THE EARLY DAYS OF COMPARATIVE ANATOMY. 157 



strated, one might almost add exhausted, by Galen, 

 Vesalius and Ruini. The limitations of work of this 

 character were apparent to Coiter, and he endeavoured 

 according to the measure of his ability to introduce the 

 new element of philosophic enquiry and discussion. But 

 it is difficult to make the dry bones live, and even when 

 the first step has been taken towards the possibility of a 

 second, and the second itself is in fact impending, the 

 tyranny of tradition may for a time inhibit a departure 

 which is none the less inevitable. So it was with 

 comparative anatomy. The first step had been brilliantly 

 accomplished, but the expected advance was still delayed. 



In the meantime some tentative efforts were being 

 put forth. Early in the seventeenth century Casserius — 

 first the domestic servant, then the pupil, and finally the 

 successor of Fabricius at Padua — had published his 

 works on the organs of sense and voice. He definitely 

 repudiates the practice, which, owing to the influence of 

 Fabricius, was no longer rigidly observed, that human 

 anatomy should constitute the only charge on the time of 

 the Professor, and his two works owe their value to the 

 fact that they are largely comparative. He was however 

 less a philosopher than a practical anatomist, and his 

 text, which is marred by various errors, does not attain 

 the level of his plates. But he does achieve the distinc- 

 tion of endeavouring to explain the fabric of man by 

 appeals to the lower animals, and that the fundamental 

 principles of comparative anatomy were feebly stirring 

 in his mind, an examination of his writings establishes 

 beyond question. 



The clear and penetrating intellect of William 

 Harvey, the immediate successor in time of Casserius, 

 enabled him to leap the gap. His own procedure is well 

 known — he urges the necessity of comparative studies. 



