Natural Knowledge in the Classical World 49interests were biological rather than strictly medical. Within the medical
traditions, we fi nd some animal anatomies in Hippocratic texts (fourth
to third centuries BCE), and a brief but very important period of research
into human anatomy during the third century BCE in the medical school
at Alexandria.^28 By Galen’s day, however, it was no longer possible to per-
form human anatomies, so he worked on animals instead, and extrapo-
lated from animals to humans. It is worth remembering in this context
that the cutting open of human bodies requires the opening up of a very
complex cultural space in which it might be seen as permissible and desir-
able to procure and systematically mutilate the bodies of the dead. Even
today, when the idea of anatomy as a basic research and training tool is
absolutely central to our medical system, not just anyone gets to perform
or even attend the cutting open of human corpses, and the contexts in
which it can be performed are very limited and highly regulated—do not
try this at home. Indeed, we may now see human anatomy as a funda-
mental part of the education of the physician where Galen’s contempo-
raries objected to it for moral reasons, but on the other hand Galen’s
contemporaries had other useful teaching tools available to them that we
now object to for moral reasons—animal vivisection for example. Morals
matter, and morals change.
Galen’s careful attention to detail and his skill in anatomy emerge
repeatedly in his writings. His ability to isolate, explore, and devise experi-
ments to determine the functions of the smallest structures was unsur-
passed for many centuries. (The word “experiment” is used deliberately
here. Experiment is not as pervasive in ancient science as it is in later
science, but the frequent reports of its absence are grossly exaggerated.^29 )
In his anatomical work, Galen noted again and again how astoundingly
complex the body is, and how very well suited each part is both for its
particular function and for the functioning of the whole body. But this
functional analysis is highly teleological. The hand, for example, is shaped
the way it is because of the functions it is supposed to perform. And this
is not just at the level of macroscopic description (fi ve fi ngers, so many
articulations, fl eshiness here, rigidity there), but also at the level of almost
microscopic internal analysis. To begin with the macroscopic:
The fi ngernails were made for the sake of bettering the action of the hands
because, although even without their aid the hands would certainly be able
to grasp, they could not handle objects of all sizes or grasp as well as they
can now. For I have pointed out that small, hard objects would readily escape
them if some hard substance capable of supporting the fl esh did not underlie