SECT. 3] AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES 153 



Like ferment, vapour, odour, rottenness ... by rule. 

 Or like the smell given off by flowers. 



Like heat, inflammation (?) A in chalk (heat ?) both the wet form 



Like what is first ... in the art of cooking . . . principles of vegetation and 

 propagation. A Dormice by hibernating. . .cleansing by water and all 

 kinds of lotions, again for insects, as for their seeds as well (?). Or when 

 a soul is a god present in nature, that is divine which it brings about 

 without an organic body by means of law. 



See Aristode Marvels concerning odours and smells given off. Whether 

 on sense and everything that can be smelt gives off something and so 

 the objects of disperses (?) what is not without heat, or by destroying . . . 

 sense. attracts to itself 



A Amongst inflammable (objects are) fire, naphtha, paper 



A WI manus et odore car . . . anatomia manair. ... 



A Anat . . . post 4°"^ poras. otium inclinente die rursus quod prius et 



olefrere vid. . . . Galen. ... 

 A Mr. Boys spainel in Paris lay all ye third night and morning in 

 getting dogg. Whelping dogg's sent (scent) are a stronger sent, 

 vesting in vestigio alios ord . . . gr . . . lepris odore lepris esse 

 libidine esse. Hors, the mare, hors, the cow, a bull per mutta 

 millsa. 

 A ... si lepra fracedo in farioli fader cupidinitus. Dogg ye otter in aquas 

 fracedo vasorum ex sulpore? 



Just as Aristotle put much of his best embryological work into his 

 Historia Animalium and not into the work with the appropriate title, 

 so Harvey has some admirable observations on the embryonic heart 

 scattered through his De Motu Cordis et Sanguinis in Animalibus. Turning 

 now to consider Harvey's influence on embryology, we must admit 

 that it was in certain respects reactionary. 



1 . He did not break with Aristotelianism, as a few of his pre- 

 decessors had already done, but on the contrary lent his authority 

 to a moribund outlook which involved the laborious treatment of 

 unprofitable questions. 



2. His opposition to atomism and to "chymistry" precluded any 

 close co-operation between his followers and those of the Descartes- 

 Gassendi tradition. 



3. Fabricius had elaborated a vitalistic theory of differentiation, 

 but had allowed growth to be "natural" or mechanical. Harvey, 

 however, made both growth and differentiation the results of an 

 immanent spirit, a sort of divine legate. 



But these failings are far outweighed by his positive services. It 

 must always be remembered that he had no compound microscope. 



