When Myth Becomes Common Knowledge

Just yesterday, I was surprised by something my extraordinarily brilliant professor taught. During his introductory lecture, he conveyed a myth typical in the religion vs. science debate. It is probably one you have heard in science or history courses: medieval anatomists supposedly fought the dictatorship of Christian universities by illegally stealing cadavers to study human anatomy and physiology. Now, one can readily think of reasons why this might be true. Medieval universities, inherently Christian in their founding and instruction, might reject human dissection because of the principle of imago Dei — mankind being created in God’s image. Pretty good justification for this myth, right?

Wrong. A little known fact about universities in both the Middle Ages and the Renaissance is that human dissection was actively practiced, and even encouraged, by school authorities.

I know what you are thinking: “How can this be? Why have I been told differently?” Good question. This common myth is rooted in the artificial division between the Age of Faith and the Scientific Revolution. It is quite popular to think that Christianity was a stumbling block for scientific progress. This idea begins to disintegrate when one peers into the world of Christian universities and the religious motivations of natural philosophers.

Take, for example, an intellectual giant of the Scientific Revolution, Andreas Vesalius—anatomist and physician. Dissections were common in universities around Europe well before Vesalius began his studies. He started at the University of Paris (Catholic) and afterward transferred to the Catholic University of Louvain. His final scholastic resting place was the University of Padua; all three of these universities conducted and encouraged dissection. Therefore, the “sacrilege” of conducting human dissection cannot be traced to the late Middle Ages or early modern Europe; rather, one must go back much further in time, to the Greco-Roman period. Human dissection enabled medieval and early modern natural philosophers to fulfill what they believed to be their duty in comprehending the handiwork of their Creator. In the first book of Vesalius’s seminal work, Fabrica (1543), he attributed his studies as a “worthy examination of the works of God.” For Vesalius, the supposed opposition between religion and science did not appear to manifest itself in his motivation for the work. The study of anatomy was an attempt to understand “the book of nature” and to better appreciate the Creator through His creation.

Surely the Church must have fought against this practice and against Vesalius’s publication, right? Actually, an examination of the Church’s reaction to the Fabrica demolishes this commonly held belief. As a result of Vesalius’s work, he received an appointment as Imperial Physician to the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, where he traveled with the court over the next twelve years. Charles V, on abdication from the Spanish throne in 1556, provided Vesalius with a lifetime pension in addition to making him a count. Furthermore, Vesalius continued working under Charles’s son, Philip II, during the high point of the Spanish Inquisition.

Andreas Vesalius is just one example of many that contradicts my professor’s assertion that dissection was prohibited on the basis of its being a sacrilege. Several reasons come to mind as to why this myth is still prevalent in common society, but two appear to be most critical. First, the warfare between science and religion is still taught as fact because it is easier in Western culture to demonize religion and uphold science as the underdog that prevailed despite persecution (see more on this topic here and here). Second, there is an overwhelming lack of instruction in the history of science among both historians and scientists alike. Perhaps the best way to combat this ignorance is for the history of science to be taught across disciplines. Then perhaps we will dispel the darkness of ignorance with the light of truth.