Niels Stensen’s Character Sketch in History (Seventeenth to Twenty-First Century)

Sobiech, Frank

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-32912-3_3

Frank Sobiech³

Part of the book series: Philosophy and Medicine ((PHME,volume 117))

169 Accesses

Abstract

In the more than 325 years since his death, various aspects of Niels Stensen’s personality and work have been appreciated by scientists engaging in medical research, physicians, philosophers, theologians and representatives of the natural sciences. Several authors discussing Stensen’s research and ethos have already been mentioned in the course of this study. What is still missing, however, is a synopsis of significant references to his scientific and personal character sketch in history and his veneration as one of the blessed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 39.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 54.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 54.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
The reader is further referred to the Dissertatio de anthropologia (Frankfurt 1737) by Prof. Dr. med. Friedrich Christian Cregut (1675–1758) mentioned in De Angelis, Anthropologien, pp. 398–400, here 399n140, in which the various authors who had written about the natural and healthy state of the body are compiled and in which Stensen is mentioned several times.
2.
The Cimbria literata […] (Learned Jutland […]; Copenhagen 1744), belonging to the early modern genre of the “Historia Literaria” and written by the rector of the Flensburg Latin school Johannes Moller (1661–1725), who was staying in Hamburg from 1681 to 1684 – Stensen’s last sojourn there lasted from mid-September 1683 until 12/11/1685 – , contains a compilation of eulogies of Stensen by contemporary authors: Cimbria lit. 2 (1744), s.v. “Nicolaus Stenonis”, pp. 867–869, here 868–869. On Moller: Hendrik Andreas Hens, (Bjørn Kornerup): “Moller, Johannes”; in: DBL³ 9 (1981), pp. 619–620.
3.
Redi, Osservazioni, p. 159, lines 5–11, here 10: “quel Dottissimo Prelato”. The treatise mentioned by Redi ibid., lines 7–8 is OvaViv. II.
4.
Examples of this already in Walsh, Churchmen in Science, p. 146.
5.
On Van Almeloveen: HGK, s.v. “Almeloveen, Theodoor Jansson van”, pp. 24–25.
6.
Van Almeloveen, Inventa nov-antiqua, p. 29: “sagacissimus structurae corporis humani perscrutator”.
7.
On Mercklin: Julius Pagel, “Georg Abraham Mercklin junior”; in: BLÄ 4 (1932), pp. 170–171.
8.
LindR, s.v. “Nicolaus Steno”, pp. 843–844. On Lindenius renovatus cf. DDPhS, s.v. “Linden (Lindanus), Johannes Antonides van der”, cols. 1200–1203, here 1203.
9.
A bibliographical overview of publications from this time mentioning Stensen in their titles can be found in Koch, “Bibliografia”, pp. 138–141. A further bibliographical groundwork is the librarian final thesis BNSten., which compiles the literature published by and on Stensen until 1986. Neither of these two bibliographies (both of which feature limitations and gaps) register literature dealing with Stensen without mentioning him in the title, however.
10.
Bartholin, Epistolarum centuria III (Epist[ola] XCVII. […]), pp. 416–425, here 417: “Stenonii tractatulus”.
11.
GlandOc. The dedication to Borch can be found ibid., p. 77, lines 7–11.
12.
Bartholin, Epistolarum centuria III (Epist[ola] XCVII. […]), p. 417: “in his sacris […]. Vivacissimis est e propinquo oculis, indefessus labore, judicio non infelix, etiam in humanioribus exercitus, cultusq[ue].”
13.
Paulli, Quadripartitum botanicum, p. 313: “publicis studiis natum”. On the Quadripartitum botanicum cf. Egill Snorrason/Anne Fox Maule, “Paulli, Simon”; in: DBL³ 11 (1982), pp. 181–183, here 181.
14.
Paulli, Quadripartitum botanicum, pp. 628–634 (De officio medicorum), here 628: “non tam eductus quam totus natus iis esse videri possit”.
15.
On Graindorge: Nicholas Dew, “Graindorge, André”; in: DFPh. 1 (2008), pp. 559–560, here 560 on Stensen.
16.
On Huet: Dinah Ribard, “Huet, Pierre-Daniel”; in: DFPh. 1 (2008), pp. 603–610.
17.
Lux, Patronage, p. 27.
18.
Tolmer, “Lettres”, pp. 269–272, here 269–270: “Ce Mr. Sténon fait rage. Nous avons vu cet après-dîner un oeil de cheval. A vous dire le vrai, nous ne sommes que des apprentis auprès de lui. […] Il est toujours en exercice. Il a une patience inconcevable, et par routine il a acquis une adresse au-dessus du commun.” Also in Tolmer, Huet, p. 330. Cf. Lux, Patronage, p. 29.
19.
Tolmer, “Lettres”, pp. 272–274, here 272: “Quand je nous mettais comme apprentis en comparaison de Mr. Sténon, j’avais raison, car je n’ai jamais vu tant de dextérité; car, sans mettre ni l’oeil, ni les ciseaux, ni un petit instrument autre part que dans sa main qu’il tint toujours exposée à la compagnie, il nous fit voir tout ce que l’on peut remarquer dans la constitution de l’oeil.” Also in Tolmer, Huet, p. 330. Cf. Lux, Patronage, pp. 40–41.
20.
Lux, Patronage, pp. 68–69. On Graindorge’s spectating during Stensen’s heart dissections cf. Tolmer, “Lettres”, pp. 270, 305.
21.
Lux, Patronage, pp. 1, 27–30, 38–42, 46–47.
22.
On Wille: Høeg, Wille, pp. 19–21, 48; Scherz, “Wille und Stensen”.
23.
AMPH 2 (1673), pp. 301–304 (CXX. Unguentum ophthalmicum efficax), here 303: “incomparabili Stenonio, praeceptore hic Hafniae meo”.
24.
On this, see Høeg, Wille, pp. 40–41 & 55, no. 10.
25.
Willius, De philiatrorum Germanorum itineribus (Dissertatio prima), p. 5: “Quid de Stenonio dicam, dulcissimo mihi nomine?”
26.
Ibid. (Dissertatio secunda), p. 96: “Rediit ille ex Italia professione Catholicus, vita & moribus maxime Christianus.”
27.
Ibid. (Dissertatio prima), pp. 44–45: “Cui praeceptores Bartholinus & Paulli se cedere fatentur, d[ominus] Nic[olaus] Stenonius amicum consilium in anatomico studio rogantem iussit sedulo cultri, oculo[45]rum & mentis acie, remotum a congerronibus, observare, quo quaeque fibrarum ducit, nullam rescindendo, antequam de ejus insertionibus, partibus & connexionibus constiterit, nullo usurum hodego, qui hac methodo uteretur.”
28.
See note 230, in Chap. 2 above.
29.
Lesky, “Säugetierovar”, pp. 238–239.
30.
Discours, p. 18, lines 13–30.
31.
E.g. ExAc., p. 294, lines 21–26; see also Scherz, Vom Wege, p. 121.
32.
Willius, De philiatrorum Germanorum itineribus (Dissertatio prima), pp. 76–77: “Stenonio suo, incomparabili illo naturae oraculo, cujus scalpellum, si revivisceret, ipse Hippocrates admiraretur, non hodie Dania carere cogeretur, nec ita repente anatomicae felicitatis gloria cadere, nisi itineribus Italicis intentum primum superstitio Romanae Religionis, post Magni Hetruriae Ducis clementia cepisset, in cujus numinis tutela, [77] condigna meritis sorte, jam ille lucet.”
33.
Ibid. (Dissertatio secunda), pp. 149–150: “Tam scripto, quam ore saepe fassus est Stenonius, se non mensium, non annorum, sed olympiadum, sed lustrorum inventa, horarum spatio & do[150]cere posse & monstrare ad oculum.” – The correspondence with Wille is presumably not preserved.
34.
See note 54, in Chap. 2 above.
35.
DefConv., p. 393, lines 10–11, here 11: “humanam prudentiam evangelio non conformem.” On this “gospel-compliance” see Sobiech, Herz, Gott, Kreuz, pp. 35–36, 64–65, 67.
36.
On that day in Livorno and its consequences for Stensen’s spiritual development see Sobiech, Herz, Gott, Kreuz, pp. 37–38, 41–42, 66.
37.
E 143, p. 368, line 38–p. 369, line 5, here p. 369, lines 1–2 = (with exact transcription) Leibniz-Forschungsstelle der Universität Münster, Philosophischer Briefwechsel, N. 160a, p. 578, lines 11–15 with citation in lines 12–13: “presumption philosophique […] amour de l’humilité chrestienne”; see in more detail in Sobiech, Herz, Gott, Kreuz, pp. 136–138.
38.
On Lister and his contribution to the question of human procreation: Andrew Pyle, “Lister, Martin”; in: DBPh. 2 (2000), pp. 527–529.
39.
On Bruce: Thomas F. Henderson/Victor Stater, “Bruce, Robert”; in: ODNB² 8 (2004), p. 324.
40.
Scherz, Indice, p. 292, Supplement 3 (undated). – The French professor remains unnamed.
41.
Papasoli, “Soggiorno”, p. 97.
42.
In Redi, Esperienze, p. 121n202, cooperation between Stensen and Redi is mentioned for the first time for 01/20/1667 (corr. from “1666” in ibid.) in Redi’s records. In CanCap., p. 117, lines 22–23 & p. 138, line 28, Stensen describes Redi as his “most famous friend” (amicus clarissimus); on Redi’s cooperation with Stensen cf. Scherz, Epistolae, vol. 1, pp. 21–23.
43.
Redi, Opere, pp. 213–214, here 213: “poichè, come sa, il Sig. Stenone mi fa l’onore di favorir la mia tavola mattina e sera, ed io ho questa contentezza di godere della sua virtuosissima, e amabilissima conversazione, e di più non istiamo in ozio, ed ogni giorno facciamo di belle notomie, e di belle osservazioni intorno a questi pesci di mare.”
44.
Redi, Lettere, pp. 5–6: “Credetemi caro Sig. Valerio, il Signor Niccolò è veramente un angiolo di costumi; oltre lo essere [6] quel gran Filosofo, e quel gran Notomista, e gran Matematico che egli si è.” On Inghirami: DRR I, p. 859.
45.
On Ricci: Luigi Campedelli, “Ricci, Michelangelo”; in: DSB 11 (1975), pp. 404–405.
46.
Fabroni, Lettere, pp. 156–157, here 156: “una gran perizia e diligenza nell’osservare, ingegno e fantasia chiara; […] sì belle invenzioni e le spieghi con tanta chiarezza e facilità”.
47.
Ibid., pp. 162–163, here 163: “la sua modestia e sincerità, e l’intelletto che ha chiaro e ricco di scienze ed altre belle notizie.”
48.
Possibly to be differentiated from Jacopo Del Lapo, cf. Guerrini, “Lettere”, p. 196n11. On the other hand, Manni, Stenone (Libro II, Cap. XVII), pp. 158–165, here 159–161, reproduces verbatim a letter (see next note) by the sender “Jacopo Lapi” (ibid., p. 161), but identifies the person as “Jacopo del Lapo” (ibid., p. 159).
49.
Manni, Stenone (Libro II, Cap. XVII), pp. 158–165, here 160: “il buono, e venerabile Signore Stenone, che inoggi è uno de’ migliori Preti Sacerdoti, che sia nella nostra Città”.
50.
On Fiorentini: Lazzarelli, Cicceide legitima, p. LXXVIII.
51.
On Trutwin: E 22, p. 190n6; Adelmann, Correspondence, vol. 1, no. 2, p. 4n4. Not in DDPhS.
52.
Add. 15, p. 933, esp. lines 8–12, here 10–11: “al parere de’ periti il primo anatomista d’Italia”.
53.
On Bernier: Michel Prévost, “Bernier (Jean)”; in: DBF 6 (1954), col. 114.
54.
Bernier, Essais de medecine, pp. 167–169 (“Jean [sic!] Stenon”), here 168–169: “Au reste je renvoye le Lecteur aux Ouvrages de Medecine qu’il nous a donnez pour preuve de sa capacité, [169] laissant ce petit portrait comme un miroir de désinteressement, de diligence, d’érudition & de Religion aux Medecins de nôtre siecle, qui n’aiment qu’à faire du bruit, qu’à intriguer & à débiter des vanitez pour s’établir & pour gagner de l’argent.” – On the income of French physicians in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries see Brockliss/Jones, Medical World, pp. 320–328.
55.
See notes 147 & 148, in Chap. 1 above.
56.
Fangerau, “Ethik”, p. 283 following Peter Weingart.
57.
Cf. ibid., and on this Merton, Social Theory, pp. 612–614, where the sociological state of “science” versus the “‘service’ professions” is outlined.
58.
On Atche: ARSI, Rh. Inf. 23, fol. 85^r–88^v (Catalogus rerum Domus Probationis Socie[ta]tis Jesu Provinciae Rheni Inferioris 1678 […]), here 86^v (no. 28); ibid., Hist. Soc. 49, fol. 254^v; Fejér s. s. 1 (1985), s.v. “P[ater] Atche Theodorus”, p. 60; not mentioned in August Ziggelaar, “Stensen (Steensen, Steno), Niels”; in: DHCJ 4 (2001), pp. 3636–3637; with imprecise information Scherz, “Jesuit durch Niels Stensen”. On Atche’s studies under Stensen cf. Add. 12, pp. 927–928, here 927.
59.
ARSI, Rh. Inf. 46, pp. 787–788: “Elogium P[atris] Theodori Atche.”
60.
Ibid., Rh. Inf. 57^II, fol. 686^r–742^v (Annuae Provinciae Rheni inferioris de a[nn]o 1692), here 729^v–731^r.
61.
Ibid., fol. 729^v–731^r, here 729^v: “dominum Stenonium anatomicum eo tempore celeberrimum et ad partes catholicas nostrorum opera transiisse […] magni viri”; cf. ibid., Rh. Inf. 46, pp. 787–788, here 787: “d[omi]num Stenonium anathomicum eo tempore celeberrimum […] magni viri”.
62.
Ibid., Rh. Inf. 15, fol. 125^r+v (Indipeta autograph by Atche on 10/16/1682 from Hildesheim).
63.
Ibid., Rh. Inf. 57^II, fol. 729^v–730^r; ibid., Rh. Inf. 46, p. 787.
64.
Paullini, ΜΟΣΧΟΚΑΡΥΟΓΡΑΦΙΑ (appendix [unpaginated]), here no. 10 of the edited works: Paullini, De starcutero, retaining the early modern notation: De Starcutero, famosissimo Ggnante [corr.: Gigante] Boreali, dissertatio curiosa ad Virum Celeberrimum D[ominum] Nic[olaum] Stenonis, Episcopum postea Titiopolitanum, & Vicar[ium] Apostolic[um], cujus curâ & impensis prodiit Florentiæ 1677. 4. (= quarto). Just as is noted in Marx, “Paullini”, p. 84n119, no copy was to be found during the research for this study; the copy documented for the Bodleian Library of Oxford University in BBU 2 (1854), s.v. “Starcater, géant du Nord”, col. 1713 along with BBU 1 (1854), p. IV could not be located despite a search on-site (Rare Books Section, Departement of Special Collections & Western Manuscripts) by curator Sarah Wheale in February 2012.
65.
Paullini studied medicine and Lutheran theology in several European cities; on Paullini: HGK, s.v. “Paullini, Christian Franz”, p. 499; Dieter Lent, “Paullini, Christian Franz”; in: BBL, pp. 549–550; Marx, “Paullini”, pp. 59–63. According to LkAE, Kirchenbuch Eisenach 1643–1648, p. 500^r (baptism: 02/26/1643 st.v.) and ibid., Kirchenbuch Eisenach 1706–1719, p. 249^v (funeral: 06/13/1712 st.n.), Paullini was baptized and buried a Lutheran.
66.
Letter excerpt (undated) in Paullini, Cynographia (Cap. III before Sectio I, here “Vota et censura excellentium virorum” [unpaginated], no. II): “Si hic Te haberem, de loco Pisis obtinendo inter Professores non desperarem, cum illum jam tum Tibi promiserit Sereniss[imus] Magnus He[page break]truriae Dux.” Cf. E 112, p. 314, lines 31–32.
67.
On Christopher Bartholin: Hjalmar Sigvard A. Nygård, “Bartholin, Christopher”; in: DBL³ 1 (1979), p. 474.
68.
Maar, Holger Jacobæus’ Rejsebog, p. 137; Guerrini, “Biografia Rediana”, p. 57. On Stensen’s years as priest and teacher at the Tuscan Court see Sobiech, “Simplicity of Faith, Intuition and Giordano Bruno”.
69.
Paullini, Talpa, p. 88: “Fautor & amicus, dum viveret, honoratissimus”. In a letter to Heinrich Meibom jr. from Florence on 09/02/1670 (Bruun, “Fem nyfundne Niels Stensen-breve”, p. 144, lines 15–16), Stensen speaks of “our old friendship” (vetus amicitia) which was to be renewed, and that he would welcome a regular exchange between them about their joint studies.
70.
Nordström, “Magliabechi”, pp. 19–20, 42. On Meier: Janse, “Reformed Theological Education”, p. 39. On the behavior of the Italian librarians towards Protestants see Cavarzere, Censura, pp. 127–128; on Stensen’s visits to the Florentine Biblioteca Laurenziana and to Roman libraries in the time prior to his conversion see Sobiech, Herz, Gott, Kreuz, pp. 38, 114. Für Stensen, the“conscience” (conscientia) of the individual was decisive in the question of conversion; he rejected compulsory measures by the state (ibid., pp. 335–343 [“Stensen und die Ökumene”], here 336–338).
71.
Adelmann, Embryology, vol. 1, p. 144.
72.
Concluded indirectly from E 26, p. 193, line 36–p. 194, line 6, here p. 193, line 37–p. 194, line 1: “risentimento”, elicited, according to Stensen, by his “words of possibly too great familiarity” (parole […], forse con troppa familiarità).
73.
On Rötenbeck: Scherz, Epistolae, vol. 1, pp. 49–50; Scherz, “Rötenbeck und Stensen”; Adelmann, Embryology, vol. 1, p. 405n4; Adelmann, Correspondence, vol. 2, no. 365, p. 764n1 (erroneous date of death “in Italy in 1677”).
74.
E 137, p. 359, lines 17–20.
75.
E 290, p. 574, lines 21–30 & p. 575, lines 6–25. On Del Pozzo: E 49, p. 216n3.
76.
On Pechlin: DDPhS, s.v. “Pechlin, Johannes Nicolaas”, cols. 1505–1507; Dietrich Korth, “Pechlin, Johann Nicolaus”; in: SHBL 7 (1985), pp. 164–166.
77.
See note 350, in Chap. 2 above.
78.
Pechlin, De optima Christianorum secta, “Monitio ad lectorem” (unpaginated), here first page.
79.
Ibid., p. 103.
80.
Ibid., pp. 103–104: “Nihil tamen omnium magis me commovit vel offendit, quam Nicolai Stenonii, pridem, ut audio, mortui, apostasia, cujus etiam causa hoc quidquid est negotii, olim suscepi. Erat enim, nisi me omnia fallunt, vir natura probus, pacatus, cujus ego judicio & pru[104]dentiae in rebus medicis atque mathematicis plurimum tribuere solebam. Adeo miraculo proximum duxi, ad sectam tam corruptam nullisque admodum fundamentis innixam transiisse hominem mathematicum & demonstrationes sectari solitum.”
81.
See Sobiech, Herz, Gott, Kreuz, p. 41.
82.
In more detail ibid., pp. 39–41.
83.
Pechlin, De optima Christianorum secta, pp. 104–106: “Hisce ille speciosis oculumque fascinantibus rebus forte etiam promissis in futurum honoribus, adductus, cum videret, quae in medicis atque anatomicis occurrunt, maximam partem incerta [105] esse, & quae certa videntur, in superficie haerere scientiaeque verae longe minimam facere partem, averso plane a demonstrationibus animo totum se credulitati dedit, & speciosa ille sectae pontificiae auctoritate, quae videbatur esse animi humilitas, cum religione pariter etiam professionis genus mutavit, non medici amplius, sed theologi, sed sacerdotis, sed Episcopi titularis & Vicarii Apostolici partes secutus. Exspectavi autem ab hoc viro, ut a nemine alio, herculeam plane & consumatissimam apologiam, & mathematicis, ut solebat alias, demonstrationibus plenam; sed ecce laborantem omnibus numeris causae defensionem & multis partibus imbecilliorem, quam esse illa aliorum solet, quaeque adeo in Hollandia, Jenae & Hauniae ad examen revocata famam non sustinuit; commiseratione ergo dignum judicavi, qui sensuum quodam lapsu abreptus meliora deterioribus mutarit. Enituit tamen usque viri in vivendo sanctitas, & disputationibus, quas ultro citroque habuit, epistolisque, quarum una alteraque me quoque dignatus est, unice charitatem, patientiam, moresque Christi imitatione exprimendos, proposuit, ostenditque non obscure, quamvis sero, vitae parce & sobrie actae exemplo, erogatisque in pauperes bonis, quem in theoreticis conceperat errorem, expiare voluisse. Potuisset tamen idem ille Stenonius eadem probitate apud nos esse, & propagato rerum naturalium medicarumque studio, ut ad quae na[106]tura factus videbatur, & honori Dei O[ptimi] M[aximi] & utilitati proximi servire.” – Stensen’s letters to Pechlin are presumably not preserved.
84.
E 148, p. 374, lines 29–30: “multa satis pungentia”; ibid., line 31: “dilectionem cum fratre”; Scherz, Epistolae, vol. 1, pp. 69–71, here 71: “non poteram prohibere”. In the context of the decree on ecumenism Unitatis redintegratio (11/21/1964) of the Second Vatican Council see in detail Sobiech, Herz, Gott, Kreuz, p. 338.
85.
On Cohausen: Beauvois, Cohausen, pp. 26–27, 52–53; BEdtM 1 (2002), s.v. “Cohausen, Johann Heinrich”, p. 108.
86.
Pompey, Pastoralmedizin, pp. 41–49 and a chapter overview of Clericus medicaster ibid., pp. 315–316. On the term “Medikaster” cf. Elkeles, “Medicus und Medikaster”, p. 198.
87.
Cohausen, Clericus medicaster (Caput XI. De clericis veris ac probatis medicis discursus finalis), pp. 125–126: “Recolo nunc viri in republica litteraria imo orbe universo celebratissimi, prima quidem vitae statione expertissimi medici, altera vero sacerdotis & episcopi summe venerandi gloriosam memoriam. Est hic Nicolaus Stenonis, seu ut alii appellant, Stenonius nobilis Danus, quem universitates Daniae, Hollandiae, Hetruriae aliaeque plures viderunt in medicina & anatomia practicum dexterrimum, dein conversione ad fidem orthodoxam facta venerata est Romana Ecclesia sacerdotem, Episcopum Titiopolitanum, & Vicarium Apostolicum. Quam fuerit admiranda in arte prosecandi ejus experientia, & Acta Danica, & ab eo ipso in lucem dati libri loquuntur. Quantus autem vir in vitae integritate, in carnis mortificatione, in vigiliis, jejuniis, in charitate non ficta, in sancta doctrina, in humilitate, verbo, in omni Christiana perfectione extiterit, ex ejus dum adhuc viveret, fama publica omnibus & undique [126] innotuit, quod ipse testari possum, quando Hildesii & Hanoverae morabatur. Hunc igitur incomparabilem virum omnibus clericis medicis in exemplum statuo. Nunquam ex medicinae exercitio lucrum sectatus est: Non fuit dives opibus, non divitiis potens, quas & ipse apostolorum princeps se non habere gloriatur. Sublimitate sacerdotii nil judicavit majus; dedit omnibus, cum quibus est conversatus, tam secularibus quam ecclesiasticis, sacrae doctrinae pabulum, dedit salutare consilium, dedit paternam consolationem, & sanctae vitae exemplum, quando Christi & apostolorum vestigiis insistens omni opum studio, mundi deliciarum amore, vitae splendore se penitus abdicavit.”
88.
On Portal: Pierre Chabbert, “Portal, Antoine”; in: DSB 11 (1975), pp. 99–100.
89.
Portal, Histoire de l’anatomie, pp. 159–183, here 159, 162: “Ses connoissances, son zele pour les Sciences, & la douceur de son caractere […]. [162] M. Stenon n’étoit pas d’ailleurs d’un fort tempéramment, il étoit d’une sensibilité prodigieuse, ce qui marque la délicatesse de ses sentiments. La mort de M. Stenon fit du bruit dans l’univers savant, les Gens de Lettres avoient les yeux fixés sur lui. Son rare savoir en Anatomie & sa conversion peu attendue devoient faire époque dans l’histoire des Sciences”.
90.
On Gradi: Tomaso Montanari, “Gradi (Gradič), Stefano”; in: DBI 58 (2002), pp. 361–363, here 362. Stensen was a guest of the Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, see Sobiech, Herz, Gott, Kreuz, p. 114.
91.
Mirto, “Lettere”, pp. 380–381: “Non mi poteva giungere al mondo cosa che più contentasse il mio animo, quanto l’honore che mi fa V[ostra] A[ltezza] col suo preggiatissimo regalo dell’opera anatomica del Sig.r Stenonio, da me discorsa et disputata prima che uscisse alla luce, et hora dopo, col medesimo autore, che ho fortuna di conoscere, riverire et ammirare.”
92.
Collet, Welt in der Stube, p. 182 with n. 549 (the Accademia del Cimento [sic!] had provided “den Rahmen dieser Vorführung”, ie the setting for this demonstration); ibid., pp. 182–183. On Ludwig: Roob, “Ärzte”, pp. 28–29.
93.
Scherz, Geological Papers, p. 25.
94.
See note 200, in Chap. 2 above.
95.
Collet, Welt in der Stube, pp. 183–187.
96.
Volckamer Sr. was a member of the Academia Naturae Curiosorum (est. 1652); on him: Renate Jürgensen/editorial, “Volckamer, Johann Georg”; in: Killy² 12 (2011), pp. 16–17.
97.
E 42, p. 209, lines 17–20, here 18: “mirifice[…] affectum”.
98.
Bruun, “Fem nyfundne Niels Stensen-breve”, p. 150, lines 14–15 & p. 153, lines 14–16, here 14–15: “programmate”. Meibom’s letter preceding the one by Stensen on 04/05/1673 st.v. as well as Meibom’s letter sent to Paulli Jr. with the Programma are presumably not preserved, cf. ibid., p. 157n99 & pp. 161–162.
99.
Meibom, Programma, fol. A 1^r & A 4^v; still unknown in Bruun, “Fem nyfundne Niels Stensen-breve”, p. 162n115.
100.
Meibom, Programma, fol. A 3^v–A 4^r, here A 4^r: “dexteritate & peritia eorum, qui ibi secuerunt Paulli, Bartholini, Stenonii”.
101.
Bruun, “Fem nyfundne Niels Stensen-breve”, p. 153, lines 15–20, here 15, 17: “honorificam […] mentionem”.
102.
Ibid., p. 138, lines 18–20, here 18–19: “ingenij praestantia, manus solertia, et alia”.
103.
On Magalotti: Cesare Preti/Luigi Matt, “Magalotti, Lorenzo”; in: DBI 67 (2006), pp. 300–304, here 301 on Stensen, claiming that Magalotti had visited Stensen in Denmark in 1674. That the two of them met during either of Magalotti’s two sojourns in Copenhagen in 1674 is however unlikely according to Kardel/Maquet, Biography and Original Papers, p. 319n120.
104.
Letter to Alessandro Segni (1633–1697), Magalotti’s predecessor as secretary of the Accademia del Cimento, on 08/24/1666 in Scherz, Epistolae, vol. 1, p. 25 = Add. 4, p. 922, lines 22–23: “la singolar modestia e’l gentilissimo tratto col quale condisce la sua dottrina.” On Segni: Mirto, “Segni”, here p. 196 on Magalotti.
105.
On Michiel: RDV 1 (1936), p. 548.
106.
Scherz, Epistolae, vol. 1, p. 25.
107.
On Lancisi: Stroppiana, “Lancisi”, pp. 5, 12–13; Cesare Preti, “Lancisi, Giovanni Maria”; in: DBI 63 (2004), pp. 360–364. During the time when Stensen was working as “Anatomicus regius” in Copenhagen as well as thereafter, Lancisi – who had been awarded his doctor’s degree on 09/12/1672 – was a student of the surgeon Giovanni Guglielmo Riva, whose vespertine academy meetings Stensen had attended in 1666 (see note 168, in Chap. 1 above), cf. ibid., p. 360.
108.
Stroppiana, “Lancisi”, p. 10.
109.
On Bonomo: Giorgio Stabile, “Bonomo, Giovanni Cosimo”; in: DBI 12 (1970), pp. 338–341, here 338; Cesare Preti, “Lancisi, Giovanni Maria”; in: DBI 63 (2004), pp. 360–364, here 360–361.
110.
Faucci, Polemica Bonomo-Lancisi, p. 3 (letter on 12/10/1687), lines 8–9; ibid., p. 13 (letter on 09/20/1687), lines 34–35; ibid., p. 14 (the same letter), lines 3, 13, 35–36, 39–40; cf. Stroppiana, “Lancisi”, p. 13.
111.
Faucci, Polemica Bonomo-Lancisi, pp. VII, 14 (letter on 09/201687), lines 19–21, here 20: “il sagro Testo nel Deuteronomio”; ibid., pp. VII, 21 (letter on 10/04/1687), lines 27–32.
112.
Ibid., p. 12 (letter on 09/20/1687), lines 35–44: “Mi creda sig.r Bonomo, che spesso succede ciò, che scrisse Nicolò Stenone à Barbetta in una letera, dicendoli, che ut credulos fallit terror, sic anatomicis imponit laetitia; dum visum quoddam prima specie insolitum, conceptae opinioni favens vel novae meditationi ansam porrigens ad Ευρηκα ingeminandos illos propellit, nullo ad accuratius examen praemittendum concesso loco. Sunt, segue egli a dire, et alij animi motus qui multos monstrosoru[m] scriptoru[m] reddiderunt parentes. Non già, ch’io stimi doversi porre in dubio le di lei acurate sperienze, ma che esse non siano tutte le possibili, e che vaglino per ciò darsi altrui osservationi, che limitino la concepita generalità delle proprie.” The passage cited by Lancisi can be found in VitTrans., p. 212, lines 2–8.
113.
Bonomo, Osservazioni and on this Giorgio Stabile, “Bonomo, Giovanni Cosimo”; in: DBI 12 (1970), pp. 338–341, here 339–340.
114.
Lancisi, De recta ratione, pp. 14–15 (Galilei), 16–17 (Descartes). On the opening of the academy cf. Stroppiana, “Lancisi”, p. 10; Cesare Preti, “Lancisi, Giovanni Maria”; in: DBI 63 (2004), pp. 360–364, here 363. On Lancisi’s speech in the context of corpuscular theories see Donato, “Onere”, pp. 85–86.
115.
Prodromus, p. 210, line 23 = Scherz, Geological Papers, p. 184, lines 31–32: “solidissimae Magni Galilei demonstrationes”; on this, see also Scherz, Geological Papers, p. 229n105.
116.
On Lugo: AGCRS, Biografie C. R. S., n. 708, pp. 5, 7–8.
117.
On Ladvocat: Hugues Jean de Dianoux, “Ladvocat (Jean-Baptiste)”; in: DBF 19 (2001), col. 92.
118.
DSP 4 (1755), s.v. “Stenone (Nicolao)”, p. 381, here r. col.: “Avvi un suo eccell[ente] discorso sopra l’Anatomia del cervello ed altre Op[ere] dotte. il Sig. Wenslow suo ultimo nipote, e cel[ebre] Anatomico, sostenne con gloria la riputaz[ione] di questo dotto Uomo.”
119.
KU-BVFB, Hdskr. 2:II:40 a, pp. 5–7: “Over halvandet Aarhundrede, er det nu siden vor store Steno, denne ufortrödne og nöjagtige Anatom, berigede Vi[6]denskaben med flere vigtige Opdagelser. Blandt dem finde vi allerede en Deel af det Organ jeg vil beskrive […]. Den Skiödeslöshed, hvormed alle hans Opdagelser ere blevne behandlede, giöre Dyrkerne af denne Videnskab kun liden Ære: […] [7] […] Det er mig derfor dobbelt kiert, at jeg som dansk kan forsætte en Undersögelse, der allerede for halvandet Aarhundrede har været begyndt af en dansk Anatom.” The ink of the manuscript is very faded. Cf. the transcription in Hollnagel-Jensen/Andreasen, “Jacobson”, p. 13; cf. also Melchiors, “Entdeckung”. On Jacobson: Otto Carl Aagaard/Ragnar Spärck, “Jacobson, Ludvig Levin”; in: DBL³ 7 (1981), pp. 207–208, here 207 r. col. on Stensen.
120.
The treatment of Stensen in scientific and news literature against the background of the intellectual and ideological changes in the twentieth century, the two World Wars and the resulting disruptions in international exchange with regard to the question of medical ethics would be worthy of a separate study, eg with reference to the Stensen anniversaries in 1936, 1938, 1986 and 1988, and the translation of 1953.
121.
Sobiech, Herz, Gott, Kreuz, pp. 11–15. – See also the brief biography of Stensen published 10 days prior to his beatification (10/23/1988) in Schmitz, “Stensen”.
122.
These were: 1) the “Niels-Stensen-Symposium”, an association of Danish and North German dermatologists, est. 1975 by the Copenhagen professor of dermatology Dr. med. Niels Hjorth (1919–1990) for reestablishment of scientific contact. Hjorth served as president of the association together with Carl Schirren (according to information by telephone [07/04/2011] from Prof. em. Dr. Carl Schirren, it no longer exists; on Hjorth: Gunnar Lomholt, “Obituary: Niels Hjorth [1919–1990] ”; in: IJD 30,12 [1991], p. 898; Carl Schirren, “Professor Dr. Niels Hjorth”; in: DermK 32,115 [March 1991], pp. 4–5), and 2) the “Niels-Stensen-Gemeinschaft e. V. (Ärzte, Apotheker, Pflegeberufe, Seelsorger im Gespräch)”, est. 1982 by Prelate Dr. Stanis-Edmund Szydzik (1915–2001) and existing until 2000, see Estermann, Szydzik, pp. 91–92.
123.
Kirwin, “Walsh”, p. 427.
124.
Walsh, Churchmen in Science, p. 138. – The Canadian-American multiple doctor and professor of anatomy and anthropology Sir Bertram C. A. Windle (1858–1929) (McCorkell, Windle, p. 54), who converted from Anglicanism to Catholicism in 1883, points out in his book Twelve Catholic Men of Science (London 1912), in which he draws on the works of Walsh in particular, that Stensen had been sent out as bishop by the Church with his groundbreaking research brought forth by him without inner reserve (Windle, “Stensen”, p. 22).
125.
Gross, Rome, p. 248; see in more detail Sella, Italy, pp. 144–160.
126.
See note 510, in Chap. 2 above.
127.
Horn/Dorffner, “Frauen”, pp. 126–127; Kernbauer, “Zawisch-Ossenitz”, pp. 266–268.
128.
KB, Tilg. 621 II 8 (Østrig).
129.
On Quattrin: AOV, [two vitae]; [editorial], “Morto Quattrin, padre dell’ematologia”; in: GVicenza, 03/17/1993 (with image), with thanks to Prof. Dr. Mariano Nardello (Vicenza).
130.
In Quattrin, Stenone, pp. 151–152, Quattrin reports on this audience.
131.
It is unclear which publication Quattrin refers to.
132.
Cf. on this lecture and on other conferences Quattrin, Stenone, p. 155.
133.
KB, Tilg. 621 II 12 (Italien til 1962 M–Z): “[…] Nella Pasqua scorsa ebbi una breve udienza con Sua Santità e Gli consegnai anche la pubblicazione su Stenone domandando che fosse fatto Santo al più presto. […] In primavera sono invitato all’Università di Parma per parlare su di Lui in occasione del 300.mo anniversario della scoperta del dotto parotideo. […] La saluto con ogni affetto nel Signore Suo dev[otissi]mo N[evio] Quattrin”.
134.
See notes 43 & 44 above.
135.
Quattrin, Stenone, pp. 95, 97. The accompanying letter sent by Quattrin to Fr. Scherz from Naples on 11/02/1961 together with the manuscript (not preserved) intended for printing in the Stenoniana Catholica can be found in KB, Tilg. 621 II 12 (Italien til 1962 M–Z).
136.
Quattrin, Stenone, pp. 154–157, here 155 with reference to Quattrin, “Presenza”.
137.
Sterpellone, “Stenone”, p. 45: “Tra i pochi veri ‘beati’ della nostra categoria.”
138.
On Faller: Institut für Anatomie und spezielle Embryologie der Universität Freiburg (Schweiz), Nachtrag, p. 38 (vita in tabular form); Günter Rager, “Adolf Faller (1913–1989)”; in: Acta anat. 137 (1990), p. 279; extended in Rager, “Adolf Faller: Anatom und Medizinhistoriker 1913–1989”; in: Gesnerus 47 (1990), pp. 118–121, here 119 on Stensen; Rager, “Gründung”, pp. 20–22; Ruffieux, Personnes, s.v. “Faller, Adolf”, p. 944; Pierre Sprumont, “A propos du décès d’un de nos membres d’honneur: Adolf Faller, un idéaliste obstiné”; in: BSFSN 78 (1989), pp. 51–55, here 53 on Faller’s works on Stensen. A collection of Faller’s publications along with a bibliographical overview (up to 1982/1983) as well as the rest of his library are located in: UniFR-DepMed.
139.
Rager, “Institut”, pp. 859–861 with citations on pp. 861, 859. On the crucifix cf. Faller, Abenteuer, p. 17.
140.
According to an e-mail (11/06/2012) by Prof. em. Günter Rager; 06/21/1978 as terminus ante quem due to the mention in Faller, Abenteuer, p. 17.
141.
Rager, “Gründung”, p. 31; the fresco of Stensen, created at no cost by Oscar Cattani (1887–1960), is located in the lecture hall of the institute, cf. Giovanni, “Projets”, p. 873 (color photograph).
142.
On Bohr: Jens Rud Nielson [to be corrected into: Nielsen], “Memories of Niels Bohr”; in: PhT 16,10 (1963), pp. 22–30.
143.
On Bohr’s manuscripts cf. Favrholdt, Complementarity beyond Physics, esp. p. [586], no. 29 & p. [590], no. 49.
144.
Bohr, “Problem of Life”, p. [117].
145.
Ibid., p. [123].
146.
NBA, Niels Bohr General Correspondence, 1910–1962, Folder 27: “Jeg benytter Lejligheden til at takke og lykønske Dem til Deres Initiativ vedrørende Stensens Monument i København.”
147.
Ibid.: “oprigtige beundring for Niels Stensen”.
148.
Jaki, Brain, pp. 120–121. On Jaki: Paul Haffner, “Jaki, Stanley L.”; in: NCE² Supplement 2010, vol. 2, pp. 576–578.
149.
Schiffers, Fragen der Physik, p. 128; similar to Schiffers later in Thielicke, Anthropology, p. 181. On Schiffers: RGG⁴ index vol. (2007), s.v. “Schiffers, Norbert”, col. 351.
150.
Schiffers, Fragen der Physik, pp. 167, 127 (with reference to Stensen’s belief in providence).
151.
Mieth, “Wissenschaft”, pp. 405–406, here 406; cf. Mieth, “Science”, p. 61: “bishop and anatomist”.
152.
AAS 81 (1989), pp. 290–296, here 292.
153.
Ibid., p. 294. On the Christian calling of the scientist from the point of view of Pope John Paul II see Austriaco, Biomedicine and Beatitude, pp. 208–210.
154.
Goodrich, [Comment].
155.
On Simon: William H. Honan, “B. E. Simon, ‘Hiroshima Maidens’ Surgeon, 87”; in: NYT-BS 30,8 (August 1999), p. 1230 (NY Times from 08/05/1999). The overview on the use of the nuclear bomb in Ludwig E. Feinendegen, “Hiroshima/Nagasaki”; in: LBioeth. 2 (1998), pp. 218–220 lacks ethical reflection.
156.
On this, see Bierbaum/Faller/Traeger, Stensen, p. 163.
157.
Grappolini/Signorini/Simon, “Stenone”, p. 96.
158.
Marzollo, “Musculo”, pp. 3–4 (“Prefazione” from 11/30/1967), here 4: “uno dei primi che si sentirà spinto a portare un fascio di candidi gigli sulla Sua tomba in San Lorenzo.”
159.
I.e. with episcopal insignia. On Capretti: BSLF, In morte […], p. [8].
160.
The letter by Capretti to Berning from 07/17/1955 accompanying the relic can be found in BAOS, 01-89-10-02. In the eulogy during the funeral for Capretti on 02/26/1973 in the Basilica of San Lorenzo, his great dedication to Stensen’s beatification is emphasized (BSLF, In morte […], p. [5]). On Berning: Klemens-August Recker/Wolfgang Seegrün, “Berning, Hermann Wilhelm”; in: BDL II, pp. 422–427.
161.
See note 51, in Chap. 1 above; cf. the reference to Stensen’s beatification in the French overview essay Van Besien/Van Besien, “Stenon”, pp. 78, 81.
162.
Merton, “Priorities”, p. 459.
163.
EndokrG, p. VII. On Bettendorf: Meinert Breckwoldt/Wilhelm Braendle/Herbert Kuhl, “Nachruf auf Herrn Prof. Dr. med. Gerhard Bettendorf * 04.05.1926 † 20.04.2009”; in: EndokrI 33 (2009), p. 67.
164.
EndokrG, p. 633.
165.
Lehnert, Innere Medizin, pp. 23–24 with citations on p. 24. Lehnert quotes the third element of the motto thus: “[…] bei weitem am schönsten jedoch das, was wir nicht wissen” ([…] by far the most beautiful that which we do not know).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Faculty of Catholic Theology, Julius Maximilians University, Würzburg, Germany
Frank Sobiech

Authors

Frank Sobiech
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sobiech, F. (2016). Niels Stensen’s Character Sketch in History (Seventeenth to Twenty-First Century). In: Ethos, Bioethics, and Sexual Ethics in Work and Reception of the Anatomist Niels Stensen (1638-1686). Philosophy and Medicine, vol 117. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32912-3_3

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32912-3_3
Published: 26 June 2016
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-32911-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-32912-3
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics