Is it true that Leonardo da Vinci was given permission by Pope Leo X to disssect cadavers?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TruthSeeker92
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TruthSeeker92

Guest
Hi!

I have been told by my professor that Leonardo da Vinci was forbidden to dissect cadavers specifically and predominantly by the Catholic Church and the Pope of the time (Pope Leo X?) However, I have found some websites that say that the Pope eventually gave da Vinci permission to dissect cadavers and record his scientific findings. I mentioned this to her and she seriously doubted it. Can anyone point me to reputable church history which I can share with my professor?
 
I don’t know if he had permission to do it, but I know he did. Michelangelo did it as well.
 
It is true that cadaver dissection was seen as disrespectful to the dead at one time. It was only when it was realized that it could benefit medical science that it became an accepted practice.
 
I don’t know a lot about it, but I do know that a lot of nonsense is said about cadaver dissection and the Catholic Church.

Look. Here’s Mondino di Luzzi. He’s the father of modern anatomy study. Lived hundreds of years before da Vinci.

He taught at the University of Bologna, which like all universities was primarily designed to get clerics taught theology and canon lawyers taught canon law. Medicine was an early and important field of study there, however, and it was probably the best place in Europe to learn to be a physician. Most European medical texts came from Bologna, and their ideas on maintaining “wellness” were very influential for daily life.

It was true that cadaver dissection was tightly controlled by law, because both Church and state had a lot of interest in people not playing around with corpses. The procedure was handled the same way as surgery demonstrations – the teacher (or his ostensor, or demonstrator) did the dissection, the teacher lectured about what they were seeing, and the students observed. But medical students did learn from actual bodies, even though medical schools had to ask permission to do this from the relevant temporal and/or Church authorities. (Because they were Church-run schools.) It sounds weird to us, because our medical schools have to apply for accreditation to professional bodies, and then apply for permission to dissect to government bodies.

(All medieval and ancient medical students were allowed and encouraged to dissect animals, however. Galen advocated it.)

Both pagan law (in practically every culture) and Christian law was against dissection for both avoiding abusing a corpse and for more specific reasons. There were a lot of necromancy attempts back then. (Still are, in countries like Nigeria.) There were a lot of known magic spells, potions, and alchemy recipes that called for bits of dead people. And people don’t take it well if parts-removal happens to their relatives, who should be safe underground.

So it was very important to distinguish legitimate study from creepy guys trying to create necromantic servants.
 
Mintaka said:
I don’t know a lot about it, but I do know that a lot of nonsense is said about cadaver dissection and the Catholic Church.

Look. Here’s Mondino di Luzzi. He’s the father of modern anatomy study. Lived hundreds of years before da Vinci.

He taught at the University of Bologna, which like all universities was primarily designed to get clerics taught theology and canon lawyers taught canon law. Medicine was an early and important field of study there, however, and it was probably the best place in Europe to learn to be a physician. Most European medical texts came from Bologna, and their ideas on maintaining “wellness” were very influential for daily life.

It was true that cadaver dissection was tightly controlled by law, because both Church and state had a lot of interest in people not playing around with corpses. The procedure was handled the same way as surgery demonstrations – the teacher (or his ostensor, or demonstrator) did the dissection, the teacher lectured about what they were seeing, and the students observed. But medical students did learn from actual bodies, even though medical schools had to ask permission to do this from the relevant temporal and/or Church authorities. (Because they were Church-run schools.) It sounds weird to us, because our medical schools have to apply for accreditation to professional bodies, and then apply for permission to dissect to government bodies.

(All medieval and ancient medical students were allowed and encouraged to dissect animals, however. Galen advocated it.)

Both pagan law (in practically every culture) and Christian law was against dissection for both avoiding abusing a corpse and for more specific reasons. There were a lot of necromancy attempts back then. (Still are, in countries like Nigeria.) There were a lot of known magic spells, potions, and alchemy recipes that called for bits of dead people. And people don’t take it well if parts-removal happens to their relatives, who should be safe underground.

So it was very important to distinguish legitimate study from creepy guys trying to create necromantic servants.
Click to expand...
THANK YOU! 👍 Why is it that there aren’t more people like you in my class? :crying:
 
The History Channel said the other day on Ancient Aliens that the Catholic Church flipped out when eye glasses were invented. Where does that come from, too?
 
thinkandmull said:
The History Channel said the other day on Ancient Aliens that the Catholic Church flipped out when eye glasses were invented. Where does that come from, too?
Click to expand...
This is from a program called “Ancient Aliens.” Which supposes that the earth has been visited by intelligent alien life. A long time ago (before we developed radio, and despite the inverse square law).

I would suggest that NOTHING you see on such a program has any credibility whatsoever.
 
thinkandmull said:
The History Channel said the other day on Ancient Aliens that the Catholic Church flipped out when eye glasses were invented. Where does that come from, too?
Click to expand...
The History Channel is anti-Christian in general and anti-Catholic in particular.
 
Well the alien thing is more just who you believe. I was wondering though if there was any basis whatsoever for them saying the Church thought glasses were immoral when they were first invented
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top