Talk:De Humani Corporis Fabrica Libri Septem

Untitled

The correct title of the book, published in Basel in 1543, is De humani corporis fabrica libri septem, or "On the fabric of the human body, in seven parts." I'm moving the page to the correct title, and will work on this page and that on Vesalius in the coming months. encephalon 10:39, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I have changed the title to fit the correct Latin translation. Fabric -> factory

Fabrica, etymologically, was a workshop in old Rome. Its interlingual usage/connotation is closer to “factory”. Derivative words include French: fabrique, ITA: fabbrica, PT and SPA: fábrica Sunbather33 (talk) 04:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

References & substance

Although I don't dispute any of the data on the page, it would be good to have a few more references, preferably in-line.

If this book is as immportant and revolutionary as is claimed here, we should put a bit more info in this article. Some more data on what the book contains, its style and its critical reception and known use would be good.

IceDragon64 (talk) 23:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

• Volumes of the collection- consider rewording the end of the 1st sentence • You use the word “each” 3 times at very close points in that paragraph. Consider rewording the sentence, or choosing a new word • You could give an actual description about what Vesalius says about each of the organs, instead of just referring to them. • Give some specific points about what makes Vesalius so unique • Discovered that Galen's observations were inconsistent with those of his,-vague, consider rewording • brought him European fame- be specific • rapidly appeared..- don’t need two periods

I like how you talk about the surviving copies, as well as the reception of the book. That is all relevant information. I also like the pictures you chose as well as how you divided the sections by book. I think you could go into a little more detail on that as well as a few other areas as some of the information is good, but a little vague. Also there are quite a few run on sentences. All in all great work! Alexnicolejones (talk) 23:52, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Language, grammar and syntax

This article has evidently not been written by someone who has English as a first language. I have language edited the last section, which I came across while researching Richardson & Carman. If I have guessed the intended meaning incorrectly in any case, please amend. I would suggest the first section needs similar treatment. Robocon1 (talk) 12:17, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have made it clear that I'm only talking about the section titled "Volumes of the Collection". Robocon1 (talk) 14:30, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Who is Galen??

"Galen" is introduced suddenly and without explanation or cross-reference, leaving me with no clue who he is. I can gather from context that he is the author of some earlier work on anatomy, but a brief introductory sentence is needed. I can't do it as I am ignorant of the subject (hence why I am reading the article) - can someone who knows what's what fix this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.213.200.108 (talk) 08:23, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Added an introductory sentence with links. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:34, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

"vivisection of the eye"?

Vivisection? Really? Ouch! I suspect this is a mistake and should read "dissection", but we are talking about an era where they bound books in human skin, so how can a casual passer-by like me know for sure? Again, can someone who knows the history double check this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.213.200.108 (talk) 08:31, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:30, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on De humani corporis fabrica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100818075226/http://archive.nlm.nih.gov/proj/ttp/books.htm to http://archive.nlm.nih.gov/proj/ttp/books.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:13, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Not sure who keeps changing the title

Fabrica does not mean fabric. Please look at a Latin etymological source and link to anywhere where it shows that fabrica means fabric. It means factory.

Fabrica, etymologically, was a workshop in old Rome. Its interlingual usage/connotation is closer to “factory”. Derivative words include French: fabrique, ITA: fabbrica, PT and SPA: fábrica Sunbather33 (talk) 04:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

The word is closer to fabricate than it is fabric. This is especially significant in historical contexts as it was one of the earliest descriptions of the human body as similar to a machine, per Federici. Sunbather33 (talk) 04:49, 5 January 2025 (UTC)