, and young after two thousand years.” His
observations referred principally to the external circumstances of
generation: the anatomical examination was 456 left to his
successors. Without dwelling on the intermediate labors, we come to
modern times, and find that this examination owes its greatest
advance to those who had the greatest share in the discovery of the
circulation of the blood;—Fabricius of Acquapendente, and Harvey.
The former 48 published a valuable work on the Egg and the Chick. In
this are given, for the first time, figures representing the
developement of the chick, from its almost imperceptible beginning,
to the moment when it breaks the shell. Harvey pursued the
researches of his teacher. Charles 49 the First had supplied him with
the means of making the experiments which his purpose required, by
sacrificing a great number of the deer in Windsor Park in the state of
gestation: but his principal researches were those respecting the
egg, in which he followed out the views of Fabricius. In the troubles
which succeeded the death of the unfortunate Charles the house of
Harvey was pillaged; and he lost the whole of the labors he had
bestowed on the generation of insects. His work, Exercitationes de
Generatione Animalium, was published at London in 1651; it is more
detailed and perfect than that of Fabricius; but the author was
prevented by the unsettled condition of the country from getting
figures engraved to accompany his descriptions.
46 Bourdon, p. 161.

47 Ib. p. 101.

48 Cuv. Hist. Sc. Nat. p. 46.

49 Ib. p. 53.
 Many succeeding anatomists pursued the examination of the
series of changes in generation, and of the organs which are
concerned in them, especially Malpighi, who employed the
microscope in this investigation, and whose work on the Chick was
published in 1673. It is impossible to give here any general view of
the result of these laborious series of researches: but we may
observe, that they led to an extremely minute and exact survey of all
the parts of the fœtus, its envelopes and appendages, and, of
course, to a designation of these by appropriate names. These
names afterwards served to mark the attempts which were made to
carry the analogy of animal generation into the vegetable kingdom.

There is one generalization of Harvey which deserves notice. 50 He

was led by his researches to the conclusion, that all living things may
be properly said to come from eggs: “Omne vivum ex ovo.” Thus not
only do oviparous animals produce by means of eggs, but in those
which are viviparous, the process of generation begins with the
developement of a small vesicle, which comes from the ovary, and
which exists before the embryo: and thus viviparous or suckling-
beasts, 457 notwithstanding their name, are born from eggs, as well
as birds, fishes, and reptiles. 51 This principle also excludes that
supposed production of organized beings without parents (of worms
in corrupted matter, for instance,) which was formerly called
spontaneous generation; and the best physiologists of modern times
agree in denying the reality of such a mode of generation. 52
50 Exerc. lxiii.

51 Bourdon, p. 221.

52 Ib. p. 49.